My 68' W machine dream build

[RTTOY]

A little background before getting into my build, when I was 15 years old back in 1996 I have purchased my first olds, it was a saffron yellow 68' "S" with a 250 6cyl. After selling it after a year or so, I searched for 12 years looking for the perfect project car, needless to say I found it a few months back in downtown Atlanta.

This is a frame off restoration of my 68' Cutlass "S". It will follow a theme of a dream ordered 455 68' W-30 with all the goodies.

I bought it as a non-running mostly complete car. Hope you guys enjoy the pictures and the progress.

[RTTOY]

It didn't take me long to tear into it. Glad to see if finally underway.

[MN71W30]

Great car to start with. That will be a beauty, one of all time my favorites. Here's a pic of mine back in the day. It is the only car I ever had that I actually regret selling.

[a64olz]

May the force be with you

[citcapp]

As they say "let the fun begin" Great start. keep the pictures comming as your proceed. Nice work

[csstrux]

sound like we are doing about the same thing, except yours is nicer right out of the box. Nice ride.what are plans? resto, or custom?

[Bluevista]

Nice ride, doesn't look like anybody messed with it too much at all.

Is the oil filler tube supposed to be gold and have a bend in it on those??? Document and mark that carefully so you can get the angulation correct on assembly.

[RTTOY]

Originally Posted by csstrux

sound like we are doing about the same thing, except yours is nicer right out of the box. Nice ride.what are plans? resto, or custom?

Resto-mod clone would be the best explanation of direction. I will built it as I would have like to had it ordered in 1968 as a 455 W-30 car then installed the usual fun bolt-on's like ceramic headers, aftermarket exhaust, beefed up suspension. I know I want to do the W-30 ram air package, woodgrain steering wheel, power disk brakes (currenly this car has manual 4-way drums yuck). It'll be fun watching it evolve.

[RTTOY]

Originally Posted by Bluevista

Nice ride, doesn't look like anybody messed with it too much at all.

Is the oil filler tube supposed to be gold and have a bend in it on those??? Document and mark that carefully so you can get the angulation correct on assembly.

Besides breaking 2-3 prongs off of almost every trim piece it wasn't too messed with it. Rust on the car is minimal, it will need both l/h and r/h fender patches, and some light floor pan and trunk work. But these days its tough to find anything worth saving for price I paid for this one.

[wmachine]

Originally Posted by Bluevista

Is the oil filler tube supposed to be gold and have a bend in it on those???

Yes, and yes. AC cars got the angled tubes.

[wmachine]

Originally Posted by RTTOY

Resto-mod clone would be the best explanation of direction. I will built it as I would have like to had it ordered in 1968 as a 455 W-30 car then installed the usual fun bolt-on's like ceramic headers, aftermarket exhaust, beefed up suspension. I know I want to do the W-30 ram air package, woodgrain steering wheel, power disk brakes (currenly this car has manual 4-way drums yuck). It'll be fun watching it evolve.

Okay, but a '68 W-30 was a 400, not a 455.
However, it wouldn't be original anyway, so I think you're better off with the 455: More cubes, more easily available (thus cheaper) parts, and the long stroke 400 G motors ('68-'69 400s) just don't hold up as well.

[toro68]

Question , what heads are you using on the 455?

[Techmaven]

Originally Posted by wmachine

Okay, but a '68 W-30 was a 400, not a 455.
However, it wouldn't be original anyway, so I think you're better off with the 455: More cubes, more easily available (thus cheaper) parts, and the long stroke 400 G motors ('68-'69 400s) just don't hold up as well.

The 68-9 400 is the same as a 455 save for the piston diameter. They are as rugged as any other Olds V8.

My 69 442 400/325hp had 85k when I bought it as a 19y/o and I drove it to 170k and it didn't burn or drip a drop of oil. Only thing that engine ever needed was a timing set at 160k and what Olds didn't?

Turned 14.4 at 96 so it ran strong also.

Good luck with the clone build, RTTOY.

[wmachine]

Originally Posted by Techmaven

The 68-9 400 is the same as a 455 save for the piston diameter. They are as rugged as any other Olds V8.

You and many others may have had good experiences with them, but they were *not* as rugged as *any* of the the other big blocks from .65 up. The long stroke design was not as good, and they more likely to (and did) launch pistons. This isn't my opinion, this is the experience of a lot Olds owners and even the factory backed racers of the day. Take a poll of Olds racers and ask them if they'd race one. Ask Mondello and Dick Miller if they recommend building up one.

[88 coupe]

Originally Posted by Techmaven

The 68-9 400 is the same as a 455 save for the piston diameter ........

3.87" x 4.25" = Shrouded valves and a poor bore/stoke ratio.

Originally Posted by Techmaven

........ Turned 14.4 at 96 .......

Congratulations.

Norm

[88 coupe]

Originally Posted by RTTOY

........ currently this car has manual 4-way drums ........

About 50 lbs lighter and less "drag" on the front wheels, than disks.

One of the many simple details that separated the winners from the losers.

