The Forgotten 1980-81 "Small Block" Pontiac 265 V8: Lackluster, Unloved, "Malaisy"

Learn more about this two-year-only engine made by Pontiac, the 265 V8 (not 389, 400, 428, 455).

[@toronado455]

The velour on that interior for the 1981 Bonneville Brougham is fantastic.

[@MarinCipollina]

It rode like a dream.

[@bobjohnson205]

My dad had that same interior in his '81 Parisienne Brougham and it was indeed fantastic and rode like a dream!

[@maconp1119]

It’s called “Vulgarlour Premium Upholstery” also found in disco refuges and pedo anonymous meetings.

[@LakeNipissing]

I have a final year 1986 Pontiac Parisienne Brougham with the same interior in burgundy. It has Chevrolet 305 V8 / 700R4 with 60,000 km. Belonged to my late mom. It's never been in the rain. LOL

[@EyesWideOpen61]

I adore the 1980 facelift of these big Pontiacs, they were quite a sales flop though. Was always surprised they didn’t have a wider appeal, I think they’re very handsome inside and out

[@benbrown2119]

In the 25 years I worked on customer cars, i only ever worked on one vehicle equipped with this 265 Pontiac V8. Was a LeMans wagon. The transmission was bad, and it had a knock. Inspection revealed a cracked flexplate, so the customer agreed to a transmission overhaul and new flexplate. Finished the job, and then discovered it also had a rod knock! Customer then abandoned the car at our shop. This was about 1997, so the car was about 16-17 years old. Ended up pulling the rebuilt transmission out and selling it to another customer. Looking back on it, I should have bought the car from them, but back then those wagons weren't really collectible yet. And yes, those crankshafts were flimsy. It was said when the 301 Pontiac debuted, it was the lightest all iron production V8.

[@DerrickOil]

My 301 has 250K and is still able to run with fresh gas and battery.

[@shawnsatterlee6035]

Looking back you ppl really misdiagnosed everything. Lol

[@scottpeterson4873]

There was talk that red and white Pontiac lemans crashed in smokey and the bandit 2 had this engine and were fleet cars sold to Phoenix airport rental agency office but there was a mistake and they were delivered with out factory air conditioning and all the cars were refused delivery and being a federal engine it was too costly and time consuming to retrofit for them with ac or use them in service in Las Vegas or neighboring States or sell new by CA restricted smog law's, gm provided replacement cars that worked. Being that ac bracket s and some components only worked with the Pontiac version and Pontiac was going to switch over to maximize base 2.5 4 cylinder engine production for the new x cars they donated them to be destroyed on film.

[@kevinhardin4700]

My mom had an 81 Monte Carlo with the 267, I actually learned to drive in it and drove it a lot in the late 80’s because she didn’t trust a teen driving her beloved 73 Thunderbird with it’s 460.

[@jonpaulschafer1871]

How did you like driving it where is the Monte Carlo now In stock forum a 267 is 110 horsepower I have three of those 267s 1 in my G body 1980 Chevy Malibu with a 5spd Manual I upgraded my 267 and got 220 horsepower out of it with a 4 Barrel carburetor headers dual exhausts and a cam

[@Foxonian]

We had this engine in my dad's 1980 Pontiac Lemans. It wasn't bad, but not stellar. I recall my dad really struggling trying to tow his 16ft motor boat with it.

[@jittychitty]

It's cool that you love the oddball, unloved cars of the 80's... someone needs to. I've noticed the kids of these days are latching onto those unwanted 80's cars also, since the 70's muscle is so untouchable.

[@serfcityherewecome8069]

Yep...my stepson just picked up a clean, decent-running (knock wood) '85 L98 Vette for nearly nothing.

[@tc6580]

My sister purchased a 1979 Malibu new with the 267ci v8 it was a good car she had it many years and put a ton of miles on it.

[@jamesengland7461]

Slow, patient miles 😂

[@bobjohnson205]

@@jamesengland7461 'Slow and steady wins the race.'

[@hendo337]

With only a 3.5" bore you would hope the block would be strong and stay cool enough to support 120hp.

[@markschommer7407]

My 1981 Bonneville was lucky enough to get the 307 Olds V8.

[@kevinbarry71]

That is General Motors; make a weak engine, but the transmission is still not strong enough to handle it

[@drippinglass]

It was barely strong enough for the Chevette 4 banger it was designed for. 😁

[@jamesheath5825]

There was a 265 Chevy in the 50,s i had a 55 Chevy with one FJB

[@johneckert1365]

And a 262 in the 70's

[@Dr_Reason]

265 OG. 262 Monza, 267 late seventies Malibu, 4300 V8 in 94 Caprice. All different but cool.

[@hendo337]

​@@Dr_Reasononly the 265 and 4.3L were any good and even they only made adequate power. The 262 and 267 were terrible.

[@robertalbertson889]

Back in 1993 I was on the fleet committee for the City of San Luis Obispo police department which I was also a police officer at that time as well. My job was to research the new 1994 Chevrolet Caprice and Ford Crown Vic police package cars do determine which one out department would purchase. Immediately the Ford was taken out of the consideration bcos it handled terrible and the 4.6 modular V8 was pretty enemic for police vehicle duties. This left the Chevrolet Caprice. So the local Chevy dealer had 2 brand new 1994 units that were the police package vehicles to look at and to test. One had the 5.7 LT1 detuned Corvette engine that produced 260 hp with factory dual exhaust and electronic fuel injection. The other one had this 4.3 V8 that if I remember correctly had 155 hp? I might be wrong but it was very low in hp ratings! When we test drove each of them, it was obvious that the police package with the 4.3 V8 was probably best used as a taxi cab bcos the car could barely get out of it's own way! Unbelievably slow and gutless 😅 Now the 5.7 LT1 was a rocket compared to the 4.3! Having about 100 extra hp under hood made our choice very easy not to mention the 5.7 unit handled like a race car and had 4 wheel anti lock disc brakes! I don't know of any police agency in California that ordered or purchased the 4.3 V8 police package? If any did I'm sure they quickly regretted that decision 😅 That 1994 5.7 LT1 police package was the best and quickest police car I'd driven since when I started my career with LAPD and we were using the AMC Matador 401 V8! That was a great police car! I forgot to mention the 4.3 V8 police package only had single exhaust hahaha 😆 what a joke

[@serfcityherewecome8069]

Lmao, reminds me of the insane people today-- presumably ALL of them violent criminals-- who want ELECTRIC police vehicles LOLOL...crime would literally skyrocket a thousandfold within hours of word hitting the streets, knowing that they would all brick up within minutes during a pursuit. .

[@clintonflynn815]

A sad ending for a storied marque.

