strotter

Gary, I got one of the "K-kits" from Comp cams. It's what they call a "retro" kit, and includes everything in the valvetrain from the cam all the way out to the springs, *but* for the rockers. It's a fairly radical cam, especially with the TBI system I'm using (.495/.502, 218°/224° @.050, 110° sep), which is why I got the LT1 to start with - fewer variables to worry about. No matter which way I'll be going (double-hump or Vortec, though I'm leaning to Vortec) I can use it all. Vortecs need self-centering rockers, which adds to the cost unless you have to buy some anyway (which I *do*!) On my 327, they'll yield about 9.5:1 (which I guess is OK) without milling, and will work with the LT1 cam without valve guide mods. Think of it as a "Stage 1" buildup; when I get everything going smoothly with this setup, I can order the chip/machine the heads/replace the cam/install 2" TBI, and so on. My ultimate goal is about 327 hp (1 hp/cu in, doable and streetable with reasonable street manners and economy), but if I get 250 hp or so out of the current setup I'll be happy as a duck.

Gary, I've been doing the same research you have. I just picked up an LT1 cam (.447/.459 @ .050, 205°/207°, 117°) as an "starter" cam (to get everything running, set up the new roller lifters, get the fuel injection operational and tuned and whatnot with a proven cam). I've understand that performance from them is respectable, and they respond moderately well to mods. Seems like one might be ideal to use with a set of Vortecs. And, they really *are* available for 30-50 bucks, all over the place. Check http://www.thirdgen.org/ or http://www.chevytalk.com/ or http://www.lt1tech.com/.

I'm just beginning the final assembly of a 327 for a Z conversion. Looking closely (apparently for the first time!) at the .202 double-hump heads, I noticed that the walls that divide the intake ports (both front and rear) have been worked to the point that they're thinner than the standard Fel-Pro manifold gasket. As a matter of fact, they're about 1/16th of an inch! The gasket measures a little less than 1/4". Seems like a recipe for vacuum leaks. I'm open for input here. I'd hate to trash the heads - somebody obviously put a great deal of work into them. Any suggestions? Metallic gaskets (are they available for intakes?) or modifying a conventional gasket? Another question about this engine - easily fixable, but strange. After I noticed the head problem, I looked the whole thing over carefully from top to bottom, and found another odd thing: there's no hole at the front of the crankshaft for the big bolt on the front that holds on the harmonic balancer and pulley assembly. It's not that the hole is stripped, or drilled out, it just isn't there! A balancer and pulley were on the front, and I missed it because I had just assumed that there wasn't a bolt there. Odd! What kind of crank has nothing to hold the pulley on? All I can think of is that it was a "blank" of some kind, available for speed shops to do custom work on - it has been balanced to within an inch of its' life. Or maybe a marine unit? Hmmm? One of the local machine shops is going to drill and tap it for me, cheaply and easily, but it seemed odd even to them when I talked to them on the 'phone yesterday. Any ideas? Finally, the problem with the double-humps got me to thinking about Vortecs. Ooooh, they're affordable, they're new, and they flow like the Mississippi. The 327 uses the same bore as the 350, so they'd fit just pretty, and I might even factor in a compression bump (with the flat-tops and the 62cc double-humps I've got about 9.75:1. I could bump that to about 10, 10.25:1, which might work better with my set-up). A compression calculator I found tells me I'd need a 58cc chamber to get 10.24:1 (with a deck height of .039" and a gasket thickness of .025). I havn't settled on a manifold yet, so I don't mind a vortec-only unit. Just have the machine shop take a bit off the bottom (how much is yet to be determined) and have fun. Comments?

OK, one more option: Summit has a Hays steel flywheel, 152 tooth for '83 to '85 Chev, internally balanced (HAY-10-330), "drilled with both Borg and Beck and long style clutch pattern". Ouch, $229.95 and prolly add a bunch o' shipping. Their tech support says it'll fit, both the bellhousing and the '89 clutch mechanism.

