GM testing Methanol in T-types?

[garyk1970]

ahh memories...

 

[smokinttype]

that is a really nice memory. its sad my car is gone but a lesson learned. dont let other people drive your car!

did anyone ever figure out who had the stolen one?

 

[garyk1970]

that is a really nice memory. its sad my car is gone but a lesson learned. dont let other people drive your car!

did anyone ever figure out who had the stolen one?

i know what you're saying...my wife to this day,wont drive mine....the stolen one as far as Ive heard is still MIA.....

 

[Pittsburghkid]

Would this be an overflow bottle for one of the methanol test cars?

RARE HURST OLDS/442 + BUICK GRAND NATIONAL COOLANT TANK NOS GM! # 10014451 | eBay

 

[smokinttype]

these cars had the exact same overflow tank as a normal t-type/turbo t/grandnational. this goes on a different year model.

 

[garyk1970]

these cars had the exact same overflow tank as a normal t-type/turbo t/grandnational. This goes on a different year model.

x2

 

[Pittsburghkid]

The pic you have listed in post #39 shows different. It shows the tank is modified for the location of the methanol pump.

 

[scot w.]

The pic you have listed in post #39 shows different. It shows the tank is modified for the location of the methanol pump.

That is a stock over flow reservoir in post #39 and was never modified! Also that round part is the Vacuum switch Not the methanol pump.....


SW.

 

[turbofish38]

Would this be an overflow bottle for one of the methanol test cars?

RARE HURST OLDS/442 + BUICK GRAND NATIONAL COOLANT TANK NOS GM! # 10014451 | eBay

That will fit the 81-87 Regal coupes. #10014451 was used on the NA 3.8 Regal and Cutlass models. The only difference is the location of the cap.

 

[Pittsburghkid]

That is a stock over flow reservoir in post #39 and was never modified! Also that round part is the Vacuum switch Not the methanol pump.....


SW.

I called it modified because it's different than the ones find on your standed Turbo Regal. The one I posted looked like it could be one from one of the methanol cars because of the area left open where the vacuum switch is but now that I think about it like turbofish said its one for the na 3.8 models. I wonder what a NOS overflow tank for a methanol test car would go for?

 

[scot w.]

I called it modified because it's different than the ones find on your standed Turbo Regal. The one I posted looked like it could be one from one of the methanol cars because of the area left open where the vacuum switch is but now that I think about it like turbofish said its one for the na 3.8 models. I wonder what a NOS overflow tank for a methanol test car would go for?

Not true! It's Not different than the ones on a standard TR, Mine on my car is just like it along with the 4 others I have sitting here. the overflow tanks on any of the methanol test cars were the same as all the rest on TR's NOTHING was/is different. and I would think an overflow tank is just an overflow tank and would have no additional cost just because it was on a methanol test car seeing as it had NOTHING to do with the methanol..

 

[Pittsburghkid]

Not true! It's Not different than the ones on a standard TR, Mine on my car is just like it along with the 4 others I have sitting here. the overflow tanks on any of the methanol test cars were the same as all the rest on TR's NOTHING was/is different. and I would think an overflow tank is just an overflow tank and would have no additional cost just because it was on a methanol test car seeing as it had NOTHING to do with the methanol..

Ok I'm an idiot. I saw the coolant tank I posted without even looking at the tank in my car to compare. I just knew the opening was in a different location which made the quarter round indent in the top left of the tank look more prominant and immediately thought that only existed on the methanol cars. After you said there was nothing different between a methanol overflow tank and a regular turbo regal tank I looked at mine and just shook my head at my own idiocy because for some reason I didn't think the regular turbo regal overflow tank had that quarter round indent where the methanol car has the vacuum switch. So please forgive me. :redface:

 

[tta983]

I saw Donnie at the Pontiacs in Pigeon Forge this weekend and he had the t-type with him. He has got it in great shape, and I rode in it and it runs great! Being from the Jim Reagan family this is great seeing one of Jim's old cars.
I got Jim's TTA back in 2010 and did lots of work on it fixing it up, it looks good now. This weekend Jim's wife gave me a special gift, she gave me Jim's GNX jacket XL size that he got when he bought GNX 83 new. Jim loved the Turbo-Buicks!

 

[seedling]

I know this is an old thread and it's funny I came across it. In that, I had just been telling a friend of mine about this project.

Anyways I came across some foot notes / abbreviated version of the EPA study the other day. Here is a link to that info and it actually gives specific references to two cars in particular and how they behaved (or didn't), etc.

I think it's somewhere around page 5 where they name the horsepower (300 according to study) and then on Page 7 (actual report pages are numbered slightly different than the 16 pages that show up on website). But, Car 565 and 039 are mentioned frequently from then on and throughout.

