The tensioner….I was back and forth on that one. I thought I read about it possibly being a problem but wasn’t sure. I’m guessing that the spaced links act as saw teeth on the plastic guides?
The 360 build that has more turns than Willow Springs
- Thread starter Kern Dog
- Start date
-
TT5.9mag
Two atmospheres are better than one
Yea it’s something like that. It’s really a surface area problem. The link belt type chains have more surface area in contact with the pad where a roller type chain has very little. So yes it’s acts like a saw, or more correctly, 3 saws if it’s a double roller.
On the advice of those that have more experience than I do….
The stuff comes apart pretty quickly.
Instead of using the original thrust plate with that relief in it, I did this…
I only got this tensioner because the chain had a slight amount of slop and I figured that it would help. It didn’t occur to me that plastic chunks could shave off and wind up blocking the oil pickup.
Cordless angle grinder FTW!
I saved the drip tab. The upper bolt on the “right side” has a hole in it.
The back side blocks off the oil galleys. Or is it galleries ?
Boom.
The stuff comes apart pretty quickly.
Instead of using the original thrust plate with that relief in it, I did this…
I only got this tensioner because the chain had a slight amount of slop and I figured that it would help. It didn’t occur to me that plastic chunks could shave off and wind up blocking the oil pickup.
Cordless angle grinder FTW!
I saved the drip tab. The upper bolt on the “right side” has a hole in it.
The back side blocks off the oil galleys. Or is it galleries ?
Boom.
Back to the point about water pumps…. I dug through my magazines and found this:
Mopar Action. Rick Ehrenberg.
I knew that there was something I didn’t like about that pump design.
New pump has the “Scallops”…
But the impeller is the same size as the old pump.
The shaft diameter is larger though.
Is the smaller impeller enough?
I guess I’ll give it a try. For now, I’m in between paint coats.
I’ll be reusing the Edelbrock RPM Air Gap intake. In another thread I asked about heater hose nipples and how other members routed theirs. Mine had a hose nipple here:
That seemed wrong to me. It seems better to have the hose coming in on this side:
That hole is just over 7/16” though and I wondered if it would flow enough to serve the heater. I guess it is common for people to run the hose to the port in the first picture.
This 360 is going into this car:
In all fairness, the car is a beater. If I were to take the time to paint it, it would be really cool but for now, it stays ugly. This engine in that car will be like a new couch in a condemned house.
Still, I can’t bring myself to go completely bonkers doing crappy work. I’m not reusing head gaskets and oil!
I did go ahead and move the hose nipple back to where it was.
Looking through some drawers, I found an oil pan drain plug with the same threads as the other hole.
In all fairness, the car is a beater. If I were to take the time to paint it, it would be really cool but for now, it stays ugly. This engine in that car will be like a new couch in a condemned house.
Still, I can’t bring myself to go completely bonkers doing crappy work. I’m not reusing head gaskets and oil!
I did go ahead and move the hose nipple back to where it was.
Looking through some drawers, I found an oil pan drain plug with the same threads as the other hole.
TT5.9mag
Two atmospheres are better than one
The heater outlet holes and temps sensor holes in the intake should be tapered pipe thread unless someone has messed them up. Your oil drain plug will be straight thread and likely not seal with 10-16lbs in the cooling system when hot.
Yeah?
Well, it seemed like an easy fix. I guess I could remove it and take it to ACE hardware to match it up to a brass blockoff plug to use.
I am not well versed in the various sizes and thread counts on fittings like this. Thank you for the help, man!
Well, it seemed like an easy fix. I guess I could remove it and take it to ACE hardware to match it up to a brass blockoff plug to use.
I am not well versed in the various sizes and thread counts on fittings like this. Thank you for the help, man!
TT5.9mag
Two atmospheres are better than one
No problem a headache cured now is a headache you don’t have to deal with later. I like aluminum allen head tapered pipe plugs in the holes I'm not using. And definitely use a sealer on them.
That looks clean.
I'll get something that sits flush like an oil gallery plug. As to the temperature sending unit....It is used so I don't know if it works. In fact, The gauge in the car doesn't work either. With a new build, I'd like to get it working with the engine that is in the car now.
I thought the test was to turn the key ON and pull the wire from the sending unit. If the wire gets grounded, the gauge needle should peg to the right, correct?
I'll get something that sits flush like an oil gallery plug. As to the temperature sending unit....It is used so I don't know if it works. In fact, The gauge in the car doesn't work either. With a new build, I'd like to get it working with the engine that is in the car now.
I thought the test was to turn the key ON and pull the wire from the sending unit. If the wire gets grounded, the gauge needle should peg to the right, correct?
At 4:30 AM yesterday I got an email that my head gaskets that I expected approximately 14 days from the May 9th date that I ordered them....would be delayed another 2 weeks!
Then a few minutes ago I saw that another email came in around 1:00 in the afternoon stating that the gaskets had been shipped and are due in on Friday.
Uh, okay....Sooner is better though since I'd like to get this engine buttoned up so I can move onto other things. Here are the numbers on where I expect to be with it:
.040 over, stock stroke, heads measured at 68 CCs, 5 CC valve reliefs on pistons sitting .015 out of the hole with the Cometic .086 head gasket puts me at 9.55 to 1.
