Thread: Streetable HP?

Tweet

Originally Posted by tango

You could always work harder or save Longer ? RIGHT

Yup, and that's exactly what I will have to do to be able to build the car the way I want to.... To me that would be a whole lot better plan then settling for something less then trying to convince myself it was what I wanted......

Originally Posted by Dave Severson

Yup, and that's exactly what I will have to do to be able to build the car the way I want to.... To me that would be a whole lot better plan then settling for something less then trying to convince myself it was what I wanted......

Sorry to say I can not do that . Time is passing me by . And if I do not have it now . I will not have it Later . I will build what I can . And run what I Brung !

Streetable HP implies considering (HP/weight) just as in a racing situation so only DennyW gave a one sentence response about the Buick 350. Since it is about 100 pounds lighter and has a longer stroke than the SBC I still wonder if it is too hard to find and parts too rare to keep in mind when wandering through a junk yard? On another thread I learned that the Ford 302/5.0 blocks may crack down the middle if built to more than 400+ HP which I would not have learned except by reading this Forum and it would seem that the SBC can be built for a little more HP but I have heard "hand grenade" stories about the SBC 400, so before I go looking for or keeping my eyes open for a Buick 350 what is the story about the limits of that engine? It seems to me that with a longer stroke than an SBC 350 that would favor street HP in the Buick 350, but maybe it is too late to find one easily? I must admit that when choosing an engine for my roadster I gave the main consideration to available aftermarket parts, accumulated roadster technology and my limitations in innovation/adaptation, but now I wish I had that 100 pounds back.

Don Shillady
Retired Scientist/teen rodder

If you want to talk about the other 350s . I like the short stroke OLD's 350 Rocket . That one has a 4.057 bore and a 3.385 stroke . The buick 350 may have a bit more Torque and it is a light engine . But with it's smaller Bore the HP will be down . It will not respond to bigger camshafts and larger heads like the Old's and chevys will . Kind of like a small bore 305 Chevy does . Try and buy and intake for one of them 350 Buicks Also not a Lot of cams to pick from . And the buick oil pump set up will need a lot of work to Live . If you have one build it try and find a Non-EGR stock Q-Jet intake add a mild Camshaft . Up grade the oil pump in the front cover with a H/V one . And pick up a set of headers an a HP HEI Dist . I think even the Pontiac 350 is a better other 350 then the Buick is . But they are buildable . And I have seen GS 350s run good times at the track .

It's all about horsepower to weight, doesn't really matter if the engine is brand x, y, or z. A good engine with quick throttle response, the correct gearing, and good suspension to free the car up so it can transfer some weight is what it takes. Street use, traction is always the limiting factor. If the chassis "works" you can up the power and not just blow the tires off......

If you would Like to Know why it does matter with Brand B-P-O GM . Go to the Thread on the other 350s and ask . That's why I started it . If you think you can build a Buick like a SB Chevy and have it hold up . Not in are Life time friend .

I don't care how you get the power....... There are some big horse Buicks, Olds, Pontiacs, Fords and everything else out there... And no, I'm not talking about 350's, just engines in general....

I've seen way too many street cars that just flat overpower the chassis and suspension that they have totally ignored.... There's a whole lot more to going fast then just the engine.

And no, I don't want to discuss engine building..... I like big inches, you like small inches... Big deal.

Tango, thanks for the info; that is the sort of knowledge I am looking for. My experience is limited to only a few engines and very old memories of the big difference between a 4" stroke in the '50 Merc and the 3 3/4" stroke in the '48 59AB but that is prehistoric data now. It is just that I perk up my ears for longer stroke and the lighter weight of the Buick 350. I missed most of this Forum all of last year so I will go back and read the "other 350" thread. Still that lighter weight is attractive to me. Does anyone know what transmissions will line up with the Buick 350? As for the Olds Rocket engines, the ones with the starter on the left side caused a lot of heart ache in the early '50s when folks wanted them in Fords and had a lot of trouble with steering clearance. In the early '50s the street culture fostered a myth that somebody knew somebody who actually had an Olds 88 with a manual shift, but I never saw one! Another myth was that somebody knew somebody who actually put a Rocket engine in a Ford with an adapter plate that moved the starter to the right side, but again I never saw one except maybe in Hot Rod magazine. Then another sad story for Fordnatics was that awful long water pump on the Ford 221, 260, 289,... so a lot of folks may have developed the SBC starting with the 283 just because it did not have the water pump problem and has the starter on the right side. Of course most of these problems can be solved today with much experiences gained in engine-swapping but I am describing what might be the "easiest swap" in the late '50s and how we got to convenient dominance of the SBC. With the price of gas still going up maybe the old push by Brian Brennen in Rod Action for use of the Buick 231 V6 will become a reality since there are still a lot of 231s out there. Was the 231 odd fire derived from the Buick 350 and then fixed with the even fire crank? The bore is the same for the 231 and the 350. Well this is just "rambling rod history" musing on my part. By the way will the 700R4 pattern mate with a Buick 350 or a 231? Just rambling thoughts while waiting for Spring. I saw two flowering cherry trees with tiny green buds the other day so maybe we only have another month of this cold stuff here?

