Please respond to oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca @ INTERNET
To:	oldsmobile-digest@chebucto.ns.ca @ INTERNET
cc:	 
Subject:	oldsmobile-digest V1 #1680


oldsmobile-digest     Tuesday, December 22 1998     Volume 01 : Number 1680



Re: Engine REBUILD
Re: Engine REBUILD
Vega thread, joke to you, not to a Vega owner!!
Re: roller rockers on SB Olds?
Re: roller rockers on SB Olds?
455 hot engine for sale fast
Re: 71 Cutlass
Re: Engine REBUILD
Re: Engine REBUILD
Re: roller rockers on SB Olds?
RE: uns*bscribe oldsmobile
Re: 67 F85 for sale
Re: Vega thread, joke to you, not to a Vega owner!!
More Restricted Racing Info
50 fastest US production cars
H-car Spindles (Was Re: starefire GT engine swap)
350 PISTONS in 307
looking for 72 Supreme(kinda long)
Cylinder Wall Cross-Hatch Degree
looking for 72 Supreme
Re:50 fastest US production cars
Re: 50 fastest US production cars
Re: bashing the 350 Buick
Re: bashing the 350 Buick
1970 Cutlass Convertible $4,000 Certified
Re: 71 Cutlass
Re: No Oldsmobile POS here..
Re: No Oldsmobile POS here..
Re: Cylinder Wall Cross-Hatch Degree
Re: 1980 ID
VIN Decoder (was Re: 1980 ID)
Re: VIN Decoder (was Re: 1980 ID)
Deltas, Deltas everywhere...
Re: Deltas, Deltas everywhere...
Re: 455 hot engine for sale fast
Re: Deltas, Deltas everywhere...
A-body styles
Re: A-body styles
Re: A-body styles
Re: Rear woe
off till 1/4
Re: 455 hot engine for sale fast
Re: Rear woe
torque engines vs high rpm engines..
Re: 68 H/O questions
Re: Rear woe
cylinder wear vs high compression

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 16:07:57 -0700
From: Roger Peterson <rkp@uswest.net>
Subject: Re: Engine REBUILD

To chime in on Joe's comments if I may... I've had very good luck using the
cylinder hones that have multiple silicone carbide balls on the end of flexible
wires.  This type of hone (which I'm sure you're familiar with) needs to be
purchased in the correct diameter to properly fit the cylinder bore.  A good
one will probably run you fifty bucks; a cheap one, well...  I use a variable
speed drill turning at medium slow speed (perhaps 3 to 4 revolutions per
second) while I move the hone through the bore no faster than 2 complete in and
out strokes per second (using copious quantities of oil in the bore).  I've
never actually timed myself or the drill, but these numbers sound good in
retrospect as I imagine the process here at the key board.  One only needs to
do this long enough to completely and evenly break the glaze and crosshatch (as
Joe said) the bore.  Also as Joe said: this step at a minimum, is mandatory.
The bore (and block) needs to be cleaned very well afterward as you don't want
any silicone carbide particles hanging around.  If you have a slight ridge (a
few thousandths) at the top of the bore, this process tends to take the sharp
edge off of that ridge, but I personally wouldn't want to have much a ridge in
my engine as new rings will undoubtedly touch it and premature wear will
subsequently occur.  Additionally, I'm not one to build an engine with much
cylinder wall taper (difference in cylinder wall diameter as measured from top
to bottom at multiple locations).   A couple of thousandths?  O/K, if I'm not
going to race.  How much is a couple?  For me it's two, maybe three.  Four is
more like a crowd (but then I've never liked crowds).  Also check for cylinder
wall out-of-round.  This has a lot to do with how (and if) new rings will
seat.  A hone won't improve on this.  Lastly, I mike journals in multiple
locations, and I plastigage in multiple locations as well.  I do this whether I
had the crank turned or not.  Leave nothing to chance (or somebody else).  It's
best to know exactly what you've got, even if it ain't perfect, so check
everything, check it again to make sure, and when you're done, check it a final
time (or two).  Roger:)

Padavano.Joe@Orbital.COM wrote:

> ...Igor, if I had a motor that had no problems when pulled, I would pull
> the
> heads off, have the cylinder wear checked ( I assume you can get a pretty
> good
> idea even with the pistons in it ) and if it was within tolerances (
> anything
> below .006 is ok...
> _________
>
> You're probably right about the 0.006 (it's a little loose, but not fatal),
> but I'm having a little trouble seeing how you can gauge piston-to-wall
> clearance without pulling the pistons and miking them in addition to the
> bores.  Note that even if you don't bore the cylinders, it is mandatory
> that they be honed in order for the new rings to seat.  I've actually done
> this by hand with an electric drill and a hone, so you don't necessarily
> need to take the block to a machine shop.  You do, however, need to ensure
> that you get a 45 degree crosshatch pattern on the walls.
>
> Joe Padavano
> padavano.joe@orbital.com
>
> 66 442
> 68 W-30
> 69 H/O
> 69 442
> 70 W-30

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 16:23:34 -0700
From: Roger Peterson <rkp@uswest.net>
Subject: Re: Engine REBUILD

Before somebody asks... Yes, piston skirts used to be knurled to take up
clearance.  The process is as scientific as pounding rocks.  In the last school
where I taught we actually still had the machine to do this, but we never used
it other than to tell stories and amuse students.  It's a very bad idea, it
won't last, it damages cylinder walls (fast on newer softer blocks), and on
modern pistons it could be fatal (to them).  It's worse than knurling guides.
Thanks!  My .02

Further more, because of rod angle inclination at the time of thrust, pistons
have major and minor thrust sides wherein the piston pin is not centered in the
piston body.  This is to further facilitate degreased wear on the piston
skirt.  Roger:)

Padavano.Joe@orbital.com wrote:

> Good points Joe..wondering why the wall to piston distance has to be
> measured...does it actually change besides the wear to the walls? Just
> curious
> to know why the pistons that came out have to be miked...what else would
> change to affect the piston to wall clearance? I was talking about cylinder
> taper in my posts, should have pointed that out.  Dorian
> _____________
>
> Yes, unfortunately, the piston wears in addition to the walls.   The piston
> skirt will ride on the wall due to the side load when the rod is at a large
> angle, resulting in wear and possibly galling on the aluminum skirt.  Also,
> while you are correct about miking the cylinder, and especially looking for
> taper and ridge, excessive piston-to-wall clearance will lead to piston
> slap and possibly accelerate the galling process.  For example, the pistons
> in the 455 I'm currently rebuilding, while not very old, unfortunately had
> excessive wear on the skirts, which forced me to make the decision to get
> new ones.  Obviously, unless you the original diameter of the cylinder,
> you'll need to get piston OD as well as bore ID to get true piston-to-wall
> clearance.  My original point, however, was that even if you're just doing
> a re-ring, the motor's got to come apart.  This really isn't the place to
> be cutting corners, as you'd be really upset if 10,000 miles after the ring
> job you spun a bearing.
>
> Joe Padavano
> padavano.joe@orbital.com
>
> 66 442
> 68 W-30
> 69 H/O
> 69 442
> 70 W-30

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 18:04:24 -0600
From: "Lou Biggs" <lbiggs@intertek.net>
Subject: Vega thread, joke to you, not to a Vega owner!!

