NTX5467

I vote for the glossy-type paper for the whole publication. I makes everything appear much more lively and accurate in all respects and has allowed the expansion of all pages to be picture pages if need be. It will also allow easier setups and formats as those producing the publication will not have to worry about what type of paper will be on what page of the publication. What might be saved in decreased paper cost would possibly be taken away in added time spent in getting things laid out for production. I concur that glossy paper (of the type which has recently been used) can have more reflectivity than some might like, so I might suggest more of a semi-gloss paper but not the totally uncoated paper of the previous times. The other issue, which I feel is a very important issue, is the fact that our club publication is how many in the outside world perceive our group and the marketing aspects of the publication cannot be discounted. The last thing we want the outside world to perceive is that the BCA is "chintzy" in how it does things. I feel that digressing to the uncoated papers of prior times might well be viewed as "being chintzy" when we should be using the expenses of the more expensive paper to invest in the future of the BCA from the marketing aspects of having a better looking publication. If a more semi-gloss coated paper might be found that will serve the readability and picture quality issues, that would be the best alternative. It's one thing to spend the club funds effectively and responsibly for the best bang for the buck, but another to hold back all of the way and possibly sacrifice long term financial viability of the organization. Therefore, some expenses should be treated as investments in the future as opposed to day to day expenses. The club publication is a definite marketing tool for the club. Excellent content is very good to have, but you have to have the cosmetics to get people to look at it to start with. A nice cover with lack luster interior pages could be viewed as "looks good on the outside, but . . ." and that's how many might view the whole organization. Thanks for this opportunity, Pete. NTX5467

You might consider taking the car to a Delco Radio Service Center and letting them troubleshoot the system. You could also take it to a trusted GM or Buick dealership for the same thing, but if it turns out to be a radio issue, the service center will need to repair your existing radio so that might be a better place to start. As the reception has deteriorated, it could also be a lead-in issue just as it could be a radio issue. It could also be that perhaps the station's transmitter power has been decreased for some reason. Several variables involved that have to be troubleshooted to ascertain where the problem could be. I'm not familiar with a 100,000 mile Buick warranty unless it's an extended warranty you're talking about. In which case it could be a GM Extended Warranty or another extended warranty company's product that might be sold by a GM dealer. Extended warranty coverage can vary, but one extended warranty company just paid to replace a broken Delco radio and others have paid to repair the radio, if it was repairable. If they will cover the radio, it would seem they would cover the antenna, whether it's mounted on the fender or in the windshield. Check your policy for those issues. Enjoy! NTX5467

On later model GM cars, they started moving many of the fuses and such out under the hood in junction blocks with covers on them. It could also be an electronic flasher that does not use the previous bi-metal spring contact inside, as the later model light trucks use, so it might be square instead of round and metallic. I don't recall the specific location on the Riverias, but highly suspect it's under the hood somewhere. NTX5467

The weather will be nice for this weekend too! We have 12 trophy classes for all Buicks, plus Long Distance (hint, hint), Hard Luck, and Best of Show. Mr. Thornhill has been very supportive of this event as he has been of past GS Club events he's hosted at his dealership. It's also the same weekend as the big NHRA race at nearby Texas Motorplex near Ennis. There's also an antique glass show/sale at the Waxahachie Civic Center too. Y'all come and bring your BUICKS! Thanks, Bill! NTX5467

Valid points, John. The main power consumption issues are related to internal rotating mass and not specifically to Chevy or Buick transmissions. Therefore, I suspect the ST300 would take similar or less power to run than the THM350. I also suspect one reason the Buick Turbo cars used the T200R-4 instead of the stronger T700R-4 had to do with the power consumption issue as we all know the T200 architecture is not specifically about torque capacity but lighter weight (considering that it was originally used in the lower horsepower engines when it was introduced). The Turbo cars also used the somewhat troublesome PowerMaster brake booster that uses an electric pump to charge the power assist accumulator--again probably in the interest of getting the most power to the pavement. There is now an OD version of the electronic T400, the 4L80E. At one time, GM Performance Parts had a controller listed for it as a stand alone situation as the diesel versions (non-electronic pump models) had a separate controller for that trans. It is strong but is also big and heavy. I suspect a strengthened T700 would make a better choice for a higher powered street rod or modified vehicle. As with the PowerGlide, the drag race guys have proven that with the correct torque converter, you can work wonders. Everyone likes that push in the seat upon initial takeoff, but if the tires have more than about 10% slippage on takeoff, anything else just goes up in smoke. Therfore, I suspect a properly set up ST300 w/SwitchPitch would get real close to what some of the other 3 speed automatics might offer in performance. In daily driving, it might be close enough to not be worth the time and expense to swap transmissions, but that just depends on what your ultimate uses might be too. As for the engine, leaving it biased more toward low and mid-range torque in cam and carb (basically stock) would be best, but to also let it breathe with a good high flow and quiet exhaust system to compliment the higher rpm capabilities which might be there. Basicaly a torque motor that will wind out and not get winded . Enjoy! NTX5467

