jack46

I presently use 26/8.5/14 and want to use 26/10/15, but don't know what offset or what rims to allow them to clear a 260Z. Presently the 14"s hold but when I replace I think it is time to consider a wider setup Thanks

I have an LT1 with a 224/232 Cam with transmission cooler on a stock 260 radiator and run ~180 degrees. If your radiator is in good order I see no reason why it won't work. BTW why do you say an LT1 runs hotter? I thought they ran the same or maybe slightly cooler

Here is a link for the differences. As mentioned look on block for 5.7 NOT 4.3 Litter. Though even 4.3 is a steal at that price Read differences The main difference is heads aluminum/iron (Corvette's also have 4 bolt mains). There are also primarily 2 cams, the reason for different hp ratings is mostly intake and exhaust, and the need for Corvette to be king. The highest LT1 was Corvette of 300 RWHP, same year Camaro had 285 rating. The iron heads are fine. I was given a set free from someone who wrongly thought they were junk. Truth is they are easy to make into 2.02/1.6 heads and will out flow the aluminum with mild porting and definately with larger valves. Iron does weigh 50lbs more but easy to overcome the weight in a Z. The short blocks are all the same, the compression ratios are the same. the iron heads have larger chambers and Chevy used a smaller gasket to achieve the same CR. Good luck, also I would get both transmissions you will make enough to easily pay for one LT1 and transmission with what you make on other. Could even rebuild it for what you will make. Good luck

Well I would look at a nother members site http://www.jnjdragracing.com/ He has pics of his setup he has run I think 5.8x 1/8 with an R200. He has done work to enlarge halfshaft u joints but they are holding. I know we are all different just pointing you toward someone with a similiar setup that is doing well with an R200 Good luck

qwik240z you have an LS1 with a 180? Wow, that seems to be alot of HP for the 180 to handle. Good luck

impressive.

Each cam is different. Contact the cam manufacturer.

There are many options. Crank for 383 is 3.75", then 4.030" pistons, Rods dependent on pistons. You can use short 400 rods or 5.7" or 6" etc. Do a search depending on what you want and are willing to spend determines the 'best' combination. We all have different tastes and that makes the world interesting but also means no one will agree on one 383 as the best. Any 383 is a torque monster and in a Z can be qiuite effective. I had a low RPM short rod version that pulled hard to about 5600. Otherds consider it a waste to not have one pull much higher. Good luck with your decisions.

I have a car that has mounts in it, has a tranny rear end heck could even build a motor for it if u wanted. I live in tn e mail me if interested we could talk. I am torn about finishing another Z or changing and building a RX7 V8.

Put $5000 in bank drive car until it dies. Then decide what you want. A project ALWAYS costs more when you haven't decided EXACTLY what you want. Wait until you know, in fact I would recommend buying a car already converted cheaper, and always plenty to do on even a 'completed' car Even opinions can be found in archives.

From an earlier post most probaly never saw Grumpvette said from http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=103152&highlight=grumpy second last post in aove thread, and last gives dyno numbers for 302

Same discussion no one will change their mind. BUT it still comes down to given equal efforts cubes ALWAYS win. I think Grumpy did some desktop dynos comparisons and is definately an eye opener. The 302/327 are great sounding and will rev to the sky. BUT tell me how expensive is a biuild that will take >7000 RPM? Put that money into a 377, 383, or even a 350 and you will beat the smaller cubes. I had a 283 in the 60's loved it but I wouldnt build one today unless given the parts. I prefer a low RPM high torque and HP setup. But my car is street driven, now a track only I MIGHT go to <7000 but sorry never on street.

Ever seen their times at the track? I just saw a beautiful 69 Camaro with a 302 at track he did a 10.2 1/8! 327's haven't done any better. In their day they were fine, this is 40 years later, tires, transmission and all have evolved. Once one hp per cube was great, today it is common from factory and gets >20 mpg, needs a tune >50,000 miles. I lived in the 60's with the cars, it was a good time, but those builds don't hold a candle to an LS1 or LT1. Watching a tach is fun, but I personally prefer a fast car versus an expensive conversation piece.

