NTX5467

There's also an AC-Delco speedometer cable lube (ST800?). It is a pretty clear gel type of lube (kind of like Dippity-Doo in consistency, but a grease), so there's no graphite or similar in it. Whatever you use, I would say to not "load it up" on the cable, but just a consistent and reasonably thin coating. In some cases, as on window regulators, too much Lubriplate can dry out and cake up, so moderation might be the operative orientation. When you have the cable out, also look for any kinks or burrs or "loose" strands of the cable itself. If you find any, it might be best to replace it (which might mean more "adventures" with "made up" cables). Seems like one of the "rule of thumb" for evaluating a speedometer cable was to lay it out on a smooth surface and turn it over by hand. It should do so smoooothly with no "jumps" due to kinks or such. Just some thoughts, NTX5467

By observation, from what I saw come in on new cars of that era, the bulk of the A/G body cars were 7.5" ring gear diameter axles. The GNX did come with the 8.5, but the normal, garden variety cars had 7.5" axles (including GNs and other turbo models). This started with the downsize of that platform in 1978. The 7.5" axles were later expanded to S-series small pickups (S-10) and the Gen3 F-body in 1982. In the later 1990s S-10 platform, rear disc brakes were added on the S-10 Blazer vehicles. IF you got an S-Blazer with a 4.3L V-6 (which most of them had) and a manual transmission, THEN you got an 8.5" rear axle with rear disc brakes. The 7.5" rear axles were also used in the 1977+ B-body platform along with the 8.5" axles. Just as the Turbo200 automatic transmission was used interchangeably (ordering wise) with the Turbo350 in these same B-body cars (i.e., Impala and Caprice) until the OD automatics came online. Seemed to depend on options, engines, and police car items. It was ALWAYS better to ask the tech to look to see which rear axle was under the car rather than take it for granted when looking up parts for them! Been there, done that, stops problems before they happen that way. Although both the 7.5" and 8.5" rear axles are interchangeable as assemblies in the particular platforms, they had completely different brake systems attached to them (whether rear drum or rear disc). The only thing that would interchange between them, internally, is the grease. Main visual difference is the shape of the rear axle cover and gasket. The 7.5" rear axle is a durable unit, for what it is and its original use (think 6 cylinder Chevy Nova in 1977). There was a later upgrade to 7 5/8" ring gear diameter in the later Camaro/Firebird F-bodies, but not a huge increase in power handling capabilities. It can last well under most any vehicle it's under that has under about 250 horsepower and good traction, but anything past that it's just a matter of time before something wears out or breaks. The 8.5" rear axle is based on what Chevy people call "10 Bolt" architecture, and the prior (I believe) 8.2" ring gear axles of the earlier 1960s. A good axle for durability and upper-middle range performance uses. The next step up would be the Chevy "12 Bolt" that came under Big Block Chevelles and many light duty trucks (which was also another use of the 10 Bolt axles, but with some variations as time progressed). Again, the best way to field identify an axle under a middle 1980s GM vehicle is to look at the shape of the rear axle cover gasket, not the number of bolts holding it onto the housing. The Chevy 10 Bolt 8.5" axle will be completely round with 10 retaining bolts. The Chevy 7.5" axle will have a smaller circle shape for the gasket, but flattened on the top and bottom sides--not a completely round gasket circle. To further ID a GM rear axle, the "birth certificate" of the axle is generally stamped into the passenger side axle tube, on the front surface, about middle way between the center housing and the brakes. That string of letters and numbers will identify the vendor, build date, axle ratio, PTrac or not, etc. For the purposes of gear ratio and ring gear size, the last three letters are what the GMParts Database has listed in their Axle Ratio Charts by model year. Only thing is that you have to sift through each model year until you find the code you have. Sometimes, the same code was used for several years and could possibly repeat several years later, so getting a firm ID on the donor vehicle's VIN can help too. For a Dana-built axle, they used to put the ID code on a strip of paper and attach it to the right hand axle tube. Once out of the plant, the paper usually disappeared, but a Dana axle had a unique shape to the rear cover anyway. If you're looking to buy a salvage yard rear axle, you'll probably want to remove the cover (with a suitable container to catch the axle lube that'll run out!) and see what the gears look like. Usually, you can determine the axle ratio by rolling the ring gear around as you look at the gear teeth AND look for a stamping on the outer edge of the ring gear. Other than date and production codes, there should be a stamping like "41 - 10" (there might also be a "T" after each number). THAT is the gearset combination of teeth on the ring gear (first number) and the number of teeth on the pinion gear (second number). Simple division gives us 41 divided by 10, or a 4.10 gear ratio (in this example). Other than paint daubs or color codes, this is generally a good thing to look for. It used to be that finding a PTrac in the salvage yard was a good thing to find, but now with the expanded availability of limited slip units in the hot rod and aftermarket areas, the only significant attraction would be price rather than availability, I suspect. Another way things have changed over the years, from the time that salvage yards were a very primary source of hot rod parts. Happy hunting! NTX5467

All of the earlier HEIs used 8mm wires as factory production, but they were the normal resistance wires. Enjoy! NTX5467

