suckolux
Well-known member
Oh I know, 70s I was in the auto business, that one was really bad! But not just the running. Of course CA cars were the worst I think in the poor running
What's your favorite car?
- Thread starter singerman
- Start date
Help Support VacuumLand:
bikerray
Well-known member
I had a '66 Buick Wildcat Convertible that had twin quadrajet carbs, it would pass anything on the road except gas stations.
I don't remember any Buicks with a pushbutton transmission. Chrysler Imperial had pushbutton on the dash and Edsel had pushbutton in the center of the steering wheel, which was fun when you turned a corner and the trans dropped into low when the wired were shorting out.
I don't remember any Buicks with a pushbutton transmission. Chrysler Imperial had pushbutton on the dash and Edsel had pushbutton in the center of the steering wheel, which was fun when you turned a corner and the trans dropped into low when the wired were shorting out.
vacerator
Well-known member
No, Buick
never offered a push button transmission selector.
David, my second cousin worked for Chevrolet central office back then. I remember him going out there to the old Southgate Ca. assembly plant which was having quality issues. It was also very old. I don't know if they ever produced Monte Carlos, but they did full size (B) body Impalas, Caprices, and (A) body Chevelles. The Monet Carlo then was an A special, with a 116 inch wheelbase vs. 112 inches for the Chevelle. Same width. Same dash board even.
A high school stands on the site today.
Van Nuys ran f body Camaro's and Firebirds. Freemont may have also made larger cars then. That's the Tesla plant today.
never offered a push button transmission selector.
David, my second cousin worked for Chevrolet central office back then. I remember him going out there to the old Southgate Ca. assembly plant which was having quality issues. It was also very old. I don't know if they ever produced Monte Carlos, but they did full size (B) body Impalas, Caprices, and (A) body Chevelles. The Monet Carlo then was an A special, with a 116 inch wheelbase vs. 112 inches for the Chevelle. Same width. Same dash board even.
A high school stands on the site today.
Van Nuys ran f body Camaro's and Firebirds. Freemont may have also made larger cars then. That's the Tesla plant today.
suckolux
Well-known member
Chevelle in a Tux as they say!
suckolux
Well-known member
Though I have to say, no worse than dad's 74 GP SJ, that was fast anyway
real1shep
Well-known member
'71 was about the end of high compression/high performance engines in street cars....the insurance companies were all over it at that point. Some could be converted back at expense, some not. Still some high performance beasts in motor homes and maybe available as recreational off-road/boat engines.
I think we established quite awhile back that there was no push button 40's Buick tranny...my bad. Doesn't really serve a purpose to keep beating that dead horse. The three-on-the-tree was the tranny to have in the 40's, the Dynaflow being a bit sluggish as was said.
If there was a Goat with the 421, I never saw one. The premium engine being the 389 Tri-power. When I was growing up in St.Louis, there was a special plant there that made the baddest of the bad Vettes, many on special order. My brother had a friend whose dad was a doc and he told his son he could have any Vette he wanted, as long as he didn't get any tickets. He'd special order Vettes from that plant every couple of yrs that were pretty incredible. Compete stock with about anything Baldwin Motors was putting on the street.
My brother taught me to drive a stick on a '68 396 SS Camaro hardtop with a floor shift. He had the car about six months and it was stolen. He had ordered the 350 and got the 396 by mistake for the same price. We raced a 350 once, same yr, right in front of a cop shop from about 30mph on. No comparison. Sweet ride....too bad it was stolen...in a way that was my 'first car'...lol.
He took the insurance money and bought a Pontiac Formula 400, auto. Had the stand-up hood scoops but they were fake. Probably some kinda dealer option to make the ram air real...I dunno. He had that car forever...even pulled his bass boat with it down in TX. The valve train on those engines was anything but bulletproof....he was lucky. I was just starting to work on engines then.
