NTX5467

In addition to the great suggestions already made, there are also several books you can find at Borders or Barnes&Noble (or on their respective websites). One is the quarterly publication "Old Cars Price Guide". The others include "The Complete Book of Buick" (with yearly breakdowns on what was available each year as to model, equipment, and specs) and the book on Buick Musclecars (which really goes all the way back to the first V-8 Buicks in the '50s instead of just focusing on the '60s and newer intermediate Skylarks and such). It would be nice to find a dealer's Order Guide book on eBay as that would detail everything that was originally slated for that year (as the books are printed several months prior to actual vehicle production) as to model series, equipment options, color/trim selection and such. From there, you could progress to finding a Buick GM Service Manual from a literature vendor (who also might have the sales brochures for that vehicle too). One thing leads to another, just depends on what you want to pursue and how much you desire to spend in time and money. Also, you might check some of the larger libraries for copies of various car magazines from that general era for road tests and new model information. Usually, the main magazines were full of new model information in either the September or October issues back then (as everyone introduced all of their new models at one time each year--"Show Date"). "Popular Science", "Car Life", "Motor Trend", and maybe "Mechanix Illustrated" were the key players back then in new car information and road tests. "The Complete Book of Buick" might be the best general information resource. Also, do not forget the Buick history book which Terry Dunham co-authored. On the Internet, click on the Buick Webring area at the bottom of the BCA home page for a list of sites in the webring. Might find some websites of others who have those particular vehicles too. Other various bulletin boards related to Buicks too, but most of them probably are related to newer models. Hope this helps . . . NTX5467

Teamsternip, please do not confuse the GM body series designation with BCA judging classes as they are two totally different things. The LeSabre is a "B-body" as Centurion noted. The only place I have observed that vehicle platforms are referred to as "class _" is in heavy duty trucks were a certain "class" of truck relates to its weight carrying capacity and related SAE generated specificaions for minimum horsepower/torque, brake sizings, etc. in that particular "class". In the automotive and light truck (up to one ton ratings), the vehicles are mentioned with respect to their "_-body" (for cars) and "_-truck" (for the light duty trucks). For example, your '66 LeSabre would be a "B-body" Buick and a '66 Chevy 1/2 ton 2 wheel drive pickup would be a "C-truck" Chevy. Since '66, there have been some additonal body series designations for the cars just as there have been for the light truck vehicles too. Hope this might clear things up a little . . . Best wishes for a great New Year to all! NTX5467

If those systems are configured as the current GM systems are, there should be a seat heater control module "down there". Probably similar to a relay where a small electrical current controls a larger electrical current (keeps the higher amps from going through the control switch and probably "cooking" it. If that is not the problem, then the heating element is probably a part of the seat covering itself and that would have to be replaced with a GM part, I suspect. You might be able to troubleshoot it with a continuity checker to see if the heating element is getting the needed electricity to properly function. The passenger side should also be heated and could probably have the same setup as the driver's seat. Is that side working also? Is just the seat cushion not heating with the seat back cushion heating or is the whole thing just not functioning? Might just be an abraded wire or one that has come unplugged or similar. The whole situation should be located in the seat area itself. Probably have to unbolt the seat from the floorpan to properly look at things. Just some thoughts . . . NTX5467

The t-top roof option and the console w/bucket seat option would have been independent of each other and restricted to 2 door models only. Engine choice was independent of these two items too. When the '80 body series came online with the '78 models, t-tops were a factory order option and generally were better designed and integrated with the vehicle than the previous Hurst/Hatch models (from American Sunroof Corporation) which were not factory installed. The factory t-tops also had more glass area than the H/H conversions too. Hope this helps, NTX5467

