Rebuilding a rebuilt '62 Olds engine

[Oldsfan]

I am rebuilding the 394 engine in my '62 Olds Starfire. The machine shop first informed me that I should start looking for .20 over main and rod bearings, because the crank had already been been turned down .10 and he was going to have to take it down another .10. Between the time I received that call, and the time I was able to make it to the shop, he also realized that the block has already been bored .30 over (I didn't think those pistons looked right...). He doesn't think he can clean the cylinders up at .40 over, that he'll have to go .60 over.

Just wondering what thoughts you folks have about any of this.

I've got a parts engine. I couldn't use the crank from that engine (already tried) because it was cracked at one of the intermediate journals. But I do think I have a usable block that hasn't been bored yet - I need to verify that. Block numbers are not an issue on this car because the engine number is on the head.

Comments... thoughts... suggestions...

Paul

[Oldsfan]

I am rebuilding the 394 engine in my '62 Olds Starfire. The machine shop first informed me that I should start looking for .20 over main and rod bearings, because the crank had already been been turned down .10 and he was going to have to take it down another .10. Between the time I received that call, and the time I was able to make it to the shop, he also realized that the block has already been bored .30 over (I didn't think those pistons looked right...). He doesn't think he can clean the cylinders up at .40 over, that he'll have to go .60 over.

Just wondering what thoughts you folks have about any of this.

I've got a parts engine. I couldn't use the crank from that engine (already tried) because it was cracked at one of the intermediate journals. But I do think I have a usable block that hasn't been bored yet - I need to verify that. Block numbers are not an issue on this car because the engine number is on the head.

Comments... thoughts... suggestions...

Paul

[imported_Badger Guy]

www.kanter.com is an excelent place to find parts for the 394. Not sure if they have the oversize parts you need.

Me personaly, I would stay with the 394. Track down another 394 and use the best parts from the two to rebuild. The 394 isn't the easiest motor to find, but they are out there.

Good luck

Tom

[imported_Badger Guy]

www.kanter.com is an excelent place to find parts for the 394. Not sure if they have the oversize parts you need.

Me personaly, I would stay with the 394. Track down another 394 and use the best parts from the two to rebuild. The 394 isn't the easiest motor to find, but they are out there.

Good luck

Tom

[Rusty_OToole]

They used to take those babies out to 480 cu in for drag racing back in the 60s. It was the only engine that could be hopped up to the required power level and still take the abuse in a rail job or altered and live, other than a Chrysler hemi.

.060 over is nothing. They used to bore them 1/8" as a matter of routine. Some guys bored them 3/16. The older models could be bored 1/4.

Same with .020 under mains. That engine is so overbuilt for strength it will never even notice.

Running 9's in an Olds powered roadster on fuel in 1963.

http://www.draglist.com/stories/SOD%20Jun%202001/SOD-062601.htm

[Rusty_OToole]

They used to take those babies out to 480 cu in for drag racing back in the 60s. It was the only engine that could be hopped up to the required power level and still take the abuse in a rail job or altered and live, other than a Chrysler hemi.

.060 over is nothing. They used to bore them 1/8" as a matter of routine. Some guys bored them 3/16. The older models could be bored 1/4.

Same with .020 under mains. That engine is so overbuilt for strength it will never even notice.

Running 9's in an Olds powered roadster on fuel in 1963.

http://www.draglist.com/stories/SOD%20Jun%202001/SOD-062601.htm

[Guest will62super88]

Try (usaparts@usapartssupply.com) that's where I get most of my parts for my '62 Olds. Super 88.

[Bart Larson]

What Rusty said 394's rule.

[Oldsfan]

We've decided to go ahead and bore out the previously rebuilt block. They're going to try and clean it up at .040 over. .040 and .060 piston and .020 bearing availability don't appear to be an issue.

Paul

[amptramp]

Take a moment to enjoy the weirdness of the 394 drive train.  I learned to drive on my father's 63 Olds that he bought new for $3500 in June of 1963 and used until 1986.  It had a 2.56:1 final drive for 2000 revs/mile or 2000 rpm @ 60 mph.  Even with the tall gearing, it never felt underpowered.

 

1. The con rods are rifle drilled for pressure oiling to the wrist pins.

2. Part of the counterweighting for the crank is in the flywheel and the front damper.

3. There is a hexagonal array of head bolts around each cylinder giving a total of 18 head bolts on each side, all SAE Grade 8.

