Landracing Forum
Bonneville Salt Flats Discussion => Build Diaries => Topic started by: snap daddy on October 12, 2008, 12:36:36 PM
-
I'll start with a little background...it all began in '06 when myself (Paul), my buddy Dave, and his wife Sue trekked out to SpeedWeek from Omaha. We went back in '07, adding another buddy, Ian. This year we decided to try World of Speed, and 7 of us had a blast. Of course, after that first trip, talk was thick about building a racecar...well, Dave pulled the trigger this July on a '53 that had been a project car, and a group materialized. We had 35 hours roundtrip of vantime on the WoS trip to pore over the rulebook and brainstorm. The resulting plan is to do a D/CBGC: the other Dave in the group (from Ames, IA) already owns a stock-bore small journal 327 block and a steel 283 crank, so we're going the 302 route with a turbo and blowthrough carb setup. Originally thought about a 4 speed (Ian has a toploader) but talked to a few guys at WoS using autos and that started to sound better...Ames Dave also has a beefed 200-4R and we think, by using a lockup converter, it would basically amount to a 5-speed. Plans include a straight axle w/ parallel leafs in front, and leafs with a 9" stockcar rear out back. The cage kit is on it's way here as we speak, so we got together yesterday to get started. The car came with a 300 Buick motor w/ aluminum heads and a TH-350 already installed, so that was the first thing to go. Then we set out to get the body off the frame and ready for blasting; we ran out of time, but it's ready to be lifted off. Front fenders are junk, so we're planning on a 'glass front end. Sorry for the lack of good pics, but my camera decided to quit working. I'll do better next time.
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3236/2935047334_67baa339d0.jpg)
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3051/2934188879_b1445b6f58.jpg)
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3149/2934233619_c8f26d4d31_o.jpg)
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3254/2934233647_93411c6fe6_o.jpg)
-
looks like the stude will be a lot of fun. sleep little build fast see and race soon.
see u at the salt
-
Snapp, Was this a Champion or a Commander ? The reason I ask is the 6cyl frames are much thinner material. (I am starting a 53 Champion Build as well) What are you going to use as a chassis/frame,, I plan on running E/CGALT so being Alt. I can do more Mods to the chassis and from what I understand the frame needs to be replaced or reinforced...
Keep up the build pics.... Where are you getting a Glass Frontend from ? Mine is in great shape, bit I may opt to save it and use a glass one for the race car.
Charles
-
Snapp. where did you order the cage kit from ? 8 point, 10 point , 12 point or what ? ( 1/5/8 or 1 3/4 ? ) D.O.M. ?
Thanks
Charles
-
Nice looking car and let me wish you the best on your build.
One thing I would hope you would revisit though is the 200R4 option. The 30% drop in rpm will come at the worst possible time, on the big end of the run. Also the lockup clutches are a weak link and I wouldn't want to use them under full power if you are making any power at all and you sure should be with the turbos. Also the 4th clutch pack is not real strong.
For instance at WOS after we got Sparky in the 300 mph Club I decided to run my truck in the 130 mph club. I have 28 inch tires, 3.50 rear gear and a 700R4 with the 30% over-drive. The truck ran 85 mph at the .2 mile and over 105 at the 1/2 mile, but was geared to low to run the 130. I ran 124-125 at the mile, but my problem was I was taching 6000 rpm there and my cam is all over at 5500, so I was on the wrong side of the power curve at the end of the mile. All of the runs were just using 1st, 2nd and 3rd.
I tried over-drive for one run and it was pulling it, but too slowly and that run resulted in 118 mph. I have my converter lockup wired so that I can turn it off, turn it on so it locks in 2nd, 3rd and 4th if I want and also so that locks and unlock automatically going in and out of 4th. I considered throwing the switch and locking it once I was in 3rd and believe that would have given me the 130 as the converter is fairly loose and was slipping 400-500 rpm in 3rd under WOT. I then decided it just wasn't worth it to take a chance blowing the converter lockup clutch since I need to go to Calif. in November with the truck and didn't want to have to replace a converter and possibly a transmission.
I had a 4L80E built by Crosley (on here) that should be good for 700 HP and that with a 3.20-3.25 Ford rearend will hopefully go in the truck over the winter. With that gearing I should be able to run the 130 with the present motor and hopefully much more if I still go ahead and turbo the motor and use some 2.75 or 2.47 gears I have for the Ford rear-end.
