how to rebuild my 428 - Page 7 - Pontiac GTO Forum
Pontiac GTO Pontiac GTO Forum

» Auto Insurance
Wheel & Tire Center

Go Back   Pontiac GTO Forum > The 1964-1974 Pontiac GTO > 1964-1974 Tempest, LeMans & GTO Technical Discussions
Register Home Forum Active Topics Photo Gallery Garage Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Auto EscrowInsurance

GtoForum.com is the premier Pontiac GTO Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-19-2012, 07:50 PM   #61 (permalink)
 
leeklm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Mpls, MN
Posts: 410
My Photos: (4)
should be a minimum of 750cfm, and maybe higher, depends on who you ask. It will flow plenty. Here is a good thread on the discussion...

Tripower VS Quadrajet
leeklm is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 12-20-2012, 07:23 AM   #62 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Austria
Posts: 508
My Photos: (0)
Garage
This is very interesting, thank you!
I really like the look of the Tri-Power so I never really thought of changing to a single carb. The sound is also great, especially after the end carbs come into play
I also have the sealed pan and open hood scoop to give the engine some cool air:
Chris-Austria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2012, 09:23 AM   #63 (permalink)
 
leeklm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Mpls, MN
Posts: 410
My Photos: (4)
I am with you there, the tri power has a high "cool factor". I was looking for a tri power for mine (it is a tri power coded car) but did not like the cost, and was having good results building my qjet with Cliff Rugles book. I am trying to keep my car fairly stock looking, but it is not a show car.
leeklm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2012, 04:26 PM   #64 (permalink)
Super Moderator
 
BearGFR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Springtown, TX
Posts: 4,400
My Photos: (12)
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris-Austria View Post
I've got another question

What if I use rocker arms with 1.65 ratio instead of 1.5? The valve lift will be higher I guess.. but can I just use these rocker arms and get more power? New pushrods will be used anyway.. but do I need different pushrods for these rocker arms? Which ratio should I use? Edelbrock says max. valve lift = 0.55" and the cam has 0.443"/0.465" with 1.5 ratio and 0.487"/0.512" with 1.65 ratio. So I can use either of them, correct?
(rocker arm example: http://www.summitracing.com/parts/cca-1452-1)
Sorry I'm late with a response...

1.65's will do two things because of the increased ratio: 1) increase valve lift, 2) increase the duration @ .050 figures. Swapping rocker arms is an easy way to effectively add a slightly "bigger" cam without actually changing cams.
It's not a huge change - it's something you can do if you like, or "keep in your pocket" in case you want to step it up a little later. As long as you stay with the same manufacturer and style of rocker arm, switching them "shouldn't" require a pushrod change but it's always safer to check the contact pattern on the valves just to make sure.

Bear
__________________
BearGFR
Garland, TEXAS
BearGFR is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2012, 01:30 AM   #65 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Austria
Posts: 508
My Photos: (0)
Garage
Thank you for your response Bear
The engine builder sells me the pushrods, rockers, lifters and cam. I will know which parts are exactly used in January, until now I only know the specific camshaft and that he uses the stock ratio. Maybe I'll ask him to sell me a set of 1.65 rockers as well just to be sure to have the correct parts that I can change if I feel I want to try it. Probably after the engine has been driven a while and I go to the dyno I'll ask for 2 runs and change the rockers for the 2nd one.
I sometimes read that people like to "overcam" their Pontiac engines and for example Speed Pro recommends to use the smaller cam if there are 2 choices that look good. So I'm happy with my choice because I can't easily go smaller if I install the bigger cam, but with the rocker ratio I can go a little bigger after I installed the smaller cam.

The Scat connecting rods have already arrived, they look nice I will have a much better feeling everytime I reach higher rpm's now.. no matter if stock ones would have worked.. the $ 500 are a good investment for a comfortable feeling instead of being afraid to crush a "almost" new engine.

Last edited by Chris-Austria; 12-22-2012 at 03:55 PM.
Chris-Austria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2012, 11:36 AM   #66 (permalink)
Super Moderator
 
BearGFR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Springtown, TX
Posts: 4,400
My Photos: (12)
Garage
Sounds to me like you've got a good plan going. Can't wait to hear how it all turns out.

Bear
__________________
BearGFR
Garland, TEXAS
BearGFR is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2012, 08:53 AM   #67 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Austria
Posts: 508
My Photos: (0)
Garage
Bear, do you know if the pushrod holes are large enough for the 1.65 ratio rockers?
(edelbrock d-port heads)
I tested it with a software called "desktop dyno 2000" and the results with 1.65 ratio rockers and my cam are a little better over the whole rpm range.
CompCams offers a set of pushrods and 1.65 ratio rocker arms (roller tip) for a good price. I'm wondering if this will fit just fine?! (high energy pushrods and magnum rockers are included). A set of full roller rocker arms is much more expensive.. probably they will reduce friction, but I'm not sure if this is really necessary for my street application?!
Chris-Austria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 10:31 AM   #68 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Austria
Posts: 508
My Photos: (0)
Garage
the heads have finally arrived, now he can start putting things together.. there have been some changes again (heads are now 72cc, cam is now a compcams..)
the static and dynamic compression has been calculated.. it's 10.52 static and about 8.61 dynamic.. it should work just fine with 93 octane I guess





and here the final .pdf
Attached Files
File Type: pdf 66GTO Details.pdf (34.9 KB, 45 views)
Chris-Austria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 01:51 PM   #69 (permalink)
Super Moderator
 
ALKYGTO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Wentzville, Mo.
Posts: 2,344
My Photos: (6)
Garage
Looks like a nice build up!
ALKYGTO is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 05:17 PM   #70 (permalink)
Super Moderator
 
BearGFR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Springtown, TX
Posts: 4,400
My Photos: (12)
Garage
Good deal, Chris.... you do realize that a video of it running is a requirement, right?

Bear
__________________
BearGFR
Garland, TEXAS
BearGFR is online now   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Pontiac GTO Forum > The 1964-1974 Pontiac GTO > 1964-1974 Tempest, LeMans & GTO Technical Discussions


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
428 Rebuild to stock EP Goat 1964-1974 GTO General Discussion 0 08-20-2011 06:29 AM
To rebuild or buy crate? MOTONATE 1964-1974 GTO General Discussion 14 07-19-2011 10:24 PM
Where to buy t56 Rebuild Kit? rj91049 2004-2006 GTO General Discussion 12 10-14-2009 12:15 PM
400 Rebuild G-Code72 1964-1974 Tempest, LeMans & GTO Technical Discussions 0 07-30-2009 05:29 PM
64 rebuild mr_gto 1964-1974 Tempest, LeMans & GTO Technical Discussions 13 11-14-2008 04:51 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.2

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:47 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.3.2
Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.