How An Apparent Vendatta Against Higher Performance Engines Undermined Engine Development at PONTIAC

A sad tale of how GM stinginess may have cost in added pollution and fuel consumption, owing to some sort of apparent strange vendetta against Pontiac Motor Division's improved engine development

Pontiac had the supreme advantage by the later 1960s, with the debut of its rendering of GM's awesome 1968-1972 A body intermediates, specifically with its endura body colored front bumber available strictly upon its GTO.

 

The development of the overhead valve Pontiac V-8, initially debut for the 1955 model year, with its 4.62" bore spacings, had advanced to the point of its 389 cid V-8 which debut for the 1959 model year, received a larger bore for model year 1967, bringing its displacement with a 3.75" stroke to 400 cid.  Due to the higher emissions of the "closed" chamber cylinder heads, such as the 1967 "670" - Pontiac engineers introduced their "open" chamber cylinder heads for model year 1968, significantly reducing particle emissions.

 

In pursuit of greater performance, Pontiac engineers embarked upon two separate paths of cylinder head development- the round exhaust port Ram Air II, and the more radical Ram Air V- the latter with a revised exhaust port arrangement to no longer have the center two ports directly next to each other (good), though changing the firing order, therefore requiring altogether different camshaft sets.  But alas the RAV had tremendously oversized intake ports, rendering it largely impractical with inferior throttle response, and was thus never released as a factory installation.

 

The Ram Air II cylinder heads were a quite decent design, good enough to evolve as the Ram Air IV.  The Ram Air II came as a 400 cid, debuting spring 1968 in the intermediate sized GTO and the compact sized Firebird.  The Ram Air II would be super-ceeded by the Ram Air IV for model year 1969, again in the GTO and Firebird.  And for 1970, again in the GTO, as well as the new for 1970 1/2 Firebird Trans Am (and plausibly the Firebird Formula, though apparently non were ordered nor built- with the RAIV weirdly not appearing in the 1970 1/2 Firebird factory literature.

Alas, both the 1968 1/2 Ram Air II and the 1969-70 Ram Air IV were hobbled by a ridiculous mandatory rear differential ration of 3.90, and an even worse option of a ratio of 4.33- essentially tractor gears giving quite poor fuel economy and excessive engine revs at freeway speeds.  Why so?  Because the engineers selected a cam shaft with incredibly excessive valve timing duration of 308 and 320 degrees respectively intake and exhaust, great for higher revs, but terrible for slower revs.  So worse fuel efficiency with greater emissions.  And due to the excessive gearing, combined with GM's insane stinginess of refusing to provide Pontiac with FORGED rather than cast connecting rods, these engines were a warranty nightmare.  So for 1970, Pontiac sought to produce a Ram Air IV with better durability.  So the plan was to start producing the Ram Air IV with the improved more durable bottom end - forged rods, crankshaft and stronger engine block of the Ram Air V; of particular note being the RAV's improved design 400 cid engine block, so improved with its integral additional lifter valley, for securing the lifter lobes (the part that activates the pushrods which transmit the motion from the cam lobes to the valves).  By doing so, that is making the engine block's lifter lobes stronger, it becomes way more practical to develop somewhat steeper opening cam lobes, for greater engine efficiency (reduced emissions with greater power and fuel efficiency).

GM would of course block what we could call the "RAV 4" - that is, the improved bottom end of the Ram Air V, combined with the eminently more sensible Ram Air IV upper end.  GM would be too stingy to give Pontiac forged steel connecting rods and crankshafts, as such had to be devoted simply to its favored division Chevrolet.  But what about the stronger block?  Unlike the forged rods and crankshaft, the stronger block represented ZERO added cost, or what, perhaps 5 cent of extra cast iron per unit?  The development and tooling was already paid for.  So why not simply make the RAV engine block the standard issue?

 

Nope.  Instead, of utilizing the already paid for research and development of the RAV block, GM has Pontiac again redesigns its 400 cid block, changing from a one year only 979914 block for 1970 (which lacks the added lifter lobe valley cross ribbing), to a new block for model year 1971, the 481988 block (which also lacks the added cross ribbing).  It is a decent block, but why so develop yet another block that lacks the added cross ribbing, rather than use what was already researched and developed?

