
oldsmobile-digest       Sunday, August 8 2004       Volume 01 : Number 4980



Re: Degreeing a cam
Cam walk
Re: Degreeing a cam
Suspension bushing fallacies exposed
Re: 72 455 exhaust manifolds
Re: 72 455 exhaust manifolds
72 455 exhaust manifolds removal
Degreeing a cam
Re: Ride Height Question
Re: Buying: thoughts, an Olds vs a non-Olds...
Re: Degreeing a cam
Re: Ride Height Question
Re: Suspension bushing fallacies exposed
Re: 72 455 exhaust manifolds removal
Re: Ride Height Question
Re: Ride Height Question
Re: Ride Height Question

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

Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 10:54:24 -0400
From: "Trade 2000" <travelchile@manquehue.net>
Subject: Re: Degreeing a cam

What slope would be the normal one in the new set? How much is still not too
much?
Matt
- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Harrison" <k0xp@dandy.net>
To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2004 9:59 AM
Subject: Re: Degreeing a cam


> At 08:32 AM 8/8/2004 -0400, you wrote:
> >> In order to degree the cam, you have to know what the cam's specs are
> >> supposed to be. Otherwise, you will just be guessing. It is possible to
> >> guess, but you will have to have done this before.
> >
> >Can a cam be checked with the engine in the car to determine the extent
of
> >timing chain wear? Assume a stock engine and factory cam.
>
> Easily.
>
> Wipe off the timing marks on the balancer and timing mark indicator. Put
> your 1-1/8" socket/rachet on the crank bolt and turn the crank one
> direction ONLY to bring the balancer mark to TDC. Remove the dist cap and
> fasten a long piece of stiff wire (18" or so) under one the rotor's
> mounting screws. Bend the wire so it points to some easily-recognizable
> feature on the engine so you can see when the wire moves the least bit.
Now
> note exactly where the timing mark is, then rock the crank back and forth
> with the rachet until the wire begins to move. Note the timing marks when
> the crank's rocked one way and when rocked the other way. The difference
in
> the timing is the slop at the
> crank. Multiply that by two to get the total timing slop of the chain.
>
> This's much easier to do with the plugs out such as when yer changing the
> plugs. Even at 225K miles, my 307 showed 160-180 PSI compression pressure,
> not real easy to rotate with the fan still in the way (my right little
> finger's finally grown new skin over the last "incident"  ;o(
>
> My '88 200K+ 307 showed about 12 degrees slop three years ago. A month ago
> at around 235K miles, it was up to about 14 degrees, time to replace the
> timing gear/chain set. Still runs great, gets 18.5 second quarter mile
> times in a 4600 lb boatanchor and 20+ mpg on the highway.
>
> SteveH

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

Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 11:06:54 -0400
From: "Christopher Witt" <rocketscience442@hotmail.com>
Subject: Cam walk

Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 18:01:41 -0400
From: Joe Vahabzadeh <king_v@mindless.com>
Subject: RE: timing fluctuations and why the Olds design excels

But, I think I recall reading in an article that, um, I think Dave Smith
Engineering (gotta go dig up the magazine to be sure) makes a thicker cam
button for Olds V8s because they do have a tendency to cam walk as much as
1/4 of an inch... which "plays havoc with your timing" if I recall right.

Now, I don't recall it being mentioned if this is a particular thing that
happens to Olds V8s at high RPM or low, or if RPM makes a difference or not.
	- Joe Vahabzadeh

=============================
No stock Olds cam can move that far. If it did, the lobes would hit 
alternate-bank adjacent lifters and things would rapidly grind to a halt. Ya 
know that funny looking special bolt on the front of the cam, holds the cam 
sprocket on? See that long head protrusion? That is there to extend to 
within a few thousandths of an inch of the timing cover. Thus preventing any 
significant fwd motion of the cam, should it try to occur. That gap is 
typically on the order of 20 to 50 thou. I usually try to set it to 10 to 15 
if assembling an engine worthy of that much attention.

1/4 inch of cam travel... nope, that ain't gonna happen. Unless you leave 
out the correct cam bolt.
- ----------------------
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

_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! 
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/

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

Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 15:34:05 +0000
From: Steve Harrison <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: Degreeing a cam

At 10:54 AM 8/8/2004 -0400, you wrote:
>What slope would be the normal one in the new set?

