John Scott

Why use the plastic slave when an alum replacement is avail? The only way you could buy one here anyway was as a set with the camaro mc. JS

Welcome Shane, Occasionally we get a little sidetracked from the original posting... If my math is right, questionable on a Sat. A.M., for a 2500 (probably lighter, mine weighs 2510)lb car about 300 RWH, 380hp flywheel for 116mph. Hp guesses are just that, guesses. All I can say is WOW! Up at Bandimere in July no less, your #s are impressive. I bet you have fun with the local big V8s! You combination obviously works. A good testament to the stock Z engine. Sorry, but where the heck is Henderson JS [ September 22, 2001: Message edited by: John Scott ]

On the horizontal axis, you are shooting for the engine/transmission centerline to be at 90 degrees to the rear axle line. Its OK to have the engine biased to one side of the engine compartment, many manufactiures have done this in the past. Finding a way to measure this exactly is a little tough. As in my swap, the center of the crankshaft is 1/2" to the right of the chassis center, I try to maintain that distance as well at the transmission tailshft. I've played with shimming the trans mount (vert axis) with good success. Sometimes a little trial and error can find the ideal location. JS

Doin' well Ron! Amazing what a little slow down at work allows! By the way, good luck next week at the bracket finals! JS [ September 20, 2001: Message edited by: John Scott ]

I notice there is no mention of the 70% intake 100% exhaust CNC machining of the ports in the 195 heads. Not until you get into the 210 race ready do you see this. For those of you that have these heads, to what extent are the ports and chambers finished? I just found a used set of 195 angle plug Wrong CC for flat tops as well. I'm seriously considering ordering the bare models. These have the guides and seats installed. If anyone is planning on running more than 550 lift the spring and valve upgrade is another $175 putting the heads upward of $1400. If you have a good head person, the bare models might be a good option. JS

Lone, pretty simple. Mill the choke horn (nice way to say hacksaw) remove choke linkage and fill hole with JB quickweld, and like you mentioned change floats. Thats it for the carb. Also needed is boost indexing a mechanical pump or boost regulated regulator with a good healthy electric. I use the Mallory. JS [ September 16, 2001: Message edited by: John Scott ]

What ever the actual cfm is I'm still going to try it. Still might be closer to my engine's needs, then again.... Drax, I have a Gtech log, numbers all over the place! I can't believe how much difference a hot day makes. You think a naturally aspirated car runs a little slower on a low density day.., but when a large percent of your hp is based on forced air, I guess it makes sense. JS [ September 16, 2001: Message edited by: John Scott ]

Until the 383 is ready to install, (only 2/3 the way there, financially) I can't help tinkering with the old motor. Probably going to save it for another project....maybe an AWD viscous coupled (Syclone) 67-72 Chev PU. I know I know, another topic/forum. Anyway, I'm convinced my engine is way over carbureted with the 600 dbl. pmpr. According to ATI a cfm rating is nearly doubled at 15 psi. Hmmmm, I doubt my engine could ever ingest 1200 cfm, let alone 1000, but the 500 should have a better delivery. I'll post results once its on. JS

I have the the aftermarket T56. I used Lee Howard's master cyl suggestion. Simple and straightforward. I recommend it! Search the archives under slave cylinders member: JuJu. All part#s are there. Also note there is an aftermarket slave that is alum. not the crappy plastic. Let me know if you can't find the part #. OOps...I read through your post too quickly. If you decide to run the T5 bell housing with stock type slave this is a good solution. JS [ September 15, 2001: Message edited by: John Scott ] [ September 15, 2001: Message edited by: John Scott ]

A good choice! I'd hope the "independent" test done by CHP was legit. Flow all the competitve models on the same bench, at the same facility. The 190s outflowed everyone in the 190 class, especially in the lower lift range, not to mention outflowing many of the bigger heads as well. When I get my 383 project rolling, it will have the 195s. Keep us posted on the results. JS

The 403 was based on the olds 350. Nothing like the chevy. Mondello has parts for them, also good for tech help. I built olds for years, believe me the chev. is much cheaper, more reliable, and has more hp potential. JS

Put in my Energy Suspension transmission mount yesterday. I can't believe how much more engine vibrations come into the cabin now. The chev V6 isn't known for its smoothness, but the cheapie soft mount was much quieter. Interesting, the tires break traction quicker from a second gear punch than before. Must be due to less flex in the drivetrain. JS

BLKMGK, just a thought on your idle speed: Sometimes a bigger cam needs more inital advance before you can get a decent idle. I had another project that idled like crap at way to high rpm, advanced the timing and could adjust it to a "reasonable" level. Don't forget to check the full advance, 2500-3000 might need to adjust some out in the dist. to avoid detonation. JS

If I were satisfied with a 10-12 lb boost my belts would last. I like the 16+ which requires the 2.95 or 2.75 pullies. This makes grip on the 8 rib difficult. Hint: get the 12 rib. BTW, bracing has done wonders to extend belt life. If I had a big ol' nasty v8 with the procharger, I wouldn't need that much boost to be happy.....for a week or two JS

I've heard good things about Sanderson, but think there early A.M. phone staff was pretty lame, and rude to boot! The recommendation for straight plug heads in a shorty style was model #CC2 1 5/8". I'd double check the #. JS

