Need machine shop, engine builder in No. Calif.

[Louie M.]

It's nearing time to get my 67 convertible's 327/350 rebuilt, which will happen at the end of this year. The engine was rebuilt sometime before I purchased the car in 2002, but the details of what's inside the block and under the valve covers are a mystery. The car is basically stock throughout and I enjoy taking long drives and also autocrossing locally a dozen times a year. The engine being unknown, I always cringe a bit when I rev it up during an autocross, some of which I run entirely in first gear (M20 and 3.36 posi). So, I have purchased Crower Sportsman rods, in anticipation of redoing the engine, thanks to a group buy two years ago arranged by Scott Marzahl. Duke Williams has convinced me to go with one of his 327 LT-1 motors. However, I have the misfortune to be a paleontologist instead of a mechanical engineer, so I'm still undecided about whether or not to build the engine myself. I've read the many How To books by David Vizard and others, and all of the details are clear, but there are SO MANY details!

At the very least I need a reliable machine shop, maybe a complete engine builder, who is sensitive to engine restoration and details like not decking into oblivion my original engine pad. I want the engine to look bone stock, so no external "hot rod" modifications.

Living in Palo Alto and being in a local Corvette club, I'm part of the local Corvette community, but this consists mostly of guys with C5s and C6s (like my 07 coupe daily driver) who think that "327" is some kind of computer port. So, I need your recommendations for machine shops and engine builders in the San Francisco Bay area. It would be a plus if these were not the most expensive guys around, but I will take any suggestions at this point, especially is you have used the shop yourself. I live about 20 minutes north of San Jose and 45 minutes south of San Francisco. Palo Alto used to have a lot auto shops, but now it's all wine bars and Thai restaurants.

Louie

[Joe L.]

Re: Need machine shop, engine builder in No. Calif.

It's nearing time to get my 67 convertible's 327/350 rebuilt, which will happen at the end of this year. The engine was rebuilt sometime before I purchased the car in 2002, but the details of what's inside the block and under the valve covers are a mystery. The car is basically stock throughout and I enjoy taking long drives and also autocrossing locally a dozen times a year. The engine being unknown, I always cringe a bit when I rev it up during an autocross, some of which I run entirely in first gear (M20 and 3.36 posi). So, I have purchased Crower Sportsman rods, in anticipation of redoing the engine, thanks to a group buy two years ago arranged by Scott Marzahl. Duke Williams has convinced me to go with one of his 327 LT-1 motors. However, I have the misfortune to be a paleontologist instead of a mechanical engineer, so I'm still undecided about whether or not to build the engine myself. I've read the many How To books by David Vizard and others, and all of the details are clear, but there are SO MANY details!

At the very least I need a reliable machine shop, maybe a complete engine builder, who is sensitive to engine restoration and details like not decking into oblivion my original engine pad. I want the engine to look bone stock, so no external "hot rod" modifications.

Living in Palo Alto and being in a local Corvette club, I'm part of the local Corvette community, but this consists mostly of guys with C5s and C6s (like my 07 coupe daily driver) who think that "327" is some kind of computer port. So, I need your recommendations for machine shops and engine builders in the San Francisco Bay area. It would be a plus if these were not the most expensive guys around, but I will take any suggestions at this point, especially is you have used the shop yourself. I live about 20 minutes north of San Jose and 45 minutes south of San Francisco. Palo Alto used to have a lot auto shops, but now it's all wine bars and Thai restaurants.

Louie

S&S Machine on Washington Bl., San Leandro, CA

[Duke W.]

Re: Need machine shop, engine builder in No. Calif.

The Special 300 HP cam actually shows higher torque/power from off-idle to 6500 in EA simulations, but I am still waiting for dyno test confirmation of the two Special 300 HP prototypes to confirm the validity of the simulations.

The only rev range where the LT-1 cam exceeds is 6500 to 7200, and this is due to estimated hydraulic lifter pump up at a little over 6500 with the Special 300 HP cam. The mechanical lifter LT-1 cam is good to about 7200 before serious false valve motion sets in if the OE 068 valve spring installed height is set up to my recommendations.

The other consideration is that the Special 300 HP cam will have a smooth 500 RPM idle rather than the characterisitc SHP idle, but SHP idle characteristics can be simulated by increasing idle speed and leaning out the idle mixture to slightly destabilize the idle.

