mrtexas

The answer is yes I have done it but it required some custom made pipes to get around the PG.

65tripleblack

This thread is already deep in the weeds.

First of all assuming he's gonna keep the PG and the very tall axle ratio then there's no need for a bigger cam. In fact, anything much bigger than the 929 cam and the PG won't be happy unless it's modified. Next, you can't simply throw timing at an engine, all other things being equal, unless you're ready to use higher octane gas, otherwise it'll ping like a can full o marbles. Next, the Winters Forge intake used for the 327/340, 327/350 and 327/365 are useful as BOAT ANCHORS. They have 90 degree doglegs in all 8 ports. The Edelbrock performer is very similar to the Z28/LT1 intake, which is a FAR better setup. As a matter of fact, the standard cast iron 327/300 intake can easily be made to flow much, much more than the Winters Forge boar anchor. There is nothing, repeat, nothing that can be done to improve the flow characteristics of the 340/350/365 intake..............................and his 929 cam won't respond to a set of headers.

If you've never ported a set of double hump heads, then take it from me, the restriction at the valve pockets (especially on the exhaust side) is very, very significant. Porting the heads on that engine is all that needs to be done if the OP is gonna keep his PG tranny and tall 3.36 axle. If the OP loses his PG and goes to deeper gears, is looking for a high horsepower smallblock, then that's where you should be starting to talk camshafts.

Unless he goes to deeper axle ratio and a manual trans, playing with the camshaft duration will risk killing the driveability of the OPs car.

SI67

Good to know. Thanks. If I change trannies, it would be to a 200-4R, so more revs on the way up to cruise, where they'd be even lower than my current cruise revs, even if I were to also change to a 3.55 or 3.70 rear. So I figure for MY operating range (not racing on track or street), probably no practical benefit to a bigger exhaust--certainly not when cost is considered. Is this logic equally applicable to L79-sized valves?

It gets lively, doesn't it? Different experiences and differing opinions.

Steve

Donald #31176

For best performance every car needs the ignition to fire the plugs at the proper moment . Optimized timing is defined as obtaining the maximum downward pressure on the piston @ about 12* ATDC. A pre emissions rotor will allow the engine to whine higher when the coil saturation period is the shortest.

SI67

When someone wants more power, it seems to me that it make sense to ask "Under what conditions do you feel that your current performance is inadequate? With maybe a breakdown into
A) Acceleration from a dead stop
B) Merging and passing on the highway
C) Running of breath at high speed

and what, along with cash upfront, are you willing to give up?

As in Nowhere Man's inquiry about goals and budget.

Steve

MikeM

427Hotrod

Definitely at least a converter/gear swap would make night and day difference in what you have. A T-350 or 2004R would be the next step up the ladder. You will FEEL these improvements instantly.

Unless you are worried about looking dead stock...just about any aftermarket aluminum head out there will improve power dramatically over what you have unless you spend some good time/$$$ porting them. Orange paint and some epoxy can create double humps. Avoid the cheapest imports though....

Along with that, a mild cam upgrade would work. Head choice will determine final specs, but nothing radical needed.

Then there are headers and 2.5" exhaust (3" will fit through the holes).

I agree the old 365 intake doesn't look that great....but a few years ago there was some testing on a relatively mild 350 HP or so combination and it didn't do as bad as I expected against the Z-28 intake. Certainly a good Performer/Performer RPM would help things a lot though. I'm not a giant Edelbrock carb fan...but when they are right they do drive very nice. I leave it alone and concentrate on the other stuff first.

JIM

MikeM

The cheapest cruising type "power increase" you can do is jack the 300 heads/intake up and slide a stock 400 short block under it and put it back together. 383 short block is a good second choice.

Gone fishing

Like walking through marsh mud, whew. So the easiest way would be (1) keep cam (2) use Edlebrock performer intake RPM with a small block hood (3) use Petronix ignition module and high voltage cool. I already use 93 octane and booster because It seems to run better

Gone fishing

Money's not an issue but time is at present. It's spring and time to ride before it gets blazing hot down here. Probably another issue to face

Gone fishing

Which Petronix module and coil or kit?

MikeM

That would be the easiest way but I don't know how any of that is going to make two hoots to a holler about how much power your engine makes for the way you drive it.

Sounds like a waste of resources to me. See my previous post is you want most bang for the buck.

SI67

According to Edelbrock, only the plain "vanilla" Performer (2101 family) will fit under your hood. Not EPS, not RPM, not Air Gap.

As far as what will or won't give you useful improvement, I'll defer to the much more experienced folks. You would be hard-pressed to find someone LESS experienced than I am in these matters.

Steve

Gone fishing

Thanks,
Would the Petronix flamethrower 111 module and coil work, 4 pin

Nowhere Man

For what? Causing a spark? If so yes. It will not add HP. all it does is eliminate checking the points every 5k miles or so.

Gone fishing

Steve
I'm probably as little or less experienced but a lot of info from these guys really helps

SI67

Suffice it to say that we don't have universal agreement in this community on the advantages of breakerless ignition conversions over the stock points system vs. initial and potential replacement cost. Nor is there complete harmony about whether any of the systems, with or without points, for producing a "hotter" spark are of any practical benefit in ordinary street driving. If you search the Forum for things like "Pertronix" or "breakerless" or "electronic ignition" you'll see that there have been some enthusiastic discussions.
I'd say you've stepped into it, but you were led there.


I have the entry-level Pertronix Ignitor in my '67, with the original stock coil. It has worked reliably for years and I am satisfied with it. It didn't transform the performance of my car, nor did I expect it to. I don't think it's doing anything for me that properly maintained points wouldn't do. I COULD add a higher voltage coil (from a narrow selection of those with enough primary-side resistance for this model of Ignitor), and it would be about the least labor-intensive modification I could perform, but with my mild engine and mundane driving conditions, I am not convinced that it would do anything for me that my 48-year-old Delco coil isn't already doing.

Steve

firemist1

I installed the following in 1997 with zero problems since then:

Ignition module - 1181
Flame Thrower coil - 40011

There are also newer versions available. There are a lot of opinions here from folks who apparently never installed these. But I can tell you from my experience that there was an immediate change in responsiveness, cold starting, and engine output. If you are in the Pacific NW, stop by and we can go for a ride. You can see for yourself. You also save money changing points, condensers and spark plugs.

63Corvette

Try MONEY! It works every time

65tripleblack

1. Pertronix ignition with a high voltage coil won't do you any good unless you have a problem with your present ignition system, OR if your engine will make power above 6500 RPM.

2. As stated already, the Performer RPM won't fit under your hood. For that matter, the LT1/Z28 is VERY close...........depends on the condition of your body mounts and/or number of shims in each position. But why? Big waste of money in this case. Your engine is a low RPM torquer, not a screamer.

3. This is the last time I'll tell you. The heads are the choke point to your engine's intake/exhaust flow and the engine's throughput is directly proportional to torque and power. I've been there, so if you don't listen then go ahead and knock yerself out.