Mondello roller RV CAM KIT

[grant schaffer]

How does this aid in my question for Oldsmobile is a one off and not typical GM. In my opinion there are too many deep discussions on a simple cast
iron block engine.

So again, with all these deep discussions, no brass cam gear, watch out in rebuilds in the rear seal thrust etc etc. why is the big block so
complicated? In my mind the more I read these forums this 455 engine is unreliable and I should move to a diesel and cut my losses.

FYI I have been racing GM 350's for over 20 years and fully aware of the intricate issues with engine blocks but the Oldsmobile according to this
forum is subpar. This is in conflict with my jet boat days. The 455 works in Boats. Not land yachts.
--
1974 GMC Sequoia 26'

 

[Jim Hupy]

Grant, be careful, extremely careful, about maligning the Olds 455. Be
absolutely sure about your suppositions and personal opinions, and have
facts to back them up. Nothing will get you tarred and feathered and run
out of town on a rail, more quickly than maligning the Olds 455. Trust me
on this one. (Grin)
Jim Hupy
Salem, Or

On Fri, Sep 27, 2019, 8:28 AM Grant Schaffer via Gmclist <

> How does this aid in my question for Oldsmobile is a one off and not
> typical GM. In my opinion there are too many deep discussions on a simple
> cast
> iron block engine.
>
> So again, with all these deep discussions, no brass cam gear, watch out in
> rebuilds in the rear seal thrust etc etc. why is the big block so
> complicated? In my mind the more I read these forums this 455 engine is
> unreliable and I should move to a diesel and cut my losses.
>
> FYI I have been racing GM 350's for over 20 years and fully aware of the
> intricate issues with engine blocks but the Oldsmobile according to this
> forum is subpar. This is in conflict with my jet boat days. The 455 works
> in Boats. Not land yachts.
> --
> 1974 GMC Sequoia 26'
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
>

 

[Ken H.]

Grant,

You must remember that "Man bites dog is news. Dog bites man is not
news." In other words, what's reported and discussed here is a tiny
portion of the total story. No one talks about their years and hundreds of
thousands of trouble-free miles. But let a light bulb blow...!

The 455 & 403 are EXTREMELY reliable engines. As is the Cad500. But that
hasn't prevented me from doing 3 swaps of 455s and 2 Cad500's during my 20
years of GMC ownership -- and I polluted this forum with details on each of
those! But I haven't previously reported 57,000 essentially trouble-free
miles on the latest Cad. BUT, I DID report two failures of the
known-to-be-unreliable rocker arm pedestals, and the corrective upgrade.

I hope if you jump into the diesel pond you'll keep us informed of those
frustrations too.

Ken H.
Americus, GA
'76 X-Birchaven w/Cad500/Howell EFI & EBL,
Manny Brakes & 1-Ton, Troy-Bilt APU, etc., etc., etc.
www.gmcwipersetc.com

On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 11:28 AM Grant Schaffer via Gmclist <

> How does this aid in my question for Oldsmobile is a one off and not
> typical GM. In my opinion there are too many deep discussions on a simple
> cast
> iron block engine.
>
> So again, with all these deep discussions, no brass cam gear, watch out in
> rebuilds in the rear seal thrust etc etc. why is the big block so
> complicated? In my mind the more I read these forums this 455 engine is
> unreliable and I should move to a diesel and cut my losses.
>
> FYI I have been racing GM 350's for over 20 years and fully aware of the
> intricate issues with engine blocks but the Oldsmobile according to this
> forum is subpar. This is in conflict with my jet boat days. The 455 works
> in Boats. Not land yachts.
> --
> 1974 GMC Sequoia 26'
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
>

 

[john r. lebetski]

The question is why roller?? I have many old 60s-80s GM cars and trucks with non roller cams and never had a cam wear (lobe wipe). My opinion is the
whole zinc scare thing, in retrospect was scare tactics. And I know the inventor of the ZDDPlus product line. Yes ZDDP levels were lowered several
time to coincide with new longer emissions life requirements But formulas were changed adding other extreme pressure chemistry. In no case does it
say in API labeling that SN is not backwards compatible with SF (highest zinc time stamp mid 80s). In fact I have had one cam failure ever, and that
was a roller cam in a 91 TBI SBC Camaro . Got car replaced under lemon law.
--
John Lebetski
Woodstock, IL
77 Eleganza II

 

[johnny]