I will be using a 350 T with 3.53 R200 with 300 halfshafts no transbrake. My stall should be ~2500 with 8.5" slicks, I would guess 60's of <1.64. Thanks for the info, I had intended to use it, but feel better hearing I have a fair chance of the setup holding.

I wondered what Darius240z's 'old' setup ran at the track. All I ever saw was a video of his on the street, and wondered what he expected his new setup to run. But, since I have your attention, I also wondered how much RWHP a CV conversion will take. I know you used them, and wonder what HP the stub axles, adapters, etc of CV conversion will take IYO. I have the 27 spline and one 280 halfshaft setup with an LT1, and I'm building a second with 300 halfshafts and a supercharged LT1. I have been told they won't take more than ~425 RWHP and wondered what you succeeded having the CV's take.

The schematic I gave will work. You do not include the diodes that hook up to ECM. BUT in your case you will provide a ground instead of ECM. Then you can use switches to turn on low or high and temp will turn on high when 'set' temp reached. You will need a temperature 'switch', when the desired temperature is reached it closes and provides a ground. The 'Taurus' fans I had operated in either direction. I have not run the fan as a pusher for more than minutes. As for the shroud covering the radiator it also covers the radiator in rear so either way will restrict air flow, so caution is always needed to ensure the radiator has sufficent air flow.

PS I know what is coming next. Testomonials, and butt dyno's. No they are not valid data. Then somone says well look at this data, which is usually created and stated: What if the MAF data...Or I heard...I read...I know a guy that... Collect data from a REAL engine running not simulated. I DON'T care about the myths you heard, you believe, or you spread. At this point with no data the discussion usually changes to an argument and I wish all well, but don't expect me to respond. We are supposed to be adults, and capable of making up our own minds. Your beliefs do not affect me. You can believe the moon is made of swiss cheese, the world is flat, etc as long as you don't say I believe it, or I stated it, I dont care. If I am not misquoted it is time for me to move on. Good luck

I have seen many make this boast, but NO one has shown any data to support these claims. I know it feels good to believe it. But if it is true there should be data to validate it's truth. Doing a Kabookie dance to drive away evil spirits when our cars don’t run properly is fun, feels good, and successful! I can bring thousands of tribesmen to verify it's success? Look at large number fallacy. I have heard them also and challenge ANYONE to show data from one that caused these stated evils! I want to believe what is right, I won't change my beliefs because someone says something. I am an engineer, so show me the data. If it can't be verified, I will not believe it, and do not understand why others can believe. To date no one has shown me a datamaster file that showed a MAF problem. I did NOT say there isn’t one, but I want to see before I believe, especially since I have data supporting the opposite. I have also been told that you can install an early opti 180 degrees out. Ever try it? It is impossible, but the myth is alive and I see it claimed all the time. I have NEVER had to change the MAF tables! The other day I tuned a dual turbo LT1 with 306 cam, headers, descreened, and ported MAF in ~hour. When I first collected data the Block Learns were 154/160. The eventual changes were slight, and were made to the idle trims NOT the MAF tables. When tuned the BLMs were close to perfect 128/128 and idles at 825, the settings just take alittle patience, experience and knowledge. Why was the tune off? He changed injectors and only changed the injector size. LT1 ECM is fine to RPM levels of a 350 why is this mentioned? Seems like a smoke screen? Laminar flow more smoke? This is how all discussion of MAF digress there is of there isn't data to support claims why believe them? Back to the discussion. The MAF screen deleted will not correct a poorly running engine, and won’t hurt a properly running engine period. That is WRONG. I said do as GM did use the larger MAF with the cam. You use the stock program for a 3.5 MAF called a Camaro tune. I know it ‘feels like’, and many ‘believe that’, but that is simply wrong. When your beliefs are contradicted by facts, maybe it is time to review your beliefs. In God we trust all others show data, and pay cash.

