
oldsmobile-digest     Wednesday, August 11 2004     Volume 01 : Number 4985



RE: Harmonic Balancer Failure
RE: Harmonic Balancer Failure
RE: of garage lengths vs car lengths....
RE: Harmonic Balancer Failure
Re: of garage lengths vs car lengths....
Re: 1993 F*rd question - sorry
Tire rotation question
Re: of garage lengths vs car lengths....
Re: Harmonic Balancer Failure
Trans. problem
Re: Tire rotation question
f/s - 68 98 LS
Re: Harmonic Balancer Failure
Re: Harmonic Balancer Failure
Re: Harmonic Balancer Failure
RE: f/s - 68 98 LS
RE: Some Batman car sightings...
Re: f/s - 68 98 LS
Fwd: Tire rotation question (answered)
1993 F*rd question - sorry
Re: f/s - 68 98 LS

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

Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 22:22:00 -0700
From: geo.aigel@sbcglobal.net
Subject: RE: Harmonic Balancer Failure

>What about those guys called " Damper Dudes"

I am sure they can do it. But can they do it for $80 shipped in a few days?

George

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

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 01:49:59 -0400
From: Cutlass7276@netscape.net
Subject: RE: Harmonic Balancer Failure

geo.aigel@sbcglobal.net wrote:

>
>>What about those guys called " Damper Dudes"
>
>I am sure they can do it. But can they do it for $80 shipped in a few days?
>
>George
>
>Hello
Well there is another choice...i think NAPA sells a Wubber kit so you can revulcanize them yerself right in yer own comfy home :)
Randy H.

__________________________________________________________________
Switch to Netscape Internet Service.
As low as $9.95 a month -- Sign up today at http://isp.netscape.com/register

Netscape. Just the Net You Need.

New! Netscape Toolbar for Internet Explorer
Search from anywhere on the Web and block those annoying pop-ups.
Download now at http://channels.netscape.com/ns/search/install.jsp

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

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 02:15:18 -0400
From: Cutlass7276@netscape.net
Subject: RE: of garage lengths vs car lengths....

Joe Vahabzadeh <king_v@mindless.com> wrote:

>Now if there were only an economical way to stretch my garage by just a few
>inches.
>- Joe Vahabzadeh
>
>Hello
Joe yer not thinkin right,,,,where are you most comfortable?..in yer home?
Do you have more room in yer house or garage?
Can you open a wall into basement?
If not try a mainfloor wall(NOT SUPPORTING WALL!)
Think James bond or Batmobile you may find mo space :)
economical?..stock up on duct tape/plywood/tarps before ya bring out the chainsaw,sledgehammer(ferd tool),and skillsaw.
Randy(can hide 6 cars now:)H.

__________________________________________________________________
Switch to Netscape Internet Service.
As low as $9.95 a month -- Sign up today at http://isp.netscape.com/register

Netscape. Just the Net You Need.

New! Netscape Toolbar for Internet Explorer
Search from anywhere on the Web and block those annoying pop-ups.
Download now at http://channels.netscape.com/ns/search/install.jsp

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

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 00:10:40 -0700
From: geo.aigel@sbcglobal.net
Subject: RE: Harmonic Balancer Failure

>Well there is another choice...i think NAPA sells a Wubber kit so you can 
>revulcanize them yerself right in yer own comfy home :)

How comfy will it be, after you stuck your balancer into the oven for 45 
minutes at 400 degrees? I'd be heading for a divorce. She didn't let me 
drill a 4" hole into the kitchen table for the transmission output shaft 
either. Would have been much easier to rebuild the th350 on the table that 
way ...

George

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

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 07:13:36 -0400
From: "Dave Cullen" <david.cullen@snet.net>
Subject: Re: of garage lengths vs car lengths....

> But, on the off chance I get another vehicle, how does the 1972 98's
length
> compare to say the same year Delta 88?

72 Land Yaght Regency is about 19 feet long, (232.2").
The B Body was 225"

Here's a good reference site:

http://encyclopedia.classicoldsmobile.com/

drc

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

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 08:51:28 -0400
From: "ron fama" <77w30442@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: 1993 F*rd question - sorry

near thermo stat housing there is a single  red wire with a 90 deg pigtail on it.  ground it to
block and see if gauge moves to full hot with key on. if it does than  sender  may be bad.BUT ford
has tsb's on the pig tail itself the connection sucks due to poor qaulity.
if you need more info feel free i can print you stuff off all data
ron
- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joe Vahabzadeh" <king_v@mindless.com>
To: <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>
Cc: <bammons@oxcom.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 10:43 PM
Subject: Re: 1993 F*rd question - sorry


> At 12:14 AM 08/09/2004 -0500, Brian wrote:
> >If you KNOW know, please reply directly to bammonsAToxcomDOTcom as well as
> >to the list.
> >
> >1993 F*rd E-250 Econoline van, 4.9L I-6, it's a work truck (I work to buy
> >Oldsmobiles) and we're being frugal so I'm doing the work.  The temp guage
> >(a full needle) is not working in the dash, it is pegged on less than zero.
> > Turning the ignition to START causes it to go even more to the left, then
> >when back in RUN it goes back to "regular" less than zero.
> >
> >WHERE is the sender for this guage?  I got a piece from the store, was
> >listed as that application, however it only has one pole (whereas all the
> >OLDS I have had with a guage were a two-wire job).  I took out what I
> >thought was the correct sender - passenger side of the thermostat housing,
>
> According to my supposedly all-knowing computer system at Autozone (which
> tends to often say "information not available" at the worst times), the
> part is located:
>
> "Front seating area, center, under engine cover, passenger side of intake
> manifold, rear of fuel injectors, mounted in block."
>
> At a brief glance, that appears to describe three separate locations.  But
> I haven't ever gotten a good look at the I-6 in the Ford vans.  I can only
> hope that's *helpful* information.
>
> - Joe Vahabzadeh
>

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

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 09:40:55 EDT
From: JonKrisInc@aol.com
Subject: Tire rotation question

- -------------------------------1092231654
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I've always believed when rotating tires, an X configuration should occur.  
That is to say, right front to left rear and left front to right rear. In this  
week's Old Cars Magazine, in the Q&A section, a guy writes that radial  tires 
should be rotated front to back on the same side (right front to right  rear, 
etc.) because the steel belts wear in a certain pattern on each side. He  
claims that rotating in an X, will cause the steel belts to unravel at speeds  
over 70 mph. I've never heard of this and Old Cars Magazine did not dispute this 
 in their answer. Can this be true?
 
Bruce
75  Delta 88 Conv. (duals, of course)
72 Cutlass Conv.
56 190 SL Conv.
92  Eldo

- -------------------------------1092231654
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3DUS-ASCII">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1458" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=3Drole_body style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY:=20=
Arial"=20
bottomMargin=3D7 leftMargin=3D7 topMargin=3D7 rightMargin=3D7><FONT id=3Drol=
e_document=20
face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D2>
<DIV>I've always believed when rotating tires, an X configuration should occ=
ur.=20
That is to say, right front to left rear and left front to right rear. In th=
is=20
week's Old Cars Magazine, in the Q&amp;A&nbsp;section, a guy writes that rad=
ial=20
tires should be rotated front to back on the same side (right front to right=
=20
rear, etc.) because the steel belts wear in a certain pattern on each side.=20=
He=20
claims that rotating in an X, will cause the steel belts to unravel at speed=
s=20
over 70 mph. I've never heard of this and Old Cars Magazine did not dispute=20=
this=20
in their answer. Can this be true?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial size=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"10"=
>Bruce<BR>75=20
Delta 88 Conv. (duals, of course)<BR>72 Cutlass Conv.<BR>56 190 SL Conv.<BR>=
92=20
Eldo</FONT></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>

- -------------------------------1092231654--

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

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:12:25 +0000
From: 62oldsfan@comcast.net
Subject: Re: of garage lengths vs car lengths....

