1980 Pontiac LeMans Station Wagon
09-10-2013, 01:46 PM
#21
Got the car up in the air yesterday to start poking around... no major surprises at this time, other than having standard thread lug nuts (I think 80-81 was when they started switching over to the metric system) - time to swap to metric studs/lugs. I started sizing it up for a mini-tub/frame notch which I will probably start this week. Wagons look much easier than coupes/sedans because of the lack of trunk hinges to worry about.
Also started looking into coil-over shocks for the car so we can keep it low and still have good suspension travel/ride comfort. It looks like it is going to cost about $800-1000 for the front and $600+ for the rear. I think we'll be using AFCO when this comes to fruition with moderate spring rates and big swaybars.
Also started looking into coil-over shocks for the car so we can keep it low and still have good suspension travel/ride comfort. It looks like it is going to cost about $800-1000 for the front and $600+ for the rear. I think we'll be using AFCO when this comes to fruition with moderate spring rates and big swaybars.
09-10-2013, 03:04 PM
#22
As for the steering box, I have the high effort-fast ratio box from my Monte Carlo SS sitting on the shelf; and if I feel up to it I can always yank the F-body XH box back out of the SS for this project as it has stops for 16x8 wheels.
But it is good to know that it bolts up.
09-16-2013, 02:05 PM
#23
Suspension ordered.
The shocks are coming out of Alabama. The only place I could find the AK6565F front and the AK5030R rear shocks under the same roof was a speed shop called Etheridge Race Parts.
Amazon.com is sending me the Hellwig swaybars and MOOG springs. I went with the 5660 (600lb/in) and 80670 (180lb/in) springs. The 80670s are 7" at installed height and are meant for a Pontiac Vibe. They are pig-tailed on one end (opening ID unknown) and "flat" coiled at the other, the diameter is 5.3"; I am taking a bit of a risk here - but it should be workable if the pig-tailed end is at least 2.75" ID. The other 7" installed height spring I was looking at was 80659 (194lb/in) which is the rear spring for a late-model FWD Buick Park Avenue, unfortunately(?) it is a double pig-tailed spring and cannot be modified.
It took a massive amount of self control not to buy the 760+lb/in and 230+lb/in springs. I had to keep telling myself: Family car... Family car... Family car...
The shocks are coming out of Alabama. The only place I could find the AK6565F front and the AK5030R rear shocks under the same roof was a speed shop called Etheridge Race Parts.
Amazon.com is sending me the Hellwig swaybars and MOOG springs. I went with the 5660 (600lb/in) and 80670 (180lb/in) springs. The 80670s are 7" at installed height and are meant for a Pontiac Vibe. They are pig-tailed on one end (opening ID unknown) and "flat" coiled at the other, the diameter is 5.3"; I am taking a bit of a risk here - but it should be workable if the pig-tailed end is at least 2.75" ID. The other 7" installed height spring I was looking at was 80659 (194lb/in) which is the rear spring for a late-model FWD Buick Park Avenue, unfortunately(?) it is a double pig-tailed spring and cannot be modified.
It took a massive amount of self control not to buy the 760+lb/in and 230+lb/in springs. I had to keep telling myself: Family car... Family car... Family car...
09-17-2013, 12:43 AM
#24
Launching!
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: asheboro, nc
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sweet wagon bud, don't really see the Pontiac gbody wagons alot I think there like the unicorn of wagons lol, just one thing I can think of right off, I know u don't really plan to drag race the thing but u may want to reinforce the back side of the frame where u have notched/mini tubed, it's cheap insurance IMO
09-17-2013, 08:24 AM
#25
Sweet wagon bud, don't really see the Pontiac gbody wagons alot I think there like the unicorn of wagons lol, just one thing I can think of right off, I know u don't really plan to drag race the thing but u may want to reinforce the back side of the frame where u have notched/mini tubed, it's cheap insurance IMO
I haven't taken the time to update with progress pictures for a while, but there is a crossbrace running behind the shock towers and tied into the top of the frame rails to absorb some of the twist/load.
09-17-2013, 01:07 PM
#26
Launching!
