Water pump identification

[Cadman-iac]

Rick here is a comparison shot of a cast 1956 Tallboy next to it's 1956 cast crank pulley, as requested. All belt grooves match up perfectly. I have yet another set and compared those and they were also a match and also agree with what is on my car. These were installed on AC equipped cars. The non-AC cars used stamped steel pulleys in both instances. Clay/Lexi

Ok, in that case I have a matching set. But I've got to double-check the compressor and generator pulleys for the same groove width.
These cast pulleys have narrower grooves than their stamped steel counterparts have. I thought that my parts car had the wider grooves on the generator and A/C compressor.

And that begs the question, if the A/C cars used the cast pulleys, then did they also have a different pulley for the power steering pump as well?

AND, why would my parts car have a 3 groove stamped pulley? Could my 3 groove stamped steel pulley actually be from a 55?

Are you positive that your car hasn't had the pulleys swapped out for a newer year? Just grasping at straws here now.

Rick

[Lexi]

As you clearly noted earlier, we can never assume that what is on cars of this age are OEM. Just have a look at a lot of early '30s Fords. Or Tri-Five Chevys. I have three matching sets of these pulleys, one of which I removed from a parts car that I thought was original. One set is on my car. The other came from an extremely knowledgeable buddy who stripped it from a 1956 Cad, (he had restored 4 of them and had three '56 parts cars). Is it cast in stone that these are as myself and my buddy believed them to be? No, but the evidence is strongly suggestive that they are. Tracing any available casting numbers or foundry marks would ace it. But where is that information? Answer: The Engineering files at GM Heritage.

More on water pumps. I checked my late '50s Hollander interchange manual and they as well list 1949 - 1956 water pumps as interchangeable, but noted that the '56 unit was different but could be adapted to work. Of note, is that they don't tell you how to identify these pumps. I think our collective posts have identified the 1956 water pump with a reasonable degree of accuracy though.

That said, your water pump with the missing fitting which I speculated might be for a non-heater ordered car is odd as it it appears to be not itemized in the MPL, nor noted in the Serviceman index. One would think all the 1956 pumps would be the same, with perhaps a blind plug used on a port not required. Some parts never make it to the MPL. Is this one of them? I don't know. Perhaps it is from another GM product which was used in the odd event that a buyer did not order a heater? The 1956 MPL lists Cadillac water pumps as good from 1949 - 1956 with some side notes regarding AC cars and nipple fittings. Hollanders seems to have repeated this info. No mention of S75 or S86 cars noted in Group 6.2050 (Water Pump Complete Section). As this is a daunting task it probably in part explains why others have not chimed in. The water is murky with few details.

That said, how do we know that all of the other pumps in your collection are even Cadillac to begin with? See mistakes like this on the net quite frequently. As Glinda the Good Witch said in The Wizard of Oz film, its always best to start at the beginning. For us, that would mean assuming that nothing on our cars is OEM until proven. With many of your parts having already been removed, God only knows where they came from. This identification process is frought with pitfalls.

On a happier note, attached are 2 images of the spacer used on the fan hub of the non-AC cars. While it is chunky as I remembered, it is even more thick, (3/4 inch I believe) than I first recalled. Perhaps this will clear up one more of your mysteries for you! Not sure about your steering pump pulley enquiry, but at the time of writing I suspect that they all used the same pulley. As per our much earlier email correspondence there were spacers used on that Left Hand engine side which I believe was dependant on whether car was AC or not, (still looking for one of them if they have since turned up in your parts stash).    Clay/Lexi

[Lexi]

As an after thought, this further illustrates that 1956 was the "bastard" year for Cadillac. So many one off and mistakes. I also suspect a higher number of swapped engines and transmissions due to the known problems with those units even when new. Another reason why these cars can be difficult to keep on the road as well as to maintain them as OEM. Clay/Lexi

[Caddyholic]

Here is a picture of the back of 57 pump that I took from a CC car.