Dunno what you mean by slope...

>How much is still not too much?

Hard to tell. If yer wanting max performance, a cupla degrees is too much
but most chains will stretch that much after a few thousand miles. For a
fambly car/grocery-getter, 10-12 degrees is probly unnoticeable. I'm
looking forward to getting a new chain/gears on mine and see how much
difference it makes. As well as it runs now, hard to believe it can be even
better ;o)

SteveH

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

Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 12:14:51 -0400
From: "Christopher Witt" <rocketscience442@hotmail.com>
Subject: Suspension bushing fallacies exposed

We had a knock-down-drag-out argument over this issue many months ago. I
will always disagree violently.
====================
Well, let's not get violent about it... It's OK to just disagree. Which, 
apparently, we still do, much like on the type C cam to dist'r drive 
arrangement issue. [both types pull the cam backwards by the action of 
turning the dist'r/oil pump drive gear- why C types sometimes force the cam 
fwd is beyond me- must be lifter action overpowering the forces from the 
driving of the oil pump.]



It doesn't make one damn bit of difference where the suspension is when the
control arm attaching bolts are torqued down to spec.
=================
Au contraire. See my last paragraph below, with my own real life example.



Notice in the shop manual that only the lower control arms are specified to
be tightened with weight on the suspension, not the uppers.
===============
1965 only thing? I recall most of my CSM's specifying torking the bolts- 
*all* the suspension bolts- with the suspension weighted. Yes, I have 1964 
thru 1990 or so versions of the CSM's, and yes, I have read just about all 
of them just about all the way thru. Are you gonna make me go look up this 
point year by year and see what the consensus is?


There's a very good reason, but that reason should have shown the tech 
writers/engineers
who wrote the shop manual the fallacy of the instructions for the lower
control arms. Also, the above statement, "and create some torsion on the
control-arms," should also be a red flag as to that fallacy.
===============
Au contraire again. If you secure the bushings with the suspension dangling, 
then they WILL tend to keep the suspension down and the car higher. Until 
and unless the forces of use cause the inner steel sleeve to move in 
relation to the frame that grips it at its ends. [Or, something worse 
happens, like the bond between the rubber and the inner or outer steel part 
gets broken.].



Neither the rubber suspension bushings or the steel center insert for the
bushing are designed to put torsion, tension, rebound reduction, or anything
else into the suspension system.
===============
I assert again that the bushing's inner steel sleeve is bonded to the 
rubber, as is the outer steel sheath. Outer steel ring is gripped tightly by 
the A-arm [or rear control arm]. Inner steel bushing is gripped tightly by 
the pinch of the nut and bolt. Neither sleeve is SUPPOSED TO ever move 
w.r.t. its attachement point. ALL motion in the joint is *supposed to* come 
from the torsional flexing of the rubber between its bonds to the inner and 
outer steel parts.




The rubber bushings and the steel center
insert for the bushing simply center the attaching bolts and help maintain
reasonable front end alignment during jolts to the suspension system. The
rubber bushings also may cushion those jolts to some extent. That's all they
do.
=================
Where, then, would you have us believe the rotational motion, required at 
this joint as the suspension moves, *should* occur, sir?



What the engineers fail to realize is that after 50-100 miles, those new
bushings will loosen and friction resistance between the rubber bushing ends
and the steel center insert for the bushing and the steel frame mounts will
disappear.
===========
what? If your bushings loosen, you got problems. Are you asserting that the 
rubber is supposed to turn or spin on the inner steel core and/or the outer 
steel sheath? Or, that the inner steel sleeve is supposed to spin/turn on 
the bolt? That's absurd.



For those of you who have removed a set of control arms, did you
notice there was very little resistance to your hand in moving the control
arm up and down?
============
Well, no, actually. Usually here in MI it's a Grade-A B*tch to remove old 
CA's. You have to pry the arm to get it to move more than an inch or two.
   THE ONLY MOTION OF THE SUSPENSION IS THAT ATTAINED THRU FLEXING OF THE 
RUBBER. THERE IS NO BUSHING-TO-FRAME OR BUSHING-TO-ARM OR RUBBER-TO-SLEEVE 
OR RUBBER-TO-SHEATH MOTION WHATSOEVER.
  The bolt is typically rusted solid to the steel inner core of the bushing. 
One part now. Often cannot be slid out or hammered out at all, but the frame 
must be cut or pried apart enough to extract the [now] headless and tailless 
bolt from its grip. The remains of the bolt stays in the bushing, and the 
entire bushing is replaced. Probably the arm too if the rust is that bad.



