What to do with an ‘80 Pontiac 301

[ck80]

Drive it untill you have something better to drop in................ My .02

If that's as to mine.... it's not safe. Rings are so shot the car you've got to double pedal it at stop lights or it stalls, all the while burning massive quantities of oil.

Which is fine, owes me nothing and we've got many other cars. But this was what I drove back when the wife and I first started dating a long long time ago. so, it's got sentimental value to her. A new engine of some sort is in its future. And it doesn't need to be built to go fast, just cruise. We've got late model cars north of 500hp to play with for that.

 

[SJ-400]

I drove some non-turbo 2nd gens with 301s in them and they were OK for what they were if you wanted to cruise and weren't after speed.

As I keep talking about randomly, I have an 85 firebird I can finally touch again as 5 years later it's out of evidence no-touchy hell. I know the 3rd gen platform borrowed heavily enough from the 2nd gen that the front subframe.can use the exact same motor mounts as a 2nd gen car. So, any parted firebird that was Pontiac powered can donate its crossmember mounts and they work.

At some point I know I NEED an engine for it, the one in there could be used for fogging mosquito duty or run it to screen a destroyer, it'd serve either purpose. And it's sat 5 years since.

I keep saying if I can find a good running poncho I'd like to make it Pontiac powered instead of chebby.

Rear end is a borg-warner 9-bolt, 3.23 gears. Should be sufficient I'd think. Has a 700 trams so I'd need to run an adapter, no biggie. Everything else would likely be OK from spring weight to cooling capacity. I'd save the original just because, but, even though it's an 85 SE it's really not super desirable as such.

That'd be the goal for it anyways, assuming it could be worked in. I'd have to see how time looked though, getting all the way up into Portland-ish territory might be stretching the trip length just a tad too far up there and might need to let someone else grab it. I've got to see how much time we have to work with for the trip.

My ‘80 GP has highway gears in the back so it was never a tire burner with the 301 but it was reliable. I sold the carb years ago as it was 800 CFM from the factory or so I was told. Let me know when you are coming up, Biddeford is a little closer and has an exit off the pike. I have a friend there that has a garage and we could do a pickup truck or trailer transfer at his place if I knew when, no hurry.

 

[SJ-400]

My ‘80 GP has highway gears in the back so it was never a tire burner with the 301 but it was reliable. I sold the carb years ago as it was 800 CFM from the factory or so I was told. Let me know when you are coming up, Biddeford is a little closer and has an exit off the pike. I have a friend there that has a garage and we could do a pickup truck or trailer transfer at his place if I knew when, no hurry.

PS, I’ve owned the car since new and always used Valvoline 10-30, then Durablend when it came along in ‘96, changed religiously at 3,000 miles. Never burned oil. Not sure how sitting for 20 years has affected it though. I used to crank it a little with a torque wrench on the harmonic balancer one in awhile but haven’t don’t it for years. I’ll check it tomorrow.

 

[olds307 and 403]

Even though the '80-'81 blocks are "supposed" to be the turbo blocks- they are not. Even though there is a "T" cast into the side. Only a car ordered with a turbo got the beefed up block. It has slightly larger main bolts and dished pistons to lower the compression. But there is nothing wrong with an '80 4 barrel motor and I hope someone appreciates it for what it is. I have a '79 in my Bonnewagon and people can't believe how great it runs. Use good gears out back and it will surprise you with peppiness while getting 20mpg all day long.

This is good info. The pics I have seen of actual Turbo blocks are quite beefy. I may have an actual side by side pic. There have been some cool and expensive stroker 301's with real Pontiac heads and the cut and welded standard deck intake manifolds with the actual Turbo blocks. Yeah, the regular 301's were a decent engine for the late 70's/early 80's, power wise. Thanks for clearing up the Turbo block myth.

 

[Bonnewagon]

What happened is that the factory made the "T" casting with a few improvements and used it for all the '80-'81 301s. But unless it was a bona-fide turbo car the main bolts and pistons remained stock. I think 7/16" vs 1/2" bolts. And of course the dished pistons were to reduce compression. I have a 1981 NOS Buick dealer service replacement short block so I know of this. Buick lost the venerable 350 and used a lot of 301s so they must have been pretty good. The first thing I wanted to see was the dished pistons and they were non-dished. I also have a 1980 real Turbo TA complete engine and yes, it had the dished pistons. You have to remember that the 301 was developed back in the gas crunch pre-computer days. It did what it needed to do which was get great mileage, pass emissions without a ton of garbage added on, and be a reliable decent small V-8. The Olds 307 and Chevy 305 all came from this same mentality. 400 owners gagged at it but the party was over. No more tire shredding V-8s and give Pontiac credit for making the Turbo 301 to at least try to get some performance back. The problem was that the C.A.F.E. fuel economy standards demanded dead rear end ratios to get maximum mileage and minimum emissions. If you want to wake up a 301 just put some better gears out back. 3:23s are just about perfect.