- --NextPart_Webmail_9m3u9jl4l_25995_1092233545_0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

> how does the 1972 98's length compare to say the 
> same year Delta 88?
>
> How about Impala/Caprice, Bonneville/Catalina, or
> LeSabre/Electra?  Were they all exactly the same length
> bumper to bumper at their longest points?
No.  Lengths varied.  Impala, Caprice, Catalina, 88, LeSabre and probably Bonneville should be shorter than your 98, although some of those Bonnevilles were pretty long, too.  They were on the GM B body platform.  98 and Electra are roughly the same size, based on the same C body platform as the DeVille.  Fleetwoods were on the D platform. 
Paul
- --NextPart_Webmail_9m3u9jl4l_25995_1092233545_0
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<html><body>
<P>&gt; how does the 1972 98's length compare to say the <BR>&gt; same year Delta 88?<BR>&gt;<BR>&gt; How about Impala/Caprice, Bonneville/Catalina, or<BR>&gt; LeSabre/Electra?&nbsp; Were they all exactly the same length<BR>&gt; bumper to bumper at their longest points?</P>
<P>No.&nbsp; Lengths varied.&nbsp; Impala, Caprice, Catalina, 88, LeSabre and probably Bonneville should be shorter than your 98, although some of those Bonnevilles were pretty long, too.&nbsp; They were on the GM&nbsp;B body platform.&nbsp; 98 and Electra are roughly the same size, based on the same C body platform as the DeVille.&nbsp; Fleetwoods were on the D platform. </P>
<P>Paul</P></body></html>

- --NextPart_Webmail_9m3u9jl4l_25995_1092233545_0--

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

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 10:18:19 -0400
From: "Christopher Witt" <rocketscience442@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Harmonic Balancer Failure

Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 10:16:42 -0400
From: robert.demuth@prudential.com
Subject: Harmonic Balancer Failure

The rubber ring on my harmonic balancer deteriorated, so the outer ring
separated from the inner hub, and it is now rubbing the timing cover.  I
was hearing an odd noise for the last 200 or so miles, only when it was
sputtering at idle (thus hitting very low RPM) when cold ... but I thought
it sounded like the alternator bearings going out.  Welll, last night I
went out to play with the timing, and imagine my surprise.  What are my
options for replacing it, quickly?  It's a '79 350 I rebuilt almost 2 years
ago.  It's been a total b--ch ever since.

Thanks,
Bob DeMuth.
'72 88 conv.
Some other stuff
====================
417142 GM Part #
go to GMpartsdirect.com and get it for like $85 delivered
BRAND NEW
Olds V8 1968-up rubberized unit.
- ----------------------
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: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 10:22:28 -0400
From: "nutmeg" <nutmeg@nutmegtech.net>
Subject: Trans. problem

I took my '67 Cutlass Supreme convertible out of storage- had to yank it out
from the back from the storage tent-went into neutral ok- bad breaks so to
stop I put it into park- no heavy jolts. After a new battery and coil, it
started up fine-almost 18 months since last start. I backed it up to get
more stuff out of the tent, no problem. Driving it in, I went to put it into
park and the console shifter would not move. I took off the cable to the
lever and the lever isn't bound up. Cable seems fine but the lever on the
trans. only rocks front-backward about 1/4 inch. Any ideas?

Thanks,
Brian

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

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 10:07:37 -0400
From: SteveH <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: Tire rotation question

At Wednesday, 11 August 2004, you wrote:

>I've always believed when rotating tires, an X configuration 
>should occur. That is to say, right front to left rear and 
>left front to right rear. In this week's Old Cars Magazine, 
>in the Q&A section, a guy writes that radial tires should be 
>rotated front to back on the same side (right front to right 
>rear, etc.) because the steel belts wear in a certain pattern 
>on each side. He claims that rotating in an X, will cause the 
>steel belts to unravel at speeds over 70 mph. I've never heard 
>of this and Old Cars Magazine did not dispute this in their 
>answer. Can this be true?

Indeed. But the final word is what the manufacturer recommends. Some 
radials have been made that are designed to rotate only one direction;
you'll find an arrow on the sidewall somewhere. I've seen a few 
that claim they can be rotated in the X-pattern.

