http://chevyhiperformance.com/projectbuild/48158/
read through all the phases of it, i found it quite helpful and inspiring :-D

 

That's one of the articles that made me go for getting my 'Bird in a trade deal...

I've got almost the same car and I'm going faster... wonder why?

 

why your going faster with the same setup? they probably dont want to get peoples hopes up too much ;-)

 

because they didnt build it the best they could.



also keep in mind, they got the car for less then 1k...

so if you had a car already and put 5k into it, it should be MUCH nicer...

 

also some of the used parts they used may not have been the best...........but i love articles that build nice cars for dirt cheap

 

I got my 'Bird on a straight trade, haven't done anything major to it, just cleaned and tuned the carb. Best time so far is 16.3

I do have to check what block it has. The VIN says it should be the 305 LG4 motor, but it also has a Jasper sticker on the oil pan and the guy I traded it with said the previous owner had a rebuilt motor put into it. Wondering if they put a 350 in instead of a 305 ???

I do have to say I love the 'Bird. First car I've owned that can easily light the tires up from a stop.

 

time sounds reasonable for the motor.... my L03 made my 3615lb vert run a 16.0... only thing done to it at that point was a open element... and i only did that because i already had the base and top and the 14x3" element was cheaper...

 

Those goons don't know what they're doing. They've done a great job of building an expensive, SLOW car.

 

so your saying that chevy high performance magazine doesnt know what theyre doing? they even put a link to thirdgen.org on their page.....i think they did a nice job...

 

i think the car guy doing the build didnt know what all his best options were, and that he didnt do a very good job with the overall car given the money he spent.


just because its in a magazine doesnt make it right... it doesnt even mean thats the best way to do it. he did do a nice job.. but not a great one... thats all im saying.. oh and his car is still slow.


remember, the people working there are carguys, just like you and me.... they dont know everything either.... i know a bunch about 3rd and 4thgen fbodys... but im sure you can find a 15 year old kid that knows more about novas, or mustangs then me... im kinda specialized in this one area.... the people working at the mag have to know a decient amount about most makes and models... so he just didnt know the very best options for 3rdgens..

im not saying its a bad artical, just that it could have been done better.

 

i wasn't terribly impressed either. my 84 sc with 3.08 (open), a4, and LG4 went 15.61 with only cat back, hypertech coil, and 160 thermostat.

 

yeah i understand what your saying, but i think the point they were trying to prove is that with stuff that you may already have lying around your garage, and for people that emmissions are a requirement, you can still get good times with pretty much junkyard/swapmeet finds....sure, you coulda done nitrous and a supercharger and probably gotten better results and less $$, but...ya know..

 

They should get better results being in a positon of "authority". Or not publish. Their resuls are pathetic. PATHETIC I say. Lets review:
Heads (Ported, no less)
Cam (ROLLER no less!)
Exhaust & headers
REBUILT ENGINE!
Rebuilt trans
15.3 seconds for $3903?!! That's horrendous! Minus the $271 purchase price and you've got $3629 in POOR mods!

My first TA, an '83 LG4, auto, 3:23 gear, went 15.3 at 85 with a $69 summit cam, no muffler, and "Free" mods! I got to the same point they did for only $3560 LESS than they did. Maybe I should start a mag!

My second TA, an 83 CFI 305 3:23 gear/5 speed, ran a 14.5 @95 with $125 used headers, and "free" mods!!

Now (see sig) I have less than $1700 into it, and it runs LOW 13's (on real street 255/50 -16's)! Over 1/2 second faster than their top-ended, rebuilt, nitroused, money sucking pig!

My problem is that kids these days will read that ****, and go buy an import and waste their money and time on that thinking F-bods are dead ends. That's sure what the mag portrays. I want to communicate w/every kid that read that article and yell, F-BODS AREN'T THAT BAD! THESE GUYS JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FOCK THEY'RE DOING!! My problem is that the article is totally misleading. American cars and F-bods are better than what those guys make that car look. Goons I say.

 

Gee. I'm wet behind the ears about performance cars... I shouldn't believe everything I read in the mags, should I? I'd prefer to talk to a first-hand, done-it-and-lived-it, got-the-tee-shirt dude, rather than take a magazine article as Gospel and potentially destroy my car. I'm not made of money, I'd like the best streetable, sleeper, stock-looking bang for the buck. Oh, and I live in Hawai'i, so shipping almost requires a water-cooled checkbook.

