I have a 1970 SX that has a very early build date..08C . Anybody know why it has a w32 engine ? ...it is original to the car. Terry...u out there?

 

How can you tell that it is a W32 motor, paperwork? The 2bbl could have been replaced at one time.

 

Yes, I am going by the paperwork....everything I have read said the w32 was not available till later in the model year...

 

Just curious as to what paperwork you have, exactly.

 

The dealer bulletin showing that the 2bbl was cancelled, and the 4bbl, plus the W32 being added, was Feb. 1970. So, I would be curious as to the paperwork also.

 

VIntage Vehicle Services...It is a Canadian car shippped to Fort Nelson B.C....it has the RPO code listed as L33 but has W32 in brackets that is messing me up. It does have a 3.08 gear and 4bbl.....must be a mistake because the car was built third week of Aug 1969...have not checked for build sheet yet....

 

I'd say it's probably an L-33 with 4 barrel conversion. Do you have an OD or OG trans? The W32 in parentheses seems like an afterthought...
Terry

 

OD tranny. Thanks ...

 

W32 had OG ...correct?

 

Yes, OG for W32s, OD for L-33 and L-31.

Terry

 

Yes you are correct. The W32 has the identical drivetrain as the 442.
I received the same information package from GM Heritage for my SX convertible and it contained an option error. It indicated N37 Tilt and Telescoping steering. I knew A bodies didn't offer such, so I called them and it should have stated N47, power steering.
It would appear in this OPs case, someone was a little over zealous with their description, by again not taking enough care when transcribing the information.
As we know, only 2bbls were available in SXs early in the 70 model year.

 

Thanks for the clarification fellas. Really appreciate it!.. somebody at sometime put the 4bbl on. 251 Carb..came with car...and intake

 

The 320hp listed on your sheet was the rating for the 455 2bbl SX engine, So it does seem to be an error.

 

This is from indelibly etched, 1970 boy-racer memory; but I know those memories can warp over time. So take this for what it's worth...

Olds was in their W-phase in 1970. They offered a W-32 Cutlass at the start of the 1970 model year; that version was the same as the 2-bbl L-33. Both the early W-32 and the L-33 had identical ratings, thus the parenthetical W-32 on the records was indeed correct--both designations were valid at that time. Attached is the spec for the L-33, you can see it mimics the early W-32.

 

No offense, but your info is incorrect. The L-33 was a 2 barrel 320 horse 455. The W-32 was a 4 barrel 365 horse 455 that was exactly the same as the base 442's 455. They were two very different engines and used two different versions of the TH400 as well. The L-31 that was introduced later in 1970 was also a 365 horse 455 but had "big car" specs and used the same TH400 variant as the L-33 2 barrel.

Terry

 

Terry, I thought the W-32 option changed halfway through the model year from a 2-bbl to a 4-bbl. Please explain further.

 

Sure. To over-simplify it, the 2 barrel L33 and 4 barrel W32 (442 specs) were available simultaneously for part of the 1970 production run. They were both replaced by the L-31 (big car specs) 455 for the second half of the year as well as all of 1971. Make sense?

Terry

 

Thanks, Terry

 

The way you wrote this it seems that you are saying that the W-32 and the 2bbl 455 were replaced by the big car 455 and I don't think that is correct. Didn't the W-32 replace the previously available L-31 big car spec 455 in Feb 1970? And the only engine in the SX in 1971 was a 455. Wasn't that engine identical to the 442 engine not the big car 455?

 

Dealer bulletin from Feb. 1970.

 

The bulletin is stating the 2bbl version of the 455 is being dropped. It is being replaced by two versions of the 455, the regular 4bbl. version, which is the 88/98 engine and the W32, which is the 442 version. Both versions are only available in option Y79, (SX), on coupes and convertibles.
In 1971, the only version available was the regular 88/98 engine with 320 horsepower. The 442 had 340 horsepower.
To summarize, there were three versions in total in 1970, however not at the same time, and only one version in 71.

 

Thanks for clarifying. I always thought that the 1971 SX got the 442 drivetrain but clearly it got the big car 455. That makes the W-32 optioned 1970 SX a unique animal in that it is the only "true" sleeper muscle car.

