Stock Eliminator secrets?

[nhrastocker]

All that internal grinding and main web windowing reduces weight at the front of the car.

That's not the intent and it is done mostly with the replacement aftermarket blocks that are stronger. There are some OEM cast irons blocks that will fail on the main web area if you did this modification.

[Firechicken]

I believe the 403 Olds engine had windowed mains from the factory but was considered a weakness for performance use.

[1972ho]

That’s just someone pulling vacuum off the manifold using a catch can to trap the oil and then measuring crank case vacuum some of the ring packs need some crank vacuum if not it smoke out the exhaust.

[Little Mouse]

Stocker bottom end

The holes really need to be that big to accomplish this.

[jed]

No.

[tenxal]

That’s just someone pulling vacuum off the manifold using a catch can to trap the oil and then measuring crank case vacuum some of the ring packs need some crank vacuum if not it smoke out the exhaust.

In a word...no.

Curious as to where you see it "...pulling vacuum off the manifold"?

[dannobee]

Look closely, the fuel pressure regulator is on a separate bracket than the oil catch can. As far as the gauge, it looks like they're just measuring crankcase pressure at the fuel pump blockoff plate.

Dunno about the rules or enforcement now, but with the stocker guys who I hung out with back in the day, it was common to only run the top ring. The second ring was either left out (DQ if torn down) or a much smaller diameter second ring that didn't even touch the bore. The problem with it was that they would sometimes smoke if the cylinder wasn't perfect, either in machining or flexing or core shift. Or if it was just plain worn out.

[PRH]

If one picks a combo that hasn’t been hammered with too much additional HP, and just builds a quality piece without resorting to any kind of special tricks, and has the fuel delivery properly sorted out(as in, a carb that really works well or a good EFI tune), has a cam that’s appropriate for the combo, and also has a good converter/clutch....... it’s really not that hard to run .5-ish under the index.
If the car ends up in a class that’s not very heavily populated....... chances of a heads up run are diminished....... and if you’re a good bracket racer...... you can go some rounds for sure.

There are a lot of people running in stock that don’t have a combo that’s loaded up with every trick under the sun.

[gmrocket]

What's the purpose of the holes in the bottom of the cyls? Something to do with crankcase venting?

its a 4-Stroke Engine above the Piston tops ,
but it acts as a 2-Stroke engine below the Piston ,
example : 300cid 4-Stroke .. is probably moving around 600cid Air in the Crankcase area for the same RPM ,
so holes allow reducing or balancing crankcase windage between all the Cylinders ... free up some TQ and HP

And what’s really cool about those holes venting....it’s not even a Stocker secret idea! Thank GM engineering! I first saw those on the (then) new LS1. In fact I was asking around about those vents while everybody else was talking about the cathedral cylinder ports. Keep threatening to do that to my AMC block but there’s an internal oil line in the block casting that scares me.

While all of us hear about those dang cheaters, or the perception of cheating, you never hear about the absolute dummies that have no real reason to be in the class because there’s just some things that some don’t get! I knew a local guy that built a 340 Dart for Stock and he was convinced the rule book said “stock” in all parameters concerning the camshaft! I mean, he bought a TRW type replacement 340 cam and used that! And when he ran low 14’s in a 10 second class, he went around barking at everybody that would listen about everybody else was a cheater and he was the only legit guy! Obviously he gave up but I hear he’s still bitter.

And we’ve all got stories of watching the full crew of four pushing the Stocker in the lanes and all four are grunting pretty heavily. Wonder why the car won’t ET or MPH?

I have a buddy with one of the fastest under index Stockers. Would you believe an auto trans done right ($$$) can knock off 3+ tenths? Another buddy ran a V/SA car and changing the rear wheel / tire comb to a smaller / lighter set, then gearing it down to RPM the same picked up over two-tenths? Under powered cars like the last two examples are more effected with these kinds of improvements.

I race a clutch car. The amount of ET reductions in a proper clutch set-up and tune is mind boggling.

