captjim

Bottom line to all this, IMHO, is that it isn't all that easy to hit 350 HP in an Olds 350, especially with "stockish" heads and keep the manners. Doable, certainly, but at some point there needs to be compromises. However, the good news is that with an Olds, you don't NEED that 350 HP to have a "quick" car that is reliable and fun to drive.

coppercutlass

The sad reality is there is so many proven combinations out there for oldsmobiles yet people act like there is some magic cam that will produce x amount of power. I ran 13.8's with a 260h cam and appx. 9 to 1 compression , I ran 13.3's with a cobbled up 350 with 10 to 1 compression and a 280h comp cam with small carb and tight converter. My current combo I think should be good for high 12's with a lunati voodoo cam and 10 to 1 compression with the same #6 heads that where on the 13.3 engine just big valves no porting. There isn't a real "science" to this all it takes it careful planning. I managed a 13.3 @ 103 with a slapped together 350 . You guys get wayyyyy to serious.

coppercutlass

@ captjim I agree that its hard to make power with an sbo with "stockish parts" and keep the street manners . It really needs to be on the ragged edge to be on the cutting edge of what was hot e.t.'s in the 70's . That is not to say that sbo's cant make power its just a matter of how crazy you wanna get.

grampy

Cutlessefi let me give you some business advice. If you want to expand you need to put your ego in check.no one like dealing with a know it all mean and cocky person .you might be loseing some sales right now.I myself won't deal with some one who if I might have a problem with the product .knowing your attude that I might get a hard time from you .why would I buy from you even if you have a better product when I can go elsewhere with better customer support.dyno numbers are not bible ,every one spits out different result.it has proven some dyno numbers are over inflated or engines just don't perform as advertised once put into service.

cutlassefi

If you're referring to my responses to gearman, please review all of his posts. He called Olds motors "pigs" then changed the conditions of the op's build, adding head work. He then boasted of many GM builds but then back peddled and said he had limited if any experience on Oldsmobiles. So who came off as brash? I did nothing but question his back round and comments. Different info came out then didn't it.

I stick to my guns. I offer advice, facts and first class customer support. Ask around for yourself, please. If you need something I will give you my full and cordial attention, guaranteed.

Thank you.

coppercutlass

I will say this. Cutlassefi and I have butted heads in the past but even then he has given me some advice. We might not see eye to eye but he helps a lot of guys here free of charge !! I think he has been around on this forum long enough to where if his way of dealing with people would hurt his buisness he would have probably changed his ways. Take that for what its worth and I'm not even a customer.

boese1978

Cutlassefi-"I offer advice, facts and first class customer support. Ask around for yourself, please. If you need something I will give you my full and cordial attention, guaranteed."

I can vouch for what Mark says above. He has gone above and beyond what I would expect from any vendor. I have sent him a multitude of questions some I should have know the answer to but he he ALWAYS was respectful and never condescending AT ALL.
The only arrogance and condescension I have seen come from people that feel threatened by his knowledge with our Oldsmobile builds.

GEARMAN69

Back pedal my ****, how about "doggy" or "puppy" instead of pig? Any way offering a "build recipe" is not changing parameters of the OP question since he offered little to no info of his engine or intentions other than asking about cams. Letting him know he wont get to 350 hp without A: headers B: larger cam than he may want and C: head work where at least two of the three A,B,C minimum are required to get there is not the wrong answer to give him. Of course offering up an "inadequate" cam only to spare him the additional expense of a converter change that a bigger cam would require is just so wrong,.. geeze. He is asking about gear changes now so maybe it will all come together for him. He is getting plenty of good info that is for shure. I wish he would say if his 69 engine is already rebuild stock and fresh and these mods are not on an old engine that really needs to be gone through first. Kneel...

70cutty

X2 I can vouch for Mark too.

I bought a custom grind cam for my 355 build which had a of the shelf CompCam in it, Mark's cam really improved the performance and sounded a lot better.
I also had Mark build my 463, and just like boese1978 I had all kinds of questions, Mark took time to answer them all, no matter how stupid and annoying they may be. Every time I had a concern about something, he was quick to respond whether on the phone or email.

