More from the Don Pearce School of Miscalculation, was Williamson by QUAD?
 

On Sep 11, 6:24 pm, Andre Jute wrote:

For your information: all American V8 engines are 90 degree engines.

Jackass:

'Cept for a 1961 GM engine, a briefly and may-come-back Ford Mustang
engine (US-made, of course even if the design was shared by Yamaha)
derived from the Ford Taurus SHO and, well ...

Hell, the 60-degree mass-produced gasoline-powered V8 goes back to the
unfortunate Sherman tank of WW-II. Before that into the 20s with
Lincoln and others.

Mr. Jute's arrogance is exceeded only by his ignorance.

A few links:

http://timblair.net/ee/index.php/web...er_polar_bear/

http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z...L/default.aspx

Rumors are afoot that Cadillac is still planning a 60-degree V10
(imagine that in the days of $3 gas), but apparently cancelled the
planned 60-degree V8 opting for the more traditional 90 degrees.

Not to mention that Detroit Diesel has had 60-degree V8s for years.

In one form or another these beasts have been around since more-or-
less the beginning of time.

"All" means just that, unless Jute has been taking lessons from
Clinton and will claim another "typo" with a thousand words of tripe
and noise.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA
Kutztown Booth 338

More from the Don Pearce School of Miscalculation, was Williamson by QUAD?
 

In article .com,
Peter Wieck wrote:

On Sep 11, 6:24 pm, Andre Jute wrote:

For your information: all American V8 engines are 90 degree engines.

Jackass:

'Cept for a 1961 GM engine,

Peter, are you saying that GM had a 60 degree V8 gasoline engine that
was used in a 1961 US production automobile? I seriously doubt it if
that is what you are implying, if you are correct it surely must have
been GM's best kept secret ever, can you cite any references?


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

More from the Don Pearce School of Miscalculation, was Williamson by QUAD?
 

"John Byrns" wrote in message
...

In article .com,
Peter Wieck wrote:

On Sep 11, 6:24 pm, Andre Jute wrote:

For your information: all American V8 engines are 90 degree engines.


'Cept for a 1961 GM engine,

Peter, are you saying that GM had a 60 degree V8 gasoline engine that
was used in a 1961 US production automobile?

None that I know of.

True, the early 60s were a time of engine diversity for GM.

They had a relatively huge (3.3 liter) slant-4 cut out of a 90 degree V8.

They had that small aluminium V8 they eventually sold to Rover.

They made a car with an available I4 cut off of an I6, which was a real
throw-back in those days.

They had a flat 6 that was built like a motorcycle engine with jugs.

They had a 90 degree V6 in the days when conventional wisdom was that V6s
needed to be 60 degrees. (hold that thouught!) No balance shaft, either! Can
we say rock and roll? ;-)

I seriously doubt it if
that is what you are implying, if you are correct it surely must have
been GM's best kept secret ever, can you cite any references?

I'm waiting with bated breath!

More from the Don Pearce School of Miscalculation, was Williamson by QUAD?
 

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"John Byrns" wrote in message
...

In article .com,
Peter Wieck wrote:

On Sep 11, 6:24 pm, Andre Jute wrote:

For your information: all American V8 engines are 90 degree engines.


'Cept for a 1961 GM engine,

Peter, are you saying that GM had a 60 degree V8 gasoline engine that
was used in a 1961 US production automobile?

None that I know of.

True, the early 60s were a time of engine diversity for GM.

They had a relatively huge (3.3 liter) slant-4 cut out of a 90 degree V8.

They had that small aluminium V8 they eventually sold to Rover.

They made a car with an available I4 cut off of an I6, which was a real
throw-back in those days.

The I4 was later resurrected as the "Iron Duke"

They had a flat 6 that was built like a motorcycle engine with jugs.

I had one of those, a great little engine.

You forgot the SOHC I6 they had in the mid 1960s. I think this one may
have been the first automobile engine to use the now ubiquitous timing
belt to drive the cam. I also owned one of these, I love most all GM 6
cylinder engines, except maybe the old Pontiac flathead six. I also
owned a couple of GM's cast iron 60 degree V6 engines.

