
oldsmobile-digest      Tuesday, November 18 1997      Volume 01 : Number 961



Re: Xmas Gifts Wanted (fwd)
Re: Odd parts for '72 442 needed
78 -->77 engine swap
Re: olds help, ?'s, info, goodies
Re:Lexus bashing 
RE: 98 Intrigue
Re: 59 Olds
Re:Lexus bashing 
Leak Stopping (Long)
59 Olds Super 88 - Engine Questions
Re:Lexus bashing
Re: Leak Stopping (Long)
Re: EGR is not A.I.R. (was: olds help, ?'s, info, goodies)
Re: EGR is not A.I.R. (was: olds help, ?'s, info, goodies)
Re: ? about connections
Re: EGR is not A.I.R. (was: olds help, ?'s, info, goodies)
Re: 442
Re:Lexus bashing 
Re: q4 and 64-72 442's
Re: Retro fitting OEM A/C
Re: q4 and 64-72 442's
Re: dual quads
78 -->77 engine swap
Re:Lexus bashing 
59 Olds
Re: dual quads
Re: 78 -->77 engine swap
RE: Lexus bashing
Re: Speedo correction
My car can beat yours!?&%*
Re: Cooling topics
Big Tires
Re: Lexus bashing
Re: Racking my brain
Re: Cooling topics
My Car is Faster/better cont.
71 4dr Supreme for sale
REPOST: how do I remove EGR components?
Re: My car can beat yours!?&%*
Re: Cooling topics
Re: Cooling topics
Re: olds help, ?'s, info, goodies
E heads Big vs Small  valves and WTB(455)
Re: My car can beat yours!?&%*
Re: q4 and 64-72 442's
Re: Cooling topics (long engineer input)
Re: Lexus bashing
Re: Don's Raincoat?
Re: My car can beat yours!?&%*
Re: Cooling topics (long engineer input)
Re: Don's Raincoat?
Re: 69 Olds Hood

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 08:34:56 -0500 (EST)
From: OldsGuyGA@aol.com
Subject: Re: Xmas Gifts Wanted (fwd)

 my supply of clocks are going fast let me know..something
 olds guy ga....
 

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 08:46:54 -0500 (EST)
From: ANTIQOLDS@aol.com
Subject: Re: Odd parts for '72 442 needed

In a message dated 97-11-18 07:53:32 EST, you write:

<< 
 > 1. Drivers side door lock mechanism (both side would be nice but drivers
 > side a must).
 > 2. Drivers side window crank regulator
 > 3. Head light baffle (?).  When I adjust the headlight up, the headlight
 > snaps and points down. (the part the adjustment screw holds on to is
broken
 > and I am unable to admust it.)
  >>
  Hi
    I can help with these parts, 
Ref: #1 this is the latch that holds the door closed? used $15.00
       #2 NOS or used? used $25.00  NOS $50.00
       #3 the mounting plate bolted to the radiator support? used $20.00
Plus shipping, I take all major credit cards

Everett OCA # 1961  
1-401-435-7139

E&G Automotive
PO Box 16095
Rumford, R.I. 02916

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 07:53:09 -0500
From: "Mike Krumwiede MIS Technician" <krumwiede@mis.highland.cc.il.us>
Subject: 78 -->77 engine swap

I will be swapping out an engine on a 1978 Olds Delta 88 Royale, with 
a 350ci 4bbl, to a 77 Cutlass 350 4bbl, will this be as simple as it 
looks? Basically, as far as I can tell so far, everything should just 
hook right up, anything special with motor mounts or anything? 

- -------------------------------------------------------
Mike Krumwiede - MIS Technician
Highland Community College
Phone (815) 235-6121
Mailto:Krumwiede@mis.highland.cc.il.us
- -------------------------------------------------------
"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one."

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 08:59:20 -0500 (EST)
From: AGUY4RUMLI@aol.com
Subject: Re: olds help, ?'s, info, goodies

In a message dated 97-11-18 07:38:04 EST, you write:

<< > Today in my quest for weather-stripping, I actually discovered another
olds
 > nut who actually has 2 parts cars and no running rocket.  His parts cars
are
 > a 70 442, and a 72 442.  He has a W-25 hood that he will sell for $600,
and a
 > (complete?) set of weather-stripping for a notchback (Supreme).  Also in
the
 > area junque yardes are a 69 442 and a 72 Cutlass S  Let me know if anyone
 > wants me to try and get some parts for them.
  >>
What does the 72 have for gauges? And does either have a power seat rack? If
so let me know $$Thanks for your help joe.

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 09:06:08 -0500
From: "Cowan" <cowancom@pipeline.com>
Subject: Re:Lexus bashing 

Ok here go's. First let me say that I love my 92 Cutlass convertable.
Here in Florida it is just now top down cruzing time. But it has been said a
lot lately that Lexus cars have no soul. I owned an Aurora. Ive owned an
BMW. But my new Lexus GS400 IS THE FASTEST 4 DOOR CAR IN THE WORLD .  In
fact, Olds has never in its history built a 4 door car off the line this
quick. 300 Horsepower sure feels good to me. As for those of you with
unmodified bowtie ss's out there,see ya at the stop lights. Yes I know its
pricey, but I believe if GM set out to build a 300 horsepower 4 door with
the traits of this car the price would be right in the ball park. I love my
Vista Cruser. I love all Oldsmobiles. But untill I drive and know about a
certain auto I would not judge it.

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 09:02:05 -0500
From: "Etzel, Bobby" <Bobby.Etzel@GSC.GTE.Com>
Subject: RE: 98 Intrigue

On Monday, November 17, 1997 10:10 PM, Paul Hartlieb [SMTP:plh@nbn.net]
wrote:
>> "Maybe the Cutlass would be more affordable, what do you think about
the
> Cutlass?"
> 
> I said nothing, just wrinkled up my nose.
> 
> "Yeah," he says, "I don't blame you..."
> 

I would have to agree, the new Cutlass is more affordable (cheap). The
Intrigue looks to be a much better car. I would liked to have see the
Cutlass name on the Intrigue also. Most of us on this list would not
trade our 60/70s cars for one, but we are not the target audience for
this car. After they get the (new car) problems worked out, I thank they
will have a product that they car be proud of. This excerpt from the
article is an example of one thing they may do that would go a long way
to making the car acceptable to this list.

"While we're fans of the 3800 V6 found in the Intrigue, we can't help
but anticipate the new twin cam V6 slated for installation under the
hood sometime this calendar year. Nicknamed the Shortstar after the
Northstar engine it is based upon, the DOHC V6 Intrigue shall prove,
umm, intriguing."

When I say this I don't mean a car we can take to the drag strip or
outrun a Q4 (which some on this list thinks is the fastest car ever
make), I am talking about a car that we can take on a 500 mile trip and
when we get there can say "that was a comfortable drive, I can't wait to
make the return trip". "Comfortable" that is what I want now that I am
older, but there is a lot a car has to offer to make that trip
comfortable.


