Mike C

Rockers probably not, timing chain is a 100k mile replacement part, so I would. Springs as well. my 104k mile Impala SS is short on top because of weak springs. Comp is fine, but too expensive in a budget motor. Crane Energizer 266 is an excellent cam for a street motor to 4500 rpm. Get some factory replacemnt Z.28 springs. The cam and lifters can be had for $100 and the springs are about another $30 if you shop around. Same with a good roller chain. Hardened locks are a good idea as well, and might as well do $2 worth of valve stem seals. Total should be right around $200.

Most likely the 307 is an Oldsmobile. 307 last saw the light in the early 70's in production cars. Can't beat the price regardless!

What Terry said. Make sure that you are getting COMPLETE opening of the primaries with your throttle linkage setup. You can pull the vacuum pot and test with a mity vac or similar. ALso, that Xcelerator is a piece of crap. Go back to the performer, or SOMETHING else regardless of what carb you run. Let me revise that, without the plenum divider it is terrible. It is acceptable with it, but still a lousy intake all in all compared to some newer designs. Almost all of the dual plane aftermarket intakes will make not only more power, but a wider power band as well. If you have a bog with the Holley, work on the accelerator pump cam and shooter. Bog means too much air and needs more pump shot.

L48 was the base 4bbl 350 from 1973-1980 in Corvettes and Camaros. Rated at 185 hp in 1973-74, it dropped to 165 in 75 with Cat converters. These are the Camaro #'s, 'vettes were usually 10 hp higher. It is a fine starting point, especially if it is cheap.

I have heard that the FWD 3800 has the narrow 60 degree type bellhousing pattern. But I cannot confirm this. A trip to the local GM dealer and a poke under the hood could be enlightening.

No Yenko Camaros ever came with 302s. But they did have small block Yenko Novas. The only 302 powered cars were the 67-69 Z/28's. They were homologated for SCCA Trans Am racing which specified a 5 liter displacement. This was achieved with the 283 3.0" stroke crank in the 327 4.0" bore block. Small journal 302 are easy to build, and cheap if you go with cast pistons. Large journal 302 is expensive to buy a crank and forged pistons for. They were supposed to have built 1000 for homologation, but 1967 production was only 612 cars. In 1968 they built about 8,000 and in 1969 about 18,000. In 1968 Mark won 13 of 15 races, arguably the most dominant performance in any racing series. Ford's response was the Boss 302 in 1969. In 1970, Penske and Donahue went to AMC from Chevy and Ford won the title. They were factory rated at 290 hp SAE gross, but it was more realistically SAE net factor. Mark Donahue's Sunoco 302 built by Traco dynoed (an engine dyno) at 457 hp. The dual quads were an over the counter dealer part that were worth about 40 hp in the 7500 rpm range. Typically the cars ran low to mid 14's stock with 3.73. 4.56 and headers put the cars in the mid to low 13's. Other high perf parts available over the counter were fast ratio steering arms, shot peened positractions, axles, and steering knuckles. Front and rear sway bars, and 4 wheel disc brakes. I have built a duplicate of the HD rear axle with discs for my 68 Convertible. In 69 201 cars were assembled with factory 4 wheel discs known as the JL-8 option.

The 3970010 block is usually a 350. A very few were 302 toward the end of the 69 model year. None of the 67-68 used that number. Some are 2 bolt and some are 4 bolt, I have had both. Regardless, all are 4 inch bore. 302-327-350 are all the same except for stroke and piston pin height. The Yenko Camaros were big blocks, but a lot if not all of the Yenko Deuces (Chevy II ie Nova) were LT-1 powered. Motion also built some LT-1 powered Vegas. Most of the LT-1 will have the 3970010 block. I was used from 1969 until probably 1977. My 72 Jimmy had a 4 bolt 3970010 motor and my brother's 76 Camaro motor is a 2 bolt 3970010. The other time you see the 010 or 020 is underneath the timing cover and in the recess behind the flywheel. THis refers to the amount of tin and nickel found in the block. This is not the same as the casting number.

