Ok. I had a long (and good) talk with the shop that is doing my cam swap. Very knowledgeable guy, and pointed out a few things, some I liked, some I didn't (the date codes on my block don't match(!) (pad stamp and date code on the bellhousing don't match...)). He said my oil problem was from not running the car long enough often enough to get the oil temp all the way up.
He said he thinks the piston clearance is acceptable for now, but I have to keep a better eye on the oil temp. I had changed it about 250 miles ago, but he used a few colorful adjectives to describe it, and well, it doesn't look like 250 mile old oil. But-- No new pistons, rings, bearings, crank, etc.
But he did say this. He got it up on his dyno, (and just for a note here, he was surprised how quiet and free flowing the dynomax hemi super turbo mufflers are, and said the motor sounds like a "kitten" compared to anything else he runs) and made 540hp through my headers and my mufflers. He also said that my mph should have been 120-- and not 113, and that I am missing about 90 horsepower somewhere along the line.
He said he thinks it is the fuel pump. I was going to go with one of his electrical units, but, I had already bought a carter 172 and some -8AN stuff. The line from the tank starts 3/8", but switches to 1/2" right away, then goes 1/2" all the way to the frame opening, then goes 3/8" rubber to the carter 120 street pump, then metal and rubber 3/8" line from pump outlet to the filter and carb feed.
What I have now is a carter 172, the 3/8 to 1/2" right at the tank, 1/2" down to the frame, then 1/2" fuel line to 8AN line adapter, which goes to a 8AN to 10AN adapter, which screws onto the fuel pump inlet, then 8AN outlet to a 8AN fuel filter and 8AN carb feed.
He said he has already welded a o2 sensor bung into my headers and said that one day I should borrow his AF meter and go down to the track anyway even with this system and said I will probably run lean, but he said if I was a blower motor, the thing would already be in parts at the top end of the track because I'm probably hitting 15:1 or 16:1 AF down there.
So do you think I lost all the HP in my fuel system? Irrespective of the 3/8" line at the tank, wouldn't I "store" way more than enough fuel in the 1/2 line from near the tank, and all the 8AN line up to the carb?
Or should I be looking somewhere else too?

Matt (breathing easier..)

You're saying the engine does 540HP not in the chassis, but on a dyno with your exact exhaust, but not running acc'ys or a transmission. So the difference must be fuel or acc'y/ transmission. Right? Check the sock on the tank pickup?

Hard to make comparisons Matt, but with a stock fuel system ( checked sock and replaced a particularly 'kinky' length of line from tank to frame rail), AC mech pump, it'll show bests of 118 mph or so. I can see where he'd be looking for 120, it is certainly making more power tahn the 427.

Go buy a milk shake.
Now pinch the straw off at different points along it's length while drinking.
See if it makes any difference from one end to the other how much shake you can pull.

Once the level in the bowls drop, the fuel going into the intake drops.

You can drill and solder in some 1/2" yourself.
Or have someone do it for a small charge.

I didn't think hemi supers fit under a chevelle.
But at 540hp, I'd think they are a restriction.

Yeah my mistake on that one. its 540hp with accessories and through my exhaust/mufflers. He said the muffs weren't as good as some of the spin techs he prefers, but was surprised they performed as well as they did.
But that is what he is saying-- the bowls are probably foam by the end of the track.

Matt

I guess what I am wondering is that is if I get the 3/8" at the rear of the tank fixed, and I run 1/2" and 8AN all the way to the carb feeds, is that going to be enough? Or is this electrical only territory?
I also throw this question out because the 540hp is *before* the cam swap. I didn't get quoted any numbers, but I am expecting a pretty big change (for better or worse). When I told him on the phone 4000lbs and 113mph, he said probably about 450hp on an engine dyno. He was very surprised to see the numbers he got.
Now the cam is going in, he is hoping it will all be done friday. But its going from 286 @ .006, 230 @ .050 152 @ .200 .639 110 hydraulic roller to a 287/291 @ .020 256/260 @ .050 170/175 @ .200 .643/.643 solid roller. So I am wondering about the capabilities of a 1/2" line from the tank to the carb, with a carter 172..
The whole setup is going on a chassis dyno before it leaves the shop, I expect maybe this saturday.