Since you have a pretty aggressive autocross schedule I highly recommend the mechanical lifter SHP oil pan and windage tray to help preclude oil starvation. This will require that you remove the power steering system if so equipped.

IIRC your '67 also has A/C. I'm not exactly familiar with the belt configuration, but it should be reviewed to determine if a better setup can be established using bolt-on OE parts from the various mechanical lifter engine belt systems. The higher rev range of your proposed new engine will strain the OE L-79 belt system. A good stating point would be to review the '64 L-76/C-60 belt configurtion.

You should also discuss the L-88 flywheel with Mark Johnson. It was fine with the CR trans and 4:11 and so far he says no problem with the 3.36, but he hasn't driven his '65 much with the 3.36 due to other work he's doing on the car, however, he should have more driving impressions soon. I am only recommending the L-88 flywheel for consideration in your case because you autocross. For strictly road use I generally recommend the OE 29 pound heavyweight. Use of the L-88 flywheel is a strictly subjective call and each user may have somewhat different criteria.

Duke

[Louie M.]

Re: Need machine shop, engine builder in No. Calif.

Thanks, Joe. A friend uses them, but since my buddy is into serious hot rodding of C3s for drag racing, I assumed that S&S was more into power mods than engine restoration. I'll give them a call and go by.

Have you used them and what sort of work did you have done?

Louie

[Louie M.]

[Joe L.]

Re: Need machine shop, engine builder in No. Calif.

Thanks, Joe. A friend uses them, but since my buddy is into serious hot rodding of C3s for drag racing, I assumed that S&S was more into power mods than engine restoration. I'll give them a call and go by.

Have you used them and what sort of work did you have done?

Louie

Louie-----



Yes, S&S is very much into performance type engines for racing; they always have been. However, they do all sorts of engine work from stock rebuilds on-up. Engine restoration is really not a lot different than rebuilding an engine. It just involves using as many original or OEM-equivalent parts AND being sure not to deck the block. Otherwise, it's pretty much just a standard rebuild. This sort of work is just about any machine shop's "bread-and-butter".

I have had them do some work for me involving some things I needed done to the heads for my "ZL-1". The machine shop I have used for 35 years could not handle that work and others referred me to S&S. After I saw their shop and talked with some of the folks there, I was 100% "sold". They accomplished the things I needed done PERFECTLY; I was 100% happy. They will be my machine shop from now on.

[Duke W.]

Re: Need machine shop, engine builder in No. Calif.

I believe those are the correct part numbers for the 327 internally baffled/trap door big pan and flat windage tray, which is a separate item. I don't think they are currently available from GM, but are available in repro.

You will also need specific main bearing studs/nuts to replace five bolts. These studs have a built in extension to mount the windage tray, and, I'm not sure, but the windage tray nuts may also need a lock washer.

The '64 L-76 w/AC pulley/belt arrangement is probably a good place to start as a "high rev" arrangement for a 327. I'm not sure about using a LT-1 belt system because the 350s have longer nose water pumps, and I think all the pulley offsets are different, but it should be fairly easy to come up with a good arrangement using 327 components from various years assuming it needs to be improved.

If the AIM has a good representation of your L=79 pulley system with AC and C60, scan it and email it to me or post it.

Duke

[Joe L.]

Re: Need machine shop, engine builder in No. Calif.

Louie-----


The GM #3820001 is the "6 quart" pan used from 1963 to 1972. The 3820000 was the standard "5 quart" pan used from 1963 to 1974. The 3820001 used a combination of internal baffling, including a "trap door", and an external, bearing cap stud-mounted baffle. That baffle was GM #3769768. The 3820001 pan was discontinued in the mid-70's and replaced by GM #359942, a nearly identical pan that uses the thicker, 1975+ style front oil pan seal. Alas, both the 359942 pan and the 3769768 baffle have been discontinued now for about 10 years. I've seen 3820001 and 359942 pans, even in used condition, sell on eBay for $500-1,000.

I think a reproduction of this pan MAY be available, but I'm not sure. Keen Parts reproduces the 3820000. However, it's a lot more in demand than the 3820001, so it might be more practical to tool up for than the 3820001 which has a more limited market. You'd have to check with them.

1972 LT-1 with C-60 does use different pullies than 1972 LT-1 without C-60 or any 1971 LT-1. However, I don't think the difference had anything to do with pulley depths; I think it was related to pulley size.

