When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
It's looks the part (I know, w/o documentation you can never be sure). But if I was a huge 69 W31 guy, that project would be hard to turn down. That said, you could easily invest $100k+ on a full on resto and with the purchase price included...that will not be a good investment. But, most cars done correctly fit into that category. Just needs one guy with a thick wallet that wants it done.
Last edited by capstoneclub; Apr 5, 2025 at 04:16 PM.
I really wanted one of these. I instead put together my own with a stout 350, 4-speed muncie, and a 12 bolt w/ 3.73s. I was completely underwhelmed w/ the power output and how relatively slow the car was. I'm glad I got this car out of my system. In the ensuing years I changed the powertrain to a 455, Tremec. The car wasn't much faster. What a great driver it was though.
It was for sale in the Czech Republic a while back. The car was exactly as I had sold it.
Never ran that car at the track. After breaking EVERY damned thing I have ever brought to the track I was very gun shy to run that car as hard as I could. I didn't hesitate to thrash it but without a sticky tire. It ran pretty good. As far as compared to what? Before and during the time I owned that car I also had many, many, other cars. Some fast (CTS-V, Terminator Cobra, SHO Taurus all modded) some not so fast (2 Toronados (66s), 2 drop top Caddys) you get the picture. All the fast ones were modified as I owned a Speed Shop at the time.
I am currently rolling a modded C5. I commented to a friend that I thought the car really ripped, but added I may be wrong. His answer was, You have owned some outstanding machinery in your day, I think you know what's fast. ok!
I miss that 68. I put that one together correctly. The name slips me right now but another member here was at least a part owner of the 68 before it got to me. When I got it it had a wheezy 350/350 combo with an open rear. Still a nice car as it sat.
I really wanted one of these. I instead put together my own with a stout 350, 4-speed muncie, and a 12 bolt w/ 3.73s. I was completely underwhelmed w/ the power output and how relatively slow the car was. I'm glad I got this car out of my system. In the ensuing years I changed the powertrain to a 455, Tremec. The car wasn't much faster. What a great driver it was though.
It was for sale in the Czech Republic a while back. The car was exactly as I had sold it.
From what I understand, the concept of the w-31 was a high revving SOB of a 350 with gear to match; I think 3.91 was standard, and the gears may have been needed to keep the thing way up in the powerband.
From what I understand, the concept of the w-31 was a high revving SOB of a 350 with gear to match; I think 3.91 was standard, and the gears may have been needed to keep the thing way up in the powerband.
Exactly. Those cars didn't run for **** unless you spun them. I had a '68 Camaro SS with an L-79/M-21/3.55 drivetrain, which I imagine would have run similarly to an undergeared W-31. With the 2.20 low and minimal low-RPM torque there was very little off the light until you got it over 4000. Then the character of the car would change entirely and it would take off like the proverbial scalded cat.
Comparing such a car to a "modded" late model performance tech-wagon is apples to oranges.
From what I understand, the concept of the w-31 was a high revving SOB of a 350 with gear to match; I think 3.91 was standard, and the gears may have been needed to keep the thing way up in the powerband.
Originally Posted by BangScreech4-4-2
Exactly. Those cars didn't run for **** unless you spun them. I had a '68 Camaro SS with an L-79/M-21/3.55 drivetrain, which I imagine would have run similarly to an undergeared W-31. With the 2.20 low and minimal low-RPM torque there was very little off the light until you got it over 4000. Then the character of the car would change entirely and it would take off like the proverbial scalded cat.e
Comparing such a car to a "modded" late model performance tech-wagon is apples to oranges.
You both are sorta correct. There is a mixture of rear differential and transmission gearing involved.
The wide ratio (M-20) and 3.91 would be good for the street with street tires. The close ratio (M-21) and 3.91 would be slightly less inefficient with street tires.
The rear differential ratio would help launch and bring the engine into peak torque and horsepower range. 4.33, 4.66, 5.00 would decrease the time and distance to get the engine in the power band. Once the engine reaches the peak torque/power band, the close ratio (M-21) will keep it buzzing. The wide ratio (M-20) drops the RPM's the most.
The higher the peak torque is in the RPM range, the longer it takes to get the engine up there.
....Just my two cents worth.
Last edited by OLDSter Ralph; Mar 31, 2025 at 09:58 AM.
My two cents. I built a small block Olds with a manual and a gear. It wasn't fast and ran out of steam quickly. Even the BBs weren't fast. Nothing is FAST by today's standards. Fun to drive? Hell yes! More fun to drive than any of today's cars? Hell yes again! Cammed, real dual exhaust, no nannies, 4 speed, gear? What's not to like? It seemed like you were going a million miles an hour but were actually running a 13 second quarter mile. I really liked that aspect of these cars.
