1980 turbo stock turbo, 455 or 454?

[1blk1]

the purists here always freak when someone talks about changing an orig. car. (specially the turbos, cause they got swapped the most).

Most were swapped out for a 400, an illusion and failed vision of actually thinking you were gaining something.

you mean like a motor that had gobs of torque that you didnt have to baby, read on

(this is from wiki)

The main causes of engine failure and distrust was the public's lack of experience and knowledge of care and maintenance of the new turbo engines. Often, the turbo cool-down procedure was never followed or even known to exist to some owners allowing the turbo to burn or "coke" oil onto the turbo's bearings causing early (sub 50,000 mile) failure prompting service or even complete engine replacement. Combined with the mechanic's lack of knowledge ultimately caused GM to cease production after April 1981.

(from HPP)

Though the 301 looked pretty good on paper, performance was not as crisp as the 400 it replaced. The engine ran out of breath above 4,400 rpm, and the mandatory automatic trans and 3.08 rear didn't help matters. Horsepower was rated at 210 in 1980 and 200 in 1981.-Thomas A. DeMauro, as published in the May '04 issue of HPP



Read more: http://www.highperformancepontiac.com/features/hppp_0707_1980_pontiac_firebird_turbo/viewall.html#ixzz1tpO0gRdb

[FactoryFreak]

I dont intend to step on any toes with the following sentiment, but why does the focus always seems to be on horsepower? If it's not fast, is it not cool? I love a ground pounding, no vacuum, thundering big block Chevelle, but I can get the same thrill getting my a/c working again like it's supposed to..when most people just pull of the ac when it quits working...or getting the hot air choke to hold the engine at a 1200rpm idle for cold day starts, when others may run without a choke ...or my power trunk release working with the touch of the yellow button...I enjoy all the nuances and mechanics of my cars. I enjoy getting all the subassemblies working again.. For some reason, I think it's cool to hear the headlight warning buzzer working on an '81 trans am... Or the smooth glow of the stock gauge lights-when more and more people are now running LEDS. I like that my car can take me back to an era I wasn't around to witness.

It brings me a thrill every time I shift my 6 cylinder 4x4 f100 into granny gear to get up a steep hill...just like it was built for.. Even though it's not a 460 like everyone would want....what I am getting at, is that some of us resto-guys get joy by seeing our cars function as intended..whether in the fast OR slow lane.

To answer the OPs question, YES. ORIGINALITY DOES TYPICALLY COMMAND A PREMIUM. A stock example of a specific car will typically bring more than a modified example. Take a cut shaker vs. an uncut shaker for example...
However, it is your car, YOU paid for it, and like said before, I'd rather the car be on the road with a chevy motor in it, than rotting away with a pontiac motor.
Oh, and please post some pics!

Again, I do not at all want to sound demeaning, or snobby.

[FactoryFreak]

Honestly, though, in this day of environmentalism and eco-awareness, it is getting more and more rare to even see a gasoline powered, v8 musclecar...stock OR modified. So, I don't want to build up a wall with the guys that I will be fighting alongside to keep the hobby alive, in the not too distant future...

[1blk1]

oh i dont know, theres a few left

[80TAPaceCar]

(this is from wiki)

The main causes of engine failure and distrust was the public's lack of experience and knowledge of care and maintenance of the new turbo engines. Often, the turbo cool-down procedure was never followed or even known to exist to some owners allowing the turbo to burn or "coke" oil onto the turbo's bearings causing early (sub 50,000 mile) failure prompting service or even complete engine replacement. Combined with the mechanic's lack of knowledge ultimately caused GM to cease production after April 1981.

Wiki  , yeah credible...Not even a true test of the of the 301 Turbo or what ability it had to offer. 

The cool down process was what less than 2-3 min, yeah, high maintenance! Then changing the oil on a regular schedule, yeah a sin to say the least!  Yeah, it’s not a problem for me at all!

(from HPP)

Though the 301 looked pretty good on paper, performance was not as crisp as the 400 it replaced.

Yeah....hmm....

We could go on all day and post different articles of write-ups, some liked the 301T and some didn't, and they are all on my website.

But I will just post this one....This engine can do so much more than what folks think....Read this....

http://www.transampacecar.com/Site/Magazine%20Articles/08_26_09/Shootout_Rick%20Unterseh.pdf

[Blackened]

Do what you want with it. It's your money, your time and your garage or driveway that its going to be parked in. It's easy to tell someone else to what do with the aforementioned, however, unless someone wants to step up and pay YOUR price for it, do according to what pleases you, not someone else.

