Well, I'm excited to say I secured and have taken delivery of Stanley Chassis #22277, originally a 740B whose body was donated to ?? and will become a 740D Sedan. Arriving yesterday, one of the worst days of weather in a while having just snowed about 10" the previous night, the chassis is safely in the garage.

First order of business will be boiler inspection and to re-install a failed tube. I was told the last "Driving" owner of this car was an airline pilot. Having split a tube, the owner removed the burner and smoke hood for replacement. He got as far as removing the old tube, but never replaced it.

I'll start a new thread once I get some decent pictures of the boiler and take a look at the inside with a handy new (and inexpensive) inspection camera. Before that however, I thought i would as a little about the chassis to you all.

The boiler wrapping and smoke hood are aluminum. Is this the original wrappers? I'm so used to seeing new and restored installs that I was surprised to see this was aluminum. Also boiler related, was the front cross member for the boiler originally riveted or bolted in place? At present there are no fasteners in the holes.

I'll have to setup an album for pictures as there is much to show and ask about. The springs still carry fairly complete and nice leather wrapping with lubrication ports. There are strap style "Snubbers" for all four corners (rears still installed). Very little rust of damage of any kind, its an amazing example of an original undercarriage if you ask me. I'm tickled and can't wait to start working!

More to come!

_______________________________________________
Jared Schoenly

1919 Stanley 735B Original Car
1922 Stanley Sedan Project
1930 Pontiac Coupe
1933 Ford Stake Body
Whatever else I can get into trouble with....

Dear Jared, I own a 1922 Stanley chassis number 22086. The front boiler retaining ring is riveted to its frame rails. The smoke bonnet is steel sheet metal, as well as the boiler wrapper. If you bought your chassis from Dan Haynes, I know where its model 740 B body now is. I am not sure if it is presently available. Probably not. SSsssteamer

I'm going over the chassis and some possible needs. Seems there was some fuel system mods done a long time ago and the Fuel Automatic is missing. Anyone have an extra they may part with?

I also seem to be missing the condensor brackets to the frame. Does anyone have a picture of these and possible an extra set laying around needing a car to go on? Thanks!

Jared

I spent a little time putting some air to the now uncovered S/N 740-3790 engine in my car after oiling it up and checking for any gross issues. It obviously needs a little adjustment to the valves and has a little blow by, but nothing too terrible. It has pretty distinct exhaust notes from the front strokes (cranks at BDC) but not very sharp at the other ends. It does get a little better in hooking up.

[youtu.be]

It should be noted there are some pretty old tweaks to things on this chassis including a "Johnson Bar" reverser added. I have the pedal to change this back, but I kinda like this setup so I'm not sure if I'll keep it for while or not. The quadrant for the hook up was long ago modified with extra notches that were too thin to hold by the looks and it would need replacement/refurbished for the Stanley reverse pedal to go back in.

As I mentioned before the fuel system was modified a little. The plumbing wasn't change to a great extent it seems, but there is no fuel automatic (still looking to purchase one if anyone has a spare!). There is also a very old electric fuel pump mounted at the tank. Just for my own curiosity, I still need to fully map the plumbing they had going on since it still have the main fuel tank (with some welds in the bottom repairing/changing something... questions on replacements another time) and the fuel pump from the pump drive is still plumbed by the looks of it. I can't quite tell till I have a closer look how pressure was regulated.

With many life obligations, it's clear progress will be slower than I hope, but the restoration project is a lot of the fun to me so I'll be trying to get in at least small bits of time. I plan on removing the Fuel tank and the main fuel pressure tanks next for cleaning and restoration. Probably the water tank as well. Here's a few pictures for now.

Forgot the other item found with the engine. On the right hand piston packing there is 2 halves of a tube stuck over the gland (well, the full length space between the bulkhead gland and the cylinder) with a made up strap clamp around the tube to hold it together. I took off the clamp (laying on the cylinder) but didn't removed the tubes yet. I'll be curious to see if this was a clamp trying to hold the nut from rotating or is there is some other issue with the gland to deal with (threads worn, something broken). We'll see what I can find out soon.

Jared, Usually when a steam engine sits for a number of years, the piston rings get stuck to the piston and you get blow by from them. After steam is put to the engine, they usually loosen up and then seal correctly. When setting the slide valves, equal valve port clearance is set while the engine is in hook up and the engine is being turned over in the direction of forward travel. The reason why "setting the valves in hook up", it is because the engine is in hook up the majority of the time while in use. The weld on the bottom of your main fuel tank is probably there because someone had to get to the pilot tank to service it and the pilot tank is located inside the main fuel tank.

