FAQ |
Members List |
Social Groups |
Calendar |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
As I recall, my uncle’s ‘69 RAIV GTO had a somewhat choppy idle. From 4000 rpm to redline it would scare the &$&? out of you!
__________________
“It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance.” Dr. Thomas Sowell |
#62
|
||||
|
||||
There are lots of Youtube clips that are supposedly RAIV cams/motors but who know what they really are. This clip is from Rocky Rotella's Youtube channel.
https://youtube.com/shorts/awAZMAtprLI?feature=share
__________________
70 TA, 467 cid IAII, Edelbrock D-port heads, 9.94:1, Butler HR 236/242 @ .050, 520/540 lift, 112 LSA, Q-jet, TKX (2.87 1st/.81 OD), 3.31 rear https://youtube.com/shorts/gG15nb4FWeo?feature=share |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Well after 7 hours on the dyno today, pretty sure I made Nick look like an absolute genius!. Had nothing but trouble all day. The good news, the engine started instantly and we ran it about an hour and broke in the cam without any problems. Then things went to hell from there. Both fuel pressure regulators failed on the dyno, One won't adjust at all, the other is too high no matter what. Had to order 2 new ones. Then one of the fuel flow meters is also not working correctly. All day long the MSD7 has been providing a weak spark which wasn't really noticed until we really loaded the engine hard. So, the results were no pulls representative of what this engine will run when all this crap is straightened out. Positives, no leaks anywhere, cam broken in, inner valve springs installed, engine mechanically sounds very nice and idles well. Will be the middle of next week before we can make any real pulls. Murphy kicked our azzz today. ..... or I was just channeling NICK!
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to mgarblik For This Useful Post: | ||
#64
|
||||
|
||||
I watched the video, then like some of you stopped when he signed off;
After reading your comments, I went back to catch the very last of it... My thoughts on the idle sound; I agree it did not sound like a 041. I seem to recall that running a 744 cam with unported #12 heads, was REALLY lopey at 700-850(?)rpm. I thought when he was running the engine it generally sounded terrible; It sounded like it was lugging and just plain unhappy; Every time he ran it, you could see he would push the throttle to a point, and the revs would go down for a bit before slowly recovering.. He definitely seemed a bit uptight/worried about the Pontiac - or maybe that's just the way he is; If uptight/worried isn't his natural state, then I would think he really was out of his element. Maybe that explains the 20w50?? I don't want to seem to knock a guy for not cutting apparent mishaps from the video (I liked seeing the trial and error stuff), or for working on an engine (and parts) as essentially supplied to him. As a side query; Am I the only one to think that if that other Quadrajet was somehow determined to run at 20:1 AFR; Shouldn't he have been able to resolve the lean AFR to go away from EVER considering running a quadrajet without secondary metering rods??
__________________
1970 Formula 400 Carousel Red paint on Black standard interior A no-engine, no-transmission, no-wheel option car. Quite likely one of few '70 Muncie three speed Formula 400's left. 1991 Grand Am: 14.4 @ 93.7mph (DA corrected) (retired DD, stock appearing) 2009 Cobalt SS: 13.9 @ 103mph (current DD; makes something north of 300hp & 350ft/lbs) Last edited by unruhjonny; 08-06-2022 at 01:51 AM. |
#65
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
As far as the oil type and pressure. It has been a good number of year be I seem to remember doing those thing back when we ran the Chrysler 426 Hemis. Stan
__________________
Stan Weiss/World Wide Enterprises Offering Performance Software Since 1987 http://www.magneticlynx.com/carfor/carfor.htm David Vizard & Stan Weiss' IOP / Flow / Induction Optimization - Cam Selection Software http://www.magneticlynx.com/DV Download FREE 14 Trial IOP / Flow Software http://www.magneticlynx.com/DV/Flow_..._Day_Trial.php Pontiac Pump Gas List http://www.magneticlynx.com/carfor/pont_gas.htm Using PMD Block and Heads List http://www.magneticlynx.com/carfor/pont_pmd.htm |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Concerning the oil pressure on the engine Nick tested: My engine has a stock pan and a M54F oil pump. (80 lb.) I like them but many don't. Start-up oil pressure and warm-up oil pressure was 95-97 PSI with 10W-30 VR1 Valvoline. When engine was up to 160-170F, oil pressure was 35-38 PSI @ 1100 RPM's. Pulls at 180 degrees, 78-82 PSI @ 5000 RPM. I am fine with that. Many on here are happy with half that. Might need a new distributor gear at 100K miles and at the mileage I drive it I will be 115 years old! |
#67
|
||||
|
||||
How much variation is there in oil pressure between tight bearing clearances and " loose"?
