NTX5467

In some situations, the glove box cylinder did not have the full set of tumblers in them as the doors did, like only three of so rather than 5. Might be better to remove the back seat and use "an extension" to reach the trunk latch from the inside Sometimes, there is a dedicated slot on the inside of the latch which can be indexed with a medium-wide flat blade screwdriver on a broomstick extension to trip the latch from the inside? The key code should be stamped on the case of the cylinder assy, in many cases. As a note, "modern" keys of the same letter shank code can be used in the earlier cyinders, although they might be a little bit thinner. Door and ignition, just that on the ignition keys, the square corners will need to be ground such that the key will fully insert into the earlier "eared" ign cylinder. Keep us posted on your progress, NTX5467

Thanks for the link to Sterns' podcasts! LOTS of interesting interviews there. Another rabbit hole to traverse! NTX5467

Great looking car! New rubber will make it better. Congrats, NTX5467

And . . . all the years, I've been thinking that a 1050cfm EFI throttle body was too big!

One of our Mopar club guys built a 528cid 440-block motor. Used two ThermoQuads for it. I remember TV Tommy Ivo's multi-engine Buick dragster, but NEVER saw anything about those 5-carb intakes . . . not even in Hot Rod Magazine, back then. Would have had to have used those little chome-top louvered air cleaners. Much less the linkage to run all of them! NTX5467

Good possibility, BUT considering that they are separated from the throttle bores by a gasket, might that gasket also show signs of such seepage, as the fuel would congregate in those hollow areas, over time? Time to get out the J-B Weld and seal them up like the well seals on a QJet? NTX5467

Trying to overpower the fuel pump aroma with the leather aroma?

In watching that video again, a few things stood out. Other than the fuel tank and refueling items, that exhaust did not sound "stock". I suspect the suspension was of the "Export" variety in order to run that fast without feeling as soft as the normal suspension might at those speeds, much less at normal 65mph speeds. In one of the radio transmissions, the "level check" stated that the manifold vacuum was about 4.5" Hg, which would mean the engine was not at WOT, but close and also probably into the power enrichment area of the fuel curve. As atf temp was about 210 degrees F. Neat to see all of that stuff going on! NTX5467

Think "oil mist" in the crankcase, from windage and how much oil is thrown off from the main and rod bearings' "leakage". 3.23 gears with later H78x15 tires is right at 25mph/1000 rpm. With 2.76 gears, it gets to right at 29.0mph/1000rpm, but seems like a 2.93 axle was available, so that might be closer to 27mph/1000rpm. NOT allowing anything for the DynaFlow's torque converter slippage. Somewhere in my archives, I have a VHS copy of that tape, but it's been ages since I looked at it. Quality was not that good, but good for the time. Although I was young at the time, I don't recall hearing of Buicks having issues with high-speed travel. My uncle had a '60 LeSabre 4-dr ht and he and his wife liked to drive fast on the highway. He did have some issues with the Carter fuel pump's internal valves failing until he finally had to buy a new one. The ears holding the valves would straighten-out, rendering it useless and resulting in a trip interruption. He carried a rebuild kit in the trunk and could do the "fix" there. One day, it happened on their way back from a trip and he didn't have a rebuild kit with him. A guy in a late model Oldsmobile took him to the nearest town to get a rebuild kit. After that, he got approval to spend the $20.00 or so for a new fuel pump. End of issues. That was in about 1964 or so. I suspect that driving that Buick must have been exciting and boring at the same time? NTX5467

Perhaps they had an auxiliary oil tank they used, not unlike a dry-sump system? Seems like it was in the Grump Jenkins engine book that they discovered that with a dry-sump system installed on a race motor, that a small block Chevy motor only had about 1/2 quart "in the engine" with the engine running. Measuring the amount of oil in the oil tank. As to oil level checks with the dipstick and the engine running? Probably not accurate considering all of the oil mist slinging around within the crankcase? Have to make sure the dipstick was clear of the spinning counterweights, too. NTX5467

I'm going to suspect the cruising rpm is closer to 4000rpm @ 100mph. I recall that the car came in every so often for an engine oil check, but no mention of how many quarts of motor oil was consumed. Interesting "in flight refueling"! NTX5467

O-rings must be compounded for the liquid they seal. Need one fuel-rated if it's in the fuel system. Same for transmission fluid and power steering fluid. Nothing's "universal" although they might all look the same. Glad you made it to Mr. Earl's "shop warming party"! Enjoy! NTX5467

