To:	oldsmobile-digest @ chebucto.ns.ca @ INTERNET1
cc:	 
From:	oldsmobile-digest-owner @ chebucto.ns.ca @ INTERNET1 @ ABTLAB
Date:	12/05/96 05:24:18 PM
Subject:	oldsmobile-digest V1 #393


oldsmobile-digest        Thursday, 5 December 1996     Volume 01 : Number 393


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

From: Steve Ochs <76057.1404@CompuServe.COM>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 23:00:20 -0400
Subject: Re: [monte-list] 7.5" vs. 8.5" rear

>>Steve, I was wondering if you could tell me what is the difference
>>between GMs 7.5 and and 7 5/8 with the 3:73 gears in the Monte SSs and
>>are the ring and pinion interchangeable.

>There is a slight advantage in strength with the 7.625" rear and you _could_
>put a 7.5" ring & pinion in the housing yes.  Why would you want to?

>The 7.5" is good for about 330 lb-ft and the 7.625" is good for about 350
>lb-ft torque.  The 8.5" rear, is a much better choice for about 440 lb-ft.
> Steve Parker

I think Steve P. pretty well answered it.

                              ---------------------------
Steve Ochs  aka  N8TYS        |                         |
Engineer                      |     ##     ###     ###  |
GM Powertrain -               |   #    #   #  #   #  #  |
Transmission Division         |  #         #   # #   #  |
(4T60/65-E)                   |  #   ####  #    #    #  |
                              |   #    #   #         #  |
'87 Olds 442                  |     ##     #         #  |
'87 Grand National            |                         |
'76 Cutlass 'S'               |  The Mark of Exellence  |
'96 Blazer LT                 ---------------------------

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

From: Steve Ochs <76057.1404@CompuServe.COM>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 23:00:24 -0400
Subject: Re: 4T60-E & GM transmissions

Hi Steve,
A couple questions...
>I have a 95 LeSabre with the 4T60E... Your engine torque rating for it was
>280... Does that mean it "should" last with up to 280 Lb/ft of torque at the
>input?  I'm looking to hop up my lesabre and don't want to kill it....
>Do you know of any Shift kits etc for the 4T60E?
>Thanks,
>Dave

Yes, it "should" hold up to the rating since there is a "safety factor".  The
torque rating is designated to apply to the useful life of the vehicle under
"normal" driving conditions.  I do not know of a shift kit for this
transmission.  The shift points and shift quality is controlled by the ECM
(engine computer).  I would HIGHLY recommend an external air/oil transmission
cooler installed after the coolant/oil transmission cooler.  This will
dramatically help the long term durability of this transmission.  The largest
killer of this transmission is heat.  This is partially due to the somewhat
inneficient design of the 245mm torque converter.  The cross section of the
toroid is not a circle but an elipse, which results is some heat generation in
high horsepower applications.  The second largest killer is 2nd clutch or
final drive failure due to stress.  A heavy duty gear set introduced in 1995
model year on 3800 SC applications helps this.

A note for anyone with a 3.4l DOHC V-6 or a 3800 SC V6. These engines have a
higher torque capacity at certain shift speeds than the 4T60-E can handle. You
will notice, especially on the 3.4l, that the transmission will not shift at
redline in the higher gears.  This is because the engines are "torque
managed". The ECM manages input speed and engine torque (through fuel
management) during shifts to avoid destroying the transmission.  If you
attempt to increase the shift speeds (through manual shifting) you run the
risk of shortening the life of the transmission.
     Because of this limitation in  the 4T60-E, GM is introducing a 4T65-E
which is a 4T60-E with many enhancements.  A new dual chain system to reduce
noise, Electronic Line Pressure (ELP) control for the pump, controlled slip
torque converter, 258mm torque converter vs. 245mm (258mm has circular toroid
cross section), heavy duty gear set, improved 2nd and 4th clutch, and some
other enhancements.  These changes will be phased in over 3 years starting
with the 1997 model year with the high torque applications first.  By 1999
model year, all will be 4T65-E (although low end applications will retain
245mm torque converter.)

                              ---------------------------
Steve Ochs  aka  N8TYS        |                         |
Engineer                      |     ##     ###     ###  |
GM Powertrain -               |   #    #   #  #   #  #  |
Transmission Division         |  #         #   # #   #  |
(4T60/65-E)                   |  #   ####  #    #    #  |
                              |   #    #   #         #  |
'87 Olds 442                  |     ##     #         #  |
'87 Grand National            |                         |
'76 Cutlass 'S'               |  The Mark of Exellence  |
'96 Blazer LT                 ---------------------------

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

From: Ryan Hehn <RYANH@docker.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 23:09:15 -0400
Subject: 81 Cutlass Update

Hello all,

A few weeks back I was complaining about my stolen and then recovered 81
Cutlass running like #@%&...  Well, the car has gone from shooting
flames out the exhaust to idling so smooth you could set an egg on the
valve cover.

What was the problem?  Not exactly sure.  We cleaned the plugs...  Then
my Dad pulled the carb. apart (that was previously 'professionally'
rebuilt), did some minor adjustments, put it back on, readjusted the
timing, and presto... Back to life!  I guess one of the carb's internal
bolts was loose, but it would be hard to believe that that would've
caused the severe problems I was having!

Now I'm anxious for spring since I refuse to license this car in the
winter (after all, I have my '86 to drive).  The first 'official' day of
winter isn't for almost 3 weeks and I'm talking about spring... Pushin'
my luck!

On a side note, anyone ever compare the glove box latches from an '81
and an '86 G-body?  My 81 glove box has a nice metal latch, and the door
closes flush with the dash.  The '86 has a bloody plastic latch... The
door sits partially open and rattles like hell.

Another 81-86 comparison would be the metal they used in the trunk.  The
81 seems to have thicker, albeit rougher, metal on the inside of the
trunk while the 86 metal seems to be smoother but lighter... This begs
the question of what differences there were in the G-bodies throughout
the 80's...  There sure weren't any styling changes!

Ryan Hehn
ryanh@docker.com

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

From: Anectine@aol.com
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 23:29:14 -0400
Subject: subscription

i would like to your newsgroup

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

From: Lloyd Culp <bculp@hiwaay.net>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 17:23:43 -0400
Subject: F85 Wheel Interchange

Wheels - F85
61-62   std duty                  477
        heavy duty                471
'63                               477
'64-65  14 x 5                    692
        14 x 6 painted            691
               chrome             749
        15 x 5                    713
        15 x 6 ('64-65)           712
'67-68  14 x 5                    692
        14 x 6
         painted,
           drum brake             691
           disc brake             775
           chrome Super Stock II  749
           Super Stock II         793
        15 x 6                    712
'69     14 x 5                    692
        14 x 6 Super Stock I      749
               Super Stock II     793
               exc Super Stock    691
        15 x 7                    820
'70     14 x 6 Super Stock        749
               exc Super Stock
                     SW           691
                     exc SW       775
        14 x 7 Super Stock I      818
               Super Stock II     819
               exc Super Stock    813

INTERCHANGE

471    13 x 5.5, 5-5 1/4  583044    Olds F85 '61-62 heavy duty.
477    (1) 13 x 4.5, 4-4 1/2
       (2) 14 x 4.5, 4-4 1/2
       (3) 15 x 4.5, 4-4 1/2
                                    Buick Special '61-63.
                                    Olds F85 '61-62 std duty.
                                    Olds F85 '63.
                                    Note: 685 fits if proper size.
691    14 x 6, 5-5 1/4
692    14 x 5, 5-4 3/4
712    15 x 6, 5-4 3/4 spec equip
713    15 x 5, 5-4 3/4
749    14 x 6, 5-4 3/4 chrome       Note: 405941
                                    Olds F85 '66 V8 exc SW.
                                    Olds F85 '67 14x6 chrome.
                                    Olds F85 '68-70 14x6 Super Stock I
wheel.
775    14 x 6, 6-4 3/4              Note: 9791450 stpd HB or HF near
valve hole.
                                    Buick Special '68 14x6 W/disc brakes
exc Rally wheel.
                                    Buick Special '69 14x6 std duty exc
Mag wheel.
                                    Buick Special '70 14x6 std duty exc
Mag wheel or space saver wheel.
                                    Grand Prix '69 14x6 exc Rally wheel
or space saver spare.
                                    Olds F85 '67-68 14x6 disc brake exc
chrome Super Stock wheels.
                                    Olds F85 '70 14x6 exc sW or Super
Stock wheels.
                                    Tempest '67 14x6 exc Rally wheel or
space saver spare.
                                    Tempest '68-69 14x6 exc Rally wheel
or space saver spare.
                                    Note: 791 fits.
793    14 x 6, 5-4 3/4              Note: 400422.
                                    Olds F85 '68-69 14x6 Super Stock Ii
wheel (chrome 5 spoke).
813    14 x 7, 5-4 3/4              Note: 3966936, 9798480.
                                    Note: Firebird & Grand Prix stpd IF.
                                    Camaro '69 14x7 exc Rally or mag
wheel.
                                    Chevy II '69-70 14x7 exc Rally or
mag wheel.
                                    Firebird '69-70 exc Rally wheel.
                                    Grand Prix '69-70 14x7 exc Rally
Wheel.
                                    Olds F85 '70 14x7 exc Super Stock
wheels.
818    14 x 7, 5-4 3/4              Note: 406070.
                                    Olds F85 '70 14x7 Super stock I
wheel.
819    14 x 7, 5-4 3/4              Note: 406069.
                                    Note: use trim ring.
                                    Olds F85 '70 14x7 Super stock II
wheel.
820    15 x 7, 4 3/4                Note: 405943.
                                    Olds F85 '69 15x7.

I'll send along a Toro wheel interchange w/this.

Bill Culp
Decatur, Alabama

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

From: Lloyd Culp <bculp@hiwaay.net>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 17:24:54 -0400
Subject: [Fwd: Interchange on Toro Wheels]

Received: from bculp.hiwaay.net by fly.HiWAAY.net;
(8.8.2/1.1.8.2/21Sep95-1003PM) 	id UAA08316; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 20:33:42 
-0600
(CST) Message-ID: <32A72FE2.4F1B@hiwaay.net> Date: Thu, 05 Dec 1996 20:26:10
+0000 From: Lloyd Culp <bculp@hiwaay.net> Reply-To: bculp@hiwaay.net X-Mailer:
Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Toro@armchair.mb.ca Subject:
Intervchange on Toro Wheels Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

We had a discussion on Toro wheels.  The 37th Hollander Interchange
manual says:

WHEEL - TORONADO

'66    painted                 757
       chrome                  758
'67    painted
        drum brakes, std wheel 757
                    opt deluxe 755
        disc brakes            755
       chrome, drum brakes     758
               disc brakes     756
'68    painted, early          757
                late           755
       chrome                  756
'69    painted                 755
       chrome                  756
'70                            755

INTERCHANGE

755    15 x 6 1/2 x 5-5    395265 '67-69
                           405663 '70
                           Note: valve stem uses lock nut.
                           Toronado '67 W/disc brakes & painted wheel.
                           Toronado '67 W/drum brakes, painted, optional
deluxe wheel.
                           Toronado '68 std painted wheel.
                           Toronado '69 painted wheel.
                           Toronado '70.
756    15 x 6 x 5-5        395469
                           Toronado '66 painted wheel.
                           Toronado '67 W/disc brakes & chrome wheel
                           Toronado '68-69 chrome.
757    15 x 6 x 5-5        397759
                           Note: Valve stem does not use lock nut.
                           Toronado '67 painted wheel W/drum brakes
(painted) exc optional deluxe wheel.
                           Toronado '68 optional wheel exc chrome.
758    15 x 6 x 5-5        397760
                           Toronado '66 chrome wheel.
                           Toronado '676 W/drum brakes & chrome wheel.