GM was hypocritical to put their phony 'ban' on street racing in the early 60's....I think it was '64. Ways around it of course, but that left Mopar to accelerate their street racing program to the point where they had little competition by the late 60's. I always liked the body style of the AMX and the little Javelin...but they weren't serious contenders. The Mark Donahue Javelins were good lookers and the red/white/blue editions were so rare, that they have been forged for decades. AMC didn't have distinct build codes for their Javelins and many of the factory cars where mix & match which to this day drives the collectors crazy trying to sort out the fakes.
And speaking of 'fakes'....did you know there are more registered Duesenbergs than were ever made? And the fakes are so well done that even the experts get fooled. Charles Schmidt Motors sold one(fake) to a well heeled collector and Charles did real prison time over it.
Kevin
[this post was last edited: 9/2/2016-04:52]
I think we established quite awhile back that there was no push button 40's Buick tranny...my bad. Doesn't really serve a purpose to keep beating that dead horse. The three-on-the-tree was the tranny to have in the 40's, the Dynaflow being a bit sluggish as was said.
If there was a Goat with the 421, I never saw one. The premium engine being the 389 Tri-power. When I was growing up in St.Louis, there was a special plant there that made the baddest of the bad Vettes, many on special order. My brother had a friend whose dad was a doc and he told his son he could have any Vette he wanted, as long as he didn't get any tickets. He'd special order Vettes from that plant every couple of yrs that were pretty incredible. Compete stock with about anything Baldwin Motors was putting on the street.
My brother taught me to drive a stick on a '68 396 SS Camaro hardtop with a floor shift. He had the car about six months and it was stolen. He had ordered the 350 and got the 396 by mistake for the same price. We raced a 350 once, same yr, right in front of a cop shop from about 30mph on. No comparison. Sweet ride....too bad it was stolen...in a way that was my 'first car'...lol.
He took the insurance money and bought a Pontiac Formula 400, auto. Had the stand-up hood scoops but they were fake. Probably some kinda dealer option to make the ram air real...I dunno. He had that car forever...even pulled his bass boat with it down in TX. The valve train on those engines was anything but bulletproof....he was lucky. I was just starting to work on engines then.
GM was hypocritical to put their phony 'ban' on street racing in the early 60's....I think it was '64. Ways around it of course, but that left Mopar to accelerate their street racing program to the point where they had little competition by the late 60's. I always liked the body style of the AMX and the little Javelin...but they weren't serious contenders. The Mark Donahue Javelins were good lookers and the red/white/blue editions were so rare, that they have been forged for decades. AMC didn't have distinct build codes for their Javelins and many of the factory cars where mix & match which to this day drives the collectors crazy trying to sort out the fakes.
And speaking of 'fakes'....did you know there are more registered Duesenbergs than were ever made? And the fakes are so well done that even the experts get fooled. Charles Schmidt Motors sold one(fake) to a well heeled collector and Charles did real prison time over it.
Kevin
[this post was last edited: 9/2/2016-04:52]
suckolux
Well-known member
I want to say the 421 and 421SD were for the bigger boats and maybe?? started with the Catalina Swiss Cheese racing program? I know they were more likely to be seen in the Bonneville and GP. I THINK
vacerator
Well-known member
Yes David,
just the large boats. I think when Pontiac had to produce thousands and thousands of small journal 350's, and large journal 455's they needed another line in the Montcalm avenue foundry and engine assembly area in Pontiac. No more room for the 421, or 428, plus they were old school heavy mills like Fords 390, and 429's.
My exes dad worked at the Pontiac foundry. He retired after they "assembled" their final engines. The 2.5 litre Iron Dukes for Fieros', and A and X body cars, and the Braziilan 1.8 litre turbo 4 cylinders for the Fiero and the J body Sunbirds.
just the large boats. I think when Pontiac had to produce thousands and thousands of small journal 350's, and large journal 455's they needed another line in the Montcalm avenue foundry and engine assembly area in Pontiac. No more room for the 421, or 428, plus they were old school heavy mills like Fords 390, and 429's.
