NTX5467

Members
  • Content Count

    8,324
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

NTX5467 last won the day on April 9 2016

NTX5467 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,008 Excellent

1 Follower

About NTX5467

  • Rank
    Sr Mbr -- BCA 20811
  • Birthday 12/25/1951

Profile Information

  • Gender:
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. There are issues with "too much " zddp" in the oil. What's too much? Probably the 3000ppm in some of the Joe Gibbs racing oils, as an example. Too much zddp can compromise the other parts of the additive package related to detergency, from what I've read. Everything must be in balance for the best results. How do the "racing oils" get by with the 3000ppm level? They're only in the engine for about 500 miles, then they are changed. No real detergency issues with that low mileage on the oil, I suspect. About 5 years ago, most of the diesel-rated oils (i.e., Shell Rotella T 15W-40 "dino") had right at 1500ppm zddp. Later versions of that oil are now closer to 1200ppm zddp, in synthetic or "dino". The Amsoil "Z-Rod" oil is about 1500ppm zddp, as I recall. Other than the PQIA, also check www.bobistheoilguy.com Virgin Oil Forum postings of oil analysis done by individuals. Most of the tests are privately-funded by the posters and are performed by Blackstone. On ANY oil analysis results, always check the date the analysis was done. VERY important as it can change year-to-year, by observation. Below are a few of the Virgin Oil Analysis postings from the www.bobistheoilguy.com website. There are about 50+ pages of such, not all with postings, though. You can also find a chart of Mobil 1 motor oil composition on the ExxonMobil website Most all of the "consumer" oils have zddp levels of about 1000ppm, as the "car" oils are usually in the 700-800ppm zddp level range. API rating "SL" was the last oil that was supposed to have 1000ppm zddp in it. The later "SM" oils went down to about 800ppm and lower. The original "SN" oils were in the 700ppm range, but as the "SN Plus" oils are attuned to the GasDirectInjector motors currently in use, their additive packages have been tweaked a bit from the orig. "SN" oils. ONE change was to increase the zddp levels back to 800ppm, as Calcium was markedly reduced. The "S_" designations are for "Spark Ignition" engines, as the "C_" designations are for "Compression Fire" (diesel) engines. Other than the noted Rislone zddp product, almost every camshaft vendor now has some sort of zddp oil additive for sale. Financially better to find an oil with at least 1000ppm zddp to start with. AND one that is readily-available at common places. To me, that means the "diesel-spec" oils, with the basic "C_" designations on them, BUT also with a secondary gas engine rating. BUT the way some things seem to be changing, be sure to check the oil analysis websites every so often to make sure what's what. Enjoy! NTX5467
  2. As with aftermarket sheet metal, if it exactly matches the OEM part, then that's "trademark infringement". If they put the hole in another location, "it's different" and no problem. Some of the early off-shore fenders would have square holes rather than round ones. Or be 1/16" shorter than the orig one, for example. Anything to make it "not an exact copy" is all that's needed, as to the stamping. Looks like you're doing a good job! NTX5467
  3. I will concur with what Russ states. It has been borne out by how the OEM alignment recommendations have evolved with radial tires on "control arm" front suspensions. It was known, earlier on, that radials were more tolerant of camber settings than bias ply tires were, due to the more flexible sidewalls of the radials, BUT that toe-in was much more critical as the stiffer tread area of the radials did not like being pushed sideways by too much toe-in or toe-out. As the wheel is pushed against the roadway, the tire will desire to be pushed rearward, so the "toe-in" adjustment will compensate for that action upon the steering linkage, resulting a "rolling toe" of near "zero" as a result. GM discovered, when the All Season radials appeared in the earlier '80s with their blockier tread designs, that to get normal wear, it was necessary to rotate the tires with EACH oil change. Later tread designs and OEM specs put the toe-in as close to Zero as possible. Which possibly was helped by harder suspension bushings and steering linkage joints with less deflection built into them? The increased caster will result in the outer tire having negative camber in a