History Oldsmobile Jetfire Turbo Rocket V8

The 215 turbo was not really done right, 11:1 compression with a turbo in the pre-EFI, pre-variable-cam-timing days was not a good idea.

It was an era when GM was trying everything, though. Some worked, some didn't. Much of what worked was thrown out anyway, usually because it was relatively expensive and GM was unwilling to take the time to work the costs down.

So you entered this giant funnel, started in the '50s but accelerated in the middle '60s where all the innovation went in the garbage and every division had its own set of more-alike-than-different iron pushrod V8s with Quadrajets stuck on top, all the divisions moved downmarket to chase volume and cannibalized one another with products more alike than different and a little bigger and a little more ponderous every year, they handed the top of the market to the Germans on a velvet pillow while the Japanese took away the bottom, eventually the divisions were pretty much squeezed down to doing grilles and stripes and the occasional nonsense like the Buick Reatta.

Where the Japanese won wasn't in innovation, it was in production engineering - taking what everyone else figured was too expensive and making it work at the price point they needed.

GM had the 215 and 300 Buick V8s and the '65 Corvair IRS and could have wrapped them up in a Chevelle/Buick Special-sized package by '67 or so but the bean-counters would never have permitted it, the '75 Seville was forgivable as a first attempt (though it was reacting to Merc and BMW models introduced seven years earlier) but the FWD '81 thing was a joke, GM had enough trouble in the '70s but they fell off a cliff product-wise in the early '80s.

 

And let's not forget the wonderful diesel engines that damn near tanked the diesel market for everybody.

 

They did, it was called the Tempest, and eventually got the 326ci in '63.

 

My dad had one as I was just starting to get into cars. He paid $300 more for it over the straight carbed model and it was in the shop a lot-Olds mechanics couldn't quite keep the turbo in order. It was worth $300 less than a carb model when he traded it in in '65. Wish I had it now-that thing would flat out scoot! I saw one at Hershey for $15K-too rich that day.

 

I always liked the all aluminum design, so recently I am building one for my model A roadster. I used the 4.6 liter Range Rover long block and bolted all the 215 Buick stuff the the outside of it. Check out the reinforced webbing in the block along with cross drilled main caps. Pretty beefy design. With a 4 speed and a quick change should be a potent lightweight package.

 

Difference between Olds and Buick versions were primarily the heads and valve angles. The Olds has 6 head bolts around the circumference of each cylinder, the Buick only 5, because the 6th one would get in the way of some valvetrain. The blocks run down the Buick line had the boss for the 6th headbolt, but it wasn't drilled and tapped. You can run Buick heads on an Olds block and Vice Versa, and use whatever bolt pattern happens to match. The Buicks had valve covers that were "flat", so they looked like a small nailhead, where the Olds head configuration is such that the valve covers are slanted.

The Pontiac Tempest has also been mentioned. GM did some pretty cool stuff with the early 60's Tempests as well. One half of a 389 V8 (slant four) with "rope drive" to a transaxle IRS in the rear, resulting in pretty close to a 50/50 weight distribution and excellent road course manners.

 

That engine was small enough to run in the "Midget Class" however they weren't allowed to run the turbo!

There are a couple of vintage Midgets running at "Angel Park" with the Buick Pin Head motors... and I heard there is an "Olds" version in the restoration process.

 

Close, but the flexi-whip driveshaft was one of those GM ideas that didn't work, and GM gave up on the whole concept before the good '65 IRS came out.

 

That is just flat awesome. I cut my automotive teeth with turbo/efi bangers and have a NASTY boost addiction. At one time I owned 5 cars, and only one of them didn't have a hair dryer . This is neat, because it does prove a turbocharged car could be traditional. WITH a wastegate and WITH water injection! While not popular, it was a option! I find it really funny about how mechanics couldn't figure these things out. A turbo system like these cars have had to be rather simple (by today's standards) but the turbos where ALWAYS the problem. Same thing happened in the 80s when turbos made a reappearance in common cars, often the turbo was blamed, because no one knew, or wanted to learn the new technology. Just like it did in the 60's!