Depends on the compression ratio to begin with, but yes, you can do it. The up to 96 Camaro Firebird 3800 and WC T5 seems a better swap IMO. In 97 they went to drive by wire which might make for a slightly more difficult swap.

How much and what type of driving do you do? FInd out if the Muncie you are talking about is an M20 or 21. Most likely in a big car it is an M20 wide ratio box which is the better street box. There are several Muncie decoder sites out there, including http://www.gearzone.net (which is also http://www.5speeds.com) If it is just a weekend car with no interstate trips, an M20 or Super T10 with a 3.70 or even a 3.54 diff is a tolerable setup. A world class T5 will stand up to street driving and even some mild street strip stuff. Some of the mustang guys run 11's for a short period of time on T5's. But if you break it once, the T56 is cheaper. After having recently driven a T56 for the first time, it's hard to do much better.

The 76 Stingray would have had a BW Super T10. 1974 was last year for the Muncie. Most likely it would have had a 2.64 first gear. I really like my ST10. The M21 has a 2.21 first gear while the M20 has a 2.52 first gear. IMO, the 21 is virtually useless except in a road racer. It has the distinction of being the closest ratio production 4 speed ever made (along with it's beefier cousin the reduced helical angle M22 "rockcrusher".) 4.10 is about the minimum gear to run, but 67-69 Z/28s came with 3.73 and the M21. Any gear less than 3.73 came with the M20. The 4 speed trans will fit easily in the trans tunnel as they are quite compact. The exception may be the side mounted shifter requireing clearancing. If you look in the JTR manual, they have a pic of the "mule" car of theirs with a 4+3 (the front half is virtually identical to the ST10 in your old Stingray) you can compare. The back end of which is a LOT bigger because of the OD. If I were to do this swap, I would use a bellhousing from an 84-88 Corvette with its hydraulic slave cylinder setup.

All of the World CLass V8 transmissions have a 2.95 first gear. In a Camaro, the 4.10 is the best gear with a T56 and it's 2.66 first gear which gives an overall first of 10.906. Just dividing by 2.95 gives a final drive of 3.69 which pretty much is perfect for a 3.70 LSD. Just for comparison, a TH700 and a 3.54 diff gives an overall 1st gear ratio of 10.903. My Super T10 has a 2.62 first gear and its gear spread is very well suited to the 4.10s as well. Except on the highway...

The LS1 is a distributorless motor with a coil for each cylinder

Do you mean '89 Corvetter? As DavyZ noted, all rules are off if it is a '99. On the back of the block the number DavyZ mentioned is a casting number. It will identify displacement (possibly) but that's about it on an older block, but starting in the mid 80's, the displacement number is also cast on the bellhousing extension. (5.0 or 5.7). The number you need for an older motor is a two or three letter code in front of the serial number. Two letters until 1970 and three letters afterwords. This number is stamped on a "pad" in front of the passenger side cylinder head. The pad is actually an extension of the block deck. Then you can go to Mortec or Nastyz28.com for suffix codes to identify the original application.

If you still have the Nissan shifter attached to your T5, immediately throw it away! Buy one of the many fine 83-93 Mustang T5 shifters on the market. I bought a Competeition plus from Hurst, the Pro 5.0 has a good reputation as well. BBK makes one and so does B&M. The Nissan one is crap...

The Lt4 Hot Cam is .525/.525 lift with the 1.6 rockers. What rocker ratio does Comp spec for their cam? The LT4 cam is plenty big enough. For much more LT1/LT4 info, try http://www.camaroz28.com or http://www.impalassforum.com I know the impala board has entire threads dedicated to the different cams.

Your 73 should have the same booster/pattern as the 280 Z. My 72 did not, but I redrilled for the later booster. Not sure about the ZX,however. To bench bleed your master, you can clamp one of the ears in a vise, put rubber hoses from the bleeder screws into the reservoir with their ends submerged in fluid, then actuate the master. I use a large Phillips screwdriver usually. If you have an assistant, you can actually bolt the master to the booster, then connect the hoses to the bleeders with the ends of the hoses submerged, then have your assistant cycle the brake pedal until no more air bubbles appear.