My '70 Buick Service Manual lists the following: Horsepower 230@4400 Torque 350@2400 Taxable Horsepower 46.2 Octane Requirement -- Motor 85 Research 93 (Posted Pump Octane is the average of these two numbers and came into existence later) Compression Ratio 9.0 The "Net" power ratings came into existence a year or so later, when about the only significant change (other than appropriate for the particular year model emission controls) was a compression ratio of 8.5 and unleaded fuel compatibility. The ratings above would be by the earlier "gross power" SAE methods. This engine is more about smooth and economical power than maximum power output considering it has the smaller Rochester 2bbl carburetor. It "drives" better than many of the beloved Chevy motors of the same size, at least to me, and is really quite similar to what the current 200 horsepower 3.8L Buick V-6 is in the current Regals--except in fuel economy. The 4bbl versions also had a dual exhaust (and a higher compression ratio prior to '71) to help explain their additional power. The Buick 350 V-8 with the 2bbl might not have the cache of having a 4bbl or being a 455, but it's a pretty dang good motor in stock form and with the small (probably about 300 cfm) 2bbl carburetor. You could do a whole lot worse than just give it a good tune and drive it! Enjoy! NTX5467

For those small areas that don't really require the full washdown, a quality brake clean spray ("chlorinated" works better than "non-chlorinated", typically, but the "good stuff" is allegedly more non-friendly to the atmosphere) can work well as can B-12 or similar. The mat idea sounds really neat, especially in an enclosed shop with a nice floor. Better to lay on also, I suspect. Happy Holidays, NTX5467

The "time honored" cleaner that the service station people used to use to really clean their driveways and such was powdered Tide soap. Wet the concrete, sprinkle it on, use the wide sweeper brush or another strong brisseled (and with an appropriately long handle) scrub brush to mix it up and such, then wash it off with a strong stream of water. Somewhat labor intensive, but it worked in the '60s and probably will work now. I've used other similar cleaners but like Castrol's liquid cleaner--buy it by the gallon as the quart bottles don't go far enough. It works with cold water too, as it says on the label. Might need to scrub or scrape the accumulations, but otherwise letting it set and then scrubbing with the sweeper brush on the handle and it works pretty well. Once you get things really clean, then you might consider getting the surface sealed, but some sealers get EXTREMELY slick with the slightest dampness! But they have to be maintained with recoats every so often so the liquid/powdered cleaners might be best. Just some thoughts . . . NTX5467

Idle speed is most probably being controlled by the Idle Air Control stepper motor. This is a spring loaded plunger that varies the air flow around the closed throttle plate in the throttle body assembly. It gets its commands from the ECM and it's various sensors. Does sound like it's trying to work, though. EGR that has stuck or is prevented from closing fully at idle by deposit buildup under its plunger (pintle) will probably also cause missing at idle instead of just a varying idle speed. Could also be an intake manifold issue or manifold gasket integrity issue. Could be deposits on the throttle plate or in the throttle bore preventing the throttle plate from closing fully (or as far as it needs to) at idle. Could even be a malfunctioning fuel injector. The FIRST thing to do would be to pull the codes from the computer and see what they are! Otherwise, you can throw chunks of expensive parts at the car and still not have it fixed. Many of the auto supplies that will pull the codes "for free" are doing it so you will buy the parts from them--still no guarantee they will fix the car as some codes are inter-related. Similar with private/chain repair facilities that have a "simple" code scanner. You can also probably short two particular terminals on the ALDL connection to get the Check Engine Light to flash, but you'll need an ACCURATE list of codes for your particular year of vehicle to see what they are. Getting the codes and dignositics and repair estimate from a quality repair facility or GM dealer would be the most expeditious way to get your Buick back to it's smooooooth running best. Then you'll have a much better picture of what the problem(s) are and what it will take to fix them successfully. These people will charge for their diagnostic time and expertise (as any professional should), but considsering that "time is money", it can be cheaper in the long run. With computerized vehicle control systems, guessing can be conterproductive unless it's a clearly defined problem that is somewhat common. Unfortunately, as in other things, "No simple answers to complex questions". Vehicles aren't as simple as they used to be--and that's a whole 'nuther discussion. This probably might not be the answer you were desiring, but that's the reality as I have observed it to be. Happy Holidays! NTX5467