The article also confirms a lot of what is being said here as well. Such as 30 gallon stainless tank, upgraded injectors / fuel system, etc. This is a great read no matter what and yet another piece of documentation that can be added to any of the cars noted herein! Quite story with any of these cars for sure!!

http://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/...ackDesc=Results page&MaximumPages=1&ZyEntry=1

 

[seedling]

Did a little more digging and found a lot more / in-depth information. As that little 16 page document barely scratched the surface!

And the cars appear to be numbered a little differently here. And it looks like they sampled the oil of all ten every 1,000 miles in this document. And it says the cars on E85 (or M85 as they referred to it as) were basically just as reliable. Aside from being slightly more difficult to start on cold mornings than their gas brethren!

In this first link on Page 38 (31 of the report itself) they are asking final opinions and the question is, “If Methanol Fuel were available at nearly every fueling station, would you be willing to use a methanol vehicle for longer business trips?” And if they answered YES they must have asked WHY because one of the comments was, “Sure – goes like a bat out of hell!”

Then on Page 39, “If costs of running a vehicle on Gasoline or Methanol were roughly equal, which fuel would you prefer?” And under the Answer of, “Prefer Methanol by Far”. One person’s answer was, “Beats out the OPEC Cartel.” Another was Peppier, More Performance was noted numerous times and then there was this, “Performance (ZOO-Mill)”.

Here is the link on that one:

http://www.osti.gov/scitech/servlets/purl/6567072


Here is a link to a 40 Page Document where the name Martin Marietta shows up for the first time and it is stamped “MASTER”.

http://www.osti.gov/scitech/servlets/purl/6640667/


This is a 33 Page .pdf version of the report that appears to be an old scanned copy of a Library Loan Copy or Edition (kind of makes you wonder if the FED didn’t put this info out through-out the library system)?

http://web.ornl.gov/info/reports/1989/3445603007252.pdf


This appears to be the same as above, however, it is a 47 Page .pdf version of an old scanned edition of a Library Loan Copy? Weird stuff, huh?

http://web.ornl.gov/info/reports/1993/3445603700029.pdf


This appears to be the same as the two above only it is a whopping 62 Page .pdf of an old scanned version of a Library Loan Copy? Pretty Bazaar Stuff Folks!!

http://web.ornl.gov/info/reports/1990/3445603159123.pdf

These cars are so cool and I get so excited every time I find something new that I didn't know before! Feels like a kid in the candy store with a pocket full of quarters (well in my candy eating days that would do ya)!

 

[TurboDave]

Did a little more digging and found a lot more / in-depth information. As that little 16 page document barely scratched the surface!

And the cars appear to be numbered a little differently here. And it looks like they sampled the oil of all ten every 1,000 miles in this document. And it says the cars on E85 (or M85 as they referred to it as) were basically just as reliable. Aside from being slightly more difficult to start on cold mornings than their gas brethren!

!

They refer to it as M85 and NOT E85 is for a reason... They are not the same and sholuld never be confused as one for the other.
The E85 that many of you run is not M85.

 

[seedling]

They refer to it as M85 and NOT E85 is for a reason... They are not the same and sholuld never be confused as one for the other.
The E85 that many of you run is not M85.

Yeah I kept seeing references to formaldehyde and such, but, had no idea why? So what is the difference exactly?? I just assumed that this was an early on variant or designation of today's E85?? However, methanol (wiper fluid / injection spray) is obviously different than Ethanol. It is just that I have never even heard of M85 and made some pretty silly assumptions obviously!!

Thanks!

 

[turbo89]

Yeah I kept seeing references to formaldehyde and such, but, had no idea why? So what is the difference exactly?? I just assumed that this was an early on variant or designation of today's E85?? However, methanol (wiper fluid / injection spray) is obviously different than Ethanol. It is just that I have never even heard of M85 and made some pretty silly assumptions obviously!!

Thanks!

One is Corrosive as hell the other isn't .. M85 will kill parts pretty quick .. I'd never run this in anything other than a Full out Race car that gets fuel switched often ..

E85 on the other hand isn't corrosive .. partly due to the anti corrosion inhibitors put in the fuel the other is that it is ETHANOL and not METHANOL .

E85 is essentially drinking alcohol + 15% regular gas ... works unreal in Turbo Buicks

 

[John Larkin]

In the research paper it says there are accummulations of iron and wear metals in the lubricating oil. My oil gets a smoky tint on the dipstick but when I wipe it off and recheck, the oil looks clean. Iron comes from somewhere, presumably from the engine block. Is the E85 cleaning the cylinder walls so well that the natural wear against the rings is getting washed off somewhat and ending up in the oil?

 

[1986 Buick GX1]

One is Corrosive as hell the other isn't .. M85 will kill parts pretty quick .. I'd never run this in anything other than a Full out Race car that gets fuel switched often ..

E85 on the other hand isn't corrosive .. partly due to the anti corrosion inhibitors put in the fuel the other is that it is ETHANOL and not METHANOL .

E85 is essentially drinking alcohol + 15% regular gas ... works unreal in Turbo Buicks

Ethanol is corn alcohol.
Methanol is wood alcohol.