Turbo one. The output shaft is larger on the T5 than the NA trans. At least on the one I have.

You can buy a Lakewood scattershield (or McLeod) that uses the Camaro T5 slave setup. It is drilled for both conventional Muncie and the rotated T5 patterns. Then you can just use the same setup as detailed in the JTR manual. This will be easier to solve hydraulic issues for sure, about the same price, but you get the added security of an explosion proof bellhousing. Another alternative is the 84-88 Corvette bellhousing. I think the hydraulic setup is easier to adapt than the Camaro one since you don't have to deal with the plastic line, but still not explosion proof. Might be worth a call to see if any of the vendors have a part# for a scattershield in an 84-88 'vette.

I have the ST rear bar on my 240. WIth the R180 then with the R200. No problems either way. I do not have the finned cover as seen above.

GM Performance parts sells the Police Package Tahoe 4L60E with a 2300 rpm converter, BRAND NEW for $1650 (give or take a few bucks depending on dealer.) Check out JIm Pace. I thinkg the address is http://www.paceparts.com I was considering a T56 swap into my Impala but have decided the Tahoe trans is how I will go. I just don't trust anybody to correctly R&R one. Look at the Impala boards and see just how often they fail and how soon they fail AGAIN after most rebuilds.

Interesting info. I have never seen a Camaro with the Ford sourced 3 speed? GM's saginaw division built all of the 3 speeds I have seen. Thanks for the V6 T5 info. DOes the shifter match the Ford or GM style pattern? (GM is almost square, Ford very rectangular.) For a fact I know that the 60 degree V6 bellhousing will not work with the 3800 rear driver. The 60 is similar if not the same as the Northstar while the 3800 is the old BOP pattern. Do you have a picture of the bellhousing?

I have heard conflicting reports concerning the T5 used behind the 93 and up V6 cars. For one they have a BOP bellhousing pattern for the 3800. They are supposedly a World Class type trans, and what I have heard is they are virtually identical to the Ford unit. If that is true, bellhousing compatibility may be a factor. I cannot verify this. A phone call to one of the big dismantlers (Billy Grahm Camaro/Firebird in Georgia) might yield more info.

Yes, but it is the more expensive way. As Phantom noted, using the short "stub" axles from a 76-78 280 allows the 300ZX LSD to be bolted into a first gen Z car by only changing the rear cover. (Assuming an R200 originally installed.) The adapters are not cheap and require you sending or buying a set of 280Z companion flanges that the adapters are then welded to. Check out the adapters on modern motorsports page.

Ross C at modern motorsports sells both styles of adapters. The 300ZX halfshafts are much more common, ie cheaper than the 280 ZXT/2+2 shafts. Some people have done the 280ZXT swap onto 240 stubs with the factory adapter, but consenus is that it will bind. I purchased his adpaters for the 280ZXT shafts and sent him my 280 flanges for the attachment. I am upgrading to the stonger 280 stubs and would recommend same to you, which rules out the 280ZXT factory flanges.

The 283 is not good for max power output because of its small bore. You are limited to a 1.94 intake valve, and even with that bore shrouding is a problem. 283 parts are more expensive than 350 parts so any mileage gain is offset by buildup price. You will have to drive a lot to make back that gain. The 283 is a fine little motor, same with the 302. But the 350 is the hands down winner $ for $. The smaller engines will require more gear to put the same torque to the wheels. This extra RPM negates the benefits of the smaller displacment. Bottom line is any of the 4" bore motors will get better mileage and power in a performance application, even if they do displace more. It takes a certain number of BTU for any work done, regardless of engine size, same power is required to move the car. That means if you can burn your fuel more efficiently for a given power output, you will get better mileage. The .060 283 was the hot ticket until 1960. Then when the 327 showed up it was all she wrote!