Michael S. Lishego
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Speedway/3706/
>OK, so you sold an OD due to an economics decision. I respect that.
>You made a trade-off. Using an OD is a matter of trade-offs too. If my
>car never got out of town I wouldn't think an OD desirable.
I got rid of my OD because, to quote many Jerry Springer guests, it wasn't
'All That'. After running it for a few weeks, I didn't think it was all it
was hyped up to be.
> Your remark about having torque at highway speeds mystifies me. After
>all, that's one reason why you can flip it into direct drive.
Yes, all it takes is a flip of a switch. Without OD, all it takes is my
foot hitting the accelerator pedal and sending it to the floor. In
situations where split-second reactions are needed, I'd rather react
naturally instead of having to think about switches. FWIW, I wiped out my
MGB while it was in OD, on ice. I can't recall much of the accident, but I
think it might have something to do with it.
> The business about 20% of wear being at highway speeds may be true.
>I think it's based on some old, pre-freeway surveys which showed that
>the "average" car spent 80% of it's driving time in town, though. I
>don't know what more modern data shows. Living in a small town , as I
>do, means that if I go more than 5 minutes in 3 of 4 directions, I'm on
>the open road. When I lived in El Paso, I went most everywhere on the
>freeways so I still used the OD a lot (read whenever I could).
>
> That business about the auxiliary oil pump brings up an interesting
>point. I installed spin-on filter adapter right after I acquired my
>present B. I'm sure you know why. Someone (was it John Twist?)
>suggested that if you had the cartridge filter and didn't want to
>replace it with a spin-on, you should put an ignition kill-switch in the
>car and not allow it to start until the oil pressure comes up whilst
>cranking. I'm not sure about that one. Sounds like hell on the
>starter. More trade-offs.
Summit racing sells a pre-oiler kit for about $500. No starter strain, just
wallet strain.
> But why throw that in anyway? We were talking about whether an OD can
>decrease engine wear in comparison to non-OD. Wear on start-up is a
>fact of life with or without OD and is not germane to the issue.
You're right, you'll have wear at start up no matter what transmission
you've got. But, if someone is going to buy an OD under the assumption that
they'll get 'X' more miles out of their engine, I'm saying they're spending
their money for the wrong reasons. Spend the $350 for an OD tranny on a
pre-oiler if wear is a big issue.
> Actually, I'd install an OD for several reasons; fuel economy, reduced
>engine wear and lower pollution output due to less fuel burned, are
>major factors.
I'll agree with you that the fuel economy is better with the OD when you can
use it. But, it only came to about two bucks per fill up for me. I'm not
saying that I'm made of money, but I wouldn't want to buy an OD for $2 per
fill up. Of course, it would all balance out eventually, of course. But,
when I pulled my OD out, I was reluctant to pull my engine and tranny to
install a transmission that had an unknown number of miles left on it. For
my piece of mind I would have wanted it rebuilt. A local LBC shop quoted me
at just under $700 for a rebuild, and that doesn't include any worn or
broken parts that we didn't know of. I couldn't justify spending $700+ for
a tranny when my current tranny is fine. Of course, that's just me...The
buyer had no problem spending that cash for his car.
So, my point is this - an OD will save you gas money, but unless you find a
NOS box, a freshly rebuilt box for sale, or you're willing to shell out the
money for an OD rebuild, you're really not saving much. As for engine wear,
that's a point in dispute. I agree with John Twist - an OD is just for
noise reduction and piece of mind.
> Charley Robinson
> Kerrville, TX, USA
> NAMGBR 8-3530
> `69 B Roadster
>
>
|