text:
Talk:Colpitts oscillator

Early comment
This is a real electrical circuit design and should exist. I am not best qualified to provide the content Rjstott 05:10, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Stability analysis
Is this your original analysis, or does it come from a published source?

 * This particular derivation is my own work, but similar analyses exist in various engineering texts. The results can be verified in a Spice simulation as well. Madhu 21:40, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

May I also ask if this section is really appropriate? If we go into this detail, many more circuit design considerations should be presented too, and the article goes beyond the level of a general encyclopedia. This section may be good work, but Wikipedia is not the place to publish, but to collect and refer to existing knowledge -- Rainglasz (talk) 22:14, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

 * I think it is. Perhaps it should be a bit more concise, but I think it's good to show exactly why the circuit oscillates. Yes, many more considerations should be added, but as with all other articles, this is still a work in progress. Feel free to add any more details you think seem fit. -Roger (talk) 06:23, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

 * Having looked at other pages (transformer), I see that the idea is to have a short, concise introduction, and then - in a structured manner - add as much detail as one is able to write :-). Thanks, Roger. -- Rainglasz (talk) 09:33, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Introduction rewrite
Basic intention was to clarify that in the circuit used in Fig. 2, the common point of the two capacitors is not output, but input of the LC tank. This required a larger rewrite and induced other changes, e.g. in the first paragraph. -- Rainglasz (talk) 22:14, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

How does it work?
Hi guys.

I'm new to electronics and oscillators are confusing to me. Would it be possible for someone to include a section describing qualitatively how the oscillator works, in reference to one of the circuit diagrams already included in the article? There's a good description of how an astable mulitvibrator works here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astable_multivibrator#Operation which I found quite useful in understanding its operation. Something like that would be quite helpful. It seems wherever I look on the net to find an explanation, most results only offer minimal, vague descriptions which I am sure is sufficient for those in the know but its hard to understand for a newcomer, particularly where it seems like there are million different ways to design or incorporate any particular type of oscillator into a circuit. Hopefully something more than 'this part is the tank circuit, this part feeds back into it to sustain oscillations'. That may (or may not) be an apt description of its operation but it requires you to just accept a lot of it on faith, if you know what I mean. Like, there is a bit of a gap going from understanding how an oscillating circuit with only a charged capacitor and an inductor works to trying to understand something more complex like this.

That's just my opinion of a novice reading the article however...

Cheers.

Gunnergrady (talk) 05:35, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

The Colpitts oscillator is a special kind of an LC-oscillator; other variants are listed under see also. IMHO it makes it no sense to illustrate the working in detail for the novice in each of these articles; this should be done in the section on LC oscillators. The first paragraph in the section implementaion should be sufficient to understand the working, provided the LC oscillator is already understood.

However, that lemma is redirected to LC circuits, which are something slightly different. Moreover, that article fails to explain the general working of LC oscillators; in so far I fully agree with your comment. Alternatively, the Armstrong oscillator should be explained in the way you missed here, because it is regarded the most simple type of LC oscillators. I have no idea why LC oscillator is redirected to LC circuit; the reasons might be no longer valid.

Also, even for me, several articles in this area contain very detailed theoretical treatments, that are very close to, if not exceeding, the boundary to original research. This makes them hard to read. However, it seems to be agreement that correct information is not deleted, provided the article is sufficiently structured, because space is not a scare resource.

Rainglasz (talk) 14:50, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Figures 1 and 2
Hi again guys,

Sorry to be a nuisance. I am still trying to get my head around how LC oscillators in general work.

The query I have is regarding Figures 1 and 2. The symbol with the designation Ic (the circle with the arrow in it) I am assuming indicates a DC current, is this correct? This is the closest symbol definition I could come up with. In any case, if there is a connection between the two capacitors straight to ground as seems to be what is indicated in the figures, the second capacitor is grounded on either side, so what role can it play in the circuit? I fully admit that I may have misinterpreted the diagram but I would like to confirm that they are actually correct.

Furthermore, wouldn't it be useful on the figures to indicate from which point in the circuit the output is taken?

Cheers,

Gunnergrady (talk) 07:17, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

 * The figure with an arrow is a DC current source. There is no connection straight to ground. A current source has an infinite impedance (unlike a voltage source that has a zero impedance). Glrx (talk) 18:41, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

 * Fair enough. You guys obviously know what you are talking about, even though it's over my head. Gunnergrady (talk) 04:28, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

More on Figures 1 and 2
I've just answered a Colpitts question over on Stack Exchange, referring them here. Figures 1 and 2, the C1 and C2 component designators get swapped between the common base and common collector versions. That's not a noob-friendly thing to do to somebody struggling with the concepts of 'ground's just another node', and 'neglecting bias components' that we experienced EEs do all the time. Does anybody feel ownership of these diagrams and be motivated to change it? Should I just change it myself once I've figured out how to do it? I'll read through the text to make sure that any references it makes are consistent with both diagrams of course, maybe even add the common emitter diagram for completeness Apostrostomper (talk) 04:00, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Figure 3
I just simulated this circuit in pSpice and it doesn't work - just look at the transistor bias voltage.

I agree with the opinion that this page doesn't explain how the circuit works - I'm no electronics newbie but I'm new to this circuit and for the first time, Wiki hasn't given me enough to get started with. I'll be back with edits once I've got my head round things.Fishtrousers (talk) 03:13, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

 * Hello, I think the biasing in Figure 3 (at the base of the transistor) should be explained in the overview, as I can't seem to find an explanation in the article as of 2014-08-14
 * I've expanded it mildly but with references. I'd appreciate if anyone more savvy could check it.
 * 190.195.122.36 (talk) 03:39, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

 * The biasing is straightforward: the resistive divider R3-R2 puts about 3 V on the base. The transistor's VBE drop will put the emitter at about 2.3 V, and emitter resistor R1 will set the collector current to about 1 mA.
 * I don't like figure 3 for many reasons. There's no AC bypass shown for the tank current. At 1 mA, rE will be about 30 ohms; the tap will transform that to 120 ohms across the coil. At 50 MHz, the reactance of 150 nH is 2 π 50 MHz 150 nH = 47 ohms. Consequently, the resonator is heavily loaded.
 * I looked on the web for better designs, but I came up dry.
 * An old Army text explains, "For minimum feedback loss, the ratio of the capacitive reactance of C1 to C2 should be approximately equal to the ratio of the output impedance to the input impedance of the transistor." I think that statement isn't quite right, but C2 should larger than C1.
 * I'd also run at a higher bias current to get a better $f_{T}$, but that triggers other problems.
 * I just don't like figure 3.
 * Glrx (talk) 23:49, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Glrx, I agree that decreasing the size of R1 will provide more accuracy in terms of frequency. However, I disagree that C2 should be bigger than C1 or that L1 is too big (if that is what you mean by overloading for L1). Try reducing R1 and using L1, C1 and C2 in the low micro range. Let me know if it works for you (I assume you use PSpice - I would be curious to know what version). If you can't get the simulation to work, I will give you the actual numbers I used. I got the equation to match my simulation at 125kHz.

I also looked on the Internet for other circuits. I simulated 5 or 6 of them including the ones in figures 1 and 2 but most of them didn't work, either because values of components are not given or because something is not shown in the schematic which prevents simulation from working like biasing (just like for figures 1 and 2 - I wonder what is the point of having a generic circuit without showing you how to bias the transistor). Out of all the circuits I simulated, the only one I got to work is the one in figure 3. I think we should ask User:Msiddalingaiah who uploaded the schematic where he got the image and if he simulated or built the circuit. The way the circuit looks does not work for me so I would think it's not practical with the current values of resistance, capacitance and inductance. Also, the frequency stated in the image does not matcth the frequency you get if you use the frequency equation. The image should be modified and replaced.

ICE77 (talk) 08:17, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

 * Decreasing R1 will make things worse. My comment about C2 is essentially sourced to TM 11-690; the input impedance of an emitter at 1 mA is about 30 Ω and the output load impedance at the collector might be 1500 Ω (XL × Qloaded = 47 × 30). Consequently the TM would recommend C2 about 7 times C1. Getting a simulation to work says nothing about good design; oscillators will oscillate with very poor Qs. Glrx (talk) 02:47, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

I modeled this in Circuit Maker and it's nowhere near 50Mhz. I get 35Mhz at Vout and see about 150MHz dumped through C3. Papwalker (talk) 07:38, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

LTspice shows it oscillating near 1.6 MHz. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.171.44.231 (talk) 18:41, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
 * for me it oscillates at 48 MHz in ltspice; maybe you aren't using realistic parasitic properties? i also used a load > 150 ohm -- Waveguy (talk) 23:53, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

-2017-02-27-

I modeled this circuit in LTSpice and it doesn't start with these values with 2N2222 transistor. I started to changing values and yes, it oscillate with 100uH and 100nF, 100nF (some audio frequencies and few-MHz also). BUT adding any parasitic series resistance to model a real world, non-ideal parts, makes this circuit more "stable" and oscillations are gone. I did this circuit quickly on a breadboard in "dead-bug" style. It doesn't work with two transistors BC546 and old UL1000 (polish '70s (early integrated circuit) part, which contains 4 NPNs and two of them can be accessed directly). Checked all parts, all connections few times. After I changed transistor I did this circuit again and still doesn't work even if I experimented with more and more values of caps and inductors. My oscilloscope was showing no oscillations but DC multimeter was showing DC voltages as on the same nodes in LTSpice. So, yes it works but only in simulation. And it works for DC. After few hours of this dissapointment I just want this circuit to be changed to something that works in real world. As Robert A. Pease wrote: My favorite programming language is ... solder.

2017-5-27

I just modeled with LTSpice and it is working. I gave initial conditions for inductor currents (0amps) and voltages(0volts) at capacitor nodes. It takes about 500us to get the oscilator to oscilate gradually. The delay is caused by 100nF capacitor is taking a while to get charged so that base of the transitor gets to its biasing voltage. I changed inductor values and checked the frequency and it is working according to the equation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.231.67.106 (talk) 05:41, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Added on 2017-5-27.

