NTX5467

The same way that magnetic resonance is transferred from the engine to the heater core on some Park Avenues at a particular rpm, making the heater core huuummmmmmm. Buick TSB on that!

The last company truck I had was a '23 Silverado Custom, with the standard 2.7L High-Output Turbo 4cyl. 310 horsepower and 430 torque, with the 8-speed GM automatic. When I first heard they put a turbo 4cyl in a 1/2-ton pickup truck, I laughed, back then. After I got that pickup, which had previiously been in our load car fleet for about 4K miles, I looked at the power figures and thought . . . not unlike the base 4bbl 396/325, 383/325, and 390/300 motors of the middle 1960s. Add in the 8-speed lower gear ratios for good measure. Power with much improved fuel economy, was the result. I never did "see what it would do", but in normal driving it certainly ran better than prior 4.3L V-6s and not that much different than 5.3L V-8s in 1/2-ton pickups. THEN I started researching the engine and discovered that it probably has more power left in it, IF anyone might desire it. With a 4-cyl, the twin-volute turbo can work well, with a more uniform flow from the exhaust manifold. In some cases, I could still feel a tinge of turbo lag, but by the time it was starting to be noticed, the trans had downshifted, the "calvary" arrived, and the right rear tire was starting to make noise. Which, not wanting to look like an over-aged hot rodder, I backed off the throttle a little bit to keep the rear tire quiet. That truck, to me, needed a PTrac! THAT would be fun! AND . . . all of this in a 5Klb 4-dr short bed pickup truck! I was more interested in what MPG it would produce, as I had already determined what the prior 5.3Ls could do in my freeway drives with cyl deactivation and such. It was close enough to 25mpg that it would be tolerable for an every-day commute as an only vehicle, too. Several YouTube videos from GM on the engine and others from actual owners proved that GM Powertrain did a great job with that engine. I would not be afraid to own one, either. Which makes the smaller Colorado (with the same engine) in the same power output a more appealing vehicle, too! Forget the off-road versions, think "Sports Truck" that is more comfortable on a road course than on a rocky trail! Not unlike the prior Dakota 5.9L R/T pickups! THEN I discovered that little 2.7L Turbo motor can produce 27psi of boost! YIKES! Other than the twin-volute turbo, obviously, computer modulation of the waste gate/boost curve is a key factor in the production of 400 lbs/ft of torque from about 1500rpm upward. Which can also mean "not a lot of throttle input" for "interesting" acceleration and greater ultimate fuel economy. Great job, GM Powertrain!!! NTX5467

The beauty of the 1960 Buick is that it looks like it's moving, in "stop action", when it is sitting still. Great styling! NTX5467

Not having researched things, BUT were all ST300s ONLY behind 2bbl V-8s with the 4bbl V-8s needing something a bit looser? Key point would be to determine why that ST300 converter was "too loose" behind the bigger engine. Did fuel economy go down? Did the driver always change throttle positions as he drove down the road? Several factors involved. As to the Firebird w/Olds 403 . . . I owned one of those cars for approximately 24 hours, once. I was getting a bit unpleased with some things on repair on my '77 Camaro Type LT 305, so I noticed a '79 TA, Red with t-tops, on our used car lot. I went up to investigate it, with the intent of trading my Camaro for it. The speedo and tach being swapped in location from the Camaro's locations could take some getting used to, but otherwise the car was pretty much what I would have ordered back then (other than the color). I did notice that the factory Goodyear radials would soon need replacement, all around. I also noticed one of the Prestone "flush adapters" already in the heater hose, too. With the 403, it would lay two stipes of rubber, as PTrac was standard on TAs back then. So I signed the papers and arranged to do the trade the next day. Then, when I was getting the Camaro cleaned out that night, I got a bit sentimental and looked at what I had and decided I would only be getting more car payments. Plus the unanswered question about the flush adapter being in the mix so soon. NOT to forget how much trouble it would be to just check the air filter! So, I backed-out of that deal. My mother later discovered that her student (the prior owner) liked to "lay rubber" with the car, which explained why all four tires needed to be replaced at 20K miles from new. I think I was better off, personally, for my situation. I always liked those Firebirds, for many reasons, and still do. But my desire to own one has passed, as I still have my trusty Camaro (with some upgrades and enhancements along the way). I always liked Oldsmobile V-8s and respected their engineering as being some of GM's best, with their hierarchy in the GM lineup being near the top, they could do "more expensive" things that Chevrolet or Pontiac (due to cost considerations) generally could not, back then. Obviously, emissions tuning hurt them more than some other similar motors, but the basic design always seemed to be good and durable. As to the Olds 307 and 260, both "good" engine sizes, just that by that time, too much car weight with not enough gear in them to work as they could. With some modern upgrades (including self-learning EFI also controlling the ignition) and an 8-speed automatic behind them, with 3-series gears, I suspect they would perform much better than they did in the "need to get fuel economy days" of the 1980s. OR . . . better optimize the fuel/air mix with an annular discharge venturi carburetor, a true-dual exhaust, dual converter exhaust system (but quiet), with more optimized ignition timing and such, backed by an OD automatic with a bit looser lock-up torque converter. I suspect that might help things all the way around AND be incognito. Enjoy! NTX5467