Really getting tired of all these references about "Vega's", however, I did
paint it once, about 1980, Silver Firemist, came out the same color all
over, but I did it all at one time. Matching is a real b*tch, amb. temp.,
pressure, batch lot, how much it's thinned, direction of paint gun, and
some alchemy. Vette plant in St. Lou used to buy railroad cars full of
paint, ALL from the same batch to eliminate color problems. Thought, we
always shot the paint at about 35 to 40 psi to reduce overspray. But I'm
old, new stuff now!
Lou Biggs
lbiggs@intertek.net

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 19:41:01 -0500
From: Rebel1 <rebel1@raex.com>
Subject: Re: roller rockers on SB Olds?

I bought the Comp Cams Magnum set - they fit under the valve covers nicely - 
the
only problem I had was I didn't use any thread lock on the screw in studs 
during
intial assembly and had two of them come loose - put a little thread lock on 
and
they've been happy ever since!  They don't require any head machining.

Semantana Chris (ONEX) wrote:

> > Has anyone out there in list land put roller rockers on a small block
> > Olds?
> >
> > I would like to do this, but without machining heads as is required by
> > some
> > parts manufacturers. If you have successfully done this, please let me
> > know
> > what you have used.
> >
> > Most (if not all) roller rockers conversions require machining the heads
> > for rocker studs, a la chevy.  I've just recently checked into this
> > conversion for my W-31.  I've talked with Custom Speed from Ohio, who
> > makes Harland Sharp and I've also talked with Dick Miller and Greg Rollin
> > from the list.  It looks like the only kit that will fit under the stock
> > valve covers is the one offered from Supercars.  Although, Dick Miller
> > said one of his Harland Sharp kits will fit under the stock valve covers,
> > you would just have to use a thicker than normal valve cover gasket.
> > My plans are to use the kit from Supercars, I think it's also a bolt on
> > kit.  And hopefully this spring I'll put the motor together.
> >
> I believe the kit from Supercars is ~$360, the kit from Dick Miller is
> ~$440.  I can't recall the exact numbers offhand, I'd suggest checking their
> catalogs or possibly webpages or you can just pick up the phone and give 'em
> a call.
>
> Chris Smetana
> Terre Haute, IN
> http://www.abcs.com/chris
>
> 1969 W-31
> 1969 4-4-2 parts car
> plus others

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 18:37:26 -0600
From: <shang@connect.net>
Subject: Re: roller rockers on SB Olds?

Rebel1 wrote:
> 
> I bought the Comp Cams Magnum set - they fit under the valve covers nicely - 
the
> only problem I had was I didn't use any thread lock on the screw in studs 
during
> intial assembly and had two of them come loose - put a little thread lock on 
and
> they've been happy ever since!  They don't require any head machining.
> 
>

I also use this kit on my 350. The studs are bolt in, so they are only
5/16", which made me nervous at first, but they have not given me any
trouble. I replaced the locking nut with some poly locks for more
accurate adjustments and reliability.

Stephen Hoover
Dallas, Texas
'70 Supreme
.

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 20:00:16 EST
From: SOMMERVLLE@aol.com
Subject: 455 hot engine for sale fast

All right list this is a hell of a deal I'm asking 2K firm and need to sell
have to many projects. Let me know Thanks Chris

CHRIS SOMMERVILLE
69 442SC
STARFIRE V8?
the braket motor has a ton of stuff in it the guy spent about 6K on the build
up here is a partial listing 455+.30, venolia pistons #ven586, ported polished
C heads2.07 in 1.71 ex , aluminum roller rockers, 7/16 screw in studs with
guide plates,  mondello push rods  Eldbrock torker, Holley 3310, MSD 6AL HEI
W/accell suppercoil, Mildon gear drive, crane solid lift cam lift IN:533 EX:
555 duration @.50 IN 248 EX 258., Mildon HV oil pump, shaft, deep sumpo oil
pan. balanced, crank is .10/.10, chamfered crank holes. I have in addition to
this a main stud kit, new head bolts and restricors for it. runs great have it
on the stand right and was going to just refresh it not that it needs it but
just to know it was just done for next season.  give me a call if your
interested. I'm more interested in getting a few cars done then I'll get back
to racing. Let me know if your interested. If you want to give me a call
(910)487-1540. I'm in Fayetteville NC. Will work out delivery with in a 350
mile radius. Thanks Chris

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 17:14:30 -0800
From: Greg Rollin <supercars@transport.com>
Subject: Re: 71 Cutlass

jason shreve wrote:
> 
> Does anyone have a production number on 1971 Cutlass's.  I am talking
> Cutlass, not Supreme or S.  I don't seem to see to many of them,
> probably because tell are converted to make 442's. (Just a thought!)
> Thanks


Jason,
The total production for the 1971 (standard) 
Cutlass was 32,278.  BTW, the 1971 4-4-2 
hardtop was based on the Cutlass S trim level.  
Rather than the standard series Cutlass.


 
Greg Rollin
Supercars Unlimited (Where Cutlass/4-4-2 is ALL we do!)
503-244-8249

Web site:
http://www.supercarsunlimited.com

E-mail: supercars@transport.com

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 17:22:24 -0800
From: Greg Rollin <supercars@transport.com>
Subject: Re: Engine REBUILD

Roger Peterson wrote:
> 
> Before somebody asks... Yes, piston skirts used to be knurled to take up
> clearance.  The process is as scientific as pounding rocks.  In the last 
school
> where I taught we actually still had the machine to do this, but we never 
used
> it other than to tell stories and amuse students.  



Roger, 
When I worked in a machine shop in the early eighties,
we had a piston knurling machine.  It too received the
status as a source of humor rather than a piece of 
actual equipment.  Sitting next to it was another
marvel known as a piston G.I. machine.  The purpose 
of this devise was to cut and enlarge the pistons ring 
lands when excessive play existed.  A "Grove Insert" 
was then installed, which brought the lands back to 
standard.  These machines always raised perplexed
looks from people, followed by the obvious question:
"Why didn't people just buy new pistons"?  
As far as any of us could figure, these must have
been used during the war years, when raw materials
were scarce.  Whatever the case, neither of these
machines could ever top the bewilderment created 
by the shops centerpiece oddity: The "in-car crankshaft 
grinder".  Not that we would have actually used it,
but I will admit however, I was always curious to see 
the thing operate.      
 