Think of the force moving those control arms with 2000
pounds of front end weight, plus the geometric force vectors (fulcrum
effect) of front end suspension movement. I don't care what anyone wants to
say, those rubber bushings are moving very promptly against the steel frame
mounts with that force behind them.
================
Then, you got a problem, 'cause, that's just not right. Certainly does not 
occur on rusted MI cars. Unless you are thinking of the ENDS of the rubber 
portions of the component.



That's exactly why the factory nuts for
the factory bushing bolts are locknuts, because those bolts will eventually
rotate as the control arm goes up and down, following the rotational
movement of the suspension bushing.
======================
If you have more than the teensiest motion of that bolt, one time, as the 
suspension settles into use, you got a problem. Alas, the bolt/ nut can 
loosen even with the teensiest motion of the bolt [if it is more than a 
solitary instance], thus the special prevailing-torque nuts the factory 
used. {INITIAL INQUIRER: REMEMBER TO MAKE SURE THAT THE FELLERS THAT WORKED 
ON YOUR CAR USED THE CORRECT NUTS DURING ASSEMBLY. -NEW- [PLAIN] NUTS FROM 
THE HARDWARE STORE ARE _NOT_ BETTER THAN THE OLD FACTORY CORRECT PARTS. A 
common fallacy among common mechanics who do not understand fastener 
variations.}




The smart move is to use both lock
washers and lock nuts on those bolts, for insurance. That also applies to
the rear control arm bolts.
============
Bah. The factory was not smart, then? Again, I say Bah! That bolt MUST be 
tight, or else it would move, which would lead to wear. Steel on steel [or 
steel on rubber] motion produces wear, simple as that. Motion WITHIN THE 
RUBBER, as I assert is the only correct way to attain the motion we are 
talking about here, does NOT produce sliding and thus wear.



Furthermore, when installing new bushings, whether rubber or polyurethane,
the bushing *must* be lubricated so the new
tight bushing can be slid into the frame mount *without shaving any material
off of the new bushing*.
============
are you thinking of the bushings' ENDS??? That would explain a lot. To 
clarify, I assert that the ENDS of the rubber bushings do move w.r.t. their 
mating bracketry, and should not grip anything. That we can agree on. 
However, the OD and the ID of the bushings do indeed grip their mating 
parts. Unless there is a problem.



That lubrication is critical. For poly bushings,
silicone grease is used. For rubber bushings, a good quality front end lube
is used, for it will not harm the rubber. The shop manual does not say that,
for it was not thought of. I can guarantee you that all good mechanics know
that and will put a thin layer of grease on the rubber bushings to prevent
any potential damage, before the control arm is installed.
==============
Where on the rubber bushings? On the ends? You sure are not going to get any 
lube between the ID or OD of the rubber portion and its mating steel sleeve 
or sheath.


With the grease present, there will be no friction between the new rubber 
bushing and the
steel frame mount.
=============
yeah, on the ENDS of the cylindrical rubber part. The ENDS of the rubber 
cylinder have --nothing whatsoeve-- to do with the action of this component. 
Let's get this straight as to where motion does and does not occur in this 
system [disregarding the irrelevant ENDS of the rubber and outer steel 
portions]:
.
   The Outer Steel Sheath is gripped on its OD by the arm, no motion between 
those two.
   The outer sheath is bonded at its ID to the OD of the rubber bushing, no 
motion there.
   The ID of the rubber bushing is bonded to the OD of the inner steel 
sleeve, no motion there.
   The inner steel sleeve grips the frame at its endpoints due to the 
pinching of the attaching bolt and nut- no motion there. [Ideally, if 
installed correctly]
.
Thus, the arm is tied rigidly to the frame, with the exception of any motion 
attainable thru the *flexing acton of the rubber portion of the bushing*.
   THAT is why the bushings MUST be tightened while the suspension is loaded 
[mid-travel]- so that the range of motion attainable [w/o overpowering the 
friction fit of the inner steel sleeve at the frame and thus causing the 
sleeve to move and/ or the bolt to turn and loosen]- is within the range of 
motion required as the suspension is used.



