From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  2 01:29:46 1992
Subject: Re: engine modifications
To: hotrod@dixie.com


In article , hotrod%dixie.com@mathcs.emory.edu (The Hotrod List) writes:
> Last year I acquired a 65 Chevy Sport Coupe with a stock 327/250hp
> engine and Powerglide.  Unfortunately there are two cylinders, #7 and 8
> that are low on compression, I think due to bad valves.  When I get a
> valve job I'm planning on having hardened valve seats installed, and I
> was wondering what other things could be done to improve the horsepower.
> I want the most bang for my buck, and am interested in suggestions -
> different cam, manifold, carb, headers, electronic ignition, etc.  I
> would like to go to 300hp and would appreciate a prioritized list so I
> can add improvements as $$ allow.  Thanks for any help.
> -- 
>  -Dean 		dean@MorningStar.Com
> 
> ----------
> Posted by: Dean Schell 


Hi Dean               

The best bang-for-the-buck parts IMHO are as follows.

Edelbrock Performer RPM manifold: this is supposed to give you all the
performance of a single plane manifold but also gives you the low end
torque of a single.
I would have liked one of these but I already had a regular Performer
( which also gives you good performance BTW.) manifold :O(

Matching Edelbrock 750 carb.   
If you get the regular Performer manifold you will be able to use your
stock carb. ( I am assuming that you have a Q-jet)

For ignition I would suggest an Accel blueprinted HEI distibutor
and an Accel HEI supercoil. 
I know that this is a little different from the usual MSD or Mallory
suggestions but I have one of these set ups and can tell you that
it works great!
It also is cheaper than the others.
Just think you can get HEI parts anywhere, so when something goes wrong
or just needs replaced it's cheap and easy to get parts!

The rest of your mods are hard to comment on since you haven't told us
how you want the car to behave or what you are going to be using it for.
However dual exhaust and headers are a number one priority when you want
easy quick but large power gains.

Note: I am know expert, one look at this post will tell you this :u)
but all of the above suggestions I have used and have had great success with.

P.S I just love questions like this! Please keep me informed on what you decide.


                       David Gunsul 



                       The information contained in the post above
                       may be unsuitable for younger or more sensitive
                       readers. This post was written as it happened,
                       nothing was reenacted.

----------
Posted by: mgwhiz!mogun!dcg@mgweed.att.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  2 11:38:16 1992
Subject: Re: Port Fuel Injection
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>
>If you want to go aftermarket, I'd probably recommend at this point
>the Haltech system, if for no other reason than I have more experience
>with it.  Since you're dealing with a '71, your emission requirements
>are trivial.  You can either slap a cat on the car and forget about it
>or go cat-less and simply tune the engine carefully, preferably using an
>emission analyzer.  Closed loop operation would gain you some 
>economy but is not really necessary for emissions.  
>John

John, I'm also interested in putting fuel injection on an older car
at some point, and I'm really interested in knowing the real world,
practical difference between open loop and closed loop.  I know the
engineering principles, cause I'm a EE, so I'd like to know what
very rough, approximate gains can be had in emissions control, economy,
and power by going to a closed loop system?

Are we talking about 10% differences, 20%, 50%?  From what a friend
here at work says, most of the difference will be in emissions and
economy, since power can/should be close to the same between the
two systems.  After all, you should be able to tune for max power
at WOT and be fairly happy, right? (assuming power is your only goal)

I guess what I'm getting at is, is it worth the extra effort and cost of
going to a closed loop system to improve emissions or economy?  I
know there are tuning advantages to closed loop, cause you don't need
to fiddle and twiddle different curves to get everything exactly right.

Paul

----------
Posted by: pha@hri.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  2 14:17:45 1992
Subject: Re: engine modifications
To: hotrod@dixie.com

> The best bang-for-the-buck parts IMHO are as follows.
> 
> Edelbrock Performer RPM manifold: this is supposed to give you all the
> performance of a single plane manifold but also gives you the low end
> torque of a single.
> I would have liked one of these but I already had a regular Performer
> ( which also gives you good performance BTW.) manifold :O(
> 
> Matching Edelbrock 750 carb.   
> If you get the regular Performer manifold you will be able to use your
> stock carb. ( I am assuming that you have a Q-jet)
> 
> For ignition I would suggest an Accel blueprinted HEI distibutor
> and an Accel HEI supercoil. 
> I know that this is a little different from the usual MSD or Mallory
> suggestions but I have one of these set ups and can tell you that
> it works great!
> It also is cheaper thso to increase performance and economy.

The HEI Supercoil DOES work great!  If you can find an HEI distributor
in a junkyard that will match your engine (not too difficult..), that
is usually cheaper than the blueprinted dist.  Installing the
supercoil on to one of these distributors is an excellent way to gain
efficiency AND power!  headers are also a great way to gain both power
and economy...  

Speaking of gaining BOTH power and economy, does anyone have
experience with the Cadillac 500cid engines?  i have gotten my hands
on one and am thinking about modifying it for efficiency as it already
has gobs and gobs of power...  of course, please consider the usual
tight budget...

I am new to this mailing list, and would really like to see that
letter on holley pro-jection...

	Derek Cunningham

		The Deekster

----------
Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  2 14:41:30 1992
Subject: Re: Port Fuel Injection
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>John, I'm also interested in putting fuel injection on an older car
>at some point, and I'm really interested in knowing the real world,
>practical difference between open loop and closed loop.  
>
>Are we talking about 10% differences, 20%, 50%?  From what a friend
>here at work says, most of the difference will be in emissions and
>economy, since power can/should be close to the same between the
>two systems.  After all, you should be able to tune for max power
>at WOT and be fairly happy, right? (assuming power is your only goal)

Your friend is essentially correct.  You'll see better mileage (major
win - I like hotrods that get 20-25 mpg).  The emissions will be 
a wash unless you run a three way cat, then you could approach modern
cars.

The big win for mfrs is the fact that they can build margin by having the
car run practically sterile under common conditions.  Remember that the
certification test collects all the exhaust while the car is run through
the EPA city and highway dyno program and then a total grams per mile
of each constituent is determined from sampling the whole.  If the
car is absolutely clean at idle and very low speed, they can be sloppy
with startup emissions (a big killer these days 'cuz the Cat is cold)
and wide open throttle.  most if not all OEM systems run open loop
during power operation.

On my agenda of experiments is to see what I can gain by closed loop
operation at all throttle settings.  Instead of trying to maintain
stochiometry, I would be trying to maintain a mixture curve known to 
produce the best power in that engine.  This will require some changes
to the lambda sensor.  A normal sensor has a very narrow range of 
proportionality around stochiometry, perhaps 0.1 lambdas on either side.
If the sensor is operated in the "oxygen pumping" mode (0.5 volts +- some 
impressed across the sensor and the current flow and direction represents
work pumping oxygen across the barrier which is  proportional to the
concentration ratio.) achieves a much wider range.  A fairly new generation
of specially designed wide range sensors are available that can handle
the entire flammability range of gasoline.  I believe that is what the
very expensive Horhuba A/F analyzer uses.  If I know that at wide open
throttle my engine makes its best power at 1.34 lambda (about 11:1),
I can have the computer control at that point.

John

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  2 15:55:55 1992
Subject: Open/Closed Loop
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>>or go cat-less and simply tune the engine carefully, preferably using an
>>emission analyzer.  Closed loop operation would gain you some 
>>economy but is not really necessary for emissions.  
>>John

>John, I'm also interested in putting fuel injection on an older car
>at some point, and I'm really interested in knowing the real world,
>practical difference between open loop and closed loop.  I know the
>engineering principles, cause I'm a EE, so I'd like to know what
>very rough, approximate gains can be had in emissions control, economy,
>and power by going to a closed loop system?

>going to a closed loop system to improve emissions or economy?  I
>know there are tuning advantages to closed loop, cause you don't need
>to fiddle and twiddle different curves to get everything exactly right.

>Paul

Generally closed loop operation is based on rewriting modified open loop 
tables (to another memory location). If you get your calibrations very
near dead on in the open loop tables, you will not really be able to tell 
the difference between open loop and closed loop. When you drive a new car,
it runs open loop until the O2 sensor comes up to temp. Can you discern
when the transition to closed loop takes place?

Emissions are a much more accurate measure, and as conditions change,
closed loop helps compensate. ('71 emissions would be no problem, but you
probably wouldn't come close to current emissions without EGR anyway)

I don't know much about aftermarket systems, but in the GM system I worked
with they don't allow for that much in terms of closed loop corrections,
because if the car drifts that far  from the baseline open loop tables,
something is wrong.

As far was WOT, I beleive all factory systems, and I assume all aftermarket
systems go open loop at this point. Hence your power output would be
identical.

						Greg

----------
Posted by: Gregory J Perantoni 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  2 16:29:13 1992
Subject: Re: aftermarket port fuel injection
To: hotrod@dixie.com

John,

Thanks for your reply.  The way you put things, the Haltech unit is sounding
attractive :-)

To be more specific about the requirements ... the motor is going in my
'55 Ford Truck.  This truck will be mainly a street machine. I have passed
the one inspection that the truck will need so long as I own it, and will 
no longer have to smog it so it isn't an issue.  Cost, ease of installation,
and dependability are the main issues.  So there is no way I can modify
someone else's manifold to work with the Haltech?  How many of my first born
do I have to sacrifice to get the setup?

Btw-please tell me if I'm being stupid to try an make the conversion on a
street truck. So far I have not had trouble hooking up with the pavement,
and I intend to keep working the motor until I do.

eric.

----------
Posted by: hiss@fionn.lbl.gov (Eric Hiss)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  2 16:34:15 1992
Subject: More Power
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Operating System: CLIX 3.1 r.6.0.13

I'm a rookie mechanic, so bear with me.

I have a '89 Ford F150 4x4 with a FI 302 v8, that I would like to get increased
performance out of.  The question is, what products on the market are 
compatable with the computer that will give respectable gains?  Ford 
MotorSports/SVO said that they are offering a mass air conversion for the 
F150 this summer, which will allow many of the performance products available 
for the 5.0 Mustang to be used with the truck engine.  Given this, what does
"mass air" give me and what else needs to be installed to get the most out
of this engine and at what cost?  I'm mostly concerned with low to mid range 
power.  I have concidered a HyperTech computer module which HyperTech claims 
will produce 10-20 hp and ft-lbs.  But, according to FoMoSports, if I make 
any engine modifications (i.e. manifold, cam, headers, etc...) the new 
computer may or may not do me any good.  I would hate to spend money on 
something that will become useless if I decide to go further.  Where would
$500 be best spent?

I basically don't know where to start, any advise or suggestions will be 
appreciated.

-- 

Kraig Pendleton
Intergraph Corporation
Reply via:
	INTERNET:	hotrod@kraig.b11.ingr.com

----------
Posted by: hotrod@kraig.b11.ingr.com (new user)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  2 16:34:19 1992
Subject: Re: Port Fuel Injection 
To: hotrod@dixie.com

> Instead of trying to maintain
>stochiometry, I would be trying to maintain a mixture curve known to 
>produce the best power in that engine.  This will require some changes
>to the lambda sensor.  A normal sensor has a very narrow range of 
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
	Ok, I give up! What is the Lambda sensors function in life?

>Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)
  _________________________________   _____________________________________
 /         _______________         \ /  OLD CHEVYS NEVER DIE, THEY JUST GO \
|        //~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\\  |     |             F A S T E R !!            |
|      / /_________________\ \|     |   OLD JAPANESE CARS NEVER DIE, THEY   |
|  -------------------------------  |       JUST TURN INTO BEER CANS!!      |
|  / O O O -----Chevy----- O O O \  |_______________________________________|
| (_______________________________) | MARK JENSEN           (503) 627-3115  |
| (_______________________________) | TEKTRONIX METROLOGY LAB.              |
|  |\ _________________________ /|  | BEAVERTON, OREGON        MS. 39-732   | 
|  |      |`V'  `---'  `V'|      |  |        markj@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM       |
 \_|______|_______________|______|_/ \_____________________________________/

----------
Posted by: markj@tekig5.pen.tek.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  2 16:42:37 1992
Subject: Re: aftermarket port fuel injection
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>To be more specific about the requirements ... the motor is going in my
>'55 Ford Truck.  This truck will be mainly a street machine. I have passed
>the one inspection that the truck will need so long as I own it, and will 
>no longer have to smog it so it isn't an issue.  

Lucky you :-)

>Cost, ease of installation,
>and dependability are the main issues.  So there is no way I can modify
>someone else's manifold to work with the Haltech?  How many of my first born
>do I have to sacrifice to get the setup?

You HAVE to use someone else's manifold with the haltech.  What you get
with the haltech is all the electronic parts.  You come up with the 
manifolding, injectors, fuel pump and the like.  What you'd want is the
Haltech F3 system. This system retails for $1961, trade $1372.
I don't know anyone who discounts the system (other than me if yous guys
convince me to become a dealer :-)

>Btw-please tell me if I'm being stupid to try an make the conversion on a
>street truck. So far I have not had trouble hooking up with the pavement,
>and I intend to keep working the motor until I do.

You can't beat it for a street machine.  I'd probably grudgingly say 
that for a strip-only truck, your money would probably be better spent on
carbs and other go fast goodies.  Very much worth the money for street
though.  Your hot street machine can be tuned to run as good as your
beater.  Won't get the mileage or the emissions of a beater but 
what the hey?

John

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  2 16:47:35 1992
Subject: Re: Port Fuel Injection
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>> Instead of trying to maintain
>>stochiometry, I would be trying to maintain a mixture curve known to 
>>produce the best power in that engine.  This will require some changes
>>to the lambda sensor.  A normal sensor has a very narrow range of 
>        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>	Ok, I give up! What is the Lambda sensors function in life?

Lambda is the proper name for what is commonly referred to as an oxygen
sensor, the little zirconia and steel thingie that screws in the exhaust
manifold and generates an output proportional to the lambda of the exhaust.

Ok, so what is Lambda, you ask?  Easy.  Lamdba is simply the ratio of
the current fuel:air and ideal (stochiometric) fuel:air ratio.  Thus
a lambda of 1 is stochiometric.  A lambda less than 1 is rich and 
more than one is lean.  A common term used in fuel injection circles is
reciprocal lambda or gamma.  This is convenient because it is >0 for 
richness.

John

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  2 17:50:42 1992
Subject: Re: aftermarket port fuel injection
To: hotrod@dixie.com

> You HAVE to use someone else's manifold with the haltech.

In my (year-old) Haltech catalog/price list, they list a number of
common hotrod manifolds already plumbed for injectors for the usual
selection of engines.

What are their terms to become a dealer?

ed devinney

----------
Posted by: ed@visix.com (Ed Devinney)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  2 17:50:49 1992
Subject: Re: aftermarket port fuel injection
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Eric Hiss writes:
> So there is no way I can modify someone else's manifold to work with
> the Haltech? How many of my first born do I have to sacrifice to get
> the setup?

There's nothing magic about the bulk of Haltech's manifolds - for American
cars they simply consist of an aftermarket manifold that's been drilled
and tapped for injectors, which are then installed.  Air metering is by
a throttle-body thats's bolted to a Holley-pattern adapter.  For cars
that have Weber manifolds available, Haltech sells Weber-style throttle-
bodies that are plumbed for injectors.  Pretty simple.

IMO, Haltech charges a lot of $$$ to drill & tap a manifold.  The rest
of their stuff seems pretty reasonable, and the tech-folks seem pretty
knowledgeable, at least when I called for info.

ed devinney

----------
Posted by: ed@visix.com (Ed Devinney)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  2 17:57:26 1992
Subject: alt.autos.antique
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Well, 

The resto dudes now have alt.autos.antique up and running. There were 44  
messages since yesterday, when I came in this a.m, so it looks like this will be  
a new relatively high volume group.

The stuff is pretty interesting, with the exception of the fact that the group has  
been in existence for less than two weeks, and already, the schmucks from  
rec.autos.* have arrived to start-up the "mustangs are better than  
volkswagens" diarrhea.

I'm going with moderated if and when we get around to rec.autos.hotrod :-)

	Chuck Herrick

----------
Posted by: cnh5730@maraba.tamu.edu (Charles Herrick)



                         AEIC News Release 1012
Status: RO

	                   March 1, 1992
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Help wanted (2 items) ................................................ 41
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: yxw5@po.CWRU.edu (Yaxin Wang) 2/28/92

Recently, Beijing University, Qinhu University and Academia Sinica have
started to build an optical fiber network in the local area. They need all
kinds of technical support badly. If anyone will offer any help to the
fiber network mentioned above, please directly contact

          Professor   Hao, Bailin
          Director
          The institute of Theoretical Physics
          Academia  Sinica
          PO Box 2735, Beijing  100080
          The People's Republic of China

From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  2 18:37:43 1992
Subject: Re: Port Fuel Injection
To: hotrod@dixie.com

    Date: Mon, 2 Mar 1992 16:41 EST
    From: hotrod%dixie.com@mathcs.emory.edu (The Hotrod List)

    >> Instead of trying to maintain
    >>stochiometry, I would be trying to maintain a mixture curve known to 
    >>produce the best power in that engine.  This will require some changes
    >>to the lambda sensor.  A normal sensor has a very narrow range of 
    >        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    >	Ok, I give up! What is the Lambda sensors function in life?

    Lambda is the proper name for what is commonly referred to as an oxygen
    sensor, the little zirconia and steel thingie that screws in the exhaust
    manifold and generates an output proportional to the lambda of the exhaust.

    Ok, so what is Lambda, you ask?  Easy.  Lamdba is simply the ratio of
    the current fuel:air and ideal (stochiometric) fuel:air ratio.  Thus
    a lambda of 1 is stochiometric.  A lambda less than 1 is rich and 
    more than one is lean.  A common term used in fuel injection circles is
    reciprocal lambda or gamma.  This is convenient because it is >0 for 
    richness.

    John

    ----------
    Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)

Ok, so I guess I'll have to stick my neck out a bit and see who hacks it
off :> [ This would be a better question for rec.autos.tech, but
somebody'd say that their chevy lambda sensor is better than your ford
lambda sensor and the italian lambda sensors are _really_ fast and ... 
Or rec.autos.really.tech, but aint' got one yet either. So... 

So, just what _is_ the ideal fuel:air ratio of the exhaust?  I'd be
inclined to suggest 0!  But seriously..

Can somebody explain this more?  I assume the thing most directly
measures oxygen? Exactly what is this taken to indicate?
Ultimately, you seem to be saying it's an indicator of fuel/air?

What is stochiometric? Ideal fuel/air?  "Ideal" in what sense? a
universal constant? parameterized by engine type, rpm, temperature...?

Unless this seems wildly inappropriate or boring, I'd like to hear more!

bruce
miller@cam.nist.gov

----------
Posted by: Bruce R. Miller 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  2 18:49:33 1992
Subject: Re: aftermarket port fuel injection
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>From what I then understand ... I could mount the Haltech's on my edelbrock
performer manifold. But if I could use FI  why would I want a manifold which
was designed to generate high velocity for proper fuel metering from a carb.
Wouldn't I want one that was made for super flow?  Doesn't the design of
everything from the cam to the cylinder heads change when you add FI?

eric.

----------
Posted by: hiss@fionn.lbl.gov (Eric Hiss)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  2 23:34:10 1992
Subject: engine modifications
To: hotrod@dixie.com



> The HEI Supercoil DOES work great!  If you can find an HEI distributor
> in a junkyard that will match your engine (not too difficult..), that
> is usually cheaper than the blueprinted dist.  Installing the
> supercoil on to one of these distributors is an excellent way to gain
> efficiency AND power!

What do I need to put an HEI on a car that didn't come with it?
Specifically a '70 Cutlass 455.  Are all the HEI units basically the same?  Is
advance tuning the only difference between them?  Do I change this
with weights and springs?  Different drive/cam gear for different
years/makes/models?

What parts would I need from a junkyard?  Just the HEI unit?  Any
wiring?  What should I look out for?

What's involved in the installation?  Get the unit installed in the
right direction/phase, change plug wires?  Just one wire to hook up?
Do I need to worry about bypassing a ballast resistor somewhere (I
don't know what this means, but somehow it's floating in the back of
my memory).

I believe I should run a wider spark gap with the HEI (0.060?).  Does
this mean changing plugs or just regapping?

What's the advantage of the Accel blueprinted HEI?  What's it cost vs
a junkyard version?

Thanks in advance for all help.  My apologies to all who might have
seen or responded to this message when I posted to rec.auto.

--
Joseph P. Cernada	AIT, Inc.
914/347-6860		40 Saw Mill River Road
cernada@ait.com		Hawthorne, New York 10532

----------
Posted by: cernada@ait.com (Joseph P. Cernada)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 00:00:32 1992
Subject: Re: aftermarket port fuel injection
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>In my (year-old) Haltech catalog/price list, they list a number of
>common hotrod manifolds already plumbed for injectors for the usual
>selection of engines.

Mine is the April 91 price sheet and does not have anything other than
components, tee shirts and the like.  I guess I outta give 'em a call.

>What are their terms to become a dealer?

Good credit and putting in an initial $5k of stock or so.  You also
have to do an installation and have a haltech rep inspect it.  
No problemo!  I'd like to sell a few systems word of mouth and maybe
do an occasional installation without having to do it full time.
I'd not want to have a full 5k stock sitting around initially so I'd
like to find an initial customer or two.

john

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 01:53:21 1992
Subject: Re: Port Fuel Injection
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>Ok, so I guess I'll have to stick my neck out a bit and see who hacks it
>off :> [ This would be a better question for rec.autos.tech, but
>somebody'd say that their chevy lambda sensor is better than your ford
>lambda sensor and the italian lambda sensors are _really_ fast and ... 
>Or rec.autos.really.tech, but aint' got one yet either. So... 

Nah, there's no intelligent life in rec.autos.*.  We're all over here now :-)

>So, just what _is_ the ideal fuel:air ratio of the exhaust?  I'd be
>inclined to suggest 0!  But seriously..

Not the fuel:air ratio of the exhaust but the intake.  The answer is
it depends :-)  "gasoline" has been considered to be stoichimetric at
a ratio of 14.7:1 air/fuel.  Actually depending on what "gasoline" really
is, this can vary from 14:1 to 16:1.  Methanol is 11:1.  That's why 
you have to dump buckets of methanol in an engine.  That's the beauty of
lambda. Regardless of the actual stoichimetric ratio of a particular fuel,
the deviation for stoichimetric will be reflected the same in the sensor
output.  

>Can somebody explain this more?  I assume the thing most directly
>measures oxygen? Exactly what is this taken to indicate?
>Ultimately, you seem to be saying it's an indicator of fuel/air?

Yes, the sensor directly measures the ratio of oxygen in the exhaust
to the oxygen in a reference chamber normally vented to air.  Oxygen
concentration directly relates to fuel/air ratio because we know
how much percentage of air is oxygen in the intake and therefore 
"compute" (in the chemical analog "computer" that is the sensor)
the oxygen used to burn the fuel.

>What is stochiometric? Ideal fuel/air?  "Ideal" in what sense? a
>universal constant? parameterized by engine type, rpm, temperature...?

By definition it is the ratio where the fuel is exactly completely 
consumed by the oxidizer present (normally atmospheric oxygen.)
This is a chemistry term and not an engine term per se.  It just so 
happens that as the mixture passes from rich, through stoichimetry
and on to lean, the CO and HC emission declines while the NOX stays
low until the lean side of stoichimetry.  All three are sufficiently
low at stoichimetry that a three way cat can clean it up.  In fact
the three way cat REQUIRES stoichimetry in order to work.  (Please
don't ask me to do a disseratation on THAT subject :-)

>Unless this seems wildly inappropriate or boring, I'd like to hear more!

Only boring if we're talking about damned old Ford sensors.  Or was
that chevy sensors... I'm so confused....

John

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 02:27:17 1992
Subject: 455 olds HEI
To: hotrod@dixie.com

To answer a few of the questions about the guy who wants to convert his
455 olds to a HEI:

  1) Yes, I belive the 455 has a slightly larger (read; not interchangable)
gear than the standard 350 olds motor.  It's been so long since I saw
one.. 8^(.

 2) All that is required is the distributor, new wires, and a +12 lead to the
dist.  Note that the +12 _CANNOT_ be the one that fed the coil.  That one;s
a resistance lead.  Run a wire to the fuse block in the car.

 3) Keep in mind that if your 455 was a performance one, i.e. 442, the 
HEI you may install might not have as agressive spark advance as the old
points-and-condeser unit.  This is cause HEI was 74-75 year and up,
in the time of those amazing, mid 70's emissions laws.  Advance weights
and springs are not interchangeable between points and HEI.  8^(.

Salvage Yard price : between 20 and 40 bucks.
MSD/spark box      : about 100, I think.

  If the old distributor is in good shape, and the rubbing block is not
worn,  then I'd just put in a MSD box, since it effectively converts the
spark output to that compareable to a HEI, although you don't get the 
reliablilty and benefits of magnetic pick-ups.  
	I converted my 72 olds 350 to a HEI and have _NO_ regrets.  I hate
points! =8^).

Any Questions? ------> bob   --->  RAVALENT@rodan.acs.syr.edu

----------
Posted by: ""Robert A. Valentine"" 



From z-car@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 16:38:15 1992
To: z-car@DIXIE.COM
Subject: rebuild prices?


Hello everyone,
I am considering rebuilding the engine on my 71 240Z.  What I was
wondering is how much does it cost (typically) for a stock rebuild?
The only people I can trust around here is the dealer (scary thought).
Has anyone ever had their local dealer rebuild their engine?  How do
you know it is time for a rebuild?  My car has 132,000+ on it and it
is starting to use about a quart of oil between changes (every 5000
miles or so).  And last question, if I rebuilt it myself, not including
the heads, what parts do I need to get?
Thanks,
      --scott (ferrari@clemson.clemson.edu)


From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 16:44:33 1992
Subject: Re: engine modifications
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Joseph Cernada asks about replacing a conventional distributor with
an HEI unit.

Before jumping into this, be sure to check to see if the HEI will fit.
Some manifolds have a passage that runs rather close to the distributor
housing and might actually cause an interference fit with the HEI.

The HEI units that I've seen have only two connections - 12 volt power
from the ignition switch (and NOT through a ballast resistor), and a
tachometer connection.  You can leave the tach connection alone, or use
it for a tach, engine computer, etc.

Sorry, I don't know if there are any dimensional differences in the
Chevy vs. Olds, Buick, Cadillac, etc. models.

Bob Hale                                      ...!ucsd!btree!hale
...!btree!hale@ucsd.edu                       ...!ucsd!btree!hale@uunet.uu.net

----------
Posted by: btree!hale@ucsd.edu (Bob Hale)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 16:44:44 1992
Subject: Re: engine modifications 
To: hotrod@dixie.com

There is a company that deals with Cadillac engines and swaps.
It is called Cacillac Motorsports Development. ph 317-583-3188.

Another is called MTS(?) offers parts and swap kits. ph 508-632-2117

Best o luck

Ron

----------
Posted by: ########################################## 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 16:52:02 1992
Subject: Buick 430 engine
To: hotrod@dixie.com

 Well, I thought today was my lucky day. I finally saw a derelict-looking
old Buick in the junker pit behind the truck stop. Thought it was an Electra
and maybe had the 455 I've been a-seekin'.

 It was older than I thought - it's a Wildcat with a 430 4bbl. Complete
with fire ants in the air cleaner. I figure it to be '70 or a bit earlier.
Only has a 10-bolt (and a funny-looking 10-bolt, sort of square) rear end,
but they'd be pleased to sell it for $200.

 So today's question, oh Poobahs of Performance, is:

 What do you know about this 430 engine? It looks like a close ancestor of
the 455; mighty wide, same sort of nose, but how close? Different stroke,
different bore, both? 

 I expect it would have a decent compression ratio (~10:1) and would be a 
torquey engine, but I wouldn't want to get into a hassle trying to build
up an orphan motor.


----------
Posted by: jws@mlb.semi.harris.com (James W. Swonger)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 16:53:16 1992
Subject: Re: engine modifications 
To: hotrod@dixie.com

HEI.    Try to find an HEI from say a late 70's OLDS. Here in Portland
OR, we have U-PULL-IT type wrecking yards where we can go in and remove
our own parts. Better yet is to find someone who is parting out a whole
car. I got my last HEI (chev) for 5$. Anyway, Get the whole distributor.
Also get the wires and valve cover looms etc. Follow the +12v lead
as far back into the wiring harness and get that too. It is always red
approx 10ga. For a tach hookup find a car with a tach and HEI, any
kind of GM car, Vega GT for example will do and follow the brown wire
back and cut it also. Now at least you have the parts.
  Take the cap and rotor off. HEI's typically have problems with advance
weight wear. The posts that the weights pivot on especially. If the 
thing is full of reddish brown dust, this is likely the case. You may
get lucky. There is help. Aftermarket advance weight kits contain a 
plastic sleve that slides down over the worn post and gives a new 
wear surface. Or, there is a company who offers replacement posts. I'm
not sure who.  
  Don't be afraid to take apart the whole distributor. This will allow
you to inspect and clean the whole thing. DON'T TAKE THE PICKUP
ASSEMBLY OFF THE MAGNET. Three screws. It is too much of a bitch getting
the gap set back up. Inspect the shaft for wear. Regrease the top 
bushing. Put it back together and put it in. 
 Set your engine up to TDC on #1 cyl. The rotor tip will be pointing
very close to the #1 spark plug terminal. Pull out the old distributor,
and drop in the HEI. The original distributor lead in your car is 
actually a resistance wire. Does the same thing as a balast resistor. 
Do not use this wire. Using the Red wire you got with the dist, you
can run it inside the car to the fuse block and use the spade lug next 
to the fuse labled "ign". I did this in my 70 Chevelle. Should be the
same in your car.
 I would not actually use the used plug wires you get but I would use
them to check routing etc. I would strongly suggest using a good brand
of spiro-core wires. Plug the red wire into the dist conn labled
batt give her a whirl.
 Accell makes a neat adj vacuum advance unit as well as curve kits.
I don't know about the rest of you guys, but I find it hard to get
the HEI to curve exactly how you want it.
GOOD LUCK
Ron

----------
Posted by: ########################################## 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 16:28:23 1992
Subject: Re: More Power 
To: hotrod@dixie.com



> From: Kraig Pendleton:

> I'm a rookie mechanic, so bear with me.

> I have a '89 Ford F150 4x4 with a FI 302 v8, that I would like to get increas
ed
> performance out of.  The question is, what products on the market are 
> compatable with the computer that will give respectable gains?  Ford 
> MotorSports/SVO said that they are offering a mass air conversion for the 
> F150 this summer, which will allow many of the performance products available
 
> for the 5.0 Mustang to be used with the truck engine.  Given this, what does
> "mass air" give me and what else needs to be installed to get the most out
> of this engine and at what cost?  I'm mostly concerned with low to mid range 
> power.  I have concidered a HyperTech computer module which HyperTech claims 
> will produce 10-20 hp and ft-lbs.  But, according to FoMoSports, if I make 
> any engine modifications (i.e. manifold, cam, headers, etc...) the new 
> computer may or may not do me any good.  I would hate to spend money on 
> something that will become useless if I decide to go further.  Where would
> $500 be best spent?

> I basically don't know where to start, any advise or suggestions will be 
> appreciated.


OK.  I guess it is time for me to jump in.  I have an '87 Bronco and want to
do similar things, so I have done some research.  I am also an engine
perfectionist (I don't care what it is, it just better run perfectly) and a
computer weenie, so I want measure everything that can be measured and
control everything that can be dynamically controlled.  So, my view may be a
little tainted.

I know of one person that has converted their 5.0 to mass air flow (MAF) and
have read several articles in performance magazines that have discussed this
issue.  Their conclusion is just do it.

Here is why.  Without it, the computer system has to make its best guess at
the operating parameters given throttle position and "downstream"
conditions.  This guess is also based upon well known static engine
parameters, like volumetric efficiency.  If you start changing things like
camshafts, heads, or intake/exhaust manifolds, you can get to a point where
the computer can't figure out which end is up, and you get an engine that runs
very poorly.  This depends on how radical the changes are, but the opinion
of my sample seems to agree that you don't get your money's worth unless you
run WOT all of the time.

Now, this upgrade assumes you want to keep you stock electronic ignition,
and various other sensors.  If you want to change this stuff out, you could
purchase an aftermarket system (and many have been discussed here), which
allow (require?) you to set the operating parameters to match your engine
requirements.

The final difficultly will be if you have the electronically controlled
automatic transmission (E4OD).  This cool little baby is controlled by the
EEC-IV based upon engine operating parameters.  If you have one of these,
you must be careful selecting a computer module to make sure this is
supported.

Another option, which I have been considering, is just buying a Mustang 5.0
HO engine from a junkyard, with all of the components (unfortunately this is
relatively easy to do), and stuffing it into the truck.  Visions of blown up
transfer cases on the highway come to mind, but this should not happen if I
drive it sensibly, right :-).

Will I ever do this?  Well, hopefully someday.  You see, my sig-other thinks
that my 1985 SVO and her 5.0 LX are project enough, and she wants at least
one vehicle that will get her to work come Monday morning :-(.

The bottom line.  I don't think you can spend $500 and get much in the way
of increased performance (sad to say).  It's a bummer that Ford has not used
MAF on more than a few performance engines.  Investing in the SVO/MAF would
not be useless, it would be the correct starting point for other performance
modifications.

That's what I know today, and I hope there is more information available
somewhere.  I know I would like to hear it before jumping into these
modifications, so I am just going to monitor this mailing list for awhile.


	Dan Malek
	dwm@hri.com

----------
Posted by: Dan Malek 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 17:57:00 1992
Subject: intake/exhaust for old straight 8
To: hotrod@dixie.com


Its time to tickle the ancient brain cells of anyone out there that
remembers rodding with older technology.

I want to keep the straight 8 in my '36 Buick because I think its
a great looking engine.  My problem has been in finding performance
parts that might bolt on to it.

Then, out of the blue, a dual carb, dual exhaust setup from a '40-'41
era Buick leaps out and bites me.  I believe the manifolds should have
the same machine pattern as my '36 but I wonder if any of you people
know for sure.

BTW: if you people know of other good sources of ways to hop up an
old engine I'd be glad to hear them.  Who knows, maybe beefed up
straight 8's will follow after everyone gets done hopping up flat
heads :)

-- 
Jeff Miller                 Network Systems Corporation
Internetwork Group          7600 Boone Avenue North
jmiller@network.com         Minneapolis MN 55428   (612)424-4888

----------
Posted by: jmiller@anubis.network.com (Jeff J. Miller)



From Hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 19:49:07 1992
Subject: mustangs...
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Okay, I need some help here.

Not being a ford fanatic, but an avid hacker just the same, a friend
of mine is seeking my advice.
He has a '69 Mustang Mach I with a 351 Cobra, standard tranny, dual
exhaust, 287(?)hp, and solid lifters.

My question is about camshafts.  can anyone recommend me a good cam
for the 351 that will not require valvetrain overhaul, work best with
more low end torque, and have some more high end power also?
Preferred RPM range is approx. 900(idle) to 4500-5000 max.
He is planning to stick with the stock manifold/carb combo.
Also please include part #s if you have them... 
Thanks for the help

	Derek Cunningham
	(the Deekster)

----------
Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 20:26:25 1992
Subject: Re: engine modifications
To: hotrod@dixie.com

> > The HEI Supercoil DOES work great!  If you can find an HEI distributor
> > in a junkyard that will match your engine (not too difficult..), that
> > is usually cheaper than the blueprinted dist.  Installing the
> > supercoil on to one of these distributors is an excellent way to gain
> > efficiency AND power!
> 
> What do I need to put an HEI on a car that didn't come with it?
> Specifically a '70 Cutlass 455.  Are all the HEI units basically the same?  Is
> advance tuning the only difference between them?  Do I change this
> with weights and springs?  Different drive/cam gear for different
> years/makes/models?

we did this to a 1970 Buick 455-- we found a 1974 buick estate wagon
in a junkyard, took the HEI distributor, replaced the coil with the
Accel Supercoil, and slapped it in!

> What parts would I need from a junkyard?  Just the HEI unit?  Any
> wiring?  What should I look out for?

All we got was the HEI unit, and we purchased new wires (Accel 8.8mm)
 
> What's involved in the installation?  Get the unit installed in the
> right direction/phase, change plug wires?  Just one wire to hook up?
> Do I need to worry about bypassing a ballast resistor somewhere (I
> don't know what this means, but somehow it's floating in the back of
> my memory).

We took out the old coil, pulled the distributor, putting the engine
at TDC first, put in the new distributor, wired it assuming the rotor
was pointing at cyl. 1, and then we could only have it either right on
or 180 deg. off.
 
> I believe I should run a wider spark gap with the HEI (0.060?).  Does
> this mean changing plugs or just regapping?

We haven't and it works fine
 
> What's the advantage of the Accel blueprinted HEI?  What's it cost vs
> a junkyard version?

dunno... can someone else answer this one?
 
> Thanks in advance for all help.  My apologies to all who might have
> seen or responded to this message when I posted to rec.auto.

don't mention it.
 
		Derek Cunningham

----------
Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 20:31:45 1992
Subject: Re: intake/exhaust for old straight 8
To: hotrod@dixie.com

I recommend HEMMINGS, possibly Clifford Performance in Corona,Ca(714
734-3310) or Patrick's down in Arizona.  I don't have a HEMMING'S with
me to pass along the number.  Good luck. 
Mike Brattland  Brattlan@nprdc.navy.mil

----------
Posted by: brattlan@nprdc.navy.mil (CDR Michael Brattland)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 20:33:04 1992
Subject: Re: Buick 430 engine
To: hotrod@dixie.com

 
>  Well, I thought today was my lucky day. I finally saw a derelict-looking
> old Buick in the junker pit behind the truck stop. Thought it was an Electra
> and maybe had the 455 I've been a-seekin'.
> 
>  It was older than I thought - it's a Wildcat with a 430 4bbl. Complete
> with fire ants in the air cleaner. I figure it to be '70 or a bit earlier.
> Only has a 10-bolt (and a funny-looking 10-bolt, sort of square) rear end,
> but they'd be pleased to sell it for $200.
> 
>  So today's question, oh Poobahs of Performance, is:
> 
>  What do you know about this 430 engine? It looks like a close ancestor of
> the 455; mighty wide, same sort of nose, but how close? Different stroke,
> different bore, both? 
> 
>  I expect it would have a decent compression ratio (~10:1) and would be a 
> torquey engine, but I wouldn't want to get into a hassle trying to build
> up an orphan motor.

BUICKS ARE NOT ORPHANS!
they are extremely torquey engines, second only to the caddy motors
of that era...
If you want to find out TONS of stuff about buicks, write to a company
called POSTON Enterprises.  I don't have the address handy, but i will
post it for you later.  They are an excellent company and generally
make all their own cam grinds, manufacture manifolds specifically for
buick engines,pistons, fuel pumps, rings, etc, etc...
I have  dealt with the buick 350 and 455s and have found them to be
extremely powerful, reliable and smooth.  we run a '69 buick special
at New England Dragway that (last season) pulled a 14.5 @ 97 mph with
a stock '70 455.  with the modifications made this winter, we are
expecting to be in the 13s this summer.  the car is still so smooth
that we let our mother use it for trips to the store, etc...
I haven't dealt with the 430s myself, but if it is anything like the
455, it will be excellent for a build-up.

Hope ive been of help (moral support, anyways)...

			Derek Cunningham

----------
Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 20:33:10 1992
Subject: Re: intake/exhaust for old straight 8
To: hotrod@dixie.com

I recommend HEMMINGS, possibly Clifford Performance in Corona,Ca(714
734-3310) or Patrick's down in Arizona.  I don't have a HEMMING'S with
me to pass along the number.  Good luck. 
Mike Brattland  Brattlan@nprdc.navy.mil

----------
Posted by: brattlan@nprdc.navy.mil (CDR Michael Brattland)



From Hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 19:49:07 1992
Subject: mustangs...
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Okay, I need some help here.

Not being a ford fanatic, but an avid hacker just the same, a friend
of mine is seeking my advice.
He has a '69 Mustang Mach I with a 351 Cobra, standard tranny, dual
exhaust, 287(?)hp, and solid lifters.

My question is about camshafts.  can anyone recommend me a good cam
for the 351 that will not require valvetrain overhaul, work best with
more low end torque, and have some more high end power also?
Preferred RPM range is approx. 900(idle) to 4500-5000 max.
He is planning to stick with the stock manifold/carb combo.
Also please include part #s if you have them... 
Thanks for the help

	Derek Cunningham
	(the Deekster)

----------
Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 20:26:25 1992
Subject: Re: engine modifications
To: hotrod@dixie.com

> > The HEI Supercoil DOES work great!  If you can find an HEI distributor
> > in a junkyard that will match your engine (not too difficult..), that
> > is usually cheaper than the blueprinted dist.  Installing the
> > supercoil on to one of these distributors is an excellent way to gain
> > efficiency AND power!
> 
> What do I need to put an HEI on a car that didn't come with it?
> Specifically a '70 Cutlass 455.  Are all the HEI units basically the same?  Is
> advance tuning the only difference between them?  Do I change this
> with weights and springs?  Different drive/cam gear for different
> years/makes/models?

we did this to a 1970 Buick 455-- we found a 1974 buick estate wagon
in a junkyard, took the HEI distributor, replaced the coil with the
Accel Supercoil, and slapped it in!

> What parts would I need from a junkyard?  Just the HEI unit?  Any
> wiring?  What should I look out for?

All we got was the HEI unit, and we purchased new wires (Accel 8.8mm)
 
> What's involved in the installation?  Get the unit installed in the
> right direction/phase, change plug wires?  Just one wire to hook up?
> Do I need to worry about bypassing a ballast resistor somewhere (I
> don't know what this means, but somehow it's floating in the back of
> my memory).

We took out the old coil, pulled the distributor, putting the engine
at TDC first, put in the new distributor, wired it assuming the rotor
was pointing at cyl. 1, and then we could only have it either right on
or 180 deg. off.
 
> I believe I should run a wider spark gap with the HEI (0.060?).  Does
> this mean changing plugs or just regapping?

We haven't and it works fine
 
> What's the advantage of the Accel blueprinted HEI?  What's it cost vs
> a junkyard version?

dunno... can someone else answer this one?
 
> Thanks in advance for all help.  My apologies to all who might have
> seen or responded to this message when I posted to rec.auto.

don't mention it.
 
		Derek Cunningham

----------
Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 20:31:45 1992
Subject: Re: intake/exhaust for old straight 8
To: hotrod@dixie.com

I recommend HEMMINGS, possibly Clifford Performance in Corona,Ca(714
734-3310) or Patrick's down in Arizona.  I don't have a HEMMING'S with
me to pass along the number.  Good luck. 
Mike Brattland  Brattlan@nprdc.navy.mil

----------
Posted by: brattlan@nprdc.navy.mil (CDR Michael Brattland)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 20:33:04 1992
Subject: Re: Buick 430 engine
To: hotrod@dixie.com

 
>  Well, I thought today was my lucky day. I finally saw a derelict-looking
> old Buick in the junker pit behind the truck stop. Thought it was an Electra
> and maybe had the 455 I've been a-seekin'.
> 
>  It was older than I thought - it's a Wildcat with a 430 4bbl. Complete
> with fire ants in the air cleaner. I figure it to be '70 or a bit earlier.
> Only has a 10-bolt (and a funny-looking 10-bolt, sort of square) rear end,
> but they'd be pleased to sell it for $200.
> 
>  So today's question, oh Poobahs of Performance, is:
> 
>  What do you know about this 430 engine? It looks like a close ancestor of
> the 455; mighty wide, same sort of nose, but how close? Different stroke,
> different bore, both? 
> 
>  I expect it would have a decent compression ratio (~10:1) and would be a 
> torquey engine, but I wouldn't want to get into a hassle trying to build
> up an orphan motor.

BUICKS ARE NOT ORPHANS!
they are extremely torquey engines, second only to the caddy motors
of that era...
If you want to find out TONS of stuff about buicks, write to a company
called POSTON Enterprises.  I don't have the address handy, but i will
post it for you later.  They are an excellent company and generally
make all their own cam grinds, manufacture manifolds specifically for
buick engines,pistons, fuel pumps, rings, etc, etc...
I have  dealt with the buick 350 and 455s and have found them to be
extremely powerful, reliable and smooth.  we run a '69 buick special
at New England Dragway that (last season) pulled a 14.5 @ 97 mph with
a stock '70 455.  with the modifications made this winter, we are
expecting to be in the 13s this summer.  the car is still so smooth
that we let our mother use it for trips to the store, etc...
I haven't dealt with the 430s myself, but if it is anything like the
455, it will be excellent for a build-up.

Hope ive been of help (moral support, anyways)...

			Derek Cunningham

----------
Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 20:33:10 1992
Subject: Re: intake/exhaust for old straight 8
To: hotrod@dixie.com

I recommend HEMMINGS, possibly Clifford Performance in Corona,Ca(714
734-3310) or Patrick's down in Arizona.  I don't have a HEMMING'S with
me to pass along the number.  Good luck. 
Mike Brattland  Brattlan@nprdc.navy.mil

----------
Posted by: brattlan@nprdc.navy.mil (CDR Michael Brattland)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 22:23:53 1992
Subject: Olds HEI
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>To answer a few of the questions about the guy who wants to convert his
<455 olds to a HEI:

>  1) Yes, I belive the 455 has a slightly larger (read; not interchangable)
>gear than the standard 350 olds motor.  It's been so long since I saw
>one.. 8^(.

I think that this is wrong. As far as I can remember my brother put an HEI
out of a '77 Vista Cruiser 350 directly onto his 455 Olds.

					Greg

----------
Posted by: Gregory J Perantoni 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 22:25:01 1992
Subject: Re: mustangs... cam selection
To: hotrod@dixie.com


>My question is about camshafts.  can anyone recommend me a good cam
>for the 351 that will not require valvetrain overhaul, work best with
>more low end torque, and have some more high end power also?
>Preferred RPM range is approx. 900(idle) to 4500-5000 max.
>He is planning to stick with the stock manifold/carb combo.
----------
>Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)

 don't know anything about Ford cams but I will recomend that your friend
 look into a Rhodes cam and lifter set. I,ve used Rhodes lifters in my
 Chevys with great results. The idea behined them is that they will
 bleed down at lower rpms to make the cam look smaller to the motor. As
 rpm increases the lifters pump up to provide full lift and duration.
 With a situation like this you can run a high lift long duration cam
 and still have it produce good low end performance. In other words you
 can have your cake and eat it too!
  _________________________________   _____________________________________
 /         _______________         \ /  OLD CHEVYS NEVER DIE, THEY JUST GO \
|        //~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\\  |     |             R A C I N G !!            |
|      / /_________________\ \|     |   OLD JAPANESE CARS NEVER DIE, THEY   |
|  -------------------------------  |    JUST TURN BACK INTO BEER CANS!!    |
|  / O O O -----Chevy----- O O O \  |_______________________________________|
| (_______________________________) | MARK JENSEN           (503) 627-3115  |
| (_______________________________) | TEKTRONIX METROLOGY LAB.              |
|  |\ _________________________ /|  | BEAVERTON, OREGON        MS. 39-732   | 
|  |      |`V'  `---'  `V'|      |  |        markj@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM       |
 \_|______|_______________|______|_/ \_____________________________________/

----------
Posted by: markj@tekig5.pen.tek.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 23:24:25 1992
Subject: Re: engine modifications 
To: hotrod@dixie.com

If you check the sparkplug listings from the various mfrs and look
up the cars that used HEI ign, the typical plug gap is .045". Some
used .060" but I believe that this was reduced because it caused
problems with the ignition system. In other words, it caused the
system to put out too much voltage resulting in more of the dreaded
red dust.
The Accell blueprinted unit is rebuilt with new parts and has the 
correct for high performance curve built in. It may also contain
an accell module. Plus the supercoil. I feel a correctly put 
together stock unit will work excellent.
There seems to be alot of talk that the stock unit is no good above
4500 rpm. I have used two in both a small block and a big block chevy
through 6000rpm with absolutely no problems. I feel that the HEI system
has to be better than points at 6000.
Do any of the rest of you remember an article in Hot Rod that compared
point type vs HEI vs MSD vs Unilite etc? The result was that very little
if any horsepower was gained over the stock setup. Provided that the 
stock point type system was in peak tune. This may all change in a 
high compression racing environment. Their test was only up through
5500 rpm.

