Hollywood has no imagination.....

Fast & Furious 6 is out in theatres. My son wants to see it to I'll probably go this weekend. Vin Diesel, Paul Walker and the Rock all return and they added MMA fighter Gina Carano ( "Haywire" ) and brought back Michelle Rodriguez so they'll have some major action I'm assuming. We can hope that Jordana Brewster or Gina Carano gets naked-but that's probably too much to ask. The last time this series had any sex appeal was four pictures ago when we got the smokin' hot Eva Mendes in a white bikini for a few minutes. ( I love dark women in white ). Maybe we'll at least get to see Carano put a sleeperhold on Michelle Rodriguez and choke the annoying bitch out. I never liked her character anyway. They also have Diesel driving yet another '68-70 Charger-how many have they wrecked-3 or 4 now? This one has a Daytona / Superbird front end on it. Any how-it looks like a re-hash of the other movies but who knows-the stunt work may be good.  Any how want to talk about not having any imagination-I read in a magazine that people have been offering Chad McQueen big bucks to do a remake of "Bullitt". If you don't know-he's the legendary Steve McQueen's son and he dabbled in acting in the '80's and '90's. He was one of the bullies in the original "Karate Kid" ( the classic with Pat Morita and Ralph Macchio, not the horrid remake with Jackie Chan and Will Smith's brat ) and he did some cool martial-arts movies with Cynthia Rothrock. Anyhow-I have great respect for him-he refused and explained why. He said- #1 you won't be able to top the legendary classic-I didn't like the "True Grit" remake-you can't top John Wayne in his prime and you can't top Steve McQueen. I loved my father and he was good to me my whole life-I got to go to France with him while he was filming "LeMans" I don't have daddy issues or anything-I'm just not going to open myself to the derision that the press would have for it. No one's asking Kyle Eastwood to re-do "Dirty Harry". "I personally like Jason Statham-but "The Mechanic" with him and Ben Foster didn't come close to the original with Charles Bronson and Jan-Micheal Vincent." "Robert DeNiro was nowhere near as scary a Max Cady as Robert Mitchum in the "Cape Fear" movies and Mitchum couldn't even say the "F" word." ( In the 1962 original ). Hollywood needs to get some new Ideas."  "I said I'd do an action movie about a badass "Dirty Harry' type detective-I've got the martial-arts background-my dad was taught by Bruce Lee- I can do just about anything that Chuck Norris or Steven Seagal or Jean-Claude Van Damme can do-and I'm younger than them." "And the McQuuen name will sell tickets, I realize that." "But were not going to call him Frank Bullitt." "Guess what?" "That was the deal breaker." "Millions to rip off my father's masterpiece and get crucified for doing it, or zero if I want to call him John Smith." "I don't need the money-so I'll take the zero."  What a smart guy who didn't sell out. I love the "Jack Reacher" books by Lee Child. In the books Reacher is 6'5" and 270 lbs. Hmm. Dwayne "The Rock" Johnsons? "Stone Cold" Steve Austin? Dolph Lundgren? I know-Tom Cruise!! Who's 5' 8" and about as threatening as a golden retriever puppy. Puhleeze. The same with "Shooter" that was based on Stephen Hunter's classic "Point of Impact". Mark Wahlberg is a good actor-but he's not "Bob Lee Swagger". Who was a Vietnam Vet and a master sniper-based on Carl Hitchcock-a real-life Marine Sniper and war hero who served in 'Nam.. The book was set in 1992 when Bob Lee Swagger would have been 46 years old. They couldn't get Tommy Lee Jones or Chuck Norris or Fred Dryer ( "Hunter", "Death Before Dishonor" ) or a myriad of other actors who are old enough to have been to Viet Nam? They have to change it and make him a "Desert Storm" vet???!!!  I had friends in Desert Storm-the Iraqis would surrender if you'd give them a bowl of Cheerios!!  "We have not eaten in three days-feed us and we will renounce Saddam." Not the same combat background!!  Ugh!  Let's hope someone listened to Chad McQueen and comes up with some original ideas. I published a book a few years ago under a pen name. "Men of Steel" by Shane Collins. My garndfather was a union organizer in the '40's and he worked with Jimmy Hoffa and Harry Bridges and other famous people. It's the story of his life, and how the mob got involved in the unions. A book reviewer called it "Roots", "Goodfellas" and "Walking Tall" all rolled into one. Hear that Mr. Spielberg? or Mr. Tarantino?  Mastermind            

Not cheap or pig-headed.....Just looking at performance gain per dollar

After the last post I got some emails accusing me of being pig-headed and too "Old-school" and not embracing technology. I beg to differ-I know the GM LS engines are the future-just like the small-block Chevy replaced the Ford Flathead as "The" hot rod engine in the lat '50s and early '60's. If you want to hot rod one of these modern marvels go ahead. With their electronic fuel management they can make awesome power and still retain decent drivability. But like I've said before-you buy something old because it's different from what's new. I don't understand buying a '55 Chevy and putting a Morrison frame under it with rack&pinion steering and 4-wheel disc brakes and an LS engine and a six-speed automatic. If you want a new Camaro SS or Corvette-go buy one. What I'm talking about is people building "Old-school" cars-I.E,-a '55 Chevy or a '68 Road Runner or even a '77 Trans-Am. Let's take the '77 T/A for example. These cars are experiencing a real renaissance right now and values are skyrocketing. That's because people have found out what great cars they actually were and how much potential they have. What irritates me about every single Pontiac ever featured in a magazine is 1st off-they all have a cut-down 455 crank, longer big-block Chevy rods and custom pistons stuffed in a 400 block so they can get 461-470 ci. That's nice, except-these rotating assemblys cost 2 grand. And that's just for the parts-that doesn't include the machine work you'll need to use this assembly. So your going to have $2,500 in the crank, rods and pistons. Consider this-if the 400 in the car ran good, had good oil pressure, and good compression, and didn't use any oil-$2500 would buy you an Edelbrock Performer intake, a hotter than stock cam kit from Edelbrock, Crane, Competition Cams, Lunati-etc, a set of headers and a good dual exhaust system,a higher-stall speed torque converter and  some 3.42:1 or 3.73:1 gears to put all that newfound power to the ground. I'd much rather be driving my T/A with 150 or so extra hp and be enjoying it rather than having it engineless while I scrape up another 4 grand to finish my stroker engine. The other thing I see is they all have to have hydraulic roller cams. Again if your building a late-model small or big-block Chevy or small-block Ford that had a roller cam from the factory-yes that's the way to go. You can run a bigger cam without excessive valve spring pressure or ruining the idle quality. Absolutely. But Pontiac never made a roller-cammed engine and the valvetrain parts necessary to convert a 1962-79 Pontiac engine to accept a roller cam costs about $1,800 on up-depending on which manufacturer you call. Now considering that the average aftermarket flat-tappet cam and lifter kit for a Pontiac costs about $200-I think I'll save the other $1,600 and live without the extra 25 hp and 30 lbs ft of torque. Or use that $1,800 to buy some Edelbrock or Kauffman aluminum heads-which will give you a lot more improvement than the 25 extra hp switching from flat-tappet to a roller. Especially if you already have the cam, exhaust, gears etc to complement the free-breathing heads. Why are NASCAR racers running flat-tappet cams to this day?  Certainly not to keep costs down-no the roller valvetrains are too heavy and aren't as reliable trying to run 8,000 rpm for 500 miles at Daytona!  The other thing that kills me is fuel injection. Now if you have a Camaro / Firebird, Corvette or Mustang that was fuel injected from the factory-yes Edelbrock, Accel, Trick Flow and other companies offer ported manifolds, larger throttle bodies, high-flow injectors, etc that work in conjunction with the factory system and will feed engines over 500 hp. That's the way to go. I'm talking about the aftermarket systems sold by Edelbrock, Holley, and others. They start at 2 grand-and that's the most basic kit for a small-block Chevy. For anything else they run more than 3 grand. $600 will buy you an Edelbrock intake and matching carb for any popular engine out there. And here's the kicker-in every test I've read-be it a Chevy, Ford, Mopar or Pontiac-the carburator made MORE power!!!  High-Performance Pontiac magazine tested on a STRONG 455 powered Trans-Am. The Edelbrock Performer RPM / 850 Holley combo made 15 MORE hp on the dyno than the $3,800 injection system. Explain this math to me-why would I spend an extra $3,200 to make LESS power?  So I can open the hood and show it to people? $3,800 for an induction system?  I read an article called "Junkyard Jewell" where Car Craft built a 400 Pontiac that had 500+ hp and 500+ lbs of torque for $4,400-for the whole engine from carb to oil pan, including machine work and the Edelbrock heads!!  I'll say it again- Hot Rod's "Project Disco" a 1979 Z/28 Camaro. 1st-off how is an LS motor and a six-speed tranny "Disco-Era Cool?"  That aside- why did it need a custom 9 inch Ford rearend? '79 Z/28's came from the factory with GM's excellent 8.5 inch ring gear Limited-Slip rear end with either 3.42:1 or 3.73:1 gears. Perfect for a street machine. Why did they have to spend $3,300 on a Currie custom? Oh yeah, that 1/2 inch on the ring gear makes a huge difference in toughness. Really? Because I have owned 400, 4-speed T/A's that use this same rear end and have dropped the clutch at 4,500 rpm incessantly drag-racing them every weekend and never broke the rear end. Why did it have to have a $5,000 six-speed conversion?  '79 Z/28s had either a BW T10 4-speed or a TH350 automatic with a 2,400 rpm converter nothing less than stellar to start with from the factory. Either one would have bolted up to their LS engine and performed flawlessly. If they wanted overdrive- a Gear Vendors overdrive only costs $2,600 and would give you six gears with the TH350 and 7 with the T10 ( the company doesn't recommend using the O/D in low gear with a stick ). I like technology fine-if it offers the biggest improvement for the lowest cost. But technology just for technology's sake-or to be able to say "I have the latest and greatest" even though it costs twice as much and makes less power is asinine. Mastermind      