My exes dad worked at the Pontiac foundry. He retired after they "assembled" their final engines. The 2.5 litre Iron Dukes for Fieros', and A and X body cars, and the Braziilan 1.8 litre turbo 4 cylinders for the Fiero and the J body Sunbirds.
oliveoiltinfoil
Well-known member
I am European so I have done it properly. Its probably not the best car in the world but it does most things well. Being a VW its beautifully built, jack of all trades, master of most of them. I have got 80.3 MPG on a long run and gets to 60 in less than 10 seconds. 550 miles per tank 
suckolux
Well-known member
Mike, is it true you can't tell what Pontiac engine you have, from the outside they all appear the same?301-455? Rumor mill is all I have. I have had several, but not at the same time.
real1shep
Well-known member
You can always tell a big block from a small block...at least I've never been fooled. Prove me wrong.....
Kevin
Kevin
vacerator
Well-known member
True David,
at least I used to have a hard time telling, unless I measured the width of the intake manifolds, like an Olds 403 vs. a 350. Except for Big block Chevy's. Their valve covers were way wider than a small blocks, without lines in them.. Then a 409 had the double C shaped valve covers. Pontiacs valve covers were all fairly wide also.
A Buick 455 was usually painted red. After 1974, all Buick V8's were blue, In fact most GM V8's by then were. Olds engines through 1974 were gold.
A Ford 460 was much bigger under the hood than a 351. of course, only the Lincoln Versailles ever had a 351.
The Chevrolet 400 was not a big block, and neither was the Ford 400.
at least I used to have a hard time telling, unless I measured the width of the intake manifolds, like an Olds 403 vs. a 350. Except for Big block Chevy's. Their valve covers were way wider than a small blocks, without lines in them.. Then a 409 had the double C shaped valve covers. Pontiacs valve covers were all fairly wide also.
A Buick 455 was usually painted red. After 1974, all Buick V8's were blue, In fact most GM V8's by then were. Olds engines through 1974 were gold.
A Ford 460 was much bigger under the hood than a 351. of course, only the Lincoln Versailles ever had a 351.
The Chevrolet 400 was not a big block, and neither was the Ford 400.
suckolux
Well-known member
No I had been told they all had the same block, it seems a waste of metal/ weight
vacerator
Well-known member
Nope,
not the same blocks. A friend used to also say, all standard GM 350's. Not true.
Big difference in crank shaft bearing journal sizes. Some had a taller deck, for a longer stroke. Some remained over square, so had a larger bore, requiring a wider, longer block.
The small block Chevy maxed out at 350 cubic inches, and then a siamesed cylinder 400, unless a custom builder made it into a 383 stroker engine
A 396, 427, and 454 were bigger MkIV blocks.
Small block marketing designation was "turbo fire" Big block was "turbo jet.
Across GM divisons, each cast their own block, at least until the mid 70's. Then the main difference were the heads, manifolds, and belt drive accessory mounting.
An Olds engine had positive valve rotation first, and it's distributor rotated in the opposite direction from the others. They ran very smooth, and sounded different.
Chevy had it's starter on the opposite side, so the battery also, and later, the A/C compressor on the drivers side. The others were on the passenger side, and Cadillac in the center with the upper radiator hose circling over it.
So all the drilling in the blocks were different.
Buick as you may well know, had it's distributor up front on an angle, same for the oil filter. The others behind the oil pan side.
not the same blocks. A friend used to also say, all standard GM 350's. Not true.
Big difference in crank shaft bearing journal sizes. Some had a taller deck, for a longer stroke. Some remained over square, so had a larger bore, requiring a wider, longer block.
The small block Chevy maxed out at 350 cubic inches, and then a siamesed cylinder 400, unless a custom builder made it into a 383 stroker engine
A 396, 427, and 454 were bigger MkIV blocks.
