455 in olds delta 88

I was thinking of buying a 1985 olds delta 88. I don't want to keeps the stock 307 engine and the Th200r4 tranny. I would like to swap to a 455 engine and a th700r4 tranny. Will the engine and tranny just drop right in and bolt up or will i have to make modifications?

you will have to find custom big block engine mounts for that chassis and get a custom driveshaft, but you'll probably want to trash the entire rear-end anyway.

Would i have to fabricate the mounts or is there a manufacturer that would have them? Also, will the tranny bolt up to the crossmember that is already on the car or will i have to custom fabrication on that as well? Also, does anyone know the body code letter for this car and if the olds 455 will bolt to the th700r4 tranny?

I would imagine you would have to do some cutting into the frame rails to get a big block in there. Parts for a 455 are also a lot more expensive and would turn it into a costly project. I would probably build a strong small block, stroke it and bored it. That way you could drop your 700R4, or maybe a TH350 or 400 in. As far as mounts, I think you can get away with normal ones. I'm not too familiar with the 200R4, but I know the 700R4, TH250, TH30, and TH400 have similiar bolt and mounting patterns. Just remember, its still a Delta 88, you're going to put a motor in a car that is pretty overweight. Good luck, let us know how it goes!

Its a B-body. Swapping to a 455 (provided its an olds 455) is super simple. The only external difference between small block and big block Olds engines is deck height. You may have interference with the hood and the valve covers may contact the brake booster, but that can all be measured first.

The motor mounts are the same, oil pans interchange, and all accessories bolt up directly.

You'll run into extreme difficulty finding a 700r4 with the BOP pattern. You'll either have to run an adapter or scour the internet to find that very rare transmission. My suggestion is to spend the cash on the 200-4r and build it up. There are some common misconceptions about the 200-4r. It is not designed to take massive torque (which is unfortunately what your 455 will produce en masse) but as far as a high-hp thrashing they are far stronger than their 700 cousin. Much stronger input shafts and a better valve body contribute to higher stock line pressures and a much longer clutch life. There are companies like Raptor that build 200-4r trannys to take well in excess of 600 hp. There are three other benefits of the 200 family; better gearing by far, lighter weight, and the lockup converters are a much better design than in the 700.

If you're not going to do any neutral drops and drive it like a civilized human, the 200-4r is the clear choice. If you need it to survive in towing or consistent high-torque applications, I might consider an adapter on a 700.

If you visit sites like B&M or Transgo they have pages listing all transmissions and their dimensions. The nice thing about GMs and their engine/tranny combos is that the frames were the same. If you look at the frame around where the tranny crossmember mounts you'll probably see several holes designed for the other trannys. That car as a Chevy Caprice used either a th350 or a 700r4, each of which were different lengths. Same goes for motor mounts. The crossmember would be drilled for either Chevy, pontiac, or olds motors.

You may also want to consider not ditching the 307. It is a factory roller cam. Its weakness is the 7A heads and pathetic intake. Get some 5A heads, maybe headers, a mild Lunati roller cam, and an edelbrock intake and you're looking at a pretty mean 5.0. I'm also not a big fan of the Olds 455. Long stroke and small bores hurt air flow. It will obvioulsy make more power than the 307, but it will also suck down a lot more fuel to make the same power.

Have fun and let us know how it goes

Yeah, what he said...

I suggested cutting the frame rails if you wanted to keep it all under the hood.

www.crossmembers.com
I think they only make for G body, but give them a shout, I'm sure they could help you out.

curtis73, thanks a lot for all that info. I'm new to the car scene and really appreciate that help. I still have a few questions though. What engine would i be able to find the 5A heads on, and should i stick with the GM quadrajet carb or get a edelbrock?
Also, what engine sizes did olds produce? I like your ideas about staying with the 307 but id like to explore other engines as well. Thanks again for the help!!!


P.S : Where can i find out what transmissions will bolt to what engines without an adaptor, just for the sake of gaining more knowledge?

