Well, thank you for the interesting story, but I'm not so sure this is "settled", at least not by historians' standards.
And why exactly are all the books wrong and "Chris" is right? What makes his info more valid exactly?
Even his own website shows the 425 standard for 1964, with no footnotes to the contrary. Perhaps he's not all that sure himself? It would be very tough to prove. Seeing cars with the 401 is a good start, but not the proof...if I saw a build sheet, well, I'd start to be convinced that all the books are wrong.
I'm not saying he's wrong, only that history needs to be researched better than that before it's changed.
It absolutely amazes me how stubborn some people can be. Chris is the best proof I can come up with at the moment, but am sure more proof is out there. Why the heck should I prove it in the first place. I owned the car, who makes you and your "books" such an arrogant authority. You are what is wrong with these forums. Mis-informed people that mislead other people. I OWNED the car for crying out loud. I AM the proof, I restored it, it was all factory original and had the 401. I took it to many car shows, and never had a conversation with anyone akin to what has been posted in this forum. You are the type of person that would never believe anything, unless you saw it dropped in at the factory, and then probably still wouldn't believe it. Yes, I am annoyed, anyone would be, after stating they had restored a car and then have some "amateur self-made experts" tell him that the car they had was not authentic. Do you know how important it is to make sure that a car is completely original when restoring it? And do you not think that I would have made sure of this as I was restoring it?
I request that Edmunds replace you, or at least stop you from insulting people with your "know-it-all" attitude. This forum is to share information, not to make people feel like idiots! You have crossed the line on this one with your posts. A moderator should exercise a little more courtesy.
You know, it wasn't fair of me to come down on only Shiftright so hard, as when I re-read the prior posts earlier, I noticed that both of you were equally disrespectful. As for my attitude changing, I have maintained my original stance, I never believed that the engine was not the original. This whole thread shows me that there are a lot of self-made experts in here. I would never quip and badger a person that had a beloved Riviera or any other collector car, that was "different". There are all kinds of oddities in the automotive world. Who are you or shiftright to say that something could never have existed! That is a rather narrow view. A better response would have been, "gee, I have never heard of one of those, must be very rare" And as for the comment, "we had an interesting interchange here, until you turned nasty", well, perhaps it was more interesting for you, as you weren't the one being forced on the defense or offended. I never asked anyone to validate the oddity of this car, in the first place. I am not by nature an arrogant person, or rude, but I am not going to stand by and be told that my car was some sort of a "mickey moused" set up. Car collecting is a very passionate thing, a car is cherished, loved and maintained, collectors usually do their homework. No one can prove that Buick never put 401's in some of their 64 Rivieras, so why bludgeon someone to death, whom had one, and feels it was an original set up. There are certainly fakes out there. I had a friend that paid a lot of money for a Camero Z-28, didn't check the numbers, it was supposedly very rare, very few existed. He found out it was a fake, thankfully he got his money back. This is an important issue, a lot of money involved. Rivieras are a dime a dozen, they are not worth a lot, even if one had an original 401 in it.....so what is the big deal. 401, 425, all current engines during that period.....
Back when this first started, I said that I had heard that a few '64's may have come with the 401 from the factory. I also said that I had never seen one and that others said these never existed.
So go back and read my posts. I said that I would bet 100.00 that there were no factory 401's but that I wouldn't bet 1000.00. I think that statement should show that I'm not entirely sure.
I'm more than willing to accept the theory that a few 401'a could have found their way into 1964 Rivieras. Hopefully, you can also consider the possibility that perhaps, sometime, someone slipped a used 401 into your Riviera.
By the way, my friends Riv was also blue/green, he had had the scoops removed from the rear quarters to make it look more like a '65.
I'm really regret you're upset about this, but I'm not trying to impose my personal opinion, just giving out the data the history books have within them. If they are wrong, and they may well be, the really, your argument is not with anyone in the forum but with the authors of the books,seems to me. You don't have to personalize a discussion of facts, why stress yourself?
If anything, I would have hoped you'd be pleased that this is a forum where the published facts are stated and referenced:
Here are the books that do not show a 401 option in 1964.
Encyclopedia of American Cars, Richard Langworth, 1980, Publications International
Catalog of American Car ID Numbers, 1960-69, Cars & Parts Magazine Editorial Staff.
Standard Catalog of AMerican Cars, 1946-1975, Editors of Old Cars Publications (Krause Publications)
Other books don't mention it one way or the other, and only one seemed to imply a possibility. That one was:
The New Illustrated Encyclopedia of Automobiles, DAvid Burgess Wise, Grange Books 1979 (Quarto Publishing).
So why don't you e-mail Chris and tell him all (or most) of the reference books might be in error and that he should help them correct the data?
thank you..I really will try, if/when I have some time, to look for some other reference. I thought Automobile Quarterly's big section on the Riv in Volume 19-2 would help us, but there again, they are very oblique about it, mentioning an "optional 360HP for 1964"...but I think that refers to a 425 with extra carburation, not implying two engines of two different sizes.
