HOME MAGAZINE FORUM RULES SPONSORS CONTACT
     
   
   
 
Go Back   CLASS RACER FORUM > Class Racer Forums > Stock and Super Stock Tech

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-17-2017, 10:05 AM   #1
hamlinmotorsports
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 21
Default 1964 Chevy ll 283/220 hp

Haven’t really found any info on this combination? Has it not been tried in this car? Or is this just a bad combination for this car? I have a 1964 chevy ll that I would like to do something with. Not looking to break any records just something to get me .5-.6 under. Is it worth trying? What’s the good and bad of this combination? Thanks for any input
hamlinmotorsports is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2017, 11:13 AM   #2
Stephen & Horace Johnson
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 830
Default Re: 1964 Chevy ll 283/220 hp

Quote:
Originally Posted by hamlinmotorsports View Post
Haven’t really found any info on this combination? Has it not been tried in this car? Or is this just a bad combination for this car? I have a 1964 chevy ll that I would like to do something with. Not looking to break any records just something to get me .5-.6 under. Is it worth trying? What’s the good and bad of this combination? Thanks for any input
stock or Superstock
__________________
Stephen Johnson #2162
Horace Johnson #2167
SS/D 427 Ford Fairlane NHRA-IHRA
Stephen & Horace Johnson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2017, 11:46 AM   #3
Mark Yacavone
Sponsor
 
Mark Yacavone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Mayer , a fur piece up the road...
Posts: 4,805
Default Re: 1964 Chevy ll 283/220 hp

Quote:
Originally Posted by hamlinmotorsports View Post
Haven’t really found any info on this combination? Has it not been tried in this car? Or is this just a bad combination for this car? I have a 1964 chevy ll that I would like to do something with. Not looking to break any records just something to get me .5-.6 under. Is it worth trying? What’s the good and bad of this combination? Thanks for any input
Nothing wrong with it, except for the cost of building a 283 today.
You don't use many original parts
602-769-0346
__________________
"I had a friend who was a clown. When he died, all his friends went to the funeral in one car."
-Steven Wright
Mark Yacavone is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2017, 12:02 PM   #4
glen myers
Junior Member
 
glen myers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: GAINESVILLE,VA
Posts: 74
Default Re: 1964 Chevy ll 283/220 hp

^^^^^^
__________________
Glen Myers
126 GT/HA
glen myers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2017, 04:15 PM   #5
Timetraveler
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 84
Default Re: 1964 Chevy ll 283/220 hp

If your running stock the newer NHRA rules have made it a little easer to be competitive with this combination. Roller rockers, beehive springs and a three speed transmission helps.
Timetraveler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2017, 04:39 PM   #6
Tom Meyer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Pierce NE
Posts: 632
Default Re: 1964 Chevy ll 283/220 hp

51 5911 R/SA Bobby Devine, Cozad NE, '64 Chevy Nova 13.458 14.05 -0.592
Bobby runs a 2bl carb, no roll bar needed. Ask anybody in Div 5 Bobby has a lot of fun in his car .Monty Jones preps this car and could enlighten you what it would take to run one. Tom
__________________
Tom Meyer 5240 SS Stock ???
Tom Meyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2017, 04:41 PM   #7
james schaechter
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,531
Default Re: 1964 Chevy ll 283/220 hp

Jim, the 283 is fun, but won’t be as good as the 327 250 hp combo. If you ran G stick it might be fun, but there are a lot of combos that are better
__________________
James Schaechter 3163 STK
james schaechter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2017, 07:16 PM   #8
Mark Yacavone
Sponsor
 
Mark Yacavone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Mayer , a fur piece up the road...
Posts: 4,805
Default Re: 1964 Chevy ll 283/220 hp

Quote:
Originally Posted by james schaechter View Post
Jim, the 283 is fun, but won’t be as good as the 327 250 hp combo. If you ran G stick it might be fun, but there are a lot of combos that are better
1964 was a big year for change in the Chevy II line.
Bigger brakes, spindles, 5 lug wheels, and the Salisbury type 8.2 rear, but not the 327 until 1965.
Of course , you can make a 64 hard top car into a 65, but not the post car , ...very easily anyway.
That being said , I do like the 65 250 hp stick car. If a 66 Q-jet car can run deep into the 10's, a 4GC should run 11 flat anyway, wouldn't you guys say?
__________________
"I had a friend who was a clown. When he died, all his friends went to the funeral in one car."
-Steven Wright
Mark Yacavone is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2017, 04:44 AM   #9
james schaechter
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,531
Default Re: 1964 Chevy ll 283/220 hp

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Yacavone View Post
1964 was a big year for change in the Chevy II line.
Bigger brakes, spindles, 5 lug wheels, and the Salisbury type 8.2 rear, but not the 327 until 1965.
Of course , you can make a 64 hard top car into a 65, but not the post car , ...very easily anyway.
That being said , I do like the 65 250 hp stick car. If a 66 Q-jet car can run deep into the 10's, a 4GC should run 11 flat anyway, wouldn't you guys say?

I think Jim has run the 250 hp this year. Not saying it is the same car, I thought it was a 65. I would think a 250 would go 11.0s in a max effort car with great air and a tailwind! LOL.

The 283 220 post Deal is the lightest combo for a Nova v8 four barrel I think.
__________________
James Schaechter 3163 STK
james schaechter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2017, 08:15 AM   #10
Dwight Southerland
VIP Member
 
Dwight Southerland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Arkansas - In the middle of everything.
Posts: 1,723
Default Re: 1964 Chevy ll 283/220 hp

The 2bbl engine in this car has a favorable power factor and fits Q at under 3000 lbs with the driver. The 4bbl engine has an unfavorable power factor (65 hp difference between the two engines). The only spec difference between the 2bbl and 4bbl engines is the intake-carb. I would be tempted to try the 2bbl first since the opportunity to work out the car and associated parts would have the advantage of not being so behind the ball performance wise with other competitors in the class.

That being said, the intake manifold is a serious limiting factor on the 2bbl engine.
__________________
Dwight Southerland is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Class Racer.com. All Rights Reserved. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.Ad Management plugin by RedTyger