Projekt Lazarus - Numbers Posted!!
So, Chevelle offered to go through the bottom end for me, as I lack a few of the tools needed to do it properly, and I REALLY appreciate it sir!!!!
Got him the motor this weekend. Cool dude for sure. Needles everywhere, which I knew would be the case. Also he's saying the cam will likely have to be cut to come out, which I also pretty much knew. No way the bearings aren't trash at this point, but at least it'll be right. Gotta take care of a few other things on the car while it's torn down this far, but it'll be a much better car when done.
Got him the motor this weekend. Cool dude for sure. Needles everywhere, which I knew would be the case. Also he's saying the cam will likely have to be cut to come out, which I also pretty much knew. No way the bearings aren't trash at this point, but at least it'll be right. Gotta take care of a few other things on the car while it's torn down this far, but it'll be a much better car when done.
Very nice of Chevelle!
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 10,451
Likes: 1,872
From: My own internal universe
Originally Posted by Darth_V8r
Indeed it is!!!!
I have a tubular K already. It still won't drop unless I drop the cradle. The pan hits on one of the steering mounts. Frustrating. for sure.
I have a tubular K already. It still won't drop unless I drop the cradle. The pan hits on one of the steering mounts. Frustrating. for sure.
When it comes to the 4th Gen and those back cylinders, verifying the pushrod is siting on the can be somewhat difficult and even with the aid of a mirror and flashlight its a PITA!
I'm thinking a borescope could prove useful here.
I'm thinking a borescope could prove useful here.
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 10,451
Likes: 1,872
From: My own internal universe
In a word, effed. Will have an update soon. For now, I need to drink heavily.
Attachment 708829
Attachment 708829
In a word, effed. Will have an update soon. For now, I need to drink heavily.
Attachment 708829
Attachment 708829
Get some BJ's instead.
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 10,451
Likes: 1,872
From: My own internal universe
The final nail in the coffin -- Fatigue cracks were found on the crank. After going back and forth with Chevelle and a few others, I do not think all the damage and carnage we are seeing was done by this one lifter spinning. Certainly cylinders 4 and 6 being the worse is from the lifter, but you can tell fresh scratches from old scratches, and that crank was a ticking time-bomb. The spun lifter probably saved my life. After seeing what I have seen from inside this engine, I look back and remember how ticked I was it only made 577, and frankly I'm now amazed it made 577. I'm not going to go into it much more after this, but by all rights, this thing should never have made more than 540. Not all the stuff I'm finding is new. Not by a long shot. So, I'm going to politely thank everyone in advance for not posting up a bunch of questions about the old engine. I'm really ticked off about the whole thing. There's some stuff going on that I'm keeping private. I really do not want to focus on what's under the bridge at this point, and instead would rather just be excited about building a new motor.
I really owe Tony a huge public apology. It was going to be a very scientific project. Heads/cam/intake package swapped out for his package, but a bigger cam, and let's see the difference at the dyno and the track. That plan has completely blown up, and it's not his fault at all. We lose the baseline comparison at this point, no matter what happens, since it's going to be a different bottom end.
So, moving on, I've decided we are going to bring this one back from the dead, like Lazarus! Here's the plan:
1. I have to sleeve the motor. The scratches are too deep to simply hone, ring, and reassemble, and would need to go to 4.150 just to clean up the bores. Given that I have to sleeve, I'm going to go to 4.185 bore for a 440. It costs me nothing to go to max bore above or beyond the cost to put it back to 428. Instead of a pontiac displacement, it's a dodge I guess
2. The old crank was a LS7 factory crank with the nose cut off. I might try to find the same thing so the weights are comparable. It depends on what I can find, etc. I will be able to preserve the titanium connecting rods from the original build - only thing not damaged.
3. Weld repair the head where it got cracked, get back to Tony for massaging, and be ready to rock and roll.
4. Replacement cam and lifter pair from Cam Motion. Cam spec will be the same.
5. Do the top end assembly OUTSIDE the car, lol. it's far easier to install the engine into the car without the heads, but I am not keen on trying to set valve lash sideways AGAIN. With 360-degree access on the stand, I can set it up in far less time and less risk.