You might want to consider a scatter shield of some kind anyway. If I recall correctly, they are required safety equipment for manual transmissions without regard to flywheel material. Keep up that great nostalgia work! It sounds great! Enjoy! NTX5467

Thanks for your comments, Bruce. I know whatever changes that happen will need to be evolutionary, but sometimes making evolutionary changes results in the ultimate goal being missed or sidetracked for whatever reasons (as when the champion of those goals in not on the Board any longer, for example). I feel the BCA has made some definite committments to get younger people involved, but it does not need to end with a particular Board member's term either. As for the Meet Manager orientation, it would appear that a local chapter would still need to put in a bid for the national meet. I highly suspect that just taking much of the basic organizational duties and responsibilities from the local host chapter would not significantly impact the current situation. I also know that Mike and Nancy are very capable people, but I also suspect having them be responsible for these additional items would make for one very busy quarter of the year for them. Not to mention the ongoing planning for the next and following years' events. If the Meet Manager orientation, as "Anonymous" as laid out, is a valid proposal it would appear that the host chapter would also split the "take" of any profits from the meet, thus decreasing the host chapter's desire to go to the trouble to host a BCA National Meet in the first place. It's great to get together each year in a different locale and all of that, but if the profit motive for doing a meet is lessened or deleted, why would a local chapter even desire to get involved? That leads us to the way the WPC Club does things. Basicaly the club officers deciding when and where the meet will be and making it happen. I understand they make good use of the local Chamber of Commerce and Convention Bureaus in doing that also. This approach would work for most any club group and would keep responsibility for any good or bad happenings within the BCA organization. It would also transfer the profit motive to the BCA, I suspect. For example, the Mopar Nats are run by a corporation that is a man and his wife. They only to that one event and enlist the help of local Mopar clubs to perform their many support functions at the event. They go out and get local and national sponsorships for the event plus get Chrysler's Mopar Performance people involved with factory trailer displays and a major manufacturer's midway. Think Super Chevy Sunday times 10. I do have a personal agenda, though. I do not want this discussion of a Meet Manager to interfere with my desire for the BCA National Meets to have a general westward movement in the future. After 2003 in Flint, we're hosting the 2004 meet in Plano/Dallas again. Hopefully, we'll see our CO associates make a successful bid for 2005 and then that would hopefully lead to a CA meet in 2006 to complete the westward progression. I feel this westward progression is a needed situation and DO NOT desire to see it short circuited by a Meet Manager discussion at this time, plain and simple. Having been involved in the 1996 meet we hosted and other local and regional car shows, I know that many people who don't think they can do something of that magnitude really CAN DO something of that magnitude if they have some guidance and mentoring in the process. Hosting a national meet is not rocket science, but it seems to me that too many people give up before they really make an effort to see what all is involved. It doesn't take a chapter of hundreds of members either, as we found out in 1996, either. What it does take is planning, coordination, research, and advance damage control--plus some members who are dedicated to making it work. Having a good computer program for registration and other functions is a definite plus, but not totally necessary. It does expedite things greatly, though. The computer is not the saviour of our meets, not nearly as much as good planning and coordination are, but it does highly expedite any data processing that happens in various meet areas--especially considering that judging and awards are the same day. Personally and professionally, I do not like the dynamics of what appears to be "Let George do it" and/or "Let's hire George to do it" with respect to the Meet Manager proposal. I feel we need to address why it has seemingly come to this and look for ways to not have to consider that whole deal any further. As we all know and Bruce mentioned too, you get out of something what you put into it. As Roberta and Jeff can attest to, I have been in email communication with them (and their respective Boards) over the past few years, so I have been involved somewhat. The hand print indentation of Judy Leets' fingers has finally gone away from my forearm (from when she "requested" me to attend her Chapter Director's meeting in Kokomo). I have been involved in our North Texas Chapter as an officer since the later 1980s, plus a local Mopar club I am a charter member of (started in the middle 1980s) and have been an officer more years than not. I am also a board member of the Texas Vehicle Club Council. I have been employed at the same GM dealership in the parts department since Sept., 1976 and hold a BBA Management degree from Texas Tech University. None of these things makes me any better than anyone else! This is not a future campaign speech either! Just a few things to illustrate my various automotive enthusiast activities over the years, plus being a "car guy" when it wasn't popular. Also, I need to state that my orientations are my own and might not correspond with the orientations of the various enthusiast groups that I am a member of. The BCA has recently emerged from some controversial times and I don't look forward for anything of that magnitude to happen in the near future. The issue of having a Meet Manager should not divide the membership either! I feel the membership of the BCA has many capable people with the expertise to host and orchestrate a BCA National Meet. We just need to get them motivated to do so! Now, about those Colorado and California meets in 2005 and 2006, respectively? Thanks for your continued time and consideration! Willis Bell 20811

