ProComp heads on a SBO 350
February 12th, 2013, 07:56 AM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 904
ProComp heads on a SBO 350
Bottom end is nearly done- bored ( 4.155), stroked and balanced, going to have CutlassEFI / Mark custom grind a roller set up for it, will be 3.42 posi behind a Monster th350 with a level 2 shift kit. I have decided to go with aluminum heads. I am aware of the mechanical fuel pump issues. What I am wondering is, what are all the other specs I should strive for, such as how much to shave off to get around 65cc ( looking for somewhere around 9 or 10:1 ( suggestions?- want to be able to use pump gas and have the vacum for accessories)? Will I need to do anything to the intake ( EB 2711 )? I searched the forums and see most of these heads are going on BBO, if I missed this info and someone has a link...send it my way! Advice and suggestions are welcome.
Thanks!
Thanks!
February 13th, 2013, 05:35 AM
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Janesville, WI
Posts: 251
You are going to need the Performer RPM intake to make it work. The vacuum will be more dependent on the cam that Mark grinds for you. As long as the cam isn't too radical, you will be fine. The dish on your pistons and how far they are in the hole will dictate how much you need to take off the heads as well as the thickness of the head gaskets. .015 thick gasket will help you out the best.
February 13th, 2013, 05:45 AM
#4
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 904
I have had this around for a long time - Edelbrock 2711 Performer Olds 350 Intake Manifold,
Why would it not work? Thanks for the help.
Why would it not work? Thanks for the help.
February 13th, 2013, 07:19 AM
#5
Old(s) Fart
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 47,310
I have had this around for a long time - Edelbrock 2711 Performer Olds 350 Intake Manifold,
Why would it not work? Thanks for the help.
Why would it not work? Thanks for the help.
February 13th, 2013, 06:23 PM
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 38
The 7111 (RPM) or the Victor intake.
Based on what you want from the engine, I would use the RPM intake.
If you want suggestions on compression ratio, you should talk to Mark, since it depends on the cam he is using.
Based on what you want from the engine, I would use the RPM intake.
If you want suggestions on compression ratio, you should talk to Mark, since it depends on the cam he is using.
June 11th, 2013, 07:50 PM
#8
Better late than not at all
I know I am late on this subject but I thought I should share my findings with all.
I am in the process of putting together an Olds 350 with considerable power.
When I begain looking for a qualified machinist I interviewed four of them and compared some of what I have been reading with their personal/professional opinions. All of them agreed that the aluminum heads Edelbrock markets for Oldsmobile V8s, are fairly versatile when properly prepped for the Big Block application but can be very costly to use on small blocks. They seem to require more machining. they have very large combustion chambers so a serious over-bore is recommended of the block and depending on desired compression domed pistons may even be necessary. Of course when the Heads are milled the intake requires adjustment as well and the 7111 intake is the most suitable match.
To be specific. Unless you are ready for a lot of extra expense it seemes (by their assessment) that the same power can be achieved reliably using earlier #5, 6, or 7 heads machined for larger valves such as the 2.00" or 2.07" intake valves found in the 400 or 455 engines and some port work.
I selected Elsasser Engines in Miller Place, NY in the end because they are well known and Keith supposedly shared classes and some conversation with Joe Mondello's son. Don't know if that is true but it sounded good enough to me.
The stock heads of the years '69-'72 have huge ports. It isn't hard to imagine them breathing well. Some folks like to grind down the "hump" to make them wide open, while others have told me that the "horn"shape of the exhaust ports is why Olds small blocks have better low RPM exhaust velocity than other GM brands and in turn offers more consistent torque over a broader range.
I know Horsepower TV used the Edelbrock Heads/Intake combo on a 350 and squeaked 385HP under 6000RPM.
Oddly Edelbrocks own catalog claims their RPM intake/cam/750CFM carb combo with iron heads makes 397HP! from a 350.
They also make it clear their heads are intended for big blocks (but can be modified to work on small block applications)
Where as I have seen others on youtube and a local racer here make more than 450HP with Oldsmobile iron heads.
This is mostly observation, hear-say and opinion but I figured I would share all of it, may be it helps before some one spends in the wrong places, may be only confuses, either way I'm telling.
