70's Pontiac Engine shoe-horned into a 98' Trans Am...
07-07-2006, 08:22 PM
#22
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Farmington Hills, MI
Posts: 1,098
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by thirteen20z28
I had a '72 BBC in my '84 Z28, daily driver, when I lived in MI (Berrien County). All you need is a title and insurance for registration. No inspection, smog check, nothing. And I imagine there are several other states/counties still like this.
07-07-2006, 08:50 PM
#23
TECH Resident
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma
Posts: 796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by mramay
Another problem that will occur with this car is that as a '98, it has to have OBD II for emissions and all the emissions crap installed. Does anyone know of a state that will allow an older engine in a newer chassis? Every one I've heard about allows a newer engine in there as long as it has the appropriate emissions "stuff" installed, but has specific regulations against putting in an older engine. I'd love to take the '87 engine out of my car and install a '67 just to be able to do anything to it.
Bet the new owner that buys it can't get it registered.
Bet the new owner that buys it can't get it registered.
07-08-2006, 02:07 AM
#24
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (22)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: 18013
Posts: 713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Project GatTagO
There was never such a thing as a Ram Air IV Firebird or Trans Am. The RA IV engines were in GTOs. Perhaps you are talking about the Super Duty 455 engines that were in Firebirds and Trans Ams in 73 and 74.
Andrew
Andrew
I dont know my pontiac history
07-08-2006, 06:46 AM
#26
11 Second Club
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Upper Marlboro, MD
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally, I love that car. Somethin about the wheels/paint scheme/shaker combo that just works for me. Plus the fact that it has a true Poncho motor makes me skeet.
07-09-2006, 12:08 AM
#28
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (22)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: 18013
Posts: 713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by hondo
What a wasted effort.....I guarantee that car is slower than a stock LS1 and gets 10 mpg.
I have a 1968 bonneville with a pontiac 400. its a great car to drive (before it rusted.) I would get 15 mpg on the highway and 12 city. thats pulling 4500+ lbs of car around.
get your facts straight. the LS1 is an outstanding engine but that does not mean other engines can not be.
07-09-2006, 01:23 AM
#29
Originally Posted by Brains
Bet its slower than a stock LS1 with a converter and gears. 
MRAMAY, in respone to the OBDII issue. If you leave the pcm intact and delete all the codes, it'll show up as a pass at an OBDII test station
If the state requires a visual safety inspection you might be fubar unless you know people
07-09-2006, 09:40 PM
#30
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: upstate ny
Posts: 1,338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by hondo
What a wasted effort.....I guarantee that car is slower than a stock LS1 and gets 10 mpg.
07-09-2006, 09:49 PM
#31
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Fort Washington Pa
Posts: 1,854
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by nasty99WS6
want to hear a secret? There were fast cars BEFORE the ls1. shhhhhhhh, dont tell anyone.
Oh I know but even from other SBCs built ups i've seen I myself have not seen a really hot 400, not to say they arn't out there and I bet some people have ones that could go faster then I'd ever dream but I just havn't seen any build ups on them.
I'm all for custom fab work and I like all cool built ups, in this case I'd like to hear why he chose this not rudly but I'd like to know.
07-09-2006, 10:18 PM
#32
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Old Bridge "Raceway Park" N.J.
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ace$nyper
I myself have not seen a really hot 400, not to say they arn't out there and I bet some people have ones that could go faster then I'd ever dream but I just havn't seen any build ups on them.
I've seen naturally aspirated 400 Pontiac engine's propel two ton Catalina's to eleven second passes, without even breaking a sweat. Did I also mention without slicks? Without slicks.
07-09-2006, 10:32 PM
#33
Launching!
Here's a popular second gen site. Scott has really done a nice job on the car.
http://www.pontiacs.org/modules.php?name=70bird
455 bored .060 over (now 468cid) 12.34 @ 108.26 1.71
http://www.pontiacs.org/modules.php?name=70bird
455 bored .060 over (now 468cid) 12.34 @ 108.26 1.71
07-09-2006, 10:56 PM
#34
TECH Resident
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: in the Trans Am
Posts: 833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OOh I think I struck a nerve here...
My uncle flies a spaceship...
12mpg is a couple wot runs from from 10mpg.
The LS1 is a pretty decent engine with good heads, there's a few things about LS1's that suck (lets talk oiling...)
