Los_Control

I like the idea of a chevy 6, I have no correct answer for you, just a question or two. I am pretty certain the older 235 6 and 283 v8 came with the front horseshoe motor mount. I have not tried to adapt any of these to a mopar front mount, just seems like it would be doable. Is there any way to adapt the 250 block to the early 235 horseshoe mount? My guess is, the 250 block is not drilled for the front mount and only side mounts. But maybe if you can locate a cheap 235 block, you could still use most of your after market speed equipment?

Will need to follow the basics and get the distributor dropped in right. It is my humble opinion, you do not have to be to critical with getting it exactly tdc. with number 1 plug removed, bump it over and when you feel compression coming out the plug hole, it is at, or about tdc. While bumping it over, you are only moving the engine a couple inches or less, not cranking it over. So the number 1 piston will not travel far when you feel the compression and the rotor will still be somewhere close to pointing at number 1 plug wire. Now pull your dizzy cap and see if it is close to pointing at number 1, or is the rotor pointing to the opposite side of the cap away from number 1? When you drop the distributor in, it is either right, or it is 180 degrees off. There is no inbetween. When you say it was popping back through the carb, almost sounds like it is 180 out.

Indeed, it was looking at a 1957 sweptline that got me thinking about it. No time to work on it right now, to busy cleaning up the junk yard. But if I think I may want it to work on later, I have to save it now or it all is going. At the same time, the job is to clean up and not save everything. I think I can cut the quarters out and set them aside just in case. And I think the suburban tail lights, bumper, tail gate all add to the look and needed. And the rear end is going in molly. Same time I am busy away working on molly my avatar, she will be as close to original daily driver as I can keep her. Soon will update the thread I started on her. But the 52 is open game, will be a project for fun. I have no intention of keeping it a flat 6, the current choices available in the shed, 235, 283, 350, 318, 318 wedge, 390 FE but for some reason I like the 272 y block with 3spd overdrive. But a good 235 with 4 speed would be good too. Even toyed with the idea of bronco II 4x4 running gear that am going to scrap out, but axles are not strong enough. I just need to create my scrap pile before it is all gone and to late. Then later on this summer can decide what's what.

Let me be clear, this is not a real truck! it is a photoshop version of 2 vehicles off the internet. I have a 1952 truck that is a mess and has a good cab and doors, and I am scrapping out a 1951 plymouth suburban. I was wondering what they would look like combined. I thought the photoshop would tell if I want to attempt the project. Here is where I would be starting. And for the record, have been busy and only 3 cars left from the photo, everything has been pretty well cleaned up.

Been looking at the scrap pile and while trying to decide what stays and what goes, I asked TheMoose over on the H.A.M.B to put together a photoshop photo of a 52 pilothouse and a 51 suburban. Thought would share it here.

I think behind the seat would be a lousy place for it. And if I were to put one there, I would choose a tank that would be a better fit then a mustang tank. Mounting it in the frame, I would want as much protection as can get, the higher the better. Or at least where the bottom of the frame was lower then the bottom of the tank. In my case, I am going with a flatbed and will have wood timbers running down the frame rails for the bed to sit on and clear the tires. I have all kinds of room to get the tank up higher. I dont know what kind of room you have to work with, But I would try to get it above the lower frame for protection.

I think they were all installed aftermarket by the dealer or owner. I might be wrong. Look for fulton visor, they fit all the late 40's early 50's that had a rain gutter around the windshield. They can be adjusted in or out almost 3" to adjust for width. This one on a 51 plymouth is advertised to fit fords and chevys also.

I checked my clutch pedal today, no rubbing I did notice if you push it sideways that it will rub.

Sounds awesome. Is pretty amazing the newer engines and the tight tolerances on them, you need 5-30 weight to get into the nooks and crannies and lubricate them properly. Then look at the miles they are getting on these newer engines, is obviously working. Not sure they knew the meaning of the word "tolerances" when the old flatheads were being made Glad it worked out for you.