Getting more power from the engine is one thing, but getting it through the 2 speed automatic is another. One advantage of the Chevy PowerGlide (which I suspect is also related to the Buick 2 speed automatic) is that it takes less power to run it than a Turbo 350 and especially a Turbo 400 automatic. Seems like the PG takes 15 or 20 horsepower whereas the T350 takes 30 and the T400 takes 40? Seems like there were some Switch Pitch versions of this trans too, just as there were for the Turbo 400. If there are, adding that would add some needed torque multiplication to the standing start performance, possibly getting closer to the torque multiplication of the Turbo 350 in the process. Adding a fixed pitch converter of a higher stall speed might not be advisable, though, especially for general street driving. As with other GM automatics, firming up the shifts might be helpful too. In that same "heavier duty" orientation, could it be that similar transmissions for LeSabres had stouter clutch packs and bands? Just some thoughts . . . NTX5467

I might recommend that you get the flywheel checked for cracks prior to installation. Aluminum connecting rods have a definite life expectancy before they should be chunked and I suspect aluminum flywheels could be similar. As I recall, aluminum flywheels were popular in the '60s. Their main advantage was light weight and resultantly less reciprocating weight for the engine, compared to the normal cast iron flywheel. The lighter weight flywheel would allow the engine to rap up quicker in neutral but would resultantly store less centrifugal energy as the engine runs before the clutch is engaged. This could result in more rpms being necessary to engage the clutch when starting from a dead stop or prior to at drag strip start. A heavy weight flywheel would let a lower power motor tolerate a sudden clutch engagement without killing the motor due to the higher level of stored energy whereas the lighter flywheel equiped motor might not tolerate that activity so well. Therefore, the cast iron flywheel engine would be easier to launch but slower to rev up under full throttle whereas the lighter flywheel engine would be trickier to get off the line but would rev quicker once underway. Kind of a trade-off of sorts. I recall seeing a comparison of this sort in one of the Hot Rod Magazine annuals from the early '60s. Seems like they were using a high performance VW motor for the test engine/vehicle, but the principles would be the same with a larger engine. Hope this helps you understand some of the issues of light weight flywheels. Enjoy! NTX5467