 

Lady in our commute car pool bought one when they first came out. Cool gal, had swaped a hi-po something for it. After the turbo lag the power came on like another passing gear, what a rush. Had all kinds of intermitant trouble with it, starting, missing, quiting, etc. Being new tech at the time the turbo system got all the initial blame, dealer even got the factory reps involved. After spending the better part of a year verifying the turbo system then replacing various wiring harnesses they finally found the problem was a defective from new ignition switch. Replaced it and no more problems driving it like she stole it. But by then she had lost confidence in the car's reliability and swapped it in a little sooner than her usual every 2 years.

Always thought there was too much potential there for GM to give up on so soon and wonderd on how many other cars did the turbos take the rap for other problems?

Ed

 

I always thought that the Olds coupe was a pretty car.

Back in the early 90s I did the exhaust on one that was mounted in a 1958 Devin glass bodied roadster. I didn't have it long enough to figure out what frame it was mounted on. He used all the factory stainless steel exhaust on the engine up to the turbine. I had to take it from the turbine discharge out and down to the customer supplied muffler....a "turbo" muffler of course. I really wanted that car. It was kinda crude even for that time but cleaned up it would be a cool piece.

Some smart hotrodder realized that the single muffler for the turbo charged Corvairs of the same years flowed better so as to not restrict the turbo's spin. That launched the whole "turbo muffler" era of the 60s-70s.

 

Here are some pics of the carb for one.I bought it for a long gone project.

 

I was involved in the development of the 215 aluminum engine and the Jetfire. I thought I posted on this before on Hamb, but don't seem to find anything now. Very long notes - want me to post?

 

I haven't seen your post, so yes, either a re-post or a link to your previous post.

 

Yes, Please! I love these motors, the more info the better. Thanks in advance.

 

I was involved in the development of the 215 aluminum engine at Oldsmobile. Here are some recollections regarding the 1963 Oldsmobile Jetfire Turbo Rocket V-8

The ‘turbo rocket fuel’ was water/alcohol. This was used to prevent detonation. The Jetfire had 10:1 compression ratio, or maybe 10.25:1. In development, we couldn’t stop that engine from burning pistons. Made great power, but kept burning pistons. So eventually Olds decided to use water-alcohol injection to cool the combustion temperatures. Water-alcohol injection was used in WW2 in supercharged aircraft engines. The injection would only happen when the boost came up, and if the fluid reservoir was empty, a sensor would trigger things so that the turbo boost would dump, to protect the pistons. There was a spare bottle of the fluid mounted beside the radiator. It was a glass bottle like the spare windshield washer fluid bottles.

Chevy had a turbo-charged Corvair available (’64 and ’65?) but their approach was different. The Corvair had a lower compression ratio and the boost came up slower to a max of about 10 psi at max revs. On the Jetfire, the boost came up fast to 5 psi and then relieved to limit the boost, which was plenty high for the street. There was a seal on the turbo relief control – you could break the seal and adjust the boost higher, but your warranty was voided. Guess what happened there.

The production 215 was actually a second version of an aluminum engine for the small car, which would be called the F-85. Originally, the 215 engine was called the X-100 engine. Kind of funny, but information got out and pictures too of the first version and were published in Motor Life Magazine, but by that time we were already working on the second version.

Olds developed the F-85 starting in 1958-59 because of a really poor economy, and released it originally in 1961 as a really cheap 4-door sedan and a station wagon (ever see a wagon?). Later we brought out a 2-door sedan, which was even cheaper than the other two models. By 1961-62 the economy had turned around, however, and the 2-door became available with a 4-barrel carburetor, bucket seats, dual exhausts, and a vinyl top and was called the Cutlass. All of a sudden the only F-85's selling were the Cutlass, and a very few 4-doors. So much for the public wanting economy cars. Then in 1963, the Jetfire was produced.

Johm Demmer of Lansing, Michigan had success drag racing a Jetfire that was built by Oldsmobile for him to race. I built the 4.56 rear axle for it.

Buick made basically the same 215 engine as the Olds, except that their engine had a typical Buick combustion chamber and the Olds had a typical Olds combustion chamber. Pontiac used the Buick engine in some of their Tempests. I hate to say it, but the Buick version produced a little more horsepower. I kind of remember the Olds had one more head bolt per cylinder too.