It seems if you use real inductor models and capacitor models, the oscillation amplitude is severely degraded. So be careful about series resistances of inductor and capacitors you use and also there seems to be a bug in LTSPice (ver. XVII) that real inductor models show a parallel resistance in the range of few 10s of ohms!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.231.67.106 (talk) 06:42, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

 * An IRC contact of mine built this last night (using deabdbug construction) and it works. I modeled this just now in ltspice, adding parasitic properties ESR 0.01 ohm to each 100pF and 0.4 ohm to the inductor; and it works if the heaviest load is above about 150 ohm. maybe your trouble is due to evil breadboard parasitics or too heavy load? i suggest trying manhattan construction and put the circuit in a cage -- Waveguy (talk) 23:48, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Added on 2018-8-8

Hey guys. It works in LTSpice just fine, just make sure not to start the simulation at "0". Set it to start at 1us (microsecond) and it will then work and you will see the waveform. This circuit layout definitely works for real since I built a exactly similar circuit with different values for 1Mhz on a breadboard and it oscillates perfectly on my scope, the waveform even looks as predicted. I suspect it's something to do with initial conditions or something LTSpice isn't happy about. Just start the simulation somewhere after zero seconds and it will work — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:1c1:8701:cc4e::eeb3 (talk • contribs) 19:05, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

 * A bit late I know, but... This is easily explained. An oscillator works by feeding a signal from its output to its input. The issue is that there must be a signal to feed back. In a real circuit, the amplifying device introduces a small amount of noise into the tuned circuit plus there is also excitation from voltage disturbances during power up. It may be small, but it is large enough to excite the tuned circuit and cause it to feed back some signal which grows in magnitude until the amplitude maxes out (usually due to the loop gain falling below unity as the signal reaches the limits of the amplifier).

 * In the case of any form of spice emulation, at t=0 the noise and any power up disturbance is missing, hence there is nothing to excite the tuned circuit. However advancing t a small amount creates a small DC offset which the amplifier attempts to feed back changing the input DC offset and away the circuit goes.

 * If it were possible to build the circuit for real and eliminate all noise and any other input signal, the same effect would occur - no oscillation. Applying a small DC voltage to the amplifier would be enough to start it oscillating normally expected. Such a condition is not possible in the real world, only in theory. 86.146.209.237 (talk) 16:28, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Basic Theory Description
The original text placed too much emphasis on the requirement of a capacitive feedback voltage divider. This is very misleading as the Colpitts oscillator does not require such a connection. Indeed, such a required connection was clearly contradicted by Fig 2, and the original patent drawing version. Kevin aylward (talk) 16:24, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The Colpitts is distinguished in that feedback is taken from a capacitive voltage divider across the inductor. The Clapp oscillator has a capacitive voltage divider, but it is not across the inductor; there is an extra capacitor in there.  Fig. 2 of the Colpitts patent clearly shows a capacitor voltage divider connected to the tube's cathode.   I changed the introductory text back. If you have doubts check the 4 citations at the end of the sentence. -- Chetvorno TALK 19:48, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

The citations are irrelevant. What matters is, what does the actual patent schematic show to anyone that can actually understand the schematic’s operation for themselves. Sure, there are capacitors connected together, giving the notional of a tap, but this is purely illusionary. The schematic shows a standard connection of a Colpitts oscillator that can be topologically redrawn as I show here:

Noting that, as described in the patent, the schematic relies on their being an impedance in the power supply connection.

I agree that it is not clear from the patent schematic where the ground is, but the most rational place for it is at the cathode, forming what would be the equivalent of what is invariably referred to as the standard common emitter Colpitts oscillator, i.e. a capacitor from output to ground, a capacitor from input to ground, and a *feedback* *inductor* from output to input. Irrespective of the actual patent schematic, the shown schematic is indeed a Colpitts oscillator, and does not have a capacitor feedback tap. Therefore a Colpitts oscillator description should not imply that a voltage feedback divider is required, when it is clearly not.

Kevin Aylward — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.21.243.129 (talk) 11:39, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

 * Patent figure 2 clearly has the two capacitors (labeled 16 and 13). Figure 3 of the patent does not have capacitor 13, but the text of the patent explains that the capacity of antenna 28 is used in place of 13. Patent figure 1 shows a topological Clapp, but the text explains that capacitor 21 is a blocking capacitor (DC stopping) rather than a tuning capacitor. Glrx (talk) 18:04, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * And it's not important what a Colpitts oscillator was back then. For WP what counts is the current usage in technical literature (WP:RS), such as the citations given. -- Chetvorno TALK 14:12, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Single Active Device
I have re-added in the information that the Colpitts oscillator uses only one active component. This was an absolutely crucial reason for the invention and patent of this particular oscillator. Many oscillators at the time had several tubes and consequently, were very expensive. A single tube was the key distinguishing feature of the Colpitts oscillator, and this should be noted, more so than the simple presence of two capacitors, and a single inductor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevin aylward (talk • contribs) 11:44, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

 * Do you have a source for a single tube being a distinguishing feature? My understanding is that early oscillators were all one tube affairs. The 1913 tickler oscillator was one tube. The single tube did not distinguish the 1918 Colpitts from the 1915 Hartley according to you. There was a significant effort to put many functions into a single tube (e.g., oscillator and a mixer). Glrx (talk) 17:36, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Practical circuit example
The practical circuit will need decoupling between 0v and the + side of the inductor else the power supply will form part of the tank circuit. In fact, it needs to be a low inductance, low resistance high capacitance (much higher than c1 and c2 in order not to load the tank circuit.Nick Hill (talk) 12:35, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

 * It's not a "practical schematic"; power supplies are typically viewed as a perfect short. Glrx (talk) 03:02, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

 * Agreed. But since it is described as practical, and since a modification makes the design realisable using practical components (I have built this design with real components) it would be only fair to demonstrate the supply as decoupled. This could have an added benefit of making the tank circuit structure more obvious to those with less EE experience. Nick Hill (talk) 22:21, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The practical example has now a capacitor between power supply and ground - as every RF engineer includes automatically. Simulation with LTSpice gives easy oscillation and breadboarding of circuit was immediate success, too. AndreAdrian (talk) 14:32, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Comments and question
1. It would be nice to replace figures 1 and 2 with circuits that show the bias.

2. "If the two capacitors are replaced by inductors and magnetic coupling is ignored, the circuit becomes a Hartley oscillator. In that case, the input impedance is the sum of the two inductors and a negative resistance given by: $$R_{in} = -g_m \omega ^ 2 L_1 L_2$$.

In the Hartley circuit, oscillation is more likely for larger values of transconductance and larger values of inductance.

Interestingly, the above analysis also describes the behavior of the Pierce oscillator. The Pierce oscillator, with two capacitors and one inductor, is equivalent to the Colpitts oscillator. Equivalence can be shown by choosing the junction of the two capacitors as the ground point. An electrical dual of the standard Pierce oscillator using two inductors and one capacitor is equivalent to the Hartley oscillator."

All of the above information should not be in this article. It should be in the Hartley and Pierce oscillators articles.

3. For the equation $$V_C = 2 I_C R_L \frac{C_2}{C_1 + C_2}$$, what is RL if there is an inductor at the collector?

ICE77 (talk) 08:53, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Impractical circuit schematics
I don't think any of the circuits presented in this article are practical. The common-base BJT implementation does not show biasing (file:Cb colp.svg) and neither does the common-collector BJT implementation (file:Cc colp2.svg). I simulated both of the circuits in PSpice without any success. If any of you had success, I would like to know, especially how you implemented the hidden details and what component sizes you used.

The only circuit I got to work out of the ones shown in this article is the practical implementation of the circuit (file:NPN Colpitts oscillator collector coil.svg). However, as it is, it does not oscillate and the nominal frequency is actually higher if calculated with the frequency equation and compared to the number stated in the image. I changed L1, R1, C1 and C2 to actually get something to simulate at 125kHz.

Since Colpitts and Hartley oscillators are dual circuits of each other and most schematics show an inductor on the collector of the BJT for both circuits, I believe there is a more appropriate circuit schematic that I also simulated successfully (http://www.expertsmind.com/CMSImages/1892_colpitts%20oscillator.png). In a Colpitts oscillator two capacitors are typically center-tapped and in parallel with an inductor. The Hartley oscillator has two center-tapped inductors in parallel with a capacitor.

I think this article should show practical circuits. The circuits should be simple and they should not hide important details like biasing or gain.

ICE77 (talk) 20:37, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

 * All the schematics look right; "typically center-tapped" is wrong. Glrx (talk) 03:00, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

The CB and CC schematics are too generic. They don't show biasing and using ideal current sources is just too easy.

I used "center-tapped" because it's the only way I can explain two capacitors that are joined together and shorted to ground. Maybe there is a better expression. If there is, I don't know what it is.

ICE77 (talk) 23:55, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

 * Center-tapped has nothing to do with shorting to ground. If it's not "center-tapped", then it is just "tapped". It could also be called a capacitive divider. Glrx (talk) 18:39, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

The first question is: do we need practical circuits? This is not a guide on how to build a practical circuit but an article on what a Colpitts oscillator is and what distinguishes it from other oscillator circuits. In that respect, a circuit without component values would be adequate to the task. I would say that a circuit where the inductor is not visibly in parallel with the capacitor divider might confuse readers who are not familiar with the concept that the power supply is a short circuit (to AC).

A better circuit would be one where the tuned circuit is a clear and obvious parallel circuit. If the circuit has to be practical then this one might be a better choice. I just knocked it up on a breadboard, though with a different transistor (2N3704) and a 10 micro Henry inductor and it oscillated nicely at 782 kHz. I did use ceramic capacitors which is probably why the frequency is a tad higher than it should be.