After considering the dynamics, side issues, and underlying orientations of the proposed professional event management, I feel the REAL QUESTION should be "Why are we even considering this in the first place?" The BCA is one of the largest single marque organizations in existence, with members between all coasts of the United States and around the world. There obviously are many members with the knowledge, expertise, and skills to group together to put on a national meet in their North American location each year--either as a group of chapters or as an individual chapter. Yet, for some reason, this is not happening to the degree it appears it could happen. I suspect there are several main reasons for this. Although the BCA has a massive number of members, very few seemingly are active at the chapter level and/or regional and/or national level. BCA Board Member candidates typically are few each election time. Member voting reached a new low point this past time. Each time bids for the national meet are entertained, there are few, typically, which are viable bids. With our large member base, why could this be? Could it be the "Let George do it" orientation? Let "George" run for the BCA National Board. Let "George" vote for the board candidates. Let "George" put on a national meet. And now, let's hire "George" to run our yearly national meets. Unfortunately, it appears this is the pattern of several years. Do we really want it to continue that way? As the number of paid members in the BCA might be increasing somewhat, I suspect the "gray factor" has remained somewhat status quo. Could this also be a factor? There has been an orientation to get younger members involved in the BCA, yet many BCA members (and probably a good deal of the general public) perceive the BCA to be an "Antique Auto Club" or "old car club". Typically, the younger people in the general population that own and love their late model Buicks (as evidenced in the many Internet websites and forums devoted to these later model Buicks and related GM cars) will stay away for that reason. Unless we can actively reach out to these younger Buick owners and successfully get their attention that the BCA is NOT SPECIFICALLY an "old car club" and that it REALLY is about ALL BUICKS, the "gray factor" will probably not change. Perhaps I have missed something in the printed mission statements of the BCA, but I don't recall seeing anywhere that it is specifically an "Antique Automobile Club". Yet this has been a perceived orientation and it has been stated that "anything newer than 25 years old is just a 'used car'". Another factor is the "12 Year Rule" that prohibits any Buick product newer than 12 years old from being in a judged BCA National Meet. With the "antique" orientation, many would consider a younger vehicle to be too new (read that "Too easy to get a trophy with", possibly) to be of interest to someone with an "antique" orientation. This can be a valid orientation, but it's also an orientation that has come back to haunt this organization. When the Riviera came out in the early '60s, under the 12 Year Rule, the earliest date that a Riviera could participate in a BCA National Meet would have been the middle 1970s. Similar with the Buick Skylark muscle cars. Certainly similar with the Reatta. Therefore, the BCA basically told these new Buick owners that while they would accept their money to be a member in the BCA, they would not let them bring their new pride and joy Riviera or GS455 or Reatta to enter in the BCA National Meet judged car show display. End result was that these owners went off to form their own groups which exist today--and existed prior to the formation of the BCA Divisions which recognizes these important vehicles. The owners of these newer, front wheel drive Buicks possibly want nothing to do with an "antique car club" when they can have their own group of their peers. Peers that are not the age of their grand parents. So they go off and do their own things too. Yet, with some of the modifications they perform to their vehicles (sound systems, fancy wheels, etc.) they would not even be eligible for an Archival Award (at the present time) and they would not show well against a full customized street machine/street rod. They could be accepted into the BDE group, though. So, they are in their own world as a result, with respect to car clubs. So, with so many Buick enthusiasts that have been told to "go play somewhere else" by the BCA's orientations, the present state of affairs would appear to be the logical result. A result that many would not have predicted in prior times. No one would have predicted that members that were active in prior times would desire to not be active in the more distant future either as everyone kind of expects them to remain active "forever". There are also other issues which transpire as we all age that I will not get into here. For any group to remain vibrant, there should be yonger members coming online to take the place of older members who desire to not be as active as they have been. There must also be an enthusiastic marketing effort to promote the group to the general public in order to get them interested in joining, but we can't pick and choose who we want to be members--except by excluding certain vehicles from our national meet car shows. In seeming contradiction of the perceived "antique" orientation of the BCA, I was highly interested that our late founder, Mr. Greg Field, was pictured in The Bugle with a modified Buick and was quoted as saying the BCA was "for all Buick enthusiasts". It would seem that if our BCA #1 felt that way, that something got sidetracked somewhere. Just my observation. So, it seems that although the number of members is at least constant, the "gray factor" has not decreased. We know that many people desire to "not work" during their retirement, even if it's in a car club where they can have fun and be productive at the same time. I have also observed that few car club members try to stay current with car related things when it much easier to "stay where they are" in that respect. They typically don't care about any "new stuff" for various reasons and to them an "antique" is the same thing it was 20 years ago, namely a '50s or '60s car, when in fact, a 1978 year model vehicle will soon be eligible for antique license plates (due to the 25 year "rolling window" for eligibility). So, I would highly recommend that the 12 Year Rule be deleted so that our BCA National Meets would truly become Celebrations of Buicks, Old and New. When that happens, the membership should increase and the demographics of the "Typical BCA Member" should start decreasing. In one feld swoop, we could easily have the younger members that our organization needs to remain vibrant into the future. I suspect the younger members would also be more active in shaping their destiny in the BCA so that could also mean more Board candidates and more people interested in doing and hosting national meets. The BCA could adopt the slogan "Buick Club of America -- for ALL Buicks, Old and New" to help get rid of the "antique" perception. I suspect that when all of these things are in place, there would be no need to be discussing hiring a national meet event person. With all due respect, there is noting wrong with being an antique car club or being perceived as such, it is just that it gets to be less marketable under that orientation to potential members which are "less vintage". If we are to help educate the later generations about Buicks, they need to also understand how their newer Buicks came to be from the earlier Buicks. When they understand the heritage of their newer Buicks, I highly suspect they will become greater enthusiasts of the Buick marque and vehicles--all enclusive. I also have no issue with the BCA orientation of "assembly line correct" in the judging standards, but I also know that few people find these correct vehicles really appealing or worth looking at, but with some extra chrome and modifications (which some Buicks look absolutely fabulous with!) the interest level will rise. If you watch the paid attendees of a car show where there are stock and customized vehicles, the more customized vehicles will always get more attention from everyone than the vehicle which is totally assembly line correct, although there are some who would walk past the customized vehicle to the completely correct concours quality stock vehicle. It has been my observation that until some of these key issues are dealt with and/or modified, no siginificant changes will take place. It has already been proven how the unwillingness to change has weakened the finances of the BCA in the past, plus generated much controversy in the process. We don't need that to happen again, in either case, yet there can be some evolutionary changes which can be made which will be beneficial to the health and longevity of the organization. I have no issues with old things or old people as we all need to understand and be cognizant of the various heritages of our environment, but in any business entity (non-profit or for profit) there needs to be an awareness of new trends and of also doing "advance damage control" so problems don't exist and/or arise in the future. You have to understand how you got to where you are, but you also need to have a viable idea of where things will end up in the future and how to best plan to get there in the most beneficial manner. I fully understand that some will not agree with my orientations, but I have seen the total energy level at the Mopar Nationals (where ALL Chrysler produced/powered vehicles are openly welcomed and embraced) in a non-generational manner. For example, one year a father advised his son as he put slicks on the front of his hot rodded Neon to race. If the grand father had been there, he would have helped too if he could have (and probably rememembered his first HEMI too). This past year, young grand mothers watched their daughters and grand children picnic under the Viper tent. Every Mopar product is welcomed and celebrated in displays, swap meet parts, a car corral, and hard core racing action. People who think the BCA judging system is tough should see their 1400 point judging sheet where no part of the car goes unscrutinized. I'm not going to suggest that the BCA move their national meet to National Trails Raceway, but some of the same orientation that make the Mopar Nats the great event (and highly prestigious and highly attended event) it is could be adapted to the way the BCA does things to increase the energy level of and enthusiasm for the BCA to everyone's mutual benefit. I know some might consider my orientations "radical" or otherwise, but hopefully we can have a blending of past, current, and proposed future orientations in a general consensus of what actions need to be actively pursued so that the BCA never again has to consider hiring someone to do their national meets (instead of chapters bidding to host those annual national meets as is presently the case). Thanks again for your time and consideration. Hopefully we can effect some positive results from this discussion. Willis Bell 20811 NTX5467