With the referenced item, which will reverse the air flow through the crankcase, what do you propose to use to filter the air going into the crankcase? Just curious, NTX5467

Yes, the referenced seal can work as a gasket for the exhaust manifold. Dirt Track racers use it for header gaskets. Using a reinforced header gasket should not result in a manifold crack. Chevy originally had them for their '55 V-8s, then discontinued their use in later years. Many overhaul gasket sets still had them in them, by observation, even if not needed. The referenced item for the air cleaner just serves the same purpose as the open breather does on other engines. Possibly that particular car had at one time been registered in California, where such might have been necessary to meet their emissions regulations? The crankcase air enters through the breather, then exits via the road draft tube (which needs vehicle speed to operate). In the transition time between a factory-designed pcv system and road draft tubes, Chevrolet had a system which could be easily added-on to their 1967 engines. Basically a cap which went in the place of the draft tube, with a rubber hose connection on its top, asicde from the through-bolt which held it in place. The rubber tube was attached to an inline pcv valve, which was attached to the rr base of the carburetor. Those parts are probably in some repro vendor's catalog at this time, so you can get an idea of if they might work on a Nailhead. OR might Buick have had some similar add-on system? OR might an aftermarket system for the California market be available somewhere? Or you could tap the road draft tube, below any internal baffling, for a hose to go to an inline pcv valve and then to a carburetor intake manifold vac tap? No real need to use the breather as referenced in the picture, unless you might desire to. When the pcv valve is added, the end of the road draft tube can be shortened, then sealed. Again, check and see what might be needed for a California vehicle back then. Seems like Chrysler started using factory pcv valve systems in 1963 or earlier? The pcv valve will be closed (air directed through the internal drilled orifices in the spring-loaded valve) at idle, getting full flow with decreased manifold vac levels (as at or near WOT or under load). Minimal affect upon idle speed or mixture settings, if any at all. Chevy used two pcv valves later on, one for their normal engines and one for the LT-1/L82 Z/28 and Corvette engines. The valve for the HP engines had a purple die where they plugged into the valve cover grommet, with a slightly higher flow rate. I tried it on my '77 Camaro 305 after the cam and intake manifold upgrade, as a tuning device of sorts, but ended up going back with the normal system. I ran across and SAE paper on early pcv work GM did, using two 1961 Chevy Biscayne 6-cyl security patrol vehicles. Trying to determine which flow rates worked best to decrease sludge build-up inside the engines. They determined that using two proposed valves, rather than one, decreased sludge a good bit, but they finally settled on the flow rate that became the production valve flow rate. Seems like it was something like 1cfm, or between 1 and 2 cfm, more toward the l cfm rate? End result, any pcv valve can work OK. Chevy started with their inline valve on the '67 models, then went to the normal ones in '68, the plastic elbow can be removed, if desired. 1966 Chrysler 383s used a metal Stanadyne valve with a curved top connection, later to be replace by the plastic valves. In those earlier systems, the breathers were open and filled with "hogs hair" as a filter. The 1972 Chrysler items had the nipple for the air cleaner attachment with a flame arrestor and filter inside of it. Another project for a long (compared to TX) winter season? NTX5467

