wmachine

Yes, indeed. And that is exactly why they need to handle and stop too!

Of course the term musclecar mandates power. But since when does that preclude anything else? I want one that handles and stops too. We are talking about cars that were made to be street drive, not exclusive track cars. I disagree. I believe *most* people's measure was on the street. Most people that bought musclecars did not buy the quickest/fastest ones. And most of the musclecars made were never on a track.


Right as far as you see it. But that obviously wasn't the whole story, as Hemi powered Mopars were not the only Mopars that were reviewed and tested.
And if you still think any W30 is watered down and shouldn't have been reviewed and tested? And a 442 is okay? Where is the logic there?
Why send a stripped down post coupe W30 that would maximize quarter mile times? That isn't what they were trying to sell. "Brute" was never in the plans for Olds. That was not their target. And I think Olds *did* get it right.

mugzilla

Since I've been driving my '70 442 I learned at least a couple things.

1. They are mostly 4spds ...
2. Brakes are overrated ...

WhatIf

What would be the weight of a stripped 70 W-30 Coupe with the aluminum W-27 rear end? Aluminum intake, plastic fenders, fiberglass hood, it would be pretty light, no? I'm not sure but I don't think the 68 and 69 H/O's used aluminum intakes or had the optional aluminum rear end so it seems like the 70 may be lighter. My friend attends those Pure Stock races and he said that Dan Jensen had a 70 W-30 4-speed car but it wasn't competitive. He said the factory 4-speed cam just doesnt run well. He put in the automatic cam in but still couldn't run with the big boys. Perhaps this is why we don't see any W-30's running in those Pure Stock or FAST races. Ive heard from a few engine builders that the factory 70 4-speed W30 cam was not designed very well and was actually a failure. Too much duration I think is what they said. The auto cam was better.

My vote for quickest would also be for the 66 W-30 and I've heard some stories on another board from some of the old timers how the 68-70 W-31 used to whip up on the W-30 cars, even the 1970 models, so the 68-70 W-31 would be my second choice.

344870M

I think I read where the '70 455 weighed in less than a 400 but don't quote me on that. I too have heard negatives about the stick cam. I took it to a local speed shop where the guy behind the counter (an Olds guy) recognized it and immediately started berating it as worthless unless it had steep gears behind it. He sheepishly acknowledged the strength of the cam when I asked if my 4:33's constituted steep gears.

344870M

Watered down is harsh, sure. But the stick car was designed to be a much better performer than the auto. I read where Olds engineers figured if you ordered an auto, you'd probably get air, p/s & p/b's. Whereas if you ordered a stick....

All I'm saying is that if Olds wanted to be seen as an all around performance/street car (handling, stopping etc) they could have sent out a standard 442 and accomplished that since a 455 auto 442 is still a very stout runner. If brute wasn't in the plans, why hint at it with W mated to an auto, 3:42's and air? I say 'all in or all out'.

Chrysler had 426's equipped w/single 4 barrels. Those cars were never sent out for comparisons. I wonder why...

WhatIf

It could also be that the 4-speed car wasn't all it was cracked up to be, so Olds never sent one out to be tested. Think about this, with all the racing Olds was involved in, with their high perf advertising campaign, and with there special 4-speed cam W-30 engine with no power brakes, their big kahuna, then why didnt they ever send one out to be tested? I too have heard many Olds guys mutter under their breath that the 70 W30 4-speed cars are very overrated and very overcammed. Stage 1 Buicks idled pretty smoothly and I think they were very fast.

WhatIf

Kurt, I think "brute" WAS the target for Oldsmobile! Bright red inner fenders made of lightweight plastic, a great looking aggressive hood with ram air, bold stripes, an available aluminum rear end, an aluminum intake, what's NOT brute about all that? I think Olds just missed the boat with the 70 W-30 4-speed. That cam was not designed properly and I think that's why we never saw any in those cars being very competitive back in the day, and they don't appear in Pure Stock or FAST races. Some have said that the 328 cam was designed for open headers and steep gears, but if thats true, then Olds should have designed better exhaust manifolds to work with that cam. Just my opinion.

wmachine

Guess we're seeing the word "brute" differently. I meant pure power, nothing to do with what it looks like.

