DJ-DOZIER

I remember reading an article about the overall reliability/driveability of the 327/350. They mention the benefits of the hydraulic lifters over the wilder solid lifters. I hope to some day own a BB car but am curious if the idea of constantly maintaining one of these hi perf cars is true. People have told me that the fuelies and the hypo bb's are in the "shop" always getting tuned--valve lash etc? What are the forum members' experiences/opinions?
My search continues... check out this car http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=2400004982
That is the ultimate dream(Elkhart Blue, Pipes, 435)...got to go find that elusive money tree though. I would live in the garage if I could own a car like this. Doug

Solidlifters

When I was 16 (many moons ago) my dad bought me a 57 210 2dr hardtop with a powerglide and the original mosquito foggin' 283. This was in 1966. Of course I wanted to stick a big block in it, but they weren't plentiful yet. We got a 350/327 crate motor from the local Chevy dealer and a used Muncie and converted it from a 20+ second smoker (tailpipe) to a high 13 second screamer. The shortblock assy. cost $266. back then and the big heads were $100. + more. I guess some of the 365's were probably faster, but a few years later I roomed with a guy in college that had one in a 56 and his car never would run with mine. I always liked the L79 as an all around, dependable, no maintenance, street engine.

As far as the comparison with the solid lifter stuff and the comment that people make about upkeep, I've got tons of solid lifter big block cars now. Without boring you with a list, there are 2 - 12 1/2:1's, and a bunch of 11:1's. I've even got a solid lifter 540 in my boat, which sees a lot of WOT time, and hasn't had a valve adjustment since I put the motor in, probably 5 years ago. I haven't re adjusted the valves on the Corvettes either, but they don't get tons of miles. I'd say given proper assembly and set up, locking valve adjusting nuts (poly locks) and decent gas, they don't require a level of maintenance that you can't live with.

Solidlifters

One thing I forgot to mention: I've also got a 65 L79 coupe now, and it's a great car to ride in. The manners of the 327/350 suit me better than the 365. I think I'd have to say I prefer this car over the same one with a 365 just from seat of the pants feel. No doubt the 365 pulls a little harder on top, but the 350 sure has a better feel through the mid.

TheOman

I had an L-79 car and indeed the valve adjustment issues were nil. I also have an LS6 BBC in one of my cars. Valve adjustment is not the big bug-a boo people say. BBCs and older 1970's LT-1s have screw in rocker studs. If the rocker lock nuts are in good shape there should not be any problem. I think it was JohnZ here on the forum who said he replaces the lock nuts EVERY time he takes them off the studs.

Remember these cars were offerd by GM as street drivers, daily use cars. Yes people were always tinkering but infrequent valve adjustments are the order of the day IF all the valve train parts are in good shape. My buddy had a 375 HP 396 Chevelle. When it was new it just ran. Nice quiet lifters that saw high high RPMs. Remember also all the mechanical lifter BBCs other than L-88s used the same valve springs, part numbers may have changed over the years, lock nuts, rockers and lifters. There were changes in pushrod diameter but unless you bend a p-rod well it is not gonna change size and alter adjustment. The cams for all solid lifter BBC's, again excluding L88's, were the same except for slight changes in specifications and possibly part number changes so don't buy this BS about 427 425 HP engines being harder to maintain from a valve adjustment point of view. The 427 425 is just an overgrown 396 375 and everything in the valve train is the same. This holds true for the LS6 also. Just an overgrown 427 425 HP.

Don't know about FI cars, if there are FI adjustment issues it likely is with the FI unit not the valve train. As with the BBC's the FI valve gear is exactly the same as the 365 HP 327 which was offered with a carb.

62fuelie

An L79 clone is essentially what lurkes underneath the stock injection unit in my 62. The whole package, FI included, is a highly reliable, very streetable rig with all the performance I care to have in a 50 year old chassis design.

Ironcross

The solid lifter engines are not any more trouble than hydraulic engines. PLUS the satisfaction is much more rewarding. All the engines are merely pumps and the more inches and horsepower just make them faster pumps............ :thumbs: :cheers:

Ih2lose

I was just looking at the pictures of that car and wonder what they used on the vin plate to make it so shinney it looks brand new

ghostrider20

I would recomend a solid lifter cam for any hobby car. The produce more power then their respective hyd. counter parts. They sound neat and are nostalgic for the period. They are so rare that most people will approach me at the gas pump and begin to tell me that I have a stuck lifer. Althought with Duke W and John H's cold engine off valve lash procedures you can not tell the car has solid lifters at idle, at 6500 RPM you can hear them :hurray: .

