I looked into CO2 extinguishers that leave no mess, but they’re super expensive. Since this was the only real fire I’ve had on a car my whole life, I’m going with the hope that it’ll never happen again and if it does I’ll have a better method than a shirt! GMwxo wrote:I was thinking of this fire and how you put it out with your shirt. Then I wondered about a fire blanket rather than an extinguisher. I'm not sure what comes out of an extinguisher, but you might not want to find out, that after the fire, you have a substantial cleanup and possible damage from the contents of the extinguisher. On the other hand this may never happen again.
1966 OLDS 442
Moderators: MostMint, wxo, Fred32v, Basement Paul, ttamrettus
Re: 1966 OLDS 442
Re: 1966 OLDS 442
I haven't posted for a bit, but slow progress is being made. I had to read back through my last couple
of posts to make sure this post is actually and update. Since last post, I took the 3.36:1 gears out of the
spare axle housing and installed the 3.90's. Fred was there to assist. I'm not certain that our work would
pass inspection at a speed shop, but the gears are in and I now have a 3.90 posi lying on the floor waiting
for install. I've also been doing minor adjustments between joy rides. I had a feeling that there was more
adjustment to be made in the vacuum advance. After switching the vacuum supply to the rear carb, I was
getting a small surge under high vacuum. I've adjusted that away and it's now way better. I also bumped the
rev limiter to 5600 rpms. After the exhaust smoothed out the acceleration so much, I felt that I was short
shifting and I was correct. I get a very strong pull through 5400 rpm now. This should help out the e.t. a bit
I'm certain. I guess my thoughts now are to take it to the track and see what it will turn with the new mid-pipes
and mufflers and newly found rpms. Once I have that baseline, I think I'll pop in the 3.90. If the axle swap
nets a large increase, I might have to do something about getting an overdrive set up. More to come.
GM
of posts to make sure this post is actually and update. Since last post, I took the 3.36:1 gears out of the
spare axle housing and installed the 3.90's. Fred was there to assist. I'm not certain that our work would
pass inspection at a speed shop, but the gears are in and I now have a 3.90 posi lying on the floor waiting
for install. I've also been doing minor adjustments between joy rides. I had a feeling that there was more
adjustment to be made in the vacuum advance. After switching the vacuum supply to the rear carb, I was
getting a small surge under high vacuum. I've adjusted that away and it's now way better. I also bumped the
rev limiter to 5600 rpms. After the exhaust smoothed out the acceleration so much, I felt that I was short
shifting and I was correct. I get a very strong pull through 5400 rpm now. This should help out the e.t. a bit
I'm certain. I guess my thoughts now are to take it to the track and see what it will turn with the new mid-pipes
and mufflers and newly found rpms. Once I have that baseline, I think I'll pop in the 3.90. If the axle swap
nets a large increase, I might have to do something about getting an overdrive set up. More to come.
GM
Re: 1966 OLDS 442
I've missed the last few Wednesday nights at the track. Last Wednesday, I was about two miles from
the track when Mother Nature scared me away with some showers and, as it turns out, they were able
to race. Today, the weather was a cool 45 degrees with a light West wind. I made the decision early to
hit the track and see if my last two modifications would make me quicker. I made it to the track and
pulled in just as they were calling cars to staging. I only sat for about 10 minutes before my first pass.
I ran a 13.73 @ 102.7. I would have been satisfied with that run, as it was a solid two tenths faster than
my best. Since there were only about 40-50 cars there, it made getting some runs in pretty easy. My second
run was a 13.71. Before my third pass, most of the cars were in the staging lanes, and I actually had to wait
about 20 minutes before I went. I pulled off a 13.57. So before my next run, I waited another 20 minutes, but
I could feel the temperature climbing and I was losing the cold. I ran another 13.71. I figured that was the
best I could get out of the day, and called it enough. I'm very pleased with my times. After checking my old
time slips from the Vette, I realized that the 442 is faster than the stock C5. I think that I can bump my rev
limiter up a bit, as I'm pulling very strong through 5500 rpm. This coupled with a cold day should net me a
couple of tenths. Going to the 3.90 rear axle I think would get me a couple more. I never dreamed that this
car would be going as fast as it is. Perhaps going in the 12's may not be just a dream for the 442. We'll see.
