A TBI Caddy would be sweet
Coming to a screen near you!
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.
Caddy big block in a K5/10??
- Thread starter pismorat
- Start date
Coming to a screen near you!
I dont think durability is an issue with these engines, I run a lot of demo derbys, caddys are very strong cars for derbys. I mainly run small block chevys but decided to run a caddy motor once, it had great power, I overheated it and floated the valves all night long, we pulled the motor and ran it in several other cars before I finally broke the snout off of the crank from it getting hit. It definetly made me want to put one in a 4x4.
You're comparing apples and oranges my friend. First off anything before '72 was rated in gross hp, everything after '72 was rated SAE net hp. An example I can think of off the top of my head to get an idea of the difference is this: '71 Dodge 318 was rated 230 hp gross. Identical engine in '72 was rated 150 hp SAE net. The gross ratings you could take with a grain of salt too...many engines under rated, many over rated. The numbers were whatever the big 3 published them to be, and often the reality was different. The SAE thing standardized things...
Second thing, I'd like to see where you found any 454 rated under 200 hp SAE net. 160 hp SAE net is what the smogger carb'd 350's were rated at.
I've never been a big fan of Caddy engines, I'd take a Buick, Olds or Pontiac 455 over the Caddy 425/472/500 any day of the week.
Of course the cubic dollar solution is the motown 454 sbc from World products. Pump gas, 600 hp, EFI, probably 100 lbs lighter than the caddy, and it would bolt right in...of course it is a small $20K
Rene
original balzer
1/2 ton status
Funny, the GM brochure literature for 1975 Chevrolet pick-ups says 215 hp and 350lbs of tq for the 454 that year.
http://brochures.slosh.com/index.shtml?1975
I had to use my browser's zoom feature to finally read it...215 hp at 4000 rpm, 350 lbs of tq at 2400 rpm. That's straight from GM's literature.
Rene
http://brochures.slosh.com/index.shtml?1975
I had to use my browser's zoom feature to finally read it...215 hp at 4000 rpm, 350 lbs of tq at 2400 rpm. That's straight from GM's literature.
Rene
You're comparing apples and oranges my friend. First off anything before '72 was rated in gross hp, everything after '72 was rated SAE net hp. An example I can think of off the top of my head to get an idea of the difference is this: '71 Dodge 318 was rated 230 hp gross. Identical engine in '72 was rated 150 hp SAE net. The gross ratings you could take with a grain of salt too...many engines under rated, many over rated. The numbers were whatever the big 3 published them to be, and often the reality was different. The SAE thing standardized things...
Second thing, I'd like to see where you found any 454 rated under 200 hp SAE net. 160 hp SAE net is what the smogger carb'd 350's were rated at.
I've never been a big fan of Caddy engines, I'd take a Buick, Olds or Pontiac 455 over the Caddy 425/472/500 any day of the week.
Of course the cubic dollar solution is the motown 454 sbc from World products. Pump gas, 600 hp, EFI, probably 100 lbs lighter than the caddy, and it would bolt right in...of course it is a small $20K
Rene
I didnt think about the gross horespower and sae net horsepower thing, but if you put a stock 1970 500 caddy on a dyno it will pull over 400hp and 550 ft-lb of torque stock. not bad for a stock engine. now go find a stock 454 thats been pampered all its life in the caddys price range and see what kind of power it makes
and guys the headers are not that hard to come by for our trucks, just get a set of 454 headers, then call dec headers and order a set of caddy flanges, cut em off the 454 headers and weld the new ones on.
Well, when I was 19 or so we have a '72 sedan DeVille with the 472. The car was maybe 12 years old at the time, not a high miler or anything. Sure the car is heavy, but not too far off what our trucks weigh. In my honest opinion it was a low rpm slug. I've had many Pontiac, Olds and Buicks and even the smaller versions of those engines would eat the caddy for lunch.
I know it'll never happen, but I'd sure love to see a real dyno sheet on a dead stock Caddy 500. I am pretty doubtful it'd even approach 400 hp or 550 lbs of tq in stock trim. I am more inclined to believe 310 hp and 425 tq on an engine dyno in stock trim.
Rene
I know it'll never happen, but I'd sure love to see a real dyno sheet on a dead stock Caddy 500. I am pretty doubtful it'd even approach 400 hp or 550 lbs of tq in stock trim. I am more inclined to believe 310 hp and 425 tq on an engine dyno in stock trim.
Rene
I have never done it myself, but read about it on some caddy site, they also said that depending on what you are putting the engine in you could also use 460 ford headers with caddy flanges. I seen it on the internet so it must be true.
myself I just got two driver side manifolds flip em over and ran em through the hood.
I have never done it myself, but read about it on some caddy site, they also said that depending on what you are putting the engine in you could also use 460 ford headers with caddy flanges. I seen it on the internet so it must be true.
I've done it and I can tell you its not fun at all. I think its easier to build them from scratch. I've done that as well.
Problem with the flange route, The first tube lines up nice(go figure
), second one is close. Third tube is far enough off that you need to start cutting stuff apart to make the adjustment and the fourth one is not even in the neighborhood. So, its not all bad, you may have to fix two tubes per side and adjust one with some heat and persuasion. Depending on how the headers are layed out will determine how bad it actually is to do. Since I've only done it once, maybe there's a better header out there than what I used.
Might be easier to work "center out"? Less accumulative error I'd think...
Rene
Rene
Yep, I'd think so too. For me, it came down to which tubes were going to be the best ones to chop off and reshape. Or I guess more to the point, which ones had the longest section of tube away from the others.
Yeah, really hard for me to say what'd be easiest without having it in front of me...
Rene
Rene
Corey 78K5
1 ton status
I would go with a rosebud, BFH and a pipe stretcher, but that's just me.
Bama67
Registered Member
Do you guys remember when Hot Rod magazine took a stock Chevette and threw a 500ci Caddy in it? It was like 10 years ago, and i was just a kid when it came out and remember thinking it was one of the coolest things ever.
The engine stuck halfway into the cab or it would smoke the tires all day from being too nose heavy. lol
The engine stuck halfway into the cab or it would smoke the tires all day from being too nose heavy. lol
Yeah, that was around '02 or so. It was a good write-up if I'm remembering it right. They used heads from a different year to boost compression.
Corey 78K5
1 ton status
They did another story back in the late 80's. They had some big old 70's Eldo with the 500 doing run's in the 1/4. The thing was a slug and to get it to go fast the kept cutting away weight. They finally had it cut down to the frame and a fire wall to get good times out of it.
http://www.coloradok5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=260523
I've driven a Caddy with a 472. Not impressed. BBC cheaper and simpler.
Also, a Chevrolet transmission will bolt right up to a BOP engine, or vice versa.
Martin
I've driven a Caddy with a 472. Not impressed. BBC cheaper and simpler.
Also, a Chevrolet transmission will bolt right up to a BOP engine, or vice versa.
Martin
chevrolet tranny will bolt right up to a bop engine.......... with an adapter. some of the bellhousing bolts line up but not all of them, you need an adapter, some transmissions come with both the chevy and bop bolt patterns but those are getting hard to find, also keep in mind that some year caddys have caddy only bellhousings. you guys need to keep in mind that the older these engine are the more power they will have, I have driven 74,75,76 caddy engines that were dogs, Ive also driven 69 and 70 models that really surprised me, in my opinion after 72 or so the 454s werent that great either.