W31 was not called out on the broadcast card in '69. 1970 only. If I recall correctly in '69, if you ordered the car with a four speed, 4:33's were the standard gears. 3:91's were standard on the auto equipped cars. to get the other ratios, you would have to specify. 4:66's were a dealer installed option.
My two cents. I built a small block Olds with a manual and a gear. It wasn't fast and ran out of steam quickly. Even the BBs weren't fast.
But W31s were quick, and big blocks were in fact quick.
I'm assuming you find the Tesla Plaid "fast" with its 1.9 second 0-60 and 9.2 @ 155 mph 1/4 mile. All the while being a 4 door family car, no less. I find it extremely "quick" and a few years from now when something is substantially quicker I will still regard the Plaid as having been quick. Quick doesnt get slow it just gets surpassed by quicker vehicles.
EVERYTHING is relative. Did you read my whole post? Should you? That's up to you. I'm writing from a perspective after owning some very fast more or less stock stuff. I hate to throw shade on a W-30, but they weren't that fast. What was their top speed w/ a 3.91 gear? 110 mph? My C5 came from the factory w/ a 177 top speed right from the dealer.
Anyway, I love the old muscle cars. Just don't confuse them with being quick or fast. Cool factor? off the chart.
The engine power wasn't necessarily the problem. 90s Corvettes came with at least 6 speed manuals and 4 speed OD automatics. That Borg Warner 6 speed was a monster. The 93 Z28 could do 162 with it, I was to 150 in one. Highway gears with a properly cammed 455 might get it to 130 or so, assuming you or the suspension didn't chicken out first. In fact, I think the reason that the engines hold up so well now is not because of "the muscle car era", but because the transmissions sucked. There was no overdrive, thus the amount of rear end gear had to be kept reasonable. Once overdrive was a thing, then the rear ends could have more gear. This is why most old cars in drive, and new cars in OD, run about the same rpm. They're not looking for fuel economy or efficiency by lowering the rpm in top gear, they're looking for fuel economy and efficiency by giving you a weaker engine because of the torque multiplier advantage of that geared rear you are now running. This is why 80s muscle has 5 liter engines, and they were sellable. Not great, but they worked. Could you imagine a 307 with a 3.42? It would be a dog.
For a wild moment, though, in the early 90s, the engines started having ***** again, and that BW 6 speed was really a 5 speed overdrive stick trans with a 6th highway OD. You did top speed in 5th, but you could get 30 mpg on the highway in 6th. Someone actually made a loafing big engine fuel model instead of a little engine working hard. The driveability of those was amazing.
I bought a 96 Z/28 new from the dealer. M6. It was as you say, loafing at highway speeds. My C5 does the same. In fact it really reminds me of the Z. Same trans anyway. My C5 will cruise at 85mph at 1900 rpm. 30 mpg. Pretty sure it would spank a W-30. I've owned BB Cutlai so I know what's what. Maybe mine weren't put together the best but they ran pretty good.
The over drive is why I went with a Tremec when upgrading from a Muncie. .64 overdrive. I could drive it on the highway and stay w/ traffic. Which is nice. BTW, my Z wasn't fast until I put in a BBC with spray and a glide. 9s at 140s.
EVERYTHING is relative. Did you read my whole post? Should you? That's up to you. I'm writing from a perspective after owning some very fast more or less stock stuff. I hate to throw shade on a W-30, but they weren't that fast. What was their top speed w/ a 3.91 gear? 110 mph? My C5 came from the factory w/ a 177 top speed right from the dealer.
Anyway, I love the old muscle cars. Just don't confuse them with being quick or fast. Cool factor? off the chart.
Pic. Me stabbing in the small block.
Well, this post is well off into the weeds at this point anyway... do you still own that '68? That's a beautiful car - even if it wasn't "fast"!
I really wanted one of these. I instead put together my own with a stout 350, 4-speed muncie, and a 12 bolt w/ 3.73s. I was completely underwhelmed w/ the power output and how relatively slow the car was. I'm glad I got this car out of my system. In the ensuing years I changed the powertrain to a 455, Tremec. The car wasn't much faster. What a great driver it was though.
It was for sale in the Czech Republic a while back. The car was exactly as I had sold it.
My two cents. I built a small block Olds with a manual and a gear. It wasn't fast and ran out of steam quickly. Even the BBs weren't fast. Nothing is FAST by today's standards. Fun to drive? Hell yes! More fun to drive than any of today's cars? Hell yes again! Cammed, real dual exhaust, no nannies, 4 speed, gear? What's not to like? It seemed like you were going a million miles an hour but were actually running a 13 second quarter mile. I really liked that aspect of these cars.
Your 1968 Cutlass now has a new owner this month, the air intakes under the bumper were removed and the car was raised back 1 inch on the front axle (the pan occasionally skidded on the ground)
Very nice 68 I restored a burgundy with garnet red interior black vinyl top a few years ago
Really nice driving 442
Alain 1970 platinum 442 4spd factory A/C