Matt

Did you check the sock?

Gene, I have looked at the sock in a while, I know it was replaced about 8 years ago (the whole pickup was). I'd hate to think its extremely dirty, but I will get a look at it when it gets back to the house.

The 8AN fittings, pro-lite 350 hose, and carter 172 are still NIB.. I'm just trying to figure out if I should have an electric fuel system put in while the car is still at his shop or not. I figured I would be able to do just as good with a carter 172 and big line vs. the electric given what I do with the car. But I'm not so sure now.

matt

Your car made 540 HP at the rear wheels?

nah, not in this form anyway.. thats like turbo-zone.. 540hp on an engine dyno, with the accessories on and through my headers and exhaust. Not on a chassis dyno. The only thing that seems certain right now is I have a 77 or 67 block that was stamped to look like a 1970 LS5 on the pad up front.

It is just alot of arrows are pointing toward fuel delivery issues at the long end of the track, and if it made 540hp before the cam swap and is having trouble, I'm wondering if an upgraded mechanical pump setup is going to cut it.

matt

Put -10 in the tank and see if the 172 will support it. Plenty of 600HP cars on TC using them. They use those pumps on NASCAR motors don't they? Good for 700HP? With -10 or -12 I think.
If the 172 isn't enough, then your ready for a big E pump already.

540 with that little cam. WoW!
That a 496 isn't it?

Nope.. 460.. 4.280 bore, 4.00 stroke. I think what is at issues with the cars in nascar engines is that the gas tank is elevated.. They will support alot more HP with an elevated tank that is 6 feet from the engine than a down low tank 15 feet from the engine.
thats how it got explained to me anyway...

matt

Elevated tank 6 ft from the engine? Hey, don't forget to close the stop cock, else your gas tank will be in your oil pan the next morning!

Well 8 years is 8 still years Matt. Seems like one of those things that folks forget to check, and end up chasing their tails on a fuel issue, only to find a gummed up sock or something.

What shape is that 3/8s in. rubber line in at the tank and the fuel pump? It isn't collapsing is it?

I'll pop the pickup out when I get it home. I don't know how exactly this happened, but the cam swap shop just dropped the front of the oil pain to do the swap, and he called me up and said the fuel pump pushrod is trashed-- so that may be it too. It's not "bent' either, he used the term "melted." Why doI feel like an irresponsible parent right now? heh.

Any idea why this would happen?

matt

A roller cam will usually require a bronze-tipped fuel pump pushrod...maybe that's what happened!

I'd hate to think they forgot the bronze tipped rod when the engine was refreshed last year. Makes me wish I wanted to learn how to do all this stuff myself. I'll have to talk with the shop to try to get to the bottom of it before the new pump goes on.

redface.gif
Matt

Let's see: one "hammered & melted" fuel pump push rod = less fuel pump stroke = less fuel delivery.

For sure other factors could be at work, but your Carter 172 should be fine. A 172 pump still had almost 5 psi at the carb @ 6,500 rpm on my 640 hp 496.

You might be suprised how easily the fuel pump sock can become a restriction - fuel additives used these days can be harsh on the tank sock.

Thomas

I'll check the sock out when the car gets back home, but what I am wondering is what could have caused the pump pushrod to grenade like that, assuming the correct fuel pump pushrod was used?

I'll talk about it with the shop its at, but any things I should ask about specifically? I'm glad this was caught now, I'm not sure what would have happened if I kept driving around on it. I wasn't around in the 1960s-70s. Were all cars this much of a pain in the butt back then? heh.

Matt

The '60's were glorious performance years - but a 11 second street car then was much like a 9 second street car is now: talked about, but seen by few people.

