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.
Hi All, I signed up because I've just pulled my '64 442 out of the garage after close to 40 years. It needs a profound amount of work, and this looks like a good place to hang out with folks who know a lot about Oldsmobiles. Dunno that it makes any difference, but I'm in Virginia.
Welcome to the site and congrats on getting your car out of hibernation. Long storage always leads to a profound amount of work especially if it needed a profound amount of work when it was parked. We have a lot of members on the E Coast. Post some pics.
Thanks for the welcome. Not sure I'm ready for pics yet, might be too depressing, but it's certainly a candidate for a before shot, way before.
It's mostly refrigerator white w red interior, as many of the early ones were, and a two door coupe. It has a green hood and gray door, the result of my then wife's inability to recognize traffic as an impediment to driving or the concept of yielding. It's also got rust. It would make a good rat rod as it sits. It still ran pretty strong when I parked it, I'd upgraded from 330 to a 400cu in engine. The tires, although rotten, were worn flat across, so the alignment was good. I had to poke around a little to find 225/70 14's to get it up off the rims.
Guess the first steps are squirting oil in the cylinders, changing oil and filter, finding out how hard it will be to turn it over by hand after it soaks for awhile, replacing ignition components, carburetor kit, oh, and figuring out how to get keys made. If it'll run, then it's on to hoses, brakes, chassis and interior.
Any suggestions y'all have on the best way to awaken Frankenstein's monster would be appreciated. Is there a thread here on un-embalming the long dead?
First I would verify if its a true 442. If so I'd want to keep it as original as possible. They didn't make very many 442's in 1964 so if its possible to save that's what I'd do.
I've got three 1964 project cars, one Cutlass 2 door hardtop that was a factory 4 speed car. One convertible and one f85 wagon. I know there's lots of other members here with 1964's and 65's which are similar in may ways. When you start your restoration let us know if any questions come up. And don't be afraid to post pictures, there's a lot of optimistic people on this site that will be able to see a diamond in the rough
Thanks guys, it looks a lot like the wagon, it's been in an old barn. I'll take a couple of pics. It's real and very rough. Expect there will be a lot coming out the tailpipes. It's not likely to be pretty when it fires up.
I got it in '66 and was aware of it and the local guy who bought it new in '64. In addition to the badges it had the right parts, rear sway bar, water pump with trimmed fins when I replaced it long ago (non-standard Cutlass part number), positraction, funky wire wheel hubcaps that came off immediately. Stuff like that, not to mention the 4, 4 & 2. Even as a 330 it was not slow. My dad had a '68 'Vette 327/300. The Olds was considerably quicker, and lighter.
Last edited by Lefty64; November 19th, 2016 at 09:42 PM.
Hi All, I signed up because I've just pulled my '64 442 out of the garage after close to 40 years. It needs a profound amount of work,...
Lefty,
Welcome to CO! I been on the site for several months and there are a lot of knowledgeable persons on here and learning a lot about Olds. I am in a similar situation...trying to resurrect my late brother's 1972 Cutlass Supreme that has been sitting for at least 30 years (in an old machinery shed with dirt/gravel floor). The progress has been slow due to my "dance card" being full but working on it when I have a few free moments.
Thanks, nice to be here. Sitting over dirt didn't do mine any good, but better than being under. No rust holes or anything looking like it's going to fall off, but expect it's going to be a trek, lots of wd40 and liquid wrench on fasteners.
I had a '00 GTP, it burned, but I liked that belt driven supercharger, it was responsive. Pontiac changed to synthetic valve cover gaskets. Apparently the supercharged engines ran enough hotter that the gaskets deteriorated and the valve covers leaked. Got a little grade in my driveway so one evening when my wife parked it ran oil out down between the stainless exhaust shroud and manifold and away it went. About 6 months later Pontiac started sending me recalls. Every now and then 10 years later one will show up. Interesting factoid, when a radial tire burns through it sounds a lot like standing next to a shotgun.
Last edited by Lefty64; November 20th, 2016 at 07:45 AM.
That's gorgeous, right down to the spinners. That makes me embarrassed to post pics, but I will in the near future.
My wife's still driving a metallic red '98 Mustang GT convertible with a black top that looks a lot like the one in the background. Makes lots of noise but it's not very fast. Small world.
That makes me embarrassed to post pics, but I will in the near future.
