| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Quasi-Traction "I have petals"

Joined: 24 Oct 2005 Posts: 3873 Location: stumptown
1986 Chevrolet Camaro Berlinetta
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Quasi-Traction "I have petals"

Joined: 24 Oct 2005 Posts: 3873 Location: stumptown
1986 Chevrolet Camaro Berlinetta
|
Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
QUESTIONS ABOUT ABOVE SETUP:
1) the heads say they have valvesprings that will accept up to a .575 lift with a roller camshaft. I read somewhere that you should subract about .03" from that if you have a flat tappet hydraulic, or with a mechanical, set your lash .03" out to compensate. Anyone know anything about this?
2) With as large a cam as I have, should I do away with the stock ball-type rockers and press in studs and go with roller rockers and screw in studs? My motor probably will be seeing a few 6000rpm blasts both on the track and Dyno, but for the most part won't be hanging out there.
3) I went with a .02" deck because the pistons have no valve reliefs, and because a 0 deck would put my DCR over 8.0 (what does this equate to with Static CR? 11.0:1?) will there be any physical interference between the pistons hitting the valves? Do you need more information to tell? If so what?
4) With #3's question in mind, should I shoot for higher compression with the cam I've selected? Its on a 110 LCA, so I dunno how that would affect tunability. This is on a carburated car, with a manual transmission.
5) Do you guys have any other comments or suggestions about the above setup being put together and ran? _________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Twilightoptics Hardcore (12sec Club)

Joined: 13 Jan 2004 Posts: 9191 Location: Auburn , WA
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 7:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Not that you tend to listen to me all that much But here are my opinions.
First off... Your quench is horrible. You wont know your deck height until you get your rotating assembly in there. I would either have the block decked, or run the .015 shim gasket. That decision would be made when the rotating assembly is in. As for no valve reliefs? Um... I would be very careful of your lift.
| Quasi-Traction wrote: | QUESTIONS ABOUT ABOVE SETUP:
1) the heads say they have valvesprings that will accept up to a .575 lift with a roller camshaft. I read somewhere that you should subract about .03" from that if you have a flat tappet hydraulic, or with a mechanical, set your lash .03" out to compensate. Anyone know anything about this? |
Your lift is your lift reguardless of cam, unless you're running a solid. If you have a solid you subtract a bit because the lash takes up some difference. But you need a dial indicator to find your TRUE lift. It doesn't change all that much though.
| Quasi-Traction wrote: |
2) With as large a cam as I have, should I do away with the stock ball-type rockers and press in studs and go with roller rockers and screw in studs? My motor probably will be seeing a few 6000rpm blasts both on the track and Dyno, but for the most part won't be hanging out there. |
Absolutely. And stay away from the HV oil pump. Get the good melling pump. Maybe swap in the good spring. I have the part # somewhere. You'll wear out those ball rockers in a heart beat. I've seen how you drive. If you have a motor that can religiously go that high, you'll hang out there. Might even do cookies at 7k like I did once! lol
| Quasi-Traction wrote: |
3) I went with a .02" deck because the pistons have no valve reliefs, and because a 0 deck would put my DCR over 8.0 (what does this equate to with Static CR? 11.0:1?) will there be any physical interference between the pistons hitting the valves? Do you need more information to tell? If so what?
|
See above. I personally don't give a crap about static since it's the dynamic that runs the fuel. My dynamic is 8.1. I can run 89 octane if I so choose. I know with mikes shaved heads to 64 CC.. we had to check valve clearance. I'd look for a set of flattop pistons with reliefs. My pistsons are only about 9cc. What's the 383 stroke? Your 11:1 seems a bit high. I'm getting 10.2:1 with zero deck. If you have pat's calculator, just run the numbers without the dynamic stroke!
| Quasi-Traction wrote: |
4) With #3's question in mind, should I shoot for higher compression with the cam I've selected? Its on a 110 LCA, so I dunno how that would affect tunability. This is on a carburated car, with a manual transmission.
|
Your compression is going to be based on your Dynamic. You want to stay in the 10:1S/8.2:1D range for Iron heads. If you had aluminum you could go a full point higher on static. Tunability? Dude, Youv'e got a carb.
| Quasi-Traction wrote: |
5) Do you guys have any other comments or suggestions about the above setup being put together and ran? |
I think that head kit is a waste of money. I'd never run spings again that werent exactly what the cam manufacturer recommended. Especially with oiling problems and cams going flat everywhere. Second, that intake sucks. You need an Air Gap atleast if you're going to be trying to build this kind of power.
Dont' forget your ARP rod bolts(find out what eagle supplies. I think Mike's were ARP), ARP main studs(Then have the block line bored), and new ARP head bolts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kage87Z Member

Joined: 19 Jan 2004 Posts: 436 Location: 12 Second Club
1969 Chevrolet Camaro
|
Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 1:48 pm Post subject: How do these numbers look? |
|
|
How do these numbers look?
HHhmmm... mostly Egyptian with a touch of Hindu influence. And, we can primarily thank the Chinese for the development of decimal notation. _________________ "Are you guys ready? Let's roll."
Todd Beamer - 9/11
Never Forget
My 69's story: http://myspace.com/69camaro454
My 87 Z/28's tale of woah... http://myspace.com/87Zcamaro383 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Dewey316 The Lama

