Register now to get rid of these ads!

History Oldsmobile Jetfire Turbo Rocket V8

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by Ryan, May 27, 2011.

  1. Ryan
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 1995
    Posts:
    14,880
    Location:
    Austin, TX

    Ryan
    ADMINISTRATOR
    Staff Member

  2. carbuilder
    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2006
    Posts:
    991
    Location:
    Just out of Seattle.

    carbuilder Member

    I had one of those in 1967 drove it till I drove by the Dodge dealer in lake city Washington (north end of Seattle) in 1968 proceeded to sell it the next day & bought a new 68 Hemi Charger off the show room floor. Both were a kick to drive.
  3. shmoozo
    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2007
    Posts:
    622
    Location:
    Media, PA

    shmoozo Member

    I wonder how many of those Jetfire Oldsmobiles they sold. Are there many still around?

    :cool:
  4. 28pontiac
    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Posts:
    192
    Location:
    dayton, ohio

    28pontiac Member

    I wish mine was a Jetfire!!!

    Attached Files:

    Register now to get rid of these ads!

  5. 28pontiac
    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Posts:
    192
    Location:
    dayton, ohio

    28pontiac Member

    There was a guy that had a complete turbo set-up on evil-bay, but he wanted more for the top end than I have in my entire car...

    Attached Files:

  6. joe_padavano
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2010
    Posts:
    262
    Location:
    Northern VA

    joe_padavano Member

    A friend of mine has dropped a Jetfire motor into his 62 Cutlass convertible. It's a cool and unusual setup, but it's a nightmare of plumbing. Keep in mind that this was before computer controls, so there is a mass of vacuum and pressure and fluid lines running around the engine - it almost looks like a 1970s smogger!

    The biggest problem with the Jetfire was that Olds had the brilliant idea to run high compression to combat boost lag, then limit boost to 5 psi. They still needed fluid injection (TurboRocket fluid - a water/alcohol mix). Unfortunately, most owners didn't keep the fluid tank filled and melted their motors (blaming the turbo in the process). As a result, a large number of these cars had the original turbo units replaced with conventional 4bbls when the motor was replaced. I recently picked up a 62 Jetfire parts car that had all the original trim and fluid injection system, but a 4bbl motor.
  7. cakes
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2008
    Posts:
    564
    Location:
    Charleston, SC

    cakes Member

    thats awesome, oh and you can let Mildred know I like pancakes
  8. Ramblur
    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2005
    Posts:
    2,088
    Location:
    Central Florida

    Ramblur Member


    Buick wanted the water/alcohol injection for their 80's turbo motors,but by then the "Safety Nazis" considered it a "fuel" that required a fuel tank,
    hardlines and crash testing... Fortunately they were able to tune around
    it with electronic control but the cars still came down the line with a
    "power injection" lense amongst the idiot lights albeit minus the bulb
    to light it up...:(
  9. porknbeaner
    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2003
    Posts:
    25,719
    Location:
    Raytown, MO

    porknbeaner Member

    Pretty slick. I wasn't aware that the little olds was available that way.

    I would like to get my hands on info about the liquid injection system. I have an engine that I am probably going to have to spray and have my tentative design but it would be good to have that info for comparison.

    Pretty damned slick.

    Last edited: May 27, 2011
  10. CutawayAl
    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Posts:
    2,145
    Location:
    MI

    CutawayAl Member

    I have seen a production numbers from as few as 1,300 to over 10,000.

