'Shifter

iTrader: (2)

Would and did, are both reality....Just because you can't do it, it just can't be done, is that how it works? It's amazing that other people are even allowed to live on your planet. (small wee-wee
syndrome) and that you have more rights to the free forum than
anyone else does. I didn't post a trap speed, because this was
in 1984, and remembering 20+ years ago is getting a little more
diffucult. The only reason I remember the e.t. is because I have
a picture of my car with my dial in at 13.2.
I really don't give a rat's buttock if you believe it or not-you mean
nothing to me. For someone who doesn't know me, you speak
awfully boldly....maybe you'd be man and head on down to
Tucson to back up your insults instead of hiding behind your
computer and crying. In other words "bring it".

bnoon

Nice talk.


I researched a 305 buildup for about the last two years and have a very good understanding of what it would take for a 300-400 HP 305.

My best 305 build for the buck came out on paper as a 6" rod 305 with KB pistons, PnP 'vette heads with back cut 1.94/1.5 stainless valves, a cam somewhere around 500-510 lift with duration in the 230 range int and 240 range ex, and 1.75" headers.

Problem was, I never found the 6" rod pistons on sale anywhere (couldn't run the compression I wanted without them) and the 'vette heads must be made of gold (Ebay prices around $4-500 a set). I went back and forth daily about building a 335 stroker, but those parts are expensive too. Then, when I had a 350 block plop in my lap, it suddenly made my decision a lot easier what I was going to do.

'Shifter

iTrader: (2)

Ban me if I'm not allowed to quote or speak the truth. It ain't rocket
science fellers.....make as much power as you can put to the tarmac.
Which my car did.....no wheelspin at all, just grabbed and went. I'm
not saying I had 7000 hp and 8000ft/lbs- I actually figuring close
to 275-280 rwhp as a rough guess as dyno's were a little hard to
come by back in the day.
I've got plenty of buddies that I raced with and against that would
gladly back me, as well as pictures of my car for you unbelieveing
types.

chrisamero

1MeanZ if you read the threads properly the guys here are saying they use aftermarket parts there not all bone stock. You can do plenty to a 305 and make good power.

'Shifter

iTrader: (2)

Nope, sorry chrisamero, he says it can't be done....we're all wrong.

chrisamero

if he knew what he was doing maybe he might break into the low 13's as well. what i have said about my car is no lie no matter what 1meanz has to say.

TPI Monte SS

OK, lets stop the and get .

I recently had my 305/5-speed/3.73 geared '88 SS on the dyno. She put down 223 hp and 277 ft/lbs of torque on a very lean tune (around 14:1 according to the wideband O2 probe). The motor is a roller 305 with an older mild Crane 2031 Compucam (think it's only .432/.459 lift at .050), box-stock World S/R Torquer 305 heads with 1.94/1.50 valves, roller rockers, air foil, ported upper plenum, and SLP runners. I also have Edelbrock TES headers, a test pipe, and a Hooker catback on the car.

I'm guessing a good tune would net me near 240hp at the wheels, which is pretty good for a stock bottom-end 305. And, it's totally driveable and passed emissions when it needed to.

GOY

Ahhh yes.... one of those rare third gen 88 SS'es....

Just busting your ***** (I know it's a monte)


Where were those peak numbers, and do you have a chart? Are you running a 165 or 730? Also, what rear did you run those numbers through (8.5)?

TPI Monte SS

Hey, third gen's make great parts donors.

I'm looking at the chart now, peak HP came in at 4800 rpms, peak torque at 3600 rpms. The motor makes over 250 ft./lbs. from 2600 all the way through 4600 rpms. I'm running an '87 F-body harness and '165 ECM, and the rear is a stock 7.625 with 3.73s and a Powertrax no-slip unit.

1MeanZ

iTrader: (9)

Chrisamero and M. Hall. The difference between my post and your posts is that my posts along with many others on here actually contain realistic technical data and real numbers to back up power and ET claims. When you guys post, you have no numbers or info to validate your claims. So when I say that I think your claims are bogus, instead of constructively proving me wrong, you just talk trash like a bunch of morons. It has been my experience on these boards that the smart guys, the ones that actually know what they are talkin about, dont talk smack and have a bunch of attitude. You dont see Willie, Vader, TimBurgess, or any of the other moderators acting like idiots do you? When they make a statement they can always back it up, and if they disagree on something they provide evidence to support their opinions.

