CAN ANYONE GIVE ADVICE ON THIS BUILD
383 STROKE EAGLR CAST CRANK KIT
40 OVER PISTONS
HOLLEY SNIPER
EDELBROCK AIR GAP
EDELBROCK RPM HEADS OLD STYLE 6089
CRANE ROLLER ROCKERS 1.6
COMP CAM WITH DURATION AT 50 230 INTAKE 236 EXHAUST
110 LOBE SEPERATION
4 DEGREE ADVANCE BUILT IN
539 LIFT INTAKE 553 EXHAUST WITH 1.6 ROCKERS
5 SPEED MANUAL
373 GEAR SOON TO BE 9 INCH WITH 410
CAR IS 8 MALIBU

JUST LOOKING FOR ABIT OF PLAY TIME AT TRACK BUT MOSTLY STREET USE
WILL THIS SETUP WORK??

 

The engine in and of itself is a familiar recipe. I modelled almost this exact 383 with Edelbrock heads (244CFM@.500-600"), 282/288, 230/236, 110 in on 106, Air Gap intake, made peak HP at 5500 RPM. Your results may vary.
That said, with a stick car and that eventual gearing, it'll be a handful of torque at the tires

 

AND HOW DID IT RUN? WHAT WERE THE HORSE AND TORQUE? NEVER DROVE IT YET AS CAR AT BODY SHOP FOR PAINT AND HAVING INTERIOR MADE SPRING TIME WIL BE HERE SOON,LOL yeah just noticed the capital its gone now

 

Modelled the engine in simulation only to get an idea of what the collection of parts would make. With a 660 CFM carb and small tube open headers, it came in at 450 HP flat from 5500-6000 and TQ was 470, 3500-4000. But, simulation only so take it as you wish. Probably shift at 6500 or so. I'm sure it would carry easily.
Which heads exactly?

I'm sure others here have raced this engine before. I can think of a few likely characters here at Third Gen.

 

edelbrock rpm performer old casting 6089

 

60899 perhaps?

Although there is a twenty year old 6089. And you did say old style.
Flow numbers are down by way of comparison. How that will affect your output may be difficult to predict.

 

60899 is the new casting these were bought about 11 years ago an never used
6089 is the 64 cc head

 

 

the numbers are very close i dont know i had them here an figured may as well use if they dont work well i can always swap them out for some new stuff just being cheap is all,
i did install100 thou longer push rods too forgot about that as they were with the heads when bought i had a plan just not sure what it was lol

 

I can relate.
As I mentioned, you'll have gobs of torque.
Fit it with a good exhaust.
With that 4:10 gear, what size tire?

 

wonder if it will make 500 hp an 500 torque or close to it
thinking 17 inch rims but need wait for the 9 inch to get actual back spacing
right now car has 2.5 inch straight to super 44s headers will changed to hookers when get car back
where ya at in alberta? bonnyville here

 

500 HP and a 383 is done everyday. Heads and cam will get you there.

I'm 20 minutes from Castrol Raceway. South of Leduc.

 

Sandwhich a head gasket between the block faces of those heads, bolt them together face to face, pack them well surrounded in a sturdy box and send them off to Lloyd Elliot @ Elliot Portworks. Alot of guys claim to be porters but Lloyd is truly gifted in the art and science. Let him work his magic on them. Those heads are begging for some work and it will make your 500 hp goal alot easier. Some of his hand ported stock LT1 castings are making 520-550+ on 383 and 396 LT1s. The offshore chinese castings he ported for my 383 are making over 500 hp with a tiny 218/224 @ 0.050 duration measured at the valve. The heads he ported for me flow nearly 300 cfm @ 0.600 through a ~210-215cc port and a 2.02 valve. Without a pipe on the exhaust they flow 200 cfm on the exhaust. Flowing with a pipe only manipulates the exhaust flow numbers to look better than they really are. While you are at it, he can set you up with a spec'd custom grind cam for your combination. Something I should have let him do myself. The Comp cam will work, but likely giving up some power and response as is the air gap intake. The air gaps work well on the dyno and usually pretty good on the strip, but are not fun on the street when you want and need good cold startup manners and good drivability. WOT is one thing but pulling away from a stop sign in a residential area at lower rpm the air gaps are terrible. I really like the GMPP Vortec intake with the water crossover under the plenum to add some heat to the intake floor for fuel vaporization.

