Good morning, went to start the Oldsmobile this morning and it began to run and died. I could not get it to start/run. I found it would run on starting fluid and would not keep running. I removed the inlet to carb and cranked the engine to find that no fuel was flowing. I have a show on Saturday and would like not to miss it. Any thoughts for quick solutions? Over the weekend I did add a missing filter element to the fuel bowl and it was running fine until this morning. Any ideas will be greatly appreciated, David

 

Try removing the filter element from the fuel pump that you just added.

 

I tried a couple of tests and found that I could connect a vacuum pump to the line from the pump to the carb (I added a clear fuel filter so I could observe fuel being sucked into it) and found that I could get fuel up the line. I then disconnected the line coming into the fuel pump and used some compressed air to push fuel up that line and could see fuel come through it. I knew I had no time to order, let alone rebuild the failed pump, so I installed a 12V electric pump and with this solution I was able to drive the 50 miles each way to Motor Muster (The Henry Ford/Greenfield Village). Its a great event!

I have a quandary. I've read some of the posts on this and I am aware that a number of similar pumps were used back then. My '57 is an early production model and used the 1956 pump. In 1957 there was a with AC version and a without AC version. With AC did not have a glass fuel bowl and I think it relied on an external in-line fuel filter. The without AC had a glass fuel bowl with a paper filter. I am not aware of other differences. I may consider adding period correct AC to my car (I may have many challenges to accomplish this). Could I opt for either a rebuilt or new AC version fuel/vacuum pump and have the car operate correctly, even if I never manage to find a way to install AC?

Any and all comments or suggestions welcome. Thanks, David

 

After doing some more reading/research, I am finding reference to 4 fuel pump numbers that cover the 1955 to 1958 model years. Part number 4397 and 4350 have no fuel bowl and the placement of the fuel inlet and outlet and have pulsator diaphragm operation to better deal with heat produced by ac units. In later years there may have been a line back to the fuel tank to prevent vapor lock. The other 2 numbers are 4646 and 4317 - these have glass fuel bowls and the 4317 may have a filter screen with the 4646 one having a paper filter (real filter) and the inlet is under the diaphragm housing with the outlet being opposite the mounting flange. If I use the first two referenced numbers, my pump to fuel line will need to be changed and I will need to add an in-line fuel filter - I am not sure about a vent/return line to the tank. With the latter 2 numbers, I think I have the 4317 pump with a screen and then I added a paper filter - I am not sure that both won't cause a problem? Does anyone know the answer to this question? Also if I stay with the OE pump and later add ac, will that cause problems? Thanks, David

 

An alternative and more modern fuel pump that has been used by others in the past is one from a late 70's Buick V6 car- 77-78 should work. AC Delco part #41209. You might have to ream out the mounting holes in the pump, others have not needed to.

 

Thanks for your suggestion. The pump you referenced is readily available and modern as you suggest. My '57 is a dual action pump, if people use the #41209, what do they do for vacuum? Thanks, David

 

That is another can of worms… You would have to go to an electric windshield wiper motor at a minimum. I believe the washer fluid pump is also run off the fuel/vacuum pump but could be wrong. It’s all workable but no small ordeal.

 

Maybe this will help,

Contact Then and Now Automotive, @ 781-335-1925, Tom is the owner and he sells fuel pumps, rebuilds them, and make modern kits (for modern fuels) and has how to videos on his website

They can help you out.


Bob

 

Thanks Bob, I had meant to provide an update on Friday, as I had removed the pump and found it had no part numbers stamped on it. I also learned that Fusick gets their rebuild kits from Then and Now. I could not reach Then and Now and placed an order for a #4317 rebuild kit. I am waiting on a reply from Then and Now. Hopefully I will get a response tomorrow. Fingers crossed, David

 

Be patient, I placed my last order about 1 year ago, it took me numerous calls before I got through, when I spoke with Tom (explaining my frustrations) he said better to leave him e-mail message: "oldpartstom@aol.com" then Tom will answer e-mailed questions him self.

Tom told me since "COVID" he has hard time finding people that are willing to work, (lack of employees)

Tom designed the "NEW" style oneway valves inside the fuel pump and makes all his fuel pump kits

I hope this helps

Bob

 

Good morning Bob, I pretty much experienced what you described - just on Friday, so no real frustrations - just a sense that no one was manning the phones and lack of information with my order. I emailed ljthen2@aol.com for information. I will send a message to Tom directly. Much appreciated, David

 

I visited the store in person and can tell you it was heartbreaking to see the store operation in action. Tom is in his 80's and has Lisa as a store clerk who fills the orders and she's in her 80's too. It's such a shame he can't get any help because they have so many new old stock items there, not only of fuel pumps but of many other items. I ended up getting the ball joints for my 61' from them and they rebuild them too. They also rebuild transmission and motor mounts plus many other items. I've written about this place before but it seems people would rather buy the china stuff.

