Answers to FAQ's....( Frequently Asked Questions )

I often get asked the same questions by many different people. When that happens I assume that there's a lot of people who want this information, but don't know where to find it. Well I aim to please, so maybe these FAQ's and their answers will help some people out. # 1. Why are some engines basically treated like boat anchors and others are sought after and frequently built up by enthusiasts and magazines?  Sometimes it's because it's an obsolete design-I'm sure there's street rodders to this day that play with Flathead Fords-but at any car show or drag race your going to see a lot more small-block Chevys and Winsdsor Fords-i.e.-289,302,351Ws-than you are Flatheads. Other factors can simply be that even though they belong to a modern, popular engine family their too small to make serious power. For example-unless your restoring a '57 Chevy to the nth degree for Concours Show Competitions why would anyone want a 283 Chevy V8? When theirs millions of 327's and 350's out there that cost no more to buy or build, but make substantially more power and torque with the same equipment. Ditto for a 273 or 318 Chrysler. A 340 or 360 costs no more to build yet makes way more power. The same goes for 326 and 350 Pontiacs. Pontiacs are externally identical from a 326 to a 455. A 389,400,421,428 or 455 costs no more to buy or build than a 326/ 350-yet makes twice the power. Further-the big-port, big valve heads that the larger engines use to make all that power can't be used on the small-bore 326 / 350s-the valves will hit the block. People talk about notching the block for clearance, but why? A 400 / 455 is still going to make way more power and torque,all other things being equal. Another factor could be that there is zero aftermarket support. I know guys who have swapped 472 / 500 inch Cadillac V8's into Chevy Pickups for an instant power infusion. I know a guy who put one in an '81 Firebird. But the reason no one is building modern-day "Studillacs" ( In the '50s it was popular to stuff the powerful Cadillac V8 into an aerodynamic Studebaker coupe and make top-speed runs at Bonneville ) is two-fold. Yes, these engines make massive torque. They needed it to move the 6,000 lb luxury land-barges they came in that might also be towing a trailer!  But they are not high revvers. And I don't mean you need to redline them at 5,700 or 5,800 rpm like a 455 Pontiac or 455 Buick-I mean their all done by about 4,000-4,500 rpm. And no one makes hot rod parts for them. Edelbrock makes a Performer Intake manifold, but that's about it. Their bore and stroke and head design-that makes that massive low-end torque just isn't suited for high-performance work. Pick any other big block-429 / 460 Ford, the BOP 455's, 440 Mopars-whatever-stock or modified-they will run off and leave the big Cads. # 2. Why is every magazine writer so adamant that a single-4-barrel carburator is the "Only Way to Fly?" I personally love tri-power and dual-quads. I helped tune a 454 Chevy with 4 Webers on it that won a truck pull competition one time. My dad was a god when it came to jetting and tuning multi-carb setups, and I learned from him. But it's definitely a lost art and if you don't have synchronizer tools and an infrared exhaust analyzer and a lot of time, you shouldn't attempt it. Multi-carb setups look and sound way cool and if their done right can make big power. But what the magazine writers are trying to do is keep amateurs out of trouble. I see it every Hot August Nights with Hemis,409 Impalas, Six-Pack Mopars,Tri-Power GTOs and Corvettes etc. Guys have this killer car that there so damnded afraid of blowing up, that it never sees the high side of 3,000 rpm. Some of them are only driven on and off the trailer. Then, the second it fouls a spark plug, the owner starts screwing around with the carbs. Pretty soon it won't even start, much less run properly. The other thing is the KISS principle-"Keep it simple, stupid". I used to say this to guys back in the '90's when "Pro Street" was popular. "If a Super Stock Firebird can run 11.30's with a Quadrajet, why do you need a Tunnel-Ram and dual 660 Holleys?"  