Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by XframeFX

  1. Rod, I believe they were the same also. I like the tumbler speedo and it would be conducive to implementing Buick's Electro-Cruise. However, the 1st generation Rivieras were blessed with round instrument pods in an era where longitudal speedos prevailed. This lends well to full custom digital gauges such as Dakota Digital. Not for me though. I simply want to restore function of my accessories. Maybe modify if a bad design or if a simple modern solution is available. I tested all components of my Electro-Cruise and the only deficient items were a leaky diaphragm, bad hose with the spring inside and that flakey hair-spring. The latter is so archaic and is just plain terrible. When not using the cruise, set the pointer high out of the way to save wear and tear. Basically a poor design in the transducer department. Again, my spring appears to be messed with long nose pliers, totally NG. If successful, I'll post images that will pertain to 1st gen Rivs only. Perhaps the 1966 - 67 speedo might be easier to mount my transducer. You are centrally located, not me. Edmonton Alberta. Thanks for responding, JB
  2. Our thoughts are closely aligned. My thinking was, a remote mirror an option yes. But I thought surely a mirror (non remote) was standard. So, 20% of 1963 Rivieras were sold without a driver's outside rearview mirror! Export cars? And I'll bet those 20% cars had a mirror installed at the Dealer. Something like my recent Jeep JL order, decided to leave trailer tow off and install a Mopar Hitch later, Regarding production changes, in the late '80s I observed two 1963 Riviera tilt steering columns. The turn signal switches were mounted differently on each. I no longer have what must've been an early '63 tilt column so, can't re-visit for details.
  3. I've seen some without a tilt wheel but find it hard to believe a Driver's outside rearview mirror being dealer installed as that would be the 1st factory option before all the rest. Also, quite a job to install along with the remote joystick (wouldn't trust a Dealer to get it right). I have the spare tire on the trunk floor. Mounting the right side mirror next to the door glass to match the left side, not now with what is confirmed here. TX! Mercedes Benz 190E had a significantly larger mirror on the right side, not matching the left at all.
  4. Jim, I had a similar observation. Thanks for bringing the broader picture to us. My '63 Riv has the Driver's Mirror further back. Making both sides to match the same location makes no sense. When doing my veneer, I drilled 3 pin holes to locate the 2 screws and hole saw in the center for the joy stick control. After finishing the veneer, only I can find those pin holes. However, I think I'll pass on a RS mirror too, have other priorities.
  5. Hello Rod, you have a beautiful Riviera and an excellent 1st post here! I temporarily installed a speedo with the "Speed Minder" in my '63 while I fix the Unit with that awful "Transducer". It is on the back-burner for now. So, glad to learn more from your dealings on the '67 unit. Achilles Heel that spring certainly is! Buick chose to not use the Perfect Circle unit that other GM divisions did. That one measured pulses and sent a Pulse Width (PWM) signal to the vacuum actuator. Buick's "Electro Cruise" measures the position of the indicator and attempts to create a PWM signal with the oscillating spring. Measuring the position of the needle ('63 Speedo) is not ideal but having an electronic system except for that flakey spring, should've named it "Mechano Cruise". The Spring in my unit is so far out-of-wack (damaged?) that I'm working with a 'real transducer' while maintaining measuring of indicator position, the original design. If successful, it will be 100% electro/pneumatic. I've tried several PWM controllers but a heated seat controller appears to work best. My attempt might be a long shot but, I'm a sucker for doing things the hard way!