RON

----------
Posted by: rons@tv.tv.tek.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar  3 23:29:17 1992
Subject: Wildcat Engines
To: hotrod@dixie.com

> Well, I thought today was my lucky day. I finally saw a derelict-looking
>old Buick in the junker pit behind the truck stop. Thought it was an Electra
>and maybe had the 455 I've been a-seekin'.
>
> It was older than I thought - it's a Wildcat with a 430 4bbl. Complete
>with fire ants in the air cleaner. I figure it to be '70 or a bit earlier.
>Only has a 10-bolt (and a funny-looking 10-bolt, sort of square) rear end,
>but they'd be pleased to sell it for $200.

I don't have the answer your looking for (most of my car books are hours
away), but there is a trick here. My grandfather had a '65 Buick Special
and if you opened the hood, the air cleaner said "310 Wildcat". The trick
is that 310 is NOT the cubic inch displacement, but rather the peak torque
rating. I beleive in this case the actual engine was a 300.

----------
Posted by: Gregory J Perantoni 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar  4 09:51:12 1992
Subject: Re: Olds HEI
To: hotrod@dixie.com

The Hotrod List writes:
> 
> >To answer a few of the questions about the guy who wants to convert his
> <455 olds to a HEI:
> 
> >  1) Yes, I belive the 455 has a slightly larger (read; not interchangable)
> >gear than the standard 350 olds motor.  It's been so long since I saw
> >one.. 8^(.
> 
> I think that this is wrong. As far as I can remember my brother put an HEI
> out of a '77 Vista Cruiser 350 directly onto his 455 Olds.
> 
we did this in our buick and made the mistake of not counting the
number of teeth on the distributor gear FIRST!  We tried to put a 13
tooth gear in where a 14 tooth gear belonged, resulting in chewing up
the cam gear and distributor gear, screwed up timing gear, and overall
a real pain in the ass!  COUNT THE TEETH FIRST!

Derek Cunningham

----------
Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar  4 09:57:40 1992
Subject: Re: Wildcat Engines
To: hotrod@dixie.com

The Hotrod List writes:
> 
> > Well, I thought today was my lucky day. I finally saw a derelict-looking
> >old Buick in the junker pit behind the truck stop. Thought it was an Electra
> >and maybe had the 455 I've been a-seekin'.
> >
> > It was older than I thought - it's a Wildcat with a 430 4bbl. Complete
> >with fire ants in the air cleaner. I figure it to be '70 or a bit earlier.
> >Only has a 10-bolt (and a funny-looking 10-bolt, sort of square) rear end,
> >but they'd be pleased to sell it for $200.
> 
> I don't have the answer your looking for (most of my car books are hours
> away), but there is a trick here. My grandfather had a '65 Buick Special
> and if you opened the hood, the air cleaner said "310 Wildcat". The trick
> is that 310 is NOT the cubic inch displacement, but rather the peak torque
> rating. I beleive in this case the actual engine was a 300.
> 
In this case, however the 430 in the wildcat says wildcat 445 on the
aircleaner if it is a wildcat motor.  The engine is really a 430 cid

BTW, POSTON Enterprises is at:

Poston Enterprises
Star Route A, Box 243
Atmore, ALABAMA 36502

phone #: (205) 577-6477

toll free order line: 1800-635-9781

Hope ive been of help.
		Derek Cunningham


----------
Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar  4 09:58:13 1992
Subject: Re: mustangs... cam selection
To: hotrod@dixie.com

The Hotrod List writes:
> 
> 
> >My question is about camshafts.  can anyone recommend me a good cam
> >for the 351 that will not require valvetrain overhaul, work best with
> >more low end torque, and have some more high end power also?
> >Preferred RPM range is approx. 900(idle) to 4500-5000 max.
> >He is planning to stick with the stock manifold/carb combo.
> ----------
> >Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)
> 
>  don't know anything about Ford cams but I will recomend that your friend
>  look into a Rhodes cam and lifter set. I,ve used Rhodes lifters in my
>  Chevys with great results. The idea behined them is that they will
>  bleed down at lower rpms to make the cam look smaller to the motor. As
>  rpm increases the lifters pump up to provide full lift and duration.
>  With a situation like this you can run a high lift long duration cam
>  and still have it produce good low end performance. In other words you
>  can have your cake and eat it too!

does this setup (if changing from solid lifters to hydraulic) require
any other change in the valvetrain (pushrods, rockers, valves,
springs)???

(is anyone a ford fanatic?)

		Derek Cunningham

----------
Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar  4 10:11:00 1992
Subject: Re: engine modifications
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>  
> > What's involved in the installation?  Get the unit installed in the
> > right direction/phase, change plug wires?  Just one wire to hook up?
> > Do I need to worry about bypassing a ballast resistor somewhere (I
> > don't know what this means, but somehow it's floating in the back of
> > my memory).
> 
> We took out the old coil, pulled the distributor, putting the engine
> at TDC first, put in the new distributor, wired it assuming the rotor
> was pointing at cyl. 1, and then we could only have it either right on
> or 180 deg. off.
> 
(i forgot to add this part-) now that I think about it, i heard
something about the coil lead also.  we just put a new connector on
the end of the original coil wire and plugged it into the HEI.  It
seems to work fine, but could we be risking serious damage? (uh oh)

Derek Cunningham

----------
Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)



From Hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar  4 11:00:21 1992
Subject: rhodes lifters
To: hotrod@dixie.com

I have a set of rhodes lifters in my 1970 buick 455.  People say
that there is a 'click' from the rhodes lifters where as the crane
variable rate lifters are silent... does anyone have experience with
the crane variable rate lifters?
BTW, i can't hear any click from MY rhodes lifters...

Derek Cunningham

----------
Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar  4 11:07:35 1992
Subject: Re: engine modifications
To: hotrod@dixie.com

About the HEI swap:

I did this to a 68 Firebird  400.  One other thing to consider is that the
HEI is bigger.  I had to dent the firewall to allow the HEI distributor to
fit.

Wynand DePuy      wdepuy@isye.gatech.edu

----------
Posted by: wdepuy@chmsr.isye.gatech.edu (Wynand Crawford Depuy)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar  4 11:48:26 1992
Subject: Re: mustangs... cam selection 
To: hotrod@dixie.com



> From: Derek Cunningham:
> 
> The Hotrod List writes:
> > 
> > 
> > >My question is about camshafts.  can anyone recommend me a good cam
> > >for the 351 that will not require valvetrain overhaul, work best with
> > >more low end torque, and have some more high end power also?
> > >Preferred RPM range is approx. 900(idle) to 4500-5000 max.
> > >He is planning to stick with the stock manifold/carb combo.
> > ----------
> > >Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)
> > 
> >  don't know anything about Ford cams but I will recomend that your friend
> >  look into a Rhodes cam and lifter set. I,ve used Rhodes lifters in my
> >  Chevys with great results. The idea behined them is that they will
> >  bleed down at lower rpms to make the cam look smaller to the motor. As
> >  rpm increases the lifters pump up to provide full lift and duration.
> >  With a situation like this you can run a high lift long duration cam
> >  and still have it produce good low end performance. In other words you
> >  can have your cake and eat it too!

> does this setup (if changing from solid lifters to hydraulic) require
> any other change in the valvetrain (pushrods, rockers, valves,
> springs)???

> (is anyone a ford fanatic?)


Yes....I was just going to wait a day and look in some manuals I have at
home from days gone by.  It has been a long time since I have done cam
swapping, especially in something this "old".

If you intend to change from solid to hydraulic, you may be able to find a
kit with lifter dimensions that will directly replace the solids.  If not,
you will then have to change out the pushrods, assuming you can find some
that match the adjustable rockers.  Then you have the arduous task of
adjusting all of those rockers to hydraulic lifters.

Good luck.  I think sticking with the "standard" cam for that engine will
give you the best of what you are looking for.  More low end torque and more
high end power is a contradiction if all you are changing is the cam.

I will try to chase down some cam specs for the engine, and then we can all
vote on what would be the best (since we are spending your money :-).


	-- Dan Malek

----------
Posted by: Dan Malek 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar  4 12:48:06 1992
Subject: Chrysler 440
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Hello.

I've just got a 1973 Chrysler Imperial with the factory 440.  Books tell
me this should have a steel crank.  Is this true?

I want to use this engine for a hotrod.  What is a decent top end for this
engine (ie. intakes, etc)?  Budget is limited.

Or would the car be worth more if I took it back to original?

Robert
brycerw@brandonu.ca
$brycerw@brandonu.ca

----------
Posted by: $BRYCERW@BrandonU.CA



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar  4 12:55:39 1992
Subject: Re: mustangs... cam selection
To: hotrod@dixie.com

 Fords?

 I'm a new (45 year old) Ford Fanatic. (although I also have a '69 Charger).
I'm building a 351W from scratch with aluminum heads and B&M blower.
I'm using a Crane Cams HMV-272-2-NC. This is a medium hot hydraulic
cam with 272 duration on intake and .512 lift at the valve (1.6 rockers).

 The TFS heads use Chevy threaded rocker arm studs with aluminum
rockers so, I might have gotten away with adjusting to the stock push
rods, but I decided to get the rocker geometry as perfect as I could
and had custom push rods made (and in case I decide to go with a
hotter cam I also have.) I also have to run Isky's new adjustable
pushrod guide plates.

 In general the Ford seems less of a turnkey operation then the Chevies
I've built, but if your willing to fabricate a little the there's
enough parts and expertise to build a nice widget. This motor is
for my   l   o   n   g  overdue '32 vicky street rod. I wanted to keep
it all Ford.....

 Milt.....

----------
Posted by: Milt.Mallory@Eng.Sun.COM (Milt Mallory -ESO LANs- )



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar  4 12:55:44 1992
Subject: Re: mustangs... cam selection 
To: hotrod@dixie.com


I previous wrote:

> If you intend to change from solid to hydraulic, you may be able to find a
> kit with lifter dimensions that will directly replace the solids.  If not,
> you will then have to change out the pushrods, assuming you can find some
> that match the adjustable rockers.  Then you have the arduous task of
> adjusting all of those rockers to hydraulic lifters.

There was one very obvious thing I forgot.  You need a block drilled to
supply oil to the hydraulic lifters :-).  

	-- Dan Malek


----------
Posted by: Dan Malek 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar  4 13:04:32 1992
Subject: Re: mustangs... cam selection 
To: hotrod@dixie.com

The Hotrod List writes:
> 
>>>My question is about camshafts.  can anyone recommend me a good cam
>>>for the 351 that will not require valvetrain overhaul, work best with
>>>more low end torque, and have some more high end power also?
>>>Preferred RPM range is approx. 900(idle) to 4500-5000 max.
>>>He is planning to stick with the stock manifold/carb combo.
>>> ----------
>>>Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)
>> 
>>  don't know anything about Ford cams but I will recomend that your friend
>>  look into a Rhodes cam and lifter set. I,ve used Rhodes lifters in my
>>  Chevys with great results. The idea behined them is that they will
>>  bleed down at lower rpms to make the cam look smaller to the motor. As
>>  rpm increases the lifters pump up to provide full lift and duration.
>>  With a situation like this you can run a high lift long duration cam
>>  and still have it produce good low end performance. In other words you
>>  can have your cake and eat it too!
>
>does this setup (if changing from solid lifters to hydraulic) require
>any other change in the valvetrain (pushrods, rockers, valves,
>springs)???
>(is anyone a ford fanatic?)
>----------
>Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)

I was assuming that the motor you refered to was stock. As far as I know
changing to hydraulic lifters requires a cam designed for same. As for
the Rhodes lifters, you can run them on any bigger than stock hydraulic
cam. Actually the bigger the better the results from the bleed down
action. For instance, if your running a long durration cam on a car with
power brakes you will probably have problems due to low vacume at low
rpms. The Rhodes bleed down effectivly reduces the lift and durration to
allow the motor to run smother and and produce more vacume which in turn
will help to produce more low end torque! I have an article that HRM
published years ago the goes into more detail. If you want a copy e-mail
me your fax number and I'll send you a copy. If there is more interest
I'll post it. Oh ya, as for push rods, rockers, valves and springs, you
should be able to use the stock ones. The only change you might consider
is stiffer springs matched to the type of cam (rpm range, lift, etc...)
that you choose to use. One more suggestion, install some headers and a
manafold such as an Edelbrock performer if you plan to bump the cam up
any significant amount. From what I understand Fords suffer in the
exhaust port flow. I would suggest a mild clean up of the exhaust ports
if you plan to pull the motor appart for a rebuild. If there are
any Ford fanatics out there that feel that I am in error flame away. All
I know is that my Chevys have always responded quite well to these
ideas. Hope this helps!
  _________________________________   _____________________________________
 /         _______________         \ /  OLD CHEVYS NEVER DIE, THEY JUST GO \
|        //~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\\  |     |             R A C I N G !!            |
|      / /_________________\ \|     |   OLD JAPANESE CARS NEVER DIE, THEY   |
|  -------------------------------  |    JUST TURN BACK INTO BEER CANS!!    |
|  / O O O -----Chevy----- O O O \  |______________^^^^_____________________|
| (_______________________________) | MARK JENSEN           (503) 627-3115  |
| (_______________________________) | TEKTRONIX METROLOGY LAB.              |
|  |\ _________________________ /|  | BEAVERTON, OREGON        MS. 39-732   | 
|  |      |`V'  `---'  `V'|      |  |        markj@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM       |
 \_|______|_______________|______|_/ \_____________________________________/

----------
Posted by: markj@tekig5.pen.tek.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar  4 13:07:05 1992
Subject: Re: Wildcat Engines 
To: hotrod@dixie.com

-->The Hotrod List writes:
-->> 
-->> > Well, I thought today was my lucky day. I finally saw a derelict-looking
-->> >old Buick in the junker pit behind the truck stop. Thought it was an Electra
-->> >and maybe had the 455 I've been a-seekin'.
-->> >
-->> > It was older than I thought - it's a Wildcat with a 430 4bbl. Complete
-->> >with fire ants in the air cleaner. I figure it to be '70 or a bit earlier.
-->> >Only has a 10-bolt (and a funny-looking 10-bolt, sort of square) rear end,
-->> >but they'd be pleased to sell it for $200.
-->> 
-->> I don't have the answer your looking for (most of my car books are hours
-->> away), but there is a trick here. My grandfather had a '65 Buick Special
-->> and if you opened the hood, the air cleaner said "310 Wildcat". The trick
-->> is that 310 is NOT the cubic inch displacement, but rather the peak torque
-->> rating. I beleive in this case the actual engine was a 300.
-->> 
-->In this case, however the 430 in the wildcat says wildcat 445 on the
-->aircleaner if it is a wildcat motor.  The engine is really a 430 cid
-->
-->		Derek Cunningham
-->
-->
	I had a '65 Buick Gran Sport with a 401 cid engine (you know, when
the corporate limit was 400 cid).  The air cleaner had 445 Wildcat
written on top of it.

                                                         Wes

----------
Posted by: Wes 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar  4 15:56:14 1992
Subject: Re: mustangs... cam selection
To: hotrod@dixie.com


 Yup, the stock 351W head that came with my motor have very small
intake and exhast ports. Tis the reason folks use Cleveland heads or
go to alloy like I did. Probably any port work you can do will help.

"DART" makes the "DART II" cast iron heads for 351W. 2.02/1.60 seats,
big ports and 64cc chambers. 634.00 bare or 929.00 assembled. DART 
claims 57 horse improvement out of the box.

 Milt.....

----------
Posted by: Milt.Mallory@Eng.Sun.COM (Milt Mallory -ESO LANs- )



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar  4 16:57:42 1992
Subject: Re: Resetting Mustang 5.0 Computer
To: hotrod@dixie.com

> 
> The other day I was trying to check my battery posts and inadvertantly pulled 
> my cable off entirely; thus a loss of power to the car.  I put it back on 
> within 5 seconds, but my clock and radio presets were gone.
> 
> But the car also seems to have gotten more sluggish than before!  I feel more 
> vibration when sitting at a light and I don't get as much speed as I'm used to.  
> A friend here at work though that the computer might have lost only part of its 
> memory, and suggested I disconnect it for at least a minute.  Will this help? 
> or does the computer adjust to optimum anyway?  or do the settings in the 
> computer 'stick' after the computer has been up for a while?
> 
well, i know precious little about car computers, but my understanding
is that it takes a little time for the computer to re-learn
about your car again.  it should readjust itself after it
takes a few reading.  but if after a couple days (or 20 miles) and
things haven't improved, i'd go ahead and pull the battery cable 
for a minute like your friend suggested.

> Or do I need to go and get myself a blower for some real power!
> 
might not be a bad idea.  but i'd trash the computer, the blower
would confuse the hell out of it i think!
another alternative might be to install a big block chevy.  :-)
yipes, i feel the flames allready!
> Matt
> matt@walsh.dme.battelle.org
> 
> ----------
> Posted by: Matthew Walsh 
> 
> 
> 


-- 
-brian 
  _______________________________________________________________________
 |                       (this space for sale or rent)                   |
 |_______________________________________________________________________|
 

----------
Posted by: SCHRAM BRIAN K 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar  4 17:57:26 1992
Subject: Re: Resetting Mustang 5.0 Computer
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Matthew Walsh writes:
>The other day I was trying to check my battery posts and inadvertantly pulled 
>my cable off entirely; thus a loss of power to the car.  I put it back on 
>within 5 seconds, but my clock and radio presets were gone.
>
>But the car also seems to have gotten more sluggish than before!  I feel more 
>vibration when sitting at a light and I don't get as much speed as I'm used to.  
>A friend here at work though that the computer might have lost only part of its 
>memory, and suggested I disconnect it for at least a minute.  Will this help? 
>or does the computer adjust to optimum anyway?  or do the settings in the 
>computer 'stick' after the computer has been up for a while?
>
>Or do I need to go and get myself a blower for some real power!

A blower, twin predators, and a magneto. 
Who needs EFI and all that electronic  crap! 

Sorry if i'm wastin bandwidth, but this is rec.HOTROD after all :-)

Damon van Dam

----------
Posted by: dvd@eng.ufl.edu



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar  4 18:52:07 1992
Subject: Ford FI Problem
To: hotrod@dixie.com




In reply to Matt Walsh's question about disconnecting his battery,


Straight from Motorcraft Shop Tips (a Ford Service Publication) :

" If the battery is disconnected or ECA replaced, there will be a short period
during which the ECA (electronics control assembly) has to re-learn the adaptive
adjustments. This learning process shows up as rough running or some other 
symptom. It usually goes away shortly after the vehicle has entered closed loop 
operation. "

On the EEC-IV system, the vehicle enters closed loop mode during part throttle
cruise with the engine warmed. (i.e. - Warm the car up and go out and drive on 
the highway for a few miles).

Hope this helps.

jeff armfield




----------
Posted by: armfield@ecn.purdue.edu (Jeffrey S Armfield)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar  4 19:23:43 1992
Subject: Blower with Mustang 5.0 Computer 
To: hotrod@dixie.com




> > Or do I need to go and get myself a blower for some real power!
> > 
> might not be a bad idea.  but i'd trash the computer, the blower
> would confuse the hell out of it i think!

Nope.  This works great.  Just put the blower between the Mass Air Flow
sensor and the throttle body.  The computer will leave those injectors open
until the fuel pump can't keep up.....And then you just buy bigger injectors
and fuel pump....And then.....

> another alternative might be to install a big block chevy.  :-)
> yipes, i feel the flames allready!

Is this because your big block Chevy is always eating my 5.0 HO flames from
behind? :-) :-) :-).

This is great, except I need to get some work done now.


	-- Dan Malek

----------
Posted by: Dan Malek 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar  4 21:52:40 1992
Subject: Cams
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>Okay, I need some help here.
>
>Not being a ford fanatic, but an avid hacker just the same, a friend
>of mine is seeking my advice.
>He has a '69 Mustang Mach I with a 351 Cobra, standard tranny, dual
>exhaust, 287(?)hp, and solid lifters.
>
>My question is about camshafts.  can anyone recommend me a good cam
>for the 351 that will not require valvetrain overhaul, work best with
>more low end torque, and have some more high end power also?
>Preferred RPM range is approx. 900(idle) to 4500-5000 max.
>He is planning to stick with the stock manifold/carb combo.
>
>Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)

Are you sure that 4500-5000 RPM is all you want to turn?  If this is the
case, you will want to stay very near the stock cam, if not smaller.
Street engines generally respond to more exhaust duration than intake.
I would recomend a cam on the order of about 205 degrees @.050 intake,
215 degrees at .050 exhaust for this shift point. I would stay away from
the varible duration lifters on a cam this small. If you want to turn 
a little more RPM, you can go with a slightly bigger cam, and use the
variable duration lifters and probably not lose any lower RPM power.

Most cam companies have info lines, which if you provide them with the 
desired RPM range, or the general combination and want you want to do, will
be able to give you specific part numbers. Also some catalogs, such as the 
one from crane, have charts which allow you to select the cam based on 
various parameters. 

						Greg
						'67 Camaro SS396 
					   with 406 (400SB .030 over)  
		Initial Startup, 4 days and counting !!!!!!!!

----------
Posted by: Gregory J Perantoni 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar  5 14:36:00 1992
Subject: Re: mustangs... cam selection
To: hotrod@dixie.com

 About Rhoades lifters; with the operating principle being a controlled
bleed-down, I would expect that the characteristic would vary with the
oil used - i.e. maybe thinner (10W-30) would have a softer idle and maybe
take longer to come up, while 20W-50 would be more lumpy.

 Those of you who have used them, have you had this type of experience? Is
the manufacturer specific about which type of oil to use?

----------
Posted by: jws@mlb.semi.harris.com (James W. Swonger)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar  5 14:40:04 1992
Subject: Re: reference books
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Try the HP Series and the SA series of books available at most speed
shops/performance shops,PeP Boys, good book stores and most of the 
automotive swap meets.  HOW TO REBUILD YOUR SMALL BLOCK FORD(HP) AND 
the SA book on hot rodding your small block ford are excellent.  Check
all the performance mags--everyone has done these buildups over the 
years so the information is out there and easy to get.
Mike Brattland  brattlan@nprdc.navy.mil

----------
Posted by: brattlan@nprdc.navy.mil (CDR Michael Brattland)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar  5 14:49:38 1992
Subject: Re: mustangs... cam selection
To: hotrod@dixie.com



> Okay, I need some help here.
>
> Not being a ford fanatic, but an avid hacker just the same, a friend
> of mine is seeking my advice.
> He has a '69 Mustang Mach I with a 351 Cobra, standard tranny, dual
> exhaust, 287(?)hp, and solid lifters.
>

Okay, now I need some help here.  I found five out of my six Mustang
reference books last night.  None of them indicate a 351 with solid lifters
was ever available as a factory option.  Could you please check this out?
Either this is not a 351 or it does not have solid lifters (or it is not a
factory installed engine).

There were two 351s offered as during the 1969-1970 model years.  One was a
two barrel and the other a four barrel.  They were both small block
"Windsor" engines, used the same cam and 60.4cc cylinder heads.  The
difference (other than carbs/intakes) was that the 4V used a flat top piston
to get a 10.7:1 compression ratio, and the 2V used a dished top piston to
get a 9.5:1 compression ratio.  The gross horsepower ratings were 250 for
the 2V and 290 for the 4V.  I could not find any reference to a "Cobra"
designation on a 351, although it may have just been an air cleaner sticker.

If you have the big-block 351C engine, it does not appear to be stock, and
the rest of this message is not important.  But since I dug up the info,
I will spew forth and assume it is a 351W.

Here is stock valve train information, if you intend to only change the cam
and lifters.  The maximum lift at the valve is 0.52" before you start
bending pushrods and valves.  I would not go over 0.50, both as a safety
margin and for not-too-radical operation.  The stock rockers are the
"ball-and-socket" adjustable, with valve guide rails, and a 1.6:1 (more like
1.61) ratio.  So, I would not use a cam with more than about 0.310 lobe lift.
Stock lobe lift is .260 intake and .278 exhaust (.418 and .448 at the valve).
You probably don't want more than about 220 degress duration if you still
want any low end, and the intake should be about 10 degrees less than
exhaust (i.e. max 210/220).

The last time I did this kind of stuff, around '84, few cam manufacturers
provided valve timing and overlap data.  They only provided duration and
lift.  Timing and overlap significantly change engine characteristics, but
we should discuss that separately since it is generic to all cams.

Since I dug up the info, the only engines with solid lifters were the Boss
302 and the 429 Hemi.  The only engines with "Cobra" designations were two
428 Cobra Jets (with and without Ram Air).

Still looking for that last reference book somewhere in the attic..........


	-- Dan Malek

----------
Posted by: Dan Malek 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar  5 14:50:01 1992
Subject: Buick 430 : Men pull moto
To: hotrod@dixie.com


 I did some asking around in the "real world" too, and decided to go for it.
Me and little bro stripped the car yesterday and I took the motor a little bit
apart when we got it home.

 It is indeed a Buick 430, 4BBL. 1967 model year, 10.25:1 compression. The
little owners manual was still in the glovebox and claims 360BHP@5000RPM.
That's on a par with the 1970 455 Stage 1, assuming consistent bias in
advertised horsepower. Peak HP at 5000RPM sez to me that it's a screamer too.

 It appears that there may be a slight problem with running low octane gas
in this engine; one side has 3 pistons with serious damage. Two have circular,
cracked depressions in the middle and one has lost most of the outer top rim.
However I was prepared to buy new pistons anyhow.

 Everything except for rings and pistons is interchangeable with the 455.
The bore is 4 3/16 vs. 4 5/16 for the 455. The heads are in good condition,
2" intake/1 5/8" exhaust valves look nice and fresh. The intake ports are
1"x2" rectangular - should flow some air. The factory intake looks pretty
decent - big runners, dual plane - but it and the NON-EMISSIONS Q-jet are
going to be replaced with an aluminum intake and Holley 750. 

 

----------
Posted by: jws@mlb.semi.harris.com (James W. Swonger)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar  5 15:04:42 1992
Subject: Watch out for wheel Theft
To: hotrod@dixie.com

I had a set of my 5.0 wheels stolen - right in front of my house.  They put two 
cinder blocks under the side ground fx, rocked it backward, took the front ones 
off, rocked it backward, took the rears off, then left (they even took the lugs 
with them)  In the process they broke the small rear window (on convertibles 
only).  In the process of towing, the idiots dragged the car WITHOUT BRINGING 
AN EXTRA SET OF WHEELS! and ruined the front spoiler (GT's only) and bent the 
brake dust covers.

Another poster said he lived in Detroit, which is worse off than Columbus Ohio, 
so here are some tips I've learned from experience:

1) DO NOT trust the stock locking nuts. You can hammer a big socket on and 
unscrew it right off. At the very least put a locking nut on each bolt.
2) DO NOT store your wheel lock key in the glove compartment or anywhere easily 
locatable in the interior (Sedan and ragtop owners: put yours in the trunk - at 
least on my car the trunk release doesn't work unless the car's started)
3) DO NOT assume that your car is safer in a decent neighborhood than a ghetto.  
Usually the opposite is true; theives usually live near the ghetto, and don't 
want to be near the scene of the crime or the owner of the tires; he'll come 
after the thief and shoot em.  Theives go to nice neighborhoods (ESPECIALLY 
APARTMENT COMPLEXES!) where they have a nice selection and where residents 
usually don't know who's car belongs to who (as opposed to communities with 
Neighborhood Watch type stuff)
4) DO park in a lit area.  My car was under a tree at the base of a hill with 
another lot on top of it.  I suspect the thieves parked on the hill, and went 
down to work on my car.  That way you didn't see a vehicle parked in the middle 
of the road while they were working and they can get away easier.
5) DO mark your tires and/or wheels with a stamp of brand.  Cops do this.  A 
thief won't want to explain why MSW ss#123-456-7689 is on the wheel they're 
stealing. You can brand (as in hot stamping) the wheels, too.
6) Do TIGHTEN YOUR LUGS TIGHT.  Slow em down or piss em off.  Though some 
thieves apparently carry a tank of pressurized gas and an air wrench.


7) if your wheels ARE stolen, and a tow truck comes, DO NOT let them tow unless 
they bring wheels or a dolley.  I TOLD the TOWERS that my car HAD NO WHEELS! 
but came with nothing but a flat bed tow truck.  They said ' Oh, we do lots of 
these.  This is just the way you do it. ' I wasn't home, and my girlfriend 
thought it sounded reasonable; until they scraped my entire front end!  Do not 
trust the common sense of the towers.

8) Don't get the stock wheels again! tell your insurance company to give YOU A 
CHECK for the adjusted amount of the tires and wheels and buy them yourself.  I 
saved $500 this way and could've saved more.

some off the wall ideas:

if your car has a cover plate (the lugs don't show) replace the garden variety 
phillips/flathead screws with some odd torx, square or allen head pattern

Cock your front tires all the way to one side every time you park

 



MTM 'Matt the Man' Walsh
mtm@walsh.dme.battelle.org
90 GT 5.0 5sp convert.

What he said was this.

----------
Posted by: Matthew Walsh 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar  5 16:12:40 1992
Subject: Re: mustangs... cam selection 
To: hotrod@dixie.com


> About Rhoades lifters; with the operating principle being a controlled
>bleed-down, I would expect that the characteristic would vary with the
>oil used - i.e. maybe thinner (10W-30) would have a softer idle and maybe
>take longer to come up, while 20W-50 would be more lumpy.
> Those of you who have used them, have you had this type of experience? Is
>:the manufacturer specific about which type of oil to use?
----------
>Posted by: jws@mlb.semi.harris.com (James W. Swonger)

When I used them I always ran 20w-50. It seemed to work just fine, had a
nice "tick" to them at idel. Sounded just like solid lifters. As soon as
the rpms came up above 1200rpm or so they quieted right down. I would
imagine oil weight would make a difference but I think they would be
more sensetive to oil pressure. I ran a high pressure pump in my 355
Chevy.
  _________________________________   _____________________________________
 /         _______________         \ /  OLD CHEVYS NEVER DIE, THEY JUST GO \
|        //~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\\  |     |             R A C I N G !!            |
|      / /_________________\ \|     |   OLD JAPANESE CARS NEVER DIE, THEY   |
|  -------------------------------  |    JUST TURN BACK INTO BEER CANS!!    |
|  / O O O -----Chevy----- O O O \  |_______________________________________|
| (_______________________________) | MARK JENSEN           (503) 627-3115  |
| (_______________________________) | TEKTRONIX METROLOGY LAB.              |
|  |\ _________________________ /|  | BEAVERTON, OREGON        MS. 39-732   | 
|  |      |`V'  `---'  `V'|      |  |        markj@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM       |
 \_|______|_______________|______|_/ \_____________________________________/

----------
Posted by: markj@tekig5.pen.tek.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar  5 17:35:53 1992
Subject: Lets try this for starters..
To: hotrod@dixie.com


I really should have known better than to try to start the hotrod up with
what I knew was a low or nearly dead battery, but no, in the run-down state
I was in after a week long battle with a miserable cold, I just wanted
to start up the hotrod and take it for a spin on the first nice day of the
year!

Turning on the battery cut-off switch, applying power to the fuel-pump, which
should have been a good clue that the battery was low, just by its sound,
I began to turn the engine over.  About 3 or 4 "rrrRRRRRRrrrr"'s and a LOUD
CRACK, followed immediately by the sound of a couple of gear teeth sliding by
each other -- the engine had kicked backwards.

I released the key instantly -- pictures of bent rods flashed before my eyes.
Then I remembered hearing that sound before..  My ol' 72 Corvette did that
once.  The 'nose' on the starter cracked when the engine kicked back on a
very low battery.  Well..  Got to try the starter again, but thought it best
to charge the battery for a while.

After about a ten minute heavy charge, I tried to start it again, this time
the engine spun over much quicker, but with a very different sound than it
use to have :^(  I THINK I may have cracked the nose on this starter also,
I'm going to make a quick check tonight and hopefully won't find a broken
block, as my friend Jerry Holley told me happen to a friend of his :^(  Oh,
BTW the motor did start this time and sounded like its normally, growling
self!!  :^)

Anyway, finally, my reason for posting...  Has anyone any good or bad
suggestions about the 'Super Starters' such as made by Tilton, McLeod and
Ram?  They range in price from about $183 to $225, boast 30-50% more cranking
torque, 50% less current and about half the size and weight of a normal starter.
One of these starters would also give me some clearance on my headers that I
would appreciate..

73's, I'm really enjoying reading everyones posts!

Phil - WB9AAX  prg@mgweed.att.com

----------
Posted by: prg@mgweed.att.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar  5 17:41:02 1992
Subject: Re: Lets try this for starters..
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>Anyway, finally, my reason for posting...  Has anyone any good or bad
>suggestions about the 'Super Starters' such as made by Tilton, McLeod and
>Ram?  They range in price from about $183 to $225, boast 30-50% more cranking
>torque, 50% less current and about half the size and weight of a normal starter.

One of the guys over at the local Parts Emporium (Downey's Auto Parts,
Canton Highway [highway 5], Marietta, Ga if you want to call) was telling
someone that these starters are the same as some model used on late
model Nissans and can be bought rebuilt for ~60 bux or so. He said 
he goes this route on his roundy-round car.  Might want to look into
it before dropping the big bux.

John

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar  5 17:59:26 1992
Subject: FMX or FMC
To: hotrod@dixie.com

anyone know what an FMX (maybe it's FMC) automatic tranny for Fords is?

A guy wants to sell me one.

	Chuck

----------
Posted by: cnh5730@maraba.tamu.edu (Charles Herrick)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar  5 19:24:35 1992
Subject: Re: Lets try this for starters.. 
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Let me guess, a big block Chevy drag car? Big blocks are famous 
for breaking starter noses. I use a heavy duty stock type starter
with a cast iron nose, the rear starter brace, super heavy duty
cables, and an ignition cutoff switch. I get the engine spinning
then hit the switch. I haven't had to resort to the big buck starters.
YET!

RON
70 Chevelle SS 454
68 Chevelle SS 427

----------
Posted by: rons@tv.tv.tek.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar  5 19:24:42 1992
Subject: Re: FMX or FMC
To: hotrod@dixie.com

The FMX was the low end automatic tranny used behind Ford motors as fat
(oops, far) back as the mid '60's, if not earlier.  It came behind
small-block V8's and sixes (I think).  It doesn't have a real
performance flair, and most things I've read say to go for a C4 or C6.


Ed Mulligan

----------
Posted by: MULLIGAN@coral.bucknell.edu



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar  6 01:53:35 1992
Subject: REFERENCE BOOKS
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Newsgroups: wiz.hotrod

->    I am looking for a good book on the subject of engine
-> building.   (small block Ford)

 SA Books has "How to Rebuild Your Small Block Ford."  As for it at your
local bookstore or speed shop.


how is an engine balanced.

 Black magic.  Seriously.  Many layouts, such as the inline four and
V8, cannot be completely balanced for both pistons and rods, so the
factories sometimes fiddle with the balance factor to change the
directions of the shake.  There are formulas in some engine design
books, but they're all rule of thumb.

-> What is involved in blueprinting?

 Blueprinting means you actually *check* things that you'd normally take
for granted, like rod length, mains being parallel to decks, etc.  This
sort of thing can be taken to extremes, like sonic-checking cylinder
wall thickness.  Whether these extremes are useful or a waste of time
depends on the builder.


-> How is flywheel weight determined?

 That's either simple or complex, depending.    On a light car,
use a light flywheel.  On a heavy car, use a heavy flywheel.  Most cases
you don't have much choice other than "heavy" or "light."  If you *do*
have a choice, get Tom Monroe's "Clutch and Flywheel Handbook" or Hot
Rod's "Powertrains and Drivelines" (?) book for formulae and
recommendations.
                                                                             

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar  6 01:53:47 1992
Subject: RE: MUSTANGS... CAM SELEC
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Newsgroups: wiz.hotrod

-> "DART" makes the "DART II" cast iron heads for 351W. 2.02/1.60 seats,
-> big ports and 64cc chambers.

 One of Competition Cams' tech people told me their dyno people didn't
recommend the Dart heads for 302-size motors.  Said the big ports killed
low end, and you had to really crank a 302 to get into the zone where
the big ports gained.  On a street engine it sounds like it'd be a wash.

 For a 351W they'd be much more useful, only intake manifold selection
is pretty limited.  Maier's repro Shelby dual plane or Edelbrock's new
Victor 351W is pretty well it if you're building a performance motor.
                                                                                                   

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar  6 03:56:17 1992
Subject: RE: FMX or FMC
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Well here is what i know about the FMX transmision, i am not in any way very
familiar with fords but do have a friend that is, he used to have one it is
for what i know a three speed automatic...this one was in a thunderbird
with a 400....i hope this helps
         Bart

----------
Posted by: KE027@zeus.unomaha.edu



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar  6 04:18:26 1992
Subject: Balancing
To: hotrod@dixie.com

> how is an engine balanced.
> 
>  Black magic.  Seriously.  Many layouts, such as the inline four and
> V8, cannot be completely balanced for both pistons and rods, so the
> factories sometimes fiddle with the balance factor to change the
> directions of the shake.  There are formulas in some engine design
> books, but they're all rule of thumb.


	I didn't catch the original question, but I'll ramble on anyway.
I suspect that the question was regarding balacing as done by a machine
shop.  I have had two engines balanced, but both had fully 
counterweighted cranks, and no crazy balance weights on the front of the
crank pully, so this may not apply to some engines.  Anyway, with L-series
Datsun engines, balancing consists of grinding off small amounts of 
the bottoms of the rods to make them all the same weight (with pistons and
rings installed),  and  removing small amounts of metal from the Flywheel 
(with pressure plate installed), crank, pulley, and anything else that rotates
with the engine so that they are perfectly balanced.  No black magic in
a Datsun engine at least...

	-Dave

----------
Posted by: Datsun Dave Coleman 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar  6 13:31:30 1992
Subject: RE: MUSTANGS... CAM SELEC
To: hotrod@dixie.com


 Re: "intake manifold selection is pretty limited". Makes me wonder
what ever happened to Crower U-Fab manifolds. Anybody remember those?
It was a kit (really for racing) manifold for bunches of stromburg
98s.  It came as a lot of little tubing parts to weld up.  The nice
thing was that the cross connects could be variable length (or even fat
rubber hose) to compensate for different deck heights.  Another gotcha
was that it required the motor have a seperate plate to cover the cam
valley like old Cad, Olds and Hemis had.


 Milt.....

----------
Posted by: Milt.Mallory@Eng.Sun.COM (Milt Mallory -ESO LANs- )



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar  6 13:49:06 1992
Subject: Re: Chrysler 440
To: hotrod@dixie.com

> Date: Wed, 4 Mar 92 12:37 EST
> Subject: Chrysler 440
> Posted by: $BRYCERW@BrandonU.CA
> 
> I've just got a 1973 Chrysler Imperial with the factory 440.  Books tell
> me this should have a steel crank.  Is this true?
> 
> I want to use this engine for a hotrod.  What is a decent top end for this
> engine (ie. intakes, etc)?  Budget is limited.
> 
> Or would the car be worth more if I took it back to original?

You could probably use the engine for a hotrod with reasonable success,
but you could also do rather better with a 440:

440 c.i. (Imperial)*

'73	8.2	215HP (net)
'72	8.2	225HP (net)
'71	8.8	335HP
'70	9.7	350HP
'69	10.1	350HP	[ Pre-1969 engines have same stats ]

	* Figures taken from _Standard_Catalog_of_Chrysler:_1924-1990_,
	  Krause Publications.

Changing from gross to net HP ratings lowered the numbers across the
board between 1971 and 1972, but a decrease of 33% in HP rating is
significant; it is a bigger drop than I would expect if the engines
really had the same usable power.  You would have a decent head start
with a '70 or earlier 440, preferably a Dodge, which tended to be more
performance-oriented.

As far as the value of the '73 Imperial is concerned, in #3 condition
it would get around $1500, depending on whether it is a 2-door or 4-
door; $4000 or more if it is in #1 condition.  This is a rather un-
common car (less than 17,000 produced, and almost 20 years old), so if
it is starting out in good condition, it would probably be best to keep
it intact and look for a more performance-oriented engine to work
with.
____________________________________________________________________________
Daniel A. Harling                        (harling@pictel.com)
PictureTel Corp.             Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of
Peabody, MA  01960                 PictureTel, but they ought to be!

----------
Posted by: harling@roadrunner.pictel.com (Dan Harling)



From z-car@Dixie.Com Fri Mar  6 14:31:04 1992
To: z-car@dixie.com, z-car@dixie.com
Subject: Re: 1980 280ZX: Head Gasket Replacement
Cc: Kenny.Lopez@West.Sun.COM

OK, OK,...here is more info on my Z. Before this recent
problem, the car ran great. Doesn't burn oil, oil pressure
is perfect,...gets between 26-32 MPG. I made a run
to Lake Tahoe about 3 weeks ago, ran like a dream,
3000 RPM, 70+ mph, ...

The body and paint is in almost new condition.
New injectors and alternator are the only problems
I've had in the past. I am the second owner.
Change oil every 3K and tune-up every 12K.
Only other mod was 4 X Goodyear GT+4 tires (205X15).

	To: z-car@dixie.com, z-car@dixie.com
	Subject: Re: 1980 280ZX: Head Gasket Replacement
	Cc: Kenny.Lopez@West

	Kenny,
	You didn't mention a couple of important factors. (1) How is
	the rest
	of the car? Is it in good shape, and working well? (2) Do you
	like the car? Is it fun to drive, reliable, etc. ?

	Putting a new head gasket on this motor is not the end of the
	world.
	If the car was running well before the gasket blew, it will run
	well after the gasket is replaced.

	The decision is yours.


---

Kenny Lopez                             AT&T: (408) 562-6058
Silicon Valley EDA Sales District       ARPA: kenny.lopez@West.Sun.COM
Sun Microsystems, Inc.                  UUCP: ...!sun!west!maui!kennyl

---



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar  6 14:53:35 1992
Subject: Re: torque converter/auto trani mods.
To: hotrod@dixie.com

The Hotrod List writes:
> 
> 
> Recently the subject of automatic transmissions has come up...  
> 
> I am wondering what to do with my C-6  ford trani.  I see all kinds of
> torque converters available and was wondering if that was really necessary.
> Do all of the high stall converters sacrifice economy for speed or is there
> some middle ground.  I see also a number of valve bodies, shift kits, etc.
> 
> Also I see different lower gears for first and second for better acceleration.
> 
> I guess my question is, what should I put in my trani for my  'Frankentruck'
> to get the best acceleration possible without completly killing my mileage and
> street drivability.   I always thought auto. trani's were relatively inefficient
> beasts and tightening up the shifts would save on gas and boost acceleration,
> but I'm confused because I hear that torque converters with high stalls burn
> up a lot of fuel.
> 
> Can anyone straighten me out
> ?
> 
> thanks,
> eric.
> 
Okay, you're right that tightening up the shifts are a good way to
save gas, and the tourque converters are what hurt economy.  One of
the things GM did was put a transmission with a 'switch-pitch'
converter into some of their larger cars.  On WOT, the converter would
act as a high-stall conv., and most other times it would act as
low-stall for economy.  I do not think ford ever played around with
this idea, so you're out of luck there.  you'll have to sacrifice some
economy for some more power.  The tourque converter is mainly for
off-the-line power, and what RPM band it should connect in...
I'm a GM person, so ill just discuss basics.

With a shift kit, an all around improvement takes place.  Depending on
how hard you want to make your shifts, there are
so many different shift kits on the market that you could have a
little trouble deciding what to get... B&M shift improvement kits are
what I have experience with.  relatively simple to install, they come
with instructions to do it in the car.  I found it easier to do with
the tranny out of the car and on a rotating engine stand (turn it
upside down to get at the valve body).

Our Buick has a TH400 with a 455.  We get a very satisfying scream
from the tires under a WOT 1-2 shift(sometimes pulling sideways...
oops).  in non-WOT conditions, the transmission still gives a firm but
not uncomfortable shift.  

I recommend a shift kit.  A converter switch can be a lot harder,
however if you don't mind losing a little economy, choose one with a
lock-up at approx 1000 RPM higher than the stock one.  I decided to
leave the stock converter on ours (we pull low 14 e.t.s at the track,
and still get 18 MPG...?!?).

	Derek Cunningham




















----------
Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar  6 18:24:54 1992
Subject: Re: Lets try this for starters..
To: hotrod@dixie.com



>One of the guys over at the local Parts Emporium (Downey's Auto Parts,
>Canton Highway [highway 5], Marietta, Ga if you want to call) was telling
>someone that these starters are the same as some model used on late
>model Nissans and can be bought rebuilt for ~60 bux or so. He said 
>he goes this route on his roundy-round car.  Might want to look into
>it before dropping the big bux.
>
>John
>
>----------
>Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)

Thanks for the info John, by the time I butchered up one or two and
tried to make it fit, I'd probably be way behind even the highest
price super starter ;^)

>Let me guess, a big block Chevy drag car? Big blocks are famous 
>for breaking starter noses. I use a heavy duty stock type starter
>with a cast iron nose, the rear starter brace, super heavy duty
>cables, and an ignition cutoff switch. I get the engine spinning
>then hit the switch. I haven't had to resort to the big buck starters.
>YET!
>
>RON
>70 Chevelle SS 454
>68 Chevelle SS 427
>
>----------
>Posted by: rons@tv.tv.tek.com

Wellllll, it was a drag car at one time.  It's a small block with a
V671 Dyer blower, but that probably doesn't have much to do with the
kick back I got.  My timing is probably a little to advanced and
combined with the slow cranking speed, fate got the best of me :^(

I went home the other night and inspected as much as I could of the
mounting boss and could not see any cracks.  Watching the starter
as I would hit the key showed only the slightest up and down motion
at the far end of the starter -- not what I would expect if the boss
was cracked, I'd expect more left to right motion.  This is of course
all speculation until I get under the rod and drop down the starter.

I like the idea of the spinning up the motor then turning the ignition
on (I would imagine you wouldn't want to crank too long before applying
power ;^)

Thanks again guys for your input.

Phil - WB9AAX  prg@mgweed.att.com

----------
Posted by: prg@mgweed.att.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar  6 18:25:01 1992
Subject: Buick Super Turbine Transmission
To: hotrod@dixie.com


>  It was in the Wildcat behind my new Buick 430. According to the response
> the Super Turbine had a variable-pitch stator giving in effect a dual-
> stall-speed torque converter, with the two stalls possibly electrically
> selectable. It looks similar (same funky pan, or at least -a- funky pan)
> to the TH400. It is a 3-speed and has a very short tailpiece.

Oldsmobile used to have one of these.  I think the book "How to
improve and modify your TH400" (or some such equivalent title) has
some info on it.  I'll take a look at my books and see what I come up
with.

>  Can youse tell me any more about how the variable stall speed works? The 
> transmission does have a two-wire connector on one side; I've never seen
> electrical controls on my other GM (TH350 and TH375) transmissions.

I think the TH400 has an electrical kick-down/downshift hookup that
runs wires to the trans.

--
Joseph P. Cernada	AIT, Inc.
914/347-6860		40 Saw Mill River Road
cernada@ait.com		Hawthorne, New York 10532

----------
Posted by: cernada@ait.com (Joseph P. Cernada)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar  6 23:52:13 1992
Subject: Re: Buick Super Turbine Transmission
To: hotrod@dixie.com

The switch pitch torque converters have a piston inside which is
operated by oil pressure.  In the low stall speed position the
stator vanes are in the usual position for a 13 inch converter;
in the high stall speed position the vanes close down and more or
less block oil flow through them so that the coupling is reduced.
This also reduces the torque multiplication although the increase
in stall speed may allow for a net gain in output torque.