If you leave the stock rubber accordion on the intake you are right, the air tumbles constantly, and the screen is needed. If however, you have a decent intake that is probably not the case. I have collected data on a few LT1's all gained power (faster track times), and flowed more air in TTS Datamaster. From another site “... tested by a MISSL member on a flowbench ... The stock MAF ... flows 556 cfm. Removing the screen is good for 650 cfm Stock MAF should flow a max of 308 g/sec. Stock MAF w/ screen delete, max of 359 g/sec 48mm TB, max of 349 g/sec 48mm TB w/ airfoil, max of 365 g/sec 52mm TB (780cfm), max of 431 g/sec“ So from this data it seems the airflow bench supports that the MAF as GM thought can be a restriction. IF you use a smooth intake, mandrel pipe you will avoid air turbulence. Mine cost ~$60 plus aluminum 'snorkel', air filter, and located the intake in front of the radiator on my Z. Pipe from O Reilly’s. Want to compare the HP change from an engine that draws air from in front of the radiator (~30 degrees cooler), and increases the available CFM to some other ~$150 recommended changes? I want to see data supporting MAF statements. I have heard how descreening made no improvement, caused split BLMs, etc show me data. I would like to see an engine making enough HP to cause a vacuum at WOT, and when a descreened MAF was used air flow went down or caused split BLMs. I did NOT believe in removing the screen on a MAF, but the data I have collected, and seen shows it usually does help engines. These engines often only have a few modifications, IT will NOT help all motors breath better, but if there is a decent intake, exhaust, then yes it probably will help.

The best solution meets all requirements for the least TOTAL cost! Total cost is life cycle cost! I guess you were trying to discuss Since I stated an after market MAF is a waste of money you must be agreeing with me? To review, an ironheaded MAF is 3", upgrading to an aluminum headed 3.5" MAF is cheap, I bought one for $30. If you use a Camaro Cam do what GM did and use the larger 3.5" MAF, this also avoids reprogramming. I recommended an Iron headed LT1 with a Camaro MAF and cam. Aluminum heads save ~50 pounds, but a car going 12.5 second 1/4 mile only needs ~5 RWHP to make up the 50 pound weight gain. Aluminum heads are simply not cost effective, I bought an entire iron headed LT1 for $350 with harness and ECM. Aluminum headed motors cost about three times more because many falsely believe aluminum are superior. Also the Camaro cams usually cost ~$25 shipped! People think so little of non aluminum that I was given a set of iron LT1 heads so I have a 2.02/1.6 heads for my supercharged LT1 for total cost ~$100 (valves, screw in studs), and a few hours of my time to do the machining. I don’t agree with an electric water pump on the street, too expensive. They cost ~$150, and only enable using an old style timing set? Stock chains are FINE for street cams and springs, and the chain is about $35 and will add the same zero hp. Also, try breaking down in some small town, I bet they have a stock LT1 water pump on the shelf. Why pay to decrease reliability and maintainability, for no performance? Between the money saved on aluminum heads, and an electric water pump I will have ~$450 and need ~5 RWHP to match the recommended non bling bling approach. I would buy the gee whiz software, and cold air intake and gain probably 10 hp and have the software toys to program mine and other's cars. People pay to get data collected and tune changed, few pay to see aluminum heads or other shiny bling bling parts.

Yes iron headed are often A LOT cheaper, but performance is ~ same. Pistons COULD but since no one makes parts for 4.3 doubtful other than custom pistons and that means one of a kind and EXPENSIVE! And smog probably will FAIL with different pistons! Hard to match GM or any manufacturer. There is little or NO free hp in most engines. STOCK LT1 is ~10.4 putting the 4.3 heads on an LT1 would raise CR BUT drop hp because they have smaller valves and won’t flow as much as real LT1 heads. The LT1 on 4.3 or 3.74" bore would hit the bore. It is like larger heads on a 305. Can be made to work but note the 4.3 had 9.5 CR with small chambers so could never exist with the larger LT1 chambers. LT1 are small I have a set from 93 Camaro and they are 52 cc later Im told are as large as 58. Iron ones I have seen 5 sets have been 60 cc. Look here for on line calculator http://www.cprparts.com/ci_calc.html Et’s hp = RWHP weight is WITH driver. 1/4 = 1/8 * 1.583 http://www.race-cars.net/calculators/et_calculator.html For HP etc I have a few desktop dyno’s to do some what if’s. There are some free desktop dyno’s on line. They should be viewed to be a comparison of two alternatives NOT absolute numbers. Many estimates are based on 30 yrs as an engineer. SWAG. SWAG = Scientific wild azz guess Always question numkbers some are simple estimates and have high error. The stock numers are as pulish and generally accepted. They are NOT accurate. LT1's are said to average ~260 RWHP not 285, 260 is more like 240 etc. Numbers often represent the best of a family not the actual as shipped. Like gas mileage often the best you will get NOT what most get. Think I need to let others post I don't want to hog, sorry if I did. but YOU need other inputs to get some balance. I am BIASED toward LT1.