[@ponchoman49]

I owned both a 1981 Olds Cutlass coupe with the 260 V8 and then later came across a mint 1981 Grand Prix with the Pontiac built 265 V8 so had much experience with both. The Olds 4.3 was rated at 105 HP and 195 torque and was really slow in my Cutlass coupe attached to the std 2.29 rear gears. In comparison the fully loaded Grand Prix LJ with the Pontiac 4.3 liter V8 and optional 2.93 trailer towing gearing felt much livelier and eager and was smoother and quieter by comparison. I got both cars with under 70K and went well over 150K with both and never had any major engine issues with either save an intake gasket on the Olds and timing chain/gear replacements on both. What did help on both engines was having them in precise tune, drilling out the main jets for a little more fuel since they were ultra lean from the factory, replacing the terrible restrictive bead/pellet catalytic converter and making sure the base timing was set at or slightly above factory spec. Making these changes on both cars helped some but the Olds was definitely weaker up hills or in passing situations. I remember hand timing both cars on the same road at 11.8 seconds for the Pontiac and 14.5 for the Olds. Another thing to consider is the mileage rating for these 4.3 liter V8's versus the larger 4.9 and 5.0 V8's. They were doing anything they could to increase MPG so going from 24 highway to 27 was a considerable jump. The original plan was to fuel inject the little 4.3 and attach it to the 200 4-R transmission for 1982 to further increase mileage. The turbo 301 was also going to be further developed and attached to that same 4 speed transmission and installed in the new smaller Trans Am but GM pulled the plug at the last minute killing the whole program.

[@johneckert1365]

We used to look for those 2.92 gears for our dirt track cars. They were tough to find. Most had 2.43

[@tombrown1898]

Good video! Not to be snarky (well, yeah ..) that Bonneville Brougham "biscuit pleated" interior looked like a six-pack of White Castle burgers.

[@dmandman9]

Looks like a lot of companies had an emissions strangled V8 created to help meatCAFE standards around that time. Chevy 267, Pontiac 265, Oldsmobile 260, Across Town Ford came out with their 255. Even Cadillac had their 368 which was decent. But it was still weak in comparison to prior Cadillac engines.

[@davem8790]

And to further add to the '4.3' obscurity, Chevrolet introduced the baby LT1 or L99 4.3, 265 V8 in 1994. Almost no one knows about that engine - although by '94 it was using the tuned port system and developed 200 hp. So that brings us to 3 265 V8 engines offered by GM. Throw in the Olds 260 and Chevy 262 V8 and V6 and that brings it to 6 4.3L sized-ish engines..

[@turbo8454]

Buick had a 264 nailhead V8 in '54 and '55 for the Special. It was the first of that size for GM. I have a '54 Special .

[@user-zn4yb9hg6q]

I had an '81 Bonneville with this little engine, had a small exhaust leak but I loved its little sound and though it burned some oil it ran very smoothly and had an early onboard diagnostic computer

[@randyfitz8310]

My grandfather bought a slightly used 1981 Pontiac Parisian with the Oldsmobile 307, the velour interior was very nice!

[@clinkerclint]

Great video. I always assumed the 265 Chevrolet and 265 Pontiac was the same motor. Now I know better!

[@RareClassicCars]

Nope. Different!

[@donreinke5863]

The 265 was Chevrolets first V-8 (not counting the failed V-8 attempt of 1918-1919) and was made in 1955 and 1956. The Pontiac engine didnt appear for another 25 years.

[@davidphillips5395]

I had a number of customers with the 301 in various cars. It seemed to be a good engine and they all got great fuel mileage! One had it in an Olds Delta 88 which was interesting. I don't recall ever seeing the 265 ...

[@MarinCipollina]

I never saw one either, and I sold new Pontiacs those years.

[@bobjohnson205]

@@MarinCipollina My dad owned an '81 Parisienne Brougham with the 265. So there were some out there.

[@MarinCipollina]

@@bobjohnson205 Obviously they existed and were out there. My only point is that the dealership I worked for didn't order any of those in a B body.

[@serfcityherewecome8069]

Some of those "301s" may have actually been 265s; they were visually identical, with the only difference I'm aware of being that all the 265s were 2bbl, whereas 301s came in both 2 & 4..

[@toronado455]

Amazing how the later 4.3 Chevrolet V6 has so much more power than this 4.3 Pontiac V8.

[@kellismith4329]

The vortecs

[@jamesengland7461]

It's all in how they were able to improve power while meeting emissions and fuel economy regs.

[@toronado455]

@@kellismith4329 yeah

[@WydGlydJim]

A gran prix with a 265 was a pretty nice little car. Very quiet, smooth, and relatively trouble free. As said for nice cruiser it was fine. I enjoyed working on that model. They were very straight forward, and the components very familiar by that time.

[@Next_Cruise_Please]

Funny that with the engine sharing that there would be a 260, 265 and a 267 from 3 different divisions.

[@jamesengland7461]

Also 262!

[@mikebrunello243]

I had two 267 one in a caprese and I put one in a 83 amc Sprint 4 speed

[@Sheisthedevilyouknowwho-ft9we]

GM figured longtime customers would insist on a V8, even though cars got somwhat smaller in the late '70s, but the 4 door family cars were still pretty big and heavy, hence the "baby V8s" as I've heard them referred to colloquially, every division had one, except Buick. Its interesting that into the '80s, even with sharing engines across divisions, there was still some of that.....chevy in a chevy, pontiac in a pontiac. Buick didn't have a baby V8, so they made the larger V6 for the bigger Buicks, 4.1 L, 252 cid, I think only offered with 4 barrel, no 2 bbl. (?)

[@mikebrunello243]

@@Sheisthedevilyouknowwho-ft9we I actually had a 4.1 V6 not the V8 and it was TBI fuel injection 1981

[@mikebrunello243]

@@Sheisthedevilyouknowwho-ft9we yeah the 4.1 V6 was offered with 4 bb or TBI fuel injection

[@gregberry9122]

Yes!! Had a 1980 LeMans with the 265. It was slow as molasses, but just as smooth!

[@rogergoodman8665]

I had a 1977 Firebird with a 301 4 speed in the mid 90's and initially hated the 301...until I drove one of my friends 1980 Firebird Esprite that had that 265 V8. After that, my 301 wasn't so bad!

[@dougkabler3032]

At least you had a 4 speed.

[@dave1956]

By 1981 V8’s were out of favor with buyers. I was looking at a 1981 Grand Prix and if you were willing to take the 265 V8 for $50.00, they would give you free air conditioning, a $601.00 value. Just like now media hype scared most buyers into buying the even slower V6.

[@jeffrobodine8579]

Pontiac should have fuel injected the 265 and 301 V-8's with optional turbos and they would have been a relevant precursor to the Buick 3800 SFI Turbo. The carbureted 301 did not work too well.

[@MarinCipollina]

@@jeffrobodine8579 the 301 V8 was decent enough for the era.. NOBODY was offering a barn burner engine those years.

[@SpookyEng1]

They were not out of favor, it’s just that unless you got one of the last 350 cars or a pickup they were all gutless and fuel thirsty. There was demand for a decent V-8 if someone would have built one.

