Cheepy Three-Sixty build

[IQ52]

No water pump? One of them waterless engines eh? We built one of those for a demo-derby once. After the Derby they had a meeting to decide if they were going to ban Imperials from the next Derby. Instead they chose to ban our waterless engine.

Like.........if we started with water it wouldn't go as far?

Keep on keeping on Jesse!

 

[RAMM]

No water pump? One of them waterless engines eh? We built one of those for a demo-derby once. After the Derby they had a meeting to decide if they were going to ban Imperials from the next Derby. Instead they chose to ban our waterless engine.

Like.........if we started with water it wouldn't go as far?

Keep on keeping on Jesse!

As you pointed out Jim, I took that shot before I bolted up the Moroso electric pump. That was an easy 5-7 hp not many would have noticed. Anyhow I was able to get some more done before work. This is pull # 3 but I don't think I'm gonna get there (400Hp). J.Rob

 

[IQ52]

5-7 horsepower is right. Brings back old times. In the dyno contests we were participating in you had to have a crankshaft driven water pump. I noticed that in previous years others were running a very loose belt between the pulleys trying to get the pump to slip. So before the first time we went to the contest I tested the loose belt and the tight belt. The tight belt made more horsepower. For awhile we were the top horsepower engine in the contest at 723 HP. The next closest engine was stuck at 717 HP until the pull where the lower belt pulley broke and threw off the belt. They made 724 HP that run. A 50 cubic inch larger engine beat us by one horsepower. No belt beats tight belt. Damn.

 

[IQ52]

Whoo Hoo very good torque. A little light on the camshaft maybe. But still 380 HP with that tiny bumpstick? You done good again.

 

[RAMM]

Whoo Hoo very good torque. A little light on the camshaft maybe. But still 380 HP with that tiny bumpstick? You done good again.

Thanks Jim but I'm not done yet. I have a set of cheap 1.6 roller rockers on the way to try maybe late Thursday.

As of tonight I have tried all manner of spacers with the 1/2" open being the best fit with the results posted above. I managed to get my converted Hall effect distributor (Magnum ex/cam position sensor) working on the first attempt! Gonna check rotor phase tomorrow and program a better curve into the 6AL-2 box to hopefully unlock some more TQ and maybe a few more HP. I am really happy with the oil pressure trend. J.Rob

 

[RAMM]

Thanks Jim but I'm not done yet. I have a set of cheap 1.6 roller rockers on the way to try maybe late Thursday.

As of tonight I have tried all manner of spacers with the 1/2" open being the best fit with the results posted above. I managed to get my converted Hall effect distributor (Magnum ex/cam position sensor) working on the first attempt! Gonna check rotor phase tomorrow and program a better curve into the 6AL-2 box to hopefully unlock some more TQ and maybe a few more HP. I am really happy with the oil pressure trend. J.Rob

View attachment 1715046008

Really like the size and sparkplug terminal cap. I'm using a cheap Prenco wire set for a 5.2/5.9 Durango. J.Rob

 

[RAMM]

I have to admit I was hoping peak power would occur around at least 5600 rpm but am really impressed at how well it holds the power all the way to 6000 rpm. It really buzz's up to 6000 rpm quite readily and easily. Check the curve's shape at the top end--they don't usually hold that well that far past peak with a hydraulic flat. J.Rob

 

[67/6barracuda]

Thanks Jim but I'm not done yet. I have a set of cheap 1.6 roller rockers on the way to try maybe late Thursday.

As of tonight I have tried all manner of spacers with the 1/2" open being the best fit with the results posted above. I managed to get my converted Hall effect distributor (Magnum ex/cam position sensor) working on the first attempt! Gonna check rotor phase tomorrow and program a better curve into the 6AL-2 box to hopefully unlock some more TQ and maybe a few more HP. I am really happy with the oil pressure trend. J.Rob

View attachment 1715046008

I love this build nothing extravagant and yet fantastic numbers. I cant wait to see those 1.6 rollers they have to be good for 5-15hp. Your going to get your goal of 400hp with a little more tuning. Using those pistons you have off the shelf surprised me. My guess KB107 or H116CP would have got you there and possibly more. AWESOME JOB!!!!!

 

[RAMM]

I love this build nothing extravagant and yet fantastic numbers. I cant wait to see those 1.6 rollers they have to be good for 5-15hp. Your going to get your goal of 400hp with a little more tuning. Using those pistons you have off the shelf surprised me. My guess KB107 or H116CP would have got you there and possibly more. AWESOME JOB!!!!!

