SoCo80p

iTrader: (5)

in this months chevy high performance mag they got mid 13's out of a carb 305 camaro, good info, they show all the average mods people do like the exhuast k&n that only give it like 2 tens more, also NOS and the world 305 heads.

rezinn

What did the car run n/a?

SoCo80p

iTrader: (5)

Heres all the numbers with the mods:

car is a camaro 305 carbed auto

stone stock with 2.72 gear: 17.45 @ 78 MPH

added K&N Air fiter, flowmaster cat back exhaust system and tweeked timing,: 17.21 @ 80 MPH gain of .24 e.t and 2 MPH

Added edelbrock performer intake, holley high volume fuel pump and open element air cleaner: 16.75 @ 84 MPH gain of .45 ET and 4 MPH

Added edelbrock shorty headers, and walker high flow cat: 16.29 @ 86 MPH gain of .46 ET and 2 MPH

Added 3.73 posi axle: 15.82 @ 86 MPH gain of .47 Et and no MPH gain

Added world S/R 305 heads: 15.39 @ 87 MPH gain of .43 ET and 1 MPH

Added 150 shot of NOS and stall converter: 13.82 @ 100 MPH gain of 1.57 ET and 13 MPH

Added crane high fire ignition box and colder plugs: 13.15 @ 104 MPH gain of .67 in ET and 4 MPH,......

now you've got answers to what mods are going to give you what power!

Vader

FWIW, if they got essentially no gain from the World S/R heads, they were obviously lacking enough cam area to use them effectively. In talking about "bang for buck", it's discouraging, no shameful that they didn't even try a different cam profile. 99-44/100ths % of SBC builders already know that all of the power is in the cam and heads, and Chevy left plenty on the table for us if we just want to go out and grab it. Too bad no one at CHP remembers that, huh?

And don't argue that they were only doing "bolt-ons". To me, a cam change is essentially a "bolt-on" since there is often no fabricating nor machining required. Just remove and replace parts. It's certainly no more difficult than changing the torque converter. And did they say how many laps they could run on NOS? They must use one big-assed bottle for a 500 mile race.

No4NJunk

Vader you took the words right outta my mouth. NOS on that engine is a cheap solution for the problem. they should have put more thought into it.

Pony Killer

Yeah that's pretty sad.

Sometimes I wonder if the guys in those magazines have a clue what they are doing

SoCo80p

iTrader: (5)

i think it really wasent that bad, they did basicaly all the bolt on mods everyone and there mother does that has a 3rd gen and getting low 13's out of a carbed 305 is really quite impressive anyway you look at it.

SSC

I've been reading MGC article off and on and it makes me laugh. 13.15 and their at sea level right?
150 shot of NOS was the biggest factor. If they were to use a good 50 state replacement cam they could have got the same numbers without the bottle, they have the heads for a larger cam. They had that qjet tweaked by Jet also, didn't do anything. Kinda shows you how all components must work together in order to make real power, unlike what CHP did just say ohh that looks cool. Performance sticker mentality

Sitting Bull

Yes, I wish they would have chosen a decent grind of cam for that 305 before resorting to NOS. I think they used the Crane Compucam 2020, .407 and .421 or very close.

What if they had used a Comp Cams XE256 roller with .447 and .454 instead? Is that cam not legal in California? They are obsessed with California regulations, and this seems to be the source of their incredibly conservative choice of cam

And the torque converter. What on earth is it? They don't mention that anywhere that I've seen, other than it is new. Big deal, tell us what the dumb thing stalls at! It must be stock because they don't brag about any improvements from that department

Am I mistaken here, or does it seem to you folks also that they have for no good reason left at least 3/4 of a second in ET on the table by ignoring these two items?

Belker

.... maybe I'm wrong ... but ... doesn't that artical continue from issue to issue .... I thought that they're not done with the car yet?
(quicky checked out the mag at the supermarket) maybe they'll do a different cam

rezinn

That's not even mid 14s without NOS.. not impressive.

RB83L69

Considering that a L69 5-speed car did almost a 15 flat off the showroom floor, that's pretty pathetic...

I agree, they should have put a real cam in it. I seem to recall several people on this BBS that are getting much better times than that out of LG4s, without aftermarket heads.

I also find it hard to believe that they got almost 7 tenths out of an ignition box... sounds to me like the distributor was defective all along.

84L69TA

I dont understand the way they modded that car in CHP. I do know I dropped about 2 1/2 seconds off my 1/4 with very simple mods. My LG4 in my 83 T/A ran 17.30's stock with 3.23 gears. I put in the 3.73's, changed to a "G" hanger and "DR" rods, edelbrock headers, 3" hi-flow cat, 3" SLP catback, and timing bumped up 2 or 3 degrees. I went from that 17.30 to 15.11. Now altogether I paid about $240 for all of it (I got it used). But anyway, thats with the stock cam, intake and heads. Valve covers have never been off of it. I think with compression up to 10 to1, XE256 cam, and some head work, this baby could be in the 13's. Maybe I'm wrong...but I'm gonna do it anyway. I could have just gotten lucky, or maybe the LG4 really does respond that well to mods. Later.

tpi_roc

Thats weak.

Reading magazines like that just seems to get more people in trouble, thankfull I've never had a subscription to any

sleeper

I was really interested in that article series when it first started too... then I realised that Car Craft has just turned into another mag selling to the highest advertising dollar... NOS spends ALOT of money in their magazine.

