Hello All,

I'm new here and I have several cars that I've collected but none being an Oldsmobile. I guess I'm sort of a car collector by default. But I've always wanted a 442.

So in my travels I ran into this 1969 442 with a W32 package. I've been looking for a real W30 but need to sell or trade a few of my cars to get that. But this car is said to be a W32 so I started doing some research and the car should have a 400 4bbl motor, T400 Tranny, PS, PDB, dual exhaust, factory sway bars, boxed control arms, SSII wheels, bucket seats, consol with floor shifter, tilt steering, A/C, W-32, Clock, delux steering wheel, 12 bolt posi, vinyl top and two snorkles that lead to two scoops under the car.

But I need some help with what to look for before I buy this car. I'm told this is all original and numbers matching but there's no build sheet or proof, so I have to do the leg work but he's not going to hold this car long with my deposit.

I have the vin and a crappy pic of the cowl tag as well as a bunch of other pictures but I don't want to post a car that I don't yet own. So what should I look for, to know this car is a W32. I want to buy this car in the next day or so, so any help that anyone can offer would be appriciated.

Thank you for any help, Rob.

 

According to oldsfaq vin should start with 344. Really if you are asking for help the vin and the codes on the body plate are the only way to tell if it is real.

 

VIN will start with 344 but VIN # and or Cowl Tag will not determine if it is a W-32. Since there were only 297 built in '69 these are extremely rare. Having A/C means either it was added later or NOT a W-32. Since the factory didn't allow it to be built with W-32 and A/C.

 

To reiterate I wouldn't spend $$$$ on one that is not documented.

 

Everything that makes the car a W-32 can be bolted onto any 442, and most of the parts are available today as reproductions. Be VERY careful to verify any claims. As noted, A/C was NOT factory available with the W-32 package. That alone would make me VERY suspicious. There are probably more than 297 W-32s in existence today, if you catch my drift.

 

one little hint also - all 69 w cars with OAI will have the front lower fender
brace ( attaches bottom of front fender under the marker lights to the core support as a solid brace without the insulator strip that the 2 bolts attaching the bottom of fender has on non OAI cars.

that was done for better clearancing for the scoops .
If it has the isolator material on those where it attaches to fender then
doubtful it came factory with OAI which also means that it wouldn't be a read W-32 .

 

Likely too late for this one, but anyone interested in the 1969 442 with w32 package please note this:
I worked as a tech for Riac Central Oldsmobile dealer when this car was introduced in 1969.
There was a problem with the CAMSHAFT, and ignition timing curve.
and this is the reason so few of them were made.
The cam didn't work well in the 400 ci engine.
The cam would not 'come on' until 5,000 rpm, and red line was 5,500 rpm.
The stock 442 would quite literally blow it away.
Next year, 1970, Hurst came out with the HURST Olds 442, using the 455 ci engine and THIS SAME CAM, and IT WORKED FANTASIC.
Then the following year Oldsmobile copied the idea with the next high end 442, where it used a 455ci engine and this cam. Both the Hurst and the 455ci 442 were incredible, mid to low 12 sec 1/4 mile times with street tires. With a very wide power band, tons of torque and Horsepower! It also handled very good as well. This on a 3800 Lb large car.
I was very impressed! (It rivaled my own souped up street cars at the time).

 

Welcome to CO. That said, I have to strongly disagree with you. The cam was not a problem, as all they did was use the stick 442 cam 393859 in the W32. That stick cam worked fine in the 442s and did not require 5,000 rpm. The power curve for that motor combo shows that. It didn't sell because 1, it was a late introduction, and 2, there was no market for it.
That cam was not used after '69, and there was no '70 Hurst 442, and the fastest '70 Olds did not run low 12s out of the box. So I don't know what you're talking about.
Don't mean to be rude with your initial post, but facts are facts.

 

 

Thanks for responding so fast and the welcome to the forum.

Perhaps you are right, could be it wasn't the W32.
I do know that I did the pre delivery on the one I remember, a flashy factory souped up high performance car. W30? and it had a high lift cam that reacted just like I described.
It was a pig. very slow until almost redline.
We figured the cam timing was not dialed in right, but Oldmobile never fixed it. Instead they made the 455 cubic inch 442, copy of the Hurst Olds.

And I did the pre delivery on the Hurst Olds as well which was sold at that same dealer, Riac Central Oldsmobile in seattle.

I've driven both and also drove the next one I described, the factory version of the Hurst Olds, which was limited Edition. So perhaps it was never in your area?
Those are the true facts from my memory.

 

I'll echo Kurt's welcome, but I'll also echo what he wrote. Facts from published Oldsmobile literature from 1968, 69, and 70 somewhat conflict with your "true facts from memory."