However, it's long been known that some steel-belted radials (some 
may say all, or at least almost all) should not be interchanged side 
to side. Then there are those who've long rotated in the classic,
well-known X-pattern who'll claim never having had a problem. Just 
rember: if you have a warranty claim and the tire failed due to steel 
belt problems, the manufacturer is likely to reject the claim if 
it appears that the tire was operated in opposition to the manufacturer's 
recommendations or requirements.

Part of the "I've never had a problem" might be due to the type of 
operation of the tires; around-town isn't likely to stress tires 
anywhere near that encountered in high-speed interstate travel across 
the desert southwest. Similarly, perhaps some of these steel-belted 
tires seat-in very nicely after a few tens of thousands miles and 
when then rotated in X-pattern, don't come unglued. Others may be 
exactly the opposite: they're just fine until called upon to rotate 
"backwards" at high speed and high temperature and fail miserably.


Personally, I'm extremely reluctant to go against any tire manufacturer's 
recommendation at all, such as inflation pressure or rotation or 
even tire loading. Take a good look at the shoulders of yer favorite 
interstate on the way home from work tonight and notice how many 
recap truck tire remnants you see out there. I don't recall ever 
seeing as much rubber trash on shoulders as I've seen the past year 
or two; maybe something's going wrong with today's rubber compounds,
or at least with truck retreads. Seeing all that trash makes me 
wonder about my own car tires.

Recently, on another reflector, someone was complaining about how 
soft their sidewalls seemed to be at the recommended max inflation 
pressure. Someone else piped up and said they'd found their tires 
to work much better at a significantly-higher pressure than the manufacturer 
recommends. That's all great and dandy; but what if that tire blows,
you overturn and someone gets injured in or by your car? Who's responsibility 
was it to insure the tires were being operated properly and within 
the manufacturer's specifications? You're as likely as not to get 
sued and the judgement will certainly go against you since you purposely 
violated the manufacturer's recommendations. You won't have a leg 
to stand on insofar as sueing the manufacturer for the failed tire.
So don't give me that song-and-dance about how well your radials 
perform on yer '69 Camro road-racer at 45 PSI when the sidewall says 
clearly "MAX PRESSURE: 35 PSI". If you don't like how your tires 
perform under the manufacturer's recommended operation requirements,
find another tire.

SteveH



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

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

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 10:28:09 -0400
From: "Christopher Witt" <rocketscience442@hotmail.com>
Subject: f/s - 68 98 LS

Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 11:19:14 -0400
From: "John Nasta" <email@johnnasta.com>
Subject: anybody else selling a 68 98 convertible?

One of the guys who looked at my car (the guy who made me wait 3+ hours for
him) said he loves the car but wants something that is completely rust free.
I told him that in order to find that he should be prepared to spend two to
three times what I was asking for mine at the time (which was $4k). It's
amazing how people want gold for the price of pewter, but if anybody has a
nicer 68 98 convertible for sale, let me know. This guy may be interested.

John Nasta
==================
I have a 1968 "98"  Luxury Sedan up for grabs right now
only the penniless have expressed interest so far.
Might be runnable, have yet to start the engine
Total Granny's Car, plastic still on the seats.
It has "no rust"*
$1000 is the price

*"No rust" here in MI is short for "no rust holes large enough to throw a 
cat thru" Holes as large as 4-5 inches, and several of them, do not move the 
vehicle out of the "no rust" category. :-)

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

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
hthttp://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

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

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 10:32:16 -0400
From: robert.demuth@prudential.com
Subject: Re: Harmonic Balancer Failure

Randy wrote:

"If one was to rebuild his engine and have the new pistons/crank balanced
dont they drill holes outa yer balancer side to correct wieght(like on my
58 balancer) if need be,,,would this not make your balancer specific to
your motor?"

Ah, crap.  I didn't think of that.  Quick call to the engine shop verified
that all the work was done on the crank and pistons.  The balancer remained
stock, so I can use a replacement.