Good luck on wheels.  I'll go out & check numbers on mine to see if I
have just the right ones.

Bill Culp
Decatur, Alaama

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

From: Lloyd Culp <bculp@hiwaay.net>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 17:28:49 -0400
Subject: Re: A New Arrival

Mike Coccagna wrote:
>

> Bill,
>
> Thanks for the offer.  I don't think the Indy Cutlass parts will be
> helpful if they are the '88 Cutlass Supreme (W-Body?) since I have 2
> N-Bodies.  If it is an '85? Cutlass Calais Indy car (FWD), then it is then
> an N-Body, and there is probably little mechanical that is helpful.
> But let me know if it is the smaller, Calais body, I may want some
> interior trim, since the 442 has had 110,000 miles of use, and needs
> a little prettying up on the interior-
>
> Thanks again!
>
> Mike


Mike,

Obviously, I am not good w/newer cars.  It is a FWD.  Beware that AL
cars lose their soft parts first.  We don't have rust, but we do have
sunshine.  I'll look for anything I can.

Bill Culp
Decatur, Alabama

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

From: JPADA@hqgate.orbital.com
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 23:28:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Exhaust Sounds

Interesting... my Buick with the little 300-V8 has the nicest, most mellow
exhaust note...

     Greg,

     You may not realize it, but the Buick 300 was a cast iron version of
     the 215 which started the whole thread about exhaust sounds.

     Joe Padavano
     jpada@hqgate.orbital.com

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



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

From: Lloyd Culp <bculp@hiwaay.net>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 17:32:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Slim Pickings

Clayton Pierce wrote:
>
> Okay, so what you do, is sell the car to Greg B.  Have Bill down in
> 'Bammy title it-- they'll title anything in Alabama!  Get it back up to
> Greg and then he'll have his 98!  :-)
>
Clayton,

I'll help if I can.  A senator titled his kid's toy wagon to demonstrate
our funny laws, but I don't think that the demonstration did any good.
He now gets a yearly notice that his kid's license is due.

Bill Culp
Decatur, Alabama

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

From: James Thingwold <jht@exo.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 00:19:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Olds ID

Snip

>There is a newer one, a Delmont I believe, more of a fastback

>roofline than the 65(?).  Virtually the same description.

>Anyone interested?

 I'd say this is a '67-69 possibly Delmont as the fast back (sloping back?)
didnt start until that year.  My backup light lenses show '67 in them.  If
this car is indeed a '67 I'd be interested in some things.....


Check if it is & I'll send a list of what I could use for mine.


Thanks much!



Lisa Madsen


<color><param>8080,0000,8080</param>Heavy Metal Forever - '67 Delta 88 &
'72 Vista Cruiser

</color>

Please E-Mail me at-----:
<bold><color><param>0000,0000,ffff</param>Lisa@hotglass.com

</color></bold>

My Web-Page-----:
<bold><color><param>0000,0000,ffff</param>http://exo.com/~jht/olds/</color></b
old>

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

From: rinacker@voicenet.com (Rich Inacker)
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 00:38:21 -0400
Subject: FWD: starfire

If anyone can help Vincent out, please contact him directly. I'll pass
along subscription info for the Olds list to him.


>Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 12:47:56 -0800
>From: rapp <portable@tfm.thonson.fr>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Subject: starfire
>
>I want to change my rear end pannel of my starfire 66,V8 425ci, have you
>got some contact for me. please.
>MY address
>RAPP Vincent
>4 chemin de la coudriette
>78990 ELANCOURT
>FRANCE
>
>I can send you some picture of my car!!!!

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 00:53:26 -0400
Subject: Re: GM Quality and Rust

At 08:20 PM 12/4/96 -0400, you wrote:
>

>Good question...I tried to get in touch with him tonight, although he was
>out. I did talk to his son who said to use "boiled".
>
>Is there much difference between the two???
>
>Steve
>71 Cutlass S 455
>93 Mustang LX 5.0
>> >
>

I called a paint store and asked.  Boiled linseed oil is produced to make a
'thicker' base solution, it then has dryers added.  Raw linseed doesn't have
the dryers, so stays gummy.

The Wiz

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

From: CRuper1@aol.com
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 01:38:09 -0400
Subject: Re: 1970 engine identification... A good laugh.....

In a message dated 96-12-04 21:03:50 EST, you write:

<< >3) Is the 250 HP motor considered a Rocket 350?

 ALL Olds V-8 pushrod engines are considered "Rocket" engines (i.e. "Rocket
 260..." ;) >>















                                                                   ^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^

Now here's a good contradiction of terms.....

Chris Ruper

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

From: image <IMAGE@cal.cybersurf.net>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 19:45:27 -0400
Subject: (no subject)

get me off this mailing.  It regularly fills mu mail box to overcapacity
with 10 copies of each message

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 02:48:21 -0400
Subject: Re: 1970 engine identification... A good laugh.....

At 01:38 AM 12/5/96 -0400, you wrote:
>In a message dated 96-12-04 21:03:50 EST, you write:
>
><< >3) Is the 250 HP motor considered a Rocket 350?
>
> ALL Olds V-8 pushrod engines are considered "Rocket" engines (i.e. "Rocket
> 260..." ;) >>
                                                                    ^^^^^^^^^^
>^^^^^^^^^
>
>Now here's a good contradiction of terms.....
>
>Chris Ruper
>
>
632

Well, maybe not quite.  Some very early turbine engines used a recip. to
turn the main compresor spool.  So if they used a Olds engine to turn the
compressor, you would at least have the rudements of a Olds powered reaction
engine.

Also, not all of their early push rod engines were infact "Rocket."  The
earliest ones were "Kettering Power!" See "Setting the Pace" p. 220.  Olds
engines would have remained "Kettering Power" if it weren't for the fact
that corporate policy disallowed it, so the powers that be, opted for
"Rocket Power."

We don't need a flame war, this is intended to be informational only, and if
you've got your own copy of "Setting the Pace" you can read it for your self.

The Wiz

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 02:47:45 -0400
Subject: Re: 1970 engine identification... A good laugh.....

At 01:38 AM 12/5/96 -0400, you wrote:
>In a message dated 96-12-04 21:03:50 EST, you write:
>
><< >3) Is the 250 HP motor considered a Rocket 350?
>
> ALL Olds V-8 pushrod engines are considered "Rocket" engines (i.e. "Rocket
> 260..." ;) >>
                                                                    ^^^^^^^^^^
>^^^^^^^^^
>
>Now here's a good contradiction of terms.....
>
>Chris Ruper
>
>
632

Well, maybe not quite.  Some very early turbine engines used a recip. to
turn the main compresor spool.  So if they used a Olds engine to turn the
compressor, you would at least have the rudements of a Olds powered reaction
engine.

Also, not all of their early push rod engines were infact "Rocket."  The
earliest ones were "Kettering Power!" See "Setting the Pace" p. 220.  Olds
engines would have remained "Kettering Power" if it weren't for the fact
that corporate policy disallowed it, so the powers that be, opted for
"Rocket Power."

We don't need a flame war, this is intended to be informational only, and if
you've got your own copy of "Setting the Pace" you can read it for your self.

The Wiz

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

From: grpruett@vt.edu (Greg Pruett)
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 18:03:42 -0400
Subject: 1977 EFI FYI (long)

I've been reading some on the analog EFI system that came on the `77 or so
cadillacs(sp?) with 350 olds engines.  I'm trying to decide if it's viable
to use for performance and possibly a twin-turbocharger setup.  I imagine
the system can be had pretty cheap since they have a bad reputation.
Thought i'd post to the list what i've found out about the manifold after
reading a 1979 chilton manual for anyone who might be interested.  Here it
is for what it's worth.

The system uses a dual plane manifold that is basically the same as the
carbuerated version.  The major difference being the injectors mounted in
the ends of the ports and a hole in one of the ports at the front of the
manifold for an air temperature sensor.  The throttle body looks like
somebody cut the top off a two-barrel carb.

Fuel delivery starts with two fuel pumps, one in the tank and one farther up
the line.  From there the fuel pumps through the injector banks and to the
fuel pressure regulator.  The pressure regulator keeps the pressure at 39
psi.  It is attatched to manifold vacuum so apparently that has something to
do with regulating pressure.  From the pressure regulator the fuel runs back
to the tank.  the fuel injectors are solonoid operated pintle valves. The
ECU signals them to open for precisely the right amount of time to meter the
fuel needed by the engine.  Air delivery is provided by a throttle body and
a fast idle valve.

The system has pretty much all the standard sensors exept for a mass-airflow
sensor or oxygen sensor.  It has a manifold absolute pressure (MAP) sensor
so maybe that was used in place of a mass-airflow sensor. That along with
the bad temp sensor location may be why the system had a reputation for
running lousy.  The system also uses a throttle positon swithch and air and
coolant sensors.  The air and coolant temperature sensors are identical and
completely interchangeable.  There is an engine speed sensor in the
distributor.  The sensor consists of a plastic housing containing two reed
swithces and a rotor with two magnets.  The ECU uses the opening and closing
of the switches to synchronize(sp?) the fuel delivery and to monitor engine
rpm.  The distributor is unique to the EFI and a regular distributor won't
work with the system.  The ECU is serviceable only by a caddilac dealer
according to the manual.

Now for some speculation on performance potential.  The ECU apparently
cannot be serviced and is pre-set for the (smogger) engine setup, a 180 net
hp 350.  I think it might be possible to "dope" the inputs to the ECU so
that it alters the mixture accordingly.  For example, playing with the
temperature input reading so that the car runs richer.  The only problem is
the ECU probably has preset cellings for how much fuel can be injected, so
the engine would likely lean out at higher rpm.  Another idea I have, which
I think is more viable, is to use some sort of adjustable fuel pressure
regulator to increase pressure so that (hopefully) more fuel will be pushed
through the injectors across the rpm range, and you could "jet" the engine
by adjusting the fuel pressure.  This would be limited of course by how much
pressure the lines and injectors could withstand.  Another problem with the
system is the fact that it used a two-barrel manifold.  A throttle body will
flow more than a carb of the same size but I have my doubts whether the
throttle/manifold setup could flow much more than 500cfm.  It may be
possible to mount injectors and sensors in a high-performance manifold and
use a cadillac ECU but i doubt it's worth the time and expense.  I
understand the air temp sensor is at the root of a lot of the system's
problems so it would probably need to be moved.(but I don't have a clue
where to)

I'd like to try and make it work one day but I don't know if I ever will.
It will all depend on money and ambition...mostly money.  Allthough I doubt
people are lining up to buy 19-year old EFI systems.  The main problem is
the fact that I would need a test rig to de-bug the EFI that doesn't have to
be a daily driver.   Maybe I canl buy a 66 Toro as a backup car so I can
slap the EFI on my Vista-Cruiser and start tinkering.  The turbocharging
project is another can of worms but I think it would be fun to run dual
dodge daytona turbochargers on my car in unison with EFI.  I'd like to
develope 350 hp or so and still retain my average of 16mpg.

The question is, do I really want to take the analog EFI then try and
re-invent the wheel.

Greg Pruett
`72 Vista Cruiser

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

From: Nick DiGiovanni <ndigiova@Direct.CA>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 03:28:16 -0400
Subject: Sacrificial Anode (was Re: GM Quality and Rust)

At 01:41 AM 12/4/96 -0400, Graham Stewart wrote:

>All this talk about rust makes me remember those "sacrificial anode"
>devices.  It hooked up to your battery, and altered the polarity of the
>conductive surfaces of the vehicle so that they wouldn't take up extra
>oxygen atoms.
>
>Did anyone every try one of those?  Did it work? Was it a fraud?

