
oldsmobile-digest    Wednesday, February 18 2004    Volume 01 : Number 4782



Sub: Thanks and Olds blower
Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older
Automotive Engineers (was Re: The New GTO)
Part # Power window switches.
Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older
RE: Automotive Engineers (was Re: The New GTO)
TCS solenoids.
RE: TCS solenoids.
RE: Automotive Engineers
Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older
RE: Automotive Engineers
Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older
Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older
Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older
RE: Automotive Engineers
Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older
Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older
Re: Re: The New GTO
Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older
Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older
Re: No slip rear ends
Control arms, round or oval bushings?
Re: Control arms, round or oval bushings?
Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older
Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 10:12:07 EST
From: Kt8321@aol.com
Subject: Sub: Thanks and Olds blower

- --part1_39.4417aa5e.2d64dac7_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Milton, thanks for the info on the TH400. Anybody need a blower for their 
394? 4-71 on our favorite auction site with dual Carters. Rather odd looking 
set-up with sheet metal fab and tilted carbs. Necessary pulleys included.
Ken Thomas
69 and 71 Deltas

- --part1_39.4417aa5e.2d64dac7_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">Milton, thanks for the info on the=20=
TH400. Anybody need a blower for their 394? 4-71 on our favorite auction sit=
e with dual Carters. Rather odd looking set-up with sheet metal fab and tilt=
ed carbs. Necessary pulleys included.<BR>
Ken Thomas<BR>
69 and 71 Deltas</FONT></HTML>

- --part1_39.4417aa5e.2d64dac7_boundary--

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:38:21 +0000
From: "Andrew C. Green" <acg_o@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older

I know this is a topic that could go on ad nauseum but there are a couple 
points that need responding to:

>but i will gladly keep my full frame gas guzzling v-8
>at least when it gets hit; it's still drivable. walk
>threw a junk yard and see how twisted  most of the cars
>are that were in accidents.

What you're seeing are crumple zones designed into modern cars to 
progressively decelerate on impact. If the car structure is rigid from 
bumper to bumper, then the occupants (and seat belts, etc.) have to take all 
the deceleration shock all at once. Next time you're in the junkyard, notice 
that although the hood or trunk areas are crumpled, the passenger 
compartment is still rigid and square, and the doors probably still open, 
too.

Even older cars had crumple zones, for that matter: Look under the hood of a 
1980s car like my Cutlass, and you'll find a stamped fold mark across the 
midpoint of the hood subframe to encourage it to start bending at that point 
in a front impact, and hooks at the rear corners to back up the folding 
action and prevent the rear corners of the hood from intruding into the 
passenger compartment through the windshield.

>just my 2 cents but what good is a car that cam last 200,000
>miles if in a accident could kill you. i rolled my 69 hurst
>olds and walked away with 5 stiches ,car was totaled.

No doubt the car was totaled, but a rollover is probably a lot less 
traumatic for you physically then if you had run head-on into a tree. The 
car, in fact, could well be still drivable after a rollover, although the 
collective body damage on all sides would make it a financial total loss.

>the mitsu was totaled,the driver crippled for life air bag
>broke his back.

The _air_bag_ broke his back? How?

All the safety systems in the world aren't going to perform perfectly under 
all conditions, and in a little car it's probably easy to exceed whatever 
safety the car can provide.

- -- Andy

_________________________________________________________________
Stay informed on Election 2004 and the race to Super Tuesday. 
http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:47:49 +0000
From: joevitek@comcast.net
Subject: Automotive Engineers (was Re: The New GTO)

> He spoke only of things such as "modulus of elasticity of
> the intended component material".  He couldn't change a spark plug in his
> own minivan, for crying out loud, let alone build an engine or a car.  THESE
> are the types that are putting out the cars you see from Detroit that you
> all dig. ;-)

Designing parts to work is all about engineering requirements. If the designed part meets the engineering requirements, the engineer is done (sounds like that guy). It's too bad that a lot of engineers are not into the "big picture" (some are though). They are just there to design to requirements and get their pay. However, the systems engineer had better know the overall picture (the guy that came up with the requirements for the subsytems and parts). Talk to some automotive systems level guys and see what they know about changing spark plugs. If they look at you with a faraway stare, steer clear. They are not car guys.

