[Chevelle-list] Malibu

2008-01-02 Thread ronnie, a.k.a. rocko
Hello,  well  the  new  malibu  is  out  and  they  say  it  is  suppose  to  
be  a  top  seller  for  G..M.  it  very  well  could  be,  i  remember  a  
time  when  the  new  line  up  came  out  people  would  seem  to  be  a  
little  more  excited,  the  designs  were  way  different  from  one  auto  
company  to  the  next,  today  it  seems  to  me  they  all  kind  of  look  
the  same,  at  least  they  are  starting  to  put  the  badges  back  on  the 
 cars,  for  awhile  there  i  couldnt  tell  one  car  from  another,  well  
enough  about  my  age,  does  anyone  know  if  there  will  be  an  S.S,  
model ?  if  so,  wonder  if  it  would  have  chrome  bumpers,  naw  i  guess  
not,  everyone  have  a  happy  new  year,  ronnie
   
-
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.

Re: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Windshield frame rot

2006-04-30 Thread John Nasta









Hi Larry,

 

Unfortunately there is nothing out there in the aftermarket for the top
of the windshield channel regardless of whether it' s a coupe or convertible.
You might have to do it the old fashioned way, but of course real "tin knockers"
are getting harder and harder to find.

 

Good luck,

John Nasta

 

 

 

-Original
Message-
From: Larry Shaw
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2006 2:57
PM
To: 'The Chevelle Mailing List'
Subject: [Chevelle-list] Malibu
Windshield frame rot

 

I've got a '72 Malibu Convertible and have been
looking at putting a new top on it.  The old one has developed a rip.

 

In looking at the frame on the top of the windshield,
I note that a lot of the metal which had been covered with a vinyl looking
paint has pretty well rusted away.

 

What are the options for repairing this?

 

Larry Shaw

'72 Malibu

'49 Nash








[Chevelle-list] Malibu Windshield frame rot

2006-04-30 Thread Larry Shaw



I've got a '72 Malibu Convertible and have been looking 
at putting a new top on it.  The old one has developed a 
rip.
 
In looking at the frame on the top of the windshield, I 
note that a lot of the metal which had been covered with a vinyl looking paint 
has pretty well rusted away.
 
What are the options for repairing 
this?
 
Larry Shaw
'72 Malibu
'49 Nash


Re: [Chevelle-list] malibu

2004-08-18 Thread Dave Benjamin



Here is a link to the 1966 Sales flyer on my 
Website. These pictures show the emblems on some.
 
http://members.tripod.com/benj30/id618.htm
 

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Dave Benjamin 

  To: The Chevelle Mailing List 
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2004 12:04 
  AM
  Subject: Re: [Chevelle-list] malibu
  
  The 1966 Malibu SS that I restored was 
  built in Oshawa Ontario and came factory 283 with a 2spd. They used emblems on 
  the rear quarters similar to 1965 chevelles.
   
  DaveIngersoll,OntarioMy web 
  site:   http://members.tripod.com/benj30/
   
   
   
   
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
Dale 
To: 'The Chevelle Mailing List' 

Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2004 11:00 
PM
Subject: RE: [Chevelle-list] 
malibu

Basically, yes (IMO) but actually no.  The U.s. 
built Super Sport was built on the same basic body and chassis but in 66, 67 
and 68 the Super Sport was a separate model from the Malibu (138xx VIN 
as opposed to the Malibu (135/6xxx VIN); the same way the Malibu was a 
separate model from the 300 and 300 Deluxe.  The Malibu could be had 
with a 6-cyl or a V8 (283 or 327) where the Super Sport came with 
the 396 engine as standard equipment.
 
The Super Sport (also referred to in GM literature as 
the SS396 model) carried no Malibu script or badges but many state's 
DMVs still classified it as a 'Malibu' or simply a 
Chevelle.
 
Canada DID produce a Malibu SS model that was simply an 
option on the Malibu and basically consisted  of the RPO A51 
Sports Option (bucket seats) but did include 'Malibu SS' badging and 
could be had with any engine, except maybe the 396 (not sure).  I have 
photos of a 66 Malibu SS with a 230 6-cyl and a 67 Malibu SS with a 283. See 
http://www.chevellestuff.com/67stuff/gallery/supersport/mel_anderson.htm for 
documentation on the 67 Malibu Super Sport w/a 283 2-bbl engine and http://www.chevellestuff.com/66velle/gallery/malibu_ss.htm for 
the 6-cyl Malibu SS.
 

Dale McIntosh TC Gold #92/ACES #1709/NECOA #41 DalesPlace  My 67 El Camino ChevelleStuff  Decoding info on 64-72 Chevelles MidwestChevelles  Midwest Chevelle Show Information 

 

  
  Are all 66 chevelle super sports 
  Malibu's? can you have a 66 chevelle ss and have it not be a Malibu?  


Re: [Chevelle-list] malibu

2004-08-18 Thread Dave Benjamin



The 1966 Malibu SS that I restored was built 
in Oshawa Ontario and came factory 283 with a 2spd. They used emblems on the 
rear quarters similar to 1965 chevelles.
 
DaveIngersoll,OntarioMy web 
site:   http://members.tripod.com/benj30/
 
 
 
 

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Dale 
  To: 'The Chevelle Mailing List' 
  
  Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2004 11:00 
  PM
  Subject: RE: [Chevelle-list] malibu
  
  Basically, yes (IMO) but actually no.  The U.s. 
  built Super Sport was built on the same basic body and chassis but in 66, 67 
  and 68 the Super Sport was a separate model from the Malibu (138xx VIN as 
  opposed to the Malibu (135/6xxx VIN); the same way the Malibu was a separate 
  model from the 300 and 300 Deluxe.  The Malibu could be had with a 6-cyl 
  or a V8 (283 or 327) where the Super Sport came with the 396 engine 
  as standard equipment.
   
