To:	oldsmobile-digest @ chebucto.ns.ca@INTERNET1
cc:	 
From:	oldsmobile-digest-owner @ chebucto.ns.ca@INTERNET1 @ ABTLAB
Date:	11/25/96 12:26:41 PM
Subject:	oldsmobile-digest V1 #381


oldsmobile-digest         Monday, 25 November 1996      Volume 01 :
Number 381


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

From: Greg Beaulieu <ab348@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 17:25:21 -0400
Subject: Re: 400 C.I. V8 in 1975???

On Sun, 24 Nov 1996 ljbeck1@facstaff.wisc.edu wrote:
> Thanks for the info, Dan.  It's funny that Olds brought out the 400
again > for just that one year.  I remember when the 403 appeared for
'77, I > thought, "Hmmm, wonder if this is the same engine that they
used back in > '75?"  Of course, the 403 had the shorter deck height of
the 350, rather > than the taller deck of the '68 - '69 400 which shared
the stroke > measurement with the 455 (4.25", wasn't it?).

Hold on a second... this got me to looking in my literature and here's
what I found:

1965-67 400: 4.00 x 3.98 bore and stroke
1968-69 400: 3.87 x 4.25
1975 400: 4.12 x 3.75 (option L-65)
1977-79 403: 4.35 x 3.39

So... it's not either of the earlier Olds 400's. Any idea what it is?

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

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 17:30:28 -0400
Subject: Re: 455 running hot

At 09:51 AM 11/19/95 -0400, you wrote:
>The cap is 16 psi. 180 stat. If I don't watch the temp gauge and don't
>drive the car right, it will boil coolant out of the recovery tank.  I
>have installed a diesel oil filter adaptor which provides me with oil
>cooler in and out lines.  I have installed an air to oil cooler.  This
>helped the situation a lot, but still will over heat at prolonged high
>speed driving in severe hot temps. (95 and up).  The oil cooler went on
 >the 70.  As far as lean fuel goes, I am running hydrocarbons at 120
ppm; >CO at 1.5%; 02 at about l.5%; and C02 is about 12.5%.  I own a Sun
four >gas analyzer. >

You don't appear to be over lean, which I expect would run even lower
hydrocarbons than 120 ppm.

Possibilities that I don't care for.  A higher pressure cap, a lower
temp t'stat.

Are the t'stats actually opening?  And at their rated temp?

Another possible cure is to add transmission oil cooler too.

Boy if you only had a flat head F**d.  I remember lots of things to do
to them when they overheat, and just about none of the fixes for it
translate over to good engines.

I noted on another posting that you have a encased spring type lower
rad. hose, which pretty well eliminates that as a problem.

I am going to pontificate a bit here.  You are attempting to reverse a
lot of engineering that went into the cars of her early '70s.  They were
designing to improve fuel economy, hence cars with a 2.2/1 rear axle
ratio, and the like.  Such a R/A ratio will result in much lower engine
operational speeds, and hence a different set of operational accessories
were designed to correspond to the new conditions.

It may just be that the water cooling system is just insufficient at the
operating conditions where you are having difficulty.  I promise no one
over builds their cars anymore.  If the max operational speed is 55 they
build for that.  Now that speed limites are back up a bit, cars with the
55 mentality can be insufficient.

My Rolls Royce owners manual says, "for continuous operational speeds in
excess of 110 mph, add 4 pounds of air pressure to the tires."  Well
maybe someone overbuilds a little, but that car cost $137,000. new.  And
that's why I bought it used, at a greatly reduced figure.  End
pontification...

Suggestions: larger radiator, oil cooler for transmission, larger oil
cooler for motor oil, extra duty water pump if there is one.

Are all the radiator/fan shrouds in place?

I'm at an end for the moment, and didn't tell you anything new.  Buy a
flat head F**d and I can help keep it from over heating.  It had a lot
of marginal design charcteristics many of which are fairly easy to
overcome.

Cliff Feiler
Not has hot under the collar as you are under the hood.

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 17:37:12 -0400
Subject: Re: 400 C.I. V8 in 1975???

At 05:05 PM 11/24/96 -0400, you wrote:
>In message Sun, 24 Nov 1996 13:10:00 -0400,
>  Daniel Gulino <gulino@bobcat.ent.ohiou.edu>  writes:
>
>> Drew,
>>

Snip>

>
>Thanks for the info, Dan.  It's funny that Olds brought out the 400
again >for just that one year.  I remember when the 403 appeared for
'77, I >thought, "Hmmm, wonder if this is the same engine that they used
back in >'75?"  Of course, the 403 had the shorter deck height of the
350, rather >than the taller deck of the '68 - '69 400 which shared the
stroke >measurement with the 455 (4.25", wasn't it?). > >Drew > > The
455 shared neither bore dimension with the 403.  The (B&S) of the 455
was 4.13"x4.25" and the 403 was 4.35"x3.39"

The Wiz

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

From: buehner@cis.nmclites.edu (buehner)
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 18:02:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Rocket Engine's and axle woe''s...

>I have an 81 Olds Cutlass Supreme with a 68 Rocket 350. The engine is
high >compression with a 4bl - I'm still looking for the exact specs...
It is >bolted to the stock TH350 for that year. It then runs through to
my stock >rear differential (81)... > >My problem is that the gear is a
2.22..

     < < < S N I P > > >

Whoa, talk about a blast from the past!  Hey this car isn't two-tone
jadestone, is it????  Just curious.  I had to double check the name to
make sure I didn't write it four years ago!  That's almost ~exactly~ how
the Rockit started out then!  It was a '69 350 tho.  and 235 7015's in
back, but that's all changed.  I'll give a quick performance history on
mine for ya...
     It started life with a 260 and 2.29's (double check your teeth
(always good to do) I think that's what yours is too, not 2.22, as you'd
figured earlier.)  I put the '69 350 in their, built up well.  Dead off
the line but gobbs of fun!  Engine went south after a little vandalism
spree:( and from there I think Bill may have run it over on the road...
:)  I stuck a 403 in there next, and had even more fun.  I had it up to
150 running on 7cyl's, with a big passenger load!  That was impressive
to all!  I soon got tired of the dead off the line sydrome, so I stuck a
2.73 in there.  It came from a '78 Buick V6 wagon, which also gave me my
monster front antisway bar.  When the crank decided it wanted to visit
the old 350 in Alabama, (the rest wanted to stay here!) I ended up
stuffing a 455 in its place.  Way toooo fun!  I put the different TH350
in at the same time.  I'd also went through numerous tire sizes by now,
too.  Soon after, I found a 3.23 posi, hub-to-hub from a 70 GS in a junk
yard.  It bolted up with some extra persuasion, and I also have an
adapter/lift bar kit to ~correctly~ mount this axle in this body.  The
axle is a little wider, but not bad.  I ran 295-50R15's on there for
quite a while, and ~oh God~ would they hook up!!! I sent a few of the
rod bearings to visit their ancestors, and now I'm running a new 425,
and it's the meanest motor the Rockit's ever seen!  I put 245-60R14s all
around a couple weeks ago, and they seem to do fairly well. Now it's
winter, and my racing spirit has gone south with the rest of the parts
:(  Of course, its warm down there, so....  It still does suprisingly
well on this snow and ice, tho! (60 foot times are a bit down, however)

     Anyway, that's a brief performance history of mine, and it sounds
like you're chasing the same path.  Hopefully, you'll be able to keep
motors in yours ;)  If you need more info about my rear-end swaps, fire
away.  They're out there.  It seems to me I'd seen someone on the list
here that had a posi for these for sale??? You might also try the
AirLift bags in there.  I use them on the GS, (It's got the open diff)
and I still spin posi with it!  They're awesome!  You can see mine at my
page, or on 442.com, but I still don't have pics of my H/O Scoop on
there, yet :(  I hope I can get some before project Olds craft gets
mailed in...

     Later, and good luck, (Oh and welcome aboard...)



      Charley Buehner       | "buehner@cis.nmclites.edu"
      500 4th Ave.          | "charley@rocketship.com"
      Box 1255              | Montana State University-Northern
      Havre, Montana 59501  | http://cis.nmclites.edu/~buehner
      "Rockit 1"            | '81 Olds Cutlass 425
      "BT UR 4D"            | '70 Buick GS 455
             (Real Cars Don't Wear Bowties!)

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

From: buehner@cis.nmclites.edu (buehner)
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 18:17:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Rear sway bar question

>I'm a little confused.  How does a rear sway bar work on a car with a
solid >rear axle?

The rear axle suspension setup allows the axle to pivot in the
suspension travel (One side goes up while the other side goes down)
which is also the same thing that happens on corners.  The sway bar
attaches to the control arms to limit the amount they can move ~in
relation to each other~ so that the axle can still move up and down
freely as a hole, but cannot twist as easily. (move only one side up and
down)  The control arms each mount to the axle through big rubber
bushings that are quite sloppy (dont believe me? Next time you change a
tire, see how far one tire goes up into the wheel well back there, while
the other one's still on the ground!)  By locking the control arms
together via spring steel, instead of rubber, it controls this twisting
tendency much better.

      Charley Buehner       | "buehner@cis.nmclites.edu"
      500 4th Ave.          | "charley@rocketship.com"
      Box 1255              | Montana State University-Northern
      Havre, Montana 59501  | http://cis.nmclites.edu/~buehner
      "Rockit 1"            | '81 Olds Cutlass 425
      "BT UR 4D"            | '70 Buick GS 455
             (Real Cars Don't Wear Bowties!)

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

From: buehner@cis.nmclites.edu (buehner)
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 18:39:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Winter Storage Question

>>Should it be put on jackstands to avoid hurting the tires?

Be sure to lift the car so that the suspension is hanging.  The springs
are a "memory" metal, and sitting while squatting is ~really~ hard on
them. This is also a way of tricking old springs into stretching back
out somewhat.
 The military changes the oil every six months whether a
>vehicle moves or not.  Their concern is that the oil will oxidize!

   Which ~is~ true.  Ever wonder why they say 2 months or 2000 miles for
the oil change?  That's why.  Normal oil will deteriorate in time
whether it's run or not.  Two months may be a bit premature, but you get
the picture. One of the problems with the "little old lady syndrome"
where the 30 year old car only has 11000 miles, with "regular" service.
You ~know~ it didn't have it's oil changed more than twice a year!
That's not a good thing! Anyway...





>If you let it set all winter, remove the battery and keep it off a
concrete >floor (even if this is an old wives tail, even olds wives
tails have their >root in truth).
     Concrete won't harm the battery, but it provides a good source of
cool moisture, which will eventually attach itself to the battery and
drain it. For very short term, there's no harm in concrete floors, but
over time, they'll kill a battery, too.

  Put a trickel charger on it.
At least occasionally.

Jack up the car at the proper
>places.
as noted above...

 Have the fuel tank completely full, a less than full condition
>leaves an airspace for water to condense inside the tank.
May try Paul Harvey's "StaBil" products???


  Change the oil in
>the spring before the driving season, and new antifreeze every year is
>recommended, and the best time to put it in, is just before long term
>storage, not after.
And check it periodically, like just before it freezes...

Maybe shoot some grease on the hinge points (hood, trunk, doors, etc)
and latches, and anywhere else that may have metal bared from use.  This
will help prevent rust from under-use.