 

[SJ-400]

What happened is that the factory made the "T" casting with a few improvements and used it for all the '80-'81 301s. But unless it was a bona-fide turbo car the main bolts and pistons remained stock. I think 7/16" vs 1/2" bolts. And of course the dished pistons were to reduce compression. I have a 1981 NOS Buick dealer service replacement short block so I know of this. Buick lost the venerable 350 and used a lot of 301s so they must have been pretty good. The first thing I wanted to see was the dished pistons and they were non-dished. I also have a 1980 real Turbo TA complete engine and yes, it had the dished pistons. You have to remember that the 301 was developed back in the gas crunch pre-computer days. It did what it needed to do which was get great mileage, pass emissions without a ton of garbage added on, and be a reliable decent small V-8. The Olds 307 and Chevy 305 all came from this same mentality. 400 owners gagged at it but the party was over. No more tire shredding V-8s and give Pontiac credit for making the Turbo 301 to at least try to get some performance back. The problem was that the C.A.F.E. fuel economy standards demanded dead rear end ratios to get maximum mileage and minimum emissions. If you want to wake up a 301 just put some better gears out back. 3:23s are just about perfect.

Thanks Bonnewagon, this kind of in-depth knowledge is exactly why I subscribed to this forum!

 

[Bonnewagon]

For more 301 info see this site. Good guys and they love the 301. http://www.301garage.com/forum/

 

[olds307 and 403]

For more 301 info see this site. Good guys and they love the 301. http://www.301garage.com/forum/

That is a very neat forum, a lot of good knowledge there.

 

[Texas82GP]

I drove some non-turbo 2nd gens with 301s in them and they were OK for what they were if you wanted to cruise and weren't after speed.

As I keep talking about randomly, I have an 85 firebird I can finally touch again as 5 years later it's out of evidence no-touchy hell. I know the 3rd gen platform borrowed heavily enough from the 2nd gen that the front subframe.can use the exact same motor mounts as a 2nd gen car. So, any parted firebird that was Pontiac powered can donate its crossmember mounts and they work.

At some point I know I NEED an engine for it, the one in there could be used for fogging mosquito duty or run it to screen a destroyer, it'd serve either purpose. And it's sat 5 years since.

I keep saying if I can find a good running poncho I'd like to make it Pontiac powered instead of chebby.

Rear end is a borg-warner 9-bolt, 3.23 gears. Should be sufficient I'd think. Has a 700 trams so I'd need to run an adapter, no biggie. Everything else would likely be OK from spring weight to cooling capacity. I'd save the original just because, but, even though it's an 85 SE it's really not super desirable as such.

That'd be the goal for it anyways, assuming it could be worked in. I'd have to see how time looked though, getting all the way up into Portland-ish territory might be stretching the trip length just a tad too far up there and might need to let someone else grab it. I've got to see how much time we have to work with for the trip.

What could have been.....

 

[78Delta88]

The 301 is a good little engine, but is limited. The Q Jet on the Turbo TA was 830 CFM, the non turbo was smaller, don't member actual number at moment. I had a new 81 Turbo TA and it had the C3 emission system on it. The trick to that system was to buy an extra O2 sensor and mount it to the fender. The sensor never gets hot and the C3 system runs open loop. The 81 would run great and strong until the engine got to operating temp, then the ECM would take over and the car was a slug. My sister had the 80 Turbo Formula, much better driving car. Both had the TH350 with lockup TQ. Things to remember..., the Turbo units had forged rotating assembly 7.5:1 dished pistons. The normal aspirated 301 were 8.0:1 cast. The crank was lightened significantly as a weight reduction measure. The turbo block was cast with thicker webbing for the main caps, but still 2 bolt mains, no 4 bolt mains. The 80 distributor had vacuum advance and springs and weights. The 81 did not, so no mechanical advance or vacuum advance. The 301 non turbo firebird came with a TH200, geared lower but made it responsive. I ended up replacing the TH200 from our 80 Formula (non-turbo) with a TH350 from a Buick.