- --
joe vitek

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 11:33:50 EST
From: Roncutlass@aol.com
Subject: Part # Power window switches.

- --part1_5a.27a51d50.2d64edee_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Does anyone know the GM part # for the 70 power window switches.  Appreciate 
your help.  Ron

- --part1_5a.27a51d50.2d64edee_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 the GM part # for=20=
the 70 power window switches.&nbsp; Appreciate your help.&nbsp; Ron</FONT></=
HTML>

- --part1_5a.27a51d50.2d64edee_boundary--

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 13:35:30 -0300
From: "Tour Op & Travel Agency Trade 2000" <travelchile@manquehue.net>
Subject: Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older

Well guys, it will not make me popular, but...
The good old GM iron resists well to accidents, sure. But think how many
accidents are avoided by driving a modern cars that brake, turn and stick to
the road som much better? Te road feel of a modern Citroen or Peugeot is so
superior to any of the classic muscle cars that it would be impossible to
race against it in a windy road. More, in big accidents,like Andy wrote, you
will have much more chances to survive in a modern car - sure , when the
sizes are comparable. Bumping a 5000lbs tank against a Honda Civic will be
easier for the driver of the heavier car. But in a crash against the wall,
any recent car will protect its occupants better than our beloved old irons.
All that said, I woul like to find a good Delta RWD to drive it daily with
the 468.... Even if I had a lot of money I would keep an Olds for pleasure,
driving a ... 500S Merc?
rgds
Matt

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 11:46:29 -0500
From: "John Nasta" <email@johnnasta.com>
Subject: RE: Automotive Engineers (was Re: The New GTO)

Well, most people go to work to do their job and get their pay. Then again,
if engineers did whatever they wanted whenever they felt like it, we would
have all sorts of quality control problems, and those engineers would
probably be fired.


- -----Original Message-----

They are just there to design to requirements and get their pay.

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 11:12:49 -0600
From: "Mike Schlottman" <mschlott@spe.org>
Subject: TCS solenoids.

It looks like someone is re-producing TCS solenoids for chevys now.  Since the part is so similar to the olds, you would think they would make some for the olds too.  Does anyone know who is manufacturing these?  I'd like to talk to them and possibly get just the insides to rebuild mine.

You can see the solenoids at http://www.wiringharness.com/tcs.htm .

    mike

Mike Schlottman
Sr. Systems Administrator
Society of Petroleum Engineers
222 Palisades Creek Drive 
Richardson, TX 75083
972-952-9382

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 17:24:24 +0000
From: "Andrew C. Green" <acg_o@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: TCS solenoids.

>It looks like someone is re-producing TCS solenoids for chevys now.
>Since the part is so similar to the olds, you would think they would
>make some for the olds too.  Does anyone know who is manufacturing
>these?  I'd like to talk to them and possibly get just the insides to
>rebuild mine.
>
>You can see the solenoids at http://www.wiringharness.com/tcs.htm .

At a glance, they seem to vary only by mounting bracket, and are listed by 
original part number, so it looks like you might be able to find an 
equivalent one there, depending on the specific application, or at least buy 
one and transfer its functional innards over to yours.

- -- Andy

_________________________________________________________________
Say “good-bye” to spam, viruses and pop-ups with MSN Premium -- free trial 
offer! http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200359ave/direct/01/

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 18:03:06 +0000
From: joevitek@comcast.net
Subject: RE: Automotive Engineers

> Well, most people go to work to do their job and get their pay.

You missed my point probably because I didn't word it very well.

I wrote:
> It's too bad that a lot of engineers are not into the "big picture" (some are
> though). They are just there to design to requirements and get their pay.

Most people go to work to get their pay, but it's unfortunate that a lot of people are not "into" what they are doing. The discussion was about engineers and that "some" don't care that much about what they are designing. Basically the exact complaint of the original poster.

you wrote:
> Then again, if engineers did whatever they wanted whenever they felt like it,

I said nothing of designing "whatever we want" as I have to design stuff that is not necessarily "what I want". However, what I am tasked to design is interesting and I am "into it". I do RF comm design because I like it. I really like the system level picture and don't go to work just "to get my pay". I do it because I like it too.