Alright, finally talked to someone from Dart. Seemed nice enough. Asked why they don't post flow #s. He stated too many people would be misled into buying the wrong head !!?? I said thats like advertising a camshaft that the manufacture says will run real strong, but won't tell you the lift and duration. What else can you use for comparison info? He said, good point, but thats how we do it. He wouldn't send me any info but would quote flow #s. Pro1 200s: .200-.500 lift are as follow: 129/114, 185/145, 229/164, 260/172. He said I don't want to hear the 215 #s because they're lower until the 600 lift range. In other words not a good low velocity head. I think I've made my decision. The numbers are OK, but not up to the AFR190/95s. The race ready run around $1100, and with porting could flow better. For $1250 the 195s are ready to go, and if need be have room to grow as well with additional porting. Now all I have to solve is the HEADER delima! Would someone Puleeez figure out what brand fits best for a healthy 383! JS

The engine builder I'm talking to is really pushing the Dart Pro1 heads. He claims he can make them outflow the 195 out of box AFRs. I know Dart makes a great head for the $$, but the AFR 195s are really impressing me. Does anyone have a source for flowbench data on the Pro1s? Even Dart website won't post any info, and haven't answered my email. Other build tid bits: Recommended solid lifter cam specs for the AFRs are coming up with 534/547, 248/259 @ .050, 108 lobe center. Our altitude will probably bring the duration down to the mid 240s, and lift up closer to the .600 mark. 108 lobe sep is a given. The need to overbuild at high altitudes becomes more evident with the local track's air density last week equivalent to over 9000ft (track is 6000 ft) [ August 03, 2001: Message edited by: John Scott ]

Thanks for all the replies, advice etc. Here's the plan: Scat9000 lightweight steel crank, lightweight 6" forged rods,AFR 195 heads. Isky custom grind solid lifter specs (guess around 240 @.050/ 550/ 110 center.) 10.5 SRP forged flat tops. 750 holley or similar. Lightweight 15# nodular iron flywheel. Still deciding on manifold. Builder likes to run on dyno before installation to verify/document hp!! This is going to take a while, probably need to sell the Procharger, 4.3 parts, but the planning is 1/2 the fun How do I explain this to my wife?? JS

Who is using what brand crankshafts in your strokers? I have one engine builder claiming there is lots of wasted $$ on aftermarket hype for a street motor. 500+ hp 6000 or so rpm. The prices for cast steel seem pretty reasonable. Trying to put the $$ where it will do the most good. JS

Since my thoughts have turned V8, I'm going to throw out a few questions. 6" rods fact or fiction? I've read plenty of articles that say the 6" rod provides little if any hp gains. Others claim big increases. The physics claim a more "effecient" combination. Most of the experienced engine builds swear by it. Worth it? After the last few hp, maybe. Read www.Iskycams.com/techtips.html#2005 among others. Tell me what you think. I'm considering it more because of the kit's neutral balance and ability to use my 3.58" bolt circle flywheel. Would a smaller head, say 195 cc be better for velocity, than 210 at higher altitudes? I see some huge torque #s using smaller heads that flow big #S like AFR. My targeted rpm range will be in the low 6000s. Fast Frog brought up the issue of oil ring lands in the wrist pin holes. I see many stroker pistons have this feature. A concern for a street engine? JS [ July 15, 2001: Message edited by: John Scott ]

Terry, to put the V6 in the "correct" location, there would be considerable flex and stress trying to use the JTR or custom set back plates. I think a more sound solution would be to fabricate a cross member and then use the V8 motor mounts. My method works, putting mounts on the front of the engine, but if I were to do it again, I'd go for a new crossmember to work under the stock V6 mount locations. How late a V6 are you suggesting? The most recent versions are really improved for smoothness, have good power, great torque etc. I really don't know what works or available for them. The pre-balanceshaft engines have more interchangable parts with the sbc. JS

My Optima lasted 8+ years. Bought another! JS

Ron CO levels are almost exclusivly a function of the air/fuel ratio. The leaner you can run it the better for test purposes. If the fuel system is running too rich the timing will come into play, but only with minor changes. I always set my carb idle mixture just to where the idle starts to come down, then another 1/2 turn in. Also set timing down to a moderate point, 8-10 degrees. (NOx levels go up with timing). Way down from its usual 16-18BTDC. Runs like crap, but gets me through the test. Greeley is starting its remote testing. They set up a van, similar to photo radar, and measure as you drive through. Claim to be as accurate as the dyno test. Two clean passes and they send you a wavier. I don't like it!! JS

Some of the 700 builders have tech lines, or at least people with good answers, like Art Carr transmissions www.artcarr.com , Rossler Transmissions, and really cool 700 parts and upgrades like: www.transmissioncenter.net/highperflist.htm. Builder's claims of 600-1000hp capable 700s. Even higher with the 200! JS

I think Andy is right about his WOT shifts due to being from a Z28. Like the Vette, it will hold in 4th. Anything over a 5K shift from 3rd in mine would stay in 4th. 7K used to yeild about 135-140 mph in 3rd! Anyone know if valve bodies can be transplanted from a Z28 or Vette into a regular 700? Probably more to it than that. I know they really improved the transmission in the later years. First years were trouble and gave the 700 a real bad reputation. Maybe the earlier ones can't or shouldn't take a wot in 4th w/o substantial upgrades in the pump etc. JS [This message has been edited by John Scott (edited April 09, 2001).]