To:	jeff.easton@abbott.com @ INTERNET
cc:	 
Subject:	Digest 1354


oldsmobile-digest       Wednesday, July 8 1998       Volume 01 : Number
1354



Part information
Re: another starting problem
How to save GM Billions!
Re: UNBOUNCE: '57 Center Diff Section Swap
Re: How to save GM Billions!
Returned mail: User unknown
Re: How to save GM Billions!
Re: 571145 and Shimming Starters
Re: How to save GM Billions!
Re: Black inner fender restoration
Re: another starting problem
Re: another starting problem
Kettering
Re: How to save GM Billions!
What motor would you use?
Re: How to save GM Billions!
Returned mail: User unknown
Re: Nice Oldses I saw in N.E.
Re: R12/R134a Experience
Re: balancer
Re: How to save GM Billions!
Re: Black inner fender restoration
Re: What motor would you use?
Re: What motor would you use?
Headlight doors
Re: door trim needed
Re: G-Body electric window adj
Re: Who's Who at Nats
Re: 571145 and Shimming Starters
RE: door trim needed
Value of 70 Delta 88 Custom
Re: Headlight doors
UNBOUNCE: '57 Center Diff Section Swap
Re: another starting problem
R12,134A, hotshot, freeze-it, etc
Re: Happy 101st...-Maybe
Re: G-Body electric window adj
Re: Who's Who at Nats

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 11:57:14 -0700
From: "Peter Slisz" <pv7793@email.msn.com>
Subject: Part information

New to the list, but need information as to location of exhaust manifold
for
62 394 Olds V-8.  Need left side, and must exit to the rear of manifold.
Also need to know what type of transmission besides the Jet-o-Way that I
can
put behind the motor.  Thanks, Pete

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 08 Jul 1998 15:02:49 -0400
From: Jim & Jo Chermack <chermac@exis.net>
Subject: Re: another starting problem

Bruce

        It sounds like your Q-jet is starting to leak in the main well
plugs. This can be fixed without rebuilding the carb. Pull the carb off and
remove the 2 or 3 screws on the bottom plate. It will then separate. Be
careful with the gasket so you can reuse it. When you pull it you will see
2
small and 2 large plugs on the bottom. Take some JB weld and seal them up.
THis should get rid of your hard starting problem if it's fuel related.

Jim Chermack

At 01:40 PM 7/8/1998 EDT, you wrote:
>If my car is not used for a day, it takes at least four or five trys to
start
>it. This may be because when I replaced the fuel line from the carb, i had
>trouble making all the bends, so I used a rubber fuel line instead. Also,
>from the exhaust odor,  the mixture may be too rich.
>Any ideas would be much appreciated.
>TIA
>Bruce
>75 Delta 88 Conv.
>
>

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 14:08:58 -0500
From: Thomas Martin <Thomas_Martin@css.mot.com>
Subject: How to save GM Billions!

Ditch the 4.3L V6, the 3800 is far better of an engine.  More efficient
and makes more power too.

(Don't flame me for this!)

Ditch the 4.0L Aurora V8.  Use the 4.6L Cad version.  Same motor, give
the Aurora the power it deserves!

2.4L DOHC Quad 4 as the only engine for the Cavalier/Sunfire

GM is pursuing the LS1 series engines, ok, fine.  Why make a 4.7L V8
when Cad has a better 4.6?  And then why make a 5.3?  They already have
a 5.6, keep it!  Use it in the new trucks.  Why have tools for 4 engines
when they can use just one?  More parts, more vendors, etc.  Costs rise.
 (Cad wants the "Exclusively by Cadillac", but they don't HAVE to keep
it!)

The 454 is dead after this year, why?  A 6.0L will not make up for it.
More tooling costs.  Leave what works.  If a Suburban 3/4t 4WD can do
0-60 in 7.5 sec, leave it alone!  No 6.0L will do that and be
streetable!

Limit it to the 2.4L, the 3800, the 4.6L NorthStar, the 5.6L LS1, and
the 454.  Make the 454 available to the "F" cars, limited production.

Transmissions, the 4L60E, 4L80E, the 4T65E and the 4T80E.  And some
sticks (hmm, 5 sp stick Aurora?).

Drop the Geo lineup completely.  Don't power anything with an Isuzu
powerplant.

Keep the Trans AM/Formula around, why kill a good thing?  It sells,
despite what they think.  They are everywhere.

Kill of the Chevy line, they are not the best, let the Corvette go to
GMC.  (Which Pontiac is in charge of....he he he, here kitty kitty
kitty...)  Suburban for Chevy and GMC?  Why?  Kill one.  The bowtie is
choking the GM company.

Keep Olds, Cadillac, Pontiac and GMC.

Feel free to update this, but GM could do things better if they WANT to.
 Don't let Chevy drive the company anymore!  They have done enough
damage!!  GM wanted to kill off Chevy in the 80's, why not now?

Thomas Martin
85 Cutlass Supreme Rocket 350 CCC
91 Bonneville LE 3800
80 Turbo Trans AM 400 Pontiac

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 08 Jul 1998 14:34:08 -0500
From: "Dr. David Ritter" <c617scc@semovm.semo.edu>
Subject: Re: UNBOUNCE: '57 Center Diff Section Swap

I would like to thank the several replies to my inquiry. I was not specific
enough in my description; I took the driveshaft all the way out of my '57
88
and as I turned the pinion or wheel by hand can feel the "scrunching"
inside.
I do not have access to a Hollander for the 50's (this is my first car for
that era).  Local salvage yards are only interested in high-price newer
vintage.
I know of a '62 Pontiac that is pretty deep in the dirt. Am told that it
has
been there at least 25 years.  I guess the thing to do is jack it up and
slither under there :-)
Thanks again,
David Ritter
At 09:32 AM 7/8/98 EDT, you wrote:
>In a message dated 98-07-07 20:55:36 EDT, David Ritter wrote:
>
><< ...the only problem seems to be some noise from the rear
> end. I want to take my center section out and swap in another carrier
> assembly to keep driving it. >>
>
>....you may experience a vibration that may appear to
>be coming from the rear end. Historically the 57 rear ends are solid
units,
>able to withstand substantial amounts of tourque. They were a favorite for
hot
>rod builders during the 60's & 70's.
>......
>Good Luck,
>
>Randy in Okla
>57 88 J2
>

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 15:41:18 -0400
From: "Jason P. Labay" <jlabay@ee.net>
Subject: Re: How to save GM Billions!

>Ditch the 4.0L Aurora V8.  Use the 4.6L Cad version.  Same motor, give
>the Aurora the power it deserves!
>
Totally agree here.

>2.4L DOHC Quad 4 as the only engine for the Cavalier/Sunfire
>
>GM is pursuing the LS1 series engines, ok, fine.  Why make a 4.7L V8
>when Cad has a better 4.6?

Two different technologies here. Can't beat how refined the ole pushrod LS1
is.  Some guys in bone stock 98 Z28's are
hitting high 12's with this motor. Dynoing around 345hp also. Chevy
seriously underrates this motor at 305hp in the
F-line.

