I thought the cam was checked out already or at least it was brought up that it should be checked out. Oh, I know what drowned that out. Too many people worrying about port alignment, port design, carb alignment over the plenum and a lot of other nonsense that has nothing to do with 10 MPH! Finally some people are realizing that all the fine tuning and massaging is not going to be picking up that kind of power. A steeper gear and a higher stall converter won't either. Shifting higher may help but not 10 mph worth. If two different carbs feel just as bad then that probably isn't the problem. That stuff will be fine to look into when the big picture is fixed. I had a 350 that just kept getting slower as the day went on at the track. Out of the blue a few lobes started wearing FAST on a good old KB cam that I had put 1000's of miles and many runs on. You can easily get an idea if your cam is worn badly as long as you have at least one decent working eyeball. Get the car warmed up and idling nicely. Pop 1 valve cover off and start the car. Maybe put some rags around to collect oil although it doesn't really take long to spot a problem. Carefully scan the rockers and valves as they work up and down. After you watch it for a few seconds your eyes should start to notice if there are any rockers/valves not going down like they should. For a big MPH drop like is happening here there probably would be a couple of worn out lobes, if indeed that is the problem. Check both sides. They won't necessarily make any more noise because only the high side is worn down noticeably, not the base circle. If you can't pick up a noticeable difference with your eyes then there probably isn't a problem. Again this problem isn't going to be caused by .020" worn off the nose. Ever since then if I have a mystery performance decrease the first thing I do is pop the valve covers and look at the cam. As far as the fuel pump goes I find it hard to believe that a barely not good enough pump is causing the problem. I have way, way many runs on many different levels of engines and I've never had one make the balance between just getting enough fuel to get down the track without dying yet it slows the car out many mph. I've gone down the track with barely 2 psi. on the gauge with only a mechanical pump and after an electric was added I had 7 psi. and there was absolutely no difference. As long as the jets have a puddle of fuel surrounding them they car do their job pretty good. Maybe not optimum, but pretty good. If the fuel pump is not up to it I would think 1st or 2nd gear is where the problem will rear its head and in a noticeable fashion. Bogging down or just plain dying. The early gears are where the fuel is used up the fastest plus the G-forces are working against fuel flow. Most cars are getting into 3rd gear by the 1/8th and then a street geared car uses part of 3rd gear to get down that 1/8th mile. To me that means fuel delivery should be easier during that time. That to me absolves fuel delivery problems in this case because the biggest problem is the 1/4 ET/MPH. Maybe I'm wrong on that point. Of course this all applies to N/A engines. One thing I'd like to bring up is if you have a high winding engine and you're trying to use a stock type mechanical FP as the rpm goes up the FP may be going into "float" and it may stop pumping somewhat because the fuel pump arm cannot follow the eccentric(like valve float). That is one reason HP pumps have heavier springs to up the pressure and to keep the arm on the eccentric at high rpm. I doubt that is the problem here because even including converter slippage the rpm should be well under 5000 rpm at the traps. Also I believe that if it was a problem you'd know it. (That however does sound like a problem that you had when you were running in the 14's with the car earlier this year.) IMO if you have a car you want to be serious with get rid of the mechanical pump and install an electric. At the very least get a good electric back at the tank and pump it up to the mechanical. Problem with fuel delivery solved. I've run well into the 11's with a Carter 7 psi electric and Stage 1 pump with stock 3/8" lines and these days I'm running well into 11's with stock lines and pickup with only a Comp 110 pump that comes set at 7 psi so no regulator needed. Before I started towing the car 3 years ago I put thousands of miles on the pump with no problem as I did on many cars with electric pumps before that. Unless you're planning on putting thousands and thousands of miles on the car the mechanical doesn't make sense. I figure it is just a restriction to a good electric and only allows heat to transfer into the fuel line where the FP attaches to the block. Mark, if you can would you please post all the numbers off your best day with the DP and the SP intakes. Maybe include the last time you ran the DP and said it slowed down. I'd like to see all the numbers that are on the time slip. IIRC the SP 1/8th ET/MPH were only off from the DP by a tenth or two and a mph or two. The big difference is the 1/4 times. Like I said the difference in the two time slips will be interesting for all the increments. If it is only off a bit at the 1/8th that would align it with Dan in this thread: http://www.v8buick.com/showthread.php?301158-SP3-on-unmodified-stock-engine He's got more gear and converter so it makes up for the poorer low end torque of the SP but you are shifting at a higher RPM making up for the short shift he is doing because of the stock engine/cam. Of course it