 

Bob, you've been very helpful. I just got a reply from Tom and we will talk this afternoon. I also offered to help him with his business woes. As a business coach, my radar has been pinging me since I first went on their website last week. I will send an update after I speak with Tom this afternoon. I share your 'heartbreak' about what we are losing and stand to lose as far as operations that support automobiles from the 19th and 20th centuries. A local shop near me is about to transition and I think a lot of connections, knowledge, and skill will be lost. Thanks much, David

 

Thank you for posting this. Resources for parts on older cars is a problem.

 

Bob and Ralph, I just had a nice conversation with Tom. He was most helpful with 40 years of knowledge he was willing to share. We live in a world where we want instant responses - as Bob had suggested to me, be patient. I am happy to report that my rebuild kit ordered on Friday has been boxed up and will go out today. I should have it yet this week. Tom suggested some options that I can try to see if my pump is caput or can keep me going until winter flies and I have more time to rebuild it.

Then and now has YouTube videos here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCN2...aDU0wFQ9yXKU8g

Updates to follow. Many thanks, David

 

Over the weekend I disassembled my dual action fuel pump. On the vacuum side, the cover had two valves in it and the body had no valves nor a diaphragm shaft seal. When it came to the fuel side, I struggled to disconnect the diaphragm shaft and wound up grinding the top of the shaft until the diaphragm could be separated, leaving only the shaft to disconnect - it was still a challenge because it was bent. The rocker shaft had a fair bit of play in it so I replaced the shaft and its inner sleeve.- I'm glad I did so because I went from a lot of play to none. On reassembly, the fuel side went very well. I found myself in a dilemma about the vacuum side and wound up following the 1956 manual that showed 4 valves. I chose not to use the paper fuel filter as the rebuild kit had a new fuel strainer in it. After reinstalling the pump, I cranked the engine for what seemed a long time, crawled under the car and could see that the fuel bowl was full. On the next crank the engine fired right away. A short drive later it was time to test vacuum. The wiper side was 22 mm hg, the manifold was about the same as before the rebuild (17-18 mm hg). I decided to test the engine side of the vacuum pump and the reading was 0 mm hg. Back to my vacuum side dilemma - Can anyone tell me whether I should have a vacuum reading on this side? Any and all suggestions welcome, David

 

Did you test the vacuum side after assembly the way he showed how to do it in the video(s)? You should feel the line going to the wiper pulling air when the other line is hooked up to the carb.

 

Good afternoon Art, I think I responded to you on an earlier post that I thought was from Bob - my apologies. There was no specific video and I used the rocker arm test I had seen in one of Tom's videos. Before I rebuilt the unit, I thought the vacuum side had tested OK (missing 2 valves and a diaphragm shaft seal). I used the '56 manual information to help me install the missing seals. I had them in correctly and then second-guessed myself and flipped the one for the engine side vacuum. The test with the rocker arm was different than before rebuilding and thus my dilemma. The manual information leaves a little to be desired. I already had an email to Tom at Then and Now, so I called him. When we spoke we discussed what I had done and my suspicions. He confirmed that the two valves on the vacuum side of the body should both be installed in the same direction, thus confirming my suspicion. When I returned home I checked the '56 fuel pump printout and my '57 manual. They are the same, but there is a cutaway schematic in the '57 manual that I could have used - the vacuum side of the '56 and the '57 pumps are the same. So, one more R&A (remove and adjust) and I should be back into full function. I will confirm success once completed. Thanks, David

 

David, the valves you speak of are the "NEW" design and Tom is the one who designed them

I found his youTube videos very helpful

Good luck with your project

@Supernice88 thanks for posting the photos from Then & Now, and giving us update with your visit with Tom


Bob

 

Bob, I try to help when I can.

 

David now you've got me a little confused about the way the valves are inserted in the vacuum side of the fuel pump. Maybe they are different year to year.

