Home » Public Forums » GMCnet » [GMCnet] Reviving the Cad 500
( ) 1 Vote
| Re: [GMCnet] Reviving the Cad 500 [message #165228 is a reply to message #162802] |
Tue, 03 April 2012 19:17   |
JohnL455
Messages: 4447
Registered: October 2006
Location: Woodstock, IL
Karma: 12
|
Senior Member |
|
|
As far as the Dyno of death, just wondering what the failure modes were on the Buick and Cad engines. I know of the aluminum rocker issue galling the steel rocker shaft issue on the Buicks, but other than that they have the most robust main bearings. How did the Caddys give it up? I'm just guessing cams/lifters. Never had a Buick engine failure, but did have the Olds 455 spin a rod bearing, but blaming the PO non oil changes for that one.
John Lebetski
Woodstock, IL
77 Eleganza II
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Reviving the Cad 500 [message #165230 is a reply to message #165141] |
Tue, 03 April 2012 19:18 |
Ken Henderson
Messages: 8726
Registered: March 2004
Location: Americus, GA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Carleton,
Believe me, if I'd had any idea I'd be making a new career of drive train
R&R, I'd have built a test stand instead. At this point, I think I've got
about one more install left in my antique body. With all my experience,
I'd expected today's removal to be quick & easy. No such luck. the
shortcuts I thought I'd identified during previous episodes proved to be
long-cuts instead. :-( It took me about 2-1/2 hours to do the removal,
including installing the gantry & hoists -- after having disconnected
everything yesterday.
One thing I WILL do this time: I'm going to bore two holes through the top
step riser to the cockpit, each aligned with one of the two top
transmission mounting bolts. I've probably spent 15+% of both removal and
installation time on the top left one; a somewhat less on the top right one.
Ken H.
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Carleton Douglas wrote:
> Ken you need to make a run stand and prove what is going on with the
> engine, taking it in and out is to had on old guys like us. Manny can
> give you some info on how he make his. That is all that I can think
> of, in and out that hurts me thinking about it.
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Ken Henderson
Americus, GA
www.gmcwipersetc.com
Large Wiring Diagrams
76 X-Birchaven
76 X-Palm Beach
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Reviving the Cad 500 [message #165231 is a reply to message #165215] |
Tue, 03 April 2012 19:36 |
Ken Henderson
Messages: 8726
Registered: March 2004
Location: Americus, GA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Larry,
Last night I filled out the information sheet at MPC. Today, while at the
engine shop, I got a call from Dick Lewis. After listening to my tale of
woes and tests, he significantly did NOT try to sell me a torque converter
-- he's convinced that I don't need one. Said he'd be glad to, but didn't
think that's the source of my problem. He was disappointed that I did not
actually drive the coach while I had the hydraulics instrumented. He says
I should immediately drive it with a gauge on the converter output and load
the engine to see what the pressure does; anything in the range of 100 psi
is TOO much. He wasn't even satisfied with my static, in-Drive, runs to
2000 rpm with the coolant line open and blocked. I'll certainly install
the gauge for the first test drive when I get running again.
Every time I talk to an "engine man" he convinces me the problem's the
transmission or the torque converter. Then I talk to a "converter man" and
he convinces me it's the transmission or the engine. Then Manny convinces
me it's the engine or the converter. It's bad enough having my arms pulled,
and my legs pulled, without having the 3rd appendage attacked. :-(
When I tear the engine down again, we will jig it up and check the main
bore alignment. But the original crank and bearings, when this whole
fiasco began, looked, mic'd, and Plasigaged PERFECT -- low to middle of all
clearance specs, including bearing tapers.
And the shop that rebuilt the crank has one of the best reputations in the
state. Again, John Beaver and I examined everything carefully, and I
Plastigaged every bearing without seeing anything to be concerned about.
Rest assured, when the engine goes together the next time, we'll be triple
checking everything. If everything receives the meticulous care I saw
today while watching John machine a racing engine head, there's no excuse
for any problem. Frankly, it has received that care both times, and will
again. He's as frustrated as I am -- even though my participation and his
free participation frees him of warranty liability. :-)
Ken H.