[ryeguy2006a]

Not sure if the OP is still posting on this topic, but I think it would be really cool to see a 301T that is heavily modified while still looking stock. I think I saw someone in HPP a while ago that had adapted the turbo system to a stroked 400 and an internally modified stock turbo. I think that one was pushing quite a bit of power and looked pretty stock to me.

[1blk1]

ya ive seen that article before, this is not a "bash the turbo" thread, i merely posted a couple quotes i found after a 3 min google search. kudos to pontiac for trying to keep the T/A performance respectable, and later turbos would do just that (3.8 GTA) the fragile, quirky, most swapped, 301t was just not the answer.

[80TAPaceCar]

The fragile, quirky, most swapped, 301t was just not the answer.

Fragile  Yeah, its not fragile.

It was swapped as nobody knew how to actually work on them at the time.  That has changed now.

[jjr]

 To lighten the 301 they used a 2 counterweight design and externally balanced
the engine. That design forced a 4500 rpm limit on the package, but the crank
is the exact same armasteel as any 400.

 In fact Pontiac V-8's are specifically designed to produce their power in the low
to mid rpm bands.

 The 301 earned a unjust bad rap for two reasons.

 1) very early engines came out with a CNC cutting error due to a mistake in
     programming. They failed day one, as the new owner drove home.

 2) ignorance. The differences in the upkeep for the especially the 301T were
    ignored, so damage did ocur. Plus the Yahoo! factor of ignoring the RPM
    design limit.

     Joe

[80whiteturbo]

Can you expand on the CNC cutting error? I hadn't heard that before. I have to say I am very happy with my turbo TA. If I had wanted a fast car I would have bought a new corvette.

[jjr]

 In 1977, and that was with only 301NA engines, some lubrication channels
were not cut and so a number of early engines failed.

 Joe

[Blackcuda]

I've bought many nice T/A's over the past 20 years, and would never even consider a 1980 or 81 car unless it was retro fitted with a 400 or 455. I believe as long as its a Pontiac motor you're not hurting the value, in fact you may improve the value if the engine swap is done right and looks like a factory installation, and detailed and clean. Like previously said, you can always hold on to the Turbo motor.

[jjr]

 That's fair...

 Put the original motor back in the corner and cover it.

 I'm far from telling someone what will make them happy with their
own car, just that for many the 301 may suit them... absent the
ignorance of a few that don't know any better.

 Recently, I tried a Cliff Ruggles carb formula in my 1980 Turbo Trans
Am and more fully realized that they were drastically de-tuned and
focused on emissions and little else.

 I now have much more crisp and anxious acceleration, further reducing
the initial only advantage of the 400.

 Joe

[fiream773]

Joe - your post about using Cliff's kit in your turbo carb made me think.  I don't own a Turbo, but help out a club member with her '80 turbo from time to time.  When we replaced the radiator and all associated hoses, I got my first real education on the intake plenum heating system.  That got me thinking that since heat is the mortal enemy of boosted engines, why not use the factory plumbing as a poor man's intercooler by plumbing the coolant lines through a small auxilliary radiator mounted ahead of the regular radiator and circulate coolant with a 12v electric pump?  I realize that fuel vaporization and cold driveability would suffer, but the car is only driven in nice weather and the emissions concerns are no longer a factor.

Have you experimented with this and, if so, what were the results?  What jetting did you use (I think the turbo carbs are huge - like 800 cfm...)?  I also recall that the main intake port is on the small side - has anybody tried to hone this out or does the turbo rely on the small port for a venturi effect?

I have to tell you that I rely on your website for lots of info when I work on the '80.  It is totally original with 70K miles and it's in need of a serious tune.  I haven't checked the turbo or wastegate for proper operation, but I'm sure the carb needs rebuilding as flooring it results in a TON of pinging and not a lot of forward movement.  I'm thinking the vacuum break solenoid is shot and leaning it out.  The car sat for five years when the starter died, so we replaced the starter & radiator last summer and got it running, now we just need to get it running right.  This car is her baby and replacing the 301 with a 400 isn't an option - I promise I've never even made the suggestion.  Besides, I'm gettting quite an education working on it and, like you, I appreciate someone trying to keep one in running order!  Thanks!