Most 455 Buicks favor 30-32 degrees of total timing...What are valve sizes on the heads? Stage 1 heads are 2.125"I and 1.75" E as compared to non stage 1 455 which are 2.000"I and 1.625"E. Stage 1 1970 455 actually had 10.5:1 Compression, non Stage 1 1970 455 had 10.0:1 Compression. The Reed cam installed is a very mild grind for a 464 c.i. Buick. This cam is all done making power at 4500-4700 rpm..The actual lift of this cam is only .487" I and .506" E using the stock 1.55 ratio Buick rocker arms. The cam card lift figures were using a 1.60 rocker arm ratio. There are many other cam grinds available that would produce substantial power improvements over this Reed cam. The low compression (9.2:1) of this build is definitely decreasing potential torque and hp.

@midnitesquirldog1 Exactly backwards! I personally have been stranded by electronic ignition three times, including once in the wrecker I was driving, and as a wrecker driver I've towed more than I can remember. Points on the other hand, won't leave you dead. After years of faithful service they will eventually cause a miss or a stumble, but you can still go home or to a repair shop. I have never towed a vehicle with points that died in use. Give me points, every time! And vintage cars that came with points should NEVER be downgraded to electronic crap.

I know you want flat top pistons with 0 Deck. Do they make Cometic MLS thinner headgaskets for that engine?

@@thefinalroman ... I had just placed an order for .027 cometic.

@@billdedrick1914 Yes, we have the Stage 1 heads. Looking to bring it to low 10's CR.

What a great Dad and spectacular car too! Boy you were lucky to have such a wonderful loving father who also had great taste in cars!!!

Or better put ... the 455 Stage 1. I agree!

1970 OLDS 442 W30 HAS TAKEN DOWN A FEW HEMIS IN IT'S DAY .

He never raced my Chevelle.

​@@SpideySenses-gb9gi 💦 dream pal.

A great combination.

Except Ford's.

@@cammontreuil7509 Forked Over Rebuilt Dodge......

@@martyzielinski1442 you want to list how many things are cheap and wrong with chevy ? There's plenty.

@Speedy rapacki was any of them running in Nascar ? What about top fuel ? Dodge and Ford dominated in the 60's.

Is it really that low of RPM? That’s pretty incredible, and would be a monster on the street. I’ve known they made 510ft/lbs for 40 years but figured it was around 3500+RPMs. All of our American V8s only have a few crucial differences, and some aren’t exactly magical. Things like compression ratio, bore vs stroke, conn rod length, are all relatively straightforward. But from the carb to the piston is where the real voodoo was. And exhaust manifolds were also a huge variable, but Hemis really had an advantage as far as flow into a cylinder. But even that isn’t the whole picture. I’m not sure when the engineers realized this, but swirl or tumbling were extremely helpful in keeping the mixture homogenous. It doesn’t matter how much air/fuel mixture you get into the cylinder if it all doesn’t blow the hell up. And if that atomized mix gets too cooled along the way, it will separate, or if it hits too many walls and slows down too much it will separate, leaving liquid fuel in the intake runners or the intake port on the head, in practice they are one runner/port, hence the “half heads” of the Ford 390, and big leap into the unknown for ford at the time but an idea that was built on solid science. It’s easier to hog out aluminum than iron, and also saves weight. So if your intake manifold takes up half the head, then it also saves more weight when you make it out of aluminum, and any porting done on your easily removed intake manifold gives you the double advantage of actually having ported most of the intake port on the “head”, because there is very, very little intake port on the actual head. But high ruse, dual plane, single plane, equal length, air gapped, all were useful ideas, and of course it’s not like the Buick had any kind of special secret to any of these things as far as I know. The next question is, if 455 cubes could give you 510 ft/lbs, then why didn’t the Cadillac 472 make proportionally more ft/lbs, like 530+ ft/lbs? Why indeed. If it was all down to the combination of compression ratio and bore and stroke, then why was Buick alone here? Was it that the others simply cared about advertising HP numbers? I doubt it. They lied about those all the time, so if you wanted to claim the biggest number, just lie. Those of us with experience know what makes power where, and torque gets you the hole shot, HP is your follow through from maybe 600’ on. And we all know the ET vs trap speed reflects this every time, unless there were traction issues at the line. But if one guy had a lower ET and the other had a higher trap speed, yet they crossed neck and neck, we know the ET winner had more torque or less weight, and the other guy had more HP. Less weight will help with the low end, but start two cars at 70mph, a roll race as the youngsters call it, and weight matters much less, but not really because of the speed itself, they are still starting their race even, as if from a starting line, but they are already up into their “working” rpm ranges. And since HP is a function of torque at a certain RPM, then 510 ft/lbs might lose to 450ft/lbs if the torque monster falls on its face at 5,000rpms, unless maybe it has like a 2.6:1 rear end, maybe, but the issue is the depth of workable rpm range, which is why these low torque Ferraris and such can still win 1/4 mile drags, but lose 1/8 mile every time. Excuse me, breadth of useable RPM range is key to a real race. Even lots of gears, with a super low first gear and 8 gears, with a sweet rpm range in each gear, only helps if the shifts are so quick that they are almost not measurable. A 1/100 second shift still adds up to 6/100, halfway to a tenth of a second, which in the drag world is very often the difference, but how many transmissions shift that quickly? None. The fastest I found was the McLaren 675 LT, at 40ms, or 0.040 seconds. For reference against a “regular” automatic, the modern Challenger/Charger ZF 8HP does it in 160ms in track mode. A Lambo Huracan Performante does it in 290ms.