Mr. Romer was an interesting car guy. The black Riviera was a GS model that had been lowered 1" for a more sinister look. Also had a 425 2x4bbl engine in it. He showed the car in indoor car shows and also drove it some back in the 1980s. The car also starred in a "Walker, Texas Ranger" episode, shot in Downtown Fort Worth. The day of the filming, he said he arrived at the appointed location to hand over the keys of the car to the production crew. They also explained the time line for their need of the car. Also suggesting some local food/drink establishments he could use to wait in. So he said he chose one and went in for a while. After his meal, he thought he would wander outside to see what was going on. About the time he got to the sidewalk and looked around, he heard some activity and looked to see his black Riv doing a 4-wheel slide around the corner of the Court Building, with the perp leaving the scene of "a crime". With those 2x4bbls gasping for all of the air they could consume. Probably seeing what he was not supposed to see as it happened. Then, when production had finished, he went to the appointed location and met the staff again. They talked a bit, did their business work, and he left. The car apparently none the worse for wear. Who'd ever thought a Buick could or WOULD be driven that way? Jim also had a Turbo GN, also all black. That was his daily driver car. It had also made several trips south to get "enhanced" by the GN guru of the times. Upgrades to powertrain as well as chassis. At a time when the ZR-1 Corvettes and GN turbos were the fastest production street cars being built. One night, he said "what he thought was" a ZR-1 went by him, so he tried to pursue it. That was when the handling dynamics of the Corvette chassis proved to be superior. No body damage, just a scare. Which generated another "trip south". During those times, Jim was a member of our North Texas Chapter, BCA. One of his running buddies was a car broker in the area, who became a stunt driver for some of the "Walker, Texas Ranger" productions. We were at a consumer Ride & Drive event at Texas Stadium. A Buick Zone Rep also came to many of our meetings back then, so he advocated that our chapter members go to the event, which we did. The cars were the new Regals and Regal GS cars, in the late 1990s. Jim's friend and his girlfriend were there. He was changing his position in line so he could drive one of the new GS (supercharged) models. When he got to that car, we heard lots of tire noise on launch and in the corners of the driving course. We chuckled that that Product Presenter in the front seat got a ride he didn't get from other attendees that day. Again, the car was driven in a "non-Buick-like" manner, but one which the chassis was certainly capable of doing. Another of the "fun times" we had in our chapter, back then. The interesting thing was that soon thereafter, CAR AND DRIVER did a comparison test between the Regal GS and the similar Grand Prix GT, and Autobahn Package Olds Intrigue. All had the same Goodyear Eagle GT tires in the same size. The interesting thing was that EACH car's suspension calibrations were different, but the handling numbers were identical. The GP had the "street fighter" feel, the Olds Intrigue was refined (with its 4-stage valved front struts) for a more refined ride, with the Regal GS being in the middle as to handling feel. An extension of "Fast with Class", it seemed. Y'all enjoy! NTX5467

For a bit greater smoothness, try increasing the base idle speed 50rpm.

My reaction to the 5rpm variation is . . . not going to get any better than that. Reason? None of the intake runners are exactly the same in shape, size, or volume. Unlike the modern LS-family motors where no intake runners or exhaust ports are siamesed. Then there is the variation of fuel mixture going through those runners. The reason the original Edelbrock Tarantula (and later Torker) intakes was devised was to make each cylinder receive more identical amounts of mixture, within a 10% variation, which was tighter than the factory dual-plane intakes were doing back then. Then there can be the variability of dwell time for each plug firing. Dwell time which relates to how much charge the coil can build before the signal is given to fire each spark plug. As the engines accumulated mileage, one of the wear points is the breaker cam in the distributor. Nobody ever worried about that until the point gap and dwell readings could not be made to happen together. Once I tried to gap the points in a distributor by using a dial indicator. For information one night, I also checked all 8 of the lobes. YIKES! The variations I found were significant. Each lobe had wear that made each one of them pretty much unique. Not desired, so I went electronic when I got the chance. With a consistent spark and spacing between them, the engine ran smoother. Additionally, each of the spark plug wires are different lengths. Which means different electrical resistances. Which can relate to the strength of the spark that gets to the spark plugs. Knowing, too, that the coil will only produce enough power to fire each individual spark plug. With those differences, each plug gets a different voltage to fire variable amounts of air/fuel mixture injested through ports that are all different. Many things which can be variable in nature. It's a wonder those old engines ran as smooth as they did. Of course, it seemed that the old Ford FE engines had so much metal in their counterweights and pistons that even the a/c compressor cycling would not affect them, by observation. Enjoy! NTX5467

If it's a mixture-related issue, the needle can drift. If it's a miss (dead cyl, burnt valve, etc.) whenever that cyl fires, and "misses", the needle will drop immediately when that happens, then regains its normal reading. Sometimes, it can be a blur.