The past two issues of Hot Rod I bought have articles on plug wires and tire shine products... they didn't even road test them... pure advertising... why do I need to see a pretty picture in a book when I can go to Target and hold them in my hand?

I completely agree with Vader... the most important parts of a sbc are the heads and cam. With the heads already off the engine it would have taken less time to "bolt on" a new cam than it did to install a NOS system

z28onTweenkies

89t-top gta, my car has the same motor and ive done alot of the same mods and my car, while it hasnt been ran in the quarter, should be good for low 15's being that ive beaten a couple of cars who run consistent 15.5's. One thing that really helped my car scream was when i added the open air element and the ascd hood with the functional scoop, thats direct ram air! much snappier now.

new87

Anyone else running 13.1's at 100 mph plus here (edit in a 305)? I dont see getting many yes to this. With a cam easy 12's, but still 13.1 out of a carb 305 :hail:. As a matter of fact that's faster than most of the 350's around here.

No4NJunk

If I was using a crutch like Nitrous then yes I would run low 13s maybe even high 12's!! They could have done a lot better.

new87

IF you had Nitrous, IF you had a turbo or S/C, IF you had a Big Block you could run low 9's maybe high 8's. Your right they could do better, but they used what they did. I'll take 13's how ever I can get them. As for Nitrous being a crutch, isn't a crutch any mod you do? Remeber that some people can even do some of the simplest mods to thier cars. Its your money and your time's, do you spend $545 (Nitrous) for 13's or well over $2k (in a 305)?

No4NJunk

your opinion!! How many times can you use YOUR nitrous. Depending on bottle size and the shot maybe 5 times. While I with my built (hypotheticaly speaking) 305 or 305 with a s/c on it can run it as many times as I want without refilling. Gas and ***** would be all I need. As for any mod being a crutch.......um no! but think what you want.

zippy

i feel they could have done better myself and was really not impressed with the choice of 3.73's in something that doesn't rev very high, but they did ok overall. i'd like to point out, they didn't actually do it as a project car. it was a write up on someone's personal car with all of it being his choice pretty much. more compression would have been better and working a set of stock heads or something slightly more updated than them old design world products castings. no matter how you look at it, 13.15 isn't bad overall, but the car just plain isn't fast without the juice. 15's is great for a family car, not a camaro. i'm hoping they go more yet.

Inwo

Maybe they should have done some suspension mods or something... I mean even someone like toosloz was running mid 14s with a few mods (!ecm) on his 305...

Vader

Check and understand the results here:

http://www.goingfaster.com/spo/carcraft325hp305.html


Moral of the story? Do your homework before even touching the first wrench.

As I was saying earlier, heads and cam. These dyno results showed a 42 HP gain with a cam change and 55 HP change with the right heads - no "little blue pills". Call me "old school" but the blue bottle is a lot like the little blue pill. To me, nitrous isn't a bolt-on, it's more like a "strap-on". If you don't have all that you need to start with, it's only going to take you so far, and you're only fooling yourself. Then again, I'm less of a straight-line guy and more of a top-end, long distance type, having been "spoiled" by oval track runners in my youth. In that game, you've gotta have some staying power that the "little blue pill" just can't provide.

GreenProStreet

Just a tid bit.

They would like to think they are getting stellar gas milage. But they aren't, no more than a 350. Frictional loses are 90% in the stroke, and they have the same stroke in a 305. The only thing adding to there milage is the overdrive.

200 post!!! YES!!!!!!!!!!!

DM91RS

Right on!

new87

Ok old school :hail:, how you been? One thing on race day he with the biggest "Strap- On" will finish first. Two diiferent worlds long distance racing and 1/4 mile at a time. I have two bottles anyone care to try, come on everyones doing it.

five7kid

iTrader: (14)

Don't forget they also tore the engine down, discovered a cracked block, and ended up with a .030" over rebuild before they were done. I haven't been to the track yet, but with similar mods, I've been quicker at 5800' uncorrected than they have been corrected (and all the times they quote are corrected for altitude).

I'm a little "old school" as well. Going to the dentist before going racing just seems like "cheating" to me. About the only power-adders I :hail: are the GN's.

sleeper

anybody else notice that they forgot to mention the cost of the paint and body in their $5000, 13 second car? Add that in and it's now a $7000 car.

1991 RS 305

Man, that article sucks, I see 13.15...I'm like sweet, until I see how they got it. Nitrous is great until your blue bottle is empty, and your gettin worked left and right. I personally like "bolt on mods" where the power will always be there. This chevy high performance article is cool, but i'd rather see them get some good times testing differend heads/cams and other bolt ons. Everyone knows what nitrous will do, show me some trick heads or something... come up with a awesome combo.

AJ_92RS

No. They figured all that in. It was a car build up, not just an engine build up.

Plus you gotta realize that they added a lot of cost into their total to better relate to what the real costs would be. For instance the cost of the car. They paid ~$250, but they listed it as ~$500 in the total cost. They did that kinda thing a few times.

Plus zippy brought up a good point. This was someone's personal car. It wasn't bought by the magazine. If they would have bought it then you know damn well they woulda said "Screw the streetability and emmisions" They would've built a $5000, 10sec ET, trailer queen. :sillylol:

AJ

Ride4ME

NITROUS IS STEROIDS!!!!!!!!!!
Sure you'll be powerful,
but when rods and pistons go flying.......