Howdy Guys and Gals
Well, long story short...I pulled the engine out of my truck about a month ago to paint the firewall which still had the original 1990 paint. While the engine is out, I decided to upgraded a few things and a few things turned into making sure it's perfect for the last time I put this engine or modify this engine internally at least if it doesn't get a blower or nitrous. Thus, lets take a look at the headers and oil pan.

Now, to the specs. This is in a 3900 lb C1500 1990 truck. Current specs on the engine and drivetrain are before I upgraded anything:
Trans - 700R4 with Edge 3000 stall with 2.5 STR
Rear end - 4.30 motive gears (30.5 tall tire)
Engine -
383
11.1:1 SCR
7.978 DCR
.048 quench
AFR 195cc Eliminators with 8017 springs (.600 max lift)
GM hyd. roller lifters
1.52 Pro Magnum steel rockers (.546/.565)
Victor Jr. MPFI intake with 1550 throttle body
Stock truck oil pan
Z28 oil pump (ported) and welded pickup
1 5/8" mid length headers and true dual 3" exhaust with H-pipe

Changes already done since engine has been out:
Upgraded AFR 8019 springs (.650 max lift)
1.6 Comp Gold aluminum rockers (.575/.595)
March underdrive pulley 3 piece set

Needing input on next changes:
The 1 5/8" headers do not match the ports on the AFR heads and I know the 1 5/8" pipe can not flow enough for the heads. So, here are my options for exhaust. For headers, I only have two options as once again...this is for a truck and not a Camaro.
-Hooker SuperComp 1 3/4" headers (32" length) 3" non-merge spike collector - $900
-Stainless Works 1 7/8" headers (31" length) with 3" merge spike collector - $760
.....I'm really looking hard at the 1 7/8" header since I have 4.30 gears and a 3000 stall that acts more like a 3400 and the collector is better plus the 1 7/8" tubing flows just a tad more than the AFR ports do and the 1 3/4" pipe flows just a bit less than the AFR ports flow on the chart at .550 lift. I'll also replace the h-pipe with an x-pipe with the header swap to help with the top end power.

Next, as far as oil pans, I was looking at one with a deeper sump to reduce the change of windage and foaming of the oil. I found this pan that has a deep sump, crank scarper, and windage screen and a new pickup.
http://www.stefs.com/bandb/products/babcapacity.pdf
However, if y'all have another option then post it up. The stock unit hasn't had any problems or oiling problems but i did have to beat it out a bit to clear the Eagle rods and ARP bolts.

What do y'all think about the header options and oil choices? I don't have any oil pressure issues that I remember but haven't taken the truck fully down a 1/4 pass but done a lot of 3rd gear pulls on the highway to tune WOT. The stock truck oil pan does have a tray in it but can't remember how much it covers.

Thanks for looking and will be interested to listen to y'all ideas!

 

Damn that's one beefy 383 for a truck! I assume this is like a bogger or a crawler or something and not a daily driver. You're not drag racing a 3500-series, truck, are you?? That would make you crazier than I am!

I am not a big fan of big tube headers. Enough to cover the port, no more, if it's regularly street driven. If it's a max-effort kind of deal then yes, go ahead and do the big tubes.

YOu sure you need springs that big? Is there something wrong with the current ones? There is a limit on spring pressure with a hydraulic roller before you start to overcome the limits of the internal guts of the lifter (solid lifters have no such limitation). Most of the hydro-roller guys I know these days have gone with a more "finesse" solution and not the usual route of big dual coil springs. They've gone with beehives. Lets them keep spring pressures modest while knocking a TON of weight out of the valvetrain. They get better valvetrain control at high RPMs without resorting to gigunda spring pressures.

Stock truck pan has a "shortie" windage tray. Better than nothing, but not anything super special. I can imagine it will continue to work just fine. Can't say I see a big reason to fix what ain't broke in this department, but if you just gotta go with a high-end pan, I guess I couldn't fault you. The more RPMs you turn the more important it is to have good oil control. The extra capacity is often of questionable value, but the oil control features are always welcome if you have the coin to spend on them. And I gotta ask, since this is a truck- does ground clearance under the pan matter to you?

 

1-3/4 headers can handle way way more power than youre putting out.
Think even 1-5/8 should do the job
Most guys put a few bolts ons, cam then think they need the biggest headers/exhaust out there. (not referring to you op)

You have a higher stall in that didnt notice
Tuning an exhaust is in the header primary size more than whats behind it. Not a fan of beehives on larger cams with aggressive ramps for something mild maybe. Still believe a good dual spring is the way to go everyone has different opinions

Chris Straub sells a certain morel lifter hyd. that can deal with higher spring pressures.

