Matt Harwood

It's definitely not because you're a Mopar guy. Fuel injection wiring can be black magic to guys more familiar with carburetors. Me? I'm the opposite--carburetors and points ignitions are mysteries but fuel injection makes perfect sens to me. Anyway, what you need is called a Ford EVTM, or an Electrical and Vacuum Troubleshooting Manual, which is the wiring diagram book for Fords, and they're specific to the year and model you're working on. Sometimes they're available at the library or on the internet, but I would strongly recommend that you get one for the 1988 Mustang donor car and find one for your Falcon as well. I wrote a manual on putting a 5.0 fuel injected motor in a Ford Ranger pickup truck, and I used the factory EVTMs to figure out the wiring on each year of Ranger, so it's definitely not impossible. Although I did it more than 12 years ago, I recall that you will need 12V switched power, 12V crank power, power to the fuel pump relay, and a few other connections, but it is not difficult. I might also recommend "How to Understand, Service, and Modify Ford Fuel Injection & Electronic Engine Control" by Charles O. Probst, as it will tell you how the system works and why each part needs a particular signal. Don't try to do it on the cheap, buy the books you need and these will get you 90% of the way there. My 1997 Ford Ranger Splash with a supercharged 5.0 liter Mustang Cobra motor started the first time I turned the key because I took the time to understand how the system worked. The Probst book is about $30 used on eBay and the EVTMs were $25 from the publisher. Make that investment and the job will be a lot easier. You might also be interested in my Ranger manual, which covers putting a Mustang 5.0 in a vehicle where it was never intended to live. You can find it at www.harwoodperformance.bizland.com. It's $25, but it might also be helpful with diagrams and explanations. You might also check with the early Mustang guys, who have done this swap hundreds or thousands of times and there might be custom wiring harnesses already made for just this application. Good luck!

Although muscle cars aren't my personal favorite part of the hobby, I have to admit that if I were going to put one in my personal collection, this 1969 Z/28 would probably be it. The important stuff is excellent: matching-numbers engine and transmission, known ownership dating back to the 1970s, 58,300 or so original miles, and a 2011 restoration that cost more than the asking price of the whole car. I also like the fact that it's a low-option Z/28, suggesting that the original owner either was reaching financially for his dream Camaro or, more likely, wanted a vehicle that was purely built for combat. Either way, I like this car's elemental, no-nonsense appeal. As far as I can tell, that's all-original sheetmetal, including the floors and quarters, and it was finished to a very high standard in 2011. Factory code 67 Burgundy paint with white SS stripes gives it that classic Camaro performance look, and I bet not many cars in Chevrolet showrooms in 1969 looked this good. The bodywork is super straight, the gaps are good, and money was spent in the right places to make it nice, but not too nice to drive. They skipped the weight-adding folding RS headlights, there's no cowl-induction hood, and all the chrome was replaced and the stainless steel polished during the restoration. This is a really nice-looking car. The black interior is all-new as well, including seat covers, carpets, door panels, and headliner. The reproduction seat covers aren't quite as detailed as originals, which had deeper pleats, but they're pretty good and with fresh foam underneath, they fit well and are quite comfortable. I personally like the industrial-strength look of the Hurst shifter sticking out of the transmission tunnel sans console, which, to my way of thinking, just added weight without making the car go faster. The gauges are original, as is the steering wheel, and those are really the only two areas of the interior that aren't quite as nice as the rest, but it's kind of a judgement call as to whether they need to be replaced or restored. The factory AM radio is in the dash and the trunk wears what I believe is the original spatter-finish paint, so the sheetmetal is factory-issue. I think they should splurge for a reproduction mat, but at least there's a full-sized spare and jack assembly included. The engine is the original, numbers-matching, documented DZ-code 302 cubic inch V8. If you haven't driven one of these, it's unlike the usual small block Chevy experience. The 302 just loves to rev and doesn't seem to run out of breath, so it's quite happy with the 3.73 gears out back. It's nicely detailed and quite correct, right down to the stamped hoses and tower hose clamps. Note the oversized pulley on the alternator for high-RPM use, the finned valve covers that were a Z/28 trademark, and correct cast iron exhaust manifolds that were left natural but could probably stand to be painted if you want to drive it. The original, numbers-matching 4-speed Muncie gearbox powers a rugged 12-bolt rear and the chassis, while note detailed for show, is remarkably clean. New Rally wheels with fresh 225/60/15 Uniroyal radials were fitted so it's a pleasure to drive fast or slow. If you've been paying attention, you already know that top Z/28s are fast approaching six-figures. This one isn't perfect and isn't intended for competition on the show field, but for a numbers-matching Z/28 in great colors with no asterisks, $54,900 is a screaming bargain. Thanks for reading! Please note: I've recently left Vintage Motor Cars and started my own dealership, Harwood Motors, and this is the first of many new listings I'll have. Thanks for your support in the past and I look forward to a great future within the hobby!