I don't see maligning of the Olds engine(s) by the longterm mechanics here. The Cadillac had a known problem in severe service which is easily
corrected with aftermarket parts. What Colie and Hupy know but didn't get into is the basis of the cost differences. At the time (70s) the one most
expensive part of engine manufacture was the transfer line, where the block casting is machined into a finished block. Buick simply bored and stroked
the 'nailhead' up to 455 and went about selling them in three and four porthole Buicks. Pontiac managed (so I'm told) to use the same transfer line as
the 389. Oldsmobile and Cadillac weren't as cost constrained and so designed hell for strong engines with very hard materials, knowing they were
going to eat up machine tool cutters wholesale and simply considering it the cost of a reliable engine. Cadillac extracted a bit of performance from
theirs. Oldsmobile wanted slow turning high torque to move the 98 series wagon down the road effortlessly and smoothly through a HydraMatic. The
ubndersquare design gave them this and made a rock reliable engine in the bargain. That it doesn't want or need to spin very fast makes a roller cam
unnecessary in this service... but it's a fun brag if you want. That the transfer tooling cost more than the Chev stuff wasn't a great concern.
(There's a very good reason mechanics refer to the 454 Chev motor as a 'tonowanda turd'.) They were building the step up cars for the CPC customers
who had done well later in life... and who also had normally passed the stoplight drag stage. Smoothness and reliability were paramount.

Now remember, when GM developed the motorhome, they had their choice of anything in the GM inventory, with the possible exception of Corvette specific
parts which weren't relevant anyway. If they wanted front wheel drive, one of the basics of the design, they were stuck with the THM425 transmission
but would have had little trouble mating any engine in the inventory to it. I suspect the choice of the Oldmobile engine was based on its rock
reliability more than anything else. It has what's needed for the motorhome, a low speed high torque engine which will last a long time under extreme
loads. At 4559 pounds the Vista Cruiser was probably the heaviest thing the engine was fitted to in the auto world. For a bit of a cam profile
change and a different carb tune it was grafted pretty much stock into the Motorhome and has pulled double the weight successfully for 40+ years.
That is a testament to the ruggedness and reliability of the design. Last year on my South Tejas trip I saw several 455s running in pump service
reliably. How many hours on them? Nobody knows. Nothing wrong with the engine design and build for the service it was intended. Nothing wrong with
it for motorhomne service either.

To me the idea of roller valve gear is a silk purse made of a sow's ear. Sure you can do it, but have you ever noted a one - ear sow with a silk
purse? Sorta silly. But by all means do it if you're so inclined.

For what it's worth, I managed to lunch a 455 thoroughly, the crankshaft broke. In that it was a Jasper Engines rebuild and went 30K plus miles
before it let go,and knowing the general 'quality' of the Jasper products I'm not surprised. With a broken crankshaft and no oil pressure it still
hauled me and the coach a couple of miles into a rest area. When I got it home the wrecker got it as close as he could to its shed. I told the
wrecker driver I cold push it in with my pickup or pull it with a comealong the last hundred feet. For a lark I got in and fired it up and, clanking
and clattering, it pulled itself on in to the parking space. So yes, you can kill one, but you got to work at it.
--
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

 

[johnny]

As to diesel power, there looks to be two ways to go. To use the existing driveline, do the Manny Travao thing. It works. It's diesel noisy, at
least the one at Bounds place was. To 'do it right, cost is no object' have a look at Hal StClair's conversion, which is documented in I believe the
photo site. He has the pictures anyway all through the process. It requires substantial fabrication but uses a more modern driveline. I expect you
could hire his design done for 100K bucks more or less, but it probably wouldn't have his attention to detail. I'll note, when I was by his place he
had a split windoe Corvette he was doing a frame - off and engine upgrade on. It might be done by now, I bet it's a beauty. Hal??

--johnny
--
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

 

[john r. lebetski]

Johnny good points, except your Buick info. The new V8s that appeared in 1967 were not warmed over nailheads but a clean sheet design.
--
John Lebetski
Woodstock, IL
77 Eleganza II

 

[johnny]

I stand corrected. Not for the first time either We had a '59 TheSword as a family car, sameold sameold. The Wildcat had a nailhead, punched out
to 425 C.I.D.

--johnny
--
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

 

[grant schaffer]

Thanks Ken it just seems everyone has an issue with the 455 in general or GM's attempt at RV's. would it have been better if they had more time to
invest in upgrade such as the final drive, sure. Its a GM/ Oldsmobile I mean really. The only thing better would be the caddy 500 in my opinion. Maybe
I ask the wrong question and keep things too open to variations in opinion. Yet there is no straight answer.

