Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Mid Century Cadillac Discussion / Re: 1954 Fuel Pump to Carb Fuel Line
« Last post by Ed Leed on Yesterday at 10:03:47 PM »
I ordered a fuel pump to carb line from Inline Tube several years ago and it was completely wrong.  As in, what car did they make if for? This after they told me that they had the correct diagram for the line.  We shortened it and bent it in the correct shape and it worked. Lemonade out of lemons.

Best,

Ed Leed
2
Mid Century Cadillac Discussion / Tire Valve Stem Size
« Last post by Ed Leed on Yesterday at 09:38:28 PM »
Hello all,

I have searched all over this forum and I bet the answer is out there somewhere, but it is not popping up.

Just had new Diamond Back bias look radials installed on my '54 and we did not replace the valve stems because the installer did not have the bigger valve stems.  One of the tires is losing air.  It is still leaking after replacing the valve cores with several new and uses ones, so I am thinking that the valve stem is leaking, not the valve core.  It could also be something worse such as a cracked wheel.  The tires always held air reliably so I am hoping that the wheel is not cracked and the valve stem is the culprit.

Since the valve stem holes on our old cars are wider than modern ones can someone tell me the exact dimensions?  I found a post on this forum by a fellow with saber wheels on his '56 and the dimensions on his valve stems are 2 inches long and the hole is .625 inches in diameter.  Are these the correct dimensions for the valve stems for my '54?  He is using Milton S425 valve stems. I am not certain if the saber wheels are thicker than my standard steel wheels.

Thanks for your help

Best,
Ed Leed.
3
Bob,

It all comes down to whether or not Cadillacs left the factory with T3's in 1955. I have no hard proof that they did but I suspect that late 55's did come with T3's. Without proof my deductive reasoning isn't worth a damn.  The issue is the judging is based on how a car was built, not how the car was retrofitted at the dealer or any point after the factory. The only exception is factory authorized dealer accessories.  We need to be careful about hard to find parts. Just because a part is hard or impossible to find it doesn't mean the rule should be changed. Example, next year a guy shows up with a 55 with the correct impossible to find guide headlights, another 55 is there with T3's. Should both cars be scored the same? If the T3's are not confirmed as a factory part.... how could they?

Now if you want to say that the Round table 1955 issue proves that Cadillac declared T3's a factory authorized dealer accessory. You may have a good argument for the chief Judge.

4
Bob,

Just my personal views, also not posting this at the CLC side as I may get shot-down with my comments..!

My answer in a nutshell is NO “there should be no point deduction if you have the T3 headlights”.

My understanding is the T3 with the triangle was made for two things, the three small bumps for the alignment tool and the T3 with the triangle logo also represent the 3 degree adjustment down and to the side adjustment.

Although the picture on the MPL (I have March 1 1955) shows the headlight with no bumps for 1952-1955, the T3s was offer as an equivalent replacement as indicated under the MPL listing, so both the “seal beam” type and the T3 should be made as authentic under the “Authenticity Manual”.

BTW the 1956 Supplemental release in August 1 1955 show the same headlight T3 and part # for the 1956 as the 1955 MPL. So there could be a possibility that some of the late 1955 were delivered with the newer T3.   ???

Just my take..!  ;)
5
Sooo what I understand from the majority of replies here is that my T-3 headlights are incorrect for my 55 and I could be deduced points when being judged. That just doesn’t seem right by me since original headlights are not reproduced and n.o.s. are non existent or if you do find some you will pay a  astronomical  price. I have checked some of the vendors for them but the headlights do not say guide or the 12v marking.

Regards,

Bob Kielar

P.S. This was in reply to the Cadillac Lasalle Forum
6
General Discussions / Re: Sun visor hinge...
« Last post by StevenTuck on Yesterday at 05:12:41 AM »
64 was the first year to have the inserts. They will not fit into the 63 and below. I'm sure you can cobble up something to make fit, but the parts did not come with the insert.
Russ is correct but the sleeve came out to resolve the problem.
7
Mid Century Cadillac Discussion / Re: Cadillac Novelties
« Last post by Lexi on June 24, 2019, 06:20:49 PM »
Saw this hand bag in the back seat of a vintage Caddy at a car show. Also pictured is a '50s automobile upholstery style purse. Clay/Lexi
8
General Discussions / Re: Sun visor hinge...
« Last post by russ austin on June 24, 2019, 06:23:29 AM »
64 was the first year to have the inserts. They will not fit into the 63 and below. I'm sure you can cobble up something to make fit, but the parts did not come with the insert.
9
General Discussions / Re: Sun visor hinge...
« Last post by StevenTuck on June 24, 2019, 04:48:00 AM »
These are the support bushings that insert in the hinge.

https://jcaparts.com/collections/cadillac-interior
10
Mid Century Cadillac Discussion / Re: Cadillac Novelties
« Last post by Lexi on June 23, 2019, 10:37:21 PM »
Check out this 1956 Cadillac Mary Kay brooch. Clay/Lexi
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10