 And then why make a 5.3?  They already have
>a 5.6, keep it!  Use it in the new trucks.  Why have tools for 4 engines
>when they can use just one?  More parts, more vendors, etc.  Costs rise.
> (Cad wants the "Exclusively by Cadillac", but they don't HAVE to keep
>it!)
>

Actually going to the LS1 series of engines is going to save lots of money.
 Many of the parts are the same between the
4 motors. Got to see how they were going to do it when I was meeting with
engineers at the GM Powertrain plant in
Romulus.

>The 454 is dead after this year, why?  A 6.0L will not make up for it.
>More tooling costs.  Leave what works.  If a Suburban 3/4t 4WD can do
>0-60 in 7.5 sec, leave it alone!  No 6.0L will do that and be
>streetable!

I would place my bets on the 6.0L running that time or better, incredible
motor.

>Limit it to the 2.4L, the 3800, the 4.6L NorthStar, the 5.6L LS1, and
>the 454.  Make the 454 available to the "F" cars, limited production.

GM is killing the F-line soon, if not this year becasue of the strike, it
looks to be dead by 2001. 454 would be cool in
a f-body, but a 6.0L option would be lighter and faster.

>Kill of the Chevy line, they are not the best, let the Corvette go to
>GMC.  (Which Pontiac is in charge of....he he he, here kitty kitty
>kitty...)  Suburban for Chevy and GMC?  Why?  Kill one.  The bowtie is
>choking the GM company.

Acutally, everything I hear is that the Bowtie, especially the trucks are
keeping GM's pockets fat.
>
>Keep Olds, Cadillac, Pontiac and GMC.
>
>Feel free to update this, but GM could do things better if they WANT to.
> Don't let Chevy drive the company anymore!  They have done enough
>damage!!  GM wanted to kill off Chevy in the 80's, why not now?

I have heard that if the strike lasts into the end of the year, divisions
like Olds and Buick may be the first to go
along with certain platforms like the F and J body's.


Jason Labay (jlabay@ee.net)   Akron, OH
98 Silverado C2500.....Vortec 350, A4, 4.10
80 Olds 442 W-30........350, A3, 2.73
75 Hurst/Olds W-25.....350, A3, 2.56
72 Cutlass Supreme.....drag car project

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 15:34:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: MAILER-DAEMON@merge1.mergetel.com (Mail Delivery Subsystem)
Subject: Returned mail: User unknown

The original message was received at Wed Jul  8 15:34:06 EDT 1998
from  oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca

- ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
lee@merge1

- ----- Transcript of session follows -----
... while talking to merge1.:
>>> RCPT To:<lee@merge1>
<<< 550 Bad recipient
550 lee@merge1... User unknown
Reporting-MTA: dns; merge1

Arrival-Date: Wed Jul  8 15:34:06 EDT 1998
Final-Recipient: RFC822; lee@merge1
Action: failed
Status: 5.1.1
Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 550 Bad recipient
Last-Attempt-Date: Wed Jul  8 15:34:06 EDT 1998
>From oldsmobile-mml-owner@chebucto.ns.ca  Wed Jul  8 15:33:59 1998
Return-Path: <oldsmobile-mml-owner@chebucto.ns.ca>
Received: from halifax.chebucto.ns.ca (halifax.chebucto.ns.ca
[129.173.4.205])
	by merge1.mergetel.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA10446
	for <lee@mergetel.com>; Wed, 8 Jul 1998 15:33:55 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by halifax.chebucto.ns.ca id <37634-29246>; Wed, 8 Jul 1998
16:39:01 -0300
Received: from ee.net ([206.31.38.3]:4637 "EHLO ee.net" ident: "TIMEDOUT")
by halifax.chebucto.ns.ca with ESMTP id <38299-29244>; Wed, 8 Jul 1998
16:38:47 -0300
Received: from default (jlabay@cak20.cak.dialup.thenap.net [209.190.88.20])
	by ee.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id PAA24393
	for <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>; Wed, 8 Jul 1998 15:43:36 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <005a01bdaaa8$6248ae80$1458bed1@default>
From: "Jason P. Labay" <jlabay@ee.net>
To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Subject: Re: How to save GM Billions!
Date: 	Wed, 8 Jul 1998 15:41:18 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-2"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4
X-Orcpt: rfc822;"|/csuite/etc/majordomo/wrapper resend -l oldsmobile -h
chebucto.ns.ca oldsmobile-mml"
Sender: oldsmobile-owner@chebucto.ns.ca
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
X-SpamBouncer: 1.00h (5/20/98)
X-SBRule: Small Fry
X-SBRule: Pass-No Pattern Matching



>Ditch the 4.0L Aurora V8.  Use the 4.6L Cad version.  Same motor, give
>the Aurora the power it deserves!
>
Totally agree here.

>2.4L DOHC Quad 4 as the only engine for the Cavalier/Sunfire
>
>GM is pursuing the LS1 series engines, ok, fine.  Why make a 4.7L V8
>when Cad has a better 4.6?

Two different technologies here. Can't beat how refined the ole pushrod LS1
is.  Some guys in bone stock 98 Z28's are
hitting high 12's with this motor. Dynoing around 345hp also. Chevy
seriously underrates this motor at 305hp in the
F-line.

 And then why make a 5.3?  They already have
>a 5.6, keep it!  Use it in the new trucks.  Why have tools for 4 engines
>when they can use just one?  More parts, more vendors, etc.  Costs rise.
> (Cad wants the "Exclusively by Cadillac", but they don't HAVE to keep
>it!)
>

Actually going to the LS1 series of engines is going to save lots of money.
 Many of the parts are the same between the
4 motors. Got to see how they were going to do it when I was meeting with
engineers at the GM Powertrain plant in
Romulus.

>The 454 is dead after this year, why?  A 6.0L will not make up for it.
>More tooling costs.  Leave what works.  If a Suburban 3/4t 4WD can do
>0-60 in 7.5 sec, leave it alone!  No 6.0L will do that and be
>streetable!

I would place my bets on the 6.0L running that time or better, incredible
motor.

>Limit it to the 2.4L, the 3800, the 4.6L NorthStar, the 5.6L LS1, and
>the 454.  Make the 454 available to the "F" cars, limited production.

GM is killing the F-line soon, if not this year becasue of the strike, it
looks to be dead by 2001. 454 would be cool in
a f-body, but a 6.0L option would be lighter and faster.

>Kill of the Chevy line, they are not the best, let the Corvette go to
>GMC.  (Which Pontiac is in charge of....he he he, here kitty kitty
>kitty...)  Suburban for Chevy and GMC?  Why?  Kill one.  The bowtie is
>choking the GM company.

Acutally, everything I hear is that the Bowtie, especially the trucks are
keeping GM's pockets fat.
>
>Keep Olds, Cadillac, Pontiac and GMC.
>
>Feel free to update this, but GM could do things better if they WANT to.
> Don't let Chevy drive the company anymore!  They have done enough
>damage!!  GM wanted to kill off Chevy in the 80's, why not now?