really isn't a short shift because with a 4000 stall converter after the 1-2 shift it probably never drops back to 4000 rpm. I noticed in that thread people are wondering about the fact he is using a "stock" SP on a stock engine and think that he may go faster with a modified one yet in this one others are thinking that this intake may have been "ruined" because it was port matched to ported heads on a noticeably modified engine. I don't know what to think about that logic. If your performance is reasonable up to the 1/8th that would just indicate that your car really isn't set up to optimize the SP intake(as others have said), as in not enough gear and converter. You seem to have a camshaft that would be good for higher rpm use but then that would just make it more sluggish down low in combination with the lower torque of the SP compared to the DP so I could see losing a bit in the 1/8th. If you shift out at 6000 rpm into 3rd you are going around 89 mph not taking into account converter slippage although that shouldn't be bad at that rpm. So what am I getting at after all this? What happens after you shift out of 2nd gear? You are in 3rd gear for just about the whole rest of the track. It has to make you wonder if the 3rd gear clutches aren't starting to give out. I've had it happen and it is just about the same thing going on as a worn cam lobe although it comes on faster. The clutches are worn too much and start to slip slowing the car down. Cruising in 3rd gear you wouldn't notice it because there is way less load. That would be next on my list after checking the cam although I'm swinging toward the trans because the 1/8th numbers indicate a decent running engine.
Hey Mike Heres my best times with the DP at BPG in May at Norwalk 60' 1.98 330' 5.652 1/8 8.716 MPH 80.51 1000' 11.378 1/4 13.653 MPH 98.84 Best with SP at Thompson in November 60' 2.1621 330' 5.9808 1/8 9.1234 MPH 78.81 1000' 11.8058 1/4 14.17 MPH 90.15 I "think" I had mentioned in a previous post that I haven't been in the 13's since BPG. I picked up almost .5 with the Q-Jet over the Vac.Sec. Holley. I dropped into the 13's like a rock with JW's convertor, from a previous 14.3 something right down to a 13.8, I was pumped! My GS is a full weight street car at 38/3900 lbs, for sure not a race car, or anything close. I just want it to run the best it can for what it is with the 350, and run consistently, it really seems to be all over the board since the best run at BPG
Great explanation of manifold differences and spacer uses. Good read!:TU: http://www.hotrod.com/how-to/engine/hppp-0906-wilson-manifold-carburetor-spacer/
I still maintain there's a lot of conjecture going on in this thread, even still. Saying someone's idea(s) are nonsense because they don't follow a misunderstood logic and then turning around and offering different conjecture that also may or may not be true is rather hypocritical... No one knows what's going on as of yet, and until we can get more information about the engine/drivetrain and what's going on, all suggestions will be conjecture. The cheap shots and low blows only show desperation. You can disagree with someone without insulting them. Why not instead offer up a counter-argument with equally persuasive evidence to back it up? There is no such thing as of yet. All suggestions made by me were relevant to the discussion and are steeped in factual basis that is well established within the racing community, and a couple of off the hip ideas that may not be very popular, but hey no one's perfect. What we know for sure so far is Mark slowed down from 1/8 to 1/4 (heck, slowed down altogether) after he put on the single plane. The rest is conjecture until we can discover more. Gary
2.1621 -1.98 = .1821 slower 60 ft -------------------- 9.1234 -8.716 = .4074 slower 1/8th --------------------- This car slowed .4 in 1/8th mark. my Car slowed .2 in 1/8th My car has 4.88 gear / 4000 converter on bone stock engine. It does not slow as much because it is easyer to move the weight with more gear in the car. If things were equal they would slow about the same. If we would put the stock intake back on the cars will pick up the loss. If I would put the race cam in the car the car will pick up because the rpm curve will move up to where the intake will like to be running. Leaving at 4000 shifting 6500-7000. Its a combo that needs both parts to work. Dan
First: Happy Thanksgiving to everyone! Second: Thanks for chiming in Mike, you opened my eyes so to speak about my transmission:eek2: I had it rebuilt back in '95 its first and only rebuild since new, it has only around 14000 mi. on it, but that doesn't mean anything really. A few things I've noticed and mentioned a few threads back: On the highway, which the car sees a lot of, at the same speed (70-75 mph) sometimes I notice the tach reads a few hundred rpm faster than other times, this was a year ago. At the track, when I tried to shift manually 1 to 2, then 2 to 3, the car would auto downshift back to 2nd, then back to third. AND, the car has gotten slower and slower in the 1/4 Like I've mentioned before, the engine runs as before the intake change, cant really tell theres a single plane on it as far as loss of low end, there just doesn't seem to be any seat of the pants loss in low end torque. What my next move is going to be I suppose is to pull the trans, and take it to Janis trans. in Akron, unless anybody has another rebuilder they like in my area. I may give Mike a call at Michaels racing Engines and see who they use also.
