![]() Dedicated to the Promotion and Preservation of American Muscle Cars, Dealer built Supercars and COPO cars. |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Matt, i have the answer, 427!
__________________
69 JL8XRAM/,68 BM Camaro/67 BM Chevelle/W-30,67 Baldwin Motion Chevelle |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Kevin,
You were born with 427 on the brain. ![]() ![]() Motown ![]()
__________________
"What Kind Of Bird Dont Fly?......." |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Gentlemen, all I said was that my deuce was faster than my L78. Not a lie, a fact. The L78 had 3.55 gears, and M20. If that worth 21/2-3 carlenghts I stand corrected. Please don't tell the L78 chevelles, 440 GTXs, and Boss302s that were also not quite as fast, that they should have won. We don't want to hurt their feelings.
Sam I agree when you're running in class on the strip, the LT/1 can't compete "headsup". Mo, you're dead on with the holeshot, and hanging on. Big cubes start catching you in 3rd. Kim, not 6 people. Five and 3 cases of old Milwaukee, and a bottle of Jack. The argument about BB vrs Sb will never end. It was the same back in the day, only worse. I've personally always thought the 68-69 L78s with the 163 high rise intake ran better than the 70 low rise. Just seemed that they flowed better. Don, great find on the Nova. They really rock with the turbo. Schonye |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Schonye,
The 163 intake vs the lower model in 70 is a no brainer. I dropped an LS6 in a 69 Camaro, made a few passes with it and was unhappy with what seemed like a momentary hesitation standing on the throttle. I swapped out the intake to a 163 using the same carb, made some passes and gained a minimum of 3 tenths of a second on each run, everything exactly the same except the intake. The additional height of the 163 is just enough to allow the fuel molecules to mix with the air causing a less liquid mixture for faster and more efficent combustion. I would think GM only dropped the intake in an effort to engineer the cold air induction system to work correctly with hood clearance. Whatever the reason, the proof is in the results, I definetly gained a quicker ET with no other changes except the intake. Motown ![]()
__________________
"What Kind Of Bird Dont Fly?......." |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
9,000 rpm's is a lot of revs. I would have to say the motor had the heads cut for big valve springs, a roller cam, and an MSD box. Most 02's shift around 7,500rpm's and go through the traps about 7,000. This is basically in stock eliminator trim. 9,000 rpm sounds like a comp. eliminator motor. JMO Sam
![]() |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sam,
You were right on all three accounts. Motown ![]()
__________________
"What Kind Of Bird Dont Fly?......." |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
There was a fellow that I used to watch in last 60s down at Acto take a small bock 327 and beat big blocks all day long His name was Bill Jenkins I would be down at the pits and watch Bill at work ( boy did I learn a lot) I don’t know why no body ever gave Bill his dues we hear a lot about Fred Gibbs Don Yenko and Dick Harrell but as long as I have been on this site no body ever mention Bill Jenkins I feel that he has been a major facture in the development on how much you could get out of a mouse motor I think he still lives about 40 min form me in Malvern Pa I know we were talking about stock but I believe Bill could still make a stock 327 and make it fly
|
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|