Pat, noted on the valve adjustments. I was working on a Stephenson design for a 3/4" locomotive and it's AMAZING the compromises you have to deal with in valve gears. I've seen some other posts you made and it certainly makes sense to set them for best running in the most used configuration.

Question on hook up - For the Stanley engines, how can I measure or know the correct gear position for hook up? I've been reading SO much and don't recall where I saw it (and couldn't find in a quick search) but I recall a post that used a measurement from a center line, frame rod, or something for "hook up's" proper "place". Do you know these values?

Clarifying the welds - they are on the service tank, not main fuel tank. I mis-spoke on that comment. The service/pressure tank looks a little scary to me and I would say should be replaced. What do people use/make for replacements? I know the 735's have the 2 copper tanks rather than the single larger tank on the 740. I'm considering fabricating a copper tank as it's replacement.

For the main/pilot tank, I still need to inspect it fully but the outer appearance seems excellent. It does not appear to have been molested in its past and doesn't show signs of previous repairs so with any luck, maybe it's in fairly good condition. We'll see!

Started myself a log and plan on making lots of notes as I work on this project. I've tried for other projects and haven't followed through but I can see it being very helpful on this car (and maybe this will help me do so on ongoing and future projects!). Thanks!

Jared, The first step is getting your hook up notch in the correct place is to get an original hook up latch dog. With that in place, you can try the different notches on your old hook up quadrant and see which one is correct. Weld up the rest the notches and use the best one. Dave Nergaard and I have both experimented in finding a better hook up notch than what the Stanleys had used. There isn't one. They hit a home run when they placed their hook up notch where they did. Looking at your hook up quadrant, I think I see the remnants of the old notch still looking at you. When we change a left hand hook up condensing engine over to a right hand hook up non-condensing engine, we always have to find the new hook up notch placement and I usually do that by locking vice grips onto the hook up lever locking it down at the different running positions. After about 15 tries, I usually have found the sweet spot by then so that I can carve out a new notch on the relocated quadrant. What ever main fuel pressure tank that you make, make sure that you hydro-test it to at least 400 PSI. It's normal working pressure is about 150 PSI That is one tank that you do not want to have come apart while in use. Art Hart said that he tested his fuel pressure tanks to 600 PSI, but I thought that was a bit high for a copper tank. I do not know of anyone making the single replacement fuel pressure tanks for the model 740. I think that I would go to the hardware store with your known measurements for the needed tank and see what size of stainless cooking pot that they have on the shelf that would measure up. Take it home and stainless weld it up to make your new pressure tank. This is just an idea.

I'd guess that you would not like the Johnson bar in real life. Backing a Stanley can keep both of your hands pretty busy, even when you have a left foot and a spring-operated return on the reverse.

Jared
It looks like you need to rebuild the dog plate, and unless you have the latching dog you need the whole setup. The amount of hook up is not much compared to a marine engine. If you could look at another engine it would give you some idea as to the location.
I have made adjustable hookup gear for the Stanley engine. The only advantage is to get more hookup if your touring on flat area and want to save more water.
You make it easer to adjust the valves in a hookup position as the port at each end of the valve travel will be opened making it easer to make each end the same measurement.
This is not necessarily the absolute correct position as the valves should open at the same crank angle at each end of the stroke. Unlike most steam engines you don’t have a shaft to make it easer to do.


Rolly

Excellent information.

Pat - Good to know on the original settings. I'll have to look closer at the dog plate, but it wasn't easily clear which notch might be original. It's got a lot of cuts made. On the fuel tank - 600 seems far in excess. As with boilers, there is a safe point for testing and a destructive point. I like to be safe and 400 sounds quite safe (even 300). Good to know though. There is no need to go copper on the tank, but I'd rather not go steel. I know forming and silver soldering better than stainless welding so we'll see where I end up.

Kelly - Very good point. While I was able to drive Tom's Brougham a bit, I certainly don't have many miles behind the wheel. Part of me likes the "Johnson Bar" reverser, however it really seems to not be a very smart way to stay.