Steve H's balancer part number looks correct, comes up at gmpartsdirect.com
as a "Engine Crankshaft and Camshaft Balancer", list $124.91, price $71.20.
Doesn't state that it's for Olds, but why would Steve memorize a Chevy (or
other) balancer part #?  ;)

Fluidamprs sure are nice, and that was actually the very first thought that
came to my head ... but there's no way I'm dumping another $500 into a car
that's worth all of $1500 (but has an engine on which I foolishly dumped $5
grand).  I thought fluidamprs ran more like $2-300 ... but that's probably
for a Chevy 350 or something.  I forgot the 2 x Chevy = Olds parts markup
... lol.  (BTW, a quick look verified that a sbc fluidampr retails for
$267.95)

I bought a balancer off of ebay (look for item # 7914266203 ) ... I like
the fact that it's got 60 deg. of timing marks cut into it, and it was
comparably priced to the gm part once shipping is included.

Thanks for everyone's suggestions!
Bob DeMuth.
'72 88 conv.

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

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 10:36:20 -0400
From: SteveH <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: Harmonic Balancer Failure

At Wednesday, 11 August 2004, you wrote:
>417142 GM Part #
>go to GMpartsdirect.com and get it for like $85 delivered
>BRAND NEW
>Olds V8 1968-up rubberized unit.

DAMB, it really went up over the past several years. Used to be down 
around $65 as recently as 2002, IIRC.

OH WAIT... you say DELIVERED?? That means shipping by GMPartsDirect 
is around $20 for that heavy thing????? Maybe the price is bout the 
same, in that case.

Otherwise... Who says there's no inflation? Doesn't matter whether 
a part's price has increased because it's no longer made and is getting 
more scarce and the market's willing to pay more; or because the 
cost of making the part has increased. The end effect is the same:
its price went UP, relative to my buying power. That's inflation,
in my book  ;o\  ;o\  ;o\

BTW, does that balancer work on 425s and 330s, or why not??

SteveH



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

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

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 10:49:09 -0400
From: SteveH <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: Harmonic Balancer Failure

At Wednesday, 11 August 2004, you wrote:
>why would Steve memorize a Chevy (or other) balancer 
>part #?  ;)

Thirty years after last needing them, I may still rember quite a 
few Poncho PNs, too  ;o))))))))

They say keeping the mind active helps keep Almheizer's away  ;o) 
That being the recommendation, I sometimes try to add, subtract or 
multiply PNs together during breaks  =============8-O  (imagine me,
10-15 years from now, sitting in some rocking chair at an ole folks' 
home, rattling off long-obsolete Poncho and Olds PNs at my fellow 
denizens.......)

SteveH



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

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

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 11:01:35 -0400
From: "John Nasta" <email@johnnasta.com>
Subject: RE: f/s - 68 98 LS

Thanks but he wants a convertible. An LS is very hard to sell. I know a guy
up here who had a 68 LS that won 2nd place at the Olds nationals in Atlanta
a few years ago. After that he decided to sell it. It took him over a year
and he finally got $3500 for it (and had a very hard time collecting the
money at that). The interior was perfect, engine bay spotless and all decals
in place, low mileage, aftermarket paint but a decent job, no rust anywhere.
Twas a very nice car but not worth much on the open market.

John Nasta



- -----Original Message-----
 ==================
I have a 1968 "98"  Luxury Sedan up for grabs right now
only the penniless have expressed interest so far.
Might be runnable, have yet to start the engine
Total Granny's Car, plastic still on the seats.
It has "no rust"*
$1000 is the price

*"No rust" here in MI is short for "no rust holes large enough to throw a
cat thru" Holes as large as 4-5 inches, and several of them, do not move the
vehicle out of the "no rust" category. :-)

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

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
hthttp://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

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

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:44:27 +0000
From: "Andrew C. Green" <acg_o@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: Some Batman car sightings...

>>nothing like the bat mobile i remember
>
>Doesn't even have the bat symbol on the doors. At least it can drive
>on its own power.

Well, yeah, it does... But you can bet there's going to be some serious 
retouching in the ol' computer before the movie comes out. Some footage of 
it on the local news showed it darting around the support beams of the 
overhead train tracks, being chased by the Gotham Police cars, but it was a 
rather bouncy, golf-cart-on-steroids kind of movement.