I know the post was about Proform Heads or something, but from what I understand most of the other heads on the market are based on the Edelbrock design or some are just are re-labelled.
Buyer beware and all that.
Be observant of the combustion chamber size because 77 cc is very big to be using on a small block.
Building a '70 350, hoping for just over or under 400HP and 400lbs/ft torque with the iron heads on a street engine.
So I have been asking a lot of questions and reading up where I can find it.
Because I do not have a limitless supply of money.
I am in the process of putting together an Olds 350 with considerable power.
When I begain looking for a qualified machinist I interviewed four of them and compared some of what I have been reading with their personal/professional opinions. All of them agreed that the aluminum heads Edelbrock markets for Oldsmobile V8s, are fairly versatile when properly prepped for the Big Block application but can be very costly to use on small blocks. They seem to require more machining. they have very large combustion chambers so a serious over-bore is recommended of the block and depending on desired compression domed pistons may even be necessary. Of course when the Heads are milled the intake requires adjustment as well and the 7111 intake is the most suitable match.
To be specific. Unless you are ready for a lot of extra expense it seemes (by their assessment) that the same power can be achieved reliably using earlier #5, 6, or 7 heads machined for larger valves such as the 2.00" or 2.07" intake valves found in the 400 or 455 engines and some port work.
I selected Elsasser Engines in Miller Place, NY in the end because they are well known and Keith supposedly shared classes and some conversation with Joe Mondello's son. Don't know if that is true but it sounded good enough to me.
The stock heads of the years '69-'72 have huge ports. It isn't hard to imagine them breathing well. Some folks like to grind down the "hump" to make them wide open, while others have told me that the "horn"shape of the exhaust ports is why Olds small blocks have better low RPM exhaust velocity than other GM brands and in turn offers more consistent torque over a broader range.
I know Horsepower TV used the Edelbrock Heads/Intake combo on a 350 and squeaked 385HP under 6000RPM.
Oddly Edelbrocks own catalog claims their RPM intake/cam/750CFM carb combo with iron heads makes 397HP! from a 350.
They also make it clear their heads are intended for big blocks (but can be modified to work on small block applications)
Where as I have seen others on youtube and a local racer here make more than 450HP with Oldsmobile iron heads.
This is mostly observation, hear-say and opinion but I figured I would share all of it, may be it helps before some one spends in the wrong places, may be only confuses, either way I'm telling.
I know the post was about Proform Heads or something, but from what I understand most of the other heads on the market are based on the Edelbrock design or some are just are re-labelled.
Buyer beware and all that.
Be observant of the combustion chamber size because 77 cc is very big to be using on a small block.
Building a '70 350, hoping for just over or under 400HP and 400lbs/ft torque with the iron heads on a street engine.
So I have been asking a lot of questions and reading up where I can find it.
Because I do not have a limitless supply of money.
June 12th, 2013, 08:01 AM
#9
Old(s) Fart
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 47,310
If your machine shops are telling you this, I'd find a new shop.
June 12th, 2013, 08:23 AM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Central Fl
Posts: 7,828
Wow! Are you telling us this stuff or are you asking us?
I'm with Joe on everything except the chamber size of the aluminums. Everyone that I've checked was in fact closer to 77, not 72.
However I'd like to point out a few things;
Your machine shop wants you to redo your irons. Why? Because they don't make near as much money if you buy a set of aluminums do they.
I'm with Joe, find another machine shop.
I'm with Joe on everything except the chamber size of the aluminums. Everyone that I've checked was in fact closer to 77, not 72.
However I'd like to point out a few things;
All of them agreed that the aluminum heads Edelbrock markets for Oldsmobile V8s, are fairly versatile when properly prepped for the Big Block application but can be very costly to use on small blocks. They seem to require more machining. Milling only and they can be milled down to less than 50cc.
they have very large combustion chambers so a serious over-bore is recommended of the block and depending on desired compression domed pistons may even be necessary. BS, as Joe pointed out.
Of course when the Heads are milled the intake requires adjustment as well and the 7111 intake is the most suitable match. Correct.
To be specific. Unless you are ready for a lot of extra expense it seemes (by their assessment) that the same power can be achieved reliably using earlier #5, 6, or 7 heads machined for larger valves such as the 2.00" or 2.07" intake valves found in the 400 or 455 engines and some port work. No way in hell.