__________________
72 lemans,455 e-head, UD 255/263 solid flat,3.73 gears,,,10" 4400 converter,, 6.68 at 101.8 mph,,1.44 60 ft.2007 (cam 271/278 roller)9"CC.4.11gear 6.41 at 106.32 mph 1.42 60 ft.(2009) SOLD,SOLD 1970 GTO 455 4 speed #matching,, 3.31 posi.Stock manifolds. # 64 heads.A factory mint tuquoise ,69' judge stripe car. 8.64 @ 87.3 mph on slippery street tires.Bad 2.25 60ft.Owned since 86' |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
I can't answer this fully, someone else may be able to chime in. My clearances are: mains, .0032-.0035 Rods: .0032-.0033. I guess you would consider that loose. I was limited on my options because of my crankshaft. The main clearances are fine IMO. The rods are about .001 larger than optimal. I was locked-in because I am running a left over Funny car Nitro crankshaft. The rod journals already had extra clearance ground in and were .031 under. So I had to polish and run. The mains were .023 under and I was able to grind to -.030. Oil circuit is stock other than .040' restrictors at each lifter bore. There is TONS of oil to the valvetrain.
|
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
RAIV #1: the original did manage 13.90’s @ 102 mph stock after new .030” over TRW pistons, rings & bearings with a rebalance back in the early 1980’s. On the track it was slow out of the hole with the stock suspension (stiff) with 2.20 60’ times typical and no wheel spin, just mat it and wait this the tach reaches 3000 rpm and then the RAIV would start to wake up. This engine had 10.0 to 1 compression. The heads cc’d at 70 cc’s as they were cut a couple times that I know of, but the pistons were deep in the hole (.020”?) with terrible quench. Ran great on 93 octane fuel with no ping/detonation ever detected. RAIV #2: (time was late 1980’s) was built around a .030” over 9792506 Service Replacement block, NOS RAIV heads/valves/ springs/rocker arms/pushrods/guide-plates/041 cam & lifters (thanks to the late Jim Luikens). The heads were minimally cut to ensure they were flat, same with the block, so the pistons (.030” TRW’s) were most likely .015” in the hole…not ideal quench…on stock resized cast rods. The combustion chambers measured 72 cc’s average after the cut and the calculated compression ratio was 9.75 to 1. A lot lower than we thought we were going to get. But, the fresh combo ran a better than #1 at 13.60’s @ 104+ mph (all-time best was 13.54 @ 105.6 mph in good cool fall weather). It was still a pig out of the hole with no wheel spin, but 60’ times improved to the 2.10’s and really turned on at 3000 rpm…again. Always ran 93 octane fuel and never a complaint or hint of knock. RAIV #3: An original numbers matching RAIV engine out of a ’70 GTO I owned that I was going to restore. We built the engine back in 2004 and replaced the rods with then new Eagle H-beams and pistons were .040” over Diamonds with 1/16”, 1/16”, 3/16” ring pack. The engine was ‘rebuilt’ by the previous owner when I acquired the GTO, but never fired/broken-in (a good thing as the rod bearings were in backwards and too tight, would barely spin with a breaker bar). The 614 heads measured 68 cc’s after a minimal cut and the block was zero-decked with quench set a .039” with Felpro 1016 head gaskets, RAIV copy cam w/ 1.65 rockers, etc. The calculated compression ratio was 10.9 to 1 and what a difference that made. The car now can’t get traction, so has to be finessed off the line (still has the too stiff stock suspension), but 60’ times are in the 2.0’s and has run a best of 12.85 @ 110 mph. It now needs 93 octane and 5 gals of 110 to keep it happy though, 50/50 when raced. I’ll admit I’ve never tried just running straight 93 octane in it yet as I sold the car and the RAIV isn’t mine to play with any more, but it probably would run fine if you kept out of the Q-jets secondaries. RAIV 400’s just need compression in the 10.5 to 11.0 range in order to run great with the 041 cam. A good friend of mine who grew up on L78 Chevelle SS’s said they never picked on RAIV GTO’s when prowling the streets back in the day because he’d been dusted by most he ran across (not many). Sorry about the long-winded post… Dennis |
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to SD455DJ For This Useful Post: | ||
Reply |
|
|