Please respond to oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca @ INTERNET
To:	oldsmobile-digest@chebucto.ns.ca @ INTERNET
cc:	 
Subject:	oldsmobile-digest V1 #1428


oldsmobile-digest      Saturday, August 15 1998      Volume 01 : Number 1428



Re: Clock Wiring - Please H*lp
Re: how to test a starter...
Re: how to test a starter...
Need h*lp w/ exhaust manifold question
RE: Clock Wiring - Please H*lp
RE: Clock Wiring - Please H*lp
RE: how to test a starter...
RE: Beware of Bumper Boyz
RE: Holly Pro Jection
Frame motor mounts
4.10 or 4.56 gears?
Olds Artwork
horn wiring diagram for a 64 Dynamic 88
re: Holly Pro Jection
400 CID in a '65 F-85?
Re: Frame motor mounts
Re: A great injustice?
Re: Toro T Shirt
Re: Windshield
RE: Frame motor mounts
RE: Christian Fair's Exhaust
Re: Frame motor mounts
Re: Camshaft's
Re: 403 olds flywheel and clutch
Re: 403 olds flywheel and clutch
Re: Frame motor mounts
Re: 400 CID in a '65 F-85?
some olds i fond for sale
Re: Frame motor mounts (simplified)
Re:  Re: A great injustice?
Re:  Re: A great injustice?
RE: List Index
Re: Resonators?
Re: Clock Wiring - Please H*lp
Mail List
Re: 400 CID in a '65 F-85?
Re: 400 CID in a '65 F-85?
RE: Beware of Bumper Boyz (What about other sources?)
How to adjust TH400 shift points ??
Re: How to adjust TH400 shift points ??
Oldsmobile Valvetrains
Re: Mail List
RE: Non-Auto W-cars
Re: More Olds model Stuff
Re: Windshield
Re: Ball Joint
Re: Non-Auto W-cars
[Fwd: Re: 64 F85 Cutlass body tag decoding]
Final (?) Word on AT 69 W-31s
Bumper Boyz
Re: [Fwd: Re: 64 F85 Cutlass body tag decoding]
Re: how to test a starter...
Re: 4.10 or 4.56 gears?
Re: Aluminum Heads!
Re: Christian Fair's Exhaust
Re: Frame motor mounts
Ebay bidding and Service Manuals
72 442 Convt at Route66 Track...
Trans Operation temp
Friday Olds Cartoon - OOOPS!
Re: Trans Operation temp
Re: Camshaft's

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 17:39:09 -0300 (ADT)
From: Greg Beaulieu <ab348@chebucto.ns.ca>
Subject: Re: Clock Wiring - Please H*lp

I added a clock to my '68 a few years back and the wiring was already
there. I think the wire colors you described are correct. Certainly the
orange one is power for the mechanism, and I think the dash light circuit
is gray.

As for fixing the works, I had mine apart because the points inside that
controls the winding mechanism were burned, but they cleaned up fine and
it has worked ever since. But really you need to hear from our clock
expert... where's Andy Green when you need him? ;-)

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

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 13:44:48 PDT
From: "Ryan D" <riviera72sss@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: how to test a starter...

>
>In a message dated 98-08-14 11:16:42 EDT, you write:
>
><< Or would you suggest to go ahead and spend the $ 30 for a rebuilt
one
> without even trying out which one is good? (or would you buy a new
one?)
>
> Regards,
> just go to autozone ,tha will do it for free : )
>

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

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 13:44:48 PDT
From: "Ryan D" <riviera72sss@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: how to test a starter...

>
>In a message dated 98-08-14 11:16:42 EDT, you write:
>
><< Or would you suggest to go ahead and spend the $ 30 for a rebuilt
one
> without even trying out which one is good? (or would you buy a new
one?)
>
> Regards,
> just go to autozone ,tha will do it for free : )
>

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

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 16:56:38 -0400
From: Jonathan Parke <jonparke@together.net>
Subject: Need h*lp w/ exhaust manifold question

I've been looking for a decent set of W-Z manifolds for my big block.

Found a pair of X-Z's with following casting #s:

LH - X  - 412287
RH- Z -  402294

Went to the trusty FAQ & found:

========================>>

W   402295   LH
1969-72 442, W-30, H/O, A-body with big block and dual exhaust. "W" is over
the front runner. THE most desirable set  to have. Has divider between
center ports. One 2.5" outlet, 2-bolt flange, points about straight down.
Companion to  Z-402294-RH.

X   412287   LH
1970-up? A-, B-, C-body with big block and dual exhaust. Has the divider
between center ports. One 2.5" outlet, 2-bolt flange, points about straight
down.
Good substitute for W-402295-LH.

X   412287   LH
1973-74 442, W-30 with big block and dual exhaust. Has the divider between
center ports. One 2.5" outlet, 2-bolt flange, points about straight down.
Good substitute for W-402295-LH.

Z   402294   RH
1969-74 442, W-30, H/O, A-body with big block and dual exhaust. THE most
desirable set to have. Has divider between center ports. One 2.5" outlet,
2-bolt flange, points about straight down.
Companion to LH unit W-402295 LH.

Typical exhaust manifold pairs, left/right, are: X/W, X/Y, W/Z

========================>>

Questions:

1) As stated both the W & the X have "divider between center ports. One
2.5" outlet, 2-bolt flange, points about straight down."  So is there any
difference other than cosmetic?  Point being:  Would a X-Z pair work just
as effectively as a W-Z pair if they were in the same condition?

2) The X manifold I'm looking at has a small hairline crack between the
center ports right at the top of the divider and it goes in about a 1/2".
I seem to remember a post awhile back that mentioned this as being typical
and not a problem.  Is this correct?

Other than the small crack the X-Z pair is in beautiful shape.  No pitting
at all.

Any advice/opinions would be greatly appreciated.

TIA,

jp

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

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 15:07:51 -0600
From: "B. Sanders" <blaines@strata3d.com>
Subject: RE: Clock Wiring - Please H*lp

>
> What car is the clock going in?  Gotta know that.

Oh yeah, it's a '72 Cutlass Supreme.  ;)

> The fogging with WD-40 trick is for clocks.  Go to the FAQ for more
> information.  You can lik to it from www.442.com

Thanks.

- -Blaine

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 15:12:13 -0600
From: "B. Sanders" <blaines@strata3d.com>
Subject: RE: Clock Wiring - Please H*lp

> I added a clock to my '68 a few years back and the wiring was already
> there. I think the wire colors you described are correct. Certainly the
> orange one is power for the mechanism, and I think the dash light circuit
> is gray.

The wiring was already there?  That's what I thought... but where?  I
suspect that the previous owner snagged the original orange wire to power
the clock in the modern tape deck that now resides there.  I guess I'll just
splice back into that wire if that's the case.  But I still can't find any
stray gray wires in there anywhere.  I can't even see where one could be
connected...

Thanks,
Blaine

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 16:04:43 -0500
From: "Smetana, Christopher" <csmetana@dowagro.com>
Subject: RE: how to test a starter...

>> just go to autozone ,tha will do it for free : )

provided of course the dude at AutoZone knows what he's doing.  I had
them test a starter, said it was bad, got a new one and it didn't fix
the problem.  Turns out it was the alternator which they also tested and
said it was good.