Bobby

Escape Back to the....Past

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 07:40:25 -0700
From: Gary Manton <sasgmm@unx.sas.com>
Subject: Re: 59 Olds

The '64 Dynamic 88 has the 394 as a standard, it was available in both a
2-barrel and 4-barrel.  The engine was only manufactured for the years of
'59 through '64. 


At 08:48 PM 11/17/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Lloyd W. Culp wrote:
>
>> I do know that the engine is supposed to be a 394 2-barrel.
>
>Well, Bill, I was all ready to jump all over you for being wrong about
>that 394 bit.  Then I thought I'd better get out the book and look for
>the facts before I had my foot in my mouth.  Sure enought, there it is,
>394 on the Ninety Eight and Super 88, something I must have known, but
>must have forgotten.  These models used the Quadra-Jet carb.  But the
>Dynamic 88 series has the 371 with Econ-o-way carb.  Makes no mention of
>the 394 being a Dynamic 88 option, but it doesn't appear to be in '60 so
>it probably wasn't in '59 either.
>
>So we're both right?  Its a draw?
>
>Paul
>-- 
>Paul Hartlieb
>Myerstown, PA
>plh@nbn.net
>'67 Ninety Eight Holiday Coupe
>'72 Cutlass Supreme Convertible
>
>Why do they sterilize the needles for lethal injections?
>
>
          \\|//
          (o o)                     
~~~~~~oOOo~(_)~oOOo~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Gary M. Manton					SAS Institute
Business Solutions Division			Phoenix, AZ  85012
(602) 265-1616 ext. 230 - voice		        (602) 265-8585 - fax
						(888) 982-4079 - Pager

"In business as in life, your chances of being run over are doubled
if you stay in the middle of the road"
~~~~~~oooo~~~~~oooo~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 10:13:31 -0500
From: Jim & Joanne Chermack <chermac@exis.net>
Subject: Re:Lexus bashing 

At 09:06 AM 11/18/97 -0500, you wrote:
        Obviously you haven't driven a 300 hp Cadillac Seville STS. 

>
>Ok here go's. First let me say that I love my 92 Cutlass convertable.
>Here in Florida it is just now top down cruzing time. But it has been said a
>lot lately that Lexus cars have no soul. I owned an Aurora. Ive owned an
>BMW. But my new Lexus GS400 IS THE FASTEST 4 DOOR CAR IN THE WORLD .  In
>fact, Olds has never in its history built a 4 door car off the line this
>quick. 300 Horsepower sure feels good to me. As for those of you with
>unmodified bowtie ss's out there,see ya at the stop lights. Yes I know its
>pricey, but I believe if GM set out to build a 300 horsepower 4 door with
>the traits of this car the price would be right in the ball park. I love my
>Vista Cruser. I love all Oldsmobiles. But untill I drive and know about a
>certain auto I would not judge it.
>

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 10:36:14 -0500
From: Jim & Joanne Chermack <chermac@exis.net>
Subject: Leak Stopping (Long)

Here's a couple tips for all of you with leak problems.

Thermostat/Water Pump - When replacing one of these used #1 hardening
Permatex on both sides of your gaskets, set the gasket on the part with
some, get it positioned and let set for 5 minutes. Then put a small bead
around the other side let sit again for 5 minutes and install. Any of the
silicones can cause gasket slip and be unsightly when it squeezes out around
the gaskets.

Intakes - When installing your metal tubs use brushtack for all surfaces
around intake ports and water passages (both sides). Drop a small ball of
Silicone sealer only in the corners of the valley. Use the rubber end
gaskets. Olds don't like beads of silicone like Ch*vys do. 

Valve Covers - I personally like rubber gaskets (you can use cork) Get both
the head and the cover surfaces clean. Take a hammer and a 3/8 extention a
gently tap the holes in the valve cover to remove any pulled down areas from
the bolts. Then apply #1 hardening Permatex to the valve cover ONLY and set
the gasket on the cover. Let sit for 5 minutes and install the cover with NO
sealer between the block and the gasket. Snug the bolts down with the proper
torque amount. DO NOT over tighten. These will no leak for many years. Plus
will not look like you've cornered the market on silicone products.

Exhaust Manifolds - If the block and the manifolds are in good shape there
should be NO gasket between them. They are not needed. There wasn't a
factory on that had them. If you do need to use a gasket to corecct for some
small warpage the used the metal sided gaskets and install the gasket DRY
with the metal side to the manifold.

**There may come the time when you'll need to get a new thermostat housing
or exhaust manifold to make anything seal. If these methods don't seem to be
working for you then you probably need a new or a part that's in better
condition.
 
Hope this helps some of you.  

Jim Chermack

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 08:41:39 -0700
From: Merkley Family <jancan@istar.ca>
Subject: 59 Olds Super 88 - Engine Questions

We are currently restoring our 59 Olds Super  88 " 394" 4 Barrel.
We have located a completely machined and rebuilt engine which the owner
claims is a
394 but unsure of what year.
Could some one help us with thes questions based on the Block & Head #'s
given:
     Head  583832
     Block  585786
1)  Can we find out what year this is?
 2)  Would it be the same block bolt pattern etc. as the 59 engine?
 3)  Would it be a straight swap?

We are trying to keep this vehicle as close to original as possible
therefore would prefer
not to make any alternations to install this engine.

Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 21:58:07 -0500
From: tonwald@eta.k12.mn.us (Tony Waldner)
Subject: Re:Lexus bashing

>At 09:06 AM 11/18/97 -0500, you wrote:
>        Obviously you haven't driven a 300 hp Cadillac Seville STS.



I second that motion!  :)


Tony

70 442 W-30
70 Toro GT W-34
65 Jetstar 88 w/4-speed
85 Cutlass Salon 455 Drag Racer
92 Seville STS

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 07:58:29 -0800 (PST)
From: John Pajak <jspajak@rocketmail.com>
Subject: Re: Leak Stopping (Long)

- --Jim & Joanne Chermack <chermac@exis.net> wrote:
Here's a couple tips for all of you with leak problems.<SNIP>Plus it
will not look like you've cornered the market on silicone products.

!!!!!
Good info there Jim! The big danger with silicone is that the chunks
can (& will) break off and clog the oil pump screen, oil return holes,
radiator tubes, etc. :)

===
John Pajak                            JSPajak@rocketmail.com
Lexington Park, Maryland  HTTP://members.tripod.com/~JSPajak

65 Delta 88 2dr    70 Cutlass S 2dr       72 Cutlass conv   
66 Toronado deluxe 70 Cutlass S W31       72 Delta 88 conv
69 Cutlass S 2dr   70 442 W30 conv        72 442 W30 conv 
70 Cutlass S 2dr   71 Cutlass Supreme 2dr 86 Cutlass Supreme

 





__________________________________________________________________
Sent by Yahoo! Mail. Get your free e-mail at http://mail.yahoo.com

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 10:46:07 -0500
From: Robert Barry <rbarry@sequent1.providence.edu>
Subject: Re: EGR is not A.I.R. (was: olds help, ?'s, info, goodies)

>..My intake has an EGR on it, but I figure that since the '72 heads aren't
set 
>up for an EGR valve that it did not matter...
>     
>     OK gang, let's do this once and for all.  The fittings in the heads 
>     are NOT EGR, but A.I.R.
>     
>     EGR=Exhaust Gas Recirculation.  The purpose of EGR is, as the name 
 [snip]
>     A.I.R.=Air Injector Reactor.  This is the system which uses a 
 [snip]
>     The original author is correct in assuming that EGR is not required on 
>     his 72 engine, however.  All that is required is to remove the EGR 
>     valve and install a block-off plate in its place on the manifold.

