
oldsmobile-digest     Saturday, February 21 2004     Volume 01 : Number 4786



Re: What is a muscle car?  was: muscle cars handling
RE:Muscle Cars
engine flush
Re: Of Airbags and Crush Zones
Re: What is a muscle car?  was: muscle cars handling
Sub: unipoints
Re: SERIOUS vibration
RE: ADMIN: Another Weather Outage
Re: What is a muscle car?  was: muscle cars handling
Re: Poll on best method for car show judging
RE: Longevity of newer vs. Older
Re: 2 Grand Air Cleaner
Re: engine flush
Re: Sub: unipoints
Olds 'sighting'... (music video)
Re: engine flush
Re: Of Airbags and Crush Zones
Re: Of Airbags and Crush Zones
Re: Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older
Re: unipoints
Re: 455 Stuck Valve update
Re: What is a muscle car?  was: muscle cars handling
Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older
Re: unipoints
Re: engine flush
magnetic oil filters
Amp Install Complete
Re: Sub: unipoints
1968 W-31/Hurst  carb 7028255

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 14:26:51 -0700
From: "Infinite Space Systems, Inc." <imp@theriver.com>
Subject: Re: What is a muscle car?  was: muscle cars handling

Cliff and
http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclecars/general/musclecars-definition.shtml
is correct. That's the way it was said back in the '70s.


> A F-85 with a 455 would not, therefore, be a factory musclecar but
> rather a sleeper.


...but sleepers can be much more fun!

Milton Schick
1964 442 Cutlass
imp@theriver.com

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 16:35:28 EST
From: ArchwayOldsClub@aol.com
Subject: RE:Muscle Cars

- -------------------------------1077312928
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Glad I could get you all worked up over how OLDSMOBILES were good on the road 
courses. Still don't care bout the other brands, but that's just me, and 
that's why the world goes round.

- -------------------------------1077312928
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><HEAD>
<META charset=3DUS-ASCII http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; cha=
rset=3DUS-ASCII">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fffff=
f"><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#0000a0 size=3D4>Glad I could get yo=
u all worked up over how OLDSMOBILES were good on the road courses. Still do=
n't care bout the other brands, but that's just me, and that's why the world=
 goes round.</FONT></BODY></HTML>

- -------------------------------1077312928--

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 17:18:49 -0500
From: John Kelsey <ribspot@pop4.net>
Subject: engine flush

Hi All
    My recently aquired 80 toro has been neglected in the maintainance 
dept. A recent oil change left me thinking it needs to be changed again!
I hope to change the oil and filter every 500 miles for a couple of 
thousand miles to try and clean the crankcase, oil pan etc. Any thoughts 
or suggestions on an engine flush of any kind?
think spring
John Kelsey
Dayton Ohio

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 17:45:57 -0500
From: "swanny" <swannys78@adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: Of Airbags and Crush Zones

BMW.........Big-Money-Wasted
- ----- Original Message -----
From: <77w30442@comcast.net>
To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2004 11:07 PM
Subject: Re: Of Airbags and Crush Zones


> tell that to the owner of the 2002 bmw  that had his side air bag deployed
when he hit a pot hole. bmw is sitting in salvage yard car was totaled after
it hit gaurd rail after startling driver.
> yes sir technoligy is great
> ron
>
>

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:57:32 -0500 (EST)
From: Stephen Amadei <amadei@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: What is a muscle car?  was: muscle cars handling

On Thu, 19 Feb 2004, Cliff Simpson wrote:

> GM-Muscle.com says:
>     A muscle car, by the strictest definition, is an intermediate sized,
> performance oriented model, powered by a large V8 engine, at an
> affordable price.
>
> The Camaro, T/A, and Mustang all fail the "intermediate sized" portion
> of this definition as they were considered small when they were first
> released.

And it can be argued that later ones are not affordable.  The size thing
also leaves the Nova in the cold... so the sizing should include
'intermediate or smaller'.

IMHO, the pony cars are a subset of muscle cars.