  The Super Sport (also referred to in GM literature as the 
  SS396 model) carried no Malibu script or badges but many state's DMVs 
  still classified it as a 'Malibu' or simply a Chevelle.
   
  Canada DID produce a Malibu SS model that was simply an 
  option on the Malibu and basically consisted  of the RPO A51 Sports 
  Option (bucket seats) but did include 'Malibu SS' badging and could be 
  had with any engine, except maybe the 396 (not sure).  I have photos of a 
  66 Malibu SS with a 230 6-cyl and a 67 Malibu SS with a 283. See http://www.chevellestuff.com/67stuff/gallery/supersport/mel_anderson.htm for 
  documentation on the 67 Malibu Super Sport w/a 283 2-bbl engine and http://www.chevellestuff.com/66velle/gallery/malibu_ss.htm for 
  the 6-cyl Malibu SS.
   
  
  Dale McIntosh TC Gold #92/ACES #1709/NECOA #41 DalesPlace  My 67 
  El Camino ChevelleStuff  Decoding info on 64-72 Chevelles 
  MidwestChevelles  Midwest Chevelle Show Information 

   
  

Are all 66 chevelle super sports 
Malibu's? can you have a 66 chevelle ss and have it not be a Malibu?  


RE: [Chevelle-list] malibu

2004-08-18 Thread Dale



Basically, yes (IMO) but actually no.  The U.s. built 
Super Sport was built on the same basic body and chassis but in 66, 67 and 68 
the Super Sport was a separate model from the Malibu (138xx VIN as opposed 
to the Malibu (135/6xxx VIN); the same way the Malibu was a separate model from 
the 300 and 300 Deluxe.  The Malibu could be had with a 6-cyl or a V8 (283 
or 327) where the Super Sport came with the 396 engine as standard 
equipment.
 
The Super Sport (also referred to in GM literature as the 
SS396 model) carried no Malibu script or badges but many state's DMVs still 
classified it as a 'Malibu' or simply a Chevelle.
 
Canada DID produce a Malibu SS model that was simply an 
option on the Malibu and basically consisted  of the RPO A51 Sports 
Option (bucket seats) but did include 'Malibu SS' badging and could be had 
with any engine, except maybe the 396 (not sure).  I have photos of a 66 
Malibu SS with a 230 6-cyl and a 67 Malibu SS with a 283. See http://www.chevellestuff.com/67stuff/gallery/supersport/mel_anderson.htm for 
documentation on the 67 Malibu Super Sport w/a 283 2-bbl engine and http://www.chevellestuff.com/66velle/gallery/malibu_ss.htm for 
the 6-cyl Malibu SS.
 

Dale McIntosh TC Gold #92/ACES #1709/NECOA #41 DalesPlace  My 67 
El Camino ChevelleStuff  Decoding info on 64-72 Chevelles 
MidwestChevelles  Midwest Chevelle Show Information 
 

  
  Are all 66 chevelle super sports Malibu's? 
  can you have a 66 chevelle ss and have it not be a Malibu?  


Re: [Chevelle-list] malibu

2004-08-18 Thread Zieg72



In 66 it was the SS396 only.

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Bill Bradley 
  To: The Chevelle Mailing List 
  Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2004 8:17 
  PM
  Subject: Re: [Chevelle-list] malibu
  
  in 66 there were SS's and malibus, either or, not both
  Bill Bradley
  67 Malibu
  Edmond OklahomaRay & Stephanie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  



Are all 66 chevelle super sports Malibu's? can 
you have a 66 chevelle ss and have it not be a 
  Malibu?


Re: [Chevelle-list] malibu

2004-08-18 Thread Bill Bradley
in 66 there were SS's and malibus, either or, not both
Bill Bradley
67 Malibu
Edmond OklahomaRay & Stephanie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:




Are all 66 chevelle super sports Malibu's? can you have a 66 chevelle ss and have it not be a Malibu?

[Chevelle-list] malibu

2004-08-18 Thread Ray & Stephanie



Are all 66 chevelle super sports Malibu's? can you 
have a 66 chevelle ss and have it not be a Malibu?


RE: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question

2004-02-25 Thread John Nasta
Hi Dale,

By now you probably saw my previous message, which also said that I agree
with you but in a different way (Even though I called you Brad. Sorry about
that.).

I think the main thing is to be realistic about what RPM you are trying to
achieve 100% VE at. Most street-only cars don't ever see high RPMs.

John Nasta



-Original Message-

John,

I think we're agreeing, just in a different manner. :*)  If you calculate
for 100% VE and knowing you'll only get 75%-80%, no problem.  Who makes a
362cfm (or whatever) carb anyway, right?  What I was trying to get across
was that if you calculate for a realistic cfm carb, you'll only overcarb a
little bit (say a 390 Holley or 500 Edelbrock) instead of the 100% which
might lead you to overcarb to say, a 700 or 750.

Shoot, if everyone thought alike and built the same cars...we'd all be
clones. :*)

Dale McIntosh







RE: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question

2004-02-25 Thread Dale McIntosh
John,

I think we're agreeing, just in a different manner. :*)  If you calculate
for 100% VE and knowing you'll only get 75%-80%, no problem.  Who makes a
362cfm (or whatever) carb anyway, right?  What I was trying to get across
was that if you calculate for a realistic cfm carb, you'll only overcarb a
little bit (say a 390 Holley or 500 Edelbrock) instead of the 100% which
might lead you to overcarb to say, a 700 or 750.

