|
Steve French posted:I got a little lost looking at the rear axle assembly; couldn't really find much in the way of any identifying information. I'm curious about it in particular because of what I was told about the car having shorter gearing, I'm assuming that was done with a rear swap. The tag here says "use limited slip diff lube only", which I would guess means it's a limited slip diff. Did these cars come with LSDs? Probably a WS6 rearend from a Trans Am, if the disk brakes are GM, not aftermarket. 10-bolt 8.5" ring gear "Pontiac" rear (not the same as a Chevy rear axle,) and yes, the WS6 was available with an LSD. At least based on my limited knowledge, picked up from owning another 1970 GM oddball - an Oldsmobile Cutlass. Pulling the cover would easily confirm LSD-ness, and you could count teeth on the ring and pinion.
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2020 19:40
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 11:40 |
|
|
Steve French posted:On a different note, I did find some markings in the expected spot on the axle after scrubbing a bit, but can't really make much out of my reading of the code: Those numbers don't match the formats I'm finding for axle codes. http://chevellestuff.net/qd/rear_axle_info.htm http://www.hitmantransam.com/Pages/etrcodes.htm Too few characters, and the format is wrong. Not sure what's up there. quote:I'm also going to order a replacement quadrajet carb and see what I can do about replacing it while I'm off work. Goal is to get something functional without spending a ton, given that I'm not sure yet if I want to go EFI. Any particular recs (for seller or part), or just find the cheapest available remanufactured/new part of the right type? I'm finding throttle body EFI systems for <$1000. Considering that a new carb is $400, it's starts to be a tough call, especially when you will need to tune the carb afterward. Twiddling bits is so much nicer than soaking oneself in gasoline yet again. Never mind that your meticulous tuning will be out of whack when the weather changes. The QJet is a good carb, and really flexible, but not the easiest to tune after mods. The accelerator pump on the one on my Cutlass has never worked right, and I've rebuilt it like 3 times over the years. Probably a passage blocked I've never checked, since I'm not super savvy on primitive technology.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2020 21:00
|
|
|
Steve French posted:Yeah, I'm starting to think that a carb replacement is not going to be as much of a short term savings over a more long term solution as I had hoped. Summit MAX-efi 500, $750: FITech Fuel Injection GoStreet EFI 400 HP Throttle Body System Basic Kit $858 (currently $818 w/ instant rebate) FITech Fuel Injection Go EFI Classic Black 550 HP Throttle Body System Basic Kit $912 None of these include the fuel pump/sump or fuel lines. The FITech kits are available with fuel pump and ignition. FITech Fuel Injection GoStreet EFI 400 HP Throttle Body Fuel Injection Master Kit [with Inline Fuel Pump & CDI Box] Natural Aluminum $1257 FITech Fuel Injection GoStreet EFI 400 HP Throttle Body Fuel Injection Master Kit [with Force Fuel System & CDI Box] Natural Aluminum (fuel module with pump inside surge tank.) $1412 Other combos and options here: https://www.jegs.com/p/FITech-Fuel-Injection/FiTech-GoStreet-EFI-400-HP-Throttle-Body-Systems/3539375/10002/-1 Looks like the Sniper is $1100 by itself, ~$1400 with fuel pump, and $1600 with ignition. No option for both in a kit. https://www.jegs.com/p/Holley/Holley-Sniper-EFI-Stealth-4150-4-bbl-Self-Tuning-Kits/8033244/10002/-1 One nice thing about the Sniper is that the ECU is integrated into the throttle body - no separate box to mount (it's hidden in one of the "float bowls") MSD has their Atomic EFI at about $1100, too ($1300 with fuel system) The MSD controller seems a little cheap to me. Monochrome backlit LCD. The rest appear to have color touchscreen controllers. FITechs, and the Summit uit appear to use the same controller - interface even looks the same. Edlebrock makes complete port injection systems that include the EFI, intake, fuel system, and ignition, BTW. About $2500 for the whole shebang. https://www.jegs.com/p/Edelbrock/Edelbrock-Pro-Flo-4-EFI-Systems/3649794/10002/-1 I'm a little salty that they cover AMC and Pontiac, as well as the usual SBC, BBC, LS, Chrysler big and small, and Ford big and small, but not Olds or Buick. Fascists. I happen to have two Cadillac Seville EFI intake manifolds, and a set of fuel rails. The Seville used an Olds 350, so I'm set, there. Just need a fuel system, throttle body, ECU... I've been wanting to go MegaSquirt, but the Holley/Summit/FITech TBIs look very inviting. I would like something that could handle (eventual) boost, though.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2020 21:11