The Hartley version is here, and this one works as well though, as they suggested, I did have to replace R3 with a pot and adjust for best output. -- Elektrik Fanne 13:43, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

 * The article should have simplified schematics, but I'm not opposed to providing a complete schematic.
 * Please do not assume that a working circuit implies a good design.
 * Quick estimates show that both common-base circuits you linked are poor designs.
 * Both circuits claim an emitter current of around 20 mA, so the impedance looking into the base is about 1.5 ohms. The Colpitts circuit puts $1.5 × 4^{2} = 24$ ohms across the tank. The Hartley circuit puts $1.5 × 6^{2} = 54$ ohms across the tank. A 3.3 μH ind at 1 MHz has a reactance of about $20 j$ ohms. A 10 nF cap at 0.5 Mhz has a reactance of about $−32 j$ ohms. Welcome to the world of pathetic-$Q$ oscillators; the designs ignore resonator loading.
 * It gets worse. With a Q of 100, the tanks should have a parallel loss resistance of more than 2 kilohms. Driving 20 mA through that loss resistance produces 40 V peak -- but there's only 6 to 9 V of head room in the designs (and good designs will keep $V_{CE} > 2$ V). Component selection is off by an order of magnitude.
 * That's why WP wants reliable sources rather than somebody's blog or personal website. Glrx (talk) 18:11, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

 * Is this an article on Colpitts oscillator or is it an article on how to design a good Colpitts oscillator? I don't think it matters how good or bad a particular design is as long as demonstrates the esential features.  Why not just use the circuit and leave out the component values?  I also don't see why any particular circuit has to exist in a reference somewhere, as it is the features of the circuit that require references.  The circuit itself is just a visual aid.  The reason I would prefer a circuit where the tuned circuit is visibly a parallel circuit is because shortly after I corrected the type of resonant circuit from series to parallel over at Ignition system, the very next day, someone challenged it on the talk page.  -- Elektrik  Fanne 12:10, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Old thread, I know. I think it would be wrong to leave out components values. Exact values may not be very relevant but values in the ball park are essential to the understanding of how a circuit works. In the extreme we could consider how a 0 Ohm or 100M Ohm would change a circuit making it work (or not work) totally differently and one could argue that if a circuit does not work is the circuit at all that it purports to be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.147.20.2 (talk) 10:26, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Colpitts oscillator. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140814113015/http://www.ijeat.org/attachments/File/v2i5/E1662062513.pdf to http://www.ijeat.org/attachments/File/v2i5/E1662062513.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:32, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Practicality of circuit in diagram
The circuit has the inductor connected to the positive rail which has no RF decoupling at all. The positive rail should have a capacitor (0.01 uF) connected between it and common negative. This allows the current that is circulating between inductor and the two capacitors to do so without having to go through the power supply. In the real world, this can make the difference between the circuit oscillating and not oscillating. This is also the reason why it should not be a practical circuit - it is incomplete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:CD40:C510:5CFC:C486:54E6:F04C (talk) 05:56, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

 * Added capacitor parallel to battery, added load resistor, removed "dubious" flag. AndreAdrian (talk) 12:55, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Why no tubes?
It seems odd that right after saying it was invented in 1918, we start giving examples of transistor circuits. Wouldn't it make more sense to start with a tube circuit and then segue into the more modern implementations? RoySmith (talk) 19:19, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Colpitts oscillator


text: Category:Brands of liqueurs

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Category:Brands of liqueurs


text:
Jewish Legion (disambiguation)

The Jewish Legion (1917–1919) was the battalions of the Royal Fusiliers of the British Army that fought in World War I.

Jewish Legion may also refer to:
 * The Jewish Cavalry Regiment (1792–1794), commanded by Berek Joselewicz participated in the Kościuszko Uprising in Poland
 * The Jewish Brigade (1940–1946), part of the British Army in World War II
 * The Jewish Legion (Anders Army) (1941-1942) was a proposed unit in the Polish Anders Army in USSR during World War II

title: Jewish Legion (disambiguation)


text:
Mount Ball

Mount Ball is a mountain located on the Continental Divide, on the borders of Banff and Kootenay national parks in Western Canada. Mt. Ball is the highest peak of the Ball Range in the Canadian Rockies.

The mountain was named in 1858 by James Hector after John Ball, a politician who helped secure funding for the Palliser expedition. The name was officially adopted in 1924 based on Palliser's 1863 map of British North America.

Mt. Ball can be ascended from a scrambling route by late summer but involves remote bushwhacking, which limits the number of attempts per year. The trailhead is located at the Marble Canyon Campground in Kootenay National Park.

Geology
Mount Ball is composed of sedimentary rock laid down during the Precambrian to Jurassic periods. Formed in shallow seas, this sedimentary rock was pushed east and over the top of younger rock during the Laramide orogeny.

Climate
Based on the Köppen climate classification, Mount Ball is located in a subarctic climate zone with cold, snowy winters, and mild summers. Winter temperatures can drop below −20 °C with wind chill factors below −30 °C. This climate supports glaciers on its slopes. Precipitation runoff from the east slope drains to the Bow River via Redearth Creek, and the west slope drains into tributaries of the Vermilion River.

title: Mount Ball


text: Category:Liqueurs

title: Category:Liqueurs


text: Category:Beer

title: Category:Beer


text:
User talk:Belgsoc

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Follow the Simplified Ruleset
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Remember Neutral point of view
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

List of micronations
You may want to check out the edit war Gene and myself got on in the list of micronations. Samboy 07:23, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Edit to Micronation
Hello Belgsoc. It appears from this diff that you changed an external link from "www.atlantium.org" to "www.asiansexyshemales.com". Please don't do that. Introducing links to pornography sites into articles - whether in the course of an edit war or otherwise - is considered vandalism and can result in a ban. Regards -- sannse (talk) 15:43, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

About TTF-Bucksfan

 * Dear Belgsoc, I'm flattered that you decided to do one against User:Gene Poole, and insert an entry about the "Kingdom of Bucksfan," but you have incurred several mishaps in doing so.

 * For starters, the nation's full name is TTF-Bucksfan, or The Tallini Family-Kingdom of Bucksfan, so you actually didn't mention the entire national entity, and you also did not mention the oldest entity, the one with the most real world connections.

 * Let me also add that if you believe that TTF-Bucksfan is a "crankish vanity project with limited serious appeal," then why do you include it with the nations under the "Vehicles for the promotion of an agenda?" TTF-Bucksfan has among its citizens both a former Italian Minister of Parliament, and an Internet scientist, one of the founders of the Internet; it owns a 256-node IPv4 network, which is equivalent to the network of the Falkland Islands; it is known to several US VIPs and politicians, to many political VIPs in Italy, and is also known personally by the House of Savoy; it runs and owns 8 alternative top-level domains (TLDs); it runs a university doing quite a bit of original research; it runs a professional news agency; and finally, it is also the founder of the Fifth World Council (5WC), an IGO-NGO with 5/6 nation members, and one member happens to be a Dutch-Australian multinational. If TTF-Bucksfan is a "crank," then what do you call the rest of them, including real cranks like Atlantium, listed in the Crank.net Micronations Page as the crankiest nation (yet you made no mention of that in Atlantium's entry). Please be fair, and if you don't call Atlantium a crank, don't use such words to describe an entity with real world bank credit with the same term.

 * In the past I have placed Nova Roma under a separate micronational category (Historical Simulations), and I left the quote by Nova Roma itself, because I felt it was significant. User:Gene Poole however eliminated both the category, which was entirely appropriate in the case of Nova Roma, and he also eliminated the significant quote. I did nothing to show Nova Roma in a crankish light, and in fact the Italian article on micronations does reflect that basic decency. This is what the Nova Roma entry says in Italian: "Nova Roma (micronation), not to be confused with the historical Nova Roma, is without doubt one of the most populated micronations with over one thousand enthusiasts. Nova Roma has issued coins, and uses Latin as an official language." Did I say anything negative here? I don't believe I did, and everything stated is factual, NPOV, and Italian readers love that article that I authored.

 * Please edit that entry for TTF-Bucksfan, and eliminate the negative bias as appropriate. I cannot do that without appearing to embellish my own nation's entry. Actually TTF-Bucksfan doesn't belong under that micronational category either, because the only agenda we have is to gain independence from the US and UN one day, and I hardly call that a separate agenda when micronations are concerned; but I can live with that for the time being, even though TTF-Bucksfan really belongs under a separate category of Fifth World nations. --IndigoGenius 21:00, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * To add to what IndigoGenius says, I don't think it is appropriate for you to call this Micronation "crankish". the change where you marked it as crankish. Samboy 23:26, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Uh, dude, you have the wrong person. I never did any edits about Bucksfan and didn't call it crankish. Those edits ain't mine. Belgsoc 03:42, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Belgsoc, do you mind if I ask who you are? I'm ex-Nova Roma as you seem to be. Email if you want. snsmith1966@yahoo.com

title: User talk:Belgsoc


text:
Talk:Annoyance

VFD
From VfD:

Maeve Wickham Unsigned entry listed for VfD by Securiger -- SWAdair | Talk  06:03, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC) (Oops. Sorry about that! Securiger 01:02, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC))
 * OK, it's been much improved. I withdraw my vote for deletion. Securiger 07:21, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Delete. I'm almost on the fence on this one.  Not too long ago I noticed the dicdef nature of many of our Emotion-related articles, but they seem to have improved recently.  This one, though, has languished for six months.  Delete if not improved within five days.  SWAdair | Talk  06:07, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: I see how it attempts to be a legitimate stub by branching out to a talk on the psychology of the emotion. That's a possibility, but "annoyance" is such a nebulous condition that I wonder if psychologists can answer it.  It can mean disquiet or anger, after all.  In its present form, delete. Geogre 12:56, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not encyclopedic. - Centrx 18:23, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Neutrality 22:32, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Soft redirect to wiktionary by replacing text with template, better than deletion. Pcb21| Pete 23:27, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, much improved since it was nominated. - SimonP 14:58, Aug 17, 2004 (UTC)

end moved discussion

First person POV in certain parts should be removed
I don't have time or I would do it right now. I like the article but it is jarring and against policy to have part of it in first person. And the link to Spongebob Squarepants is a joke? Spalding 17:09, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

Clean-up
I placed the clean-up tag on this article, it needs it badly but I'm busy with other things right now and don't know where to start. The language is choppy, with poor grammar in parts. The article is stubby - little more than a dic def and needs expanded. It is also inaccurate in places. Lastly, I noticed a lot of vandalism that's not being taken care of in a reasonable amount of time. I'll watchlist it and keep an eye out for vandalism. Someone needs to take this under their wing though. ~  ONUnicorn (Talk problem solving 19:42, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * If you are willing to take some of this on, or can recruit someone, that would be appreciated quite a bit. You are 100% correct on all accounts, and it's really just a matter of who is to be the "someone" (willingness/capability/patience/etc.). I'd considered requesting edit protection, but there's not that much here to protect. The article is clearly an attractive vandalism target, as some people seem to consider it "clever" to be annoying with it. dr.ef.tymac 21:03, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

This article is rubbish
I think the title says it all. And the property of being easily angered is called being bad-tempered or irritable. Petulance is childish anger and the things that go with it, e.g. sulking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.173.31.167 (talk) 18:37, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 March 2018
2601:1C2:4B00:937:5109:CFB6:FB32:9BB7 (talk) 01:00, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Phillip is always annoying
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Rfl0216 (talk) 02:10, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Annoyance


text:
Oldsmobile 442

The Oldsmobile 4-4-2 (also known as the 442) is a muscle car produced by Oldsmobile between the 1964 and 1987 model years. Introduced as an option package for US-sold F-85 and Cutlass models, it became a model in its own right from 1968 to 1971, spawned the Hurst/Olds in 1968, then reverted to an option through the mid-1970s. The name was revived in the 1980s on the rear-wheel drive Cutlass Supreme and early 1990s as an option package for the new front-wheel drive Cutlass Calais.