4. The coolant going into the head goes into a pipe and exits through openings behind each exhaust valve seat.

4. The intake manifold is dry - no coolant flows through it.

5. The valley cover is separate from the manifold so the manifold does not get soaked in hot oil

6. The firing order is 18736542, not the usual 18436572.  7 and 4 are transposed.

7. The 1964 394 (last production year) was the standard engine used for rust tests on engine oil because everything was iron.

8. The Roto-Hydramatic transmission used a fluid coupling rather than a torque converter and was the last transmission to do so.

9. The transmission connected the gears through the torque converter in gears 1 and 3 but bypassed the fluid coupling and connected direct to the flywheel in 2nd.  You could apply the brakes and stop the engine in 2nd and the shifts would rattle your teeth.

 

There is one modification that is essential.  The oil return passages in the head are no larger than bolt holes and the engine will easily pump 3/4 of a quart into each head, enough to submerge the valve seals for cylinders 7 and 8.  It will cause fouling if not addressed.  Enlarge and port these holes.  Other than that, nothing short of a grenade in the pan could damage these engines although the flat tappets needed a lot of ZDDP in the oil.  The only production engine that was heavier was the Chrysler Hemi.  These things were built for brutal amounts of power with relatively low maintenance.  No thinwall casting techniques were used here - this beast could be bored pretty much as large as you wanted.

[Pfeil]

On 4/1/2008 at 1:08 PM, Rusty_OToole said:

They used to take those babies out to 480 cu in for drag racing back in the 60s. It was the only engine that could be hopped up to the required power level and still take the abuse in a rail job or altered and live, other than a Chrysler hemi.

.060 over is nothing. They used to bore them 1/8" as a matter of routine. Some guys bored them 3/16. The older models could be bored 1/4.

Same with .020 under mains. That engine is so overbuilt for strength it will never even notice.

Running 9's in an Olds powered roadster on fuel in 1963.

http://www.draglist.com/stories/SOD%20Jun%202001/SOD-062601.htm

You're forgetting the  389 and 421 SD  Pontiac engine. Eddie Hill ring a bell? Mickey Thompson? In fact the Pontiac was one of the first for many tracks to top 200 mph.

 I good friend of mine owned the top fuel 394  Albertson Olds dragster.

[Rusty_OToole]

Mickey Thompson was paid a lot of money by Pontiac to build up their performance image. You might better point to Pontiac's racing success in NASCAR in the late fifties - early sixties, and their drag racing success in the stock classes.

 

There were lots of good engines from Ford, Pontiac, Dodge and others in those days. But Olds V8s from 1949 to 1964 stood out for being immensely strong and overbuilt.

[Pfeil]

14 hours ago, amptramp said:

Take a moment to enjoy the weirdness of the 394 drive train.  I learned to drive on my father's 63 Olds that he bought new for $3500 in June of 1963 and used until 1986.  It had a 2.56:1 final drive for 2000 revs/mile or 2000 rpm @ 60 mph.  Even with the tall gearing, it never felt underpowered.

 

1. The con rods are rifle drilled for pressure oiling to the wrist pins.

2. Part of the counterweighting for the crank is in the flywheel and the front damper.

3. There is a hexagonal array of head bolts around each cylinder giving a total of 18 head bolts on each side, all SAE Grade 8.

4. The coolant going into the head goes into a pipe and exits through openings behind each exhaust valve seat.

4. The intake manifold is dry - no coolant flows through it.

5. The valley cover is separate from the manifold so the manifold does not get soaked in hot oil

6. The firing order is 18736542, not the usual 18436572.  7 and 4 are transposed.

7. The 1964 394 (last production year) was the standard engine used for rust tests on engine oil because everything was iron.

8. The Roto-Hydramatic transmission used a fluid coupling rather than a torque converter and was the last transmission to do so.

9. The transmission connected the gears through the torque converter in gears 1 and 3 but bypassed the fluid coupling and connected direct to the flywheel in 2nd.  You could apply the brakes and stop the engine in 2nd and the shifts would rattle your teeth.

 

There is one modification that is essential.  The oil return passages in the head are no larger than bolt holes and the engine will easily pump 3/4 of a quart into each head, enough to submerge the valve seals for cylinders 7 and 8.  It will cause fouling if not addressed.  Enlarge and port these holes.  Other than that, nothing short of a grenade in the pan could damage these engines although the flat tappets needed a lot of ZDDP in the oil.  The only production engine that was heavier was the Chrysler Hemi.  These things were built for brutal amounts of power with relatively low maintenance.  No thinwall casting techniques were used here - this beast could be bored pretty much as large as you wanted.

