Hey guys. I wanted to start a new thread for my car. I have the other thread going about installing vortec heads on my 350 MerCruiser. That project will commence in the last leg of winter come February when I can move into my house I just purchased and use that garage.

Anyway, I have decided to retain the stock heads on my 1990 350 TBI engine in my Caddy. I was seriously considering changing them out for vortecs, but decided against it. However, I want to and NEED to replace the valve stem seals. Do I need umbrella style and/or o-ring style seals for the intake valves? What about the exhuast valves - one or the other or both?

Also, while I am in there, I want to upgrade the cam to an LT1 and/or install 1.6 rockers. Would I need to elongate pushrod holes for clearance when using 1.6 rockers?

Is the Summit SUM-G6601-9 a good timing set to use? It says: "For factory roller camshaft Gen 1 motors, except 1996 and later Vortec. Will not fit behind stock plastic timing covers."

 

use positive valve stem seals for both the intake and the exhaust. depending on your cam lift.... check to make sure the bottom of the retainer doesnt hit the seal and leave your self .060 extra clearance. as for you 1.6 rocker ratio question. no you shouldnt have to as long as you have the correct push rod length and proper rocker arm geometry.

 

Fel Pro SS72861, set of 16 positive seals should do the trick?

I bought 906 vortec heads that came off a new L31 engine a guy bought, put 15k miles on, and then decided to swap in a 5.3... He gave me the roller cam that it came with too. I measured some lobes and came up with .411/.426 lift assuming a 1.5 rocker ratio. I looked for the specs and found that it looks like the "806" grind: 207/214 273/278 117 LSA .413/.426.

I suspect this would be a good upgrade over my stock cam in my 1990 Cadillac Brougham 350 TBI stock roller engine, especially if I used 1.6 rockers which would give me .454/.468 lift. Would this lift likely interfere with those seals??

 

If he gave you the cam from a production L31 engine, it's not the specs you quoted. L31 cam is more like 191/196/111; really no better than the TBI cam you already have.


On TBI heads I've seen, 1.6 rockers caused interference at the pushrod holes.

 

Darn it. Thank you for pointing that out. You're right. I looked up the specs for a brand new L31 and the cam specs have about the same lift but less duration, and the 111 LSA.

My engine is a 1990 TBI 350 VIN 7 car engine. My understanding is that I have the flat top pistons and a tiny cam. Does anyone have any idea what the specs are of the cam I have?

At this point I am VERY tempted to say f*** it and put the vortecs on it. After several hours of fumbling around with valve seals and springs and keepers in the 193's I still won't have much power, unless I also changed the cam which means taking the whole front of the engine apart and then dealing with clearance issues with the valve seals and spring cups due to the added cam lift.

I could retain the stock cam, at least for now, and avoid taking the whole front of the engine apart, including removing the radiator, condenser, and whatever else might be in the way, and just bolt on the vortecs and call it a day. Even with the stock cam I'll probably see 40+ more HP, right?

 

Yes, I'd put the Vortecs on it. You already have them; money wasted on parts for your TBI heads can go toward an intake manifold to fit the Vortecs.

 

That's what I'd do too...

I would not throw away even ONE DIME on the TBI garbage, regardless of what the ONE PERSON in the world that likes them and claims to get results COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from EVERY OTHER person that has ever had them, comes in here and says about them. Freshen up the Vortec if needed. Get a 4-bbl intake, Perf RPM is about perfect. Use a 4-bbl adapter, make sure it's one of the ones that puts the TB in the stock location, NOT the one that moves it front-rear.

I'd recommend a cam at the same time, but not any of the stock ones. Look for something in the 212° @ .050" range on the intake, 10° more on the exhaust; keep the lift low so you don't bump into the lift limits of the heads and have to spend money to get around that. Like, below .465" or so. Not necessary of course to change it, but now's the time. It's only acoupla more bolts at the point the heads are already off.

 

For any cam swap, you WILL need better springs than stock L31 springs. Even with your TBI cam, they'll float the valves past 5000 rpm.
Get a setup something like this, and you won't have to worry about the lift limit:
http://www.alexsparts.com/valve-spri...rf-hyd-roller/

 

Thank you for all the input!

