- Home
- About Us
- Join/Renew
- Member Benefits
- Member Pages
- Log In
- Help
- Museum Store
I have found a 662R distributor that fits LaSalle with a cam in better shape, the it looks the same as 662J but not certain at this point until I can pull it apart. A bit of a gamble but the price was right. It took some doing to find the Pertronix that fits, but finally located a source for that if I go that direction. I will see what the LaSalle cam looks like or if I get any other responses this week to decide. The rest of the distributor is ready to go and one way or another it is going on this weekend.
Coincidentilly my Packard distributor cam would probably interchange if it had the correct distributor, but it has a Northeast for a 1934 instead of a 662T.
Thanks, Jim
Thanks Ed, I have sent a message to John. Jim
Apropos to the rear slinger seal discussion, the later hub has no seal but simply relies on the fill level to stay just below the shaft when stopped and centrifugal force keeps it away from the shaft when turning. No seal to wear out. I was lucky in that my bearings were in such good shape that without the drag of a positive seal I could determine a significant out of balance on the fan blades and counterweight it to adjust.
Jim
Is the ’27 fan hub the same design as my later ’35 845? I ask because I just went through mine and the owners manual says it should be filled with 30 weight oil. I was amazed at the elegant (actually gilding the lily elegant) design of this thing which amounts to a centrifugal pump where the oil is forced out to the wall of the hub and then gets interrupted by a single paddle as it flows to the front to force a little bit of oil to flow into the inside diameter tube with the bearings. Ball bearings generally only need minimal lubrication usually of light oil and I think P-A jumped through hoops with this design to try and give the ball bearings the right level of oil. If the ’27 is the same system 600W oil seems a lot thicker than necessary and I don’t see a benefit.
Jim
Joe, yes loose clearances an/or the drain partially plugged with gunk could cause excessive leakage from the main. I guess it is mainly a question of how bad the leak is and is it worth chasing.
In terms of “marking territory”, my Packard has a Bijur system that lubricates the spring shackles and intentionally drips at every shackle. Years ago a friend with a restoration shop was sued by a finicky owner who claimed negligence because his early ’30’s Packard leaked on his pristine garage floor. Despite calling an expert who went through the whole system to the judge to explain they were supposed to drip by design he lost the case. A comment on the intelligence of our judiciary.
Jim
Joe, I imagine the guys with more knowledge are recovering from the PAS meet, so until then here is a picture of my ’35 845 rear main when checking clearance and with the main bearing cap installed. The rear seal is simply a “slinger” without a mechanical seal or packing. It relies on centrifugal force to keep the oil from coming out. If put on a steep enough incline with the engine stopped it will leak out the back. There is nothing to wear out or repack or tighten.
Some drips are to be expected, but if it is more than that I would suspect the rear cap side seals. You will note mine are very small rectangular slots. The guys at NAPA found a Ford side seal that fits this. The gasket rebuild kit I got from Olsen had .458′ x .440″ rectangular wood sticks that are much bigger than the slots on my ’35. The kit is for ’29-38 Pierce 8’s, so I am guessing earlier 8’s had larger side seals on the rear main made of wood.
Another possibility wcould be the threaded plug that plugs the back of the oil gallery adjacent to the starter.
Good luck, Jim
Yup, feel pretty stupid. I was staring at the back of the backing gland bushing the whole time thinking it was a flange end to the sleeve bearing. It was stuck tight but after coaxing it out with a hammer and punch all was revealed and it looks like a proper packing gland complete with two conical packing washers instead of rope.
You guys were probably wondering what I was going on about! Problem solved and I can get this thing cleaned out and remounted this weekend without “improving”” it.
Jim”
Immediately after posting the response above, it occurred to me that I may be an idiot. It finally dawned that am probably looking at the end of the intermediate conical bushing sticking out the end of the housing, and since it didn’t budge when I was checking it out I just assumed it was part of the bearing sleeve. Will check out when I get home.
