1960 283 chevy

Geerhead55 · 02-28-2009, 12:49 AM

The data was provided by Superstock and Drag Illustrated magazine many years ago. Granted the car in the article wasn't a 60' 283 car,, but a typical (at the time) small block Superstock 69 Camaro. The 'glide was quicker than the TH350.............................Danny Durham

bill dedman · 02-28-2009, 01:51 AM

Jim,

I don't remember us DISAGREEING on anything but "factory" figures on boost and monitoring it; how, why, and when, and if you'll remember, I eventually came around to ~your~ way of thinking on that subject after about ten thousand pages of posts.... so, I think that whatever "issues" we had dissipated when the dust settled.

I don't know if you knew it, or even cared, since it's not a Class car, but my street/strip/ "bracket" car is a daily-driver '72 Valiant 4-door sedan with a Vortech boosted 360 Magnum that is good for about an 11.80 @ 118 in the quarter, with 3.55 gears, which really isn't very fast, but adequate on the street, for a 70 year old geezer with an attitude... LOL!

Just telling you that because you seemed to think that ~I~ thought that "boost" was a dirty word.

Nope; it's "addicting"... need I say more????????

X-TECH MAN · 02-28-2009, 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geerhead55

The data was provided by Superstock and Drag Illustrated magazine many years ago. Granted the car in the article wasn't a 60' 283 car,, but a typical (at the time) small block Superstock 69 Camaro. The 'glide was quicker than the TH350.............................Danny Durham

That was an article on Paul Forte's TURBO ACTION '69 Camaro SS/JA. He was still running a cam ground for a powerglide combo that made more torque and he had tire spin. Maybe he could give you more info about this but I dont think Jack will have trouble with tire spin.......lol.

Jim Cimarolli · 02-28-2009, 08:15 AM

I built a '91 Camaro for a customer, it is a low 10 second small block footbrake car. We broke our turbo 350 on Saturday, changed to a powerglide on Sunday and went back to the same track to test. Car was over a tenth slower with the 'glide. I built both trannys myself, the turbo was a stock 2.52 low and the glide was a 1.76, using the same torque converter. Car suffered out of the hole and lost most of the et. by the 330, I was driving the car myself. I think the biggest problem was the loss of gear ratio with that 1.76 low, probably would not have been near as much a difference if we had a 2.08 first gear. But that was what I saw in the comparison with a 3200 lb. car on 9 inch tires.

Greg Hill · 02-28-2009, 08:46 AM

The heavier the car the more et will be gained using a 3 speed trans. Since Jack's car weighs 4,000 plus pounds it should really pick his car up. Going from a 2.18 low gear to a 2.75 or lower first gear should really help get the car moving and not having a big drop when you shift should help it down the track. I would bet it would be worth at least .15 on his car.

Lyn Smith · 02-28-2009, 08:58 AM

Watch that tach Jack. You will be shifftin in to second gear right after the 60 foot cone,not and the end of the grandstands!!!!!!!!!

Jim Cimarolli · 02-28-2009, 09:32 AM

Is Jack going to use a 200 or a turbo 350?

442OLDS · 02-28-2009, 11:00 AM

Jack,

You better look into getting some wheelie bars.

John Mason · 02-28-2009, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg Hill

The heavier the car the more et will be gained using a 3 speed trans. Since Jack's car weighs 4,000 plus pounds it should really pick his car up. Going from a 2.18 low gear to a 2.75 or lower first gear should really help get the car moving and not having a big drop when you shift should help it down the track. I would bet it would be worth at least .15 on his car.

How about in a 3300 lb 327 GT car, 2.08 low, very good PG versus a 2.52 low, very good Rossler 350? The PG is in the car and I have access to the Rossler.
Any data or thoughts?

Don Whitmore · 02-28-2009, 01:15 PM

A powerglide versus turbo 3-spd difference is not that easy to figure out. A pure back-to-back swap won't give you correct answer. You need to optimize each setup i.e., cam, gear, tires etc.

That said, I would guess an optimized turbo 3-spd would be better due to less converter slippage and ability of trans to keep engine in a more narrow power range. There are some on this board who have good knowledge of converter efficiency, would like to hear their input...

