Hot Rod Forum banner
1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi Guys,


First, I'd like to thank all of the knowledgeable people that have contributed over the years. It's been interesting reading past posts.


So, I'd greatly appreciate some recommendations specific to what I'm going to be doing in the near future.


I recently purchased a rebuilt 327 that a guy had sitting for a couple of years. So, I'm going to disassemble it, make sure everything is clean, have the balance checked, and either determine what cam is in it, and/or what cam I should put in it.


DETAILS:
The car it will be going in is a '67 Malibu.
Trans is a TH350 with your standard B&M shift kit, but have a 4L60E that I will be installing at a later date (the tranny is one of those projects that "has babies", as my old man would say...).
Rearend is stock 10-bolt, turns 3K at ~80MPH (indicated) with 235 60R15 tires, so maybe someone can estimate the gears...


The 327 currently has 492 angle-plug heads with 2.02/1.60 valves.
From what I can tell by looking in the spark plug holes, it seems to have flat-top pistons, so I'm assuming compression will be about 10ish:1...(?)


It has a Performer intake, but I'd be open to buying an RPM...


OBJECTIVE:
I'm going for a "nostalgia" look and feel.
I'd like to have a motor that doesn't suck too much gas on the street, but will turn 14-seconds in the 1/4.
It would be nice if it sounded cool (like an L79), but "works" with a stock converter, and would be great with 2000 stall.
Also don't want to destroy the trans and/or stock 10-bolt one-legger rearend...


QUESTIONS:
1. Cam recommendations to meet the stated objectives
2. Would the 2.02 heads be overkill for my objectives (and make it a gas hog)?
3. Would 1.94 heads be better for my objectives? I happen to have a pair of '68 291 camel humps with 1.94s.
4. The 492s are used/rebuilt, whereas the 291s appear to be "virgin, never used" (believe it or not)... would it be best to use the 492s, and sell the 291s to someone doing a nice restoration, or just use whichever best meets my objectives?


Thanks in advance for the transfer of knowledge!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,203 Posts
1. Speed Pro CS179R camshaft
(duplicate of the discontinued GM-3863151 cam used in the Chevrolet L79 engine option)
Speed Pro HT-817 hydraulic lifters
Speed Pro VS139R valve springs (Chevrolet Z-28 )
2. Keep the 462 heads with a good valve job, 10.3:1 compression ratio, 64 cc
3. and 4 Sell the 291 heads to someone restoring a 1962 Chevrolet 327/300.
5. Use Speed Pro equipment, buy some Comp Cams decals and save about $150

The GM-3863151 "L-79" camshaft is what my 1962 Chevrolet 327/300 is equipped with. It was installed during a major rebuild in 1990 an the engine is still strong. The GM cam was still available in 1990 so aftermarket duplicates were not needed. That cam works best with 11:1 compression ratio with dome Pistons but it will be good with as little as 10:1 compression ratio with flat top Pistons.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
1. Speed Pro CS179R camshaft
(duplicate of the discontinued GM-3863151 cam used in the Chevrolet L79 engine option)
Speed Pro HT-817 hydraulic lifters
Speed Pro VS139R valve springs (Chevrolet Z-28 )
2. Keep the 462 heads with a good valve job, 10.3:1 compression ratio, 64 cc
3. and 4 Sell the 291 heads to someone restoring a 1962 Chevrolet 327/300.
5. Use Speed Pro equipment, buy some Comp Cams decals and save about $150

The GM-3863151 "L-79" camshaft is what my 1962 Chevrolet 327/300 is equipped with. It was installed during a major rebuild in 1990 an the engine is still strong. The GM cam was still available in 1990 so aftermarket duplicates were not needed. That cam works best with 11:1 compression ratio with dome Pistons but it will be good with as little as 10:1 compression ratio with flat top Pistons.

Thanks for the feedback, MF (are you RatFink's son? ;))


Just to clarify, the 291s are '68, so good for a 68 resto...
I was wondering if the L79 cam (or Comp Cam's Nostalgia+ L79H) would be too much for a stock converter...?
What trans are you running?


