Parts compatibility question - Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board
Hotrodders.com -- Hot Rod Forum



Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Unanswered Posts Auto Escrow Insurance Auto Loans
Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board > Tech Help> Engine
User Name
Password
lost password?   |   register now

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 07-26-2008, 05:01 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: E Tex
Posts: 7
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Parts compatibility question

Hey everybody. First time on this site. Just stumbled across it and it looks like there's a lot of knowledgeable folks here. I could use some advice. I'm pretty much a novice at engine building, but it seems I probably couldn't do too much worse than previous builders have done for me.
Anyway, I'm rebuilding, or at least getting parts together, for the 350 in my '71 Vette. A local circle track builder is actually doing the work. I'm just looking on trying to learn. What I really need opinions on is the parts I'm planning on using and whether they are a good combination or not. This is the list of parts I have so far.
Procomp Aluminum Heads 64cc, 2.02/1.60, 210cc runners
Crane Blue Racer Cam and lifters 1064K..Adv Dur.300/.310, Dur. @.050 .234/.244, Gross lift .488/.510
[B] SS roller rockers
[B]Weiand 75471 low rise single plane/open plenum design, 2000-65000 power band
Holley 750 CFM Vac. Sec. 0-80508S
Does this look like a decent conbination or not? Would it be better made into a 383? Thanks in advance for any help.

    Advertisement
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 07-26-2008, 05:37 PM
ericnova72's Avatar
More for Less Racer
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: S.W. Lower Michigan
Age: 47
Posts: 8,801
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 19
Thanked 350 Times in 320 Posts
The Pro-Comp heads need a lot of porting to be any better than a stock Vortec head, If you use them, buy them BARE and have a local shop check them over and assemble them as quality is spotty. Don't buy them on ebay as these are often seconds and other people's rejects, get them from a reputable speed shop BARE. Also sold under the names Strike Force and Short Turn. I got mine from a PBM (Erson Cams) distributer.
The set I'm durability testing now took a lot of porting to get to the numbers I wanted (290 intake, 215 exhaust cfm) and a 2.055 valve. Seems to be making the expected power, now we are just waiting to see how they hold up (Guide wear, cracks, seat wear etc..)
Any 350 is better as a 383, and the 210cc runners are a little big for a hydraulic cammed 350, there are much better, more modern grinds than that old Blue Racer stick but there is really nothing wrong with it as long as it matches your engine goals.
What are you expecting for HP?? For driving mannerisms??
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 07-26-2008, 06:03 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: E Tex
Posts: 7
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I did buy them assembled from a company that sell on e-bay. Thay have done quite a bit of testing with them and the cam and doesn't look too bad. Making it a 383 at this point woundn't be much of a problem, just a little more machine work and a different crank. Here's the link to them. Let me know what you think. http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/SBC-C...3911.m14.l1308
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 07-26-2008, 06:29 PM
ericnova72's Avatar
More for Less Racer
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: S.W. Lower Michigan
Age: 47
Posts: 8,801
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 19
Thanked 350 Times in 320 Posts
I have bought from White's as have several friends, no problems with anything and the place seems straight-up over the phone. The revised version heads do flow somewhat better than the older set I used, but I would still have to have them hand blended(maybe your circle track friend can help?). That cam will need a 2800+stall and 3.73 gears to really shine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 07-26-2008, 06:42 PM
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 1,172
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
I don't know what you are trying to acheive.
IMO those heads are waaaay too big port volume for a 350. That is a big rpm head based on port volume. 185 would be much better.

You have plenty of cam for a 350,
if you are building for rpm that is building for your heads, then it could stand more cam, but a hydraulic will be limited to 6500 or so max., so your heads seem too big to me for your cam limitations.
Buzzing this much rpm requires a fairly expensive valve train with lighter weight components. You will also need compression in the high 10s and more intake manifold.
If you put this together it will lack torque below 2500 rpm and have lackluster throttle response due to the port volume and single plane intake and probably will start pulling about 3800.
I'd go vacuum secondaries if you want to drive it much, and vacuum advance will be mandatory.

Most everybody builds a soggy engine at least once, usually due to just plain old overcamming.

IMO 185 cc heads and a good 224* cam on 108* LSA and Air Gap will out do yours on the street/strip every time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 07-26-2008, 06:50 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: E Tex
Posts: 7
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Yeah, they seem like an up front co. I talked to Skip White, the owner, the other day and he talked me into the Crane cam instead of a 230/230, 480/480 one I was going to use. Actually, their testing they did really showed the best #'s with the 383 setup. The stall's not a problem since I have a four speed, but my 3.08 gears my be. They might have to wait awhile. Only got so much money to work with now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 07-26-2008, 06:51 PM
ericnova72's Avatar
More for Less Racer
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: S.W. Lower Michigan
Age: 47
Posts: 8,801
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 19
Thanked 350 Times in 320 Posts
Also, the low rise single plane Weiand Accelerator and its Edelbrock Torker II cousin just flat don't work, even the guy at Edelbrock when it was designed hates it. Go with a big dual plane like the Performer RPM or RPM Air-Gap.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 07-26-2008, 07:14 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: E Tex
Posts: 7
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Well, that intake issue is another problem. With the stock hood, I just don't have the clearance for anthing taller. Along with the rears, an early BB hood is also in my plans to get more room. How restrictive do you think it will be?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 07-27-2008, 02:11 AM
techinspector1's Avatar
Senior Curmudgeon
 
Last wiki edit: DynoSim combinations Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hemet, California, USA
Age: 72
Posts: 12,518
Wiki Edits: 326

Thanks: 678
Thanked 868 Times in 738 Posts
"Only got so much money to work with now."