Trying to keep a 1974 year old engine moving can be trouble some to include upgrading parts to today's standards.
--
1974 GMC Sequoia 26'

 

[Ken H.]

Sort of following up my previous comments and sorta expanding on Johnny's
water pump comment: When I (actually a sorry mechanic in San Antonio)
destroyed the engine in my brand new to me coach at 59,065 miles on 1 May
1998, I had to build an engine. I was living at the time in deep SE GA,
pure farming country with LOTS of heavy irrigation from one of the biggest
aquifers in the country. Thus, when I found a machinist for the core I'd
found, his response to my inquiry was "I don't know anything about
motorhomes, but used to build a lot of Olds 455s to run water pumps 24/7 at
full throttle; I can build you one of those." And he did (I did the
assembly despite having not done one in over 35 years at the time). The
last time I checked with my son, I and later he have put over 82,000 miles
on that engine with no problems. Good 'nuff for me!

Ken H.
Americus, GA
'76 X-Birchaven w/Cad500/Howell EFI & EBL,
Manny Brakes & 1-Ton, Troy-Bilt APU, etc., etc., etc.
www.gmcwipersetc.com

On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 6:39 PM Grant Schaffer via Gmclist <

> Thanks Ken it just seems everyone has an issue with the 455 in general or
> GM's attempt at RV's. would it have been better if they had more time to
> invest in upgrade such as the final drive, sure. Its a GM/ Oldsmobile I
> mean really. The only thing better would be the caddy 500 in my opinion.
> Maybe
> I ask the wrong question and keep things too open to variations in
> opinion. Yet there is no straight answer.
>
> Trying to keep a 1974 year old engine moving can be trouble some to
> include upgrading parts to today's standards.
> --
> 1974 GMC Sequoia 26'
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
>

 

[johnny]

Grant, you seem totake it as a given that this is a poor engine and you seem to go from there. Your base premise is incorrect, hoss.
I'm far from a GM product fan either. I've owned two of their cars over 60 years of driving, and they can't run fast enough to catch me to make me a
gift of another. The Motorhome and its 455 engine, however, are a different and desirable story.

--johnny
--
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

 

[Matt Colie]

> Sort of following up my previous comments and sorta expanding on Johnny's water pump comment: When I (actually a sorry mechanic in San Antonio)
> destroyed the engine in my brand new to me coach at 59,065 miles on 1 May 1998, I had to build an engine. I was living at the time in deep SE GA,
> pure farming country with LOTS of heavy irrigation from one of the biggest aquifers in the country. Thus, when I found a machinist for the core I'd
> found, his response to my inquiry was "I don't know anything about motorhomes, but used to build a lot of Olds 455s to run water pumps 24/7 at full
> throttle; I can build you one of those." And he did (I did the assembly despite having not done one in over 35 years at the time). The last time I
> checked with my son, I and later he have put over 82,000 miles on that engine with no problems. Good 'nuff for me!
>
> Ken H.
> Americus, GA

This is really hits home with me. I knew well of the Olds 455 as I have been an "Engine Guy" and professional at it for years.

What hit this home for me was that my engine broke a piston (120° of rings now in the pan) and that was the Eclipse year. We went from 2000+/qt to
-500.....
I just kept pouring lube oil in until we could get her home. I did a full inspection when I tore the engine down. (This is measurement to 0.0001 in
most cases.) The records said that the engine was open 70K+ before that, and when I was filling in the build sheets, I was sort of annoyed. I had
one bad piston. That the sheets did not say where it was from. If I could have bought just one matching piston, I could have closed it up and sent
it back out.

There have been many well cared for 455s that ran over 100K. Look at the coaches with CBBs, they are lucky to make 80.

If you want to talk to me more about the durability of this platform, meet me at Mansfield and be ready to buy an evening's beer. I can tell you more
than anybody wants to know.....

Matt - Chaumière is back on SIX tires now. She is wanting to GO.