Another more overlooked item is the storage facility.  Take steps to
make sure mice (and other vermin, like kids, etc...:) are kept out.
I've seen many interiors destroyed because little animals like our cars
as much as we do.  When it's 40 below, that foam in the seats sure is
comfortable to them! They also like to eat plug wires.  Something with
the silicone content? I think...  When I lunched out my 350, the Rocket
sat dead for over 6 months in the shop, and three of those were spent
right next to its donor wagon. One day I was out there, and I saw a
mouse scamper out of a grommet hole in the firewall of the Rockit.  This
was entirely too much for me to see, and I was driving the Rockit 3 days
later!  It wasn't spending another night in there!!!  Never had any
mouse damage, thankfully!  No matter how you look at it, there's no such
thing as a good mouse!!!  (Sorry, Jason, Honest!!!)  :) Good luck, and
later...




      Charley Buehner       | "buehner@cis.nmclites.edu"
      500 4th Ave.          | "charley@rocketship.com"
      Box 1255              | Montana State University-Northern
      Havre, Montana 59501  | http://cis.nmclites.edu/~buehner
      "Rockit 1"            | '81 Olds Cutlass 425
      "BT UR 4D"            | '70 Buick GS 455
             (Real Cars Don't Wear Bowties!)

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

From: Lloyd Culp <bculp@hiwaay.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 00:25:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Another Newbie

One of my favorite big Olds of all times
> was a new 1975 88 sedan I came across at a dealership.  It was a
"stripper", as > 88s go, with blackwall tires and dog-dish hubcaps.  It
had no power options, > but it was equipped with heavy duty suspension
and the 455 V8.  Since it was > white, it seemed a lot like a cop
cruiser, though I don't think Olds > produced squads in those years.  I
wanted to buy it, but we had the '72 > Regency at that time and it
didn't make sense to trade it a luxury cruiser > for this bare-bones
sedan.  Another one that got away. > > Drew

Drew,

I had a family friend that fell in love w/his son's new '66 442.  He
always bought Oldsmobiles & so went out & purchased a new 4 door 88
w/the biggest engine possible w/a 3-speed stick.  They wouldn't sell him
a 4-speed.  He was the fastest old guy on the block for the year that he
owned it.  His wife wouldn't let him buy another one.

Bill Culp
Decatur, Alabama

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

From: buehner@cis.nmclites.edu (buehner)
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 18:46:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Awaking 455 from long sleep

>The 455 I'm purchasing for my engine swap has already been completely
>rebuilt.  The possible problem is that it was rebuilt 6 years ago.
Sounds ~exactly~ like my 425!  One thing to do is get in touch with the
builder, and find out about the gaskets.  The ones I'd be concerned with
is the head gaskets.  Will they need re-torquing???  The 425 turned hard
at first, I know it'd never been periodically oiled, but I shot some
down the night before firing, and prelubed with a speedwrench, so she
seemed plenty happy, as was I when I heard that parumbparumbparumbparumb
sound we all know and love...

      Charley Buehner       | "buehner@cis.nmclites.edu"
      500 4th Ave.          | "charley@rocketship.com"
      Box 1255              | Montana State University-Northern
      Havre, Montana 59501  | http://cis.nmclites.edu/~buehner
      "Rockit 1"            | '81 Olds Cutlass 425
      "BT UR 4D"            | '70 Buick GS 455
             (Real Cars Don't Wear Bowties!)

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

From: r_mullen@Merck.Com (R Mullen)
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 18:44:00 -0400
Subject: Grade 8 is great

Cliff F. wrote in a piece about fasteners and the savings associated
with buying the lower grades.  I don't know about everyone else, but I
buy my fasteners by the pound, at an industrial fastener store (Hiawatha
Fasteners in Syracuse, NY).  I spend about $40 in a visit, and come out
of there with enough grade 8 fasteners of every size and description, as
well as plated washers and nuts, to require two trips to the car.  I do
this about once every 18 months, and I have a good inventory built up.
As I perform various repairs on the car, I replace all of the stock
fasteners with grade 8 ones, nicely (cadmium dichromate?) gold plated.
The plating on the grade 8 fasteners is superior, and will not corrode
for many years.  Even my license plate is held on with grade 8
fasteners, since that's the only kind I have around.  It's comforting to
know that I could suspend my 442 from the plate and still have capacity
to spare.  The moral to the story is to buy in bulk, then cost is not an
issue.

I have been told that the only grade 8 nut is a Stover nut, the ones
with the oblong openings that you typically find on control arm bolts.
Some of the nuts I have bought have 6 little slits cut into the side of
the nut, on the face that would contact the washer or the bolt head.
Does this mean these nuts are grade 8?  Any fastener experts out there?

Also, when I use my cherry picker, the bolts will project out about 1/2"
from the head, due to the chain.  The further the bolt sticks out, the
more leverage/side load that is exerted on the bolt.  Cliff, do the
figures you mention refer to capacity of the fastener when it is
stretched or when it is side loaded (shear?)

Scott Mullen
'70 442

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 19:04:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Another Newbie

At 12:25 AM 11/25/96 -0400, you wrote:
>One of my favorite big Olds of all times
>> was a new 1975 88 sedan I came across at a dealership.  It was a
"stripper", as
>> 88s go, with blackwall tires and dog-dish hubcaps.  It had no power
options, >> but it was equipped with heavy duty suspension and the 455
V8.  Since it was >> white, it seemed a lot like a cop cruiser, though I
don't think Olds >> produced squads in those years.  I wanted to buy it,
but we had the '72 >> Regency at that time and it didn't make sense to
trade it a luxury cruiser >> for this bare-bones sedan.  Another one
that got away. >> >> Drew > >Drew, > >I had a family friend that fell
in love w/his son's new '66 442.  He >always bought Oldsmobiles & so
went out & purchased a new 4 door 88 >w/the biggest engine possible w/a
3-speed stick.  They wouldn't sell him >a 4-speed.  He was the fastest
old guy on the block for the year that he >owned it.  His wife wouldn't
let him buy another one. > >Bill Culp >Decatur, Alabama > >

Hi Bill,

I can't beat it, but I can match it.  In the mid '60s my dentist bought
a 455 Riveria GS.  It had dual 4-bbls, and WAS the fastest factory
street sedan I've ever seen.  It would do 0 to 60 in the driveway.

He drove it into a short post on the parking lot were he worked.  His
wife wouldn't let him get if fixed.  Obviously it's a rare woman that
can appreciate 455 ci for transportation.

The Wiz

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

From: r_mullen@Merck.Com (R Mullen)
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 19:13:00 -0400
Subject: Rear sway bar

>From: Aaron Neumann <neumann.12@osu.edu>
>Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 14:11:25 -0400
>Subject: Rear sway bar question

>I'm a little confused.  How does a rear sway bar work on a car with a
solid >rear axle?

Aaron,
The sway bar does not touch the rear axle at all.  It acts as a torsion
bar between the two lower control arms, and functions the same way as
the front sway bar.  It reduces body roll, and thus unwanted excess
weight transfer to the outboard tire during cornering.
Scott Mullen
'70 442

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 19:43:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Grade 8 is great

At 06:44 PM 11/24/96 -0400, you wrote:


Sniped>>

                                                    Cliff, do the
>figures you mention refer to capacity of the fastener when it is
>stretched or when it is side loaded (shear?)
>
>Scott Mullen
>'70 442
>
Hi Scott,

I have not looked in a fastners catalog for a long time, so the numbers
indicated below are from memory, and should only be considered
approximate.

My figures were based on tensil strength, ie, pull it apart.  From my
memory, typical barn yard steel (plain 0 pts carbon) steel will usually
exhibit a t.s. of about 40,000#/sq in. (40,000psin)  This is the
material that a typical Gr. 1 bolt will be made of.  Actually, from
fastner dealers, anything below a Gr. 3 is often hard to find, unless
special ordered.  And a Gr. 3 is not far from the minimum.

Gr. 5 which is about 1/2 was between Gr. 3 and Gr. 8 should exhibit
about 80,000psin, and a Gr. 8 should not be less than 140,000psin.

I'm afraid that I have a bit of the dutch (which is in fact worse than
that of a Scot!) in me, and a real sit at a drawing board mechanical
engineer father; who was chairman of the Saint Louis Section of the SAE
many decades ago.  My father was the overkiller of overkillers when it
came to overbuilding.  We always kidded him about working for McDonnell
aircraft (which he did at one time); because we figured that if he
worked there nothing could possibly fly, because if he worked on the
airframe it would be too heavy to move, much less fly. And even then, he
wouldn't use a Gr. 8 fastner if a Gr. 5 would have been 100 times
excessive.

To give you and an idea: bolts

        Gr. 3 1/4"=1900

        Gr. 5 1/4"=3900

        Gr. 8 1/4"=6800

They do get very much stronger as the grade increases.  However, if you
are going to screw the bolt into one of the cast iron bolt holes, which
will fail first a Gr. 3 bolt or the threads in the block.

Buy Gr. 8 if they give you piece of mind.  Also as a rule of thumb,
plating decreases the bolts tensil strength by about 10%, thereby
blackened bolts are stronger.

Maybe it is my dutch thightness, but if a Gr. 5 bolt will give you 10
times excessive strength, do you really need to pay twice as much for 20
times?

Nothing I've discussed has to do with marginal conditions.  If I were
working under marginal conditions I would buy Gr. 8 everytime.  There
are even stronger fastners, but they are completely special.

And the NUT question is a good one.  I don't know the answer to that.  I
believe that I was told that if the nut was thicker than the bolt going
thru it, it would be a Gr. 8, but I wouldn't want to bet my life on
that. Anyone know for sure?

Also I didn't get an answer about Japaning, remember the Hurst job that
was supposed to be finished in Japan. I might have some use for a
Japanner if one still exists.

Cliff Feiler
Gone nutz

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 19:55:44 -0400
Subject: One Fastner Thought

To: Scott Mullen and anyone else interested

Strength of Fastners

A properly designed system will only have fastners in stress by pull.
If you must have a side acting vector to the system, it is usually
overcome by size, large diamater and short length.

Take a 12"x3/8" bolt, and in a vise you can probably bend it by hand.

Take a 1/2"x3/8" bolt, and you probably can't bend it with, even a
little.

In your engine lifting analogy, if you are going to lift an engine by
bolting a chain on, say by a bolt thru the chain and into a bell housing
hole on the rear, and water pump on the front.  If you use a long bolt,
say 6" and run it in 1" at each end, you may indeed bend the bolts.
Instead take a 1-3/8" bolt, run it in 1", the head will be up against
the 3/8" chain, and nothing is going to bend, move or cause a problem.
And if the engine is any Oldsmobile even if its a Gr. 1 x.375" dia it
will not fail. There isn't any Oldsmobile engine that big.

And one more thought.  Go out to an airport where they still work on old
large airliners with reciprocating engines.  See what holds say a 2,000
hp engine on.  You will be amazed.  There are usualy 6 or 8 3/8" to 1/2"
bolts and that is all.  I expect they are Gr. 8, but you've got 2000
real hp hanging on what really looks like it couldn't possible do the
job.

Cliff

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

From: Greg Beaulieu <ab348@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 20:03:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Grade 8 is great

As an aside... a few weeks back I had to pull the steering wheel from my
 Skylark. I used my trusty made-in-Taiwan wheel puller, which I had
used with no problem on this car several times in the past. However,
the last time the wheel was off it was done by a shop, and they must
have reinstalled it with an air wrench.