I don't get it. If you're on a budget, why don't you start at the other end of the car in the first place? Those big heads and a 3.08 gear are gonna be a miserable combination to try to drive on the street.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 07-27-2008, 08:20 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: E Tex
Posts: 7
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
[/QUOTE] I don't get it. If you're on a budget, why don't you start at the other end of the car in the first place? Those big heads and a 3.08 gear are gonna be a miserable combination to try to drive on the street.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, you're probably right. It wasn't exactly a matter of choice which end I started on. It was a garbage rebuild that only lasted a year and a half. The engine HAD to be rebuilt now. I will eventually change the gears. Right now it's really more of a time thang than money. What exactly do you mean by "a
miserable combination to try to drive on the street"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 07-27-2008, 03:51 PM
techinspector1's Avatar
Senior Curmudgeon
 
Last wiki edit: DynoSim combinations Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hemet, California, USA
Age: 72
Posts: 12,518
Wiki Edits: 326

Thanks: 678
Thanked 868 Times in 738 Posts
Well, maybe "miserable" wasn't exactly the right word to use. It all depends on what you are willing to put up with. I can visualize a bog comin' off idle with those heads on a 350 and havin' to slip the clutch to keep the r's up to get past it. That may be acceptable to you and it probably would have been acceptable to me when I was a young man. However, in my advanced years, It wouldn't be the car I'd want to drive on the street.

Maybe I would have done it like this:
Bore 0.030", Keith Black KB193 hypers w/5.7" rods
http://kb-silvolite.com/performance....tails&P_id=155
12558062 Vortec heads (170cc runners) rescued from a boneyard, along with the rail rockers and covers. 9.6:1 static c.r. with the KB's.
Cut decks for 0.020" piston deck height.
GM 10105117 head gaskets.
Dual plane Vortec intake of your choice, based on being matched to the cam. "Matched to the cam" in this example would mean a standard Performer Vortec to me, to generate power throughout the range of the cam. There are others on this board who would recommend a Performer RPM, but in my opinion, you'd be giving up low end to gain some on the top. In my opinion, it's better to make more power "under curve" than it is to make power at the top and give up some down lower. I could be wrong though and in the whole scheme of things, it probably wouldn't make all that much difference. The standard Performer might fit under the bonnet a little better though.
Cam of your choice based on static c.r., maybe something like this that would have limited lift to coordinate with the limited lift of the stock Vortec heads but would still have a little cackle to it. Although a dead smooth idle is just fine with me in most applications, I don't think a Corvette should have a dead smooth idle.
http://www.cranecams.com/?show=brows...tType=camshaft
Rear gear something like 3.73:1

Last edited by techinspector1; 07-27-2008 at 04:09 PM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 07-28-2008, 07:27 AM
Double_v23's Avatar
Horsepower Enthusiast
 

Last journal entry: Finished BMOD001FH
Last photo:
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Mooresville, NC
Posts: 1,495
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
The weiand 7547-1 is an IMCA/WISSOTA legal intake for a reason...because it sucks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 07-28-2008, 07:37 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: E Tex
Posts: 7
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double_v23
The weiand 7547-1 is an IMCA/WISSOTA legal intake for a reason...because it sucks.
Thats what I'm hearing. The only other one I know will fit under my hood is the one I have had on there, the Edlebrock Performer 2101, and it's probably not any better, at least with what I got.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 07-28-2008, 07:59 AM
Double_v23's Avatar
Horsepower Enthusiast
 

Last journal entry: Finished BMOD001FH
Last photo:
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Mooresville, NC
Posts: 1,495
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
If you can fit the 7547 under your hood then the performer RPM should not be a problem.

Here is a picture comparing the heights.

the one on the left is a 7546 the one in the middle is a Performer RPM and the one on the right is a 7547-1

as you can see the one inch carb spacer on the 7547-1 makes them all level.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	100_1044.jpg
Views:	50
Size:	110.1 KB
ID:	31514  
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 07-28-2008, 08:59 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: E Tex
Posts: 7
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hmmmm.. I know the RPM intake is too tall. I didn't know the Weiand had to have a spacer. If that makes it as tall as the RPM, it ain't gonna work. Reusing the 2101 is probably not a good idea. Any other suggestions, other than putting on a early LT1/BB hood?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Recent Engine posts with photos

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name (usually not your first and last name), your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hotrodders Guidelines -- READ ME Jon Hotrodders Site Suggestions and Help 0 06-14-2003 05:07 PM
Hotrodders Guidelines -- READ ME Jon Suspension - Brakes - Steering 0 06-14-2003 05:03 PM
Hotrodders Guidelines -- READ ME Jon Electrical 0 06-14-2003 05:01 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Copyright Hotrodders.com 1999 - 2012. All Rights Reserved.