You're right this build is nothing extravagant and the 3 most expensive components were the intake manifold, valve springs, pushrods, and soon to be roller rockers if they help power at all. The "personality" of the engine is just what I was after with an idle vacuum of 13.5" @ 750-800rpm, 91 pumpgas compatibility (180psi crank comp), ZERO leaks, starts instantly/shuts off instantly, etc... Simulating a highway cruise @1800 rpm 65-70 hp and it was generating 200 ft/lbs uncorrected @ a very low throttle opening, which is more than enough. I'm pretty happy with it so far but I'm doubtful I could reach an honest 400hp with a belt driven waterpump as well. Thanks for the compliment however I wouldn't rank this as an awesome job but it sure was/is a fun one. J.Rob

 

[67autocross]

Well the numbers look good, should push the average street A body into the low 13's or 12's with a bit of gear and setup. The power is just where you want for a fun street car that you don't need to be tuning every week.
So with the thread title having the word "cheepy" in it are you going to spill the beans on the cost?

 

[RAMM]

Well the numbers look good, should push the average street A body into the low 13's or 12's with a bit of gear and setup. The power is just where you want for a fun street car that you don't need to be tuning every week.
So with the thread title having the word "cheepy" in it are you going to spill the beans on the cost?

I could easily divulge a cost but the question/ answer gets convoluted fast. The parts I used are easy enough to look up anywhere such as Summit or Jegs, but do you go by your local/favourite machine shop pricing for the labour or mine? Or perhaps you have the skills to handle anything other than the decking/honing and cylinder head seat work? Maybe you own your own cam bearing install tool to eliminate that cost? I assure you if you add the parts up it would be tough to call this build anything but cheap. Watch for my upcoming 371 BigMouth build to see the opposite of this build in terms of $$$$$. J.Rob

 

[cookietruck]

aren't you using magnum heads, so 1.6 rockers already?

i love seeing this thread because i think i have a very similar build in a 67 coronet, 180-190psi, ~13" vacuum at idle. it builds rpm really really fast. just seems like an excellent street build.
hoping to put the 360 in my power wagon after i build a 451 for the coronet lolol.

 

[RAMM]

aren't you using magnum heads, so 1.6 rockers already?

i love seeing this thread because i think i have a very similar build in a 67 coronet, 180-190psi, ~13" vacuum at idle. it builds rpm really really fast. just seems like an excellent street build.
hoping to put the 360 in my power wagon after i build a 451 for the coronet lolol.

Yes using Magnum heads but with a stud mount Chev replacement rocker from Melling in a 1.5 ratio. J.Rob

 

[rumblefish360]

Is there room for a 1.7 rocker?

 

[RAMM]

Is there room for a 1.7 rocker?

Yes there is room for a 1.7 but I don't think I'd consider it unless the 1.6's unlock some jawdropping amount of power--which they won't. J.Rob

 

[rumblefish360]

LAMO, tha was funny.

I like that cam. Used it a few times. 318 & 360 engines. IMO, it is an excellent daily driver cam with power right off idle for EZ driving.

 

[67autocross]

I could easily divulge a cost but the question/ answer gets convoluted fast. The parts I used are easy enough to look up anywhere such as Summit or Jegs, but do you go by your local/favourite machine shop pricing for the labour or mine? Or perhaps you have the skills to handle anything other than the decking/honing and cylinder head seat work? Maybe you own your own cam bearing install tool to eliminate that cost? I assure you if you add the parts up it would be tough to call this build anything but cheap. Watch for my upcoming 371 BigMouth build to see the opposite of this build in terms of $$$$$. J.Rob

That's cool just like to have an idea of cost of something like this as I have friends who are often looking for engines and don't want to wait or go to the trouble of getting one built.... just looking for a buy it of the Dyno price..

 

[RAMM]

Whoo Hoo very good torque. A little light on the camshaft maybe. But still 380 HP with that tiny bumpstick? You done good again.

Do you dyno test for anyone other than your own in house builds? The reason I ask is --Have you tested many Chev's--particular the beloved 383 Chev? I had an opportunity as recent as 2 weeks ago to test one--Edelbrock heads 170cc, roller rockers, RPM Air-gap,Schoenfeld 1 5/8-1 3/4" sprint headers, pumpgas, Edelbrock RPM hyd flat cam(234/244 .488/.510?). With the 750 on this engine it made 409 HP/442 tq, His carb 400 HP/432 TQ. The customer takes it home, installs it and reports that it's AWESOME--which I do like to hear.