The L-88 flywheel is still available from GM under GM #14085720. However, I don't recommend the use of this flywheel on any street 327. To be honest, I would not even use it on a street 427.

[Joe C.]

Re: Need machine shop, engine builder in No. Calif.

Duke,
I didn't realize your Special 300 HP hydraulic cam made more power than an LT-1 cam. However, I still like the power range continuing to 7000 rpm for that inimitable SB wail! We'll talk about this once this completely wretched pneumonia leaves me and my energy returns.

I see in an old Chevy parts counter book that a 63-65 oil pan for "FI, SHP w/ mechanical lifters" P/N 3820000 cost $28.20. Is this the pan you have in mind? Wonder what it costs today?! Does this pan have a built in windage tray? I'm under the impression that windage trays mount on the main bearing caps. In the old parts book is also "Baffle, oil pan upper, 62-65bCorvette – FI SHP w/ mech. lifters" for $1.60. Is that a windage tray – probably not, it's too cheap even for the early 70s parts book.

I took the stock power steering off my 67 and went over to the Jeep box that is internally valved; so now there is no external ram and nothing hangs lower than the PS pump. Makes the car much nicer to drive and there's a blessed relief from constantly correcting the steering back and forth when trying to go straight down the superslab.

My 67 does have factory AC. I had not thought about having to re-do the pulleys to keep the belts on. I'll look over the 64 L76/C60 configuration. I recall Chevy didn't allow AC with the 70-71 LT-1 engine, but ultimately did in 72. Wonder if they did anything different in 72, like deeper pulley grooves?

Mark did highly recommend an L88 flywheel. I've never run a lightweight flywheel in any of the midyears I've had. I'll have to talk to local guys to learn their impressions of such a setup. Assuming Chevy even sells an L88 flywheel anymore.

Louie

Louie,

The 327/350 (L79) has a sweet running cam. Makes very close to the same peak power as the later L48/L82 cam, but with about 4% more torque @ 2000RPM. If you want solids (you want a "screamer") then use the LT1 or 30-30.

As stated above, use the belt config from '64-'65 L76 with C60. The SHP engines (the real ones, with solid lifters) used deep groove pulleys, to prevent slinging belts.

Be sure to use a standard volume/high pressure oil pump (Melling #M-55A, in place of your current std vol/std press pump). You might want to either change to a 80 psi oil pressure gauge, or have your 60 pound unit converted and re silk-screened to 80 psi. Make sure to use the proper length bolt for the oil pump to main cap retainer. Some use a bolt shorter by about 3/16".

Joe

[Louie M.]

Re: Need machine shop, engine builder in No. Calif.

The oil pan may be a problem, since I haven't yet found a repro online, even at Long Island Corv. It's discouraging to hear about the high prices for even used trap door oil pans' there's an NOS one at eBay now for $775! The windage tray can still be bought at the normal vendors. I knew about needing extended main bearing studs for mounting the tray, and those are readily available.

Duke, the AIM is not that informative about 67 pulley systems. The most useful item is a diagram showing my car with PS and AC:


Joe C,
I had not realized oil pressures and volumes were not tied together. I do recall recommendations from others against high volume pumps. I will have to do some research here, and thanks for mentioning it.

Joe L,
Good to hear of your experiences at S&S. The fact that you have switched your own work there is high praise. I am definitely looking forward to going there' they're about 45 minutes from my house.

Louie

[Joe L.]

Re: Need machine shop, engine builder in No. Calif.

The oil pan may be a problem, since I haven't yet found a repro online, even at Long Island Corv. It's discouraging to hear about the high prices for even used trap door oil pans' there's an NOS one at eBay now for $775! The windage tray can still be bought at the normal vendors. I knew about needing extended main bearing studs for mounting the tray, and those are readily available.

Duke, the AIM is not that informative about 67 pulley systems. The most useful item is a diagram showing my car with PS and AC:


Joe C,
I had not realized oil pressures and volumes were not tied together. I do recall recommendations from others against high volume pumps. I will have to do some research here, and thanks for mentioning it.

Joe L,
Good to hear of your experiences at S&S. The fact that you have switched your own work there is high praise. I am definitely looking forward to going there' they're about 45 minutes from my house.