 
Greg Rollin
Supercars Unlimited (Where Cutlass/4-4-2 is ALL we do!)
Portland, Oregon  503-244-8249

Web site:
http://www.supercarsunlimited.com

E-mail: supercars@transport.com

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 19:04:17 -0700
From: "Igor T. '81 DRB 455" <igor455@home.com>
Subject: Re: Engine REBUILD

Thanks A lot for all the reply.  When I built my 455 I bored, turned the
crank, all new bearings, new cam, dbl. timing, etc., and I checked
clearances 3 times.  But this motor is crowding my stand and since it is 1/2
disassembled I might as well finish it up before moving it onto the floor.
I have another 455 to disassemble.  So if I decide not to change even the
rings (I probably will) can I take out the pistons and put them back in or
do I have to hone and change rings.  ALSO WHAT ABOUT THOSE CAM specks.
Thanks.

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 21:26:59 EST
From: KS7RACING@aol.com
Subject: Re: roller rockers on SB Olds?

I've used Dave Smith's Roller Rocker kit on my racing engine with no problems
at all.  However, the studs are oversize and require redrilling and tapping
the threads.  Dave's kit comes with bigger pushrods, guide plates, studs,
rockers and polylocks.  I wouldn't build a racing engine without them.

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

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 21:35:07 -0500
From: drolds@net1plus.com
Subject: RE: uns*bscribe oldsmobile

>uns*bscribe olds
>I ALSO WANT TO UNSUBSCRIBE BUT CANNOT WITH YOUR 
INSTRUCTIONS !!!!!!! WHAT IS WRONG PLEASE REPLY




- ------------------------
Sent by NET1Plus WebMail

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 21:53:06 -0800
From: Toby Blom <floridarealtor@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: 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: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 22:03:00 -0500
From: "Peter Berusch" <pber710840@email.msn.com>
Subject: Re: Vega thread, joke to you, not to a Vega owner!!

I don't know about you, Lou.  My Vega rocked.  Not quite there with my '57
DeSoto Adventurer, but trick nonetheless.  Peter.  With new hot water
heater.
- -----Original Message-----
From: Lou Biggs <lbiggs@intertek.net>
To: Olds List <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Monday, December 21, 1998 7:03 PM
Subject: Vega thread, joke to you, not to a Vega owner!!


>Really getting tired of all these references about "Vega's", however, I did
>paint it once, about 1980, Silver Firemist, came out the same color all
>over, but I did it all at one time. Matching is a real b*tch, amb. temp.,
>pressure, batch lot, how much it's thinned, direction of paint gun, and
>some alchemy. Vette plant in St. Lou used to buy railroad cars full of
>paint, ALL from the same batch to eliminate color problems. Thought, we
>always shot the paint at about 35 to 40 psi to reduce overspray. But I'm
>old, new stuff now!
>Lou Biggs
>lbiggs@intertek.net
>

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 23:05:08 EST
From: KS7RACING@aol.com
Subject: More Restricted Racing Info

David, Mike and List:

Thanks for the insight -- that's what I was hoping to receive!  Let me address
your comments (positively, of course!)

1) Back in '92 (unrestricted 350 Olds) we ran a set of heads (#5's) that had
2" intake valves and standard SB exhausts, same as a W31 350.  We tried a set
that had BB Olds valves (2.07 I believe) in them, but they didn't help with
the otherwise W31-style engine specs.

2) I have several sets of the 350 2V heads that have the smaller valves in
them, one set should be good to start out with on the "test" engine.

3) From what I've been able to find out, the #5 and #6 heads are practically
the same, so I'm not sure that checking the flow will show us much -- we're
not allowed to do any grinding on the ports whatsoever, and since they will be
suspicious of me (doing something different) they'll look for any grinding
marks they can find.  But I could ask Dave Smith to check out the
head/intake/carb spacer/carb combo, or as much as he can.  BTW, Dave's solid
lifter cam was what we used for the unrestricted engines, and I'd highly
recommend it, Dave just hasn't had any experience with this type of engine in
his "roundy-round" engine racers.

4)  As a matter of fact, I've been looking for ways to block off the heat
crossover, an idea I was contemplating was to make a mold of the crossover
port on the heads and fashion a plug from some material that I could install
in the port without the pour and grind method, which might catch the eye of an
inspector or two -- they routinely pull heads for both head inspection and to
actually measure the displacement of the engines.

5)  The exhaust divider will be milled down to the point that the separator in
the center two ports will be large enough to hold a gasket.  Dave told me to
do this, so we're all thinking alike.  But the ides about the inserts in the
individual ports is an interesting idea -- I'll bring it up with the man I'll
be having custom-build the headers.  He does headers for SCCA Formula Fords
and American Sedans, NASCAR Craftsman Trucks and IRL racers, so he knows what
he's doing.  In fact, that's why we built the set we have in the car now -- he
asked me a lot of questions we didn't have the answers to yet, like cam
profile, RPM range, head port design, and so on.  So we decided to build a set
on our own so we could get the car out to the track and have something to test
with.  They're long on the primary side, but we believe we'll be cutting them
down as we experiment.  We're starting out with 1 & 3/4" primaries that step
out to 1 & 7/8" after the first 6" to 9", this "stepping" of the headers is
the hot ticket right now in stock car racing.  I'll also keep the idea of the
Tri-Y headers in the forefront, my header builder will know best and I
wouldn't be surprised if some or all of these show up in the final product.
As for mufflers, they're required -- specific type and number of mufflers are
mandated.

6) The heads will probably wind up with somewhere around 55 to 60 cc chambers,
and we'll be using some of Dave's thin head gaskets to keep it all as close to
11 to 1 (or just slightly over:-) ) as we can.

7)  I think I'd have to pass on the vacuum gauge idea -- I don't think I could
remember to disconnect it and reconnect it before returning to the pits.  I am
going to try to use an open gasket between the carb and adapter and between
the adapter and the intake, to allow the two sides of the intake to "talk"
somewhat like an open plenum intake, just not as well as they do.

8) We aren't allowed much of anything to be done on the carb except removing
the choke butterfly (but not the horn) and no other spacers are permitted.

9) Lakeside Speedway is almost a 1/2 mile asphalt oval, we don't shift after
we get on the track, just one gear used.  The transmission we'll use is a
modified Powerglide without the torque converter and a modified valve body
that allows us to operate it like a manual, using the 'clutch' pedal to bypass
fluid pressure until we get moving.  It's less rotating weight than most of
the other systems being used, and the less rotating weight we have, the
better.

10) Thanks for the cam approximates, they'll help us begin the journey.  After
we get this thing running it'll be interesting to see just what happens to
what we've discussed here.

  Again, thank you, Thank You, THANK YOU for all the ideas.  Having some other
interested parties to bounce ideas off of and get ideas from really helps, I
just hope I can help out some others along the way as much as I've been
helped.

Take Care and Happy Holidays!

Ken Snyder
Kansas City, Kansas
KS7RACING@aol.com

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 23:11:00 -0500
From: "Arnold, W D" <w.d.arnold@lmco.com>
Subject: 50 fastest US production cars

Since we are/were on the subject of respect for other GM lines I figured I
send this to the list to show how we compare among others.  I have included
all of the top 10 and below that, only where the B,O,and P's fit in.