Yes, it was designed for open headers (and steep gears) and says so right in the tech bulletins they had on the car. Olds specifically said to their dealers that the W30s were recommended *not* be sold to the general public due to the specifics of the car. There is no way to make exhaust manifolds enough better to not need the headers. No wonder it gets the bad press for performance when it is not used as intended. No, Olds didn't miss the boat, some people try to put a square peg in a round hole even if they're told it doesn't fit. Believe me, you would have heard similar nonsense if '66 W30s were released to the general public.
Bottom line: There is no way that a '70 442 W30 4-speed will realize anything near its potential in *totally* stock trim. And FWIW, the Hemis were pretty much that way too. In totally stock trim, a 440 could best them.

mugzilla

I wonder how many Hemis' had a.c. ...

WhatIf

Kurt, I'm just curious about this. If the 328 cam was designed for open headers and not really intended to be sold to the general public, why did Olds even bother to install it in a car? Why didn;t they just sell it over the parts counter? This "steep gears and open headers" tech bulletin from Olds really sounds like an excuse for the fact they screwed up on the cam. All aggressive factory cams, whether from Chevy or Pontiac or whatever, need open headers and gears, so this sounds like Olds was back peddling for a cam that didn't work. If someone back then had the technical know-how to install headers, and change the rear gears, they sure could have installed a cam. I think Olds just went too far with that cam and it never ran very well. I truly believe that Olds WAS trying to sell a "brute". All of the things I mentioned before, like the alumnim intake, aluminum rear end, glass hood, etc, and a 328 cam that would barely idle, with no available power brakes, you cant get much more "brute" than that! I just don't think the 4-speed cam was designed right. Too much duration. They should have used the 308 and made 328 available over the counter. With a cam that wild you would not only need headers, but an intake and steep gears, and after all that I think people would have looked to a Crane or Lunati or something else back then.

wmachine

Think about it: How are they going to sell it over the counter if it isn't a stock (like already on a car) cam? What Olds cam could you buy over the counter that wasn't in a car? It just didn't work that way.
If that isn't good enough for you, then add the fact that for "stock" drag racing, headers could be added, but the cam had to be stock.


Believe what you want, but this was nothing new. This didn't start with 1970 W30s. This was true right from the beginning with the '66 W30. See the notice attached? That was for the introduction of the '67 W30. So you think the backpedaling started in in 1966? That was not backpedaling. That was a warning to dealers not to sell them to someone who didn't know what they were doing or they would end up with a customer who was unhappy because of the customer's ignorant expectations. That is not just an opinion of mine, that is documented.

Diego

Dan's car is a column automatic with buckets. Never has been a 4-speed as long as he's owned it.

As far as what car he's driven in some of these events, I can't say for sure but he is a Pontiac guy - he probably mixes it up a bit.

Quote from 34487:
Are you talking about the Hemi? Only the NASCAR versions had 1x4s.

Or are you talking about the 426-S? Only made from 1964-65, rated at 365 hp.

In regards to the 1970 4-speed's cam . . . It's been my understanding that Oldsmobile expected buyers of W-30 4-speed cars to add headers. This contrasts with the automatic's cam, which was maximized for performance and drivability in showroom trim. Someone mentioned the Stage 1, but Buick designed the engine for stock street duty, so it's not really an apples to apples comparison.

The 1968-69 W-30s also needed headers to show its potential - that's been my impression too. Perhaps the W-31 also falls into that category as well, but they seem to run pretty good as-is.

WhatIf

Didn't Buick sell Stage 2 parts over the counter, and I thought Pontiac did similar with RAV parts? I don't think those ever saw production, but I could be mistaken. I think I see what you mean though, that for stock class racing it had to have a stock cam, so Olds had to place that cam in the car. I forgot that they allow headers in NHRA stock class.

