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.
I am an Olds guy through and through. With that being said I would like to hear different opinions on Oldsmobile 455 vs. Buick 455 engines - specifically for 1970 models. More specifically the differences in internals and power outputs for manual W30 motors vs. Stage 1 manual motors. And Toronado motors vs. Riviera GS motors. Were the power outputs of these motors really “fudged” ? If so - what are realistic outputs ? I have been searching for articles with dyna results but naturally the drag strip speaks volumes.
Last edited by Bigmikey65; July 19th, 2020 at 07:25 PM.
All the Big 3 played the numbers game, some more than others. Sometimes they would pick a RPM to report horsepower that wouldn’t exceed GM horsepower to weight ratio. For example, say an engines horsepower peak is at 5800 rpm, but that number will raise the eyebrows of top brass. No problem, use the power number at 5000. Technically, they aren’t lying, they are being “less than truthful”.
Pontiac did the same thing with one of the GTO engines that was available in the smaller/lighter F body cars. They deliberately adjusted the throttle to not open all the way, couldn’t have the GTO Flagship shown up by a lesser car! Even though the engines were identical, the GTO was quicker with the designed in F body handicap.
I recall reading a few dyno tests on the 70 W-30 engines, I think the engines actually made around 425 hp, the Buick’s I wouldn’t be surprised to find a similar number. Having friends with well tuned Buick engines in Skylarks and Grand Sports,In my opinion it’s safe to say Buick is the only engine that out-torques our beloved Olds 455. They definitely are fun to drive.
And if you have any “Mopar or no car” chest thumping Hemi fanatics, remind them that some smart *** Hemi fanatic was throughly humbled after stating “Buick’s run like they are tied to a tree”. If your a Buick fan, it should be required reading.
The Buick got the Hemi killer reputation no doubt because it was a powerful light motor and surprised everyone. Of course the bottom end is weak and the aluminum front cover oil pump wears and causes oil pressure issues. Ironically, maybe Buick did this as a last hurrah for racers but the 75 and 76 blocks are actually beefier. Considering 8 to 1 compression, a peanut can and horrible heads, it makes no sense to make the block stronger. It would be interesting to have both these motors built to stock specs and dynoed. I believe our 455 W30 put out a supposed 440 gross hp. I think the Buick was estimated at 450 gross hp. It come down to weight, gearing and driver in both stock cars at the track.
My little brother had a 70 Stage 1 for a while..Automatic bench seat car, fairly loaded option wise.. I never drove the car, he daid it wasn’t that impressive acceleration wise. He bought it from the original owner with 35k miles, was the guys wifes car, so it is very possible the engine just wasn’t ever loosened up with some hard acceleration.. at one point back in the day i bought a 69 400 firebird from a schoolteacher gal..car was auto on column, split bench seat..she was on the larger side and told me because of her sizes her ordered the bench seat.. my point is when I bought the car it would turn over the tires but not like it should..I ran the car hard for like two months, keeping clean oil etc..within a few months the car woukd slip sideways in 1st, leave solid rubber in 2nd and pull like it was designed to do.. turbo 400..
My parents 1970 Skylark 350 GS (Factory 315 HP but more like 365 HP and crazy amount of torque well over the 410 factory #) .was the fastest car in High School. At 16 years old. My Dad and Mom let drive her to and from school. Little did they know what I was doing with her. We had a great mechanic who tuned it by ear. Never did it run so fast. That car was a real eye opener for me. Not sure how much lighter than the big block. But 350 normally can go higher RPM.
The only problem with that engine was the distributor in front of engine. Great to tune, just watch you fingers! Rain was it Achilles heel. Between the air scoops in hood and rain puddles. Water would get under cap. The engine would backfire and blow exhaust system apart. Had to use the heavy duty Blue Stranded distributor cap. Spray silicon over the cap and wires. I even sealed the little window into cap that was used adjusted points. After backfiring a few time. We did not drive in the rain if possible. And drove slowly through puddles.
