Impressive

 

I've been bench racing for decades , and I'd have to agree w/ this. Big bore = RPM = HP = Win. Buick had the biggest bore 455(/454), Olds had the biggest bore 350. In contrast, Olds had the smallest bore 455 and Buick had the smallest bore 350. Regardless, GM >> Ford.

I contend that the reason Chevy never put the 370HP LT1 in a Chevelle is because they didn't want to be embarrassed by the 325HP W31.

 

In case you are asking yourself why is that v16 Hemi engine inverted, some aircraft ran v engines in that configuration. The most famous example is maybe the Daimler Benz V12 in the Bf 109 Messerschmidt. There are advantages to using it in an inverted V.

 

It was used between 1937 and 1941, before being superceeded by the next generation Benz updates. Japan obtained license rights to copy it. But, were never able to get it right:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aichi_Atsuta

 

Just because such engines weren't common in automotive use doesen't mean that this technology was new:


Buick was also experimenting with hemispherical combustion chambers:

https://www.curbsideclassic.com/auto...e-arrangement/

 

Hemi history.

http://www.woiweb.com/index.php/Hemi_engine

 

The True HP of the 10 Most Powerful Classic Era Muscle Cars

https://autowise.com/the-true-hp-of-...a-muscle-cars/

 

Eastern European Internet crap

 

Muscle_Car_Source_Book Lot of info.
http://dl.booktolearn.com/ebooks2/engineering/automotive/9780760348574_Muscle_Car_Source_Book_f7e8.pdf

Time Slips on bias ply tires.

Drove a (In 1974)1970 Ford Torino 351 Cleveland on bias tires. We had pick-up for cheap. The toque would hardly let the tires grab. Had to very gentle with the gas pedal. To keep from spinning tires. Radial tire made a huge different in the 1/4 mile. Making horsepower calculation with bias tires, with speed and weight Incorrect.

 

The only thing bias-ply tires are good for is for hiding sloppy steering components, since the bias-plies are prone to wanting to roll in a straight line, whereas radials have no mind of their own

 

By referencing the actual 69 (calendar year) Buick (70 model year) stage 1 455 factory dyno numbers and many stock Buick engines tested since, the author’s Buick numbers are inflated by 40-50 horsepower.

 

Most of the F.A.S.T. racers prefer bias ply tires at the track. From what I understand, radial tires won’t recover from wheel spin like old school bias ply. Once radials loose traction, you can’t feather the throttle and recover as quickly as bias ply. Old school tires are easier to “walk out” and throttle, preventing wheel spin.

Sometimes old school still has advantages

 

I'll say -- I didn't even realize there was a '69 Stage I 455

 

All I can say is my 69 4-speed 442 ( back in 72) that poor car was a dog, that could not get out of it's own way! I traded for a 69 Pontiac GP...

 

There wasn't, but there was a 69 400 stage1, the 455 stage 1 was in 70.

 

You guys misinterpreted my post. The factory dyno runs for 70 stage 1 development were performed in the 69 calendar year. The 70 455 cars were first sold beginning September, 1969.

 

I know.

 

Buick's answer to the Starfire. I'm not necessarily a Nailhead fan. But, I wouldn't mind resto modding one of these, replacing the over-carbureted dual quad 401 with a 425 Quadrajet from a '66 Riviera, if the opportunity were ever to present itself:

 

Why kill part of the appeal with such an intake swap? These old cars aint about maximum horsepower at times when regular family wagon outrun them..

 

I like reading these debates on factory hp and 1/4 times. I'll throw my 2 cents in.

first it seems most folks don't realize that the HP numbers aren't the best the factory could do. The engineers were tasked with building a performance car. It's no accident that they all the big performers run about the same mid to high 13s at about a buck. Any of the manufacturers were easily capable of making an engine that would make 500 hp or more. However that's not what they were tasked to do.

I play around with a full dress 71 Skylark. Its a BBB car with stage 2 heads and a 4 speed. I've gone 11.50s at 120, leaving a lot of time at the first 60'.

A 70 GS350 is not a very fast car. Mid 16s is about right...

 

Having street racing both a stock 70 GS 350 (Other than tires)in 1973-1974 and was an proud owner of a new 1984 Hurst/Olds 1/4 mile in 16.3 mph @ 85 mph. 1970 GS 350 under 100 MPHin the 1/4 at over 14 seconds. I can not remember the extra numbers GS. I do remember trying hard to get her to 100 mph 1/4 and not making it. Unless any of you drove stock 1970 GS 350. You just do not know! Did mine just was hotter out of the factory? I do not know. You guys are going to make look for the pictures of that car. In the many old photo albums I have. She was gold with dark brown vinyl roof.

 

What gear was in your 69 442 stick and did you do any tuning or exhaust modification ?

 

None all stock car...

 

https://classicoldsmobile.com/forums...-glade-145296/
Yes - I'll admit it.....in a "weak moment" a Buick found its way into my "collection". I dropped my guard one time and stroked a check for the Buick. Probably caused by my miscreant youth (you know....high school) days when I tried to buy a '70 GS that a local friends dad had and another buddy of mine ended up buying it. I was looking at more Cutlass's at the time but that GS, even though it was a GS350, left an impression on me when we used to haul *** to lunch in it in high school sometimes. Made some REAL GOOD Rochester 4 bbl sounds.

