Eric, you might want to consider whether you could be over reacting just a bit. No need to be contentious. But a good bit of what you say makes sense. To stay in the Buick engine family, have a look at what is available for Rover engines. There are 96mm pistons used in the 4.8 and 5.2L builds, described as having a high wrist pin location: http://www.mez.co.uk/TuningTheRoverV8-pt4.html Depending on the compression height, a suitable rod piston combo might be found for the stroker 300. I don't know the details, but one variety is an off the shelf forged piston so prices might be reasonable. Reading between the lines it sounded like cast pistons were available too. Again, I haven't looked but I imagine thinwall wrist pins are available and the size should be the same as SBB. Sounds to me like this would be worth checking out. JB
What a gorgeous motor. My 300 4bl only has a mild cam, and I can't run the stock air cleaner because it chokes the engine- I wonder whether you'll be running that stock housing? Also, I noticed in the Magazine that they built an awesome set of headers, but I guess they were built just for the dyno runs? I see you're running the Sanderson shorty headers now- did they ever do a run with stock manifolds vs the Sanderson? Any idea what kind of gains were made using the Sanderson headers? Beautiful car!
From the article... Fabricated by Millers Custom Headers, the long-tube headers with 13/4-inch primaries x 31/2-inch collectors were worth about 9 hp and 11.5 lb-ft over Sanderson's standard shorty headers.
Your helping to make my point, cost does matter to most people. One of the biggest mistakes people make is that they confuse RACE MOTORS WITH STREET MOTORS. This is a point that Joe Sherman continually makes to potential customers. It is not uncommon for people to over build the lower end and then skimp on what will really turn them on, the cylinder heads or valve train. The biggest difference between engine builders with many years of experience ( dyno and racing ) and ones with much less experience is that the more experience builders have a lot better idea ( because they have seen and tried just about everything ) as to what you can safely get away with and how much things, like rod length for example, are really worth. How much H.P can you safely make with stock cast pistons? with a stock cast iron block? with a stock cast crank? How much RPM is safe with stock rods? stock valves? The stock oiling system? Is a gear drive worth more power and the extra expense? At what point should you consider up-grading from stud mounted rockers to ( expensive ) Jessel style shaft mounted rockers? When should you think seriously about laying out your hard earned cash for a main gridle or billet main caps? ect. ect. Building a mild street motor, on a budget, that will rarely, if ever see, 6000 RPM, is a far cry from a race motor that will frequently be revved past 7000 RPM or squeezed with both hands, in terms of what is actually needed. Putting longer rods in this motor is not a bad idea but it will likely add cost to the build, especially if you already have a set of good stock 300 rods. If someone wanted me to build theirs with longer rods and money was not an object, I wouldn't try to talk them out of it. I will pose a question to make my last point. How many miles a year is your average classic/muscle/hot rod/street-strip car typically driven? Here is a clue, it is very low as evidenced by the fact that classic car insurance is relitively cheap. Dave
> the long-tube headers with 1 3/4-inch primaries x 3 1/2-inch > collectors were worth about 9 hp and 11.5 lb-ft over Sanderson's > standard shorty headers. Given the 137 CFM peak exhaust flow and small diameter exhaust valves those are some very large diameter headers. The ones pictured in the magazine article look like some sort of a street rod header. Do they fit the Buick chassis or are they just something that was handy to test? FWIW, Kaase, McLain and some of the other Engine Masters contestants found a 3" collector worked best on their 400+ cubic inch engines making between 600 and 700 HP. David Vizard wrote a couple of good articles ("Exhaust Science Demystified" Popular Hot Rodding, May 2005 and "No Loss Exhaust", Drag Race Monthly) in which he presents simple design equations for header and muffler sizing. I use his equations as starting points for Dynomation iterative simulations so I wrote a little routine to calculate the parameters. The equations are based what the exhaust port flows at your maximum exhaust valve lift: OID = SQRT (Ex_CFM * 1.27/FD) CDiam = 1.75 * OID where: OID = optimal internal primary diameter (inches) Ex_CFM = exhaust port flow (CFM) at 28" H20 FD = flow density (around 80 CFM/square inch @ 28" H20) CDiam = collector diameter (inches) I have tested several sets of Buick 215 and 300 aluminum heads on a local flow bench and ran the exhaust flow