Please respond to oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca @ INTERNET
To:	oldsmobile-digest@chebucto.ns.ca @ INTERNET
cc:	 
Subject:	oldsmobile-digest V1 #1673


oldsmobile-digest      Friday, December 18 1998      Volume 01 : Number 1673



Re: Rear woe
Re: No Oldses in Iraq
Re: even more bench racing[was 8000 rpm 350]
Re: Heads heads heads
Re: Rear woe
Re: Camshaft selection, 350 V8    (LONG!)
Re: Camshaft selection, 350 V8    (LONG!)
Re: Hey carb-guys?
Water Pump Woes
Re: Convertible Well-liner
Re: Camshaft selection, 350 V8    (LONG!)
If they have Vista-Cruisers...we should have some too
Re: Emissions
Re: Hey carb-guys?
PCV (long)(was: Re: Emissions)
Emission Testing and cooperation
67 F85 for sale
TH 200-4R experience needed
Re: Kenne-Bell Oldsmobile
Re: Water Pump Woes
Re: 330/350 swap & more '64 questions
Re: squealing fan
Re: TH 200-4R experience needed
Re: TH 200-4R experience needed
Re: TH 200-4R experience needed
Re: 67 F85 for sale
Re: TH 200-4R experience needed
Re: TH 200-4R experience needed
Re: W29 Option
Re: Batten vs Edelbrock flow #s
Re: TH 200-4R experience needed
'99 Olds Nats??
RE: Cutlass front coil spring replacement/ Hotchkiss
'86 442 FS
RE: cutlass supreme engine offset
Re: '99 Olds Nats??
Re: Emissions
Re: TH 200-4R experience needed
Re: TH 200-4R experience needed
Re: TH 200-4R experience needed
Re: TH 200-4R experience needed
Re: cutlass supreme engine offset
[none]
Are my 7a heads good for performance?
TH 200-4R-METRIC-TH 200-C
RE: TH 200-4R-METRIC-TH 200-C
Re: '99 Olds Nats??
Re: squealing fan
Re: TH 200-4R-METRIC-TH 200-C

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 19:24:38 EST
From: RARE73OLDS@aol.com
Subject: Re: Rear woe

Your not suppose to just tighten. When you do a rear seal your suppose to
messure the inch pounds while you loosen the nut...when you put the new seal
in you would use the same setting of inch pounds that you tested before. Since
yours loosened up on its own, you should have the rear setup again with a new
crush collar to have the right preload

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 19:35:37 -0500
From: "Peter Berusch" <pber710840@email.msn.com>
Subject: Re: No Oldses in Iraq

Sorta like the Italian tanks in WWII, except they had five gears forward in
case of an attack from the rear.  Peter.
- -----Original Message-----
From: Lou Biggs <lbiggs@intertek.net>
To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Thursday, December 17, 1998 6:11 PM
Subject: Re: No Oldses in Iraq


>Ray, their tanks only have one gear, reverse, need a 403 to get the hell
>out of there.
>Lou
>
>----------
>> From: Ray Costanzo <costanzo@netcarrier.com>
>> To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
>> Subject: RE: No Oldses in Iraq
>> Date: Thursday, December 17, 1998 4:52 PM
>>
>> Not to mention the mass amounts of torque.  I've heard they use 455's to
>> power their rockets.  403's for the tanks.
>!

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 18:53:08 -0600
From: "mbloomer" <mbloomer@gateway.net>
Subject: Re: even more bench racing[was 8000 rpm 350]

>Mike B,
> I hope i'm not sounding like a small block chev fan. I am NOT.

Never would accuse you of that.

> We started out talking about the pros and cons of the "C" head on a high
rpm 350
>Olds. Now we're comparing the Olds to the sb chev.

Way I see it the cheby's have had 10 times the R&D work done to them as the
Olds
(probably far more) so they do make a good benchmark for improvement if
nothing
else.

>I wish it wasn't so, but the
>layout of the olds ports[large and small block], compared to the sb chev
has the
>Olds looking not so good. As you say, the Olds has more cross section, but
if you
>look at the turns in the Olds heads, and especially in the exhaust, the
Olds port
>looks bad. You can't even see the exhaust valve from the port mouth on an
Olds.
>Check a chev.

Your right here but the turns aren't as important as the way the curves are
done.
The exhaust side on the Old's heads is the real weak point, but if were
talking
racing here, a good set of open headers would help scavenge the exhaust
side to reduce the effect of this deficency.  Add in the right dual pattern
cam
and it won't be a noticable difference.  If the intake was the real weak
spot then
that would be a different matter because the ports would cause a lower
charge velocity which would lead to less efficiency and power.

>i
>don't believe the factory Olds head will touch the better aftermarket sb
chev heads.
>
>Here's why i believe this to be true;
> I'm sure we'd all agree that the Edelbrock Olds head outshines all the
factory Olds
>heads, yes? H*ll, the Edelbrock Olds head doesn't flow as well as some of
the
>Edelbrock sb chev heads, and the sb chevs have smaller valves!
>I bet there's some other brands of
>aftermarket sb chev heads that put the best Edelbrock sb chev head to
shame.

Comparing the Edelbrock Olds heads and their performer RPM cheby flow
numbers the cheby has the edge at low lift, but the higher the lift the
better
the Olds does.  Even so, a 350 cheby with all thier RPM package (incl.
heads)
makes 420hp.  Pretty good number.  The 350 Olds made 397hp with the RPM
package which is also pretty good but doesn't tell the whole story.  The
cheby
engine had thier high zoot aluminum heads and the Olds had pretty much stock
(larger valves, and some clean up.  No real port work) #5 heads.  Like you
said, there are even better cheby heads out there, but if you invest some
work
in the right areas of the Old's heads they promise to be right there with
them.

> I hope this is still fun.


Yes, definitely still fun.

Mike B
mbloomer@gateway.net
ICQ# 19113713
72 Cutlass S (RIP)
68 Cutlass Supreme

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 20:04:30 EST
From: GT5726@aol.com
Subject: Re: Heads heads heads

In a message dated 12/17/98 6:25:51 PM Central Standard Time, olds442@en.com
writes:

<< I also bought 7/16" Comp Cams Aluminum Roller rockers w/ poly locks.  All
this combined with the Arias flat tops ought to put that 12.30@110 in the
dust..  
  >>
I'm Jelious...Congratulations!

Collyn Eastham
65 442
65 Cutlass

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 19:20:30 -0600
From: "mbloomer" <mbloomer@gateway.net>
Subject: Re: Rear woe

I had the same problem on my '72.  The rearend was assembled all to
spec, new nut and all.  Redoing the rear end was out of the question
since the car was in Germany so what I did was put the nut back on
with some blue Loctite and retorqued it.  It takes a lot of force to
crush the crush sleeve so I guesstimated the torque (the only torque
wrenches I could find were in Newton Meters!) and relied on the
Loctite to keep the nut from vibrating off again.  Pulled the rear cover
and you could see on the carrier where the back of the pinion teeth
had cut shallow grooves in it.  Cleaned everything out, buttoned it
up, and refilled it.  Never had another problem.  You really don't
need to redo the rearend IMHO since it takes so much torque
to move the crush sleeve.  You can use the loctite and enough
torque to keep the nut on without moving the crush sleeve and
changing the bearing preload.