--
Matt & Mary Colie - '73 Glacier 23 - Members GMCMI, GMCGL, GMCES
Electronically Controlled Quiet Engine Cooling Fan
OE Rear Drum Brakes with Applied Control Arms
SE Michigan - Twixt A2 and Detroit

 

[Jim Hupy]

Johnny, we couldn't believe that, hardly.
Personally, I have no brand loyalty to any Detroit iron. South Bend or
Toledo? Perhaps a bit. But, this much I know for a fact. An impala that
looks like a Camry is no accident.
Jim Hupy
Salem, Oregon

On Fri, Sep 27, 2019, 5:23 PM Johnny Bridges via Gmclist <

> Grant, you seem totake it as a given that this is a poor engine and you
> seem to go from there. Your base premise is incorrect, hoss.
> I'm far from a GM product fan either. I've owned two of their cars over
> 60 years of driving, and they can't run fast enough to catch me to make me a
> gift of another. The Motorhome and its 455 engine, however, are a
> different and desirable story.
>
> --johnny
> --
> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
>

 

[johnny]

What part couldn't you believe hardly?

--
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

 

[Jim Hupy]

Johnny, the part about you NOT HAVING any great love for a GM built
product. (GRIN) You are by no means alone in your thinking. Any corporation
that gets in bed with politicians is immediately suspect in my book.
GM built some awful stuff from about 1970 onward. But, they had
company, Chrysler was right there with them, Ford too. Some was driven by
new "clean air" regs, some just corporate greed.
Then came "clunker buy backs" That was really special. Fine example of
government interference in stuff of which they have NO BUSINESS being
involved.
It constantly amazes me that the GMC motorhome ever got built, and
that it is still around. But, I am glad that it is. And I know you and many
others are as well.
Jim Hupy
Salem, Oregon

On Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 5:58 AM Johnny Bridges via Gmclist <

> What part couldn't you believe hardly?
>
> --
> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
>

 

[johnny]

Oh OK. At the risk of Bob and Mike's horror, one was a '65 Corvair which was utter junk except it handled fairly well. Other was a Citation Twice.
Once would of been enough. However, the GMC Motorhome can be parked by today's offerings and you will note it's better out together out of better
materials than anything I've seen. Closest are GM highway buses properly converted, and likely for the same reason - they were built to last. To a
degree the GMC was built to a price point, but it's noticeable inside, not underneath. I pass a Tiffin Allegro Bus every day sitting in a front yard
going to rack and ruin. The side panels are delaminating in the sunshine. Mind, Tiffin builds the industry leaders, this one is twenty years younger
than the GMC and it's now junk.
I see nothing advertised new under a hundred thousand. Give me a GMC and 100K less what it cost, and I can top anything out there for build quality,
interior layout and quality. Speaks well for the design.

--johnny
--
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

 

[Randy Hecht]

Hear hear. GMC’s are well designed and built.

Chaplain Randy Hecht
Roswell, GA
Chaplains are ready to Listen when you're ready to talk.

1974 Canyon Lakes GMC the Unicorn Express
80mm Front Disc and a work in progress

>
> Oh OK. At the risk of Bob and Mike's horror, one was a '65 Corvair which was utter junk except it handled fairly well. Other was a Citation Twice.
> Once would of been enough. However, the GMC Motorhome can be parked by today's offerings and you will note it's better out together out of better
> materials than anything I've seen. Closest are GM highway buses properly converted, and likely for the same reason - they were built to last. To a
> degree the GMC was built to a price point, but it's noticeable inside, not underneath. I pass a Tiffin Allegro Bus every day sitting in a front yard
> going to rack and ruin. The side panels are delaminating in the sunshine. Mind, Tiffin builds the industry leaders, this one is twenty years younger
> than the GMC and it's now junk.
> I see nothing advertised new under a hundred thousand. Give me a GMC and 100K less what it cost, and I can top anything out there for build quality,
> interior layout and quality. Speaks well for the design.
>
> --johnny
> --
> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org

 

[douglas smith]