Found a few websites in my favorites on the 200-4r and the Olds engines.

http://www.transmissioncenter.net/TransmissionMeasurements.htm

http://tech.oldsgmail.com/

http://www.realoldspower.com/phpBB2/index.php

http://www.mondello.com/

http://www.442.com/oldsfaq/oldsfaq.htm ... An excelent resource for the olds engines

Thanks for those links. I think i've finally made up my mind. I'm going to go with the 403 so i don't have to mess with cutting the frame, etc to get the engine to fit right and so i can still mount the A/C compressor in the same place ( From what i found the 403 has the same mounting locations for all external accessories as the 307 does). I can also keep the computer with the 403 I'm going to also stick with the Th200-r4 tranny but build it up as strong as i can. Right now I'm trying to save up some money and locate a car with a frame/body that isn't rusted out ( I'm contemplating ordering a new frame and bolting it to a decent body). I'll keep this post updated as i slowly progress lol.


If i do decide to get a new frame, would i be able to order one from gm or would i have to look somewhere else?

I wouldn't imagine GM would have any frames for that car, they stopped producing full framed cars in the 80's, (I think the monte carlo was the last car to have a full frame). If you're lucky, may be find a NOS frame. However This is something I wouldn't have that much knowledge or experience in.

Thanks. Do you know what year they started putting overdrive tranny's in the delta 88?

Actually, RandomTask, they continued full frame cars until 96 when the last B-body rolled off the line. You were just testing me right? :)

With certain exeptions, the B-body frame like you Delta has didn't change much at all over its years. I won't go as far as to say they are interchangable, but I know the suspension trailing arms on my 96 impala have the same part number as your Delta. Many things like brakes, spindles, control arms, fuel tanks, and crossmembers are identical or interchangeble, even though the bodies changed. Suffice it to say that ANY B-body frame (not wagons... different frame) before the rounded body styles came in 91-ish will be interchangeable. Confirm that with someone else first before you buy, but I'm pretty darn sure of that. There were subtle differences, like for instance Buick bodies had some droning problems so they added an additional cross piece in the back under the trunk to cut down on resonances.

You won't be able to get a new frame from GM. You might be able to find a specialty aftermarket frame manufacturer that will build you one to spec, but you're looking at insane dough there. Find a good junkyard frame that's not too rusty, have it sandblasted and painted or powdercoated. Rarely you'll find a frame with some parts rusted through. G-bodies like Elcaminos and Cutlasses were notorious for this, but its easy as blasting it and welding in plate steel over the holes. The end result can be stronger than the original if done right.

Olds built a 215, 307, 330, 350, early 400, late 400, 403, 425, and 455. Ther were other ones but we won't worry about them The 215, 307, and 403 are the small. The 400, 425, and 455 are big blocks. Your swap to a 403 is an excellent choice. Big bore, short stroke, nice power, and externally identical to the 307.

Overdrive trannys started in 1981; standard on all 98 and regency, standard on all 88s with the 307. Finding which trannys fit where is pretty simple so I'll just spit it out here.

The old three speed autos fit into two families; TH350 and TH400... and they fit using one of two bellhousing patterns; BOP (for buick olds pontiac) or chevy. The 350 was the medium duty and the 400 was the heavy. The TH350 was later redesigned to add the overdrive. About the same time, the THM200 3-speed (and its lockup version 200-C) and the THM200-4r was created (M is for metric) as a small lightweight tranny to combat parasitic losses and keep fuel economy up. Up until this point, all 350s and 400s were cast in both the BOP and chevy patterns depending on which engine was in it. After 81, you had several options for trannys, and if GM had made different casts for all the trannys in both bolt patterns it would have been costly. The decision was made to cast the metric 200 family in a dual pattern case. The holes are there so that the metric trannys can bolt up to any GM engine. The 700r4's however remained only chevy patterns.

There are exceptions. I had a metric 200 three speed behind a chevy 305 in an elcamino that was a chevy-only pattern. There are also rare occurences of BOP 700r4's but you most likely won't find them unless you're looking really hard. On the website I had given you earlier, http://www.transmissioncenter.net/TransmissionMeasurements.htm , you'll see under each tranny's heading it says, "bellhousing pattern; BOP, chevy, fit all". You need a tranny that is either BOP or fit-all.

Later transmissions came along, too. The 700r4 became called the 4L60. Its technically just the same thing with a different name. Starting in 1993, they were electronically controlled by the computer and called the 4L60E. Externally identical to the 700r4. The "E" transmissions can't be run without the computer.

