FLYNAVY30

iTrader: (1)

Just purchased a bare bones, base model, '67 Camaro....327 auto with no options that Im thinking of building into just a fun, blast around the mountains, weekend toy. The idea being to keep it light, simple, and balanced.

My thoughts for the engine/drivetrain are:

Aluminum L33 5.3L. New factory bearings and piston rings on the stock rotating assembly. Send the 799 heads to TEA for their STG 2 package, and then spec a cam and spring that will allow the car to pull all the way to 7000 RPM. Id run a Holley single plane intake with their Terminator TBI for the LS motor.

To help the smaller motor rev quickly, Id go with a lightweight flywheel, a TKO600 5 speed, and 4.10s in the rear. I would think that would be a fun little package in a 3000 lb car, but Im open to suggestions.

Mercier

iTrader: (15)

Sounds real nice. I have a few thoughts initially:

While more expensive than a 5.3L, LS2 bottom ends can be had pretty reasonably. High compression, same stroke and therefore RPM potential as the 5.3, still aluminum block so same weight as the 5.3 with >10% more fun/inches. LS2 comes with 243 heads as well if you buy and engine or long block and these are virtually identical to 799s. LS2 also has a big enough bore for LS3-style heads which if you want to turn some RPMs will flow what you need, possibly without spending so much on head work. Same applies to LS3 except more expensive.

This is always a fun idea to throw out(gets a lot of funny looks) but if you are attracted to "327-ish" for the nostalgia of it and that's the motivation behind the 5.3..AND you want to turn some RPMs, a LS2 with a 4.8 crank(about a half-inch shorter stroke) would net you about the cubes you want and open up your RPMs a bit. 4.8 crank probably $200 and then another couple hundred to get the assembly balanced. That being said, I'm building a LS2 now that I intend to turn over 7 with the stock stroke crank so I don't think it's required by any means.

Why TKO and not T56 or Magnum? Magnums for RWD swap applications are a real steal IMO.

If you just want dead simple and don't want to mess with wiring, the EFI/carb intake you are considering is valid but I think you'll get better performance out of a true EFI swap. How much better? Not going to keep you up at night but I think worth considering.

My $0.02.

FLYNAVY30

iTrader: (1)

I appreciate the input...and agree with you on the LS2 topic. That being said, Ive found multiple L33s for at or slightly under 1k for the entire pull out motor. I figured I could sell off the truck intake, throttle body, harness, injectors, and a few other things and be down around 500 bucks for the aluminum long block with 799 heads.

I will admit, I do like the idea of the 327 (-ish....I realize its actually 324) for nostalgia reasons....I intend to dress this up as closely to a stock 327 as possible. Ive also looked at the LS2 block with the 4.8 crank, but at the end of the day, that seems like effort to give up horse power....although still kinda cool (I really like that Mast Motorsports 388 destroyed LS7....if you've got a spare 20K laying around).

As for the trans, I believe (although I could be wrong) that you need to cut the tunnel in a 1st Gen Camaro to get the T-56 in there....something I want to avoid as I want to keep the metal fab/paint/body work in the "nonexistent" category. That and with the engine not making much over 400 horse power at the crank, I wasn't worried about having the biggest, beefiest trans on the market.

Please excuse the dumb question, but which trans specifically is the "magnum"? Theres so many different variations floating around I can't keep them all strait.

As for the intake/EFI set up, Im currently running the exact same thing on the 6.0L 4L65E swap in my suburban and I really like it.....probably leaving a few HP or the table, but it drives really well, and 90% of the people who look under the hood still think its a carb.

If you go on you tube and look for the show Hot Rod Garage, they actually recently installed the same set up on an LS3 in a 66 Chevelle and did the self tuning thing, and then had the guys at Wyotek do a full custom dyno tune, and they were in the single digits and far as horse power difference so I think on a relatively mild motor, the self tuning set up is pretty effective.

Thanks again for the input!

FLYNAVY30

iTrader: (1)

Disregard....Google is my friend....apparently American Powertrain sells a kit for the T56 magnum that does not require any tunnel modification in the 1st gen Camaro.....6 speed it is!