Iron or steel objects can be protected from corrosion in several different
ways. One way is by covering the surface with a protective coating.  This
can be a layer of paint that cuts off access to moisture and O2.  A more
desirable coating is a metallic one (Ni, Cu, Ag, Zn, Cr).  If the plating
metal is a more active one than iron (for example, Zn), it, rather than
iron, will be oxidized if the surface is broken.  However, if the plating
metal is less active than iron, then there is the potential that cracks in
its surface may enhance the corrosion of iron.  This can be seen with tin
cans which are made by applying a layer of tin over a steel base.  If the
food in the can contains some kind of acid like citric acid, some of the tin
plate will dissolve exposing the steel beneath.  When the can is opened
exposing the interior to the air, corrosion forms on the iron surrounding
the breaks in the tin surface (sometimes, a thin coating of laquer is
applied over the tin to help prevent this occurance).

A second way to prevent the iron from corroding is by bringing the iron into
electrical contact with a more active metal.  In order for a 'sacrificial
anode' to work it must be in contact with the metal surface that you are
trying to protect.  For instance, you would directly attach a different
piece of Metal to the Iron.  Since Oxidation occurs at the anode, you want
to use a metal which is much more readily oxidized than the iron in order
for this other metal to become oxidized rather than the iron.  Common
sacrificial anodes are Mg or Zn.  Under these conditions, the iron becomes
cathodic and the Mg or Zn is anodic and thus the iron is protected against
corrosion.  The more active metal is the 'sacrificial anode' in a large
scale corrosion cell.  This is also known as cathodic protection.  Usually,
ships (salt water) have huge Mg/Zn strips attached to the underside for this
same type of corrosion protection.  If you have never seen a ship that did
not replace the dissolved Mg/Zn strips... well it looks like a Vega in the
showroom ;)  In the industry that I work in, we use the Mg or Zn anodes in
chillers/condensers for added corrosion protection.  I would tend to think
that anything hooked up to the battery in a car is not going to work very
well but thats just my opinion.

Nick DiGiovanni
ndigiova@Direct.CA
Port Coquitlam, B.C.
1970 4-4-2

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

From: Nick DiGiovanni <ndigiova@Direct.CA>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 03:28:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Outside Door Handles for '72 and Earlier

At 04:14 PM 12/4/96 -0400, Greg Beaulieu wrote:
>Heard something last night that I cannot confirm, but a guy who is
>in our car club abd drives big rigs and heavy equipment for a
>living *swears* that outside door handles for '72 and earlier
>Cutlasses, etc. are still being produced by GM. He says that you
>just need to go to a dealer that carries heavy trucks and ask for
>outside door handles for a Chevy (or is it GMC?) "Bruin" model. He
>claims they are identical.

I ordered a pair for my car that came from GM Restoration Parts thru Trim
Parts from Tamraz's. They are identical to my originals with a perfect
chrome plating.  They came with the handles, buttons, springs and gaskets
for about $59 US.  I originally wanted to buy their Original ones for ~$100
but the sales guy claimed these were exactly the same ones.  I didn't
beleive him at first and kept asking him if he was sure and if they were the
same shape and on and on and on.  Finally, I thought if I don't like'm I'll
just rechrome my originals.  When they arrived, I compared them to my
originals and they are better than flawless.

Nick DiGiovanni
ndigiova@Direct.CA
Port Coquitlam, B.C.
1970 4-4-2

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

From: "Peg O'Connor" <peg@grove.ufl.EDU>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 04:25:56 -0400
Subject: Re: 78 thru 88 cutlass ID (was: Swapping bodyparts)

> >    ----- -----
> >   |     |     |
> >   |     |     |
> >   |    |X|    |
> >   |     |     |
> >   |     |     |
> >    ----- -----

And don't forget  -- some of them had more space between the vertical
dividers, and some did not have the Rocket cutout.  Also, the '78 Calais
had straight vertical grilles, no dividers.

(one subject i know about, having a '78 Cutlass Calais!!!)
8)
peg

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

From: "Peg O'Connor" <peg@grove.ufl.EDU>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 04:29:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Identifying Cutlasses

>
> 78-80 Tail lights	81-83 Tail Lights	84-88 Tail Lights
>  ----- -----		 --- ---	 	 -------
> |     |     |		|   |   |		|       |
> |     |     |		|   |   |		|	|
> |    |X|    |		|   |   |		|   -	|
> |     |     |		|   |   |		|  |X|	|
> |     |     |		|   |   |		|   -	|
>  ----- -----		|   |   |		|	|
> 			|   |   |		|	|
> 			 --- ---		 -------
> 	-
> Where  |X| is a chrome rocket sybol

Well, on the '78-'80 lights, it's not a chrome symbol; it's actually a
cutout -- the chrome surrounds the cutout.  The brake lights shine through
the cutout (looks *waaay* cool at night).  :)

8)
peg

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

From: "Peg O'Connor" <peg@grove.ufl.EDU>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 04:36:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Resto  Tips  .....

> Good to hear.  I work at a bowling alley here, and part of the job involves
> plugging the finger holes in bowling balls.  We use a catalyst-urethane plug
 [snip]

Uhhhh . . . . doesn't that defeat the purpose of bowling??  ;)

8)
peg

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

From: John Young <reospeeder@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 04:45:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Re[2]: GM Quality

I had a 6.9 MB and painted it twice.  The answer is Mercedes Benzes
with good silver paint live in garages.  They sure don't like
California sun.

Old Dog
70 Supreme SX Conv

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

From: John Young <reospeeder@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 05:34:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Strange cars (was: Isetta)

12/4/96 you wrote
>...And then there's the Morgan, which I think tries to be a little
>sportier, but enough already; I doubt Olds would ever build something like
these minicars except to replace the spare tire in the trunk... > How can you
call a Morgan a minicar?  They were a robust, albiet somewhat agricultural,
man's car with straight cut gears and a suspension that tried your soul.
They were cold in the winter and hot in the summer.  The side curtains
wouldn't even keep out a light fog.  They looked agressive and fast compared
to other offerings from England of the time.  The Plus-4 motor was a
Triumph, derived from the Ford-Furgeson tractor (later Plus-fours used a
Fiat), the Plus-8 was the B.O.P. aluminum V8.  They were a handful on the
road, required continuous service, and you coundn't get parts.  In short, the
Morgan was a delight to own and drive.  The most fun car I have owned aside
from my 70 Cutlass.   Myth buster: no, they did not have wooden frames.  They
had wood body framers and steel frames.  (I know, the idea of wood frames is
more fun.)

Old Dog
70 Cutlass Supreme SX Convertible

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 06:46:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Re[2]: GM Quality

At 04:45 AM 12/5/96 -0400, you wrote:
>I had a 6.9 MB and painted it twice.  The answer is Mercedes Benzes
>with good silver paint live in garages.  They sure don't like
>California sun.
>
>Old Dog
>70 Supreme SX Conv
>
>
>
A friend of mine recently bought a 1962 to 4 roadster out of a garage, I'll
call hem and ask exactly what year if someone wants to know exactly.  The
paint was still exceptional, although much of the rest was very bad,
especially the rubber.  The windshield gasket was so hard it came out in
chunks.

The Wiz

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 06:54:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Strange cars (was: Isetta)

At 05:34 AM 12/5/96 -0400, you wrote:
>12/4/96 you wrote
>>...And then there's the Morgan, which I think tries to be a little
>>sportier, but enough already; I doubt Olds would ever build something like
these minicars except to replace the spare tire in the trunk...
>>
>How can you call a Morgan a minicar?  They were a robust, albiet
>somewhat agricultural, man's car with straight cut gears and a
>suspension that tried your soul.  They were cold in the winter and
>hot in the summer.  The side curtains wouldn't even keep out a
>light fog.  They looked agressive and fast compared to other
>offerings from England of the time.  The Plus-4 motor was a
>Triumph, derived from the Ford-Furgeson tractor (later Plus-fours
>used a Fiat), the Plus-8 was the B.O.P. aluminum V8.  They were a
>handful on the road, required continuous service, and you coundn't
>get parts.  In short, the Morgan was a delight to own and drive.  The
>most fun car I have owned aside from my 70 Cutlass.   Myth buster:
>no, they did not have wooden frames.  They had wood body framers
>and steel frames.  (I know, the idea of wood frames is more fun.)
>
>Old Dog
>70 Cutlass Supreme SX Convertible
>
>
Have I got something wrong here?  The car my roomie had was a four wheel
car.  Orange in color, and the only car that looked SIMILAR was an MG TD.
And I'm saying that it was only superficially comparable to the TD, actually
the Morgan was a bit larger.  If we are talking about the same car, your
'agricultrual' appliance comparison was well chosen.

I'm sure it was a Morgan.  The older three wheeled kind, I only assumed were
from the same builder.

Also, I fairly well remember that his car had a more or less standard "C"
channel fram, with x-members etc.  Also, I don't remember there were any
window curtains, at all, with this particular specimine.  Or course they may
have just been missing.

The Wiz

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 07:46:18 -0400
Subject: 455 Rebuild

My current rebuild of a 455 project has finally found some form.  The G/GA
heads came in Monday, and yesterday I was informed that the GA was good, and
the G was not. But Tuesday also found a pair of F heads, and I was informed
later this afternoon that they were both good.

I would like to wind up with about an 8.25:1 compression ratio, and have
noted various head (combustion chamber volume) and head gasket combiniations
listed here.  It is possible to come up with about 8.25:1 with an F head and
stock pistons?  I should get the heads back on Monday/Tuesday and start the
rebuild by Wednesday, hopefully with all the data in hand.  I would prefer
to use both the block and heads as is, and massage the numbers in other ways.

The rest of the job is fairly straight forward.

I'm keeping track of the exact costs and will give a report a later as to
the total amount.

Note:  This engine is going in where a 140hp 305 is coming out.  It is
intended to give the car a little more go when pulling a trailer, and of
course without.  It is not intended to be First On Race Day!  I have a TH350
being gone over right now, and it is supposed to be ready Friday.

The Wiz

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

From: Esko Ilola <esko.ilola@tele.telebox.fi>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 08:32:28 -0400
Subject: Which way to install the carburetor jets ?

I took my (other) Rochester apart and now I have a bunch of parts
over my desk.

During the disassembly process I notcided that the carburetor was so
simple that I would not need to do any notes about it.

So I thought.

Now I have a problem:
There are two jets screwed in the bottom of the carburetor bowls, one for
each bowl (or should I say one for primary and one for secondary side).

The jets look exactly the same until You look in the hole. The holes in
these jets are different.

Which side should receive the bigger hole, primary or secondary ?

The carburetor is original for this olds (4GC I think it was).

The sixth December is the independancy day of Finland. It is a holiday
for everyone except polices, nurses and politicians.

We have decided to go to movie with Anneli.

- --
**********************************************
* Esko Ilola                                 *
* Email esko.ilola@tele.telebox.fi           *
* X400  G=esko S=ilola O=tele A=mailnet C=fi *
* Tel.  +358 2040 3439                       *
* Mail  Ukonkivenpolku 7B5                   *
*       01610 VANTAA                         *
*       FINLAND                              *
**********************************************
* Oldsmobile Ninety Eight 1964               *
*            Holiday Sports Sedan (4D HT)    *
**********************************************

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

From: r_mullen@Merck.Com (R Mullen)
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 08:52:00 -0400
Subject: 1970 assembly manual

All,
I would like to acquire a 1970 assembly manual for my 442.  Any sources
that anyone can recommend?
Scott Mullen
'70 442

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

From: "Mark Cornea (R)" <mcornea@ford.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 09:25:39 -0400
Subject: Re: 1970 assembly manual

On Dec 5,  8:52am, R Mullen wrote:
> Subject: 1970 assembly manual
> All,
> I would like to acquire a 1970 assembly manual for my 442.  Any sources
> that anyone can recommend?
> Scott Mullen
> '70 442
>
>-- End of excerpt from R Mullen

	Scott - Fusick Automotive has them.....there phone is (860)623-1589,
not sure what the price is, $25.00 I think.