I have heard that if the strike lasts into the end of the year, divisions
like Olds and Buick may be the first to go
along with certain platforms like the F and J body's.


Jason Labay (jlabay@ee.net)   Akron, OH
98 Silverado C2500.....Vortec 350, A4, 4.10
80 Olds 442 W-30........350, A3, 2.73
75 Hurst/Olds W-25.....350, A3, 2.56
72 Cutlass Supreme.....drag car project

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 14:59:31 -0500
From: "Brett Wilson" <bwilson@dmotorworks.com>
Subject: Re: How to save GM Billions!

>>GM is pursuing the LS1 series engines, ok, fine.  Why make a 4.7L V8
>>when Cad has a better 4.6?

>Two different technologies here. Can't beat how refined the ole pushrod
LS1
is.  Some guys in bone stock 98 Z28's are
>hitting high 12's with this motor. Dynoing around 345hp also. Chevy
seriously underrates this motor at 305hp in the
>F-line.


No kidding, I Lost to one last week. the first out of the box production
Firebird that can beat my car since the ones made in the early 70's.
I can say I'm impressed with them, also they are faster than the vettes as
far as I know.Probably has something to do with     Power:weight ratio.
Brett Wilson
67 Cutlass Convertible

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 16:06:00 EDT
From: <JonKrisInc@aol.com>
Subject: Re: 571145 and Shimming Starters

In a message dated 98-07-08 14:26:17 EDT, you write:

<<  If you can get away without
 shimming, fine, but if you need to, just don't blow it off.  You will be
 replacing starters sooner.  Guaranteed. >>

Thanks for the advice, Mike, but how would I know? Would there be some sort
of
sound or something or would that develop later? If it seems to be working
fine
now. would that mean it dosen''t need shims? Would appreciate yor input.
Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 08 Jul 1998 15:09:18 -0500
From: David L Wyatt <WYATT_DAVID_L@lilly.com>
Subject: Re: How to save GM Billions!

>I have heard that if the strike lasts into the end of the year, divisions
like
>Olds and Buick may be the first to go along with certain platforms like
the F
and J >body's.

Sounds like corporate B.S. to me, just trying to get the strikers to accept
less on their contract by threatening their fellow workers that would be
affected by dropping certain lines.  Do you really think GM is willing to
p*ss
off a large part of their customer base by dropping their favorite brands
and
models and loose them to makers other than GM?  If you don't think it is
possible, just ask yourself if you would by a new Olds right now if you
were
in the market for a new car?  I wouldn't because they don't make anything I
want.

Of course I could be wrong, knowing how corporate America works, GM would
be
dumb enough to do such a thing.

Just save the old cars and let the new ones go to h*ll
Dave Wyatt
70  4-4-2

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 16:09:17 EDT
From: <BuchD@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Black inner fender restoration

Are the W-30's red or black on the wheel side of the inner fender?
Charlie

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 16:23:40 EDT
From: <JonKrisInc@aol.com>
Subject: Re: another starting problem

In a message dated 98-07-08 14:39:13 EDT, you write:

<< you may be sucking in air from clamps to the rubber or possibly a
hairline
 crack in the line. if not then check timing. may be fuel pump problem.
    >>
Thanks for the reply. Clamps are tight. Hoses are new. Wow do I check the
timing?

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 16:29:17 EDT
From: <JonKrisInc@aol.com>
Subject: Re: another starting problem

In a message dated 98-07-08 15:08:12 EDT, you write:

<<      It sounds like your Q-jet is starting to leak in the main well
 plugs. This can be fixed without rebuilding the carb. Pull the carb off
and
 remove the 2 or 3 screws on the bottom plate. It will then separate. Be
 careful with the gasket so you can reuse it. When you pull it you will see
2
 small and 2 large plugs on the bottom. Take some JB weld and seal them up.
 THis should get rid of your hard starting problem if it's fuel related.
  >>
Thanks, Jim. Sounds  plausable. I'll try it this weekend.
Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 08 Jul 1998 13:32:59 PDT
From: "Chris Rivier" <crivier@hotmail.com>
Subject: Kettering

Hi all,

Does anyone still have the "Kettering" string.  I would like to send it
to a friend, also a Kettering.  Not sure if related.

TIA,
Chris Rivier
'66 Delta 88..."The Beast"
'88 Festiva..."Zippy"  162K+@ 40 mpg, neeed I say more.

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 16:43:17 EDT
From: <JonKrisInc@aol.com>
Subject: Re: How to save GM Billions!

In a message dated 98-07-08 15:13:18 EDT, you write:

<< Don't let Chevy drive the company anymore!  They have done enough
 damage!!  GM wanted to kill off Chevy in the 80's, why not now? >>

Tom,
I couldn't agree more. Jimmy / GMC/ and blazer are essentially the same
anyway. Problem is Ch*vy has always been the biggest seller cause it's the
least expensive GM line. I doubt they would dish their bread and butter.
Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 17:01:06 -0400
From: Jonathan Parke <jonparke@together.net>
Subject: What motor would you use?

Being relatively new to the list I don't know if the following:

1) has been asked and discussed a few zillion times
2) if you'll all yell heretic and tell me to take a hike.

Now with that warning here goes.

I've got a '72 Cutlass Supreme Convertible.  I've had it for about ten
years and driven it all around the country.  Soon after I got it the engine
(a 350) blew just before a big trip.  At the time I didn't know diddly
about Olds or other '60s & '70s performance cars... nothing.  So I had the
350 rebuilt and went on my way.   After my trip I started getting
interested and soon replaced the 2bbl with a 4bbl Q-jet and put a mild
street cam from Crower in it.  Later I put a TH700 and a 3.42 10 bolt posi
in it.  I had the TH700 built up so that it would take a 455 if I ever went
that route.

A couple of years ago I realized I needed to replace the convertible top
and top frame.  They were shot.  The following is an old story.  The rust
trail eventually led to a frame-off.  Well the car is basically back
together, painted, new top and top frame.  Now I'm working on all the
little stuff I'd dreamed up.  Customized dash and interior, great sound
system, tilt column out of an '84... stuff like that.  I figure to have the
car on the road by next spring.

All along I've been thinking about the engine.  I'm pretty ignorant when it
comes to what's available and what works best etc.  But, I've done some
homework, asked a lot of questions and tossed around some thoughts... still
I'm no genius.

Let me point out that my objective is to have a very streetable car the
runs coast to coast on high octane pump gas.  Smooth idle and as much grunt
and snap as I can get without going to the exotic and temperamental side of
things.

My first thought was to build up a 350.  Then after talking with Dave Smith
I thought a 403 might be the ticket.  Soon I was thinking big block and
tossed around 425 vs 455.  Well I've been leaning toward the 455.  As
everybody has said all along, "nothing takes the place of cubes."  I also
realized I could make the jump to the big block when I realized I could put
on an aluminum intake and head combo from Edelbrock and that the weight of
the 455 with aluminum was about equal to the weight of the 350 with all
iron.  The weight was a big concern because I had gone to a lot of trouble
to set up the handling of the car (sway bars, springs, poly bushings) and I
didn't want to mess with it by adding a bunch more pounds up front.