I suspect you'll need to make sure WHICH 10 Bolt GM rear axle it is, not just that it's under a station wagon. The SHAPE of the gasket is the most telling visual indication of which axle it is. By the time frame of that vehicle, the "reference" of what axle it was was the ring gear diameter, rather than the number of bolts holding the rear cover on. Just because it's under a station wagon is no automatic proof that it's an 8.5" ring gear diameter axle per se. The "Chevy" 10-bolt 8.5" rear axle has a completely round rear cover gasket, whereas the "Chevy" 7.5" rear axle has a more oval shaped rear axle cover gasket. BOTH could well have 10 bolts in the rear cover. If you're chasing a PTrac unit per se, rather than the complete axle assembly, it'd be more cost effective (in any event) to get the complete axle, somehow, rather than trying to disassemble it where it is. If you want the PTrac and KNOW it's going to fit the housing you have to put it in, you'd be better off with the donor axle assembly sitting on some jack stands in your shop than trying to maneuver around under a car stacked in a salvage yard! If the complete axle assembly will fit the vehicle you desire the PTrac for, then get the yard operatives to torch the control arms and other attaching links and let it safely fall to the ground so you can haul it out of there. Otherwise, you can buy an Eaton PTrac (or other similar brand) aftermarket and proceed. It might cost more up front, but your time and safety can have similar costs. Key point is to make sure what YOUR vehicle will accept and if the salvage yard wagon would be a suitable donor vehicle. Axles that look the same externally can have different "guts" in them from model year to model year and model to model of the same basic vehicle platform. If you can't get a definitive (and warrantiable) answer of interchangeability, don't buy it. Sometimes, "Will Fits" wont. Just some thoughts, NTX5467

It sounds like the transmissions were not really designed for synthetic lube to start with (which can relate to synchro issues, as mentioned) and that possibly the GL spec was not adhered to by upper mgt recommendations. They obviously were chasing fuel efficency rather than equipment longevity although it's assumed -- I'll use "that" word here as it seems to fit -- that synthetic lubes will extend service life in every place it's used. Your "fix" for the situation was a good one! If, perhaps, the OEM-supplied transmission was compatible with the particular GL grade synthetic lube, the other question might be as to whether or not, with all due respect, the rebuilder was using an alloy of synchro that worked fine with normal lube (which most of their customers would use) rather than synthetic lubes? There are several reputable suppliers of aftermarket manual transmission parts and rear axle gears--much less expensive in cost than OEMs too--that, when used, could ultimately generate the issues with synthetic lubes you mentioned. I mention this as just a possibility. I suspect the rebuilder was being used as they were reputable and reliable and cost effective--plus that they were profitable enough to stay in business. Yes, synthetic oil flows easier than regular oil (for a given viscosity). The first time I poured a quart of full synthetic oil into my car, rather than normal or blended synthetic oil, I thought they'd only filled the bottle half full. I suspect that if the trans is spec'd for synthetic grease from the OEM supplier, that's what it needs to have it it. Many things will be designed around that lube spec--seals, gaskets, materials, clearances, for example. Using regular lubes in their place--in those units--has been observed to cause the same issues mentioned--hard shifting (from thicker grease) and lower general durability of the assembly (as observed in the GM C/K Getrag transmissions that aren't refilled with the "spec" lube due to slightly increased costs of doing so). In those GM-Getrag units, saving the $30 or so by putting normal gear lube back in them typically results in another trans overhaul about a year down the road (or sooner). In our more modern vehicles, using the factory spec lube (or updated factory lube specs as time progresses) in manual AND automatic transmissions is much more critical than in prior times--especially with modulated lock-up torque converters in the more recent electronic-controlled automatics. So the default "rule of thumb" might be to use what the factory recommends rather than trying to upgrade to "something better". Just because a lube might cost more (than the factory recommendation) does not always mean it'll work better or save more fuel or make things last longer in the long run. I was in a new WalMart last night. I overheard a lady reading her husband the label on a "fuel saving" additive's bottle. "Increases fuel mileage up to 2% in many cases" was on the bottle. Sounds great until you figure out what the additive costs, might do, and how much a 2% fuel savings would actually mean in ultimate mpg increases. Sometimes, you have to look at the big picture rather than the snap shot of a particular moment. If you go into www.bobistheoilguy.com board, it's mentioned that (at least in motor oil), full-synthetic lubes will clean the surfaces they contact. As I mentioned re: silicone gaskets, every seal needs to be compatible with synthetic lube to last as "they used to". It might also be that gasket/seal makers, just as the fuel line hose suppliers upgraded their rubber compounds to deal with reformulated fuel, have or are quietly upgrading their seal materials with expanded OEM use of synthetic lubes in existing families of products. This is due to some of the synthetic components of the oil, which no detergent-laden "dino" oil has. Since I've been looking at that website for the past year, the cleaning action has been mentioned as "part of the deal" with synthetic motor oil's basic composition. Some type of "olefin" chemistry, I believe. A similar situation could exist with transmission lubes and rear axle lubes too. Might take a few fluid changes of synthetic lube to get things cleaned out of the transmission or axle housings as those lube systems have no filters in them, typically, in the changeover from normal lubes. Just some additional thoughts and comments, NTX5467