> Musclecarclub says:
>     ... the actual definition of a muscle car, or which models were
> muscle cars, is a topic that is often disputed. Here is the general
> interpretation of what is a muscle car and what cars qualify, and which
> don't:
> http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclecars/general/musclecars-definition.shtml
>
> Their list is more inclusive and includes the Pony cars as long as they
> have large motors or higher performance small block motors.  Therefore
> the Mustang GTs, Mach 1's and Boss, Camaro SS and Z28, and T/A with 400
> c.i. or larger engines are considered Muscle cars.
>
> They consider a 442 a musclecar but not a Cutlass despite the fact that
> a 70's Cutlass could be ordered with a larger engine than the late 60's
> 442.  The Chevelle SS is a muscle car while a Malibu 350 (my other car)
> is not.

I think this list is just wrong.  With the ability to swap engines at
will, I feel _all_ GM A-bodies during that period are muscle cars... I
suppose if your going to discriminate based on engine, it should have at
least 8 cylinders.  The thing that made them muscle cars was that they
were versatile enough that you could put a big V8 in the same chassis as a
6 sat.  You can't do that today without alot of fab.

As noted at the top of the list, they weren't called muscle cars at the
time they were built... so no manufacturer ever classified them as 'muscle
cars'... so hard limits are hard to come up with.

I agree that the fullsize cars are not muscle cars, but the Catalina 2+2
or Galaxie is listed as a muscle car... I don't agree with that either.
IMHO, the fullsize cars aren't muscle cars because they generally had V8s
as standard fare.

Actually, I'm always felt a muscle car should be a coupe.  So I cringe a
bit when the '90s Impala SS is called a 'muscle car'.

In the end, I think these guys are just trying to make their club more
exclusive... snobs.  ;-)  They can't even spell 'Javelin'.

This list should be called 'Cars that cost alot to buy now because of a
few special badges'.

					----Steve
Stephen Amadei
Dandy.NET!  CTO
Atlantic City, NJ

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:55:32 EST
From: Kt8321@aol.com
Subject: Sub: unipoints

- --part1_1ec.198d68b6.2d67f874_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Does anyone know if the G.M. unipoints fit distributors which have separate 
points and condenser?
Ken Thomas

- --part1_1ec.198d68b6.2d67f874_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><HTML><FONT  SIZE=3D2 PTSIZE=3D10 FAMILY=
=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0">Does anyone know if the G.M. unipoi=
nts fit distributors which have separate points and condenser?<BR>
Ken Thomas</FONT></HTML>

- --part1_1ec.198d68b6.2d67f874_boundary--

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

Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 00:28:51 +0000
From: Steve Harrison <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: SERIOUS vibration

At 02:08 PM 2/20/2004 EST, you wrote:
>    In a message dated 2/20/2004 12:06:54 PM Central Standard Time,
>amadei@dandy.net writes:   Just for a moment or did it do it for a
>few seconds?
> It shook violently for about seconds. I really don't think it's in the
>brakes. Although stomping on the brakes made it much, much worse, it shakes
>a little bit all the time at highway speeds. It's fine around town. I'm
>wondering if maybe the driveshaft is out of balance, or the pinion angle is
>off?

All that sounds classically much more like worn front end parts.

SteveH

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

Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 00:15:10 +0000
From: Steve Harrison <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: RE: ADMIN: Another Weather Outage

At 05:48 PM 2/20/2004 +0000, you wrote:
>>As for me, I've been able to clear out my back door and driveway, although
>>there isn't much place to go. My front door is buried under a snowdrift
>>and I can't open it or even get to it from outside. Once the snowplows
>>start making their way around I'll be digging my driveway out again, and
>>the weather is calling for another storm on Sunday. Lucky us. ;-)
>
>Y'know, we 'murricans down here use snowblowers for that kind of thing, and 
>we don't get anywhere near as much as snow as you do...  :-)

Yeah; then agin, we're lazy, fat slobs who LOVE convenience and
high-technology, especially if it uses petroleum-based products  ;o)

SteveH

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 19:56:11 -0500
From: "ron fama" <77w30442@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: What is a muscle car?  was: muscle cars handling

  so by that statement  as qoated the  w-31 cars are not muscle cars.
  even when wearing the 442 badges.
  sounds to me that the person who wrote the article did not check all their information. 
  the w-31 ran well as the w-32  a detuned w-30. weird by the most part
  so then how did the qaud 4 even be considered a muscle car in the 90's.
  for me  a older car ,fast engine; that handles good
  ron
   ---- Original Message ----- 
  From: "Cliff Simpson" <csimpson@ucalgary.ca>
  To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
  Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2004 4:20 PM
  Subject: What is a muscle car? was: muscle cars handling