                                                       ___  ___
                                              /     /    / /  /
                                             / __  /  --/ /  /
       Mark Cornea (Dr Decal) `70 442 stick /_/ /_/ ___/ /__/ Red

             (MCORNEA@pt8228.pto.ford.com)

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

From: Clayton Pierce <zcwp11@Access.ETSU-Tn.Edu>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 08:34:24 -0400
Subject: Re: 81 Cutlass Update

On Wed, 4 Dec 1996, Ryan Hehn wrote:

> my Dad pulled the carb. apart (that was previously 'professionally'
> timing, and presto... Back to life!  I guess one of the carb's internal
> bolts was loose, but it would be hard to believe that that would've
> caused the severe problems I was having!
Yes!  Definitely it can!  My father used to drive an '83 Honda Accord.
It quit on him on the way back from work.  It was the carburretor, it
seems that a small screw inside had somehow wiggled itself slightly
loose.  That was the only problem with the car, and it was not even
driveable!

> and an '86 G-body?  My 81 glove box has a nice metal latch, and the door
> closes flush with the dash.  The '86 has a bloody plastic latch... The
> door sits partially open and rattles like hell.
Thanks for telling me that, I've got the same rattling problem in my '84
and I've got an '81 Calais Parts car.  Oh, if you need any parts, drop me
a line and maybe we can work something out.  I'm keeping the 15'wheels,
the console/shifter, the steering wheel, the guages and that's about it.

> the question of what differences there were in the G-bodies throughout
> the 80's...  There sure weren't any styling changes!
Well, I've noticed that the '85 or '86 and later cars seem to have more
of a problem with paint and rust (goes back to the GM quality thread).


>
> Ryan Hehn
> ryanh@docker.com
>
>
>


Peace, Goodwill, and Happy Oldsmobilling,
Clayton Pierce,
zcwp11@Access.ETSU-Tn.Edu

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

From: Clayton Pierce <zcwp11@Access.ETSU-Tn.Edu>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 08:41:21 -0400
Subject: Calais Guages.

I've got a question.  I've got the guage cluster in an '81 Cutlass Calais
parts car that I'm thinking of swapping into my '84 Supreme.  I've heard
there is some sort of switch on the back to convert from V-6 to V-8.  The
Calais was a 3.8liter car, and my '84 has a 350 in it.  Will this cause a
problem?  Also, a friend told me that he didn't think that the Canadian
cars had those switches on the back, and the Calais is a Canadian built
car.  Is this true, or is my friend BS-ing me?  I guess what I'm asking,
is should all of these guages work in my '84?

One other question about the Calais, there is something that is confusing
me.  I didn't think that the V-6's were computer controlled in 1981, and
also, I didn't think that the Canadian built cars were computer
controlled.  Well, this car was originally a V-6 car, and was built in
Canada (confirmed by the VIN etc.) and it WAS computer controlled.  What
gives?

Peace, Goodwill, and Happy Oldsmobilling,
Clayton Pierce,
zcwp11@Access.ETSU-Tn.Edu

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

From: david wyatt <Wyatt_David_L@Lilly.COM>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 09:57:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Suggestions for making my  '69 4-4-2 go faster

Patrick,
Your setup is almost identical to my 70 4-4-2. I was running the 800 cfm
Holley spread bore with a Holley Street Dominator intake. I went back to
a Quadrajet which has improved drivability but has dropped some speed.
You did not mention if you had headers or not. From my experience the
W-30 cam leaves a lot to be desired. My car runs hard from 3000 RPM up
to 5500 but the bottom end suffers terribly. I have had good luck with
Competition Cams in other vehicles. The next engine to go in my Olds
will get one of their cams. The old W-30 grind is 30 year old
technology. The modern grinds are much more efficient. If your intake is
of the dual plane design stick with it. If it is a single plane like
mine, get a dual plane. Your carb should be larger for the engine size.
I know some of you will disagree but I go by the "double the engine size
equals CFM of carb" ie: 455 x 2 = 910. An 800 works well. As far as
heads go, just make sure you have the large valve E or C heads with a 3
angle valve job.  Add a set of GOOD headers and go to a 3.90 rear gear
or higher. The 3.42s, 4 speed, and W-30 cam is a little hard to get the
car moving with.

FWIW I will be going back to my original intake, a cam and adjustable
rocker arms from Competition cams, headers, and a Quadrajet on the next
engine. I also have the 3.42 gears and a 4 speed. The car will be more
drivable and probably faster than now due to overall efficiency.

Just my $.02 worth
Dave Wyatt
70  4-4-2

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

From: Lloyd Culp <bculp@hiwaay.net>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 03:52:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Resto  Tips  .....

Peg O'Connor wrote:
>
> > Good to hear.  I work at a bowling alley here, and part of the job
involves > > plugging the finger holes in bowling balls.  We use a
catalyst-urethane plug >  [snip] > > Uhhhh . . . . doesn't that defeat the
purpose of bowling??  ;) > > 8) > peg


Peg,

After you do that it is called keggling & instead of a wooden alley, a
lawn is used.  Now you see why the finger holes were invented, the
wooden alley developed, & the name changed to "bowling".

Bill Cuplp
Decatur, Alabama

PL. I hate bowling & have never gotten to try keggling.

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

From: Lloyd Culp <bculp@hiwaay.net>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 03:48:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Outside Door Handles for '72 and Earlier

Nick DiGiovanni wrote:
>

>
> I ordered a pair for my car that came from GM Restoration Parts thru Trim
> Parts from Tamraz's. They are identical to my originals with a perfect
> chrome plating.  They came with the handles, buttons, springs and gaskets
> for about $59 US.  I originally wanted to buy their Original ones for ~$100
> but the sales guy claimed these were exactly the same ones.  I didn't
> beleive him at first and kept asking him if he was sure and if they were the
> same shape and on and on and on.  Finally, I thought if I don't like'm I'll
> just rechrome my originals.  When they arrived, I compared them to my
> originals and they are better than flawless.
>
> Nick DiGiovanni



Nick,

i have the same experience w/getting some for my '70 GS from Tamraz's.
these are very nice units & the cost is okay.  I am pleased when you
consider that it is very hard & expensive to get something rechromed.

Bill Culp
Decatur, Alabama

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

From: Lloyd Culp <bculp@hiwaay.net>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 03:38:37 -0400
Subject: Axle Ratios

Here is some axle information:

OLDSMOBILE - FULL SIZE & F85 (Includes toronado)

Explanation: Axle ratios are identified by letter or number code.  On
F85, Toronado and Jetstar 88 the ratio letter codes are followed by
numbers giving the date of production.  Locking axles are identified as
follows:

FULL-SIZE CARS EXC JETSTAR 88:
1959-64-- symbol X (circled).  If no symbol, axle is non-locking.
1965-69-- "L" followed by number code.
1966-69 Toronado-- letter code.

F85 AND JETSTAR 88:
1961-64-- symbol X (circled).  If no symbol, axle is non-locking.
1965-69-- letter codes identify both locking and non-locking.

In 1964 the F85 had another ratio marking (example: P3.08L).  It is on
the right rear inboard side of axle houlsing tube. "P" is vendor; 3.08
is ratio; "L" means locking axle.  Axle ratio codes are located as
follows:

FULL-SIZED CARS
1959-63-- On carrier casting lower locating boss.
1964 exc Jetstar 88-- On carrier casting lower locating boss.
1965-69 exc Toronado-- Stamped on right rear inboard side of axle
housing tube.
1966-67 Toronado-- Ratio and date code stamped on the flange below fill
tube boss.
1968-69 Toronado-- Ratio and date code stamped on flange near RH
spreader hole.

F85 AND JETSTAR 88
1961-64-- On right side of housing cover.
1965-69-- On right rear inboard side of axle housing tube.

FULL-SIZE CARS

1959 - 1964 EXCEPT JETSTAR 88
Code   Ratio
2      43-16 2.69
3      41-16 2.56
4      39-10 3.90
6      40-11 3.64
7      43-15 2.87
8      41-12 3.42
9      42-13 3.23
0      40-12 3.08

1964 JETSTAR 88
Code   Ratio
A      40-13 3.08
B      42-13 3.23
C      39-14 2.78
D      39-11 3.55
E      37-11 3.36
F      39-10 3.90

1965 JETSTAR 88 & 1966 jETSTAR 88 EXC POLICE
   Code             Ratio
std    locking
RA     RB           39-14 2.78 '66
RC     RD           40-13 3.08
RE     RF           42-13 3.23
RG     RH           39-11 3.55

1965 JETSTAR I, DYN 88, DELTA 88, STARFIRE
1966 DYNAMIC 88, DELTA 88, STARFIRE, EXC POLICE
  code              Ratio
std   locking
QA    QB            41-15 2.73
QC    QD            41-14 2.93
QE    QF            40-13 3.08
QG    QH            42-13 3.23
QI    QJ            41-12 3.42
*QS   *QT           41-12 3.42 '66
* W/heavy duty 15" wheels & hubs & drums

1965 - 1966 98
   Code             Ratio
std   locking
QK    QL            41-15 2.73
QM    QN            40-13 3.08
QO    QP            42-13 3.23
QQ    QR            41-12 3.42

1966 TORONADO
Code                Ratiio
AB                  3.21

1967 DELMONT 88 "330"
   Code               Ratio
std       locking
RA, QV    RB, QU      39-14 2.78
RC, RI    RD, RJ      40-13 3.08
RE, RK    RF, RL      42-13 3.23

1967 DELMONT 88 "425 & DELTA
       Code                        Ratio
std              locking
QA, RO           QB, RP             41-15 2.73
QC, RQ           QD, RR             41-14 2.93
QE, QY, RM, RS   QF, QE, RN, RT     40-13 3.08
QG, QW, RG, RU   QH, QX, RH, RV     42-13 3.23
QI, QS, RW, RY   QJ, QT, RX, RZ     41-12 3.42

1967 98
   Code                 Ratio
std       locking
QK, RO    QL, RP        41-15 2.73
QM, RS    QN, RT        40-13 3.08
QO, RU    QP, RY        42-13 3.23
QQ, RW    QR, RX        41-12 3.42

1967 TORONADO
Code    Ratio
AB      3.21

1068 DELMONT 88 8-350 ENG
    Code               Ratio
std    Locking
RA     RB              39-14 2.78
RC     RD              40-13 3.08
RE     RF              42-13 3.23

1968 DELMONT 88 8-455 ENG & DELTA
      Code                 Ratio
std          locking
QA, QK, QS   QB, QL, QT    41-15 2.73
QC, QQ       QD, QR        4-16 2.56
QE, QM, QY   QF, QN, QZ    40-13 3.08

1968 98
     code                   Ratio
std          locking
QA, QK       QB, QL         41-15 2.73
QC, QQ       QD, QR         41-16 2.56
QE, QM       QF, QN         40-13 3.08

1968-1968 TORONADO
Code    Ratio
T       43-14 3.07

1969 DELTA 88 W/8-350 ENG
   Code          Ratio
std   locking
RA    RB         39-14 2.78
RC    RD         40-13 3.08
RE    RF         42-13 3.23

1969 ALL DELTA W/8-455 ENG & STD BRAKE
1969 98 OPTIONAL EQUIPMENT
   Code          Ratio
std   locking
QC    QD         41-16 2.56
QI    QJ         41-14 2.93

1069 ALL DELTA W/8-455 & HEAVY DUTY BRAKE
             (POLICE) OR DISC BRAKE
1969 98 STD EQUIPMENT
   Code          Ratio
std   locking
QQ    QR         41-16 2.56
QU    QV         41-14 2.93

1970 -1971 NOT AVAILABLE

OLDSMOBILE F85

1961 -1963
Code     Ratio
A        40-13 3.08
B        42-13 3.23
C        37-11 3.36

1964
Code     Ratio
A        40-13 3.08
B        42-13 3.23
C        39-14 2.93
D        39-11 3.55
E        37-11 3.36
F        39-10 3.90

1965 EXC SKYROOF SW
   Code           Ratio
std   Locking
SA    SB          39-14 2.78
SC    SD          40-13 3.08
SE    SF          42-13 3.23
SI    SJ          39-11 3.23

1965 SKYROOF SW
   Code           Ratio
std   locking
SM    SN          37-12 3.08
SO    SP          42-13 3.23
SU    SY          39-11 3.55

1965 - 1966 EXC SKYROOF SW & POLICE
   Code           Ratio
std   locking
S     SB          39-14 2.78
SC    SD          40-13 3.08
SE    SF          42-13 3.23
SI    SJ          39-11 3.55
TG    TH          39-10 3.90 ('66)
NOTE: Codings not available on '66 4.11-1 (37-9) & 4.33-1 (39-9).