I selected Elsasser Engines in Miller Place, NY in the end because they are well known and Keith supposedly shared classes and some conversation with Joe Mondello's son. Did they talk about the weather, women, Olds engines or what?
Don't know if that is true but it sounded good enough to me. You're right you don't know if it's true so why believe it.
The stock heads of the years '69-'72 have huge ports. Have you ever actually looked at them? They're tiny.
It isn't hard to imagine them breathing well. Really? I flowed a set of #7 heads with some decent bowl work and 2.00" valves. They flowed 209 at .500 lift and 217 at .600 lift. Does that sound good to you?
Some folks like to grind down the "hump" to make them wide open, while others have told me that the "horn"shape of the exhaust ports is why Olds small blocks have better low RPM exhaust velocity than other GM brands and in turn offers more consistent torque over a broader range. Really? The exhaust ports on an Olds have a lot to be desired. Ask yourself one question, if the Olds exhaust port was so good for a broad torque range, when GM designed the LS why didn't they copy anything from the Olds head? hmmmm.
I know Horsepower TV used the Edelbrock Heads/Intake combo on a 350 and squeaked 385HP under 6000RPM. And 410lb/ft of torque, with mild compression.
Oddly Edelbrocks own catalog claims their RPM intake/cam/750CFM carb combo with iron heads makes 397HP! from a 350. Call them and ask them for the particulars on that build, you may be surprised.
They also make it clear their heads are intended for big blocks (but can be modified to work on small block applications)
Where as I have seen others on youtube and a local racer here make more than 450HP with Oldsmobile iron heads.
This is mostly observation, hear-say and opinion, Correct but I figured I would share all of it, may be it helps before some one spends in the wrong places, may be only confuses, either way I'm telling.
I know the post was about Proform Heads or something, but from what I understand most of the other heads on the market are based on the Edelbrock design or some are just are re-labelled. They're not relabelled, they've been copied by another manufacturer.
they have very large combustion chambers so a serious over-bore is recommended of the block and depending on desired compression domed pistons may even be necessary. BS, as Joe pointed out.
Of course when the Heads are milled the intake requires adjustment as well and the 7111 intake is the most suitable match. Correct.
To be specific. Unless you are ready for a lot of extra expense it seemes (by their assessment) that the same power can be achieved reliably using earlier #5, 6, or 7 heads machined for larger valves such as the 2.00" or 2.07" intake valves found in the 400 or 455 engines and some port work. No way in hell.
I selected Elsasser Engines in Miller Place, NY in the end because they are well known and Keith supposedly shared classes and some conversation with Joe Mondello's son. Did they talk about the weather, women, Olds engines or what?
Don't know if that is true but it sounded good enough to me. You're right you don't know if it's true so why believe it.
The stock heads of the years '69-'72 have huge ports. Have you ever actually looked at them? They're tiny.
It isn't hard to imagine them breathing well. Really? I flowed a set of #7 heads with some decent bowl work and 2.00" valves. They flowed 209 at .500 lift and 217 at .600 lift. Does that sound good to you?
Some folks like to grind down the "hump" to make them wide open, while others have told me that the "horn"shape of the exhaust ports is why Olds small blocks have better low RPM exhaust velocity than other GM brands and in turn offers more consistent torque over a broader range. Really? The exhaust ports on an Olds have a lot to be desired. Ask yourself one question, if the Olds exhaust port was so good for a broad torque range, when GM designed the LS why didn't they copy anything from the Olds head? hmmmm.
I know Horsepower TV used the Edelbrock Heads/Intake combo on a 350 and squeaked 385HP under 6000RPM. And 410lb/ft of torque, with mild compression.
Oddly Edelbrocks own catalog claims their RPM intake/cam/750CFM carb combo with iron heads makes 397HP! from a 350. Call them and ask them for the particulars on that build, you may be surprised.
They also make it clear their heads are intended for big blocks (but can be modified to work on small block applications)
Where as I have seen others on youtube and a local racer here make more than 450HP with Oldsmobile iron heads.
This is mostly observation, hear-say and opinion, Correct but I figured I would share all of it, may be it helps before some one spends in the wrong places, may be only confuses, either way I'm telling.
