BBO mondello

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Mar 4, 2012 | 06:12 PM
  #1  
firefrost gold's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,444
From: mn
BBO mondello

I ran into this seems to be a good artical at least it made some good power .http://www.jpmagazine.com/projectbui...5/viewall.html .
Old Mar 4, 2012 | 10:00 PM
  #2  
Vega's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 473
From: Indianapolis, IN
seems about right. just remember those are gross power figures and measured at the crank
interesting read though, the zex nitrous system interested me since i was just looking at a zex nitrous system for my camaro a few minutes before i saw this haha, talk about ironic
Old Mar 5, 2012 | 06:24 AM
  #3  
joe_padavano's Avatar
Old(s) Fart
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 50,768
From: Northern VA
With the exception of the E-brock heads, it's the same BBO build article that Mondello has been publishing for the last 30 years.
Old Mar 5, 2012 | 11:30 AM
  #4  
firefrost gold's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,444
From: mn
Other than the info on the carb that worked better for them and the intake info . Lot better numbers that car craft and hot rod on their olds build up.
Old Mar 5, 2012 | 11:54 AM
  #5  
Vega's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 473
From: Indianapolis, IN
Yeah, typically carcraft under rates Olds, one of those magazines did a big block comparison a few years back and it was a joke. they said they wanted to use as close to the same parts as possible to get an accurate comparison. So naturally most motors got Performer RPM intakes but the Olds got some lame intake, also the Buick won that shootout and strangely enough it got its heads and intake from TA performance. Also there was something about the 440 if i remember correctly, it got more cam than the others or something like that. The Olds 455 they used was a turd, it was such a bad core they had to bore it out to .060-over. Could have been a really awesome comparison if every motor was .030-over and got Performer RPM stuff all around with stock strokes and 700-800 carbs for each, but they got way off track and it was terrible...
Old Mar 6, 2012 | 02:46 PM
  #6  
ah64pilot's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,703
Magazines...sheesh! J/k! Good read, but not much more power than I made and I don't have near the port work or cam that this engine has. Makes me wonder what I could do if I popped my heads off for a full port and got a larger cam...oh wait, this is still a street car, dang! Maybe the next one
Old Mar 7, 2012 | 04:30 AM
  #7  
firefrost gold's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,444
From: mn
what RPM did you make that at?
Old Mar 7, 2012 | 09:48 AM
  #8  
ah64pilot's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,703
Originally Posted by firefrost gold
what RPM did you make that at?
5500, and we ended the test. I should've had it pulled to 6000 to see where the HP dropped off...lesson learned. I can only claim what I saw but it was still climbing up at 5500. So either I'm making 492 or slightly more.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
1964F85
General Discussion
25
Nov 13, 2019 08:40 PM
Mr. King
Small Blocks
13
Jun 12, 2019 08:14 AM
Bluevista
Vista Cruiser & Wagons
15
Oct 17, 2014 05:04 PM
rocketman482
Parts For Sale
21
Feb 24, 2009 01:50 PM
rocketman482
Parts For Sale
0
Feb 20, 2009 05:24 AM




All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:43 PM.