numbers through Vizard's equation: Buick 215 unported 85 CFM (1.3125" exhaust valve) Primary ID (inches) = 1.16 Collector ID (inches) = 2.03 Buick 300 unported 116 CFM (1.3125" exhaust valve) Primary ID (inches) = 1.36 Collector ID (inches) = 2.38 Buick 215 home ported 129 CFM (1.48" exhaust valve) Primary ID (inches) = 1.43 Collector ID (inches) = 2.50 1964 aluminum Buick 300 pro ported 153 CFM (1.5" exhaust valve) Primary ID (inches) = 1.56" Collector ID (inches) = 2.73 The above CFM numbers are exhaust flow at 0.5" lift and the diameters are ID's (internal diameters). You have to add your tubing thickness. Vizard's rules reflect bank separated 4-into-1 headers on 90 degree V8's with dual plane crankshafts. Tri-Y primaries can be slightly larger. For most applications, primary lengths should fall between 24 to 36 inches with shorter lengths favoring higher RPM. Likewise collector length should fall between 12 and 20 inches (good for up to 8000 RPM). On engines like these (small valve, short port), longer collectors are generally better. I base that comment on similarity with small block Windsor Ford. Also, in the new version of "How To Build Horsepower" (a completely new Volume 1), Vizard has refined the above for three different applications (street, street/strip and race IIRC). When the Buick 300 stroke magazine article came out, I ran my head flow numbers and dimensions through Dynomation along with the rest of the info from the magazine article and the simulation prediction closely matches the published dyno results. Dan Jones
And this, boys and girls,,, all this childish behavior and bench racing "expertise" uzzled: is why I dont post much around here anymore. Kam, Beautifull car and an amazing build :TU: Dave, My hat's off to you. Amazing thet you were able to pull that much power out of the little buick
There is no harm in looking at other alternatives and improving on other's ideas. Let's don't squelch improvement, innovation, free thinking, and the exchange of ideas. Some of you want to build the short rod engine, go ahead. I have been inspired by Jim's 340 build to aim a little higher. You can't fault a person for that. And again, by doing diligent research, we have seen that we can build a 340/350 connecting rod equipped stroker 300 for essentially the same amount of money as Dave's 300 rod equipped rotating assembly costs. Again, a couple hundred bucks either way, spread out over the 20 year lifespan of the finished engine, is no big whoop. Let's face it, if costs were the only factor here to be considered we would all build Chevys! But we all want something better than that! Jim brings up the Rover engine parts option and he brought up the fact that Silvolite will produce the 3800 S.C. pistons with a slightly larger pin bore if we want. Lot's of cool options here and you can bet that there are even more out there yet to be discovered if we only dig a little. I will stop trying to convince you short rod loving folks to build a longer rod engine. (Even though our "long" rod engine is still a short rod engine.) Please understand though that some of us do want to and will build an engine with a better rod ratio than 1.548 to one. Jim, the over reacting and the contentiousness stems from the negative posts towards me like the one where the wag implied I am a troll. That would tick you off too. Trolls don't contribute anything constructive. I have been and am continuing to contribute something constructive to this thread. And I'm doing it without the ulterior motive of seeing everybody here as a potential source of income. I myself have the harder task of coming up with a longer, strong yet cheap rod for my 340 so I can run the same piston that we come up with here. I'm gonna have to go through Jim's 340 build thread again to find out how much the rods that he used cost. If they are too pricey, I'm gonna have to find an alternative. Another alternative that might actually be the cheaper way to go is to find a 300 block and base my engine on that! I already have the crank to use in it! Anybody have a set of capsrcew SBB 350 rods for cheap? I know that I could use my 340 rods but I would prefer the capscrew rods. (I still feel that even the capscrew rod is too weak though cause it too is cast, not forged.) As I said before, there is nothing wrong with slightly overbuilding an engine to protect oneself from the occasional missed shift and/or over rev. Regards, Eric