I have the 327-365hp with the 30-30 cam. It has poor low end performance but once it gets rolling it screams all the way to 6500 RPm without a hick-up.
I have never driven the 327-350hp model but I would assume that it would have a little better low end. Depends on your driving the gearing etc. I have 4.11's in my car so the low end issue is not an issue any more. Suites my driving.

How much are you going to race the car? I have fun now and then but most of my driving is conservative cruising. A 4 cylinder engine would propel the car just fine for that but would not sound tough idling at the gas station or in the DQ drive-up. So if I had to chose again I would chose the 365 solid motor.

Mark

Vetterodder

IMO, until the later EFI engines, the L79 had the best combination of power and civility of any factory Chevy engine. Some others made more power but had less drivability, higher cost, and higher fuel consumption. I'm not saying that the L79 was the best choice for everyone, only that it was a better choice for more people than most of the other performance engines available at the time.

As others have said, maintenance on solid lifter engines isn't that big a deal, especially on a classic car that usually isn't driven enough to require adjustment once a year or more.

DJ-DOZIER

Thanks for the response...if you guys recall I have a 64 that has been in the garage for almost 20 years with the occasional cruise but I am still "stuck" on what to do with the car. With the 6500 tach and 80lb oil gauge I could envision putting the solid lifter 365 hp in it etc/semi restore her but I am not sure yet if this is worth it (you know what they say about 64's)


I paid "Vette Pro" a visit (look at the ebay link from my orig. post) yesterday and saw that 435 car...wow! But any BB car does that to me. The owner is a great guy and surely comes across some interesting cars.

Ihate2lose...seems like all the cars have those shiny VIN plates...reason for concern? I would like to hear members thoughts on Identifying fakes, from restamps to bogus paperwork/POP's. I have heard that you can tell a restamp by the "broach" marks on the block?

62fuelie

Whether you elect to rebuilt the engine with a solid cam or a hydraulic one, you probably aren't going to exactly duplicate the engine's original specs. Both had 11:1 compression if I recall correctly, and if you are going to use pump gas you need to hold it to around 10:1 or less.


[Modified by 62fuelie, 3:09 PM 1/12/2003]

JohnZ

All mid-years had bright polished stainless steel VIN plates; they stay looking like that forever.

Re-stamping has become a fine art (especially on BB's), and broach marks alone don't tell the story any more, as there are now methods to re-create them; NCRS has a photo library of over 7,000 pad stamps that shows all the types of factory "anomalies" that are genuine, and aids in spotting re-stamps. Most of the points for the engine block (525 out of 613) are now allocated to the casting number and casting date, with only 88 allocated to the pad and the numbers stamped on it. :thumbs:

Solidlifters

(you know what they say about 64's)..........Yes I do and I think it's a whole load of crap. I just don't see any reason for a 64 to be worth any less than any of the other mid year mid years. (64 through 66) given the same options.

As far as the fake 435's, if somebody's REAL knowledgeable or has another car to go by, it's almost impossible to catch a fake without some detective work back to an original owner, which can be difficult or impossible. Of course today's state of the art level of block rebroaching/restamping makes it even more difficult, along with the ready availability of fake build sheets and protecto plates. There are some details that many fakers might not know, outside of the usual stuff like fuel lines on the frame, sway bars, red lines, trans. ign holes in the inner skirt, etc. If you get real serious about a car I'd e mail a common mistake of the fakers to you, but I don't want to post it here, because it's just one more detail for them to add to the bogus cars.

As far as the correct finish/broaching on the pad, there are only two possibilites, one which you can't detect, the other you can. If somebody runs a block in on you that was never stamped when new, it's impossible to detect if the stamping is now done just as the factory did. Obviously there are very few of these floating around and finding one with a proper casting number and date to a given car is VERY unlikely. The second option is that the block is decked enough to remove the factory stamping with a machine that duplicates the old style broach marks, as opposed to the swirl that today's machine shop mills always leave in the deck surface. There are obviously people now who can duplicate this process. The problem is the entire surface of the block must be cut this much to remove the old letters, or a straight edge down the surface would reveal a downward slant on the pad. If the entire surface is cut flat, then the cut would result in a much tighter than stock deck height measurement from stock. I doubt that someone could or would take a corresponding cut off the flat part of the piston top to bring this back to factory specs, or if it could be done without being noticeable.

If I were buying a car in the price range that authentic 67 435's are fetchin', I wouldn't consider it without pulling the right side cyl head for a REAL close inspection and measurement unless I was sure of the history of the car. There's a lotta horses in them woods now.