Actually it's almost twice as much work to do the cam as well; i.e: radiator, condenser, all the accessories and brackets and stuff, timing chain set... The oil cooler and trans cooler line fittings going into the radiator do not look too hot. If I do the cam I may be committing to buying a radiator and lines, not to mention the gaskets, cam, timing set. Even if I felt like doing all that work, I'm not sure I could really afford it anyway.

How would it run with vortecs and the stock cam? What if I put 1.6 rockers in the vortecs? I'd get a few more degrees of duration plus I'd go from, I don't know, something like .390/.4 to .422/.440 lift... I really wish I knew the exact cam specs I have!

My 906 vortecs only have 15k miles on them. Can I just run them like they are? This engine never sees past 4500 or so RPMs. My 906's have pressed in studs: is this okay for my application?

I am not looking to do anything crazy with this thing. I just want to solve a few problems, namely: knock signal under load causing reduced timing advance and low power, smoking at start up, and a general lack of power. I'd like 250-300 HP and as much torque as I can get, maybe 325...?

With a 28 inch tire and 3.23 rear, this car shifts into OD and locks the converter at about 44 MPH, which is awesome. It feels like it is idling, but it's still smooth as silk cruising along. I know the swirl heads are good at one thing: low RPM torque. Would the vortecs give up a little torque in the lower RPM's to gain it in the upper band? Would it still cruise like it does?

 

You'll notice no loss on the lowend with the Vortecs. Elongate the pushrod holes for the 1.6 rockers before you install the heads. For 4500 rpm, yes new stock L31 springs will be ok. Pressed-in studs are fine. Stock cam, 1.6 rockers, and vortec heads will be a big improvement. No loss anywhere, and at least a 30 hp gain at 4500 rpm.

 

Awesome! Okay, I am getting much closer to a well planned out build here. Thank you everyone for all the help. There is a plethora of knowledge here!

My next concern is static compression and quench. There seems to be a dance between static compression and quench. I believe I have flat top pistons with +6 cc eyebrows. 4" bore, 3.48 stroke, +6 cc pistons, .02-.025 down the hole estimation, 64 cc chambers or 62.5. With typical .039-.041 head gaskets I get about .059-.065 quench depending on the exact gasket, and about 9.6-9.7 SCR.

It is my understanding that quench is extremely important for producing power and piston cooling which is conducive to warding off detonation. It's interesting how an excessive quench distance can lower CR but cause hot temps.

Anyway, I found the Mr. Gasket 1134G to be the best choice because it has a relatively large bore at 4.13 but with a thin thickness at .028. This should give me .048 quench assuming the piston is .02 down the bore, .052 quench assuming it is .025 down; and 9.93 SCR with 64 cc heads, 10.1 with 62.5 cc as I have read these heads actually measure out to be.

I have been dealing with a spark knock issue with this engine. When it warms up, it starts picking up a knock signal and backs of the timing to the point where you can feel it! The current SCR is probably about 9.8:1, but that's with a tiny cam, heads that can barely breathe, probably some carbon build up, and a crappy chamber design. Also, the quench may be large if the factory uses thick gaskets. I also read the factory uses gaskets with small bores that can protrude into the chamber and get hot causing detonation...

Will my proper quench make up for the estimated 9.9-10.1:1 SCR? And will these superior heads with their intrinsic flow ability and formidable chambers prevent spark knock and detonation problems with 91-93 octane even with a high SCR? If I put this whole top end package together and I get a spark knock signal under load to the point where it backs off the timing so much that I can feel the power reduction I am going to be royally pissed! LOL

 

Before you worry too much about the CR, I'd make sure you know whether or not you have flattops. TBI 350's came with both. Something that might help: head casting ending in 191 is 76cc and likely combined with flattops; casting ending in 193 is 64cc and likely combined with dished pistons.
Regardless, assuming the deck surfaces are flat and smooth, I'd run .015" shim gaskets to get the quench as good as you can for an undecked shortblock. You can bet the pistons are much closer to .025" in the hole than they are to .020". I've never seen .020" stock; closest I've ever measured is .023" and they're typically .025-.028".
Remember those Vortec heads will want less timing at all rpm's to make best power compared to the TBI's, so that's going to help you.
Another point of reference: Iron head LT1's have the same combustion chamber and ports as the L31 heads, and they ran 10.0:1 CR on 87 octane with the same L31 cam but retarded 5 degrees. Albeit, they were reversed cooled, but also had a not-so-optimum quench clearance of about .055". Give up a half point CR for the reverse cooling (although you could argue you get that back by running a 180 deg tstat), another half point for the cam retard, but take back another full point for running 91 or 93 as opposed to 87 octane, and I don't see why you won't be OK even if you DO have flattops in your TBI motor.
Don't ever give up that quench number for a couple tenths of SCR!


