I <3 my torque
#1
Senior Member
![](https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/images/ranks/tgo10.gif)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Missouri
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1989 IROC
Engine: LB9
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: 3.42 Posi
I <3 my torque
I'm livening up a 350 in a shallow-geared daily driver. Another 010 block. I'm picking up some resurfaced/rebuilt 305 heads for $40 from a friend, as long they're not swirlports or a similarly bad casting. I basically want to make absolute craploads of torque with little regard for any power above 5000 RPMs and if possible, decent gas mileage. I'm using a stock quadrajet along with stock exhaust manifolds, with exhaust being about 3 feet of true duals into dual 18 inch glasspacks, with no cats. The drivetrain is a 700-R4 with 2.14 rear axle gears.
Here's my line of thinking so far:
305 heads will not only give me some good high compression, but the small 305 valves should yeild some good torque as well. Not sure what the 010's had in terms of stock internals, and I'm not sure if flat top pistons would put me out of the range of pump gas.
A Comp cams XE-250H
An Edelbrock Performer intake
The motor has 1985 truck smogger heads/cam/intake with all emissions and AC removed, and it's in a g-body with a 700-r4 (that I put in to replace a TH-200). With the stock smogger heads/cam/intake and nice cap/rotor/wires, it's actually already pulling mid to low 15s, even with the terrible axle gears.
I want some recommendations on a cam with craploads of torque and good pull to at least 4500 RPMs, maybe even to 5000. If there's something similarly affordable that will outperform the CC XE-250H with those gears, I'd be interested in it.
I'm not real sure about intake. I've considered maybe an Edelbrock Torquer II, but Edelbrock doesn't have a whole lot about it on their site, and I haven't seen much feedback on here about it.
Just looking for suggestions. I'll likely do the build with the XE-250H and Performer, but I'm open to any suggestions.
Thanks!
Here's my line of thinking so far:
305 heads will not only give me some good high compression, but the small 305 valves should yeild some good torque as well. Not sure what the 010's had in terms of stock internals, and I'm not sure if flat top pistons would put me out of the range of pump gas.
A Comp cams XE-250H
An Edelbrock Performer intake
The motor has 1985 truck smogger heads/cam/intake with all emissions and AC removed, and it's in a g-body with a 700-r4 (that I put in to replace a TH-200). With the stock smogger heads/cam/intake and nice cap/rotor/wires, it's actually already pulling mid to low 15s, even with the terrible axle gears.
I want some recommendations on a cam with craploads of torque and good pull to at least 4500 RPMs, maybe even to 5000. If there's something similarly affordable that will outperform the CC XE-250H with those gears, I'd be interested in it.
I'm not real sure about intake. I've considered maybe an Edelbrock Torquer II, but Edelbrock doesn't have a whole lot about it on their site, and I haven't seen much feedback on here about it.
Just looking for suggestions. I'll likely do the build with the XE-250H and Performer, but I'm open to any suggestions.
Thanks!
#3
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Loveland, OH, US
Posts: 18,457
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
15 Posts
Car: 4
Engine: 6
Transmission: 5
With typical flat-tops you will be at about 10½:1 CR... WAY out of the range of the possible with that sort of a cam. If that's what you've got, I would suggest not building this, and start looking for some other parts instead.
If the pistons have a 15cc dish, you'd end up at around 9½:1; which is about as high as you could go with a cam that will make THAT MUCH cyl pressure at low RPMs.
Changing the induction system won't change this basic mismatch.
The T2 would be one of the absolute worst possible intake choices..... for this, or just about anything else. The Performer would be the way to go for the purpose at hand.
If the pistons have a 15cc dish, you'd end up at around 9½:1; which is about as high as you could go with a cam that will make THAT MUCH cyl pressure at low RPMs.
Changing the induction system won't change this basic mismatch.
The T2 would be one of the absolute worst possible intake choices..... for this, or just about anything else. The Performer would be the way to go for the purpose at hand.
#4
Senior Member
![](https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/images/ranks/tgo10.gif)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Missouri
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1989 IROC
Engine: LB9
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: 3.42 Posi
Originally posted by thirdgen88
TPI..
TPI..
![Cool](https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/images/smilies/cool.gif)
![Big Grin](https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
Last edited by 80smetalfan; 05-16-2005 at 12:03 PM.
