500hp 2 x 4 WCFB ! (well almost)
[/QUOTE]
11-08-2011, 09:51 AM
#122
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
Long trip update...runs too cool
Several of you have contacted and wanted the details of the engine parts and build up. Thought I would update driving experience of this engine on recent longer road trip.
This past weekend took the 500hp DART 400 on a 500 mile trip from Houston to the Texas Hill country for the weekend.
I had been running all summer without a thermostat, but in the Houston summer in 100F daily temps it still indicated 170-180F. I am out at 37 degree advance @2700 rpm on stock dual point Mallory distributor.
Fall has come and temps for the trip were expected to be 45-70F. So, I thought I better install a thermostat, I put in a 160F. I bought a higher quality since many of you have told of poor quality aftermarket in recent years.
DART has truly designed efficient coolant passages into this new casting. At 50-60F ambient temperatures at 70-80 mph the temp ran too cool at less than 140F.
The engine balked a bit and the oil pressure was up. So, used a little farm boy engineering and found a piece of cardboard in a dumpster to place in front of the radiator. Remember I am using the original 50 year old (200,000 mi) aluminum radiator.
The Kiesler T-45 (RS 400?) 5 speed just adds an entirely new dimension to the 61. We ran 75-80 mph at 2100-2200rpm. My wife commented that she thought the car was louder when she drove it 40 years ago to teach school.
She did complain that the original 50 year old top did not stop the draft on her neck during some short rain showers when the top went up. But, being 'a keeper' she announced that will be my Christmas present...new top.
While in the Texas Hill country, we took a 70 mile cruise (wife says race) with 20 Corvettes on back roads. We were running 80 mph much of the time up hill, down hill, curves, etc.
The old 61 with the DART engine and T-45 tranny ran easily between a few weeks old Grand Sport and new Z06, most of it in 5th gear at 2100 rpm.
Crossing cattle guards at 80 mph is a new experience.
Joe
This past weekend took the 500hp DART 400 on a 500 mile trip from Houston to the Texas Hill country for the weekend.
I had been running all summer without a thermostat, but in the Houston summer in 100F daily temps it still indicated 170-180F. I am out at 37 degree advance @2700 rpm on stock dual point Mallory distributor.
Fall has come and temps for the trip were expected to be 45-70F. So, I thought I better install a thermostat, I put in a 160F. I bought a higher quality since many of you have told of poor quality aftermarket in recent years.
DART has truly designed efficient coolant passages into this new casting. At 50-60F ambient temperatures at 70-80 mph the temp ran too cool at less than 140F.
The engine balked a bit and the oil pressure was up. So, used a little farm boy engineering and found a piece of cardboard in a dumpster to place in front of the radiator. Remember I am using the original 50 year old (200,000 mi) aluminum radiator.
The Kiesler T-45 (RS 400?) 5 speed just adds an entirely new dimension to the 61. We ran 75-80 mph at 2100-2200rpm. My wife commented that she thought the car was louder when she drove it 40 years ago to teach school.
She did complain that the original 50 year old top did not stop the draft on her neck during some short rain showers when the top went up. But, being 'a keeper' she announced that will be my Christmas present...new top.
While in the Texas Hill country, we took a 70 mile cruise (wife says race) with 20 Corvettes on back roads. We were running 80 mph much of the time up hill, down hill, curves, etc.
The old 61 with the DART engine and T-45 tranny ran easily between a few weeks old Grand Sport and new Z06, most of it in 5th gear at 2100 rpm.
Crossing cattle guards at 80 mph is a new experience.
Joe
11-09-2011, 11:54 AM
#123
Instructor
Member Since: Jun 2011
Location: Portland Oregon
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Devildog, it's encouraging to hear how those WCFBs can perform. Can you tell me which WCFBs--year and #s--you were using/modified--to help get that kind of hp? I have a 2X4setup on my 59 running early 60s WFCBs ( 3739653 manifold and 3696s and 3500s carbs)
Doubt that I will ever get the HP that you did, but encouraged to hear that you can tune them to perform well. Some others on the forum have bad-mouthed the WCFBs--
Doubt that I will ever get the HP that you did, but encouraged to hear that you can tune them to perform well. Some others on the forum have bad-mouthed the WCFBs--
11-09-2011, 02:42 PM
#124
Instructor
Big Cube aftermarket blocks
Joe,
I second all of the above.