Rain problems made me go with Oldsmobile 350.
Last edited by HighwayStar 442; July 20th, 2020 at 08:38 PM.
Reason: adjusted points not timing!
Ahhh GS Stage 1. Second or third on my list.
I've witnessed street brawilin back in the day with a few of Buick's finest 455s. The Buicks were fast. The Stage cars were as underrated as any of Detroit's iron in 1970.
Hell one of the older crew members had a 70, 455 Bonnie that would woop most of us small block youngsters. Though in later years he confessed to a stage cam and heads and high 3 series rear gear. what a sandbagger he was and still is.
My close buds had Buicks. A 70 GS and his brother had a 71 GS. Both factory Stage cars, The Buick Brothers as they were known. Never saw the 70 lose a race.
The Silver/white loaded 71 still exists in condition 2. I've been trying to pry it loose for 35 years!
I bought a '70 Stage 1 automatic with 90k on the clock. Recurved the distributor and tuned the qjet. The car felt heavy driving in traffic, but when you dropped the hammer All Hell Broke Loose. It planted you in the seat and never stopped pulling. Big regret selling it. Quite and awesome machine.
My first build experience was in 1993ish, friend bought a 70 Skylark. Someone swapped in completely stock 71 455 and th400 trans. The car had a 12 bolt with 3.55 gears. We borrowed some 28 inch slicks and went to the track. The car ran 9.80s occasionally would dip into the 9.70s (1/8 mile track obviously!). Very lame, even for the time. Over the summer, he installed a Piston (I think) aluminum intake, 850 Holley, Mickey Thompson headers, an 11 converter, all simple bolt ons. By the end of that summer, it was running 7.90s, and never had a valve cover off of it. Other than the rumble from the exhaust, it looked Mild and idled smooth as glass. The engine was done making power at 4800, just put the shifter in drive and floor it. The car was very consistent, whatever the first timeslip said he could usually count on dialing in the car .08 quicker and was 9 times out of 10 right on.
He sold the car to another mutual friend, he had the car painted, swapped in a 4 speed, and a few other things. Unfortunately, the friend has become rather fond of “recreational prescription” candy, the car hasn’t seen the light of day in probably 15 years. I wish he would get himself straightened out. Life is too short.
T I believe our 455 W30 put out a supposed 440 gross hp. I think the Buick was estimated at 450 gross hp.
A 70 Buick Stage 1 made 376 HP gross peak at approximately 5300 rpms on the Buick factory dyno. This information is straight from the head powertrain engineer, Dennis Manner, who I think still has the factory dyno print out. I personally attended a presentation on this topic by him.
Around 1969 the Buick factory borrowed, or bought, a 70 W30 and tested it head to head against a 70 GS. I will look to see if I still have a copy of the results.
Last edited by Tri-Carb; July 21st, 2020 at 06:55 AM.
I believe GM fudged the numbers because insurance companies at the time were charging huge penalties premiums based on horsepower. GM saved customers from insurance payments bigger than their car payments. Insurance companies didn't care about torque. But you can feel the torque push you deep into the seat, as the gas petal went down. Broke the tilt steering pin on my Olds a few times. From holding on to the top of the steering wheel. Now I away hold on to the bottom. Love that torque!
I believe GM fudged the numbers because insurance companies at the time were charging huge penalties premiums based on horsepower. GM saved customers from insurance payments bigger than their car payments. Insurance companies didn't care about torque. But you can feel the torque push you deep into the seat, as the gas petal went down. Broke the tilt steering pin on my Olds a few times. From holding on to the top of the steering wheel. Now I away hold on to the bottom. Love that torque!