Ok, I thought Jensen had a 70 W30 back about 10 years ago. I stand corrected if it was not a 4-speed. I think he (and his brother) have had a lot of cars, and I thought I read somewhere that he thought the 328 cam was way overdone and just didnt run as well as the 308 cam. Why dont we see these wicked bad 4-speed 70 W-30's at these pure stock races? are there any at these FAST events? I haven't kept up on all the pure stock races but I do look at the results when they print them and Im always looking at the top 20, and it seems like the 70 W30's dont appear. i think there was a 66 W30 and 71(?) recently and i think a 69 H/O, but i dont see the 70 W30's, my favorite!

Diego

I was living in MI at the time and I know he's only had one 4-4-2 over the years and it's a post '70 automatic with black stripes. When bought, I think it had Super Stocks but he changed it to poverty caps to keep in the spirit of an Olds optioned to go fast. He's a firm believer in going fast, which is why he doesn't own stick-shift cars(!).

However, his place is often a resting place for other cars, and one I know was there was that brown/gold '71 W-30 stick car. Did they have the same big cam? I always had the impression that lowered compression also meant a less radical cam for drivability with unleaded, but I'm not much of a hands-on guy so I could be full of it.

And then there's been the dyno tests that he's been involved with in Musclecar Enthusiast, and perhaps in one of those tests they used an opportunity to play around with a variation of the engine so they changed the cam to see what would be different?

I dunno, just throwing some things out. I bet you're just a little mixed up with some things but once it's unraveled it's all good.

wmachine

No, Diego, you're right on the money. "71s did get a toned down cam.

WhatIf, seems Diego and I are having a hard time convincing you how good your favorite car really is!
Seriously, the FAST events are not an invitational. It is just whoever wants to show up. With whatever they want to pass off as stock.
But I agree with Diego: "once it's unraveled it's all good".

Diego

I forgot to address something: Why don't you see more of these stick cars at these events?

Because the owners are not bringing them.

WhatIf

I really like this site, you guys are great! Diego - now I remember that Jensen brown gold car. i think he called it the "UPS" car? (LOL!). Guess he was years ahead of the old Dale Jarrett NASCAR ride!

Now Im wondering if Jensen was referring to THAT car with the 328 cam, and they put in a 308 cam and it ran better? Now I need help here - Im looking at the original ad for the 71 442 W30 (the blue one, 2-pager, the one that says "It comes factory blueprinted...") with Dr. Olds standing behind it. In the specs it shows :

Camshaft duration : 328 degrees
Camshaft overlap : 108 degrees

So now I am officially confused (which isnt hard for me to be!), Did the 71's NOT use the 328 cam?

mugzilla

I checked out nascar. You know, win on Sunday ...

Olds had as many wins in nascar that year as any other GM make ...

wmachine

Just remember, *you're* on of the guys, too!

That's interesting. Can you post or e-mail that to me?
No, the '71s didn't get that cam by all of my many sources. It may have been in the plans (thus the ad) and then ditched.
Here's one:
http://www.oldsmobilewiki.com/index.php/Category:Cams
Note the same 108 deg cam was used in '68 and '69.

344870M

uh-oh. Them thar's fightin' words. While it's the only real MC I've ever driven it scares the H outta me and my dad says he's never driven anything this wicked. And to quote my boss when I took him for a ride " J---s C----t!" But then again you could be right. Until everyone has driven a wide variety of cars it's all personal experience/preference.

I knew they were hush hush but they weren't available to just anybody? Didn't know that.


Single 4 barrel 426. According to Chiltons it was available this way.

I have an *article* here that says the 71 came blueprinted too. Of course I have another article that says the '70 W-30 package included a tilt steering wheel.


I too read where the Hemi was high maintenance and unless you knew what you were doing, the 440 was the better choice. But if you did know what you were doing.......

Was there other factory lit which stated that the optionally geared W's were not intended for street use? Or was it only in the full color sales brochure? And if you think these disclaimers are sweet, you should read the advisory that came with the full race hemi cars.