Rolly - I remember now seeing your adjustable dog plate in the past. Slick setup, but sounds like you don't really use it much. Very good point on the dog. I have correct pedals and brackets for the reverser, but that is all. I'll need to rebuild/make the dog plate, dog, rods, pins, and springs.

If anyone has some good pictures of the correct Stanley parts, I would appreciate it. Thanks!

Jared
I have never seen a mutable notch dog plate, and am not sure I’ve seen a 740 plate.
But I am attaching my drawing of the 735 parts. I hope there helpful. If you need more let me know.

Rolly



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/24/2014 04:43PM by Rolly.

Rolly,

Mine should have had a single notch in it, like the 735. Thanks for the drawing! That should be helpful. I'll measure the other parts, but I would imagine the 740 ad 735 were very similar if not the same in this area. I've studied a lot of your other drawings out on the forums and places and they are most helpful! You have certainly done a lot of CAD and it's very helpful stuff! I do that same with a lot of my projects, first drawing them up in solidworks to see that they are what I am looking for in the final result. Good stuff.

Did you make it to Cabin Fever this year? I don't recall seeing you and as usual was running around like a mad man most of the weekend.

Jared

Jared
Yes I did, along with 35 of our other Boston club members. I went with another friend and only brought my ¼ scale white generator and a new model duplex pump I made this past winter. I need to down scale and make smaller things.
Rolly

With a little luck, I'm hoping to spend some time tomorrow on the car and remove the old boiler, keep digging into a few areas. I've been planning to get some materials for a few items I know i need to make including the service fuel tank previously mentions. This brings up a few questions:

For the engine's steam connections, I've see a number of methods used nowadays. I currently have the feed connection that used a packing connection on the pipe for flexibility to the main feed line from the loop. This fitting also has a 1/4" pipe opening in the top which seems to have had the oil feed connection. It appears that most of the 735's have the oil feeding down the engine side of the steam loop. Mine has the oil line front the dash area running along the main line (wrapped in the insulation) and connected at the engine. This makes two questions: Do many people retain the "packing" type connection or do most use the more modern flexible stainless pipe with the braid over it? And 2, for oiling, Should the connection be made at the steam loop for better emulsifying/mixing or back at the chest of the engine?

Next that I've been pondering is the super heater. There is a poor looking coiled type super heater in the car. I planned on making a new one for safety sake. I've seen both the coil and "Zig-Zag" type super heaters made these days. Seems to me the zig-zag might grab more heat being more evenly spread over the fire. So again, 2 questions: Which is preferred (or what are the Pros and cons) between the two types? And 2, I've seen 3/8" and 1/2" seamless used for these. Again, which is preferred? Seems 1/2" might be correct for the later condensor cars.

I really enjoy hearing people experiences on best practice and looking forward to getting dirty working on the car more in the better weather (other than the current monsoon we seem to be getting). Thanks!

Jared

Jared, The steam swivel with packing at the engine is still the most reliable method of coupling the steam line to the engine. Stay with it. The oil being fed in at the steam swivel is the best place for it to enter as the super heat is at its lowest temperature there and the oil has a better chance of not burning. The Zig Zag pattern for the super heater is the best pattern for heat expansion. 3/8" stainless schedule 40 or schedule 80 pipe if you would like, fits well for tighter corners than the 1/2" pipe. 1/2" stainless pipe is excellent, but it is hard to get the tight corners needed. I have an original later condensing car super heater and it is made from a schedule 80 black steel pipe that appears to be a weird 7/16" pipe size. It is in the Zig Zag pattern. Do not do any welding on the super heater in the fire zone as that is the first place that the super heater will eventually crack. Been there and done that.

Dear Jared
I agree with Pat.
I’ll start with your last question first. I personally like lots of 90 degree bends in a superheater more then just a coil. Saturated steam has a lot of water still in it, a small partials of water. (Solids) Solids move in a straight line and do not flow as a gas. The water droplets in the saturated steam will slam into the 90-degree bends and brake into smaller partials helping to convert into a gas as it travels thought the superheater.
Some will argue the heat will take care of the conversion, I say there is a time facture as well.
I have used braded SS over bellows type flex lines on my Steamboat and have had failures with them more then once. I now make my own flexible fittings. There is nothing wrong with the Stanley fitting. The steam line on the 735 & 740 is long and has many bends to absorb vibration and movement.
I like putting the oil in at the engine for the same reason Pat stated but just after the loop works fine if your running reasonable superheat. 600 PSI is 486F all you need it 200 degrees over saturated temperature 686F there is no reason to run any more then this with your car.
Rolly

Good stuff. I've seen 10' listed for superheaters. Is 10' a good length wither either 3/8" or 1/2" or should the length vary with pipe size? Whether it's correct or not, I like the bend and "breaking up the water" theory in my head as well.