I know the post was about Proform Heads or something, but from what I understand most of the other heads on the market are based on the Edelbrock design or some are just are re-labelled. They're not relabelled, they've been copied by another manufacturer.
I'm with Joe, find another machine shop.
Last edited by cutlassefi; June 12th, 2013 at 08:33 AM.
June 12th, 2013, 02:49 PM
#11
Just rambling some opinions collected from different discussions with different folks.
The over bore theory is as simple as placing a higher volume of air into a given space (combustion chamber).
I don't disagree with anything anyone is saying. It is my opinion that the 350 has pretty fat bore to begin with as well.
The real point of it all was that the machinist (which I am not. I am a mechanic) seemed to feel the Edelbrock heads require a bit of work to use on the 350 where old cast iron can produce similar results at a lessor cost.
It probably comes down preference. I would think that aluminum offers better heat transfer than Iron and with that alone should offer more possibilities but I think the point was at what cost more so than anything else.
The other opinions were collected from several different persons in my efforts to find a machinist.
Perhaps these are minimalist points of view or they were simply being budget sensitive on my behalf or maybe THEY PREFER CHEVY.
I don't know.
I posted in hopes of gathering other opinions which may help educate whom ever may be watching. My self included.
The over bore theory is as simple as placing a higher volume of air into a given space (combustion chamber).
I don't disagree with anything anyone is saying. It is my opinion that the 350 has pretty fat bore to begin with as well.
The real point of it all was that the machinist (which I am not. I am a mechanic) seemed to feel the Edelbrock heads require a bit of work to use on the 350 where old cast iron can produce similar results at a lessor cost.
It probably comes down preference. I would think that aluminum offers better heat transfer than Iron and with that alone should offer more possibilities but I think the point was at what cost more so than anything else.
The other opinions were collected from several different persons in my efforts to find a machinist.
Perhaps these are minimalist points of view or they were simply being budget sensitive on my behalf or maybe THEY PREFER CHEVY.
I don't know.
I posted in hopes of gathering other opinions which may help educate whom ever may be watching. My self included.
June 12th, 2013, 03:14 PM
#12
[QUOTE=cutlassefi;556916]Wow! Are you telling us this stuff or are you asking us?
Kind of asking.
I assumed this was a discussion forum.
Where collecting facts and opinions and experiences can assist in formulating decisions.
I have built a few cars in the past, but it has been nearly twenty years since the last one and this my first Oldsmobile project so I am trying to gather what I can and share what I've gathered.
You guys are sensitive aren't you?
LS head comparisons and all, wow!
I suppose I should get all rattled and ask if the LS engine is such a great breather why doesn't every manufacturer build one or something?
I think I would have preffered some one telling me how much it cost for the little bit of adjustment the Heads and intake may or may not required instead of the flat mockery, but it was great welcome to forum anyway.
Kind of asking.
I assumed this was a discussion forum.
Where collecting facts and opinions and experiences can assist in formulating decisions.
I have built a few cars in the past, but it has been nearly twenty years since the last one and this my first Oldsmobile project so I am trying to gather what I can and share what I've gathered.
You guys are sensitive aren't you?
LS head comparisons and all, wow!
I suppose I should get all rattled and ask if the LS engine is such a great breather why doesn't every manufacturer build one or something?
I think I would have preffered some one telling me how much it cost for the little bit of adjustment the Heads and intake may or may not required instead of the flat mockery, but it was great welcome to forum anyway.
June 12th, 2013, 03:39 PM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Central Fl
Posts: 7,828
.
The real point of it all was that the machinist (which I am not. I am a mechanic) seemed to feel the Edelbrock heads require a bit of work to use on the 350 where old cast iron can produce similar results at a lessor cost. Again not even close.
It probably comes down preference. I would think that aluminum offers better heat transfer than Iron and with that alone should offer more possibilities but I think the point was at what cost more so than anything else.
The real point of it all was that the machinist (which I am not. I am a mechanic) seemed to feel the Edelbrock heads require a bit of work to use on the 350 where old cast iron can produce similar results at a lessor cost. Again not even close.
It probably comes down preference. I would think that aluminum offers better heat transfer than Iron and with that alone should offer more possibilities but I think the point was at what cost more so than anything else.
