Found a StageII here in Sweden, have questions!

Good luck Uffe and you have to change your profile :)

I am looking forward to see your car in action sometime... but this will take some years right ?

Daniel
 
Originally posted by Swede2
Good luck Uffe and you have to change your profile :)

I am looking forward to see your car in action sometime... but this will take some years right ?

Daniel

Hello Daniel!

Oooops.... sorry about my profile, forgot that!
Have fixed it now.

Yes, this project will take at least 2 years since i'm not swimming in money.

Maybe a big sponsor can help?;)
Any one here maybe?:cool:
 
Originally posted by Mac in SD
Uffe, the 153 block is "on-center" while the stock block and early stage blocks were "off-center." What this means is that the cylinders were shifted .120 each way to center the crank throws on the cylinder bores. The cam and crank are the same in either on- or off-center, but the front face of the block is .120 further out than a stock or early stage block. That means that if you use a stock front cover, the cam sensor gear, as well as the water pump pulley, will be .120 out of alignment. Some builders say the easy fix is to shim the crankshaft timing chain gear out .120, and then everything will line up, which is true as far as the Cam nose sprocket and crank sprocket, and the water pump and main accessories. BUT, the cam sensor gear will be riding out on the edge of the cam drive gear, in other words it won't be centered. There have been reports of rapid cam gear wear in on-center blocks, and I think it's because of this misalignment. So, in my opinion, it's better to remove .120 from the gasket face of the front cover, then also the main accessory bracket in order to line things up. Even Buick said that front covers needed to be shortened when using the on-center block. Again, that's just my opinion.


If you shim out the damper and shim out the cam sensor drive gear then they will BOTH be in alignment period. A test with some grease on the gears will show the wear pattern. Both my damper and cam sensor sprocket were shimmed out about .090 and there everything is fine.
 
Originally posted by The Swede
Any one having the typical flow numbers on full ported Stage2 heads?

Thanks!:cool:

:confused: Really.... no one here flowed there S2 heads?

Thanks for any reply here guys!:cool:
 
I don't know, what's typical? Depends on who did the porting job, and what the customer was after. I've been told that 340 on the intake at .700 lift is good, that's what my s2 heads flow per chapman's specs.:)
 
Hello again guys!

On Monday we are going to pick up our StageII 153 casting on centre engine.

We need all of your help from over there to get this set up to be good!

From what we have understood, we can't use the Carillio rods since we are looking way over 1300bhp.

Is the Oliver rods the only way to go? Or, can we use some aluminium rods from some engine?
Do we have to notch them?

Since we are starting the build up on the short block, what is the best bearings to use on the crank/rods?

And, what clearance is recomended?

Our goal is to go under the Swedish/European record in Competion.

Car will run on pure Methanol and no IC.

The car is an Trans Am -89 with Chrome Molley Chassie, classified under 7.50.

Thank you all for your input and backup in our project! :cool:
 
The best set of S2 heads I have ever flowed are on my current engine, at .700 (which is where the port stalled on the intake and exh) they flowed 345 and 267 at 28", they were on a Robbie Moroso Bush engine.
I like Carrillo rods with Carr bolts, I use them in my engines and have never had a problem with them, some have stated they are only good to 800hp or so, I have found that to be incorrect, I have seen Olivers break and I have seen Carrillos break, alot of it depends on the tune up. My car only gets out about 4 times a year but I have 4 seasons on this one and in the neighborhood of 80 passes or so.
As far as clearance, on a high revving, high HP engine, I would run a dry sump and put the rods at .0029-.0033 and the mains at .0030-.0035. If you use a wet sump, I would tighten them both up to just under .003.
FM performance bearings are the most durable IMO, part# 107m for the mains and 7120ch for the rods.
Alot of your power is going to come from the proper camshaft, alot more goes into the valvetrain on the type of engne you are building than it does on your standard type of street or even mild race engine.You can count the number of cars tha thave run faster than 7.50 with a Buick V6 on 3 fingers (of course I am sure that number will be corrected by the experts :D )
 
EightSecV6 said:
You can count the number of cars tha thave run faster than 7.50 with a Buick V6 on 3 fingers (of course I am sure that number will be corrected by the experts :D )

Expert here, LMAO.........i will humble myself! :D
 
Thanks for your answer Bill!

So..... it shouldn't be any difference in Carrillio or Oliver rods then?

We will use dry sump, oil pan is shipped from USA already.

You see.... what you over in USA think is easy is hard to understand for us here in Sweden..... ;)

Ex; FM Performance bearings.... where do we find them?

Carr rod bolts, where do we find them?

There is a rev kit that comes with the engine, is this something you recomend to use?

Thanks again! :cool:
 
Carr bolts are Carrillo rods heavy duty bolts, SPS are the standard bolts.

FM is Federal Mogul, I stock them in all sizes but I would think you should be able to get them local somewhere?????

I would use the Carrillos and use the rev kit too.
 
EightSecV6 said:
FM is Federal Mogul, I stock them in all sizes but I would think you should be able to get them local somewhere?????

Yes, maybe there is a shop that store FM racing bearings here in Sweden but i'm not so sure about it.

The problem is also the high prices here in Sweden, ex; if something is priced $1 in US this part is priced $2 here in Sweden.

We have approx. 40% tax on things that we import here and then when we buy parts in shops we have to pay 25% more in tax.

So.... the best thing for us to do is to import by our selfs.

Thanks again Bill!

Guess that we will do some business with you later.
 
EightSecV6 said:
You can count the number of cars tha thave run faster than 7.50 with a Buick V6 on 3 fingers (of course I am sure that number will be corrected by the experts :D )

Ask and you shall receive.
There are 4.

In Chronological Order =)
-Buddy Ingersol
-Ken Duttweiler
-Bill Anderson
-Big Al

There are a couple more that are close but no cigar!
-Bob Borelli
-Shawn Lilly
-Gary Lee
 
Hey John!

Hopefully we will count in the crazy Swedes soon in the low 7's club. ;)

Thank you all for your support to help us to build a really fast StageII over here in Sweden! :cool:
 
The Swede said:
Hey John!

Hopefully we will count in the crazy Swedes soon in the low 7's club. ;)

Thank you all for your support to help us to build a really fast StageII over here in Sweden! :cool:

With the more aerodynamic body and the meth I would think that you would have no problem. In fact I would go out on a limb and say you could hit a 6 depending on what your race weight is.
 
John Wilde said:
With the more aerodynamic body and the meth I would think that you would have no problem. In fact I would go out on a limb and say you could hit a 6 depending on what your race weight is.

Wasn't that car a little over 2300 lbs with a big block chevy in it? Should be nasty fast turboed. :)
 
John Wilde said:
Ask and you shall receive.
There are 4.

In Chronological Order =)
-Buddy Ingersol
-Ken Duttweiler
-Bill Anderson
-Big Al

There are a couple more that are close but no cigar!
-Bob Borelli
-Shawn Lilly
-Gary Lee

I'll be in there too hopefully in the next year or so. All it takes it money and persistance...I have plenty of persistance! :D
 
Top