More Major Dollar Overkill on magazine project cars.....Don't they get their average reader doesn't have 100K to put in a car?

Saw this months "Super Chevy" today and I again had to ask "Why?" They were talking about their recent project-a Rat-motored '72 Nova. You would think that would be a blue-collar guy kind of project-The factory put 396's in Novas from 1968-1970 so the motor mounts, springs, radiators etc are available from Jeg's, Summit Racing, Hooker, and various other suppliers. I figured they'd stuff a 454 in it with a TH350 or 400 behind it, slap on some traction bars and drag radials and let it rip-Call it "Project Cheap Shot" or something. Oh no-this baby has to have a custom front subframe, a custom 9 inch Ford rear end and 4-link drag-race style suspension, Wildwood 4-wheel disc brakes, and a 509 inch Dart-built monster backed by a TH400 with a 4,500 rpm converter and a trans-brake. Come on guys. I understand them not wanting to scour junkyards for a 454 out of a truck. Why couldn't they buy a brand-new GMPP Gen VI 427 / 454 block for $1500 and put whatever crank, rods, pistons, heads, to get whatever displacement they wanted from 427-496 ci.. Or buy a 454HO short block that has a forged crank, rods and pistons, and comes with the balancer, flywheel and oil pan. They could have used one of several "Turn-Key" Top End kits that come with heads, cam intake, etc- Like the Edelbrock Performer RPM Top-end kit-, or the ones from Trick Flow, Dart, or Brodix that all guaratee 550-600 hp on a 9.5:1 454. Anyway their 650 hp 509 inch Dart "M" based monster was leaking oil profusely from the oil pan or the the timing cover-they couldn't tell. So they had to pull the motor out to fix the oil leak. Hey that happens to the best of us-that I understand. But then decide while the engine is out-to change the cam. Why? They said the damn thing showed something like 663 hp on the dyno-who needs more than that? The car was already 10.70's in the 1/4. Any how they changed the cam-from a hydraulic roller to a solid roller-no less, and were just stoked as hell that it picked up 2 inches of vacuum at idle and went 10.47 in the 1/4. Ok-1st off if you've got a 663 hp engine backed by a trans with a 5-grand converter and a trans-brake-I don't think you were too worried about a glass-smooth idle. And I don't think dropping from 10.70 to 10.47 is worth pulling the cam and spending another 500-1,000 bucks over what you've already spent to convert your valvetrain from hydraulic roller to solid-roller!! I mean 2/10s for all that work?  I understand they have to push their advertiser's products to stay in business-but why can't they ever build say- a Camaro or Nova with subframe connectors, traction bars-and an "Old-School" small or big block with a T10 or Muncie 4-speed or TH350 / 400? Why does everything have to have an aftermarket subframe, rack&pinion steering, Wildwood or Brembo 4-wheel disc brakes, a custom 9 inch Ford rear, a $15,000 crate motor and a $4,000 4, 5 or 6-speed tranny?  State-of-the-art stuff is always cool, but can we once in a while feature a car that the average guy could afford without winning the lottery?  I applaud Popular Hot-Rodding this month-their cover car is a way-cool '68 Charger with a 383 and a 4-speed that the guy built for $25,000.  That's the stuff that 95% of us can afford and would like to read about.-so let's see more of them instead of page after page after page of  LS motors, SRT Hemis and Ford Coyotes stuffed into vintage iron with 100K+ pricetags.  Mastermind    

Beware of "Professionals" and their advice.......

I feel I need to clarify something for the average person who may be fooled by someone's title. The definition of a "Professional" is someone who gets paid for doing something. Whether or not their any good at it is a crapshoot. The definition of an "Expert" is someone who is very good at doing something whether or not he or she gets paid for it. For example-the 19 year old college girl that works at Autozone for $8.25 per hour who doesn't know where the jack is on the Honda her dad bought her is a professional auto parts person. So is Vic Edelbrock. They both sell auto parts for a living right?  Who would you rather ask about what camshaft to put in your small-block Chevy racing engine?  The 16 year old boy that flips burgers at McDonalds is a professional cook. So is Emeril LaGrasse. The 18 year old boy that delivers pizza for Domino's is a professioanl driver. So is Dale Earnhardt Jr.  The 75 year old man that checks your bag and receipt when your leaving Wal-Mart is a professioanl security guard. So are the Secret Service agents guarding the White House. The guy who sings and plays guitar at your local bar on Friday night is a professioanl musician. So is Kid Rock. See the point I'm making?  Conversely-an "Amateur" middleweight Golden Gloves boxer who had 100 fights and won 95 of them would certainly be considered an "expert" fighter even though he never got paid for doing it. A macho jerk that has 6 months training and has entered 10 MMA "Cage" fights and lost 4 of them while getting paid $100 a bout is a "Professional" fighter. His friends are shocked when the "Amateur" he challenges to a fight destroys him in a minute and a half.  I think you get the point-before you spend your hard-earned money following some "Pro's" advice-find out how much experience he has and what level of "Professional" success he's had. Nick Saban who's won multiple national Collegiate Championships coaching at LSU and Alabama and once coached the Miami Dolphins in the NFL and makes 5 million bucks a year is a professional football coach. So is the history teacher clown that coaches your son's JV team for an $800 stipend for the season that's gone 1-8 the last five years. They both get paid for coaching right? Their both "Professionals" right?  Mastermind            

A "Clone" may be the only way some of us can have our dream car....