Don't be embarrassed to show off your car. If someone is dumb enough to bash it because it needs restoration, I or one of the other moderators will BAN the immediately!
BTW, welcome to the site. This is the place to be.
Whew, glad there was something I missed, but I may make up for the chicken poop in mildew. I like the wagon, that would be fun. Had a buddy long ago with a '55 Chevy 2 door wagon, not a Nomad, with a 327, 4 speed and good suspension/tires. It would run and handle, and did not look as fast as it ran. It was nice to be able to haul stuff too.
Think mine's a candidate for a rat rod. Sort it out mechanically, start over on the interior, and leave the outside as it is. I've lost what little taste I ever had for body work.
I liked the big block I swapped in with 350hp and 440 ft lbs of torque. We figured cars started to get quick at around 10 pounds per hp and this one was about 3300 pounds. It wouldn't run with the real fast cars, but it wasn't shabby. The torque made it good for hole shots. It surprised some Chevrolets in its day. After I pulled the 442 badges off it was a sleeper, a docile looking white 2 door sedan if you didn't notice the tires.
Last edited by Lefty64; November 24th, 2016 at 08:57 PM.
Ooh, I like that, a little Simoniz, the shop vac and it's good to go. Showing up with it at a local parking lot car show seems like it would be good for a laugh. Had to have the tires to get it out of the garage. Amazingly one of the old ones was still holding air.
Yeah, it is good to have a sense of what's achievable. Surprised me to find that authentic replacement interior stuff is available.
Well, I think the production number was 2,999 of how many 442's were built in 1964. That's why my first thought is to restore it if possible. It looks like a big project, but if you have the 442 only parts that would be a big step. Do you have the protectoplate? If so, do you have the original motor block? Those two would be real important and if you had them I'd say go to extreme lengths to restore it as so few cars have documentation like that.
Whether you restore to original or rat rod it, let me share a few things I've learned about the 1964's. The trim pieces are not reproduced and since many were anodized aluminum they have dissolved over time and are really hard to find. The sheet metal is not reproduced so you'll need to find replacement body panels from parts cars. The nose and tail are different from 1965, but the lower areas such as bottom of fenders and bottom of quarter panels will interchange. Behind the rear wheel well you can even use parts from a 4 door car. The frame is unique to 4 speed cars and there may be a specific code stamped in the drivers side rear rail that show's it as a 442 frame. There's an interesting thread on the frames. Bumpers are not reproduced but can be straightened and re-plated unless it has holes rotted through it. As you said, the interior parts are reproduced. The first year of 330 engines are not common, but there's not a lot of demand for them. So if you need to replace a head or the rocker rails they're not too expensive used. If you have the original transmission/rear end they're easy to get parts to rebuild. John
2,999 is the total production number and 563 is the count on Club Coupes. There were three times that many hard tops. Neat on the frame thread, thank you. I'll get under mine and add its data to the thread. Station wagon or convertible frames would make sense. Glad to find out that Olds did more than throw a warmed up 330 under the hood, add a couple of suspension pieces parts and stick the badges on.
Dunno on the protectoplate. I don't remember and have not gotten down to the bottom of the glove box yet. The original owners manual was on top of the litter along with a parking ticket, so the plate may be lurking in there too. That's the only place it would be. I have gotten as far as iding the information plate on the firewall, it's a Fremont car. That's a long haul to where it was sold in northern Virginia.
I got the 400 cu in. engine in a '65 hardtop from guys who had pulled it from a wreck. I swapped the 330 with that and my ex subsequently drove off in it. I considered it a good deal at the time. I had a couple of pangs about originality, but lust for horsepower and torque in a lighter body were stronger.
Current 400 block is a G and heads C so that's diagnostic of '68-'69. Thought I had a '67 but the "new" big block is not all bad. Aside from lots of surface rust the body is not in bad shape, no rust out. Front saddle was replaced and there's not even dings in that. I've got the exterior trim pieces and they are in pretty good shape. Being under roof for the better part of 40 years probably helped that. I am missing the left rear fender cap, don't recall what happened to that. Bumpers have dings, peeling chrome and surface rust, but no rust out. They were both shiny when it went into the shed.
