History / Originality Got a question about 1982-1992 Camaro or Firebird history? Have a question about original parts, options, RPO codes, when something was available, or how to document your car? Those questions, answers, and much more!

does anyone know specs for 78 350?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 14, 2002 | 07:15 PM
  #1  
chris1roc's Avatar
Thread Starter
Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
From: St. Clair Shores, MI, USA
does anyone know specs for 78 350?

does anyone know the specs for a 350 out of a 78 chevy truck?
compression?
carb is a four barrell but what size?
head specs?

any help would be greatly appreciated.

I got this block for free its a four bolt. I want to put it in my car.
Reply
Old Aug 18, 2002 | 06:46 PM
  #2  
RB83L69's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 18,457
Likes: 16
From: Loveland, OH, US
Car: 4
Engine: 6
Transmission: 5
The motor was "rated" at 180 hP IIRC. Heads are 76cc smog crap, probably 882. Throw them away. Cam is a 929, with .390"/.410" lift. Also crap. Get rid of it. It has dished pistons, the CR is approximately 8.5:1. Carb is a Q-jet, one of the worst ever, with a Q-Jet the "size" is irrelevant, wrong question to ask about it. Get rid of it. The block is probably a 010, typical 350 block in the 70s, may even have 4-bolt main caps installed on it, many truck motors did. That's good, if it doesn't have either The Starter Bolt Hole Problem where the holes are drilled too far from the crank, or The Lifter bore Problem, where one or more lifter bores are incorrectly aligned to the cam, and as a result, eat cam lobes.

It's a typical 70s smog 350, with all the benefits and shortcomings. What would you really like to know?
Reply
Old Aug 19, 2002 | 07:41 PM
  #3  
original's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
From: Chillicothe, Ohio
I always wondered why GM restricted their engines so much. I mean think about, why put all of that crap on a basically good motor to drag it down? If they had swaped heads manifold, carb, cam, etc, they could've got a more powereful engine, and It might've actually been easier on gas!
Reply
Old Aug 20, 2002 | 11:08 AM
  #4  
RB83L69's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 18,457
Likes: 16
From: Loveland, OH, US
Car: 4
Engine: 6
Transmission: 5
At the time, they basically had "deer in the headlights" syndrome, and didn't have a clue how to do anything right, especially when it came to performance, they were too busy just trying to survive... it was a very different world then from how it is now....

The block is the same as a 60s block except that their machines had been allowed to go to hell which is what caused the Problems. Everything else, was total crap.
Reply
Old Aug 26, 2002 | 12:44 PM
  #5  
LetsRock's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 182
Likes: 2
From: Ann Arbor,MI
Car: 1989 Trans Am GTA
Engine: LB9 TPI with L98 cam (Manual car)
Transmission: T5 5Speed/ 9bolt Borg-Warner 3.45 gears with posi
This also was in the era just after the gas crisis of 70's which pushed the Big 3 into fuel saving mindset when it came to engine designs.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
IROCZDAVE (88-L98)
Engine/Drivetrain/Suspension Parts for Sale
1
Nov 19, 2015 07:03 AM
Jorlain
Tech / General Engine
6
Oct 8, 2015 01:57 AM
BAMiller
TPI
4
Sep 14, 2015 06:38 PM
angel2794
Engine Swap
11
Sep 8, 2015 06:22 PM
Eric-86sc
Engine/Drivetrain/Suspension Parts for Sale
0
Aug 24, 2015 09:01 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:06 PM.