Nonetheless, intelligent minds within Pontiac prevail to establish such an improved stronger block with the development of the SD 455.  Due to the indisputably insane April 1970 dictate by upper level corporate GM management to lower engine compression ratios all the way down to about 8 to 1 (down from 9.5- 10.5 to 1), Pontiac shifted its development from the 400 cid engine to the 455 engine.  The reason given for this was to lower NOX emissions, nevermind that drastically increased CO and HC emissions, and resulting in automobiles getting 8 mpg instead of 13 mpg, while being able to use lower grade gasoline.  Hence we got such poorly tuned engines for 1971-72, such as what occurred with a road test by High Performance Cars during 1972, with a 455HO Firebird Trans Am, with a 4 speed manual and a 3.42 differential reportedly getting 5 to 8 mpg! 

The SD455 was essentially an improved version of the 455HO.  Representing a labor of love by Pontiac engine development, it was found to have considerably better fuel economy than the 455HO, at least according to a Spring 1973 SD455 Firebird Trans Am road test report by Car & Driver magazine, reportedly 13 mpg, as well as accounts of a model year 1973 preview caravan of Pontiac models, with the SD455 equipped automobile yielding that fleets 2nd best fuel economy.

People can read up more about the SD455 story in numerous places elsewhere.

The SD455 did have the integral cast additional lifter bore reinforcements.  Yet sadly the SD455 engine block was not only not adopted as the standard block, it was discontinued along with the SD455 engine by mid 1974.

Can we dare estimate the loss of potential engine efficiency, made possible with developing more efficient camshaft lobes, denied by corporate GM's failure to include the added lifter lobe strength?

 

How much extra automobile exhaust and extra fuel consumption did such a move so result?

How "Value Capture" High Finance Dictated Housing Codes Further Economic Expoitation

"Value capture" - a friendly sounding term encountered in high finance and planning circles.

 

What it really means is value denial, value transfer or simply value theft.

 

In practice this means things as altering housing codes to give less.

 

Examples:  In housing codes:

 

First and foremost, devise a campaign crafted and financed by high finance, and embraced my much of the political spectrum, least likely Republicans, embrace reducing or eliminating parking spaces upon private properties.  We see this principally from the supposed "left" - such as nifty "progressive" sites as Dave Alpert's Greater Greater Washington, and an entire cacophony of "new urban-inst entities.  And we even see such talking points likewise touted by "free market" libertarians as Reason's Virginia Postel, chiming that residential off street parking spaces be eliminated to reduce housing prices - even in areas quite unlike say Manhattan, such as residential developments in areas with comparably low land costs.

 

Reduce housing lot sizes.  California is disgusting with this nonsense, 7300 square foot postage stamp sized lots, with the houses no more than 24 feet apart on one side and as little as 8 feet on the other, and backyards barely 18 feet deep.  Yes, in California where the developers paid little and were directed to so squeeze the properties for maximizing property tax income.  And developers that refuse to sell an added lot to a new house & lot for extra space, insisting they shall ONLY sell an extra house together with the extra house to preserve their profit.

Eliminate attics, second floors, with low roofs combined with high ceilings. And be sure to deny choice for new development, such as in Victorville, east of LA, where they are building these tiny lot sizes upon scrub lands at the edge of the Mohave Desert, while refusing to offer the house models with at least a somewhat higher roof with a second floor crawl space that the same builders DO offer in Nevada.

Eliminate basements entirely.  California does this entirely, with concrete slab.

Be sure to never dig into the side of a hill to create a partial or full lower level, not even if but slightly (e.g. for a lower level beneath a rear patio but not the house itself) but instead use truckloads worth of fill soil.

 

Be sure to make front driveways barely long enough to park even a sub compact vehicle without such overhanging the sidewalk- a ticket-able offense).

 

Be sure to not prohibit placing residential garages that face each other with a space of under say 28 feet.  Lived in such a development, in the San Elijo Hills area of San Marcos, California.  Some such spacing were over 30 if not as much as nearly 40 feet.  But ours was a mere 21 or 22 feet, insufficient for pulling an automobile straight into the garage, necessitating bringing the car's turning radii into the garage, so using the right-hand space would conflict with any car parked in the left-hand space. 

 

Downsize the size of the garages.  Pretend that any car is to be downsized from the early - mid 1970s.  Assume no more 1960s-70s traditional large cars.  Leave perhaps a single foot extra length for a traditional intermediate.  Make the garages barely wide enough, without the space to open the doors without striking the adjacent car.  If a garage lower than the main house floor - - a platform within the garage may be too close to fully open a car door.  

