you don’t need to clear up anything. You were wrong in saying it doesn’t control opening. That’s as clear as it gets.

this isn’t about me, you know that. You just can’t handle being wrong or being corrected.

Here’s more proof your statement about the dashpot is to hold the air door closed being false. There is a spec clearance between the dashpot rod and the slot in the air door arm. If it holds it closed, why is there clearance? It’s because it doesn’t

 

I stand corrected.

 

Where you really need corrected is the manner in which you lash out. Exactly what is gained by insinuating someone else doesn't know as much as you purportedly know and then admonishing them for voicing their opinion by suggesting they can't comment. I'm sorry, that's offensive and really unnecessary. Everyone is entitled to comment, and should be able to comment w/o having another member slam dunk them in the face - it just isn't very pleasant.

 

Appreciate your effort to return the thread to civility, Norm, but you may have @Dynoking confused with somebody else. He didn't really lash out at anybody.

 

I'm not going to argue the point, but I didn't find his statement "user-friendly"
EDIT: Let me just say I believe the wording could have been more friendly and less hostile.

 

I guess. There's been worse, though.

Anyway, thanks everyone. I have an idea how to proceed now. I'll be back to let you know how things work out.

 

You're correct. I'm not w/o faults of my own...

 

hey, don’t back down to the mob on here .

your initial statement was absolutely correct..it controls the opening. Joe Pee said you were wrong on that part,, you were right

the second part was where you had it wrong.

 

Norm, from my view point; I took the time to write a response to the OP based on my knowledge and experience. I only respond when I think I can help, not shoot from the hip, not spew wrong information, not trying to impress people by writing five page masterpieces, using big words or acronyms that few if any people understand. What do I get in response? A post challenging my repair suggestions that was so wrong I couldn't believe it was ever written. I write from memory what I did forty years ago in an effort to help the OP and here comes another response that includes pages from the service manual in an attempt to one up me by mincing words.Then yet another post criticizing my choice of words. Wow. What does the OP get? Confused by wrong information. Remember the whole point of of the thread is help the OP. I prefer to only respond to the OP. Look what became of this thread, confusion and fighting all because of egos. I'm spending more time responding to challengers, egotists and cry babies then I spent with the OP. Heck if the OPs car was in my driveway it would have been fixed by now using the repair I suggested in the first place.
Peace,
Richard

 

PS.
An easy way to check the vacuum chamber's operation is first ensure it is connected to the vacuum port and the hose is not split. Start the engine. The chamber link should be retracted and held into the chamber by engine vacuum. Use middle nose pliers to pull the vacuum hose off and watch the chamber linkage. It should extend outward from the chamber. Reconnect the vacuum hose and the linkage should retract. Sorry for all the static. All I ever intended was to help you by sharing my knowledge and experience. Please let us know how you make out.

 

Will do. Thanks for your efforts.

 

Just for closure: fuel filter. As Matt warned, it was an anti-drainback type and the check valve froze. Everything else checked out good and the problem is solved.

Thanks to all who provided ideas, advice or entertainment.

 

BTW, I replaced the ignition module with the 15 year old Accel unit. Wish me luck with that!

 

Glad to hear you resolved your problem! It's frequently the simplest thing. That's why I always suggest not running around replacing parts (usually with modern crap made in China) and introducing new issues.

 

Get out there and drive it like you stole it

 

OR you can just kick back with a bag of popcorn for a time of entertainment in a twisted kind of way ( must be age related). It's almost like a therapy session reading this. Lol

 

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 first post …amazing

 

Human or bot?

 

My thoughts exactly!
Not my thoughts - until you posted it!
murdesrapes ? - interesting handle...

 

Worthwhile thoughts, but why are they in a troubleshooting thread?

 

It appears that you have combined, re-worded and added from several posts. Care to elaborate?
murdesrapes is an interesting handle. What is its origin? It reminds me of the lyrics of a song from 1969.
BTW What year, make, model, vehicle do you own that made you join this site?

 

murdesrapes = most likely a bot of some type.

 

Perhaps. I'd like to hear the answers, or is murdesrapes just one and done.
Actually second thoughts. I hope this isn't a virus. Moderators?

 

Completely understand the basis of your query. User registered country of residence as Germany (DE) which may or may not coincide with user's IP address. Kiddies (tongue-in-cheek - hackers) often find a forum to "test" their program capabilities. A bot runs a program, often times drops into any social media forum/thread. They create user (name) account (opens 1st door which gains access to website) either manually or via their program which operates as a subterfuge. Program runs in first post (thread) message. This user registered @ 2:29pm (my EDT) & posted first message at same time. This is basic "kiddie" hack. What kiddies will often do next is create another different user (member) account and view their message/thread/post to see if the program ran successfully. Many far, far more sophisticated ways to run bot programs. And, to be straight-up about it, there's nothing to stop any current CO member from creating another CO member account, make one post and never check back in (perhaps just to make a point). I think Eric (Moderator) is always on top of the game. CO Antivirus s/w runs on CO servers continuously throughout the day providing the most up-to-date security intelligence updates (signatures) so I suspect it is highly unlikely to be a virus.

 

Very unusual post and no response (yet) to my query. I'd hate to see our beloved CO become a shoot show for floozies, flee bags, flunkies, and fly by nights.
SY2455, stand by with the jiffy pop...