Shoot, if everyone thought alike and built the same cars...we'd all be
clones. :*)

Dale McIntosh


I've stopped 1,583 spam messages. You can too!
One month FREE spam protection at http://www.cloudmark.com/spamnetsig/ 

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Nasta
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 9:42 AM
> To: The Chevelle Mailing List
> Subject: RE: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question
> 
> Right, you can calculate for 100% VE and you probably won't 
> get it, but if you calculate for 75% VE you definitely won't 
> get it. You probably wouldn't even get the 75% you think you 
> are trying to get because VE is influenced by more than just 
> the carburetor.
> 
> Again, the key is to *be realistic* about what RPM you want 
> to try to get 100% VE at. This is precisely why a 600 CFM is 
> overkill on a 283 street engine. You would have to be running 
> at over 7000 RPM to attempt to get 100% VE.
> 
> I still disagree with you. I think you should get the 
> carburetor that will give you 100% VE at a reasonable RPM 
> according to the formula. It's true that you might not get 
> the whole 100%, but I think you'll get a higher percentage 
> than you would out of a carb that you know in advance can't 
> give you more than 75% even with everything else being optimal.
> 
> John Nasta
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> 
> My point is that you can calculate for 100% VE but, in 
> reality, you'll probably never achieve it in a day-to-day 
> car.  So, why fool yourself into thinking you can run a 
> larger carb at a higher RPM than you can really use?
> It's not a point of choosing a carb that'll only "get" you 
> 75%, it's choosing a carb that'll make the most of the 75% 
> you'll probably achieve.
> Even at 80% to 85% VE with the same basic engine, you're 
> looking at 360cfm to 380cfm range.  It's like selecting a 
> camshaft, bigger sounds better (i.e., .580 lift at 320º 
> duration) when a .490 lift and .295º duration will
> make your car drivable.   I'd just say to give it some 
> thought and don't run
> out and buy the biggest or most popular combo out there...it 
> might not work for you. :*)
> 
> Dale McIntosh
> 
> I've stopped 1,542 spam messages. You can too!
> One month FREE spam protection at http://www.cloudmark.com/spamnetsig/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 




RE: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question

2004-02-25 Thread John Nasta
Keep in mind that most street-only cars w/ 3-speed automatics & 8 cyl
engines (esp. big blocks) probably rarely exceed 4,000 RPMs.

So, I think Brad is right in saying that most people need to dumb down the
formula, but I think the answer is not to second-guess some imaginary
minimized VE, but to be realistic about what RPM you want to try to get 100%
VE at.

John Nasta



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of John C. Butler
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 2:05 PM
To: 'The Chevelle Mailing List'
Subject: RE: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question

WOW!..thanks everyone for all the information!..I will let you all know how
it turns out...performance wise!..I really missed this list!!!


Thanks

Johnny






RE: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question

2004-02-25 Thread John C. Butler
WOW!..thanks everyone for all the information!..I will let you all know how
it turns out...performance wise!..I really missed this list!!!


Thanks

Johnny





Re: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question

2004-02-25 Thread Stephen Monjar
Sounds like Rochester should have taken a page from the mattress industry:
"Do not remove this tag under penalty of law...!"

I tried Googling "Rochester 4CG + rebuild kit" and got some useful-looking
sites.  I didn't have much time to look around, but I did find that GM used
4CGs on big block Cadillacs (390 and 421).  Couldn't find 348/409.  But, I
owned two 348s, one with 3x2s and one with what my fading memory tells me
was a 4CG or WCFB Carter. 409s?  Beats me!  I know 4CGs were used on
low-power 327s -- 250hp?

Bottom line:  You're probably right.  A 4CG might work fine on a low-energy
350.  But if you're thinking about a snotty cam and Performer RPM, you'll
need to be thinking heads, as well!

And in an S10???  You are a nasty person, Brad, but I like your thinking!

Good luck!

Steve



On 2/25/04 11:42 AM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Unfortunately the 4Gs came with an attached aluminum tag that contained the
> pertinent info, and the tags were prone to being damaged or disappearing.  8^(
> I keep my eyes open at swap meets so maybe if I find one that still has its
> tag I'll take a flyer on it.  Of course, there's no guarantee it's the correct
> tag!
> 
> I don't know if 4Gs were used on 348s and 409s but if they were I think one
> would be able to feed a low-RPM 350.  Then again, the other thing I want to do
> to this engine is stuff in an absurdly cam and top it with a Performer RPM or
> single-plane intake...  ;^)
> 
> Brad
> 




Re: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question

2004-02-25 Thread bdo_chevelle
Unfortunately the 4Gs came with an attached aluminum tag that contained the pertinent 
info, and the tags were prone to being damaged or disappearing.  8^(  I keep my eyes 
open at swap meets so maybe if I find one that still has its tag I'll take a flyer on 
it.  Of course, there's no guarantee it's the correct tag!

I don't know if 4Gs were used on 348s and 409s but if they were I think one would be 
able to feed a low-RPM 350.  Then again, the other thing I want to do to this engine 
is stuff in an absurdly cam and top it with a Performer RPM or single-plane intake...  
;^)

Brad

> Makes sense to me, although I seem to recall hearing that these oldies were
> getting expensive -- probably from someone who wanted to sell one to a
> restorer.  They can't be rare -- they made zillions of em.  And just about
> as many versions, each requiring a different rebuild kit!  Were these carbs
> stamped with ID numbers?  If so, you might be able to narrow your search a little.
> 
> I'd love to hear the results of your experiment, although strictly from the
> standpoint of CFM, putting one of those little winkies on a 350 is sort of
> like fitting a 2-barrel.  Which makes it no less fun!
> 
> SM
> 
> On 2/25/04 10:10 AM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > My experience has been that the older intakes are worth $$$ only to those who
> > want or need  them for a specific reason; I had a '64 WCFB intake and a '66 4G
> > intake for a long time before finding people (both list members, incidentally)
> > who were interested in them.  Same goes for 4G carbs...which are still sitting
> > in my basement, Gary!  ;^)  They're out there but not worth as much as you
> > might think.
> > 
> > I think from a performance standpoint the modern intakes and carburetors offer
> > wider variety and better bang for the buck but the older stuff has a coolness
> > that can't be duplicated.  I'm half-tempted to rebuild one of my 4Gs (both of
> > which are missing the tags so finding a kit might be tough), get a matching
> > intake, and put them on my '77 C10 guinea pig (350) just to see what
> > happens...
> > 
> > Brad O.