It's not that the output past 4000rpm goes "to pot", just that it decreases from what it is at lower rpms. Still higher than what a point system would be and still most probably less of an issue with the more normal .035"-.045" plug gaps. ALSO note that HEIs were used in factory applications (i.e., Chevy L-82 Corvette motors) that were capable of well past 4000rpm engine speeds in stock form. One book on ignitions noted long ago that all it takes to get rid of the higher rpm spark output decrease in the HEI is an MSD module for the HEI. It's pretty much a bolt-in situation, but can require some re-wiring internally as some connections are in different places from stock. The spark plug wire retainer on the cap was on the earlier models and the spark plug wire boots at the distributor indexed with the retainer so that the whole wire set could be removed as "an assembly", but this was deleted in later models. The "pre-HEI" electronic ignition (which had limited optional availability on some 1972 Pontiac V-8s) had a similar spark plug wire holder on the cap. The spark output of the stock HEI has been well documented over the years, but the output at lower rpm ranges proves that the basic setup if quite good in many respects. I've not seen any graphs or figures on the variable dwell situation of the stock module, though, of it is was only on the earlier modules. If you put a dwell meter on a vacuum advance point distributor and rev the motor (to get vacuum from the ported vac advance port), you'll see the dwell decrease as the vac advance works. Dwell decreases the "charge time" of the coil so ultimate coil output could similarly decrease. Perhaps having a module that has a constant dwell situation at all rpms would similarly have a higher spark output at the higher engine speeds too? Usually, after the higher output electronic ignitions came out, we didn't "need" dwell meters any more (no points to adjust, no point gaps, no maintenance--just "plug and play") and some engineers stated that although you could get a dwell reading, it would not be accurate--hence, "no worries" about those things. In our current times of fuel "issues", using an HEI module from a middle '80s Chevy pickup and the attendant knock sensor hardware could be a good salvage yard setup to be scouting for. The knock sensor plugs into the right hand bank block drain plug and then the harness goes to a stand-alone controller and then to the "more pins" module in the distributor. They were on Chevy 305s and 350s of that era--if you find an engine with a silver dollar sized sensor with one wire coming out of it rather than the normal pipe plug in the block on the right hand side, that vehicle has the system on it, called "Electronic Spark Control". There were different part number sensors for 305s and 350s, but I don't know why other than if one needed less sensitivity than the other one. I see that MSD also has a new knock sensor system out now too. I'd say to proceed in the direction you're headed in with the HEI conversion. It'll probably work well. DON'T forget to put the dielectric grease under the module after you get everything cleaned up and reassembled!!!! The module generates heat and the dielectric grease helps dissipate the heat (via a "heat path") through the distributor body (heat sink). If you get a new module, it should come with a small packet of said grease. As the distributor body serves as the heat dissipator of the module's generated heat, it might be adviseable to just clean it up and not make it shiney or "more pretty" than the stock appearance ("shiney" might reflect heat, but it doesn't dissipate heat nearly as well as "satin" or "dull" does). I suspect you're also going to replace the spark plug wires. I have used magnetic suppression plug wires by Borg-Warner with great success for many 100K miles on my vehicles. I like them as they USED to be in the same colors as the factory GM wires, but had massive correct-color boots on them. They were KoolWire and KoolWire II in the earlier times. I think they are now "Select", though. There might be other companies that have them now too. They come pre-terminated so that they are direct factory replacement part. Don't be surprised if they do not have the tabs to index with the plug wire retainer of the earlier HEI plug wires--even if you get an ACDelco set of "normal" resistance wires. Magnetic suppression wires also have about 1/10th the resistance of "normal" resistance plug wires. Just some additional thoughts. Enjoy! NTX5467

Have you checked with Sherman and Associates? They usually have patch panels that nobody else has. I haven't looked on their website to see if they might have what you're needing, though. Might have to find a donor vehicle. There might be other areas that might need replacing too. Just some thoughts, NTX5467

Many Buick owners have upgraded to the GM HEI also. One reason the Olds people might like it could have to do "where" on the motor that their distributors are located (i.e., on the back rather than on the front). As with other GM engine families that used points and then used HEI, you'll probably need a new spark plug wire set (OEM spec pre-terminated) to match the year of the distributor and donor vehicle to complete the change. If you are concerned about BCA judging issues (even for the Driven Class!), you might desire to consider an "incognito" upgrade to a Pertronics system. This would not significantly change the underhood "look" of the vehicle as the HEI would. Your judgment call on that! Points can work well, provided the contact cam is not worn from miles and/or lack of lube on the rubbing block of the points. Points also have no "minimum battery voltage" issues as electronic systems can--which can relate to the vehicle not starting with a marginally weak battery with the electronic ignition vehicle, although it will spin over and has clean spark plugs. If the points will "spark" when they open or close, the spark plug will get a spark of some intensity. In general, though, the electronic conversions can be much easier to deal with in our "no maintenance" orientations of modern times/vehicles. What type of system you decide to use CAN relate to what future uses you might have for the vehicle. The normal HEI is a very good unit with lots of spark capacity in stock configuration--a "design" spec from back when was for it to fire a .100" spark plug gap, although it was observed that when it was over .080", plug wire condition might be an important issue. Therefore, running .035"-.045" is no problem. There's also supposed to be some variable dwell design in the factory modules too, which the aftermarket units supposedly do not have. Only issue is that potential spark output starts to decline past about 4000rpm, but I doubt that's not a "normal cruise rpm" for many of use in our normal driving situations. Even with the large reserve capacity, the "decline" might not be significant if spark plug gaps are in the more normal .035" range with a generally stock engine. Add in some of the more modern Iridium or other .040" wire electrode spark plugs (which take less juice to fire) and the "decline" can be pretty much a non-issue for the generally stock engine--plus even LESS maintenance. Enjoy! NTX5467

One KEY item to research (for the particular vehicle) and then position against the particular potential/current rear axle/transmission lube is the "GL" rating specified by the vehicle manufacturer. This has NOTHING to do with normal or synthetic gear lubes as both can meet the same "GL" rating. The GL rating takes into account the type of metals in the assembly and keeping them from wearing prematurely. In many of the modern manual transmissions, especially HD truck transmissions, Castrol SynTork has been spec'd for quite some time, for example. The HM290 and later GM "Getrag" manual transmissions require a particular GM part number grease (or equivalent) to get them to last as they should (possibly a part-synthetic formulation?). When GM started using synthetic rear axle lube (the "Fresh Grape Scent" lube) in the C/K trucks several years ago, they changed the rear axle cover on the 9.5" rear axles to now use a real gasket rather than silicone from a tube. This generated not only a gasket but also a new rear end cover--it took both to make the change. The service information said that using synthetic lube in a "silicone gasket" situation would result in the deterioration of the silicone seal and fluid loss (with dire conssequences) over time. It took the gasket and the new cover to fix that issue. For many decades, almost all rear axle lubes have been compatible with limited slip or locking differentials--not requiring the PosiTrac additive. Much of that has to do with the style of limited slip differential. In the earlier years, all of these differentials were "locked until unlocked" rather than "unlocked until locked". The former had springs that put pressure on the clutch plates all of the time, but had to slip when the vehicle executed a turn or corner. The latter uses a governor weight to sense rear wheel speed differential and then "lock" the rear axle to give torque to both rear wheels. In the case of the latter, the GM tech bulletin said NOT to use PTrac additive in that style of locking differential (clutch material durability issues were noted), but continue to use it where it was originally spec'd in the earlier light truck models (that used the "locked until unlocked" units). I believe that you'll find that all current synthetic rear axle lubes are compatible with limited slip differentials--as noted on the lube bottles and the respective lube manufacturer websites. As with a transmission clutch, if lots of "use" is involved, the friction material in the limited slip differential will deteriorate in a similar manner. It's a similar set-up as a clutch pack in an automatic transmission. Again, check the "GL" spec number for the particular vehicle to see what specs the lube must meet--whether normal/ blended / or full synthetic--as THAT will determine how the assembly holds up under normal use rather than the base stock of the lube (although both can be related in some cases). It's more about the additive package in the lube, typically. Going to higher "GL" numbers is not recommended as they are specific, with the higher numbers not being "upgrades" from prior specs. Hope this helps, NTX5467