Although muscle cars aren't my personal favorite part of the hobby, I have to admit that if I were going to put one in my personal collection, this 1969 Z/28 would probably be it. The important stuff is excellent: matching-numbers engine and transmission, known ownership dating back to the 1970s, 58,300 or so original miles, and a 2011 restoration that cost more than the asking price of the whole car. I also like the fact that it's a low-option Z/28, suggesting that the original owner either was reaching financially for his dream Camaro or, more likely, wanted a vehicle that was purely built for combat. Either way, I like this car's elemental, no-nonsense appeal. As far as I can tell, that's all-original sheetmetal, including the floors and quarters, and it was finished to a very high standard in 2011. Factory code 67 Burgundy paint with white SS stripes gives it that classic Camaro performance look, and I bet not many cars in Chevrolet showrooms in 1969 looked this good. The bodywork is super straight, the gaps are good, and money was spent in the right places to make it nice, but not too nice to drive. They skipped the weight-adding folding RS headlights, there's no cowl-induction hood, and all the chrome was replaced and the stainless steel polished during the restoration. This is a really nice-looking car. The black interior is all-new as well, including seat covers, carpets, door panels, and headliner. The reproduction seat covers aren't quite as detailed as originals, which had deeper pleats, but they're pretty good and with fresh foam underneath, they fit well and are quite comfortable. I personally like the industrial-strength look of the Hurst shifter sticking out of the transmission tunnel sans console, which, to my way of thinking, just added weight without making the car go faster. The gauges are original, as is the steering wheel, and those are really the only two areas of the interior that aren't quite as nice as the rest, but it's kind of a judgement call as to whether they need to be replaced or restored. The factory AM radio is in the dash and the trunk wears what I believe is the original spatter-finish paint, so the sheetmetal is factory-issue. I think they should splurge for a reproduction mat, but at least there's a full-sized spare and jack assembly included. The engine is the original, numbers-matching, documented DZ-code 302 cubic inch V8. If you haven't driven one of these, it's unlike the usual small block Chevy experience. The 302 just loves to rev and doesn't seem to run out of breath, so it's quite happy with the 3.73 gears out back. It's nicely detailed and quite correct, right down to the stamped hoses and tower hose clamps. Note the oversized pulley on the alternator for high-RPM use, the finned valve covers that were a Z/28 trademark, and correct cast iron exhaust manifolds that were left natural but could probably stand to be painted if you want to drive it. The original, numbers-matching 4-speed Muncie gearbox powers a rugged 12-bolt rear and the chassis, while note detailed for show, is remarkably clean. New Rally wheels with fresh 225/60/15 Uniroyal radials were fitted so it's a pleasure to drive fast or slow. If you've been paying attention, you already know that top Z/28s are fast approaching six-figures. This one isn't perfect and isn't intended for competition on the show field, but for a numbers-matching Z/28 in great colors with no asterisks, $54,900 is a screaming bargain. Thanks for reading! Please note: I've recently left Vintage Motor Cars and started my own dealership, Harwood Motors, and this is the first of many new listings I'll have. Thanks for your support in the past and I look forward to a great future within the hobby!

Avoid and avoid. Any British car that's not an MG and needs work is going to be a pretty big headache, and a Triumph prototype no less? Oof. Forget it. The XJS is a wonderful car, but buying a bad one will destroy your finances and that of all your heirs for three generations. As they say, an XJS is inexpensive to maintain but expensive as hell to neglect. If you're buying one for $2500, I know into which category it falls. You can buy a really, really nice one for not a lot more than $10,000, but a $2500 Jag will cost ten times that to put right. Avoid at all costs. All the advice up above is good: get a slightly unusual '60s American car with a V8. You'll pay extra for a Camaro or a 1970 Mopar, but an oddball like the early Barracuda, a V8 Falcon, or a small block Chevy II would be affordable and easy to work on with a vast aftermarket of support. I remain convinced that $2500 worth of any car you buy is going to need some pretty serious TLC--you're not getting a "nice" car for $2500 unless you want a frumpy 1970s 4-door sedan. For that small sum, expect a project that'll require time and money in equal measure before it's ready to enjoy. I remain convinced that spending more up front to buy a better car is smarter financially (and better for your mental health) than buying a bargain-priced project thinking you can fix it up yourself and have a nice car on the cheap. Everyone here has tried (and failed) at that particular task...

