86 442 Finally Got The 350

[sergio]

I got the 69 Olds 350 today. Has less than 5,000 miles on it. The guy I got it from is looking for the paper work on the rebuild he said it has over 300 horsepower. Just got to get that dam 307 out my 442 now. Might just wait til winter to start that project. My 307 has 62,000 orig miles and has a tapping sound, going on 2 years now. Cant figure it out, so im going to replace the engine.

 

[YGspider]

Congratz good find, I'm sure that Olds motor will be a big diffrence and sounds mean! 8)

 

[olds307 and 403]

Assuming it has flat top or small dish pistons and a better cam to hit 300 hp. Nice to have paper work, some people lie to rip others off. The extra torque will make it very fun. I took my daughter out for driving practice in the 4x4 with the Olds 350, she noticed a big difference over the 3.9 Dakota 4x4 😀 .

 

[Evan11]

Still got the #5 heads on it? A 1969 olds 350 made close to that hp stock, so you should be good. There was a 250, 310, & 325 hp version. I've got a '69 olds 350 in mine too.

 

[DoubleV]

Still got the #5 heads on it? A 1969 olds 350 made close to that hp stock, so you should be good. There was a 250, 310, & 325 hp version. I've got a '69 olds 350 in mine too.

Yeah, but those older HP ratings were totally bogus. They don't even rate HP like that anymore ( and haven't since 71 I believe ). Almost always when somebody speaks of HP, they mean HP as it's rated today. If that 69 350 were rated the way they rate HP now, it would only be about 210-220 or so with a 4 barrel and crappy factory duals.

 

[sergio]

Still got the #5 heads on it? A 1969 olds 350 made close to that hp stock, so you should be good. There was a 250, 310, & 325 hp version. I've got a '69 olds 350 in mine too.

Yeah, but those older HP ratings were totally bogus. They don't even rate HP like that anymore ( and haven't since 71 I believe ). Almost always when somebody speaks of HP, they mean HP as it's rated today. If that 69 350 were rated the way they rate HP now, it would only be about 210-220 or so with a 4 barrel and crappy factory duals.

The whole engine was redone, bigger pistions, bigger cam, and the heads where redone. So its not a stock 69 Olds 350
I have the paper work on the total rebuild. When I get a chance I will post what it had done.

 

[Evan11]

Either way, I think you'll be very impressed with it.

 

[YGspider]

Still got the #5 heads on it? A 1969 olds 350 made close to that hp stock, so you should be good. There was a 250, 310, & 325 hp version. I've got a '69 olds 350 in mine too.

Yeah, but those older HP ratings were totally bogus. They don't even rate HP like that anymore ( and haven't since 71 I believe ). Almost always when somebody speaks of HP, they mean HP as it's rated today. If that 69 350 were rated the way they rate HP now, it would only be about 210-220 or so with a 4 barrel and crappy factory duals.

I've heard that in the 70's the horsepower was rated to the crank and in the 80's the horse power was to the wheels so thats why the 1980s looks sh*t! But when really the 70's cars ran 14 second quarter miles too.

 

[Dragonist]

You will love the olds I do. Also just about everything on the 307 can swap over.

 

[DoubleV]

I've heard that in the 70's the horsepower was rated to the crank and in the 80's the horse power was to the wheels so thats why the 1980s looks sh*t! But when really the 70's cars ran 14 second quarter miles too.

No, that's not true. No car is rated at the wheels. They are all rated at the crank. It's just the earlier way of rating at the crank ( 71 and earlier ) was rated with no restrictions like no exhaust ( sometimes with actual headers in place of manifolds ), no water pump or other accessories, no air cleaner etc etc. As you can see, those HP numbers would be total fabricated BS as those engines would never really run in an actual car in that state.

Cars in the 80's, along with the equally lame late 70's engines, had low HP rating because they were simply underpowered crap.