turn, which as the car leans, will keep the outer tire more vertical to the road surface. "Bracing" it against the turn so to speak, rather than leaning over on the outer edge (which will decrease cornering performance). Similarly, the inside wheel will exhibit positive camber, for the same reason. BOTH front wheels being more vertical to the road surface can help steering response. As noted, the rear track bar bushings are a somewhat over-looked/not considered factor in the handling of GM or similar rear coil spring suspended vehicles. As can be the rear axle control arm bushings, too. One thing which Russ did not mention was "polyurethane suspension bushings" to replace the OEM Rubber bushings. From what I've figured out, there is a reason for that recommendation not being there. The OEM engineers needed rubber in some places to absorb forces before they got to the body structure. There are places designed to absorb/dissipate suspension road forces, whether in the suspension, the frame/chassis, mountings thereof, or the body structure itself. In a bod/frame construction car, the desire was to keep these things isolated closer to their origin, for the best riding/driving experience for the passengers. Most of the front cornering forces are absorbed by the lower control arm mounts, whereas, as mentioned, the upper control arm mounts are more locational in nature. Using the harder polyurethane items sends forces normally absorbed by the OEM rubber items to places that were not designed to deal with them, by observation. Which can cause issues with OTHER parts of the total body structure, over time, as a result. One thing I might mention is that Russ's recommendations can also work on almost any vehicle, whether radial tires or not. I've also had good luck with running tire inflation pressures which mimic the basic vehicle's weight distribution. I started with 30 frt/28 rear (for a basic 55/45 f/r weight distribution). With bias ply tires, when I'd turn the wheels side to side, while stopped, the resulting rubber pattern on the concrete was a full patch, rather than having a light patch in the middle. With 28psi being the "70mph+" inflation recommendation, with 24psi being for the "soft ride/minimum load" recommendation. More inflation, less tire body flex as it rolled. Longer tire life, too. The tread wore "flat", by observation. Those were my experiences . . . proceed at your own risk. Just some thoughts, NTX5467
  4. (Camber, Caster, and Toe-In?)
  5. I was looking at one of those click-bait deals about the new 2020 cars. Volvo has one sleek, Jag-esque COUPE that looks gorgeous. Volvo, who made the square/boxy cars in the '70s (save for the P1800)! IF GM management hadn't gotten flaky enough to disavow what the two young designers did in designing the pre-Avenir Buick COUPE, then it could be said that Volvo was copying Buick! Or possibly it was that Buick concept which gave the Volvo people the idea for their car? Or perhaps those two designers went to Volvo? NTX5467
  6. When the end of the Park Avenue line was imminent AND loyal/existing PA/LeSabre customers realized that, many drove hundreds of miles to our dealership to get one of the last ones. Even after they were gone, many still trickled in as trades. The Buick dealer body wanted a new name for a new car they could advertise as "Come See The NEW Buick". Which was the vehicle called "Lucerne". Which turned out to be not quite as bad (in some parts of the country where "Lucerne" was a quality private-brand of supermarket dairy products) as Lacrosse was in Canado . . . for a model name choice. As much as I wanted to like that car, it really wasn't that bad as such, just that the lines didn't have any "Buick" in them past the front grille. I tried to determine how to pus a SeeepSpear on the side, in colors, or some chrome and hash marks on the deck lid between the tail lights, but nothing really "worked" or would have looked very well. Maybe now with the added capabilities of the "vehicle wrap" vendors, something might be possible. At the time, in another forum, some (apparently younger) posters didn't like that it didn't have a manual trans. Never did hear that comment in other Buick-related forums! I will concur that Buick needs a halo vehicle, just like the coupe concept of a few years ago. Done by two younger designers, which could have been produced on a Camaro platform. BUT as upper management apparently didn't approve OR approve of it, it was just a styling exercise to see what some designers could do!! It was a shame that they didn't see