IF the water is clear, it is condensate from the hot exhaust hitting the cold steel in the exhaust system, no more no less. After the pipes heat up, the hot exhaust flow will evaporate any left in there. About 15 years ago, I could observe new Toyotas as they were driven out of the shop during make ready procedures. New cars. After the cars had run a bit, the first main throttle input would usually result in about a cup of water from the tail pipe. Condensate. IF coolant is leaking due to a compromised/degraded head gasket, the exhaust should smell different AND the radiator hoses should expand after running for a while, usually. If it's running lean, there MUST be a reason. If the air bleeds on the venturi cluster had been decreased from deposits, that would send the mixture to the richer side of things, not leaner, unless they might have been mechanically enlarged . . . not very possible with a normal rebuild. OF course, ethanol'd fuel has an optimum mix ratio of about 14.2 to one, whereas non-ethanol'd fuel has always been 14.8 to one. So E10, by itself, can make things a bit leaner, but usually not enough to compromise things or cause cause additional smells out the exhaust system. As to "fuels", it used to be that each major refining/brand company had their own tank farms and truck fleet to deliver fuel. If it was an Exxon station , you KNEW that fuel came from a local Exxon distributor, for example. It was a higher-quality fuel than the private brand gas station down the street and would consistently work better than that less expensive fuel. It would take several months of daily metro commutes to work (on that cheaper fuel) before the car would need a tune-up. I saw that scenario play out several times locally. The Exxon station owner stated that their Exxon fuel came from Exxon channels, blended at the refinery, whereas the station down the street's fuel was (what is now termed "splash blended") from a generic terminal and the additive package was put into the mix as the gas went into the transport truck. As things have progressed, I suspect that all fuel is splash blended from generic unleaded fuels. Even back in the 1970s, I heard stories about how every brands' transport trucks lined up at a fuel terminal (away from the metro area) to fill with gasoline. Which fed the rumors that "all gasoline, no matter the brand, is all the same stuff". This seemed to be more prevalent in metro areas away from the main population centers. As the main population centers usually had larger fuel terminals for specific brands of gasoline. I DO know that the Phillips 66 FliteFuel I bought in Lubbock, TX in 1974 (95.5 pump octane) ran better than the same product I bought in Irving, TX a year later. Closer to the main refining operation in the TX Panhandle, possibly? I guess I need to research the current gasoline distribution models to see what's really going on these days? In more current times, with the rise of massive self-service gas stations, plus intense price competition, the consistent prices between "Top Tier" fuels and fuels not labeled as such is miniscule, if any. Are the private-brand TT fuels the same price as other private-brand non-TT fuels? Usually the exact same price. Some of the non-TT stations also sell add-at-the-pump fuel additives, for a fee, too. "Faith" puts them in? AND, they all operate the same in my computerized car engines! So, if the TT fuels have certain levels of additives, allegedly costing more, do the non-TT fuels have the same additives at the same levels, but don't go through the TT testing system are are the additive levels a bit lower to not make the TT "cut"? LOTS of unanswered questions! BTAIM Enjoy, NTX5467

What I learned about "lean misfire" one Saturday. I had the Camaro at the deaelrship to try and get the emissions-spec Holley 4160 I had put on it (with the cam upgrade, 210 @ .050) a few months earlier. I was wanting to get the idle mixture better as to speed and mixture. With the engine fully warmed and hooked up to the exhaust analyzer, also measuring intake manifold vac, I firmly set the parking brake and proceeded to do the idle mixture adjustments in "P". I had read what the desired CO levels should be, so that was my target. Only thing is that when I started to get close to that level, the HC digital display started going crazy. I could lean the mixture to get that lower level of CO, but the HC numbers were wildly varied, changing as quick as the display could change. Not right. So I slowly went richer until the HC numbers calmed down greatly, just drifting a bit rather than jumping all over the place. THAT was "lean misfire". I also need to state that for this testing, a Test Tube was installed. Then, when I put it in gear, I noted that the intake manifold vac dropped to 10.5" Hg, steady. I found that interesting as the two-stage power valve in the Holley started to open its first stage at 10" Hg. So, with the engine loaded against the brake, a/c running, the least bit of throttle would drop the vac to the 10" Hg level, which only slightly-enriched the mixture. Which is what it was designed to do, with full enrichment happening at the normal 5.5" Hg level. All of this with the stock torque converter. Knowing these things, observing them, I found interesting, but did not worry about them again. During lean misfire, the engine just quiverred a slight bit more. Nothing like a misfire caused by a fouled spark plug by any means. If the meters had not been doing what they were, I would have never known what was going on, or why. Using my shadetree method of adjusting hot base idle speed and carb mixture relies on how the exhaust smells, or minimized HC smell, out the tail pipe. I'm defining "hydrocarbon smell" as a fuel mixture that is too rich, which can also be smelled on the engine dipstick and oil thereon. As if the choke never gets fully open and/or black smoke is emitted from the tail pipe. The smells coming from the crankcase road tube are more of an "oil smell", by observation. I realize that your driving season up there has mostly come to an end, so this mystery should also exist next April. When NEW fuel will be needed after the old fuel is driven-out. In the mean time, put some new spark plugs in those two cylinders that are different from the others. Re-tweak the idle speed and mixture, if needed. Then drive the car on the Interstate and recheck the insulator colors. Check those two plug wire's circuits for resistance/continuity, too. The look of the manifold plenum is interesting, but might also be the result of the crossover passage being a bit "deposited-up" in that one area. Interesting, but inconclusive as the carb barrels on that location are not all operating at normal driving speeds. Presuming, of course, that the different look is under the secondaries. So, put the winterized car away for the winter and enjoy the holidays! Then when you get bored, go out and wax it, to ready it for its spring re-awakening! Take care, NTX5467