If you guys wanna talk crap to me lets look at TPI monte SS for example. He has very similar mods as me. I have the aluminum heads with same valve size, I do NOT have a roller cam, and my RWHP numbers are with an automatic and 3.23 gears and i still put down 10 more horsepower than he did.

Lets also look at TunedPort335 and mw66nova for example, they run 13.4 and 13.6 respectively on SLICKS. i walked my car off the line with street tires and ran a 13.9.

Chrisamero, and M. Hall, neither of you have posted any constructive info or advice. You have made baseless claims and when I call you on them, you talk trash like a buch of Jr. High boys. Where are your facts to prove me wrong? Why has no one else ran the numbers you claim with so few mods? Why are you talkin so much trash to me if your car actually can run these numbers? If you cars could actually go low 13s you would not be offended at my skepticism but instead constructively provide proof.

A similar issue to this rose up a few months ago with a guy with a white GTA running 13.0 almost bone stock. I didnt really believe the claims but he politely posted timeslips, pics, and other info to support his claims. He did not talk trash, he knew his car would run the number and had no problem supporting his claims.

Chrisamero and M. Hall, I referred to you guys above as the "armpit of thirdgen owners" and with each retarded post you guys continue to prove me right, keep up the good work.

GOY

Wow Monte, with 250ft/lbs at 4600, I'm suprised you only had 223 HP only 200 RPMs later.

2600-4600 is a good street powerband though. Have any ET's and Weight measurements?

TPI Monte SS

I did run the car once last year. I granny-shifted my way to a 15.0 @ 90 mph on a humid day with air temps in the upper 80s. My 60' time was a 2.3x on 17" Continentals. It weighs 3640 with me and 1/2 tank of gas (IIRC).

I know I can find some more powah in there through tuning. I'm using a stock '88 5-speed/3.45 gear chip for now. I forgot to mention I have 19/lb. SVO injectors which is probably the reason for me running lean (no AFPR). The A/F ratio according to my dyno printout was 15:1 at 2200 rpm and it gradually smooths to 13.4:1 by 4100 rpm.

'Shifter

iTrader: (2)

Who started the trash talk? I only posted how I did what I did,
and you came back telling me I didn't do what I did.....I don't
recall seeing you there...I would have known it was you from
all the sniffling and snivelling. By the way, what difference
do slicks make if you aren't spinning the wheels? I know I've
only been drag racing since the late 70's, but is this some new
unheard of technological advantage? All drag racing mods
are not about horsepower.....most of them are chassis related.
I've offered to show you proof and back what I've said, and
the offer stands, but you'd probably rather cry and stamp your
feet until I bring the proof to you (very unrealistic, since it's
you that refutes me...). I'm sure this will bat back and forth until
we're both banned (fine by me, I know I'm righteous) since
you say I won't offer proof, and I won't be coming to Ohio to
bring you proof......Go back to your hero worship of Vader and
everyone else you mention.

Stupid should hurt.

chrisamero

should i get into more detail, like i run 2.02 valves on the intake and 1.6 on the exhaust plus the head is ported and flows more air. This is a huge inprovement on power, the motor can breath better and it makes alot more power then stock. my car does run low 13's at just over 100mph.

'Shifter

iTrader: (2)

Chrisamero-there is nothing we are going to do to convince 1meatZ
that he is not immortal and has the power to put us armpit types in
our place. Strange, this sure looked like an open forum with free
exchange of ideas and opinions, but ours don't count, just his.

Moderator-please remove my name from this forum, thanks, it's
been real.

bnoon

Still no pics, specs, dyno chart, head flow chart, or other means of proof. And with all of this crying you're both doing, you'd think someone was calling you out at a bar fight or something. Nobody is saying you didn't do it, they're saying "PROVE IT!" If you don't have proof, you should have just stated such and moved on with the technical conversation, but that point has long since passed.

1MeanZ

iTrader: (9)

Thanks for the backup bnoon.

Am I the only one who gets frustrated when people come on here and post questionable times and then talk smack instead of proving it? If we just let people come on here and talk out thier butt and never challenge any claims, this whole site will soon be nothing but rumors and BS. If we want this site to always contain honest, up front, reliable tech info, we need to make sure fellow posters are posting relavant information that can be be proven.

Now back to the post, GOY, I will try to scan and post my dyno sheet. my power curve was very flat as well, I think we can thank TPI for that.

