Originally Posted by sofakingdom

A stock T-56 flywheel will work fine. Just get that when you get your T-56.

No particular need for a new damper if your old one is OK. Again, one made to stock specs is fine.

Yes in general lighter is better for wrist pins... after all, for every power-producing stroke of the engine, they get accelerated to the top of the cyl, stopped, accelerated to the bottom of the cyl, and stopped again; all this energy-wasting motion, TWICE. No sense diverting any more of your fuel's energy than absolutely necessary to this task.

I used a word up there, that sort of applies to the situation... "muda". Read about it and understand it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muda_(Japanese_term) The wrist pin is a necessary part, doing a necessary thing; but does not "add value" to the engine's operation. Kind of like, in your office where you work, the carpet has to be vacuumed every so often, say, once a day; but, vacuuming the carpet twice as much, say, once at lunch and once in the evening, doesn't make your company's product any better. That would be considered "muda". Same deal here. Use enough to be adequate but no more. In the case of wrist pins, the lighter they are, the less energy they waste, therefore the better; as long as they're heavy enough to (a) not break, and (b) be within the range of the crank's ability to balance to them.

Originally Posted by Seanphelps321

Interesting information. Now, the summitracing pages didn't specify the wrist pin length for those pistons. So I found this page for specs..
http://www.coasthigh.com/Chevy-383-2...ns-p/12344.htm
Closer to the bottom the specs are in a chart.

So I found the wrist pin length there(2.500"), but it also gave me the weight. From our conversation above, I assume that the 118 grams it specifies is interchangable. But I used the 0.927" I already knew and the 2.500" the link gave me and came up with maybe..
http://www.summitracing.com/parts/UEM-0927X216K/
My only concern is, is there a reason why these are so cheap, and I should maybe avoid?

Originally Posted by sofakingdom

My favorite pump setup is the stock replacement M55, with the Mr Gasket 26 spring, the IS-55E intermediate shaft, and 55S screen.

Your stock pan is entirely adequate.

Originally Posted by sofakingdom

Those pins would be fine... I'd suspect that they're cheep because (a) they are made from some ordinary material instead of some exotic high-$$$$ alloy; and/or (b) they start with some dimension of tubing that requires a minimum of machine work to get from the size it walks in their door, to the finished size going back out the door; and/or (c) whatever alloy they use, is easy on tools and machines fast; and/or (d) they use something that's real soft and easy to machine and then have it heat-treated to harden it, in bulk along with lots of other parts, such that the incremental cost of the heat-treating isn't too huge.

Ask your balancing shop, when you take all your parts in to be balanced, if it would be OK to use lighter pins. Usually, the lighter the reciprocating parts are, the more metal they have to remove from the crank counterweights.

Originally Posted by Seanphelps321

Ok. Cool.

Now what should I look for in choosing a distributor? Do I need to look for something special to match this setup?

Originally Posted by sofakingdom

Probably not too much different... Scat & Eagle both have their forgings made overseas and then finish them themselves. Pretty much equivalent "quality", odds of success, etc.

Main thing I'd be checking into, is what pistons they use in the Eagle kit; says "hypereutectic"; most of those are going to locate the top the extra .020" "down in the hole" at TDC. Find out EXACTLY what they are (you can just call Eagle, they're in Southaven MS) BY PART NUMBER, and what the ACTUAL compression height is, not the "specified" or "designed to fit" CH.

Originally Posted by transam357jim

my springs on my vortec heads leave me .050 clearance with plenty of room cam u use roller came on your block what year is the blocke roller or none the roller cam accelerates fast and youll b happereri have .501 .509 howards oe roller and love everythinh about it got thru skip white but kmj sells them also on ebay i have factory roller motor so im using factory lifters if you want call me later i have verizon 4193576833

Originally Posted by sofakingdom

Probably not too much different... Scat & Eagle both have their forgings made overseas and then finish them themselves. Pretty much equivalent "quality", odds of success, etc.