This is very true, although leaning over a fender can be part of a "lower back stretching exercise" some might find uncomfortable these days. 30 years ago, less much. Point is that looking at some of the issues can be better done with the engine on an engine stand rather than in the car. The narrow engine bay might be better for lifting heavier engine parts over the fenders, but also tighter to get down and dirty to look at things, it seems to me. My earlier point was that although many like to "do things by the numbers", as to timing and such, as long as the engine makes no unusual sounds other than "quietness" during normal driving under acceleration or going up a hill in "passing gear", just drive it and enjoy it as it is. ALSO, ensure it does not run hotter than normal, too. "No clatters" and "no higher operating temperatures" (when cruising down the Interstate), all should be fine. Trust what the engine and car are telling you rather than being a slave "to numbers". Numbers can be important, but can also be a baseline from which to possibly improve things. In using a vac gauge to set timing, find the max vac at idle and then back it down a bit from there, for good measure. Being a bit conservative might cost a little bit of fuel economy, but be better in the long run, by observation. THEN ask Santa Claus for a dial-back timing light and dwell tach for Christmas. Timing lights and dwell tachs can generate "better numbers" than a vac gauge ever could, from my experiences. Plus not being affected by altitude! Enjoy! NTX5467

In another forum, there was mention of a whistle which screws into the spark plug hole. As the piston moves up on compression, it whistles. When the piston heads down, no whistle. Quite simple and accurate enough. Seems that normally, the cap retention clips are parallel with the back of the block, one at 3:00pm and the other one at 9:00pm. That way, greatest accessibility to remove the cap. For other references, you can find spark plug wiring images in a service manual or online. Worst case scenario, pull the engine and take it apart enough to see where everything is. Might beat leaning over the fender or grille! Enjoy! NTX5467

As to hot idle rpm and distributor advance, just as in later years, the centrifugal advance usually does not start until about 1000rpm. Vac advance needs about 9" Hg to start, which is why they used ported vacuum to keep the distributor from adding advance (for the base timing), so it can be set accurately and consistently with the vac advance unhooked and plugged. As far as what you are getting in initial timing settings . . . as long as the engine does not ping/clatter under light acceleration, you're fine with the fuel currently in the car. Should the engine clatter on hard acceleration, then back it up until it doesn't. Enjoy! NTX5467

Interesting comments about fuel octanes from various prior times. INCLUDING that the way of talking about octane levels has also changed. ALL of the octanes mentioned in the upper item are RESEARCH octane. By 1957, "Ethyl" or "Premium" was 97 Research octane, plus or minus 1 octane number. Regular was usually 94 Research octane. Then, when the "sub-Regular" grades (as Gulf's Gulftane) appeared they were about 91 Research Octane. By the time that low-lead/unleaded gasolines happened in the early 1970s, the newly mandated "consumer-oriented" PUMP Octane numbers appeared. An average of the fuel's octane level, posted as an average of the Research (the number everybody was used to seeing and talking about) and the Motor method (which was a more severe test and yielded lower octane numbers). As a general rule, you can add about "4" to the pump octane number to get "Researchj Octane" numbers. So that makes the current "Regular" 87 octane fuel basically equal the earlier sub-Regular gas of the 1966 times. The "Mid-Grade" 89 pump octane fuel pretty much the old "Regular" gas from the 1966 time. With 93 pump octane"Super Unleaded" being close to the old "Ethyl" of 97 Research octane. But the earlier 91 pump octane "Super Unleaded" closer to the old "Regular" of 1966. In 1966, "Regular Fuel" would take care of an engine with 9.0 compression ratio nicely. "Ethyl" or "Premium" did the 10.0 compression ratio engines. Just wanted to mention these things for a better understanding of current numbers. Enjoy! NTX5467

