Bernhard

I thought your car ran that number my mistake.

Bernhard

My 1969 442 post 4speed bench seat car arrived on Monday. This will be the plat form for my 400 G block street strip car. I hope to run the car at the track to get a base line.

oldsmobiledave

Still waiting for you to get around to posting pics of your new car.

Bernhard

Hi Dave
I still have to learn how, I just learned how to post pictures on the free add sites so I'm halfway there. I tried to add a sig line with the new car but failed. I really need to take some how two lessons on computers, this self teaching is not working very well.

oldsmobiledave

This will get you started. Hope you do not mind me posting these for you.

Nice car & congrats. Looking forward to seeing it restored.

T2eC16Rw0E9szNYhFVBQLndyLV48_20_zpsfb0794ed.jpg

T2eC16NHJF0E9nmFQinLBQLndc5w48_20_zpsd1fd05b3.jpg

Bernhard

Thanks Dave.
It would have taken me a long time before I got them up.
I hope to sonic test a 400 G block this year, one that we spun the rod bearings on back in 1980.
I hope it has thick a bores as others have said. This car will take some time before It will be street /strip ready.

droptopron

Wow, that is a nice car to start with. Good luck with it.

gearheads78

My 68 442 feels like a solid low 13 sec car if it had traction. I've been around a lot of cars that did see track time so I am usually pretty accurate with my butt-o-meter.

Big Features

My bone stock 1968 442 has 77k on the clock and I ran a 14.81 @ 92.11 MPH.
That's on 14x6 street tires, full 2 1/4 exhaust and 3.08 posi.

RROLDSX

Hey Bernhard, how’s your 69 442 coming along? Look forward to letting our cars meet at a cruise in somewhere.

Randy

Bernhard

I'm still collecting parts but hope to start media blasting the body- shell,frame, suspension etc early next year. The first step is to get all the metal stripped and in primer. I wanted to do every aspect of the restoration myself but have been giving this a serious rethink

ctosiflying

ctosiflying

VORTECPRO

You know how to determine its potential to a small degree. NHRA Stock Eliminator.

I would say high 10s.

Bernhard

Nice
For the weight of the car the 3.42 rear gear and the stock nature of you build I would say solid performance.

Bernhard

Bernhard wrote:
Mark with your skill set and experience you would extract the maximum potential out of the 400 G, it would be interesting to see how far you could take the small bore engine.
I'm building a period correct Jr stock. In 69 the 400 G in JR stock ran a best of 12:20, on 7'' slicks and far more restricted rules than we find in today's NHRA stock.
My pockets are not deep enough to run a modern stock program, and even if they were I very committed to seeing my project through.
So from the start my build potential is limited by the 69 NHRA rule book and what was available back in 69.
I will be running factory spring pressure and Oldsmobile's 69 cheater cam that was given to the factory supported racers.

VORTECPRO

What is the bore size of the 400 G?

Sounds like a fun project. Have you heard of a cam called a Eonic?

Bernhard

Bore 3.870 stroke 4.250

Max over bore in 1969 .030

Max over bore today .080

OLDSter Ralph

The stock intake manifold and carburetor were the only "legal" intake manifold and carburetor in "stock"classes back then.
What "cheater cam that was given to the factory supported racers" are you referring to ? Most racers back in that era ran a factory ground cam or a Lunati "cheater cam". All cams had to be as the "advertised" duration and lift. Steeper opening and closing ramps were probably different than what came from the "factory". Valve spring pressure (closed) was also required, if I remember correctly.
Berjik Olds could run 12.0's under ideal conditions with the long stroke 400, but they held the record for a while at 12.20, as I recall.

Bernhard

https://www.supercarsunlimited.com/i....aspx?nid=1133


I talked to the son of one of the factory racers. Oldsmobile gave his father this cam.

OLDSter Ralph

Its the #402569 cam, nothing secret about that.

VORTECPRO

So I guess this is not the 400 combination that runs D/S. What is the bore of the 1966 400? Al Steinmetz told me in the 80s they used to like to use a factory race cam called a "Eonic" cam.

OLDSter Ralph

There is a typo in this ad. Its a 328/328 cam, not 328/348.

Bernhard

I was told this is the cam and I don't think it is a typo.
NHRA checked lift and valve spring height and pressure from my understanding.

Bernhard

The 400 E engine is better choice for a performance build with its over square 4.00 bore 3.975 stroke.

