CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.
73 k5 blank slate
- Thread starter 1300obo
- Start date
yes sir, the long block already dressed out with carb and distributer on the blueprint website
hadn't really had a chance to call and specifically address that with them, any suggestions?
Yes, roller
But I presume you already went there with the target number of 450 lb/ft
I really like the cam that GM used in the LT1, the ZZ series of crate engines, or even the LT4 (though it may be a little peaky)
ZZ4 Cam- 208/221, .474/.510 112LS
24502486 LT4 Hot Cam- 218/228, .492/.492 112LS with 1.5 rockers.
19210723 ZZ383 Cam- 222/230, .509/.528 112 LS (new part number)
https://paceperformance.com/i-6255003-10185071-hydraulic-roller-camshaft-g-m-zz4-crate-engine.html
But I presume you already went there with the target number of 450 lb/ft
I really like the cam that GM used in the LT1, the ZZ series of crate engines, or even the LT4 (though it may be a little peaky)
ZZ4 Cam- 208/221, .474/.510 112LS
24502486 LT4 Hot Cam- 218/228, .492/.492 112LS with 1.5 rockers.
19210723 ZZ383 Cam- 222/230, .509/.528 112 LS (new part number)
https://paceperformance.com/i-6255003-10185071-hydraulic-roller-camshaft-g-m-zz4-crate-engine.html
Between me and the old man, we’ve had the corner of the market on these ZZ crate engines, having zz3-6 currently installed in something
I know it’s not a 350, but I’ve only ever seen two 350” engines with stock cylinder heads and compression hit 450+ lb/ft on the dyno
One was .410” lift and 270 duration @.050”. Not real streetable. 425 hp @ 6100, 458 lb /ft at 3800
second was an LT1 powered camaro that had some computer work done. Can’t find the sheet for RPM specifics, but it was 346 HP and 462 lb/ft, but much lower. Maybe 3200. That car shredded converters and rear axles
First was carbureted, 750 Q Jet
Second was factory TPI with a 750 cfm throttle body
That type of cam should make a mess of torque on a 383
I know it’s not a 350, but I’ve only ever seen two 350” engines with stock cylinder heads and compression hit 450+ lb/ft on the dyno
One was .410” lift and 270 duration @.050”. Not real streetable. 425 hp @ 6100, 458 lb /ft at 3800
second was an LT1 powered camaro that had some computer work done. Can’t find the sheet for RPM specifics, but it was 346 HP and 462 lb/ft, but much lower. Maybe 3200. That car shredded converters and rear axles
First was carbureted, 750 Q Jet
Second was factory TPI with a 750 cfm throttle body
That type of cam should make a mess of torque on a 383
Thanks, I'm going to do some research on cams before I call, but the ones I'm looking at do have roller cams. I need to do some reading first so I dont sound like a complete moron when I order
Good info because I’ve got a spare block I’m planning on having machined for a 383 next year. Yes a crate is cheaper but I can’t teach my daughter how to build an engine with a crate.
Is that a factory roller block? If not, that cam would need some retro fit lifters
will do and thanks again. I am hoping to learn enough this week that I actually understand what you sent me
If not, PM me and I’ll see if we can makes heads and tails of itwill do and thanks again. I am hoping to learn enough this week that I actually understand what you sent me
@1300obo , my thought is to concentrate slightly less on the horsepower number and more on the torque number and where it comes on. Obviously the roller cam helps this a good amount.
I have never had a 383, but have had a couple of 400 small blocks. I like the torque and I believe that the 383 will be a good plan.
I have never had a 383, but have had a couple of 400 small blocks. I like the torque and I believe that the 383 will be a good plan.
Appreciate it guys. More info to come soon
Ed
Ed
Yes it is. 97 vortec block.
This is what came out of the blazer. The numbers say it's out of an 84 Camaro. It's been bored over .030. We might mess with it at some point
19Tim69
1/2 ton status
The cam I chose for my LQ9 is Comp Cams XR265HR cam offered a .558/.563 lift split, a 212/218-degree duration split and 115-degree isa.
http://www.cpgnation.com/lets-talk-torque-ls-truck-upgrades/
I didn’t swap the heads to the smaller 706 but I was looking at a lower RPM Torque range in a daily driver.
I know you are not going the LS route but the concepts discussed in the article works for old school small block.
Some guys put a factory LS3 in their rigs and use the factory cam. I don’t need my K5 to operate at 6500 RPM & the factory LS3 cam has a drop in torque at the wrong RPM for 33” tires.
http://www.cpgnation.com/lets-talk-torque-ls-truck-upgrades/
I didn’t swap the heads to the smaller 706 but I was looking at a lower RPM Torque range in a daily driver.
I know you are not going the LS route but the concepts discussed in the article works for old school small block.
Some guys put a factory LS3 in their rigs and use the factory cam. I don’t need my K5 to operate at 6500 RPM & the factory LS3 cam has a drop in torque at the wrong RPM for 33” tires.
thanks, today i'm figuring out lift,duration and overlap and i did learn why the roller cam is different regarding the type of lifters and how the lobe is milled. pretty interesting stuff-i didn't realize the lifters are designed to spin on a conventional cam. i plan to call regarding the engine to see if they will send me a power curve to see what kind of torque i will have at 2038 rpm. thanks for the link. back to reading
Those spinning lifters without the zinc in regular oil causes lobes to go flat. Just more food for thought to go with the roller. No requirement for high zinc oil.
thanks, everything I have read so far says go with the roller- longer lasting, more efficient better low end torque etc. oil situation is a bonus