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: asheboro, nc
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lol yea the dash, front clip an hood are the hard parts to find, but I love the dash in the Pontiacs all the round gauges are nice an makes it easy to swap them all out for some bad *** autometers
The following users liked this post:
spectre977 (12-27-2020)
12-01-2013, 05:23 PM
#31
Well I just ordered a **** tonne of parts for this thing from Car Shop Inc (motor mount plates, tools), Speedway Motors (fuel system), Summit (fuel system, prop valve, tools), UMI Performance (roto-joint rear UCAs, LCA relocation brackets, tie rod adjusters), Speedhut (Revolution series gauges 4" tach and speedo; and 2-1/16" voltmeter, oil press, water temp and fuel gauges), Eastwood (paints and seam sealer), Amazon (car audio and fuel tank sending unit from an Astro van), and SDPC (CNC LS2 heads, gaskets and LS7 roller lifters) etc.
I am hoping to have a custom cam, springs, pushrods, trunion upgrade, oil pump and timing chain ordered tomorrow.
I am hoping to have a custom cam, springs, pushrods, trunion upgrade, oil pump and timing chain ordered tomorrow.
12-02-2013, 11:44 AM
#32
Ordered the cam this morning from Speed Inc and it looks like this:
226/230 .605"/.609" 113+3
Should work very well from off idle (ish) to 6500rpm. I will likely have to run a 3000 converter with it to offset the cam and the 3.08 gears. The LXL lobes I chose from Comp are softer lobes designed for LS7 applications with a 1.8 rocker, using the LS1 1.7s softens them up even more. This made the most sense since the LS7 cam is a good swap into any LS motor, and the added advantage is the powerband is moved lower to be more usuable by advancing it 3 degrees.
"The LXL series is based off the Comp Cams LSL profiles but are optimized with lower acceleration rates and softer closing ramps for less valve train noise and better stability with the high ratio LS rocker arms. Great choice for street/strip applications and engines that see a lot of highway driving with the occasional weekend at the autocross or drag strip. For cathedral style LS heads, Comp recommends using this lobe on the exhaust and an LSL lobe on the intake when using the stock 1.7 rocker ratio. For applications using 1.8 or higher ratios or LS7 style heads, Comp recommends using this series on both the intake and exhaust lobes for applications that demand a quiet valvetrain and proven power increases. These lobe designs provide excellent torque and valvetrain durability for road race, street/strip, and endurance applications. Please consult with the SDPC Professionals to make certain you have the correct valve spring and valvetrain components to match your custom cam selection."
I chose to do the LXL/LXL vs the LSL/LXL combo to save some wear on the springs as the LSL lobes would have been a touch taller at .612" or .614"; the springs chosen are good for .625" lift.
These are the comments from a noted cam spec guru (regarding the LSA supercharged engines): "LXL is a bit slower then LSL and has softer ramp. If using Comp I like the LSL/LXL or LXL/LXL combos on these cars depending on rocker ratio and how the heads flow. Both of those lobes are easier on the valve train then some of the other designs popular in the LSx world (XER, LSK etc..) even though they have a pretty good amount of lift even with a stock rocker. The LXL lobes offer a relatively quiet valve train with proper setup (compared to many other LS lobe designs)."
Hopefully this will get us in the 8lbs/hp range once the car is all said and done.
Fun times.
226/230 .605"/.609" 113+3
Should work very well from off idle (ish) to 6500rpm. I will likely have to run a 3000 converter with it to offset the cam and the 3.08 gears. The LXL lobes I chose from Comp are softer lobes designed for LS7 applications with a 1.8 rocker, using the LS1 1.7s softens them up even more. This made the most sense since the LS7 cam is a good swap into any LS motor, and the added advantage is the powerband is moved lower to be more usuable by advancing it 3 degrees.
"The LXL series is based off the Comp Cams LSL profiles but are optimized with lower acceleration rates and softer closing ramps for less valve train noise and better stability with the high ratio LS rocker arms. Great choice for street/strip applications and engines that see a lot of highway driving with the occasional weekend at the autocross or drag strip. For cathedral style LS heads, Comp recommends using this lobe on the exhaust and an LSL lobe on the intake when using the stock 1.7 rocker ratio. For applications using 1.8 or higher ratios or LS7 style heads, Comp recommends using this series on both the intake and exhaust lobes for applications that demand a quiet valvetrain and proven power increases. These lobe designs provide excellent torque and valvetrain durability for road race, street/strip, and endurance applications. Please consult with the SDPC Professionals to make certain you have the correct valve spring and valvetrain components to match your custom cam selection."
I chose to do the LXL/LXL vs the LSL/LXL combo to save some wear on the springs as the LSL lobes would have been a touch taller at .612" or .614"; the springs chosen are good for .625" lift.
These are the comments from a noted cam spec guru (regarding the LSA supercharged engines): "LXL is a bit slower then LSL and has softer ramp. If using Comp I like the LSL/LXL or LXL/LXL combos on these cars depending on rocker ratio and how the heads flow. Both of those lobes are easier on the valve train then some of the other designs popular in the LSx world (XER, LSK etc..) even though they have a pretty good amount of lift even with a stock rocker. The LXL lobes offer a relatively quiet valve train with proper setup (compared to many other LS lobe designs)."
Hopefully this will get us in the 8lbs/hp range once the car is all said and done.
Fun times.
12-05-2013, 07:59 PM
#33
Spent some time running some quick simulations on the motor and potential combinations of parts. Each of these is running stock exhaust manifolds and mufflers... but, it gives an idea of where and how it should make power. Headers look like they will really wake this thing up (not shown).
12-07-2013, 09:41 AM
#34
So while I was running simulations on the probable engine combos I could go with, it kept nagging at me as to how much potential was left on the table with the addition of headers to the mix. The problem was that if I go with headers I would lose the ability to run cats, as I was planning on running stock F-body manifolds and cat-deletes (with the stock cats waiting on the shelf for emissions "issues"). The other issue was noise as I would see a serious increase in cabin noise (NHV) with headers. Also, because there isn't a good stainless G-body swap header on the market, I wasn't inclined to buy a mild steel header (coated or otherwise) regardless of price, or do the same with a small tube eBay F-body header or Pacesetter. Then I saw that Speed Engineering released a set of 1-3/4" primary headers (and look like a knock-off of the Pacesetters) for cheap and got to thinking...
After a lot of research I came to the conclusion that these headers (which I can afford to chop up to suit my application) and some 3" cats should flow/sound similarly to my previous plan of manifolds and delete pipes (not overly loud through a muffler). However, because the kid in me hasn't left the building yet, I figured I should continue with my plan to run electric cutouts so I ordered some stainless ones off eBay.
Catco 6907 flow numbers (365cfm @ 28" H2O): http://forums.corvetteforum.com/1550686662-post3.html
Straight pipe flow numbers (doesn't list test pressure): http://www.exhaustvideos.com/faq/how...diameter/#easy
And a really long paper I read on the way a close-coupled catalytic (ie. a cat mounted on a manifold or header collector) works (hint: having a good cold side (post-cat) is mandatory to reduce any restrictions on flow): http://www.mech.kuleuven.be/en/doctorates/persoons.pdf
***Bonus reading: http://www.mie.uth.gr/labs/ltte/grk/pubs/exhsysht.pdf
I already have some long standing experience running a headered/3" catted car and have done as much as 116mph through generic ceramic core catalysts like the Catcos using a small-shot nitrous Chevy small block. So I know that power can be made with them in place, granted that was a full free-flowing 3" dual exhaust system and not the dual 2.25" crush-bent Flowmaster equipped system I will be attaching this to in the wagon; but, that is what the cut-outs are going to compensate for.
There is a general rule of thumb that 18" header extensions are best for most applications when using open exhaust, so these may have to be integrated into the cut-outs; as well they help prevent having the 02s wash out when the cut-outs are open (very bad for closed loop functionality). An example of the theory: http://www.headersbyed.com/hc_cheapperfgains.htm
Using a "small tube header, open exhaust" the power increase is quite notable over previous iterations (see attached); but, in no way do I expect to see 500hp at the crank - this is just a behavioural indicator. A small single plane intake does some wonderful things too.
After a lot of research I came to the conclusion that these headers (which I can afford to chop up to suit my application) and some 3" cats should flow/sound similarly to my previous plan of manifolds and delete pipes (not overly loud through a muffler). However, because the kid in me hasn't left the building yet, I figured I should continue with my plan to run electric cutouts so I ordered some stainless ones off eBay.
