Hmmm.. forged insides, vortec heads, efi, custom headers and dos turbos - all hanging off a 307. What do you think, 500 horses? smile.gif

Nothing wrong with that imho!!

TT's can make up for the small bore the 307 has..

He He!! It has the potential to make as much hp as the block can withstand if you can get fuel with high enough octane to feed it at max. boost when you have the waste gates turned all the way up!!

Please check over at Pro-Touring b/c there are a few TT car's there as well as I think Jody's car over at team camaro, (handle "Camcojb")..

pdq67

Wow, that is lavishing a lot on a 307. From a dollar vs horsepower standpoint it wouldn't win any prizes - but you could claim the special bragging rights of "yes, it is a 307".

500 hp is entirely feasible, it is not hard at all for a tubo engine under boost to make double its naturally aspirated power.

As an alternative you should check out Popular Hot Rodding's Engine Master's Challenge from two years ago - John Beck/Pro Machine won third place with a 307 based engine that made well beyond 500 hp.

Thomas

It'd just be rockin hardcore to blow by a big block with the "economy" v8... plus it'd be no's matching hehehe

Or you could 40 over a 302 and call it a 307.

I would not even attempt to TT a 307. The whole concept of forced induction is airflow, and 307's do very little of that. The small bore eliminates any attempt to put a head on that might make kind of power. IMO building a TT 307 would be a huge waste. You could put whatever parts you were planning on using into a 302, 327, 350, 400 and probably increase HP by at least 30%.

Originally posted by dennis68:
I would not even attempt to TT a 307. The whole concept of forced induction is airflow, and 307's do very little of that. The small bore eliminates any attempt to put a head on that might make kind of power. IMO building a TT 307 would be a huge waste. You could put whatever parts you were planning on using into a 302, 327, 350, 400 and probably increase HP by at least 30%. =
Ok,,,, while I will agree this may not be the best combination or even anything I personally would build,, I just gotta ask,,, why exactly won't a 307 flow air & why can't you put a decent head on it :confused:

Anyone know how much $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ they are wanting for one of those TT SBC's anyway?

Dragn70....how cool would a turbo sound in a wicked 10,000 RPM .040 over 302. That would be awesome, and i bet it would rock most anything it lined up against, but youde have to gear the heck out of it. But man would that be cool

You know that there is Bench racing, well I'm gonna invent another one: "dream racing". The hallmark of dream vs bench is "wouldn't it be cool" followed by some abstract like "10,000 rpm" etc. At least in my mind most bench racers "put together" feasible buildups, just mostly that they lack the resources to pull it off in real life. Dream racers on the other hand do not understand the relationship between stroke and rpm, or the requirements of a 10,000 rpm valvetrain, or that one of the reasons for selecting twin turbos so that all the hp and tq can be dialed in at sub astonomical rpms.

Wolfie, does not the smaller bore size of the 307 place some limits on head selection vs a 327/350 etc?

Thomas

Sorry, I was away. The bore size of the 307 limits head selection and totally prevents running 2.05's (ask me how I know). When building forced induction motors (my forte) head flow is crucial to extracting max HP. It makes no sense to spend 10K on turbo’s and exhaust and sacrifice 100+HP to bolt it on an engine that barely reaches 80% VE. Even with a 2.02 the intakes are so sooo shrouded by the cylinder wall it's almost a waste to run them.

Hi Thomas,
Definitely puts limits on the valve size. 2.02 is the limit & 1.940 would probably be a better choice.

Dennis,
This does not mean you cannot put air through a 307 & my question is still why can't you flow enough air in a 307 to make reasonable HP if that is your desire, not disagreeing with your statement about efficiency.

You do not need a 2.05 intake valve to make 500HP in a small engine.
You only need enough port to support the amount of air it takes to make the HP you want at the RPM you want to run the engine too & if you increase the pressure above the port it will flow more air for a given size even though the efficiency goes to hell just as a carburetor will flow more than it's rated CFM if you have enough pressure differential.

The original question was about a 307 & if the gentleman wants to keep the original engine & build it,,, hey, it can be done & will make power.

So,,, to repeat myself while this is not something I would personally build & while I completely agree that there are a lot of combinations of bore & stroke more efficient at making power,,, 500HP is not even close to a problem with a 307 ;)
You could also argue that building a 283 is not real bright but a lot of people love em & to me this is reason enough for them to build it.
A 307 ain't nothin but a stroked 283.
Again,, neither would be my choice,,, :D

I don't even do turbo stuff but if I were my choice would probably be something on the order of a big bore 350 like 4.125x3.25 or a 377 type deal.

