L88Plus

Little Mouse, this isn't a dig at you, but why are you here instead of on a mid-engine car forum? You're not exactly making a lot of friends in a forum dedicated to front engine cars.

You may have all the racing facts, but you should expect people to be defensive of the cars they grew up with and love.

69427

I'll give you credit. You're consistent. Consistently wrong. Clark's Lotus was not front engined.

And C3DeedlyDee was correct. You can't admit you're wrong, so you have to keep shifting the goal posts.

Pathetic.

69427

But that's it, HE DOESN'T! He's a blithering idiot, spewing out nonsense. Even with the true facts presented to him, he ignores them. He can't admit he's full of crap.

Batty Mantis

It’s amazing how this thread started by asking a question about big block c3 handling vs small block, and slowly transformed into something completely different. It hit things like Zora’s favorite Vette, sbc stroker vs bbc, mid engine handling vs front engine, open wheel racing, bashing Harley owners, and outright name calling. To Little Mouse I have to ask what is your intention? To inform or antagonize? Of course mid engine cars handle better. That’s the whole reason Chevy is changing the platform. But it has nothing to do with the question that was asked. And if you’ve had so many problems with new Chevys why do you keep going back? And Harley owners don’t buy them to be the fastest people on the road. That’s what Buells are for, although they are doing pretty well in NHRA right now. But with your vast racing knowledge you probably already knew that. But you can always go to a biker bar or rally anywhere in the U.S. and tell them all how they are riding tractor motors. Make a game of it by seeing if you can leave with any of your teeth left. In conclusion, I wonder if Brassplyer has abandoned this thread, or if he’s sitting on the couch with a bag of popcorn waiting to see how this soap opera ends.

Jebbysan

On the subject of Big Block vs. Small Block handling wise....I would like to throw in an interesting curve......my 66' L-79 was a great handling car.....albeit tire challenged but great balance and predictable.....and it sat right (car in the Avatar). When I got my 69' 427/400 it handled like a bus with a boat strapped to the hood.....but it sat nose high due to bullshit Moog coil springs that almost always make a Vette sit like a 4x4......so I cut a spring out and put new Monroe gas shocks all around and damn, it was like a different car. It handled WAY better than the 66'......but it had a lot more tire (255/60/15 vs. 215/70/15).
The point I am trying to make is that a LOT of Corvette's....for whatever reason.....sit dead wrong....and sitting wrong throws the instant center of the IRS off dramatically not to mention the COG.......so for a bunch of people to try to compare these cars is ridiculous because the suspensions are no where near where they need to be to begin with......
That said.....I doubt VERY highly you could tell the difference between two identically optioned 70' Vette's, one with a 350 and one with a 454.....a good portion of the weight is behind the axle centerline as stated previously anyway...so the balance is not changed as much......and the actual 200 of extra pounds working the tire can be felt only at 8/10ths or above cornering....
My 3150 lbs. 72' with Nitto's and VB&P suspension handles like a dream......if you stuck 200 lbs. on the hood it might actually be less tail happy

Jebby

Metalhead140

What a train wreck of a thread! To throw some fresh fuel on the fire... I don't believe handling is the same thing as outright performance capability, and I think that is one of the issues people have in these discussions. We all know that a rearward of centre weight bias is optimal for outright performance, but those same cars are generally accused of poor/twitchy/unforgiving handling. A close to 50:50 bias, while not best for outright performance, is generally what is associated with best handling, where handling is the controllability and balance of the car.

suprspooky

That is some impressive torque for 434 CI, I wish you were closer my 460 BBC Tri-power puts down 481 to the wheels (N/A) I'd need a rolling race tho (4 spd car, so non-sticky tires are required to prevent breakage). I am complimenting your motor by the way, 15 year old and still impressive

If the dyno sheet is RWHP ignore the following and see me paying homage. Do you think the heads are holding you back or did you cam it on purpose just for low end? I ask because I only calculate 1.14 HP/CI and my AFR 265 460 is at 1.21 HP/CI with the Tri-power (1.3 with a Dart S/P and 850 Holley)

suprspooky

Train wreck, it's hilarious (Honda riders like myself have been badmouthed by Harley Guys for decades), Tractor Motor? more like a kick start washing machine motor (oops, Harleys have two cylinders and hydraulics so I guess way better than the maytag), just funnin, guys my brother has a beautiful knucklehead, I just won't let him park it in my driveway.

