Mudge

Has anyone here converted to full floating pins (top o' the rod)? I'd like to know where to get the stuff for it, and hopefully part numbers to do so. This would be for an F54 rebuild.

Dan, I saw your sheet and printed it out awhile back. Damnit, I didn't want to believe that, but 13.0:1 is not street no doubt about it. I know a local guy that made 287 crank HP with his 3.0L, I'll have to pick his brain about setup, but his cam isn't all that big so that leads me to believe you can make good HP with the engine with the right heads.

I've got some space, I could maybe even compress them further? (WMV) I can setup an FTP for you if you'd like to upload, and then I can transfer them over, or my email address will take them IF you have an email address that wont complain about your big message. william@fortmason.org

That looks very nice indeed! I've got a F54 and N42 setup I plan to do a budget rebuild on, and am hoping for 235ish RWHP, but it has to be streetable with my 3.90 gears. Is it possible to get head flow specs, and the cam your running? I'm thinking of going with a 270/280 (seat to seat) cam. If I had more accurate data I could put something together in EA but I'm mostly just making guesses, and being lazy I've got dual 32/36 Weber Downdrafts so I dont know that if that will really hurt me compared to your numbers, and how much so. Was there an E88 block, or is that a typo? I only know it as a head...

VVT on the exaust, I wonder how they are doing it, interesting. At minimum it would reduce overlap on the low end, which would help emissions, but VVT on both intake/exaust would be awesome (in theory), although PITA, sure you betcha.

I thought the 5.7L bikes were stupid enough, oh well.

260/240 rods are NOT the same. http://www.zhome.com/rnt/3.1HanveyProject.htm 3.1 L Stroker Myths and Legends Revealed! 171 cubes versus 189 cubes, sure tempting but not worth the massive investment for me. I'll stick to 2.8L

VVT on a GM engine? Are you serious?

Exactly, a bit of a difference between a peaky NA engine and a blown setup.

Yep, I dont know what the rear end ratio was (2.73?), but it was a TH400 (4 speeds are hard to find!), 400 engine. I can't vouch for the speedos accuracy either, but it was fast, and in that car it felt VERY fast because of the old ass suspension and basically dead KYB shocks. Front end with some head wind is not something that makes you feel comfortable, which is what held me against trying for more. Now the Camaro while noisy at high speeds, is totally and absolutely stable at near 150 (Koni DA, 600# front 140-160# rear), haven't had the balls to go for more though, because if you do F up, your toast, and I'd rather not have that become reality! As time goes on I'll push it more and more though I'm sure, I love I5 for those road trips

One nice thing about having alot of HP is you dont need as many gears or such a whacked rear end ratio, and you can stay in the gear longer which is great for road racing. With that much power on tap, simply finding something that wont break is going to be expensive. However, since the car is so light, if you only road race it (which would be interesting with that much pony), then I probably would not worry too much, although getting a cooler and swapping fluids somewhat often, and checking the internals now and again might be nice, you may even want to cryo the T56. Unfortunately the LS1 T56 I'm told is not as strong as the previous version, but if your dragging the car it is probably not the trans for you, and I think a TH400 built up would be the way to go for the real drag-man. What are you doing with the car? That sounds like a hell of a beast, what kind of wheels/tires? With that much power if you can stay on the ground, I see 220 MPH and www.silverstateclassic.com fun. Major aero work though for safety...

I'd rather go for big bore 3.0L, but I guess those extra 6 cubes are that tempting huh?

I'd rather have a somewhat light engine up front though, if you drag race though you have more flexibility.

When I first found this video, I swear I watched it probably 8 times in a row, I was ROFL, I love stupid humor and used to have several GB of collected stupid videos. www.stupidvideos.com has some nice stuff.

That thing looks like a redneck 4x4 minus the knobbies...

The Anti-bike, bike...

73BOTIZ was telling me about one that he has today, although he hasn't run it yet that I know of.

Yeard ago when I worked in Hayward, I used to drive my 69 Firebird 130 MPH on parts of 280 to get to work. 35 miles and 18 or 19 minutes was my usual time No that thing didn't handle for beans, I used to take 2-3 lanes for my mild turns, this was between 3-3:30 AM BTW, so I'd see no more than 2 cars on the way to work. This practice of boyhood idiocy ended up costing me my engine eventually, I think it started with a lifter, but it went fast either way. Upon dissasembly, I could punch 3 pistons down into the bore, and there was quite alot of cast iron and aluminum in the intake valley, doh

225s, or smaller.

I dont know the laws in MA, but in CA you have to carry over ALL smog equipment, and you cannot backdate at all, if you have a 95 car you can't put an 82 engine, etc Once completed you must have the car certified, dont know the cost in this, but it can be done.

The 3.1 is mega expensivo, I wouldn't recommend that to anyone but someone who wanted the most cubes from a stock looking engine, and who of course had a big wallet.

Fuel cell?

Yep, doesn't really matter since your going to clean it all up anyway with the bore. The one I have was found for $90, although it has 175k miles on it or so. Stroker is way more than I'd want to spend, I'd rather go V8, so this one will probably be a budget refresh with new bearings/rings.

Ross, no new find, I guess the one I have was a gear swapped unit then, doh!

3.90 is pretty sweet, you could even go with less, but since there are 3.90 LSDs out there I'd look for one. If you go high up into the 4s with the gears you end up shifting way too fast, and those are better for cars with less power.