Cadillac Owners Forum banner

21 - 40 of 83 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,258 Posts
Discussion Starter #21
davesdeville said:
Well even though I won't have any money for awhile, I'm still planning on what I'm going to do to my 500. I might just get that book to see what Doc Frohmader has done. If anyone else has 500 info or specs on a 500 build up, I need it.
If you haven't seen them yet, there are magazine articles of two different Caddy builds in the photo section of this site.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
Vern said:
Lux

Good to see you are making progress. Wow 60 over that would be a 514. At a bore of 4.360 that will easily unshroud, or flow some 2.19 intake valves. Even just a bowl blend to match the valves will go a long way and be money well spent. JWalker could give you excellent advice with regards to what to tell your head porter/machine shop about the heads and valves. Better than what is in that book and I am not knocking the book. Like it or not your shop is likely without telling you using your parts to experiment on as they probably don't have hands on experience with performance Cads. I am not commiting Mr Walker to share his time and experience only saying he is in the no. ;)

At this level headers which I believe you can buy ready made for your motor and truck would also be money well spent. I say this with full understanding of the fact that your goals are moderate performance. And that Christmas is coming. ;) You would get a good performance return for your dollar. Torque horsepower and mileage as it is now by far the biggest cork in your system.

JWalker if you read this and have the time I would love to hear about your build up of the Bu er Boo. And where other than Al's board do you talk online about big Cads and racing?

PS For the guy who asked. Starting with nothing and including everything but the value of my time. All parts, machine work, balancing, porting, core, misc. Comparing part for part to the Chev crate 502ci 502hp delux assembly which sells for $7,000 I have $3,512 in mine. I have 509ci expect to make 509hp & 575tq. I know it will not dyno exact but neither would the 502.
As far as im concerned vern is 100% right
A mild port job and bigger valves is exactly what you need
headers are a must and converting a set of bbc headers is easy
the build on my engine is slow going
it is a 545 incher with aluminum heads and the new bulldog intake
were still squeezing cfm out of the heads and ill let everyone know what we get when done
more to follow and if you want more info ,vern and others e-mail me...later
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,258 Posts
Discussion Starter #23
Re: Valve size

JWalker said:
So what valve size are you going with for your lower compression engine ?
I talked to they guy at the machine shop today. The valves going into the motor will be: 2.15" intakes and 1.687" exhaust.
Do you think that should work well with the mild set-up of the motor? Again, remember, I'm not looking to squeeze every last bit of power out of the motor.
He was originally going to keep the stock exhaust size and bump the intakes to 2.080. He said he was trying to save me a few dollars. I told him there was no need for that now. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
Re: Valve size

lux hauler said:
I talked to they guy at the machine shop today. The valves going into the motor will be: 2.15" intakes and 1.687" exhaust.
Do you think that should work well with the mild set-up of the motor? Again, remember, I'm not looking to squeeze every last bit of power out of the motor.
He was originally going to keep the stock exhaust size and bump the intakes to 2.080. He said he was trying to save me a few dollars. I told him there was no need for that now. :)
Good choice
as long as he opens up the ports it should run ok even with the low compression and narrow lc on the cam your using
i realize that your not SQUEEZING every last bit of power out of it but get what you pay for
doing the bigger valves was a %100 great idea
are you having him mill the heads a bit to increase the compression ?
prolly should and if you stay under .030 you SHOULDENT have to do any intake work
sounds like its coming along
later JW
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,258 Posts
Discussion Starter #25
Re: Valve size

JWalker said:
Good choice
as long as he opens up the ports it should run ok even with the low compression and narrow lc on the cam your using
i realize that your not SQUEEZING every last bit of power out of it but get what you pay for
doing the bigger valves was a %100 great idea
are you having him mill the heads a bit to increase the compression ?
prolly should and if you stay under .030 you SHOULDENT have to do any intake work
sounds like its coming along
later JW
JW,
Thanks for your reply...
The heads are going to be milled enough to clean them up. I'm not sure how much it's going to take.
if you stay under .030 you SHOULDENT have to do any intake work
Intake work as far as......? I'm not sure what you mean here.
He (the machine shop) also told me about a set of roller rockers that he came across. I'll post some pictures of them in another thread. Take a look and tell me whos you think they are and what they're worth. He wants to get rid of them and a used Edelbrock intake.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
Re: Valve size

lux hauler said:
JW,
Thanks for your reply...
The heads are going to be milled enough to clean them up. I'm not sure how much it's going to take.