That depends on your definition of fudging. At the time insurance carriers were using a 10 to 1 power to weight ratio limitation for surcharging purposes. Thus, a lot of manufacturers selected 3600 pounds as a curb weight for intermediate muscle cars. The horsepower was then limited to 360 by selecting a lower rpm point from the dyno graph. I recall the graph point to get 360 hp on a 70 stage one was about 4600 rpms. This is how a 70 stage 1 came to be advertised as being rated at 360 horsepower. So were some GTOs and Olds.
If you took a 70 Buick Electra, the weight was over 4000 pounds. The horsepower for a Buick Electra 455 did not need to be limited to comply with the 10 to 1 power to weight ratio. Buick rated their small valve 455 engines in these large cars at 370 hp. In real life these were the same as a standard GS 455 which made 360 hp but were rated at 350 hp in a GS to make room for the stage 1 selectively reduced to 360.
Last edited by Tri-Carb; July 21st, 2020 at 01:37 PM.
For a 455 Buick? I would need to look to see if Denny’s factory dyno graphs from 1969 are published. I saw these graphs in person in 2003. 1969 graphs were made before the SAE measurement convention was changed beginning in the 1972 model year. My guess is you are wondering whether a 70 Buick 455 ever made 510 ft lbs of torque? If you measured a factory stock 455 engine today under today’s SAE net standard, one would make maybe 460–475 peak on the torque.
Last edited by Tri-Carb; July 21st, 2020 at 09:34 AM.
Would you have the peak torque numbers? Thanks John And anything on the 1970 Buick 350 GS?
On 70 GS 350 HP engine factory rated 315 SAE gross? Nothing other than you know that the numbers will be knocked down 10-20% once you convert the numbers to SAE net and another 15 to 20% to allow for drivetrain losses when measuring at the rear wheels. A stock GS 350 on a really good day might make 200 hp peak at the rear tires. (A number of modern muscle cars will make 600 hp or more at the rear tires.)
On 70 GS 350 HP engine factory rated 315 SAE gross? Nothing other than you know that the numbers will be knocked down 10-20% once you convert the numbers to SAE net and another 15 to 20% to allow for drivetrain losses when measuring at the rear wheels. A stock GS 350 on a really good day might make 200 hp peak at the rear tires. (A number of modern muscle cars will make 600 hp or more at the rear tires.)
At 10.25 to 1 compression, 1970 350 GS. with the posi rear. Lighter engine, front springs TH350 I believe has loss less of HP than TH400. It was a wild fast car.
Last edited by HighwayStar 442; July 21st, 2020 at 10:05 AM.
Buick had the lightest 450+ GM made -- 616 lb. vs. the Olds (655 lb.) vs. Ppntiac (636 lb.) vs. Chevy (714 lb.)...
The Buick also being the youngest, Pontiac the oldest. Buick had time enough for casting them as light as possible. Not without drawbacks, though. There was an initial oiling issue of which was later resolved.
The Chevy was the only one to offer an aluminum block. Therefore, so much for the 714 lb. crown
Last edited by Killian_Mörder; July 21st, 2020 at 12:50 PM.
I have no numbers to prove anything from one engine to the other but I did own a 1970 Wildcat with a stock 455, it was as smooth as can be and once that barge got going there was no stopping it. I miss that car
At 10.25 to 1 compression, 1970 350 GS. with the posi rear. Lighter engine, front springs TH350 I believe has loss less of HP than TH400. It was a wild fast car.
See the Car Life Magazine test of a new GS 350 in the June 1970 edition. The car in stock form ran a 16.7 ET at 86 mph. Assume the car with the driver and fuel weighs conservatively 3600 pounds. Run those numbers through a Wallace Racing calculator. I believe 176.44 horsepower at the rear wheels will appear. For sure, this car and most anything can be made to run much better with changes from stock. I remember seeing a dedicated track Buick 350 run in the low 11s.
Last edited by Tri-Carb; July 22nd, 2020 at 01:02 PM.