427435

Any issues with tuning and maintanence will have more to do with the right heat range plugs than the cam. When I was driving my BB as a daily driver, it got the valves set once a year. I changed plugs a lot more until I went to 2 steps warmer heat range. A friend with the 327/350 did lots of tuneups also, until he went warmer with his plugs.

Hard to beat the idle and music of a solid lifter engine but the 327/350 is a good motor too.

ARed64

It is my understanding that the increased horsepower for a solid lifter versus a hydrauilic lifter car comes primarily at higher RPMs - over 4,500 rpms. As a result, for most street driving and crusing, you should see very little, if any difference in performance - zero to sixty or zero to eighty. If you are planning on performance driving or quarter mile racing, then a solid lifter engine would be the choice due to hydraulic lifter float over 4,500 rpms.

Of course, this does not take into account the sound of a solid lifter engine. The mechanical noise does sound neat. There will be more maintenance for the solid lifter engine, at some point, but for a hobby car, you are probably looking at an adjustment every ten years.

If you are looking for a combination that is the best of both worlds, without respect to originality, you might want to look at a roller cam. Most people would not know its a non-original cam anyway.

As far as the original fuel injection units, they are tempremental. There are very few people around who can make them run right and even then, that won't last for long. The reason you see so few fuelie cars without the original unit is because people got fed up with them years ago and took them off. Many ended up in the trash because nobody wanted them. Given there is a minimal performance advantage between the fuelie and the carb version of the same engine, you are better off with the carbs. Remember the performance advantage is only for a properly set up and running fuelie car.

joe58

From what I have read, Zora was not happy with the HP they were getting from the FI unit development so he sent an engineer and a bunch of FI parts to Smokey Yunick's shop.
Smokey was very good at getting more HP from anything.
Smokey's comment on FI "after we got it going good, it was almost as good as two four barrels".

Solidlifters

Joe, I've never heard that rumor before, but I've gotta tell you, I doubt it VERY seriously. Not to take anything away from Smokey, who was definately a mighty smart guy, Zora was brilliant himself and had tools at his disposal that other people could only dream of. Another problem with the rumor was the fact that the 2 4's are actually pretty much pigs from a performance standpoint, although there're sexy as hell to look at. The single carb/alum intake such as the 62/63 340's and more noticeably the alum intake/single Holley that came around in 64 would outperform the 2 4's by a pretty fair margin, when retrofitted on one of these engines. It was true then and unfortunately it still is. A car magazine ran an intake comparison within the last year or two, and the current 2 4's on a low alum. aftermarket intake like Edlebrock and Weind still offer were at the bottom of the list compared to everything they were compared to, and if I remember right were off about 50 HP from a single plane high riser and a big Holley on a BB Chev. It was really disappointing to me because I'd bought an Edelbrock intake and was going to use it on a big block 55 Chevy project just because I like the looks so much.

66427-450

[QUOTE].......... then a solid lifter engine would be the choice due to hydraulic lifter float over 4,500 rpms..................

There will be more maintenance for the solid lifter engine, at some point, but for a hobby car, you are probably looking at an adjustment every ten years.
[QUOTE]

"float over 4500" ??? Properly set hydros are good for 6000.

and "adjustment every 10 years"! I'd say more like once a season, unless your talking about just driving it on and off the trailer for shows...).

BTW, I wouldn't have anything but solids. Lashing valves is very simple on a midyear (easy to pull the valve covers). I just lash mine cold, and add .002 to the lash spec, it works for me

Just my perspective

:seeya

ARed64

I will have to disagree with you on this.

The hydrualic lifters on my car begin to float at 4,500. Its the original engine - a rebuilt 327/300 with about 6,000 miles on the rebuild. I don't think there is any way my car could do 6 grand. Based on other Chevy SBs with Hydraulic lifters that I have owned, this is not unusual. In any event, red line starts at 5,000. The engine runs out of steam at that point. There would be no point in pushing it further. Its making peak power at that level. The 327/350 engine is very similar. Revving a SB Chevy engine with hydraulic lifters to 6,000 RPMs is a waste of time. You are past peak HP and torque.

If you drive a solid lifter car 1,000 miles a year, you should be able to go 10 years or so before making an adjustment. I think that is normal usage for a hobby car.

Solidlifters

If your valve train begins to lay down at 4500, then whoever did the rebuilding 6K miles ago missed, or the tach is wrong. I'd be inclined to look at the valve springs. The L79 will pull hard to high 5's, maybe a little more, and a 300 horse engine should easily pull into the mid 5's.