garym52

I was wondering if I can put a big block in my 79 L82 without making significant mods? Any thoughts are appreciated!

Thanks,
Gary

Ganey

Bolts in. Acc. brackets for BB needed. Good to upgrade springs unless FE-7 sus.

TheSkunkWorks

All C3 chassis will readily accept the BB; just use the correct bits. BB'ed my '78 long ago, and would do it again in a heartbeat.

Vette5.5

I wouldn't do it, as 100 more lbs hanging over the front axle. If wanting to go bigger, probably go 406 SB myself. I've been in many 406's, that easily show tail lights to most BB cars. Unfortunately, some not so much though, so choose your builder/combo well. Recall a guy with a 71' 406 Camaro 4 speed, and even with 4 of us in the car, was dusting everything on the road. I was impressed.

srs244

a front suspension upgrade would be almost mandatory to deal with the added weight and make the car steerable, even with gymkhana originally (as i am certain the shocks are no longer to OEM specs as they are hard to come by in OEM stuff). when i was completely restoring the undercarriage of my 78 i consulted with wilcox as to what they were using on gymkhana equipped cars when the restored them (i couldn't find reference anywhere to a correct replacement delco shock) and they told me that they have been using the regular part number shock in the gymkhana cars. admittedly the springs and sway bar are much more heavy duty, but they still should be beefed up if you put in a BB in my opinion.

Ganey

Since he was asking for general info., that's what he got & w/o specifics all that can be expected. I brought up something to consider, not the final design. Some are installing w/ stock std. sus.! I don't type & usually keep it short to the point.
I have FE-7 & would use BB al. heads, rad., etc. to start...

I replaced the stock FE-7 shocks early w/ Koni adj. which worked like stock FE-7 shocks in std. positions.

Clubby99

Why? Maybe in a 74 or earlier.

A new crate motor will be lighter, more powerful, much easier to install, and less trouble later.

TheSkunkWorks

What's wrong with BB'ing a '75 or later shark? (That's rhetorical, please don't answer.) A good number of us late C3 owners wouldn't have it any other way.

And, why is it that everytime someone brings up swapping in a BB the persistant myth they're only suppermassive, impotent lumps soon follows? A healthy alum head BB will easily more than make up for the bit of extra weight, and with a little astute chassis sorting will handle with the best of them. Besides, if one is bucks up, an alum BB weighs in at less than an LT-1 mill.

The only real downside is BB's aren't cheap, but if you've got to have one nothing else will scratch that itch.

couperdecar

Anyone know what a BB with aluminum head weighs compared to a sbc with iron heads ? I would have thought it'd be less than 100 lbs difference.

I had a built 396 BB years ago and it was a torque monster compared to my 383. 396 BB used to get about 5mpg though. 383 : 24mpg

bashcraft

A big block with aluminum heads, intake and water pump isn't going to be much, if any heavier than a small block with iron heads and intake.

I have a big block with stock small block springs (not even gymkhana) and it sits perfectly.

bashcraft

You have obviously never ridden in a big block car.

nate99

The thought crossed my mind to build a big block slowly as an eventual replacement for my lowly 290 HP crate that will be powering my '81 for the foreseeable future. High torque through the aluminum rear has me spooked about that, though I suppose I could mitigate that with crappy tires.

iree75

Do it! ... but not with iron head 427 as I did. (Although it was fun to rev a solid lifter 427... and they do sound different. ) If do a BB swap again, I'd build nothing less then a 496 with aluminum heads... ie.. with modern components, if you are going to go big block get all the cheap ci you can out of it.

Ganey

While the 80s al. rears are not as strong as the earlier iron, it's the shock that gets them like manual trans. & slicks. That's why some knowledgeable guys run autos & get by w/ basically stock rears w/ very high power setups.

TheSkunkWorks

'79 was the last year before the weaker rear end. '80 & up, one can always fit a beefed up iron 10-bolt hog head to the batwing. Either way, given enough abuse, the stock 10-bolt will eventually break - slicks not required IMOE. Yep, 12-bolt IRS diff here.

Love those solid cam 427's. Saving my pennies to finish up another one for my '78 as we speak.

Vette5.5

Another thing to throw into mix. There's good reason, many here are going LS conversion. An LS3 weighs 120 lbs less than a iron headed SB, let alone a BB. The way LS heads flow, dont think they'll be many BB's in sight.

auavette

Swapped a 406 that I had in my 76 for a 496 with aluminum heads.
mayor changes besides brackets are rack and pinion power steering, adjustable monoleaf front suspension, aluminum radiotor with twin electric fan and a 8-71 blower.
very nice ride, kind of loud with the sidepipes and spiral baffles

milo30

Going to need a new radiator and find the pulleys or a serpentine set. I looked into it last year but the pulleys were expensive and I was trying to do it on a budget so I passed.

I wouldn't worry about most of the comments here about reasons why not to do the swap because of weight or anything else. There is always a reason not to use one engine over another. A BB isn't the lightest, a SB is lighter, an LS is even lighter but who cares? If you are wanting to build a car and base it on features to improve the handling or lighten and spread the weight then why even mess with a C3 when there are several other cars out there that would be better candidates for speed and quickness out there?

To me you go with a C3 for the nostalgic look of the car. You go to the BB for the same reason. SB are a dime a dozen, LS conversions in old cars is headed that way IMO. A BB nowadays is rare to see and has the cool factor.

If you just want lighter, more powerful, less weight then just buy a C6