If you ever want to really see car collectors go at it, be a judge at a concours sometime. The plainer and more ordinary the car, the worse the arguments...Model A shows are pretty deadly. I've feared for my life.
There were so many sources for modifications back then, it is difficult to make heads or tails out of everything with 100% certainty 30-40 years later. Unfortunately, some of those responsible are no longer around ... and with them went the records.
To get to the original question ... How could you drive them today? Excluding cars like the Zl-1 Camaro, most performance cars had a compression ratio in the range of 10:1 to 11:1. If the engine is in good condition, tuned right and isn't burning oil (which is a major cause of pinging), it is manageable with a few precautions. You can run even higher compression on the street like 12, 13 and 14 to 1. With that, you have to pay for the higher grade, which at last count, was about $4.50 a gallon or more for a good mid-grade race fuel. I understand 76 offers a 100 octane fuel at the pump. People who tell me they have seen it say it costs about $3 gallon.
10:1 or 11:1 compression engines will run OK on today's 92 octane, as long as they're in good condition? I'd like to know. This question came up some time ago in another topic, I believe.
At risk of over-simplifying a complex issue, yes in some cases. Idle and part-throttle cruising require less octane because the cylinder pressures are not as high. At what point does cylinder pressure rise enough to make fuel quality an issue? That depends on many factors including the engine design itself. The recommendation for 11:1's is around 100 octane.
One of my engines is an 11:1 402. I've run this one off 92 w/octane booster and a few degrees of timing removed. It was ok for putting around but it's not the blend to be using if you plan on racing someone.
You dont' want to mess around with severe detonation. If you've ever taken an engine apart that has failed from detonation, it's not a pretty sight...it's really a violent event, and quite a surprise to see holes punched right through the tops of pistons, or cylinder walls shattered by the force of the mishap. Often you can just throw that block away.
Cylinder head design does make a big difference. For instance, I found a big difference between the old style '66 Pontiac heads and the redesigned '67s. Same 10.75:1 CR but the later heads tolerate 92 octane a lot better.
I used to recurve advances with a Mr. Gasket kit that let you take advance out of the distributor and add a few more degrees at the crank. It really sharpened throttle response so I always ran at the hairy edge of audible pinging, but apparently the inaudible variety can get you too.
What do you think causes that? Did someone perhaps not build the engine right...you'd think it would be pretty hard to give an individual cylinder higher compression than the others or more advance.
One variation is that combustion chambers in mass-produced cylinder heads aren't all the same size. A combustion chamber that's on the small side of production tolerances will give you a higher combustion pressure than one on the large side. That's why when you blueprint an engine you "cc" the heads so each chamber has the same volume.
Sometimes a combustion chamber will have a piece of casting flash that heats up more quickly than the surrounding metal, causing pre-ignition or uneven combustion.
Another variation is air-fuel mixture. Some cylinders will run lean because of compromises in intake manifold design. Those are the ones that ping first.
True ... and throw in an oil burning problem. I know of at least 1 block where the cooling passages are not equal and 1 cylinder can run hotter making it more prone.
Good point on intake manifolds. That's one of the areas the aftermarket manufacturers have evolved in over the years. On dry EFI systems it's a moot point. Speaking of EFI, new FI/Ignition systems like the FP sefi8lo allow you to take ignition timing out of just 1 cylinder.
How to drive em with their motors beggin for leaded 100+ Octane? Well if you have an original with a good strong original motor a lot of the value is in the originality but the driveability is not. Solution..... Pull the original engine, detail it and put it on a stand in your rec room. Replace it with a modern monster motor built to today's specs and putting out more horses and a cleaner exhaust.
As for water down the carb... yes it does work but better yet do what some old time racers along with the US Army Air Corps did with some of the fighters in WWII...... Water injection. Its cheap, simple and not only helps avoid carbon build up but increases horsepower by providing a denser cooler air/fuel mix when you're running. You can get extra cute and rig it to work only at near or full throttle or triggered to actuate at a certain manifold pressure.
When your old carbuerated engine hydraulics(seizes, blows, whatever you may call it) let me be the first to know so i can laugh at ya. Yeah it's good once in a while for blowin out carbon build-up but a water injection system is NOT even an "ok" idea. When you inject water it can almost double normal cylinder pressures and most likely either blow your rings or your head gaskets or in some cases even both. Water injection is only for those extremely experienced in engine building and performance...amatuers can very easily blow their engines.
Comments
And why exactly are all the books wrong and "Chris" is right? What makes his info more valid exactly?
Even his own website shows the 425 standard for 1964, with no footnotes to the contrary. Perhaps he's not all that sure himself? It would be very tough to prove. Seeing cars with the 401 is a good start, but not the proof...if I saw a build sheet, well, I'd start to be convinced that all the books are wrong.