Chris Smetana
Terre Haute, IN
work: csmetana@dowagro.com
home: chris@abcs.com

1969 W-31 currently under the knife for tranny repairs
1969 4-4-2 parts car
plus others

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 14:10:29 -0700
From: Chris Fair <cfair@FairIsaac.com>
Subject: RE: Beware of Bumper Boyz

Just so we're clear, I had my 98 rear bumper replaced by them.
They had it in stock and I trusted them. The quality is poor and
I too would not do business with them again.

By quality what I mean is the plating is o.k. -- little fuzzy where
it ought to be mirror sharp reflection (bad prep?). Also there is
a repair on the end which is obvious to the aficionado -- a .25"
to .5" gap which should have been filled.

Too bad for them. I hope the word goes far & wide. Let's use
the power of digital data to get them to sharpen up their act.

Those of you with contacts on other lists & forums, here's your
chance to copy & paste for justice.

cf

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 14:13:21 -0700
From: Chris Fair <cfair@FairIsaac.com>
Subject: RE: Holly Pro Jection

I'm looking forward to any posts on this topic too.

My specific interest is in the digital feedback loop
system with O2 sensor adjusting the mixture.

For those who don't know, there is a fuel injection
do it yourself list or BBS or similar which I accessed
while back on reference from another olds list member.

Some good stuff, but not much then on the Holley
systems. Maybe now there is more content. If anyone
goes there, please bring the news back for the rest of
us.

Same goes for other lists members.

TIA

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 15:18:31 -0600
From: "B. Sanders" <blaines@strata3d.com>
Subject: Frame motor mounts

I'm doing the ol' small block to big block conversion soon.  In the next
week or two, I'm going to take a 3 hour trip to remove the frame mounts off
my '68 parts car.  So I need to know how the mounts are attached to the
car - bolts, rivets, or welded.  If they are welded or riveted on I'll have
to borrow a torch.

Thanks,
Blaine

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 23:14:50
From: <crl6420@online.no>
Subject: 4.10 or 4.56 gears?

Hello,

I have a -81 calais, and i`m going to build up a
350 with the edelbrock rpm perf. pack (397 hp)
the trans is a th 200 r4 from a -84 hurst/olds.

what gears are recomended for this combo ?
and can the trans take the "heat" ?
i can live with the rpm.

Thanx

Chris lovik, Norway

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 16:22:33 -0500
From: Doug Newman <newmand@WCBI.com>
Subject: Olds Artwork

Hi folks,
            A while back, Gib Loudon sent a post to the list about some
good-looking Olds artwork he had done for his website.  After I saw what
he had done, I decided to get some artwork done of MY car.  The guy's
name is D. Frizsell, and he's a list member.  He has a website at
http://www3.wcu.edu/~dfrizsell that shows some examples of his work.
All he requires is some photos of your Olds scanned at 300 ppi.  I had a
poster and a "show board" made, and I'm VERY satisfied with his work.
D-man is good about sending updates on your project via e-mail, and he's
a stickler for detail.  (Prices vary depending on the work you want
done, so talk to him about how much $ you're willing to spend.)  His
address is dfrizsell@WCUVAX1.WCU.EDU    Check out his website and see
for yourself.  He doesn't disappoint.

Later,

Doug Newman         OCA # 30311
Columbus, MS         1987 442

http://www.442.com/newman.html
http://www.442.com/newmantape.html

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 17:15:30 EDT
From: <Shorwitt@aol.com>
Subject: horn wiring diagram for a 64 Dynamic 88

Can someone provide a diagram or tell me where to find one?  Thanks.

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 16:21:33 -0500
From: Chad Schwartz <ChadS@pcsco.com>
Subject: re: Holly Pro Jection

>Have any of you ever tried the Holly Pro-Jection fuel injection system
>on an Oldsmobile engine?  If so, what are the results?

I haven't seen one on a Oldsmobile but my friend had the 900 cfm unit on his
'79 Mustang GT with a 460 Ford.  I personally think they are junk and would
say stay away from them.  I'm sure someone has gotten them to work but not
that I've seen.  It would be an expensive experiment.  We ended up selling
it to someone else and putting on a 850 cfm Holley.  The car was much slower
with the Pro Injection and the fuel curve wasn't right.  It takes a lot of
work to try and dial them in (if you can).  I don't think the setup has
enough sensors for input to be a very accurate.  Run basically off throttle
position only.  It will not run as perfect as a multi-port injection setup
with MAF and O2 sensors.  It's just a computer controlled carb.  Now if you
can get a MPI setup for an Olds then I think your talkin!! :-)

Just my $0.002

Chad Schwartz
chads@pcsco.com <mailto:chads@pcsco.com>
mIRC: ROCKN6
Denison, IA
'87 GN  T-Tops (TE-44, 40lb Inj, Modified Stock IC, ATR Cam, JC Chip,
                          ATR 2 ½" SS Exhaust, TH 3" DP, 3" Test Pipe, ATR
Ram Air)
'79 H/O T-Tops (400 HP/430 TQ ZZ4 350 H.O. Chevy, TH350, 3.73 Posi)

"Poverty Is Owning A Race Car"  "Happiness Is A Low E.T."

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 16:29:01 +0100
From: cdemps@lsumc.edu (Dempsey, Charles)
Subject: 400 CID in a '65 F-85?

Hi,

There is a 1965 F-85 two door hardtop for sale about 150 miles away from
me. The current owner doesn't know much about it, but he says it has a
400 CID motor and an automatic on the column. He says it is not a 442.
I'm trying to decide if it's worth the trip to see it.

Was the 400 offered in a non-442 F-85? The FAQ seems to indicate it was
only available with the 442 option.

If you reply please copy to cdemps@lsumc.edu. I am subscribed in digest
mode and I'd like to figure this out soon.

Thanks,
Charles

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 18:03:45 EDT
From: <DYeager535@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Frame motor mounts

In a message dated 98-08-14 17:26:15 EDT, you write:

<< I'm doing the ol' small block to big block conversion soon.  In the next
 week or two, I'm going to take a 3 hour trip to remove the frame mounts off
 my '68 parts car.  So I need to know how the mounts are attached to the
 car - bolts, rivets, or welded.  If they are welded or riveted on I'll have
 to borrow a torch.

 Thanks,
 Blaine >>

     I think  they are bolted on..haven't seen a GM newer than '67 that had
them riveted..especially since these are the rubber mounts that can/need to be
replaced, correct? And they are probably like most other GM cars, absolutely
no way to get to the end inside the frame....and if you lose the nut/bolt in
there, forget about it : )  Dorian

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 18:04:06 -0400
From: "Mike Rothe." <hurstolds@xtalwind.net>
Subject: Re: A great injustice?

> I would put the wing on. I think it ads character to the car. Some of the
> cars came from the factory with the wing and looked fine.

Again, it's a matter of personal choice.  If it's very excellent stock,
I'd probably keep it that way, or butcher ANOTHER trunk lid for the
spoiler and save the original.