 

 

 

Roto HydraMatic is the last HydraMatic to use a fluid coupling, and is the only fluid coupling transmission to have a fixed stator in the small coupling. The Olds and Pontiac's ( 61-64 Catalina, Ventura, Grand Prix use Roto) ( Star Chief and Bonneville and Cadillac continued to use the 4 speed Controlled Coupling HydraMatic until 65 some Cadillacs got T400 in 64).

As said before with a 2.56 rear gear they were never underpowered due to Roto's 1st range of 3.50 and a 2nd range of 2.93 ( which is lower than T400 & T350's first gear ) and third range of 1.56 and a 1 to 1 4th range.

 And as said before in 3rd range or 2nd gear the coupling is empty and the trans is in complete mechanical connection.

 Also like in it's predecessor the Controlled Coupling HydraMatic,  when this transmission is in high gear the power flow splits in the transmission ( Called split torque) whereby 40% of the torque goes through the coupling and 60% is in mechanical connection. This means that these two transmissions are the most efficient automatic's in high gear until the wide use of lock-up torque converters. 

Edited June 27, 2019 by Pfeil (see edit history)

[Pfeil]

32 minutes ago, Rusty_OToole said:

Mickey Thompson was paid a lot of money by Pontiac to build up their performance image. You might better point to Pontiac's racing success in NASCAR in the late fifties - early sixties, and their drag racing success in the stock classes.

 

There were lots of good engines from Ford, Pontiac, Dodge and others in those days. But Olds V8s from 1949 to 1964 stood out for being immensely strong and overbuilt.

Alright, thanks for pointing that out and I'll agree. Also besides Thompson, Ray Nichels engineering 1957-1963, and Smokey Yunick 1958- 1962 were on Pontiac's payroll until that fateful day in January 1963 when the 14th floor at G.M. ended Pontiac and Chevrolet racing participation and Pontiac's SOHC and DOHC projects ( except the OHC Six). Thanks GM!

 The new 421 DOHC 4 valve per cylinder engine would have made the 2nd generation Chrysler Hemi fodder for the track.

Edited June 27, 2019 by Pfeil (see edit history)

[padgett]

OY. I would avoid at all costs the roto-hydramatic. It was essentially a four speed tranny with second removed. Would wind to 5 grand in first then chug along in second. Only thing worse was a Chevvy Turboglide with a super low  first gear. Was used mainly with base 348s. Has a "Gr" (grade) instead of "L" on the column.

[Pfeil]

10 hours ago, padgett said:

OY. I would avoid at all costs the roto-hydramatic. It was essentially a four speed tranny with second removed. Would wind to 5 grand in first then chug along in second. Only thing worse was a Chevvy Turboglide with a super low  first gear. Was used mainly with base 348s. Has a "Gr" (grade) instead of "L" on the column.

 

 

Roto is a FOUR range three gear HydraMatic. In stock form it's designed to shift at WOT at 4400 rpm and that's all you need in a stock-big torque 394 Olds or a 389 or 421 Pontiac.

If you are experiencing hard shift , a lingering shift, a early shift usually it's because the TV rod is misadjusted.

 

The gear ratio's are the following.

Roto:          1st = 3.50,  2nd= 2.93,  3rd= 1.56,  4th= 1 to 1

Controlled coupling;  1st= 3.97,  2nd= 2.55,  3rd= 1.55, and 4th 1 to 1

What ratio did they leave out? They didn't.

 

 

 

Most people that complain about Roto don't understand it, don't want to understand it, are afraid of it and don't want to work on it. You need the  knowledge to know where you're going and you need the special tools to do the job right. If you are afraid of it, if you have a bad attitude about it,  you've already lost.

 

Watch the 63 Indy Nationals in the final run for AS/A to see how well a Roto works, a 62 Cat, 421, with a Roto does a nice spanking on a 63 426 wedge with a Torqueflite for the AS/A national win and title. OR,   Come over and drive my 63 Cat to see how a properly set up Roto shifts.

 

Edited June 28, 2019 by Pfeil (see edit history)

[Oldsfan]

On 6/26/2019 at 10:28 PM, amptramp said:

4. The intake manifold is dry - no coolant flows through it.

 

Um, that's where the thermostat and engine coolant temperature sensor are located...