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Larry wrote:
>
> Contact Dick Lewis at Midwest Performance Converter. He is building a
> number of converters for some of the guys that have 500 Cad motors.
>
> 800-262-2063
>
> http/www.midwestconverter.com
>
> Contact Bob Miller for a review on how he likes his. Sorry, don't have his
> # with me, but should be in the GMCMI Membership roster.
>
> I'm skeptical also of a TC problem. Are you sure your line bore is
> straight, and when you plastigaged your motor, was the plastigage even all
> of the way across the whole bearing. I've seen crank grinders get lazy
> with their grinding and not trim the grinding wheel often enough to get a
> flat surface across the crank throws and mains meaning the grinding wheel
> wears most at the edges and then does not grind flat all of the way to the
> edge of the bearing surface. Just a thought...
> --
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Ken Henderson
Americus, GA
www.gmcwipersetc.com
Large Wiring Diagrams
76 X-Birchaven
76 X-Palm Beach
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Reviving the Cad 500 [message #165256 is a reply to message #165228] |
Tue, 03 April 2012 22:31 |
Bob de Kruyff
Messages: 4260
Registered: January 2004
Location: Chandler, AZ
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
| JohnL455 wrote on Tue, 03 April 2012 18:17 |
As far as the Dyno of death, just wondering what the failure modes were on the Buick and Cad engines. I know of the aluminum rocker issue galling the steel rocker shaft issue on the Buicks, but other than that they have the most robust main bearings. How did the Caddys give it up? I'm just guessing cams/lifters. Never had a Buick engine failure, but did have the Olds 455 spin a rod bearing, but blaming the PO non oil changes for that one.
|
John, when I was that 18 year old dyno operator in Saginaw as a GMI student, all I recognized was when an engine virtually came off the floor and peppered itself against the wall and safety glass. One of our engineers had to figure out how we could run transmission tests instead of engine tests. We weren't concerned about oil consumption, piston slap, valve noise or any thing like that. If it could run another test at wide open throttle for several days, it was a keeper. Both the Cadillacs and Buicks were spectacular in their ability to self destruct and explode and wake me up at 4 in the morning. When Saginaw Transmission retooled from the old 3 spd to the new Muncie 4 spd replacement, we needed much more HP and durability. The Olds couldn't deliver the power and the Pontiac finally became the power and durability standard. I can only assume that the Cadillac is often considered as a GMC alternative because it was offered in the Eldorado--not because it is a good engine.
Bob de Kruyff
78 Eleganza
Chandler, AZ
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Reviving the Cad 500 [message #165262 is a reply to message #162802] |
Tue, 03 April 2012 23:36 |
Richard Brown
Messages: 281
Registered: May 2009
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Does the rebuilder have a dyno or an engine run stand? I'm wondering if, just for process of elimination, you could break in the engine on a dyno, then do a couple of pulls on the engine after break-in. Then drop the pan & check the thrust bearing. If after that the thrust bearing is OK, then that eliminates the engine from the equation as a possible cause. I don't know if there is any such thing as a transmission dyno, but if there were it would help to eliminate it as well. You might even temporarily replace the torque converter with a known good one. What's the old saying that, if you eliminate the impossible, what's left however improbable is the truth. I remember in the Navy that was the usual way to find a problem that defied diagnosis. Replace suspected parts with known good parts until the problem went away. You'll either find the problem or end up with an all-new setup.