[Caddyholic]

Here is a picture of a pump I got extra with my 61. The heater hoses connect to the back and run under the intake. This is the same for 62. This pump has a extra port on the front? That my 2 cars don't have. It also has a thick flange for the AC car.

[Lexi]

Here is a picture of a pump I got extra with my 61. The heater hoses connect to the back and run under the intake. This is the same for 62. This pump has a extra port on the front? That my 2 cars don't have. It also has a thick flange for the AC car.

As David and Rick noted, the '57 had a different lower hose location. I think the oil filler tube in '57 also was re-directed to point in the same direction as that water pump hose connection. Perhaps some of your photos can help Rick sort out issues with his pumps that may post date 1956. He sure has a lot of ground to cover. Thanks for posting Caddyholic. Clay/Lexi

[Cadman-iac]

 Caddyholic,
 Would you happen to have a service manual for either of those years, 61 or 62, and if so, can you post a picture of the heater hose diagram?

 Thanks,  Rick

[64\/54Cadillacking]

This thread is super interesting guys. Too much info to wrap my head around! I'm curious to know how my water pump looks like in my 54. I did get some A/C parts off that one 54 Fleetwood, but unfortunately the original engine and the entire drivetrain was missing from it so the owner didn't have any engine parts or attachments like the water pump or the fan.

I had no idea about the water pump pulleys and the different sizes depending of it's an A/C car or not. Cadillac made so many tiny changes to things depending on the year and features the car had.

Like how the 55 Eldorado's had transmission cooler lines, while the other cars didn't? Is that correct? Again if that's true, that's something new I just learned! Lol.

Definitely lots of "one offs" with the 56's. Everything from interior and exterior trim, to the engine and transmission, the steering wheel, wheel covers, a lot of things.

[Cadman-iac]

 I double-checked the generator and A/C compressor on the 56 parts car and both have the narrower grooves like the cast pulleys have, so I believe that the cast pulleys are the original type for 56. My guess is that someone in the past has changed the crank pulley with one from a 55 with A/C. The water pump pulley was missing when I got the car, but what was supposed to be the original engine from my Coupe De Ville had the cast water pump pulley.
 The 55 parts car has the stamped steel pulleys for both crank and water pump, and I believe those to be original.

[Cadman-iac]

This thread is super interesting guys. Too much info to wrap my head around! I'm curious to know how my water pump looks like in my 54. I did get some A/C parts off that one 54 Fleetwood, but unfortunately the original engine and the entire drivetrain was missing from it so the owner didn't have any engine parts or attachments like the water pump or the fan.

I had no idea about the water pump pulleys and the different sizes depending of it's an A/C car or not. Cadillac made so many tiny changes to things depending on the year and features the car had. 

Cadillacking,
I would like to see what you have in your car as well. The more input I get the better, and hopefully the more accurate this will be.

My ultimate goal is to post a reference thread for anyone who needs to identify what pump they have on their 49-62 Cadillac, and what to look for when they are trying to figure out which one to buy.
From what I've seen so far, different ones can be made to work with a different year, but it doesn't make it right. A perfect example is the pump on my 56 parts car.
It worked only because it has those two extra ports on the top passage, so whomever installed it adapted it to work. Does it make it right? No, but who knows what they had to choose from and what information they had available to them when they were looking for a pump.

And honestly, I'm not even going to use the original engine in my car anyway, I'm hopefully going to use a 472 in it.
But as an old parts guy, it bugs me that there isn't a clear reference for these original pumps. And since I happen to have 11 of them in total, I thought I would at least try to figure out exactly what they are supposed to fit.
 It's going slow, but it is going. I know more about them than I ever thought I would now. But there's still a whole lot more to figure out.
 The 58-62 pumps are next if I can get some responses from owners of those years.
 And I still have some questions about the 49-53 models.
 I would like to get photos of the heater hose routing for each year specifically, as hopefully it will help to identify these. I only have service manuals for the 56,57, and the 58 supplement.
 I need info on the 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 59, 60, 61, and the 62 yet.
 It would be great if I could post the hose diagram with each style of pump to make it clear what pumps would work for a given year.