Actually, when Buick introduced straight-8s in 1931, the 80 and 90 series used an all-new 344 cubic inch straight-8, which continued until 1936 when the more familiar 320 was introduced. I owned a '32 90-Series with the 344 and it was powerful and smooth and would be a decent match for the Auburn (provided you couldn't get a correct Lycoming unit, which would obviously be preferable). The smaller Buick 8s were a little soft on torque and to move a big car like that would probably offer tepid performance at best.

It definitely looks like an OHV Buick STRAIGHT-8, not a V8 which probably led to the confusion. No OHV Auburns, right? Even the color appears to be mid-30s Buick Green. If it's a big 90-Series 344, it probably moves rather well, but if it's a small series engine, maybe not so much. I wonder which transmission and rear end it carries, as the Buicks used torque tubes? Seems like a lot more work that simply finding a correct Lycoming straight-8, no?

Definitely not this car. It arrived in enclosed transport and is still in my shop waiting for the new owner to pick it up as of June 5. I always cringe seeing old cars going on open transport and discourage it whenever possible. I like this car so much it would absolutely break my heart to put it on an open trailer and send it out into the unknown. I can't control it when the owners set up shipping, but I think the guy buying this car knows it's worth protecting. I hope, anyway, since I didn't set up the transport in this case. Thanks for the heads-up!

Does it look like this one that I bought last summer? Complete details and photos here, if that helps: http://vintagemotorcarsusa.com/Details_new.php?id=286

I think this is one of those situations where there just has to be a balance between what's possible (in terms of what the club can "police") and the intent of the club (cars as they were when new). Personally, you can count me in the group that's not happy that this car was awarded highest honors, despite it being spectacular in every possible way. HOWEVER, and this is the point that I think West and Herb were trying to make, it IS as it could have been. Had this car shown up, as-is, with nobody saying anything about where it came from (and let's just fantasize for a moment that everyone who did know kept his mouth shut), there would be no issue. I'm not implying that the club should reward deceit and fraud, but I am saying that the car is quite correct and represents something that was the way the factory made it. Surely there are 1964 Pontiac Tempests out there with both GTO and AACA Senior badges on them, but since the GTO was a Tempest "option" that's perfectly OK. The line is very, very blurry and as a club, it's simply logistically impossible to split that hair fine enough to satisfy all parties. I don't like it, but I accept that the club's official stance on it is at best a compromise that respects the intent of the club's mission statement, if not necessarily the letter. As I said, I'm against awarding such cars awards if the alterations are known, but that would only encourage fraud, which is perhaps an even bigger detriment to the hobby. In contrast, is this car welcome in AACA competition? It COULD have been built, it was shown in the Fleetwood catalog, even though none were ever built in-period. It's not welcome at CCCA shows...

Turbocharged Ford 2.3 liter found in, say, an old Thunderbird Turbo Coupe or Mustang SVO. Grab the 5-speed manual transmission and make a driveshaft to link it to the original rear end. Ford's EEC-IV engine management system is rather simple and the factory setup from a T-Bird or SVO should work by connecting less than 20 wires--get an ECTVM for both the Pinto and the donor car and it'll be easier. Alternatively, the Mustang 5.0 guys figured it out 20 years ago so there are easy-to-tune stand-alone systems that'll drive it, too. Voila! 100% Ford sleeper that isn't a goofy V8-powered nightmare that overheats the moment you go above 2000 RPM. I think that would be very cool. The world doesn't need another preserved Pinto, have fun with it instead!