Mike B
mbloomer@gateway.net
ICQ# 19113713
72 Cutlass S (RIP)
68 Cutlass Supreme

>I have a problem with the rear in my 71 Cutlass Supreme.  I installed 3.73
>gears last summer and have noticed that the pinion nut loosened up and
there
>is play in the pinion bearing.  I think this is due to a couple of high
speed
>runs with an out of balance driveshaft that I haven't had corrected yet.
>
>So the first thing is... have the driveshaft balanced.  But what should I
do
>with the pinion nut?
>
>Should I just tighten the nut to the point it was before?  I know these
things
>need a certain amount of preload on the bearing.  My friend works at a GM
>dealer and he says that when they replace a pinion seal they just replace
the
>nut and put an 1/8" more turn on it.  Is this what I should do?  Any help
>would be appreciated.
>
>Vince Knight
>71 Cutlass Supreme Convert
>

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 20:07:51 -0500
From: "Frederick Nissen" <FSNissen@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Camshaft selection, 350 V8    (LONG!)

Mike,

Have you considered the factory cam for the '83-'84 Hurst Olds "9" code 307?
Wakes it up a bit without hurting emissions.

Someone posted specs and a part number a while back.  Perhaps they could
post again?
Regards,
Fred

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 19:30:17 -0600
From: "mbloomer" <mbloomer@gateway.net>
Subject: Re: Camshaft selection, 350 V8    (LONG!)

To add in my bit of experience, it sounds like for what you want you
should go with the widest lobe centers (112) and try to stay away
from lots of overlap.  All other things being the same this will make
the engine think it has more compression.  Will let you make more
power without going to long duration or high lift so the stock springs
won't be a problem.

Mike B
mbloomer@gateway.net
ICQ# 19113713
72 Cutlass S (RIP)
68 Cutlass Supreme

>
>That's about all that I can think of now for the camshaft.
>This car is driven mostly on the city streets, sometimes in 2nd gear to
>cheat the motor into thinking it has a 3.73+ ratio in the rearend.  Most of
>all, this automobile is registered in California, and may have to pass a
>smog test before May of '99.  I need to keep this in mind, hence some of
>the mild grinds.  That and this motor has 100k on it too.  Don't want to
>waste the valvesprings quite yet.
>
>Thank you ahead of time.
>
>Mike Jones
>'78 Delta (350/TH350/102k)
>
>
>
>
>

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 20:28:42 -0500
From: "Thomas P. Smith" <smithtp@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Hey carb-guys?

KarlAune@aol.com wrote:

> Being assailed by fellers that want help/info on their "Vara-Jets".
>
> Know we all know few self respecting gearheads would let it be known that 
they
> actually use a carb that is 1/2 of a QuadraJet.
>
> However, Karl knows (and cares) nothing about VaraJet carburetors.

Ahh, the Vara-Jet.  Since I am secure with myself (insert stupid sensitive 
'90's
guy rhetoric here), I will admit it.  My name is Tom...and I had a 
Vara-Jet...in a
1982 Chevy Cavalier.  There I said it.   Anyway, as has been noted, it was a
progressive 2 bbl.  Mine was the electronic variety, and never gave me fits.  
It
did have some Q-Jet(ish) characteristics, but was technically not identical to 
one
primary and one secondary of a Q-Jet.  However, I never really dove into it.
Nevertheless, since the laws of physics care little about name brand or model, 
all
fixed-venturi carbs are bound to utilize essentially the same theory, they just
differ in how they go about it.  So, troubleshooting should use the similar
principles.  Of course, certain model-specific idiosyncrasies may raise their 
ugly
heads.

- --
Thomas P. Smith
1971 Cutlass S 350
smithtp@ix.netcom.com

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 21:26:58 -0500
From: "Mick Gillespie" <mgillespie@sprynet.com>
Subject: Water Pump Woes

Two weekends before my 69 Cutlass was to be loaded on the moving van and
moved to Florida my water pump crapped out on me. To move a car it has to be
running or they won't load it. Since I was working here already and only
going back to Indiana on weekends, I essentially had one weekend to get the
pump replaced before the Monday morning move. I had a Summit catalog and
called them. They listed an aluminum high flow pump for a 71 up 350 and
swore it would fit a non-a/c 69. I ordered the pump and had second thoughts
and asked the List. I got the response that it probably wouldn't fit. Called
summit back the next day to cancel but they had already shipped. Got back to
IN on Friday and found the pump there and 1/2 too long. It looked like I
could line up everything but the power steering so I installed it and got
the car on the truck Mon. morning. Now I want my power steering back :-)
Can anyone tell me if I can change the pulleys to match the 1/2" longer
pump? What pulleys should I look for? Is it as simple as finding the a 3
groove fan belt pulley, with the third groove 1/2' closer to the block? Do I
have to go back and install the correct pump?
BTW, the pump from Summit was advertised as lowering the operating temp. by
up to 30 deg. My 69 sure runs cooler. Of course that may be from not having
to run the power steering pump :-)
Thanks in advance.
==============================================
Mick Gillespie
69 Cutlass Conv.
80 Toronado Brougham
mgillespie@sprynet.com
http://home.sprynet.com/sprynet/mgillespie/oldspage.htm
==============================================

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 21:27:02 -0500
From: "rkn" <rkn@ezaccess.net>
Subject: Re: Convertible Well-liner

I can't say about the 442, but on my 66 Dynamic 88 the well liner was
stapled to the trim stick first, so I don't see any way that it could be
replaced without at least un-stapling the top from the trim stick. Not a
pleasant job. Good luck.
				R. Kevin Noon
				66 Dynamic 88 Convertible
				85 Delta 88 Royale Brougham

- ----------
> From: Peter Landowski <PETTRIX@prodigy.net>
> To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
> Subject: Convertible Well-liner
> Date: Thursday, December 17, 1998 11:19 AM
> 
> On a 72 442 convertible, the well liner must be replaced. Is this done
with
> the top assembly on or off the car? 
> 
> 
> Pettrix@prodigy.net

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 21:41:23 EST
From: DYeager535@aol.com
Subject: Re: Camshaft selection, 350 V8    (LONG!)

There is no bit of the post that started this, because I couldn't find one.
But having recently torn my motor down, I feel qualified to say that if the
motor has in ANY way been abused even slightly (racing, long oil change gaps)
you are going to incur some more expenses along the way. I had to replace ALL
the pushrods (there isn't supposed to be any bend in them at all, mine were
almost all slightly bent) and the rocker arms and the aluminum "bridges" (what
ARE those things called?) all had enough wear for me to replace them all.
Granted this was a 1977 motor that had already been rebuilt once, and I don't
know the history of, but I figure these would be problems that MAY crop up,
and might be best to fix before the engine is slapped back together with a new
cam, with perhaps more lift. Just my thoughts, Dorian

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 18:47:31 -0800
From: "Steve Elijah" <selijah@eznet.com>
Subject: If they have Vista-Cruisers...we should have some too

Ahh there is a market for my VC! I need to strike while the heat is on.
Anybody on the list a military procurement officer?

