
oldsmobile-digest        Sunday, March 7 2004        Volume 01 : Number 4806



68-72? A arms
Rotella Bad for O2 Sensor or Cat??
RE: Wanted:  '69 Ragtop
Re: ADMIN: UNBOUNCING posts, etc.
Re: Rotella Bad for O2 Sensor or Cat??
Looking for parts
Re: Rotella Bad for O2 Sensor or Cat??
Parts wanted
Re: Rotella Bad for O2 Sensor or Cat??
[Fwd: power seat answer needed asap]
Re: Rotella Bad for O2 Sensor or Cat??
Re: Rotella Bad for O2 Sensor or Cat??
seeking 61 Starfire CARB Buyer
Re: Re: Looking for parts
Re: 3.23 vs 3.42
Re: Tri-Power more fuel efficient?
Re: Tri-Power more fuel efficient?
Re: 3.23 vs 3.42
Re: Tri-Power more fuel efficient?
Re: Rotella Bad for O2 Sensor or Cat??
Tri-Power more fuel efficient - the first 4 barrel
Re: Tri-Power more fuel efficient?
Re: Tri-Power more fuel efficient?
IN SEARCH OF MOTOR MOUNTS
Re: IN SEARCH OF MOTOR MOUNTS

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

Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 12:04:40 -0800 (PST)
From: jayandcindy@webtv.net (Jay and Cindy Bognar)
Subject: 68-72? A arms

Just an interesting note:  We had to get another A arm (can't remember
if it was upper or lower) for our 70 supreme some years ago (bent).  It
had 4 wheel drums.  I think I remember the yards saying there was a
difference in either the upper or lower front arms if the car had drums,
or maybe that it was different for 68-70 and 71-72.  I know that some
front stuff is diff. for 71-72, like the disc brake line/hoses for sure.
Jay B
72 CS
95 Aurora
86 442

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

Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 03:35:03 +0000
From: Steve Harrison <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Rotella Bad for O2 Sensor or Cat??

Tom Lentz on the G-body reflector says he heard diesel oil, like Rotella,
isn't good for either the O2 sensor or the catalytic converter, he can't
remember which. Another guy opines it's because of the added detergents.
I've never heard one way or the other. Anybody know for sure?

Thanks,
SteveH

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

Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2004 21:55:02 -0600
From: Steve Reed <ssreed@direcway.com>
Subject: RE: Wanted:  '69 Ragtop

Joe & All,

> Hey Steve,
> 
> Does he want a Cutlass, 88, or 98??
> 
> Joe Varley


	He's specifically said a cutlass model, but I'll write him again,
and ask him if he would take another model.

Steve Reed 
'96 9C1 Chevy Caprice 
'70 Cutlass Supreme Ragtop (In Reassembly mode) 
'68 Cutlass Supreme (Seized Engine) 
Austin, TX 
http://www.sreed.0catch.com/html/cars.html

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

Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 21:17:40 -0800
From: Scott Alfter <scott@alfter.us>
Subject: Re: ADMIN: UNBOUNCING posts, etc.

On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 05:08:23AM +0000, Steve Harrison wrote:
> At 08:48 PM 3/5/2004 -0800, you wrote:
> >Do you think it is time to move ourselves into the new millennium by 
> >switching to a more modern discussion board forum?
>
> I thank the Almighty, every day, that there are still some reflectors that
> flatly refuse to go forum-style. I cannot stand forums, myself. I'd go away
> if a reflector became one.

At the risk of sounding like an AOLer ("me too"), I'll second that thought. 
It's much easier to track new messages and save old messages you want when
everything's arriving in your inbox.  Semi-clever use of your mail software
will sort mail into separate areas for you (one directory for Olds stuff,
another for homebrewing stuff, etc.).  Web-based message boards usually
don't do this, so keeping track of subjects you've read (and messages you've
read within those subjects) is up to you.

  _/_   Scott Alfter (scott at alfter dot usTRAPEZOID minus shape)
 / v \  '77 Cutlass Supreme Brougham
(IIGS(  http://alfter.us/
 \_^_/  rm -rf /bin/laden

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

Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 23:41:43 -0700
From: "Infinite Space Systems, Inc." <imp@theriver.com>
Subject: Re: Rotella Bad for O2 Sensor or Cat??