I'm not saying he's wrong, only that history needs to be researched better than that before it's changed.
Here's Chris' notes on the 1964
http://www.redeemer.on.ca/~cknowles/chron/chron.html
Nice site, by the way. I've bookmarked it.
I request that Edmunds replace you, or at least stop you from insulting people with your "know-it-all" attitude. This forum is to share information, not to make people feel like idiots! You have crossed the line on this one with your posts. A moderator should exercise a little more courtesy.
Your whole attitude changed when you found your "expert" who happened to agree with you.
The "expert" at the Buick Club that I talked about had an opposite opinion.
So, who is correct?
We had an interesting interchange going here until YOU turned nasty!
Now, perhaps youf expert is right, or just maybe your car was mickey moused with a 401 (like my friends) at some point in it's long life.
Again, I have NEVER seen a '64 401, and I have seen more than most!
Back when this first started, I said that I had heard that a few '64's may have come with the 401 from the factory. I also said that I had never seen one and that others said these never existed.
So go back and read my posts. I said that I would bet 100.00 that there were no factory 401's but that I wouldn't bet 1000.00. I think that statement should show that I'm not entirely sure.
I'm more than willing to accept the theory that a few 401'a could have found their way into 1964 Rivieras. Hopefully, you can also consider the possibility that perhaps, sometime, someone slipped a used 401 into your Riviera.
By the way, my friends Riv was also blue/green, he had had the scoops removed from the rear quarters to make it look more like a '65.
It's not that far fom LA to Portland...
If anything, I would have hoped you'd be pleased that this is a forum where the published facts are stated and referenced:
Here are the books that do not show a 401 option in 1964.
Encyclopedia of American Cars, Richard Langworth, 1980, Publications International
Catalog of American Car ID Numbers, 1960-69, Cars & Parts Magazine Editorial Staff.
Standard Catalog of AMerican Cars, 1946-1975, Editors of Old Cars Publications (Krause Publications)
Other books don't mention it one way or the other, and only one seemed to imply a possibility. That one was:
The New Illustrated Encyclopedia of Automobiles, DAvid Burgess Wise, Grange Books 1979 (Quarto Publishing).
So why don't you e-mail Chris and tell him all (or most) of the reference books might be in error and that he should help them correct the data?
Host
If you ever want to really see car collectors go at it, be a judge at a concours sometime. The plainer and more ordinary the car, the worse the arguments...Model A shows are pretty deadly. I've feared for my life.
A guy had the most beautifully restored 1950 Chevrolet I had ever seen! And he drove it to the show.
A judge docked him points because he felt that the vanity mirror was not an original. The owner swore it was.
He also knocked points off for some flyspeck pits in a piece of chrome.
The discussion got loud and ugly before some official decided to get involved.
And this was a mere '50 Chevy!
To get to the original question ... How could you drive them today? Excluding cars like the Zl-1 Camaro, most performance cars had a compression ratio in the range of 10:1 to 11:1. If the engine is in good condition, tuned right and isn't burning oil (which is a major cause of pinging), it is manageable with a few precautions. You can run even higher compression on the street like 12, 13 and 14 to 1. With that, you have to pay for the higher grade, which at last count, was about $4.50 a gallon or more for a good mid-grade race fuel. I understand 76 offers a 100 octane fuel at the pump. People who tell me they have seen it say it costs about $3 gallon.
One of my engines is an 11:1 402. I've run this one off 92 w/octane booster and a few degrees of timing removed. It was ok for putting around but it's not the blend to be using if you plan on racing someone.
I used to recurve advances with a Mr. Gasket kit that let you take advance out of the distributor and add a few more degrees at the crank. It really sharpened throttle response so I always ran at the hairy edge of audible pinging, but apparently the inaudible variety can get you too.
What's really annoying is to have the problem only in 1 or 2 cylinders.
Sometimes a combustion chamber will have a piece of casting flash that heats up more quickly than the surrounding metal, causing pre-ignition or uneven combustion.
Another variation is air-fuel mixture. Some cylinders will run lean because of compromises in intake manifold design. Those are the ones that ping first.
Good point on intake manifolds. That's one of the areas the aftermarket manufacturers have evolved in over the years. On dry EFI systems it's a moot point. Speaking of EFI, new FI/Ignition systems like the FP sefi8lo allow you to take ignition timing out of just 1 cylinder.
As for water down the carb... yes it does work but better yet do what some old time racers along with the US Army Air Corps did with some of the fighters in WWII...... Water injection. Its cheap, simple and not only helps avoid carbon build up but increases horsepower by providing a denser cooler air/fuel mix when you're running. You can get extra cute and rig it to work only at near or full throttle or triggered to actuate at a certain manifold pressure.