 

Bob and Art, Tom is a great resource, his videos are very helpful and his valves are very much needed. Speaking with Tom was most helpful. Art as far as any confusion, if you look at my photo - this is a '56 pump in an early '57 model 88. When I took the pump apart there were no valves in the body and the '56 manual said to put them back in. I should have looked at my '57 manual as it clearly shows the two valves in the vacuum pump body face the same direction - I second guessed myself and flipped the one to the wrong direction. If it helps when I reverse my mistake I will send a photo. Hope this helps, David

 

Can you upload the pic of it from your manual.
​​​​​​

 

Good evening Art, I'd be happy to. It will have to be this weekend as I'm out of town. In an earlier post - 56 Fuel pump - another member, Ozzie, had posted the 1956 manual information on fuel pump removal, disassembly, rebuild, and reinstallation. The 1957 manual is essentially the same and it states that if your pump has a glass fuel bowl to reference the 1956 fuel pump information in that year's shop manual. Early production 1957 cars used the 1956 fuel pump. The part I didn't think about until it was a little too late is the vacuum side of the '56.and the '57 pumps are the same. The basic information in the two manuals is the same except for the fuel side of the pumps. The '57 manual shows a cutaway of the whole pump and it clearly depicts the 4 vacuum side valves and their orientation which was less than clearly described in the '56 fuel pump pages that Ozzie had shared in his earlier post. When I spoke with Tom at Then and Now, he put me on hold to verify that fact. I will scan the page with the cutaway from my '57 manual. While I am at it is there something else I can send you? I will follow up later Saturday or Sunday. I have two new valves coming in the mail that should arrive Saturday or Monday - I should be able to send a photo of a wrong valve placement and a second one with the correct placement after I pull the pump one more time. Thanks, David

 

Thank you.

 

Good evening Art, attached is the shop manual


schematic of the 1957 Oldsmobile 88 fuel pump - the fuel side is different than on the '56 pump. Attached also are two photos of my pump before with the incorrect placement of the vacuum valves in the pump body and second photo after flipping the incorrect valve to its correct orientation. Hopefully this all makes good sense. Let me know if you have questions. Thanks, David

 

Thanks David. The exploded view of the one in my CSM doesn't match the pump I have in my car. It had me confused when I was rebuilding it. The pump I have matches the pump you show from your book and the number on the pump matches up to what the parts book shows belongs in the car. Maybe Joe P or Charlie could explain better why there are these differences. I also noticed the rocker arm showing from my book is different in shape. Either way I did put the valves in the way you did and it works, so it must be correct for my application. Also the glass bowl housing with the filter is separate on mine.
I'm glad you got it figured out. I won't add anything more to this thread after this because of my ignorance on the subject and it's better left to the experts.

 

Good morning Art, I understand your confusion - the schematic you shared shows two valves in the vacuum cover and none in the body. Your application is on a '61 Olds 88, correct? When I took my pump apart the valves for the body were not there, though the vacuum side of the pump appeared to be working. After assembling my '57 (really a '56 version) pump with 4 valves in the correct orientation, I am still not convinced that the vacuum side of the pump is working properly. I suspect something with the diaphragm as the vacuum side of the pump had a lot of oil in it and the diaphragm was deformed whereas the old one was flat. I'll report back with what I find out. Thanks,

 

This is the Then and Now video I followed when I rebuilt mine. He shows how to put a preload on the diaphragm (I messed that up my first time and had to redo it). He also shows how to peen the seals and valves so they don't pop back out during the pump's operation (it looks like you didn't in your photos). The first time I opened my up the shaft seal was floating around inside and it was loaded with oil. I'm going to have to take mine out again because I think one or two valves failed. It definitely did it on the vacuum side. I'm getting tired of taking this thing apart.
I noticed this on the cover ov the vacuum side, not sure if it could help you.

Mechanical fuel pump #6585 out of my '61 S88

 

Art, yes, I have the same markings though the connections are different. When I talked with Tom, he said I did not need to stake the engine side valve but the wiper side one needed staking - this was the opposite from the manual information. Also I did the staking after I had taken the photo. If you provided a link from Then and Now, I did not see it in your post. It's great to compare notes, even if our cars are from different years. I'm getting much more efficient with the R & R of my pump. Thanks, David

 

Oops, forgot to put the link in.

 

Thanks Art, I was using that one plus another for an earlier 6 cyl Chevrolet. Good to know, David

 

Very good, lots of luck and hope it works for you.

 

All great details and photos of your fuel pump


Bob

 