[@bobjohnson205]

@@jeffrobodine8579 Didn't they turbocharge the 301 for the '81 Trans Am?

[@jeffrobodine8579]

@@bobjohnson205 Yes, but with a carbureted system and not fuel injection like a turbo needs.

[@mikemcsweeney2993]

I ended up with my dad’s 1980 Chevy Caprice wagon. It had 110k miles when I took it over. I needed something to tow my boat, some 4500#! I affectionately called it the Towing Machine. I’d cruise down the freeway at a max of 60 MPH after having topped off with premium gas, windows down, heater blowing wide open, all in effort to keep the engine from self destructing! Oh, fun times! But this engine was, indeed, smooth.

[@shawnsatterlee6035]

Umm... Ur wagon didn't have this motor. Probably n obviously had a 350 Chevy small block. Maybe a 305, but probably a 350.

[@mikemcsweeney2993]

While it wasn't the Pontiac version of this motor, it was Chevy's version. It was labeled a 4.4L. I would know if it was graced with the presence of a true small block Chevy!

[@iluvcamaros1912]

@@mikemcsweeney2993 I looked on Wikipedia and it said it had the same stroke as a 350, but the smallest bore of any SBC ever made. 120 horsepower at 3,600 rpm and 215 lb-ft of torque in a 1980 Camaro. Maybe less in a Caprice.

[@hendo337]

You'd think it would at least have a 305, a 267 in a fullsize wagon would be tough going. 79 was the last year any civilian Chevy wagons got a 350 until 1992. There may have been some 350 1A2 wagons before 1992.

[@tonyflorio3269]

My understanding is that the low deck 301/265 built on engineering from the proposed SCCA racing 303 ci RAV in the late 1960s, which was also a lighter, low-deck block, aimed at Trans Am racing -- think the equivalent to the Chevy 302 Z/28 motor.

[@richceglinski7543]

As a young technician in the early 80s I remember working on all the baby V8s and a Buick 4.2 V6 in LeSabers and a few Cadillacs. I like how you describe the times and reasons for this period of automotive history instead of some juvenile rant like some young You tube wannabes. Please do a video on the Ford baby v8 the 255 in the early 80s. I bought the last 0.30 pistons to be found in North America for one I rebuilt 4yrs ago for a young man that inherited his grandmothers 80 Tbird

[@KirkKnoferle]

Drove my grandfather mercury cougar with that engine. Was factory ordered grey with blue interior. Fun car neat little engine. Unfortunately got rear-ended by some idiot who was on his phone.

[@johnlincicum6390]

Buick 4.2 V-6 was 252 cubic inches.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

@@KirkKnoferle Did the police charge him with anything? I once saw one of those morons almost run over a traffic cop.

[@iluvcamaros1912]

I'm "only" 34 and I get annoyed when baby KZbinrs comment on the low hp numbers of '80s/'90s V8 and V6 cars. They always say it sounds like 4cyl power numbers without realizing they still made torque. And that actual 4 cyls of the era made like 75 hp.

[@KirkKnoferle]

not for the accident for not having insurance! even went to court he claimed he was scared and suffered from agoraphobia but he did pay my insurance deductible his lawyer thought it was a good idea. @@jamesbosworth4191

[@theeducatedredneck4144]

I had a 79 Pontiac Lemans with a 301 2bbl and 200 transmission. I blew up the transmission first, had a new transmission installed. Shortly afterwards, I blew up the 301. The car was a mint 2 door, so installed a 455, turbo 350 transmission and a ford '9 inch rear end. The car was pretty fast then, but I lost a race to my friends 68 Dodge Coronet 440 R/T. That was back around 1988 or 1989.

[@bobjohnson205]

No shame in losing to a '68 Coronet 440 R/T! 😊

[@jamesbosworth4191]

A turbo 350 in back of a 455?

[@dalevackar182]

​@@jamesbosworth4191Yes it works just fine.

[@theeducatedredneck4144]

@jamesbosworth4191 Yeah, a high-performance transmission shop built it for me, it held up to some serious abuse.

[@rjbiker66]

GM Holden had a small 4.2l v8 that had 134hp (single exhaust) 154hp ( dual exhaust) in 1980.

[@tonymaglio9376]

Awesome informative as usual. I got the second view pretty cool.

[@DSP1968]

This was very interesting, Adam. I'd totally forgotten about this engine. Thank you for spotlighting it.

[@aaronhollingsworth6808]

There was a 1980 Monte Carlo in the junk yard that had that engine and it still ran, it was all original with 42k miles

[@chrissunde1104]

I remember that my grandfather had a Ford Ltd that had a very similar sized anemic power plant.

[@araudan]

I grew up with and learned to drive in a 1980 Catalina with a 267 under the hood. It probably saved my life by being so under-powered. I couldn't even chirp the tires on wet pavement. I can't imagine the trouble and damage I'd cause starting out with today's cars.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

Part of it's gutlessness was it's sky-high gearing. If you geared it down, it would have been much livelier.

[@Alpha-ms9nj]

Never heard of the Pontiac 265 V8. I had a 1979 Pontiac station wagon with a 301. I do remember a 267 V8 in a 1980 Chevy wagon that I had. I opened the hood on that one for the first time and that engine looked so puny lol. It did sip gas compared to my other vehicles.

[@bobjohnson205]

My dad owned an '81 2-door Parisienne Brougham with the 265 while at the same time my brother owned a '79 4-door Parisienne Brougham with the 301. So, my family owned vehicles with both of those engines. As far as I can remember neither of them ever gave them any trouble. And yes, sippy-sippy on the gas!

[@jamesbosworth4191]

All Chevy small-blocks look like that, (they are all outwordly identical). Only the big blocks - the 348/409 and the 396, 427, and 454 looked different and larger.

[@davidpowell3347]

Chevrolet 350s looked smaller than Pontiac or Oldsmobile 350s @@jamesbosworth4191

[@DanEBoyd]

The engine shown at 0:44 had a front exhaust cross-over pipe! Notice how that driver side manifold outlet is at the front of the engine.

[@davidpowell3347]

I think the water pump/coolant flow system is unusual on that engine

[@johneckert1365]

That was a coolant outlet.

[@DanEBoyd]

@@davidpowell3347 I see the elbow-tube and coupler-hose between the front of the cylinder head and the water pump. It's not that. What I'm talking about is the grayish-brown exhaust manifold - look at its lower left, and you will see the outlet where a pipe attaches, pointing at just below the fuel pump. The rear appears to have no outlet/inlet. Those three bulges sticking out of the side of the cylinder head, inline with the sparkplugs, are for the exhaust ports. The crossover pipe likely wrapped around the front of, or perhaps under the engine, and connected to the front of the passenger side exhaust manifold, which would have an inlet at its front, and an outlet at its rear. That configuration was used in the mid 1950s, and also used by Ford on some of their Y-block series of engines. Ford's rendition had the crossover pipe wrapping around the upper front of the engine - right where the uninitiated could easily burn themselves badly... I don't think that trend lasted long at all. The Pontiac appears to route it more out of the way. I didn't recognize the paint color on that engine and assumed that it was old, but looking at it again, I see the old '50s-style center mount, visible just behind and under the crankshaft pulley. That rebuildable-looking fuel pump is old-school too!

