ROCKETMAN269V

It sounds like you're running manifold vacuum to your distributor. That will give you more advance at idle and it will decrease when you hit the throttle. Change your vacuum advance source to "ported" vacuum and you'll get advance when you accelerate, where you need it. Find a vacuum port that is above the throttle plates and test it with your gauge. It should have little to no vacuum at idle, depending on throttle opening at idle, and show an increase in vacuum when you flash the throttle. This might also lower your "curb idle" a little, as you'll be running less total timing at idle. Give it a shot.

oldcutlass

I disagree, vacuum advance goes to 0 at wot. What your suggesting will have 0 effect on power.

70sgeek

isn't the E-brock 3711 an EGR manifold? If so, I'd presume any port openings are plugged to eliminate vacuum leaks.

deadeyejedi

Yes it is I have the egr blocked and I'm using my original choke stove on the other side. I do have the vac advance connected to manifold right now I have tried a couple different ports on the carb but didn't change a whole lot . And to answer an earlier question I think my mechanical advance is all in at around 3500 rpms.i will double check that though

ROCKETMAN269V

I don't believe that deadeyejedi nor myself mentioned WOT in reference to this issue. He stated that his distributor vacuum dropped from 17" at idle to 10" when he "thorttled it up". My point was that his TOTAL timing would decrease based on a decrease in vacuum. Ported vacuum would give you an increase in vacuum at partial throttle, thus more advance to get the car moving. I've had countless young enthusiasts come into my shop with a complaint of no power and bad fuel mileage after installing the distributor suggested by a counter person at some chain operated speed shop. Inevitably, it has NO vacuum advance. We replace it with the same type, with vacuum advance, tune the timing and carburetor adjustments and get a marked improvement.

oldcutlass

Sorry, I was stuck on the making power part of the discussion.

AZ520

I just got done with timing an olds 350, I picked up the crane timing limiter kit, I used the medium springs and limiting vac advance about halfway, pulls good with these settings: Use manifold vacuum, not ported. Unplug vacuum line to distributor and cap the line, set total mechanical advance to 36-38 degrees at 3k-3.5k rpm, at idle it should be around 12-14, doesnt really matter, total timing at high rpm is what counts. After that reconnected vacuum line to distributor, you should have 30 degrees at idle and around 50 degrees at 3k. If you get pinging back of timing 2 degrees at a time until its gone and you are done. If it doesn't run right with these settings something else is up with it.

AZ520

Manifold and ported vacuum, always misunderstood. The initial advance really helps dig the car out of the hole, makes it run cooler and get better fuel economy, running ported made it run like crap and get hot under load, better off with mechanical only than ported. It is very confusing because if you have a dail back timing light you with see the timing advance with an increase in rpm, but the engine is not under a load. Ported vacuum will increase under a load and over advance the engine causing pinging and overheating, manifold vacuum will go to zero underload and the engine should be at 34-38k total. Do some internet researching and then test for yourself, thats what got me to get a handle on it.

jpc647

I'm not going to make any friends with this writeup, but I just sold my car, a 1972 Cutlass "S". It had a stock rebuilt original motor in it(maybe 20k miles on the rebuilt, when I sold it), and 3.23 gears. I assume the stock converter. Peg leg rear, and I couldn't get it to burn rubber. Power breaking the car bogged out my car too. I can only imagine what it would have been like with the standard rear end gears. My engine ran great, started perfectly, was smooth, no skips or rattles. It idled with ~17 in park, -1 or -2 in drive. But it would move very similar to how yours moves when revving, etc. Our vacuum readings are pretty identical. Just a dog, and not very efficient. My girlfriends Cruze is a dog, but at least it gets 37mpg.