  > Matt Crumley wrote:
  > 
  > > ... I don't consider the Camaro or Trans Am a muscle car.
  > 
  > Matt brings up a good point, what is a muscle car?
  > 
  > GM-Muscle.com says:
  >     A muscle car, by the strictest definition, is an intermediate sized, 
  > performance oriented model, powered by a large V8 engine, at an 
  > affordable price.
  > 
  > The Camaro, T/A, and Mustang all fail the "intermediate sized" portion 
  > of this definition as they were considered small when they were first 
  > released.
  > 
  > Musclecarclub says:
  >     ... the actual definition of a muscle car, or which models were 
  > muscle cars, is a topic that is often disputed. Here is the general 
  > interpretation of what is a muscle car and what cars qualify, and which 
  > don't: 
  > http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclecars/general/musclecars-definition.shtml
  > 
  > Their list is more inclusive and includes the Pony cars as long as they 
  > have large motors or higher performance small block motors.  Therefore 
  > the Mustang GTs, Mach 1's and Boss, Camaro SS and Z28, and T/A with 400 
  > c.i. or larger engines are considered Muscle cars.
  > 
  > They consider a 442 a musclecar but not a Cutlass despite the fact that 
  > a 70's Cutlass could be ordered with a larger engine than the late 60's 
  > 442.  The Chevelle SS is a muscle car while a Malibu 350 (my other car) 
  > is not.
  > 
  > What at first seems capricious upon reflection does make sense.
  > 
  > The prototypical musclecar was the GTO and it still embodies the strict 
  > definition of a factory musclecar.  Basically an intermediate model with 
  > a big-a$$ed engine dropped in _and_ some badging.  The badging or 
  > separate model distinction is important.
  > 
  > In the Oldsmobile line the Cutlass would have been the "regular" model 
  > while the 442 was the muscle car because of the big engine _and_ badging.
  > 
  > A F-85 with a 455 would not, therefore, be a factory musclecar but 
  > rather a sleeper.
  > 
  > Opinions and flames welcome.
  > -- 
  > 
  > Factory musclecars, musclecars, pony cars, sleepers, I love them all.
  > http://www.ucalgary.ca/~csimpson/TheOldsZone.html
  > 

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:09:46 -0700
From: Oldsmagnet <oldsmagnet@oldsmagnet.com>
Subject: Re: Poll on best method for car show judging

Couple issues I've seen, participant judging can be swayed easily, many 
nearby towns have boycotted one 'specific' annual car show, solely because 
they go with participant judging.  Only becomes a problem because the club 
that puts on the event has so many members that the voting is too easily 
swayed towards 'internal' cars.  Didn't matter how nice a car was, if it 
was an outsider, it wasn't voted on.  ALL non-local members could vote on 
the same car, and it still wouldn't get enough votes to win.

Our local shows here have used actual judges (most uneducated as to what is 
original or correct or even tasteful) but at least had some uniformity to 
it.  They've also had the spectator favorites, too.  They charge admission, 
which includes ~one~ voting ballot.  Could be faked with some effort, but 
stuffing hasn't been much of a problem so far.  ...so far.

In the past, I was a car audio judge.  Things are done differently now in 
that arena, but back then, we'd have several organizations, stores, clubs, 
etc, coming together to any given show.  Each club would bring a judge or 
two, and all the judges would take on one specific area together, ie two 
judges for sound quality, two for interior appearance, two for installation 
integrity, two for external appearance.  In the end, there were enough 
judges from varied backgrounds that it kept it impartial.  We also stuck to 
a strict rule that we could not judge any car from any class that our own 
car was in.  ie, if I'm competing in the 251 to 500 watt class, someone 
else would judge the entire class.  Period.  There were occasionally some 
exceptions and areas where that just couldn't work, but those were few and 
far between.

The last car show (actual car show, not stereo) that I judged, had me and 
one other guy judging interiors.  We'd both look a car over, both assign it 
a score, then add the two scores together.  Then divide by two.  Easy.  Got 
to my car, I kept my mouth shut, let him get his number, then told him 
that's the number to use - only way to be impartial there.  (and ~then~ I 
pointed out all the stuff that was wrong with it, and he missed :-)

Bottom line is there is no perfect judging format, and you're best off to 
weigh all the pros and cons of the various formats with various members of 
the club(s) that will be participating in the show.  Then pick a format 
that you all can agree on, and go with it.  If it backfires, you can change 
next year, but you'll at least have the peace of mind that it was a group 
decision, rather than an arbitrary one.