[@joeseeking3572]

I remember the Olds 260 and being very underwhelmed by it - this is a V8?? However, we had a 301 4bbl in a 79 GP SJ, and that wasn't *bad* for the day, certainly not in a church parking lot sporting a sea of (not turbo) V6 Regals and Monte Carlos or the poor Fairmonts with a 220 cu six and an auto. Neighbor had a 78 LeSabre with the 403 but I don't know what rear. 450 pounds heavier but 35 more hp, it would probably have beaten me. Anyway the 260, 265 and Chevy 267 - all underwhelming. Kudos however to the Bonneville Brougham interior - they were the most luxurious of the B bodies while they lasted. At the very end the Lesabre and Olds caught up (the 'Royale Brougham LS') but by then the B body Bonneville was history.

[@Clyde-2055]

These things were slow as hell, but they did their job. They’d cruise at 80 mph all day and got respectable mileage doing it. Going from 0-60 in under five seconds is fun, but it’s not necessary. The cars of this era were exceedingly comfortable, and overall very dependable.

[@JrGoonior]

That's how I feel about my 79 Cordoba 318 2bbl. Goes like stink but will run at 75 mph all day long.

[@ponchoman49]

Exactly. All of these engines made decent torque and that was indeed what you needed to accelerate up to speed. These engines weren't designed for racing but safely getting you up to speed and going 75-80 on the highway when needed. The issue was that with these smaller V8's there was little reserve power left over for towing or climbing steep hills so it was these areas where they were lackluster.

[@stevejarred6484]

"Forgotten"?! I never even knew Pontiac even made a 265 V8! I always though the 301 V8 was Pontiac's last V8!

[@therealjayseh]

My Regal had one, I enjoyed driving it.

[@soyounoat]

Sometime in the mid-1990s I bought a well used 1977 Pontiac LeMans Sport Coupe for $750 to use as a beater/ commuter. It had a 301 V8 2-bbl, auto trans, can't recall the rear end ratio. That engine ran flawlessly and reliably, and it was a gutless dog. Going up a moderately steep hill with gas pedal on the floor, it would slow down and I had to shift into "L" first gear to reach the top. On the plus side, it handled better than any other stock American big car I had driven with it's "Radial Tuned Suspension". And it had a working 8-track stereo.

[@ponchoman49]

Not too surprising considering the Colonnade's were rather heavy often close to 3800 LBS with only 135 HP and 2.41 rear gears. It could have been worse. A Buick 105 HP 231 V6 was std and well over 16 seconds to 60 was needed. We took a few of these cars and tinkered around with them. One we stuck a 4BBL intake and carb from a 1978 GP on with a few tweaks and a little more base timing and it woke the engine up a bit. Another example we drilled out the main jets on the 2BBL, replaced the restrictive bead catalytic converter, bumped up the timing and swapped out to a 3.23 rear end gear and it would burn rubber and actually felt like a 350 out of the hole! Fun times

[@EvilBraTT]

Informative as always.

[@shawnmcculley2995]

Slow but excellent. I knew a guy who got 325k out of a 265. He said it was terribly slow but just wouldn't die.

[@littlesquirtthefireengine5478]

My buddy from high school had a 1981 Grand Prix with this engine. He thought he was the coolest thing since sliced bread. He let me drive it one day, I couldn't believe how dog slow it was. I asked is something wrong with it. He said nope, just got it tuned up. I mean...this thing was SLOOOOOW. My Dodge Neon would run rings around it (this was in the 90s).

[@petertornabeni602]

We all appreciate your excellent work here Adam. Keep going !

[@madmike2624]

Adam, just knocking "em" outta the park lately!! Just love the "rat holes" kinda obscurity lately!! Bravo!!

[@AlexanderWaylon]

Excellent video, interesting information

[@daydayy]

You've been doing great and interesting content, Adam. Thank you and I hope you keep on sharing your automotive knowledge.

[@NorthernChev]

*le sigh. I miss white wall tires with wire spoke hubcaps.

[@MarinCipollina]

Thanks for this one, Adam.. I sold Pontiacs those years, and our Pontiac franchise did not order any B bodies (Bonneville & Catalina) with any engine smaller than the 4.9 liter 301 V8.. Even that one was barely adequate. But the competition down the street wasn't offering anything much more powerful either, so..

[@ponchoman49]

The 301 was only offered in the B-body Bonneville for 1980. For 1981 the top engine switched to the Olds 307 with 4 speed overdrive automatic for improved highway mileage. This of course was for 49 state cars and Canada often used Chevy engines in place of the Pontiac and Olds motors. Looking back most 1980 Bonneville's seemed to be equipped with the W code 301 4BBL and the 1981's were an even mix of 231 V6's, 265 V8's and Olds 307's. Diesels were exceedingly rare in these for some reason

[@haggis525]

I tried hard to forget this engine. Now this! 😣

[@marko7843]

I think I said this on another post, but I remember the Oldsmobile 260 V8, but never heard about the 260 V6 and the Pontiac 265... Thank you, Adam.

[@ryanjones568]

Thank you Adam! Great information about an engine that is pretty rare up here in Canada nowadays along with the other sub 5 litre v8’s. I saw a clapped out 81 impala advertised on marketplace up here a few years ago with a 267 and I wondered if it had the same camshaft issues as the 305. I had a 305 in an 83 impala which was my first car that developed camshaft problems but it had almost 250 thousand kilometres on it so not too bad. I also remember uncles of mine having 305’s with camshaft issues in the early 80’s with fairly low mileage.

[@mattmccormick5042]

I'm really happy to finally see a video on the Pontiac 265. My 1st car was an 81 Buick Century with the 265 underhood. You very accurately portray the sluggishness of this engine. It was an absolute DOG! I tried to sell the car for very cheap and had a heck of a time because no one knew anything about that engine, or simply disliked it. Thanks for the great video!

[@ponchoman49]

We had a 1980 Century sedan at our dealership during the 1990's with this engine. It was actually quite peppy after we tuned it and went through everything. These engines during this time needed to be in proper tune or they were dogs. One had to pay particular attention to the base timing and vacuum advance as often it didn't work due to broken springs or a stuck mechanical actuator in the distributor causing no advance in the timing when you put your foot in it. We saw this quite often by the 1990's on these cars. Knowing how to tune them was critical otherwise they were slugs and drank gas. The horribly restrictive bead catalytic converters certainly didn't help either and replacing those woke up any car I owned a bit.