Got a bunch of heat from "Purists" over the last post-but I don't care. I've gotten crap from people over my Hurst / Olds-which while rare-it's not a Hemi 'Cuda convertible-But even if it was-Where do you get your balls big enough to walk up to another man, a total stranger-and tell him he's stupid for driving his own car? Or for drag racing it during "Hot August Nights" or on the Hot Rod "Power Tour" or some other event? I've had people actually swear at me in the pits when they see the Chevy engine under the hood. Excuse me-It's my property, I can do whatever I want with it. Secondly-I put the Chevy engine in it so I could run it as hard as I wanted and not worry about putting a rod through the side of a rare, numbers-matching block. I have the original 455 Olds V8 and BOP bolt-pattern TH400 in my garage in case I ever want to sell the car to a "Just as it left the factory" type. For the right price I'll sell it with both engines, or I'll pull the Chevy out and put the Olds powertrain back in. But I don't need some Pompous ass telling me I've "ruined" the car or that I'm crazy for driving it. I don't want a $10,000+ piece of garage jewelry that I show to people and never drive because I'm afraid of wrecking it or putting too many miles on it. If you were married to Pam Anderson   would you make love to her every day and take her out often or would you lock her in a closet because your afraid of "damaging" her or decreasing her "Star Power"?  As to the Clone deal-I saw one at an auction on TV-it was a 1970 Chevelle SS454 LS6 clone. The seller freely admitted it wasn't original. He'd taken a 2 dr Malibu and decked it out like an SS and rebuilt a junkyard 454 to LS6 specs. The price was $22,000!! That was a screaming deal for the buyer. Even if you are an expert mechanic / bodyman and can do all the labor yourself, you can't buy a small-block Malibu, and all the exterior and interior trim parts from Year One, and build an LS6 spec 454 and paint it for $22,000. No way. And a "Real" LS6 will cost you 4 times that. You'd have a hard time finding an L34 SS396 in any kind of shape for 22K. So they both made out-the seller sold his car and the buyer made the deal of the century. Like I said when he's banging through the gears he's not thinking about VIN numbers and when people "Ooh" and "Ahh" over it at gas stations or the drags nobody knows it's a fake unless he tells them!  As long as he doesn't try to sell it as an original for an exorbitant price, who cares? And shut up about the argument that clones hurt the market for numbers-matching cars. Does the fact that Colt makes Single-Action Army Revolvers and .45 ACP automatics to this day diminish the value of an 1873 SAA revolver or WWII vintage 1911 pistol?  Of course it doesn't!!  But guess what? The shooting enthusiast can go to his local gun shop and buy a brand-new Colt 1991A1 .45 ACP pistol for about $900 bucks and put thousands of rounds through it at the range or in competitive matches and not worry about it. Ditto for the "Cowboy Action" shooter-he can buy a new SAA .45 revolver for about $1,200 and play "Wyatt Earp" to his heart's content. Neither of these guys can afford $5,000 on up for an "Original" and if they could-they damn sure wouldn't put 500 rounds a weekend through it!!  It would probably be hanging on the wall in an expensive walnut and glass showcase. That's what I'm saying-just like guns were meant to be fired-cars are supposed to driven. I understand not wanting to put a lot of miles on an expensive, rare car. But if you drive it 100 miles a month-your only adding about 1,000 miles a year. So in ten years is your pristine 440 / Six-Pack Charger or RAIV Judge or whatever really going to be worth a penny less because it has 69,000 miles on it instead of 59,000??  I'd rather have enjoyed it on all the sunny days I wanted to rather than preserve every last ounce of "Resale Value". Who-besides a real-estate speculator-buys something with the paramount attribute being what it will be worth if or when I want to get rid of it?  Did you marry your wife because you thought she'd give you a less-expensive divorce than the other women you dated?  Come on, guys. You could take a '65-68 Mustang fastback and with the help of the aftermarket build a great GT350 or GT500 clone for about 25K, including the purchase price of the base car-( say 10K for a good, driver-quality Mustang ). You can't touch a "Real" Shelby for under a 100 grand. So why can't the guy have a unique fast car and not spend the price of a house?  A lot of guys, over the course of a couple years can scrape up 15 or 20 grand for a hot rod project. But I don't know anyone who can write a check for 80 or 100 grand for what is almost certainly going to be a third or fourth car in the family. If you can do that-good for you. But 90% of the rest of us can't. So don't deride the clone builders. That's the only way many people can have a musclecar. Mastermind      

Do you think about serial numbers when your getting rubber into 2nd or blasting down the 1/4 mile?

I was talking to a guy the other day that was looking at a website where they were selling a 1969 427, 4-speed Corvette for $65,000. He lamented that a 427 Corvette was his dream car, but he'd never be able to afford one. "Build one." I said "What do you mean?" he asked. I pointed out an ad in our local newspaper where some used-car lot was selling a pretty decent 1976 Corvette with a 350 and a 4-speed for $3995!!  "You can probably buy that 'Vette for $3,500 cash."  "For $5995 Scoggin-Dickey will sell you a brand-new 454 with 440 hp and 500 lbs of torque." "All you need is a carburator, distributor and headers." "Spend 3 or 4 hundred more on a big-block radiator and your all set."  "You'll have a Rat-Motored 'Vette that hauls ass for like 11 grand." "Put 427 valve covers on it if you want."  He says-"It wouldn't be original." Arrrrgggghhhh!!!  "It's also not $65,000 either." "You'd only have 1/6 of the money in it, and you'll have way more fun because you won't be afraid to drive it like you stole it." "If you wad up a '76 'Vette that you paid 3 grand for, who gives a shit?"  "If you blow the motor-GMPP gives you a 2 year 50,000 mile warranty." "If you blow it up after the warranty period ends-as long as a rod doesn't go through the block-you can put a crank in it or rods and pistons for a couple grand."  "I guarantee if you hit the lottery right now and bought that $65,000 one-you'd never drive it because you'd be afraid of it getting wrecked or putting too many miles on it." "If you did drive it, you'd drive it like a little old lady because you'd be deathly afraid of throwing a rod out the side of a -numbers-matching block." "Your probably right." he lamented. "I know I'm right." "So let's go look at it." We go look at it-and it was in good shape-it needed paint-but the interior was clean and it ran good. "Buddy-if  you don't buy it-I'm going to and put the ZZ4 out of my Olds in it, and put the 455 back in the Olds." "That's a screamin' deal."  "You can have your Rat-powered 'Vette for around 10 grand." At that moment the salesman comes over and says that a guy who looked at it the day before just walked in an laid down $3,600 cash, so it was sold.  "Damn" my pal says. "Hey, they'll be others." I say. "I see '70's small-block C3s for 5 grand all the time-especially the '75-79 models."  "I wish I was rich." he said ruefully. "So you could look at your $65,000 'Vette instead of driving it." I said-being sarcastic. "Yeah." he admitted. Unbelievable. I got the same crap from another acquaintance who wanted a '70's Trans-Am to play with. We looked at a website that had an unrestored but well-maintained 400, 4-speed, 1978 "Macho T/A"  for sale for $14,000. They also had a 1971 455HO model for $49,000. "I'd love to have that one." I asked the same questions-"You can't afford that one, and if you could you wouldn't drive it much and you certainly wouldn't drive it like Burt Reynolds in "Smokey and the Bandit." "You'd be too afraid of grenading the 455HO." "You can afford the "Macho"-"They said they offer financing, you've got good credit-you can put two or three grand down and get it." "You could put a 455 crank in it and some Edelbrock heads and have a real rocker that you could run hard."  "And if you grenade a 1978 400 big deal." "You can always find a generic 400 Pontiac for less than a couple grand." "Seems to me that "Macho" is deal of the century.' Then he lights on another one-a numbers matching 1973 SD455 model for $59,000. "Why are you looking at 50 or 60 thousand cars that you can't afford?"  "Just dreaming" he says. "You can afford the '78 and It's just as fast as the others-those "Machos" rocked back in the day." "Quit dreaming and start driving."  "It's not the same." he says. "Your an idiot." I say. "I know a guy that built a '55 Chevy just like the one in "American Graffiti" and "Two-lane Blacktop"-complete with tunnel-rammed, solid-lifter 454, a Muncie 4-speed and a tilt front end." "When he's powershifting at 6,800-7000 and ripping off 11 second 1/4s he has a big smile on his face." "He doesn't pout that it's not THE real movie car." "I know another guy that has a Charger done up like the "General Lee". "He loves driving that thing and all the attention it gets." "He doesn't care that it was never on the show, or that it's a 318 model that he stuffed a 440 in."  "Stop dreaming about stuff that you can never afford, and wouldn't play with anyway if you hit megabucks tomorrow."  "You don't understand."  He's right. I don't understand. My next project is going to be a clone of either a Motion Camaro or a Yenko Chevelle. I figure 10 grand will buy me a nice small-block 2dr '68-69 Malibu or '70-'73 Camaro body-another 5K to trick it out, and another 8k for the GMPP 454 crate motor and Richmond Super T10 4-speed, and I've got a fast, unique ride for under 25K. Which is about 1/6 what a "Real" Yenko or Motion car would cost. And when I'm smoking the tires all the way through 1st and 2nd gear, I WON'T be thinking-"Gee this would be much cooler if it was a "Real" Yenko and I'd paid the price of my house for it."  Get over yourselves, people. Mastermind                        

Do it right the first time......It will be way cheaper in the long run!