72 Vista-Cruiser 350cid

\\Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 16:40:35 -0600
From: "Lou Biggs" <lbiggs@intertek.net>
Subject: Re: No Oldses in Iraq

They use Vista Cruisers to haul Scuds around, faster than the Ruskie
trucks. Harder to hit.
Lou
 From: Timothy A. Churchill <tchurchill@draper.com>
> To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
> Subject: Re: No Oldses in Iraq
> Ray C. Observes:
>
> > Wow, I'm real glad that none of those Iraqie's have 442's or anything!

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 21:55:33 EST
From: DYeager535@aol.com
Subject: Re: Emissions

In a message dated 12/17/98 2:15:36 PM Pacific Standard Time, rkp@uswest.net
writes:

<< Disconnecting of PCV (Positive Crankcase Ventilation) valve: bad idea.  PCV
uses
 engine vacuum (usually after carb circuits) to draw blowby gasses from
carnkcase
 into the intake and combust them.  Excessive blowby = fix funky engine.
Crankcase
 blowby _will_ go somewhere.  It'll push out a seal if it has to (this would
be a
 _bad_ thing).  Better to vacuum it out through the tailpipe.
 Hope this helps... Roger:) >>


     Ok, whats the real deal here? I know many people that run crankcase
breathers, not pcv valves. (racers, 4 wheelers, etc.) as long as the pcv valve
port isn't PLUGGED in the valve cover, you will be ok. The PCV is to evacuate
the fumes and pressure in the crankcase, generated by piston blowby. Running a
breather would be no different, except that there would be vacuum sucking on
the valve. The pressure generated would be evacuated by the breather before it
reached problem levels. 
     According to Chilton's, all pre-'68 cars had "open' systems that did not
rely on vacuum to evacuate the crankcase...the Compression Ratios back then
were higher on lots of motors compared to what we now have, so I would think
the problem would have been worse on higher CR cars. Thats the way I
understand it..anyone else? Dorian

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 22:16:35 EST
From: KS7RACING@aol.com
Subject: Re: Hey carb-guys?

Karl/List,

I've got another Rochester with birth defects around here now, thanks to a
friend that didn't want it cluttering up his garage any more (so now it's
cluttering up mine).  Anyone ever hear of the DualJet 200?  It really looks
like Rochester began building a Quadrajet, and didn't install the rear
butterflies or open the holes for the back barrels -- there's holes through
the base plate just like they intended to make a 4-barrel, just not any
corresponding openings in the top casting.  It will bolt on to a regular
4-barrel intake, the pattern is exactly the same as any QJ.

Now I'm familiar with the DualJet that I have on the Starfire, but it is the
front half of a QJ WITHOUT the back half at all, with a modified pattern to
match.  I got one on the 79 Starfire SX parts car with a 305 C-word V-8 and
one with the V-6 in the 80.  I don't like these carbs, I've never been able to
get them to run as well as a regular QJ or a 2G.

Just some more stuff to put through our grist mill of knowledge.

Take Care, and Happy Holidays!
Ken Snyder
Kansas City, Kansas
KS7RACING@aol.com

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 21:38:42 -0600
From: "mbloomer" <mbloomer@gateway.net>
Subject: PCV (long)(was: Re: Emissions)

Here's what I know.  The PCV works by sucking the unburnt blowby fumes
into the intake via vacuum.  This eliminates cranckase pressure but dilutes
the incoming fuel/air charge.  On race motor's this is bad because it hurts
hp, and there are several alternatives.  On drag cars with open headers
a common system is to hook tubes up from the valve covers to one way
valves mounted on the header collectors.  The vacuum caused by the
passing exhaust gasses suck the crankcase pressure out.  Most road
race/oval track cars use simple breathers to keep excess pressure from
building up (keeps crankcase at atmospheric not as good as a vacuum).
Before PCV road cars used a "road tube" which went from the top of the
engine to down below the car.  Supposedly (not an expert on this) the
passing air would suck the fumes out while the car was going down the
road.  I remember hearing stories about Smokey Yunick (the ultimate
tinkerer) modifying a smog pump to pull vacuum and hooking it to
the motor to replace the PCV system.  This pulled very high vacuum on
the crankcase, which was good for power.

Why?  Glad you asked.  If the crank/rods/pistons have to move through
a pressurized environment then that adds parasitic hp loss to the motor.
If they move through a vacuum it free's up hp plus is suppossed to aid
in oil drainback to the pan, aeration of the oil, windage, etc.  Smokey
quit playing with it because it was ruled illegal (like so much he did)
on his race car.  It is actually a myth that the PCV will take much power
away from your motor on the street.  If you think about it, your vacuum
drops off at WOT so when you punch it your not getting much intake
contamination from the PCV system anyway.

Back to where this started, it's an emissions thing somewhat similar
to a charcoal canister (doesn't hurt performace either) to keep fumes
from being vented to the atmosphere.  I don't know what effect having
it hooked up or disconnected would have on the tailpipe sniffer but
if they fail the car for not having the timing set to factory specs, as
mentioned earlier, they would definately flunk it for not having the PCV
hooked up (supposed to be part of the I/M inspection anyway).

Mike B
mbloomer@gateway.net
ICQ# 19113713
72 Cutlass S (RIP)
68 Cutlass Supreme

>
>     Ok, whats the real deal here? I know many people that run crankcase
>breathers, not pcv valves. (racers, 4 wheelers, etc.) as long as the pcv
valve
>port isn't PLUGGED in the valve cover, you will be ok. The PCV is to
evacuate
>the fumes and pressure in the crankcase, generated by piston blowby.
Running a
>breather would be no different, except that there would be vacuum sucking
on
>the valve. The pressure generated would be evacuated by the breather before
it
>reached problem levels.
>     According to Chilton's, all pre-'68 cars had "open' systems that did
not
>rely on vacuum to evacuate the crankcase...the Compression Ratios back then
>were higher on lots of motors compared to what we now have, so I would
think
>the problem would have been worse on higher CR cars. Thats the way I
>understand it..anyone else? Dorian

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 22:49:09 EST
From: RAC5419@aol.com
Subject: Emission Testing and cooperation

Bought my 72 442 in July and got the emission test requirement last month.
Engine needs to be rebuilt due to low oil pressure. With the 6 miles per
gallon I'm sure it would fail. Plan to rebuild this winter. On the card
received from IL EPA requested new test date of 5/99 and returned it. In mail
today received compliance certificate valid to last day of 7/99. Cooperation
from a government agency without hassle? or just an hallucination?... must be
Christmas. Thanks to Texas442 for providing a spot to post a picture at
http://www.flash.net/~texas442/CLR-RED-442SIDE.JPG. It's the first two. Still
waiting to get the shot with the white top up scanned.

