2toys

Can someone post a picture of a 326 water pump? Either the pump itself or a close up on the car as that is how I'll be checking mine. I ran a search on "water pump" and came up with nothing close. I think mine is incorrect and will be at Carlisle to pick one up if needed.

'65 327/350 L-79

Thank you

2toys

Anyone?

I have a judging sheet from previous owner which states thr pump is not a 326. I don't know how to tell the difference between castings, a picture may help.

Chuck Gongloff

What's the casting number on the pump you have now? Use a mirror.

It's on the front of the pump..... , a 7 digit number 3859"326" is the casting # you're looking for.

Some pumps are also date coded. The 326 began date coding in November of 1965.

Should have the bypass hose on the top without a reducer bushing. Chuck

ctjackster

{edit - all pretty much like Chuck says} no date on your 65 SHP water pump, and it (date code) is imposs to see when mounted anyway. ideally, you want to see a 1/2" NPT for the by-pass, rather than a 3/4" NPT as seen on later service replacement 326 pumps, which will have a date.

and then there is this exchange I just dug up from the NCRS board (whatever this place did to lose Joe Lucia was a huge mistake) Anyway, there is a real doubt if the TIM&JG has it right about the 326 pump even being on the 63-65 SHPs originally:

http://www.ncrs.org/forum/archive20.cgi?review=160065

If you really want to go for it, you'd be looking for a 3782609 pump with the 1/2" by-pass, but then you'd be incorrect as measured by the TIM&JG. I am aslo told that the 3782609 is very hard to find.

PS - Thanks to the TIM&JG and my blind faith on it, I have a '326 pump on my 65 SHP.

Chuck Gongloff

I'm no guru, but I think the "609" is right for SHP 63-5's, and I think the 63-4 JG is wrong.

I don't have a 65 JG. What does it say?

When Jack is talking about the bypass, he's referring to the "hole" in the top to which the 90 degree nipple attaches. Then a hose goes to the intake manifold.

Originals use a 1/2 inch NPT hole opening. Later service replacements have a 3/4 inch hole, BUT that size can be reduced by using a reducer bushing to make the 3/4 into 1/2. It's obvious on installation. Chuck

2toys

Thanks guys. Learnig this stuff is neat, paying to make it correct
isn't !!! I'll need a pump.

Jackster you provided the "key", the judging sheet states replacement pump 3/4" fitting. I had ordered a new correct elbow to pickup from Paragon as I have all new hoses and clamps already.

The car is up on the lift and I don't have time to move the C-5 and bring it down right now.

New question. I knew their was no date code on a '65 pump. will I need a '65 or earlier pump or is the date code not visible for judging if I get a '66 or newer pump? Just reread your post and see the date code is not visible.

Great, now what pump do I "invest" in. Wanted to do this all at one time.

2toys

Just finished reading the NCRS discussion on casting numbers. What a dilema.

ctjackster

yup, Check's admonition to be wary of reducers was the same info as I conveyed regarding the 1/2 vs 3/4 " npt on the by-pass.
Chuck, the 65 TIM&JG calls out the '326 pump for the SHPs, with no date. If you scroll down the linked thread I posted, you'll see Joe Lucia posts up the fact that the FIRST engineering drawing for the '326 pump is dated in May of 65, so it's impossible that this pump was OE on the 64, and ditto for most of the 65s (and certainly NOT the 63s) Thus the TIM&JG for all three MYs is incorrect in this area (among others )

If you want a water pump for your 65 SHP that will pass judging, I guess you should get the '326. If you really want to chase down the pump your car likely was delivered with (I admit to playing that game from time to time) then my money is with Joe Lucia's point, and I'd be looking for the 609 pump, but as I said, those are harder to find.

PS - IF you want a '326 no date code pump, you can get one from Goat Hill - but be wary of getting lost in their shuffle. I had no problem with them, however.

Chuck Gongloff

I personally would look for a 609 pump.

That's what I have on my 63, and I feel it's correct, regardless of what the JG says.

Also, regarding Goat Hill, I've bought stuff from Paul Baker. I've had no problems with items I've bought from Paul at the event. This is stuff "on the table".

The problems arise with items that he'll "send to you" when he gets back to California, or stuff that he's "making" and will send to you when he gets it done.

He has NICE stuff. Remember the above admonitions. Chuck

JohnZ

The 326 pump is correct for your '65, and the date isn't judged, as it can't be seen with the pulley installed; here's a photo of a 326 pump, with the correct 1/2" NPT elbow fitting for the bypass hose. The same casting was used for truck applications, but it had a larger (3/4" NPT) tapped hole in the top; that casting, with a reducer bushing, is judged as a service replacement part.

2toys

Thanks for the photograph. I pulled out the C-5 and lowered the '65 for a closer look. Personally I had never noticed, but now see it has a reducer bushing in the opening. Now I understand why it is incorrect.

I've looked at so many c-2's at shows and all had a larger diameter fitting than mine and it "cornfused" me. Now I know they are all incorrect, however so is mine. I can't see the model number on mine it appears there is too much paint.

I'm sure I'll find what is required at Carlisle. I may stop by g-110 and ask you to inspect my purchase. This "correct" stuff is so innate for you and new for me.

I appreciate the help.

ctjackster

what John shows in his picture (of course he has a picture!) is exactly what is on my 65 L76, perhaps not quite as glossy and clean though, and I might wipe that teflon dope off of the side fitting

still, all in all, I might go for a '609 pump just to be one up on the judging manual . . . . .

Chuck Gongloff

According to Joe Lucia, the original, unrevised engineering drawings for the 326 pump are dated May of 1965, so if that is correct, (and Joe L is RARELY incorrect), they hadn't even started making them at THAT time.

Late 326's are dated, beginning in November of 65. Wonder if that's when they hit the production line?

Hmmmm. Food for thought. Chuck

JohnZ

Very true - however, until the JG is changed, if you want the points, you need the 326.