I have news and more photos to share. We don't always know or understand what lies under the cover - vacuum cover that is... As you may have gathered, I have not been convinced that the rebuild of my pump was totally successful - at least on the vacuum side of things. I removed the pump to flip a valve and reinstall the pump to find that I still had concerns, so removed it again. Then and Now has been very helpful - Tom Hannaford to begin with and today I spoke with Mike Casella who does a lot of their rebuilding. Now for the photos. I sent these to Mike and I explained what I had found when I first disassembled the pump - two missing valves and no seal for the diaphragm shaft (see my earlier posts). For this third and hopefully final time to remove my pump, I did a bench test to find that pumping the rocker arm produced not suction and there was exhaust on the engine side valve (furthest from the rocker arm). You'll notice in the second photo that the diaphragms are different there is no hole in the protrusion part whereas the new one has a hole there. After I explained this and Mike looked at my photos he said I'm missing a hole and without it the vacuum will never work properly. He shared with me what was needed - drill a 7/32" hole from the inside of the pump body at an angle to end up under the wiper vacuum valve (in the protrusion near the rocker arm). The last two photos show the drill placement and the hole that I created. I am waiting on a new diaphragm as mine got soaked with oil. I am not sure whether any of you may have similar experiences with vacuum - I am looking forward to seeing how this works - first with a bench test and secondly with some of my vacuum issues. I will provide another update as my next steps unfold. Learning as I go, David

 

Interesting that Mike said to drill that hole, but will be interesting to see if that makes the difference.

Who would have thought (except Then & Now) to drill that hole

Bob

 

Good morning Bob, I couldn't agree more! Mike said he had drilled such a hole many times. I now know that the pump I removed and took apart was very different than what either the '56 or the '57 manuals suggest it should be - hindsight is so clear - I initially missed that the old diaphragm was different than the new one and I missed that the pump body was missing a hole. The why of these differences I cannot answer. I do take some comfort in that my pump will look like and have all the valves, seals, etc. as depicted in the manuals of the time. By the way, I am getting very proficient with the R&R of my dual action pump. The fuel side, deemed less easy turned out to be the easy side of things. My biggest hope is that with the vacuum side issues resolved, some of my other vacuum issues will be easier to address. More to be shared for sure! Thanks, David

 

This thing is making my head hurt. I knew I would be pulling mine again because I had lost the vacuum function of it which controls the functions of the Deluxe Heater. This will be about the fourth time I've had to r&r it. Each time I've had to take it out I noticed the bolts holding it to the engine were loose and oil had soaked the gasket and the gasket wasn't even attached. When I had installed it the last couple of times I had tightened them to what I thought was pretty tight because I was having trouble maneuvering the torque wrench in the engine compartment. This time I moved the generator and fan belt out of the way and was able to torque the bolts to 38 ft.lbs. which the book called for 34-40 ft lbs. Hopefully I won't need to redo this anymore.
On the vacuum side I saw the diaphragm was deformed and pinched and wasn't sealed. I have an extra fuel pump and was just going to swap them and that's when I noticed the vacuum end of the other is different from the one that was running in the car. When I took the cover off I see the valves are opposite of what's in my book but they match the '57 you showed. I think the wrong one in my car was drawing air and not releasing and the force pulled the diaphragm inside the housing causing the failure. On the original one that was in the car the first time I rebuilt it the valve hole you show where you drilled didn't have a valve there and the channel that runs at an angle in the top is a dead end and doesn't do anything (thus why there is no hole there in the diaphragm, it's not needed). The direction of air flow through the valves in each diagram show to be correct - the direction in the outlet is the same as is the inlet is the same. The difference is they are reversed in the top housing when they are joined to the main housing.
The original one I have doesn't have a valve in the main housing and where you drilled into that hole is also a dead end and doesn't do anything (there is no chamber in the lower end of the main housing).

The question is why did they change the design and not use those extra valves and why would you need to drill that hole? Does anyone know if there's a special size wrench for the nut on the fuel line connection?

compare 1957 to 1961 fuel pumps.

 

Good evening Art, I can appreciate your frustration and I too am on round four, though its been less than a month. I've experienced the same 'looser than when I first tightened the pump bolts' - next time I am going to replace the lock washers and see if that helps. You're right getting a torque wrench in there is a challenge. I've found it easier to remove the fan belt and loosen the pivot bolts for the alternator.

I just sent a message to Mike at Then and Now to see if you can contact him directly. In an earlier message you added a photo of your vacuum cover which looked similar to mine (engine and wiper). The schematics above shows the inlet/outlet sides of the vacuum pump as being opposite one another. Through my experience, I found I paid attention to anything that was written or highlighted in a video and I ignored the rest. It's only in the past 2 days that I've noticed the new diaphragm is different than the old one and the pump body did not have the hole in it that I drilled yesterday. My suggestion is to look at your manual and examine the pictures to see if they depict what is installed on your car. I'll report back once I've heard from Mike. If you think it might help, I'd be happy to talk. Let me know, David

I just noticed on the '57 cutaway view that the cross section of the hole I drilled is shown in the image - a picture paints a thousand words...

 

With my earlier post I forgot to mention that I 'test assembled' the vacuum side of my pump and bench tested it and it has in and out pressures as expected (confirmed by Mike). I'm supposed to get the replacement diaphragm on Monday - more follow. Thanks, David