The "4-4-2" name (pronounced "Four-four-two") derives from the original car's four-barrel carburetor, four-speed manual transmission, and dual exhausts. It was originally written "4-4-2" (with badging showing hyphens between the numerals), and remained hyphenated throughout Oldsmobile's use of the designation. Beginning in 1965, the 4-4-2s standard transmission was a three-speed manual along with an optional two-speed automatic and four-speed manual, but were still badged as "4-4-2"s. Because of this change, from 1965 on, according to Oldsmobile brochures and advertisements, the 4-4-2 designation referred to the 400 cubic inch engine, four-barrel carburetor, and dual exhausts. By 1968, badging was shortened to simply "442", but Oldsmobile brochures and internal documents continued to use the "4-4-2" model designation.

1964
The 4-4-2 was born out of competition between Pontiac and Oldsmobile divisions of GM. The high performance GTO version of the Pontiac LeMans intermediate had proved an unexpected success midway through the 1964 model year. Oldsmobile's hasty response was to beef up their own popular Cutlass, a task given to a team led by performance enthusiast and Olds engineer John Beltz (later responsible for the distinctive and powerful Toronado), aided by Dale Smith and division chief engineer Bob Dorshimer.

Contrasted with the 1964 Tempest LeMans GTO with its 389 cubic inch V-8 (introduced in September, 1963 as an option package), the Oldsmobile offering was a conservative package. Technically the "B09 Police Apprehender Pursuit" option, the 442 used the four-barrel carbureted 330 CID (5.4 L) V8, known as L79, but with shorter valve spring retainers, longer pushrods, M400 rod and main bearings, and high lift camshaft, raising rated (SAE gross) output to 310 hp (231.3 kW) at 5,200 rpm. Torque remained 355 lbft, although the torque peak rose from 2800 rpm to 3600 rpm. Enhanced handling was credited to the heavy duty (HD) suspension package that included HD springs (30% higher rating), HD shocks (valving with 50% more restriction), a 15/16 diameter front and 7/8 diameter rear sway bar, and boxed lower rear control arms with denser bushings. Other standard 442 equipment included Muncie M20, heavy duty clutch with higher rate springs in the pressure plate assembly, HD manual steering ratio 20:1 versus the standard ratio 24:1, performance rear axle ratio 3.36:1, dual exhaust, 14x6 HD wheels sporting 7.5 x14 US Royal 80XP Black with red stripe tire, front fender and rear decklid 442 medallions, and a dual snorkel air cleaner. The 442 was not equipped with power brakes or steering, unless added as an option. The frame, part number 3837595, was not unique or modified for the 442 option, and could be found under F85s equipped with a manual transmission. There was an HD frame option in 1964, part number 9773002; which was boxed, but it was not standard equipment for the 442. Unlike the 1965 442 model built in Lansing, the 1964 442 does not have an option code on the data plate. There is documentation available showing that the 1964 442 was built in both Lansing and Fremont.

The package was dubbed 4-4-2 based on its combination of four-barrel carburetor, four-speed manual transmission, and dual exhausts. It was available on any F-85 or Cutlass model except the station wagon, although most were Cutlass hardtop coupés (Oldsmobile archives indicate that approximately 10 four-door sedans were built with the B09 option) with an optional list price of $136 ($0 in dollars ), added to the MSRP of $2,663 ($0 in  dollars ) for the coupe and $2,773 ($0 in  dollars ) for the hardtop, along with additional optional equipment. A total of 2,999 were sold.

Motor Trend tested an early 1964 4-4-2 with a 3:55 rear axle (standard ratio was 3.36:1) and found that the 3,440-lb (1,560 kg) car ran 0–60 mph (0–96 km/h) in 7.5 seconds, the standing quarter mile in 15.5 seconds at 90 mi/h, and reached a top speed of 116 mph (185.6 km/h).

1965
With the GTO receiving GM corporate sanction to receive their full-sized car's 389 V-8, Oldsmobile followed suit and replaced the 4-4-2's standard 330 CID with the new 400 CID (6.5 L). The definition of "4-4-2" was then restated as referring to 400 cubic inches, a four-barrel carburetor (a 515 cfm Rochester four-jet), and two exhausts. Output for the big engine rose to 345 hp and 440 lbft. The standard transmission became a three-speed manual with column shifter, with a floor shifter four-speed and Oldsmobile's two-speed Jetaway automatic transmission as optional. A heavy duty three-speed with Hurst floor shifter was introduced as a mid-year option. Other touches added to the 1965 were chrome body side scoops adorned with 4-4-2 badging, chambered dual exhaust pipes, chrome single snout air cleaner, and 4-4-2 badging on the dash. Late in the year option N98 was added, which were chrome 14 x wheels. It also offered standard bucket seats when optioned on the Cutlass and a 6,000 rpm tachometer, mounted in the optional console, more as decoration than for usefulness. Retractable front seat belts were optional. The turning diameter was 41 feet.

Modern Rod tested a 1965 F85 4-4-2 with the four-speed manual, slicks, and headers and obtained a quarter mile acceleration of 13.78 seconds at 102.73 mi/h; Car Life's automatic 1965 ran the quarter mile in 15.5 seconds at 89 mi/h, with a 0 to 60 mph time of 7.8 seconds. Car and Driver tested a 1965 4-4-2 and did 0–60 mph in 5.5 seconds.

Offered in four body styles, 4-4-2 sales rose to 25,003, including 3,468 convertibles.

1966
The 1966 4-4-2 shared a modest facelift with other Cutlasses. It came with a 400 ci L78 V8 rated at 350 hp/440 lb•ft with a single four-barrel carburetor. Two new optional 400 ci engines offered even higher performance: the 360 hp L69, with three two-barrel Rochester 2GC carburetors on a progressive linkage and 440 lbft of torque, which was priced at US$264.54, and the rare W30. Besides the convertible, the 4-4-2 option was available on both hardtop and pillared coupes, which shared the same roofline. Besides the new sweeping C pillar on coupes which featured a "flying buttress" recessed rear window, the new body had high, round rear fenders giving the car a more muscular appearance.

The W30 engine added an outside-air induction system (admitting cool air to the carburetors via tubing from the front grill) and a hotter cam, under-rated as producing the same 360 hp as the L69. The battery was relocated to the trunk to make room for the air hoses, which prevented the package from being ordered on convertible models. Only 54 W30s were built by the factory, although an additional 97 were produced for dealer installation. The standard transmission was a three-speed manual with column shift and the two-speed Jetaway automatic with switch-pitch torque converter was optional. Hurst shifters became standard equipment with floor-mounted manual transmissions including the optional heavy-duty three-speed, M-20 wide-ratio four-speed or M-21 close-ratio four-speed. The standard 350-horsepower 400 engine could be ordered with any of the four transmissions, while only manual transmissions could be ordered with the L69 three two-barrel option.

Inside, a revised instrument panel featured two round pods for the speedometer and other instruments, replacing the horizontal sweep speedometer of 1964–65 models, but the rest of the basic dashboard designed was unchanged. F-85 models had base interiors with bench seats and rubber floor mats while the more lavish Cutlass versions came with full carpeting and featured Strato bucket seats of a new design with higher and thinner seat backs, or a no-cost bench seat option. Head rests were an option.

Car Life tested an L69 4-4-2 with four-speed transmission and obtained a 0–60 time of 6.3 seconds and a quarter mile of 14.8 seconds at 97 mi/h. Motor Trend's similar test car ran 0–60 mph in 7.2 seconds, with a quarter mile time of 15.2 seconds at 96.6 mi/h.

Production slumped to 21,997. The 4-4-2 still constituted only about 10 percent of Cutlass sales.

1967
For 1967 the 4-4-2's styling and base engine remained the same, save for minor trim changes, a distinctive louvered hood, and an increase in intake valve size to 2.067 from 1.99. The three-speed Turbo Hydra-Matic automatic transmission with Switch Pitch became available, replacing the two-speed Switch Pitch Jetaway, as was the case with the mid-sized muscle cars from other GM divisions (Pontiac GTO, Chevrolet Chevelle SS396, and Buick GS400). The heavy-duty floor-mounted three-speed manual transmission was now standard with the Muncie M-20 and M-21 four-speeds optional, all with Hurst shifters. Front disc brakes were a new option.

A GM policy decision banning multiple carburetors for all vehicles except Ed Cole's beloved Corvette and the Corvair saw the demise of the L69 with its triple carburetors, a rare option for Olds and an icon for Pontiacs since 1957. The W30 remained available, although the four-barrel Quadrajet carburetor replaced the tri carb setup. New red plastic inner fender liners became part of the W30 package. 502 factory W30 engines were built to meet NHRA homologation rules, along with an unknown number of dealer-installed packages. Cars tested a W30 4-4-2 with close-ratio four-speed and 4.33 rear axle (a dealer-installed only option), obtaining a quarter mile of 14.1 seconds at 103 mi/h in completely stock form. 0–60 mph times were between 6.5 and 6.7 seconds.

Unlike in previous years which the 4-4-2 option could be ordered on either baseline F-85 or upscale Cutlass models, the 1967 4-4-2 package was based on the top-line Cutlass Supreme series, including the sport coupe (with center post), Holiday hardtop coupe and convertible. Standard equipment on all models included Strato bucket seats or no-cost notchback bench seat, full carpeting, expanded Morocceen vinyl upholstery, heavy-duty suspension with rear sway bar, and wide-oval tires.