[@MarinCipollina]

I got a J2000 fastback coupe in light jadestone green metallic (gorgeous color) with a four speed as a company car/demo in July 1981.. I think it was one of the first ones made.. Transmission was notchy, but I got used to it. It had the 4 cylinder engine, which was "adequate" for the era.. Still remember the new car smell in that one. 🙂

[@Ramcharger85]

Love that interior on that car.

[@AlexanderCrump]

8:40 So wait! These came with the swing casket door pulls! No way! Nice!

[@johnz8210]

They were smooth and quiet, but that engine and the Olds 260 were absolute dogs. Chevy's 267 wasn't much better.

[@beenbeatenbybishops5845]

I drove a 79 malibu with a 267. Out of the box, it actually was pretty peppy and easy on gas. After putting on a 4 barrel, in which I changed out the primary metering rods, curved the distributor, installed a shift kit in the trans, and changed to NGK plugs, it was a screamer. Fuel economy actually got better. Went from average hwy mileage of 19.5 to 24.6. Still went though test lane clean. All really simple modifications that should have been done in production. I think that the engineers were either lazy or were held back from doing the things that were pretty well known to get the most out of an engine. Perhaps the cost was considered prohibitive. The mods I made cost $300.00. The bulk of that was getting a junk yard intake and Carb off a 305. My bet is that the unit cost at the factory would have been about $3 per vehicle. .

[@donreinke5863]

No worse than that hideous 255 Ford engine from 1980-82. Theres one in my core pile.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

@@beenbeatenbybishops5845 They had to meet the regs for 50,000 miles, without tuning it up at any time, and your setup might not have been able to do that.

[@matthewmiller2268]

​@@beenbeatenbybishops5845did you leave the stock cam in the 267? What were the initial and total advance numbers for the recurved distributor including vacuum advance? What gears were in the rear end?

[@PRH123]

We had a cutlass cruiser wagon with the 260, it was a very comfortable car, the engine did everything you asked of it, it never felt underpowered...

[@hughjass1044]

My friend's mom had a 1980 Firebird "Yellowbird" with one of these. It gave up the ghost one day when we tried unsuccessfully, to pull a dead cat off a fencepost.

[@MarinCipollina]

I remember those.. and the "Redbird" and the "Bluebird".. those were mostly marketed towards females. Guys wanted the fire breathing Trans Am.

[@drippinglass]

@@MarinCipollinaI remember a lot of women driving Trans Ams back in ‘79. Pontiac sold 116,000 T/A’s that year.

[@MarinCipollina]

@@drippinglass Perhaps that was a regional thing where you lived.. Certainly did not apply where I lived.

[@drippinglass]

@@MarinCipollina Yeah. Waiting for school in the morning, me and my buddies would catch a smoke down the street at a local business. I was 13 in ‘78 and I remember two new for ‘79 T/A’s that were both driven by women. One was white with garish yellow and orange bird and stripes. 6.6 liter on the shaker, so 403/ 350 THM. The other was Nocturne Blue with no hood bird or engine designation on the shaker. It looked sinister. I found out later in ‘79 you could get a downgrade 301, and get a credit off the sticker. And they didn’t have a decal on the shaker. 😂

[@alexanderspenser4960]

Buddy just bought a 1981 265 Grand Prix. Going to LS it asap. For confusion sake, the decks may different on two versions that were produced for limited years; they're the same block, and in the Pontiac performance realm, no big vs small blocks. Just one block. It can even be even more confusing that the journals were small vs big. Purist love to correct someone at car shows. It is odd that with GM swapping engines between divisions in the 70s, why C-P-O-B all had their own and GM didn't dictate the best one to be applied to all divisions.🏁👍🏾🇺🇸

[@dave3657]

We had a ‘76 LeMans with a 260 v8. It was a terrible, underpowered, burnt and leaked oil. The engine made 100K but was pretty ragged when we sold it.

[@shawnsatterlee6035]

Yes had a Bonneville with this motor. Would say ran about same as 305 Chevy. Tho the rear main leaked horribly. I preferred it over the Caprice at end of day.

[@volktales7005]

So my best friend's Dad owned an '81 Olds Cutlass Supreme coupe, a basic model in silver with blue interior. It featured a small V8 that in my memory was 265 or 267 cubic inches. Which engine would have been found in this Canadian spec car? We spent a lot of time in that car and it was not fast, but was smooth. Gave great service for the whole family (5 kids) for years. Final "repair" was to make a sheet metal shield so the leaking transmission wouldn't dump oil on the hot exhaust causing that pesky smoke...

[@marko7843]

Hell, that Olds 307 made 5 more HP than my 368 Cadillac... 😅

[@ponchoman49]

The non CCC 307 Olds V8's made 150 horses for 1980. There were down to 145 for 1981 and then down again for 1982-1990 to 140. The 368 was good for 150 HP with a 4BBL and 145 with TBI. That 368 did make more torque though but was horribly strangled as far as HP goes.

[@daveditcher4059]

I like this series of videos about “forgotten” stuff. The years 1972 thru maybe ‘83 or so were terrible for the domestic auto industry. Pertinent to this video, the Ford 255 V8 might be worth a look too.

[@mainebigfoothunter7088]

I had this engine in a 1980 Buick Regal coupe. It ran well

[@weegeemike]

Very interesting engine. Goes to show that GM was still somewhat committed to having their divisions manufacture their own distinctive engines even during the car/engine downsize trend of the late 70s, until of course Roger Smith cane in and made an effort to consolidate the operations of all the divisions which resulted in the death of each brand having independent engine designs. Great video as always, Adam. Keep it up!

[@matthewmiller2268]

That was a disservice and a disgrace to the GM makes... If each still had their own engine engineers/designers, each of those brands would still be around today still continuing to make their mark on automotive history

[@johneckert1365]

​@matthewmiller2268 It's stupid for a corporation to have 6 different divisions competing against eachother. 6 seperate groups of engineers to design 6 different similar sized engines is laughable. The Chevy V8 should've became the GM V8, the Buick V6 should've became the GM V6, and Pontiacs Iron Duke 4 cyl should've been the GM 4 cyl until smaller, more modern 4 cyls were designed.

[@pinchnloaf]

If you go by bore spacing, the larger pontiacs were more of a mid block

[@johnstine9001]

My friends, Mother and Dad had a 1981 Bonneville when we turned 16 it had the 3.8 Buick engine. It was the slowest car ever. I always thought something was wrong with it as under powered as it was. My family never had anything that under powered his dad said it was that way from day one brand new my friend ended up with it sold it and the guy put a 350 Chevy engine in it. I’m sure it ran much better.

[@2011joser]

Being in California , our engine choices in GM cars were very limited in these years. For these cars it was basically either the 231 buick or the 305 chevrolet.

[@Dr_Reason]

I drove a Grand Am with the HO 301. It was good and would outrun a 305 Malibu.