And a historical note: The only cars that could have came from the
FACTORY with this "cessna" wing was the 70-72 Cutlass and 442.  The
Rallye 350s all had this required option.  The '69s never had a factory
version, however, the "wing thing" was installed by Demmer AFTER the car
left the factory on the 69 H/O.  Olds apparently liked it, and included
that very design as the W-35 option in the 70-72s.  With the factory
wing addition, trunk pinstripe deletion was included.  Although there
were no official convertible versions of this wing, a few were modified
for the 69 H/O convertibles, however many there are, and some
dealerships modified them and/or installed them for customers for
various years.  Personally, I think the 69 H/O looks good with it,
balancing out the huge scoops on the hood.  Because of it's ominous
(downright bad-to-the-bone) black/silver schemed, super-stealth-like
appearance, I don't think the 68 H/O would've looked as neat with the
spoiler.  Regardless if you like the spoiler or not, it WILL make an
impact one way or another.

Oldsmo-thoughts,
Mike Rothe

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 18:15:14 EDT
From: <MW440@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Toro T Shirt

Hi,     Please use this address  MW440@juno.com.
         Discontinue the AOL address.    Thanks!

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 18:29:37 -0400
From: "Mike Rothe." <hurstolds@xtalwind.net>
Subject: Re: Windshield

> here is from a 70-72.  The wagon is a 69.  The Olds parts books as well
> as Hollanders show these to be different.  I suspect the only difference
> is the fact that the 70-72's have the imbedded antenna.  Whereas the
> 68-69's antennas are fender mounted.  As close as I can measure, it
> appears it will fit.  Anybody interchanged these before?

Installed a 72 Cutlass Supreme windshied WITH antenna on a a friend's 69
Cutlass years ago.  Why?  He needed it, it was free, so no harm in
trying.  We were like you, in thinking it would fit, since it seemed as
the measurements showed it would.  Guess what?  It DOES!  Same rake,
same windshield shape.  And the antenna isn't that noticable.  He still
used the fender mount though.

Mike Rothe

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 16:53:08 -0600
From: "B. Sanders" <blaines@strata3d.com>
Subject: RE: Frame motor mounts

<snip>
> So I need to know how the mounts are attached to the
>  car - bolts, rivets, or welded.  If they are welded or riveted
> on I'll have
>  to borrow a torch.
>
>  Thanks,
>  Blaine >>
>
>      I think  they are bolted on..haven't seen a GM newer than
> '67 that had
> them riveted..especially since these are the rubber mounts that
> can/need to be
> replaced, correct?

Actually, I was referring to the metal part that's on the frame that the
rubber motor mounts attach to.  I understand these are a necessary part of
the conversion, since the BB would otherwise sit too high and the fan would
rub on the shroud.

This is what I believe is necessary in the conversion.  Correct me if I'm
wrong:

- - BB to replace the SB (obvious)
- - Metal frame mounts that the rubber motor mounts attach to
- - Heavy-duty front coil springs to carry the extra weight of the BB
- - 4-core radiator, top plate, and lower mounting brackets (?)
- - Notched valve covers to clear power brakes booster (?)

Am I missing anything?

Thanks,
Blaine

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 15:58:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: JM <super442@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Christian Fair's Exhaust

- ---Chris Fair <cfair@FairIsaac.com> wrote:
 It seems flowmasters come in
> 1,2, & 3 chamber varieties. The more chambers, the less
> sound, it seems. Can anyone confirm this?
- ---! chambers are "race only" basically meaning RF LOUD,2 chambers are
slightly loud,And 3 chambers are quiet, yet provide a nice 5.0slow
rumble.
         John
==
mailto:super442@yahoo.com           ICQ # 16956740
1985 Cutlass-----T-Tops--307 H.O./3.73--http://members.tripod.com/~SuperOlds/
1984 Cutlass-Moonroof--307 http://members.tripod.com/~SuperOlds/PatsCar.html
1982 Cutlass Cruiser Wagon(g-body)--soon to be 403!



_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 19:11:45 EDT
From: <DYeager535@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Frame motor mounts

In a message dated 98-08-14 18:55:09 EDT, you write:

<<
 Actually, I was referring to the metal part that's on the frame that the
 rubber motor mounts attach to.  I understand these are a necessary part of
 the conversion, since the BB would otherwise sit too high and the fan would
 rub on the shroud.

 This is what I believe is necessary in the conversion.  Correct me if I'm
 wrong:

 - BB to replace the SB (obvious)
 - Metal frame mounts that the rubber motor mounts attach to
 - Heavy-duty front coil springs to carry the extra weight of the BB
 - 4-core radiator, top plate, and lower mounting brackets (?)
 - Notched valve covers to clear power brakes booster (?)

 Am I missing anything?

 Thanks,
 Blaine >>

      As I have no experience with Olds big blocks, are they not like the
small blocks, where the rubber is on the frame? If they aren't the same, I
apologize! : )  Are the BB motor mounts bolted to the block in a different
spot than Sb's? And if so, are there dimensional differences in the SB and BB
where the motor mounts bolt?   Dorian

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 06:57:44 -0700
From: Kerry Kroger <kerryk@MCI2000.com>
Subject: Re: Camshaft's

used a 478 in a 350 however it was an original w-31 and it had the heavier
springs etc...kk
- -----Original Message-----
From: DYeager535@AOL.COM <DYeager535@AOL.COM>
To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Thursday, August 13, 1998 9:45 PM
Subject: Camshaft's


>Hi everyone, more questions as usual : ) Has ANYONE out there put a .474+
lift
>cam in a small block Olds that wasn't originally a .474+ lift without
changing
>the valve springs or pushrods? This 403 is still giving me fits with the
>different answers about needing different springs and pushrods with a .474+
>cam. I'm only going to a .456 lift, and they used up to a .480(?) in the
High
>Performance marine engines...I think I'm going to need new springs and
>pushrods, just hoping I wouldn't have to...
>       Thanks for any input, Dorian

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 18:07:19 -0700
From: "Tim W." <tropical@micron.net>
Subject: Re: 403 olds flywheel and clutch

Yes the block has a hole drilled and tapped from the factory for the clutch
pivot ball. So i was with the assumption that there is a flywheel made for
this application. Coming up with the bell housing is no problem, I think i
have found one that will fit. The flywheel is the major problem though. Are
there any flywheels that olds made that will fit the 403?
Thanks Tim Wurtz
- -----Original Message-----
From: Padavano.Joe@Orbital.COM <Padavano.Joe@Orbital.COM>
To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Friday, August 14, 1998 8:27 AM
Subject: Re: 403 olds flywheel and clutch


>Though they were *made* to mate to a manual transmission, none ever were.
>_____________
>
>I just wanted to add a little to Bob's post.  What we're all talking about
>here is that apparently (and unlike those of most Olds motors), _all_ 403
>cranks were drilled for the pilot bearing, despite only being mated to an
>AT.  To put a 4 spd behind a 403, you'll still need the pilot bearing and
>an MT flywheel with a late (68-up) crank flange pattern.  I assume (not
>being a 403 expert) that the 403 doesn't have some oddball external balance
>requirement and that the block _is_ drilled and tapped for the clutch
>linkage pivot ball.
>
>Joe Padavano
>padavano.joe@orbital.com
>
>66 442
>68 W-30
>69 H/O
>70 W-30
>
>

