|
Thread Number: 77728
/ Tag: Other Home Products or Autos
Coal powered Oldsmobile |
[Down to Last] |  |
| Post# 1017505 12/9/2018 at 18:23 (1,958 days old) by LordKenmore (The Laundry Room) | ||
 | ||
|
Post# 1017518 , Reply# 1 12/9/2018 at 19:37 (1,958 days old) by wayupnorth  (On a lake between Bangor and Bar Harbor, Maine) |
||
 | ||
|
Post# 1017527 , Reply# 2 12/9/2018 at 21:03 (1,958 days old) by RP2813 (Sannazay) |
||
 A fun friend, pipe organ restoration guru Ed Stout, had a diesel Olds wagon back in the early '80s. A bunch of us piled into his car and buzzed from Sebastopol in Sonoma County over to Occidental near the Russian River for dinner at the Union Hotel where the food just doesn't seem to stop coming.
On that dark two-lane country road, we encountered a steep incline, and being a dog of a car already, it really struggled with a full load of men packed into it. A pair of headlights came up behind us, seemingly out of nowhere. Ed floored it to try and pick up speed, producing a huge thick black cloud behind us. The set of headlights was seriously obscured and quickly dropped way back -- and not because we were moving that much faster, either. It was really satisfying and we all roared with laughter. | ||
| Post# 1017529 , Reply# 3 12/9/2018 at 21:07 (1,958 days old) by Kate1 (PNW) | ||
|
And I thought emptying coal ash out of a furnace or boiler was a chore. Imagine having to empty your car’s ash pan. Having a car that belches out black soot everywhere doesn’t sound like much fun either. | ||
| Post# 1017640 , Reply# 5 12/10/2018 at 21:23 (1,957 days old) by Stricklybojack (South Hams Devon UK) | ||
.
View Full Size
| ||
|
Post# 1017667 , Reply# 7 12/11/2018 at 07:00 (1,956 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md) |
||
1970s Oldsmobile Diesel Durability | ||
| Post# 1017707 , Reply# 9 12/11/2018 at 16:40 (1,956 days old) by LordKenmore (The Laundry Room) | ||
|
It seems to me I've heard stories, too, that people would buy their diesel Oldsmobile, drive it for a while, go buy a new Oldsmobile...and have the Oldsmobile dealer refuse to take the diesel Oldsmobile as a trade in.
This is only a story I heard--I can't confirm it--but somehow it seems quite believable. | ||
| Post# 1017714 , Reply# 10 12/11/2018 at 19:05 (1,956 days old) by speedqueen (Metro-Detroit) | ||
 Union Pacific's GE built gas turbine electric locomotives from the '50s and '60s such as the one I included a picture of burnt heavy fuel oil(Bunker C) that had to be heated before it could go through the system. These were and remain the worlds most powerful locomotives ever built at 8500hp and 212,313 lbf of tractive effort. For comparison, a current production GE ES44DC only has 4400 hp and 166,000 lbf.
At one point, UP tried converting one of these to run on coal powder. While it did work, the acidity of the coal eroded the blades of the turbines, which, I presume was the issue why the coal powered Olds never went further.
**Regarding the picture, everything in frame is required, the front power unit, the rear power unit and the heated and insulated tender that kept the fuel oil liquid. These were massive machines that were superseded in 1969 when it was figured out how to use multiple diesel locomotives with only one manned and controlling the rest.
| ||
|
Post# 1017716 , Reply# 11 12/11/2018 at 19:13 (1,956 days old) by DaveAMKrayoGuy (Oak Park, MI) |
||
I wonder about all those gauges necessary to monitor whatever additional functions, and why they can't be added in a more conventional manner... There seemed be nothing in the story telling about anything of which they do...
It looks like it be just right for Popular Science to cover, and as for the Olds dielsel engine fiasco, I read in a used car book of how dealers would not take any in even on trade, myself... The engine truly was GM's historically worst failure until the 1981 Cadillac V-8-6-4 (often running mostly in 1-3-5-7,--and ZERO!) came along... -- Dave | ||
| Post# 1017718 , Reply# 12 12/11/2018 at 19:19 (1,956 days old) by LordKenmore (The Laundry Room) | ||
|
>I wonder about all those gauges necessary to monitor whatever additional functions, and why they can't be added in a more conventional manner... There seemed be nothing in the story telling about anything of which they do...
