No it was confusing because I guess I hacked the thread from the OP and made it with my car. Sorry OP!
1966 New Yorker heat control method?
- Thread starter Len Z
- Start date
No it was confusing because I guess I hacked the thread from the OP and made it with my car. Sorry OP!
LocuMob
Fluid Technician with a hat
So other than the cable attached to the dash control, the valve is independent of the heater assembly?
jollyjoker
Active Member
I got tired of the factory heater control valve leaking inside the firewall and into the carpet on my 65 Dodge . . . and the replacement ones too! Simple and cheap fix - go to parts store and get a new inline valve for a mid-70s Dodge pickup (under $20 last time I bought one). Then mount it in the engine bay (like it should have been all along) . . . you might need a longer cable . . . I used one out of a 67 Chrysler I think, and it's worked perfectly.
commando1
Old Man with a Hat
Running the cable directly from the temperature control lever on the dash directly to the heater valve under the hood still allowed you to modulate the amount of heat?
rexus31
Senior Member
This was in response to the thread starter. Sorry for the confusion.
commando1
Old Man with a Hat
turboomni
There's also the capillary tube that runs into the bottom of the heater box as a temp sensor, otherwise the valve is stand alone.
commando1
Old Man with a Hat
Yes. That's what I was thinking about when he said he replaced the original heater valve with one from a mid-70s Dodge pickup.
What about that capillary tube?
And which mid-70s Dodge pickup valve. There were two of them. One for a heater only equipped vehicle and for one with A/C.
jollyjoker
Active Member
Yes . . . control cable directly to the in-line HCV regulated heat w/o any problem. I did this maybe 15-20 years ago, so I'm a bit fuzzy on details. It is a A/C car, but the A/C actually hasn't worked since I got it. To be honest w/ you, when I did it, I never even realized what the capillary tube was for. I just spliced the new HCV in-line to the heater inlet hose, w/ the idea that it would cut off the flow into the core - therefore, easy-to-control heat! I was actually trying to rig-up something on the order of the picture Turboomni posted, when I stumbled onto a PU truck in the junkyard (sorry - don't remember what year). Went to the parts store, and told them what I wanted - he went into the back, and returned w/ one in hand. I remember being stunned at how cheap it was! Well under $20. I don't think I'd ever put another original valve into my car - why in the world would Chrysler engineer a drippy, leaky valve INSIDE the firewall, only to go right back OUTSIDE the firewall again???
commando1
Old Man with a Hat
I've asked myself that a 1,001 times.
It has been my understanding that automotive engineers need to produce new/redesigns on a regular basis to justify their existence... and sometimes the bad ideas get approved for production.
Maybe an insider can speak up and set me straight if I have this wrong.
I had a young man many years ago who's father worked for GM. After spending a little time discussing they "whys" of Vortec central point injection... if you dealt with it you might call it a spider. That system would use one electronic injector to control one or more mechanical injectors (poppet valves) and had lots of issues during its lifespan. Not saying its pure crap, I own 2 of them, but it had some issues...
When asked why this was a good idea, I told him that I never spoke to a GM person who could justify the concept... just one of those things that somehow got into production. Turns out the young man's father was involved in the project, and explained to him that the guy behind it carried enough weight to push it through... and was impressed junior understood the break in logic having one injector to control another.
The water valve's capillary tube was there for a reason, but as things progressed, that "higher level of execution" was not needed enough to justify the added cost AND assembly line additional labor for installation, I suspect. Just as the reason the two heater hoses ran though the bottom of the '69 era valves, rather than one being directly connected to the heater core . . . was probably so the assembly line people doing the heater hoses wouldn't have to take the extra time (at that assembly line station) to connect the hose to the core when it was easier to do it higher on the fender when the other hose was connected.
The '65-'68 cars generally had GREAT underhood accessibility, but as I said back then, for the great '69 Fuselage bodies, they must have hired some GM engineers as underhood accessibility suffered significantly. The inner hvac assembly was still basically where it had been all the time, but the body contours seemed to rise and make accessibility more difficult than before. Therefore, the hvac box seemed to be hidden like it was on many GM cars.
I like the styling of the Fuselage bodies a lot, so putting up with a few things can be better tolerated.
A friend in the automatic transmission rebuilding industry mae a comment that kind of made sense to me. I was at his shop one evening as he was building a TF8 for export. I remarked at the diameter size of the clutch plates and how they related to Ford C6 and GM THM400 plates, with the THM400 plates being of smaller diameter. I commented that the THM400 was supposed to be the "killer end all" automatic, according to GM people. And it is in the same category as the TF8 727, BUT the 727 has larger diameter clutch plates. His comment was that "When Chrysler or Ford do something, or change something, there's a reason for that. At GM, it appears that changes happen depending upon whom is making decisions that day." From some of the things I'd seen in GM parts, at the dealership level, over the years, that made sense.
The smaller diameter clutch plates in the THM400 also relate to a smaller diameter case, which then relates to the side of "transmission humps' in the floorpans. At one time in the '60s, that mattered and was an advertising issue.
GM seemed to take a competitor's new part and engineer as much money out of it as they could when they designed THEIR version of it. It might take a good bit of money to do that, but with the volume of vehicles they built, those pennies turned into dollar bills quickly.
CBODY67
The '65-'68 cars generally had GREAT underhood accessibility, but as I said back then, for the great '69 Fuselage bodies, they must have hired some GM engineers as underhood accessibility suffered significantly. The inner hvac assembly was still basically where it had been all the time, but the body contours seemed to rise and make accessibility more difficult than before. Therefore, the hvac box seemed to be hidden like it was on many GM cars.
I like the styling of the Fuselage bodies a lot, so putting up with a few things can be better tolerated.
A friend in the automatic transmission rebuilding industry mae a comment that kind of made sense to me. I was at his shop one evening as he was building a TF8 for export. I remarked at the diameter size of the clutch plates and how they related to Ford C6 and GM THM400 plates, with the THM400 plates being of smaller diameter. I commented that the THM400 was supposed to be the "killer end all" automatic, according to GM people. And it is in the same category as the TF8 727, BUT the 727 has larger diameter clutch plates. His comment was that "When Chrysler or Ford do something, or change something, there's a reason for that. At GM, it appears that changes happen depending upon whom is making decisions that day." From some of the things I'd seen in GM parts, at the dealership level, over the years, that made sense.
The smaller diameter clutch plates in the THM400 also relate to a smaller diameter case, which then relates to the side of "transmission humps' in the floorpans. At one time in the '60s, that mattered and was an advertising issue.
GM seemed to take a competitor's new part and engineer as much money out of it as they could when they designed THEIR version of it. It might take a good bit of money to do that, but with the volume of vehicles they built, those pennies turned into dollar bills quickly.
CBODY67
commando1
Old Man with a Hat
Any Engineer can design a water pump for Rolls Royce.
Only the best Engineers can design a water pump for GM.
Only the best Engineers can design a water pump for GM.
And there's a funny story about when Rolls Royce was considering purchasing the GM THM400 automatic trans for their cars. The ones GM sent worked very smoothly. RR pulled them apart for inspection and found many poorly-machined valve body passages, so they fixed that to their satisfaction. Transmissions shifted very poorly and "out of whack", by comparison. Seems those imperfections were "calibrated for" and when RR smoothed them out and made them look pretty, to their standards, the flow was different. So, GM told them "hands off" of the guts, just install them. They did and the transmissions shifted as desired. This was along about 1968 or so.
CBODY67
CBODY67
Similar threads