Main thing I'd be checking into, is what pistons they use in the Eagle kit; says "hypereutectic"; most of those are going to locate the top the extra .020" "down in the hole" at TDC. Find out EXACTLY what they are (you can just call Eagle, they're in Southaven MS) BY PART NUMBER, and what the ACTUAL compression height is, not the "specified" or "designed to fit" CH.

Originally Posted by sofakingdom

Probably not too much different... Scat & Eagle both have their forgings made overseas and then finish them themselves. Pretty much equivalent "quality", odds of success, etc.

Originally Posted by sofakingdom

Personally I'd get the lighter pins... used to be one of the ways I'd always somehow manage to make just a little more power than "the other guys", AND get better reliability at the same time.

As far as the springs, the limit to the valve lift on Vortec heads, isn't "the springs"; it's the bottom of the retainer crashing into the top of the valve guide. Doesn't matter what springs you use if the retainers are the same thickness. Stock, there's clearance for somewhere around .460" - .480" of lift before bad things start happening (the seals get wiped out first...). It's easy enough to check; you just dummy the heads up with some real light springs from Lowe's or some such and the seals you want to use, and see how far you can push em down before they hit something. Not rocket science. You want .050" or so of clearance between the bottom of the retainer and the top of the seals if you can get it. The reason beehive springs give more clearance, isn't "the springs" as such; it's because the retainers are thinner.

Originally Posted by sofakingdom

The length is fine. Could stand to be longer but perfectly OK. OTOH, making em shorter is one sure-fire way to make em lighter, without losing much strength.

They're at least as durable as the heavier ones... otherwise, wouldn't make much sense to put them in "high-perf" motors; eh?

I wouldn't worry too much about trying to shave more weight off; it's kind of like the "knee of the curve", where those first 40ish grams are pretty cheeep (say, $.12 per gram, if $5 loses you 40 grams); but the next 20 are $1 a gram OR MORE. Hmmmmmm..... sounds like the "sweet spot" to me.

I don't recall which heads you are looking at, at the moment; but I seem to recall that they're set up for up to .550" lift. So they should be fine with the 60103 which is just a bit over .500". Don't forget you'll lose a little bit if any parts flex; rockers, push rods, etc.; and since the rocker moves around the circumference of a circle and not in a straight line, that costs a little bit of lift off of "theoretical" as well. So I think they'll be fine.

As far as Eagle vs Scat, what the Cup guys use has little to no bearing on the subject at hand. Might if he was going Cup racing, but ..... At this price/performance point (hot street, light sportsman strip) they're largely equivalent.

Originally Posted by sofakingdom

OK yeah, I kinda thought that's what I remembered... in which case, they're set up great for that cam.

The zinc additive was mentioned, that's good advice... absolutely necessary in this day and time. Pour about half of a bottle of GM EOS or something similar all over the cam before putting the intake on and add the rest to the oil. When starting up the engine the 1st time, make ABSOLUTELY POSITIVELY CERTAIN that it's ready to run THE FIRST INSTANT YOU HIT THE KEY... no extended cranking, no idling below 1200 RPM or thereabouts for the first 15 minutes or so of it's life, it needs to be READY to FIRE UP and BACK DOWN THE DRIVEWAY and TEST DRIVE ON THE FREEWAY without any hesitation reservation or equivocation the first time you touch the key. But, you'll get to all that, it's a ways off yet.

Originally Posted by transam357jim

i run 93 or 94 its just cheap insurance agaist spark knock when u hear its itsalredi doin damange

Originally Posted by sofakingdom

One of the most important properties of fuel is its "heat content"... basically, energy per unit of fuel (volume, mass, whatever)

Turns out, lower octane gas has a higher heat content; and therefore, produces more power per gallon, i.e. .... more power, and better mileage.

This comes with a big IF: namely, AS LONG AS there is no spark knock. Knock reduces the power output on its own, and in a car with a knock sensor, causes the ECM to AGGRESSIVELY pull out timing, which causes everything about how it runs to suffer.

