Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Memories Of The Old GM And Its Cars
386 messages, Last post on Dec 04, 2009 at 9:01 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: hpmctorque (Jun 06, 2009 5:48 am) In the "old days" going 100,000 miles without an overhaul was possible but it didn't happen that often. Valve jobs were common around the 50-60000 mark and ring jobs were usually necessary not long after that. Any engine with 80,000 plus miles was probably due for a rebore. These things are unheard of now with modern engines. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: blh7068 (Jun 06, 2009 6:13 am) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: blh7068 (Jun 06, 2009 3:57 am) Valve guides would wear out and we used to have the heads machined and Perfect Circle seals installed which really helped. A 283-327's were pretty rugged but after 80,000 miles or so they needed a rebuild which usually required a rebore. We expected this back then and just had the work done if we could afford it. OTerwise, we chugged around burning oil. |
|
|
|
|
"What did Ford and C do?" They always had corporate motors, using the same basic designs across brands. So, Lincoln-Mercury owners didnt get upset seeing Ford 460 engines under the hood. And Mopar was famous for using the same engines, no one cared if a Plymouth or Chrysler used same 383 or 440.
|
|
|
|
I do remember my cousin had a used 74 Catalina with a 400 2v, and it had a plastic timing gear that broke.  Replaced with a metal one. That car was constantly needing tune ups, and had to be babied to run good. GM fans rationalize and say 'well jut put oil in' or 'just pay the $$ to fix it', but people have better things to do with their time than baby their cars.  Thus, GM loses sales, and Ch. 11 BK...
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: tomcatt630 (Jun 06, 2009 2:52 pm) The mid-seventies weren't good years for GM or anyone else.
|
|
|
Replying to: isellhondas (Jun 06, 2009 3:35 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: imidazol97 (Jun 06, 2009 7:18 am) But Honda took a far more creative approach in dealing with the gear noise problem. They wanted to use a gear primary drive in their 160cc and 175cc twin cylinder motorcyles; but helical gears were unacceptable for that application; because of the side loading and power loss they create. Straight cut spur gears would have solved the side loading and power loss problems; but anyone who remembers the sound of a 1950s VW Beetle in first gear (They had a straight cut, non synchro spur first gear), which was typically audible a half block away, knows why that design would also be unacceptable. Honda engineers then designed a straight cut spur gear, with two offset parallel rows of teeth; which was essentially two identical spur gears mounted side by side; with one gear rotated 1/2 pitch from the other gear. The 1/2 pitch offset between the gears placed the teeth on each gear so they lined up halfway between the teeth on the other gear. That design reduced the backlash and play between the teeth so dramatically that this dual row spur gear was as quiet or quieter than a helical gear.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: zaken1 (Jun 06, 2009 5:35 pm) Now that you mention I had heard of the fiber gears. Interesting responses from both. Thanks. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Memories Of The Old GM And Its Cars
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