the value in having such a car with a Buick nameplate on it. An upscale coupe to be a less expensive alternative to a Jaguar, for example. Then came Avenir. Another concept we all liked and could see a good-sized market for. But it, too, was dismissed by GM management as "an exercise". With that name applied to later high-trim interiors of some Buicks, only to fade away in a year or so. Nobody understands that name, I suspect. How GM approved of letting "somebody/new hire" manage Cadillac, in an apparent "do your thing" approach, without real apparent oversight, is a classic example of upper management "FAILS", to me. To be sure, the CT6 (is that code for "Cadillac Touring, 6 cyl"?) has some very innovative (and expensive) tech in it's platform construction. A more complex extension of "lighter and stronger", but obviously more complex to manufacture, I suspect. Light enough to let the base Turbo 4cyl do a decent job of moving the car, easier still for the twin-turbo V-6, too. With some styling cues from the Cadillac Sixteen. When the Chevy Tahoe came out, it happened to coincide with the demise of the Chevy Caprice models. The Tahoe had enough passenger/luggage space for 4 people and a week's vacation. Or a weekend trip to the casinos? AND it was unabashedly rear wheel drive! Many who still wanted a rwd vehicle seemed to gravitate toward the rad truck-chassis vehicles, from what I saw. Then the flood of CAR BASED utility vehicles bring us up to current times. The problem seems to be that "sedans" don't allow for sufficient utility functions for many purchasers. The CUVs do. The other thing is that if you take a modern "smooth-contoured" sedan, put a more vertical rear glass contour to the roof, then you really see how short the cars are, with their short deck lid. Even the Mercedes models! So those "aerodynamic" lines hide their shortness as the single chrome around the windows tend to imply "length", visually. Which leaves us with the Chrysler 300 and "Burnout/Doughnut King" Dodge Charger SEDANS. At least for now. But look at what even VOLVO is selling! BMW, too! And most other import brands. FOUR DOOR sedans which many claim American buyers won't buy! As I've said before, when the USA brands exit a market because they are "uncompetitive", the import brands fill that void. History repeats itself! NTX5467
  7. I will certainly concur that GM has done a very suboptimal job with Cadillac, of late. They hired a formal Audi guy to reform things and he was a complete failure, from what I could see. PLUS getting the dealer body up in arms about the things he wanted to do (even putting smaller dealers with "virtual test drives" rather than having real inventory on the lot!). PLUS a new image renovation of existing dealer facilities, it seems. He's now gone, thankfully! The Cadillac XTS is tied to the Chevy Impala and Buick Lacrosse, I believe. Those name plates are destined to be deleted in the near future, I believe. As for the last Gens' Lacrosse, it might have looked good, but was lacking, to me. Not enough interior lateral room for the size of the outside body, to me. I felt cramped sitting in one. I'm not tall or extremely rotund, either! My right leg was against the left hand side of the console as I sat in the driver's seat. To it's credit, the body structure was better than the prior Lacrosse/Regal. The engine ran much stronger than the old 3800, too. But the car it replaced was not that "bad" either! So there was improvement. Only thing was that GM was going through a period when it didn't know where to "put things" for various cabin functions. I had to get the owner's manual out to see how to adjust the radio speaker balance and tone controls! The speedometer markings were confusing, also. I could spend a lot of bytes describing how GM marketing has been substandard since the first "Not Your Father's Oldsmobile" campaign. It completely discredited all of the famous and neat Oldsmobiles of prior times, in one feld swoop! Sometimes, those who approve these things don't consider the consequences, just that "It's different", it seems. To me Oldsmobile could have been saved, with a small bit of repositioning their advertising (forget about Lexus and Infinity, but worry about scrappy Chrysler, for example, at the time). Position the Intrigue more against the Lincoln LS, for example, too, or the similar Jaguar model. Nothing major involved, JUST A CAR PERSON to make the decisions. But there had been a "parade" though the Olds front office since about 1992, when GM had a financial reckoning of impending