I may need to make a new packing nut, but the fitting at the engine for the main steam seems serviceable. I will stick with that and the oil at the engine. Should the oil feed line extend into the fitting to be more in the middle of the steam stream? Is a open ended tube for this extension good or would there be any benefit to a plug ended cross drilled affair? That it probably way overkill but it's pouring down rain and Friday so my mind wanders...

Next question - Blowdowns. The current plumbing on the car has a variety of incorrect valves on the lower section, globe valves and some goofy things. Is there a particular valve to use for blowdowns or standard Stanley valves? I recall reading in the bulletins or somewhere about a different style blowdown valve. Also since this is a new boiler install, I figure it's better to go a little overboard on the number of locations? I'm putting in a 26" boiler and was planning on 4 around the lower sheet and the middle with a standpipe.

Thanks!

Dear Jared
There would have been four blowdown valves on your car; they would have been Yarway seatless valves see attached drawing. Very nice valves. The front left valve would have a pipe up from the bottom to the water line in the boiler. About five inches from the inside top. This was used as an oil and crud skimmer.
Stanley valves work OK.

Ten feet is enough with a good burner. I have made them up to 16 feet for Stanley boiler in the round format at customers request.

For the oil feed I always make up a quill, looks like an old fountain pen. This sticks in the steam line at 90 degrees to the flow of steam.
Rolly

10 Feet it is. Does it make much difference then that you've seen using 3/8" or 1/2" pipe? The quill for the oils is just what i was curious about. Perfect.

Very interesting on the Yarway valves. I thought there was a different style. All 4 would have been these variety? Hard to tell from the pictures, but does the stem actually back up all the way out of the first packing to "open" the valve then? I hit the almighty google and see some versions with a hollow stem and radial holes that opens it to the floating packing, but it's hard to tell the design from the attachment. Looks like the stem would have to back out and I wondered if that was bad for the packing. Cool stuff. Anybody supply these valves or castings for such a valve? I don't mind machining up the parts I need for things, I'd generally want to get castings if I could. Thanks!

Jared

Dear Jared
3/8 IPS would be fine.

The Yarway valves come in two body styles, one has the spout the other has a hub for ¼ inch pipe. You should be able to find them at Hershey. I can send you the same drawing in a PDF file if you E-mail me your address. It’s a little clearer.

The stem backs out to the hole in the floating seat. When I first got my 735 the valves were leaking. I asked all the so-called experts in SACA-NE and was told to through them out and no one knew how to fix them. I dissected one and found out for myself how to repack them. Very easy, I made up that drawing when I was editor of our new letter.
I have seen them at the Stanley auction as well. I still have two with the spouts. I doubt any one has castings.

Seatless vlaves are still made today I have two 4000 PSI valves very large and heavy.

Rolly

I'd been wanting to make a test fuel tank for pilots and other playing around, so i put together some fittings Tuesday night. I pulled the Maxwell pilot to clean it off a bit from the Baker Burner and figured I'd light it up for something to do. May need a little more cleaning on a few slots, but in general it seemed to work nicely.

[www.youtube.com]

Question on the pilot - What is the purpose of the roughly 3/16" rod over top the pilot flame? Is this supposed to relight it on a backfire or some other purpose? It's also brazed in well at the mounting plate, but no attached at the inner end where it bends down. Not sure if it was supposed to be brazed there as well.

Baby steps, good to check out little components and document them for the future. Might test fire the burner soon for kicks.

As usual, I make a post and forget to mention/ask something. For the Maxwell and the Coleman vaporizer - Is it normal that the valve/adjustment is a little erratic? It was closed with i got the burner/removed the pilot. To light I started opening the valve but it took multiple turns before it lit. Then it seemed the fire would go up and down and was actually burning the best and most fierce NOT backed out all the way. It burnt very low when opened fully.

I'm assuming that the valve needle goes down the vaporizer to the jet at the end and a little bend may make it not act very linearly? I hadn't found any pictures online of the parts of the vaporizer and didn't take it apart at all. Thanks!