The pressure control is done by a solenoid valve, the same kind as
is used for kickdown in the T400.  The connector has two wires to
work both the kickdown and the pitch solenoids.  Some of the Buicks
had the pitch solenoid wired to the brake pedal switch so that the
engine could idle with less load (smoother); the solenoid was also
wired to a throttle actuated switch so that large throttle openings
could get the engine into the power range more easily.

The input shafts on the switch pitch trans are different than on the
typical T400 in order to accommodate the oil pressure used to operate
the piston.  You'll notice that the splines on the stator shaft are
only about half the usual length.  These torque converters are not
usable on the non-switch pitch transmissions, and vice-versa.

I believe that Kenne-Bell still does a good bit of business in the
switch pitch converters and transmissions; ther may also be other
shops that cater to Buicks that could help out.

Bob Hale                                      ...!ucsd!btree!hale
...!btree!hale@ucsd.edu                       ...!ucsd!btree!hale@uunet.uu.net

----------
Posted by: btree!hale@ucsd.edu (Bob Hale)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Sat Mar  7 00:28:19 1992
Subject: BALANCING
To: hotrod@dixie.com


-> I suspect that the question was regarding balacing as done by a
-> machine shop.  I have had two engines balanced, but both had fully

 I may have misunderstood the original question.  Yes, the actual
process of dynamic balancing is relatively simple, assuming you have
the proper equipment.  Determining what the actual balance should be
is a whole different story.  Fortunately, most automotive engines seem
to work just fine at zero balance.

 As an aside to my original message, if you're working on some oddball
engine and it's *way* out of whack and you haven't done anything major,
then it was probably designed off-balance to begin with.  This was
sometimes done to prevent undesirable harmonics with existing chassis,
or because the engine had been developed out of a smaller engine, and
ther was no longer physical space for the proper counterweighting.
       

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Sat Mar  7 16:33:22 1992
Subject: Buick Super Turbine Transmission
To: hotrod@dixie.com


Here's the rest of the info I promised.  This stuff is from the book
"How to work with and modify the turbo hydra-matic 400 transmission"
by Ron Sessions, from Motorbooks International.

>From '65 to '67 there was a version of the TH400 using a
variable-pitch-stator torque converter.  This was available on Buicks,
Oldsmobiles, Rolls-Royces and some Cadillacs.

Standard stator blade angle is about 23 degrees.  The variable pitch
used 18 and 26 degrees. An electric switch, located on the throttle
linkage is used to trigger a 12-volt solenoid.  This solenoid closes a
valve that reroutes hydraulic fluid to change the stator angle.

Variable-pitch has 1/2 inch stator-shaft splines, fixed-pitch has 1
inch.

--
Joseph P. Cernada	AIT, Inc.
914/347-6860		40 Saw Mill River Road
cernada@ait.com		Hawthorne, New York 10532

----------
Posted by: cernada@ait.com (Joseph P. Cernada)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Sat Mar  7 21:23:00 1992
Subject: Re: 455 olds HEI
To: hotrod@dixie.com


In article , hotrod%dixie.com@mathcs.emory.edu (The Hotrod List) writes:
> 
>  3) Keep in mind that if your 455 was a performance one, i.e. 442, the 
> HEI you may install might not have as agressive spark advance as the old
> points-and-condeser unit.  This is cause HEI was 74-75 year and up,
> in the time of those amazing, mid 70's emissions laws.  Advance weights
> and springs are not interchangeable between points and HEI.  8^(.

Don't forget you can always buy a performance curve kit for the HEI
for about two bucks.






                       David Gunsul 



                       The information contained in the post above
                       may be unsuitable for younger or more sensitive
                       readers. This post was written as it happened,
                       nothing was reenacted.

----------
Posted by: mgwhiz!mogun!dcg@mgweed.att.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Sun Mar  8 13:49:47 1992
Subject: Blueprinting and Balancing
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Since someone brought up the subject, let me give you my short course
of "How to Hotrod Your Smallblock Chevy". The very first thing you
must do is make friends with your local Chevrolet Parts counterman.
Buy him lunch, run errands for him, bring him presents. Once he's
putty in your hands, lean on him to let you carry home a whole barrel
full of HP rods and pistons. Now carefully sort through this junk
until you have eight of each whose pin centers, hole sizes, and weights 
are close to the same. Do a trial assembly with these parts and measure 
deck height. Juggle the parts around until you get them all to measure
the same. You'll probably succeed, but if not, don't despair. Measure
the median rod and resize the big ends of the shorter and longer ones
to match. Now carry all the excess junk back to your counterman and
only pay for the eight you keep. You'll save a ton of money, and wind
up with better rods and pistons than you can buy on the aftermarket.

While you're at the parts counter, and assuming you're building a
streetable small block, pick up a #3896962 cam and lifters. The
cam will set you back a whole $29 and is a much more accurately
ground and shaped cam than you can get on the aftermarket for
hundreds more. Of course you are starting with the *truck* 4 bolt
main block and you've already had the mains line bored, and checked
and honed the cylinders.

Now take your prize rods and grind all the casting flash off of them.
Set up a pin in your vise so you can hang one end of the rod on it
and attach a spring scale to the other end. Write this down. Now
reverse the rod and weigh the other end. Write this down. Do this
with each of the rods. Starting with the small end weights, pick
the lightest of the rods as your reference and grind material off
the balance pad on the rod ends of each of the others to match.
Now do the same thing for the big ends. You now have a finished
set of balanced rods. You can optionally now magnaflux the rods,
but Chevrolet already did this once and they should be fine.

Weigh your pistons. Pick the lightest for a reference. Mill material
from the balance pad inside the head of each of the heavier pistons
until they all weigh the same. You now have a set of balanced pistons.
Gather up the wrist pins and weigh them. Again pick the lightest and
ream the holes of each of the others for the same weight. 

Now everything is balanced except the crank, flywheel, and harmonic
damper. Assuming you've already checked the crank for straightness,
journal size and true, and magnafluxed it, unless you have the right 
balancing machine, farm the balancing out to a machine shop. If you
have the balancing machine and know how to use it, why have you read
this far? Now do another trial assembly and make sure everything still 
fits. You have a balanced and blueprinted short block.

I will save head prep for another day if anyone wants to see it.

Gary

----------
Posted by: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar  6 14:53:35 1992
Subject: Re: torque converter/auto trani mods.
To: hotrod@dixie.com

The Hotrod List writes:
> 
> 
> Recently the subject of automatic transmissions has come up...  
> 
> I am wondering what to do with my C-6  ford trani.  I see all kinds of
> torque converters available and was wondering if that was really necessary.
> Do all of the high stall converters sacrifice economy for speed or is there
> some middle ground.  I see also a number of valve bodies, shift kits, etc.
> 
> Also I see different lower gears for first and second for better acceleration.
> 
> I guess my question is, what should I put in my trani for my  'Frankentruck'
> to get the best acceleration possible without completly killing my mileage and
> street drivability.   I always thought auto. trani's were relatively inefficient
> beasts and tightening up the shifts would save on gas and boost acceleration,
> but I'm confused because I hear that torque converters with high stalls burn
> up a lot of fuel.
> 
> Can anyone straighten me out
> ?
> 
> thanks,
> eric.
> 
Okay, you're right that tightening up the shifts are a good way to
save gas, and the tourque converters are what hurt economy.  One of
the things GM did was put a transmission with a 'switch-pitch'
converter into some of their larger cars.  On WOT, the converter would
act as a high-stall conv., and most other times it would act as
low-stall for economy.  I do not think ford ever played around with
this idea, so you're out of luck there.  you'll have to sacrifice some
economy for some more power.  The tourque converter is mainly for
off-the-line power, and what RPM band it should connect in...
I'm a GM person, so ill just discuss basics.

With a shift kit, an all around improvement takes place.  Depending on
how hard you want to make your shifts, there are
so many different shift kits on the market that you could have a
little trouble deciding what to get... B&M shift improvement kits are
what I have experience with.  relatively simple to install, they come
with instructions to do it in the car.  I found it easier to do with
the tranny out of the car and on a rotating engine stand (turn it
upside down to get at the valve body).

Our Buick has a TH400 with a 455.  We get a very satisfying scream
from the tires under a WOT 1-2 shift(sometimes pulling sideways...
oops).  in non-WOT conditions, the transmission still gives a firm but
not uncomfortable shift.  

I recommend a shift kit.  A converter switch can be a lot harder,
however if you don't mind losing a little economy, choose one with a
lock-up at approx 1000 RPM higher than the stock one.  I decided to
leave the stock converter on ours (we pull low 14 e.t.s at the track,
and still get 18 MPG...?!?).

	Derek Cunningham




















----------
Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Sun Mar  8 21:48:34 1992
Subject: Re: engine modifications
To: hotrod@dixie.com


In article , hotrod%dixie.com@mathcs.emory.edu (The Hotrod List) writes:
> 
> 
> 
> What's the advantage of the Accel blueprinted HEI?  What's it cost vs
> a junkyard version?

The advantages of the Accel Blueprinted HEI are as follows.

Every critical part, anything that can wear out, has been replaced with
new heavy duty components.

Accel cleans the shafts, housings and gears.
Then they replace the stock bushings with lubed ones, give them high
dielectric strength caps and rotors, new magnetic pickups, capacitors
and a late model adjustable vacume advance control.

They're also tested before they leave the factory. 

The price of the Blueprinted HEI is 133.95 from Summit.
Not quite as cheap as a junkyard unit but IMHO well worth it.

> 
> Thanks in advance for all help.  My apologies to all who might have
> seen or responded to this message when I posted to rec.auto.

Glad I could help I'm just so happy that we're talking about great performance
stuff rather than the usual junk that can be read on rec.autos or tech!
This group just makes my day!!

> 
> --
> Joseph P. Cernada	AIT, Inc.
> 914/347-6860		40 Saw Mill River Road
> cernada@ait.com		Hawthorne, New York 10532
> 
> ----------
> Posted by: cernada@ait.com (Joseph P. Cernada)




                       David Gunsul 
                       dcg@mogun.uucp


                       The information contained in the post above
                       may be unsuitable for younger or more sensitive
                       readers. This post was written as it happened,
                       nothing was reenacted.

----------
Posted by: mgwhiz!mogun!dcg@mgweed.att.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Sun Mar  8 13:49:47 1992
Subject: Blueprinting and Balancing
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Since someone brought up the subject, let me give you my short course
of "How to Hotrod Your Smallblock Chevy". The very first thing you
must do is make friends with your local Chevrolet Parts counterman.
Buy him lunch, run errands for him, bring him presents. Once he's
putty in your hands, lean on him to let you carry home a whole barrel
full of HP rods and pistons. Now carefully sort through this junk
until you have eight of each whose pin centers, hole sizes, and weights 
are close to the same. Do a trial assembly with these parts and measure 
deck height. Juggle the parts around until you get them all to measure
the same. You'll probably succeed, but if not, don't despair. Measure
the median rod and resize the big ends of the shorter and longer ones
to match. Now carry all the excess junk back to your counterman and
only pay for the eight you keep. You'll save a ton of money, and wind
up with better rods and pistons than you can buy on the aftermarket.

While you're at the parts counter, and assuming you're building a
streetable small block, pick up a #3896962 cam and lifters. The
cam will set you back a whole $29 and is a much more accurately
ground and shaped cam than you can get on the aftermarket for
hundreds more. Of course you are starting with the *truck* 4 bolt
main block and you've already had the mains line bored, and checked
and honed the cylinders.

Now take your prize rods and grind all the casting flash off of them.
Set up a pin in your vise so you can hang one end of the rod on it
and attach a spring scale to the other end. Write this down. Now
reverse the rod and weigh the other end. Write this down. Do this
with each of the rods. Starting with the small end weights, pick
the lightest of the rods as your reference and grind material off
the balance pad on the rod ends of each of the others to match.
Now do the same thing for the big ends. You now have a finished
set of balanced rods. You can optionally now magnaflux the rods,
but Chevrolet already did this once and they should be fine.

Weigh your pistons. Pick the lightest for a reference. Mill material
from the balance pad inside the head of each of the heavier pistons
until they all weigh the same. You now have a set of balanced pistons.
Gather up the wrist pins and weigh them. Again pick the lightest and
ream the holes of each of the others for the same weight. 

Now everything is balanced except the crank, flywheel, and harmonic
damper. Assuming you've already checked the crank for straightness,
journal size and true, and magnafluxed it, unless you have the right 
balancing machine, farm the balancing out to a machine shop. If you
have the balancing machine and know how to use it, why have you read
this far? Now do another trial assembly and make sure everything still 
fits. You have a balanced and blueprinted short block.

I will save head prep for another day if anyone wants to see it.

Gary

----------
Posted by: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar  6 14:53:35 1992
Subject: Re: torque converter/auto trani mods.
To: hotrod@dixie.com

The Hotrod List writes:
> 
> 
> Recently the subject of automatic transmissions has come up...  
> 
> I am wondering what to do with my C-6  ford trani.  I see all kinds of
> torque converters available and was wondering if that was really necessary.
> Do all of the high stall converters sacrifice economy for speed or is there
> some middle ground.  I see also a number of valve bodies, shift kits, etc.
> 
> Also I see different lower gears for first and second for better acceleration.
> 
> I guess my question is, what should I put in my trani for my  'Frankentruck'
> to get the best acceleration possible without completly killing my mileage and
> street drivability.   I always thought auto. trani's were relatively inefficient
> beasts and tightening up the shifts would save on gas and boost acceleration,
> but I'm confused because I hear that torque converters with high stalls burn
> up a lot of fuel.
> 
> Can anyone straighten me out
> ?
> 
> thanks,
> eric.
> 
Okay, you're right that tightening up the shifts are a good way to
save gas, and the tourque converters are what hurt economy.  One of
the things GM did was put a transmission with a 'switch-pitch'
converter into some of their larger cars.  On WOT, the converter would
act as a high-stall conv., and most other times it would act as
low-stall for economy.  I do not think ford ever played around with
this idea, so you're out of luck there.  you'll have to sacrifice some
economy for some more power.  The tourque converter is mainly for
off-the-line power, and what RPM band it should connect in...
I'm a GM person, so ill just discuss basics.

With a shift kit, an all around improvement takes place.  Depending on
how hard you want to make your shifts, there are
so many different shift kits on the market that you could have a
little trouble deciding what to get... B&M shift improvement kits are
what I have experience with.  relatively simple to install, they come
with instructions to do it in the car.  I found it easier to do with
the tranny out of the car and on a rotating engine stand (turn it
upside down to get at the valve body).

Our Buick has a TH400 with a 455.  We get a very satisfying scream
from the tires under a WOT 1-2 shift(sometimes pulling sideways...
oops).  in non-WOT conditions, the transmission still gives a firm but
not uncomfortable shift.  

I recommend a shift kit.  A converter switch can be a lot harder,
however if you don't mind losing a little economy, choose one with a
lock-up at approx 1000 RPM higher than the stock one.  I decided to
leave the stock converter on ours (we pull low 14 e.t.s at the track,
and still get 18 MPG...?!?).

	Derek Cunningham




















----------
Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  9 09:48:35 1992
Subject: Re: Lets try this for starters..
To: hotrod@dixie.com

 While stripping down my project engine this weekend I came across a little
detail I had not seen before and which relates... on the tail of the starter 
there was a small angle piece which held the back end of the starter motor
down to a tapped boss on the block. If your starter is seeing a lot of flex
maybe you can fabricate something of this sort (and get a steel nosepiece).

----------
Posted by: jws@mlb.semi.harris.com (James W. Swonger)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  9 09:59:24 1992
Subject: Re: Lets try this for starters..
To: hotrod@dixie.com


> >Let me guess, a big block Chevy drag car? Big blocks are famous 
> >for breaking starter noses. I use a heavy duty stock type starter
> >with a cast iron nose, the rear starter brace, super heavy duty
> >cables, and an ignition cutoff switch. I get the engine spinning
> >then hit the switch. I haven't had to resort to the big buck starters.
> >YET!
> >
> >RON
. 
. 
. 
> 
> I like the idea of the spinning up the motor then turning the ignition
> on (I would imagine you wouldn't want to crank too long before applying
> power ;^)
> 
> Thanks again guys for your input.
> 
> Phil - WB9AAX  prg@mgweed.att.com
> 
> ----------
> Posted by: prg@mgweed.att.com
> 
> 
This sounds like a really neat idea... but do you have the coil wire
being run off of a relay?  or is the coil wire coming all the way into
the interior for a plain switch?  how long can you crank 'till firing
up before you start dumping gas into the exhaust?  I would think you
might go through a couple mufflers a year going this route... ???

	Derek Cunningham

----------
Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  9 12:32:38 1992
Subject: Re: Lets try this for starters..
To: hotrod@dixie.com

	The starter support brackets are available from GM.
	The ignition is supressed by either not providing 12v to HEI
or by grounding points (or supressing 12 v to the coil in a points 
setup)

My question, What make/model car does the mystery starter (tilton like)
come from? Does anyone know for sure?
I've seen the Tiltons and I've NEVER seen a foreign car starter with 
a nice machined flat block of aluminum for a nose. Likewise, one that
will accept a GM starter drive.

	derekp@gvls1.gvl.unisys.com

----------
Posted by: derekp@gvls1.GVL.Unisys.COM (Derek J. Pietro)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  9 13:35:32 1992
Subject: Re: Lets try this for starters.. 
To: hotrod@dixie.com

My car is a race car, so the ignition system is on it"s own
circuit. I simply let the engine spin a few revs then turn the
ignition on. This keeps the first cylinder that tries to fire
from trying to push the crank backwards. This happens when you have
a weak battery and alot of initial advance. I run approx 22deg in
this engine. 
RON

----------
Posted by: rons@tv.tv.tek.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  9 13:39:51 1992
Subject: Transmissions Questions
To: hotrod@dixie.com

  With all the talk on auto-trans, I have to ask some questions.
  What are the advantages, in a high performance vehicle, of having
  an automatic tranny?  The only place I've seen any serious use of
  them is drag racing, especially the street/race classes.  I have
  nothing against drag racing.  I race on road copurses however.
  (1968 MGB)  I can not recall any racing aside from drag which 
  uses auto trans  (Indy, Formula 1, IMSA GTP)

  Also, all the supercars built for the street have manual boxes.
  (Lambo, Ferrari)  And a lot the historical perfromance vehicles
  (like the original Cobra)

  I'm just interested.  The only car I've ever really driven which had
  an auto was a Jag XJS and I could tell that it would have benefited
  from a manual box.

  Thanks guys

  Keith

----------
Posted by: kmwheeler@UALR.EDU



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  9 15:34:15 1992
Subject: Re: Transmissions Questions 
To: hotrod@dixie.com


>  With all the talk on auto-trans, I have to ask some questions.
>  What are the advantages, in a high performance vehicle, of having
>  an automatic tranny?  The only place I've seen any serious use of
>  them is drag racing, especially the street/race classes.  I have
>  nothing against drag racing.  I race on road copurses however.
>  (1968 MGB)  I can not recall any racing aside from drag which 
>  uses auto trans  (Indy, Formula 1, IMSA GTP)

One of the main reasons for using an auto trany in a drag car is
consistancy. An auto trany can be set up to virtually shift instantly
thus eliminating power lost to the rear tires due to the clutch being
depressed. Four and five speeds used in pro stock do not require the use
of a clutch when shifting so power lost to the rear tires is not an
issue. Also you stand a much bigger chance of grenading your motor all
over the track when you mis a shift (thoughts of some poor bastard with
bucket in hand collecting his motor off the track come to mind). Cars
that road race or just run the corners occasionally may and do benafit
from the 4 or 5 speeds over an auto. The reason is fairly obvious. The
driver can control the speed and sometimes the handling of his car
better because the motor is directly connected to what the tires are
doing. On a drag strip this is not important, on a winding road it is
essential! Oh, one more thing about the auto tranys at the strip. With
the use of high stall converters you can get an effect like dropping the
clutch while also gaining torque multaplication benafits.
Hope this answeres your question, I'm sure someone else may have
something to add.
  _________________________________   _____________________________________
 /         _______________         \ /  OLD CHEVYS NEVER DIE, THEY JUST GO \
|        //~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\\  |     |             R A C I N G !!            |
|      / /_________________\ \|     |   OLD JAPANESE CARS NEVER DIE, THEY   |
|  -------------------------------  |    JUST TURN BACK INTO BEER CANS!!    |
|  / O O O -----Chevy----- O O O \  |_______________________________________|
| (_______________________________) | MARK JENSEN           (503) 627-3115  |
| (_______________________________) | TEKTRONIX METROLOGY LAB.              |
|  |\ _________________________ /|  | BEAVERTON, OREGON        MS. 39-732   | 
|  |      |`V'  `---'  `V'|      |  |        markj@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM       |
 \_|______|_______________|______|_/ \_____________________________________/

----------
Posted by: markj@tekig5.pen.tek.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  9 17:48:20 1992
Subject: remote brake power booster - good idea or bad?
To: hotrod@dixie.com


Hi,

I'm still trying to figure out what to do with Frankentruck.  Now I've got
a frame with 4 disk brakes instead of 4 drums and the old stock brake master
won't work on its own.  Someone makes a kit which adapts the mustang II m/c and
power booster but it sits on the frame below the cab. This is good because it
is a complete unit and it sits on the frame and eliminates the problem of the
cab moving on its rubber mounts and fatiguing the lines. Its bad because I
would not be able to get to the resevoir easily.  Also I don't know if its the
correct amount of boost.  Another option is to use a remote booster with a
fruit jar type m/c.  I could then put the booster anywhere. However people
have advised me that these remote boosters (maybe bendix) have a tendency to
suck up all of the brake fluid and cause discomfort for the driver. (anyone
heard this?)  A third option would be to remove a whole pedal assembly from
a wrecking yard with m/c and power booster and put it up in the cab. This would
solve the resevoir problem but not the line fatigue problem and I would
not be able to use the stock pedal either.  My goal is to get the best 
braking with good pedal control or feel. My brakes are all of the single piston
type with 2.75 inch diameter pistons in the front and 1.75 inch in the rear.
The rotors are 12 inch front and 10 inch rear (both vented).  

Can anyone advise me here? Any brake info would help. Does anyone know of
a good place for me to get help or parts or ?  I have never done brake work
that deviated from original design. Is there a brand that is better than 
another, type of lines that are better, etc.

thanks in advance for _any_ info.

eric.

----------
Posted by: hiss@fionn.lbl.gov (Eric Hiss)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  9 22:22:37 1992
Subject: Re: remote brake power booster - good idea or bad?
To: hotrod@dixie.com

> Hi,
> 
>  Someone makes a kit which adapts the mustang II m/c and
> power booster but it sits on the frame below the cab. This is good because it
> is a complete unit and it sits on the frame and eliminates the problem of the
> cab moving on its rubber mounts and fatiguing the lines.

	I know nothing about power boosters (I just drive a light car, so
I don't need poewr brakes!) but an idea about your fatigue problem:
You could use braided steel lines from the master cylinder to somewhere
on the frame.  The Braded steel lines are made to move, so they wouldn't 
have any problem.  Braded steel lines are extremely expensive, but for the
short distance from the master cylinder to the frame, it should not be a big
deal at all.

	-Dave

----------
Posted by: Datsun Dave Coleman 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar  9 23:48:35 1992
Subject: Re: remote brake power booster - good idea or bad?
To: hotrod@dixie.com


> > 
> >  Someone makes a kit which adapts the mustang II m/c and
> > power booster but it sits on the frame below the cab. This is good because it
> > is a complete unit and it sits on the frame and eliminates the problem of the
> > cab moving on its rubber mounts and fatiguing the lines.
> 
> 	I know nothing about power boosters (I just drive a light car, so
> I don't need poewr brakes!) but an idea about your fatigue problem:
> You could use braided steel lines from the master cylinder to somewhere
> on the frame.  The Braded steel lines are made to move, so they wouldn't 
> have any problem.  Braded steel lines are extremely expensive, but for the
> short distance from the master cylinder to the frame, it should not be a big
> deal at all.
> 
> 	-Dave

 Your local motorcycle parts store might be a resource here. Braided
lines are popular on steet bikes. My local bike shop (Zoom Cycle in
Santa Clara) made up custom ones for my Kawai for about $35 each. Just
bring a sample brake fitting and length....

 Milt.....

----------
Posted by: Milt.Mallory@Eng.Sun.COM (Milt Mallory -ESO LANs- )



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 10 14:23:58 1992
Subject: Re: remote brake power booster - good idea or bad?
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>Hi,
>
>I'm still trying to figure out what to do with Frankentruck.  Now I've got
>a frame with 4 disk brakes instead of 4 drums and the old stock brake master
>won't work on its own.  Someone makes a kit which adapts the mustang II m/c and

The kit to mount the Mustang II booster/master cylinder looks pretty
nice. It lets you mount up to your original brake pedal and is in the
same (near) location as the original master cylinder. You will need 
to make a new access door into floor to check fluid. You'll need to
make sure this location isn't under the seat! (When I saw it it was
on a bare frame.) You might also need some residual check valves in
the lines to keep the proper line pressure to the brakes if the B/MC
is below your brakes. The company that sells the mount should be
able to tell you what you need to know.
 
I don't care to much for the remote boosters because your not getting
the benefit of dual reservoir master cylinder.

Your third option is what I'm doing/done on my '47 Ford. I couldn't
use the original brake pedal to make a mount from beacause the center
frame has been widened for tranny clearance w/engine setback (brake
pedal mounted on inside rail not outside). With a new under floor
pedal and mount the M/C was under the seat. So with my options getting
smaller I decided to mount it to the firewall. I used a full size 
early 70's GM pedal and mount because it had the right curve in the
pedal to come down and under my steering column. It also had several
predrilled holes to change the pedal location (had to drill the ones
I needed). The booster mount holes didn't match so I had to redrill 
them also. Keep in mind that early firewalls are not designed for the
extra weight and stress you will be putting on it. To cure this I 
added three more braces to different locations to spread the load out.
I also added my steering column mount to this. It's big and ugly but
when the dash is in you can't see it. I also made it removable so if
I don't like it I can change it later down the road.

The Mustang booster (small dia. dual diaphram) should work OK but I
think you'll need to change the master cylinder to one that will
better match your braking system. Find one of them Versailles (Sp?)
that have 4-wheel disk brakes, that would be more suitable. You
might also check with with ECI that sells the Corvette M/C and booster.
It's about the same size as the Mustang and set up for disk all the
way around (check Street Rodder magazine for ad). 

I can't tell you how mine is working because I haven't driven it yet :-(
I have talked to others who are using the Mustang setup and say it
works fine. I'll dig out some more info tonight when I get home.

>thanks in advance for _any_ info.
>
>eric.

   Bill Drake   -   bill@ecn.purdue.edu

   47 Ford Coupe////454/AT/3:00//// the "Fat Rat"
   69 Camaro convertible////327/AT/2:73

----------
Posted by: bill@ecn.purdue.edu



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 10 18:23:22 1992
Subject: Re: Transmissions Questions
To: hotrod@dixie.com

In article  hotrod@dixie.com writes:
>  With all the talk on auto-trans, I have to ask some questions.
>  What are the advantages, in a high performance vehicle, of having
>  an automatic tranny?  The only place I've seen any serious use of
>  them is drag racing, especially the street/race classes.  I have
>  nothing against drag racing.  I race on road copurses however.
>  (1968 MGB)  I can not recall any racing aside from drag which 
>  uses auto trans  (Indy, Formula 1, IMSA GTP)

NASCAR teams use autos at Riverside where they have to turn right as
well as left. Richard Petty was the first to use an auto here and
won handily. On the superspeedways they never need to change gears
so they stay with the manual, with a lock, but at Riverside the auto
wins.

Auto trannys are also often used in 4WD races. The additional precise
control of power flow to the wheels is invaluable in negotiating soft
terrain. I converted to autos in my 4WD trucks years ago.

>  Also, all the supercars built for the street have manual boxes.
>  (Lambo, Ferrari)  And a lot the historical perfromance vehicles
>  (like the original Cobra)

The Superbird, and it's twin the Daytona, were both available with
automatics behind the 426 Hemi. These are *the* supercars. The Torqueflite
was arguably the strongest transmission available in a street car.

I used a much modified Powerglide in my rail dragster and used to give
the in/out box guys fits in Econorail. Lighter than a manual box too.

The most crushing argument for the automatic is that they rarely break,
and when they do, are easily rebuilt in the home shop while the manual
boxes are a nightmare to repair.

Gary

----------
Posted by: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 10 23:52:22 1992
Subject: Re: Transmissions Questions 
To: hotrod@dixie.com

    In article  hotrod@dixie.com writes:
    >  With all the talk on auto-trans, I have to ask some questions.
    >  What are the advantages, in a high performance vehicle, of having
    >  an automatic tranny?  The only place I've seen any serious use of
    >  them is drag racing, especially the street/race classes.  I have
    >  nothing against drag racing.  I race on road copurses however.
    >  (1968 MGB)  

(What class?  Write me back -- I've got an E Production MGB which I
race with the SCCA in the San Francisco region.  In fact, who ARE
you? :-)

    >  I can not recall any racing aside from drag which 
    >  uses auto trans  (Indy, Formula 1, IMSA GTP)

Define "automatic."  It appears that the leading F1 teams are all
going to a semiauto gearbox -- that is, you pick the gear, it does
the shifting.  There's still a clutch for starting and for the pits,
but shifting on track is all electronically controlled.  On the
Williams-Renault that won this year's Kyalami Grand Prix, the shift
mechanism is a switch mounted on the steering wheel; you flip it 
one way to shift up, another to shift down, and the electronics
and hydraulics take care of the rest.

Pluses: the driver doesn't have to take his hands off the wheel to
shift, which can be a big thing as you're simultaneously braking and
downshifting through a tight set of corners.  Also, shifting is really
fast, fast enough that the first Ferraris to use a semiauto had a 
seven-speed box built in so that they could tune the engine for more
peak power rather than a broader powerband, since they knew that the
transmission would let them stay in a narrower range without losing
speed during the shifts.

Minuses: COST -- these things are pretty much built one at a time, 
and I guess most people on this list know what that means to a complex
electronics system.  Also, there's no fail-safe -- if it overheats, if a
connector shakes loose, if a layer in the semiconductor wasn't thick
enough and it shorts, you coast to the side of the track and get out
of the car.

As for conventional automatic transmissions, no sensible bracket
racer would be caught dead with a clutch, as I understand it.  The
added consistency of an automatic makes it simpler to dial in an
ET and hit it with a reasonable degree of accuracy.

In addition, Corvettes used for Pro Solo competition are almost always
automatic-equipped.  One reason is that the Pro Solo uses a bracket-
racing type handicap start in their final round, so again the consistency
of launch makes autos particularly desirable.  Also, of course, Corvettes
have never been known for their lack of low-end torque, so the extra
power consumption of a hydraulic torque converter isn't noticed, and
the powerband is flat and broad enough they hardly need to shift at all.

As for your MGB, I know of no conventional automatic that you could
fit in the transmission tunnel that wouldn't sap more power than you
would gain in improved lap times.  (Doesn't mean there isn't one, 
but I'd be real surprised to learn of one that would bolt up to the
B's engine.)  The issues are power consumption by hydraulic torque
converters and number of forward speeds.  Anything less than four
speeds is a serious step in the wrong direction for the B, and with
power outputs ranging between 75 bhp and 175 bhp depending on how
fast you can afford to go, there probably isn't enough that you can 
effectively trade it off.  (Of course, if you're in some class that
lets you swap engines, that's another story, but the most common U. S.
road-racing classes for MGBs are ITB and EP, and I know both of those
classes pretty well...)

The other issue is smoothness of downshifting, and that's a fairly
big one in road racing, which is why the NASCAR cars still use all
three pedals when they run at Sears Point in June.  The F1 cars
use electronics to match revs so that there's no driveline shock
when the driver picks a lower gear; a conventional automatic isn't
going to be that gentle, and if the rev mismatch between gears is
high enough, you *will* lock the rear wheels.  I guarantee you it's
a very disorienting experience to be going into a turn and suddenly
to find yourself face-to-face with the guy who was just trying to
outbrake you on the corner entry; you wouldn't believe how big a 
pair of eyes can get.  And letting a conventional automatic
shift for you through a set of turns seems like a really good way to
get to know Mister Guardrail.  I'd hate to be at the limit in 11 at
Sears and have the transmission kick down as I was trying to dial in
power to make a pass (or protect myself from one), but I suspect
it's something you could learn to compensate for.  

Does anyone on this list compete in an automatic-equipped road-racing
car (say, a 1LE Camaro in Showroom Stock with the 5.7 and the auto)?
What do you do?

    I used a much modified Powerglide in my rail dragster [. . .]

The best part about a PowerGlide is taking someone for a drive when
they don't know it's a two-speed.  Took me days to get to the point
where I wasn't waiting for the other shoe to drop...

    The most crushing argument for the automatic is that they rarely break,

Especially true for PowerGlides from what I understand; they have the
reputation for being bulletproof.  However, I can attest to the fact
that driving a two-speed MGB around a road course is an exercise in
frustration. :-)  A 110-cubic-inch engine really benefits from the
ability to keep it in what passes for the fat part of the powerband, 
and a multi-speed gearbox really makes it easier for the driver to fit
said fat part to the varying needs of a track with corner speeds that
range from (well, here in SFR anyway) 35 mph to 105 mph.  The factory 
close-ratio gearbox, for instance, is said to give a lap time reduction
roughly equivalent to a 15-horsepower boost in engine output, just 
because each shift keeps you higher up the RPM range where the engine
can turn fast enough to get a lot of air in and out.

My experience with PGs, though, refers to the car that I had in mind when
I joined this list.  I'll be describing that in the coming few days
as I get to know the list and its constituents; I just had to chime in
on MGBs in road racing, since I actually know something about that. 

Meanwhile, is there an FAQ file for this list, or an introductory 
package?  I'd like to get started on the right foot...

--Scott "I tried it once, but I stubbed my toes on a cylinder head" Fisher

----------
Posted by: Scott Fisher 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 11 00:26:44 1992
Subject:      Re: Transmissions Questions
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Ferrari uses a semi-automatic seven speed in their formula one cars.
to engage first the driver uses a stick, like a regular manual; after
that gear changes are made by two paddle like switches connected
to the steering column, the paddle on the left upshifts, the right downshifts
This setup makes it easy to bleed off speed (along with lots of braking)
and end up in the correct gear at the exit of a corner. bBefore I new about
this tranny, i had always wondered how the f1 cars downshifted 5 gears so
quickly before entering corners.

Although i generally dislike automatics, i really like this set up...

AUTJW@ASUVM.inre.asu.edu              Arizona State University
Tom Wetherell            College of Archi-torture and Environmental Design
(602) 966-0874    For a B.S. in Industrial Design, spec. in Automotive Design

      "He's DEAD Jim,... You grab his tricorder, and I'll grab his wallet!"

----------
Posted by: tom 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 11 00:32:27 1992
Subject: Re: Transmissions Questions
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>The other issue is smoothness of downshifting, and that's a fairly
>big one in road racing, which is why the NASCAR cars still use all
>three pedals when they run at Sears Point in June.  

Probably as important is NASCAR's (oh hell, let's call names, Bill 
France Jr's) abject fear of the big E. (electronics, of course.)
I sometimes marvel that MSD boxes are allowed.

>The F1 cars
>use electronics to match revs so that there's no driveline shock
>when the driver picks a lower gear; a conventional automatic isn't
>going to be that gentle, and if the rev mismatch between gears is
>high enough, you *will* lock the rear wheels.  I guarantee you it's
>a very disorienting experience to be going into a turn and suddenly
>to find yourself face-to-face with the guy who was just trying to
>outbrake you on the corner entry; you wouldn't believe how big a 
>pair of eyes can get.  And letting a conventional automatic
>shift for you through a set of turns seems like a really good way to
>get to know Mister Guardrail.  


Understatements of the year :-)  The ultimate auto is of course a 
CVT.  Though not available in production for cars, CVTs have been
available for motorcycles at various points over the last 20 years.
I've raced two example.  

First was the Rokon dirt bike.  This motorcycle had a 380 cc snomobile
engine (complete with pull cord!) and a snow-mobile-style torque converter
(CVT by another name.)  For those unfamiliar, this CVT involves a 
belt drive between two variable diameter pulleys.  The engine driven
pully is actuated by centrifugal force (RPM) and tries to increase
its diameter as the engine speed advances.  The other pulley is actuated
by a cam that responds to torque and tries to increase its diameter 
according to the torque requirement.  The net effect is a balance between
RPM and torque.  In practice, the engine revs to near its peak torque
RPM immediately and stays there while the vehicle accelerates (fast!).

The second bike was the Husky automatic.  This bike is actually a 5 speed
transmission with a series of centrifugal clutches that sequentially
shifts up according to ground speed.

The Rokon, despite its small engine, was the hardest accelerating dirt
bike I've ever been on.  It would loft the front wheel the entire
length of most any straightaway one encountered on a motocross track.
The Husky is fast but not quite as fast.

Riding either bike required a significant change in style.  The Husky
freewheels on closed throttle as a byproduct of the clutch design.
The Rokon effectively does the same because the torque pulley will
shrink when the torque demand goes away.  Several techniques were
developed by riders but mine was to stay on the gas a bit and use the
rear brake to control torque application.  I fitted a hand brake lever
to my Rokon to allow me to do that in either type turn.  A little power
would keep the gearing correct while the brake is large enough relative
to the bike's weight to make it practical.

>From this experience, I can extrapolate to 4 wheels.  A car is too heavy,
of course, to use brakes for power control.  I believe electronics can
do the job here.  A solution might be to use accelerometer 
and accelerator pedal rate input to control gear selection.  When
lateral acceleration is present or when the pedal is being lifted, the
ratio is frozen.  When lateral acceleration is present but the petal
is being advanced, the engine can be allowed to slowly speed up.
When there is only forward motion (straightaway) and the petal is 
pushed or is wide open, then the engine speed is optimized for maximum 
acceleration.

Clicking down a notch in complexity, the transmission control computer
could simply delay downshifting until throttle is again being 
applied and RPM is matched, such as during a turn exit.  This is how I 
manually shift an automatic on a road course.   I'll blip the throttle
while downshifting and then save the last downshift until I apply 
exit throttle.  

Clicking down another notch in complexity, the shift is manually triggered
like the F1 situation but the shift is delayed until the engine speed
matches. The driver must push the button and blip the throttle in order to 
cause the downshift.

Either of the last two could be implemented with existing computer controlled
production transmissions.

I'm assuming here that throttle control is strictly manual.  If 
drive by wire with an integrated power management system is implemented,
then the driver's gas pedal input could simply be a demand for 
acceleration and the computer controls the engine and transmission 
in order to deliver. One might have to mask the engine sound to the
driver in order to not confuse him :-)  I know one of the hardest
parts of adapting to the Rokon was learning to ignore the exhaust 
note.

>My experience with PGs, though, refers to the car that I had in mind when
>I joined this list.  I'll be describing that in the coming few days
>as I get to know the list and its constituents; I just had to chime in
>on MGBs in road racing, since I actually know something about that. 
>Meanwhile, is there an FAQ file for this list, or an introductory 
>package?  I'd like to get started on the right foot...

Pretty much anything having to do with high performance goes here.
You got a hot rod 'tronmobile that you plug in at night?  Talk about it.
Me, I hotrod Datsun Zcars and am interested in automotive electronics and 
engine engineering.  We have several drag racers, a few road
course drivers and a few classic hotrodders on the list.  Noise factor is
practically zero.  Best list I've ever been on.

FAQ?  No but if you'd like to volunteer :-)  while on the subject,
what does everyone think of developing a resource list?  We've been
building one over on the Z-car list for quite some time and it is an
invaluable resource.  Someone want to volunteer to collect the list 
and either post it monthly or send it to me for automatic posting?
And while we're at it, how about someone volunteering to set up an
archive site?  We've had about 3/4 megabyte flow through the list so 
far (yeah!) so there's a lot of good poop available.  I would do this
but I'm not on the Internet proper.

Hey, let's have fun... Rapidly..

John

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 11 01:25:22 1992
Subject: Re: Transmissions Questions
To: hotrod@dixie.com

> Understatements of the year :-)  The ultimate auto is of course a 
> CVT.  Though not available in production for cars, CVTs have been
> available for motorcycles at various points over the last 20 years.
> I've raced two example.  


	Actually, the Subaru Justy has been available with an ECVT 
(electronically controlled CVT) for several years.  Right now, the little
three banger is about all the power the CVT can handle, but Nissan is working
on a CVT that can handle the power of their V-6, it should be out by 1995.

	-Dave

----------
Posted by: Datsun Dave Coleman 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 11 14:26:23 1992
Subject: Re: Transmissions Questions
To: hotrod@dixie.com

In article <992hr-b@dixie.com> hotrod@dixie.com writes:
>Gary C - re rebuilding - do you recommend any particular books for a first-
>timer on transmissions? I've done several engines but always shied away
>from the auto trans...

Pederson of "How to Hotrod Your...." fame has a book out on transmissions,
but it is mostly worthless dribble. All you really need is the shop manual
for your transmission and a modicum of common sense. There's no black magic
hidden in that housing, just simple gears, clutch packs, and elementary
hydraulics. When one breaks you either replace a gear or a clutch. It's
all rather straightforward. The only secret to automatics, if there is
a secret, is to keep the fluid clean and cool. There are trick things
you can do with the transmission such as high stall converters and rapid
shift valve bodies, but they don't change the simple mechanics of the
transmission, or what you need to do to repair it.

As a hotrodder, there are things you would like to know about and do
about your transmission that the factory didn't consider important
for a street car. I haven't found this all together in one book. You
have to dig for this type of information among your hotrodding buddies
and the aftermarket suppliers. For example, the tricks to making a
Powerglide live behind a rail dragster motor aren't written down anywhere
that I'm aware of, but they are common knowledge in the fraternity.
Your best method of learning auto transmissions is to enlist the aid
of an experienced transmission man who will answer your questions and
show you the tricks. After you've torn one or two down and worked through
the mechanism by hand, it'll all seem simple. Demand downshifting is
the most obscure part to an auto transmission, and the part that varies
so widely from one make to another. Governor based upshifts are simple
and common to most makes. Remember the area rule and transmission
hydraulics are absurdly simple.

There's a mystique to auto transmissions similar to the one about disc
brakes. Transmission shops play on this much the way brake shops do so
they can charge *more* to perform a *simpler* operation. Auto transmissions
operate with all the gears always meshed. Power flow is determined by
which clutch is engaged. That's determined by the demand sensors and 
the hydraulic valve body. The demand sensors are typically a engine
vacuum operated valve and a flyball governor. The fluid pressures they
regulate are combined in the valve body, a set of different sized passages
in an aluminum plate with springs and check balls, that determine which 
clutch is to be engaged. By changing this valve body, you can change the
rate and timing of clutch engagement. The valve body is really a fluidic
computer. In some new transmissions it's function is replaced by an
electronic computer.

Most auto transmission problems are caused by dirt in the valve body
or by worn clutch packs. One's a cleaning problem, the other is simple
parts replacement. These wet clutches are much less critical than the
dry clutch in a manual setup. You just slap them in and adjust a tension
nut to a specified inch-pound reading and you're done.

Gary

----------
Posted by: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 11 22:30:33 1992
Subject: Re: How to improve...
To: hotrod@dixie.com

> Okay folks, here's your chance to laugh a little... :-)  I own an '86 Celica
> GT-S, and I'm interested in seeing what I could do to it to help improve the
> performance a little.  I know it's not quite on par with the usual cars 
> discussed here, but I figure that until I can afford something with a few
> more cylinders, this will have to do.  :-)

	Hey, four is all you need!  Of course 'Yoda cylinders aren't as good
as Datsun ones, but there is still much that can be done!

> A few suggestions that have been mentioned to me have been either "chipping"
> the engine, or installing a turbocharger.  What I'm interested in knowing is
> if you feel this is worth the effort, and what it's likely to cost me.  A
> good place to go to get the required parts would also be nice.  :-)  
> Someplace that will ship stuff to Canada would be preferred.

	I'm not familiar with the term 'chipping', what do you mean?
Turbocharging is a very expensive proposition that has the potential to 
shorten the life of the engine substantially if not done correctly.  (Unless
you can find a stock turbo engine to put in ($$$$))
	Try TRD (Toyota Racing Development) for some good tips and parts.  I'm
afraid I don't know where they are, but they are pretty big, and should be
easy to track down.
	On a relatively light car like a celica, suspension mods could be as
rewarding as engine mods (but doing both of course is best) TRD has those 
parts too.

	-Dave

----------
Posted by: Datsun Dave Coleman 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 11 22:49:19 1992
Subject: Me and my Cars
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Well, now that I've jumped into the automatic discussion, I thought
I'd take a minute to introduce myself, my cars, and what I expect to
bring to (and hope to get from) this list.

I'm Scott Fisher (no, the other one), writing from beautiful downtown
Palo Alto, California, where on the one hand a really bad case of rust
means you have to spend five minutes with the wire wheel, and on the
other hand the private automobile is looked on as very politically
incorrect, unless it's so boring that you could only use it to drive
to the recycling center or to post handbills for your favorite alternative
candidate.

My cars... I was going to talk only about my project cars until I
realized that *all* my cars are project cars.  All three street-
registered cars have over 100K on them, which means no matter how
wonderful they are or how carefully you maintain them, things are
going to start going every so often.  As for the race car, well by
nature a race car is an ongoing project; you're either building it
or repairing it or improving it or driving it.  Or waiting till you
have enough money to do whatever's at the top of the stack, which
is where I am right now.

As for what the cars are, I think I have something to satisfy a wide
variety of audience.  I drive a 1971 MGB to work every day because I
like it.  If you go back far enough in the company's history (an
interesting topic in itself, not only to car buffs but to anyone
who's ever worked in a dynamic, fun, small organization that got
swallowed up by a big overwhelming corporation), MGs started out
as hot-rodders in the classic sense: tweaking engines, putting on
lighter, low-drag bodies, and winning races and speed records.  MGs
spent a lot of time at Bonneville in the Fifties; in fact, the record
that the Olds Aerotech broke had been set by an MG driven by Stirling
Moss some 30 years before.  I don't expect to talk much about this one
here, though, because I don't plan to change it much from stock.  When
I finally build my MGB-V8, we'll talk a LOT about it.

The family car for the time being is a little more modern, a factory
hot-rod wannabe -- a 1984 GTI.  Same idea as the Falcon Sprint I used
to have, or the '64 GTO, but adapted to the world of the late '70s
and early '80s (and aren't we glad THEY'RE gone) -- stick a bigger
engine in a smaller car and make it go faster than people expect it to.
If all goes well, I'll be doing some more interesting things to this
car, at least freeing up the exhaust system (the weakest link on the
early GTI is the exhaust manifold, the most restrictive unit VW made
since the 1200 Beetle) and probably including a cam and some fuel
injection system work (throttle body and dyno time to get the mixture
right).  My hope is to get more power out of an engine that stays
clean; underneath the layers of grease and grime there's an environmentalist
in there somewhere.  Or maybe it's just that I want to drive my MG through
Yosemite one day, and I hope both are in a condition that will make the
experience as wonderful as I dream it will be.  Or maybe it's just the
California smog check every two years.

But the *real* reason I wanted to join this list -- forget the four-
bangers -- is the car I brought back to life last Sunday.  It's a 
1965 Chevelle Malibu Super Sport, two-door hardtop with L-78 engine
(9.25:1 CR, 283, Power-Pak heads, Quadrajet, 225 bhp) and PowerGlide.
I love this car, and I can't figure out why.  I really like little,
nimble cars, and I'm usually willing to trade power in exchange for 
the ability to change direction *right now* no matter how fast I'm
going at the moment.  But I love the Chevelle.

At present, it's (horrors) stock.  Almost completely original, in
fact.  Only some interior panels and an oil filler cap came from
anywhere but the factory.  It even has stock hubcaps... and a stock
air filter housing.  (Well, okay, so I've got a K & N for it.  Good,
I thought John was going to kick me off for a minute...)

But after 27 years, there are some things that need fixing on this car.
I'm in the process of deciding what to do about the engine; part of me
says fercrissake, you've got the original block, heads, and tranny in
that car, keep them together!  But part of me says that if the 225-horse
283 is as much fun as it is, how much MORE fun would a hot 350 be?