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 18:09:31 -0700
From: "Tim W." <tropical@micron.net>
Subject: Re: 403 olds flywheel and clutch

Yes its true, I have (4) 403's and they are factory drilled and tapped for
the clutch linkage pivot ball. Tim Wurtz
- -----Original Message-----
From: DYeager535@aol.com <DYeager535@aol.com>
To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Friday, August 14, 1998 10:39 AM
Subject: Re: 403 olds flywheel and clutch


>In a message dated 98-08-14 11:23:21 EDT, you write:
>
><< I just wanted to add a little to Bob's post.  What we're all talking
about
> here is that apparently (and unlike those of most Olds motors), _all_ 403
> cranks were drilled for the pilot bearing, despite only being mated to an
> AT.  To put a 4 spd behind a 403, you'll still need the pilot bearing and
> an MT flywheel with a late (68-up) crank flange pattern.  I assume (not
> being a 403 expert) that the 403 doesn't have some oddball external
balance
> requirement and that the block _is_ drilled and tapped for the clutch
> linkage pivot ball.
>
> Joe Padavano >>
>
>     Now that is odd! Why would they even think of doing this? Sounds like
a
>good reason to keep the 403 around! : )   Dorian
>

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 17:00:33 -0700
From: Kerry Kroger <kerryk@MCI2000.com>
Subject: Re: Frame motor mounts

- -----Original Message-----
From: DYeager535@aol.com <DYeager535@aol.com>
To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Friday, August 14, 1998 4:15 PM
Subject: Re: Frame motor mounts


OK guys the portion of the mount that resides on the frame is the same on a
68
as are the rubber portions so just bolt it in and go...kk

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 20:25:31 -0400
From: GARY K DAGENAIS <dagenais@gate.net>
Subject: Re: 400 CID in a '65 F-85?

Charles I would check the car out real good as I do not believe that the 400
engine
was available in 1965 without ordering the 442 package. It may be a standard
car
that someone has installed a 400 engine but it did not come with it in it.

Dempsey, Charles wrote:

> Hi,
>
> There is a 1965 F-85 two door hardtop for sale about 150 miles away from
> me. The current owner doesn't know much about it, but he says it has a
> 400 CID motor and an automatic on the column. He says it is not a 442.
> I'm trying to decide if it's worth the trip to see it.
>
> Was the 400 offered in a non-442 F-85? The FAQ seems to indicate it was
> only available with the 442 option.
>
> If you reply please copy to cdemps@lsumc.edu. I am subscribed in digest
> mode and I'd like to figure this out soon.
>
> Thanks,
> Charles

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 17:35:55 PDT
From: "Ryan D" <riviera72sss@hotmail.com>
Subject: some olds i fond for sale

Hey i fond these olds for sale in my auto trader ,


a 1984 cutlass. with a 403 big block,
some chrome,edelbrock parts,new duals,rear tires,
runs and looks good!(man dose it)$1,500



1983 cutlass ,3.73 rear end,blue int,blue ext,fact rallyes w/white
lettered tires,new windsshield,brakes ,shocks.no motor or trans.
would mack good race or project car.$1,500



1978 olds tornado.brougham,prstine cond.72,000 act.mi.,orig owner
oklahoma car ,403,w/ 4bbl carb.$4,400


1986 olds 4.4.2,maroon and silver,307,at,loaded,t tops,
new tires ,ALL orig.clean car inside and out,stored winters,98,000.mi
$5,500 obo



1968 cutlass .runs good ,needs doghouse,$700


1968 olds 4.4.2 ,maroon,black vinyl top,exe in and out,455,at,
VERY NICE 4.4.2,$9,000



1968 olds cutlass s,ram-rod,350,1 of 717,correct motor,4 sp.3:91 posi.
black/red ,80,000  mi ,non run since 1976 ,$5,000


1971 cutlass ,350$10,000




1966 cutlass,330, $7,900



1973 olds 4.4.2 rocket .455w/lots of chrome,ac,ps
sunroof,in primer,needs body work.$3,500


thanks
      ryan


  My  -------   -------
            /  |
           /   |
          /     ------
         /            |
        /             |
       /        ------    DELTA 88
Ryan D Beck
           Riviera72sss@hotmail.com


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

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 98 20:47:04 EDT
From: Glenn Connors <gpc442@buffnet.net>
Subject: Re: Frame motor mounts (simplified)

>I'm doing the ol' small block to big block conversion soon.  In the next
>week or two, I'm going to take a 3 hour trip to remove the frame mounts off
>my '68 parts car.  So I need to know how the mounts are attached to the
>car - bolts, rivets, or welded.  If they are welded or riveted on I'll have
>to borrow a torch.


      I removed a small block 350ci. from my '69 4-4-2 and replaced it with
a big block 455ci.  The frame mounts stayed right where they were and I
placed the block mounts on the motor and set it right in and bolted them
up....'that 'ill do 'er'.


  Glenn
  '69 4-4-2

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 21:03:27 EDT
From: <JJP442@aol.com>
Subject: Re:  Re: A great injustice?

What car are we talking about??
JJP442@aol.com

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 21:04:27 EDT
From: <JJP442@aol.com>
Subject: Re:  Re: A great injustice?

Sorry...... Ignore that didn't scroll down.
JJP442@aol.com

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 18:09:21 -0700
From: "Corey Day" <dayc@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: RE: List Index

Corey Day
dayc@ix.netcom.com
www.netcom.com/~dayc/

> -----Original Message-----
> From: oldsmobile-owner@chebucto.ns.ca
> [mailto:oldsmobile-owner@chebucto.ns.ca]On Behalf Of JCRASH7@aol.com
> Sent: Friday, August 14, 1998 8:49 AM
> To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
> Subject: List Index
>
>
> Listmembers,
> I am going to make a page that lists all of the listmembers'
> websites.  If you
> are reading this and have a website, please email me the url.
>
> Joe
>
> BTW-  I forget who posted it, but I'm glad my method for testing
> ball joints
> worked for you.
>

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 21:11:37 -0400
From: Paul Hartlieb <plh@nbn.net>
Subject: Re: Resonators?

KarlAune@aol.com wrote:

> From High School's motor shop I remember a diagram (which I can prolly
> dig up!) of resonators coming before mufflers in an exhaust system......
>
> Ah well, "proof in the pudding"....
> Karl will stat search soon.
>
> SOM
> &KA

From the '60 Olds Models, Features and Facts dealer book (this is the
first year that Olds made reference to positions of the components)...

"Optional dual exhaust system gives flashing acceleration.  Twin
resonator chambers behind mufflers further subdue engine sound."

But I, too, seem to recall seeing something somewhere about resonators
first, mufflers second...

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

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 20:55:36 -0700
From: Greg Pruett <grpruett@vt.edu>
Subject: Re: Clock Wiring - Please H*lp

B. Sanders wrote:
>
> >
> > What car is the clock going in?  Gotta know that.
>
> Oh yeah, it's a '72 Cutlass Supreme.  ;)

Hey! I can work with that!  :)

Lessee, consult the shop manual....  You're right on the wire colors,
orange is clock feed and grey is instrument lighting.