[@ponchoman49]

That was a one year only W72 HO 301 4BBL engine rated for 170 HP which was quite good for the time when 318 Mopars were making 130 and Ford's 302 with TBI was making between 130 and 140 horses. Those 1980 Grand Am's and Grand Prix SJ's also used a specially calibrated 350 transmission and a 2.93 rear gear in place of the lame 2.29's that came stock

[@michaelatkins9780]

I stand corrected, Adam.

[@eth39232]

Per an old issue of Motor Trend, Pontiac offered the 265 to Cadillac for the 1982 model year, but Cadillac decided to rush the HT4100 into production instead. I would think the 265 would have been more reliable, but probably just as slow.

[@howardfletcher7206]

Had a 78 Catalina wagon with the 301 2bbl along with a 77 Impala wagon with the 350 4bbl. They were like night and day. Could not believe how slow the Pontiac was unloaded how would it be load up the family and merge on the highway? A few years later I had an 88 Buick estate wagon with the 307 also a slug. Smooth reliable quiet but barely adequate. Sad times.

[@LakeNipissing]

I have several B body wagons. One of them is a 1989 Caprice which came with a 307 Olds slug. The Olds 403 is a direct fit. Had Olds 350 heads installed on the 403 to get the compression from 7.5:1 to 9.4:1, and this wagon WOKE UP.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

If you geared them down, they would have been much better.

[@ponchoman49]

@@jamesbosworth4191 One trick we used to advise customers during the 1980's buying any of these B-body wagons or even the Cadillac Brougham using the Olds 307 was to special order or look for units with trailer towing 3.23 rear gears. That certainly helped

[@hendo337]

What a terrible wimper of an engine for Pontiac to go out on. I have seen a forum where a guy took a 301T block, put a set of normal Pontiac heads that didn't share ports, bored it 0.030" over and used a normal Pontiac 3.75" crank in it, it was 383ci and made something like 470hp. I'm not sure if custom piston and/or rods were required, a customized narrower intake manifold was required. Apparently the short deck Pontiacs could have been good and they weren't allowed to be. Then everyone was unemployed on April 1st 1981 from Pontiac engine.

[@bmerlin376]

The Buick 4.1L V-6 made the same torque, but 5 more horsepower! Now I know why Buick didn't offer a V-8 in the Regal from '82-'85. It's too bad they didn't give all these engines a simple EFI setup. It would have made these cars so much better.

[@ponchoman49]

Its interesting that the 4.1 liter Buick V6 outlasted the other small V8's by two model years. 1984 was the last year this engine was produced with 1982 being the last for the Ford 255, the Olds 260 and the Chevy 267. The Pontiac 265 died in 1981 and the Chevy 262 was a two year only offering for 1975 and 1976

[@Flies2FLL]

-My mom had an '84 Pontiac 6000 LE. She did volunteer work at the school, and her best friend was this woman named Pat. Pat had bad eyes.... [I don't know what was going on, but one day they wanted me to drive them in front of a school board members house so they could see which cars were in the driveway. They were both flakes. Anyway, I took them in my '85 Volkswagen Scirocco Turbo and we drove past the house; As I was driving a guy on a bike flipped me off. What? Then this kid was walking up the street with a backpack on and he suddenly flipped me off. Hmm. Somethings not right here, I haven't pissed anyone off lately; So I look at Pat who is in the front passenger seat, and as we are driving her glasses fell down her nose. And she used her middle finger to push them back up. Whoops! "Hey Mrs. Shaneradt [I cannot spell her odd name, that's as close as I can get], could you use a different finger to push your glasses up? I keep getting people flipping me off"] My mom chuckle from the back seat... In any case, Pat saw the name of the car on the top of the hood and asked my mom how she liked her "Google". She called it a "Google", since the plastic 6000 LE script on the hood looked like the word Google. Yes, she had bad eyes, but it does kind of look like "G00G LE" Guess what we called that car until it's eventual trip to the junkyard with close to 230,000 miles....?

[@Flies2FLL]

Back then "Google" did not exist. "googol" was the technical term for 10 to the 100th power, or an enormous number.

[@martinsuter3531]

True story. I used to work with a recent immigrant from India who drove a Pontiac 6000SE. He honestly thought the car was called a Pontiac GOOSE!🤣🤣🤣

[@Flies2FLL]

@@martinsuter3531 He should marry Pat Schaneradt.....

[@hugieflhr03]

They were slugs but smooth. I had a friend with the 265 and a rare 5 speed in a 80 Grand Prix

[@komradkolonel]

The 10 year span from about 1974 - 84 was really hard for Detroit. The new fuel standards just sapped engine power and performance. I don't know anyone who had a Pontiac with this engine but I can imagine in a full size car it would be really underpowered feeling. I doubt it would be as bad as a Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham with the 4100 (and that was a terrible decision for Cadillac to put that engine in that car) but I can imagine that merging into traffic on an interstate required you to put it to the floor and keep it there.

[@ponchoman49]

The Cadillac 4100 and 2004-R would easily outperform and of these small V8's in the 1980-82 full sized B-body cars because it not only had more responsive fuel injection but also used a performance 3.42 rear gear and higher stall speed torque converter. The 4100's also made 135 HP were these other small V8's ranged from only 100 to 120 horses. A proper running Deville with the 4100 was reasonably peppy on the low end and managed okay passing power when running right. If your 4100 is a total dog and can't pass a car on the highway it is either out of tune or has a compromised camshaft. No they aren't fast but were easily capable of 12-13 second 0-60 times in the C-body cars. The B-body cars with the Olds 260 were around 17 second cars, the Chevy 267's were in the 14-14.5 second range and the 265 were mid to high 14's due to the Bonneville's being slightly heavier and more loaded than the Impala's and Caprices.

[@johneckert1365]

Full-size Caddys were WAY better with an Olds 307 than they were with that stupid f$%&ing 4100.

[@TeeroyHammermill]

@@johneckert1365 : 4100 ran better and got better mileage than Olds 307. 307 was more durable and had much longer service life. Cadillac 368 and Chevy Small block in the 90s put them both to shame.

[@damianbowyer2018]

Yep Adam, small V8's only good if the vehicle weight/size has been reduced at the same time. Otherwise, little savings on fuel consumption, as have to put the foot down to get the car to perform with any satisfaction for the owner. Cheers fm Damo🤔🤲

[@dave1956]

It couldn’t have been any slower than the Oldsmobile 260.

[@jeffrobodine8579]

Same along with the slightly more powerful Chevrolet 4.4 liter 267 V-8.

[@ponchoman49]

My 265 1981 Grand Prix was much livelier than my same year 1981 Cutlass with the Olds 260. Not surprising considering the Pontiac mill made 20 more horses, 15 more torque and used a 2.93 rear gear instead of the Cutlass's 2.29. The 260's were okay off the line but quickly ran out of steam much like the old straight six engines. They made there torque at a tractor like 1600 RPM's.

