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.
Day, actual +91°, feel +102°, pressure 29.5 , humidity 61%
Passes
1125am = 18.749 @ 69.67 = 110.67 hp* and 97.65 hp*
1142am = 18.746 @ 72.72 = 110.72 hp and 111.05 hp
1212pm = 17.974 @ 77.19 = 125.61 hp and 132.81 hp
1242pm = 18.023 @ 76.07 = 124.59 hp and 127.11 hp
222pm = 18.069 @ 73.99 = 123.64 hp and 116.97 hp
317pm = 18.251 @ 62.28 = 119.98 hp and 69.76 hp
356pm = 17.641 @ 77.86 = 132.86 hp and 136.30 hp
429pm = 17.746 @ 78.56 = 130.52 hp and 140.01 hp
*Flywheel Horsepower production in order to see given performance at 3700 lbs test weight.
Pattern indicates the best passes where yet to come on that day. Perfecting your highest hp pass (when both et and mph power production is virtually identical).
= 17.335 @ 78.56 hp = 140.0 hp on both ends. (your 2nd pass of the day was virtually perfect, just underperforming)
The 317pm pass seems to be the only partially botched pass, did you let up early ?
And as I mentioned in another thread, but now with the advantage of more information. Your best overall pass at 356pm corrected to ideal conditions = 16.881 @ 81.421 MPH = 151.63 hp and 155.87 hp. Bowling Greens weather conditions on race day were killing 12.5% of you cars currently accessible power or roughly 20 hp. And Atco in fall/winter conditions are better than ideal. (Original road test at Atco fall/winter 1979 = 16.63 @ 81.89 MPH)
P.S. in order to see every bit of power production in a 1/4 mile pass your gearing has to be ideal. And you have to hit the 1/4 mile marker at + of your engines peak power production RPM. That's why she feels like she falls off a cliff when shifted into 3rd. Same with my ride, that's why I go in 2nd, so she's hitting 5000 rpm at the 1/4 mile marker. And my pass ends up being several 10ths quicker... Your baby probably would of ran 17.3 if you left her in 2nd and let up right after the marker. We both have similar highway gearing, if we had 3.73s we could leave the car in drive or manual shift into 3rd and end up with peak performance results...
Excellent data Phil, a huge thanks for this, it all makes sense. Good catch on my 3:17 run I almost gave up the race between 1st and second, I thought I over-revved 1st and did some damage. But I was completely mistaken and it was a good thing I got it back together and finished it. I was just about to hit the brake and shut it down in that race, my foot was completely up off the gas pedal at that point.
In the semifinal race I thought for a split second I would keep it in 2nd all the way to the finish line but I made mind up before the day started that I would not redline anywhere anytime and I was right there at 4300 rpm, the edge at that point. Since I dialed in at 17.45 there was also the chance I'd break out if I blasted away at 2nd to the end nevertheless. So I knew very close to the finish line I was cooked and sure enough, the 4 door roared past me for the win. Geez.
Phil, forgot to mention, my current 79 H/O was not the test car, however perhaps the one I sued to own was. I know Brian Monahan, who owned that 79 from 1981-1989 (purchased from Hurst Performance who was the original owner) did race it at Atco on several occasions. He sent me photos of it beating a Firebird with a 403 Olds motor at Atco one day.
Excellent data Phil, a huge thanks for this, it all makes sense.
Originally Posted by BlueCalais79
He sent me photos of it beating a Firebird with a 403 Olds motor at Atco one day.
My pleasure, love dissecting that kind of info. Just fed your results to Wallace Racing and Drag Times. Two awesome and informative sites. Put some order to the info collected, then expounded on it.
With regards to the original 79 H/O, I bet she pulled on a 403 Firebird. 79 H/Os were quicker, true stock to true stock.
(When it came to Trans Am the 403 couldn't touch the 400 T/A.)
Road test results are Car & Driver and Super Stock. Both the Bird and the Z were 4 speed manual. And 3.23 for the Bird, 3.73 for the Z, meanwhile the H/O was 2.73.
When viewed with the proper perspective the 79 H/O was in fact quick for its time. 0-60 in 9 seconds was moving when the average car back then was taking 12 seconds...
And as you know from the multiple times that Hemmings has covered the car. If you take away the 1975 emissions stranglehold. They are mid 15 second cars. Equal in performance to the original 442.
My pleasure, love dissecting that kind of info. Just fed your results to Wallace Racing and Drag Times. Two awesome and informative sites. Put some order to the info collected, then expounded on it.
With regards to the original 79 H/O, I bet she pulled on a 403 Firebird. 79 H/Os were quicker, true stock to true stock.
(When it came to Trans Am the 403 couldn't touch the 400 T/A.)
Road test results are Car & Driver and Super Stock. Both the Bird and the Z were 4 speed manual. And 3.23 for the Bird, 3.73 for the Z, meanwhile the H/O was 2.73.
When viewed with the proper perspective the 79 H/O was in fact quick for its time. 0-60 in 9 seconds was moving when the average car back then was taking 12 seconds...
And as you know from the multiple times that Hemmings has covered the car. If you take away the 1975 emissions stranglehold. They are mid 15 second cars. Equal in performance to the original 442.
Once again thanks for posting.
try to find drag tests for a late 70’s Formula Firebird with the 403 and available 3:23’s, or a 79 T/A 403 WS6 which came mandatory with 3:23’s
both the Formula and WS6 403/3:23 deal beat the 79 H/O easily. You’re using the 2:41 gear performance numbers for the Firebirds
Excellent data Phil, a huge thanks for this, it all makes sense. Good catch on my 3:17 run I almost gave up the race between 1st and second, I thought I over-revved 1st and did some damage. But I was completely mistaken and it was a good thing I got it back together and finished it. I was just about to hit the brake and shut it down in that race, my foot was completely up off the gas pedal at that point.
In the semifinal race I thought for a split second I would keep it in 2nd all the way to the finish line but I made mind up before the day started that I would not redline anywhere anytime and I was right there at 4300 rpm, the edge at that point. Since I dialed in at 17.45 there was also the chance I'd break out if I blasted away at 2nd to the end nevertheless. So I knew very close to the finish line I was cooked and sure enough, the 4 door roared past me for the win. Geez.
Nice to see a downsized A body running the 1320. What are the gears in that rear?
My 86 G body with the 185 h/p 305 powerhouse ran 15.83 but has 373 gearing and 215/65/15" tires iirc on it. Fast it is not.
Yep, that was a "California rear axle" I believe. This of course is an exaggeration, but can you imagine a 260, M-200 with a 2:14 rear doing about 1500 RPMs on the Interstate doing about 65? Watch out for that truck!
Yep, that was a "California rear axle" I believe. This of course is an exaggeration, but can you imagine a 260, M-200 with a 2:14 rear doing about 1500 RPMs on the Interstate doing about 65? Watch out for that truck!
On ramps, try'n to get up to speed to merge musta been fun.
I never tried, when I had it. I used town roads, most 35-45 mph. It was SLOW.
Last edited by CutlassMarc; Aug 2, 2025 at 05:46 AM.
try to find drag tests for a late 70’s Formula Firebird with the 403 and available 3:23’s, or a 79 T/A 403 WS6 which came mandatory with 3:23’s
I don't doubt you, but I say the exception doesn't set the rule. Meanwhile as you know the 79 H/Os combination was essentially always the same. The optional rear gear ratios seem to have never been chosen for them...
Originally Posted by CutlassMarc
My 86 G body with the 185 h/p 305 powerhouse ran 15.83 but has 373 gearing and 215/65/15" tires iirc on it. Fast it is not.
Nice !
Considering they ran 15.9 on their best day true stock, I would be proud of that. And although not considered fast, 15s in 1986 was healthy. True stock 5.0 Fox Stangs ran 15s back then... Let's look at a 305 Monte circa 1980, they ran high 18s. The difference between 1980 and 1985 is much like the difference between 1970 and 1975. But reverse, instead of slowing down 3 seconds in performance (1970-1975) vehicles picked up 3 seconds in performance (1980-1985). Unfortunately not Olds, they lost 3 seconds in performance by 1975 and never got it back, but thanks to the 79/80 R code coupes they maintained the same peak performance of 1975 till the end of rear wheel drive.
With regards to what is fast.
The Pininfarina Battista is the quickest production car money can buy today. 1900 hp and the 1/4 mile in 8.5 seconds.
If we just judged performance from that one lense view there has never been a quick car till today... And I for 1 do not believe that.
P.S. the L69 while not a natural born powerhouse, was a badass engine that took well to mods.
x2 on those rear axles for the 79 H/O, I'd say the majority of them were 2:73's, with the 2:56 for the California cars, per the 1/12/79 Bulletin. . I knew of only one 79 H/O owner who had 3:08's. I am guessing you could special order something else. Page 4B-84 of the 79 manual lists the rear axle identifications for the Cutlass that go from 2:14 to 3:42 but there is no list further breaking down what the H/O got or could get.
Well, 273's aren't that bad, I had another a/g body with are you ready for this 214's in the rear. What were they thinking. And no that is not a typo.
Years ago, I had a 78 Grand Prix that I had swapped in a worn out 425 Olds. It also had 2.41 gears, I could run the entire 1/8 mile in 1st gear.
While it was slow as congress (if memory serves me, I think it ran 9.40s) it was very consistent. As long as you could cut a decent light, the car would run the same time within a couple thousands.
And speaking of s-l-o-w, for the Nationals next year, I'm again bringing my 1994 Cutlass Supreme which I (badly) raced last year. I won't be racing that car, but there is a slight chance I may bring my black/silver 1979 Cutlass. The one you see in the avatar. If I do, I may race that, I'm interested to see if it would break 20 seconds in the 1/4 with its original drive train: 260 motor, M-200 transmission, 2:29 differential. It will be close!
Years ago, I had a 78 Grand Prix that I had swapped in a worn out 425 Olds. It also had 2.41 gears, I could run the entire 1/8 mile in 1st gear.
While it was slow as congress (if memory serves me, I think it ran 9.40s) it was very consistent. As long as you could cut a decent light, the car would run the same time within a couple thousands.
Presumably the statute of limitations has passed by now, but what mph did first and second gear top-out at? (2.41 is crazy, but those had tiny tires too)
I also had a 70 cutlass with 2.56’s. LC 2bbl 350.
I put a Holley 4bbl and headers on it. Really played with the timing and advance…15.86 at the track.
That felt pretty quick to me in 1992!