There are many on here who will tell you the opinion and "facts" you stated are flat out wrong. That's nobodys opinion, that's the fact.
Small block heads are average at best, you stated you thought they "have huge ports" They don't, not by anybodys standards for a middle 300 cubic inch american V8. They're quite small. And I stated the flow rates, they hardly reflect what a "huge" port might flow.
You seem to be an educated person, think for a minute why your machinist would say the things he did. My guess is he either really doesn't have a clue, or better yet, he just wants to rework your old tired iron heads. He makes more money that way. I guess I can't blame him for that.
Best of luck in your build.
June 12th, 2013, 03:49 PM
#14
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Central Fl
Posts: 7,828
[QUOTE=Littlepetey;557015]
Uhh they have. Look at the new Dodge Hemi, Ford Mod motors and of course the LS. Any similarities?
A bunch, solid bottom ends, long runners, excellent flowing heads, raised exhaust ports and all were designed from a clean sheet of paper. I think everybody did do the same thing don't you?.
And welcome to the forum. Maybe next time don't assume what you post hasn't already been done a hundred times and you may get a better response. Especially when you're posting heresay.
Again good luck in your build. Feel free to ask any question you want, There are a lot of very knowledgeable people on here who will be glad to help, me included.
A bunch, solid bottom ends, long runners, excellent flowing heads, raised exhaust ports and all were designed from a clean sheet of paper. I think everybody did do the same thing don't you?.
And welcome to the forum. Maybe next time don't assume what you post hasn't already been done a hundred times and you may get a better response. Especially when you're posting heresay.
Again good luck in your build. Feel free to ask any question you want, There are a lot of very knowledgeable people on here who will be glad to help, me included.
June 13th, 2013, 04:35 PM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Virginia
Posts: 26
Cost of olds head work
I ported a set of C heads myself and then had the steel exhaust seats installed and a valve job for larger valves. (Both intake and exhaust) Also, bronze valve guides were installed and had a clean up shave on block surface only and had them drilled for studs. Total cost for machine work was $850.00 and that didn't count the price for valves, valve springs, retainers.
Had them flowed for another $100.00 and the intakes were capable of 540 HP a .600 valve lift but the exhaust ports were so weak, they pulled total HP capability down to approx 475 HP. Over $1700.00 invested in heads and that does not count rocker arms.
Mind you now, I ported these myself and the Edelbrocks are well worth the $1900.00. Next time I'll know better.
BTW Both heads put out about the same expected HP.
Had them flowed for another $100.00 and the intakes were capable of 540 HP a .600 valve lift but the exhaust ports were so weak, they pulled total HP capability down to approx 475 HP. Over $1700.00 invested in heads and that does not count rocker arms.
Mind you now, I ported these myself and the Edelbrocks are well worth the $1900.00. Next time I'll know better.
BTW Both heads put out about the same expected HP.
June 14th, 2013, 06:57 PM
#16
I ported a set of C heads myself and then had the steel exhaust seats installed and a valve job for larger valves. (Both intake and exhaust) Also, bronze valve guides were installed and had a clean up shave on block surface only and had them drilled for studs. Total cost for machine work was $850.00 and that didn't count the price for valves, valve springs, retainers.
Had them flowed for another $100.00 and the intakes were capable of 540 HP a .600 valve lift but the exhaust ports were so weak, they pulled total HP capability down to approx 475 HP. Over $1700.00 invested in heads and that does not count rocker arms.
Mind you now, I ported these myself and the Edelbrocks are well worth the $1900.00. Next time I'll know better.
BTW Both heads put out about the same expected HP.
Had them flowed for another $100.00 and the intakes were capable of 540 HP a .600 valve lift but the exhaust ports were so weak, they pulled total HP capability down to approx 475 HP. Over $1700.00 invested in heads and that does not count rocker arms.
Mind you now, I ported these myself and the Edelbrocks are well worth the $1900.00. Next time I'll know better.
BTW Both heads put out about the same expected HP.
June 14th, 2013, 08:00 PM
#17
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Janesville, WI
Posts: 251
Littlepetey, just to let you know, the aluminum heads aren't hard to make work on a 350. I just finished my engine with a set of ProComps from Bernard Mondello. They were $1250 assembled and cut to 68cc chambers. Add the 7111 intake for $285 and I would say thats pretty easy and cheap for heads that out perform heavily modified factory irons out of the box. To be honest, the whole process was pretty painless, and my engine runs really strong.