Therefore, it does not make one single bit of difference whether or not the
front control arms are tightened with the car up in the air and the
suspension hanging down or with the car sitting on the ground. It just does
not matter.
====================
Uhm, with all due respect, sir... Bullshirt!
In my younger days, way before I had so much as one CSM, I replaced the diff 
in my '67 Cutlass. Snugged the bolts with the diff hanging, of course. A 
week later, I got a funny noise from the back. Pretty soon, it got worse. 
Soon after that, the car went like 3" sideways [dog-tracking] when I let off 
vs applied the throttle. Look underneath, WHT, a rear [upper?] control arm 
bolt FELL OUT and the others are loose. So, you see, sir, it matters.... in 
some cases, very much so.




These statements will no doubt start a firestorm, for it goes against
"conventional" wisdom.
Milton Schick
1964 442 Cutlass
imp@theriver.com
==================
It appears you are simply confusing the ENDS of the rubber bushings with the 
true gripping surface- their ID and OD, where they meet the inner steel 
sleeve and outer steel sheath, respectively. If anyone can dispute my 
assertion that all suspension motion does [or, at least in theory and in 
properly installed use, SHOULD] occur entirely within the rubber bushing, by 
its capability to flex rotationally, then, please, state your case. With all 
due respect, I think you need to work on a few MI cars to broaden your 
perspective, Milton.
- ----------------------
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

_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® 
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

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

Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 12:18:05 -0400
From: "Dan Roethel" <droethel@rogers.com>
Subject: Re: 72 455 exhaust manifolds

Soak the bolt with a good rust penitrating oil for about a week.
I would avoid using a impact wrench they tend to snap the heads off the
bolts. My son used an impact wrench on a exhaust manifold bolt and the bolt
head twisted off. We used a 6 point socket and large bar on the rest and
they came out fine.
Because exhaust bolt are subject to extreme heating and cooling the metal
can fatigue hence people tend to snap them off.
A little trick I used to keep the penitrating oil on the bolt was to turn
the engine on its side and make a small dam around the bolt with plumbers
putty. I added a little oil every day for a week keeping a puddle around the
bolt and it came out fine.

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

Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 12:42:37 -0400
From: "ron fama" <77w30442@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: 72 455 exhaust manifolds

never use impact wrench on a frozen bolt .
and never force the bolt, it will break, pena trateing fluid works but heat works best
ron  
- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dan Roethel" <droethel@rogers.com>
To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2004 12:18 PM
Subject: Re: 72 455 exhaust manifolds


> Soak the bolt with a good rust penitrating oil for about a week.
> I would avoid using a impact wrench they tend to snap the heads off the
> bolts. My son used an impact wrench on a exhaust manifold bolt and the bolt
> head twisted off. We used a 6 point socket and large bar on the rest and
> they came out fine.
> Because exhaust bolt are subject to extreme heating and cooling the metal
> can fatigue hence people tend to snap them off.
> A little trick I used to keep the penitrating oil on the bolt was to turn
> the engine on its side and make a small dam around the bolt with plumbers
> putty. I added a little oil every day for a week keeping a puddle around the
> bolt and it came out fine.
> 
> 
> 
> 

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

Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 12:45:27 -0400
From: "Christopher Witt" <rocketscience442@hotmail.com>
Subject: 72 455 exhaust manifolds removal

Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 19:51:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Matt Crumley <crumleym_50@yahoo.com>
Subject: 72 455 exhaust manifolds


Also I have one exhaust manifold that won't come off.
One of the bolts will break loose with a 9/16 socket.
The other 4 are smaller and have the locking tabs.
I'm puzzled.  Any help appreciated.

BTW PB Blasters kicks but on old bolts.

Matt
STL
=========================
Apparently there's too much "butt" on xst bolts then.
Rusted below 9/16" are they? I usually hammer on a 13mm socket and twist off 
the bolt with that. If you really want to not twist off the bolt, you must 
apply heat, and lots of it, to the boss in which the bolt is stuck. Lately I 
have also used electronic-store "chill" spray to make the fastener cold 
before applying removal torque. Pricey, $10/can, but works very well. Spews 
out some chemical at about -50F. Makes the bolt smaller to break the rust 
bond, and harder, to withstand the required torque.