Dick Compton
72  442 convertible
RAC5419@AOL.COM

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 22:55:44 -0800
From: Toby Blom <floridarealtor@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: 67 F85 for sale

Due to circumstances, I am forced to sell my 67 F85 2dr sedan ASAP.
Color: Aqua, good (2 years old)
Engine/Tranny: 330 4 barrel, jetaway
New: Springs, KYB shocks, battery/battery tray, PST front end kit,
complete floor and trunk, gas tank, late model GM bucket seats,
carpet(black) and padding, alternator, starter/solenoid + lots more over
the last two years.

Car is a factory AC car, but AC is not in car now. Straight body, decent
chrome, needs windshield (got hit by golf ball) and dash pad, lots of
parts goes with car, some even new in boxes. The car runs excelent, was
my daily driver for about six months.

My (new) warehouse landlord have doubled my rent from Jan. 99, and I
have no place to keep it. My wife is going nuts, I have 5 other cars all
over the place...
Will take $2000.00

Email me at: Floridarealtor@worldnet.att.net, or call (954)328-6802
I live in Ft.Lauderdale, Florida

Toby

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 21:57:32 -0600
From: "mbloomer" <mbloomer@gateway.net>
Subject: TH 200-4R experience needed

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- ------=_NextPart_000_00AA_01BE2A08.3F615180
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I've been pouring over the FAQ and related links and as I'm
not entirely confused yet I figured I'd give the list a chance.
(Kind of like Stump the Chump, though Chump still applies)

I'm wanting to build a 200-4R for my 68 for highway cruising
and am still in the research phase and have found a lot of=20
good info but I'm going to need a good reference book for
the actual teardown/rebuild.  Anyone have any suggestions?
Based on the dead links on the FAQ it doesn't seem that it
has been updated lately, so does anyone have any further=20
suggestions or experience to share?  Recommendations=20
for parts sources for rebuild kit, 10 vane pump, ht stator,=20
press valve, shift kit, etc?  One other thing, the FAQ doesn't
say anything about the differences of using a lockup/non=20
lockup converter.  It says not to use a lockup unit without=20
having the wiring hooked up, but what would you have to do
to use a non lockup converter?  Drawbacks?  Benefits?

I plan to find a junkyard tranny and rebuild/upgrade it myself
as long as I can price all the parts needed under the $1200
they want from TCI for a complete trans.=20

Mike B
mbloomer@gateway.net
ICQ# 19113713
72 Cutlass S (RIP)
68 Cutlass Supreme
 =20

- ------=_NextPart_000_00AA_01BE2A08.3F615180
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>

<META content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Diso-8859-1 =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D'"MSHTML 4.72.3110.7"' name=3DGENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>I've been pouring over the FAQ and related links and as I'm</DIV>
<DIV>not entirely confused yet I figured I'd give the list a =
chance.</DIV>
<DIV>(Kind of like Stump the Chump, though Chump still applies)</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I'm wanting to build a 200-4R for my 68 for highway cruising</DIV>
<DIV>and am still in the research phase and have found a lot of </DIV>
<DIV>good info but I'm going to need a good reference book for</DIV>
<DIV>the actual teardown/rebuild.&nbsp; Anyone have any =
suggestions?</DIV>
<DIV>Based on the dead links on the FAQ it doesn't seem that it</DIV>
<DIV>has been updated lately, so does anyone have any further </DIV>
<DIV>suggestions or experience to share?&nbsp; Recommendations </DIV>
<DIV>for parts sources for rebuild kit, 10 vane pump, ht stator, </DIV>
<DIV>press valve, shift kit, etc?&nbsp; One other thing, the FAQ =
doesn't</DIV>
<DIV>say anything about the differences of using a lockup/non </DIV>
<DIV>lockup converter.&nbsp; It says not to use a lockup unit without =
</DIV>
<DIV>having the wiring hooked up, but what would you have to do</DIV>
<DIV>to use a non lockup converter?&nbsp; Drawbacks?&nbsp; =
Benefits?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I plan to find a junkyard tranny and rebuild/upgrade it =
myself</DIV>
<DIV>as long as I can price all the parts needed under the $1200</DIV>
<DIV>they want from TCI for a complete trans.&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>Mike B<BR><A=20
href=3D"mailto:mbloomer@gateway.net">mbloomer@gateway.net</A><BR>ICQ#=20
19113713<BR>72 Cutlass S (RIP)<BR>68 Cutlass=20
Supreme<BR></FONT>&nbsp;&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

- ------=_NextPart_000_00AA_01BE2A08.3F615180--

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 22:54:10 EST
From: KS7RACING@aol.com
Subject: Re: Kenne-Bell Oldsmobile

Here's what I remember from my days in Southern California, circa 1981-1984.
Kenne-Bell did sell a pretty good (for that time) number of Olds parts, but
the driving force behind their Olds parts program was Dave Smith.  Many of the
"custom" parts they sold really were concocted out of Dave's Anaheim,
California speed shop known as Precisioned Speed.  In fact, the Kenne-Bell
catalog I got when I was in Memphis (just before I got to California) had an
insert for "Dr. Oldsmobile Engine Services" and had a picture of Dave next to
his Pro Stock Olds with one of his creations on an engine stand, and a price
list for machine work and assembly.

I believe Dave (and Karen, his wife and usually the one you'll talk with when
you now call DSE) split with Kenne-Bell sometime in the early 80's and went in
to their own business, originally called Dave Smith Oldsmobile Performance
Products, now shortened to Dave Smith Engineering and now somewhere in lovely
Corona, California.  Their phone number is (909) 371-7040 and although their
catalog isn't as much of a technical manual (like Mondello's manual he
promotes along with his catalog) it's worth the cost to get one, and Dave will
usually take the time to answer your questions or Karen will forward them to
him and you can call her back for a reply.  I've been trying to get them to
work up a web site to get the word out about their products and services and
possibly provide a way to answer Olds engine questions via the internet, but
Dave's a busy guy and I'm sure when they get the chance to join the internet
game they'll do it with all the quality that you can expect from them.  

In all the track engines I've ran with Dave's parts I've never had a single
problem with anything from him, and I don't expect that I ever will.  'Nuff
said.

Take Care, and Happy Holidays,
Ken Snyder
Kansas City, Kansas
KS7RACING@aol.com

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 22:07:27 -0600
From: "mbloomer" <mbloomer@gateway.net>
Subject: Re: Water Pump Woes

Mick,
A/C cars should have the 3 groove water pump pull which might work.
With GM interchangeability chances are it will.  If it ends up sitting too
far back you could simply make a shim to go between the pump snout
and pulley.  Thing to watch out for though is how far you push the fan
up into the fan shroud.  Could cause overheating problems in summer
but that's another bridge.  I wouldn't space the P/S pump out to get
it to line up since you have the one part of the bracket on the rear that
goes to the exhaust bolt.  In that case I would opt for the pump which
would save the headache.