June 14th, 2013, 11:22 PM
#18
Senior Moment Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,862
The Edelbrock heads have to be relieved to fit the stock mechanical fuel pump to the point of running into the water jacket. I know because I did it myself. I was buying the heads assuming they would fit. They didn't. At the time the catalogue said nothing about them not fitting the small block without major surgery. I ended up with a 350 horse 350. Not worth the trouble or the cost. I later built a 455 for the car. I am very happy I did. It puts out 435 ish and 550 to 575 to the crank.
June 15th, 2013, 08:08 AM
#20
Senior Moment Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,862
Build; 455 30 over. Edelbrock heads, cam,@.50 Dur 230/246 Lift 520/523. Comp, 10.5 to 1. Air gap, Holley 780, MSD, Headers. Chassis dyno sheet. How much to take away for drivetrain loss? I have heard (here) as little as 5%. When I owned the shop we would go 20%. That may seem high. The numbers are what they are. The line is squiggly because it was breaking the tires loose in 4th gear on the rollers.
Last edited by z11375ss; June 15th, 2013 at 08:12 AM.
June 15th, 2013, 02:05 PM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: maryland
Posts: 1,393
Hi Littlepetey, First of all welcome aboard!. I would listen intently to Joe P, and cutlassefi; they are extremely knowledgable when it comes to these Olds engines. There are a few others here that may chime in, and trust me when I tell you, for the most part, they are right. Opinions may vary, but the bottom line is, these guys have been around for a long time and learned the hard way. I have a couple small block Oldsmobiles and one makes terrific horsepower---the other about three hundred wish 9-1 compression and dished pistons.
I will tell you going in, making horsepower with an Olds will probably not be inexpensive, but if you listen to the old-timers you can make a great engine that should last and take a beating. Look into what Oldsmobile did with the factory built W-31s---no dome pistons, "stock" #5 and #6 heads, stock bore and for two years, a cast iron intake. You can start with a W-31 as a foundation, and with today's cam technology and a good tune make upwards of 350 horsepower easily and have a reliable engine. My '69 W-31 has a close to "legal" NHRA stock type engine and I'm very happy with the performance, drivability, and durability. Heck, a stock W-31 with headers and a good tune should give you 350HP or so. Check what some of the old F/S and G/S W-31s ran and you'll see my point. You won't need to build a record holder because of the cost and usage, but between 350-400 HP won't be "rocket science" and taking your time, investigating what some of the "heavy hitters" are using listening to us here will yield positive results. Unlike some of the other sites and forums, you'll find that most of the guys here are eager to help and will share with you what works and what doesn't. Any of the W-31 guys are good ones to talk to take advice from. You don't need the latest super duper stuff, just the right combination and testing.
I will tell you going in, making horsepower with an Olds will probably not be inexpensive, but if you listen to the old-timers you can make a great engine that should last and take a beating. Look into what Oldsmobile did with the factory built W-31s---no dome pistons, "stock" #5 and #6 heads, stock bore and for two years, a cast iron intake. You can start with a W-31 as a foundation, and with today's cam technology and a good tune make upwards of 350 horsepower easily and have a reliable engine. My '69 W-31 has a close to "legal" NHRA stock type engine and I'm very happy with the performance, drivability, and durability. Heck, a stock W-31 with headers and a good tune should give you 350HP or so. Check what some of the old F/S and G/S W-31s ran and you'll see my point. You won't need to build a record holder because of the cost and usage, but between 350-400 HP won't be "rocket science" and taking your time, investigating what some of the "heavy hitters" are using listening to us here will yield positive results. Unlike some of the other sites and forums, you'll find that most of the guys here are eager to help and will share with you what works and what doesn't. Any of the W-31 guys are good ones to talk to take advice from. You don't need the latest super duper stuff, just the right combination and testing.