> we would have all sorts of quality control problems, and those engineers would
> probably be fired.

I wish they would be fired. Unfortunately, once hired and the person performs just barely adequately, it's hard to get them to leave.

Anyway, back to the point. The engineer who designs because he feels like he HAS to is not much of an engineer. The one who designs because he/she LIKES to and is interested in the system as a whole because it is their passion, are the best engineers and the ones you want designing your cars.

A valvespring that does what it's supposed to doesn't require that the person who designed it know what the rest of the car does (as long as he/she knows mechanical engineering rpinciples). It's just much better to work with the person who does (and better quality).

No slams to the rest of the engineering community, just observation and opinion.

What are all the Olds engineers gonna do? Are any on this list?

- --
joe vitek

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 19:35:43 +0000
From: 77w30442@comcast.net
Subject: Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older

i wont argue the  advanced technoligy behind the cars designed today i fully understand there also designed to crumble the way they do.
in fact most abs cars take longer to stop.that was proven a few years ago,simply because the abs primairy function is to let you maintain controle  by preventing wheel lock up and keeping the front tires rolling to avoid hitting things in the event of a skid.
air bags have done more damage and killed  more than they save. look at the statistics.
now power train management has devoloped into some great improvements.
structure design is designed to crush around you and protect you. that is often not the case.
heres my favorite bitch, auto locking doors. if you are as ignorant as my friend was who left his 6 yr old son in there 1998 chevy truck with engine running. you will see my point.
truck running  faceing a lake. dad jumps out to say hi as we were rideing the qauds. kid unfastens seat belt closes door because he was cold. steps on brake puts truck in drive at 5 mph doors lock. truck hits water and floats while they try to break a window. truck sinks  to roof line. took shot gun and blew out back window,after makeing sure kid was out of line of fire. as soon as truck filled with water door opened  kid is okay,truck repairable,police hand the kids dad 5 tickets, child indangerment,discharging a fire arm in city limits,driveing on private property,damage to private property,and others. that option is now disconnected. granted thats a extreeme case but regaurdless a stupid option
sorry for the rant but i could not resist. i still prefer my 1968-1977 oldsmobiles over techno. besides no inspection required.
take care
ron       
> Well guys, it will not make me popular, but...
> The good old GM iron resists well to accidents, sure. But think how many
> accidents are avoided by driving a modern cars that brake, turn and stick to
> the road som much better? Te road feel of a modern Citroen or Peugeot is so
> superior to any of the classic muscle cars that it would be impossible to
> race against it in a windy road. More, in big accidents,like Andy wrote, you
> will have much more chances to survive in a modern car - sure , when the
> sizes are comparable. Bumping a 5000lbs tank against a Honda Civic will be
> easier for the driver of the heavier car. But in a crash against the wall,
> any recent car will protect its occupants better than our beloved old irons.
> All that said, I woul like to find a good Delta RWD to drive it daily with
> the 468.... Even if I had a lot of money I would keep an Olds for pleasure,
> driving a ... 500S Merc?
> rgds
> Matt
> 

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 19:55:17 +0000
From: "Andrew C. Green" <acg_o@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: Automotive Engineers

>What are all the Olds engineers gonna do? Are any on this list?

I'm not sure that any of them would recognize themselves as "Olds" engineers 
per se, since GM has been divided, subdivided and reorganized so often that 
the various marques (aside from maybe Saturn) are pretty well muddled 
together, with the only distinguishing characteristics being sales-driven 
nameplate issues.

That is, Joe Smith down in Door Engineering, Doorlatch Division, isn't 
necessarily designing hardware only for Cadillacs. Even the bigger areas 
such as engines and powertrains are widely shared. Whatever was 
Olds-specific in days gone by became corporate a long time ago.

So it's sad to see a historic nameplate go away, but it doesn't necessarily 
mean that all the people with Olds on their business cards are arbitrarily 
out of a job; a great many who were working for Olds were more realistically 
working for all of General Motors instead.

