Stock Restoration?

[Verne_Frantz]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: XXXBlackLs6M22</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I would restore it to bone stock the way it was born.
It is becoming a lost art that when people restore cars they tend to modify them to much away from stock form.
I prefer seeing cars restored the way they came out of the show room IMO </div></div>

You, my friend, are in the tiny minority of people in the hobby today. The majority want to &quot;restore&quot; their car via a pile of catalogs and a credit card. No respect for preserving history....... They're creating a snack for themselves and they want extra whip cream and two cherries on top.

Verne [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/rolleyes.gif[/img]

[markjohnson]

It's easy for owners of L78, L72, or LS6 cars to remain &quot;bone stock&quot; because they run hard as they are but I wouldn't blame any 396-325 owner for wanting a little more grunt. It can be done very easily without altering stock appearances.

[Lynn]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bill Pritchard</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">Tone down </span></span>a 325hp 396??? Are they serious? My 69 Chevelle convertible is a 325hp 396 and I have driven it about 5,000 miles over the past 12 years.....all on pump 93 octane premium and with bias belt tires. Same points, plugs, cap, rotor, etc that I put in it right after buying it. It runs and drives just fine. </div></div>

Have to agree with Bill on this one. Pretty sure you could run that car all day long on 91 if tuned properly. 10.25:1 compression; lift is something ridiculous like LESS than .370. I don't know who is telling you to tone it down, but have to wonder if they ever drove a car with a 325 horse 396.

Pretty sure the only diff between the 325 horse and the 350 horse is the camshaft. That cam would make a good choice and even help fight detonation just a bit. Or.... you could run a more modern cam. Chris Staub has some good bumpsticks for vintage big blocks. The engine would look and sound just like stock, but give you some more umph.

This is one of the few areas I am going to disagree with Verne. Any huge improvement you can make like this that doesn't show in any way, and does not hurt your performance, I am all for it. Having said all that, I too like totally stock restos. That is why I have kept my exhaust manifolds, smog system and stock exhaust in storage. After I am done beating on the Z for a while, I will be fine making it bone stock. I have no problem with bolt ons in the mean time.

[VintageMusclecar]

With a few relatively minor internal modifications, 400+ HP is easily attained with a 396, even through OEM exhaust manifolds. The OEM iron intake and Quadrajet should easily suffice as well.

With that in front of a wide ratio Muncie and a 3.55-3.73 gear you've got a very enjoyable driver that should be about as fussy as an anvil.

[WILMASBOYL78]

The L-35 camshaft had an advertised lift of .398/.398 [pretty weak] with 322* duration on both sides. The 67 we had was never partial to pump gas...my experience with these motors was they developed a lot of cylinder pressure from the weak cam and 10.25 compression. I guess you can tune them to run on 91 or 93...never really tried to do that. I still think a modern camshaft combined with some &quot;minor internal mods&quot; as Eric mentioned, would make the car a more enjoyable driver.

Good luck with the car...I love that color [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/worship.gif[/img]

[Xplantdad]

Hi John, my 1966 Chevelle had a 396 and when I got it...it had 3.08 gears. The car came with 3.73 gears in the trunk...so I installed them.

With the 3.08's it was a pleasure to drive on the highway (like going to Pavilions) but a bit slow off the line. With the 3.73's, it wound up a bit on the way to Pavilions, but was great off the line [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/burnout.gif[/img]

Here's not too long after the 3.73's were installed...and a complete rebuild and restore of the stock carb by Eric Jackson. Engine was completely stock...

Click to play

http://vid19.photobucket.com/albums/...s/Burnout1.mp4


Some of Eric's work:




And a link to the thread about the carb restoration...from the best guy in the business!

https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/ubbt...opics/185401/1

Have fun...and let me know when I can come by and check it out!

[COPO CARTEL]

Eric is the K I N G

[Verne_Frantz]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lynn</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bill Pritchard</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">Tone down </span></span>a 325hp 396??? Are they serious? My 69 Chevelle convertible is a 325hp 396 and I have driven it about 5,000 miles over the past 12 years.....all on pump 93 octane premium and with bias belt tires. Same points, plugs, cap, rotor, etc that I put in it right after buying it. It runs and drives just fine. </div></div>

Have to agree with Bill on this one. Pretty sure you could run that car all day long on 91 if tuned properly. 10.25:1 compression; lift is something ridiculous like LESS than .370. I don't know who is telling you to tone it down, but have to wonder if they ever drove a car with a 325 horse 396.

Pretty sure the only diff between the 325 horse and the 350 horse is the camshaft. That cam would make a good choice and even help fight detonation just a bit. Or.... you could run a more modern cam. Chris Staub has some good bumpsticks for vintage big blocks. The engine would look and sound just like stock, but give you some more umph.

This is one of the few areas I am going to disagree with Verne. Any huge improvement you can make like this that doesn't show in any way, and does not hurt your performance, I am all for it. Having said all that, I too like totally stock restos. That is why I have kept my exhaust manifolds, smog system and stock exhaust in storage. After I am done beating on the Z for a while, I will be fine making it bone stock. I have no problem with bolt ons in the mean time. </div></div>

Lynn,
I see nothing wrong with improving the internals a bit to gain some more performance. The grief for me is seeing the &quot;need&quot; for disc brakes, dual master cylinders, air ride suspension, digital dashes, 5-speeds and aluminum radiators in cars that never came with them.

Verne [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/flag.gif[/img]

[WILMASBOYL78]

Lynn,
I see nothing wrong with improving the internals a bit to gain some more performance. The grief for me is seeing the &quot;need&quot; for disc brakes, dual master cylinders, air ride suspension, digital dashes, 5-speeds and aluminum radiators in cars that never came with them.

Verne [img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/flag.gif[/img]

<span style="font-weight: bold">I hope Tibor doesn't see this </span>[img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/rolleyes.gif[/img]

[Lynn]

Point taken.