Recommissioning 1929 long two

[BarryCambs]

I've had a very interesting chat with the chap at CPA Radiators in Grantham. He tells me the radiator currently has a "cellular film" core, which was probably put in during the 60s when they tended to get used for anything like this:

orig_cellular_film.jpg (17.76 KiB) Viewed 179 times

However, he is suggesting it probably had an "A type" core originally. These were used in Austin 7s and most other common cars from the era. and he fits around 4 a month.

type A core.jpg (14.28 KiB) Viewed 179 times

I do like the look of it and interestingly (and luckily), he says the A type is for some reason cheaper than the cellular film, so I don't see any reason not to use one of these. I am unable to find any pictures of a Jowett of this age where I can make out the radiator in good enough details, but any information would be much appreciated. While I am not trying to "restore" the car, where things have had to be repaired, or replaced, I have tried to get them correct for the period and original specification.

Barry

[BarryCambs]

In my excitement, I forgot to re read the post from a few weeks back about the 1927 radiator. That radiator says "gill on tube". It also seems to suggest this is not an easy option and could be incredibly expensive.

I've also noticed the nickel silver cowl has 4 holes on the sides in front of the mounting holes for the radiator itself. I'd wondered if it had a winter blind at sometime, but could it have had a grill or some sort? It could be the cowl is from the 1934 car? Interestingly, the radiator has a cut out in the core to clear the crank handle, but this sits above the crank bush tube for some reason. The bottom tank is in 2 parts and this does sit around the tube.

[george garside]

Barry, the misalignment of the starting handle hole is simply down to the fact that your car is fitted with a 1934 engine which uses a completely different crankcase and cylinders etc etc.

The earlier vintage cars definitely had a grilled tube radiator which was a type widely used by many other makers as well. I'm not sure from the photos whether your radiator is a 1929 or a 1930 one or even one off a early thirties commercial which 'used up' the stock of older parts.

When you have the rad rebuilt it might be worth having a starting handle orifice made in line with your crankshaft

george

[Tony Fearn]

Here's a photo of a couple of second hand radiators for the 34-ish era I 'unearthed' recently in my garage.
They have the different cores.

Tony.

[BarryCambs]

Thanks George and Tony.

I hadn't realised the later engine was that different, assuming wrongly the removable heads were the only big difference. I had suspected the engine was sitting very low in mine and the heads are tight up against the chassis rails, the engine mounts are solid tube. I don't think there is anyway the heads will come off without lifting the engine, but the manuals do seem to suggest they should.

The radiator is slightly different from those in Tony's photo. The bottom tank is in 2 separate parts, rather than having a shaped tank. I'm guessing it is the original rad, now I know the engine is very different to the original. The filler on mine is in the centre of the top tank, whereas Tony's seen to have the filler offset. The tube for the crank handle does line up with the shaft, so I wonder if the round cross member it's welded to is off the 1934 car?

I'm just waiting for the proper quote, but I am leaning towards the A type core. I think Gill on tube is probably going to be very expensive and if some of the vintage cars had A type, it should look fine. It seems the film type it has (and in the left of Tony's photo) wasn't around in the 20/30s. It was pointed out to me the frost damage to the rad was caused by the fact you can't actually drain the tubes that are above the cut out in the tank. I don't really see how these tubes add anything to the cooling as they are blanked off at the bottom by a sheet, so the A type could improve flow too I guess.

[BarryCambs]

Looks like the decision has been made for me. Jess, the owner at CPA rang. He tells me that particular radiator would never have been gill on tube and confirmed the cellular film would probably be 1950/60s. He's quoted £600 to rebuild it using an A type Core and is going ahead. Should be done by the end of February in time for the spring sunshine!

[ian Howell]

Barry raised the point about the tubes over the cut-out for the starting handle being impossible to drain.

If so, getting antifreeze into them would be mostly a matter of something like osmosis!

Are they in fact isolated from the rest of the radiator or is there some means of cross flow?