Intake work as far as......? I'm not sure what you mean here.
He (the machine shop) also told me about a set of roller rockers that he came across. I'll post some pictures of them in another thread. Take a look and tell me whos you think they are and what they're worth. He wants to get rid of them and a used Edelbrock intake.

milling the mounting face of the intake to make it fit after milling the heads
for what your doing i would recommend that you dont run roller rockers
1 reason is cost
another is they wont make that much more power and most of the systems made for the cadillac arent really made for the street
I know of a couple of shaft systems that use OEM type rockers that would double the reliability and they would cost quite a bit less
id be happy to look at what your guy came up with
as far as the edelbrock goes
its better than a stock stock intake for sure and its a few lbs off the nose and they dont look too bad
ilater JW
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,258 Posts
Discussion Starter #27
Re: Valve size

JWalker said:
milling the mounting face of the intake to make it fit after milling the heads
for what your doing i would recommend that you dont run roller rockers
1 reason is cost
another is they wont make that much more power and most of the systems made for the cadillac arent really made for the street
I know of a couple of shaft systems that use OEM type rockers that would double the reliability and they would cost quite a bit less
id be happy to look at what your guy came up with
as far as the edelbrock goes
its better than a stock stock intake for sure and its a few lbs off the nose and they dont look too bad
ilater JW
I understand now what you mean about the intake now. :eek: I'm a little slow sometimes. ;)
I wasn't planning on using the rollers on my motor. I might be able to make a little money though. :D
 

·
Registered
94 ETC,97 STS
Joined
·
3,531 Posts
I have to ask something about the compression ratio, and I don't know the answer, I am just asking.
You said the 120cc headds are 9:1 and the 76cc heads are 10:1. Is that with the same pistons? That sounds too close if the pistons are the same. The 120's are more than half again bigger than the 76's.This would seem like it would drop it to at least 8:1.

Let me know if I'm in left field.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
zonie77 said:
I have to ask something about the compression ratio, and I don't know the answer, I am just asking.
You said the 120cc headds are 9:1 and the 76cc heads are 10:1. Is that with the same pistons? That sounds too close if the pistons are the same. The 120's are more than half again bigger than the 76's.This would seem like it would drop it to at least 8:1.

Let me know if I'm in left field.
a 120 cc headed engine can be as little as 7.9-1 depending on deck height and the pistons you use
with the kb hyper pistons for the 76 cc heads you could have right at 10-1
you can zero deck a 120 cc headed engine with flat tops and mill about .050 off the head and have around 9.4 to 9.5 -1
if you run 76cc heads with a flat top piston with no dish youll have about 12-1 or more
nothing complicated about it just a few choices as far as pistons go
also have to take into account gasket thickness
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
The compression ratios are correct with the KB hypereutectic pistons: 9:1 for the 120 cc heads and 10:1 for the 76 cc heads. Afterall, the bore is 4.360". I will be using the 76 cc (older) heads to make 10:1 compression and run a MTS MT15 cam with an Edelbrock Performer and 2.19/1.88 intake/exhaust valves in ported heads. I'm looking for 500 hp/600 ft.lbs. The engine will be bored .050" over (512) and use BB Chevy pistons on 7" Olds 425 forged rods. I already have a Holley Pro-Jection system. Based on the performance improvement of the Holley system on my stock 500, and what I have read, my hp/torque ratings should be realistic.

zonie77 said:
I have to ask something about the compression ratio, and I don't know the answer, I am just asking.
You said the 120cc headds are 9:1 and the 76cc heads are 10:1. Is that with the same pistons? That sounds too close if the pistons are the same. The 120's are more than half again bigger than the 76's.This would seem like it would drop it to at least 8:1.

