rx7speed

well I was cruising down the road and see that a light turned red in front of me so like I always do I blip the gas and downshift. blip and downshift

well I guess this guy in a nova that was next to me thought I wanted a go at it

right when the light turned green we both took off and he smoked my *** up till about 60

well he had me by about a car

he prolly runs mid 14's

still have more work to do on my car but I'm getting on it

trans87

What year Nova was it? Hey its cool to lose once in awhile. Hey I have a 305 so I know about it especially going against some of those other domestics at there. They can spank me.

iroc22

Novas are fairly light. They're different almost every year for weight but the heaviest weighed in at 3000lbs (68-72).

ATOMonkey

Fraternity brother of mine has a BBC Nova w/TH400 and my g*d is it fast. He's got about ~$50K in it too though.

rx7speed

I am guessing about a 71? but don´t quote me on that one cause I really am not sure there

bastard will lose one of these days though

iroc22

Yeah his curb weight should be sitting at 3000lbs then. That's fairly light for the size of the car.

rx7speed

I just saw him again today and I want to race the guy once again and find out what all he has in the car but it just seems athat anymore we are just going the wrong way to do anything.....

one of these days my little nova friend


though I am also trying to set up a race with my friends chevelle with a 327 and a powerglide in it

iroc22

That should be a good race. Is his car a street car? Why would anyone run a 2 speed on the street?

trans87

Is that Nova modded? You make those suckers really fly if you wanted to plus they don't have smog. I hope your friends Chevelle isn't a street car because it would suck to drive with a 2-speed powerglide in it for a daily driver.

rx7speed

yup daily driver for him

kinda sucks having a 327 behind a powerglide on a street car though......

chevySS

3000 lbs is all a Nova weighs?? All years? Are you sure about that? If that's so I might seriously consider an early 70's Nova when I get some cash saved up. 3000 lbs is pretty freakin light for a RWD V8 full-framed car.

88Bravo

Don't get your hopes up about a full frame car. In around 74 it went to a sub frame. And the weight is around 3300 With a full int and a 350 with a turbo 350 tranny. I have one. They are fast and fun. Mine is a 74 with a sub frame. And a power glide, one shift, no more. Good trannys. Just make srue not to go any later than a 74 on the nova, they started getting family on us. Stopped in 79 but came back in 84. They were a toyota with a bowtie. What a dissapointment!! And yes my car can move pretty good even though the 350 is a stock 4 brl.

iroc22

Actually, every Chevy II/Nova was a sub-frame car. My Dad's 68 weighed in at just under 3000lbs with 1/3 tank of gas and him in it (160lbs).

66-67 were 2700-2800lbs

63-65 were 2600-2700lbs.

I prefer the 66-67 Chevy II's because they look the nicest, are light and aren't death traps like the 63-65 ones.

camaro-mayhem

i like 63 novas

but thats just me

90Iroc-Zee

novas are that light?! omg thats lighter than a notch w/o smog. hrmmmm im contemplating a bike or a car as my next purchase...that nova idea sounds awesome.

camaro-mayhem

novas are awesome

iroc22

The reason why Novas/Chevy II's are so popular is because of their power to weight ratios.

My Dad had a 67 Chevy II with the L76 (I think that was the RPO) solid lifter Corvette engine with single carb and Duntov cam that was rated at 365hp (gross rating; probably more like 300 SAE net) with a Saginaw 4-speed and it ran high 12's back in the 70's.

camaro-mayhem

yeah they go in straight lines well,but they dont handle for CRAP,at least if you put a big block in a 62-67 nova,cuz all the weights in the front

Azure

Still love that RX-7, though....a friend still has his old one, white, just like yours, but bought a nicer convert. model (both shown in the pics).

MattW

iTrader: (1)

my bro's gotta 73 nova

one way u can kinda tell what year the nova is

is where the parking lights are

if they are in the grille inbetween the headlights then its a 73-74

but if they are down in the chrome bumper then its around a 70 or so

thats how i tell atleast......

my bro just threw out a syncranizer in his stock saginaw 3 speed while racing a porsche so now he bought a muncie 4 speed:rockon:

here is a pic of he and his friends Nova's...u can see the diff in the grille's(by bro's is on the right).......btw.....the other nova got stollen and was never found....