Re: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question

2004-02-25 Thread Stephen Monjar
Brad,

Makes sense to me, although I seem to recall hearing that these oldies were
getting expensive -- probably from someone who wanted to sell one to a
restorer.  They can't be rare -- they made zillions of em.  And just about
as many versions, each requiring a different rebuild kit!  Were these carbs
stamped with ID numbers?  If so, you might be able to narrow your search a
little.

I'd love to hear the results of your experiment, although strictly from the
standpoint of CFM, putting one of those little winkies on a 350 is sort of
like fitting a 2-barrel.  Which makes it no less fun!

SM


On 2/25/04 10:10 AM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> My experience has been that the older intakes are worth $$$ only to those who
> want or need  them for a specific reason; I had a '64 WCFB intake and a '66 4G
> intake for a long time before finding people (both list members, incidentally)
> who were interested in them.  Same goes for 4G carbs...which are still sitting
> in my basement, Gary!  ;^)  They're out there but not worth as much as you
> might think.
> 
> I think from a performance standpoint the modern intakes and carburetors offer
> wider variety and better bang for the buck but the older stuff has a coolness
> that can't be duplicated.  I'm half-tempted to rebuild one of my 4Gs (both of
> which are missing the tags so finding a kit might be tough), get a matching
> intake, and put them on my '77 C10 guinea pig (350) just to see what
> happens...
> 
> Brad O.
> 
>> Without meaning to deflect the technical drift of this thread, I had a
>> thought:
>> 
>> Whatever happened to those old Carter (WCFB?) and Rochester (4CG?)
>> four-barrels that I remember coming with up-rated 283s?  They flowed far
>> less than 600cfm -- nearer 400 or 450cfm, I think -- and seemed to do the
>> business pretty well.
>> 
>> But then, I suppose both these carbs and the manifolds designed for them are
>> now collector's items and pricier than Fabrege eggs.
>> 
>> SM
> 




Re: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question

2004-02-25 Thread bdo_chevelle
My experience has been that the older intakes are worth $$$ only to those who want or 
need  them for a specific reason; I had a '64 WCFB intake and a '66 4G intake for a 
long time before finding people (both list members, incidentally) who were interested 
in them.  Same goes for 4G carbs...which are still sitting in my basement, Gary!  ;^)  
They're out there but not worth as much as you might think.

I think from a performance standpoint the modern intakes and carburetors offer wider 
variety and better bang for the buck but the older stuff has a coolness that can't be 
duplicated.  I'm half-tempted to rebuild one of my 4Gs (both of which are missing the 
tags so finding a kit might be tough), get a matching intake, and put them on my '77 
C10 guinea pig (350) just to see what happens...

Brad O.

> Without meaning to deflect the technical drift of this thread, I had a thought:
> 
> Whatever happened to those old Carter (WCFB?) and Rochester (4CG?)
> four-barrels that I remember coming with up-rated 283s?  They flowed far
> less than 600cfm -- nearer 400 or 450cfm, I think -- and seemed to do the
> business pretty well.
> 
> But then, I suppose both these carbs and the manifolds designed for them are
> now collector's items and pricier than Fabrege eggs.
> 
> SM



Re: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question

2004-02-25 Thread Stephen Monjar
Without meaning to deflect the technical drift of this thread, I had a
thought:

Whatever happened to those old Carter (WCFB?) and Rochester (4CG?)
four-barrels that I remember coming with up-rated 283s?  They flowed far
less than 600cfm -- nearer 400 or 450cfm, I think -- and seemed to do the
business pretty well.

But then, I suppose both these carbs and the manifolds designed for them are
now collector's items and pricier than Fabrege eggs.

SM

On 2/25/04 9:41 AM, "John Nasta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Right, you can calculate for 100% VE and you probably won't get it, but if
> you calculate for 75% VE you definitely won't get it. You probably wouldn't
> even get the 75% you think you are trying to get because VE is influenced by
> more than just the carburetor.
> 
> Again, the key is to *be realistic* about what RPM you want to try to get
> 100% VE at. This is precisely why a 600 CFM is overkill on a 283 street
> engine. You would have to be running at over 7000 RPM to attempt to get 100%
> VE.
> 
> I still disagree with you. I think you should get the carburetor that will
> give you 100% VE at a reasonable RPM according to the formula. It's true
> that you might not get the whole 100%, but I think you'll get a higher
> percentage than you would out of a carb that you know in advance can't give
> you more than 75% even with everything else being optimal.
> 
> John Nasta
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> 
> My point is that you can calculate for 100% VE but, in reality, you'll
> probably never achieve it in a day-to-day car.  So, why fool yourself into
> thinking you can run a larger carb at a higher RPM than you can really use?
> It's not a point of choosing a carb that'll only "get" you 75%, it's
> choosing a carb that'll make the most of the 75% you'll probably achieve.
> Even at 80% to 85% VE with the same basic engine, you're looking at 360cfm
> to 380cfm range.  It's like selecting a camshaft, bigger sounds better
> (i.e., .580 lift at 320º duration) when a .490 lift and .295º duration will
> make your car drivable.   I'd just say to give it some thought and don't run
> out and buy the biggest or most popular combo out there...it might not work
> for you. :*)
> 
> Dale McIntosh
> 
> I've stopped 1,542 spam messages. You can too!
> One month FREE spam protection at http://www.cloudmark.com/spamnetsig/
> 
> 
> 
> 




RE: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question

2004-02-25 Thread John Nasta
Right, you can calculate for 100% VE and you probably won't get it, but if
you calculate for 75% VE you definitely won't get it. You probably wouldn't
even get the 75% you think you are trying to get because VE is influenced by
more than just the carburetor.

Again, the key is to *be realistic* about what RPM you want to try to get
100% VE at. This is precisely why a 600 CFM is overkill on a 283 street
engine. You would have to be running at over 7000 RPM to attempt to get 100%
VE.