1965 -1966 SKYROOF SW EXC POLICE
   Code           Ratio
std   locking
SM    SN          37-12 3.08 '65
SM    SN          40-13 3.08 '66
SO    SP          42-13 3.23
SU    SY          39-11 3.56
NOTE: Codings not available on '66 4.11-1 (37-9) & 4.33-1 (39-9).

1967 EXC SKYROOF SW
   Code                     Ratio
std           locking
SA, S2, SK    SB, S3, SL    39-14 2.78
SC, S4, SQ    SD, S5, SR    40-13 3.08
SE, S6, SV    SF, S7, SW    42-13 3.23
SS, SU, ST    TA, TS, TB    41-17 2.41
TL, S8, TP    TM, S9, TQ    41-12 3.42
TN, T2, TU    TO, T3, TV    43-11 3.91

1967 SKYROOF SW
   Code                     Ratio
std           locking
SM, T4, SG    SN, T5, SH    40-13 3.08
SO, T6, TC    SP, T7, TD    42-13 3.23

1968 EXC SKYROOF SW & 442
         Code                    Ratio
std           locking
TYPE "O" DIFFERENTIAL
R2, R6        R3, R7             41-16 2.56
SA, S2        SB, S3             39-14 2.78
SC, S4        SD, S5             40-13 3.08
SE, S6        SF, S7             42-13 3.23
TL, S8        TM, S9             41-12 3.42
TN, T2        TO, T3             42-11 3.91
TYPE "C" DIFFERENTIAL
R8, TR        R9, TW, TH         41-16 2.56
RA, TT        RB, TJ             41-15 2.73
RC, T4        RD, T5             43-14 3.07
RE, T6        RF, T7             43-13 3.31

1968 SKYROOF SW W/8-400 & 442
   Code                          Ratio
std          locking
              TW, TY             39-9 4.33

1968 SKYROOF SW W/8-350
   Code                           Ratio
std          locking
SM           SN                   40-13 3.08
SO           SP                   42-13 3.23
TA           TB                   39-14 2.78
* For identification of type "O" & "C", see beginning of AXLE OR CARRIER
ASSEMBLY section.

1969 EXC SKYROOF SW
    Code                          Ratio
std          locking
TYPE "O" DIFFERENTIAL
R2, R8       R3, R9               41-16 2.56**
R6           R7                   41-16 2.56+
S2           S3                   39-14 2.78+
S4           S5                   40-13 3.08+
S6           S7                   42-13 3.23+
             S9                   41-12 3.42+
SA           SB                   39-14 2.78**
SC           SD                   40-13 3.08**
SE           SF                   42-13 3.23**
             T3                   43-11 3.91+
TM                                41-12 3.42**
TO                                43-11 3.81**
TY                                39-9  4.33**
TYPE "C" DIFFERENTIAL
RA           RB                   39-14 2.78**
RC           RD                   40-13 3.08**
RE           RF                   42-13 3.23**
T4           T5                   43-14 3.07+
T6           T7                   43-13 3.31+
             TL                   39-11 3.55**
             TN                   41-11 3.73**
TR           TH                   41-16 2.56+
TT           TJ                   41-15 2.73+
* for identification of type "0" & "C", see beginning of AXLE OR CARRIER
ASSEMBLY section.
+  HD brake (Police) or Disc.
** Std brake

1969 SKYROOF SW
   Code             Ratio
std   locking
SM    SN            40-13 3.08
SO    SP            42-13 3.23
TA    TB            39-14 2.78

1970 - 1971 NOT AVAILABLE

I surely wish that they were available, although I am tired of typing
them too.

Bill Culp
Decatur, Alabama

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

From: "Timothy A. Churchill" <tac3550@egbsun1.draper.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 10:17:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Strange cars (was: Isetta)

> From wizkid@inlink.com Thu Dec  5 05:55:40 1996

> Have I got something wrong here?  The car my roomie had was a four wheel
> car.  Orange in color, and the only car that looked SIMILAR was an MG TD.
> And I'm saying that it was only superficially comparable to the TD, actually
> the Morgan was a bit larger.  If we are talking about the same car, your
> 'agricultrual' appliance comparison was well chosen.
>
> I'm sure it was a Morgan.  The older three wheeled kind, I only assumed were
> from the same builder.

I'm sure it was a Morgan too, Wiz.  It sounds just like the Morgan featured
in the film "The War of the Roses"... watch for the scene where the wife
tries to crush her hubby in his beloved Morgan by running over it in her 4x4
:)



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: "Andrew C. Green" <acg@dlogics.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 10:40:05 -0400
Subject: Today's Useless Factoid

Noticed this morning from the train that the local Mercedes-Benz
dealership, Mark Motors in Arlington Heights, IL, keeps a little
fleet of loaner cars ready for customers when their own cars need
to come back for repairs, etc. They were all lined up next to the
service department doors this morning ready to be distributed for
the day in place of sick Mercedes cars on the way in. And what do
they select for nice reliable loaners? A set of white Oldsmobile
Cutlass Cieras. Probably bought 'em from Kelly Olds down the street.

Andrew C. Green                   (312) 853-8331
Datalogics, Inc.
101 N. Wacker Drive, Ste. 1800    Internet: acg@dlogics.com
Chicago, IL  60606-7301           FAX: (312) 853-8282

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

From: Clayton Pierce <zcwp11@Access.ETSU-Tn.Edu>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 10:06:53 -0400
Subject: Options ID

Bill R. has been helping me ID the options codes on my 1984 Cutlass.
There were a few that we had trouble with though, probably because he was
using an '85 book.  The car is a regular 2dr Cutlass Supreme, originally
V6, # 14004 off the assembly line at Arlington, with bucket seats and a
console shifter.

What are?

ARL
D2D
E6L
GMD
K19
NB1
NK1
YT9

and what was the body color designated by 62 in 1984 (should be sort of a
metallic champagne color)
what was the interior color designated by 77 in 1984 (should be a burgundy)

And what does te B, I, and 9 after the interior color stand for?

Thanks,
Peace, Goodwill, and Happy Oldsmobilling,
Clayton Pierce,
zcwp11@Access.ETSU-Tn.Edu

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

From: r_mullen@Merck.Com (R Mullen)
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 10:50:00 -0400
Subject: [none]

>From: jbosh@cais.cais.com (Jeff Bosh)
>Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 12:05:10 -0400
>Subject: Blower

>>I've got a '71 Cutlass Supreme with a blower that grinds and rattles when I
>turn it on.  It seems to blow heat and change speeds, but i'm thinking its
>fan is loose.  Any ideas?

>jbosh@cais.com

Jeff,
Perhaps you have ingested something into the fan (e.g. leaves,ice).  My
'69 Cutlass use to get ice in the fan periodically, either ingesting it
or having it form from condensation.  That is of course seasonal, but a
leaf or stone in there would grind all the time.  Sounds like a very
annoying situation.
Scott Mullen
'70 442

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

From: "Andrew C. Green" <acg@dlogics.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 11:06:13 -0400
Subject: Re: 81 Cutlass Update

>> and an '86 G-body?  My 81 glove box has a nice metal latch, and the door
>> closes flush with the dash.  The '86 has a bloody plastic latch... The
>> door sits partially open and rattles like hell.
>Thanks for telling me that, I've got the same rattling problem in my '84
>and I've got an '81 Calais Parts car.  Oh, if you need any parts, drop me
>a line and maybe we can work something out.

Guys, I haven't actually _looked_ at an '86 assembly, but I can't believe
there isn't provision for adjustment somewhere. If not the latch mount,
maybe the striker mount? Any oval-shaped slots under the mounting screws?

Andrew C. Green                   (312) 853-8331
Datalogics, Inc.
101 N. Wacker Drive, Ste. 1800    Internet: acg@dlogics.com
Chicago, IL  60606-7301           FAX: (312) 853-8282

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

From: r_mullen@Merck.Com (R Mullen)
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 11:17:00 -0400
Subject: '69 442 GO FASTER

>From: "Patrick Derkacz" <spencergrant1@msn.com>
>Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 20:21:25 -0400
>Subject: suggestions for making my '69 442 GO FASTER

>I have a '69 442 convertible with a '70 455 in it.  I could use some
>suggestions on the most cost efficient way of getting this 4 speed to GO
>FASTER.  I have put a '70 W30 cam, an aluminum manifold and a Holley 750 in.
>No idea  what the bottom half is. It has a 3.42 posi.  I am thinking of
>having
>the heads done. Any suggestions? How complicated is this, can it be done by
>the do-it-yourselfer? How?  Is there a better way to go?

Patrick,
Here is my .02$:

 Dump the W30 cam.  It was hot in '70, but it ain't '70 anymore.  Try a
JM 20-22 cam (or the next one up).  Makes power everywhere, up to 5500
or so.
Scott Mullen
'70 442

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

From: Matt Mayer <mmayer@interaccess.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 13:31:26 -0400
Subject: Instrument Panel Swap

I have a friend in Indianapolis who isn't on the web (neaderthal...) but
he does have an '86 Cutlass Salon so I guess he's not all bad.  He had a
couple of questions that he wanted me to ask....

First:  He had a standard instrument panel that he replaced with a full
guage instrument panel.  He has replaced all the guages when he
installed it.  We thought we had all the wiring worked out, but it still
doesn't work quite right...for example, the fuel guage only reads 1/2
full on a full tank, the volt meter reads low.  The Temp and Oil seem to
read correctly.  It also has an itermittent ground problem, i.e. all the
guages read all the way one way or the other, but this will correct
itself after 15-20 minutes.  If anyone has any experience with this kind
of swap, we weoiuld appreciate any advice....

Second question was about a puddle of mysterious black, burnt-smelling
stuff in the depressions of his intake manifold.  We can't figure out
what kind of fluid it could be--it is up too high for it to be oil out
of the valve covers, right??  He does say that he gets a fuel odor in
the engine comparment that he can smell when he pulls into his garage,
but we don't know if its related or not.

Thanks!
- ---M
'86 442
-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
MMayer@InterAccess.Com                 | Matt Mayer VM: (800) 481-1323 
		
| "Well, that was interesting......"