It was a pleasure to do business with him and results speak for them selves.
(check out my 463 build with Procomps thread)

boese1978

[QUOTE=GEARMAN69;743161]Back pedal my ****, how about "doggy" or "puppy" instead of pig? A

Why do you feel the need to act so "above" these lowly Oldsmobiles? if you don't like them move on or at least keep your arrogant comments to yourself. Careful, your "moron" is showing.....

GEARMAN69

[QUOTE=boese1978;743173]
So you are better with your name calling, what a hypocrite you seem to be. First off, I am not above anything , thats your words. A stock SBO head is a dog for flow that is why my comment. Get over it. I like the cars very much so not moving on. I just have a guy that disagrees and wants to continue the argument that he has made personal and I have been equally at fault for particpating in that but the difference is I never insulted his knowledge or abilites yet that is all he has done to me and that makes him the A hole more than me.

76olds

A question to do with a Cam and it gets to this ?? Really. The internet forums can really hurt an outstanding businessman. I hope the moderators shut this thread down in best interest of all posters.
A businessman myself Jus' sayin. ANUF-SAID
Eric

captjim

[QUOTE=GEARMAN69;743175]
Almost any of the stock iron heads produced in the "Muscle car era" can use some work. All have flaws, especially the hard turns on the exhaust. So then, they are really all "dogs", compared to the technology of today.

GEARMAN69

170-180 / 130-140 cfm in the .400-.500 range is pretty low, working it to a minimum of 210-220 / 150-160 alone should help a good bit for a street car. Later this Fall when I have my hands on my new project I will take the #6 heads to the flow bench for baseline and the plan on those is to go biggest valves I can 2.07/1.71 or so and the bowl work , etc. Lloyd has done some "rough cut" port jobs cheap for us before ($200) without the time consuming sanding rolls / polishing (used to pay $400 for port and polish with Superflow bench results) and go for the most flow I can. Once a few years ago I did a home pocket port on a set of #452 BB Mopar heads and had never looke at or done any before and with the stock smaller size valves and Lloyd said the baseline on those is about 210 on the intakes similar to a 2.11 valve stock Pontiac and he flowed the 452's after I did only a pocket job and they went on up to 269 cfm and 192 on the exhaust so I was pretty pleased with that (50 cfm+) with just me and my Dremel. Rough cut jobs have done decent on old school 389 heads for use 30+ cfm gains or so intake / exhaust on stock small valves with stock valves job.

70cutty

I am a little confused here, what does that have to do with OP's question?

70cutty

To answer OP's question, to get 350hp you will need more than a cam. Cam should be the last on your list of upgrades as it needs to be matched with the rest of your engine, TC, rear end gears etc.
Start with headers, some duals (if you don't have it already) and rear end. Work your way from there.
However, if you don't want to sacrifice MPG leave it the way it is. JMO

GEARMAN69

Relevant if he wants 350 HP with a small cam upgrade thats only good for 320 HP otherwise. 210 /160 cfm or more out of his heads should get it closer

boese1978

Moron, imbecile or idiot, take your pick,the shoe seems to fit you well.

GEARMAN69

Post #2

76olds

Put-r-ther Edin , Awesome post!!! Straight up shootin and to the point.

GEARMAN69

[QUOTE=GEARMAN69;742334]T o my point in my first choice, go any bigger than that and MPG will suffer. and if your not running at the track anyway why push towards more cam that is really needed. A well tuned 325-340 hp actual engine number is gonna be fine for you I am sure. If you want the HP without the MPG loss and the 350 HP goal do it with the milder cam and make up the gap on good exhaust with headers (a must) and some mild head work (pocket porting and gasket matching). QUOTE]

Post #5

76olds

Grampy nailed it earlier on in this thread as well!! Put-r-ther!!!