They had a 90 degree V6 in the days when conventional wisdom was that V6s
needed to be 60 degrees. (hold that thouught!) No balance shaft, either! Can
we say rock and roll? ;-)

IIRC this engine was developed to replace the ill fated aluminum V6 that
they dumped on Rover, and IIRC it was derived from an existing V8 so it
could be built on the same line with existing tooling. It soon went the
way of the aluminum V8 and was sold to Willis/Jeep, GM eventually bought
it back in the 1970s. They eventually converted it to an "even fire"
design with a special crank and both my and my wife's automobiles are
powered by this engine today. It seems smooth enough to me, with
minimal if any "rock and roll". The 60 degree V6 I mentioned above did
have a serious case of "rock and roll".

I seriously doubt it if
that is what you are implying, if you are correct it surely must have
been GM's best kept secret ever, can you cite any references?

I'm waiting with bated breath!

Just don't hold your breath.


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

More from the Don Pearce School of Miscalculation, was Williamson by QUAD?
 

On Sep 12, 10:05 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"John Byrns" wrote in message

...

In article .com,
Peter Wieck wrote:

On Sep 11, 6:24 pm, Andre Jute wrote:

For your information: all American V8 engines are 90 degree engines.
'Cept for a 1961 GM engine,
Peter, are you saying that GM had a 60 degree V8 gasoline engine that
was used in a 1961 US production automobile?

None that I know of.

True, the early 60s were a time of engine diversity for GM.

They had a relatively huge (3.3 liter) slant-4 cut out of a 90 degree V8.

They had that small aluminium V8 they eventually sold to Rover.

They made a car with an available I4 cut off of an I6, which was a real
throw-back in those days.

They had a flat 6 that was built like a motorcycle engine with jugs.

They had a 90 degree V6 in the days when conventional wisdom was that V6s
needed to be 60 degrees. (hold that thouught!) No balance shaft, either! Can
we say rock and roll? ;-)

I seriously doubt it if
that is what you are implying, if you are correct it surely must have
been GM's best kept secret ever, can you cite any references?

I'm waiting with bated breath!

Developed for Buick in 1961, sold to Rover in 1964, never went into a
production car to my knowledge, but it was an American V8 that was not
90 degrees - and it eventually did see use even if then made
elsewhere. Even as spavined a company as American Motors in that era
built several experimental 60-degree V8 engines, again none went into
full production as I am aware. And, technically not American as I
dimly remember it was made in Canada.

I also dimly remember a 60-degree V8 used in racing... hardly
production, but also to the point. I believe it was derived from the
GM engine as noted above, except that at the same time American Motors
was in that game...

I am no motor-head, but like most Americans of a certain age who grew
up in Michigan, some of this stuff inevitably got into my blood. But
the Ford SHO engine, the Lincoln engine, the 500ci Sherman engine, and
quite the number of Detroit Diesel engines are all 60-degree V8s.
Perhaps Arny can be useful, I also heard that the Mercruiser 454ci BB
Marine Engine was a 60-degree engine? Also American if so.

"All American V8s are 90-degrees". Sure they are. Mr. Jute has
written, so it must be.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA
Kutztown Space 338

More from the Don Pearce School of Miscalculation, was Williamson by QUAD?
 

"John Byrns" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"John Byrns" wrote in message
...

In article .com,
Peter Wieck wrote:

On Sep 11, 6:24 pm, Andre Jute wrote:

For your information: all American V8 engines are 90 degree engines.


'Cept for a 1961 GM engine,

Peter, are you saying that GM had a 60 degree V8 gasoline engine that
was used in a 1961 US production automobile?

None that I know of.

True, the early 60s were a time of engine diversity for GM.

They had a relatively huge (3.3 liter) slant-4 cut out of a 90 degree V8.

They had that small aluminium V8 they eventually sold to Rover.

They made a car with an available I4 cut off of an I6, which was a real
throw-back in those days.

The I4 was later resurrected as the "Iron Duke"

Exactly. It was offered in the initial Chevy II, but about zero were ever
sold. GM redirected it into the industrial engine market and by all
acccounts, it sold and served well. It was just the ticket for a small
combine or big irrigation pump.

They had a flat 6 that was built like a motorcycle engine with jugs.

