Okay, you've heard it a million times. The difference here is that its not so much "who would win" as it is "what are the differences". Ive been into Olds for a while and noticed there are quite a few people on this forum who are into Olds as well. Id just want to get a fresh take on what makes the Buick different. What parts/areas are better, what are worse, the differences between building Olds performance and Buick performance, etc. To start, i'll say the Olds has the longest stroke of the 4 major big blocks (excluding Caddy of course) and the Buick has the largest bore. I'll also say from a purely asthetic point of view the Buick is a big beautiful horsepower hero while the Olds is a mean ugly torque monster! haha. Lets take it from there shall we?
In my opinion the only edge the Olds 455 has on the Buick 455 is a stronger block. I know a guy with a 1700 HP Olds 455 in a mud bogging truck. Twin Turbocharged.... http://www.v8buick.com/showthread.php?t=225628
Buick has front mount distributor. shaft mount rockers. easier to work on. both good motors. Buick has cam bearing problems olds has oil return problems. both easily addressed. can't go wrong with either but Buick still my number 1 choice. i hate all the funky accessory brackets on the olds.
Its not a matter of excluding a certain motor as much as it is just a comparison of two. I also excluded the Chevy 454 and Pontiac 455. Mainly looking for a comparison of what i know vs what i dont is what brought it up, figured it might be helpful to other new members as well From what ive gathered the Olds has a much sturdier bottom end than the Buick. Ive heard of people running some seriously mad numbers with a stock Olds bottom end, ive also heard the Buick refered too as "glass". I believe both are great motors myself, just trying to acquaint myself better with the Buick is all
Ah, here's one i just remembered. Olds 455s swap perfectly with Olds 350s (and i think most other Olds motors too), and ive heard getting the Buick 455 to swap into a 350 or other Buick powered car is a bit more of a chore Also Olds have that really annoying "drilled crank" problem. As they didnt find it necessary to drill all the cranks for manual transmission use, only the cars equipped with a manual transmission got a crank set up for it. So there's the added task of getting the crank drilled and/or getting the pilot bearing installed if you arent lucky enough to score a pre-drilled crank and plan on running a manual transmission
Car Craft did a great article on a comparison of all the BB motors. They were rebuilt with performance in mind. The Olds came in last in power, the Buick came in near the top.
Yeah i saw that one, it was a great read. There were a couple things that bugged me with that though, the Olds didnt get an intake to match the Edelbrock heads (it wasnt available at the time) and the Buick got all T/A Performance stuff instead of Edelbrocks like the rest of the crowd, which i would expect T/A to give better results as its a Buick specialized brand rather than Edelbrock's more general approach. Not trying to bash the Buick or anything, like i said i love them both, i just felt like the Olds got kinda screwed on that one.
Olds got the short end of the stick on that one, IMO. It was the first engine they built, and I think they put it together before they had the comparison in mind. So it actually was short on a few spec's if I recall correctly. Like compression and/or valve lift, and CC just put it in because they had a "close enough" rather than build it to match the other's in spec's. Or at least that's what I remember of it (other than Buick being King and Pontiac coming in second on torque but the torque curve was already on the down slope from the rpm they started testing at).
After Buick, I say Pontiac,Caddy, Olds. Of course Im a little bias for obvious reasons.:Brow: Hear is a good read on this from last year from the HAMB. http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=575946&highlight=buick+olds+455+better
Yeah i feel like the Olds was just kind of tossed in there randomly. They had to bore the block 60-over so i feel like the core wasnt the best to begin with. But aside from that, the Buick still made amazing power in their build up, and they arent even true Buick builders. Anything that can take a 440 has gotta be mean. Say what you want, there's a reason Buicks target Mopars all the time, they're MEAN haha. I wish i could find the actual build on that Buick, the Olds and Pontiac are easy to find but the Buick is hidden. I cant really pick a favorite myself, i like Olds and Buick, i feel like neither of them ever get the credit they desirve. Everyone always jumps right to the 454, 460, or 440. I love the Mopar 440s and the Pontiac 455s but theyre just getting a little too popular anymore and the reason i like the off-brands is because theyre the underdogs and because theyre unpopular. The Caddy is pretty cool too but i just dont see myself driving a Cadillac and i like to keep motor and car brand the same. Dont ask why, it just bugs me haha. Id be interested to know the head flow difference between Olds and Buick. I know Olds heads are terrible, even the sought after C heads still dont flow for crap really. Wondering how Buicks head-wise and what heads are better and how to ID them and such
For sure! Both are great motors. Id still like to hear some fact for fact comparisons though, the thread started leaning towards "which is better" and thats not really what i had in mind with the thread, just wondering how they differ and how the builds of the two motors differ. Ive heard a lot about how important sonic testing is on the Buicks Thanks for the responses guys! Very interesting thread :TU:
Pontiac and Olds have the same long stroke (4.25). Buick has a shorter stroke (3.90) than a 454 Chev (4.00) so it's a torquer that likes to rev. Just have to be reasonable with it. Pontiac stock weak point was cast rods.....never understood that....esp with all the 4 speed GTOs being flogged and broken in the day....
Doesnt the Pontiac have 4.155 bore and 4.21 stroke? And it would make sense that the Buick would rev better than the other 3 with the shorter stroke
I hear Olds have oil drain back issues, or rather pump too much oil to the top end. I've read tech tips of using holley jets as oil restrictors in the mains to keep the oil in the bottom end. I could be mistaken though, I haven't built an Olds. I'm with you on the pontiac cast rods, wth? I've had people tell me I'm mistaken about the rods in my OHC Pontiac 6 being forged with the arguement "Why would the six get forged rods and the V8 get cast?". Heck if I know, but glad the six has forged rods.
my experience with an Olds has kept from ever having another. I had a boat with a 455 in it. I changed the oil by pulling the distributor and pumping out the oil.... unfortunately, it's possible to put the distributor back in and push the hexagonal oil pump rod back into the oil pump. When I fired it up, it good pressure (riding on the top of the shaft). It lasted maybe 1/2 mile on the river... It's interesting that the premise is the Buick is a better rev'ing motor; but if it were, then most of the jet boats from the 70s would have had Buick motors.... I honestly think the Olds rev's better.... but there is no science behind that opinion.