I believe you may be thinking of the long-stroke 400 motor used in 1968-69 only. These were not the best big block Olds motors, as the 3.980" bore and 4.250" stroke made for problems. The 455-powered Hurst/Olds you recall was offered in both 1968 and 69 and was definitely stronger than the 400. I also suspect that problems you are recalling were with the 1968-69 W-30 motors that used the 328/328 cam, a more radical cam than the 308/308 used in the 66/67 W-30 motors. The 328 deg cam really needed headers and other improvements to work properly in the long-stroke 400. That same cam was used in the 455 in the 1970 W-30 manual trans cars and was a much better match for that motor. I suspect this is what you are recalling.

 

Hey guys, Been a member for awhile, just haven't posted or replied much. This w32 is the car that always brings up good conversation. So rare and mysterious. I would like to comment on the last couple of posts as to the performance of the car. Mine still retains the original cam and low mileage. The car, with fact 3:42, performs as well as my w30, 4spd factory 3:91 did. Not sure why it wasn't produced in larger numbers, but could have been due to the fact of the other available performance cars (w30, w31) and avail. trans, options.

 

I worked at Jim Graham Olds / Joliet IL in Parts and purchased new my 69 w32 convertible. It was hugger orange with white top and interior. I know some people have said that hugger orange ( which was a Camaro color) was not offered, but guess what I bought it off the showroom floor and it even has a partial quart of paint tied in the trunk. I had no engine problems and yes it was a TH400, Ram Air, and no AC. the 4spd cam gave it a little better sound and performance. My favorite time to drive it was a clear very cold day in winter because that super cold air flowing up those scoops made it run like a bat out of hell. I still know who has it today...although I don't know the condition.

JS442w32

 

Oldsmobile had several RPO codes for non-standard paint. It was certainly possible to get a non-standard paint color from the factory. The trick is proving that the car was actually delivered that way, since there is nothing other than the "- -" on the cowl tag. The build sheet, if found, would prove it.



Y62 Special Paint, Extra Charge
Y63 Special Paint, No Charge
Y66 Two Tone Special Paint, Extra Charge
Y76 Special Firemist Paint, Extra Charge

 

Wonder if he ever purchased this car? 1 post wonder...6 years ago.

 

What exactly was a W-32 ?

 

In 1968 and '69, for reasons never revealed, Oldsmobile penalized people who ordered automatic transmissions in their 4-4-2s by using a milder camshaft in the engines of those cars so equipped, resulting in 25 fewer rated horsepower (325 auto vs. 350 stick). In 1969, in order to right this wrong, and make a buck besides, Olds introduced the W-32 option which restored the higher performance cam to the automatic 4-4-2 and also included the nifty force-air set-up from the W-30. A triumph of marketing for John Beltz's boys.

 

While I think the 1969 W-32 cars are cool and under-appreciated, I have a hard time understanding how only selling 297 cars qualifies as a "triumph"...


The reality is that the W-32 was introduced late in the model year and barely advertised at all. There is exactly one ad that I am aware of.

 

Thanks Joe. I was never a fan of the "under square" 400 cu in motor.

 

The G-block 400 is the classic example of why you don't give the beancounters final say in the design. This was all about using a single crank and rod design for both 400 and 455 to save production costs. Olds marketing came up with some BS story of how the smaller combustion chamber surface area that resulted from the undersquare design helped reduce emissions, blah, blah, blah. I didn't buy it then and I still don't.

 

Beancounters like Roger Smith have screwed up more than most people know. "Sales/marketing" people are generally F.O.S. and will tell you anything. I was drag racing a 68 H/O, so I wasn't paying any attention to the 4-4-2 lineup.
The earlier 400's (65-67) were good engines and they would rev. If I ever run across another 65 4-4-2 convertible carcass, I'll build another car like I had, "back in the day".
.

 

Sorry, Joe. I'll crank up the irony dial a notch or two.

 

Sorry. The [IRONY] [/IRONY] HTML tags weren't working today...


I'm going to be a heretic and suggest that the 1969 W-32 was actually the precursor for the detuned 1970 W-30s with automatics.



Of course, I also believe that the Rallye 350 is the precursor to the all show, no go "performance" cars of the 1970s like the screaming chicken T/As, Mustang King Cobra, and Volare-based Road Runner.

 

that road runner looks like something clark griswold would drive.

 

I spotted one of those Volares on my way to work last year. It really hurt my eyes.

 

Just to keep the timeline correct, Roger Smith didn't become CEO of GM until 1981. In 1969, he was a low-level assistant executive and probably not in a position to influence engine design.

 

Yes, but low-level assistant executive to CEO in 12 years is pretty impressive, don't you think?