And then there's the matter of intended use.  The Chevelle will, with
luck later this year, become the tow vehicle for my race car, which
is an MGB prepared to SCCA's E Production rules (as modified by my
budget, anyway).  In a pinch, I've got friends with tow vehicles, so
the race car has to get finished first, and the Chevelle can be kept
as a driving restoration for the near future.

Still, my experiences towing so far have proved to my satisfaction that
you can't have too much power if you want to tow something.  I also think
that the power characteristics of a tow motor are probably different from
the power characteristics of a full-race motor.  So I'll want to consider
some of the options for building a strong engine that will let me tow my
2200 or so pounds of race car, trailer and gear without breathing hard --
but not forgetting that it is, after all, a Super Sport.  I'll also be
interested in suspension modifications that will make towing easier and
also might help satisfy the lateral-G side of my personality.

What I hope to be able to offer the list:  Well, on the last day of 
driver's school, the head instructor here at Sears Point said he'd
give out signed logbooks (the thing that has the magic words "OK For
Competition" written across the bottom of the page) to us in random 
order, but he'd give the first logbook to the person who brought him
an Irish coffee (this was safely after the last checker of the day).
Another Production-category driver, Roger Ward (no, really!), managed
after a few minutes to approach the podium (actually the fender of
somebody's dually, where the instructor was perched) holding a thermal
mug with some green tape wrapped around it and an Irish flag over his
arm.

"We couldn't find an Irish coffee," Roger said, "but if there's one
thing I've learned at driver's school, it's that if you don't have
what you really need, you grab what you can find, slap some racer's
tape on it, and make it work the best you can.  In that spirit, here's
some coffee with a little sugar and a lot of Jack Daniels in it, and
an Irish flag to look at while you drink it."

Make it work the best you can: that's what I've learned from building
the race car.  Building race cars is like building hot rods in at least
one way: there is no factory manual for what you're doing, so you have
to make it work the best you can.  In spite of the fact that I have a
production-bodied car with an engine, transmission, and rear end out of
the same kind of car, I've had to do an amount of fabrication that I
never would have imagined just to get the thing to work.  I've had to
cut the trans tunnel with an acetylene torch, which was a HELL of a lot
of fun once I got over the nerves; I've drilled, ground, and filed bits
and pieces to get them to fit, I've measured things to have other shops
do them, and I've had a lot of fun.  (Not as much fun as *driving* it,
but that's another story.)  Anyway, I hope I can offer some useful tips
on how to grab what you can find and make it work the best you can.

And I also hope that I get to read about a lot of way cool hot rods.
On "the list" somewhere is a '32 roadster with a nice tight small-block
and disc brakes and about a zillion louvers... someday.

--Scott "A 1-gee corner is as big a thrill as a 9-second quarter" Fisher

----------
Posted by: Scott Fisher 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 11 23:00:53 1992
Subject: Re: How to improve...
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>	I'm not familiar with the term 'chipping', what do you mean?
>Turbocharging is a very expensive proposition that has the potential to 
>shorten the life of the engine substantially if not done correctly.  (Unless
>you can find a stock turbo engine to put in ($$$$))
>	Try TRD (Toyota Racing Development) for some good tips and parts.  I'm
>afraid I don't know where they are, but they are pretty big, and should be
>easy to track down.
>	On a relatively light car like a celica, suspension mods could be as
>rewarding as engine mods (but doing both of course is best) TRD has those 
>parts too.

Now dave, you know better'n that.  Nothing is better than having your
head plastered against the backrest when you nail the throttle :-)

Interesting note in this month's _Turbo_ magazine.  Garrett has apparently
ended up with a large surplus of variable vane turbochargers from some
Dodge product and is liquidating them to the high performance market.
This turbo is sized for a 2000-2400 cc engine and will maintain 14 psi
boost with the vane actuator supplied and will come on boost below 2000
RPM.  No price was given but it was implied that it is low.  Seems like
this would be just the ticket for the Toy.  I think I'll buy a couple and
lay 'em on the shelf for future projects.

They did note that the turbo comes with technical specs, maps but no
support and no manifolding.  If one can fabricate manifolding, this 
should be a very interesting item.

John

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 11 23:09:46 1992
Subject: Re: High Tech Mods
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>Any suggestions about going for a high tech engine?  I know that sounds
>like a joke considering the ancient flat four, but I was thinking about
>computer controled fuel injection, monitering of fuel flow rates, 
>exhaust sensor etc.

Why don't you pick up a Subaru flat 4 engine?  These little screamer have
all good of the VW but with water cooling, high revving capability
and in later models, fuel injection.  


Back when I was dragging a VW, there was this guy that ALWAYS gave me 
a run for the money.  he had a Subaru that had been tweaked to what
sounded like 10,000 rpm.  He was front wheel drive so I could get him
on the launch which won the race but that puppy would literally fly.
I've also seen this engine used on dune buggys.

John

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 12 01:02:56 1992
Subject: Trmissions Questions
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>  Also, all the supercars built for the street have manual boxes.
> (Lambo, Ferrari)  And a lot the historical perfromance vehicles
>  (like the original Cobra)

Carroll Shelby's own 427 Cobra (and I think Bill Cosby's too) had auto 
trans. There is a fable that a mechanic parked it on the side of the 
road one day and refused to drive it any further after it unexpectedly 
downshifted, broke loose and did a few 360's before he could get his 
foot off the gas.

As for your original question. I don't know of any advantage of an auto 
in competition where you have to work through a variety of speed ranges. 
Drag racing is a totally different ball park. One speed .... flat out.
There is very little in common between a car for drag racing and one 
that goes around corners. Engine, tires, wheels, diff, etc. are all 
different. 

Steve.


----------
Posted by: Steve_Baldwin@kcbbs.gen.nz



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 12 01:08:32 1992
Subject: Re: How to improve...
To: hotrod@dixie.com

> Now dave, you know better'n that.  Nothing is better than having your
> head plastered against the backrest when you nail the throttle :-)


	Sorry, I was thinking about piston engines at the time.  The thought
of all those burned valves, cracked rings, and other such reciprocating
stuff gives me the willies (doesn't stop me from building piston engines, 
mind you, it just gives me the willies).  Now just give me a nice open 
exhaust port from a rotary, and I'll slap a turbo on any day!  (now, no
cracks about broken apex seals! ;-)

	I guess I haven't opened my big mouth about the Roatary powered 510
I built yet, so here goes:  A friend who had recently bought an RX-3 with
a street ported 13B, complete with Racing Beat intake and exhaust manifolds
and a 48mm Delorto, totaled the car.  Another friend and I had been building
up the suspension on his '71 Datsun 510 for several months, and were finally
to the point where we needed far more power than the high compression L-16
could pump out (it handled so well that we once took a corner rated for
15mph at just over 60mph!  It would pound your brains out on rough pavement,
but it was worth it when the twisty bits came along!!!!).  Needless to say,
we bought the engine and tranny from the RX-3 and spent aboiut a month
fabficating a new crossmember, cutting out the trasmission tunnel, and
having a new one fabricated, and generally doing a surprisingly large amount
of work to make a smaller engine fit in the engine compartment.  
	The result was by far the most fun car I have ever driven.  The 
little rotary was putting out close to 200hp, and the car, with a stripped 
interior and the lighter rotary engine was down around 1950lbs.  We went to
great lengths to get the engine as far back and as low in the engine
compartement as possible, and the handling rewards were great (though it is
hard to tell simply by feel what improvements were from the change in weight
distribution, and which were from the drastic increase in power).  The
combination of very straight exhaust (two straight thorugh presilencers, and
an Ansa tip), the large carb, and a few problems with the ignition system
led to some rather fun idiosyncrasies.  Namely big flaming backfires.  Once,
after an autocross, I was driving behind the beast (as the car was known)
when the exhaust just started spewing flames.  It flamed for about a second,
with the flames licking at the bottom of the tailights, before a backfire
put it out.  Unfortunately, we never figured out how to contorl this flame
throwing capability to use to our advantage.
	Since then, my friend has sold the car and bought a '66 Datsun
Roadster.  The beast has a chance to come back into my life now, the current
owner has offered to trade the beast for my '67 1/2 Datsun Roadster with a
brand new, somewhat hot, L-18, and a recenly acquired big dent in the side.
It's a tough decision, I've put a lot of work into the Roadster, and I love
top-down driving, but the dent is about $1500 to fix right.  Of course, the
beast has to go through emissions in November, and of course the flame
thrower can't pass emissions.  A fuel injected 13B would cost about the same
amount as the dent in my pre-emissions Roadster.  But, like John said, there 
is nothing better than having your head plastered against the (corbeau racing
seat) headrest when you nail the throttle!  Tough decision!!!


	-Dave

----------
Posted by: Datsun Dave Coleman 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 11 22:49:22 1992
Subject: High Tech Mods
To: hotrod@dixie.com


Reading about all the high tech stuff in use with auto performance,
I've decided to try my hand at it. (For the most part, I like to
work with older cars, so I tend to use older performance ideas.
I prepped my street MG from info in an old MG competition manual.)

Any way, I've got this VW pan and I'm thinking about putting a kit
car body on it.  

Any suggestions about going for a high tech engine?  I know that sounds
like a joke considering the ancient flat four, but I was thinking about
computer controled fuel injection, monitering of fuel flow rates, 
exhaust sensor etc.

I'm a computer engineering tech student and it wouldn't bother me to have
to fabricate some microprocessor equipment.

I hope no one minds having a VW question here, but rec.auto.vw is full of
talk about spoilers for golfs, and other useless dribble.  And, for the
most part, I've been impressed with the traffic on this group.  I know
some of you are really into computer tuning and so forth, and I'd really
appreciate any ideas for the VW.

Thanks

Keith



----------
Posted by: kmwheeler@UALR.EDU



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 11 00:32:27 1992
Subject: Re: Transmissions Questions
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>The other issue is smoothness of downshifting, and that's a fairly
>big one in road racing, which is why the NASCAR cars still use all
>three pedals when they run at Sears Point in June.  

Probably as important is NASCAR's (oh hell, let's call names, Bill 
France Jr's) abject fear of the big E. (electronics, of course.)
I sometimes marvel that MSD boxes are allowed.

>The F1 cars
>use electronics to match revs so that there's no driveline shock
>when the driver picks a lower gear; a conventional automatic isn't
>going to be that gentle, and if the rev mismatch between gears is
>high enough, you *will* lock the rear wheels.  I guarantee you it's
>a very disorienting experience to be going into a turn and suddenly
>to find yourself face-to-face with the guy who was just trying to
>outbrake you on the corner entry; you wouldn't believe how big a 
>pair of eyes can get.  And letting a conventional automatic
>shift for you through a set of turns seems like a really good way to
>get to know Mister Guardrail.  


Understatements of the year :-)  The ultimate auto is of course a 
CVT.  Though not available in production for cars, CVTs have been
available for motorcycles at various points over the last 20 years.
I've raced two example.  

First was the Rokon dirt bike.  This motorcycle had a 380 cc snomobile
engine (complete with pull cord!) and a snow-mobile-style torque converter
(CVT by another name.)  For those unfamiliar, this CVT involves a 
belt drive between two variable diameter pulleys.  The engine driven
pully is actuated by centrifugal force (RPM) and tries to increase
its diameter as the engine speed advances.  The other pulley is actuated
by a cam that responds to torque and tries to increase its diameter 
according to the torque requirement.  The net effect is a balance between
RPM and torque.  In practice, the engine revs to near its peak torque
RPM immediately and stays there while the vehicle accelerates (fast!).

The second bike was the Husky automatic.  This bike is actually a 5 speed
transmission with a series of centrifugal clutches that sequentially
shifts up according to ground speed.

The Rokon, despite its small engine, was the hardest accelerating dirt
bike I've ever been on.  It would loft the front wheel the entire
length of most any straightaway one encountered on a motocross track.
The Husky is fast but not quite as fast.

Riding either bike required a significant change in style.  The Husky
freewheels on closed throttle as a byproduct of the clutch design.
The Rokon effectively does the same because the torque pulley will
shrink when the torque demand goes away.  Several techniques were
developed by riders but mine was to stay on the gas a bit and use the
rear brake to control torque application.  I fitted a hand brake lever
to my Rokon to allow me to do that in either type turn.  A little power
would keep the gearing correct while the brake is large enough relative
to the bike's weight to make it practical.

>From this experience, I can extrapolate to 4 wheels.  A car is too heavy,
of course, to use brakes for power control.  I believe electronics can
do the job here.  A solution might be to use accelerometer 
and accelerator pedal rate input to control gear selection.  When
lateral acceleration is present or when the pedal is being lifted, the
ratio is frozen.  When lateral acceleration is present but the petal
is being advanced, the engine can be allowed to slowly speed up.
When there is only forward motion (straightaway) and the petal is 
pushed or is wide open, then the engine speed is optimized for maximum 
acceleration.

Clicking down a notch in complexity, the transmission control computer
could simply delay downshifting until throttle is again being 
applied and RPM is matched, such as during a turn exit.  This is how I 
manually shift an automatic on a road course.   I'll blip the throttle
while downshifting and then save the last downshift until I apply 
exit throttle.  

Clicking down another notch in complexity, the shift is manually triggered
like the F1 situation but the shift is delayed until the engine speed
matches. The driver must push the button and blip the throttle in order to 
cause the downshift.

Either of the last two could be implemented with existing computer controlled
production transmissions.

I'm assuming here that throttle control is strictly manual.  If 
drive by wire with an integrated power management system is implemented,
then the driver's gas pedal input could simply be a demand for 
acceleration and the computer controls the engine and transmission 
in order to deliver. One might have to mask the engine sound to the
driver in order to not confuse him :-)  I know one of the hardest
parts of adapting to the Rokon was learning to ignore the exhaust 
note.

>My experience with PGs, though, refers to the car that I had in mind when
>I joined this list.  I'll be describing that in the coming few days
>as I get to know the list and its constituents; I just had to chime in
>on MGBs in road racing, since I actually know something about that. 
>Meanwhile, is there an FAQ file for this list, or an introductory 
>package?  I'd like to get started on the right foot...

Pretty much anything having to do with high performance goes here.
You got a hot rod 'tronmobile that you plug in at night?  Talk about it.
Me, I hotrod Datsun Zcars and am interested in automotive electronics and 
engine engineering.  We have several drag racers, a few road
course drivers and a few classic hotrodders on the list.  Noise factor is
practically zero.  Best list I've ever been on.

FAQ?  No but if you'd like to volunteer :-)  while on the subject,
what does everyone think of developing a resource list?  We've been
building one over on the Z-car list for quite some time and it is an
invaluable resource.  Someone want to volunteer to collect the list 
and either post it monthly or send it to me for automatic posting?
And while we're at it, how about someone volunteering to set up an
archive site?  We've had about 3/4 megabyte flow through the list so 
far (yeah!) so there's a lot of good poop available.  I would do this
but I'm not on the Internet proper.

Hey, let's have fun... Rapidly..

John

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 12 12:05:39 1992
Subject: Re: TRANSMISSIONS QUESTIO
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Just another note on auto transmissions---
Anybody that has one and does NOT have a tranny cooler---
they are very easy to install and prolong the life of the transmission
greatly... 

Has anybody heard ANY minuses to having a tranny cooler?

(besides it requires the use of more fluid...)

the only note i have is when installing it, put it in front of the
radiator, and BE SURE TO USE high pressure hose--- NOT FUEL LINE
fuel line is rated at something like 20 PSI (?), while the pressure
going to a tranny cooler can sometimes reach 150 or higher PSI
(or so i have heard.. please correct me if i am wrong)

	Derek Cunningham

----------
Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 12 11:57:42 1992
Subject: Re:  MORE AUTO TRANS STORIES..
To: hotrod@dixie.com

(dave.williams) 

re shifting at the same RPM every time - that's the governor's function. If
all other modifiers are removed (vacuum modulator plugged, throttle 
position linkage/wire disconnected) then the governor should be tuneable
to shift based on RPM only, without any serious internal mods. I was reading
a back issue of CC last nite and it was talking about changing shift points
by switching the governor springs. Said it was a bit tricky (like maybe
manual dexterity needed to get the little springs to go in and stay put
long enough to reinstall).

I've seen lots of adjustable vacuum modulators; anybody know of externally
adjustable governors?

re 10-bolt posi unit: I have a 10-bolt now and would like to get (1) posi
and (2) more than a couple of weeks of life behind a high-torque engine. I
have the impression that 10-bolts are not as robust as other diffs. 

Where did your brother pick up the 10-bolt posi unit? Does the spool
differ from the 12-bolt or can a 12-bolt center section be adapted or
machined to fit a 10-bolt? There are a couple of aftermarket places
(Rieder Racing comes to mind) selling 10-bolt spools new but ouch!
Any idea what models and years 10-bolt posi was offered in? I read once
that Olds 12-bolts had GM 10-bolt internals. Should I be looking under
every 442 and Cutlass S I see by the side of the road?

Any problems with putting a lot of torque through a 10-bolt so far? The
455 Buick engine seemed to come bundled with the 12-bolt; whether this was
for practical or marketing reasons I dunno. I expect to make about 450 lb-ft
from the 430 and don't want a big surprise ...

----------
Posted by: jws@mlb.semi.harris.com (James W. Swonger)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 12 11:41:49 1992
Subject: RE: TRANSMISSIONS QUESTIO
To: hotrod@dixie.com

The Hotrod List writes:
> 
> 
> reply to: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)
> 
> -> I just added a shift kit to my TH400... ive run it for two seasons at
> -> the track plus regular daily driving...
> -> no problems yet...  :-)
> 
>  Unless you're doing something foolish like neutral-dropping or power
> braking it, the trans should last a long time in a street-strip car.
> By the time many T400s or C6s wind up in a hot rod they've already seen
> 100,000 miles or more and aren't exactly in the best of shape.
> 
>  If your trans is in good shape now, you don't have to worry about it
> unless you're making a *lot* of power. 
>                    
> 
> ----------
> Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)


What do you consider a LOT of power?  its behind a bigblock buick 455
churning out somewheres around 550 lb.ft of tourque... (gross figure
not net)  it was rebuilt about 15K before we got our hands on it...
regular fluid changes and stuff seem to be doing it right. (every 10K
miles except when we're racing-- every 6K).

I hope it hold up.. :-)

Derek Cunningham

----------
Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)



From schuette@roadkill.nrl.navy.mil Thu Mar 12 11:27:44 1992
To: bmw@balltown.cma.com
Subject: replacing tranny oil.


Hi,
	Well yesterday I changed the oil in my 528E's rearend and tranny.
With 4 quarts of amsoil synthetic oil and a properly trimmed 17mm allen
key VW Transmission tool (I'll never need it again for a VW), and a 
lead hammer for gentle reminders I spent about 1 hour changing the oil.

	Made a big difference in the transmission, and it definetly didnot
have 3.4 pts in it before.

	Hardest part is getting the oil in the transmission.  There isn't
alot of room, unless you remove the exhaust (like the book tells you). 
But a 1 foot long 3/8" plastic tube forced into the top of the squeeze 
bottle will wrap around and allow you to force (force!) the oil in.  Next
time I'm buying a pumper.

Larry
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
     "In my opinion the aggressive spirit is everything"  BM v. Richthofen

Lawrence C. Schuette			  schuette@roadkill.nrl.navy.mil
Code 5133				  (202)767-2739  
Naval Research Laboratory		  	
Washington D.C.	20375-5000


From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 12 21:47:44 1992
Subject: New to list.
To: hotrod@dixie.com

I'm new to this list but have been into hotrodding cars for about the past 12
years.
It's nice to see so many postings here!
I'm in between project cars right now but I have the urge to wrench.
Being married with child I have to choose my next project with care.
It will be my commuter (approx 80 mi/day) as well as my fun car. My wife will
get my present commuter (Scorpio) which I love.
In the past I've built mostly Camaros(Small blocks), a Nova and a KILLER 4 door
Grenada (No kidding). 
I'm trying to make my mind up on what to build next, here are a few thoughts:
I would like to build a Convertible.
First generation Camaro with any engine. Do everything except the engine while
       using it to commute. Then drop one of my 396's in it and get another
       commuter car.
1985 Mustang GT. I like them, last year for carbs, cheap parts. I could commute
	in it and keep it as a project too. A guy around here has a Saleen SSC
	with a Paxton on it....nice car.
I have not ruled out other convertibles either. 
Later,
Mike Glynn

----------
Posted by: mg15@prism.gatech.edu (Glynn,Mike)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 12 21:56:09 1992
Subject: Re: Transmission question
To: hotrod@dixie.com

'you wrote'
> Has anybody heard ANY minuses to having a tranny cooler?

Yes. If you use unsuitable line or don't provide lips
on the metal tubing at the interface between it and
the flexible line, you will have leaks when you least
expect it. Take it from me :)

> the only note i have is when installing it, put it in front of the
> radiator, and BE SURE TO USE high pressure hose--- NOT FUEL LINE

Sounds like a good idea. But what exactly to use? I
am going to be revamping my tranny cooler arrangement
and this time I am going to do it RIGHT!

Preferably it would be metal tubing all the way up front,
but that may be a real nuisance. I am all eyes...


bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler)
NCN Skinny => 703.241.BARE  Club updates, events, and info

----------
Posted by: John Boteler 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 12 21:57:41 1992
Subject: Re: 5 Speed & 350 Chevy 
To: hotrod@dixie.com

I would use the BW T-5 and take your chances. The very latest versions
are beefed over the early versions. Your car is a lot lighter than
the cars Chevy puts them in now and as long as you don't beat the 
crap out of the thing, I bet it will be fine!
RON

----------
Posted by: rons@tv.tv.tek.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 12 22:07:11 1992
Subject: RE: VW engine swaps
To: hotrod@dixie.com


>Why don't you pick up a Subaru flat 4 engine?  These little screamer have
>all good of the VW but with water cooling, high revving capability
>and in later models, fuel injection.  

>Back when I was dragging a VW, there was this guy that ALWAYS gave me 
>a run for the money.  he had a Subaru that had been tweaked to what
>sounded like 10,000 rpm.  He was front wheel drive so I could get him
>on the launch which won the race but that puppy would literally fly.
>I've also seen this engine used on dune buggys.

>John

Subura flat four?  Out of what?  I'm not very familiar with Japanese cars.

If the Subura engine is that good of a powerplant, I may consider it for
my Renault R10.  I've decided that if that thing's French engine *ever*
quits that I'm going to put something with some kick in it.  I'd thought 
about an RX-7 engine.

The R10 is a neat little car.  Mine's a 1968 model and, from the factory
(it's all stock) it has: coil over shock on all four corners, disc brakes
on all four corners, double wishbone front suspension, front sway bar,
rack and pinion, and semi-independant rear suspension (only bad part--
swing axles).  All this long before any marketing bozo thought up the
gimmick of a 'sports sedan'. (whatever the hell that is)

Speaking of RX-7 engines, somebody who autocrosses with the local SCCA
has stuffed one of those things into a Formula Vee! He's mounted the
radiator on the roll bar.  It beats everything the region has, including
the Pantera and the rally Renault R5 turbo!

I will look into the Subura flat four, as soon as I find out which hoods
to look for them under.

Keith

----------
Posted by: kmwheeler@UALR.EDU



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 12 22:53:08 1992
Subject: RE: VW engine swaps
To: hotrod@dixie.com

> >Why don't you pick up a Subaru flat 4 engine?  These little screamer have
> >all good of the VW but with water cooling, high revving capability
> >and in later models, fuel injection.  
> >John
> 
> Subura flat four?  Out of what?  I'm not very familiar with Japanese cars.
> 
> If the Subura engine is that good of a powerplant, I may consider it for
> my Renault R10.  I've decided that if that thing's French engine *ever*
> quits that I'm going to put something with some kick in it.  I'd thought 
> about an RX-7 engine.
> 
> Speaking of RX-7 engines, somebody who autocrosses with the local SCCA
> has stuffed one of those things into a Formula Vee! He's mounted the
> radiator on the roll bar.  It beats everything the region has, including
> the Pantera and the rally Renault R5 turbo!
> 
> I will look into the Subura flat four, as soon as I find out which hoods
> to look for them under.
> Keith

	All Subarus have flat fours (except XT-6, Justy, and SVX).  Even
though I drive one on a regular basis, I don't really know many details
about which ones went in which cars.  I do know that the flat four in the
Legacy is a far better powerplant then the one in the Loyale.  Much
smoother, more powerful, and it is all aluminum, DOHC, turbo if you can
afford it, basically all the 'high tech' stuff you were looking for.
	I have heard of Jubaru Brats with twin webers putting out gobs of
horsepower too, so don't rule out older Subaru engines.

	Speaking of RX-7 engines, Racing beat makes an adaptor to mount a
Rotary to a VW transaxle.  If you want power, no Subaru can stand up to a
rotary!  

	Racing Beat        If you want info on rotaries, their catalog is
	1291 Hancock st    worth the $7!
	Anahiem CA 92807
	(714) 779-8677

	Any other rotary nuts out there?

	-Dave

----------
Posted by: Datsun Dave Coleman 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 12 23:55:17 1992
Subject: RE: HIGH TECH MODS
To: hotrod@dixie.com


reply to: jgd (John De Armond)

-> Why don't you pick up a Subaru flat 4 engine?  These little screamer
-> have all good of the VW but with water cooling, high revving
-> capability and in later models, fuel injection.

 Why not a late Transporter/Vanagon motor?  Magnesium block, 1700cc,
Bosch fuel injection, water cooling, and it will bolt up to the stock
transaxle.  You'd be all VW.

 Parts availability for the wasserboxer isn't as good as the air cooled
motors, but it's no problem for the enthusiast.
                                                                                                             

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 12 23:55:18 1992
Subject: AUTO
To: hotrod@dixie.com


 All this talk about automatics is making me reconsider my plans for a
B/Mod autocrosser.  Now that I've sold my old D/SP Capri I will have
some funds available for the project.

 The original plan was for something similar to a DSR racer, only two
place, streetable (Arkansas doesn't care about emissions, safety
equipment, windshield, or other junk - if the car has lights, muffler,
and the wear bars aren't showing on the tires you're just fine).  The
original plan was midships-mounted Cosworth Vega with a VW four speed
transaxle, mainly because I knew where I could pick up a Cosworth cheap
at the time.  Now it's gone, and I'd like to use the Buick 231 V6 I have
laying around.

 I'm leaning heavily toward an auto trans.  After running autocross off
and on for ten years, I'm sick of manual boxes.  (heresy, so what...)
I've proven to my satisfaction I'm faster in an auto car, even if I have
to hide my head in shame.

 If I go auto, my most reasonable layout is to use a FWD transaxle rig
from one of the GM cars that used the 3.0 version of the V6.  I know the
bolt pattern on the block was different, and it will take some doing to
figure out who makes an adapter or if there was a 3.8 with the proper
pattern.

 I'd really like to run a longitudinal engine, ie the Buick mounted
front-to-back with a VW transaxle.  It seems lots of people have put
everything from Evinrude two-strokes to 350 Chevys up against the VW
manual, but I get blank looks when I ask about the auto.

 Does anyone have any experience with the VW automatic, or know of any
place that does?  I'm talking the conventional auto, not the "automatic
stick shift" thingie.
                                                                                                                     

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar 13 01:33:25 1992
Subject: RE: TRANSMISSIONS QUESTIO
To: hotrod@dixie.com


reply to: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)

-> >  If your trans is in good shape now, you don't have to worry about
-> it > unless you're making a *lot* of power. 
...
-> What do you consider a LOT of power?  its behind a bigblock buick 455
-> churning out somewheres around 550 lb.ft of tourque... (gross figure

 I'd say you'd be just fine.  A big block and wide tires are like the
irresistible force and the immovable object - what gives will be the
trans.  Specifically, the servos are programmed to slowly engage and
disengage the bands, which can get sorta scorched if you're pumping a
lot of torque through.  A good stiff shift kit will minimize that.  Just
keep an eye on the filter and sniff the fluid (see if it smells burnt)
for a while until you know it'll handle the load.

 There are various things that can happen - you could, for example, rip
the vanes out of the convertor, break the input shaft, flip the sprags
over backwards, crack the tailhousing, etc.  Presumably you should run
into none of these problems, as GM built several engines with over 500
ft lb of torque back in the '60s and early '70s.
                                                                                                               

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar 13 01:33:30 1992
Subject: TRMISSIONS QUESTIONS
To: hotrod@dixie.com


reply to: Steve_Baldwin@kcbbs.gen.nz

-> Carroll Shelby's own 427 Cobra (and I think Bill Cosby's too) had
-> auto trans.

 Cosby's did, though the car was later found in England with a 396 Chevy
and a manual trans.  Last I heard it was back in the US and under
restoration.

 Bill Cosby's comments on his Cobra take an entire side of the LP, "Bill
Cosby at 200MPH."

 Shelby owns a Cobra with a 351 Cleveland and an auto, but I'm not sure
if it's originally a small block or big block car.  Hardly any two cars
were alike, and Shelby American would cheerfully build anything you
wanted, and (while they were still in business) would happily refit your
older car to the latest spec.
                                                               

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar 13 09:48:40 1992
Subject:  Subaru Performance Parts ???
To: hotrod@dixie.com

  Hello fellow hotrodders,

 Hi, this is my first post to the list but I have been reading all along
and am mightily impressed by the level of expertise and enthusiasm about
hotrodding.
  So, to begin, after hearing about someone speak of Subaru flat fours as
" little screamers " I just had to post and find out more about how they did
this.  I have a '86 Subaru GL 4WD station wagon w/ the 1.8 L , carbureted ,
NON - computer controlled ( believe it or not in '86 ) flat four .  Presently,
the engine is in excellent condition, ie good compr., good valves , in tune;
the problem is it has seriously slow acceleration ( has always been this way ).
So, when I heard about Subaru " little screamers " I had to inquire as to the
availability of parts or mods to PEP this baby up !!!  I'm really looking for
ways to make it more pleasurable and SAFE out on the roads, not to make it a
" screamer " !  Any info that you guys can pass along that would help me
speed-up my SOOB would be greatly ( and I do mean GREATLY ) appreciated.  Right
now it's pitifully SLOOOOOOW !!!
  Some pertinent facts :  1.8 L flat four
                          progressive 2-bbl carb
                          no computer controls ( no f.b. carb )
                          belt drive OHC
                          5 spd trans. w/ dual range x-fer case
                          this engine is like the present day Loyale engine
                            NOT like the Legacy engine


  Please send help, though, it needn't be fast since it's NO problem 
    to catch me !!!  8^)

  Now for a little info that stays closer to home w/ most of you guys.
Right now my project car is a 1972 Chevelle w/ a 250 L6 and a PG .  All orig.
and real clean.  I'm in the process of restoring it to use as an occasional
ride ( weekends and such ).  I intend to keep the L6 and the PG in place since
they're both in excellent health w/ low miles ( 80 K orig. ) and since almost
every other chevelle I've seen has a V8. ( I'd like to be a little different! )
However, I plan to modify the L6 for an increase in power; ie. headers, 
manifold/carb , cam ; so, if there exists any fellow L6 lovers out there I'd 
like to hear what you've done to yours and the results you've received.  All
tips and info would be of great help to me.
       Thanks in advance and once again I think this is a GREAT forum !

                                       later,

                                         Pete Fazio
                                         Havre De Grace , MD

----------
Posted by: Peter Fazio (SECAD/TANK) 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 12 11:57:42 1992
Subject: Re:  MORE AUTO TRANS STORIES..
To: hotrod@dixie.com

(dave.williams) 

re shifting at the same RPM every time - that's the governor's function. If
all other modifiers are removed (vacuum modulator plugged, throttle 
position linkage/wire disconnected) then the governor should be tuneable
to shift based on RPM only, without any serious internal mods. I was reading
a back issue of CC last nite and it was talking about changing shift points
by switching the governor springs. Said it was a bit tricky (like maybe
manual dexterity needed to get the little springs to go in and stay put
long enough to reinstall).

I've seen lots of adjustable vacuum modulators; anybody know of externally
adjustable governors?

re 10-bolt posi unit: I have a 10-bolt now and would like to get (1) posi
and (2) more than a couple of weeks of life behind a high-torque engine. I
have the impression that 10-bolts are not as robust as other diffs. 

Where did your brother pick up the 10-bolt posi unit? Does the spool
differ from the 12-bolt or can a 12-bolt center section be adapted or
machined to fit a 10-bolt? There are a couple of aftermarket places
(Rieder Racing comes to mind) selling 10-bolt spools new but ouch!
Any idea what models and years 10-bolt posi was offered in? I read once
that Olds 12-bolts had GM 10-bolt internals. Should I be looking under
every 442 and Cutlass S I see by the side of the road?

Any problems with putting a lot of torque through a 10-bolt so far? The
455 Buick engine seemed to come bundled with the 12-bolt; whether this was
for practical or marketing reasons I dunno. I expect to make about 450 lb-ft
from the 430 and don't want a big surprise ...

----------
Posted by: jws@mlb.semi.harris.com (James W. Swonger)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 12 12:07:16 1992
Subject: 5 Speed & 350 Chevy
To: hotrod@dixie.com


	I am planning on swapping the engine in my '72 240Z with a 
stock (for now) chevy target master 350. I want to use a 5 speed, 
but all the tranny shop people I have talked to say that there is
no 5 speed that can stand up to even a mild 350. Does anyone have
any experiance/advice/knowledge in this respect? I do not want to 
go the T-10 with overdrive method, and the Corvette 6 speed is out
of my price range. I have seen ads for the 5 speed from Richmond
Gear, but have been told that they are not good units. Any comments/
suggestions wanted. Thanks.

conrad.frank@quotron.com

----------
Posted by: conrad@pub.Quotron.COM (Conrad Frank)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Sat Mar 14 12:48:01 1992
Subject: Re:  10 bolt posi
To: hotrod@dixie.com


> 
> re 10-bolt posi unit: I have a 10-bolt now and would like to get (1) posi
> and (2) more than a couple of weeks of life behind a high-torque engine. I
> have the impression that 10-bolts are not as robust as other diffs. 
> 
> Where did your brother pick up the 10-bolt posi unit? Does the spool
> differ from the 12-bolt or can a 12-bolt center section be adapted or
> machined to fit a 10-bolt? There are a couple of aftermarket places
> (Rieder Racing comes to mind) selling 10-bolt spools new but ouch!
> Any idea what models and years 10-bolt posi was offered in? I read once
> that Olds 12-bolts had GM 10-bolt internals. Should I be looking under
> every 442 and Cutlass S I see by the side of the road?
> 
> Any problems with putting a lot of torque through a 10-bolt so far? The
> 455 Buick engine seemed to come bundled with the 12-bolt; whether this was
> for practical or marketing reasons I dunno. I expect to make about 450 lb-ft
> from the 430 and don't want a big surprise ...

we found our 10 bolt posi unit from a guy we met at New England
Dragway.  He  was another buick dude and we just started talking cars
and stuff and it turned out he had an extra that he would be willing
to sell.  

from what I understand, the rearends will not interchange, but the
internals will.  We have had no problems running well over 500 lb.ft.
of tourque through our 10 bolt, but i have been told that if we put
slicks on our car, we will be pushing the rearend to snap an axle.

we have had it in for 1 1/2 years now, and no problems.  thats with
spinning the tires at the first-second shift at 55 MPH... :-)

it should serve you well if you can come across a standard unit.

just a note-- the buick GSX Stage I had a 10 bolt posi in it... the
only cars that came with the 12 bolt were the canadian built ones.  we
originally had a 12 bolt non-posi in ours.

The other thing worth mentioning is that someone told me that GM put
out two different types of 10 bolts-- one that would be as strong as
the 12 bolt, one that was not...  ?????

Derek Cunningham

----------
Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar 13 14:52:14 1992
Subject: head prep
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Great article on balancing Gary !! 

I have a couple of questions.

Would grinding the pistions/rods to the same weights as an assembly be
worth the time?  Or is it worth the time and money to have them pressed off
and back on?
It seems to me that just matching the weight of the pistion/rod ends and
the crank journal ends would give the same effect as balancing both rod
ends and the pistons seperatly. (did any of that make sense?) 

What kind of tolerance in weight should I shoot for?  I'll be using a 3
beam balance, so I can get really accurate if the time is being well spent.


Also, how about that post on head prep?  I really could use it as I will be
prepping some 68' Vette heads for the street very soon.

Thanks in advance. 
Damon van Dam

----------
Posted by: dvd@eng.ufl.edu



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar 13 16:24:28 1992
Subject: Re: Buick stuff - actually welder
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>  I've been doing some cut-n-weld on my floor pan and body. Finding out just
> how bad I am at sheet metal welding. I'm about ready to bag it and just braze
> instead. Anybody ever buy/use one of those Eastwood stitch welders (like you
> see in the ads in CC/HR)? I can't afford a MIG; I need the money for parts!
> Is the stitch welder any good, let alone as good as the ads claim?

I just got an Eastwood catalog but I don't recall the price on the stitch
welders.  I need to do quite a bit of sheet metal work and scoped out the
costs associated with having someone else do it or getting a MIG.  Turns
out the pocket MIG from Daytona cost me $361 which was considerably cheaper
then having someone else do it; plus I get a new tool!

I looked at Eastwoods and chose against it because it has less power.
I also looked at a number of other low cost Migs and it seemed to me
that the Daytona Mig was the best cheap one.  Then again, I haven't
had a chance to try it yet.  I'll be able to tell you more on Monday.

-- 
Jeff Miller                 Network Systems Corporation
Internetwork Group          7600 Boone Avenue North
jmiller@network.com         Minneapolis MN 55428   (612)424-4888

----------
Posted by: jmiller@anubis.network.com (Jeff J. Miller)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar 13 18:52:18 1992
Subject: Re: Buick stuff - actually welder
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Make sure the mig you get uses gas. There are several out there that are 
gasless. They use a flux core wire. The useability of them is rather poor
compared to the ones that use gas. I have a century 110V mig, It's rated 
at 90 amp with a 20 amp circiut or 105 amp on a 30 amp circiut. It has a 
switch on the front panel to select ranges. Look for variable controls
for wire speed and heat. I've had the best results useing the small welders
by picking a heat range, striking an ark, and tweeking the wire speed for
a smooth ark. If you only have a few ranges to pick from thats hard to do.
Another thing I have found is that on old rusty/dirty metal CO2 works
better than Argon/CO2 mix does. It seams that the CO2 splatters more and 
pitches the impurities out, Where the argon holds it in and bubbles as it
cools down. However if you are welding clean new metal the argon gives you
a smoother nicer looking weld than the CO2 does. When you test drive the 
welder, Take some sheetmetal scraps with you. They may not have any there.
I tested the Miller the Lincoln and the Century and the century came out
on top and it cost less. I have $600 into it with a 30lb. CO2 bottle and
regulator, and a nice hood. My comparison also includes a MillerMatic 200.
The little ones don't stand up to that one but you can't expect them to.
Try and weld on several different thickness of scraps and see how much 
penetration you get. The little miller didn't seem to be able to burn in
as well as the other two. Also look at the guns. The century uses Tweko
wiredrives cables and guns which are readly available. The others looked
like they were made by mattel and if you dropped them they would shatter.
Well that should be enough rambling for now. Once you have a mig you'll
wonder how you ever got along without one.

Brian

----------
Posted by: brianpi@tekig6.pen.tek.com (Brian D Pimm)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar 13 18:52:24 1992
Subject: Where did you hotrodders go??
To: hotrod@dixie.com



Hello out there!!  I haven't seen any 'hotrod' articles in a few days
so I thought I try to start something going ;^)

With the few nice days of warm weather we had, I started working on the
hotrod and in a way, I'm almost glad the weather turned a little cooler,
since the car is now undrivable :^(  Ah, but that's O.K., that will make
me get going on the things I need to do.

The blower is now free and ready to lift off the top of the engine this
weekend and the new gaskets have already arrived from Dyers.  Jerry Holley
(hi Jerry!) made up a pair of metal brackets that mount to the front and rear
of the blower to which I attached a pair of 4' long 2x4's that now stick out
over the tops of the fenders.  My nephews suggested I stain them and leave
them attached!  I don't think that what they mean when they talk about
a 'woodie' though ;^)

While the blower's off, it will give me a chance to do some polishing
on it.  It will also expose the long sought after thermostat housing and
mystery thermostat :^)

A friend here at work (Jerry again!) brought in a Super Chevy Mag. with an
advertisement for California Discount Warehouse, Inc., (anyone ever dealt with
them?) they have the RAM Super Starters on sale, about $40 off of Summits price.
They also had a very good article on "Awakenings", getting your street rod
ready to drive after a winter nap...

One final note, it's just a couple of weeks away before an "RFD" can be
generated for the hotrod group on the net, anyone ready to talk about it?

Phil - '31 Model A Ford with a Chevy Heartbeat..

----------
Posted by: prg@mgweed.ATT.Com (Phil - WB9AAX)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Sun Mar 15 15:22:28 1992
Subject: Re: head prep
To: hotrod@dixie.com

In article  hotrod@dixie.com writes:
>Great article on balancing Gary !! 

Thanks.

>I have a couple of questions.
>
>Would grinding the pistions/rods to the same weights as an assembly be
>worth the time?  Or is it worth the time and money to have them pressed off
>and back on?
>It seems to me that just matching the weight of the pistion/rod ends and
>the crank journal ends would give the same effect as balancing both rod
>ends and the pistons seperatly. (did any of that make sense?) 

No this won't give the same results. What you are trying to achieve is
uniform distribution of mass in the rotating system of the engine. Simply
matching total mass of the rod, pin, piston assemblies neglects the fact
that different parts of the assemblies are at different distances from
the crank rotation centerline. A small mass imbalance further from the
centerline has more effect than a larger mass imbalance closer to the
centerline. It's simply an effect of centripedal force.

>What kind of tolerance in weight should I shoot for?  I'll be using a 3
>beam balance, so I can get really accurate if the time is being well spent.

I'm happy to hold mass differences to a quarter gram.

>Also, how about that post on head prep?  I really could use it as I will be
>prepping some 68' Vette heads for the street very soon.

Very nice, I'm using fuelie Vette heads on my motor. Give me some slack
time to type in a head job treatise. It's more involved than a simple
engine balancing.

Gary

----------
Posted by: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Sun Mar 15 22:22:35 1992
Subject: Re:  Turbo...
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>They did note that the turbo comes with technical specs, maps but no
>support and no manifolding.  If one can fabricate manifolding, this 
>should be a very interesting item.
>
>John
>
----------
	
>How much work would it be to install one of these things, if you've never
>done it before?  :-)  Is it in the realm of the possible, or should I (if
>I'm going to) just grab one, bring it to a shop, hand them my left arm & leg,
>and ask them to install it?  :-)  This does sound interesting.  I do have
>access to a wide variety of tools, and a few people who're familiar with 
>piecing things together.


If you can weld stainless tubing, can cut and bend it, and have some 
patience, the job is easy.  Assuming, of course, that your engine 
falls in the specificied displacement range.  Otherwise it would be a 
bitch.  You'll need to use stainless tubing because mild steel will soften
at operating temperatures sufficient to distort and leak.  I know from
hard experince.

John

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 16 11:24:29 1992
Subject: small MIGs
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Brian had some nice tips on welders; I had similar opinions but it
took me a lot of time to research it all.  Hear are some more comments.

> Make sure the mig you get uses gas. There are several out there that are 
> gasless. They use a flux core wire.

This was news to me.  All of the MIGs I looked at had gas (Metal Inert Gas)
but not all of them were suitable for flux welding.  Flux welding might
be nice if you didn't have your gas along but I didn't make it a real
high priority in buying mine.

> Look for variable controls for wire speed and heat.

Yup!  I like the inifinite wire speed better then switches but this
might be a personnel choice.  4 power selections is probably a minimum.
Also check what the lowest and highest settings are.  My lowest setting
is 30 amps which means you have too be careful about burning through
on sheet metal.  Mine also goes up to 110 on high which should give
real good penetration and after tests this weekend I have no doubts
that this thing will work well on everything up to the advertised 1/4"
metal.

> Another thing I have found is that on old rusty/dirty metal CO2 works
> better than Argon/CO2 mix does. It seams that the CO2 splatters more and 
> pitches the impurities out, Where the argon holds it in and bubbles as it
> cools down. However if you are welding clean new metal the argon gives you
> a smoother nicer looking weld than the CO2 does.

Nice tip.  I'll have to give it a try.  I practiced on new, cleaned up
metal until I felt comfortable about the welds I was making (and they
even looked good!).  Then I took it to some small cracks in my fender
wells and I encountered hassles like Brian describes.  I did try to
clean on the cracks before welding but they were still quite dirty.

> When you test drive the welder, Take some sheetmetal scraps with you.
> They may not have any there.

For me, thicker metal was a lot easier to weld then the sheetmetal.

> I tested the Miller the Lincoln and the Century and the century came out
> on top and it cost less. I have $600 into it with a 30lb. CO2 bottle and
> regulator, and a nice hood. My comparison also includes a MillerMatic 200.
> The little ones don't stand up to that one but you can't expect them to.

I didn't like the Miller.  It seemed very expensive for the features you
get compared to the other ones available.  I did like the Hobart (copper
wound!) but for a package, it is up in the $600 range also.  If you want
a truely nice welder, HTP is probably the best way to go.  It offered
a copper winding, 6 heat settings, infinite wire speed, a cooling fan,
better duty cycle then most, and extra features like spot and stich
welding; unfortunately were talking about a $850 setup.

> Also look at the guns. The century uses Tweko
> wiredrives cables and guns which are readly available. The others looked
> like they were made by mattel and if you dropped them they would shatter.

Also look at the way the cables and gas feed come into the gun.  Make
sure there is strain relief.

One additional feature to look at is to be sure the unit has dead stick
capability.  If you don't have this, the wire will ALWAYS be HOT!  This
will reduce the life of the unit and could also cause headaches in trying
to work with it.


The MIG I bought was the Daytona MIG, pocket MIG.  Its a great price
performance model.  It was only $361 for a startup package (plus gas)
which brought it in for over $100 less then any of the other welders
I considered.  If I had the money, I would by the HTP but for the
money, I really can't complain about this one.

> Once you have a mig you'll wonder how you ever got along without one.

Yup!  Its amazing all the things that you can use it for.  Simply a
matter of working it into your tool set.

-- 
Jeff Miller                 Network Systems Corporation
Internetwork Group          7600 Boone Avenue North
jmiller@network.com         Minneapolis MN 55428   (612)424-4888

----------
Posted by: jmiller@anubis.network.com (Jeff J. Miller)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 16 16:48:54 1992
Subject: Good news and bad news
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Well, the good news is it appears that the 283 in my '65 Chevelle SS
is internally sound.  I ran it for a short period of time over the
weekend and I appear to have fixed the oil leaks, and there was no
blue smoke from the exhaust so the clouds that followed my on my
last test-drive must have been coming from oil being vaporized when
it hit the exhaust manifold after pouring out of the 3" gap where a
piece of gasket was missing from my right-hand valve cover.

The bad news, of course, is that this now takes away much of my
justification for swapping in a 350. :-)  (Also, if anyone knows
where to find the voltage regulator in a '65 Chevelle SS, please
write me back -- privately, I would think, since it's not a hot-rod
issue, I just can't find my next-to-useless Chilton.)

On the other hand, it means some more meat for discussion on this
list, since I'll be able to get bits and pieces to help with the,
uh, tow capacity (yeah! that's it!) of the motor in the car now.
I'm contemplating the basic hot-rod bolt-ons of intake manifold,
headers, maybe a carb and ignition upgrade; this car already
has dual exhausts (on stock below-the-head cast-iron manifolds, 
not ram's-horn manifolds) and a Quadrajet with the factory intake.
Oh, and the all-important K & N so it isn't stock and therefore I
can talk about it on this list. :-)

While I was hanging over the fenders this weekend, I had time to
contemplate some interesting features of the '65.  

  - If I put on a set of headers, how do I support the bottom of
    the alternator, which is currently bolted to a bracket that is
    in turn bolted to a boss on the left-hand cast-iron exhaust
    manifold?  (Likewise the A/C compressor and the right side.)