Louie

Louie-----


All high volume pumps are also high pressure. Standard volume pumps may be either standard pressure or high pressure; the only difference is the installed relief spring. For a solid lifter 327 or 350, you're probably better off with the standard volume, high pressure which is what was originally used for most such applications.

GM never used a high volume oil pump in ANY small block PRODUCTION engine. Ever.

[Louie M.]

Re: Need machine shop, engine builder in No. Calif.

Joe,
Thanks for clearing this up. I'm aware of relief spring differences, and I'm glad to hear that this is all that's involved in achieving higher pressure. I know that Duke advocates avoiding the "hot rod" high volume pumps. Yet guys still put them in because they're "better."

BTW I got another local machine/engine shop recommended to me today. This guy, Steve Clark, is a one-man operation in Mt. View, only about 4 miles from my house. I'll probably go by tomorrow and see what his shop looks like, etc.

Louie

Louie-----


All high volume pumps are also high pressure. Standard volume pumps may be either standard pressure or high pressure; the only difference is the installed relief spring. For a solid lifter 327 or 350, you're probably better off with the standard volume, high pressure which is what was originally used for most such applications.

GM never used a high volume oil pump in ANY small block PRODUCTION engine. Ever.

[Duke W.]

Re: Need machine shop, engine builder in No. Calif.

That belt system doesn't look too bad. The problem with high revs is that the long runs between pulleys - like between the crank pulleys and AC and alternator pulleys - can sometimes flutter and jump the pulleys.

As long as the pulleys are deep groove - the belt should be below the OD of the pulley - and tension is correct, I think it will be okay.

One thing to watch for is that some OE 3/8" belts were replaced with 7/16" belts for service, which will ride high in the pulleys. This must be avoided. The correct OE belt dimensions should be in the AMA specs and you can buy belts by size.

If someone has a '64 AIM and can scan the L-76 with AC belt system, that would be good for comparison.

I don't necessarily recommend raising the oil pressure for competition. Raising the oil pressure can actually drain the pan faster because the higher pressure increases oil flow rate. This can be an issue in long turns. For autocross turns, are generally much shorter in time duration, but the big pan and baffle will really help keep the pickup covered during braking, which can be an issue.

Another way to raise oil pressure is just to shim the OE spring. I'm not sure of the size-increase relationship (I may have it somewhere.), but a proper sized shim can be used to slightly raise the hot pressure, say from the OE 40-45 to 45-50, so the gage won't be pegged all the time.

Duke

[Louie M.]

Re: Need machine shop, engine builder in No. Calif.

Louie-----
The GM #3820001 is the "6 quart" pan used from 1963 to 1972. The 3820000 was the standard "5 quart" pan used from 1963 to 1974. The 3820001 used a combination of internal baffling, including a "trap door", and an external, bearing cap stud-mounted baffle. That baffle was GM #3769768. The 3820001 pan was discontinued in the mid-70's and replaced by GM #359942, a nearly identical pan that uses the thicker, 1975+ style front oil pan seal. Alas, both the 359942 pan and the 3769768 baffle have been discontinued now for about 10 years. I've seen 3820001 and 359942 pans, even in used condition, sell on eBay for $500-1,000.

After scouring the web etc. I finally found an aftermarket pay that may work. Here is the link: http://www.cantonracingproducts.com/...bc_street.html

Note that the pan holds 4 quarts, and that it is rated as a "5 quart" system by including the oil filter. It is stock depth, has a trap door, scrapers and built in windage tray. The drain is on the side rather than the back, but that's no biggie. It costs 1/3 to 1/4 the price of 53-65 FI pans I've seen for sale. Any pro and con comments from anyone?

Louie

[Joe L.]

Re: Need machine shop, engine builder in No. Calif.

After scouring the web etc. I finally found an aftermarket pay that may work. Here is the link: http://www.cantonracingproducts.com/...bc_street.html

Note that the pan holds 4 quarts, and that it is rated as a "5 quart" system by including the oil filter. It is stock depth, has a trap door, scrapers and built in windage tray. The drain is on the side rather than the back, but that's no biggie. It costs 1/3 to 1/4 the price of 53-65 FI pans I've seen for sale. Any pro and con comments from anyone?

Louie

Louie----


This pan looks almost identical to the GM #360450 that I mentioned in my e-mail response to you. However, it says that it has a "trap door" internal baffle; the GM pan does not.