This will fit right in with *several* "debates" currently on line.


Legal Mumbo Jumbo:
Sources are Car Craft, Car and Driver, Car Life, Hi Performance Cars, Hot
Rod, MCR, Mopar Muscle, Motor Trend and Super Stock.

Note: Since the tests were *probably* not all done simultaneously, don't
take this as absolute data. I don't believe these were times were normalized
to std day conditions. But, I could be wrong about that too.


                          1/4 et     engine    tranny   gears
1.)97 Dodge Viper GTS    12.05@116    V10       6 spd    3.07
2.)66 427 Cobra          12.20@118    427 8V    4 spd    3.54
3.)90 ZR1 Corvette       12.8@113.8   LT5 350   6 spd    3.45
4.)66 Corvette           12.8@112     L72 427   4 spd    3.36
5.)69 Road Runner        12.9@111.8   440-6pk   4 spd    4.10
6.)97 Hurst/Firebird     12.99@103    350       auto     3.42
7.)70 Hemi Cuda          13.10@107    426hemi   4 spd    3.54
8.)92 Dodge Viper RT/10  13.1@108     488 V10   6 spd    3.07
9.)70 Chevelle SS454     13.12@107    454 LS6   4 spd    3.55
10)69 Camaro             13.16@110.2  427 ZL1   4 spd    4.10

13)90 Pontiac Firehawk   13.2@107     350       6 spd    3.54
16)70 Buick GS Stage I   13.38@105.5  455 stg1  auto     3.64
17)73 Pontiac Trans Am   13.54@104.3  455 SD    auto     3.42
30)87 Buick GNX          13.70@102    231 T-V6  auto     3.43
36)68 HURST/OLDS         13.77@103.9  455 W-30  auto     3.91
37)68 Firebird           13.79@106    400 HO    4 spd    NA
45)70 OLDS 442 W-30      13.88@95.84  455 W-30  auto     3.42
50)70 Trans Am           13.90@102    400 RA    4 spd    3.91


How does your car fair?

Donny Arnold
w.d.arnold@lmco.com

72  Olds 442  
41 Chevy 
63 Chevy Truck


        

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 23:25:37 EST
From: KS7RACING@aol.com
Subject: H-car Spindles (Was Re: starefire GT engine swap)

Joe/List,

The swap I'm referring to involves everything from the spindle out.  The stock
caliper pins are only held in place with a plastic insert and an "E" clip on
the end of the pin.  Many have had this clip remove itself and have the pin
back out.  The 78 - 87 A/G Body spindles are larger and retain the caliper
with a more conventional threaded bolt like most cars do.  The only thing
needed to do this swap (other than the parts already mentioned) is a reducer
bushing to go on the lower ball joint.  The existing ball joint is an odd size
that doesn't cross over to the more conventional size of the A/G spindle, so
the bushing takes up the difference.

The best part of this swap is the ability to move to the 14" (or 15" if so
inclined) wheels and tires from the 13" variety.  The SS1's I have around here
will look like they were there all along since the rallye wheels these cars
got looked like 4-spoke SS1 wheels.  And the IMSA panels -- there was a Monza
Mirage made back in the late 70's that had panels like an IMSA racer for the
street.  I'm getting a set for my car, and along with the other mods, I'm
going to call it a Starfire GTS -- like the class some of these ran in back
then.

If nothing else, it'll be different!  For more information, click on the link
to Bob Gumm's Monza page on OldsLink, near the bottom.  He has all the info on
the swap for both the front and the back axle.

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

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 21:24:48 -0700
From: "Igor T. '81 DRB 455" <igor455@home.com>
Subject: 350 PISTONS in 307

I believe that one can't bore the 307 to take 350 pistons.  I KNOW that this
subject has been brought up millions of times but I can't really remember.
I just thought to ask since they are all same stroke and the 307 looks like
it has 1/4" + room between the cylinder walls and water.  I also know that
there should be some meat between cylinder walls and water for cooling.  And
yes, I know that 403 pistons can't go into a 455.  Can someone please
clarify the differences between 307 and 350 and if/if not the 350 pistons
can fit and why/why not.  Thanks.

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 23:26:56 EST
From: OLDS44272@aol.com
Subject: looking for 72 Supreme(kinda long)

                   My wife must really love me. After i put a CD player in her
Lumina APV van (aka Family truckerster), she gave me my Christmas present
early- a 6 disc for my 90 Supreme. I just now installed it.There is nothing
like laying something out and the standing back and saying " Damn, i did
this!". I know a radio might not be a big deal, but would have had to be there
to see all the little thing that had to be figured out ( like you can't mount
the new wires to close to the defroster vent servo). Anyway, she'll never
understand that feeling. She jumps in her her van and says " ok i have a cd
player too".  Well she then hit with me a great thing. I have had 2 72
Supreme's in the past. I wrecked one when i was 17 ( that seems to happen to
everyone first car!!) and i had to sell my second one in mint shape ( had 63k
on it, i was the second owner) when i got laid off 5 years ago.  Getting to
the point, she said  would get me another 72 Supreme 9 mostly to shut me up
about talking about wanting another one)          I would like a 2 door hard
top, with a good frame.Of course a convert. would be nice too, but i don't
think 2000 would get a decent one. The more of the car that is there, the more
i'd pay. I have 2000 to spend. I would like something that runs or is close to
running. I would like it to have front disc brakes. I live in Bedford Ohio,
near Cleveland........THANKS......SCOTT

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 22:37:06 -0600
From: "Peter Landowski" <PETTRIX@prodigy.net>
Subject: Cylinder Wall Cross-Hatch Degree

On a 455 Mondello recommends a 43 degree cross-hatch pattern for the final
finish for the cylinder walls. I have a C&A zero-gap rings and they
recommend a 30 degree pattern. I am better off going with what C&A
recommends, right?

Pettrix@prodigy.net

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 23:33:51 EST
From: OLDS44272@aol.com
Subject: looking for 72 Supreme

        I should have just started a new post. I am looking for a 72 Supreme.
As long as the frame and possibly the floors are solid, that is pretty much
what i want. I have 2k to spend. Ideally, a big block 4 speed would be great
but i know about supply and demand. As long as the car is mostly there, or can
run, that is about all i am interested in. The eventual plan is to make it
fast. Of cousre i wouldn't distroy a decent car, but i have some ideals of
what the finished car would look like.  Thanks SCOTT

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 23:34:36 -0500
From: "Red" <Olds442@webmail.bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re:50 fastest US production cars

Arnold, W.D. wrote:
>
>Note: Since the tests were *probably* not all done simultaneously, don't
>take this as absolute data. I don't believe these were times were normalized
>to std day conditions. But, I could be wrong about that too.
>


It is very possible that the later tests were corrected because of 
"normalizing" became the right and accepted way.  In the old days, it was just 
a bonus if your 'official' race was held in fall instead of summer and at 
night instead of 2 in the afternoon. How were the racing rules then? Was there 
such a thing as 'standard  
day' corrections when you were running against the clock?