Edit: Oh, and don't go any larger on head gasket bore diameter than you have to. The standard 4.100" is plenty. Crevices are bad news from a detonation perspective.

 

I will check the casting # on my heads. I thought in 1990 the cars got roller cams and flat tops, but I won't know for sure until I remove the heads. I am very eager to find out, but I guess in any case I should use the .015 shim gasket it sounds like.

Can I use the summit SUM-141507 rocker arms? It is my understanding that I need one of three methods of "aligning" the pushrod action - "self-aligning" rocker arms, pushrod guide plates, or the oval shaped pushrod holes in the heads that are close to the girth of the pushrods.

First of all, I don't know why I need any method of "aligning" the pushrods. The pushrods shouldn't touch ANYTHING except the top of the lifter and the bottom of the rocker. For whatever reason, I guess one method is necessary. I have round 7/16" holes in my heads, so the last method mentioned is out. I plan to turn them into 1/2" for more clearance for the 1.6 ratio. I have pressed in studs, so guide plates are out, which leaves self aligning rocker arms as the last option.

If someone could tell me what 1.6 rockers are inexpensive and self aligning and hopefully clear my stock valve covers that's be helpful. Or tell me that those Summit ones will be fine. If someone could also tell me why I need some aligning methods, I would love to know that too. I assume it is just for ease of installation and to help keep stuff relatively located in the case of a failure, but I don't know. I read you should use hardened pushrods with guide plates. I assume this is in case the pushrod comes into contact with the guide plate during use, which it never should.

Anyway, I will go with the Fel Pro 7733SH1 4.1x.015 gasket. What are some cheap and good intake manifold gaskets I can use with my vortec heads? There are like a million options. Some say they work with 1955-1988ish, other's say 1955-2002ish, some say 1996-2000ish...

 

I did some more research, and although I don't really understand the requirement for "aligning" things, I see how the self aligning rockers have little ledges to locate them on the valve tip. Anyway, I think I will go with the Comp 1418 1.6 roller tip rockers unless someone tells me they won't work or fit or will interfere with my valve covers...

My plan is to reuse my old cylinder head bolts with thread sealer on all the bolts. I plan to use Fel Pro 1255 intake gaskets or SCE 111119 and to get bolts for the intake from Home Depot or Advance Auto. I'll use Fel Pro 7733SH1 head gaskets. Am I forgetting anything?

 

Those Comp 1418's look pricey for only roller tip. So much for budget parts...lol!
IMO, you're gaining virtually nothing with just roller tip. Case in point: GM's newer OEM rockers - roller fulcrum but no roller tip. Most of the relative movement is at the pivot; almost none at the tip. Roller tips are a marketing gimmick to me; cheap to make them with OEM style stampings, not so cheap to make a roller fulcrum.
I'd search the for sale ads for full roller rockers before I'd spend that much on stamped. I could help you out with 8 of the GMPP 1.6's. Still have these
https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/engi...mpp-1-6-s.html

 

I agree with everything you just said. I just want the added ratio for as cheap as possible. It looks like the cheapest option for 3/8 stud 1.6 ratio rockers are these Comp 1418 pieces. I found a set of 16 new from a store on ebay for 168.55... That's not too bad. Real full rollers from Scorpion or GMPP or Lunati or whatever are easily twice that much...

Don't worry, my '69 GTO has 1.65 Scorpion rockers I just can't justify the cost for this car. It's a Cadillac... I am not racing. I'm cruising and just want it to run stronger and get out of its own way. 220 HP is a little low for a 4500 pound land yacht LOL

 

I changed my mind once again. I'll use the vortecs on the boat. That project will commence in a couple months. The boat needs new heads way more than the Caddy does, and I cannot afford another set of vortecs.

