Steven6282

I've never gotten around to putting a T56 I bought like 5 months ago into my car. Now I've started auto crossing my car and I'm wondering if the T56 swap would even be very beneficial now for it. So my first question concerning the T56 is, would you use it in a car doing autocross? Or would the first gear ratio cause issues?

The entire reason I bought it is because I was worried the T5 would not hold up to my engine. So far it has and I'm not sure why, maybe it's cause I haven't gotten any good hookups so haven't strained it, or it's also possible my engine isn't putting out the hp / torque that it's supposed to be. I've had it installed for 5 months now, and it was a noticeable improvement over the original 305 that I had, but this engine is supposed to have at least as much or more power than the stock LT1 and LS1 engines. I just recently have gotten a chance to compare to a couple of 4th gen camaros, one running the LS1 and one running a LT1, both stock without any engine mods. They both seem to have noticeably more power than my engine. I'm beginning to wonder if the guys that installed my engine for me didn't do something right and I'm not getting as much power out of it as I should, or if something else in my drivetrain is preventing me from seeing the full power of this engine.

My engine is a rebuilt 350 with a .440 cam in it, I honestly don't know exactly what that means but that is the numbers on the spec sheet for it . I mainly bought this one for the lopey idle sound lol). It's supposed to have 350 hp and around 390 lbs of torque.

If I floor mine on take off I can feel a little of the torque pushing me back but nothing like the LT1 and LS1 I compared it to. Both had much more take off power, and also both had more rolling power. In 3rd gear going 40 mph both could pull away from mine at a full throttle rolling take off.

How much difference would the rear end gearing make on something like this? I don't know exactly what gears mine are right now, I know on the interstate doing 70 mph I'm running at about 2100 rpm in 5th gear on stock size 245 / 50 / 16 tires. I imagine if anyone is good enough at math and knows all the T5 gear ratios they could figure out an approximate rear gear ratio with that information. I do plan to put 3.42 gears in the rear end if I keep the T5, probably 3.73 if I go with the T56.

Thanks for any advice!

InfernalVortex

iTrader: (4)

T56 first gear isnt an issue unless you're running 3.23(or 3.27) or lower numerically gears.

You probably bought one of those "Crate" engines that use 70s heads and whatever parts they can get cheap. .440 lift is pretty small, so if it's lopey, it's gotta be a REAL old school grind, which means it probably isn't very good by modern standards. Some stock cams hit .440 lift.

Does your spec sheet say ANYTHING else about the cam? Or what heads you have? Or what intake you have? Compression ratio? Usually when they gloss over that information and prefer to tell you about larger valves and stuff like that, its because the heads themselves arent very good and the engine itself isnt very powerful. It is probably reliable, but performance parts cost money and to do it cheap requires a lot of work.

Power is determined by camshaft, heads, and intake. You need to figure out what those 3 parts are. The heads can be identified by the last 3 digits of the casting number. Should be able to see it easy if you remove the valve cover.

//<86TA>\\

iTrader: (14)

dont think you have anywhere near that kind of power. I would stick with the t5 for now. Its much lighter than the t56.

Steven6282

It's not a crate engine, it's a rebuilt engine from a reputable company, cmengines.com

It is their performance upgrade 350, and they are the ones that say it is supposed to have 350hp. If I find out they lied and it doesn't then me and them will have words, but I don't know how to find out, unless I go through a whole lot of trouble to pull the engine and take it somewhere to be dyno tested.

I'm not sure where my spec sheet is atm, but if I find it I can post the other parts. I know most all the parts in the engine are supposed to be performance parts. I remember the compression ration is 9.5:1

As for the sound, it is an old school sound at idle. The closest thing that comes to mind that is easy to find a comparison to is the way the 68 shelby mustang in the movie Gone in 60 seconds sounds, not quite as deep, but has about the same chop at idle.

My Intake is the stock aluminum intake currently.

I paid 2400 dollars for the engine, so if I find out it's not any better than a crate 350 that I could have gotten for 1k and doesn't live up to the specs they told me, I'm going to be one ticked off person.

EDIT:
Actually here you go this is easier to show how it sounds:
http://www.zombiesweb.com/exhaust.mp4

The sound is the main reason I bought the lopey version of the engine, really love how it sounds, it's just something isn't right about the power output and I don't know if it's a problem in my tuning, drivetrain, the engine itself, or what.

pearl_iroc

why don't you run it on the dyno, then you will have a much better idea of what power your putting down

Steven6282

I was just coming back here to post about that.

I just got off the phone with a local race shop that has a dyno. Going to carry it up to them tomorrow for a 1 hour dyno tuning session. That way they can make sure the timing and carb and everything is tuned right and find out where it is at.

One other thing I was looking at, I think I may have a vacuum leak somewhere. I wonder how much power that could rob from it if I do?

Steven6282

Just found my spec sheet.

This is what it says about the parts

"This engine begins with premium seasoned and thoroughly inspected OE heads, rods, and block. All critical internal components are new, including valves, Federal Mogul hypereutectic pistons, Perfect Circle moly rings, brass expansions plugs, and premium main & rod Bearings. Also included are performance valve springs, pushrods, hydraulic lifters, roller timing set and a camshaft with over .440" lift and 270/224 duration. It has been expertly machined, plate honed, and assembled by highly capable technicians and spin tested to check oil pressure, compression and oil circulation! It has approximately 9.5:1 compression and will have a lopey high performance idle and fair manifold vacuum."

Now I don't know what is good / bad about that stuff, I just know it's supposed to be 340 hp (not 350 like I said earlier, 340 or higher).

1985WS6TA

That's probably about right but I can guarantee you that is flywheel Horsepower not Rear Wheel. You MIGHT be pushing 300-310 at the wheels or less. FYI that cam is smaller than the stock cam in my 93 LT1 Formula.

Steven6282

Oh yeah, it's definitely flywheel hp, not rwhp. I'll see what happens at the dyno tuning tomorrow. It might all be carb tuning that is needed. I was just outside fiddling with it some and made some improvements on it I think. I've got a stutter on full throttle acceleration that I'm pretty sure has something to do with the air valve but I can't seem to find the right spot for the adjustment to get it to stop. So maybe they can fix that at the dyno tuning tomorrow and it could likely be other carb tuning issues causing me to have less power than I should.

