In the past 3 years I've bought and sold a 1988 Cutlass Supreme Classic - 1979 Cutlass Calais (Cloned to a Hurst Olds) and a true 1979 Hurst Olds. I got really good money for each.
I recently purchased an original paint - original interior 1980 442 - Black/Gold local car. I got lucky and could not not buy this car.
What ceases to amaze me is on how little value this car is worth compared to the 1979 Hurst Olds or even the 1986 442 T-Top car I have at the moment.
Really makes no sense with the ridiculously low production numbers, despite not having the Hurst Shifter, it is the exact 1979 I sold.
You can barely find a book or market value for this particular vehicle as well.
I know book values are only a value and some people shell out more on a vehicle than market value or visa versa.
I guess leverage on a vehicle that is hard to find if one is selling it is, hey find another like this one.

 

Many people, including some self-proclaimed car "authorities", are unaware the 1980 car even existed. Never mind it was the ONLY GM midsize to get a 350 that year.

If you can find a nice example for cheap money enjoy the car. If you're expecting to flip it for big money, ain't gonna happen. Those cars are under the radar.

There's something to be said for a disco-era car that didn't attract disco stereotypes the way TransAMs and Z28s did.

 

So true, I consider myself fairly familiar with Cutlasses 1964-1988, been into Olds for coming on 35 years. I wasn't really aware of the 1980 442 till about 15 years ago. Never seen one in real life either, 79 H/Os on the other hand iv'e seen often an fairly consistently since they came out....

Once you realize they are almost identical to 79 H/Os it truly is mind boggling that they don't pull the same or even similar interest. I'm figuring when trying to sell one the owner has a helluva time just getting the prospective buyer to understand its existence.

 

Another example of rarity doesn't always equate to desirability. And this is only my opinion, it sounds a bit desperate to claim "hey, find another like this one." That should never be a selling point so I don't see any leverage to be had.

As mentioned, just enjoy it, and don't over-try flipping it or you'll likely be frustrated. If someone walks up and offers to buy it, that's fine, but actively trying is going to lead to some heartache I'm afraid.

I don't buy anything I don't plan on keeping, so flipping cars is something I could never do, or do well, anyway. I probably could if it was a Ford, because mostly they suck, so it would be easy to say goodbye to one.

 

Is it a 8.5" rear end? With the 350 already in it, it's already a good starter for a street rod. Very surprised the G body guys don't go crazy for it..

 

You're thinking 1984-up with the 8.5 and 3.73. The 1980 had the 7.5 with something like 2.73 rear gear ratio if memory serves. Hardly a barn burner. If they did indeed have the same situation as the 79 H/O, if in California it would have 2.56 gears.

 

Thanks for all's input. What's truly amazing is within my 15 miles area there was another 1980 black/gold 442 behind a local transmission shop sitting for 25 years that i've been trying to buy for 10 years. It's in tough shape, way more so than the one I bought. The chances of 2 of them in the same areas is unlikely.
My 80 442, the original owner unfortunately passed away a year ago, he had already started a restoration and installed a brand new rebuilt Rocket 350 and trans from a 1970 Cutlass. It's much faster than the 1979 Hurst Olds I owned that had original motor and trans. I'm not a mechanic so I don't know the specs, horsepower or gear ratio.It was also installed with a true dual exhaust and no catalytic converter so I'm sure than helps on horse power.

 

 

Yes and I agree, but what may surprise some the 1979 H/O / 1980 442 and later G-Body Olds tested almost identical. ( Torque still ruled with cars like this...)

1979 H/O 1/4-mile ET: 16.63 @ 81.89 MPH January 1980 Super Stock and Drag Illustrated
1985 442 1/4-mile ET: 16.6 @ 83 MPH July 1985 Car and Driver

1979 H/O 170 HP 275 LB FT @ 2000 RPM
1985 442 180 HP 245 LB FT @ 3200 RPM

So it seems that the additional 30 LB FT of the 350 and how much earlier it hit essentially neutralized the 85s better gearing both in transmission and rear end.


Absolutely, after 1976 till 1988 when it comes to Oldsmobile the bigger the better for engines. Whatever you do to a 307 will be more effective on a 350, etc.

In the end I believe there are many reasons the 1980 442 fell through the cracks...

Essentially the same as the 79 H/O ( been there done that... in a bit of a ho hum era)
Absolutely no improvement in performance over the 79 H/O...
Something tells me if the 80 442 came with 403s we would all remember them.
Looks, while the 78-80 Calais is a handsome and attractive car. The 81-88 are more attractive IMHO and I am thinking I am not alone... 81-88s seemed to be stretched out and appear more sleek.

 

RIP for the original owner.

He did the car a huge favor with a rebuilt 70 350. Besides the superior quality of the engine itself. A 1970 310 gross HP 350 Cutlass or the like would destroy anything stock Olds made after 1973.

The base dual exhaust 4bbl 350 for 1970 has 250 HP net and 330 Lb FT net.
The stock y pipe single cat 4bbl 350 for 1979 has 170 HP net and 275 Lb FT net.
If you convert the 79 to true dual's you are around 200 HP and 300 Lb FT.

So 2 different worlds however you cut it. Gearing wont matter much when you are plus 55 Ft Lbs in torque, give or take, etc. A 1970 auto 310 hp with the equivalent highway gear as the 79 H/O is a second and a half quicker and 10 MPH faster. According to Automobile Catalog.

Don't trust simulation... my 120,000 mile+ original 350 is a full second quicker and 7 MPH faster than a stock new 79 H/0.

P.S you may want to check out your rear, a stock 7.5 might not like 300+ lb ft hitting it all the time... Otherwise enjoy it to the fullest.