June 15th, 2013, 05:21 PM
#23
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Central Fl
Posts: 7,828
Where did the 550-575 numbers come from? So with all due respect you're saying that your build puts out as much as or is close to this combo?
http://realoldspower.prophpbb.com/topic830.html
I don't believe that for a minute, sorry. I think once the wheels grabbed it spiked your dyno readings. You can do the same thing on an engine dyno as well if you load it real quick. I'll bet you lunch your numbers are skewed. My 9.7:1 350 will blow the tires off as well, I have the video to prove it. Sorry but I don't believe those numbers.
Just my opinion.
Last edited by cutlassefi; June 15th, 2013 at 05:33 PM.
June 15th, 2013, 11:17 PM
#24
Senior Moment Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,862
So are you saying the dyno is wrong or my numbers are inflated? I printed the sheet. What numbers in your estimation does it make to the crank? Your little small block would make a nice meal! 550x.2=110. These are wheel horsepower numbers so....No pissing contest needed here, what do you think? Your small block blows the tires off in 4th gear? Post the video I'd like to see that. Watch the vid in my sig. You are right about the cam specs, typo.
Nick, Straightline is still open and I think they charge $150 for three pulls. They even have a quarter mile simulator that is very close to real world numbers.
Nick, Straightline is still open and I think they charge $150 for three pulls. They even have a quarter mile simulator that is very close to real world numbers.
Last edited by z11375ss; June 15th, 2013 at 11:34 PM.
June 16th, 2013, 04:00 PM
#25
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Central Fl
Posts: 7,828
So are you saying the dyno is wrong or my numbers are inflated? Yes I printed the sheet. What numbers in your estimation does it make to the crank? 450/520, at the crank. These are wheel horsepower numbers so....No pissing contest needed here, what do you think? I have no intention or need to get into a pissin match. I'm sorry but with all due respect your numbers are bogus in my opinion.
Your small block blows the tires off in 4th gear? 1st, 2nd, but if you're really making 550+torque at the rear wheels then your builder should go work for Nascar. Post the video I'd like to see that. It's on youtube, punch in my name. Watch the vid in my sig. I did and I still don't believe the numbers, sorry.
Your small block blows the tires off in 4th gear? 1st, 2nd, but if you're really making 550+torque at the rear wheels then your builder should go work for Nascar. Post the video I'd like to see that. It's on youtube, punch in my name. Watch the vid in my sig. I did and I still don't believe the numbers, sorry.
June 16th, 2013, 05:32 PM
#27
XCELERATIONRULES!
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Orwell,Ohio
Posts: 323
Edelbrock loves to copy factory engineering ...probably dont flow any better than the factory heads.
Send the stockers for a porting job and invest in some head studs.$2000 can be spent so much better than a fancy name on a box=no performance gain.
Send the stockers for a porting job and invest in some head studs.$2000 can be spent so much better than a fancy name on a box=no performance gain.
June 17th, 2013, 05:32 AM
#30
Again not true. I have 1100 into my #6 heads only bowl work not porting but everything else was upgraded. For an extra 600 I would have had a simple port job for 850 I would have had an all out competition port job. The edebrocks still have a much better combustion chamber. This has been discussed so many times. The procomps run just over 1000 with out rockers etc. They require a couple hunderd dollars more than iron heads to make work. Depending on your taste of parts. I did the math. I did my heads before the procomps where available. But the procomps are the old edelbrock design still very good at a much cheaper price. If you are doing a mild build the stock heads will do. But in a case like mine I would have been much better off running the procomps in box stock for not only is the combustion chamber design worth it but you will be able to run higher compression safer on the street. Iron heads do have positive benifits and they have theor purpose even on a mild street build. But if down the road you plan on going faster the procomps or edelbrocks are not a bad investment.
Last edited by coppercutlass; June 17th, 2013 at 05:35 AM.
June 17th, 2013, 06:58 AM
#31
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Central Fl
Posts: 7,828
Edelbrock loves to copy factory engineering ...Uhhh, you're kind of showing your ignorance here. You think maybe they leave the port locations etc in the same spot for a reason? Hmmm think about it for a minute.
probably dont flow any better than the factory heads. Yeah they do, about 10-15% right out of the box. I've posted flow numbers on here. Stock BB heads flow about 230-235, the Edelbrocks are in the neighborhood of 260.
Send the stockers for a porting job and invest in some head studs.$2000 can be spent so much better than a fancy name on a box=no performance gain.
probably dont flow any better than the factory heads. Yeah they do, about 10-15% right out of the box. I've posted flow numbers on here. Stock BB heads flow about 230-235, the Edelbrocks are in the neighborhood of 260.