Most likely that had something to do with putting eight zillion oversized 
tires on a vehicle that probably doesn't weigh much more than a standard 
pickup truck, at which point I think with such low, oversupported body 
weight, you'd need to run your tires almost flat in order to keep your tread 
on the ground.

- -- Andy

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

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

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 10:45:30 -0400
From: SteveH <k0xp@dandy.net>
Subject: Re: f/s - 68 98 LS

At Wednesday, 11 August 2004, you wrote:
>*"No rust" here in MI is short for "no rust holes large 
>enough to throw a cat thru" Holes as large as 4-5 inches, 
>and several of them, do not move the vehicle out of the 
>"no rust" category. :-)

How bout flapping door panels? When I lived in Dearborn back in '82-
'83, I rember seeing this P*nto running down the road with these 
wing-looking things sticking outta the sides. As it went past, I 
saw they were the door panels flapping in the breeze. You could see 
the winder glass inside the door as the panels rose  ;o)))))

So, Michigan air-conditioning is a car with just a lil bit of rust 
just starting?  ;o)

SteveH



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

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

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 11:35:22 EDT
From: JonKrisInc@aol.com
Subject: Fwd: Tire rotation question (answered)

- --part1_12d.481fa1e0.2e4b96ba_boundary
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="-----------------------------1092238522"


- -------------------------------1092238522
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 
In a message dated 8/11/2004 9:44:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time,  
JonKrisInc@aol.com writes:

I've always believed when rotating tires, an X configuration should  occur. 
That is to say, right front to left rear and left front to right rear.  In this 
week's Old Cars Magazine, in the Q&A section, a guy writes  that radial tires 
should be rotated front to back on the same side (right  front to right rear, 
etc.) because the steel belts wear in a certain pattern  on each side. He 
claims that rotating in an X, will cause the steel belts to  unravel at speeds 
over 70 mph. I've never heard of this and Old Cars Magazine  did not dispute 
this in their answer. Can this be  true?



According to Goodyear:      Front wheel  drive vehicles
                                        
                                        Front  two tires go straight back
                                         Rear tires crisscross to front
 
                                        Rear  wheel drive vehicles
 
                                         Rear two tires go straight up
                                         Front crisscross to rear
 
C'mon, nobody knew that, right?
I sure didn't. 
                                               
Bruce
75  Delta 88 Conv. (duals, of course)
72 Cutlass Conv.
56 190 SL Conv.
92  Eldo

- -------------------------------1092238522
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3DUS-ASCII">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1458" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=3Drole_body style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY:=20=
Arial"=20
bottomMargin=3D7 leftMargin=3D7 topMargin=3D7 rightMargin=3D7><FONT id=3Drol=
e_document=20
face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D2>
<DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 8/11/2004 9:44:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time,=20
JonKrisInc@aol.com writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><=
FONT=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=
=3D2>
  <DIV>I've always believed when rotating tires, an X configuration should=20
  occur. That is to say, right front to left rear and left front to right re=
ar.=20
  In this week's Old Cars Magazine, in the Q&amp;A&nbsp;section, a guy write=
s=20
  that radial tires should be rotated front to back on the same side (right=20
  front to right rear, etc.) because the steel belts wear in a certain patte=
rn=20
  on each side. He claims that rotating in an X, will cause the steel belts=20=
to=20
  unravel at speeds over 70 mph. I've never heard of this and Old Cars Magaz=
ine=20
  did not dispute this in their answer. Can this be=20
true?</DIV></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>According to Goodyear:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <STRONG>Front whee=
l=20
drive vehicles</STRONG></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp=
;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nb=
sp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&=
nbsp;&nbsp;=20
</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp=
;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nb=
sp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&=
nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Front=20
two tires go straight back</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp=
;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nb=
sp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&=
nbsp;&nbsp;=20
Rear tires crisscross to front</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp=
;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nb=
sp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&=
nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<STRONG>Rear=20
wheel drive vehicles</STRONG></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp=
;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nb=
sp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&=
nbsp;&nbsp;=20
Rear two tires go straight up</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp=
;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nb=
sp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&=
nbsp;&nbsp;=20
Front crisscross to rear</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>C'mon,&nbsp;nobody knew that, right?</DIV>
<DIV>I sure didn't.&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp=
;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nb=
sp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&=
nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
</DIV>
<DIV><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial size=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"10"=
>Bruce<BR>75=20
Delta 88 Conv. (duals, of course)<BR>72 Cutlass Conv.<BR>56 190 SL Conv.<BR>=
92=20
Eldo</FONT></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>

