GMs HP RATINGS

General engine tech -- Drag Racing to Circle Track

Moderator: Team

rfoll
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2021
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: St. Helens, OR

Re: GMs HP RATINGS

Post by rfoll » Tue Oct 31, 2017 11:37 am

In 1975 I had a 365 hp 327 crate motor in my 60 Bel Aire. I was using a T10 4 speed and the rear end was a Pontiac with 4.56 gears. My friends encouraged me to drive down to Lebanon OR from Portland, about 100 miles, to race a bunch of irritating guys with hot cars. I guess I was supposed to be a ringer. I beat everyone that showed up for a while, that heavy old car would launch on the street. Money changed hands with lot's of grumbling, and eventually everyone was saying wait 'till some guy gets' off work. He finally shows up with a 1970 Z 28. He had done all of the right things for modifications, and the car was stunning to look at. Dark metallic green with the with white stripes. We ran and at the finish line it was too close to call. At the line he went past me like I was standing still.
So much to do, so little time...

Frankshaft
Pro
Pro
Posts: 436
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 6:01 pm

Re: GMs HP RATINGS

Post by Frankshaft » Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:45 pm

Stan Weiss wrote:
Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:41 am
Frankshaft wrote:
Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:19 am


Was at an NHRA divisional in August, hanging out with a buddy of mine from Canada. We both love the stock, super stock, and comp stuff. He says, there is a 68 Camaro, 302 dz car in stock running 10.40's. I said, you mean superstock, he said no, stock. Hmm, sure enough he went 10.42 at like I 126 or 127. I said, wow. Then I thought about it. Smaller cubic inch, they had dome pistons, so, with "blueprinting" they end up at a decent compression ratio, they come with a higher lift solid flat tappet cam, and, a pretty decent intake, and a holley carb. And, they rev much higher, allowing more gear and a wilder converter. I wonder if anyone will get the correlation? lol
:shock: :?

In '68 they only came with a 4 speed.

Stan
Good catch, lol. Allows for an even higher rpm launch, and with 4 gears instead of 3, keeps the engine at higher rpm between shifts. Better yet even

User avatar
Stan Weiss
Guru
Guru
Posts: 3347
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Contact:

Re: GMs HP RATINGS

Post by Stan Weiss » Tue Oct 31, 2017 1:21 pm

Frankshaft wrote:
Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:45 pm
Stan Weiss wrote:
Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:41 am
Frankshaft wrote:
Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:19 am


Was at an NHRA divisional in August, hanging out with a buddy of mine from Canada. We both love the stock, super stock, and comp stuff. He says, there is a 68 Camaro, 302 dz car in stock running 10.40's. I said, you mean superstock, he said no, stock. Hmm, sure enough he went 10.42 at like I 126 or 127. I said, wow. Then I thought about it. Smaller cubic inch, they had dome pistons, so, with "blueprinting" they end up at a decent compression ratio, they come with a higher lift solid flat tappet cam, and, a pretty decent intake, and a holley carb. And, they rev much higher, allowing more gear and a wilder converter. I wonder if anyone will get the correlation? lol
:shock: :?

In '68 they only came with a 4 speed.

Stan
Good catch, lol. Allows for an even higher rpm launch, and with 4 gears instead of 3, keeps the engine at higher rpm between shifts. Better yet even
Were you one of those that used to run Modified Product with 287 ci SBC launching @ like 11000 RPM :mrgreen: with a 40-50 lb flywheel?

Stan
Stan Weiss / World Wide Enterprises
Offering Performance Software Since 1987
Image
http://www.erols.com/srweiss/index.html

mark_follweiler
New Member
New Member
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2017 4:20 pm

Re: GMs HP RATINGS

Post by mark_follweiler » Tue Oct 31, 2017 1:44 pm

Stan Weiss wrote:
Tue Oct 31, 2017 1:21 pm
Frankshaft wrote:
Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:45 pm
Stan Weiss wrote:
Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:41 am


:shock: :?

In '68 they only came with a 4 speed.

Stan
Good catch, lol. Allows for an even higher rpm launch, and with 4 gears instead of 3, keeps the engine at higher rpm between shifts. Better yet even
Were you one of those that used to run Modified Product with 287 ci SBC launching @ like 11000 RPM :mrgreen: with a 40-50 lb flywheel?