Anyway if you can't afford something like a G-Force, Gerico, etc. for the car I would look at a close ratio Muncie for the car along with a Ford rearend and maybe a couple different ring/pinion combinations. We ran over 600 HP through a Muncie in Hooley's Stude for the first couple years and it held up.
Here is a link to a 13% over-drive option for the M21.....
(http://www.riversidegear.com/categories/muncie-4-speed/products/images/M21%20Overdrive%20Set.jpg)
http://www.riversidegear.com/categories/muncie-4-speed/products/product-166.html
.......... that could be a pretty slick option if it is strong enough.
Here is a link to 700R4 stuff on my site and a lot of the lockup stuff applies to the 200R4 also.....
http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner/techinfo/techinfo.html
c ya,
Sum
-
I agree with Sum, if you are making big power the high gear in an auto is not strong. The big drop in RPM's with short stroke or small cubic inches is also not good.
Now my car has only run the Mile at Maxton, so I have no idea what happens at longer distances, but I know I shift from 2nd. to third at 8200 RMP's and the R's drop to 5,000 and it pulls steady to 6,500 at the traps... the motor is strong enough to pull to 8200 but not enough track...
This motor is coming out and going in my 53 Stude project with a Nascar style Tex Racing T101 or a close ratio Muncie (have good line on a few T10's as well)
Charles
-
Cajun -
It was a 6 cyl. car, and we've been a little concerned about the frame, but after looking at salt2salt.com and their build it doesn't seem all that big of a deal...
The cage is coming from Art Morrison - 1-3/4" DOM, 10 pt. with F/C option. $650 to my door.
Sum - as usual, your post made me think. We spoke with a guy at WoS running the 150 in a stude with 500 Caddy power and a 200-4R...he was using the lockup...it was a race converter. I'll talk to Ames Dave, he's the one who researched gear ratios and spreads. IIRC, the OD isn't quite as high a gear as in the 700.
How 'bout the toploader idea?
-
................ IIRC, the OD isn't quite as high a gear as in the 700...........
I'm not sure what the "IIRC" is, but if you are talking about the 200R4 it actually has a slightly higher over-drive at .67 vs. the .70 in the 700R4 (.75 in the 4L80E). If I turbo my motor with the 4L80E I've been told that it would still be best to not use the 4th gear or the lockup on the converter. If the converter manufacture says that you are good to go with their converter and lock it in your application at WOT then go for it. It would probably be equivalent to about a 6% to 7% gear change at about 7000 with a converter that would slip around 450 unlocked and that could be good.
I think if you used the "Car Transmission Gear/RPM" spreadsheets on my site ...............
http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner/bvillecar/bville-spreadsheet-index.html
........... you would see that the rpm drop going from 3rd to 4th is not going to be a good thing unless you have a very broad rpm band.
More important than the speeds vs. rpms that these spread sheets give is that using them you can look down them and instantly see on any gear change (1st to 2nd, 2nd to 3rd, etc.) and at any rpm that you choose as a shift point what the rpm drop will be on the shift. It is very easy to change the transmission gear ratios or the rear-end ratios with them and see how that might benefit you in staying in the power band of your engine.
c ya,
Sum
-
Snap, I question your choice of a front straight axle. Although several Stude's have run with them over the years, it may be hard to get the car very low without adding a new front frame clip. The Geisler/Vail/Banks 53 has run since the mid 60's with stock front suspension with the upper a-arms relocated for more caster ( I would suggest 15 to 18 degrees) and has gone over 240. I run a Chris Alston independant (mustang II) front which works well, and the choice is yours, but I would suggest that you talk to several other drivers of like cars and get their input..........Bob
-
Bob, if I am running CGALT can I change the frame suspension completely (as in all new ) ..
I am thinking of a FatMan or Alston Mustang II or Tubular A Arm IFS with Coil Overs ? Not certain, even thought of a dropped I Beam Straight axle with Coil Over Conversion set up...instead of the transverse leaf like stock.
Charles
-
Cajun, as an altered, you can build or buy any chassis you want. On my car (#394, A/CFALT 53 Stude), I bought a Chris Alston Chassis kit (Eliminator I if memory serves), and modified it to my needs. The only information I had to provide was the roll cage bends.
