Wedgewood Rod Shop

I am currently in the beginning stages of a 495 stroker build. I am using Eagle's kit with H-Beam rods and forged .060 pistons. I am topping it off with a nice "air gap" aluminum intake and Pro Comp aluminum heads.

Anyone out there have experience with a similar build? I am historically a Chevy guy, so I am just curious if there is any insight or success stories to read. I have also heard that oil delivery can be in an issue for these engines. Thanks!

tru-blue 442

You are in luck my friend.
There are several fellows
on the forum that know these
engines and how to build them.

oldsmobiledave

Curious
Why do
you answer like
this?


I have seen several people posting in this format & it is very difficult to read.

70cutty

I agree, I am expecting it rhyme every time I see it.

rubeng442

Possibly by way of using a phones web-browser?

cutlassefi

What are your hp/tq goals? What's the rest of the combination?

rubeng442

Question to the forum? Has anyone seen the Mahle stroker pistons (BBO) with the 1 mm, 1 mm, 2 mm, ring pack? I see them on their website, but I have not seen them for sale through the usual big store vendors.

cutlassefi

It'll take a little time for those to filter through. They're changing all their Powerpak piston sets to the new ring sizes and material. I love the Mahle stuff but for now the jury is still out on using a 1.00mm steel ring for street applications. The issue is that the steel rings don't have much forgiveness to them. In other words, your tune needs to be right and they don't do well with big shots of nitrous. BUT the Powerpak pistons are mostly made of 4032 alloy, which you normally don't use for a nitrous application anyway.
I'm anxious to try them in something.

tru-blue 442

I never even thought about it to tell the truth Dave. Difficult to read is when people don't use punctuation. You sometimes have to read over those a few times to get the gist of what is trying to be communicated.

Dool Cat

I built a 488 utilizing eagle kit and ebrock heads and made 586 ft-lb tq @ 3700 rpm and 487 hp @ 5100. Strictly street car with power brakes and ac

Wedgewood Rod Shop

Thanks everyone for getting the conversations going.

CutlassEFI (It's Mark right?) thank you for inquiring on my full build. The engine is getting full machine work. It is a standard bore right now and will get the following:

.060 over bore
Align honed
decked
balanced
(the Eagle kit is intended for internal balance, so converting to an SFI balancer and SFI steel flexplate for internal balance)

The Eagle kit consists of a 4.55" stroke crank, H-Beam rods and Mahle Forged .060 pistons with a -22cc dish.

Pro Comp 77cc aluminum heads with big valves, springs, retainers, etc.
1.65 Ratio Roller Rockers
Chrome Molly pushrods (should I use oil restricting rods?)

Comp Cams 249-CL42-600-5 thumpr series camshaft
Exhaust Lift = .476 / Intake Lift = .491 | Intake Duration 278 / Exhaust Duration 296

Aluminum air gap intake
800 CFM Edelbrock Carb that has been ported and polished to flow closer to 900 CFM

Final compression should be close to 10:1

I am actually dropping this beast down into my 1964 Ninety Eight Holiday, so the only exhaust that will clear the steering are the Stock B/C body exhaust manifolds from Mondello (made by Thorton I think) They lead into 2.25" pipe with 40 series flowmasters.

cutlassefi

Are the heads ported? By big valves do you mean 2.07 or bigger?
Do you have a Hp goal?
Thanks.

rubeng442

Just a hunch, but it seems under-cammed for the cubes.

Wedgewood Rod Shop

Sorry, the heads are not ported, but I considered doing so. Yes, I believe they are 2.072 on the intake side.

I haven't really thought too much on the HP expectation. My thought is that a range between 450 and 500hp would be faily obtainable. I don't have dyno plans though.

rubeng442

Your exhaust leaves a lot to be desired. But 400 to 430 are achievable with the combo as it is. IMO.

cutlassefi

Procomps out of the box have some real limitations. I'd do a different cam and more cylinder head. It'll drive better that way and probably make more power everywhere.
Jmo.

rubeng442

Thank you for the reply. I hope the wait is measured in months. I think these pistons would be a welcome addition to the Olds performance arsenal. I believe good machine work will be a make or break deal with these thin rings, especially on street builds.

Wedgewood Rod Shop

I definitely recognize that the exhaust isn't ideal, but it is impossible to convert this car to a 455 with headers. It is quite the process just to fabricate motor mounts and the exhaust has arch over the steering. So, I am stuck with the best I can do.

The car is a cruiser (I just laughed typing that) and will be built to drive and have fun taking on the road and to shows. It doesn't have visits to the track in its future. That is why I was very afraid to over cam it. The thumpr is very streetable and still sounds good. What would you recommend for a cam and what should be done to the heads?

rubeng442

The engine is induction AND exhaust limited, so I would have most likely went with a single pattern cam. Something along the lines of 242/242 and about .550 lift, maybe more lift depending on the specific lobes. 108 LSA. A hydraulic roller would be ideal. But much more costly.

As to heads, the most porting you can afford with as big a valve as you can fit.

young olds

idk if its a close comparison, i had a 68 88 and the drivers side had a center dump manifold to clear the steering, i always wondered if center dump shorty headers would work. they may not be as good as headers but i gotta imagine they flow better than a manifold.

Wedgewood Rod Shop

Did you do any other modifications? Were the heads just bolted on? What cam and compression? Thanks!

Wedgewood Rod Shop

Thanks for the idea and I actually did consider this. I think the 61-64 was very different though. This car did have center dump with the 394, but the 455 conversion changes a lot. I believe a center dump now will not get around the frame or starter.

Dool Cat

I went with the hyd roller version of thumpr you have with 10.25:1 cr and ebrocks out the box. I have hooker super comps for exhaust. Same intake you are using also.
From 3k rpm to 5k averages 562 ft lb tq

cutlassefi

That would be exactly the wrong cam, let me tell you why.
You have a 496c.i., 4.500" stroke big block with stock style exhaust manifolds.
It's going to make the low end torque anyway, AND it's already corked up with the exhaust manifolds so that has a tendency to enhance the low end as well. Why make it worse? Plus the 108 lsa will bring the power in sooner too, why? Again you already have plenty of c.i. and a 4.500" stroke. And the intake side is far less restricted than the exhaust side.

What you need is for it to breathe past 4000. I'd do something like a 238/246 on a 112 with lift in the mid to upper .500's, higher if the heads are even just cleaned up. That would broaden the power curve and make it drive better than either of the cams listed.

And the Procomps aren't 77cc, they're about 83, so at that you'd have about 9.8:1 on this combination. I'd mill them .035 or so to reach approx. 10.25:1.

Let me know if I can help. Thank you.

rubeng442

Because I don't think this car will be breathing much past 5k, if it even gets there. . It's a cruiser, no track time expected, going in a sedan, with most likely (and this is totally an assumption) highway gears. So the more low end power the better. Maximize the power from idle to whenever the exhaust chokes the engine.

I did think about a cam like the one you suggest; to try and bandaid the top end. But given the use of the vehicle, I saw no need to give up low and midrange power for more seldom used top end.

cutlassefi

I agree with you to some extent, a majority of street applications spend most of their time between 2000-4000rpm. But why cripple it above that even more. Plus it will undoubtedly drive better done on a 112 vs a 108.


I stand by my recommendation. Thanks.