Back to 409 stuff........

X-TECH MAN · 03-25-2009, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ss wannabee

Sorry for the late response but for 2009 I'm trying to use the computer LESS...too much to do around here! Those are pretty decent times for the '09 given the time period you ran it....the tires compared to TODAY and Track conditions then.....I've heard of the head gasket deal with the '09's before. Trying to find out what a 425hp would do "back in the day" WHEN prepped for class competition....I don't think too many ran that combo back then....409hp and 380hp seemed commonplace. Some guys have tried the 425 hp more RECENTLY as in the last 20 years or so....don't know if anybody was knockin on the 10's though....wonder how Aubrey's doing? Anybody here remember "Mousie Brown" back in the day? I think he held either A/S or B/S record for a while with a 409hp '62 Chev. post car? I GUESS I could bounce around on the 'Net to one of those 409 sites but consider the info here to be more accurate! BTW Rocky, does the process you mentioned on your 'site replace the earlier dry film coating process? Thanks!

Mousie Brown used to run a 1962 409/409 Impala Convertable A/S at Aquasco, Manassa Va., and Capitol when I was running my 65 Plymouth. He usually ran high 12,s and low 13's back in the early 60's. He was partnered with an "ANNABEL WALKER" (spel ?) with Brown & Walker on the quarter pannel. I believe SHE owned the car. In 1966 Mousie got a 66 427 Biscayne and later either a 66 or 67 396/375 HP Chevelle. Then came either a 68 or 69 396/375 Chev nova with a turbo 400.

Aubrey N Bruneau · 03-26-2009, 09:26 AM

No "old days" here in my shop, wannabe !
Dyno'd my engine a couple weeks ago ( 3rd build ). Looks like I FINALLY got the valve train stabilized, by using Comp's new tool steel retainers, and a set of heavy wall Manton pushrods.
Pretty darn happy with this engine now ! Spins the RPM that I always thought it should, horsepwer hanging in there.
According to the dyno numbers, which don't have a great peak, but a very respectable average... with a perfect operating chassis, the car weighing in at 3640 ( with me ), should run a high 10 @ around 121 at sea level.
Perfect chassis ?
HEEE HEEEE !!
don't know about THAT ? !

good engine though

ss wannabee · 03-27-2009, 08:53 AM

Aubrey, keep us posted especially when you get to the track!

Greg Reimer 7376 · 03-27-2009, 11:15 AM

Back in the early 70's,I had a red 62 impala ss two door hardtop. I put a stock 409 together with whatever used parts there were out there, but with a NOS camshaft I bought at the dealer where I worked.(Pt # 3830690 if memory serves me right)and after collecting all this stuff and assembling a complete dual four barrel motor,I put it in the impala with a decent set of fenderwell headers.Trans was a 2.52 low gear Muncie with a Hurst competition plus shifter,a Mc Cloud 11 inch Borg and Beck pressure plate,a Lakewood scatter shield, and later came a 12 bolt out of a Chevelle with 4.88's.I drove this insane 6 mile per gallon car on the street a bit,and discovered fun and grudge racing at the original Irwindale Raceway until it closed down in 1977. With a pair of 10 inch M&H's ,it went 13.30's at around 106-107. i learned that that motor didn't like 6200 rpm shift points,short shifting it at 5500 brought the ET';s down to 12.88-12.95 with the same MPH.5200 through the gears with a 6500 rpm launch resulted in a 12.66 at 108.95 at Orange County. This thing had the correct matched pair of carbs, the stock intake, and a stock bore and stroke. It was balanced, but it wasn't trick.This car weighed 3690 without driver. It wasn't too bad of a bracket car,and in 1981 I traded the car off as a roller for a '63 post car with a roll bar, an aluminum interior, and a decent paint job and lettering. I ran another 12 bolt with 4.56's, and an A-1 Powerglide and an Art Carr C-8 converter. I figured that it would probably go 12.50 at 110- first pass it went 12.49,109+.Well by the end of the day,it went 12.20 at 109. Subsequent minor tuning made it go 11.91 at 111.52. the torque it made was unreal. It seemed to like a torque converter more than a 4 speed, andRPM could be counterproductive. Ten years ago,I sold the 63 to a friend in San Diego, who restored it and put a 480+ inch '09 in it, and I still have the 409,the 12 bolt and the trans and converter. It's great to see such a resurgence of interest in these prehistoric beasties with the repro parts and all that's out there,some day I'll put one together again. I would like to put it in a 64 or 65 Chevelle and build the car Chevy never would build. Maybe someday!!