My recollection is that the transmission was noisy, I had needle bearings for the cluster gear but never got around to pulling the tranny and replacing them. It was not "rock crusher" noisy. It has a low mileage clutch and pressure plate, but I'm not betting on clutch facing that's been sitting so long, or throw out bearing. I figured the Muncie was pretty standard GM, glad to hear the rear is too. It's positraction.
There's so much mildew, mold and mouse poop on the interior I'm not even sure I want to put the pieces in the back of my truck to haul to the dump.
Thank you very much for the specific information. Any more you feel like sharing will be appreciated. Proceeding in ignorance is not a feature.
The G block 400 engine has the 455 stroke but a smaller bore. If it were me, my opinion, I'd sell the G block motor to someone restoring a 1968-69 442 and go with a 455 for your car. You can do a mild build on the 455 without costing a ton of money and get more power out of it than the G block. The G block was only used in 1968-69 in the 442 and Vista Cruiser. The 455 was used in many applications from 1968 through 1976.
Which makes me think, what's the application stamp on the carb, distributor and alternator on the G block engine? Let me know if you need help locating these numbers.
I hear you, but think I'm happy with the 400 if it'll run. It's got enough torque to be interesting, I've got enough to do to keep me occupied for awhile and I'm not getting any younger. That 400 was both smaller bore and shorter stroke on the 455 block with the 425 in between wasn't it? Same crank fit all three? The C heads seem to be close to the pick of the litter and breathe pretty well.
What am I looking for, like a metal tag on the carb maybe, stamped ids on the distributor and alternator? What are they going to tell me?
Last edited by Lefty64; November 26th, 2016 at 05:50 PM.
The numbers will be stamped in them. I'll come up with some photos to show you where to look.
Personal preference, but the early 400 (B and E blocks) had almost a square bore, (bore and stroke about the same) and would rev better than the G block. The 425 had the same stroke as the early 400 with a bigger bore. Olds wanted to share the same crank shaft with the G block and 455, but it didn't work out as well. I don't want to get the G block people mad at me, but used on the race track they didn't hold up as well as the early 400's. And now if you want to build an engine the only reason to build a G block over the 455 is if someone wants to keep the car original. The 455 is easy to get more hp and torque than the G block. So... that's my opinion and unless you have questions about it I'll leave it at that.
I do have tons of pictures and will come up with some to share on the application numbers. Sometimes the correct application can be in big demand to someone restoring a car. That can add some funds to your resto-rod project. John
Thanks for the pics. Are those the good numbers shown? Funny that a 55amp alternator would be a high dollar item. I'd have guessed that 100a or whatever was high output then would be the pricey one, but there ain't no substitute for original. Me, I'd just as soon have new diodes and insulation on the windings.
Knew the '65-'67 400's were better engines and that they were relatively big bore short stroke. The longer stroke, smaller bore later 400's like the one I've got would not wind like the early engines, got torque at lower rpms and let Olds build several engines off the same tooling. Didn't know the G blocks don't hold up as well if you push them hard. 455s share that issue? It was sold to me as a '67 and I was too dumb to check the numbers. They're a lot easier to find on the web these days. I got the joke when I checked it after pulling it out of the garage, it was on me by a year.
I was an, um, street racer long ago, suppose that's incorrect to admit, and have only been to a drag strip about twice in my life. That was with a '55 Olds I had in high school (J stock??). After I got outrun by a slant 6 in a roach I rearranged the logo on the grille to slo mobile and never went back. Street's more hazardous to licenses these days and my reflexes are slower so I don't expect to resume my rowdy ways. But, it will be fun to show my kids and grandkids what muscle means and pin them back in the seat coming out of the hole .
Last edited by Lefty64; November 26th, 2016 at 08:34 PM.
"You can use either a 455 or a 425 block to make an engine of either displacement; the bores are the same. What's different is the crank [stroke], rods (length), and pistons (compression height). So get the crank, rods and pistons!" http://www.442.com/oldsfaq/ofblk.htm
Was the 400 bore really so much smaller it could use the longer stroke 455 crank?
Ha, and the answer is, yep. Ain't the web wunnerful?