I know which one I'd rather have a head-on collision in: My BIG Cadillac: versus my "small" Cadillac: People come up to me all the time and tell me how reassuring it must be to have all that "steel" around me in the '29 and those giant battering-ram bumpers. They think that old car could go through a house without even getting scratched. Instead, I'm terrified of an accident in it because I know there will be no survivors if it's truly a bad accident. Crashes that you could walk away from in a modern VW Beetle would probably kill you in anything older than 1950 and leave you pretty badly wounded in anything pre-1985ish. Anyone remember the impale-O-matic steering columns? Hard steel dashboards and door panels? Crumple zones known as your neck and chest cavity? The smallest car today is safer to be in than the biggest car of the 1950s. Just because your gut instinct says bigger is better doesn't make it necessarily so. In a crash, all that energy has to go somewhere and the forces are so astronomical that it's hard to fathom--watch a crash in slow motion to watch the ripples and shockwaves travel through SOLID STEEL in milliseconds. In a modern car, the sheetmetal and body structure bends and twists and crumples to absorb and dissipate the energy before it even gets to the passenger compartment. In an old car, the structure stayed rigid and let the energy dissipate using your body as a cushion as you bounced around the interior. People see a modern car after a crash and how wadded-up it is and shake their heads in disgust as if the car was so poorly made that it just fell apart, whereas an old car wouldn't have anything more than a bent bumper and a broken headlight--as if that's some kind of virtue. That suggests a profound misunderstanding of how car crashes and general physics work. The crumpled up car is working as intended to save your life. The uncrumpled old car is working as intended to save itself without any regard for the soft, fleshy humans inside.

My advice is always to drive everything you can afford, without preconceived notions, and buy the one that makes you smile the most. Don't decide you like a Falcon without trying other stuff on for size. You might discover that you're a Mopar guy or an MG guy instead. Take your time browsing, learning, and dreaming, that's a big part of the experience!

Master cylinder is down low on the driver's side frame near the firewall. It won't look like a modern master cylinder, but rather a cast iron cylinder of some kind with a filler plug that's a hex bolt. Top it off, but there has to be a reason the brakes didn't work beyond low fluid. If they worked when it was parked and don't work now, I'd suspect something like a bad master cylinder or a leak somewhere. Fortunately, rebuilding them is easy an inexpensive. Neither disc brakes nor 12 volts are needed to make the car safe. Both will adversely affect the car's value, and the 12V conversion will never work right, no matter what the "experts" say. Get your stock brakes in top condition and the car will easily be able to handle modern traffic. Descending Pike's Peak in August? Maybe not. But for regular driving, the stock drums are plenty adequate. The only thing discs do better is shed heat, and if you're driving that car within its limits, you won't be generating all that much excess heat anyway. Hope this helps. Let us know what you find.

One more update, just in case anyone needs help with a similar issue in the future. I've been paying a mechanic friend by the hour to chase this problem and he's had the car for the last month. He found a lot of things that made him say, "A ha!" and fixed them, only to have it continue to stall. He was going nuts just like I was. More new items include: Bad Pertronix unit (replace) Coil with abnormally high resistance (replace--again) Ignition switch (this is the third switch, original had a bent pin, first replacement was cracked) Entire engine wiring harness Pink ignition resistor wire Lots of miscellaneous wires throughout the car that looked frayed and/or melted Tachometer and related wiring Battery That's all in addition to all the stuff I had already replaced looking for the issue, like the gas tank and fuel pump. He also adjusted the carburetor again because he thought the float levels were too low. The sucker ran amazingly and more than one person commented that it was the best-running early Mustang they'd ever driven. However, it still was breaking up above 4000 RPM and still stalling at unpredictable times. 95% of the time, great. 5% of the time, dying. And it continued to be vexing because turning the key off and on would start it instantly and it would act as though nothing unusual had happened. Since the Pertronix is happy on 12V and the voltage drop to the coil is basically to keep the points from burning up (and there are no points anymore) he ran a direct 12V feed to the coil, bypassing the resistor wire just to see what would happen. Yesterday he was driving it home (he's put more than 300 miles on the car testing it trying to get it to act up while he's got equipment hooked to it) and there's smoke coming from the cowl vents. He pulls over and shuts it off and sees that the brown wire coming from the solenoid to the coil which shoots 12V during cranking is starting to melt--that's the smoke. Are you kidding? That should be able to handle 12 volts, right? The verdict? It appears that the starter solenoid was occasionally hanging up and grounding itself, spiking resistance in the system and causing a voltage drop to around 4-6 volts. That's why cycling the ignition would usually cure it--it was resetting the solenoid and fixing the "sticking" situation temporarily. It's why the problem was so intermittent and so unpredictable. It wasn't sticking enough to kick the starter, just enough to bleed off a lot of excess energy that wasn't getting to the spark plugs and would eventually drop low enough to kill the ignition. So I've spent about $3500 chasing this problem with new parts and about 40 hours of mechanic time, only to find it was a solenoid that I can get at the local NAPA for $20. The upside is that the car now cackles and snarls like it should, pulls hard to 5000 RPM, doesn't stumble, idles perfectly, and we fixed a lot of stuff that may or may not have been an issue in the future. I won't be convinced it's fixed until we get some drive time on it, because there have been too many "obvious" fixes that should have solved the problem, but this really has to be it--there's nothing else left to replace. My lovely wife will have her car back on Tuesday, so we'll find out. Thanks to everyone who helped me out, and I hope this is helpful to someone else in the future.