So now I've been following the 455 idea.  A blueprinted block with bigger
oil pan and heftier pump.  Aluminum heads and higher compression pistons
and all the stuff to support that direction.  I researched fuel injection
and came up with port injection set up and a fully programmable computer
interface.  Making it happen on an aluminum intake has been done a bunch of
times, so I wouldn't be blazing completely new territory.

Well I've been sitting with this basic game plan for a few weeks.  The
details about the cam and pistons are still under consideration, but the
basic concept was seeming to be solid and workable.

Well I woke up last night and thought... hey I've never really considered a
non-Olds engine.

  <<Is this the part where I'm told to go to my room and leave the list?>>

There must be some interesting engines swaps out there that would give me
what I want cheaper and with proven components (by that I mean things that
have been working together and the interface bugs worked out).

This whole process is a big learning curve for me.  So I'm open to
suggestions of any sort.  My car is no longer stock, I'm not into
by-the-book restoration (I really appreciate that path but it's not my
thing) and I've gone way beyond the point of ever getting my money back
out.  I love this car.  I can't imagine ever parting with it.  My son (age
19) said awhile back, "Dad, please never, never get rid of that car.  Sell
the house if your broke, but don't sell the Olds."

So I'm committed to it and happily so.

I will say that there is a big appeal to me to have an Olds engine in the
car; one that I've thought about and with the help from lots of
knowledgeable people made some interesting modifications to.  But I'm not
wedded to the concept.  If there is something really obvious sitting out
there right in front of my nose and I don't see it because I have no
experience then I'd like to hear about it and look at the pros and cons.
Are there newer engines that would work more efficiently as well as be
better environmentally and still give me the power and torque I want.

Remember, this car fully loaded with two people, luggage, tools and a spare
is going to tip the scales 4200+ lbs.  That's why I wanted to move away
from the stock 350 in the first place.

Any money, although not growing on trees at my house, is not my first
consideration.  It may ultimately be the final factor, but reliability and
smooth, yet gutsy, performance are my main concerns.  And yes, torque... I
like torque, but I'm not looking burn up a set of tires each week.  So I'm
not wanting a monster motor, just big enough to have fun.

So that's it.  What do you folks think?

TIA

Jonathan Parke
mailto:jonparke@together.net
'72 Cutlass Supreme Convertible

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 17:32:05 -0400
From: "Jason P. Labay" <jlabay@ee.net>
Subject: Re: How to save GM Billions!

- -

>>I have heard that if the strike lasts into the end of the year, divisions
>like
>>Olds and Buick may be the first to go along with certain platforms like
the F
>and J >body's.
>
>Sounds like corporate B.S. to me, just trying to get the strikers to
accept
>less on their contract by threatening their fellow workers that would be
>affected by dropping certain lines.  Do you really think GM is willing to
p*ss
>off a large part of their customer base by dropping their favorite brands
and
>models and loose them to makers other than GM?

Unfortunately I think it may happen.  F-line seems headed to a certain
death.  Camaro nameplate will die and the Trans
Am name will live on in a different platform all together.  GM's Fixed Roof
Coupe Vette due out late next year will
replace the Camaro as the performance car for Chevy. Supposed to be priced
in the high $20K to low $30K.  All this I
hear and read on the f-body mailing list so take it for what its worth.
Now the J-line ~I think~ is scheduled to be
replaced by a new platform. Not sure, but I do know that the rumors are
running wild here that the GM Lordstown plant
that makes the J-line will close...who knows.  I really hope Olds doesn't
die, but working in the auto industry and
being around upper management, I see first hand that they don't care too
much about customers feelings, etc towards a
product line, its all about the cash profit and "what have you done for me
lately" attitudes nowadays.

Jason Labay (jlabay@ee.net)   Akron, OH
98 Silverado C2500.....Vortec 350, A4, 4.10
80 Olds 442 W-30........350, A3, 2.73
75 Hurst/Olds W-25.....350, A3, 2.56
72 Cutlass Supreme.....drag car project

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 17:27:55 -0400 (EDT)
From: MAILER-DAEMON@merge1.mergetel.com (Mail Delivery Subsystem)
Subject: Returned mail: User unknown

The original message was received at Wed Jul  8 17:27:55 EDT 1998
from  oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca

- ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
lee@merge1

- ----- Transcript of session follows -----
... while talking to merge1.:
>>> RCPT To:<lee@merge1>
<<< 550 Bad recipient
550 lee@merge1... User unknown
Reporting-MTA: dns; merge1

Arrival-Date: Wed Jul  8 17:27:55 EDT 1998
Final-Recipient: RFC822; lee@merge1
Action: failed
Status: 5.1.1
Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 550 Bad recipient
Last-Attempt-Date: Wed Jul  8 17:27:55 EDT 1998
>From oldsmobile-mml-owner@chebucto.ns.ca  Wed Jul  8 17:27:52 1998
Return-Path: <oldsmobile-mml-owner@chebucto.ns.ca>
Received: from halifax.chebucto.ns.ca (halifax.chebucto.ns.ca
[129.173.4.205])
	by merge1.mergetel.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA24421
	for <lee@mergetel.com>; Wed, 8 Jul 1998 17:27:51 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by halifax.chebucto.ns.ca id <40547-29244>; Wed, 8 Jul 1998
18:33:08 -0300
Received: from ee.net ([206.31.38.3]:1516 "EHLO ee.net" ident: "TIMEDOUT")
by halifax.chebucto.ns.ca with ESMTP id <38274-282>; Wed, 8 Jul 1998
18:32:48 -0300
Received: from default (jlabay@cak35.cak.dialup.thenap.net [209.190.88.35])
	by ee.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id RAA14229
	for <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>; Wed, 8 Jul 1998 17:37:37 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <00af01bdaab8$4ffb1000$1458bed1@default>
From: "Jason P. Labay" <jlabay@ee.net>
To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Subject: Re: How to save GM Billions!
Date: 	Wed, 8 Jul 1998 17:32:05 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-2"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4
X-Orcpt: rfc822;"|/csuite/etc/majordomo/wrapper resend -l oldsmobile -h
chebucto.ns.ca oldsmobile-mml"
Sender: oldsmobile-owner@chebucto.ns.ca
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
X-SpamBouncer: 1.00h (5/20/98)
X-SBRule: Small Fry
X-SBRule: Pass-No Pattern Matching


- -

>>I have heard that if the strike lasts into the end of the year, divisions
>like
>>Olds and Buick may be the first to go along with certain platforms like
the F
>and J >body's.
>
>Sounds like corporate B.S. to me, just trying to get the strikers to
accept
>less on their contract by threatening their fellow workers that would be
>affected by dropping certain lines.  Do you really think GM is willing to
p*ss
>off a large part of their customer base by dropping their favorite brands
and
>models and loose them to makers other than GM?