Perhaps a visit to your local Buick dealer's parts department might be in order to request they pull up a picture of the instrument panel area. I suspect you'll find there are clips that hold the trim panel, but there might be some screws too. The parts database illustration should detail what's there, but will not have disassembly instructions. Good luck, NTX5467

Hopefully you are looking in a GM Service Manual for 1990 Buicks as those pre-OBD codes could change from year to year for the same malfunction. Having a GM manual is critical in that aspect! Don't rely on some auto supply diagnostics either as they can be faulty. Once you verify the code and its malfunction mode, then you can seek out that circuit and see what sensors are involved with it and what they do. Then, if you had the Tech2 scan tool the dealership guys have, you could watch what the sensors are doing in "real time" instead of having to guess what they are doing. There are some things that unless you have the quality diagnostic tools and expertise, that it's cheaper and quicker to let the dealership guys do the work for you. That might not be the answer you are looking for, but it could well be the most expeditious in getting the car fixed and the Check Engine light extinguished. NTX5467

There can be some merit into that approach, but with no consistent financial incentive I suspect there would be few qualified people to apply for the job. If a group of current BCA members forms a Meet Production Group, that might be better than hiring an "outsider" to do the shows (and all that might entail) and as BCA members, they might also have a greater vested interest (not necessarily financial) in making things happen as they need to. The other situation would be to do as the Walter P. Chrysler Club does. When no bids are received, the club officers get together and put the meet together themselves. No host chapter is needed or utilized, as I understand it, as the club officers make the decision of where the meet will be, plan tours and day trips, and handle all contractual obligations themselves. While they do solicit bids to host their national yearly meets, there apparently are few chapters with the expertise and manpower to put one on. This approach involves local chamber of commerce people and/or visitors bureau groups to help make things happen. I suspect there are some people in the BCA that could form the Meet Production Group and do a good job with that task, BUT if the group is not geographically diverse enough there could well be dialogue about "one group runs things" or has too much input into what happens, as has happened in the past. Perhaps the most geographically diverse group in the BCA that meets regularly is the Board of Directors? We also know that the Board has enough normal business to handle without having the added burden of locating and planning the annual meets. I really wish that such an approach is not needed or even necessary to keep the yearly BCA National Meets going! The present orientation of BCA Chapters putting in bids to host the annual national meets is probably the best way to do it, even if some chapters might need a little coaxing, as it keeps the way those meets transpire, are planned, and happen in the hands of the membership instead of otherwise. Historically, each chapter that follows another chapter in doing a national meet seems to not desire or feel they need any help or mentoring in how to do what they have set out to do. This is good, to a point, but it also keeps the next host chapter from passing along any tips to the others (who do not believe they need to know what they might be), even though there might be some that are beneficial to the next chapter. In the past, there have been some chapters that have raised the bar in many aspects of the meets, but very few other chapters solicit their input in planning the later meets. Things like how not to loose money can be very important, as are other planning functions, in making things work. Once a good computer program for registration is finalized, it seldom is passed along to the next chapter as the next chapter doesn't feel they need it, for example, when they really could use it. End result is that many host chapter operatives have to dig themselves out of problems that could have been avoided if some mentoring from the previous host chapter(s) had been accepted (or solicited) and sufficient research had been done on how others did things in the past and were successful with what they did. In otherwords, doing a national is not the same as just doing a bigger weekend car show, yet that's the way some approach the whole affair. As I understand it, the BCA still has their minimum standards for many aspects of the national meet. Each host chapter then must see if they can meet those specs with what is available in their particular locale. I suspect that many people give up before they get very far into those initial site investigations, much less the financial aspects of hosting a meet and this is where the mentoring could come in handy. I suspect the best result would be a situation where the BCA not only dictates the minimum specs for a chapter's hosting of a national meet, but could also take a more active role (either by a group of dedicated members or a dedicated meet planning advisory group to mentor, help, and oversee the chapter's activities in bidding for and hosting a national meet) in helping the chapters host financially successful meets that are highly enjoyed by the participants and geopgraphically diverse from year to year. The key would be for this advisory group to only assist and oversee and not be actively involved any deeper than that, yet would be ready to step in to help should problems arise. Perhaps the best functions for this group would be mentoring and quality control? The host chapter would still be the main operatives, though. Basically, I would be highly opposed to having some outside "professional" come in to be the promoter and main operative in making the yearly national meets happen when there already are enough qualified people in the BCA to do that ourselves. I supsect that if the whole situation of hosting a BCA National Meet is demystified, more might be inclined to consider hosting one. Key factors would include networking with other chapters and non-BCA car groups that have done successful national meets previously, communication among the chapters during the planning stages, and a reverse scheduling plan of making sure things are taken care of sequentially before the meet opens. Therefore, I feel we have the necessary expertise in our membership base to not need a "professional" to do our national meets for us. Thanks for your time and consideration, Willis Bell, 20811 NTX5467