Mike I think we agree, but differently. I never said you couldn't do 500HP with a TT307-I just said why?? With those same parts in a 377, as you suggest that engine would be at 600HP with the potential to make 1000HP. I do agree with 377 statement, always been my sm blk of choice.

If I had the money, and was really bored and curious, I'd build it, but not as a 307ci. I'd bore it and stroke it, and of course, slap on some good flowing heads. It's be a 333ci of course ;) :D

Dennis,

I will tell you what I will do!!

I will build a 292/283 motor and put it in my car and gear it and tire it and we will see how well a small bore motor can go!!

Back in the day, they turned like 525hp+ at darn near 10,000rpm or above and in tri-5's if not mistaken when they ruled the roost!!

Heck, I already have my air-head nephew's 283 to start with and a good solid cam too boot!!

Nothing beats the sound of a short stroke 283/292 or 307/327 motor at high rpm!!!! get her up above 7,000rpm and it is music to my ears!!

I would miss a gear with my old junk 301 and I swear she bounced til 8,000rpm every so often...

These kids nowadays think a 9,000rpm Honda is something but they ain't never heard or seen a 9,000rpm 292 motor!!

pdq67

Originally posted by dennis68:
Mike I think we agree, but differently. I never said you couldn't do 500HP with a TT307-I just said why?? With those same parts in a 377, as you suggest that engine would be at 600HP with the potential to make 1000HP. I do agree with 377 statement, always been my sm blk of choice. =
Actually,,, it looks like we agree completly in different words :D

You be sayin "why",,, & I be sayin I wouldn't but you could :rolleyes:

------------EDIT+++++++++

And then of course Paul would just go ahead & do it. graemlins/thumbsup.gif

Originally posted by pdq67:
Dennis,
I will build a 292/283 motor and put it in my car and gear it and tire it and we will see how well a small bore motor can go!!
pdq67 No need, I have built several 283's. Pops Chevelle was a 283, G-pops Elco was a very built 283, my first 2 Elco's were 283's the later being a Dontov cammed 283.

Hey dennis ,i really hope that wasnt some round about way to try and take a hack at somone....Actually Dennis68, theres only one way to build a 302 {307}, thats to wind the stink out of it. Hell a factory Z-28 302 was probably shifting over 7,000 RPM. Anyone building a 302 for low RPM power is wasting there time, plain and simple. Dream racing is ABOUT right, but im leaning more tward bench racing on this one. I would never have the funds to build such a creature, but if i was independantly wealthy and had nothing better to do, id build it just so i could tell you to stick it in your a$$

**EDIT** Whoops, i got the wrong guy, i apologise Dennis68, it was Bomber67 i was after....sorry

Hey Nickel, you do realize that a 302 and a 307 are completely different on bore and stroke? The 307, as mentioned before is like a stroked 283. The 302 lends itself much better to high rpms with its shorter stroke an ability to run big valve heads. 307's have no such luck with a longer stroke and smaller bore size and should be be built around a lower rpm goal.

PDQ, I know that you hold a special place for the 283, for me it is like that with 327's because that was the hot and cheaply available small block when I got started on all this drag racing stuff. Here's one that sticks with me, when Offenhauser came out with the first single Dominator manifold for the small block, appropriately named "SuperSonic", a hot 327 was their demo engine - it made ~475 hp at close to 9,000 rpm before everbody bailed out of the dyno room for fear of flying metal (it didn't blow up...that time!). I knew of 283's and 302's that made good power into the mid 8,000 rpm range, but the only ~ 10,000 rpm engines that I knew about were all Jr Fuelers with injected nitro 301's - and that was mostly possible because nitro brings its own oxygen to the party.

Okay, now that we've all flogged this topic in a few different directions when is somebody actually going to do a 307 to shut up us naysayers?

Thomas

Thomas,
Not trying to get in the middle of it all, but Nickel ever since his first reply hasnt been refering to the small 283 based 307 econbox motor... He's been talking about a 302 bored .040 over in every post.

I do realize the initial post is about the econobox 307... but thats the reason for the mixup... some of you guys are talking about a stock bore econobox 307, and some are talking about a .040 over 302.