A word of caution on roll cages. The current rule book calls for a minimum .120 thickness. It is my understanding that the SCTA is purchaising a Sonic Tester to verify roll cage thickness. If you bend .120 wall tubing, the outside of the "curve" will end up less than the specified .120, so you want to go to the next thicker tubing which I believe is .135. Most roll cage vendors use this for their standard roll cage material for this very reason................Bob
-
i have dealt with the nhra for years-- they know that when you bend a piece of tubing the outside of the bend will become thiner because it has to stretch --they never measure the tube on a bend and am sure the scta wont either--just some thoughts---------willie buchta
-
I have been using 1 5/8 .120 D.O.M. I was going to use 1 3/4 .120 D.O.M. on the Stude...
Are you suggesting the SCTA will sonic test the cage "in a bend" ? If so I woould suppose that we would all have to go to .134 D.O.M (or is it .135) ? Either way, I think I will go up to 1 3/4 from the 1 5/8 I used on the Vicky.
I just got the 08 SCTA rule book.. guess I better wait till I see any 2009 changes,,,, with the economy and the market like it is,, I sure don't want to have to "re-do" any thing on this new build...
Heck, I may have to sell the Yellow 36 Roadster to finance the 53 project and finish up the shop too...
(http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii43/cajunkid5690/DSC_0068.jpg)
Charles
-
i have dealt with the nhra for years-- they know that when you bend a piece of tubing the outside of the bend will become thinner because it has to stretch --they never measure the tube on a bend and am sure the scta wont either--just some thoughts---------willie buchta
I would also hope that the "nominal wall thickness" would still apply,
Sum
-
charles---i was saying that i dont think the scta will will check the tube on a bend ---look at it this way the more you bend the tube the thinner it gets on the outside of the bend and you have no controll of the thickness of material that is left --if i get a chance i will do some testing and post it since i have a tubing bender and a sonic checker it wont be a big deal --maybe you all can tell me what you want tested and i will try to do some testing willie buchta
i will also do some testing on "nominal wall thickness" if you all like let me know---------------
-
Willie.
All I have is 1 5/8 and 1 3/4 .120 DOM .. I will use the 1 3/4 for the Stude... If Nominal .120 is the rule then I am OK.. ( I agree with you and Sum and the IHRA) but if for some reason they check in the bend, both the main hoop and the halo bar will have 90 degree bends in them..
How thin would 1 3/4 .120 DOM be if was bent 90 degrees ( would madrell bends thin out material less ? )
Charles
-
charles if you have dom tubing it is within .001 of .120 wall thickness --the electric weld ( E W ) in .120 can be as thin as .115 (that is the thinnest ive found ) thats called nominal wall thickness --E W is a much cheaper material but does come in .134 wall nominal thickness (in a few sizes ) and is usually well above .125 wall thickness --the rule book lists minimuns you can always go larger if you want --willie buchta
a bend will stretch the material on the outside --i dont think manderal would make a differance but might even make it worse -just a guess
-
Sum -
IIRC: If I Remember Correctly :wink:
We'll have to do some more thinking about trans choices...thanks for your input. The idea of using the lockup in third is intriguing. The funny thing about all this is the jerico I'm hoarding in my garage! Tempting, but it's destined for my 66 Nova stock elim. NHRA car.
Charles - FYI, the kit we are using is .134. Nice hijack of my build diary! :cheers:
Bob - We spoke with a gentleman who had a maroon '53, BFALT I think, who recommended the straight axle...I think it had a 5" drop or so, with parallel leafs. He recommended it due to fewer problems with alignment; we liked it because it's CHEAP!! :-D
-
Snap, Sorry for the HiJack,,, hmm I did it unarmed :evil:
I am very interested in your build,,, If you can keep us posted and plenty of pics.
I too was given the same advice about the dropped straight axle and parallel leafs.
Good luck and keep the Diary Up !!!
Charles "the hijacker" :cheers:
-
......... The funny thing about all this is the jerico I'm hoarding in my garage! Tempting, but it's destined for my 66 Nova stock elim. NHRA car.............
IIRC ( :-) ) during speed week you probably won't be running the NHRA car and it won't mind giving up the Jerico for a week 8-) ,
Sum
-
Sum -
AAAAAA!!!!! Now my only excuse is the gearing - 3.19 first gear. No! No! No! Gotta get the Nova done!
Thoughts on the toploader idea?