See the Car Life Magazine test of a new GS 350 in the June 1970 edition. The car in stock form ran a 16.7 ET at 86 mph. Assume the car with the driver and fuel weighs conservatively 3600 pounds. Run those numbers through a Wallace Racing calculator. I believe 176.44 horsepower at the rear wheels will appear. For sure, this car and most anything can be made to run much better with changes from stock. I remember seeing a dedicated track Buick 350 run in the low 11s.
Was that not a 1967 GS 340 ci rated at 260hp? Car Life test in June 1967 edition?
If the Big block 455 GS (Non Stage) had 350 hp and the 350 GS had 315 hp all factory numbers. That is a 35 hp different. The 350 GS had a lighter Engine, front springs, lighter transmission(better first gear and less parasitic loss, rear end gearing. And the new radial tires added in 1973. I was born in 1957
.Its been a long time, but I do remember being just short of 100 mph in the 1/4 at around 14 seconds. Not bad for the early 70's.
1974 gas shortage. People where selling their muscle cars for $500 - $800. Ford Torino, Dodge GTX, Pontiac GTO, Olds 442. My best friend and I had a ball. Buying, driving and selling some great cars. We took to chasing deer in the harvested corn fields with them. Even racing to work, sometime hitting each other. We called it car tag. Who knew what these car would be worth.
X2
Buick 455 large bore short stroke. They also produced a limited number of stronger cast iron 4 bolt main blocks.
The 4 bolt main blocks were experimental test beds never put into production. They were actually stamped and coded as experimental. As part of the development process, Buick did give a few to existing Buick drag racers around the country. This was a durability modification.
The performance package was the stage 2 package sold over the counter for the 455. This included Stage 2 heads, cam, valve springs, pistons, intake manifold, Holley carb and special slip joint headers. Only about 75 sets of these heads were made. (The exact number is unknown). These Stage 2 packaged engines made about 550 peak horsepower but they were never offered on production cars.
Last edited by Tri-Carb; July 22nd, 2020 at 04:45 PM.
At 10.25 to 1 compression, 1970 350 GS. with the posi rear. Lighter engine, front springs TH350 I believe has loss less of HP than TH400. It was a wild fast car.
.
Here is one more from Road Test magazine, also June, 1970. As tested this GS 350 scaled in at 3795 pounds. It ran a quarter mile ET of 17.4 seconds at
88 mph. Using the specified weight of 3795 pounds and 88 mph, the Wallace calculator yields a RWHP of 181.66.
Last edited by Tri-Carb; July 23rd, 2020 at 09:19 AM.
455 Buick V 455 Olds Buick turns the win light on
350 Buick V 350 Olds Olds turns the win light on
I'm an Oldsmobile fan through and through but you can't argue with all the very fast 455 Buicks in stock. pure stock, street and bracket cars.
IMHO
You are going to see some Buick’s with the TA aluminum block and the new Big Chief heads making 2000 horsepower. For sure, neither are from the factory. But, this is still impressive.
Here is one more from Road Test magazine, also June, 1970. As tested this GS 350 scaled in at 3795 pounds. It ran a quarter mile ET of 17.4 seconds at
88 mph. Using the specified weight of 3795 pounds and 88 mph, the Wallace calculator yields a RWHP of 181.66.
It weird that a 1967 GS 340 ci rated at 260hp at 3,419 pounds. Car Life test in June 1967 edition. Run almost exactly the same 1/4 mile time and speed.
1970 GS 350 3,648 pounds
The only thing not stock was on the 1970 was the wider and slightly taller radial tires. Not the bias ply tire that came with car. Could that have made a difference? I know it made a big difference in handling with new type Monroe Shocks. Never drove the car on bias ply tire.
As I look online, there are number all over the place. Mine was a beast for it time!
Most typical muscle cars stock where lucky to scrape13's. The hemi vs. buick thing is a joke imo when you consider all the fastest cars in the world at that time where hemi based so..... There is always that. Even today although far beyond the hemi of yesteryear too fuel is still hemi based.