"1968 and 1969 400s shared the Olds big-block standard 4.25 in (108 mm) stroke with the 455 but used a very undersquare 3.87 in (98 mm) bore to comply with GM's displacement restrictions in the A-body cars while also reducing tooling costs." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldsmobile_V8_engine#400
and, guess this is why they don't hold up as well as the earlier engines when pushed:
"Early 400s" used the same forged steel crankshaft as the 425, while "later 400s" used the same cast iron crankshaft of the 455, with rare exceptions;"
also from wikipedia
Last edited by Lefty64; November 26th, 2016 at 09:31 PM.
I'm not an expert by any means, but I believe its the undersquare that causes the problems. 455's with the same cast iron crankshafts are much more durable.
Yes, the early crankshafts were all forged steel, and the 400 & 425 shared the same crank. Then there were a few forged steel cranks installed in 1968 455's but they're scarce. The rest of the 455's used cast iron cranks, most nodular cast iron.
The 330 all had forged steel cranks, the 350's are nodular iron but they also interchange. The 330 & 350 are only different in the bore.
Welcome Lefty. I have a 64 442 and have gathered a wealth of information on these cars over the years. A lot of that info I've posted on this forum. Shoot me a message any time. Glad you are bringing this one back to life and created a post about the existence of this car. Please post your data plate information or a photo of the data plate. A couple of us have been collecting info on survivors. Ed Vickers, on this forum, has the largest data base known of surviving 64 442's.
Thanks for the response. Only anomaly I see is that it's a Fremont style plate with a Lansing code. VIN matches with Lansing M code.
Looks like third week of April mfg date, Cutlass sedan all white with red interior. Pretty common in the first half year. Body sequence number is 11441, too bad it's not 11442, oh well. Any indications Olds built them in batches, or were they just stacks of options starting with the frame? FWIW, although I didn't buy it new, I remember this car showing up new on the street in northern Virginia in late July or August '64.
Hope this adds at least a little something to the data base. Where would I go to look at the data or more specific '64 442 stuff?
Last edited by Lefty64; December 4th, 2016 at 08:13 AM.
Mine is also a third week of April but built in Fremont, white with red interior. Also a club coupe like your car. Not sure what you mean by Fremont data plate. Regardless of whether car was built in Fremont or Lansing the data plates were the same, except the Accesory codes which Fremont did differently. Send me a private message with your email and I'll send along the info about 64 442s.
It's for '65s so the data plates may be different. But, the data plate they identify as used at Fremont sure looks like mine, and the one they identify as being used at Lansing does not. Mine clearly has Body LA, the code for Lansing and I presume yours has BF for Fremont.
I would not be surprised to find that GM data plates vary and that they were not unique to a particular factory.
Last edited by Lefty64; December 4th, 2016 at 07:57 PM.
Nice '64, sounds like she was a fun car back in the day. Great to see one being brought back to life. The early one's are very rare, some great advice here about not missing any original markings. Have had my '65 442 for over 40 years and still enjoy putting it thru the gears.
You can be proud of that car for years to come. Put it on a trailer and take it to a show. A friend of mine did that with a '64 Nova he took out of a farmer's field 20 years ago. It rode around on that trailer for a couple of years and then disappeared into the garage for the next 3 years. It took Best of Show in his class at the AACA AutoFairat Charlotte Motor Speedway 2 years ago. There is always hope but there aren't many Oldsmobiles. Thanks for doing this one proud.
classicmuscle442 - Yeah, there's nothing like that push back in the seat coming out of the hole or from a full throttle shift. Funny, I'm driving a pickup with more hp and torque than the 442 these days. It's quick for what it is, but needs to shed a ton to be a muscle truck. What would the world have been like 50 years ago if everything hot was fuel injected and supercharged like a run of the mill 6 banger truck today?
keener - Thanks for the info and help on the data plate.
btw - Dunno that I've done this one proud. All I've managed so far is to hang onto it for about 50 years and recently to get it out of a shed with a leaky roof. Getting it out where I can work on it was a big step for me. I've got no ambitions to win anything with it. But, I'd like to turn it back into a respectable driver and put the last few thousand miles on it to roll over 100k and make it low mileage again. Also wouldn't mind getting it back to refrigerator white as it is in my memory.
November 19th, 2016, 05:59 AM
, but I may make up for the chicken poop in mildew. I like the wagon, that would be fun. Had a buddy long ago with a '55 Chevy 2 door wagon, not a Nomad, with a 327, 4 speed and good suspension/tires. It would run and handle, and did not look as fast as it ran. It was nice to be able to haul stuff too.
.