Thanks for the explanation, Joe! As I see this comparison, I'm realizing
that cars with bothy EGR_and_AIR have exhaust gases plumbed back into the
intake, and fresh air from the intake pumped into the exhaust! Gotta love
those emissions systems.... ;)

As for removing the EGR, the thing to watch out for on this is the
calibration of the carb; EGR calibrated carbs are usually much leaner at
part-throttle operation, which results in pinging under such conditions
when the vacuum line to the EGR valve is simply disconnected. If the carb
is a '75 Q-jet (has a number beginning with something like 17055xxx), then
it is an emissions-calibrated carb and you might experience some pinging.
The year of the block and the heads are irrelevant; an 8.5:1 1971 350 motor
is the same as an 8.0:1 1980 350 motor, as far as operation and tuning of
the carb and ignition are concerned.
__________________________________________________________
Bob Barry  	     MailTo:RBarry@Sequent1.Providence.Edu

1969 Toronado		 455/TH425
     See it at http://www.execpc.com/~gkalkhof/drbob69.htm
1970 Cutlass Supreme SX	 455/TH400
1978 Electra Limited	 409/TH400

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 10:52:33 -0500
From: Robert Barry <rbarry@sequent1.providence.edu>
Subject: Re: EGR is not A.I.R. (was: olds help, ?'s, info, goodies)

>operating properly!  All I did was pull off the end of the vacuum line,
>and wedge an oversized ball bearing down in it, therefore preventing any
>vacuum reaching the EGR...

Or you could put a vacuum cap over the vacuum port where the line
originates; about $1.99 for an assortment of them at most auto stores.
Allows you to clean up your engine quite a bit.

>And yes, I was careful about it...the ball bearing I used was much too
>large for the small vac line, so I forced it in with a set of needlenose
>pliers, just to be sure it wouldn't come loose, and have the carb suck
>it in...

Do you mean you put the ball bearing in the line as it faced the carb?
Either way, if it was too small for the vacuum line itself, there's no way
it would make it through the vacuum port.

>Would it work better if I were to let the line draw in fresh air and
>richen up the carb as well?

All that would do would richen up your mechanic, when he rebuilt the engine
on which you'd burn a piston if you did leave that line open. Adding more
air without more fuel will lean out the engine, causing higher cylinder
temperatures, preignition, and possibly, under extreme circumstances,
melted pistons. Invest the $1.99 in vacuum caps and do it the right way (I
always get concerned when I'm looking at a used car, and the engine has
assorted vacuum lines with screws and bolts in them to plug them up; if the
guy has shown so little concern and investment in this area, how well
cared-for can the rest of the car be?)
__________________________________________________________
Bob Barry  	     MailTo:RBarry@Sequent1.Providence.Edu

1969 Toronado		 455/TH425
     See it at http://www.execpc.com/~gkalkhof/drbob69.htm
1970 Cutlass Supreme SX	 455/TH400
1978 Electra Limited	 409/TH400

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 08:16:44 -0800
From: Tom Lentz <tlentz@ior.com>
Subject: Re: ? about connections

Don't worry about it, it's supposed to be there hanging free.  That's the
connection to hook a dwell meter up to in order to set the mixture control
solenoid on the carb properly.  If you follow the wire, it should go to the
carburetor.

Jerry Christopher wrote:

> It's two identical colored blue wires that go in to a Green Connector,
> the connector is a one piece (one point) connection.
>
> It's located right above the water pump, and has a little bit of room to
> move.  But there's no sensors near by missing connection....

- --
Tom Lentz, tlentz@ior.com                          '84 Hurst/Olds
http://www.ior.com/~tlentz                         '78 Cutlass Supreme
Network Admin, CPM Corp, Spokane, WA.              '78 Chev 1/2ton (Olds
350)

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 11:34:31 -0500
From: Joseph Gambaccini <jgambaccini@ci.richmond.va.us>
Subject: Re: EGR is not A.I.R. (was: olds help, ?'s, info, goodies)

Robert Barry wrote:
> 
> >..My intake has an EGR on it, but I figure that since the '72 heads aren't
> set
> >up for an EGR valve that it did not matter...
> >
> >     OK gang, let's do this once and for all.  The fittings in the heads
> >     are NOT EGR, but A.I.R.
> >
> >     EGR=Exhaust Gas Recirculation.  The purpose of EGR is, as the name
>  [snip]
> >     A.I.R.=Air Injector Reactor.  This is the system which uses a
>  [snip]
> >     The original author is correct in assuming that EGR is not required on
> >     his 72 engine, however.  All that is required is to remove the EGR
> >     valve and install a block-off plate in its place on the manifold.
> 
> Thanks for the explanation, Joe! As I see this comparison, I'm realizing
> that cars with bothy EGR_and_AIR have exhaust gases plumbed back into the
> intake, and fresh air from the intake pumped into the exhaust! Gotta love
> those emissions systems.... ;)
> 
> As for removing the EGR, the thing to watch out for on this is the
> calibration of the carb; EGR calibrated carbs are usually much leaner at
> part-throttle operation, which results in pinging under such conditions
> when the vacuum line to the EGR valve is simply disconnected. If the carb
> is a '75 Q-jet (has a number beginning with something like 17055xxx), then
> it is an emissions-calibrated carb and you might experience some pinging.
> The year of the block and the heads are irrelevant; an 8.5:1 1971 350 motor
> is the same as an 8.0:1 1980 350 motor, as far as operation and tuning of
> the carb and ignition are concerned.

if i was stuck with EGR, i would do some head work too - including
grinding out the EGR bump on the exhaust ports.