Eric, I would check out those Rover pistons before doing anything about the rods. You probably don't want the rods I used, they are suitable for very light weight pistons only in one of these engines, and also require a very short pin height, almost surely meaning a custom piston. A set of the stock rods will be just fine for your build. The capscrew rods have been used in engines up to 1000 hp and I don't think you'll be anywhere close to that. So the 340 rods you have, if in good condition are an ideal choice. I would have used stock rods in mine but they were mismatched and I was uncomfortable with the machine work that had been done to them so I bailed. If you can find a Rover piston with the right pin height then it certainly would be worth looking for a 300 block. Opens up more intake options. The reasons why I used those rods are complex to say the least. That motor is not intended for typical usage. It is designed as having a fairly conventional and flat power band but with an extended rpm operating range if needed. It is designed for economy. Horsepower is a side benefit derived from displacement and the blower. Components are light but strong, compression is high at 10.6:1 and the blower will add up to perhaps as much as 12 psi max on top of that. But, aluminum heads were used (good for one whole number on the CR) and they are bone stock 300 heads with no porting and stock valves, but with stiffer valve springs. Again, there was a method to the madness. The smaller ports and valves will keep the port velocity up and the blower will enable high speed operation. Target horsepower for the build was 300+, and I expect it'll be more like +++. Figure a stock high compression '64 300 with a .436/262 cam and multiply by about 1.75 and that ought to be the actual max target. The extra 50 cubes will help offset any losses, and the possible use of less boost. Realistically it might approach 500. But this configuration results in a very wide powerband. Prior testing confirms that excess manifold pressure combined with restrictive heads on a street blower engine means that the boost comes in extremely early but is then limited by head restriction on the top end. If this delicate balancing act is done well, the engine will not destroy itself, but will produce a very flat powerband with the area under the curve at maximum. Just what is needed for a daily driver and the high CR bumps up the fuel economy. Obviously it needs the intercooler to work. Additionally,this in combination with the custom ground cam will allow operation at speeds up to about 7000 rpm, which is application specific. It allows continued acceleration through long corners without up-shifting and the attendant loss of traction, for finer control on the knife edge of adhesion. This is not the typical build. Aside from a few fairly expensive parts it required a great deal of fabrication and machine work to pull it off and the cost for almost anyone who is not a machinist would be nearly prohibitive. But it explores an area that has not seen much if any development work in the automotive world and in that respect alone it is worthwhile. Because the engine is in a 2500 lb car the resultant weight/power ratio is 5:1 which is extremely high for a street car and more so for a daily driver which is it's intended function. (Equivalent to 680 hp in a 3400 lb car) The 8 speed automatic is just icing on the cake. I enjoy raising the bar, just because I can. But you need to understand that there's 40 years of development history behind this project. Until someone knows what will work and what won't, it's a pretty good idea to stick kinda close to the tried and true. JB
>Has anyone mentioned sbc rods-yet ?They have been used in 215-300 builds, for decades. Light, strong with lots of different lengths available. Good value. Sbc(305) pistons, same deal. As a side note, I had (10) round lobe billet cams made, to help the cause of the 215-340 builds. Some actually said they we're interested, that's as far as it went ! Kind of like all those that signed up, for TA sbb heads. How many actually bought them?The Reel Steel head is a good value for sbb's, but will anyone in this forum, give them a try ?o No:
I tried to buy a set of the TA heads last week and they told me that they might be ready for sale sometime this year????
> I suppose it's possible ,TRS might have 1-2 sets left. Not likely, considering the special, "introductory price", ie. 8,500, pita Aussie bucks.:rant:
A very interesting and educational thread with lots of useful technical info. Karl, beautiful car, my Dad had a 67 Special with a 300 in that gold color. Great job on the engine, Dave. For you guy's who say it wasn't a very cost effective way to get high HP (ie. a budget build) or that they should have built a 350 Buick; if we use that kind of lodgic nobody would build anything but sbc, The more different the engine the more interesting IMHO. Dave has done a very good job explaining the "hows" & "whys" of the 300 build. Others have proposed alternatives. All this give and take gets the rest of us thinking. However I don't see the need for someone to restate his same personal opinion over & over in multiple posts. Daryl & GS Johnny please ignore the the rantings of these self proclaimed experts and post more often. I'm sure that I speak for most members when I say that we miss your contributions!