Let me know if I'm in left field.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
Re: Valve size

Hicks,
Loved the picks of the engine you posted on this board. While I agree you could have built up a SBC for less, it will not run as smooth, long or as good as the Cad or make anywhere near the torque. Your BIGGEST problem will be traction.

lux hauler said:
I talked to they guy at the machine shop today. The valves going into the motor will be: 2.15" intakes and 1.687" exhaust.
Do you think that should work well with the mild set-up of the motor? Again, remember, I'm not looking to squeeze every last bit of power out of the motor.
He was originally going to keep the stock exhaust size and bump the intakes to 2.080. He said he was trying to save me a few dollars. I told him there was no need for that now. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
FI and cam selection

you might wanna reconsider your cam selection for a fuel injected engine
and your horsepower /torque figures are a little high
I seriously doubt that youll pull more than 430-440 altho im sure it will make a pile of torque...as cadillac always do
you might wanna consider an olds 403 piston instead of the glass KB pistons
speed pro has a forging that works really well for what your doing
put em about .007 in the hole and it comes out to around 9.5-1 and thats a bunch friendlier on pumpgas
later JW
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,258 Posts
Discussion Starter #33
The valves are in!!
Here's what they look like......

and


There are a few more pictures in my gallery in the photo section.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
one or two questions

lux hauler said:
The valves are in!!
Here's what they look like......

and


There are a few more pictures in my gallery in the photo section.
Are those heads finished ?
If it were me id blend the bowl and guide together...not to smooth it but to give it a more gradual radius
you could do both heads in about an hour and pick up alot of USEABLE airflow
something else is
were the guides loose?
seen you have bronze guides in it
the valves you used.....the SI's are usually a bit oversize and every head ive put those particular valves in required the guides to be honed.
to sum it up im not knocking the work that was done just saying there is more you can do with what you have
they look good as far as what was done
later JW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Good luck on your 500 Lux! You might want to make sure that motor has as much compression as you can get away with if you are considering racing it.... It makes much more power with higher compression and I would use the 76CC heads for sure. It will definatly idle better with more compression.


This quote below is pretty much the same engine combo I have in my Fleetwood hot rod. Block and heads built by Al and the cam is an MTS custom Al made which is really a Comp cam, ground for MTS on his specs.... I just have a bit more compression than 10:1, and I wish I would have gone with more as that is what makes these motors really run. If I had to do it a again it would be 13:1. The compression takes the lope out of the cam and increases the HP an throttle response like nothing else and actually makes the engine quite a bit better idle and tamer in all aspects except when you floor it. Of course you have better have a mixture of fuel for it or you will kill it on detonation, but its a strong contender that will give the 8000 over the counter alloy head GM 502/540 a run for its money... My engine was not much cheaper than this though, and if my car was not a cadillac, I would have used a 502 as it makes more since as its new and many things are avalible for it... But a cad needs to stay a cad and my MTS 500 is a hell of an engine overall! I would imagine that if it were put in a 3000LB vehicle, you would have a 10 second car that had no reliability, idle or typical aftermarket BS issues as most of us long time hot rodders are so familiar with.... But in my 4000LB, fully loaded, all accessory working car, it runs high 12's with a Q-jet and 3:08 gears and 500 manafolds.... Its pretty amazing at that and its just as drivable as it was brand new and probably more reliable as it cooled to the max with coolers on everything.

You will definatly get your HP ratings with what you quoted at the flywheel, but if you are looking to run hard and have those ratings, that pro-jection is not all its cracked up to be in my hard knock experience with it. I have never had in on a cad, but on mega built 406 SBC in one of my sleeper projects... the Holley Pro-Jection is almost 70HP real world/rear wheel dyno HP shy of what a modded 3310 900CFM did. It never idled as good as the carb... The AC kick up just did not work and made for a problemed idle with the AC on (AC is a must for all hot rods in my book!), there was always some quirk with the projection, and the economy was really not that great for its quirks and lack of power compared to a carb. I was so pumped up when the pro-jection came out many years ago as it is a novel idea and I and gave it every opportunity I could.. Even had Holley rework the firmware.... Its just not that good for HP... Frankly its not good for much as the carb offers so much more for so much less without the quirks...

