When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Over the top is a relative thing. If it's what you want and you're not breaking the law to get it, let 'er rip.
On my side I'm keeping it simple trying to get done while I can still have fun in it or at least by the time this guy's feet reach the pedals.
Yo, Grandpa! ANY chance at all you'll have this ready when I'm 16?
Meanwhile there's a '32 Ford Roadster, my father's hot rod from the 50's, sitting in a barn back home also waiting to be back on the road, which it hasn't seen legally since since 1960, i.e. when I was about this guy's age .
Lucky bastard. Whenever I ask my daughter when they're planning on having kids, all I get is .
My daughter has been living with her boyfriend for 4 years now. Recently, we got a text with a picture of them standing in front of a judge. His family is VERY well connected politically, we figured there was only one reason for a quickie wedding. We were wrong! Seems his company's sending him to Singapore. Turns out if you want to live together in Singapore, you have to be legally married. Oh well. It'll happen eventually.
Lucky bastard. Whenever I ask my daughter when they're planning on having kids, all I get is .
My daughter has been living with her boyfriend for 4 years now. Recently, we got a text with a picture of them standing in front of a judge. His family is VERY well connected politically, we figured there was only one reason for a quickie wedding. We were wrong! Seems his company's sending him to Singapore. Turns out if you want to live together in Singapore, you have to be legally married. Oh well. It'll happen eventually.
I guess men don't get to vote in Singapore
I had a Chinese engineer come to the US for 3 months of training. To seal the deal he had to get married, and leave his wife behind, because the Chinese government wanted to be sure he'd come back.
My son and his wife met in their sophomore year in college. Got married 6 months after graduation and still waited 6 years for the little guy you see there.
Over the top is a relative thing. If it's what you want and you're not breaking the law to get it, let 'er rip.
On my side I'm keeping it simple trying to get done while I can still have fun in it or at least by the time this guy's feet reach the pedals.
Yo, Grandpa! ANY chance at all you'll have this ready when I'm 16?
Meanwhile there's a '32 Ford Roadster, my father's hot rod from the 50's, sitting in a barn back home also waiting to be back on the road, which it hasn't seen legally since since 1960, i.e. when I was about this guy's age .
That could finance the Vette if you sold it to me. Is it all real steel?
You are cherry picking out a small part of my response to turn it out of context so you can make a completely different point that had nothing to do with what I posted. I simply hate when people do that and have no respect for it.
I will repeat what I have been posting all along. The LS engines are NOT small block engines. They are not the same family as the small block that was produced and sold in cars by GM from the 50's until the early 2000's. It doesn't matter what anyone claims, they aren't. How can it be nitpicking to say this???
Just an observation, nobody has referred to any engine by their GENERATION.
Just an observation, nobody has referred to any engine by their GENERATION.
My 434 c.i. SMALL BLOCK, is a Gen 1 engine.
Chill.
You do realize that despite numerous documentation as to what a small block engine designation is, still insists on his own definitions and terms. This from someone who proclaims that certain engines like the LS7 427 small block V8 is NOT a small block despite GM who designed and makes this engine, calling THEIR engine a small block V8!
Think about these 2 sentences for a second and you will just ignore like most......................
LS engines are not the same as the first generation small block. The legendary very historically significant small block GM produced for 50 years. The small block that came in a C3. The small block with such a strong legacy that anyone who says Chevy small block is understood to be talking about the original engine and not a LS engine. So, I still can't figure out WTF displacement or measurements or any other metric has to do with this, or how this is making up definitions.
If someone made a post on this forum and asked "What heads do you use on your small block?" not ONE person would respond with LS engine part numbers.
Last edited by lionelhutz; Nov 30, 2018 at 07:36 PM.
You do realize that despite numerous documentation as to what a small block engine designation is, still insists on his own definitions and terms. This from someone who proclaims that certain engines like the LS7 427 small block V8 is NOT a small block despite GM who designed and makes this engine, calling THEIR engine a small block V8!
Think about these 2 sentences for a second and you will just ignore like most......................
Originally Posted by lionelhutz
LS engines are not the same as the first generation small block. The legendary very historically significant small block GM produced for 50 years. The small block that came in a C3. The small block with such a strong legacy that anyone who says Chevy small block is understood to be talking about the original engine and not a LS engine. So, I still can't figure out WTF displacement or measurements or any other metric has to do with this, or how this is making up definitions.
If someone made a post on this forum and asked "What heads do you use on your small block?" not ONE person would respond with LS engine part numbers.
Lionel, I agree with you on ALL your points, however, it is not worth arguing with someone who can't see the wood for the trees. 😉
As I said, it would be easier if engines were referred to by their GENERATION designation.