|
|
|
One of the plusses of carbs is that they can run "OK" just fine. They can usually tolerate quite a bit of mis-tuning or suboptimal parts matching, if you're willing to put up with a little weirdness from time to time. I've lived with the nonfunctional accelerator pump on my Q-Jet for, oh, 30 years, I think. I'm not sure it ever worked under my hand. And the Q-jet has never been retuned despite the addition of headers, true duals, and a more aggressive cam. edit: honestly, to me, the hardest part about EFI is the fuel pump and new fuel lines. Especially for me, since an external pump is just not good enough. I'll be modifying the tank for an internal late model pump module than incorporates a swirl pot, so I don't have to weld one into the tank - just cut a hole and add a mounting ring. I can use the original fuel line as a return, but will need to run a new feed, and, again, *hose*, even braided, isn't good enough. The rest of the throttle body systems is mostly bolt on, and finding a 12V battery and ignition source. Darchangel fucked around with this message at 20:21 on Oct 21, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2020 20:17
|
|
|
Steve French posted:
I'd like to get one of those for my Olds. The factory starter is yuuuuuuge. And very heavy. edit: I too have a Summit retail location nearby. They just built it a few years ago. It's amazing inside.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2020 18:28
|
|
|
You're missing the choke (on the primaries), but the air door/flap on the secondaries is there. No telling what else is broken or missing.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2020 17:39
|
|
|
Yeah, the plate over the secondaries is not a choke but a device to change the effective size of the secondaries on the fly. Well, technically... I guess it could be described as a choke, but is vacuum dependant rather than heat controlled. It's what makes a Q-Jet work on a fairly wide variety of engines and conditions/modification ranges, yet still deliver something resembling fuel economy. When it's working right.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2020 23:27
|
|
|
I would probably use soda or walnut-shell blasting on the polycast parts. That should clean without damaging the urethane. They can look great. They're just heavy as heck, being a steel wheel with another 10 pounds of urethane rubber attached...
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2020 18:38
|
|
|
Suburban Dad posted:Interesting. My first car (93 mustang) had something like this and I never thought about it until reading this. I remember them being heavy as poo poo and having this rubbery stuff on the spokes. The little triple strips around the perimeter were rubbery and you could move them with finger pressure. Always thought it was really weird. Ford *loved* those even more than GM. '70s through the '80s. Buddy had them on his '84 Cougar, very similar to those Mustang ones - replacing the triple-damned TRX wheels (which looked cool, but had, like, two tires available.) edit: added quote for new page context.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2020 20:46
|
|
|
That said, *learning* to do what you need to do is sometimes part of the fun. All depends on what exactly you want to deal with. If you don't care to learn carbs, and don't *need* to, like, say, for bucks-down reasons, then by all means, pay someone, so you can drive the car.  I've done a bit of both, depending on my available time and ability.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2020 20:27
|
|
|
Yeah, the little pancake compressors are useless for anything other than inflating stuff and operating nail guns. Personally, I have a 60-gallon 5-HP 240V unit I lucked into, and I love having it. Does a great job with the media blaster, air tools, and spray guns.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2021 21:36
|
|
|
Steve French posted:My understanding is that the 15" wheels came paired with F60-15 tires, which as I understand it would be a P235/60R15; so I'm thinking I will either go with that or _maybe_ put 245s on the back for just a little bit of stagger. 236/60-15 is what I ran on my '70 Cutlass with 15x7 Olds Rallye Wheels.    A little sidewall bulge, but not too much.
