O.K., it's not Corvette, but close --- just bought a '65 # 3855961 motor (T0607LF = 325hp w/manual trans, Holley) and pulled the stock # 3856206 heads to reveal 30-over pistons and a slightly higher dome than I would have expected. Stamped on the piston top is the number "1687" and ".030" (second line). Are these TRW ? Can anyone tell me what compression ratio (nominal) these would yield, if identification is possible, and whether they're cast or forged ? TIA
-
-
Re: 396 Piston Identification
Wayne----
1965 Chevrolet 396/325 engines originally used cast aluminum pistons with a significant dome of just at .200". These pistons were also side-specific with a different part number used for the left and right cylinder banks. This was unique to these lower performance pistons; SHP pistons were the same for all 8 holes. Most aftermarket replacement pistons for the 396/325 application use only one piston for all 8 holes, too.
The number "1687" which you provided does not fit into the number scheme of the original GM SERVICE +.030" pistons (GM #3874993, 3874994) or TRW pistons forged replacements (L2240NF-30). However, I have identified it as a Perfect Circle replacement cast piston of complete part number 224-1687. This piston should have a pistom dome of about .125" maximum height and produces a compression ratio of about 9.3:1 when used with original cylinder heads.In Appreciation of John Hinckley -
OK, Joe, I have to know....
...why you do it?
I am amazed, there is simply no other word for it, with the quantity and quality of information you provide to this Board and to individuals privately, (me being one of them, I know your posts to this forum are just the tip of the iceberg).
But why? Why would you spend your limited time to do it, as you have said, to the detriment of your other Corvette (ZL1) projects?
I had assumed that you did it from work so it wasn't strictly *your* time, so to speak, but this is the weekend so it *is* your time. I know you don't get involved (and I respect you for it) in off-topic, non-Corvette questions but, please, make this one exception and answer my query.
Regards,
JPComment
-
Re: OK, Joe, I have to know....
Jeff----
Actually, even my posts from the office are, effectively, on my own time. You see, although I take frequent breaks from my "chores" to check the board and offer a comment from time-to-time, I still do have to finish my "chores". As a "management" employee, I'm not allowed to "clock in and clock out" at the appointed hours regardless of what happens in between. So, my excursions to the board usually mean that I'm in the office for an hour or two longer. Also, I frequently skip lunches(as my waistline requires) so I have additional time to spend on the board. The problem is, in my office, I have very few references with respect to Corvettes, so I can't always provide very complete responses from that venue.
As to why I spend so much time on the board, it amazes me a little, too. Perhaps its part of my obsessive-compulsive tendencies. But, I do enjoy it, usually. You see, as I've gotten a little older I've become a little more aware of my mortality. As I understand it, only one guy that lived about 2,000 years ago has beaten the grim-reaper and I'm not naive enough to think that I'm going to be the second. So, it behooves me to pass on while I'm still able what I've learned over the 35 years, or so, of my obsession with cars and, particularly, Corvettes. Perhaps, through the board, and most particularly the board archives, I can pass along some of the knowledge that I've acquired to younger(and future) generations. One of these days, those of us who have lived through the "Golden Age of Corvettes" won't be around anymore, but, most probably, the cars will.
In addition, I'm also fortunate enough to have a very considerable reference library and reference sources for Corvette information which I've accumulated over 35 years. I recognize that few folks do, so I try to share what I have through the NDB.
In any event, I guess the bottom line is that I consider that "with knowledge comes responsibility". So, that pretty much sums up why I'm here.In Appreciation of John HinckleyComment
-
Thanks, Joe, for taking the time to respond...
...and, of course, thanks for all the info I have gotten from you on and off the list.
Best Regards,
JeffComment
Comment