
oldsmobile-digest      Sunday, February 29 2004      Volume 01 : Number 4798



Re: Building a 260?  Re: 260 versus 468 - weight
AIR Pump Belt Adjustment??
Re: Building a 260?  Re: 260 versus 468 - weight
Re: AIR Pump Belt Adjustment??
Re: Laid off today
Re: AIR Pump Belt Adjustment??
Re: AIR Pump Belt Adjustment??
Re: Building a 260?  Re: 260 versus 468 - weight
Re: AIR Pump Belt Adjustment??
Re: AIR Pump Belt Adjustment??
RE: More eBay fun-  Question for seller -- Item #2462917579
3x3"KN Hood Clearances Pics
Re: AIR Pump Belt Adjustment??
Re: More eBay fun-  Question for seller -- Item #2462917579
Re: AIR Pump Belt Adjustment??
Re: Building a 260?  Re: 260 versus 468 - weight
Re: Building a 260?  Re: 260 versus 468 - weight
Re: Building a 260?  Re: 260 versus 468 - weight
Re: Building a 260?  Re: 260 versus 468 - weight
Brakes redux
Re: Building a 260?  Re: 260 versus 468 - weight
sensors and such: CCC vs EFI
Load Leveling on Silhouette goes nuts
Re: Brakes redux
Re: Building a 260?  Re: 260 versus 468 - weight
Re: More 66 parts
Re: Building a 260?  Re: 260 versus 468 - weight
more FWD vs RWD 3.8L
Using a 260... was Re: Building a 260
Re: Using a 260... was Re: Building a 260
Re: sensors and such: CCC vs EFI
Re: More eBay fun-  Question for seller -- Item #2462917579

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 08:26:38 -0800
From: Kevin & Casey Olund <kcolund@shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: Building a 260?  Re: 260 versus 468 - weight

> 
> (blows out dust and watches moths flutter from wallet....)
> 
> Well, there goes that idea for me!  ;)
> 

I know that feeling all too well. It sucks being an Olds guy on a Chebby budget.

Kevin 

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:05:52 +0000
From: Steve Harrison <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: AIR Pump Belt Adjustment??

Gotta query for you guys who have AIR pumps that use the big belt (not the
little one that runs directly off something else): was looking at my '88
CSM and it appears as if my AIR pump (which I need to put back on to pass
emissions sometime these next several weeks) belt might be adjusted by
moving the A/C compressor, rather than a separate movement of the AIR pump
itself to tighten the belt. Can anybody go have a look and confirm??

If that's the case, it means I'll have to put the A/C compressor back on,
too, which I didn't want to do, since it doesn't work and I don't want the
extra weight anyhow.

The alternative would be to somehow find the brackets from a
non-A/C-equipped 307. And if B-bodies weren't even available without A/C,
I'd likely have to install the pump and brackets from a non-A/C G-body,
which don't exist in the northeast.

On the plus side: just fired up my '83 M*libu, which has been sitting in
the driveway undriven (and not even started) since... oh, I guess November
sometime. After turning over for a few seconds and getting gas back into
the carb, it fired right up  :o))))  May take it for a short spin a bit
later once I get enough gas in the tank to make it to the local gas station
 ;o\  Next, to put the dash back in the Elky and run it for awhile...  :o|

Nice, balmy 45+ degree day here in southwestern Connecticut; should take
advantage of it in some way  ;o|

Thanks,
SteveH

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 16:56:38 +0000
From: Steve Harrison <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: Building a 260?  Re: 260 versus 468 - weight

At 08:26 AM 2/28/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>> 
>> (blows out dust and watches moths flutter from wallet....)
>> 
>> Well, there goes that idea for me!  ;)
>> 
>
>I know that feeling all too well. It sucks being an Olds guy on a Chebby
budget.

...... and especially in the far, still-frozen (but slowly thawing) north  ;o\

SteveH

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 12:18:33 -0500
From: "Fred Nissen" <fsnissen@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: AIR Pump Belt Adjustment??

> Gotta query for you guys who have AIR pumps that use the big belt (not the
> little one that runs directly off something else): was looking at my '88
> CSM and it appears as if my AIR pump (which I need to put back on to pass
> emissions sometime these next several weeks) belt might be adjusted by
> moving the A/C compressor,

Yes.

> If that's the case, it means I'll have to put the A/C compressor back on,

Yes.

> The alternative would be to somehow find the brackets from a
> non-A/C-equipped 307.

No.  Find a Cadillac RWD 307 or an E car (Toro / RIv) and get the AIR parts
(crank pulley and possibly AIR brackets).  These used the separate belt for
AIR.    Some G cars had this as well.

>And if B-bodies weren't even available without A/C,

A/C was standard on the Custom Cruiser by '86.  Don't know about the Chevy.
Have never seen one '86 or later w/o A/C though.