Let me tell you, a stock low compression 1972 Oldsmobile 350 motor, is anything but a "ROCKET". It's a dog. It will always be a dog. Without a lot of money into the motor, it will always be a dog. I did everything, I bumped the timing up as much as I could(about 20* initial), I did a full tuneup, I put lighter springs in the distributor to bring the timing in sooner, I changed the carb (sold it with an Edelbrock 1405 on it, if you have a Q-Jet, keep it!),I had an aluminum Edelbrock intake, I played with the vacuum advance, I ran a phenolic spacer between carb and manifold, I even replaced the radiator and cooling thermostat to put a 180* thermostat in it, to try and get the car to run cooler. You name it, I tried it. I started countless threads on here, try to make the car into something it wasn't. At the end of the day, a stock 1972 Cutlass sucked in performance in 1972, and it still sucks now.

Did I make improvements? Yes. But it's only a 180hp motor. And a 2 ton car. It's only 8:1 compression. It's slower than every family sedan on the road today, and that's just how that cookie crumbles. In stock form, they are a waste of the gas they burn.

What other year Rocket 350's did you own? If they were 1970 and before, those are higher compression, better motors.

If you have a Quadrajet, there's a guy on the forum, Miles71 that has a thread about his rebuilt, and the rods/jets he used that he found gave him the best results. He was able to get his car to pull hard. You can try his settings. I never got that far, I ended up selling my car before dumping another $400 into rebuilding the Q-Jet and trying it. I probably would have been disappointed. For the $50, it'd get his jets/rods and try them. You might be satisfied. My daily has AWD and it cranks out 385hp/4XX fl/lbs, and still gets 24/25mpg when I want it to. I came to the realization, my stock 350 would never, ever make me happy because of it.

PLEASE DON'T REPLACE THE Q-JET WITH AN EDELBROCK. It'll be the worst decision you make.

I'm interested to find out how you make out with the checking the degree of the cam.

RROLDSX

Sounds like you screwed with it and it never ran right. My 72 350 2 bbl could smoke the L60-15 peg leg for a good hundred feet. Beat on it for 100,000 miles and it still had 150 psi in each cylinder. Of course the newer engines have more power but not all have any low end torque. You can't compare old to new, if you did you'll lose the cool factor. Anyone can buy a new muscle car. Sorry you were disappointed. Guess it's time to quit the Oldsmobile brotherhood and give back your decoder ring.

deadeyejedi

I have owed a 71,73,74,77 all 350s and all great running engines .we just took my sons 1971 cutlass out of storage took it for a ride (original 350 rocket )when he stomped it from a dead stop he put down 200 feet of one wheel peel .273 rear. I do get what you're saying , the 350 is not a powerhouse in stock form but this just ain't quite right . I'll figure it out sooner or later . And don't get me wrong it's a great running engine in everything but the takeoff department .again I thank everyone for their experience and advice

jpc647

When was this? l60-15 makes it sound like this was many years ago. And tire technology has changed. If those were bias ply tires, irrelevant. I had T/A's and Cooper Cobra's and from a dig it wouldn't bark the tires. All of the cylinders in that car were within 5%. I didn't say all Oldsmobile sucked, I just said a stock 72 cutlass isn't anything to write home about in the power dept. Sorry if that offends you. Or maybe my engine was just tired. Maybe the op's is too.

Anyone can buy an old one too. I could write a check, and buy a restored w30 just as easy as I could buy a new muscle car. I'm not sure what your point is?


Not a rebuilt motor? Was this stomping on it straight from a stop, or nailing it 90* at a stop light/etc and continuing straight. That makes a big difference. I could sit at the end of my driveway, punch it, turn right to continue on the street, and the 3.23 rear tire would spin all through second gear. But try and do that straight, without the weight shift causing the tire to break free, and nothing.

RROLDSX

Sorry your decoder ring isn't working, I didn't understand a thing you said.

deadeyejedi

No not rebuilt but I must confess it was a slight upgrade and it is a post car so about as light as it gets for a cutlass . I would be thrilled if mine would do half that . I just read the thread in rejetting the quadrajet jet ,this may be an option for me

jpc647

Sorry that you want to live in fantasy world. But I brought up a couple of valid points and you just don't want to hear it. That's fine.

