grumpyvette

tim240z check the info I added in my post and I changed the input to a flat tappet solid lifters (like pparaska suggested) it changed the figures to 416hp and 423ft lbs (still a huge improvement) but I sure the roller lifters would make more power than flat tappet solids.

620 hp and 600 ft lbs would be much closer to the max real world with a belt driven supercharger useing pump gas,they are baseing that on a stock engine with no mods. as in 250 hp stock boosted to about 480 hp at 15 lbs boost.too get 900 hp the engine would need to have all the best forged big($$$$$) parts a 7 to 1 cpr fuel injection special fuel(like toluene or methenol) and with an intercooled twin turbo system!BTW if you want to spend money like toilet paper these people will build you a quality twin turbo 900hp engine http://www.bankspower.com/Bio.cfm http://www.callawaycars.com/

I don,t have DD-2000 but the program I do have works well and it says you have someware close to 355hp and 380 ft lbs at the flywheel. most of the flat tappet hydrolic cams that fit this engine will not give a huge boost in hp over the cam you picked mostly because your limited as to valve lift with out further head mods(like a good pocket port and 3 angle valve job) but just for fun I tryied the CRANE hydrolic roller cam #119661 (set in at 6 deg retarded)(BTW its ground 6 degs advanced) that gave you 432hp and 444 ft lbs but you would need to also work the heads for more clearance and buy the whole kit (.539/.558 lift 230/236@.050 dur 112 LSA

no the lines run from the sensor ports on the heads to the two ports you show in your photo that are circled in red, water enters the engine by being sucked into the big lower intake port on the water pump(lower water hose on the radiator)courses through the block and then travels back to the upper radiator hose through the heads and into the forward manifold cross-over that feeds the upper return hose to the radiator.the addition of the extra hoses increases the flow speed through the engine of the coolent and drilling about 8- 1/8" holes in the thermostat flange perimeter will also help increase flow too.some of the stock car boys do this and they say with no other changes it cools the heads near the exhaust ports about 7-15 degs more!(thats important for exhaust valve guide wear too.)

ok this will work and it will give you lots of hp for dollars spent; http://www.sdpc2000.com/cart.asp?action=prod_detail&catid=130&pid=383 then add crane cam #113821 and find a good dual plane intake(like the edelbrock performer rpm) that way you will have a new engine that produces about 345hp (get all the small parts like oilpans and valve covers, brackets, etc, at the salvage yard ($175 will easily buy everthing includeing a carb if your carefull although you may want to just get a new 600cfm edelbrock for $200)the intake plus headers and cam will get you the hp you want. BTW this might help too; http://www.goautocenter.com/377_stroker.htm

if your not running a heater core you can just put a plug in all three fitting ports and everything will be fine but a little trick that works well to cool the heads better than normal(but it looks bad)is to run a hose from the sensor port on the side of the cylinder head (the port that in most cases holds the heat sensor near the center two cylinders near the header flange on the cylinder heads) too the two forward water return passage ports near the main radiator return hose. this will flow extra water by the two center exhaust ports that tend to run hot. but be sure the route the hoses along not over the valve covers for easy access but not too close to the headers. BTW GREAT PHOTOS

Omar while you are correct on all the points you brought up(with in limited parameters)(and yes it is possible to make more power PER CUBIC INCH with a shorter stroke engine) this disscussion is a little like argueing over which playboy playmate is the prettiest (alot depends on whats important to who) now while all your points are valid your overlooking the fact that the extra 23 cid MORE than makes up for the theoretical pumping/thermal losses if that were not true building a 383 with its even greater stroke and even worse rod angles would not be as popular a combo as it is! and no one in his right mind would think that a 327 will produce more total hp than a 350 or a 383 with the correctly matching parts installed,and in any racing class where there is a set minimum car weight the largest engine displacement available is normally used even though as you point out the shorter stroke with a set displacement would be used if the car weight was based on weight per cubic inch, look here: http://www.ryanscarpage.50megs.com/combos.html I think you will find that as the displacement gets larger so do the hp and torque numbers and that even though the rod angles and thermal effiecency may fall the total power goes UP as the displacement and stroke gets larger and factors like cylinder head flow and cam timeing have a far greater effect on total power output than small stroke changes.and did you notice there are very few small(265-327cid engines)thats because in every case the money spent will produce more hp on a 350cid or larger engine and if the cash outlay is the same getting more hp through the use of more cubic inches is the way to go! not limiting yourself to a theoretical effeciency level!and while were talking big cube sbc engines, check this too;(and yes the rod angles/thermal effiecency really suck on this ) http://www.carcraft.com/editorial/article.jsp?viewtype=text&id=1004 and this; http://forums.chevytalk.com/forums/Forum64/HTML/004971.html btw that thread address is; http://forums.chevytalk.com/forums/Forum64/HTML/004400.html[/url] (you left on the url crap so its not a direct link) and since IM the moderator on that performance forum you might as well be able to get there and you will also notice the 350 consistantly has slightly higher hp/ft lb #s over the 327