02-28-2009, 12:49 AM	#1
Geerhead55 VIP Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Tacoma, Washington Posts: 1,632 Likes: 0 Liked 5 Times in 5 Posts	Re: 1960 283 chevy The data was provided by Superstock and Drag Illustrated magazine many years ago. Granted the car in the article wasn't a 60' 283 car,, but a typical (at the time) small block Superstock 69 Camaro. The 'glide was quicker than the TH350.............................Danny Durham

02-28-2009, 01:51 AM	#2
bill dedman VIP Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Conway, AR Posts: 1,739 Likes: 0 Liked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Re: 1960 283 chevy Jim, I don't remember us DISAGREEING on anything but "factory" figures on boost and monitoring it; how, why, and when, and if you'll remember, I eventually came around to ~your~ way of thinking on that subject after about ten thousand pages of posts.... so, I think that whatever "issues" we had dissipated when the dust settled. I don't know if you knew it, or even cared, since it's not a Class car, but my street/strip/ "bracket" car is a daily-driver '72 Valiant 4-door sedan with a Vortech boosted 360 Magnum that is good for about an 11.80 @ 118 in the quarter, with 3.55 gears, which really isn't very fast, but adequate on the street, for a 70 year old geezer with an attitude... LOL! Just telling you that because you seemed to think that ~I~ thought that "boost" was a dirty word. Nope; it's "addicting"... need I say more???????? __________________ Bill

02-28-2009, 08:15 AM	#4
Jim Cimarolli Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Sulphur Springs Texas Posts: 743 Likes: 146 Liked 166 Times in 46 Posts	Re: 1960 283 chevy I built a '91 Camaro for a customer, it is a low 10 second small block footbrake car. We broke our turbo 350 on Saturday, changed to a powerglide on Sunday and went back to the same track to test. Car was over a tenth slower with the 'glide. I built both trannys myself, the turbo was a stock 2.52 low and the glide was a 1.76, using the same torque converter. Car suffered out of the hole and lost most of the et. by the 330, I was driving the car myself. I think the biggest problem was the loss of gear ratio with that 1.76 low, probably would not have been near as much a difference if we had a 2.08 first gear. But that was what I saw in the comparison with a 3200 lb. car on 9 inch tires.

02-28-2009, 08:46 AM	#5
Greg Hill VIP Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: Louisville , KY Posts: 1,995 Likes: 68 Liked 279 Times in 68 Posts	Re: 1960 283 chevy The heavier the car the more et will be gained using a 3 speed trans. Since Jack's car weighs 4,000 plus pounds it should really pick his car up. Going from a 2.18 low gear to a 2.75 or lower first gear should really help get the car moving and not having a big drop when you shift should help it down the track. I would bet it would be worth at least .15 on his car. __________________ Greg Hill 4171 STK

02-28-2009, 08:58 AM	#6
Lyn Smith VIP Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Pontiac,il. Posts: 1,199 Likes: 282 Liked 967 Times in 194 Posts	Re: 1960 283 chevy Watch that tach Jack. You will be shifftin in to second gear right after the 60 foot cone,not and the end of the grandstands!!!!!!!!!

02-28-2009, 09:32 AM	#7
Jim Cimarolli Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Sulphur Springs Texas Posts: 743 Likes: 146 Liked 166 Times in 46 Posts	Re: 1960 283 chevy Is Jack going to use a 200 or a turbo 350?

02-28-2009, 11:00 AM	#8
442OLDS VIP Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Elgin,IL Posts: 1,339 Likes: 5 Liked 282 Times in 103 Posts	Re: 1960 283 chevy Jack, You better look into getting some wheelie bars.

02-28-2009, 01:15 PM	#10
Don Whitmore Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 140 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: 1960 283 chevy A powerglide versus turbo 3-spd difference is not that easy to figure out. A pure back-to-back swap won't give you correct answer. You need to optimize each setup i.e., cam, gear, tires etc. That said, I would guess an optimized turbo 3-spd would be better due to less converter slippage and ability of trans to keep engine in a more narrow power range. There are some on this board who have good knowledge of converter efficiency, would like to hear their input...