I want to put a motor together for a 66 or 67 Chevelle and I run across Edelbrocks power packages and thought they looked pretty good. I am new to this place and would like any advise and thought on this. Is there anything diffrent that I could do to this motor to get more HP or is this plenty with this set up. With 540 HP under the hood of a 66 Chevelle what kind of time will I be looking at in the 1/4 mile. Thanks!
540 HP in a 454 Chevy (Oval Port)


540 HP in a 454 Chevy (Oval Port) with 539 ft/lbs of torque.


Edelbrock Performer RPM Power Package Components for
454 c.i.d. Chevrolet:

Edelbrock Performer RPM 2-O intake manifold..........................#7161

Edelbrock Performer RPM camshaft kit.................................#7162

Edelbrock Performer Series carburetor (750 cfm, manual choke)........#1407

Edelbrock Performer RPM aluminum cylinder heads......................#6045

Edelbrock timing set............................................... ..#7810

Edelbrock valve springs

(supplied with Edelbrock Heads; iron heads use #5762)................#5745

Edelbrock retainers

(supplied with Edelbrock Heads; iron heads use #9731)................#9715

Edelbrock valve locks

(supplied with Edelbrock Heads; iron heads use #9612)................#9615


Shortblock Components:
Bore.............................................. ..........4.250" + .060"

Stroke............................................ ..........4.000" (stock)

Crankshaft........................................ ....factory forged steel

Rods.........

factory (polished and shot peened) 6.135"center to center with ARP bolts

Pistons........................................... ......TRW #L2399 + .060

Rings......................Speed-Pro #R9590 + .065, 5/64" x 5/64" x 3/16"

Head Gaskets........................................... .....Fel-Pro #1017


Test Engine Specs:
Main Bearings (clearance)...........Michigan 77 #MS 829 H (.0026"-.0035")

Rod Bearings (clearance)............Michigan 77 #CB 743 H (.0022"-.0025")

Piston Wall clearance......................................... .... .0065"

Ring End Gap clearance.................top ring .018" - second ring .014"

Rod Side clearance......................................... ........ .020"

Compression ratio............................................. ......9.6:1

Ignition and timing...........................36° @ 3000 RPM + MSD 6 A box

Headers.............2-1/8" Primary, 32" long - collector 3-1/2"- 10" long


Edelbrock Performer RPM Aluminum Cylinder Head Specifications
Intake port volume............................................ ......290cc

Exhaust port volume............................................ .....100cc

Combustion chamber size.............................................1 10cc

Crane roller rocker arms.........................................13750-16

Intake valve size.............................................. ....2.190"

Exhaust valve size.............................................. ...1.880"

http://www.edelbrock.com/automotive/index.html

not sure why they used 2 1/8" headers. that shouldn't be necassary on a 9.6 to 1 motor with a hydraulic cam. 2" primaries would work much better i think. i don't like that cam profile either.
but it would be an easy way to get 500+ hp, just a pretty darned expensive way to do it. i'd run the heads and intake, a nice little hydraulic roller and a HP950 Holley, 2" S/C's and bump the compression up to 10.5 to 1. it should make close to 600hp with the right cam. ;) get a recommendation from Bullit or Ultra Dyne or Cam Motion. tell them everything you have as far as motor, tranny, gear, convertor, and weight of car, and how you intend to drive it, whether it's a weekend warrior, race only, street only, etc. that way you'll get the most for your money.

Bullit or Ultra Dyne or Cam Motion.
2 out of 3 aint bad,,,,Ultradyne went out of business,,,Mr.Harold went to work for Lunati...and now a public service message " your taxes are due April 15th" :rolleyes:

I ran that exact set up, only on a 396 not a 454. My best time in the '72 was a 12.43. Like m71 said, you'd be happier with a roller cam, I'd prefer a solid roller. The headers I used were 1.75" primary tubes, at that horsepower level you don't need any more.

To clarify something, Mr. Brookshire had an employee that stole $$, which was the payroll tax deposits. HE didn't forget anything. He was eventually liable as the owner as is the law.

West, You want to get sued for libel?

Then you should shut the hell up unless you know the facts.

Here's a fact for Dan. I swapped in one of Harold's cams for a Crane I was running. The Crane is pretty close to the RPM cam you're looking at. The car GAINED over 8 mph in the 1/8 mile. That's a substantial horsepower increase.

I make considerably more power than most here in a 427 ( except Todd G , aka, 10secBu, whose 414ci motor SCREAMS!)and much of that is the Brookshire Special cam I run. "newer versions" of the grinds are avaiable through Harold at Lunati.

IMHO 9.6:1 is too light for alum heads unless it's an 87 octane motor you're looking for.

The 2.125" headers are way too big for a mild 454, although many folks use these for dyno testing. Use 1.75", or NO bigger than 2". And with 2" you better run a X crossover to help low rpm scavenging.

.065 on the skirts is a bit loose for a street motor , even with the heavy TRW slugs. Lighter SRP's use .004-.00425". You might be fine with hypereutectic cast slugs, which run tight at .002-.00275". The $200 you save there can be redeployed elsewhere.

Those are the things that jump out at me. HOWEVER, most importantly, if you want the great minds here to make educated/relevant comments, you really need to provide the drivetrain setup you are planning on. Gears. transmission. Stall, etc. Also, your use parameters? Street? Strip? What combination?

A motor should be built to provide peak effectiveness in a particular power band under certain conditions. Once that power band is set ( by drivetrain) , then you can start working on the design parameters of the enigne itself. To do so without the desired rpm band and conditions of use, would be spurious indeed.

While I have great respect for the Edelbrock name. I don't think you'll replicate the 540 hp with those particular components.

