325 hp and 445 ft/lbs of torque. With turbine drive, it was a smooth fast pull from zero to 120mph. Quarter mile times were nothing to write home about, but on the highway, you couldn't catch or beat those things. My 60 Invicta that I had 30 years ago used to make the usual badly hopped up Camaros and Novas of the day look sick. It required manual shifting, if you shift out of 1st at between 45-50 you catch the D range right in the power band; - it never rotated the rear wheels, just sat squat on it's rump and took off. The car had no passing gear; watch the tach as the torque converter did all the work. It wouldn't even rev up an bit, it would just lock up and pull. Turbine Drive (Dynaflow) was one of the neatest experiences I've ever had driving. Sure they are sloppy when driven normally, but when driven aggressively, they do respond. Never underestimate a Buick, that was what a lot of people learned the hard way back then.
I know a guy who collects 1960 Buicks , Electra , invecta, la saber, a few wild cats, and 63 to 65 Rivieras, has about 80 total 50 of them the 1960 Buicks, I helped him move all of them from Berkeley to a canyon , mines canyon deep in Livermore , actually drove more than half of them there. You can see the cars on google earth . But power depends what motor . 425 was the biggest, previous post sounds about rite. I'm not sure if the dual carb set up came on a 60 but pretty sure you can update one to that set up. The 65 dual carb Riviera 425 .
When I rebuilt my 59 364 the stated HP was 300. That was for a 4 barrel and "10.5/1" compression. I had it bored, used the larger 401 carb, better valve springs, and stock 59 401 cam and it dynoed at 265ish hp. That was with a 60,000V coil and modern plugs and wires. The 401 realistically would be in the 300 hp range. With a few upgrades (cam, roller rockers, and true 10.5/1 pistons) you can get around 350. Much more then that would require going radical. Aside from traditional held notions that nailheads are low rpm grunt torque motors, the dyno graph showed a constant rise in HP all the way to 5500 where the valve springs were max rated. I could have have it run higher then that, but didn't want to risk anything during the break in. This is with a stock 59 401 cam grind! The interesting part was the torque 'curve'. It was flat from 2800 to about 3400ish rpm and then gradually dropped (not like falling off the earth as some believe). If I ever find a car to put my 364 in I will put a hotter cam and roller rockers in my 364. Edit: Also the aftermarket Offy 4 intakes for the nailheads are CRAP. I educated myself about performance parts when building my 364 to try and find 'cheap power'. Russ Martins website goes in depth about performance mods and what not that will help clear up some of the confusion. http://nailheadbuick.com/
Agreed, most mild builds are in the 350 hp range. Tough to get over 400. Nailheads don't breath well at high rpm, that limits the big HP numbers. Most peak by 4800 rpm. But they make lots of torque and that makes them great performers on the street..... don't sell them short!
Everyone says they are torque engines and not designed for high rpms but if you look at their bores and strokes it says they have short strokes relative to their bores. I have always understood that long strokes are for torque engines and short strokes were for high rpm hp engines. Whats the deal? 364 Nailhead Production: 19571961 Displacement: 364 cu in (6.0 L) Bore and Stroke: 4.125 in 3.39 in (104.8 mm 86.1 mm) 401 Nailhead Production: 19591966 Displacement: 401 cu in (6.6 L) Bore and Stroke: 4.1875 in 3.64 in (106.4 mm 92.5 mm)
Hopefully someone with more knowledge on the subject will chime in, but the reason why that is the norm for the nailheads (I believe) has to do with the small valve size. Buick increased the valve sizes in the nailhead in 59, but they are still small for their size. The nailhead is actually designed off of the 1951 Lesabre concept cars v8 which has dual cams! Guss they figured the added cost didn't justify the added power when designing the production v8 in the early 50s. Plus the added fact that affordable OHV v8s with hydraulic valve trains were just becoming the norm, therefore imagine the difficulty to find a shop to work on a DOHC v8! Buick designed the nailhead to power heavy luxury cars without needing to put the hammer down to get up to speed. They didn't build them to handle high rpm (very weak valve springs is a example thus creating valve float at around 4800ish rpm). With better valve springs and a decent cam they can handle decent RPM and power numbers. The problem still comes down to flow though in the heads. There are very few people that actually know how to port nailhead heads to gain flow numbers. The best I heard is a guy Russ recommends can get about 25% better flow which is really good for these engines, but that is about as far as stock heads will flow. The bottom end can handle really high rpm and power numbers, but the valve train needs some attention to produce it. That wasn't a problem for Buick in the 50s though, but hot rodders realized this and tried many things to 'remedy' that. Kind of the same thing Buick did with the big blocks. The 455s ran great in stock form in Electras, Wildcats, and other big cars they were meant for. Its when you start hot rodding them you see the limitations the factory didn't think was a issue. Buicks engine department mentality seems to mostly be "We will make them great for production, but don't worry about the issues at higher power or RPMs. We don't need to worry about that in a luxury car :shock:". As wkillgs said don't sell them short! Like the 455s and Buicks other v8s they are great motors, and with some careful building they can hold their own on the street!
