GM's Forgotten Engines: The "Short Deck" Pontiac 301, 4.9 Turbo, and 265

In this video, we'll be talking about the last V-8 engines Pontiac ever made. The "short deck" Pontiac 301, 4.9 Turbo, and 265.

[@dastardlydave1455]

I had a 2 barrel 301 in my '78 Cutlass (second motor). Burned a quart of oil a week but it ran fine. Ahh, the good old days...

[@Str8sixfan]

As an owner of a 79 Grand Prix as my current content, I can vouch for the 135hp especially with the highway gears, it takes off like a golf cart 😂

[@joequillun7790]

Thanks for keeping the last Pontiac V8 fresh in our minds. Most of the info was correct. But I believe the data mentioned on the oil pump is not. RAIV engs had a 60lb oil pump, and the 455 SD had an 80 lb pump. I believe the 301T had an 80lb pump as well.

[@toecuttre]

The introduction of corporate engines across GM brands was both a blessing and a disservice. Great video!

[@rporestorations]

Thank you!

[@number3665]

It was definitely a disservice for about 20 years. GM big wigs really ran the company into the ground. They became a blessing when the LS platform was created.

[@stepheng3667]

Nice job!. My older brother bought a new Grand Prix in 1980 with the 4.3 265. In the late 80's I got to use it and take it to school sometimes. To me and my friends it seemed peppier than the 260 and 267 that was in friend's Cutlasses and Malibus etc. It could even hang with a buddy's Monte Carlo with the 305 4 baril with dual exhaust. It had good torque and a nice kick down. Miss that car, we kept it in the family until 1993.

[@tonidmc]

I have a 79 Trans Am with the 301 4 barrel (credit option that year) and i love it. Perfect for cruise, the car is not nose heavy and very good in fuel consumption

[@thisisyourcaptainspeaking2259]

My cousin bought his '79 Formula 301 automatic new, I recall him having the speedo wrapped around past 100 and back up to 20~30, once. I always thought it was a great runner for it's small displacement.

[@stephenhans189]

Best Pontiac engine when built correctly

[@terrypikaart4394]

Had a 78 GP 301 and loved it, in the stock form did good. Crankshaft was the main reason it was not hot rodded, it was a tiny weak toothpick looking thing.. Junk.

[@wymple09]

301's ran forever if properly maintained. I put 278K on my 78 GP I bought brand new.

[@davidforte964]

I have the 301 in my 80 T/A and doesn’t stop me from getting trophies. I have performance upgrades and it’s dressed under the hood like any other Pontiac motor. Buy the way it gets 16.5 mpg

[@OnlyGeneralMotors]

Great video! These engines don’t get much love but were essential for GM’s CAFE and emission response in the smog era. Nice to see this type of content 😊.

[@rporestorations]

Thanks!

[@mccrackenphillip]

GM also had a 262 & 267 v8 engine's as well as the 265

[@unicornsteaks6769]

lots of unnecessary overlap of malaise era engines.

[@grabasandwich]

I remember in the late 90s when the car magazines 💩 all over the malaise era smog junk. Guys like Freiburger made me think anything from this era would never be rare or desirable, yet her we are.

[@beamshobbyshack266]

I have a 1977 301 C.I.D. engine sitting in a garage that came out of my 1977 Pontiac Grand Prix. The Water Pump and Fuel Pump were the only mechanical things ever replaced on on it.

[@rporestorations]

They lasted if they were taken care of.

[@thisisyourcaptainspeaking2259]

I wish I had one, I'd put it in my g-body el camino. The 231 in there now has the 4.1 intake manifold on it and that really woke it up. It's fun to drive imo, I call it my rolling couch.

[@mikee2923]

The 301 in a 77 GP had to be painfully slow.

[@Slane583]

My father had a 79 Firebird Formula that had this engine in it. Of course I think it was just the standard power plant for the "Formula" package. Either way. I always thought it was a cool car growing up as a kid and that body style is my favorite out of all the Firebird Era's. Once they hit the mid/late 90's with that ugly rounded "arrow head" style nose it just started looking awful. Adding on the lifted ram-air scoops on that hood just made it look worse.

[@stevemino142]

The small V8 from GM in the late 70s were great good on fuel and reliable maybe not powerful but easy to work for the most part and parts were cheap... good video

[@rporestorations]

Thank you!

[@analogkid4557]

Ir's a shame they weren't allowed to continue with the turbo 301. Once it got a fuel injected blow through setup, it would have made well over 300 hp. The heads would have had to been better too but could have made 400 hp with no problem, at that point. There are guys making 400 hp with the stock setup.

