If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
SWAPING A PONTIAC 301 WITH A 1971 OLDS 350
IM LOOKING TO SWAP A PONTIAC 301 WITH A 1971 OLDS 350 INTO A 1979
PONTIAC FIREBIRD.IS THIS AN EASY TASK?DO I HAVE TO CHANGE ANYTHING IN THE CAR? ANY HELPFUL TIPS WOULD BE APPRECITED .THANKS |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
sure thats not a 307 your starting with?
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
I DONT KNOW.WHENI BOUGHT THE CAR I WAS TOLD IT WAS A 301.I WAS TRYING
TO FIND A PONTIAC 400 BUT I FIGURED THE OLDS 350 WOULDNT BE TOO MUCH OF A PROBLEM TO PUT IN.I WILL CHECK TO SEE IF IT'S A 307.WOULD THE 307 MAKE A DIFFERENCE WITH THE SWAP? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On 18 Jul 2005 16:25:34 -0700
"LouLou" > wrote: > I DONT KNOW.WHENI BOUGHT THE CAR I WAS TOLD IT WAS A 301.I WAS TRYING > TO FIND A PONTIAC 400 BUT I FIGURED THE OLDS 350 WOULDNT BE TOO MUCH > OF A PROBLEM TO PUT IN.I WILL CHECK TO SEE IF IT'S A 307.WOULD THE 307 > MAKE A DIFFERENCE WITH THE SWAP? Please stop yelling. -- remove MYSHOES to email |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"ed" > wrote in message ... > sure thats not a 307 your starting with? > > Pontiac did make a 301 engine. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
mst wrote:
> On 18 Jul 2005 16:25:34 -0700 > "LouLou" > wrote: > > >>I DONT KNOW.WHENI BOUGHT THE CAR I WAS TOLD IT WAS A 301.I WAS TRYING >>TO FIND A PONTIAC 400 BUT I FIGURED THE OLDS 350 WOULDNT BE TOO MUCH >>OF A PROBLEM TO PUT IN.I WILL CHECK TO SEE IF IT'S A 307.WOULD THE 307 >>MAKE A DIFFERENCE WITH THE SWAP? > > > Please stop yelling. > and tell us what kind of car you're doing the swap in. 70's firebird would probably be easy if the mounts line up. A Fiero might be a bit more work. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"LouLou" > wrote in message oups.com... > IM LOOKING TO SWAP A PONTIAC 301 WITH A 1971 OLDS 350 INTO A 1979 > PONTIAC FIREBIRD.IS THIS AN EASY TASK?DO I HAVE TO CHANGE ANYTHING IN > THE CAR? ANY HELPFUL TIPS WOULD BE APPRECITED .THANKS > > FIRST SHUT OFF THE CAPS LOCK. Now. Could I ask why you want to do the swap. That 301 is a better engine that the olds 350. It was BUILT for racing. The 301 is actually a 400 that was decked and destroked to allow it to run in trans am racing. It is one beast of an engine when turned back up. Has a stronger crank, higher revving valvetrain and MUCH stronger block. In turbo form it will really get up and go. Had one in a '78 Grand Prix, man what a beast. bone stock it would run 120mph like nothing. Almost wish I never got rid of it but the frame rotted off in the back (repaired it with a rear clip) and then a deer decided it wanted a ride. That said IF you still plan on the swap it is easy since they share the same bellhousing. The mounts may need to be moved forward depending on which mounts the olds had. Fuel system won't be a problem since they are both carbed. Steve W. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Steve W. wrote:
> "LouLou" > wrote in message > oups.com... > >>IM LOOKING TO SWAP A PONTIAC 301 WITH A 1971 OLDS 350 INTO A 1979 >>PONTIAC FIREBIRD.IS THIS AN EASY TASK?DO I HAVE TO CHANGE ANYTHING IN >>THE CAR? ANY HELPFUL TIPS WOULD BE APPRECITED .THANKS >> >> > > > FIRST SHUT OFF THE CAPS LOCK. > > Now. Could I ask why you want to do the swap. That 301 is a better > engine that the olds 350. It was BUILT for racing. The 301 is actually a > 400 that was decked and destroked to allow it to run in trans am racing. > It is one beast of an engine when turned back up. Has a stronger crank, > higher revving valvetrain and MUCH stronger block. In turbo form it will > really get up and go. Had one in a '78 Grand Prix, man what a beast. > bone stock it would run 120mph like nothing. Almost wish I never got rid > of it but the frame rotted off in the back (repaired it with a rear > clip) and then a deer decided it wanted a ride. > > That said IF you still plan on the swap it is easy since they share the > same bellhousing. The mounts may need to be moved forward depending on > which mounts the olds had. Fuel system won't be a problem since they > are both carbed. > > Steve W. > are you high? which racing series was a Pontiac 301 entered in? I wouldn't use one in a demo derby. If I owned a boat that needed an anchor... I'd use the 301 that came in my 80 TA project car. 150hp doesn't impress me in a 4000 pound car. I'm trying to remember how many bearings it had, but it wasn't enough. The airflow through the heads sucked too. Ray |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"ray" > wrote in message ... > Steve W. wrote: > > "LouLou" > wrote in message > > oups.com... > > > >>IM