- -- Andy

_________________________________________________________________
Find and compare great deals on Broadband access at the MSN High-Speed 
Marketplace. http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200360ave/direct/01/

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:03:35 -0500
From: "JOHN ORR" <jorr@paylessequipment.com>
Subject: Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older

i still prefer my 1968-1977 oldsmobiles over techno. besides no inspection
required.
take care
ron

  well damn, what about us 64 to 67's  we count too!!!!  :-)
john
67 cutlass supreme

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 20:01:28 +0000
From: "Andrew C. Green" <acg_o@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older

>in fact most abs cars take longer to stop.

Er, longer than what? A car that's sliding? Are you sure?

>that was proven a few years ago,simply because the abs primairy function
>is to let you maintain controle  by preventing wheel lock up and keeping
>the front tires rolling to avoid hitting things in the event of a skid.

And you can steer around the obstacle at the same time, yes.

>air bags have done more damage and killed  more than they save.

They have?

>look at the statistics.

Be happy to. Can you point us to those, please? It's a surprise to me to 
hear that more people have been killed via air bags than those who have 
survived an otherwise-unsurvivable impact because the airbags deployed.

- -- Andy

_________________________________________________________________
Store more e-mails with MSN Hotmail Extra Storage – 4 plans to choose from! 
http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200362ave/direct/01/

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:49:36 -0800 (PST)
From: Bill Brooks <deaconblue1969@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older

- --- "Andrew C. Green" <acg_o@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >in fact most abs cars take longer to stop.
> 
> Er, longer than what? A car that's sliding? Are you
> sure?
> 
If standing on the brakes and skidding was the fastest
way to stop, you'd see formula 1 drivers doing it all
the time.  You actually stop faster with the wheels
just short of lock up - kind of like ABS does for you.
 The fact that you can still steer is an added bonus.

ABS-equipped cars should have an off switch, though,
for deep snow and gravel roads.

Andy, I think the dumbing down of America is kicking
in.  People are using anecdotes and 'my
brother-in-law's buddy and an accident where....' -
This reminds me of my dear old dad telling me he would
rather be thrown from the car in an accident and that
heavy cards handle best because they 'hold the road'.

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:53:13 -0800 (PST)
From: Bill Brooks <deaconblue1969@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Automotive Engineers

> >What are all the Olds engineers gonna do? Are any
> on this list?
> 
1977 was the last year Oldsmobile Division had their
own engineering staff.  In my opinion, that meant the
end of GM's automomous divisions that provided so much
inovation due to the competion within Generous Motors.

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 16:38:30 -0500
From: SteveH <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older

At Wednesday, 18 February 2004, you wrote:

>>i still prefer my 1968-1977 oldsmobiles over techno. besides 
>>no inspection required.
>>take care
>>ron
>
>well damn, what about us 64 to 67's  we count too!!!!  :-)
>john
>67 cutlass supreme

More so; '64-'67s came first!!!  ;o\  ;o\  ;o\

SteveH



===================================================================
EASY access to your email http://webmail.dandy.net/mr2/nph-mr.cgi
===================================================================

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:37:59 -0700
From: Cliff Simpson <csimpson@ucalgary.ca>
Subject: Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older

Andrew C. Green wrote:

>> in fact most abs cars take longer to stop.
> 
> 
> Er, longer than what? 

Compared to a car that is being driven by someone who knows how to brake 
properly.

> A car that's sliding? 

No, a car being stopped by properly controlling the pressure so the 
wheels are just on the edge of breaking traction.

> Are you sure?

Even the ABS Education Alliance made up of Robert Bosch Corporation, 
Delphi Automotive Systems and Continental Teves has to admit that it 
does not always result in shorter stopping distances:

  -  Do cars with ABS stop more quickly than cars without it?
     Not always. Although the stopping distance with ABS is shorter 
under most road conditions ...

and can result in longer stopping distances:

  - If I live in the Snow Belt, how can I benefit from ABS?
    ... In exchange for an increased stopping distance, ...