the 350 is the better choice as several of the other guys pointed out.just a new cam and a set of top quality cylinder heads with a new intake and 750 cfm carb(after you rebuild the short block of course) will get you over 400 hp(if you want part numbers from a proven combo just say so) oh why wait, this combo is worth about 450hp 450 ft lbs AT THE FLYWHEEL AFR 195CC HEADS (#1037) EDELBROCK VICTOR JR INTAKE 750 HOLLEY CARB LUNATI 30114 HYDROLIC FLAT TAPPET CAM 350 SHORT BLOCK AT AT LEAST 9.8 TO 1 COMPRESSION RATIO (CHEVY FLAT TOPS WITH THOSE HEADS GIVE YOU 10.1 CPR)

their is a 7% difference in stroke and a 7% difference in displacement with 9% difference in piston speed between the two engines, the 350 turns at 57.1 intake strokes per minuite at a piston speed of 4000fpm(about the max safe long term rpm) the 327 turns at 61.5 intake strokes per minuite at the same 4000fpm piston speed. that means that the 327 has to open and close the valves about 4.4 times more per second and the ports need to flow 7% less fuel air mix into the cylinders 4.4 times more per second. because the differences are so small the the true benefits of one over the other are also small but the 350 will fill it cylinders more effectively at most rpms simply because it has more time in which to do so! the 327 in most cases has a small journal crank, the 350 a standard dia. journal(slightly stronger) so pick what you will but the 350 will almost always give a slightly wider torque curve for the same money with the same parts with a slightly stronger and more efficient engine.

needwaymorespeed I live in LOXAHATCHEE FLA thats a town about 20 miles west of palm beach or if you have a map it half way between the lake and the atlantic ocean and yes your correct DD-2000 has a few flaws

hey guys nice pics but still no bbc pics???

needwaymorespeed lets look at your big block example first, you say the program gives you 760 hp well lets check that against the checking formula for max potential hp first, you say those heads flow 360 cfm so lets take that number times .257 times 8, that equals (740hp)the program says (760hp) but it has a built in fudge factor to compensate for headers that help cylinder scavageing, so for most cases it matches,now if I read you right the AFR sbc heads flow 291 now if we run that through the formula we get 291 x .257 x 8 =598 hp you got 560hp with that flow. but the program also knows those valves are smaller and flow less so altho the heads are capable of 598hp the valves are not up to that level of flow so the program compensates and when you increase the valve size the program looks at the flow numbers, checks against the valve size, sees its possiable and raises the hp numbers. hey its just a guide its not totally infalliable. use the formula to check your results,its a good way of finding bad info! BLKMGK your correct once you place positive pressure behind the intake valve (supercharge) almost any hp can be reached! btw did you notice the relationship of that 720 deg cycle where about 72% of the 250 degs that the cam has the valve open is meaningful flow? well 72% of 250 degs is about 180 degs and .257 x 720 degs is about 180 degs, so what that formula is doing is ruffly figureing cylinder flow!and you should recognize that 180 degs remember (720 degree repetitive cylcle)intake,compression,power,exhaust,,,720 divided by 4 =180 degs.

needwaymorespeed I dont think you have a good grasp on what the program measures and how it relates to airflow in the ports. first the ports in a given head have a cross sectional area that can only flow a certain amount at 28" of vacuum (the standard measureing flow)that area will always be about equal to the valves max flow because to make it much larger hurts flow velocity without increaseing that flow past the valve,(the the valves have a curtain area(lift x valve circumference) that max,s on flow at about .52 lift x the valve diameter because the curtain flow area of the valve reaches the same area as the hole the valve closes at that lift.now lets look at an example, lets look at an AIRFLOW RESEARCH 195cc head(about 280cfm at max lift)heads are measured at a steady flow with an open valve at a steady 28" of vacuum but heads are used in a 720 deg cycle of the 4 stroke engine this means that only about 250 degs of that 720 degs are actually available to flow air into the cylinders on a per port basis durring that 720 deg cycle and only about 72% of that 250 degs is meaningful flow numbers.a good way to judge possiable hp potential of a high performance head is to look at the ports max flow (280cfm with the AFR head) and multiply it by .257 x the number of cylinders(8)= max hp or 583hp in that case is the max possiable non-assisted hp available from that unmodifyied cylinder head on any engine with that cylinder head.now if you put unrealistic flow numbers into the data you get unrealistic answers (garbage in garbage out) so check your answers against that formula and if they are far off your data not the program useing it is WRONG!