The TH400 was also redesigned for a 4speed and went directly to "E" status. There is no 400-family four speed that is not electronically controlled. The "E" heavy tranny is the 4L80E. Again it can't be run without a computer.

Your only other choice for "bolt-in" tranny in your car is the TH350 with a BOP or fit all bellhousing. Which you could do by moving your tranny crossmember forward a couple holes in the frame, but its a 3 speed. As you can see from that website the 350 is the only one that shares overall length with the 200-4r. Any of the other trannys you'd have to either shorten or lengthen the driveshaft.

You may wish to do yourself a favor. One of those websites above that I gave you has links to which 200-4r tranny code was used in certain vehicles. There are some in bold type and they were equipped with better valve bodies and governors from the factory. If you modify your 403 to breathe a little, you may want to either get one of these trannys marked in bold (they're easy to find) or modify your current one to perform similarly. The stock 200-4r you have is a touch lazy and might have some frustrating shift points. If you don't build it up at least some, it will have a shortened life behind the bigger 403. The guts of the tranny will hold, but the extra power will eat the clutches if you don't improve its shift performance. Read up on those mods at the 200-4r tech pages I listed above.

Curtis is mostly right, except one can get aftermarket electronic controllers to install a 4L80E in a non computer car.
I installed an Olds 455 into an '81 Fleetwood. It was really easy. The Fleetwood frame is identical to a Delta 88, except the wheelbase is a bit longer. Under the hood its identical.
IMHO as you are going to do this project seriously, GO FOR THE 455!!. A pre-71 455 is best. It has much more performance potential than a 403.
It fits exactly the same as a 403, with the same engine mounts and bellhousing, except its approx an inch wider and an inch taller. However, there is still plenty of room to spare, with lots of hood clearance and lots of room between the frame and fenderwells. Enough room for me to install big, fat headers.
I used the factory THM 400 trans in mine.
A 700 R4 would be nice, but you can easily use a BOP pattern 400 and locate a Cadillac trans mount from '77 to 81, and it will bolt right in.
I also used the stock Olds 455 mounts. They lined up perfectly with the frame cross member.

Before I get down to technical stuff, I just want to say thanks for all the great information and help. I've learned a ton and feel 100% more confident it taking on this project. MagicRat- I considered the 455 and would love to use it but at the same time i want to keep the car streetable and get somewhat respectable fuel economy. I figured the 403 would be a good engine for a mix of perfromance and economy, if i gear the rear end right and get a torque converter with the right stall speed. With the 455 I'd have to yank the computer/emisson controls, and since it isn't identical externally to the 403 i would have trouble getting the A/C compressor mounted without modifying the lines. I figure that if i get a decent cam, headers, a performer RPM intake, and get a pair of heads with a smaller chambers to up the compression to around 9.5 ~10 :1 (as well as port and polish them) i figure i could get about 400`425 hp. ( what kind of 0-60 time could i get with this?)

I also considered switching tranny's like you said, and from what curtis had to say i would like to stay with the th200-r4 (better gearing than the 700r4 as well as a better lockup converter, plus i don't want to shorten the driveshaft,etc. I also must have an overdrive transmission as this car will be my daily driver when the weather is nice, so a th350 or 400 will not work). The only thing i am concerned about now is whether the stock rear end of the delta will hold up to the extra power.

also magicrat, what were your 0-60 times with the 455 in your fleetwood?

Most likely your rear is a 7.625" 10-bolt. Its possibly an 8.5" 10-bolt. The 7.625 isn't particularly strong, nor is it particularly weak. At 400 hp, I would seriously consider finding an 8.5 from nearly any HD B-body except wagons. (wagons used a slightly wider axle and you might have fender rubbing on a non-wagon car) You can find them on many Taxis, cop cars, and all Impala SS. If you plan on passenger car tires in like a 235 width, they will lose traction before the rear end blows, but if you plan on 400 hp and getting it to stick to the ground with some performance sticky tires, make sure its an 8.5"

If you want, find a late model B-body with the disc brake rear. Its an 8.5. I can even tell you how to modify your stock proportioning valve to properly operate the rear discs.