Diego

You still haven't answered the question.

And what year is Chilton's (admittedly a poor resource) talking about?

wmachine

Talking about Mopars are bad enough. Quoting (or even looking at) Chilton's earns you a trip to the woodshed..........

Is this still Chilton's?
FWIW, "blueprinting" has nothing to do with what cam it has. *Generally*, blueprinting is making sure that every machined engine dimension is held within machined print dimensions and tolerances or tighter. Oldsmobile actually meant it in a broader sense. "Select fit" is a more appropriate term. Pistons, engine bores, etc. were selected to more closely match than average production would give you. Effectively giving us "tighter tolerances" in a way.
Sure, '71 W30s were still "blueprinted", as all WMachines were supposed to be (through '72).


Sure, I can dig up more. Did you see the one I posted earlier in this thread?
How many more would you like to see?

WhatIf

I looked around on the web and I simply cannot believe no one has this ad!!!! I had to scan in a b&w verison from a book. The ad is on the home page for 442.com but he cut off the specs part. Its viking blue I think. I hope the small print is readable. It shows the 328 cam.

WhatIf

ok, heres the specs close up from that ad in case you cant read the fine print. I hope this works.

344870M

I seen the clip for the '66. They made mention elsewhere for the '70?


I may have misread (or misunderstood) your question about the '71. I wasn't sure if you were questioning the cam or the bp'ing. The article I have that was written by Martyn Schorr says that the '71 & '72 used respectively, the 308 and 286 cams. I think I'm gonna believe the factory sales lit.

They quit mentioning that the the steeper gears were dealer installed in '71. Does that mean Olds was putting them in or was this a deliberate omission on their part?

mugzilla

w/ 108 ...

Order with the GOOD w30 package ...

Regular Fuel, that's nice ...

I wonder how they reduced back pressure ..?

nice add...

mugzilla

Right around then you had to certify each drivetrain combination ...

You still can't get order from wide range of gears ...

wmachine

First I am going to address the 328 deg cam in the '71 SMT W30 issue. Yes, there are a couple places that it is mentioned. But I firmly believe those references are flat out wrong.
Over the years I've associated with guys that know these cars inside out, and the experienced consensus has always been that the '70 W30 SMT cars were the only Olds to get the 328 cam. Now that is far from any proof, but I'll back it up with the 1971 Chassis Service Manual and the Olds Parts and Accessories Catalog (Models thru 1972, effective June 1972) that both concur that the 328 cam is *not* the '71 SMT W30 cam. Much more reliable than sales literature.
Conflicting info can, and does, occur. That is one reason why I have many sources.

wmachine

Deliberate or not, you could get *very* steep gears in '71, in the same manor as previous year. The W30 stick had factory 3.42 std and 3.73 optional.
But dealer installed gears available were 4.10, 4.66, and 5.00, available to all intermediate V8s except wagons, AC, Y72 special cooling.

344870M

I should have said I believe Olds lit, not Olds sales lit. Of course then that would put me in the quandary of what printed Olds material to believe.

At this point I would have to lean towards the consensus. And I tend to believe tech over sales any time. Thanks Kurt.

wmachine

It wasn't just the steep geared ones that got the disclaimer. The 1970 Dealer "Product Selling Information" Showroom album has a section on just the W-cars.
On the page for the W30, it says at the top:
"W30 CONVERSION
Not for city or highway use"

By '70, there wasn't the need to put as much emphasis on it, because it was the 4th year in a row that the disclaimer was used for the W30!