Don Shillady
Retired Scientist/teen rodder

Originally Posted by Don Shillady

Does anyone know what transmissions will line up with the Buick 350?

Hi Don,

The BOP (Buick/Olds/Pontiac) bell housing pattern is different than other GM trannys; but, Summit racing sells an adapter plate that will mate trannys for Chevy motors to the BOP engine. I don't know if that is really what your asking here; but, I guess what I'm trying to say is that anything you can get to fit a Chevy motor would fit a BOP motor with the adapter.

Cheers,
Dutch

This is why I started the thread to begin with. I don't want to have too much power where I just spin the tires.

With the supsension I have for the truck (coil-overs 4-link and IFS) what would be the best streetable HP and torque for my specific configuration. I can put whatever gears I need in the rear end.

I do like the output of engine combo #11. Is this going to be too much torque where I will not be able to hook up and just spin the tire?

Thanks to everyone for the info.

Originally Posted by tango

Check out combo #13 See how a well built 355 with the right Camshaft . Will make the same power as that 383 in combo #11 . I would go with a 355 4 bolt with 190cc heads and a Comp cams XE268H camshaft . And for the intake . The Weiand Stealth Air Strike # 8501 . And for the carb the Edelbrock Performer 750 CFM . Or if you have your mind set on a 383 build . I think the #15 combo is the better one to go with .

RCS-72 Go with the 350 combo #13 . It's will have a Little less Torque . But will get the job done with out all that tire spining

Originally Posted by rcs72

This is why I started the thread to begin with. I don't want to have too much power where I just spin the tires.

With the supsension I have for the truck (coil-overs 4-link and IFS) what would be the best streetable HP and torque for my specific configuration. I can put whatever gears I need in the rear end.


Thanks to everyone for the info.

With the suspension you have and a reasonably soft street radial I would think you should be able to handle 400 to 450 ft. lbs. torque.... That's not saying it will leave without some spinning if you launch it off the converter real hard, but it should get a good hook with that torque range. Again, this will be dependent on what you are running for spring rates front and rear and what shock valving the coilovers have.... Have you scaled the truck with 4 wheel scales to see what your front/rear weight distribution is? Is your 4 link a parallel bar or unequal length? This will have a lot to do with how well you can hook the truck up... As a general rule trucks are quite light in the rear and will require a light spring rating in the rear to get some weight transfer. Too heavy a spring on the coilovers and the back end will raise up and further unhook the truck..... But, with some tuning and tweaking, should be able to hook it up fairly well and get the weight transferring and the torque pushing it forward and not just blowing the tires off the back.....

I have stayed out of this thread until now because my idea of streetable hp is much different than others.
I would say in Ryans combos. he uses to large a cylinder head in a majority of his tests.
If you have any doubts on port volume size go one size smaller which is the exact same advice I give on camshafts.

Originally Posted by erik erikson

I have stayed out of this thread until now because my idea of streetable hp is much different than others.
I would say in Ryans combos. he uses to large a cylinder head in a majority of his tests.
If you have any doubts on port volume size go one size smaller which is the exact same advice I give on camshafts.

Erik I would Like to know what you think on an engine Build for this truck . And yes you are right on the 170 to 180 cc heads for a street and some strip SB Chevy 383 or smaller under 6000 RPM . Many times you do have very good info to share .

[QUOTE=erik erikson]I have stayed out of this thread until now because my idea of streetable hp is much different than others.[QUOTE] OH YOU THINK SO DO YOU