But many a car can do a burnout, and not be "fast". IE, bad tires. Bias ply tires. Etc.

olds 307 and 403

Your performance sounded the same as my 260. I have always found all Oldsmobile V8's very torquey for their displacement. The new stuff needs RPM's to do anything.

RROLDSX

Think we're gonna need that badge back too.

coppercutlass

I had a 307 on my 72. With a 3.73 gear and 2200 stall. 650 Holley. It was a bone stock 307 with everything my low 13 sec 350 had as it was out of commission I dropped a 307 to just cruise. It would lay rubber like no ones business. I burned oil , barely had any oil psi yet it had pep !

Cutlass Fan

I remember my stock 72 S 350 2bll was somewhat of a dog until I installed dual exhaust and lighter advance springs, that really woke it up! Up here in Canada they came with a 2.73 axle. Can't actually if it would do a one wheel peel after I put on radials though, but it was a peppy car.

Tiha

- which one from cloyes ?

deadeyejedi

cloyes 9-1113 has three notches on the lower gear to set it from 4 degress advance ,normal ,and 4 degrees retarded.i used the normal setting because there was no cam change .imo i have the timing dialed in as good as it going to get until i mess around with the weights in the distributor .

olds 307 and 403

I used the same timing set, it degreed pretty much bang on.

442fanatic

My two cents into the fire

A stock cutlass 350 with automatic transmission isn't going to be a high performance unit like the Ralleye 350 olds was.

Sounds like that engine was ordered with a very mild cam - which makes a difference. Alot of the adjustments in timing you mentioned, carb swap, intake swap, timing chain swap will not better a mild cam.

The automatic transmissions mated with a very low stall torque converter made these cars the cruisers with smooth slush shifts. Stock torque converter engaged way before the power band - giving you the ******* off the line.

When a customer rolled in to the dealership back in the day he/she could check off how they wanted the car built. Sounds like this one was ordered as a family cruiser.

To get the performance you wanted out of that cutlass you needed: a higher stall torque converter, a medium level shift kit in front of your 3:23 gear ratio. A better cam with lift and duration to make that engine breathe along with your carb/intake/timing adjustments.

True dueled exhaust with headers to help with the engine exhaling.

I am a novice compared to all the other guys on here, but I had an olds 350 overhauled on a 76 cutlass, with a stock th350, 2:92 rear, stock torque converter.
Was not happy with the performance either, even though I did put a bigger cam in it, higher compression pistons from the smoggers.. true duel exhaust..

What wasn't changed at that point was as mentioned above - torque converter (to get the engagement on the power band), shift kit for transmission (so it shifted and went imediately in gear not smooth and slushy), and rear end gear (i went 3:73 first way to low, then went with 3:42 and kept it).
I wasn't happy either, but then realized the machine shop guy wasn't whom I should have depended on solely. I was young, internet resources weren't like they are today. And didn't seek out a mechanic/racer who had the knowledge at the time that these on the forums have.

Not going to touch on new point, as it is a moot point in comparing something 40 years apart in technology, wear, etc...

Enjoy the newer vehicle. Cheers

olds 307 and 403

I would bet a torque converter in the 2000 stall range would help a lot. I have seen stock converters stall at 1400 rpm.

442fanatic

Upon talking to the transmission shop about the possbility of overhaul to have the TH350 behind a 455, he advised medium shift kit, showed me how to adjust it's shift in the modulator after install, and advised a tad over 2k stall, i would have to dig in the file to figure the exact. This is all going back to the stock rear axle with a 3:42 gear with an Auburn limited slip.

Made a big difference, plus having installed a Hurst Dual Gate shifter nice to have those solid shifts when running hard..

jpc647

Well it was a 350. It was the original motor. Maybe a stall converter would have helped. Maybe my cam was retarded. The car was fine from say 7mph onward to about 70(when it would really start to drop off). But from a stop, it just wasn't enough.

