Could there have been a '79 Hurst Olds with a factory 403?

[pose_442]

Okay, this is simply a hypothetical idea from boredom on a rainy Saturday, but follow me on this.

I know that these weren't available in '79. However, after looking at some info regarding how Olds was able to put the Olds 350 in these cars and keep it legal, they could have done the same for the 403, right?

If I read this correctly, it states that Olds could equip a limited number of these Hurst's (under 2500) with the Olds 350 since there were already Olds vehicles eqipped with these engines for the model year.

The 403 was offered in '79 as well so Olds could have done something similar. Offering up a Hurst "442" ("4"03 cubes, "4" bbl, "2" tailpipes).

Am I off base, or is this a missed opportunity?

Anyhow, wouldn't this be a cool idea for a "factory equipped" Cutlass?

 

[joe_padavano]

There's a little more to the certification process than simply having the engine in production in another car. The EPA testing (even in 1979) certified the engine and drivetrain for a specific chassis. In addition, GM needed to comply with CAFE requirements. At a minimum, the certification would need to demonstrate that the original installation was in a vehicle of similar weight and similar drivetrain configuration. Having said that, I'm now wondering if the 403 T/A might not have been close enough. We'll never know and there may have been other factors, like corporate directives, engine production capacity, etc.

 

[srercrcr]

You're missing something. Gas was very expensive...just like now. The auto manufacturers were scrambling to get fuel efficiency....no gbodies were fortunate enough to get the 400 size engines. The Pontiac 400 will bolt into the Grand Prix and Lemans, so it could have been a "go" if conditions had changed.

 

[85 Cutlass Brougham]

Yeah, and by 1980, even the Trans Am did not get the 403. It had to make due with the sucky turbo 301 pinging itself to death. Plus, GM may not have thought that the rear axle would have been good enough to handle it, as the F bodies of that era had the 8.5, just like the X cars from 1975-79, no matter what engine they came with. G bodies were stuck with the crappy 7.5 axle, which was a modified Chevy Monza axle. The late 70's were not a good time in America. The Carter years were dark days, with the second OPEC oil crisis and gas lines, coupled with mortgage rates around 18% and something called the "Misery Index", a term coined by President Carter to describe the combination of high inflation and high interest rates and the effect they had on the country. He said "The country is in a malaise". This is why if you have ever seen the episode of The Simpsons where Mayor Quimby erects a statue of Carter, the inscription reads : "Malaise Forever".

Then again, sometimes it takes a Jimmy Carter to give us a Ronald Regan.

 

[srercrcr]

I don't know. The times are what YOU make of them, not Washington.
Late 70s ...I was full of optimism...just finished my MBA, had two beautiful toddlers, bought a new house, took annual vacations, and bought a brand new loaded Grand Prix....which brings me here.

 

[clean8485]

Even though it would be a car that was never actually produced, I think it would be something neat to build as a "tribute" car. Provided it is done properly, it should get some double takes at car shows & cruises.

 

[beeterolds]

The 403 is a great motor.. mine put out very very little emissions when i had mine tested in my 1983 Cutlass... i believe they should have put that engine in the H/O but noooooo the public got stuck with the lame 170hp 350.. the 403 would have been more fun and gotten better mileage..due to the simple fact it made an extra 50ft lbs of torque at the same rpm..so you wouldnt have to press the pedal nearly as far as the 350... just my .02..but GM had different thoughts.

 

[joe_padavano]

You're missing something. Gas was very expensive...just like now. The auto manufacturers were scrambling to get fuel efficiency....no gbodies were fortunate enough to get the 400 size engines...

Actually, I think YOU'RE missing something. The 79 H/O was a limited production car. The targeted buyers for that car didn't care about mileage and the production numbers were so low that it would have had no impact on GM's CAFE average if mileage had been 1 MPG. No other Olds G-bodies got 350s either that year. That's why I think the problem was related more to availability of the 403s and the lack of a strong enough axle to handle the 403's torque reliably (keep in mind that the 8.5" didn't come out in the G-body until 1984).

 

[85 Cutlass Brougham]

What I find sort of humorous is that some of our cars actually get better fuel economy swapped than stock. With the 110 storming horses of power that the 231 V6 provided my car stock, it would get 14 mpg in the city, over and over again. With my Chevy 350 swap, an overdrive trans and more aggressive gearing, it will get somewhere around 16-17 mpg city. I think the biggest problem with fuel efficiency was the combination of parts as GM clearly had crutched things atop other crutches and ruined what good had existed when these engine designs were new in the 50's and 60's. A smaller, less powerful engine is only more efficient at a steady state speed in a heavy car. Otherwise, you are ringing it's neck just to get the poor car moving off the line. This is of course, an over simplification as there are many other factors involved in making a efficient but fun car to drive. Had GM used the same combustion chamber design as a 1950's BMC A series engine in the 70's instead of waiting till the 90's, things would have been different.

 

[85 Cutlass Brougham]

I don't know. The times are what YOU make of them, not Washington.
Late 70s ...I was full of optimism...just finished my MBA, had two beautiful toddlers, bought a new house, took annual vacations, and bought a brand new loaded Grand Prix....which brings me here.

I agree, but marketing is based on the average consumer, not the individual. For example, most people don't keep cars longer than 3-4 years, I have owned my AMC since 1989, my Cutlass since 1993, and my Frontier since 1998. No one markets to people like me because I am odd and not predictable.