I'll probably go with a 2000 converter in the future, just wondering if I can make do with a stock one on the 4L60, until I feel like shelling out another $400 for a 2000 lockup converter...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,203 Posts
The L79 cam will be fine with a stock automatic or 4-speed manual transmission. A high stall torque converter and low rear end gears are not necessary. The cam only has 64 degrees valve overlap for a noticeable rough idle at 700 rpm.

My '62 Chevrolet Bel Air 327/300 2- door sedan is equipped with the original BW T-10 4-speed manual and a 3.36 rear gear. The engine has the original #3890462 ciylinder heads with Ferrea 1.94" / 1.50" stainless steel valves. The Pioneer/Elgin valve springs were equalized with 110 lb @ 1.700" seat pressure and 280 lb open pressure @ .447" valve lift. Two years ago, I installed a 1967 intake manifold and a rebuilt 1967 Rochester Q-jet rated at 750 CFM after I priced several rebuilt 1962 Chevrolet Carter AFB carburetors that are rated at 650 CFM. I saved $150 and got a better carburetor to boot. The engine pulls hard from 2,000 RPM to 5,000 RPM through each gear.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,338 Posts
sell both sets of heads to someone that wants old heads. You can buy better heads for less money,invest in a small hydraulic roller cam with a mild idle. Make 75 more horse power than using the old heads,still using cast iron and get better mpg.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
506 Posts
I ran this converter in my 89' c1500 for over 15,000 miles before truck got totaled.
it was a major improvement over the stock stall of 1350. worked great, no over heating, locked when suppose to. I do a lot of pullin and up hill climbs around here.
it's advertised a 2075 stall, but was brake stallin 1800-1900, flash stallin to 2500 behind a stock 305 tbi.
shift drop rpm didn't fall out like the 1350 did.
at 1st, I was worried about it not holding up, but it done a hellava job for a $150 converter. it sure make the ole junker truck hit 60 mph a lot faster.
I've bought big brand name converters that didn't work as good as this cheapo stock converter.
you can pick em up at any auto parts store.
i still got the tranny and converter from the totaled truck.
i think it'll work great behind a mild 327 or 350.
http://www.autozone.com/drivetrain/.../1995/6-cylinders-z-4-3l-tbi/940354_190662_0/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,203 Posts
NOSTALGIA: circa 1967:

My associate bought a new 1966 Chevt II with a L79 327/350 engine option and a 4-speed transmission.
The L79 cam was called a "350 cam" back in the day. He could run with a local guy that owned a 1965 Corvette equipped with a 327/365, fuel injection, "30-30" solid lifter cam, 4.56 gears, and a 4-speed transmission. Both were low 14 second cars on street tires and closed exhaust. At the time, I had a 1956 Chevrolet Del Ray 2-door sedan equipped with a "over the counter" 327/365 short block, "30-30" cam, 1957 power pack heads equipped with 1.94"/ 1.50" valves, a 1957 intake manifold with a Carter WCFB carburator, a 3-speed O.D. transmission, 12 lb aluminum flywheel, and 4.11 rear gears. My '56 Chevy could turn consistant 15 seconds flat with open headers and 7.50x14 Atlas Buchron tires.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,126 Posts
I would go with a roller cam; because I don't like the risk vs reward of the flat tappet stuff.
If you do go hft, make sure you follow proper break in procedures to the letter.

The key to the L79 cam is adequate compression. At least 9.5:1; and lets try to keep the quench distance between .035" and .045"
Doing both of these will keep your 327 from being a gas hog (if you can keep your right foot sane).

If you use an Edelbrock carb; for the vintage look, peel the edelbrock sticker off if its visible under your aircleaner.