Catco 6907 flow numbers (365cfm @ 28" H2O): http://forums.corvetteforum.com/1550686662-post3.html
Straight pipe flow numbers (doesn't list test pressure): http://www.exhaustvideos.com/faq/how...diameter/#easy
And a really long paper I read on the way a close-coupled catalytic (ie. a cat mounted on a manifold or header collector) works (hint: having a good cold side (post-cat) is mandatory to reduce any restrictions on flow): http://www.mech.kuleuven.be/en/doctorates/persoons.pdf
***Bonus reading: http://www.mie.uth.gr/labs/ltte/grk/pubs/exhsysht.pdf
I already have some long standing experience running a headered/3" catted car and have done as much as 116mph through generic ceramic core catalysts like the Catcos using a small-shot nitrous Chevy small block. So I know that power can be made with them in place, granted that was a full free-flowing 3" dual exhaust system and not the dual 2.25" crush-bent Flowmaster equipped system I will be attaching this to in the wagon; but, that is what the cut-outs are going to compensate for.
There is a general rule of thumb that 18" header extensions are best for most applications when using open exhaust, so these may have to be integrated into the cut-outs; as well they help prevent having the 02s wash out when the cut-outs are open (very bad for closed loop functionality). An example of the theory: http://www.headersbyed.com/hc_cheapperfgains.htm
Using a "small tube header, open exhaust" the power increase is quite notable over previous iterations (see attached); but, in no way do I expect to see 500hp at the crank - this is just a behavioural indicator. A small single plane intake does some wonderful things too.
Last edited by mOtOrHeAd MiKe; 12-07-2013 at 09:49 AM.
12-30-2013, 01:55 PM
#35
Updates!
Finally got the rear wheel wells finished off - shown in etching primer (seam sealer and top coat is done (no pics), waiting on undercoating). We also got some (actually a lot) parts in the mail and waiting for more to arrive (soon?).
Finally got the rear wheel wells finished off - shown in etching primer (seam sealer and top coat is done (no pics), waiting on undercoating). We also got some (actually a lot) parts in the mail and waiting for more to arrive (soon?).
12-30-2013, 03:26 PM
#39
And in case you couldn't read the cam card:
Serial # D 2961-13 Spec Card# 24966813
Part # 54-000-11 CAMSHAFT, LS1 CHEVY LS1/GEN III '97-UP
Core C54-11HH CAMSHAFT BLANK, LS1 1997 UP 5.7 CORVETTE
Grind # LS1 13158 /13159 HR113.0
DURATION @ .050 INTAKE 227 ROCKER ARM RATIO
VALVE ADJ INTAKE .000 DURATION @ .050 EXHAUST 230 INTAKE 1.70
VALVE ADJ EXHAUST .000 LOBE LIFT INTAKE .3560 EXHAUST 1.70
VALVE LIFT INTAKE .605 LOBE LIFT EXHAUST .3580
VALVE LIFT EXHAUST .608 LOBE SEPARATION 113.0
DURATION .006 INTAKE C/L 110.0
TAPPET LIFT INTAKE 278 CAM ADVANCE 3
TAPPET LIFT EXHAUST 282 HYDRAULIC Y
VALVE TIMING .050 OVERHEAD CAM N
VALVE OPEN INTAKE 3 JOURNAL DIAMETER STD 2.165
VALVE OPEN EXHAUST 51 RECOMMENDED VALVE SPRINGS
VALVE CLOSED INTAKE 43 DEPARTMENT P
VALVE CLOSED EXHAUST 1- SPC INSTR FOR CUSTOMER
SERIAL # ONLY ON CAM
And some interesting cam basics: http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles...r/viewall.html
Serial # D 2961-13 Spec Card# 24966813
Part # 54-000-11 CAMSHAFT, LS1 CHEVY LS1/GEN III '97-UP
Core C54-11HH CAMSHAFT BLANK, LS1 1997 UP 5.7 CORVETTE
Grind # LS1 13158 /13159 HR113.0
DURATION @ .050 INTAKE 227 ROCKER ARM RATIO
VALVE ADJ INTAKE .000 DURATION @ .050 EXHAUST 230 INTAKE 1.70
VALVE ADJ EXHAUST .000 LOBE LIFT INTAKE .3560 EXHAUST 1.70
VALVE LIFT INTAKE .605 LOBE LIFT EXHAUST .3580
VALVE LIFT EXHAUST .608 LOBE SEPARATION 113.0
DURATION .006 INTAKE C/L 110.0
TAPPET LIFT INTAKE 278 CAM ADVANCE 3
TAPPET LIFT EXHAUST 282 HYDRAULIC Y
VALVE TIMING .050 OVERHEAD CAM N
VALVE OPEN INTAKE 3 JOURNAL DIAMETER STD 2.165