I came onto the puller with all of my strength. I knew I was in trouble
because the previous times the wheel came off with ease but not this
time. I did everything I could to get it off and gave up only when I
noticed that the 2 5/16 bolts threaded into the wheel hub were bending
quite noticeably. In fact, it was quite a job to extract them from the
wheel because they were bent so much. Never knew I was such a gorilla...

Anyway, I replaced them with grade 5's (the only ones I could find).
Hopefully these won't bend (haven't tried it yet). If they do, then it's
 off to find some grade 8's. BTW, anyone have any tips for how to
remove a steering wheel that doesn't want to come off?

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

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

From: Greg Beaulieu <ab348@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 20:08:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Counting Dollars

On Sun, 24 Nov 1996, Mike Frederick wrote:
> Fernando Proietto wrote:
> > sorry to hear that but brakes are essential. I'm sure it's good
money > > spent. However, $600 of which probably $300 in labour would of
bought > > you some nice tools instead. Are you not inclined to do your
own work, > > especially, brakes, there not to difficult? > > > > Greg
Beaulieu    ab348@chebucto.ns.ca    Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >
And no garage. ...Eh?

No garage (yet, but the house-hunting begins in earnest soon), not
enough tools (good point though Fernando), no time, and brakes always
strike fear into my heart. But I suppose one of these days...

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

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

From: Scholar <jev114@email.psu.edu>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 20:11:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Grade 8 is great

anyone have any tips for how to remove a
>steering wheel that doesn't want to come off?

There are always torches Eh!

                The 88 Calais and Jeff

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

From: Terry Scott <tscott@CapAccess.org>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 20:20:56 -0400
Subject: '57 drum diameter/repost

Can anyone tell me the diameter of the front/rear drums on a 1957 Super
88?  I'd like to put new shoes on my car which I store out-of-state.  It
 would make my life a lot less complicated if I knew the diameter and
already had the new shoes in hand on my next trip (rather than making
two trips: one to measure the drums, followed by a second to do the
actual work). For those of you who find this request familiar...you're
imagining it. Seriously, this is a repost of my original info query
about three weeks ago. Thanks loads, TJ Scott

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

From: "Donald E. Romine" <ro@proaxis.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 20:59:17 -0400
Subject: New subscriber

I just sent the initial message to subscribe.  I have a 1964 olds F-85
convert. about one half restored from ground up.  I need info on where
to get a complete rubber set, and drivers side metal that goes on the
window post.  I will make this one short and see what happens.  I am
very new to the computer and 
internet.						Thanks RO

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

From: r_mullen@Merck.Com (R Mullen)
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 21:03:00 -0400
Subject: Re: 455 running hot (long)

I read Oldsman's post with interest, having battled the same overheating
problem with my '70 442.  My car had AC, 3.23 gears, 455 @.030 over, 4
speed, clutch fan with thermostatic clutch, and 4 core radiator.  When I
would drive around without the AC on, the car would run slightly above
halfway up the temp gauge on the stock Ralleye-Pac gauge.  As soon as I
turned on the AC, even at highway speeds, the car would start to
overheat.  When I turned the AC off, the car would take a LONG time at
highway speed to cool off.  I had the radiator disassembled and cleaned
(tanked and rodded, I believe the term is).  You said you visually
inspected yours.  The cores may not be visually clogged, but could have
a thin coating of lime/scum on them.  Spend the money and have the thing
chemically cleaned.  With that done, the car would still heat up when
the AC was turned on, but would now cool off quickly when the AC was
turned off.  Next I replaced the fan clutch with a NEW THERMOSTATIC
unit.  Problem solved.  I could not believe the ROAR the clutch made
when it engaged.  I also replaced my frequently-sticking-shut Robert
Shaw thermostat with a 180 degree unit made by Gates.  With these mods,
the car could idle in 95 degree weather with the  AC going full blast
and the temp gauge would never go above a little over the 1/4 mark on
the factory gauge.  I used to stress test it to make sure I had the
problem solved, by letting it idle for an hour, and it never budged.  It
still runs right above the 1/4 mark all the time, whether at idle or
100+MPH speeds, staging in the drag pits in August, etc.  So, have faith
Oldsman, the factory setup DOES work.  Here are some things to check:

1)  Use only a thermostatic clutch fan, not a RPM-disengaging clutch.
As you probably know, you can tell the difference by the coiled metal on
the front of the thermostatic one.  Leaking silicone around the coil is
usually the sign of a dead thermo. fan clutch.  Invest the $50 in a new
one, it's worth it.  The AC cars came from the factory with a
thermostatic clutch, not an RPM-declutching type.  Your post said you
are using the RPM type.  That's why the car will overheat at highway
speeds.  You, in effect, have no fan above 2500 RPM or so, even if the
paint is blistering off the motor.  THIS MAKES A HUGE DIFFERENCE IN HOT
CLIMATES WITH THE AC ON!!!!!  The thermostatic one is the way to go.  It
will lock up the fan and keep it locked until the motor cools.   Use the
stock fan (I believe mine is a 7-blade) and the shroud.  I would be
willing to bet that a thermostatic clutch will solve your problem.  By
the way, I have read that a stock fan costs 5HP, a flex fan 3HP, and a
clutch fan 1HP.

2)   Also, make sure the facia/air deflector piece is in place between
the bumper and the center link.  This is the plastic part that flares
down right behind the front bumper.  Olds originally designed the thing
to hide the front end parts during a photo shoot, and discovered by
accident that it really helped cooling.  I guess it helps prevent air
turbulence behind the radiator.  I read that tidbit in an old Car Life
mag, and assume it's true.

2)  Make sure the thermostat is installed right side up, and with the
correct side facing the front.  Pull out your '70 shop manual and read
the cooling section.   They show a diagram of how an improperly
installed thermostat causes turbulence in the coolant flow, and cripples
cooling ability.  While you have the thermostat out, put it in a pot of
water and heat it on your stove.  Use a thermometer to make sure it pops
open at the right temp.  I check even brand new ones.  Use  a Gates
thermostat, they are superior.

3)  Make sure you have a new radiator cap, or test your current one.
Install a coolant recovery bottle and the correct cap for this type of
system, in place of the stock "coolant all over the driveway" hose and
cap.  I assume you are using the correct cap for your set up (coolant
recovery style of cap vs. non-coolant recovery style)

4)  Paint your radiator flat black.  The flat black is the most heat
emissive coating.  (Oooh! Here's a thread that will go on for days!!!!)

5)  I assume you are running stock exhaust manifolds.  I had headers on
my car  when I got it, and they radiate alot of heat into the underhood
area by virtue of their very large surface area.  This is brutal on a
hot day.  I switched to stock manis.  Maybe that header wrap tape helps.
 Don't know, don't care.

6)  Once installed, test your thermostatic fan clutch.  The manual
recommends putting a piece of cardboard over the front of the radiator,
turning on the AC, and letting the car heat up.  The engaging of the
thermostatic fan clutch will make a VERY LOUD fan roaring noise.  There
will be no doubt when it engages.  Mine will roar at first when I
restart the car on a hot day.  The roaring stops after 10 seconds or so.

Since you have relatively mild gearing in both of your cars, the stock
set up should work.  It works for me, and I have the same car you do.

Scott Mullen
'70 442

P.S.  I still have the original correct (with "OR" (I think it's "OR")
ink stamp) fan clutch from my car.  It is not functional, but would be
just the ticket for a W30 show car.  Any takers?

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

From: Katana72@aol.com
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 21:00:55 -0400
Subject: Oldsmobile Recall for 79-84 Olds

When I was out in San Diego, performing my military duties by ensuring
our squadron helicopters were up and ready to fly, I received a recall
notice on my 79 Olds Cutlass wagon. This was about 1984/85 time frame.
The recall was for an inspection of the rear axle. It appears that there
was a problem with the rear axles departing from the housing. An
inspection was required and it involved the measurement of the rear axle
and how much sidewards play was in it. I thought of this due to one of
the posts today. I also wondered how many people out there have an Olds
that may not know about this recall. Just a thought................. I'm
sure that if someone wanted to check on this, the Oldsmobile dealer, or
possibly our on-line Oldsmobile rep would be able to get this
information for us and what was involved with the inspection. It would
be a tragedy for both car  and driver to have the rear axle suddenly
leave the car.


Katana72           It's NOT your Daddy's Oldsmobile !!!!!!!!!
Hastings, MN Rob Turner

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

From: sbento@mecn.mass.edu
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 21:08:07 -0400
Subject: Re: 400 C.I. V8 in 1975???

On Sun, 24 Nov 1996, Greg Beaulieu wrote:

>
> Hold on a second... this got me to looking in my literature and here's
 > what I found: > > 1965-67 400: 4.00 x 3.98 bore and stroke >
1968-69 400: 3.87 x 4.25 > 1975 400: 4.12 x 3.75 (option L-65) > 1977-79
403: 4.35 x 3.39 > > So... it's not either of the earlier Olds 400's.
Any idea what it is? > > Greg Beaulieu        ab348@chebucto.ns.ca
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada > Ok, I think I know what it is, I have a
friend who is into Chevy small blocks, actually 400 small blocks and
they have the same bore as the 455 (4.125) and 3.75 stroke. My brother
works the counter at a local parts store (unbelievable discounts)..;-)
and he pointed out that they both use the same piston rings!!

Just a guess.....

Steve
71 Cutlass S 455
93 Mustang LX 5.0

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

From: Lloyd Culp <bculp@hiwaay.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 15:28:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Grade 8 is great

Scholar wrote:
>
> anyone have any tips for how to remove a
> >steering wheel that doesn't want to come off?
>
> There are always torches Eh!
>
>                 The 88 Calais and Jeff

Greg,

Start w/a well built puller made of something besides soft iron.  Use
good bolts (grade 5 is ok).  As you evenly tighten the bolts (the more
bolts the better) & get the wheel under tension; tap w/Ford tool #001
(hammer) on center section of puller to shock the wheel.  Tighten evenly
again so that pull is parallel w/steering shaft & strike again.  You
should get it off w/a couple of these routines.

Bill Culp
Decatur, Alabama

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

From: sbento@mecn.mass.edu
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 21:50:11 -0400
Subject: Re: 400 C.I. V8 in 1975???

> >
> Ok, I think I know what it is, I have a friend who is into Chevy small
 > blocks, actually 400 small blocks and they have the same bore as the
455 > (4.125) and 3.75 stroke. My brother works the counter at a local
parts > store (unbelievable discounts)..;-) and he pointed out that
they both use > the same piston rings!! > > Just a guess..... > >
Steve > 71 Cutlass S 455 > 93 Mustang LX 5.0 > Oh no, I caught this one
a little to late the Olds 455 has a 4.25 stroke as opposed to the Chevy
small block having a 3.75....

Sorry......

Steve
71 Cutlass S 455
93 Mustang LX 5.0> >

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

From: WMACHINES@aol.com
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 22:28:49 -0400
Subject: Re: (RE) Re: W-30 Intake or not?and headers

In a message dated 96-11-24 16:15:35 EST, you write:

<< >As for Headers, Hooker supercomp 1 and 7/8 headers will go on
without
 >moving your brake lines.  They cost about 319.00 from Super shops.
 >add another 180.00 for ceramic coating.

 Summit has Hooker Super Comp headers for $251.95 a pair "for most
 applications".  Ceramic coating is $175.00.
  >>

Not for Olds though, Summit and SuperShop are set at 319.00.
Its not a high volume product, so expensense is more.
Wmachines

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

From: Greg Beaulieu <ab348@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 22:40:26 -0400
Subject: Re: '57 drum diameter/repost

Terry, at the risk of stating something you may already know, is knowing
the drum diameter going to help you all that much in getting the right
brake shoes? I don't know the answer to your question, but I imagine
that if I was needing brake shoes for a '57 I would call a place like
Kanter Auto Products (they're on the web too) and just order them from
them.