Seriously, hot rods were slower then. Think about it: hard narrow tires, stone age (okay, maybe bronze age)cylinder head technology, drum brakes on all four corners, dual point ignitions, et. etc.

In favor of yesteryear: super high octane available at the pump all around town, fuel without the harsh rubber and plastic eating additives as used currently, simple solid lifer flat tappet cams, cheap speed available all over the place, definitely a greater percentage of the population were performance enthusiasts, parts and cars were CHEAP!

Then the insurance companies figured out that there was a relationship between a car's power to weight ratio and its rate of claims, emissions regulations became a reality, the Vietnam war became more and more depressing, and later a fuel crisis deep sixed performance thoughts for a large number of people.

There was good and bad in the '60's and '70's, as is true of most all eras.

Thomas

I installed the carter 172 GPH pump on my car last year and it collapsed my fuel sock and rolled it up! :eek:

Been running my $30 used Carter 172 pump for over a year now,no problems graemlins/thumbsup.gif

If it's the comp hydraulic roller then you don't need the bronze tipped pushrod, as the cam is not billet, it's cast. Also, it's only plated at one end.. the cam end, so you'll have to look at another reason for the rod failure.

On a seperate but related issue here; what do the rollers on the lifters look like?? Which lifters did you use??

Originally posted by Bomber '67:

Seriously, hot rods were slower then. Think about it: hard narrow tires, stone age (okay, maybe bronze age)cylinder head technology, drum brakes on all four corners, dual point ignitions, et. etc.

Thomas Hey, hey, watch it there bud, that's Old Red you're talking about. Well least he's got some rubber.

He, He!! pdq67

Matt....you need to focus on your 60 ft.
period!

I'd like to, but this thing has roll bar written all over it in different colors, and its not gonna happen to this car.

I'm already eyeballing for new 70's, even w/o engine/trans. I am thinking like a 5+ year timeline to start, but this car is going back to the way GM made it, and some unlucky 1970 shell is getting every aftermarket part thats on this car, a cage, some paint, and the heads/intake off of my block. I can't butcher a documented ls5, even if I have some question as to whether the block is the original one or just a date coded one stuffed in there, but the trans and rear check out fine.

thats my plan anyway. the thing gets enough adrenaline pumping as it is, I don't know how another 100hp is going to feel, and certainly not on a set of 28 or 29" slicks...

not to sound like an idiot, but I don't think I'd have swapped the cam if I had realized the full potential of this engine, but I think it was limited somehow when I brought it to the track by the fuel pump issue. I don't see it in my 1/8mi mph, but maybe there is more to it, the guy who dyno'd the current form of the engine said 120 not 113 (he wanted to get a baseline before/after before the cam swap), and judging by his experience, I figure somthing near there was appropriate. He heavily suggest running an AF meter in any performance vehicle, maybe I should look into it.

matt

Quote by Matt "I'm already eyeballing for new 70's, even w/o engine/trans. I am thinking like a 5+ year timeline to start, but this car is going back to the way GM made it, and some unlucky 1970 shell is getting every aftermarket part thats on this car, ",

I hear ya. That's why Old Red is an "ancient" car according to Thomas. Not really, but why I tried to keep things looking stock exe the powertrain.

Early 80's Regals/Bu's make AWESOME drag platforms. Cheap too. Add shocks, springs, running gear and cage, and shazzam, low 11 bracket car, 10's with experience and tuning.

I'll either end up with a bracket car or a jr. dragster, but not both. The Chevelle? Well, the plans are in the making for a very docile 496. Collecting parts as we speak!

Actually, I'd like to keep running the L88, but in a neat little 2500 lbs chassis. Easy 10's.

How about a 63 split window look alike for 10G's rolling.Tubed, Dana, coil over, Dzus'd body panel Add rat, 4.88s or 5.13s and PG and go. smile.gif

Someday when I can afford a 'cheap' 15K billboard. For now, I' in 'savings purgatory' for a while... graemlins/waving.gif