Peternell

I read a buch of the 5-lug posts, but none of them addressed the "el-cheap-O" route. I'm wondering if I can redrill the 82-82 280ZX rear disc's to a 5 on 4.75" pattern? Then I could use one set of tires and wheels at the track for either my Z or my Chevelle. Is there enough material on the rear hub to go to 4.75" spacing? Thanks, Larry

What is the current edition # and date? I have the first edition with a 1990 date. I've read several post that talk about engine and tranny combos (LS1's T-56, etc.) that my edition obviously does not cover. I'm going the carbed enarly engine TH400 route so am I missing anything? Newer suspension suggestions? Does the later edition cover the 4L80 and 4L80E transmission? Thanks Larry (aka Peternell)

Someone waht this? After all the LS! chat, this looks to be a pretty fair deal! http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=594322759

DrewZ, just send you two CURRENT auction, so check your e-mail. Later, Larry (aka Peternell)

Well I'll address the problem rather than the issue. I use a dB meter from time to time at work (I'm not a cop) and used it one my BB Chevelle. Original setup was 3" dual exhaust to 3" Flowmasters that dumped at the rear wheels. Results 104 dB inside the car @ 2000 rpm's (no sound insulation) and 92 dB @2000 rpm's at about 50 feet. It sure sounded good to me, but looking back it was a little too loud. I had 2.5" pipes extended up and over the rear end and dumped them just behind the reat tires. What a difference that made and I'm pretty sure I didn't loose anything in terms of power. Even if the car is loud but within the dB limits, the cops will notice any eventually write you for something. If you beat them on the noise issue, they will find something else to cite you for and watch you closer. Give em' fewer reasons to notice you and you will come out ahead. By the way how does the 377 run? Any 1/4 mile times yet? Later, Larry

I didn't even see the post in question nor do I care who started it, but I fully support the administrators decision to pull it. Like many I was pleased to find a forum that dealt with the V8 Z car and I'm even warming up to Turbo 6's, heck make that all Z cars. Another plus is the absence of Ford, Chevy or Mopar bashing, although I must admit I get a little kick out of "ricer bashing" that I find in the "I'm Tellin Ya" section. Like your saying, the mission statement says it all. There are SOOOO many places on the web for everybody's different interests. To those that started it and moderate it I say: This site is great, please do what you feel is needed to keep it that way!! Thank You, Larry (aka Peternell)

I did the Painless 18 circut in my Chevelle and it was pretty much painless. Work well enough that I'm gonna put a Painless kit in my Z too. Time involved, well that's up to you. I planned it out in my head and laid it out on the living room floor (bachelor days) before I even got it to the garage. It took me more time to decide on where to route the wires than to do the work (task included, complete new in dash gauges, hiden line loc switch, fuel gauge in the old console ashtray, etc) Actual work once I got going was about 6-8 hours (got real unproductive near the end-it was a beer thing) Painless kit $300+ Misc connectors $25+ Wire loom $15+ Not having to screw with the electrical system again, PRICELESS. Later, Larry

Drew I tried to e-mail to you but it just gets returned. Bad arddress or am I just "computer ignet"? Dont answer that http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/aw-cgi/ebayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=593655270&r=0&t=0 http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/aw-cgi/ebayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=593628404&r=0&t=0

Davy, your right on the under $30.00 US for my brackets, but that didn't include all the BEER! Seriously the JTR manual was very helpful and the brackets took very little time to fab. I got the material from the local scrap yard which also held the cost down. Later, Larry

Mike, I gotta take exception to ALL SJ engines had steel cranks. That was true up until ? 1964 or 1965, the GM put cast cranks in engines that they deemed didn't need a steel crank (ie lower performance engines) I've had and torn down several SJ engines over the last 5 years and have had several cast SJ cranks, most of them however were the 3" stroke 283 cranks. I do however agree the 302 Chev would be a GREAT Z car engine. Later Larry