What I tend to take away from this is: 1. 383 Chev's are a formidable engine package.
2. 360's (stock stroke) Often equal or even exceed similarly built 383's.
Of course you can throw money at either engine 'till you are blue in the face but that is not what this build or this thread is about. I do wonder how a 383 Chev with some Vortec heads built along these lines would fare. J.Rob

 

[rumblefish360]

Engine Masters on YouTube has a few Chevy miles they screwed with. We all know the corporate 383 shot out. Vortex headed.

They recently did a odd Chevy displacement, 372. Dart block @ 4.125 X 3.48.

 

[MopaR&D]

I just read through this start-to-finish and it was great... I want to take the Magnum top end from my busted 360 and build basically the same as you did but on a 318 instead. Same kind of bottom end, zero-deck flat tops etc. but with something like this cam Voodoo Hydraulic Flat Tappet Cam - Chrysler 273-360 268/276 - Lunati Power; the lift with 1.6 rockers would be like .527/.547" though, you think that would be excessive for how these tend to stall past .500"?

I was thinking about just leaving the heads alone, they're untouched iron Magnums but this thread convinced me to get a good valve job done. I'm OK with reusing the factory Magnum valves and Hughes springs/retainers though no G3 Hemi valves lol.

What do you think the HP/Tq curves would be like in comparison to your 360? I'd guess around 40-50 less lb-ft, and mayyybe 20 HP less if I'm lucky?

 

[MopaR&D]

One other thing I just saw, are those VE numbers for real? If so I had no idea you could hit 100% with this kind of combo I thought that was "race engine" territory? (I'm learning here lol)

 

[stixx]

Very solid numbers for such a small cam, showing that you used the given parts to their best!

Looking at the cam specs I have got a question (kinda stabbing in the dark): isn’t is usually said that the Magnums have a good exhaust port that doesn’t need a lot more duration, if any, than the intake?

I noticed that your other 360 you showed recently (?) had like 224/224° duration and made very good numbers (with different cylinder heads, I admit). So does the Cheepy really need the split on intake/exhaust … or was the cam just one you had on the shelf, or could it have made even better numbers with a ‘square’ cam?

 

[woods]

Now I'm curious to see how it does with the new rockers.
My build is close to yours. same pistons. a little less compression. a little more lift and EQ heads with 1.6 roller rockers.

 

[IQ52]

Do you dyno test for anyone other than your own in house builds? The reason I ask is --Have you tested many Chev's--particular the beloved 383 Chev? I had an opportunity as recent as 2 weeks ago to test one--Edelbrock heads 170cc, roller rockers, RPM Air-gap,Schoenfeld 1 5/8-1 3/4" sprint headers, pumpgas, Edelbrock RPM hyd flat cam(234/244 .488/.510?). With the 750 on this engine it made 409 HP/442 tq, His carb 400 HP/432 TQ. The customer takes it home, installs it and reports that it's AWESOME--which I do like to hear.

What I tend to take away from this is: 1. 383 Chev's are a formidable engine package.
2. 360's (stock stroke) Often equal or even exceed similarly built 383's.
Of course you can throw money at either engine 'till you are blue in the face but that is not what this build or this thread is about. I do wonder how a 383 Chev with some Vortec heads built along these lines would fare. J.Rob

We'll test anyone's engine for $550/day. But in a town where the sign reads "Population 1081" before the big mine layoff, it's mostly our own stuff.

I have a 350 core with some Vortec heads sitting out back. Never tested them though.

A while back I alluded to a 383 Chevy we built. Local customer requested 450 HP for his show truck because he could get that on a budget of X$ from an outfit advertising on the internet.

Ah, well, we kept to the budget, and.............with a carburetor he got 392 LB-FT @ 3,000 rpm, 484 LB-FT @ 5,000 rpm and 518 HP @ 5,800-6,000 rpm

With the Holley Terminator FI not fully through it's learning curve, 399 LB-FT @ 3,000 rpm, 472 LB-FT @ 4,900 rpm and 511 HP @ 5,800 RPM.

10.1:1 compression, Pump gas, Victor Jr intake, AFR 1034 heads, custom street solid roller 236/242 .564/.570 113 LSA 109 ICL, 1.5 Scorpion roller rockers, and using the long tube headers for his truck.

I'm still a 383 Chevy novice because that is the sum total of my 383 experience.

 

[mario03srt]

RAMM,

I noticed the lean AFR condition up to 4500 rpm. Was that only part throttle up to then? I would not think so. The #'s could be off, why so lean?

Marion