I NO LONGER subscribe to ANY automotive publications, thus, the ONLY way that I will see the information is right here. But actually, NONE of your comments surprise me at all--------------it's pretty much what I would have expected.
The SB400 (70 4bolt stock block) with cleaned up 66 2.02 heads, .500 lift flat tappet cam and a modified Rochester FI unit (those air meters only flow about 600cfm and original 2x4 WCFBs flow about 770cfm total) in my 56 is an outstanding performer. So, it would only be expected that with the DART "good" stuff and a roller, the numbers should be higher! Many of you are aware of the "cheater" stuff that I've done to the 66 heads on my 400 (only to create an appearance of 57 539 heads), which of course are still not as good as modern technology aftermarket heads.
WAY TO GO!!!
(Actually, I'm kind of surprised that more owners of these early Vettes are not running big cube SBs, ie 383-427ci. But then, I guess I'm still much more of a hotrodder than I am a NCRSer
. Frequently. when I visit the NCRS site, I read things that just make me hang my head and roll my eyes. For me personally, some of that stuff just takes the fun out of driving/owning one of these early pieces of Americana!)
Tom Parsons
I second all of the above.
I NO LONGER subscribe to ANY automotive publications, thus, the ONLY way that I will see the information is right here. But actually, NONE of your comments surprise me at all--------------it's pretty much what I would have expected.
The SB400 (70 4bolt stock block) with cleaned up 66 2.02 heads, .500 lift flat tappet cam and a modified Rochester FI unit (those air meters only flow about 600cfm and original 2x4 WCFBs flow about 770cfm total) in my 56 is an outstanding performer. So, it would only be expected that with the DART "good" stuff and a roller, the numbers should be higher! Many of you are aware of the "cheater" stuff that I've done to the 66 heads on my 400 (only to create an appearance of 57 539 heads), which of course are still not as good as modern technology aftermarket heads.
WAY TO GO!!!
(Actually, I'm kind of surprised that more owners of these early Vettes are not running big cube SBs, ie 383-427ci. But then, I guess I'm still much more of a hotrodder than I am a NCRSer
. Frequently. when I visit the NCRS site, I read things that just make me hang my head and roll my eyes. For me personally, some of that stuff just takes the fun out of driving/owning one of these early pieces of Americana!)Tom Parsons
11-09-2011, 05:35 PM
#125
Team Owner
One thing that might hold some guys back is the lack of the old style crankcase breather set up. You have to run different valve covers, you can't make a stock apearing engine. Also, I think these aftermarket cyl. head, Dart, Edelbrock, etc. are really missing the boat by not offering a externally stock appearing head, i.e. no bolts holes, camel humps, etc.
RPO-242 PCV valve replaces the old draft tube - was a legit option for '61 and requires no different valve covers than original...providing the block has the hole in the back for the draft tube...
11-09-2011, 07:12 PM
#126
POSSE ZR-1 Driver
One thing that might hold some guys back is the lack of the old style crankcase breather set up. You have to run different valve covers, you can't make a stock apearing engine. Also, I think these aftermarket cyl. head, Dart, Edelbrock, etc. are really missing the boat by not offering a externally stock appearing head, i.e. no bolts holes, camel humps, etc.
Internal breather vapor seperator:
External breather tube:
Pretty much a stock looking engine with unmodified valve covers. Uses the stock 64 L76 air cleaner, intake manifold. New 770cfm carb was modified with the old 2818 fuel bowls and choke setup so all the fuel plumbing is stock as well.
Last edited by Subfixer; 11-09-2011 at 07:17 PM.
11-09-2011, 08:33 PM
#127
If you want to see something instructive, put your car on a chassis dyno, and watch your air cleaner lid start to suck down to the carb tops at about 4000 RPM due to vacuum above the carbs.
On my old 327, the factory 1961 air cleaner was so restrictive, that over 5000 RPM, I was starting to lose HP, and by 6000 RPM, my HP was down 30%, based on the MAP readings on the EFI.