Here's a website to help you identify your axle. The site lists a 7.5" which is the same case as the 7.625" If yours looks like a circle, its an 8.5. If its slightly squared off, its the smaller 7.5/7.625" Scroll down to the GM part of the page:

http://truckparts-specialists.com/catalog/differentials/axle-and-differential-picture-guide.htm

I like the idea of using a disc brake rear end. How would i go about modifying the proportioning valve to operate it properly?

Its quite easy itself. As always, I recommend a full flush and bleed when doing this. There are two types of prop valves and the one is easy to modify in 10 minutes on the car. I think the other type has to come off, but its been so long that I have to re-confirm my info.

The prop valve on B-bodies has retained the same pressure bias for years; designed for disc/drum. Since drums in general take less pressure to provide the same braking, the fluid bias was about 90/10 which provided a braking power bias of about 70/30. When they did the rear disc brakes, they didn't modify the prop valve. So sending 90/10 fluid bias creates about a 90/10 brake bias which is not optimal. On our impala SSs, we pull a cap off the front of the valve, pull out a part, and reassemble the cap. Super simple and it totally fixes the issue.

If you find a car with the disc brake rear, pull the front spindles and brakes, too. 2 reasons: 1) Your current wheel bolt pattern is 5 on 4.75". The disc brake rear is 5 on 5". Getting the front stuff to match will make sure you have 5 on 5" all around the car. 2) The front brakes on rear disc cars are 12" rotors and have a slightly taller spindle (only about 1/4"). You would get the bolt pattern right, bigger brakes in front, and a touch better handling.

I'll have to do some more research before I tell you exactly what to do before you tear into that prop valve. If I don't get back to you on it, cruise over to either www.impalassforum.com or www.impalasuperstore.com and go to the forums and ask there. You'll get a few hundred responses. :)

thanks. Now all i have left to do is figure out what to do with the suspension and then i can go shopping for parts. I am assuming i will need very strong springs, but what brands should i look at for shocks?

Also, since the 403 has windowed main webs, whats the max RPM i could safely get out of it? I would be very happy with 6000 RPM

Since you're not adding any "block" to it you probably won't need any different springs. The 403 should be within 3 or 4 pounds of the 307.

If you are keeping a stock ride and stock springs I would stick with a good Bilstein gas charged stock replacement. If you are going to make it a little lower and stiffer, I would suggest KYB adjustables. You can set them for stiffer or softer valving by turning a little knob. A set of stock Impala SS springs from a junkyard or swap meet would drop you about 2". Might be a nice compromise.

You'll be fine up to 6000 RPMs. Its not so much that they randomly break above that RPM, its just that they flex enough to cause tolerances to change. Sustained RPMs over 6000 may cause some damage leading to breakage. Depending on your cam, that 403 shouldn't need more than about 5800 to make most of its power.

You can make things a little stronger by using main studs instead of bolts, and for all-out stability, use Mondello's Main Girdle. It requires some machining and custom fitting, and probably not necessary in your application. The windowed main webs can take plenty of torque and pressure, just not the super-high RPMS, so you might want to focus on using good head flow and a smart cam to make your powerband in the 2000-5800 range.

All the Impala SS suspension pieces will fit. Also there are good aftermarket performance suspensions available for the Impala with better springs, sway bars and shocks.

MagicRat- I considered the 455 and would love to use it but at the same time i want to keep the car streetable and get somewhat respectable fuel economy. I figured the 403 would be a good engine for a mix of perfromance and economy, if i gear the rear end right and get a torque converter with the right stall speed. With the 455 I'd have to yank the computer/emisson controls, and since it isn't identical externally to the 403 i would have trouble getting the A/C compressor mounted without modifying the lines. I figure that if i get a decent cam, headers, a performer RPM intake, and get a pair of heads with a smaller chambers to up the compression to around 9.5 ~10 :1 (as well as port and polish them) i figure i could get about 400`425 hp. ( what kind of 0-60 time could i get with this?)

The only thing i am concerned about now is whether the stock rear end of the delta will hold up to the extra power.

also magicrat, what were your 0-60 times with the 455 in your fleetwood?
I think it will be easier to reach your power goals with the 455.
You won't reach those power goals while retaining the stock 'computer'. The stock carb will not work well with a 400 and a more radical camshaft. The stock ignition is easy to retain, just use a 455 HEI distributor and plug in your stock wiring harness.
It would work with a stock 400, but that would only give you about 225-250hp or so.
Therefore, since you are changing your intake, cam, exhaust etc to get the power, make it easier for yourself and go for a 455.