(Now, why would a classy Riviera be driving on that "dirt road" in the hills if it was not involved in something "sinister"?) Bernie's "crop dusting" could be anywhere, like remote Alaska, headed to a fishing village. Enjoy! NTX5467

Try this to go to the Automotive History Preservation Society website . . . //autohistorypreservationsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/1963-04-MT-BUICK-Riviera-test-1-6.pdf The complete road test, including a picture of how the Turbine Wheels work. For the heavier 1966 GS with 3.42 rear axle ratio . . . //automistorypreservationsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/1966-02-CL-1966-Buick-Riviera-GS-Test-1-5.pdf See if those work, NTX5467

Early '70s, that's recent history . . . until you stop to count the years. Yikes! THEN you stop to consider all of the neat things you've done and then you smile.

I never did see any specs on stall speeds from GM, back then. I do know that the 1977+ Z/28s would all spin their rear wheels against the foot brake at 1800rpm when new. They came with a V-6 torque converter from the factory. On my then-new '77 LT 305 2bbl, it would go to about 1600rpm with no wheel spin against the brake. The V-6 converter was also used behind the L82 Corvettes, which had THM350s behind them. Only things I did see had to do with using 4cyl, 9" or 10" converters for V-8 drag cars, with the highest stall being the 8" Opel torque converter. NTX5467

The turbo cars probably had a looser torque converter, too.

Dale also had a '70 Dart Swinger 340 that was well-finessed as to drivability. It was running better than when new, so he wanted to race it in the NMCA class for it, but needed some better tires. Which was the first contact with Team TA. I had been to some autocrosses and noticed what tires they were running, knowing that those tires had to grip great after the first 20' of travel. Looking at tire specs, I discovered a Z-rated BFG tire that fit the D70-14 size specs perfectly. I told Dale and he talked to his team TA contact. So he contacted our Discount Tire operative and got a set ordered. When they arrived and were installed, they looked great and "just right size" on the car. After some break-in miles, he took it to the track. It shot out of the hole as some claimed they sounded like slicks, so they crowded around the car to see which slicks he had. No slicks, just "normal" BFG radials. LOL They did not know about Z-rated tires at that time, but they learned. Enjoy! NTX5467

Tire paint? Back when the BFG Drag Radials had just come out, I had two friends who raced in the factory stock nostalgia class. One with a '70 Hemi 'Cuda and the other one with a '71 Challenger R/T 6-Pack car. I had been working with Dale (the Hemi 'Cuda) with getting some incognito tires for his car, which were better than stock and within the durometer specs for the NMCA rules. We had a car club friend who worked for Discount Tire (who could source BFG tires). Dale had also talked to "Team TA" at BFG, too. When the Drag Radials came out, Dale got a pair, but wanted to disguise them from Jeff (Challenger). The Drag Radials were blackwalls with no white letters, so Dale got some white latex house paint and painted-in the BFG letters on the sidewalls. Looked a big jagged up close, but at 20ft, not bad. So they got to their next race and pulled up beside each other. Dale did a dry chirp then staged. When the light got to green, Dale was gone. Jeff didn't know what happened. One give-away was that the softer rubber of the Drag Radials picked up gravel on teh way back to the timing tower. Unusual! Which Jeff noticed and then realized he "had been had". We all got a good laugh out of that. THEN, about a week later we got a recon report that a freight truck had delivered several sets of Drag Radials to Jeff's father's repair shop. LOL. Those were some fun times! NTX5467