Maybe a lot of new cars. My bimmer produces max torque at 1400rpms.


You want it? Come and get it.

Fun71

The Rallye 350 used the same 350-4bbl engine that was put in every other Cutlass 350-4bbl (excluding the W-31). There was nothing special about it being in a Rallye.

oldcutlass

The Yellow made it faster...

GEARMAN69

Exactly unless it is a stick car.... it blows my mind how small the 68-70 310 hp rated 350 automatic cam is. 187/200 @ 050 good god

A friend gave me a 1988 Muscle Car Review mag that had a Rallye 350 in it that was F85 automatic with factory 3.91 rear-end.... talk about out of breath quickly..

442fanatic

Good to know, figured maybe it was a bit hotter. Just 4 speed transmission and different gear option and the rest was paint and badging, and less the chrome wheel rings.

Fun71

As GEARMAN69 posted, the 4 speed manual trans engines got a better cam than the automatic transmission cars. This was not specific to the Rallye, though - any Cutlass with a 4 speed (excluding the W-31) had the same thing.

And the Rallye had the same rear gear options as any other Cutlass.

deadeyejedi

i realize this thread is ancient but i never did get the the bottom of this car being such a slob out of the hole. Its been a great running and driving car and have put lots of miles on it ,but im determined to get a little more performance from it .when i get my recurve kit for the distributor ill start there. right now im getting about 38degrees all in at 3000 rpms. would getting it all in at 2500 increase my low end power?i switched out my quadra jet with my test mule holley and get the same sluggishness. i am also in the process on duplicating the quadrajet build that a fellow member did with my nearly identical set up .(he claimed a marked improvement after trying many of the things i did). over the winter if time and money allows i will swap out the stock convertor with maybe a 2000 rpm stall .when i get this all done i will post the results in a new thread with an abbreviated back story

olds 307 and 403

The stock 1600 rpm stall converters suck, so a 2000+ stall helps a lot. Even with 2.56 and 2.78 gears with a 2300 and 2400 flash stall converter, 1/4 block burnouts, no problem. My 70 now behaves like your 72 with a 1600 stall stock TH350 converter and
2.78 gears.

1967Supreeeme

My 67 with 4 bbl 330 has these same issues. True duals (2 1/4") H pipe, 3.08 rear, frsh TH350 with mild shift kit, Jegs 2000 stall converter, Mallory Unilite with MSD 6AL/MSD coil. It is very much a dog from a stop, but runs great at higher RPM. Compression in each hole ranged from 145-195 (2 cylinders low, but doesn't smoke or burn much oil). I haven't had a chance to check much else, but I think it needs head gaskets and checking the cam timing. It sounds like it has an aftermarket cam in it. It really doesn't even feel better than the malfunctioning Jetway trans. Pretty disappointing. While checking the cam timing, I can check that the timing is correct on the balancer as well. What else should I check?

oldcutlass

Unilites have 24* mechanical advance built in to them. What is your initial set at? With some cylinders showing low compression, I would chase that issue first.

olds 307 and 403

Pretty sure the Unilite can be adjusted like my Mallory Breakerless distributor, mine had 24 mechanical out of box, set it to 18. Adjust to more like 18. How fast do you have the curve coming in? How much vacuum advance?

1967Supreeeme

This distributor is mechanical advance only. I'm pretty sure I need to pull the heads, check cam timing and then distributor springs before re tuning it. I had a MSD 6AL and coil, so I installed those too. Opened plug gaps up to .045. I suspected a weak ignition, but I think I've eliminated that. It fires within 1 crank if the carb is full, and 1 click of the starter if its been warmed up.

olds 307 and 403

Why no vacuum advance? It helps part throttle response without a doubt.

ROCKETMAN269V

X2 See post #45 above.

olds 307 and 403

Basically what I say as well. Olds with their old school chambers need vacuum advance. I understand with more compression and cam that is more difficult. Of course expect a diet of 91 or 93 octane, non ethanol if possible.