You might research and see where the power ratings (horsepower and torque) were, rpm-wise, on your engine. Then, using the mph/1000rpm figures, see where those two rpm levels would equate to road speed in high gear. That would give you a speed range to deal with. In the middle '60s or thereabouts, I saw a general rule of thumb that sustained cruising speeds (without getting into higher engine rpm levels) could be about 80% of peak horsepower-rated rpm for best results. This would put the engine a little above the torque peak (for a V-8 engine of that era) but comfortably below the horsepower peak rpm. End result for a luxury car of that era would be about 80-90mph using that formula. I suspect such a general rule might apply to almost any engine, but the key would be how it feels and sounds at these rpm levels. If it's "happy", you'll know it as there should still be decent throttle response at those rpm levels and no real strain when accelerating up hills--plus plenty of accel pedal travel left in the linkage. Again, how it feels is important as every vehicle tends to have a "sweet spot" of where it likes to run on the highway, speed-wise. Other than engine issues, don't forget about BRAKE issues--their design and capabilities as positioned against what was the norm when the vehicle was produced and modern traffic patterns. Not to mention TIRE issues and their capabilities! Getting up to "a" cruising speed and maintaining it is just one factor in the whole equation!! With the more modern oils of today, engine lubrication is not the factor it might have been when the vehicle was new. Seems like many of those older vehicles had engine oil coolers from the factory? A high quality 30W oil might work well, but the 20W50 alternative could work too--just watch the gauge and see how the different viscosities might affect oil pressure in the ambient temps you're driving in. With the lower power engine, the 20W50 oil could take more power to run the oil pump at normal operating engine temps, which might be noticeable in performance, but that can be a variable situation depending upon engine wear factors and such. Personally, I think I'd baseline it with 30W and progress from there. Almost any oil on the shelf will have higher specs than the oils of the era your vehicle was produced, so brand would be your judgment call (although we all have our own brand perferences, without turning this into a "You ought'a use ________ brand of motor oil" commentary). Just some thoughts . . . "Happy Motoring" NTX5467

Although it might sound "involved", it's really not as the lever is on the "top side" of things. Once you get the tool to compress the spring holding tension on the lock plate (from behind it), which is not too expensive and can be found in many tool selections (even at some of the tool warehouses). If you don't have a steering wheel puller tool, that might be a good addition to your tool box too. Of course, some "shadetree" activity can work too, if you're limber enough. Sometimes, the steering wheel can be jarred loose and then pulled off (once the nut holding it on is removed). From there, (here's where the "limber" part comes in), if you can position yourself in the driver's seat such that you can gently and squarely press on the lock plate with your feet (having harder sole shoes on is recommended), you can compress the lock plate enough to quickly remove the round wire "o-ring clip" that retains the lock plate to the column shaft. You'll need an awl or other (safe) sharp instrument to do that as it's somewhat like a round lock washer. If it flies off, they are very common in GM, possibly a dealer still has some in stock--BUT the best option is to NOT let that happen. Once you get the lock plate removed--it has MASTER SPLINE in it just as the steering wheel does--the turn signal lever should be visible as it interfaces with the turn signal switch mechanism. Many are retained with one or two small hex head screws, but some might be "insert, turn, click" type of engagement with the switch. There will be a short piece of wiring harness coming out of the turn signal level. It will have a connector that must be unplugged. Hopefully, there'll be enough slack in the harness to pull it upward and do that--gently. If not, you might have to remove a possible access panel on the bottom of the steering column assembly (as in on the bottom surface of the tube below the shift bowl--it should snap off, possibly). If it's a "turn, click" lever with no screws, then you'll have top push inward on the level gently and try to turn the level assembly at the same time--possibly about 10-20 degrees of rotation, or until you can pull it out of the switch mechanism. You'll still have to deal with the harness, though, as with the other style of attachment. Then, reverse proceedures to install. Some might be able to do it in about 15 minutes, but you might plan on a longer time if this will be a learning experience (i.e., first time). It's really reasonably simple once you see where everything is and how it all fits together--and have the tools laid out before you start. If, per chance, the metal retaining ring for the lock plate vanishes in the proess, you can fashion one from a normal size paper clip. Make sure that it's totally round with no "peaks" in the smooth curve. It has a dedicated slot to fit into as it retains the lock plate against the spring pressure, so roundness is important. But if you're successful, it'll work pretty well (been there, done that--before I knew they were still available from GMParts). Still, plan on NOT letting it be lost!!! As I recall, the basic vac servo is the same for many GM vehicles of that general vintage. Differences might be in the vac plug-in or mounting bracket (which should come off). I think they were all "chain drive", but some might be cables or dedicated linkagae. ONE key thing is to make sure that both vehicles have a FACTORY CRUISE system on them!!! There were some aftermarket cruises that looked very similar to the factory units--but had no common parts between them. Levers look similar, but can have slightly different shapes and configurations from the factory units. If it was an AC-Delco GM Accessory cruise control unit, it should have everything like the production factory unit did (but was installed at the dealership or similar). You can probably find replacement factory cruise vac servos from other sources. Possibly from NAPA or similar. Hopefully, the one you've found will last a good while. Just some thoughts, NTX5467