I am curious to see the rest of the top 50 that you ddn't post.  

Where's the GTO Judge ? I figured it would have been right there with the H/O..

Good post, that ought to stir a few folks up.(chuckle)..Just Kidding.
 


Red                 
Olds442@webmail.bellsouth.net

1972 Olds 442 
(more fun than ANY man should be allowed to have!!) 
Almost seems illegal..

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 23:37:37 EST
From: Gutlass66@aol.com
Subject: Re: 50 fastest US production cars

GTO Judge wasn't that quick. The 70 W-30 was faster, the Stage one, the LS-6,
lots of cars will, I guess it needed the extra 55cubes ;)

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 21:03:59 PST
From: "jason shreve" <jasonshreve@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: bashing the 350 Buick

Well spoken!!! I like to collect engines, I like various types also.  I 
personally have these:

79 403 Olds T/A
78 403 Olds T/A  (In my 72 Supreme)
78 400 Poncho T/A
74 440 Dodge   ?
73 455 Poncho  ?   (for my 79 Bandit T/A)
73 350 Olds  Cutlass
71 350 Olds  (In my 71 Cutlass)
70 350 Chevy  Camaro
7? 454 Hi Perf Pass  (for my 68 Camaro SS350)
68 330 Olds

I like just about all GM engines.  I do not touch fords.  The only 
experience I have with a Buick is a 231 in a 81 Supreme I once owned and 
it burnt(bad carb.)  I have never missed with a caddy.  I always like 
looking at a nice engine.  I will admit I like Olds engines the best,  
but I am open minded.  The only thing that piss's me off is see a cool 
Cutlass or 442 with a chevy power plant.  What a cop out.  
My 2 cents.


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

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

Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 00:35:47 EST
From: Gutlass66@aol.com
Subject: Re: bashing the 350 Buick

Never a 330 1968, the 330's last year was 1967. 68 was the 350s first year.

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

Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 00:49:12 -0500
From: "Robert Schinkel" <docbob@caninet.com>
Subject: 1970 Cutlass Convertible $4,000 Certified

A buddy of mine just told me tonight that his 70 Convertible is up for
sale, I thought I would pass it along to the list.

1970 Cutlass convertible.  350 4 bbl. stock, under 95,000 miles - I don't
remember the actual number but somewhere between 86,000 and 95,000.  I help
him restore the car, so I know this car very well.
It has manual steering and came with manual drum brakes, now has power
drum.  2.56 posi rear, Bench seat column shift, Dark Blue with Dark blue
interior, Front and rear bumper are straight but will need rechroming.  Car
has NO rust in floors frame or trunk, Had a fresh body and paint 2 years
ago. So needs no body work.  The top is bad, we temporarily patched it just
to keep the rain out, It was all he felt he needed cause it was a summer
car and would never have the top up.  When I took my car drag racing he ran
his for curiosity, best time was 15.23 @ 86 - Not bad for a stock 350.  Car
is certified and road worthy right now, can be driven anywhere.  He want
$4000 (US) 
I don't have a scanner and have no access to one.  But I have the car on
video at the track, a copy could be made for those really interested.
I personally think the car is a steal at this price, I paid more for mine
and his is more solid.
If I had more cash I would buy it myself, I did make him an offer but no
luck.

Robert Schinkel   docbob@caninet.com
Niagara Falls,    Canada   905-357-4454

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 21:41:52 PST
From: "jason shreve" <jasonshreve@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: 71 Cutlass

Yea I know but they both have the same body style, unlike 
 the Supreme's.


  BTW, the 1971 4-4-2 
>hardtop was based on the Cutlass S trim level.  
>


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

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

Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 00:48:34 -0500
From: "Erik Gertsen" <ainode@frontiernet.net>
Subject: Re: No Oldsmobile POS here..

oooooops, got me there! doh. 
Olds content: ummm, olds never made a car as ugly as a mid-70's dart.

- ----------
> From: Uncle Pete <pteubel@mediaone.net>
> To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
> Subject: Re: No Oldsmobile POS here..
> Date: Monday, December 21, 1998 6:54 AM
> 
> Nope <g>.  SLANT 6....
> 
> At 01:24 AM 12/21/98 -0500, you wrote:
> >straight sixes! straight! arrggh. or a 318. arrgh.
> >Erik gertsen
> >
> >----------
> >> From: Uncle Pete <pteubel@mediaone.net>
> >> To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
> >> Subject: Re: No Oldsmobile POS here..
> >> Date: Saturday, December 19, 1998 10:50 PM
> >> 
> >> At 08:01 PM 12/19/98 -0500, you wrote:
> >> >----------------
> >> >Bad things...
> >> >I get beat by old ladies in V-6 Darts.
> >> 
> >> Uh.....they don't exist (but of course you knew that, right?)
> >> 
> >> - Uncle Pete
> >> '51 98
> >> '82 98 (w/403)
> >> '86 Ciera
> > 

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

Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 01:01:28 -0500
From: Uncle Pete <pteubel@mediaone.net>
Subject: Re: No Oldsmobile POS here..

Even as a Mopar owner, I'll have to agree with you there!

At 12:48 AM 12/22/98 -0500, you wrote:
>oooooops, got me there! doh. 
>Olds content: ummm, olds never made a car as ugly as a mid-70's dart.
>
>----------
>> From: Uncle Pete <pteubel@mediaone.net>
>> To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
>> Subject: Re: No Oldsmobile POS here..
>> Date: Monday, December 21, 1998 6:54 AM
>> 
>> Nope <g>.  SLANT 6....
>> 
>> At 01:24 AM 12/21/98 -0500, you wrote:
>> >straight sixes! straight! arrggh. or a 318. arrgh.
>> >Erik gertsen
>> >
>> >----------
>> >> From: Uncle Pete <pteubel@mediaone.net>
>> >> To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
>> >> Subject: Re: No Oldsmobile POS here..
>> >> Date: Saturday, December 19, 1998 10:50 PM
>> >> 
>> >> At 08:01 PM 12/19/98 -0500, you wrote:
>> >> >----------------
>> >> >Bad things...
>> >> >I get beat by old ladies in V-6 Darts.
>> >> 
>> >> Uh.....they don't exist (but of course you knew that, right?)
>> >> 
>> >> - Uncle Pete
>> >> '51 98
>> >> '82 98 (w/403)
>> >> '86 Ciera
>> > 
> 

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

Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 01:03:12 EST
From: DYeager535@aol.com
Subject: Re: Cylinder Wall Cross-Hatch Degree

In a message dated 12/21/98 8:29:42 PM Pacific Standard Time,
PETTRIX@prodigy.net writes:

<< On a 455 Mondello recommends a 43 degree cross-hatch pattern for the final
 finish for the cylinder walls. I have a C&A zero-gap rings and they
 recommend a 30 degree pattern. I am better off going with what C&A
 recommends, right?
 