And I know the cam might not be bigger than a stock LT1 cam, but it sounds better! If I can get over 300 hp on the wheels I'll be happy with it. From what I was reading earlier a stock 97 LT1 only pushes about 255 to 270 hp to the rear wheel (97 is one of the ones I was comparing to). And the LS1 in a 2001 is supposed to peak around 325hp (couldn't find rear wheel hp on this one). So in either case if mine is running properly and tuned properly I should be producing at least as much if not slightly more hp than a stock version of one of those.

I've got an LT1 from a 97 trans am in an 84 camaro that I've got sitting in my backyard. Maybe one day I'll get around to rebuilding it and put a bigger cam in it and performance parts to see if I can't get it over 400 hp and drop that one in my 86 =/. Wonder if I can get a lopey cam to give it the same sound as mine though.

jmd

iTrader: (4)

Hopefully you pick up some power. But yes, the dyno time to see where you're at is needed.

As a reality check re: comparing your engine to a stock LT1,
You have 1970s or 1980s heads which aren't going to outperform an LT1 head. The aluminum LT1 heads are D-port exhaust and outflow yours there.
You have a smaller cam.
You have lower compression.
You get the idea.

I'm not trying to make you but please don't act too at the dyno.

As for whether the T56 would benefit the car at the autoX course, it depends on whether the car is falling out of an ideal powerband and would benefit from the closer 1-4 ratios. I haven't been around too many courses but some cars get a lot of use out of 1st and would benefit from one that's slightly taller to avoid an upshift.

Steven6282

I'm usually in 2nd most of the course at the autocrosses I've been to on the T5. I don't know how 2nd on a T5 compares to 2nd on a T56. I would not want to be in a situation where I need to be shifting up to 3rd and back down to 2nd a lot.

As for the heads and such, I don't really understand. What difference is the flow of the heads going to make if the HP I'm supposed to be producing is more HP than a Stock LT1? The heads and the block are supposed to be from an 86 I believe, but not 100% sure on that. And what options are there of putting better heads on mine? What all has to be changed to change the heads? When I was first looking at this engine I saw a lot of high hp engines being built with Vortec heads. Can I put vortec heads on this engine? I really don't know much about all the components of an engine, which is why I paid cmengines to build me one instead of trying to do it myself.

Steven6282

So got the dyno done today and it's about as bad as I expected.

http://www.zombiesweb.com/Camaro_Dyno.pdf

Only peaking at ~234 rwhp and ~307 max torque.

According to the dyno guys: timing is good, carb tune is good, the engine just isn't putting out anywhere close to 340hp at the flywheel like it's supposed to be.

I guess I should do a compression test on the engine too and see if it has the compression that it's supposed to.

//<86TA>\\

iTrader: (14)

its the tiny cam and what i can only assume are the stock iron heads?

Steven6282

Maybe that is the case, but if it is then cmengines is going to owe me a new engine since they advertised and sold me this engine built just like this as 340 hp or more.

I don't know what the proper conversion I should use is, but I read somewhere for a manual 15% loss at the flywheel would be a good estimate, that would place my flywheel horsepower at around 275 hp or about 20% less horsepower than cmengines advertised and sold it as.

pearl_iroc

unfortunately I think you got taken by the shop, usually when a motor is built for you specifically they dyno the motor alone, and give you a print out.

Steven6282

I really don't think that is the case here. cmengines is a reputable business that does a lot of engines for people all over the south east. It's not some little side of the road shop that I picked because they were cheap. Most likely the engine simply isn't living up to specifications or either the shop I paid to install it didn't break it in correctly and damaged the cam or something (it's a flat tappet cam so apparently the initial break in is important).

I could have gotten an engine cheaper from summit racing or somewhere like that, but I went with cmengines because of their reputation, and because of the warranty they offered. Plus they are local to me and so I figured if I had any problems I'd rather deal with a local company than someone selling engines in mass on a retail site.

This engine was not dyno'd by them because they don't dyno every engine they build, only the race engines they build get dyno'd by default. I could've paid them extra to dyno this one but at the time I chose not to because they wanted an extra 500 dollars to break it in and dyno it and the guy doing the install for me would only take 150 dollars off labor for not having to do the break in (I'm not happy with the guy that did the install for me and no longer use his services, and honestly would not be surprised to find out that him or one of his employees did something wrong during the install). The 340 hp is based on similar builds they have done with a dyno. If it were close but a little under the 340hp I wouldn't care, but it's a long ways from 340 hp.

I've already sent an email to them with the dyno results from today. We will see how they choose to handle it, if they try to give me the run around, or if they step up and make it right.

jmd

iTrader: (4)

This one:

Chevy 350 350 Lopey 9.5 o

http://www.cmengines.com/Engines/Per...3/Default.aspx ?

What exhaust in the car?

Steven6282

Honestly, I'm not sure which one it is on their website listing. I talked to them on the phone and told them what I wanted and they told me about their performance upgrade 350 with 340 hp 9.5 compression and lopey idle. That one you copied shows 350 hp... it could be the same one? It lists the long block at 2796 on that one but I remember paying 2396, it's possible the price has changed though.

As for exhaust, I've got Hooker 2055 headers going out the hooker y-pipe to a 3 inch straight pipe, into a flowmaster muffler.

InfernalVortex

iTrader: (4)

Pull off the valve covers and tell us what the numbers on the heads are. We will be able to tell a LOT from that. That block is probably very well machined and very reliable, but making things fast is a whole different ballgame. Theres a reason most legitimate 350+hp 350 crate engines cost $4500+. You didn't really get ripped off. Even at 234 rwhp, that's more than most any 305, more than 90 percent of 350's. An L98 can't do that stock.

For $2400 if you got smogger heads, you still got a good deal.

Note, however, they dont mention:
1. What the cylinder heads are
2. What the intake is
3. What kind of pistons they used (forged? hypereutectic? Dish? Flattop?)
4. What rods they used (factory? aftermarket?)
5. What crankshaft they used

I honestly think you got a pretty good deal on that engine if it's putting out 234rwhp for $2400. If you assume 20 percent drivetrain loss, that's 290hp. With a better cam you might be able to hit 350.