LOOKING TO SWAP A PONTIAC 301 WITH A 1971 OLDS 350 INTO A 1979 > >>PONTIAC FIREBIRD.IS THIS AN EASY TASK?DO I HAVE TO CHANGE ANYTHING IN > >>THE CAR? ANY HELPFUL TIPS WOULD BE APPRECITED .THANKS > >> > >> > > > > > > FIRST SHUT OFF THE CAPS LOCK. > > > > Now. Could I ask why you want to do the swap. That 301 is a better > > engine that the olds 350. It was BUILT for racing. The 301 is actually a > > 400 that was decked and destroked to allow it to run in trans am racing. > > It is one beast of an engine when turned back up. Has a stronger crank, > > higher revving valvetrain and MUCH stronger block. In turbo form it will > > really get up and go. Had one in a '78 Grand Prix, man what a beast. > > bone stock it would run 120mph like nothing. Almost wish I never got rid > > of it but the frame rotted off in the back (repaired it with a rear > > clip) and then a deer decided it wanted a ride. > > > > That said IF you still plan on the swap it is easy since they share the > > same bellhousing. The mounts may need to be moved forward depending on > > which mounts the olds had. Fuel system won't be a problem since they > > are both carbed. > > > > Steve W. > > > > are you high? which racing series was a Pontiac 301 entered in? I > wouldn't use one in a demo derby. If I owned a boat that needed an > anchor... I'd use the 301 that came in my 80 TA project car. > 150hp doesn't impress me in a 4000 pound car. > I'm trying to remember how many bearings it had, but it wasn't enough. > The airflow through the heads sucked too. > > Ray The net output of the turbocharged 301 (Engine Code "YL") varied but was generally cited as being 210 horsepower at 4000 rpm, down 10 horsepower from the mighty T/A 6.6 engine laid to rest after the '79 model year. Bolting on the turbocharger bumped the torque up to 345 lb/ft @ 2000 rpm, a 25 ft/lb increase over the T/A 6.6L engine. The compression ratio of the engine was lowered to 7.5:1 and was fitted with a derivitave of GM's Buick electronic control unit to monitor boost and timing settings. Maximum boost was achieved at around 3500 rpm, a little below the shift point. The turbocharger was a grand idea, but the technology to make it work properly was nonexistent at the end of the 70's. As the newer high octance fuels were ave today were not yet availiable, the engine had to operate on substandard fuels (Sunoco 94 was and the like nowhere to be found) of 87 to 90 octane, and this would have led to severe detonation under boost if it were not for the ECU. By placing a vibration sensor in the valley between the cylinders which would detect detonation, the ECU interrupted this chain reaction by retarding the ignition timing and reducing boost pressure until the detonation was gone. By utilizing these computer controls, this process was repeatedly continued during the operation of the engine, attempting to keep the engine running at optimum performance all the time. By eliminating so much timing, the result was a none to powerful feeling from the turbo engine. With today's fuels, many owners claim quite reasonable performance and many of these engines have lived well beyond the 150,000 mile mark with little other than routine mainenance. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Steve W. wrote:
> the operation of the engine, attempting to keep the engine running at > optimum performance all the time. By eliminating so much timing, the > result was a none to powerful feeling from the turbo engine. With > today's fuels, many owners claim quite reasonable performance and many > of these engines have lived well beyond the 150,000 mile mark with > little other than routine mainenance. ok, I get your point, you like the 301. I'll sell you mine, cheap. 0-60 in 10 seconds isn't a selling feature for me. Didn't they also siamese port the intake and reduce the number of main bearings? Hey, I like the idea of the 301 - low weight, short stroke... but the reality is they were slow then and are really really slow now. Two of my favorite car designs are the 80 TA and 80 Vettes, but with non-stock engines... 1980 wasn't a great year for horsepower. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
98 Olds Intrigue won't start | John Clonts | Technology | 0 | July 10th 05 06:41 PM |
Saturn vs Pontiac | marx404 | Saturn | 16 | April 5th 05 02:22 AM |
For Sale: 3 Ford Trucks, 1968, 1969 & 1971 | [email protected] | 4x4 | 0 | December 18th 04 09:20 AM |
misc cars 4 sale 55 Lincoln, 56 Pontiac, 57 Olds, 58 Buick, 58 Cady, 59 Cady, 70 Cady | G. Westburg | Antique cars | 0 | October 13th 04 05:22 AM |
FS: 1997 Rob Atchison Pontiac Firebird "FUNNYCAR" Promo Sheet | J.R. Sinclair | General | 0 | March 3rd 04 05:46 AM |