GOY

Ahhhh 2.02 and 1.6 vales in the 305's bore??

I was going to stay out of the whole arguement until that. Now I don't believe you either.

brutalform

Back in the mid 90s, my S/D 92 Formula,with the t-5, had all the mods that GOY had mentioned in the earlier post. With the EXCEPTION of my heads were 100% stock. The best I could run, one time...ONLY ONCE was a 13.99. And that was at a fast track, in good air! The norm was 14.10s.

I dont know what I did wrong in the past, but I wish someone with these "STOCK" 305 cars would set me straight!

BTW M.Hall, and Chrisamero, what kind of 60ft times were you layin down?

chrisamero

i am not gonna waste anymore time telling you guys things about a 300hp 305. i have said enough here and nothing gets through to a few of you morons so have fun spending all the money on aftermarket parts, instead of useing knowledge to get more power.

brutalform

Just making a statement, and asking a question....thats all.

GOY

Promise?!?

chrisamero

ya just for this thread its a waste of my time telling you guys about anything thats possible to do to a 305.

Fast355

iTrader: (2)

One comment that I have to make is even if you put heads with 2.02 and 1.60s on a 305 the bores would shroud them very badly. It will do one of two things, you will end up with 76 cc chambers that overhang the 305s bore, or end up with the valves packed into a 58 cc head. The only way to get those bigger valves to flow and make power is to have them in a head of around 64 cc. Don't believe me, take a head with 2.02 and 1.60s and stick even a 3.8" bore restrictor on it. Now check the same head with a 4.0" bore restrictor. I bet you will see a rather large difference on the intake side. In fact I bet a set of heads with 2.00 and 1.55 valves would make more power.

GM does however make a 2.00" valve that will fit in a 305 head if you cut the seats. A 2.00" valve and a 1.56" valve will clear the bore up to about .575" of lift without notching the bores. Can we say GM fastburn aluminums on a 305 in a 80 C10. No problems running a CC XE274-H with those heads on a 305 other than the reliefs in the pistons had to be cut larger to clear the valve when it was clay checked.

Here are the flow#s for the fastburns.

Intake
Lift----------CFM
0.050-------30
0.100-------62
0.200-------136
0.300-------187
0.400-------232
0.500-------266
0.600-------275

Exhaust
Lift----------CFM
0.050------23
0.100------55
0.200------104
0.300------133
0.400------158
0.500------180
0.600------193

Best of all they use 62 cc chambers so it will not hurt compression too badly especially by the time you have increased the bore size when you rebuild.

Combine that with a good edelbrock performer rpm vortec intake, 750 Holley, CC 274XE cam, headers, and a good bottem end you can make about 325 RWHP @ 6,000 rpm. I have seen this combo bump 323 RWHP on the mustang dynomomter behind a 700r4 in a C10 truck. It also made 309 ft/lbs to the ground @ 5,100. The torque curve was smooth all the way from the start. This thing will flat out scream. Best of all it made over 250 ft/lbs at the wheels from 2,500 all the way to 6,200 where it hit the rev limiter in the MSD box.

^^In case you are wondering I just checked with my buddy to get the facts straight(dyno #s mainly). I have seen the sheet and watched him bolt the Fast Burns to the 305, I also helped him select the intake, carb, headers, cam, converter, etc, and tune the engine.

The flow numbers are off of Sallee Chevrolets web site.

Sure he spent some money on the heads but they will still transfer over to a 350 or 383 on down the road if he wants them to.

Granted I am sure you want to use TPI but that won't hurt power if you upgrade the TPI with good oversized or siamesed runners, port the base, port the plenum, have a good tune, etc. Or upgrade to a LT1 intake.

Fast355

iTrader: (2)

Also just in case you question those numbers the track times are as follows. This is in about a 4,000 lbs truck lowered 5 rear, 3 front, with a 3.73 powertrax rearend, a 700r4 w/ 2,500 stall, and the above engine run through a quiet low restriction exhaust system (think near factory noise level). The truck is still using the stock 80 air cleaner and cold air ducting. The air cleaner even still has the thermac valve in it and functional. The air pump is still in place as well. It is complete with A/C and still has all the options that could be found on an 80 chevy. (Its a 305 with a miss and a cam, yeah right!!!) The tires are P275/50/R15s all the way around mounted on Impala SS 17" rims. This thing is a head turner.