That 1" tall filter element is barely adequate for 283 cubes at 6000 RPM.
I spent a lot of time, and perhaps $300 making a 3" tall filter element with cold air induction fit under my hood for the larger 427 motor, as the 3" tall element is large enough that I do not start to build a manifold vacuum (power loss) under full throttle at higher RPM, again confirmed by MAP readings.
You may want to consider building a intake plenum, and using a FI airbox for the filter element, you want about 135 square inches of filter surface area (not counting the pleats) for that motor, other wise, your top RPM power will be off by as much as ~30%.
Doug
Doug
On my old 327, the factory 1961 air cleaner was so restrictive, that over 5000 RPM, I was starting to lose HP, and by 6000 RPM, my HP was down 30%, based on the MAP readings on the EFI.
That 1" tall filter element is barely adequate for 283 cubes at 6000 RPM.
I spent a lot of time, and perhaps $300 making a 3" tall filter element with cold air induction fit under my hood for the larger 427 motor, as the 3" tall element is large enough that I do not start to build a manifold vacuum (power loss) under full throttle at higher RPM, again confirmed by MAP readings.
You may want to consider building a intake plenum, and using a FI airbox for the filter element, you want about 135 square inches of filter surface area (not counting the pleats) for that motor, other wise, your top RPM power will be off by as much as ~30%.
Doug
Doug
When I was drag racing with the 2x4's (last in the mid 70's) I turned (on a lathe) a bottom and a lid out of 1/4" aluminum plate and used a 2 1/4" x 14" K&N element - tallest element I could squeeze in under the hood.
I turned a nice step on both the top and the bottom to locate the element and pick up an extra 1/4" of clearance.
I always attributed the Q'jet set-up better performance due to the larger and better flowing ported stock intake and the heat barrier coating (Zirconium Oxide) on the bottom.
31 YEARS ago I wasn't quite as tuned into analytical instrumentation - vacuum readings on Air cleaners etc.
Jerry
03-13-2015, 03:39 PM
#128
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
March 13, 2015 UPDATE
I get asked how it is running and performing....see comment on initial post
03-17-2015, 12:24 AM
#129
Glad you've had fun with it! Looks like your air cleaner and or exhaust are limiting your power - a bunch - based on your drag strip run. My 64 ran the exact same numbers with the same size tires (235/60 BFG TA) with a 355hp ZZ4 crate motor running 2" manifolds and factory sidepipes (that still had the sleeves between the manifolds and the pipes, which only have a 1 5/8" ID opening! - talk about restrictive) Only took 3 runs with a best of 12.9 at 108, with a 2.03 60 foot.
03-17-2015, 08:55 AM
#130
Team Owner
Devildog, it's encouraging to hear how those WCFBs can perform. Can you tell me which WCFBs--year and #s--you were using/modified--to help get that kind of hp? I have a 2X4setup on my 59 running early 60s WFCBs ( 3739653 manifold and 3696s and 3500s carbs)
Doubt that I will ever get the HP that you did, but encouraged to hear that you can tune them to perform well. Some others on the forum have bad-mouthed the WCFBs--
Doubt that I will ever get the HP that you did, but encouraged to hear that you can tune them to perform well. Some others on the forum have bad-mouthed the WCFBs--
Also, I don't hear all that much bad-mouthing of WCFBs; its more like frustration because they are ill-understood, have been boogered with, or, adjusted improperly. Its less important what the WCFB part numbers are than what is done to the internals to make them run well. My clone dual quads were setup as 270hp versions with an unknown passenger car 1x4 in front and a 'real deal' Chrysler 2x4 rear carb. They ran like the real thing with over 750 cfm on tap if your engine called for it. What more do you want ?
02-09-2017, 10:48 AM
#131
Race Director
Member Since: Nov 2003
Location: Cottonwood AZ
Posts: 10,698
Received 3,048 Likes
on
1,934 Posts
C1 of Year Finalist (performance mods) 2019
I know this thread is several years old and was a very interesting read but the links to the article don't work for me. Can anyone direct me to a way to access them?