I’m trying to get another buddy to change his Stocker torque convertor. I am definitely not a TC expert but what I do know is that old “stall it to maximum torque RPM” went out the window some twenty (30?) years ago! He has a 5200 stall convertor on an engine that is shifted at around 6200 and traps at around 6700. I’m about to bet him the cost of a new convertor that he needs a 6000 stall unit (no less than 5800). Plus I recommend to him an ATI to his...well, I shouldn’t mention the brand, but let’s say it’s not the “go to” convertor company in Stock or Super Stock!

There’s so much ET to be found without even opening the hood. Suspension (front and rear), transmissions with different ratios, rear ratios, clutches, convertors, etc. Spend the time in those areas and keep the hood shut will be the best advise I can give.

Stopped by the chassis shop today as I’m back-halving the AMX from D/S to SS/G. Man, I am excited to debut this car! And there’s so much more you can do to a Super Stock engine. Absolutely loved Stock but there’s new territory to mark!

Those “vent” holes in the LS mains you’re taking about were first used by GM 45 years ago on the 260 olds when they were chasing every last mpg they could get during the gas crunch era

It was to reduce pumping losses in the crankcase which helped free up power...and mpg

GM used that the following years in the 350 and 403 olds..the old wives tale that it was to reduce weight and casting costs is not true

There is a very detailed technical paper online that Chrysler paid some outside engineer to do on crankcase pumping loses and reductions down to cylinder to cylinder venting ...it even has the vent hole sizes being different for the Center 4 cylinders than the outer 4

I used a vented main webbed block in the 2008 and 2011 EMC for that exact reason...in 2008 I was torn down for a photo shoot and questioning...the holes where clearly visible,, but was never asked why they were there

[jed]

Perty sure the engine in the picture is tenxal's race car engine. I found a thread some how some where where tenxal
explained some of the specifics of that trick stuff

[tenxal]

I found a thread some how some where where tenxal
explained some of the specifics of that trick stuff.....

It's about as 'un-trick' as it gets.

[Little Mouse]

I like the holes plan but not so big if i have to use my factory blocks with the super special 10/20 higher nichol content and 3284 caps. I have the only true higher nichol 10/20 blocks that were made.

[The Iron Icon]

What's the purpose of the holes in the bottom of the cyls? Something to do with crankcase venting?

its a 4-Stroke Engine above the Piston tops ,
but it acts as a 2-Stroke engine below the Piston ,
example : 300cid 4-Stroke .. is probably moving around 600cid Air in the Crankcase area for the same RPM ,
so holes allow reducing or balancing crankcase windage between all the Cylinders ... free up some TQ and HP

And what’s really cool about those holes venting....it’s not even a Stocker secret idea! Thank GM engineering! I first saw those on the (then) new LS1. In fact I was asking around about those vents while everybody else was talking about the cathedral cylinder ports. Keep threatening to do that to my AMC block but there’s an internal oil line in the block casting that scares me.

While all of us hear about those dang cheaters, or the perception of cheating, you never hear about the absolute dummies that have no real reason to be in the class because there’s just some things that some don’t get! I knew a local guy that built a 340 Dart for Stock and he was convinced the rule book said “stock” in all parameters concerning the camshaft! I mean, he bought a TRW type replacement 340 cam and used that! And when he ran low 14’s in a 10 second class, he went around barking at everybody that would listen about everybody else was a cheater and he was the only legit guy! Obviously he gave up but I hear he’s still bitter.

And we’ve all got stories of watching the full crew of four pushing the Stocker in the lanes and all four are grunting pretty heavily. Wonder why the car won’t ET or MPH?

I have a buddy with one of the fastest under index Stockers. Would you believe an auto trans done right ($$$) can knock off 3+ tenths? Another buddy ran a V/SA car and changing the rear wheel / tire comb to a smaller / lighter set, then gearing it down to RPM the same picked up over two-tenths? Under powered cars like the last two examples are more effected with these kinds of improvements.

I race a clutch car. The amount of ET reductions in a proper clutch set-up and tune is mind boggling.

I’m trying to get another buddy to change his Stocker torque convertor. I am definitely not a TC expert but what I do know is that old “stall it to maximum torque RPM” went out the window some twenty (30?) years ago! He has a 5200 stall convertor on an engine that is shifted at around 6200 and traps at around 6700. I’m about to bet him the cost of a new convertor that he needs a 6000 stall unit (no less than 5800). Plus I recommend to him an ATI to his...well, I shouldn’t mention the brand, but let’s say it’s not the “go to” convertor company in Stock or Super Stock!