Well, that would be news to Shell Oil Company. According to Shell, Rotella
is recommended for use with all emission control equipment.

Milton Schick
1964 442 Cutlass
imp@theriver.com


- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Harrison" <k0xp@dandy.net>
To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2004 8:35 PM
Subject: Rotella Bad for O2 Sensor or Cat??


> Tom Lentz on the G-body reflector says he heard diesel oil, like Rotella,
> isn't good for either the O2 sensor or the catalytic converter, he can't
> remember which. Another guy opines it's because of the added detergents.
> I've never heard one way or the other. Anybody know for sure?
>
> Thanks,
> SteveH
>

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

Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2004 23:40:03 -0700
From: Joe & Gloria Varley <carcouple@cox.net>
Subject: Looking for parts

Have a club friend with a nice '70 Vista Cruiser.  The right (pass) grille 
has 1 fin broken out of it, in about the middle.  He needs a junk grille to 
pull 1 piece out of and epoxy into his.  Anybody have 1 cheap?

Joe Varley
      AZ

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

Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 23:46:20 -0700
From: "Infinite Space Systems, Inc." <imp@theriver.com>
Subject: Re: Rotella Bad for O2 Sensor or Cat??

Furthermore, if the oil is getting into the O2 sensor or the cat, you've got
a whole different set of problems to worry about. The only thing from the
oil the O2 sensor or cat should ever see is a miniscule amount of burned oil
by-products from the miniscule amount of oil that got past the rings and
valve seals. Those burned oil by-products will **not** hurt the O2 sensor or
cat, regardless of the source of the oil.

Milton Schick
1964 442 Cutlass
imp@theriver.com


- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Harrison" <k0xp@dandy.net>
To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2004 8:35 PM
Subject: Rotella Bad for O2 Sensor or Cat??


> Tom Lentz on the G-body reflector says he heard diesel oil, like Rotella,
> isn't good for either the O2 sensor or the catalytic converter, he can't
> remember which. Another guy opines it's because of the added detergents.
> I've never heard one way or the other. Anybody know for sure?
>
> Thanks,
> SteveH
>

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

Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2004 23:42:13 -0700
From: Joe & Gloria Varley <carcouple@cox.net>
Subject: Parts wanted

Have another club member with a '65 F85 deluxe sedan with 67,000 
miles.  Nice car, daily driver.  He needs the long chrome molding on the 
top of the LF fender, the V8 emblem, and the F85 emblem for the same 
fender.  Anybody have these to sell?

Joe Varley
      AZ

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

Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 03:04:59 -0500
From: "Fred Nissen" <fsnissen@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Rotella Bad for O2 Sensor or Cat??

> Tom Lentz on the G-body reflector says he heard diesel oil, like Rotella,
> isn't good for either the O2 sensor or the catalytic converter, he can't
> remember which. Another guy opines it's because of the added detergents.
> I've never heard one way or the other. Anybody know for sure?

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

Ridiculous.  Rotella meets or exceeds all of the API gas engine specs.  In
order to do this, it MUST be sensor and cat friendly.

I think this urban legend got started when someone switched a worn out oil
burner over to Rotella and blamed the oil when the real problem was a worn
out engine.

Regards,
Fred

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

Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 06:15:31 -0500
From: John Kelsey <ribspot@pop4.net>
Subject: [Fwd: power seat answer needed asap]

- -------- Original Message --------
Subject: power seat answer needed asap
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2004 19:10:14 -0500
From: John Kelsey <ribspot@pop4.net>
To: toro list <thelist@toronado.net>

Hi All
    I need a quick answer to a question on power seats (as if anyone has
much experience with them) My gen 3 toro needs the right side power seat
transmission. I have found someone who is parting out a similar car. His
only has a power seat on the drivers side. Is there a right and left
seat transmission or are they both the same? Maybe someone with a parts 
book could help me out.
     I need to tell the trim shop what to do ASAP hence the need for a
quick answer if anyone knows.
thanks a ton
John Kelsey
Dayton Ohio

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

Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 14:41:35 +0000
From: Steve Harrison <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: Rotella Bad for O2 Sensor or Cat??

At 11:41 PM 3/6/2004 -0700, you wrote:
>Well, that would be news to Shell Oil Company. According to Shell, Rotella
>is recommended for use with all emission control equipment.