I have a lot of people asking me to de-bunk a lot of  "Gotta Haves" that they read in magazine articles. Some of the "Gotta Haves" are valid, some aren't. For example if your building a small-block Chevy-there are "Experts" that will tell you that you "Gotta Have" a 4-bolt main block, a steel crank, forged pistons, aftermarket heads with screw-in studs, roller rockers, etc. Their half-right. If your building an 850 hp NASCAR Nextel Cup engine that has to turn 7,800 rpm for 500 miles at Daytona-Yes, you need all the beef you can get. But if your building a street / strip car or even a weekend "Street Stock" racer that's only going to have 450 hp and never see the high side of 6,500 rpm-you'll be perfectly fine with a two-bolt main block, a cast crank, and cast pistons. I have raced "Hobby Stock" and "Street Stock" circle track cars for over 20 years and I have NEVER seen a stud pull out of a head. I've seen broken rocker arms, broken pushrods, broken valvesprings, jumped timing chains-but I have never, ever seen a stud pull out of a head, in the usage I described.  Here's where you need to be brutally honest with yourself about what your building and how you plan to use it. For example-if your building a Big-Block Chevy for your tow rig or warmed-over street machine motor to put in your Camaro or Chevelle that you use as a weekend cruiser and maybe take it to the drags once every couple months-a 454 "Truck" motor-i.e. something out of a pickup or Suburban etc-will be a fine base. As long as your not constantly running it over 6,000 rpm-a two-bolt main block, cast crank and pistons will be fine, the stock heads will be fine and with the right cam, and carb and intake combo-you can make 450 hp pretty easily and it will have a glass-smooth idle and tons of torque, and probably run 100,000 miles before you need to re-build it again. Which is what makes a great street machine engine. However-if you want a Rat Motor to really beat on-I mean you want 600 normally aspirated horsepower or 800 with a blower or nitrous and your going to run it 7,000 rpm regularly-then step up and buy a GMPP 454 HO short-block. It's a Gen VI 4 bolt-main block with a one-piece rear main seal and it's machined for high-lift roller cams. It also has a forged steel crank, forged rods with 7/16 bolts, and forged pistons. It also comes with the balancer, flywheel, oil pan and timing cover. Now you can put whatever cam, heads, induction or exhaust that you want on it, and it will take any abuse you want to lay on it as long as you keep rpms under 7,200. That's much smarter than trying to slide by with a cheap short-block with a cast crank and 3/8 rods and cast pistons and blowing it up three times before realizing that your overloading the stock bottom-end and you'd have been many dollars ahead if you'd got beefier parts in the first place. Here's a guy I don't understand. He's a Mopar guy that runs a Duster at his local track-in some kind of unlimited class-nitrous is allowed.-Anyway he's got this '73 Duster set up with a great drag-style suspension-90/10 front shocks, a pinion snubber on the rear end, fat drag radials-so it launches great. He's got 4.11 gears in the rear end, and he's got a well-thought-out 400 hp nitrous system-I mean an extra fuel pump to and solenoids to supply extra fuel with the nitrous-two-stage switches, an MSD iginition to adjust the timing from inside the car along with an Edelbrock Performer RPM intake and Barry Grant carb that he has to swap every time-all top-notch. For an engine he goes to the junkyard and buys a 318 or 360 out of a Dodge truck or wrecked Jeep Cherokee, slaps it in the car, and runs 10 or 11 second ets with it until it grenades. Then he goes to the junkyard and gets another one. Sometimes these engines last 30 or 60 days, sometimes they don't last one weekend. If he's only paying $300 or $400 for these engines and he does that say 8 times a year-he's invested $2,400-3,200 in engines that are now doorstops or boat anchors. If he had put $3,000 into the first engine-i.e. a high-quality Scat or Eagle crank, forged rods, forged pistons, got a Comp cams or Lunati grind specifically for heavy nitrous use-and o-ringed the heads-He'd have had a reliable engine that would have lasted him all season-and he wouldn't have had to swap the engine out of his car 8 or 10 times, plus the labor for yanking them at the "U-pull-it" Yard. To me that's a lot of un-necessary work, and he's not really saving any money. The other is driveline parts. Yeah, I get sick of every single magazine project car you ever see-has a custom 9-inch Ford rear end. If you have a 70's GM car with an 8.5 inch ring gear 10 bolt rear end or a '70's Mopar with an 8 3/4-your probably ok with all but the most monster combos- unless your running a 700 hp engine backed by a TH400 or 727 with a 4 grand converter and a trans brake and are running wrinklewall slicks bolted to the rims-I don't think you'll break the rear end in daily driving or a weekend trip to the drags. However-if youhave a '78-88 GM "G" body-Monte Carlo, Malibu, Cutlass, Gran Prix, etc- or an '82-92 Camaro or Firebird-the 7.5 inch ring gear axle in those won't even stand up to say a 350 hp small-block. Ditto for the trannys-( unless you have a T/A or Z/28 with an '88 up 700R4 ) the T5 5-speeds only have a 300 lbs ft torque rating. That's why you couldn't get a 5-speed with a 350, only a 305. I know guys that run them behind 350s-but were talking mild 350s-with maybe 325 hp. I wouldn't trust one behind anything with real power-i.e. a ZZ4 or ZZ383 crate engine. If you want a stick behind a powerful small-block or big-block in one of these cars you need a Richmond T10 4-speed or a Richmond or Tremec five-speed conversion.  Ditto for the automatics-the TH200 / 250, and 200R4's that came behind the 231 inch V6's and 305 inch V8s that had maybe 165 hp-and 240 lbs of torque will not stand up to a 450 hp small-block. You need a TH350 / 400, or you need to buy a high-performance 200R4 from TCI or B&M or another reputable builder. Buick Grand National racers run 10s with 200R4s-but they are beefed-up substantially, in stock trim-they won't stand up to something with 400+ hp. See what I'm saying-sometimes spending a little more at the start of a project is better than going through the frustration of multiple parts breakage and laying out the extra bucks anyway. Mastermind            

Take "Stock" or "Street" with a grain of salt......

Saw basically the same thing in two different magazines. Articles about cars run in the "Pure Stock" drags that are blisteringly fast but aren't really "stock" or steetable. Case #1 was a woman and her husband who won the Tournament last year with a scorching 11.54 1/4 mile time. Their car was a '69 "L88" Corvette. 1st off it wasn't a real L88 car-it was a 390 hp model that was built to L88 specs. The rules say engines don't have to be numbers-matching, it just has to have been an option on that model that year. For example you could run a 426 crate Hemi in a '71 Charger because although rare, the 426 Hemi was a factory option in 1971. Converseely, you can't run an LS6 454 in a '68 Chevelle because the 454 didn't become an option until 1970. That part of the rulebook I understand. But the rest of it-they say they borrow NHRA stock class rules-well the rules are skewed. For example-the guy was running 12.5:1 compression-reasonable-that's what the original L88 was back when you could buy 100 octane gas at your local station. However the guy bragged that he was well below what's allowed-the rulebook allows 13.7:1 compression!!. Excuse me? When did Chevrolet ever offer a big-block with 13.7:1 compression??!! The L88 was 12.5:1 and the over-the-counter-only LS7 454 was only 12.25:1. I'm sorry-but a compression ratio of almost 14:1 is not "Stock" in any way, shape or form. The cam has to be the original "type" which means a flat-tappet solid-lifter design- no rollers- But that leaves duration and lift-wide-open. They also allow electronic ignition conversions-like the Petronix setup that fits under a stock cap. And the guy was running 4.56:1 gears. Case #2 was a 1970 Pontiac Firebird Formula 400 built to Ram Air IV specs. The RAIV was a 400 inch V8 available in GTOs and Firebirds and Trans-Ams in 1969 and 1970. They had 10.5:1 compression, special round-port heads and exhaust manifolds, an aluminum intake, and a hot cam with 308 / 320 duration and .520 lift. They were grossly under-rated at 345 hp in Firebirds and 370 in GTOs. Same thing-only worse-your allowed to be within 15 inches of original displacement. This car had a custom 3.79 inch stroke crank ( stock is 3.75 ) which with a .030 overbore gave it 415 inches. It also had custom longer-than-stock connecting rods-6.800 inches-stock Pontiac rods are 6.625-and custom pistons which gave 12.4:1 compression when paired with the allowed 62cc chamber heads. Except stock RAIV heads have 72cc chambers. He's also running a custom Quadrajet that flows 1000 cfm and a cam with over .600 lift. And 4.88:1 gears. So yeah-it's ungodly fast-it runs something like 10.90 with slicks. But an engine with a custom crank, longer-rods ( small-block Chevy racers know this makes more power ) 12.5:1 compression with a .600 lift cam and a 1000 cfm carb is nowhere near stock!!  Stock would be 10.5:1 compression with stock rotating assembly,a .520 lift cam and an 800 cfm carb. Think this engine was a tad stronger than stock? By like 150 hp?!!  I applaud these builders for finding every last ounce and staying within the rules-I'm not slamming the car owners-I'm saying the rules are messed up. "Stock" should be a lot closer to stock. Like head cc / compression ratios, cam duration and lift, and carb size. I remember Car Craft pulling this 20 some years ago. They bragged about their "Stock" 5.0 Mustang that ran in the high 13s. When Hot Rod and Car and Driver and Motor Trend and everyone else recorded times between 14.72 and 15.29 for stock "5.0" Mustangs of '87-93 vintage. Yeah their test mule was stock alright-except for the K&N air box, Flowmaster "Cat-Back" exhaust, swapping the stock 2.73:1 or 3.08:1 gears for some 3.73:1s and swapping the stock P225/60VR15 radials for some M&H bias-ply 235 / 60R15 wrinklewall drag tires. Yep, bone-stock. Except for the improved intake and exhaust, stiffer gears and stickier tires!! Why do you have to be such a nit-picker?  Anyhow- next time you read about some unbelievably quick "stock" car-I think you'll find it's nowhere near stock. Mastermind          