Having said that I hope you understand that:
    1) many (most?) drivers do not know how to stop properly and ABS is 
miles ahead of locking up your wheels until you slam into something.

    2) in snow and on ice ABS can be a royal PITA as you have to let off 
until the ABS quits pulsing in order to reduce stopping time.  That is, 
in very low traction situations the ABS will start pulsing while you are 
trying to stop in a nice straight line.  You can decrease your stopping 
distance by letting off until the ABS quits trying to out think you.

I know, I've been driving with ABS since 1995 and every winter I'll put 
on the brakes at the intersection by our house and the ABS will start 
chattering and I can feel the vehicle quit decelerating as quickly 
(de-decelerating?).  I have to decide to either let off the brakes until 
it quits or keep my foot on it and steer around the vehicles in front of 
me.  It's a PITA because I am slowing to a safe stop until the ABS kicks 
in and then I'm in trouble unless I let off and brake less aggressively 
or steer around the car ahead of me.

    c) when ABS kicks you must realize what is going on.  My first 
reaction is often to let off the brakes because it feels like I am skidding.

    Still, I'm going to keep ABS in case I ever get in a real panic 
situation and want to just tromp on it and concentrate on my steering.

> air bags have done more damage and killed  more than they save.

1st generation air bags were a good idea screwed up by bureaucrats. 
Basically the engineers designed them to cushion a belted driver in an 
accident.  Bureaucrats upped the stopping power with the intent of 
saving people who didn't have seat belts on.  The resulting overpowered 
bags were dangerous to smaller people, kids, and pets.  I have never 
allowed my kids to ride in the front of our cars just because they have 
1st gen. air bags.

But even with the dangerous 1st generation air bags factored in I don't 
know of any study that indicated that they cost more lives than they 
saved.

Could be true but I doubt it.
- -- 

Smoking causes cancer.  Cancer causes death.  Death cures smoking.
    - the circle of anti-life.

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 17:59:44 -0500
From: "swanny" <swannys78@adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: Re: The New GTO

He spoke only of things such as "modulus of elasticity of
the intended component material".  He couldn't change a spark plug in his
own minivan, for crying out loud, let alone build an engine or a car.  THESE
are the types that are putting out the cars you see from Detroit that you
all dig. ;-)

There are people who read and people who actually perform the duties, those
people read. Yet the customers can't understand the labor rates for the
knowledge we have to know to correctly diagnose problems.

Life goes on.
Swanny.










- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Evans" <mevans@jasnetworks.net>
To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 9:36 AM
Subject: Re: Re: The New GTO


> Agreed.  Having been around the block a couple of times in the OEM/Tier
One
> automotive manufacturing world, it is amazing to me how very few "car
guys"
> there are in the automotive realm, let alone in the automotive writing
> realm.  There are frighteningly few people who actually know cars, and a
> frightening majority who understand only a tiny piece of the pie.  I
recall
> sitting down a few years ago with the guy who was the valve spring
designer
> for most of the NHRA Top Fuel teams, thinking we could have some fun
custom
> engineering some valve springs for my new Cutlass motor.  Here I thought
> things live valve lift, rpm levels, desired life cycle, etc. would come
into
> play.  Silly me.  He spoke only of things such as "modulus of elasticity
of
> the intended component material".  He couldn't change a spark plug in his
> own minivan, for crying out loud, let alone build an engine or a car.
THESE
> are the types that are putting out the cars you see from Detroit that you
> all dig. ;-)
>
> Mike Evans
> Richland, MI
> '76 Cutlass S/461
> www.time-save.com/cutlass.htm
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Infinite Space Systems, Inc." <imp@theriver.com>
> To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 12:13 AM
> Subject: Re: Re: The New GTO
>
>
> > Mike,
> >
> > Interesting website, but this statement is b**ls**t:
> >
> > "Based on the space frame and suspension of the latest Ford GT, the new
> > Cobra doesn't include the basic design mistake which made Shelby's
> prototype
> > Cobra 427 of 1963 so 'treacherous'
> > (Ford's adjective) to drive - a huge engine and leaf-spring rear
> > suspension."
> >
> > Ahhh, no. That Ford rep didn't know how to drive things around corners.
> > Carol Shelby had that suspension perfectly balanced. Anything that
weighs
> > only 2500 pounds and has 550HP is going to be a little squirrelly.
That's
> > part and parcel of knowing how to drive, when to put your foot into it
and
> > when to use moderation. That statement would damage these guy's
> credibility
> > to me.
> >
> > Milton Schick
> > 1964 442 Cutlass
> > imp@theriver.com
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Mike Evans" <mevans@jasnetworks.net>
> > To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2004 3:10 PM
> > Subject: Re: Re: The New GTO
> >
> >
> > > Or, when eight cylinders is not enough (and money is no object!):
> > > http://www.carkeys.co.uk/features/product/1601.asp
> > >
> > > Mike Evans
> > > Richland, MI
> > > '76 Cutlass S/461
> > > www.time-save.com/cutlass.htm
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Kevin Wright" <krwright@sbcglobal.net>
> > > To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2004 11:45 AM
> > > Subject: Re: Re: The New GTO
> > >
> > >
> > > > Two words: Ford GT
> > > > If only I had the $$($$$$$).
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 18:05:26 -0500
From: "ron fama" <77w30442@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older

