Neat one came in for a build
Moderator: Team
-
- Expert
- Posts: 908
- Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 11:04 pm
- Location: Omaha, NE
- Contact:
Neat one came in for a build
It won't stay the way it showed up, but
4 bolt large journal small block, TRW 327 pistons .150 in the hole, Howards alum rods, steel 302 crank, iron DZ heads ported 1960s style (very aggressive porting, need to pressure test), 10% underdriven 6-71 blower, gear drive, Isky reverse rotation cam, 280@.050 , rev kit, and about everything that could make you cringe
Would love to see what it ran like, but I just can't LOL
Going to stay true to the early 70s vibe, but not entirely sure the plan yet. Likely going to bring the peak rpm way down
4 bolt large journal small block, TRW 327 pistons .150 in the hole, Howards alum rods, steel 302 crank, iron DZ heads ported 1960s style (very aggressive porting, need to pressure test), 10% underdriven 6-71 blower, gear drive, Isky reverse rotation cam, 280@.050 , rev kit, and about everything that could make you cringe
Would love to see what it ran like, but I just can't LOL
Going to stay true to the early 70s vibe, but not entirely sure the plan yet. Likely going to bring the peak rpm way down
Bullock's Power Service, LLC
Plattsmouth, NE
70 Mustang, 489 FE, TKO-600, Massflo SEFI, 4.11s
71 F100 SB 4x4, 461 FE, 4 speed, port injected EFI, 3.50s
Plattsmouth, NE
70 Mustang, 489 FE, TKO-600, Massflo SEFI, 4.11s
71 F100 SB 4x4, 461 FE, 4 speed, port injected EFI, 3.50s
-
- Guru
- Posts: 1747
- Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2013 8:10 pm
- Location:
Re: Neat one came in for a build
.15 deck clearance ? I wonder if they are 350 pistons.
CHEVROLET 5.7L/350 Pistons. Compression Height (in.): 1.565 in.
CHEVROLET 5.4L/327 Pistons. Compression Height (in.): 1.654 in.
CHEVROLET 5.7L/350 Pistons. Compression Height (in.): 1.565 in.
CHEVROLET 5.4L/327 Pistons. Compression Height (in.): 1.654 in.
Re: Neat one came in for a build
It would be interesting to read of the original builder's logic for a 6-71 blown 302" with a 280 @ .050" cam. I know I can't make my mind work that way.
A while back, we had a guy going the other way, had a Chevy II 283" block and had a 350" crank turned down to fit inside. I tried to tell him no one would ever know the difference if he built a 383" or a 400" for less cost and since he was changing things, the restoration logic was null anyway. His money, his car, his decision.
A while back, we had a guy going the other way, had a Chevy II 283" block and had a 350" crank turned down to fit inside. I tried to tell him no one would ever know the difference if he built a 383" or a 400" for less cost and since he was changing things, the restoration logic was null anyway. His money, his car, his decision.
Jack Vines
Studebaker-Packard V8 Limited
Obsolete Engineering
Studebaker-Packard V8 Limited
Obsolete Engineering
Re: Neat one came in for a build
Ha, sounds like HAMB logic......
Motorcycle land speed racing... wearing animal hides and clinging to vibrating oily machines propelled by fire
Re: Neat one came in for a build
I plugged it into EAP just to see what it shows.
Idle vacuum = 3.0"
Max boost pressure = 11.1 psi
384 HP / 334 TQ
A turd...
Idle vacuum = 3.0"
Max boost pressure = 11.1 psi
384 HP / 334 TQ
A turd...
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
- Expert
- Posts: 908
- Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 11:04 pm
- Location: Omaha, NE
- Contact:
Re: Neat one came in for a build
Part number checked for a 327, 9.025-(3.00.2)-5.70-1.654=.171, pretty close to what I did on a quick check before square deckDan Timberlake wrote: ↑Sun Nov 27, 2022 11:10 am .15 deck clearance ? I wonder if they are 350 pistons.
CHEVROLET 5.7L/350 Pistons. Compression Height (in.): 1.565 in.
CHEVROLET 5.4L/327 Pistons. Compression Height (in.): 1.654 in.
LOL I am not sure it would have even idled....I am likely going way milder, thinking 230s with plenty of split and low overlapPackardV8 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 27, 2022 12:19 pm It would be interesting to read of the original builder's logic for a 6-71 blown 302" with a 280 @ .050" cam. I know I can't make my mind work that way.
A while back, we had a guy going the other way, had a Chevy II 283" block and had a 350" crank turned down to fit inside. I tried to tell him no one would ever know the difference if he built a 383" or a 400" for less cost and since he was changing things, the restoration logic was null anyway. His money, his car, his decision.
Love it, all that stuff makes less than N/A would at 1000 rpm lower!