Regards,
Fred

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 09:44:12 -0800 (PST)
From: kenneth treharn <kwt_1950@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Laid off today

Steve   Good luck.  The economy sucks in Ohio also.  I
have lost 6 jobs in my working lifetime of 37 years.
My present employer is in bankrupcie. spelling bad!  I
don't see much help coming from "our" goverment, they
ARE more "WORLD" leaders than American leaders.  Just
my opinion.  Later, Ken Treharn
- --- "Reed, Stephen" <sreed@chatsworth.com> wrote:
> All,
> 	I received notice today that I am being laid off
> from CPI.  Please forward all emails to my home
> address @ ssreed@direcway.com
> 	I have the option to work up to 4 additional weeks
> to finish a project I'm working on, but please send
> any emails to the home addy to contact me.
> 
> 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Get better spam protection with Yahoo! Mail.
http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 18:17:44 +0000
From: Steve Harrison <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: AIR Pump Belt Adjustment??

At 12:18 PM 2/28/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>>... my AIR pump (which I need to put back on to pass emissions 
>>sometime these next several weeks) belt might be adjusted by
>>moving the A/C compressor,
>
>Yes.

Daddratit.

>>If that's the case, it means I'll have to put the A/C compressor back on,
>
>Yes.

Rats.

>>The alternative would be to somehow find the brackets from a
>>non-A/C-equipped 307.
>
>No. Find a Cadillac RWD 307 or an E car (Toro / RIv) and get the 
>AIR parts (crank pulley and possibly AIR brackets). These used the 
>separate belt for AIR. Some G cars had this as well.

Yeah; from my CSMs, looks like '85-'88 Cutlass/Regal or '85 Toro at least,
plus the Caddies as you said; i.e., roller-cammed 307-Ys except in the wagons.

So, anybody have the complete roller-cammed 307 non-B-body AIR pump system
you wanna get rid of?  :o)

>>And if B-bodies weren't even available without A/C,
>
>A/C was standard on the Custom Cruiser by '86.  Don't know about the Chevy.
>Have never seen one '86 or later w/o A/C though.

There's rumors that a larger proportion of vehicles sold in the
northwestern states weren't equipped with A/C than in the rest of the
states. And, of course, very likely Canadian vehicles, too.

Thanks, Fred.
SteveH

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 15:24:06 -0500
From: "ron fama" <77w30442@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: AIR Pump Belt Adjustment??

  or you could  switch to the electric version used on the 94 and up chevy lt1 350 and 265 engines
in buick and chevy  cars
  ron
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: "Steve Harrison" <k0xp@dandy.net>
  To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
  Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2004 1:17 PM
  Subject: Re: AIR Pump Belt Adjustment??


  > At 12:18 PM 2/28/2004 -0500, you wrote:
  > >>... my AIR pump (which I need to put back on to pass emissions
  > >>sometime these next several weeks) belt might be adjusted by
  > >>moving the A/C compressor,
  > >
  > >Yes.
  >
  > Daddratit.
  >
  > >>If that's the case, it means I'll have to put the A/C compressor back on,
  > >
  > >Yes.
  >
  > Rats.
  >
  > >>The alternative would be to somehow find the brackets from a
  > >>non-A/C-equipped 307.
  > >
  > >No. Find a Cadillac RWD 307 or an E car (Toro / RIv) and get the
  > >AIR parts (crank pulley and possibly AIR brackets). These used the
  > >separate belt for AIR. Some G cars had this as well.
  >
  > Yeah; from my CSMs, looks like '85-'88 Cutlass/Regal or '85 Toro at least,
  > plus the Caddies as you said; i.e., roller-cammed 307-Ys except in the wagons.
  >
  > So, anybody have the complete roller-cammed 307 non-B-body AIR pump system
  > you wanna get rid of?  :o)
  >
  > >>And if B-bodies weren't even available without A/C,
  > >
  > >A/C was standard on the Custom Cruiser by '86.  Don't know about the Chevy.
  > >Have never seen one '86 or later w/o A/C though.
  >
  > There's rumors that a larger proportion of vehicles sold in the
  > northwestern states weren't equipped with A/C than in the rest of the
  > states. And, of course, very likely Canadian vehicles, too.
  >
  > Thanks, Fred.
  > SteveH
  >

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 15:25:51 -0500
From: "ron fama" <77w30442@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Building a 260?  Re: 260 versus 468 - weight

  never heard of anyone rebuilding a 260.
  ron   
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: "King V" <king_v@mindless.com>
  To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
  Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 10:51 PM
  Subject: Building a 260? Re: 260 versus 468 - weight


  > At 01:53 PM 02/27/2004 -0500, SteveH wrote:
  > 
  > >Never heard of anyone overboring a 260 so have no idea how thick 
  > >the cylinder walls really are. I figger you'd hafta be either a strict 
  > >restorationist or a masochist to want to rebuild a 260 anyhow  ;o\ 
  > >Or else, you just enjoy having the sand kicked in yer eyes like 
  > >the weakling on the beach  :o)))))))
  > 
  > Hey man . . I figure if engines like the 273 Mopar, the 289 Ford, and 283
  > Chevy could have had decent reputations back in the day, I'm sure SOMETHING
  > could be done with the 260!
  > 
  > Not that I've tried, mind you.  But maybe, just maybe, someday, I might.
  > 
  > - Joe Vahabzadeh
  > 

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 21:10:42 +0000
From: Steve Harrison <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: AIR Pump Belt Adjustment??

At 03:24 PM 2/28/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>or you could  switch to the electric version used on the 94 and up 
>chevy lt1 350 and 265 engines in buick and chevy  cars

In fact, I was wondering whether an electric AIR pump would work. I thought
possibly one of the ways the thing worked with the cat was the fact that
the faster the engine speed, the more exhaust, so the more air would be
required into the cat. Do they control the electric pump's speed like that??

Where's the thing mounted? It runs from a high-current relay somewhere,
switched by the ignition, right? Maybe controlled by an oil pressure switch
so it only comes on when the engine's running?

Mebbe a trip to the Yarde really is in order tomorrow morn....

SteveH

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 16:22:34 -0500
From: "ron fama" <77w30442@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: AIR Pump Belt Adjustment??

  the electric air pump is only used after start up its timed or shut off by coolant temp reaching a
certain degree wich comes first is not important. it directs air into air pipes mounts on a bracket
with a triangler bolt pattern  built in rubber  collored holes. 8 mm bolts. a relay operates it
controled by pcm in this case a keyed soarce and piped into youre exsisting tad/tab valve assembly.
you could mount it on inner fender.
  ron
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: "Steve Harrison" <k0xp@dandy.net>
  To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
  Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2004 4:10 PM
  Subject: Re: AIR Pump Belt Adjustment??


  > At 03:24 PM 2/28/2004 -0500, you wrote:
  > >or you could  switch to the electric version used on the 94 and up
  > >chevy lt1 350 and 265 engines in buick and chevy  cars
  >
  > In fact, I was wondering whether an electric AIR pump would work. I thought
  > possibly one of the ways the thing worked with the cat was the fact that
  > the faster the engine speed, the more exhaust, so the more air would be
  > required into the cat. Do they control the electric pump's speed like that??
  >
  > Where's the thing mounted? It runs from a high-current relay somewhere,
  > switched by the ignition, right? Maybe controlled by an oil pressure switch
  > so it only comes on when the engine's running?
  >
  > Mebbe a trip to the Yarde really is in order tomorrow morn....
  >
  > SteveH
  >
  >

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 18:18:15 -0500
From: oldslist@nuthinfancy.com
Subject: RE: More eBay fun-  Question for seller -- Item #2462917579

Hey Guys,

I feel like I HAD to reply to this one... 

In my opinion Jeff is one of the NICEST fella in the Olds community!!!
He has gone out of his way numerous time to help me!!! I don't know
exactly what went down between you guys but... in my book Jeff is a
class act, they don't get much better then him!

Just my .02

Regards,

Bob
www.1970-442.com


- -----Original Message-----
From: oldsmobile-owner@chebucto.ns.ca
[mailto:oldsmobile-owner@chebucto.ns.ca] On Behalf Of Christopher Witt
Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2004 9:23 AM
To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
Subject: More eBay fun- Question for seller -- Item #2462917579


>From: "Jeff" <jsalinardi@comcast.net>
>To: <rocketscience442@hotmail.com>
>Subject: Re: Question for seller -- Item #2462917579
>Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 08:18:23 -0500
>
>Stay away from my auctions a__hole.
==============================
[edited for family content by CBW]
Does anyone have any idea why this "jsalinardi@comcast.net" or " 
bigblockolds" feller is so ingracious?

I cannot imagine what I might have done to bring that on. I wrote back
to 
ask him what his problem is exactly. That's the sort of behavior I have
come 
to expect from Brand C people. Perhaps he has me confused with someone
else. 
Perhaps he just does not like inquiries.

Chris Witt



>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <rocketscience442@hotmail.com>
>To: <jsalinardi@comcast.net>
>Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 10:50 PM
>Subject: Question for seller -- Item #2462917579
>
>
> > what's the part number on that NOS OP sending unit? cannot make it 
> > out
>in
>the photo...
> > --------------------
> >
> >
> > Question from:           *the*rocketscientist
> > Title of item:           NOS 68-72 Oldsmobile 442 Rally Pack Temp 
>Sending
>Unit
> > Seller:                  bigblockolds
> > Starts:                  Feb-24-04 21:41:28 PST
> > Ends:                    Mar-02-04 21:41:28 PST
> > Price:                   Currently $45.20
> > To view the item, go to:
>http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2462917579
> >
> >
> >
> > Visit eBay, The World's Online Marketplace TM at http://www.ebay.com
>

_________________________________________________________________
Get fast, reliable access with MSN 9 Dial-up. Click here for Special
Offer! 
http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200361ave/direct/01/

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 18:26:32 -0500
From: Cutlass7276@netscape.net (Randy Hermsen)
Subject: 3x3"KN Hood Clearances Pics

Hello
I had ordered these 3x 3inch tall KN filters before the motor was even in the car.
I have been running a few weeks now,,,the filters arrived yesterday.
Apparentley KN was outa stock and they had to make them.
They musta tapped the tree for rubber for the molds it took them long enough...LOL :O
The parts guy laughed at me and said the prt# application is for a Ferrari Tractor.
How did i guess i had to hillbilly up the hood a 1/4" before the filters even came....must be old age or i am finally gaining common sense? :O
  http://images.andale.com/f2/115/106/3596099/1080127398266_0228_008.jpg 
  http://images.andale.com/f2/115/106/3596099/1077903033808_0228_005.jpg 
  http://images.andale.com/f2/115/106/3596099/1076750712001_0228_003.jpg 
 http://images.andale.com/f2/115/106/3596099/1075913367048_0228_001.jpg
Dont ferget there is 1/2 inch spacers under carbs also. 
Using the Silly Putty like plastigauge on top of cleaners i got 1/4" clearance on rear cleaner and 5/16 on frt cleaner..i think this should be ok.
And yes the car is running real strong!
Wandy H.
Van.B.C.Can.



__________________________________________________________________
Introducing the New Netscape Internet Service. 
Only $9.95 a month -- Sign up today at http://isp.netscape.com/register

Netscape. Just the Net You Need. 

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 18:51:07 -0500
From: "Fred Nissen" <fsnissen@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: AIR Pump Belt Adjustment??

>   the electric air pump is only used after start up its timed or shut off
by coolant temp reaching a
> certain degree which comes first is not important. ...

This is why I DETEST AIR.  It does NOTHING to reduce emissions after the
engine is up to operating temperature, and yet you are stuck with a huge
amount of plumbing and other junk in the way when you need to service
anything.  The Olds AIR is also not the best for either design or quality.
Try getting the fittings from a rusted out AIR manifold out of the head....

Regards,
Fred

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 18:54:41 -0500
From: "Fred Nissen" <fsnissen@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: More eBay fun-  Question for seller -- Item #2462917579

> I feel like I HAD to reply to this one...
>
> In my opinion Jeff is one of the NICEST fella in the Olds community!!!

- ---------

Jeff or Chris?  My vote is with Chris as the good guy.  Snipped remainders
below.

Regards,
Fred


> >From: "Jeff" <jsalinardi@comcast.net>
> >To: <rocketscience442@hotmail.com>
> >Subject: Re: Question for seller -- Item #2462917579
> >Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 08:18:23 -0500
> >
> >Stay away from my auctions a__hole.
> ==============================
> [edited for family content by CBW]
> Does anyone have any idea why this "jsalinardi@comcast.net" or "
> bigblockolds" feller is so ingracious?
>
> I cannot imagine what I might have done to bring that on.

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

Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 00:46:11 +0000
From: Steve Harrison <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: AIR Pump Belt Adjustment??

At 06:51 PM 2/28/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>The Olds AIR is also not the best for either design or quality.
>Try getting the fittings from a rusted out AIR manifold out of 
>the head....

Yes, that's bad, having to take the whole head to the machine shop after a
nut breaks. I had to take a pair of Ch*bby V6 exhaust manifolds to the shop
to get broken tubing nuts taken out last fall, that was bad enough.

SteveH

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:58:59 -0700
From: Mark Mullins <mark@marineaviation.org>
Subject: Re: Building a 260?  Re: 260 versus 468 - weight

It could be worse.. (Olds guy on a Schwinn budget)  : )

M

At 08:26 AM 2/28/2004 -0800, Kevin Olund wrote:
>I know that feeling all too well. It sucks being an Olds guy on a Chebby 
>budget.
>
>Kevin

Mark Mullins
Tucson, Az

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 18:01:30 -0700
From: Mark Mullins <mark@marineaviation.org>
Subject: Re: Building a 260?  Re: 260 versus 468 - weight

Ron,
If you rebuilt a 260 as a performance engine, would you tell anyone ??