Like all cars sold in the U.S. for 1967, the 4-4-2 came standard with a group of occupant protection and accident avoidance features mandated by Federal law. This package included an energy-absorbing steering column and safety steering wheel, padded dash, recessed controls, four-way hazard flashers, and a dual-circuit brake hydraulic master cylinder.

Production rose somewhat from the previous year, rising to 24,833.

1968
The 4-4-2 became a separate model from 1968 through 1971. The wheelbase was 112 in, and over 33,000 were sold for 1968. Despite the engine displacement staying at 400 CID, the engine was based on the new 455 V8's 4.25 stroke, with the bore decreased (to 3.87). Torque came at 3000–3200 rpm as opposed to the early 400's 3600 rpm peak, mostly due to a milder base cam grind. Car Life tested a 1968 4-4-2 with a 3.42:1 rear axle ratio and Hydramatic and attained 0–60 times of 7.0 seconds, and a quarter-mile time of 15.13 seconds at 92 mi/h. Top speed was reported as 115 mi/h. The base engine was still rated at 350 hp, but only with the standard three-speed and optional four-speed; automatics were rated at 325 hp. W-30s were rated again at 360 hp. Car Life also tested a four-speed W-30 with a 4.33 rear end and recorded a 13.3 at 103.30 mi/h.

All standard 1968 4-4-2 engines are painted a bronze–copper color, as with the 1967s, topped with a fire-red air cleaner. W-30 option cars were equipped with ram air intake hoses leading from chrome-topped dual snorkel black air cleaners to special under-bumper air scoops and set off by bright red plastic fender wells. In addition, a Turnpike Cruiser option was made available with a two-barrel carburetor; this was previously available on the Cutlass Supreme for 1967. 1968 was the first year for side marker lights and front outboard shoulder belts, and the last year for vent windows on hardtops and convertibles. 4-4-2s for 1968 had unique rear bumpers, with exhaust cutouts and special exhaust tips.

Hurst/Olds
In 1968 Oldsmobile partnered with Hurst Performance Research Corporation to create the Hurst/Olds rather than just adding Hurst shifters as with earlier models. The limited regular production run of 515 Hurst/Olds (459 Holiday Coupes/56 Sport Coupes) started out as regular 4-4-2s, but were treated to numerous distinct enhancements, both cosmetic and mechanical. All cars were painted Peruvian silver (a Toronado color) with liberal black striping and white pinstripes, exterior and interior H/O badging (unique to 1968), and a real walnut wood dash insert. Mechanically, the cars left the factory with two drive train combinations. Red 455 CID engines were backed by modified W-30 Turbo 400 automatic transmissions. A/C cars got W-46 engines with 3.08:1 rears while non-A/C cars got W-45 engines with 3.91:1 rears. While both engines were rated at 390 hp, the W-45 engine received the cylinder heads from the W-30 and the camshaft from the W-31, making it more suitable for higher rpms. All cars came with bucket seats and a Hurst dual-gate shifter in a mini-console. Also standard were numerous regular 4-4-2 options such as disc brakes, heavy duty cooling, and FE2 suspension. They shared the red fender wells and ram air setup with the W-30. Popular, but not standard, additional options included the tick-tock-tach and wood-grained steering wheel. Power front disc brakes were optional.

The 1968 Hurst/Olds posted a 0–60 mph time of 5.4 seconds, and turned the 1/4 mile in 13.9 seconds at 103 mi/h.

1969
1969 4-4-2s were very similar to the 1968 except the division tooth between the grilles, the trunk lid inlets for the tail lights, wing windows deleted on Holiday Coupes and convertibles, steering lock ignition switch on the steering column, standard headrests were added to the front seats, and the paint scheme. Twin hood stripes were now available to highlight the new dual-bulged hood. The 4-4-2 numerals grew to nearly double their previous size. Optional disc brakes had updated single-piston calipers. The exhaust manifolds featured a new center divider for better performance. Other changes to the engine were minimal, but the Turnpike Cruiser option was deleted. A new optional W-32 high-performance engine was available with an automatic; it came with the W-30's forced air induction system, but had the base engine's milder cam. A total of 297 were built, including 25 sport coupes and convertibles each.

The Hurst/Olds returned, with a cameo white and fire frost gold striped paint scheme, large functional ram air mailbox hood scoops, rear pedestal spoiler, 15" SSII chrome plated rims, European racing mirrors, and a 380-horsepower 455 cid V8 that was detuned slightly from 1968. 906 production Hurst/Olds Holiday Coupes were built, plus 6 prototypes and 2 convertibles. Performance was 0–60 in 5.9 seconds, the 1/4 mile in 14.03 seconds at 101 mi/h.

1970
1970 was the pinnacle of performance from Oldsmobile. In order to keep up in the horsepower arms-race, General Motors dropped the cap on engine size in 1970, and Oldsmobile responded by making the Olds 455 V8 the standard 4-4-2 engine. Output was 365 hp and 500 lbft, with a 370 hp variant available with the W30 option. The 1970 model year can be identified by its vertical bars in silver grille, rectangular parking lights in front bumper, and vertical tail lights.

The revised body style and increased performance resulted in the 4-4-2 being awarded pace car duties at the Indianapolis 500 race in 1970. A high-performance W-30 package was offered, which added a fiberglass hood (option W25) with functional air scoops and low-restriction air cleaner, aluminum intake manifold, special camshaft, cylinder heads, distributor, and carburetor. Two W-30 equipped 4-4-2 Vista Cruisers were produced by special order. Rear shoulder seat belts were optional at $23.

Motor Trend tested a 4-4-2 W-30 with the four-speed manual transmission and 3.91:1 rear gears, clocking a quarter mile time of 14.2 seconds at 102 mi/h. However, the magazine noted that Oldsmobile engineers had earlier posted a best of 13.7 seconds on the same test car with a fresh tune.

New options for the 1970 4-4-2 included GM's variable-ratio power steering (option N47), a console-mounted Hurst Dual/Gate shifter for use with the Turbo Hydra-matic transmission, and aluminum differential housing and cover (option W27). All Oldsmobile V8s received new Positive Valve Rotators for the 1970s to increase engine valve life.

1971
Despite an industry-wide softening of muscle car sales, the 4-4-2 returned in 1971 with only minor modifications from the previous year. Engine output was down for 1971 due to a lower compression ratio (8.5:1), which affected all of GM's engines as the result of a corporate policy requiring engines to run on lower-octane regular leaded, low lead, or unleaded gasoline, in preparation for the introduction of the catalytic converter on 1975-model cars. The base 455 was rated at 340 hp, with the W-30 achieving a rating of 350 hp. The W-27 option was downgraded to an aluminum cover for the cast iron differential housing.

The 1971 4-4-2 was available in a hardtop coupe and convertible body type. The sport coupe disappeared for the first time since 1964, only to return in 1972. 1971 Model Year Appearance changes included a black grille with silver surround, silver headlight bezels, round parking lights in front bumper, and horizontal tail lights.

Quarter mile performance as reported by Road Test magazine was 15.2 seconds at 99 mi/h, and 0–60 mph in 8.9 seconds, using the TH400 automatic transmission.

1972
By 1972, the muscle car era was unmistakably in decline due to the twin blows of rising insurance rates and increasingly stringent Federal emissions standards. The 4-4-2 name reverted to an appearance and handling option package (option code W-29) in 1972 on the Cutlass Holiday coupe, Cutlass S sport coupe and Holiday coupe, and Cutlass Supreme convertible. The W-29 option was not available on Cutlass Supreme notchback hardtops. The 4-4-2 option package, which carried a modest sticker price of $29, consisted of the "FE2" suspension upgrades (heavy duty springs & shocks, front and rear sway bars, boxed lower rear control arms, and 14- by 7-in [356- by 178-mm] wheels), side striping, fender and decklid badging, faux hood louvers, and a unique grille. The rear bumper sported cutouts for exhaust tips, but only when paired with the optional L75 455 CID V8 in place of the standard Oldsmobile 350 V8. Interior trims differed on each 4-4-2 bodystyle, much like the early 1964–66 models. For the base Cutlass hardtop coupe a basic two-spoke steering wheel, vinyl or cloth/vinyl bench seat, and rubber floor mats were standard along; Cutlass S sport coupe and Holiday hardtop coupe featured full carpeting, deluxe steering wheel, courtesy lighting, and bench seats with cloth-and-vinyl or all-vinyl upholstery or optional Strato bucket seats; and the Cutlass Supreme convertible came with more woodgrain interior accents than the "S", along with an all-vinyl notchback bench seat with armrest or no-cost Strato bucket seats; a center console was optional. An AM/FM stereo radio with a tape player was $363.

4-4-2s could still be ordered with the additional W30 option, which included the still-potent L77 455 engine, rated at 300 hp and 410 lbfts of torque with standard low-restriction dual exhausts. Other notable components of the W30 package included a lightweight aluminum intake manifold, the W25 fiberglass ram-air hood, anti-spin differential with 3.42:1 gears (3.73:1 available), and heavy duty cooling. Due to the low-vacuum at idle, air conditioning was not available, and power brakes were only available with an automatic transmission. Only 113 W30 convertibles and 659 W30 coupes were produced in 1972.

A special edition Hurst/Olds paced the Indianapolis 500 in 1972. The H/O coupe was based on the notchback Cutlass Supreme Holiday coupe (not offered with the 4-4-2 option) and the Cutlass Supreme convertible, both of which came standard with a 270-net horsepower 455 Rocket four-barrel V8 or optional 300-net horsepower W-30 option 455. Both H/O engines were mated to Turbo 400 transmissions with console-mounted Hurst Dual Gate shifters. A H/O Vista Cruiser was provided for the Medical Director.

Appearance changes included a silver grille with black surround, black headlight bezels, round parking lights in front bumper, and 3-section horizontal tail lights.

1973
Originally expected to debut for the 1972 model year, the new "Colonnade" body style was delayed until 1973 due to an auto workers strike in 1972. The body was redesigned to feature massive 5 ft long doors and energy absorbing bumpers. The rear windows were fixed and the roof was reinforced in anticipation of roll-over standards being imposed by the government. These cars were a few hundred pounds heavier and slightly larger than the 1972's.

