Cadillac Owners Forum banner

21 - 40 of 52 Posts

·
Administrator
2002.5 F55 CORSA STS, 2014 Explorer XLT FWD
Joined
·
69,854 Posts
The beauty of pushrod BB's and SB's from all the auto brands is that they can be built to move mountains, be highway cruisers, win drag races, and win long distance sanctioned road races. The variety of parts and possible combinations is infinite. ..........and when you build one and drop it into a Chevelle, Nova, Rambler, 32 Ford, or early Charger there's absolutely no doubt in anyone's mind that the engine will kick ass. Unlike our wussy 280 C.I. Northstar packages. Even a moderately built 327 Chevy engine/transmission/axle from 1965 will EAT a FWD Northstar for lunch and dinner..........
 

·
Registered
1998 Seville STS / 2013 Chevrolet Impala
Joined
·
1,889 Posts
I'm surprised the one pushrod that would eat ANY DOHC for breakfast, brunch, lunch, dinner, and midnight snack hasn't been mentioned..........




:devil:
 

·
Registered
2018 Mazda 6 (Venus) 1964 Impala (Betty) 1991 Miata (Dolly)
Joined
·
14,333 Posts
I've heard that the 327 is the most balanced version of the classic Chevy small block. I know the 350 is the most common Chevy small-block, but since I have a 327, I'm curious if this is true and if so, why that is. Although it's not at all built for racing, I know the 327 in Betty is very smooth, has excellent torque off the line and good top-end performance.

Does anybody here know what in the bore and stroke of the 327 that makes it better than the 283, 350 or 400 versions of the small block?
 

·
Registered
'06 Z06, '05 CTS-V 453rwhp/434rwtq (sold)
Joined
·
4,455 Posts
I like my supercharged small block.
 

·
Registered
NONE
Joined
·
1,339 Posts
The beauty of pushrod BB's and SB's from all the auto brands is that they can be built to move mountains, be highway cruisers, win drag races, and win long distance sanctioned road races. The variety of parts and possible combinations is infinite. ..........and when you build one and drop it into a Chevelle, Nova, Rambler, 32 Ford, or early Charger there's absolutely no doubt in anyone's mind that the engine will kick ass. Unlike our wussy 280 C.I. Northstar packages. Even a moderately built 327 Chevy engine/transmission/axle from 1965 will EAT a FWD Northstar for lunch and dinner..........
It's not really a fair comparison though.
The modern engines, eg a Northstar are WAY better on emissions than the older engines, and while you may to care about that it is a limiting factor, performance wise.

Plus, a 67 GTO with a 400ci engine and 4.33 gears is only 0.3 or 0.4 seconds faster in the 1/4 than a RWD Northstar STS. and the STS does it in near silence with ultra low emissions and *much* better gas mileage and probably reliability. And as the speeds rise and the race goes past the 1/4 mile that wussy Northstar will reel in the 327 65 and blow past it.

Time moves on, modern engines (and cars) perform much better than those of old.

Give me a late 60s Camaro with modern ZR1 running gear (retro looks with modern performance)...
:worship:
 

·
Administrator
2002.5 F55 CORSA STS, 2014 Explorer XLT FWD
Joined
·
69,854 Posts
Apples and oranges: You'll notice I specifically said "280 C.I." and "FWD Northstar". The supercharged 4.4 offerings, while being incredible machinery tuned to Swiss watch precision, are not in the realm of the OP.

I could care less about emissions: A normally aspirated 1965 SBC, or even BBC, built with today's parts and tuned to run on 92 octane E10, is darn near as clean as any of today's strangled offerings. But the EPA doesn't want you to know that.

Don't forget that, at WOT on most of today's "high performance" engines, most of the emissions controls are temporarily bypassed anyway.
 

·
Registered
NONE
Joined
·
1,339 Posts
Don't forget that, at WOT on most of today's "high performance" engines, most of the emissions controls are temporarily bypassed anyway.
That's a very good point actually.
I know you don't care about the emissions et,c it's just that a built 65 engine is not being hampered by all the design requirements of the stock Northstar.