 

Basically this ^^^.
The airflow numbers for those heads don't necessarily add up to 500 HP so some improvement is the way to go.
That said, there are workarounds for a smallish cylinder head. The following is from a tech article on developing a 383 with RPM heads which were touted as too small for the application. A camshaft fixed that.

"A short while back, I got involved with a T&L 383 build to test a set of Edelbrock Performer RPM heads and intake while utilizing a COMP Cams 288/293 Extreme Energy hydraulic roller. This, on premium pump gas, cranked out 484 lb-ft and 482 hp, but from T&L it cost $4,596. This combination, however, was more revealing than just peak numbers. The Performer RPM heads have intake ports of 170cc, which are intended to target 350-inch motors rather than 383-inch ones. Theoretically, the combination should produce good results because the higher port velocity (produced by the smaller-than-expected port for a 383) should allow the use of a bigger cam before low-speed output was impacted. That was just the case here. In spite of using a relatively big cam, the engine was up and making great torque just as far down as T&L's SuperFlow dyno would pull it."

I've always found that insight to be interesting.

 

On this I will disagree. Despite no choke on the Barry Grant 750 VS carb, the Air Gap has performed flawlessly in all manner of driving conditions. At one time it was a 3-season daily driver and cold starts were often at the freezing point. Many times below when shuffling the heap in and out of storage. But that's tuning. Even with a 236@.050" cam (71° overlap), it ran like it was EFI. Much to my surprise and delight I should add. But that's as much ignition timing related as anything.

 

That is a pretty cookie cutter recipe and will perform excellent. I've driven the RPM air gap with a similar cam and a bigger carb and it worked well. I'm not saying cookie cutter as a bad thing either... that's just a go to 383 recipe and works well out of the box. It's very similar to what I am going with except I'm doing a 231/239 split cam with no advance on a 110. I'd guess that is a 450/450 engine or there about.

Curious, you said Holley Sniper... why use an air gap with that? Not anything against it but there are better intakes if you are using injection...

 

Even with EFI you should use the intake that makes power where you want it. Most typical street SBC builds respond best to a dual plane with a plenum notch or open center spacer 1" tall or combination of both.

I had great results with a MPFI dual plane. Loads of torque even though the engine was a bit over cammed.

The dual plane worked so well that I am actually having a LS performer rpm dual plane drilled and welded for injector bungs. Dual plane adds 30-40 ft/lbs right where the 6.0 LS combination needs it and that is compared to a TBSS/GenIV truck intake. Its in a 4,200 lbs brick with a TH400 that has the stock torque converter and 3.08 rear gears. Low/mid range torque is what that 6.0L needs. I will not be changing the converter in it because it cruises very well at low rpm now. It would never couple well at cruising speeds with a higher stall speed. Dual plane intake will crush a single plane under 6,000ish rpm even with port injection because of runner length and resonance wave tuning. These single plane EFI intakes look racey but a dual plane would give better results. I wish Edelbrock and Holley engineers would wake up and make dual plane PFI intakes for the SBC, LS and modern Hemi as well as others. Single plane is not ideal for most street builds. This is coming from someone who once prefered single planes or even a victor jr on TBIs.

 

4-6 jet sizes is the difference for nearly the same power with an unheated vs heated dual plane manifold. I would rather heat the atomized mixture a bit since vapor is what burns. I am sure that the issues could be masked by tons of pump shot and richer jetting. I had the jetting and timing well dialed in and still had some occassional stumbling and idle quirks. Also hated when you opened the throttle heavy on the primaries at low rpm when the intake manifold was cold. It would fall on its face after the pump shot burned off. It would also blow grey or black smoke from the exhaust at times, indicating to me that the fuel was not staying in suspension or vaporizing adequately.

This test should be an eye opener. The regular rpm can make just as much power as the air gap and actually had too much vacuum signal to the venturis in this test. The standard performer rpm has better throttle response using less fuel. Fuel economy is always an important consideration on something that is going to get street driven, that I might twist the key and take on a 2,000+ mile road trip.

https://youtu.be/VuaZWGRVTLk