If it's REALLY rwhp they gave you at 234, then you can assume about 290fwhp, then another 50hp on an engine dyno with headers and no accessories isnt really that outlandish. To get 290fwhp with a 350 isn't as easy as a lot of people think it is. You just cant do that with smogger heads and low compression, especially with any kind of choppy cam.

I bet you have 083 (stock 350 IROC/Z28) heads. I was about to jump in and say it must be some smogged up commuter v8, but 234rwhp is actually not all that bad.

So lets assume...

234rwhp -> 290fwhp

290 fwhp and a 3600 lb car with driver (about average for third gens) is good for about a 100mph trap speed in the 1/4 mile and if you can drive, under 14 second ET. I would guess you'd be hitting 13.7-13.9 on a good run. Thats faster than a lot of those classic muscle cars - they werent nearly as fast as legends say they are.

Pablo

iTrader: (1)

Judging by your dyno sheet, you are way too lean. Your AFR should be just below that red dotted line. You lose a lot of power on the lean side of your max power rich afr. Since your dyno curve looks fairly smooth I assume you are not detonating (but you might be). That tells me that you are also running less timing than would be optimal had you been running a correct afr. I would not be surprised to see 30 horsepower by correcting these issues alone.

The other factors have to do with what equipment the engine used for its HP rating. Did it have a Performer RPM type manifold, accessories, electric fan? A stock manifold vs performer RPM is an easy double digit difference. If the engine had no accessories/fan that can also be another double digit difference.

The number one thing is the tune, you can have the best parts available but if the engine is not tuned properly it will not make power.

As for the T5, the talk of T5s being weak is greatly exaggerated by people that don't know how to keep a transmission alive. Drag racing is rougher on the trans than autox. Slamming it through the gears is a quick way to destroy one. You want to avoid shock loads. Even so, I ran a nwc T5 for years in my mid 13 second firebird that I drag raced almost every weekend. I broke the bellhousing, and one of the ears off the trans, the gear oil looked like liquid metal, but it still shifted fine.
The T5 is a lot lighter than the T56 and I would stick with it until it breaks which will be a long time if you aren't abusing it.

88WS-6

Did you upgrade your fuel delivery at all?

Steven6282

I think you missed the post of mine that answered a bit of that:

"All critical internal components are new, including valves, Federal Mogul hypereutectic pistons, Perfect Circle moly rings, brass expansions plugs, and premium main & rod Bearings. Also included are performance valve springs, pushrods, hydraulic lifters, roller timing set and a camshaft with over .440" lift and 270/224 duration"

The intake is the stock aluminum intake from my motor. If I can ever get to it I'll try taking a valve cover off to get the serial number off the heads, but right now they are difficult to get off because of stuff in the way. On the passenger side the heater hoses go over the valve cover preventing me from taking it off easily, and on the driver side I don't remember what is in the way honestly but I remember something being in the way.

You say 234 rwhp is good but I don't really think so. Not when I can compare it to an LT1 in a 98 that is pushing more like 260 rwhp on an engine that is supposed to have less fwhp horsepower. I've got an 84 camaro in my backyard that has an LT1 from a 97 trans am in it, the power difference between that LT1 and my 86 camaro feels fairly huge. I know that what I'm feeling is the torque but the LT1 will literally slam you back against the seat if you are leaning forward where mine will gently push you back.

I got the camaro with the LT1 right after I bought the engine in my 86, mainly bought it for the T56 that is in the car (that is the one that I haven't gotten around to putting in mine yet). Right now I'm really wishing I had found the car a little sooner and saved a bunch of money. The LT1 needs to be rebuilt but it runs good overall, just has an overheating problem that I think is it is stopped up in the engine somewhere. If cmengines gives me any problems with making my engine produce the power it's supposed to, I might be switching to the LT1. It depends on if I can get a cam for the LT1 to make it sound like mine does or not.

What is the performer RPM? You say stock manifold but the only part on the engine I know of that goes by "manifold" is the exhaust manifold, and I don't have an exhaust manifold with Hooker 2055 headers on it do I? And I am running an electric fan. I have already replace the alternator with one the ones that is supposed to turn easier and put less strain on the engine, maybe I'll do the same with the power steering pump and water pump if they make them. I've got the ac compressor on there still (it's way to hot in SC to not have AC), but if it isn't overly difficult I might start slipping that belt off when I'm doing something that needs a little extra performance.

On a quadrajet what do I need to adjust to adjust the afr? Is that the screw on the back side the adjusts the big flap, or is it one of the two screws on the front, or something different?

As for the timing on the engine, it's actually advancing 5 degrees more than the engine spec calls for at 4500 rpm atm.

And for the T5, one of the reasons I'm debating switching now is I either need to switch or need to replace the clutch in my T5. It's chattering something fierce after it heats up when taking off in first gear. The transmission itself might be due for a rebuild. I would need to find another T5 to compare it to, but mine just doesn't feel anywhere near as smooth as the T56 does. Also if I did keep the T5, I'd want to get a better shifter / short throw shifter for it.

No, it's got a mechanical fuel pump on it. I don't know what a fuel delivery upgrade would even entail or if it's even necessary, a bigger fuel pump?



As for the intake, a few questions about it. Like I said I'm using the stock aluminum intake currently with a non cc 750 cfm quadrajet on it. The guy at the Dyno told me I probably could increase my hp some with a better intake and carb. I know guys around here say the quadrajet is one of the best street performance carbs for our cars. But what are the opinions on it? What exactly would be a better intake? Do I need a different carb? If I did get a different intake and not a different carb, what would I have to do to make the quadrajet fit correctly on it? And about how much extra hp could I expect from such a change?

Honestly, I was not very impressed with the guy that did the dyno. It was initially supposed to be a tuning dyno session, but he ended up only doing 2 pulls and charging me for the dyno runs instead of tuning. He said he couldn't tune it anymore than it already was. He also could not give me an idea of how much hp a different intake and carb that he suggested would give.

jmd

iTrader: (4)

If fuel delivery is a problem, it can show up in a higher gear but be fine in lower ones. The dyno sheet doesn't indicate fuel delivery dropoff, so work on the Q-jet a little and re-check that later.

You can very easily swap Q-jet secondary rods and hangers with the air cleaner off. Pull them out and identify by letters stamped in them / tip o.d. & taper shape. Then swap a couple steps smaller on the tip and re-test.