Mike B
mbloomer@gateway.net
ICQ# 19113713
72 Cutlass S (RIP)
68 Cutlass Supreme

<snip>
>. Got back to
>IN on Friday and found the pump there and 1/2 too long. It looked like I
>could line up everything but the power steering so I installed it and got
>the car on the truck Mon. morning. Now I want my power steering back :-)
>Can anyone tell me if I can change the pulleys to match the 1/2" longer
>pump? What pulleys should I look for? Is it as simple as finding the a 3
>groove fan belt pulley, with the third groove 1/2' closer to the block? Do
I
>have to go back and install the correct pump?
>BTW, the pump from Summit was advertised as lowering the operating temp. by
>up to 30 deg. My 69 sure runs cooler. Of course that may be from not having
>to run the power steering pump :-)
>Thanks in advance.
>==============================================
>Mick Gillespie

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 23:03:38 EST
From: Gutlass66@aol.com
Subject: Re: 330/350 swap & more '64 questions

I think the 330 is a BETTER engine than a 350. Its a 350 pretty much, just
underbored. Keep the 330, but most of the 350 stuff will work, and that tranny
will have NO problem with the torque, the 330 probably has more.
Kelly
1966 Cutlass
330ci, 310hp

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 22:14:02 -0600
From: "mbloomer" <mbloomer@gateway.net>
Subject: Re: squealing fan

Sometimes the bearing in the alternator go out and make it look
like the pulley's out of alignment.  If the front bearing goes out it 
can cock it sideways so that the fan hits the case causing an
ungodly noise.  Have seen them that spin fine by hand but when
you tighten the belt, it's enough to move the pulley and cause the
fan to hit.  Double check it's out of alignment by using a straight
edge (yardstick works well) so you can measure exactly how far
out it is.  Trying to eyeball it rarely gets it close.

Mike B
mbloomer@gateway.net
ICQ# 19113713


>Hi all,
>
>Last night I decided to get constructive and change my thermostat,
>belts, hoses, antifreeze, heater hoses, and oil and filter.  The whole
>operation was a success except for my alternator belt.  For some reason
>I can't get it to stop squealing.  It seems that the alternator is out
>of alignment with the rest of the pulleys, although I have loosened and
>tightened every mounting bolt I can find in every order I could think
>of.  I changed nothing about the mounting or the location, and I have
>tried two different belts, one smooth and one with teeth, and they both
>do the same thing.  There seems to be no forward movement of the
>alternator, which it appears to need to be brought back in line. My best
>guess is there is a little bit of a twist in the belt and the alternator
>pulley itself is the one that is causing the belt to squeal.  I have
>tried varying degrees of tightness and looseness.  I know it is the
>alternator because without the alternator belt it makes no noise, and
>runs rather well.  Anyone out there know what may cause this and what
>may fix it?
>TIA
>Brian.
>

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 23:16:38 EST
From: DYeager535@aol.com
Subject: Re: TH 200-4R experience needed

In a message dated 12/17/98 8:01:48 PM Pacific Standard Time,
mbloomer@gateway.net writes:

<< One other thing, the FAQ doesn't
 say anything about the differences of using a lockup/non 
 lockup converter.  It says not to use a lockup unit without 
 having the wiring hooked up, but what would you have to do
 to use a non lockup converter?  Drawbacks?  Benefits? >>

     You would have to get a convertor that was designed not to lock up. I
don't know if they ever made any..MAYBE the 200C's had an application with no
lockup. On the other hand, you can buy the kits to manually control 4th gear
lockup, and in the more expensive kits, they have manual AND automatic
capabilities for the convertor lockup. Best bet if you ask me...Dorian

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 22:31:54 -0600
From: "mbloomer" <mbloomer@gateway.net>
Subject: Re: TH 200-4R experience needed

I've seen the kits ($120 at Jegs!) and they also list an 11"
non lockup converter from TCI.  Probably too much for
my needs right now but I don't see any benifit personally.
Mike B
mbloomer@gateway.net
ICQ# 19113713
72 Cutlass S (RIP)
68 Cutlass Supreme


><< One other thing, the FAQ doesn't
> say anything about the differences of using a lockup/non
> lockup converter. >>
>
>     You would have to get a convertor that was designed not to lock up. I
>don't know if they ever made any..MAYBE the 200C's had an application with
no
>lockup. On the other hand, you can buy the kits to manually control 4th
gear
>lockup, and in the more expensive kits, they have manual AND automatic
>capabilities for the convertor lockup. Best bet if you ask me...Dorian
>

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 22:55:12 -0600
From: Shang <shang@connect.net>
Subject: Re: TH 200-4R experience needed

mbloomer wrote:
> 
> I've seen the kits ($120 at Jegs!) and they also list an 11"
> non lockup converter from TCI.  Probably too much for
> my needs right now but I don't see any benifit personally.
> Mike B
> mbloomer@gateway.net
> ICQ# 19113713
> 72 Cutlass S (RIP)
> 68 Cutlass Supreme
> 


If you want to manually control the lockup yourself, you don't need to
waste money on a kit - learned it the expensive way. The wiring to
activate the lockup internally should all be in the pan. You need to go
to the local auto parts store and get the 4-pin pigtail that fits the
connector and just wire a switch. You can do the whole thing for like
$8. 

I can understand you not wanting to mess with the lockup for convenience
reasons, but I highly recommend the lockup. It cuts the RPM's down even
more (that's the point of having O/D right?) and it lets the
transmission run considerably cooler - which is especially important. I
absolutely love the TH-2004R in my '70.

Stephen Hoover
Dallas, Texas
'70 Supreme

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

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 00:02:22 -0500
From: Don Sowers <dstaxpro@lex.infi.net>
Subject: Re: 67 F85 for sale

Toby Blom wrote:
> 
> Due to circumstances, I am forced to sell my 67 F85 2dr sedan ASAP.
.................
> have no place to keep it. My wife is going nuts, I have 5 other cars all
> over the place...
> Will take $2000.00

I know the feeling.  I'm trying to peddle 3 Lincoln Marks because the
friend of mine that had a lot of space and allowed me to park them on
his property sold his business.  So I have to do something with them
between now and Monday.  A real bummer.  I don't have the room at home
because I have 4 Cutlai and a GS Buick sitting there as well as several
other vehicles.  Good luck in your efforts.

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

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 00:00:34 EST
From: DYeager535@aol.com
Subject: Re: TH 200-4R experience needed

In a message dated 12/17/98 8:34:43 PM Pacific Standard Time,
mbloomer@gateway.net writes:

<< I've seen the kits ($120 at Jegs!) and they also list an 11"
 non lockup converter from TCI.  Probably too much for
 my needs right now but I don't see any benifit personally.
 Mike B >>

      Mike, IMO, if I was going to go through the trouble and expense of
putting an OD trans in my car, I would try to get as much efficiency out of it
as possible. I know that is not everyones goal, just mine. However, I also
don't know the economy difference. Anyone else have an experience with
lockup/nonlockup? I would think the hard parts would be easy to come by, as
these transmissions are so common, so I would think the cost wouldn't be so
bad parts wise. If the shops don't have to pull and install the trans, they
are quite a bit cheaper. I found out one of the local shop guys rebuilds trans
outside of work..$300 for a 700R4...which is considerably cheaper than any
other route, besides me attempting to do it. maybe that would be a way to go,
just make some friends in the right spots : )   Dorian

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 23:27:20 -0600
From: "mbloomer" <mbloomer@gateway.net>
Subject: Re: TH 200-4R experience needed

><< I've seen the kits ($120 at Jegs!) and they also list an 11"
> non lockup converter from TCI.  Probably too much for
> my needs right now but I don't see any benifit personally.
> Mike B >>
>
For clarification I was refering to not seeing the benifit in using
a non lockup converter.  I would like to hear more from the guy's 
that are running 200-4R's as to what modification's/problems
they have had.  TIA (forgot that part earlier but it's pretty much
understood on the list I think)

Mike B
mbloomer@gateway.net
ICQ# 19113713

Feel free to email personally for whatever.