Norm

[MN71W30]

Originally Posted by wmachine

You and many others may have had good experiences with them, but they were *not* as rugged as *any* of the the other big blocks from .65 up. The long stroke design was not as good, and they more likely to (and did) launch pistons. This isn't my opinion, this is the experience of a lot Olds owners and even the factory backed racers of the day. Take a poll of Olds racers and ask them if they'd race one. Ask Mondello and Dick Miller if they recommend building up one.

I couldn't dissagree more, I have only seen 65-67 400's blown including a batch of 425's, not the stroker 400. I pounded a 68 for years and ran 13.93@97 stock with the exhaust hooked up. I had a friend pound one for 15 years. I've never seen one blown. In stock form they run close to their advertised HP numbers. I've heard all the arguments, but I just haven't seen the proof. It doesn't make sense to build one because of the lack of cubes and cost of parts compared to a 455. Believe what you want
You'll never catch me slandering a long stroke 400.

[wmachine]

Originally Posted by MN71W30

I couldn't dissagree more, I have only seen 65-67 400's blown including a batch of 425's, not the stroker 400. I pounded a 68 for years and ran 13.93@97 stock with the exhaust hooked up. I had a friend pound one for 15 years. I've never seen one blown. In stock form they run close to their advertised HP numbers. I've heard all the arguments, but I just haven't seen the proof. It doesn't make sense to build one because of the lack of cubes and cost of parts compared to a 455. Believe what you want
You'll never catch me slandering a long stroke 400.

I don't doubt what you say. And I'm not slandering the 400Gs. Though you've never seen the proof, it is out there. Our own Joe P from Oldsmobile Wiki:
"Over Square, Under Square The G-block Olds 400 (1968 - 1969) has the worst bore-to-stroke ratio of any American V-8 ever made. Period. The undersquare 455 isn't too great, either. Of course, the Olds 350 has about the best bore/stroke ratio of any GM 350 motor. [ Thanks to Joe Padavano for this information ]"
I wouldn't say they are extremely weak, but they are just not as durable as the other Olds big blocks. I know I can dig up more on this, but quite frankly this is the first time I've ever heard it argued that they are as durable.

[MN71W30]

Originally Posted by wmachine

I don't doubt what you say. And I'm not slandering the 400Gs. Though you've never seen the proof, it is out there. Our own Joe P from Oldsmobile Wiki:
"Over Square, Under Square The G-block Olds 400 (1968 - 1969) has the worst bore-to-stroke ratio of any American V-8 ever made. Period.

If these under square and over square ratios are so important and the ultimate goal having a "square" engine, why are the new GM motors way over bored? Example LT1, LS1. They are from 8% to 11.5% off square. The 400 G was built for torque. The Olds engineers did their homework, they didn't drop the ball.
IMHO of course.

[Techmaven]

Originally Posted by wmachine

I don't doubt what you say. And I'm not slandering the 400Gs. Though you've never seen the proof, it is out there. Our own Joe P from Oldsmobile Wiki:
"Over Square, Under Square The G-block Olds 400 (1968 - 1969) has the worst bore-to-stroke ratio of any American V-8 ever made. Period. The undersquare 455 isn't too great, either. Of course, the Olds 350 has about the best bore/stroke ratio of any GM 350 motor. [ Thanks to Joe Padavano for this information ]"
I wouldn't say they are extremely weak, but they are just not as durable as the other Olds big blocks. I know I can dig up more on this, but quite frankly this is the first time I've ever heard it argued that they are as durable.

I won't argue the advantage of an early 400/425 in regard to bore/stroke ratio compared to a 400G when it pertains to a track engine but for a street engine it's a non-issue. Even so, NO tall deck Olds has a really oversqare bore/stroke ratio.

As for durability? There is no reason that this late 68-9 400 is not as strong as any other Nodular crank Olds V8. The forged crank 400-425 and rare 455 have a strength advantage for high HP builds but aside from that, anyone who claims a 400G isn't as durable as any nodular crank 455 is either a parrot of someone who is mis-informed or just sniffing glue.

[wolfman98]

Originally Posted by RTTOY

A little background before getting into my build, when I was 15 years old back in 1996 I have purchased my first olds, it was a saffron yellow 68' "S" with a 250 6cyl. After selling it after a year or so, I searched for 12 years looking for the perfect project car, needless to say I found it a few months back in downtown Atlanta.

This is a frame off restoration of my 68' Cutlass "S". It will follow a theme of a dream ordered 455 68' W-30 with all the goodies.

I bought it as a non-running mostly complete car. Hope you guys enjoy the pictures and the progress.

Saffron Yellow is the same color as my 98 convertible , I actually like it with the white interior.

[RTTOY]

I know the only 68' cars that got 455's was hurst olds, and well mine or so thats the way i'm building it. I have a donor 70' 455 that i'll paint red with a TH400, not sure which heads are on the engine. It is a factory 4 barrel.

Originally Posted by wmachine

Okay, but a '68 W-30 was a 400, not a 455.
However, it wouldn't be original anyway, so I think you're better off with the 455: More cubes, more easily available (thus cheaper) parts, and the long stroke 400 G motors ('68-'69 400s) just don't hold up as well.