Get an air/fuel gauge hooked up to an O2 to gauge how things read. Stoichiometric of 12.7:1 or a tiny bit richer is good. You'll hit a happy place with the secondaries when you aren't gaining by going to richer rods. When you swap intakes, you'll need to re-check, but the A/F gauge will make it easy.

When you are running moreso at stoichiometric, you may be able to run more base ignition timing or total advance or both.

There is a discontinued Weiand single plane w/ EGR, the Edelbrock 50 state legal intake, the ZZ4 intake, all of which should show minor gains over the stock intake (you'll notice the difference but it won't be 25hp.)

InfernalVortex

iTrader: (4)

LT1 in a 1998 car? That's an LS1 unless you typo'd the year. The LS1 needs no introduction to its magic.

The LT1 from the 97 TA is officially rated at 285 fwhp... so if you're making 290ish fwhp it should feel about the same. If you feel a difference and the cars are of similar weight then that's pretty telling. But remember, the LT1 has a roller cam, much higher compression, and a much better intake, it SHOULD be much faster. With your 350, if you switch to a better intake I do wonder how much power you'd pick up. I have a feeling it would be pretty noticable, but it depends on what heads you have as to whether it will be worth it.

Also, with Qjets, they're great carbs, but for performance tuning a lot of guys probably dont know how to mess with them. That's probably why he didnt tune it for you. Everything probably looked "okay", and he probably didnt want to mess with the Qjet. They're a little less common for performance builds and yours is probably computer controlled which adds another layer of compelxity to tuning it. Most pro tuners are more set up to tune Holleys (and Edelbrocks) or modern OBDII EFI cars. Our cars are kind of the red headed stepchild in the transition years that no one wants to mess with.

If you have to deal with emissions and had EFI, I would tell you to leave it stock. But since you have a Qjet and you want power, I think you should get a squarebore Performer RPM and Holley 650 double pumper. You WILL need to tune it, but performance tuners are very familiar with playing with those, so if you dont want to do it, you can find someone who will, and those Holleys are one of the most popular hot rod carbs ever. Go to a drag strip and all the fast cars are gonna be running Holleys or Holley variants. Edelbrocks seem to be better suited for daily driver street cars. I like my Holley a lot, and since you've got a manual trans, I think a double pumper would suit your car very nicely. 650 CFM is plenty for you.

You will need a new distributor too most likely, since you'll want to go to a mechanical/vacuum advance distributor instead of a computer-controlled advance distributor. Im not super positive on that, but I think that's the case.

I'd be surprised if you didn't see gains. But if you want to throw the LT1 in (and I wouldnt blame you at all) then dont bother investing the money into a carb setup. The LT1 intake is a good one for power.

We can narrow down what yours heads are pretty quickly if you dont want to pull teh valve covers (although that's the only way to know for sure)

Count the intake manifold bolts where the intake bolts to the heads.

This one has 8 bolts that point straight down. 2 at each corner. This type will always have centerbolt valve covers.


This one has 12 bolts in pairs.


Take special note to see if any of those bolts are angled to go into the cylinder heads. Here's an illustration of the difference:


A and B type are the earlier version. 86/87+ will have the type labeled "C". The bolts go straight down towards the ground instead of straight into the cylinder head.

The first type mentioned with 8 bolts is what you will have if you have 906 or 062 heads. The second type with angled center bolts is most likely to be 70s smogger garbage heads.The third type with the vertical center bolts are probably 083/193 heads.

All we can do is make assumptions to most likely scenarios, the only way to know for sure is to pull it apart and get numbers and measurements, but short of that, we can make educated guesses. If you have 083 or 193 heads, you're kind of stuck, since those heads will have vastly different airflow requirements. The 193's wont benefit much at all from the Performer RPM. The 70s smogger heads are crap, just replace them. The 083's and 906/062 heads are all great heads, and they would all benefit. So if you're in that boat with 12 bolts taht go straight in, you may need to do further research to see if an intake/carb swap is worth it.

Steven6282

Yeah I meant 97 LT1 not 98. And the LT1 I have in my 84 camaro is very noticeably stronger on take off. Granted the rear end gears may be larger, I haven't done the rear end on mine yet, not sure how much difference that will make in the take off feeling. The 84 has got a hub equipped 10 bolt from a 97 trans am under it as well (basically the entire 97 trans am drivetrain was swapped into it). I haven't taken the 84 to a dyno since that LT1 is overheating right now, the 97 that I compared to over the weekend had been dyno'd however.

I'll try to look at the bolts tomorrow afternoon when it's daylight again to see if I can figure out what is on there. Maybe snap a few pictures of it in case I can't tell.

As for the Carb and Distributor, they are non CCC. I tossed all the computer controlled crap when I replaced the engine. The computer wasn't playing nicely with the new engine since it was to different from the original 305. So I'm running a MSD vacuum advance distributor, and a non CCC Qjet, with the stock intake. I'd really like to stay with this carb if I can get it tuned right instead of going with a gas guzzling holley. Right now I can get about 23 to 25 mpg on the highway which is really nice for a big V8 haha. I also don't have any smog or emissions equipment on the car anymore.

I might try replacing the intake if I can find a good affordable one, after looking at the heads and seeing if they are one that you guys think would benefit from an intake replacement. I just don't want to spend 150 dollars on a performer intake and not get anything out of it. Maybe I can find someone with one sitting in their garage that would let me borrow it to test with lol. There is also the problem of clearance though. I've got an open air breather on the carb, it already pokes into the hood insulation when I close the hood, if the new intake lifted the carb up more than 1/2 an inch the hood would not close properly.

Oh and just to note, the engine spec sheet calls for at least a 680 cfm carb, but recommends bigger.

InfernalVortex

iTrader: (4)

Performer intakes are pretty much stock replacement. Performer RPM intakes are the good dual planes. It will sit much higher. You will need a shorter air filter assembly to fit it. Just one of those prices you have to pay for an intake that can flow at higher RPMs. I dontk now for sure but if I had to guess I think about a half-1 inch is the difference in mounting flange height.

