Hi all,

Would be great to have your measurement on a 71 no shroud top plate,
mine is 8.5" (see pic) but the radiator is leaning toward the engine and want to
make sure the plate is ok. Thanks

 

8.5"???? From WHERE to WHERE?? Your tape measure isn't hooked onto one end in the pic....that would really help.

 

Thanks for the reply, ha ok, probably moved while holding the phone for the picture, sorry,
dimension is from the edge to center of hole , see red arrow on pic. mine is pretty much at 8 7/16".

Thanks

 

PIC below - shows the same measurement...right around 8-7/16" or so. Disregard the "hook" on the end of the tape measure.....it's lined up w/the edge of the top plate although it doesn't look like it in the pic.

Also - You can't tell in the pic but this is the SAME STYLE top plate as you have so this is a "apples-to-apples" comparison.

 

Thank you 70Post, ok so my plate is genuine (but yours look way better), so here's what I'm trying to understand, in the first pic below it's the same plate as mine and yours and in the second, a top plate for a shroud (4 core rad, AC etc)...
There's quit a difference in the position of the rad with these 2 top plates, there's a large gap between the "let's call it side panel" and center of rad tank in the 1st pic but not in the second pic.
I looked at a lot of photos of engine bay and it looks like they are all the same ! Dont know what would be the reason for the rad leaning toward the engine like this ? So I suppose the 8 7/16" dimension on our plates should be at least 1inch shorter on the plate with
shroud to bring back the rad to a straight position !

And besides, there must be a side seal in there like in 3rd picture...don't know if it would be really effective.
Thanks again and excuse my english !

 

I see what you mean. I only have '70 radiator related parts here right now....top plates, core supports and radiators but they are likely the same thing as what you have in terms of radiator placement, etc. I think the only difference b/n the '70 setup and a '71 is the slightly different stamping of the main top surface on the core/radiator support. Not sure if I'll be able to mock anything up for comparison that easily (parts in different locations)....I'll look and see.

 

Thanks I'm glad you see what I mean, this intrigues me a lot, but you don't have to mock anything for me, I will continue my investigation on this and probably other members will shim in with there knowledge.

Thanks again, happy new year.

 

I had the same issue on my 69. The radiator leaned way back towards the engine, enough that the bolts for the shroud would go in straight.

I fixed it by carefully drilling the spot welds that held the radiator mounting pocket in place, and moving them to where the radiator was almost straight, and the shroud fit.

It’s been along time, but I posted a thread on this subject. If I remember correctly, Joe had some insight.

Of course, Joe ALWAYS has useful info.

 

Thanks, maybe an olds engineering mistake ! Would love to have Joe's info on that !

 

My 2 cents: The top plate in the first picture (with the 'Sold' label) is for a non-AC car, and the top plates in the 2nd and 3rd pics are for an AC car. In the non-AC config, Olds used a 4-blade direct drive fan without a clutch, and the radiator was mounted about 1.5" further to the rear (ie closer to the engine) than in the AC configuration -Hence the top plate is wider front to rear. In the AC config, the radiator was mounted 1.5" further forward than the non-AC to allow room for the 6-blade fan and a clutch - hence the AC top plate is shorter front to rear. In both cases AC and non-AC, the lower radiator support saddles were also positioned forward (for AC) or rearward (for non-AC) so the radiator remained roughly vertical. In my attached photo, the #1 top plate came off my non-AC 72 Cutlass, and the #2 top plate came off an AC car at a junk yard. Measurements shown are approximate due to the yellow tapes moving.

 

The top plate in the first picture (with the 'Sold' label) is the same as mine, my radiator is not vertical and my lower radiator support saddles looks original, so the radiator is leaning toward the engine.
Would like to know however if the lower saddles were at the same place on AC and no AC top plate. I think so because it would affect the position of the lower hose neck of the radiator (front to rear).

Thanks

 

I think your right 72OldsCut, I was able to get a picture of the position of a lower saddle on a 70 and 71 cutlass with AC top plate (1st pic) and
the second pic is from my friend's 71 with a NO AC top plate, see the position difference in the red circle ...

 

As I said above: " In both cases AC and non-AC, the lower radiator support saddles were also positioned forward (for AC) or rearward (for non-AC) so the radiator remained roughly vertical." So NO, the lower saddles are NOT in the same place on AC and NON-AC cars.

Your last 2 pix show 2 different lower radiator supports. In the 2nd to last photo you sent, the saddles are mounted forward in the AC car position. In the last photo you sent, the saddles are mounted rearward in the NON-AC car position.

Caveat: Everything I say is related to 72 Olds Cutlass, but it's a good bet that the 70 and 71 were the same.

I refer you to "1972 Cutlass/442/Vista Cruiser Assembly Manual" which you can find on the GM Parts Wiki at http://www.t.gmpartswiki.com/.
On page 333 of that is a diagram showing the lower radiator support saddles positioned to the REAR SIDE of the lower radiator support assembly (the frame under the radiator) -- this diagram is for a NON-AC car.
On page 334 of that assembly manual is another diagram showing the lower radiator support saddles positioned to the FRONT SIDE of the lower radiator support assembly (the frame under the radiator) -- this diagram is for a car WITH AC.

I don't see a similar Assembly Manual for 70 or 71 Cutlass, but you might try looking in the "Parts and Accessories Catalog" effective Jan 1972 (covers 1965-1972) and the "Parts Illustration Catalog" effective Jan 1972 (covers 1965-1972).

I think what you might be dealing with is a car with an AC configuration of the lower radiator support assy (frame under the radiator), but with a NON-AC upper radiator support plate. That combination would make the top of the radiator lean backward toward the engine, as you described. You need to go with either the AC config or the NON-AC config (depending on if the car has AC or not) in order for the radiator to get vertical.

Hope that makes sense.
Barry

 

Thanks for the info, trying to find page 333, I found the catalog but I have to browse page by page, can you guide me on this please ?
GMPartsWiki - Oldsmobile Cutlass Assembly Manual July 1971

 

In my experience, there is no way to jump to a certain page within a document. I was told that you have to click thru every page until you get to the page you want. So enjoy your 333 clicks. I just did it myself a few days ago.

 

Ha ha ! Ok that will be fun...

Thank for your time