Actually, what you should have told me is "RTFM!!". It occurred to me that
Shell spends millions of dollars having artists, English and Spanish
language professors, and others in the printing trade, come up with purty,
nice-looking plastic buckets within which to sell their oils, including
Rotella. I.e.: reading the label on the big bottle revealed that, among
other things, low-emissions gasoline engines can use the stuff without
problem since it's rated SJ and SL.

Next time, maybe I'll remember to RTFL  ;-\  It's probly some
old-mechanic's tale based on some old mechanic not liking either something
new, nor something like dissel oil
  ;o\  ;o\  ;o\

Thanks,
SteveH

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

Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 15:37:24 +0000
From: 77w30442@comcast.net
Subject: Re: Rotella Bad for O2 Sensor or Cat??

maybe its the fact the oil is in the combusion mix to begine with. i ran rottella no problems
ron
> > Tom Lentz on the G-body reflector says he heard diesel oil, like Rotella,
> > isn't good for either the O2 sensor or the catalytic converter, he can't
> > remember which. Another guy opines it's because of the added detergents.
> > I've never heard one way or the other. Anybody know for sure?
> 
> ------------------
> 
> Ridiculous.  Rotella meets or exceeds all of the API gas engine specs.  In
> order to do this, it MUST be sensor and cat friendly.
> 
> I think this urban legend got started when someone switched a worn out oil
> burner over to Rotella and blamed the oil when the real problem was a worn
> out engine.
> 
> Regards,
> Fred
> 
> 

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

Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 11:40:39 -0500
From: "Christopher Witt" <rocketscience442@hotmail.com>
Subject: seeking 61 Starfire CARB Buyer

Had an inquiry for 4-jet for 1961 Starfire
Have the carb, nice and new, cannot find that guy's contact info
if you can help, please contact me privately per below.
Thanks!

- -----------------------
Chris Witt
1303 W. Miller Rd.
Lansing MI 48911

RocketScience442@hotmail.com

Cell 517-449-0432 weekends or short weekday calls or leave message.
Home 517-882-9747 thru 10-11pm MI time most days

_________________________________________________________________
Frustrated with dial-up? Lightning-fast Internet access for as low as 
$29.95/month. http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200360ave/direct/01/

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

Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 09:14:20 -0800
From: "Mike Morrissey" <oxfarm@oregontrail.net>
Subject: Re: Re: Looking for parts

I have a (rather large) file I could email your friend concerning plastic
grille repair... pics and all, if he's interested. I saved over $600 on my
'69 rebuild going this way, and got very good results. My grilles were
HASHED, and you cannot tell theyve been repaired. Email off-list. Mike
- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joe & Gloria Varley" <carcouple@cox.net>
To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2004 10:40 PM
Subject: [SPAM?] Looking for parts


> Have a club friend with a nice '70 Vista Cruiser.  The right (pass) grille
> has 1 fin broken out of it, in about the middle.  He needs a junk grille
to
> pull 1 piece out of and epoxy into his.  Anybody have 1 cheap?
>
> Joe Varley
>       AZ
>

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

Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 12:18:44 -0500
From: "Chris Carson" <fastcarson@prodigy.net>
Subject: Re: 3.23 vs 3.42

I think you may have a tuning problem...check your timing! My '71 Cutlass
conv. has a 2.56 open rear, a completely bone-stock 73 455, and 2.5" duals,
and anything more than 50% throttle from a stop is like revving it in
neutral! The car has *NO*! trouble spinning tires; in fact, I'm on the
lookout for posi carriers because it's so ridiculous!

I have crappier tires on the back (215/75r14) but I don't think this would
make a huge difference; with a 455, you should have no trouble roasting the
hides without slicks.

As for the rear, I would personally go for the 3.23s... either are good but
for a car that is going to see the freeway, and one with a 455 that makes
most of its power down low, keeping the RPMs lower is beneficial.

Chris

> The current 2.56 can not spin the tires which I am not happy with.
> levels at highway speed.  Would like to be able to spin the tires if
desired
> from a slow roll plus have some head snapping when punched to pass.  Don't
> want to have to be careful about spinning the tires in regular everyday
> driving.
> Car has 245/60R14s TA Radials

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

Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 12:20:53 -0500
From: "Chris Carson" <fastcarson@prodigy.net>
Subject: Re: Tri-Power more fuel efficient?