Some 307 AC brackets will bolt right up to a 455. But if not, it would be easy to modify yours.

As for economy......this is the wrong project to build and still get good fuel mileage. 400 or 455, the tuning required to get 400 hp will really suck down the gas. That being said, though, a 400 will be cheaper to buy used, because the 455 is much more popular for performance use.

However, their 'popularity' proves my point. People build 455's instead of 400's because it's a better engine for performance. Go with the 455. It will cost the same to build, it will give you more power and it will be worth much more if you ever need to sell the engine.

As for my car....the 0-60 is about 6 seconds. It would be faster with lower gears, but I kept the stock 2:55 gears in the rear end and the stock low-stall converter, because I like low engine revs while cruising on the highway. (like at 130 mph all day out in Montana :iceslolan )

If I were to do this project again, I wouldn't use a full size car. I would put the 455 in an early 80's Cutlass, since its about 700 lbs lighter, and thus would be faster.

I did this swap in a '78 olds 98. Same frame specs.

No frame mods necessary-all under the hood.

1973 Olds 455 (station wagon)
Stock Q-jet (650 or 750cfm, I forget)
Stock 400th, HUGE torque converter

1978 Olds 98
Stock exhaust, cat emptied
A/C car-converted to R34
2.73 rear gears
KYB Shocks from PST
Polyurethane swaybar & endlinks from PST
trailer towing springs

Awesome all around road car, launch like a bulldozer, very logy motor spool-up. Top end out of this world :naughty:

First mods:
Swapped Q-jet from '72 GP Model J-400ci: 850 cfm
Swapped torque converter from '72 GP 400TH (torched the tranny): A lot smaller, better launch, better motor spool-up
HEI ignition-swapped stock
Platinum plugs gapped @ .080
Accel Coil
Accel wires, custom
performance thermostat- 170 degrees
Double roller timing chain-set @ stock specs

I would have gone with ignition advance upgrades if I knew more about them, would have like an upgraded ECM module.

Change in launch power was tremendous. Acted a lot more like a performance setup.

Second mods:
200R4-B&M shift kit, B&M Trick Shift fluid
Transmission cooler-truck rated, routed through radiator, then cooler
Toggle-switch controlled lockup torque converter
Dual exhaust-Purple Horny mufflers

This gave me 3-6 inch flames from the tailpipes when dumping the secondaries (visible at night). Assumably, the secondaries were too rich. Launch was extreme for a car of this size and vintage, top end was extreme, and the car handled remarkably well for its' size. Mileage was approx. 21 mpg highway, which equalled out to approx. 483 miles cruising range, interstate @ 21 mpg. w/23 gal. tank
The car climbed hills well in overdrive (with lock-up) without bogging in the least (for testing only, not recommended on a regular basis), and ate other cars for lunch both red-light and highway.
This is a buildup I highly recommend for those who enjoy a POWERFUL full-sized car, and I was very pleased with it. I would further recommend 17 inch rims (as I now have on my '89 Cadillac Brougham), and certainly would want headers for the economy improvement alone. Would have also liked roller rockers.
At the time, I was lusting to have a Projection stand alone system, and a Cyberdine digital speedometer (in order to know the top end).
All of this goes to say that at the beginning, one starts with all of the basics up to snuff-Spark plugs, etc.
I later transferred this setup into a 1972 GP. 16 inch IROC rims, all else the same. GP was rated @ a little under 200lbs. heavier. Same 21 mpg. highway, with a lot of room to improve it. Biggest mistake? Not starting with a fresh rebuild-while getting the TV cable adjusted, the transmission hung up, and it spun a main bearing...end of project. But it was fun while it lasted!
Increased compression ratio would have been an immediate boost to power AND economy, as would have a cam upgrade, intake upgrade, etc. In all of this, I used the stock radiator for the OLDs A/C equipped 350 that came with the car. With out the change to a TH400, it is my understanding that a custom driveshaft would not have been necessary to do the 200-R4 swap

Really good info, Kriegar... but in general its a no-no to revive old threads :grinyes:

Welcome aboard!