Small Blocks

-
ocdart said:
Design the water pump similar to a big block for easier and quicker replacement
Click to expand...
and the oil pan and intake manifold.
I still want a front mounted distributor so I don't need a frick'n step ladder to set my timing on my 73 W200.
 
fishmens67 said:
and the oil pan and intake manifold.
I still want a front mounted distributor so I don't need a frick'n step ladder to set my timing on my 73 W200.
Click to expand...
as a D300 owner, everything requires a step ladder!

agree on the front mount dist. tho. it would open up the possibility of making engine swaps much more inviting.
 
I would ask for a different front suspension so the oil pan dumped in the rear. Mid sump or front sump on hard excelleration causes the oil to flow toward the back and not only starving bearings of oil but the weights of the crank now slinging oil everywhere.
 
Lots of great ideas here, too bad someone wasn't there 1966-67 (In Highland Park Engineering) to suggest some for T/A engine program. Tremendous cost and time factors to redevelop an engine, why didn't they keep and offer the T/A for other models (than E body). Even cheaper, why couldn't you get a Lil Red Truck engine or E55 in other models? The bean counters had final say-so and lots of great ideas got shot down by those that could barely drive a car.
 
Thank the Govt. from preventing the E55 in anything but a truck. Cars were limited because of emissions. Trucks at that time had no limitation on emissions because they were work vehicles.
 
A few repeats here.

- Better lifter angle
- no chamfer on the top of the lifter bores
- dry intake system
- ability to swap the timing chain and cam without pulling the pan and cover
- slightly taller heads to get better intake and exhaust runners
- W2 or similar exhaust port
- all blind bolt holes
 
Last edited:
tonysrt said:
Thank the Govt. from preventing the E55 in anything but a truck. Cars were limited because of emissions. Trucks at that time had no limitation on emissions because they were work vehicles.
Click to expand...
Yes, I think your right. I had forgotten the separation between trucks and cars. "Federal" trucks were not limited but Canada, California, and Export categories had different emissions standards, later in the 1970's. Can't remember a specific date. The best engineers were technicians too at some point, or they had technician friends they actually listened to. More experience on FABO then any group of engineers I ever sat in a meeting with.
 
tonysrt said:
Thank the Govt. from preventing the E55 in anything but a truck. Cars were limited because of emissions. Trucks at that time had no limitation on emissions because they were work vehicles.
Click to expand...

i think you mean the EH1? the E55 was 340 6 pack (with the caveat of needing the A53(?) TA code to unlock it) otherwise it was just a 340 4V no?

the EH1 was based off the E58 cop motor, so we got a taste of the action...
 
junkyardhero said:
i think you mean the EH1? the E55 was 340 6 pack (with the caveat of needing the A53(?) TA code to unlock it) otherwise it was just a 340 4V no?

the EH1 was based off the E58 cop motor, so we got a taste of the action...
Click to expand...
Yes, you're right. I had two cop cruisers so I should have remembered. EH1 - Lil Red Truck.
 
Lifter angle, instead of different bores for cid used 4.04" bore and used different cranks for cid change, a shorter deck along with stock deck blocks, a canted performance head option, same bellhousing on all, factory 400" engine, 4 bolt main.
 
Dan the man said:
I would have those 4 bolt main cap bolts go into a blind hole,as well as the timing chain cover bolts. Get rid of those sloppy rocker arms. The oil pump pick up tube would have a bigger inside diameter. Get rid of the freeze plugs that are on both sides of the camshaft. I would design the heads so that there wouldn't be any cracking between the valve seats and the heads would be a closed chamber
Click to expand...
Those sloppy rocker arms are an engineering marvel, they are light weigh and have excellent oiling design due to flood pool. The only problem is they tend to fail with high lift camshafts.
 
Dan the man said:
Shorter deck height would effect the 360's stroke and the rod to stroke ratio of the 318's and 340's. Otherwise I agree with you
Click to expand...
No it would not. You use a shorter, lighter piston with a shorter pin height. Rods would stay the same length. The stroke of a 360 is only a little more than a 1/4 than a 340/318/273.
 
ch1ll said:
Those sloppy rocker arms are an engineering marvel, they are light weigh and have excellent oiling design due to flood pool. The only problem is they tend to fail with high lift camshafts.
Click to expand...
Don't forget that the ratio of those rocker arms vary anywhere from 1.48 - 1.55
 
Dan the man said:
So what you say, I've seen well tuned small blocks out run a few big blocks it's rare but it happens
Click to expand...
Ever drive a big block Dart or Barracuda? A 340 Dart will outrun a 383 Road Runner in the quarter mile.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top