Good point. I have to wonder if some of the gauges might have been more about that car as a research/development project, and not so much something that would be needed if the car had ever reached a point of being a salable product. | ||
|
Post# 1017719 , Reply# 13 12/11/2018 at 19:41 (1,956 days old) by DaveAMKrayoGuy (Oak Park, MI) |
||
|
Yes, my point exactly--not much they wanted to reaveal, should anything that was too inner-sanctum, in their top secret research/development be exposed...
Another thing to mention, and in regards to that handful of coal shavings we saw that, that entire vehicle is expected to run on... Putting a shovelful would hardly sustain that car towards even electric-vehicle attainability... Plus, that vehicle-weight from such a power plant needed to be run on a thing like coal (with all the breaking-down and excessive heat) would make that Oldsmobile just too front-heavy... The most practical measure anyone can think of with even the most amateur level of engineering would be to just use the trunk space to keep all that coal to power the car for any reasonable amount of distance... Then in place of the drive shaft is the screw-drive to run the coal through what would be the transmission tunnel, sort of like how coal is delivered to a furnace... Finally, the car, as far as any transmission goes, would simply be (although STILL front-heavy) just front-wheel-drive... (Ummmm, clever! --No?!) -- Dave | ||
| Post# 1017756 , Reply# 15 12/12/2018 at 10:08 (1,955 days old) by 63kenmore (Burlington, North Carolina) | ||
|
Diesel cars of the eighties I remember back in the early to mid 1980’s someone my husband worked with had a diesel Cadillac. We lived in Minneapolis at the time and I remember him coming home at night in the dead of winter saying that this guy’s car had to be pushed into the Republic Airlines hangar so the fuel would warm up enough to drive home. | ||
| Post# 1017771 , Reply# 16 12/12/2018 at 13:22 (1,955 days old) by twintubdexter (Palm Springs) | ||
So happy that I'm happy... Where would any discussion about vehicles be without mentioning the "Northstar Curse"? The one in my little 1998 Eldorado must have been vaccinated, since to this day it remains the most trouble-free engine I've owned since 1968 (the worst being an optional Japanese Mitsubishi in a Chrysler Town & Country wagon). I am very fortunate to have a small, independent service shop that works exclusively on Cadillacs. He knows them inside and out and is friendly and reasonable. The local GM/Cadillac dealer here stinks. Not only are they outrageously expensive, they don't want to see a car as old as mine anywhere near their dealership unless it's in the trade-in pile. As old as it is, the sophisticated Northstar is not the engine you have your neighbor work on in his garage.
My 20 year old car has a whopping 25,000 miles on it so I suppose the engine has plenty of time to act up. I on the other hand don't have plenty of time. By the time this car has 30K on the odometer I'll be history. In the mean time, the little Cadillac remains a total pleasure to drive, similar to my old 96' Corvette but quieter, smoother and with a lot more room for my XL fanny. I have a couple of other vehicles but the Eldorado remains my favorite.
purrs like a kitten, maybe not forever, but certainly for now | ||
|
Post# 1017772 , Reply# 17 12/12/2018 at 13:36 (1,955 days old) by RP2813 (Sannazay) |
||
|
| ||
| Post# 1017775 , Reply# 18 12/12/2018 at 14:00 (1,955 days old) by cadman (Cedar Falls, IA) | ||
Man, lots of misinformation here that seems to get passed down like gospel.
The Cad V864 was actually a great engine...just a 368 with valve deactivation solenoids. Torque peak at 1400 RPM. Dead reliable EFI. The ECU was up to the task, but customers complained about vibration, especially during the 6 cyl transition. Snip 1 wire and you were running on 8 cylinders full-time. I think people confuse this with the other early 80's Cad engine that was a fiasco, the 82-85 HT4100. I've had several, and rather like them, but they require actual routine maintenance the likes of which Americans were, shall we say, unaccustomed to with their cast iron big blocks. I'd take an 84/85 anyday. The diesel 350 was not simply a converted gas 350, as is often told. It shares many similarities so that the same machining and tooling equipment could be shared, but that's about it. Where GM screwed up was the low numerical gearing which made the cars even slower, and pinching pennies on injector pumps and WIF equipment, which were added back in after the initial waves of failures arrived (mostly after the DX block upgrades). And let's not forget about the head-bolts. Of course this didn't address the other inherent diesel issues..like fuel gelling, sooty, smelly exhaust, maintaining a pair of batteries, and nightly block heater plug-in. All of that, plus a rod through the side of the block of our '81 Olds put my father off GM for a few years. | ||
|
Post# 1017780 , Reply# 19 12/12/2018 at 15:40 (1,955 days old) by RevvinKevin (Tinseltown - Shakey Town - La-La Land) |
||
V8-6-4 and diesel
My uncle had an '81 Seville (the fugly one with the sloped back) and it had the 8-6-4 engine. As I recall he wad quite happy it and felt that was a good engine, but gas mileage wasn't all that great. It wasn't trouble free for him however, but overall it was OK considering what repairs had to do. He even went to the trouble of repainting a two-tone green just because he wanted to.