Unfortunately I think it may happen.  F-line seems headed to a certain
death.  Camaro nameplate will die and the Trans
Am name will live on in a different platform all together.  GM's Fixed Roof
Coupe Vette due out late next year will
replace the Camaro as the performance car for Chevy. Supposed to be priced
in the high $20K to low $30K.  All this I
hear and read on the f-body mailing list so take it for what its worth.
Now the J-line ~I think~ is scheduled to be
replaced by a new platform. Not sure, but I do know that the rumors are
running wild here that the GM Lordstown plant
that makes the J-line will close...who knows.  I really hope Olds doesn't
die, but working in the auto industry and
being around upper management, I see first hand that they don't care too
much about customers feelings, etc towards a
product line, its all about the cash profit and "what have you done for me
lately" attitudes nowadays.

Jason Labay (jlabay@ee.net)   Akron, OH
98 Silverado C2500.....Vortec 350, A4, 4.10
80 Olds 442 W-30........350, A3, 2.73
75 Hurst/Olds W-25.....350, A3, 2.56
72 Cutlass Supreme.....drag car project

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 17:51:22 EDT
From: <ANTIQOLDS@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Nice Oldses I saw in N.E.

In a message dated 98-07-08 04:20:18 EDT, you write:

<<
 YOu should have come to Rhode Island, there are 5 that I know of in my
 hometown of Pawtucket. I am restoring/ pro streeting a 71 now and I know
of a
 body shop restoring a 442, not sure of the year.

     Peter
  >>
Greg was in Rhode Island, next door to Pawtucket, Rumford. Actually he
stopped
in Pawtucket for directions. My Olds place is in Rumford call me
401-435-7139


Everett   OCA# 1961   1991 Starfire

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 18:00:34 EDT
From: <Mikeytvb@aol.com>
Subject: Re: R12/R134a Experience

not true about r-134a......you can add extra cans to get the right
temperature.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 18:07:22 EDT
From: <ANTIQOLDS@aol.com>
Subject: Re: balancer

In a message dated 98-07-08 14:36:32 EDT, you write:

<<
 the local olds club vp called to see if i had an harmonic balancer for a
 394, alas i dont, but i said i would check here.  i dont know what year or
 if year makes any diffrence other than pulley groves.  as this is for a
 third party, i only know what i was told on my answering machine.  so if
 any one has a balancer they would like to part with please e mail me.

  >>
Need to know what year and if it has A/C, I have one for a 63/64, w/A/C.


Everett    OCA #1961     1961 Starfire

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 18:16:42 EDT
From: <Mikeytvb@aol.com>
Subject: Re: How to save GM Billions!

454.........not as good as it sounds.  WoW.....they make a whole 220
hp......if they could only redesign the 403's with a solid main, the 403
would
be the best truck motor ever.  without chevys, pontiac's would start to
take
over.  why doesn't pnotiac and chevy use the same engine block with
different
heads?  what about trannys.....why not convert chevys to accept the b-o-p-c
tranny?  there is alot of things to think about, but on a serious note, gm
won't listen to us olds guys about dropping the chevy lines.

just a few lines of thought
mikeytvb@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 08 Jul 1998 18:01:34 -0400
From: "George & Joan C. Lesperance" <gal1@MNSi.Net>
Subject: Re: Black inner fender restoration

The W30 fender wells are molded red other fender wells are molded black.

BuchD@aol.com wrote:

> Are the W-30's red or black on the wheel side of the inner fender?
> Charlie

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 08 Jul 1998 18:14:54 -0400
From: "George & Joan C. Lesperance" <gal1@MNSi.Net>
Subject: Re: What motor would you use?

What exactly do you want to do -- blow doors off or have a reliable fast
Oldsmobile that will get you from coast to coast as many times as you want
to
do the trip??
Go the 455 if you want to drag race at the stop lights and bounce down the
road
with your foot on the break.
You could put a smogger 455 with a 2 barrel - it would have lots of scoot
but
gas milage might scare most people.
A 350 2 barrel , dual exhaust, steel timing gear - this combination will
run
forever.
Best of Luck in your decision!!!

Jonathan Parke wrote:

> Being relatively new to the list I don't know if the following:
>
> 1) has been asked and discussed a few zillion times
> 2) if you'll all yell heretic and tell me to take a hike.
>
> Now with that warning here goes.
>
> I've got a '72 Cutlass Supreme Convertible.  I've had it for about ten
> years and driven it all around the country.  Soon after I got it the
engine
> (a 350) blew just before a big trip.  At the time I didn't know diddly
> about Olds or other '60s & '70s performance cars... nothing.  So I had
the
> 350 rebuilt and went on my way.   After my trip I started getting
> interested and soon replaced the 2bbl with a 4bbl Q-jet and put a mild
> street cam from Crower in it.  Later I put a TH700 and a 3.42 10 bolt
posi
> in it.  I had the TH700 built up so that it would take a 455 if I ever
went
> that route.
>
> A couple of years ago I realized I needed to replace the convertible top
> and top frame.  They were shot.  The following is an old story.  The rust
> trail eventually led to a frame-off.  Well the car is basically back
> together, painted, new top and top frame.  Now I'm working on all the
> little stuff I'd dreamed up.  Customized dash and interior, great sound
> system, tilt column out of an '84... stuff like that.  I figure to have
the
> car on the road by next spring.
>
> All along I've been thinking about the engine.  I'm pretty ignorant when
it
> comes to what's available and what works best etc.  But, I've done some
> homework, asked a lot of questions and tossed around some thoughts...
still
> I'm no genius.
>
> Let me point out that my objective is to have a very streetable car the
> runs coast to coast on high octane pump gas.  Smooth idle and as much
grunt
> and snap as I can get without going to the exotic and temperamental side
of
> things.
>
> My first thought was to build up a 350.  Then after talking with Dave
Smith
> I thought a 403 might be the ticket.  Soon I was thinking big block and
> tossed around 425 vs 455.  Well I've been leaning toward the 455.  As
> everybody has said all along, "nothing takes the place of cubes."  I also
> realized I could make the jump to the big block when I realized I could
put
> on an aluminum intake and head combo from Edelbrock and that the weight
of
> the 455 with aluminum was about equal to the weight of the 350 with all
> iron.  The weight was a big concern because I had gone to a lot of
trouble
> to set up the handling of the car (sway bars, springs, poly bushings) and
I
> didn't want to mess with it by adding a bunch more pounds up front.
>
> So now I've been following the 455 idea.  A blueprinted block with bigger
> oil pan and heftier pump.  Aluminum heads and higher compression pistons
> and all the stuff to support that direction.  I researched fuel injection
> and came up with port injection set up and a fully programmable computer
> interface.  Making it happen on an aluminum intake has been done a bunch
of
> times, so I wouldn't be blazing completely new territory.
>
> Well I've been sitting with this basic game plan for a few weeks.  The
> details about the cam and pistons are still under consideration, but the
> basic concept was seeming to be solid and workable.
>
> Well I woke up last night and thought... hey I've never really considered
a
> non-Olds engine.
>
>   <<Is this the part where I'm told to go to my room and leave the
list?>>
>
> There must be some interesting engines swaps out there that would give me
> what I want cheaper and with proven components (by that I mean things
that
> have been working together and the interface bugs worked out).
>
> This whole process is a big learning curve for me.  So I'm open to
> suggestions of any sort.  My car is no longer stock, I'm not into
> by-the-book restoration (I really appreciate that path but it's not my
> thing) and I've gone way beyond the point of ever getting my money back
> out.  I love this car.  I can't imagine ever parting with it.  My son
(age
> 19) said awhile back, "Dad, please never, never get rid of that car.
Sell
> the house if your broke, but don't sell the Olds."
>
> So I'm committed to it and happily so.
>
> I will say that there is a big appeal to me to have an Olds engine in the
> car; one that I've thought about and with the help from lots of
> knowledgeable people made some interesting modifications to.  But I'm not
> wedded to the concept.  If there is something really obvious sitting out
> there right in front of my nose and I don't see it because I have no
> experience then I'd like to hear about it and look at the pros and cons.
> Are there newer engines that would work more efficiently as well as be
> better environmentally and still give me the power and torque I want.
>
> Remember, this car fully loaded with two people, luggage, tools and a
spare
> is going to tip the scales 4200+ lbs.  That's why I wanted to move away
> from the stock 350 in the first place.
>
> Any money, although not growing on trees at my house, is not my first
> consideration.  It may ultimately be the final factor, but reliability
and
> smooth, yet gutsy, performance are my main concerns.  And yes, torque...
I
> like torque, but I'm not looking burn up a set of tires each week.  So
I'm
> not wanting a monster motor, just big enough to have fun.
>
> So that's it.  What do you folks think?
>
> TIA
>
> Jonathan Parke
> mailto:jonparke@together.net
> '72 Cutlass Supreme Convertible

