| FAQ |
| Members List |
| Social Groups |
| Calendar |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#181
03-22-2006, 03:38 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Point was we had a head with at LEAST 310 cc -big bowl, big valves that still had 619 ftlbs @ 2500. Bowl size generally gets measured in the port cc.That's still a "tractor motor" bottom end torque in anybody's book, and still had all HP in by 6200 rpm, so not a high rpm motor. Shoot the Continental convertor flashes to 3000 where it had 622 ft lbs.. It needed the airflow to make those numbers.
And it's on a Pontiac bore spacing/head bolt pattern block, Pontiac intake,Pontiac headers for those guys that say it is only applicable if it's a "Pontiac". |
|
#182
03-22-2006, 05:59 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
ok Slowbird, was thinking about the SC heads with the built in spacer. yes, the raised port and bowl area will add greatly to the overall port volumne.
yes, Skip agree with your point. the min CA, velocity, valve angles, chamber shape, and DEPTH of the chamber,(kaases) plays a big role in the lowend rpm engines.
__________________
 1963 Cat SD Clone (old school) streeter 1964 GTO post coupe, tripower, 4speed (build) 1965 GTO 389 tripower, 4 speed, driver 1966 GTO dragcar 1966 GTO Ragtop 1969 Tempest ET clone street/strip 1969 GTO Judge RA lll, auto 1969 GTO limelight Conv. 4speed go and show (sold) 1970 GP SSJ 1970 GTO barn find..TLB…390 horse?….yeh, 390 1972 GTO 455 HO, 4 speed, (build) 1973 Grand Safari wagon, 700hp stoplight sleeper 525ci DCI & 609ci LM V head builds Last edited by J.C.you; 03-23-2006 at 12:26 AM. |
|
#183
03-22-2006, 06:37 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Solid rollers have a lower rpm torque for their .050 numbers than do hydraulic flat tappet cams.
__________________
Badder than old King Kong And meaner than a junkyard dog -Jim Croce |
|
#184
03-23-2006, 07:59 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Wow, what a thread...the giants of the Pontiac hobby at a fierce battle...one thing i would like to add: I would like to thank Jim Hand for being one of the few people that publish articles and books in the hobby that are not trying to talk you into buying all sorts of expensive aftermarekt parts. Jim has shown that the engineers of the factory were not completely dumb and that a well tuned "stock" engine can show very good results with low investments. His "tractorengine" is what most people need/want anyway.....
|
|
#185
03-23-2006, 09:03 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
"His "tractorengine" is what most people need/want anyway....."
Really? These tractors engines are VERY expensive! After installing ours we had to add subframe connectors, weld the axle tubes to the housing, drag shocks and custom leaf springs/adj pinion snubber. In addition we had to sump the tank/electric pump and run -8AN fittings/lines everywhere. Did I mention we LUNCHED the TH400 on the second outing. How about grenading two 8.5 posi units in two trips to the track, not to mention twisting the stock driveshaft into a "pretzel". To date we've spend over $1000 in different tires trying to hook this thing up, and a custom 10" converter ($500).....are you sure you really want one of these engines? On a good note, once we upgraded everything behind the engine, the car runs well into the 11's in full street trim. About as easy to drive on the street as my daughters 2001 Nissan Sentra! At the track, we just lower the tire pressure from 24 to 18psi, and race. No cooling down required, 89 octane fuel, 15mpg's and it idles like a "stock" Ram Air III 400........Cliff
__________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English, thank a Veteran! https://cliffshighperformance.com/ 73 Ventura, SOLD 455, 3740lbs, 11.30's at 120mph, 1977 Pontiac Q-jet, HO intake, HEI, 10" converter, 3.42 gears, DOT's, 7.20's at 96mph and still WAY under the roll bar rule. Best ET to date 7.18 at 97MPH (1/8th mile), |
|
#186
03-23-2006, 09:34 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Cliff you sound like you really regret it! You mighta got 23 mpg or so with your daughter's Sentra motor.....
|
|
#187
03-23-2006, 10:39 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Jim has done a great job finessing stock parts and has used good thoughts in all his modifications. I'll bet if Jim "paid" himself even minimum wage for all the tuning, porting, parts swaps, engineering on his car it would be anything but cheap, especially for someone that would have to pay someone else to reproduce it, but then we all spend time doing what we like for our hobbies.