Back in the later 1950s, my favorite uncle lived east of Houston and worked the night shift as a maintenance tech at a petro-chemical plant. He had two young daughters and a wife. He drove Oldsmobiles or Buicks. The car he had back then was an Olds 88, mid-50s. In buying tires, he opted for the blackwalls and then put Port-O-Walls on it, with the orientation that he could change them to the next car he bought a few years later. He also liked to drive fast, as did his wife. One morning, when he got up, his wife asked what happened to one of the whitewalls. Answer . . . it must have flown off on the way home. On the typical two-lane road lined with trees, no telling where it ended up OR how high it went before it returned to earth. Back then, I always got a kick out of that story. Plus the possible look on the tire guy's face when my uncle showed up needing a new whitewall. Enjoy! NTX5467

One time back in about 1983, I walked across the service drive of the local Porsche+Audi dealer to get to the parts department. I waksed past a 924 that had been hammered and it was only a few years old. I thought "Some people buy a Porsche and treat it like a Volkswagen". Similarly "Some people buy a Cadillac and treat it like a Chevy, then complain when it 'falls apart'". Some people, by observation, do not understand "the machinery" and how to make it perform its best. When they try to make it do something it was not really designed to do, it is "junk" (to them, as if THEY were the ones to bestow such a title blithely). The BEST driver/vehicle "partnerships" happen when the driver learns what the vehicle "likes" and then exploits those attributes to the mutual benefit of all, as to normal driving with some "verve" every so often. Did you hear the story about how Rolls started to use the GM THM400 automatic, then tried to improve it? PM me for details. Take care, NTX5467

For the record, I always liked that body series of Toro and Eldo much better than the similar Rivieras. The noted rpm at 70mph was typical of the time. Even the current GM cars and trucks are at the 1700rpm, usually, but with a deeper low gear, they move out quicker off-idle yet still hit that lower cruising rpm level. Knowing the heritage of the Olds V-8, getting one to 200K miles with normal maintenance should be an easy thing to do. If I can get a small block Chevy past 500K miles, an Olds should be able to do much more than that, I suspect. When I replaced the timing chain at 92K miles (for insurance purposes and to upgrade the cam a bit), I put in a Cloyes Plus Roller chain set rather than a stock replacement kit. Nice looking car! In the "traditional luxury" orientation of things. Take care, NTX5467

In many tires, for over 10+ years, they have used the 2-ply polyester cord sidewall, with 2-ply steel belts on top of that, THEN a 1-ply nylon "cap" on top of all of that. The original radials of the 1960s, their outer two steel belts were at 90 degrees to the polyester plies which went bead-to-bead. That gave them the "radial feel" on the highway, but also contributed to the more noticeable "impact" non-absorption at lower speeds. Then when the P-Metrics came around, with their 35psi inflation pressure, the outer steel belts were angled a few degrees for better impact absorption, but still have the benefits of radials. Then, in order to have better alleged high speed durability, the outer nylon cap was added to make the tread more stable, or something like that. I put some MIchelin Defenders on my 2005 LeSabre when I determined the Sears Michelin WeatherWise tires on it (when I bought it) were 10 years old. As I drive it sporadically, letting it sit for months, sometimes, on that first drive, it can take up to 50 miles for them to roll smooth again. Once smooth, no issues. Keeping them near max inflation pressure tends to help. The same brand and model of tires on my 2005 Impala do not display the "after sitting" behavior as it is the daily-use vehicle. NTX5467

On the Nissan Altimas (when they were new, about 5 yrs ago) worked just fine with their 4 cyl engine. If you just drove them normal, things worked well. I'm not sure if their EPA mileage was high enough that they didn't need the "high tech" startstop software of is they were too cost conscious to use it? In any event, a nice-driving car with good handling and power. I think they programmed things so that a small "shift" happened, which could be felt by the driver so that they knew what was going on. With the little detents in the throttle pedal going along with that deal. Make the passengers/driver feel like it's a normal automatic transmission when it isn't. NTX5467