Thus, I decided to retain the swirly TBI heads in the Caddy. I scored a 395 marine/Ram Jet/HT 383 roller cam (196/206 .431/.451 109 LSA) for the Caddy. I'll do the valve seals while I am in there. Can someone please verify which valve seals I should get? I don't know what valve guide and valve stem size I have and there are several options. I know someone said use the Fel Pro "Positive Stop" seals, which are for a .545" guide, and they appear to be the only ones for a .545" guide. Will they work with my heads? I am talking about PN# SS72861.

 

I am ordering the PN of the valve seals I said above. Hopefully they're right. I also ordered a new ignition module. After doing a bunch of research I saw the importance of the 369 module over the 048 module. My old distributor had the 048. I thought the module may have been going bad and causing the knock retard issue so I replaced the distributor with a 70 dollar Dorman unit. This is before I knew about the different modules available. It turns out the module in it is the Chinese equivalent of the 048 module, at least that's what I found doing research afterward. Even if that isn't correct a genuine AC 369 module is worlds better anyway.

I am also going to try to isolate the knock sensor a little better to reduce its sensitivity and maybe add a resistor inline to impede the signal some. If anyone has any advice or suggestions in the way of this endeavor that would be awesome. Basically, the engine runs great but sometimes feels like I am towing a yacht in the mid-range under load, at which point it starts counting knocks. I have been chasing this issue for a while and at this point I am confident it is not a genuine detonation issue.

I do believe this 395 cam is going to wake it up quite a bit. I think it will help with the knock retard issue by reducing the cylinder pressure in that range that is probably through the roof due to the tiny duration of that piddly little peanut cam. In other words, if I can get this knock retard issue squared away, which I believe the 395 cam will help with inadvertently, I am going to see massive improvement!

 

I just wanted to report the improvements I have experienced. Just to recap, I installed the 395 marine/Ram Jet 350 cam, a new timing chain and gear set, replaced all the valve seals, and installed a "custom" chip from Harris Performance. Overall, it runs a lot better with more power and does not smoke at startup thanks to the new valve seals.

As I did the work, when I sealed the cylinders using compressed air, I would get a little air leaking past the valves. This became most evident when I went to replace the valve seals on the last cylinder, which was #2. The intake valve wouldn't seal at all! I had to hit the valve a few times with a mallet until it would seal enough to hold air in the chamber to keep the valves up. I looked into the intake ports and saw a ton of carbon build up on the intake valves. Anyway, I finished the job and like I said there was a great improvement, but it has me wondering: Am I losing significant power with all that carbon buildup on the intake valves?

After doing all the engine work, I adjusted the governor for higher upshifts. With trial and error, I got the upshifts to occur at about 5,000 RPM at WOT, up from 3800-4000. I still have the stock valve springs, which I know are inadequate, but I feel almost no power above 4200 RPM. It's still running smooth, not misfiring like the valves are floating, but doesn't pull hardly at all above 4200. It's like it hits a wall, but never runs rough. Could this be from the carbon on the intake valves causing so much restriction; from the stock light valve spring pressure; or is it just the nature of the swirl port heads to not pull at all past 4200 RPMs?

I am entertaining the idea of swapping on vortec heads at this point. They're a fairly easy bolt-on. Would it be like a day and night difference if I did, especially since the intake valves are caked in carbon? Or could I clean off the valves and get it to pull a little harder, especially from 4000-5000 RPMs. Even in the mid-range it almost feels like I'm towing a boat. It's not as bad as before, but it just doesn't have much pep. Maybe my expectations are just too high!

 

Yes, it would be a night and day difference.

 

I ended up replacing the valve seals in the swirl port heads, but installing a 395 marine cam (196/206 @.05, 256/264 adv., .431/.451, 109 LSA). There are more details in my previous post. Anyway, it runs a lot better but still feels pretty weak. I think this is attributable to the giant caked on chunks of carbon on the intake valve stems killing the flow of the already flow challenged swirl heads.

I've decided to swap on the vortecs like I should've done in the first place. My biggest concern is how it is going to run with this "custom" chip from Brian at Harris Performance since it's "designed" for my current setup of TBI heads and a mild cam. I've got everything else pretty well sussed out for the vortec head swap as discussed earlier in this thread. I'll use 1.6 roller tip rockers, elongate the pushrod holes, use a vortec 4 barrel intake with a centered TBI adapter, .015 shim head gastet for optimal quench, etc... I just want to know if this thing will run okay until I get a proper tune!