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2021 18:33
|
|
|
Raluek posted:that could be. i was going off of some forum post that named GR70-15, which dude says is equivalent to a 225. you probably know better! A bit too much, actually. It was supposed to be 1.5-2" as I recall, but that's not what I got. It was closer to 3". That was when it had Edelbrock (by Eibach) front springs in it, that I got when one of the original front springs fatigued and broke. The rears are HO Racing from years ago, replacing traditional saggy-butt GM originals, The Edelbrocks, while aesthetically pleasing was about 1.5-2" too low. The front crossmember was 3" from the pavement, and the springs weren't stiff enough to keep it *off* the pavement. I've since upgraded to Hotchkis springs in front. Edelbrock only specced one spring for "small-block A-body". Hotchkis has different part numbers for Olds vs. Chevy, for example, and AC vs. non-AC. The Hotchkis springs basically level the car out. It sits like this now:   Tires on both ends are basically at the wheel opening lip. This was stock, BTW, with saggy original rear springs:  Probably about 1.5-2", maybe 3", between the top of the tire and the wheel arch lip. edit: crossmember was 3.5" from the ground: 
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2021 18:48
|
|
|
Raluek posted:do you know what the spring rate was on the edelbrocks? i do love the stance, and my chevelle is going to be much stiffer than stock, but idk if 600lb/in springs are going to be stiff enough for 3" clearance. it does look good as hell though I don’t. Edelbrock is no longer selling suspension bits, so tough to find. It definitely wasn’t stiff enough for the car. Maybe for a small-block Chevelle with no AC, but not for my fat boy.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2021 13:20
|
|
|
I *think* the choke closes when powered, but I could be wrong. Mine uses heat activation. Your idle was high at startup probably because it was on the fast idle step. That’s set by pressing the accelerator pedal before startup (which also should squirt the accelerator pump of course.) A little heat and blipping the throttle cancels that.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2021 15:13
|
|
|
Thirding the lack of an exhaust leak. An exhaust leak is a pretty noticeable rhythmic noise, most often a “tic-tic-tic-tic” noise, when it’s just one cylinder leaking. Also, the secondaries almost certainly won’t open without a load. They’re vacuum operated, and you’re just not going to get that vacuum without a load.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2021 11:14
|
|
|
Raluek posted:did the second gen have rear disc brakes stock? i didnt think they did, but i also dont know f-bodies too well. if they're a retrofit, it could be that those wheels clear the original drums, but not the retrofit discs. They did, optionally. WS6 option included rear discs. Not sure if there were specific wheels for that, or perhaps specific years of wheel. edit: back in the day, the issue was getting pre-'68 wheels, particularly 14" to clear the *front* disc brakes that started appearing around then, and became standard on GM in '71-2-ish. Never thought about the rears being a problem, but on the Trans Am, they were 10" rotors, as I recall, with a fairly large caliper. Like same size as the front GM "D52" caliper. Later models went with a smaller caliper. I... may be mixing all that up with the Seville/Eldo/Toronado rear discs, though. I have to check my notes. Edit2: OK, so the WS6 option was 79-81. May have been retrofitted, or that's an aftermarket kit. 77-78, Seville and big Caddy/Buicks had rear discs with the "large" calipers. 79-81 Firebird, 79-81 big Cad (Deville, Fleetwood)/ big Buick, and 79 Seville has "small" calipers. Discs were all the same, 11", except for the bolt pattern (5 x 4-3/4" for the Firebird, 5 x 5" on the Cads/Buicks). Seville went FWD in '80, and shared rear discs with the Eldorado/Toronado/Riviera. Pads for the 79-81 Trans Am are D154, same as 79-85 Seville, 79-81 LeSabre, Electra Park Avenue, Eldo, Toro, 79-84 Fleetwood, Deville, and G-body front pads. That's the factory stuff. No idea what your car might have. Still surprised that the wheels would fit the fronts but not the rear. Darchangel fucked around with this message at 22:11 on Jun 8, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2021 21:51
|
|
|