Richard & Carol Brown
1974 Eleganza SE
"DILLIGAF"
Lindale, Tx. 75771
903-881-0192
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Richard & Carol Brown
1974 Eleganza SE
1174 Hickory Hills Dr.
Murchison, TX. 75778
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Reviving the Cad 500 [message #165285 is a reply to message #162802] |
Wed, 04 April 2012 09:24 |
JohnL455
Messages: 4447
Registered: October 2006
Location: Woodstock, IL
Karma: 12
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Well I can say I've had most all the GM flavored engines over the years. Still have a 76 Grand LeMans with a real Pontiac 350, albiet a 2BBL. Never had a problem and in that low HP version and being a 350 out of the same block, I don't think it's possible to have it hurt itself. I'll hang on to it. I guess you would need the NTSB then to find out what went wrong wten they exploded, and that was not the real focus of the testing. I was just curious of what led to the failures and what the weak points of the Buick and Cad were. I know on the Northstars it's the head bolt creep that causes Dexcool thirst.
John Lebetski
Woodstock, IL
77 Eleganza II
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Reviving the Cad 500 [message #165291 is a reply to message #165285] |
Wed, 04 April 2012 10:03 |
Bob de Kruyff
Messages: 4260
Registered: January 2004
Location: Chandler, AZ
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
| JohnL455 wrote on Wed, 04 April 2012 08:24 |
Well I can say I've had most all the GM flavored engines over the years. Still have a 76 Grand LeMans with a real Pontiac 350, albiet a 2BBL. Never had a problem and in that low HP version and being a 350 out of the same block, I don't think it's possible to have it hurt itself. I'll hang on to it. I guess you would need the NTSB then to find out what went wrong wten they exploded, and that was not the real focus of the testing. I was just curious of what led to the failures and what the weak points of the Buick and Cad were. I know on the Northstars it's the head bolt creep that causes Dexcool thirst.
|
Although I wouldn't dismiss the results entirely, these were transmission test and we would routinely disassemble the trannies to check wear, etc. We didn't do any of that for the engines and ran them till they gave up. On the otherhand, there are engine dynamometer tests that will run at WOT for 500 hours in a similar abusive state. Usually, there was a rod flying out of the side of the block but it's hard to say what the root causes were, other than some brands were distinctly worse than others.
Bob de Kruyff
78 Eleganza
Chandler, AZ
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Reviving the Cad 500 [message #165342 is a reply to message #165291] |
Wed, 04 April 2012 15:38 |
 |
Matt Colie
Messages: 8547
Registered: March 2007
Location: S.E. Michigan
Karma: 7
|
Senior Member |
|
|
| Bob de Kruyff wrote on Wed, 04 April 2012 11:03 |
| JohnL455 wrote on Wed, 04 April 2012 08:24 |
Well I can say I've had most all the GM flavored engines over the years. Still have a 76 Grand LeMans with a real Pontiac 350, albiet a 2BBL. Never had a problem and in that low HP version and being a 350 out of the same block, I don't think it's possible to have it hurt itself. I'll hang on to it. I guess you would need the NTSB then to find out what went wrong wten they exploded, and that was not the real focus of the testing. I was just curious of what led to the failures and what the weak points of the Buick and Cad were. I know on the Northstars it's the head bolt creep that causes Dexcool thirst.
|
Although I wouldn't dismiss the results entirely, these were transmission test and we would routinely disassemble the trannies to check wear, etc. We didn't do any of that for the engines and ran them till they gave up. On the otherhand, there are engine dynamometer tests that will run at WOT for 500 hours in a similar abusive state. Usually, there was a rod flying out of the side of the block but it's hard to say what the root causes were, other than some brands were distinctly worse than others.
|
The thing missed here is that the engines used in everybody's transmission test program are straight of the assembly line and considered a disposable item. They are typically run out of envelope for as long as at least that test requires. It is not atypical for a single engine to be used for multiple transmission validations. It is no surprise when they grenade. There is also another waiting on an engine pallet so the test can resume.
I could tell you stories of Detroit testing that would astound you.
And John,
It isn't head bolt creep that is the problem with the Northstar. It was that they didn't want to buy the right (more expensive) gasket that I proposed or revise the joint design prior to production. The joint weakness was obvious to us (McCord Gasket) early in the development phase, but we didn't win the bid. So, I talked management into tooling for the aftermarket and packaging the "fix it right kit". We did OK on that one.
