Chrysler hemi and air pollution

There were Olds motors and there were Chevy motors, and then sometime in
the 70s they started putting Chevy motors in Oldsmobiles, and at the
same time you could get an Olds engine in a Firebird (of all things...)

In any case, the Olds 330/350/400/455/whatever IMHO was a hell of a lot
better than the SBC... come to think of it, just about any GM engine
*other* than Chevy was better than Chevy. But you're right, SBC
performance parts are everywhere while you actually have to think about
what you're doing and maybe even (gasp) do some custom work to get a few
more ponies out of an Olds or Caddy engine.

nate

 

Ayup, at least the 4.3...

IIRC the 3800 was designed from the ground up to be a V-6 however and
it's not only way older than the 4.3 but at least in its current
iteration, it has a good reputation for durability...

and then there's the 2.8 family. I really don't care whether they're
good engines or not, anything that *sounds* that shitty when it's
running, I don't want to drive.

nate

 

A knowledgeable buyer would have been pissed, yes, to buy a new Olds
thinking there was an Olds 350 under the hood and finding a Chubby 350.
Now a case could be made (and I'm sure GM tried to make it) that the
Chubby motor was more than adequate for any normal driving conditions.
And, of course, they're actually right - it's not a *bad* engine. It's
just that every other engine that they made at the time was pretty
uniformly *better...*

nate

 

Sure, but the threshhold of *needing* to get more ponies out of the Olds
engine was much higher. A desmogged Olds 350 ran decently well for its
day, and would allow the car to get out of its own way. A same-year
desmogged Chev 350 had considerably poorer driveability and MUCH less
punch.

 

That is also how Chrysler made the 3.9 (318 * 0.75).

"not".

 

Funny, isn't it, how there weren't any Chevrolets quietly built with
Oldsmobile 350s instead of the Chev engine!

 

From all I've read, ANY 4-valve head would be hard-pressed to work as
well or better than the new Hemi™ head.

Or is the new Hemi™ actually a

Look at that combustion chamber image I linked- its definitely a 2-valve
head. Its not even really a "rule," just general usage. Chrysler just
capitalized on the terminolgy- they're not the only ones to have built
2-valve hemi-headed engines (to remove all ambiguity) for street cars in
the past, and may not be the only ones today, but I'm not aware of any
others right off the bat.

 

Meh. Some Pontiac v8s were pretty lame. Its a little ironic that the
Olds 403-powered Trans Ams are much less collectible now than
Pontiac-powered ones... I'd almost prefer the Olds engine. Except the
403 was never really a performance engine like the Pontiac was. Now if
it had been a Buick 455 under the hood... :-D :-D :-D

 

Better not let Yyoyd "4-valve is ALWAYS better than 2-valve, and disc
brakes are ALWAYS better than drum" Parker hear you say that...

 

Hasn't it been PLEASANT around here without his bleating?

 

Surely has.