  - Are the "camel-back" heads identified by a notch in the casting
    between the middle two exhaust ports?  

  - I've got the factory intake manifold and Q-jet in the car now.
    What kind of gains can I really expect from going to an aftermarket
    manifold?  Because of the kind of driving I plan to do with the
    car, a two-plane seems the right choice since I won't get around
    to valvetrain upgrades -- well, probably never on this motor.  And
    I'm looking for lots of low-end torque to get the trailer started
    rolling but I *do* like winding it out at least a little bit.  But
    I don't think a big single-plane is called for given the kind of
    driving I have in mind for this car right now.

  - Are intake manifolds sized (internally, I presume) to fit the
    engine's displacement -- that is, if I get a (for the sake of
    argument) Edelbrock Torker II and install it on the 283, will
    I later be able to use the same manifold on a 350 if I go that
    route?

I want it all -- compatibility with existing hardware, ability to
migrate to a base upgrade at a later date, and easy installation.
(Sounds like I'm writing a spec for a workstation order. :-)
I'm basically asking the usual beginner questions which all amount
to the same thing: what can I do that will waste the least money?

Oh yeah, last question, this one about documentation.  I have a 
library of several books on engine preparation and theory, but I
need a good comprehensive manual on the rest of the car (so that
I can find the damn voltage regulator, among other things).  Can
anyone recommend the name of a good manual for the '65 Chevelle?
As I said, the Chilton is basically worthless (it never seems to
be more than a table of lubricants, a few color pictures of spark
plugs, and an appendix on how to apply Bondo over rust).  There
are still some restoration-type tasks I want to perform on this
car (rubber seals, etc.) in addition to hot-rod stuff, and I do
need a list of things like torque values, etc. so that I don't
wreck anything while I'm working on it.

----------
Posted by: Scott Fisher 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 16 22:54:13 1992
Subject: Re: Good news and bad news
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Well about all I can help you on on your question is the heads that  
you are running.  As for cammel back heads, (the small blocks big  
fuelie heads with 2.02 intakes)  The cammel humps are on either end  
of the head, and they are smooth curves with no jagged edges.  I'm  
not perfectly sure of the other two types of heads, I beleive that  
the 1.94 heads had 3 square bumps and the 1.83 (?) heads had 2 square  
bumps on them.  All of these are on the ends of the heads.  I hope I  
didn't really screw any info up there, but I'm sure I managed to  
anyway. :)  Please do bash me if I messed it up.  :)  later!
 

Rob.
snyderre@nextwork.rose-hulman.edu

----------
Posted by: snyderre@nextwork.rose-hulman.edu



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 16 23:00:03 1992
Subject: Re:  Turbo...
To: hotrod@dixie.com


John,

 >>patience, the job is easy.  Assuming, of course, that your engine 
 >>falls in the specificied displacement range.  Otherwise it would be a 
 >>bitch.

I assumed that if my engine was larger than the specificied displacement range
that I was out of luck.  I imagine these turbos would be too small to "pump"
enough volume for a 5.0 liter V8.  Not so??  Just how much of "a bitch" are
you talking about?  I sure like the idea of turbo power!  8^)


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 Don Robinson    (602) 752-6466                |  We don't quit playing because
 Internet:     vlsiphx!donr@asuvax.eas.asu.edu |  we grow old...   We grow old
 UUCP:         ...uunet!asuvax!vlsiphx!donr    |  because we quit playing.

----------
Posted by: vlsiphx!enforcer!donr@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Don Robinson)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 17 01:47:01 1992
Subject: RE: Good news and bad news
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Well Scott anything you get for the 283 will fit on a 350, they may not
be exactly what you want for the 350, but they will work, or should anyway.
As far as the Torker II goes it will probably work better on a 350 than a 283.

Well that is all I know, sorry i can't help with the manual, I personally find
the Chilton manuals to be of some general help, some place to start when you
don't know anything else.

well good luck on the Chevelle
Bart

----------
Posted by: KE027@zeus.unomaha.edu



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 17 09:11:23 1992
Subject: Re:  Good news and bad news
To: hotrod@dixie.com

 The Chevy aftermarket intakes are generally on-size-fits-all-smallblocks.
However the 350 is the meat of the market so you will be OK for the future,
maybe have a little extra room to grow with the 283. Hold onto that 283 even
if you swap in a 350; they're not too common and you may value its original
numbers depending on how the infection progresses :{)

 The Torker series (at least the original Torker I had once) were simple
single-plane manifolds. You might want just to go with the Performer
series (bargain dual-plane). 

 It sure would be nice if the hot rod rags would do some meaningful
brand comparisons - like a test of several different manifolds on a
couple of testbed engines (say, stock, [mild cam/iggy/carb], [big cam/
big valves/big carb]) - and give dyno results. All they like to do is
"yup, yup, I watched the shop do the work" reports on complete engines.
Manufacturers don't share a common basis for reporting performance data
unless you count "Improves performance! Increases fuel economy!". What
I need is the real info to make sure that the component I end up buying
is the best for my application, since I can afford (at most) only one.
Even the tech support lines are of limited use; they may recommend their
best guess out of their lineup but not any other brand.

 Check on the firewall for a 3" cube with a ~5 wire connector (most of
them fat). That's likely the regulator. Unless there has been prior 
modification to the charging system... 

 You may have to fabricate some support components for the
alternator and A/C; this could be relatively simple if you can grind, bend
and weld 1/4" steel. I'm sure that suitable (chrome, of course) brackets
can be had aftermarket too. You're probably the second or third dude to 
put headers on a Chevy smallblock... :{)

----------
Posted by: jws@mlb.semi.harris.com (James W. Swonger)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 17 10:30:24 1992
Subject: Calculating air flow
To: hotrod@dixie.com


I came across a formula that describes the theoreticle airflow of
an engine (in cfm) to be:
	
	( (displacement * rpm ) / 2 ) / 1728

	or

	(displacement * rpm) /  3456

Does anybody know of a similar formula that can be used to determine
how much a carb setup might supply?

I'm in the process of trying to design a new intake for my '36 but
the manuals that I have don't indicate the flow rate of the carb.
This is only important because I want to know where I'm starting
from.

This flow rate also seems to indicate the MAX that can be pushed
through the engine without the use of ram air, turbo, or super
charger; is this correct?  If so, then that has a very large
aspect on how I design my intake as well as carb selection.


-- 
Jeff Miller                 Network Systems Corporation
Internetwork Group          7600 Boone Avenue North
jmiller@network.com         Minneapolis MN 55428   (612)424-4888

----------
Posted by: jmiller@anubis.network.com (Jeff J. Miller)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 17 13:23:36 1992
Subject: Re:  Good news and bad news
To: hotrod@dixie.com


Hi Scott,

Regarding the 283 mods you are contemplating:

Here are a few thoughts you may want to consider based on what I have
experienced with this engine.

 >>uh, tow capacity (yeah! that's it!) of the motor in the car now.
 >>I'm contemplating the basic hot-rod bolt-ons of intake manifold,
 >>headers, maybe a carb and ignition upgrade; this car already
 >>has dual exhausts (on stock below-the-head cast-iron manifolds, 
 >>not ram's-horn manifolds) and a Quadrajet with the factory intake.

If you mentioned what trans you are using in a previous post, I missed
it.  Considering the type of trans you are using will make a difference
when optimizing the rpm range where the engine will do most of its
work.  Selecting performance parts that work best in this rpm range is
the best way to get the most out of the engine.

[...]

 >>  - If I put on a set of headers, how do I support the bottom of
 >>    the alternator, which is currently bolted to a bracket that is
 >>    in turn bolted to a boss on the left-hand cast-iron exhaust
 >>    manifold?  (Likewise the A/C compressor and the right side.)

When building an engine for low end torque, keep the diameter of the
primary header pipe as small as you can.  You may want to install a
balance tube in the exhaust system.  This usually helps strengthen the
bottom end power.

As for the brackets, I don't know the best way.  I always had trouble
with the silly add-on bracket that mated with the generic header flange.
Some header mfgrs make the alternator bracket as part of the flange, but
I have never been too impressed with that either.  Maybe the aftermarket
mounting system that mounts both the alt and the a/c on their own brackets
may be the best way to go.  Anyone else have inputs here??

[...]

 >>  - I've got the factory intake manifold and Q-jet in the car now.
 >>    What kind of gains can I really expect from going to an aftermarket
 >>    manifold?  Because of the kind of driving I plan to do with the
 >>    car, a two-plane seems the right choice since I won't get around
 >>    to valvetrain upgrades -- well, probably never on this motor.  And
 >>    I'm looking for lots of low-end torque to get the trailer started
 >>    rolling but I *do* like winding it out at least a little bit.  But
 >>    I don't think a big single-plane is called for given the kind of
 >>    driving I have in mind for this car right now.

Yup, you are right about the dual plane manifold.  Again, it keeps the
power toward the bottom end.  Plenum dividers are a plus.  I have read
that carb spacers work well.  This area is good for experimentation,since
every combination works a little differently.

Also keep the carb on the small side.  The Q-jet you have on it may
be your best bet until you get the 350 engine.

 >>
 >>  - Are intake manifolds sized (internally, I presume) to fit the
 >>    engine's displacement -- that is, if I get a (for the sake of
 >>    argument) Edelbrock Torker II and install it on the 283, will
 >>    I later be able to use the same manifold on a 350 if I go that
 >>    route?

I forget what the optimum rpm range the Torker II is rated for but it
would be a good choice for both engines.

Speaking of the 350 "route", I have to tell you that the 283 is not going
to make *lots* of bottom end torque.  It is a short stroked engine that will
really spin the tach around but the upper rpm range is where it is best
suited to work.  You can build it for low end use and "get by", but you
will be much happier towing with the 350.  This may be a help when
deciding how much money to put in the 283.

[...]

 >>----------
 >>Posted by: Scott Fisher 
 >>

Hope this helps.  Good luck!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 Don Robinson    (602) 752-6466                |  We don't quit playing because
 Internet:     vlsiphx!donr@asuvax.eas.asu.edu |  we grow old...   We grow old
 UUCP:         ...uunet!asuvax!vlsiphx!donr    |  because we quit playing.

----------
Posted by: vlsiphx!enforcer!donr@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Don Robinson)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 17 13:52:24 1992
Subject: Re: Calculating air flow
To: hotrod@dixie.com

In article  hotrod@dixie.com writes:
>
>I came across a formula that describes the theoreticle airflow of
>an engine (in cfm) to be:
>	
>	( (displacement * rpm ) / 2 ) / 1728
>
>	or
>
>	(displacement * rpm) /  3456
>
>Does anybody know of a similar formula that can be used to determine
>how much a carb setup might supply?

This is a complex issue. The formula you quote shows the theoretical
*displacement* capacity of the engine. It neglects residuals and
flow restrictions. Anyone sizing a carb from this formula would
be very disappointed with the performance of the vehicle. *Except*
that carb manufacturers use an unrealistic method of rating the flow
of their carbs. Note that the above formula shows a 350 CID engine
turning 6000 RPM displacing 608 CFM. Now a 600 CFM Holley would
be a good mid-range carb for a street 350, but at 6000 RPM on a
performance engine, the engine would be seriously undercarbed. 
That's because a 600 CFM Holley doesn't really flow 600 CFM under 
actual engine conditions. It only flows 600 CFM with a hard vacuum
on the outlet side and a real engine never closely approaches this
condition.

To calculate mass flow, you need to know the pressure differential
across the carb and the carb throat area. In a mormally aspirated
engine, you have a maximum of 14.7 PSI on the inlet side. On the
intake manifold side you have anywhere from near atmospheric pressure
at WOT to around 5 PSI at idle. The lower the pressure differential,
the bigger the throat area has to be for a given flow. Most carbs
are designed to work with a pressure differential across the venturi
of 1 to 2 PSI. The throttle plate is used to adjust the amount of
manifold vacuum the bottom of the venturi sees in order to maintain
this differential at any given flow rate.  At WOT you reach flow
maximum when the differential across the venturi starts to go outside 
this range. Too much carb will drop the differential below 1 PSI and
not enough fuel will be pulled over and the engine will lean misfire.
Too little carb and the engine will richen out as the pressure differential
increases and the engine will stop accelerating because of flow 
restriction. (Just like the throttle wasn't completely open.)
The actual flow of a carb is difficult to calculate, requiring a
fluid dynamics model on a computer or actual engine testing.

The actual "demand" of the engine is also complex and not just
a simple matter of displacement. It depends on valve size and
timing, manifold design, chamber design, and exhaust scavenging 
among other things. In an unblown engine, displacement is an
unreachable *upper* bound on air consumption at any reasonable
performance RPM. Only at low idle is the displacement formula
reasonably accurate.
 
>I'm in the process of trying to design a new intake for my '36 but
>the manuals that I have don't indicate the flow rate of the carb.
>This is only important because I want to know where I'm starting
>from.
>
>This flow rate also seems to indicate the MAX that can be pushed
>through the engine without the use of ram air, turbo, or super
>charger; is this correct?  If so, then that has a very large
>aspect on how I design my intake as well as carb selection.

Yes you can "force" the carb to flow more air by increasing the
differential across it through the use of tuned intake, turbo,
or supercharger. Please note that you must *draw* air through
a normal carb, not *blow* air into it or your fuel mixture will
be throughly screwed. If you need to "blow through" the carb,
you need a special carb that has positive pressure in the float
bowl.

14 pounds of boost would allow the 600 CFM Holley to actually
flow 600 CFM and make it a good 6000 RPM carb. As you can see,
a boosted engine should have a *smaller* carb than an unblown
engine.

A good reference for your manifold project is "Design and Tuning
of Competition Engines".

Gary

----------
Posted by: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 17 16:42:06 1992
Subject: Re: Calculating air flow
To: hotrod@dixie.com

> >
> >I came across a formula that describes the theoreticle airflow of
> >an engine (in cfm) to be:
> >	
> >	( (displacement * rpm ) / 2 ) / 1728
> >
> >Does anybody know of a similar formula that can be used to determine
> >how much a carb setup might supply?
> 
> This is a complex issue. The formula you quote shows the theoretical
> *displacement* capacity of the engine. It neglects residuals and
> flow restrictions.  Anyone sizing a carb from this formula would
> be very disappointed with the performance of the vehicle. *Except*
> that carb manufacturers use an unrealistic method of rating the flow
> of their carbs. Note that the above formula shows a 350 CID engine
> turning 6000 RPM displacing 608 CFM. Now a 600 CFM Holley would
> be a good mid-range carb for a street 350, but at 6000 RPM on a
> performance engine, the engine would be seriously undercarbed. 
> That's because a 600 CFM Holley doesn't really flow 600 CFM under 
> actual engine conditions. It only flows 600 CFM with a hard vacuum
> on the outlet side and a real engine never closely approaches this
> condition.

OK.  I should have said more about my application.  I have been
having an impossible time trying to figure out how to get more
power out of the straight 8 in my `36.  I like the engine because
there is just something about engines that are that long; problem
is that nobody that I've talked to knows much about giving them
more power.

I current plans are to increase the flow through by adding more
carbs (4 side draft webers might be nice), and by reducing back
pressure in the 8 into 1 exhaust system.  This is not to be a
drag or racing machine, just something that goes faster then
it origianally did.

My first ideas were to calculate the theoretical max and then get
a carb setup that would handle this.  If I do go the route of having
4 carbs I would try to get each carb of at least the size equal to
1/4 of the total theoretical flow rate.

> To calculate mass flow, you need to know the pressure differential
> across the carb and the carb throat area. In a mormally aspirated
> engine, you have a maximum of 14.7 PSI on the inlet side. On the
> intake manifold side you have anywhere from near atmospheric pressure
> at WOT to around 5 PSI at idle. The lower the pressure differential,
> the bigger the throat area has to be for a given flow. Most carbs
> are designed to work with a pressure differential across the venturi
> of 1 to 2 PSI. The throttle plate is used to adjust the amount of
> manifold vacuum the bottom of the venturi sees in order to maintain
> this differential at any given flow rate.  At WOT you reach flow
> maximum when the differential across the venturi starts to go outside 
> this range. Too much carb will drop the differential below 1 PSI and
> not enough fuel will be pulled over and the engine will lean misfire.
> Too little carb and the engine will richen out as the pressure differential
> increases and the engine will stop accelerating because of flow 
> restriction. (Just like the throttle wasn't completely open.)
> The actual flow of a carb is difficult to calculate, requiring a
> fluid dynamics model on a computer or actual engine testing.
> 
> The actual "demand" of the engine is also complex and not just
> a simple matter of displacement. It depends on valve size and
> timing, manifold design, chamber design, and exhaust scavenging 
> among other things. In an unblown engine, displacement is an
> unreachable *upper* bound on air consumption at any reasonable
> performance RPM. Only at low idle is the displacement formula
> reasonably accurate.

Huh?  Your use of upper and reasonable confused me.  The formula
indicates the maximum that a normally asperated engine could ever
flow (right?).  Perhaps all your saying is that the formula might
be acurate at say (displacement * 800)/3456 but not as the rpm
raises from 800 to 6000.

In my case, the engine displacement is only 233 and it developes
max torque at 3200 rpm.  Red line is somewhere around 4000.  Plugging
these numbers indicates I would need something that would flow
(theoretically) 215cfm@3200rpm or 270cfm@4000.  So if I were to
find 4 carbs that flowed at 100 cfm I would probably be over-carbed
and would result in a lean mixture at WOT?  This doesn't sound
right.  Here I was concerned about flooding out the engine by
dumping too much gas into it and now your telling me the back
pressure will restrict the flow and lean out the engine.  Would
you suggest that I might look for 1/2 that flow instead?

> 
> ... stuff deleted ...
> 
> 14 pounds of boost would allow the 600 CFM Holley to actually
> flow 600 CFM and make it a good 6000 RPM carb. As you can see,
> a boosted engine should have a *smaller* carb than an unblown
> engine.

Wish I had a boosted engine (I really like super chargers)!
Since I don't, that would seem to indicate that I want a carb
that is fairly wide but won't that increase the potential for
back preasure that would create the lean condition you describe
above?

> 
> A good reference for your manifold project is "Design and Tuning
> of Competition Engines".

Thanks for the reference.  I guess its time to go do more reading.

-- 
Jeff Miller                 Network Systems Corporation
Internetwork Group          7600 Boone Avenue North
jmiller@network.com         Minneapolis MN 55428   (612)424-4888

----------
Posted by: jmiller@anubis.network.com (Jeff J. Miller)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 17 20:22:53 1992
Subject: Engine Hop Ups - Underdrive Pulleys
To: hotrod@dixie.com

I'd liek to get a little more umph from my convertible, but have plenty of 
money left over for subframe connectors, new bushings, control arms, etc.

The more I look into it, it seems like changing ONE part of my motor (i.e. the 
GT 40 intake or a new exhaust system) won't do anything by itself.  You need to 
do the whole enchilada to increase flow throughout.

The pulleys, however, have nothing to do with flow; new pulleys only reduce the 
parasitic accessory load.  Also, a guy I know who specializes in 5.0 
performance stuff said underdrive pulleys made a big difference.  

Thus:

1) please share your experience and knowledge on pulleys (or other good bolt on 
ideas)
2) what price will I pay? (hotter engine, dim headlights, dead battery?)

Thanks.  I'll save the responses to put in our FAQ-type file.

MTM 'Matt the Man' Walsh
mtm@walsh.dme.battelle.org
90 GT 5.0 5sp convert.

What he said was this.

----------
Posted by: MTM 'Matt the Man' Walsh 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 17 21:47:54 1992
Subject: Re:  Engine Hop Ups - Underdrive Pulleys
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Hi Matt,

I've been using these underdrive pulleys for about 2 years now, and I've
been pretty happy with them.  I bought them as a set of 3, but I think
you should get just two; one for the crankshaft and one for the waterpump.
The third one for the alternator will make it turn much too slowly, and
you will have battery problems.  However, using just the two will require
you to either use a shorter belt or adjust one of the accessory drive
brackets to take up the extra slack.

I noticed the slightest improvement in all-around performance and economy.
I also noticed that my engine seems to run cooler than before, according
to the temp guage.

The set I got was made of steel.  The water pump pulley was actually a
Motorsport part, chromed.  The other two were custom made.  I got them
from Texas Turbo for about $130.  I don't think their prices have
changed much.

have fun

eyc

----------
Posted by: chu@hanauma.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Eugene Chu)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 18 12:06:03 1992
Subject: Totally irrelevant note : TRW Performance Catalog
To: hotrod@dixie.com


 Gimme Gimme address! I didn't know they had a catalog, let alone sold 
direct.

 The 400-crank thing is pretty popular especially for the 350 -> 383
beef-up. I'm sure that plenty of folks with smogged 305 Camaros are
doing this swap as one way to push up torque without catching the
inspector's eye.

 Car Craft had an article pretty recently on a by-the-numbers (all catalog
stuff, numbers given, almost Betty Crocker) 350->383 project. Over 400 lb-ft
and about 400HP on the dyno. It impressed me that they basically did this
without any fancy parts or techniques.

----------
Posted by: jws@mlb.semi.harris.com (James W. Swonger)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 18 02:59:47 1992
Subject: RE: CALCULATING AIR FLOW
To: hotrod@dixie.com


reply to: jmiller@anubis.network.com (Jeff J. Miller)

-> In my case, the engine displacement is only 233 and it developes max
-> torque at 3200 rpm.  Red line is somewhere around 4000.  Plugging
-> these numbers indicates I would need something that would flow
-> (theoretically) 215cfm@3200rpm or 270cfm@4000.  So if I were to

 Gee, a straight-8 sounds nice...

 Four Webers are a viable alternative; they make venturis small enough
to use pairs of them on 750cc motorcycle engines.  Most Weber
installations are grossly overcarbureted by conventional standards.
1000 or more CFM on smallblock engines is typical.

 Another, less expensive alternative would be four SU side drafts.
They're available in constant-depression or variable venturi models, and
pairs of them worked fine on my 70 cubic inch Spitfire, right from the
factory.  They're easy to rebuild and not hard to find in the salvage
yards.  Eight of them would probably work just fine too.

 I have no idea what the port layout of your 8 is - 8 separate, evenly
spaced ports, 8 pairs of ports, 4 siamesed ports?  That, and your
manifold-building capability, should be the deciding factor in your
induction system.

 Of course, nobody says you have to stay with carbs...
                      

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 18 03:00:19 1992
Subject: Ford intake
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Hi all-
     I'd like to get some reccomendations/comments about 
which mail order companies seem to have the best prices/service for 
aftermarket parts.  I'm tring to get a 4bbl. 289/302 intake manifold, and
everyone's local prices (N.Y.) are about twice as expensive as anyone in
the performance mags.  
    Actually, does anyone have a used one they want to off load?  I'm
in Syracuse, or in New York (long island area).

   thanks,  
        Bob     --->  RAVALENT@rodan.acs.syr.edu

----------
Posted by: ""Robert A. Valentine"" 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 18 03:25:17 1992
Subject: RE:  GOOD NEWS AND BAD NE
To: hotrod@dixie.com


-> Speaking of the 350 "route", I have to tell you that the 283 is not
-> going to make *lots* of bottom end torque.  It is a short stroked
-> engine that will really spin the tach around but the upper rpm range
-> is where it is best suited to work.  You can build it for low end use
-> and "get by", but you will be much happier towing with the 350.  This
-> may be a help when deciding how much money to put in the 283.

 The 283 isn't *that* weak on torque - my 1965 Chevy 1-ton pickup has a
283 in it.  Well, actually a 302 (little known Chevy truck fact: "High
Torque" option 283 engines were 4 inch bore, not 3-7/8!).

 It is stone stock, with the original 2bbl carb, air cleaner, and dual
exhausts.  I've towed a 4000lb trailer through the mountains, a couple
of mobile homes, and it's hauled a cabover camper through the Smokies.

 If I ever decide to modify it, it will get a factory Q-jet intake (they
work fine on a 350 to around 4500), a 600CFM AFB, an HEI, and probably
ditch that giant airplane-propeller fan for an electric.

 The 283 will never beat a 350, of course, but in today's world a 4.7
liter is a big ol' motor, and a 1965 don' need no steenkeeng smog
controls, at least in this state.

 Totally irrelevant note:  I just got a new TRW Performance catalog in.

They carry a *standard inventory* forged piston for a 305 with a
cut-down 400 crank.  Is that weird or WHAT?
                                                                                                                       

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 18 12:29:57 1992
Subject: RE: Air flow and manifolds
To: hotrod@dixie.com

reply to: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)

>  Gee, a straight-8 sounds nice...

Grin.... nice and long, kinda like a jag only bigger.

>  Four Webers are a viable alternative; they make venturis small enough
> to use pairs of them on 750cc motorcycle engines.  Most Weber
> installations are grossly overcarbureted by conventional standards.
> 1000 or more CFM on smallblock engines is typical.

I do lots of motorcycles and happen to have a set of 4 32mm chromed carbs
from my last bike project.  At one point I was thinking of using them
to drive the car but I was concerned that they may not flow enough for
the car.  I looked around for specs on them (standard Yamaha part for
a 750 Maxim) but they weren't in my factory manual.
>
>  Another, less expensive alternative would be four SU side drafts.
> They're available in constant-depression or variable venturi models, and
> pairs of them worked fine on my 70 cubic inch Spitfire, right from the
> factory.  They're easy to rebuild and not hard to find in the salvage
> yards.  Eight of them would probably work just fine too.
> 
>  I have no idea what the port layout of your 8 is - 8 separate, evenly
> spaced ports, 8 pairs of ports, 4 siamesed ports?  That, and your
> manifold-building capability, should be the deciding factor in your
> induction system.

Thanks for the idea on the SU carbs.  I still am collecting information
on available carbs and costs so any ideas on where to look are always
welcome.

My current exhaust manifold has cylinders 1&8 with their own exhaust
and 2&3, 4&5, 6&7 sharing.  It looks something like this:


        | |     | | |     | | |     | | |      | |
        | |     |   |     |   |     |   |      | |
        \  \_____\   \____|   |____/   /______/  /
         \______________________________________/


The head has a cylinders 1&2, 3&4, 5&6, 7&8 paired for intake and it
results in a simpler looking intake mainfold that is something like:

             | |      | |      | |       | |
             | |      | |      | |       | |
             \  \_____\  \____/  /______/  /
              \___________________________/
                            ^
                          carb sits here


This layout seems to lend itself to the idea of having 4 carbs
hanging off the side of the engine.  The exhaust will prove more
interesting in the welding department though.  I hope to siamese
2&3, 4&5, 6&7 and eventually tie all of these together further
from the engine and into at least a 3" exhaust.  All theory at
the moment; I need to do more research.

BTW: Anybody ever welded up manifolds before?  It doesn't seem
like it will be too difficult but any suggestions before I start
would be greatly appreciated.

>  Of course, nobody says you have to stay with carbs...

Umm... fuel injectors are out because of cost :(  Actually,
if your refering to fuel systems that meter the gas, I tend
to interchange them freely with carburators so I hope thats
not too confusing.  I actually like the idea of metering but
I again need to do more research to understand any benefits
or drawbacks as compared to carbs.


-- 
Jeff Miller                 Network Systems Corporation
Internetwork Group          7600 Boone Avenue North
jmiller@network.com         Minneapolis MN 55428   (612)424-4888

----------
Posted by: jmiller@anubis.network.com (Jeff J. Miller)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 18 12:40:47 1992
Subject: Re: Calculating air flow
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Jeff

Heres what I would try. But I'm a little crazy.  Get yourself the fuel 
injection package off of your favorite small V8. build a manifold and 
line up the injectors. I don't think the injectors would care if they were
in line. :-)   The control system for the V8 should be able to give the engine
just what it needs. I think I would use a closed loop system.

Brian

----------
Posted by: brianpi@tekig6.pen.tek.com (Brian D Pimm)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 18 13:22:26 1992
Subject: seeking machine shop recommendations in BA
To: hotrod@dixie.com


Hi,  I am looking for a competent machine shop and/or cylinder head shop
in the S.F. bay area preferably close to berkeley...

I intend completely work over my 429 ford that I've been blabing about for
a while now.  

also, I've gotten a lot of differing responses about header selection...
Which headers should I use for low end torque applications ?   Tri-Y ?
how important would be the primary tube diameter, collector length, equal length
etc.  What about the HTC coatings?

So far the only header that I know will fit in franketruck is the block hugging
variety from Sanderson headers in South S.F.   They come with 1 5/8 inch
primaries and a 3 inch collector.  This seems small, since my Ford Performance
book reccomends like 2 1/8 inch primaries.  I know that for low end one would
select a smaller diameter than a balls to the wall motor but that much differnece?

I don't need any cat. converter or anything so it should be a simple job to 
make some... I guess.

again, thanks for any info.

eric.

----------
Posted by: hiss@fionn.lbl.gov (Eric Hiss)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 18 13:49:44 1992
Subject: Re: Calculating air flow
To: hotrod@dixie.com

In article  hotrod@dixie.com writes:
>
>OK.  I should have said more about my application.  I have been
>having an impossible time trying to figure out how to get more
>power out of the straight 8 in my `36.  I like the engine because
>there is just something about engines that are that long; problem
>is that nobody that I've talked to knows much about giving them
>more power.
>
>I current plans are to increase the flow through by adding more
>carbs (4 side draft webers might be nice), and by reducing back
>pressure in the 8 into 1 exhaust system.  This is not to be a
>drag or racing machine, just something that goes faster then
>it origianally did.
>
>My first ideas were to calculate the theoretical max and then get
>a carb setup that would handle this.  If I do go the route of having
>4 carbs I would try to get each carb of at least the size equal to
>1/4 of the total theoretical flow rate.

That's probably too much, see below.

>> To calculate mass flow, you need to know the pressure differential
>> across the carb and the carb throat area. In a mormally aspirated
>> engine, you have a maximum of 14.7 PSI on the inlet side. On the
>> intake manifold side you have anywhere from near atmospheric pressure
>> at WOT to around 5 PSI at idle. The lower the pressure differential,
>> the bigger the throat area has to be for a given flow. Most carbs
>> are designed to work with a pressure differential across the venturi
>> of 1 to 2 PSI. The throttle plate is used to adjust the amount of
>> manifold vacuum the bottom of the venturi sees in order to maintain
>> this differential at any given flow rate.  At WOT you reach flow
>> maximum when the differential across the venturi starts to go outside 
>> this range. Too much carb will drop the differential below 1 PSI and
>> not enough fuel will be pulled over and the engine will lean misfire.
>> Too little carb and the engine will richen out as the pressure differential
>> increases and the engine will stop accelerating because of flow 
>> restriction. (Just like the throttle wasn't completely open.)
>> The actual flow of a carb is difficult to calculate, requiring a
>> fluid dynamics model on a computer or actual engine testing.
>> 
>> The actual "demand" of the engine is also complex and not just
>> a simple matter of displacement. It depends on valve size and
>> timing, manifold design, chamber design, and exhaust scavenging 
>> among other things. In an unblown engine, displacement is an
>> unreachable *upper* bound on air consumption at any reasonable
>> performance RPM. Only at low idle is the displacement formula
>> reasonably accurate.
>
>Huh?  Your use of upper and reasonable confused me.  The formula
>indicates the maximum that a normally asperated engine could ever
>flow (right?).  Perhaps all your saying is that the formula might
>be acurate at say (displacement * 800)/3456 but not as the rpm
>raises from 800 to 6000.

Yes that's correct. The engine, at idle RPM has a valve open period
sufficient to fill the cylinders to near atmospheric pressure during
the intake stroke. As RPM increases, the flow restrictions begin to
limit total fill to less than atmospheric *in the time available* 
and increased residual exhaust gases remain in the cylinders. This 
means you can't achieve *displacement* flow into the engine. Air has 
*mass* and fluid friction, it takes time for it to navigate from the 
inlet to the cylinders. To give some benchmarks, a good racing engine 
can achieve 80% of displacement flow at peak power RPM while a conventional 
street engine will be lucky to get 40% fill at RPM limit.

Now comes the tricky part. Complete cylinder fill *could* occur at
low RPM, but only if the carb was at *WOT*. At normal part throttle,
fill is even *less* than at high RPM because of the throttle plate
*restriction*. Yet you can't really operate the engine at WOT at low 
RPM because the mass flow is too low to support the required *venturi 
velocity* to pull over enough fuel.  Thus you lean out and *bog*.

>In my case, the engine displacement is only 233 and it developes
>max torque at 3200 rpm.  Red line is somewhere around 4000.  Plugging
>these numbers indicates I would need something that would flow
>(theoretically) 215cfm@3200rpm or 270cfm@4000.  So if I were to
>find 4 carbs that flowed at 100 cfm I would probably be over-carbed
>and would result in a lean mixture at WOT?  This doesn't sound
>right.  Here I was concerned about flooding out the engine by
>dumping too much gas into it and now your telling me the back
>pressure will restrict the flow and lean out the engine.  Would
>you suggest that I might look for 1/2 that flow instead?

Well let's back track a little. The key to getting proper fuel pull over 
is the velocity of the air through the venturi. If the pressure differential
across the carb is too little because the carb throat area is too large, 
then air flow velocity will be low and insufficient fuel will be pulled 
from the float bowl, through the jet, and into the airstream. This
leads to WOT lean out and engine destruction.

Consider this, with a stopped engine, if you open the throttle,
ignoring the squirt from the acceleration pump, there is *no* fuel
flow from the carb. The faster you can suck air through the carb,
the more fuel is sucked over from the float bowl. The float bowl
is at atmospheric pressure while the venturi is below atmospheric
pressure due to the Bernouli effect. Therefore fuel is actually 
*pushed* over by atmospheric pressure into the partial vacuum in
the venturi. This vacuum should not be confused with the manifold
vacuum, though the manifold vacuum *causes* the mass flow that
*generates* venturi vacuum. Now in an over carbed engine, the
manifold vacuum is *insufficient* to cause enough mass flow *velocity*
through the venturi to pull enough fuel over for the proper
mixture. Thus lean out at WOT. On a conventional carb like the
Holley you need about 2 PSI differential of manifold pressure
to atmospheric pressure to generate enough mass flow to get enough
venturi vacuum to get enough fuel. If the opening is too big, you
can't get enough vacuum so you lean out. The carb *needs* to have
enough restriction to create that 2 PSI drop, or it won't work
properly.

When you go to multiple small carbs, you can keep the velocity higher
in the venturis with a smaller pressure differential because each
throat must support a smaller *mass* flow. You can still lean out at
WOT, but the system is much more responsive at part throttle. If,
in addition, the carbs are "variable venturi" like the SU, or have
an airflow "demand" butterfly like the Qjet secondaries, lean WOT 
can be avoided by the compensation built into these systems.

So, with a Qjet or SU system, it's ok to be over carbed because these
systems *adapt* their flow based on demand. Remember also that a 
conventional *advertised* 600 CFM carb isn't really capable of flowing 
600 CFM on a real engine because that rating is against a hard vacuum. 
On the engine the flow is going to be across a pressure differential
of only a couple of PSI. Indeed, the differential may be *greater* than 
2 PSI because the carb is going to act as a restriction on flow since 
it's not really a 600 CFM carb at a 2 PSI differential. This will make
the mixture too *rich* if the engine really *needs* 600 CFM.

Tuner's tip. If the engine is too rich at WOT, but fine in the mid-range,
you are *under carbed* for that engine. If the engine is too lean at
WOT, and boggy at mid-range, you are over carbed.

>> 
>> ... stuff deleted ...
>> 
>> 14 pounds of boost would allow the 600 CFM Holley to actually
>> flow 600 CFM and make it a good 6000 RPM carb. As you can see,
>> a boosted engine should have a *smaller* carb than an unblown
>> engine.
>
>Wish I had a boosted engine (I really like super chargers)!
>Since I don't, that would seem to indicate that I want a carb
>that is fairly wide but won't that increase the potential for
>back preasure that would create the lean condition you describe
>above?

Yeah, four compensating SUs would be great, even a (nominal) 780
CFM Qjet on the proper manifold would work. A big Holley Dominator,
or even a little 650 double pumper, would be bog city at mid-range 
and too lean at WOT. You could jet it up to be rich enough at WOT, 
set up the acceleration pump to cover the bog at mid-range, and it 
would make a great *drag* carb. But it's steady state mid-range would 
be terrible on the street. It would be way too rich at steady part 
throttle.

I'd be tempted to put 8 Mikuni motorcycle carbs on that engine. Closest
thing to fuel injection you could have. Actually, since syncing multiple
carbs is such a pain, just go ahead and inject the thing.

Gary

----------
Posted by: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 18 17:22:23 1992
Subject: SEEKING MACHINE SHOP RECO
To: hotrod@dixie.com


reply to: hiss@fionn.lbl.gov (Eric Hiss)

-> also, I've gotten a lot of differing responses about header
-> selection... Which headers should I use for low end torque
-> applications ?   Tri-Y ?

 Tri-Y headers are out of style.  Collector-types seem to have taken
over, probably because they're simpler to build.

 I've looked over a few installations where tri-Ys would have saved an
enormous amount of room in the engine compartment, but so far I've been
unable to find *any* information on tube sizing for tri-Ys.  Sizing info
for collector types is easy to find.

 If anyone has tube sizing info for tri-Ys, I'd love to get it.
                                                                                                                 

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 18 17:28:54 1992
Subject: Totally irrelevant note : TRW Performance Catalog
To: hotrod@dixie.com


reply to: jws@mlb.semi.harris.com (James W. Swonger)


-> Gimme Gimme address! I didn't know they had a catalog, let alone sold
-> direct.

 ASCII and ye shall receive:

        TRW Performance Components
        Aftermarket Division
        8001 E. Pleasant Valley
        Cleveland OH 44131-5582

 Ask for Catalog X-3009.  They wanted a $5 check before they'd send it,
but it was worth it.  Lots of detailed stuff like piston compression
heights and pin diameters, pushrod lengths, lots of oddball stroker
stuff, and some new stuff since my old (1980) catalog, like roller cams,
TRW racing harness, rack and pinion units, valves, and "stuff".


-> The 400-crank thing is pretty popular especially for the 350 -> 383
-> beef-up. I'm sure that plenty of folks with smogged 305 Camaros are
-> doing this swap as one way to push up torque without catching the
-> inspector's eye.

 Oh, yeah, the 383s have been popular for twenty years or so.  377s are
less common (350 crank in 400 block), and I once saw a "327 the hard
way" with a 3-inch 283 crank in a 400 block, using rods over 7 inches
long.

 Let's see, a 400 crank in a 305 would be (3.73)^2 x .7854 x 8 x 3.75,
= 327.8, hardly seems worth all the effort when you could simply slide
in an entire 350 short block and nobody'd be able to tell.  You could
buy the 350 for less than the price of buying a 400 crank, having it cut
at a specialty shop (common rebuilders usually won't do it), the special
(expensive) TRW pistons, a complete set of 400 rods, balancing, and -
nearly forgot! - the special 400 balancer and flexplate, since the 400
is externally balanced.

 Or better yet, simply slide a whole 400 in, for a swift 25%
displacement increase.  
                                                                                                                              

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 18 17:30:19 1992
Subject: RE: CALCULATING AIR FLOW
To: hotrod@dixie.com


reply to: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)

-> conventional *advertised* 600 CFM carb isn't really capable of
-> flowing 600 CFM on a real engine because that rating is against a
-> hard vacuum.

 Holley rates 4bbl carbs at 1.5 inches of mercury, 2bbl carbs at 3.0
inches of mercury.  I forget what Carter rates theirs at.  Weber,
Dell'Orto and SU don't even bother, they just rate them by venturi size.

 The ratings are from HPBooks "Holley Carbs and Manifolds" book.


-> I'd be tempted to put 8 Mikuni motorcycle carbs on that engine.
-> Closest thing to fuel injection you could have. Actually, since
-> syncing multiple carbs is such a pain, just go ahead and inject the
-> thing.

 The difficulty of syncing carbs is overstated.  It only takes a few
minutes as long as all the screws are easily accessible.  Of course,
he'd need two sets of pixie sticks to do eight Mikunis, but once they've
been set once, you seldom have to mess with them again.

 The way his ports are paired, it would be much more difficult to do
eight carbs than four.  Also, even used Mikunis are expensive, and the
jets and needles are more expensive than the SUs.

 Injection would be nice, but *that* tends to be expensive too.  Of
course, if expense is no object...
          

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 18 17:43:45 1992
Subject: RE:  GOOD NEWS AND BAD NEWS
To: hotrod@dixie.com


Hi Dave,

 >> The 283 isn't *that* weak on torque - my 1965 Chevy 1-ton pickup has a
 >>283 in it.  Well, actually a 302 (little known Chevy truck fact: "High
 >>Torque" option 283 engines were 4 inch bore, not 3-7/8!).
 >>
 >> It is stone stock, with the original 2bbl carb, air cleaner, and dual
 >>exhausts.  I've towed a 4000lb trailer through the mountains, a couple
 >>of mobile homes, and it's hauled a cabover camper through the Smokies.

What rear axle ratio do you have in your truck?  I would be willing to bet
it is pretty low (high numerically) geared.  If so, your little 283 was
probably spinning pretty fast "through the Smokies".  8^)  That is not what
I consider "bottom end" torque.

 >> Totally irrelevant note:  I just got a new TRW Performance catalog in.
 >>
 >>They carry a *standard inventory* forged piston for a 305 with a
 >>cut-down 400 crank.  Is that weird or WHAT?

I could be *very* interested in this.  If this stroke on this engine is even
close to the 400, it could be a REAL stump puller!  Bottom end torque.  What
is the final displacement of the combination of parts?  Do you know the
stroke dimension?  How about a phone number for requesting this catalog from
TRW?

 >>----------
 >>Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)

Thanks much!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 Don Robinson    (602) 752-6466                |  We don't quit playing because
 Internet:     vlsiphx!donr@asuvax.eas.asu.edu |  we grow old...   We grow old
 UUCP:         ...uunet!asuvax!vlsiphx!donr    |  because we quit playing.

----------
Posted by: vlsiphx!enforcer!donr@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Don Robinson)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 18 17:43:59 1992
Subject: RE: AIR FLOW AND MANIFOLD
To: hotrod@dixie.com


reply to: jmiller@anubis.network.com (Jeff J. Miller)

-> Thanks for the idea on the SU carbs.  I still am collecting
-> information on available carbs and costs so any ideas on where to
-> look are always welcome.

 SUs look alien, but they're very easy to work with, simple, and
reliable.  Hardly anything you'd expect of British engineering!  Needles
and jets are available from British car places at relatively reasonable
prices.  You'd have to go out of your way to mail order the stuff, of
course, but if you were *that* concerned about parts availability you
wouldn't be building a straight-8.  

 I did an SU conversion on a 250 Ford six, the one with the integral
head.  It was pretty much of a hack job - a machine shop charged my $50
to mill off part of the outside of the integral intake manifold, I did
some cleanup grinding through the exposed slot with my Dremel tool, had
a local welding shop rough-cut the three carb openings on a piece of 1/4
inch steel flat stock and had the plate welded to the head.  It would
have been a good idea to weld tabs on the head and bolt the plate on,
but I didn't want to have it remachined.  Anyway, I finished out the
carb holes with the Dremel, drilled and tapped for the SU bolt pattern,
and it was done.  I think I paid $30 each for the carbs.  I already had
a 1-into-4 throttle cable from an old Honda 750; I just tucked the extra
cable out of sight and ran the other three right to the original cable
brackets on the carbs.  Worked just fine.

 In your case, simple stubs made from plate and muffler pipe would
probably work just fine.  One carb for each pair of ports, and voila!


 For a proper tuned exhaust, you need your pipes paired to cylinders as
far apart in the firing order as possible.  For example, #s 1 and 4, 2
and 5, 3 and 6, etc.  These pairs of pipes can be joined from 20 to 30
inches from the manifold.  In your case, probably two quad collectors
and dual exhausts would work fine.  Since the engine doesn't fire
consecutively front to back, the pipes tend to look sort of jungly.

 There are various formulas available for figuring tube diameter, tube
length, and collector volume.  I think someone posted one earlier.
Since you're not building an all-out performance engine, your main
concerns are fitting everything in the engine compartment and
fabrication difficulties - the tubes should ideally be the same length,
but in practice they can be a few inches off without affecting much.
After all, look at the original manifold you just took off.  

 Don't chrome the header.  Chroming doesn't work well - motorcycles
normally run double wall pipe to make the chrome stick better.  There
are places that do ceramic coating, which looks pretty good.
                                                     

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 18 18:49:19 1992
Subject: Re: Air flow and manifolds 
To: hotrod@dixie.com

    reply to: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)

    >  Gee, a straight-8 sounds nice...

    Grin.... nice and long, kinda like a jag only bigger.

Hold that thought! :-)

    Thanks for the idea on the SU carbs.  I still am collecting information
    on available carbs and costs so any ideas on where to look are always
    welcome.

British-car wrecking yards for some of the pieces, but note that
SU carbs have some known bugs about wear (specifically, throttle
shafts and cylinder bores where the butterflies close) that can
make them more expensive to repair than to replace.  As for books,
there are a pile of them; start with the Haynes manual for SUs,
which I understand has a needle selection chart that will help
you pick out appropriate needles for your power and displacement.
If you need names and numbers for the parts suppliers, let me know.

    My current exhaust manifold has cylinders 1&8 with their own exhaust
    and 2&3, 4&5, 6&7 sharing.  It looks something like this:


            | |     | | |     | | |     | | |      | |
            | |     |   |     |   |     |   |      | |
            \  \_____\   \____|   |____/   /______/  /
             \______________________________________/

The interesting thing here is going to be timing the exhaust pulses
so that each pulse does the most good for the one immediately 
preceding it.  Hmmmm, do you want an 8-into-4-into-2-into-1 header
or a quad-Y header? :-)

Is this in fact the venerable Stovebolt engine?  If it is, I might
be able to help a LOT with the theory, since the Austin B Series 
engine (like the one I built in my race car) was derived largely 
from lessons learned when Austin built the Stovebolt under license
in the Thirties.

    The head has a cylinders 1&2, 3&4, 5&6, 7&8 paired for intake and it
    results in a simpler looking intake mainfold that is something like:

                 | |      | |      | |       | |
                 | |      | |      | |       | |
                 \  \_____\  \____/  /______/  /
                  \___________________________/
                                ^
                              carb sits here


    This layout seems to lend itself to the idea of having 4 carbs
    hanging off the side of the engine.  

Four SU carbs -- we know they work well with the kind of weird pulses
you get in siamesed ports.  Each carb is handling about 58 cubic inches,
so use 1.5" SUs -- type HS4.  You're in luck; those are the most common
SU carbs in the States, since they were used on the MGB of which there
were half a million made.  The B has a 110-cubic-inch engine and two HS4
carbs, so four HS4s ought to provide about the right flow for your 233.  
That carburetion setup can easily provide 1 bhp per cubic inch (two SUs
on my engine do that with no strain and with very tractable drivability
at around-the-paddock speeds).

There are some great tricks on tuning SUs, since they've been used on
racing cars since about 1909.  You can even pick up linkage pieces and
fabricate the rest; you could fabricate an SU linkage with a hacksaw
and a pencil.  The trick bits (cheap, see the wrecking yard) slide on 
and off the ends of a piece of rod, and you braze the lever for the cable. 
You'll need to come up with something that works the two end units
simultaneously, since the standard SU setup is in pairs.  

SUs give you a simple way to get a straight shot into each port, which 
is good for high intake velocity, and the variable venturi means you can 
pretty much ignore the question of bogging down on midrange.  The 
accelerator pump is a little indirect; strictly speaking, there is no
accelerator pump in an SU, so how it works is you control the rate at 
which the venturi size increases when you step on the gas.  If the 
venturi increases slowly, the air speed through the carb rises, the 
vacuum across the jet becomes harder, and more gas is squirted into the
airstream.  You control this with a combination of oil viscosity in the 
venturi damper (called a dashpot) and with spring tension.

Some questions will be whether to use a balance tube between the front
and rear pairs of carbs (or whether to hook a balance tube up to the
entire manifold; I don't think so, but pairs might be worth doing, I'll
look up the reasons if you're interested).  There are also a lot of
subtleties in the shape of the velocity stack on the mouth of an SU
carb, but again the stock MGB piece is a good one.  

