First year for the 396?
11-25-2002, 05:13 PM
#21
Team Owner
Member Since: Oct 2000
Location: Washington Michigan
Posts: 38,899
Received 1,856 Likes
on
1,099 Posts
Re: First year for the 396? (Ironcross)
The 1969 L-78 (396/375) Camaro used the 3863143 cam (as did the Camaro 427/425hp COPO and L-89 engines); the Camaro 325hp and 350hp 396's used two different hydraulic cams - 3874872 (325hp) and 3883986 (350hp).
The L-78 also used the 9840 iron heads, and the L-89 used the 842 aluminum heads; both had 2.19" intake valves, and the iron heads had 1.72" exhausts while the aluminum heads had 1.84" exhausts. The 325hp and 350hp 396's used the 063 oval-port heads, with 290 heads very late in the model year.
All '69 Camaro 396's and 427's used the same exhaust manifolds - 6178 and 9879 - all were drilled/tapped for A.I.R. fittings, and all Camaro solid-lifter BB's used casting #3933163 aluminum high-rise intake, with one large hole and a center divider. :thumbs:
The L-78 also used the 9840 iron heads, and the L-89 used the 842 aluminum heads; both had 2.19" intake valves, and the iron heads had 1.72" exhausts while the aluminum heads had 1.84" exhausts. The 325hp and 350hp 396's used the 063 oval-port heads, with 290 heads very late in the model year.
All '69 Camaro 396's and 427's used the same exhaust manifolds - 6178 and 9879 - all were drilled/tapped for A.I.R. fittings, and all Camaro solid-lifter BB's used casting #3933163 aluminum high-rise intake, with one large hole and a center divider. :thumbs:
11-26-2002, 08:19 AM
#22
Melting Slicks
Re: First year for the 396? (JohnZ)
John, could the 67 396 safely be bored to 427?
From what I have read the 65 396 block was the only one.
Making it not the same. But there are so few around,
nothing is in stone. Mainly speculation.
Many books say the engines were "virtually" the same.
And looking at the cam specs I posted earlier,
what do you think? I have read they toned the cam down
for 66, but am not a cam guru. The 65 cam has not been available
since the early 70's. My car got a STD 66-67 cam in 76.
Not many 396 threads either, still plenty of confusion on the subject it seems.
:lol:
Red man needs to show up, as he researched the heck out of this.
From what I have read the 65 396 block was the only one.
Making it not the same. But there are so few around,
nothing is in stone. Mainly speculation.
Many books say the engines were "virtually" the same.
And looking at the cam specs I posted earlier,
what do you think? I have read they toned the cam down
for 66, but am not a cam guru. The 65 cam has not been available
since the early 70's. My car got a STD 66-67 cam in 76.
Not many 396 threads either, still plenty of confusion on the subject it seems.
:lol:
Red man needs to show up, as he researched the heck out of this.
11-26-2002, 09:03 AM
#23
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Mar 1999
Location: delmont pa
Posts: 6,744
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Cruise-In I Veteran
Cruise-In II Veteran
Re: First year for the 396? (396 RAT)
i have bored several original 65 corvette 396 to 4.250 back in the 60s but i never tried to bore them .125 over 4.250 which the 427 blocks will take. the 396 used in chevelles,camaros will not take a 4.250 bore as i also did that and the cly. cracked. the 65 corvette cam was different than the 66 and 144 was the # and the valve setting was .020and .024 in the 1965 interim shop manual. and we did run them as close a .012 and .018:chevy
11-26-2002, 09:15 AM
#24
Melting Slicks
Re: First year for the 396? (clem zahrobsky)
Thanks for the info.
Its appreciated.
What should I adjust my valves to?
My book says the same for 65,
but my engine has the 66-67 cam.
And just know in time this thread will
show up all over again.
And I will get :nono:
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
So in the future is it safe to say the
Block, cam, intake, heads, exhaust manifolds, ignition,
carb were diferent?
Or will I get :smash: ?
[Modified by 396 RAT, 8:43 AM 11/26/2002]
Its appreciated.
What should I adjust my valves to?
My book says the same for 65,
but my engine has the 66-67 cam.
And just know in time this thread will
show up all over again.
And I will get :nono:
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
So in the future is it safe to say the
Block, cam, intake, heads, exhaust manifolds, ignition,
carb were diferent?
Or will I get :smash: ?
[Modified by 396 RAT, 8:43 AM 11/26/2002]
11-26-2002, 09:50 AM
#25
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Mar 1999
Location: delmont pa
Posts: 6,744
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Cruise-In I Veteran
Cruise-In II Veteran
Re: First year for the 396? (396 RAT)
i have run the 143 cam at .024/.028 but also have run it .020/.024. the low end is smoother at .024/.028 :chevy
11-26-2002, 07:35 PM
#26
Drifting
Re: First year for the 396? (396 RAT)
"396 Rat, how could that be? That car used the same 1/2 shafts as the mighty 427?"
I don't know....I just watched that car self-destruct at the christmas tree.
I don't know....I just watched that car self-destruct at the christmas tree.
11-29-2002, 12:13 PM
#30
Race Director
Re: First year for the 396? (67HEAVEN)
No, no aluminum radiators in the early Camaro line. It would have been nice however. None of mine were so equiped and they are all big block cars. :thumbs: :flag :thumbs:
