[LESS1]

Originally Posted by rocket403

The 70’s vs the 289 Cobra

Did anyone else notice the SS454 was faster around Lime Rock Park than the Boss 302? Significantly faster actually, very impressive when you consider the Boss was Frod's Trans AM homologation special.

[oldman]

yeah kind of ironic ain't it. That one super fat, rat powered muscle car is faster than a pony car. IMO the AAR Cuda would do pretty well.

[rocket403]

The GM platform that the Cutlass Chevelle Skylark and Lemans were on was one of the better handling platforms on the road at the time, if the Chevelle was a small block with 300lbs less in the front end imagine what it's numbers would have been compared to the Mustang on the track.

[oldman]

can you imagine a 4 dr with a built 350 and suspension trolling "Boss" Mustangs on the back roads. I got into BMW with a 2000 CS, a 2800 CS and my Bro went with a 2002. My buds (Asians) liked the Datsun 510 and Fairlady, but also had a Challenger with suspension (rear sway bar etc). I was might impressed what a 340 Challenger could do with suspension and a aluminum intake etc. Mighty impressed.

[rocket403]

Here is Car Craft 1970 Drag Test

[oldman]

I did some research on the 427 Cougar. At the very end of the year the 427 Cougar were produced with a 428 CJ engine. The 428 CJ make 340 NET HP. the 427 IMO is down about 20 HP, it has a 600 cfm carb off the 390 (CJ has a 715 carm, a 780 cfm carb with truck venturies for better fuel atomization), it has the 390 log manifolds and exhaust vs the CJ with high flow exhaust manifolds and system, CJ has a ram air cleaner (don't know if there is a hole to the scoop but would assume so). So ironically the 428 CJ in the "427" Cougar is the better engine by 20 HP and MPG and drive-ability.

I have the article with a GNX vs Turbo T/A, interesting, so maybe the GNX can indeed do a mid 13 second 1/4 mile. I do think about .25 of that is because of the much better rear suspension.

[rocket403]

Found this Video of a W31 vs a Road Runner A12

[rocket403]

Olds vs Mopar

[oldman]

Olds had always been a better looking car with a way nicer interior.. Baby Blue is one of my favorite colors. Back in the day one of my buds painted his 67 camaro BB.. I was telling him don't do it, it going to look plain and be a girl's car. He did it anyway and it was awesome... My 69 camaro was of course hugger orange with black stripes.

[oldman]

so back to the top fifty. Number 1 is the Cobra, here is the link to the article:
http://www.mustangtek.com/Library5/S...ver_65-11.html

It does NOT say anything about there actual testing. The data was probably supplied to them by Shelby. The competition Cobra was test at 12.2, but the semi competition which was MUCH milder was 13.2. The pictures show a semi competition Cobra, because there was no way in Hades they were driving around the barely idling 105 octane gulping, no low end, wear out instantly races tires around on the street. Yep and 50 years not it is STILL listed as 12.2 for this short article which they did not test anything. So the pictures and the car the drove is the street car, the published data says 485 HP which is the competition's HP number. Further proof the article has NOTHING to do with the enclosed data sheet, which they probably got from Shelby, probably done on purpose. Nobody has questioned it till right now.

Sports Car Grahic test both the street and and competition models here, you can plainly see the 12.2 for the race car and the 13.2 for the street car.
http://www.mustangtek.com/Library5/S...Car_65-11.html

[rocket403]

Oldman just like your input on the Cam I have in my Olds, I just found my engine build info and here are the cam specs

Lift @0.5 230 In 236 Ex Lob 110
Int .512 Ex .523

When I rebuild I going to go with a little less cam and compression

[oldman]

I like tight lobe centers 110 or even tighter. That said you already have a large engine and don't really need the mid-range torque (also dynamic compression is going to be high), meaning the engine will have a tendency to ping in the mid-range. I probably would have spec for a little less cam:
225 / 230 on a 113 lobe center installed set straight up, you don't need to advance the cam as you have a big engine with big valves (advancing brings in some midrange).

If you want the same power as the cam now you could try the exact same spec but on a 114 or even a 116 lob center which would smooth the idle and bring in some vacuum to the party.

I base this all on the engine has a short stroke with a large bore / large valve meaning it breaths well enough but needs to rev a bit to make power.


What are you thoughts? Anybody know of a free cam doctor here is free version of "desktop dyno":
https://barnhill.bitbucket.io/
My copy of desktop dyno is like version 2... I may spring for the dynosim 6 as it shows wave dynamics:
http://www.proracingsim.com/purchasejac2.htm

[oldman]

on the ram rod race, the pure stock drags (my favorite) encourages cheater cams aka cams with fast ramp profiles. The Dart 340 article from Mopar Magazine says his 340 cam last 250 miles! The Olds needs to rev to make HP (small engine), so the trifecta of high spring pressure, fast ramp profile, and a small lifter diameter leads to valvetrain faiure.

IMO the engine rules (like the exhaust rules) should be:
roller cam allowed but engine must pull say 10 or 12 hg of vacuum. Then problem solved, guys could run cams that would last 100K miles and make the same power. The are still limited on size of cam due to vacuum

[rocket403]

I always had an issue with detonation so I had to pull timing out of it and still had to run Sunoco 94 with 110 race fuel to run hard but it would move for a what it was I would say high 12's on a radial