Stan
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

rewguy
Expert
Expert
Posts: 723
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 2:45 am

Re: GMs HP RATINGS

Post by rewguy » Tue Oct 31, 2017 3:03 pm

Yeah. I dont believe it either. I could buy a well tuned 340-365. I saw a 355 chevy, stock 461 heads, 2.02/1.6, no porting, vic. jr. manifold, 750 carb, zero decked, 10.2-1 flat top engine, comp cams 305H ( I believe....but could be wrong on the specs.... 252/252@.050, .525/.525, on a 110) make 359hp @ 5800 or so. And although I could maybe see a solid cammed 302 matching the power.......I definitely cannot see it beating it by 70 horsepower unless there was some "behind the scenes" work done.

rewguy
Expert
Expert
Posts: 723
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 2:45 am

Re: GMs HP RATINGS

Post by rewguy » Tue Oct 31, 2017 3:07 pm

AND....if they reeaaally made that power.....you would have seen some full weight (non gutted) 69 camaros @ 3500 lbs race weight SOMEWHERE in stock engine (Meaning UNTOUCHED stock engine) trim running waaaaaaaay bottom elevens. And noone saw that. I could see waaaaay high elevens or twelve flats if owned by a serious racer.......but no faster unless seriously lighter or engine messed with.

vortecpro
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1068
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 11:10 pm

Re: GMs HP RATINGS

Post by vortecpro » Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:15 pm

novadude wrote:
Tue Oct 31, 2017 9:32 am
stangbuilder wrote:
Mon Oct 30, 2017 7:34 pm
I have had about 5 cars with the 302s and 350Lt 1s One was a low compression Lt1 9.1 deal in a 72 z28 I ran them all at local drags with street tires...all were 4 speed cars ...

69 Z28 with the 302 with headers on it . Only 1 run was around a 14 sec deal bad traction big time..at 109mph
70 Z28 Lt1 with headers Best i remember was 13 .5s at 105mph
72 z28 bone stock 14,2 at 99 mph with headers think i got in the 13s at 104 mph

Heres what i remember about these cars. were the 69z after i put headers on that deal that car came alive.It was fun to drive once you got it going,Had a 220 first gear with 373 gear.All i remember was that car halled the mail at the top end. i buzzed that motor to 8000 rpm . honestly that was my favorite one.. bitchin fun car.
109 mph sounds like a lot for a stock 302 ci and what I would assume to be a ~3500 lb car with driver. NHRA Stocker-prepped Z/28s were only running 116 mph in 1968, and we know those weren't "stock" factory builds. Not saying it didn't happen, but that is really flying for a stock 302 with headers.

http://z28camaro.com/old-reliable/
Back I believe in the early 80s Hot Rod had a 69 Z with headers and tuning, slapper bars, I thought they got it to run 109 MPH if my memory is right, and this would have run at OCIR, very good air. Interestingly enough 109 MPH @ 3500 is 353 observed HP, makes sense to me, if it weighed 3500, probably less.
Racing a NA NHRA stocker should be mandatory before any posting.

Jeff Lee
Pro
Pro
Posts: 243
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 1:20 am
Location: Anthem / Phoenix Arizona

Re: GMs HP RATINGS

Post by Jeff Lee » Thu Nov 02, 2017 2:29 am

My favorite Z-28 was my buddies black ’69. This was back in 1980-1981 I think. 3.73 gears and a non-stock hydraulic cam. But a rowdy one. My low-compression 340 Challenger would beat it. But I tried like heck to get him to trade me. That 302 was the best sounding engine and 7,000 RPM all day long. He sold it to his brother. He put 4.56’s in it. It was better driving, faster AND got better gas mileage! Even 3.73’s are lugging’ that 302 down in town! I still want that car....
NHRA SS/H
1970 AMX
390 4-speed
Advanced Clutches
Red Line Racing Cams

rfoll
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2021
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: St. Helens, OR

Re: GMs HP RATINGS

Post by rfoll » Thu Nov 02, 2017 9:50 am

I saw this in a parking lot recently. No modifications to anything. The owner bought it off the showroom floor at the dealer here in town. It's a little rough around the edges, literally, but I waited long enough to hear it run when he drove away .
lg1 055.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
So much to do, so little time...