- -- 
=/   http://oldsmagnet.com   \===========/         Oldsmobile        \=
|  mailto:442@oldsmagnet.com  |=========|         1897 -- 2004        |
=\ Charley Buehner Sidney MT /===========\      Shot In The Back     /=

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 20:43:19 -0500
From: "Kurt" <wmachine@shubes.net>
Subject: RE: Longevity of newer vs. Older

Milton, you do bring up an interesting issue.
Back in the 1980s the Olds Performance Chapter was struggling for its
existence.  Not due to membership interest, but it leadership interest.
More
specifically finding people with the interest *and* the time to devote to
running the chapter (Which is a lot more than most people realize).
During the discussions, when there were some differences being aired out,
someone said, "Hey remember we're all in this for the same reason".  It was
then that is really hit home to me.
No, we're *not* all in this for the same reason.  We are quite different,
with
different likes, backgrounds, financial positions, time available, etc.
Some
like coupes, some convertibles, some stock, some modified, some '60s, some
'70s.  I'll bet there is someone out there that likes the '78 442.  You get
the
picture.
We start with the common love of Oldsmobile, but quickly branch out from
there.
 Which is *good*.  Think about it.  It is the differences that give us
color,
as a whole.

Kurt mailto:wmachine@shubes.net
http://wmachines.shubes.net
'65 Jetstar 1 (4-speed)       '66 442 Sport Coupe (Tri-Carb, 4-speed)
'67 442 Convertible (4-speed) '69 442 Convertible (3-speed manual)
'92 Achieva SCX W-41(5-speed) '99 Expedition (no-speed)
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: oldsmobile-owner@chebucto.ns.ca
> > [mailto:oldsmobile-owner@chebucto.ns.ca]On Behalf Of Infinite Space
> > Systems, Inc.
> > Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2004 12:17 AM
> > To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
> > Subject: Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older
> >
> >
> > However, there's a catch; a point everyone's missing. For those of you
who
> > restore your cars to original condition, much of these mods can also be
> > done.
> >
> > Why do you want an older car? Because you like it! Okay, then what? It's
> > old. It probably needs to be repaired or restored. When the R&R is being
> > done, why not build your car better than it was when it came from the
> > factory? Yes, even an old '64 A-body can be built to rival or greatly
> > surpass the stopping power, handling ability, and safety of a
> > 2005 vehicle.
> > If the car's stopping and handling ability is of outstanding quality,
one
> > can drive their way out of the majority of bad situations.
> >
> > By increasing the performance of the powertrain, then one has the best
of
> > all worlds. The equivalent of a brand new car in one's older vehicle,
that
> > will out perform anything currently made. Now that's where the
> > challenge is
> > and the fun in our Oldsmobile pastime.
> >
> > Milton Schick
> > 1964 442 Cutlass
> > imp@theriver.com

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 19:26:11 -0700
From: Mark Mullins <mark@marineaviation.org>
Subject: Re: 2 Grand Air Cleaner

I just think of all the Olds parts I could pick up for $2 grand (both of 
'em.. LOL)

M

At 08:33 AM 2/20/2004 -0500, ron fama wrote:

>   thats nuts, must be nice to have 2 grand for a air cleaner
>   ron

Mark Mullins
Tucson, Az

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

Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 03:09:08 +0000
From: Steve Harrison <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: engine flush

At 05:18 PM 2/20/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>Hi All
>    My recently aquired 80 toro has been neglected in the maintainance 
>dept. A recent oil change left me thinking it needs to be changed again!
>I hope to change the oil and filter every 500 miles for a couple of 
>thousand miles to try and clean the crankcase, oil pan etc. Any thoughts 
>or suggestions on an engine flush of any kind?

My dad used to use engine flush way back in the '60/'70s but that was when
oils weren't as good as they are now. But he quit using the stuff after he
traded in his '65 Valiant for a stang II in '73.