Oh, axial hits with the BFH help a LOT in loosening such stuck fasteners, 
and also serve to mushroom out the head of the bolt so that perhaps a 
original size socket might grip it. Use at least a 2-3 lb hammer.
- ----------------------
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

_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! 
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/

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

Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 11:33:56 -0500
From: bcroe@juno.com
Subject: Degreeing a cam

I'd expect a new chain to be essentially zero slop, 
though other things like dist gear wear could show 
up at that point.  My limit is 6 crank degrees.  More 
on an OEM plastic tooth cam sprocket means the 
plastic could fall off any time.  No plastic should 
be left in service more than a dozen years anyway.  

I think more slop yet will make measureable 
performance loss. It certainly greatly increased the 
pinging of my 79 Toro engine (on unleaded premium).
If you are noting it increasing some, you may not be 
far from finding yourself stranded on the side of the 
road.  I prefer to chose the time to do maintenance, 
instead of letting the car chose it.

8 Aug 2004 <travelchile@manquehue.net> writes:
> What slop would be the normal one in the new set? 
> How much is still not too much?
> Matt

I don't know what chain was put on this used engine, 
but I have a Cloyes True Roller replacement.

    Bruce Roe

8 Aug 2004 "Frederick Nissen" <fsnissen@worldnet.att.net> writes:

> What brand of timing chain set did you put in it?  Virtually 
> the only one I
> have found to be consistently accurate is Cloyes.
> 
> Regards,
> Fred

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

Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 13:40:28 -0700
From: "Infinite Space Systems, Inc." <imp@theriver.com>
Subject: Re: Ride Height Question

> Are you saying that factory rubber bushings rotate on the steel tube that
> passes through the middle?


No, the rubber is bonded to the center steel tube.


> I know the friction on the ends would be
> negligible, but I was always under the impression that the middle was
> bonded to the tube.


Right, the friction of the ends is negligible. That's where the bushings
will pivot, just like a poly bushing.


> Granted, the aftermarket poly bushings are different,
> but all the bushings I've ever used had the bushing fixed to that center
> tube, so that when th arms were bolted down the only movement was from the
> rubber twisting, not from the bushing spinning.


The rubber doesn't want to twist, permanently. If it did, over way too many
cycles, the rubber would fatigue and go away, much quicker than it usually
does from age. Initially, there's enough friction from the rubber and the
steel tube to give that effect, but it will go away real quick.

I believe the misconception is how the attaching bolt tightens. The
attaching bolt is only torqued about 45 foot pounds, which isn't very much,
and uses a lock nut. 45 pounds will not collapse the sides of the frame
mount to crush into the ends of the steel tube in the center of the bushing
to any great extent. The bushing is going to pivot freely after a short
time. The rubber is designed to *only* absorb road shocks to the attaching
bolt and the frame. The rubber bushing is not part of the spring/shock
system for carrying vehicle load.

If the torque on the attaching bolt was significant enough to crush the
frame attaching mount into the ends of the steel tube inside of the rubber
bushing, how would one *ever* remove the control arm? For that matter, how
would the control arm *ever* pivot up an down? It couldn't.

The point I'm trying to hammer is that friction between the ends of the
rubber suspension bushing against the steel sides of its frame attaching
mount, whether that friction is from the rubber or the center steel tube,
does not count, will go away in a short period of time, and will not affect
the ride height of the vehicle. It simply can't.

Okay, less even take this one step further. The shop manual also doesn't
show a very acceptable way to R&R upper control arm bushings *with the
control arm on the car*. The control ram is never removed, the upper ball
joint is never popped off, and the control arm shaft is never removed from
the frame mount. I'm sure many of the mechanics on the List will know this
procedure. It's quick and fast and accurate.

Milton Schick
1964 442 Cutlass
imp@theriver.com

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

Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 14:14:15 -0700
From: geo.aigel@sbcglobal.net
Subject: Re: Buying: thoughts, an Olds vs a non-Olds...

>Availability, or, more accurately, lack thereof.  Simply haven't been able
>to find them.


Really? Man, there is literally hundreds of them out here. Generally nice 
ones are about 3k. May be worth a trip to the left coast. ;)

George

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

Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 13:42:34 -0700
From: "Infinite Space Systems, Inc." <imp@theriver.com>
Subject: Re: Degreeing a cam

Yes.

Milton Schick
1964 442 Cutlass
imp@theriver.com


- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Cullen" <david.cullen@snet.net>
To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2004 5:32 AM
Subject: Degreeing a cam


> > In order to degree the cam, you have to know what the cam's specs are
> > supposed to be. Otherwise, you will just be guessing. It is possible to
> > guess, but you will have to have done this before.
>
> Can a cam be checked with the engine in the car to determine the extent of
> timing chain wear? Assume a stock engine and factory cam.
>
> drc
>

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

Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 20:55:28 +0000
From: "bob ryan" <featlittle@msn.com>
Subject: Re: Ride Height Question

rear air shox part# ma762 $79 at auto zone

>From: Greg Beaulieu <ab348@chebucto.ns.ca>
>Reply-To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
>To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
>Subject: Re: Ride Height Question
>Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 10:43:26 -0300 (ADT)
>
>On Sat, 7 Aug 2004, Infinite Space Systems, Inc. wrote:
><snip>
> > Therefore, it does not make one single bit of difference whether or not 
>the
> > front control arms are tightened with the car up in the air and the
> > suspension hanging down or with the car sitting on the ground. It just 
>does
> > not matter.
>
>I have to admit (not knowing much about this to start with) that I found
>it hard to believe that the bolts and bushings could cause the rise in
>ride height given the amount of weight on the front end. I suspect your
>original explanation of the split bushing causing a sag is a good part of
>this. I tried checking to see if the springs were properly seated in the
>pocket but couldn't really tell. Milton, you're correct, the amount of
>change is about 1".
>
>I may have an issue with the springs themselves. About 9-10 years ago I
>had them replaced. There was some confusion at the time here locally re.
>getting the right part. I'm wondering now if they are the right ones, and
>if this was masked all that time by a failed set of bushings. Maybe I
>should just drop a 455 into the front and let that take care of the ride
>height. :) Failing that, I suppose I could try something to raise the rear
>slightly to make it more level.
>
>Greg Beaulieu    ab348@chebucto.ns.ca    Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada
>           Olds List Admin Info: http://oldslist.oldsgmail.com
>

_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! 
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/

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

Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 15:14:59 -0700
From: "Infinite Space Systems, Inc." <imp@theriver.com>
Subject: Re: Suspension bushing fallacies exposed

> 1965 only thing? I recall most of my CSM's specifying torking the bolts-
> *all* the suspension bolts- with the suspension weighted. Yes, I have 1964
> thru 1990 or so versions of the CSM's, and yes, I have read just about all
> of them just about all the way thru. Are you gonna make me go look up this
> point year by year and see what the consensus is?


Yes, I am. The upper control arms mount with a cross shaft through the
control arm. It's a completely different configuration from the lower
control arms. The rebuild of the upper is completely different. It does not
apply.


> Until
> and unless the forces of use cause the inner steel sleeve to move in
> relation to the frame that grips it at its ends.


Got you. If the inner steel sleeve was locked to the frame, *you would never
be able to remove the control arm in the future*. It doesn't work that way.
Also, your statement just inferred the rubber bushings are part of the load
carrying system, represented by the springs and shocks, and the bushings are
not and were never intended to be.


> I assert again that the bushing's inner steel sleeve is bonded to the
> rubber, as is the outer steel sheath.


Of course it is.


> Outer steel ring is gripped tightly by
> the A-arm [or rear control arm]. Inner steel bushing is gripped tightly by
> the pinch of the nut and bolt.


NO.


> Neither sleeve is SUPPOSED TO ever move
> w.r.t. its attachement point. ALL motion in the joint is *supposed to*
come
> from the torsional flexing of the rubber between its bonds to the inner
and
> outer steel parts.


NO. That's why lcok nuts are applied to the bolts at the factory. By your
discription, there would be NO requirement for lock nuts, since there would
never be a chance the bolts could rotate.


> Where, then, would you have us believe the rotational motion, required at
> this joint as the suspension moves, *should* occur, sir?


Around the bolt. That's why it has a factory lock nut.