 Pettrix@prodigy.net >>

     From what I've heard, it depends on the composition of the rings..moly
gets one angle, cast gets another....not like I know the angle though : )
Dorian

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

Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 00:41:22 -0600
From: Brian Ammons <b_ammons@mail.utexas.edu>
Subject: Re: 1980 ID

I went and looked at this page and got the following, dreaded Error 404:

File Not Found

The requested URL /~jadcock/cutlass/vin.html was not found on this server.

This was with the following in the address box:

http://www.cslab.vt.edu/~jadcock/cutlass/vin.html

At 03:08 PM 12/21/98 , you wrote:
>If you can get the vin # that would be the best way to know exactly what it
>is. if you can get the vin number either post it on the list or you can go to
>this site  <A HREF="http://www.cslab.vt.edu/~jadcock/cutlass/vin.html">
>http://www.cslab.vt.edu/~jadcock/cutlass/vin.html</A>        Hope this
helps  
>  																
Rich
> 
- -------------------------------------------------------------
 Brian Ammons		 Universal Internet # (ICQ) - 3585737
 MIS Major - UT Austin	 b_ammons@mail.utexas.edu
 2903 Breeze Terrace	 http://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~ammons/
 Austin, TX 78722	Home :	(512) 236-8088 (Austin)
 1984 Oldsmobile		(713) 776-2110 (Houston)
	Delta 88	Pager:	(512) 483-8056
 	  4-door		(713) 318-5938	
- -------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 00:49:20 -0600
From: "Mark Tupper" <mtupper@palacenet.net>
Subject: VIN Decoder (was Re: 1980 ID)

>
>The requested URL /~jadcock/cutlass/vin.html was not found on this server.
>
Give this one a try...Jason's been moving  around a lot lately. ;-)

http://members.xoom.com/jadcock/cutlass/vin.html

- -Mark Tupper     1987 442    (OCA 30666)
mtupper@palacenet.net     http://cyberglyphs.com/442/

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

Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 01:16:58 -0600
From: Brian Ammons <b_ammons@mail.utexas.edu>
Subject: Re: VIN Decoder (was Re: 1980 ID)

That's the ticket...up late with me, I see.

At 12:49 AM 12/22/98 , you wrote:
>>
>>The requested URL /~jadcock/cutlass/vin.html was not found on this server.
>>
>Give this one a try...Jason's been moving  around a lot lately. ;-)
>
>http://members.xoom.com/jadcock/cutlass/vin.html
>
>-Mark Tupper     1987 442    (OCA 30666)
>mtupper@palacenet.net     http://cyberglyphs.com/442/
> 
- -------------------------------------------------------------
 Brian Ammons		 Universal Internet # (ICQ) - 3585737
 MIS Major - UT Austin	 b_ammons@mail.utexas.edu
 2903 Breeze Terrace	 http://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~ammons/
 Austin, TX 78722	Home :	(512) 236-8088 (Austin)
 1984 Oldsmobile		(713) 776-2110 (Houston)
	Delta 88	Pager:	(512) 483-8056
 	  4-door		(713) 318-5938	
- -------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 01:26:39 -0600
From: Brian Ammons <b_ammons@mail.utexas.edu>
Subject: Deltas, Deltas everywhere...

Talking about 8~ thru 85s here...

There is a car, called the Delta 88, that came in different trim levels.  I
know this because it says so right on the interior of the door.  Some say
Royale, some say Royale Brougham.  I know that one of the differences in
these trim levels was the upholstery pattern.

But what is a Delta 88 Royale Brougham LS?

And what order ("niceness", also known as "cost") do these models go in?
I'm pretty sure it's...

Delta 88
Delta 88 Royale
Delta 88 Royale Brougham

...but again, where does the LS fit in?

Also...I am under the impression that there were only two body styles
available: the 2-door and the 4-door.  Were there any additional body
styles (akin to the three different hardtop types of '70 - '72 A-bodies)?
I guess "no", but if I was totally sure I wouldn't be asking...
- -------------------------------------------------------------
 Brian Ammons		 Universal Internet # (ICQ) - 3585737
 MIS Major - UT Austin	 b_ammons@mail.utexas.edu
 2903 Breeze Terrace	 http://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~ammons/
 Austin, TX 78722	Home :	(512) 236-8088 (Austin)
 1984 Oldsmobile		(713) 776-2110 (Houston)
	Delta 88	Pager:	(512) 483-8056
 	  4-door		(713) 318-5938	
- -------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 02:50:31 -0500
From: "Frederick S. Nissen" <FSNissen@Worldnet.ATT.NET>
Subject: Re: Deltas, Deltas everywhere...

Brian Ammons wrote:
> And what order ("niceness", also known as "cost") do these models go in?
> I'm pretty sure it's...
> 
> Delta 88
> Delta 88 Royale
> Delta 88 Royale Brougham
> 
> ...but again, where does the LS fit in?
> 
> Also...I am under the impression that there were only two body styles
> available: the 2-door and the 4-door.  Were there any additional body
> styles (akin to the three different hardtop types of '70 - '72 A-bodies)?
> I guess "no", but if I was totally sure I wouldn't be asking...


Brian,

Your basic conceptions are correct.  The Delta 88 was the base model
from 1969 (when the Delmont 88 was discontinued) to 1982 (When the base
Delta 88 was dropped).  The "Royale" was the high line 88 from 1969
through 1978.  In 1979 the "Royale Brougham" interior option debuted. 
It basically consisted of "loose cushion" look seatbacks and "98"
caliber fabrics.  This became a separate model with unique exterior ID
in 1980.  From 1980 through 1983 the "Royale Brougham" was the top line
88.  In 1984 the RWD 98 was dropped for its FWD successor.  The "Delta
88 Royle Brougham LS" was added to the line to woo fallen away 98 buyers
turned off by the '85 98's new small FWD platform.  It used lots of left
over parts ('80 88 Royale Borugham scripts on the front fenders, '77-81
98 LS ebmlems on the sail panels, '80-'84 98 back up lamps, '82-'84 98
Regency Brougham seats, '84 98 grille ('84) or '85 98 grille ('85),
etc.) and a few unique pieces (solid red tail lights) on an 88
platform.  It was the top of the line 88. 
Regards,
Fred

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

Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 00:48:02 -0700
From: "Larry Pegg" <nurelic@primenet.com>
Subject: Re: 455 hot engine for sale fast

Call me    602 751 7827     this might be the answer to my prayer.

