The results are in.

Dished Piston 383
Engle HR cam, Sealed Power Retro-fit HR Lifters
.492/.501" 223/232*, 271/282* adv on a 112* LS; I put a 1.6 rocker on the intake and a 1.5
180 CC Dart Pro 1 Platinum Heads
Edelbrock C3B intake
#3310 750 CFM Holley
1 3/4" Super comp headers
2 1/2" exhaust
700R4 Trans
3.36 geared 10 bolt posi

12.64 @ 107.97 1/4 mile

Stroker with small cam and heads, outstanding tq numbers!
Best part is knowing there is more to be had knowing youre shifting early and are doing that on a small converter, less than optimum intake and 3.36 gears. Keep up the good work Wes.

Parts swapping, dyno and track results, good old hard facts.

Well Ron, guess there's not much interest in a lttle hard data, huh?

:crickets:

I'm just soaking this all in. One day all these numbers and graphs will mean something to me.

Tommy, I started reading before I ever started wrenching. Nothing wrong with trying to learn... keep at it and it will all start to fall into place.

Regarding this thread, I'm just surprised how little interest the data generated, compared to the controversary the prospective change stirred-up.

Hey Wes, those numbers look pretty good for a small cam I guess. Huge torque, must feel great.

Do you have any other mods planned for this motor? Other than the trans problem? I thought I recall you having some part swapping planned, for comparison sake, perhaps I'm wrong.

New intake perhaps since you mentioned its weakness?

So what I find interesting, is it's probably about the same power as the other motor, with more torque I bet, which is where you got your time pickup, I would assume. I figure because you had a 300HP measured generously in '62. With the stroke and the head work, probably about the same as this one.

Seems the HP kicks up fast, and falls off but the torque stays flat all the way across, for the most part. Betcha it has a kick in the ass.

For comparison sake, do you have a sheet on the old motor?

Jsup, the torque curve is pretty impressive, and no doubt has something to do with how the car performed at the track. The fuel curve went pretty rich in the higher RPM range. I suspect, with the fuel and timing curves dialed-in, the engine would pick up at least 10-15 HP, which would be worth at least 1 MPH in the 1/4 mile.

The old school Edelbrock C3B intake leaves something to be desired. I went with it for the following reasons: I already had it; it has a front oil fill tube/vent; it was a dual plane; it fit under my stock hood. I also have an old school Torker that's been ported and matched to a Felpro 1205. It would probably pick the top end up some, but hurt the low-end. Given my relatively low shift points, it might have hurt the ET.



An Edelbrock 2101 Performer would fit under hood, and some of them have a pad to be drilled for an oil fill tube. To be honest, this likely wouldn't be worth much over the C3B. If dyno time were free, I'd be willing to test the Torker and the Performer. It would also be nice to see the effects the intakes had on the fuel curves.

I previously tested a Weiand #8120 low-rise dual plane on the old motor. It fit under hood and produced good ETs and MPH. Probably worth at least 5-10 HP and torque vs the old school C3B. The big down side is it looks like a new pece and it doesn't have an oil fill tube/vent provision. It would not be easy to add one. This intake requires that I run a PCV and a breather in my valvecovers, which isn't correct for my gen car.

I also previously tested a Team G intake that was ported and opened up to a Felpro 1206 gasket. This intake fits under hood. This would likely be the best performing intake that fit under hood, especially if I could get the shift points up. I ran this on the old, stroked 327. It went 2 hundredths quicker and .5 MPH faster in the 1/4 mile vs the Weiand #8120 dual plane. To be honest, I was impressed. My car with its 3.36 gear, 1800-2200 stall, and 5000 RPM shift points were absolutely not matched to this intake's power range. Nonetheless, this intake improved performance.

The two engines are similar in displacement and compression ratio. The 383 had more of a production type rebuild, and less precise balancing, and was externally balanced. The stroked 327 had more precise deck heights/quench, and was interally balanced.

The 383 had a HR cam with 224/232* @ .050". The stroked 327 had a solid flat tappet with 236* @ .050". Both cams were ground on a 112* LS. The 327 cam and lifters set me back $100. The HR cam/lifters from the 383 cost quite a bit more. The 383 had aluminum 180 CC Dart Pro 1 Platinum heads. The stroked 327 had 1962 #461 X heads, with some port work. The 383 also benefitted from a lighter aluminum water pump.

Looking how each engine matched the rest of the car: the 383 seemed to make more torque and peak lower. As such, it was less affected by the lower than ideal shift points.

The stroked 327 seemed to pull harder up top, and would have benefitted more from higher shift points. I suspect the 327 makes more HP, albeit at a higher RPM.

I'd like to do a cam and head swap on the stroked 327. It will probably happen later this month, or in the near future. I will post the results, regardless of how the chips fall. Time and $$$ being the variables. Eventually, the 327 will go back in the Vette. The 383 will probably go back in the garage as a spare.

Wes

Id like to see how the ported Torker stacks up against the Team G.

Ron, if dyno time were free, I'd be testing a GM #461 intake, the Torker, the Weiand #8120, a Z/28 inntake, RPM Air Gap, and the Team G. I don't mind the work to swap intakes, but that would take a few days on a dyno... it would be nice to see what they all did on the same engine, on the same dyno.

Hey wes, seems like that motor works for a truck. Big flat torque is what you'd want, so if you throw it back in the truck I'm sure you'll be happy.

As far as the 327, you're dealing with 50-60 year old technology, or more. Any head cam you put on there with current technology is going to make a huge difference. I'm sure you'll enjoy the ride and see some great improvements. A 396 is nothing to sneeze at with modern head/cam should make be even more fun.

I love the fact that you want to keep the intake true to the car. Have you considered extrude honing? Do you think that would improve it dramatically?

Jsup, I don't have immediate plans for the 383. The truck is running good on a stock 350, and it's a PITA to swap engines on. The Vette is much easier. So for now, the engine will sit in the garage.

I doubt extrude honing would help the C3B much. If the engine goes in the truck, or a vehicle without hood clearance issues, I can run any intake I want...

Oh, I thought you pulled the 383 out of the truck.

Jsup, I pulled it out of my 72 C20.



This was when it was pulled, given a cam and intake swap, then put in the 62 last year. The engine was re-ringed since that pic was taken, and given the Engle HR cam and Dart heads...

The other truck

Cars do keep nice out there....so your 72 will have no motor for now?

JSUP, I sold the tan 72 C20 a while back, after I bought the Green 72 C10. Both trucks were one owner prior to my getting them. My co-worker's father was the original owner of the green truck. Prior to selling the tan ione, which was a damn good truck), I pulled my engine, headers, and exhaust (3.00" with X ipe and large case Magnaflows).

I sold the truck to a guy that probably had no business buying it. After listening to his floundering and tales of woe, I felt sorry for the dumb-azz. I ended up pulling an engine and trans out of another truck and installing them for him. Work I never intended doing or wanted to do, but I suspect in all honesty, it kept the truck out of a junk yard or from being parted out.

Here is a pic of the current trucks engine. It was rebuilt years ago by one of the former owner's son, has large chamber 71 - 72 LT-1 heads, unk cam (I hope it's an after market cam, because the truck only idles with 15 1/2 - 16" vacuum). I've undone years of neglect and a few bubba repairs, which are expected on a car that's been out of service for years. Now it's pretty squared-away, and a damn good truck, and doesn't need much. It could be driven daily, even in L.A. traffic. Unfortunately, I keep thinking I want a 72 short bed or 1965 El Camino... It never ends.