According to the ad it has #16 heads and a ram air IV cam, 800 q-jet, maybe headers, blah blah, just scraps from the PAW catalog. If we ASSume it makes anywhere near the RA IV's 370hp at the crank, through a through a turbo 400@15% driveline loss= ~315 whp. **** thats pretty close to an M6 LS1 if you like to dyno race. Plus the added weight of the iron block and heads, which you know what they weigh. Drivers race.
If he says it runs 12's maybe it will but it probably won't. And show me where I said old Pontiac engines suck?? Old Pontiac engines just belong in old Pontiacs.
Originally Posted by zigroid
my uncle had a heavy *** 4200 lb grand prix with a mild 400 that ran 14 flats.
I have a 1968 bonneville with a pontiac 400. its a great car to drive (before it rusted.) I would get 15 mpg on the highway and 12 city. thats pulling 4500+ lbs of car around.
get your facts straight. the LS1 is an outstanding engine but that does not mean other engines can not be.
According to the ad it has #16 heads and a ram air IV cam, 800 q-jet, maybe headers, blah blah, just scraps from the PAW catalog. If we ASSume it makes anywhere near the RA IV's 370hp at the crank, through a through a turbo 400@15% driveline loss= ~315 whp. **** thats pretty close to an M6 LS1 if you like to dyno race. Plus the added weight of the iron block and heads, which you know what they weigh. Drivers race.
If he says it runs 12's maybe it will but it probably won't. And show me where I said old Pontiac engines suck?? Old Pontiac engines just belong in old Pontiacs.
07-09-2006, 11:11 PM
#36
TECH Resident
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: in the Trans Am
Posts: 833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That 70 is really nice, and exactly what i'm talking about, old car, old technology.I would roll that in a second, but it illustrates my point, a 468 cube motor and it only traps 108 mph?? bolt on ls1's do that.
07-10-2006, 12:25 AM
#37
Launching!
Originally Posted by hondo
but it illustrates my point, a 468 cube motor and it only traps 108 mph?? bolt on ls1's do that.
If he says it runs 12's maybe it will but it probably won't.
07-10-2006, 02:29 AM
#38
TECH Resident
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: in the Trans Am
Posts: 833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TransAm12sec
There's more to it then horsepower. The LS1 runs 13.3@108, while Scott's car runs a full second faster at the same mph
Maybe I put my foot in my mouth (a little) when I said It could get taken out by a stock LS1, but cubic inch for inch as both cars sit I don't think the performance difference is that great, maybe Brains' guess is a little closer than mine. Driveability and style wise, I guess that is just (my)opinion.
07-10-2006, 05:17 AM
#39
TECH Regular
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by hondo
Oh, I understand...a 468 has more, LOTS more torque than an LS1, which obviously means it can accelerate the car faster(= quicker ET)It better, because it has over 100 more CI than an LS1... comparing the milder 400 to an LS1 is a much closer comparison.
Maybe I put my foot in my mouth (a little) when I said It could get taken out by a stock LS1, but cubic inch for inch as both cars sit I don't think the performance difference is that great, maybe Brains' guess is a little closer than mine. Driveability and style wise, I guess that is just (my)opinion.
Maybe I put my foot in my mouth (a little) when I said It could get taken out by a stock LS1, but cubic inch for inch as both cars sit I don't think the performance difference is that great, maybe Brains' guess is a little closer than mine. Driveability and style wise, I guess that is just (my)opinion.
The 400 will also brutalize the LS1 in torque. As far as peak horsepower, it comes down to the heads - and short of the roundports (RA2, RA4, 455 H.O., 455 SD) the old Pontiac heads don't flow with the LS1's; About 20-25 CFM short in stock form, and cubes don't make power, airflow does. That said, with a well tuned and though out combo, you can make 400HP out of a 400 without touching the heads. Lets also not forget most of the cars the old Pontiac wills be running in are VASTLY heavier and aerodynamically challenged compared to a 4th gen Bird which definetly handicaps them with trap speeds.
That old 400 can run hard, and they routinely do. Theres quite a few Pontiac/3rd gen swaps out there and they run considerably harder than they do in a heavy, aerodynamic brick of an older car. I know, my mom used one for a daily driver for years. I've been around Pontiacs my entire life and just yanked my old 400 for an LS1, I do not underestimate them.
07-10-2006, 07:26 AM
#40
interesting swap, im just wondering what he put the ls1 into once he pulled it, this car is probably whats left after he took the 400 out of his old firebird and installed the ls1, im guessing this was a parts car that he reassembled. if it puts up the numbers its worth the time spent doing it, it will definately raise some eyebrows at any car show.