Consistent with 1972, the 4-4-2 option remained a handling and appearance package, code W-29, and was available on the Cutlass and Cutlass "S". It consisted of a faux louvered hood, FE2 suspension, specific grilles, emblems and stripes. Items such as dual exhaust and super stock wheels were optional, reflecting an industry-wide weaning of U.S. consumers from large powerful cars. Power figures are all net, rather than the earlier gross units.

The W-30 (that had 300 hp in 1972) had become a trim package. The L77 "V" code 455 was there, but only with the 4-speed wide-ratio M-20 transmission. 1973 was also the last year of the 4-speed manual transmission in the Oldsmobile "A" body. The L77 "V" code produced 270 hp, the L75 "U" code 455 AT produced 250 hp, while the "K" code 350 single exhaust produced 180 hp and the "M" code 350 with dual exhausts produced 200 hp. Positraction rear ends, axle ratios, gauges, Super Stock wheels, HD cooling and many sport type options were optional. The L77 "V" code engine was also available in the Hurst/Olds without A/C, code W-46, the W-45 L75 "U" code was standard with A/C. Both 455s used the Turbo Hydra-matic 400 transmission, while the 350 was mated to the Turbo 350.

Interior trims for the 1973 4-4-2 included a cloth/vinyl or all-vinyl bench seat and rubber mats on base Cutlass coupe, while Cutlass S included full carpeting on floor and lower door panels, woodgrain trim, deluxe steering wheel and more luxurious cloth-and-vinyl or all-vinyl bench seat, or optional swiveling Strato bucket seats with vinyl trim that could be rotated 90 degrees for easy exit/entry. Center console with floor shifter was optional with either the 4-speed manual or Turbo Hydra-matic transmissions.

1974

The 1974 4-4-2 received the same facelift as other Cutlasses that year including a revised grille and new flush taillights over a newly mandated 5 mi/h rear bumper to match the similarly mandated front bumper introduced in '73. It remained a handling and appearance package available on both base Cutlass and Cutlass S Colonnade coupes. Engine offerings included the standard 180 hp Rocket 350 four-barrel V8 or optional 230 hp Rocket 455, which reintroduced the W-30 code that signified the top 4-4-2 engine option package from 1966 to 1972. Power steering and Turbo Hydra-matic transmission became standard equipment on 4-4-2 and all other Cutlass models. The four-speed manual transmission with Hurst shifter was dropped from the option list. GM-specification radial tires were introduced as an option.

Interiors were similar to 1973 with cloth-and-vinyl or all-vinyl bench seats standard, or optional swiveling Strato bucket seats with Moroceen vinyl upholstery. The center console with floor shifter was optional with bucket seats.

1975
The 1975 4-4-2 received revised vertical-bar grilles and continued with vertically stacked taillight lenses. It was once again a handling/appearance package on base Cutlass and Cutlass S coupes with content similar to previous years. Radial tires became standard equipment, along with a GM High Energy electronic ignition.

All engines were mated to catalytic converters, which required use of unleaded gasoline and spelled the end of true dual exhausts. With economy now a selling point following the 1973–74 energy crisis, the 1975 4-4-2 and most other Cutlass models no longer included a V8 engine as standard equipment. For the first time since its 1964 introduction, the 4-4-2 came standard with a six-cylinder engine, Chevrolet's 250 cubic-inch inline unit which had previously been offered on some Oldsmobile intermediates from 1966 to 1971 and the compact Omega since its 1973 introduction. Also new was a small Oldsmobile-built 260 cubic-inch Rocket V8 specifically designed for fuel economy. The 170-horsepower 350 Rocket V8 was now an extra-cost option along with the 190-horsepower 455 V8. A three-speed manual transmission was reinstated as standard equipment with the six-cylinder engine, with the Turbo Hydra-matic transmission optional with that engine and the only transmission offered with the V8 engines. Interiors again consisted of bench seats with cloth-and-Moroceen vinyl or all-Moroceen trim, or optional swiveling Strato buckets upholstered in Moroceen vinyl. Revised door panels featured pull straps. The console remained an option with bucket seats.

Due to Detroit's conversion from SAE Gross horsepower ratings (commonly referred to as "brake horsepower" (bhp) to SAE net for the 1972 model year, and ever-more stringent Federal emissions standards, engine output continued to significantly decline. The 1975 4-4-2 equipped with a 455 was rated by Oldsmobile at just 190 hp at 3400 rpm and 350 lb-ft at 2000 rpm.

1976
The 1976 4-4-2 shared a new aerodynamic sloped nose designed for NASCAR with split grilles and new quad rectangular headlights with Cutlass S models, along with revised lower sheetmetal with fewer creases than the 1973–75 models. The 4-4-2 option was offered on Cutlass S coupes and was once again an appearance/handling package. Engine/transmission offerings were unchanged from 1975 except that the 260 V8 could be ordered with a five-speed manual transmission. This was also the final year for the 455 Rocket V8. Interiors again consisted of bench seats with cloth-and-Moroceen vinyl or all-Moroceen trim, or optional swiveling Strato buckets upholstered in Moroceen vinyl. A console was optional with bucket seats.

1977
The 1977 model year was the last for the 1973-vintage Colonnade body. The 4-4-2 was the only Oldsmobile intermediate to feature the NASCAR sloped nose from the '76 model, with the Cutlass S switching to an upright nose similar to Cutlass Supreme models. Engine offerings were revised, with Buick's 231 cubic-inch V6 replacing the base model Chevy 250 inline-six, with optional powerplants again including the Oldsmobile built 260 and 350 cubic-inch Rocket V8s. Replacing the 455 as the top engine was a new Oldsmobile 403 cubic-inch Rocket V8 rated at 185 hp and 320 lbft. Transmission offerings included a three-speed manual or Turbo Hydra-matic with the V6, five-speed manual or Turbo Hydra-matic for the 260 V8, and Turbo Hydra-matic was the sole offering for the 350 and 403 V8s. Interiors included a standard bench seat with cloth-and-vinyl or all-vinyl bench seat, or optional Strato bucket seats with all-vinyl upholstery and without the swiveling feature of previous years. The console remained optional with bucket seats.

1978
The 4-4-2 model continued on the downsized A-body platform introduced for the 1978 model year. The 1978 version of the 4-4-2 was an option package on the semi-fastback "Aeroback" Cutlass Salon, which was now the entry-level trim of the best-selling Cutlass range. It was offered with all powertrains available on the standard Cutlass, including the 231 cuin two-barrel Buick V6, 260 cuin two-barrel Oldsmobile V8, and 305 cuin Chevrolet V8s, in either two- or four-barrel form. A three-speed manual transmission was standard, and a three-speed THM200 automatic was available with all engines; a Borg-Warner five-speed manual was offered with the 260 V8 and a four-speed Saginaw manual with the 305 V8.

Distinctive trim elements included contrasting striping along the rocker panels, lower doors, and wheelwells, badging on the rear trunk, and interior emblems. All other options offered on the Cutlass Salon were available with the 4-4-2 package.

1979
The 1979 4-4-2 remained based on the Cutlass Salon body style. The Hurst/Olds rejoined the lineup this year, based on the Cutlass Calais.

1980
The 4-4-2 moved to the notchback Cutlass Calais for 1980, with some of its performance heritage returning as it gained a larger 350 cuin Oldsmobile V8 engine not available on other Cutlass models. The 231 V6 and the Chevrolet 305 were no longer offered. It included W-30 badging on the front fenders above the side marker lights, with less dramatic graphics than before. Otherwise, the car shared identical powertrain with the 1979 Hurst/Olds, excepting the Hurst shifter. Also available only in gold over white or gold over black paint, a total of 886 were built: 540 in black, and 346 in white.

The MSRP of a Cutlass Calais in 1980 was $6,919.57 (~$ in ). Option W-30 4-4-2 appearance and handling package consisted of: gold accent paint scheme (Y71), painted grille face, applique pillar molding, aluminum sport wheels, "W-30" decals on front fender, tail lamp bezel and rear window molding to match body color, "442" emblem on sail panel and deck lid, 5.7 liter engine (350 CID) V8, 4-bbl (L34), sport console (D55), Rallye suspension package (FE2), P205/70R14 steel belted radial ply blackwall tires with raised white letters (QFV) and a digital clock (UE8). The W-30 4-4-2 option was not available in California.

The 4-4-2 was not available from 1981 to 1984.

Fifth generation
The 4-4-2 name was revived in 1985 on the rear-wheel drive G-body Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme due to the demise of Oldsmobile and Hurst's official collaboration on the Hurst/Olds but Oldsmobile wanted to continue to offer a performance-oriented Cutlass model to the public. The name was now defined as referring to the car's four-speed 200r4 automatic transmission, four-barrel carburetor, and two exhausts. This W42 model replaced the 1983 and 1984 Hurst/Olds models and used the same 5.033 L LG8 V8. The shifter was mounted on the floor in a console between the front seats, and the upgraded F41 suspension package was included. 3,000 were produced in the first year, and all were sold quickly. 4,273 were produced for 1986, and 4,208 were made in 1987.

All 1985 and 1986 4-4-2s used the already-sporty Cutlass Salon model as their base platform. Due to cost concerns, for 1987 it was decided they would use the less-expensive Cutlass Supreme model to base the 4-4-2 on. The package included a beefier drive train, 15 X 7 fully chromed styled-steel wheels with gold trim, manually inflated air shocks in the rear, special paint scheme (always silver at the bottom) and gold body stripe decal package, dual-snorkel air cleaner with chrome lid, mandatory A/C and door panel 4-4-2 emblems. With few exceptions (vinyl tops, painted pinstripes, chrome outside mirrors and wire wheel covers, for example), 4-4-2s could be ordered with much of the optional equipment found on other Cutlass models.

The 1984 Hurst/Olds and 1985–87 4-4-2 were equipped with an 8.5-inch GM corporate differential and all were equipped with 3.73:1 ring and pinion final drive gears. Rather than using the weaker 7.5-inch rear differential found in the Monte Carlo SS, these models used the same stout unit found in the Buick Grand National. Many 4-4-2s (and G-body Hurst/Olds) did not come with RPO G80 (limited-slip). This was, in large part, due to dealer ordering "packages" that grouped popular options together for ease of ordering. Problem was, G80 was not part of a single one of those popular option packages, but could be added a la carte.