Moral of the story: run only the octane "rating" you ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO, but NO HIGHER. Any extra money you pay to get higher octane that you don't need, is "muda". Waste. Voluntarily DONATING YOUR MONEY to the oil companies in return for NOTHING, or worse, possibly even reducing your engine's efficiency.

If you haven't already looked up that word on Wikipedia or something and FULLY ABSORBED the concept, you really should.

No way to know what your fuel requirement is, until it's running. Depends on how many sharp edges there are in the chamber, carb tuning, dynamic compression (a function of the cam as much as the pistons and heads), and about a million other factors. Just gotta experiment after it's running.

Originally Posted by transam357jim

if engine temp r near 160 the vortec heads r less prone to pre ignition i run timing a 30 total n only had a problem on real hot days when temp is near 95 i run a 160 stat dual fans most times i run every othe tank 03 dont get me wrong i do put 87 in if im low on cash i just dont jump on it alot

Originally Posted by skinny z

Better .040 than .060.
Are you doing the assembly?

Originally Posted by Seanphelps321

I agree. I was trying to stay only up to .030. And I will be taking the rot assy and the block to get balanced, this is the first time I've had to take an engine somewhere to be balanced so I don't know if they assemble that when they do it. I will for sure be assembling everything else.

Originally Posted by skinny z

Assembly would (typically) be extra on top of the balance job.
I've assembled a few short blocks in my time and I've learned that for a performance oriented application, I'll leave it to the pros. Having a full compliment of tools, particularly measuring tools (and a bolt stretch gauge) ensures that ALL the clearences are spot on. Different specs for different applications. Less bearing clearence for a daily driver, more for a race application, etc.

Originally Posted by Seanphelps321

That makes sense. I've assembled a couple engines, but I know mechanics can do it better for sure. About how much more would it be for them to assemble it on top of balancing?

Originally Posted by sofakingdom

Coupla hours... probably in the $200 - 300 kind of range for the short block.

Originally Posted by Seanphelps321

Ok. Just curious. It sounds like a good investment. But before I do all of that, should I go ahead and shave off the 0.002" off the decks? Since the plan was to zero deck it, it would need to be at 9.008" with what I'm planning to buy. Right now it's at 9.010" from the resurfacing. I'm tempted to just leave it at that since it's such a small area.

Originally Posted by skinny z

You would be hard pressed to measure a hp gain with the small amout of compression increase you would see. Again speaking only from my own experience, I've done more with less so I would say save your money and use for something else. Spend some time assuring that the cam is dialed in correctly. Maybe use your savings to purchase a dial indicator and degee wheel (that's my assumption that you don't already have these tools).
That's just my opinion mind you however it's a fair bet that others will agree.
Rule of thumb for a build such as ours is that a FULL point in compression is worth about a 4% in hp increase.

Originally Posted by Seanphelps321

So what do you guys think about the vortechs vs these RHS heads?
Thoughts?

Originally Posted by skinny z

Interestingly, I just bought these.

http://www.summitracing.com/parts/RHS-12410-01/

I got them in bare form and outfitted them Ferrea valves and Comp 26918 Beehive springs.
They are a big step beyond stock Vortecs if the published flow numbers are any indication. The cost to rebuild my high mileage Vortecs wasn't justified when these heads were available. RHS has discontinued the Pro Torker series. Add to that the cost to upgrade the Vortecs with screw in studs, etc, and it makes even more sense to go the aftermarket route.
As for the cam, my feeeling is that a) it's too big and b) it's a flat tappet which I would never use again. But to each his own.

Originally Posted by transam357jim

if there close to same price id use the rhs but as long as the spring hieght is ok for the cam there close you can get aluminun heads for 650 complete my buddy got some an there good also i only had 400 so i got the vortecs every1 says they work good ive got good hp n tq im happy

Originally Posted by sofakingdom

You should zero-deck it, regardless of "compression"... that's only one part of the reason for doing that. The main reason is to get the "quench" or "squish" right: such that the piston gets to within .040" or so of the head "deck" surface .