Grade Retard was also a feature of the Chevy TurboGlide. IT was probably a Chevy version of DynaFlow as it was "on the converter" for acceleration, passing, and such. A huge amount of heat was generated as the stator in the converter uses the fluid to flow against itself for the retarding functions. IF the units were used normally, they lasted a long time. My uncle had a '61 Impala 283 that he bought new, which had a TG in it. It ran well and never "shifted". The recent Nissan Altimas I've rented had CVTs in them. They did well. The interesting thing is that there are several pre-programmed "gears" in the software. When depressing the accel pedal, there are also "detents" which signal a downshift into a lower gear position. There seems to be a max torque limit the CVT can handle. Nissans have it but Infinitis use normal geared transmissions. Hill Descent Control was introduced on BMW X5s, as I recall. At a consumer ride/drive event we went to, their method of demonstrating it was to drive up a ramp, then over the top of a secured tractor trailer trailer, then down the other side. Quite a ride!!! If the driver touches the brake pedal, it disengages. Seems like it was set for a max speed downhill of 10mph? When engines started to have more than 200 horsepower (when that much power was perceived to be the limit which a fwd vehicle could have, possibly due to the fact that all of the fwd automatic transaxles were built to that limit, a new tweak of the software to allow such higher power and deliver a smooooth shift. That software tweak was to retard the spark timing during the shifts, to decrease or eliminate "shift shock" in the transmission. This was in about 1982. As the ECM knew what the transmission was doing, the tweak to decrease the ignition advance during the split second the transmission shifted just took some extra "code" to make that happen. Still used with the modern 8+ speeds, too! On a newer Chevy pickup, on partr throttle acceleration, you can hear the exhaust get quiet a second before the shift and stay quiet for a second after the shift, as the rate of deceleration does not decrease. It can be heard best during warm-up, when accelerating from a stop, by observation. Take care, NTX5467

Might start watching the online prices at NAPA for filters several months prior to the sale. Just to make sure it is really "a sale", for general principles. Check Rock Auto for a reference, too. Enjoy! NTX5467

In the several Chargers I've rented with the ZF 8-speed, I was impressed with how smooth it operated. Just a "RCH" more accel pressure and it downshifted, rpm increase a few hundred rpm, ease past the slower vehicle, hit "Resume" on the cruise, and "done" and back to enjoying the drive. On the GM 8-speeds, after the first few shifts, nothing left to feel, as if they were invisible. I'm thinking that the main reason these newer automatics fail is their OEM programming more than anything else. Our heavy line shop foreman took a troublesome 6-speed (when they were all we had) on a test drive with the GM scan tool laptop hooked up. He noticed that going up a mild hill, the torque converter was in "50% slip" mode! That was when we were having lots of torque converter issues. AND those torque converters must weigh 60lbs or so! Instead of modifying the software, they beefed-up the torque converter. Makes one wonder who's calling the shots there? I have read many glowing reports of how great the ZF 8-speed is in performance and durability, so any USA OEM having transmission issues with that transmission raise questions to me. We saw some of the 305 cam issues, but not quite as many as some others did, apparently. We saw more '78 vintage 305s need a valve job at 30K miles from cyl head issues on their then-new "lightweight" casting cyl heads. But like other warranty issues, once the main spike in numbers went down (on the backside of the bell curve), that was it. Or the remaining vehicles had miled-out of the OEM warranty. As "bad" as the warranty issues were back then, outside of loosing customers for the carlines, those warranty repairs generated a good bit of cash flow into the dealers. But at what ultimate cost? As long as the dealers did their job of keeping the customers feeling like they were doing all they could do, the customers usually stayed around. Yet Oldsmobile customers expected better from their cars, I suspect. Chevy owners probably suspected that everybody was having issues. As Buick owners would usually trade the car at 3yrs old and get another one, by observation. Also, it seemed that GM could get away with those component failures, but if it had been Chrysler, they would have been out of business from all of the negative publicity. The "power" of General Motors back then. NTX5467