I'm thinking it should run pretty strong with the vortec heads and 395 cam with 1.6 rockers (.460/.481). It should achieve about 10:1 CR with a .04 quench. I'll have to make some measurements once the heads are off.

 

Why did you not just chisel the carbon off the back of a closed valve and blow it out.

I cleaned the carbon off the back of my 2011 Inifiniti M56 engine that uses direct injection with the only engine teardown being removing the intake.

That being said your lack of power is most likely the Harris chip. They are JUNK and he cheats his customers. Well that and the horrific stock manifolds, Y-pipe and cat they use. My Stock 8.75:1 1-ton 350TBI made the same HP and more TQ than a stock Vortec after bolt ons and 1.6 rockers.

My stock TBI head and cam engine had no issues making power to 5,000 rpm and would still pull strong at 5,500 rpm. Negating the torque spike to 330 rwtq at the throttle hit, I made 310 tq @ 3,250 and 204 hp at the tires at 4,600 rpm with the stock TBI long block. My 5.7 Vortec with the 300 hp GM Marine cam, headers, marine intake and tuning put down 230 rwhp @ 4,400 and 303 rwtq @ 3,400. So yes you will make more power but it will be past 3,500 rpm. The TBI heads will make noticeably more torque in the 1,000-3,500 rpm range than the Vortecs.

From experience I can tell you it will not be driveable at all. It will blow fire out of the TBI when you try to accelerate. The Vortec heads need ALOT more timing and AE fuel than the TBI heads. If you go heavy throttle under 2,000 rpm the combination of lean and retarded spark will make it have tremendous backfires.

 

This was before and after on my M56.





I actually ended up walnut blasting them with an adapter built for the purpose that uses a shop vac to contain the mess.

 

 

Thank you for the replies! I think I will just remove the intake and clean those valves. The reason I didn't when I had it all apart was simply because I started the job on Saturday and it was getting kind of late on Sunday and that was my transportation to work Monday morning, lol. I just ran out of time. Plus, I wasn't sure how to clean them. I do't have a media blaster. Maybe I can soak them in Sea Foam or something.

I could be wrong, but I thought the vortecs actually needed less timing advance being "fast burn" heads; 32* total with the heart shaped chambers as opposed to 34-36* total with typical open or closed chambers...

Anyway, yes I am afraid I wasted 200$ on that chip from Brian. Is there anyone in the DC, MD/VA area who could tune my car for me?? I'll give the TBI heads one last chance by cleaning the intake valves. If it runs a lot better I'll keep 'em, if not I'll do the vortec swap, but either way I could really use a real tune on this thing.

 

Those Fel Pro SS72861 valve seals fit your swirl port heads without machining correct? Did you use the same springs with dampner?

 

TBI heads only need 26-30* of total timing to run well. They also require less advance at lower engine speeds than Vortecs. For example at 1,000 rpm and WOT which would be around 100 kpa at sea level the Vortecs really like no less than 10* on anything I have run them on. My tuned Express van at that RPM runs 14* advance. Most factory TBI engines have negative spark values in the stock chip at that RPM. The Vortec heads require a drastically different advance curve than the TBI heads even though the total timing at WOT above 3,500 rpm is very similar. The Vortec heads even like more timing at idle than the Swirl Ports. Vortec idles around 24-28* for the best idle and the TBI 16-20*

I would use B12 or Oven cleaner before using the Sea Foam. It is cheaper and works better for cleaning up the coked up oil/carbon blob on the valves and the runners. Get a metal pick and after some soaking the carbon should come off in big globs of sticky goo.

You can try the Vortecs but I am just letting you know in my experience with multiple swaps they lose low-end torque and do not really come alive until after your stock 700r4 has already shifted. On a TBI 350 with the stock flat tappet cam and 1.6:1 roller rockers, swapping TBI heads for Vortecs created a loss until 3,500 rpm, same power from 3,500-4,000 and the Vortecs pulled ahead by 15 rwhp at 5,000 rpm. Both setups were running the edelbrock performer spreadbore carb intakes matching the head type in use.

If you saw what Brian did to the BLM limits in the chip to make his VE tables look like he had them down well, you would know what I am talking about. I have had several setups I have fixed for people that tried his chips.

