Is the RS a bad platform?
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
From: Canadia
Car: 1991 RS
Engine: 90' TPI 305
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: posi disc 3.23's
Originally posted by SLEEPER 86
if you decide to change the cam just get what fel-pro calls a "head kit" it will have all the gaskets you need.
i would also highly reccomend a new timing chain as well,my favorite personally being the cloyes "true roller".just remember there are three different ways to mount it,advanced 4*,straight up,and retarded 4*.straight up is just fine.read and follow the directions.
by the time you get the manifold off,all that is left to change the cam is to pull the water pump(another good thing to replace while you're there,timing cover,timing chain,timing gears(you'll need a puller,but they're cheap,and you'll use it over and over),lifters,and cam.
too bad you're in canada,i have a set of '601 heads you could practice porting on that i would give ya!i also have an rpm manifold(non vortec)i'd sell pretty cheap,it needs a water outlet heli-coiled(easy),but it is otherwise in perfect shape.do you have center bolt valve covers?i forget,and don't want to re read the whole post!if not,i also have a set of chromed tall chevy covers along with the T shaped hold downs,washers,and chrome spreaders that really make a stock engine 'pop'.all for sale cheap,P/M me!
looks like this post is gonna make it to 100 replys!LOL!
Eric B
if you decide to change the cam just get what fel-pro calls a "head kit" it will have all the gaskets you need.
i would also highly reccomend a new timing chain as well,my favorite personally being the cloyes "true roller".just remember there are three different ways to mount it,advanced 4*,straight up,and retarded 4*.straight up is just fine.read and follow the directions.
by the time you get the manifold off,all that is left to change the cam is to pull the water pump(another good thing to replace while you're there,timing cover,timing chain,timing gears(you'll need a puller,but they're cheap,and you'll use it over and over),lifters,and cam.
too bad you're in canada,i have a set of '601 heads you could practice porting on that i would give ya!i also have an rpm manifold(non vortec)i'd sell pretty cheap,it needs a water outlet heli-coiled(easy),but it is otherwise in perfect shape.do you have center bolt valve covers?i forget,and don't want to re read the whole post!if not,i also have a set of chromed tall chevy covers along with the T shaped hold downs,washers,and chrome spreaders that really make a stock engine 'pop'.all for sale cheap,P/M me!
looks like this post is gonna make it to 100 replys!LOL!
Eric B
WHY DONT YOU LIVE IN CANADA!
Yeah i figured it would be more around the $200 range. Thats alright though. Cam swap sounds easier then i thought...
EDIT: I havent checked the casting numbers yet. This is Iroc22's old engine, so ill ask him what it was.
Supreme Member
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,833
Likes: 0
From: Cincinatti OH
Car: 1991 L03 700r4 RS
Engine: 1987 WS6 Trans AM Lb2
Transmission: Th350 red neck Performance 3k stall
Axle/Gears: 95 Mustang 8.8 built with 3.73s
If you have a TPI engine you already have a superior cam to the TBI cam. I would save the cam swap for when you take the engine apart and do heads etc. Exhaust, intake, gears and posi
then you can practice some prom tuning on it. If you can't hit 14's on this combo something's dead wrong.
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
From: Canadia
Car: 1991 RS
Engine: 90' TPI 305
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: posi disc 3.23's
Originally posted by 1991CamaroRslow
If you have a TPI engine you already have a superior cam to the TBI cam. I would save the cam swap for when you take the engine apart and do heads etc. Exhaust, intake, gears and posi
then you can practice some prom tuning on it. If you can't hit 14's on this combo something's dead wrong.