What is the asking price?

I get calls for this about once a week and sadly have to turn them away--it is indeed a problem with insurance. It isn't even that money is changing hands, it's that the car is being used in service instead of a hobby-related activity. My advice is always that you should try to find a friend who knows someone with an old car and invite them to the wedding and see if they'll let you use the car for photos alone. The chauffeur-driven part is over-rated anyway. On your special day, you want something that has A/C, is reliable, and doesn't smell of exhaust, gas, and oil. Trust me, when you're all dressed up and looking beautiful, the last thing you want to be doing is sweating in the back of an old car that smells like exhaust fumes. Have the car there for photos, but stick to a modern limousine for actual transport. It's a romantic idea, but the reality is different than you're imagining.

With rare Budd wheels no less!

*SOLD* Thank you!

*SOLD* Thank you!

Where, exactly, would you like me to cut some corners? LOL

Ding ding ding! Winner! Best quote of the day.

It sounds like the guy who owns this yard HAS been trying to sell his stuff for years and years with fewer and fewer takers. He HAS been haggling with the public. He's losing money every day he's in business. I think the point is that he DID try to sell this stuff to hobbyists, and they either didn't buy it or offered him such low prices that it wasn't worth his while to try to stay in business anymore. If it's such a gold mine of treasures and an easy way to make money, go offer him scrap value for it and set yourself up in a new business. I guarantee he'll sell it to you for pennies on the dollar, just as he would the scrap man. Nobody here hates hobbyists and more than a few folks will resent the implication, but if you go to a yard sale and pick up an item with a $2 price tag on it and try to get it for $1, you're only trying to make it into sport for yourself at someone else's expense. You're not trying to "save money" or trying to convince someone that their price is unrealistic, you're just trying to see how far you can push someone to get what you want, wasting their time and embarrassing yourself. A yard sale, fine, no harm, no foul. But wasting a business person's time has a cost for them, whether you appreciate it or not, and yes, after a while they're going to decide that your money just isn't green enough to compensate them for the headaches you're causing. And while it is unquestionably part of every financial transaction out there, a lot of people DON'T enjoy it, particularly when people do it just to amuse themselves. I've told more than one guy I won't sell him a car just because the hassles would outweigh the potential profits. I'm sure it's that way on a $5 part as well as a $50,000 car. I would love to not haggle in my business. I could lower all my prices on all my cars by a significant amount immediately, but since I expect people to haggle, I have to give them someplace to go so they can feel like they got a "win." When a guy calls and says, "What will you take, cash money, for that car?" I know he's merely doing it for sport. If he can work the price down to a below-market level, maybe he'll consider buying the car. More than once I've had a guy offer me somewhat below asking price, but right around my bottom-line, I accepted, and he has either vanished or continued haggling. "Oh, it seems my offer wasn't cheap enough, I rescind it and now am offering 20% less. Will you take it now?" I figure he's just seeing if I'm desperate enough to fall for his tactics. We're all hobbyists here, but some of us pay asking price for things because we respect the other guy's time and efforts and knowledge. If the price tag is close to what I'm willing to pay, I pay it, no questions asked. If it's too much, I don't bother. I certainly don't walk into the Rolls-Royce dealership and offer them $20,000 for a new Rolls-Royce then look at them like they're the jerks for not wanting to deal with me.

Knowing that Cadillac was killing the CTS wagon, I grabbed one last fall. Not a V, but a 3.6 with direct-injection and all-wheel-drive. The sucker looks like a rock star and drives quite well--just finished a 900-mile road trip and it pulled down better than 25 MPG at 75 MPH. Not bad for a full-boat luxury car. Sadly, the looks, as awesome as they are, mean that the cargo bay is pretty useless for large items that would fit in my former Audi allroad wagon. I'm bummed there won't be another CTS wagon, but they were pretty much sales-proof. I think mine is one of only 1300 built that year.