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 11:56:32 -0500 (EST)
From: Shaun Miller <smille02@astro.ocis.temple.edu>
Subject: Re: 442

Jerry christopher
Hey jerry youre wrong about the q4.  All these cars youre driving are the 
new generation of the q4.  these engines are often the single overhead 
cam type and the double cam type is toned down dramaticly from the 442 
engines.  Im not impressed either with the new versions of the q4.  My 
father had the achieva s with the single cam version and i found it way 
underpowered.  All i have to say is drive in my car or any of the q4 guys 
on this list and youll know what were talking about.  Maybe you were one 
of the guys in the 5.0's that i beat one night!!  the numbers speak for 
themselves.  14.31 quarter mile is no "sunfire or cavalier engine".  the 
only time im seeing you is at the stop light!!!


shaun
81 custom cruiser
89 calais gold edition
cheap beer enthusiest

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 12:09:11 -0500 (EST)
From: Shaun Miller <smille02@astro.ocis.temple.edu>
Subject: Re:Lexus bashing 

Hey jim i havent agreed with you in the past on the q4 but you couldnt be 
more right about this lexus.  who likes driving overpriced boxy toyotas, 
certainly not me.  Personally i think the aurora is a great deal for the 
price but these Cadillacs are excellent.  My father has worked on olds 
and cadillac for 19 years and says that these northstar engines are some 
of the best ever produce among the 3800 v6 and the old q4's.  Im right 
with ya jim!!!

shaun

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 12:14:46 -0500
From: Andy Geeting <geetinag@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu>
Subject: Re: q4 and 64-72 442's

At 08:10 AM 11/18/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Shaun Miller wrote:
>> 
>> hey tim its time to leave the old days.  that time is over, its the time
>> of the q4! 
>
>two very different cars from two very different eras.  sorry, but i
>wouldn't "leave the old days" for a q4.  i prefer the appearance, ride
>and torque of the old "monster muscles".  personally, i couldn't imagine
>buying a q4, but for you it's fantastic - good for you!  (but not for
>me)
>
 I agree, you can't beat those old "monster muscles"! I personally have
never liked 4 cylinders because of their sound. Yea I know, that's probably
a bad thing to judge them on but give me the sound of a v8 any day! That
little 307 I have may not be much in the Hp or torque department but it
sure does sound healthy! Plus I like the fact that when my car spins the
tires, its not the front ones! But to each his own. If that's what you like
then that's what you like.

Andy Geeting

'87 Cutlass Supreme 307 V8
'88 Cutlass Supreme Classic Brougham 307 V8
'74 Delta 88 convertible 350 Rocket V8
'78 Caprice wagon 350 V8
'36 Plymouth coupe 


 

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 12:29:42 -0800
From: Larry <dilligaf@tl.infi.net>
Subject: Re: Retro fitting OEM A/C

Paul,

	I looked through the May issue but could not find anything that
mentions firewall conversion plates or packages.  I'll look through some
of my other issues for the ad.(The May issue is the oldest that I
have)   If I find anything I'll let you know.

						Larry

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 12:46:12 -0500
From: Jason Adcock <jadcock@vt.edu>
Subject: Re: q4 and 64-72 442's

Andy Geeting wrote:

>  I agree, you can't beat those old "monster muscles"! I personally have
> never liked 4 cylinders because of their sound. Yea I know, that's probably
> a bad thing to judge them on but give me the sound of a v8 any day! That
> little 307 I have may not be much in the Hp or torque department but it
> sure does sound healthy! Plus I like the fact that when my car spins the
> tires, its not the front ones! But to each his own. If that's what you like
> then that's what you like.

I couldn't agree more!  And, most 4 cylinders TODAY don't have the
horsepower or even close to the torque our 307's do.  I haven't heard of
ANY factory 4 cylinder motors pumping out 250 lbs. of torque...most V6's
don't make torque like that.  And the saying says, horsepower sells
engines, but torque wins races.  I'm certainly not saying that our 307
Cutlasses will take your Quad4, but even those Quad 442's don't have the
feel of a V8 motor...

...just my $0.02...
_____________________________

Jason K. Adcock
mailto:jadcock@vt.edu
http://www.erols.com/adcockjk

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 09:59:24 -0800 (PST)
From: Jack Karamanos <jalkara@whidbey.net>
Subject: Re: dual quads

offenhauser still makes 2x4 manifolds in low rise, hi rise and tunnel ram
configurations,  jim chermac (parts seller on the digest) did have a 2x4
setup.

47rocket98

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 12:07:19 -0500
From: "Mike Krumwiede MIS Technician" <krumwiede@mis.highland.cc.il.us>
Subject: 78 -->77 engine swap

I will be swapping out an engine on a 1978 Olds Delta 88 Royale, with 
a 350ci 4bbl, to a 77 Cutlass 350 4bbl, will this be as simple as it 
looks? Basically, as far as I can tell so far, everything should just 
hook right up, anything special with motor mounts or anything? 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mike Krumwiede - MIS Technician
Highland Community College
Phone (815) 235-6121
Fax (815) 235-6130
Home Page http://www.highland.cc.il.us
Mailto:Krumwiede@mis.highland.cc.il.us
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one."

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 13:10:14 -0500
From: Jim & Joanne Chermack <chermac@exis.net>
Subject: Re:Lexus bashing 

At 12:09 PM 11/18/97 -0500, you wrote:
Shaun

        This old dog does know something about the new tricks available. My
offer is still open to ANY of you youngsters that think your Q4 will peel
the paint off my 66 or 67 442's. Like I said before, I've owned some of the
cars your talking about. Never said they were a bad car or anything, but
other than a warranty and better gas mileage they won't hold a candle to a
big block and a 4 spd. I'd like to see a street driven Q4 of any type (no
NO2) run 12's in a quarter mile on street tires.

>Hey jim i havent agreed with you in the past on the q4 but you couldnt be 
>more right about this lexus.  who likes driving overpriced boxy toyotas, 
>certainly not me.  Personally i think the aurora is a great deal for the 
>price but these Cadillacs are excellent.  My father has worked on olds 
>and cadillac for 19 years and says that these northstar engines are some 
>of the best ever produce among the 3800 v6 and the old q4's.  Im right 
>with ya jim!!!
>
>shaun
>

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 12:12:14 -0600
From: "L. D. Lyons" <ll62539@navix.net>
Subject: 59 Olds

Thanks everyone for your help. If anyone knows of aanyother Websites that
will help me, I would really appreciate it
Butch Lyons
59 Olds Dynamic 88 2dr HDTP
63 Rambler Ambassador 880 4dr

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 13:14:16 -0500
From: Jim & Joanne Chermack <chermac@exis.net>
Subject: Re: dual quads

At 09:59 AM 11/18/97 -0800, you wrote:
Hey it's Jim
        
        Yes! Offenhausr still lists 2-4bbl manifolds in a couple
configurations. They even have a listing for one to use two Q-jets. Just to
let you know, these manifolds are pricy. $350+ ea. The Tunnel Ram is almost
$500 with the top plate. Then you have to buy the carbs.

Jim Chermack
C&M Classic Parts


>offenhauser still makes 2x4 manifolds in low rise, hi rise and tunnel ram
>configurations,  jim chermac (parts seller on the digest) did have a 2x4
>setup.
>
>47rocket98
>

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 13:15:10 -0500
From: Jim & Joanne Chermack <chermac@exis.net>
Subject: Re: 78 -->77 engine swap

At 12:07 PM 11/18/97 -0500, you wrote:
Mike

        It's a direct bolt in swap.