Intake should be a Edelbrock C3B, C3BX or C4B or maybe a Holley 300-36 for the vintage "Day 2 look" (the 300-36 would be more 1969 and later if you're theme crazy. There was a dyno test in Hot Rod Deluxe or something that did some dyno testing of vintage manifolds on a pretty stout 283. The C3B/C4B did about as good as a regular Edelbrock Performer, so in a street car you wouldn't be held back.

Distributor would probably be best to use a Pertronix-type drop in module and a matching coil. Option 2 for me would be a Delta 10B box, and use Echlin points in the distributor. Boy will this thing throw an arc :-D

You didn't mention exhaust; Im assuming you're using 2.5" rams horns or basic 1-5/8" headers? Me? Id use the rams horns. Buy em new from Dorman, grind off the brackets and casting lugs. No leaks, no heat and looks the part.

Fun project!!
 

·
Wrench Turner
Joined
·
4,952 Posts
Thanks for the feedback, MF (are you RatFink's son? ;))


Just to clarify, the 291s are '68, so good for a 68 resto...
I was wondering if the L79 cam (or Comp Cam's Nostalgia+ L79H) would be too much for a stock converter...?
What trans are you running?


I'll probably go with a 2000 converter in the future, just wondering if I can make do with a stock one on the 4L60, until I feel like shelling out another $400 for a 2000 lockup converter...
FWIW,the Comp Nostalgia L79 cam will perform much better than that repro L79 cam & get better milage.It has the sound of the L79,but,modern timing & lobe profile & offers better power under the curve than the outdated L79 cam.Both cams will,however,need a higher than stock convertor to run well.IIRC,none of the L79 equipped cars were offered with auto trans from GM.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
The L79 cam will be fine with a stock automatic or 4-speed manual transmission. A high stall torque converter and low rear end gears are not necessary. The cam only has 64 degrees valve overlap for a noticeable rough idle at 700 rpm.

My '62 Chevrolet Bel Air 327/300 2- door sedan is equipped with the original BW T-10 4-speed manual and a 3.36 rear gear. The engine has the original #3890462 ciylinder heads with Ferrea 1.94" / 1.50" stainless steel valves. The Pioneer/Elgin valve springs were equalized with 110 lb @ 1.700" seat pressure and 280 lb open pressure @ .447" valve lift. Two years ago, I installed a 1967 intake manifold and a rebuilt 1967 Rochester Q-jet rated at 750 CFM after I priced several rebuilt 1962 Chevrolet Carter AFB carburetors that are rated at 650 CFM. I saved $150 and got a better carburetor to boot. The engine pulls hard from 2,000 RPM to 5,000 RPM through each gear.

Yeah, now that I looked at the specs for the cam you mentioned, and Comp Cam's standard repro of the L79, I see that the specs seem to be very close to (as I recall) the Erson cam that I put in my 283 back in '85. I'm pretty sure it was .222 @.050, and I think .454 lift...
I'm sure it would be a bit more fun in the 327.


The specs on the Nostalgia+ L79H are a little different, which is what made me wonder if it would idle OK with a stock converter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
sell both sets of heads to someone that wants old heads. You can buy better heads for less money,invest in a small hydraulic roller cam with a mild idle. Make 75 more horse power than using the old heads,still using cast iron and get better mpg.

Thanks Vinnie... I'll have to decide whether I'm mainly going to be "cruising", with things being more about novelty, or whether I'm really going to be racing (street legal bracket racing). Now that they've re-opened the AAA Dragway (which I can see from my backyard), going with modern heads is something to think about...


I might run the 492s for now (have to find some headers that will work of course), and if I really start racing it, I can always sell them and the 291s, and get some modern heads to get me closer to that 14 second goal...
 

·
Wrench Turner
Joined
·
4,952 Posts
Yeah, now that I looked at the specs for the cam you mentioned, and Comp Cam's standard repro of the L79, I see that the specs seem to be very close to (as I recall) the Erson cam that I put in my 283 back in '85. I'm pretty sure it was .222 @.050, and I think .454 lift...
I'm sure it would be a bit more fun in the 327.