OK then, what are my options? I have three: 1. Find a 158 tooth flywheel from a pre-86; make sure the appropriate plates and whatnot fit. Plenty of wrecking yards around here. Q: what vehicles used such a flywheel? Will an '89 clutch assembly fit an older wheel? Are the other critical dimensions (I'm thinking plate thickness) similar? 2. Machine the existing flywheel. It's not in perfect shape to start with, and would need to be refaced as well as have the counterweight removed, and the bolt holes punched. Probably not wise, but an option? 3. Obtain and install an "old" style flywheel (larger diameter) and fit a larger bellhousing to the T5. Q: are larger bellhousings available for the T5, from a yard, and can I adapt the hydraulic clutch assembly to it? Will a larger housing fit a Z and allow good positioning of the engine? Would a larger housing interfere, such as with the exhaust? 4. Something else? I'm beginning to understand why the JTR book is so strident about getting a complete assembly, and then using it intact! These kinds of details can drive you nuts.

OK, my '66 or so 327 ("old" style everything) is gradually coming together, money's flowing like wine and everything's cake. Then last night I come upon a reference to "new style cranks require new style flywheel" somewhere on the net. Huh? I'd assumed I could use the flywheel from my donor '89 Firebird, along with its' T5. The motor is on a stand and I can't get to the back end to measure it, but have I found a *new* problem? If so, is there anything *else* I should know? Pilot bearings? Pressure plates? Bellhousing dimensions? HMMMM? Has anybody on the board put an old motor onto a new clutch/tranny?

OK, here's the deal, then: I'm gonna go for it, and see what I see. I've got a single-plane manifold already, a Holley Street Dominator (and I don't want to say how long it's been sitting in my closet). I mean, if it turns out to be a problem, I can afford the cost and effort to swap on another manifold. But man, I have to say, it looks just wicked cool. ZROSSA, you said I can "tune out" some of the problems associated with single-planes. I assume you mean by reprogramming the PROM. That begs two questions: first, what behaviors in particular are you talking about, and, second, how specifically would you do so? I'm a bit of a computer guy, and a bit of a car guy, but I've never in my life programmed a PROM - I imagine I'll be spending a lot of time in the apropriate forum at some later date, but I'd like to know it's something that can be done by a novice. I'm hoping that fuel injection will just *automatically* clean up some of those problems. Finally, I'd like to point out that I havn't picked out a cam yet, other than "steetable". I can say, however, that I'd like to stick with a factory hydraulic roller setup, much like that found on the 305 that's donating its' FI, electronics, and tranny. Perhaps one of the less radical cams, with 214 to 218 degrees duration (at .050" lift), with a wide lobe separation angle (112 to 114 degrees). Those numbers come from some of the Comp Cams, which I understand will yield streetable yet fun results. Any suggestions here would also be appreciated.

I think I understand some of the advantages of single-plane intake manifolds - improved power and efficiency at high RPM's, with a moderate improvement at mid-ranges, and a decline at lower speeds. This sounds great for a high-reving engine, such as my 327, especially in a small, light car such as a Z. Although I am partial to high revs, I'm concerned about streetability and economy. I'm not looking for all-out power with a lumpy idle or twitchy behavior around town - something I associate with single-planes, though I have little experience with them. If my goal is a touring machine with some punch if I'm in a hurry, would the single-plane fit the bill, or would I be better off with the more conventional dual-plane? BTW, I'm preparing the motor to use a TBI unit from an '89 Firebird, with all the associated sensors and electronics, with one of the adapter plates available from Holley and others, and a set of ported/polished .202 "Double-hump" heads (#3782461's). Any comments/concerns would be appreciated.

Well, I picked up the vict - uh, project car yesterday. A '72 with everything there, and all of it needing work. Drove it home at *ridiculous* speed, though, dizzy with excitement and carbon monoxide as I listened to the sweet cuh-clunk of the front suspension and the mutiple rattles of loose panels. As a matter of fact, I composed a poem (which wasn't hard, as the hallucinations made the imagery just *flow*...) You're my little grey Z, With a thunk in your rear, And a groan and a crunch and a rattle. When we get to my house I'll get down on my knees, Have a look and make plans for the battle. I'll go nuts on you kid, Make a bet, wait and see, I'll do things to your innards improper. Yes I'll cut and I'll toss and inspect and discard, Till you're no-one's idea of "eye-popper". But I'll make you again, Bend and fit, weld and bolt, 'Till your panels are full and a-bulging, With a motor and a tranny and a wire or two, Oh the costs will need government funding. But sometime, someday, You'll roll once again, With a different and new disposition. And you'll take me, like wind, to my new friend and yours, A clinical mental physician. Just thought I'd share, Scotty