Last edited by Steve Ference; Nov 30, 2018 at 07:48 PM.
That could finance the Vette if you sold it to me. Is it all real steel?
As I noted, my father's rod in the 50's. Weren't nothin' back then but real steel.
someday I'll get back to this project too
As it sits right now it's worth twice what the 80 vette is
Had it running in a manner back in the late 70's. It was in little better shape than shown here. No exhaust, tires from the 50's, a wire to the carbs for a throttle. I managed to get pulled over in it. Sherriff says, license, registration, and insurance. I said, I've got one out of three. After some discussion he wrote me up for unregistered and ordered me to have it towed home. I got out it for ten bucks - 5 hours labor back then.
Now that's one hot rod I would love to build.
I hope I don't get struck down by forum lightening, but I'd much rather have that in my garage than my 73 with all the parts I've collected.
Nice
But there is no replacement for displacement if you want to make big HP and still get lots of low end torque that makes the car fun to drive on the street. I wouldn't have much trouble betting money that a 450hp 454BB makes more low end torque then a 450hp 383SB or 406SB.
What would make the heads "equal" between a small block and a LS engine? If you picked intake runner cc as the main metric when building a small block to match the power of a LS3 then you'd be using 260cc heads on your small block build. That's a lot of intake runner cc to use on a 383 cu-in 430hp small block build and you likely wouldn't be happy with the result on the street..
what is interesting is comparing 427 SBC combos to 427 BBC combos. Torque comes with cubic inches, the example you lay about is comparing more cubes to less cubes. When you compare an equal cubic inch SB and B.B. you will start seeing that the SBs actually have more torque per cube most of the time. The SBs have to get more port velocity to flow the same amount of air with smaller intake ports and valves and this creates a more efficient engine that also happens to be lighter and sometimes cheaper. (A lot of B.B. heads have DRAMATICALLY oversized exhaust ports that really hurt torque, too/ Calvin Elston, arguably the best header designer builder in the business regularly finds huge average torque gains on bbcs by making a header primary size that’s actually smaller than the heads exhaust ports to increase exhaust flow velocity.(air velocity is king, SBCs often have more average port speed than bbcs and low valve angles also make higher average port speed possible as it doesn’t have to be slowed down to make a sharp turn to get into the cylinder.)
Comparing intake runner volume between 23 degree heads and lower angle heads (like all LS heads) is not an apples to apples comparison. The steeper angle and “straighter shot” into the cylinder with the steeper angles means that’s the air doesn’t need to be slowed down as much and can produce more airspeed/ torque at higher CSAs; the higher valve angle heads generally have LONGER intake ports so the CSAs can be the same even with a bigger port volume with a steeper valve angle head. A 260cc 18 def sbc head on a 6.2 sbc will perform essentially the same as a 260cc 18 deg LS head on a 6.2 LS. You are right that a 260cc 23 deg head would not be great on the street on 5.7 or 6.2L.
Adam
Last edited by NewbVetteGuy; Dec 1, 2018 at 11:02 AM.
As for the rod/stroke ratio. Evaluating rod length based on the rod/stroke ratio it causes is probably the most over-blown part of engine bench racing. The 383 gets way too much attention for having a "poor" rod/stroke ratio. Long stroke big blocks end up with a much worse rod/stroke ratio then a 383 with 5.7" rods yet you don't read much about how those builds are terrible because of it like you do with a 383 small block. It's just accepted to be what it is. You're much better off evaluating rod length based on the piston design (lightest weight yet wrist pin not into the ring pack or compromised strength) and any possible help with clearances it gives you.
100% agree. A 383 with a 6” rod has almost the exact same rod/ stroke ratio has a 5.7” rod 350; the ultimate angles are barely changed at all even between 5.7” and 6” rod 383s, anyway.
You all are funny. Gen III Ls engines have smaller bore diameters then Gen I&II 350 engines so which one is smaller? Gen III Ls engines carried over the same bore spacing, cam bearings and lifters as the previous generation. And the LS are lighter. If the Gen I engine falls between the LS and big block should we rename them? LS=mouse BB=rat Gen I=chipmunk?
You do realize that despite numerous documentation as to what a small block engine designation is, still insists on his own definitions and terms. This from someone who proclaims that certain engines like the LS7 427 small block V8 is NOT a small block despite GM who designed and makes this engine, calling THEIR engine a small block V8!
Think about these 2 sentences for a second and you will just ignore like most......................
I get it... as I am not on who gets all bent out of shape when 'small block' is used to describe an LS7 427. Many are reluctant to accept this even though WE did not call it that.... GM does....as previously stated. How or what method is used for GM to describe something is up to them and if people cannot grasp it...then OH WELL.
