[69 HO FIREBIRD]

WOW!!! THIS HAS BEEN A GREAT POST. THIS HAS TO DO WITH DIFFERENT METHODS FOR MAKING POWER & MAKING YOURSELF HAPPY WHILE DOING IT. SOME PEOPLE WANT TO GO AS FAST AS THEY CAN AS EASY AS THEY CAN.(EASY BEING A RELATIVE TERM)& AS SUCH BUY POWER RIGHT OUT OF THE BOX SO TO SPEAK. THEY GO FAST & ARE HAPPY & THAT`S GREAT.WHILE OTHERS SEEK WHAT THEY PERCEIVE TO BE MORE OF A CHALLENGE & STRIVE TO DO MORE WITH LESS. FOR EXAMPLE - HAVE YOU EVER GOT YOUR DOORS BLOWN OFF BY SOMEONE WHO HAD 1/2 AS MUCH $ INTO THEIR MOTOR AS YOU DID ? OR HAVE YOU EVER KNOWN OF A GUY WHO HAD JUST A CARB & COULD SMOKE THE GUYS WITH NITROUS & BLOWERS ???????? YEARS AGO I USED TO RACE A GUY LIKE THIS AT NED. HE WAS .2 TENTHS FASTER THAN ME. MY 400 USED TO RUN PRETTY STRONG - HEALTHY HYDRALIC,TORKER,HOLLEY,ETC. I`D LOOK UNDER THIS GUYS HOOD & SEE HIS IRON INTAKE,QUADRAJET,ETC & I`D BE PISSED & DUMFOUNDED. I FINALLY FIGURED OUT THAT THIS GUY OBVIOUSLY KNEW SOMETHING I DIDN`T. OVER THE YEARS I HAVE ONLY MET A HANDFULL OF THESE VERY TALENTED PEOPLE & HAVE LEARNED MUCH FROM THEM. THESE GENIUSES CAN BUY E-HEADS & GO FAST BUT DON`T CONSIDER THAT A CHALLENGE & WON`T BE HAPPY UNLESS THEY DO IT THE HARD WAY. AS GOATMAN POINTED OUT EVEN IF IT COSTS MORE TIME & MONEY IN THE LONG RUN. EVEN IF YOU THINK THESE GUYS ARE STUPID & DON`T UNDERSTAND WHY THEY DO IT THE WAY THEY DO - YOU STILL HAVE TO ADMIRE & RESPECT THEM FOR THEIR ACCOMPLISHMENTS.WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT THEY`RE IN A LEAGUE OF THEIR OWN & ARE BETTER THAN MOST OF US WOULD LIKE TO ADMIT. BTW - EVER HEAR OF A GUY NAMED JIM HAND ??? JUST MY 2 CENTS - HOPE THIS HELPS PUT THINGS IN PERSPECTIVE & DOESN`T CAUSE ANY CONTROVERSY.

[77TA]

Great post 69 !! I think you summed it up very well ! I like trying to get more out of mine with out spending more partly because I don't have the cash !!! I plan on getting e-heads someday at least its a possiability. I have been debating today after a dismal performance from my 455 last saturday 13.3 @102.4 of weather to spend big bucks on heads and stuff that are needed it seems to get this turd moving or giving up and spend that big money on a 502 Crate motor. I know if I spend the money on heads I'll be commited for life to this engine and its limitations. I got off the subject sorry !

[Larry Navarro]

skip...3 different combinations?
...lee has one, so what. he's had one goal in mind...Stock eliminator.
you been tinkerning with those combinations of yours for 10 yrs.?!!...gathering all this knowledge, and for what? to make excuses?
high temperatures, bad track conditions, muffled exhaust.
we have great weather down here now...go to the track now. let us now how it runs now!
c'mon skip,...face it... what were the best times d-ports running at PSN? mid 11's...in the heat!...through the mufflers!
i know that this post has strayed from the original topic but now you've turned it around into a "anything goes" d-port to e-head challenge.
sorry, but i'll need a years plus time to get my combo sorted out as well...i'm not running the "magical" hardware in-a-box.