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

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 01:32:48 EST
From: Bbymks4@aol.com
Subject: Re: W29 Option

                 I know for sure that the W-29 option was on the ' 73 Cutlass
"S"
    because I have one. The option was mostly just the 442 emblems, special
paint,
    (stripes) and a heavy duty suspension. At the time this was an additional
$121.00
    As for a '72, I'm not for sure, That's all I know about it. I hope that
helps
   from........Steve M.
   
   1-' 73 442  and my goal is to have it done by next year. 

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

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 01:38:56 EST
From: WMACHINES@aol.com
Subject: Re: Batten vs Edelbrock flow #s

If you send a fax number I can send all the test parameters, but here are
some of the more important numbers.
Super Mod port 290 @ .600. of the Batten Heads 

			Int.	Exh.
Full Port	.800	327.5	242.6
		      .700	324 	238.2
		      .600	313.2	233.1
		      .500	283.2	223.5
		      .400	250.6	194.7
		      .300	206.7	156.4
		      .200	143.2	114.9
		      .100	 71.6	 63.9

Unported	.800	253	      172.4
		      .700	249	      170.8
		      .600	239       167.6
		      .500	227 	164.4
		      .400	199 	159.6
		      .300	156.4  	148.5
		      .200	110 	114.9
		      .100	 62.6	 70.2

Brian Nutter
Sales Manager, Batten Performance
734-946-9850 or 800-233-1591

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 23:51:19 -0700
From: Ben <olds442@primenet.com>
Subject: Re: TH 200-4R experience needed

- --------------5342E0103AB0DB7DB65ED269
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I'm no tranny guy, but I've looked in to this alot. The 200-4r is the
better tranny for us if you want something strong that SHOULD hold up to
a mild 455. The major problem is that our Olds put out too much torque
for them. If it were a ch&&y with all that horse and no torque, you'd be
fine. But we are dealing with the king of the forest here. TORQUE
MONSTERS!!! The deal with converters as I understand it is as such:
Non Lockup- your standard th-400/350 torque converter. Relies on engine
speed (rotation), torque, and physics (intertia) to "lock" and apply
power to the transmission. Hensforth, not extremely efficient and high
heat.
Lockup(electronic)- senses engine speed (rpms), throttle position and
maybe some other factors to ELECTRONICALLY tell the convertor to lock
up. A LOT less heat, and more efficient. That was the first major step
to efficiency and overdrives. In cars with electronic lockup but no
overdrive, it feels like a 4th gear when it fully locks in place at
cruise speed. Without the electronics you wont lock up completely and it
will be even less efficient than the traditional Th-400/350 convertor,
not to mention it will engage and disengage so often it will cause
extreme heat and premature failure.

Make sense? I hope you can understand what I'm saying.
Anybody correct me if I"m wrong.

Ben

mbloomer wrote:

>  I've been pouring over the FAQ and related links and as I'mnot
> entirely confused yet I figured I'd give the list a chance.(Kind of
> like Stump the Chump, though Chump still applies) I'm wanting to build
> a 200-4R for my 68 for highway cruisingand am still in the research
> phase and have found a lot ofgood info but I'm going to need a good
> reference book forthe actual teardown/rebuild.  Anyone have any
> suggestions?Based on the dead links on the FAQ it doesn't seem that
> ithas been updated lately, so does anyone have any furthersuggestions
> or experience to share?  Recommendationsfor parts sources for rebuild
> kit, 10 vane pump, ht stator,press valve, shift kit, etc?  One other
> thing, the FAQ doesn'tsay anything about the differences of using a
> lockup/nonlockup converter.  It says not to use a lockup unit
> withouthaving the wiring hooked up, but what would you have to doto
> use a non lockup converter?  Drawbacks?  Benefits? I plan to find a
> junkyard tranny and rebuild/upgrade it myselfas long as I can price
> all the parts needed under the $1200they want from TCI for a complete
> trans. Mike B
> mbloomer@gateway.net
> ICQ# 19113713
> 72 Cutlass S (RIP)
> 68 Cutlass Supreme
>



- --------------5342E0103AB0DB7DB65ED269
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF">
I'm no tranny guy, but I've looked in to this alot. The 200-4r is the better
tranny for us if you want something strong that SHOULD hold up to a mild
455. The major problem is that our Olds put out too much torque for them.
If it were a ch&amp;&amp;y with all that horse and no torque, you'd be
fine. But we are dealing with the king of the forest here. TORQUE MONSTERS!!!
The deal with converters as I understand it is as such:
<BR>Non Lockup- your standard th-400/350 torque converter. Relies on engine
speed (rotation), torque, and physics (intertia) to "lock" and apply power
to the transmission. Hensforth, not extremely efficient and high heat.
<BR>Lockup(electronic)- senses engine speed (rpms), throttle position and
maybe some other factors to ELECTRONICALLY tell the convertor to lock up.
A LOT less heat, and more efficient. That was the first major step to 
efficiency
and overdrives. In cars with electronic lockup but no overdrive, it feels
like a 4th gear when it fully locks in place at cruise speed. Without the
electronics you wont lock up completely and it will be even less efficient
than the traditional Th-400/350 convertor, not to mention it will engage
and disengage so often it will cause extreme heat and premature failure.

<P>Make sense? I hope you can understand what I'm saying.
<BR>Anybody correct me if I"m wrong.

<P>Ben

<P>mbloomer wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>&nbsp;I've been pouring over the FAQ and related
links and as I'mnot entirely confused yet I figured I'd give the list a
chance.(Kind of like Stump the Chump, though Chump still applies)&nbsp;I'm
wanting to build a 200-4R for my 68 for highway cruisingand am still in
the research phase and have found a lot ofgood info but I'm going to need
a good reference book forthe actual teardown/rebuild.&nbsp; Anyone have
any suggestions?Based on the dead links on the FAQ it doesn't seem that
ithas been updated lately, so does anyone have any furthersuggestions or
experience to share?&nbsp; Recommendationsfor parts sources for rebuild
kit, 10 vane pump, ht stator,press valve, shift kit, etc?&nbsp; One other
thing, the FAQ doesn'tsay anything about the differences of using a 
lockup/nonlockup
converter.&nbsp; It says not to use a lockup unit withouthaving the wiring
hooked up, but what would you have to doto use a non lockup converter?&nbsp;
Drawbacks?&nbsp; Benefits?&nbsp;I plan to find a junkyard tranny and 
rebuild/upgrade
it myselfas long as I can price all the parts needed under the $1200they
want from TCI for a complete trans.&nbsp;<FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT 
SIZE=-1>Mike
B</FONT></FONT>
<BR><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE=-1><A HREF="mailto:mbloomer@gateway.net
">mbloomer@gateway.net</A></FONT></FONT>
<BR><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE=-1>ICQ# 19113713</FONT></FONT>
<BR><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE=-1>72 Cutlass S (RIP)</FONT></FONT>
<BR><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE=-1>68 Cutlass Supreme</FONT></FONT>
<BR>&nbsp;</BLOCKQUOTE>
&nbsp;
</BODY>
</HTML>

- --------------5342E0103AB0DB7DB65ED269--

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

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 03:13:39 -0800
From: "Mike Jones" <mike@gleep.com>
Subject: '99 Olds Nats??

