pparaska

Jim, pretty cool! I first made up a bracket but then decided to do exactly what you did! Great minds think alike, huh? I'm going to go back and put my gages in the stock bezels, as now they just sit in the holes and flop around (waiting for me to do something about that. Then again, I don't know when that'll happen, as the car is still in paint jail!

Cool stuff, Kevin. I need to buy that book!

Actually, Mike would have to specify, since runout could be measured parallel to the centerline of the stub axle, or perpendicular. Rotor runout is parallel to the stub axle centerline. Is that what you meant, Mike (Kelly)? If so, how about having a machinist chuck the adapter/companion flange weldment to a lather and true the surface? Fixturing it so that it turned true to the stub axle splines might be difficult though.

Jim, I don't remember saying that the dimmer switch worked the ground - it doesn't, I agree. The fuel level sender "grounds" the fuel level gage, and the temp sender "grounds" the input to the temp gage though, maybe that's what I wrote earlier? BTW, where did you get blue bulb condoms? The tach and speedo are held in with two wing nuts up behind them.

I'm having my S&W roll bar put in and we are trying to determine where the shoulder belt bar (gets welded to the main loop, goes straight across behind the seat). should be located vertically. First, my long legs and seats required that the Corbeau A4 be 1/2" forward of the raised shelf behind the seat. So I had the guy section the main hoop and put it up on the shelf next to the inner wheel houses. It's also about 3/4" below the roof sheet metal, just in front of the "box" that holds the dome light just in front of the hatch. I'm having it tied to that box with plates welded to the hoop to accept bolts to go in the holes in that box. Anyway, this all means that the seatbelt bar can't go where it's designed to, at the bend in the main hoop, if I want it to line up with the holes in the seat back for the harness. The question is, where should this bar be vertically, directly at the mid height of the holes in the seat? Also, the most room between the seat back and the seatbelt bar I could come up with is like 1/2". Is that O.K.?

John, thanks for that link. Great index of software there. However, the ones that seem to be able to do any of what were talking about are commercial, and the free stuff I looked through briefly didn't include the calculations I'm looking for. Kevin, I'm not sure what form the spreadsheet will be in. But I'll try to make it user-friendly. I'll get you the particulars on that book this weekend.

BTW, that article on the different types of cams was in the August 1999 Car Craft magazine. [ May 04, 2001: Message edited by: pparaska ]

We can get you going from here. Wow, if you didn't know it, you'd think this was a Homework Forum . Here's a scan from the book: A picture is worth a thousand words, huh? Anyway, the piston is going left-right in that diagram, it's not shown, but it's at point P. Anyway, I think you can see what Tim was talking about, but making right triangles to be able to use trig. That angle is something that you can calculate using the principle that the "leg" along that vertical line below "C" is given by the opposite/adjacent (sin) rule: That leads to the calculation of phi, as a function of theta, r, and l. I've been working on the spreadsheet and I've recreated the example Kevin put in the other post, but I'm trying to get it to work the inverse problem - given a compression ratio, what intake valve closing (IVC) angle, or theta, gives an X position that's 80%. In other words, leaves 80 percent of the cylinder volume above the piston. I can do it with Excels solver, but not everybody has that loaded. Anyway, I'm about done playing with it and I'll put it up in a few days. HTH, [ May 04, 2001: Message edited by: pparaska ] [ May 04, 2001: Message edited by: pparaska ]

Here ya go: http://everythingnova.homestead.com/headflow1.html The 462s are second down on the left. They came with either the 1.94/1.50 or the 2.02/1.60 valves. 40 lbs is nothing to sneeze at, but not something I'd spend $1000 to loose either. The newer heads are worth 50-70 horsepower though!

Nice lobes! Thanks Lone

Duct tape to seal over the holes. They are only small (1/8") holes, so it gives a good seal.

Guys, don't buy more POR-15 than you'll use in 6 months time. It doesn't have a long shelf life. Get lots of throw away brushes, gloves, and I use plastic bags in a butter dish for holding the paint. Pour in what you'll need (hard to judge - it does go a long way) and seal the can with duct tape right away. If you leave it open at all in humid weather it'll brick up like BLKMGK says. BTW, I don't remove the lid. Just puncture two holes in it and pour from one. They say not to shake the can, but I roll it over very slowly before using it. I got this tip from Hirsch Automotive that sells a similar product called Miracle paint. The problem with the lid is that even a tiny bit down in the crevice of the lid opening will glue the lid on forever.

Lone, what about the possiblity that the C200 and R200 actually use the same differential? Isn't this the same as using a 4x4 LSD?

Ross, my 73 is now in the body/paint shop. Had to get it in there before I was really ready, so I'm paying for stuff I would have done. Anyway, one of the things they are having trouble with is rolling the fender lip. I had new outer wheel houses and 1/4s put on previously and the way the two come together is making it very hard to roll the fender. They think they'll have to pie cut the lip bend it up and seal it. [ May 03, 2001: Message edited by: pparaska ]

Ross is right about me talking about people mixing ratios on an engine for the use of single pattern cams. But also remember that the newer heads for the SBC flow so well on the exhaust side that single pattern cams begin to make sense again. I have a few year old magazine article (can't remember the mag - I'll dig it up tonight) that compared similar hyd and solid flat tappet and hyd and solid roller cams on the same engine. What I found interesting was that the solid flat tappet cam (an old design no less) did very well when compared to the hyd roller in terms of average power and torque over 3 bands. THe writer went on to say that if an engine wasn't already set up for rollers, he'd go with a solid flat tappet in alot of cases.