At 03:25 PM 2/28/2004 -0500, ron fama wrote:
>   never heard of anyone rebuilding a 260.
>   ron

Mark Mullins
Tucson, Az

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

Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 01:18:23 +0000
From: Steve Harrison <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: Building a 260?  Re: 260 versus 468 - weight

At 05:58 PM 2/28/2004 -0700, you wrote:
>It could be worse.. (Olds guy on a Schwinn budget)  : )

..... or worser..  SteveH (Olds guy on Tinkertoys-from-Salvation-Army budget)

>M
>
>At 08:26 AM 2/28/2004 -0800, Kevin Olund wrote:
>>I know that feeling all too well. It sucks being an Olds guy on a Chebby 
>>budget.
>>
>>Kevin
>
>Mark Mullins
>Tucson, Az
>
>

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

Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 01:20:14 +0000
From: Steve Harrison <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: Building a 260?  Re: 260 versus 468 - weight

At 06:01 PM 2/28/2004 -0700, you wrote:
>Ron,
>If you rebuilt a 260 as a performance engine, would you tell anyone ??
>
>At 03:25 PM 2/28/2004 -0500, ron fama wrote:
>>   never heard of anyone rebuilding a 260.
>>   ron

The Lord can do some mighty mysterious things; but that might be beyond
even Him  ;o\

SteveH

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 20:08:35 -0600
From: Brian Ammons <b_ammons@mail.utexas.edu>
Subject: Brakes redux

OK, I'm going to make it quick. (I just looked back at that during proofing
the whole thing and realized I lied).  The brake job should be done but isn't.

We now have 1984 Delta 88 reservoir, mc, booster, mc-to-propvalve pipes,
and prop valve (all clean and pretty and even painted) running to '84 "low
drag" front calipers and '78 LeSabre 11" drums in back on '77 Delta 88.
The only '77 parts remaining are the brake hard lines from prop valve to
fronts and rear, as well as the brake pedal assembly itself (it COULDN'T be
that the pedals are different between years, can it?...the '77 pedal hooked
right up to the '84 pushrod with no persuasion required...)

Also have Summit adjustable proportioning valve between '84 prop valve and
rears, dialed to approx. 20% reduction (assuming that the degree of
restriction is constant throughout it's travel, 43% total reduction on 10.5
turns lock to lock = 4.09% a turn @ 5.25 turns = 21.5%).  This restriction
is needed so the backs don't lock up before the fronts (the '84 prop valve
is setup for 11" disc in front/9" drums in back, not the 11" drum brakes
currently installed.)  This is not dialed in, it's just a guess on where to
start.

So it DOES stop itself, they DO work, I drove it around the neighborhood
this evening...it's just that there's a lot of pedal travel before they
start to do anything.  The brake pedal pumps up nicely when the car is off,
but as soon as you start the engine (with your foot on the brake) the pedal
goes down a lot - not to the floor, but too much.  Doing a burnout (testing
purposes only of course, it wasn't even me driving) the fronts give way
after only a few seconds - I would have expected them to hold the car
almost indefinitely...right?

I have just been bleeding the snot out of them last weekend and now today,
but am always getting some air, especially in the back, but really only on
the driver's side.  The MC is definitely bled, I bench bled it before
installation but today I unhooked the pipes and re-bench bled it with it on
the car and it didn't have any air in it at all, then hooked it back up and
trying to bleed them and...I don't know, it seems like if I didn't have a
connection tight somewhere I'd be dripping fluid, which I'm not...I think
I'm to undserstand that if the booster was bad the pedal would be hard, not
squishy..does anybody have any ideas on what's next besides getting a shop
to power-bleed the system?

The reason I'm asking is I've never NOT been able to bleed a system
(scratch that - basically, THIS system, installed on a different car)
myself, and certainly in the past it was done in much less time than I've
spent on this recently...

Thanks,

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 22:27:45 -0500
From: King V <king_v@mindless.com>
Subject: Re: Building a 260?  Re: 260 versus 468 - weight

At 06:01 PM 02/28/2004 -0700, Mark wrote:
>Ron,
>If you rebuilt a 260 as a performance engine, would you tell anyone ??

I can't answer for Ron . . but I think I would!  Well, I'd definitely tell
you Olds guys, not sure about the rest of the world . . 

Though it has a certain "Hah, and they said it couldn't be done" appeal.

	- Joe Vahabzadeh

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 22:36:00 -0500
From: King V <king_v@mindless.com>
Subject: sensors and such: CCC vs EFI

All,

Couple of questions:

I know that fuel-injected systems have a number of sensors and such that
are required to communicate with the ECM so that the amount of fuel as well
as spark timing can be adjusted.

But....

Do EFI and TBI more or less have the same plethora of sensors?

How about the CCC-equipped cars?  Do they have this intense variety of stuff?

I can't even remember most of them, but the ones that come to mind are:

Oxygen sensor
Throttle Position Sensor
Knock Sensor
Mass Air Flow Sensor
Manifold Absolute Pressure Sensor (MAF and MAP don't exist together?)
Air Intake Temperature Sensor
Coolant Temperature Sensor

and probably a plethora of others I can't remember.


Thanks.....


	- Joe Vahabzadeh

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 19:38:09 -0800 (PST)
From: Bill Brooks <deaconblue1969@yahoo.com>
Subject: Load Leveling on Silhouette goes nuts

My wife's 1998 Olds Silhouette with 86K miles went
nuts today.  The car has load leveling and it went to
its top position and stayed there.  It didn't just go
to the top, it is so pumped that the car is virtually
undrivable.  If you jump on the back bumper, it
doesn't give, it just quivers slightly.