 

Fail to provide any meaningful lower level.  No real basement.  Claim the water table is too high even to deny a PARTIAL basement, e.g. an excavation less than required for a full 8 foot basement.  IOW ZERO excavation whatsoever, with a mere 2 or 3 foot craw-space insufficient for owners to monitor repair personal due to the line of sight being blocked by ducting.  And of course, NO storm shelter.

Fail to delineate property lines, e.g lot corner posts embossed with a town, county or state emblem.

Allow California style small lot sizes and tight house spacing to permeate rural areas.

 

Subscribe to Obama/Biden Administration Wall Street high finance advisors to "value capture" space from within new residential construction.  Reduce or eliminate "needless" space from new house constructed, such as office and shop space.  Reduce kitchen sizes, with the excuse that the space to prepare "elaborate" meals is simply unneeded as people now have take out delivery.  Be sure to exclude building bookcases into walls.  Be sure that garage space is reduced to deny any extra space for hobby activities, let alone storage space- the latter so people are more dependent upon corporate self storage businesses, so people lose their possessions from the added "value capture" for spiking such storage unit rental income.

 

See also: https://southmallblogger.blogspot.com/2023/08/so-called-value-capture-in-media.html

 

The Crafted Counter Reformation U.S. Anti Road Movement

A multitude of well funded & crafted front groups continuing repeat the same simple talking points:

 

We are always being told that adding any lanes to existing expressways adds vehicle miles traveled.  But how is that absolutely bad, particularly as we could use the extra capacity for serving a broader segment of a growing population?! This is especially so within existing urbanized areas, to accommodate more activity within an existing urbanized footprint.

Adding any such capacity increases emissions.  Which emissions?  Automobiles are getting cleaner and cleaner.  Pollution standards are tightening.  More cars are going electric, which is quite bad with the carbon front loading from the mining of the materials for, and the production of the enormous battery packs for the pure EVs (non hybrid, meaning lacking an on board small internal combustion engine to waste existing liquid fuel infrastructure while severely increasing demand upon the grid), which Biden's EPA pushes.  But asides from any emf emissions, which gets ZERO mention in the media, the EVs are quite clean in their use.

 

Expressways certainly DO add auto emissions to a given corridor, especially when there was no expressway there previously.  Just look for instance at N.Y.C.'s Cross Bronx Expressway. So why is that apparently the sole urban expressway now being consideration for retrofit with a new tunnel shell to enclose traffic emissions, equipped with various technologies to filter such exhaust?  After all, should not such technologies be made mandatory upon such high capacity roads within the more densely built urban environments?

 

Expressways of course require space, and we would want to reduce the displacement of existing dwellings while preserving space for local relocation of existing businesses that would be displaced from the most logical and feasible existing main corridor to construct new urban expressway tunnels.  

 

To better understand the planning dynamics, with what occurs within the U.S. and elsewhere, examine what occurred within the capital city, Washington, D.C. in the wake of the Kennedy assassination.  To wit, the stymieing of the inside the Capital Beltway segments of I-95, as well as the spur to I-270, following 1962-63, of the B&O Metropolitan Branch RR/above ground WMATA Red line/MARC/CSX corridor, agreed upon and endorsed by the November 1962 White House transportation report.

 

  "Significance of Using B&O Route. Use of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad corridor to bring Routes 70-S and 95 into the city is the key to meeting the need for additional highway capacity in northern Washington, Montgomery County and northwestern Prince Georges Counties and at the same time avoiding the substantial relocation of persons, loss of taxable property and disruption of neighborhoods that would result from construction of the Northeast, North Central and Northwest Freeway proposed in the 1959 plan. Further savings are realized by placing the rapid transit line to Silver Spring and Queen’s Chapel in the same railroad corridor."

 

So why was a promised for summer 1963 further detailed report not released?  

 

And, why would the report that would be released, October 1964, 11 months after 11-22-63, and mere days before the 1964 U.S.Presidential election, so deviate from the Kennedy Administration plan?

