NV3550 first gear failure. Need opinions.
10-20-2005, 11:43 PM
#51
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NV3550 first gear failure. Need opinions.
But I wouldn't call the supercharged Cord, nor Tornado and El
Dorado in the sixties, puny:
http://www.loc.gov/bicentennial/prop...h_souder5.html
http://www.hubcapcafe.com/ocs/pages01/cord3702.htm Like the ricer five
speeds.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Lon wrote:
>
> Submitted for your consideration: Cord. The other ones are left as an
> exercise for the student.
Dorado in the sixties, puny:
http://www.loc.gov/bicentennial/prop...h_souder5.html
http://www.hubcapcafe.com/ocs/pages01/cord3702.htm Like the ricer five
speeds.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Lon wrote:
>
> Submitted for your consideration: Cord. The other ones are left as an
> exercise for the student.
10-20-2005, 11:43 PM
#52
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NV3550 first gear failure. Need opinions.
But I wouldn't call the supercharged Cord, nor Tornado and El
Dorado in the sixties, puny:
http://www.loc.gov/bicentennial/prop...h_souder5.html
http://www.hubcapcafe.com/ocs/pages01/cord3702.htm Like the ricer five
speeds.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Lon wrote:
>
> Submitted for your consideration: Cord. The other ones are left as an
> exercise for the student.
Dorado in the sixties, puny:
http://www.loc.gov/bicentennial/prop...h_souder5.html
http://www.hubcapcafe.com/ocs/pages01/cord3702.htm Like the ricer five
speeds.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Lon wrote:
>
> Submitted for your consideration: Cord. The other ones are left as an
> exercise for the student.
10-21-2005, 08:06 AM
#53
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NV3550 first gear failure. Need opinions.
I never said what kind of 5 speed it had....I did say 5 speed but I assumed
as much. It was manual. Never attempted to guess what model.
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:435833AC.4C7A19AB@***.net...
> Right, there was puny cars when Real men drove Real Jeeps with rock
> crusher boxes. Did you forget you said it had a puny five speed??
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>>
>> When did FWD come into the discussion? You asked about a fullsized Bronco
>> having a stick, I said I had seen one, whether it was a T90 or a T5 or a
>> 3550 or a 3500 or whatever is IRRELEVANT!
as much. It was manual. Never attempted to guess what model.
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:435833AC.4C7A19AB@***.net...
> Right, there was puny cars when Real men drove Real Jeeps with rock
> crusher boxes. Did you forget you said it had a puny five speed??
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>>
>> When did FWD come into the discussion? You asked about a fullsized Bronco
>> having a stick, I said I had seen one, whether it was a T90 or a T5 or a
>> 3550 or a 3500 or whatever is IRRELEVANT!
10-21-2005, 08:06 AM
#54
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NV3550 first gear failure. Need opinions.
I never said what kind of 5 speed it had....I did say 5 speed but I assumed
as much. It was manual. Never attempted to guess what model.
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:435833AC.4C7A19AB@***.net...
> Right, there was puny cars when Real men drove Real Jeeps with rock
> crusher boxes. Did you forget you said it had a puny five speed??
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>>
>> When did FWD come into the discussion? You asked about a fullsized Bronco
>> having a stick, I said I had seen one, whether it was a T90 or a T5 or a
>> 3550 or a 3500 or whatever is IRRELEVANT!
as much. It was manual. Never attempted to guess what model.
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:435833AC.4C7A19AB@***.net...
> Right, there was puny cars when Real men drove Real Jeeps with rock
> crusher boxes. Did you forget you said it had a puny five speed??
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>>
>> When did FWD come into the discussion? You asked about a fullsized Bronco
>> having a stick, I said I had seen one, whether it was a T90 or a T5 or a
>> 3550 or a 3500 or whatever is IRRELEVANT!
10-21-2005, 08:06 AM
#55
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NV3550 first gear failure. Need opinions.
I never said what kind of 5 speed it had....I did say 5 speed but I assumed
as much. It was manual. Never attempted to guess what model.
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:435833AC.4C7A19AB@***.net...
> Right, there was puny cars when Real men drove Real Jeeps with rock
> crusher boxes. Did you forget you said it had a puny five speed??