GM
the track when Mother Nature scared me away with some showers and, as it turns out, they were able
to race. Today, the weather was a cool 45 degrees with a light West wind. I made the decision early to
hit the track and see if my last two modifications would make me quicker. I made it to the track and
pulled in just as they were calling cars to staging. I only sat for about 10 minutes before my first pass.
I ran a 13.73 @ 102.7. I would have been satisfied with that run, as it was a solid two tenths faster than
my best. Since there were only about 40-50 cars there, it made getting some runs in pretty easy. My second
run was a 13.71. Before my third pass, most of the cars were in the staging lanes, and I actually had to wait
about 20 minutes before I went. I pulled off a 13.57. So before my next run, I waited another 20 minutes, but
I could feel the temperature climbing and I was losing the cold. I ran another 13.71. I figured that was the
best I could get out of the day, and called it enough. I'm very pleased with my times. After checking my old
time slips from the Vette, I realized that the 442 is faster than the stock C5. I think that I can bump my rev
limiter up a bit, as I'm pulling very strong through 5500 rpm. This coupled with a cold day should net me a
couple of tenths. Going to the 3.90 rear axle I think would get me a couple more. I never dreamed that this
car would be going as fast as it is. Perhaps going in the 12's may not be just a dream for the 442. We'll see.
GM
- Attachments
-
-
Hibernation - 1966 OLDS 442
59,404 -- Winter hibernation. According to the odometer, I put on 2,206 miles this season. Last
night, I purchased a battery. While at the track last time, I had a slow crank that kind of scared me.
The battery was a 60 month battery and was 5 years old. I caught a sale on a DieHard Silver. This coupled
with my speed perks at Advanced Auto got me a "deal" on the battery. I got to the store to pick it up
after I had oredered it online, I noticed the silver being much bigger than my old battery. A short talk
with the manager got me a Gold for the same money. I installed it today with no issues.
Going into winter I have some decisions to make and some work to do. I still can't stop the wheel hop.
That's a problem. Something will have to be done about that. I can't go faster with that stumbling block there.
If I can find a way to overcome the wheel hop, I can go after getting out of the hole better. My average 60'
time is 2.1X. After watching Dave and Tony put a half a second on me in the first 60', I have to find a way
to better this. I still need to lower the rear end down. I'm not wanting to put a traction helper on. I'll think
on this. I am happy wiht my best of 13.47 and my best mph of 104. I basically gained a half a second and 5
mph in the quarter withbigger exhaust pipes and and more RPMS. I am thinking of putting the battery in the
trunk, and they make a kit for that as the '66 W-30 had it there as a factory option. We'll see. In the meantime,
the cover is on and the battery tender has been connected.
GM
night, I purchased a battery. While at the track last time, I had a slow crank that kind of scared me.
The battery was a 60 month battery and was 5 years old. I caught a sale on a DieHard Silver. This coupled
with my speed perks at Advanced Auto got me a "deal" on the battery. I got to the store to pick it up
after I had oredered it online, I noticed the silver being much bigger than my old battery. A short talk
with the manager got me a Gold for the same money. I installed it today with no issues.
Going into winter I have some decisions to make and some work to do. I still can't stop the wheel hop.
That's a problem. Something will have to be done about that. I can't go faster with that stumbling block there.
If I can find a way to overcome the wheel hop, I can go after getting out of the hole better. My average 60'
time is 2.1X. After watching Dave and Tony put a half a second on me in the first 60', I have to find a way
to better this. I still need to lower the rear end down. I'm not wanting to put a traction helper on. I'll think
on this. I am happy wiht my best of 13.47 and my best mph of 104. I basically gained a half a second and 5
mph in the quarter withbigger exhaust pipes and and more RPMS. I am thinking of putting the battery in the
trunk, and they make a kit for that as the '66 W-30 had it there as a factory option. We'll see. In the meantime,
the cover is on and the battery tender has been connected.