[Goatman]

Brian, I use RAIV's not E-heads. 10.60's with E-heads wouldn't really be all that spectacular, if one knew what he was doing. Tell you the truth, its not all that spectacular with the heads I have, but that ET was the SIXTH pass the car has EVER made. I figure I'll go 10.40's next year once the car is sorted out.

I'm glad there are a few of you out there going fast with D-ports, I really am. But you all have said it better than I could. MOST of you feel that IF you had the initial cash, you would go with the E-heads. That is what I'm talking about. You all know that they are the BEST base for performance and D-ports are not. As long as we see eye to eye, we'll be alright.

Hope this has been as educational and entertaining for all of you as it has been for me. Later.

[71 T/A]

Goatman, running 10.60s with Ram Air IVs is actually good. Soon, you'll do better. I'd rather run that time with any iron head than with Es. It's nice to know that Pontiac cast iron can get you there. People have run 8s with your heads. After akll, they're still round ports.

['ol Pinion head]

'69 HO Firebird, Could you please take the caplocks off? All caps really hurt the eyes!

One of our more prolific & informational contributors is now resting his eyes in preparation for eye surgery, & I'm sure he will have some catching up on all these posts, coming up soon. I know I'm about to the point, I skip over all cap posts, esp late at night. Thankyou....Roger

[Skip Fix]

69 you are right it is cool to go fast with any combination and to continue to tune it to go faster each outing especially with some self imposed restrictions like using a Q jet, D ports, stocker rules or what ever.Especially with something besides a Chevy, eventhough I like some of them too.

Larry my three combos
Combo 1)1988 -First Poncho I built 455 deck .100 down to cut compression with RAIV heads(bad idea no quench, detonation city without enogh race gas). HO intake, Q jet headers 2 1/2 exhaust 3.42 gears DOT 16" tires A/C, and road race shocks and springs 12.30s 115mph open headers 12.80s mufflers.3900lbs.Drove to and from autocross events with A/C.

Combo 2) 1992 Some upper end 400 short block Started with 12.60s in good air with 6 cylinder shocks 3" mufflers and 2 1/2 "tailpipe, Added slicks 4.10s 12.40s weighing 3990 to make class.12 teens in bad air with the right headers and cam and with mufflers. Lee and I ran against each other at the PSN both with low 12 dial ins, I redlighted. His D motor wasn't in the 11s then either, more tuning time and it is now.

3)1999 Newest combo 455 E heads mild roller, started with HO intake and Qjet, HEI , still 3" mufflers and 2 1/2 tailpipes, mild roller just a step above Warren's in the shootout. With the Torker II 11.70s @115, still has the stock rebuilt TH350 that was $275 out the door, going away. Components picked for a totally different car and throw in the TA.

Larry if you want I'll even throw an "iron head" 400 in for a matchup!

[Jim Hand]

69 HO Firebird and others:

I realize there was no intent to discredit anyone in your post, and I appreciate your thoughts. However, because of previous attempts to distort what we have done over the years, and why we are at the position we are now, you and others may assume that I have deliberately not used the "required modern technology" because it was too easy! Nothing is further from the truth! I have been using my wagon for street use, show use, and drag racing for over 16 years. During that time, the body and chassis has seen over 3500 drag strip runs, and probably more then that on the street.

Yes, we have tried a lot of parts, but let me ask all these questions:

If you are a bowler, are you using the same ball and shoes that you started with?

If you are a golfer, are you using the same clubs you started with?

If you play softball or baseball, did you ever try a different glove from your very first?

I could go on but I think most will get the drift. One of the self anointed "professionals" that used to post on this board informed all that if I would have only gone to a dyno when I started, "none of the testing we have done would have been necessary"???? In other words, I would have been frozen at the original 13.60 for the past 16 years!!!

