U/SA

[L.Fite]

So...
How is the 230/140hp L6 as a combo?
In a Camaro.
Looks tough... no compression, 1bbl...
How's parts availability?
Curiosity strikes...

[Doug Hoven]

Originally Posted by L.Fite

So...
How is the 230/140hp L6 as a combo?
In a Camaro.
Looks tough... no compression, 1bbl...
How's parts availability?
Curiosity strikes...

Billy would know better than I would, being that he played with two different cars with that combo for about 20 years. Some parts are easier to find than others. When I ordered a cam 2 years ago, I was told by bullet they had to search far and wide for a cam core for me. Stock connecting rods and crankshaft seems fine for the rpm capability of the motor (lack there of). The intakes and cylinder heads don't exactly fall out of trees, but they are out there. When I rebuilt the engine, it was not a "high dollar" rebuild, but it was all good parts. It's not a bad U/SA car to bracket race, but is more competitive in V/SA. I wouldn't be surprised with enough cash and time it could be a .75-.80 under combo in V. Would be neat to see one built with a third pedal. I was close to doing that, but went the v8 route instead. BTW for those curious, I had a vacuum gauge on the car for a few runs. Pulled about 7-8 in. of vacuum at the top end with that tiny carb. Fun fact the dimensions are the same as one hole of an 850 holley.

[Bill Bogues]

Afew years back I ran a 82 Monte Carlo in U with a 267/ It was factory rated at 115 hp, but Nhra saw fit to bump hp to150 without even seeing what could be done with it.Stated out with15.0 and eventually got it to run fairly consistent 14.40's and 50's. Best I ever ran was 14.20 @90 in killer air at No Problem. This was not a money is no object car but had good parts in car and engine.I felt that hp on engine was too high and that it should have been around 135 or 140 at start , then s ee how it turns out.Sure enjoyed running car and if things played out right would like to run it again but there's no way I feel like it's a 1.30 or higher car.

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by L.Fite

So...How is the 230/140hp L6 as a combo?

It treated me quite well. It would need more HP back to make it a "hitter" in the 21ST Century but it is a good, dependable combo that would probably respond well to a metric or a 4 speed. You can have cams made that will "make" compression (cylinder pressure) but, in the end you're still dealing with a 210 CFM carb..

[GTS340]

Gees 210 is a little guy. I like your line Billy. Might have to call you General Nees. Fun stuff this U/SA class. How is the average doing on the 302 this year?

Paul Haszlauer

[Jack McCarthy]

tall paul and billy nees you guys need to meet !!!
we can cook some burgers and make a day of it, maybe a few beers too !!

captain jack has the BEST friends

[Greg Gay]

So the discussion of the 230 led me to a question: Let's assume that an engine with a carburetor that flows twice the cfm of the cubic inches is "well fed". Are there any 4 or 6 cylinder engines that come close to that?

[Doug Hoven]

Originally Posted by Greg Gay

So the discussion of the 230 led me to a question: Let's assume that an engine with a carburetor that flows twice the cfm of the cubic inches is "well fed". Are there any 4 or 6 cylinder engines that come close to that?

As far as inline engines, not sure. AMC 6 cylinders had fairly big 2 barrels. I know some Chevy truck inline 6 engines had 2 barrels later on, but they aren't in the guide. There seems to be a decent number of "well fed" v6 combos out there. Maybe not all 2cfm/CID, but there is an 86 Chevy truck 262 v6 with a quadrajet in the guide.

[Curt Rees]

My Super 6 with the Carter 2 barrel is rated at 280 CFM. With the Holley 2 barrel is rated at 250 CFM.

#5458

Curt Rees

[joe huestis]

Originally Posted by Curt Rees

My Super 6 with the Carter 2 barrel is rated at 280 CFM. With the Holley 2 barrel is rated at 250 CFM.

#5458

Curt Rees

My 267 V8 is fed by a dualjet flowing only 287 cfm !