Larry Pegg




- -----Original Message-----
From: SOMMERVLLE@aol.com <SOMMERVLLE@aol.com>
To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Monday, December 21, 1998 6:01 PM
Subject: 455 hot engine for sale fast


>All right list this is a hell of a deal I'm asking 2K firm and need to sell
>have to many projects. Let me know Thanks Chris
>
>CHRIS SOMMERVILLE
>69 442SC
>STARFIRE V8?
>the braket motor has a ton of stuff in it the guy spent about 6K on the
build
>up here is a partial listing 455+.30, venolia pistons #ven586, ported
polished
>C heads2.07 in 1.71 ex , aluminum roller rockers, 7/16 screw in studs with
>guide plates,  mondello push rods  Eldbrock torker, Holley 3310, MSD 6AL
HEI
>W/accell suppercoil, Mildon gear drive, crane solid lift cam lift IN:533
EX:
>555 duration @.50 IN 248 EX 258., Mildon HV oil pump, shaft, deep sumpo oil
>pan. balanced, crank is .10/.10, chamfered crank holes. I have in addition
to
>this a main stud kit, new head bolts and restricors for it. runs great have
it
>on the stand right and was going to just refresh it not that it needs it
but
>just to know it was just done for next season.  give me a call if your
>interested. I'm more interested in getting a few cars done then I'll get
back
>to racing. Let me know if your interested. If you want to give me a call
>(910)487-1540. I'm in Fayetteville NC. Will work out delivery with in a 350
>mile radius. Thanks Chris
>

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

Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 00:47:57 -0700
From: "Igor T. '81 DRB 455" <igor455@home.com>
Subject: Re: Deltas, Deltas everywhere...

>Delta 88
>Delta 88 Royale
>Delta 88 Royale Brougham
- ---------------------------------------------------

I am not sure but I think that maybe the LS is a '86  and up model with FWD
and those V6 engines.  My delta is a '81 Delta 88 Royal Brougham but has no
power doors/windows/seats, has no sunroof or leather but HAS 455. :-)

My '81 Regency is just Ninety Eight Regency and has it all including OD.
The only thing lacking is leather.  Igor.

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

Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 01:58:14 -0600
From: Brian Ammons <b_ammons@mail.utexas.edu>
Subject: A-body styles

While I'm at it, I would like to clear the confusion that is running
rampant through my mind, in regards to 70-72 A-body hardtop styles.

For the moment (probably forever, actually), let's keep the discussion to
2-doors, OK?  And I know that this has probably been explained before
(recently, actually, in the discussion about engine offsets), but I read
those, and I'm still confused.

You could basically get three hardtops - the notchback, the Sport Coupe
("post"), and the Holiday Coupe ("coupe").

The notchback body style was only available on Cutlass Supremes and the
1972 H/O, and NEVER on anything else, correct?  This is the car with the
larger C-pillar (I guess it doesn't really have a B-pillar, so does that
make the rear window frame the "B" pillar?), in relation to the other two
types, correct?

The post and the coupe are extremely similar to each other...the only
difference being that the post cars have a body-color painted "post" (duh)
behind the rear edge of the door frame, right?  By extremely similar, I
mean that they share the same rear glass, whereas the notchback had
different glass, right?

On a Holiday Coupe, can you, with all the windows down, run you hand all
the way from the windshield to the back window?

Can you do this on a notchback?

If the car is a Cutlass (and JUST a Cutlass, not an "S", not a "Supreme",
and I don't even know what an "SX" is), then it has to be either a Sport
Coupe or a Holiday coupe, right?

Then, given all of this, what exactly is the difference between a Cutlass
and a Cutlass S?  What is an "SX"?

And...to sum up (hah!)...the differences between these three different
styles, when viewed from the side, is appearant only above the top of the
rear fender, right?  I mean, the roofs are the only things that change, right?

I suspect that someone will suggest that I do a little research on the
442.com owner's page and figure this out for myself, but I did that, and
the conclusion I came to was that some of the cars were mislabeled.

Now moving to convertibles...

There's no such thing as a "Cutlass S convertible", is there?

Why did Joe P. once write (in the "engine offset" thread) that the
convertible was based on the notchback body style, when the only real
differences are with the roofs?

Is there an "SX" convertible?

*** THIS IS WHY I WANT ONLY 1 THING IN LIFE - A 1969 442 CONVERTIBLE.  ONE
BODY STYLE, ALWAYS THE SAME, ALWAYS THE SAME VIN, ALWAYS... ***
- -------------------------------------------------------------
 Brian Ammons		 Universal Internet # (ICQ) - 3585737
 MIS Major - UT Austin	 b_ammons@mail.utexas.edu
 2903 Breeze Terrace	 http://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~ammons/
 Austin, TX 78722	Home :	(512) 236-8088 (Austin)
 1984 Oldsmobile		(713) 776-2110 (Houston)
	Delta 88	Pager:	(512) 483-8056
 	  4-door		(713) 318-5938	
- -------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 04:39:17 -0500
From: "Mike Rothe." <hurstolds@xtalwind.net>
Subject: Re: A-body styles

> The notchback body style was only available on Cutlass Supremes and the
> 1972 H/O, and NEVER on anything else, correct? 

Supremes.  Correct. 72 H/O was based on the supreme body style.
> 
  By extremely similar, I
> mean that they share the same rear glass, whereas the notchback had
> different glass, right?

Yes, the back glass is the same for HC and SC.

> 
> On a Holiday Coupe, can you, with all the windows down, run you hand all
> the way from the windshield to the back window?

Yes, no posts.
> 
> Can you do this on a notchback?

Yes. Again, no posts.
> 
> If the car is a Cutlass (and JUST a Cutlass, not an "S", not a "Supreme",
> and I don't even know what an "SX" is), then it has to be either a Sport
> Coupe or a Holiday coupe, right?

Again, correct.  Except in 71/72, there were no post cars.
> 
> Then, given all of this, what exactly is the difference between a Cutlass
> and a Cutlass S?  What is an "SX"?
> 

Basic trim levels.  Stuff on the "S" that was standard came optional on
the Cutlass.  Cheap version vs. a bit more goodies included in the
price.  The SX was a 442 in sheeps clothing, based on the Supreme body. 
There was no SX for 72, though, to my knowledge.

> And...to sum up (hah!)...the differences between these three different
> styles, when viewed from the side, is appearant only above the top of the
> rear fender, right?  I mean, the roofs are the only things that change, 
right?

AND the rear section of the car.  Supremes and convertibles in these
years are the same rear sections basically.  

> There's no such thing as a "Cutlass S convertible", is there?

I don't THINK so in 70-72, I could be wrong, there seems to be some
claim there was, but in 1969 there sure was.  I know where one is, but
it's not for sale.
> 
> Why did Joe P. once write (in the "engine offset" thread) that the
> convertible was based on the notchback body style, when the only real
> differences are with the roofs?

Cause of the rear end.  Quarter panels, etc. are like the Supreme body.

> 
> Is there an "SX" convertible?

Yes, Virginia, there WAS an SX 'vertible...

Hope this straightens up a few things.

Mike Rothe

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

Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 05:18:32 -0600
From: "mbloomer" <mbloomer@gateway.net>
Subject: Re: A-body styles

Glad there's someone more confused than me.  One thing to add, 
though.  The majority of the confusion is that there wasn't a seperate
Supreme body style until '70.  My '68 Supreme has the standard
HC body style.  It was that way at least until '72 but don't know about
'73 and later.