Big deal. Stage 1's were fat and happy. The hemi heads were far superior to anything Buick produced. The hemi is a much better engine.

@@greasyhitchball yes on the race track but not on the street

@@greasyhitchball How about looking up the term hemi killer engine and see just what pops up, we'll wait 😏

@455buick6 No need to wait, I know the story. A guy in a Stage 1 beat a couple Hemis. Big deal. Lot of factors at play. Driver skills, tune, traction, etc, etc. I've seen plenty of Hemis beat 455 Stage 1 Buicks. In Pittsburgh, in 1978, there were two well-respected street cars, a 70 Stage 1 and a 68 Hemi Roadrunner. They were both stock with the RR the faster of the two.

The new bearing proved to be within specifications

The engine had an STD? Sounds like it really got around!

I hated those Buicks. My 69 Eliminator could not out run them.

Must not have been many fast cars in your area at the time...

@@davelowets any excuse will do. Maybe your neighborhood had a lot of Ramchargers and Swiss-cheese Pontiacs and a couple T-Bolts on the next block?

My 383 GTS dart had no problem with 455 buicks but i will say my car was probally lighter

​@@onesecureone A lot of Buicks had 455s. All other things being equal in factory options, a 1970 GS455 Stage 1 should be a little lighter than a 1970 Chevelle SS LS6

My dream boat will have a pair of buick 455's

I have a lobster boat that had a brand new 455. Stage one 1970 engine that thing would go out by 15 foot Boston whalers with 33 hp engines its a 35 foot boat still have it and it has 400 hp detroit diesel now it goes good now but the snap of that buick would take you off your feet if you didn't get. Ahold of something lol

@@michaeltibbetts8155 It speaks volumes that the Buick 455 had more low end acceleration in a big heavy hull than a huge diesel. Usually it would be the other way round. I didn't say it in my original comment, but nearly all the BBC boats I saw as a kid were running 8-71 superchargers. They also were the fastest in top speed, but the naturally aspirated 455's had about the same acceleration from standing starts heading out of the launch and dock area. Only a few of the others had blowers - I really only distinctly remember one of the Olds 455's having an 8-71. I also remember it sitting backwards (likewise about half of the BBC's) in the boat, with the front end at the back of the boat angled up much higher than the other end. I don't recall if any had nitrous, and turbos were non-existent back then. Most non-supercharged boats had twin 4 barrels on tall tunnel rams. Also remember the big jets of what I now know to be cooling water shooting out the exhausts or from the transom area (besides the rooster tails from the jet drives).

I believe that 69 had a 430ci

His knowledge IMO is limited to mopar I’m NOLONGER a fan

The ratings of all of this are jokingly skewed. When the standard valve 455 was put in a Riviera, Wildcat or Electra, it's rated at 370. The SAME 455 engine in a GS 455 was rated at 350. Chevy and Pontiac did the same thing. The bigger valved and very slightly bigger cammed Stage 1 was rated at 360. All just a rating game. The Stage 1 was rated at 10.5 to 1 compression only because the slightly larger valves took up a tiny bit more space in the combustion chambers. All 1970 455 pistons were cast and were the same. Another example of silly "ratings" ... the 360 hp LS5 Chevelle's 454 was rated at 390 hp when installed in the Monte Carlo.

@@LR-my2di there were actually 3 different buick 455 codes,SF code was 370 hp.,I dont remember the others right off hand but they were 350 and 360 hp.,I checked into that years ago but went 425 buick nailhead instead for my project so never remembered the other codes for the 455's

@@steveesman9469 Yes, Steve. I can remember that there was SF, SS and SR. The SS was the under-rated Stage 1 with the slightly "hotter" cam and bigger valves; etc. These other 455 engines did have their own codes but were identically built and thus were all the same regardless of the codes which denoted the car into which they were installed. That includes the standard GS 455 rated at 350 hp. That same engine was used in an Electra, Riv. or Wildcat but was rated at 370 hp. Just a ratings game.

Didn’t you hear Nick say he worked for 3 yrs in 1970 at a Buick dealership as a mechanic rebuilding these engines 😳

Perfectly said!

Heh. Had 300 hp in my Shelby Dodge. Light car. It was Fun! For those that doubt it.... T2 bottom block, G head, Super 60.

when detectives nick and manny are on the job, the case will get solved. what a great team.

Thank you.