Personally, I wouldn't. I got my 1988 fullsized wagon with about 200K miles
in '99 and seriously doubt it had had any kind of regular maintenance since
it had the original date-coded wires and the plugs were so worn that half
of them had no center electrode sticking above the ceramic or the side
electrode was worn to a point. All the vacuum hoses were hosed ;o\  When I
had to replace the intake manifold gasket in 2001, I did find a small
amount of sludge in the lifter gallery but not nearly as much as I would
have expected for the mileage and apparent lack of maintenance (wish I knew
what kind of oil the PO had been using since it didn't sludge much). In
2002, I switched to using Shell Rotella D oil which turned black within
1500 miles. It turned black at around 2000 miles, the next time. Now, 25K
miles later, it turns yellowish-black at about 2500 miles and dark black by
3000 miles, which is when I aim to do oil changes now. I've not gotten
under the valve covers yet to see what kind of sludge still lives there.

I would suggest you do the same rather than use a slush... uh, flush agent.
Flush stuff really dilutes the viscosity of your oil and IF I had to use
it, I certainly wouldn't use it during cold weather as it would take awhile
before it mixed with the cold oil so you could be running your bearings on
mainly flush stuff for some seconds.

If you feel you ABSOLUTELY MUST use the stuff, I'd suggest you simply pour
it into the valve covers, let it sit, then flush with 3-4 quarts of oil and
then an oil change, ALL WITHOUT RUNNING THE ENGINE (but after having warmed
up the engine so the old oil isn't stiff).

But one real problem you can encounter is the stuff has been known to
loosen thick globs of sludge which then clogged oil return holes in the
heads and/or block. So I wouldn't suggest using the flush stuff at all.

SteveH

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

Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 07:08:27 -0400 (AST)
From: Greg Beaulieu <ab348@chebucto.ns.ca>
Subject: Re: Sub: unipoints

On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 Kt8321@aol.com wrote:

> Does anyone know if the G.M. unipoints fit distributors which have separate 
> points and condenser?

I think GM called them "Uniset" and yes, they fit. They were designed for
just that purpose.

Greg Beaulieu    ab348@chebucto.ns.ca    Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada
          Olds List Admin Info: http://oldslist.oldsgmail.com

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 20:57:15 -0800 (PST)
From: Frank Fellman <frank.fellman@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Olds 'sighting'... (music video)

- --0-1325235298-1077339435=:83913
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Heads up, list!
 
Red/white '70 (?) 4-4-2 convertible--
 
       John Mayer
         Clarity
    "Heavier Things"
 
...nice "bird's eye" footage.  (Fine-looking driver
 and front-seat passenger, too!)
 
                Enjoy!     ;o)))              Phantom455

- --0-1325235298-1077339435=:83913
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

<DIV>Heads up, list!</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Red/white '70 (?) 4-4-2 convertible--</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; John Mayer</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Clarity</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; "Heavier Things"</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>...nice "bird's eye" footage.&nbsp;&nbsp;(Fine-looking driver</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;and front-seat passenger, too!)</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Enjoy!&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;;o)))&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Phantom455</DIV>
- --0-1325235298-1077339435=:83913--

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 22:44:06 -0600
From: Brian Ammons <b_ammons@mail.utexas.edu>
Subject: Re: engine flush

It sounds like you have some money to spend.

I would like to see you try the magnetic clamp that goes on the oil filter
(no I don't know the name - did I see it in Eastwood?) and report back with
your results.  It seems wicked cool, I would like to hear a first-hand
account.

At 05:18 PM 02/20/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>Hi All
>    My recently aquired 80 toro has been neglected in the maintainance 
>dept. A recent oil change left me thinking it needs to be changed again!
>I hope to change the oil and filter every 500 miles for a couple of 
>thousand miles to try and clean the crankcase, oil pan etc. Any thoughts 
>or suggestions on an engine flush of any kind?
>think spring
>John Kelsey
>Dayton Ohio
> 

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 22:18:45 -0700
From: "Infinite Space Systems, Inc." <imp@theriver.com>
Subject: Re: Of Airbags and Crush Zones

Tom,

> 69 Cutlass Convertible (no air bag - 3" Simpson lap belt)


You got it!

Milton Schick
1964 442 Cutlass
imp@theriver.com

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 22:24:28 -0700
From: "Infinite Space Systems, Inc." <imp@theriver.com>
Subject: Re: Of Airbags and Crush Zones

> You know that material they make the little black boxes out of, you know
> the boxes that survive the crash and have all the info in them.