The first versions of this engine were cast in a high-silicon content aluminum alloy and had no cylinder sleeves or valve seats. These seemed to work fine in development, but for production engines, and long engine life, they blocks were cast with iron sleeves and the heads had pressed-in inserts. I think for 1963, the cam bearings were eliminated and the cams ran in the aluminum.

Better than the Jetfire - Olds made a non-turbo version of the 215 engine which was pretty hot too. These had 4-barrel carbs and really wild solid lifter cams. Sounded better even that the Duntov cammed Chevys. I can’t remember the horsepower numbers. The cars with this engine also had 4-speed Borg Warner transmissions. Typical of Olds, you could buy one if you knew the secret handshake.

When we were developing the new cast iron 330 V8 engine for the 1964 Cutlass, we built up some with turbos and they made big, big horsepower. Too much I think for the corporation, so the turbo never went into production on that engine. Too bad. Lots of battles about things like that.

In about 1962 or 1963 we built a 455 (394 based) Starfire with twin turbos. I can’t remember, but I think this car might have been built for an executive. Anyway, it was really nicely done with a big chrome twin air cleaner set-up. Would have been fun to drive.

Regarding Repco: I knew that some Olds 215 blocks, heads, and cranks were being shipped to England for building race engines. Oldsmobile was probably unaware of this.

The Buick V6 was a direct development of the 215 aluminum V8. The first prototype V6 I saw was actually a 215 V8 cylinder block cast in iron with the front two cylinders empty. The crank had a long nose on it to come out of the front cover, but no throw for the front two holes. This engine came from Buick to Olds for test, and I put it on the test stand to start it up for the first time. Olds had done a lot of work on V6 engines going back to the late 40’s, but all of these were 60-degree engines to get and even firing order. The Buick V6 was a 90-degree block with an uneven firing order. The Olds engineers didn’t think it would work. That V6 was very successful, but was later sold to Jeep and the machining line was shipped to Toledo. Then, when the fuel thing hit in the 70’s, GM bought the machining equipment back and shipped it to Flint where it was installed back in Plant 36 on the same foundations it had been on originally. That engine went thru a lot of development and became and even better engine. The crank became a ‘split-pin’ design, and in 1988 a balance shaft was added. I had a 1987 Buick Grand National for years, and sold it with 142,000 miles on it. Great car.

Yes, the Buick heads looked like their typical ‘nailhead’, but I kind of remember that both versions used the same manifolds. The exhaust manifolds definitely looked Buick not Olds. The first intake was for a 2-barrel with the air cleaner seated on a rail cast into the manifold. Strange. The 4-barrel that came later was more conventional.

]I always thought that the Buick horsepower advantage came from the combustion chamber not the ports. Nailhead Buicks got good power using rather small valves. The valves used to remind me of the ‘tulip’ shaped valves that some old racing engines used. Of course today modern valves are not like that at all. Too much weight. And we know a lot more about flow today.

When we were developing the engine, the first test car was a Corvair body that we modified to put the aluminum V8 in the front. Because there wasn’t clearance for the air cleaner, the hood was bumped out over the engine. No scoop, just a hump. Typical of the way things were then, someone saw the car and one of the magazines published a drawing of the ‘new small Olds’, using the Corvair body. Later, we modified several Studebaker Larks to have the new engine and the new suspension too. The spies probably wondered what we were doing with the Studebakers. Speaking of Studebakers, one time much later when I was at the GM Tech Center in Warren, I saw a Studebaker Avanti in for testing. That was when the Avanti was using a Chevy engine.

 

Ryan, Thank you for this article. Really wish I would have snatched up one of these cars, back when I got into collecting '64 Oldsmobiles. Smaller, more fuel efficiant, sportier and love the technology. Allot of good comments and info. Will subscribe to this thread.
JT

 

I put one of these engines in my MGB roadster around 1974. You can see a picture of the engine in the link in my sig. The Olds design was primarily for low end punch with 10.25:1 compression and a wastegate limited boot of 5 psi that was all in before 2,000 rpm and even that required water injection. The engine I built used the 2 barrel Olds heads that had a lower compression of about 8.8:1 and I put a stronger spring in the wastegate to get up to 15 psi boost. I also used water injection but mine was a windshield washer unit that squirted through an orifice into the carb. I originally tried a Weber carb but it wouldn't meter fuel properly over the wide range of airflow that the turbo had. The best carb was a 2" SU off of a Jag XKE with a modified needle. When the piston was all the way up the increasing airflow kept pulling more and more fuel in and provided the richness on the top that I needed. The car was really fast running 15 psi boost.