I don't think the extra 12 CI will actually make much difference on the power. The heads, cam, intake, and exhaust will still flow what they will flow. What I think will happen is the HP number will match what the 428 would have done, but at a lower RPM. Spit-balling here, but maybe it peaks at 6500 vs 6800, but HP number is the same. But I also think the extra displacement will help tame what is a very rowdy cam (idling at 85-KPa! (but some of that could have been overcoming a dead hole)), bring in the torque a little bit sooner, make about 15-20 lbs more peak torque, and still rev nicely by preserving the 4" stroke. I did toss around the idea of going bigger - to 454/5 or even 468 - but really, I set this thing up for RPM and for this reason would really rather keep the 4" stroke so I can rev it hard.
Block is en route - or will be shortly. Will continue to keep the thread going.
I really owe Tony a huge public apology. It was going to be a very scientific project. Heads/cam/intake package swapped out for his package, but a bigger cam, and let's see the difference at the dyno and the track. That plan has completely blown up, and it's not his fault at all. We lose the baseline comparison at this point, no matter what happens, since it's going to be a different bottom end.
So, moving on, I've decided we are going to bring this one back from the dead, like Lazarus! Here's the plan:
1. I have to sleeve the motor. The scratches are too deep to simply hone, ring, and reassemble, and would need to go to 4.150 just to clean up the bores. Given that I have to sleeve, I'm going to go to 4.185 bore for a 440. It costs me nothing to go to max bore above or beyond the cost to put it back to 428. Instead of a pontiac displacement, it's a dodge I guess

2. The old crank was a LS7 factory crank with the nose cut off. I might try to find the same thing so the weights are comparable. It depends on what I can find, etc. I will be able to preserve the titanium connecting rods from the original build - only thing not damaged.
3. Weld repair the head where it got cracked, get back to Tony for massaging, and be ready to rock and roll.
4. Replacement cam and lifter pair from Cam Motion. Cam spec will be the same.
5. Do the top end assembly OUTSIDE the car, lol. it's far easier to install the engine into the car without the heads, but I am not keen on trying to set valve lash sideways AGAIN. With 360-degree access on the stand, I can set it up in far less time and less risk.
I don't think the extra 12 CI will actually make much difference on the power. The heads, cam, intake, and exhaust will still flow what they will flow. What I think will happen is the HP number will match what the 428 would have done, but at a lower RPM. Spit-balling here, but maybe it peaks at 6500 vs 6800, but HP number is the same. But I also think the extra displacement will help tame what is a very rowdy cam (idling at 85-KPa! (but some of that could have been overcoming a dead hole)), bring in the torque a little bit sooner, make about 15-20 lbs more peak torque, and still rev nicely by preserving the 4" stroke. I did toss around the idea of going bigger - to 454/5 or even 468 - but really, I set this thing up for RPM and for this reason would really rather keep the 4" stroke so I can rev it hard.
Block is en route - or will be shortly. Will continue to keep the thread going.
The final nail in the coffin -- Fatigue cracks were found on the crank. After going back and forth with Chevelle and a few others, I do not think all the damage and carnage we are seeing was done by this one lifter spinning. Certainly cylinders 4 and 6 being the worse is from the lifter, but you can tell fresh scratches from old scratches, and that crank was a ticking time-bomb. The spun lifter probably saved my life. After seeing what I have seen from inside this engine, I look back and remember how ticked I was it only made 577, and frankly I'm now amazed it made 577. I'm not going to go into it much more after this, but by all rights, this thing should never have made more than 540. Not all the stuff I'm finding is new. Not by a long shot. So, I'm going to politely thank everyone in advance for not posting up a bunch of questions about the old engine. I'm really ticked off about the whole thing. There's some stuff going on that I'm keeping private. I really do not want to focus on what's under the bridge at this point, and instead would rather just be excited about building a new motor.
I really owe Tony a huge public apology. It was going to be a very scientific project. Heads/cam/intake package swapped out for his package, but a bigger cam, and let's see the difference at the dyno and the track. That plan has completely blown up, and it's not his fault at all. We lose the baseline comparison at this point, no matter what happens, since it's going to be a different bottom end.
So, moving on, I've decided we are going to bring this one back from the dead, like Lazarus! Here's the plan:
1. I have to sleeve the motor. The scratches are too deep to simply hone, ring, and reassemble, and would need to go to 4.150 just to clean up the bores. Given that I have to sleeve, I'm going to go to 4.185 bore for a 440. It costs me nothing to go to max bore above or beyond the cost to put it back to 428. Instead of a pontiac displacement, it's a dodge I guess
2. The old crank was a LS7 factory crank with the nose cut off. I might try to find the same thing so the weights are comparable. It depends on what I can find, etc. I will be able to preserve the titanium connecting rods from the original build - only thing not damaged.