The wastegate is run by a vacuum solenoid, if I recall correctly, that supplies vacuum to open the wastegate at Max boost, which you'll only see under full throttle and no other time. A Regal GS I test drove once (with the boost level showing on the Driver Info Center display) would hit 8.5lbs at lower rpm in 1st gear at WOT but would then taper off to 5.5lbs as the rpms increased. At the time, the car was a new car demo with a few thousand miles on it. Many of the Buick 3800 lower pulley/harmonic balancers have a swinging counterweight on the backside of them. When the torsilastic rubber goes away, which holds the counterweight where it belongs, the counterweight is free to swing on the ball bearing that it's mounted on. This makes a clank from the front of the engine under certain conditions. Not sure about "rebradding" the rivets that might hold the pulley together, though, as a long term fix (if they've already loosened once)--but it might work for a while. Many of the lower pulleys also have the crank sensor "trigger" mounted on their backside also. If the adjustment of the sensor is not correct for the pulley, the first time the engine turns over, it'll do damage to the trigger and/or the sensor. Dealership techs are conditioned to not touch something that might "grenade" that they'd get blamed for breaking, when it was not first broken. If they'd taken the belt loose to check for the looseness you describe, then the belt made noise later (being a used item and all), then that could have generated a "come back" that they'd have had to pay for and/or a new belt to fix the "problem" which was not there before PLUS the labor to change it (which is not that easy on the SC3800 engines, many times requiring removal of an engine mount bracket to get the belt out and back in). Therefore, they might have given it a visual and listened rather than actually disassembling anything--and not setting themselves up for later comeback issues. Michelins might be a premium tire, but what makes them run quiet has more to do with the tread design (i.e., Symmetry) rather than construction per se. We warrantied several sets of Symmetrys on Cadillacs for "road force variation"--which some might claim is not possible for such a high quality product, but it happened several times on new DeVilles. I'm not sure which BFG tires you might have, but they generally have a more agressive tread design (i.e., noisier) than many Michelins do (with tread designs more reminiscent of what we had in the '60s and '70s than the later style M&S tread designs). Rubber compounding can also play a part too, plus the size of the tire. Just some thougths . . . NTX5467

The whole idea of shock absorbers or "dampers" is to keep the wheels from bouncing around. If you happen to hit a bump while in a turning situation (at speed), the "underdamped" wheel will not be in contact with the roadway while it's in the air. THAT could well be why it feels funny back there--one less wheel to keep the car under control back there. Add into the mix the (suspected) aged rubber bushings in the entire rear suspension, that are also allowing more deflection than intended, and it can get worse. The springs might get "sag" from age and use, but probably not get that much weaker in "ride rate" than factory specs. If you do desire to re-spring the car, you might as well plan on doing all four springs and not just the rear ones--unless you can only do one end of the car at a time. First place to start? A complete set of new shock absorbers all the way around. That will be the easiest and most cost effective thing to do for now. Then you can progress from there. You know you're going to get new shocks anyway, I suspect, so that makes it an even better place to start. I suspect that just a basic set of Heavy Duty calibration shocks should firm things up without being harsh. In the later '60s, a local service station operator had many customers with larger GM cars. All it took to get the bounce out of them was a set of Monroe Super500s--then they rode smoooth and firm. I'm not sure how those things would cross over into the current listings, though. Don't forget the affect that tire pressure can have on vehicle handling too. I'd say to aim for 28psi f/r and go up from there. It used to be that 28psi was the "+4 psi" over the standard 24psi recommendation for high speed driving and standard loads. Just some thoughts . . . NTX5467

Bryan, if you need the time you might normally spend in the BCA Forums to work on your Buicks, that's fine with me (and probably others). We all know how involved things can get in here, sometimes! We all also know (I suspect) that when you're trying to focus on getting something done, the last thing you need is to try to keep up with some "goings on" in here. Yet monitoring the Forums from time to time can provide some diversion from the work at hand. As with any Forum, there will always be new people (what we want!) coming in here that might see the first place to post and do that--even if it might be more appropriate in another section. With all due respect, they might not be aware that what they post might fit better in another location or they are looking for the highest profile place where the most people will see their post and offer help. Several ways to look at that issue--which is a valid one. So . . . take the time to get your Buicks done up to your desires and please check in every so often. Last weekend, I found a LaCrosse CSX "hiding" with the normal CX models in a National Car Rental Emerald Aisle Executive Selection lineup at DFW. It really feels like the 3.6L VVT V-6 in that car is under-rated in horsepower and as mild as the chassis might be, it is another "no float" calibration that works well. The new definition of "Fast With Class". Best of luck in your Buick projects! NTX5467

You might also post this at www.RegalGS.org or look at some of the Pontiac GrandPrix (fwd) websites. That's where most of the information on the SC3800s has been, by observation. Seems like you can get some of the reman units from PerfectCircle/Dana via NAPA? Seems like I discovered that a few years ago. As I recall, it's the nose section bearing that goes away, not the entire unit as such. That front section is available separately. Again, the Grand Prix websites can detail that change-out operation. Don't forget the GM Supercharager Oil . . . Just some thoughts, NTX5467

