Most people seem to want dirt cheap, "all motor" builds (and given Jeff Smith's ability to find fantasy stuff like a 496 BBC for less than $1,000.00, CC should be able to accomodate this)

BUT . . . .

There's a little 301-post thread on here about another kind of project a few of us would like to see SOMEDAY in CC  (not to the exclusion of all the endless nitrous and "all motor" stuff the vocal majority seems to dream about) . . .

In case CCMAG missed the gist of the thread, here's a "budget-friendly" taste . . . .

Flashback: 3/22/05

Just in case anyone in the plush confines of the CC executive editorial suite has forgotten this awesome thread . . . . On October 2, 2003, Dr511scj suggested:

"The JY (Junkyard) turbo people might disagree!"

" I'm thinking a couple of junkyard Powerstroke turbos, blowing through an old Powerstroke intercooler into a double pumper on a Super Cobra Jet-head 460 would be mad cheap and make sick power."

"Of course if Camaro Craft does it, they will probably cobble up a couple of T-3s on a "smokin'" 305 SBC or something."

HMMM? Still a GREAT idea for the NEW HOT, FAST, REAL JUICY CC . . . .

If its not TURBOCHARGED, you're not finished yet . . . .

December 30, 2004, Dr511scj offered this CREATIVE IDEA:

"How often do we need to say it . . . .

JY BIG BLOCK TURBO! (And hopefully on something other than a bellybutton SBC/BBC).

Wouldn't it be BITCHIN' to snag a Pull-a-Part 455+ cube "lump," ram in some forged "blower" pistons in a quickie rebuild, girdle the bottom end (if necessary), slip in a streetable "juice stick," and weld up a homemade turbo kit with off-the-shelf shorties, a brace of truck turbos (remember "turbos are for diesels"), some mail-order mandrel bends and a JY/eBay intercooler. For extra fun, dust off the "how to build water injection" article CC ran in about 1980 and cobble together a budget water-alcohol injector . . . .

Blow through the carb if you must to keep the no-tech, no-coin natives happy. Even use PVC for the cold side (Sitar proved these concepts nearly a decade ago)

How awesome would it be for CC's JY Turbo to dyno in the 1000-hp neighborhood with Jay Leno's mega-buck Turbo Toronado?

Come on, CC! Show 'em the real meaning of "Got Boost!"

If its not TURBOCHARGED, you're not finished yet . . . .

How about a sub 300cid V8 comparison. Nearly all of the manufactures have built these 200 odd inch v8's.

I'll put my money on the 281 DOHC Cobra . . . .

I also would like to see a JY Turbo build especially on a smog era stock engine since most had low compression ratios to start with.

However IF CC does not do the turbo deal I have an idea for the JY budget build NA engine. Require that each engine you build attains 15 inches of vacuum at 700-750 rpm idle speed. This will cure any cam advantages/disadvantages.

The small bore issue was raised and beaten to death in the 305 thread. I would still like to see what the push it till it blows power level of the small engines are for something different.

I have never seen a Pontiac 265, 287, 316, 336, or 347 built in a CC rag. Try a 301 if you want but they along with the 265 had shorter deck heights.

Do a 3.75" bore engine comparison. Or your can do a 3.75"stroke engine comparison. By comparison rebuild them in the most equal configuration and either dyno them or take them to the strip in a same or equal chassis.  Get yourselves a cheap rail chassis and make it so you can different mounts for each engine.

One thing I do agree on, the Chevy builds have ben beaten to death. I did not see a "Pour Coffee Over a 350 and Gain 50hp" article yet but I am sure that is coming. 

What would be the goal of the build? Just to rebuild it? I dont think it is going to make any power with iron heads on 87 octane unless you run a huge cam to bleed cylinder pressure and run pop-ups. Do you want power or just a mellow rebuild?

douglas

Didn't the 260 Olds make Car Craft's 10 Worst Engine's ever list?  I think the pontiac turbo 301 did too.  

Does putting big block Oldsmobile heads on a small block count as cheating...even though the heads were technically stock for something?  Cuz then the only issue is gettting the compression up to make up for the larger chambers...which you left open with allowing aftermarket pistons.  

what about a comparo of the lt1 and ls1 4th gen f bodys? you could find a clean example of each and set the chassis up the same then do all the same hp bolt ons to each car and see who wins and by how much at the dyno and strip. then internal work(strokers heads cams)and repeat.you could matbe even run em on a road course for an over all winner.  

I'd like to see a mopar 400, or maybe an FE 390.  Maybe a mopar 360 or BOP 350.  I DO NOT want to see another LS1 build.  CHP has done them to death.  A stroker windsor would be cool, so would a Chevy 372 (400 block with 350 crank) just to see the thing rev.  How about an '07 mustang GT vs '07 Camaro z28 shootout?  Give both teams 10K to build them as fast as they can.

Uhhhhh. That sounds expensive.

douglas

Want to double check those years you've got listed there?  If you can find an 07 Z28, let me know...I want it.

Other ideas are cool.  And I agree with the LS1 builds...they've been done too much.  The only thing I would like to see involving a new engine is the new hot cam kit for the LS7...but CC isn't the place to read about that.

I think I am pretty settled on a in car or in chassis engine comparison. I am not that concerned what engines are used as long as they are not Chevrolet. How about a undersquare engine group vs. a oversquare engine group? The engine masters challenge is finding out that in order to win the competion, an undersquare engine is the way to go. Perhaps that would bring in the ultimate undersquare engine after all, the 400 Olds (early).

The main thing is that it is a comparison of different brand engines. 1/4 miles times from 60' to the end should be included.