And when dimensions prove that an LS engine is the same as the cast iron one in regards to cylinder bore centers.......'they' still will not accept it....and possibly why GM calls an LS engine a small block. Because is must be OBVIOUS that the actual cubic inch displacement of a motor DOES NOT define it as a big block or small block due to a 400 CID is a small block has more cubic inches in it than a 396 CID big block. As previously stated
I did not write this but they even call a LS a small block. Times are changing. And with the LS designed engines already been out for over 21 years,,,that is almost half of the time the cast iron small blocks have been used in production. Time flies. So holding onto the historical value of what the cast iron small block achieved is fine by me...but not accepting a new era is upon us and things can change is quite ........ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LS_based_GM_small-block_engine
Technically the small block has been use in production for 48 years and not 50 years as thought by some as previously stated. Much like a LS1 is a 5.7 liter...which is what GM refers it to even though it is slightly under 350 cubic inches ...like previously mentioned....which is also known as being a 5.7liter Actually...346 cubic inches is 5.669924 liters.....and 350 cubic inches is 5.735472 liters. Go figure. I guess they 'rounded' it up.
And if someone asked for casting numbers tor their small block.....the next question asked would be..... "What engine do you have?" due to not all heads are the same....due to not all small blocks are the same.....obviously. So somebody just throwing out casting number would be pointless....much like this discussion about what is or is not a small block.
Yet some here feel that some of us can not see the trees due to the forest. Well I guess they can think as they like.
As I said, it would be easier if engines were referred to by their GENERATION designation.
I agree... but that is not likely to happen...but that would take more effort for those who choose to 'stay in their lane' and do as they have been doing for so long thinking that we know what they have. Like we can read minds. Because you know there are small journal crank shafts and large journal cranks shafts in a GEN 1 small block. and engines with the draft tube for the crankcase and others without.it in the GEN 1 era.. Probably needing the block casting number so we know what that have and maybe still more information also. Because as we know many of these Corvettes have had engine swaps in them and until you KNOW what you have... it is all a guessing game.
Thankfully 'worship79' knew he had a 383 in his car.and how that led to possible internal parts that are known to fail. More than likely it was the wrist pin or piston that caused the failure or a dropped valve, but it can still be a rod that went bad also...which is how I commented initially.
This all started off when someone's feelings got hurt when a big block was mentioned. And how some people had to throw in their views on that which did not help this out by any means. And then it grew from there to where it is now. Information being provided to support comments that some people want to contradict or argue about and yet the information provided to support a view ....they just cannot accept.
It is quite similar to this BS way of categorizing Corvettes today into C1, C2, C3 and so on. What a crock of crap. Even though I have accepted it....There is a mile of difference in a 1953 and a1962....and a 1963 to a 1967...and lets not leave out the 1968 to 1982 and also the 1984 to 1996. So many design changes and improvements that make many year models unique in their own right. So where does it end
So those of you can obviously do as you see fit and believe what you want to believe...because it is clear to me that we all 'read' into what has been written differently and some comprehend it an while others do not with the information provided to support a specific comment. . And if you feel or believe that I cannot see the 'trees' ( as you put it out there first) because I am not comprehending what someone wrote to try to support their views in how and why they think about this in the way they do which you support and agree with. Then it is what it is and I really do not care. It is not my job to worry about what you think of me.
If the technical data has shown the bore centers of GEN 1 small block are the same as an LS engine...then MAYBE that is WHY GM calls it a small block. And for those who just cannot possibly grasp that GM may use measurements to call an engine a big block or small block ...because I am sure GM used some form of information to make this decision on what they call something and not just pulling words out of thin air....because as know ...cubic inches of displacement does not describe if an engine is a big block or small block...even in the GEN 1 era... so it is not my problem to try to solve it for them.
I agree... but that is not likely to happen...but that would take more effort for those who choose to 'stay in their lane' and do as they have been doing for so long thinking that we know what they have. Like we can read minds. Because you know there are small journal crank shafts and large journal cranks shafts in a GEN 1 small block. and engines with the draft tube for the crankcase and others without.it in the GEN 1 era.. Probably needing the block casting number so we know what that have and maybe still more information also. Because as we know many of these Corvettes have had engine swaps in them and until you KNOW what you have... it is all a guessing game.
Thankfully 'worship79' knew he had a 383 in his car.and how that led to possible internal parts that are known to fail. More than likely it was the wrist pin or piston that caused the failure or a dropped valve, but it can still be a rod that went bad also...which is how I commented initially.