The 1983–84 Hurst/Olds and 1985–1987 4-4-2s are distinguishable by there being a "9" as the engine code found in the 8th character of their VINs. These were the only models to get the hotter VIN 9 307 cubic inch engine, and it was the only engine available. From 1983 to 1985, this engine was flat-tappet valve train, and rated at 180 hp/240 lb•ft torque. In 1986, the 307 engine received a roller-camshaft valve train and new swirl-port heads to improve economy and low-end torque. HP dropped to 170, with torque climbing to 255LBS FT. The 1985 4-4-2 used an OZ code THM 200-4R transmission (as did the 1983–84 Hurst/Olds). Both 1986 and 1987 4-4-2 used the KZF code THM 200-4R. The KZF removed much of the shift harshness of the original OZ coded transmissions, but were still firmer than the run-of-the-mill overdrive transmissions used in the rest of Oldsmobile's lineup.

Sixth generation
The 442 option was revived on the Quad 442 front-wheel drive 1990–1991 Cutlass Calais. This model used a 2.3 L LG0 Quad-4 four-cylinder engine with four valves per cylinder and two camshafts. The engine was tuned with higher output camshafts which produced more top end power at the expense of idle quality. It used a single exhaust with a dual tipped muffler and produced 180 hp with a five-speed manual transmission.

This version of the 442 also played upon the "W-30" option code used in past versions of the 442, the exception being that this model used the option code "W-40". A low production, late 1991 model year version used the option code "W-41"; the key differences of the "W-41" package were a 190 hp engine with a differently geared five-speed transmission.

This 442 model lasted just two years.

Production totals:

1990 "W-40" = 2,629

1991 "W-40" = 1,160

1991 "W-41" = 204

GM literature referred to the 1992 and 1993 Oldsmobile Achieva SCX as a 442, the last time the designation was used. The Achieva SCX used the same W41 drive train as the very limited production 1991 Quad 442 W41.

Engines

 * 1968-69 Oldsmobile 400 CID 4-barrel V8 (3.87 in (98 mm) bore and 4.25 in (108 mm) stroke) 290 hp
 * 1970 Oldsmobile 455 CID 4-barrel V8 (4.126 in (104.8 mm) bore and 4.25 in (108 mm) stroke) 370 hp
 * 1971 Oldsmobile 455 CID 4-barrel V8 (4.126 in (104.8 mm) bore and 4.25 in (108 mm) stroke) 340 hp; W30 350 hp
 * 1972 L32 350 CID 2-barrel V8, (160 hp and 275 lbft in 1972) [H or J in VIN]
 * 1972 L34 350 CID 4-barrel V8, (180 hp and 275 lbft in 1972) [K in VIN]
 * 1972 L34 350 CID 4-barrel V8 w/N10 dual exhaust, (200 hp and 275 lbft in 1972) [M in VIN]
 * 1972 W30 455 CID 4-barrel V8, (300 hp and 410 lbft in 1972) [X in VIN w/ TH400 and M20]
 * 1972 L75 455 CID 4-barrel V8, (250 hp w/ TH400 and 370 lbft in 1972) [U in VIN]
 * 1972 L75 455 CID 4-barrel V8, (270 hp w/ M20 and 370 lbft in 1972) [V in VIN] – used 2.07 valves and W30 automatic camshaft
 * 1973–1976 455 CID V8
 * 1973–1977, 1980 350 CID V8

title: Oldsmobile 442


text: Category:Brands

title: Category:Brands


text: User talk:24.164.184.203

title: User talk:24.164.184.203


text:
Shaughnessy Cohen

Elizabeth Shaughnessy Cohen ( Murray; February 11, 1948 – December 9, 1998) was a Canadian politician who represented the riding of Windsor—St. Clair for the Liberal Party of Canada from 1993 until her death in 1998.

Background
She was born in London, Ontario, and grew up in Thamesville. She studied English literature and sociology at the University of Windsor, and taught at St. Clair College before returning to law school. She married Jerry Cohen, a psychology professor, in 1971. She had originally intended to keep her own surname, but opted to take her husband's name when she realized it would make her both Irish and Jewish.

She was called to the Bar of Ontario in 1979, and worked as a lawyer until her election to Parliament.

1988 and 1993 Federal Elections
Cohen stood as the Liberal candidate in Windsor—St. Clair in the 1988 election, but lost to New Democratic Party incumbent Howard McCurdy. However, in the 1993 election, Cohen defeated McCurdy for the seat. Following the election, she was briefly the subject of controversy when she and her husband were sued for $200,000 in unpaid debt, but Cohen blamed the situation on the costs of conducting a political campaign and the controversy soon subsided after she agreed to a debt consolidation plan.

Member of Parliament
Her first political action after being sworn in as a Member of Parliament was a letter requesting that the federal government building in Windsor be named after former MP Paul Martin, Sr., a request which the government accepted. After the first sitting of the new parliament in January 1994, Cohen was the first newly elected MP to be subjected to a critical profile in Frank, although both Cohen and the Windsor Star criticized the profile's accuracy.

In February 1994, Cohen was appointed to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Human Resources and Development. In June, she was one of several Liberal MPs, alongside Jean Augustine, Barry Campbell, Bill Graham and Hedy Fry, who privately intervened with Ontario Liberal Party leader Lyn McLeod to encourage her not to withdraw the party's support of the Equality Rights Statute Amendment Act (Bill 167). In August, she was appointed co-chair with Herb Gray of a parliamentary subcommittee to investigate allegations against the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, including the role of Grant Bristow as an informant.

On the final day of the 1995 Ontario provincial election campaign, Cohen was one of several MPs, alongside Jane Stewart, Paddy Torsney, Benoît Serré and Stan Dromisky, who made speeches in the federal House of Commons campaigning on behalf of McLeod's Ontario Liberal Party and against the Ontario Progressive Conservative Party of Mike Harris.

In September 1995, she was one of only a few MPs to vote in favour of Réal Ménard's private member's motion calling on the government to recognize same-sex marriage.

In January 1996, she travelled to the Middle East as an election monitor for the Palestinian Authority election. In March, she was appointed to and named as chair of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice. In this capacity, she conducted a review of the federal Young Offenders Act, which led to reforms announced by Justice Minister Anne McLellan in 1998.

She was re-elected in the 1997 election by a narrower margin, due to a significant resurgence in support for the New Democratic Party. Her NDP challenger was Joe Comartin. In her second term, she identified one of her key goals as advocating for a crossnational environmental project to clean up pollution in the Detroit River.

Death in House of Commons
On December 9, 1998, she collapsed in the House of Commons, just minutes after she had stood to address the House. Three MPs, that were doctors, rushed to her desk and performed CPR on her until paramedics took over about ten minutes later. Reform Party MP Grant Hill was one of those doctors, and said she had a pulse when the paramedics rushed her to the hospital. She had suffered a cerebral hemorrhage and was pronounced dead soon afterward at Ottawa Civic Hospital. She was the fifth MP in Canadian history to die on Parliament Hill, and the first ever to suffer a fatal health incident in the House of Commons chamber rather than in her office or on the wider Parliament Hill grounds.

In the House the following day, MPs from all parties spoke in tribute to Cohen. Reform Party MP Randy White praised her personality as "a seemingly impossible combination of vigorous partisanship and open-minded friendship," while New Democratic Party leader Alexa McDonough paid tribute to Cohen's passionate belief in "the pursuit of justice for the rights of those who were not being fully respected." Historian Charlotte Gray, a personal friend of Cohen's, revealed that Cohen had once filled the glass on Paul Martin's House of Commons desk with gin just before a budget speech, while Liberal Party strategist Jerry Yanover described her as "an up-front, in-your-face, old-fashioned Liberal, the kind that had principles and didn't compromise them." Following the speeches, MPs unanimously agreed to immediately adjourn the House for the Christmas holiday, several days earlier than planned.

Her funeral was held Saturday, December 12, with prime minister Jean Chrétien and almost the entire federal cabinet attending the service. Over 800 people attended the funeral held at St. Anne's Catholic Church in Tecumseh. She was cremated after the church ceremony and her ashes were buried on Pelee Island, Canada’s most southern inhabited land. Her gravesite can be found in the municipal cemetery.

Following her death, her widower Jerry Cohen ran for the Liberal nomination in the resulting by-election, but lost to city councillor Rick Limoges. Limoges won the by-election, narrowly defeating the NDP's Comartin by 91 votes, although Comartin defeated Limoges in the 2000 election.

Legacy
In 2000, the Writers' Trust of Canada instituted a literary award, the Shaughnessy Cohen Award for Political Writing, in her memory. Journalist Susan Delacourt published a biography of Cohen, Shaughnessy: The Passionate Politics of Shaughnessy Cohen, the same year.

Electoral record

 * New Democratic Party
 * Howard McCurdy
 * align="right"|18,915
 * Liberal
 * Shaughnessy Cohen
 * align="right"|16,192
 * Progressive Conservative
 * Bruck Easton
 * align="right"|8,453

 * Liberal
 * Shaughnessy Cohen
 * align="right"| 22,958
 * New Democratic Party
 * Howard McCurdy
 * align="right"| 8,871
 * Progressive Conservative
 * Tom Porter
 * align="right"|4,553
 * Reform
 * Greg Novini
 * align="right"|4,153

 * Natural Law
 * Stephanie Moniatowicz
 * align="right"|194
 * Marxist-Leninist
 * Dale Woodyard
 * align="right"|61
 * Abolitionist
 * Ayesha F. Bharmal
 * align="right"|52

 * Liberal
 * Shaughnessy Cohen
 * align="right"|16,496
 * New Democratic Party
 * Joe Comartin
 * align="right"|14,237
 * Reform
 * Harold Downs
 * align="right"|5,899
 * Progressive Conservative
 * Bruck Easton
 * align="right"|4,253

 * Marxist-Leninist
 * Dale Woodyard
 * align="right"|115

title: Shaughnessy Cohen


text:
Mupirocin

Mupirocin, sold under the brand name Bactroban among others, is a topical antibiotic useful against superficial skin infections such as impetigo or folliculitis. It may also be used to get rid of methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) when present in the nose without symptoms. Due to concerns of developing resistance, use for greater than ten days is not recommended. It is used as a cream or ointment applied to the skin.