[george garside]

I would have thought they must be connected to the bottom tank otherwise there would be no circulation through them and they would therefore not 'radiate'!. I don't ;know the answer but have always assumed that there was/is a sort of upwards 'hump' to the bottom tank with a hole through it for the handle. This would only apply to the 2 seaters long and short as on the 4 seaters the handle passed more or less under the rad


????????????

george

[BarryCambs]

Ian is right in his assumptions. There was no flow through these tubes and obviously no antifreeze getting to them. The tubes have split due to frost damage - hence the rebuild. I guess it was just done this way as it was quickest and cheapest at the time, but these centre tubes probably added little to any cooling effect. I'm assuming it was done before the engine change, as it now doesn't need this section of core cut out anyway.

rad_sketch.jpg (32.06 KiB) Viewed 123 times

The A Type core would have worked without problem as the water can simply flow around the cut out.

[BarryCambs]

As the fuel tank had to come out to re solder the tap boss and to replace yet another alraldite bodge, it seemed a good time to look at the sender unit. We cleaned the resistance wire and all looks good. However, when we tried it cautiously with the gauge on 6 volts it was dead. Tried it on 12 volts and nothing either. Looking inside the gauge, it is obvious one coil has burnt out. I think the circuit board which was with the old loom was probably a voltage reducer for the gauge, but had been disconnected, so I guess someone put 12 volts across it causing the damage. Strangely, it has 3 coils in the gauge, the 3rd being behind the needle. I wonder if it some sort of damper??

Trying to work out the wire sizes and rewind the coils is going to be quite some job, so I am hoping I can find another gauge. As I need a voltage reducer for the windscreen wiper motor, it doesn't matter if it is 6 or 12 volts, but I don't know how the gauges match to the sender. My car has the tank under the dash, so I don't know if the sender is the same as those with the tank in the rear? It measures between 0 and 30 ohms between full and empty. The gauge is Smiths.

As always, any advice would be much appreciated!

Barry

[george garside]

as far as I am aware a fuel guage was not fitted to cars with the scuttle mounted tank and the 1930 catalogue only mentions ammeter and oil pressure guage. The first mention I can find of an electric fuel guage is for the the 1932 model year when the tank was moved to the rear.

It looks as if your fuel guage may have been added later

george

[BarryCambs]

Thanks George

Do you know which year the cars went over to 12 volt electrics? I think you said the vans carried on with 6 volts latter. I wonder if the sender and gauge came from the same 1934 car as the other parts. I guess it would be an easy enough conversion to solder the mounting boss for the sender into the tank.

Barry

[george garside]

12v introduced on the cars for the '33 model year ( chassis number starting with 3) . Twin cyl Vans retained 6 volt until later CC Bradfords c1951. 4 cyl vans were 12 volt.

george

[BarryCambs]

The radiator is back from CPA in Grantham. When I originally spoke to Jess Dilly the boss, he told me I would be "over the moon" with anything they did and in all fairness, he was right. Really nice job and good people to deal with. They turned it round in 6 weeks, rather than 3 months i'd been quoted elsewhere for £600. Highly reccomended

I'm not sure what the bracket that looks like a cable guide is at the bottom right of the cowl?

I looked at the manual and parts list and I think George is right in that there was no fuel gauge on this model. It looks like the sender is from an Austin 7, these having a 5 gallon tank as well. I guess it was a simple enough job to cut a hole in the top of the tank and solder a mounting ring to it. I've managed to get hold of a couple of Smiths gauges off ebay for Austin 7s to try. As the hole in the dash is there, it seems a shame not to try and use it!

[Tony Fearn]

I'm not sure what the bracket that looks like a cable guide is at the bottom right of the cowl?

In my opinion, it is a cable guide, and it holds the end of the outer casing (with an internal wire) from the choke pull on the dashboard to the brass 'pancake' choke assembly on the carburettor.
Tony.