Stroker Windsors are cool and all, but even SBF's have been done to death in mags. Not necessarily Car Craft, but look at any Ford based mag, or hell, ANY multibrand shootout in any mag. Car Craft's style comes across as different, yet still 'real world'.

That reasoning is why id like to see the budget FE build. In SoCal (yeah yeah, save the "world revolves around SoCal" comments... they are out here so its the atmosphere they have to work and deal with) 390s are still out in the junkyards. Earlier ones with factory high compression (9.5 2bbl or 10.25 4bbl or so are common in late 60s big cars) are still available, so having to settle with a smogger era engine isnt really needed. Hell, if they want ill scout out there and find an early one even.

FE's are a nice foundation to build on. The deep skirt design and rods that arent useless from the factory are plusses. Heads can use work, but name any 60s production engine that couldnt use a little work. (Edelbrock Aluminums list at $1300 a pair... cheaper than a BBC even) I bet a nice Aluminum headed 390 can be built for $3500. Like it or not, thats a 'real world' budget. The only reason i have another $1000-1500 in my 428 is that a 428 costs 2 or 3 times more than a 390 as a core, and i splurged on a few other things. (Forged Pistons, Crane Rockershafts, bought everything new instead of swap meeting most of it) Hey, FE's are just cool too. I almost cried when Overhaulin put a 392 Windsor in place of the 390 in a 67 Galaxie they did.

When was the last multibrand shootout? If you consider a Chevy vs. Ford shootout multi...then I dont want to see it either. However, if it is a the kind that I mentioned then I think it will be a worthwhile shootout. And I never saw a same chassis/different engine shootout since the small block chevy vs. big block chevy shootout in a nova and I cant even remember what rag that was in.

And I agree, why, why, why, why s-can a 390 in favor of a windsor based engine? I can only justify that swap if you were comparing the two engines. In one of the other rags they tested a 427 or 428 FE against a windsor based 427, the FE won the battle on the dyno. They really need to start testing these builds on the track and not just the dyno.

Got another idea, how about a long rod/short rod 1 mile drag race and top speed test?

The idea behind my theory is to take anything you can reasonably expect to find in a boneyard and built that.  If putting BBO heads on a SBO's works then great do it. 

Why build it?  because contrary to most of the builds in CC the average rodder doesn't have $3k+ to budget for just the engine, nor does he have the extra vig needed to run 91+ octane regularly.  I ain't talking about building some garage queen, but rather an old school ride.  You know, one that actually put miles on it, not some pretty piece of work that only gets the oil changed because it's been three months since the last one.

If you think building an 87 octance fueled ride needs the old school popups and huge cam to make power, you would be wrong.  Most rides built never see the strip so quit thinking like that.  High rpm power is nice for a daily driven bike but for a streetable car it's not about high rpm power.

Steve

We probably need some suggestions as to how much CC can budget for a project (both time and money).

I suspect the thing that's killed the turbo deal for all these years is the time commitment involved.  They tell me that pumping out a monthly book is a time intensive operation, even in the days of computers.  Who has time to weld up a bunch of tubes or to "eBay" a pair of turbos?  Still, it'd be cool if y'all would just do it.

People read multibrand titles like HRM, CC and PHR to see things they can't see in the brand-specific rags.  And Freiburger's legendary antics have forever recast reader perceptions of CC as the "JY-cheap", "real-world" book at Primedia.  So the readers want to see multi-brand shootouts, budget builds and hard test data (all stuff that most readers can't swing on their own).

I like the Rambler stuff because you can't read about it anywhere else.   Camaro v. Mustang will always be popular (as it was when Cam Benty did it at PHR back in the '80s). Odd-ball stuff will keep long time readers interested (e.g. Olds, Buick, Pontiac, FE/FT Ford, 351/400M, Gen I Hemi, SBMopar, etc.).  If gas prices go back up, a few folks will want to hear about hot sixes.

Doug Marion's Econoperformer series from Super Chevy and PHR back in the late '70s and early '80s was popular because it balanced power and economy (which is real-world for many young Car Crafters).  And he tested lots of stuff.   CC could do something similar, but with higher benchmarks (although it would be hard to beat a mildly-modified four or five-year old Camaro or Mustang).  The trick would be to do it in a more economical '80s, '70s or even '60s body style (if there are any good, cheap '60s cars left . . . .)   If y'all had a bigger staff, the small-v8 shootout thing could happen in this context.

Personally, I'd like to see more nutty stuff like cheap V8s crammed in a RWD Ford Focus or ex-cop cars on the ragged edge (nitrous, blowers, turbos) or a Gen III Hemi in a Fifth Avenue (Fifth Avenue SRT-8?), or a wild luxo-performance build on a cheap, old Lincoln Mark VIII or maybe even spraying an ex-rental Taurus until something pops (We all hate FWD and hate working on FWD, but probably 90% of us have at least one FWD in the family--and killing tuner Hondas in a sleepy Taurus would be fun to read about)

Finally, it's too bad that CC can't figure out a way to make Real Street Eliminator work.  The test data from RSE is helpful in developing innovative projects.  HRM's Drag Week(tm) works because it's open to anyone who wants to show up with the entry fee. Grassroots Motorsport's "200x Challenge" works with a slighly more restrictive entry formula (pre-entry required, build budgets limited).  R&C's Ego-rama and CC RSE haven't worked because of silly voting schemes and other selection barriers.    Lots of folks talk smack, but RSE will separate the talkers from the Car Crafters who show up with a well-rounded street machine.   I'd have the cars appraised by some insurance company (advertising tie-in here) and handicap the cars in a separate bang-for-the-buck award . . . the results could also be factored to take value into account  (e.g. compare test results "heads up" and "value averaged").