It seems like it is some kind of sensor that is on the
blink.  I would just remove the line from the manifold
and let it come back down, at least so it can be
driven to a garage, but this vehicle has its own
compressor.

Any ideas on what this might be and whether it looks
like a dealer issue would be appreciated.

Also, this car had the upper manifold seal problem
about 30k miles ago.  Today I had to add quite a bit
of coolant, so I'm not feeling too well about having
this job done again.  First time was $700 at a dealer.
 Does GM have any kind of program that warrenties
their work like Frod used to advertise?

Other than that it has been a pretty decent car.  I
hope it lasts another 4 years.

Thanks in advance,
Bill

1970 Cutlass 'S', 1998 Olds Silhouette, 2002 Buick
LeSabre

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

Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 03:29:46 +0000
From: Steve Harrison <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: Brakes redux

At 08:08 PM 2/28/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>OK, I'm going to make it quick. (I just looked back at that during proofing
>the whole thing and realized I lied).  The brake job should be done but
isn't.
>
>We now have 1984 Delta 88 reservoir, mc,.....
.......
>The reason I'm asking is I've never NOT been able to bleed a system
>(scratch that - basically, THIS system, installed on a different car)
>myself, and certainly in the past it was done in much less time than I've
>spent on this recently...

Is that '84 MC new or Yarde-vintage? If from another car, were you able to
test it before you removed it? Sounds like it's leaking internally.

SteveH

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

Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 03:35:41 +0000
From: Steve Harrison <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: Building a 260?  Re: 260 versus 468 - weight

At 10:27 PM 2/28/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>At 06:01 PM 02/28/2004 -0700, Mark wrote:
>>Ron,
>>If you rebuilt a 260 as a performance engine, would you tell anyone ??
>
>I can't answer for Ron . . but I think I would!  Well, I'd definitely tell
>you Olds guys, not sure about the rest of the world . . 
>
>Though it has a certain "Hah, and they said it couldn't be done" appeal.

We didn't say it couldn't be done; we just asked "Why bother, when you can
spend just as much or maybe less money (try finding new 260 pistons, fer
example) rebuilding something that'll give ye more powah and torque, eh"
;o\  ;o\  ;o\

SteveH

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 23:09:52 EST
From: Tremendous442@aol.com
Subject: Re: More 66 parts

- --part1_145.233ae9fb.2d72c010_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I am interested in the 330 engine, is it a  2 or 4 barrel? what do you want 
for it? iI do not have any 71 specific parts, although I have owned a 71 and a 
72 442 at one time. I have some things you might be able to use. I have some 
big block C heads and a 455 short block that needs a rebuild, crank is good. I 
have a rebuilt thm 400 trans, a good running thm 350, a 12bolt posi, many 
other parts. anything you need specifically?

Sean

- --part1_145.233ae9fb.2d72c010_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">I am interested in the 330 engine,=20=
is it a&nbsp; 2 or 4 barrel? what do you want for it? iI do not have any 71=20=
specific parts, although I have owned a 71 and a 72 442 at one time. I have=20=
some things you might be able to use. I have some big block C heads and a 45=
5 short block that needs a rebuild, crank is good. I have a rebuilt thm 400=20=
trans, a good running thm 350, a 12bolt posi, many other parts. anything you=
 need specifically?<BR>
<BR>
Sean</FONT></HTML>

- --part1_145.233ae9fb.2d72c010_boundary--

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 23:11:58 -0500
From: "Andrew Geeting" <geeting@woh.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Building a 260?  Re: 260 versus 468 - weight

Well, I guess I'll be the one to say it can't be done. :)

The bore on the 260 is just way too small to provide enough room to run
intake/exhaust valves that would support a decent horsepower level. And, the
to my knowledge your stuck with the 260 heads as no other Olds head will fit
properly. Again due mostly to valve sizes/bore size.

The other problem is that to get the power out of the 260 your going to have
to really zing it in the rpms and the bottom end definitely isn't going to
like that.

Comparing the 260 to similarly sized engines (Ch*vy 283,etc) is problem in
the fact that they are two totally different designs and just because they
are almost the same size cubic inch wise would not mean they would perform
the same. The 260 was made as an emissions friendly, gas friendly engine
that would last. If there's one thing about the 260 that is admirable is
that I don't believe I've ever heard of someone "blowing" one up. It could
be that the poor things make such pathetic power and which in turn gives
them their great reliability.
The fact is though, the money spent to hot rod the 260 would go 10 times
farther with a 350. The 260 probably wouldn't be bad if you could put it in
something the size of a Civic but using it in a 3300lb+ car is tough without
the torque output.

Just my opinion.

