Serial number help?

[1965rivgs]

3 hours ago, RivNut said:

I have a friend here in the KC area who has 4 or 5 1965 Buicks, one of which is a Riviera.  All of his '65's have 1 as the first of the six digits in the serial number except for the Riviera, which has a 9.  He's wondering if the 9 might be unique to cars built in Flint.  What other models were built in Flint besides the RIviera in 1965?  Is his thinking worth exploring?

Yes, the 900,000 serial number format is exclusive to Flint built `65 Rivieras and Wildcats, with the exception of the first handful of Wildcats. Because all `65 Rivieras were built in Flint, all `65 Riviera serial numbers have this format. All models were built in Flint... after all it was Buick`s home town. Worth looking into? Nothing to look into, take my statements to the bank, I`m quite positive they are accurate,

Tom

[bluesy66]

Hi all,

Been a while and just a quick update. the rivi is on the road after 3 years.

Now the question.

The owner is going with a fitech efi system.  Seems something we could install but I would like to know about the linkage to the carb and kickdown switches.

Since there is no dashpot what happens to the wire hookup? Apparently someone put a microswitch on the throttle linkage close to the firewall. Seems to me that this sw was from the dashpot but moved to this other location.   Can't see how the movement of throttle linkage activates this sw.

Has anyone done a fuel system conversion like this?  Would appreciate some help with this setup.

Tranny is sp400

Thanks,

Paul

Ps  will send pics soon

[RivNut]

Some intermediate models had the switch pitch wired into the dashpot, but the full sized cars did not.  There were two ways to engage the high stall converter. One was with the switch that was connected to the carburetor linkage (along with the kickdown,) the other is the microswitch which is connected to the throttle linkage. The switch on the carb linkage is activated at WOT.  The switch on the throttle linkage when there is no pressure on the accelerator, when the car is stopped at idle. 

[bluesy66]

Rivnut,

thanks for the quick reply.

so that micro sw on the throttle linkage is not unusual?

If that is the case then I need a new micro sw.  Know where I can find one?

Thanks again,

Paul

[RivNut]

Look in the classifieds in the Riview. Lots of guys with parts for these Rivieras.

[bluesy66]

Hey Rivi,

Thanks

As you can see in the photo the micro sw is mounted on throttle to gas pedal link.

There is no way that sw could be activated in the position it is in and thruout it's stroke.  could there be a missing piece there?

How about if I mount it in front of efi or fab something to activate it,

.So this sw is energized when the throttle is closed? Is that right?

Once again thank you for your knowledge and help

Paul

[RivNut]

The SP switch on the throttle only activates the high stall when there is no pressure in the throttle linkage.  It's designed to keep the car from creeping using little brake pressure when sitting at a stop light or stop sign or any other time the car is NOT moving.  The torque of a Buick will cause the car to creep if sufficient brake pedal pressure is not applied. Once you move the accelerator pedal, that switch is turned off and the converter goes into low stall.  Little old ladies did not like having to stand on the brake pedal so the high stall at idle switch was installed.  In '68 the bean counters said 'too much $$, get rid of it."  So you'll only find that feature in 65, 66, and 67. Your car will always be in low stall except for when idling at a stop or when engaging the other SP switch at WOT.  If you want the high stall feature to stay engaged during acceleration from a dead stop, you'll have to rewire as in the previously posted illustration.

Edited November 6, 2020 by RivNut (see edit history)

[bluesy66]

Rivinut,

Okay got it.

Since the car is going with an efi system I'm moving the micro sw to the front of the throttle linkage and making a bracket to hold the sw.

I believe this would work.

Will keep you updated.

thanks,

paul

[RivNut]

57 minutes ago, bluesy66 said:

Rivinut,

Okay got it.

Since the car is going with an efi system I'm moving the micro sw to the front of the throttle linkage and making a bracket to hold the sw.

I believe this would work.

Will keep you updated.

thanks,

paul

I'd have to see what your idea is before commenting.  You could do this. Use what ever linkage youre using on the FI to activate the high stall at WOT. Then, if you want to continue to use the high stall at idle (remember Buick did away with it on the ST400 in 68) you could wire the SP solenoid into your brake light switch.

