I'm building a 496 for my chevelle and I would like to hear some opinions on the ET potential for the car. MOTOR: 496, Eagle 4340 crank, Eagle h-beam 6.385" rods, SRP 18cc domes (approx 9.8:1 CR), solid roller cam (not selected yet, but will be in the area of 250ish @ .050 and .650ish lift), Dart Pro 1 310 (untouched, out of the box), Holley Strip Dominator single plane, Holley 850 dp, MSD Pro Billet and MSD 6AL. TRANS / REAR: TH400 auto with 10" TCI Streetfigher, 3600 stall. 12 bolt with 3.73. CHASSIS: Jegs adjustable rear lower control arms (like southside machine lift bars), Jegs adjustable rear upper control arms, Comp Engineering adjustable drag shocks on all 4 corners. M/T ET Street 28x12.5. Weight is 3950 (yikes) with fuel and me in it.

I have all the parts except for the cam, so I'm pretty close to getting this motor together. I was hoping to run low 11's on the motor and I'm wondering if that's possible. If anybody has a cam recommendation, that would be cool, too.

I look forward to hearing from some of you folks.

Thank You.

I don't think there should be any doubt that you'll be in the 11's, but where in the 11's is the question (as I know you're asking). I think it will have to do greatly with how the car hooks as well as your launch technique. I'm not sure if you'll have enough power to get you in the low 11's. I'm not saying that will be impossible to achieve with your combo, but let's just say that if I had to guess, I'd say mid to high 11's (mid 11's if you get it to hook-up real good with some consistent 1.6 sec 60' times).My opinion is based on the assumption that you'll be running the car on pump gas alone.

BTW, as far as solid roller cams go, I've just purchased an engine with one, and I haven't got the car together yet. Since this will be the first engine I've had with a solid roller in it, I cannot speak from experience on these cams, but what I have noticed while looking through camshaft company catalogues as well as camshaft profiles on their websites, is that in their descriptions of these cams, some of them say the words.."easy on valve train parts" ... and some of them do NOT say that. So my suggestion is to choose one of those that say that in the cam company's description IF you plan on running the car on the street and taching on some mileage on it. The cam that I have is described like that, so that's what I did (I made sure of that before I bought the engine). Good luck.

Paul,
I have no experience with 496s but Bob West is right at 10.9? or so with his & iron heads.
I just wanted to ask who you were using for your machine/assembly work.
Gary

I am running a 496 in mine. The difference I see is I am running merlin 310 cast irons (soon to be replaced by afrs) and 9"/w 4.56 gears. I am running very low 11's now and hope to soon be constant 10's on motor. I had comp make a cam with 251/259@50 683 lift solid roller. My car weighs 4000+ with me in it. Good luck.

Great info.

BillyGman, your comments on the spring pressure are well-spoken. I'm definitely going to make that a consideration. Paddy, I use a local machine shop for block and balancing work. I do all my own blueprinting and assembly, though. To me, that's the fun part -- and, I'm picky enough, that I prefer to measure things myself, then I KNOW what I have.

I plan to start the chassis work / tuning (pinion angle, adjust shocks, airbags, etc.) on the existing motor (396 that makes around 350 horse and runs 13.20's), just to get it in the ballpark while I assemble the 496. I know the motors are totally different, but the adjustable control arms, shocks, etc. are all brand new and I've never messed with anything but a stock suspension. I'm eager to see if the chassis stuff improves ET's with the existing motor.

I'm sure that once the 496 is in and I play with it, I'll be making other changes to run the number, like different converter, carb, and plenty of chassis adjustments.

Based on the comments so far and from what I've heard, my goals sound attainable with this setup. Not sure if my lifestyle (3 small children and my own business) will allow for it, but I really want to run this car in the NMCA Nostalgia Muscle Car class this season. The car is a stock looking resto 69, and I plan to keep the stock valve covers, air cleaner, etc. They featured that class in CC last month and it looks like a blast. I have a Cheater NOS system for the car as well, but want it to run low 11's on the motor so that I can tune it for consistent 11.50's. They don't require a cage above 11.50 in that NMCA class.

I'm using GM 781's 2.25/1.88's 120cc chambers, ported?? no flow #'s, it went 10.87@123 last weekend. I'm using the Comp Cams XR286R on a 107lsa which was originally purchased to do a 468, then got talked into a stroker by the builder and I like cubic inches ;). The cam may be wrong for the motor, but it got my 10 second timeslip :D It was all over the low 11's last year, so it will probably do what you need to do. I also tried the single plane/dual plane swap a couple times last year with a loss in 60ft and a slight increase in mph with the Vic JR. I'll try the swap again after I get the new heads on it.

I'm using GM 781's 2.25/1.88's 120cc chambers, ported?? no flow #'s, it went 10.87@123 last weekend. I'm using the Comp Cams XR286R on a 107lsa which was originally purchased to do a 468, then got talked into a stroker by the builder and I like cubic inches ;). The cam may be wrong for the motor, but it got my 10 second timeslip :D It was all over the low 11's last year, so it will probably do what you need to do. I also tried the single plane/dual plane swap a couple times last year with a loss in 60ft and a slight increase in mph with the Vic JR. I'll try the swap again after I get the new heads on it.
I'm about to start on my 496 project and reading this post lifts my spirits up! I am also going with 781 heads but with 2.19 /1.88 valves. I don't expect a high 10 second 1/4 but do expect high 11's . Sorry didn't mean to B*TT in :D

i to am going to be building a 496. i will be using semi- closed chamber heads with the biger valves. when you build a 496 do you have to clearance the block?? for the rod bolts.

i to am going to be building a 496. i will be using semi- closed chamber heads with the biger valves. when you build a 496 do you have to clearance the block?? for the rod bolts. I think that might depend on whether or not it will be a stock factory block or an aftermarket block. I also believe that it will depend on whether you'll be using H-beam connecting rods or I-beam. From the engine specs I've read in the past, I'm under the impression that H-beam rods provide a bit more clearence w/out having to relieve the block.

I was hoping to run low 11's on the motor and I'm wondering if that's possible. If anybody has a cam recommendation, that would be cool, too.

I look forward to hearing from some of you folks.

Thank You. Low 11's should definitely be attainable with that engine. My 496 has GM Performance oval port heads, a dual plane intake, and an Ultradyne 288/296F10 mechanical flat tappet and runs 117 mph in the 1/4. Weight is ~3900 lbs. I've seen cars ET in the low 11's with less mph. Of course, they're hooking very well. Your engine combo ought to put you in the 120's. Only thing you may want to look at is a larger carb. I'm running a 950HP and it is not too big.

A 1000HP would get my vote! Mid to low 11's would be my guess with some traction. The 3.73's and the converter might limit you a little. You are on the right track with your cam. A little more lift than .650 would be better with those heads. Depends on how much you plan to drive it on the street. Something around .680, on a 110 would be my choice. JMHO.