Common side effects include itchiness and rash at the site of application, headache, and nausea. Long term use may result in increased growth of fungi. Use during pregnancy and breastfeeding appears to be safe. Mupirocin is chemically a carboxylic acid. It works by blocking a bacteria's ability to make protein, which usually results in bacterial death.

Mupirocin was initially isolated in 1971 from Pseudomonas fluorescens. It is on the World Health Organization's List of Essential Medicines. In 2021, it was the 203rd most commonly prescribed medication in the United States, with more than 2million prescriptions. It is available as a generic medication.

Medical uses
Mupirocin is used as a topical treatment for bacterial skin infections (for example, boils, impetigo, or open wounds), which are typically due to infection by Staphylococcus aureus or Streptococcus pyogenes. It is also useful in the treatment of superficial methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections. Mupirocin is inactive for most anaerobic bacteria, mycobacteria, mycoplasma, chlamydia, yeast, and fungi.

Intranasal mupirocin before surgery is effective for prevention of post-operative wound infection with Staphylcoccus aureus and preventative intranasal or catheter-site treatment is effective for reducing the risk of catheter site infection in persons treated with chronic peritoneal dialysis.

Resistance
Shortly after the clinical use of mupirocin began, strains of Staphylococcus aureus that were resistant to mupirocin emerged, with nares clearance rates of less than 30% success. Two distinct populations of mupirocin-resistant S. aureus were isolated. One strain possessed low-level resistance (MuL: MIC = 8–256 mg/L), and another possessed high-level resistance (MuH: MIC > 256 mg/L). Resistance in the MuL strains is probably due to mutations in the organism's wild-type isoleucyl-tRNA synthetase (IleS). In E. coli IleS, a single amino acid mutation was shown to alter mupirocin resistance. MuH is linked to the acquisition of a separate Ile synthetase gene, MupA. Mupirocin is not a viable antibiotic against MuH strains. Other antibiotic agents, such as azelaic acid, nitrofurazone, silver sulfadiazine, and ramoplanin have been shown to be effective against MuH strains.

Most strains of Cutibacterium acnes, a causative agent in the skin disease acne vulgaris, are naturally resistant to mupirocin.

Most strains of Pseudomonas fluorescens are also resistant to mupirocin as they produce the antibiotic and it's possible other species of Pseudomonas may be resistant as well.

The mechanism of action of mupirocin differs from other clinical antibiotics, rendering cross-resistance to other antibiotics unlikely. However, the MupA gene may co-transfer with other antibacterial resistance genes. This has been observed already with resistance genes for triclosan, tetracycline, and trimethoprim. It may also result in overgrowth of non-susceptible organisms.

A second type of high-level resistant synthetase was discovered in 2012 and termed MupB. It was found in a Canadian MRSA isolate "MUP87" and is probably located on a nonconjugative plasmid.

Mechanism of action
Pseudomonic acid inhibits isoleucine—tRNA ligase in bacteria, leading to depletion of isoleucyl-tRNA and accumulation of the corresponding uncharged tRNA. Depletion of isoleucyl-tRNA results in inhibition of protein synthesis. The uncharged form of the tRNA binds to the aminoacyl-tRNA binding site of ribosomes, triggering the formation of (p)ppGpp, which in turn inhibits RNA synthesis. The combined inhibition of protein synthesis and RNA synthesis results in bacteriostasis. This mechanism of action is shared with furanomycin, an analog of isoleucine.

Inhibition of the tRNA ligase/synthase is brought by the structural similarity between the molecule's monic acid "head" part and isoleucyl-adenylate (Ile-AMS). The unique 9-hydroxynonanoic acid "tail" wraps around the enzyme and further stabilizes the complex, keeping the catalytic part stuck. Mupirocin is able to bind to bacterial and archaeal versions of the enzyme, but not eukaryotic versions.

Biosynthesis

Mupirocin is a mixture of several pseudomonic acids, with pseudomonic acid A (PA-A) constituting greater than 90% of the mixture. Also present in mupirocin are pseudomonic acid B with an additional hydroxyl group at C8, pseudomonic acid C with a double bond between C10 and C11, instead of the epoxide of PA-A, and pseudomonic acid D with a double bond at C4` and C5` in the 9-hydroxy-nonanoic acid portion of mupirocin.

Biosynthesis of pseudomonic acid A
The 74 kb mupirocin gene cluster contains six multi-domain enzymes and twenty-six other peptides (Table 1). Four large multi-domain type I polyketide synthase (PKS) proteins are encoded, as well as several single function enzymes with sequence similarity to type II PKSs. Therefore, it is believed that mupirocin is constructed by a mixed type I and type II PKS system. The mupirocin cluster exhibits an atypical acyltransferase (AT) organization, in that there are only two AT domains, and both are found on the same protein, MmpC. These AT domains are the only domains present on MmpC, while the other three type I PKS proteins contain no AT domains. The mupirocin pathway also contains several tandem acyl carrier protein doublets or triplets. This may be an adaptation to increase the throughput rate or to bind multiple substrates simultaneously.

Pseudomonic acid A is the product of an esterification between the 17C polyketide monic acid and the 9C fatty acid 9-hydroxy-nonanoic acid. The possibility that the entire molecule is assembled as a single polyketide with a Baeyer-Villiger oxidation inserting an oxygen into the carbon backbone has been ruled out because C1 of monic acid and C9' of 9-hydroxy-nonanoic acid are both derived from C1 of acetate.

Monic acid biosynthesis
Biosynthesis of the 17C monic acid unit begins on MmpD (Figure 1). One of the AT domains from MmpC may transfer an activated acetyl group from acetyl-Coenzyme A (CoA) to the first ACP domain. The chain is extended by malonyl-CoA, followed by a SAM-dependent methylation at C12 (see Figure 2 for PA-A numbering) and reduction of the B-keto group to an alcohol. The dehydration (DH) domain in module 1 is predicted to be non-functional due to a mutation in the conserved active site region. Module 2 adds another two carbons by the malonyl-CoA extender unit, followed by ketoreduction (KR) and dehydration. Module three adds a malonyl-CoA extender unit, followed by SAM-dependent methylation at C8, ketoreduction, and dehydration. Module 4 extends the molecule with a malonyl-CoA unit followed by ketoreduction.

Assembly of monic acid is continued by the transfer of the 12C product of MmpD to MmpA.

Post-PKS tailoring
The keto group at C3 is replaced with a methyl group in a multi-step reaction (Figure 3). MupG begins by decarboxylating a malonyl-ACP. The alpha carbon of the resulting acetyl-ACP is linked to C3 of the polyketide chain by MupH. This intermediate is dehydrated and decarboxylated by MupJ and MupK, respectively.

The formation of the pyran ring requires many enzyme-mediated steps (Figure 4). The double bond between C8 and C9 is proposed to migrate to between C8 and C16. Gene knockout experiments of mupO, mupU, mupV, and macpE have eliminated PA-A production. PA-B production is not removed by these knockouts, demonstrating that PA-B is not created by hydroxylating PA-A. A knockout of mupW eliminated the pyran ring, identifying MupW as being involved in ring formation.

The epoxide of PA-A at C10-11 is believed to be inserted after pyran formation by a cytochrome P450 such as MupO. A gene knockout of mupO abolished PA-A production but PA-B, which also contains the C10-C11 epoxide, remained.

9-Hydroxy-nonanoic acid biosynthesis
The nine-carbon fatty acid 9-hydroxy-nonanoic acid (9-HN) is derived as a separate compound and later esterified to monic acid to form pseudomonic acid. 13C labeled acetate feeding has shown that C1-C6 are constructed with acetate in the canonical fashion of fatty acid synthesis. C7' shows only C1 labeling of acetate, while C8' and C9' show a reversed pattern of 13C labeled acetate. It is speculated that C7-C9 arises from a 3-hydroxypropionate starter unit, which is extended three times with malonyl-CoA and fully reduced to yield 9-HN. It has also been suggested that 9-HN is initiated by 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaric acid (HMG). This latter theory was not supported by feeding of [3-14C] or [3,6-13C2]-HMG.

It is proposed that MmpB to catalyzes the synthesis of 9-HN (Figure 5). MmpB contains a KS, KR, DH, 3 ACPs, and a thioesterase (TE) domain. It does not contain an enoyl reductase (ER) domain, which would be required for the complete reduction to the nine-carbon fatty acid. MupE is a single-domain protein that shows sequence similarity to known ER domains and may complete the reaction.

title: Mupirocin


text:
Von der Decken's hornbill

Von der Decken's hornbill (Tockus deckeni) is a hornbill found in East Africa, especially to the east of the East African Rift, from Ethiopia south to Tanzania. It is found mainly in thorn scrub and similar arid habitats. Jackson's hornbill is often treated as a subspecies of it. It was named after the German explorer Baron Karl Klaus von der Decken (1833–1865).

Description
This species is a small hornbill with blackish upperparts and mainly whitish underparts and head. It has a long tail and a long curved bill which lacks a casque. It is similar to the red-billed hornbill except for the bill colour and the lack of spotting on the wing coverts in both male and female.

The species shows sexual dimorphism; the female has a black bill, whereas the male has a red bill with a cream tip and a black cutting edge.

Breeding
During incubation, the female lays two or three white eggs in a tree hole, which is blocked off with a cement made of mud, droppings and fruit pulp. There is only one narrow aperture, just big enough for the male to transfer food to the mother and chicks.

When the chicks and the female are too big for the nest, the mother breaks out and rebuilds the wall. Then both parents feed the chicks.

Captive breeding can be achieved by providing a small barrel or hollow tree with an entrance hole 5 inch tall and 3 inch wide. The birds will block off the hole once the hen is ready.

Food and feeding
Von der Decken's hornbill is omnivorous, taking insects, fruit and seeds. It feeds mainly on the ground and will form flocks outside the breeding season. In captivity, Von Der Decken's hornbill will readily eat papaya, cantaloupe, blueberries, bananas, and apples. Live food such as crickets and mealworms should also be offered daily. Small rodents are readily taken but should only be offered two or three times a week.

title: Von der Decken's hornbill