Batty Mantis

lol. You Honda guys kill me (just kidding. I’ll ride with anyone regardless of make so long as they know how to ride)

mrichi

Most of those who raise the issue of BB weight are the ones who don’t own a BB . You can’t beat the torque of a big block always so much fun to drive

jb78L-82

BBC Power is fantastic! No one is arguing that it is not. So is a 500 Gross HP SBC V8 355/383 or a twin turbo 500 HP V6 Or a Supercharged small displacement V8 with 550 hp. They are all fun and great in their own way!

BBC and SBC C3's have a different handling feel and actually do handle differently when pushed hard...this fact is undeniable. BBC C3's are and feel nose heavy...they are...whether anyone likes that fact or not. It does not matter whether one likes that statement or not...its not about the emotion from the statement...the emotion is what drives all the discussion and descension.

Last, all cars from the era of the C3 were generally poor handlers for a variety of reasons. The C3's were actually some of the best handling cars of the time (including the BB C3's, just not a good as the SBC C3's), mostly due to the weight distribution and the much maligned rear IRS which can be made to perform quite well on the street with minor updates to a few parts. Try driving hard a Chevelle 454 with a posi rear, Nova SS 396, a V8 Monza, etc for some real scary handling and you will know what tail snap really is......

Little Mouse

Stripped 66 both sbc and bbc used in it no real difference. Was 1975 though 205 width tires. Lol. No one should consider handling based on sbc or bbc. As 427 hot rod said it correctly few to no one has the ***** to push the cars hard enough to make any difference. From power everywhere across the board its a bbc no substitude for one and anything done to sbc can be done to bbc and take even more advantage of it. I like sbc but i dont lie to myself and tell myself its better then a bbc. As far as pushing something hard on the street the state of arkansas pulled my license 4 times and thats only when i was caught. Was so bad would not be much of an exacturation to say, that if a cop car pulled up beside of me the race was on. Judge butler constant words to me when we met in court... Jim what im i going to do with you... Was there so many times before him he called me by my nickname. As to why one poster said why im i not on a mid engine forum no need will never own one even if its a better way to do it. But if argued with will point out when im right could care less what anyone thinks of me one way or the other not here to make any friends dont need any have enough. Of the 4 vettes i owned a long time ago 72, 73, 66, 78 in that order only two i would want back is tge 66 and the 78. The C2 in my opinion best looking dash ever put in a mass production car. In a minority but to on me the 78 up was best looking C3. My 78 was a better car then the earlier ones just not from a performance standpoint its weight the huge problem and when i buy another the cadillac stuff will all be gone along with ralf naders bumper bullshit. To another idiot poster i have had 100s of pms sent to me over the time here asking my opinion on things they want to do. Do i have any friends here dont know dont care. If your not female or i know you personally could care less if you breath air in your lungs, may be air i want to breath and reason i was succesfull as small business person. Have fun.

TheGreek!

I still build 454's and I'm not a restorer. Here's the one I'm putting in my '69:



Don't knock it until you've tried it, lol....

With the blower on my 454 I can make the power of a huge cube big block without having to spend the huge money needed to build one...

And you cant deny the awesome look of an 8-71 blower...

As for how the car will handle around corners with it that's a different story, I'm not building my 69 to go fast around corners...

Batty Mantis

Badass! 👍

mrvette

I find most of these comments amusing, in that as tech back in the 60's was just abdominal compared to the upgrades available today.....First is TIRES/wheels....obviously, after that glass rear springs, then Billy Stein shocks, then upgrades to stock brakes.....much less the rest of the car/engine/trans/RACK steering/etc....

OldCarBum

Here are a couple photos of the chassis and suspension for the 33 Roadster I built.
A slight improvement over what Henry Ford designed.

suprspooky

I was totally pokin fun anyway. I will also ride with anyone, as long as I'm not behind the loud pipes anyway (Harley or other brand). The parking in my Driveway is due to the old Harleys oil leak issues (not cause it's a Harley).

cv67

Any C3 will feel subpar compared to most modern cars as far as ride and handling goes, most are just pleasure driving these anyways. Dont get too wrapped up over it, the way they feel is all part of the charm. Sometimes wonder if we are all spoiled by todays cars and expect too much out of something 50 yrs old.

Batty Mantis

l know. I was just messin with ya

v2racing

Did you know that old Harleys had oil leaks designed in to both the engine and trans to lube the primary and rear chains? They didn't seal the primary until 1965 on the big twins, but still had a rear chain oiler that would leave puddles.

Mike