Jim Chermack


>I will be swapping out an engine on a 1978 Olds Delta 88 Royale, with 
>a 350ci 4bbl, to a 77 Cutlass 350 4bbl, will this be as simple as it 
>looks? Basically, as far as I can tell so far, everything should just 
>hook right up, anything special with motor mounts or anything? 
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Mike Krumwiede - MIS Technician
>Highland Community College
>Phone (815) 235-6121
>Fax (815) 235-6130
>Home Page http://www.highland.cc.il.us
>Mailto:Krumwiede@mis.highland.cc.il.us
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one."
>

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 13:07:17 -0500
From: "Etzel, Bobby" <Bobby.Etzel@GSC.GTE.Com>
Subject: RE: Lexus bashing

On Tuesday, November 18, 1997 9:06 AM, Cowan
[SMTP:cowancom@pipeline.com] wrote:
But my new Lexus GS400 IS THE FASTEST 4 DOOR CAR IN THE WORLD .  In
> fact, Olds has never in its history built a 4 door car off the line
this
> quick. 300 Horsepower sure feels good to me. As for those of you with
> unmodified bowtie ss's out there,see ya at the stop lights. Yes I know
its
> pricey, but I believe if GM set out to build a 300 horsepower 4 door
with
> the traits of this car the price would be right in the ball park. I
love my
> Vista Cruser. I love all Oldsmobiles. But untill I drive and know
about a
> certain auto I would not judge it.

I thought Cadillac was part of GM????? The Seville is a 4 door and has
had 300 HP for years.


Bobby

70 442 Escape Back to the...Past

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 14:04:24 -0500
From: Todd Morris <toddmorr@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Speedo correction

Jason, you first need to determine how inaccurate your current speedo is.  Then
find where your speedo cable enters your tranny.  The cable inserts into a
plastic speedo gear.  Remove the plastic gear and count the number of teeth.
Then calculate the correct number of teeth you need for an accurate speedo
reading.  These plastic gears are readily available from the dealer.


>New to the list here... My name's Jason Belt and I'm from Tennessee.
>I would like to know if anyone knows how I might correct my
>speedometer... what tranny speedo. drive gear do I need?  I've got an
>'83 Cutlass Supreme (the year that _didn't_ have the extra mounts to
>move the cross-member back for an overdrive) with the stock instrument
>cluster.  I've got a 2004R and a 3.73:1 rear end.  Any help would be
>appreciated.

Todd Morris
71 442

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 11:12:16 PST
From: "Brent Pinkstaff" <fear_of_tomorrow@hotmail.com>
Subject: My car can beat yours!?&%*

Why do I feel like I'm in high school again?

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 13:15:25 -0600 (CST)
From: Rich Meyers <richbmeyers@cctr.umkc.edu>
Subject: Re: Cooling topics

At 08:02 PM 11/14/97 -0600, you wrote:
>At 12:21 AM 11/14/97 -0500, you wrote:
>>In a message dated 97-11-11 09:29:28 EST, you write:
>>
>><< My brother went to his local Buick GS chapter meeting
>> last weekend and forwarded the following on to me.  I'm not
>> sure I agree with all the points, but it makes for interesting
>> reading none the less.
>> 
>
>>
>>Does everyone agree with all of this? I just wanted to know if 
>>anyone found any discrepencies with any of this......TIM
>>
>I do.One time I foolishly tried to run my 455ci without a thermostat.Boy,was
>that a mistake!The water pump and the radiator psi,after water temp was up to
>normal temp,was able to lift my cap.I guess you know what happened next!No,the
>cap didn't fall off,the water went down the overflow tube.
>Fred Kemp
>'67 442
>'67 Cutlass
>Fred Kemp
>'67 442
>'67 Cutlass
>
>
In a General Motors class I took the technician told us that you could run
an engine without a thermostat, but more than likely if you do any prolonged
driving(reaching operating temperature) you will overheat your engine.  The
primary reason for this is that the coolant moves faster through the engine
without a thermo. Sometimes the coolant gets moving so fast that it isn't
able to pick up heat from the engine, causing overheating. Good luck.
Oldsmobile Forever!

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 13:15:26 -0600 (CST)
From: Rich Meyers <richbmeyers@cctr.umkc.edu>
Subject: Big Tires

I was wondering if anyone knows what the largest size tire will fit on my
'84 Cutlass. I had an '83 with 215's and it was fine.  The reason I ask is
because I say a GN with what looked like at least 245's.  I'm planning on
new tires and wheels soon since mine has the lame hubcaps. I'm planning on
using 15" wheels.  If anyone has any of the solid chrome olds five holes,
'82-'88 vintage, I might be interested in them. Thanks. Oldsmobile Forever!

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 11:20:29 -0800
From: "Chris Sparks (Mr. Ada)" <mrada@catalina-inter.net>
Subject: Re: Lexus bashing

Jim Chermack wrote:
> 
>         This old dog does know something about the new tricks available. My
> offer is still open to ANY of you youngsters that think your Q4 will peel
> the paint off my 66 or 67 442's. Like I said before, I've owned some of the

C'mon folks stop with the p*ss*ng matches.  It is getting wet here on
the
list! :-)


Chris Sparks

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 13:23:49 -0600 (CST)
From: Rich Meyers <richbmeyers@cctr.umkc.edu>
Subject: Re: Racking my brain

At 08:26 PM 11/16/97 -0500, you wrote:
>True "Ford" words...  hehehe...  Anyway...  
>
>I have been looking and looking and looking, and I can't seem to find
>what I am looking for:
>
>I am looking for CHROME motor pieces for an 87 307 in a Cutlass Supreme,
>I am wondering if maybe Small Block (gasp) Chevy Chrome parts will
>work.....  HELP!!!  The car looks too good to leave in "Stock" form.
>-- 
>             		    Jerry Christopher
>     ___        HTTP://WWW2.Viperlink.Net/Members/IThEFunKI
> ___/.o \__, 	     1987 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme
>_=O------O=__________It ain't my father's Oldsmobile_______
>

On the Edelbrock web site www.edelbrock.com they list plain chrome valve
covers for the olds motor.  Anything from 307-403 should fit. 

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 11:43:23 -0800
From: "Chris Sparks (Mr. Ada)" <mrada@catalina-inter.net>
Subject: Re: Cooling topics

Rich Meyers wrote:

> In a General Motors class I took the technician told us that you could run
> an engine without a thermostat, but more than likely if you do any prolonged
> driving(reaching operating temperature) you will overheat your engine.  The

A couple of years ago when I was driving my 77 C/S 350, I had the
thermostat
removed.  The car ran like a champ between 150 - 180 degrees.  Never
overheated.
The only time I remember it ever overheating is when one of the hoses
sprung a
leak and I was losing coolant.  Just my 2 cents....

Chris Sparks

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 11:49:26 PST
From: "Brent Pinkstaff" <fear_of_tomorrow@hotmail.com>
Subject: My Car is Faster/better cont.

Accidentally hit send before I wanted to there.

Just wanted to bitch for a minute:
For what seems like a week or so there has been way too much of 'my quad 
4 is better than your car' and 'maybe you are one of the people I beat 
last week' etc, etc.
This seems a little adolescent to me. Way too defensive.
I'm not saying that the quad 4 isn't a great motor. I was a working on 
cars when it was released and it was pretty exciting. My personal 
preference is for rear wheel drive automobiles. I don't like the way 
that front wheel drive feels. This however doesn't mean that I'm going 
to put down all of the fwd cars on the list.
This list is not a competition. The diversity of the cars owned by the 
people on the list is a strength. 
Remember that.
'Just because you have an Olds' is good enough for everyone on the list, 
and they will respect you for it.