WhatIf

ok, I figured as much that this ad from 1971 may be wrong. I seriously couldn't believe that Olds would use that radical 328 cam with low compression in 71. I think that would have killed bottom end torque.

wolfman98

Yes, it was designed for open headers (and steep gears) and says so right in the tech bulletins they had on the car. Olds specifically said to their dealers that the W30s were recommended *not* be sold to the general public due to the specifics of the car. There is no way to make exhaust manifolds enough better to not need the headers. No wonder it gets the bad press for performance when it is not used as intended. No, Olds didn't miss the boat, some people try to put a square peg in a round hole even if they're told it doesn't fit. Believe me, you would have heard similar nonsense if '66 W30s were released to the general public.
Bottom line: There is no way that a '70 442 W30 4-speed will realize anything near its potential in *totally* stock trim. And FWIW, the Hemis were pretty much that way too. In totally stock trim, a 440 could best them.[/quote]

Sounds like another debate about the "stock" question. if these were designed by the manufacturer to run with headers would that not be it's stock condition , but had to have different exhaust manifolds when sold to the general public? Could you not put it back to it's intended condition and claim it to be "stock"?

wmachine

Sounds like another debate about the "stock" question. if these were designed by the manufacturer to run with headers would that not be it's stock condition , but had to have different exhaust manifolds when sold to the general public? Could you not put it back to it's intended condition and claim it to be "stock"?[/QUOTE]

I see where you are going with this, but I don't see where it is an issue at all. "Intended condition" is not factory stock. Period. Headers are not stock, period. "Intended use" doesn't change the way it came!
Personally, I'd have headers on it, and so what if it isn't "factory stock". It is what it is.

344870M

"Dealer Product Selling Information" & "Tech Bulletins" I gotta get me some of them.

You guys have just about, almost, probably convinced me to look into adding headers.

Now this takes us waaaay off track of the thread but how are the lumpy cam and exhaust headers related? Is it because of the amount and frequency(timing) of the exhaust gases?

wmachine

Personally, if I had even a "concourse" '70 SMT W30, I would have headers on it because that was what it was equipped for. So what if it doesn't fit the definition of "factory stock"


Off thread? You started this, Mr. "Don't want to stir the pot"!
Oversimplified, but:
Think of an engine as a big breathing machine. Air in and air out. Headers get the air out much better than stock manifolds of any kind. The 328 cam gets the air through the engine much better (more lift, more duration, more air), so without headers, the engine is choked down at the the exhaust manifolds.
In fact, on the same "W30 Conversion" page I earlier referenced it said all the stats on the engine was "with headers". So just imagine how incrementally less the figures are with stock exhaust.

mugzilla

I wonder what happened to all those stock manifolds ..?

wmachine

......and air cleaners......and steel wheels........ and hubcaps.........

WhatIf

Now this goes back to what I was saying before, if the 4-speed 328 cam was designed for open headers, then in stock form with manifolds doesn't that sort of mean it was not as fast as the automatic with the 308 cam?? And question : weren't ALL the really high performance cars back then designed for open headers and not intended for the general public too? I thought the LS6 Chevelle and the RAIV Pontiac cars were like that, with really aggressive cams, but those cars seem to run well in stock form, where the 70 4-speed W-30 didn't seem to run that well. Im just asking because I always see these other cars like the Pontiacs, Chevys, and Mopars winning those Pure Stock events, and it seems like those cars had really radical cams too, but they seem to do well.

wmachine

I think you're a bit too focused on the "Pure Stock" events. They are no more an objective evaluation of all musclecars' potentials than the old magazine tests were. It all depends on what shows up, what's been done to them, and how well they're driven. What '70 SMT W30 didn't run good? And
did *all* of the LS6 Chevelles and the RAIV Pontiac cars run good? And I certainly don't believe that they are all stock.
I'm just pointing out that I'm sure there was not a good basis for comparison.
Its only logical that higher production cars would be better represented in numbers and "degree of tune", let say.
Those meet are fun, but good for bragging rights only.
Note: In the late '80s when they started doing these type events (and quite frankly the cheating was not so well developed), the Stage 1 Buicks were *killing* everybody. Why? Because those Buicks ran much closer to their potential in *totally* stock trim.

Presuming you mean a quarter mile as measure? I don't honestly know if a totally stock '70 SMT W30 would be slower than an equivalent automatic, but I wouldn't be surprised.