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

From: "Mark Cornea (R)" <mcornea@ford.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 12:08:43 -0400
Subject: Re: '69 442 GO FASTER

On Dec 5, 11:17am, R Mullen wrote:
> Subject: '69 442 GO FASTER
>
> >From: "Patrick Derkacz" <spencergrant1@msn.com>
> >Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 20:21:25 -0400
> >Subject: suggestions for making my '69 442 GO FASTER
>
> >I have a '69 442 convertible with a '70 455 in it.  I could use some
> >suggestions on the most cost efficient way of getting this 4 speed to GO
> >FASTER.  I have put a '70 W30 cam, an aluminum manifold and a Holley 750
in. > >No idea  what the bottom half is. It has a 3.42 posi.  I am thinking of 
>
>having > >the heads done. Any suggestions? How complicated is this, can it be
done by > >the do-it-yourselfer? How?  Is there a better way to go? > >
Patrick, > Here is my .02$: > >  Dump the W30 cam.  It was hot in '70, but it
ain't '70 anymore.  Try a > JM 20-22 cam (or the next one up).  Makes power
everywhere, up to 5500 > or so. > Scott Mullen > '70 442 > >-- End of excerpt
from R Mullen

Scott's right, the 20-22 or the 22-25 make excellent power.

                                                       ___  ___
                                              /     /    / /  /
                                             / __  /  --/ /  /
       Mark Cornea (Dr Decal) `70 442 stick /_/ /_/ ___/ /__/ Red

             (MCORNEA@pt8228.pto.ford.com)

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

From: "Andrew C. Green" <acg@dlogics.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 12:19:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Instrument Panel Swap

>First:  He had a standard instrument panel that he replaced with a full
>guage instrument panel.  He has replaced all the guages when he
>installed it.  We thought we had all the wiring worked out, but it still
>doesn't work quite right...

Maybe you could define "worked out" for us; for example, there are some
wires in the harness plug (going into the back of the cluster) which must
be relocated into different slots when changing to the gauge cluster setup.
Someone else here has full instructions for doing this.

>Second question was about a puddle of mysterious black, burnt-smelling
>stuff in the depressions of his intake manifold.  We can't figure out
>what kind of fluid it could be--it is up too high for it to be oil out
>of the valve covers, right??  He does say that he gets a fuel odor in
>the engine comparment that he can smell when he pulls into his garage,
>but we don't know if its related or not.

Boiled-off gasoline residue? Oil seeping down from a wet PCV hose or
oil-soaked air cleaner housing? I'd clean the upper area of the engine,
check that the PCV valve is clear and rattling, then check again a while
later after a bit more driving to see what's leaking.

As a rule of thumb, though, I would recommend tracking down that fuel
leak first.  :-)

Andrew C. Green                   (312) 853-8331
Datalogics, Inc.
101 N. Wacker Drive, Ste. 1800    Internet: acg@dlogics.com
Chicago, IL  60606-7301           FAX: (312) 853-8282

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

From: "Tom Lentz" <tlentz@teknon.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 04:49:22 -0400
Subject: Re: 1977 EFI FYI (long)

     Hmm... this is sure neat to fantasize about!  I would probably trash
     the whole ECU and switch to something like the Accell DFI system to
     control it.  Something like an ECM from a Grand National would be
     ideal, but since those are set up to run 6 cyls, I dunno if you could
     make it work.

     If you're going to be running really high boost, what about using a
     converted diesel block?  If they can handle 22:1 compression (I think
     that's what a diesel is?) then a high-boost turbo should be no
     problem.

     I don't think the throttle body will be as big of a restriction as you
     think.  The throttle bodies on modern EFI cars are what, about
     55-60mm?  I think the venturi in a carburetor is where most of the
     restriction is, not in the throttle plate.

     Yes, turbo Buicks have adjustable fuel pressure regulators available,
     that's exactly how they fine tune their mixture.  The manifold vacuum
     is hooked to your regulator so that the pressure difference between
     _inside_ the manifold and the fuel rail is maintained at 39psi (not
     between the rail and the outside air).  Running a turbo, at times you
     would have positive pressure inside the manifold so you need the
     regulator to increase the fuel pressure by an equal amount.  You might
     need a beefier fuel pump capable of supplying 39psi+boost level+a bit
     left over for adjustment.

     Since you don't have a carb to mess with, what about bagging the turbo
     and getting a centrifugal supercharger instead?  It'd be easier to
     install, although probably more expensive.

     Tom Lentz
     tlentz@teknon.com

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

From: "David Brown" <dbrown@mcis.bsd.uchicago.edu>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 14:26:15 -0400
Subject: Re[2]: Slim Pickings

Sounds nice.  What about putting the title in your name or father's, mother's
name, and then selling it private?  I don't know about Ohio, but I think in
Illinois you can privately sell up to 10 or 11 cars a year without legally
being required to obtain a dealers (or some form of) license.  Could be too
much of a hassle.

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

- -----------
Too bad. We have a 1983 beige 98 with blue interior in our salvage yard.
This car is in excellent condition, never wrecked, the previous owner just
didn't want it. It will forever remain as a parts car as it is getting
extremely dificult to get a title for a car out of a towing yard (in Ohio at
least)  and when you do it is a "salvage title" which ruins resale value.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Jason Labay  Akron, Ohio (z28cfi@gwis.com) or (jlabay@kent.edu)
Sport Administration Grad Student at Kent State University
93 Z/28......Patriot Red, A4, G92(3.23), Lic. Plate: "1FST93Z"
80 Olds 4-4-2  W-30, Lic.Plate:"OLDSPWR"
75 Hurst/Olds W-25...restoration project up for $sale$

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

From: "David Brown" <dbrown@mcis.bsd.uchicago.edu>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 14:29:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Slim Pickings

I know what you mean.  I'm looking for a '78 - '81 Holiday 88 or '77 - '85
Delta 88 with nice body, interior and blown/no engine to swap the '77's
engine, trans, and misc. into.

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

- -------------
Seems as though good samples of these cars just do not come on the market
here very often. All I've been able to find is mostly junk. I'll keep
looking though... would love to find a '77-'79 88 or 98 coupe with a 403...

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

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

From: nmichelli@acl.nyit.edu
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 14:48:18 -0400
Subject: Re: GM Quality (in paint)

so what your saying is that you brought your car to the dealer and they
repainted it for free. was there a recall on that car or you just went and
asked about the warranty.

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

From: BobH592058@aol.com
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 15:10:49 -0400
Subject: Theft Deterrents

 >>>A local towing company has some kind of big dog (unsure what kind,
probably a Rott) He uses bowling balls as his chew toys.  Grabs on to one and
jumps up in a
pickup bed and starts gnawing away.  I'd sure hate to be on its bad side!

      Charley Buehner       | "buehner@cis.nmclites.edu"<<<<

You know, that brings up an interesting point.  Why is it legal for a
recylcing yard to use what, in some cases, could be deadly force?  Is it OK
to use "living" deterrents to discourage or outright severely injure a
trespasser?  But if you use a mechanical means (e.g. razor blades, electrical
shock, etc.) you can get sued?

OTOH, perhaps the big nasty dog is a clearly visible warning which
constitutes the equivalent of prior notice.  So, maybe we should put a big
sign on our cars that says something like:

 "DANGER - TOUCH THIS CAR AND YOU WILL BE COOKED MEDIUM-WELL DONE!"

Or:

"THIS CAR IS EQUIPPED WITH SEVERAL VERY NASTY THEFT DETERRENTS. MESS WITH IT
AT YOUR OWN RISK!"

I actually used the second one in my younger days.

This way the low life will be warned and saved from him/herself.  But, what
about an illiterate thief?  Do the warnings have to be multi-lingual?

:-)

I recently saw a bumper sticker which says "Protected by Smith & Wesson."

Works for me.


"Enjoy the Ride!"

Bob Handren        OCA/OCF# 7728
'67 W-30 Modified     '70 SX Convertible
Oviedo, FL

Handren Associates, Inc.
FDA Medical Device Regulatory Affairs
Laser/Optical Radiation Safety
(407)365-6385

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

From: BobH592058@aol.com
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 15:10:54 -0400
Subject: Cone vs clutch posi units

Ok, nobody else has jumped in here (at least not that I have been able to see
on the digest).

I have run both types and rebuilt _both_ types.

I can see no reason why a rebuilt clutch plate type posi can't be rebuilt
good as new. This assumes no obvious mechanical failures which would
otherwise render the unit useless.  It is/was common practice among drag
racers to take a brand new unit and tighten it up as much as possible by
using thicker plates and other means.  If the car is street driven, you
_must_ use gear lube formulated for posi units. The 12 bolt "C" rear in the
SX makes scary banging noises if I don't.  Put in the additive and it stops.

BTW, synthetic lubes do _not_ contain posi additive.  At least not Mobil.

The cone units have advantages and disadvantages versus the clutch type
units.  The most immediate advantage is that they seem to work fine with most
any gear lube.  Friction discs and clutch plates are not used.  Resistance is
achieved by the steel cone (which has a series of raised spiral groves)
rubbing on the smooth steel case. Under acceleration the cone is forced into
the case which results in limited slip.  I have never had to use lubes
specifically formulated for posi units in my cone posi's. Even though the car
came with a "limited slip lube" tag on the housing.  Mobil synthetic works
fine, as is. But doesn't work fine in the "C" rear without additive.

When a cone posi wears out it is because the cone has bottomed out in the
case.  While you can't make it "good as new" you can restore it to like new
or better limited slip action by grinding the lip off the bottom of the cones
and deepening the recess in the case.  OIds/Pontiac cone posi's use a split
case.  Open it up by removing the eight (I think) grade 8 bolts which hold
the two sections together.  Grinding a 1/4" total separation between the case
and cone is more than enough.  I then use side bearing shims to take up the
slack in the gears. These are the same shims you need to use to set backlash.
 You put them between the splined cone and splined driven sections on each
side.  Installation is a lot easier if you use an axel shaft to keep the
splines aligned.  If you over pack the shims, the cone unit will actually act
like a "locker" style rear.  Been there, done that and changed it to a more
reasonable preload. :-)

You can also shim, modify or replace the triple coil springs which serve as
preload.  I've used an old exhaust valve to increase the preload once.
 Increased it a LOT.  The case halves should go together with some preload,
just don't over do it.

I don't know how long one restored this way will last, I'm still using one
after several years, lots of street use and some drag racing.  It still works
great.

All the "ruined" cone type posi's I have seen were severly abused.  They
should last quite a while if not abused.   I still have the _original_ cone
posi that shipped with my '67 in the car.  It has never worn out.  The
"restored" unit cost me $10 bucks from a Pontiac guy in Hemmings.

FWIW if I had access to either cone or friction plate posi's I would go with
the cone, first because the original poster of this question stated he was
told they are cheaper.  Next, in my experience, the cone works as well or
better than the more common design. And, given the smaller ring gear, they
are stonger than the other designs (four pinion gears is much more than
double the strength of two). The case is also almost full circle, there is no
need for a large opening through which the plates and frictions are
installed.  Only enough space to ensure full lubrication is needed.

FWIW, this is the type of posi Olds used for the 66-67 W-30's.  As noted
above, I've never broken it.

In the final analysis, both designs work and will last a long time if not
severely abused.

There are also other designs such as locking, Torsen (sp?), air lockers and
others I am sure.  I have no experience with these units but they receive
rave reviews in the 4X4 mags.  Just remember that magazines have two main
functions.  To show you good stuff so you'll buy the mag again and to sell
the goods their advertises pay them to push.  The latter usually prevails.

"Enjoy the Ride!"

Bob Handren        OCA/OCF# 7728
'67 W-30 Modified     '70 SX Convertible
Oviedo, FL

Handren Associates, Inc.
FDA Medical Device Regulatory Affairs
Laser/Optical Radiation Safety
(407)365-6385

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

From: BobH592058@aol.com
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 15:10:50 -0400
Subject: Saving the good stuff

Charley wrote:

>>Subject: Trash Can Joys...