The effectiveness of the light is due to the reflector, not the brightness (or color of brightness) of the bulb. Brightness by itself is not a good judge of lamp performance, from what I have seen. Just look at the difference in the E-code Cibies and US-code lights as to "down the road" light AND where that light is placed. Same wattage bulbs. I like LEDs for their efficiency, BUT . . . I find it curious that with their lower current draw, the headlight bulbs also need a miniature cooling fan on their backside. Just where the LED emitters are placed with respect to the reflector in a headlight can determine how effective the lamp unit becomes. This is also more true of tail lights, from one YouTube video I saw on such, with a Nissan Z-car where the lamp housing was the reflector (but was not painted silver). When I did the Cibie upgrade on my Camaro, I just swapped the headlights, pure plug 'n play. One significant issue is "why" the need for bright headlights? Is it due to declining vision performance in low-light conditions, possibly? Or the age of the headlights themselves? Or the need to upgrade from the older lamps to get a better beam pattern? All of the above? While you might like the way things look BEHIND the lights, considering how much safer YOU might be, I noticed that in "high-contrast light situations", bright headlights (especially those not aimed perfectly) can cause real issues with the on-coming drivers being able to see. One never knows if their headlights are "blinding" the on-coming driver UNLESS you have been one of the on-coming drivers in such a situation. I became of that situation about 10 years ago and luckily found some supplements to be able to drive at night again. The height of the vehicle approaching from the rear, at least in TX, can be flaky as in my 2005 Impala, the headlight height on a common new F250 SuperDuty pickup is at the same height as the inside rear view mirror. Guess where those bright lights go after reflecting in the mirror? Which can result in a quick change to "Nite" on the mirror! Similar HD 3/4 ton GM and Ram trucks are similar, but do not seem to cause as many issues as the SuperDuty pickups do. And THAT is if they are at stock ride height. When I put the Cibies in the Camaro, I discovered that I could raise those lights' adjustment a good bit from the factory sealed beams. As they had a much sharper upper beam cutoff pattern. I made sure that the beam pattern would not hit the car in front of me's outside rear view mirror, and was just a bit aimed down from pure horizontal. This was not hard to do and gave me the best down the road light, such that I seldom needed to use high beams at all. A while back, Bosch (or similar) was working on a new headlight concept using fibre-optic emitters rather than a dedicated bulb. Using a camera system to determine on-coming vehicles or pedestrians, the computer would appropriately dim individual emitters to decrease "glare" in the on-coming driver's eyes. So the lights only had "high beam" brightness, but dimmed emitters as needed. This was hailed as a great improvement, but not cost figure was ever given for it. As neat as this was, it did nothing to fix the "high contrast light situation" for the on-coming drivers. THAT still existed. Additionally, the beam pattern was "out there" rather than being defined. THAT bothered me too. A "wall of light" coming at you on a dark night with few reflective pavement markings can be a recipe for crashes to happen. By observation, many people tend to get a false sense of "I can see" confidence if they can clearly see 25 feet in front of their car with their bright lights. When they need to be looking 750+ feet in front of their car at night. When ever you see an obstacle at 60mph, determine what it is, your vehicle could have traveled close to 200 feet BEFORE any steering or braking activity happens. Many people seem to have forgotten about that, or have not thought about it, apparently. So, brighter is not always better. What got me concerned was that one night, I was at a T-intersection at a stop sign. A late-model F150, raised from stock ride height with fancy wheels sticking out wider than the truck body, with bright bulbs in the 4 headlights and 2 fog lights, ALL on at once. Nice looking truck, in the daytime, but all of those bright lights blazing at dark, threw all kinds of multiple shadows around my car making it hard to see the road and anybody driving on it. Then I started to notice other pickup trucks and their headlight heights! All of those shadows motivated me to turn right when I desired to turn left, just to get away from those lights, even if it meant I had to go a different route to do it. I know he didn't mean any harm, but "unintended consequences" sometimes happen. Now, I'll admit that I'll be 72 in two months, but I found it interesting that some work associates got animated when the "lights in the rear view mirror" issue was mentioned. They are in their late 40s. Sorry I got off on that tangent. NTX5467