This all started off when someone's feelings got hurt when a big block was mentioned. And how some people had to throw in their views on that which did not help this out by any means. And then it grew from there to where it is now. Information being provided to support comments that some people want to contradict or argue about and yet the information provided to support a view ....they just cannot accept.
It is quite similar to this BS way of categorizing Corvettes today into C1, C2, C3 and so on. What a crock of crap. Even though I have accepted it....There is a mile of difference in a 1953 and a1962....and a 1963 to a 1967...and lets not leave out the 1968 to 1982 and also the 1984 to 1996. So many design changes and improvements that make many year models unique in their own right. So where does it end
So those of you can obviously do as you see fit and believe what you want to believe...because it is clear to me that we all 'read' into what has been written differently and some comprehend it an while others do not with the information provided to support a specific comment. . And if you feel or believe that I cannot see the 'trees' ( as you put it out there first) because I am not comprehending what someone wrote to try to support their views in how and why they think about this in the way they do which you support and agree with. Then it is what it is and I really do not care. It is not my job to worry about what you think of me.
If the technical data has shown the bore centers of GEN 1 small block are the same as an LS engine...then MAYBE that is WHY GM calls it a small block. And for those who just cannot possibly grasp that GM may use measurements to call an engine a big block or small block ...because I am sure GM used some form of information to make this decision on what they call something and not just pulling words out of thin air....because as know ...cubic inches of displacement does not describe if an engine is a big block or small block...even in the GEN 1 era... so it is not my problem to try to solve it for them.
DUB
Buddy, if I may call you that ? ; although you and I generally SEEM to like the same things in life ?! as a 60 year old man, I really don't give a damn how a person views things in life.
You could call black, white, for all I care. As long as I, know which is black or white, is all that matters to me.
Life is too short to be arguing about miniscule details like this.
Have a GREAT day DUB, and I mean it!
Last edited by Steve Ference; Dec 2, 2018 at 12:50 PM.
I get it... as I am not on who gets all bent out of shape when 'small block' is used to describe an LS7 427.
Yet some here feel that some of us can not see the trees due to the forest.
DUB
LOL, It's rather obvious that you are the one all bent out of shape considering the length and frequency of your posts on the subject keeps intensifying.
I have posted OVER and OVER that when I wrote the LS7 is not a small block, I was referring to the original small block.
I could care less if you want to call the LS engine series a small block. The LS engines will NEVER be the same engine series as the original small block engines no matter what you want to call them or how much you rant on trying to justify why your'e doing so..
Last edited by lionelhutz; Dec 2, 2018 at 04:19 PM.
Buddy, if I may call you that ? YES you may. ; although you and I generally SEEM to like the same things in life ?! as a 60 year old man, I really don't give a damn how a person views things in life. As you should be if that is what makes you you..
You could call black, white, for all I care. As long as I, know which is black or white, is all that matters to me. This is where we are slightly different.
Life is too short to be arguing about miniscule details like this. Agreed...but if I do not stand for something ...I stand for nothing in my book.
Have a GREAT day DUB, and I mean it!
Steve..I also hope you have GREAT DAY also....and YES...I mean that.
Originally Posted by lionelhutz
LOL, It's rather obvious that you are the one all bent out of shape considering the length and frequency of your posts on the subject keeps intensifying.
No..I am no where near being bent out of shape on this... it is actually amusing to me. And go back and see who starts this back up. I DID leave this subject alone.
Originally Posted by lionelhutz
Ihave posted OVER and OVER that when I wrote the LS7 is not a small block, I was referring to the original small block.
What you think you wrote and what you actually wrote are two separate things. Hard for me to read any more into what you wrote than what you wrote.
POST #38
[QUOTE=jb78L-82;1598401559]Correct...LS7 427 all aluminum small Block..in a C6 Z06[/QUOTE
POST #39
Originally Posted by lionelhutz
That's not a small block....
So, I'm not really understanding your point either SO how is a person supposed to read this any other way???
Originally Posted by lionelhutz
I could care less if you want to call the LS engine series a small block. The LS engines will NEVER be the same engine series as the original small block engines no matter what you want to call them or how much you rant on trying to justify why your'e doing so..
We can agree on this. It is OBVIOUS the the new LS engine cannot be the same series...or 'GEN' as GM has labeled some of the earlier cast iron small block engines. have been shown to be described as. They are not the SAME SERIES...but a small block... nonetheless. This is where we obviously differ in being willing to use the words 'SMALL BLOCK'.
I am done with you on this so call it as you see fit.
.
We were wrong! Seems his company's sending him to Singapore. Turns out if you want to live together in Singapore, you have to be legally married. Oh well. It'll happen eventually.
[/QUOTE