If you have a TPI engine you already have a superior cam to the TBI cam. I would save the cam swap for when you take the engine apart and do heads etc. Exhaust, intake, gears and posi
sweet!
what kind of 14's?
low? *crosses fingers*
Supreme Member
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,833
Likes: 0
From: Cincinatti OH
Car: 1991 L03 700r4 RS
Engine: 1987 WS6 Trans AM Lb2
Transmission: Th350 red neck Performance 3k stall
Axle/Gears: 95 Mustang 8.8 built with 3.73s
I would have to say yes. Better intake, headers and 3in exhaust, 3.73 gears and a posi, I would put money on it I could get this combo deep into the 14's without much effort. After that I would buy a nitrous kit for the carb intake I swapped on and spray the thing into the low 13's or 12's until it exploded dramatically
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
From: Canadia
Car: 1991 RS
Engine: 90' TPI 305
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: posi disc 3.23's
dramatically? i like the sounds of this...
lol
seriously though, i think this will be my plan of action. Should i start a new thread now to find the best setup of those parts and installation?
lol
seriously though, i think this will be my plan of action. Should i start a new thread now to find the best setup of those parts and installation?
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
From: Canadia
Car: 1991 RS
Engine: 90' TPI 305
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: posi disc 3.23's
does anyone know if my engine could handle a 50 wet shot mulitple times after all the other mods that have been mentioned are on?
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 849
Likes: 2
From: MA
Car: 93 GM300 platforms
Engine: LO3, LO5
Transmission: MD8 x2
Originally posted by sofakingdom
... Especially considering that his claims should be published in The Journal Of Irreproducible Results; since no one has ever, to my knowledge, been able to reproduce them, or has even come remotely close.
... Especially considering that his claims should be published in The Journal Of Irreproducible Results; since no one has ever, to my knowledge, been able to reproduce them, or has even come remotely close.
Dyno Don ported 193 the (350) casting lightly and briefly, and posted the results on TGO before anyone else did. He obtained 196/183 cfm. Stock was 178/146 cfm.
On the same head type, Fast355 got 224/216 cfm with more porting effort.
HRM (via Westech porting) got 208/190 cfm on 4.3 v6 heads. Stock was 135 cfm on the intake side. A 4.3 is 3/4 of a 350, so the results are applicable to the comparison with the two above (both 350s).
That's three different tests by three different people on the same basic GM head design. The results are not identical, but then again the porting level/effort on each was not done identically so no surprise there. The trend, however, is clear in a peer review sense. The results have been reproduced and they are more than remotely close. And they're close to par with ported iron TPI heads.
Last edited by kdrolt; Jan 26, 2006 at 06:46 PM.
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 27,899
Likes: 2,437
Car: Yes
Engine: Usually
Transmission: Sometimes
Axle/Gears: Behind me somewhere
Problem with porting swirl-port heads is, you gotta grind about a half-pound of metal out of each intake port, to get rid of the swirl-port ramp. Then once you do that, the rest of the head isn't too much different from any other head.
Where you run into trouble, is that porting costs money. Time, lots of it; and if you want those big numbers, it needs to be time from somebody that knows what they're doing.... and those people aren't cheap. So you pay for lots and lots of hours, and they're mighty expensive hours. Except just for the "thrill" of getting swirlies to run good, you're money ahead - LOTS of it - to get better castings to start with. Junk stock castings are cheaper than flow bench time.
Where you run into trouble, is that porting costs money. Time, lots of it; and if you want those big numbers, it needs to be time from somebody that knows what they're doing.... and those people aren't cheap. So you pay for lots and lots of hours, and they're mighty expensive hours. Except just for the "thrill" of getting swirlies to run good, you're money ahead - LOTS of it - to get better castings to start with. Junk stock castings are cheaper than flow bench time.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 849
Likes: 2
From: MA
Car: 93 GM300 platforms
Engine: LO3, LO5
Transmission: MD8 x2
Originally posted by sofakingdom
Problem with porting swirl-port heads is, you gotta grind about a half-pound of metal out of each intake port, to get rid of the swirl-port ramp.
Problem with porting swirl-port heads is, you gotta grind about a half-pound of metal out of each intake port, to get rid of the swirl-port ramp.
Really? You must know this from experience then, with your scientific background. You've claimed ramp removal and a half pound of metal. Applying science to your claims:
A half pound is approx 226.8 grams.
Iron density is roughly 7.8 g/cc
So you're talking about removing 29 cc from each intake port (226.8/7.8). Stock ports are approx 168 cc, so by your "argument" the port size would go up from 168 to 197 (168+29) cc.