 

 “ During the preliminary line studies it became evident that in pin pointing the general corridor of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad in the District of Columbia should only be accomplished only after more detailed investigation of a band of alignments in that area”,

 

Why would it instead, scrap the tightly aligned B&O Route North Central Freeway.  Instead it examined 37 routes all over the map, with a recommended route primarily along the B&O.  But that variant had outright ridiculous deviations.  In the D.C. neighborhood of Brookland, it was pushed needlessly through the Turkey Thicket neighborhood so as to move it a bit further away from Catholic University of America).  And even worse, in Takoma Park, Maryland, deviating about 1/3 mile from the B&O insanely slashing through charming late 1800s neighborhoods, for a longer more out of the way route!

 

Rightfully so, the public broadly opposed such nonsense.  But strangely, indeed weirdly, the press failed to ask why the plans were so botched from what was proposed under the Kennedy Administration, with zero public mention by the Johnson Administration asking why.

 

By November 1966, a "supplementary" North Central Freeway report was released, that was on the right path, with a tightly aligned B&O route.  It could have used further refinement, such as making the portion just inside the District into a full cut and cover tunnel, rather then simply a widening of the existing elevated corridor at Takoma Station. Public opposition was nonetheless considerably less than the evil 1964 plan.  However, instead of further design refinements, the feds went backwards.  See 1967 Duncan Wall letter to Spiro Agnew.  By mid 1967, officials from the then recently crafted Federal Highway Authority publicly announced they were still favoring  that evil 1964 plan.  Public opposition was again heightened, and the previous approvals of the U.S. National Capital Planning Commission.were reversed by late 1968, and formally "de-mapped" by the early to mid 1970s. And quite tellingly, the federal documents concerning these "de-mappings" show, NOT the alignments of 1962 or 196, but instead that from 1964!

 

This was clearly and blatantly a crafted scuttling, assisted by a complacent and undeniable centrally controlled press, in the wake of the J.F.K assassination, for the sake of keeping the I-95 North Central Freeway from being constructed along the sole agreeable route - the B&O - with its single most important real estate holding being Catholic University of America, owned of course by the Catholic Church.

 

The propaganda behind this had two main thrusts: completely ignore this post 11-22-63 planning perversion; and pretend to this very day, that the U.S. was somehow too poor to afford constructing such urban expressways (which in this case would obviously MUST be enclosed within tunnel box with exhaust filtration, and best covered with new linear parkland), with the insistence that such facilities MUST be cancelled "for all time".

They would mean that literally. 

 

No discussion of long term planning, to say build an expanded railroad with the WMATA line and at least a extra set of tracks to separate MARC and CSX freight, nor a segmented expressway construction of initial box tunnels with space for a supplementary set to be opened when auto emission standards had resulted in a population of cleaner automobiles.

 

And therefore, NO program at a minimum to leave space for any such corridor improvements.

 

By the early 1980s, the authorities permitted development encroachment.  Just north of the Turkey Thicket neighborhood, the westernmost properties of Catholic Sisters College, previously suggested as a new industrial area for relocating businesses from directly alongside the B&O, was filled with new houses.(despite the District's shortage of industrial spaces).  And horrifically, the lightly developed, virtually building free industrial strips on BOTH sides of B&O just outside the District in downtown Silver Spring went under assault by developers insistent upon erecting large office towers, under the notion that people using the passenger rail must not have to walk perhaps a quarter or half a block to work.  No, they had to jam such buildings directly abutting the railroad with no more than 20 or so feet, the first being the office tower placed along the T.W. Perry property just north of the Silver Spring Metro, DIRECTLY on the B&O Route North central Freeway's long agreed path.  And if anyone had the idea of placing it to the B&O's west side, that area was subsequently filled with office towers, opened by 1993 and used by the National Oceanic Administration.

With the corridor in Silver Spring so blocked (and therefore requiring substantial removal by the righteous use of eminent domain for public use at perhaps well over $100 million), the corridor remained clear to the south well into the 1990s.  The Takoma Station area remained essentially flanked by parking lots, as did the stations further south at Fort Totten, and in Brookland, with a clearing next to the Pizza Hut just south of Catholic University of America.  That is, until following the publication of an article by yours truly in the July 1997 Takoma Voice, featuring the idea of a revived B&O N.C.F, as an underground, encased, set of cut and cover tunnels, including such for actually removing the elevated railroad, with the WMATA Red line and the MARC/CSX tracks relocated underground.  Include a replica of the historic 1880s Takoma station building within the new park space atop, which would be a part of a new grand northern D.C. linear park/what could be called the North Mall, in what would be called the Grand Arc project.