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

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

From: Greg Beaulieu <ab348@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 22:43:24 -0400
Subject: Introduction (fwd)

Forwarding a message that got redirected to me...

***

I just sent the initial message to subscribe.  I have a 1964 olds F-85
convert. about one half restored from ground up.  I need info on where
to get a complete rubber set, and drivers side metal that goes on the
window post.  I will make this one short and see what happens.  I am
very new to the computer and 
internet.						Thanks RO


Date:	Sun, 24 Nov 1996 20:59:17 -0400
From:	"Donald E. Romine" <ro@proaxis.com>
To:	oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
Subject: New subscriber

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

From: Greg Beaulieu <ab348@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 22:46:47 -0400
Subject: Re: 455 running hot (long)

Regarding the overheating problems being discussed, a few months ago in
JWO there was a series of articles from a retired Olds engineer who
claimed that the thermostats commonly available these days are not
necessarily suitable for Olds Rocket V-8s, and that in fact the GM parts
 catalogs have a mistake in their part number listings for these.
Unfortunately I don't know the answer to what *is* the right type and
part number... anyone able to help? This might also be contributing to
the problem.

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

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

From: FERRERO@uno.cc.geneseo.edu
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 22:55:33 -0400
Subject: Resto  Tips  .....

It is getting really close to winter and time to get out the ice picks!

well really if you have an ice pick fof smaller ice, it is useful for
this tip.

Have you ever cut tubing for breaks or fuel lines?  well sometimes if
the end is crimped inwards from the cutting tool, it makes it difficult
to get a "double flange tool" in place.  get the old ice pick (looks
like a tapered pointed rod with a handle) and widen the hole to where it
should be... This ice pick should have many other uses... (and i cant
wait to hear some others!)

Resto Corner
- --joe ferrero

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

From: Greg Beaulieu <ab348@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 23:17:19 -0400
Subject: Introduction (fwd)

Here's a message that got redirected to me...

GB

***
Date:	Sun, 24 Nov 1996 20:59:17 -0400
From:	"Donald E. Romine" <ro@proaxis.com>
To:	oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca

I just sent the initial message to subscribe.  I have a 1964 olds F-85
convert. about one half restored from ground up.  I need info on where
to get a complete rubber set, and drivers side metal that goes on the
window post.  I will make this one short and see what happens.  I am
very new to the computer and 
internet.						Thanks RO

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 23:17:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Grade 8 is great

At 03:28 PM 11/25/96 -0400, you wrote:
>Scholar wrote:
>>
>> anyone have any tips for how to remove a
>> >steering wheel that doesn't want to come off?
>>
>> There are always torches Eh!
>>
>>                 The 88 Calais and Jeff
>
>Greg,
>
>Start w/a well built puller made of something besides soft iron.  Use
>good bolts (grade 5 is ok).  As you evenly tighten the bolts (the more
>bolts the better) & get the wheel under tension; tap w/Ford tool #001
>(hammer) on center section of puller to shock the wheel.  Tighten
evenly >again so that pull is parallel w/steering shaft & strike again.
You >should get it off w/a couple of these routines. > >Bill Culp
>Decatur, Alabama > > Bill & Greg,

The more points of attachment to the wheel the better.  However, they
usually just have two holes to accept the puller atachment bolts.

Yup, Gr. 5 is fine.

However, use of Fo*d tool #001, should be replaced by GM Tool no. B.F.H.
I remember it well, from my two years at Chevrolet.  The Fo*d tool is
likely mis-shapen, mis-hardened, and mis-sissippi bound.  Or was it
Alabama?  A GM B.F.H. will look cosmetically similar to a Fo*d #001, but
will prove superior in performance. Also, for you Oldsmobile pureist,
this tool is a GM tool, and Olds would have access to exactly the same
item.

The Wiz

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

From: PHartlieb@aol.com
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 23:21:56 -0400
Subject: Re: 400 C.I. V8 in 1975???

In a message dated 96-11-24 08:52:20 EST, you write:

> I found reference in a 1975 sales brochure to a 400 cubic inch V8
available >  for large Oldsmoblies, in place of the standard 455 V8
(some kind of fuel >  economy option, I would guess).  Anyway, does
anyone know who made this >  engine?  I know Olds had their own 400 V8
up until 1970, but was the 1975 >  engine from Pontiac, or <<shudder>>
Chevy?  I've never seen an 88 or 98 of >  this vintage with a 400, so I
haven't had the opportunity to figure it out >  for myself.

Well, I learned something new today!  My '75 dealer sales album and
SPECS book list a 400 as an option on the Delta 88, Ninety Eight and
Custom Cruiser.  On the Deltas it was option L65 ($6.00), with a 2bbl.
On the 98 and CC it was option L48 ($62.00 credit), with a 4bbl.  This
looks like a Pontiac motor, as it had a bore of 4.12 and a stroke of
3.75, just like the '67 Pontiac 400.  Olds's former 400 was 4.00 x 3.98.
The old Buick 400 was 4.04 x 3.90.  Chevrolet didn't list a 400 till
'70, and it had the Pontiac specs.  This option appears to be a '75 only
option on the Olds.  I've never seen one either.  It was also an option
on the Buick LeSabre, as well a various Chevrolets and Pontiacs.

Paul

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

From: FERRERO@uno.cc.geneseo.edu
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 23:21:03 -0400
Subject: Speaking of counting costs...

I bought a 1947 olds for $700.  it had a smashed fron passenger fender
and broken grill.  When i bought it, it didn't run and it didn't have
breaks.

To get it to run, i cleaned and gaped the spark plugs and cleaned and
adjusted the points. To get it to stop, i used the parts there (because
physically there were breaks but no fluid)  I added fluid ($2) and blead
'em.

As for the fender and grill...  I found another 47 olds on the side of a
cliff and I asked the owner "how much?"  he said "If you can climb down
there and get those parts, you can have them!"   so after cutting the
trees and weeds downthat were growing up through the car, i unbolted the
fender and grill, tied a rope on them, and hoisted 'em up after getting
off the side of the cliff.

Now I have a solid and complete body, and a car that runs and stops
for $702.  the car has 41,000 miles on it...  I wanted (and needed)a
parts car and this $700 one is still my parts car...  I am using the
"mechanical" parts to keep my origional running (if / when needed).

for $150, I bought a 1981 olds cutlass LS that runs great and drives
nice.

I am cutting this car up, and making the 47 olds into a hot rod (keepin
it all olds).  The 47 hot rod will tow the origional 47 to the car
shows i am just starting the front suspension, I am just starting the
front suspension on the "hot rod" and hope to have the car complete for
August of 97 for lansing.  So far, $852.00 invested... I predict that
the cost will rise rapidly once i get a little further into its
construction....

just wanted to share a real "low buck" hot rod olds (so far)...

- --joe ferrero

p.s.  I have tried many Resto Tips on these Oldsmobiles... so far, so
good!

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 23:21:51 -0400
Subject: Re: '57 drum diameter/repost

At 10:40 PM 11/24/96 -0400, you wrote:
>Terry, at the risk of stating something you may already know, is
knowing >the drum diameter going to help you all that much in getting
the right >brake shoes? I don't know the answer to your question, but I
imagine that >if I was needing brake shoes for a '57 I would call a
place like Kanter >Auto Products (they're on the web too) and just order
them from them. > >Greg Beaulieu        ab348@chebucto.ns.ca
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada > > There is a good likely hood that there
was more than one brake drum diameter, although there are probably only
two sizes.  I would buy a set of each, with the understanding that one
was coming back.  My parts guy does this routinely.

That is if you can find them at a parts house.  I think N.A.P.A. has an
older cars catalog, even into stuff considered antique.  Try Kanter too,
that also routinely advertise in Hemmings.

The Wiz

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 23:43:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Resto  Tips  .....

At 10:55 PM 11/24/96 -0400, you wrote:
>
>It is getting really close to winter and time to get out the ice picks!
>
>well really if you have an ice pick fof smaller ice, it is useful for
this tip. > >Have you ever cut tubing for breaks or fuel lines?  well
sometimes if the >end is crimped inwards from the cutting tool, it makes
it difficult to get >a "double flange tool" in place.  get the old ice
pick (looks like a tapered >pointed rod with a handle) and widen the
hole to where it should be... >This ice pick should have many other
uses... (and i cant wait to hear >some others!) > >Resto Corner >--joe
ferrero > > Sounds like an awl fully good tip to me.

The Wiz

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

From: CRuper1@aol.com
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 00:04:46 -0400
Subject: Re: 1970 cutlass engine swap

In a message dated 96-11-19 20:57:27 EST, you write:

<< All Oldsmobile engines from the 307 to the 455; and up to the 1984
model
 year are wonderfully interchangable. Evenything that may need changing
motor
 mount wise is strictly bolt up.  (I do not have any personal experience
with
 a 403), but the rest; especially the 307/350/455 are, no hacking
required. >>

Don't forget the wonderful generator of high horsepower that also falls
into this "easy exchange" category.  That is, the 260.

Chris Ruper

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 00:10:35 -0400
Subject: Re: 400 C.I. V8 in 1975???

At 11:21 PM 11/24/96 -0400, you wrote:
>In a message dated 96-11-24 08:52:20 EST, you write:
>
>> I found reference in a 1975 sales brochure to a 400 cubic inch V8
available >>  for large Oldsmoblies, in place of the standard 455 V8
(some kind of fuel >>  economy option, I would guess).  Anyway, does
anyone know who made this >>  engine?  I know Olds had their own 400 V8
up until 1970, but was the 1975 >>  engine from Pontiac, or <<shudder>>
Chevy?  I've never seen an 88 or 98 of >>  this vintage with a 400, so I
haven't had the opportunity to figure it out >>  for myself. > >Well, I
learned something new today!  My '75 dealer sales album and SPECS >book
list a 400 as an option on the Delta 88, Ninety Eight and Custom
>Cruiser.  On the Deltas it was option L65 ($6.00), with a 2bbl.  On the
98 >and CC it was option L48 ($62.00 credit), with a 4bbl.  This looks
like a >Pontiac motor, as it had a bore of 4.12 and a stroke of 3.75,
just like the >'67 Pontiac 400.  Olds's former 400 was 4.00 x 3.98.  The
old Buick 400 was >4.04 x 3.90.  Chevrolet didn't list a 400 till '70,
and it had the Pontiac >specs.  This option appears to be a '75 only
option on the Olds.  I've never >seen one either.  It was also an option
on the Buick LeSabre, as well a >various Chevrolets and Pontiacs. >
>Paul > > Don't you just love this mix and match.  It's almost as much
fun as dinner for 8 in a Chinese resturant.  Eleventeen different 400ci
engines, and there all different and all made the same years.

Anon.

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

From: CRuper1@aol.com
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 00:04:45 -0400
Subject: Qeustion... Are Vista Cruisers a Wagon???

