SBC parts combo

[62convert]

.025 PLUS .017 Equals .042 quench it wont be that b ad as is.The 305 vortec head will wake it up.Go back one size to an XE 262 ,use an Edelbrock EPS or equilevent intake and an Edelbrock 500 AVS2,small tube headers.That 3.75 combo will require expensive custom pistons,not worth it imo.The package that I mentioned will punch well above it's weight,be inexensive to build and meet your wife's expectations.Run a 3.55 gear on it.

Thank you Don! Appreciate the advice, especially on the cam selection.

 

[Don Jacks]

That piston will work in the 305 Vortec no problem.It might have a problem with the 350 Vortec.As to the "notch" in the 350 head,it can be removed without issue.The 305 Vortec doesn't have one The reason for the 262XE as opposed to the 268 is that the 268 is a little"Doggy"at low speeds in a 350,I wouldn't want it in a small bore engined car.

 

[dakota tom]

You've all ready have the pistons but some 307 blocks will take a 4 inch bore.

Edit. Did some looking and its after 70 when 307 and 350 shared coreing. This 69 probably wouldnt take a big bore.

 

[1958 delivery]

Hi all,
Im planning on redoing the engine in my 69 Camaro and would like an opinion from you gents on the combo.

First, it’s a 307-yes I know I could do much better with a 350, but the wife just HAS to have the original engine in the car. I have a 396 sitting here that I’d rather do, lol.

Anyhow, it’s bored .040 to 313 c.i. with a stock stroke. Have 2cc domed RaceTec pistons sitting .025 in the hole, .017 steel shim gaskets, planning on running small valve vortec heads with a dual plane manifold and edelbrock 500 cfm carb. Cam choice is the Comp Cams xe268h with 1.52 roller rockers. Transmission will be a th350, and I’m thinking 3.23-3.55 for the rear (2.56 currently). I have no illusion that this motor will build a ton of power, just trying to get the most out of it. Intended use is cruising with occasional highway use @ 80 mph. Anticipate 91 octane no ethanol fuel.

Good combo or is this just gonna be a big ol turd?

Rob

I didn't know a 69 Camaro came with a 2.56 rear. You need a Doug Nash 4 speed

 

[Don Jacks]

I once had aa 2.80 posi from one of those early 8.2's that came in those cars and that's the tallest that I've seen.I have seen 2.41's in the later 8.5's on more than one occassion frrom back in the old "Grams per Mile" days,the tallest being 2.29's in a 3.8l[229 in.] Chevy Monte Carlo with a 250-c trans.

 

[62convert]

I didn't know a 69 Camaro came with a 2.56 rear. You need a Doug Nash 4 speed

Yep it shows as 2.56 on the Protecto-Plate. I didn’t believe it either, but it was pretty good on gas

 

[1958 delivery]

Just going from the 2.56 to a 3.36 will perk that car up.

 

[62convert]

Thinking of using a 2000 stall converter. Whatcha think?

 

[62convert]

I once had aa 2.80 posi from one of those early 8.2's that came in those cars and that's the tallest that I've seen.I have seen 2.41's in the later 8.5's on more than one occassion frrom back in the old "Grams per Mile" days,the tallest being 2.29's in a 3.8l[229 in.] Chevy Monte Carlo with a 250-c trans.

Wow, 2.21 behind a 3.8? And I thought the 2.56 was tall. What’s that, 0-60 in 45 seconds?

The 2.56 was the tallest you could get in a 69 Camaro.

 

[Don Jacks]

Wow, 2.21 behind a 3.8? And I thought the 2.56 was tall. What’s that, 0-60 in 45 seconds?

The 2.56 was the tallest you could get in a 69 Camaro.

3 Days! Yes,2,000-2200 wouldn't hurt.

 

[Skip FIx]

My 78 Trans Am 180 HP 400 TH 350 came with 2.56 gears. I could run the most of the Texas World Speedway Road race course in 2nd! Long straight using the oval in 3rd the little motor could only pull 4000-but that was about 130ish. 1/4 mile barely in 3rd at the lights.

 

[Don Jacks]

I ran 3.08's for a long time.At the 1/8th mile tracks,put the trans selector in "2nd",on the quater mile,just use drive.Very consistant at either track,wouldn't hit the 6000 chip in the 1/8 most days,4300 in the eyes at the quarter mile mark.