OK Chas, See If You Can Tell What's New...

[ERA Chas]

Post your current build specs.

[Dimis]

C'mon... Go the full alu pond build.
If nothing else you'll enjoy the lighter front end.

Plus you'll be helping to stimulate the economy.

What are you waiting for. It's only money! And it will be going to 2 good causes.
1 - your car &
2 - help clothe and feed Brent's little one. (No pressure - haha!)

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by ERA Chas

Post your current build specs.

Stroke - 4.125 (SCAT crank)
Bore - 4.155
447 CID

Wiseco Flat Top Forged Aluminum Pistons - 10.6:1 Compression

Edelbrock 76cc Heads polished and port matched to a Blue Thunder dual plane Intake Manifold

Erson Roller Rockers

Holley 4160 750 CFM Vacuum Secondary Carb

Elgin SFT Cam 324/324 Advertised Duration
245/245 at .050
.535 lift, less .024 hot lash, for an effective lift of .511
114 Lobe Separation Angle, ICL installed five degrees advanced at 109

Aluminum water pump and flywheel, Canton RR Pan w/ HV Pump

ROMAC aluminum/steel balancer

[blykins]

More head, more stroke, more lift, less LSA, more carb.

[Jerry Clayton]

Orrrrrrrrrrrr------------------

You might want to look at a combo that the Nascar boys did back then----427 so block, 352 crank for 390/396 cubes------the aluminum heads re worked and you'd save probably 100 lbs over what they were running with the alum h2o pump and alum clutch------

[patrickt]

OK, I'll put Brent's and Jerry's thoughts in to my proverbial pipe and smoke them.... In the meantime, here's a shot of the new K&N Xtreme Filter Top as it will appear when the new 9" round filter arrives. The second shot shows the "head room" with blocks used to simulate the new filter, which is just under two inches tall. The third shot shows the modification to the existing base that will allow the new K&N 9" filter to sit flush and mount properly to the new Xtreme Top. There's plenty of breathing room.

[ERA Chas]

Brent made a good guess.
And I know you don't want to spend for what Jerry's recommending-which is cool BTW.

I didn't know you had a 4.125 stroke and .025 overbore.
But here's some numbers I'd run by Brent (assuming you chose him) were it my motor, used your way.
4.25 stroke which prolly means new pistons (10.5 to 11.:1) on your 6.48 rods.
Polished heads are useless and port match is slightly less so but more effective on big power builds. You need to get the heads at or over 300 and 210 cfm-so let him port (CNC) them, do bowl work, short side radius and maybe back-cut the valves. (Are the intakes 2.08 or 2.19?-Maybe notch the bores for 2.19's but ask him)
Once the heads aren't a restriction, cam it with at least .100 more lift on both sides, a tad more exhaust than intake duration and a 110 LSA. Springs would be very mild and street friendly at those numbers and 6000+/-.
Maybe a 950 which I think he likes.
He could easily produce 600 lb/ft + at that size and chase boredom from your drab existence.
But follow what HE tells you.

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by ERA Chas

I didn't know you had a 4.125 stroke and .025 overbore.

Well you know I don't tell you everything. I downplay my numbers, but they're reasonably stout. Dyno numbers without having the side pipes on, water pump being pushed, etc. are just fake. And the bigger the HP numbers, the bigger the fake is, because the pipes will take more from the bigger mills than they will the smaller ones.

Originally Posted by ERA Chas

4.25 stroke which prolly means new pistons (10.5 to 11.:1) on your 6.48 rods.

That was something Joe and I discussed, and something that Barry supports, Keith does not support, and, I think, Brent does not. "That" being a shorter stroke, lower piston speed, lighter reciprocating mass, and aluminum accoutrements for a "faster revving" FE engine for the "harmonica effect" of buzzing fast up past six grand. Meaning, it's like playing a harmonica... it doesn't really get you anywhere, some might not even call it a true musical instrument, but it's just fun to do nonetheless. And my rods are not 6.48", they are 6.7".

The engine runs exceptionally well. I really wouldn't want to take it apart. I would be more inclined to simply have a spare monster all-aluminum mill built. Swapping them in and out is not a big deal. It might be more fun than I even think.