In a message dated 96-11-19 13:22:29 EST, you write:

<< I recently saw a 70 something Cutlass Vista Cruiser with a 442 badge
on
 the left
 side of the grille.  A friend also tells me he has seen one other wagon
 with 442 emblems recently at Pomona Swap Meet.  Did Olds make 442
wagons,
 and if so what engine would the car likely have.  The one I saw was in
 pristine condition, and I'm told the car may be for sale. >>

Ummm...  a question.....  not being familiar with  all of the Oldes out
there, I'm kinda curious..  Is a Vista Cruiser a wagon then?  This
salvage yard I found by me, when I went there and asked him about older
Cutlasses, he said something about having a 70 or 71 wagon out back
somewhere along one of the fences.  Never did find the car, but I'd bet
it's there, he seems to know where things are out there, and what he
has.

Hmmmm.....  Hafta actually look for it now....

Chris Ruper

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

From: Brad Bowles <wolds@napanet.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 00:12:42 -0400
Subject: Smog Rumor

I've heard some great news for those of us in California that
are having trouble with smog.  I heard that Congress is in the process
of passing a bill that states that all cars that are older than 25 years
 old from the present date are smog exempt.  I know that this is too
good to be true, so what's the real story? Thanks Brad '70 442

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 00:07:25 -0400
Subject: Oldsmobile Literature

In as much as there are no Viking experts out there, this may be beating
a dead horse.  Even though I have noticed a number of indications that
there ARE some old car literature types with us.

I am trying to fill in a gap of factory literature, and am wondering if
any of you have actual genuine GM literature, or even reprints of Gennie
lit, as that should prove the point, n'est pas.

        1. At least Olds/Buick/Chev produced their own open car bodies
from about 1929.  Unsure about Pontiac an Oakland, but I am going to
assume that they did their own as well.  Of course Cadillac continued to
get Fisher and Fleetwood open bodies well past this period.  Does anyone
have any factory literature dealing with the maintenance, parts,
construction, repair on Olds/Buick/Chev/Pontiac-Oakland built bodies of
this period?  Also to call them O/B/C/P-O built could also be in error
for they could easily have been outside sourced, but the attribution
seems to be directed towards the divisions themselves.  So my desire is
discover whether any of the other four ever printed any of the books
necessary for the maintenance and repair of their open cars.

        Another help would be if anyone has ever noticed a body builder
tag on any non-Cadillac open car of the 1929-1932 period.  I've looked
at numerous cars and have never noticed.

        Apparently Fisher Body only built closed car bodies from 1929
for the other than Cadillac divisions.  And don't get your parts books
out and tell me about the books you have for your 1938 convertibles; as
they are closed cars?  Got ya!  Open cars do not have windows in the
doors, but closed cars do.  Open cars have curtains instead!  See the
diff.

        In the Olds line, the pertinent data would only be dealing with
the 1929 and 1930 Olds roadster and phaeton, as they discontiued open
cars with the 1930 model.  Buick continued until 1932 with Phaetons,
their last roadsters were '31s.  Chevy went even farther with open
models, and I'm completely unknowning about Pontiac.  Also I'm
unknowning about Oaklands 1929-1931 cars either.  All the Oakland stuff
I have is earlier twenties; but them seem to follow the same suit as the
others.

        2. Anybody got an Olds body parts book for the Viking or the
1931 car?

        That's all for now.

The Wiz




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

From: "Loyd Bonecutter" <loydb@enteract.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 01:19:03 -0400
Subject: Rear anti sway bar

>From: Aaron Neumann <neumann.12@osu.edu>
>Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 14:11:25 -0400
>Subject: Rear sway bar question

>I'm a little confused.  How does a rear sway bar work on a car with a
solid
>rear axle?  I understand the concept of a sway bar, and I understand
how >they work to minimize body roll in the case of an independent
suspension, >but it seems that a sway bar would be pointless when used
in conjuntion with >a solid rear axle. >snip< >axle to the other.
Since a solid rear axle is indeed solid, one end can >never move
independent of the other, which would seem to eliminate the need >of a
"sway bar" as I know it.

>Thanks,

>Aaron

With solid axles the tires do not move independent of each other, but
there will be body roll when turning a corner.  Each side of the car is
still sprung indepently of the other, even with a solid axle.  The anti
sway bar applies downward pressure to the higher side of the car and
upward pressure to the lower side of the car, when it is leaning,  to
minimise the lean. The principal is the same on the back as the front.
On G-Bodies it is a torsion bar that connects the two lower links.  This
link connects the body to the axle, and when one side of the car is
higher the angles differ, thus placing torsion of the bar, which exerts
the opposite force on the other side.

Loyd Bonecutter
Olds Powered G Body

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

From: "Loyd Bonecutter" <loydb@enteract.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 01:19:13 -0400
Subject: GM 7 1/2 in. and 8 1/2 in. Differentials

>From: "Tracy H. Shires" <twodogs@ou.edu>
>Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 14:07:00 -0400
>Subject: Rocket Engine's and axle woe''s...

>snip<
>My problem is that the gear is a 2.22.. I would like to go with
something >b/w 3.5 and 3.8... As I stated before, I'm trying to do this
car on a budget >and the local transmision shops, of which only one said
they would even >touch, wanted the better side of 1k to put the new gear
in.. I understand >that the carrier is too small to put anything over
3.08 in. I have beeen >told that they put 3.73 in the 85-87 g bodies.
Did they, and how easy would >they be to find?

Your car probably has a 7 1/2 inch (ring gear diameter) rear end, and
you need an 8 1/2 inch rear end to do what your want. Check with local
car clubs, the Bryceman parts for sale list or the Turbo Regal Home Page
parts for sale list for somebody parting out mid 80 442 or Turbo Regal.
Maybe somebody on the mailing list can help you here.  Be sure to get
the driveshaft with the rear end, since it is well ... 1/2 inch shorter.
Also get the rear anti-sway bar that links the lower control arms, to
help your 60 ft. times.  Posi-traction units are available from Auburn
Gear works for about $295 for clutch type and $395 for the better cone
type units, in case you get find a reasonable priced differential with
open gears.  A number of places sell 8 1/2 in. gear sets for changing
ratios.

The 3.73 should have been available in the 442's, (hopefully the 442
guys can substianiate this, and give you differential numbers to look
for) and the Turbo Regals had 8.5 inch rear ends with 3.42 gears
standard and 3.73 optional from 84 through 87.  Earlier years had
reported optional higher ratios in  7 1/2 inch units. (Sometimes the
information in the American Musclecar Publications should be taken with
a grain of salt)  On the front of the right axle tube the second and
third codes should be TJ (for open rear end) and TP (for limited slip
differentials).  There may be a little tag on one of the bolts on the
cover indicating the need for limited differential fluid, but do not
rely on that.

The 7 1/2  inch units look similiar to the 8 1/2 inch units from the
outside, but most publications show a more rounded cover for the 8 1/2
inch unit.  Having had the units side by side I could barely tell the
difference.  They both are 10 bolt covers.  The mounting points for the
upper control arms hang out more on the smaller units...maybe a half
inch !

Finally for a daily driver I would get an overdrive automatic that
restores the engine revs at highway speeds to normal, to save a little
gas and wear and tear on the engine.

Loyd Bonecutter
Olds Powered G-Body with an 8 1/2 inch differential installed

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

From: "Robert J. Barry" <rbarry@sequent1.providence.edu>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 01:10:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Qeustion... Are Vista Cruisers a Wagon???

At 11:04 PM 11/24/96 -0500, you wrote:
>Ummm...  a question.....  not being familiar with  all of the Oldes out
>there, I'm kinda curious..  Is a Vista Cruiser a wagon then?  This
salvage >yard I found by me, when I went there and asked him about older
Cutlasses, he >said something about having a 70 or 71 wagon out back
somewhere along one of

All Vista Cruisers are Wagons, but not all wagons were Vista Cruisers.
The Vista Cruiser had the funky skylights, third seat, woodgrain, longer
wheelbase, etc, all on an A-body chassis, sharing front sheetmetal with
the rest of the Cutlass line.

The Cutlass Cruiser was a flat-top wagon, based on the Cutlass.

The Custom Cruiser was the full-sized wagon. From 1968-1970, however,
there was no full-size Olds wagon, so the Vista Cruiser served the
upper-class wagon market.
_______________________________________________________ Dr. Robert Barry
MailTo:RBarry@Sequent1.Providence.Edu Theology Dept, Providence College,
Providence, RI 02918

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

From: "Loyd Bonecutter" <loydb@enteract.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 01:19:10 -0400
Subject: Over heating Problems

>From: oldsman <oldsman@innercite.com>
>Date: Sun, 19 Nov 1995 09:24:00 -0400
>Subject: 455 running hot

>My name is Russ Jones. I am in the Olds.442  hobby deep. Actually I
> have done several down to the bare body core restorations.  This hot
running >problem has been persistent in all of the vehicles. I have
water pumps with original >equipment cast numbers that are for the
performance

The June 1996 issue of Car Craft (aka Chevy Craft) has a decent article
with 15 cooling tips, on page 50.  Several of course have been brough up
here, but others such as modifying impellers, air dam spoilers, surge
tanks, sand traps, using wetter water, etc have not.

Might be worthwile reading.

I noted you had an aftermarket oil cooler.  Is it mounted to obstruct a
portion of the air flow through the radiator.  What shape in the AC
condensor in, and does air flow through freely ?

Loyd Bonecutter
Olds Powered G-Body

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

From: John Benjamin Jackson <a52373@erols.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 02:12:15 -0400
Subject: registry

Hello I just found your page and realy enjoy it. I just bought a 1978
Olds Cutlass. The point of this e-mail is to ask about the registry
because i can't seem to get it to work. Thanks, John & Sara Jackson
a52373@erols.com

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

From: John Benjamin Jackson <a52373@erols.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 02:09:35 -0400
Subject:

subscribe oldsmobile
John & Sara Jackson
a52373@erols.com

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

From: "Peg O'Connor" <peg@grove.ufl.EDU>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 03:00:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Winter Storage Question

> >>Should it be put on jackstands to avoid hurting the tires?
>
> Be sure to lift the car so that the suspension is hanging.  The
springs are > a "memory" metal, and sitting while squatting is ~really~
hard on them.

 What about the suggestion I heard on this list to get some junk rims
and put those on?  Is it still necessary to lift the car?  Is the
concern both with the rims *and* the suspension?

8)
peg

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

From: buehner@cis.nmclites.edu (buehner)
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 03:11:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Oldsmobile Recall for 79-84 Olds

>When I was out in San Diego, performing my military duties by ensuring
our >squadron helicopters were up and ready to fly, I received a recall
notice on >my 79 Olds Cutlass wagon. This was about 1984/85 time frame.
The recall was >for an inspection of the rear axle. It appears that
there was a problem with >the rear axles departing from the housing.

Seems to me it had something to do with the C-clips coming out, but I
can't remember if it was due to poor clips or the crosspin failing.  I
remember hearing about the problem, tho.

      Charley Buehner       | "buehner@cis.nmclites.edu"
      500 4th Ave.          | "charley@rocketship.com"
      Box 1255              | Montana State University-Northern
      Havre, Montana 59501  | http://cis.nmclites.edu/~buehner
      "Rockit 1"            | '81 Olds Cutlass 425
      "BT UR 4D"            | '70 Buick GS 455
             (Real Cars Don't Wear Bowties!)

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

From: buehner@cis.nmclites.edu (buehner)
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 03:11:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Counting Dollars

 sorry to hear that but brakes are essential. I'm sure it's good money
>> > spent. However, $600 of which probably $300 in labour would of
bought >> > you some nice tools instead.