  a few years ago a few independent  researches did test.
  the abs cars stopped in a longer period. than the non abs cars but the catch was that  it was a
non skid condition  the abs car wouls release brakes before they lockewd up where the non abs car
stopped shorter simply because the brakes were allowed to stay at near lock up conditionds. it was a
very confuseing and boaring article if i can find it ill send it to you
  ron
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: "Andrew C. Green" <acg_o@hotmail.com>
  To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 3:01 PM
  Subject: Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older


  > >in fact most abs cars take longer to stop.
  >
  > Er, longer than what? A car that's sliding? Are you sure?
  >
  > >that was proven a few years ago,simply because the abs primairy function
  > >is to let you maintain controle  by preventing wheel lock up and keeping
  > >the front tires rolling to avoid hitting things in the event of a skid.
  >
  > And you can steer around the obstacle at the same time, yes.
  >
  > >air bags have done more damage and killed  more than they save.
  >
  > They have?
  >
  > >look at the statistics.
  >
  > Be happy to. Can you point us to those, please? It's a surprise to me to
  > hear that more people have been killed via air bags than those who have
  > survived an otherwise-unsurvivable impact because the airbags deployed.
  >
  > -- Andy
  >
  > _________________________________________________________________
  > Store more e-mails with MSN Hotmail Extra Storage – 4 plans to choose from!
  > http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200362ave/direct/01/
  >

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 18:08:24 -0500
From: "ron fama" <77w30442@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older

  thank you  you said it correctly. ron  
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: "Cliff Simpson" <csimpson@ucalgary.ca>
  To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 5:37 PM
  Subject: Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older