-The Husband

 

lmao.. i have NEVER heard that phrase before... pretty funny


yea, well the best way to save money when working on cars is to do your research and learn as much as you can before you buy...

once you know whats out there, make a plan... and adjust it as needed and go from there...

the two big things are:
knowing whats out there
making a plan.


because without a plan, it will never come together right... and for you to make a good plan, you need to know whats availble...

 

Good article, its way better than that car craft LG4 that puts out rediclous numbers. This moding was very realistic except the baseline which was slow do to the miles on the car. Personally I would have put new roller rockers and lifters on, but they did this moding pretty cheap so it was good results.

 

I think that building the 305 is great, alot of people have them and they can run very good. When they pull the engine and rebuild it is where I don't agree. Go as fast as they can for the least amount of money? They should have gone to a 350 right then, they probably would be going alot faster for not much more $$. Look at my sig, I bet this thing would run with there juiced 305 and I don't have $5000 in it yet, I got about half as much $'s invested in it.

 

I liked the article more for pointing out where improvements need to be made on the LG4. While not wanting to "polish a turd", it's the engine I've got right now, so I want to optimize it's potential.

Like I indicated the previous owner said the engine was a rebuilt from Jasper. I'm already starting ahead of the game compared to the article. (1.14 seconds ahead.)

I've already planned for:

A) Ignition - MSD cap, rotor, coil, plug wires, AC-Delco Rapidfire plugs.

B) Exhaust - used shorty headers, unknown manufacturer off ebay. Want to go to a 2 1/2" to 3", 3" cat, 3" cat back.

C) Intake - will probably go with Edelbrock Performer EGR & rebuilt stock carb. Also going to go with cold air induction off the stock hood scoop.

D) New rear - 3.27 gears + posi, bought 9-bolt for $100.

E) Valvetrain - probably need to replace a lifter. Might go to 1.6 rocker arms to get some more air flow.

F) Tranny - will probably put a TCI (or some other) shift kit in it.

After that depends on how fast it goes with these mods.

These are all mods that are relatively inexpensive. And if I can get in the 14's with just these mods I'll be a happy clam. And most of these could be moved over if I decide to drop a larger block in later on.

 

The DID polish a turd. Rebuilding a 305, putting $3600 into it, only to run mid 15's is turd polishing at its finest.
Keith Indy

A couple suggestions on your proposed mods;

Nice score on the $100 9 bolt!

Forget the 1.6 rocker arms. If you are doing the intake, and you need a lifter anyways, throw in a cheapo Summit Cam and lifter Kit. I think they're like $89 buck now days. That will get you WAY better improvement than rockers, for about the same money.

These mods whould put you in the mid 14.5 easy.

To "Pre", What you're saying doesn't make sense.
"Good article"? Yeah, of how NOT to do it.

"Moding was very realistic except the baseline which was slow do to the miles on the car""? In my above example, my '83 LG4, I ran those time with 180,000 mile in the original engine trans and rear. The only thing that had been changed was the cam. A high mile motor that's had oil changes is every bit as quick as a low mile motor. I have a friend that has an '86 Camaro, originally an LG4 5 speed. At 150,000, he did cam, headers, and intake. That's like $500 in parts. He ran a 14.5 @96. I'm telling you, if you think what these guys did in this article is "good" or even "OK", then you are settling for "second best", so to speak. Tuning and set up will get WAY more out of the car than what they got. They left SO much on the table. Before the nitrous, (after they had spent $3600+ on heads, cam, full headers and exhaust, etc) they had a ~13.9 second car, that WAS RUNNING 15.3!! PATHETIC!!

"They did this moding pretty cheap so it was good results"?! How can you say that having read MY post?? CHEAP?! You must have WAY more money to waste than I do to call that kind of modding cheap.

 

They DID polish a turd. Rebuilding a 305, putting $3600 into it, only to run mid 15's is turd polishing at its finest.
Keith Indy

A couple suggestions on your proposed mods;

Nice score on the $100 9 bolt!

Forget the 1.6 rocker arms. If you are doing the intake, and you need a lifter anyways, throw in a cheapo Summit Cam and lifter Kit. I think they're like $89 buck now days. That will get you WAY better improvement than rockers, for about the same money.

These mods should put you in the mid 14.5s easy.

To "Pre", What you're saying doesn't make sense.
"Good article"? Yeah, of how NOT to do it.