    The system was fairly complicated. It had a wastegate AND an axillary boost limiting butterfly in the inlet that automatically closed under certain conditions. The ADI fluid system was tied into the butterfly. It had a set-up that monitored pressure in the ADI tank and ADI fluid delivery. Most mechanics didn't understand the systems. When something went wrong many were converted from turbo to carb. Things did wear out and fail, and it has been a very long time since all the unique aparts have been available. It would be a miricle to find one with a working turbo and full functional system.
  11. panheadguy
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2005
    Posts:
    684
    Location:
    S.E. WI

    panheadguy Member

    A buddy of mine had one in '64 I think , we were in HS and some things are a bit foggy. That was a wild ass car for the time. Keep the r's up and get rubber out of the first 3 gears. Ran out of the turbo juice and water worked just fine. We felt like the alcohol was there to prevent freezing. It had a wild sound to it when the waste gate opened. I could hear him coming a 1/2 mile away.
    Guy
  12. Jack Thomas
    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Posts:
    1,971
    Location:
    Maryland Eastern Shore

    Jack Thomas Member

    Cool little cars like the turbo Corvair Monzas, every town in America probably had one of each but NOT many were sold.
  13. Pro-Mac
    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2009
    Posts:
    97
    Location:
    S.F. Bay Area

    Pro-Mac Member

    Have one in our collection, My Dad bought it new in 62<O:p</O:p
    Sitting in the barn collecting dust I'll post up a couple pictures this weekend.<O:p</O:p
  14. fleetside66
    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2006
    Posts:
    1,774
    Location:
    Bethlehem, PA

    fleetside66 Member

    Back in the early 60's, my best friend's dad bought one new...an automatic. It was the best of both worlds. My buddy & I could give the thing a real workout & not have to foot the maintenance bills. I remember driving it & feeling that strange rush of the turbo-charger...a very odd feeling for the time. I never did understand the turbo fluid thing...now I know. And get this...when he traded it in, it was on a new '65 442! Oh, the humanity!
  15. DeucePhaeton
    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2003
    Posts:
    960
    Location:
    Grand Ledge, MI

    DeucePhaeton Member

    I have one in my shop that belongs to my son. We bought it in '94 and it was rescued from a salvage yard in '71 in Wyoming. A buddy bought it then and I bought it in '94. The car is on a rotisserie and will be air bagged with a 2x2 bbl intake rather than the turbo unit. Many of the turbos were removed by the dealers because they were unreliable. This car ended up in the salvage yard with less than 40,000 miles on it. When I tore down the engine it had a burned piston and the top ring had broken and bounced around from one cylinder to another.
    More info here:
    http://www.442.com/oldsfaq/ofjet.htm
    http://oldsjetfire.com/

    Production


    1962: 3,765 1963: 5,842 </pre>
  16. |Tom|
    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2009
    Posts:
    139
    Location:
    Palo Alto, California

    |Tom| Member

    I can't wait!!
  17. coilover
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Posts:
    107
    Location:
    Texas

    coilover Member

    I have a brand new never been fired one that's been sitting in my garage since around 1970. It is what I think is the early version because the intake manifold has a cast in ridge for the pressure box to seat against. All lines and linkage run through grommets to prevent pressure loss. The former president of the OCOA has a 62 that just pressurizes the carb which is the later version I'm sure. The bell housing and transmissions, both auto and standard, were unique to the all aluminum 215 engine. GM, in their infinite wisdom, sold all the inventory, tooling, and machines to Rover which still uses that engine to this day. It's increased from the original 3.5L to near 5.0 but is still the same basic engine. It's rumored GM tried to buy it back but Rover said no. The 215 was so light and strong that it was used in home built planes and was supposed to be ultra smooth when compared to a Franklin or Lycoming. Mine was destined for a Pete and Paul (plane) to replace the standard Model A engine but cancer took my brother so I'll never sell it but pass it on to one of his two boys if they show an interest.
  18. cruzincougar
    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2008
    Posts:
    543
    Location:
    Ontario in SoCal

    cruzincougar Member

    I had a 62 F85, no turbo, but it was a fairly quick stock car. I had one or 2 after dark encounters with it. Had a friend with a 289 Mustang with headers and a few other goodies, in a block, he only had me by 1/2 a car. My buddy with a 327 Powerglide 62 Impala, didn't have a chance.
    I did hear that the problem with the turbo was there was no rebuild kit. If the bearings went out, you took it off.
  19. DeucePhaeton
    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2003
    Posts:
    960
    Location:
    Grand Ledge, MI