[telriv]

To ALL,

  

     Sorry but I have to make a statement about the high stall/low stall of the converter. As everyone one knows, I assume, the last year of the DynaFlow was '63.  Also I assume everyone knows the TH400 came out in '64 to replace the DynaFlow.  Well the older people like my Dad noted/stated that the quality of an automobile with an Automatic trans. is that sitting at a stoplight the car could be held back with little or very little pressure on the brake pedal & the car wouldn't "creep".  Now back then MANY cars were still standard shift & they would hold the car on a hill by slipping the clutch.  There was more wear done to the clutch in that 1-1 1/2 minutes than 10K miles of NORMAL driving.  Now the DynaFlow as good of a trans. that it was/was pretty in-efficent. Then Buick came out with the TH400 & also the 425 in Dec. of '63.  The cam for the new 425 was a pretty radical cam. It had the '59/401 specs. But had a slightly diff. profile which made it idle not as smooth as a Buick should be.  With a DynaFlow it wasn't too bad as all that had to be done was to increase the idle speed slightly which would "kinda" take care of the roughness. Being coupled behind a DynaFlow, since it was not as efficent, it contained the qualities that Buick & the public was looking for.

    Then came the TH400 in '64 & the same cam was being used.  Since the 400 was a much more efficent trans. it would "Creep" at idle, as much as 5MPH, & if the idle speed was slowed down to please the masses, now the engine has a pretty aggressive roughness to it.  MANY consumers complained about it enough that Buick told their dealers if the consumer complained about the roughness & everything checked OK they were to replace the cam with a 401 cam. This was received by many as an acceptable comprimize so much so that it was run around by the dealers as an eccepted practice.  Suppossedly there was a TSB (technical service bulletin) put out to the dealers in Jan/Feb '64 covering the roughness complaint.  This is what I was told by a service manager at the local Buick dealer where I bought my Riv. back in '64.

    Although I have no evidence of this nor can I find any TSB covering this I don't know how true it may/may not have been. As this is what I was told back in '64.  The service manager even asked if I wanted my original cam replaced with a milder cam.  Of course being a gearhead I liked the slightly rough idle.  I remember MANY times being asked by some IF I had replaced the original cam because of the exhaust note/sound. 

    At the garage where I was working at the time a customer came in with his fairly NEW '64 Riv. & wanted the original cam changed out for a "Better" Isky at the time, cam.

  I can personnaly tell you that the car just didn't perform as well as before, BUT the customer was satisfied & probably convinced himself that it in fact did run better which I know it DID NOT!!!

If I remember correctly this car didn't have 10K miles on it yet.  It was virtually a new car.  I saved this cam & it's lifters "just in case".  When I rebuilt my engine back around 1970/'71 when my car had about 120K on it I went crazy trying to find the CORRECT original type cam.  I even made MANY a phone call to Buick & finally I got in touch with someone who was knowledgeable. Don't know who it was, could have even been Dennis Manner himself.  I was told how to identify the CORRECT cam. I know I drove the Buick parts departments CRAZY (about 6 of them) in my local area. The cam would come in & it was the 401 cam everytime.  The parts guy would pack it back up & send it back.  This went on for about 9 months & who knows how many cams later as I had informed/educated them ALL on how to identify the CORRECT cam.  Finally one of the dealers parts man called me & said to me "we finally got a "winner" at which time I left work IMMEDIATELY & went to check it out. He was right. After about 9 months the Correct cam was delivered & I was a HAPPY individual.

    Instead of driving myself & others crazy I should just have used the cam I saved from way back when.  The way I stored the cam & lifters to me is an insperation.  I ended up selling it to someone on this forum when he did his engine the 1st. time & he actually checked it against a BRAND NEW cam one of his friends had & it checked out perfect as if it was an original BRAND NEW cam.

   Anyway I've kinda gotten somewhat off the beginning of this message. Back to the original.  It was because of this roughness the switch pitch was added in '65.  ALSO there is another very seldom known about why the '65 went to P-R-N-D_2_1 pattern instead if the P-R-N-D-L of the '64. The 430 really didn't need it because the cam was no where near the aggressve/radical  cam of the "NailHead" & the reason it was dropped after 1967.