So what happens?  

Did the feds even bother considering the idea? 

Seemingly not.

But get this, suddenly there is this heighten effort to constrict the corridor with new "transit oriented" development.

A Yale University School of Architecture graduate starts a project to place a new residential building "Elevation 314" about 15 feet or so from the railroad's eastern side, in a blissful disregard of blatantly violating safety, next to heavy freight trains, a derailment of which would send freight cars directly into people's apartments/condos!  As if on cue, projects spout up on the corridor's west side, likewise within a freight rail derailment zone, and at a lower elevation with like safety concerns, for new residential buildings using wood frame construction touted as cheaper!

Further south, particularly in Brookland, new real estate development springs up like mushrooms, on both sides of the corridor.

 

And likewise further south.  Both around the mouth of the downtown interceptor, the underground Center Leg/better known as the 3rd Street Tunnel, and with that facility itself with the 2014+ "air rights" project which steal more than half the facility's built capacity, (not even leaving sufficient shoulders!).  Yours truly writes a series of articles at my D.C Expressway planning blog "A Trip Within The Beltway".  But not anyone else!  The media, press, television and internet ALL completely ignore the right of way surrender!  Yes, you read that right.  The media is so obviously controlled, that they abjectly fail to even dare mention this dirty deal, upon this "air rights" project, upon that downtown open trench expressway alongside Georgetown Law Center (the law school of Jesuit run, (Catholic Church owned) Georgetown University.

Just connect the dots.  The expressways are scuttled by obviously perversion of planning and manipulation of popular opinion by an orchestrated mass media, further propagated by likewise controlled activist organizations spouting the doctrinaire anti urban expressway agenda of the counter reformation.

 

Anti Road Anti Automobile Elitist Dogmas Pushed By Elitists

Principles:

 

a rigid ideology against any expansion of existing roads.

 

A rigid ideology against any new roads (outside new subdivisions)

 

A rigid ideology against roads with grade separation - bridges/tunnels - to avoid stop signs and/or traffic lights.

 

A total disregard for discussing cleaner burning renewable, safest form of improved octane Ethanol in motor vehicle fuel, if not simply a contempt for Ethanol that regurgitates American Petroleum Institute disinformation.  And if there is any positive mention of alternative fuels, its confined to "bio fuels" that are patent protected, with zero discussion of the relative production costs. (Akin to mass media reporting upon patent protected pharmaceuticals,versus those that are either already generic, or naturally occurring and therefore non patent protected).

 

A rigid insistence that countries as the U.S.A., and for such places as within New York City and Washington D..C are somehow too poor to plan both underground expressways and transit - essentially that we MUST cancel underground expressways "for all time" in order to secure additional funding for transit.

A rigid ideology to shift traffic burdens disproportionately upon less affluent areas, with Washington D.C. being what really should be a textbook example taught in planning related schools.

A rigid ideology that only bicycling or rail transit matters, never-mind the densities, distances and practicalities.

 

A rigid ideology so in favor of transit oriented development that places substantial new development - office towers as well as new residences - directly next to scarce transportation corridor to directly create conflict with future transport corridor additions as additional rail-tracks as well as expressway tunnels.

 

This same rigid ideology, so bent upon blocking transportation corridor expansion, that it has total contempt for safety by placing new development dangerously within the footprint of a rail de-derailment, particularly that of heavy rail freight cars, made even worse by placing such at a lower elevation.  The 1999 Yale University Architectural School graduate situated "Elevation 314" residence immediately south of the WMATA Takoma station, just within north-north central Washington, D.C. station a prime suitable textbook example of piss poor planning.

A disregard of basic common sense, such as supposedly favoring buses yet waxing over making streets more narrow like after a snow storm.

 

A neglect of mixed use, (asides from a few coffee and food shops within walking distance of certain transit oriented development), with absolute bans on any sort of businesses within residences, even as innoculous as software creation or web page development, let alone smaller industrial facilities upon residential zoning, even upon lots larger than 3 or 5 acres, as well as upon farms with residences.

 

Zoning prohibitions against "unregistered" and/or inoperable automobiles upon private property, particularly residential, even in one's own driveway, even if under a car cover, even within a semi open car port, even if the view is blocked by high fencing and even worse even if indoors, or perhaps limited to a single such car.