> No, the MPG should be the same as long as the foot and brain are educated
to
> only give enough throttle to get the same general acceleration and
> performance that was used before with the single 4-barrel for normal city
> driving and constant highway cruising.
If this is the case, how does one explain the notorious bad-MPG reputation
of a Holley double pumper?

Chris

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

Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 15:26:28 -0300
From: "Trade 2000" <travelchile@manquehue.net>
Subject: Re: Tri-Power more fuel efficient?

Milton, the MPG is also determined by the setting of each carb, NOT only by
the right foot of the driver. Strange as it can appear, my Holley is
slightly more economical when driven firmly than when used very lightly...
the idle and off-idle being rather on the rich side. Possible as well is
that the fuel atomisation is not perfect at slow speeds of intake air
stream.
The A/F indicator shows this as well, very rich at idle and off idle,
moderatelly rich after, and rich again at WOT when the power valve opens.
Matt>
> Actually, MPG is determined by your foot and how much the foot keeps the
gas
> pedal depressed.
>
> Milton Schick
>

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

Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 11:34:31 -0700
From: "Infinite Space Systems, Inc." <imp@theriver.com>
Subject: Re: 3.23 vs 3.42

Chris Carson is right. Tires can spin under many different circumstances,
but a stock engine with a very low numerically rear gear, high speed highway
gear, will spin the tires best of all. The reason is the rotational speed of
the tire is much higher than with a higher numerically rear gear. That's
what gives the higher speed on the highway. The faster the tire rotates at
low engine speed, where more torque is available and is in the process of
building up both in the engine's power curve and with the stall speed of the
torque converter, the easier it is to spin the tires.

Milton Schick
1964 442 Cutlass
imp@theriver.com


- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Carson" <fastcarson@prodigy.net>
To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2004 10:18 AM
Subject: Re: 3.23 vs 3.42


> I think you may have a tuning problem...check your timing! My '71 Cutlass
> conv. has a 2.56 open rear, a completely bone-stock 73 455, and 2.5"
duals,
> and anything more than 50% throttle from a stop is like revving it in
> neutral! The car has *NO*! trouble spinning tires; in fact, I'm on the
> lookout for posi carriers because it's so ridiculous!
>
> I have crappier tires on the back (215/75r14) but I don't think this would
> make a huge difference; with a 455, you should have no trouble roasting
the
> hides without slicks.
>
> As for the rear, I would personally go for the 3.23s... either are good
but
> for a car that is going to see the freeway, and one with a 455 that makes
> most of its power down low, keeping the RPMs lower is beneficial.
>
> Chris
>
> > The current 2.56 can not spin the tires which I am not happy with.
> > levels at highway speed.  Would like to be able to spin the tires if
> desired
> > from a slow roll plus have some head snapping when punched to pass.
Don't
> > want to have to be careful about spinning the tires in regular everyday
> > driving.
> > Car has 245/60R14s TA Radials
>
>

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

Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 11:39:39 -0700
From: "Infinite Space Systems, Inc." <imp@theriver.com>
Subject: Re: Tri-Power more fuel efficient?

> If this is the case, how does one explain the notorious bad-MPG reputation
> of a Holley double pumper?


Chris, you just did, it's a Holley. Holleys can't get good MPG.

Seriously, Holley double pumpers have 30 cc front pumps and 50 cc rear
pumps. That can dump a lot of fuel real quick. On Thunder's 850 double
pumper, if I behave myself, I can get 13-14 MPG. If I don't behave myself,
the MPG can drop as low as 8.

Milton Schick
1964 442 Cutlass
imp@theriver.com

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

Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 12:09:36 -0700
From: Oldsmagnet <oldsmagnet@oldsmagnet.com>
Subject: Re: Rotella Bad for O2 Sensor or Cat??

> Ridiculous.  Rotella meets or exceeds all of the API gas engine specs.  In
> order to do this, it MUST be sensor and cat friendly.