  6. Holy Cow, if it's too good to be true . . . . . The rear control arm bushings have been beat-to-death in postings. We finally have quality replacements that James has in stock. I checked that link and a give away is that their offering fits Skylarks, full size Buicks, Rivieras and 8 pieces versus the required 6: This Kit is constructed using High-Quality OEM spec replacements for 1964-1970 Buick Vehicles. Vehicle Fitment: 1964-1970 Buick Lesabre, 1964-1970 Buick Wildcat, 1964-1970 Buick Electra, 1964-1970 Buick Riviera, 1964-1970 Buick Special, 1964-1970 Buick Skylark These parts are Factory Design and will only work with Stock Vehicles. This Kit Contains All Of The Pieces Below: Upper Rear End Control Arm Bushings (4 Each) Lower Rear End Control Arm Bushings (4 Each)
  7. With any website that has a "Canned Contact Us" app, I right click and copy before hitting 'send'. Many times it appears to be a placebo app and my dialogue disappears with an error. 5 years back, I have had only 1 minor back-ordered part that never showed from C.A.R.S. Slipped thru-the-cracks? Otherwise, parts from them was satisfactory. For parts sources, the back of ROA's Riview.
  8. Ray, Thanks for the details on your 4L60E install. Good that the swap is still fresh in your head! Thanks Tom on confirming bolt size. In hindsight, I now think the Pinion Flange is from a 1964 Electra. It has 3/8"-14 threads for sure. The drive shaft from that 1964 Riv has 7/16" holes. Regardless whether the Riviera had different bolt sizes or not, I'll have to punch them out to 7/16"-14 for fresh threads. Will use grade-8 socket head bolts which should eliminate a weak link. I have those Australian bushings for the rear including track-bar and plan to change the steering box. Considering George's Bilstein shocks as well. I have come a long way with this project and still have much more to do. At this point, I wish I could turn it over to a 'crew' and just-get-it-done!
  9. Thanks Ray & Ed My Pinion Flange and Drive-shaft is from a 1964 Riviera Super Wildcat and is intended for my Dynaflow-to-ST400 conversion. I believe the pinion flange is a direct swap for my 1963 pinion yoke. Something like 30 splines. The 1/2" thick pinion flange has worn-out 3/8"-16 holes but is otherwise OK. Again, fitting 7/16"-14 bolts should be the best fix. The 1964 Drive-shaft I plan to use has a swack of balance weights on both shafts. I will have to drill new holes into the X-Frame for the ST400 X-Member. Yet to copy/determine where they should be. Perhaps the transmission output shafts are at different heights between 1963 & 64, the reason why center support bearing has a difference of 1.25"? Dennis's Riv would've had new X-member holes drilled by a previous Owner. Too much thought here I know. Using OE parts from 1964/65 should minimize surprises when I'm into the swap. But, the Dynaflow isn't as bad as I remember back in the 80s! Thanks for responding.
  10. Source for 1964 - up Center Support housing. Made-In-USA? https://www.powertrainindustries.com/story/3R80-10?catalog_table=dsp_center_bearings
  11. Tim, with the engine idling and the air cleaner off, look down the primary throats. If the float seats are leaking, you may see dripping from over-flow. Except for the pump (will do that too), I went thru the entire fuel system. From a flushed fuel tank (with a soldered-on tag) to a rebuilt AFB carburetor using FI hoses and clamps. All good now. Yes, I wish my Dad did the same. Keep it!
  12. I didn't try a search on this because no accurate description. I agree describing it as a vacuum valve. Details on a replacement? Thank-You.
  13. An FYI alternative to the Pin. I used a bolt with a shank, washers and a "well-nut" from Lowes. This made for a sturdier pivot point. A design flaw? the longer "7" lever is at the top of the stack where the pin is more likely to wobble?
  14. A good post here. This confirms to NOT use the '63 center support on the '64 drive-shaft. I have been wanting to swap my Dynaflow to a 1965 ST-400 setup with a 12" switch-pitch torque converter for 30+ years now. After spending the last 5 years assembling my '63 Riv, I am appalled how it drives like an old car. The Dynaflow happens to be the best part! Having 98% parts to do the swap, I noticed the pinion flange has extremely sloppy 3/8"-16 thru-holes. My first inclination is to use longer bolts with nuts on the backside of the flange. Or, machine for 7/16"-14 bolts. The CV joint flange accepts the larger 7/16" bolt and appears to be a better fit. In fact, there might have been some movement here with the 3/8" bolts causing the threaded holes to be stretched-out.. Has anyone encountered sloppy threads such as mine?