I wanted to be in the low 9s. I based my goal on an estimated combustion chamber of 72 to 73 CCs, a number that I was told to expect from the #308 heads. These measures to 68 CCs so they must have been milled to get there. I knew that these KB pistons had a compression height .015 higher than the Speed Pro pistons I had but I somehow thought the Speed Pros sat below deck. It now seems that they were actually at zero deck since these KBs sit above by about the same amount of that .015 difference. The 8553 head gaskets that I originally bought would have put me at 10.32 to 1.
Then a few minutes ago I saw that another email came in around 1:00 in the afternoon stating that the gaskets had been shipped and are due in on Friday.
Uh, okay....Sooner is better though since I'd like to get this engine buttoned up so I can move onto other things. Here are the numbers on where I expect to be with it:
.040 over, stock stroke, heads measured at 68 CCs, 5 CC valve reliefs on pistons sitting .015 out of the hole with the Cometic .086 head gasket puts me at 9.55 to 1.
I wanted to be in the low 9s. I based my goal on an estimated combustion chamber of 72 to 73 CCs, a number that I was told to expect from the #308 heads. These measures to 68 CCs so they must have been milled to get there. I knew that these KB pistons had a compression height .015 higher than the Speed Pro pistons I had but I somehow thought the Speed Pros sat below deck. It now seems that they were actually at zero deck since these KBs sit above by about the same amount of that .015 difference. The 8553 head gaskets that I originally bought would have put me at 10.32 to 1.
mopowers
Well-Known Member
Hey Greg, try this calculator instead: Jeep Strokers - Dynamic\Static Compression Ratio Calculator
It accounts for gasket bore diameter and a couple other minor parameters. It also has a provision for dynamic compression if you have your cam specs.
It accounts for gasket bore diameter and a couple other minor parameters. It also has a provision for dynamic compression if you have your cam specs.
Evan, my numbers came in pretty close using that calculator. When it comes to dynamic compression and such, it feels to me that is going a bit further and in depth than what will affect this build of mine.
I mean no disrespect to others but some of the chatter about “triangles” and other minutiae just goes way over my head. I don’t see how it will make a measurable difference to what mild build that I am doing here.
The Cometic gaskets came in and as it has been mentioned before, they come with clearance issues in some cases. Mine only had a problem on the right side below the exhaust ports.
I used a flapper wheel on an angle grinder and made more than adequate clearance. The left side head cleared everything.
I’m curious though….
Why do aluminum heads overhang the decks so far? Stock iron heads don’t.
Here is another one… I’ve heard that the Magnum valve covers can fit LA heads but I can’t see how. The edge of this Holley valve covers is almost square.
See how the cover aims almost straight up from the inside edge of the gasket rail ?
Now look at the Magnum valve cover and how it is angled.
This interferes with the rocker shafts but these are Hughes….
Are the Hughes shafts longer than stock ?
I tried the Magnum valve covers on a stock 318 and it didn’t fit there.
In what application would a Magnum valve covers clear a rocker shaft?
I mean no disrespect to others but some of the chatter about “triangles” and other minutiae just goes way over my head. I don’t see how it will make a measurable difference to what mild build that I am doing here.
The Cometic gaskets came in and as it has been mentioned before, they come with clearance issues in some cases. Mine only had a problem on the right side below the exhaust ports.
I used a flapper wheel on an angle grinder and made more than adequate clearance. The left side head cleared everything.
I’m curious though….
Why do aluminum heads overhang the decks so far? Stock iron heads don’t.
Here is another one… I’ve heard that the Magnum valve covers can fit LA heads but I can’t see how. The edge of this Holley valve covers is almost square.
See how the cover aims almost straight up from the inside edge of the gasket rail ?
Now look at the Magnum valve cover and how it is angled.
This interferes with the rocker shafts but these are Hughes….
Are the Hughes shafts longer than stock ?
I tried the Magnum valve covers on a stock 318 and it didn’t fit there.
In what application would a Magnum valve covers clear a rocker shaft?
CudaJason
Well-Known Member
For the valve covers i think its the other way around. I have those same Holley valve cover but for and LA motor bolted to the magnum heads on the 5.9 Magnum im putting together for my 66 Barracuda. The La Cover fit fine on the magnum(less a few bolts), but the the magnum covers hit the rocker shafts on an LA
I did a test fit of the right side header, a “Doug’s 453”.
It clears a 1085 oil filter with no adapter.
I traded a set of 340 manifolds for these headers awhile back not knowing when or where I’d use them.
It clears a 1085 oil filter with no adapter.
I traded a set of 340 manifolds for these headers awhile back not knowing when or where I’d use them.
That is actually correct.
When I torqued down the heads, I used this book…..
This book showed this:
90 ft lbs is what I did. Later I looked at a Chiltons.
Then I read a Mopar Action blurb in the tech Q & A section where Ehrenberg wrote that in the early 80s, the torque number for the LA series was increased to 105 ft lbs.
The first book is dated 1982.
The Chilton book:
I get to dig in and run the bolts up to 105 ft lbs. Now this makes me wonder if the engine blew the head gaskets because the prior owner didn’t torque to the high number.
This book showed this:
90 ft lbs is what I did. Later I looked at a Chiltons.
Then I read a Mopar Action blurb in the tech Q & A section where Ehrenberg wrote that in the early 80s, the torque number for the LA series was increased to 105 ft lbs.
The first book is dated 1982.
The Chilton book:
I get to dig in and run the bolts up to 105 ft lbs. Now this makes me wonder if the engine blew the head gaskets because the prior owner didn’t torque to the high number.
Last edited:
mopowers
Well-Known Member
Interesting. I wonder what changed in '77. What does the #4 footnote say in third photo?
-
Similar threads