It's just very thick alloy steel.


Why
> don't they make the whole plane out of that stuff?


It would be just a bit way too heavy. However, M1A2 main battle tanks are
made out of that stuff. So are RTGs (Radiological Thermal Generators), which
supply spacecraft electrical power.

Milton Schick
1964 442 Cutlass
imp@theriver.com

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 22:45:06 -0700
From: "Infinite Space Systems, Inc." <imp@theriver.com>
Subject: Re: Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older

Warning. This incident is somewhat graphic.

I always wear seat belts, but I do know of one case where a seat beat was
also deadly, but the crash was not survivable anyway, particularly without
the seat belt. Fall, 1968. A young college couple were out partying after a
football game. They were in a '66 Mustang. They had a headon with another
college couple in a Camaro on two lane Missoura Highway 13, south of
Warrensburg (Central Missoura State University). Estimated combined speed of
impact was 165 MPH. The driver of the Mustang was not wearing his seatbelt
and was ejected through the windshield over the steering wheel. His
girlfriend was wearing her seat belt, survived the initial impact, but the
seat belt pushed her intestines out the rear. A close friend of mine and his
girlfriend were the first ones on scene, in his '65 bright orange Mustang.
Mike Curry was close to being drunk, but he sobered very quickly. He knew
everyone involved. Mike immediate lifted his dead friend's girlfriend out of
the '66. The doors were gone. She died in Mike's arms before the MHP showed
up. The couple in the Camaro survived the impact, they were wearing their
seatbelts, but died in the ambulance in route to the hospital.

That's why I use 3" seat belts to distribute the impact force on the body
over a wider area, hopefully resulting in less blunt force trama and less
internal damage. Also, the driver of the '66 cured me of ever not putting on
my seat belt. I installed 3" racing seat belts in my '59 Olds 98 sleeper
that weekend. My '23 "T" roadster, Hemi powered, already had them.

Milton Schick
1964 442 Cutlass
imp@theriver.com

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 23:02:14 -0700
From: "Infinite Space Systems, Inc." <imp@theriver.com>
Subject: Re: unipoints

I assume you mean the points and condenser attached to the same base, as a
one piece assembly. The answer is, yes!

Milton Schick
1964 442 Cutlass
imp@theriver.com


- ----- Original Message -----
From: <Kt8321@aol.com>
To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2004 4:55 PM
Subject: Sub: unipoints


> Does anyone know if the G.M. unipoints fit distributors which have
separate
> points and condenser?
> Ken Thomas
>

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 23:14:41 -0700
From: "Infinite Space Systems, Inc." <imp@theriver.com>
Subject: Re: 455 Stuck Valve update

> Can any of you confirm this or is this a function of the
> guides and the valves?


Both. From the shop manual:

intake valve, clearance in guide = 0.0010 - 0.0027"
exhaust valve, clearance in guide = 0.0015 - 0.0032"

intake valve, stem diameter = 0.3425 - 0.3432"
exhaust valve, stem diameter = 0.3420 - 0.3427"

valve guides, inside diameter, both intake and exhaust = 0.3442 - 0.3452"

Milton Schick
1964 442 Cutlass
imp@theriver.com

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

Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 06:21:30 +0000
From: Steve Harrison <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: What is a muscle car?  was: muscle cars handling

At 06:57 PM 2/20/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>> Musclecarclub says:
>>     ... the actual definition of a muscle car, or which models were
>> muscle cars, is a topic that is often disputed. Here is the general
>> interpretation of what is a muscle car and what cars qualify, and which
>> don't:
>> http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclecars/general/musclecars-definition.shtml
>>
>> Their list is more inclusive and includes the Pony cars as long as they
>> have large motors or higher performance small block motors.  Therefore
>> the Mustang GTs, Mach 1's and Boss, Camaro SS and Z28, and T/A with 400
>> c.i. or larger engines are considered Muscle cars.
>>
>> They consider a 442 a musclecar but not a Cutlass despite the fact that
>> a 70's Cutlass could be ordered with a larger engine than the late 60's
>> 442.  The Chevelle SS is a muscle car while a Malibu 350 (my other car)
>> is not.

Seems to me that the Cutlass SX would certainly qualify although its
badging isn't specifically "performance-oriented"; after all, they only
came with 455s.