Here's a low profile dual quad intake. I tried e-mailing it to you but it wouldn't work. Don't worry about the not shipping it to Canada thing. I'm sure you can find a fellow Hybrider near you in the states that will allow it to be shipped to their house then get it to ya. Later Larry http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/aw-cgi/ebayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=593363337&r=0&t=0

Heck find a large journal 327 crank (1968 only?) and get a steel one to boot or get a 307 crank (all large journal) and balance the rotating assembly. The 307 crank (3.25 stroke) will work, but is balanced for lighter pistons. You can usually find a 327 LJ crank on E-Bay for $250 + shipping. Use a 350 4-bolt block and a 327LJ or 307 crank and then you could have a 4-bolt 327. Later Larry

Welcome Craig I'm sure the group will chime in quickly. I will be running a TH400 but freeway speeds are not an issue. A general finding by the gang here is go with an OD. A mid 80's Caprice with a 350 and 200R4 or 700R4 will get you the engine/tranny package and all the AC stuff you need. (the Caprice probably saw an easier life than a Camaro or truck engine) Look into the "big and ugly" cars for lower mile engine/tranny packages. Unfortunately the donors cars I have suggested typically have the less desirable heads, but get the package swap some heads and cam and you got a good starting point. Smog laws a consideration? Just one of many opinions your sure to get Larry

Couple of thoughts. First Davy is right the 350 has smaller mains (2.45) than the 400 (2.65) so you either need spacer bearings for about $40 from Powerhouse or special (& costly) oversized bearings. Secondly the 377 is an interesting combo and I have the parts to build eiter a 377 or 406, but chose the 406 for a few reasons. Why give up 29 cubes? The 383 is popular cause its 28 cubes larger than a .030 350 and has a longer stroke for more torque. (I know these cars don't need that much torque) Second the longer stroke allows power to be made at a lower RPM and spining R's is expensive. Much cheaper to build an engine to survive at 6 grand than 7 grand. The David Vizard book that Davy mention is great (I've got his How to build a high performance SBC on a budget book)Solid block, good rods, darn good heads, good ignition and exhaust and the RIGHT cam a lower budget 406 can get the numbers your seeking. The 377 can produce similar numbers but get ready to spend the buck$ Just my input, for what its worth Larry (aka Peternell)

I put a painless harness in my Chevelle and plan to do the same in my Z. After a little [planning it was pretty much painless). I solved several electric problems with that 1 modification (& had some piece of mind too) Total cost including misc. connectors around $300.00........not having to screw with the electrical system again PRICELESS. Larry (aka Peternell)

Hey gang give me your knowledge. Two ways to answer my question 1) What is the length of a driveline behind a TH400 short shaft with the engine in the JTR position and the differential in the 72 and newer placement (as per JTR) U-joint center to U-joint center? OR 2) What is the transmission length difference between the TH350 and the TH400 short shaft? That would basically answer my question too! I've search the archives but not much about the TH400. Thanks Larry (aka Peternell)

Gotta a FREE driveshaft if it will work for you out of a 74 260 with auto trans (are the yokes and length the same?) Pay the shipping and its yours. Larry, (aka Peternell)

Dumb question gang. What are the differences between/how do you identfy an early and late 1974 260Z. I've got a 74 but I'm not sure which one I have (how lame is that) I think its the early 74 cause the blinkers were under the bumpers (heck I got a 50/50 chance of being right) Never been an issue until I was looking to get rear suspension parts. Thanks Larry (aka Peternell)

Danno, I made my engine, trans and radiator brackets by following the JTR manual templates. Pretty darn easy (my fabrication buddy works for beer) - it was a little bit of a pain to drill through the 3/8" off-set brackets. The spacers were made from 3/8" & 1/4" aluminum plates (obtained from the local metal salvage yard for $.40 per pound) which cost about $6.00. Total cost for engine brackets & spacers, transmission mount and radiator mount was $15 for material and $20 for beer (I got half of it) so a net cost of $25 and a few brain cells. Dropped in a bare block & heads and transmission just to check the fit and it was fine. I may make another set of brackets and move the engine up about a 1/2" (ya I know guys) to give enough clearance for an 8" balancer. (building a lower budget 406 and want to avoid either an internal balance job or pricey 7 1/4" external balancer) IMO Save the money make the brackets and spend the savings elsewhere on the project. Larry (aka Peternell)