  > Andrew C. Green wrote:
  > 
  > >> in fact most abs cars take longer to stop.
  > > 
  > > 
  > > Er, longer than what? 
  > 
  > Compared to a car that is being driven by someone who knows how to brake 
  > properly.
  > 
  > > A car that's sliding? 
  > 
  > No, a car being stopped by properly controlling the pressure so the 
  > wheels are just on the edge of breaking traction.
  > 
  > > Are you sure?
  > 
  > Even the ABS Education Alliance made up of Robert Bosch Corporation, 
  > Delphi Automotive Systems and Continental Teves has to admit that it 
  > does not always result in shorter stopping distances:
  > 
  >   -  Do cars with ABS stop more quickly than cars without it?
  >      Not always. Although the stopping distance with ABS is shorter 
  > under most road conditions ...
  > 
  > and can result in longer stopping distances:
  > 
  >   - If I live in the Snow Belt, how can I benefit from ABS?
  >     ... In exchange for an increased stopping distance, ...
  > 
  > Having said that I hope you understand that:
  >     1) many (most?) drivers do not know how to stop properly and ABS is 
  > miles ahead of locking up your wheels until you slam into something.
  > 
  >     2) in snow and on ice ABS can be a royal PITA as you have to let off 
  > until the ABS quits pulsing in order to reduce stopping time.  That is, 
  > in very low traction situations the ABS will start pulsing while you are 
  > trying to stop in a nice straight line.  You can decrease your stopping 
  > distance by letting off until the ABS quits trying to out think you.
  > 
  > I know, I've been driving with ABS since 1995 and every winter I'll put 
  > on the brakes at the intersection by our house and the ABS will start 
  > chattering and I can feel the vehicle quit decelerating as quickly 
  > (de-decelerating?).  I have to decide to either let off the brakes until 
  > it quits or keep my foot on it and steer around the vehicles in front of 
  > me.  It's a PITA because I am slowing to a safe stop until the ABS kicks 
  > in and then I'm in trouble unless I let off and brake less aggressively 
  > or steer around the car ahead of me.
  > 
  >     c) when ABS kicks you must realize what is going on.  My first 
  > reaction is often to let off the brakes because it feels like I am skidding.
  > 
  >     Still, I'm going to keep ABS in case I ever get in a real panic 
  > situation and want to just tromp on it and concentrate on my steering.
  > 
  > > air bags have done more damage and killed  more than they save.
  > 
  > 1st generation air bags were a good idea screwed up by bureaucrats. 
  > Basically the engineers designed them to cushion a belted driver in an 
  > accident.  Bureaucrats upped the stopping power with the intent of 
  > saving people who didn't have seat belts on.  The resulting overpowered 
  > bags were dangerous to smaller people, kids, and pets.  I have never 
  > allowed my kids to ride in the front of our cars just because they have 
  > 1st gen. air bags.
  > 
  > But even with the dangerous 1st generation air bags factored in I don't 
  > know of any study that indicated that they cost more lives than they 
  > saved.
  > 
  > Could be true but I doubt it.
  > -- 
  > 
  > Smoking causes cancer.  Cancer causes death.  Death cures smoking.
  >     - the circle of anti-life.
  > 
  > 

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 16:31:27 -0700
From: "Infinite Space Systems, Inc." <imp@theriver.com>
Subject: Re: No slip rear ends

Matt,

I had forgotten that was the one you had that caused problems.

Milton Schick
1964 442 Cutlass
imp@theriver.com

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 18:35:47 EST
From: ChazToone@aol.com
Subject: Control arms, round or oval bushings?

- -------------------------------1077147347
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi List,

I'm looking to replace the lower bushings and ball joints on my '71 Cutlass 
Supreme convertible.  I bought all the MOOG parts last fall.  My first thoughts 
were to bring the car to someone and pay them to pull the arms and replace 
the parts.  I asked the guy that's closest to me for an estimate and he gave me 
the line about "bring it in and I'll ket you know".  Sorry, but you should 
know about how much it will cost.  Now I'm leaning towards doing it myself, at 
least pulling the arms.  But even then I'll have to bring the arm some where to 
have the bushings + ball joint pressed out/in.  Not my idea of fun while the 
cars sits in the driveway on jackstands.  Then I saw a couple of arms up for 
auction on the e-vil site.  I thought it would be much easier to buy some arms, 
clean them up and paint them, put in new bushings/ball joint/bumpers.  Then 
the driveway time would be minimized.  Now for the questions:  I see some arms 
have round bushings, while mine has ovals.  If I'm swapping the arms anyway, 
does it matter?  The car is very original and I'd like to try and keep it that 
way. I thought it might just be hit or miss which you get.  I also figure I'd 
replace the springs as long as they're out. Any recommendations?  Part numbers 
much appreciated.