   OH, one more thing.  Instead of driving yourself crazy trying to get this micro switch adjusted properly, there's a whole section in the chassis manual covering this adjustment that obviously nobody bothers reading, there is a dashpot that's now made to take care of, the crappy repro dashpots now being made that very seldom works properly, which has this micro switch incorporacted/built into it & it DOES WORK properly & needs hardly ANY complicated adjustments. A little costly, BUT for the amount of time getting an original adjusted properly is & the cost of replacement micro switches/wiring etc. to me is well worth the price.

 

Tom T.

[RivNut]

QUOTE "ALSO there is another very seldom known about why the '65 went to P-R-N-D_2_1 pattern instead if the P-R-N-D-L of the '64."

 

And what, pray tell, would that be.  Love listening (reading) of your experiences. Everyone else should as well knowing how fast you can type.  😉

[telriv]

Knowing how fast I can type!!!! That's funny as that took me about 2 hours.

IF I remember tomorrow after I finish working on a '58 Buick Special I'll type my reply.

 

Tom T.

[RivNut]

I only posted that because I've seen you post before that you only type with one finger.  

[telriv]

Your right Ed, BUT I'm gettin' better as I've been practicing with two now & starting to get pretty good at it.

 

As MANY will know IF they've ever practiced with the '64/400 IF you put the lever in "L" & leave it there the trans. will NEVER shift to the next gear, 2nd. Meaning that it WILL NOT shift automaticly to 2nd. The lever has to be pushed to "D" than back to low to hold 2nd.  Cadillac had the same 400 in '64 ALSO. 

A short recap.  Put the lever in "L" & hold it to the desired RPM & shift into "D" & then back to "L" it will hold 2nd. gear until you manually move the lever to "D".

One of the reasons is because on Monday morning the Buick & Cad dealers were getting swamped with cars that somehow the engines went bad.  This is because the teen took Mom's or Dad's car for a ride & who knows BUT they were probably racing OR showing off to friend's.  Who knows how many RPM's the engine was turning as I'm sure none/veryfew had a tach in them when this was done.  We know that the engine is capable to turn 6000 Rpm's. It's defintely NOT making any power there BUT It was done to show off/race whatever.

ALSO on the '64 you had very little control of 2nd. gear as it would shift to "L" at about 20MPH when you went from"D" to "L" so there was NO control over 2nd. gear. The '65 solved this problem IF you put the trans. into "2" it would stay there & NOT downshit to 1st.

This was costing Buick & Cad dealers & ultimatly GM $$$$$.  So Hydramatic came up with a plan which is now the 1-2-D.  IF you put the lever in "1" & HELD YOUR FOOT TO THE FLOOR the trans. would shift to 2nd. gear when engine speed reached 5500RPM's even WITHOUT moving the lever.  This carried through until the end of production of the 400 trans.

IF you left the lever in "2" the trans wouldn't shift until you shifted it into "D" BUT by that time you were probably going way over the speed limit.

 

Tom T.

[EmTee]

14 hours ago, telriv said:

IF you put the lever in "1" & HELD YOUR FOOT TO THE FLOOR the trans. would shift to 2nd. gear when engine speed reached 5500RPM's even WITHOUT moving the lever.  This carried through until the end of production of the 400 trans.

 

Yup -- I can attest to that!  The '66 327/TH 400 that I installed in my '56 Bel Air back in high school would hold low until 6000 RPM and then shift to 2nd with a satisfying 'chirp' of the right rear tire.  Needless to say, I became very proficient at swapping-out the rear carrier assembly in the stock rear axle... 

 

And, by the way, when I disassembled and cleaned the kickdown switch on my '67 Riviera I noticed that the high-stall transition actually occurs BEFORE the kickdown to 2nd gear.  This allows the engine to 'spool-up' first, which not only helps when 2nd gear comes in, but may be enough alone to obviate the need for the downshift in some cases.

[bluesy66]

Rivnut

Can you point me to that pic/write up about hooking up the sp sw to the brake system please.

I posted a blurb about what I'm going thru trying to install dashpost with sw to efi.

It's under 64 efi conversion.

I might have to go the brake route.

Thanks again,

Paul

ps can I just not hook up the micro sw/ dashpot at all?

[RivNut]

Check my post in the other thread in which you asked this question.