As for the location of the wires, they're in a bundle of wires that
comes out of a legnth of the harness that is attatched to the dash over
the insturments.  As near as I can tell they're in the same bundle of
wires that contains: The heater feed, a brown wire I think.  Cigar
lighter feed, another orange wire.  An instrument light feed (grey) that
looks like it goes to one of the bulbs over the A/C controls.  The
instrument light feed for the clock ends in a spade connection.  The
spade connection hooks to two wires, spliced in a "V" shape, that go to
the back of the clock.  The clock feed wire has a spade connecteor on
the end of it as well.

Hope this helps.  If it doesn't make sense let me know and I'll try to
clarify.

Greg Pruett
72 Vista Cruiser
67 Cutlass Supreme
80 Cutlass Calais

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 22:02:01 EDT
From: <GaryDW30@aol.com>
Subject: Mail List

Anyone have the address given the other night re: pre- '72 Olds list?
Now I didn't loose it, exactly, just misplaced it!
I've heard it said that the memory is the first to go, can't remember what was
second.
Anyway, if someone would give that address again.
TIA
Gary

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 22:03:44 -0400
From: Paul Hartlieb <plh@nbn.net>
Subject: Re: 400 CID in a '65 F-85?

Dempsey, Charles wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> There is a 1965 F-85 two door hardtop for sale about 150 miles away from
> me. The current owner doesn't know much about it, but he says it has a
> 400 CID motor and an automatic on the column.
>
> Was the 400 offered in a non-442 F-85? The FAQ seems to indicate it was
> only available with the 442 option.
>
> Thanks,
> Charles

Well, this COULD be interesting.  In addition to the 442, the 400 was
available as the Police Apprehender V8 on F-85 models as part of the
Pursuit Police Apprehender Equipment Package.  This package was
available on Cutlass Holiday and Sports Coupes, F-85 Deluxe and standard
4-door sedans and standard F-85 Club Coupes.  Lots of heavy duty
equipment was included and Jetaway was available.  MIGHT be worth
checking into.  Apprehender cars are around, doesn't Bryceman have one?

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

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 19:04:41 +0000
From: Bob Blanchard <bob149@efortress.com>
Subject: Re: 400 CID in a '65 F-85?

At 08:25 PM 8/14/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Charles I would check the car out real good as I do not believe that the 400
>engine was available in 1965 without ordering the 442 package.
> It may be a standard car that someone has installed a 400 engine
> but it did not come with it in it.

This is a bad thing?

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 22:08:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: Christopher Casteel <earthsci@POP.usit.net>
Subject: RE: Beware of Bumper Boyz (What about other sources?)

This is an interesting post as I've gotten the bumpers off the 442 this week
(finally!).

I've had some reservations about the idea of sending my cores away only to
await arrival or rechromed bumpers, never really knowing what I'll get until
it shows up.  Based on these experiences, it looks as though common sense
was talking to me for a good reason.

I guess I'll go ahead and try to have someone local rechrome mine instead of
the ordering routine. I think it'll actually cost more bucks, but at least
I'll be able to show up at their front door if I'm dissatisfied.

Just curious if anyone's dealt with other suppliers? I know that "The Parts
Place" and "DesertDog Auto" had rechromed '68s (for my car) at Springfield.
They looked o.k. to me, but I'm no expert. Opinions??

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 98 22:51:40 EDT
From: Glenn Connors <gpc442@buffnet.net>
Subject: How to adjust TH400 shift points ??

   I just replaced the automatic transmission in my '69 4-4-2...(TH400 'OG'
code)...and the shift points seem wrong. It wants to come out of first early
and likes to stay in second forever or until I lift off the excelerator.
I've played with the vacuum modulator, but other than some minor changes in
performance, I can't seem to be able to change the short lived first gear.
Hummmph...been under this thing too many times today.  Even tried another
modulator.  Felt better but it still seems it wants to get out of first
prematurely.  If I can't fix this what's going to happen when I replace the
2:72 open rear gear with the 3:23 posi rear gear ??


  Glenn                         gpc442@buffnet.net
  '69 4-4-2

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 23:00:13 EDT
From: <DYeager535@aol.com>
Subject: Re: How to adjust TH400 shift points ??

In a message dated 98-08-14 22:53:20 EDT, you write:

<<  I can't seem to be able to change the short lived first gear.
 Hummmph...been under this thing too many times today.  Even tried another
 modulator.  Felt better but it still seems it wants to get out of first
 prematurely.  If I can't fix this what's going to happen when I replace the
 2:72 open rear gear with the 3:23 posi rear gear ??


   Glenn                         gpc442@buffnet.net
   '69 4-4-2 >>


     Hold it in first : ) My car (86 Salon w/thm400) does the same thing,
unless I floor it from a stop..it'll get to about 25-30 on it's own before
shifting..I hold it to 40 usually. Easy with a console shift, harder with the
column. Adjustable vacuum modulator is only supposed to be able to change
shift points +/- 5 mph. Is this the same transmission that came out of the
car? If not I would assume the governor and valve body components are
different than original.....Dorian

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 20:04:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: John Pajak <jspajak@yahoo.com>
Subject: Oldsmobile Valvetrains

     Some questions were posted about valvetrains: here's my 2 cents:
     1969 350, Kenne-Bell MKC118 cam: .490 lift. I rebuilt the motor.
I retained the stock sized valves (310 HP 4 bbl version), and used new
TRW springs. They were just 310 HP stock replacements, not even the
stiff W31 types.
     The motor was good for MANY 6000 RPM blasts and loads of fun. Ran
a best of 13.98/98MPH in a 69 Cutlass with 10" converter. TH350,
3.91s, and functional A/C!
     This was long ago; I was low on cash so I just filed the rocker
stands to get the valvetrain to stop clicking! I set each cylinder on
TDC and filed until the slack was gone. Then a few more strokes to get
a little preload!
     Since then I've used Mondello adjustable pushrods in my 72 W30
455 with great success. Small base circle cam (Mondello 22-25), thick
head gaskets, trued heads, valve job, no problem! Just bring each
cylinder to TDC, take up the slack, and then unscrew 1 more turn, and
tighten the jam nut. Never touched them since. The 72 W30 runs 13.30
and has won it's share of races. I'm looking forward to trying the
Comp Cams kit or even a set of aluminum roller rockers and screw-in
studs for my upcoming bracket car project (If I ever get the time/$$) :)


==
"2 + 2 = 5 for sufficiently large values of 2"

John Pajak
Lexington Park, Maryland

Check out our Oldsmobiles and more at
http://members.tripod.com/~JSPajak
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 22:59:48 -0000
From: "RANDY A GEISEL" <RANDYGEISEL@prodigy.net>
Subject: Re: Mail List

>Anyone have the address given the other night re: pre- '72 Olds list?


It's a pre 72 GM list.