[Robert G. Smits]

Paul. what are you using for carbs.  Truely enjoy your thread.  Brings back memories of my high school days when I dropped a 57 J-2 in my 53 98 hardtop coupled to a 37 LaSalle 3 speed floor shift.  I wasn't smart enough to change the rear end ratio so it wasn't the best off the line but once you got it rolling look out.  Sure wish I still had it, but don't we all.  I think I still have a Olds dual quad intake on the shelf somewhere.

[TexRiv_63]

21 hours ago, Pfeil said:

 

 

Roto is a FOUR range three gear HydraMatic. In stock form it's designed to shift at WOT at 4400 rpm and that's all you need in a stock-big torque 394 Olds or a 389 or 421 Pontiac.

If you are experiencing hard shift , a lingering shift, a early shift usually it's because the TV rod is misadjusted.

 

The gear ratio's are the following.

Roto:          1st = 3.50,  2nd= 2.93,  3rd= 1.56,  4th= 1 to 1

Controlled coupling;  1st= 3.97,  2nd= 2.55,  3rd= 1.55, and 4th 1 to 1

What ratio did they leave out? They didn't.

 

 

 

Most people that complain about Roto don't understand it, don't want to understand it, are afraid of it and don't want to work on it. You need the  knowledge to know where you're going and you need the special tools to do the job right. If you are afraid of it, if you have a bad attitude about it,  you've already lost.

 

Watch the 63 Indy Nationals in the final run for AS/A to see how well a Roto works, a 62 Cat, 421, with a Roto does a nice spanking on a 63 426 wedge with a Torqueflite for the AS/A national win and title. OR,   Come over and drive my 63 Cat to see how a properly set up Roto shifts.

 

Totally agree. I have always loved the shifting characteristics of the Roto when they are adjusted correctly. Hurst actually offered a dual gate shifter for them in 64 which included lengthy performance modification instructions.

[JamesR]

On 4/10/2008 at 2:14 AM, Bart Larson said:

What Rusty said 394's rule.  [Rusty said: "There were lots of good engines from Ford, Pontiac, Dodge and others in those days. But Olds V8s from 1949 to 1964 stood out for being immensely strong and overbuilt."]

 

I really miss the 394 in the '63 88 Holiday Coupe I had. The car itself wasn't in the greatest mechanical condition, but the engine was awesome. Lots of torque for a 2bbl stock engine.

[Buffalowed Bill]

Former brother in law had a 63, and I had a 63 Cutlass convertible. He had a consistent problem with engine pinging and run-on, due to engine's compression ratio and his unwillingness to step up to higher octane fuel. My Cutlass had the Aluminum V8 with the "Sim-Jim" automatic behind it. I loved the car hated the trans. There was a reason that the old timers referred to it as the "jerkomatic."  

[Pfeil]

2 hours ago, Buffalowed Bill said:

There was a reason that the old timers referred to it as the "jerkomatic."  

 

The reason IS they didn't know how to adjust/tune the HydraMatic. I just got back from The Friday car guy's lunch and drove my 63 Catalina with a Model 10 Roto HydraMatic. No problems shifting , no jerking. 

Edited June 28, 2019 by Pfeil (see edit history)

[Pfeil]

5 hours ago, TexRiv_63 said:

Totally agree. I have always loved the shifting characteristics of the Roto when they are adjusted correctly. Hurst actually offered a dual gate shifter for them in 64 which included lengthy performance modification instructions.

 

That's a rare piece I wouldn't mind having.

 

Royal Pontiac made a internal shift kit for the model 10 Roto to hold the trans in higher horsepower cars to 6,200 in 421 and 6,400 in 389. The kit was designed in Pontiac engineering but farmed out to the participating dealers that sponsored Pontiac drag racing owners. By 61 (actually by 1959)  Olds was out of any kind of racing effort and didn't offer any performance enhancements, they just weren't interested.

 

Also of the model 10 Roto HydraMatic there are 4 versions of it for Pontiac.

 

    The PA version is for Tri-Power 318 HP, 348HP, 363HP, 368HP , 4BBL SD 385HP all of 389 cu. inches. and the 4bbl 320HP, Tri-Power 350HP@ 370HP, SD 390HP 4bbl. and the 2-4bbl  SD 405HP and SD 410 HP  421 engines. And also Police package cars and possibly taxi cars.

The PB version is for 389 4 barrel carbs.

The PE version is for the economy 389 2bbl. engine.

The P version is for all others. ( high compression 2bbl.) 

Edited June 28, 2019 by Pfeil (see edit history)