- -------------------------------1092238522--

- --part1_12d.481fa1e0.2e4b96ba_boundary
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

Return-Path: <oldsmobile-mml-owner@chebucto.ns.ca>
Received: from  rly-yi04.mx.aol.com (rly-yi04.mail.aol.com [172.18.180.132]) by air-yi02.mail.aol.com (v101.19) with ESMTP id MAILINYI21-7c6411a22af29b; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 09:44:24 -0400
Received: from  halifax.chebucto.ns.ca (chebucto.ns.ca [192.75.95.75]) by rly-yi04.mx.aol.com (v101.19) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINYI44-7c6411a22af29b; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 09:44:16 -0400
Received: (daemon@halifax.chebucto.ns.ca) by halifax.chebucto.ns.ca
        id S3726AbUHKNmU (ORCPT <rfc822;James244@aol.com> + 32 others);
        Wed, 11 Aug 2004 10:42:20 -0300
Received: from lich.chebucto.ns.Ca ([192.75.95.79]:47936 "EHLO
        lich.chebucto.ns.ca") by halifax.chebucto.ns.ca with ESMTP
        id S7732AbUHKNl0 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;"|/csuite/etc/majordomo/wrapper resend -l oldsmobile -h chebucto.ns.ca oldsmobile-mml">);
        Wed, 11 Aug 2004 10:41:26 -0300
Received: from imo-m22.mx.aol.com ([64.12.137.3]:9681 "EHLO imo-m22.mx.aol.com")
        by lich.chebucto.ns.ca with ESMTP id <S407955AbUHKNlQ>;
        Wed, 11 Aug 2004 10:41:16 -0300
Received: from JonKrisInc@aol.com
        by imo-m22.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v37_r3.4.) id m.1cf.28443242 (3874)
         for <oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca>; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 09:40:55 -0400 (EDT)
From: JonKrisInc@aol.com
Message-ID: <1cf.28443242.2e4b7be7@aol.com>
Date:   Wed, 11 Aug 2004 09:40:55 EDT
Subject: Tire rotation question
To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1092231654"
X-Mailer: 9.0 for Windows sub 5000
X-MailScanner: Clean
X-Is-Spam: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-0.648, required 5, BAYES_10 -0.91,
        HTML_MESSAGE 0.10, NO_REAL_NAME 0.16)
Sender: oldsmobile-owner@chebucto.ns.ca
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: oldsmobile@chebucto.ns.ca
X-AOL-IP: 192.75.95.75


- -------------------------------1092231654
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I've always believed when rotating tires, an X configuration should occur.  
That is to say, right front to left rear and left front to right rear. In this  
week's Old Cars Magazine, in the Q&A section, a guy writes that radial  tires 
should be rotated front to back on the same side (right front to right  rear, 
etc.) because the steel belts wear in a certain pattern on each side. He  
claims that rotating in an X, will cause the steel belts to unravel at speeds  
over 70 mph. I've never heard of this and Old Cars Magazine did not dispute this 
 in their answer. Can this be true?
 