A healthy mild 350 is fine with a 650 cfm carb. Those cfm ratings are half voodoo anyway, not as cut and dry as you might think. There are a lot of voodoo maths and nonstandardized methodologies involved with carb cfm ratins. mechanical secondaries are less forgiving when you "over carb" a car also, so it's important not to over do it with them.

A well-tuned holley isnt going suck down that much more fuel than anything else, the problem is that most people dont bother to tune their holleys that well. I have a friend on here who got over 20mpg in a 12 second car with a Holley DP. But the Qjets were specifically designed to get great mileage, hard to argue with that while Holleys have pretty much been used on racecars specifically over the years. Efficiency was never their purpose.

But it doesn't matter, if you've got a non CCC qjet etc, there's no reason to get rid of it. It flows more than enough for you, but you're going to need to take matters into your own hands and tune it yourself. Be sure you want to stay with it before you buy an intake, since you will need a different intake flange for the Qjet than the standard squarebore Holley/Edelbrock. The ONLY caveat I have about Qjets is the vacuum secondaries. It's possible you'll get better throttle response with a mechanical secondary carb with a manual trans. But you should be fine with what you have too, and the Qjet likely will get better mileage.

And gears can make a HUGE difference in how the car feels. Do you know what your rear gear ratio is?

Steven6282

I don't know that I can go to a smaller filter. I'm already running a 2 inch I think, although it might be a 2 1/2 inch I'll have to measure. I'd be worried about not getting enough air if I go smaller. Eventually I'd like to rig up some sort of cold air intake system for the carb rather than it pulling in all that hot air from the engine bay. I have a couple ideas on a way to do it just haven't gotten around to it yet. There may even be something I can purchase but I haven't done much searching for it lol.

I haven't tested what gears I have yet, I'll try to figure it out tomorrow using the jack up and count the number of turns on the tire vs on the driveshaft. I'm pretty sure I have an open differential currently so I believe it's 2 tire rotations and count how many times the shaft turns?

I plan to put an auburn posi and either 3.42 or 3.73 gears in it as soon as I get the money. Can't decide which ratio to go with, I was thinking 3.42 if I stayed with the T5 so that I don't kill my gas mileage to much, but 3.73 if I went with the T56 to account for the first gear a little. But it's the next thing on my list to do to the car, just got to get this engine stuff worked out first.

88WS-6

Was the car originally TPI? Do you have the SPID sheet in the center console with the RPO codes? That would tell you the rear gear ratio if the rear axle is still stock. Do you know the rpm range of the cam? Highway gears and a cam that starts around 2000+ rpms will leave you in a big hole from a dig. I mismatched my drive train like that in my first thirdgen, an LG4 Trans Am.

When I asking about fuel delivery I was asking about the fuel pump and the carb. When I swapped the cam in my LG4, I went through two bigger fuel pumps to find one adequate enough and my cam size was maybe a hair bigger than the original L69 cams, so nowhere near the jump you have. I also had to change my rods and hangers in the carb to ensure sufficient fuel delivery. What you need is a quality O2 sensor placed into your headers to see your A/F. You are likely very lean and could pick up a ton of your lost power just from tuning. Do everything that jmd said above.

Gears will help if feel faster, but you need to tune this thing first.

Steven6282

No it was originally a 305 with the cc qjet. The rpm range on the cam is 2500 to 5500. What are considered highway gears? Is that just smaller gears on the rear end?

It is running a little lean according to the dyno afr measurements. I'll try to figure out how to tune that some, but I really have no idea what to try and tune. I need to find someone that knows qjets that can tune it properly for me.

I think I got a new o2 sensor in the headers now, but it isn't being used since the ECM stuff has been taken out. Can I get a gauge or something to read directly from that? I think I also need to get a dwell meter or something like that because I don't have one of those either =/

EDIT:
I'm just looking on summitracing.com, what should I be looking for on an intake if I were going to try a different one, and keep my quadrajet? Which bore style do I need? Dual plane or single plane? What RPM range would be best? I don't need EGR since I've eliminated my computer and smog equipment do I? Any specific brand better than others?

88WS-6

By highway gears I was referring to the 2.73 (10 bolt) and 2.77 (9 bolt) gears that came with these cars. My LG4 Trans Am had stock converter (1500 rpms? if that...), 2.73s and a cam with a similar rpm range and it was a complete dog off the line because it was mismatched. You have the T-5 so you can launch at whatever rpm you like, but higher gears in the back will help a lot.

You mentioned earlier that you have a non-cc 750 cfm q-jet now right? The stock LG4 intake is definitely holding you back, but a performer rpm manifold won't free up all the power you seem to be missing though.

This is the wideband O2 kit that I am saving for:

http://www.bmotorsports.com/shop/pro...roducts_id/357

InfernalVortex

iTrader: (4)

You would want a Dual plane manifold that works from 1500 to at least 6000 RPM. Avoid the idle- 5000 RPM type intakes. The Performer RPM is pretty much the standard street performance intake. The RPM Air Gap is just a gimmicky version of the RPM. Weiand has equivalents of both, just make sure the RPM range goes up to at least 6000.

Steven6282

Ok, just got a look at my intake. Looks like it's 12 bolts and all 12 bolts are angled.

If I'm reading your post correctly then that means they are most likely "70s smogger garbage heads" But is that 100% accurate? Looking on summitracing at other intakes, all of the intakes showing that fit an 87 camaro with a 350 (I used 87 camaro since they didn't put 350s in them in 86), have 12 bolts all angled, not straight down.

I can try to get a valve cover off this weekend to get the actual casting numbers, but I really question if they would've used some known crappy head on a engine being sold as a performance engine. They responded to my email today and told me that the hp numbers definitely look lower than they should be for this engine and asked me some more information, which I provided, and am waiting to hear back from them again. If they are some known crappy head, can I replace them? I have no clue what is involved in replacing a head, does other stuff have to be replaced too? If I can replace them, what is better that is an option to replace them with?

What about the EGR, do I need it? And the bore type? Is it spread bore to keep using my quadrajet? Will I need any kind of adapter for the carb to fit a new intake?