 

In 1971 the full size cars got the L31 455, the Supreme and Vista got the L32. Frankly, not a lot of difference between the two. Both were rated at 320 HP/460 ft-lb gross. Both used the same 258/272 deg cam. Both used the same 7041251 Qjet. Same distributor. Same 2.000" intake valves. The only differences I can find between the L31 and L32 motors are the number and location of head bolts with studs for accessory brackets and the heat riser shroud on the exhaust manifold.

The 340 HP gross motor in the 1971 442 used a different cam and the larger 2.070" intake valves.

 

Since the '70 Cutlass SX W-32 has a 442 drivetrain, did Oldsmobile go by the body model or engine drivetrain in regard to the alternator type - Does the '70 W-32 engine have an internal or externally regulated alternator?

 

Based on experience with a friends 70 SX W32, they went by the model type, so no internal regulator. This is consistent with the 72 W30, which being a Cutlass by body number, also had the external regulator.

 

So, when Oldsmobile said only the 442 would get the internal alternator, they meant it. lol

 

Although this thread is just over a year old, I just came across it and thought I might be able to clarify some of the thoughts about the availability of the W-32 engine in the SX model for 1970.

The original poster's car was built the third week of the first month of production for the 1970 models (8C), and does not have the W32 engine in it. I don't have any explanation as to why some guy George ? put W32 in parentheses on the document he presented, but he did correctly list the engine on the original posters car as RPO L33, and included the correct description of the engine with that code. It is also a fact that the 3:08 rear end was an available option for the L33 engine and this rear end could be correct for the application. Unfortunately for the original poster, this means that the original 2 bbl intake and carburetor were in fact, swapped at some point as stated by further comments in the thread. The car can only have one engine code or the other, it cannot have both. The RPO code for the W32 engine was "W32". On any real W32 build sheet, there will be no mention of any other engine listed other than W32, be it L33 or L31. The W32 engine option is not an "in addition to", it is an "in replacement of" all other engine designations. To add to the confusion here is the fact that all 1970 442's that are not W30's, use the RPO code L31 on their build sheets. This engine is not the same as the L31 used in the SX and the only way to differentiate it, is by referencing the two digit code in the upper portion of the build sheet to determine exactly which variant the engine actually is.

When the original poster stated that everything he read stated that the W32 was not available until later in the model year, I can tell you that he is partially correct, however, in this case, later in the model year means exactly two weeks after his car was built. The W32 engine became available for production in the first week of September of 1969 (9A), and continued throughout the entire model year until the production of the 1971 models started. It was never cancelled or replaced. The Memo produced in February of 1970 cancelling the availability of the L33 two bbl engine was the end of the 2bbl SX's production run, and left only two remaining engine choices for the SX, being either the L31 or the W32, for the remainder of the model year.

Lastly, I agree with RocketBrian's assessment of the voltage regulator being model related and external on all SX's. It's been on the firewall of every one I have ever seen, W32 or not.

Some people know of my history with the SX models and some do not, as I am a relatively new member to this forum. I can honestly say that I thoroughly enjoy reading the information shared on here, and have learned so much since joining that I can't believe it took me so long to do so. I can only add that throughout my many years of researching and documenting the SX Models in particular, I have amassed quite a bit of data to support my statements. If there is anything that I may provide to answer anyone's questions regarding what I have stated above, please feel free to ask it of me so I may elaborate further.

Thanks for reading my long winded statement and thanks for all the hours of enjoyment I get from reading in this forum.

Alan Reedy

 

Thanks Alan for the clarification. I always thought the Cutlass Supreme SX was a great way for Oldsmobile to offer the 442 engine and get around the insurance company surcharges on muscle cars at that time. This was especially true if one ordered a Cutlass Supreme SX convertible with the FE2 suspension package instead of a 442 convertible.

 

As Spock might have said, "Logical, Captain."

Thanks, Alan, for the for clear cut through the W32 fog.

 

I thought all came with a 2barrel and you did the work to save costs

🤔