Andrew Geeting
geeting@woh.rr.com
'87 Cutlass Supreme 461
'98 Olds Intrigue 3.8L
http://home.woh.rr.com/designsofarch/index/olds_site/olds.swf

> Though it has a certain "Hah, and they said it couldn't be done" appeal.
>
> - Joe Vahabzadeh
>
>

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 23:50:46 -0500
From: King V <king_v@mindless.com>
Subject: more FWD vs RWD 3.8L

All,

Can anyone confirm or deny the following with regard to these engines?  I
found it actually on a webpage talking about putting a Buick V6 into a
Toyota truck of all things....

(some of you might well wonder why I obsess about this)

1)
"Any model rear-wheel drive Buick 3.8L V6 or 86-88 front wheel drive (FWD)
3.8L V6 will work in the Toyota truck. The 86-88 FWD engines have mounts
for rear wheel drive use also, as well as the luxury of Sequential Fuel
Injection (SFI) and tubular exhaust manifolds (though they would have to be
slightly modified for rear wheel drive use)."


This seems to imply that the 3.8L V6 FWD version can simply have the RWD
mounts put on it and bolt the sucker into a RWD car?!



2)
"Actually, the entire 86-88 SFI intake from the FWD cars can be bolted to
the earlier 3.8L RWD engines."

I believe Chris Carson might also have ventured this theory as well when I
asked about it a few weeks earlier.


3)
"The 3800 engine family should be avoided because this engine series no
longer retains the necessary rear wheel drive transmission bolt pattern."

Ok, the 3800 is less useful as a whole engine due to the tranny bolt
pattern.  Gotcha, I think.  But I thought the earlier and later OD FWD
trannies all used the same bolt pattern?


Just wondering.  Maybe I *should* haul out that completely useable 3.8L FI
engine I've got, at least once the insurance issues are finally
straightened out with my car.


	- Joe Vahabzadeh

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

Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 00:06:10 -0500
From: King V <king_v@mindless.com>
Subject: Using a 260... was Re: Building a 260

At 11:11 PM 02/28/2004 -0500, Andrew Geeting wrote:
>Well, I guess I'll be the one to say it can't be done. :)

<well thought out explanation snipped

>The 260 probably wouldn't be bad if you could put it in
>something the size of a Civic but using it in a 3300lb+ car is tough without
>the torque output.
>

Hmm . . several good points were made.  Perhaps we're going about this the
wrong way.

The 1979 260 backed by my 2.29 gears is a reasonably good driver (were I to
use it as such).  Power's only 105 horses and 205 ft-lbs, and has some good
part-throttle punch for its sizze, but let's look at this for a moment.

First off, the 260's not a brute, so we can easily put a boneyard 200-4R
behind it without risking the tranny.  Thus, easy to swap in 3.23 or 3.42
gears and still retain good highway mileage.

Next, let it breathe a little.  Give it duals.  A good Y-pipe (can it be
widened a bit?), a high-flow catalyst, then split off into 2 pipes, 2
mufflers, 2 tailpipes.  Maybe give it a little better chance.

Then, intake.  The intake passages are tiny I believe, matched to the 260
heads' tiny intake ports.  But don't the 307 roller intake and roller heads
have a similarly diminutive passage?  If so, is a roller-307 intake a good
swap?  Maybe throw on a quadrajet off a 301, so that it won't overwhelm the
260?  Or is there an easy way to make a CCC carb behave in a pre-CCC
manner?  In which case I'd say the 4-bbl off the 307 or the Buick 252 would
be a good match.

Perhaps instead one of the lowest-rated CFM of the aftermarket 4-bbl carbs?

I don't know if true duals or headers would be particulary helpful.  I
think the good flowing cat and duals afterward will more than suffice for
the relatively low-revving 260.

Can the crank be ground such that the rods and pistons are pushed slightly
higher in the bores than they currently are?  If my info's right, these
engines run 7.5:1 compression.  Maybe bumping this up to say to an even
modest 8.0:1 might help things a bit?


Of course, all my thoughts now aren't to make it a powerhouse, but to make
it better, reliable driver that it should've been rather than the good,
reliable driver that it was.

Don't forget Andrew Green's story of when his father's 260-equipped Delta
got sold.  The beaming, immigrant father, in his limited English still
pronouncing his enthusiasm:
- --------
The father leaps out from behind the 
wheel, absolutely beaming: "I VERY LIKE THEES ENGINE! [He makes two fists, 
shaking them vigorously...] EES STRONG!!!"
- --------


Anyway, I digress.  I think that with some tweaks, real-world could've put
that engine to about 130 horses, maybe 140, and bump the torque up to the
220 or so range.

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

Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 00:08:18 -0500
From: King V <king_v@mindless.com>
Subject: Re: Using a 260... was Re: Building a 260

Oops. . . hit send too soon.