From what my '68 Buick service manual shows, the 350 V-8 (no carb spec) in a LeSabre could have the 3 spd manual trans, the ST300, or ST400. The Wildcat, and higher level cars with the larger motors (plus a selection of the intermediate cars with the larger engines) would only have the ST400. My uncle bought a new '68 LeSabre 4dr hardtop with the 350 2bbl and ST300 trans. I somewhat suspect there were lots of them equipped that way. My '68 LeSabre Custom Conv. has a 350 4bbl and ST400. The Turbo350 came out in '69 model year so it was either the ST300 2spd or the ST400 3spd automatics prior to that. It's possible someone could have swapped the engine/trans in a prior time, but considering how things usually happened back then, only the engine would have been changed and the trans would have "stayed there". Too many little side issue things to change to go from a ST300 to ST400 or vice versa. If people would buy some emblems and make "clone" Z-28s, they could also have bought the 400 emblems and added them to your car too. Might also have been a factory miscue or miscoordination on the assembly line--or a shortage of ST400s when that particular car came down the line so they substituted the 350 2bbl w/ST300 in its place, rebated the price difference to the dealer and everyone was happy. Possibly, if you desired to disassemble the car for a copy of the build sheet (if it hasn't disintegrated by now) that might indicate what the "build order" for the car was, either ST300 or ST400. That might narrow things down somewhat. Might also be some codes on the ProtectoPlate or data plate under the hood. Enjoy! NTX5467

There might still be a bumper recycling facility in your area. Check with some of the local body shops. Most of these places have now evolved into the bumper fascias of modern vehicles, but might still do the older straighten, recondition, rechrome operations. Fed regulations on emissions have driven many of the chrome shops out of business and have probably resulted in some buyouts and consolidation of facilities. NTX5467

I concur with Roberta, it's related to the SuperTurbine 400 trans, probably moreso than being tied to an engine option at that time as the ST300 could be had with larger motors too. The SuperTurbine 300 2-speed automatic was the "base" automatic into the later '60s. These were "switch pitch" converter automatics. The ST400 is a variation of the TurboHydraMatic 400 trans used by other GM divisions, yet the higher carlines got the switch pitch converter that Chevies and Pontiacs didn't. Every Buick 4bbl V-8 back then was "high compression" with the compression ratio you mentioned, typically. Enjoy! NTX5467

I concur Greg. Along about '73, I found an article in Chilton's "Automotive Industries" magazine that reviewed what Chrysler did in some testing. It wasn't until about the '74 model year that Chrysler's engines were fully unleaded fuel compatible (with induction hardened valve seats) so they recommended switching off between leaded and unleaded fuels (one tank of leaded for each two of unleaded) at that time. What they did was take a New Yorker station wagon with a 440 equipped with their heavy duty trailer equipment package and hooked it to a trailer that was "full rated capacity" for the vehicle. They ran it on the proving grounds at something like 75mph under that load with unleaded fuel only just to see how far it would go before problems happened. Valve seat recession had completely ruined the heads in about 10,000 or 12,000 miles. Again, this was heavy loads and higher speed conditions. I rather doubt that was all on level roads too. At that time, the only anti-wear additives in the fuel typically was the tetraethyl lead. During these earlier times, Amoco marked a high octane unleaded fuel. There were no issues with valve seat recession or it would not have been on the market as long as it was. If they'd been buying cylinder heads, it would have been different. There were other fuel additives that would do the same as tetraethyl lead would do with respect to valve seat wear, just that lead did double duty as an octane booster and wear preventative. Unleaded fuel also takes about 5% more crude oil to refine than did leaded fuel, so you can see the economic implications of using tetraethyl lead. I agree that few of us will drive our vintage cars at full rated load and higher speeds on a regular basis. I also concur that having a fuel of sufficient octane to work in our older engines (without clattering too much) is probably more important in day to day or other occassional use than worrying about valve seat wear. As long as the valve guides are in good shape, the valve will seat squarely and not typically cause any problems. It's when the guide and valve stem pairing get some wear on them that the valve might wobble and not seat squarely each time it closes. This will lead to oil consumption (from too much clearance and further wear the valve stem seals) and "burnt" valves. In retrospect, I haven't observed the unleaded fuel in engines originally designed for leaded fuels to be the big issue it was suspected it would be in passenger car use engines. Just some additional thoughts, NTX5467

The numbers might mean more than amp ratings. They can also refer to a different physical size and/or terminal placement. You might check one of the reproduction battery sites for more information on amp/hour ratings and other related things. Enjoy! NTX5467