Tools and Preration H, 'cuz brakes and suspension work is a pain in
the... oh, never mind.  :)

      Charley Buehner       | "buehner@cis.nmclites.edu"
      500 4th Ave.          | "charley@rocketship.com"
      Box 1255              | Montana State University-Northern
      Havre, Montana 59501  | http://cis.nmclites.edu/~buehner
      "Rockit 1"            | '81 Olds Cutlass 425
      "BT UR 4D"            | '70 Buick GS 455
             (Real Cars Don't Wear Bowties!)

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

From: buehner@cis.nmclites.edu (buehner)
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 03:11:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Introduction (fwd)

 I have a 1964 olds F-85

>convert. about one half restored from ground up.
                ^^^^^^^^  I'll bet that one side looks great, too! :)

Welcome aboard!!!

      Charley Buehner       | "buehner@cis.nmclites.edu"
      500 4th Ave.          | "charley@rocketship.com"
      Box 1255              | Montana State University-Northern
      Havre, Montana 59501  | http://cis.nmclites.edu/~buehner
      "Rockit 1"            | '81 Olds Cutlass 425
      "BT UR 4D"            | '70 Buick GS 455
             (Real Cars Don't Wear Bowties!)

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

From: buehner@cis.nmclites.edu (buehner)
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 03:11:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Another Newbie

>455 Riveria GS.  It had dual 4-bbls, and WAS the fastest factory street
>sedan I've ever seen.

Ooh, I'd like to have that under ~my~ GS hood!!!  Does he still have the
corpse?

      Charley Buehner       | "buehner@cis.nmclites.edu"
      500 4th Ave.          | "charley@rocketship.com"
      Box 1255              | Montana State University-Northern
      Havre, Montana 59501  | http://cis.nmclites.edu/~buehner
      "Rockit 1"            | '81 Olds Cutlass 425
      "BT UR 4D"            | '70 Buick GS 455
             (Real Cars Don't Wear Bowties!)

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 04:42:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Introduction (fwd)

At 03:11 AM 11/25/96 -0400, you wrote:
> I have a 1964 olds F-85
>
>>convert. about one half restored from ground up.
>                ^^^^^^^^  I'll bet that one side looks great, too! :)
>
>Welcome aboard!!!
>
>      Charley Buehner       | "buehner@cis.nmclites.edu"
>      500 4th Ave.          | "charley@rocketship.com"
>      Box 1255              | Montana State University-Northern
>      Havre, Montana 59501  | http://cis.nmclites.edu/~buehner
>      "Rockit 1"            | '81 Olds Cutlass 425
>      "BT UR 4D"            | '70 Buick GS 455
>             (Real Cars Don't Wear Bowties!)
>
>
>
Naw the front ends done.

Anon.

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 04:42:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Winter Storage Question

At 03:00 AM 11/25/96 -0400, you wrote:
>> >>Should it be put on jackstands to avoid hurting the tires?
>>
>> Be sure to lift the car so that the suspension is hanging.  The
springs are >> a "memory" metal, and sitting while squatting is ~really~
hard on them. > > What about the suggestion I heard on this list to get
some junk rims and >put those on?  Is it still necessary to lift the
car?  Is the concern both >with the rims *and* the suspension? > >8)
>peg > > Before you go jacking up the car to put on junque rims, just
put it on stands.  The suspension will 'live' better without the weight
of the car, than with.  Contrary to previous postings springs do not
have a memory, but do take a 'set.'

The 'set' comes from bearing the weight of the car.

Tires also do better when not in long term contact without moving, thus
the junk rims procedure; jacking up the car is still better.  If you are
going to take a car out of service for the winter, and have the
facilities to put in on jack stands do so.  Install new anti-freeze a
day or two before so that it is run in, and the last thing is fill the
gasoline tank complete full.

The first thing to do in the spring is run the car long enough to get it
hot, and change the oil and filter.

Water inhibitors and vermin inhibitors are also good ideas on the inside
of the car.  If you live in an area of substantial himidity leave the
windows cracked too.  I would also put one of those soft car covers over
the car, to protect it from light.  It should also retard mechnical
damage due to human errors and other mishaps.

Check with a tire company about what tire pressure to leave in the
tires. It is probably (a guess) better to have them at a much reduced
pressure while the car is idle; but check and see.

The Wiz

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 04:43:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Counting Dollars

At 03:11 AM 11/25/96 -0400, you wrote:
> sorry to hear that but brakes are essential. I'm sure it's good money
>>> > spent. However, $600 of which probably $300 in labour would of
bought >>> > you some nice tools instead. > >Tools and Preration H, 'cuz
brakes and suspension work is a pain in the... >oh, never mind.  :) >
 >      Charley Buehner       | "buehner@cis.nmclites.edu" >      500
4th Ave.          | "charley@rocketship.com" >      Box 1255
| Montana State University-Northern >      Havre, Montana 59501  |
http://cis.nmclites.edu/~buehner >      "Rockit 1"            | '81 Olds
Cutlass 425 >      "BT UR 4D"            | '70 Buick GS 455 >
(Real Cars Don't Wear Bowties!) > > > How far is Havre from Lovell,
Wyoming?

Anon. II

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 04:46:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Another Newbie

At 03:11 AM 11/25/96 -0400, you wrote:
>
>>455 Riveria GS.  It had dual 4-bbls, and WAS the fastest factory
street >>sedan I've ever seen. > >Ooh, I'd like to have that under ~my~
GS hood!!!  Does he still have the corpse? > >      Charley Buehner
| "buehner@cis.nmclites.edu" >      500 4th Ave.          |
"charley@rocketship.com" >      Box 1255              | Montana State
University-Northern >      Havre, Montana 59501  |
http://cis.nmclites.edu/~buehner >      "Rockit 1"            | '81 Olds
Cutlass 425 >      "BT UR 4D"            | '70 Buick GS 455 >
(Real Cars Don't Wear Bowties!) > > Unfortunately I doubt it as he died
the same week my dad did, in Oct. 87.  I was driving my '68 Corvette at
the time, which would have made it between 1968 and 1974.

The Wiz

P.S. I think I would like that ride restored as was.

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

From: Greg Beaulieu <ab348@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 07:39:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Introduction (fwd)

On Mon, 25 Nov 1996, C.R.F. wrote:
> At 03:11 AM 11/25/96 -0400, you wrote:
> > I have a 1964 olds F-85
> >
> >>convert. about one half restored from ground up.
> >                ^^^^^^^^  I'll bet that one side looks great, too! :)
> >
> Naw the front ends done.

I think you're both wrong... its being done from the ground up, right?
So I figure he's gotten the body done from the rockers up to the
windows, which is why he needs the weatherstrips and such now... ;-)

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

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

From: Todd Morris <tmorris@bt1dc18e.bet.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 09:38:32 -0400
Subject: No Subject


unsubscribe tmorris@bt1dc18e.bet.ibm.com


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

From: david wyatt <Wyatt_David_L@Lilly.COM>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 09:50:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Rear gears in 81 up

Someone posted the question concerning replacing the ring and pinion in
their 81 (?) Olds with an early 350/350TH combo. My suggestion would be
to swap out the original setup for a 9 inch Ford unit. There are quite a
few shops fabbing the 9 inch housing to bolt in these and other GM
applications. Greg Mosier in Indiana and Art Morrison in Florida. Both
places are about the same on price. Morrison does offer upper control
arm brackets with multiple holes for adjustments. If you bought
everything new you would have under 2 grand in the whole set up. It aint
cheap but it would be bullet proof. Both of these guys advertise in the
major car magazines like Hot Rod and Car Craft. With your combo and the
fact that you are running on the strip, I think you would be better off
spending the money up front and save a lot of headaches. The old "you
can pay me now, or pay me later" syndrome.

My $.02s worth
Dave Wyatt
70  4-4-2

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

From: "Timothy A. Churchill" <tac3550@egbsun1.draper.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 10:19:10 -0400
Subject: Re: storing your car over winter (was Re: Spare parts/won't
start)

> > I can't think of how to keep moisture from building up and affecting
 > > your interior, apart from airing it out when possible. > > You
can get some of those Scilica Gel (sp?) packs they put in boxes > of new
shoes and other places they don't want moisture.  I've also > heard that
kitty litter will absorb moisture out of the air > (haven't tried this
one).

Also, laying down a lot o' newspaper in the interior and in the trunk
will help absorb excess moisture... I do this with Big Red every winter.



Tim Churchill
- -------------
'67 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme Convertible, a.k.a. 'Big Red'
'89 Cadillac Fleetwood, a.k.a. 'Der KinderWagen'
'91 Mazda Protege, a.k.a. 'The Next Car to be Replaced'

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

From: Steve Ochs <76057.1404@CompuServe.COM>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 10:47:18 -0400
Subject: GM Transmissions

Someone asked the question about the 4T60/65-E replacing the 700-R4.
The 700-R4 is now known as the 4L60-E.  The 4T60-E is a FWD tranny.
 The 4T65-E is new this year for the hi-po applications
(Grand Prix GTP, Riviera S/C, Monte Carlo Z-34, etc).  Unfortunately
this will not help the racers out.
     The 4L60-E (700-R4)  was improved again this year.  Shift quality
 and durability was enhanced.  But the real choice for heavy duty
racing is the 4L80-E or the 400.  Here are some comparisons of ratings:

If you note, the engine torque rating for the 200-4R and the 700-R4 is
very close in stock form.  Considering the weight advantage, the gear
ratio preference, deeper overdrive, and the fact that the 700-R4 only
comes in Chevy bolt pattern, the 200-4R is preferable for most street
applications when built properly.

                           |--------Maximum-------|
                           Engine  Gearbox  Gross    Torque      Overall
Transmission       Weight  Torque  Torque  Veh. Wt. Conv. Dia.    Length
   Model           (lbs.)  (lb/ft) (lb/ft)  (lbs)    (inches)
(inches) -
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- Rear Wheel Drive: - ----------------- THM 180C (3L30)   130/140
258     440     7716   9.6/10.24   26.29/28.11 4L30-E            168/177
258     440     7716   9.6/10.24   28.54/31.57 THM 200-4R          157
330     550     6000     11.73        28.26 THM 700-R4 (4L60) 167/184
350     650     8600   9.6/11.73   29.77/30.64 4L60-E            160/176
350     612     8600   9.6/11.73   29.77/30.64 THM-400 (3L80)      190
440     885    12000     12.20     29.30/34.48 4L80-E              260
440     885    15000     12.20     31.93/33.02

Front Wheel Drive:
- ------------------
THM 125C (3T40)     161      200     416     5100     9.64
THM 440-T4 (4T60)   195      235     369     5181     9.64
4T60-E              203      280     390     6400     9.64
4T65-E              214      285     400     6400   9.64/10.16
4T80-E              295      305     461     6800     10.43


Gear Ratio Chart:

Transmission
   Model           First   Second   Third   Fourth   Reverse
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Rear Wheel Drive:
- -----------------
THM 180C (3L30)    2.400   1.479    1.000    -----    2.000
4L30-E             2.400   1.479    1.000    0.723    2.000
4L30-E Optional    2.860   1.620    1.000    0.723    2.000
THM 200-4R         2.741   1.568    1.000    0.674    2.067
THM 700-R4 (4L60)  3.059   1.625    1.000    0.696    2.294
4L60-E             3.059   1.625    1.000    0.696    2.294
THM 400 (3L80)     2.482   1.482    1.000    -----    2.077
4L80-E             2.482   1.482    1.000    0.750    2.077

Front Wheel Drive:
- ------------------
THM 125C (3T40)    2.840   1.600    1.000    -----    2.067
THM 440-T4 (4T60)  2.921   1.568    1.000    0.705    2.385
4T60-E             2.921   1.568    1.000    0.705    2.385
4T65-E             2.921   1.568    1.000    0.705    2.385
4T80-E             2.960   1.626    1.000    0.681    2.130

I know this is a lot of information, but I hope that it is
useful and maybe make it into the FAQ.
Steve - Engineer - GM Powertrain - Transmission Division (4T60/65-E)
'87 Olds 442
'76 Cutlass S

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

From: Steve Ochs <76057.1404@CompuServe.COM>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 10:47:23 -0400
Subject: G Car Axles

Twodogs wrote:
>>I have beeen told that they put 3.73 in the 85-87 g bodies. Did they,
and how easy >>would they be to find?