Mercier

iTrader: (15)

Ok sounds like you've thought that through..budget dictates the 5.3, sleeper/carb look for the EFI. I dig it. If you like RPMs, one other thing to look into is Cam Motion's low-lash solid roller cams. Little more spend on the lifters but the cam should cost you the same. Better high-RPM stability and what's more nostalgic than a solid lifter cam? Oh, and more power.

The Magnum is the aftermarket version of the TR6060 and its variants. Basically the "new" T56 that started in or around the release of the LS3 Camaros. If you can get a TKO cheap and it will fit and handle the power, by all means. You hadn't indicated budget and the TR6060/Magnums are supposed to be better(smoother) at shifting at higher RPMs. Of course the aluminum flywheel you already have planned should help out the synchros in any transmission.

FLYNAVY30

iTrader: (1)

Ill look into the cam motion stuff...solid lifter aluminum 327 in a base model '67 sounds like a lot of fun to me.....my wife's gonna shoot me

Mercier

iTrader: (15)

I always figure she's going to shoot me anyway...so build it how I want it to make it worth taking the bullet.

FLYNAVY30

iTrader: (1)

sound strategy....in all reality, I wanted to build a '69 Corvette....but she prefers 1st gen Camaros....so she got the car she wanted (with a back seat and a trunk), I should be able to build the motor I want right?!?

MaroonMonsterLS1

I was a non believer in the low lash solid roller. People on here have attested to it so strongly that it can't be ignored. If you want to spin to 7000, this is by far the best way to go. It will keep the valvetrain exponentially more stable and allow the power to continue to pull up to that RPM rather than falling off do to valve float. I believe gmpp makes a lines of valve covers for the ls that is intended to mock old small block looks. Also, if you really want to keep the look, you could relocate the coils and run the wires like a traditional small block to really sell it.

FLYNAVY30

iTrader: (1)

Just looked into the solid roller set up....im sold. As far as the valve covers, the plan is to run a set of adapters that will allow me to bolt any SBC valve covers to the LS, and relocate the coils somewhere hidden/out of the way.

Mercier

iTrader: (15)

Sounds like a lot of fun. I am a bit opposite.. My GF wanted me to buy a Vette for the next project and I opted for the V instead. It's a lot of extra weight to be "different" but I'm committed at this point.

Give Kip a call @ Cam Motion. He really knows his stuff. I always learn something any time I talk to him. Tell him Chris sent you and he might even give you a hard time.

FLYNAVY30

iTrader: (1)

Any idea what the labor cost will be to have one of the local speed shops (VA Speed, Abacus Racing, etc) disassemble, inspect, and reassemble the factory short block with new rings and bearings?

Forcefed86

iTrader: (4)

I don't get the appeal of staying NA and blowing 5x the money on less performance. 90% of the time there is nothing wrong with the bearings/rings, I've had a TON of these "Ran well when pulled" 100-190k motors apart and have yet to see ring/bore/bearing that was not in good enough shape to run.

You could literally put in a 100% stock/untouched 5.3/4.8 long block and run a 6-12lbs of boost from a $200 turbo with some $80 valve springs and make more power. You could also run a much taller gear and keep it more street friendly.

Don't get me wrong I love the NA stuff, but the biggest bang for your buck by a mile is boost.

Just throwing out another option, good luck either way...

Mercier

iTrader: (15)

I think the problem you will run into is that a machine shop likely wouldn't do a backyard rebuild like that because of liability. They are going to do more than you or I would because they need to guarantee the work and that costs money. I guess what I am saying is you might be in for a grand or so...so just run what you got!

FLYNAVY30

iTrader: (1)

I understand what you're saying completely, and don't disagree at all. I guess in my case, and the case of this particular car, Im going with simplicity and light weight over all out numbers....possibly at the expense of all out "bang for the buck". Im going to run a 275/35/18 at all four corners, so theres no need for anything more than 400 RWHP as I won't be able to put it down regardless. As far as the gearing, with a 6 spd magnum, with a final ratio of .63, a 26" tall tire, and 4.10 gears, Id be turning about 2170 RPM at 65 mph.....hardly unstreetable as far as Im concerned.....yes it will require a lot of shifting in 1-4, but thats the point!!