#5
Senior Member
![](https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/images/ranks/tgo10.gif)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Missouri
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1989 IROC
Engine: LB9
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: 3.42 Posi
Originally posted by RB83L69
With typical flat-tops you will be at about 10½:1 CR... WAY out of the range of the possible with that sort of a cam. If that's what you've got, I would suggest not building this, and start looking for some other parts instead.
If the pistons have a 15cc dish, you'd end up at around 9½:1; which is about as high as you could go with a cam that will make THAT MUCH cyl pressure at low RPMs.
Changing the induction system won't change this basic mismatch.
The T2 would be one of the absolute worst possible intake choices..... for this, or just about anything else. The Performer would be the way to go for the purpose at hand.
With typical flat-tops you will be at about 10½:1 CR... WAY out of the range of the possible with that sort of a cam. If that's what you've got, I would suggest not building this, and start looking for some other parts instead.
If the pistons have a 15cc dish, you'd end up at around 9½:1; which is about as high as you could go with a cam that will make THAT MUCH cyl pressure at low RPMs.
Changing the induction system won't change this basic mismatch.
The T2 would be one of the absolute worst possible intake choices..... for this, or just about anything else. The Performer would be the way to go for the purpose at hand.
Last edited by 80smetalfan; 05-17-2005 at 01:51 PM.
#7
Senior Member
![](https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/images/ranks/tgo10.gif)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Missouri
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1989 IROC
Engine: LB9
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: 3.42 Posi
I'm thinking these heads just won't work unless they're older 8.6-1 LG4 heads. I've had people tell me that using the dished pistons with them will kill my quench.
Would using .051" or similarly thick headgaskets make up enough extra cc's to help me out with compression?
Would using .051" or similarly thick headgaskets make up enough extra cc's to help me out with compression?
Trending Topics
#9
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Loveland, OH, US
Posts: 18,457
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
15 Posts
Car: 4
Engine: 6
Transmission: 5
I did my CR calculations with a .039" head gasket. The 2 numbers I gave, were for a 9cc chamber volume difference.
8.6:1 LG4 heads are 58cc, same as L69 or LB9 heads. The lower compression in the early LG4s came from dished pistons.
If you can find a head gasket that holds 9cc more in its bore than a .039" one, then it will get you where you need to be. That's about .080". Somehow I think this could be a low probability.
Sounds to me like you simply have the wrong ingredients for what you want to build. You either need to build something else with them, or replace them with what you need for what you want to do.
8.6:1 LG4 heads are 58cc, same as L69 or LB9 heads. The lower compression in the early LG4s came from dished pistons.
If you can find a head gasket that holds 9cc more in its bore than a .039" one, then it will get you where you need to be. That's about .080". Somehow I think this could be a low probability.
Sounds to me like you simply have the wrong ingredients for what you want to build. You either need to build something else with them, or replace them with what you need for what you want to do.
#10
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Pensacola, FL
Posts: 1,104
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: 1999 Saturn SL2
Engine: 4 cylinder
Transmission: 4-speed automatic
Originally posted by DevilsAddvocate
2.14 gears???
2.14 gears???
![doh](https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/images/smilies/doh.gif)
![Confused](https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/images/smilies/confused.gif)
#11
Supreme Member
![](https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/images/ranks/tgo10.gif)
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Caldwell,ID
Posts: 5,388
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Car: 2005 BMW 545i
Engine: 4.4L N62B44
Transmission: 6spd auto
Axle/Gears: Rotating
Originally posted by 80smetalfan
I'm thinking these heads just won't work unless they're older 8.6-1 LG4 heads. I've had people tell me that using the dished pistons with them will kill my quench.
Would using .051" or similarly thick headgaskets make up enough extra cc's to help me out with compression?
I'm thinking these heads just won't work unless they're older 8.6-1 LG4 heads. I've had people tell me that using the dished pistons with them will kill my quench.
Would using .051" or similarly thick headgaskets make up enough extra cc's to help me out with compression?
there are some pistons made with a reverse dome or d shape dish whatever you want to call it that still has a quench pad in there just the dish part is in the shape of a d that fits the same shape as the depression in your combustion chamber.
this way you cna still keep your quench which gives many bennies and get to lower your compression to a better level
#12
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Glendale, AZ
Posts: 1,940
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Car: 4 Mopars total
Engine: Pentastar power
Transmission: T/F and New Process
Axle/Gears: Three 8 3/4's & one 9 1/4
Originally posted by Nate86
Yeah, I noticed this too. What's up with that? Third gens never came with anything higher than 2.73s, I thought.