And after all is said and done, you might have been better off with a 502 crate. ( I think I make as much HP with a self designed 439 ci motor fwiw. so crate's are there for convenience IMHO.)

Usage parameters, driveline paramters please!

Dan - I can agree about the CAM - If you look at my combo, you'll see that I'm running a similar combo except the the heads and pistons. I am going to change to a Lunati/Ultradyne Design CAM after I've tuned this thing all I can. I want to optimize what I have before I change parts.

If I had it to do all over. I wouldn't have run this RPM CAM - it's anemic below 3000 and really screams above 4500. Since I don't go to the strip that often, I don't see many 4500+ blasts.

Call Harold at Lunati. JMHO.

Troy.

I'll agree with a couple of the others, the headers are way too big, 1&7/8" would be better. I've used a couple edelbrock cams and was disappointed. They are a very conservative lobe profile and don't produce like a UD or other cam with similar numbers.

RR, have you considered changing your name to NR, Nasty Robert? I wonder why you always come across as such a jerk?

Tom

If you do run the Edelbrock heads,and you want a hydraulic cam,the Lunati/UD cam 288/296H,231/239 @ .050 .550/.575 110 LSA would sure out perform the Edelbrock grind...and it would have a better idle,and make more tq/hp.

The solid UD 288 / 296 would work good too.

All depends on the rest of the setup. If he's shifting at , say, 6000, would think that the same UD276/84 I shift at 6700 ( 439 ci) would rock out.

Converter ,gears, etc etc!

Hey Tom,,,thats cuz I wanna come across just like you graemlins/thumbsup.gif :D you're my hero :rolleyes: oops I got sidetracked...1.75/3" headers will get the job done just fine, seems they support mid 10's pretty easily. Not knowing your gears or what transmission you're running, 540hp ought to get mid 11's. All the calculators that I've used, and I'm not sure how accurate they are, estimate my HP at a little over 500.

NR >> "Hey Tom,,,thats cuz I wanna come across just like you you're my hero "

I'm touched by your display of loyalty, but sorry, I'm not like Ed and don't need leg-humpers.

Tom

Those calculators are not accurate Robert. If they were, I'd be making more power than you, with less cubes and "seemingly" mismatched parts. How can that be?

Dan, primary usage and gears buddy, we're a-waiting for the rest of the story!

Gene,

Dan probably took one look at the way this thread unfolded, headed for the hills.

Tom

I think there are lots of folks here having EXCELLENT results with their bbc's, and a great wealth of knowledge. And I think we can agree that there are a few ways to make them work right.

Anyway Dan, you really need to fill in the other parameters before we can really provide a good answer. The "matched" set isn't a bad thought, but I truly don't beleive the cam is what it could be. Mine was similar and a change made a big difference.

Gene, its quite possible that you ARE making more power than I am...look at your mph compared to mine, I'm just getting more power to the ground,hence better 60ft times. I don't know how much compression you are running,and I know that you are running more cam than I am, and not sure on the gear. There are plenty cars here making more power than I am. I've been racing no/e fulltime the last two years,and I havent been worried about maximizing what I have,I've been more concerned with consistency. I accomplished my goal, I got my top 10 in points with a street car on slicks,now I'm gunning for low 11's possibly high 10's.

I think you're doing excellent Bob. Consistency is the name of the game. I'm resigning myself to the fact that a stick car , well a non race-only stick car, will never run as good an ET as an auto. I just don't believe the calculators much. People always seem to ask " How much HP". I just tell them whatever the sticker says on the aircleaner. Becuase I really don't care much.

Bob, Harold's a true gentleman, a southern gentleman, which I'm sure you'd appreciate. Just no reason to say anything negative about him. He makes a great cam. I know he's not the only game in town though.

BTW, I'm where you where a year ago. Knocking on 11.99. I'll stop right there though. Can't cage this car. Now, lets help this dude out..... I think we can agree he can do a bit better than the package deal.

They really make 540 Hp with a 9.6:1 motor>>??

awhile back carcraft built a 454; TRW l2399 pistons with about 10-1 compression, a comp hydraulic 274 extreme, roller rockers, air gap intake, 750dp, hooker super comp 2 inch headers, made 540 horse

Remember these dyno numbers are "corrected" to near optimum air density. How many cars are actually driven or raced at 60 deg F., 0 humidity, and sea level barometric pressure? Deduct a fair amount from those dyno numbers for real world conditions which vary infinitely.

Dan,

Your question has been asked here quite a few times before, if you do a search, you will find that I asked the same exact question here sometime back.

With the help of some very knowledgeable people here, I was able to build a more powerful, yet less expensive engine than the Edlebrock engine package.

Good Luck bill

One thing about this thread that has helped me is the idea that 1 7/8" headers are so effective on a BBC. I really want to try some smaller tube headers on my 69's 427,preferably an intermediate-style that will have good ground clearance.

I built a package very close to their 540hp engine. I used their heads and intake, but used a Crane 304 solid camshaft.238/248@.050,544/567 lift. I also went with TRW 2465 pistons which checked at about 10.4:1 compression. I used the Hooker 2" headers and Harland Sharp rollers in place of the Cranes. I'm running a Holley 800DP but after reading some of these post, I'm thinking about a 950. I don't have any dyno #s, but have been fairly pleased with this combo. Car is very heavy, but runs high 11s in good air.

Gene, NHRA changed the rollbar/et requirement to 11.49 this year! I think that IHRA has been the same for a while now.

No reason to hold back anymore!

:thumbsup:

Did you guys notice the date on the postings in this thread? :p

:clonk: Holy smokes.... better pay closer attention in the future

No wonder my mess don't run. I don't pay attention!

http://www.chevelles.com/showroom/Epistuff/133oldthread.jpg