 

I built a flat top piston 355 for an Astro van a while back that had the marine cam and stock swirl ports on it. Had shorty headers meant for a late 70s Camaro running into a dual 2.25" exhaust system with a H-pipe. Had the stock 700r4 and 3.08 G80 rear end in it. On the stock chip, it ran best with the fuel pressure set at 14 psi and the timing bumped to 6 initial. Also adjusted the minimum idle to 650 rpm with the adjustment screw and the IAC closed. Had a Holley Projection TBI intake manifold and a 2" bore TBI unit. That Astro van would smoke P275/60R15s all the way through first gear and get a nice chirp going into 2nd. It pulled like crazy up to 4,500 rpm only falling off a little on its way to 5,000 rpm upshifts.

 

I've seen that too on Harris chips. That's a poor way to tune to fake out a user to think that's the best tune they can get.

 

The one I messed with local ran better on the factory memcal after driving for a few miles than the 5th or 6th datalogged Harris chip. I started from the stock chip and had it driveable in 2 burns.

 

Perhaps this post will show how difficult it is to get these OBD1 ECMs dialed in without a wideband. The old 160 baud ECUs are slow and without a sound knowledge of the system and tuning it is impossible to get them to run right even with datalogging. I saw mechanical issues through the datalog even that had to be fixed.

https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/diy-...27747-tbi.html

I prefer to use a wideband with atleast 4 auxiliary inputs. I input RPM, MAP, TPS, and intercept the Knock signal between the ESC and ECM. I can then create history tables and tune the VE and Spark tables in open loop. Much faster and easier.

 

Stokes1114, yes those valve seals worked fine on my swirly heads. I just reused the same valve springs since it rarely sees over 4k RPM.

Now I am scared of my Harris chip. Fast355, where are you located? I could really use a good tune on this thing. I'll clean the intake valves, install my 2 1/2" dual exhaust and use some better manifolds or headers and run it. I bet with a good tune, the marine cam, and all those bolt on's it'll run like your Astro van, which is how it should run. I do have my governor tweaked for ~5,000 RPM WOT shifts, and it's dead past about 4k. It feels like it hits a wall but doesn't misfire or sputter. I think it just can't move any more air because of the carbon, log manifolds, and single exhaust.

It is VERY tempting to run an HEI and a Qjet!

 

I am in Dallas, TX area.

I have run the Q-Jet/HEI on one of these engines before and it does not help power wise much, but does help for ease of tuning for those not computer savy with chip tuning.

Those stock logs and single exhaust IS the biggest restriction. The engine just cannot breath through them at higher rpms. The B-car should be the same as the L03 F-car and those parts are the first change I recomeend for a L03 TBI car. Full exhaust replacement from the head ports out.

 

Currently, I actually have a caprice y-pipe (2 1/4" downpipes and 3" collector vs. 2" downs and 2 1/4" collector), no cat, and single 2 1/2" mandrel bent exhaust. But, I still have the logs and stock muffler for stealth, after all it's a Caddy.

I'm not dealing with headers on this car. I could do those LT-1 manifolds like these: http://www.ebay.com/itm/94-95-LT1-Ca...BZYEJa&vxp=mtr

Or, I bet the truck rams horns that turn back at the end could fit and be cool. I know they only have 2" outlets, but they're still probably a lot better than what I have and maybe I could massage them out a little bit. I wonder how they compare to the LT1 units.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Exhaust-Mani...1ZMm1l&vxp=mtr

Do you know any savvy TBI tuners local to me in the DC MD/VA area you could refer me too?

 

The 1992 G20 vans with the 350 TBIs had the common 70s style under the spark plug log manifolds with 2.25" outlets that would probably work just fine in your chassis. Used them on a 1987 Cadillac 400 swap years ago for a friend of mine. Also used the same manifolds on a 305 in a 1984 ElCamino.

 

Well, I already have log manifolds in the over-the-spark plug variety. I don't think changing one log style for another would do me any good. I was considering removing my current log manifolds and massaging them out some, but then of course it's a thinner wall and less durable.

I think those rams horn manifolds are the best bet. The 2" or 2 1/4" ones that turn back at the end - although not as good as the Vette straight down dump 2 1/2" units - should be a good improvement over the logs and should fit my chassis. I guess I'll find out on my own. I've searched all over and haven't seen any B or C or G body with them.