Address is: Majordomo@cliptrakker.com

Add the following line to the body of the e-mail and your subscribed.

subscribe gmrestotech-list

Hope this helps,
Randy

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 23:08:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: Robert Barry <RBarry@Sequent1.Providence.Edu>
Subject: RE: Non-Auto W-cars

>>One of the things I've found is that while many of these "research" books
>>will reproduce period factory documentation, midyear or special offerings
>>are sometimes not included.  It's entirely possible, for example, that the
>>68 W-31s were originally offered only with MT, and a later midyear change
>>brought in the TH350.  Ordering sheets might not have been updated, or the
>Anything is possibly.
>
>>reference book cited may have reproduced an early-year copy of the sheet.
>BINGO!  I have the 69 version of what the Sullivan book has for 68 about
>the W-31 (If my memory serves me correctly as I don't have my book with
>me).  It is as far as I can tell an original and it was an after model
>year had started release, don't recall the date of the letter (Oct?).
>This states the available of the auto for 69, along with a bunch of
>other great info.

JFTR, the 1969 factory shop manual, which is printed in September or October
of 1968, does not list an automatic available for the W-31, so it might have
been a mid-year intro on the '69, or at least a second thought on Olds' part.

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 17:27:14 -0700
From: Kerry Kroger <kerryk@MCI2000.com>
Subject: Re: More Olds model Stuff

no time for punctuation just yping fast sometimes I have to work for a
living and if it was typing I'd starve.....kk
- -----Original Message-----
From: LooseCanno@aol.com <LooseCanno@aol.com>
To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Thursday, August 13, 1998 9:37 PM
Subject: More Olds model Stuff


>so i'll just respond in the manner of kerry kroger my computer has no
>punctuation marks or capital letters but i have the black olds w/white
stripes
>available all the time sharper image about 5 bucks more now remember just
>teasing kerry

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 17:18:07 -0700
From: Kerry Kroger <kerryk@MCI2000.com>
Subject: Re: Windshield

physical size is the same but the antenna is the same size...kk
- -----Original Message-----
From: Greg Rollin <supercars@transport.com>
To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Friday, August 14, 1998 11:35 AM
Subject: Windshield


>Our Vista Cruiser's windshield recently lost the contest of rock vs
>glass.  So this weekend I'll be replacing it (the windshield that is).
>Potential problem:  the only  Vista Cruiser windshield we've got around
>here is from a 70-72.  The wagon is a 69.  The Olds parts books as well
>as Hollanders show these to be different.  I suspect the only difference
>is the fact that the 70-72's have the imbedded antenna.  Whereas the
>68-69's antennas are fender mounted.  As close as I can measure, it
>appears it will fit.  Anybody interchanged these before?
>
>Greg Rollin
>Supercars Unlimited (Where Cutlass/4-4-2 is ALL we do!) 503-244-8249
>http://www.supercarsunlimited.com
>E-mail: supercars@transport.com
>
>

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 17:22:04 -0700
From: Kerry Kroger <kerryk@MCI2000.com>
Subject: Re: Ball Joint

to check ball joints jack the car up under the lower control arm then using
a prybar under the tire liftand release the bar while observing the play
vertically in the joint...kk
- -----Original Message-----
From: JonKrisInc@aol.com <JonKrisInc@aol.com>
To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Friday, August 14, 1998 6:10 AM
Subject: Re: Ball Joint


>In a message dated 98-08-13 20:58:33 EDT, you write:
>
><< This isn't absolute, but to test ball joints, jack the car up, push on
the
>top
> of the tire, and pull on the bottom of the tire, and if the wheel moves
more
> than just a little bit, you should have them checked. >>
>
>Joe,
> FWIW, I saw excessive wear on the outer walls on my tires. Thought it was
>ball joints, used your method, turned out to be I needed a new center link.
>Had it replaced, solved the problem.
>Bruce
>75 Delta 88 conv.

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 17:32:31 -0700
From: Kerry Kroger <kerryk@MCI2000.com>
Subject: Re: Non-Auto W-cars

car life did a road test in 69 auto column shifted w-31 I used to own a 69
column shifted th350 havin' four wheel drum brake equipped
aztec gold with black stripes black vinyl top wearing W-31 may it rest in
piece. a moment of silence please......kk
- -----Original Message-----
From: Padavano.Joe@Orbital.COM <Padavano.Joe@Orbital.COM>
To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Friday, August 14, 1998 8:44 AM
Subject: Re: Non-Auto W-cars


>Joe,
>As I am continually astonished at the amount of great info on this list, I
>ran out and bought the HP Books guide to GM MUscle Cars as a reference.
>According to it the 69 W-31 did come with "Turbo Hydra-Matic Column-Mounted
>Automatic (Console-Mounted available. Shall we start the W series auto
>contraversy anew? Thanks for the previous info on the W-32/W-30.
>realtorjohn@sprynet.com
>69 W-32 (or so I was originally told, it is an OAI/auto!!)
>________________
>
>John,
>
>I can't say that I'm 100% certain about the 69 W-31.  The Sullivan book
>reproduces an Olds press release describing the 1968 W-31/RamRod 350 cars
>as only being available with the MT.  Similarly, I have the 1970 442 and
>W-machine dealer brochure which describes the TH350 as being available in
>the W-31, in addition to having first hand knowledge of one car.  I'll need
>to double check on the 69s.
>
>I'm interested in your W-32.  Does it have black fenderwells with cutouts
>for the O.A.I.?  C heads with a G-block 400?  OW TH400?  How about the rear
>- 3.91 posi?  Power disc brakes?  No A/C?  Wide hood stripes?  I've been
>trying to find out more about these cars, and from what I can gather, this
>is how they were equipped.  (Though I don't claim to be a W-32 expert by
>any stretch).
>
>Joe Padavano
>padavano.joe@orbital.com
>
>66 442
>68 W-30
>69 H/O
>70 W-30
>
>

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

Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 00:26:49 -0400
From: Joe & Toni Artwell <tjf26@gte.net>
Subject: [Fwd: Re: 64 F85 Cutlass body tag decoding]

Message-ID: <35D50A77.10B@gte.net>
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 00:11:35 -0400
From: Joe & Toni Artwell <tjf26@gte.net>
Reply-To: tjf26@gte.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-KIT  (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Craig MacDonald <craig@datacube.com>
Subject: Re: 64 F85 Cutlass body tag decoding
References: <35D19B5F.B72ADC91@datacube.com> <35D241AA.76D8@gte.net>
<35D44497.C795607C@datacube.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Craig MacDonald wrote:
>
> > Craig,
> >   What does your body tag say? I might be able to decode it for you.
> >                                  Joe
>
> Joe,
> Thanks for your response, it is really appreciated.
> The body tag on my car (64 F85 Cutlass) says:
> ------------------------------
> style-64 3237Body LA 9483
> trim 963 paint c-f
> acc x-t-s-2y-3-td
> ------------------------------
Style-64-3237:
 64=1964 (year), 32=Cutlass, 37=Holiday Coupe

Body-LA 9483
 LA=Lansing Mi, 9483=Production Number

Trim-963
 963=Blue Vinyl

Paint-C-F
 C=Lower Body Color (Provincial White), F=Upper Body Color (Wedgewood
Mist)

acc x-t-s-2y-3-td=I wasn't able to cross that to anything, not even
option codes. Did this come off the the body tag?
Hope this helps you out some.
                                JOE

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 21:24:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Joe Padavano <joe_padavano@rocketmail.com>
Subject: Final (?) Word on AT 69 W-31s

...I have been researching the available of an auto in the 69 W-31...Some
sources say it isn't available, some say it is.  But from what I can tell it
~definitely~ was available in 69.  The code on my tranny is JO and it has a 69
build date, don't recall it off hand.  A couple places I checked on for this
tranny code don't list JO in 69, but in 70 it is the correct code for an auto
W-31...
_______________

OK, Chris and List, here's what I've found.