DaveMcLain
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2688
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 8:57 am

Re: GMs HP RATINGS

Post by DaveMcLain » Fri Nov 03, 2017 1:24 pm

Jeff Lee wrote:
Thu Nov 02, 2017 2:29 am
My favorite Z-28 was my buddies black ’69. This was back in 1980-1981 I think. 3.73 gears and a non-stock hydraulic cam. But a rowdy one. My low-compression 340 Challenger would beat it. But I tried like heck to get him to trade me. That 302 was the best sounding engine and 7,000 RPM all day long. He sold it to his brother. He put 4.56’s in it. It was better driving, faster AND got better gas mileage! Even 3.73’s are lugging’ that 302 down in town! I still want that car....
Better yet use all of the 302 stuff on a 350 or 400 short block.. I bet that's what a lot of the fast ones really were back in the day.

rfoll
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2021
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: St. Helens, OR

Re: GMs HP RATINGS

Post by rfoll » Fri Nov 03, 2017 3:30 pm

DaveMcLain wrote:
Fri Nov 03, 2017 1:24 pm
Jeff Lee wrote:
Thu Nov 02, 2017 2:29 am
My favorite Z-28 was my buddies black ’69. This was back in 1980-1981 I think. 3.73 gears and a non-stock hydraulic cam. But a rowdy one. My low-compression 340 Challenger would beat it. But I tried like heck to get him to trade me. That 302 was the best sounding engine and 7,000 RPM all day long. He sold it to his brother. He put 4.56’s in it. It was better driving, faster AND got better gas mileage! Even 3.73’s are lugging’ that 302 down in town! I still want that car....
Better yet use all of the 302 stuff on a 350 or 400 short block.. I bet that's what a lot of the fast ones really were back in the day.
It never ceases to amaze me that GM never developed the 400 block. I have several times installed decent small chamber heads on a stock 400 short block along with headers and an appropriate cam. The compression ratio only comes out to 8.8:1 or 9:1, but the resulting power and torque is all out of proportion to the cost and effort involved.
So much to do, so little time...

pamotorman
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2308
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 11:55 pm

Re: GMs HP RATINGS

Post by pamotorman » Fri Nov 03, 2017 7:29 pm

the 69 chevy 302 trans am race engines made 450 hp

vortecpro
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1068
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 11:10 pm

Re: GMs HP RATINGS

Post by vortecpro » Fri Nov 03, 2017 8:13 pm

pamotorman wrote:
Fri Nov 03, 2017 7:29 pm
the 69 chevy 302 trans am race engines made 450 hp
People that know me know I'am fascinated by Traco and Al Bartz and the Champion dyno facility run by Dick Jones in Long Beach, there was a lot going on when I was a kid down in and around Culver City, the 302 was definitely getting developed, wow what a time to live!
Racing a NA NHRA stocker should be mandatory before any posting.

grandsport51
Member
Member
Posts: 97
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 11:47 am

Re: GMs HP RATINGS

Post by grandsport51 » Fri Nov 03, 2017 9:06 pm

This seems to be a real number to me !

"To discern the state of the Trans-Am art in 1967 and '68, we felt we should strap our optical fifth wheel to a faithfully restored example, then race it. Because Ryan had the perfect car, we plied him gently via Tom Cotter's run-amok PR firm in Charlotte. Eventually, Ryan agreed. We did not ask whether our insurance agent had any opinions on slamming around a 27-year-old Camaro worth $240 Large. What we discovered (about the Camaro, not about our insurance company) surprised us. For starters, []Ryan hauled out an original dyno sheet from Traco Engineering—the company from which Donohue purchased the engine in September 1967. With the dual 600-cfm Holley setup, that 304-cid V-8, with an 11.5-to-1 compression ratio, spit out 398 horsepower at 6800 rpm. Twenty-six years later, Ryan ordered from Traco an identical engine but with 11.8-to-1 pistons, MSD electronic ignition, and “modern” polishing of the intake ports. Otherwise, the mechanical bits were identical. The result?
Some 440 horsepower at 7200 rpm on 112-octane fuel—or 42 newfound horsepower. This is typical of Ryan's current engines, though he has seen as much as 470 hp, an amount Donohue would have killed for. (In fact, Chevy engineers once demonstrated to Donohue that they could summon 420 horses from Traco-derived small-blocks by “seasoning” them. As Donohue explained it, “You run a newly built engine carefully for as long as possible, so that all the parts get 'friendly'... then you pop on a fresh set of heads, and it will give you another 20 horsepower.”)"
LIGHT 'EM UP

Truckedup
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1355
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 2:41 pm

Re: GMs HP RATINGS

Post by Truckedup » Sat Nov 04, 2017 7:47 am

No matter what power is verified by a dyno, no matter what the 1/4 mile times are, many guys think certain 60's engines had way more power than they did..
Naked frame LSR bikes, dressed in animal hides clinging to machines propelled by fire...

Post Reply