MY thoughts on this. As Mark has just explained the trans. is NOT acting properly. My thoughts go to the trans. since he added MORE power the trans. can't take the additional Torque/HP that the engine is now producing. Could not be the fault of the SP at all.
Another thought on the trans: A few weeks ago coming home from work, I exited the highway, stop at the red light, light turns green, I go, then floor it, the rpm climbs to 6 grand, it climbs to 6 grand as tho it was going down the track, BUT the car was not accelerating as such, I thought, "that's bizzare" it hasn't done that since, at least that I know ofou:
Well, after 12 pages it might be time to start a new topic about transmission diagnosis? Others have said it better than I can. Tremendous amount of variables here; in any car. Devon
I said it back in post 269. There is something else going on here for the car to lose 10 MPH. That intake is sound. I understand losing some torque at lower RPM with the SP, but that in no way explains that big a difference.
Might be a good time to go to a built 200 4R and higher ratio gears. That would really get get those 1/4 times down.
I can tell you right now that Janis will do a great job for you. I think it is time to build the 2004R trans. Direct bolt in. My trans works great been in since 2005 and have run that nitrous on it and did not break. He is a Buick guy as he runs a Turbo Regal. I have worked with them since 1983.
I agree that an upgrade to a 200R4 would be the way to go, but that will void the before and after comparison because it won't be the same, unless the D/P is tested with the O/D trans. But then again Mark just bought a JW TH350 torque converter that won't work on a 200R4, decisions decisions!! GL P.S. Happy Thanks Giving to all. Derek
Check the fluid if its burgundy or smells real strong than there is definitely something goin on and the higher gears are first to go. The converter can be reconfigured for the 200r for pretty cheap if you want to to do a non lock up which is usually done for more track oriented and higher power applications
Yeah, I really like my convertor, Im going to stay with the T-350, I'd like to have overdrive, but with my 3.42 gear it wouldn't make much sense unless I put a high 3 or low 4 series gear in, and as Derek said it wont be an apples to apples comparison. I am anxious to see how the SP3 will do with a transmission that actually works.
I wouldn't worry about comparison, just get it to run the best you can. If you need the turbo 350 redone, I would do the 2004r swap. I believe it has a better 1st gear ratio too. You'll be faster and have overdrive to boot! I ran my 2004r without lockup for a good while, not a big deal if you run a trans cooler. Your new JW convertor should work just fine. Plus you can have Jim restall it once for free!:TU:
Thanks Gary! I did have a 2004R trans yeeeeeeeears ago on the floor, but I had it rebuilt and put it in my Dads '90 Estate Wagon, so I'd have to snag another trans, plus rebuild, plus the extra stuff for the shifter, AND I'd want a deeper gear than my 3.42, at least 3.90, probably want a 4.10/4.11 if I had overdrive, why not take advantage:Brow: Ratios for the T-350 are 2.52, 1.52, 1.00 For the T-400 2.48, 1.48, 1.00 For the 2004R..IIRC 2.76, and I forget the rest For the menial leverage advantage of the 2004R's first gear and staying with 3.42's I don't think there'd be any advantage. I think I'll have Janis Trans build me a strong 350 trans and come spring slap this bitch around on the track LOL, see what happens:Brow:
I run the exact same times between the 2004 trans and the 350 trans. I went to a lower 3000 stall for the 2004 trans from a 3500 stall, I went from 1.70-1.80 60 ft to a 1.90 60 ft but made all of that up by the 1/8th mile Plus now I have lockup with a switch I can operate myself I can lock it up in 3rd gear when only driving at 35-45 mph. It acts like a stick shift then. This is really the way to go. In 4th gear locked up I am at 2200 rpm @ 65mph. This is a no brainer install your gong to want to do this once you figure out your SP3 is going to need more gear to get the engine in the correct power band. The power band for the intake peaks between 4500-6500 rpm. Are you at 4500 after shifting, because this is about where the torque is at for the 413 cam.