EDIT:
I just got off the phone with the local race parts shop. They have a Professional Products performer intake that is dual plane, idle - 5500 rpm that accepts both square and spread bore patterns. Would something like this work? I mentioned the rpm range on it and they told me since my cam is 2500 to 5500 there was no reason to go up to a 6k, and since I have a manual and can launch at whatever speed I wanted the idle didn't really matter either. I don't really know what all that actual means to make an educated decision myself lol. What would I gain by going with one that is 1500 to 5500 or 6000 instead of idle to 5500 or 6000?

jmd

iTrader: (4)

Summit will sometimes list 86-down bolt pattern intakes when pulling up parts for an 87-up Chevy.

Gen I SBC Production head / intake bolt pattern:

The middle 4 bolts (2 on each side of the carb) on 87-up iron heads are at a different angle than the outer 8.

All 86-down and 87-91 aluminum heads have all 12 bolts at the same angle. (yours are probably like this...)

1996-2003 Vortec pattern is 8 total bolts, all aligned vertically.

EGR can only help the engine if it's installed correctly. It cools the chambers which reduces detonation and allows for more timing. This means more power and mileage at part throttle.

I'd go with a ZZ4 intake over the Edelbrock 3701 over the PP. The first 2 have EGR and are spreadbore compatible. The 3701 is dual-bolt pattern for either carb. bolt setup.

Steven6282

I was under the impression that I did not use an EGR at all anymore since I'm not running an ECM? How do you install it correctly?

Also what makes the ZZ4 better than the Edelbrock 3701, and what makes the Edelbrock 3701 better than the PP? Comparing images of them, they all 3 look almost identical. So I don't really see what makes one better than the other. The ZZ4 doesn't even list the RPM range of it. In fact looking at the 3701 and the Professional Products, they look like they could've been cast from the same exact mold almost. Very slight difference in the curves around the outside is all I see lol.

Steven6282

Arg! Trying to figure this intake out tonight so that I can work on the car tomorrow, assuming I can find the intake locally, but I can't find any information to say which intake is better and why

Need more opinions / reasons here!

jmd

iTrader: (4)

EGR on pre-ECM cars was done using a temp switch (which didn't open to allow vaccuum until the coolant was warmed up) to control vaccuum. Ported vaccuum is used so the valve is opened during cruising conditions, not WOT or idle.

The ZZ4 has bracket bolt holes lined up correctly for factory accessories and IIRC, the EGR pad was angled better for rocker cover clearance.

InfernalVortex

iTrader: (4)

You're correct... The Edelbrock 3701 is a regular Performer intake. The intake you have is just as good as the 3701. If you're afraid of hood clearance issues, then dont bother with changing the intake at all. The ZZ4 intake is, I'm pretty sure, exactly the same as the 3701. Edelbrock casts all of GM's carburetor intakes, they just put GMPP logos on them.

This is a 3701:



ZZ4 intake:



There are some slight differences on the mounting flange, and they make revisions and slight adjustments over time, but you can see the intakes are both largely completely identical.

This same pattern exists with the Performer RPM (this is the Vortec version):



GMPP Vortec intake:


There are other Edelbrock/GMPP intake comparisons that make it pretty obvious too. And this is important because the GMPP intakes cost a TON more than the Edelbrock ones, but the GMPP intakes can be had cheap second hand because people aren't always aware that they're just Edelbrock castings.

Professional Products, I thought, casted their own intakes, but it may be just Edelbrock and Weiand (Holley) these days casting carb intakes. You can look through the Weiand offerings and you'll see they look noticably different to the Edelbrock ones.

This is Weiand's closest version to a 3701. (pn 8121)



Very different.

You're not gonna find a high performance dual plane intake with EGR. You dont have an ECM so Im not sure why you'd want to keep it. You earlier seemed to make it clear you wanted more power but you keep ending up back at stock replacement (and stock power level) parts.

Besides, if you have perimeter bolt valve covers and 86 down heads I dont think a high performance dual plane will see much of an advantage to you. You definitely need to get some casting numbers to know for sure.

Steven6282

The amount of different information people are telling me is driving me crazy....

You say the 3701 is no better than stock. You are the first one to tell me that, everyone else says a performer will be a lot better than my stock intake.

I don't care if I keep the EGR or not. I was only asking about it because some of the others ones suggested by people here had the EGR stuff on it. I'm not using the EGR now so if the new one doesn't have it fine.

I don't know what is going to give me better performance and what isn't. I can only go off what people tell me when I ask for suggestions on something with better performance...

InfernalVortex

iTrader: (4)

Performers are great with smogger van engines that people drop in beater Camaros. They look nice, they say Edelbrock, and they say "Performer" on them, so people like them, and people dont like to think they wasted money.

http://www.hotrodders.com/forum/edel...ke-179037.html

http://www.stevesnovasite.com/forums...d.php?t=135736

https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/tech...ormer-rpm.html

(Note the application here, read what is actually being said about both intakes)

There may be a difference, but if you're spending hte money and going through the trouble I dont see the point in going with one. Go for an RPM intake or leave it alone. The only drawback of an RPM intake is that it's supposedly only good for a 1500+ RPM range, but I can cruise on the highway at 1300 RPMs with my 350 with one, so you may lose a little directly off idle torque, but clearly it's dependent on other factors too, because I dont have any problem cruising in mine at low low RPMs.

Steven6282

I've been told by 3 other people that a Performer RPM is way overkill for my engine. My cam RPM power range is 2500 to 5300. The Performer is supposed to be idle to 5500 so it should cover the entire power range of my cam, should it not? What about a Performer RPM is going to make it perform any better in the same RPM range?

I wish I could get some solid answers that everyone agrees on, but it seems like everyone is just giving me their opinions based on what they have read or used themselves in the past.

Right now I'm considering this one:
http://www.summitracing.com/parts/EDL-2601/

I've read some people say the Air Gap is just a gimmick.. and I've had others say that it really does help keep stuff cooler and it's worth it. The main thing I'm worried about with that one is hood clearance.

With so many different opinions being slung around as fact, I really wish I could find someone that has an extra intake sitting on a shelf that wouldn't mind letting me put it on to test and see what happens. That aside, I'm going to have to guess at who's opinion is correct.

InfernalVortex

iTrader: (4)

That may very well be the case. Truth is your cam is pretty borderline. If I read the specs right, it's 224/224 @ .050, which should be good to probably 5500 RPMs or so, which is right at the top of what a Performer can handle, but remember, the Performer also flows less air than an RPM, so the closer you get to 5500 RPMs the more power you're losing, and remember, torque is the amount of work being done, horsepower is how fast your engine can do the work.