I had one of those, a great little engine.

As did I, 140 gross hp and 4 single-barrel carbs. I ran it long enough for
the jug gaskets to leak like sieves.

You forgot the SOHC I6 they had in the mid 1960s.

Note my OP - "early 60s". Yes, they did the OHC I6 for Pontiac in, if memory
serves, 1966. The Wikipedia agrees.

I think this one may
have been the first automobile engine to use the now ubiquitous timing
belt to drive the cam.

You mean the now-ubiquitous steel-reinforced-rubber timing belt... There a
Fiat OHC I4 with one that was also introduced in 1966 - the 124. Fiat's
implementation included a camshaft that would go idle after belt breakage
with valves interfering with the pistons. Thus a minor belt failure became a
total engine failure.

also owned one of these, I love most all GM 6
cylinder engines, except maybe the old Pontiac flathead six. I also
owned a couple of GM's cast iron 60 degree V6 engines.

My first driver was an old 1958 chevvy Biscayne with the old "Blue Flame"
235 I6. You know, the one that was in the first Corvette. ;-)

They had a 90 degree V6 in the days when conventional wisdom was that V6s
needed to be 60 degrees. (hold that thouught!) No balance shaft, either!
Can
we say rock and roll? ;-)

IIRC this engine was developed to replace the ill fated aluminum V6 that
they dumped on Rover,

The aluminum that Rover got was a 214 V8. There was a turbocharged version
of it with water injection - Oldsmobile.

and IIRC it was derived from an existing V8 so it
could be built on the same line with existing tooling.

The V8 that begat the 90 degree V6 was the smalleruick "Nail head" cast iron
V8.

It soon went the
way of the aluminum V8 and was sold to Willis/Jeep, GM eventually bought
it back in the 1970s.

Agreed, except that by then Willys/Jeep was part of AMC.

They eventually converted it to an "even fire"
design with a special crank

That was the original design - a *special* crank. However they updated it,
and finally added a balance shaft.

and both my and my wife's automobiles are
powered by this engine today. It seems smooth enough to me, with
minimal if any "rock and roll". The 60 degree V6 I mentioned above did
have a serious case of "rock and roll".

I've owned 7 60 degree V6s, Nissan (1) , GM (3) and Ford (3). One is
smoother than the next. OK, the first chevvy V6 I had was a little rough,
but it also had a carburator. I blame the carb. FI made all the difference
on its sucessor with the same everything else. A 60 degree V6 that rocks
and rolls does so for reasons other than inherent balance.

My daughter owned a recent copy Chrysler's 3.8L 90 degree V6 (Liberty), and
it still had a little rock-and-roll at idle. I've driven a prototype of the
upgraded NVH version of the same car, and it is better but still has a bit
of the classic 90 degree V6 lope. For some odd reason I've never knowingly
driven one of the General's 90 degree V6s with the balance shaft, so I don't
know about it. I kay have ridden on one or three, so if there's nothing to
report, it must be pretty good.

The GM 90 degree V6 I did drive was in a 1964 Buick Special, back in the
day.

I seriously doubt it if
that is what you are implying, if you are correct it surely must have
been GM's best kept secret ever, can you cite any references?

I'm waiting with bated breath!

Just don't hold your breath.

No, holding one's breath for most of these turkeys to take a correction with
grace could result in a very blue face.

Dickless Wiecky, Body Parts Trader Williamson by QUAD?
 

Peter Wieck wrote:

As to Ms. Piaf:

Trust Mr. Jute to embelish interesting enough facts with enough legend
and falsehood to choke even 60 horses:

Why, you lying little dickless slug, The Boss never wrote anything as
turgid as this rubbish that you're trying to put in his mouth.