The specs on the Nostalgia+ L79H are a little different, which is what made me wonder if it would idle OK with a stock converter.
Either of thjose cams,the repro or the Nostalgia will need more than stock stall.A 2500 stall would be about the minimum for best performance.The Nostalgia cam will give you better performance,but,it will still need a higher than stock convertor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
I ran this converter in my 89' c1500 for over 15,000 miles before truck got totaled.
it was a major improvement over the stock stall of 1350. worked great, no over heating, locked when suppose to. I do a lot of pullin and up hill climbs around here.
it's advertised a 2075 stall, but was brake stallin 1800-1900, flash stallin to 2500 behind a stock 305 tbi.
shift drop rpm didn't fall out like the 1350 did.
at 1st, I was worried about it not holding up, but it done a hellava job for a $150 converter. it sure make the ole junker truck hit 60 mph a lot faster.
I've bought big brand name converters that didn't work as good as this cheapo stock converter.
you can pick em up at any auto parts store.
i still got the tranny and converter from the totaled truck.
i think it'll work great behind a mild 327 or 350.
http://www.autozone.com/drivetrain/.../1995/6-cylinders-z-4-3l-tbi/940354_190662_0/


Thanks for the heads-up that I can get a "stall" converter on the cheap. Since the 4L60E that I bought is basically stock, it might be better if the converter ended up being the weak point anyway... ;)


I'll have to see if I can find out what the converter that came with it is. Maybe it already has a 2000 stall like this one... the guy that I bought the motor and trans from didn't know anything about them, other than that they were professionally rebuilt...
 

·
Wrench Turner
Joined
·
4,952 Posts
SoulSurfSD;32676for the heads-up that I can get a "stall" converter on the cheap. Since the 4L60E that I bought is basically stock said:
The stall rating of the convertor has nothing to do with strength or weakness.The higher stall allows the engine to operate within it's rated RPM range without stalling or over riding.It's a performance issue vs strength.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
NOSTALGIA: circa 1967:

My associate bought a new 1966 Chevt II with a L79 327/350 engine option and a 4-speed transmission.
The L79 cam was called a "350 cam" back in the day. He could run with a local guy that owned a 1965 Corvette equipped with a 327/365, fuel injection, "30-30" solid lifter cam, 4.56 gears, and a 4-speed transmission. Both were low 14 second cars on street tires and closed exhaust. At the time, I had a 1956 Chevrolet Del Ray 2-door sedan equipped with a "over the counter" 327/365 short block, "30-30" cam, 1957 power pack heads equipped with 1.94"/ 1.50" valves, a 1957 intake manifold with a Carter WCFB carburator, a 3-speed O.D. transmission, 12 lb aluminum flywheel, and 4.11 rear gears. My '56 Chevy could turn consistant 15 seconds flat with open headers and 7.50x14 Atlas Buchron tires.


So, it looks like I should set my sights on getting under 15, unless I want to go with a bigger cam and modern heads... I'm hoping I can get under 14.5 without too much trouble (and $$$!)


I've grown up occasionally hearing the story of a neighbor with an ego problem, who went out and bought a new '69 427 Caprice... don't know why he didn't go with a Chevelle... I guess the bigger number was all he saw... and he kept bugging my dad to take his '65 GTO (mom's daily driver) to the local drag strip.
My dad finally agreed to go, if he could use the neighbor's cheater slicks.
It turned out that the neighbor couldn't get his 427 Caprice under 14.5, even with slicks.
My old man did a few runs with bald street tires, until he could borrow the slicks from the neighbor. Since it just fried the tires in 1st gear, he did a couple of runs starting in 2nd gear... and turned a 14.3... with bald street tires, starting in 2nd(!). He never did find out what it would have done with slicks, since when he got back to the pits the neighbor was packing up, and when my dad asked about borrowing his slicks, he just grumbled something, and split...
He sold the new 427 Caprice right after that, and bought a brand new Ford Talladega... which from what I've read, wasn't all that in a 1/4 either... guess the guy's brain wasn't much bigger than his little "unit". Talk about ego issues...