Just my bitch,

Brent Pinkstaff
70 Cutlass S

 
  

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 12:38:15  -0500
From: scott or sharon <jerdan@erols.com>
Subject: 71 4dr Supreme for sale

Hello everyone,

One of my coworkers has a 71 4dr Cutlass Supreme he wants to get rid of.
The car has air, auto, disk brakes, bumper guards, etc.  The car has not been
run in a few years and is located in West Virginia.  He told me the other
day he was considering having it towed to a Junk Yard.  From the pictures
I've seen it is not a rust bucket and looks OK.  If you are interested give
him a call at Home (304)728-6238 or Work (301)713-2950.  Please direct
you're questions to him as I have only seen pictures.

Scott Jerdan
70 442 W-30  

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 15:32:41 -0500
From: Matt Cremean <ccremean@edcen.ehhs.cmich.edu>
Subject: REPOST: how do I remove EGR components?

I only got one reply the first time, so here it goes again.
- -----------------------------------------------------------

When my engine gets rebuilt, it's going to get the Edelbrock RPM
manifold. It says that it is not for EGR. Obviously, I'm going to have
to remove all that crap.

My question is: What exactly am I removing and what do I have to change
to make this work?



- -- 
**********************************
Matt Cremean
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
CreamerSoftİ Software
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Park/5988/creamersoft.html
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
1973 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Vista/3973/73olds.html
**********************************

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

Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 02:26:50 -0500
From: tonwald@eta.k12.mn.us (Tony Waldner)
Subject: Re: My car can beat yours!?&%*

>Why do I feel like I'm in high school again?
>
>______________________________________________________
>



LOLOL!!  This DOES remind me of high school!  We used to call it "bench
racing"  because all we did all day was sit on the benches in the high
school hallway and brag about how fast our parent's cars were and how many
girls we scored with. (Mostly lies on both accounts!!!)

But as long as everyone is putting in their 2 cents worth I may as well
give mine.  Today's technology is fantastic.  Take the 300 horse Seville.
That is a family car that gets good milage, does an honest 150 MPH and
passes emissions all on a measly 279 cubic inch V-8. The same holds true
for a C5 Corvette. I have driven one and it is AWSOME!!

I still love the plant-you-in-the seat feeling of those old big block V-8's
of the 60's and 70's. If only we put the fuel-injection technology and head
breathability into those old motors, just think of the power potential you
would have with those big cubes!  I know it can be done with aftermarket
parts, but the factory stuff is nice.

I have had dozens of 60's and 70's Olds cars and I have had a Quad 4.  My
89 Calais was a big lemon and souerd my feelings on q4's forever.  When it
was running right it was great,  but 2 blown head gaskets, a snapped timing
chain, bad water pump, a coil pack that left my wife stranded, constantly
doing brake jobs..etc, etc. all within 70,000 miles was pretty bad.  So I
guess I gave it a try and my heart is still with the old Rockets.

Anyways this debate was fun to see in old vs. new technology,  and it did
remind me of those wonderful days of high school bench racing!

Tony

70 442 W-30
70 Toro GT W-34
65 Jetstar 88 w/4-speed
85 Cutlass Salon 455 Drag Racer
92 Seville STS

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 15:33:01 -0500
From: Jason Adcock <jadcock@vt.edu>
Subject: Re: Cooling topics

Rich Meyers wrote:

> In a General Motors class I took the technician told us that you could run
> an engine without a thermostat, but more than likely if you do any prolonged
> driving(reaching operating temperature) you will overheat your engine.  The
> primary reason for this is that the coolant moves faster through the engine
> without a thermo. Sometimes the coolant gets moving so fast that it isn't
> able to pick up heat from the engine, causing overheating. Good luck.
> Oldsmobile Forever!

I heard also (from the list of course...) that if the water flows too fast
through the radiator, it doesn't have enough time to transfer the heat away
(cool down) and the water returns to the engine block too hot.   I
apologize to the individual who posted this idea, but it sounds reasonable.

And another point, it seems that whenever an engine runs too warm (after
warmed up properly, like as in pulling a trailer), the common "fix" is to
put in a cooler (160 F) thermostat.  Why is this supposed help the
problem?  The 160 F thermo will only open SOONER, not WIDER, right?  My
dad's Grand Cherokee runs warm (over 220 F) when pulling our camper trailer
and the guy at the Jeep dealer suggested putting in a 160 F thermostat. 
This won't help, will it?  It'll still let the same amount of water/coolant
through when the engine temp is 220 F, right?  If it might help, I'd try it
on my car (84 CSC, 307 V8) because it runs up near 220 F in the summer with
the A/C running.  Thanks.

P.S. CSC = Cutlass Supreme Calais.  If there can be a CS (Cutlass Supreme)
and a DRB (Delta Royale Brougham), then there can be a CSC! :-)
_____________________________

Jason K. Adcock
mailto:jadcock@vt.edu
http://www.erols.com/adcockjk

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 15:35:24 -0500
From: Jason Adcock <jadcock@vt.edu>
Subject: Re: Cooling topics

Sorry for the extra post, but (regarding my previous post) I guess I should
first ask if 220 F in 90 F weather and the A/C cranked is too hot.  It
seems that everything is against the 307 and that 220 F is actually not
bad.  Experiences?  Where does everyone else's 307's run when the weather's
hot?  Thanks again...
_____________________________

Jason K. Adcock
mailto:jadcock@vt.edu
http://www.erols.com/adcockjk

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 15:56:08 -0500 (EST)
From: OldsGuyGA@aol.com
Subject: Re: olds help, ?'s, info, goodies

olds guy looking for 70 sport mirrors...

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 14:58:24 -0600
From: Mike Schlottman <mschlott@rsn.hp.com>
Subject: E heads Big vs Small  valves and WTB(455)

From the olds FAQ, I see that there were E heads with large and small
valves.  Can you tell the difference with out removing the heads?  What
about with the heads on.

On another note.  My 455 has developed a knock.  I'd like to buy a
complete motor to rebuild so I can do a same day swap out.  So,  If
anyone has a 70 455 with E heads they would like to sell please contact
me.

	mike

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 17:16:33 -0500
From: Don Sowers <dstaxpro@lex.infi.net>
Subject: Re: My car can beat yours!?&%*

Brent Pinkstaff wrote:
> 
> Why do I feel like I'm in high school again?