It's sad, yes, but what do we expect guys like this to do? Just keep maintaining a yard for the one guy every few days who shows up and buys a few bucks' worth of parts? There's insurance, property taxes, and other expenses to keeping it open, not to mention the headaches of dealing with "pickers" who will low ball you on everything and haggle over every single dollar. It's probably exhausting and would turn even the most kind-hearted person into a jerk. There are people who just LOVE to haggle, they don't even really come to buy, they just like making a deal. I get them now and again on cars, usually the cheapest ones, and they just want to haggle, they're not serious buyers. I can only imagine the nightmare of trying to sell junk to some of the guys who feel that that by showing up with money in their pocket he owes them some kind of special deal. Listen to the gripes about him charging too much--if it's too much, don't buy it! But I bet it's the hagglers complaining about his prices, not the guys who actually need a specific part. To collectors, sure, that pile of junk might be worth $2 million. But it probably costs $3 million in time and effort to turn all that junk into $2 million. Easier to scrap it and be done, no? If there's something there you need, go get it! But don't expect some poor guy to keep investing time, money, and effort in the off chance that someone someday might need some random part off a junk car, especially when most of the guys who show up at his door are bottom-feeders who will give him $10 worth of aggravation for a $5 part.

We recently hosted a technical seminar for our local CCCA club and this year had a pair of scientists from Brad Penn come to talk to us about old car oils. Now, granted, they make a special oil just for old cars, but their presentation was not about selling oil, it was extremely informative and heavy on science and history. They clearly knew about old cars and old engines and what hobbyists want in a motor oil. A few things I took away from their presentation: One, Brad Penn (or Penrite) oil is the only 100% Pennsylvania crude oil. It's formerly Kendall, AKA "The green oil" that many old timers swear by. It is also the only oil currently on the market that is 100% made in America, from the ground to the shelf. That might mean something to some people. Two, it's "sticky," meaning it clings to engine parts instead of draining back into the pan. That's why I use Mobil 1 in most of my cars, because it clings. But in my old cars, the synthetic oil finds its way through porous old gaskets and castings where regular oil won't. They did a demonstration of pouring some oil out of an unopened container of their oil, then dipping a metal rod in it, then spraying the rod with carb cleaner. The oil DID NOT want to come off. Very convincing. Three, they pointed out that modern multi-grade oils like 10W30 weren't around until the 1950s, and unless you're running in cold weather, you don't really need the multi-weight. There's no harm in it, but they pointed out that with a multi-weight oil, you're getting additives that thin out the oil at lower temperatures, since they always start with a base stock of the thicker viscosity. Single-grade oils don't have these additives and have a more consistent flow rate once up to temperature. If you don't drive your car in the cold, you probably don't need multi-grade. No harm in it, but you don't need it. Four, there's zinc in their oils. I won't get into the zinc debate here, but they addressed it saying that if you have a high-performance engine with a lot of valve spring pressure and flat tappets, it's a good idea. Older cars with lighter springs and lower lift cams aren't as critical, but it can't hurt. However, there is such thing as TOO MUCH zinc as well, so don't just dump a bunch of additive in your crankcase thinking you're getting extra protection. Five, they recommend changing your oil at the end of the season and storing your car with fresh oil in it. The contaiminants in your oil WILL eat the bearings if allowed to sit for an extended period of time. Always store your car with fresh oil in it. I'll admit to making this mistake, changing the oil in the springa nd storing it all winter with dirty oil in it, figuring that since it's sitting, it'll get contaminated with condensation, but he said that's incorrect. Get the dirty oil out ASAP. Now, as I said, they were obviously there to promote Brad Penn oil, but the presentation was given by a scientist, not a salesman, and the science was pretty compelling. I'm a skeptic in most cases, but they answered every question posed to them with a good answer, and there was no indication that they were just there to sell oil. As a result of what they said, I am now running straight 50-weight Brad Penn oil in my 1929 Cadillac. I bought two cases, which should be good for three oil changes. In regards to the original poster's question, I don't think you're doing any harm in running multi-grade oil in your rebuilt engine. Everything should be new and in good order and modern oils are not going to damage your bearings, regardless of viscosity. I personally tend towards slightly thicker oils on my old cars simply because the clearances are not as tight as a modern car and it helps keep oil pressure up. Between the clinging of the Brad Penn oil and the warmer temperatures at which I drive it, there's really not much danger of cold start up starvation, in my opinion. And remember that any oil today is worlds better than the best oil when your car was new, so as long as it's clean and your car maintains proper pressure, then there's probably no harm in running whatever you like. Hope this helps!