-
Sum -
AAAAAA!!!!! Now my only excuse is the gearing - 3.19 first gear. No! No! No! Gotta get the Nova done!
Thoughts on the toploader idea?
I have had no experience with a toploader, sorry. What are your HP goals? I would suggest a transmission that would take at least 60% of the HP you anticipate if it was used in a drag strip application and you would probably be good on the salt since the shock loads are less. I doubt the Muncie we were using would handle 600-750 HP on the drag strip with a car that could hook up, but we were ok with it at b'ville, but we only ran it about 6-8 runs.
Sum
-
Time for an update now that I have something to update with...the cage showed up and Dave bought a pretty nice tubing notcher, seen here: http://www.vansantent.com/tube_notcher.htm (http://www.vansantent.com/tube_notcher.htm) We got the car moved over to where the build will be taking place -
a friend's spare garage, that has (almost) everything we need: room, power, compressed air, tools, stereo, fridge, toilet, etc. Kyle, the owner, even showed up with an Econotig while we were working! The 'almost' is the lack of heat, but there's a gas line there so we're hunting for free heaters.
Saturday, we got the doors and hinges off. Sounds simple, right? No. It sucked. We prevailed, however, and moved on
to eliminating the rusty floor. Dave (bless his heart) spent about an hour with the cutoff wheel and now it's gone. This car has some
rust issues, to say the least! It's strange, though, because all the outside sheet metal is great. Maybe a P.O. put new quarters on it at some point. I spent some time looking over the frame, though, and it looks to be solid.
Anyhow, with the floor gone, it's a lot easier for me to visualize what we need to do for the cage, new floor, and rockers.
The rockers were so rusty that I can't even tell what the inner / outer originally looked like and how they joined the floorpan!
We have a pretty good idea of how it's going to look, though - we're thinking the inner rocker will be a piece of 1" x 3" tube...
then the new outers and the new floor will weld right to the inners.
Next time, the body comes off so we can blast the frame. Another good thing about the garage - we can sandblast right next to it in the yard. Gotta beat the snow!
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2051/2999542514_eb865fe8a7_b.jpg)
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3296/2999541300_1698c1b823_b.jpg)
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3163/2998704699_55d72c1415_b.jpg)
We've been tossing other powerplant ideas around, too...those LS Chevies are sooo nice. A 4.8L from a truck would be a decent basis for a 'D' motor, I think. That would allow us to run EFI, right? That would be a little more turbo-friendly than a blow-through Holley, I'm thinkin'. The rulebook says 'OEM' Efi is allowed in Classic category...has anyone pushed the definition of OEM in this situation? How much of the system would need to be GM standard issue? Hmmm....
-
The way I read the rule OEM EFI is was it available on the year the body was manufactured. Just my take on the rule.
-
"has anyone pushed the definition of OEM in this situation? How much of the system would need to be GM standard issue?"
All of it with nothing additional.
DW
-
The way I read the rule OEM EFI is was it available on the year the body was manufactured. Just my take on the rule.
Dan, is this the case? Or is it referring to the engine? Thanks
-
The car and the year it was manufactured.
I tossed a gentleman from impound a couple of years ago using EFI in a Monza in Classic Category. He came back in '08 with the EFI, ran in Modified Category got a red hat.
DW
-
.................. The rulebook says 'OEM' Efi is allowed in Classic category...has anyone pushed the definition of OEM in this situation? How much of the system would need to be GM standard issue? Hmmm...
Good to see you working on the car!!
The OEM EFI would have to have come stock in the car of that year not from the engine that was swapped into the car, unless I'm wrong,
Sum
-
Dan and Sum -
Thanks for the info...I guess that's good news - we won't have to add EFI to the long list
of things we need to learn before our first attempt at the salt! I'm going to do a little
research on the LS-style 4.8L, maybe we could do a blowthrough Holley on one of those.
-
You will need to go with a little larger bore to be able to use the Great place to start 6.2 heads mild porting ---375 cfm---2000 cheaper than the LS7 heads
-
Hmmm....just did a little math, and a 4.8 (293) bored .060 over ends up at 303ci.
From what I could find online, all the Gen III Chevs share almost everything, including
the 6-bolt crossbolted mains. I'm just brainstorming at this point, but it seems to me
that the Gen III would be more durable at the same boost and power levels than a traditional
small block. If the costs were similar, it would be very attractive.