Yes, there was a 3.73 ratio in 83-87 for the Hurst Olds/442 G-body.  It
is a different axle than the regular Cutlass receives.  The 3.73 is a
8.5" ring gear while the rest of the ratios are 7.5".  The Olds 3.73
might be hard to come by, but the Monte Carlo SS also used a 3.73 ratio.
It only used a 7 5/8 ring gear though.  It will fit in a Cutlass. (I
know this is blasphemy to mention a Chevy axle, but it would be much
more economical to locate and the design is the same except for ring
gear size).

>>As it stands right now,   1/8th mile    72.3 at 10.4sec
>>I'm also having a problem hooking up my 245/60/14's. 60 ft time was
2.8sec

It should help your 1/8 mile and 60 foot times dramatically.  My '87 442
which is completely stock (no mods) with 307 HO V-8 (170 hp, 245 lb/ft),
P215/65R-15 tires and 3.73 rear end runs:  1/8th mile  67.1 at 10.32
sec, 60 foot 2.25 Your car should do much better with a better rear end
and some 15" tires.

Steve - Engineer - GM Powertrain - Transmission Div. (4T60/65-E)
'87 442
'76 Cutlass S

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

From: "Thomas Stoner" <TGSTONER@mailgw2.pmr.med.umich.edu>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 10:49:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Oldsmobile Literature

Anybody got an Olds body parts book for the Viking or the 1931 car?
*****
I have Oldsmobile Parts Manuals from the mid '50s, but I believe that
they only go back until about 1940 or so.  I can check, if you would
like.

Tom Stoner
Ann Arbor, MI
tgstoner@umich.edu

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

From: JPADA@hqgate.orbital.com
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 10:43:38 -0400
Subject: Calipers (was: Counting Dollars)


>     I always upgrade to the later single-piston
>     floating units (safety over originality any day).
>
I doubt they are short on safety.  But I do understand that they are
very hard to come by these days.

The Wiz

          Actually, the non-sliding four-piston calipers do have one
          major flaw.  Any lateral runout in the rotor will cause the
          pads and pistons to be knocked back out of contact with the
          rotor.  This will manifest itself as greatly increased pedal
          travel on the first application of the pedal.
          Theoretically, the sliding calipers will follow the runout
          and thus maintain closer contact with the rotor, minimizing
          pedal travel.

          I've read the posts on the problems with the sliding
          calipers, particularly with the inboard pad wearing
          prematurely due to the caliper not sliding.  I am very
          familiar with this problem on my crewcab dually pickup,
          which will typically wear out the inner pads long before the
          outers.  That configuration uses a "tongue and groove" mount
          between the caliper and the mounting bracket to provide the
          sliding surfaces.  The design relies on metal-to-metal
          contact on these surfaces.  I have taken great pains when
          replacing the brakes to clean and lubricate these surfaces
          and still have the uneven wear problem.

          I contrast this to the factory single-piston calipers on the
          variety of 68-72 Cutlass/442s I have owned over the last 20
          years.  In every case, if the car did not have the 69-72
          design calipers on it to start, I quickly installed them.  I
          have never had a problem with the pads wearing unevenly,
          which I attribute to the use of the two pins as the sliding
          surfaces.  These pins are plated and use o-rings between the
          caliper and the pins.  I believe that this combination
          prevents the friction-increasing rust on the sliding
          surfaces.

          Joe Padavano
          jpada@hqgate.orbital.com

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

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

From: "David Brown" <dbrown@mcis.bsd.uchicago.edu>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 10:58:06 -0400
Subject: Re: ALTERNATOR mystery

I have heard that GM has had a rash of alt failures on the W-body line
(Cutlass, Regal, Grand Prix, etc).  Something like just about every
owner has replaced their alt.  One remanufacturer is selling units with
slightly redesigned alt fans and internals to handle the higher heat.
Car Quest is one retailer handling this remaned brand.  I called the
local store, and Amphere (SP?) was the brand, other than ACDelco, that
they carry.  Amphere (SP?) seems to be the brand that had the heavier
duty internals.  Check around.

Unfortunately, the parts are not available seperately, according to the
rep at the CQ warehouse show last year.  That was a great day - picked
some good parts from a yard, won CD boombox at show plus a great meal!

My guess is heat and high revs.

David Brown   Mailto:dbrown@mcis.bsd.uchicago.edu
Olds FAQ 2.0 at: http://www.en.com/users/thall/
                 ftp://arl.arizona.edu/lists/olds

- ----------------
SInce there seems to be several alternator contasours on the list...i
figured i'd throw in my alternator problem!

Problem alternator failure every other month or so...
Car 88 Calias Quad 4

Now mind you the car has just over 170K, and up to this point i've
replaced many alternators...i lost count some where around 10. I 've had
the thing tested at the alternator shop several times and nothing...now
what could be causing all this? Mind you this car is run up to 7000 rpm
daily. the original one lasted till 105K. Just lucky i've only had to
pay for 2 of these thanks to good warranties!

Help
Jeff

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

From: "Timothy A. Churchill" <tac3550@egbsun1.draper.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 11:14:20 -0400
Subject: Re: One Fastner Thought

Wizkid observes:

> And one more thought.  Go out to an airport where they still work on
old > large airliners with reciprocating engines.  See what holds say a
2,000 hp > engine on.  You will be amazed.  There are usualy 6 or 8 3/8"
to 1/2" bolts > and that is all.  I expect they are Gr. 8, but you've
got 2000 real hp > hanging on what really looks like it couldn't
possible do the job.


Can you say... DC-10s?

"Boy, these DC-10s fly nice & quiet!"

"Maybe it's because both motors fell off the wings??"



Tim (Real Planes Are Built in Seattle! -- Just Watch Out for Faulty
Wiring
     in the Fuel Tanks) Churchill
- -------------
'67 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme Convertible, a.k.a. 'Big Red'
'89 Cadillac Fleetwood, a.k.a. 'Der KinderWagen'
'91 Mazda Protege, a.k.a. 'The Next Car to be Replaced'

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

From: JPADA@hqgate.orbital.com
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 11:16:48 -0400
Subject: Re: 70 Rotors

Do any of you all know where I can find new or good used 69-70
front disc brake rotors. I've been working off junkyard luck
and thought you'd be a good group to ask.

agreeing with Joe Pavadano on safety over originality,
cf

          I bought a set of brand new rotors from my local auto parts
          store about 6 months ago.  They are made by Wagner and are
          excellent replacements.  Unfortunately, I don't recall the
          price (I'll see if I can find the receipt tonight), but the
          number $70 ea sticks in my mind (don't quote me on this).  I
          bought new ones because it seems that every used one I can
          find is at or under the minimum thickness for resurfacing.
          FYI, the rotors are the same from 69-72.

          Joe Padavano
          jpada@hqgate.orbital.com

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

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

From: Mike Frederick <edison3@cpeq.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 14:37:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Resto  Tips  .....

C.R.F. wrote:
>
> Sounds like an awl fully good tip to me.

Is that another one of your pointed remarks?   ;)

The 66 Toro and Mike


- --
Michael R. Frederick, CEO           Edison3, Incorporated
     Tampa, Florida           Data Translation & Communication
     (813) 210-8649             http://www.cpeq.com/~edison3/

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

From: Lloyd Culp <bculp@hiwaay.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:33:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Speaking of counting costs...

FERRERO@uno.cc.geneseo.edu wrote:
>
> I bought a 1947 olds for $700.
> Now I have a solid and complete body, and a car that runs and stops
> for $702.  the car has 41,000 miles on it...  I wanted (and needed)a
parts car > and this $700 one is still my parts car...  I am using the
"mechanical" parts > to keep my origional running (if / when needed). > >
for $150, I bought a 1981 olds cutlass LS that runs great and drives
nice. > > I am cutting this car up, and making the 47 olds into a hot
rod (keepin it > all olds).  The 47 hot rod will tow the origional 47 to
the car shows > > I am just starting the front suspension on the "hot
rod" and hope to have the > car complete for August of 97 for lansing. >
--joe ferrero > > p.s.  I have tried many Resto Tips on these
Oldsmobiles... so far, so good!

Joe,

Those early post-war Oldsmobiles are an unusual group.  I hope to be in
Lansing in '97.  I've got to see this '47 combination.  Yours will be 50
while Olds will be 100.  Congratulations

Bill Culp
Decatur, Alabama

PS.  I like the Resto Tips too.

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

From: pnelson@cyberport.net (Nelson)
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 12:17:19 -0400
Subject: Parts

OK this is what I have, Stripping an 67 delta 88.

The seats (bench)have no rips at all.
The carpet(god forbid anyone would want it) is self renueing (mold)
The dash came out ok and all the gauges are intact and work
Crank wing and side windows
The trim around the ft win is intact and a lovely shade of cream..
The grill looks to be ok and the turn signal trim is all there (four
layers) All the wheel well trim is ok, want the entire front wheel well?
The gas tank is going to be yanked and will join the 98's in a pile
should anyone want it All I need of the doors is the outer skin and I
would consider another bent door in trade. Still have the windows out of
the 66 98 and expect to get them out intact from the 67 88 also The
beastie had air so did the 98, any I still have both. Heater box will
come out nicely if anyone wants it, if not Hatchet Time! Still have the
grill and head light assembly out of the 66 98 also the t lights, a
little worse for the ware. I am just intirely gutting this thing so send
in requests, I am not above trading and am looking for a disk setup that
would fit the 67 88 Anyone want fr drums? I've got 5 Also any in
formation about the worth of a Buick 430 would be aprecated, runs but
really needs a tune up. I really don't want to see the trim and things
go to the dump again and could be talked down to COD for shipping.
Kenneth

PS:  I am looking for sponsors for this Olds we race.  Just think of a
classic Olds punching through an impala, does my heart good...hey just
how long can I run a 425 at 5500 RPM's anyway?

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

From: JPADA@hqgate.orbital.com
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 12:23:31 -0400
Subject: Re[2]: 400 C.I. V8 in 1975???


> Hold on a second... this got me to looking in my literature and here's
 > what I found: > > 1965-67 400: 4.00 x 3.98 bore and stroke >
1968-69 400: 3.87 x 4.25 > 1975 400: 4.12 x 3.75 (option L-65) >
1977-79 403: 4.35 x 3.39 > > So... it's not either of the earlier Olds
400's. Any idea what it is? > > Greg Beaulieu
ab348@chebucto.ns.ca        Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada > Ok, I think
I know what it is...Chevy small blocks, actually 400 small blocks and
they have the same bore as the 455 (4.125) and 3.75 stroke...