I guess my ego will have to settle for whatever is reasonable.
Either way, it should be a definite step up from the 283...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
I would go with a roller cam; because I don't like the risk vs reward of the flat tappet stuff.
If you do go hft, make sure you follow proper break in procedures to the letter.

The key to the L79 cam is adequate compression. At least 9.5:1; and lets try to keep the quench distance between .035" and .045"
Doing both of these will keep your 327 from being a gas hog (if you can keep your right foot sane).

If you use an Edelbrock carb; for the vintage look, peel the edelbrock sticker off if its visible under your aircleaner.

Intake should be a Edelbrock C3B, C3BX or C4B or maybe a Holley 300-36 for the vintage "Day 2 look" (the 300-36 would be more 1969 and later if you're theme crazy. There was a dyno test in Hot Rod Deluxe or something that did some dyno testing of vintage manifolds on a pretty stout 283. The C3B/C4B did about as good as a regular Edelbrock Performer, so in a street car you wouldn't be held back.

Distributor would probably be best to use a Pertronix-type drop in module and a matching coil. Option 2 for me would be a Delta 10B box, and use Echlin points in the distributor. Boy will this thing throw an arc :-D

You didn't mention exhaust; Im assuming you're using 2.5" rams horns or basic 1-5/8" headers? Me? Id use the rams horns. Buy em new from Dorman, grind off the brackets and casting lugs. No leaks, no heat and looks the part.

Fun project!!


Thanks for the tips AG.
Yeah, I don't think my "nostalgia" is going to be that detailed...
It's just that the heads seem to be the thing that says "period" or "aftermarket", so I kinda liked the idea of camel humps, and of course the proper brackets and pulleys for the basic "period correct" look.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
FWIW,the Comp Nostalgia L79 cam will perform much better than that repro L79 cam & get better milage.It has the sound of the L79,but,modern timing & lobe profile & offers better power under the curve than the outdated L79 cam.Both cams will,however,need a higher than stock convertor to run well.IIRC,none of the L79 equipped cars were offered with auto trans from GM.


Hey Joker, thanks for the input.
Yeah, I'm seriously considering the L79H for those reasons.
Since the 327 seems to have all new components (including lifters), I don't think I'm going to spend the bucks on roller, unless I really end up doing alot of racing.
As for the converter, I might just try the one suggested earlier, unless I find that the one that came with my 4L60 already has a 2000 stall.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
You didn't mention exhaust; Im assuming you're using 2.5" rams horns or basic 1-5/8" headers? Me? Id use the rams horns. Buy em new from Dorman, grind off the brackets and casting lugs. No leaks, no heat and looks the part.
Fun project!!
Hey AG, yeah I'll have to also get my head into the "quench" and "squish" and things that I've seen as I've read past posts...
While I have the motor apart, I figured balancing, and I assume that quench and squish and what-not are the things involved with blueprinting, would be worthwhile.
Any other tips that you or anyone else can give me, that will help keep the motor as efficient as possible, would be greatly appreciated!


Oh yeah, I don't think I can use rams horns on a Chevelle (let me know if I'm wrong)... so I'll have to find some headers that will work with the angle plugs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,203 Posts
The Comp Cams reproductions of the GM high performance daily driver camshafts have cam lobes that are more radical (steep) than the GM cam lobes. The GM cam lobes are lazy in comparison. The Comp Cams version of the GM L79 cam therefore requires higher valve spring pressure in order to prevent lofting of the lifters on the return flank of the cam lobes. Lofting the lifters is a major cause of valve float at high RPM unless higher valve spring pressure is used. High spring pressure can lead to wiped out cam lobes for a daily driver.

GM camshafts are ground to last in the daily driver new car warranty period whereas Comp Cams camshafts are optimized for competition. Comp Cams and other high performance cam grinders could care less if their camshafts fail during the new car warranty period.
 
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
Top