[@rporestorations]

I think they should have carried it over into the 3rd Generation F body. At least for the first few years.

[@analogkid4557]

@@rporestorations they planned to do that but GM pull the rug out. That is why the 3rd gen had the offset turbo scoop hood. They actually built a few with the 301 turbo. They even had an ad for it. That is how close they were.

[@edwardpate6128]

That spindly crank would never have withstood that horsepower level and would have had to been upgraded.

[@analogkid4557]

@@edwardpate6128 Wrong. There plenty of people making 400 hp with the stock crank. It is not spindly. It just has less counterwieghts which isn't a problem for a 3" stroke and a lightweight rotating assembly.

[@mikee2923]

Had to protect the Corvette. It was only making 10 more HP at that time but less torque. We see what EFI brought to the table with turbo cars like the GN and GNX. The 301 turbo probably would’ve eclipsed the 300 HP mark by the mid 80s with the addition of EFI. Something the Corvette didn’t do until the mid 90s. Chevy saw it coming and per usual cried to GM corporate until Pontiac’s funding was pulled and the program discontinued. Happened plenty of times over Pontiac’s existence from the 60s onward.

[@johnsheetz6639]

I got one in a 77 Grand Prix no luxury items except for power steering and brakes the AC still worked and it had a really nice ride and for the size super good fuel economy that two-barrel was tiny all being said great for what was intended for

[@rporestorations]

I think people today tend to forget that not everybody who bought a V8 wanted an 11-second car. Some people were just looking for good acceleration and smoothness.

[@johnsheetz6639]

@@rporestorations I didn't have much acceleration with the gears that it had it would cruise though im guessing around 3500, at 100 mph could have been more thats all the speedo read the fuel economy seems like it was about 20 at that speed it was like a quadrajet that only had two primaries in my opinion it was a good engine.

[@georgekalafatis7286]

I don't know about the turbo one but the regular 301 would not get out of its own way

[@joequillun7790]

Neither would the 80-81 T/A with the 301T. The car was too heavy, too much smog equipment, no stick shift option, and a horrible 3.08 rear gear. Nothing more than a sticker and handling package. Does have potential tho.

[@calvincrews3885]

The Pontiac 301 is a great engine while 265 is it’s own engine which is a reinvented for that year Chevrolet started in 1955-57 for three years and switched to 283 in 1957 even though those Chevrolet small block isn’t mentioned

[@mikee2923]

The first small block Chevy was a 265 way back in 1955. The 265 mentioned here was based of the traditional Pontiac V8. The traditional Pontiac V8 is like a small block Chevy on steroids. However nothing really interchanges between the two. The 265 and 301 are a low deck version of the traditional Pontiac V8.

[@BrianChappie]

I had a 1980 Pontiac Bonneville with the 265 V8. It was terrible! You would press the gas, and the engine would scream and do nothing. It was much too weak for such a heavy car.

[@unicornsteaks6769]

Reminds me of my 1978 305 2bbl Camaro LT. I got outrun by a Mazda 4 cyl pickup in a drag race. But the car could do a respectable 130+ MPH. It actually had a 130 MPH speedo. All 4 and 6 cyl cars of the day topped out at about 100.

[@googleusergp]

There was nothing wrong with these engines, except for the "mechanics" that attempted to "fix" them. Nothing more. They were economy engines that were right for the times, and given the technology around then, they "worked". Again, improper training and servicing by many "experts" back then were mostly to blame. If you take care of a 265 or 301 V8 and drive them reasonably, they will run, run, run, run, run, run, run and run some more. Mostly correct (for the US market) on the CCC system. Canada and exports often got the non-CCC versions from the prior years. The intent was to continue the Pontiac V8s into the third generation F cars, but the corporate suits won out and the Chevrolet V8s were cheaper to produce and that's why they won out. I call them "Chevyiacs". The boost "gauge" (RPO code "UR4") was not used on all 1980 turbo cars, as it was phased in by around March 1980 production. My 1980 turbo Trans Am produced at Norwood in January 1980 doesn't have it.

[@mikee2923]

I think the real story is Chevy had to protect the Corvette and cried to corporate until they pulled funding on Pontiac. It happened several times in the past. The 301 turbo was making 210 HP while the Corvette was making 220 but the 301 turbo made more torque. The introduction of EFI really helped turbocharged engine development as proven by the Buick GN and especially the GNX. With EFI and further development it isn’t unreasonable to believe that the 301 turbo would’ve eclipsed 300 HP by the mid 80s. The Corvette didn’t eclipse 300 HP until the mid 90s. Just my 2 cents.