Well said Johnny. I park my ratty old =E2=80=9973 and always get a (favor=
able) comment. I keep it in a storage yard with a =E2=80=9CFor Sale=
=E2=80=9D sign on about a third of the many unwanted RV=E2=80=99s there. My=
oldest brother bought a small $130K class C and not only had loads of trou=
ble with it, but his wife hated it. They sold it after about 18 months. We =
routinely attend RV shows to see what is offered now, and NEVER see anythin=
g we=E2=80=99d want, certainly nothing we=E2=80=99d want more than our GMC.=
I might mention that our coach was built in Oct. =E2=80=9973 and does not =
have the enhancements from =E2=80=9975 on, much less those of =E2=80=9977-=
=E2=80=9978. It never ceases to amaze me how successfully the GMC navigates=
the compromises between size/capacity. The holding tank capacity, fuel cap=
acity, interior room/storage, engine/drivetrain=E2=80=94 whatever you look =
at they=E2=80=99ve pretty much got it nailed. We don=E2=80=99t tow anything=
, so our GMC is our vehicle away from home; and I=E2=80=99ve threaded it th=
rough some amazingly tight alleys and twisty roads. =E2=80=9CIt doesn=
=E2=80=99t look like a box or drive like a truck=E2=80=9D has real resonanc=
e for me. And even though many would be aghast at some of the cosmetic shor=
tfalls of our coach, it has embraced in its fiberglass and aluminum skin ma=
ny of the most wonderful moments in a 47 year old marriage. Why it hasn=
=E2=80=99t been cloned for those who shudder at old vehicles is yet another=
cause for amazement. Having said all that, I know it takes an unusual pers=
on to embrace a 40-some year old vehicle. I seems that the younger generati=
ons not only don=E2=80=99t want to fix things, they don=E2=80=99t really ca=
re how they work, and they can=E2=80=99t believe an old mechanical thing mi=
ght be as good as something =E2=80=9Cnew.=E2=80=9D Fine with me, I guess. 4=
0 below keeps the riff-raff out as we say in Minnesota. (End of Rant) =
Douglas & Virginia Smith dsmithy18 at gmail Lincoln Nebraska =
=E2=80=9973 =E2=80=9CCanyonlands=E2=80=9D since =E2=80=9895: =E2=80=9CWanab=
izo=E2=80=9D, Anishinabe Indian for =E2=80=9CHe gets lost driving=E2=80=
=9D Yes, really. Quadrabag/6 wheel disks/3;70 final/Paterson QuadraJet/T=
horley=E2=80=99s/Sundry other P&W PT6, no wait, that's the wish list...=
> On Sep 28, 2019, at 10:28 AM, Johnny Bridges via Gmclist wrote: > > Oh OK. At the risk of Bob and Mike's horro=
r, one was a '65 Corvair which was utter junk except it handled fairly well=
. Other was a Citation Twice. > Once would of been enough. However, th=
e GMC Motorhome can be parked by today's offerings and you will note it's b=
etter out together out of better > materials than anything I've seen. Cl=
osest are GM highway buses properly converted, and likely for the same reas=
on - they were built to last. To a > degree the GMC was built to a price=
point, but it's noticeable inside, not underneath. I pass a Tiffin Allegr=
o Bus every day sitting in a front yard > going to rack and ruin. The si=
de panels are delaminating in the sunshine. Mind, Tiffin builds the indust=
ry leaders, this one is twenty years younger > than the GMC and it's now =
junk. > I see nothing advertised new under a hundred thousand. Give me=
a GMC and 100K less what it cost, and I can top anything out there for bui=
ld quality, > interior layout and quality. Speaks well for the design.=
> > --johnny > -- > Foolish Carriage, 76 26' Eleganza(?) with be=
aucoup mods and add - ons. > Braselton, Ga. > I forgive them all, save =
those who hurt the dogs. They must answer to me in hell > > > ____=
___________________________________________ > GMCnet mailing list > Uns=
ubscribe or Change List Options: > http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinf=
o/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org

 

[douglas smith]

Oh, and by the way, we have about 145K miles on the original 455 engine and burn about a quart in 1000 miles.

Douglas & Virginia Smith
dsmithy18 at gmail
Lincoln Nebraska
’73 “Canyonlands” since ‘95: “Wanabizo”, Anishinabe Indian for “He gets lost driving” Yes, really.
Quadrabag/6 wheel disks/3;70 final/Paterson QuadraJet/Thorley’s/Sundry other
P&W PT6, no wait, that's the wish list...

>
> Oh OK. At the risk of Bob and Mike's horror, one was a '65 Corvair which was utter junk except it handled fairly well. Other was a Citation Twice.
> Once would of been enough. However, the GMC Motorhome can be parked by today's offerings and you will note it's better out together out of better
> materials than anything I've seen. Closest are GM highway buses properly converted, and likely for the same reason - they were built to last. To a
> degree the GMC was built to a price point, but it's noticeable inside, not underneath. I pass a Tiffin Allegro Bus every day sitting in a front yard
> going to rack and ruin. The side panels are delaminating in the sunshine. Mind, Tiffin builds the industry leaders, this one is twenty years younger
> than the GMC and it's now junk.
> I see nothing advertised new under a hundred thousand. Give me a GMC and 100K less what it cost, and I can top anything out there for build quality,
> interior layout and quality. Speaks well for the design.
>
> --johnny
> --
> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org