 Thanks for your interest and comments, I appreciate it.

 Rick

[Roger Zimmermann]

I know that the Hydramatic was redesigned for the 56, so it used an external cooler, but did they ever use a transmission cooler on anything prior to the 56?
 I checked my 55 and it didn't have one, but from the information given in this thread, a cooler was "optional" for 56, so would that also be the case for prior years as well?
 

As David King wrote, the transmission cooler was used only on cars with dual carbs for 1955. All cars had the cooler for 1956.
1954 and older cars had no transmission cooler.

[Lexi]

...so I believe that the cast pulleys are the original type for 56.

Seems so. You may be interested in learning that I weighed both the Tallboy as well as the Fatboy 1956 pulleys on an industrial scale, accurate to within 1 ounce over some 44lbs. Here are the results: 1) Tallboy 2570 grams (5.6 lbs) 2) Fatboy 1287 grams (2.8 lbs). So the triple groove Tallboy is twice the weight of the Fatboy, though in masss it looks smaller. I determined that the weight comes from it being thicker everywhere especially from the bottom of the cone (where the 4 bolts pass through to mount). The metal there I measured with a depth gauge and is a touch over 1 3/8 inches thick! Both inner and outer flat portions of this area are also machined on the pair that I checked as if done on an industrial lathe. So its original thickness was even greater prior to finishing as had to be trued to flat, perhaps around the 1.5 inch mark prior to cutting. Then the metal slims down a bit up the "cone" area, which also shows lots of evidence of lathe work to cut to a taper, (concentric ring cuts). The Fatboys depth of metal there is nowhere near that, and negligable (but is stamped steel). Doesn't seem to be any finishing work there. See Tallboy images for reference. Clay/Lexi

[Cadman-iac]

Clay,

Here we go again!! I measured my tallboy pulley and the hub center thickness was 1.215 inches thick, just under 1 1/4" thick.
It sounds like we have just uncovered another mystery.
Maybe this is why you found a spacer behind one?
Could different years have different thicknesses, or maybe it's the air conditioning issue? But  the crank pulley position in relation to the balancer, and the generator pulleys don't have to be shimmed or spaced to accommodate air conditioning. Or do they?

I hadn't started out to decipher Cadillac's pulley issues, all I wanted to do was figure out the water pumps.
However they are linked due to their relationship to each other.
What have we uncovered?

Rick

[Lexi]

Its not necessarily another mystery. I would think that most important would be balancing the unit so it spins harmonized and true. Cutting more or less off to effect true may be as a result of what "noise" was left after casting, (and how sharp a cutter was). More "hills and valleys" would necessitate more cutting to level. Perhaps that exhibited changes from batch to batch? I ran a company that did a lot of Architectural casting (though not metal), but can think of additional reasons that would be analogous to this. Would probably make for dull reading here. Also, the 1956 MPL lists the same part# for '54 - '56 Tallboys (AC) under Group 6.0245. So there should only be one such part, unless that changed in later years if Cadillac felt that a change was needed. I used a machinist's depth gauge to measure this and any deviations from others I would think are negligible as long as the unit is balanced (and the fan does not hit the rad). I suspect these measurements are "nominal" and there must be some acceptable tolerances.

Again, the answer, if available might be found in Cadillac's Engineering files at GM Heritage.

Also, as Cadillac experienced heating issues that year as evident by the Serviceman and Roundtable publications, did GM make  small alterations to
cause the radiator fan to sit marginally closer to the rad to increase cooling efficiency? Speculation, but who knows.

As for the spacer, I have only found those used with the Fatboys, (non AC cars). So they are not part of the equation here. Clay/Lexi

[Cadman-iac]

 What I was referring to was the thickness of the pulley center hub. But I guess the critical dimension is from the rear surface of the center where it mounts/mates with the pump hub, and the groove locations.
 I was thinking the variance in the thickness would interfere with the groove alignment, but that would only change where the fan ends up.
 I was looking at it from the wrong end so to speak.

