FAQ |
Members List |
Social Groups |
Calendar |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
...Perfect Crappical Pontiac discussion material (just funn'in)
__________________
Buzzards gotta eat... same as worms. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
...Perfect Crappical Pontiac discussion material (just funn'in)
__________________
Buzzards gotta eat... same as worms. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
How about putting some RA4 heads on a 326?
------------------ Gatomon A car is cheaper than a girlfriend. Better than a wife. If it gives you trouble you can park it and forget about it!
__________________
Try calling CRUSHPROOF! 512-386-9889 |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
How about putting a 455 crank in tat 326 w/RA IV heads. A 397" stump puller!
------------------ Bill
__________________
Bill 64 GTO, tube chassis w/606" IA tall deck, PG & a pro geared Fab 9". 2750 lbs. 8.2550@164.17-1/4, 5.2901@131.97-1/8, 1.1981-60-ft. 8/10/08 |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
How about you guys stop somking the stuff you grow in the back yard and get the imported stuff? Funny Stuff!!!!!!!!
Ron
__________________
Due to the current economic conditions...the light at the end of the tunnel has been turned off. Meet you at the finish line.....don't be late! |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
hahahahaha!
A 397"? Is that what a 326 block with a 455 crank would work out to? hahahahaha again! So would it be better to run a set of small-valve or large-valve heads on that sucker? Oh boy.... -Will
__________________
---------------------------- '72 Formula 400 Lucerne Blue, Blue Deluxe interior - My first car! '73 Firebird 350/4-speed Black on Black, mix & match. |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
How about OHC6 Heads [cut short] on the V8 motor?
__________________
12.24/111.6MPH/1.76 60'/28"/3.54:1/SP-TH400/469 R96A/236-244-112LC/1050&TorkerI//3850Lbs//15MPG/89oct Sold 2003: 12.00/112MPH/1.61 60'/26"x3.31:1/10"/469 #48/245-255-110LSA/Q-Jet-Torker/3650Lbs//18MPG 94oct Sold 1994: 11.00/123MPH/1.50 60'/29.5"x4.10:1/10"/469 #48/245-255-110LSA/Dual600s-Wenzler/3250Lbs//94oct |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
I have always loved the sound of a V-12. So how about four more cylinders on a 455 and the OHC-6 heads? Indian Adventures how about.....?
------------------ Bill
__________________
Bill 64 GTO, tube chassis w/606" IA tall deck, PG & a pro geared Fab 9". 2750 lbs. 8.2550@164.17-1/4, 5.2901@131.97-1/8, 1.1981-60-ft. 8/10/08 |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
How about putting a 3.5 stroke crank in a IA block (4.350 bore)(416 cu.in.), with Super Chief heads that flow 395 and twist it 9500..............with juice.....or turbo????????
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Why would it need to be in an IA block? Are short stroke cranks breaking blocks?
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
For the hearing impaired.... "4.350 BORE"
Big bore, short stroke. If it's possible to get that out of a Stock Pontiac block, Scott, let me know which block is the one to use and I will buy it. Yo, duh!!!!! |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Dude, we know of the "Tall deck" block,
the "standard deck" Block , and now we have the "Minime super low deck block" the new secret weapon for all pontiac 301 racers who want to keep their 301 pontiacs "all pontiac" GROOVIEE BABY!!!!!!!! later Mark B. ------------------ |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Dude:
You're in the trade; You ever hear of some process called "sleeving?" |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
P-Dude ; you crack me up over here with your intact logic with the 4.350+ bore RA V type motor.
Scott ; 8 sleeves makes for a wobbly block. Somewhere around 9000RPM the 90degree Vee becomes a substantially 180 degree flat.