Don't fall into the "I have to have the biggest,baddest thing they make" trap!

I see an alarming trend in all the buff magazines lately. The stroker engine craze-"Bigger is Better" has really gotten out of hand in my opinion. For example Hot Rod dyno-tested a bunch of headers on a big-block Chevy. They concluded that the 2 1/4 inch headers made the most power. Except their test mule was a 650 hp 540 incher!!  Honestly-how many people actually have a 540 inch Rat Motor in their car? So the average joe reads that article and puts these huge headers on his car or truck and wonders why they killed his low-end and mid-range performance. Maybe because your 9:1 454 with a stock cam and heads doesn't breathe nearly as well as the 12:1 solid-roller cammed, Brodix-headed monster test mule?  Even if someone had a VERY HOT 454-they'd get more power and torque all through the range with 1 7/8 or 2 inch headers. Most people who had a streetable 427 / 454 or especially a 396 / 402 would be better served by even smaller 1 3/4 headers. Especially if it was a street machine or tow rig that never sees the high side of 6,000 rpm. GMPP, Blueprint Engines, Smeding, and a bunch of other companies are selling 496 inch, 540 inch or even 572 inch Big-block Chevys. These engines all cost 12 or 15 grand. For $5995 GMPP will sell you a complete ZZ454 engine. That has 440 hp and 500 lbs ft of torque. Super Chevy magazine  tested one, and with only a cam change and swapping the GMPP intake for an Edelbrock Performer RPM-they pulled 521 hp and 530 lbs of torque. Now honestly-who in the hell needs more power than that in anything but a full-on race car? Magazine writers spout numbers flippantly-but believe me an engine with 520 honest hp will turn any street car into a rocket. If you had the tires and suspension to handle it-that would put you solidly in the 11s, at over 115 mph in the 1/4 mile. How many people have actually driven an honest-to-goodness 11 second car? ( I mean with a timeslip from the strip; not what your buddy "thinks" his car can run )  If you "Need" to go faster than that then you need a Pro Stock drag car, a competent therapist, or a cage. It's the same with small-blocks. Dart offers a 427 inch small-block Chevy short-block assembly ( That can further stroked to 454 inches if you want ). For $5599. Then you still have to add a flywheel and balancer, all the tin, and heads, cam,intake, exhaust, carburator and distributor. By the time your done the price tag has easily topped 10 grand. Why? for $5599 you can buy a Complete ZZ383 engine from Scoggin-Dickey or Summit that has 425 hp and 449 lbs of torque. For $4399 you can buy the famous ZZ4 350 crate motor. Or for $2600 you can buy a ZZ4 short block-with 4-bolr mains, a steel crank, LT1 / "Pink" rods and Keith Black pistons. Add another $2600 for a Trick Flow top-end kit-heads, cam, rockers, springs timing chain and intake-and you've got 500 hp and 450 lbs of torque for $5200!! That's $400 bucks less than Dart wanted for the 427 SHORT-BLOCK!!!  Now, doubtless the stroker will make more power than a 350-Blueprint's 454 Small-block stroker claims 575 hp-but costs 11 grand!! In my mind 75 hp isn't worth another 5 grand!! Seriously-if you want or need more power than a 350 or 383 can deliver-then-like I said-you can get over 500 hp from a 454-Big Block for a lot less than 10 grand. It's not just Chevy people either. Ford Racing offers 351-based 427 inch strokers with 500+ hp for $12,999!!!  Mopar performance offers 505 inch 440 based motors and 472 and 528 inch Hemis-for $15,000 on up!!  The hot setup now for Pontiacs is to put an aftermarket crank and rotating assembly in a 400 block to get 461-477 ci. Kauffman Racing and Butler Performance will build you a "Real" Pontiac with 500-600 hp on pump gas-but again your looking at a $10,000 engine. Whatever your restoring-or "Restifying"  you can have plenty of power without a mega-buck, mega-inch $15,000 engine. A 350 Chevy or a 396 or 454, or a 400 Pontiac or a 383 Mopar or 351 or 390 Ford or whatever will make more than enough power. Again forget the magazine writer's flippantly spouting numbers-any of these engines can make 400 hp or more reliably and cheaply-and 400 hp will make any street car into a rock-n-roller. If you can afford one of these mega-buck monsters good for you. But if you can't-don't despair. $5,000 will allow you to buy or build a VERY Strong powerplant. You don't need to spend 10 or 15 or 20K to have a badass ride. Mastermind  

Tuning tips for maximum performance.....Even if your car is concours-stock!