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 18:53:17 -0400
From: "Peter Berusch" <pber710840@email.msn.com>
Subject: Re: What motor would you use?

John, a box stock pre emissions 455 will deliver 365 HP and 510 ft. lbs. of
torque in a bone reliable condition.  How much "snap" are you looking for ?
The 455 will drop in.  If you feel you need more power, remember, the stock
455 is virtually sonambulent at the 365 HP level.  Breathe on it gently and
it will produce in the low 400 HP zone without busting a bead of sweat.
Push harder, and you will enter an area of suspension mods, tire
consumption, rear axle changes, broken drive line components, etc.  And, if
you are looking for a hot mill, do not discount the 425.  This too makes a
fortune of horsepressure and comes with a forged crank.  Have fun.  Peter.
- -----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Parke <jonparke@together.net>
To: oldsnet <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Wednesday, July 08, 1998 4:57 PM
Subject: What motor would you use?


>Being relatively new to the list I don't know if the following:
>
>1) has been asked and discussed a few zillion times
>2) if you'll all yell heretic and tell me to take a hike.
>
>Now with that warning here goes.
>
>I've got a '72 Cutlass Supreme Convertible.  I've had it for about ten
>years and driven it all around the country.  Soon after I got it the
engine
>(a 350) blew just before a big trip.  At the time I didn't know diddly
>about Olds or other '60s & '70s performance cars... nothing.  So I had the
>350 rebuilt and went on my way.   After my trip I started getting
>interested and soon replaced the 2bbl with a 4bbl Q-jet and put a mild
>street cam from Crower in it.  Later I put a TH700 and a 3.42 10 bolt posi
>in it.  I had the TH700 built up so that it would take a 455 if I ever
went
>that route.
>
>A couple of years ago I realized I needed to replace the convertible top
>and top frame.  They were shot.  The following is an old story.  The rust
>trail eventually led to a frame-off.  Well the car is basically back
>together, painted, new top and top frame.  Now I'm working on all the
>little stuff I'd dreamed up.  Customized dash and interior, great sound
>system, tilt column out of an '84... stuff like that.  I figure to have
the
>car on the road by next spring.
>
>All along I've been thinking about the engine.  I'm pretty ignorant when
it
>comes to what's available and what works best etc.  But, I've done some
>homework, asked a lot of questions and tossed around some thoughts...
still
>I'm no genius.
>
>Let me point out that my objective is to have a very streetable car the
>runs coast to coast on high octane pump gas.  Smooth idle and as much
grunt
>and snap as I can get without going to the exotic and temperamental side
of
>things.
>
>My first thought was to build up a 350.  Then after talking with Dave
Smith
>I thought a 403 might be the ticket.  Soon I was thinking big block and
>tossed around 425 vs 455.  Well I've been leaning toward the 455.  As
>everybody has said all along, "nothing takes the place of cubes."  I also
>realized I could make the jump to the big block when I realized I could
put
>on an aluminum intake and head combo from Edelbrock and that the weight of
>the 455 with aluminum was about equal to the weight of the 350 with all
>iron.  The weight was a big concern because I had gone to a lot of trouble
>to set up the handling of the car (sway bars, springs, poly bushings) and
I
>didn't want to mess with it by adding a bunch more pounds up front.
>
>So now I've been following the 455 idea.  A blueprinted block with bigger
>oil pan and heftier pump.  Aluminum heads and higher compression pistons
>and all the stuff to support that direction.  I researched fuel injection
>and came up with port injection set up and a fully programmable computer
>interface.  Making it happen on an aluminum intake has been done a bunch
of
>times, so I wouldn't be blazing completely new territory.
>
>Well I've been sitting with this basic game plan for a few weeks.  The
>details about the cam and pistons are still under consideration, but the
>basic concept was seeming to be solid and workable.
>
>Well I woke up last night and thought... hey I've never really considered
a
>non-Olds engine.
>
>  <<Is this the part where I'm told to go to my room and leave the list?>>
>
>There must be some interesting engines swaps out there that would give me
>what I want cheaper and with proven components (by that I mean things that
>have been working together and the interface bugs worked out).
>
>This whole process is a big learning curve for me.  So I'm open to
>suggestions of any sort.  My car is no longer stock, I'm not into
>by-the-book restoration (I really appreciate that path but it's not my
>thing) and I've gone way beyond the point of ever getting my money back
>out.  I love this car.  I can't imagine ever parting with it.  My son (age
>19) said awhile back, "Dad, please never, never get rid of that car.  Sell
>the house if your broke, but don't sell the Olds."
>
>So I'm committed to it and happily so.
>
>I will say that there is a big appeal to me to have an Olds engine in the
>car; one that I've thought about and with the help from lots of
>knowledgeable people made some interesting modifications to.  But I'm not
>wedded to the concept.  If there is something really obvious sitting out
>there right in front of my nose and I don't see it because I have no
>experience then I'd like to hear about it and look at the pros and cons.
>Are there newer engines that would work more efficiently as well as be
>better environmentally and still give me the power and torque I want.
>
>Remember, this car fully loaded with two people, luggage, tools and a
spare
>is going to tip the scales 4200+ lbs.  That's why I wanted to move away
>from the stock 350 in the first place.
>
>Any money, although not growing on trees at my house, is not my first
>consideration.  It may ultimately be the final factor, but reliability and
>smooth, yet gutsy, performance are my main concerns.  And yes, torque... I
>like torque, but I'm not looking burn up a set of tires each week.  So I'm
>not wanting a monster motor, just big enough to have fun.
>
>So that's it.  What do you folks think?
>
>TIA
>
>Jonathan Parke
>mailto:jonparke@together.net
>'72 Cutlass Supreme Convertible
>
>
>

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 19:06:33 EDT
From: <TomW30@aol.com>
Subject: Headlight doors

   Anyone know if the plastic headlight doors from a '68 442 will fit my
'69
442? Appreciate your replys.