[@ronbrock6153]

I wonder how available the plastic parts that support the square headlamps are today? The early GM's with square lamps usually have at least on sagging headlamp.

[@dongeorge4037]

Well, as a SBC guy (yes, I do have a Chevy 265) I would have appreciated more compare/contrast discussion. Was, for instance, the transmission the only rev limiting issue or did rods/valve train play a part. Inquiring minds want to know.

[@OLDS98]

Thank you Adam. This was interesting. I thought the Pontiacs used the Chevrolet 305 V8 rated at 165 hp. I guess that came a few years later. I know all the GM brands used the Oldsmobile 307 V8. I heard two different horsepower numbers. Some say 150 hp on the early 307 and then it dropped to 140 hp until 1990. I know the Cutlass Supreme 442 used a 5.0 liter H.O. 307 was 165-180 hp. I do not know why they did not put that engine in the Ninety Eight and Toronado. None the less, this video was good because of the 1980--1981 Pontiac Bonneville photos. I smiled. That interior and exterior styling was later used on the 1985-1986 Pontiac Parisienne. I also saw the downsized Ninety Eight. That was the one thing about the early 80's that was sad.. the lack of power in cars. The 3.8 liter V6 went to later become the 3800 V6 too.

[@kc9scott]

I believe there were some years where Pontiac used their 301 for federal-emission states, and the Chevy 305 for California since the 301 couldn’t pass there.

[@OLDS98]

@@kc9scott I see...thank you for your comment. I know the brochures in 1985-1987 said 5.0 305 V8. I later learned that Parisiennes used 307 and 305 V8's. I was shocked to learn some of the Oldsmobiles used 305 V8's too. I recall that controversy in the late 1970's about Oldsmobiles using Chevrolet 350 V8's and GM had to go put that line in the brochures about using engines by other divisions.

[@ryanjones568]

My uncle had an 1980-1981 Pontiac Parisienne up here in Canada with the 305 Chevrolet engine that car had both camshaft and transmission problems sounds like the 265 might have been gutless but more reliable in the long run. I really liked the headlights split by running lights theme for the front end and I remember it having an interior similar to the Chevrolet impala another uncle had (305 with camshaft problems as well) but nothing like the one in the American b body boneville which was shown in the video.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

@@kc9scott I remember that too.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

@@OLDS98 GM was also sued because of that.

[@WhittyPics]

I used to have a Chevy Monza with a 262 V8

[@mcqueenfanman]

Instead of making all these new down sized engines GM should have been fitting the 350 sized engines with tbi.

[@vincentconsolo5782]

Oldsmobile had its own 260 V8 .

[@hotpuppy1]

Did not realize those had such poor cranks. Saving nickels I guess.

[@Flies2FLL]

Hmm. How many "chevettes" did GM actually produce? My uncle had an Olds station wagon with a 4.3 liter V8 engine that promptly blew a head gasket as soon as the warranty was over.... "The Mark of Excellence" should really be "Let's See How Much Cost We Can Pull Out Of The Design And People Still Buy It" No thanx. I've never owned a GM car and never will. Great video!

[@jamesbosworth4191]

Probably improperly tightened head bolts from the factory. My 54 New Yorker developed a lope that would disappear when the engine was warm, so I pulled the heads - two of the head bolts on the left cylinder head were not as tight as the rest, and the headgasket was starting to leak between two cylinders. Put new ones on and properly torqued the head bolts. No more lope.

[@ponchoman49]

Strange I never ever heard of any Olds 260 or 307 blowing a head gasket these years so if that what was happened you had a very rare defective gasket or head. These engines while slow were very reliable and long lasting

[@chrisjeffries2322]

The 265 was a Dog! 🐶

[@googleusergp]

Not really on the Oldsmobile 260 V8, VIN code "F" engine. That came out for the 1975 model year and was out for a full five years before the "LS5" 265 VIN code "S" V8 being discussed here came out. The 301 turbo V8 shared a tie with the 265 V8 for longevity in the line as both were only available in 1980-1981. You misspoke at about 8:43 in as you meant "1980-1981" when referring to the Bonneville, as the 1982 Bonneville was a "G" body intermediate, not a "B" body full size. My parents had a 1980 Bonneville with a 265 V8. We only had it two years as it was stolen in 1982 and never recovered.

[@motoxdudeNV-UT]

You mention the 1985 C Body vehicles, but you neglect the H... they were both crap the first few years, but after taking buyer money for years they finally improved the platforms. This video reminds me of the era when the consumer was the guinea pig or the "test dummy"... all the makers pumped-out some really miserable crap!

[@deanstevenson6527]

I figured all this out in 1979 reading the Italian World Cars Catalogue. US cars were the low hanging stragglers. If the Big Four only used Port Electronic Fuel Injection like the Vega Cosworth and Cadillac Seville/Eldorado did in 1976, then you would get the economy of a 20% smaller engine. Or if they kept up with wide ratio effective over drive gearbox, where you got a 9% fuel economy improvement with a 20% increase in top gear gearing. I worked that out when I was like, oh, nine years old. If you wanted to halve your CAFE averages from 12 mpg in 1974 to 24 mpg in 1984, all you had to do was add EFi, an over drive or switch pitch torque converter, and then set in place a management program to reduce your average fleet engine capacity from 350 cubic inches to 175 cubic inches in 10 years. Why Buick Olds and Pontiac killed off their smaller V8 engines wasn't due to economies of scale, it was due to GMs failure to continue its Advancement with Port EFi and wide ratio switch pitch and 5 speed overdrives. All of which were components which could have been onsold to other European car makers. Anti-Trust laws by one party prevented GM, Ford, Chrysler and AMC doing so. The CAFE era wasn't about a Malaise, it was about Big Government stopping American automakers doing what they did in the 50s and 60s...Selling and patenting Development to overseas car divisions and affiliates. From 1974 to 1984, Mercedes Benz downsized its V8 engines with total success, making a 5 liter V8 equal the 6.3 and 6.9 liter engines performance, or a 3.9 liter the equal of a 4.5...and Bosch selling it's inferior Bosch K Jetronic continuous injection and ZF and Getrag its own 4 and 5 speed gearboxes back to GM and Ford, for a Profit. That 265 Pontiac V8 should have been Bendix Delco port EFi and turboed with a Switch Pitch THM 400.

[@jamesengland7461]

I agree. There's so much tech that the big 3 could've employed, like the Cosworth injection, or the available 5 speed stick, which only the Cosworth and Pontiac Astre ever had. Some of the problem was the cost and the sheer time pressure to meet the new regs, but steps could have been taken.

[@jamesengland7461]

You know, just the Cosworth engine as is had 110hp; it could've replaced most malaise era V6s and V8s and wlcould easily have been tuned for even just 10-20 more hp, stretched to 2.3 liters, etc.