    The exhaust will prove more
    interesting in the welding department though.  I hope to siamese
    2&3, 4&5, 6&7 and eventually tie all of these together further
    from the engine and into at least a 3" exhaust.  All theory at
    the moment; I need to do more research.

What's the firing order?  Ideally, you want to use the engine's
firing order to help each successive pulse through the exhaust
manifold push the preceding one out -- and also to reduce back
pressure in the manifold as the pulse goes into the collector.
If you time everything right you can help scavenge old gases out
the back of the engine to such a degree that you can help get
new gases in that much better.  Also, try running your valve
clearances (I presume this is an OHV engine?) a little loose and
see what that does to your perceived power.  Just a hunch, but if
this is the engine I think it is, you'll find that running, say,
0.015" clearance instead of 0.012" will have a slightly beneficial
effect on power.  I'll explain why if you're interested (I finally
figured it out myself; the answer should go into the dictionary
as the definition of "counterintuitive.")  If this is the Stovebolt,
then I know the technique works on some of the engines derived from
it, so it might work on the original.  Anyway, it's cheap to do 
and cheap to fix if it doesn't help (since running looser valves
will only give them more time on the head to sink heat, so it won't
burn them up).

    BTW: Anybody ever welded up manifolds before?  It doesn't seem
    like it will be too difficult but any suggestions before I start
    would be greatly appreciated.

Models, models, models.  Clay?  Drier hose?  Do you plan to bend the
tubing or weld up sections or both?  When it comes to welding, I'm 
a halfway decent cutter...

    I again need to do more research to understand any benefits
    or drawbacks as compared to carbs.

If you want to learn most of the good stuff about SU carbs, check
out Tuning the A Series Engine by David Vizard (a name that should
be familiar to small-block Chevy fans, since I know he's written
one or two books on that subject).  This gives some suggestions 
for increasing the airflow of a stock SU carb by up to 30%, if
you're willing to try some fairly exotic things.

Hell, maybe I'll try to make an eight-carb crossflow manifold and
slap four 1" SUs on each side of the 283... :-)

----------
Posted by: Scott Fisher 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 18 18:49:19 1992
Subject: Re: Air flow and manifolds 
To: hotrod@dixie.com

    reply to: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)

    >  Gee, a straight-8 sounds nice...

    Grin.... nice and long, kinda like a jag only bigger.

Hold that thought! :-)

    Thanks for the idea on the SU carbs.  I still am collecting information
    on available carbs and costs so any ideas on where to look are always
    welcome.

British-car wrecking yards for some of the pieces, but note that
SU carbs have some known bugs about wear (specifically, throttle
shafts and cylinder bores where the butterflies close) that can
make them more expensive to repair than to replace.  As for books,
there are a pile of them; start with the Haynes manual for SUs,
which I understand has a needle selection chart that will help
you pick out appropriate needles for your power and displacement.
If you need names and numbers for the parts suppliers, let me know.

    My current exhaust manifold has cylinders 1&8 with their own exhaust
    and 2&3, 4&5, 6&7 sharing.  It looks something like this:


            | |     | | |     | | |     | | |      | |
            | |     |   |     |   |     |   |      | |
            \  \_____\   \____|   |____/   /______/  /
             \______________________________________/

The interesting thing here is going to be timing the exhaust pulses
so that each pulse does the most good for the one immediately 
preceding it.  Hmmmm, do you want an 8-into-4-into-2-into-1 header
or a quad-Y header? :-)

Is this in fact the venerable Stovebolt engine?  If it is, I might
be able to help a LOT with the theory, since the Austin B Series 
engine (like the one I built in my race car) was derived largely 
from lessons learned when Austin built the Stovebolt under license
in the Thirties.

    The head has a cylinders 1&2, 3&4, 5&6, 7&8 paired for intake and it
    results in a simpler looking intake mainfold that is something like:

                 | |      | |      | |       | |
                 | |      | |      | |       | |
                 \  \_____\  \____/  /______/  /
                  \___________________________/
                                ^
                              carb sits here


    This layout seems to lend itself to the idea of having 4 carbs
    hanging off the side of the engine.  

Four SU carbs -- we know they work well with the kind of weird pulses
you get in siamesed ports.  Each carb is handling about 58 cubic inches,
so use 1.5" SUs -- type HS4.  You're in luck; those are the most common
SU carbs in the States, since they were used on the MGB of which there
were half a million made.  The B has a 110-cubic-inch engine and two HS4
carbs, so four HS4s ought to provide about the right flow for your 233.  
That carburetion setup can easily provide 1 bhp per cubic inch (two SUs
on my engine do that with no strain and with very tractable drivability
at around-the-paddock speeds).

There are some great tricks on tuning SUs, since they've been used on
racing cars since about 1909.  You can even pick up linkage pieces and
fabricate the rest; you could fabricate an SU linkage with a hacksaw
and a pencil.  The trick bits (cheap, see the wrecking yard) slide on 
and off the ends of a piece of rod, and you braze the lever for the cable. 
You'll need to come up with something that works the two end units
simultaneously, since the standard SU setup is in pairs.  

SUs give you a simple way to get a straight shot into each port, which 
is good for high intake velocity, and the variable venturi means you can 
pretty much ignore the question of bogging down on midrange.  The 
accelerator pump is a little indirect; strictly speaking, there is no
accelerator pump in an SU, so how it works is you control the rate at 
which the venturi size increases when you step on the gas.  If the 
venturi increases slowly, the air speed through the carb rises, the 
vacuum across the jet becomes harder, and more gas is squirted into the
airstream.  You control this with a combination of oil viscosity in the 
venturi damper (called a dashpot) and with spring tension.

Some questions will be whether to use a balance tube between the front
and rear pairs of carbs (or whether to hook a balance tube up to the
entire manifold; I don't think so, but pairs might be worth doing, I'll
look up the reasons if you're interested).  There are also a lot of
subtleties in the shape of the velocity stack on the mouth of an SU
carb, but again the stock MGB piece is a good one.  

    The exhaust will prove more
    interesting in the welding department though.  I hope to siamese
    2&3, 4&5, 6&7 and eventually tie all of these together further
    from the engine and into at least a 3" exhaust.  All theory at
    the moment; I need to do more research.

What's the firing order?  Ideally, you want to use the engine's
firing order to help each successive pulse through the exhaust
manifold push the preceding one out -- and also to reduce back
pressure in the manifold as the pulse goes into the collector.
If you time everything right you can help scavenge old gases out
the back of the engine to such a degree that you can help get
new gases in that much better.  Also, try running your valve
clearances (I presume this is an OHV engine?) a little loose and
see what that does to your perceived power.  Just a hunch, but if
this is the engine I think it is, you'll find that running, say,
0.015" clearance instead of 0.012" will have a slightly beneficial
effect on power.  I'll explain why if you're interested (I finally
figured it out myself; the answer should go into the dictionary
as the definition of "counterintuitive.")  If this is the Stovebolt,
then I know the technique works on some of the engines derived from
it, so it might work on the original.  Anyway, it's cheap to do 
and cheap to fix if it doesn't help (since running looser valves
will only give them more time on the head to sink heat, so it won't
burn them up).

    BTW: Anybody ever welded up manifolds before?  It doesn't seem
    like it will be too difficult but any suggestions before I start
    would be greatly appreciated.

Models, models, models.  Clay?  Drier hose?  Do you plan to bend the
tubing or weld up sections or both?  When it comes to welding, I'm 
a halfway decent cutter...

    I again need to do more research to understand any benefits
    or drawbacks as compared to carbs.

If you want to learn most of the good stuff about SU carbs, check
out Tuning the A Series Engine by David Vizard (a name that should
be familiar to small-block Chevy fans, since I know he's written
one or two books on that subject).  This gives some suggestions 
for increasing the airflow of a stock SU carb by up to 30%, if
you're willing to try some fairly exotic things.

Hell, maybe I'll try to make an eight-carb crossflow manifold and
slap four 1" SUs on each side of the 283... :-)

----------
Posted by: Scott Fisher 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 19 12:58:21 1992
Subject: RE:  GOOD NEWS AND BAD NEWS
To: hotrod@dixie.com

On the subject of alternator brackets, your best bet is to do some serious
junkyard searching.  I had a similar problem with the alternator
on my '68 Firebird (350 chevy, close-ratio 4sp, posi, FUN!)
The previous owner had rigged up some bracing, but it didn't work
real well, and it kept throwing the belt.  I went to the local yard,
and after an hour or so of peeking under hoods I found a GM bracket
setup that didn't bolt to the exhaust manifold.  (I think it may have
even been off an old chevelle, come to think of it)  Bolted right up,
and I never had a problem after.  Of course this was a yard that a) let
you take stuff off the car yourself, and b) hadn't stripped the engine
accessories on all their cars.  YMMV.

If you go this route, make sure that the pulleys all line up (= are in
the same plane) or you'll throw the fanbelt.  If you're not sure, it
isn't a bad idea to grab all the brackets and the balancer pulley from
the same car when you swap.

Pat

----------
Posted by: lotus!spice!patman@uunet.UU.NET (Pat Mancuso Walden)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 19 13:15:43 1992
Subject: Re: Calculating air flow
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Sorry guys, this may sound like a flame but Gary keeps saying that
carburtetor CFM ratings are measured against a hard vacuum and it
just isn't so.

Carb flow ratings are measured at a specified pressure difference
across the carb.  The spec varies depending upon whether it's a
1 or 2 barrel, or 3 or 4 barrel.  My memory is rusty but if I
remember correctly the spec for a 4 barrel is 0.4 inches of mercury.

In practice a typical 350 engine will need almost 600 CFM at 6000 RPM;
a well modified one will need more, probably about 700 CFM.  A big
block (427-454 range) will need almost 800 CFM unless it is extensively
modified in which case it will need more.

You can easily find out if your carb is too small or large.  Connect a
vacuum gauge that you can read while testing and accelerate at full
throttle up to your maximum desired RPM.  Read the vacuum at that RPM.
If it's around 0.5 inch then you are in good shape.  If it's less than
that then the carb is too big, and vice versa.

I hope that this brings some enlightenment to the carb selection process.

Bob Hale                                      ...!ucsd!btree!hale
...!btree!hale@ucsd.edu                       ...!ucsd!btree!hale@uunet.uu.net

----------
Posted by: btree!hale@ucsd.edu (Bob Hale)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 19 13:16:59 1992
Subject: RE: AIR FLOW AND MANIFOLD
To: hotrod@dixie.com


Dave and Scott, thanks for the info on the SUs and ideas on the
exhaust manifold.

The intake I was planning was to simply get a hunk of metal (maybe
only 3/8" instead of 1/4")that would fit across all ports.  Then
take that to a machine shop to have them drill holes for the ports
and mounting.  I would then weld straight tubes and mounting hardware
on it for the carbs I select.  I suppose I could do the same type
of thing for the exhausts but I want to see if I can somehow make
the exhaust easier to remove.  I might have to see if I can use a
compression type affair like motorcycles to attach the exaust mipes
to the new plate (manifold replacement).

>  There are various formulas available for figuring tube diameter, tube
> length, and collector volume.  I think someone posted one earlier.
> Since you're not building an all-out performance engine, your main
> concerns are fitting everything in the engine compartment and
> fabrication difficulties - the tubes should ideally be the same length,
> but in practice they can be a few inches off without affecting much.
> After all, look at the original manifold you just took off.  
> 
>  Don't chrome the header.  Chroming doesn't work well - motorcycles
> normally run double wall pipe to make the chrome stick better.  There
> are places that do ceramic coating, which looks pretty good.

&

> The interesting thing here is going to be timing the exhaust pulses
> so that each pulse does the most good for the one immediately 
> preceding it.  Hmmmm, do you want an 8-into-4-into-2-into-1 header
> or a quad-Y header? :-)

When I was designing the exhaust manifold I was looking more at
plumbing issues and ease of building and simply forgot about fireing
order.  I'll have to check it out and design collectors based on
that.  Hmmmm....  I wonder how pipes coming straight down the engine,
then taking a gradual curve down under the engine bay panels into
first four collectors, then into two collectors and on out to a
dual exhaust finished with ceramics would look :)


> Is this in fact the venerable Stovebolt engine?  If it is, I might
> be able to help a LOT with the theory, since the Austin B Series 
> engine (like the one I built in my race car) was derived largely 
> from lessons learned when Austin built the Stovebolt under license
> in the Thirties.

Sorry, I haven't heard that term before.  It is a stock buick engine
from '36.  It has a "valve in head" arrangement that I would consider
over head valves but I believe they are actuated by pushrods instead
of a chain.

Should I be checking out Austin engines now?  Perhaps there will
be more around for them then Buick.

> Four SU carbs -- we know they work well with the kind of weird pulses
> you get in siamesed ports.  Each carb is handling about 58 cubic inches,
> so use 1.5" SUs -- type HS4.  You're in luck; those are the most common
> SU carbs in the States, since they were used on the MGB of which there
> were half a million made.  The B has a 110-cubic-inch engine and two HS4
> carbs, so four HS4s ought to provide about the right flow for your 233.  
> That carburetion setup can easily provide 1 bhp per cubic inch (two SUs
> on my engine do that with no strain and with very tractable drivability
> at around-the-paddock speeds).

I'll look into it.  I think its time for a trip to the library or auto
store to find a manual on these things.

> Some questions will be whether to use a balance tube between the front
> and rear pairs of carbs (or whether to hook a balance tube up to the
> entire manifold; I don't think so, but pairs might be worth doing, I'll
> look up the reasons if you're interested).  There are also a lot of
> subtleties in the shape of the velocity stack on the mouth of an SU
> carb, but again the stock MGB piece is a good one.  

I happen to have a 4 stick carbstix and I've balanced motorcycle carbs
lots over the years.  I might be ignorant but it doesn't seem like this
should be a whole lot more difficult.  My building partner (we built
his '38 ford delivery over the last couple years) kind of shakes his
head weird when I talk like this but we gotta learn sometime!

> ..............................  Also, try running your valve
> clearances (I presume this is an OHV engine?) a little loose and
> see what that does to your perceived power.  Just a hunch, but if
> this is the engine I think it is, you'll find that running, say,
> 0.015" clearance instead of 0.012" will have a slightly beneficial
> effect on power.  I'll explain why if you're interested (I finally
> figured it out myself; the answer should go into the dictionary
> as the definition of "counterintuitive.")  If this is the Stovebolt,
> then I know the technique works on some of the engines derived from
> it, so it might work on the original.

Thanks for the tip.  I assume you are referring to the exhaust valves
only.

>> BTW: Anybody ever welded up manifolds before?  It doesn't seem
>> like it will be too difficult but any suggestions before I start
>> would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> Models, models, models.  Clay?  Drier hose?  Do you plan to bend the
> tubing or weld up sections or both?  When it comes to welding, I'm 
> a halfway decent cutter...

See above.  I was planning on getting the tube bent somehow but I
haven't figured that out yet.  One idea was to go to the muffler
shops and have them bend some stuff up for me and then take it home
and weld it all together.  Stainless would be nice but that would
poss even more problems in bending.  I think I'll have to stick
with steel and coat it.  I also gave brief consideration to trying
out casting but I think it would be easier to screw up.

> If you want to learn most of the good stuff about SU carbs, check
> out Tuning the A Series Engine by David Vizard (a name that should
> be familiar to small-block Chevy fans, since I know he's written
> one or two books on that subject).  This gives some suggestions 
> for increasing the airflow of a stock SU carb by up to 30%, if
> you're willing to try some fairly exotic things.

Thanks for another tip.  Back to the library/auto shop.

-- 
Jeff Miller                 Network Systems Corporation
Internetwork Group          7600 Boone Avenue North
jmiller@network.com         Minneapolis MN 55428   (612)424-4888

----------
Posted by: jmiller@anubis.network.com (Jeff J. Miller)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 19 13:04:26 1992
Subject: Re: CARB ADAPTER
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>  Racing Beat wants to sell me an entire intake manifold.  I don't want
> an entire intake manifold.  This is just her transportation back and
> forth to work and some light autocross, nothing major.

I have the Racing Beat intake header and DelLorto carb setup with velocity
stacks and big air cleaner, I really like it. It took some fiddling to get
it balanced right (the ignition timing has to be adjusted to compensate)
but since the setup has been right it's the most tractable and powerful
bolt-on unit I've used.


-- 
---
John R. Lupien
lupienj@hpwarq.hp.com

----------
Posted by: lupienj@hpwarq.wal.hp.com (John Lupien)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 19 13:35:26 1992
Subject: Re: AMX
To: hotrod@dixie.com

I've been asked to expand a little on my Jav/AMX so here we go.

	The block is a nice and square 401 bored .030" . It has a  
forged steel crank which has been drilled, chamfered and journals  
polished. The rods are stock AMC items with bronze bushings at the  
small end. They have been shot-peened. Pistons are Venolia  floaters  
with a compression ratio of 12:1 which are soon going to be 10:1  
(time to shave'em) so I can drive it daily without the wory of  
finding good gas. A complete balance (again) will follow. The bottom  
end is capped off with a Milodon 7qt. pan and extended pickup. Stock  
oil pump is in place and has worked just fine. Anyone know of a  
windage tray for this application???? I can't find one. 


	On top I have the factory heads ported and matched to an Offy  
dual quad manifold running two 390cfm Holley 4150's mounted sideways,  
or an Edelbrock Torker with an as of yet unpurchased carb.  The valve  
train consists of a Crane solid lifter cam .555 lift int. and exh.  
and the duration is in the 270 degree area (can't remember off the  
top of my head). I also have Crane roller rockers, triple springs and  
Smith Bros. hardened tip pushrods to finish it off. 


	From the engine back, it gets weird. Although I haven't told  
you how weird it was building a 401 in the first place. I decided to  
toss the automatic my car came with in favor of a four speed. The  
problem was finding one, I couldn't. So I picked up a B-W Super T-10  
which came out of a 1974 vette and started hacking. I first had to  
have my Lakewood blowshield fitted with an internal steel ring in the  
hole the trand fits into (forget what the hole is called). This is  
because the collar on the T-10 is smaller than what was on an  
original AMC 4-speed. Next was choosing a clutch. I went with a  
McCloud B&B long style for a  secong generation camaro which works  
well with the Vette throwout bearing and the Camaro clutch fork which  
I had to fit to my blowshield by cutting the fork window opening a  
little. I also had to create my own pivot for the fork out of an AMC  
and Camaro combination (cut and weld). Next is the 70's Chevelle  
4-speed "beefy" fork linkage which hooked up to my stock chutch Z-bar  
with only a little bending. A Hurst comp plus shifter made for a mid  
70's camaro and a custom made driveshaft and BINGO! I'm done. Kids,  
don't EVER try this at home.

	A major lesson was learned from all of this. Considering all  
of the time, money and aggravation used up by myself and others on  
this project, I will build a Chevy next time. Parts are plentiful and  
a whole lot cheaper than AMC stuff. This car which I have had since I  
was 18 (going on 12 years) is a love-hate relationship I can't shake.  
I will love it a lot more when it is finished again for the fourth  
time. Sometime when I have the time to write a novel. I will tell you  
all about the engine build............

				Scott

----------
Posted by: scol@scottsdale.az.stratus.com (Scott Colbath)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 19 13:45:16 1992
Subject: Re: SEEKING MACHINE SHOP RECO
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Eric and Dave have been discussing header selection and design.  For Eric's
application the tri-Y type is far superior.  I replaced a set of Hooker
4-into-1 headers with a set of Doug Thorley tri-Ys and found a big boost
in mid-RPM torque.  It didn't seem to hurt 0-60 times either so it can't
be too bad at the top end.

BTW, Doug Thorley headers are made out of thicker and more durable
materials than any other brand that I've seen.  The Hookers that were
replaced were replaced because they were developing all kinds of cracks
and leaks and warps and gasket sealing problems.  The Doug Thorleys
haven't shown any of those problems (or any other problems) in 3 years.

In general the tri-Y head pipes should be the same diameter as you would
use in a 4-into-1 system.  1.625 inches is good for a 350 size engine
while 1.875 to 2.0 is good for a big block.  The middle pipe diameter should
be about halfway between the head pipe diameter and the collector
diameter.  You really don't have a choice here (unless you build your
own) as the header manufacturer has already worked out the sizing.
For a small block the collector should be about 2.5 to 2.75 inches
while a big block should be 3 to 3.5 inches.  You may not be able to
handle pipes this large under the chassis; if not, just use the
biggest that will fit and don't worry too much about the restriction
because it isn't that bad.  All of my remarks about sizing apply to
moderate streetable applications; if you have a race-only engine then
you will need larger sizes.

Personally, I like the Chrysler Hemi mufflers.  They don't make much
noise under part throttle conditions but their restriction is low so
they don't build up much back pressure.  If you have a real fire-breather
engine then you might want to split each collector into two of these
mufflers on each side.

Bob Hale                                      ...!ucsd!btree!hale
...!btree!hale@ucsd.edu                       ...!ucsd!btree!hale@uunet.uu.net

----------
Posted by: btree!hale@ucsd.edu (Bob Hale)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 19 14:30:08 1992
Subject: CARB ADAPTER
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>  I need to find a carb adapter for my wife's RX7.

I seem to remember something weird about replacing RX7 carbs, like
they need to be drilled/adapted to allow oil injection into the
chambers (to keep the rotor seals lubed).  Something to consider.

I think AUTO-X mag did an article once on someone who put the Holley
fuel injection (do you hate just the Holley carbs, or all Holley's :-)
) on an RX7.  If you're interested I can try to look for the article.

--
Joseph P. Cernada	AIT, Inc.
914/347-6860		40 Saw Mill River Road
cernada@ait.com		Hawthorne, New York 10532

----------
Posted by: cernada@ait.com (Joseph P. Cernada)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 19 19:48:03 1992
Subject: RE: carb adaptor
To: hotrod@dixie.com


 I recall seeing an ad for a company called "Advanced Adapters" in the 
back of one of the hotrod mags.  I think they are in the Midwest.  
As memory serves, they make adaptors for everything from transmissions to
steering colums to carbs.  
 As for oil injection, I think it was a seperate unit that injected oil
DIRECTLY into the intake, not under the carb.  Although, I'm sure the 
owner knows best 8^).

Carter rules over Holly; no fuel bowl leaks, change mixture rods without 
dissasemby, and the small passages NEVER seem to clog.  The one I'm using
is about 10 years old, 60,000+ miles, and have yet to have to rebuild it.

  --> Bob

----------
Posted by: ""Robert A. Valentine"" 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 19 22:40:50 1992
Subject: CARB ADAPTER
To: hotrod@dixie.com


reply to: cernada@shadow.ait.com (Joseph P. Cernada)

-> I seem to remember something weird about replacing RX7 carbs, like
-> they need to be drilled/adapted to allow oil injection into the
-> chambers (to keep the rotor seals lubed).  Something to consider.

 There's nothing troublesome with that.  The only problem is rigging up
the lever arm for the oil pump control.

-> I think AUTO-X mag did an article once on someone who put the Holley
-> fuel injection (do you hate just the Holley carbs, or all Holley's
-> :-) ) on an RX7.  If you're interested I can try to look for the
-> article.

 Heck, if I had a thousand bucks I'd toss the rotary and drop in a V6.
                                                                              

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar 20 03:51:33 1992
Subject: RE: CARB ADAPTOR
To: hotrod@dixie.com


-> As for oil injection, I think it was a seperate unit that injected
-> oil DIRECTLY into the intake, not under the carb.  Although, I'm sure
-> the owner knows best 8^).

 Actually, there's an oil control valve on the front of the engine.
There are two plastic tubes which run up to the carburetor; they plug to
passages which run right to the venturis on the primary side.  There's
also a metering control rod which snakes up and around the engine and
back to a lever on the throttle shaft.  It's a pretty Rube Goldberg
arrangement.

 I'll probably be able to find an air bleed somewhere on the carb; if
not it's a simple task to drill an appropriate hole.  The rod is a
little more difficult.  If it gets to be TOO much hassle, I'll just toss
it all and have her dump X amount of oil into the tank per gallon, just
like we used to do with the old lawnmower.  Sure it's a hassle, but for
the $750 price of a new Mazda carb we can put up with some hassle.

 The oil injection setup on the RX is pretty by-guess-and-by-gosh
anyway.  Supposedly it's to keep the tip seals lubed.  In actuality,
they must not take much oil - we've (ahem) let the previous engine slide
over 10,000 miles between oil changes and the thing had used less than
half a quart of oil.  The previous engine died catastrophically at
160,000 miles with water in the oil.
                                            

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 18 17:43:59 1992
Subject: RE: AIR FLOW AND MANIFOLD
To: hotrod@dixie.com


reply to: jmiller@anubis.network.com (Jeff J. Miller)

-> Thanks for the idea on the SU carbs.  I still am collecting
-> information on available carbs and costs so any ideas on where to
-> look are always welcome.

 SUs look alien, but they're very easy to work with, simple, and
reliable.  Hardly anything you'd expect of British engineering!  Needles
and jets are available from British car places at relatively reasonable
prices.  You'd have to go out of your way to mail order the stuff, of
course, but if you were *that* concerned about parts availability you
wouldn't be building a straight-8.  

 I did an SU conversion on a 250 Ford six, the one with the integral
head.  It was pretty much of a hack job - a machine shop charged my $50
to mill off part of the outside of the integral intake manifold, I did
some cleanup grinding through the exposed slot with my Dremel tool, had
a local welding shop rough-cut the three carb openings on a piece of 1/4
inch steel flat stock and had the plate welded to the head.  It would
have been a good idea to weld tabs on the head and bolt the plate on,
but I didn't want to have it remachined.  Anyway, I finished out the
carb holes with the Dremel, drilled and tapped for the SU bolt pattern,
and it was done.  I think I paid $30 each for the carbs.  I already had
a 1-into-4 throttle cable from an old Honda 750; I just tucked the extra
cable out of sight and ran the other three right to the original cable
brackets on the carbs.  Worked just fine.

 In your case, simple stubs made from plate and muffler pipe would
probably work just fine.  One carb for each pair of ports, and voila!


 For a proper tuned exhaust, you need your pipes paired to cylinders as
far apart in the firing order as possible.  For example, #s 1 and 4, 2
and 5, 3 and 6, etc.  These pairs of pipes can be joined from 20 to 30
inches from the manifold.  In your case, probably two quad collectors
and dual exhausts would work fine.  Since the engine doesn't fire
consecutively front to back, the pipes tend to look sort of jungly.

 There are various formulas available for figuring tube diameter, tube
length, and collector volume.  I think someone posted one earlier.
Since you're not building an all-out performance engine, your main
concerns are fitting everything in the engine compartment and
fabrication difficulties - the tubes should ideally be the same length,
but in practice they can be a few inches off without affecting much.
After all, look at the original manifold you just took off.  

 Don't chrome the header.  Chroming doesn't work well - motorcycles
normally run double wall pipe to make the chrome stick better.  There
are places that do ceramic coating, which looks pretty good.
                                                     

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar 20 11:35:21 1992
Subject: Re: Rhodes lifters, once again revisited.
To: hotrod@dixie.com


I talked about the Rhodes lifters a few weeks ago and since then several
people have requested a copy of the article the appeared in Popular Hot
Rodding mag (May 1983), so here it is. Sorry if this subject has been
beat to death, if not interested "rm" it!

________________________________________________________________________________
SCHOLARLY  LIFTERS,  By Cam Benty.

Rhodes lifters are not new, in fact they have been around for over 20
years. They increase torque and horse power in a dramatic way and
improve idle vacuum for improved streetability.

Rhodes lifters, invented by Jack Rhodes in the mid 60's are hydraulic
lifters, machined very differently than stock lifters. At idle the
Rhodes lifters tend to bleed off more oil, lessoning the overall lift of
the camshaft. As engine rpm increases however, the oil is retained by
the lifter, restoring the full duration and lift of the camshaft.
According to Rhodes, his lifter is fully pumped up at 3500rpm and stays
pumped up throughout the rpm range of most camshafts. In fact Rhodes
claims that his lifters are capable of 9500rpm with no pump-down as with
stock hydraulic lifters.  (ya right, this I find hard to believe)

One very attractive feature of the Rhodes lifters is the increase of
engine vacuum at idle. This allows the high performance engine builder
to install a more radical camshaft with the increased vacuum, making the
engine more drivable on the street without losing the high rpm
performance end of the camshaft. In fact the lifters will increase the
upper rpm limit of the camshaft.

Rhodes lifters are installed similarly to most stock lifters and adjusted
in the normal manner. It should be noted that due to the slow bleed down
characteristics of the Rhodes lifters, the valve closes faster causing
the rocker arm to lose contact with the valve retainer for an instant
creating a clicking similar to mechanical lifter. The noise is very
apparent at idle, however it lessens dramatically as engine rpm is
increased and the lifter fills with oil again.

To put the lifters to the test we installed them in a test engine built
by Mike Kuhl Racing Engines. The the engine was a 350cid Chevy bored 30
over with 7.9 to 1 compression TRW turbo pistons and a Schinder camshaft
featuring 310-degrees duration and 0.485 inch lift. A 600cfm carb,
Edelbrock street master intake manifold, Mallory ignition, and AC spark
plugs (R-43t) were also used.

As noted by the chart, both torque and  horsepower were improved
dramatically by the installation of the Rhodes lifters. No other changes
to the engine were made except for the lifter swap. Overall, the engine
torque and horsepower increased, however the most dramatic improvement
cam at the 6000rpm mark. The Rhodes lifters added 25 foot lbs of torque
and over 25 horsepower-the improvement is due to the fact that most
stock hydraulic lifters tend to bleed down above 5500rpm lessening the
duration and lift of the camshaft, while the Rhodes lifters stayed full
of oil.
                                            ( At sea level)
                                              /          \
         STOCK      RHODES      STOCK      RHODES      STOCK     RHODES
       OBSERVED    OBSERVED   CORRECTED   CORRECTED   OBSERVED  OBSERVED
 RPM      HP          HP          HP         HP        TORQUE    TORQUE
_____________________________________________________________________________

3000    171.42      177.14      181.84      185.74      300        310
3500    203.33      210.00      215.69      220.19      305        315
4000    236.19      243.80      250.55      255.63      310        320
4500    252.85      257.14      264.33      268.22      295        300
5000    261.90      276.19      277.87      289.60      275        290
5500    256.66      267.14      273.83      280.11      245        255
6000    222.85      251.42      237.76      263.62      195        220
_____________________________________________________________________________

Thats it in all its' glory!
  _________________________________   _____________________________________
 /         _______________         \ /  OLD CHEVYS NEVER DIE, THEY JUST GO \
|        //~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\\  |     |             R A C I N G !!            |
|      / /_________________\ \|     |   OLD JAPANESE CARS NEVER DIE, THEY   |
|  -------------------------------  |    JUST TURN BACK INTO BEER CANS!!    |
|  / O O O -----Chevy----- O O O \  |_______________________________________|
| (_______________________________) | MARK JENSEN           (503) 627-3115  |
| (_______________________________) | TEKTRONIX METROLOGY LAB.              |
|  |\ _________________________ /|  | BEAVERTON, OREGON        MS. 39-732   | 
|  |      |`V'  `---'  `V'|      |  |        markj@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM       |
 \_|______|_______________|______|_/ \_____________________________________/

----------
Posted by: markj@tekig5.pen.tek.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar 20 22:52:29 1992
Subject: Re: RE: carb adaptor
To: hotrod@dixie.com

With regard to Advance Adapters, they are infact located in Paso Robos,Ca
and here is their address: ADVANCE ADAPTERS, 1645 Commerce Way,P.O.Box
247, Paso Robles,Ca 93477 805 238-7000.  They manufacture 4wd engine and transmission
 conversions, overdrives and underdrives for all sorts of vehicles.  Hope 
this helps.
Mike Brattland     Brattlan@nprdc.navy.mil

----------
Posted by: brattlan@nprdc.navy.mil (CDR Michael Brattland)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Fri Mar 20 22:52:33 1992
Subject: Re: RE: carb adaptor
To: hotrod@dixie.com

With regard to Advance Adapters, they are infact located in Paso Robos,Ca
and here is their address: ADVANCE ADAPTERS, 1645 Commerce Way,P.O.Box
247, Paso Robles,Ca 93477 805 238-7000.  They manufacture 4wd engine and transmission
 conversions, overdrives and underdrives for all sorts of vehicles.  Hope 
this helps.
Mike Brattland     Brattlan@nprdc.navy.mil

----------
Posted by: brattlan@nprdc.navy.mil (CDR Michael Brattland)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Sat Mar 21 15:26:44 1992
Subject: Buick stuff (what else)
To: hotrod@dixie.com


OK, so I'm sitting here doing some catalog shopping for rebuild++ parts
for the Buick 430, and getting somewhat less enthused. Seems that nobody
makes forged pistons, for example. Being as 3 out of 8 were seriously
cracked I think I would like some better slugs this time around. But since
the engine was only made for 3 years, it's not that important to make
forged pistons for.

Now, all the guts except for the bore are identical to the 455. One thing
I would like to know is, is it practical to bore out 0.125" thereby
getting basically a virgin 455 bore? I can't find any spec for casting
cylinder wall thickness (nom or min) in my Buick shop manual. Anybody
have either the numbers, a place to get the numbers, or a rule of
thumb for minimum wall thickness @ 10.25:1 compression, 400+ HP?

If that's no go then I guess I end up having a shop mill down some
455 forged pistons and regroove. But 455 stuff is cheaper somewhat and
more available, so if I can get up to the 4.3125" bore and still have
enough room for the .030" grind over that, then I'd be happier.

----------
Posted by: jws@mlb.semi.harris.com (James W. Swonger)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Sat Mar 21 19:24:14 1992
Subject: Re: Buick stuff (what else)
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>OK, so I'm sitting here doing some catalog shopping for rebuild++ parts
>for the Buick 430, and getting somewhat less enthused. Seems that nobody
>makes forged pistons, for example. Being as 3 out of 8 were seriously
>cracked I think I would like some better slugs this time around. But since
>the engine was only made for 3 years, it's not that important to make
>forged pistons for.

Call Weisco pistons.  They'll make 'em to order for about $70 a slug.
They'll need an old piston to go by.  I'll dig up a number if you can't
find it.

>Now, all the guts except for the bore are identical to the 455. One thing
>I would like to know is, is it practical to bore out 0.125" thereby
>getting basically a virgin 455 bore? 

I'd doubt the wall being even that thick much less thick enough to remove
that much metal.

>If that's no go then I guess I end up having a shop mill down some
>455 forged pistons and regroove. 

Won't work unless the shop has a machine that can cam-grind and taper
the pistons properly.

John

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Sat Mar 21 21:26:11 1992
Subject: Buick Stuff
To: hotrod@dixie.com


A Buick engine should not be overbored more than .060".
I have cast pistons in my 455, and I am very happy with them- 
unless you have your heart really set on forged, I dont think it will make
that much of a difference.

----------
Posted by: ghost of Bob Cunningham 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 23 01:49:07 1992
Subject: Re:  Turbo...
To: hotrod@dixie.com

> >>patience, the job is easy.  Assuming, of course, that your engine 
> >>falls in the specificied displacement range.  Otherwise it would be a 
> >>bitch.
>
>I assumed that if my engine was larger than the specificied displacement range
>that I was out of luck.  I imagine these turbos would be too small to "pump"
>enough volume for a 5.0 liter V8.  Not so??  Just how much of "a bitch" are
>you talking about?  I sure like the idea of turbo power!  8^)


No, you'd simply use two turbos.  A 5.0 would be a perfect application 
for a pair of these blowers.  Less rotational inertia than one large
blower which means better throttle response.  Plumbing is simplified 
too.

The "bitch" I was referring to involves trying to do this job without
adequate tools.  Or doing the job without adequate patience :-)
This is not a good job for someone to do to a daily transportation 
vehicle unless he has a spare.  The first from-scratch turbo installation
I did took several weeks of after-work work.  Much of it was taken 
chasing parts.  I had a spare engine and a front chassis clip so
I did not have to take my car out of service until time to drop the
motor in.  Tuning took a bit more time, a period I spent driving 
a spare car.  Having a chassis dyno available for even an hour (rent one
if you can) saves literally days of cut'n'try.

If you can deal with these problems, go for it.  IT is very satisfying to
pop the hood and show someone YOUR work as opposed to a collection of
bolted-on parts.  Even more so when the occasion is someone wanting to 
see what just beat 'em :-)

John

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Sun Mar 22 18:24:17 1992
Subject: Re: Rhodes lifters, once again revisited.
To: hotrod@dixie.com


In article , hotrod%dixie.com@mathcs.emory.edu (The Hotrod List) writes:
< 
< I talked about the Rhodes lifters a few weeks ago and since then several
< people have requested a copy of the article the appeared in Popular Hot
< Rodding mag (May 1983), so here it is. Sorry if this subject has been
< beat to death, if not interested "rm" it!
< 
< 
< engine more drivable on the street without losing the high rpm
< performance end of the camshaft. In fact the lifters will increase the
< upper rpm limit of the camshaft.

I read a book called "How to Build Horsepower" In it the author says that
Rhodes lifters prevent the cam from ever producing it's maximum power.
Your chart has me wondering whether or not the above info. is correct,
any opinions?

< Thats it in all its' glory!
<   _________________________________   _____________________________________
<  /         _______________         \ /  OLD CHEVYS NEVER DIE, THEY JUST GO \
< |        //~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\\  |     |             R A C I N G !!            |
< |      / /_________________\ \|     |   OLD JAPANESE CARS NEVER DIE, THEY   |
< |  -------------------------------  |    JUST TURN BACK INTO BEER CANS!!    |
< |  / O O O -----Chevy----- O O O \  |_______________________________________|
< | (_______________________________) | MARK JENSEN           (503) 627-3115  |
< | (_______________________________) | TEKTRONIX METROLOGY LAB.              |
< |  |\ _________________________ /|  | BEAVERTON, OREGON        MS. 39-732   | 
< |  |      |`V'  `---'  `V'|      |  |        markj@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM       |
<  \_|______|_______________|______|_/ \_____________________________________/
< 
< ----------
< Posted by: markj@tekig5.pen.tek.com

Great sign Mark!!


                       David Gunsul 
                       dcg@mogun.uucp
                       

                       The information contained in the post above
                       may be unsuitable for younger or more sensitive
                       readers. This post was written as it happened,
                       nothing was reenacted.

----------
Posted by: mgwhiz!mogun!dcg@mgweed.att.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 23 09:47:10 1992
Subject: Re: Engine Hop Ups - Underdrive Pulleys
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>
>In article , hotrod%dixie.com@mathcs.emory.edu (The 
>Hotrod List) writes:
>> 
>> The more I look into it, it seems like changing ONE part of my motor (i.e. 
>the 
>> GT 40 intake or a new exhaust system) won't do anything by itself.  You need 
>to 
>> do the whole enchilada to increase flow throughout.
>
>I'm not sure but wouldn't you get more power from the manifold or exhaust
>than you would from changing to underdrive pulleys?
>

I'm saying that I won;t get much power out of the manifold or exhaust 
SEPARATELY, but that the parasitic underdrive pulleys can be done alone.


MTM 'Matt the Man' Walsh
mtm@walsh.dme.battelle.org
90 GT 5.0 5sp convert.

What he said was this.

----------
Posted by: MTM 'Matt the Man' Walsh 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 23 16:50:04 1992
Subject: RE: POWER CHIP COMPARISON
To: hotrod@dixie.com


reply to: "Oliver Scholz (Turo - Backstage)"

-> I have a GM with a Chevy V6 engine, but the ECM is Pontiac. I don't
-> know if the engine has a know sensor. Do I need higher octane fuel
-> then or is it recommended? I know a friend who put a Hypertech in his
-> car and said the engine an much better after the swap. Just his
-> imagination?

 GM is pretty much GM as far as injection goes.  (US GM, of course)
Most of them use the knock sensor, so your engine probably does too.
I'd be doubtful if your friend's car *really* ran any better with the
Hypertech chip - they probably fiddle around with the idle map a bit to
make the chip "feel" different, but the GM block-learn is quite capable
of handling most modifications.  Once you get beyond the block-learn's
capability, you don't need a chip, you need to change sensors.

-> >Hypertech chip at the drag strip.  We picked up nearly a tenth with

> I'm sorry, I'm German, so what's a drag strip?

 Drag strip: timed acceleration runs of approximately 425 meters.


-> So is swapping chips worth the effort? I think I read that it doesn't
-> change the engine's performance under normal driving conditions, just
-> under full throttle (to give you maximum acceleration). And I
-> couldn't reach into

 I think the chips are a crock.  We've accumulated a lot of information
on how the engine management on the Corvette works, and most GM units
are similar.  Under part throttle you're running off a preprogrammed
spark advance and fuel delivery curve.  There are many of these
preprogrammed curves in the computer; if the engine is modified to the
point none of them quite fit, the computer "learns" the appropriate
parameters to set the engine back to proper emissions/economy.  Under
full throttle, the Corvette:

        abandons the map to run straight speed/density
        sets the fuel delivery to the rich side of maximum power
        slams the spark advance all the way forward, using the knock
                sensor to keep from pinging itself to death
        turns off the air conditioner
        turns off EGR
        turns off the electric radiator fans (?) (don't know why)
        cuts the alternator out of the circuit
        closes off all vacuum taps (fuel evaporation canister, heater
                controls, etc)

 It's hard to imagine what else they could do.
                                                                     

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 23 16:55:29 1992
Subject: BUICK STUFF (WHAT ELSE)
To: hotrod@dixie.com


reply to: jws@mlb.semi.harris.com (James W. Swonger)

-> for the Buick 430, and getting somewhat less enthused. Seems that
-> nobody makes forged pistons, for example.

 No problem.  Arias, Venolia, Ross, or Diamond would be happy to make
you a set.  Last month I priced a set of stroker forgings from Arias,
lots of custom work, with rings and pins for $600.


-> Now, all the guts except for the bore are identical to the 455. One
-> thing I would like to know is, is it practical to bore out 0.125"
-> thereby getting basically a virgin 455 bore?

 You could reach into the water jacket with a pair of calipers and
measure the thickness of the walls.  If you get down to less than 1/8
inch of wall, you're asking for trouble.

 What's the bore, pin height, and pin diameter on a 430?  We might be
able to match up a piston from a more common engine.  My wife's 283
Chevy is running Studebaker pistons, for example.
                                                                                    

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 23 17:20:18 1992
Subject: RE: cam bearings
To: hotrod@dixie.com


    In reguards to the question of how to replace cam bearings, I think
I might suspect something else before replaceing them.  I've yet to hear
of an engine that had low oil pressure due to worn cam bearings, execept
for 3.8 buick V-6 (one of gm's mistakes.....).  Unless the cam didn't wanna
go in and you used force to convince it to go in, I doubt that's the 
problem.
    Now, didn't Buick motors (all of 'em) use an external oil pump mounted 
in the front cover?  I know the V-6 had problems with them due to the fact that
they used dissimular metals that would wear each other badly.  I recall
that the pump had to be removed (dissasembled?) to get at the cam, on the 
V-8 and V-6 models.  
   To remove the cam bearings, there's a tool (at least the one I have) 
that looks like a long threaded rod with round discs that thread on to them.
with the engine disasembled, you put the rod thru, spin the disc on, and then 
attach a slide hammer to the front, and pull.  I don't know, althought I would
think there is, if there is a cam bearing tool that works with the engine in
the car, with just the cam removed.

   If it was mine, I'd check the pump and related gaskets first.


-----> Bob

----------
Posted by: ""Robert A. Valentine"" 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 23 18:35:24 1992
Subject: Re:  Cam Bearing Replacement
To: hotrod@dixie.com

I have always let the machine shops do it; there are about 5 of the buggers
down the cam bore and you have to press them in one after the other working 
back to front. Also the oil holes must line up or yer bumming I bet.
Removing them crudely wouldn't be too hard altho they are interference
fit. I seem to recall some places chill them down to shrink them first.

The Poston catalog insinuates that cam bearing problems are common on the
455 Buick, and will cause loss of oil pressure to one side's valvetrain.
The front cam bearing is the culprit I think. That one has an oil groove
(-> less load bearing area, totally appropriate for the most heavily
loaded of the bearings). Poston sells some sort of kludge kit to reroute
the oil feed. Maybe I better consider it too.

----------
Posted by: jws@mlb.semi.harris.com (James W. Swonger)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 23 18:36:12 1992
Subject: CAM BEARING REPLACEMENT
To: hotrod@dixie.com


reply to: Bob Cunningham 


-> the engine idles at 700rpm in drive.  So, it is my suspicion that the
-> cam bearings might have been damaged when we installed the cam, hence

 That's highly unlikely.  I'd suspect an oil gallery plug might have
come loose, the oil pump bypass spring might have collapsed, crud
blocking the oil pickup, or a loose oil pickup.

-> engine was rebuilt 2 years ago, and I never saw them.  Do they just
-> slide in and out? or are they pressed in using a special tool? or are
-> they removeable with just a screwdriver and some prying?  I am
-> interested in knowing about the cam bearings themselves

 The bearings are a light press fit in the block, and are removed and
inserted with a special tool.  In some engines, every cam bearing is a
differenct size.  Ford's bad about that.  It's not generally an
operation you do with the engine in the car, though it'd possible.

 It's also possible you might have a defective oil pressure switch.
                                                                                                                              

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 23 18:46:26 1992
Subject: RE: POWER CHIP COMPARISON
To: hotrod@dixie.com

The consensus among Porsche hotrodders (that's not an oximoron, is it?)
is that chip sets offered by aftermarket tuners (notably Autothority) 
improve the performance of the turbocharged cars (944 Turbo,
930) but don't do much for normally aspirated cars.  In addition, the
horsepower increases claimed by the tuners appear exaggerated--even
for the turbocharged cars.

I put an Autothority
chip set in my '89 944 Turbo and it made a noticeable difference.  At Texas
World Speedway, my car will easily pull away from unchipped cars on the 
straightaway.  But I don't think the chip set gave me 50 additional horsepower
(from 247hp to 300hp) as Autothority claims; 25-30hp seems more likely.
The increase in horsepower is not surprising because the chip set
increases the maximum boost pressure produced by the 
turbocharger.  In fact, some of the early editions of the Autothority
Stage II chips for 944 Turbos tended to blow head gaskets.  Later editions
taper the boost near the readline to avoid this problem.

Corky Cartwright
Computer Science Department
Rice University

----------
Posted by: cork@cs.rice.edu (Corky Cartwright)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 24 16:23:50 1992
Subject: Re: Ford 4-speed
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>     I plan on using a Ford top-loader 4-speed behind a 300 hp
>302 in a 66 Mustang.  I have been told (by the guy trying to sell
>me the trans) that it is easily strong enough.  I think ford
>used it in heavier cars than mine with more hp, but I'm not sure.
>Does anyone have a feel for how strong this transmission is?  I
>plan on more hp in the future.  I like it because it is cheap and
>very easy to install, but I'm not fond of rebuilding
>transmissions.
>
>                  Roger Burnett
>                  rab2f@fulton.seas.virginia.edu
>
>----------
>Posted by: "Roger A. Burnett" 
>
>

I have a 4 speed in my 83 Mustang GT - it has held up to 90,000 miles, a new 
cam, new intake, and no cats like a charm.  I don't know if they are the same; 
but if they are let me know as I may use this in place of my wimpy 5 speed in 
my 90 GT.


MTM 'Matt the Man' Walsh
mtm@walsh.dme.battelle.org
90 GT 5.0 5sp convert.

What he said was this.