The Lumina was a solid product and a durable vehicle. Somewhat mundane styling and a name that should have been something else were the main issues, as I perceive it. Mechanicals were good but nothing earth shattering. The rear suspension with the transverse leaf spring (as the '84 Corvettes had) was innovative and practical, but was later replaced with struts. NTX5467

Theoretically, any cylinder head without hardened or hard valve seats needs some kind of valve recession additive for the fuel. But, there are other variables involved in that deal too (i.e., how hard the vehicle is driven, valve rotators or not, other anti-wear fuel additives in the fuel already). From what I understand, it takes about 1 gram of lead per gallon to give minimal protection from valve seat wear with non-hardened seats. In the days of 100 Research Octane fuels, there were about 4 grams/gallon. Lead was also the main octane increase additive back then too. GM changed all of their engines to unleaded fuel capability in April of 1971. This included induction hardened valve seats in the cylinder heads. In later years, some engines actually have hardened valve seat inserts in the heads (cast iron included) as all aluminum heads already have. A competent machine shop can install the hardened seat inserts in heads which didn't come with them or did not have the induction hardened seats. I don't believe that valve seat recession has been quite the big deal it was originally suspected of being, so you might be better off driving the car on existing fuels (without additives) as octane would probably be a more critical issue than a lack of lead. The lead additives on the market will not supply even 1 gram per gallon unless you dump a whole case in the tank at each fillup. Not all fuels respond to that deal to increase octane either. NTX5467

There were some black LeSabre coupes for a few years in the later '80s as you described. Upgrade suspension and tire/wheel package and with the normal 3.8L V-6 of those years. At the last Flint BCA meet in the later '80s, there were also some black LeSabre coupes (with bench seats) on display that were part of a promotion Buick did at a NASCAR track like Darlington. Seems like they supplied about 50 or so of those cars for that event. (Strange how little bits of Buick history like that get lost during the 12 years that a Buick must exist before being allowed into a judged BCA event.) One of our chapter members bought one of those black coupes (not the promotional ones) and owned it for a while. A nice car that was distinctive and "not everywhere". I did notice that LeSabre couples built in Flint during that time frame had a higher build quality and slicker paint than those built in the other plant. Enjoy! NTX5467

The same 3.8L Turbo was also available in Monte Carlos during that same time frame. It was a "higher power" alternative to the 305 Chevy V-8, but not by much. The first year Turbo Monte Carlo that a salesman had as a demo back then clattered anytime the accelerator was depressed significantly (the knock sensor was not quite calibrated to keep all of the spark knock out as later ones did). It wasn't just a "trace rattle" either, or at least struck me as not being a trace rattle, but I supsect any further timing retard would have killed too much power back then. The oil seals on the turbos had some problems as time and miles accumulated. In a few cases, the seal on the output side of the impeller would coke up and deteriorate and basically evacuate the oil in the crankcase via the tail pipe over a period of time. Most customers did not check their oil often enough to be aware of this so they ended up buying a turbo center section AND a long block assembly. There was one Riviera Turbo 3.8 that we had problems keeping the turbo operational due to the fact the oil supply lines were gunked up from non-maintenance. The extended warranty company said they would cease to cover that vehicle unless the turbo was removed and the customer was unhappy with all of the problems they didn't know they had. Many early turbo customers weren't aware of the dynamics of how a turbocharger operated and functioned, other than that it made a little engine act like a bigger engine under full power. They had no conception or comprehension that the turbo was supplied with oil by the engine so that when the engine stopped and the oil pressure ceased, the turbo impeller could still be hot and spinning 10,000+ rpm. Plus that until the turbo got oil pressure after sitting overnight, the impeller was spinning basically without lube. Key thing--don't race the turbocharged cold engine just after startup with a turbo (before the oil pressure gets fully "there") and don't immediately kill the engine after a hard run (as the impeller's still spooled up more than normal, let it idle about a minute or so before shutting down so the impeller can slow down). These are little things you don't consider, but I saw in print in a Ford Service publication about how to "live with a turbo engine". In short, one of these various GM vehicles with the early Buick 3.8L Turbo engine might well be collectible some day, they can be rather expensive to maintain and repair. Not that they weren't good motors or setups for their time, it was at the basic infancy of automotive turbos in those earlier times. Chrysler later made "turbo" a common word when they became the world's largest supplier of turbocharged engines in the 1980s (and elevated the "art" of making a turbo last in the process). Later 3.8L Buick Turbo engines with their sophisticated electronics and other advancements/enhancements are in a whole different ball game. As I recall, those earlier engines were carbureted and not fuel injected. It made the turbo easier to adapt with a little extra plumbing, but did not work nearly as well as with fuel injection. As for performance potential, the accepted limit for the amount of horsepower that a front drive transaxle could transmitt to the ground back then was 200 horsepower. This was basically an industry-wide limit and explained why that was the upper limit of power for fwd cars in that time frame, regardless of brand. Therefore, with the other factors involved, unless the transaxle is seriously upgraded, it's not feasible to even consider any type of high performance modification for this setup. Usually, the Turbo 3.8L V-6 in a LeSabre was paired with the F41 suspension calibration for a modest performance image of sorts, but nothing near what the later GNs were capable of. Basically, they were nice Buicks with a higher technology engine than normal that were good driving and running cars but not "hot rods". That's how I remember them when they were new. NTX5467