 	Will there be any weekend-long olds meet (like the mondello nats) this
 year?  I have a very big nterest in attending next year, I'd drive my
Delta
 out there just to see everything (yes, from Calif!)
  
 Mike Jones
 '78 Delta 88 (350/TH350/102k)
 

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

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 06:49:24 -0500
From: "<GJC> CC-IROC-SS" <gjcouse@francomm.com>
Subject: RE: Cutlass front coil spring replacement/ Hotchkiss

Peter wrote:
<Snip>
Installed Hotchkiss front springs on my '67 Cutlass 400 convert and they
were
very unsatisfactory. Lowered the car about 4" in front! Cool looking, but I
couldn't turn the wheels.

<GJC>
courious? Give them a call and see if they have a set of front springs for
the front of an El Com*no. And if that spring # is different than the set
you purchased. I know my Eibach's were for am El....

Have a Happy and Safe Holiday Season!
- -----Regards,

Gary J. Couse
Couse Custom
ICQ# 5209322
mailto:gjcouse@CC-IROC-SS.com

Custom Conversion Prototype:
CC-IROC-SS-#001 =  "Quincy"
http://www.CC-IROC-SS.com
Send Project Questions To:
mailto:info@CC-IROC-SS.com

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

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 04:43:48 -0800
From: "Mike Jones" <mike@gleep.com>
Subject: '86 442 FS

(I know this should go on the G-body list, but I'm not subscribed to it,
and I knw it'll get there somehow)

86 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS, V8, bucket console, loaded, 442
rims, needs 1/4 PANEL, exhaust, runs/ looks good, $1600,
(810)220-3551 BRIGHTON
Location: Brighton, MI

(ripped from traderonline.com)
 
Mike Jones
'78 Delta (350/TH350/102k)

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

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 08:14:36 -0500
From: "Semantana Chris (ONEX)" <SemantanaC@tce.com>
Subject: RE: cutlass supreme engine offset

> currently get a slight interference between the headers and the brake
> proportioning valve.
> 
This isn't good is it?  I mean can't the heat from the headers get hot
enough to boil the brake fluid resulting in  ... well no brakes.

Chris Smetana
Terre Haute, IN
http://www.abcs.com/chris

1969 W-31
1969 4-4-2 parts car
plus others

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

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 09:47:18 EST
From: ANTIQOLDS@aol.com
Subject: Re: '99 Olds Nats??

In a message dated 12/18/98 6:17:53 AM Eastern Standard Time, mike@gleep.com
writes:

<< 
  	Will there be any weekend-long olds meet (like the mondello nats) 
this
  year?  I have a very big nterest in attending next year, I'd drive my
 Delta
  out there just to see everything (yes, from Calif!)
   
  Mike Jones
  '78 Delta 88 (350/TH350/102k)
  
  >>
Irving Texas (Dallas area) same town of DFW airport June 23rd thru the 26th


Everett  OCA# 1961   1961 Starfire

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

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 06:50:16 PST
From: "Andrew C. Green" <acg_o@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Emissions

> I know many people that run crankcase breathers, not pcv valves.
> (racers, 4 wheelers, etc.) as long as the pcv valve port isn't 
> PLUGGED in the valve cover, you will be ok. The PCV is to evacuate
> the fumes and pressure in the crankcase, generated by piston
> blowby. Running a breather would be no different, except that
> there would be vacuum sucking on the valve.

I assume you dropped a word there and meant to say "_no_ vacuum
sucking on the valve."

> The pressure generated would be evacuated by the breather before
> it reached problem levels. 

Yes, vented to the outside. But as Mike B. pointed out, there are
some (maybe small) benefits to actually drawing a vacuum on the
crankcase, not just allowing it to vent. With a vent, the best
you'll get will be atmospheric pressure in the crankcase; with
a PCV valve and a vacuum draw, you can actually go negative in
the crankcase and have something _less_ than atmospheric pressure.

In addition, the PCV/vacuum system has an intake as well, usually
drawn off the air cleaner, so you're flushing air _through_ the
crankcase rather than just burning or venting whatever gets pushed
out by a plain breather system.

- -- Andy

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

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

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 06:53:14 PST
From: "jason shreve" <jasonshreve@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: TH 200-4R experience needed

Does the TH-2004R have a pan that looks like a th350?  My 72 has a trans 
with the 4 socket plug in.  It has a switch wired to the bottom of the 
dash that the previous owner said was an overdrive switch.  I took the 
pan of recently to change the filter and fluid and noticed the valve 
body is different than a 350.  I also have the swifting problem were it 
doesn't want to shift into third at wot. Thanks


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

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

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 08:57:31 -0600
From: <shang@connect.net>
Subject: Re: TH 200-4R experience needed

jason shreve wrote:
> 
> Does the TH-2004R have a pan that looks like a th350?  My 72 has a trans
> with the 4 socket plug in.  It has a switch wired to the bottom of the
> dash that the previous owner said was an overdrive switch.  I took the
> pan of recently to change the filter and fluid and noticed the valve
> body is different than a 350.  I also have the swifting problem were it
> doesn't want to shift into third at wot. Thanks
> 
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com


The TH-2004R pan looks very different than the TH-350. It has a main pan
and what looks like a small secondary pan at the rear. All TH-2004R have
the word "M E T R I C" stamped on the bottom. There are lockup TH-350's
that use the same connector as the TH-2004R. The TH-700R4 pan is square
and somewhat similar to the TH-350.  The TH-700R4 pan is completely
square, where as the TH-350's pan is angles at the right rear corner.

Stephen Hoover
Dallas, Texas
'70 Supreme
.

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

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 07:53:52 PST
From: "jason shreve" <jasonshreve@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: TH 200-4R experience needed

Does anyone know what years these trans were made?  Whould they have a 
different valve body?  Is there a kit availible to control the 
convertor?  Sorry for all the questions this early in the morning.





>There are lockup TH-350's
>that use the same connector as the TH-2004R. The TH-700R4 pan is 
>square and somewhat similar to the TH-350.  