The first OEM applications for the THM200 was on A/G platforms with 4cyl or V-6 motors. In other words, it was originally designed for low-torque lighter vehicles. Which also meant "lower power consumption" (as there was not a lot of power to consume from thoer earlier "MPG" engines). When Buick put it behind their turbo motors, I knew it was an uncocked grenade, but with some beefing, it did pretty good, all things considered. Still, an area Olds dealer's parts guy said that the THM200s sometimes grenaded racking off of the transport trucks, as to their longevity and build quality. They stocked the individual clutch frictions, as their service rep would only pay for what was broken (as the transmissions were so new), whereas we stocked the GM overhaul kit as it was less expensive and had the same things in it, with ONE part number. Obviously, somebody fixed the weaknesses and increased the strength as they later held up being modified GNs with no problems. We didn't see that many warranty issues after the first year or so, but it appears that any of the performance GN people had already broken theirs' and were seeking out a non-dealership transmission shop instead. I was shocked to see that little trans behind the modified Turbo cars, BUT it obviously had lower power consumption than a stronger THM350 or otherwise. Then there was the PowerMaster brake booster that also seemed to come out of that Turbo program too. Quite ingenious, but it was problematic and nobody "in the field" understood the "empty" brake fluid reservoir. It was also used on the B-car wagons of several model years. As a result, the salvage yards were quickly depleted of vac boosters on Caprice wagons. There were some HydroBoost conversions done, too. Years later, TCI started selling some beefier internals such that a 454 Chevy street rod could use them successfully, on the OD models. THEN . . . GM changed the order codes for "3 Speed Automatic" from M38 (THM350) to MX0 for "3-speed automatic" so we didn't know which transmission would be installed in a '78 Caprice 305 4bbl. Which generated some customer concerns due to a loss of shift smoothness, by comparison. A minor concern as our customers loved those Caprice 305 4bbls. As good as the THM Division's reputation might have been, their products made us a lot of warranty money. In later years, the Service Replacement Transmission Assembly (SRTA) GM crate reman transmissions made us lots of money, not related to the gear ratio spread between 1-2, but from things like "lack of lube to the rear tailshaft area when running in "D" rather than "OD" at lower speeds. You had to know the Julian date of when the trans was built to know what parts would be needed! At one time, our transmission guy had 3 lifts and 4 stalls as we had that much volume in doing SRTA THM700s. 3-4 a day! And now, decades later, there are more warranty transmission issues than we could have foreseen back then! But like back then, it was not just GM having issues that way. Most of the recent issues seem, from what I could tell, are in the programming of the transmission. Apparently there are some aftermarket programs which let the transmission work "more normally" than GM desired, with the end result that after the vehicle gets out of warranty, some customers get the aftermarket programs installed and we never see them again, as they have not more transmission-related performance issues any more! In driving them, it's as if they have major inputs buffered far too much (obviously to protect the transmission from itself??), which causes other issues that we see and are addressed with TSB re-programs that don't really work. The issue with THAT is that they probably can't change the program too much, which can be related to EPA emissions and MPG certifications, without re-certifying the vehicles. But as long as GM pays the bills, we had to do what they said to do, as the customers saw little change and still were not pleased. From what I could see, they are scabbing trying to meet EPA regulations via how the transmission does its work. The original Dex VI fluid for the 6-speeds was originally semi-syn, but became full-syn later on due to apparent heat issues from torque converter modulation of the lock-up clutch. Then came the 8+ speeds and TWO other new ATFs, one with Mobil's name on it. "LV" for "low viscosity"? When ATF in general is close to 10W viscosity? Must be some trick friction modifiers in that fluid, too! When we got the 8-spee automatics, I always suspected it was a ZF-licensed product, but in more recent times, I realized it is not. Although the Chrysler ZF transmission have some similar service issues, it seems. The difference in the GM 8-speeds is that some of the valve body functions are BEFORE the gearset? Reason is that their design can result in quicker shift executions, which CAN affect cars operating under race conditions on that German race track everybody always talks about. Where a nanosecond longer shift time might mean the difference in having the crown that year or not. Quicker shifts due to shorter tubes/fluid circuits, it appears. AND . . . those 6+ speed automatics weigh past 200lbs! Lots of rotating mass in there! Sorry for the length . . . NTX5467