Matt
Matt & Mary Colie - Chaumière -'73 Glacier 23 - Members GMCMI, GMCGL, GMCES
Electronically Controlled Quiet Engine Cooling Fan with OE Rear Drum Brakes with Applied Control Arms
SE Michigan - Near DTW - Twixt A2 and Detroit
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Reviving the Cad 500 [message #165354 is a reply to message #165075] |
Wed, 04 April 2012 16:34 |
GMC_LES
Messages: 569
Registered: October 2009
Location: Montreal
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ken,
I just had a discussion with a friend of mine who used to do a lot of engine work. He mentioned having a similar problem on small block vette years ago. After redoing the engine several times due to thrust bearing failure, they replaced the vibration damper and the problem disappeared. They never were sure as to the cause of the problem, just happy that the engine finally made it well past the warranty period with no signs of trouble.
I don't see how this could be the source of your problem, but I guess it could be possible. Compared to having to replace a crank and bearings, a new damper is a cheap Investment.
Les Burt
Montreal
On 2012-04-02, at 7:51 PM, Ken Henderson <hend4800@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> Les,
>
> The only thing unique about the front of my engine is the pair of
> serpentine belts. No one I've talked to, including myself, thinks there's
> any possibility of their causing axial loads on the crank. There were NO
> signs of radial damage to the front bearing as I'd expect if there were a
> problem. There's no reason the serpentine belts should cause more problem
> than the V-belts. Also, with the excess end play, I can literally move the
> crank fore and aft by hand, even with the belts in place.
>
> As for oil starvation, that's unlikely: The #3 journal (where the thrust
> is taken on the Cad) showed no different wear than any of the others --
> just that minor amount caused by the circulating debris.
>
> Today I talked to Marty at Maximum Torque Specialists. He thinks the
> torque converter is the cause of my problems; he claims the housing CAN
> expand enough to take up my 0.125" clearance. I'm still skeptical, but
> with nothing else to blame, I'm going to replace the TC with the best one I
> can find -- any suggestions? I'll also have the builder of this one tear
> it down to see if they can find anything wrong with it.
>
> After I drop the engine tomorrow, I'll be looking for any signs of
> interference that I may have missed before. The general assumption, in the
> transmission industry at least, seems to be that an expanded TC would
> immediately cause massive damage to the transmission -- I saw NO signs of
> any damage when I had the transmission partially disassembled to replace
> the input bushing. Maybe the TH-425 is especially rugged in that area
> because of the chain drive?
>
> Ideas welcomed.
>
> Ken H.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Les Burt wrote:
>
>> Ken,
>> Is there any possibility that something running off the front of the crank
>> is pulling it forward with enough force to load the thrust bearing?
>>
>> Another very long shot might be a defect in the block oiling passages that
>> is causing a restricted oil flow to the main journal with the thrust faces.
>> Increasing oil flow to the thrust face by chamfering the bearing shell
>> might actually have a negative effect if the oil flow was already on the
>> low side. You'll find out for sure on this tear down as the bearing shell
>> surfaces for the main with the thrust faces and the rods fed off that main
>> should show signs of oil starvation if this is the case. I doubt this would
>> be your situation though.
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Les Burt
Montreal
1975 Eleganza 26ft
A work in Progress
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Reviving the Cad 500 [message #165362 is a reply to message #165342] |
Wed, 04 April 2012 17:20 |
Bob de Kruyff
Messages: 4260
Registered: January 2004
Location: Chandler, AZ
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
""The thing missed here is that the engines used in everybody's transmission test program are straight of the assembly line and considered a disposable item. They are typically run out of envelope for as long as at least that test requires. It is not atypical for a single engine to be used for multiple transmission validations. It is no surprise when they grenade. There is also another waiting on an engine pallet so the test can resume.
I could tell you stories of Detroit testing that would astound you.