Steve
71 Cutlass S 455
93 Mustang LX 5.0

          It definitely isn't an Olds engine.  My first reaction was
          Pontiac, since they built the 6.6 liter (400 ci) motor well
          into the 70s, however since the bore and stroke also match
          up with the 400 SBC, my vote goes for Chevy.  Wasn't the
          "Chevomobile" lawsuit in the mid-70s?  That would be
          consistent with the 1975 use of an SBC.

          Joe Padavano
          jpada@hqgate.orbital.com

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

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

From: Lloyd Culp <bculp@hiwaay.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 06:35:52 -0400
Subject: Re: 400 C.I. V8 in 1975???

JPADA@hqgate.orbital.com wrote:
>
>
> > Hold on a second... this got me to looking in my literature and
here's > > what I found: > > > > 1965-67 400: 4.00 x 3.98 bore and
stroke > > 1968-69 400: 3.87 x 4.25 > > 1975 400: 4.12 x 3.75 (option
L-65) > > 1977-79 403: 4.35 x 3.39 > > > > So... it's not either of the
earlier Olds 400's. Any idea what it is? > > > > Greg Beaulieu >
> > Ok, I think I know what it is...Chevy small blocks, actually 400
small blocks > and they have the same bore as the 455 (4.125) and 3.75
stroke... > > Steve

>
>           It definitely isn't an Olds engine.  My first reaction was
>           Pontiac, since they built the 6.6 liter (400 ci) motor well
>           into the 70s, however since the bore and stroke also match
>           up with the 400 SBC, my vote goes for Chevy.  Wasn't the
>           "Chevomobile" lawsuit in the mid-70s?  That would be
>           consistent with the 1975 use of an SBC.
>
>           Joe Padavano
>
Joe,

I've been following this thing & couldn't believe that the Olds 400 was
ressurected.  I could be convinced though.  I'm sure that we have the
Chevy 400 here.  This is the only one that makes sense.  The Pontiac was
on teh way out, expensive, & big to be transferred to other cars on a
mass basis.  Chevy was the only acceptable one (not to tell those
plaintiffs in the law-suit though).

Bill Culp
Decatur, Alabama

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

From: Greg Beaulieu <ab348@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 12:53:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Re[2]: 400 C.I. V8 in 1975???

On Mon, 25 Nov 1996 JPADA@hqgate.orbital.com wrote:
>           It definitely isn't an Olds engine.  My first reaction was
>           Pontiac, since they built the 6.6 liter (400 ci) motor well
>           into the 70s, however since the bore and stroke also match
>           up with the 400 SBC, my vote goes for Chevy.  Wasn't the
>           "Chevomobile" lawsuit in the mid-70s?  That would be
>           consistent with the 1975 use of an SBC.

Quotes contained in the Norbye & Dunne book, "Oldsmobile - The Classic
Postwar Years" talk about the Chevymobile controversy as beginning in
'76 when Olds ran out of capacity for 350 V-8s due to their own high
sales plus commitments made to supply engines to Buick and Pontiac. This
'75 400 is the first mention I've ever seen of this brand substitution
happening earlier. It clearly isn't an Olds Rocket V-8. Interestingly,
the book says that in '76 the Chevy engines were fitted with air
cleaners bearing the same Olds rocket designation as the real rocket
V-8s. Wonder if this one did too?

I think we've uncovered a piece of heretofore obscure Olds trivia!

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

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

From: Robert Barry <rbarry@sequent1.providence.edu>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 12:53:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Re[2]: 400 C.I. V8 in 1975???

At 11:23 AM 11/25/96 -0500, you wrote:
>> 1975 400: 4.12 x 3.75 (option L-65)
>          It definitely isn't an Olds engine.  My first reaction was
>          Pontiac, since they built the 6.6 liter (400 ci) motor well
>          into the 70s, however since the bore and stroke also match
>          up with the 400 SBC, my vote goes for Chevy.  Wasn't the
>          "Chevomobile" lawsuit in the mid-70s?  That would be
>          consistent with the 1975 use of an SBC.

My first, and second reaction was Pontiac, since its bore is 4.120" (not
4.125"), and since the BOP lines were more likely to swap motors in the
US, even after the downsizing (e.g. the use of the 403 Olds, rather than
the 400 Ch*vy, in the B and C-bodied cars). Plus, it could use the same
transmissions as the Olds-powered cars, eliminating the addition of
another part number for dealer stock (never underestimate the power of
the beancounters in determining engine availability).
_______________________________________________________ Dr. Robert Barry
MailTo:RBarry@Sequent1.Providence.Edu Theology Dept, Providence College,
Providence, RI 02918

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

From: Robert Barry <rbarry@sequent1.providence.edu>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 12:56:25 -0400
Subject: Re: 400 C.I. V8 in 1975???

>I've been following this thing & couldn't believe that the Olds 400 was
>ressurected.  I could be convinced though.  I'm sure that we have the
>Chevy 400 here.  This is the only one that makes sense.  The Pontiac
was >on teh way out, expensive, & big to be transferred to other cars on
a >mass basis.  Chevy was the only acceptable one (not to tell those
>plaintiffs in the law-suit though).

Actually, the Pontiac 400 was produced until '79 (remember the T/A 6.6
flamingchickens?), and installed in the '78 B-bodies (all makes), so the
Chevy is not the only possibility.

I still think they'd avoid using two different trannies if at all
possible. _______________________________________________________ Dr.
Robert Barry  MailTo:RBarry@Sequent1.Providence.Edu Theology Dept,
Providence College, Providence, RI 02918

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

From: OldsHeidi@aol.com
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 13:11:52 -0400
Subject: Re: registry

Hello,

Thanks for visiting our site.  We are having problems with one of the
links but the Link in the news area is working fine.  You can also go
directly to the registry at www.compusa.com/citrus.htm

Sincerely,
Heidi
Oldsmobile Division

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

From: tonwald@metro2.k12.mn.us (Tony Waldner)
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 00:15:26 -0400
Subject: Re: 400 C.I. V8 in 1975???

>JPADA@hqgate.orbital.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> > Hold on a second... this got me to looking in my literature and
here's >> > what I found: >> > >> > 1965-67 400: 4.00 x 3.98 bore and
stroke >> > 1968-69 400: 3.87 x 4.25 >> > 1975 400: 4.12 x 3.75 (option
L-65) >> > 1977-79 403: 4.35 x 3.39 >> > >> > So... it's not either of
the earlier Olds 400's. Any idea what it is? >> > >> > Greg Beaulieu >>
> >> Ok, I think I know what it is...Chevy small blocks, actually 400
small blocks >> and they have the same bore as the 455 (4.125) and 3.75
stroke... >> >> Steve > >> >>           It definitely isn't an Olds
engine.  My first reaction was >>           Pontiac, since they built
the 6.6 liter (400 ci) motor well >>           into the 70s, however
since the bore and stroke also match >>           up with the 400 SBC,
my vote goes for Chevy.  Wasn't the >>           "Chevomobile" lawsuit
in the mid-70s?  That would be >>           consistent with the 1975 use
of an SBC. >> >>           Joe Padavano >> >Joe, > >I've been following
this thing & couldn't believe that the Olds 400 was >ressurected.  I
could be convinced though.  I'm sure that we have the >Chevy 400 here.
This is the only one that makes sense.  The Pontiac was >on teh way out,
expensive, & big to be transferred to other cars on a >mass basis.
Chevy was the only acceptable one (not to tell those >plaintiffs in the
law-suit though). > >Bill Culp >Decatur, Alabama



OK......I  have been following this too.  For what it is worth the
engine you guys are talking about is a Pontiac.  Olds installed 400
Poncho's in '75 and '76 as a economy deal.

Working in the salvage yard industry for the past 15 years, I have seen
a couple of these cars.  Looks strange to see a Pontiac engine in a full
size 88!

There........... end of controversy!  And I didn't do any Chevy
Bashing!!!!

Tony

Cars.......                                       Boats......
70 442 W-30                                       70 Rayson Craft flat
bottom 70 Toro GT W-34                                   455 Olds
V-drive 65 Jetstar 88 w/4-spd                             79 Sidewinder
455 Olds jet 85 Cutlass Salon 455 Drag racer                   86
Wellcraft Nova 454 Chev 92 Seville STS

 _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/+++\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\_\_


                                        Tony Waldner
tonwald@metro2.k12.mn.us                Northeast Metro 916
                                         3300 Century Ave. N.
                                         White Bear Lake, MN
                                                       55110

 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_+++_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/_/

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

From: Jason Labay <z28cfi@gwis.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 13:24:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Re[2]: 400 C.I. V8 in 1975???

I have been researching this question and have positive proof that it is
a PONTIAC 400.  The Mitchell Interchange Manual lists the engine as a
Pontiac design. The part number for the engine block is 498978 and it
has a 7.7 to 1 compression ratio.  This same part number lists the
following cars it was installed in: 78 Buick 75-77 Firebird 78 Firebird
(180 hp) 75-77 Grand Prix 75 Olds 75-78 Pontiac 75-77 Pontiac LeMans

....hope this helps solve the confusion:)
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Jason Labay  Akron, Ohio (z28cfi@gwis.com) or (jlabay@kent.edu)
93 Z/28......Patriot Red, A4, G92(3.23), PEG2 a real muscle car...bone
stock! 80 Olds 4-4-2  W-30 ( Actually a 4-3-1 W-30  in reality)..a
pretend muscle car 75 Hurst/Olds W-25.....restoration project that is
currently up for $sale$

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

From: Blaine Sanders 5483 <BLAINES@strata3d.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 14:41:49 -0400
Subject: Year One service manuals =(

Got my order from Year One.  Those guys need some real salespeople...
 My order was incomplete, but I ordered Tuesday and recieved it
Thursday.  He shipped it UPS 2-day & only charged me for ground
shipping...  At any rate, I made the mistake of ordering thier Chassis
Service Manual reprint.  These are low quality, folks.  The wiring
diagrams are pretty much worthless.  One wire is labeled "tan", and you
can't even see it.  Also, all the pictures look like they were
photocopied on a circa 1980 machine that was low on toner.  I've never
seen an original service manual, but they've got to be better quality
than this.  So if it's really important to you, spend the extra money
for an original copy.

I did make one good purchase this weekend, though.  Got a good 12-bolt
posi rearend, complete w/factory sway bar & boxed control arms, and
another 12-bolt non-posi -- all for $300.  Oh, I also ordered a Super
Poly-Graphite front end kit from PST.  Can't wait to get that! ;)

- -Blaine
'72 Cutlass (442 wannabe) Supreme

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

From: mefco@sprynet.com
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 14:16:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Year One service manuals =(

Blaine,
That's exactly the reasons I quit ordering from every place but
Fusick's.

Art Fuller

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

From: JPADA@hqgate.orbital.com
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 14:13:35 -0400
Subject: Re[4]: 400 C.I. V8 in 1975???

I have been researching this question and have positive proof that it is
a PONTIAC 400. ...it has a 7.7 to 1 compression ratio.
                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

          Ouch!  With that low a compression ratio, this one is a
          natural for the addition of a turbo!

          While I agree with Bob Barry that the Pontiac made more
          sense from a transmission bellhousing commonality
          standpoint, keep in mind that Olds (and the rest of B-O-P)
          used the Chevy straight six (complete with Chevy bolt
          pattern) from the mid-60s on; switching bolt patterns was
          not an issue (although this may have lead to the
          dual-pattern TH350 case).

          Joe Padavano
          jpada@hqgate.orbital.com

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

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

End of oldsmobile-digest V1 #381
********************************
 