__________________
12.24/111.6MPH/1.76 60'/28"/3.54:1/SP-TH400/469 R96A/236-244-112LC/1050&TorkerI//3850Lbs//15MPG/89oct Sold 2003: 12.00/112MPH/1.61 60'/26"x3.31:1/10"/469 #48/245-255-110LSA/Q-Jet-Torker/3650Lbs//18MPG 94oct Sold 1994: 11.00/123MPH/1.50 60'/29.5"x4.10:1/10"/469 #48/245-255-110LSA/Dual600s-Wenzler/3250Lbs//94oct |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Scott, explain how you are going to sleeve the block to 4.350. And what are you going to use to center the sleeve when 3/4's of the wall is gone by boring, let alone the cutter trying to work? And sizing the sleeve so they are flat against each other. I don't think (and I will check)that you can put four sleeves together, with proper thickness, in line and it will fit in the bore spacing of the Pontiac parameters. later.
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Dude, Do you think Scott might be qualified enough to be tear down boy for your cheaper cores?
__________________
Buzzards gotta eat... same as worms. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
It's done every day with diesels. It's been done before with Pontiacs, too. And at a helluva lot less than four grand for a new block, too. And it may also require substantially less Hard Blok than the new block, too! With NO main saddle casting porosity. The factory didn't let THEIR blocks go out the door this way.....
[This message has been edited by Scott Misus (edited 12-04-2000).] |
#18
|
||||
|
||||
OK Scott, How much would you think it would cost, NOWADAYS" to put 8 sleeves in a block.
Then hard fill it. Then install "5" Billet caps (splayed) with studs. Align bore then align hone. Drill and tap "ALL" the oil passages Deck the block Figure a way to completely fill the lifter area (dry sump?) and reinforce the lifter bores. Find a way to use the off-set Chevy lifters in the Factory block or pay extra to buy a set for Pontiac. Figure a way to increase the deck thickness for NOS and Turbo usage to control distortion in the Factory block. Plus you would still have to bore and hone the sleeved block also. How do you install High nickel content for strength into a block that's already cast? Ok Scott, Go to your favorite Pontiac Machine shop or what ever and get me a price, and like I told "Handsel" in another post. Put up or shut up!!!!!!!!!!! LOL. Post the results here. I'll be waiting. Inquiring minds want to know!! I know your Half brother (1/2" Studley)will do it fer ya. He likes to crunch #'s. LOL. http://PontiacPower.cc BTW: Diesels are made to have the sleeves replaced not the Pontiac block. [This message has been edited by PONTIAC DUDE (edited 12-05-2000).] |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
I was talking about a way to increase bore size without (unnecessarily) spending four grand on an aftermarket block. To get a 4.350 bore size doesn't require a $4K investment. Since you're the owner of a machine shop, you tell ME what YOU charge for sleeving and finish bore/hone. That'd save me the time of calling around. Besides, YOU are my favorite Pontiac Machine shop, Big Boy... The Hard Blok I can do myself.
Stick with the initial comparison: using the factory block to achieve a 4.350 bore. Your praises of the features of the new block are duly noted. But they have nothing to do with the initial topic: bore sizing. There are plenty of folks out there running 8's without them (new blocks and cranks). Reliably. And there have been for years. However, if somebody wants to use 500 hp shot of N2O (not "NOS", which is a brand name) to push a 3700 slug into the 8's, perhaps the new block is just the ticket. Or perhaps, maybe so too is a factory block with turbos. But, if the goal is to be able to say "Hey, I pushed a 3700 lb. slug with power windows and air conditioning into the 8's and it only cost $50K in aftermarket glitter items to do it", then perhaps a $4K block should fit into those plans rather nicely. Later. [This message has been edited by Scott Misus (edited 12-05-2000).] |
#20
|
||||
|
||||
4.350 in a stock block is not feasible. Believe me I spent many nights awake thinking about it. Whitmore used to sleeve to .100 plus over (4.250) and had nothing but problems. As half-inch said the remaining material (what little there is) is to unstable and prone to cracking (thin). The 64 Classical Gas GTO (Beautiful car) used to be a test bed for this project and it failed miserably. At 4.350 you may as well take four sleeves and wrap a rubber band around them. It will probably hold together better. Or maybe some duct tape...hey wait a minute...got to go, talk to you guys later!
------------------ Wade Congdon - BOP Engineering www.bopengineering.com "If you can turn left you're going too slow"
__________________
Wade Congdon BOP Engineering Hi-Performance Specialty Parts for Buick, Olds, and Pontiac www.bopengineering.com |
Reply |
|
|