Small block marketing designation was "turbo fire" Big block was "turbo jet.
Across GM divisons, each cast their own block, at least until the mid 70's. Then the main difference were the heads, manifolds, and belt drive accessory mounting.
An Olds engine had positive valve rotation first, and it's distributor rotated in the opposite direction from the others. They ran very smooth, and sounded different.
Chevy had it's starter on the opposite side, so the battery also, and later, the A/C compressor on the drivers side. The others were on the passenger side, and Cadillac in the center with the upper radiator hose circling over it.
So all the drilling in the blocks were different.
Buick as you may well know, had it's distributor up front on an angle, same for the oil filter. The others behind the oil pan side.
suckolux
Well-known member
I was speaking of all V8 Pontiacs
vacerator
Well-known member
Ok David,
they looked identical, but side by side, a Pontiac 389, 400, or 455 was wider than a 326, or 350. Near the end of their V8 engine production, they made the 301, and even a 265. Chevrolet made a 267, and a 305. Close to the displacement of their first V8's in 1955 of 265, and 283.
Canada never even got a Pontiac mill in their Pontiacs. Only Chevrolet engines.
The US eventually got the Parissienne after full size Bonnevilles were no longer made here. Power was from a Chevrolet 305.
My dad used to say a V8 was a V8. Take care of it, it takes care of you. I disagree.
You could feel a difference in a '77 Bonneville that had an Olds 350 from one with a Pontiac engine, and an Olds Delta 88 with a Chevrolet engine. Also between a '77 Buick Regal with a Chevrolet vs. a Buick 350. I drove them. The Buick engine seemed quieter with a low purr. The Olds powered Delta 88 royal pushed me back in the seat on take off with silent low end torque. Plush ride. They offered the base Buick 231 V6, but I bet that was a dog. It barely moved a Cutlass Supreme.
they looked identical, but side by side, a Pontiac 389, 400, or 455 was wider than a 326, or 350. Near the end of their V8 engine production, they made the 301, and even a 265. Chevrolet made a 267, and a 305. Close to the displacement of their first V8's in 1955 of 265, and 283.
Canada never even got a Pontiac mill in their Pontiacs. Only Chevrolet engines.
The US eventually got the Parissienne after full size Bonnevilles were no longer made here. Power was from a Chevrolet 305.
My dad used to say a V8 was a V8. Take care of it, it takes care of you. I disagree.
You could feel a difference in a '77 Bonneville that had an Olds 350 from one with a Pontiac engine, and an Olds Delta 88 with a Chevrolet engine. Also between a '77 Buick Regal with a Chevrolet vs. a Buick 350. I drove them. The Buick engine seemed quieter with a low purr. The Olds powered Delta 88 royal pushed me back in the seat on take off with silent low end torque. Plush ride. They offered the base Buick 231 V6, but I bet that was a dog. It barely moved a Cutlass Supreme.
suckolux
Well-known member
But it is true they didn't have a big block and small block right? I think.Its been so many years.Yes the Buick and Olds seemed more into quieter lower rpm torque, quite easy at it.
vacerator
Well-known member
Pontiac, Olds, and Buick did have
small and large blocks. They did not have entirely different shapes like the Chevrolet small block and Mark IV big block, but had larger dimensions to accomadate the larger bearing journals and crankshafts, as well as cylinders. Thus a wider oil pan, and heads.
We saw the sad result when Oldsmobile over stroked the compression ratio of a small block 350 to make it a diesel. The crank shafts, wrist pins, connecting rods, and or bearings broke. They were probably relying on the higher revving ability of small blocks, but a diesel does not rev higher. It has a lot more force on the crank from the piston because of the high compression, thus more torque.
Law of physics. The base or lower end of an engine must be able to handle the force to it by the load of the pistons.