Now, what do you think of that boss-looking new air filter top?

[ERA Chas]

Originally Posted by patrickt

Dyno numbers without having the side pipes on, water pump being pushed, etc. are just fake. And the bigger the HP numbers, the bigger the fake is, because the pipes will take more from the bigger mills than they will the smaller ones.

Depending on the methodology you test under, the numbers are very valid to monitor changes and tuning improvements. The pipes can definitely be a factor. The water pump is 6HP tops so drop that.
I proved by my own dyno testing for Lou's Stainless Specialty pipe development, that correctly designed pipes do not lose 100 HP. Lou's first pipe design was exactly 52 chassis HP less than his 2nd, enlarged and improved design. THAT design in turn was 5 HP less than open header collectors. The chassis number for open headers was exactly 15% less than the FWHP numbers the motor made with open headers so they correlated. Water pump included.

Originally Posted by patrickt

That was something Joe and I discussed, and something that Barry supports, Keith does not support, and, I think, Brent does not. "That" being a shorter stroke, lower piston speed, lighter reciprocating mass, and aluminum accoutrements for a "faster revving" FE engine for the "harmonica effect" of buzzing fast up past six grand.

I'm advocating a long stroke combination because It's my understanding you prefer a high torque low revving combination. At 3.78, my stroke gave me just what I wanted-with a cam that worked up to 6800 and power on top.

Originally Posted by patrickt

I would be more inclined to simply have a spare monster all-aluminum mill built. Swapping them in and out is not a big deal. It might be more fun than I even think.

Then DO IT! All can make you a 482 or 511 that's 630 / 650+. I just didn't know you want to use that kind of power - you never demonstrated that you used it in any way other than touring sedately.

Originally Posted by patrickt

Now, what do you think of that boss-looking new air filter top?

I get encouraged then have to hang my head after you ask me something like this................ (sigh)

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by ERA Chas

I get encouraged then have to hang my head after you ask me something like this................ (sigh)

... but you had two of them on your car.

[Dimis]

ERA's do look very nice with dual quads and polished pent-roofs with 427 badges on them...
Food for thought perhaps.

[ERA Chas]

Originally Posted by patrickt

... but you had two of them on your car.

OF COURSE YA DOPE- I WAS FEEDING 1308 CFM at WOT!

[patrickt]

... dang, and you won't even let me have one.

[ERA Chas]

Brent will guide you...................

[RodKnock]

I'd keep your current engine and wouldn't touch a thing. I'd spend about half that amount of money and get rid of the beige paint. The upside you have a new look, save some cash and the wheel color wouldn't have to change since IT'S LOOKS EXACTLY THE SAME AS BEFORE.

[patrickt]

I found my notes from when Joe was building the engine. With open headers and nothing being driven, this engine, which he has built many times before, will consistently bench dyno in the 580's torque at around 4200 RPM and peak at 525 HP around 5000 RPM, and still have close to 500 HP at 6000 RPM. So, there you have it, if you were driving it on the bench, that is....

[blykins]

Your heads must perform horribly. To peak at only 5000 with the cam that you have says something for how efficient the heads and intake are.

I use similar durations on engines that are 40 cubes bigger than yours and peak 1000 rpm higher.

[patrickt]

Well, it is what it is... and my side pipes drop it all down to 475 or less. I had custom pipes made to be a little quieter than the average, with the understanding that it would take some power away. I still set off car alarms, but it doesn't hurt my ears. In fact, it sounds exactly how I want it to sound. I sat in somebody's Cobra a few years ago that was so loud that I had ringing in my ears for the rest of the day.

[ERA Chas]

Originally Posted by blykins

Your heads must perform horribly. .

That's why I'm hounding him (you) to do a Stage II, III or 1000 (), on them and get them near 300 cfm-at least. He never said valve sizes so that wouldn't hurt either. I think he has enough bore for 2.19s.
Maybe the BT dual plane is OK but the heads / cam don't work with it.

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by patrickt

Well, it is what it is... and my side pipes drop it all down to 475 or less.

...or less. Typical drivetrain HP loss is 15-20%. A 50 HP loss would only represent about a 10% loss.