I talk to so many musclecar owners that complain about being beaten in a "Stoplight Gran Prix" by a supposedly slower, newer car, or they went to the drags and their car didn't run anywhere close to what an old "Hot Rod" or "Car and Driver" road test said it could do in the 1/4. I see it all the time-cars with $5,000 paint jobs and $2,000 worth of tires and wheels that run like total crap. Here's why-sloppy maintenance and bad tuning. Here's how to solve this problem easily and cheaply. # 1. Ignition. You'd be amazed at the number of musclecars running around with bad plug wires, the points closing up, the vacuum advance disconnected, and the timing either too far advanced or retarded. Ask somebody at a "Show-n-Shine" someday when's the last time they changed the spark plugs, or the distributor cap, rotor and wires?  You'll get a blank stare and an answer like "Huh?" "Why?" After they complained about it not running right. So do a complete tune-up-points and condenser, cap , rotor , wires, plugs, and make sure the vacuum advance is working and hooked up and set the timing to the factory specs. # 2. Carburation. This is the big one. If the car has a single 4bbl-chances are it hasn't been rebuilt in years. The floats are sinking, the throttle shafts are warped, it's full of dirt, the throttle linkage doesn't open fully. Ask the average guy when's the last time he changed the fuel filter? Or they've just put a new Holley or Edelbrock or Demon carb on the car and can't understand why it doesn't run up to par. They either over-carburated it like a 750 cfm Holley Double-Pumper mounted on a single-plane "Victor Jr" intake- ( Yes It worked great on the magazine's 11:1 383 with a .520 lift cam, a 3 grand coverter and 4.11 gears ) I don't understand why it totally killed the bottom-end and mid-range on an otherwise stock 8.5:1 compression 350 with a stock torque converter and 3.08:1 gears?  "I just don't get it." They also don't get that on their otherwise stock car they'd be better off with a Dual-plane Edelbrock Performer or Weiand Stealth and a 600 cfm vacuum-secondary Holley or Edelbrock carb.  Or they didn't read the instructions that said  "Some tuning may be required". It's rare that you bolt a carb on and it works perfectly out of the box. Depending on your application their usually either too rich or too lean. And even on vacuum-secondary carbs sometimes the secondarys open too quick which can cause a bog. Take the time to jet the carb right and tune it right and the performance increase will be amazing. It's worse on tri-power or dual-quad setups. They drive like my grandmother on prozac and the second it fouls a spark plug, they start screwing around with the carburators. Pretty soon it won't even start, much less run properly. Have someone who's experienced in multi-carb setups tune the system with a carb syncronizer. If your going to drive like grandma then go a range or two hotter on the plugs. You can always change the plugs if you decide to take a long trip or go to the drags. # 3. Do a compresssion test. Ultra-performance crate motors may have readings of 175-200 lbs or more. Most healthy stock engines will have 140 lbs. Even an 8:1 compression "Smog" motor should have 125 lbs, and all cylinders should be within 5-10 psi of each other. If your only reading 90 lbs on one or more cylinders-then you have a serious problem-bad rings, burned valves, or a blown head gasket. You'd be amazed at the number of cars running around on 6 or 7 cylinders. # 4. No high-rpm power. I'm not talking 7,000 or 8,000 rpm-many cars don't have the valvetrain or bottom-end strength for that. But a 318 Dodge with a two-barrel will pull smoothly to 5,000 rpm or so. If your car is backfiring, or missing, or won't rev over 4,000-4,500 rpm-you could have a flat cam, or bad valvesprings or a lot of timing chain slop. You'd be amazed at the number of cars with $5,000 paint jobs that can't pull 5,000 rpm in low gear!  # 5. Transmission. If you have an automatic transmission-when's the last time you changed the fluid?  Is your vacuum modulator hooked up? Is your kickdown linkage working properly? . Have you installed a "Shift Improver Kit?" If you don't know the answers to these questions then you could be losing a substantial amount of performance through a slipping, or improperly shifting trans.  All these factors contribute. Bad tuning or lack of maintenance can cost you as much as 50 hp on a bone-stock engine. Get to work and make your car run up to it's potential. Mastermind    

Magazines are always going for the maximum....The biggest numbers don't always mean the best performance in the real world!

Talking about recipes for speed-I can't stress it enough really read what a magazine is printing and take it with a grain of salt. Like the '69 Chevelle that Hot Rod used in their "Crate Motor Shootout". The LS3 6.2 liter 'Vette motor than ran in the 11s with 4.44:1 gears and a 5,000 rpm torque converter? Yeah, that's a streetable combination!! When they tested the ZZ427 big-block they changed the gears to 4.11:1s but they still had a converter with a 4,800 rpm stall speed. Come on guys-even with 4.11 or 4.44 gears your 65 mph cruise rpm is going to be at least 1,000-1,500 rpm BELOW the converters stall speed. If you try to drive this car on the street at all- You'll burn up the tranny in less than 50 miles!!  If they had run a more reasonable and streetable 2,500-3,000 rpm converter no the car wouldn't have been nearly as fast with either engine but the public would have gotten a more accurate view of what kind of real-world performance they could expect if they put this engine in their car. I mean seriously-no one drives around with a 5 grand converter. The same for the test mule that Car Craft used in their intake manifold comparison. A 408 inch small-block with 10.5:1 compression, Dart 215cc heads and a .630 lift solid roller cam is not what the "Average" guy is running in his Camaro. It's wonderful that this motor made 560 hp; however the Dart or Holley / Keith Dorton single-planes topped by an 850cfm double-pumper Holley that made the most hp and torque on the dyno for this combo would absolutely destroy the performance of the average Joe's  8.5:1 or 9:1 350 with stock heads and a cam with say-470 lift. This fellow would be much better off with a dual-plane intake like an Edelbrock Performer or Weiand Stealth and a vacuum secondary carb with 600-750 cfm. They didn't say that in the article-but I think they need to. "By the way our engine was a full-on race motor-this combo probably won't work well in your street car or work truck". I say this because I see it all the time. Guy goes and buys a Victor Jr intake and a 750 Double-pumper carb and puts it on his otherwise stock 350 Camaro that has an automatic with a stock converter and 3.08:1 gears. He can't understand why it falls flat on it's face, doesn't run as good as the stock iron manifold and Q-jet combo did, has no power below 4,000 rpm and is all done in by valve float at 5,200!!  "But ( Insert magazine name here ) said this made the most power and ran the best 1/4 mile time on their Camaro."  Yes-that had a 10:1 383 with a .525 lift cam, a 3,000 rpm converter and 3.73:1 gears!!  Yes, on that car that had 400+lbs of torque from idle on up-it could afford to lose some bottom end-it probably helped the car launch better with less wheelspin, and it hit like "gangbusters" about 3 grand and pulled hard to 7,000 because their motor had the compression, valvetrain and gearing to take full advantage of the big carb and intake. On the guys 8.2:1 compression 350 with a stock cam with .390 / .410 lift, that mad maybe 280 lbs ft of torque at the peak- a stock torque converter and high ( low numeric ) gearing it killed the bottem-end, and the car didn't have the valvetrain or the gearing to rev to the point where the Victor manifold made it's most power. ( 4,000-8,000 rpm .) He'd have been better off with a Performer and a vacuum secondary carb that built up low-speed and mid-range torque. Then he have noticed a big improvement in performance from idle-5,000 rpm. I said it once before-but I think it's relevant here. I told a customer of mine that wanted more power out of his 350 powered Suburban tow rig to buy an Edelbrock Performer intake, the matching cam, and some 1 5 /8 inch headers. He was a diy type guy-so I offered to set up his distributor and re-jet his carb after he was done. He comes over completely furious. The truck won't idle below 1,000 rpm, has no power brakes, and doesn't even have the power it had stock. I look under the hood and see 1 / 7 /8 chrome headers, and a Performer "RPM" intake topped by a 750 double-pumper Holley. "What cam did you use?" i ask "The matching "Performer RPM". he says. "You didn't listen to me." "I said get the Performer package, small-tube headers, and I'd re-jet your Quadrajet for you." "Didn't you read the box-where the cam says only for high-performance vehicles not for use in vehicles over 3,600 lbs or towing applications.?"  "But the guy at the parts store said-"  "You listened to the Idiot at Autozone instead of me." I showed him on Edelbrock's website that the SBC  RPM cam had more lift and duration than the one used in an LS6 454 Chevelle or a 455 SD Pontiac Trans-Am, and it only had 10 inches of vacuum at 1,000 rpm. I showed him that his headers were WAY too big- he could have use 1 /3/4's but 1 /7 8 were too huge for a truck motor.  I also showed him how the "Regular" Performer cam had 15 inches of vacuum at idle and built low-speed torque. I traded him a Performer intake for the "RPM" intake, and he returned the carb and headers after cleaning them up.. He had to eat the cam since it had been installed. After he installed the smaller-tube headers, the Performer cam and intake, and his re-jetted Q-jet he was amazed. The truck idled at 750 rpm, the power brakes and everything worked fine, and it had a TON more torque-especially in the 2,000-4,500 rpm range where he did most of his towing. And it got better gas mileage-16 mpg instead of 12. He was esctatic-and apologetic. "I should have listened to you" "I don't know why I listened to that idiot at the parts store."  "It was a costly lesson" "If you'd called me before you bought that 1st batch of stuff I'd have told you to ignore the parts guy and look in the Edelbrock catalog-all the specs are in there." "I'm glad it worked out." "I'm still out the $250 bucks on that other cam." "Maybe I can sell it for you and recoup part of it." "Thanks. " "Sure."  The moral of the story is- be brutally honest with yourself about what you want and how you plan to use it. Sure, all of us look in a magazine and think we'd like to have a 12:1, solid-roller 650 hp monster motor. But in reality- for 99% of us a 9.5:1 engine that runs on pump gas and idles at 800 rpm makes a lot more sense. Bigger is not always better-especially in a street application. Mastermind                      

Recipes for speed aren't always exact or set in stone....Their general guidelines!