1968CutlassSupreme

I am not an expert, though I have gained much knowledge and experience as a result of the kindness and direction of several here, especially Mark (CutlassEFI). Since I am not the expert, I will only speak to that which is known to be true and leave the fine points to those who are OLDS experts. The original poster asked a question about "a cam and lifter kit or whatever." His intention is to get 350 HP @ 400 TQ. He said, in this thread, which is what we are talking about (we cannot answer a question that was not asked), that everything is "bone stock." The issue here is that unless the "bone stock" engine has most of the HP and TQ already, adding a cam, especially a small grind cam, will not reach the target sought. That's the bottom line. In order for the original poster to reach his goals he will have to do some head work as well as improving both the intake and exhaust manifolds for the increased fuel/air flow. Changing the cam and lifters (ignoring for the moment the "whatever" aspect) will not meet his goals. Period.

For what it's worth, Mark (CutlassEFI), knows what he is talking about when it comes to Oldsmobiles, especially. Other GM engines are not the same (other than their nature), and as such cannot be used when giving advice on Olds engines. He is extremely helpful to all who ask. He has been working with me for about six months, helping me not only figure out what is best to reach my goals but also through a very unfortunate and sticky situation I am currently dealing with - for zero compensation. Further, Mark is an accomplished engine builder, and a cam guy especially, he knows his stuff so I would take what he says to the bank any day.

BTW, GEARMAN69, approach matters. It's probably not a good thing to come to an OLDS forum and make statements such as those calling olds 350s a pig, or "if your [sic] done relieving yourself," etc. The folks here are generous with their time and assistance and would probably have welcomed you here with open arms if you hadn't come in like a bull in a china shop. We don't need puffery, insults and name calling. That's what children do. If you are a GM expert (minus OLDS) then maybe you ought to keep yourself within your realm of expertise.

Let's remember to be civil, and that much of this deals in the realm of opinion. Let's not take personal shots and try not to take disagreement personally and we'll all get along much better...

GEARMAN69

captjim

For what it's worth, Mark (CutlassEFI), knows what he is talking about when it comes to Oldsmobiles, especially. Other GM engines are not the same (other than their nature), and as such cannot be used when giving advice on Olds engines.

Simply not true if you know the head flow , brand means little , engines are air pumps. A combo is a combo if head flow and velocity are the same or close enough.

Yes and no. It isn't that simple. While basically true, there ARE differences in design such as intake runner length, bore/stroke, rod length, chamber design, port shape, etc that will make techniques that work well on one engine not work as well on others. Take for instance the Olds center exhaust port, it negates a LOT of the scavenging benefits of headers, not so on other engines. Same with manifold designs and on and on.

Keep in mind the goal of Oldsmobile engineers; to make a quiet, reliable engine to move it's fleet of land yachts. Performance was not a priority. These engines excel at their intended purpose, good throttle response and low end torque with a broad, flat torque curve. The much maligned 307 was a FANTASIC engine, it lived a looooong time, and moved some really heavy vehicles around. But, was it a power house? Nope. But it did it's intended job very well, IMHO.

GEARMAN69

Thats correct Jim, Yes Bore and Stroke factors included like if its over square or under square also the siamese center exhaust I am familar with as Pontiacs is the same. Heck we share lifters too and distributer housings but different drive gears. Wonder why old Dr. Olds liked a straight grind cam over a split grind considering the poor exhaust flow ?

captjim

So which is it? Are all engines "air pumps" and identical or do different designs require different strategies? It sounds contradictory to me.

BlackGold

Would someone please explain why people in this thread are making it sound so hard to get 350 HP out of an Olds 350? The factory got 325 HP out of it in the W-31 using stock intake and exhaust manifolds (no headers) and no porting of the heads. NHRA stockers in the day were exceeding that and still passing tech.

GEARMAN69

Over course there are different strategies but the constant that doesn't change much is the HP potential from the air flow characteristics (like a weak exhaust can be helped by the split grind cams like us Pontiac guys like) , a big bore short stroke ratio engine typically will have higher rpm for peak torque and HP in comparison to another engine identical specs with the bore and stroke reversed , the long stroke engine peaks earlier. Just like a larger CI engine if held back by a small head flow number that already restricts the smaller engines already will suffer even lower rpm peaks and very limited HP. Constants like matching compression ratios to cam duration to keep cylinder pressure up (torque and response). Use of dual plane versus a single plane intake to move peaks around. Basic engine combos matching gear and stall is all basic stuff, work on lots of things. If head flow is the bottle neck, increase head flow. Look at a W31 with its long duration cam but modest head flow. Take that engine and mill and deck it to 11:1, go even larger on valves and port to 250/175 cfm , use a single plane intake and a set of nice headers but still the stock W31 cam , it would go easily over 400 HP and beg for even more cam to reach 450-500 hp when before it probably was too big compared to the rest of the stock engine. Its surely been done but I would be curious how much a stock W31 would pick up just going to a split grind cam that was a bit smaller on the intake but a lot bigger on the exhaust duration like say a 230-240 split.