                    Tom

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 08 Jul 1998 16:12:21 PDT
From: "Chris Rivier" <crivier@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: door trim needed

With all the people on this list, no one has a door trim for a 66
Dynamic 88 2 dr convertible?  It is an Olds :-)
======================================================================
Thomas,

Never apologize for your car...Conv., Coool.

'66 Delta 88 4dr Celebrity Sedan.  Let me check the local bone yard.
Which door trim...duh?  The wide one on the lower half of the door?

Boneyard diggin,




Chris Rivier
'66 Delta 88..."The Beast"
'88 Festiva..."Zippy"  162K+@ 40 mpg, neeed I say more.

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 18:37:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: Kevin Wong <brougham@geocities.com>
Subject: Re: G-Body electric window adj

> Common problem with well used windows on these cars.  All G-body
> frameless windows had this problem.  I JUST replaced the outer window
> seal on my 87 Salon, and it minimized that problem.  It soon came back
> as the window seal "molded" itself into position.  While I had the door
> apart, I tried this very maneuver of trying to "tighten" things up in
> there to prevent that problem.  I suppose all the nylon bushings/rollers
> in there wear eventually, and there's not much to tighten up.  Haven't

I recently fixed this problem on a friend's '87 442.  The long tubular
vertical track has two slotted attachment points.  The two adjustment
bolts face upwards, and in the case of this car, one had loosened.  To
increase the closing pressure of the glass on the weatherstripping, the
window guide needs to be moved a bit closer to the door skin.  At first
this seems counter-intuitive, but once it is realized that the glass
pivots over multiple "felt"-laden bumpers higher up, things make sense.
Before any changes were made, it was possible to push the glass outwards
with very little force.  Now, it is tight, and highway speed sealing is
great. Go easy on the adjustment, as it is likely possible to damage
something if the door is slammed and too much tension is put on the
window.

Kevin Wong       mailto:brougham@geocities.com       Toronto, Ontario,
Canada

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 19:21:59 EDT
From: <Cnvrt67@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Who's Who at Nats

will there be one final list of everyone who is goin posted a couple of
days
befor the big meet???

Brent
1967 Cutlass Convertible

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 19:30:01 EDT
From: <KarlAune@aol.com>
Subject: Re: 571145 and Shimming Starters

In a message dated 98-07-08 08:48:53 EDT, you write:

<<  I just replaced the starter in my 75 Delta. The old starter had a shim,
but I remember someone telling me that shims were not necessary for my car.
I
decided not to replace the shim on the new starter. So far, it works
perfectly.>>

The page of information that I mentioned in a previous post also said that
a
replacement starter may or may not need shims. It is rather a case-by-case
situation where some reman. starting motors or the engine block itself may
be
worn, or whatever affects clearance. If you get shims with your starter (I
did) you might as well save them...you just never know when the need will
arise.

KA
&SOM

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 17:30:11 -0600
From: "Kevin Meredith" <bkmeredith@telusplanet.net>
Subject: RE: door trim needed

There is a 64 Dynamic 88 with complete chrome sitting in the proverbial
farmer's field in Andrew Alberta...is it the same car? We don't see many of
ya'lls units around here!

Kevin Meredith
70 Vista Cruiser
mailto:bkmeredith@telusplanet.net
http://www.telusplanet.net/public/mereditk/bkolds.htm

> -----Original Message-----
> From: oldsmobile-owner@chebucto.ns.ca
> [mailto:oldsmobile-owner@chebucto.ns.ca]On Behalf Of Thomas Barriano
> Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 1998 10:48 AM
> To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
> Subject: door trim needed
>
>
>
> With all the people on this list, no one
> has a door trim for a 66 Dynamic 88 2 dr
> convertible?  I know its not a 442 or even a Cutlass, but it is an Olds
> :-)
>
> Regards
> Thomas
>

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 17:34:09 -0600
From: "Kevin Meredith" <bkmeredith@telusplanet.net>
Subject: Value of 70 Delta 88 Custom

Could I have some help in figuring the value of this car:

1970 Olds Delta 88 Custom
455/trans-?
Gold Vinyl on Gold with Gold Interior
63,000 Miles.

Thanks,
Kevin

Kevin Meredith
70 Vista Cruiser
mailto:bkmeredith@telusplanet.net
http://www.telusplanet.net/public/mereditk/bkolds.htm

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 20:36:31 -0300 (ADT)
From: Greg Beaulieu <ab348@chebucto.ns.ca>
Subject: Re: Headlight doors

On Wed, 8 Jul 1998 TomW30@aol.com wrote:
>    Anyone know if the plastic headlight doors from a '68 442 will fit my
'69
> 442? Appreciate your replys.

Almost sure they will not. '69s have a rather plain-looking dualdoor
while '68s have individual doors for each light.

Greg Beaulieu    ab348@chebucto.ns.ca    Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 20:45:10 -0300 (ADT)
From: Greg Beaulieu <ab348@chebucto.ns.ca>
Subject: UNBOUNCE: '57 Center Diff Section Swap

- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
From:	"Dr. David Ritter" <c617scc@semovm.semo.edu>
Subject: Re: UNBOUNCE: '57 Center Diff Section Swap

I would like to thank the several replies to my inquiry. I was not specific
enough in my description; I took the driveshaft all the way out of my '57
88
and as I turned the pinion or wheel by hand can feel the "scrunching"
inside.
I do not have access to a Hollander for the 50's (this is my first car for
that era).  Local salvage yards are only interested in high-price newer
vintage.
I know of a '62 Pontiac that is pretty deep in the dirt. Am told that it
has
been there at least 25 years.  I guess the thing to do is jack it up and
slither under there :-)
Thanks again,
David Ritter

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 20:13:09 -0400
From: "Andersons" <robertan@cfw.com>
Subject: Re: another starting problem

Watch out for the rubber fuel line up close to the hot engine.  The PO did
that to my Cutlass, and it baked out and cracked one day- BIG puddle of gas
all over the hot motor (no sparky).

Would be OK, I guess, if you replace it often.  Better to order a pre-bent
pump-to-carb pipe- they're only about $20 from catalog places.