doom if something was not done. Products were delayed a year, with Olds seeming to get hurt worse than other GM divisions in the process, unfortunately. The Chevy Impala is tied to a Cadillac platform, which makes it a nicer car, BUT also increases the price point it must sell at in the process. A $40K Impala replaces a $30K Impala? Similar with the Cruze replacing the Cobalt. The Cruze is a nice car by comparison, but was significantly more expensive than the Cobalt. It's as if nobody considered these things when they approved them?? Or were these seeming management blunders a way to orchestrate the demise of these vehicle models to fit someone's agenda??? One way you can see the future coming is to look at the sales brochures. The last T-bird multi-seat couipes' sales lit got dull and thin. Ford knew that platform's tooling had a shortening life, so they had to let the cars die slowly. The Lincoln Mark went first, then the 'Bird and Cougar, letting the Cougar live long enough for a "__th Anniversary Edition" model. Toward the end of Camaro production in Canada, the brochures got stale. With the requisite Camaro state trooper picture of a Mustang GT driver pulled over by one, EACH year. The cars got fewer upgrades to the interior, so it was all "stale". But when the Camaro faithful rose up and complained, THEN Chevy put some money into the later sales brochures, with some really neat picture spreads, started to network with the major Camaro clubs, etc. So, that whole deal was orchestrated, it seems. As a reason to delete the car from production due to "lower sales", by observation. Everyone wants an SUV? Funny that the import branes still build "sedans" as their main product. GM and Ford are now much heavier on SUVs than sedans, by comparison. Perhaps if there were some really good sedans, things might be different? Or can't GM and Ford compete the smaller car wars anymore? With Opel gone, GM lost its primary small car machine, globally. IF it weren't for the loyal Buick buyers in China, we probably would not have Buick today. As hard as that might be to conceive, that's what the Task Force determined during the bankruptcy "discovery mode" of things. Many on this side of the water felt that Pontiac should have survived and Buick let go, it seems, but at that time, Pontiac had NO real product in the mill, just variations of everybody else's vehicles. So it was easier and less disruptive for Pontiac to go away, unfortunately. Back to the original comments which started this thread . . . other GM divisions have already deleted their names from the "ends" of their vehicles. Putting logos and trim levels on the rear end. BUT the Model Names on the front side doors . . . WHERE THERE'S ROOM TO PUT THEM. To me, that's the real reason . . . not enough WIDTH in the smaller vehicles to put the Logo AND Names on the rear end of the cars. Just not wide enough any more. AND, in the process, another way to mimic what many import brands have been doing for years. It seems that many of GM's marketing and model decisions have been flawed, in retrospect, for the past (almost) 30 years. Which have led us to where we are today. FEW seem to understand that when one of the USA brands tends to vacate a particular vehicle segment, the IMPORT brands fill that void, even taking it over in the process. That's not going to change, either. Once lost, much harder to regain it. I'm not sure that anybody at GM understand that as they seem to be more concerned with other issues at the present time. LIke what's the next sales rebate product going to be? Just some thoughts, NTX5467
  8. What is the purpose of the coating? Part of the uv filtering? I remember the "fluidic control sweep" of the defroster vent, side-to-side, rather than in a dedicated place as most other cars. NTX5467
  9. In many cases, the "Revs/Mile" info is in the sizing information for particular tires in the "Specs" section of the particular tire on the www.Tirerack.com website. There is a comparison device on the Miata website, too, where you put in info on the current tire size and then the info for the new tire size. A nice graphic to show you what's generally going on, too. I've seen a similar tool in other places, too, but the first place was on the Mazda Miata ehthusiasts' website. In general, a P215/75R-15 or P225/70R-15 tire size (replaced the old "G" size designation . . . G78-15 and G70-15 respectively) is in the 750-754 revs/mile range. Check the GM service manual for the OEM-supplied tire sizes for the car. W.hich should have been P-Metric sizing. NTX5467