My recent post about recipes for speed stirred up the usual spittingly hysterical maniacs, because I didn't include their car or said their car wasn't as fast as they think it is. The horsepower and power to weight ratios I listed are general guidelines. I guess some of these people didn't read the part about extra mechanical advantage-i.e. a 4-speed or 4.11 gears or a high-stall speed torque converter. When I said you needed 400+ hp to run in the 12s I was assuming we were talking about the typical 3,500-4,000 lb musclecar-i.e. Chevelle, GTO, Road Runner / Charger, or Camaro / Firebird, or 'Cuda / Challenger. Like I said I know a guy that got kicked off the track on the first run-he had a small-block Chevy in a Datsun 240Z. This combo makes an amazing drag racer-the independent rear suspension really bites hard, and the motor being slightly set back helps weight transfer. And the car only weighs about 2,300 lbs. A 350 Chevy V8 only weighs about 75 lbs more than the big Nissan inline 6-so the handling of the car isn't adversely affected. He had a mild cam and an Edelbrock Performer intake-so he had maybe 325 hp. But in a 2,300 lb car with 4.09:1 gears it ripped off a blistering 11.90 second pass. And he didn't have a driveshaft safety loop or a roll cage which this track required for any car running 12 flat or less. Some tracks have lowered this to 11.50-but that's the rule. Think about this-that's like having 650 hp in a 4,600 lb car-i.e. a GMPP 572 in a '67 Impala SS. That would run high 11s pretty easily, right?  I know guys with 340 Dusters that eat the lunch of big-block cars, and I know a guy that has a 289 '62 Falcon with a 4-speed and 4.56:1 gears that kicks ass-he only has maybe 300 hp-but the car weighs about 2,600 lbs and has 4.56:1 gears! His only friend who can give him a race is a guy with a '65 Nova with a 327 and a 4-speed and 4.11s.  Like I talked about the guy that put the LS Motor in the Chevelle-his only ran 13s-with street tires, a stock converter and 3.55 gears. He was pissed that it didn't run 11s like Hot Rod's Chevelle-that had an 8-point cage, wrinklewall slicks, a 4.44:1 axle ratio, and a 5,000 rpm converter!  Think that'll make a difference?  I've mentioned it before but I had a buddy in high school who had a 440 Six-Pack Super Bee. He was always spewing about how his car could run 12s. He assumed this because of an Old Car Life road test where Chrysler engineers had Pro Stock Drag racing champion Ronnie Sox piloting a dyno-tuned "Protoype" Road Runner with a 4-speed, 10 inch slicks, and 4.30 gears to a string of 13.0s and 13.10s with the best being a 12.88. He was shocked when his car with street tires, 3.23:1 gears and an automatic ran something like a 14.10 at our local track. When I tried to explain that he didn't have Ronnie Sox's lightning reaction time at the tree, and that the slicks and 4.30 gears made quite a difference, regardless of who was driving, he didn't want to hear it. He was doubly shocked when my warmed-over 4-speed, 4.33:1 geared RAIII Judge beat him in a drag race, and my dad's Tri-Power 421 Catalina 2+2 with 3.90:1 gears  gave him a helluva run up to 90 mph. He couldn't grasp the concept of mechanical advantage-his stock converter stalled about 2,100 rpm, and the big 440 still lit the G70-15 Goodyear Polyglas G/T tires up like they were on fire. I had a posi and soft-compound M/T N50X15 tires on the rear, and Lakewood traction bars. After heating the tires-I could rev to 3,500-4,000 rpm and drop the clutch hard. The GTO would rip off the line with just enough wheelspin to get engine up on it's torque curve and the car moving with alarcity. Trust me, if a Ram Air III Judge with 4.33:1 gears jumps you two or three car lengths off the line-your not getting it back. Ask the Hemi Charger driver, the 427 / 390 hp Corvette driver, and the 429SCJ Torino Cobra driver- all of whom I beat at our local track. A friend of mine had a 350 in a Chevy LUV pickup that was lightning-fast, and another guy had a Gremlin with a 401 in it that was a rocket. It's not always about raw power-gearing, traction, weight transfer all make a difference-you should have seen that short-wheelbase Gremlin, or that Chevy-engined 240Z rocket out of the hole!!  The rule of thumb - "If you think your car can run 12s but you've never been to the drags, then your probably in the mid-13s" is usually dead-on. People don't know-or forget that 1/10 of a second equals one car length. So if your buddy's car runs 13.60s and you beat him by 3 car lengths-your running 13.30s-not twelve-anything. Got it?  I've said it before-but I'll say it again-very few people had Hemi 'Cudas, LS6 Chevelles, Boss 429s, etc-most fond "Musclecar Memories" are from base models-383 Road Runners, 396 Chevelles, 389 GTOs, etc- tales of pulling the front wheels and third-gear rubber seem silly when someone pulls out a yellowed, dog-eared copy of Hot Rod or Car and Driver and we find the machine in question ran in the 14.50s. There's more to speed than just horsepower-that's all I'm saying. Mastermind              

What the hell do you people want?

I said earlier-I'm trying to sell my beloved Hurst / Olds 442. It's a 1973 model one of 1,097 ever made. It has the original paint, original swivel bucket seats, the original Hurst Dual / Gate shifter, the original owner's manual and the original spare. The body is virgin- I'm the third owner and it's never been wrecked or painted and it's rust-free being an original Nevada car. It currently has a ZZ4 Chevy crate motor and Chevy bolt-pattern TH400 in it. I advertised it for 13 grand with both engines or for 9 grand with the original numbers-matching 455 Olds and TH400 tranny because I wanted to put the Chevy crate engine in another car. I had a guy who said he was really serious. I said I'd take six grand for the car but he'd have to put the Olds engine and tranny back in himself. He said he'd pay $7,500 if I'd put the Olds drivetrain back in it. I said I would if he'd send me a $1,000 deposit, that I didn't want to change engines and trannys and then him change his mind and not show up. He never called me back or tried to negotiate further. Like the Tom Cruise movie- "Show me the money". Screw you-I'm supposed to pull two engines and trannys because you might want to buy the car?  I'll set the the goddamn thing on fire before I'll sell it for less than $6,000. Where are you going to find a numbers-matching original one of 1,097 Hurst / Olds that's never been wrecked or painted, with original swivel buckets, dual / gate shifter and digital tach for $6,000? When people are paying $50,000 for "clone" Judges?  Excuse my language- but fuck you and die. You whine about not finding a "Deal". Puhleezze. Mastermind.  

Read the ENTIRE article before you make a buying decision on anything!