That's a big jump in port volume, which is a problem because no one that's ported them has removed the swirl ramp. It makes no sense to do that (they'd become the functional equivalent of iron TPI heads, which you could have started with had you bought them) and you lose the benefit of the swirl in combustion speed.
So ramp removal is overstated by you (no one has done that), and you also overstated the mass or volume of the metal removal.
Example as proof:
Dyno Don, who actually ported a set of 193s, said he removed about 7 cc worth of iron in this thread. 7 cc is a lot less than 29 cc.
Where you run into trouble, is that porting costs money.
Sorry but it's no trouble, and the cost isn't large if it's DIY porting. Most people, especially people that own budget 20-year-old 3rdgen Fcars instead of new Corvettes, wouldn't spend the money to have someone else port them.
Time, lots of it; and if you want those big numbers, it needs to be time from somebody that knows what they're doing.... and those people aren't cheap.
Porting any heads, incl 416/081/083 iron heads, will also take time. There are threads on TGO that already prove it. And again, people on TGO with ported heads have them mostly because they ported the heads themselves. So the porting=money argument is, like your other points, a weak one.
Last edited by kdrolt; Jan 26, 2006 at 06:51 PM.
Supreme Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,701
Likes: 0
From: San Diego, CA
Car: 1991 Camaro RS
Engine: LO3
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.42 LS1
Do most people actually <b>totally</b> remove the ramp in the stock swirl intake ports ?
Zion,
strip some pounds of the car. I would actually try to do some "body work" i.e. actually chassis work, so you can end up with a finished weight of the car.
Ever since I removed my entire backseat assembly I've noticed more body flex sound. Roll cage and subframe connectors will add weight.
Zion,
strip some pounds of the car. I would actually try to do some "body work" i.e. actually chassis work, so you can end up with a finished weight of the car.
Ever since I removed my entire backseat assembly I've noticed more body flex sound. Roll cage and subframe connectors will add weight.
Last edited by vorgath; Jan 26, 2006 at 08:28 PM.
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 13,757
Likes: 560
From: Cincinnati, OH
Car: '90 RS
Engine: 377 LSX
Transmission: Magnum T56
Originally posted by sofakingdom
I was educated in various scientific type disciplines, and the guiding principle in all forms of REAL research is, no matter how much of a breakthrough you have come up with, it has to be able to be duplicated by others. If it can't, then part of the task of "peer review" is to figure out where the unverifiable results came from.
I was educated in various scientific type disciplines, and the guiding principle in all forms of REAL research is, no matter how much of a breakthrough you have come up with, it has to be able to be duplicated by others. If it can't, then part of the task of "peer review" is to figure out where the unverifiable results came from.
Originally posted by sofakingdom
87 was the first year of center-bolt valve covers; 416s use perimeter-bolt. With a possible exception of some VERY EARLY production slipping out the door with last year's motor, no 87s would have had early-model heads. Likewise for 187s on 87 cars.
87 was the first year of center-bolt valve covers; 416s use perimeter-bolt. With a possible exception of some VERY EARLY production slipping out the door with last year's motor, no 87s would have had early-model heads. Likewise for 187s on 87 cars.
Last edited by ShiftyCapone; Jan 26, 2006 at 09:59 PM.
Supreme Member
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,833
Likes: 0
From: Cincinatti OH
Car: 1991 L03 700r4 RS
Engine: 1987 WS6 Trans AM Lb2
Transmission: Th350 red neck Performance 3k stall
Axle/Gears: 95 Mustang 8.8 built with 3.73s
I would have to agree on the tuning side with these cars. I didn't tune my 91 RS but I did up the fuel pressure and manually advance the timing, this made a literal WORLD of difference with my other mods (exhaust and no air cleaner, no I didn't run it this way just played with it). The fuel pressure and timing mods were basically a "band aid" fix for good tuning. There's also a bunch of stuff you can do to those TBI units to get them flowing alot better (grinding off the big walls in front of the bores, grinding down the throttle shaft, putting in 3 or so injector spacers). I have 2 or 3 of them hanging around just in case I ever get a hankering to mod on one. BTW I sold the adjustable fuel pressure regulator I made for one to a kid in an 88 Firebird with a TBI and it made a huge difference in his car. In Zions case however we must keep in mind he DOES NOT have the swirl port heads anymore, he now has the 305 TPI heads, cam, and block. This is going to make his car respond much better to the smaller mods he can do and I'm sure it's in need of a chip tune.