Joined: 08 Jan 2004 Posts: 7295 Location: Bringing the tech
1990 Chevrolet Camaro RS
|
Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 1:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I would agree with everything Paul says in there. The thing you want to make sure you do, is clay your piston/valve clearance with that setup, make darn sure you aren't going to gernade thing then first time you start it.
The quench is also number #1 issue there. YOu can't really pick some of those parts until the motor is done, what is to say that there isn't pitting on the deck, and that they have to go to a zero deck? You need to know for sure what you are going to be dealing with, then get the head gasket to get you the proper quench. From there calculate away. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Quasi-Traction "I have petals"

Joined: 24 Oct 2005 Posts: 3873 Location: stumptown
1986 Chevrolet Camaro Berlinetta
|
Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the advice Paul and Dew..
The picture is decieving for the head kit though, they just use the same one that has the Vortec Performer in it.
I've also stronly considered buying a bare set of Vortecs and adding my own valves/springs/studs. Only problem is I haven't really gone around to machine shops to find out how much this procedure is going to cost me, so I haven't factored in cost. I also don't know how much the machine work on my 4 bolt block is going to be.
My Budget is about 2,500-3,000 for the motor. I can't go too much beyond that, because I need to adress a few other things on the car (tires, Suspension, working posi, finish exhaust...)
I'm having trouble finding a rotating stetup for a 383 that uses 5.7 rods, has Hyperetecutic or Forged flattops (with valve reliefs) and is Internally Balanced. I see a TON of external balanced 383 setups.
Should I just avoid the "rotating assembly kit" altogether? I'm just afraid of when all is said and done, I'll have spent 3 grand and not have a complete motor. _________________

Last edited by Quasi-Traction on Fri Dec 14, 2007 3:20 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Dewey316 The Lama

Joined: 08 Jan 2004 Posts: 7295 Location: Bringing the tech
1990 Chevrolet Camaro RS
|
Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 3:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
E-mail wolfplace from team chevelle. He will give you all the parts numbers etc, for what you need. He is SUPER cool to talk to, just be real honest with him, give him your budget, your plan, your goal.
--John |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Quasi-Traction "I have petals"

Joined: 24 Oct 2005 Posts: 3873 Location: stumptown
1986 Chevrolet Camaro Berlinetta
|
Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 3:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cool. I'll do it. Thanks John. _________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Quasi-Traction "I have petals"

Joined: 24 Oct 2005 Posts: 3873 Location: stumptown
1986 Chevrolet Camaro Berlinetta
|
Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 3:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Also paul:
When the numbers are crunched what should I be looking for with my Quench Distance? _________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Twilightoptics Hardcore (12sec Club)

Joined: 13 Jan 2004 Posts: 9191 Location: Auburn , WA
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
.040 is ideal.
So a Zero deck with a common replacement aftermarket felpro .041 gasket is perfect.
If you have a pre-balanced assembled rotating assembly:
Engine machine work cost:
$85.00 Line Bore Mains
$100.00 Deck Block
$65.00 Hot Tank Block
$150-200 Bore/hone
$40-80 Cam Bearings and Install
$XX For labor to install the rotating assembly dry to find deck height before decking.
Parts:
Main Studs About $70
Rod Bolts About $40
Rings?
Rod Bearings?
Main Bearings?
Head Work:
$150.00 Valve Grind
$100.00 Screw in Studs/Install
$40.00 Seals
$63.00 Comp Retainers
$25.00 Comp Locks
$30.00 Set Spring Height
$XX Cut Seat for higher lift
$80+ Valves
$80 Bronze Guides
You'll spend about
$80 having a new Balancer and flywheel balanced.
Even though the assembly comes balanced, it'd have been nicer to have the whole assembly balanced with the balancer and flywheel onboard. But you might be able to get away with having the two pieces neutrally balanced for sure.
Get a new balancer. A Pioneer from Competition Products. Might consider a new timing cover as well. New chain. Oil Pump. Pick up.
I'd get bare heads and have Brandon install all the parts at his shop. The prices I quoted are some his and should be in the ballpark for his shop.
Cost $190 with tax to have him do a valve grind and install new springs with proper height and seals. I'll take my next set of heads to him. I know he can do everything but I'm not sure about the screw in stud bit. But you could take them afterwards to another shop to have that done if need be.
Last edited by Twilightoptics on Fri Dec 14, 2007 7:09 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Twilightoptics Hardcore (12sec Club)