Considering that Olds V-8s did come from the factory in that chassis, in 403/350/307 sizings, I would go with the Olds 455 for that reason. Probably all that would be needed is to get the motor mount brackets from a salvage yard. I suspect the 455 motor mounting pad is the same as on the 403, et al., but you need to verify that. Also, remember that you'll also need to upgrade the transmission torque capacity too. The Cadillac 500 cid V-8 was from the prior chassis so the possiblity of it taking more to make it work (mounting and all other hookups for exhaust, radiator, EMISSIONS, and such would be much more work. Putting the earlier model engine in the later model car still means the later model car would be the determining factor in what emissions standards the vehicle would have to pass to be legal for street use, unless you can register it as an "antique" which would also mean "not everyday use" too. It would also be much easier to make the Olds look correct in that respect. NTX5467

A high flow catalytic converter without a complimentary higher flow muffler and exhaust system behind the converter would be of little use (other than bragging rights). Check out the Random Technologies website for information on what makes their replacement converters different and allegedly better. There is also some good information and specs in the DynoMax.com website. There are many "high flow" converters out there, but their point of reference for those claims might be questionable. Also be aware that aftermarket converters don't have to last as long as the factory converters must last and could require replacement sooner in order to keep tailpipe emissions "acceptable" for the vehicle. Hope this helps with what you are looking for. NTX5467

Also check out HighTech GM Performance magazine. Lots of late model computer controlled vehicle vendors in there too. NTX5467

The Grand Prix enthusiasts have the bulk of information and vendors on "enhancement" performance parts for the Buick 3800 supercharged V-6. Notable items are the pulleys to buzz the supercharger faster (and suitable installation tools) and cat-back exhaust systems. The Regal has a 109" wheelbase whereas the Grand Prix, Monte Carlo, and Impala have 110.5" wheelbases. One of the Pontiac enthusiast magazines did some testing on a supercharged Bonneville a year or so ago and got it just into the 13s in the 1/4 mile with bolt on stuff, I believe. As mentioned, some good information at RegalGS.com too. Also be cognizant that the limiting factor in how much ultimate power you can put to the ground is the 4T65E transaxle in the vehicle. It's also the reason the next version of GP will only have about 260 horsepower instead of "more". In your zeal to go fast, don't forget that some items will void the factory warranty. Plus, when a malfunction sets a code and turns on the Check Engine light, GM dealership diagnostics can tell what operating parameters were in place when the code was set. So, if the computer "catches" you, don't try to sidestep that situation with the dealership people and/or GM service rep. Otherwise, it's a fantastic car even in stock form, supercharged or not! I also like the feel of the Grand Touring Suspension too! There's more to "performance" than straight line stuff! Just some thoughts . . . NTX5467

Thanks for that update! I highly suspect the "mechanic" will be imortalized by his followers on that board, but he did committ some major indiscretions in what he did, not to mention the way he broadcast it to "the world". He bit the "forbidden fruit" and things happened as a result. Enjoy! NTX5467

What state are you located in? It might have been advantageous to do a title search with your department of motor vehicles before attempting to get the vehicle registered. Perhaps that might have helped, but if it just hadn't been registered for a good while, they probably purged their current files so the existence of prior registration is not there. In some states, you can also apply for a "lost title" if the prior owner can't produce that when you purchase the car. I suspect the reason the law enforcement people need to look at the vehicle is to check it against their unsolved stolen vehicle file and to make sure all of the hidden numbers don't show up in their files. Past that, it's just re-establishing registration data in the computer. The plate you mention with all of the numbers is the Body Plate that identifies the body on the assembly line and also had paint and trim information on it. Maybe you could combine the trips (for one tow bill) to the various state entities and get a cut rate on the tow charges? Enjoy! NTX5467