Well gang, I finally did it.  I just deleted the majority of all the Olds
posts of the past.  (Ya know, the ones I read and forgot, and the ones I
never got around to reading, etc....)  I saved as many technical posts as I
could, and all the personal replies I kept, but I finally killed off the
rest of the "me too" articles.  Spent the better part of an hour and freed
up 40 Meg on my hard drive!!!  Eudorka sure runs quicker now!  The hardest
part was weeding through what I wanted to keep the most...  Sure would have
been easier to just delete them when I read them, I'll have to start doing
that I guess.  Just thought I'd share that with y'all, since it's 1 AM, and
I don't see any other list activity right now...  Gotta go do some homework,
now, I guess.  Later....

      Charley Buehner       | "buehner@cis.nmclites.edu"<<

Charley:

I started a document in my word processor that I open when I want to save
something.  Just copy from the list and paste into the file. It's about 20
pages now and contains all the stuff I consider gems.  Takes up a lot less
room than saving the whole thing.

"Enjoy the Ride!"

Bob Handren        OCA/OCF# 7728
'67 W-30 Modified     '70 SX Convertible
Oviedo, FL

Handren Associates, Inc.
FDA Medical Device Regulatory Affairs
Laser/Optical Radiation Safety
(407)365-6385

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

From: "Jason Hairston" <jth442@flash.net>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 15:41:20 -0400
Subject: Re: (no subject)

- ----------
> From: image <IMAGE@enterprise.cybersurf.net>
> To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
> Subject: (no subject)
> Date: Wednesday, December 04, 1996 5:45 PM
>
> get me off this mailing.  It regularly fills mu mail box to overcapacity
> with 10 copies of each message

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

From: "Jason Hairston" <jth442@flash.net>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 15:35:47 -0400
Subject: Re: subscription

You would like to what?

- ----------
> From: Anectine@aol.com
> To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
> Subject: subscription
> Date: Wednesday, December 04, 1996 9:29 PM
>
> i would like to your newsgroup

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

From: Lloyd Culp <bculp@hiwaay.net>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 09:49:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Suggestions for making my  '69 4-4-2 go faster

david wyatt wrote:
>
> Patrick,
> Your setup is almost identical to my 70 4-4-2. I was running the 800 cfm
> Holley spread bore with a Holley Street Dominator intake. I went back to
> a Quadrajet which has improved drivability but has dropped some speed.
>
> FWIW I will be going back to my original intake, a cam and adjustable
> rocker arms from Competition cams, headers, and a Quadrajet on the next
> engine. I also have the 3.42 gears and a 4 speed. The car will be more
> drivable and probably faster than now due to overall efficiency.
>
> Just my $.02 worth
> Dave Wyatt



Dave,

I can agree w/most everything you say.  I don't like 3.90's & much
prefer the 3.23, 3.42, or 3.55 types & so that means milder cams & dual
plane manifolds.  It only stands to reason that they have made the
Mustang, Camaro, Firebird group of old engined HP cars do just as well
as they used to & get good gas mileage & get good drivability somehow.
It is mostly from what they have learned about cams in the last 25
years.

I had a new 1973 455 Cutlass w/dual exhaust, nice heads, & everything
that the factory had to offer.  It got only 8mpg & no real power.  I
changed the intake to a dual plane Edlebrock, 650 Holley, headers,
changed the cam to a '70 442 spec (not W30), added a mild trans shift
kit, recurved tha distributor, & added headers. The power went up
nicely, drivability was much improved & gas milage went to 14mpg.

I didn't really like the Holley as it would suffer sticking floats
easily & that angered my wife.  I only ran it a few months & then
rebuilt my Quadrajet to Buick Stage 1 specs & reinstalled it.  It worked
wonderfully - even better than the Holley.

The headers were a pain & over the years finally rusted out.  Back went
the stock manifolds & pipes.  I liked them much better - no more leaking
gaskets.

Over all, I found that I had a wonderful driving, fast, ok gas mileage,
& reliable Olds 455 & the key was the carb, manifold, & distributor.
The rest made little contirbution to a street car except trouble.  that
car stayed w/us for 16 years & was always a pleasure.

Bill Culp
Decatur, Alabama

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

From: Lloyd Culp <bculp@hiwaay.net>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 10:02:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Instrument Panel Swap

Matt Mayer wrote:
>
> Second question was about a puddle of mysterious black, burnt-smelling
> stuff in the depressions of his intake manifold.  We can't figure out
> what kind of fluid it could be--it is up too high for it to be oil out
> of the valve covers, right??  He does say that he gets a fuel odor in
> the engine comparment that he can smell when he pulls into his garage,
> but we don't know if its related or not.
>
> Thanks!
> ---M
> '86 442
> -                 | Matt Mayer

Mat,

Sounds like gasoline varnish from a fuel leak,  Check the gas lines &
carburetor.

Bill Culp
Decatur, Alabama

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

From: Lloyd Culp <bculp@hiwaay.net>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 10:09:07 -0400
Subject: Re: GM Quality (in paint)

nmichelli@acl.nyit.edu wrote:
>
> so what your saying is that you brought your car to the dealer and they
> repainted it for free. was there a recall on that car or you just went and
> asked about the warranty.

I went & asked.  I was told that there was free work on cars that had
complaints.

Bill Culp
Deccatur, Alabama

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

From: Bob Valentine <ravalent@liii.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 16:22:29 -0400
Subject: Re: '69 442 GO FASTER

On Thu, 5 Dec 1996, R Mullen wrote:

>  Dump the W30 cam.  It was hot in '70, but it ain't '70 anymore.  Try a
> JM 20-22 cam (or the next one up).  Makes power everywhere, up to 5500
> or so.


> Scott Mullen

   On the subject of cam choices, I just picked up a "worked" 350 Olds,
complete with adjustable rockers and teflon seals on the heads.    It's
got a unknown cam in it - large enough it only has 9" of vacuum at idle
and barely runs under 3000 rpm.

   Gotta decam it to run as a street motor.   Anyone have any experience
with the JM 18-20 vs. the JM 20-22?

                     -->   Bob Valentine  <--
                    --> ravalent@liii.com  <--
        "Experience varies directly with equipment ruined"

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

From: "David Brown" <dbrown@mcis.bsd.uchicago.edu>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 16:26:57 -0400
Subject: Re: 81 Cutlass Update

I recall someone posting that in '84 the G-bodies went to a lighter frame.
Could be they went to different (eg. lighter, cheaper) materials throughout or
 in heavier subsections.

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

- ----------
Another 81-86 comparison would be the metal they used in the trunk.  The
81 seems to have thicker, albeit rougher, metal on the inside of the
trunk while the 86 metal seems to be smoother but lighter... This begs
the question of what differences there were in the G-bodies throughout
the 80's...  There sure weren't any styling changes!

Ryan Hehn
ryanh@docker.com

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

From: Clayton Pierce <zcwp11@Access.ETSU-Tn.Edu>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 15:36:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Theft Deterrents

> I recently saw a bumper sticker which says "Protected by Smith & Wesson."
>
> Works for me.

Yes, I have one of those on the front of my '84 Cutlass :-)
Clayton Pierce

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

From: "Andrew C. Green" <acg@dlogics.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 16:45:02 -0400
Subject: Re: 81 Cutlass Update

>Another 81-86 comparison would be the metal they used in the trunk.  The
>81 seems to have thicker, albeit rougher, metal on the inside of the
>trunk while the 86 metal seems to be smoother but lighter...

Are you sure it's not simply a change in coatings? I seem to remember
my '82 being coated on the inside of the trunk with some sort of
splatter-coated goopy stuff, for rustproofing, soundproofing, something
like that...

Andrew C. Green                   (312) 853-8331
Datalogics, Inc.
101 N. Wacker Drive, Ste. 1800    Internet: acg@dlogics.com
Chicago, IL  60606-7301           FAX: (312) 853-8282

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 17:12:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Today's Useless Factoid

At 10:40 AM 12/5/96 -0400, you wrote:
>Noticed this morning from the train that the local Mercedes-Benz
>dealership, Mark Motors in Arlington Heights, IL, keeps a little
>fleet of loaner cars ready for customers when their own cars need
>to come back for repairs, etc. They were all lined up next to the
>service department doors this morning ready to be distributed for
>the day in place of sick Mercedes cars on the way in. And what do
>they select for nice reliable loaners? A set of white Oldsmobile
>Cutlass Cieras. Probably bought 'em from Kelly Olds down the street.
>
>Andrew C. Green                   (312) 853-8331
>Datalogics, Inc.
>101 N. Wacker Drive, Ste. 1800    Internet: acg@dlogics.com
>Chicago, IL  60606-7301           FAX: (312) 853-8282
>
>
>
They cost a lot less, and are reliable.

The Wiz

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 17:10:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Strange cars (was: Isetta)

At 10:17 AM 12/5/96 -0400, you wrote:

Snip>

>> I'm sure it was a Morgan.  The older three wheeled kind, I only assumed
were >> from the same builder. > >I'm sure it was a Morgan too, Wiz.  It
sounds just like the Morgan featured >in the film "The War of the Roses"...
watch for the scene where the wife >tries to crush her hubby in his beloved
Morgan by running over it in her 4x4 :) > > > >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' > 007 said, one parallel and you have conincidence
          two parallels and you have hapenstance
          three and you have enemy action...

What say you,

I was at the Video store a couple of days ago, and almost rented "War of the
Roses."  I like Kathlene Turner, but don't care much for Mike Douglas.  So I
passed.  I'll go ahead and get it next time, just for the Morgan, and of
course, a good picture too.

Other Morgan data as I can remember.  I doubt it had a suspension, when you
drove/rode in it, you had the feeling that you were riding right on the
ground.  It had knock off wire wheels, and they were a pain to get properly
tightened.  For a small car it got poor gas mileage, as I recall not more
than about 10 mpg.

Thanks for the update,

The Wiz

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

From: "David Brown" <dbrown@mcis.bsd.uchicago.edu>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 16:47:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Today's Useless Factoid

I see an Olds commercial here - at least for the Chicago area that knows
about places like Mark Motors, Motor Werks, etc.  Anyone with spare a (MW),
I want to talk to you!  I want to put it on my Delta - cynical I know!

[camera panning the dealership]
"Not only does Mark Motors in Arlington Heights have service (or is it
purchasing) consultants with sharp pencils, but they have a reliable fleet
of loaner vehicles for their service department customers."

[camera on the fleet of Olds', focuses on 'Oldsmobile' tag]
"You don't necessarily need to spend 60,000 dollars for the privilege to
drive a reliable loaner car, spend xx,xxx dollars on a nicely equipped
Ciera at your Olds dealer."

[camera focused on white Ciera, focuses out on complete Olds lineup in
white]
"It's your money . . ."

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

- ------------
Noticed this morning from the train that the local Mercedes-Benz
dealership, Mark Motors in Arlington Heights, IL, keeps a little
fleet of loaner cars ready for customers when their own cars need
to come back for repairs, etc. They were all lined up next to the
service department doors this morning ready to be distributed for
the day in place of sick Mercedes cars on the way in. And what do
they select for nice reliable loaners? A set of white Oldsmobile
Cutlass Cieras. Probably bought 'em from Kelly Olds down the street.