check this out,it will give you an idea of what can be done with a small block and the correct parts. http://www.ryanscarpage.50megs.com/combos.html

Tim240Z my son is a computer software programer so I had him combine DD-2000 an ENGINE ANYLIZER and DRAG STRIP PLUS and a few other programs for my personal use. dsommer yes if your willing to change to a super victor (EDELBROCK # 2925) intake and a 750 carb the CRANE solid roller # 118691 (250/258 @.050 dur .561/.561 lift on a 112 lsa ) will give you about 443 hp/440 ft lbs and the CRANE #118131 242/250 @.050 dur .580/.600 lift 0n 106 lsa will give you about 453hp/439 ft lbs (call crane for advise too 1-386-258-6174)

dsommer sure be glad too, but with that much duration a dual plane intake is going to kill the higher rpm flow so Ill run it with both a performer rpm and a super victory intake/750 holley, to show you what I mean! performer= 395 hp/375 ft lbs super victory= 440 hp/370 ft lbs as you can see all that duration and the single plane intake hurt the low end torque but give it back in high rpm flow

does anyone have pics of a bbc installed in a 240-280z? and or pics of the install in progress? I lost all the pics I had of the last one I worked on and now my neighbors asking questions and I think a few pics would really help a bunch to convince him it can be done! we have a 240z we can buy and we already have a ls6 bbc so its just desideing to spend the time and money on his part and he thinks it can,t be done! even though I have done it before BTW great site guys Im allmost ready to sell one of the vettes to do that myself(240-280z/454 bbc)with a th-350 trans

my computer says that comp cams grind will get you about 404 hp/381 ft lbs but looking through my notes I tryied a crane hydrolic roller # 109841 and with the same parts it gives you 417 hp and 445 ft lbs (thats 64 more ft lbs of torque and 13 more hp, a big gain!!!)BTW it has 234/242 dur@.050 .539/.558 lift and a 112 LSA so the idle should be simular to the comp grind

all good advise in the above posts (just use a solvent that leaves no residue)(aceatone works well as a cleaning fluid,thats finger nail polish remover if the wifes not looking guys) when cleaning the surfaces the silicone goes on and I have found both the black and the red high heat silicone work ok

Z YA do you have any pictures of that (x) pipe? do they have any 3" (x)s do they have a web site?

zfan let us know what cylinder heads,intake and true compression ratio you wind up with on that 383 and the max valve lift that your heads/springs can handle and we can give you a good idea as to the best cam to use. [ October 29, 2001: Message edited by: grumpyvette ]

you might want to look at these threads too http://forums.chevytalk.com/forums/Forum12/HTML/000124.html http://forums.chevytalk.com/forums/Forum12/HTML/000005.html http://www.jimsperformance.com/portinj.html

thanks for the welcome guys, and no sorry I don,t even have pictures of my own vettes but as I am sure you are aware there are kits out there with motor mounts,radiators, trans mounts,ETC. so its not a big deal to do this swap and the results are fantastic if you take the time to do quality work.BTW are any of you located in the west palm beach/ loxahatchee fla area? Im sure that you have these site. http://www.jagsthatrun.com/ http://www.garlic.com/~junmike/engswap.htm http://www.atk-engines.com/highperf.html http://www.edelbrock.com/automotive/7101pp.html : http://www.advanceadapters.com/ http://members.aol.com/danmas/ http://www.goodnet.com/~jayk1/swaps.htm http://www.powerplayhemi.com/ http://www.triumphspitfire.com/engineswap.html http://www.jtrpublishing.com/Pages/Chevrolet_TPI_TBI_V-8.html http://www.ryanscarpage.50megs.com/combos.html all of which have info you can sometimes use [ October 29, 2001: Message edited by: grumpyvette ]

hello gentelmen, Im new to this board so I have a few questions that perhaps someone can answer. (1) I have installed both sbcs and bbcs in the older model 240/260 Zs but has anyone installed a BBC or SBC in a more modern 300z car yet? (2)what frame strengthing measures seem to work best? (3) who has the best deal on bolt in seats? (4) what headers (comercial) fit the bbc engines, (I made my own last couple of times) thanks for any info guys