[color:\\"blue\\"] HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO Y'ALL TOO, MIKE AND NANCY! It's been a very nice day down here in North Texas with a clear sky and temps in the higher 60s. Although I'm not a football fan, the Cowboys did beat the Redskins this afternoon too, so that completed an upbeat day. I hope everyone has a very nice Holiday Season. Enjoy! NTX5467

If it goes in like the Buick Service Manual indicates for my '70 Skylark Custom, there will be two small holes in the divider bars that the tangs on the "monogram" will stick through. I suspect the factory manual for the '71 will also show the same details my '70 factory service manual does. There had to be some "bulletproof" way for the people in off-line assembly to put it all together back then, I suspect, or they could have been placed all over the place. For a general idea, you might check some accurate sales literature pics too and then look closely on your existing grill for the holes I mentioned. Hope this helps, NTX5467

Many times, the rates on older vehicles don't seem to decrease as it seems they should, so you might end up paying for coverage on a "new" car even if it's got a good bit of age on it. But, it could be that as the vehicle valuation decreases, the rates keep increasing so the payments stay pretty much the same. One goes up as the other goes down. No doubt, the LeSabre operates better than the Lumina (with its basically middle '80s-type design, which was good for back then). I like the way the current gen LeSabre feels to drive and handle--kind of reminds me of my '70 Skylark Custom 350 2bbl in the way it winds the gears out for part throttle acceleration. I guess you've also noticed that it takes about 82mph to get to 2000rpm on the tack in 4th gear, yet still has no lack of low end performance due to that famous Buick Torque. In short, a very nice car! Enjoy! NTX5467