3. Weld repair the head where it got cracked, get back to Tony for massaging, and be ready to rock and roll.
4. Replacement cam and lifter pair from Cam Motion. Cam spec will be the same.
5. Do the top end assembly OUTSIDE the car, lol. it's far easier to install the engine into the car without the heads, but I am not keen on trying to set valve lash sideways AGAIN. With 360-degree access on the stand, I can set it up in far less time and less risk.
I don't think the extra 12 CI will actually make much difference on the power. The heads, cam, intake, and exhaust will still flow what they will flow. What I think will happen is the HP number will match what the 428 would have done, but at a lower RPM. Spit-balling here, but maybe it peaks at 6500 vs 6800, but HP number is the same. But I also think the extra displacement will help tame what is a very rowdy cam (idling at 85-KPa! (but some of that could have been overcoming a dead hole)), bring in the torque a little bit sooner, make about 15-20 lbs more peak torque, and still rev nicely by preserving the 4" stroke. I did toss around the idea of going bigger - to 454/5 or even 468 - but really, I set this thing up for RPM and for this reason would really rather keep the 4" stroke so I can rev it hard.
Block is en route - or will be shortly. Will continue to keep the thread going.
I really owe Tony a huge public apology. It was going to be a very scientific project. Heads/cam/intake package swapped out for his package, but a bigger cam, and let's see the difference at the dyno and the track. That plan has completely blown up, and it's not his fault at all. We lose the baseline comparison at this point, no matter what happens, since it's going to be a different bottom end.
So, moving on, I've decided we are going to bring this one back from the dead, like Lazarus! Here's the plan:
1. I have to sleeve the motor. The scratches are too deep to simply hone, ring, and reassemble, and would need to go to 4.150 just to clean up the bores. Given that I have to sleeve, I'm going to go to 4.185 bore for a 440. It costs me nothing to go to max bore above or beyond the cost to put it back to 428. Instead of a pontiac displacement, it's a dodge I guess

2. The old crank was a LS7 factory crank with the nose cut off. I might try to find the same thing so the weights are comparable. It depends on what I can find, etc. I will be able to preserve the titanium connecting rods from the original build - only thing not damaged.
3. Weld repair the head where it got cracked, get back to Tony for massaging, and be ready to rock and roll.
4. Replacement cam and lifter pair from Cam Motion. Cam spec will be the same.
5. Do the top end assembly OUTSIDE the car, lol. it's far easier to install the engine into the car without the heads, but I am not keen on trying to set valve lash sideways AGAIN. With 360-degree access on the stand, I can set it up in far less time and less risk.
I don't think the extra 12 CI will actually make much difference on the power. The heads, cam, intake, and exhaust will still flow what they will flow. What I think will happen is the HP number will match what the 428 would have done, but at a lower RPM. Spit-balling here, but maybe it peaks at 6500 vs 6800, but HP number is the same. But I also think the extra displacement will help tame what is a very rowdy cam (idling at 85-KPa! (but some of that could have been overcoming a dead hole)), bring in the torque a little bit sooner, make about 15-20 lbs more peak torque, and still rev nicely by preserving the 4" stroke. I did toss around the idea of going bigger - to 454/5 or even 468 - but really, I set this thing up for RPM and for this reason would really rather keep the 4" stroke so I can rev it hard.
Block is en route - or will be shortly. Will continue to keep the thread going.
Move forward and don't look back. Like what I am doing,
Be excited because your new engine will be better than your old one!
I'm sure Tony will help you out with things too. He is a good guy..
Getting a resleeve will definitely make it good again.
Would it be cheaper to just get a new block like I did?
Also Darth, with the cam specs you can always slightly adjust the specs to suit the larger displacement so you have the same RPM range as before.
You might only need a 1-2 degree later IVC maybe.
Do you think it might be worth getting a new crank so it's stronger?
I think keeping the 4 inch stroke is a good idea.
I like the no ******* around approach.
Block is already sent off to be done.
Good stuff.

















Lol