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

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

Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 05:44:23 -0600
From: "mbloomer" <mbloomer@gateway.net>
Subject: Re: Rear woe

Well, yes and no.  You collapse the crush sleeve by tightening 
the pinion nut, so yes.  It takes a whole helluva lot of torque to
collapse a crush sleeve, so no.  Don't know the exact torque
it takes, but if you end up doing it by yourself were talking 
serious cheater pipe.  So for the sake of arguement it's 
300 ft. lbs to collapse the crush sleeve.  You take the nut
back off for whatever reason do you have to tighten it back
up to 300 ft lbs?  I wouldn't just for the simple fact that you 
run the risk of collapsing the crush sleeve further which would
change your bearing preload and lead to problems.  Besides,
it's a b*tch to do in the first place.  My personal rule of thumb
is to use a little loctite (I do the same thing for flexplate bolts,
not a band aid, just extra insurance), tighten it until all the free
play's out, and give it a good amount of torque.  With the backlash
already in the rearend you can spin the pinion just enough
to tell if it's too tight (or maybe I just have a karmic bond with
rearends?).  

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

>Mike, Doesn't the amount of torque applied to the nut determine the
>ultimate length of the crush sleeve? Agree with everything else.
>Lou
>PS I just like the color red.
>----------
>> From: mbloomer <mbloomer@gateway.net>
>> To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
>> Subject: Re: Rear woe
>(snip)
>

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

Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 06:56:25 -0500
From: "Mark Cornea (R)" <mcornea@ford.com>
Subject: off till 1/4

List,

	Signing off till 1/4/99. Have a nice Holiday!! 

         ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
               Mark Cornea (Dr. Decal)  OCA# 4903
                             1970 W30 (red)

                     <mailto:drdecal@wwnet.net>
                     <mailto:mcornea@ford.com>

                    Visit http://www.drdecal.com
        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

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

Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 07:54:44 EST
From: SOMMERVLLE@aol.com
Subject: Re: 455 hot engine for sale fast

Larry where are you located? I'll give you a call tonight or you can call
today @ (910)396-5420, Thanks Chris

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

Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 10:18:35 -0000
From: "RANDY A GEISEL" <RANDYGEISEL@prodigy.net>
Subject: Re: Rear woe

>With the backlash already in the rearend you can spin the pinion just
>enough to tell if it's too tight (or maybe I just have a karmic bond with
>rearends?).


FWIW, for those without that karmic bond (like myself) my '72 chassis manual
(page 4B-25) says preload should be 24-32 in. lbs when using new bearings
and 8-12 in. lbs for used bearings.

Do newer rwd cars still use crush sleeves or do they use shims like
say...... a Dana 60 rear? Just curious.

Happy Holidays,
Randy

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 12:03 
From: "John Carri" <jcarri@alesis1.usa.com>
Subject: torque engines vs high rpm engines..

   On the subject of how an engine with a low-rpm torque peak and a 
multispeed transmission would perform - here's my 2 cents.

   As mentioned by a couple of folks, the ultimate multispeed 
transmission is a CVT or continuously variable transmission, which 
came on some Subaru Justy's as well as a few other models. This lets 
the engine stay at almost a constant rpm, right at its torque peak. So 
what dictates that choice of torque peak rpm?

    Well, horsepower is proportional to torque, but also to rpm. So an 
engine making 450 lb-ft of torque at , say, 3000 rpm is only making 
HALF as much power as an engine making 450 lb-ft of torque at 6000 
rpm.  And here's the catch. If all the power the engine is making is 
transferred perfectly into making the car accelerate (no traction 
problems , etc) the acceleration of the car is proportional to the 
power the engine is making. Not the torque. The exact relationship is

   acceleration = power/(mass of car x velocity of car) 

In this formula acceleration is in metres/sec^2, power of the engine 
is in watts, mass of the car is in kilograms, and velocity is in 
metres per second. The formula is the same for horsepower, miles per 
hour, and pounds except that a numerical constant will show up and you 
will have to multiply the right hand side by that constant to get the 
actual answer. If anyone is interested I will calculate that number 
for you.

   So to answer the question : Given a good multi-speed transmission, 
you would get better acceleration out of an engine making torque at 
high rpm than the same torque at low rpm.  If one engine has its 
torque peak at half the rpm of the other, it needs to make twice as 
much torque to accelerate the car the same.  This is what lets little 
4-banger engines like the H*nda VTEC's produce respectable 
acceleration by having 8000 rpm or whatever redlines though they don't 
have a whole lot of torque.


   Of course, engine wear, etc, all favour the low-rpm engine. And 
some of us just love the sound and feel of a big American V8 burbling 
away, making lots of power at fairly low rpm. :)


- -John Carri

'72 Cutlass Supreme
'73 Plymouth Road Runner   

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

Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 07:37:00 PST
From: "jason shreve" <jasonshreve@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: 68 H/O questions

Any Idea where it is located? 


>1968 H/O     Factory A/C and PW  455 does not run   Great for 
restoration
>$3750
>David  770-975-0808
>


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

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

Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 11:54:17 -0400 (AST)
From: Greg Beaulieu <ab348@chebucto.ns.ca>
Subject: Re: Rear woe

Reading all of this stuff about crush sleeves, preload, backlash and the
like, along with having watched the guys on Shadetree Mechanic do this on
one of their shows a while back, makes me glad my area of expertise is
8-tracks, not rear ends. ;-)  I understand exactly none of it. Almost as
difficult as getting a straight answer on Olds valve train setups and
what you need to do when you change cams to keep the tolerances correct...
clear as mud. I'll stick my tinkering to less complex things I guess!

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

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

Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 11:05 
From: "John Carri" <jcarri@alesis1.usa.com>
Subject: cylinder wear vs high compression

Engines make power due to combustion pressure in the cylinder. Almost 
anything that increases power (compression ratio, cam, ignition
timing, whatever) does so by increasing the MEP (mean effective
pressure) in the cylinder during the power stroke.  Since the
piston-rod spends most of its time angled away from the straight line 
connecting piston to crank mains (except at TDC and BDC), a part of 
this downward compression force presses the piston and rings sideways 
against the cylinder wall (same as tipping a chair up on two legs, it 
wants to fall sideways). Pressing harder sideways on the rings while 
they scrub up and down in the cylinder does just what you expect - 
increases cylinder wear.

  Hence : Anything that increase MEP (read: horsepower) will also 
increase cylinder bore wear, all else being the same.

  One more interesting point - since it's the angularity of the rod 
that causes the sideways force, engines with low rod/stroke ratios 
(i.e short rods or long stroke) such as the BB C*evy experience more 
cylinder wall friction and wear than the same engine would with longer 
connecting rods.

  Olds 350's have shorter strokes than C*evy 350's. All Mopar engines 
have long rods for their strokes. There really are good engineering 
design reasons why some engine brands are better than others! :)



- -John Carri  
'72 Cutlass Supreme
'73 Plymouth Road Runner 

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

End of oldsmobile-digest V1 #1680
*********************************