VALVE OPEN EXHAUST 51 RECOMMENDED VALVE SPRINGS
VALVE CLOSED INTAKE 43 DEPARTMENT P
VALVE CLOSED EXHAUST 1- SPC INSTR FOR CUSTOMER
SERIAL # ONLY ON CAM
And some interesting cam basics: http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles...r/viewall.html
01-02-2014, 12:07 PM
#40
So I managed to get some work done over the last few days. Dropped out the old 7.5", removed the remainder of the rear suspension and pulled the gas tank. The gas tank was in surprisingly good shape inside and out, it just needed a good cleaning and some paint on the top to deal with some minor surface rust (the bottom is coated in rubberized undercoating).
The hanger is from a 1994 Astro with MFI/TBI. It fits very nicely into the wagon's tank which is sort of baffled, it is really just too deep and narrow to matter in my opinion. As such I didn't make a fuel bucket... but, was considering it.
I slightly modified the hanger to ensure good flow from the Walbro 340 pump and an easy return from the Corvette regulator/filter unit. The hanger was modified by chopping off the feed nipple to insure that it was a full 3/8" ID from the pump outlet to the regulator/filter. The return line was opened up above the max fuel line to allow unrestricted fuel drain back. I have had issues in the past where this becomes a problem in higher performance applications as the low pressure return has to overcome the pressure of a full tank of gas (the original return was/is at the base of the pump). There are also two tabs that have to be cut off the top of the sender to allow it to orient in the right direction.
The sender Ohm'd out at ~92 ohms full, and ~2 ohms empty; which I believe is well within spec.
The lines coming off the sender are the factory fuel lines from a 1991 TPI F-body and are 3/8" and 5/16" ID respectively.. . perfect for this application... and also why I bought the Astro sender shown. The fittings on the end are these: http://www.summitracing.com/parts/sum-220009b/overview/ and will allow me to run -6 AN feed return lines to the filter/regulator (http://www.speedwaymotors.com/LS1-Fu...Kit,41791.html).
Oh and there is an epic amount of wiring harness attached to the sender to make connecting this to the ECM a breeze.
The hanger is from a 1994 Astro with MFI/TBI. It fits very nicely into the wagon's tank which is sort of baffled, it is really just too deep and narrow to matter in my opinion. As such I didn't make a fuel bucket... but, was considering it.
I slightly modified the hanger to ensure good flow from the Walbro 340 pump and an easy return from the Corvette regulator/filter unit. The hanger was modified by chopping off the feed nipple to insure that it was a full 3/8" ID from the pump outlet to the regulator/filter. The return line was opened up above the max fuel line to allow unrestricted fuel drain back. I have had issues in the past where this becomes a problem in higher performance applications as the low pressure return has to overcome the pressure of a full tank of gas (the original return was/is at the base of the pump). There are also two tabs that have to be cut off the top of the sender to allow it to orient in the right direction.
The sender Ohm'd out at ~92 ohms full, and ~2 ohms empty; which I believe is well within spec.
The lines coming off the sender are the factory fuel lines from a 1991 TPI F-body and are 3/8" and 5/16" ID respectively.. . perfect for this application... and also why I bought the Astro sender shown. The fittings on the end are these: http://www.summitracing.com/parts/sum-220009b/overview/ and will allow me to run -6 AN feed return lines to the filter/regulator (http://www.speedwaymotors.com/LS1-Fu...Kit,41791.html).
Oh and there is an epic amount of wiring harness attached to the sender to make connecting this to the ECM a breeze.