Let's see if I have this right. You want to build a 160 mph car that has no roll cage or 5-point harness in it and hand it to a 17 year old?

Maybe it's just me, but it sounds irresponsible.

 

No.
It's my car.
He'd kill himself.

 

Any particular reason for the Chevy engine instead of a true Pontiac engine??

A Powerglide would not be a good trans for this type of car, IMO it would be the best for drag use. I would think a 5-speed OD like the Tremec TKO stick trans, or maybe a beefed-up 200R4 automatic for the type of driving you want to do.

 

Never use Powerglide and 2:75 in the same sentence. Unless you live on a hill (to get it moving) a Glide would be a bad choice.

 

Never use Powerglide and 2:75 in the same sentence. Unless you live on a hill (to get it moving) a Glide would be a bad choice.

Yup, I'm gonna agree on this..

Especially if you plan on doing 160+

The motor is gonna be aimed towards high RPM, so your gonna be taking all day to go stop light to stop light with that rear gear and a Powerglide

 

Would a TH400 be a better choice with those gears?
Haven't heard of a 200R4.
Which year and vehicle would I find one in?

 

If you're wanting a top speed car and still have good normal driving manners the TH2004R would be a good choice. It has a .67 4th gear and will shift into 4th @ WOT. Takes less HP to turn than most O/D automatic trans also.
Here's some ID and gearing Info. > http://www.maliburacing.com/auto_tranny_id.htm
Found in 80-90 GM cars, G-Body= Malibu, MonteCarlo, Cutlass, Regal, GranPrix. Large B/D Body cars Caprice, Electra, Parisienne. Cadillac etc..
The better 2004R's here in BOLD.> http://web.archive.org/web/20070128173316/http://members.aol.com/powerrslid/thm2004r.html
SSMonteCarlo, Buick GN,GNX,T-Type / Olds H/O-442

 

If you want to drive anywhere at 160, I hope to God me and my family are not sharing the road w/you!

Get a 3'rd. gen F-body, and a license to run it at the lake (the dry variety) or Bonneville, and stay off the highways.

I'm not gonna waste my time figuring out the HP requirements for this if done in a '68 F-bird, but it's considerable. Just the safety gear will set you back a chunk, but that's another story.

You can't just build a 500 HP engine and gear it 2:1 and go fast. Just doesn't work that way, unless your local land speed track is in a vacuum. Like this whole idea.

 

#1- refer back to post #2 by Tech Inspector doesn't matter who's driving this one.

#2- I hope while it's in the body shop for paint they are installing down force designed front and rear spoilers as well as wheel well air deflection.

#3- 60's style suspension isn't up to grade anymore.

#4- if your really expect this car to run at these speeds that 40 year old platform should be in top notch condition as the uni-body construction has a lot of wear and tear on it. If you've never felt the flooring in a uni-body car flex under your feet from bang shifting a big block then you don't know what your missing and I hope you never find out.

#5- as for enough power to do this yes a SBC can be built to do this with a AOD trans and a tall rear gear.

Just some food for thought,
Tony

 

with a AOD trans and a tall rear gear.

Yeah, now I understand.

'68 f-bod w/SBC, 160 MPH, w/a Ford overdrive automatic tranny. Brilliant. This is getting better all the time. I guess the OD is for better MPG.

 

Yes, We have a place in Canada to run it.
Yes, we are going through the suspension, ect.
My last Firebird was a 67 and it did 140mph with a slight built 350 LT1 and a TH400 and 2:98 rear gears.
So another 20+ mph faster with todays knowledge available and better products isn't much of a strech is it?

Your guys knowlege is what I'm asking for.
And I know there is some SMART guys on here.
That's why I joined this forum.
Not to get your opinion whether or not I should drive a car that fast.

I'm switching trannys.
What you guys said makes sense.
That will save me some time and money, Thanks.

Still undecided if a 383 stroker is really worth the extra money.
Do I really need 400-500 HP?
Or would a well built 350 4 bolt with 194's or 202's work just fine?

 

Still undecided if a 383 stroker is really worth the extra money.
Do I really need 400-500 HP?
Or would a well built 350 4 bolt with 194's or 202's work just fine?

A 350 SHOULD work, IMO

From what I understand, strokers generally have more power in lower/mid range. You want it in the higher RPM range to run that fast. Sombody please correct me if I'm wrong there..

 

What is the differance in manifolds?
Cross plane VS a Hi-Rise?
Which makes are better?
Is it worth the money to port the heads?

 

160 mph

To go from 140mph to 160 requires 49.3% more power.
Clive W :welcome:

 

FWIW when I was younger and dumber I got my Cutlass conv. around 160 with a mild SBO build- well I guess mild is a relative term.

You will not need to rev the crap out of it to go fast, just gear it accordingly- stock 2000ish TA's can do 160 with just a few mods.

Aerodynamics are a *****- its going to make this a lot harder- ever feel what its like to "float" in a muscle car at 160- scary as ****.

You're an irresponsable idiot for building this car to do 160, where do you plan on doing 160? There's not a lot of places that you can safely do it.

The car will need a lot more work/money to safely hit 160 than the enigne will.

 

gman536,I am curious as to where in Canada you can take a street car and run it at those speeds ??
Guy

 

In addition to the traditional sanctioning body- SCTA- there are several legal events held in the US each year. They usually involve closing off a public roadway and after paying an entry fee and going through tech, the competitors are allowed (one at a time) out on the course to run top end.

Some have several classes, divided by estimated or targeted speeds, and usually have an "open" class as well.