The Pontiac engineers had such diverse combinations they came up with that even disagree with some of the thoughts here , how do you know which engineer at Pontiac had the good ideas? Different chambers and port CCs of the RA/SD heads, or the RAV huge ports, so there must have been some disagreement even among them! |
|
#188
03-23-2006, 08:31 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
"Cliff you sound like you really regret it! You mighta got 23 mpg or so with your daughter's Sentra motor....."
Not really, but we got a real "reality check" after installing the engine, took about 2 years to really get the car to run the numbers we were looking for. It's usually that way with this hobby, easy to make the power, very difficult to effectively use it! We really LOVE the entire "package", it let's us run a lot of "stock" parts and exhibit nearly "stock" engine/vehicle characteristics for "normal" driving. A quick glance at the car or listen to it, you'd think maybe high 13's at best? The thing I love about it the most, is the looks we get when folks wonder over and take a gander at it in the pits or staging lanes. The look on their faces when they see the iron intake and Q-jet.....PRICELESS!......Cliff
__________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English, thank a Veteran! https://cliffshighperformance.com/ 73 Ventura, SOLD 455, 3740lbs, 11.30's at 120mph, 1977 Pontiac Q-jet, HO intake, HEI, 10" converter, 3.42 gears, DOT's, 7.20's at 96mph and still WAY under the roll bar rule. Best ET to date 7.18 at 97MPH (1/8th mile), |
|
#189
03-23-2006, 09:39 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
[QUOTE=Cliff R
The thing I love about it the most, is the looks we get when folks wonder over and take a gander at it in the pits or staging lanes. The look on their faces when they see the iron intake and Q-jet.....PRICELESS!......Cliff __________________ ..I know that look CLiff!!  ... that and the how much does it weigh?,lol
__________________
Darby 74 Grandville 2Dr 455 c.i 4550# 2011 1.60 60 ft,7.33@94.55-11.502@117.74  2017, 74 firebird -3600 lbs (all bests) 1.33 60 ft, 6.314@108.39 9.950@134.32 M/T 275/60 ET SS Drag Radial 2023,(Pontiac 505) 1.27 60 ft, 5.97@112.86, 9.48@139.31.... 275/60 Radial Pro's |
|
#190
03-24-2006, 09:31 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Darby, ever get "where's the nitrous"?......Cliff
__________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English, thank a Veteran! https://cliffshighperformance.com/ 73 Ventura, SOLD 455, 3740lbs, 11.30's at 120mph, 1977 Pontiac Q-jet, HO intake, HEI, 10" converter, 3.42 gears, DOT's, 7.20's at 96mph and still WAY under the roll bar rule. Best ET to date 7.18 at 97MPH (1/8th mile), |
|
#191
03-24-2006, 10:09 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Yep
...I especially like when they come over and say WOW This thing moves mUst have some deep gears in her huh,like 4.10's or something?...I say nope!! 3.23's!!! ...... The look is "PRICELESS" as u say
__________________
Darby 74 Grandville 2Dr 455 c.i 4550# 2011 1.60 60 ft,7.33@94.55-11.502@117.74 2017, 74 firebird -3600 lbs (all bests) 1.33 60 ft, 6.314@108.39 9.950@134.32 M/T 275/60 ET SS Drag Radial 2023,(Pontiac 505) 1.27 60 ft, 5.97@112.86, 9.48@139.31.... 275/60 Radial Pro's |
| Reply |
|
|
The PY Online Forums is the largest online gathering of Pontiac enthusiasts anywhere in the world. Founded in 1991, it was also the first online forum for people to gather and talk about their Pontiacs. Since then, it has become the mecca of Pontiac technical data and knowledge that no other place can surpass.
Linear Mode