As I recall, the April date was for all passenger vehicle engines for the North American market. It involved induction hardening the valve seats. Such induction hardened seats will have a blueish tint in the immediate seat area from the heat. It only goes about .003" deep so one good seat "facing" could go through it. Usually, the reason a valve "burns" is from guide wear. When the guide to valve stem clearance becomes excessive, it can result in the valve not seating squarely in the seat. This can degrade the seat itself also start some erosion of the valve edge. End result is that a flat spot on the outer circumference of the valve head begins until compression is further lost past the valve head/cylinder head interface. In previous times, it was common practice to knurl the valve guides internally. This basically puts grooves inside the existing guide to result in raised areas to make up for the wear. They can last for a good while, but a temporary fix at best. When you get the cylinder head off, it will be evident from the way the crowns of the pistons are "cleaned" or have deposits on them how much oil is coming up past the rings and getting into the combustion chamber. In prior times, it was common to pull the heads and just fix what needed to be fixed on the cylinders that needed repairs and resinstall everything. Theory was that if you "renewed" all of the valve seats it would show up the lesser capabilities of the compression rings (due to their wear). It is possible to have good compression yet had oil consumption due to poor oil ring performance. The other situation is that when the heads were torqued onto the motor when it was originally built, the head bolts exerted a particular "distortion" into the cylinder wall areas. A distortion that the rings have come to wear into over the miles. When the cylinder heads are removed and then retorqued, this distortion pattern can change and compromise the rings' performance until they once again might become acclimated to their new "circle" in the cylinder wall. Oil consumption can increase until they get re-worn-in. Some of these things are "worst case scenario" situations. The deal with fixing only what needs to be fixed and putting things back together was the main way things were done in the '70s (an later) and prior with good results. Of course, the "high dollar" was to do things is to remove the motor, find a quality machine shop, and have them do an OEM-spec or better rebuild. That would include boring the block (probably about a .030" cut to clean it up) with deck plates to simulate the heads being bolted down, line honing the main web saddles to make sure the crank is in the block "true" and will spin easily, decking the block to make sure the heads are sitting squarely on the bore as they need to be, polishing and checking the index on the crankshaft, resizing and honing the rods, checking things for cracks or defects or high wear situations--and all of that is before you even look at the cylinder heads. As for the cylinder heads, putting a new set of chrome stem valves into correctly-sized valve guides with new bronze helicoil inserts, with high quality valve stem seals (but NOT valve stem seals that will not let enough oil get into the guide for necessary long term lubrication), and a quality valve job that does not "sink" the valves into the cylinder head. Of course, the heads will neeed to be surfaced to correct any surface warpage which might have existed when they left the factory or have accumulated over time. Not to mention being checked for cracks also. Don't forget to inspect the oil pump mechanism (if it's mounted in another engine part casting) for rotor and casting wear. If it's a self-contained unit, preplacement probably is the best option. When all of that is done and the long block reassembled, the engine is ready for reinstallation. Now, for the sticky part, there are always plenty of "good" engine builders but few of these have a full complilment of machines to do all of these machining operations themselves. Many times, though, they have access to these people. Quality machine work is the backbone of any engine build procedure and poor quality machine work can ruin an otherwise and previously good engine core--regardless of how "good" this shop allegedly is. Always use and specify gaskets, rings, etc. which are AT LEAST OEM-spec quality so that you don't end up with what I call a "30,000 mile rebuild". What that means is that those less expensive gaskets and rings and such will work fine for 30,000 miles before the oil consumption and such start instead of the basically 100,000+ mile durability from the at least OEM-spec parts. In the small block Chevy engine book that Grumpy Jenkins wrote in the '80s, he stated that they used used engine cores to build their race engines. Even if they had to buy new ones, they put them in a protected place outside for them to cure further. End result, when you remachine a used engine block, the machining does not "move" as it will with a "green" casting. So, if you take a used engine in good condition and then optimize the machine work on it (with high quality machines and an operator that knows how to use them correctly), it should last longer than the original buildup did. Depending on what your financial and logistical issues might be, the least deal with just fixing what needs to be fixed (but in a high quality manner) and let the other stuff sort itself out might be the best way to do things. If there are no issues with oil pressure or lower engine sounds, then it's still probably good enough to be usable for some time yet. Other than that, you can play it by ear on the rest of the things I've mentioned and see how it goes. Plus, it's probably a lot easier to find a garage that can get a good valve and guide job performed (probably less than $1000.00 depending on what all is done and how extensively, plus labor rates) than a complete engine rebuild (where the rebuild itself could run probably $2000.00 or a little more--without any remove and installation labor). I hope this might help explain some of the various orientations and options you might have to consider. Enjoy! NTX5467

Back in the later '80s and early '90s, there were many GM cars on the "low loss" list. When you looked at what they were and the demographics of the owners, it became obvious. Basically, they were the full size station wagons (Olds, Buick) and similar sedans (LeSabre, Delta 88). This was before GM started getting all excited about their higher carlines' customers age demographics. Those people didn't drive fast, travel to unsafe areas, travel during the wee hours of the morning, and probably parked their cars in their garages when they were home. At that point in time, there seemingly were several vehicles from Buick, Olds, and maybe Cadillac on those lists. The higher volume Chevies and Pontiacs typically weren't there (except possibly the Pontiac Parisienne wagon) which had much higher "exposure" to potential loss for many reasons. GM dominated that list with their larger number of vehicle choices. At the other end of the scale was the Olds Cutlass that usually came in on the "most desired"/stolen vehicle while similar Buicks and Pontiacs might have been well down on those lists (if they were there at all). Some Hondas were on that list too as were GM Chevy/GMC C/K series light trucks. There are several ways to look at those lists too, but trying to read too much into them can lead to incorrect conclusions. Enjoy! NTX5467

I'd forgotten about the Transmission Controlled Spark. It was connected to an automatic trans high gear pressure switch that ran a vacuum chopper/bleed solenoid in the vacuum advance line between the carb and the distributor. It allowed normal vacuum to the distributor only after the trans had shifted into high gear, keeping the vacuum bled off during operation in the lower gears. A "less advanced spark" led to higher combustion chamber temps and more fully cooked the unburn hydrocarbons before they went into the exhaust manifold. On some 1970 higher model series 455s with TCS, there was an override for the vacuum advance to help keep the engine from overheating during prolonged idle time with "less advanced" vacuum advance. When the coolant got to about 220 degrees, it would put straight manifold vacuum to the vacuum advance to increase engine speed (plus fan and water pump speeds) to cool things back down. The EGR that Chrysler used initially was like a controlled vacuum bleed, except it did it with small "floor jets" in the intake manifold that fed off of the heat crossover passage. A pretty neat concept that cost little to implement and obviously worked pretty well for what it was. The floor jets let exhaust gases be drawn into the intake manifold from the heat crossover passage that went laterally under the manifold plenum area. The jet sizing would be critical as if too much came in during higher vacuum situations at idle, idle quality would suffer, but once higher rpm levels for cruise conditions were reached, the engine tolerated the extra inert gasses better. In prior times, when or if a manifold might crack to do the same thing the Chrysler floor jets did, it would be replaced, but the Chrysler situation was carefully calibrated to do what they wanted. Later, they did go to the more normal and controllable vacuum controlled EGR valve. During those higher vacuum operational modes, there would be very little back pressure in the exhaust so the jet sizing "worked". Just as with regular EGR valves, the EGR would go away at WOT with the lessened manifold vacuum. I found an SAE Transastion along about '73 or '74. It was done by an unnamed GM division on the effects of EGR on engine performance. The two engine sizes were 350 and 455. From the way it read, I suspected it would be Olds that did it, but it could have been Buick. Many graphs, dyno runs, and data. They determined that a maximum of 15% EGR should be used for best results. Also, any power loss that occurred from the introduction of the inert exhaust gasses to decrease the heat of combustion (and oxides of nitrogen production) could be regained with advanced spark timing. After all, it takes more lead to fire off a diluted charge than a clean charge. This is why that some engines clattered when their EGR valves became non-functional. NTX5467

Typically, CA spec engines would have had leaner carb jetting characteristics, distributors with an altered advance curve (less advance at lower rpms than Federal spec vehicles), initial timing would be closer to TDC than a Federal spec vehicle, and they probably most certainly had the Air Injection Reactor system (i.e., air pump). Heated air to the air cleaner was on all cars and light trucks by that time so that would be constant. EGR came into the mix a few years later. In some cases, most of the calibration changes only affected idle, low speed, and midrange rpm cruise situations with WOT typically being the same or a little richer to compensate a little for the leaner primary calibrations. The rated horsepower and torque figures are at WOT and not part throttle. Some initial throttle reponse off idle and a little more lethargic reaction to throttle input during the altered operational phases might be evident too. As the spark advance was "slower" than optimum, fuel economy could suffer a little too. Ultimate cruise fuel economy might not suffer as much as everyday fuel economy as the lesser throttle response usually results in deeper throttle movements which could put the carb into the power mixture more, further decreasing fuel economy. The 8.5 to 1 compression ratio came online with the 1971 engines and hardened valve seats happened along about April,1971. During those earlier times, the strategy was to alter existing calibrations as that was cheaper than adding equipment and running the production cost upward and later redesigns specifically for emissions reduction were not yet funded. Hope this helps, NTX5467

That's the blower control module I mentioned. When you get it out, it looks like a big finned aluminum heat sink with one transistor on one side and a circuit board on the other side, typically. Easy to change, as you mentioned. Thanks for the input, NTX5467