Joined: 13 Jan 2004 Posts: 9191 Location: Auburn , WA
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I still think you'll be hard pressed to do the motor alone for $3000.
It would be tight, but things like gaskets and other nit picky things will tear you down.
Did I mention you want guideplates and need to get proper length pushrods after you have the cam installed? Comp Magnum pushrods are like $80. Well worth it. They wont bend, other things will.
Oh and $25 for a lifter valley baffle.
And $265 for the good comp pro magnum rockers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
91RSVert Member
Joined: 16 May 2007 Posts: 2736 Location: AR
1991 Chevrolet Camaro RS
|
Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 7:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Internal motor I am still learning here.
The mention of pushrods not bending and all the clearance issues. IF something would have to go and bend. I am thinking pushrods would be the desired thing? Am I wrong here?
Valve=new valve, head, piston, maybe more.
Rocker=.. will a rocker actually bend? Never seen that.
Stud= heard of studs coming out
Pushrod=seems most likely choice to me?
Lifter=if its hydro, it will compress a bit, but not alot.
Like I said, I'm new to insides, so I'm open for some schooling here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rjmcgee The Hammer

Joined: 08 Jan 2004 Posts: 2328
|
Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 8:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nothing should bend.
Nothing should hit.
Start running high spring rates for aggresive camshafts and things like stock stamped rockers, stock pushrods, and press in rocker studs can and will flex and or fail. It's amazing how fast the $'s add up with the valvetrain. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
chevymad Master B
Joined: 11 Jan 2004 Posts: 5476
1987 Pontiac Formula
|
Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2007 10:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Look on the web for some of those slow motion valve train videos. Stuff you don't think could bend will be flopping all over the place. You want full control of your valves, not things bending. The pushrods will flex like a spring if you use cheap ones, lowering your lift and not following the cam profile. I see some race guys using 7/16 or even 1/2 diameter pushrods in some cases. Not needed here but gives you an idea how important it can be.
I can do most of the machine work on heads, except for the screw in studs. My milling maching is so old there's no way to set it up correctly to mill the stud bosses down. All my equipment is ancient, labor intensive stuff. But it does pretty decent work if pay attention. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
alloy T56 Elitist

Joined: 25 Jan 2004 Posts: 1716 Location: Vancouver, WA
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2007 1:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Brandon,
From what I read a piloted counterbore seems to be the best way to cut the stud bosses down. You would still have to get fairly close to the correct angle with the head of your mill, but with the polited tool I think it would be doable.
You could use a large drill motor with a piloted counterbore, but the problem there I see is depth control, and matching the height of the cut down bosses so your guide plates wouldn't be at an angle.
I'm debating whether to grab an end mill and just run it across the bosses, or order a counterbore to cut my stud bosses down on the vortecs I have. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
chevymad Master B
Joined: 11 Jan 2004 Posts: 5476
1987 Pontiac Formula
|
Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2007 5:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This thing is an antique... say 1950s. It's a rotary broach. Overhead clamps and you level the part to the table across the cutter head. Think it would be a huge pain in the butt to set up just to mill the rocker bosses. I debated doing what you're talking though with the valve guide/seat machine. It's basically a big slow moving drill press that has positive stops you can set for depth etc. Would just have to come up with a way to get the rocker bosses perpendicular to the table.
I bought a cutter for cutting the valve guide bosses down. It cuts the guide for positive seals as well. Got the guides to do both bb and sb's. It really wasnt all that expensive. Can also do hardened seats etc. But again I bet these machines are 1970s tech at best. So its really up to the operator on how good things come out. Still using stones to do the 3 angle seats, and have an ancient old black&decker valve grinding machine. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
alloy T56 Elitist

Joined: 25 Jan 2004 Posts: 1716 Location: Vancouver, WA
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2007 5:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That's the catch, getting the angle right. If it's off even a little then the rocker stud will be angled and change the rocker arm geometry...........move the rocker closer or further from the valve centerline.
A piloted counterbore usually doesn't have a very long pilot. The one I was using on a landing gear beams today only has about a .250 long pilot. The entire counterbore is used on about a 1.00 deep fixture to ensure the counterbore is lined up with the hole exactly. I don't have any variance in angle allowed on this type of part.
Do you know what the rocker stud angle is with the head sitting flat on the work table on the gasket surface? I've not been able to come up with this yet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rjmcgee The Hammer

Joined: 08 Jan 2004 Posts: 2328
|
Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2007 10:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| alloy wrote: |
Do you know what the rocker stud angle is with the head sitting flat on the work table on the gasket surface? I've not been able to come up with this yet. |
11*
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
chevymad Master B
Joined: 11 Jan 2004 Posts: 5476
1987 Pontiac Formula
|
Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2007 10:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I'll bet its 11.5* ... half of the 23* valve angle. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
alloy T56 Elitist

Joined: 25 Jan 2004 Posts: 1716 Location: Vancouver, WA
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Sun Dec 16, 2007 4:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
I was thinking of doing the exact same same with my angle finder. I have been looking online to see if I could find the spec on the angle, but so far no luck.
11.5 is going to be hard to hit. Yes my mill has a scale for angle on it, but it's not accurite enough to get the 11.5 deg. or 11 deg. needed. Maybe put a starret last word indicator on the rocker stud and run it up and down while adjusting the head to get the angle right. All I can think to do. Other than a large angle plate or sine plate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|