As I understand it, Pontiac has a large historical library -- which has been maintained for many years. If "sales codes" are what you are seeking, I highly suspect they could help. There could be a nominal charge for the information. Also, as I understand, you can send them your VIN number and they'll put together a packet of information on the car. Possibly the window sticker and other information on that model year and model of Pontiac. It's been a while since I saw that mentioned in one of the Pontiac enthusiast (i.e., "Pontiac Enthusiast" and the other similar magazine that you can usually find at Barnes&Noble) magazines a few years ago. Pontiac Motor Division "came to the documentation game" a little sooner than other GM divisions, it seems, and also seems to have been more supportive of the restoration hobby and documentation of vehicles (i.e., orig GTO). Just an observation. How all of these prior things now play into the new GM Heritage Center entity might need to be investigated. Just some thoughts, NTX5467

If the primary throttle bores are 1.38", as the vast majority of them are, with the "constant" size of 2.25" secondary throttle bores, it does make 750cfm. If they are the 1.50" primaries, which are typically very rare and only in the 1970-71 model year range on the factory HO big blocks, then it makes it 800cfm. By the "smoggy" 80s, the stop tang (travel limiter) on the secondary air valve gained some height and limited the total openning amount of the air valve, which basically made the 750cfm carb into a 650cfm carb. The lower power engines didn't need that extra air flow so the engine didn't know the difference. With the vacuum break mechanism regulating the rate of openning and the tension spring regulating how much it would open with a given amount of air flow across the secondaries, the secondary should only open as much as needed anyway (consistent with good power and not "sound"). I suspect the Chevy carb is not jetted and metering rodded for the fuel curve a Buick engine would need for best performance. Might be better off trading or selling it for something more appropriate. Just some thoughts, NTX5467

Probably the transducer under the hood having "issues". Seems like there is a set of contact points inside of it that are the "ON" contact. Unless you've been into one of those units and knows what's in there, you'd probably be better off trying to find someone that sells them "reman" and then keep your core. The transducer is what the speedo cable runs into and out of near the left side fender skirt, plus an electrical connection and some vacuum lines into and out of it (to the "actuator" bellows, if I recall correctly). If they are like the later versions, there will be several variations--depending on the division they were used by. Differences would be things like the size of the orifice hole in the vacuum nipple on the transdicer, whether or not there is a connection market "Light" (for an indicator lamp on the instrument panel), and the mounting boss on the bottom for the later ones with "Resume" feature to mount the vacuum chopper solenoid. They'll all go in the same place, operate the same, but with slightly different cosmetics. If originality is an issue, then try to get one similar to yours, if possible. Of course, those things were "everywhere" back up until about the middle 1980s, but now "everywhere" is much fewer and farther between than back then. Some of the Buick parts vendors might have some, but you might also have luck with other GM carlines (i.e., Corvette, Camaro, musclecar). Seems like I found a place in CA that had some remans for about $100.00 or so, a few years ago. You might check with some of the ACDelco Speedometer Cluster service centers (to start your search) to see if they have any leads of who might have some. If there are some older ACDelco repair stations, they might still have some in the corner or know where some might be. Or possible a Google search? Hope this might help, NTX5467

At our chapter meeting last Saturday, the "BCA Chapter Challenge" was discussed in an open discussion of the North Texas Chapter members and officers together. It was discovered that many of our chapter members had already or were getting ready to make financial donations or other goods/services donations to the Red Cross or Salvation Army--some even while they had been out of the area on vacation. All were done because they felt the need to help others in their time of need. The total value was greater than what our chapter treasury could tolerate at this point in time. As most of the evacuees are now moving out of their intial "housing and processing" locations in the Dallas/Fort Worth (and most probably other metro areas too) area into faith-based and/or non-profit organization housing, they have begun the job of getting their lives back in order--getting the kids into schools, getting temporary jobs (or longer term jobs for those that do not plan to return to New Orleans), and working to get their finances back in order, our chapter members decided that when one of our members might become aware of an evacuee that needed some additional financial assistance (screened by their local church or aid agency), then we would consider making a donation directly to the affected person. This way, the money would all get to the "end user" directly. Although the debit cards from FEMA and the Red Cross were extremely handy initially, the evacuees' longer term financial issues are yet to come as many were delayed in accessing their localized bank accounts and it was reported that it could take six months for FEMA to inspect their homes and make a financial settlement at that time. For strained finances, this can be a long time. The local Fort Worth Star-Telegram has had many stories of the evacuees and how they are adjusting to the situation at hand. Many apparently did not know where they were going until after they got on the busses or airplanes to leave New Orleans. Other than the DFW, Houston, San Antonio, Abilene, Tulsa, and other regional metro areas, some even ended up in Utah. In the process of evacuation, some families were separated. Many people volunteered for the Red Cross to do the physical transportation of family members to reunite them with others of their family. Those larger SUVS really came in handy--regardless of the $3.00/gallon fuel costs. Another series in the Star-Telegram focused on one local trucker taking several loads of relief aid to the people of Mississippi. With the bulk of the national media focused on New Orleans, there are neighboring areas in other Gulf Coast states that are having serious issues with hurrican damage to their areas. As time progresses, more and more side issues (quality of life issues rather than "other" issues) to the whole situation will emerge which will have to be dealt with at the local, state, and federal levels. Something like the mail service being reinstated and no place to deliver it to, for example. Locally, many food companies and restaurants donated meals at the initlal housing/processing venues. Other food items were purchased from the various local food banks by the Red Cross and other aid groups--one reason that money was a preferred donation. As the evacuees are now spreading out into the general population, many businesses are offering discounts for those with a Louisiana driver's license. It is highly commendable that many BCA chapters have made generous donations, as have their individual chapter members, and speaks well of the general character of those in the automobile hobby. As time progresses, I suspect we'll hear more information of our respective chapter members' involvement in the Katrina Relief Efforts. Although many might not have cash on hand to donate, we all have some "gently used" clothing and other expertises that we can donate as individuals helping other human beings in need. And we might not hear about all of these contributions as many of our BCA and chapter members might not want the publicity of the good deeds they've done, yet they know what they did. Willis Bell 20811 Director, North Texas Chapter BCA