Thanks,

Charlie Toone
OCA Member# 22915
1971 Cutlass Supreme Convertible
1972 H/O (w/sunroof) - for a short while
1966 F-85 - my first car - long gone
ChazToone@aol.com
http://hometown.aol.com/chaztoone/myhomepage/index.html

- -------------------------------1077147347
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 6.00.2737.800" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fffff=
f">
<DIV>Hi List,</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I'm looking to replace the lower bushings and ball joints on my '71 Cut=
lass Supreme convertible.&nbsp; I bought all the MOOG parts last fall.&nbsp;=
 My first thoughts were to bring the car to someone and pay them to pull the=
 arms and replace the parts.&nbsp; I asked the guy that's closest to me for=20=
an estimate and he gave me the line about "bring it in and I'll ket you know=
".&nbsp; Sorry, but you should know about how much it will cost.&nbsp; Now I=
'm leaning towards doing it myself, at least pulling the arms.&nbsp; But eve=
n then I'll have to bring the arm some where to have the bushings + ball joi=
nt pressed out/in.&nbsp; Not my idea of fun while the cars sits in the drive=
way on jackstands.&nbsp; Then I saw a couple of arms up for auction on the e=
- -vil site.&nbsp; I thought it would be much easier to buy some arms, clean t=
hem up and paint them, put in new bushings/ball joint/bumpers.&nbsp; Then th=
e driveway time would be minimized.&nbsp; Now for the questions:&nbsp; I see=
 some arms have round bushings, while mine has ovals.&nbsp; If I'm swapping=20=
the arms anyway, does it matter?&nbsp; The car is very original and I'd like=
 to try and keep it that way.&nbsp;I thought it might just be hit or miss wh=
ich you get.&nbsp; I also figure I'd replace the springs as long as they're=20=
out. Any recommendations?&nbsp; Part numbers much appreciated.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial size=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"10"=
>Thanks,<BR><BR>Charlie Toone<BR></FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial color=
=3D#000000 size=3D1 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"8"><I>OCA Member# 22915<B=
R>1971 Cutlass Supreme Convertible<BR>1972 H/O (w/sunroof) - for a short whi=
le<BR>1966 F-85 - my first car - long gone</FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial=
 color=3D#000000 size=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"10"></I><BR>ChazToo=
ne@aol.com<BR>http://hometown.aol.com/chaztoone/myhomepage/index.html<BR><BR=
></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

- -------------------------------1077147347--

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 00:02:13 GMT
From: geo.aigel@netzero.net
Subject: Re: Control arms, round or oval bushings?

There is no need to buy extra arms. You can do the job in a weekend, driving again on monday. Bushings and balljoints can be pressed in at home with a vise, a large socket and a BFH.

If you insist on buying a set of exchange arms, I'd stick with the style you have for originality. I do not think that it makes a difference mechanically, however. 

George

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 18:06:49 -0500
From: "ron fama" <77w30442@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older

  i like all the older cars but 1968-1977 are my favorite.
  heck i owned a 1958 olds 88 with a 371 and that big car could fly if it had wings . the 371  was
awsome
  ron
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: "JOHN ORR" <jorr@paylessequipment.com>
  To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 3:03 PM
  Subject: Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older


  > i still prefer my 1968-1977 oldsmobiles over techno. besides no inspection
  > required.
  > take care
  > ron
  >
  >   well damn, what about us 64 to 67's  we count too!!!!  :-)
  > john
  > 67 cutlass supreme
  >
  >

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 17:00:49 -0800 (PST)
From: Bill Hutchison <rkt88403@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Longevity of newer vs. Older

- --- "Andrew C. Green" <acg_o@hotmail.com> wrote:
 

> 
> Even older cars had crumple zones, for that matter:
> Look under the hood of a 
> 1980s car like my Cutlass, and you'll find a stamped
> fold mark across the 
> midpoint of the hood subframe to encourage it to
> start bending at that point 
> in a front impact, and hooks at the rear corners to
> back up the folding 
> action and prevent the rear corners of the hood from
> intruding into the 
> passenger compartment through the windshield.
 Those hooks are designed to catch the "crash bolts"
that attach the top of the fender to the cowl. That is
the reason for the raised head on the bolt. Yes we
called them crash bolts at work on the assembly line.
 The only safe car is the one that just sits,and is
never driven.  




=====
Bill Hutchison,Lansing,MI.
95 GMC Sierra 1500,95 Prowler 27N travel trailer
81 W-88 Cpe 403/TH350/8.5-3.23 LS
My Olds Club http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/olds889877to85

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want.
http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools

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

End of oldsmobile-digest V1 #4782
*********************************