__________________________________________________ ___

In 1958 she was in a serious car accident and took morphine for pain
and relapsed into drug and alcohol abuse. In 1959, Édith broke down
during a performance in New York and thereafter survived a number of
operations. She returned to Paris in poor health. Édith met her second
husband, Théo Sarapo, in the winter of 1961. Théo was a twenty-six-
year-old hairdresser-turned-singer and actor, and was twenty years
younger than Piaf. They married in 1962. He rejuvenated her enough to
make her last recordings and performances. Piaf went to a small town
(Cannes) in the South of France in early 1963 to recuperate but she
fell in and out of a coma beginning in April 1963. At the early age of
47 on October 10, 1963, Édith Piaf died of cancer. Her husband Théo
discretely drove her body back to Paris and announced her death on
October 11, 1963. Upon hearing of her death, Édith's long-time friend,
Jacques Cocteau suffered a cardiac arrest and died.
The Roman Catholic Church denied Édith Piaf a funeral mass because of
her lifestyle. Piaf was buried in cemetery Père Lachaise on October
14, 1963.
Théo Sarapo, Édith's husband died in an automobile accident in 1970
and is buried beside Piaf in Père Lachaise.
__________________________________________________ ______

The saddest part is that the bare facts are interesting enough to
stand on their own without additional tripe and twaddle afterwards.

Then why do you, Worthless Wiecky, embroider the facts by inventing
the story that Theo Sarapo chopped up Edith Piaf's body for transport
to Paris. You say: "Her husband Théo discretely drove her body back to
Paris". Into how many pieces do you claim he chopped her body? And how
many trips do you claim he made?

Far from Mr Jute embroidering the story, or adding anything, you're
the one who in manufacturing your so-called "evidence" is inventing
events that never happened: "additional tripe and twaddle" indeed.

This is what The Boss actually wrote:

Andre Jute wrote:

Trivia for you: Edith Piaf's last lover, after she took the drugs
overdose that killed her, decided a French national icon should not
die anywhere but Paris, so he drove her body, sitting in the passenger
seat beside him, through the night from the Mediterranean coast to
Paris. The car was a Simca V8.

And that is everything The Boss wrote on the subject, nothing
superfluous, just the facts, and just enough of them to suggest the
story and whet the appetite. Compare the two versions. The Boss took
exactly 53 words to tell the entire story with a stunning punch. You
took 230, more than four times as many to make the same story dull
even as you tried unnecessarily to sensationalize it. That tells us
everything we need to know about who is the professional storyteller
and who is the clumsy wannabe.

And that brilliantly brief piece by The Boss is what you, Worthless
Wieckless, snipped out so that you could deceitfully substitute your
own piece of turgid pomposity. How did you think anyone with the
faintest sensitivity to the English language could ever believe The
Boss wrote your flyblown piece of crap?

And all that we learn from Mr. Jute is that he cannot tell a story
straight.

Compare the two pieces. It is quite clear who tells the story straight
and who throws in a kitchen sink full of garbage and bizarre
invention, including a chopped-up body. It is also clear that you,
Dickless Wieck, feels the need to embroider your version because you
know you lack authority. And then, further to enhance the authority of
your turgidly overwritten piece, you try to claim those are Mr Jute's
words! Does Mrs Wieck know you're stalking another man, Dickless
Wiecky?

Kinda puts the whole Simca statement in question.

You've been screeching for two years that The Boss is untruthful yet
you have failed to prove that he ever told a single lie. You're a
******, Wiecky, just like the Magnequest Scum before you were ******s.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA
Kutztown Space 338 to get your Body Parts

Yours sincerely but without any respect for worthless trash.

Gray Glasser

PS to The Boss: I never suspected you of knowing anything at all about
popular music and/or popular musicians. Is the car the clue? Or is it
Suicide Chic, the Sylvia Plath Syndrome? I still burst out laughing
every time I remember the faces of those feminists when you sprang
that one on them.

Williamson by QUAD?
 

On Sep 11, 12:35 pm, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article .com,
Andre Jute wrote:

The 60 can't stand for cubic inches; that's only one litre. So what
does it stand for? Horsepower. Actually, before the war 60 real horses
pretty the sturdiest of the British engines, the 3 litre Austin
Princess engine as fitted to Austin Healeys, didn't cross the 100bhp
barrier (except advertising puffery) until you breathed on it.

The Healey 100/4 used basically a pre-war Austin engine which struggled
to make 100 bhp, but 6 cylinder models had post war C Series units all of
which were good for over 100 bhp. Although not by much in standard trim.
The last version with the Weslake head and separate ports *could* be made
to produce a fair amount. But was a desperately heavy lump.