Bruce
75  Delta 88 Conv. (duals, of course)
72 Cutlass Conv.
56 190 SL Conv.
92  Eldo

- -------------------------------1092231654
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3DUS-ASCII">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1458" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=3Drole_body style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY:=20=
Arial"  bottomMargin=3D7 leftMargin=3D7 topMargin=3D7 rightMargin=3D7><FONT=20=
id=3Drole_document  face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D2>
<DIV>I've always believed when rotating tires, an X configuration should occ=
ur.=20
That is to say, right front to left rear and left front to right rear. In th=
is=20
week's Old Cars Magazine, in the Q&amp;A&nbsp;section, a guy writes that rad=
ial=20
tires should be rotated front to back on the same side (right front to right=
=20
rear, etc.) because the steel belts wear in a certain pattern on each side.=20=
He=20
claims that rotating in an X, will cause the steel belts to unravel at speed=
s=20
over 70 mph. I've never heard of this and Old Cars Magazine did not dispute=20=
this=20
in their answer. Can this be true?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial size=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"10"=
>Bruce<BR>75=20
Delta 88 Conv. (duals, of course)<BR>72 Cutlass Conv.<BR>56 190 SL Conv.<BR>=
92=20
Eldo</FONT></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>

- -------------------------------1092231654--

- --part1_12d.481fa1e0.2e4b96ba_boundary--

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

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 08:47:52 -0700
From: "Schopen, Kenneth" <kenneth.schopen@medtronic.com>
Subject: 1993 F*rd question - sorry

> Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 00:14:17 -0500
> From: Brian Ammons <b_ammons@mail.utexas.edu>
> Subject: 1993 F*rd question - sorry
 
> ALSO...if you just happen to know the "correct" way to get the
> reverse-threaded fan clutch off without having a coniption a 
> tip would be appreciated

Is that the style with the HUGE nut on the fan clutch that screws 
onto the large diameter threaded shaft on the water pump? (I can 
see no reason for that design - what was so difficult about four 
studs, nuts and lock washers?) If so, there is a special tool for 
that job. It's essentially a thin open end wrench and either a 
spanner style wrench or another thin open end wrench - it's been 
a while since I changed the water pump and fan clutch on the wife's 
'93 H.O. XR7, so my memory is fuzzy on that. Anyway, said special 
tool is available for free rental from your local Auto Zone store.

Kenneth
1971 Cutlass Supreme convertible
Phoenix, AZ

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

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 11:47:48 EDT
From: JonKrisInc@aol.com
Subject: Re: f/s - 68 98 LS

- -------------------------------1092239268
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 
In a message dated 8/11/2004 10:32:19 AM Eastern Daylight Time,  
rocketscience442@hotmail.com writes:

*"No  rust" here in MI is short for "no rust holes large enough to throw a 
cat  thru" Holes as large as 4-5 inches, and several of them, do not move the 
 
vehicle out of the "no rust" category. :-)




Here on the East Coast...Cat fits through=no rust. Cow fits  through=minimal 
rust. If Mack truck easily fits through=condition 3.
 
 
Bruce
75  Delta 88 Conv. (duals, of course)
72 Cutlass Conv.
56 190 SL Conv.
92  Eldo

- -------------------------------1092239268
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3DUS-ASCII">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1458" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=3Drole_body style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY:=20=
Arial"=20
bottomMargin=3D7 leftMargin=3D7 topMargin=3D7 rightMargin=3D7><FONT id=3Drol=
e_document=20
face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D2>
<DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 8/11/2004 10:32:19 AM Eastern Daylight Time,=20
rocketscience442@hotmail.com writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><=
FONT=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=
=3D2>*"No=20
  rust" here in MI is short for "no rust holes large enough to throw a <BR>c=
at=20
  thru" Holes as large as 4-5 inches, and several of them, do not move the=20
  <BR>vehicle out of the "no rust" category. :-)<BR><BR></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>=
</DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>Here on the East Coast...Cat&nbsp;fits through=3Dno rust. Cow&nbsp;fits=
=20
through=3Dminimal rust. If Mack truck easily fits through=3Dcondition 3.</DI=
V>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial size=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"10"=
>Bruce<BR>75=20
Delta 88 Conv. (duals, of course)<BR>72 Cutlass Conv.<BR>56 190 SL Conv.<BR>=
92=20
Eldo</FONT></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>

- -------------------------------1092239268--

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

End of oldsmobile-digest V1 #4985
*********************************
