| parrish | -- 02-22-2011 @ 5:49 PM |
|
On a 36 manifold, can a Holley be substituted for the original Stromberg without causing flange distortion or manifold leaks?
|
|
| Stroker | -- 02-22-2011 @ 6:24 PM |
|
Yes.
|
|
| parrish | -- 02-23-2011 @ 7:53 AM |
|
Thanks Stroker! I have a problematic 34 Stromberg (stripped shoulder bolts among it's issues)on my 36 and also have a 38 or so Holley from a LONG time ago. The Holley has a problem with the throttle plates and I think that Vintage Speed has an aluminum replacement base that would solve the issue...seem reasonable?
|
|
| Stroker | -- 02-23-2011 @ 8:46 AM |
|
I'd see if I could repair the Stromberg first, as it is correct to the motor. I definitely would avoid simply bolting on an aluminum throttle body on the 94. In addition, the ancient 94 will undoubtedly need a new fuel-resistant power valve, which I'm sure Vintage Speed stocks.
|
|
| supereal | -- 02-23-2011 @ 10:12 AM |
|
It is interesting that the the iconic Stromberg 97 carb is now being reproduced, with some improvements incorporated. They are pricey, but will provide the authentic appearance important to many.
|
|
| Dolman | -- 02-23-2011 @ 1:37 PM |
|
This discussion caused me to go to the garage and see what sort of carburetor is on my 34 pickup. It has a Ford script on one side and Model 59 on the other. Now I think I know why the the choke and throttle knobs have 1 1/4 inch of exposed rod when fully pushed in. Googled Model 59 and found that the carb was used on the 46-48 models which are 239 cu. in. as opposed to the 221 cu. in. in the 32-38 models. The engine is not later than 1936 because the water pumps are on the heads. Dr. Supereal, should I replace the carburetor or shorten the dash control rods? Of course the knobs are epoxied to the rods so I know I will be replacing those if I do shorten the rods.
|
|
| supereal | -- 02-23-2011 @ 3:15 PM |
|
Thanks for the promotion. When we shorten the throttle and choke rods, we try to remove the rods from the crimped joint on the flex piece and cut them to fit. If that doesn't work we fit a piece of tubing over the rod and braze it together. Altering the rods is cheaper than swapping carbs. The original 40-9510-D '34 carb was replaced "in service" by the 59A later carb, and does require some adapting of the rods, even though the later carb is correct, unless you are a purist.
|
|
| Dolman | -- 02-23-2011 @ 3:54 PM |
|
Dr. Supereal, no purist here. Function trumps form. As to brazing, my results always look like a digestively distressed chicken passed by, but I'll try it one more time. The breadth and depth of your knowledge and experience and the quantity and quality of which you freely share in this forum suggested to me that you should at least be awarded an honorary PHD.
|
|
| flatheadfan | -- 02-24-2011 @ 1:32 AM |
|
Dolman- As an alternate to brazing you may want to consider just cutting the shaft and threading the ends and use a turnbuckle to connect the two rod pieces back together. This allows you to remove the rod from the dash without having to butcher it or make whatever length adjustments you need to accommodate different carbs. Tom
|
|
| Dolman | -- 02-24-2011 @ 7:05 AM |
|
That's a good idea, Tom. It would overcome my tendency to measure twice, cut once and still have to get another board.
|
|
| TomO | -- 02-24-2011 @ 7:55 AM |
|
I always end up with a board that is too short even when I cut it twice. Tom
|
|
| supereal | -- 02-24-2011 @ 10:20 AM |
|
Dolman: If you are shortening the rods, you won't have to braze them if you do it at the rubber joints. The rods are staked in place, and with a bit of pursuasion, they will come out. If you are careful, the rod can be pulled out of the rubber if you apply some heat to the rubber. We use an old hair dryer for that purpose where a heat gun would be overkill. As to the PhD, my daughter has a genuine PhD (and a couple of Masters) and says it really stands for "push here, dummy". She is a university professor, and my computer "guru" who keep me from scr*w*ng up my system.
|
|
| Dolman | -- 02-24-2011 @ 10:41 AM |
|
Proud Papa, The rods are continuous from the knobs in the cab to the ball socket connections on the carburetor levers. The only rubber I see are the grommets in the dash.
|
|
| jerry.grayson | -- 02-24-2011 @ 10:44 AM |
|
He was thinking about later model rods. Yes, your 36 rods are one piece from knob to carburetor, so some people just bend a slight "S" shape in the rod somewhere in the middle if you don't want to go to the trouble of shortening them.
|
|
| Dolman | -- 02-24-2011 @ 11:06 AM |
|
Jerry, you made me think of doing S turns on final approach to give another airplane time to clear the runway. It would require Z bends to get them short enough. I guess I could then call them "impedence" rods. I have an extensive tap and die set so I will probably do the turnbuckle suggestion.
|
|
| supereal | -- 02-25-2011 @ 9:06 AM |
|
Some rods, probably later, have rubber "knees" between the firewall and the carb. Looks like either a cut and braze or threading for a turnbuckle. The problem with that approach is that one end of a turnbuckle has left hand threads, and not many dies sets have them. If you don't want to braze a sleeve, you can always drill both ends and pin them, or use a small cotter.
|
|
| flatheadfan | -- 02-25-2011 @ 10:56 AM |
|
Bob- I agree that turnbuckles have a left and right thread. To get around this problem you just buy a turnbuckle that has a hole slightly smaller than the rod being used. Drill out the turnbuckle to accommodate the larger diameter control rod. Then tap a right-hand thread on each end to match the freshly cut threads on the rods. Just put everything together and adjust the turnbuckle (now acting as an adjusting sleeve). Add a lock washer and nut on each end of the "adjusting sleeve" and you are done. If you get a chance take a look at the picture I posted with my earlier response. Incidentally, doing it this way also allows you to make a perfect alignment of the wording on the knob ends. I have done this many times. It is easy to do and works great. Tom
|
|
| supereal | -- 02-25-2011 @ 3:13 PM |
|
Tom: Good idea. We have used sleeves with set screws on the ends, but I don't recall where we got them. For those wondering about Stromberg vs Holley, our new Jegg's catalog arrived yesterday, and the "94" carb is also now being reproed with some improvements, but at $400 a pop, you would really want one. We used 97's in my stock car racing days, as we could easily swap jets between heats. I still have my homemade T handle wrench.
|
|
| MG | -- 02-25-2011 @ 3:34 PM |
|
The correct Stromberg for the '34 Ford Model Year was the Stromberg '48'. I'm not sure, but I think the '97' was introduced in 1937......
|
|
| EFV-8 Club Forum : | https://www.earlyfordv8.org/forum |
| Topic: | https://www.earlyfordv8.org/forum/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=18&Topic=2646 |