I think the more specific issue at hand here is not Rotella alone, but 
diesel oils in general - I too have heard that diesel oils contain much 
stronger detergents and additives, and are not recommended for use in 
gasoline engines.  I ran 15W40 for years without problems, and I tend to 
doubt the claims that it's bad, but it is a rumor that we hear pop up often.

The sum total of this thread so far has been Rotella-specific, but the 
initial post was about diesel oil in general, I think, Rot just named as an 
example.  I've heard really good things about Rot, and we can always 
recognize rot coming out of powerstrokes, cuz it's clean and smooth, as 
opposed to black and waterry.  But regular run of the mill diesel oils, I 
know very very little about.
- -- 
=/   http://oldsmagnet.com   \===========/         Oldsmobile        \=
|  mailto:442@oldsmagnet.com  |=========|         1897 -- 2004        |
=\ Charley Buehner Sidney MT /===========\      Shot In The Back     /=

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

Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 14:27:47 -0500
From: "The General" <patton442@verizon.net>
Subject: Tri-Power more fuel efficient - the first 4 barrel

OK list,

        This has got me thinking...
When was the first Olds 4 barrel offered ???
1953 maybe ???


The General       patton442@verizon.net

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

Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 19:01:00 +0000
From: Steve Harrison <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: Tri-Power more fuel efficient?

At 12:20 PM 3/7/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>
>> No, the MPG should be the same as long as the foot and brain are educated
>to
>> only give enough throttle to get the same general acceleration and
>> performance that was used before with the single 4-barrel for normal city
>> driving and constant highway cruising.
>If this is the case, how does one explain the notorious bad-MPG reputation
>of a Holley double pumper?

Because double-pumpers dump fuel from TWO accelerator pumps compared to
just a single pump. But more importantly, Hooleys were never designed or
intended to provide fuel mileage; and they certainly don't. Most don't even
do a very good job at performance as most folks don't know how to tune them
properly.

SteveH

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

Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 19:19:42 +0000
From: Steve Harrison <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: Tri-Power more fuel efficient?

At 11:39 AM 3/7/2004 -0700, you wrote:
>> If this is the case, how does one explain the notorious bad-MPG reputation
>> of a Holley double pumper?
>
>
>Chris, you just did, it's a Holley. Holleys can't get good MPG.
>
>Seriously, Holley double pumpers have 30 cc front pumps and 50 cc rear
>pumps. That can dump a lot of fuel real quick. On Thunder's 850 double
>pumper, if I behave myself, I can get 13-14 MPG. If I don't behave myself,
>the MPG can drop as low as 8.

Heh.... ifn you really want an eye-opener, drop a tunnelram or crossram on
Thunder complete with a pair of 850 double-pumpers  ====================8-O

That's a real good way to see whether yer fuel gage works, too  ;o(((((

SteveH

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

Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 14:45:01 EST
From: MrExMt@aol.com
Subject: IN SEARCH OF MOTOR MOUNTS

- -------------------------------1078688650
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

List
I'm in need of a pair of motor mounts for my '70 Cutlass Supreme w/ a 455.
Can anyone tell me who or where to get them from please. 
Thank you
Leigh Tenenholtz

- -------------------------------1078688650
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 6.00.2726.2500" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fffff=
f">
<DIV>List</DIV>
<DIV>I'm in need of a pair of motor mounts for my '70 Cutlass Supreme w/ a 4=
55.</DIV>
<DIV>Can anyone tell me who or where to get them from please. </DIV>
<DIV>Thank you</DIV>
<DIV>Leigh Tenenholtz</DIV></BODY></HTML>

- -------------------------------1078688650--

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

Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 16:39:15 -0500
From: Robert Barry <rbarry@providence.edu>
Subject: Re: IN SEARCH OF MOTOR MOUNTS

At 02:45 PM 3/7/2004, you wrote:
>List
>I'm in need of a pair of motor mounts for my '70 Cutlass Supreme w/ a 455.
>Can anyone tell me who or where to get them from please.

I got ones for the same application a few years back over the counter at a 
chain parts store. I called around, and I think they had to get them from 
the warehouse, but they were there the next day. Nothing really exotic 
about them. They seem to hold the motor down just fine.


_______________________________________
Bob Barry  MailTo:rbarry@providence.edu
http://home.off-road.com/~wagoneer/ 

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

End of oldsmobile-digest V1 #4806
*********************************