When I was a kid working at the local gas station, pumping gas and oil, wash the windows and check the air in the tires etc ... After pouring a quart of oil in the customers car, we would put the card board container with oil spout in a drain barrel, to Finnish draining the last ounce out of it. Then in the evenings when it was slow, we could pull our cars in and work on them. I would use that mixed oil to clean gummed up engines, It was all new oil, but it was mixed weight and brands and also trans fluid mixed in as well. I had a 1970 torino I got for next to nothing it ran so bad and lifters clattering. I changed a valve cover gasket and it was bad inside. I changed the oil and ran it a couple hundred miles, then change it again. That atf cleaned the old torino right out. One lifter was still a little noisy, but in time it may have quieted down also. I sold the car after a couple weeks and tripled my money on it.

The links are normal, is part of internet sales. I do not know how it all works. I believe the advertisement links are randomly added as you type, then the forum site we are using gets a monetary percentage of sorts. Just saying that it is nothing on your end that is causing it.

I am also going to come up against this issue. I have 2 tanks to choose from, one has a ball of old bubble gum looking patch material on it already. Another looks good on the exterior, but it sat with no gas cap on it for years and expect holes. I have newer tanks available from different trucks, What I wonder about, is there any certain modern sending unit that can be made to work with the original gas gauge? Or what others have done to get around the gas gauge issue.

Thank you verry much for that. I was not sure and been trying to pull on it. But have also tried to push, with the bent and weakened handle, I may need to get creative. At least I know which way to go. Feel confident I can get it open. Had a similar issue on a old chebby. Seems like there is 2 rivets that hold the handle, and only dangling by one. Just when you think it will break, you pull harder and it will release. But took a couple months to get the hood open, was worried it would break off. I have a stick lying on the core support now, so the hood can not close again. Even a modern 1977 ford F250 I am working on, I had to pull the grill to get the hood release lever oiled and enough clearance / movement for the hood to open. Let these things sit for a few years, they just dont want to be disturbed. Thanks again!

It is starting to warm up, snow is melting and time to get back to work. This 51 suburban I have not been able to open the hood, feels as if the hood release handle is bent. I only assume and do not know, Handle is pulled towards you to release? When I do this, it runs into grill metal before it releases. Seems like I will need to bend the handle back in such a way that I can get more movement on it, but need to confirm that I should pull and not push the handle. A quick look at it, I do not think I can remove the grill to get to the core support without the hood open. Thought I would ask the experts what they have done in the past to overcome this issue. Sadly the car will be parted out, but trying to not destroy the front body in the process. There is to much rust in the floor boards, try advertising it cheap and nobody even called to negotiate a even lower price. Just zero interest in it, and to please code enforcement, it needs to go. A picture of the passenger side floor, drivers side is worse. Is easier to open the passenger door and get it closed again, just no support on the A pillars.

Seems like it was between 1934 and 1935 that they did a little physical work on the bell housing, moving the starter location. I would think the '35 or '36 trans would fit fine. Or even newer. Does the 1937 have a floor shift or column? Thinking it is floor shift, my 1949 truck has the 3 on the floor with a 1937 218 engine. I bet something newer then the 37 would fit.

Was a lot of recent conversation about upgrading the stock brakes to disk. Looks pretty straight forward. Power steering still might be nice for the wife daily driver though.

interesting that it had a under the hood heater also. I have not got the hood open on this thing yet. So have not seen. Hood latch is bent and when you pull it to you, run out of room because it is bent. Will be a creative process to get the hood open. Add rust and weather. Maybe when the sun comes out it will open itself.

I have one that is mounted under the drivers seat. I am curious if this was standard location or a option on these cars. Not sure what to think of the location. I suppose it helps heat the rear passenger area better. But sitting on top of the heater, would seem to be hot and uncomfortable. I would be tempted to turn the heater way down or almost off. My wife on the other hand ... probably never get her out of the car.