Ok ROUGH Hp ratings 4.3L 200 RWHP 305 220 RWHP 350 260 RWHP LT1 (Iron headed stock from Caprice) 350 285 RWHP LT1 (Aluminum headed from Camaro many Vettes rated 300) going from Caprice to Camaro HP is really just a Cam. Aluminum heads flow better for larger cam's, but stock about the same. So best compromise for all since a cam, different MAF and you get higher RPM and 285 RWHP. Beauty of stock is NO reprogramming required, and WILL pass smog! So You wouldn't NEED any of the software! And MPG SHOULD be >20 I don't check mine I guess it to be >20, but I have 4.11 and with automatic. Also can point out to Dad that with tools mentioned he could set rev limiter on LT1 until he 'trusts' or feels confident in your driving skills. He could set it to say 4500 and then car has <200 RWHP. You could negotiate he keep software until x miles or y grades etc. Some achievement he accepts, or even only lets the rev limiter removed when you go to track! Be creative. Make it a win win all he wants is to get you a reliable. safe car that is economical.

I was referring to

Well I do NOT want to help you deceive dad. If I were him I would look at block see 5.7 and ignore internals. I suggest you sit down with dad, and say here it is an LT1 with a small cam 214/224 .460"/.480" LSA 112 (regrind costs ~$100, small lift uses stock rockers), will get you a SOLID 300 - 315 RWHP and should pass smog. It will get good mileage probably >20 mpg, and allow you to do one conversion. It would be ~12.5 sec 1/4 so no changing later. Talk to him and both negotiate and simply do a mild 350 LT1 or whatever engine. CHEAPER to do it once. CA smog is TOUGH to fool I THINK a 214 would work, I have HEARD a 218/226 (Hot cam will pass). VERIFY verify verify! MAKE sure that is FACT. People talk I am biased toward LT1 talk to someone biased toward LSX to make sure there aren't similiar packages for LS. NEVER accept a few peoples opinion. Too easy for anyone to be wrong. No one intentionally misguides you, but they still might point you in the wrong direction. Seems this thread has gone full circle. I definately think you need to get dad on board and build an engine you accept 300 RWHP is ALOT and still a GREAT daily driver, look at signitures 280 - 325 RWHP is what most use in a daily driver Z!

As for a 302 making more hp than a 350, they make LESS torque and hp except at HIGH RPM, and are basically a DISASTER for a street motor. It is unique and if you want unique fine, but build cubes if you want power. A 302 is also EXPENSIVE because the cost of pistons, and Chevy quit building them SUPPOSEDLY because of smog problems so NOT valid for a Ca build. Search 302, 327, 350 etc it has been debated MANY times. The crank in the 4.3 has a 3.00" stroke. BUT I have not heard of anyone destroking an LT1, simply no need. Also remember the LT1 rotating assebly is lighter. here is a recent debate of 327/350 http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=103152&highlight=327 LT1 opti is NOT reliable for high RPM. So you will need a different system than the opti, and the ECM will not handle HIGH RPMs needed to make a 302 viable so it is simply impractical in most SBC and ESPECIALLY an LT1. To put it in a few words there is NO substitute for cubes. Smaller cube engines require HIGH RPMs for the same HP, and a 350 LT1 makes good power to ~6500. Most INCREASE cubes to 383 in an LT1, but with Ca smog ASK BEFORE you start building. Try to get a ruling from Ca smog if possible. CA smog is STRICT and not forgiving so ASK people that KNOW Ca SMOG.