----------
Posted by: MTM 'Matt the Man' Walsh 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 24 23:27:04 1992
Subject: Re: Ford 4-speed
To: hotrod@dixie.com

The 4 speed top loader was used in the 427 Cobra. My friends dynos at 400 hp
at 4500 rpm at the wheel; the limit of the dyno. The top loader was also used
in the Sunbeam tigers with warmed up ford small-blocks.
-------

----------
Posted by: Jeff Deifik 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 24 23:32:27 1992
Subject: DRAG RACING
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Hi group! And particularly to those of us who bravely venture to the
drag strip to get a real evaluation of our efforts.
 I've been a drag racer since 75. Over the years if I drive it, I hotrod
it and race it. It's a real blast.
 I got down to the drags a few weeks ago and broke my race car on the 
first run after 7 months work and too many $. Luckily it wasn't serious
but will take a few weeks to fix. The machinist who did my head work got
the guides too tight.
 So last weekend I took my street car and daily driver down for a much 
anticipated run. It's a 70 SS454 Chevelle. LS5.
Let me describe the combination:

Two bolt main short block with TRW cast flat-tops.
  Align honed and bored and honed with torque plates
  3/8 rods with NO balance job
Heads
  1970 closed chamber oval ports with 2.06in and 1.72exh valves.
  With the help of a head porter I pocket ported them myself
  Manley street-flo SS valves
Compression ratio: true 8.75:1
Camshaft: Comp cams 280H  .525lift 230dur @ .050"
Springs: Isky dual with a damper
Rockers: Comp cams magnum rollers
Intake: Edelbrock Performer (port matching a necessity)
Carb: Holley 4780 800cfm DP (stock) for the strip
      Holley 9510 800cfm DP spreadbore for the street
Ignition: HEI with curve kit   20 initial  38 total
Headers: Hooker comp  2x33x3.5
Exhaust: 3.5" Flowmaster with 3" full length tailpipes (kinda loud
         but not too bad)
Trans: Turbo 400 with transgo dash 2 and B&M holeshot 3000rpm stall
Rear: 3.55 posi 12 bolt

This car weighs 3900-4000 lbs with me in it and has dead stock
suspension. 

On 7.5" x 26"tall firestones on the first time to the strip I ran a 
best of 12.30 @ 109.5 mph. We're talkin big grins here! With a little
tuning it may go even quicker!

I'm not trying to blow my horn here, (well...maybe a bit) but my point
is that it doesn't take a lot of trick stuff to go pretty darn fast in a 
streetable vehicle. I drive this car 30 miles a day (cause it's all I 
have) and it runs on regular gas and gets 10-12mpg. Plus it's a boat!
I spent less than 2 grand on the engine by being cheap.

I'm really happy with the results and would love to hear some stories
from some of the rest of you who like to hit the strip with your
pride and joy!  Like Jungle Jim once said. "DRAG RACING IS FAR OUT"

See ya at the track!

Ron Selberg

----------
Posted by: rons@tv.tv.tek.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 24 23:40:37 1992
Subject: Re: Ford 4-speed
To: hotrod@dixie.com

The short answer is yes.  From late 65(after 6 bolt bellhousings) the toploader
4 spd was what came from Ford in all their mustangs.  There is a difference 
however in the big and small block toploaders horsepower wise, but your 
s
situation is made to order for  the toploader.  I run a small block toploader
behind my built 68 302(3X2s, Isky 280 mega cam) with 3.70 gears 31 inch tires
in my roadster.  Made to order setup.  If you check your friendly SVO catalog
you will find that you can buy the NASCAR version of your toploader. About 
the best 4 spd going.  If you want to know where your transmission originally
started life, find the tag on the side and call your friendly ford parts guy
or a SVO dealer and give him the numbers.  He can tell you what engine it came
from. They use the toploader behind the 289,302,351W,351C,390,406,427,428
and 429.  I am sure their are many out there behind 460's as well.  Good
luck with your project.  Mike Brattland

Brattlan@nprdc.navy.mil

----------
Posted by: brattlan@nprdc.navy.mil (CDR Michael Brattland)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 25 00:29:35 1992
Subject: Re: Turbos
To: hotrod@dixie.com

(Garrett variable geometry T-25 turbos)

>Questions: 
>   What was the sale price for these?

R-M Distributing (818) 333 1556 has an ad in the same magazine for $695.
Probably cheaper if you buy two.

>   What effect does the variable vane setup have on boost capabilities?

Means boost comes on real quick.

>   It would seem that if the turbo is set up for a 2.2 liter engine, it
>   may put out a little too much boost on 2.5 or be overdriven.

I've never seen any difference in response for engines that close together
in displacement even in a fixed scroll turbo.  For example, I use the
same blower on 240 and 280 engines (400 cc difference).

Remember too that this system implements a variable A/R scroll.  The article
says that the control diaphram is set up to control at 12 psi manifold 
pressure.  I would assume that the control system would be designed with
a bit of margin so a bit more or less capacity would be adequately handled.

John

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 25 15:50:07 1992
Subject: Re: DRAG RACING
To: hotrod@dixie.com

> Hi group! And particularly to those of us who bravely venture to the
> drag strip to get a real evaluation of our efforts.
>  I've been a drag racer since 75. Over the years if I drive it, I hotrod
> it and race it. It's a real blast.

My brother and I have been racing for 2 seasons now... (new englands  
stupid weather forces the strip to shut down for the winter) it is
Definitely the most fun thing I have ever gotten into!  

>  I got down to the drags a few weeks ago and broke my race car on the 
> first run after 7 months work and too many $. Luckily it wasn't serious
> but will take a few weeks to fix. The machinist who did my head work got
> the guides too tight.

That sucks!  we have yet to break...
(knock on wood)

> I'm not trying to blow my horn here, (well...maybe a bit) but my point
> is that it doesn't take a lot of trick stuff to go pretty darn fast in a 
> streetable vehicle. I drive this car 30 miles a day (cause it's all I 
> have) and it runs on regular gas and gets 10-12mpg. Plus it's a boat!
> I spent less than 2 grand on the engine by being cheap.

Thats not a boat!  well, mabye it is, but then MY car is a stinkin
OCEAN LINER!  Its a Buick LeSabre ('73) that has a soon-to-be
implanted 500 ci motor...  
Our '69 buick special runs high 13s and still gets 17 mpg!!
the whole engine has about 2 grand into it also.  its not hard to keep
the price down when building a motor... just shop around a little bit
for decent/low buck machine shop, and look for deals on parts and
stuff... that leaves money left over for N2O...

BTW, does anybody have any info about how using nitrous will
shorten the life of an engine?  our engine is a 455 with 10.5:1
compression, mild cam, intake manifold, and stock Q-jet.
 
> I'm really happy with the results and would love to hear some stories
> from some of the rest of you who like to hit the strip with your
> pride and joy!  Like Jungle Jim once said. "DRAG RACING IS FAR OUT"
> 

our Special is also a daily driver (approx 100 miles/day...), runs smooth,
cruises on the highway like nothing else, and will eat up a stock
mustang GT while carrying 7 people! (try to fit 7 into a GT...)
Runs on pump gas, and is a lot of fun!

luck to all at the track this year... 
See ya there!
(new england dragway, epping NH)

----------
Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 25 16:00:41 1992
Subject: Re: Bolt torques
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>     Last night I was reading the latest issue of Popular
>Hotrodding and ran across an article on engine building.  In the
>article they suggested lubricating the main bearing cap bolts
>with assembly lube before torqueing to avoid torque errors from
>binding.  I have very limited engine building experience, but I
>believe that this is very wrong.  Torque specs are given for
>clean dry threads.  Lubricants will cause the bolts to be
>overtorqued.  Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Actually both are wrong but oiled threads are more correct.  Torque has
only an oblique relationship to the real parameter of interest - 
fastener stress.  This stress or preload, measured by the enlogation
of the fastener, is the critical value.  SAE specifies a stress load
for each kind of fastener in ... (oh hell, I can't find it now) anyway,
the "bolt spec."  Turns out that a fastener achieves its ultimate 
strength when stressed to about 85% of its yield strength.  A good
layman's summary of this subject can be found in Carrol Smith's
"Engineer to Win" book.

The problem with "clean dry threads" is that an unknown proportion of 
the twisting effort goes to stiction, dry friction and perhaps
galling.  Lubricating the threads and head gets the situation much
closer to the ideal (coiled incline plane).  The problem is many
American engines have their torques specified dry.  Since there is 
no mathematical conversion, other methods must be used.

The best method is to simply measure enlogation directly.  This is 
possible on rod bolts where both ends are available.  A small dial 
indicator assembly is readily available for the purpose.  Blind holes,
such as cap and head bolts are more trouble.  I specialize in one 
engine (the Datsun Z) and even though the japanese sensibly give torque
figures as wet, I've gone to the trouble to develop my own.

This is most easily done by making up an assembly of parts such that the
bolt can be torqued in a similar environment but where access is had to 
both ends of the bolt.  I carefully clean and polish the threads
and the underside of the cap, lube them and then torque the bolt until the 
specified stretch is achieved.  Averaged over several samples, this becomes 
my assembly torque.  My assembly lube is STP or STP with moly disulphide 
mixed in when I can locate it (Dow Corning Moly 77 powder.)

During assembly, I carefully chase the female threads, polish the threads
and the underside of the head of the fastener using a buffing wheel and
red rouge, use a hardened thrust washer and lube the whole assembly.
Even then, if it does not feel right, the joint comes back apart and
the trouble found.  I never use "click" torque wrenches because the 
feel of the joint is destroyed just when you need it the most.  I also
don't use them because when I worked in a metrology lab, click wrenches
were the most common instrument to arrive grossly out of calibration.

This may seem like an excessivly tedious procedure but it is standard
practice in the aerospace/nuclear fields, places where failed fasteners
have a bit more serious consequences.  I can proudly say that I've never
had a bottom end failure on one of my engines attributable to fastener
failure

Interesting trivia:  The 6" diameter studs that hold the head on a 
nuclear reactor are hydraulicly stretched while heated to operating 
temperature with a heater inserted in the hollow shank.  the "nut"
is then hand tightened down against the reactor lid and the hydraulic
pressure released.  No wrench or torque is used.

John

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 25 18:10:22 1992
Subject: Re: Bolt torques
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Go with what they say in the mag. I have always used some sort of an  
assembley lube or anti-seize lube with much success.

----------
Posted by: scol@scottsdale.az.stratus.com (Scott Colbath)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 25 18:17:19 1992
Subject: FORD 4-SPEED
To: hotrod@dixie.com


->    I plan on using a Ford top-loader 4-speed behind a 300 hp
-> 302 in a 66 Mustang.  I have been told (by the guy trying to sell me
-> the trans) that it is easily strong enough.  I think ford
-> used it in heavier cars than mine with more hp, but I'm not sure.
-> Does anyone have a feel for how strong this transmission is?  I

 Ford rated the close-ratio Top Loader at 1000 ft-lbs.  The wide-ratio
box is rated at 900.  It is the strongest passenger-car manual
transmission ever produced by Detroit.  Second-strongest is the New
Process box that came behind the Chrysler Hemis.

 The close-ratio Warner T5 is rated at 300 ft-lbs, the ultra-wide
(4.10 first) is rated at 195.  The Doug Nash/Richmond 5-speed is rated
around 300.
           

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 25 18:18:45 1992
Subject: BOLT TORQUES
To: hotrod@dixie.com


-> believe that this is very wrong.  Torque specs are given for
-> clean dry threads.  Lubricants will cause the bolts to be
-> overtorqued.  Please correct me if I'm wrong.

 Well, you're not exactly wrong, but you're not exactly right.

Figures for bolts going into aluminum are almost always given with
antiseize or light oil.  Most manufacturers give torque specs for
lightly oiled threads, realizing engines may have to be serviced without
complete disassembly and cleaning.  Of course, if a manufacturer
specifies "clean and dry", that's how you do it.

 Some manufacturers don't give any spec, so it's a tossup between clean
and dry or lightly oiled.

 Unless the spec requires it, don't ever use grease, cam lube, or STP on
the threads.  The bolts will eventually back out.
                                                                                            

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 25 18:30:10 1992
Subject: RE: BOLT TORQUES
To: hotrod@dixie.com


-> of the fastener, is the critical value.  SAE specifies a stress load
-> for each kind of fastener in ... (oh hell, I can't find it now)

 Torque charts can be found in Machinery's Handbook and the back pages
of most auto service manuals.  Remember, fine threads take *less* torque
than coarse threads since they have greater "leverage" on the fastener.


-> The best method is to simply measure enlogation directly.  This is
-> possible on rod bolts where both ends are available.  A small dial
-> indicator assembly is readily available for the purpose.  Blind
-> holes, such as cap and head bolts are more trouble.

 Correct.  Hmm... you just gave me an idea.  It's pretty well impossible
to measure the stretch of a blind bolt, but if you're using studs...
a bridge across two other studs might work.  You'd have to use a fudge
factor to allow for gasket compression on a head, but overall it might
be more accurate than a torque figure.


-> my assembly torque.  My assembly lube is STP or STP with moly
-> disulphide mixed in when I can locate it (Dow Corning Moly 77
-> powder.)

 Uh.  I've used STP on head bolts, and over the course of a few races
the suckers would check in 25 to 30 ft-lbs under the original torque
spec.  I've had the same problem with moly lubes.  The engines in
question were 2000 OHC Fords used for autocross.
 I use STP on bearings, oil pumps, cams, etc, but not on the threads.


-> the trouble found.  I never use "click" torque wrenches because the
-> feel of the joint is destroyed just when you need it the most.  I
-> also don't use them because when I worked in a metrology lab, click
-> wrenches were the most common instrument to arrive grossly out of
-> calibration.

 A friend of mine works in a USAF PMEL lab.  They calibrate torque
wrenches along with electronic equipment.  Doug's comments are similar
to yours.  Click wrenches don't like rough handling or being dropped,
and usually when someone *does* mung one, they just wipe it off, put it
back in the box, and let someone else discover it.
 It's also hard to get some people to explain that you have to apply
torque smoothly and steadily with a click wrench, particularly when
you're doing mains or head bolts around 90-110 ft-lbs.  They'll heave on
it once or twice and make it click without actually tightening anything.


-> Interesting trivia:  The 6" diameter studs that hold the head on a
-> nuclear reactor are hydraulicly stretched while heated to operating
-> temperature with a heater inserted in the hollow shank.  the "nut" is
-> then hand tightened down against the reactor lid and the hydraulic
-> pressure released.  No wrench or torque is used.

 Now *that* was interesting.  Thanks!
                                                                                           

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Wed Mar 25 20:26:33 1992
Subject: Re:  Bolt torques
To: hotrod@dixie.com


 I just did up my 351W with 100% ARP studs. ARP insists on at least
oil, if not moly grease for proper assembly torque. They list two
different values depending on how you choose to lubricate things. I
don't remember if this carried over to cap bolts too thou. I'll post
the ARP technote if there is any interest...

 Milt......

----------
Posted by: Milt.Mallory@Eng.Sun.COM (Milt Mallory -ESO LANs- )



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 26 03:54:43 1992
Subject: Fuel Injection poop
To: hotrod@dixie.com


Note:  I've been consulting to the Rutgers Formula SAE team regarding
engine management for some time.  I thought bits of our conversations might
be of interest to the list.  I'll post some info on Formula SAE later.

Enjoy
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've done some injector evaluation today and the results may be of
interest to the team.  It's really nifty to reread an old document
(in this case J1832) and re-evaluate it in terms of new resources (in
this case, the fluke scope :-)  I decided to set up some of the tests
specified in the standard and look at the results.

The test setup is as follows:

The injector is from a Datsun Z car.  It is a low impedance (2.3 ohm, 
6.5 millihenry)) injector and is driven by a saturated driver through a ballast 
resistor in its native environment.  In the test setup, A 13.5 volt power 
supply supplies power to one terminal of the injector.  The other terminal is
sunk to ground with a darlington transistor pair (2n3055 pair connected
as a darlington.)  The base is driven from a function generator that is
driven from another function generator (so that width and frequency can
be varied completely independently.)  A 0.1 ohm resistor is in the 
emitter lead of darlington pair to measure current.

An Endevco piezo accelerometer is attached to the injector with a rubber
band and serves to detect the mechanical opening and closing of the 
injector.  (A cheap substitute for the Endevco is a phono cartridge
with a #8 or #10 lead shot glued to the stylus.)   The endevco is attached
to one channel of the Fluke scope and the other channel is connected either
to the resistor for current or to the collector of the darlington for 
voltage.  

The first test involved driving the injector saturated at full current,
about 4 amps.  The pulse width was increased from zero until the 
injector opens.  The injector started lifting at 1 ms and exhibited full
opening at 1.25 ms.  Pretty much what we expected.  Here's the interesting
part.  The closing time is over 1 ms!  This is with no flyback diode -
the kick goes to over 40 volts.

I next simulated a peak and hold driver by current limiting the power 
supply and adding an output capacitor which supplies the peak.  With
the hold current set to 0.5 amps (low as I can easily go), the closing
time is only 0.25 ms.  I suspect that 250 ma would suffice as a hold 
value and would cut the closing time even more.  

Since the Electromotive is a saturated driver, allbeit to high impedance
injectors, this closing delay may have a significant effect on the
ability of the engine to idle.  I've gained almost 10% in dymanic range
by going to peak and hold.  It would be fairly trivial to add peak/hold
to the Electromotive system via an external driver stage with a 
one shot.

I'd suggest you measure the closing time on the car (use a phonograph
needle if you can't find an accelerometer) and see if those injectors 
behave similarly.  If you see an extended closing delay, you might
want to build an external peak/hold driver.  I can suggest a design if
you like.

-- 
John De Armond, WD4OQC        | "Hey, don't blame me.  I voted Buchanan."
Rapid Deployment System, Inc. | 2nd Amendment RADICAL 
Marietta, Ga                  |              
jgd@dixie.com                 | Need public access in Atl?  Write me.

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From rsiatl!rsiatl!hotrod Thu Mar 26 14:44:12 1992
Subject: Bolt torque
To: hotrod@dixie.com

The machine shop that I typically use builds a lot of racing engines.
One day I happened to ask what they knew about tightening bolts by
elongation rather than by torque.  The response was "we never broke any
rod bolts until we started to use the stretch method."  They since
abandoned the stretch method.

Almost all bolts in an engine are supposed to have something on the threads
whether it is oil, sealer, or anti-seize.  I have always used oil on rod
and main bolts and never had one break or loosen up.  Perhaps this is
because I only work on iron blocks; aluminum may be a different story.

Bob Hale                                      ...!ucsd!btree!hale
...!btree!hale@ucsd.edu                       ...!ucsd!btree!hale@uunet.uu.net

----------
Posted by: btree!hale@UCSD.EDU (Bob Hale)



From rsiatl!rsiatl!hotrod Thu Mar 26 15:06:08 1992
Subject: GM GEARBOXES
To: hotrod@dixie.com


-> In light of all the discussion of for top-loaders, does anyone know
-> the torque ratings of the gm boxes. specifically, Muncie 20 series
-> vs. Saginaw boxes.  My friend runs a supposedly inferior saginaw box
-> behing his 70 chevelle LS-6 big block.  It's taken a pounding for
-> close to three years of street-n-strip, 6000+ shifts, and it still
-> shifts fine, and there are no bearing noises, yet.

 We went through several Saginaws when we were running a 350 Monza in
SCCA A/MOD.  If you pop the side cover and look in, you'll notice the
input shaft gear and the layshaft gear don't match up well.  Usually
there's only about 2/3 of the width overlapping.  The ones we broke, the
teeth shelled right off the two gears.

 Autocross puts heavy reverse loads on the gears.  We lost one Saginaw
when Jay let off the throttle suddenly on the freeway; it had probably
been severely weakened by then.

 If we'd had access to a machine shop we would have shimmed the shafts
for better engagement.

 I've seen several other munched Saginaws; it usually gets them in the
same spot.

 Muncies appear to be strong enough except for the cases.  At one time I
had 14 Muncie cases with missing ears or large cracks.  There's an iron
Muncie case, or you might try heliarcing some ribs onto an aluminum one.
The guts seem to be fine.
                                                            

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 26 21:48:42 1992
Subject: Re: Fuel Injection poop
To: hotrod@dixie.com


Keywords: 

John De Armond writes:

>The first test involved driving the injector saturated at full current,
>about 4 amps.  The pulse width was increased from zero until the 
>injector opens.  The injector started lifting at 1 ms and exhibited full
>opening at 1.25 ms.  Pretty much what we expected.  Here's the interesting
>part.  The closing time is over 1 ms!  This is with no flyback diode -
>the kick goes to over 40 volts.

Two questions come to mind just off the top of my head John, what part
does fuel pressure play on opening and closing (any?) and without
digging out an ol' transistor book, what is the collector breakdown
voltage on the that transistor??

Phil

----------
Posted by: mgwhiz!mogun!prg@mgweed.att.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 26 22:53:01 1992
Subject: Re: Fuel Injection poop
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>>about 4 amps.  The pulse width was increased from zero until the 
>>injector opens.  The injector started lifting at 1 ms and exhibited full
>>opening at 1.25 ms.  Pretty much what we expected.  Here's the interesting
>>part.  The closing time is over 1 ms!  This is with no flyback diode -
>>the kick goes to over 40 volts.
>
>Two questions come to mind just off the top of my head John, what part
>does fuel pressure play on opening and closing (any?) 

Da books say none.  I can sorta confirm that and will be able to 
fully confirm it as soon as I get my flow stand finished (day or two.)
We looked at opening and closing times of the injectors on the race
car but did not have an accelerometer.  When you look at current draw,
you see a little jig in the rise time when the armature strikes home.
You see a similar jig in the flyback on release.  I could not see any
difference using this measure.  With the accelerometer, I'll be able
to tell for sure.

>and without
>digging out an ol' transistor book, what is the collector breakdown
>voltage on the that transistor??

Oh, 60 volts or so. The flyback pulse is real sharp so I don't think
the tranny is breaking down.  Even if it did, I'd expect only some
zener conduction considering how low the coil inductance is.  While
I had my bridge out, I measured a convenient relay just for grins.
1.5 henry.  The few millihenrys of the injector don't look so bad.

The three other systems that I've put my scope on (BMW, Toyota and the 
Electromotive system) all switch in the same manner, ie, they allow
full flyback voltage to develop.

Amongst the other experiments I'm going to do is one where I drive the
injector from a bridge and apply 500 us or so of reverse drive at
release time.  That should kill the electrical delay.  The only remaining
lag would be the mechanical inertia of the pintle valve.  The accelerometer
output looks like that might be as low as 100 us.  With the gain turned up
on the accelerometer charge amp, one can see the noise of the pintel
moving before the actual touchdown is seen.

I've ordered the optical printer interface for the Fluke Scope so I'll
be able to make screen dumps of this stuff available to anyone who 
wants it.  Maybe even as a GIFF.

John

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From z-car@Dixie.Com Thu Mar 26 22:57:53 1992
Subject: Re:  ansa exhaust systems
To: z-car@dixie.com

> >On a recent trip to my dealer, the parts manager and I were discussing
> >sport exhaust systems for the 240Z.  He said that ansa (maybe not the
> >correct spelling) was the best for an early Z.  What do you all think?
> >I have also been told not to buy headers from a catalog because
> >you cannot see how thick the metal is where it attaches to the gasket.
> >Is this important?  What can you expect from changing exhaust systems?
> >--scott
> 
> I'd like to know what would be best as well.  MotorSports Auto has a 
> 2.5" pipe system using a Walker Turbo muffler. $135.  They do have other 
> systems as well but I'm not sure which one to go on.  Everyone is biased
> to what they sell or what they bought so I'm also confused and would appre-
> ciate the same info.  Does $135 sound high??  (bolt on installation)
> 

	Well, just to throw one more suggeston into the air, I have seen
several Zs with the Nissan Comp exhaust system, and they sound great!  (if
a little on the loud side) The comp exhaust is a dual exhaust with two
glasspacks per pipe (both pipes come out the stock opening).  The sound is
like nothing you can get with any other exhaust system, and being Nissan,
you know it is good.  Check your dealer for prices, but it is probably
pretty expensive.

	-Dave


From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 30 00:47:47 1992
Subject: Intake Bolt Torques
To: hotrod@dixie.com


     On the subject of torque for aluminium manifolds, the one on my 
small block chevy said 25 pounds, the one on my 302 ford says 35, 
and the one on my olds motor says "use factory specifications".  
On a note, the small block ford (289-351w) is known for breaking the 
headgasket seal when torquing manifolds, because the bolts go 
vertically into the head, so they try to 'lift' the head from the block. 
SOme of the aftermarket places say to torque the upper row of head bolts
and extra 5 pounds to prevent this.  

  Will this help your buick?  I don't know, since I've never done a manifold
on one.  As for 55 pound torque, I don't see any problem, as long as there's
a good size washer under the head of the bolt to spread the force, and the 
bolts are torqued EXTRA even (not more than +/- 2 or 3 lbs.)

good luck!    ----> Bob

----------
Posted by: ""Robert A. Valentine"" 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 30 02:26:33 1992
Subject: ANYONE HOME?
To: hotrod@dixie.com


-> Just testing to see if the mail link is still alive..
-> Posted by: prg@mgweed.att.com

 Things seem to die down a bit on weekends.  I get this feeling a lot of
people log in from work.

 Right now I'm doing some build sheets for a guy who is interested in a
320 Chevy.  Seems the 350 is the Holy Grail of Chevoids any more.  Back
inna old days nobody wanted a 350 if they could get a 327; somewhere
when I was out of hotrods the 350 has acquired a mystique.  Weird.
Anyway, I'm attempting to deprogram the owner of a late Camaro with a
305.  He wants a high-RPM screamer for bracket racing, and I'm
attempting to persuade him a 4.125 bore, 3.00 stroke motor with 6.5 inch
rods and a set of Dart II heads might be exactly what he needs.  He's
suspicious of the 320; the local speed shops tell him (of course) he
needs a 350, a Victor Jr, an 850 double pumper, and a big hydraulic cam
and he's ready to go.  Your universal generic 350 Chevy.    I keep
trying to tell him if he runs the same motor 90% of the guys at the
local track are running, he's not going to get anywhere.
                                             

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 30 03:02:28 1992
Subject: BUICK INTAKE WOES
To: hotrod@dixie.com


reply to: jws@mlb.semi.harris.com (James W. Swonger)

-> The stock intake valley pan/intake gasket combo will not tolerate
-> much if any angle mismatch. If the heads have ever been milled or the
-> block decked, the angle may end up off. If this is the deal then you
-> may have to get the intake sides milled to match.

 Milling or decking normally won't affect angularity.  Everything
matches up at the same angle, though there might be a step at a port.


-> has pinholes, etc. I don't know how Poston gets their custom manifold
-> manufactured but somehow I think they may have a bit less experience
-> than Edelbrock

 Hmm... there *is* a possibility the manifold might not be machined
properly.  Might be worthwhile to get out the tools and check it against
the old manifold.
                                                                                           

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 30 03:06:25 1992
Subject: HELP! ENGINE BURNS ANTIFR
To: hotrod@dixie.com


replt to: ghost of Bob Cunningham 

-> Other work: We have done much work recently (cam, distributor
-> replacement, etc) but the car has been fine until we tinkered with
-> the intake manifold.

 Since you've already pulled and resealed the intake, check the timing
cover.  If it was a head gasket you'd probably have water in the
exhaust, on a spark plug, or foam in the radiator.

 If you pull the intake again, look for signs of a casting flaw in the
water crossover area.
                                                                                                           

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 30 10:20:17 1992
Subject: INTAKE BOLT TORQUES
To: hotrod@dixie.com


reply to: ""Robert A. Valentine"" 

-> On a note, the small block ford (289-351w) is known for breaking the
-> headgasket seal when torquing manifolds, because the bolts go
-> vertically into the head, so they try to 'lift' the head from the
-> block.

 I've never come across this!  The only way the intake could lift the
head would be if the end gaskets were bottomed out on the block.

 Lots of people get caught by the difference between early and late
Windsor gaskets, though.  Early ones have an L-shaped passage and an
extra bolt hole, and late gaskets will leak water.
               

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 30 10:28:22 1992
Subject: Re: ANYONE HOME?
To: hotrod@dixie.com

dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams) writes:
>  He wants a high-RPM screamer for bracket racing, and I'm
>attempting to persuade him a 4.125 bore, 3.00 stroke motor with 6.5 inch
>rods and a set of Dart II heads might be exactly what he needs.  He's
>suspicious of the 320;

	Ok, I give. sounds like this is a 400 block with a custom
(read $$$) crank and ($$$) rods. Is this the kind of thing that can be
offset ground on a 350 crank, or what? Can you describe the crank 
configuration better? What kind of rpm range is this combination
good for? What kind of torque (cam dependant) can it generate. Would 
it work out ok in a 3100 lb bracket car?
Thanks...

	derek pietro 69 chevelle 323 cid 12.0/114 mph
	Another 'bracket bomber'

----------
Posted by: derekp@gvls1.GVL.Unisys.COM (Derek J. Pietro)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 30 11:13:34 1992
Subject: Re: Buick intake woes-fixed (i think)
To: hotrod@dixie.com

The Hotrod List writes:
> 
> 
>  Too bad about the troubles; that's the intake I was expecting to buy (I
> assume it's the S-divider one on pg. 12 of the latest catalog).
> 
>  The stock intake valley pan/intake gasket combo will not tolerate much if
> any angle mismatch. If the heads have ever been milled or the block 
> decked, the angle may end up off. If this is the deal then you may have to 
> get the intake sides milled to match.

The heads have never been milled anyways.

 
>  Another possibility is a case of extreme mismatching where the forcing
> of the intake breaks the head gasket seal. I wouldn't think this too likely
> but you never know (until you take it all apart).

I have taken that thing off and on soooo many times in the last few
days that i have the interior and the bolt tourquing patterns
completely memorized...  argh!
 
>  Did you inspect the manifold all around before installing? There's always
> the possibility of a defective casting which has or develops cracks, or
> has pinholes, etc. I don't know how Poston gets their custom manifold
> manufactured but somehow I think they may have a bit less experience than
> places like Offy or Edelbrock.

They designed it themselves, and upon a request for technical help,
they DO follow up on their sales.  They gave me the phone # of the guy
that designed the thing.  He is around to take phone calls for like 2
hours a day.  I am going to call him today and question him on why the
VERY light tourque rating.  now that the bolts are tourqued to 55,
they seem to be holding okay...
 
>  If you don't like it, how much you wanna sell it for? I'm in the market
> for used Buick speed parts...
> 
> ----------
> Posted by: jws@mlb.semi.harris.com (James W. Swonger)
> 
whats that? you want to buy our 200 lb. cast iron stock manifold? 
Ill cut you a GREAT deal ;)


  Thanks for the suggestions and help to everyone!

Derek Cunningham



----------
Posted by: emory!gatech!decvax!av8r!dcunning (Derek Cunningham)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 30 12:32:21 1992
Subject: Re: ANYONE HOME? 
To: hotrod@dixie.com

The ONLY substitute for cubic inches.....is MORE cubic inches. If you
are going to run a 4.125 bore, use the 400 CI crank that goes with it.
Bracket racing does not need high RPM's and a motor that screams. So what
if everybody else runs a 350. The trick is to get yours to run better.
Build a light car, <3000lbs and a 400 with Dart 2 heads with the right
parts combo and the 11's will show up on the time slips. If thats not 
fast enough, build a big block!
RON

----------
Posted by: rons@tv.tv.tek.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 30 12:34:06 1992
Subject: Re:  ANYONE HOME?
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>
> Things seem to die down a bit on weekends.  I get this feeling a lot of
>people log in from work.

Thanks Dave, I think you're right, however, after I sent the test message
the dam seems to have broken and quite a few articles showed up in my
mailbox.  I'll have to look back at the article headers and see if there
is any info that can be derived from them on how long an article was
sitting around, trying to get out.

> Right now I'm doing some build sheets for a guy who is interested in a
>320 Chevy.  Seems the 350 is the Holy Grail of Chevoids any more.  Back
>inna old days nobody wanted a 350 if they could get a 327; somewhere
>when I was out of hotrods the 350 has acquired a mystique.  Weird.
>Anyway, I'm attempting to deprogram the owner of a late Camaro with a
>305.  He wants a high-RPM screamer for bracket racing, and I'm
>attempting to persuade him a 4.125 bore, 3.00 stroke motor with 6.5 inch
>rods and a set of Dart II heads might be exactly what he needs.  He's
>suspicious of the 320; the local speed shops tell him (of course) he
>needs a 350, a Victor Jr, an 850 double pumper, and a big hydraulic cam
>and he's ready to go.  Your universal generic 350 Chevy.    I keep
>trying to tell him if he runs the same motor 90% of the guys at the
>local track are running, he's not going to get anywhere.
>                                             
>
>----------
>Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)

Interesting comment!  BTW, I see the TNN (The Nashville Network) will be
carrying one of the drag race finals LIVE next Sunday!  I believe this
practice will be continuing throughout the season this year.

As for my week-end, work continues on my hotrod, getting it ready to
cruise!  Mostly just cleaning, in fact the blower, (with carbs) is sitting
on my dinning room table (what an understanding wife I have :^) being
polished by hand :^(  It's a dirty job, but somebody has to do it.

And as long as I'm replacing the starter, it doesn't look as though it
will be a REAL tough job to get the headers off -- even though dismantling
part of the steering is required -- and take them over to the shop to be
Jet Coated and polished.  This seems like a good insurance policy for a
set of expensive, custom made headers, that will be ready to start rusting
if I don't do something with them.  Total cost, about $180 with polishing.
Does anyone have anything good to say about Jet Coating?

Phil - prg@mgweed.att.com

----------
Posted by: prg@mgweed.att.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 30 14:26:59 1992
Subject: Re: rec.autos.hotrods news group
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>>Yup, I'm here and anxiously awaiting the upcoming announcements
>>and voting for Rec.auto.hotrod.
>-- 
>>Jeff Miller                 Network Systems Corporation

>I would think this would be the week to start our campaign for the new
>group on netnews.  I think our mailing list is beyond belief with all
>the fantastic post that have shown up here, I really appreciate it so
>much.  In fact I am thousands(!) of article behind in rec.autos and
>rec.autos.tech...

>Phil - prg@mgweed.att.com

I'm sure this is the case with many of us! The absence of all the drible
and flame jobs is more than refreshing! I think the possability of being
bumped from the mailing list is the real deterent here.

In response to the posting from Ron S. about cubic inches, I have seen
both of his Chevelles and can honestly say he knows what he is talking
about (hi Ron!). His '70 Chevelle runs low 12's with just a basic build
on a 454, nothing special about it! To get a near 4000 pound car to run
that fast with a 320ci motor would take some real serious hardware not
to mention $$$$! Im with him, if your into small blocks (and I am),
build a 400, make it breath deap, keep the compression reasonable and
you'll kick ass over the mini screemers for a lot less money.
  _________________________________   _____________________________________
 /         _______________         \ /  OLD CHEVYS NEVER DIE, THEY JUST GO \
|        //~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\\  |     |             R A C I N G !!            |
|      / /_________________\ \|     |   OLD JAPANESE CARS NEVER DIE, THEY   |
|  -------------------------------  |    JUST TURN BACK INTO BEER CANS!!    |
|  / O O O -----Chevy----- O O O \  |_______________________________________|
| (_______________________________) | MARK JENSEN           (503) 627-3115  |
| (_______________________________) | TEKTRONIX METROLOGY LAB.              |
|  |\ _________________________ /|  | BEAVERTON, OREGON        MS. 39-732   | 
|  |      |`V'  `---'  `V'|      |  |        markj@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM       |
 \_|______|_______________|______|_/ \_____________________________________/

----------
Posted by: markj@tekig5.pen.tek.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 30 15:50:16 1992
Subject: Stock or not stock, that is the question.
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Ok guys, here we go with my big question for the group.  


What I have:
'68 Camaro RS 


DriveTrain/Engine as of current:

Engine:
327 ci @ 210 bhp.
Rochester 2-jet carb.
1.94 Chevy heads
Dual Exhaust

Tranny:
2 Speed Aluminum Powerglide.

RearEnd:
10 bolt Posi (308 gears) recently rebuilt

What I wan't to do:
This summer, after I get out of school, I am going to rebuild my  
engine and tranny. (it has 117k miles on it and is starting to get  
tired).  Anyway, my plan is to rebuild the motor to stock, but not  
rebuld it to stock.  What I want is to have it bored oh say 30 over,  
put a mild cam into it, get a nice aluminum intake and a decent sized  
4bbl carb., or whatever.  My need is however is to be able to slap  
the original intake and carb back on, take it to a show and have it  
be be stock again.  I need a cam and bore arangement so that when I  
put the 2bbl back on will have a nice smooth idle, and it won't sound  
like it's got a mild cam or a rebore in it at all (it needs to sound  
stock).  Then I go back home, slap the 4bbl back on, and I have a  
fairly hot racer.  I'm not expecting to have a super hot racer, but I  
wan't more power that what I have.
	Well, now that is my situation and my accutal question to you  
guys is:   What kind of combination should I look for for: Cam (most  
important), is 30 a good bore, how about the carb, and intake.   
Finally what about tappets and pistons.   I have my own idea for a  
fairly good combination but I want to hear what you guys have to say.
	Finally I will be doing most of the work myself, I have  
already rebuild 2 chevyV-8's  so I am (like to think so) fairly  
comptent.  I will however not be doing the machining or the rebuild  
of the tranny,  but will be doing every thing else.  I'd like to do  
this relativly inexpensive, but when it comes down to the rebiuild of  
my engine, I will not sacrifice quailty to save a buck, and I'm not  
that tight on bucks. Anyway Thanks Alot!
	
Rob Snyder
snyderre@nextwork.rose-hulman.edu

----------
Posted by: snyderre@nextwork.rose-hulman.edu



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 30 15:57:52 1992
Subject: Questions..questions..
To: hotrod@dixie.com


        Well, now that I see that my mail alias is working, I will follow it up
with my questions.  After reading the mail traffic for a week or so, I can see
this is the right place.

        What I have is a 77 corvette, 350 with a 350 HydraMatic.  In 1977,
vettes were sold with two different engines, one rated at 180 hp the other,
220.  I believe I have the 180.. it appears to me the only difference is the
cam.

        Well, I would like to get a little more pep from this 350, so I am
looking at replacing the manifold, the carb and maybe some headers.  I am
looking for recommendations on what to get.  Some people tell me Carter, others
Holley, now I see that Edelbrock has a line of carbs out..  Comments,
experiences?  And would a 650 CFM be large enough?

        What about the manifold?  

        And where are the best places to purchase from.. the local parts stores
seem rather high compared with mail order...

Any input will be greatly appreciated...

thanks...
--
Tracy J. Evans
Hewlett-Packard
1-503-750-3837

----------
Posted by: Tracy J. Evans 



From z-car@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 30 16:01:08 1992
Subject: Re:  Nissan Comp. Exhaust 
To: z-car@dixie.com (Z-Car Group)

> 	There is no mention of leagality, but they are described as race
> headers, so I wouldn't bet on it.  I have seen the complete bolt in exhaust
> system on several cars, so I don't know why it isn't in this catalog.  

	For the late 70's Zcar, the emissions control in the exhaust system
	amounts to an exhaust gas reculation outlet.  What I did to
	stay legal is to have a brass plumbing fitting welded onto the
	collector of the header and fitted a steel (somewhat hard to find)
	pipe up to the EGR valve.  There isn't much that's tricky about
	the setup.  The EGR valve has to have a neutral gas (so they use
	burnt exhaust gas) to input into the intake manifold.  
	
	If your car has an air pump, then it is a different scenario, and 
	it is not as easy.

	Mike


From schuette@roadkill.nrl.navy.mil Mon Mar 30 16:44:41 1992
To: bmw@balltown.cma.com
Subject: re: head bolts / new design
Cc: dan@grok85.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM@att.att.com

Hi,
	Dan asks about the head bolt design of the E engine.
When redoing the head on my 83 528E I replaced the headbolts.  
They originally were 17mm hexagonally headed bolts.  The new ones used a
Torx type head (E-12 I believe).  The mechanics mentioned that they
had been redesigned due to breakage problems about 2 years ago.
The new ones have more than just a different head.  The body of the bolt
has been chamfered slightly for the last 1 - 1 1/2" near the head.

Larry

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
	"..suprise, make your attack and disappear.."	Galland

Lawrence C. Schuette			  schuette@roadkill.nrl.navy.mil
Code 5133				  (202)767-2739  
Naval Research Laboratory		  	
Washington D.C.	20375-5000


From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 00:23:40 1992
Subject: Re: FUEL!!!!
To: hotrod@dixie.com

To comment on Derek's question about aviation gasoline:

As I understand, the characteristics of aviation gas are somewhat
different than those of automotive gas.  For example, the vapor pressure
(which determines ease of starting in cold weather and tendency to vapor
lock in hot weather) is controlled in different ways for the different
applications.  This is one of the reasons why I never tried the stuff;
the other reason is that it's just too inconvenient to go to an airport
to get it.

Engines that do not dynamically sense operating conditions such as ping
will run best on the lowest octane gas that they can tolerate.  The
tolerance of the engine is controlled in part by the setting of the timing.
Thus, you can fill up with high octane fuel and advance the timing to
take advantage of it.  Back when Standard Oil offered their white pump gas
I found that moving the timing forward about 4 degrees gave enough increase
in mileage to more than offset the extra cost of the high octane fuel.

High compression ratios generally give better power due to the increased
turbulence of the mixture as well as due to the higher thermodynamic
efficiency from the higher expansion ratio.  Unfortunately, high
compression ratios also normally require high octane fuel to avoid knock.
But there is no sense in using fuel of a higher octane rating than you
need; that will just hurt the power and mileage.

Bob Hale                                      ...!ucsd!btree!hale
...!btree!hale@ucsd.edu                       ...!ucsd!btree!hale@uunet.uu.net

----------
Posted by: btree!hale@ucsd.edu (Bob Hale)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 00:24:55 1992
Subject: Re: Stock or not stock, that is the question.
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Rob and his '68 RS Camaro wants alittle more power, but.... also wants
it to easliy be converted back to stock for shows. 

Me thinks you need to decide if you want a restored car or a hot
rod . I don't think swapping the intake back and forth a few times 
a year sounds like much fun. James W. Swonger's  idea of a spare 
motor didn't sound to bad. My idea was to go out and find another 
Camaro if you want the best of both worlds. Your nice original
will stay that way because you'll be driving the hotter one more
often. And once there both running right you don't have to tear 
them all apart for a one day or weekend show!


   Bill Drake   -   bill@ecn.purdue.edu

   47 Ford Coupe////454/AT/3:00//// the "Fat Rat"
   69 Camaro convertible////327/AT/2:73
   new addition - 73 Camaro LT

----------
Posted by: bill@ecn.purdue.edu



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 00:35:14 1992
Subject: Finally some hot rod working time
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Looks like I'll be getting some good working time on the my rod coming
up. We've been going thru the process of buying our first house for the
last month and should be moving in pretty soon! Oh ya, it does have a
nice barn that will become my shop so the garage can be used to park
the regular cars in :-)  BUT, in the meantime we found ourselves without
a home :-(  Since it should only be about a month we decided to store
all our belongings and stay with the mother-in-law. So to me that means
I'll be out working on my car most of the time I should be home. Don't
want to be in the way all the time :-)

So right now I'm finishing up my rear end set up. I've installed 
parallel leaf springs on the rear getting ready to set the rear
pinion angle. With all books and stuff packed up I can't get to
the info I need so does anybody know the correct way to set this?
I seem to remember it should fall within 3 degrees of tailshaft
angle. 

Any help here is welcomed.

   Bill Drake   -   bill@ecn.purdue.edu

   47 Ford Coupe////454/AT/3:00//// the "Fat Rat"
   69 Camaro convertible////327/AT/2:73
   new addition - 73 Camaro LT

----------
Posted by: bill@ecn.purdue.edu



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 00:50:25 1992
Subject: RE: ANYONE HOME?
To: hotrod@dixie.com


reply to: derekp@gvls1.GVL.Unisys.COM (Derek J. Pietro)

->      Ok, I give. sounds like this is a 400 block with a custom
-> (read $$$) crank and ($$$) rods. Is this the kind of thing that can
-> be offset ground on a 350 crank, or what? Can you describe the crank
-> configuration better? What kind of rpm range is this combination good
-> for?

 It's a 400 block, a plain old 265 or 283 crank, RHS main bearing
adapters ($30 or so), off-the-shelf high-pin TRW 400 pistons, and 6.25
inch small journal rods, available from most rod makers.  Not a single
custom or specially-machined component in it.

 Juggling the bore/stroke and rod ratio doesn't cause drastic power
differences.  What they do is tend to make an engine tend toward certain
characteristics.  The Chevy heads shroud part of the intake valve; the
larger bore would increase airflow if the heads are properly modified.
The long rods would tend to reduce cylinder wall loading and reduce
piston velocity near TDC and BDC; this minimizes the reversion pulses
the carburetor "sees".  This lets you run more carburetor and more cam,
while the short stroke lets you wind the engine higher while keeping
internal stresses low.

 A racing engine is a *system* of components, matched to each other.
The trick is coming up with a system that's matched to your car.  

->  What kind of torque (cam dependant) can it generate. Would
-> it work out ok in a 3100 lb bracket car?

 Torque would be dependent on cam selection and head design.  I'd expect
it to be right around what an average 350 would make; volumetric
efficiency would tend to offset the 30 cube displacement difference.

 Are you interested in building a 320?  Give me the details of your car
and how you run it, and I'll pick out the cam and heads and send you a
build sheet.
                                                                                              

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 01:00:20 1992
Subject: STOCK OR NOT STOCK, THAT
To: hotrod@dixie.com


reply to: snyderre@nextwork.rose-hulman.edu

-> rebuld it to stock.  What I want is to have it bored oh say 30 over,
-> put a mild cam into it, get a nice aluminum intake and a decent sized
-> 4bbl carb., or whatever.  My need is however is to be able to slap
-> the original intake and carb back on, take it to a show and have it
-> be be stock again.  I need a cam and bore arangement so that when I
-> put the 2bbl back on will have a nice smooth idle, and it won't sound

 Your overbore will be determined when you take the engine to the
machine shop.  You should normally go for the *minimum* overbore in
order to maintain cylinder wall stability; the shop will typically
recommend .030, .040, or .060.

 Since showing the car is one of your major concerns, find a spread bore
iron intake with the filler neck on the manifold.  That's what the car
would have had as original.  On your 327, it's good to around 5500 RPM.
David Vizard did a dyno shootout on Chevy manifolds a few years ago, and
very, very few aftermarket intakes could match the stock spreadbore
manifold down below 5000.  If you know Quadrajets and their
peculiarities you can run one, the 327 used those, Holleys, *and*
Carter AFBs in various OEM configurations.  Your main concern isn't the
carb, but finding the correct throttle linkage, fuel line, and choke
parts.  (considering you're showing the car)

 As for a camshaft, you can order a generic regrind of the 327/275 or
327/300 hydraulic which should be adequately smooth, but cam technology
has advanced a lot since the 1960s.  Sig Erson makes some "RV" profiles
with *extremely* aggressive ramps - call them or your favorite cam
company and let them know what you want to do.  You probably don't want
to go more than 225 degrees duration at .050.
                                                                                                                        

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 01:01:29 1992
Subject: RE: REC.AUTOS.HOTRODS NEW
To: hotrod@dixie.com


-> about (hi Ron!). His '70 Chevelle runs low 12's with just a basic
-> build on a 454, nothing special about it!

 My brother is a Chevy-head.  While he was stationed in the Philippines
he had a '72 Nova with a 350, which blew up.  I persuaded him to build a
327, configured for a little more bottom end than the 350, and it ran
well enough someone made him an offer he couldn't refuse.

 Kevin was your traditionalist - 350 Chevy, great big cam and carb,
twist its tail and hope the valvetrain didn't disintegrate.  I'd been
working on him for over a year, telling him with the kind of racing he
was doing, he needed a big block.  Any big block.  He wanted a 427 or a
454, but none were to be had where he was.  I finally got this diffident
letter, saying he'd bought a 455 Pontiac.

 I sent him an HO catalog and ordered the correct motor mounts for a 350
Pontiac powered Ventura, which of course fit the 455.  He did a standard
rebuild on the engine, 9:1 CR, a mildly lumpy Schneider cam, and an
Offenhauser 360 dual-quad intake with two 600 AFBs.  The 455 probably
didn't make much more *horsepower* than the small Chevys he'd been
running, but he was awed by the torque.  Like I'd told him, he'd built
much more motor for his money than he could ever have obtained from a
small block.