 

The truck is a C1500 not C3500 so....it's not that heavy...weighs in about 3900 lbs and that was before I relocated the battery, went to an aluminum radiator, and did a few other odds and ends. The lifters can hold up to it as long as you don't over do the pre-load on them. The 8019 springs are a dual spring like the 8017. Closed pressures are 155 compared to 135 and open are 412 compared to 340. The GM 847 camshaft recommends similiar spring rates as teh 8019 so I went with the AFRs to match my current retainers, etc to save money. I think I'm 5 lbs heavier than what the Crane recommends which ain't a big deal. I made the switch from 8017 to 8019 to help stabilize the valvetrain from 5500 to 6500 without running a stud girdle and help give extra clearance for the 1.6 rockers. And no, clearance isn't really an issue from the deep sump but the cross member can't have any more than 5" depth.

As far as headers, the truck is a weekend truck...not a daily driver.

The AFR 8019 is a dual spring.

According to the camshaft calculator on header size, I need a 1.69 header with a 3" collector which is bigger than what I have currently so I already know the 1 5/8" headers won't do what I need them to do plus they don't match the port on the head so that hurts some cfm as well. So, back to the main question....1 3/4" or 1 7/8"? I really would like to plug it in to the engine calculator that has all of the factors of the engine and drivetrain to see what the calculator thinks is best but don't have that software. I guess I could check with Stainless Works and see if a they could make a 1 3/4" header as I would like to have Stainless steel and then ceramic coat them.

 

Sorry, I confused 3900 lbs with 3500 series. My bad. Being the owner of a 454SS truck with a warmed up big block under thood I can relate to what you're trying to do. I'm just doing it with a lot more cubes (and it still ain't easy getting 4000 lb. truck to go fast).

There is only so much I'm going to criticize somebody for over-dong it on the header primary size. If the tues ain't big enough to cover the ports you gotta go bigger. The AFR heads on my big block have GIGANTIC exhaust ports. You could almost stuff your fist down one. I use 2-1/8" primary hooker Super Comps. WAY WAY WAY too big for a medium-serious big block making well under 600 HP. But that's what was necessary to cover the ports so that's what I used. Would have preferred some 1-7/8" headers but if they aren't going to work, they aren't going to work; If that's your situation I'm not going to criticize.

Suggestion on the AFR springs..... you better check their pressures in your own spring tester before you drop them in. I have used quite a few sets of AFR heads and tested many sets of AFR springs to make sure they are "as advertized" in terms of spring pressure......

Sadly, this is one area where AFR's typically dead-on specs ain't nearly dead-on. Their advertised spring pressures are often nowhere near reality. Often higher than quoted.

And I'm **** about thhis stuff. I test dual springs with the recommened retainers so the inner spring is compressed more than the outter like it will be as-installed in the engine and then subtract out the retainer thickness, etc. I've sprent HOURS making sure I have dead-on measurements on the springs. And AFR's quoted specs are often out to lunch.

Springs from the usual cam companies- Comp, Crane, etc. are, by comparison, totally reliable, measured in the same way. It's sucfh a drastic difference I've gotten in the habit of buying AFR heads and immediately swapping out the springs for those recommended by the cam manufacturer.

For serious. I'm not exaggerating or making this up. What you think is a mild increase in spring pressure might be significantly more than that. Check for yourself. Take NOBODY'S word for it. Not even AFR.

 

If the 1-5/8 dont cover use 1-3/4 then

 

Yep, I totally agree with you and no worries on the truck, I understand where you are also coming from. The 8017 actually were close to their specs but the coil bind was good for .615 max lift and not .600 so there is a safety aspect to AFR in that regard. I did have a few tested to be sure and they are .660 max lift and just a few pounds higher than advertized so I do know what you mean. They also recommend that you install them on a 1.800 height and I'm just a bit higher then that at 1.810 to take some of the load off of the springs to compensate so hopefully everything will work well...and i'm usually a 1/2 turn preload. GM uses 1 full turn actually on stock hyd. roller lifters back in the day so that will help keep them happy as well.

 

Ok. Just an update...I got the Hooker supercomps....got them for a heck of a deal on ebay brand new from a company clearing out old stock and they are ceramic coated as well. As far as the oil pan, I'm going to try the B&B as I've read some great reviews on it on fit and finish.