At one point (a few cars ago) I had a 1980 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham diesel. It was very clean and very comfortable, but had 120K miles showing when I bought it. At that time it had a new factory crate motor (latest DX series diesel), plus new tires, batteries, brakes, etc. It was a wonderful car for the majority of the 8 years I owned it. I put over 80,000 miles on it and never had a problem with the actual engine itself. With the exception of the injector pump failing once, it never failed to start, even when it was 26 degrees in the mountains when I went skiing. It also never leaked or used a drop of oil and consistently produced 28 MPG @ 65-70 mph with the A/C on. I really liked that car and that it was a diesel.
Cory mentioned tall gearing. As I recall my car had 2.56 gear ratio and with the 3 speed TH-200C trans, any moped could/would beat me off the line at the traffic light grand prix (the first 100 feet or so).
It was a great car until little, small, annoying things started failing or falling apart. As was typical with GM products of the time, once it neared the 20 years / 180K miles mark, the headliner fell, small trim pieces (inside and out) started falling off or breaking, some electrical things (switches for mirrors, cruise control, some lights, rear window defroster, etc) stopped working. Oh... there's also the fact I went through 3 transmissions (under sized/under rated for the engine) and 5 alternators. That last one was my fault I suppose, for trusting the rebuilt / lifetime warranty P.O.S. alternators that Pep Boys offered at the time. The longest one survived before failing was maybe 5 months.
When I sold the car to a (at that time) co-worker, the trans was starting to acting up again. I heard he ended up selling it to a junk yard after the transmission failed again. This post was last edited 12/12/2018 at 15:57 | ||
| Post# 1017781 , Reply# 20 12/12/2018 at 15:43 (1,955 days old) by twintubdexter (Palm Springs) | ||
|
As is usually the case, there's a lot of very knowledgeable people here. They know far more than I do for sure! Also very typical are my posts taking a subject way off course. So sorry, and please don't give General Motors any ideas about a coal-powered Cadillac. This post was last edited 12/12/2018 at 20:06 | ||
|
Post# 1017786 , Reply# 21 12/12/2018 at 16:02 (1,955 days old) by DaveAMKrayoGuy (Oak Park, MI) |
||
|
Getting back to the coal powered machine, why would they use a shlubby Oldsmobile for it? I think the tree huggers need this in something more smaller & economical... At despite the energy usage of some fossils fuels, what's still at a less expense of what is normally mined for or taken out of the ground...
The experimental diesel engine designed to run on used deep frying oil (remember Deep Fry?) was used in a Volkswagen Rabbit...
Just a thought on how the best vehicle to use is something which likewise meant less trips to the gas pump...
As mentioned, I like the idea of this being a government vehicle, however, if something like required to go a realistic distance should suddenly fall into a shortage, a crisis, or just suddenly need a bailout... (Not!)
-- Dave | ||
|
Post# 1017883 , Reply# 22 12/13/2018 at 15:58 (1,954 days old) by goatfarmer (South Bend, home of Champions) |
||
 | ||
|
Post# 1021670 , Reply# 25 1/19/2019 at 04:36 (1,917 days old) by DaveAMKrayoGuy (Oak Park, MI) |
||
|
I liked the article in the Hagerty’s link, it seems to chronicle accurately how the world’s greatest automaker sadly made in the industry, the world’s worst mistakes...
As it says, cost cutting and expeditation don’t ever fare successfully when it comes to building cars... Likewise, when GM was building a reliable engine that WAS a true diesel for in its truck line in that very era, anyone that mechanically inclined with the right amount of automotive know-how could have plopped one of those under the hood of what was STILL branded Oldsmobile Diesel, and gotten the tried and true product that should have been rather than something misnamed, powered by the obvious solutions of transplanting a regular gas engine, given the rest of these cars were still redeemably good... — Dave | ||
|
Post# 1023040 , Reply# 27 1/30/2019 at 11:24 (1,906 days old) by DaveAMKrayoGuy (Oak Park, MI) |
||
|
I suddenly just wondered: | ||
| Forum Index: |
| Other Forums: |
|
|
|
|
|
Comes to the Rescue!
;){kind=link}
;){kind=link}