Would you like to give a revised performance upper limit on the 400 G given the valve shrouding caused by the small bore ?

ctosiflying

VORTECPRO

I think I'am with you at 12.20 after my education. My thought process was this: If a 400 small block 4.125 x 3.750 could run 10s easily with a production head, why couldn't an Olds with more head flow run as well, I just didn't take into consideration the bore size. For some reason I thought the one version of the 400 Olds had a big bore, my mistake. Now after looking at the 403, that thing could be a very serious power maker with production heads, you would think that could get on a small block Chevy 400 with production heads. Big bores make big power.

OLDSter Ralph

Back then, they checked camshaft duration because it also determined horsepower rating.

Bernhard

They used manufactures HP rating until a engine was re-factored based on performance and lobbying from other makes and brands.
They may have checked randomly but some Oldsmobile racers were using this cam with out getting caught.

Bernhard

If you look at the weight and the large tire& wheel package the 400 G is doing well.

Run to Rund

The 328/348 cam is not the regular W30 328/328 degree cam. However, for those wanting more performance than the 328 degree, there are more modern choices today that will work better. After all, you can't see the cam and valve springs at the car show, so use what you want. Being competitive in NHRA stock is very difficult and expensive, especially for an Olds, because the rules are written to fix the problems of other brands' stock equipment, not so much the Olds limitations. There are still a few Olds racers such as Forester and Murray. The only Olds 400 I know about which held an NHRA stock record in recent history was Sam Murray's 1967 W30, in 2006, at 10.91-119.74 mph.

Bernhard

OLDSter Ralph

Bernhard, HP and factoring based on performance is correct. As far as the lobbying from other makes and brands wouldn't surprise me either.
"Cheatin is cheatin" ! Using the cam you mention was entirely possible at local tracks without getting caught.
A "protest" could be filed by putting up $50 before the first round of eliminations (1969). After eliminations, you removed the intake manifold and one head (the tech official chose which head). Bore and stroke measurements, heads cc'd, valve lift and duration were checked. If you were caught cheating, you would be disqualified.
This was probably done after all ET and MPH record. It was certainly done with NHRA Division and National events for Stock Eliminator. I recall the winner and runner up both at a National Event being disqualified, but I can't remember who.
The national ET record at 12.20 was held by Berejik Olds (Woodland & Andreason) with the "long stroke 400" and this may have been when the Smothers Brothers sponsored them. This record stood til a guy named Tony Pizzi blasted it down to 11.86 with a Camaro of some sort.
To run on the NHRA national record was admirable, expensive and not eve3yone could do it. Most racers tried to set the record with a .1 second cushion, to be able to run on the record in less than ideal weather conditions. To set a national record was tremendous ! The "stock engines" are not the same as back when the cars were new. Edelbrock and Batten heads are now considered "stock replacements" if you check recent NHRA specs.

Bernhard, I am not looking to argue with you. I am trying to correct some misinformation. You can Google "1969 NHRA Rules/Rulebook". Oh, by the way, the picture in my Avatar (68 H/O) was taken in March or April of 1969. That was MY car and I WAS driving it.

Bernhard

Thanks Ralph for the reply. I understand that you are not trying to argue and I do appreciate the feedback. I have a copy of the 69 rule book and will be building the car as close to the rule book as I can.
Its very cool that you were racing a 68 H/O in the golden are of the sport! Thanks for setting the record straight on the camshaft, and that it was not legal and would not have been able to pass tech!
I will use the 328 / 328 W 30 cam as the point of the build is to be as close to a legal 69 jr stock as possible.
I know that Jr stock and modern stock class car have little in common.
Bernhard

OLDSter Ralph

Bernhard, I will PM my email address later. I think I have some stuff that would be easier if I emailed it.
If you have time, Google "Rich Powers W-31". If you find the right article (scan of a magazine article), read and print it out. Pay particular attention to the valve train, rocker arm part, shimming the rocker arm stands and valve lifter snap rings, etc.

droldsmorland

A G400 will do 380-400+ hp all day...carbureted, properly built, clean-up porting, well tuned fuel and spark curve and no real fancy parts. Just attention to the details. I wouldn't go more than that on a stock lower end. If you need more then definitely do a 455. Easy to get a reliable pump gas 500hp with few aftermarket parts out of a 455.
Im running an 11:1, 400 G block with a W30ish cam, a 2700 converter and 323s. Its good for consistent 13.9s
If you keep this engine in its torque band while up-shifting its a smooth ride up to 100mph. The Gs get their bad rap when shifted above the torque band. If a Chevy guy gets in one and waits for valve float to shift KA-Boom!

Eddie Hansen

here ya go

VORTECPRO

379 HP = 111 mph @ 3600 pounds
1320/111=11.89

Bernhard

Thanks for posting the link.

VORTECPRO

Thanks-they don't make articles like that any more!