I wasn't talking about the SC Northstars though just the regular naturally aspirated VVT Northstar, comparing the v.high 13s of the GTO to the low 14s of the STS. The supercharged offerings wipe the floor with the majority of the old muscle cars.

I suspect you'd find that a built Northstar would be capable of the same horsepower numbers as the slightly larger small block chevy but at higher rpm and with less torque. But that high rpm hp figure would mean that the powerband would play well into the hands of the gearings and give you a faster car at the end of the day.

Now, the much larger 5.7L+ v8's are a different story as there is only so much displacement difference that the high tech bits can make up for...
 

·
Registered
04 ctsV platinum,maggied,rt cats,headers,corsa,stealth tune
Joined
·
4,750 Posts
Have the best of both worlds,roots blower on a small block.Gotta love the torque!
 

·
Registered
07 cts-v
Joined
·
293 Posts
In the old days I preferred the big block. But with our advancement in engines I think small block is best for most applications. In the old days I owned 6 cars with smallblock Chevy engines and 3 cars with bigblock Chevy's. We didn't care about mileage so no problem with the bigblock, and it offered a usable increase in performance. Fast forward to today's world where mileage is important, and smallblocks have advanced to where a 6.0L smallblock can do as well or better than the old 7.0+ L bigblocks. Plus they are smaller and lighter. If we can have 6.0L and 7.0L smallblocks with good performance and even higher performance potential, what more do we need.
 

·
Registered
2000 Seville STS
Joined
·
170 Posts
ill take a "small block". you can easily stroke a smallblock to right at 400 ci. with the right parts, 450-550hp and 450-500tq is attainable and the engine is streetable enough to run power brakes, run on pump gas, and idle in 95 degree weather for extended periods if needed.

if you really wanted, you could turbo your stroked smallblock and easily get 900+ hp and a smooth idle.
 

·
Registered
1992 Town Car Cartier & 2014 Accord LX MTX
Joined
·
34,087 Posts
Discussion Starter #34
Oh, I forgot about this one, perhaps the coolest "Small Block" ever made by GM. :drool:

 

·
Registered
1992 Town Car Cartier & 2014 Accord LX MTX
Joined
·
34,087 Posts
Discussion Starter #36
Yes!! The LT5. The only twin cam small block Chevy, and the only twin cam Corvette.
 

·
Registered
1991 Sedan Deville
Joined
·
2,932 Posts
Yeah, that was a pretty sick engine, by the end of its production wasn't it bumped up to like 405HP? I remember reading somewhere that iw was also super reliable and long lasting
 

·
Registered
1992 Town Car Cartier & 2014 Accord LX MTX
Joined
·
34,087 Posts
Discussion Starter #38
375 hp, bumped to 405 in '93. I dunno about it's relibility, I've only seen one in my life. From what I remember from my days at Southview Chevrolet, parts for the LT5 are hard to come by and very expensive. Aside from being twin cam, the LT5 has no real performance advantages over the current Corvettes 6.2l V8. In other words, to justify buying an LT5 over an LS1 or LS2 Corvette, you'd better really want that twin cam 32v V8.
 

·
Registered
1991 Sedan Deville
Joined
·
2,932 Posts
375 hp, bumped to 405 in '93. I dunno about it's relibility, I've only seen one in my life. From what I remember from my days at Southview Chevrolet, parts for the LT5 are hard to come by and very expensive. Aside from being twin cam, the LT5 has no real performance advantages over the current Corvettes 6.2l V8. In other words, to justify buying an LT5 over an LS1 or LS2 Corvette, you'd better really want that twin cam 32v V8.
I'd still prefer a pushrod. I just heard somewhere it was a very reliable engine and that they were thinking of bringing something like it out in the future. I'm not sure how reliable the source was though lol
 
21 - 40 of 52 Posts
Top