Another FNG

69hurstolds

Geezer
Supporting Member
Jan 2, 2006
5,767
113
They could have done better in the umph department. But considering GM held them to 307 cubes, that was what they had to work with. The 3.73s woke up the 307 a bit.

If EPA had no say, then use a modified HVAC housing to clear the 10.5 CR 455 valve covers properly. Give it a rear gear of 3.42, and use a TH400 behind the 455. No need to worry about fuel mileage, right? Factory 2.5" dual exhaust without cat(s). Would that necessitate raising the body off the frame a bit (not the best idea) or redesigning the footwells to clear a factory correct double hump crossmember for that TH400 to fit that dual exhaust.

I'd make sure that cowl scoop was redesigned to function and be useful against the base of the windshield.

Along with a much better suspension and lower that beech about 2" front and rear, with at least some wider tires than the 215s on maybe 15x9" wheels. They didn't have bigger diameter wheels from the factory back then, but they could have.

I know the Lightning Rods were the 80s H/O thing to have, but I'd have a dual gate for a shifter. When adjusted right, the Rods do fine, but if they're not, they can be a nightmare. With a dual gate, the only thing you need to do for adjustment is get the right geometry on the trans selector shaft lever.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: 4 users

Texas82GP

Just-a-worm
Supporting Member
Apr 3, 2015
7,146
113
Spring, Texas
They could have done better in the umph department. But considering GM held them to 307 cubes, that was what they had to work with. The 3.73s woke up the 307 a bit.

If EPA had no say, then use a modified HVAC housing to clear the 10.5 CR 455 valve covers properly. Give it a rear gear of 3.42, and use a TH400 behind the 455. No need to worry about fuel mileage, right? Factory 2.5" dual exhaust without cat(s). Would that necessitate raising the body off the frame a bit (not the best idea) or redesigning the footwells to clear a factory correct double hump crossmember for that TH400 to fit that dual exhaust.

I'd make sure that cowl scoop was redesigned to function and be useful against the base of the windshield.

Along with a much better suspension and lower that beech about 2" front and rear, with at least some wider tires than the 215s on maybe 15x9" wheels. They didn't have bigger diameter wheels from the factory back then, but they could have.

I know the Lightning Rods were the 80s H/O thing to have, but I'd have a dual gate for a shifter. When adjusted right, the Rods do fine, but if they're not, they can be a nightmare. With a dual gate, the only thing you need to do for adjustment is get the right geometry on the trans selector shaft lever.
I like all of your ideas.

If the 307 could have benefited from more development like the Buick 3.8 did, or the SBC, it could have been a lot better. Better heads (aluminum), higher compression (9.5:1), better exhaust, sequential fuel injection, better engine management.

Something like that with what you suggested and you'd have a Olds powered hot rod that you could be proud of. It would have been cool.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

64nailhead

Goat Herder
Supporting Member
Dec 1, 2014
3,585
113
Upstate NY
‘84 was a bad year/era for GM and factory performance. EFI wasn’t perfected until the late 80’s and EGR was being used for all of the wrong reasons imho.

Aside from that, your car is fabulous car that needs some help under the hood unless you want to cruise with it. Keeping it Olds powered is not the cheapest route, but doable.

Welcome from upstate NY.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Oct 14, 2008
7,651
113
Melville,Saskatchewan
Nice choice on the 84, it would be my first choice for another G body. I say an Olds 350, in place of the 307. Edelbrock is testing a new aluminum head that allows the mechanical fuel pump with a 68cc ultra modern chamber for the 350. With the new Mahle 10cc dish 4032 forged 1mm ring pack pistons on the new Molnar rods, 9.2 to 1 compression with a mild 222/228 Crane roller cam it is putting out around 440 hp/425 tq. Plenty of power, for plenty of fun. Welcome and enjoy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

CopperNick

Royal Smart Person
Supporting Member
Feb 20, 2018
1,074
113
Canada
Like the man said, everyone on this board used to be an FNG or a NOOB. Yo, and welcome aboard from the land of the semi-frozen chosen, aka Canader, or Cana-duh, or, ah, Canada, Y'all don't mention what region of the lower 48 you claim as home. North of the Mason/Dixon and East of the Mississippi pretty much puts you in the rust belt.

Most of the residents lurking inside the various threads LOVE pictures. They are also a great way to keep track of what you are working on and what you have run into, particularly if there is a time lapse between teardown and re-assembly.

Speaking here solely and only for myself, the only stupid question is the one that doesn't get asked. (Although there are quite a few that fall into the categories of Moot or Rhetorical or already asked and anwered somewhere else on the board) If you are in need of information, there is a high probability that someone here has it or knows who to ask or where to look for it.

Anwyay, welcome in.



Nick
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Turbo Zach

Royal Smart Person
Sep 8, 2015
2,442
113
50130
Welcome and good luck with your project. I am interested in where this is headed. I for one would like to see how a smog 307 takes to boost.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Streetbu

Know it all, that doesn't
Supporting Member
May 22, 2011
2,753
113
Central NY
Welcome, one piece of advise, make sure the car still has the 8.5" rear end under it. It will have square ears on the corner of the diff housing instead of fangs the 7.5" has.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

CopperNick

Royal Smart Person
Supporting Member
Feb 20, 2018
1,074
113
Canada
I am curious in one respect at this point. Just for my own clarification here, We talking 84 H/O and all, is this the Monte Carlo SS H/O or the Olds 442 H/O? Thinking from the described size of the motor that it is likely the Olds but, if so, now wondering if a W31 configured mill would bolt in or???



Nick
 

Rktpwrd

Comic Book Super Hero
Supporting Member
Feb 2, 2015
3,429
113
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
I am curious in one respect at this point. Just for my own clarification here, We talking 84 H/O and all, is this the Monte Carlo SS H/O or the Olds 442 H/O? Thinking from the described size of the motor that it is likely the Olds but, if so, now wondering if a W31 configured mill would bolt in or???



Nick

H/O for the Monte SS = High Output, but in this instance, H/O for the Oldsmobiles most likely = Hurst Olds.

And yes, a W30 engine in 1978-80 is just a 350ci Olds engine. It will bolt directly in on factory Olds 307 frame stands.
 
Oct 14, 2008
7,651
113
Melville,Saskatchewan
The 68 to 70 W31 is an Olds 350 in its factory high performance form. The updated version of the Olds 350, I mentioned is the best of both worlds, more power with better manners.
 

GBodyForum is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com. Amazon, the Amazon logo, AmazonSupply, and the AmazonSupply logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.

Please support GBodyForum Sponsors

Classic Truck ConsolesDixie Restoration DepotMike's MontesP-S-TSouthside Machine PerformanceUMI Performance

ContactAdmin@GBodyForum.comfor info on becoming a sponsor