- -----Original Message-----
From: JonKrisInc@aol.com <JonKrisInc@aol.com>
To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Wednesday, July 08, 1998 1:40 PM
Subject: another starting problem


>If my car is not used for a day, it takes at least four or five trys to
start
>it. This may be because when I replaced the fuel line from the carb, i had
>trouble making all the bends, so I used a rubber fuel line instead. Also,
>from the exhaust odor,  the mixture may be too rich.
>Any ideas would be much appreciated.
>TIA
>Bruce
>75 Delta 88 Conv.
>

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 08 Jul 1998 18:19:06 -0600
From: Oldsmagnet <buehner@lyrea.com>
Subject: R12,134A, hotshot, freeze-it, etc

Trying to keep your cool?  Having troubles doing just that at $38 a pound
for
genuine R-12?  There are several other options available, I've even seen
some on
the net, for much much cheaper.  Here's a bit of a story about ~them~.
Currently there are only two "authorized" refrigerant agents availalbe,
genuine
R12, and genuine R134A.  The others are actually a blend of products and
additives.  They may work quite well, but one thing needs to be kept in
mind.
Upon normal usage, these additives and blended agents tend to seperate.
Some
additives leak out, others stay behind in the system.  From a service
standppoint, this spells disaster.  Most servicing involves reclaiming all
the
refrigerant, repairing problems, and then recharging.  Many reclaimers use
50 to
60 pound bottles to store the recycled R12 in.  If one were to try
reclaiming a
system that ~ever~ had any of the "off-brand" freons in it, the recycled
freon
supply becomes tainted, and no longer sellable.  In addition to potentially
contaminating the recovery machine, as well.  Do the math, 60 pounds at
$35-40
bucks a pound?  ~Big~ loss for the shop.  Because of this, many stations
won't
even open the hood on anything that's had any unauthorized product in it.
Don't
know if there's any way they can tell, but definately keep that information
in
mind during the decision process.

Also, anyone ever wonder how the government realized R12 was destructive to
the
Ozone?  And how convenient the ban started when DuPont's R12 patent
expired?
Food for thought.  Can you say political sellout?  I knew that you could...


Being in or near triple digits here gives me a little more incentive to
think
about this sort of stuff.  Any state-changing substance will work in an A/C
system.  The drawbacks include reliability, efficiency and safety.  Rumor
has it
propane works excellently for a refrigerant.  Just pray ~nothing~ ever goes
wrong in the system!  Compressor fails, siezes, heats up and sparks, and
~boom!~  Talk about a cooling problem!

So, with that all in mind, my recommendation is to suck up your prides,
cough up
the dough, and do it right, or just suffer in the heat and complain alot,
like
me.  And write you're congressman telling him/her how much bull*$#@ that
actually is...  Apparantly the military commonly used liquid freon to clean
their aircrafts.  Presumably hundreds of pounds at a time, shot on a single
aircraft, and vented into the  air.  But it's the automotive world that's
causing all the "ozone" problems???  Yeah.  I guess the military ~still~
uses
R12 to clean their electronic equipment.  Don't know for sure, just a
rumor, but
still gotta wonder.

Heated up in Montana,

Oldsmagnet - Charley Buehner @ Sidney Montana |\      |-------|
mailto:buehner@lyrea.com To mail direct to me |/\|=|  |   |   |
http://www.lyrea.com/~buehner See my homepage |\ |=|  |   |   |
   \ | / =========================== \ | /    |<||=|  |   |   |
    \|/  List Removal and Guidelines  \|/     |/ |=|  |  / \  |
     V   ===========================   V      |\/|=|  | / | \ |
  http://www.lyrea.com/~buehner/listfaq.htm   |/      |___|___|

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 08 Jul 1998 18:29:08 -0600
From: Oldsmagnet <buehner@lyrea.com>
Subject: Re: Happy 101st...-Maybe

> Sorry for the waste of bandwidth, but these are the miscellaneous
> rantings of a person that got up on the wrong side of the bed today.
> Besides the thought of Charley having to buy a new Chevy in about 10
> years when all the Oldsmobiles run out is a LOT depressing.  BUILD ME A
> NEW 442 CONVERTIBLE AND I WILL SEE YOU IN THE SHOWROOM, GM!  The way it
> looks right now, I have a beter chance of seeing 101 than Olds

> Flame retardant clothing on and force shields in place.

Naw, don't worry about that.  It's hot enough outside without piling on
extra
clothing.  The way ~I~ see it, you hit the nail right on the head.  (except
me
buying a ch*vy in 10 yrs... I'd sooner push my Olds to work!!!  :)

- --
Oldsmagnet - Charley Buehner @ Sidney Montana |\      |-------|
mailto:buehner@lyrea.com To mail direct to me |/\|=|  |   |   |
http://www.lyrea.com/~buehner See my homepage |\ |=|  |   |   |
   \ | / =========================== \ | /    |<||=|  |   |   |
    \|/  List Removal and Guidelines  \|/     |/ |=|  |  / \  |
     V   ===========================   V      |\/|=|  | / | \ |
  http://www.lyrea.com/~buehner/listfaq.htm   |/      |___|___|

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 08 Jul 1998 18:34:37 -0600
From: Oldsmagnet <buehner@lyrea.com>
Subject: Re: G-Body electric window adj

> I recently fixed this problem on a friend's '87 442.  The long tubular
> vertical track has two slotted attachment points.  The two adjustment
> bolts face upwards, and in the case of this car, one had loosened.  To
> increase the closing pressure of the glass on the weatherstripping,
> window guide needs to be moved a bit closer to the door skin.

Exactly.  The bottom of the glass needs to get adjusted outwards, to put
more
pressure at the top of the glass.  New weatherstripping may be the only
other
cure for it, I don't know.  I've been fighting the scenario for years.
Another
problem that contributes is the crack at the front of the door.  The
increased
door pressure from the adjustment will stress that area more, and that area
being loose will make your glass problems nearly uncurable.  I've tried to
find
a consensus for repairing the cracked area up there, some say yes, some say
no.
Can't answer that.  I don't know if some new bushings somewhere in the
track
will help or not.  It seems like there's looseness down there somewhere,
also.
I've never found ~new~ parts, and none of the body guys I've ever spokeni
with
have known what I'm talking about.
- --
Oldsmagnet - Charley Buehner @ Sidney Montana |\      |-------|
mailto:buehner@lyrea.com To mail direct to me |/\|=|  |   |   |
http://www.lyrea.com/~buehner See my homepage |\ |=|  |   |   |
   \ | / =========================== \ | /    |<||=|  |   |   |
    \|/  List Removal and Guidelines  \|/     |/ |=|  |  / \  |
     V   ===========================   V      |\/|=|  | / | \ |
  http://www.lyrea.com/~buehner/listfaq.htm   |/      |___|___|

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 08 Jul 1998 20:56:46 -0400
From: Paul Hartlieb <plh@nbn.net>
Subject: Re: Who's Who at Nats

Peg O'Connor wrote:
>
> As of Wednesday morning:
>
> Name            Dates           Hotel           Car(s)
> --------------------------------------------------------
> Mark Prince     7/17-7/18       none yet        72 442 W-30

Hey, Peg!

R U the official list keeper for Nat's?  If so, you can add me:

Paul Hartlieb 7/14-7/19 Holiday Inn '67 98 Coupe

See ya there!

Paul
- --
Paul Hartlieb
Myerstown, PA
mailto:plh@nbn.net

------------------------------

End of oldsmobile-digest V1 #1354
*********************************