Anyway, like I said, I don't disagree with anything you said, it just all depends on what kind of car you're looking for. I dig big blocks, I dig big turbos, but I also like the idea of nimble, light weight, and basic.....kind of like a late 60's or early 70's Porsche in American iron

FLYNAVY30

iTrader: (1)

Yea, I suppose thats true....I guess my concern is do you:

1. run it as is and risk something giving out and trashing all the fancy solid roller valvetrain and having to repurchase that for the rebuild

or:

2. sink som extra cash into the short block to ensure its solid from the start and only have to build this thing once?


On the 6.0 I put together for my suburban, I used a "rebuilt" LS6 oil pump....after less than 10 miles, the cylinder on the bypass spring caught a bur and stuck in the open position, bypassing all oil back to the pump....it wasn't for very long, but it was enough to chew up numerous bearings. Since that little episode, Im hesitant to assume used stuff is good without disassembling and replacing consumables like bearings, rings, etc.

Mercier

iTrader: (15)

Find a reputable machine shop and get a quote at least.. Rebuilt engines can have all kinds of problems just like what you mentioned if everything isn't done just right. To me, miles on a reasonably maintained engine is the validation that everything is right; there's value there! And get yourself a Melling anyway.

ken6881

We spin our 5.3 to 7100 every pass at the drag strip with a lil John motorsports hydrolic roller still pulling hard. Solid lifters are not needed at 7000 rpm.

Forcefed86

iTrader: (4)

I gotcha...

Are you wanting to rev to 7k+ just for the sound/feel/bragging rights? If you kept the RPM down, 500 crank is cake and won’t require anything in the way of big money valve train parts. Run a nice dual plane intake and keep the RPM down to keep cost low. Have you seen the “Big BANG” 5.3 article hotrod did on the JY SBE 5.3? Ignoring the turbo junk, their NA mild hydraulic cam/heads combo made 503hp at 6600rpm and had over 400ftlb from 4400-6600. They used a 281LR HR13 Comp cam (231/239 @ 113 .617/.624) with basic hydraulic lifters. I’m sure with the heads you mentioned above and decent exhaust, you could easily meet your power goals for a lot less money.

If you really want to rev the engine have you considered picking up a 4.8? They are usually dirt cheap. Or maybe just a 4.8 crank/rods? (I paid $140 for a 4.8 rotating assy) You could bore the alum 5.3 out to 3.9”, toss in some cheap hyper pistons ($240 last I looked) with the 4.8 crank/rods and make a rev happy destroked 331 pretty cheap. You save 80lbs going with the alum 5.3 over the iron, so the savings aren’t that huge. Could always just punch a 4.8 iron block out to 3.9” and go to town.

FWIW we would routinely buzz a turbo 4.8 to 7300ish and never had an issue on the factory valve train (with cam/springs). It didn’t’ make power up there, but we were out of gear at the strip. Engine had tons of passes before the car was sold. Untouched bottom end with 180k on it.. (2006 gen 4)

Mercier

iTrader: (15)

I don't think anyone said a hydraulic lifter won't spin to x,xxx RPM. But the solid should be more stable and make more power. Or maybe lose less power? Depends on perspective, I guess.

I *really* wish I had a practical example of this from personal experience but due to my project ADD(nothing to do with the parts) neither of my projects with LLSRs are making noise. Fingers crossed, next couple of weeks. I do have experience with solids in other platforms(mostly BBC, SBC) and I tell you the difference is there. You can hear it, feel it.

I suggest you guys read up on some of the folks having great success with this setup...hard to ignore. Maybe not worth the small amount extra to some folks but to each his own.

By small I mean:

Cam costs about the same (new).
BTR duals - these are fairly common whether hydraulic or solid and affordable - same cost
Lifters - if you're comparing to the cheapest lifter anyone would actually run, you're looking at $100 for the LS7s, Morel drop-in solid lifters are perhaps $200-$250 more.
Rockers - guys are doing this well with shimmed stock rockers so no additional expense here(well; $5 for shims). Roller rockers for this level can be had for about $500 for adjustables...some will run roller rockers anyway.

So $200-$250 more. More stability, more power, cool factor. I've spent far more for far less and I'm not the only one. Am I missing something?

Plenty of things in this hobby aren't *needed* at certain levels but necessity and benefit are two different things that aren't always directly tied, no? I really have no dog in the fight but if you're suggesting casting something aside here I think we need more justification than $250 and not absolutely necessary at X RPM.