One of the most overlooked aspects of building engines in this topic and all similar topics is the rpm to be run. Until that is decided, it is impossible to accurately discuss the attributes of any part. I have always run very moderate rpm, although I now have a shortblock that is capable of more. We have kept our engine in the rpm range suitable for stock internal components. We have used stock untouched rods until last year, and TRW forged pistons. That means for max safety, I have kept the rpm at or below 5500. A 455 may well run safely past 5500 with stock parts, but I don't wish to debate that - we picked 5500 and it has been successful.

This past season, I tried some parts that allowed higher rpm, found what I wanted to know, and am now back to the stock type 5500-5600 range. However, some are already criticizing me for trying them after they repeatedly criticized me for not using them before.

What is the significance of 5500? Airflow requirements are a direct function of both displacement and rpm. Lower rpm does not require as much flow as higher rpm in a similar size engine. Lower rpm does not require a longer duration, higher rpm cam. Lower rpm does not require as much carburetion. And a lower rpm setup means that there will be more power at idle and very low rpm, and that means good throttle feel and excellent drivability on the street. I will not debate what is a "street" car, but am telling you what my goals are and have been.

The fact that I and many others have not tried some of the miracle parts that automatically put you deep into the 10's or whatever the number is now, does not mean we have chosen a "harder" or more "difficult" method to run competitively. What I have learned over the past 16 years is that the most important aspect of any good performing engine is that all parts be compatible with the rpm range to be run, and that rpm must be selected to match whatever rpm the engine will be loaded. That in turn means the power range must match the car weight, rear gears, converter style, and engine rpm range. In fact, we have chosen the easiest and cheapest method of running competitively with other similar weight vehicles that are capable of normal driving on the street. All of our cars should match what we want them to do, to be, to sound like, and to reflect our overall desires. Again, "my performance envelope" includes moderate rpm, great idle, quiet driving, smooth street manners, and competitive at the track. What we have learned in the past 16 years allows us to do just that. And this is not to infer that any of you should or would want to have the same parameters.

Is the engine expensive? Although I now have Eagle rods, and JE pistons, the engine could as easily utilize stock rods and TRW pistons for the rpm we are now running just as I have for most of the 16 years. The rods allowed an extra few cubes, which translate to 4 or 5 HP gain. The lighter rods and pistons might help slightly at higher rpm, but I doubt that they are adding much at our shift point of 5500-5600. The heads are modestly ported D ports that flow 253 @ .55 lift. Any D port head of suitable chamber size could do the same - 6X, 96, 7K3, and so on. I do have very small ports in order to match the lower rpm we run. The final and total cost of my engine is exactly what it would cost to build one just like it. Heads are available that are very close to mine for $1100 delivered. The cam costs around $70, the lifters about $70, the iron intake is pretty cheap, (or a Performer RPM is a moderate cost), a correctly setup up Q Jet is reasonable, so where is this extraordinary cost and trouble for duplicating my engine? I use the factory shop manual for clearances and assembly instructions. Lots of experience involved? Sure - just read the various material and engine specs I have posted throughout the net. You can share in my experience - we hide nothing.

That is the crux of this discussion. I have not chosen the hard way to run well. Rather, I have enjoyed my journey from high 13's to 11's using cheap and stock type parts. Keep in mind that that the 3500 runs includes a great deal of bracket racing, and we actually made more then enough money to pay for the engine! In fact, trying different combinations is probably easier to obtain the total performance we want, with "performance" defined as idle quality, good low end, excellent throttle feel at all rpm, quiet and smooth operation, and competitive results at the drag strip.

So what is the result of our efforts today? I was at the track last night at KCIR, an NRHA sanctioned track. Running at 4050# race weight, iron Q Jet intake, Mellings SPC-8 Pontiac 041 cam, Rhoads lifters, 92 octane pump gas, 3.55 gear, street legal MT ET tires, relatively tight converter, and full out the rear quiet exhaust system, we clicked off an 11.81 and 11.80. I believe these kind of numbers reveal lots about total performance.

What if I wanted to have a real race car? What would I change? First of all, I would select a much sleeker and lower body - one that doesn't plough through the air like a brick! Secondly, I would select a car with much less weight. Less weight is free power.