> what? If your bushings loosen, you got problems. Are you asserting that
the
> rubber is supposed to turn or spin on the inner steel core and/or the
outer
> steel sheath?


No, I've already said it bonded together on previous posts. You aren't
reading.


> Or, that the inner steel sleeve is supposed to spin/turn on
> the bolt? That's absurd.


Yes, it rotates on the bolt, the movement is very small relative to the
diameter, it's NOT absurd, and that's the reason for the factory lock nuts.

To further prove the point, guess what, ***poly bushings rotate on the
bolt***.


> Well, no, actually. Usually here in MI it's a Grade-A B*tch to remove old
> CA's. You have to pry the arm to get it to move more than an inch or two.
>    THE ONLY MOTION OF THE SUSPENSION IS THAT ATTAINED THRU FLEXING OF THE
> RUBBER. THERE IS NO BUSHING-TO-FRAME OR BUSHING-TO-ARM OR RUBBER-TO-SLEEVE
> OR RUBBER-TO-SHEATH MOTION WHATSOEVER.
>   The bolt is typically rusted solid to the steel inner core of the
bushing.
> One part now. Often cannot be slid out or hammered out at all, but the
frame
> must be cut or pried apart enough to extract the [now] headless and
tailless
> bolt from its grip. The remains of the bolt stays in the bushing, and the
> entire bushing is replaced. Probably the arm too if the rust is that bad.


I guess I've just been real lucky. In Missoura, after removing the 2 bolts
from the lower control arm, just pull the arm straight out. Just a little
tug is all that is necessary.


> If you have more than the teensiest motion of that bolt, one time, as the
> suspension settles into use, you got a problem. Alas, the bolt/ nut can
> loosen even with the teensiest motion of the bolt [if it is more than a
> solitary instance], thus the special prevailing-torque nuts the factory
> used.


Not with a steel pinch locknut.


 {INITIAL INQUIRER: REMEMBER TO MAKE SURE THAT THE FELLERS THAT WORKED
> ON YOUR CAR USED THE CORRECT NUTS DURING ASSEMBLY. -NEW- [PLAIN] NUTS FROM
> THE HARDWARE STORE ARE _NOT_ BETTER THAN THE OLD FACTORY CORRECT PARTS. A
> common fallacy among common mechanics who do not understand fastener
> variations.}


One's local industrial bolt supply house can help with any bolt and nut
requirement.
> are you thinking of the bushings' ENDS??? That would explain a lot.


That's the only thing I've been talking about. The ends.


> Where on the rubber bushings? On the ends?


For the last time, I've only been talking about the ends.
> Thus, the arm is tied rigidly to the frame, with the exception of any
motion
> attainable thru the *flexing acton of the rubber portion of the bushing*.
>    THAT is why the bushings MUST be tightened while the suspension is
loaded
> [mid-travel]- so that the range of motion attainable [w/o overpowering the
> friction fit of the inner steel sleeve at the frame and thus causing the
> sleeve to move and/ or the bolt to turn and loosen]- is within the range
of
> motion required as the suspension is used.


Then you belong to the school of thought that states the rubber suspension
bushings are part of the load bearing components of of the front suspension,
i.e., the springs and shocks. With the bushing acting in the mode you
described, there will be constant flex of the rubber, the rubber will
contribute to the resistance of the shock absorber to road forces, and the
rubber will fatigue and fail in a short time. Rubber can't do the job of a
hydraulic or gas cylinder. What's interesting is that by your description,
what are poly bushings supposed to do? Poly bushings do rotate around the
bolt, period. Poly bushings do not flex. Poly bushings are an order of
magnitude firmer than rubber bushings. Poly bushings do exactly the same job
of a rubber bushing, they mitigate suspension flex without having a solid
steel bushing suspension when the suspension is subjected to road shocks.
Maybe you should look at the function of the ***steel*** suspension bushings
in the upper control arms of a '64 A-body.


> Soon after that, the car went like 3" sideways [dog-tracking] when I let
off
> vs applied the throttle. Look underneath, WHT, a rear [upper?] control arm
> bolt FELL OUT and the others are loose. So, you see, sir, it matters....
in
> some cases, very much so.