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>>
>> When did FWD come into the discussion? You asked about a fullsized Bronco
>> having a stick, I said I had seen one, whether it was a T90 or a T5 or a
>> 3550 or a 3500 or whatever is IRRELEVANT!
as much. It was manual. Never attempted to guess what model.
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:435833AC.4C7A19AB@***.net...
> Right, there was puny cars when Real men drove Real Jeeps with rock
> crusher boxes. Did you forget you said it had a puny five speed??
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>>
>> When did FWD come into the discussion? You asked about a fullsized Bronco
>> having a stick, I said I had seen one, whether it was a T90 or a T5 or a
>> 3550 or a 3500 or whatever is IRRELEVANT!
10-21-2005, 05:35 PM
#56
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NV3550 first gear failure. Need opinions.
Then in your inexperience you assumed WRONG. As the Japanese puny
five speeds didn't come until later. Like the Real trucks had Real
transmissions and they were only four speeds because we had Real V8s.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> I never said what kind of 5 speed it had....I did say 5 speed but I assumed
> as much. It was manual. Never attempted to guess what model.
five speeds didn't come until later. Like the Real trucks had Real
transmissions and they were only four speeds because we had Real V8s.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> I never said what kind of 5 speed it had....I did say 5 speed but I assumed
> as much. It was manual. Never attempted to guess what model.
10-21-2005, 05:35 PM
#57
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NV3550 first gear failure. Need opinions.
Then in your inexperience you assumed WRONG. As the Japanese puny
five speeds didn't come until later. Like the Real trucks had Real
transmissions and they were only four speeds because we had Real V8s.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> I never said what kind of 5 speed it had....I did say 5 speed but I assumed
> as much. It was manual. Never attempted to guess what model.
five speeds didn't come until later. Like the Real trucks had Real
transmissions and they were only four speeds because we had Real V8s.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> I never said what kind of 5 speed it had....I did say 5 speed but I assumed
> as much. It was manual. Never attempted to guess what model.
10-21-2005, 05:35 PM
#58
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NV3550 first gear failure. Need opinions.
Then in your inexperience you assumed WRONG. As the Japanese puny
five speeds didn't come until later. Like the Real trucks had Real
transmissions and they were only four speeds because we had Real V8s.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> I never said what kind of 5 speed it had....I did say 5 speed but I assumed
> as much. It was manual. Never attempted to guess what model.
five speeds didn't come until later. Like the Real trucks had Real
transmissions and they were only four speeds because we had Real V8s.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> I never said what kind of 5 speed it had....I did say 5 speed but I assumed
> as much. It was manual. Never attempted to guess what model.
10-21-2005, 06:06 PM
#59
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NV3550 first gear failure. Need opinions.
Wrong Bill Americans were driving front wheel drive cars since 1966
The Oldsmobile Toronado, which reintroduced front-drive to the U.S. market
in 1966, also used a longitudinal engine placement for its V-8, coupled with
an unusual "split" transmission, which turned the engine power 90 degrees.
The driveline was set well behind the centerpoint of the wheels, however,
for better weight distribution. (Consequently, it was sometimes called the
Mafia car, because it was "all hood").
The Cadillac Eldorado, with front wheel drive introduced in 1967, holds the
record for the largest engine in a front wheel drive production vehicle, at
8.2 liters (The 1970 edition). The Cadillac Eldorado continued to be the
only front wheel drive offering from Cadillac until 1980, when the front
wheel drive Cadillac Seville was introduced. Reasons cited for the enormous
engine are smoothness due to the inertia of the engine soaking up much of
the vibration caused by low milling tolerances of the era, resulting in a
very smooth ride.
The changeover of cars in the US to front wheel drive began in earnest in
the 1980s, with the introduction of the compact Chevrolet Citation probably
marking the real beginning, and the 1986 introduction of the Ford Taurus
bringing front wheel drive to prominence in mid-size cars. By the mid 1980s
most formerly rear wheel drive Japanese models were front wheel drive, and
by the mid 1990s most American brands only sold a handful of rear wheel
drive models. Some suggest that the introduction of the Volkswagen Rabbit in
1974 led to Detroit's Big Three to market the FF layout; Chrysler's vehicle
lineup was 100% FF by decade's end. GM followed Chrysler in the mid-1990s
when their vehicle lineup was FF (with the exception of the Corvette and
F-body lineup).