Fortunately, I was able to talk with one of the original designers of the turbo at Air Research in Phoenix and he told me that I was lucky that I hadn't destroyed the compressor wheel because at 15 psi the wheel was spinning at close to 150,000 rpm! He recommended I dial it back to 12 psi and it would probably be OK for non-sustained full boost running. It was a little disappointing at 12 psi but the engine lived for years as a daily driver until I eventually sold the engine to a guy with a dune buggy. That was probably one quick buggy.

 

I had a Jetfire. My turbo didn't survive the extra RPMs.

 

The engineer at Air research couldn't believe how lucky I was either. Must be all the clean living in my youth.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mm4wlocZRz8

 

Ya mean like this?

 

Have you ever tuned a turbocharged carbureted motor or tried to keep one in tune? Don't diss those old mechanics until you walk in their shoes. A carb is a totally different monster than your efi, especially when you consider you are taking something that operates on a vacuum signal and reversing the pressure from vacuum to boost. It's not like they had off the shelf mail order blow through carb parts back then either. Then throw in the rats nest of vacuum tubes to operate the fluid injection and waste gate, poor bearing technology in the turbo, and the added heat under the hood, it all adds up to more things that could go wrong. It's not that mechanics couldn't figure them out, they could pull all the turbo stuff off, put a four barrel on and make just as much power without all the hassle and unreliability.

And yes, turbos most always were the problem in early applications. Bearing technology did not come around until the 90's, even now they are still improving on it. Check out the clip of AJ Foyt in the 1974 Indy 500 over on the dogfight site. I can't tell you how many turbos I replaced in the Marine Corps on our AAV's due to bearing failure. You take something with that much heat, moving at an insane speed, you got to have good bearings and they didn't back then.

 

A few pictures of the Jetfire & F-85's

 

Hey Owen, good to see you here on this thread. Thanks for the history lesson!

 

found on ebay

 

possibly in the wrong forum but saw this on wichita's c/l.

http://wichita.craigslist.org/cto/2430205466.html

 

That guy's been trying to sell that car for a couple of years now. My friend and I contacted him about it last year, then heard no response to several follow-up emails and calls. Go figure.

 

Regarding the Buick/Olds parts compatability, the Buick/Rover heads will work on the Olds block but Olds heads will not work on the Buick/Rover block. Why? The extra bolts that afix the Olds heads also are used to attach the rocker arm shaft on the Olds.
I have several of the these engines. My TR7 has a 4bbl Olds with a TR8 bellhousing and Rover 5 speed. I also have a complete TR8 engine and 5 speed that I bought from a burned TR8. Several Buicks and one really interesting piece. This one attracted my attention because it had a magneto on it. What is interesting is that the bores had heavy bolt in sleeves. The bore was decreased by 5/8". I considered why anyone would do that and pondered the evidence. It had individual exhaust stacks. It had a solid lifter cam and the lifter bores were bronze bushed and the tappets were mushroom head. There was a set of steel tube fabricated intake manifolds that appear to take 48 IDA Weber carburetors. The displacement is about 2.5 liters. I am thinking it was probably in some kind of displcement limited race class. Hyroplane perhaps. It has been sitting around a long time so it was probably a fairly new engine when all of this transpired.
With fuel prices the way they are,I am seriously considering putting the 2.5 liter engine in the TR7 with a high boost turbo using the Buick 300 heads that I have to drop the compression ratio.
I got a bit off topic to the Olds turbo thread. Sorry.

 

Actually, they will if you convert to stud-type adjustable rockers and hollow pushrods for oiling. There are kits available to do this. I'm building a Rover 4.6 short block with Olds heads (for appearance) to go into my 62.