""
In those days blowing an engine during a transmission test was not taken lightly. Unlike today, we were not a powertrain facility but rather a manufacturing plant in beautiful Saginaw. We did an extensive breakin procedure on each engine and treated them with respect (other than running the crap out of them). We did not have the luxury of having engines waiting in line. Before I graduated to the Tech center in Warren, we were able to remodel the dyno facility to an automated, programmable cell so that the transmission could be shifted and the engine was not always running at WOT. Even though it killed us at Chevrolet, we still stuck with Pontiac engines. As far as the Northstar, it was developed by the then centralized Powertrain group with application mainly meant for Cadillac. At the time I was Director of Engineering for Isuzu and we had a competing 4.6 engine as well. We were told to meet with the Northstar development group and decide on a common or at least an integrated design. WOW,talk about not invented here syndrome (I won't mention the individual's name) but the Isuzu design was spit out and stomped on. To this day, I still feel it was a superior product.
Bob de Kruyff
78 Eleganza
Chandler, AZ
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Reviving the Cad 500 [message #165363 is a reply to message #162802] |
Wed, 04 April 2012 17:28 |
JohnL455
Messages: 4447
Registered: October 2006
Location: Woodstock, IL
Karma: 12
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I like the full dyno break in/ certification for the Caddy. I guess you would then need a "rolling chassis" type setup to do a dyno roller test on the full drive train. You could perhaps put some sort of dial indicator or fabricate an interference type indicator at say the balancer to see if the under load the converter was balooning and driving the crank forward??? How about a more HD converter? But how can a balooning converter push forward on the crank without the trans behind it? Can that slight chain angle provide that much forward vector? So confusing.
Matt... I thought the Northstar issue was the threads pulling out of the block and loosing head clamping force?? I ask as I just took over my dad's 97 SLS (we got him the Chrysler T & C Limited handicapped van by VMI) Any tips on how to keep it alive and happy? All I know of is to change the Dexcool on schedule and add the Caddilac pills to the coolant.
John Lebetski
Woodstock, IL
77 Eleganza II
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Reviving the Cad 500 [message #165372 is a reply to message #165362] |
Wed, 04 April 2012 19:06 |
jhbridges
Messages: 8412
Registered: May 2011
Location: Braselton ga
Karma: -74
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I had as a company truck an Isuzu P'up diesel 4WD with every option known to Isuzu in the 80s. It was the best diesel ride I've ever had. 145CID or so pushrod engine. Ran like a top, totally unbreakable. Very comfoprtable on the highway, and the low transfer was like ver many to one - it would climb walls and pull stumps. I was sorry to turn it back - after 270K miles or so, for a HiLux diesel. I wish I had bought it, I had the option.
--johnny
'76 23' transmode norris
'76 palm beach
'91 Jetta diesel toadstone
From: Bob de Kruyff <NEXT2POOL@AOL.COM>
To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2012 6:20 PM
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Reviving the Cad 500
""The thing missed here is that the engines used in everybody's transmission test program are straight of the assembly line and considered a disposable item. They are typically run out of envelope for as long as at least that test requires. It is not atypical for a single engine to be used for multiple transmission validations. It is no surprise when they grenade. There is also another waiting on an engine pallet so the test can resume.
I could tell you stories of Detroit testing that would astound you.
""
In those days blowing an engine during a transmission test was not taken lightly. Unlike today, we were not a powertrain facility but rather a manufacturing plant in beautiful Saginaw. We did an extensive breakin procedure on each engine and treated them with respect (other than running the crap out of them). We did not have the luxury of having engines waiting in line. Before I graduated to the Tech center in Warren, we were able to remodel the dyno facility to an automated, programmable cell so that the transmission could be shifted and the engine was not always running at WOT. Even though it killed us at Chevrolet, we still stuck with Pontiac engines. As far as the Northstar, it was developed by the then centralized Powertrain group with application mainly meant for Cadillac. At the time I was Director of Engineering for Isuzu and we had a competing 4.6 engine as well. We were told to meet with the Northstar development group and decide on a common or
at least an integrate
d design. WOW,talk about not invented here syndrome (I won't mention the individual's name) but the Isuzu design was spit out and stomped on. To this day, I still feel it was a superior product.