[@deanstevenson6527]

@@jamesengland7461 My uncle and Aunty were fruit exporters here in New Zealand. Each year from 1977 to 1979, they would have a new US California import...a 5 speed Skylark 3.8 hatch, or a 5.7 Chev Monza, or, later, an 80 Turbo 2.3 Mustang, or Indy 500 82 Firebird. It wasn't that the US car makers couldn't make it in an international market...it's that they were prevented to do so by cost cutting at the Mass Production Quality value added parts. America has always excelled at being able to make stuff cheaper, with more quality than the Japanese and Europe. Mass production improves reliability, reduces cost and provides a means of patenting it's second year designs. Lessons the rest of the world, has Learned off ...U.S.!

[@jamesbosworth4191]

We didn't want EFI in our cars. We did our own automotive work, and with EFI, you would have to bring it to the shop. We didn't want a car like that.

[@deanstevenson6527]

@@jamesbosworth4191 The moment you got do gooders running your international motor racing, crash laboratories, emissions control testing, and your legal systems, you were assured to have button pushing cowboys designing compliant cars. I love carbs, you could have had variable fuel supply with QuadraJets, ThermoQuads, Carter YFA's, BBDs and Motorcraft 2150s as well, and you did. Like that was simple. Independent Runner EFi initially offered either a 20% mileage improvement if the performance was the same, or the same mileage with a 20% performance increase, equal to that kind of Boost a Port on Port Independent Runner Twin Dominator intake offered over a 4bbl carb like Ford ended up having to use in Trans-Am's 5-liter racing. It ended up being a mandatory slush fund for which engineering accommodated the next new whims of legislation. Ford and Toyota in 1986 had to remove the 16.1: 1 Air Fuel Ratio lean cruise feature because of the ingrained 14.7: 1 Stoichiometry culture required for CARB and EPA and FMV emissions. The suggestions became Rules. Then shed hydrocarbon emissions stopped Carburettors , then Throttle Body EFI, now, port EFi will be eliminated. Thanks greasy, slippery slope legislators. Thanks a lot ..

[@BrianChappie]

That engine was forgotten for a reason. I had a 1980 Bonneville 4-door with the 265. It was terrible! If you wanted to get on the highway, you would press the gas and the engine would scream and do nothing. It was much too weak for such a heavy car.

[@therealjayseh]

They should have offered the 4.3L V8 in the omega lol

[@TeeroyHammermill]

They did in the 70s

[@therealjayseh]

@@TeeroyHammermill the heck they did lol 🤣 The Omega was a baby car. That only came with a 2.8L for the largest optional engine. The standard engine was a 2.5L Iron Duke.

[@joshuagibson2520]

It's embarrassing to admit, but I didn't know how good we really had it.

[@davidpowell3347]

Was the Olds 307 the best of these lightened smog motors? Was the Olds 403 the same lightened block as the 307 ? Seems to have been used more rarely than the 307 -- maybe in the largest Cadillac hearses ? Was the Chevrolet 305 a full weight (not lightened) small block and so heavier than the lightened Olds and Pontiac smog motors? Did a version of it make 180 horsepower? Was the Pontiac Turbo 301 a failure? Did they have to add back some kind of a girdle for the bottom end? Really kind of scary that metal was cut out by thinning the webbing that supported the crankshaft/main bearings in these engines or even that the webbing in some of these had holes designed into it but I guess the lowered compression of these engines allowed that? (Except when a few owners got unlucky or someone tried to "soup up" the engine)

[@johneckert1365]

The Chevy 305/350 blocks did get lightened a bit in the late 70's, but it didn't weaken the bottom end the way Olds did to thier 307/403

[@ponchoman49]

Out of all these engines the Olds 307 was probably the longest lasting with proper maintenance of course. The 403 was indeed a lighter weaker block with material removed out of the block. It was still a good motor but couldn't stand the same sort of abuse as the old 455's with higher nickel blocks. There were actually 2 Chevy 305 blocks used. The main lighter duty one was used for all LG3 and LG4 2 and 4BBl V8's as used in passenger cars. The heavy duty block was used in rare circumstances in the early days on 1980 Corvettes and certain trucks. This heavy duty block was also used for the 1982/83 Cross Fire 305 V8's in the F-body coupes and then resurfaced during 1983 in the L69 HO 305 as used in both the F-body cars and the G-body Monte SS's rated for 180-190 horses. After that the better block made its way into the more powerful TPI 305's. The 301 T wasn't really a failure per se but was a victim of not being developed enough by the time they pulled the plug. These turbo engines actually have a ton of power hiding in them. Want proof? Check out TTA performance on KZbin. What that guy can do to a 301t will blow your mind! As for what Pontiac did to the 301 they did some simple mods to make it turbo worthy starting with a lower 7.5: compression ratio, special pistons, higher volume oil pump, special exhaust with no crossover and a beefier block with a rolled fillet crank. They also used the tamer 301 code W camshaft instead of the hotter W72 mill. As far as durability the key to 301T survival was 2-3K oil change intervals, waiting a minute or two before shutting your engine off in hot weather to prevent oil coking in the turbo and keeping it in proper tune. I had a beautiful 1981 TA Nascar with this engine and never had any trouble with it in the 30K miles I owned it. I never revved it over 4500 RPM's and kept the oil religiously changes and never shut the engine off with letting it idle for a minute or so and it ran great the entire 20 years I owned her. One really needed to be familiar with these engines because a lot of misinformation floated around regarding them

[@ericwhitehead6451]

I honestly didn't know about this engine. I wonder why they just didn't use the Buick 4.1L V6 instead.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

That engine was for Buicks and, after the HT 4100's problems became known, Cadillacs as well. Probably a matter of prestige - confining that engine to the better cars must have meant it was a better engine in people's minds.

[@ponchoman49]

In GM's confusing early 80's strategy the Buick 4.1 liter 4BBL V6 was meant to be the base engine for all the full sized and premium cars like the Olds Toronado, Buick Riviera, Olds 98 and Buick Electra and Park Ave. It was also used in the LeSabre paired with the 4 speed automatic overdrive transmission as a mid way option. It also made its way into the entire Cadillac line for 1981/82 except the Cimarron and replaced the 4.3 265 in the 1982 Regal lineup and the new downsized 1982 Bonneville and the G-body Grand Prix coupes.

[@ericwhitehead6451]

@@ponchoman49 Wasn't it a credit option for Cadillac?

[@ponchoman49]

@@ericwhitehead6451 Indeed it was. Both for 1981 and 1982 it was offered as a 165.00 credit option on the full sized Cadillacs and quite a bit more for the Seville which had the 5.7 diesel as std for 1981

[@ericwhitehead6451]

@@ponchoman49 Thanks. I thought I had read that someplace.

[@AlexanderCrump]

1:55 That Bonneville is super handsome with those rare cornering lamps. Why was GM so stingy with these, unlike Ford?