Yeah, I noticed this too. What's up with that? Third gens never came with anything higher than 2.73s, I thought.
![Confused](https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/images/smilies/confused.gif)
#14
Senior Member
![](https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/images/ranks/tgo10.gif)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Missouri
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1989 IROC
Engine: LB9
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: 3.42 Posi
Originally posted by RB83L69
I did my CR calculations with a .039" head gasket. The 2 numbers I gave, were for a 9cc chamber volume difference.
8.6:1 LG4 heads are 58cc, same as L69 or LB9 heads. The lower compression in the early LG4s came from dished pistons.
If you can find a head gasket that holds 9cc more in its bore than a .039" one, then it will get you where you need to be. That's about .080". Somehow I think this could be a low probability.
Sounds to me like you simply have the wrong ingredients for what you want to build. You either need to build something else with them, or replace them with what you need for what you want to do.
I did my CR calculations with a .039" head gasket. The 2 numbers I gave, were for a 9cc chamber volume difference.
8.6:1 LG4 heads are 58cc, same as L69 or LB9 heads. The lower compression in the early LG4s came from dished pistons.
If you can find a head gasket that holds 9cc more in its bore than a .039" one, then it will get you where you need to be. That's about .080". Somehow I think this could be a low probability.
Sounds to me like you simply have the wrong ingredients for what you want to build. You either need to build something else with them, or replace them with what you need for what you want to do.
I did find out these heads came off of a 80s El Camino 305. They've been coated in something on the valve cover side, and the casting numbers are indistinguishable. It's not the obvious (oil), because these things have been totally rebuilt/resurfaced/cleaned, and look brand new. Don't know if the fact that they're not F-body heads will affect anything about them. Anyone know if these are just LG4's as well?
#15
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Loveland, OH, US
Posts: 18,457
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
15 Posts
Car: 4
Engine: 6
Transmission: 5
Probably; which would be the same as 86-back L69 or LB9 heads. All of those motors used the same heads. Don't get hung up on the "LG4" deal.
But non of that matters; they're not going to work for this, no matter which motor they originally came off of.
64cc is probably still too much CR. You need to be at 9 or so. You'll be at 9.7 with 64cc and .039" gasket and a normalish deck height with the piston in the hole .025".
Same conclusion as above.
But non of that matters; they're not going to work for this, no matter which motor they originally came off of.
64cc is probably still too much CR. You need to be at 9 or so. You'll be at 9.7 with 64cc and .039" gasket and a normalish deck height with the piston in the hole .025".
Same conclusion as above.
#16
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Glendale, AZ
Posts: 1,940
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Car: 4 Mopars total
Engine: Pentastar power
Transmission: T/F and New Process
Axle/Gears: Three 8 3/4's & one 9 1/4
RB83L69: Wouldnt that be 87 and earlier? The reason I ask is because I thought the 87 LG4's used the centerbolt "LB9" heads, and then the swirlport L03 heads were introduced in 1988. So arent the 416 heads the same as the 87 centerbolt heads, except for valve cover mounting and the center 2 intake bolts?
#17
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Cazenovia, WI
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 83 Z28
Engine: Mild 383 Stroker
Transmission: B&M TH400 with shift kit
Axle/Gears: 3.73 Limited Slip
if ur lookin for around 9.0:1 with that setup you can probley go with 70cc chambers which is about 8.89:1 i believe, or if you wanna go a bit over go with 67cc's and its about 9.2:1... all providing i did my calculations correctly that is
![Big Grin](https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
#18
Supreme Member
![](https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/images/ranks/tgo10.gif)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Pueblo Co
Posts: 3,974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1989 C4
Engine: L98
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 307
Crower makes a tq cam "Baja Beast" it's supposed to be the best low end cam made. Ive never used it since ive been told it's spent at 4500 rpm but that would be perfect for what you want.
I'd suggest you do use the fresh 305 heads and just used some reverse dome pistons AKA dished so you can run a fair amount of advance. If you were to use the Baja B, RD Pistons and those small valve heads it would make a good torque engine. It shouldent be too hard on gas either.
I'd suggest you do use the fresh 305 heads and just used some reverse dome pistons AKA dished so you can run a fair amount of advance. If you were to use the Baja B, RD Pistons and those small valve heads it would make a good torque engine. It shouldent be too hard on gas either.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
no green
Engine/Drivetrain/Suspension Parts for Sale
11
01-09-2016 09:22 PM