The 455 would have been a better choice for this, but it's big cubic inch displacement would have not saved enough fuel consumption. Cars were also already downsized, and it would have been a tight squeeze even in a full size B or C body, let alone a mid size after 1977.
Once Oldsmobile engineers beefed up the crank shafts and bearings, the engines lasted longer. Then the 6.2 litre diesel by Detroit diesel was well proven, but only used in light trucks.
small and large blocks. They did not have entirely different shapes like the Chevrolet small block and Mark IV big block, but had larger dimensions to accomadate the larger bearing journals and crankshafts, as well as cylinders. Thus a wider oil pan, and heads.
We saw the sad result when Oldsmobile over stroked the compression ratio of a small block 350 to make it a diesel. The crank shafts, wrist pins, connecting rods, and or bearings broke. They were probably relying on the higher revving ability of small blocks, but a diesel does not rev higher. It has a lot more force on the crank from the piston because of the high compression, thus more torque.
Law of physics. The base or lower end of an engine must be able to handle the force to it by the load of the pistons.
The 455 would have been a better choice for this, but it's big cubic inch displacement would have not saved enough fuel consumption. Cars were also already downsized, and it would have been a tight squeeze even in a full size B or C body, let alone a mid size after 1977.
Once Oldsmobile engineers beefed up the crank shafts and bearings, the engines lasted longer. Then the 6.2 litre diesel by Detroit diesel was well proven, but only used in light trucks.
rugsucker
Well-known member
"sad result when Oldsmobile--(made) it a diesel"
I was talking cars with someone years ago who bought one of the first Olds diesels and decided to take a vacation in their wonderful new car.By the time they got to Washington DC they were having problems from bad to worse and found an Olds dealer who was not prepared to service the diesel.After problems,days in motels,loaner cars,etc they got in touch with a GM executive.He had the car repaired as well as they could as well as writing a rather large check for their time and trouble.When they returned home the diesel was traded!
I was talking cars with someone years ago who bought one of the first Olds diesels and decided to take a vacation in their wonderful new car.By the time they got to Washington DC they were having problems from bad to worse and found an Olds dealer who was not prepared to service the diesel.After problems,days in motels,loaner cars,etc they got in touch with a GM executive.He had the car repaired as well as they could as well as writing a rather large check for their time and trouble.When they returned home the diesel was traded!
real1shep
Well-known member
I bought a 60 something Jeep truck for my son when he was a teen...to try and keep him out of trouble and form a positive father & son project. The engine was a 327, but I realized shortly it wasn't a Chev 327. I wanna say the truck was a '67.
If I remember, it started life as a Kaiser-Nash engine and then later, AMC was still using it when they bought Jeep. I think it disappeared in the 70's. I remember getting parts for the rebuild and people thought I was on drugs talking about a non-GM 327. I even heard it rumored that it was a Buick motor....but that never really panned out.
I had a '75 Renegade CJ5 with the little AMC 304 V8. I liked the motor, especially after I put in an Edelbrock and a Holley. My only complaint about that Jeep was the three spd floor tranny. Always felt like it was missing a gear;shift into third and it felt like your tranny fell into a deep hole....horrible ratios between second and third. Fix was a Ford T-18 top loader 4spd, but I never got that far with it. Gearing was great off-road however.
Kevin
If I remember, it started life as a Kaiser-Nash engine and then later, AMC was still using it when they bought Jeep. I think it disappeared in the 70's. I remember getting parts for the rebuild and people thought I was on drugs talking about a non-GM 327. I even heard it rumored that it was a Buick motor....but that never really panned out.
I had a '75 Renegade CJ5 with the little AMC 304 V8. I liked the motor, especially after I put in an Edelbrock and a Holley. My only complaint about that Jeep was the three spd floor tranny. Always felt like it was missing a gear;shift into third and it felt like your tranny fell into a deep hole....horrible ratios between second and third. Fix was a Ford T-18 top loader 4spd, but I never got that far with it. Gearing was great off-road however.
Kevin