There’s so much ET to be found without even opening the hood. Suspension (front and rear), transmissions with different ratios, rear ratios, clutches, convertors, etc. Spend the time in those areas and keep the hood shut will be the best advise I can give.

Stopped by the chassis shop today as I’m back-halving the AMX from D/S to SS/G. Man, I am excited to debut this car! And there’s so much more you can do to a Super Stock engine. Absolutely loved Stock but there’s new territory to mark!

Those “vent” holes in the LS mains you’re taking about were first used by GM 45 years ago on the 260 olds when they were chasing every last mpg they could get during the gas crunch era

It was to reduce pumping losses in the crankcase which helped free up power...and mpg

GM used that the following years in the 350 and 403 olds..the old wives tale that it was to reduce weight and casting costs is not true

There is a very detailed technical paper online that Chrysler paid some outside engineer to do on crankcase pumping loses and reductions down to cylinder to cylinder venting ...it even has the vent hole sizes being different for the Center 4 cylinders than the outer 4

I used a vented main webbed block in the 2008 and 2011 EMC for that exact reason...in 2008 I was torn down for a photo shoot and questioning...the holes where clearly visible,, but was never asked why they were there

Any idea where I could find a copy of that paper?

[gmrocket]

And what’s really cool about those holes venting....it’s not even a Stocker secret idea! Thank GM engineering! I first saw those on the (then) new LS1. In fact I was asking around about those vents while everybody else was talking about the cathedral cylinder ports. Keep threatening to do that to my AMC block but there’s an internal oil line in the block casting that scares me.

While all of us hear about those dang cheaters, or the perception of cheating, you never hear about the absolute dummies that have no real reason to be in the class because there’s just some things that some don’t get! I knew a local guy that built a 340 Dart for Stock and he was convinced the rule book said “stock” in all parameters concerning the camshaft! I mean, he bought a TRW type replacement 340 cam and used that! And when he ran low 14’s in a 10 second class, he went around barking at everybody that would listen about everybody else was a cheater and he was the only legit guy! Obviously he gave up but I hear he’s still bitter.

And we’ve all got stories of watching the full crew of four pushing the Stocker in the lanes and all four are grunting pretty heavily. Wonder why the car won’t ET or MPH?

I have a buddy with one of the fastest under index Stockers. Would you believe an auto trans done right ($$$) can knock off 3+ tenths? Another buddy ran a V/SA car and changing the rear wheel / tire comb to a smaller / lighter set, then gearing it down to RPM the same picked up over two-tenths? Under powered cars like the last two examples are more effected with these kinds of improvements.

I race a clutch car. The amount of ET reductions in a proper clutch set-up and tune is mind boggling.

I’m trying to get another buddy to change his Stocker torque convertor. I am definitely not a TC expert but what I do know is that old “stall it to maximum torque RPM” went out the window some twenty (30?) years ago! He has a 5200 stall convertor on an engine that is shifted at around 6200 and traps at around 6700. I’m about to bet him the cost of a new convertor that he needs a 6000 stall unit (no less than 5800). Plus I recommend to him an ATI to his...well, I shouldn’t mention the brand, but let’s say it’s not the “go to” convertor company in Stock or Super Stock!

There’s so much ET to be found without even opening the hood. Suspension (front and rear), transmissions with different ratios, rear ratios, clutches, convertors, etc. Spend the time in those areas and keep the hood shut will be the best advise I can give.

Stopped by the chassis shop today as I’m back-halving the AMX from D/S to SS/G. Man, I am excited to debut this car! And there’s so much more you can do to a Super Stock engine. Absolutely loved Stock but there’s new territory to mark!