Plan sounds solid. Might be worth seeing exactly where the wheels are rubbing, and determining if the caliper or whatever can be clearanced safely.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2021 22:18
|
|
|
BigPaddy posted:Ah yes the remove the entire caliper to change the pads GM design. Yep. But usually, you *can* remove the caliper, even on a GM. edit: though it looks like that is the fault of the aftermarket slapper bars, not GM per se.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2021 20:45
|
|
|
Extended lug studs aren't even slightly abnormal, and you've got one of the most common cars to be modified in America. I wouldn't think it would be difficult. The rear axle being a different year may provide a wrinkle, but this shouldn't be difficult. Maybe I have unrealistic expectations of the aftermarket. Can you not search on Summit for wheel studs for a '70 WS6 TA? I'm not sure how much of a interference fit .03"-.04" makes. Have you popped one of the originals out and measured it? If you did, I missed it. It will be deformed but would give you an idea of what you're aiming for.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2021 17:51
|
|
|
Dorman seems to run the gamut of "wow, that's a great idea," or "that's a great problem solver," to "what the gently caress were you thinking." Ford 4.6L intake manifolds are a good example. They're manifold for wearly 4.6 engines is spot on, and reportedly makes more power than the original one. Ford changed the heads, and improved the manifold on later years (like my '05 Crown Vic - the "Improved Performance" version.) So Dorman... just changed the flanges on their early intake so it bolts on to the newer heads. And performs worse that the OEM, leading me to spend the extra $100 for the Motorcraft part. And yeah, I did mean '79 WS6 up there, whoops. Well, I would probably try and install one of the new studs, carefully. I'm reasonably certain that the stud will fail before the flange, if it comes to that.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2021 19:27
|
|
|
Steve French posted:So the good news is that earlier this week the Dorman guy I was emailing with said he found a set of 10 studs with the right knurl diameter. And that he could mail em out right away if I sent him my address. Right away he fedexed me a free set of studs that arrived today. Pretty nice. Except that they were the right knurl diameter because they were the wrong studs; the stock length 610-186, not the longer 610-157 studs I was asking about. Oops. He said I can keep the extra studs but doesn’t have anything else with that knurl diameter. I guess I’ll try mashing the longer ones in this weekend Moser only lists 0.480" knurl diameters anywhere close. Literally the smallest they have. ARP lists 0.486" for "late GM drum" - but the specs say "Wheel Stud Hole Size - Cast Iron/Steel Hub 0.470˝ - 0.480˝ " and "Cast Iron/Steel Hub Drill Bit Size (actual dim.) 12mm (0.472˝) ". Everything else they list for GM is larger (0.509", 0.580", 0.625".) I think Dorman is just not right on how they're listing the 610-186 studs. I trust ARP. What do the ones Dorman sent actually measure for you?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2021 19:52
|
|
|
What I'm saying is that it's likely that 0.486"/0.487" is the correct size, and the listing in the Dorman catalog is using the diameter of the hole rather than the actual knurl diameter. I don't know, just theorizing. If it were me, I'd try to press one in, carefully.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2021 18:00
|
|
|
Normally the speedo cables are heat resistant enough. They just can't handle being in direct contact, which it appears that one got to do.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2021 21:17
|
|
|
That’s what I was thinking. You beat me to it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2021 21:52
|
|
|
Nice thing with the A- and F-body GM cars is that there are a lot of options with regards to suspension. That's also the terrible thing. The two options previously mentioned seem solid and well-regarded, though. I *think* the second-gen F-bodies already have a lot better geometry than our early A-bodies, so he can just focus on bushing, spring, and shock replacement for the most part, maybe tubulars as Raluek mentioned, for adjustability. Hotchkis also makes some good relatively budget stuff. If sticking with rubber bushings, Moog should be the way to go - OEM quality.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2022 19:18