With the new body, I would then need to run the engine higher in rpm to develop the HP required for serious race work. That in turn would mean more airflow needed, different cam to spin to the required higher rpm, different intake system to match the added rpm, different rear gears, different converter, and of course, all of that would then require a stronger short block that would live at higher rpm. Where would I get the added airflow? My heads would provide some if I desired, or I could buy heads with more flow. The kind/type is not important as long as adequate flow for the desired rpm is available. At some elevated flow level, cost would become important, and the tradeoffs between available heads would be considered. But please understand that making this sort of change is a departure from a smooth, quiet street engine, and a big step towards a higher rpm more radical engine. Unfortunately, we can't have both in the same package. That is one of the very clear things I have learned in the past 16 years. Not that everyone or anyone wants the same package as I do, but I am simply stating the facts.

And regarding airflow, I have made two separate tests where only the heads were changed - same cam, intake, exhaust, CR, gears and converter. Does anyone know of similar tests? Not where many parts were changed, but only the heads? I clearly found that enough flow is enough and more doesn't help! The first test is documented in The Pontiac Enthusiast Magazine, March/April 1995, and showed this: When heads flowing 220 peak cfm @ 28" @ .55 lift were replaced with similar heads flowing 243, no change in ET or MPH was noted on a 5200 rpm shift point engine. Only after raising the shift point to 5500 was any change found as a result of the added flow, and it totalled .1 sec (one tenth) and 1 MPH. A later similar test was made between those 243 heads and the present 253 heads, and resulted in no gain of any kind on a 5500 rpm shift point engine. So if 253 doesn't make it quicker or faster, why would even more flow do it? As noted above in the discussion about a race engine, at some point in increased rpm, more flow would clearly be required.

And although off the subject a little, while I watched the car start and drive away for one of those runs last night, and then watched it come out of the staging lanes, I thought how great it would be for each of you to see that. Started on the first cylinder, didn't lunge when place in Drive, idled away so smoothly that no one noticed it, and when it came out of the Pro staging lanes, several spectators asked what "that wagon" was doing! After the burn-out, and while it was staging, the spectators began to watch. When it left the line with a 1.65 60' time with the wheels up, there was an uproar! And when the times flashed on the board, a lot of voices discussing that could be heard! When we finished for the evening, I loaded the spare tire and jack in the car and drove home. No cooling down, no fussing, no adding race gas, no changes at the track, simply drove there, raced, and drove home. And thus we arrive at today - a fun car that has provided entertainment, knowledge, made a few dollars at the races, looks decent, and can be driven as much as needed. Got there the hard way? No, I don't think so. In my opinion, probably the easiest and most positive method available to any of us. Jim Hand

[71 T/A]

Jim,

Do you think the 041 cam has a lot to with your 11 second capabilities? Is that cam so well designed that other cams in the 225-240 duration range are not likely to perform nearly as well with heads ported like yours, Q-jet, RPM or stock intake and 3.55s in a 3800+ weight car? In other words, at that level of performance (the kind I'm shooting for) does it not pay to go to another cam besides the 041 and Rhoads lifters and the parts yoiu're using?

BTW, do you use 1.65 rocker arms? Like I've said to run 11s and slower, you don't need anything better than the D-ports.

Jim, you keep proving what a waste it is to buy E-heads unless you're planning to run much quicker than you do.

[77TA]

I wish I lived next door to Jim. He would never have to worry about cutting the grass or any yard work if he'd only fix my car to run close to what he's running. I am so frustrated with this. I Just know it is a tuning deal but I don't know where the knobs are that I need to turn . The thing seems to run nicely just isn't making the power. Ive read everything I can find concerning POntiacs and tuning and thought I had a good grasp on it. I am prociding with the fuel Idea but I don't think its the silver bullet as I'm sure theres other problems slowing me down I mean I thought I could run mid 12's with this now Id be happy with a 108-110 trap speed then Id know the engine was making power !

[David Holmberg]

77, again, Fix your fuel system first! Then try again.

