what combo is better ? - Page 3

njk53 · 04-20-2010, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by doug schriener

Lew-Let us know how the 327 does-I don't recall seeing this combo before-Good luck. Doug Schriener

I agree with the 327. I like the fact that you can use a Holley carb. and you will need the extra cubes to lug all of the weight.

Geerhead55 · 04-20-2010, 09:15 PM

I could be wrong,,but I'm thinking the only Holley carbed 327 in 66' was the L-79 combo, which was available in Corvettes, Chevelles, and Chevy IIs. I don't recall it being in a full size Chevy, let alone a station wagon. I'm sure somone on here will set me straight.
That L-72 427 combo would be wild, if its legal. I can see class eliminations for D/S when Ben Wenzel looks over in his 67 Z and sees a wagon in the burnout box with him!
Might be one big parts breaking machine, but could be fun. My 2 cents.
Danny Durham

Mark Yacavone · 04-20-2010, 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by njk53

I agree with the 327. I like the fact that you can use a Holley carb. and you will need the extra cubes to lug all of the weight.

You won't like the fact that it was a 540 cfm Holley with the same rating as a 750 Q-jet.
The 66 Chevy II did not come with the Q-jet originally. Only the Holley or AVS .
The 67's came Qjet equipped ,so NHRA relented for the 66's too.

I f you want more cubes ,how about a 396/325?

Billy Nees · 04-21-2010, 06:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Yacavone

I f you want more cubes ,how about a 396/325?

Now that would be a really good combo but a load to tow!

danny waters sr · 04-21-2010, 07:26 AM

I had a 66 belair s/w for a few years . Ran IHRA and was fast with the exception of Lee Tuttle. Car was 1.50 under . We were at Rockingham Nats In October 04. Lee was 1.51 under (not trying to protect combo) and i was 1.31 under(trying to protect my combo)Needless to say we got HP on Monday. Sad thing is Lee ran IHRA twice a year. Had 198 low gear and 6.14 gear and loooooose converter,with 30x9 hoosier radial.Boy do i miss that car now. I think it weighed 4260 lbs. and ran a 13.84 .

k.pascoe · 04-21-2010, 08:21 AM

427/425 D/S x2!!!

Lew Silverman · 04-21-2010, 08:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by danny waters sr

...... Had 198 low gear and 6.14 gear and loooooose converter,with 30x9 hoosier radial.Boy do i miss that car now. I think it weighed 4260 lbs. and ran a 13.84 .

It's definitely a tank! What kind of RPM's would you pull through the traps? I was thinking of starting with a 4.88, but if you've had luck with the lower gears I may have to reconsider.

Thanks for the help!

Lew

wagonboy · 04-21-2010, 09:10 AM

Thanks for the info guys. I have the car. It has been a 283 r and t car most of its life.I have had it up for sale. No one has stepped up to the plate to purchase it. So maybe after I get my current car running under, I have toyed with the idea of spending the next 5 or 6 years building it with my son, so he could race stock when he gets old enough.

By the way 6:13 gears 2.18 low gear set in the trans are what help to make the 283 combo work.

Bob Bender · 04-21-2010, 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lew Silverman

It's definitely a tank! What kind of RPM's would you pull through the traps? I was thinking of starting with a 4.88, but if you've had luck with the lower gears I may have to reconsider.

Thanks for the help!

Lew

I run a 5.57 in my 4400 lb. wagon with the 350 ci. A 5.86 will make that 283 GO

doug schriener · 04-21-2010, 10:47 AM

Hi-For that car these guys are right-ya need lotsa gear and buzz it!!!!

04-20-2010, 09:15 PM	#22
Geerhead55 VIP Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Tacoma, Washington Posts: 1,632 Likes: 0 Liked 5 Times in 5 Posts	Re: what combo is better ? I could be wrong,,but I'm thinking the only Holley carbed 327 in 66' was the L-79 combo, which was available in Corvettes, Chevelles, and Chevy IIs. I don't recall it being in a full size Chevy, let alone a station wagon. I'm sure somone on here will set me straight. That L-72 427 combo would be wild, if its legal. I can see class eliminations for D/S when Ben Wenzel looks over in his 67 Z and sees a wagon in the burnout box with him! Might be one big parts breaking machine, but could be fun. My 2 cents. Danny Durham

04-21-2010, 07:26 AM	#25
danny waters sr VIP Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: lagrange,nc Posts: 2,224 Likes: 1 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: what combo is better ? I had a 66 belair s/w for a few years . Ran IHRA and was fast with the exception of Lee Tuttle. Car was 1.50 under . We were at Rockingham Nats In October 04. Lee was 1.51 under (not trying to protect combo) and i was 1.31 under(trying to protect my combo)Needless to say we got HP on Monday. Sad thing is Lee ran IHRA twice a year. Had 198 low gear and 6.14 gear and loooooose converter,with 30x9 hoosier radial.Boy do i miss that car now. I think it weighed 4260 lbs. and ran a 13.84 . __________________ Danny Waters, Sr / 73 Duster "340"

04-21-2010, 08:21 AM	#26
k.pascoe Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Fenton, Missouri Posts: 107 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: what combo is better ? 427/425 D/S x2!!!

04-21-2010, 09:10 AM	#28
wagonboy Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 54 Likes: 7 Liked 26 Times in 5 Posts	Re: what combo is better ? Thanks for the info guys. I have the car. It has been a 283 r and t car most of its life.I have had it up for sale. No one has stepped up to the plate to purchase it. So maybe after I get my current car running under, I have toyed with the idea of spending the next 5 or 6 years building it with my son, so he could race stock when he gets old enough. By the way 6:13 gears 2.18 low gear set in the trans are what help to make the 283 combo work.

04-21-2010, 10:47 AM	#30
doug schriener Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: pennock,mn Posts: 83 Likes: 21 Liked 7 Times in 6 Posts	Re: what combo is better ? Hi-For that car these guys are right-ya need lotsa gear and buzz it!!!!