PS This thread is massively long and has changed topics like it has ADHD. I hate to admit it but I keep coming back to it like it's crack I'm surprised one of the mods hasn't closed it yet.
PS This thread is massively long and has changed topics like it has ADHD. I hate to admit it but I keep coming back to it like it's crack I'm surprised one of the mods hasn't closed it yet.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 849
Likes: 2
From: MA
Car: 93 GM300 platforms
Engine: LO3, LO5
Transmission: MD8 x2
Originally posted by vorgath
Do most people actually <b>totally</b> remove the ramp in the stock swirl intake ports ?
Do most people actually <b>totally</b> remove the ramp in the stock swirl intake ports ?
I already said it above --- no one that I have ever seen, or heard of, has removed the ramp entirely. No one. It would be a massive undertaking that even I would not attempt to justify.
Anyone that hard-over on ramp removal should just get rampless ordinary iron heads to begin with (contemporary example: 083 casting from an iron head L98)
Most of the owners on TGO that have ported heads, any heads, have not paid others to do the porting work. They've done it themselves.
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
From: Canadia
Car: 1991 RS
Engine: 90' TPI 305
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: posi disc 3.23's
what should i advance the timing too on this new block?
also, is there anyone that has already tuned this engine/injection that i could get a chip burned from? Becuase i have a seriously ran out of time for that sort of thing.
Im getting really excited about the possibilities i have now, i cant wait to start adding parts!
will i need this fuel pressure regulator if im tuning the prom ? or does the computer take over instead?
also, is there anyone that has already tuned this engine/injection that i could get a chip burned from? Becuase i have a seriously ran out of time for that sort of thing.
Im getting really excited about the possibilities i have now, i cant wait to start adding parts!
will i need this fuel pressure regulator if im tuning the prom ? or does the computer take over instead?
Supreme Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,701
Likes: 0
From: San Diego, CA
Car: 1991 Camaro RS
Engine: LO3
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.42 LS1
Correct me if I'm wrong:
1) Adjustable fuel pressure regulator will be needed.
2) Learn to burn chips, very unlikely someone else will have the very same EXACT engine, including induction system, engine block, heads, cam .. similar yes.. exactly same .. no way
Advance it to probably anywhere between 4 and 8
1) Adjustable fuel pressure regulator will be needed.
2) Learn to burn chips, very unlikely someone else will have the very same EXACT engine, including induction system, engine block, heads, cam .. similar yes.. exactly same .. no way
Advance it to probably anywhere between 4 and 8
Supreme Member
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,833
Likes: 0
From: Cincinatti OH
Car: 1991 L03 700r4 RS
Engine: 1987 WS6 Trans AM Lb2
Transmission: Th350 red neck Performance 3k stall
Axle/Gears: 95 Mustang 8.8 built with 3.73s
The weird revving is due to the larger cam, mine did it when I ran the 110 LSA cam, I had to bump the idle up to get it to not die when it was warmed up, you WONT have to do this you have a fuel injection friendly cam, it's just not the same as the TBI cam. You need to do the adjustable regulator it's free and you'll know you did something. Did you ever start a new thread on this? You should start the thread "TBI on a TPI long block" and tell us what all you have done already (I know it's in your sig somewhere but have you done anything new etc.). Do you have exhaust yet? Bumping the timing and fuel pressure regulator are free so you should do those asap and tell us how it reacts to this. Also did you get the prom burning stuff yet? With the TBI you can pull your chip directly out, this will help alot; but remember you need a UV eraser to erase those proms and DEFINETLY get a spare in case you mess one up (I have one here with a broken off leg, junk now).
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
From: Canadia
Car: 1991 RS
Engine: 90' TPI 305
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: posi disc 3.23's
Last edited by Zion; Jan 27, 2006 at 04:49 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Hill1513
Engine/Drivetrain/Suspension Parts for Sale
0
Sep 19, 2015 04:15 PM