I still disagree with you. I think you should get the carburetor that will
give you 100% VE at a reasonable RPM according to the formula. It's true
that you might not get the whole 100%, but I think you'll get a higher
percentage than you would out of a carb that you know in advance can't give
you more than 75% even with everything else being optimal.

John Nasta



-Original Message-

My point is that you can calculate for 100% VE but, in reality, you'll
probably never achieve it in a day-to-day car.  So, why fool yourself into
thinking you can run a larger carb at a higher RPM than you can really use?
It's not a point of choosing a carb that'll only "get" you 75%, it's
choosing a carb that'll make the most of the 75% you'll probably achieve.
Even at 80% to 85% VE with the same basic engine, you're looking at 360cfm
to 380cfm range.  It's like selecting a camshaft, bigger sounds better
(i.e., .580 lift at 320º duration) when a .490 lift and .295º duration will
make your car drivable.   I'd just say to give it some thought and don't run
out and buy the biggest or most popular combo out there...it might not work
for you. :*)

Dale McIntosh

I've stopped 1,542 spam messages. You can too!
One month FREE spam protection at http://www.cloudmark.com/spamnetsig/






RE: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question

2004-02-25 Thread Dale McIntosh
Not my numbers, John.  Holley states that an ordinary low-performance engine
has a VE of about 80% at 'maximum torque' and a high-performance engine at
about 85%.
http://www.holley.com/HiOctn/TechServ/TechInfo/TI-224.html

Other sites say between 80% and 90% is typical for a normally aspirated
engine.
http://www.auto-ware.com/combust_bytes/eng_sci.htm
http://www.epi-eng.com/ET-VolEff.htm
http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/jk/020529.htm

This guy went so far as to calculate his on a 99 Z/28.
http://www.installuniversity.com/install_university/installu_articles/volume
tric_efficiency/ve_computation_9.012000.htm - came out with just a shade
over 76%

My point is that you can calculate for 100% VE but, in reality, you'll
probably never achieve it in a day-to-day car.  So, why fool yourself into
thinking you can run a larger carb at a higher RPM than you can really use?
It's not a point of choosing a carb that'll only "get" you 75%, it's
choosing a carb that'll make the most of the 75% you'll probably achieve.
Even at 80% to 85% VE with the same basic engine, you're looking at 360cfm
to 380cfm range.  It's like selecting a camshaft, bigger sounds better
(i.e., .580 lift at 320º duration) when a .490 lift and .295º duration will
make your car drivable.   I'd just say to give it some thought and don't run
out and buy the biggest or most popular combo out there...it might not work
for you. :*)

Dale McIntosh

I've stopped 1,542 spam messages. You can too!
One month FREE spam protection at http://www.cloudmark.com/spamnetsig/ 

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Nasta
> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 10:01 PM
> To: The Chevelle Mailing List
> Subject: RE: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question
> 
> What you are supposed to do is *be realistic* about what max 
> RPM you will be running at, and find the CFM that will get 
> you 100% VE at that RPM. Using the formula to find a carb 
> that will get you 75% VE at your max RPM kind of defeats the 
> purpose of using the formula if you ask me.
> 
> Now, it's true that there are factors other than the 
> carburetor that contribute to whether or not you are getting 
> 100% VE at max RPM, but that doesn't mean you should choose a 
> carburetor that will guarantee you not to get better than 75%.
> 
> John Nasta
> 
> -Original Message-
> 
> But...you're lucky to get 75%-80% VE on any given street 
> engine. :*)  A normal street 283 isn't going to see the high 
> side of 5500 and live very long either, to be honest.  
> So...in the real world
> 
> 283 * 5500 / 3456 = 450.  Multiply that times 75% and you get 
> 338.  Of course, there are always exceptions and VE can vary 
> - but not much.  :*)
> 
> 
> 
> 




Re: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question

2004-02-25 Thread chevelle292wagon
Be cautious of what manifold you use on a 283-2 barrel engine.
It was pointed out to me that these have small ports so some manifolds aren't a good 
match. 
 see Team Chevelle engine forum:
http://www.chevelles.com/cgi-bin/forum/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=9;t=011698

It's occurred to me that any recent small block parts are really intended for 350's; 
just a gut feeling, not a conspiracy theory.
I was shopping for Edelbrock C3B or C4B manifolds
(for nostalgic look and oil fill pipe)
but I decided to buy an Edelbrock S.P.2-P instead.
I'm going to use either a 390 or a 450 Holley, might try both and see which I like 
better. At the pace things move at around here, might be next year before I can say 
which I used. :(   


Pete Geurds
Douglassville, PA




RE: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question

2004-02-24 Thread John Nasta
What you are supposed to do is *be realistic* about what max RPM you will be
running at, and find the CFM that will get you 100% VE at that RPM. Using
the formula to find a carb that will get you 75% VE at your max RPM kind of
defeats the purpose of using the formula if you ask me.

Now, it's true that there are factors other than the carburetor that
contribute to whether or not you are getting 100% VE at max RPM, but that
doesn't mean you should choose a carburetor that will guarantee you not to
get better than 75%.

John Nasta

-Original Message-

But...you're lucky to get 75%-80% VE on any given street engine. :*)  A
normal street 283 isn't going to see the high side of 5500 and live very
long either, to be honest.  So...in the real world

283 * 5500 / 3456 = 450.  Multiply that times 75% and you get 338.  Of
course, there are always exceptions and VE can vary - but not much.  :*)





RE: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question

2004-02-24 Thread Dale McIntosh



But...you're lucky to get 75%-80% VE on any given street engine. 
:*)  A normal street 283 isn't going to see the high side of 5500 and live 
very long either, to be honest.  So...in the real world
 
283 * 5500 / 3456 = 450.  Multiply that times 75% and you get 
338.  Of course, there are always exceptions and VE can vary - but not 
much.  :*)
Dale McIntosh TC Gold #92/ACES #1709/NECOA #41 67SS/67 Elky DalesPlace  My 67 
SS and 67 El Camino ChevelleStuff  Decoding info on 64-72 Chevelles 
Team67  1967 
Chevelle/El Camino Specific MidwestChevelles  Midwest Chevelle Show Information 