What happens is you get a crown in the tread area, you will be riding on the center of the tread and not full contact with the road. This will lead to irregular and premature tread wear, a bit of a safety issue with possible hydro planing on wet surface. And generally bad handling while driving. This would be extreme conditions. With the 5" wheel, I do not think you will see any of these conditions. And if you do, you could maybe adjust it out running 30 pounds air instead of 35 to get the tread flat. You would not be under inflated and get a good ride and handling. The 4.5" wheel really is getting to narrow for modern radial tires. I think the 5" wheels will be fine, 4.5 I would avoid. What I am going to do, replace my old original wheels with modern steel 6" wheels. I have 2 trucks, a utility trailer with a old dodge axle, and a 51 plymouth car will be parting out, I have 15 original dodge wheels with locating pin holes. Probably more if I look around. I dont trust any of the old wheels for a daily driver. For the new wheels I end up with, I want a small dog dish hub cap on them, and will make a simple jig out of plywood to mark the locating pin holes and just drill them out by hand, keeping the old drums. Just saying what I will do, but I think you can get by with 5" wheels. I will add, while pulling my truck around the yard in soft dirt on a chain, had to try and pull the front sideways just a bit to point it into a parking space. This cracked the wheel around the bolt holes, pretty bad actually. This could have happened driving and need to make a panic stop and sharp turn to avoid a collision, or just parking and bumping a curb. Just to many years on these old wheels to put up with daily driving conditions for me.

I agree, arguing on the internet is about as productive as counting ants in your garden. Back in the day before metric radials, we had L R 78 15 The L would be the height again and the 78 the width. When we got the metric radials, the same concept was carried over and used for years. I see all are calling the 235 the width and the 75 the aspect ratio. Honestly this is a sales tool imho, makes it sound like rocket science and you are getting the latest space age technology with our tires. If we are so precise with the measuring, why does two different brand of tires with the same size stamped on it, differ in height and width when you stand them next to each other? If you go to tire rack and look at a tire size in inches, say a 235 75 15 is 30 " tall, then you change the 235 to a 225, what changes is the height of the tire in inches. To me this is the common sense way of telling the tire size. Ask any 4x4 off roader, they want to go to 33 inch tall tires on their truck, they need to get 265 75 tires. What changed between a 235 tire at 30 inches and a 33 inch tire is the first 3 numbers. The tire manufacturers can call it the width if they want, it determines the height and according to the tire manufacturer, there is no hight reference, only width and aspect ratio. Oh wait ... that is the height. When I want to know how tall a tire is, I will look at the first 3 numbers and the next 2 numbers will tell me the width.

In a past life before I became a carpenter, as a kid I started out running a service truck repairing semi truck tires, did that for a few years and then I started off in a shop retreading truck tires. I retreaded for about 14 years. During that time I spent much time in school for repairing tires, I was a certified Bandag master craftsman for over ten years and eventually ended up managing the retread shop. When that shop sold, I went to another company and started a off road tire repair shop. In my late 30's was tired of breathing rubber dust and I wanted a change, moved on to carpentry. Just saying, I have been around a tire or two, the 235 is the height and the 75 is the width.

the correct way to read tire sizes 235- 75-R-15 235 is the height of the tire 75 is the width of the tire R is indicating a radial, B would be a bias 15 is the rim size. Is kinda stupid but funny how the tire width is / was explained to me. 75 means it is 75% wide as it is tall. I did not create the system, I dont claim to agree with it, but it is what it is. A 70 series tire is wider then a 75, a 60 series is wider then 70 and the 50 series are ... A quick glance at a random online tire store, they do make some 80 series tires, but did not see them in the height you would want. A 235-75-R-15 would be ideal height and width for the trucks, the tire says a 6" rim is recommended. Putting the tire on a skinnier rim, would poof out the sidewalls and create a arch at the tread area, not nice and flat like you want. I do not think that a 75 series tire and a 5" wide rim you will notice. A 70 series you might be able to see it, a 60 series and oooh boy we got a problem. But a 75 series I think you will be just fine. Ideal rim width, maybe not. But look at your options and go with the lesser evil.

I got to go visit molly today, rocked her pistons a little, and then looked at her rear end. The u-joint does look like a different animal, not sure if this looks like the odd ball everyone was talking about. If it is, will be hoping I can use the yoke off the 52 transmission and install it on the 49. Time will tell, still to cold and snow on the ground to be working outside for the joy of the project. Where the 52 is parked, cant even get to it because of snow.

actually I kinda like the brass look, but may get them re chromed sometime down the road. Will for sure be sanding the chrome off of my dome light, maybe we could make a trade for my chrome and your brass

I also thought the same, but if a inline fuel pressure regulator was installed, and probably should have one any ways, would think it to be ok.