Andrew C. Green                   (312) 853-8331
Datalogics, Inc.
101 N. Wacker Drive, Ste. 1800    Internet: acg@dlogics.com
Chicago, IL  60606-7301           FAX: (312) 853-8282

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

From: "C.R.F." <wizkid@inlink.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 17:25:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Instrument Panel Swap

Snip>

>Second question was about a puddle of mysterious black, burnt-smelling
>stuff in the depressions of his intake manifold.  We can't figure out
>what kind of fluid it could be--it is up too high for it to be oil out
>of the valve covers, right??  He does say that he gets a fuel odor in
>the engine comparment that he can smell when he pulls into his garage,
>but we don't know if its related or not.
>
>Thanks!
>---M
>'86 442
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>MMayer@InterAccess.Com                 | Matt Mayer
>VM: (800) 481-1323 		       | "Well, that was interesting......"
>
>
Stick you finger in it, then rub it around a bit, and smell it.  And taste
it.  Don't ingest it, just taste it.  There are up to five fluids that one
can find under the hood.

        1. Engine oil
        2. A/T fluid (tranny and power steering)
        3. Tranmission grease if manual trans
        3. Coolant, usually water and glycol
        4. Fuel: Gasoline/diesel fuel, depending on engine type
        5. Windshield washer fluid

All have a distinctive smell and taste.

It can also be more than one in conbination.


The Wiz


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

From: Steven Larry Cannon <slcannon@uncc.edu>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 18:07:20 -0400
Subject: '86 442 sensors

Hey guys,

	I'm still having trouble getting my car to shift right.  It's been 
nothing
but trouble from day one.  I hope I get it fixed soon because I really like
this body style and if I can't figure it out I'm going to have to put it up
for sell (don't have money took keep sinking into possible solutions).  This
weekend I was trying to get out of our driveway after two days of solid rain
and the car absolutely would not run and the water was only about 4 inches
deep (my Impala made it with no problem and it sits lower).  I had to
powerbrake back up the driveway (because it was idling so rough).  The
voltmeter was jumping between 8 -12V.  I've been told maybe the TPS or O2
sensors are causing all this,  but I don't know anything about them.  This is
my first computer controlled car and it's really getting on my nerves.  I have
a Sunpro scanner, but it says all sensors are fine (are they reliable?).
Somebody help before I go crazy!

Thanks,
Steve

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

From: John and Elizabeth Gene <gene@cybernex.net>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 18:23:31 -0400
Subject: mystery 66 rear axle code

I can located a '66 B body rear end at a salvage yard about 100 miles away.
The guy said the code on the axle tube reads EM 0104 B . Can any one
translate this data into useful information. I don't mind the drive if its
not a waste of time. Thanks for the help.

John
+================================+
| John and Elizabeth Gene        |
| mailto:gene@cybernex.net       |
| http://www2.cybernex.net/~gene |
+================================+

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

From: Scott R Clark <mickeyd@selway.umt.edu>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 18:43:58 -0400
Subject: Tasters Choice??  was...Re: Instrument Panel Swap

> >Second question was about a puddle of mysterious black, burnt-smelling
> >stuff in the depressions of his intake manifold.  We can't figure out

	*snip*

> Stick you finger in it, then rub it around a bit, and smell it.  And taste
> it.  Don't ingest it, just taste it.  There are up to five fluids that one
> can find under the hood.
>
>         1. Engine oil
>         2. A/T fluid (tranny and power steering)
>         3. Tranmission grease if manual trans
>         3. Coolant, usually water and glycol
>         4. Fuel: Gasoline/diesel fuel, depending on engine type
>         5. Windshield washer fluid
>
> All have a distinctive smell and taste.

	Hmmm.  Sounds like wine tasting.  (I can just picture it--a bunch
of gear heads sitting around a fancy table with plastic quart bottles, and
nice wine glasses...swishing his glass with a circular motion, sniffing,
one of them says "Hmmm...August '96...exellent month for a nice Red
ATF...")  Just kidding.
	
	Seriously though, I've always thought that gear oil has the worst
bouquet out of any of them! (Old gear oil is some of the *worst* smelling
stuff on the planet!)  The only ones I've ever tasted were gasoline
(testing a fuel line to see if it was plugged...it was'nt, and I got a
mouthful) and coolant (another long story).  Funny how you learn some of
these lessons when you're young and...not quite as experienced.  ;) I'd
have to agree that the stuff in that intake definetly sounds like gas
varnish though.

				Scott
			1960 Oldsmobile Rocket 98

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

From: "Andrew C. Green" <acg@dlogics.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 18:59:47 -0400
Subject: Re: '86 442 sensors

>	I'm still having trouble getting my car to shift right.

Hold that thought while we deal with what else you said...

>This weekend I was trying to get out of our driveway after two days
>of solid rain and the car absolutely would not run and the water was
>only about 4 inches deep (my Impala made it with no problem and it
>sits lower).

I don't think the standing water had anything to do with this...

>I had to powerbrake back up the driveway (because it was idling so rough).
>The voltmeter was jumping between 8 -12V.

Don't know what to make of that symptom, but if it was an awfully wet
day and the thing didn't want to idle at all, maybe the moisture is
screwing up some old plug wires; i.e. they're shorting through their
insulation.

>I've been told maybe the TPS or O2 sensors are causing all this,

I doubt it, unless you have some error codes pointing that, and what
you're saying below:

>I have a Sunpro scanner, but it says all sensors are fine (are they
>reliable?).

...seems to imply that you have no error codes stored, if you did that
right. (Insert paper clip into ALDL socket, turn on ignition, review
codes blinked out via Check Engine light, if any, etc.)

You mentioned that it doesn't shift right, aside from all the other
complaints. I'd be interested to see if the catalytic convertor is
plugged up. That can result in a lot of exhaust backpressure, which
confuses the ECM: it sees low vacuum, thinks you're accelerating hard,
and holds the upshifts for as long as possible. Meanwhile you're just
trying to accelerate normally and wondering if the stupid thing is ever
going to go up to the next gear.

How old is the convertor, and how old are the plug wires?

Andrew C. Green                   (312) 853-8331
Datalogics, Inc.
101 N. Wacker Drive, Ste. 1800    Internet: acg@dlogics.com
Chicago, IL  60606-7301           FAX: (312) 853-8282

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

From: JPADA@hqgate.orbital.com
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 10:09:56 -0400
Subject: Humor for the Holidays NON-OLDS MATERIAL!!! (but funny)

          Sorry to post this non-Olds content, but this is just too
          funny to pass up.

          Joe Padavano
          jpada@hqgate.orbital.com

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


______________________________ Forward Header
__________________________________ Subject: Upgrade bug    :-) Author:  RLYNC
at OSC-DULLES2 Date:    12/5/96 8:22 AM





Last year, my friend upgraded his GirlFriend 3.1 to GirlFriendPlus 1.0
(marketing name: Fiancee 1.0). Recently he upgraded Fiancee 1.0 to Wife 1.0
and it's a memory hogger, it has taken all his space; and Wife 1.0 must
be running before he can do anything. Although he did not ask for it,
Wife 1.0 came with Plug-Ins such as MotherInLaw and BrotherInLaw.

Some features I'd like to see in the Upcomming GirlFriend 4.0...

- - A "Don't remind me again" button

- - Minimize button

- - Shutdown feature

- - An install shield feature so that Girlfriend 4.0 can be completely
uninstalled if so desired (so you don't lose cache and other objects)

I tried running girlfriend 2.0 with girlfriend 1.0 still installed, they
tried using the same i/o port and conflicted.  Then I tried to unistall
girlfriend 1.0 but it didn't have an uninstall program.  I tried to
uninstall it by hand, but it put files in my system directory.  Another
thing that sucks in all versions of girlfriend that I've used is that it
is totally "object oriented" and only supported hardware with gold plated
contacts.

*****  BUG WARNING  ********

Wife 1.0 has an undocumented bug. If you try to install Mistress 1.1
before uninstalling Wife 1.0, Wife 1.0 will delete MSMoney files before
doing the uninstall itself. Then Mistress 1.1 will refuse to install,
claiming insufficient resources.

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

From: "Tom Lentz" <tlentz@teknon.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 11:04:28 -0400
Subject: Re: '86 442 sensors (long)

     Sorry to hear about the troubles.  I'm not sure exactly what the
     symptoms you described are.  You mentioned shifting but then said it
     wouldn't idle?  Does this only happen when you run through water?
     Does it happen when the engine is just started, or only after it's
     warmed up and the computer enters closed loop mode?  Once you're going
     and not idling, how does it behave?

     If it happens when the engine is cold too, it's probably not one of
     the sensors, since they're not used to regulate engine function until
     it warms up.

     If your voltmeter is jumping between 8-12v, then you've got other
     problems like a bad voltage regulator (replace alternator), or maybe a
     bad ground somewhere (which sounds very likely).

     A rough idle after entering closed loop and hesitation on acceleration
     are signs of a misadjusted TPS.  The symptoms can be very similar to a
     malfunctioning accelerator pump or low float level.  Here's a repost
     of some earlier instructions I typed on adjusting the TPS.  I just got
     the parts to make myself a pigtail-connector of sorts to put in
     between the TPS harness and the carb, and provide alligator clips for
     easy voltmeter hookup.  I'll let everyone know how my 69-cent tool
     turns out once I use it.

     - - - begin repost - - -

     The TPS is actually _inside_ of the carburetor, and you won't see it
     unless you take apart the carb.  You don't need to take apart the carb
     to adjust it.  There is a small plug (1/4", maybe smaller) near (I
     think right behind) the pivot for the accelerator pump, which is the
     see-saw type thing on the front driver side top corner of the carb
     (move the throttle and you can see the accelerator pump get
     depressed).  The 3-wire connector is on the front of the carb in that
     same area.  You'll need a drill, a _digital_ voltmeter and 3 small
     gauge jumper wires (preferably with aligator clips).

     Drill a small hole in that plug, careful not to go too deep because
     the adjusting screw is underneath it.  The instructions say to drill a
     small hole then thread a sheet metal screw in just a few turns and use
     a pair of pliers to pull the plug out.  My plug fell out while I was
     drilling, so I didn't get that far.

     Then disconnect that 3-wire connector and run three jumper wires
     across so that it's still electrically connected but so you can get at
     the connections too.  I bought some small jumper wires at Radio shack
     that have tiny alligator clips on them (about $4 for a 10 pack) that
     clipped to the male end and used a few nails in the female end hooked
     to the other end of the jumper.  Turn your ignition on (but don't
     start the car) and check the voltage of those wires, one should be 5v,
     another ground, and another is the TPS output, which _should_ be
     0.38v, but is probably a bit off.  The plug is labeled A B and C but I
     don't remember which wire is which.  Put the voltmeter between the
     ground wire and the TPS output wire and then adjust the screw you just
     exposed to achieve 0.38v.

     The manual says you use a small flat-bladed screwdriver to adjust the
     adjustment screw you just exposed, but mine was hex-shaped instead.
     And _very_ small too.  I used the inside tube (the part that holds the
     ink) of a ball-point pen and squared off the end of the tube with
     pliers, which fit over the hex-screw just perfectly and allowed me to
     adjust it.  I'm sure you can buy an adjustment tool for these, but I
     wasn't in a position to run to the store.  Once you get it adjusted to
     about 0.38v (you probably won't get it perfect) move the throttle open
     and closed and check the reading again and re-adjust if necessary.
     You might have to do that a few times.

     Last thing to check is that with the throttle held wide open, the
     manual says you should be getting 4.6-4.8v.  I only got about 4.5v on
     mine, but it seems to work fine.  If you only get something like 3v,
     then you need a new TPS (must take apart the carb to replace, and I'm
     told they're expensive).  You should also check that the voltage
     increases fairly smoothly as you open the throttle.

     I never replaced my plug, though I probably should before winter.  I
     think a little dab of RTV silicone should work nicely.

     Long instructions, but the whole ordeal, start-to-finish took me 20
     minutes.  10 of that was hunting for the right size nails.  Good Luck!

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

End of oldsmobile-digest V1 #393
********************************
 