Karl, great car. Dave, great engine. Hope you both stick around and help to keep V8Buick at the leading edge of the Buick community:TU: This site has a whole lot more to offer than techno-flamming bench racersp
Hope that's not directed at me, as I'm at the track at Fontana every month, every time they open it up to the street cars, and the invite still stands for Karl to join me. That's hardly a "bench racer". Again, some us want to aim slightly higher and that should be encouraged, not discouraged. All can benefit from the knowledge that is gained as a result of the effort! Like it says in your sig: "It's a free country"! I keep restating what I keep restating because it seems that some folks still don't get it! There are some of us who want to go beyond monkey see monkey do and there is ALWAYS a better way. If people would stop injecting their posts with their little jabs/barbs, I would stop too. Now, let's focus on these engines. Jim, could your engine's bottom end girdle/bed plate be used in a 300 block based build? Could you slightly relocate the main cap bolt holes if needed without too much trouble? How much would you charge board members for them? Regards, Eric
It'd be real easy for someone to rear up and ask, "Just who died and left you king?" to some of you guys posting on here and more or less calling others idiots. How does that help? If you can explain it I'm all ears but it'd better be good. I don't know who those barbs were aimed at. If they were aimed at me, at least be enough of a man to say so and I'll answer you. By not singling anyone out you included us all. Just because you happen to be a legend in your own mind does not mean anyone else thinks you are, and believe me, there are plenty who think you aren't. Humility is a hard thing to master, and extremely so if you have a few well intentioned individuals blowing smoke up your ass. It takes a powerful sense of self to overcome these evils and concentrate on the good instead. Those who know how to build an engine to achieve their own objectives did not come by that ability easily. But this does not mean they know how to be a good citizen. Appreciation for achievements is worthy and worthwhile if they benefit others. But to disparage others for their attempts is not. If you are at the top of your game in one area, perhaps it is time to expand your abilities and take on a challenge that you are not so good at. Eric, I think I sent the template for that plate to Shaun but it wasn't that hard to make. However you really don't need that for your build. I don't think you are planning to spin it over about 6 grand right? So your motor will hold up just fine without it. If I had not needed an extra 1/4" for rod clearance I would not have made it. I do not know if the skirt of the 300 extends the same distance as that of the 340. You can measure it when you get a 300 block. But the plate itself was made from a pasteboard template, made in the same way you'd tap out a gasket, then drilled and sawed. It's possible to make one with nothing but a bench vise, drill, and sawzall if you find you have to have it. There is a whole thread on girdles that has an extensive and detailed discussion of every aspect and design. You should be able to find that with a search. JB
"I keep restating what I keep restating because it seems that some folks still don't get it! " Everybody got it the first time! There are just different opinions out there. Your points have validity but so do other peoples. "some us want to aim slightly higher and that should be encouraged" Agreed, however just because its your idea doesn't make the aim higher, just in a different direction. All ideas that push the envelope are good even the ones that fail. "It'd be real easy for someone to rear up and ask, "Just who died and left you king?" to some of you guys posting on here and more or less calling others idiots. How does that help? If you can explain it I'm all ears but it'd better be good. I don't know who those barbs were aimed at. If they were aimed at me, at least be enough of a man to say so and I'll answer you. By not singling anyone out you included us all." Right on, JB! Everybody's ideas are useful, even if its only to stimulate discussion, we just need to remember that getting into a p***ing contest about "I am right you are wrong" serves NO purpose. Boy has this thread gone off the rails! Eric & Dave great job, I hope you as well as Eric remain as members in this Buick family!
Jim Blackwood I for one wasnt talking about you. Your work with the 215/300/340 family is well known and respected around here :beer But..... I just dont like to see one of the few small block buicks to ever get more than a passing glance in a major mag get nitpicked to death over minutiaou: And the owner and builder get beat over the head with woulda-coulda-shoulda untill they get the impression that the best Buick web site around is fill with nothing but self-important mouthy know-it-alls:af: Discussion is good, but thats why members can start new threads about enginering minutia and parts swapping:TU: FYI... n00b is forum slang for newbie or new guy, it is used to describe a new member that joins up argues alot without knowing the tone of the forum and dissapears in a couple days/weeks.