I just "re-found" that website via some unrelated Google searches I was just doing. It can be a little tricky to use, but if you first pick the make (Domestic pull down menu) and then click the icon to the far right of that window, it'll pull down the complete Buick PPG color list by model year. Then choose the model year from the pull down menu and click "View Chips". This will bring up a graphic with the color chip page from the PPG catalog and the interior color page, side by side. Click on the page you desire to see and it will enlarge. Be advised that in paint shop jargon, "poly" = "metallic" It might be a little tricky to cross-ref the Buick and other GM divisional paint codes, but you can download the images and then do the work you desire offline. This is the website that I was thinking about in my prior post. Thanks for the reminder Daves69! Enjoy! NTX5467

In some cases, there are parts of the Carter design that look "sloppy" compared to what Holley or Rochester did. Kind of like it was designed to be less precise in operation . . . but they work very well and reliably. One other observation . . . a "fixed jet" carb (i.e., Holley or similar) might not get quite the same level of cruise fuel economy as a "metering rod" carb. In the fixed jet carb, once the main system is fully operational, that's it, until vacuum levels drop such that the power valve/piston opens for added enrichment under load. This might result in a soft spot in the pedal response and then more pedal actuation as a result. Circa 1972, Holley started using a 2-stage power valve that had a first level of enrichment at 10.5" Hg with full enrichment at the normal 5.5" Hg. This let them meter their carbs' primary side main system circuits about 2 jet sizes smaller for emissions and economy (the economy part was generally lost with the lower compression ratios, though). In the case of the AFB, the metering rods had two steps (Economy and Power), whose interface with the fuel jet in the bottom of the float bowl was modulated by the power piston springs. Similar in concept to the "on" or "off" enrichment, but was possibly better tailored AND could be changed with very little effort. With the AVS, "three-step" rods were introduced with a little different power piston design that appeared to have less leakage (via more ribs, if I recall correctly). This allowed for a similar transition from "economy" to "power" as the two-stage power valve, but in a more gradual manner. It also allowed for a more finely tuned fuel curve in the process too. QJets were similar in this arrangement (three-step metering rods). In the Rochester Carb book, it mentions using "metering area" as the real tuning device rather than just changing jets and rods with abandon. Using the stock calibration, you determine the metering area (jet size - rod diameter) for each of the three metering rod steps. This way, one aspect of the fuel curve could be changed while also minimally affecting the other aspects of the curve, yet putting the fuel mixture at the more optimum value for the particular operational parameters of the engine/vehicle interface. The Rochester Carb book went through this procedure, which was somewhat time consuming without a chassis dyno to work with. Other magazine articles have documented how the current Edlebrock AFB can be recalibrated to match the engine it's mounted on with increases in power and economy too (from the base "generic" application calibration). Same things with the prior AFBs and AVSs and can also be done (with more disassembly/assembly time) with QJets or other metering rod carbs. When the electronic control carbs of the 1980s came in, the metering "kit" came assembled and application specific. No way to really tell what was what, as compared to jet and rod sizes as the control solenoid did it's job according to the computer controls from the ECM and oxy sensors. You could suspect that a metering kit for a Chevy 350 would flow more fuel than one for a Chevy 305 or 4.3L V-6, though, but not real way to document that fact. So, my observation from times past was that Holley 4160s had crisper throttle response, but my Carter AVS (in a medium-priced luxury oriented car) would get about 1-2 mpg better than a friends car with the same engine (in an intermediate car) with comparable tire size/rear axle ratio combinations. Back then, the only people that seemed to like Holleys were the people that knew how to work on them, whereas when you put on an OEM Carter AVS in their OEM place, they ran well, and needed no yearly rebuild. Kind of how the Holley got the reputation as a "hot rodder's" carb? After Holley changed their metering block/float bowl gasket material, they are pretty much maintenance free (in OEM replacement applications), from my experience. But while Holleys were generally for Fords (until Ford did their own 4bbls), Carter did OEM carbs for GM and Chrysler as a matter of course. Plus Carter also did aftermarket 4bbls too. Remember the old J. C. Whitney catalogs from the middle '60s that touted "venturi area" of a Carter AFB as the determiner of performance capabilities? This was before Holley jumped into the aftermarket and factory performance markets circa 1965 and started quoting air flow rates (cfm) with respect to carburetor size classifications. 4bbls rated at 1.5"Hg and 2bbls rated at 3"Hg, from what I've read in the Holley Carb book (HP Books). Carbs can be highly interesting creatures, if you understand what makes them tick and how and why. . . . and then there's the decal I saw on a quarter window at a car show recently . . . "Low Carb Diet. Only 3 Carbs . . ." which were mounted on a Chrysler 440 V-8 in a '65 Plymouth Belvedere 2-door hardtop. Had to smile at that! Enjoy! NTX5467

