I like that too! Hey, truth is no one knows better than you what's right for the car, and you, and your wallet. I am totally down with your "vision". I have a buddy who owns a Chervrolet/Buick dealership, and I've often thought of getting him to pitch in a couple bucks for vinyl lettetring and putting together a faux C/SA - Jack it up, recaps on steelies, 4:30's (Ha! Goodbye pistons!) All easily done and undone....(except the pistons!) Here ya go! You and me next fall after the exihbition runs....Courtesy of O'Niells Chevrolet Buick - Same Location since 1935
Hi Rhett, am I looking at correct results else where that say 11.50s to 12.1 are some of the top times? Are they trying to say there is no cheating going on? Them are some really fast cars. I guess top tune and chassis mods really improve some of them cars:grin: I know you are only doing this for fun and it sure looks like a lot of fun. Might have to one day see where I can get the 66 to run. Good luck. Also I think there is another thread on here that states Pop got to 12.60 with BIG cam
Not gonna comment on all that, when I go it won't be my concern.. I'll be lucky to break 14.5, and doing it that I could look any one of you in the eye. Rainy day here and I'm daydreaming about the C/SA thing - The "Party Barge II" Dyno Tuned by Vic's Sunoco! Super Turbine by Capital Automatic! B&M, Competion Engineering, Eaton Gear,
I hear ya, two books that are bad to look at when you dig the old days, SUPER STOCK "Drag Racing The Family Sedan", and JUNIOR STOCK "Drag Racing The Family Sedan" both books make me want to letter everything, chrome steelies with cheater slicks by Hurst,exhaust cut outs.....Yeah dreamin' here too.
On the Reynolds Buick blog: http://reynolds1915.blogspot.com/2013/01/lennie-pop-kennedy-and-buicks.html >>> In 1965, Buick introduced a 400 incher (the 401" de-rated by one cubic inch to meet GM's limit of 400 inches in a small car.) The 1964 had to go. Pop bought the first one to hit California. 12.70s at 107 mph with our Switch Pitch Converter, 2 Speed Trans, Mark 3 cam kit and 11:1 pistons. The 3 Speed TH 400 picked up exactly .1 and 1 mph to 108 at 12.60 One of these cars lightened to 3300 pounds with ram air ran a best of 111 at 12.30 back in 1966. The '65 was run mostly in brackets until 1967 <<< and they had some problems with the new for '67 400.... >>> 1967, when Buick came out with a completely new 400 inch engine design. A GS 400 was soon getting the treatment in our garage for NHRA Super Stock. 13 years ago we ran a best of 111 at 12.10. It put out another 75 hp over the 401, but we were paying a heavy price for the horsepower. We were blowing up the 400s as fast as we could build them. <<< Nailhead....Tough as Nails!:TU:
Now your talking, your head's definetely in the right place - and of course this is what Doc has been talking about all along.. I'll see your 4 and raise you four more A WARNING to anyone who reads the two books Tom mentioned -they'll change your priorities - all of a sudden "pro - touring" looks kinda ridiculous.
Real cool stuff....Walt, I wonder how your L-76 option car would of done back in the day. also it is a little hotter than a run of the mill GS. If you was to build a non cheater engine but went with all the little stuff would the 091 cam be legal? 66 gs could run a q-jet? Just wondering.
Some more of the Smyly 66 for Walt, and a much newer C Stocker for Tom. The sad fate of the first Reynolds "small emblen" 65 B/SA car and a note from Smyly Buick stating that the best combo for their 66 C/S car was 4.88 gears (!) and 9.80x15 M&H slicks - "better than any other combo, and we tried them all" As of June 30th, 1966 their best time was apparently 13.40 @ 103.33
There's a thread out there about someone in FL who ran the 66 Q-Jet combo back in the day - the car was red I believe, and is still around somewhere -Walt, do you know that car?
Oh Geez, thanks alot Rhett. Just when I think I knew 100% what my goal and intent was with the car, you had to go and post cool old pics I've never seen.ou: When I placed a want ad several months ago for a 65 or 66 Gran Sport, I really wanted a 66. The number 1 reason was to do an L-76 Q-jet car(which I would still do if I found the right car before I start on this 65), plus the fact that I've never owned a 66 Skylark GS(I've owned this same 65 before,had several 67's, 70,71,72,73,etc.) Me,having automotive A.D.D., and knowing that if I didn't secure a car within a reasonable amount of time(reasonable to me is the day or day after I place a want ad), that I would lose interest, and buy something different, the 65 was offered back to me by Mike Sobotka, the price was fair,Mike offered to deliver, and I knew what I was buying,no surprises, so here I am with the same 65 I owned several years ago. I dig the 65's, love the lines and their looks, just wish the L-76 was offered in 65 as well. But within the PSMCDR rules, your allowed 1.5 point more compression than advertised, and I feel the AFB can be tweaked to work well, just takes more work than the Q-jet.
I get the L-76 love - I tracked down an intake and 70412304 Service Replacement Q-Jet, and love them both.....best of both worlds I guess, although short a little compression and cam
Rhett, we could always letter 'em up, and take them here> http://meltdowndrags.com/ For those of us who have been sitting in the back of the class not paying attention, what is the "091" cam?
Does anyone know what cam was in the L-76? Looks like rules say you can add 1 to 2 % to lift and duration? 1.5 to compression? Loose some pounds and you could be running pretty good. I have a 401 with 30,000 miles that is factory and solid std. bore. I am starting to get ideas...
if I'm not mistaken, the "091" was the 65 and 66 dual quad 425's. I'm not clear on what makes it the greatest cam ever... Paging Dr. Modisett, paging Dr. Modisett........Dr. Modisett to the white courtesy phone please. ---------- Post added at 06:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:08 PM ---------- i dunno where I got it, but I have a picture of some big legged Jungle Pam-esque girl in go-go boots from the Meltdown staging somebody, and it's been on my list ever since! Call me shallow, I can handle it. ---------- Post added at 06:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:16 PM ---------- And you're just down the road from Stanton..kinda. I think you're right though, and Tom T. and I have been talking about it. A fresh build with that kind of "interpretation" could be a runner - then factor in rockers and solid lifters and Q-Jet for the days when you're not under the microscope.....Now I'M getting ideas
the 091 cam was on a 109 LSA. made for a rougher idle and the old buick owners did not like that, so buick went to 114 or 115 LSA.
Rhett not trying to stomp on your thread but just wondering what would be a strong nailhead with out cheating. I don't know much about the 091 cam except a few guys and of course Doc says they were the strong runner. I think it had a little extra lift and was on a 109 lsa compared to the 114 in my GS. Thinking something on that line with the little extra they do say you can have, with the q-jet and some good gear and a switch p. 400 ...who knos. mabey13 somthings. I like my Holley but we know it never came with one..You gotta like all the old pictures:grin: Also I seen jungle Pam a few times straighting out the funny car stageing at the old Alton drag strip here in the St Louis area years ago:grin:
The older owners didn't like the rough idle, but the important question is....did the engine like that tight lobe sep angle, or does the wide sep angle work better? HHMM??? And, more specifically, what cam would the engine prefer if it was in a light post coupe with lets say a 3.91 or 4.10 gear??