First is that blue tri-fold brochure about all the 1969 W-cars, which _does_
indicate that a TH350 was available in the W-31 that year ('course, that same
folder also indicates that the W-32 had 360 HP, while all other Olds
literature lists it as 350 HP.

Next is the 69 powertrain table from the dealer brochures.  This only shows
the three manual transmissions as being available (3 spd and close and wide
ratio 4 spd).

The Dr. Olds series of magazine ads for that year _do_ indicate that a TH350
was available (though some omit the 3 spd MT).

Finally, the parts book _does_ list a TH350 replacement trans for the "3200,
3600, 350 Eng. T.H. 350 O.A.I", with part number 6260147.  As an interesting
note on the "JO" trans code mystery, this transmission is _the_ only one in
the book which does not have it's two letter designator listed!  The other
TH350s do have designators that start with "J", however.  Also interesting is
that only this TH350 and the "OW" (W-30 and 68 H/O) and "OH" (69 H/O) TH400
transmissions do _not_ have a price listed in the parts book - all the other
transmissions _do_ have price listings.

The conclusion I draw from this is that the TH350 was probably released in the
W-31 after the start of the 1969 model year.  It appears that literature which
was printed prior to or early in the model year doesn't reference it, but
later documents do.  Just out of curiosity, what's the build date of your
W-31, Chris?

Joe Padavano
padavano.joe@orbital.com

66 442
68 W-30
69 H/O
70 W-30




_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 21:35:32 -0700 (PDT)
From: Joe Padavano <joe_padavano@rocketmail.com>
Subject: Bumper Boyz

While I haven't used them, I'd like to add a comment.  I've specifically _not_
gotten bumpers from them based on their ads in Hemmings.  They point out that
they _sandblast_ the old bumpers prior to replating.

Well, I've tried to sandblast the chrome off of a bumper that I wanted to
paint body color.  Not only was it extremely slow (just getting through the
chrome layer to the nickel took forever, never mind getting past the copper to
the parent metal), but it obviously leaves a rough finish.  I've always been
told (mainly by Bob Barnes, who runs Verne's Chrome in SoCal) that surface
prep for chrome is similar to that for paint; namely, any imperfection in the
substrate will show in the chrome.  Verne's used an electrochemical dip to
remove all the plating from parts, and spent a lot of time polishing the bare
steel prior to applying any plating.  Obviously, the copper layer will fill
minor imperfections (like primer), but anything beyond that will show in the
finished surface.

Joe Padavano
padavano.joe@orbital.com

66 442
68 W-30
69 H/O
70 W-30





_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

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

Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 01:19:28 -0400
From: Paul Hartlieb <plh@nbn.net>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: 64 F85 Cutlass body tag decoding]

Joe & Toni Artwell wrote:

> acc x-t-s-2y-3-td=I wasn't able to cross that to anything, not even
> option codes. Did this come off the the body tag?
> Hope this helps you out some.
>                                 JOE

I have some of those accessory codes, but it's gonna take me a while to
find them.

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

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

Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 03:16:04 EDT
From: <KWhite5590@aol.com>
Subject: Re: how to test a starter...

George wrote
>(or would you buy a new one?)
Dorian wrote
>I *think* to test a starter...
to test a starter still on the engine ground the battery terminal on the
solenoid to the terminal directly to the right of it(x term. I think).Do this
with a remote starter switch to prevent getting bit by the battery.If its off
the car take it to the parts store (Auto Zone,Pep Boys...)they can test it for
you.
Kevin
KWhite5590

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

Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 02:42:30 -0500
From: "Peter Landowski" <PETTRIX@prodigy.net>
Subject: Re: 4.10 or 4.56 gears?

I thought the calais is front wheel drive?!?!? 4.56 gears would be an
OVERKILL. Also a stock 200 R4 WILL NOT hold up to 400hp. I guarantee it.
Pettrix@prodigy.net

- ----------
> From: crl6420@online.no
> To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
> Subject: 4.10 or 4.56 gears?
> Date: Friday, August 14, 1998 6:14 PM
>
> Hello,
>
> I have a -81 calais, and i`m going to build up a
> 350 with the edelbrock rpm perf. pack (397 hp)
> the trans is a th 200 r4 from a -84 hurst/olds.
>
> what gears are recomended for this combo ?
> and can the trans take the "heat" ?
> i can live with the rpm.
>
> Thanx
>
> Chris lovik, Norway

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

Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 02:39:43 -0500
From: "Peter Landowski" <PETTRIX@prodigy.net>
Subject: Re: Aluminum Heads!

You can't run pump gas with 12.5:1 compression. I think any car that needs
to run race gas (high octane 100+) is not a street car. If you havre to
drive to some location and have to fill up, where are you going to find
race gas. Most gas stations have only 93 as the top. To me that's not a
street car if you drive and hope you can find a station that carries race
gas, if not then your dead in your tracks.

Just a thought.....
Pettrix@prodigy.net

- ----------
From: Chad Schwartz <ChadS@pcsco.com>
To: 'Oldsmobile Digest' <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Subject: RE: Aluminum Heads!
Date: Friday, August 14, 1998 11:26 AM

>400 w/ a 268 street/strip cam, headers,
>aluminum heads running at least 12.5:1, performer intake and 750
>Edelbrock Q-jet. My desktop dyno says over 400 hp and over 500 ft/lb...

>Pretty good for street with close to 18+ mpg highway.

Just curious about what gas do you plan on using with 12.5:1 compression on
the street?  I don't think even premium would be up for the job.

Chad Schwartz
chads@pcsco.com <mailto:chads@pcsco.com>
mIRC: ROCKN6
Denison, IA
'87 GN  T-Tops (TE-44, 40lb Inj, Modified Stock IC, ATR Cam, JC Chip,
			 ATR 2 ½" SS Exhaust, TH 3" DP, 3" Test Pipe, ATR
Ram Air)
'79 H/O T-Tops (400 HP/430 TQ ZZ4 350 H.O. Chevy, TH350, 3.73 Posi)

"Poverty Is Owning A Race Car"  "Happiness Is A Low E.T."
- ----------

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

Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 02:50:28 -0500
From: "Peter Landowski" <PETTRIX@prodigy.net>
Subject: Re: Christian Fair's Exhaust

I personall don't like Flowmasters. The reason being is that EVERY Mustang
dork out there has them on their cars. They think "wow this thing sound
bad, its gotta be fast". I hear so many of those Mustang goofs say that
they have a 12 second car because they put on "Flowmasters". But when they
get to the track "when the light drops, the bullshit stops" they seee they
run 15 second blasts.
They other reason is that there are other muffler designs that flow better
and have a DIFFERENT sound than the Flowmasters do. Try DYNOMAX, they sound
better and flow great.....
Pettrix@prodigy.net