I've stopped 1,541 spam messages. You can too!One month 
FREE spam protection at www.cloudmark.com
 

  
  
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John 
  NastaSent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 8:57 PMTo: The 
  Chevelle Mailing ListSubject: RE: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb 
  question
   
  
  ((Engine 
  CID x Max RPM) / 3456) x Volumetric Efficiency = 
  CFM
   
  Example:
   
  350 
  CID
  7000 
  RPM Max
  Assume 
  you want 100% VE
   
  Looks 
  like this:
   
  ((350 
  x 7000) / 3456) x 1 = 709 CFM
   
  If you 
  generally always assume that you want the CFM that will give you 100% VE, you 
  can remove that part of the equation, because multiplying by 1 doesn’t change 
  the result, so you could say:
   
  (350 x 
  7000) / 3456 = 709 CFM
   
  You 
  have to know your displacement and be realistic about the max RPM you intend 
  to run the engine at. A 600 CFM carb is only appropriate on a 283 if you are 
  running it at over 7000 RPM. If it is a streetcar, you are probably better off 
  with a 500 CFM. That would get you 100% VE at a little under 6000 
  RPM.
   
  John 
  Nasta
  Old 
  Car Network
  http://oldcarnetwork.com
   
   
  -Original 
  Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of GunnerSent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 9:34 
  PMTo: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb 
  question
   
  


  
Hi 
John,
 
I did the same thing on my 
'64.  Used the Edelbrock 600 CFM 4 BBL.  Does get the job done 
. 
 
-= Gunner 
=-
-= Jacksonville FL 
=-
-= www.tail-gunner.net 
=-
 
 
 

---Original 
Message---
 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; The Chevelle Mailing 
List
Date: 02/24/04 
16:44:11
To: 'The Chevelle Mailing 
    List'
    Subject: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb 
question
 
Does anyone know where I could find 
information on the carburetor size that
was on the 66 Malibu, 2 barrel, 283 
motor. I need to replace mine and was
thinking about getting a edelbrock 
4 barrel manifold and carb but not sure
of the cfm to get. Any hints or 
suggestion would be great.
 
 
 
John
 
-Original 
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On 
Behalf Of Pelle Andersson
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 
10:35 AM
To: Chevelle Mailing 
List
Subject: [Chevelle-list] Off subj? 
Q: Impala towing hook?
 
 
A friend of mine is wondering which 
towing hooks that will fit a -75 Impala
B-bod?
 
Best 
regards
Pelle 
Andersson
--
http://members.chello.se/gearheads/
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
.

  

  
  

   

   

   

   
<>

RE: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question

2004-02-24 Thread John Nasta









((Engine CID
x Max RPM) / 3456) x Volumetric Efficiency = CFM

 

Example:

 

350 CID

7000 RPM
Max

Assume you
want 100% VE

 

Looks like
this:

 

((350 x
7000) / 3456) x 1 = 709 CFM

 

If you
generally always assume that you want the CFM that will give you 100% VE, you
can remove that part of the equation, because multiplying by 1 doesn’t change
the result, so you could say:

 

(350 x 7000)
/ 3456 = 709 CFM

 

You have
to know your displacement and be realistic about the max RPM you intend to run the
engine at. A 600 CFM carb is only appropriate on a 283 if you are running it at
over 7000 RPM. If it is a streetcar, you are probably better off with a 500
CFM. That would get you 100% VE at a little under 6000 RPM.

 

John Nasta

Old Car
Network

http://oldcarnetwork.com

 

 

-Original
Message-
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On
Behalf Of Gunner
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004
9:34 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Chevelle-list]
Malibu Carb question

 


 
  
  Hi John,
   
  I did the same thing on my '64.  Used the
  Edelbrock 600 CFM 4 BBL.  Does get the job done . 
   
  -= Gunner =-
  -= Jacksonville FL =-
  -= www.tail-gunner.net =-
   
   
   
  
  ---Original Message---
  
   
  
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED];
  The Chevelle Mailing List
  Date: 02/24/04 16:44:11
  To: 'The Chevelle Mailing List'
  Subject: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question
  
   
  Does anyone know where I could find information on
  the carburetor size that
  was on the 66 Malibu, 2 barrel, 283 motor. I need to
  replace mine and was
  thinking about getting a edelbrock 4 barrel manifold
  and carb but not sure
  of the cfm to get. Any hints or suggestion would be
  great.
   
   
   
  John
   
  -Original Message-
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
  Behalf Of Pelle Andersson
  Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 10:35 AM
  To: Chevelle Mailing List
  Subject: [Chevelle-list] Off subj? Q: Impala towing
  hook?
   
   
  A friend of mine is wondering which towing hooks
  that will fit a -75 Impala
  B-bod?
   
  Best regards
  Pelle Andersson
  --
  http://members.chello.se/gearheads/
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
  .
  
 
 
  
  
   

 


 


 

   
  
  
  
 


 






<><>

RE: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question

2004-02-24 Thread Dale McIntosh
A 283-2 isn't going to take much fuel to get it running.  Probably the
smallest 4-bbl from Edelbrock would be their 500cfm unit (#1404).  Another
choice would be a Holley 390cfm (#0-8007) for a small engine
(http://www.holley.com/HiOctn/ProdLine/Products/FMS/FMSC/0-8007.html).  An
Edelbrock Performer EPS (#2701) intake would make a good choice for a mild
283 (idle - 5500).