 Rick

[Lexi]

My depth measurement was obtained using one of the 4 mounting holes, (see last image above in post #91). Clay/Lexi

[Cadman-iac]

My depth measurement was obtained using one of the 4 mounting holes, (see last image above in post #91). Clay/Lexi

 Yes, that's the same way I measured mine.

 Rick

[Lexi]

When I owned Foley Architectural, we often ran into "hills and valleys" with our castings which prompted us to use more rigid molding mediums to increase dimensional stability and reduce our finishing processes and machining. Having spent decades collecting vintage iron as well as having been exposed to many, many tons of cast iron barbell plates as well as studying them; changes in sand casting for example, can create all sorts of dimensional anomalies if the mother mold is not properly prepared. When manufacturers began producing calibrated plates one began seeing many of the signs that the casting had been reworked to bring the product into spec. Not unlike the tool marks observed in these Tallboys. I imagine the differences we found can most likely be attributed to variations in trim, cutter sharpness, casting preparation and specification allowances that the rotating fan must fall within. So some variation is perhaps expected. Seems supported by the MPL as no other part is reported at the time. Then again, manufacturers have always had the right  to make changes in order to improve their product (or to avoid liability issues). Are such changes always reported? Who knows. Clay/Lexi

[Warren Rauch #4286]

  Cadillac waterpumps from a Champion parts Rebuilder ID Guide 1972

  Pump  #    Cast   
 
  W1202  1460222  49-54 exc 54 with Dynaflow

  W1202A  1461288  54 with dynaflow , two outlets one each top of upper manifold

  W1203  1462531 or C55  1955  outlet on thermostat housing 3/8"

  W1204  1464403 or C56  1956  outlet on thermostat housing 1/2"

  W1205  1465323    1957 outlet to radiator on right side this year only

W1206  1469500  1958  heater outlet on left side down by radiator outlet

W1207    1471373  Early 1959  heater outlets one each 3/8 and 1/2 "

W1207A  1473914  Late 1959-1962  Heater outlets two both 1/2"


The positions of the fan hubs vary some for air conditioned or not. The rebuild info in the shop manuals will give the details,if it is important to you. These are the varitions this rebuilder worried about.

Warren

[Cadman-iac]

Wow! That's really great Warren, thank you for that.
I'm guessing that the "W" numbers are the "in-house" numbers that the  rebuilder assigned to identify the pumps in their own catalogs and for their distributors.

I'll go through mine and check the few that have a GM casting number on them and see if any fall into any of these groups.

Unfortunately, I realize that some of mine are probably aftermarket pumps, and as such, probably cannot be identified by the numbers, (if they have any).
But this is a great help, thank you Warren.

I'm going to ask for specific year hose routing diagrams in separate threads in an effort to try and pin down some of the various differences between the years and pumps.
I think some of the questions are probably getting lost in the length of this thread, particularly when I and others get sidetracked with related questions, such as the pulley issue.
That is a legitimate topic all by itself, and would benefit from a separate thread dedicated to just that as well.

And like I had mentioned before, I would like to see a reference thread for this that would help anyone who might have a question about water pumps for a 49-62 Cadillac.
Until I began looking at the ones I have, (11 in total), I had absolutely no idea that there were so many minor and major differences between them. And if someone was only looking at 1 pump, they would never know what they are facing if they were wanting to replace it.
How many parts people today can figure out this stuff with what they find in their systems? Probably none!
Even as an old GM parts man I never had anyone ask me for one.
But now I feel like I'm in a position to at least try to figure this out in order to help the rest of the Cadillac community who owns one of these great machines and would like to keep it as original as possible. (I know, I know, as I'm trying to fit a 472 into my 56, I'm one to talk,). (Bows head in shame)!

I'm amazed at the response to this question, it's been great. So please, if you can, help me out with pictures of your pump and the hose diagram for your car.
We will make a proper reference source for anyone with a need to know.

Thank you all,
  Rick