Anyway, I know it'll never be fast, but it'll still be interesting. And
it's probably the only engine that can really effectively use the 307
roller intake wihtout choking on it.

Maybe a mild cam as well.  Has to be something milder than the stock 350
cam I'd imagine.  How'd the 260 cam compare to the non-roller 307?


I'm going to stop asking questions now as my typing ability's impaired by
the sleeping meds....


	- Joe Vahabzadeh

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

Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 00:24:01 -0500
From: "Chris Carson" <fastcarson@prodigy.net>
Subject: Re: sensors and such: CCC vs EFI

ftp://ftp.diy-efi.org/pub/gmecm/manuals/1227730/92-7730v8tpi-1.jpg
and tpi-2, tpi-3, tpi-4...but most of the sensors are listed on the first
page.
That might help you out there.Yes, MAP does not coexist with MAF, ever.
There are also several solenoids,etc that go along with it , like IAC, TCC,
fuel pump relay...
Chris
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "King V" <king_v@mindless.com>
To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2004 10:36 PM
Subject: sensors and such: CCC vs EFI


> All,
>
> Couple of questions:
>
> I know that fuel-injected systems have a number of sensors and such that
> are required to communicate with the ECM so that the amount of fuel as
well
> as spark timing can be adjusted.
>
> But....
>
> Do EFI and TBI more or less have the same plethora of sensors?
>
> How about the CCC-equipped cars?  Do they have this intense variety of
stuff?
>
> I can't even remember most of them, but the ones that come to mind are:
>
> Oxygen sensor
> Throttle Position Sensor
> Knock Sensor
> Mass Air Flow Sensor
> Manifold Absolute Pressure Sensor (MAF and MAP don't exist together?)
> Air Intake Temperature Sensor
> Coolant Temperature Sensor
>
> and probably a plethora of others I can't remember.
>
>
> Thanks.....
>
>
> - Joe Vahabzadeh
>

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

Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 22:58:51 -0700
From: "Infinite Space Systems, Inc." <imp@theriver.com>
Subject: Re: More eBay fun-  Question for seller -- Item #2462917579

Everyone, I understand the irritation involved in this matter, but lets keep
it private, off list.

We've already had a potential *flame* start. Lets stop it before it spreads.

Milton Schick
1964 442 Cutlass
imp@theriver.com


- ----- Original Message -----
From: <oldslist@nuthinfancy.com>
To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2004 4:18 PM
Subject: RE: More eBay fun- Question for seller -- Item #2462917579


> Hey Guys,
>
> I feel like I HAD to reply to this one...
>
> In my opinion Jeff is one of the NICEST fella in the Olds community!!!
> He has gone out of his way numerous time to help me!!! I don't know
> exactly what went down between you guys but... in my book Jeff is a
> class act, they don't get much better then him!
>
> Just my .02
>
> Regards,
>
> Bob
> www.1970-442.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: oldsmobile-owner@chebucto.ns.ca
> [mailto:oldsmobile-owner@chebucto.ns.ca] On Behalf Of Christopher Witt
> Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2004 9:23 AM
> To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
> Subject: More eBay fun- Question for seller -- Item #2462917579
>
>
> >From: "Jeff" <jsalinardi@comcast.net>
> >To: <rocketscience442@hotmail.com>
> >Subject: Re: Question for seller -- Item #2462917579
> >Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 08:18:23 -0500
> >
> >Stay away from my auctions a__hole.
> ==============================
> [edited for family content by CBW]
> Does anyone have any idea why this "jsalinardi@comcast.net" or "
> bigblockolds" feller is so ingracious?
>
> I cannot imagine what I might have done to bring that on. I wrote back
> to
> ask him what his problem is exactly. That's the sort of behavior I have
> come
> to expect from Brand C people. Perhaps he has me confused with someone
> else.
> Perhaps he just does not like inquiries.
>
> Chris Witt
>
>
>
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: <rocketscience442@hotmail.com>
> >To: <jsalinardi@comcast.net>
> >Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 10:50 PM
> >Subject: Question for seller -- Item #2462917579
> >
> >
> > > what's the part number on that NOS OP sending unit? cannot make it
> > > out
> >in
> >the photo...
> > > --------------------
> > >
> > >
> > > Question from:           *the*rocketscientist
> > > Title of item:           NOS 68-72 Oldsmobile 442 Rally Pack Temp
> >Sending
> >Unit
> > > Seller:                  bigblockolds
> > > Starts:                  Feb-24-04 21:41:28 PST
> > > Ends:                    Mar-02-04 21:41:28 PST
> > > Price:                   Currently $45.20
> > > To view the item, go to:
> >http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2462917579
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Visit eBay, The World's Online Marketplace TM at http://www.ebay.com
> >
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get fast, reliable access with MSN 9 Dial-up. Click here for Special
> Offer!
> http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200361ave/direct/01/
>
>
>

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

End of oldsmobile-digest V1 #4798
*********************************