Most typical muscle cars stock where lucky to scrape13's. The hemi vs. buick thing is a joke imo when you consider all the fastest cars in the world at that time where hemi based so..... There is always that. Even today although far beyond the hemi of yesteryear too fuel is still hemi based.
The joke in my opinion is the Hemi guy trailering his car, didn’t bother to make sure it was tuned and ready to race, and expecting to just walk away from his competition. Adding insult to his “Hemi is superio” mentality is the fact he is the one who called out the Buick fanatics.
I have the old muscle car review (or maybe it was car craft magazine?) articles about the race. It wasnt even close, the Buick made the mopar guy look like a idiot. I’m sure he thought “hey, I got a Hemi! This is the greatest thing on four wheels!”
Moral of the story, unless your name is John Force, chances are pretty good someone somewhere has a faster car. And if your going to drop a challenge, you probably should prepare and plan to bring your best effort.
And that's just my point . You equally pair the best of the best on each camp and then you have a race . Match gear ratios as best as possible , trans , and put their best engine in there. In a somewhat matches weight wether it be "dry weight or full weight sitting on the curb fully loaded " for each respective car. The 340 dusters imo are the real under dog imo. You soon too many of these comparisons with running gear in opposite ends of the spectrum.
"That points to advantage Buick. Of course money and cleverness could tilt the balance. I'm just telling the natural outcome based on engine geometry".
Above Quote is from VC455 / Gary
X 2 on the above statement.
An engine is only as good as its design, and quality of each component.
__________________
Last edited by Bernhard; July 23rd, 2020 at 10:21 PM.
A Buick versus Hemi race has taken several times since the Lassiter Buick raced the Badie HEMi. The HEMIs have since shown what they can do against the Buicks. The Badie 70 GTX was sold at a Mecum auction within the last couple off years.
Tom Hoover told me the 426 Hemi made 510 horsepower stock on the Chrysler factory dyno while the 64 426 stage 3 Max Wedge made 490. These are two engines that were intentionally vastly underrated on paper due to their concern over a potential backlash.
Last edited by Tri-Carb; July 24th, 2020 at 05:30 AM.
A Buick versus Hemi race has taken several times since the Lassiter Buick raced the Badie HEMi. The HEMIs have since shown what they can do against the Buicks. The Badie 70 GTX was sold at a Mecum auction within the last couple off years.
Tom Hoover told me the 426 Hemi made 510 horsepower stock on the Chrysler factory dyno while the 64 426 stage 3 Max Wedge made 490. These are two engines that were intentionally vastly underrated on paper due to their concern over a potential backlash.
The Hemi was band from NASCAR for the 1965 year because it was so successful in 1964.
I don't think the engineers get enough credit for the performance cars they developed in the 1960's
I can tell you from experience. Driving can eat up alot of E/T. This showdown should be done with one pro driver. Not a heads up race but beat E/T vs best E/T. You put an unexperienced driver against someone who has some experience. You can gain half a second with proper shifting , staging, preloading at the line , launch Rpm etc etc etc. This should be re done
The Hemi was band from NASCAR for the 1965 year because it was so successful in 1964.
I don't think the engineers get enough credit for the performance cars they developed in the 1960's
Hoover was a fascinating person and full of stories from the 50s and 60s. But you know the HEMI head predates even the 50s? Here is how I first learned about its origin. In the early 80s two of us were flying around central NC. My friend, and one time flight instructor, told me to land at a grass strip near a town called Mebane. He knew the owner of the field who was also a longtime A & P dating back to WWII. On the hangar floor lay the first Chrysler V16 2200 cid aircraft Hemi head engine that he worked on developing back in 1944–45. It made 2500- 3000 hp. It was massive. But if you have ever see a Republic P 47 in person, you can appreciate how it could accept such a massive engine.
Sample aircraft Hemi.
Last edited by Tri-Carb; July 24th, 2020 at 01:14 PM.
July 19th, 2020, 06:51 PM