His best pass has been
R/T------------.491
60' Time------2.33 (Blowing the tires away)
660' Time----9.32
660' MPH-----80.1
1320' Time---14.32
1320' MPH----98.6

I will see if I can get him to send me jpgs of the time slip and dyno sheet and I will try to post them.

The truck is black and has 305 SS near the back of the bed just like the old 454 SS did.

He also gets about 15 mpg if he keeps his foot out of it. I actually verified that myself when he let me drive it for a week. When I killed the 355 in the G20 by breaking the crank.

brutalform

.

brutalform

.

brutalform

Man sorry about the 2 blanks...Going to a second page really had me screwed up! I thought I was Starting a post , but, was really responding.

brutalform

WOW, just wait till its sorted out. That 1/8 mile MPH is impressive. I think that will eventually do a low 13 second E.T., maybe better. If he can get the 60fts down too. Hitting 80 MPH in the 1/8th shows his shift points are sorted out. Nice mild 2500 stall converter, I'm sure also contributed.

This is a good example of a well thought out combination. Nothing wrong with a stout 305. I just cant buy into people putting an exhaust, and underdrive pulleys on, and they think they are knocking on the 12s!

Yellow87Bird

Bone stock with a cutout and no it was a 700-r4 i cant drive a 5 speed very well lol

Yellow87Bird

oh yeah with a 2.1 60 ft

D's89IROCZ

I don't either now. I have seen pictures of a 305 head with the 2.02 valve in it . SHROUDING from hell . I will see if I can get a pic and post it .

BTW my stock 305 5 speed w/ 3.08 posi ran 15.1 @ 93 w/ 2.2 60ftr. w/ 227'000 km's on'r

Fast355

iTrader: (2)

I see pictures of the 305 heads with 2.02 and 1.60 on Ebay all the time. Mostly modified 416s.

D's89IROCZ

without the unshroudeing of the combustion chamber ,...... it doesnt look like they belong there. Plus to unshroud them new valves you got to open the chamber so much as to become a problem.


...still trying for the pic ...I will post it when I get it

bjankuski

Before I switched to my 355 combo that is listed in my sig I ran my modified 305 and recorded 255 RWHP and 327 RWTQ numbers with well used 305. Those numbers work out to around 315 FWHP and 370 FWTQ with the 305. With the 305 I was able to run 13.51 at 101 MPH with a T-5 and 3.45 gears. My mods were ZZ-4 cam, TPIS large tube runners, headers, free mods, vortec heads, SDPC vortec intake, and AFPR. Before I put the heads, cam, intake, and large tube runners on, I was able to run 13.85 at 99 MPH. I believe a fresh 305 with the modifications I listed would make even more power because my 130,000 mile 305 was completly worn out when I modified it with the heads, cam and intake.

Liger

I have a bone stock 1986 IROC-Z with a 305 TPI... It has 112k miles on it and a 3:23 posi rear... I have the 700R4 automatic trans... Now, I consistently run 15.3s in that car!!! 15.3s!!! So these little engines can make some respectable numbers at the strip for what they are... But I tell ya, 1986 305s had the weakest cam of any 3rd gen camaro from factory... You can change the cam out to another 3rd gen 305 and it will definately improve your performance... But, I thought Id letcha know that a 305 TPI w/ a 700R4 Automatic is running 15.3s stock, and thats with 112k miles!!! Good Luck with yours!!!

D's89IROCZ

here is that pic of the 2.02 valve in the 305 head ..... just not a very good idea ( for the 305)




congrats on the fast 305 guys I know they go ....

GOY

The outer edge of that valve has to flow GREAT!

1MeanZ

iTrader: (9)

Wow, I was gone at the Camaro Superfest for the weekend, and i came back to this post to see how bad I had been trashed on, but it looks like honesty has prevailed! Sweet info on the fastburn heads on a 305 and the info to back it up, that is what this site is all about.

FYI with no traction compound at Milan this weekend my car ran a dissapointing ET. with a 2.2 60ft it only went 14.2 @ 98.5 mph. that is by far the fastest trap speed i have cut with the car, so the new 5speed freed up some power. I think with traction this car could go 13.70s

D's89IROCZ

No doubt ! I am also told by a reliable sorce that running a high lift cam with them valvs would be a "smashing idea "



1meanZ ....congrats on the quick 205 man .