  15. I've done this in wrecking yards with a battery pack to listen for a "click" from both the switch pitch and kickdown solenoids before extracting the torque converter and front pump. One time, this test had me abandon transmission removal. A trans rebuilt had removed the switch pitch. A painted torque converter, another clue.
  16. There's no mention what type timing chain set where 'tight' and 'slack' was experienced. The OE style inverted tooth or roller type. From previous communications, "tight" applies to the latter for sure. So, was there any Brand name on the packaging for roller sets? Vendors for our Nailheads source them from somewhere. For replacement, a roller set recommended over the OE style? For OE style, there's Cloyes, Melling (same?) and Engine Tech (made-in-China?)
  17. I've seen so many of these in GMs of my past where there's a "dead-zone" when rocking the crankshaft back and forth. All of those had the nylon coated cam gear. When I installed a roller timing set along with a performance camshaft in a SBC TargetMaster crate engine in the early 80's, no dead-zone. So, could it be that a dead-zone with the nylon gear was a purpose design? Of course with wear, the dead-zone would be alarmingly larger. I appreciate the wisdom shared here. I had this question for quite some time and since this post is on the topic . . . . . Also, are our Nailheads interference engines by design? I've heard of other GM engines with the nylon gear skip a tooth and the only symptom was an engine that no longer ran. Thank-You.
  18. Please keep us posted on a decent roller timing chain set with a brand name/manufacturer/description. I would then source from a vendor here in Canada. TA sources from somewhere.
  19. Alex, we should have Bruce do a video clip on all our cars to relate a face to the name! Really enjoyed watching and I couldn't help notice a pedestrian in the background with an umbrella in that lush park! Love seeing those clam shells operate. Thank-You.
  20. Frank, the Mr. Gasket Plates are .07" aluminum not steel or .05" as stated. Being supplied with just 3 gaskets, the product seems to indicate to mount the carb directly on the soft aluminum? Sorry, I might be a little too much OCD on such a simple task as mounting a carburetor. For your install, I suppose you have 2 smiley gaskets. A regular 4-Hole gasket is all that's required on top of your plate. I see your brass fitting for the power brake is broken off. Hopefully not the Tee fitting for AC. A 90 degree brass fitting is easy to source for non AC cars.
  21. Ed, There's a thought I did not consider as I was focused on sealing the entire flange equally and not concerned about heat. Plug the Holes and mount the carb directly on the smiley gasket! The secondary feature of the heat shield is that it prevents exhaust gas exposure eating away at the carb flange. Not an issue when the holes are plugged.
  22. Ed, with the 3 plates and gaskets, that #98 amounts to 1/2". I'd use just one plate with smiley gasket. Question is if the soft .07" aluminum plate is good enough to set the carb on directly. Or, use a 4-hole gasket in-between thus defeating the heat transfer in favour for a positive seal around the perimeter and between holes. Lots of discussions on this. But, I'm addressing the seal over the entire flange area. https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums/c1-and-c2-corvettes/1978466-q-jet-carb-base-gasket-tech-info-the-hot-slot-manifold-problem.html
  23. Exactly. In addressing flange-to-flange seal, I'd use just the top plate of that Mr. Gasket #98. It is .07" aluminum but has the same area as the flange. I think I'll use it instead of that 'Square SS Shim'. Thanks for the response!
  24. I'm bringing this back as I'm still confused. For my AFB, I have .060" smiley gaskets and the .017" heat-shield all on the left in the image below. My observation has this sealing well around the perimeter. But what about in-between the 4 holes? The gasket will compress more around the perimeter then in the center. Would the center section of the gasket be sandwiched or flap in the flow? The heat shield on the right (I'd use just one, not the stack), will seal evenly on the entire flange surface. Wouldn't this be preferred? Thanks
  25. On the '58 Impala, didn't GM have to scramble because of Chrysler releasing their "Forward Look" in '57? 1958 GMs were a 1 year only offering. Ford went 2 more years before switching from Shoebox to los slung car in 1960
  • Create New...