Duh! Jim
Bill. All I have is the flat surface end of the bronze sleeve bearing sticking out of the housing and the threaded packing cup to use for packing. The inside of the packing cup is flat. I don’t have the intermediate conical seat part shown in Bill Lyons’ picture.
My sleeve bearing is sticking out so far from the housing that all I can accommodate is single strands of packing to be able to engage the first threads of the cup, so even if I had the intermediate conical seat bushing I wouldn’t be able to use it unless I can push the sleeve bearing further into the housing.
Does your pump have that intermediate conical seat bushing?
My pump may have been rebuilt in the ’60’s and perhaps they had the same problem and whomever just tossed the intermediate piece because it wouldn’t fit. The car was only driven about 50 miles in the ’60’s after it’s rebuild then. The sleeve bearing is in very good shape so I don’t want to mess with it if I don’t have to, as I will likely cause more harm than good.
I am considering cutting a taper in the threaded cup that would allow a bit more packing and the inward force to seal against the shaft. I haven’t figured out why Pierce would have had the intermediate piece instead of simply cutting the threaded cup and the end of the sleeve conical a la Packard.
Thanks for the your responses!
Jim
Bill, thanks for posting. It is clear form your first picture that I am missing the conical packing seat bushing, and that for whatever reason my water pump outer sleeve bearing is not far enough in the housing. Looks like the next question will be whether It can be pressed in further and fabricate or modify to get a conical packing gland. The sleeve bearing is basically in very good shape internally.
Ed, my ’36 Packard uses the original packing gland system with graphite impregnated rope packing, the original steel shaft, 50/50 water/glycol and no extra corrosion inhibitors, or “wetting” agents. I did replace the non-seal ball bearings with sealed but they are on the other side of the packing gland away from the water on a Packard. It has been going for 30 years now with very little weeping and one change of packing material. Presumably the original Pierce system is not inferior to Packard?
Apologies, couldn’t hep mysef!
I have lots of interesting issues with this engine I won’t admit to on the forum, so getting this thing going ASAP to see if everything works is the priority. I am not rebuilding it presuming it will ever see 10,000 miles before the end of time.
Today I had the fantastic experience of riding in the Collings Foundation B-24 Liberator. Pretty much just sons and nephews of WWII vets – no youngsters. My Pierce is 9 years older than the Lib!
Thanks for the help! Jim
Yes, but is mine right? I have managed to wrap individual strands of water pump packing rope around the shaft and into the tiny gap but it doesn’t seem likely to be right.
Is it possible this didn’t use any packing at all but relied only on the grease to seal the shaft? The owners manual talks about refilling the grease cup and turning down every 1000 miles, and tighten the packing gland nut if a leak develops and refill and turn down the grease cup. There is no mention of pump packing per se.
Jim
Jim, I was hoping you might get a reply from someone, I have been in the same boat for 25 years. My friends go to Hershey every year and look but have yet to find one. This is a tougher part to find than headlight lenses. When I finally get mine to the point of driving I will substitute a generic mirror.
Jim
The issue as I understood it is that the woven linings have a higher friction coefficient and take less force to apply and are appropriate for non-power brakes. The SW is definitely a power brake and molded lining are called for – they were original. A caution is that with the disappearance of asbestos many new linings are too hard and are downright dangerous fading on one stop and grabbing the next – a bad experience with my ’66 Chrysler after which I hoarded asbestos linings. I couldn’t find a source for 16″ asbestos for my Pierce.
The key seems to be to have a lining stamped on the side with code FF or maybe FE. The letters have to do with friction coefficient versus temperature if I remember correctly. Anything with a G or above is too hard. This was discussed a couple years ago here and someone came up with a source for linings that had some actual definition of the linings they sell. that thread may still be here. I think I have a pdf technical report somewhere I will try to dig up and send when I get a chance.
Good luck! Jim”
Theoretically a V-12 will swallow around ~40 CFM of cold air at 1000 rpm fast idle, however the high temperature exhaust could be 3x that amount due to the low density. 3000 rpm would multiply by 3 again basically. Multiply by 3 again if you have it running at wide open throttle at 3000 rpm fixed to a dyno. The typical cheap squirrel cage won’t take the direct heat of the exhaust for long. You need to seal a metal tube around the exhaust pipe and not let the exhaust mix with the surroundings until it is well outside the garage – no blower needed but you still should have some fresh air ventilation.