All of the inputs are interesting, but the real issue becomes - if it is important for you to keep the matching numbers 307 motor - store it in a corner in the garage. Dropping the top end out of the equation (blowers, heads, EFI), what about the bottum end of the motor, are you going to throw all this at a near stock 2 bolt small block bottum end? How about the trans and rear? Custom headers to feed dual turbos - 700.00 - 800.00? Intercoolers, fab work?

My opinnion - if this is an original 307 Malibu in decent shape, leave it alone. It's ok to be different, but practicality has to take the lead. A Chev. 307 is designed more for torque, A Roots blower would work better here.

Want to be different, want to fit in with the High Tech crowd - go get yourself a brand new GM Vortech FI 6.0 crate that comes in the Denali for about 3800.00 and drop that in your Malibu. Feed it with a simple elec. fuel pump, get the ECM from a wrecked truck. Or better yet, get a LS6 complete with the ECM from a wrecked Trans Am or Z28 and put that in there. Throw a Vortech on it and crank out a reliable 500 ponies.

There is a test you can perform to check the integrity of the bottum end of the motor as it sits and make the process a lot more simple: Go out to the car - start it up and get to operating temperature. Now leaving the car in neutral, press the accelerator pedal to the floor and hold it there for 1 - 2 minutes at WOT. Then when the stock bottum end of the motor comes apart, realizing that you no longer have a numbers matching car issue at hand - go out and get a 350 or a 383 stroker to put in the car.

[Note : please read all of this response twice, especially this disclaimer : I am only kidding!]

Originally posted by Bomber '67:
.

but the only ~ 10,000 rpm engines that I knew about were all Jr Fuelers with injected nitro 301's - and that was mostly possible because nitro brings its own oxygen to the party.


Thomas =
Now you be talkin about little "mouses" I have a soft spot for graemlins/thumbsup.gif
The small block Blown Alcohol car I drove was a 301" BFD before it had a blower & the little sucker would almost always run over 200.
4.88 gear & a 31" (edit,32") tire,,, you can do the math!!
Also drove an AFD 354 Hemi 5/8ths stroker that would usually ET a little better but normally only ran about 185-190,,, I think it would ET about the same if you pushed the clutch in at the 3/4 mark it laid over so bad on the top :eek:

Gotta love them old deals smile.gif

Oh, BTW, never did a 307 "long stroke" :D

10,578.58 RPM up top at 200 mph!!

Sucker was hummin' ta say the least!!

pdq67

Originally posted by pdq67:
10,578.58 RPM up top at 200 mph!!

Sucker was hummin' ta say the least!!

pdq67 Slight misprint graemlins/clonk.gif it was a 32" tire not 31 but we still estimated it at 10,000+ with tire growth & probably some clutch slippage with the 4.88 & real close to 10,000 with the 4.56
Didn't have no stinkin tach, just an oil pressure gauge & if it had pressure on the starting line it was good to go :D

Hey Bomber67, You obviously need to improve your reading skills and go through a post more carefully before you try to make somone look stupid. Like Steve D said, ive been referring to a .040 302 {307}, you know.... the one with the factory 4" bore and 3" stroke. Not the economotor. Geese :rolleyes:

Well I kinda missed it too, but so what.. We're all still having a great time anyway... Nobody seems ta have gooten PO'ed yet...

And I still stand by a hopped up 292 motor kicking some serious motors tails if it is geared and tired right and in, say a '62 Duece Coupe!!

And I wouldn't be afraid to put a 327 steel crank in a 307 and do about the same thing.....

He, He!! Please carry-on..

pdq67

No B/Sin' now..

Bttt, My Jan, 2004 copy of Car Craft has a pic. of the car I saw idling away at the Ozark Street Machine Fall Nat's one year in Springfield, Missouri. Page 63 down in the lower left corner!!

It is a '69 owned by, (per the article), Jimmy and Clarrissa Spears in Springfield, Missouri, and it has the sweetest TT's on it I have ran across!!

You might try to contact Jimmy if possible AND ask him for more information about his TT conversion...

Like I said, it's a honey of a TT conversion...

pdq67

Well "geese" back to you I didn't know you were "after" me, math on a +.040 302 puts it at 307.65 cubes smile.gif Seriously, isn't this all for fun anyway :D Sorry for the sensitive types, but the original topic poster even refers to an "economy V8" - I missed(?) the part where he said 307 cubes no matter how it was achieved But if it makes you feel better - ya got me on switching the discussion over to a +.040 302.