Brent, I have to agree with you.  Maybe everybody that wants bragging
rights to what's fastest, quickest, etc ad nauseum can meet in a central
location, hit the strip and put up or shut up.  Of course we would need
unbiased officals and tech support to make sure nobody cheats. 
(Couldn't happen, right?)  Now do we break them up in classes or run
them straight up?  Do we measure 1/4 mile, 1/8 mile or use the flying
mile?  One thing I do know.  I don't have the fastest, best looking, or
_______est (insert wording of choice) on the list.  Furthermore I don't
care.  If you want to be techincal about it you're all slow.  Go
challenge Craig Breedlove or somebody.  Now where can we find a
centrally located drag strip for rent to do this?  ENOUGH!   High school
was 30 years (man that's a LONG time ago) back when muscle cars were new
and the quad4 etc were not even dust in the engineering dept. closet. 
Technology moves on, but not always for the better.  Today's technology
and yesterdays cubes would be a combination you wouldn't believe.  Can
you imagine what turbos, electronics, fuel injected, motors tied to 6 or
7 speed transmissions would be capable of?  It would be interesting to
say the least.  So it's money time,  put up or shut up.  Talk is cheap,
on with the action.  I'm sure a few of us on the list would be more than
happy to have this issue settled and done with.  Now let's see, where
might that strip be located? HUMMMM...........

Don Sowers

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 17:18:32 -0500
From: Jason Labay <z28cfi@gwis.com>
Subject: Re: q4 and 64-72 442's

Jason Adcock wrote:
> 
> Andy Geeting wrote:
> 
> >  I agree, you can't beat those old "monster muscles"! I personally have
> > never liked 4 cylinders because of their sound. Yea I know, that's probably
> > a bad thing to judge them on but give me the sound of a v8 any day! That
> > little 307 I have may not be much in the Hp or torque department but it
> > sure does sound healthy! Plus I like the fact that when my car spins the
> > tires, its not the front ones! But to each his own. If that's what you like
> > then that's what you like.
> 
> I couldn't agree more!  And, most 4 cylinders TODAY don't have the
> horsepower or even close to the torque our 307's do.  I haven't heard of
> ANY factory 4 cylinder motors pumping out 250 lbs. of torque...most V6's
> don't make torque like that. 

Sure factory 4 cyl's can't produce those power numbers, but has anyone
seen what a modified 2.2L 4cyl Mitsubishi can run in the 1/4? Try 10.98
@ 128. My friend races his 91 Eagle Talon at a local track here and
consistently runs low 11's..granted these cars have some serious
mods..BUT they are street driven. For proof go to www.buschurracing.com.
The quad 442's deserve respect. They are fast for their size. And they
will hang with or beat stock 5.0's..but the emphasis is on stock. 5.0's
flat out fly once modded the right way. I have been beaten by more than
a few Quad 442's, but then again I have beaten them also. Lot depends on
the driver. 

Oldsmobile content: Looks like I will be selling my 80 Olds 442 very
soon for a
1987 Buick Grand National (Charley will approve I think). It is amazing
the power those cars have...no wonder they rule the street/strip and
were voted #2 Muscle Car in the Chevy Craft top #100. Boost is good! 

Jason Labay (z28cfi@gwis.com) Akron, OH
Quality Engineer - TRW Automotive Group, Inc. 
95 Impala SS...14.66 @ 95.5 and weighs 4400lbs
80 Olds 442 W-30...soon gone
75 Hurst/Olds W-25...project car
85 S-10 Blazer..motor blew this week at 216,000 miles..damn chevy :-)

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 17:31:48 -0500
From: Mike Rothe <MROTHE@prodigy.net>
Subject: Re: Cooling topics (long engineer input)

The
> primary reason for this is that the coolant moves faster through the engine
> without a thermo. Sometimes the coolant gets moving so fast that it isn't
> able to pick up heat from the engine, causing overheating. Good luck.
> Oldsmobile Forever!

If that were true, the engine would be really hot, and the radiator
would be cool to the touch, don't you think?

Well, I asked this question today at lunch to some heat transfer and
fluid flow-type engineers that are responsible for the design of steam
generators at our nuke plant.  Since it was a quick down and dirty
answer (they wanted me to come back to their offices and show me 4,000
formulas to prove their ideas, but I didn't have time) this is basically
what they said in a nutshell (I hope I can remember this right):

The engine is the heat source, the radiator is the heat sink.  The heat
source varies in it's production of heat in relation to speed,
therefore, the faster it goes, the more heat is produced.  The water
pump spins faster to move more water through the block.  This increases
the mass flow rate, which in turn, removes more heat from the source. 
Now, when it gets to the radiator, or the heat sink, the air moving
across the fins removes the heat.  However, since the size of the
radiator is constant, there is a maximum amount of heat it will be able
to remove.  The air speed across the radiator fins is not crucial, since
the air doesn't come in contact with the water, but sufficient air
movement is required to keep the delta T's at a maximum in the heat
sink.  Air is NOT a good conductor of heat.  All you have to do is
replace the air that heats up around the tubes with cooler air, and you
continue to keep the delta T's to a maximum.  Increased air speed won't
make it COLDER, just more efficient in taking away heat.  (forced
convection theory) When the heat source produces more heat than the heat
sink can take away, the obvious occurs.  It's the design size of the
heat sink to the heat source that makes a difference.  Basically the
bigger surface area of the sink, the more heat it can dissipate.  This
is one reason a big block usually had a 4 core radiator versus a 2
core.  Metal pipes instead of rubber radiator hoses would be more
beneficial in helping to remove heat also, but since the engine flexes,
and cost considerations, rubber hoses have to do.

For instance, if you had an 4 core radiator, with a 4 cylinder engine,
then you ~shouldn't~ have any concerns about overheating. 

The thermostat is designed for one thing in mind.  To control the
temperature of the engine.  It also helps aid in the rapid heat-up of
the engine when cold to reach operating temperatures sooner.  Key word,
operating temperature.  Hence the recirc line.  While it is true that
colder is usually better for a car engines performance, it also has
something to do with expansion clearances at operating temps and in
reducing emissions.  The thermostat, regardless of opening size, is a
restriction, and without it, you run the risk of cavitating the water
pump at increased speeds.  Since the pump is centrifugal, some back
pressure must be present to prevent saturation pressure at the inlet of
the pump from becoming lower than what is required by saturation
temperature.  Pressure differences through the system must be
maintained.  If net positive suction head to the pump could not be
maintained, the system flow could actually SLOW DOWN if the pump
cavitates. This could lead to departure from nucleate boiling around the
cylinder walls and combustion chambers where the temps are the highest,
and air pockets could form, and lead to even faster overheating.  This
is why they sell those restrictor plates to replace the thermostats in
race cars.

Another key is to ensure the water leaving the heat sink is colder than
what is entering.  Increased residence time in the heat sink will also
help lower the water temps going back to the block.  So if the
thermostat closes, water flow in the radiator stops, and since heat
flows from hot to cold, then the radiator temperatures will drop more
toward outside air temperature.  EXAMPLE: When it's really cold outside,
turn off your house's heating sytstem.  Open your front door for a
second and close it back up.  You didn't lose much heat, so you stay
warm.  Leave it open for an hour (increase residence time), and it gets
to be about the same temperature as it is outside.  When the engine
temps heat up enough to open the thermostat, then the cool water
replaces the warm water in the block, reducing it's temperature, and
hopefully, closes the thermostat.  This would be the cycle that you
would want to maintain, regardless of engine speed.  It would just
happen more often at higher speeds.