If the kits are the same for all three part number carbs, then the kits either come with a selection of some gaskets or the gaskets are all the same and it's a calibration issue rather than a casting issue. Calibration issues might relate to particular transmissions, with or without a/c, or California emissions back then (generally a leaner main system calibration, I suspect). These differences could be in the metering rods and primary jet combinations (metering rods were generally "two step" rods for that year of AFB) and possibly power spring differences too. Might just be different secondary jets OR a different counterweight for the secondary air valve setup, if it has one. Other calibration areas in those carbs were the air bleeds in the venturi cluster AND the low speed jet in the bottom of the idle tubes--things that are there but you don't generally worry about in a rebuild, but are important for things to work "as designed". Somewhere . . . I've got an old Carter Strip Kit for AFBs which has a listing of carb numbers and metering rod/jetting for each one. I bought it for a Chrysler application, so it might not have non-Chrysler listings--don't recall. The Buick Chassis Service Manual for 1966 might hold the key, though! About the only "wear" area in those carbs was the throttle shaft for the primary side. Just as with Rochester carbs, they can generally install bushings in there to put things back where they need to be. If the accel pump bore is worn, that might take a little ingenuity to compensate for. From experience, the primary power pistons tend to be a little loose in their bores, but that looseness is generally calibrated around in the carb's basic metering calibration map. Might be that The Carb Shop could recondition your existing carb rather than chase a NOS or rebuildable carb of the desired number? Just some thoughts, NTX5467

From what I've seen over the years, each carline division had their own names for some of the same color formulas, so the correct interchange or crossover you might be looking for might be more in the PPG or other OEM paint supplier databases. Maybe even DupliColor (the OEM supplier of touch-up paint)? Seems like there was a link to a PPG listing for paint codes in one of these forums about three years or so ago? Other sources would be factory paint chip charts from the paint suppliers (if you can find a paint supply house that still has some) or the similar item supplied by the vintage literature vendors. The color code information could also be in the Buick parts books for that year range and also in the applicable GM-Buick factory chassis service manuals. In that earlier time, each GM carline division was their own basic operating entity, unlike in more current times. Fisher Body did run the assembly operations and could dictate some things to happen. There were also more single-model/brand assembly plants back then too, as I recall. Even if the paint code was the same, each division was at their own liberty to attach whatever name they desired to it. Other than black or white, few people were concerned that one color name in Buicks might be the same as another color name on Oldsmobiles--except in the body shop or paint supply business. Sometimes, it's a little easier to see the general scheme of things if you get into the replacement parts (in this case, somebody like PPG or RM or similar from back then) end of things rather than go in circles with factory production codes and such. I suspect their formula listings and paint chip pages would have the crossover information you might be desiring. Hope this helps, NTX5467

Some thoughts . . . Considering the GM part number for a 1978 Chevy 305/350 QJet was 1705____, your suspicion of a 1980 model year carb seems ballpark. Probably the best way to search for the vehicle application would be in a carb kit listing. By 1980, it seems that there were starting to be some electric choke assist items and a few other electronic gizmos sneaking into the product mix? GM-Rochester Products did use Carter for a sublet manufacturer in some cases back then, while Carter was still Carter and not an almost "dead" Federal-Mogul property. I was thinking most of those were a good deal before 1980s, though. They were built to the same blueprints as an "in house" Rochester carb, but I recall hearing that they were not of the same build quality as the GM-Rochester carbs and were somewhat "trouble prone". In that case, "Made for GMC" would mean "General Motors Corporation" rather than "GMC Truck and Coach Division", I suspect. I recall no GM-Rochester carbs for the aftermarket or non-OEM applications back then. GM-Rochester did build carbs for various non-GM entities over a period of time, though, as Chrysler used QJets as replacements for Carter ThermoQuads when Carter stopped doing OEM carbs in the 1980s. Seems like there might even have been a year of so of them on late 1960s Ford big V-8s? Still, no non-OEM applications per se. One possible reason for there not being any non-OEM applications was the pretty specific jetting the QJets had. They were highly adaptable (primary metering rods, secondary metering rods, primary power piston springs, secondary metering rod hangers, primary jets, choke pull-offs and vacuum break setups) to a very wide variety of engine and fuel curve requirements so they were not really "universal" in the same way as a Carter AFB or some of the Holley 4bbls can be. Not that they probably could not have done some "hot rod" aftermarket versions, but with all of the GM business they had anyway, there might not have been enough time and research money to do non-OEM items. Just curious, though, whas was this carb desired to fit? Take care, NTX5467

Prices vary from model year to model year and also model to model and GM division to GM division. No "universal" remotes! Different models can have different suppliers (to GM) just as different years can be similar. Some GM Remote Keyless Entry transmitters are very reasonable, but others with personal choice identities and active arming are much more expensive. As you've found out, online auctions can result in "incorrect" items and items that do not work with your vehicle (although they can look identical on the outside). As for programming, that can vary too. Some years can be done manually via the Driver Information Center, certain proceedures listed in the owner's manual, yet others need the GM Tech2 (or similar factory supplied tool) to do it. No universal proceedure either! Programming charges, by the dealer, appear to be about 1/2 hour of the hourly labor rate for the shop. As for the parts prices, take the time to walk into different GM dealers and get prices from them (no phone calls, please!). They all come from the same warehouses so different dealers might have different prices, if they don't use the published GM price list. Shop around and just make inquiries, without telling the parts counterperson your "story". If you find one that's a better price for the same part, that would be where you might consider doing business. In the programming part of the situation, the way it is done is to first clear existing memory of the former remote transmitters. Then, ALL of the remotes you've got for each vehicle need to be present for the programming as they ALL have to be programmed at once (for each respective vehicle), in sequence, for the vehicle to recognize them. Seems like there's some signal when that happens, like the horn beeping or the door locks cycling. As mentioned, some of the programming proceedures are more time consuming than tricky, but others require the GM Tech2 to make happen--just depends on the year and model and GM division of the vehicle. If the GM prices sound expensive, there's always the Toyotas and Nissan products with their titanium keys and integral remotes with the key. Word is that none of those items are serviced separately if lost, but as a new complete security system (to the tune of over $1200.00). At least on the new Dodge Charger, there's a small screw that holds the keyless entry transmitter to the key. And also consider those import prices with respect to the GM "chip" keys and the more late model transponder keys. Not in the "hardware store" selection either. And the transponder keys have to be programmed to the vehicle too--no choice. Hope this helps . . . NTX5467