--
Bob de Kruyff
78 Eleganza
Chandler, AZ
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Foolish Carriage, 76 26' Eleganza(?) with beaucoup mods and add - ons.
Braselton, Ga.
I forgive them all, save those who hurt the dogs. They must answer to me in hell
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Reviving the Cad 500 [message #165373 is a reply to message #162802] |
Wed, 04 April 2012 19:42 |
g.winger
Messages: 792
Registered: February 2008
Location: Warrenton,Missouri
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
|
Les,,,,Caddy 500's don't have harmonic dampners.,,,,,PL
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Reviving the Cad 500 [message #165382 is a reply to message #165373] |
Wed, 04 April 2012 20:33 |
Kosier
Messages: 834
Registered: February 2008
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Sorry, Paul, but the 500s had harmonic balancer through 73.
74 to 76 had a big, cast iron pulley that was balanced with the
front hub. They came as a single part number.
Gary Kosier (old parts man)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Leavitt" <leavittpaul@yahoo.com>
To: <gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2012 8:42 PM
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Reviving the Cad 500
>
>
> Les,,,,Caddy 500's don't have harmonic dampners.,,,,,PL
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Reviving the Cad 500 [message #165391 is a reply to message #165382] |
Wed, 04 April 2012 21:20 |
Ken Henderson
Messages: 8726
Registered: March 2004
Location: Americus, GA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
After having spent ALL day in Montgomery at Pull-a-Part helping Bill
Hutchinson, John Nicholls, and Fred Veenschoten pull the 72 Eldorado engine
that I brought home with me, I'm not up to answering all the questions. In
summary: My engine guy has an engine dyno but it's not yet operational.
Since most of his race engines are Chevy's, he probably won't even have
adapters for BOPC. I see no return from running anything less than on a
full chassis dyno since the engine, torque converter, and transmission are
all suspect. And anything less than 100 miles probably wouldn't prove much
-- that's more than I would spend $400 per hour to try.
Gary, since this is a '72, I presume it has a harmonic balancer though I
didn't notice. Do you think I should run it with that crank if that's the
route I take? Or should I continue with the cast iron hub & my
Ford-sourced serpentine pulley? Just how out of balance could an iron hub
mated to another round chunk of iron pulley possibly be???
Ken H.
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Kosier wrote:
> Sorry, Paul, but the 500s had harmonic balancer through 73.
> 74 to 76 had a big, cast iron pulley that was balanced with the
> front hub. They came as a single part number.
>
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Ken Henderson
Americus, GA
www.gmcwipersetc.com
Large Wiring Diagrams
76 X-Birchaven
76 X-Palm Beach
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Reviving the Cad 500 [message #165416 is a reply to message #162802] |
Thu, 05 April 2012 03:47 |
Richard Brown
Messages: 281
Registered: May 2009
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
The reason I was thinking about breaking it in using an engine dyno is to take the transmission out of the loop temporarily to see if something like the torque converter/transmission could be the reason that the thrust bearing is failing. Using a chassis dyno on the setup that has been used when it last failed would not isolate the components unless you temporarily used a different transmission/converter from a Cadillac conversion that had been used without a thrust bearing failure. If the engine is dyno-ed without that transmission or torque converter and the thrust bearing shows unusual wear again, you have just eliminated the transmission and the torque converter from the possible source of the problem. If the engine passes the pulls without unusual wear, then you can use the chassis dyno with a converter known to have not caused a problem & the old transmission from your coach, then look at the thrust bearing again. If the thrust bearing is still OK,
then the old transmission can't be the problem & the torque converter must be the problem. At that point, you have empirical evidence that the converter is absolutely the problem. I hope this explains what I'm getting at.Instead of replacing each part permanently with new parts, you are using used parts with a known track record temporarily until you have absolutely found the problem, then you only need to buy the one part that you now know is at fault. Costs a lot less than buying a new converter when it's the transmission at fault or the other way around. I hope this clears up my thought process on this.