500 CID Home Page




Cadillac Pat said:
The compression ratios are correct with the KB hypereutectic pistons: 9:1 for the 120 cc heads and 10:1 for the 76 cc heads. Afterall, the bore is 4.360". I will be using the 76 cc (older) heads to make 10:1 compression and run a MTS MT15 cam with an Edelbrock Performer and 2.19/1.88 intake/exhaust valves in ported heads. I'm looking for 500 hp/600 ft.lbs. The engine will be bored .050" over (512) and use BB Chevy pistons on 7" Olds 425 forged rods. I already have a Holley Pro-Jection system. Based on the performance improvement of the Holley system on my stock 500, and what I have read, my hp/torque ratings should be realistic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
compression isnt everything

Ultra Slow said:
Good luck on your 500 Lux! You might want to make sure that motor has as much compression as you can get away with if you are considering racing it.... It makes much more power with higher compression and I would use the 76CC heads for sure. It will definatly idle better with more compression.


This quote below is pretty much the same engine combo I have in my Fleetwood hot rod. Block and heads built by Al and the cam is an MTS custom Al made which is really a Comp cam, ground for MTS on his specs.... I just have a bit more compression than 10:1, and I wish I would have gone with more as that is what makes these motors really run. If I had to do it a again it would be 13:1. The compression takes the lope out of the cam and increases the HP an throttle response like nothing else and actually makes the engine quite a bit better idle and tamer in all aspects except when you floor it. Of course you have better have a mixture of fuel for it or you will kill it on detonation, but its a strong contender that will give the 8000 over the counter alloy head GM 502/540 a run for its money... My engine was not much cheaper than this though, and if my car was not a cadillac, I would have used a 502 as it makes more since as its new and many things are avalible for it... But a cad needs to stay a cad and my MTS 500 is a hell of an engine overall! I would imagine that if it were put in a 3000LB vehicle, you would have a 10 second car that had no reliability, idle or typical aftermarket BS issues as most of us long time hot rodders are so familiar with.... But in my 4000LB, fully loaded, all accessory working car, it runs high 12's with a Q-jet and 3:08 gears and 500 manafolds.... Its pretty amazing at that and its just as drivable as it was brand new and probably more reliable as it cooled to the max with coolers on everything.

You will definatly get your HP ratings with what you quoted at the flywheel, but if you are looking to run hard and have those ratings, that pro-jection is not all its cracked up to be in my hard knock experience with it. I have never had in on a cad, but on mega built 406 SBC in one of my sleeper projects... the Holley Pro-Jection is almost 70HP real world/rear wheel dyno HP shy of what a modded 3310 900CFM did. It never idled as good as the carb... The AC kick up just did not work and made for a problemed idle with the AC on (AC is a must for all hot rods in my book!), there was always some quirk with the projection, and the economy was really not that great for its quirks and lack of power compared to a carb. I was so pumped up when the pro-jection came out many years ago as it is a novel idea and I and gave it every opportunity I could.. Even had Holley rework the firmware.... Its just not that good for HP... Frankly its not good for much as the carb offers so much more for so much less without the quirks...

500 CID Home Page

and worse yet it makes the thing octane sensative
as far as the tbi goes....it wont work with a cam with big seat timing
DO NOT EVER COMPARE A SBC TO A CADILLAC
nothing ever works the same as it will on a cadillac
going from 10-1 to 13-1 with the cam you have would do little but make you buy racing gasoline
lux haulers engine will run on 89-90 octane
im thinking that was his intent
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,258 Posts
Discussion Starter #37 (Edited)
Thanks for the replies.
The heads are bascially finished UNLESS, I decide to have him do more. I will consider the blending of the bowl and guide though.

Having a motor built is new territory for me and a performance build on a Caddy motor is new to the machinist also.

As JWalker mentioned, my intentions were to keep the compression kinda 'middle of the road'. High enough to gain me a little power but low enough to not have problems with detonation on pump gas. The compression shouldn't be much over 9:1.....there was only enough material removed from the surfaces to 'clean them up'.