 By the way, he ran into one snag.  They had bent the distributor when
pulling the 455, so he picked up another one at a junkyard.  The engine
ran like crud, causing much head-scratching and beer consumption.  One
evening they noticed something... peculiar... about the vacuum advance.
Specifically, it was a vacuum retard.  Looking in the distributor, they
found it also had centrifugal retard.  The distributor was from a Buick,
which uses an identical distributor, only reverse rotation.  A new Accel
distributor fixed things right up.
                                                                   

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 01:12:21 1992
Subject: RE: ANYONE HOME?
To: hotrod@dixie.com


-> The ONLY substitute for cubic inches.....is MORE cubic inches. If you
-> are going to run a 4.125 bore, use the 400 CI crank that goes with
-> it. Bracket racing does not need high RPM's and a motor that screams.

 I'll be the first to admit I'm not an expert on 400 Chevys, but I have
yet to see - in my own personal experience - one that had any noticeable
advantage over a 350.  I *have* seen them break cranks, break rods, and
spin bearings where equivalently-built 350s had no trouble.


-> So what if everybody else runs a 350. The trick is to get yours to
-> run better.

 Yawn...  and we can all go 'round and 'round in our identical Camaros.
Any goober who can pick up the phone and recite his VISA number can get
a generic 350 delivered right to his door.  If you're going to go
through all the hassle of building your own engine, why not try
something different?
                                                                                                                             

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 02:58:24 1992
Subject: ENGINE RECOMMENDATION
To: hotrod@dixie.com


-> I have a 79 El Camino.  Bought it new.  Piece o' shit but it's grown
...
-> situation with an eye toward future work.  My inclination is a 350
-> TPI from a late model camaro so something similar.  Ideally I'd buy a
-> complete engine/auto tranny unit and just drop it in.  I might use
-> the factory ECU in the beginning but I have in mind my own controller

 I spent a lot of my just-post-high-school days with a friend who had a
'79 ElCo, lowered and flamed, with the 305 and T200 auto.  It's
basically a Malibu, only better looking.  

 If you can get a whole, running 350, that'd be the easiest solution.
The ECU on the ElCo won't work with a Tuned Port unit - it's just
distributor control, not even carburetion control.  You'd need an
adapter harness and all the requisite black boxes to keep the Tuned
Port; your best idea would be to sell it and go to a four barrel.

 The T200 probably won't hold up long behind a strong 350 (given it's
already 12 years old), so you might consider having it strengthened or
just going to a T350. The rear axle is also a light duty unit, but
chances are you'd never get enough hookup to break anything.
                                                                                                       

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 03:07:07 1992
Subject: BUSHINGS
To: hotrod@dixie.com


reply to: dvd@eng.ufl.edu

-> So, I'm going over a new Moroso catalog and I come upon Herb Adams
-> Supension Nylon Bushings.  These things look like no other bushing
-> I've seen (we're talkin space age here :-).  Machined sleeves, a thin
-> nylon sleeve, and a grese fitting.

 The SCCA bans solid metal bushings in many classes of racing; the
nylon makes them "cheater" bushings.  There's very little practical
difference between them and all-metal bushings.
                            

----------
Posted by: dave.williams@CHAOS.LRK.AR.US (Dave Williams)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 05:49:44 1992
Subject: Re: ENGINE RECOMMENDATION
To: hotrod@dixie.com

> I spent a lot of my just-post-high-school days with a friend who had a
>'79 ElCo, lowered and flamed, with the 305 and T200 auto.  It's
>basically a Malibu, only better looking.  
>
> If you can get a whole, running 350, that'd be the easiest solution.
>The ECU on the ElCo won't work with a Tuned Port unit - it's just
>distributor control, not even carburetion control.  You'd need an
>adapter harness and all the requisite black boxes to keep the Tuned
>Port; your best idea would be to sell it and go to a four barrel.

You don't understand. :-) I design custom engine management systems.  I 
consult to people with fuel injection design problems.  I have a 
system under development that I hope to commercialize and compete with
the Haltechs, DFIs and the like.  I hate carburators.  

My mention of using the factory ECU was in reference to getting the proper
one from the car I get the engine from.  The 79 barely has electronic 
ignition.  

The problem I have is that I don't know American cars well enough to 
go shopping at the Junque yard.  So I have lots of questions.  What's
a good GM model/year for a good TPI engine and tranny?  I want to
buy them as a set.  I'm particularly interested in electronic 
transmissions, though I'd settle for an appropriate hydraulic unit.
Pretend you're advising someone who just stepped onto these shores
as far as American autos go.  I've raced and wrenched jap iron all
my adult life so I know that stuff pretty well.  I just don't know 
GM and don't want to go wading into the junqueyard jungle uninformed.
I also need some idea of reasonable cost.  Jap iron goes for a 
pretty penney so I don't have a frame of reference.  

> The T200 probably won't hold up long behind a strong 350 (given it's
>already 12 years old), so you might consider having it strengthened or
>just going to a T350. The rear axle is also a light duty unit, but
>chances are you'd never get enough hookup to break anything.

Probably right.  I won't be racing this vehicle (other than an occasional
bushwhack on I-75 :-) so the tranny/rear end does not have to be drag
race bullet proof.  It is going to be my driver for awhile while I do
a ground-up restoration of my first love - my 75 280Z - so it needs
to drive good.  I want fuel injection because a) I like it and b) 
I need a test sled for my ECU.   Lots of power with good gas mileage
turns me on with street cars. 

Thanks,
John

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 30 18:23:40 1992
Subject: FYI:  Your government at work
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>'oh sure i can sell you the fuel, but i can't put it in your car or i
>will have to figure out road tax charges and other [stuff].  I CAN
>sell it to you if you bring me a gas can... thats no problem.'

This brings up a subject I've been meaning to post about.

A friend of mine recently told me that he'd gotten a letter from his
petrochemical supplier telling him that the IRS is demanding the 
records of customers who have purchased light hydrocarbons suitable
to be blended into high octane fuel.  Seems the IRS wants to assess
the fuel tax against these purchases and then as is the IRS's practice,
make the victim prove that the substance was not used as motor fuel.
Typical gestapo tactics.

Any of the goodies we're used to using for octane boosting - tolulene,
xylene, isobutane, methanol and a few others - are subject to this
inquisition.  Not stated but implied in this letter is the fact that
the Tax Nazis would be looking at racing fuel sales.

Keep those timing slips handy and your powder dry.

John

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 30 18:38:10 1992
Subject: Engine recommendation
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Ok, guys.  Time for some American Iron questions :-)

I have a 79 El Camino.  Bought it new.  Piece o' shit but it's grown
on me.  Has a 302.  With no oil pressure for the last two years.  Now with 
a couple of rods that are knocking "lemme out, lemme out."  I figure the 
first time I get 50 miles from  home, they'll escape along with all the oil 
and forward locomotion.

New engine time.   I need advice.  I want to improve the performance
situation with an eye toward future work.  My inclination is a 350
TPI from a late model camaro so something similar.  Ideally I'd buy
a complete engine/auto tranny unit and just drop it in.  I might use
the factory ECU in the beginning but I have in mind my own controller
sometime in the future.  

So .... Recommendations.  And what should it cost?  About my only criteria is 
it cannot have a carburator and it  has to be an auto.  I'd like to have a
4-speed/lockup auto but can forgoe it if needed or if too expensive.  
I can fab engine mounts, drive shafts and the like if necessary.   
I don't have time to do internal work right now so this needs to be a 
drop-in.  

This truck is used for light hauling, light trailer pulling and lots of
hauling ass.  It will probably be subject to a restoration at a later
date.  

Ok guys, what do I need? 

-- 
John De Armond, WD4OQC        | "Hey, don't blame me.  I voted Buchanan."
Rapid Deployment System, Inc. | 2nd Amendment RADICAL 
Marietta, Ga                  |              
jgd@dixie.com                 | Need public access in Atl?  Write me.

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 30 18:48:10 1992
Subject: Hotrod/Stock ping-pong
To: hotrod@dixie.com


 If I were me, I'd redo the 327 as exactly stock as possible (even leaving
the 2BBL on, but maybe looking for a higher-flow version). Also, I'd only go 
.030 over if I couldn't hold .010; I think you can get rings and pistons for
10 over in stock types, and that gives you one more grind over the life of
the engine (.010, .030, .060, kaput).

 Then what I'd do, if I were me only richer, is build up another small block
and tranny combo. This one gets every aftermarket goodie you can justify
(higher compression, new intake, cam, 4BBL, etc.). Back it up with a TH400
with a slightly higher stall and quality internals.

 Now with about the same aggro as swapping intakes, maybe less, you have
the best of both worlds. You goin' to da show, pull the stocker out of the
shed and bolt the engine/trans in. If you connecterize the fluid and 
electrical lines, the process should be easier and less expensive than
doing the intake; no throwing away gaskets, dropping chunks into the bottom,
etc. 

 If the trans lengths differ then you might be looking at two driveshafts.
Little things like that. I guess an engine hoist might help too...

----------
Posted by: jws@mlb.semi.harris.com (James W. Swonger)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 30 18:56:44 1992
Subject: Bushings
To: hotrod@dixie.com

So, I'm going over a new Moroso catalog and I come upon Herb Adams
Supension Nylon Bushings.  These things look like no other bushing I've
seen (we're talkin space age here :-).  Machined sleeves, a thin nylon
sleeve, and a grese fitting.

Has anyone used these?  Are they really worth the cost difference over
urethane bushings?  Are they noisy?  Too firm? etc...

My use will be on a 68' Vette, so if you have or know of a similar setup
please tell me about it.

Thanks in advance.

Damon van Dam

----------
Posted by: dvd@eng.ufl.edu



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Mon Mar 30 19:26:41 1992
Subject: Re: Stock or not stock,  (Camaro 327 rebuild ideas)
To: hotrod@dixie.com


>What I have:
>'68 Camaro RS 
>Engine:
>327 ci @ 210 bhp.
>Rochester 2-jet carb.
>1.94 Chevy heads
>Dual Exhaust
>This summer, after I get out of school, I am going to rebuild my  
>engine and trany. (it has 117k miles on it and is starting to get  
>tired).  Anyway, my plan is to rebuild the motor to stock, but not  
>rebuild it to stock.  What I want is to have it bored oh say 30 over,  
put a mild cam into it, get a nice aluminum intake and a decent sized  
>4bbl carb., or whatever.  My need is however is to be able to slap  
>	Well, now that is my situation and my actual question to you  
>guys is:   What kind of combination should I look for for: Cam (most  
>important), is 30 a good bore, how about the carb, and intake.   
>Finally what about tappets and pistons.   I have my own idea for a  
>fairly good combination but I want to hear what you guys have to say.
>Rob Snyder

A good fool proof combo is an Edelbrock Performer cam and manifold kit.
I would also suggest a set of TRW forged flat tops. You really don't
need them for the mild cam and manifold set up but my experience tells
me that a hot rodder is never quite satisfied and you may find your self
bumping things up to a point where they might be good insurance. Also
the cost difference is so little that a person has to ask him self "why
not?". A mild head porting job is easy to do and can be worth a few more
hp's and r's. Clean up the intake and exhaust port bowls and the exhaust
port runners. Port  matching the intake and exhaust ports to the intake
and exhaust headers respectively can also provide for some free horse
power. If your 327 is a stock two barrel motor chances are that it is a
2 bolt main block and may even have the small journal crank. If this is
the case I'd suggest at least a stud kit for piece of mind. Remember,
its easier to do it the first time than to go back and redo things when
you get that wild hair up your ass to build in some more ponies! I think
the rods may be more of the aniemic variety in this motor also. You
might consider a beefier set from a 350 with a set of SPS rod bolts to
keep them together. Ya I know what your saying, "all I want is a mild
build"! My personal way of doing things is to beef things up so I don't
have to worry about picking my motor up off the road and placing it in a
bucket! Headers are a must IMHO. A shift kit in the trans will provide
for more confident shifts and make it last longer. As far as the carb
goes, I like the Carter AFB 625 for this size motor, it will give you
good streetability and performance right out of the box. Lastly the
ignition could probably use some help if its still stock. I used to run
an Accell Super coil, heavy duty points, and plugs for a turboed v6
gaped at 60thousanths in my 350 Chevelle. This worked great and never
missed a beat! BTW, I had the coil wired directly to the battery with 10
gage wire through a heavy duty relay. This made for some very serious
juice and fried points every 5000 miles, it was worth it!! Hope this
gives some ideas.
  _________________________________   _____________________________________
 /         _______________         \ /  OLD CHEVYS NEVER DIE, THEY JUST GO \
|        //~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\\  |     |             R A C I N G !!            |
|      / /_________________\ \|     |   OLD JAPANESE CARS NEVER DIE, THEY   |
|  -------------------------------  |    JUST TURN BACK INTO BEER CANS!!    |
|  / O O O -----Chevy----- O O O \  |_______________________________________|
| (_______________________________) | MARK JENSEN           (503) 627-3115  |
| (_______________________________) | TEKTRONIX METROLOGY LAB.              |
|  |\ _________________________ /|  | BEAVERTON, OREGON        MS. 39-732   | 
|  |      |`V'  `---'  `V'|      |  |        markj@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM       |
 \_|______|_______________|______|_/ \_____________________________________/

----------
Posted by: markj@tekig5.pen.tek.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 14:36:18 1992
Subject: Re: Finally some hot rod working time
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Bill, I believe the Alston chassis manual says that the pinion angle
should be 1 degree negative. Negative meaning that the pinion should 
be angled towards the ground.

----------
Posted by: derekp@gvls1.GVL.Unisys.COM (Derek J. Pietro)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 16:03:49 1992
Subject: Ford rear end
To: hotrod@dixie.com

     Thanks much for the info/advice on the 4-speed top loader.
After everybody agreed that it could easily handle 300 hp in my
66 Mustang I rushed out and bought it ($400 for rebuilt trans.
with an almost new Hurst shifter thrown in).  The next step is
the rear end.  The car currently has a rear axle with a removable
carrier that looks on the outside like a 9-inch rear to my
beginner eyes.  When I took it apart I found the ring gear
measured a little less than 8 inches (not 9).  I would like to
change the ratio to 3.5:1 (currently 2.8:1) and use a 9 inch
gear.  My question for anybody familiar with the Ford rear ends
is:  Will this change involve simply changing gears,  changing
carriers,  or a completely different rear end ?

                        Roger Burnett
                        rab2f@fulton.seas.virginia.edu

----------
Posted by: "Roger A. Burnett" 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 15:42:10 1992
Subject: Re: ANYONE HOME?
To: hotrod@dixie.com

RE: the 400 block with stock 265 or 283 crank.  Looks to me you'd be looking
at some wild spacers for the main bearings for this setup.

But this ties in with a similar project I'm considering.  Replace that 283
crank with a 327 large main-bearing crank, in a 400 block.  Could use the
same spacers as to put a 350 crank in a 400 block.  A few quick calculations
on my handy, dandy calculator shows this comes out to about 348-350 ci's.
Checked out the books, and the bore/stroke is very close to the old Chevy
348!

I've got the crank and the block.  Would I need custom rods, or are there
factory rods close to what I need?  How would this perform?  Would it be
worth it?

Rob.

----------
Posted by: $BRYCERW@BrandonU.CA



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 16:59:55 1992
Subject: GM TPI Combos
To: hotrod@dixie.com


>You don't understand. :-) I design custom engine management systems.  I 
>consult to people with fuel injection design problems.  I have a 
>system under development that I hope to commercialize and compete with
>the Haltechs, DFIs and the like.  I hate carburators.  
>
>My mention of using the factory ECU was in reference to getting the proper
>one from the car I get the engine from.  The 79 barely has electronic 
>ignition.  
>
>The problem I have is that I don't know American cars well enough to 
>go shopping at the Junque yard.  So I have lots of questions.  What's
>a good GM model/year for a good TPI engine and tranny?  I want to

As far as I know GM was pretty lame about TPI V8 engines. Basically you 
are only likely to find them in Z28 Camaros and Trans Ams. As I recall,
someone posted a list of all Z28 combinations by year and VIN code to 
the F-Body mailing list a little while back. Sounds kind of like what
you are looking for. 

>to drive good.  I want fuel injection because a) I like it and b) 
>I need a test sled for my ECU.   

I know a certain '67 Camaro w/ 400 small block that would happily 
prostitute itself as a test sled. 

						Greg

----------
Posted by: Gregory J Perantoni 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 17:00:55 1992
Subject: Re: Quadrajet mods 
To: hotrod@dixie.com

I used a Q-jet with great success. It was a 68 model so it allready had
the good non-emissions idle circuitry. I bought a bunch of QJ's at various
swap meets for a song just to get the jets, rods, hangers etc.
The book by HP "Rochester Carburetors" is excellent and details how to
mod them for more performance. I did this and couldn't have been happier.
Throttle response was excellent and secondary action meant tire smoke.
I had it on a decent 350 in a Monsa thet ren low 13's. Worked better
than any of the Holleys I tried. These are highly tuneable carbs. You can get
fuel economy and performance at the same time.
Also, if you check out the ads in the perf mags, The Carb shop specializes
in Q-jet.
E-mail me if you would like to know the rods, jets, etc I used in my carb.
Good choice!
RON

----------
Posted by: rons@tv.tv.tek.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 17:11:35 1992
Subject: Re: Quadrajet mods
To: hotrod@dixie.com

> 
> OK, it's time for me to rebuild my quadrajet, so while
> I'm at it, I thought I'd soup it up a bit too.
> 
> To me, quadrajet work has always seemed to be black
> magic, so I'd appreciate suggestions.  I know that
> some folks swear by them, while others (like me)
> end up swearing at them.  What's the secret?
> 
> Doing the rebuild is no problem (just hop down to
> the parts store for a kit) but I'd like something
> a bit better than 'rebuilt'.  What mods can I do, and
> who sells good aftermarket accessories for QJs?
> 
> It's on a 350, to be used for street/bracket duty
> in my '64 Nova SS.

        The last two issues of Vette (I believe that is the name, they are at
home, I can check tonight), have an article on rebuilding the Qjet.  The first
part is just basic rebuild tips, the second is performance tips.  Most seem to
involve sending your carb to a shop and having the work done though.

        I just rebuilt mine and got improved performance and gas mileage, but I
don't like it..  I am looking to replace it..  I cannot, for the life of me,
get the idle mixture right..  think it's still sucking a little air...


--
Tracy J. Evans
Hewlett-Packard
1-503-750-3837

----------
Posted by: Tracy J. Evans 



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 17:22:18 1992
Subject: Re: Stock or not stock, that is the question.
To: hotrod@dixie.com

In article  hotrod@dixie.com writes:
>What I have:
>'68 Camaro RS 
>DriveTrain/Engine as of current:
>
>Engine:
>327 ci @ 210 bhp.
>Rochester 2-jet carb.
>1.94 Chevy heads
>Dual Exhaust
>
>	Well, now that is my situation and my accutal question to you  
>guys is:   What kind of combination should I look for for: Cam (most  
>important), is 30 a good bore, how about the carb, and intake.   
>Finally what about tappets and pistons.   I have my own idea for a  
>fairly good combination but I want to hear what you guys have to say.

Ok, for show and go a .030 overbore won't hurt. I'd recommend the 
Chevy #3896962 cam, it can't be beat for the street while maintaining
a smooth idle, cheap too. Use Chevy's high performance dual valve springs.
You'll need them for the tranny mod. For carb and intake, Chevy offered a 
four barrel for the 68 RS, use that and you won't have to play swap every 
show weekend. It's plenty good for your mild engine. The main thing to 
improve go will be a very careful rebuild blueprinting job. Pay special
attention to the valve job and do a little clean up of the ports and
manifold. Don't go crazy, big and slick holes are *not* what you want
here. You want to maintain some turbulence and velocity. The Powerglide 
really needs a kit though, or performance will die between 45 and 65 MPH.
Put in a manual shift body and a high stall converter. With your rear
gears it won't be a neck snapper, but it should move out smartly.

Gary

----------
Posted by: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 17:23:08 1992
Subject: Re: Engine recommendation
To: hotrod@dixie.com

In article  hotrod@dixie.com writes:
>
>New engine time.   I need advice.  I want to improve the performance
>situation with an eye toward future work.  My inclination is a 350
>TPI from a late model camaro so something similar.  Ideally I'd buy
>a complete engine/auto tranny unit and just drop it in.  I might use
>the factory ECU in the beginning but I have in mind my own controller
>sometime in the future.  
>
>So .... Recommendations.  And what should it cost?  About my only criteria is 
>it cannot have a carburator and it  has to be an auto.  I'd like to have a
>4-speed/lockup auto but can forgoe it if needed or if too expensive.  
>I can fab engine mounts, drive shafts and the like if necessary.   
>I don't have time to do internal work right now so this needs to be a 
>drop-in.  
>
>Ok guys, what do I need? 

It should be obvious John, you need a 454 LS6 and a beefed T400. I
may even know a guy with a set of Hilborn injectors that will fit.
You can't beat eight sewer pipes sticking up in the air and a good 
*mechanical* injection system on serious cubic inches. You'll have 
to sacrifice the hood though. :-)

For a mouse motor, any late model Corvette engine and tranny will fill
the bill. Serious bucks for the checkered flags.

A late 305 FI out of a Camaro is in the $2500 range dressed with 
accesories. Sorry system though, not as much go as a carbed engine.
To find more than 200 horses under the hood you're gonna have to
go inside the motor as well as completely redo the FI.

Best bet, get a strong 350 out of a late C10 or 1500. Four bolt,
decent heads, good bottom end cam, and after you junk the factory
FI you should be looking at 280 hp with a little work. Shouldn't
be as dear at the junque emporium as the Camaro engine either.

Check out Lance in Dacula first. They have fifty acres of U pull ems
just waiting for you. They've even got an old Reo fire engine sitting
on hill five. Stay as far away from R&R (Ripoff&Ripoff) as you possibly
can, they'll try to unload a tired engine on you for $3,000. Lance
can put you in a low mileage generic 350 for around a grand, less the
accessories. I pulled a late HEI for my Camaro out of a car with less
than 12,000 on the clock, got wires and all for $50. Manifolds go for
around $20. For you sickos, they've got a whole hill full of Pintos
that have been smacked in the rear. Some are a little toasted. :-)

Gary

----------
Posted by: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 18:24:54 1992
Subject: Re: Engine recommendation (TPI)
To: hotrod@dixie.com


John,

Just got off the phone with my brother-in-law who owns Pacific Auto
Wrecking here in Seattle. He says a fairly low mileage <30K, late
model ~88^ Camaro or Firebird 350 TPI with sensors, wiring and the
ECU and related items such as the fuel pump, should run around $1400.
That may vary according to the area you're in, but provides you with
a baseline.

He recommends that you have a very specific shopping list when you go
to the salvage yard.

    1)  If you think you need the p/s brackets, the exhaust manifolds,
        or the cross member, etc.  ...say so up front.

    2)  If you want and need the wiring and sensors intact, tell them
        that's the way it has to be  ...or better yet, negotiate just
        who will be doing the disassembly.  Some places will let you
        help if they think you know what you are doing. Otherwise they
        just say "Sorry, insurance blah blah blah."

    3)  All things being equal, if you plan to use this as a test bed,
        ask for something close to what your market will be. IMHO, it
        would appear that guys with '83 305's might be more inclined 
        to buy an upgrade than a guy with a late F/B or Camaro.

FYI, my nephew and I dropped a 350 short block into his 305 TPI with no
other modifications. Turns out the injector size is critical as well as
a few other things. Aftermarket chips, repeated trips to local experts 
and so on did nothing to improve the situation. Finally rebuilt the 305
and swapped back in for the 350 and now all is okay.

I know you're down on carbs, but aftermarket injection is still way
off from being cost effective and easily integrated for the average
enthusiast.

I'm glad to see someone with your smarts is working on it. It gives me
hope that an effective solution may be forthcoming.

----------
Posted by: vcook@sierra.com (Victor Cook)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 19:24:17 1992
Subject: Octane boosters
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>What about these "Octane Booster" products that are supposed to enhance
>the octance rating of the fuel?
>
>I have a '63 Vette with a 11:0 compression ratio.  The best fuel I can
>get is the Super unleaded stuff which is usually around 91-92.  Do I
>need to boost the octane?  Also, is it alright to run unleaded in this
>engine which was designed for leaded gasoline?  What about these "Lead
>substitute products?"...

These generally fall into three catagories:  Tolulene or xylene based,
methanol based and organometallic based (typically tetraethyl iron.)
I'm, of course, discounting "Real Lead" which is nothing more than 
very expensive leaded gasoline.  I stay away from lead in my work for
a number of reasons.

Most that I've looked at are tolulene based.  They all work but I consider
them ripoffs nontheless.  Why?  The price, of course.  Technical grade 
tolulene in 5 gal quantities can be had for about $3 per gallon.  Recycled
solvent-grade tolulene can be had for as little as $1.50 a gallon.  Buy
in 55 gal drum quantities and the price is even lower.  Check the yellow
pages.  Contrast this with the several dollars for a pint of "octane 
enhancer."

The neat thing about all octane boosters is that the relationship between
quantity of octane boost and the amount added is very non-linear.  
That means that adding a whole lot of booster does little more than 
adding just a touch.  For example, pure tolulene has an octane rating of
about 125.  Adding just a half gallon to 20 gallons of 92 octane gas 
may boost it as high as 102 octane.  

Here's my suggestion.  If you don't want to fool with running down
tolulene from an industrial supplier, simply buy some Turbo Blue
racing fuel from your friendly local hotrod supplier (or mailorder).
Then experiment with mixing this in with your pump gas.  Since 
Turbo blue is mostly tolulene, you should be able to use it 
in a similar manner as the octane boosters.  A quart to a 12 gallon
tank of gas should do it.  Experiment with your engine until you 
discover the minimum amount of booster necessary to supress knock.

You need to use a knock sensor in order to determine this.  An engine
makes its best power when incipitent (silent) detonation is present.
This knock IS visible to a knock sensor.   There are two easy ways to 
do this.  One is to buy a knock sensor from a commercial vendor.
The only one I know of right off the top of my head is the SafeGuard
system from J&S electronics (714) 534 6975.  This is actually a knock
control system that also displays knock activity.  It's expensive at
$425.  I've not evaluated it so I cannot comment on its effectiveness.

The second method is to install a knock sensor on your engine and 
monitor it with an oscilloscope.  To get a sensor, simply visit your
local car parts emporium and look in their sensors catalog.  find
a sensor for an engine similar to yours that was equipped from
the factory.  The sensor is acousticly tuned to the knock frequency of
an engine type so it is important to match engine types.  In general,
I've found that all V8 sensors, all in-line six sensors and all
4 cylinder sensors, etc, are interoperable within the engine type.

The signal must be viewed with a scope triggered from ignition pulses.
This is because other engine noise can mimic knock.  What you're 
interested in is looking for knock from about 5 degrees after ignition
firing to about 20 degrees after top dead center on the power stroke.
I have a Fluke Model 97 digital storage scope that makes this easy.
It can be done with an analog scope but will require an assistant to
run the scope.  With my digital scope, I can gate the sweep from
the ignition pulses and trigger the acquisition cycle on amplitude 
of knock signal.  Then I just drive and when the scope triggers, stop
and look at it.  With the ignition signal on the other channel,
I can compute the RPM where the problem happens.

The neat thing about knock sensor is that they pick up resonances set up
in the block and head stimulated by the detonation process.  This means
that the same signal can be generated with a sharp hammer rap 
on a solid spot on the block.  Thus you can calibrate your knock sensor
without having to run the engine.

While I'm at it, (boy did this wind around away from the article)
This fluke scope is an absolute essential for the high technology engine
hacker.  Take a handheld DMM, give it a shot of steroids so it grows
100% in all dimentions, add a large LCD screen, put in a two channel
50 mhz digitizer and make a handheld digital storage scope.  The scope
is double insulated and isolated to 1000 volts RMS which means you 
can float it across the primary of even CDI and magneto systems.
It stores several setups and waveforms in memory.  It drives a fiber
optic interface that can either data dump or dump the screen to 
eitehr an epson or thinkjet printer.  The scope is also a digital multimeter
that measures true RMS AC as well as DC, ohms, frequency, and diode test.
When in DMM mode, it displays a small scope screen below the large numbers
so you can still see the waveform.  It runs about forever on its
Ni-Cads or about 4 hours with the EL backlight on.  When the battery
runs down, you can pop it out and replace it with dry cells.
All this for only $1795 retail.

The only problem is you gotta kiss Fluke's ass to get 'em to sell you one.
They started national advertising last november but only shipped a 
few weeks ago.  I've raised hell since early January, including calling
the Prez of Fluke and I only got mine about 3 weeks ago.  

John

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 19:48:05 1992
Subject: Re: small block questions 
To: hotrod@dixie.com


>Has anyone out there got a brief history on the small block chevy and  
>it's changes over the years?? Big block would be nice also.
----------
>Posted by: scol@scottsdale.az.stratus.com (Scott Colbath)

I have a book published by Hot Rod that covers every small and big block
ever made by Chevrolet. It contains info on Chevy stock and after market
high performance parts for both the small and big blocks including the
409's. I bought the book in early 80's so I really dought that you could
find a copy of it now although a call to Hot Rod mag might produce
results. The book is chuck full of part numbers and data on eveything
that has to do with a Chevy motor. Its a die hard Chevy mans bible!!

Just in case anyone wants to try to locate one from Hot Rod the cover of
the book says...
                                " New bolt-on power parts!"

				     C H E V R O L E T
				      High performance

				      Complete guide:
				      small-block &
				      big block V8's

				      How to choose the right...

				      crankshafts
				      blocks
				      camshafts
				      carburators
				      pushrods
				      bearings
				      cylinder heads
				      pistons

Although I will not part with it for nothing short of... well never
mind, I will be happy to referance any info on a specific question that
you might have.
  _________________________________   _____________________________________
 /         _______________         \ /  OLD CHEVYS NEVER DIE, THEY JUST GO \
|        //~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\\  |     |             R A C I N G !!            |
|      / /_________________\ \|     |   OLD JAPANESE CARS NEVER DIE, THEY   |
|  -------------------------------  |    JUST TURN BACK INTO BEER CANS!!    |
|  / O O O -----Chevy----- O O O \  |_______________________________________|
| (_______________________________) | MARK JENSEN           (503) 627-3115  |
| (_______________________________) | TEKTRONIX METROLOGY LAB.              |
|  |\ _________________________ /|  | BEAVERTON, OREGON        MS. 39-732   | 
|  |      |`V'  `---'  `V'|      |  |        markj@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM       |
 \_|______|_______________|______|_/ \_____________________________________/

----------
Posted by: markj@tekig5.pen.tek.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 21:20:55 1992
Subject: Re: ANYONE HOME?
To: hotrod@dixie.com

Yo' ron, Like I said in my mail to you, I ran 11.96 (on a 12.00)
and went home. The Gold chevelle is running 10.20's and he's a
happy chappy. (Thats a warmed over ls-7 in an all steel 69 chevelle)
re: the 320... like someone else said, thats a thick spacer! 
I don't know, so far the low 12's is the only thing I  can afford 
to run. I'd be looking at > $1000 for just pistons and rods.
Anyone know any drag racers that went this approach?
derek pietro (the other derek drag racer... See you at maple grove
bracket finals derek?)

----------
Posted by: derekp@gvls1.GVL.Unisys.COM (Derek J. Pietro)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 21:25:26 1992
Subject: Re: FUEL!!!! 
To: hotrod@dixie.com

As usual there is debate about whether you should use unleaded in the
earlier high compression engines. The answer is ... it depends.
If you are not running the engine real hard for long durations it is
probably ok. Hardened exhaust seats and stainless valves are the real
piece of mind solution. A good machine shop can handle the work.
Your engine's rated 11.0:1 ratio is probably a bit optimistic. The factory
tended to overate. The true ratio is probably less. Still needs at least 
super unleaded. 
104+ makes a booster that contains real lead. It works good but adds to 
the cost of the fuel. Price is $8 for enough to treat 20 gal.
Try it and see how it works. 
RON

----------
Posted by: rons@tv.tv.tek.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 21:53:13 1992
Subject: Re: Octane boosters
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>Is there anyway I can determine if detonation is occuring
>without a scope?  I am not sure what the output of the
>knock sensor is?
>
>I don't have the $$$ to buy a scope now, but I just passed my
>amateur radio test, and I do need to buy a good DMM, will
>this do?  If so, can you recommend one?  I would like a Fluke.

No.  You've got about 4 choices.  I've given two of them and the third
is to find some other product I'm not aware of that does gated monitoring.
The last is to build a monitor.

I've spent a whole lot of time and a moderate amount of money trying
to build a simple non-gated analyzer.  I finally built up a data
acquisition system, digitized the output of the sensor and did a 
fast fourier transform analysis on the data.  I was hopeing I could
find some characteristic that distinguishes engine noise from knock.
No luck.  The only way to make this reliably work is to gate the 
monitoring circuit with ignition.  All the literature I've read says
the same thing.

An analog circuit can be built but it is complicated by the fact that the
gating window varies in the time domain with RPM.  Much easier to simply
precision rectify the output of the sensor then apply it to the analog
input of an 8751 or equiv programmed with an appropriate algorithm.

This is a problem I've been addressing for several years now.  You see,
I have this crazy propensity to want to run 30psi of turbocharging
on street engines.  One little knock == instant piston kit :-(

>I'm not sure you answered my question about lead substitues.
>Is there a relation between lead additives and octane boosters?
>
>Your reply seemed to suggest that lead is used as a anti knock
>agent.  Is this correct?  

Tetraethyl lead (TEL) is the traditional octane booster used by gasoline
refiners from about 1920 until catalytic converters came on the scene.
TEL is really nifty because it is very cheap and can make even so-called
"crack gasoline" - gas that has an octane of from 20 to 60 - into 
premium with an octane of 100 or better.  The negatives of TEL include
making econazis wring their hands and spin in place, poisons cat converters
and lambda sensors, craps up spark plugs and exhaust, and causes 
exhaust systems to corrode faster.  I can post some references if someone
is interested in reading LOTS of heavy text on the subject.

Another booster is Tetraethyl Iron (TEI).  Unfortunately, the breakdown
product of TEI is iron oxide, a very abrasive material.  The breakdown
product of TEL is lead oxide, a substance that melts in the combustion
chamber and makes nice soft little ball-ettes.  iron oxide is also
electrically coductive so it rapidly fouls plugs.

Other boosters include oxygenated hydrocarbons such as MTBE, Iron Carbonyl,
nickel carbonyl, aniline, ethyl alcohol, methyl cyclopentadienyl 
manganese tricarbonyl (AK-33x), ethylene dicloride, ethylene dibromide and
a variety of proprietary goops.  Then you have to consider extenders or
synergists.  These chemicals enhance the action of TEL and certain other
primary anti-knock agents.  A typical synergist is Tetra-butyl acetate 
(TBAc).  It breaks down during compression to yield, among other things,
acetic acid.  Acetic acid greatly enhances the effectiveness of TEL and
reduces the sensitivity of the fuel.

It is safe to say that the only boosters available to us hotrodders are 
tolulene and xylene.

As an aside, I saw an interesting note in some literature.  It said that 
during the 30s, gasoline dealers stocked little glass vials of pure
TEL.  The dealer was supposed to dump the TEL into the customer's
tank in order to make regular into premium when the customer paid for 
premium.  Can you see the safety nazis spinning about that? :-)

John

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 22:23:03 1992
Subject: re: Ford rear end
To: hotrod@dixie.com


>  carrier that looks on the outside like a 9-inch rear to my
>  beginner eyes.  When I took it apart I found the ring gear
>  measured a little less than 8 inches (not 9).  I would like to
>  change the ratio to 3.5:1 (currently 2.8:1) and use a 9 inch
>  gear.  My question for anybody familiar with the Ford rear ends
>  is:  Will this change involve simply changing gears,  changing
>  carriers,  or a completely different rear end ?
>  
>                          Roger Burnett
>                          rab2f@fulton.seas.virginia.edu


Unfortunately, if you want to install a 9", you have to go to a completely
different axle.  The 9" carrier is larger than the 8" and won't fit into
the 8" case.  This might run into some bucks, as the 9" stuff is somewhat
expensive, especially for the stronger stuff (nodular iron case, etc.).

A few years ago, I was in a similar dilemma - I have a Pinto with a 302,
and put in an 8" rear end from a 75 Mustang II to handle the extra power.
When I put the Nash 5 speed in, I bought an 8" carrier with Traction-Lok
(Fords version of Posi-Traction) and a 2.80 gear from Currie Enterprises 
(they advertise in the back of HRM).  At the time, they said the 8" should 
be able to handle 400HP easy, and even up to 5-600 HP, if you don't abuse
it too much. The center section ran about $290 at the time. When I asked 
about a 9" setup, they said it would run somewhere around $1100, complete 
with the housing, carrier, and Traction-Lok.

You may be able to find a 9" axle from another car in a wrecking yard to fit 
your Mustang, although these are getting somewhat rare. I don't remember which
cars were compatible, though. Some of the other years of Mustangs and Cougars
probably did come with a 9".  The 8" and 9" do look very similar, but if I
remember correctly, the 9" has one more bolt to attach the carrier to the
housing.  Someone correct me if I'm wrong.  The housing is also "rounder" than 
the 8", which has a flatter top and bottom.  There were two different axle 
bearing sizes used, so the flanges that the brakes mount to may be different; 
just measure the bolt holes. You could use the brakes on the new axle, and get 
a proportioning valve if they are geometrically different than the originals. 
I believe the emergency brake cables attach the same way to most Ford rear 
drum brakes of the 60's and 70's.  Of course, you could get an axle off a
bigger car and have it modified to fit; seems like there are a lot of shops
around that specialize in that sort of stuff nowadays.

I would say that if you're not going to do any extreme horsepower upgrades,
then just change the 8" gears to the ratio you want. You could even get 
Traction-Lok, if that's what you're looking for.  If you are going the high 
horsepower route, and also going to bigger tires, etc., and need something 
bulletproof, the 9" is definitely the way to go.

   Derek

-- 
Derek Deeter                           derek_deeter@mentorg.com
Mentor Graphics Corp.
8005 S.W. Boeckman Rd.
Wilsonville, OR 97070-7777

----------
Posted by: derekd@apd.MENTORG.COM (Derek Deeter)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 22:38:32 1992
Subject: Fuel injection
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>
>
>John,
>
>Just got off the phone with my brother-in-law who owns Pacific Auto
>Wrecking here in Seattle. He says a fairly low mileage <30K, late
>model ~88^ Camaro or Firebird 350 TPI with sensors, wiring and the
>ECU and related items such as the fuel pump, should run around $1400.
>That may vary according to the area you're in, but provides you with
>a baseline.

Vic,

Thanks for the poop.  That and the other one with all the model numbers
was most helpful.  I'm now armed and ready to go shopping.


>FYI, my nephew and I dropped a 350 short block into his 305 TPI with no
>other modifications. Turns out the injector size is critical as well as
>a few other things. Aftermarket chips, repeated trips to local experts 
>and so on did nothing to improve the situation. Finally rebuilt the 305
>and swapped back in for the 350 and now all is okay.

Did you try buying an ECU for the 350?  I'd imagine that what bit  you
was simply the difference between the engines in the quantity of fuel 
needed for a given MAP.  A $chip$ would not help the situation.

>I know you're down on carbs, but aftermarket injection is still way
>off from being cost effective and easily integrated for the average
>enthusiast.

yeah, I know.  I'm trying to remedy that problem.

>I'm glad to see someone with your smarts is working on it. It gives me
>hope that an effective solution may be forthcoming.

Thanks a bunch.  I'm gonna try to demystify fuel injection for people.
Following is the first installment, an exercise on calculating 
fuel injector sizing.

John
---------------------------------------------------------------------

This calculation was done for an engine that had been originally equipped
with carburators.  Since this engine was fuel injected from scratch,
it is a prototypical example.

The target engine is a 600 CC 4 cylinder 4 stroke motorcycle engine being
used in a small race car.  My job was to fuel inject it.  Peak power 
is designed to come at 12,000 rpm.  

First thing to do is to calculate the amount of air required at full 
power:

600 cc * 12,000 rpm * 0.5 (every other stroke) = 3,600,000 cc per minute.

each cylinder uses 900,000 cc per minute. 

Assuming a 0.8 volumetric efficiency, that works out to 720,000

Note:  0.8 is a good VE for stock engines.  For better manifolding and
a good exhaust, use 0.9.   For turbocharged/supercharged engines, use
a VE equivalent to the absolute pressure ratio minus 0.1.  For example,
14 psi gauge manifold pressure is a ratio of 2:1 absolute.  A good
VE would be 1.9.

Air density at STP is 0.00129317 gm/cc so the engine consumes
931.2 grams per minute.

For an air/fuel mass ratio of 11:1 (good full power mix), we need 
931.2/11 or 84.7 grams/minute of gasoline.  The racing fuel we use
has a density of 0.775 (from the data sheet) so that means we need 
109.23 cc/minute of fuel.  The nearest off-the-shelf fuel injector 
flowed 120 cc/minute so that's the one we chose.  [1]

An engine revolution at 12000 rpm takes 5 ms so a whole cycle takes 10 ms.  
That entire 10 ms is available for injection.  According to the above 
calculation, the injector should be open 10 ms * (109.23/120) = 9.1 ms.
On the dyno, the engine made peak power at 11,500 rpm with an 
injector open time of 8.776 ms.  Not bad calculating, huh? :-)
BTW, this engine went from 55 to 70.5 hp simply from adding the FI
and a tuned intake.  No other changes.

I usually like to keep the open time below 80% at these engine speeds
because a typical electronic injector takes 1 - 1.25 ms to open
and some non-zero (around 0.5 ms) time to close.  Also, I need a bit
of time over 100% so I can do acceleration enrichment.

Observe that the injector is flowing practically all the time.  This is
OK because the closing of the intake valve delimits one cycle from the
other.   This is necessary in order to give enough dynamic range to
allow the engine to idle.  For example, this engine at 2000 rpm needed
an open time of under a millisecond.  Since the injector starts flowing
before it is completely open, it is impossible to calculate the timing.
it must be done experimentally.

If a standard injector size is just a bit low in flow capacity or you
determine that you under-allowed for acceleration enrichment, you
can simply increase the fuel pressure a bit.  Over the narrow pressure
range of interest, flow and pressure can be treated as linear.
There is a tradeoff in that with increased pressure it becomes more 
difficult to regulate idle mix.  You get to the point where the 
injector is not completely opening before being closed.  This is 
not the way to get consistent idle.

------------------------------------------
[1]  Getting data sheets on fuel injectors is an exercise in futility for
	the average hotrodder.  I'll address how to actually measure the 
	delivery in another article.


----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 22:45:24 1992
Subject: Re: Hot Starts
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>
>I am having a hot-start problem.  Does anyone have any experience 
>killing a hot start problem?  ( it is not a fuel vaporization 
>problem, but a struggle-to-turn-the-engine problem).  Some
>suggestions so far have been 

>1) slick 50
>2) wrap the exhaust system
>3) starter heat-sheild
>4) oil cooler
>5) oil pre-luber (run after shutdown to cool engine)
>
>Any other suggestions? I dont *think* its the starter, more like 
>an engine that tightens up... 

Sounds like you've been out asking out on the usenet :-)  I'll bet
someone will claim that Slick 50 will cure hemoroids.

This problem is almost always too much static advance.  Back the timing
off even a degree or two and the problem will likely go away.  To 
positively prove this, next time your engine does its trick, jump
out and pull the ignition lead off then crank again.  If the engine
turns over OK, you've found the problem.

John

----------
Posted by: jgd (John De Armond)



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 22:52:11 1992
Subject: Re: FUEL!!!!
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>
>As usual there is debate about whether you should use unleaded in the
>earlier high compression engines. The answer is ... it depends.
>If you are not running the engine real hard for long durations it is
>probably ok. Hardened exhaust seats and stainless valves are the real
>piece of mind solution. A good machine shop can handle the work.
>Your engine's rated 11.0:1 ratio is probably a bit optimistic. The factory
>tended to overate. The true ratio is probably less.

Not sure where you got this info from Ron, I tend to believe this number
to be correct.  I've seen this engine rated at 11.25:1, maybe that's the
"high" number you are thinking about.  I've looked in several publications
from the Chevy parts manual to Chiltons to Corvette News, etc., etc. and
can find nothing that indicates this engine is anything less than 11.0:1.

>Still needs at least super unleaded. 
>104+ makes a booster that contains real lead. It works good but adds to 
>the cost of the fuel. Price is $8 for enough to treat 20 gal.
>Try it and see how it works. 
>RON
>
>----------
>Posted by: rons@tv.tv.tek.com

I've used the Real Lead and Super Octane Boost with great results.  And when
low-lead was mixed with high octane no-lead, it results in a higher octane
rating than either of them, and there is enough lead to keep the engine
valve seats happy.

We have been fortunate in this area, Unocal is selling 107 octane, leaded
racing fuel, at the pump for $2.25 a gallon, considerably less than the
cost of octane boost and Real Lead additives added to the normal tank of
fuel.

Phil - prg@mgweed.att.com
>
>
>

----------
Posted by: prg@mgweed.att.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 23:24:59 1992
Subject: Re: Octane boosters
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>I don't have the $$$ to buy a scope now, but I just passed my
>amateur radio test, and I do need to buy a good DMM, will
>this do?  If so, can you recommend one?  I would like a Fluke.

Congratulations Dave, from WB9AAX :^)

I have had several different types of Fluke meters and have enjoyed
them all!  But none of them will replace a scope :^(

You might see if there is a rental scope available when you are
ready to do your testing.  Joining a local ham club may scare up
a fellow hotrodder/ham that will share your interest in combining
electronics and automobiles.

>I'm not sure you answered my question about lead substitues.
>Is there a relation between lead additives and octane boosters?
>
>Your reply seemed to suggest that lead is used as a anti knock
>agent.  Is this correct?  

Lead reduces the knock because it increases the octane..  It also
cushions the valves..

Congrats again Dave, 73's :^)

Phil - WB9AAX
>
>
>--------
>Dave Arnold (KD6??)
>Internet: darnold@filenet.com
>UUCP: uunet!felix!darnold

----------
Posted by: prg@mgweed.att.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 23:38:02 1992
Subject: Re:  Hot Starts
To: hotrod@dixie.com

>
>I am having a hot-start problem.  Does anyone have any experience 
>killing a hot start problem?  ( it is not a fuel vaporization 
>problem, but a struggle-to-turn-the-engine problem).  Some
>suggestions so far have been 
>1) slick 50
>2) wrap the exhaust system
>3) starter heat-sheild
>4) oil cooler
>5) oil pre-luber (run after shutdown to cool engine)
>
>Oh, no electric water pump is possible on this engine...
>
>Any other suggestions? I dont *think* its the starter, more like 
>an engine that tightens up... 
>Thanks
>-Bob Cunningham
>
>----------
>Posted by: ghost of Bob Cunningham 

O.K. Bob, let me add one to the list, check your GROUND connection
between the engine and the frame or battery (assuming the hot lead
is in excellent condition).

If you have a meter (even an ol' crummy analog one ;^) measure the
voltage between the negative side of the battery and the engine block
while someone else is cranking the engine over (YIKES, watch those
test leads!).  You may see several volts difference if the ground
cable is not making a good connection.  Anyway, it's one to add to
the list..  BTW, make sure that timing isn't too advanced.  You
might try and experiment next time the engine is hot, do what ever
it takes to kill the coil and crank over the engine a couple of times
to see if it still cranks slowly without a spark..

Phil

----------
Posted by: prg@mgweed.att.com



From hotrod@Dixie.Com Tue Mar 31 23:39:07 1992
Subject: Re:  Hot Starts
To: hotrod@dixie.com


I had this trouble with my beater van recently and it turned out to be a
lame battery. I tried cleaning & tightening, all that, no luck. Finally I
swapped the battery with one from my project car, and it cranked like
a bugger. 

It was being a real hound about starting hot, too. Sometimes I would end
up stuck and have to wait for things to cool down before I could go...

----------
Posted by: jws@mlb.semi.harris.com (James W. Swonger)