Well, I picked up the vict - uh, project car yesterday. A '72 with everything there, and all of it needing work. Drove it home at *ridiculous* speed, though, dizzy with excitement and carbon monoxide as I listened to the sweet cuh-clunk of the front suspension and the mutiple rattles of loose panels. As a matter of fact, I composed a poem (which wasn't hard, as the hallucinations made the imagery just *flow*...) You're my little grey Z, With a thunk in your rear, And a groan and a crunch and a rattle. When we get to my house I'll get down on my knees, Have a look and make plans for the battle. I'll go nuts on you kid, Make a bet, wait and see, I'll do things to your innards improper. Yes I'll cut and I'll toss and inspect and discard, Till you're no-one's idea of "eye-popper". But I'll make you again, Bend and fit, weld and bolt, 'Till your panels are full and a-bulging, With a motor and a tranny and a wire or two, Oh the costs will need government funding. But sometime, someday, You'll roll once again, With a different and new disposition. And you'll take me, like wind, to my new friend and yours, A clinical mental physician. Just thought I'd share, Scotty

I was been talking to a member of the group (gearhead240z) about some heads he has for sale for use in a buildup of and '89 305 TBI. They'd be prefect *but* for the fact that they're for the pre '88 motors. I've seen references in several places (both here and at the 3rd Gen board) that they don't swap properly because of the "angle of the intake". I've been comparing the manifold off my 305 to an aluminum manifold made in the '70s, and everything looks similar but for the angle of the four center bolts. This is mentioned briefly in the JTR Engine Swapping book, where they say that "You must grind of file the holes in the intake manifold so the bolts will line up properly." So here (at last) is my question: Can I do old gearhead and myself a favor and get these heads (and do a bit of machine work), or is there something else I'm missing?

Oh, and about Dan's question- I teach at Plaza Robles High School, which, though a part of the Lodi district, is actually located in Stockton. It's a Continuation school (kids with problems of various kinds: rough guys; problems at home; English second language; unplanned mommy; a few just plain lazy; that kind of thing). Challenging job - it's easy to teach people who want to learn, tough with people who don't, won't, or can't. Fun job though. A few of them are following this project very closely. Most every week, I'll have someone come up to me with with a "Chevy Power" magazine or something in their hand, and go "Dude! I been readin' up on this s**t! You gotta *turbo* that five-point-oh, man! Wicked harsh power, man! And **nitrous**! Dude! It'd be *scandlous* dude! Totally! Look at this s**t!" at which time the dog-eared magazine is shoved into my face showing me some chrome monstrosity with multiple turbos, quad carbs, nitrous, and 14:1 pistons, and then I spend the next ten minutes of lunch time explaining why I can't spend thirty thousand dollars on a V8 Datsun project, and besides, you can't commute in an AA fueler...

Well, about the AIR pump affecting the ECM, I can answer my own question: I was browsing through the JTR TPI/TBI swap book, and noticed on the very first page of the Exhaust chapter that leaving off the AIR gear "will not affect the ECM, or engine operation." D'oh! I've read that book from end to end half-a-dozen times, and still havn't absorbed it... As to the headers, I was thinking about using the Summit block-huggers. I'll have a fitting tapped into the driver-side collector, and be done. I've considered powder-coating, but I think the cost is a bit steep for the budget - especially when I think about how *many* things I've already spend money on, and how *many* things I'm gonna spend money on...

On the stockers, there's just the one on the driver's side, by the outlet. That's why I was thinking a fitting should be placed at the collecter of the header - that way it's reading the average reading for the whole bank. On an associated note, will the absence of AIR injection affect the sensor? Or, more exactly, does the ECM take the presence of fresh air in the exhaust stream into account when calculating mixtures/timing, and would it be confused without the extra air?

>What heads are you going to run? So as to keep things simple, I'm going to either stick with the stockers (the 58cc X 1.84"X1.50") or something with an identical exterior shape. I've been flirting with the World Products Sportsman S/R Torquer heads (mostly because they're cheaper than a port-n-polish job, which I'm too chicken to do myself), but I'm not sure if they're still available with the 58cc chambers. The motor's out of an '89 Firebird, and there's a tremendous amount of bracketry and whatnot attached to the heads. I don't want to get all involved in making bracketry and whatnot if I can possibly avoid it.

I'm putting together a late-model GM small-block for a swap into a 240. All is preceding well, but for one snag: what headers will both fit into a Z conversion, as well as provide an oxygen sensor? Failing that, is it possible to have a fitting tapped into the headers - say at the collector - to perform that function? Any suggestions would be appreciated.