Dale

I've stopped 1,541 spam messages. You can too!
One month FREE spam protection at http://www.cloudmark.com/spamnetsig/ 

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
> John C. Butler
> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 3:40 PM
> To: 'The Chevelle Mailing List'
> Subject: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question
> 
> Does anyone know where I could find information on the 
> carburetor size that was on the 66 Malibu, 2 barrel, 283 
> motor. I need to replace mine and was thinking about getting 
> a edelbrock 4 barrel manifold and carb but not sure of the 
> cfm to get. Any hints or suggestion would be great.
> 
> 
> 
> John
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of 
> Pelle Andersson
> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 10:35 AM
> To: Chevelle Mailing List
> Subject: [Chevelle-list] Off subj? Q: Impala towing hook?
> 
> 
> A friend of mine is wondering which towing hooks that will 
> fit a -75 Impala B-bod?
> 
> Best regards
> Pelle Andersson
> --
> http://members.chello.se/gearheads/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 




Re: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question

2004-02-24 Thread Gunner






Hi John,
 
I did the same thing on my '64.  Used the Edelbrock 600 CFM 4 BBL.  Does get the job done . 
 
-= Gunner =-
-= Jacksonville FL =-
-= www.tail-gunner.net =-
 
 
 
---Original Message---
 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; The Chevelle Mailing List
Date: 02/24/04 16:44:11
To: 'The Chevelle Mailing List'
Subject: [Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question
 
Does anyone know where I could find information on the carburetor size that
was on the 66 Malibu, 2 barrel, 283 motor. I need to replace mine and was
thinking about getting a edelbrock 4 barrel manifold and carb but not sure
of the cfm to get. Any hints or suggestion would be great.
 
 
 
John
 
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Pelle Andersson
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 10:35 AM
To: Chevelle Mailing List
Subject: [Chevelle-list] Off subj? Q: Impala towing hook?
 
 
A friend of mine is wondering which towing hooks that will fit a -75 Impala
B-bod?
 
Best regards
Pelle Andersson
--
http://members.chello.se/gearheads/
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
.









[Chevelle-list] Malibu Carb question

2004-02-24 Thread John C. Butler
Does anyone know where I could find information on the carburetor size that
was on the 66 Malibu, 2 barrel, 283 motor. I need to replace mine and was
thinking about getting a edelbrock 4 barrel manifold and carb but not sure
of the cfm to get. Any hints or suggestion would be great.



John

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Pelle Andersson
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 10:35 AM
To: Chevelle Mailing List
Subject: [Chevelle-list] Off subj? Q: Impala towing hook?


A friend of mine is wondering which towing hooks that will fit a -75 Impala
B-bod?

Best regards
Pelle Andersson
--
http://members.chello.se/gearheads/








Re: [Chevelle-List] Malibu with a tick. Sounds like a lifter to me.

2001-10-03 Thread CHEVWRENCH
just to confrim:
    
   if it is in fact a lifter(s) --- this is a worth-while 
    tip(atf), I,also, have used it on many of ocassion
    and it works!!


Robert O. Means II
 Livermore,Calif 
  USA 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]




RE: [Chevelle-List] Malibu with a tick. Sounds like a lifter to me.

2001-10-03 Thread KEVIN DUGAN


Replies to this message are sent to The Chevelle Mailing List


Marvel's Mystery Oil works well for this too.
kevin d
--- "Robert B. King" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Malibu with a tick. Sounds like a lifter to me.If
> you are able to determine
> that this is a sticking lifter, here is trick that I
> have used many times.
> Add about half of a Quart of automatic trans fluid
> to the engine.  Plain old
> Dexron is fine.  ATF contains a lot of the same
> detergent additives used in
> motor oil and will help dissolve accumulated
> varnish.  Drive the car up to
> 1500 miles and change the oil.  I have used this
> trick for preventive
> maintenance on most of the cars and trucks that I've
> driven for the past 25
> years with good results.
> 
> Bob
> 
>   -Original Message-
>   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of Kays, William @
> San Fran Peninsula
>   Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 3:51 PM
>   To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
>   Subject: [Chevelle-List] Malibu with a tick.
> Sounds like a lifter to me.
> 
> 
>   Hey everyone,
> 
>   I have been floating around this list for a month
> or so now.  I never
> really had any questions till now.
> 
>   A couple of days ago, I started the chevelle up
> after work and I noticed
> it started making this ticking sound that I had
> never noticed before.
> 
>   I am pretty sure it sounds like a lifter is
> sticking in it's bore but I am
> not sure.  I had never heard my car do this before. 
> One of those things
> that just strated happening out of the blue.
> 
>   What could have caused this to start happening. 
> It wasn't a slow
> progression of ticking either, it just started all
> of the sudden, really
> audible.
> 
>   Is there anything I can do to fix this problem? 
> Is this a bad sign of
> things to come in my engine?  Is this just something
> that starts to happen
> in 30+ year old cars?
> 
>   Look forward to hearing what you guys think,
> 
>   Bill Kays
>   '69 Malibu
> 
> 


__
Do You Yahoo!?
NEW from Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1

-
To Unsubscribe please visit www.chevelles.net/list.html
To start a new topic, send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



RE: [Chevelle-List] Malibu with a tick. Sounds like a lifter to me.

2001-10-03 Thread Robert B. King
Title: Malibu with a tick. Sounds like a lifter to me.



If you 
are able to determine that this is a sticking lifter, here is trick that I have 
used many times.  Add about half of a Quart of automatic trans fluid to the 
engine.  Plain old Dexron is fine.  ATF contains a lot of the same 
detergent additives used in motor oil and will help dissolve accumulated 
varnish.  Drive the car up to 1500 miles and change the oil.  I have 
used this trick for preventive maintenance on most of the cars and trucks that 
I've driven for the past 25 years with good results.
 
