buick-rover-v8
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Values of 215 & 4-speed?

To: <buick-rover-v8@Autox.Team.Net>
Subject: Re: Values of 215 & 4-speed?
From: "Op" <oliverp@gte.net>
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 23:00:12 -0800
Hello all,

I have one of the 1963 Buick HO 215 HP engines. I compared the block
stamping to the Auto Repair guide published for dealers. I had photocopied
the specs, but have been unable to find them. I had gotten the motor almost
12 years ago. I can't say for sure, but I think it has a solid lifter cam. I
might be wrong. Tomorrow I will go look at the block and see for sure. The
compression was 11-1. It also had a dual plane 4bbl manifold. I bought the
engine complete and pulled it out of the car myself for about $115usd.

I purchased a flywheel and bellhousing for $150usd, but the flywheel turned
out to not be the right one.


-----Original Message-----
From: Curt and Amy <amy_curt@pacbell.net>
To: SEEverist@aol.com <SEEverist@aol.com>; buick-rover-v8@Autox.Team.Net
<buick-rover-v8@Autox.Team.Net>
Date: Sunday, December 13, 1998 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: Values of 215 & 4-speed?


>Steve,
>The 62 Skylark (all Skylarks had four barrel carbs)  was rated at 190h.p.
>with 11to1 comp. ratio.   The Car that was rated at The 215 h.p. figure you
>saw was for the rare Olds F-85 Turbo charged engine that was made in 1963.
>It yielded 1 hp for 1 cubic inch displacement with an alcohol water
>injection and the same 11 to 1 comp ratio and low boost.  (I believe about
>6psi)   The turbo and side draft Rodchester carb were the same as the
>Corvair Turbo of the same vintage.  The turbo operated off of one bank of
>cylinders only.
> The T-10 four speed mentioned  and old Buick parts do have Value!!!!!!  Do
>not trash old Buick Parts simply because they are old!!!    I cannot tell
>you how many requests I get for Buick 4 speed bellhousings, distributors
and
>four barrel intake manifolds.  I have supplied many MG V8ers with Buick
>parts that are in the works or running today.  My 62 Skylark has 3.36
possi,
>a four speed and is capable of 9sec 0-60 times.
>Remember where the Rover engine and engineering came from, and recognize
>that there are folks out there that would love to have that odd piece of
>Buick history.
>Curtis Hunter  (just now stepping off his soap box).
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: SEEverist@aol.com <SEEverist@aol.com>
>To: buick-rover-v8@autox.team.net <buick-rover-v8@autox.team.net>
>Date: Sunday, December 13, 1998 6:33 PM
>Subject: Re: Values of 215 & 4-speed?
>
>
>>Can anyone verify that there was a different horsepower output for the
>Skylark
>>with the T-10 in 1962?  Somewhere many years ago I read that if you had a
>>Skylark (doesn't work for Specials) and the 4 speed trans (not for autos)
>>there was a compression ratio increase and the combo was rated at 215
>horse.
>>I've always assumed this to be true as this is the version of Skylark that
>my
>>mom has owned since she bought it used in 1964.  If anyone is interested
in
>>seeing a few pics of the car that I shot last summer, they're at
>>http://members.aol.com/seeverist/index.html
>>The navigation bar has a 1962 Skylark button.  Just give it a click.
>>
>>Steve
>>
>>
>>> The original four speed out of a 62 Skylark was a BorgWarner T-10.  This
>>>  tranny was originally designed for the Corvette.  The version used in
>the
>>>  Skylark has a unique cast aluminum output shaft housing and the output
>>shaft
>>>  itself is the same as the Dualpath automatic.  There should be an  i.d.
>>>  plate on the linkage cover.  My Skylark T-10 has such a date.   Enough
>for
>>>  identification;  I bought my  T-10 in 1989 for $400 less bellhousing.
>Add
>>>  at least another $150 for it.
>>>  The four barrel engine complete (including flywheel) should go for
about
>>>  $200-350 depending upon condition.
>>>  If you have the car that these parts came out of you may want to cut
the
>>>  larger transmission hump out of the floorpan, the pedal assembly and
>>>  steering column.  Also the lower gear ratio for the manual box is
>>desirable.
>>
>


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>