The vast majority of front wheel drive vehicles today use the transversely
mounted engine with "end-on" mounted transmission, driving the front wheels
via driveshafts linked via Constant Velocity (CV) joints. This configuration
was made popular by the Fiat 128 of 1969. The 1959 Mini, while a pioneering
transverse front wheel drive vehicle, used a substantially different
arrangement with the transmission in the sump of the engine.
--
Coasty
Remove the SPOOGE to reply
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:43571DF9.E01D2982@***.net...
> The heck it's not! We as Americans didn't have puny front wheel
> cars until the Chrysler KCar and the crap they made after that! That's
> the biggest reason the screaming greenies can't get the Real Americans
> out of the giant SUVs! You saw the sleeve on Rod's NV3500! Sh*t a 1940
> Borg Warner T90 made for a flat head would be stronger.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>>
>> That's a given, considering the 3550 wasn't even around then. But as
>> usual,
>> it's irrelevant. You asked:
The Oldsmobile Toronado, which reintroduced front-drive to the U.S. market
in 1966, also used a longitudinal engine placement for its V-8, coupled with
an unusual "split" transmission, which turned the engine power 90 degrees.
The driveline was set well behind the centerpoint of the wheels, however,
for better weight distribution. (Consequently, it was sometimes called the
Mafia car, because it was "all hood").
The Cadillac Eldorado, with front wheel drive introduced in 1967, holds the
record for the largest engine in a front wheel drive production vehicle, at
8.2 liters (The 1970 edition). The Cadillac Eldorado continued to be the
only front wheel drive offering from Cadillac until 1980, when the front
wheel drive Cadillac Seville was introduced. Reasons cited for the enormous
engine are smoothness due to the inertia of the engine soaking up much of
the vibration caused by low milling tolerances of the era, resulting in a
very smooth ride.
The changeover of cars in the US to front wheel drive began in earnest in
the 1980s, with the introduction of the compact Chevrolet Citation probably
marking the real beginning, and the 1986 introduction of the Ford Taurus
bringing front wheel drive to prominence in mid-size cars. By the mid 1980s
most formerly rear wheel drive Japanese models were front wheel drive, and
by the mid 1990s most American brands only sold a handful of rear wheel
drive models. Some suggest that the introduction of the Volkswagen Rabbit in
1974 led to Detroit's Big Three to market the FF layout; Chrysler's vehicle
lineup was 100% FF by decade's end. GM followed Chrysler in the mid-1990s
when their vehicle lineup was FF (with the exception of the Corvette and
F-body lineup).
The vast majority of front wheel drive vehicles today use the transversely
mounted engine with "end-on" mounted transmission, driving the front wheels
via driveshafts linked via Constant Velocity (CV) joints. This configuration
was made popular by the Fiat 128 of 1969. The 1959 Mini, while a pioneering
transverse front wheel drive vehicle, used a substantially different
arrangement with the transmission in the sump of the engine.
--
Coasty
Remove the SPOOGE to reply
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:43571DF9.E01D2982@***.net...
> The heck it's not! We as Americans didn't have puny front wheel
> cars until the Chrysler KCar and the crap they made after that! That's
> the biggest reason the screaming greenies can't get the Real Americans
> out of the giant SUVs! You saw the sleeve on Rod's NV3500! Sh*t a 1940
> Borg Warner T90 made for a flat head would be stronger.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>>
>> That's a given, considering the 3550 wasn't even around then. But as
>> usual,
>> it's irrelevant. You asked:
10-21-2005, 06:06 PM
#60
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NV3550 first gear failure. Need opinions.
Wrong Bill Americans were driving front wheel drive cars since 1966
The Oldsmobile Toronado, which reintroduced front-drive to the U.S. market
in 1966, also used a longitudinal engine placement for its V-8, coupled with
an unusual "split" transmission, which turned the engine power 90 degrees.
The driveline was set well behind the centerpoint of the wheels, however,
for better weight distribution. (Consequently, it was sometimes called the
Mafia car, because it was "all hood").
The Cadillac Eldorado, with front wheel drive introduced in 1967, holds the
record for the largest engine in a front wheel drive production vehicle, at
8.2 liters (The 1970 edition). The Cadillac Eldorado continued to be the
only front wheel drive offering from Cadillac until 1980, when the front
wheel drive Cadillac Seville was introduced. Reasons cited for the enormous
engine are smoothness due to the inertia of the engine soaking up much of
the vibration caused by low milling tolerances of the era, resulting in a
very smooth ride.