Thanks for adding the note about using a quality coil spring compressor, Brad. With all due respect, Brad, "torching" coil springs to lower the cars was the time honored method before car enthusiasts knew what chop saws were. It was very common in the '50s and '60s when low ride heights were very common on "custom" cars--when if you went through a dip too fast, when the car rose up as it exited the springs could fall out on the ground. As for changing the metal characteristics by heating the coils, if you go to a spring shop where they make their own springs, especially leaf springs which can also need rearching, the first thing they do is put the spring\stock in a kiln and then extract them (with proper tongs and such) when the metal is red hot and soft and workable. The leaf spring is then placed on a curved tool to which the red hot metal is beaten with a hammer so it will follow the contour of the tool and have the necessary arch to it. During this forming time, the metal will slightly air cool and a scale can form on the outside surface, which is knocked off by the hammer before the spring is chilled in a vat of water. I suspect that coil springs are manufactured similarly. The metal in the spring is a special "spring steel" that will tolerate heat and flexing when cooled too. If heating the coils to lower the cars of yore made the spring more brittle and more prone to failure, everyone would not have been doing it back then. Also, in the absence of the high tech saws in those earlier decades, the springs typically were cut off with torches too. Granted, cutting the ends of the coils would be the preferred method, but as you mentioned it is also a "cut and try" situation too. Not many people wanted to do that when just heating a short section of the spring to let it ease down would to the same thing. Cutting would also be more consistent side to side, but a "pro" with the torch could work the same magic with much less work involved. Not everyone had spring compressors back then either. Previously, I mentioned the "bottoming out" as an awareness issue. Typical vehicles of the '60s and such had a total suspension travel of about 6 inches, meaning 3 inches in compression and 3 inches in extention. Therefore, if you take 2 inches out of the ride height, that would basically leave 1 inch before you hit the bumpers in that direction. Even if the springs got stiffer when shorter, 1 inch of remaining wheel travel before the lower control arm bumper hits the crossmember (with stock bumpers) is not a lot, but keeping the vehicle from bottoming out is also a function of the shock absorber control too. This is the advantage of using "drop spindles" on vehicles (when available) in that they retain full suspension travel and factory alignment while moving the wheel bearing mounting location to allow the lower ride height. As for shock absorbers, unless you modify or shorten the suspension bumpers on the lower control arms in an effort to keep suspension travel with the lowered ride height, the bumpers should stop the suspension travel before the innards of the shocks stop it instead. Except in some of the new Monroe shocks, all shocks have the same valving characteristics throughout their full stroke. I know that many people like the lowered "in the weeds" look, but there are also some compromises involved in using a vehicle with those modifications--expecially in the area of the rear bumper or exhauast pipes contacting the roadway on driveway approaches and such. It might be a "cool look", no doubt, but having to modidfy your driving habits might be an unexpected downside. And that is the big variable--where you live, the roads you drive on, and how they will interact with decreased suspension compression travel. Personally, I like firm suspensions with full wheel travel as I always don't drive on really smooth roads (asphalt or otherwise) at posted speeds and I know that although my '77 Camaro is a little lower to the ground and has less wheel travel in the front suspension (at factory specs) than my '68 LeSabre or other American cars, I can easily drive over more different terrains in those cars than my Camaro any time I want to. As the Ford guys say, "No Boundaries". Just some additional thoughts and observations . . . NTX5467

I believe that '67 was the first year that all vehicles without the dual master cylinders got them from the factory as part of a safety-related agenda. Dual master cylinders for drum brakes typically had two equal fluid areas whereas those with front disc brakes had different sized reservoirs, typically, not to mention the "residual pressure valve" that was specific to the type of brakes (disc or drum, I don't recall which needs it as I write this, but feel sure that one type does) being supplied from the respective reservoir. The residual pressure valve would be the main difference in the disc brake and drum brake master cylinders, I suspect. I believe the '70 Monte Carlo would have had disc/drum brakes from the factory. In doing these upgrades, how the master cylinder piston diameters compare to the existing master cylinder piston diameters might be of some concern (using one of equal or slightly larger piston diameter and not one of smaller diameter) as that has a relationship to the wheel cylinder piston diameters (and related fluid force issues). On drum brake dual master cylinder systems, what appears to be similar to the proportioning valve in the disc/drum brake system is just a divider block that houses the switch to warn of pressure loss in one of the fluid circuits. On the disc brake vehicles, the "combination valve" combines the proportioning valve function with the divider block switch mounting functions. They might look similar, but have different functions and internals. As stated, with the correct parts the changeover should be rather easy and simple to do. You can bench bleed the master cylinder prior to installation and then can draw a vacuum on the master cylinder reservoirs after you get everything hooked up. This will keep any air in the system pretty much localized in the areas highest in the fluid circuit. An extra master cylinder top and rubber diaphram seal (with a fitting plus a hole in the rubber for each side of the cylinder), some small screw-in fittings, and a hand vacuum pump could accomplish that activity. Just some thoughts . . . NTX5467