I might run back out to Wakeman today and have another quick look at the heads and make some final decisions.

Thanks again!!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,258 Posts
Discussion Starter #38
BTW.....JWalker,
I believe the guides were honed for the valve stems.

I talked to Chuck this evening and asked him about the blending. He said that he didn't have any problem doing it as long as I didn't have any problem paying for it. :eek: :rolleyes2
I'm gunna stop in and see him tomorrow (Sunday).
He's also trying to get me to run it on their dyno.........$$$
It would be cool to have/see the numbers and have the motor basically ready to bolt in and go, I'm not sure I want to pay for all of that.
Either he or I would have to come up with headers and a bellhousing. I don't want to spend the money on that kind of stuff for one dyno run......I'll have to see what he says.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
989 Posts
lux hauler said:
BTW.....JWalker,
I believe the guides were honed for the valve stems.

I talked to Chuck this evening and asked him about the blending. He said that he didn't have any problem doing it as long as I didn't have any problem paying for it. :eek: :rolleyes2
I'm gunna stop in and see him tomorrow (Sunday).
He's also trying to get me to run it on their dyno.........$$$
It would be cool to have/see the numbers and have the motor basically ready to bolt in and go, I'm not sure I want to pay for all of that.
Either he or I would have to come up with headers and a bellhousing. I don't want to spend the money on that kind of stuff for one dyno run......I'll have to see what he says.
I've seen some cheap headers on ebay. It looks like you're coming along well, Lux. Good luck with that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Re: compression isnt everything

Sorry to open my big uneducated mouth J walker.... Sounds like you got a handle on everthing by your SCREAMING reply... I am really sorry I said anything and will never offer any of my previous experience to things to are all too familiar with to you as you seem to have taken a major offense to it...
Please forgive me.


But for Lux Hauler........

From what I have seen over my 30 few years of working on cars, and this applied to BOP and Cadillac Big Blocks, you will NEVER get any of them out of the low 300HP range without some darn good compression..... You can trick the heads, you can put headers, you can cam em up... Whatever you want to do... You are just going to be a low 300HP engine.... The actual wheel HP is going to be in the 200's or even less.

Since we cannot use a chevy to compare compression VS HP as so mentioned above.....Take for example the 70 eldo motor...... Does the fact it has a very small cam, pathatice intake, make the 70 eldo motor have to put 93 in it a waste of high octane gas???? I dont think so.... It is 10:1 and it ran pretty darn good in its day.. I used to race one all the time in my GTO.... I wont have to tell you that it would consitantly kick my 360HP tail.... I promise it will outdo a flowed, cammed and intaked 8:1 500.... Even at its overrated 400HP as the 70 HP standards were.

If you are building transportation and dont want the expence of good gas, I can completely understand and go with the lower compression for sure..... At 10:5:1 you WONT need race gas...!

But, if you are trying to race it, which by your many previous posts I am assuming is a good part of your goal, you are doing yourself a big injustice that you are going to wish you did after you put in in your vehicle and learn that its limitations are going to be lower than you probably expected...

If you need a subtle hint.. Just remeber these...... I did not write the book on this......

LT5 Chevy.... 405HP... 11:1
LT4 Chevy.... 330HP... 10.5:1
LS1 Chevy.....345HP... 10.5:1
LS6 Chevy.....425HP... 11:1
Olds W30..... 370HP... 10:5:1
Pon RAIV...... 370HP... 10:5:1
Buick Stg1.... 360HP... 10:5:1
70 Cad 500... 400HP... 10:5:1

120CC head Cad 500..... 190HP 8:1


JWalker said:
and worse yet it makes the thing octane sensative
as far as the tbi goes....it wont work with a cam with big seat timing
DO NOT EVER COMPARE A SBC TO A CADILLAC
nothing ever works the same as it will on a cadillac
going from 10-1 to 13-1 with the cam you have would do little but make you buy racing gasoline
lux haulers engine will run on 89-90 octane
im thinking that was his intent
 
21 - 40 of 83 Posts
Top