Bullock's Power Service, LLC
Plattsmouth, NE
70 Mustang, 489 FE, TKO-600, Massflo SEFI, 4.11s
71 F100 SB 4x4, 461 FE, 4 speed, port injected EFI, 3.50s
Plattsmouth, NE
70 Mustang, 489 FE, TKO-600, Massflo SEFI, 4.11s
71 F100 SB 4x4, 461 FE, 4 speed, port injected EFI, 3.50s
-
- Expert
- Posts: 908
- Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 11:04 pm
- Location: Omaha, NE
- Contact:
Re: Neat one came in for a build
Took a different route, let the collectors have the 302 parts. Going with a set of NOS RHS iron heads with T&D rockers, Eagle lightweight 3.48 stroke crank, 6.00 SCAT H-beams, and likely Racetec 2618s. Not a fan of the heavy H beams but the guy had them and I like them better than the old Howard alum rods
Likely will go light parts and set up with a hyd roller but still in planning stages
Likely will go light parts and set up with a hyd roller but still in planning stages
Bullock's Power Service, LLC
Plattsmouth, NE
70 Mustang, 489 FE, TKO-600, Massflo SEFI, 4.11s
71 F100 SB 4x4, 461 FE, 4 speed, port injected EFI, 3.50s
Plattsmouth, NE
70 Mustang, 489 FE, TKO-600, Massflo SEFI, 4.11s
71 F100 SB 4x4, 461 FE, 4 speed, port injected EFI, 3.50s
-
- Pro
- Posts: 449
- Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2022 9:20 am
- Location: US
Re: Neat one came in for a build
Still running the blower? If so, I'd suggest not running the lightweight crank.My427stang wrote: ↑Wed Dec 14, 2022 8:30 am Took a different route, let the collectors have the 302 parts. Going with a set of NOS RHS iron heads with T&D rockers, Eagle lightweight 3.48 stroke crank, 6.00 SCAT H-beams, and likely Racetec 2618s. Not a fan of the heavy H beams but the guy had them and I like them better than the old Howard alum rods
Likely will go light parts and set up with a hyd roller but still in planning stages
Maximum power using simple logic and common sense
-
- Expert
- Posts: 908
- Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 11:04 pm
- Location: Omaha, NE
- Contact:
Re: Neat one came in for a build
Think the forged piece isn't strong enough? We are 11% under driven, and a hyd roller, I figured it was plenty but haven't ran those Eagles, I am generally a SCAT guy
Bullock's Power Service, LLC
Plattsmouth, NE
70 Mustang, 489 FE, TKO-600, Massflo SEFI, 4.11s
71 F100 SB 4x4, 461 FE, 4 speed, port injected EFI, 3.50s
Plattsmouth, NE
70 Mustang, 489 FE, TKO-600, Massflo SEFI, 4.11s
71 F100 SB 4x4, 461 FE, 4 speed, port injected EFI, 3.50s
- af2
- Guru
- Posts: 7014
- Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 4:42 pm
- Location: Grass Valley, CA :Northern Foothills
Re: Neat one came in for a build
X1000!Bigchief632 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 15, 2022 5:35 pmStill running the blower? If so, I'd suggest not running the lightweight crank.My427stang wrote: ↑Wed Dec 14, 2022 8:30 am Took a different route, let the collectors have the 302 parts. Going with a set of NOS RHS iron heads with T&D rockers, Eagle lightweight 3.48 stroke crank, 6.00 SCAT H-beams, and likely Racetec 2618s. Not a fan of the heavy H beams but the guy had them and I like them better than the old Howard alum rods
Likely will go light parts and set up with a hyd roller but still in planning stages
GURU is only a name.
Adam
Adam
Re: Neat one came in for a build
(Bigchief) Still running the blower? If so, I'd suggest not running the lightweight crank.
I agree with Bigchief- I think you'll snap the nose off a lightweight crank driving a Jimmy from there.
I agree with Bigchief- I think you'll snap the nose off a lightweight crank driving a Jimmy from there.
-
- Expert
- Posts: 908
- Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 11:04 pm
- Location: Omaha, NE
- Contact:
Re: Neat one came in for a build
Are you guys concerned about the size of the counterweights and the blower pulling on it? The crank doesn't seem much different otherwise
Bullock's Power Service, LLC
Plattsmouth, NE
70 Mustang, 489 FE, TKO-600, Massflo SEFI, 4.11s
71 F100 SB 4x4, 461 FE, 4 speed, port injected EFI, 3.50s
Plattsmouth, NE
70 Mustang, 489 FE, TKO-600, Massflo SEFI, 4.11s
71 F100 SB 4x4, 461 FE, 4 speed, port injected EFI, 3.50s
-
- Pro
- Posts: 449
- Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2022 9:20 am
- Location: US
Re: Neat one came in for a build
Got a picture of it? but yes, the blower puts a lot of stress on it compared to a n/a deal. Depending on how it's "lightened" it may not hold up.My427stang wrote: ↑Sat Dec 24, 2022 9:15 am Are you guys concerned about the size of the counterweights and the blower pulling on it? The crank doesn't seem much different otherwise
Maximum power using simple logic and common sense