Sorry, bolt failure for another reason. Didn't use lock nuts. By the way,
Energy Suspension supplies both Nyloc nuts and lock washers with their
suspension bolt sets. So does Edelbrock. Both are to be used. There's a very
good reason.


> It appears you are simply confusing the ENDS of the rubber bushings with
the
> true gripping surface- their ID and OD, where they meet the inner steel
> sleeve and outer steel sheath, respectively.


I didn't confuse anything. I discussed *****ONLY***** the ends of the
bushings. Re-read what I wrote.

Milton Schick
1964 442 Cutlass
imp@theriver.com

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

Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 19:52:32 +0000
From: Steve Harrison <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: 72 455 exhaust manifolds removal

At 12:45 PM 8/8/2004 -0400, you wrote:
>Lately I have also used electronic-store "chill" spray to make 
>the fastener cold before applying removal torque. Pricey, $10/can, 
>but works very well. Spews out some chemical at about -50F. Makes 
>the bolt smaller to break the rust bond, and harder, to withstand 
>the required torque.

Also try canned air; invert the can or turn it on its side and you'll get
the supercold stuff. Might be a bit cheaper than the freeze stuff, I dunno.

SteveH

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

Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 22:11:33 -0300 (ADT)
From: Greg Beaulieu <ab348@chebucto.ns.ca>
Subject: Re: Ride Height Question

On Sun, 8 Aug 2004, Infinite Space Systems, Inc. wrote:
> Okay, less even take this one step further. The shop manual also doesn't
> show a very acceptable way to R&R upper control arm bushings *with the
> control arm on the car*. The control ram is never removed, the upper ball
> joint is never popped off, and the control arm shaft is never removed from
> the frame mount. I'm sure many of the mechanics on the List will know this
> procedure. It's quick and fast and accurate.

Wel, I'm no mechanic, but I don't know this procedure, and since my upper
bushings are equally bad, I'd love to hear it. 

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

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

Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 01:00:46 +0000
From: Steve Harrison <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: Ride Height Question

At 01:40 PM 8/8/2004 -0700, you wrote:
>Okay, less even take this one step further. The shop manual also 
>doesn't show a very acceptable way to R&R upper control arm bushings 
>*with the control arm on the car*. The control ram is never removed, 
>the upper ball joint is never popped off, and the control arm shaft 
>is never removed from the frame mount. I'm sure many of the mechanics 
>on the List will know this procedure. It's quick and fast and accurate.

How are the bushings removed from the control arm?????

SteveH

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

Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 18:55:20 -0700
From: "Infinite Space Systems, Inc." <imp@theriver.com>
Subject: Re: Ride Height Question

> Wel, I'm no mechanic, but I don't know this procedure, and since my upper
> bushings are equally bad, I'd love to hear it.

> How are the bushings removed from the control arm?????


It's how one beats the flat rate.

Replace one bushing at a time. Remove the nut and cup washer from one end.
Drive the bushing out with an air chisel. It'll come out. Start on the outer
rim and work around. You can hit the inner edge as long as you don't balloon
it. As the bushing starts to work itself out, place a hydraulic jack under
the lower control arm and apply just enough pressure to keep the cross shaft
centered in the bushing. That will take excessive load off of the bushing,
making removal easier. Once the bushing is out, re-center the cross shaft
end in the bushing hole. Apply front end grease or heavy oil around the
short raised portion of the new bushing's outer steel sleeve that presses
into the control arm. Grease will stay better. It will be lubricant for ease
of installation. Install the bushing on the cross shaft end, bush into the
bushing hole, re-center with the jack as necessary, and push the bushing in
as far as it will go. There will be a point where the threads of the cross
shaft will exit the bushing. Depending upon application, you may need to tap
the bushing a little. Once sufficient threads are visible, install a
hardened nut (grade 8 or better) of the right size on top of a thick grade 8
fender washer and use an impact wrench to draw the bushing all the way home
to its final seat. Then, install the cup washer and new locknut with
lockwasher. I've had other mechanics fail to do so and have later found a
missing nut and cup washer. Not cool.

Go to the next upper bushing on the list.

A mechanic who is real good doing this can install new upper bushings in 1/2
to 1/3 the flat rate time.

Milton Schick
1964 442 Cutlass
imp@theriver.com

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

End of oldsmobile-digest V1 #4980
*********************************