Definitely had to find some positives in order to sell an Olds 307 back then. I suspect it had "more cam" and "more cfm in the carb" than the earlier 303 did, but that 303 was also pulling a deep low gear HydraMatic that got it out of the hole much quicker so the lack of low rpm torque was not really noticed. We sold massive amounts of Caprice 305 4bbl cars, starting in 1977 model year. They all ran well and were very good road cars in TX. But going up Ranger Hill on I-20 headed toward Abilene, they were no match for a 400cid Pontiac 2bbl with highway gears. As to pickup trucks, our guys were good about putting the rear axle ratio in perspective to the use of the pickup truck. Few other dealers did that, by observation, especially after fuel economy became more of an issue. I once saw a '72 Dodge D-100 that a plumber brought in for an oil change. He complained about it having no power. The bed was full of misc. items. It was a 400 2bbl with a 2.76 rear axle. Needed a 3.21 to do things better. Many times, the deeper gears would improve fuel economy on pickups that "worked". I was always amazed at the mass of vac hoses on the Olds 307s. A major undertaking to change valve cover gaskets, unless you could loosen the "harness" enough to snake them out from under it. ALL emission control hoses, usually. By comparison, the earlier 1972 Cutlass 350s, when "de-smogged" (as was propular back then) would usually do 20mpg on the highway after such things. A big improvement from OEM specs. Just made those '72 vintage Cutlasses more or a sweeter car. Back to the Olds 307 in a mid-'80s Buick Estate Wagon . . . a customer had one sent to us to see if it was running as it should. I took it on a test drive on the highway. Going up a slight grade at 60mph, I suddenly went to WOT. Transmission downshifted, carb opened up (heard by the secondaries' "roar"), but mph did not increase one bit. I thought . . . this car, with 5 people, and towing a boat in Colorado would be a disaster . . . but that's what Buick built. Yikes! It WAS a very luxurious car, just needed "more engine".

I totally concur on the Olds 307 being one of the least powerful 165 horsepower motors GM built back then. Especially in a B-body station wagon (EMPTY!). Not sure how the Cutlass (with the "garbage truck" shifter in the console) did. BTAIM The '79 Toronado Trofeos were great looking cars, to me. Add the 403 and they would be much better. At the time, their multi-color instrument cluster was industry-leading. When combined with the factory cell phone option, it could call the police to report itself stolen, from what the presenters said at the Dallas New Car Show that year. The similar Eldo was a great looking car, too. The "soft" Rivieras just did not trip my trigger. NO problem with the powertrain's integrity and longevity, or the interior comfort, but that exterior styling could have been a bit better, to me. But then I never was in their desired customer demographic then or now. I'm waiting for the 1980s Riviera (converted) convertibles to fly upward from their $12K plateau. I might not live that long. Have fun! NTX5467

I used the gauges in my earlier years to ensure things were "just right" on the float level. Usually, NO adjustment was needed or they were usually very close, so only a mild tweak was needed, if any. In my more recent times, there is usually a witness line on the float from it being in gas (at the correct level). This line parallels the flat part of the air horn housing very accurately. If it's close, I just run with it. So far, no issues. Just my experiences, NTX5467

How long has this been going on? Did it start suddenly or has it been building to this point? Just curious, NTX5467

I suspect that finding that glass might be like hen's teeth, already built and such. Yet I suspect that any residential glass company might cut one for you, then you adhesive it in. GM never sold mirror glasses as a separate item from the mirrors. Except for the stick-on convex rh mirror accessory items, which were installed over the existing mirror, for specific types of mirrors. As minor as they might seem, they worked well as long as you learned how to use them. I put one on my then-new '77 Camaro back then and it's still in place. It is thicker in the middle than on the edges, "convex" built to adhere to a flat surface. Later versions were not that way. Might the "distortion" you are seeing actually be a bit of convex shape of the glass? Also interesting that looking at the OEM mirror with the window rolled up, the window glass is causing the mirror to appear to supply a distorted vision? Just some thoughts and observations, NTX5467