Those “vent” holes in the LS mains you’re taking about were first used by GM 45 years ago on the 260 olds when they were chasing every last mpg they could get during the gas crunch era

It was to reduce pumping losses in the crankcase which helped free up power...and mpg

GM used that the following years in the 350 and 403 olds..the old wives tale that it was to reduce weight and casting costs is not true

There is a very detailed technical paper online that Chrysler paid some outside engineer to do on crankcase pumping loses and reductions down to cylinder to cylinder venting ...it even has the vent hole sizes being different for the Center 4 cylinders than the outer 4

I used a vented main webbed block in the 2008 and 2011 EMC for that exact reason...in 2008 I was torn down for a photo shoot and questioning...the holes where clearly visible,, but was never asked why they were there

Any idea where I could find a copy of that paper?

I’ll try to find it again and post it here.. I believe it was done by the university of Windsor here in Ontario

I’ll let you know

[gmrocket]

And what’s really cool about those holes venting....it’s not even a Stocker secret idea! Thank GM engineering! I first saw those on the (then) new LS1. In fact I was asking around about those vents while everybody else was talking about the cathedral cylinder ports. Keep threatening to do that to my AMC block but there’s an internal oil line in the block casting that scares me.

While all of us hear about those dang cheaters, or the perception of cheating, you never hear about the absolute dummies that have no real reason to be in the class because there’s just some things that some don’t get! I knew a local guy that built a 340 Dart for Stock and he was convinced the rule book said “stock” in all parameters concerning the camshaft! I mean, he bought a TRW type replacement 340 cam and used that! And when he ran low 14’s in a 10 second class, he went around barking at everybody that would listen about everybody else was a cheater and he was the only legit guy! Obviously he gave up but I hear he’s still bitter.

And we’ve all got stories of watching the full crew of four pushing the Stocker in the lanes and all four are grunting pretty heavily. Wonder why the car won’t ET or MPH?

I have a buddy with one of the fastest under index Stockers. Would you believe an auto trans done right ($$$) can knock off 3+ tenths? Another buddy ran a V/SA car and changing the rear wheel / tire comb to a smaller / lighter set, then gearing it down to RPM the same picked up over two-tenths? Under powered cars like the last two examples are more effected with these kinds of improvements.

I race a clutch car. The amount of ET reductions in a proper clutch set-up and tune is mind boggling.

I’m trying to get another buddy to change his Stocker torque convertor. I am definitely not a TC expert but what I do know is that old “stall it to maximum torque RPM” went out the window some twenty (30?) years ago! He has a 5200 stall convertor on an engine that is shifted at around 6200 and traps at around 6700. I’m about to bet him the cost of a new convertor that he needs a 6000 stall unit (no less than 5800). Plus I recommend to him an ATI to his...well, I shouldn’t mention the brand, but let’s say it’s not the “go to” convertor company in Stock or Super Stock!

There’s so much ET to be found without even opening the hood. Suspension (front and rear), transmissions with different ratios, rear ratios, clutches, convertors, etc. Spend the time in those areas and keep the hood shut will be the best advise I can give.

Stopped by the chassis shop today as I’m back-halving the AMX from D/S to SS/G. Man, I am excited to debut this car! And there’s so much more you can do to a Super Stock engine. Absolutely loved Stock but there’s new territory to mark!

Those “vent” holes in the LS mains you’re taking about were first used by GM 45 years ago on the 260 olds when they were chasing every last mpg they could get during the gas crunch era

It was to reduce pumping losses in the crankcase which helped free up power...and mpg

GM used that the following years in the 350 and 403 olds..the old wives tale that it was to reduce weight and casting costs is not true

There is a very detailed technical paper online that Chrysler paid some outside engineer to do on crankcase pumping loses and reductions down to cylinder to cylinder venting ...it even has the vent hole sizes being different for the Center 4 cylinders than the outer 4

I used a vented main webbed block in the 2008 and 2011 EMC for that exact reason...in 2008 I was torn down for a photo shoot and questioning...the holes where clearly visible,, but was never asked why they were there

Any idea where I could find a copy of that paper?

here it is. the conclusion for the vent passages between cylinders for cyl to cyl venting was to make the holes as large as possible and to promote ease of air exchange, smooth rounded edges and also not make the block weaker by doing so. the holes in the olds blocks are really quite large.

150+ pages which includes many other tests on reducing crankcase pumping losses

https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/cgi/viewcon ... ontext=etd