My 77 TA with a 462,6x's, RAIV cam, stock rods and TRW's, RPM intake and a 750 holley ran a 13.35 @ 109 on it's first pass with Sam's Club tires on it. With some tuning it went 12.46 @ 113 with the same tires on about the 8th pass. It weighs just under 3800lbs with me in it, 3.42 gears and a 4-speed. BTW: the Best 60 ft was 2.19...

You will not MPH on the other end without enough fuel.

Even Jim Hand with his "Simple" approach to performance puts a solid fuel system in the Super Wagon.

Don't be discouraged, just work out the bugs and track your progress, then you can pass that information you learned to someone else one day.

[Jim Hand]

71 T/A,
There is no one "best" cam. As I mentioned above, we have provided much of our experiences on the net, and info on cams is at address below. And at the same site, there is a complete presentation on cam technology and ID. Is the 041 a good combo for a 455 or larger streetable engine? I think it is, but I did give up around .05-.08 seconds when we changed from the Wolverine 234/244. Yes, I run 1.65 rockers. They provide some of the fast open/close attributes of roller setups without the cost.

Note that a cam has to provide you with all the things you want with your car so the last hundreth of a second may mislead you. If you can't drive it normally, you may want to leave that extra hundreth at the cam seller's place! And also remember that five extra peak HP may cost more performance then it gains depending on what the torque in the real driving/power range does.

Cam Information: http://members.home.net/69bird3/jhand5.htm

Street Performance: http://www.boyleworks.com/ta400/psp/featuredcars.html

For complete information on my car and engine go to Bill Boyle's Street Performance site at the second address. Jim Hand

[Scott Misus]

I think those fellas like Jim Hand and some of those stock-type racers have a little bit more gray matter upstairs than the average hobby racer. Many have technical or engineering backgrounds. Thus, it's their nature to appreciate what other engineers have designed for them (factory) and to try to work with it's advantages. Some of these guys are retired or semi-retired with grown families and have the time and energy to think about what lies in front of them. Most of us young pukes haven't got that luxury.

I fall into the other category. I possess neither the intrinsic mechanical aptitude nor the patience and time required to put a Q-Jet into the low 10's, but I have a sincere appreciation for those who are able to.

[Goatman]

I also respect everyone out there who has put in the time and sweat and tears to accomplish something that was thought to be impossible, untill they did it.

Mr. Misus' point is well taken. I am in the same boat as he is and my goals are different. I want to go a fast as I can go.....PERIOD. Hopefully some day, if I'm lucky, I'll retain the kind of knowledge that Jim and others like him have earned. Stock stuff just isn't my cup of tea.

[Floyd Hand]

Goatman,

As we all like to read about other members accomplishments, would you mind listing your specifications on your most recent car and some ET's and speed numbers?

Most everyone has his ideas on how to improve his or her cars, and that is what makes this hobby so interesting.

Floyd Hand

[Goatman]

Sure Floyd. I built this car from the ground up. The only things left from when I bought it are the glass and sheetmetal. I've painted it once and probably will do so again after the rest of the cage gets installed.

1970 GTO Judge clone. Weighs approximately 3500lbs. Rebuilt front end with polygraphite bushings as well as frame mounts and rear control arms. HAL shocks on all four coners. 29.5x10.5x15W MT slicks on Monocoque star wheels. Aerospace Component front discs with stock drums in the back.

473" motor with RAIV heads (288cfm from .500-.700), solid roller cam (.660-.680 lift) 2.11-1.77 valves (.100 longer than stock), Eagle rods, "N" crank (turned down for BB chevy rods, stroked .040), ATI balancer and flywheel, Melling oil pump, Canton pan, stock Victor intake, MSD billet distributor, MSD 6digital box, 850 HolleyDP worked over to 1050 CFM by Nickerson Performance. I use a Moroso vaccum pump becasue I've got "low tension" rings. Headers are 2" primary Hookers and my exhaust is two 4" Dynomax Race magnums. They're really loud, but they should give me no restrictions.

The motor made 642HP at 6200 RPM on the dyno with over 600ftlbs of torque.