"Moding was very realistic except the baseline which was slow do to the miles on the car""? In my above example, my '83 LG4, I ran those time with 180,000 mile in the original engine trans and rear. The only thing that had been changed was the cam. A high mile motor that's had oil changes is every bit as quick as a low mile motor. I have a friend that has an '86 Camaro, originally an LG4 5 speed. At 150,000, he did cam, headers, and intake. That's like $500 in parts. He ran a 14.5 @96. I'm telling you, if you think what these guys did in this article is "good" or even "OK", then you are settling for "second best", so to speak. Tuning and set up will get WAY more out of the car than what they got. They left SO much on the table. Before the nitrous, (after they had spent $3600+ on heads, cam, full headers and exhaust, etc) they had a ~13.9 second car, that WAS RUNNING 15.3!! PATHETIC!!

"They did this moding pretty cheap so it was good results"?! How can you say that having read MY post?? CHEAP?! You must have WAY more money to waste than I do to call that kind of modding cheap.

I don't mean to sound rude, but you guys that think their results are OK, you need to expect more.

 

I've been debating doing a cam swap. Really didn't want to pull the front off the engine (can a camshaft even be done inside the car?) I've done them on older cars that had more room, but was debating whether I could do it without yanking the engine.

Also it seems to be some debate over whether the LG4 is roller-cam or flat tappet. If it's roller cam then wouldn't I need to get a roller cam to replace it? I haven't found any of those that are $89. I figured I'd know for sure when I yank the intake off and then order the parts. I may get by with just adjusting the valve-train though (a lifter is ticking.)

Their results were certainly not what I would expect, but then they were starting out with a pretty dead car.

My wifes 72 Skylark does 17's in the 1/4, and I know that needs an overhaul. I was pretty happy that the 'Bird would outrun her car. One of the reasons I traded for it was so we'd have a car to run at the track that I wouldn't feel bad about breaking. Nothing like going down the track in your wifes car and hearing a loud bang/pop. Luckily it was only the mufflers blowing out that time...

 

LOL about the loud pop.

I don't think the LG4 ever had a roller cam.

Summit cam and lifter kits; $79.95 Best bang for the buck out there!
http://store.summitracing.com/produc...earchtype=ecat

You can easily replace the cam with the engine IN the car. Remove the radiator, and condenser if you have one. Then it's standard fair, cam swap stuff. The last time I did one in an F-body, it took me 3 hours, PLUS startup, break in, and timing etc. So about 4 hours total.

 

Cool to know that there's room up there if I want to do it.

Yeah that loud pop first scared the poop out of me and then made my heart sink as I thought I broke my wifes car... Pulled over to the side, looked at the guages and they were all reading fine. Just a lot louder, so I coasted to the turn-off lane and checked it out. Boy was I relieved. CarX even did the repair under warranty (always send the wife to do warranty work.) But sir, (bat eyes) we were just passing someone on the interstate when it happened...

See this thread... Since it's an 87 it may have roller rockers, or it may not. Nice and clear huh. That's why I'm not going to buy the parts till I need to. Plus it's got a rebuilt motor, so who knows if they replaced it with an exact, or close enough engine.

https://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/sho...LG4+roller+cam

 

87 LG4 had a roller cam and that was the only year.

Like I said it was a good article, but they left out some stuff. The bigger the engine the better is always true. If some people like me want to mod a 305 this is a interesting article then.

 

i'm sorry........
i'm new to all this stuff pretty much, 15 years old, have yet to find another article that detailed and stuff....guess i dont really need to.....i never said that just because they wrote for a magazine they were geniuses, and i never said everything they did was completly right....all i meant by what i posted was that i think that because they work for a magazine like that means they have a decent amount of experience with all different GM cars and arent going to feed people tons of BS stuff.

 

I thought those times were real slow. even stock. both of my friends stock 86 lg4 T/As ran low 16's one had around 40,000 on it and the other had 100,000+ neither had there carbs rebuilt or tuned and they had the auto 700r4 with 2.77 gears! the 88 formula was a 305 tpi auto 3.23 gears and smoked them both (low 15's with lots of wheel spin) so we thought they were slow but I guess not huh? I don't under stand why they felt the duration had to be so small? 212 should have been fine and allowed for plenty of wheel spin even with the gears they had. I wonder if they have the carb off too? (I know they tuned it but, with out a dyno or times how?)the stock hei should be fine with 100 shot and stock plugs (at least as far as running down the track a couple times). I think there is something that is being missed and causing such poor times heck 5000? put a SC on the bad boy problem solved!

 

Speedingpenquin, no need to apologize. It's that mag that should appologize for embarrassing F-bods and F-body owners with that over priced pig they built.

For your $5k budget, for get about the 305. Get a 400. $5k is a bunch of money, you can go a LONG way with that.