    DeucePhaeton Member

    The Turbo engines were only available '62 and '63. What you are describing is a 2bbl intake manifold and the air cleaner sits down and seals over the intake in the ridge you are describing. I believe yours to be a 155 HP version which is the base '61 engine. Still a very nice little engine.
  20. 1950ChevySuburban
    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Posts:
    6,218
    Location:
    Tucson AZ

    1950ChevySuburban Member Emeritus

    A friend of mine had a Jetfire back in the 80s. Complete with the Rocket Fuel and everything. I seem to remember the block was aluminum? Anyway, it was a fast little car- ran great!
    We both wish he still had it.
  21. 1950ChevySuburban
    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Posts:
    6,218
    Location:
    Tucson AZ

    1950ChevySuburban Member Emeritus

    Just re-read Ryan's post again, yes it was aluminum. That engine supposedly found it's way into the Triumph TR-8 afterwards.
  22. KrisKustomPaint
    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Posts:
    1,106
    Location:
    Rhineland, MO

    KrisKustomPaint Member

    I believe that was the Buick version. The Olds was used for the repco motors. The buicks got bought by the rover group. Rover used them up until just recently. TVR's used that version as well.
  23. JEM
    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Posts:
    1,031
    Location:
    SF Bay Area, CA

    JEM Member

    GM sold the tooling to Rover, who used it in a lot of different vehicles - the Land Rover and Range Rover SUVs, the P6-series Rover 3500S and the swoopy Rover SD1 (sold in the US as the Rover 3500), it was also used in a lot of specialty Brit products like TVRs and has long been a favorite of the Brit kit-car and engine-swap community.

    The Olds and Buick versions had some absurdly trivial differences.

    The crank and heads from the later iron-block 300ci Buick will fit the US 215 Buicks with a little work.

    In production, the Rover version went to 4.0, 4.6, then a major design revision to get the 4.2 and 5.0L versions.

    Last I read the tooling had been sold to some Chinese outfit about five years ago.
  24. olds215
    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2005
    Posts:
    24
    Location:
    C-more, OK

    olds215 Member

    I have a '29 Model A CCPU that I put an Olds 215 in with an S-10 5 speed. (for sale BTW) Not a turbo - I'm using a Holley 390. A great combo in a light vehicle. The whole thing only weighs about 320# fully dressed.
    I learned a lot about "the little engine that could" in the process. Just about everything posted so far is true, and I found out that the engine was even used in a few Tempests in those years. Anyone who wants to learn more should visit www.aluminumv8.com That's the site for D&D Fabrications in MI, and IMO they are the single best source for anything you want to know about the 215. They also sell a lot of parts, both new and used.
  25. CutawayAl
    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Posts:
    2,145
    Location:
    MI

    CutawayAl Member

    All the Jetfires(both years) were draw through, no blow throughs.

    The cast iron V-6 of the same era is related and had the same flywheel housing pattern.

    When GM asked about buying the engine back, Rover gave them an offer they could refuse.
  26. 1950coronet600hp
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2009
    Posts:
    2,196
    Location:
    AZ relocated to MASS for now...

    1950coronet600hp Member

    they got the 215 turbo right... wtf happened when they designed the 301 turbo?
  27. CutawayAl
    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Posts:
    2,145
    Location:
    MI

    CutawayAl Member

    That engine came near the peak of GM's, we are GM so we can get away with anything design and engineering approach.
  28. DeucePhaeton
    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2003
    Posts:
    960
    Location:
    Grand Ledge, MI

    DeucePhaeton Member

    That was a time because of emissions and carburetors, the output of our engines sucked across the boards. It wasn't until years later and the advancement of EFI did we start seeing performance gains.
    It was a SAD time in automotive performance history esp. if you lived thru the 60s and aspired to own a factory muscle car.
  29. CutawayAl
    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Posts:
    2,145
    Location:
    MI

    CutawayAl Member

    True, but 301 engined sucked mechanically as well.
    Last edited: May 28, 2011

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2013 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.