I have a large evaporative cooler with a large volume squirrel cage similar to a furnace blower in my garage and a sealed air inlet through the wall that dumps outside air into the garage. If I open the garage door it makes for a one way flow path to ventilate out. That plus a tube sealed to the exhaust pipe going out past the garage door gets rid of exhaust fumes.
Jim
I managed to get it off finally, it was corrosion keeping it on. I had to put a clamp on the puller’s arms to keep them engaged on the fitting. Thanks for the responses.
I have started soaking it and maybe will try some heat tomorrow. If yours slid off them it must be corrosion.
Thanks, Jim
Greg, I cut a crude jig out of a piece of 2 x 4 to support the shaft without loading the bearing and got it started with my press. It tapped out the rest of the way without any drama (there is a hole drilled in the wood that is covered by the drive fitting that the pin goes into when it is being driven out).
Thanks again!
Jim
When in doubt, assume Pierce knew what it was doing. I’ll clean up the original regulator/cutout and use it as is. Now, to the struggle with tapered press fit dowels! One of the things I really don’t like doing, for fear of screwing something up badly (like my #1 hydraulic lifter – fingers crossed).
Thanks for the responses!
Jim
Greg, I measure the resonator in your picture at just under 6″ OD and 12″ long. Thanks again!
Stainless of course will always outlast. The Pierce specs for ’34 say the mufflers were insulated with asbestos lagging, and there is an asbestos insulator attached to my passenger side floorboard. Forgive the un-authenticity of it, but I think I will replace with non-asbestos insulation! Perhaps the original resonator is actually a 5″ with asbestos insulation and an outer cover.
One of the problems with collector cars rusting out mufflers and tailpipes is the tendency to run them on very short drives without getting the exhaust system hot enough to evaporate the water, leaving condensed water and carbon in the low spots. This is an ideal combination for rusting of steel. I drill small drain holes in the lowest points of mufflers and tailpipes. I don’t know if it does any good, but it makes me feel better.
Jim
I have read these accounts in the PASB about restricting the flow to keep from foaming and dumping coolant out of the overflow, I guess that hasn’t changed. I will add a thermostat and drill some holes as suggested.
Thanks for the responses!
The debate about how an engine can counter-intuitively run cooler by restricting the flow doesn’t really depend on looking at an atomic level. It depends on the heat balance between the engine adding heat to the coolant versus the ability of the radiator to remove the heat. Basic convective heat transfer says that increasing the velocity of the flow increases the heat transfer rate from the hot engine surfaces to the coolant. More heat is transferred but the temperature rise of the coolant will be less because more coolant is flowing. The radiator’s ability to reject the heat added to the coolant by the engine is limited by the amount of air passing through the radiator – a perfect radiator can’t reject any more heat once it raises the air temperature passing through it to the coolant temperature. Thus, if the radiator is close to capacity on the air side the coolant temperature can rise with more coolant flow.
Regardless, restricting the flow through the engine can reduce the overall temperature of the coolant but reduced velocities can make local hot spots more likely that can turn into steam pockets – so I am a little leery of taking this too far.
The goal is not to reduce the temperature of the engine but to keep it at the right level. The cylinder barrels actually tend to run cooler than ideal, and it would be better to keep the scale and rust on them to reduce the heat transfer from them if one could guarantee the junk wouldn’t flake off and plug the radiator!
Note that an engine that has been bored and had the cylinder head surfaces machined has thinner walls allowing more heat transfer through those surfaces, and will slightly increase the tendency towards overheating.
As mentioned above one of the biggest concerns is avoiding local hot pockets particularly under the exhaust valves. Prestone doesn’t have as much heat capacity as water, but it raises the boiling point to help suppress steam, and that is why engines can live a healthy life on water/glycol mix.
Jim