03-26-2009, 09:26 AM	#2
Aubrey N Bruneau Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: South Eastern Alberta, Canada Posts: 311 Likes: 6 Liked 7 Times in 3 Posts	Re: Back to 409 stuff........ No "old days" here in my shop, wannabe ! Dyno'd my engine a couple weeks ago ( 3rd build ). Looks like I FINALLY got the valve train stabilized, by using Comp's new tool steel retainers, and a set of heavy wall Manton pushrods. Pretty darn happy with this engine now ! Spins the RPM that I always thought it should, horsepwer hanging in there. According to the dyno numbers, which don't have a great peak, but a very respectable average... with a perfect operating chassis, the car weighing in at 3640 ( with me ), should run a high 10 @ around 121 at sea level. Perfect chassis ? HEEE HEEEE !! don't know about THAT ? ! good engine though __________________ Aubrey N Bruneau 6409 C/S 62 BelAir sport coupe, 409 HP 409

03-27-2009, 08:53 AM	#3
ss wannabee Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 663 Likes: 0 Liked 7 Times in 7 Posts	Re: Back to 409 stuff........ Aubrey, keep us posted especially when you get to the track!

03-27-2009, 11:15 AM	#4
Greg Reimer 7376 VIP Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Glendora,Calif. Posts: 1,136 Likes: 172 Liked 705 Times in 219 Posts	Re: Back to 409 stuff........ Back in the early 70's,I had a red 62 impala ss two door hardtop. I put a stock 409 together with whatever used parts there were out there, but with a NOS camshaft I bought at the dealer where I worked.(Pt # 3830690 if memory serves me right)and after collecting all this stuff and assembling a complete dual four barrel motor,I put it in the impala with a decent set of fenderwell headers.Trans was a 2.52 low gear Muncie with a Hurst competition plus shifter,a Mc Cloud 11 inch Borg and Beck pressure plate,a Lakewood scatter shield, and later came a 12 bolt out of a Chevelle with 4.88's.I drove this insane 6 mile per gallon car on the street a bit,and discovered fun and grudge racing at the original Irwindale Raceway until it closed down in 1977. With a pair of 10 inch M&H's ,it went 13.30's at around 106-107. i learned that that motor didn't like 6200 rpm shift points,short shifting it at 5500 brought the ET';s down to 12.88-12.95 with the same MPH.5200 through the gears with a 6500 rpm launch resulted in a 12.66 at 108.95 at Orange County. This thing had the correct matched pair of carbs, the stock intake, and a stock bore and stroke. It was balanced, but it wasn't trick.This car weighed 3690 without driver. It wasn't too bad of a bracket car,and in 1981 I traded the car off as a roller for a '63 post car with a roll bar, an aluminum interior, and a decent paint job and lettering. I ran another 12 bolt with 4.56's, and an A-1 Powerglide and an Art Carr C-8 converter. I figured that it would probably go 12.50 at 110- first pass it went 12.49,109+.Well by the end of the day,it went 12.20 at 109. Subsequent minor tuning made it go 11.91 at 111.52. the torque it made was unreal. It seemed to like a torque converter more than a 4 speed, andRPM could be counterproductive. Ten years ago,I sold the 63 to a friend in San Diego, who restored it and put a 480+ inch '09 in it, and I still have the 409,the 12 bolt and the trans and converter. It's great to see such a resurgence of interest in these prehistoric beasties with the repro parts and all that's out there,some day I'll put one together again. I would like to put it in a 64 or 65 Chevelle and build the car Chevy never would build. Maybe someday!! Last edited by Greg Reimer 7376; 03-27-2009 at 11:17 AM. Reason: typo