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

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

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 09:52:33 -0600
From: <shang@connect.net>
Subject: Re: TH 200-4R experience needed

jason shreve wrote:
> 
> Does anyone know what years these trans were made?  Whould they have a
> different valve body?  Is there a kit availible to control the
> convertor?  Sorry for all the questions this early in the morning.
> 
> >There are lockup TH-350's
> >that use the same connector as the TH-2004R. The TH-700R4 pan is
> >square and somewhat similar to the TH-350.
> 
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com


I believe the TH-350C (lockup) first appeared in 1978 and was used until
1986-7. It was the standard transmission on vehicles where O/D was
optional. I am not familar with differences in their valve bodies, but
any lockup kit for the TH-2004R/TH-700R4 will work. The kit uses a
vacuum actuated microswitch that engages the lockup under stable vacuum
in 4th gear. This is the same method that GM used on non-computer
controlled vehicles, such as my '86 Silverado work truck :)

Stephen Hoover
Dallas, Texas
'70 Supreme
.

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

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 11:31:20 -0500
From: Brian Kerr <bkerr@golden.net>
Subject: Re: cutlass supreme engine offset

"Semantana Chris (ONEX)" wrote:

> > currently get a slight interference between the headers and the brake
> > proportioning valve.
> >
> This isn't good is it?  I mean can't the heat from the headers get hot
> enough to boil the brake fluid resulting in  ... well no brakes.

This was a concern of mine, and well, when the situation made itself known
to me, I sorta of needed to get the sucker on the road, so I took the
chance, and was watchfull of the situation with the idea that I would
probably have to change the position of the valve. The header tube touches
the bolt head that goes thru the valve and into the frame. I am assuming
that the reason it doesnt cause a problem is because the heat is dissipated
into the frame as opposed to the brass valve. The hole in the valve is
bigger than the bolt by a fair margin, so the main heat transfer point is
only from the bolt head/valve interface.  Installed all new brakelines,
master cylinder, flexhoses, rear wheel cylinders and new seals and boots on
the front discs. (only original brake parts are the rear drums and shoes.
Front calipers, pads and rotors came out of a 70 Monte) Have driven the car
on some pretty hot days, with extended idling and highway runs, and see no
adverse braking problems other than some brake fade with sequential braking
from highway speeds, something to be expected from older brake pad
material. I will put some new pads on the front this winter probably.

Brian Kerr

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

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 09:36:47 -0800 (PST)
From: "JAMIE  A.K.A. HOMER" <vistaboy71@yahoo.com>
Subject: [none]

unsubscribe oldsmobile

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

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

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 13:23:06 EST
From: Cutw29@aol.com
Subject: Are my 7a heads good for performance?

I want to rebuild the 350 in my 72 Cutlass s.  My question is are the 7a heads
good for performance?  What type of machining would you suggest?  Thanks.

Steve
CutW29@aol.com

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

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 13:34:26 -0500
From: "<GJC> CC-IROC-SS" <gjcouse@francomm.com>
Subject: TH 200-4R-METRIC-TH 200-C

<Snip>
All TH-200-4R have the word "M E T R I C" stamped on the bottom.

<GJC>

I was under the impression that the TH-200-C had the "M E T R I C" stamped
on the pan. Which one does, or do they both have it stamped?

- -----Regards,

Gary J. Couse
Couse Custom
ICQ# 5209322
mailto:gjcouse@CC-IROC-SS.com

Custom Conversion Prototype:
CC-IROC-SS-#001 =  "Quincy"
http://www.CC-IROC-SS.com
Send Project Questions To:
mailto:info@CC-IROC-SS.com

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

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 13:56:44 -0500
From: "Semantana Chris (ONEX)" <SemantanaC@tce.com>
Subject: RE: TH 200-4R-METRIC-TH 200-C

> <Snip>
> All TH-200-4R have the word "M E T R I C" stamped on the bottom.
> 
> <GJC>
> 
> I was under the impression that the TH-200-C had the "M E T R I C" stamped
> on the pan. Which one does, or do they both have it stamped?
> 
I kinda thought the same thing too.  I do know the TH200 does have METRIC
stamped on the pan as I have one in a 77 Buick LeSabre and the drivetrain is
the original.  Don't know about the 200r4 though  Incidentally, the TH200
METRIC rivals the jetaway as far as reliability.

Chris Smetana
Terre Haute, IN
http://www.abcs.com/chris

1969 W-31
1969 4-4-2 parts car
plus others

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

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 14:04:48 EST
From: KarlAune@aol.com
Subject: Re: '99 Olds Nats??

In a message dated 98-12-18 09:53:37 EST, you write:

<<<< Will there be any weekend-long olds meet (like the mondello nats) this
   year?  I have a very big nterest in attending next year, I'd drive my
  Delta   out there just to see everything (yes, from Calif!)
   Mike Jones   '78 Delta 88 (350/TH350/102k) >>>>
  
<< Irving Texas (Dallas area) same town of DFW airport June 23rd thru the 26th
>>

Kinda glad this came up.
Karl is going to drive SOM down to Dallas From Chicago.
Have recently proposed a Chi-town area caravan to the Dallas-Ft.Worth area for
the nats (taking a full week off!).

Andy Green ain't goin' (a moment of silence please!).

Lou Biggs is interested.

Dave Brown is still a possibility (and of course Karl will nag him untill he
agrees...)

Anyone in the area or Canada (so long as Chicago is on the way!) is invited.

This is the best time to plan (hotels not booked up yet!).
How many of your co-workers plan their vacations 6 months ahead?

Send to Karl privately if possible.
If not, OK too, more people need to be encouraged to visit TX.

Telya what!

The Caravan will have a planned stop at the largest yarde Karl knows of in IL!
Harmons!
Forested hillsides glint in the sunlight due to the sheer number of
windsheilds hidden within!

Looking forward to yakking with Mike Hall and Christian Fair again....

SOM

&KA

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

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 14:06:15 EST
From: JonKrisInc@aol.com
Subject: Re: squealing fan

In a message dated 12/17/98 3:56:54 PM EST, Padavano.Joe@Orbital.COM writes:

<< Are you sure it's the belt and not the alternator bearing that's making the
 noise?   >>

Good point Joe. And if that's true you may want to check your water pump as
well. T
Bruce
75 Delta 88 Conv. (duals of course)

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

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 13:00:15 -0600
From: <shang@connect.net>
Subject: Re: TH 200-4R-METRIC-TH 200-C

<Snip>
> All TH-200-4R have the word "M E T R I C" stamped on the bottom.
> 
> <GJC>
> 
> I was under the impression that the TH-200-C had the "M E T R I C" stamped
> on the pan. Which one does, or do they both have it stamped?
> 
> -----Regards,
> 
> Gary J. Couse
> Couse Custom
> ICQ# 5209322
> mailto:gjcouse@CC-IROC-SS.com
> 
> Custom Conversion Prototype:
> CC-IROC-SS-#001 =  "Quincy"
> http://www.CC-IROC-SS.com
> Send Project Questions To:
> mailto:info@CC-IROC-SS.com



They BOTH have the stamp. I have never seen a TH-2004R without one. I
have never seen a TH-200C

Stephen Hoover
Dallas, Texas
'70 Supreme
.

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

End of oldsmobile-digest V1 #1673
*********************************