Starting in the late 60's, GM came up with something for their air
conditioned cars that was to help reduce overheating when idling.  We
all know that when idling, the ignition is not advanced, and the engine
will produce more heat than if it were advanced.  With the A/C on, this
was even worse.  The thermostatic vacuum switch on the front of the
manifold was introduced, which, when the engine started to overheat, 
transferred the distributor advance canister's ported vacuum to direct
manifold vacuum.  This in turn advanced the spark, which reduced heat
load from the engine.  While not a miracle cure, it did help somewhat.

Now, not being a thermodynamics expert, the way these guys explained it
sorta made sense.  I've heard a thousand theories on this subject, but
what these guys told me was the best way I've understood it yet.  Of
course, they would probably lose me with all their formulas, so I'm glad
they just EXPLAINED it to me.

One note on thermostats.  I used to run a 160 in my 71.  I was
constantly running hot.  Flushing the system, and tuning it up didn't
help.  I ended up going back to the factory recommended 195, and the
overheating stopped.  Just some food for thought.  Funny, it still has
enough power to lay down tire tread.

I'm done with this thread now.  The engineers satisfied all I wanted to
know.  Just thought I'd share some thoughts that they had.

2 and 1/2 cents.
Mike Rothe

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 17:45:16 -0500
From: Don Sowers <dstaxpro@lex.infi.net>
Subject: Re: Lexus bashing

Chris Sparks (Mr. Ada) wrote:

> C'mon folks stop with the p*ss*ng matches.  It is getting wet here on
> the
> list! :-)

Chris,

I wonder if we can get a Pratt & Whitney jet engine, stick it in a 1980
Starfire (decent aerodynamics, 2600+ lbs), and go racing.  The
transmission and braking system might present a small problem, though. 
Man what a power to weight ratio it would have!  Uh, you can drive it if
you would like, I might be too slow for it anyway. :)  

One serious question, though.  My book shows the largest engine
available through 1990 (as current as my book is, I don't need anything
newer than that anyway) is 185 hp and a weight of about 2500 lbs. What's
the deal?  Chevy (Charley's favorite make-heh heh) had a 180 hp Corvair
in the mid 60s at about the same weight that was nowhere near
(apparently anyway, per the b s ing contest going on) the quickness.  I
guess the horses are a lot different today than they were 30 years ago.
Those little Corsas could scoot, but weren't the top dog of their day.  
Oh well, think we can get SBA financing and put a Pratt & Whitney/Olds
dragmobile together?  Now that would give out some real B S
opportunities, huh?

Don Sowers
in Nicholasville, Ky, wearing a raincoat 
:) :) :)

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 17:57:43 -0500
From: Mike Rothe <MROTHE@prodigy.net>
Subject: Re: Don's Raincoat?

> 
> Don Sowers
> in Nicholasville, Ky, wearing a raincoat


Don, the question is, what are you wearing UNDER that raincoat?  I bet
it isn't even raining there...
;^)

Mike Rothe

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 17:54:28 -0500
From: Mike Rothe <MROTHE@prodigy.net>
Subject: Re: My car can beat yours!?&%*

> Brent Pinkstaff wrote:
> >
> > Why do I feel like I'm in high school again?
> 
To all who believe their car is the quickest....forget all of that. 
There is ALWAYS someone just a little quicker.  Keep that in mind.  I
guess I'm at that age where it doesn't have to be all that quick.  Plus,
mine's been paid for a long time ago.  While my cars won't be running in
the 11's anytime soon, they are fast enough for me, and besides, which
would turn your head more on the street, an 11 second turbo
4-popper-looks-the-same-as-everything-else, or a '67 W-30 easing up to
the lights?  Trust me, I've been there and done that.  I remember once
cruising into the Sonic Drive In on Washington Road in Augusta, GA with
my 71 442.  There was some guy there showing off his shiny new, modified
RX7.  Not only did his "friends" come over and start ogling my car,
people that were parked elsewhere came over and started complimenting me
on such a cool car.  Even the waitresses loved it.  I'm sure that his
car was super fast, and probably could beat my 442.  But, just the sheer
recognition of the 442 nameplate made people want to stop and look at MY
car instead of his.  "RX7-Man" was spouting off about how his car could
kick my car's butt in a race, but I just sorta laughed it off.  I had
nothing to "prove."  Just the mass of people that come by to look and
mutter "nice car" was all the proof I needed.  The newer 4 banger
musclecars have their place, but it's not with the musclecars of old,
that's for sure.  I still can't fathom 25 years from now someone walking
up and saying "Wow, cool RX7, dude!"  But I bet my 442 will still get
looks 25 years from now.  And hopefully, I'll still be driving it.

Mike Rothe

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 18:04:15 -0500
From: Jason Adcock <jadcock@vt.edu>
Subject: Re: Cooling topics (long engineer input)

Mike Rothe wrote:

> Well, I asked this question today at lunch to some heat transfer and
> fluid flow-type engineers that are responsible for the design of steam
> generators at our nuke plant.  Since it was a quick down and dirty
> answer (they wanted me to come back to their offices and show me 4,000
> formulas to prove their ideas, but I didn't have time) this is basically
> what they said in a nutshell (I hope I can remember this right):
> 
> The engine is the heat source, the radiator is the heat sink.  The heat
> source varies in it's production of heat in relation to speed,
> therefore, the faster it goes, the more heat is produced.  The water...

Yeah, what he said...  :-)
 
> 2 and 1/2 cents.

That's a BIG 1/2 cent!  Very interesting.  Well, at least I learned ONE
thing today :-) 
_____________________________

Jason K. Adcock
mailto:jadcock@vt.edu
http://www.erols.com/adcockjk

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 15:15:55 -0800
From: "Chris Sparks (Mr. Ada)" <mrada@catalina-inter.net>
Subject: Re: Don's Raincoat?

Mike Rothe wrote:
> 
> Don, the question is, what are you wearing UNDER that raincoat?  I bet
> it isn't even raining there...
> ;^)

Doh! :-)

Chris Sparks

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 97 18:31:23 EST
From: Glenn Connors <gpc442@buffnet.net>
Subject: Re: 69 Olds Hood

At 08:42 PM 11/17/97 -0800, you wrote:
>I have been on and off of this list for about 2 years now and don't
>remember ever seeing this question but here goes.  One of my Marines at
>work just bought a 69 Cutlass and is looking for a new hood.  He may be
>able to get a 70 hood and I can't remember if it will fit or not.  Are
>there any other year hoods that will fit a 69 Cutlass?
>
>Thanks
>
>Chris Miller
>68 442
>cya442@mindspring.com
>
>Are there any other hoods that will fit on a 69 Cutlass
>
>
    The '70 hood fits.  Matter of fact when I bought my '69 4-4-2 it had the
'70 hood on it.



     Glenn
     '69 4-4-2

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

End of oldsmobile-digest V1 #961
********************************