Still...Oldsmobiles came first when I eventually bought my own first car. Someday I'll scan or post photos of the pics showing how my first 442 ended up ('70 442 - long story).

Another excuse I have......I had already bought my '70 W31 and had started tearing into it. So my "excuse" on the Buick was wanting a musclecar to occasionally drive while I worked on one of the Oldsmobiles. UGGGH.

Thanks to ALL OF YOU for the props.....the feeling is MUTUAL.
__________________
Patton Glade
70Post Restorations
Austin, TX

 

My high school girlfriend wanted a GS, I found her a 69 350, 3 speed floor shift car, beautiful car, silver, black buckets, no console.. great car, fast? no.. not at all, burn the tires etc but wouldn’t touch my brothers 69 350 cutlass 4 speed car, never got close to my 68 442 4 speed convertible either..

 

It must have been frightening for a belt to snap or a hose to burst, since everything was hydraulic-powered on one of these . Did Buick put their cars into production having 12 volt systems already in '53 or was this updated?:

 

 

That makes sense, since Pontiac and Chevrolet didn't introduce their V-8s until 1955, despite Pontiac already having theirs ready to drop in '53. That's why Pontiac frames were built from '53 up, for receiving their V-8 drop-ins

 

Not really an Olds vs. Buick post. It's just that I don't know where else to post this video. Maybe, any Buick experts here can pin it down: Methinks, this is a phoney 400 GS. Not only because of the sluggish test drive, claiming "600 hp". The previously-yeared 400 GS came with standard front disc brakes and bucket seats with console. I can't imagine that Buick division would lame a GS 400 that far for '68. The Star Wars air cleaner isn't there and plenty of other valuable items are missing. Nevertheless, he's looking to get thirty five grand. I'm guessing this supposed "455" to be no larger than 350 cubes in reality with an aftermarket camshaft, at best:

 

It was not until after 70 models that disc brakes were standard on GS Buick’s, including stage 1s. For that model year you can tell if it is a GS 400 via the vin. The guy says it has 400 valve covers on a period correct 455. There were no Buick 455s until the 70 model year. With that cam an iron head 455 may not make 500 hp. If he has aftermarket aluminum heads he could. The only exception would be if he has one of the 75 sets of factory over the counter stage 2 iron heads. Notwithstanding the stage 2 decal, those are not stage 2 heads. The Star Wars air cleaner was for 67 models only. The video shows 5 hold downs for the valve covers. This proves that block is not a Buick 350.

 

Even power windows during this time period were hydraulic. 1953 may have been the maiden year for 12 volt electric systems.

 

He's playing the middle man, claiming to be selling it for an "estate". If so, since when would an estate speculate on trying to get thirty five grand for a something that molested. That's why my mental B.S.-o-meter is smelling a rat on this one. For that amount of money, I'd at least expect all matching parts and no add-ons. Even without the optional buckets, disc brakes and console. With all due disrespect , if anybody, I suspect this self-called "estate representative" of being an amateur conman.
For that amount of money, the following real thing would come closer to reality:

 

Keep in mind an original owner could dumb down factory standards for cost savings...

Very nice car, sounds like a beast but definitely a sleepy test drive. Maybe he is siding with caution (being respectful to someone's else's car).

If its dyno proven then he's just half gassing the pedal, because honestly my car seems to take off harder than that with half the power and highway setup...

This is what a built beast with a 3 inch exhaust and AC, looks and sounds like when you get on it.

1973 Olds Ninety Eight Regency, motor 455, C cast iron heads fully ported, ported air gap intake, ported headers,10 to 1 comp, N crank, milodon 8 quart oil pan, comp cams Xtreme Energy™, XE274H camshaft, speedpro forged slugs, 780cfm quickfuel carb, scorpion aluminum roller rockers, 3.73 posi, billet 3400 stall, 3" exhaust, super 40 flowmasters, ice cold AC, .

 

Here is a street driven stage 2 Electra powered by a Buick 455 stroked to 482 dusting a supercharged Trackhawk. The Buick had 3 persons on board. It runs in the lower 11s at 118 mph on the track. The owner thinks it will get into the high 10s. This engine does make over 600 hp.

https://bangshift.com/bangshift1320/morning-symphony-the-baddest-buick-electra-around

 

That's one of the lighter-weights without the later models' heavy fat bumpers

 

The Challenger in that clip is not stock. He ran 11.7 in a losing effort against the land yacht. This Electra scales at 4760 pounds.

 

That is badass as hell. My childhood dream has been to build a '62 Eldorado convertible to run like that. Narrow the rear so some fatties can be tucked behind the fender skirts. I was thinking BBC though.

 

Did you notice that he does not bother to remove the fender skirts?

 

I doubt that removing the skirts on a 4760 pound yacht would have done that much to improve his quarter mile time. Perhaps, the skirts improve the aero dynamics needed at high speeds . Why does it weigh that much? Has it every option available or are the 71 and 2s that much heavier than their '65-'70 predecessors? I can remember my Starfire weighing-in below four grand on the title and the Olds engine's are heavier than the Buicks' were

 

This is a C body. Obviously the weight is because these are 127” wheelbase, 225” long vehicles that usually have a lot of options. I point out the fender skirts because when is the last time that you have seen a car with fender skirts run that fast.