- ----------
> From: JM <super442@yahoo.com>
> To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
> Subject: RE: Christian Fair's Exhaust
> Date: Friday, August 14, 1998 5:58 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---Chris Fair <cfair@FairIsaac.com> wrote:
>  It seems flowmasters come in
> > 1,2, & 3 chamber varieties. The more chambers, the less
> > sound, it seems. Can anyone confirm this?
> ---! chambers are "race only" basically meaning RF LOUD,2 chambers are
> slightly loud,And 3 chambers are quiet, yet provide a nice 5.0slow
> rumble.
>          John
> ==
> mailto:super442@yahoo.com           ICQ # 16956740
> 1985 Cutlass-----T-Tops--307
H.O./3.73--http://members.tripod.com/~SuperOlds/
> 1984 Cutlass-Moonroof--307
http://members.tripod.com/~SuperOlds/PatsCar.html
> 1982 Cutlass Cruiser Wagon(g-body)--soon to be 403!
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
> DO YOU YAHOO!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

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

Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 02:57:03 -0500
From: "Peter Landowski" <PETTRIX@prodigy.net>
Subject: Re: Frame motor mounts

I had a 350 rocket in my 72 442 and replaced it with a 455. I left the
original metal part that is on the frame but replaced the rubber motor
mounts. THe engine did sit higher, but I was still able to rig up the fan
shroud to clear the fan. Also the 4 core radiator fit no problems. The
valve covers fit also with no notches.
Pettrix@prodigy.net

- ----------
> From: B. Sanders <blaines@strata3d.com>
> To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
> Subject: RE: Frame motor mounts
> Date: Friday, August 14, 1998 5:53 PM
>
>
> <snip>
> > So I need to know how the mounts are attached to the
> >  car - bolts, rivets, or welded.  If they are welded or riveted
> > on I'll have
> >  to borrow a torch.
> >
> >  Thanks,
> >  Blaine >>
> >
> >      I think  they are bolted on..haven't seen a GM newer than
> > '67 that had
> > them riveted..especially since these are the rubber mounts that
> > can/need to be
> > replaced, correct?
>
> Actually, I was referring to the metal part that's on the frame that the
> rubber motor mounts attach to.  I understand these are a necessary part
of
> the conversion, since the BB would otherwise sit too high and the fan
would
> rub on the shroud.
>
> This is what I believe is necessary in the conversion.  Correct me if I'm
> wrong:
>
> - BB to replace the SB (obvious)
> - Metal frame mounts that the rubber motor mounts attach to
> - Heavy-duty front coil springs to carry the extra weight of the BB
> - 4-core radiator, top plate, and lower mounting brackets (?)
> - Notched valve covers to clear power brakes booster (?)
>
> Am I missing anything?
>
> Thanks,
> Blaine

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

Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 03:58:58 EDT
From: <KarlAune@aol.com>
Subject: Ebay bidding and Service Manuals

In the greater spirit of good will among Oldsmobilers, I would like to make a
general request of those of you who are Ebay members.

Kindly do not bid against user "49-holiday", especially where Service manuals
are concerned.

I have been in contact with him in the past.
He is the "reference librarian" for the Arizona Oldsmobile Chapter.
His library is pretty impressive.

I have asked if he would be willing to answer Q's from listmembers.
(A potentially frightening prospect.....)

He has not replied as yet.

I have also offered to donate (photocopies of) my more unusual Oldsmobile
dealer-only literature.

Consider it a courtesy to an OCA member performing a great service for his
chapter.

Thanks!

SOM
&KA

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

Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 03:14:08 -0500
From: "Peter Landowski" <PETTRIX@prodigy.net>
Subject: 72 442 Convt at Route66 Track...

I took my 72 442 convt' to the track today for the first time ever. It has
a 455 Th-400 trans and Chevy 12 Bolt with 3.73 gears. The motor is a 9 1/2
compression motor with Mondello's JM-22-25-10 cam , C Heads(ports/polished)
by Mondello$$$$$$$$$$, Edelbrock Performer Intake and a Holley 830cfm carb.


Well I never raced on a 1/4 track and I fumbled at the lights and also with
my shift points. I ran the car with a 2.5 inch exhaust with mufflers and
M/T ET Drag tires. Out of 3 blasts my best time was
12.60 at 106MPH. On that pass I goofed again on the shifts but I am getting
better at it. I believe that the car will do 12.50 or better with proper
shifting and a little tuning.

Overall I am VERY PLEASED with the results. I didn't think that it would do
mid 12's.
Pettrix@prodigy.net

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

Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 03:16:59 -0500
From: "Peter Landowski" <PETTRIX@prodigy.net>
Subject: Trans Operation temp

I installed a trans temp gauge and my trans runs around 155 degrees and at
times will get to 180 degrees. The average temp is around 150-160 degrees.
Is this a good temperature. I heard if a trans stays in range of over
200degrees it cuts its life by 30%. Anyone know what the norm is???
Pettrix@prodigy.net

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

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 13:54:51 -0500
From: Brad Nicholson <brad442@erols.com>
Subject: Friday Olds Cartoon - OOOPS!

Here's the location:

http://www.erols.com/brad442

Also check out what went online yesterday!

http://www.oldsmobilemotorsports.com  !!!

Brad Nicholson (OCA's WebGuy)
brad442@erols.com
webguy@oldsclub.org

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

Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 09:08:40 EDT
From: <DYeager535@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Trans Operation temp

In a message dated 8/15/98 1:10:47 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
PETTRIX@prodigy.net writes:

<< I installed a trans temp gauge and my trans runs around 155 degrees and at
 times will get to 180 degrees. The average temp is around 150-160 degrees.
 Is this a good temperature. I heard if a trans stays in range of over
 200degrees it cuts its life by 30%. Anyone know what the norm is???
 Pettrix@prodigy.net
  >>

Peter, what trans are you runnning? I was told by my friend at the tranny shop
that a 700R4 runs right around 200 most of the time. I would think 150-160 is
VERY good! Where did you install the guage?   Dorian

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

Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 09:49:52 +0100
From: Matt Cremean <ccremean@edcen.ehhs.cmich.edu>
Subject: Re: Camshaft's

DYeager535@AOL.COM wrote:
>
> Hi everyone, more questions as usual : ) Has ANYONE out there put a .474+ 
lift
> cam in a small block Olds that wasn't originally a .474+ lift without 
changing
> the valve springs or pushrods? This 403 is still giving me fits with the
> different answers about needing different springs and pushrods with a .474+
> cam. I'm only going to a .456 lift, and they used up to a .480(?) in the High
> Performance marine engines...I think I'm going to need new springs and
> pushrods, just hoping I wouldn't have to...
>        Thanks for any input, Dorian

The cam I put in my car has .472/.486. So far, it idles nice, and revs
to 2K RMPS with no problem. I can't really say that I have any REAL info
about it, my car only has body panels from the rear doorjam back! Hasn't
been driven since Sept 17, 97!

- --
*************
Matt Cremean
mailto:ccremean@edcen.ehhs.cmich.edu
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
         777777 33333
            77      33
Cutlass    77    3333   Supreme
          77        33
         77     33333
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Vista/3973/
**************************************************

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

End of oldsmobile-digest V1 #1428
*********************************