Sometimes you want a classic that is really a classic I'm building a 67 C-10 with a BBC nothing will be electronic. The idea behind it is back in the 1980's when I was in my late teens what would I do with it if I wanted to make a hotrod out of it didn't have the money back then to do it. Something about the smell of a rich running carburetor not one electronic part on the thing. Today I'm not street racing anymore too much to lose if I get caught I want to hear a big cam and smell that gas smell at a small car show.

Good morning, Bruno.

YEAH...I BOUGHT A TUBE OF THAT GM POINT LUBE...YUP...MY 55 235 DAD BOUGHT NEW...HE PUT A DUAL POINT DIST PLATE IN IT FROM A 53 BUICK...BOLTS IN...HE EVEN PUT EX VALVE ROTATORS IN THE HEAD...BUT THAT CRAZY ENGINE WOULD STILL BURN AN EX VALVE AROUND 32 to 35,000 miles...crazy...

You don’t lube the lobes you stack some on the following edge of the rub block on the points. The block won’t spin the grease off and as the block wears it adds grease to the contact point automatically. I used to use Standards Blue Streak line or Napas points exclusively. They come with cam lube.

Well I agreed with you up until you said putting distributor in back was good idea. That's one of the stupidest things Chevy did.

@@cammontreuil7509 Putting a window in the cap was a blessing since the distributors were hard to reach in the back. I agree on the location being not a good idea.

@@paulkocek6576 dang. Someone agrees. My first car in 1975 was a 65 283 Impala. Setting those points hurt my knees every time.

No external "test" will confirm it being a real Stage 1 ... or not.

That was a big deal back then!

Oh yeah, that's when Lasseter was cheating. He, in no way would take a valve cover off to show that it was stock.

@@gordonstroup882 Badies Hemi was not factory stock along with Lasseter's Buick. The hemi had headers and an upgraded cam with a little more duration and lift. The Buick similarly had headers, an upgraded cam from stock with more duration and lift along with an Eldebrock B4B aluminum intake and a Holley (700 cfm). Typically, headers will result in 25-30 hp gain over exhaust manifolds, cam upgrades could result in 10-25 hp gains, and in case of the Buick, the B4B intake will gain 15hp over stock C.i. intake. The 700 Holley most likely did not improve HP much, if any over the stock 700cfm Q-jet carb. The stock Stage 1 1970 455 actually was underrated by Buick (360hp) and rated at at only 4600rpm (peak HP actually occurred at 5400 rpm). Similarly, the hemi was underrated (425hp) at only 5000rpm and peak hp was made at 6000-6200 rpm. I remember watching both of these running back in 1970 at the drag strip and both were very close in ET/mph stock depending on which mopar body the hemi was installed in (weight differences).

@@gordonstroup882 Well to get even with the hemi maybe some shaft rocker arms were used. haha. The hemi probably came stock with them. And remember the ball stud hemi. And the sohc and dohc hemi. Like the 427 sohc fords and boss 429's. The experimental hemi's are what fuel lore and pro mod to this day! haha.

Yeah, I think that you got it %99 right. The good ol' days. Anyways, it was all in good fun that also came with some serious bragging rights. 😅😏🙄🤐Ha ha!

riviera correct spelling lmao , lol spelled it wrong, i was a little kid when he had that car 12 years old never forge t how it ran really strong motor nice car to. split window in the back

Yes - but that eliminates any Pure Stock or even F.A.S.T. racing so the best solution is to Extrudehone. And of course port-match. Use thin steel head gaskets. And on-top too - a heat spacer - and everything opened-up and matched.

Closer to "Pure Stock" would be the old B4B manifold, which Edelbrock is making again. That was the manifold for the Stage 2 engine.

RPM no s, ever

The Edelbrock manifold is so much better and lighter too..

@@karaDee2363 Yes it is but … it disqualifies the car for the Pure Stock, and F.A.S.T. ( factory appearance stock tires ) racing classes it was born-to-run in. The ExtudeHone of intake - exhaust - and heads is much of why you see “Pure Stock” cars running 2 seconds and 10 mph faster than they did new. And we rarely ran street gears above 3.90 or 4.10. Although I ran 4.56 with a 289 K-Code Mustang I

yep--that motor done up ---really worked good

These an the dodge diplomat. I agree

Thanks for watching, Darren.

Enjoy it!

Lucky man.. Those Buick Grand Nationals were a sexy car.

@@NicksGarage thank you the gn has 31,383 original miles on it and the stage 1 has the carb off right now getting rebuilt

The stage 2 heads were aftermarket..

That's why I don't like old school stuff a ECU will tell you exactly where your problem is.

Would be nice for my Chevy 350tbi small block but stuck with ob 1

Right on. Get ready for torque!

According to die hard Buick owners, 70 carbs weren't that great. They were better in 71-72. A lot of them have been "swapped" because, I think, 71-72 were slightly bigger or something like that.

I agree that old Rochester carb is junk I would put a better upgraded carb

@@rverro8478 Nothing different with the carb for any of those years.

@@bigthunder2860 Quadrajet carburetors are absolutely wonderful if you know how to build them properly. Most people don't have the proper skills to build them.

Get a big 950 edlbrok on there more fuel More power