And I wouldn't consider a turnpike-cruiser-equipped 442 to be a muscle car
by any stretch of the imagination  ;o\

>I think this list is just wrong.  With the ability to swap engines at
>will, I feel _all_ GM A-bodies during that period are muscle cars... I
>suppose if your going to discriminate based on engine, it should have at
>least 8 cylinders.  The thing that made them muscle cars was that they
>were versatile enough that you could put a big V8 in the same chassis as a
>6 sat.  You can't do that today without alot of fab.

Seems to me that much of the list is fairly accurate, as far as it goes,
particularly as concerns their definition of "full-sized" muscle cars
although I think the definition should have included that the engine had to
be performance-oriented rather than a run-of-the-mill large-displacement
type such as were commonly found in a fambly vehicle. As for intermediates,
I maintain that the 4 bbl Cutlass SX should qualify, even though it doesn't
have special performance badging (the turnpike cruise option clearly isn't
performance-oriented). Many of the full-sized types, such as the Frod
Galaxies with 427s, 428s and 429s, also didn't have any specific special
performance-oriented badging. One thing that set Olds apart from the others
was that Olds rarely included the engine displacement as part of the
badging, unlike the other GM divisions and most of the other marques.

>I agree that the fullsize cars are not muscle cars, but the Catalina 2+2
>or Galaxie is listed as a muscle car... I don't agree with that either.
>IMHO, the fullsize cars aren't muscle cars because they generally had V8s
>as standard fare.

I don't agree with that reasoning because whether the vehicle was a compact
(read: early Barracuda), intermediate or full-sized, I6 engines were
standard for almost every model (except the "specialty" models such as
T-birds, Riviera, Toronado, etc.).

What SHOULD qualify them is that the engine wasn't merely a run-of-the-mill
large-displacement V8, such as the top-of-the-line 345 hp 428 that was in
my '66 Galaxie 7-liter, 4-speed convertible. Had that car had something a
little less mundane, such as the dual-quad 425 horse 427, THEN it would
certainly have qualified as a full-sized muscle car. The same would apply
to Poncho 2+2's; the ordinary 389 certainly wouldn't qualify a heavy,
full-sized 2+2 but either of the 421 engines certainly would. Same with
Ch*bby's Impala SS's; the SS 327s were no great shakes but the special
Canadian-built versions equipped with 427s certainly were, as were Canadian
Poncho Bonnies with the Ch*bby 427.

They went part of the way in inclusion of the engine as part of the
definition when they said a 340 Cuda isn't a muscle car, but they stopped
short. For example, ANY Poncho GTO with a 389 and a Powerslush is most
definitely NOT a muscle car  ;o\  Even those with TH400s were not
necessarily all that special; it wasn't until the car got a 325 horse 389
that it began to become something to be reckoned with on the drag strip.
The same holds true for Ch*belles; the proportion of actual
performance-engined versions was WAY smaller than the count of
run-of-the-mill Ch*belles with 327s and Powerslushes.

>Actually, I'm always felt a muscle car should be a coupe.  So I cringe a
>bit when the '90s Impala SS is called a 'muscle car'.

In my mind, NOTHING later than 1980 is worthy of the title "muscle car",
those especially. There's absolutely nothing that sets those whales apart
from what used to be a regular, ordinary fambly car of the late '60s/early
'70s. The total lack of eye-appeal styling, alone, should disqualify them
entirely.

>In the end, I think these guys are just trying to make their club more
>exclusive... snobs.  ;-)  They can't even spell 'Javelin'.
>
>This list should be called 'Cars that cost alot to buy now because of a
>few special badges'.

Yeah, most of them are like fighter pilots: huge aviation wristwatches and
mirrored wrap-around sunglasses but very small.... uh, can't say that here
;o\

What's one of the things that REALLY set off a muscle car of the '60s/'70s??

EYE APPEAL, or eye candy. It was not only the appearance of the vehicle,
but also that the appearance generally matched the performance capability
;o\  ;o\  ;o\

SteveH

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

Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 02:30:54 -0700
From: "Infinite Space Systems, Inc." <imp@theriver.com>
Subject: Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older

Kurt,

> Not due to membership interest, but it leadership interest.
> More
> specifically finding people with the interest *and* the time to devote to
> running the chapter
> No, we're *not* all in this for the same reason.  We are quite different,
> with
> different likes, backgrounds, financial positions, time available, etc.
>  Which is *good*.  Think about it.  It is the differences that give us
> color,
> as a whole.