Let me say this first - I like solid cams. I like not having those lifters squishing up. I also like the sound of the solid lifters, although they play havok with knock sensors! I've read that for stuff much beyond 6500 rpm on a SBC, hydraulics (even the anti-pumpup ones) still tend to pump up and promote valve float. Solid lifters obviously don't do this. Street solid cams have gentle ramps that make it easy on the parts and the valve seats. Sure, you need to adjust them every 10K miles or so (that's probably every couple of years for me), and stiffer parts like 7/16" studs and probably rocker arm stud girdles are a good idea for valve train stability and keeping the adjustments in check. My car had nothing over the valve covers and removing them takes about a minute each if I take my time. I think the maintenance aspect is negligible. I think that if you want to rev in this range, solids are the way to go. Comp Cams just came out with a mechanical (solid) flat tappet version of their Xtreme grinds. I'm looking to upgrade to that from my Magnum solid cam this Winter. As far as rocker ratios, the stuff I've read says to get the cam you need and used standard ratios. I see larger ratios as a band-aid to getting the lift and duration needed. Valve train geometry is trickier with non-stock ratios. Of course, if you want to buy a standard cam, but want more exhaust lift and duration, using larger ratio rockers on the exhaust side of a cam with the same duration and lift for both intake and exhaust is a proven method that works.

I did a test and did put an image in my sig. I just went to the signature section of the profile and included a small .GIF file from my site, gave the full URL, between . No spaces between the I took the image back out of my signature after I saw that it worked. I wonder if it has to do with image size. The GIF I used was only 1.8kbytes in size. A larger one may not be allowed by the software.

I have a 73 that I'm fitting a 70 bumper to. I changed the bumper brackets to the early ones and that works fine. But the little bracket/nut that's welded to the ends of the bumper don't line up with the holes in the fender or the headlight case in the indented area. The welded on nut lines up with the parting line between the fender and the headlight case. I think I can slot the holes in the middle brackets to move the bumper out a bit so that the nuts on the end line up with the holes in the headlight case. On the early cars, do these brackets/nuts in the end bolt through the hole in the headlight case of the ones in the fender?

Sounds alot like the swap Darius has. I don't recall any 1/4 mile times for his car. Let's just say he has more torque than his tires can handle . Search the old posts for "Darius" and "movie". You'll get the picture. As for how hard it is to do, I'll let him chime in. Hope he's still around.

John, that's some good food. Great point - if you're adding stroke, you add to the torque in a linear fashion (I'd surmise - basic concept). The geometric thing stumps me though.

Doh, since it was a jeep, I thought it was IRS, since some of them (ARMY) had swing axle. Sorry.

quote: Originally posted by Andrew Bayley: Bottom line, anyone who's good working with their hands will prove sucessful in this type of hobbie. Heck, one of closest friends is a UAW mechanic without a shred of Engineering knowledge. However, he is very gifted and creative when it comes to car projects. On the other hand, I had a roomate that graduated with a 3.9 gpa in Mechanical Engineering... yet couldn't figure out how to remove a battery from his 83 Grand Marquise -Andy Oh man, this is so true in my experience. Most of the good gear heads I meet have no engineering training or whatnot. I think it's something you're born with. I have a little bit of these natural skills, but not as much as I'd like! My dad (an Electrical Engineer) is good with his hands, etc. but he too was born with it, he says. I think it's somewhat genetic, but I did help my dad work on cars, tvs, you name it, when I was a kid. And I know SO MANY engineers that have NO tinkering skills at all. Totally clueless about things mechanical. And these are mechanical engineers (mostly)! But I have to say it does come in handy at times, knowing a bit about stress, strain, stiffness, shear, vibrations, etc. Then again, I think knowing this stuff ends up diverting me from doing actual work on the car - but I find it fun as well to work out some engineering problems related to car stuff. It's a hobby, afterall. [ May 01, 2001: Message edited by: pparaska ]

Wow! I think this swap should be one of our HybridZ tech articles! Please document and take pictures as you go. This ought to be pretty cool. BTW, ar the halfshafts CV or u-joint?

Lone, the valve size (2.02 vs 1.94) won't be evident by looking at the marking on the front of the head or the casting number, AFAIK. I don't know if 1.94 vs. 2.02 would make much difference in this head. They don't flow all that great (compared to the stuff out today) but are what made the SBC such a nicer performer in those days. I wonder if anyone could feel or measure the difference in how a 1.94 vs a 2.02 461 head flowed at lower rpms. Those heads in stock form start to run out of breathe above like 0.47" lift anyway. Still nice heads though. I have a set of 2.02 461s on my engine and have used 1.94 462s (same ports) before on a 327 and it worked well for a slightly warmed over setup.

Stan, so what's the deal!? We're waiting to hear if it's possible without resorting to cutting into the firewall!