 

Actually, there was a response to your query...but 1st.... I STRONGLY suggest no one click on the link inserted into Post 56

Follow along, you'll see what's happening...phishing scam w/ a bit more disguise; however, be aware it is entirely possible to introduce a virus, Trojan Horse or back-door man-in-the-middle attack from such deviant behavior.

murdescrapes created a user account and logged in July 16th, 2023, 02:29PM. Luckily Member SY2455 (and others) created a Post quoting murdescrapes first post. NOTE this first post (captured via SY2455 quote) was edited by user member murdescrapes on July 17th, 2023, 10:14AM. murdescapes is still listed as having Posted only "1" (one) time - because an edit is not considered a new (additional) Post; albeit, murdescapes still demonstrates only one Post.

This is the clever part.

The last post to the thread was July 16th, 2023, by yourself (DYNOKING) at 09:42AM. One half hour later (after your last Post) murdescapes logged onto this website and edited their original Post by INSERTING a URL link into their original Post (#56).
I have notified the moderators.


Note the timestamps

SY2455 first captured the original quote - note the timestamp.

When they inserted the URL link - note the timestamp.

 

Ah HAA!, (said like Jackie Gleason). Good sleuthing there Norm. I thought something was up. Fun71 put the bug in my ear. I chose the wording I used to try and elicit a response from m***s. You can't be too careful...

 

Mods deleted the post and account.

 

At the risk of revisiting the site of a trainwreck, my problem has returned, and worse now than ever. The car lurches and jerks and then will smooth out and run okay as long as you don't get on it or drive up any hills (which just results in more lurching and jerking). Sounds like classic fuel pump failure to me, so I got a new Carter M6109 and am in the process of installing it. I know, "throwing parts at it" without proper diagnosis, but fuel pumps are cheap.

My question now is, I remember reading in a thread here ('course I can't find it now) to use a dab of assembly lube on the cam contact arm and, having not built any engines lately, I don't have any assembly lube around here. Can I just go ahead and use lithium grease (which I have lots of)?

Thanks in advance.

 

If you know the age of the pump do a pressure test on it. Have you verified the condition of all of your rubber fuel lines? I found out the hard way that while the outside of a couple of my fuel line looked great on the outside, the inside of the rubber was collapse due to the quality of gasoline today. Now I use fuel injection rated hose.

 

Yes. Let's face it. Any grease is going to be gone after 10 miles of driving. The grease is only used for a metal-on-metal application during its brief break-in period. After that, it's going to be coated in oil.

 

While restoring the rear in my 1970 442 I found that the rubber fuel line from the gas tank to the hard line was kinked, almost closed off. The design of the hose requires pretty much a 90 degree angle, and this issue is easily spotted once you can look up from underneath the front of the fuel tank.

 

Inspected all hoses in initial diagnosis. Pump tested @ about 4.5 PSI in June which should be adequate (although I was surprised to see that spec per the CSM is 5.5-7.5). My concern here is that the problem being intermittent, is it possible to get a good reading and then have it crap out on the road anyway? Anyway, the deal is done and I'm replacing it. If the problem lies elsewhere, I'll know soon enough.

 

Thanks. I guess that's pretty much common sense, right?

 

I didn't perform a pressure reading on my fuel system the last time I replaced the mechanical fuel pump on my '71 350. I'll just mention I began to experience some modest hesitation on "occasions" over a four year period. During this four year period I did notice very minor amounts of fuel seepage surrounding the fuel pump gasket where it mounted to the engine. During that time I merely tightened the two bolts, but that only bought me several months each time I'd tighten them up. Finally, since I wasn't positive when/if the fuel pump had ever been changed since before my purchase, I just elected to replace the fuel pump and of course, the gasket. I wish I'd have measured the fuel system pressure to provide some credibility to this story, but after replacement of the pump and gasket I never encountered any further issues. I "suspect" an ill-fitting or "weak" gasket might introduce a minor leak and reduce "some" fuel pressure. Good Luck!

 

Your experience is helpful, Norm. I hope I have a similar experience. Right now, I'm headed back to town to find an adapter for the pump outlet fitting as the threaded female receptacle in the pump is a different diameter than the old one which I had planned to re-use. Wish me luck ... again!

 

These are not pipe fittings they are flares. Not sure you can use an adapter and have it seal. This is why you diagnose a problem first before replacing parts. You just add complication by replacing parts that may be good with parts that don't fit and, if made in China, may not work properly even when new.

 

That's pure unadulterated hog wash B.S.

 

What I can't understand is why the exact same model number fuel pump by the same manufacturer (Carter M-6109) would use two different diameter fuel line fittings. Not only that, but the new one takes off at a 45° angle rather than the old one's 90°.

 

Well, I hope others can benefit from my mistakes: do not order a Carter M6109 as a replacement fuel pump for a '69 4-4-2 unless you feel like thoroughly re-plumbing your fuel line. The weirdest thing is, the old pump that I removed was even stamped "M-6109" but its fuel line fitting angled differently and the female piece uses a different diameter.

Three weeks later, I hold in my hand a Delphi MF0152, which seems correct, at least visually. Tune in next week when I'll tell you why it won't work. Oh, and early warning for those headed down this road -- the Delphi does not come with a gasket. Fortunately, the Carter came with two and I haven't returned it yet.