You are absolutely correct.

In 1987, I was vice-president and from 1988 to 1996 I was president of Pima
Pistol Club. The exact same issues were present there in relation to
different types of shooting sports and interests. There were quite a few
rivalries between different shooting disciplines, plus running the
day-to-day operation of the shooting range. Sometimes, it was like
conducting kindergarten. It took a 2x4 to get some individuals' undivided
attention. The idea was to operate the club according to NATO doctrine,
everyone needed to support everyone else's interests. An attack on one
shooting discipline was an attack on all shooting disciplines. It's fun :-)
getting cooperation out of diverse individuals.

Milton Schick
1964 442 Cutlass
imp@theriver.com

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

Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 05:22:32 -0500
From: "Fred Nissen" <fsnissen@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: unipoints

> Does anyone know if the G.M. unipoints fit distributors which have
separate
> points and condenser?

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

If you are talking about over the counter points and condenser units, yes.
Personally, I love AC Delco for most things, but I would not use their point
sets.  Get Standard Ignition's Blue Streak points and condenser unipoint
set.  NAPA / Echlin is not bad either.

Regards,
Fred

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

Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 05:18:46 -0500
From: "Fred Nissen" <fsnissen@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: engine flush

>     My recently aquired 80 toro has been neglected in the maintainance
> dept. A recent oil change left me thinking it needs to be changed again!
> I hope to change the oil and filter every 500 miles for a couple of
> thousand miles to try and clean the crankcase, oil pan etc. Any thoughts
> or suggestions on an engine flush of any kind?

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

I am in agreement with Steve.  Do not use a flush agent.  At best it will
break up large hunks of glop and clog things you do not want clogged.  Use a
good high detergent oil and a quality filter like Purolator, WIX or AC Delco
and change it often until the oil starts staying clean longer.  Among
conventional oils, I like Shell Rotella and Sunoco.

Regards,
Fred

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

Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 07:23:45 -0500
From: John Kelsey <ribspot@pop4.net>
Subject: magnetic oil filters

snip-I would like to see you try the magnetic clamp that goes on the oil 
filter
(no I don't know the name - did I see it in Eastwood?)
Brian
Its called filter mag. and can be seen at filtermag.net Runs $75.00 to a 
little over $100.00. I'll have to do more reading on this before I make 
a decesion
John Kelsey
Dayton ohio

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

Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 07:37:38 -0600
From: Branson Sparks <bsparks@gosparkle.net>
Subject: Amp Install Complete

*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro*
*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro*
Works incredibly well. Will get up pictures ASAP. Thanks for everyone's 
help!

- --Branson

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

Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 13:38:53 +0000
From: 62oldsfan@comcast.net
Subject: Re: Sub: unipoints

> Does anyone know if the G.M. unipoints fit distributors which have separate 
> points and condenser?

Yes, I believe they do.  I bought a unipoint set for my '61 98 many years ago.  Right after that the car quit running.  I had it towed in and the mechanic replaced the unipoints with separate points and condenser and all was fine.  The mechanic told me the unipoint sets are junk and told me not to use them.  I haven't bought a set since.

Paul

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

Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 09:33:25 EST
From: HURSTOLDZ@aol.com
Subject: 1968 W-31/Hurst  carb 7028255

- -------------------------------1077374005
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Greetings all.

I remember that someone here was looking for a 7028255  1968 W45/W31  carb.

I have one in great shape that will need a rebuild.

Email me privatly if you are interested,  if not  it will go on E*ay.

Vinny  
68 Hurst/Olds W45 # 511

- -------------------------------1077374005
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><HEAD>
<META charset=3DUS-ASCII http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; cha=
rset=3DUS-ASCII">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fffff=
f">
<DIV>Greetings all.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I remember that someone here was looking for a 7028255&nbsp; 1968 W45/W=
31&nbsp; carb.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I have one in great shape that will need a rebuild.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Email me privatly if you are interested,&nbsp; if not&nbsp; it will go=20=
on E*ay.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Vinny&nbsp; </DIV>
<DIV>68 Hurst/Olds W45 # 511</DIV></BODY></HTML>

- -------------------------------1077374005--

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

End of oldsmobile-digest V1 #4786
*********************************