Someone was looking for a low profile dual quad (tpi) setup. Well heres one I just saw on E-Bay http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/aw-cgi/ebayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=591957308&r=0&t=0

Bill, Lone had some pretty good info for you, however the #461 casting number is not a guarantee of 2.02" and 1.60" valves. In fact of the 6 or 7 sets of 461's I've had over the years only on set were 2.02/1.60's. You can tell factory 2.02 by looking in the chamber. Chevrolet would use an oversized cutter to enlarge the chamber wall around the intake valve to reduce valve shrouding. if it has 2.02 and the chamber is not clearanced it may not flow as well a 1.94 valve. The J195 is the date code with J being the month (October-I think, some info indicates Chevy did not use "I" for dating purposes due to possible confusion with the number 1) the 19 is the day of the month and the 5 is for 1965. Hope this helps, Larry

The 400 was produced from 1970-1980. The 70-72 blocks were 4-bolts and the 73-80 blocks were 2-bolts. The 79-80 block can be a little deceptive cause they don't have 3 freeze plugs like the previous blocks (look for the 8" balancer w/some material missing for external balancing purposes. The came in trucks, vans, large sedans and station wagons. The truck engines have probably seen the most work and the sedans the least work. Try looking into 1971-1976 4-door Impala's and station wagons. Yes the 327 crank (3.25" stroke can go in the 400 block just as the 350 crank (3.48" stroke) can. You must use special bearings or bearing spaces to make up for the 400 having larger mains. (I assume you talking about a large journal 327 crank?) Putting Vortec heads on a 400 is almost the same as putting them on an early 350, just remember to drill the 6 steam holes per head. Alot of people swapped high compression heads of 400's to boost power and then complained that they overheated. Not the 400's fault, but the owners cause they forgot to drill the steam holes. 327 crank/.030 over 400 block is a 352 (I think?) A racer with a 70 chevelle runs this combo and does quite well, however redid the engine for this year with the 350 crank for nearly the same rev potential yet 25 more cubes. The 352 can easily fit a 6" rod, just make sure you get pistons with the right pin height. Between the two I'd go the 377 route!

If easy access means it runs and is real cheap, I'd consider the 305. Power and torque are no where near that of comparable 350's but, a small block is a smal block in terms of mounting brakets, exhaust, yadda, yadda, yadda. Work out all of the conversion bugs with a proven engine (stock and whimpy as it may be) while you hunt down your dream small block. Nothing like trying to fire that fresh rebuilt engine with things like ignition and electric fuel pump being unproved. I've taken 2 years to round up most of the pieces to build a healthy 406 and manual valve body TH400, yet I could have been driving it with a mildly built 350 and stock TH400 in the mean time. Wish I could get those 2 years back!

I'm was also considering a 377 for my 74 260z, cause I have most of the parts for it and it would be a Great RPM engine, however I'm not in the same league as you when it comes to bucks. Heck I was going to put the 377 together w/a Chevy 350 steel crank and spacer bearings, SCAT 6" rods, a 400 4-bolt block and some #186 camel hump heads with port work and 2.02's & 1.60's for about the price of your crank alone. However I've opted for the 406 route, cause I'm after torque for drag racing and longer stroker means power at lower RPM's which = less stress on the whole engine. "There's no replacement for displacement" - don't mean to start a war here guy's, I know the benefits of NOS and super trick parts and machine work, I'm talking $ for $. One suggestion, consider the 6" rods, they are well within your budgets and have many benefits.

Thanks guys keep em' coming. So far the 67 vette look it a winner.