THE oldsmobile rocket 303 324 371 394 post to end all other posts, (lasalle related )

the Scout clutch disc I tried did not fit my Olds flywheel.
the disc hub did not clear the recess in the flywheel.

 

1.8:1 rockers have 5/16" cups,
use 5/16" pushrods
and lifters with 5/16" cups.

 

Paul
Could one or both parts be modified slightly to make them compatible?

 

if I remember correctly the recess in the flywheel was too small a diameter and too shallow.
I may still have the disc, I will check.

 

here is a picture showing the Scout clutch plate (disc) on the left and an Olds on the right with the flywheel side up on both.

there may be other Scout plates out there that would work but this is what came when I ordered one.
11" diameter with correct spline but hub too big.

 

Thanks! That is a lot more of a difference than I was thinking. The Scout must have a meatier flywheel maybe because of 4 wheel drive.

 

Good point on the Scout Paul. I will scrub that item from the list just to be safe.

 

Since this thread is open again can anyone tell me what these holes in the middle of my edmunds intake are? They are connected by a metal tube that runs through the manifold, it looks like someone made a half ass effort to thread one of them but I have no idea why.
Thanks in advance.

 

the hole is for the choke heater tube

 

The metal tube inside it is to keep exhaust soot and corrosive products out of the choke housing, thus it is open on both ends to the atmosphere. It can be a source of a leak as they are often cracked internally and should be pressure checked.

 

Bingo. I threaded mine and put a plug in it but it's still a leak. Oh well, turn the radio up

 

Looking for info on front cover mag drives. This motor ran with some sort of front mag. The cam button has a slot machined like it would take a hemi shaft. The distributor hole has a block off plate with a cut down shaft to drive the oil pump.

 

I put together this sheet from info here. The valve sequence should be right but I'll verify in a couple weeks. Thought it might be handy for anyone with adjustable rockers or pushrods.

 

I posted this in another Olds thread so, maybe some have seen it there but, I'm still looking for this info and have added some other things to it.

I'm trying to determine the deck heights of the 49 - 64 Olds engines. I'm guessing there are 3 deck heights. I'm pretty sure the '59 - '64 371/394 DH is 10.625, with 7.00 rods and a 3.688 stroke, with 1.766 CH pistons, has a 10.625 DH (1.844+7.00+ 1.766 = 10.61). It's the 57 - 58, 371 and the 49 - 56, 303/324, that I'm trying to confirm.

My Badger, Nylen and TRW piston catalogs list CH's of 1.875, '49-'53. 1.875 or 1.890 for '54-'56 engines but, the 371 has a 1.890 CH and has a longer stroke of 3.688 vs the 303/324 of 3.438. The 303/324 rods are 6.625 but, I can't find a rod length for the 371. If it also uses the 6.625 rod, then the deck has to be higher by 1/8" or the rod has be shorter by the same amount (6.50).

Based on the rod, piston and stroke, the 303/324 should have a DH of ~10.25 (1.719+6.625+1.875/1.89 = 10.219/10.234) but, I've seen it claimed that the DH is 10.5 for the 303/324. If it was 10.5 DH, with the 1.890 piston, it would give 27.25cc, with .141 deck clearance, more with the 1.875 piston. Since the '59 and later engines have .015 DC, I think .016/.031 DC would be reasonable for 303/324. Can anyone confirm the DH of the 303/324?

That brings me to the 57/58, 371 engine. Again the two catalogs list the CH to be 1.890 for that engine so, with a 1/4" longer stroke, there has to be a difference some where. The block had a 1/8" bigger bore and larger mains. 2.75 vs 2.5, 1-4, 2.625 rear main ( '59 and later have 3.0 mains). The rods were 2.25, same as 303/324 ('59 and later are 2.50). So, it was a 2 year only block. Did they raise the DH 1/8" on it? I, personally doubt that they would have shortened the rod, with the longer stroke but, who knows.

Added:

55olds88 info:
Bare Blocks The 1949-1953 are the same, 3.750 bore. 1954-1955 1/8" larger bore (3.875). 1956 larger cam journals.

1957-1958 larger bore again (4.00), larger mains and lifters, deck height +1/8".

1959-1960 larger bore (4.125) for 394 engine 4.00, 371 engine and larger mains again, oil pump drive changed to hex shaft, deck +1/4 more, cam longer.

HEATHEN @ HAMB:
Lots of guys used to bore a 324 to 4 inches and use a standard bore 371 piston to make a 345. Yes, the 371 pistons will work, since Olds kept the compression height of the piston the same and raised the deck height of the 371 blocks to compensate for the longer stroke.

Does anyone have any confirmed info on the deck height of these early engines?

 

Likely @Paul or @GOATROPER02 is going to have this info. Paul is active here, not sure if Tony still is, but you could call him at Ross Racing Engines.

 

I don't have those specs but I could look into it.

 

Thank you, Paul.

I would truly appreciate it.