Bob
 

  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Kays, 
  William @ San Fran PeninsulaSent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 3:51 
  PMTo: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'Subject: 
  [Chevelle-List] Malibu with a tick. Sounds like a lifter to 
  me.
  Hey everyone, 
  I have been floating around this list for a month 
  or so now.  I never really had any questions till now. 
  A couple of days ago, I started the chevelle up 
  after work and I noticed it started making this ticking sound that I had never 
  noticed before.
  I am pretty sure it sounds like a lifter is 
  sticking in it's bore but I am not sure.  I had never heard my car do 
  this before.  One of those things that just strated happening out of the 
  blue.
  What could have caused this to start 
  happening.  It wasn't a slow progression of ticking either, it just 
  started all of the sudden, really audible.
  Is there anything I can do to fix this 
  problem?  Is this a bad sign of things to come in my engine?  Is 
  this just something that starts to happen in 30+ year old cars?
  Look forward to hearing what you guys think, 
  
  Bill Kays '69 
  Malibu 


Re: [Chevelle-List] Malibu with a tick. Sounds like a lifter to me.

2001-10-02 Thread rick schaefer


Replies to this message are sent to The Chevelle Mailing List


William welcome to the list.   About your tick,  it MAY/COULD be a
blown/leaking  exhaust gasket.   I had a tick when I first installed my
motor and that was the problem.   You could have a lifter problem, but
check the easy stuff first.

rick (Abilene Texas)
72 El Camino  TPI 350/700r4
ACES #00140   TEAM CHEVELLE #00038
http://members.home.net/jimmy4/rick1972elky.html
http://chevelles.com/showroom/ricks%20motor%20-L
  
On Tue, 2 Oct 2001 12:50:32 -0700  "Kays, William @ San Fran Peninsula"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>Replies to this message are sent to The Chevelle Mailing List
>
>
>This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not 
>understand
>this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
>
>--_=_NextPart_001_01C14B7B.7EC22D80
>Content-Type: text/plain;
>   charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>Hey everyone,
>
>I have been floating around this list for a month or so now.  I never 
>really
>had any questions till now.
>
>A couple of days ago, I started the chevelle up after work and I 
>noticed it
>started making this ticking sound that I had never noticed before.
>
>I am pretty sure it sounds like a lifter is sticking in it's bore but 
>I am
>not sure.  I had never heard my car do this before.  One of those 
>things
>that just strated happening out of the blue.
>
>What could have caused this to start happening.  It wasn't a slow
>progression of ticking either, it just started all of the sudden, 
>really
>audible.
>
>Is there anything I can do to fix this problem?  Is this a bad sign of
>things to come in my engine?  Is this just something that starts to 
>happen
>in 30+ year old cars?
>
>Look forward to hearing what you guys think,
>
>Bill Kays
>'69 Malibu
>
>
>--_=_NextPart_001_01C14B7B.7EC22D80
>Content-Type: text/html;
>   charset="iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
>
>
>
>charset=3Diso-8859-1">
>5.5.2653.12">
>Malibu with a tick.  Sounds like a lifter to me.
>
>
>
>Hey everyone,
>
>
>I have been floating around this list 
>=
>for a month or so now.  I never really had any questions till =
>now.
>
>
>A couple of days ago, I started the =
>chevelle up after work and I noticed it started making this ticking =
>sound that I had never noticed before.
>
>I am pretty sure it sounds like a =
>lifter is sticking in it's bore but I am not sure.  I had never =
>heard my car do this before.  One of those things that just =
>strated happening out of the blue.
>
>What could have caused this to start 
>=
>happening.  It wasn't a slow progression of ticking either, it =
>just started all of the sudden, really audible.
>
>Is there anything I can do to fix 
>this =
>problem?  Is this a bad sign of things to come in my 
>engine?  =
>Is this just something that starts to happen in 30+ year old =
>cars?
>
>Look forward to hearing what you guys 
>=
>think,
>
>
>Bill Kays
>'69 Malibu
>
>
>
>
>--_=_NextPart_001_01C14B7B.7EC22D80--
>
>-
>To Unsubscribe please visit www.chevelles.net/list.html
>To start a new topic, send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-
To Unsubscribe please visit www.chevelles.net/list.html
To start a new topic, send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: [Chevelle-List] Malibu with a tick. Sounds like a lifter to me.

2001-10-02 Thread Paul Hernandez


Replies to this message are sent to The Chevelle Mailing List



might want to check you rockers adjment

p. Hernandez
68 chevelle



   

"Kays, William @ San Fran  

Peninsula"

[EMAIL PROTECTED]   cc:  

velles.netSubject: [Chevelle-List] 
Malibu with a tick.  Sounds like a  
   lifter to me.   

   

10/02/2001 02:50 PM

Please respond to  

chevelle-list  

   

   





Hey everyone,


I have been floating around this list for a month or so now.  I never
really had any questions till now.


A couple of days ago, I started the chevelle up after work and I noticed it
started making this ticking sound that I had never noticed before.


I am pretty sure it sounds like a lifter is sticking in it's bore but I am
not sure.  I had never heard my car do this before.  One of those things
that just strated happening out of the blue.


What could have caused this to start happening.  It wasn't a slow
progression of ticking either, it just started all of the sudden, really
audible.


Is there anything I can do to fix this problem?  Is this a bad sign of
things to come in my engine?  Is this just something that starts to happen
in 30+ year old cars?


Look forward to hearing what you guys think,


Bill Kays
'69 Malibu








-
To Unsubscribe please visit www.chevelles.net/list.html
To start a new topic, send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



[Chevelle-List] Malibu with a tick. Sounds like a lifter to me.

2001-10-02 Thread Kays, William @ San Fran Peninsula
Title: Malibu with a tick.  Sounds like a lifter to me.





Hey everyone,


I have been floating around this list for a month or so now.  I never really had any questions till now.


A couple of days ago, I started the chevelle up after work and I noticed it started making this ticking sound that I had never noticed before.

I am pretty sure it sounds like a lifter is sticking in it's bore but I am not sure.  I had never heard my car do this before.  One of those things that just strated happening out of the blue.

What could have caused this to start happening.  It wasn't a slow progression of ticking either, it just started all of the sudden, really audible.

Is there anything I can do to fix this problem?  Is this a bad sign of things to come in my engine?  Is this just something that starts to happen in 30+ year old cars?

Look forward to hearing what you guys think,


Bill Kays
'69 Malibu