The idea of a 10,000 rpm 3" stroke smallblock has a very small window of opportunity. The engines were at revs for only several seconds in a lightweight dragster. The greater load and longer time at revs for a heavy middleweight Chevelle would absolutely kill such an engine.

I'm hoping that PDQ does make that 292 engine. The old Popular Hot Rodding "Project X" '57 Chevy earlier in its long Pop Hot Rod history ran a similar enough engine into the 11's - and that was with a most likely heavier car. Of course the differential had 5.13+ gearing, but so what - it still launched wheels up! Lots of fun for sure.

Thomas

All this confusion wouldn't exist if you all weren't referring to your motors by displacement. Chevy never made 355s, but everyone's got one. I do (and probably always will) calling it a 350, and if one wants details I'll mention the .030 overbore. All I know is that if someone says they've got a 427, I expect to see a BBC.

That said, I suspect that a normally-aspirated high-RPM 302 wouldn't behave anywhere near the same with forced induction. You can effectively double the displacement this way, so why rev it?

Good point GTO b/c I think the article "Limefire" had a blown 302 in it that ran like a scalded dog and made something like 22mpg on the old Power Tour years ago??

Was it Pete Chappouris's(Sp?) roadster ride??

Anybody else remember this ride?? And the article??

pdq67

I'm going to do a TT307 someday. But that'll be years down the road......When I'm OLD like you guys. :D graemlins/waving.gif

Enrique LOL, one day at a time, the man with the gray beard is slowly appearing in the mirror.

One of these days I'll bump into you at Irwindale on a Thursday night or something. Once I found a 307 Malibu there, but the young guy said his name was not Enrique - so that means at least two guys are drag racing their 307 Malibus at Irwindale.

Race on.

Thomas

Originally posted by Slowpoke70:
I'm going to do a TT307 someday. But that'll be years down the road......When I'm OLD like you guys. :D graemlins/waving.gif Hey,,,,
We ain't old,, just age challenged ;)

Well,, maybe you're right as a year or two ago I noticed I started fartin dust :D

Originally posted by Wolfplace:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Slowpoke70:
I'm going to do a TT307 someday. But that'll be years down the road......When I'm OLD like you guys. :D graemlins/waving.gif Hey,,,,
We ain't old,, just age challenged ;)

Well,, maybe you're right as a year or two ago I noticed I started fartin dust :D </font>[/QUOTE]You aren't "age challenged" you're "numerically challenged" tongue.gif :D

Thomas, LOL. Well, I'm not racing a 307, its a 307 car with a 350, but I could fool anyone with the times it runs!

Guess when it recovers from the car crash, I'll try winding her to 5500 RPM and see if she finally runs like a 350 should. The 3.36/posi should help too.

He, He!!

"Farting dust!"...

I don't know about that b/c I usually have ta wipe after a good rip!!!

The pucker isn't as tight as it used ta be, I guess???

LOL. LOL!!! ROTFLOL!!!!!!! He, He!!!!!!!

pdq67

Your crazy Paul, crazy. Crazy old man, hey that's what i wanna be when i grow up, how do you get there? :D

Dang Enrique, 350 huh? Hopefully you will get it figured out and have it running more like a 350 should.

Enough with the old man stuff, I'll trade off acquired knowledge for youth anyday.

Thomas

LOL, I know, I just like making you guys feel old. I can only wish to have learned what you guys have learned by the time I'm your guys' age.

Yeah, it doesn't run like a "350 should" but every other similarly equipped 70-72 I've found at Irwindale runs about the same times as mine. I think the key is in the gearing, the one car out of the bunch that runs in the mid 9s is either a 3.36 or 3.55 geared car with a posi. Makes all the difference. I've driven his car on the street before and it feels like a monster compared to mine and the compression/heads/cam are exactly the same. Both of us run 8.5:1 350s with the "Performer"-type cams and smog heads.

Enrique, its a hijack of this post, but what do you say that we turn "Slowpoke" into one of those misnomers that is anything but slow.

Start a new topic, or email me everything you know about your car, or just show up in Garden Grove this weekend and I'll pass on my thoughts for a plan of attack that meets your budget. Gearing aside, your friends car is less "exactly the same" in many small ways that add up to a big difference - trust me on this.

Thomas

I gotta see your car when you and Thomas are done with it!!! Sounds exciting :D Now if I can only get my 388 to run the way a "388 should" tongue.gif I still think I'm too slow.