70cutty

Gearman why don't you start your own thread in which you can explain to all of us how the Oldsmobile engine really works. I think 350turbro deserves that since this thread made a wrong turn long time ago.

captjim

I will try . Most everybody agrees that factory HP ratings were unreliable and inaccurate. The exact same engine in a Toronado made more HP than in a Cutlass. Also, the fuel that was available for high compression engines is not available today. 350 flywheel HP eqautes to 275-300 RWHP which equals low 13s to high 12s in a 3800 lb car. How many 350 powered Cutlasses ran that? Even the Ram-Rods only ran low 13s on a good day. Also, HP is is a function of torque and rpm, to make decent HP the engine needs to rev, which Olds engines really don't excel at. IMHO, you can't toss stck car racing into an argument, apples and oranges.

captjim

Please take a course on writing, very few of the above are actual sentences, making it confusing and difficult to read. I'm done.

GEARMAN69

How about I will quit posting when all you quick taking new snarky jabs at me that keep it going. He has other posts elsewhere that have not been train wrecked. Oldsmobiles are not special over other engines to basic common sense understanding of what will work or what needs to be done to get a desired result.

GEARMAN69

Barring any more snarky comments I am done too.

rubeng442

,,That is true. All engines respond to more compression, more airflow and better cam timing. How you go about achieving those things is where the paths diverge.

grampy

Since this post has grown way out of intention.since the poster is looking for help locally. I might as well put in my beliefs on camshaft .this is my guide for 350 CI street strip .it is not set in stone but to put me in the ball park.camshaft centerline and lobe separation can fudge things one up at down sometimes.so here it is .up to 205 @50 can use 8 to 1 .for every 5 degrees of duration @ 50 add a half point compression .when you get to 220 to 225 @ 50 it might be time to add some stall to a auto trans @ 230 stall for sure .once you go over 235 it is most likely strip less street.. As for rear gear this is where it get interesting . right from the start for fast ETs start with a high gear 3.73 to.411as you move up in power your RPM will follow.a stock 350 will run about a second faster or better from a 2.73 rear gear that most cars came with.if you can't go that high of a gear , go to a overdrive trans.I have lot of experiance on rear gears back in the late 80s mustangs and camaros I put so many 3.73 for sticks and 4.11 for auto in mostly stock cars for fast et at the strip. With overdrive it did not kill MPG.if you have a 3 speed trans it how much RPM or gas milage you can stand .it matters on on high your tires are but 2600 to 3000 RPM @ 70 is in the ball park.if you less than described compression per duration it might not make it any faster if you had put in the smaller cam in the first place .tq rpm spread and rpm drop on shift is a factor.it about useable average power.I have seen it many times a person up his cam from a mild 205 @50 jump to 225 @50 without a compression increase or put in a converter run the same or worse and have less part throttle driveability.

BlackGold

Well, Jim, thanks for trying. But I asked about the W-31, not W-30. The factory never put a W-31 engine in a Toronado, and NHRA stockers back in the day routinely spun their W-31s over 7000 RPM, so I think it's fair to call it a high-RPM engine. You're right that the factory horsepower ratings have always been suspect; but in the case of the W-31, they were suspected low. It may have made 325 HP at the RPM claimed, but that wasn't the top .....

captjim

Fair enough. What is the best and average ET's that you have heard of from guys running these? Of course, with decent tires. Thanks, Jim

coppercutlass

I think the w31 stockers regularly ran in the low 12's depending on class.

captjim

Not talking about the SS guys, those are not practical numbers, IMO. I'm talking real life cars that are driven around.