At least this way, there'll be an ambulance within a few miles of where you cash it in.

 

My last Bird was pretty smooth at 140 mph.
And I didn't even let it top out.
I only did it once, just to see if it could do it.
And that was without any suspension improvements and limited bulid funds.

Yes, there are plenty of places to trial run your car.
You just have to do some research to find them.

Another 49.3% power?
Nitro boost?

Some people want to see how fast their car will do in the 1/4 mile.

Some want to see how fast it will do in a couple of miles.

Is one crazier than the other

 

My last Bird was pretty smooth at 140 mph. *snip* And that was without any suspension improvements *snip* Some people want to see how fast their car will do in the 1/4 mile. Some want to see how fast it will do in a couple of miles. Is one crazier than the other

Some people (me among them) would say yes, this IS crazy.

You see, the odds of something going awry at speed increase w/the speed achieved. What your car was able to do in the quarter mile was far less than 140 MPH

You say there were minimal mods done- I'm guessing no roll cage, no Z rated rubber, prob. not even a helmet.

But- I could care less. As long as you're not endangering anyone else, you should be free to go as fast as you care to. :thumbup:

 

My last Bird was pretty smooth at 140 mph.
And I didn't even let it top out.
I only did it once, just to see if it could do it.
And that was without any suspension improvements and limited bulid funds.

Yes, there are plenty of places to trial run your car.
You just have to do some research to find them.

Another 49.3% power?
Nitro boost?

Some people want to see how fast their car will do in the 1/4 mile.

Some want to see how fast it will do in a couple of miles.

Is one crazier than the other

Would you mind helping me out in finding where in Canada you can do these high speed trial runs ?? I did a google search,but nothing applicable comes up.
Guy

 

Let's see if I have this right. You want to build a 160 mph car that has no roll cage or 5-point harness in it and hand it to a 17 year old?

Maybe it's just me, but it sounds irresponsible.

I'm with ya on this 1.
What has this guy been smokin??????????

 

I don't know about all the safety stuff, but you could probably build a engine for tq over hp. That will get you up there with those gears. I have a 95 Chevy ext cab. shortly after I bought it, I was going to the VA about 2 hours away. It was around 5 in the morning and no one was on the road. So I decide to see how fast she would go. According to the gps i hit 140. It then started shaking so i backed off, but as far as I know it my truck was stock except for some exhaust, and apparently a chip are something since it did not cut off. I do have a standard tranny an nv4500 but that would be heaver for a car. so build for TQ

Skeeter

 

Cobalt327

Yeah, now I understand.

'68 f-bod w/SBC, 160 MPH, w/a Ford overdrive automatic tranny. Brilliant. This is getting better all the time. I guess the OD is for better MPG.

Not sure but I believe there are several AOD's out there made by the generous motors corp. Using a 4 or 5 spd. A/T makes more sense so that it actually has a low enough first gear to get it rolling on the street. Of course a direct tranny and a super tall gear would work but who wants to roll it down hill all the time to get it moving.

:evil: But the metric aod from the 80's that was basically a c-6 with a gear added to it is a good tranny if you have enough engine in front of it to not worry about the power loss throught this trans.

P.S. :nono: Last time I checked this wasn't a wizzing contest. There was a question asked and several folks have tried to offer some good suggestions. From several areas that need to be addressed at these kind of speeds.

Tony

 

Not sure but I believe there are several AOD's out there made by the generous motors corp. Using a 4 or 5 spd. A/T makes more sense so that it actually has a low enough first gear to get it rolling on the street. Of course a direct tranny and a super tall gear would work but who wants to roll it down hill all the time to get it moving.

:evil: But the metric aod from the 80's that was basically a c-6 with a gear added to it is a good tranny if you have enough engine in front of it to not worry about the power loss throught this trans.

P.S. :nono: Last time I checked this wasn't a wizzing contest. There was a question asked and several folks have tried to offer some good suggestions. From several areas that need to be addressed at these kind of speeds.

Tony

gearing for 160MPH is not an issue for most cars. Look at your tach when you're on the highway doing 70- most of them fall between 1800-2800 RPM when cruising at 70 MPH, which if you're in the same gear with the same rear gear and tire size would put you at about 4200-6400 RPM- right in the area of your peak power. Basically stock gearing is adequate in most cases. Trans strength is another issue.

 

Not sure but I believe there are several AOD's out there made by the generous motors corp.

"AOD" is a FoMoCo designation.

It might help to use close to the correct terminology. If you mean an automatic trans w/OD say something like "An automatic trans w/OD" or 700R4 or 2004R, etc. when referring to GM trannys- unless you really do mean to use a FoMoCo automatic overdrive tranny in a high top speed vehicle w/a Chevrolet engine- a vehicle that would be better off w/a manual tranny, OD or otherwise.

A weak OD clutch pack and the inability of an OEM tranny to hold OD at WOT means modifications to even get close to making one work. Add to that, the heat generated and power losses through an AT- and they start to make even less sense in this app, IMO.

gearing for 160MPH is not an issue for most cars.

Except for the fact that "most cars" are equipped w/an AT w/OD. At cruise speed an AT is locked up in OD. The least amount of throttle input changes all that. To build an AT w/OD that'll hold WOT in OD at the power levels and stress it takes to run 160 MPH in a blunt object will cost a bundle, and for zero advantage.

An OD manual trans would make more sense, but the OD gears of OEM trannies are usually weaker than ideal. But they might hold up to 160 MPH stresses. Or not. ain:

IMO, a serious high speed dual-use (road and track) car is going to have an aftermarket manual, w/OD.