But there is a lot of reason to believe than an RPM may not really help you much. The main thing we havent been able to determine is your cylinder heads. If your heads are 70's era smogger 880 type heads, then you're not at 9.5:1 compression (unless they used dome pistons... ) and they definitely wont support any more power past what the Performer can make. An RPM intake on those heads would net you nothing but a loss of torque. If you have heads that flow more, like 083's or Vortecs, then an RPM is much more likely to be a better choice for you.

You want more power, you said so yourself. The Performer may make a small difference, and you may not even be disappointed with it, but if the heads can support it, the cam will go far enough that it will be a restriction. Do you want a commuter daily driver? Or do you want a street/strip car? The first post you made you were all about "Im only making 234 whp, I need more!". In that case, get the best flowing parts you can put on a street car. An RPM is a perfectly streetable intake on any healthy 350. My car has a torque curve you wouldn't believe from 1200 RPMs and up, and it's got a cam about the same size as yours, albeit with a lot more lift.

But you seemed to be saying you wanted to do everything you could to get as much power as possible, if that's the case you will likely be changing camshafts and intakes and heads and so on and so forth, and at that point an RPM will be what you need. If you just want to change the intake and call it a day, a Performer won't be so bad.

A smaller air filter isnt going to kill performance. It's not ideal, but I run a 1.5 inch filter on a drop base, I think I have room for a 2 inch, but I just havent really tried bigger yet. A 3 inch definitely wont fit, though. But I dont know if a Qjet is taller or shorter than a Holley.

You've got the right attitude, learn as much as you can, read as many opinions as you can, and just make up your own mind. By all means dont take my or anyone else's word for it, do as much research as you can. If something someone says doesn't make sense and they dont explain it, dont give it a second thought.

Feel free to read through this, however, very good article, and it corroborates my Air Gap as a Gimmick opinion. After the engine has been on 10-15 minutes the heads/block are at temperature, and it's only a matter of time before the intake becomes that same temperature, regardless of the "air gap" underneath it. It will gain temperature slower and lose temperature faster due to more surface area, but to see a performance gain you'd have to cool your engine down, and then tune it to run its best when it's at a lower operating temperature, and the intake hasn't warmed up yet. In teh real world you tune your car to run well when its at temperature since most of the time you're driving, it's at temperature. With that being the case, all an air gap does is throw off the tune when the engine is cold. That's my take on it, you can think whatever you want, but the article I linked beneath this paragraph has a section where they basically say the same thing.

http://www.popularhotrodding.com/tec...ech/index.html

The only thing that irritates me is that they dont do a good comparison of a Performer to a Performer RPM. Remember the RPM Air Gap has the same ports and flowrates as a regular RPM.

Steven6282

My intent on this engine is not to get into changing a lot of stuff. The engine is pratically brand new with barely 4k miles on it now. I'm not planning on doing a camshaft swap or anything like that. If I figure out that my heads are crap and I might upgrade them because I don't want anything that is plain crap on the engine, but if they are descent heads (which I'm giving cmengines the benefit of the doubt that they are, I really don't think they would've put crappy heads on a engine being sold as a performance engine). They aren't vortec I know that for sure. I will still pull a valve cover off as soon as I can to get a number to verify though.

I'm not pushing for every scrap of HP I can get off this engine. I want it to be a descent street rod. I'm autocrossing it occasionally, I may even take it to do a few quarter mile pulls when I get it tuned right and everything just to see what it can do. But I'll never be racing it on a drag strip. My original goal was 300 rwhp, but I settled for what should've been just under that because to get over that jumped me up into a completely different price bracket.

I've also decided that I'm going to rebuild the LT1 engine I have and I'm going to do a lot of research on it and build it with the purpose of making it a beast. Not a ridiculous 1k street car or anything like that, mid 400s maybe 500 will be my goal (fwhp). Although I think I might leave the 500 mark to be achieved with a supercharger or small shot of nos. It depends on how much more it would take to build it to 500, but that is a discussion and planning for another day. Once I get it built, then I'll decide if I want to drop it into my 86 or not.

For now I simply want to get the engine I have now performing where cmengines told me it should (340hp flywheel, which should be around 275+ rwhp). In their last email to me they told me to call them to set up a time to bring the car to them for them to look at it and figure out what is going on with it. So I'm going to hold off ordering any parts until I see what they say.

Pablo

iTrader: (1)

I know new parts seem more enticing than tuning a carburetor so that's what the conversation has centered around.
Unfortunately, if you get a new manifold (intake manifold), you are not going to fix the problem of your carburetor being too lean. In fact, you will probably make it worse. Hopefully you don't eat a piston.
The o2 sensor in your exhaust is not a wide band. It is virtually useless for tuning WOT.
Your dyno sheet included a wide band AFR, and there it is, plain as day why your car does not perform as expected. It's staring you in the face. I am speaking from experience when I say a WOT afr that lean will drop 30 hp. You will feel this.
I'd suggest reading about tuning your carb. I also suggest finding out what your total advance is. To do this you need a dial back timing light and you need to disconnect the vacuum advance. Rev the engine up past 3000. At some point you will see the timing stop increasing. That is your total timing. You mentioned timing at 4500 rpm. If you aren't reaching max mech. advance until 4500 rpm, your timing curve is way too lazy. 3200 rpm is closer to correct. 34 degrees total is usually a safe bet to start with on heads like yours.

There is a lot of power left on the table in just your tune.

Steven6282

Thanks for that input Pablo. I do intend to try and tune the carb. I'm trying to find someone that knows how to tune a quadrajet to take it too. I don't have a wideband measuring tool, and am not planning on spending a lot of money to buy one. So I don't see how I could properly tune (if I could even figure out what I need to tune) it without knowing where it's running.

As for the timing, actually the engine spec calls for it to max out at 4500 rpm. Specifically it says 14 degress @ 700 rpm idle, 27 degrees at 3k and a total of 30 degrees at 4500. I don't know exactly when it's hitting the 35 total that it's hitting now I just know that is where it was at 4700 rpm. This is another thing that is difficult for me to check. I have a timing light, but no way to know what my revs are if I'm under the hood watching the timing lol. Maybe I can get a friend to help next week and rev it for me from in the car so I can see what RPM it actually maxes out at.