 

i'm still debating about LT1's, LS1's, and just working with a TPI.....i've heard good and bad things about the 400....one of the down sides to the 400 is fule effeciency....now i dont want something that gets 30MPG (although it would kinda be cool), but something around 20MPG would be nice......is it possible with a 400?

 

I got almost always got 24 mpg on the highway. I say almost because on trip from Park City to LA, the car turned 25 mpg. This is with the combo listed below in my sig., traveling at about 85 - 95 mph the whole way. So I would say a resounding YES, a 400 will do better than 20.

Around town (driving to and from work everyday), it did poorly, but that was due to my driving, and the CFI intake which is exceedingly poor at atomizing fuel when cold.

 

neat. Do you have AIM? I'd like to chat about cars and stuff....you may have sparked one of my crazy ideas hahaha

 

You can email me at
Storm861triple@hotmail.com

Or IM me at the same at MSN.

 

I would add that to your sig too...

Best E.T. 13.257
Best MPH 105.24
Best MPG 24 MPG Highway

Those are some really good numbers.

One thing to keep in mind with "budget" buildups is that they can be done in stages. If I had $5000 just laying around, I could do a lot, but I don't. I do have a couple hundred every month or so that I can do modest improvements with. And my goals are pretty modest to. If I could knock down 24mpg to, we could get rid of a car payment (which would mean more money for hobbies...)

I've already ate through my car cash with the MSD upgrades, used headers and the 9-bolt. So it will be another couple months before I get to the next set of mods.

The article was good in that it pointed the way. Not with the exact setup I want, but with which parts to look at first. Exhaust, Intake, cam. The other thing I saw was traction and that lines up with everything else I've learned. If you're going to make power, make sure it gets to the ground.

As with anything, just cause you read it somewhere, doesn't make it the bible. It's just another part of the puzzle. Do research, sites like this are great for that. Find real world experience (ie ET or dyno results) for the mods you're thinking of. Especially if you're on a budget.

 

I agree 100%.

I realize that just dumping a 350 HO GM crate in my car then moding that would be the cheapest in the long run with respect to performance, but I have spent money moding when I have extra money. Moding a 305 or the stock engine in your car is cheaper in the short run, but usually more expensive in the long run.

Not everyone has the know how to get a 400 out of junkyard and install it themselves and get it to run properlly.

 

I've always heard that the CFI was a "slug" as far as other designs. Guess I can't believe everything I hear. I suppose that some people wouldn't know a performance opportunity if it sat in their own fenderwells, eh? But I'm curious, HOW IN THE WORLD, would I getr such efficiency out of a TPI 350? (The old GP was GREAT for gas...)

-The Husband

 

The only CFI's I've seen that are "slugs" -and a slug to me, is a car that runs slower than it's specs would indicate, like that car in that article- are CFI cars that are way out of tune or have something wrong with them. Like I said above, mine went 14.5 @ 95 with the original 305, headers, timing, FP, no smog pump, and a 160 T-stat. That's not a slug, IMO. As the car sits in it's current form, (in the sig), the CFI intake is the most restrictive part, followed closely by the stock heads. For the car to do better, it needs heads and an Offenhauser crossram intake. I bet those two parts (in conjuction w/tuning) would net me 60+ hp.

As for TPI fuel economy, there's no reason why it should be any worse than CFI. Rather, it should be better. Oddly though, my Moms '86 TPI 305 a-4, 3.08 geared TA never did as well as my CFI car (this was years ago). I don't know why. Hers ran fine, but turned around 21-22 on highway trips. I'd try to run the timing as far advanced as possible, verify that all the injectors are flowing the same rate of fuel, good exhaust system VRFPR functioning? Converter locking? etc. Basically attention to detail and tune, and a TPI should get over 20 no problem. Other plus things I did on the 400 for efficiency were full roller rockers, underdrive pullies, electric fan, and all synthetic fluids.

Keith_Indy, thanks for the compliments. When I put the 400 in, I decided that if I couldn't make it get OVER 19 mpg on the highway, I'd take it back out, and put the old 350 back in. To my great surprise, it got basically the same milage as my old 350, which was about the same as the original 305.

 

I'm only doing 18 MPG or so - last time I checked, right after I got it. I think I'm doing better now, the last owner drove it like he stole it, I'm a little bit more conservative (trying to keep a good reputation for us, not acting like a knuckle-dragging, ham-fisted retard-o....) and I think it helps a bit. Dont' have any real numbers yet, tho.

-The Husband

 

LMAO! That was funny. Hopefully next time you check it on a trip, it'll be over 20. It sure should be. Gook luck!