Send the stockers for a porting job and invest in some head studs.$2000 can be spent so much better than a fancy name on a box=no performance gain.
You might want to dive into the facts first before you show your lack of knowledge again.
June 18th, 2013, 11:46 PM
#32
XCELERATIONRULES!
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Orwell,Ohio
Posts: 323
You guys just love to sell stuff to guys who dont know better.If you guys at incrediblehock think your going to out do guys like smokey yunick and the Gm engineering staff...your smoking dope...right along with your customers.
June 19th, 2013, 04:49 AM
#33
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Central Fl
Posts: 7,828
Soooo you don't think technology has advanced at all since the 60's? Well that explains your "smoking dope" comment.
June 19th, 2013, 08:04 AM
#34
XCELERATIONRULES!
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Orwell,Ohio
Posts: 323
Im saying GM had good engineering especially in the mid 60's.all the race track work and testing shows off easily by the amount of cars and parts remainjng today.Cast iron lasts...how many cars do you find with factory aluminum parts?..probably zero...nearly every test of an edelbrock is a copy of a factory part...big performance numbers compared to stock...lol.Why doesnt incrediblehock make their own designs??People are still rebuilding their old technology...because the design just works.the original small block chevy lasted 40 years...it was that good...now they re design every 2 years...new junk!
June 19th, 2013, 08:11 AM
#35
Old(s) Fart
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 47,310
nearly every test of an edelbrock is a copy of a factory part...big performance numbers compared to stock...lol.Why doesnt incrediblehock make their own designs??
June 19th, 2013, 01:58 PM
#36
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,250
Im saying GM had good engineering especially in the mid 60's.all the race track work and testing shows off easily by the amount of cars and parts remainjng today.Cast iron lasts...how many cars do you find with factory aluminum parts?..probably zero...nearly every test of an edelbrock is a copy of a factory part...big performance numbers compared to stock...lol.Why doesnt incrediblehock make their own designs??People are still rebuilding their old technology...because the design just works.the original small block chevy lasted 40 years...it was that good...now they re design every 2 years...new junk!
What a silly post. When RR makes an aftermarket head with design improvements everyone complaines that a special intake is needed. Like Joe stated, in order to sell to the vast majority of hot-rodders, these parts need to be as close to "bolt-on" as possible. If you start messing with things, intakes, headers, and valve components won't work. The percentage of guys willing to deal with that stuff to get extra performance is tiny. Yeah, those aluminum LS heads will never work..............
r
June 19th, 2013, 08:27 PM
#38
Fwiw the chevy small block lasted that long because I think gm stuck with the if it aint broke don't fix it theory. The Ls series engines are amazing they keep updating them to make them even more efficient and get good mpg, reliability, and performance. Its before my time but it was not uncommon for people in the 60's to open up an engine with 100k on it. I have seen ls engines go 400k Stone stock !!!!!!!!!! wtf is wrong with that. I would love to stick a ls engine in my car run 12's virtually stock and not have to mess with it for decades. Not to mention the performance and mpg these cars nowadays get is amazing vvti technology has allowed for what American muscle dreamed of for decades before it came along. Im all for being old school but you cant deny the advancements in automobile technology. There is a reason gm redesigned it's small block.
June 19th, 2013, 10:59 PM
#39
Out of Line, Everytime😉
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Melville, Saskatchewan
Posts: 8,919
The sbc was so much better than the LS motors
. Remember the flat cams and worn valve guides? Those cams were flat by 100,000 km or less. The LS has undeniable advantages over our 1964 Olds V8 technology. Block, heads, factory roller cams etc. The sbc, not so much, never impressed me. The only reasons I won't own newer GM products is dreadful styling and them killing all the brands I like.
. Remember the flat cams and worn valve guides? Those cams were flat by 100,000 km or less. The LS has undeniable advantages over our 1964 Olds V8 technology. Block, heads, factory roller cams etc. The sbc, not so much, never impressed me. The only reasons I won't own newer GM products is dreadful styling and them killing all the brands I like.
Last edited by olds 307 and 403; June 19th, 2013 at 11:03 PM.