Guest

Jeez, the price you paid, you should've just went FI with a cammed LT1. I do realize though that you paid for a new engine instead of a used one.

Just saying, I got my lt1 with 70k on it for $1000. Cam was $300, I'm expecting 350hp~ 400+tq. That's with a little head work too.

Steven6282

Wow, this is kind of sad.

After putting a lot of work in, putting a performer rpm intake on the engine, putting a new higher flowing fuel pump, tuning the carb pretty close, and fixing a few other things that I found (busted vacuum on the air horn):

http://www.zombiesweb.com/Camaro_Dyno_04-24-2012.pdf

Needless to say I'm not happy, and the car is going to the shop that built the engine next week so that they can look at it and figure out what is wrong with it and why it isn't producing the horsepower it should be.

You can see in that dyno it's still running slightly lean, but a lot less than before. I gained 4 fraking hp, and lost 27 ft-lbs of torque... it also looks like it lost a lot of horsepower on the lower end of the RPMs. Not sure what is up with that, the performer rpm is supposed to be good from 1500 to 6500 rpm, and the cam is supposed to make it's power from 2500 to 5300 RPM, but at around 2800 RPM it looks like I'm a lot lower. It could just be how the dyno was done, I don't know enough to know that for sure?


After reading up on some things I can guess why it's not producing the hp though. The heads are crap. One of them from what I've been told is rated as a 175hp head. The other one is a truck head that can supposedly handle 350 to 375hp, but is still a low end thin wall head prone to cracking.




I don't understand why they would put these heads on a "performance" engine. Going to have a talk with them about that when I drop it off next week for them to look at it.

jmd

iTrader: (4)

The engine might make that much peak advertised power at the flywheel with dyno headers, and absolutely optimized timing amd fuel for peak h.power. But, if your engine was optimized to make a peak hp number, it would then lose drivability in the rpm range where you're actually using the engine.

Figure out whether you're going to get anywhere with the engine builder. Best case scenario I can see coming out of this is they offer to upgrade heads for parts + gaskets. (Don't count on that, BTW.)

If you don't get anywhere, chalk it up to experience, get details on exactly what pistons are in the engine so you can pick out new heads in the future and put together a planned power package. Not choose an intake here and a cam there, and rockers here and heads there. A gathering of parts that are known to dyno where you'd like to be, and save up and do the heads and cam.

If you're going to stay non-emissions legal, the Vortec heads and an intake would be a reasonable step forward. But, they have their quirks with higher lift cams so do your research.

Steven6282

*points up three posts*

Yeah you know at first I thought that might be what they would do is dyno it special dyno parts. But they swear the hp numbers come from dynoing a "similarly built engine".

As for chalking it up to experience, I will in the end if they don't fix it. It's just the principal of the matter, I bought this and paid them for a 340 hp engine so I want a 340 hp engine. So if they try to give me any problems with making it right I'm gonna fight them on it as much as I can. In my eyes they have two options, fix whatever is wrong so that the engine puts out 340 hp, or refund me at least half my money.

As for planning a build, that is why I originally paid them for the engine instead of rebuilding one myself. I didn't want to get into all the technicalities of it for the engine for this car, I just wanted something that was going to work and be done for me, so that I could drive and enjoy the car. Honestly, I'm an impatient person a lot of times, so when it comes to things like this I often find myself jumping into something to soon. After the fact finding out I would've been better doing it a different way than my preliminary research showed. I am going to attempt rebuilding a LT1 engine that I have myself, and building it for more power. I've actually got a post asking about some things for it over in the LTX and LSX section, but haven't gotten any replies to it

With that one I can be a little more patient and take my time with it because I'm not in a rush to get it into my car. It's in an 84 that doesn't get driven ever (isn't even tagged) so I'll be able to take it slow and do a lot of research on it without feeling like I'm not able to enjoy my car until I get it finished.

I really hope next week the engine builders will just work with me and fix the engine to run where it's supposed to be running. Because I'm not going to be happy with it in it's current state and am going to be impatient about getting it fixed if they don't lol.

87350IROC

iTrader: (2)

Unfortunately this is the reality of most of the engine builders out there. Slap on some junk parts and run it on an engine dyno and make reasonable numbers. Thing is, 340hp on an engine dyno is nothing.

Figure you lose 10% for all the accessories on the engine. Now your 340hp engine is 305hp. Now you lose 15% power on a chassis dyno to turn the trans and rear. Now your 305hp engine is 260hp. On top of that they used big dyno headers and probably a big intake. Slap on the parts you used, and bam 240hp. Its not that hard really.

The unbelievable part is that they used mismatched heads. They certainly didn't do that when they dyno'd the similar engine.

I would use this as a lesson we have all learned. If you want it done right you are going to have to do it yourself. You are going to have to get in the weeds or someone is going to take advantage of you. The engine companies assume you are never actually going to dyno your car. Most don't. You did. Good for you.

Pablo

iTrader: (1)

Sorry to hear that you have mismatched heads. Definite bummer.

What is your total timing and at what RPM?

Looking at your new chart, you are still way too lean. You lose a lot more power on the lean side than you do on the rich side of best rich afr, and you really start to put the engine at risk of detonation.
You can see how the torque curve rises and falls corresponding with your AFR. There is also an odd gap where your peak HP is developing.
At the peak, your afr is over 13.5:1, that is very lean, especially for inefficient heads such as yours.

This reminds me of some years ago I rented a dyno for a day of tuning and hit a wall at 460 rwhp on my buick. The curve was chopping up. For some reason I was hung up on boost issues mentally but the dyno operator just kept pointing at the chart and saying ignition. I sort of nodded and just kept on my idea of something wrong with my boost controller. Frustrated he finally said "It's ignition, but what do I know. I don't know nutting." (he had a heavy accent)
I called it a day and went home. A few days later I decided to check my "new" plugs. Sure as **** a few were fried already. They weren't that new I guess. I suppose he was on to something. Changed em out and ran a new best (at the time) 7.2@97.5 1/8th
Moral?
Your car still looks pretty lean to me, but what do I know.. I don't know nutting