Got two interesting emails this week that really reinforce the term "Buyer Beware". One was from a guy who spent major bucks installing an LS3 / "E-Rod" crate engine in his '72 Chevelle. The car ran great, but he was disappointed when he took it to the track. He only bought the package largely because of two magazine articles-Hot Rod's Crate Motor Shootout-where they tested 8 different GM engines-and Hot Rod's "Project Disco". Both of these LS3- powered Project cars ran in the 11s, yet his Chevelle could only run a 13.55 at his local track. He asked me if something could be wrong with his engine or car combo. I replied, no, that his car was running as good as it possibly could-a 4,070 lb Chevelle that runs 13.55 with street tires, through the mufflers,and using a TH350 with a stock torque converter and 3.55:1 gears is pretty damn good performance in anybody's book. The '69 Chevelle that Hot Rod tested-with a box-stock LS3- was a gutted race car with a 10 point roll cage, a fiberglass hood, a 9 inch Ford rear end and a ladder-bar suspension that weighed 3,520 lbs. In addition to being 500 lbs lighter-this car also had 28X10.50X15 wrinkelwall slicks, a 4.44:1 axle ratio, open exhausts, and a TH400 with an 8-inch TCI 5,100 rpm stall converter!!. I asked if he'd read the article thoroughly-all this information was disclosed. Of course Hot Rod's test mule-being 500 lbs lighter and having slicks, 4.44:1 gears, a drag-race optimized suspension, and a 5-grand converter is going to run substantially faster than his car with street tires, 3.55:1 gears, a stock suspension and a stock converter!!  "Project Disco" was a 1979 Z/28 Camaro that they stuffed an LS3 engine into. This car weighed 3,660 lbs, had a Tremec five speed stick, and a 3.73 posi rear end, and it only dropped into the 11s with a "Shot of Nitrous". Again- it was a lighter car with more mechanical advantage-a stick and stiffer gearing, and oh yeah-don't forget the nitrous. Now Hot Rod magazine didn't do anything wrong-they printed all the information about both vehicles. He just didn't read it-all he saw was the 1/4 mile times. If I buy that engine-I'll go that fast. I asked him-has he read a road test of a new Camaro SS. Yes he had. Ok I said- a 2012 Camaro SS weighs about 4,000 lbs and has a 400 hp LS3 engine and a 3.45:1 axle ratio and every test I've seen in magazines has them running low 13s in bone-stock trim. Why would you think that your 4,000 lb Chevelle with the same engine and similar gearing would run 2 full seconds faster?  "Because of those magazine articles". AAAAUUUGGHH!!!!  "Didn't you read anything I emailed you?" "I read it." "Then read it 500 times until you understand how gearing, nitrous and traction affects performance!!"   The second one was a guy who had a '77 L82 Corvette that ran low 13s in street trim. It had a TH350 with a 2,500 rpm converter, 3.55:1 gears and he'd added headers, and an Edelbrock Torker II intake and matching cam. He was totally happy with the car's performance-it would smoke the tires as long as he wanted to stay on the throttle, and if he drove like a normal person it got 16 mpg. Then he read a single-plane intake comparo in Car Craft. The Torker II was ranked #1 in "bang for the buck" but ranked low in total power when compared to some other offerings by Dart, Brodix, Weiand, and some other Edelbrocks. He asked me if he should replace his intake with one of the manifolds that fared better in this test!!  My answer-Absolutely not!!  Here's why-the test mule- was a 10:1 406 inch small-block Chevy with 215cc Trick Flow heads, an MSD ignition, an 850 cfm Holley carb and a solid-roller cam with 248 / 256 dgrees duration at .050, and .613 lift!!!  This was a 500+ hp race motor to start with. So yes,-the Torker, the Weiand X-celertor, and other basically street intakes are going to make less power than the competition style Dart, Brodix, Super Victor style etc on a peak hp dyno pull on this MONSTER test mule. In fact-if he put one of these bigger intakes on his 9:1 350 with stock 157 cc heads and a cam with "only" 232 duration and .488 lift-( Compared to a 10:1 400 with 215 cc heads and a 256 duration / .613 lift cam )  he would show a big loss in low-speed and mid-range torque, and very little, if any top-end improvement. And these competition style intakes wouldn't fit under his hood!  Luckily-he understood what I was saying and decided to leave his car that he liked alone!!  What I'm marvelling at is his initial reaction-a magazine said this intake was better-so I should immediately go buy it. Here's where you have to really read the articles. The part that makes the most peak hp on a dyno is not always the best-especially for a street-driven car. So read-I mean really read all the specs before you rush out and buy the latest and greatest piece of equipment that a magazine is dyno-testing.              

Recipes for speed.......

I've had several people ask about what it takes to run 13s, 12s, 11s, and mainly because of the "Fast&Furious" movies and their casual references to "10 second cars"-what it takes to run 10s. There are various combinations to do this- for example- a small-block Chevy in a Datsun 240Z is an easy to build 11 second ride-but we can't cover all the possibilities here. I can give you some general guidelines on what you'll need for a mild to wild street machine-regardless of the nameplate. What the average person doesn't know is in a 1/4 mile drag race-1/10 of a second equals 1 car length. So if your car runs say a 14.9 in the 1/4 and your buddy's car runs a 14.5-that doesn't sound like a big difference, but it is!  He just smoked you by 4 car lengths!!  If  your pal's car ran a 14.0-he beat you by 9 car lengths, which is a serious ass-whippin'-even though both cars technically run "In the 14s". That's why I laugh at the "F&F" movies and their casual references to "10 second" cars!  Anyhow- I'll break it down for everyone here.  # 1. 14 second cars. Like I just said-this is a lot of room from 14.00-14.99-but you'll get the general idea. Cars that fall into this realm are generally stock for the most part and consist of-small-block 327 and 350 '60's and '70's Novas and Camaros, '69-73 351 Mustangs, and '70-74 340 / 360 Dusters or 'Cuda / Challengers. You'll also find some "entry-level" big-block musclecars-i.e.-389 GTOs, 383 Road Runners, 396 Chevelles , etc. Also in this category would be 400 powered '70's Firebirds and Trans-Ams, '85-92 LB9 and L98 Tuned Port Injected Camaros, Firebirds and Corvettes, and '83-93 "5.0" Mustangs. These cars look and sound cool and are fun to drive, and are often used as daily drivers. They are fast enough to back up the image-you don't have to take crap from little boys in Honda Civics, old men in Northstar Cadillacs, or soccer moms in V8 Cherokees. The engines idle smoothly, the seats are comfortable and the suspensions don't rattle your fillings loose. # 2. 13 second cars. In this realm-you have some of the above mentioned cars mildly warmed over-aftermarket carbs and intakes, headers, maybe a mild cam or additional mechanical advantadge-i.e.- a 4-speed, or a higher-stall speed torque converter and 3.73 or stiffer gears. You'll also find the typical premium big-block musclecars here-454 Chevelles, 455HO / SD GTOs and Trans-Ams, 440 Road Runners / Chargers / Challengers, 455 Olds 442s, and 455 Buick GS Skylarks. Later stuff would include '85-87 Buick Grand Nationals, '93-2002 LT1 / LS1 Camaros, Firebirds, and Corvettes,2004-2006 GTOs, as well as 2005 and newer Hemi Chargers and Challengers,2009 and newer Camaros, and 2005 and newer 4.6 and "5.0" Mustangs. # 3. 12 second cars. Now your getting into some serious power. Nitrous can yank a 13 second car into the 12s, but the really glory is to run it "on the motor" which means "off the bottle". In order to do that, you'll need at least 450 hp-which means a stout small-block or a warmed over big-block. Additionally you'll need some traction aids to put all that power to the ground-a limited-slip rear end, larger, stickier tires, and traction bars or a pinion snubber. And, you may have to beef up the driveline to handle the extra power-for example upgrading the transmission or rear end.  # 4. 11 second cars. Now, your getting to the edge of streetability. It's rare to see an 11 second street car without a blue bottle in the trunk, but you can do it without nitrous. You'll need 500-600 hp depending on the weight of the car. This means a stout small-block with a big shot of nitrous, or a blower, or a pretty serious big-block.  Most strips require any car that runs the 1/4 in less than 12 seconds to have a driveshaft safety loop and an 8-point roll cage. To put all that power to the ground you'll definitely need a drag-race style suspension and an upgraded driveline-i.e. a TH400 or 727 or C6 automatic, or a heavy-duty Muncie, BW or Richmond 4 or 5-speed stick and a 12 bolt , Dana 60, or Ford 9" rear to avoid parts breakage.  # 5. 10 second cars. You can do this two ways-give an 11 or 12 second car a big shot of nitrous, or build a STOMPIN" big-block. To run 10s without nitrous-you'll need 600+ hp-which means a blower, or a 12:1 compression, 500+ inch big-block with a serious cam, which means you'll also need racing gas, a 3,500-4,000 rpm converter, 4.11 or 4.56 gears, and a reinforced chassis-an 8 or 10 point cage, subframe connectors, ladder bars, etc. Yes, anything is drivable-depending on what the driver is willing to tolerate-but these cars are really stretching the limits of "Streetability".  Buff magazines that blurb on their covers about 7,8 or 9 second "Street Cars" are full of shit, plain and simple. A car that runs the 1/4 in 7,8 or 9 seconds at better than 140 mph is not a street car, it's a race car. What else would you call a car with a 700 hp+ engine, a 4,500 rpm converter and a trans-brake, a 10 point roll cage,4-link ladder bar suspension, and rolling on 29 or 31 inch slicks or "DOT legal"-wink,wink, wrinklewall street tires or drag radials?  Most states require any car built after 1978 to have a smog and safety inspection which often includes checking for equipment like catalytic converters, EGR valves, etc. How does one get a 720 hp, 572 inch Rat powered '86 Monte Carlo SS legally registered?  And even with 4.56:1 or 4.88:1 gears-your 55-65 mph highway cruising rpm is going to be well below your 5 grand converter's stall speed, so how far toward soccer practice can mom go before she burns up that expensive B&M or TCI racing tranny?  Hope this clears some things up. Mastermind