LeSabre Limiteds should have had leather and alloy wheels "standard", as I recall. Should be a nice car, except for me the chassis calibration is just toooo soooffftttttt. Go into a dip, the wheel extends, the body follows, suspension compresses, rebounds upward, then settles downward, suspension compresses, and does a final rebound. The LeSabre I rented in the later '90s did that and I thought the struts were worn out at 15,000 miles--until I paced an elderly lady on the interstate in her original '87 or so Park Avenue which "bounced" the same way. Obviously, an attempt to mimic the smooooth ride of '50s Buicks in a smaller wheelbase version for the "traditional Buick customer". YIKES! No wonder we put Bonneville production struts on LeSabres wtih "bottoming out" complaints under warranty! All of that changed with the firmer calibrations on the 2000 and up LeSabres with no loss of ride comfort--which I like much better, for many reasons. Other than the suspension items, the cars were good cars that were nice, luxurious, etc. and got good fuel economy. I'd look for one with the gauge package for general principles. Fit and finish were also good, and seemed a little better on the cars built in Flint (for some reason). Most problems were related to harmonic balancer/pulley's rubber cushion coming apart and letting the counterweight swing around and make noise plus the "Interrupter" magnet in the cam sprocket for the computer's cam sensor falling out and the engine stopping as a result of the sensor not having a signal. Seems like we sold a good number of crankshaft position sensors too. Nothing really earthshatteringly bad, just some "common" deals that were easy to fix if you knew what to look for. Remember that Kelly Blue Book was developed for the banking people and is not an accurate guide of vehicular value other than for banking loan purposes. The "Black Book" will have more accurate trade-in values as it's related to actual auction prices paid by dealers. In that respect, the $2995 pricing would be more "real world" accurate than the KBB $3995 value. You might also run the VIN through one of the "pay for" databases to check for insurance payouts on it too. Key thing is to be an informed shopper, as always. Enjoy! NTX5467

You might contact Eaton Spring. They have original factory blueprints of factory springs back to the very early days of vehicles. THEN, you can use the "time honored" art of heating the coils to let the car's ride height drop or cutting the ends of the springs to achieve the same result. Only thing is that with either method, there is no way to return the altered springs to their original height. ALSO, as you lower the ride height on the suspension, you also decrease the amount of wheel travel in the suspension too. As the spring is shortened, it also becomes a little stiffer, but not enough to keep the suspension from bottoming out on the rubber suspension bumpers sooner than it currently does or would with stock ride height. That will probably be tolerable on smooth roads at "town" speeds, but on not-so-smooth roads, the greater bottoming out of the suspension will transfer all of those "crash throughs" to the chassis and body, putting more bending stresses on those components. End result, more body shakes and rattles--among other things. I seriously doubt you'll find any ready made lowering springs from the popular spring vendors, so finding someone that can competently heat or cut coils will be necessary--and they can quickly ruin a spring (that you'll have to pay for when you buy another) if they don't do it right the first time. Obviously, the springs on the rear of the car are not correct for it as someone else might have tried something and discovered it would not work as their "advisor" said it would. From reading a suspension thread at GSPerformance.com recently, it appears that there are some problems with the popular aftermarket spring vendors on some later model applications (they don't work like they are supposed to or have poor durability). I wish you well in your project, but you could do a lot worse than putting it back "stock"--and spend more money in the process. Enjoy! NTX5467

That is some post in that Mustang board! I got through the first two pages and it would not go past that into the third page, but by that point it had degenerated to personal attacks and such. That whole discussion can have many orientations, but can end up as one massive can of worms, just as it did. Basically, if the tech tried to pull any codes out of the computer that might have been there--and found none--that's where his labor time stopped. He might have gotten a few extra tenths for a test drive, but he obviously went beyond that. In any event, when he left for the "test drive" he should have checked out with the dispatcher/shop foreman when he left or, more appropriately, turned the car over to the service management people to drive when he found no problems. Several years ago, there was a "true story" in the North Texas Mustang Club's newsletter on a "low power" complaint on a Mustang 5.0L GT owner. The vehicle was checked and no problems found, so the tech went with the waiting customer as he drove the car himself. After a short while, the tech asked the customer to let him drive. Seems the customer left the dealership and stood on it some and them promptly shifted into 3rd gear and then 4th gear, lugging the car around in higher gears at lower speeds it has poor throttle response. When the tech drove the car with all forward gears and plenty of throttle, the owner was impressed with what the car would do and paid his bill at the cashier. The "older" Mustang owner was driving it like he probably used to drive earlier V-8s in earlier times so the concept of "keeping the rpms up" was something new to him. It was a mutually beneficial driving lesson for both. With that prior story, it makes me wonder if the female customer who owned the Cobra really knew what the car was about or bought it because it was "kewl"? I'd better stop there . . . Enjoy! NTX5467

On modern computer controlled engines, I don't really see a need to get away from the factory 195 degree thermostat. Naturally, the many rent cars I've driven are reasonably new, but they never got past the middle mark on the gauge in our hot summers with the a/c going full blast. The electric cooling fans keep things under control. The alleged power gain from using a 180 degree thermostat would be basically nil, even on a stock motor. If the compression ratio was a good deal higher than what it is, using a slightly cooler thermostat might keep the detonation limiter from kicking the timing back, but that would not be an issue with a stock engine these days. Also, the cooler thermostat might keep the computer from getting into closed loop as soon as it normally would and that would possibly affect emissions adversely. I know everyone that "talks chips" thinks they need the 160 degree thermostats in engines that didn't have them from the factory, but I perceive that is more hype than anything else. Plus, keeping the engine temps near 195 will keep the condensates and such cooked out of the oil better so oil life will be increased. Basically, I see no real compelling reason to get away from the factory thermostat specs on a stock motor. In prior decades, it was different. Just some thoughts . . . NTX5467