Re: Stock engine basics
 

Terry's right enhanced is the word when I started racing in 96 my motor was a stock motor no stainless valves etc it made 280 horsepower.I have been asked the same question many times about how did i get that 283 to run so fast.One thing u have to consider is we have slicks and a lot of rear gear and spin these motors very high in RPM.For a stick car we have clutches u wouldnt want to run on the street,if you run an automatic u will have 3-4 torque convertors at $2000 a pop.

Re: Stock engine basics
 

I must be mistaken, but I thought most stock cams wouldn't let the motor rev very high, or at least make any power while doing it. Don't they kind of fall on their face above 5 or 6 grand? Am I wrong?

Re: Stock engine basics
 

"Stocker" cams are far different than a stock production camshaft. They typically have 50 or more degrees of duration @ .050. than an OEM cam would. Many of these stocker engines turn rpm in excess of 7500,don't try that with most OE cam profiles.

Re: Stock engine basics
 

Even before the lifter rule, valve spring rule, and camshaft duration rule were all rescinded, the "cheater" camshafts for Stock were fairly "square" with regards to lobe design. These days the only thing stock about a Stock camshaft is the tappet lift.

Re: Stock engine basics
 

Danpa, it's not just the power that's made, although the process of perfecting every part of the engine combination, and maximizing each one within the rules to make 100hp more than the factory engine is a big piece of the performance. In stock, EVERY part of the car is looked at to maximize straight line acceleration, no compromises, and very often no expense spared. The thinking behind the modifications and the systematic approach to increasing performance would apply well to a street car when you begin to tinker with it, but most of the parts that are used in a stocker would not be acceptable in a street car by far. To best achieve your goals, a lengthy discussion with a knowledgeable car/engine builder will pay big dividends down the road, to recommend the proper combination of parts and modifications to work for you (and your budget). If you modify just the engine, you're falling short of the best approach for street performance, the whole car needs to be considered, and many improvements can come at little cost. Knowing the best parts/mods for your "bang for the buck" is important. I offer this service (Robinson Performance Consulting - powerful, fast street cars) if you want to call me, send me an IM.

Re: Stock engine basics
 

I think one thing I see time & time again on "street" engines is they over cam the thing! I know everyone wants to hear that cam lop BUT one of the best little street engines we ever built had a cam with about the same specs as Edelbrock Performer! (went 12.88 @104 on 87octane in a 67 Camaro)

Re: Stock engine basics
 

I sold my 2nd 69 Camaro to a friend who completely blew the car apart and rebuilt everything. When I had it, it just had a 307 2bbl. with lackluster performance at best. He had a guy build a 427 for it, with a setup that would pull real hard between 3 and 6k. He also had a 4.11 gear and a ST-10 with 2.88 first in it.
Even with MH street tires, it was scary fast (to me at least at the time, 1979).
Man I'd love to have that car back now!

Re: Stock engine basics
 

Drag racing engines in general conform to a different set of standards than street motors. We had a stocker style bracket motor (440) that went through at least three different cars and four seasons of abuse. It was one of those "built in the dirt" motors that just refuse to die. It was running mid elevens in a 3600 pound car the day that it spit out a rod bearing. We were amazed and a little proud of that thing. Then I started thinking, if it had been in a street car it would have died before it got started on it's fifth tank of gas! Granted, you aren't going to shift at 5500 rpm in your street car but still I like the idea of using current state of the art stuff like heads, pistons, and a roller cam and painting it up to look old.

Also, I totally agree that the motor is but one piece of the stocker equation. Weight distribution, suspension set up, alignment, chassis reinforcement etc are equally important.

Good luck!

Chris Barnes
Wagons of Steel
Stock 6621

Re: Stock engine basics
 

The General Kinetics cam in my '56 Chevy in the early/mid '70s. The lobes were almost square. Killed valve springs in three or four races. It was the 2X4 bl 225 hp Corvette engine, solid lifter deal, valves set at .003"/.003" (stock was .012" - .018"?) hot. Was faster than anything else I tried. Looked flaky but always past Red Anderson's tear downs. Red would check it, look at me and shake his head, but he always passed it.

Re: Stock engine basics
 

Another way of looking at the differences. A factory built performance muscle car from the '60's to 1970, the very best of the best, made 1 HP per cube approximately.
Most of your "bread and butter" muscle engines made around .75 HP per cube.
A modern Stocker version would not even be a serious engine unless it made in excess of 1.25 HP per cube.

And like everybody else has mentioned, it's a package deal. You can't compromise on one area.