  10. GM used the "ratio boxes" until the electronic clusters started to come online in the later '80s, cars included. There were some of the '80s years where the number of teeth on the drive and driven gear pretty much doubled from earlier years. Which should have increased accuracy, I suspect. When I put factory '78 Z/28 15" tires/wheels on my '77 Camaro Type LT, after much research in the speedo gear charts in the parts book, I determined that taking the 1.05 ratio box off of the 14" set-up would make the speed/distance correct for the 15" factory set-up. And it worked just as suspected! When our Delco Radio Warranty service station started to do speedometer work, I would look at the Delco Speedometer manual. I was surprised at the +3/-2 accuracy spec, but when I discovered that varying the magnetism in the bar magnet was a hit/miss trial/error situation, that wide of a spec made a bit of sense to me. The variance would allow for the lower speeds (in town) and the moderate speeds (highway driving), with the greatest accuracy desired on the highway, it seemed. Genuine police car speedometers were marked "Calibrated". I ordered two new ones for my '80 Chrysler Newport, while I could still get them. Just wanted them for the higher speed numbers on them, rather than the normal 85mph deal. They came with a "Calibration Card", which listed the indicated speeds would be = or - 1mph from actual velocity. I asked our speedometer repair people about that and he said the added accuracy was from a better clock spring that the speedo needle turned against, which returned it to ":0" when the vehicle stopped. There was also a note on the card that mentioned a particular "vehicle interior ambient temperature range", for the accuracy, too. Just remember, 1 measured mile in 1 minute is 60mph. Enjoy! NTX5467
  11. Both brands have been around for decades. One brand or the other were usually what the local auto supplies carried. Possibly good, so you might choose the least expensive one? Are those bad, too? NTX5467
  12. BEFORE, note "BEFORE" you start worrying about the indicated SPEED, check the ODOMETER for accuracy FIRST! The odometer runs directly off of the speedo cable as it's turned by the speedo gears in the trans tail shaft. A direct link! The speedometer speed needle is run by a spinning bar magnet, whose magnetism turns the other speed cup as the magnet is turned by the speedometer cable. A VARIABLE interface at best. Use the mile markers on the Interstate for a 10 mile constant speed run. or the same distance with a GPS. THEN see how far the odometer is off and adjust the related gearing accordingly. Might need a "ratio box" installed at the base of the speedometer cable, as GM did with MANY vehicles in the '70s and '80s. The ratio is stamped on the side of the adapter. The "traditional" way to do the deal is just to worry about the speed reading. As that change will also affect the odometer reading, you might suddenly see a change in your mpg, with no engine changes. Enjoy! NTX5467
  13. Are the performance issues related to the a/c vent temps or the blower motor speed? What about the foam seals between the gaps where the vents go together? Or is it all flex plastic(?) tubing? Any frost on the underhood a/c lines, which would indicate a POA valve adjustment issue? Just curious, NTX5467
  14. Just observing from the sidelines, every now and then. Y'alls money, y'alls desires, y'alls enjoyment. Have fun! NTX5467
  15. Why not find a HD2500 GM pickup with the same wheelbase and put the Buick Body on top of that chassis? At least his Estate Wagon didn't begin life with a 307 Olds motor in it!!! When it was discovered the wagon might not handle the weight of the Airstream, then a more reasonable plan of action should have been formulated, rather than what ensured? Of perhaps the wagon with trailering options was not really up to the task, regardless of what GM might have claimed? As I recall ONLY the Olds 425s were in the GMC motorhomes, as it used the Toronado drive module. There might have been some durability changes to the cooling system and such, but I don't recall anything to the motor itself. The 403 didn't exist back then. Perhaps a '72 Estate Wagon might have made a better platform to start from? Would have the 455, THM400, heavier rear axle, larger brakes, etc. Add a few re-tuning items to the engine, an external trans cooler, HD shocks and such. Then exercise the gas credit cards!! Or maybe one of the '76 Estate Wagons, with the Delco AM/FM Stereo/CB/Power Antenna sound systems? NTX5467