GM
Re: 1966 OLDS 442
extra weight not likely to help wheel hop - if that is what you were thinking.
the rear end is twisting under the car that is what causes it. New poly bushings would probably help that a lot, and a pinion snubber would cure it. You should be able to mount one where the stock snubber is (assuming they had that in 1966) so no mods to the car would be needed, and no visible traction bars. I can't even recall if this car is leaf or coil spring rear suspension but I have used the snubber on both with great success. If it leaf then clearly traction bars would do the job and they are bolt on.
It is impressive already that the car runs 13.40's. In 2021 we should find out how close a caged L98 C4 can get to that number.
the rear end is twisting under the car that is what causes it. New poly bushings would probably help that a lot, and a pinion snubber would cure it. You should be able to mount one where the stock snubber is (assuming they had that in 1966) so no mods to the car would be needed, and no visible traction bars. I can't even recall if this car is leaf or coil spring rear suspension but I have used the snubber on both with great success. If it leaf then clearly traction bars would do the job and they are bolt on.
It is impressive already that the car runs 13.40's. In 2021 we should find out how close a caged L98 C4 can get to that number.
[quote="Basement Paul"]Is that a mint rocketship on the hood?? :shock:
-BP[/quote]
-BP[/quote]
Re: 1966 OLDS 442
MostMint --
From what I've been reading, the whole deal with wheel hop in these cars is because the lower
control arms aren't parallel to the ground. Lowering the rear end is a bunch of the answer. The
battery in the trunk helps accomplish that. Once wheel hop is gone, I have traction to deal with,
so that's another reason I'm thinking that way. 35 lbs. over the rear wheels is way better than
having it over the left front. As for poly bushings, everything I've read says they don't give enough
for normal driving and cause bind on turns. I still have more studying to do there. I don't know how
old the ones in the car are. The pass visual inspection, but for the cost of rubber ones, I might just
put new rubbers in there. I wish a pinion snubber was an option. The brake lines on this car are
right at the top of the center of the axle. If there was a snubber there, it would crush them. We
have dilemas, but I'm not the only guy in the world who's had this issue, I just have to figure it out.
GM
From what I've been reading, the whole deal with wheel hop in these cars is because the lower
control arms aren't parallel to the ground. Lowering the rear end is a bunch of the answer. The
battery in the trunk helps accomplish that. Once wheel hop is gone, I have traction to deal with,
so that's another reason I'm thinking that way. 35 lbs. over the rear wheels is way better than
having it over the left front. As for poly bushings, everything I've read says they don't give enough
for normal driving and cause bind on turns. I still have more studying to do there. I don't know how
old the ones in the car are. The pass visual inspection, but for the cost of rubber ones, I might just
put new rubbers in there. I wish a pinion snubber was an option. The brake lines on this car are
right at the top of the center of the axle. If there was a snubber there, it would crush them. We
have dilemas, but I'm not the only guy in the world who's had this issue, I just have to figure it out.
GM
Re: 1966 OLDS 442
Since my last post, I've studied up a bit on this and taken steps to move forward. After a bit of
deliberation with myself, I've decided to do a couple of things over the winter. First step is to make
sure my rear ends are in good shape. I'm going to have the rear end guy check our gear install on the 3.90
axle and go over the 3.23 whele he's at it. It developed a small pinion seal leak, and I want that fixed. In
my mind there's a small clunk in that rear end and I want it checked so I don't destroy a tough-to-find
gear set and factory correct axle housing. The rear ends go to the shop today. While removing the rear
axle yesterday, I wanted to check the control arm bushings. I have new rubber ones waiting on the bench.
As I was removing bolts, I noticed that the bushings seemed firm in the arms. Upon inspection after the
axle was on the floor, I noticed nearly new bushings that seemed real hard. Low and behold there was a
part # on them and it turns out they're urethane bushings. That's good news. It also turns out that the
guy who assembled the car before me didn't know how to use a torque wrench! The bolts that connect the
control arms to the body of the car are supposed to be at 80 ft./lbs. torqued and I used a 3/8" ratchet and
very easily loosened them up. Grabbing the control arm and pushing it side to side, I could get an easy 3/4"
play. I tightened them up and after tightening them, the play was almost not measurable. I'm certain this
isn't helping my wheel hop situation. I'm going to study up a bit more on this before I install the rear end,
but I'm feeling pretty confident that I've discovered a bit part of the problem. Here's a link to what's in there:
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/ptp-7-225-bl
The other install guy also decided to leave out the thrust washer cups on the top control arm where it connects
to the frame. I think I'll get this kit and some urethane lube and do these the right way. Never a dull moment!
GM
deliberation with myself, I've decided to do a couple of things over the winter. First step is to make
sure my rear ends are in good shape. I'm going to have the rear end guy check our gear install on the 3.90
axle and go over the 3.23 whele he's at it. It developed a small pinion seal leak, and I want that fixed. In
my mind there's a small clunk in that rear end and I want it checked so I don't destroy a tough-to-find
gear set and factory correct axle housing. The rear ends go to the shop today. While removing the rear
axle yesterday, I wanted to check the control arm bushings. I have new rubber ones waiting on the bench.
As I was removing bolts, I noticed that the bushings seemed firm in the arms. Upon inspection after the
axle was on the floor, I noticed nearly new bushings that seemed real hard. Low and behold there was a
part # on them and it turns out they're urethane bushings. That's good news. It also turns out that the
guy who assembled the car before me didn't know how to use a torque wrench! The bolts that connect the
control arms to the body of the car are supposed to be at 80 ft./lbs. torqued and I used a 3/8" ratchet and
very easily loosened them up. Grabbing the control arm and pushing it side to side, I could get an easy 3/4"
play. I tightened them up and after tightening them, the play was almost not measurable. I'm certain this
isn't helping my wheel hop situation. I'm going to study up a bit more on this before I install the rear end,
but I'm feeling pretty confident that I've discovered a bit part of the problem. Here's a link to what's in there:
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/ptp-7-225-bl
The other install guy also decided to leave out the thrust washer cups on the top control arm where it connects
to the frame. I think I'll get this kit and some urethane lube and do these the right way. Never a dull moment!
GM
Re: 1966 OLDS 442
So the rear ends made their way back home on Christmas Eve. I was correct in my thinking that the
3.23 rear was clunking. As it turns out, the cross shaft that holds the spider gears in place was starting
to chew into the carrier and one of the spider gears was frozen on the shaft. The gear set and housing
were still in good shape, but I had to have a new posi carrier put in that rear end. Eaton doesn't make a
carrier for that gear set, so we had to go with an Auburn center section, which is very similar to the
original carrier. The 3.90 rear end that Fred and I just bolted together was half correct. We used the old
crush collar, which got the pinion depth correct, but our shims were wrong side to side. That rear got
fixed on the cheap. I tood the time today to install the 3.90 and make sure that the control arms are
properly torqued and teh bushings are lubed properly. The only thing left to do to the car now is take the
speedo ratio adapter off so the speedo will read correct. That's a twenty minute job tops, and can be done
on another day. The goal with this whole project is to see how many tenths the 3.90 gains over the 3.23.
If the gains are significant enough, I will seriously consider a 5 speed transmission. Tremec has now started
producing a 5 speed trans that will fit in the transmission tunnel without cutting the floor boards. It isn't
a cheap option, but if the car is touching the 12's or low 13's, it might be tough to go back to mid-13's.
Spring is coming.
GM
3.23 rear was clunking. As it turns out, the cross shaft that holds the spider gears in place was starting
to chew into the carrier and one of the spider gears was frozen on the shaft. The gear set and housing
were still in good shape, but I had to have a new posi carrier put in that rear end. Eaton doesn't make a
carrier for that gear set, so we had to go with an Auburn center section, which is very similar to the
original carrier. The 3.90 rear end that Fred and I just bolted together was half correct. We used the old
crush collar, which got the pinion depth correct, but our shims were wrong side to side. That rear got
fixed on the cheap. I tood the time today to install the 3.90 and make sure that the control arms are
properly torqued and teh bushings are lubed properly. The only thing left to do to the car now is take the
speedo ratio adapter off so the speedo will read correct. That's a twenty minute job tops, and can be done
on another day. The goal with this whole project is to see how many tenths the 3.90 gains over the 3.23.
If the gains are significant enough, I will seriously consider a 5 speed transmission. Tremec has now started
producing a 5 speed trans that will fit in the transmission tunnel without cutting the floor boards. It isn't
a cheap option, but if the car is touching the 12's or low 13's, it might be tough to go back to mid-13's.
Spring is coming.
GM
Re: 1966 OLDS 442
Spring is coming, but the Hangover Nationals are coming sooner according to Smoker.
Re: 1966 OLDS 442
Does anybody know someone who wants to loan me their enclosed trailer??wxo wrote:Spring is coming, but the Hangover Nationals are coming sooner according to Smoker.
GM
Re: 1966 OLDS 442
The weather was pretty decent yesterday and I was looking for a reason to go outside, so
I went to the barn to tie up some loose ends. The 3.23 axle needed fluid and a cover gasket, so
I searched them out at the local Napa store. I knew they’d have the gasket, as I had purchased from
them before. They did. I grabbed my parts and went did the install. It was pretty simple. I also
removed the old rubber control arm bushings from the housing and installed urethane ones. It’s
properly filled with 80/90 lube and Auburn’s positraction additive and is now ready to install if/when
I need to use it. I also spent twenty minutes removing the ratio adaptor from the trans housing, so
the 3.90 axle install is now complete. I fired the car up, let it come to temperature, then parked it away
for the rest of the winter. The battery tender is on and so is the car cover. Attached are some pics of the
new Auburn carrier with my 1966 dated 3.23 gear set installed.
GM
I went to the barn to tie up some loose ends. The 3.23 axle needed fluid and a cover gasket, so
I searched them out at the local Napa store. I knew they’d have the gasket, as I had purchased from
them before. They did. I grabbed my parts and went did the install. It was pretty simple. I also
removed the old rubber control arm bushings from the housing and installed urethane ones. It’s
properly filled with 80/90 lube and Auburn’s positraction additive and is now ready to install if/when
I need to use it. I also spent twenty minutes removing the ratio adaptor from the trans housing, so
the 3.90 axle install is now complete. I fired the car up, let it come to temperature, then parked it away
for the rest of the winter. The battery tender is on and so is the car cover. Attached are some pics of the
new Auburn carrier with my 1966 dated 3.23 gear set installed.
GM
Re: 1966 OLDS 442
I had to go back and read my prior post to see where I am with the 442. Yesterday, the weather was
wonderful and I’ve already passed up a few real nice days, so I wasn’t going to pass up another. I took
off the car cover and removed the battery tender. A few very “Rochester-esque” pumps and it came
to life and idled its high speed idle nicely. Plenty of condensation was blown out of the pipes as I walked
around looking for issues that would be caused by sitting. Typical for first start up, I had a loose fuel
line on the fuel pump. One turn of a screwdriver fixed that. I took it for a ride to Home Depot and
realized that my brake lights were stuck on. When I got home, I adjusted the brake switch a couple
of turns and it cured the problem. The 3.90 rear end is set up so nice. Zero clunks and no howling even
at higher cruising speeds. The rear end guy was concerned about this because the gears are original to
the car, but he nailed it. Other than the fact that the car feels really responsive on acceleration and
the tach being at 2800 at 55 mph, you can’t tell there’s a 3.90 gear in there. ( It is pretty easy to get to
4th gear under normal driving conditions too.) I bought an oil filter and I have the oil, so an oil change
and lube is in order before I put any serious mileage on.
GM
wonderful and I’ve already passed up a few real nice days, so I wasn’t going to pass up another. I took
off the car cover and removed the battery tender. A few very “Rochester-esque” pumps and it came
to life and idled its high speed idle nicely. Plenty of condensation was blown out of the pipes as I walked
around looking for issues that would be caused by sitting. Typical for first start up, I had a loose fuel
line on the fuel pump. One turn of a screwdriver fixed that. I took it for a ride to Home Depot and
realized that my brake lights were stuck on. When I got home, I adjusted the brake switch a couple
of turns and it cured the problem. The 3.90 rear end is set up so nice. Zero clunks and no howling even
at higher cruising speeds. The rear end guy was concerned about this because the gears are original to
the car, but he nailed it. Other than the fact that the car feels really responsive on acceleration and
the tach being at 2800 at 55 mph, you can’t tell there’s a 3.90 gear in there. ( It is pretty easy to get to
4th gear under normal driving conditions too.) I bought an oil filter and I have the oil, so an oil change
and lube is in order before I put any serious mileage on.
GM
Re: 1966 OLDS 442
[quote="Basement Paul"]Is that a mint rocketship on the hood?? :shock:
-BP[/quote]
-BP[/quote]
Re: 1966 OLDS 442
So I’m on several Olds forums and this popped up. Some of the guys grenaded Jay for saying
that it had the same 401 as a Buick and some other stuff, but I totally appreciate that Jay wanted
to drive it and talk about it. Some things I noticed: 1) the dual chamber master cylinder didn’t
enter the scene until ‘67, the owner did that for safety. 2) Who needs power steering, power
brakes??? 3) Front disc brakes were a performance artermarket add on. Again, the owner wanting
“better than stock” upgrades. 4) There were no head rests on bucket seats in ‘66, his had the right
seats, but added on headrests. 5) The “spare” dashboard in the trunk is worth over a grand! 6) The
“spare” tach in the trunk ( if it was a stock ‘66 tach ) is worth about $850. 7) Yes, redlines make the
car.
His tail pipes are hanging too low!! A little tweaking and he could have them under the car
correctly. It was obvious to me that the owner of that car didn’t want a museum piece, he made it
to drive it and he did what he wanted to make it what he wanted. Good for him!! Thanks to Jay for
showing it off, it’s a beautiful car!
GM
that it had the same 401 as a Buick and some other stuff, but I totally appreciate that Jay wanted
to drive it and talk about it. Some things I noticed: 1) the dual chamber master cylinder didn’t
enter the scene until ‘67, the owner did that for safety. 2) Who needs power steering, power
brakes??? 3) Front disc brakes were a performance artermarket add on. Again, the owner wanting
“better than stock” upgrades. 4) There were no head rests on bucket seats in ‘66, his had the right
seats, but added on headrests. 5) The “spare” dashboard in the trunk is worth over a grand! 6) The
“spare” tach in the trunk ( if it was a stock ‘66 tach ) is worth about $850. 7) Yes, redlines make the
car.
His tail pipes are hanging too low!! A little tweaking and he could have them under the carcorrectly. It was obvious to me that the owner of that car didn’t want a museum piece, he made it
to drive it and he did what he wanted to make it what he wanted. Good for him!! Thanks to Jay for
showing it off, it’s a beautiful car!
GM
Re: 1966 OLDS 442
He did repeat himself a few times, and since it was not his car he didn't have all the research like so many other cars he presented. He was unsure about gear ratios, and also asking if the trans was the same as other GM models. Didn't bother me much as he said he didn't know that much about the car.
I did notice the headrests I was kind of surprised they had them in 66 - obviously they did not. And I also noticed that master cylinder did not look right either, like 70's stuff, but not being an expert did not recall if they ever came with factory disc brakes.
Anyway it was in a museum lol!
I did notice the headrests I was kind of surprised they had them in 66 - obviously they did not. And I also noticed that master cylinder did not look right either, like 70's stuff, but not being an expert did not recall if they ever came with factory disc brakes.
Anyway it was in a museum lol!
[quote="Basement Paul"]Is that a mint rocketship on the hood?? :shock:
-BP[/quote]
-BP[/quote]