The rod over the flame is a relighter and it works most of the time. Only welded at one end to allow for expansion. I have gone on a whole weeks tour without the pilot light ever accidentally going out. When screwed in, the vaporizer has a wire that cleans the jet. When all of the way open, the flame is much too high and it may soot a little. The adjustment is supposed to be linear. I adjust my vaporizer by looking for soot drifting up through the smoke bonnet's inspection hole. I adjust back the vaporizer until there is no soot being emitted above. Also looking through the peek hole, I adjust it so that it looks just right. Just a touch of yellow on top of the blue flame seems to work best for me.

Hope everyone has a nice long weekend! With any luck I'm going to use mine to remove the old boiler and set the body in place on the chassis for a little test fitting. Here's hoping!

Luck has prevailed. I mocked up the car to assess how work will progress on the car in it's entirety. I thought I liked the big sedans just seeing the body. Now seeing it on the chassis, it's just stoking the fire for this project. She is certainly a BIG car!

Happy Memorial Day all!

Awesome sedan. In our northern states, this is the car of choice for year round touring. They look like they have always been together. Excellent match up. :)

Amazingly tall car - a big project though. We'll enjoy watching your progress!

Mike

I haven't gotten a lot done on the car in the last 2 weeks as I got sidetracked getting the launch ready for the season. Still have some boiler related valves and piping to change more to my liking, but it was nice to get it going and in the water this weekend.

I'm headed to the Northeast Classic Car Museum tomorrow (luckily work is taking me close by) to see the nice Blue 750 Sedan like mine. I talked to them last week and should hopefully be able to take a lot of good reference pictures for the forthcoming body work to be done as well as see how the windshield is on that car and other details. Should be fun!

I got some parts in this week as well. Fuel Auto/Reg, some Yarway Blowdowns for rebuild, etc. Still looking for a Pitman Arm (on the steering sector shaft) and a condensor cross member if anyone has anything around. Thanks!

Jared

I had a work trip this week and was able to fit in a quick trip to the Northeast Classic Car Museum to take a look at their 750 Stanley with a very much similar Body to mine. One of the bigger areas I'm looking to find parts for is the windshield. Anyone recognize this windshield as far as brand? I'm going to be putting this on my list of things to find/modify for the car. The hack job that is the wood framed vertical split windshield will not do. I really love this split window and the visor it has so I'd like to see if i can find some parts of one and/or just recreate it new. Any help is appreciated!

Awesome looking car, Will be great to see it on the road.

The fun should really start soon! The boiler arrived safely today. A few scratches on a few ferrules but pretty much cosmetic. I really only loaded it in the van and looked at it so far, but it looks good. 3 layers of wire, oiled and tight. Has a decent ring to it and seems to have a nice tube layout at I believe 858 tubes. Wires are screwed fast on one end and through a vertical hole in the upper band, bent over up top. Should these have a screw tapped in to secure the end? I haven't seen the terminations on other boilers much.

The mocking up, superheater & ring, burner mounts, wrapper, etc will begin soon!

I'm finally getting to the point where I'll be mocking up the boiler into the frame and designing/constructing the superheater and ring to attach the burner. I thought I would double check my thoughts with everyone before I start bending metal. Here are a few shots.

There is a bottom view of the mock up showing a zig zag 1/2" superheater that is approx 13 feet long. I have the feed from the throttle entering the front lower point and exiting the right lower to connect to the steam loop.

The cross sections show my thoughts on everything fitting up. The ring I'm planning will be 3 pieces, an 1/8" ring about 2" tall, a 3/16 or 1/4" plate donut, and a 1/2 by 3/4" bar ring for sealing surface at the burner. This will result in a 4 1/2" to 5" space from the tube sheet to the top of the burner grate. Obviously openings for the blow downs and piping. I show an inner SS Shield with straight and cone sections which will obviously take it's final shape how it's easiest to form. There will be a minimum of about 1/2" insulation between the outer and the SS shield except in the area of the rope gasket to the burner.

This ring will be closely just inside the lower ring on the boiler and the boiler will sit on the cross member "feet" nicely as it looks. A busy week, but with any luck I'll be setting the boiler in place to make sure this all seems to make sense.

Any thoughts are appreciated.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/12/2014 01:22PM by jschoenly.

Jared
If your metal working skills are as good as you CAD drawing your going to be in great shape?
Good luck. Looks like your Backer burner is slightly smaller then your boiler. Your still OK
Rolly