MattW

iTrader: (1)

im sorry but i just cant let u guys think that that is my bro's car at its best



he fixed the stance of it and put on some ACTUAL rims........even though the snap on's did alright for a while
lol

chevySS

I had no idea Nova's were that light. If I had some money for a good project car, I'd consider an early 70's Nova.

rx7speed

ok the guy in the chevelle says he has about 340hp in his nova

I have no idea how old the motor is or how many miles it has on it

but it is a stock motor with a performer rpm intake, I not sure if he is using a 4 or 2 bbl carb at the moment
last I checked he had a 2 bbl, and a powerglide.


what would you on best guess with the limited info I have think he would run

85transamtpi

With a powerglide, the gear is gonna make a huge difference.

Most people who run 327's and race spin 'em to like 9000rpm and run like 4.56 gears at least.

We need more info on his combo to tell how fast it is.

-Doug

rx7speed

all I know is the car is all stock
the motor though taken from another car and was not orig in his car it is stock.

stock gears, stock everything except the intake manifold

iroc22

Whoa, a 327 wouldn't survive past 7500rpm.

ATOMonkey

Not so my friend. I've personally seen 302 '69 cam'rs Launch at 9K. That doesn't mean he was shifting there. There wasn't much "stock" left on that 302 mind you, but it was in stock class.

camaro-mayhem

thats a 302 not a 327

ATOMonkey

Same thing, just shorter stroke.

Who the hell cares anyway. That's like calling BS on any SBC turning serious RPM. It happens. I don't know what else to tell you.

camaro-mayhem

i thought a shorter stroke allowed it to spin easier,which would mean more rpm's?

iroc22

Yes, although when you think of it, a 1/4 of an inch is very insignificant but when the crank is revolving say 6000 times a minute, then that 1/4 of an inch becomes very significant.

ATOMonkey

Well, yes and no. Let's start with the equation F=m*a

F is force, m=mass, a=acceleration

With this the larger acceleration of the piston the more force it takes to move it from TDC or BDC these force impede crank speed.

To get a lower piston acceleration you need a small rod angle.

Piston acceleration ~ sin^2(stroke/rod length)

It just works out that short stroke engines have a small rod angle because they are used in engine with the same deck height with long strokes. For instance a 383 w/ a 6" rod has a rod angle of 38.8* and a 350 w/ a 5.7" rod has and angle of 37.62* So a longer stroke 383 only has one more degree of rod angle. On the other hand a factory 400 sbc is 42.5*

For big blocks a 502 BBC has a rod angle of 40.69* and a 427 BBC is 37.8* Obviously BBC pistons weigh more so that impedes rotation, but they also make more power.

A factory 302 rod angle is 31.75* which is much smaller than a stock 350. If you put 350 slugs in a 302 your rod angle is only 29* If you put 6" 383 slugs in a 302 then your angle is a mere 26.34* but you need a 6.76 rod. Do you see where I'm going with this?

The other thing that impedes crank speed is friction. Obviously if you're not moving as far your making less total friction froce.

Stress analysis in the rod shows that

axial stress = (mass of piston* acceleration of piston)/(cross sectional area of piston)

Buckling stress is a function of rod geometry and I won't get into that.

So this all means that longer rods put less stress on the rods and apply less resistance force on the crank.

Another useful piece of information is average piston speed which is also proportional to intake/exhaust air velocity.

Mean speed = 2*Stroke*RPM

Therefore a short stroke has a lower air velocity. This is generally bad for wet manifolds, because the fuel tends to fall out of the air. Short strokes also tend to fill the cylinders better at high RPM.

The biggest factor is the valve train for crank speed. Valves can only go up and down so fast when they are being held by steel springs. That is why F1 uses tiny little air bags.

Going the other way, a longer stroke mechanically provides more torque.

Torque = Force * Length.

So to make the most badass engine around you need a long stroke big bore long rod low friction monster aka NHRA pro stock engines.

camaro-mayhem

im so confused right now

but ill take your word for it

ATOMonkey

That's OK. Just keep learning, that's what this is all about.

rx7speed

damn boy you know your stuff


but you might want to keep it in simple english so others can understand

iroc22

F in F=mxa actually represents Fnet, which in turn represents Fapplied-Fretarding

Yeah thats true but then it depends more on inside the cylinders, you need a co-efficient of friction between the cylinder walls and the rings; and then you need to find out the weight of the pistons. Ffr=uFn.


The equation T=Fxd depends on an axis of rotation (ie. pivot point). In the engine, the pivot point on the crankshaft would hardly change the torque because the head of the piston is in a stationary position (well, sorta), so the T=Fxd is somewhat neligable.

Not meaning not nit-pick, just tryin to clear some things up. I learned a lot from your post.