|
|
|
Detroit Speed has the (half) coilover kit in non-, single, and double-adjustable, and even remote reservoir. https://www.detroitspeed.com/products/suspension_and_chassis/coilovers/ About $1K for the base shocks, though. https://www.detroitspeed.com/products/suspension_and_chassis/coilovers/parts/030313DS They do appear to work with the stock-type control arms. Ridetech's appear to be "normal" coilovers with top plates @ $830 Those do require the tubular lowers, looks like. I kinda want the Ridetech Shockwave air springs on my Cutlass so I can play around with the ride height.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2022 17:16
|
|
|
Raluek posted:the ridetech ones don't use normal coilover springs, they're open at the top. but yeah, requires a coilover lower control arm. but imo that's a benefit, so the control arm can be designed for what you're actually using it for, instead of being adapters all the way down. mr french seemed to be interested in doing tubular control arms anyway, so that doesn't seem like a hurdle Ridetech’s website and the PDF instructions for the coil overs disagree without you. There is an upper perch on the shock body. https://www.ridetech.com/product/1970-1981-chevy-camaro-firebird-coilover-front-system-single-adjustable/ Bonus there is that they should be a standard diameter and of the springs turn out to be too heavy for the 455, they can be fairly easily replaced, though I agree with others that while the 455 isn’t technically a “big block” it’s close enough.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2022 21:47
|
|
|
Detroit Speed's are like those QA1s, and yeah, I think I like that better. That said, standard coilovers let you use a wide variety of springs easily available. I don't think the shock mount on the frame is too much of a weak point, seeing as how it's just a hole in the part where the springs rest anyway, though your concern about spreading the load versus concentrating it is a valid point. I'd probably consider welding something like a 3" 3/16" donut there to reinforce the area, just on principle.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2022 23:12
|
|
|
guess the Ridetechs have an eyelet at the lower end rather than a stud?
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2023 23:27
|
|
|
Boaz MacPhereson posted:Your F body is pretty much the same animal as my X body, just wearing a different shirt. The way your spring is now, there's a little tension in there and it'll make a break for it if you yank that arm down a bit more and stick a pry bar in the spring, but it probably won't be as violent as you're expecting. You can probably get that out of there without any bodily harm assuming you're standing behind the flopped down control arm when you bust it free. I second just removing the lower control arm bolts entirely, so it can drop straight down. Works the same for most GMs with IFS. It's fiddly to get back in, but less stressful than dealing with an arched spring under tension in my book.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2024 19:24
|
|
|
Steve French posted:Some bushings "Some" bushings. Maybe even most of them! quote:And there’s a whole lot of… stuff… inside the front subframe Yeah, subframes and the like tend to collect gravel and dirt. Like little mini-excavators, they are. Love that random nut there on the right. "Theeeeere's where that went!" Pretty sure the front crossmember on my Cutlass harbors a small hardware store by this point. Boaz MacPhereson posted:Piece of cake. Nice job. And shorter springs are easier to install 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2024 21:18
|
|
.
|
Stop - I'm already trembling with rage and fear.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2024 23:09
|
|
|
Steve French posted:Well I’m not putting this poo poo back on with a bunch of new parts without cleaning and probably painting it. Good on you. I just *can't* put grimy junk back on the car. Physically unable.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2024 22:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 11:40 |
|
|
Oh, yeah, that's good enough. I've been finding the Rustoleum "Rust Resolver" a very nice rust coating/primer on my trailer. It seems to be tougher than the actual paint, so far.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2024 17:09
|
|