Another blow thru 1600 build

[John S.]

I was just on the CB site and saw the jet reamers that I bought 20+ years ago are $74.95!
I have no idea what I paid back then.

[John S.]

Unfortunately my Father passed the day after Christmas. We went up to evaluate his shop yesterday. It’s where I have a few VW’s. Including this solid, but dirty ‘56.

[Chip Birks]

Sorry for your loss

[madmike]

Hey john, So sorry about your Dad , I lost my nephew the day after Too, and my sister the day before new year ,,,fuckin covid,,couple years ago, no one left but me ,from my immediate family

[John S.]

Yes it all sucks. Thank you guys.

[John S.]

Condensation!

[madmike]

Yep ,Normal, u made that bitch sweat ,Cheers,Mike

[John S.]

Thanks. I just moved the O2 sensor to the outlet pipe.

[madmike]

That should give ya better readings,, we had almost 50* up here yesterday,,

[John S.]

I drained my tank. Going to switch to all -AN fittings. May change the regulator to make it easier. Mine has pressed in fittings and I don’t feel like pulling them out and tapping them.

[John S.]

Getting the fuel system done. Been a little distracted with my new to me 83 Chevy stepside. It was my Father’s. And the oval bug pictured above is gone.

[Ol'fogasaurus]

This is a "for what it is worth" information.

John, changing out from "pressed in" fittings ("inserted") is usually a good idea as long as the threading to the unit when replacing the fittings is done to match. "TPI" (threads per inch), diameter of the fitting, entrance and exit size match things and the way the threads are made can be critical. The pressed in fitting can have several ways of doing it also.

Cut threads don't necessarily take side loadings that well (the tube going into or with it has the potential to "push or pull" as twists and turns that can be involved). You also have other things that need to be watched out for also. I ran into this problem when dealing with both brake lines as well as fuel fittings and had to make changes to lower the potential of this happening.

"AN" (a generally miss-used term indicating it is a MIL-spec part. AN (Army-Navy) fittings can come in many various designs (in this case thread counts and materials to name a few things) so you would need to be careful with choosing the right ones. The MIL spec term is a fixed design assuming you have access to them. They are usually very expensive as there is a lot of "stuff" ("stuff" in this case meaning a lot of work) that goes on in making them and following the mill spec directions in making and finishing them is critical. Very complicated and potentially expensive assuming they really are MIL-spec parts. If I remember correctly the term AN started sometime during of after WWII or the Korean war.

When working I did the drawings for the company I worked for and did 9 different drawings for fasteners. 5 or 7 of which, I was told, that later became Mil-spec parts (not sure if the numbers were AN or other mil specs codes) with one became a NAS (National Aerospace Spec), and one not sure if it became a Mil-spec part or remained a company part number (I got transferred to another design area within the company). The drawing parts list also listed the manufacturing specifications that were required to mix the material, the forming the material to get the "grain" of the material in the right direction and other necessary things (so long ago I forget a lot of it). The threading, size of the fastener and finish all were part of the fastener number and coding.

If dealing with commercial fittings (cheaper than real MIL spec fittings for sure) the same or similar specs would have to be checked also but at what level and a bit more difficult to find out from the maker of the part (I ran into this several weeks ago). "MIL-spec" has become a general term for things but commercially, the term may not apply to the parts design. Also, one fitting from the same company or other similar fittings from other companies could look the same but the strength and other things may not necessarily work together well over time.

Commercial parts have become MIL standards but changes to them are usually added such as use limitations. One of the Nyloc fastener designs (for example) had a cycle limitation of either 13 or 14 uses but the MIL standard took the cycles down to 9 cycles as I remember (we are talking back in the late 60s I think). This change was a safety change to assure that the locking ability hadn't started to wear too much and soften up the clamping.

Usually this is obvious but also easily missed also when doing certain things. I've run into this and similar problems myself and have/had to deal with the problem myself. It's easy to miss things until it is too late.

I am sure that commercial parts do a lot of the same things but probably not to the "cost" of the MIL parts do.

Lee

[John S.]

Thanks Lee.
My new fuel return.

[madmike]

Clean

[John S.]

Thanks. I keep needing more hose and fittings. Not fun.