The Boss had a beautiful gunmetal gray Healey 3000 with walnut facia
and windup windows that he tooled around in when he could be bothered
to show for class. Eventually someone made him an offer of a Stingray
and cash pink slip exchange that he took.

Regards,

Gray

More from the Don Pearce School of Miscalculation, was Williamson by QUAD?
 

On Sep 12, 8:00 am, Peter Wieck wrote:
On Sep 12, 10:05 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:



"John Byrns" wrote in message

...

In article .com,
Peter Wieck wrote:

On Sep 11, 6:24 pm, Andre Jute wrote:

For your information: all American V8 engines are 90 degree engines.
'Cept for a 1961 GM engine,
Peter, are you saying that GM had a 60 degree V8 gasoline engine that
was used in a 1961 US production automobile?

I seriously doubt it if
that is what you are implying, if you are correct it surely must have
been GM's best kept secret ever, can you cite any references?

I'm waiting with bated breath!

Developed for Buick in 1961, sold to Rover in 1964, never went into a
production car to my knowledge, but it was an American V8 that was not
90 degrees - and it eventually did see use even if then made
elsewhere. Even as spavined a company as American Motors in that era
built several experimental 60-degree V8 engines, again none went into
full production as I am aware. And, technically not American as I
dimly remember it was made in Canada.

So no 60 degree American V8. Looks like there is only one Jackass here
and his names is Peter Wieck, also known as Worthless Wiecky.

I also dimly remember a 60-degree V8 used in racing... hardly
production, but also to the point. I believe it was derived from the
GM engine as noted above, except that at the same time American Motors
was in that game...

Muddle, muddle, mystery engine, twitch and twaddle. You lied,
Worthless Wiecky. Again. Looks like there is only one Lying Jackass
here and his names is Peter Wieck, also known as Worthless Wiecky.

I am no motor-head, but like most Americans of a certain age who grew
up in Michigan, some of this stuff inevitably got into my blood. But
the Ford SHO engine, the Lincoln engine, the 500ci Sherman engine, and
quite the number of Detroit Diesel engines are all 60-degree V8s.
Perhaps Arny can be useful, I also heard that the Mercruiser 454ci BB
Marine Engine was a 60-degree engine? Also American if so.

You should get your facts straight before you start calling people
names, Worthless. Still ooks like there is only one Lying Jackass here
and his names is Peter Wieck, also known as Worthless Wiecky.

"All American V8s are 90-degrees". Sure they are. Mr. Jute has
written, so it must be.

The Boss wrote a book on it and several articles for distinguished
magazines with knowledgeable editors. Why should anyone believe the
Jackass Peter Wieck knows anything The Boss doesn't?

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA
Kutztown Space 338

Get your body parts and ignorance here.

Sincerely, with zero respect for a Loudmouth Jackass.

Gray Glasser

More from the Don Pearce School of Miscalculation, was Williamson by QUAD?
 

"Peter Wieck" wrote in message
ps.com...

I am no motor-head, but like most Americans of a certain age who grew
up in Michigan, some of this stuff inevitably got into my blood. But
the Ford SHO engine,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_SHO_V6_engine

"In the mid 1980s, Ford Motor Company worked with Yamaha Motor Corporation
to develop a compact 60° DOHC V6 engine for transverse application."

the Lincoln engine,

If you mean the LS, that was the same-old, same-old 3.0 liter 60 degree V6.

There actually was a Ford 90 degree V6, but it ended up in trucks and
minivans:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Es...%28Canadian%29

the 500ci Sherman engine,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M4_Sherman#US_Variants

The Serman tank was propelled by a variant of a 9-cylinder radial aircraft
engine. There was a later "12 cylinder" diesel, but it was implemented by
means of 2 I6's side-by-side!

and quite the number of Detroit Diesel engines are all 60-degree V8s.

I can find one reference to the Detroit Diesel 8V-71 being a 60 degree V8.
(finally!)

Perhaps Arny can be useful, I also heard that the Mercruiser 454ci BB
Marine Engine was a 60-degree engine? Also American if so.

The numbers 454 should tip off any up-to-date motorhead. That's a large
block Chevvy 90 degree V8, in boater's drag. Many references to it as such
on google.