Richard & Carol Brown
1974 Eleganza SE
"DILLIGAF"
Lindale, Tx. 75771
903-881-0192
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Richard & Carol Brown
1974 Eleganza SE
1174 Hickory Hills Dr.
Murchison, TX. 75778
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Reviving the Cad 500 [message #165419 is a reply to message #165391] |
Thu, 05 April 2012 05:26 |
jhbridges
Messages: 8412
Registered: May 2011
Location: Braselton ga
Karma: -74
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Mopar Performance was adameant that I use the damper which was supplied with the crankshaft. How that translates to GM stuff, I dunno. But you know it's balanced with the original one.
--johnny
'76 23' transmode norris
'76 palm beach
From: Ken Henderson <hend4800@bellsouth.net>
To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2012 10:20 PM
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Reviving the Cad 500
After having spent ALL day in Montgomery at Pull-a-Part helping Bill
Hutchinson, John Nicholls, and Fred Veenschoten pull the 72 Eldorado engine
that I brought home with me, I'm not up to answering all the questions. In
summary: My engine guy has an engine dyno but it's not yet operational.
Since most of his race engines are Chevy's, he probably won't even have
adapters for BOPC. I see no return from running anything less than on a
full chassis dyno since the engine, torque converter, and transmission are
all suspect. And anything less than 100 miles probably wouldn't prove much
-- that's more than I would spend $400 per hour to try.
Gary, since this is a '72, I presume it has a harmonic balancer though I
didn't notice. Do you think I should run it with that crank if that's the
route I take? Or should I continue with the cast iron hub & my
Ford-sourced serpentine pulley? Just how out of balance could an iron hub
mated to another round chunk of iron pulley possibly be???
Ken H.
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Kosier wrote:
> Sorry, Paul, but the 500s had harmonic balancer through 73.
> 74 to 76 had a big, cast iron pulley that was balanced with the
> front hub. They came as a single part number.
>
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Foolish Carriage, 76 26' Eleganza(?) with beaucoup mods and add - ons.
Braselton, Ga.
I forgive them all, save those who hurt the dogs. They must answer to me in hell
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Reviving the Cad 500 [message #165421 is a reply to message #165391] |
Thu, 05 April 2012 07:09 |
Steven Ferguson
Messages: 3447
Registered: May 2006
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ken,
Shouldn't be a problem IF you have the entire rotating assay balanced.
That means pistons, rods, a ring pouch, bearing set, flex plate and
balancer.
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Ken Henderson <hend4800@bellsouth.net>wrote:
> After having spent ALL day in Montgomery at Pull-a-Part helping Bill
> Hutchinson, John Nicholls, and Fred Veenschoten pull the 72 Eldorado engine
> that I brought home with me, I'm not up to answering all the questions. In
> summary: My engine guy has an engine dyno but it's not yet operational.
> Since most of his race engines are Chevy's, he probably won't even have
> adapters for BOPC. I see no return from running anything less than on a
> full chassis dyno since the engine, torque converter, and transmission are
> all suspect. And anything less than 100 miles probably wouldn't prove much
> -- that's more than I would spend $400 per hour to try.
>
> Gary, since this is a '72, I presume it has a harmonic balancer though I
> didn't notice. Do you think I should run it with that crank if that's the
> route I take? Or should I continue with the cast iron hub & my
> Ford-sourced serpentine pulley? Just how out of balance could an iron hub
> mated to another round chunk of iron pulley possibly be???
>
> Ken H.
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Kosier wrote:
>
> > Sorry, Paul, but the 500s had harmonic balancer through 73.
> > 74 to 76 had a big, cast iron pulley that was balanced with the
> > front hub. They came as a single part number.
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Fathom the hypocrisy of a nation where every citizen must prove they have
health insurance......but not everyone has to prove they're a citizen.
Steve Ferguson
Sierra Vista, AZ
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu May 02 23:27:24 CDT 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01531 seconds
|
GMCforum
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