For 99% of the people a single 4bbl makes a lot more sense. Even with most cars now being fuel-injected. If your car is fuel-injected from the factory-great. If you want more oomph-Edelbrock, Accel,Trick Flow, Holley and other companies make manifolds, larger throttle-bodies, etc that work in conjunction with the factory system. Those are great. But aftermarket fuel-injection systems cost anywhere from $2,000-$5,000 depending on application and are complicated to dial in and tune. A simple, $400 carb on a $200 manifold makes just as much or more power and is practically a bolt-on. Anyone with hand tools and common sense can make one work. That's what the writers are saying. Their trying to protect idiots from themselves. # 3. Why do old guys like you constantly scoff at the "Overkill" in magazine project cars? The reason is we speak from experience. Ask some "expert" what you need to build a hot small-block Chevy. I guarantee he'll say "You gotta have a 4-bolt main block" "You gotta Have "Pink" rods" "You gotta have a forged crank" "You gotta have screw in studs in the heads" and a bunch more "Gotta Haves" I can't remember off the top of my head. He'd be half-right. Yes, if your building a NASCAR Nextel Cup car that has to go 7,800 rpm for 500 miles at Daytona, you need all the beef you can get. But I remember guys running Chevy engines for two whole seasons in IMCA circle-track cars with two-bolt main blocks, cast cranks, and cast pistons without a rebuild, and with no problems!!  I have raced drag cars and circle track cars for 30 years and I've never seen a stud pull out of a head. For a street car where rpms don't go over 6,500? You don't need any of that stuff. Here's another example. Summitt Racing list new Richmond / BW T10 4-speeds as having a 325 lb torque rating. Which means you couldn't use them behind any kind of a big-block, right? Wrong!!  In the early '60's 409 Impalas,421 Catalinas, and 406 Galaxies all used T10 4-speeds, and they all had a lot more than 325 lbs of torque!! Most had 450-500 lbs-ft!!  And the "modern" Richmond T10's have much tougher gears and mainshafts due to modern metallurgy! So if you want to put a T10 behind a 390 Ford or 396 Chevy or 400 Pontiac-I wouldn't worry about it!!  I've said it before-I've never seen anyone break a Chrysler 8 3/4 rear!! Not even a buddy of mine who has a 9 second, nitrous-fed, 505 inch Duster!!!  I've had 400, 4-speed Trans-Ams and abused and drag raced them for years and never broke the GM 8.5 inch 10 bolt rear!!  I know guys with 10 second "5.0" Mustangs that haven't broke the stock 8.8 rear!!  So how come every single magazine project car has "Gotta Have" a custom Currie built 9" Ford rear???  I understand that the magazines have to feature and sell their advertisers products to stay in business. But a lot of the "Gotta Haves" you read about are unnecessary. # 4. Why do you always say carefully measure the "Bang for the Buck" factor?  Ok-here's a perfect example. For anything other than a small-block Chevy, a pair of Edelbrock aluminum heads costs $2,000 on up. So if your building say a 383 / 400 Mopar or a 455 Olds or a 400 Pontiac-that $2,000 would buy you a carb and intake, a cam kit, a set of headers,a high-stall converter and some gears and traction bars to put all that power to the ground!! Or the set of heads. See what I'm saying?  # 5. Why do you slam certain parts or car lines?  I'm not "Slamming" anything. I'm just telling the truth. For example-it's an irrefutable fact that GM and Chrysler stuff is much more interchangeable than Ford stuff. You can take a Turbo 350 out of a 305 '81 Camaro and replace the Powerglide in a 327 '64 Impala and not have to change anything. Ditto for taking a 727 Torqueflite out of a '67 361 Belvedere and putting it in a '78 Dodge D150 Pickup with a 440. Guess what? A 289 /302, 351C,a 390, and a 351 /400M  all have a different bellhousing bolt-pattern!!  Another example-GM points were good to about 6,000 rpm. Mopar points were awful. They'd bounce and close up, especially above 5,000 rpm. You never saw a Mopar racer in the '60's or '70's without extra points in his toolbox, and they were usually Accel or Mallory!  The Autolite 4300 is the worst carburator ever made, bar none. I worked for Ford in the '70's. If you had a 351 Mustang or 460 T-Bird that stumbled, was hard starting, got crappy gas mileage and all around ran like shit, and you bitched hard enough Ford would replace it with a 600 Holley at no charge, and warranty it!! That's how bad those carbs were, brand-new!!  If something is awful-I'll say it's awful. No prejudice, like "Calvin" pissing on a bow-tie!!  Mastermind