The trans is a TH400 rebuilt by SRA Transmissions in RI. Its got an ATI manual valve body, and its uses a ATI 4400 stall 8" converter. I'll be putting an aftermarket driveshaft in the car this winter so I can use the trans brake in the spring.

The rear end is a 12 bolt, with Moser 30 spline axels (C-clip eliminator as well) and a 4.10:1 equipped Detroit locker.

I have 6 passes on this car right now. The best to date is a 10.62 @ 128MPH at Englishtown NJ, made on Sept. 1st. The best 60' occured on the same pass 1.58. This was launching off idle. Hopefully, I'll get the car into the 10.40's in the spring once the suspension is tuned.

[Floyd Hand]

Goatman,

Your car sounds real impressive. What are your shift points? Keep us imformed on your ET's as you get time to dial it in.

Floyd Hand

[Goatman]

Thanks Floyd. I shift the car around 6500. I haven't had a chance to play with my shift points either. I'd love to shift it lower, but I'll have to wait and see what next year brings.

[Skip Fix]

Larry, I just can't help giving you a hard time about the D ports when you've been an SD and HO fan for so long!! It's great for anyone to accomplish what those guys have, with D ports or round ports.

Jim has pointed out as usual what it takes to have a really good combination. That is ALL the parts have to work in the same rpm range to go really fast and it does take trying different parts with good engineering thought before you try something, as he has to get where his car is. Otherwise the car would have been in the 11s first out. Most of the stockers have done alot of testing too.Being able to know what part to try and why is what makes a "good tuner", as well as good attention to detail.

I have a friend who had some heads ported and decent numbers when I flowed them on my bench ,same as the heads Jim mentioned above, same Wolverine cam,cast iron intake , headers, Q jet as Jim has run in the 11s with and only runs 13s! The chassis and the rest of the combination is not optimized, timing is done by ear! No carb tuning. So it does take some tuning and combination swapping to get where alot of any kind of fast cars are.Not everyone can do it with the same pieces Jim has. This one is a perfect example. Chassis, convertor as well as motor all have to work together, and they all affect each other. A gear change will affect how you convertor works on the same motor.

Steve Coombs has done a great job trying different motors, with different heads and intake and carbs he posted awhile back even on a high hp motor to get it even better. I think he has even posted comparing his bigger CI D port motor and his current higher airflow and smaller CI E head motor running faster.

I chased a bog I thought was a carb problem to find it was really a chassis unloading problem. That inter-relation is where I get baffled.

I'm like some of the "younger" guys here in I've been in the low 12s for awhile and want a big jump hopefully for the 10s. I see my Buick buddies doing it all too often. After having a 400 I like the rpm too. As well as a full time job when I'm not a kid's sports event(homecoming game tonight).

I think even looking at the formulas you have to have the a certain hp to make a certain weight vehicle run the times or mph. And to get to a certain hp you HAVE to have the airflow. The Superflow formula of 0.43xcfm@10"=hp/cylinder is based on OPTIMUM CR,intake, exhaust and cam. Jim and most of these stockers have gotten all those variables right on. That doesn't just happen with any combination of parts off the shelf th efirst out.To get close a LITTLE extra airflow can still get you there(HP needed) until you work at the perfect combination.I thin kthere can be very little arguement that Round ports and E heads outflow the Dports, and a whole lot more cars in the 10s and 9s with them over D ports. The question is can you optimize your D port combination enough to get all of the available hp in the airflow you have? If so you can be in the 11s or 10s, if not you aren't.

Also some of us make some compromises in the intitial combination looking toward the future. To get to the optimum higher hp as time and money permits.Some are really a bad mismatch like the E head car running 12s. Or D ports running 14s! They all need optimizing to go to their best potential as Jim has shown, if that's where you want your car to go.

[69 HO FIREBIRD]

Jim Hand - the reference to you in my post was meant not only as a compliment but also to acknkowledge your outstanding accomplishments & hope you took it in the spirit in which it was intended. When I referenced "easy vs. hard " I attempted to qualify these terms as "relative" meaning it`s never easy to go fast but that some methods are easier than others - especially to those who perceive it to be that way.