[@joequillun7790]

Both you guys are right. At the time the short deck Pontiac was introduced, people were still use-ta the abuse the traditional motor could take. And they would beat them to failure, wonder why, and bad mouth them. Here we are, many decades later, and have learned their limitations, (just like the 80s GM 6.2 diesel). There are many out there that have proven how to modify these engs., and when driven and maintained sanely, will perform better than ever. And people don't understand, the 301 engine, (even with the turbo) weighs the same as an SBC. I know, cause I have one, and weighed it. Totally trimmed out, with accessories, and flywheel, 560 LBs. Some have mentioned the eng. is too heavy to put in a 3rd gen, and bigger springs would be needed. (BS). Plus the lower deck height, fits better under an F- body hood, than the traditional Poncho mill. As for GM wanting to protect the Vette sales, it wouldn't be the 1st time it happened, (as Mikee mentioned), and wouldn't surprise me if it was true. Would've been nice, if the 301Ts were up-graded into the 80s.

[@engineerjmd3]

I'm sorry, Barely breaking 200 BHP with a 301 v8 running 9 lbs of boost? These were the darkest days of the big 3. And I'm old enough to remember. I owned a 78 Bandit edition Trans Am with one of the last of the Pontiac 400's. Also barely breaking 200 bhp. I appreciate the history shown, but most of the 70's and early 80's were bad days for the big 3.

[@unicornsteaks6769]

The malaise era is best forgotten. But there are still a bunch of these motors around. At least you can swap an LS or 350 into anything from this era.

[@mikee2923]

A Pontiac 400 or 455 can bolt in place of a 301. Pretty much like swapping a 305 for a 350. The malaise era cars were nothing more than detuned muscle cars. While 200 HP is pathetic for a 400, it doesn’t take a whole lot to get it up to 400 or so HP. In fact, most malaise era V8 cars can pick up as much as 50 HP by simply getting rid of the horribly restrictive pellet type catalytic converter, a set of headers and true dual exhaust. Hot Rod or Car Craft proved this many years ago. A cam change and bump in compression brings them pretty much up to muscle car standards. And it’s a hell of a lot easier and cheaper than an LS swap. Back in the day, you could build an easy 12 second Pontiac with junkyard parts from station wagon and land yacht engine parts. Even the smog era Pontiac heads can be used on big HP builds.

[@artlife6210]

engines that should not be forgotten but enshrined as to how primitive and inferior the smog engines were due to overreaching government regulations

[@edwardpate6128]

Engineers were working like crazy to simultaneously meet Emissions, Mileage standards while still trying to get some measure of performance. It was a challenging task.

[@rodneychapman1506]

Those turbo trans Am where slow turds use to run circles around them in my Buick with a 401 nail head !!

[@user-xq1zl7ts8o]

Eww. These are the comments that I come across that I can’t stand. Your 401 nail head is cool but it is also flawed.

[@mikee2923]

Yes they were but in a 3rd Gen that was about 500 lbs lighter, probably would’ve been a different story. Besides, if they would’ve put 301s in a 3rd Gen, it would’ve made swapping in a Pontiac 400 or 455 a bolt in affair. How sweet would that have been?

[@joequillun7790]

@@mikee2923 Hey Mikee, you're absolutely right. I've had a project car for yrs, tryin to make time to work it. An 84 T/A, that I've dumped an 80 301T motor in, backed with a T5. Stalled on the mechanical clutch linkage right now. But exactly as you mentioned, because the car is a half second lighter, and since the smog crap has been dumped, with a few up-grades, 250-300 hp should be doable, and will make the car perform with the cars of the mid 60s. Haven't been able to acquire that precious commodity called "TIME", yet. :(

[@mikee2923]

@@joequillun7790 That sounds like a really cool project. It will definitely run much better than the 305 it was born with. Are you planning on installing the lights in the driver’s side hood bulge? I know it would be costly but are you considering EFI? I’m not sure how much performance upgrade wise is available for the Pontiac 301 but I’d have to believe it would not only run better but would be more reliable with EFI vs the carb. You’ll get it all sorted out. I’d love to see it. It’s one of those what GM should have done cars. I’ve read about others converting 3rd Gens to Pontiac power. What did you use for motor mounts?