I was gonna use my 72 350 2V in my Regal since its such a gem, but now I'm reconsidering. I have a 69 350 4V that would be WAY more powerful. I can't afford a rebuild so I gotta go with it as is. I suspected this engine to be wore out cause it smoked and popped through the carb. The car reads 46K, or 146K. I checked the oil and found it about 2 quarts over full and thin. It was gassed. I added the proper oil to the correct level. The smoking greatly reduced. Since the light smoke it makes now causes my eyes to water, I think its running rich. I fixed a vacuum leak and added a HEI. I pulled the valve covers and it was crud free. I'm gonna put in new plugs today since I used old ones. Heres my results: Compression, nearly 160 psi per cylinder(book calls for 165). 18 inches of vacuum at idle with an almost completely steady needle. Oil pressure, 20-25 at Idle and 50 when revved. I'm liking the numbers its showing, but I don't want to swap engines now and again in two months if its bad. Any opinions???????????????
Good question, I have been having some of the same thought but once i start to compare the engines from the years. my 80 350 is almost better than them all if it just had more compression. When you compare 69 and 72, the 72 kinda looks better but who knows, Im may just be seeing things. http://ViragoTech.com/BUI-68-82.rtf my 80 has big 66cc heads and a monster cam but not enough compression to even start to use it. Matt uzzled:
I'm back with the 146K or 46K mile debate. I removed all the exhaust manifold bolts today. Only two broke ( a new record for me ) . None of them were burnt, badly rusted, or worn to the "hourglass" shape I'm used to seeing. The are the original bolts with the original retainers. I also found my pass side manifold to be cracked. I've heard this is common, but this is the first I've seen. This weekend I'll check the timing chain. If thats good I'll probably pass out.
1980 H.P. Disp. C.R. Head cc 165 350 9.06 66.35 Deck Piston Type H.P. Disp. Cl Dish/Dome Ht/Vol Cam Lift 165 350 .002 Dished .131" 11.86cc 474/474 ------- 1969 Specifications for the 1969 Buick engines. H.P. Disp. C.R. Head cc 230 350 9.00 51.0 280 350 10.25 51.0 H.P. Disp. Cl Dish/Dome Ht/Vol Cam Lift 230 350 .010 Dished .235" 377/384 280 350 .010 Dished .075" 17.3 cc's 377/384 ------------------- 1972 H.P. Disp. C.R. Head cc 155 350 10.50 50.0 195 350 10.50 50.0 Deck Piston Type H.P. Disp. Cl Dish/Dome Ht/Vol Cam Lift 155 350 .010 Dished .075" 17.3cc 392/408 195 350 .010 Dished .075" 17.3cc 392/408
There is no way the 1972 4 and 2 barrel 350s had a compression ratio of 10:50. GM cut all ratios in 1971 to meet tougher emission laws. I appreciate the printout but the 72 info is flawed.
The info is comming form the NHRA website, here is the full header for 1972. Issued: Feb 25, 1972 Revised: 1-1-96, 2-24-96, 10-02-01,2-21-03 Bulletin #: BUI-72 Page 1 of 1 http://www.nhra.com/tech_specs/classification/index.html#buick Other than that I have no idea. Why the info confuses me about my 80 engine. Form the looks of it, I got a monster motor compared but no compression. 165hp must be under rated allot or my work and mods have losened up some power. I had a 150hp 79 camaro and it sucked. The wagon gets up and goes. Matt uzzled:
According the NHRA info the ratio didn't drop till 75 to 9.61 and they all stayed above 9.61-9.70 till 1980 when it dropped to 9.06 oops in 1977 the 9.06 showed its ugly head and then hide till 1980. 1977 had 9.06 / 9.61 / 10.21
Well looks like the NHRA site is worthless for Buick info. Or maybe they don't list 2bb engines. course why would they build two motors, one for 2 and one for 4bb??????
For 1970: 4bbl GS engine was 10.25:1 4bbl Skylark engine was 9.0:1 2bbl Skylark engine was 9.0:1 Different heads, I'd guess. http://www.taperformance.com/facts.htm Engine facts up to 1970 anyway...
NHRA specs are for what you are allowed to do to a given engine combination under their rules to ensure that their factoring equations keep different engines from different manufacturers competitive in a given class. In no way can those numbers be misconstrued as the stock specifications from the factory. Thats how Joe Blow from nowhere minnesota can run his 72 skylark 4 door in the stock class at a 12.50 with stock parts ou: . The word "stock" in nhra terms really means nothing when comparing real world engines. How many "stock" parts do you suppose there are in a pro stock car?
Thanks for clearing me up, Nate, I just thought that the heads on GS engines were different (stage heads? What do I know). :grin:
350 I hope you meant 350 the 455 does have diffrent heads. and i think there is really only one compression option (with a serious points diffrence instead of fractional points) on the 455 though i could be wrong here...
Yes, I did mean the GS350 engines. I always thought there were different heads... I guess because of TA Performance and their Stage 1 350 heads. I'm in college... leave me alone :grin: Just kidding, thanks for clearing up what you did. I really wasn't sure. I had read something somewhere about 70 350 heads having different chamber sizes (50-55)...
ahh. just between years with the compression. and thats because there is a diffrence in the design of the valves (70 valves don't have a dish in the flat surface where the newer ones do.) hey, it took me about 5 months to figure out that the heads were the same by reading on here its all good.. oh.. im a college student to for 28 more days !!! WOOHOO!!!! coming out with a bachlors of Mechanical Engineering Tech. from MSOE. Nate
Ya know in my case that is still kind of encouraging. My 80 Buick can't have more than 165hp to race. More than 165hp must be so fast the paint will peel. Does that mean my 165 HP 80 is just as fast as a 230hp 69??? Matt