The changeover of cars in the US to front wheel drive began in earnest in
the 1980s, with the introduction of the compact Chevrolet Citation probably
marking the real beginning, and the 1986 introduction of the Ford Taurus
bringing front wheel drive to prominence in mid-size cars. By the mid 1980s
most formerly rear wheel drive Japanese models were front wheel drive, and
by the mid 1990s most American brands only sold a handful of rear wheel
drive models. Some suggest that the introduction of the Volkswagen Rabbit in
1974 led to Detroit's Big Three to market the FF layout; Chrysler's vehicle
lineup was 100% FF by decade's end. GM followed Chrysler in the mid-1990s
when their vehicle lineup was FF (with the exception of the Corvette and
F-body lineup).
The vast majority of front wheel drive vehicles today use the transversely
mounted engine with "end-on" mounted transmission, driving the front wheels
via driveshafts linked via Constant Velocity (CV) joints. This configuration
was made popular by the Fiat 128 of 1969. The 1959 Mini, while a pioneering
transverse front wheel drive vehicle, used a substantially different
arrangement with the transmission in the sump of the engine.
--
Coasty
Remove the SPOOGE to reply
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:43571DF9.E01D2982@***.net...
> The heck it's not! We as Americans didn't have puny front wheel
> cars until the Chrysler KCar and the crap they made after that! That's
> the biggest reason the screaming greenies can't get the Real Americans
> out of the giant SUVs! You saw the sleeve on Rod's NV3500! Sh*t a 1940
> Borg Warner T90 made for a flat head would be stronger.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>>
>> That's a given, considering the 3550 wasn't even around then. But as
>> usual,
>> it's irrelevant. You asked:
The Oldsmobile Toronado, which reintroduced front-drive to the U.S. market
in 1966, also used a longitudinal engine placement for its V-8, coupled with
an unusual "split" transmission, which turned the engine power 90 degrees.
The driveline was set well behind the centerpoint of the wheels, however,
for better weight distribution. (Consequently, it was sometimes called the
Mafia car, because it was "all hood").
The Cadillac Eldorado, with front wheel drive introduced in 1967, holds the
record for the largest engine in a front wheel drive production vehicle, at
8.2 liters (The 1970 edition). The Cadillac Eldorado continued to be the
only front wheel drive offering from Cadillac until 1980, when the front
wheel drive Cadillac Seville was introduced. Reasons cited for the enormous
engine are smoothness due to the inertia of the engine soaking up much of
the vibration caused by low milling tolerances of the era, resulting in a
very smooth ride.
The changeover of cars in the US to front wheel drive began in earnest in
the 1980s, with the introduction of the compact Chevrolet Citation probably
marking the real beginning, and the 1986 introduction of the Ford Taurus
bringing front wheel drive to prominence in mid-size cars. By the mid 1980s
most formerly rear wheel drive Japanese models were front wheel drive, and
by the mid 1990s most American brands only sold a handful of rear wheel
drive models. Some suggest that the introduction of the Volkswagen Rabbit in
1974 led to Detroit's Big Three to market the FF layout; Chrysler's vehicle
lineup was 100% FF by decade's end. GM followed Chrysler in the mid-1990s
when their vehicle lineup was FF (with the exception of the Corvette and
F-body lineup).
The vast majority of front wheel drive vehicles today use the transversely
mounted engine with "end-on" mounted transmission, driving the front wheels
via driveshafts linked via Constant Velocity (CV) joints. This configuration
was made popular by the Fiat 128 of 1969. The 1959 Mini, while a pioneering
transverse front wheel drive vehicle, used a substantially different
arrangement with the transmission in the sump of the engine.
--
Coasty
Remove the SPOOGE to reply
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:43571DF9.E01D2982@***.net...
> The heck it's not! We as Americans didn't have puny front wheel
> cars until the Chrysler KCar and the crap they made after that! That's
> the biggest reason the screaming greenies can't get the Real Americans
> out of the giant SUVs! You saw the sleeve on Rod's NV3500! Sh*t a 1940
> Borg Warner T90 made for a flat head would be stronger.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>>
>> That's a given, considering the 3550 wasn't even around then. But as
>> usual,
>> it's irrelevant. You asked:
