Register now to get rid of these ads!

Tech: Pontiac Engines

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by axle, Nov 22, 2007.

  1. Pontiacsven
    Joined: Jan 1, 2016
    Posts: 14

    Pontiacsven

  2. draggin'GTO
    Joined: Jul 7, 2003
    Posts: 1,792

    draggin'GTO
    Member

    The casting # for the 1960 4-barrel intake is 536518

    The 1959 4-barrel intake is casting # 532120, both intakes will work for your engine.

    If you can't find a 4-barrel intake and carb right away you could always just keep the 2-barrel, these engines were stout runners back in their day and the vast majority were equipped with the 2-barrel.

    Of interest is the fact that the 283 HP 2-barrel, 303 HP 4-barrel and the 318 HP Tri-Power 389 engines were all equipped with the same camshaft in 1960, part # 529472. Specs for the '472' cam were 273/282 degrees advertised duration with .406"/.406" lift, this cam is essentially the same profile as the later 9779066 cam. The '066' cam is widely used as a stock replacement cam in just about every stock rebuild these days. Your engine most likely has the '066' cam in it right now.

    The '066' cam can be easily replaced with the 9779068 cam that was used in numerous HO and Tri-Power engines from 1965 through 1972. Specs for the '068' cam were 288/302 degrees advertised and .406"/.406" lift.

    The '068' cam would be a very nice upgrade that will give you a noticeable power increase, more than just adding a 4-barrel intake and carb. It will work fine with the 2-barrel and idle with a nice little rumble. The '068' cam will really help with the breathing, and later if you find a 4-barrel setup it will really shine.

    A cam swap has always been the best bang for the buck, that combined with a 4-barrel will net you a better power increase than a just a swap to HO heads ever would have.

    When you're working on these older engines it really pays to keep the correct-year parts on them. Sure, you can swap later year parts onto them but sometimes it gets a little complicated and you end up needing more parts than you first thought.
     
    DBake likes this.
  3. draggin'GTO
    Joined: Jul 7, 2003
    Posts: 1,792

    draggin'GTO
    Member

    That's the one you want.

    Direct replacement for your old cam, no other modifications are necessary to use it.
     
  4. Pontiacsven
    Joined: Jan 1, 2016
    Posts: 14

    Pontiacsven

    Wow fat Thanks. I will order the Cam and when i find this 4bl Intake later its ok . But first i will do it with the 2bl
    Thankkkks
     
  5. simon g-s
    Joined: Mar 1, 2009
    Posts: 116

    simon g-s
    Member

    Just read most of this. I'm building a 400 with a 6v71 and transbrake equipped th400 that will go in an Austin pickup gasser. Will shit myself or break something, maybe both !
    I plan on racing in the gasser circus, a growing low key group here in UK.
    This started out as a budget build but got a nice redundancy package so blowing it on a ton of stuff, mainly from Butler Performance, Ross Pistons, scat rods, custom roller cam, etc. I'm sticking with my 6X heads with some clean up porting. Should be up and running by next year. Mock up photo, I have a build thread on the NSRA forum. image.jpg
     
    patrick english and Bowtie Coupe like this.
  6. ClassicDriver
    Joined: Mar 8, 2010
    Posts: 118

    ClassicDriver
    Member

    I love that: ".... low key group"!

    That is awesome!
     
  7. Skankin' Rat Fink
    Joined: Jun 18, 2006
    Posts: 1,496

    Skankin' Rat Fink
    Member
    from NYC

    Anyone have any info on machining a 1955-1957 Pontiac bellhousing to accept a four-speed transmission? I hear a toploader Ford is the way to go, for proper input shaft length.
     
  8. Skankin' Rat Fink
    Joined: Jun 18, 2006
    Posts: 1,496

    Skankin' Rat Fink
    Member
    from NYC

    Any information available about a later diaphragm clutch on a stock 56/57 flywheel?

    Sent from my LG-H900 using H.A.M.B. mobile app
     
  9. DBake
    Joined: Oct 8, 2016
    Posts: 4

    DBake

    Any advice on repairing rocker studs that want to crawl out of their holes? 1959 389 stock heads
     
  10. draggin'GTO
    Joined: Jul 7, 2003
    Posts: 1,792

    draggin'GTO
    Member

    The only proper way to repair them would be to pull them all out (a stack of washers and a rocker nut with plenty of moly lube will usually do the trick) and tap the holes for screw-in studs.

    Make up a tapping block to guide the tap straight, or have your trusted machinist do the work so the studs don't end up looking like the spines on a porcupine.

    Isky Cams sells the '55 -'60 screw-in studs you need to replace the old press-in studs, part # 909:http://iskycams.com/cart/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=73&products_id=1957
     
    62hotcat and loudbang like this.
  11. c-10 simplex
    Joined: Aug 24, 2009
    Posts: 1,371

    c-10 simplex
    Member

    How do pontiac cranks fare, specifically the nose----like if you wanted to bolt a 6-71 or other roots type blower on the engine?

    Because on STOCK sbc's, the crank nose generally isn't designed for this and eventually breaks.....
     
  12. treb11
    Joined: Jan 21, 2006
    Posts: 3,947

    treb11
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    I would o'pine (never had a blown Pontiac) that the large journal (421, 428, 455) cranks would be a tad stronger. especially the ArmaSteel ones. Super Duty of course, but they are $$$ for originals.

     
  13. toxic waste
    Joined: Dec 18, 2011
    Posts: 383

    toxic waste
    Member
    from Iowa

    I drag raced a 400 Pontiac blown ,injected on alky. 35 lbs of boost. No front crank support. It worked fine. Ran 130 mph in the 1/8mile. Armasteel crank
     
    loudbang likes this.
  14. toxic waste
    Joined: Dec 18, 2011
    Posts: 383

    toxic waste
    Member
    from Iowa

    Mickey Thompson ran a twin Pontiac in a boat. He drove the V drives off the front of the engines.
     
    C. John Stutzer likes this.
  15. Joe H
    Joined: Feb 10, 2008
    Posts: 1,525

    Joe H
    Member

    The original Challenger had four blown Pontiacs in it and went 400 mph with out blowing up any of the engines.
     
    loudbang likes this.
  16. c-10 simplex
    Joined: Aug 24, 2009
    Posts: 1,371

    c-10 simplex
    Member

    Ok, so i guess chalk that up as another advantage over the SBC.
     
  17. Jeff Walker
    Joined: Feb 6, 2007
    Posts: 498

    Jeff Walker
    Member

    It has been found that the large journal (421, 428, 455) cranks aren't any stronger due to the larger mains. I ran a 455 crank in a drag car of mine and had the mains cut down to put it in the 400 block. The ArmaSteel ones are better though as they are made with a better iron. Also any Pontiac crank that has an N cast into it is supposed to be made with the same material as the ArmaSteel ones.
     
    C. John Stutzer likes this.
  18. Nov '07 DESOTO wrote:
    "ALSO, Only '55~'57 heads can be used on the early block due to WATER passages, So dont get froggy & put LATER head on it.. You will only cause MORE problems"

    I kept this sentence in the back of my mind while researching putting a pair of 1974 GTO heads [#46] with 1.96/1.66 valves, 7/16ths chevy big block screw-in studs with factory guideplates on my 1957 block. I checked early and late head gaskets against each other for hours, burned up the computer looking for anybody else doing this swap and in the end I couldn't find any differences in coolant passages to prevent me from doing it.
    I also used clay to check for any piston/valve contact problems and everything cleared with room to spare. Fired it up and it runs great. but haven't put coolant in it yet.
    Also used the early front cover on it. Made 1/4 inch adapters [taking advantage of the 1/4 inch difference between pre 64 and post 64 crank length] to use '57 water necks on the front of the '74 heads. I can't use the distribution [gusher] tubes in the late heads but they weren't used on the late heads anyway.
     
  19. Skankin' Rat Fink
    Joined: Jun 18, 2006
    Posts: 1,496

    Skankin' Rat Fink
    Member
    from NYC

    Sending coolant to the heads first without the gusher tubes may not cool the way it's supposed to. You may want to consider using a 1960-up front cover that sends coolant to the block first, like the later engines.
     
    C. John Stutzer likes this.
  20. Just because I'm a MT fanboi and nothing to do with nothing really...

    thompson - intake & exhaust on outside.jpg challenger-four pontiacs.jpg
     
  21. pontman
    Joined: Mar 18, 2011
    Posts: 419

    pontman
    Member

     
    C. John Stutzer likes this.
  22. Okiefromwatonga
    Joined: Nov 28, 2010
    Posts: 3

    Okiefromwatonga
    Member
    from Watonga,OK

    I have a question for you Pontiac gurus, I have a 1959 GMC 370 that has the Pontiac V8 in it. As I understand it it is a De-bored 389 displacing 336 cid. I have a 1976 455 that was going to go into my 76 T/A to replace its 400 but now i'm thinking of replacing the the GMC's engine with the 455. Now the part i'm confused on as I have read the old Pontiac and the BOP patterns are close, are they close enough that the original bell housing for the 4 speed bolt up to the 455? Lastly will I need a custom flywheel made or can I have the 59 GMC flywheel re-ballanced?
     
  23. Clik
    Joined: Jul 1, 2009
    Posts: 1,965

    Clik
    Member

  24. The bolt pattern of a '59 Pontiac/GMC bell housing is not gonna work with your later engine. The pattern was changed in 1961. That shouldn't be bad news, though. With the later engine you can use a nice late bell housing or even a stamped steel scatter shield. You'd have to weld motor mount bracketry on the scatter shield or if using an aluminum bell housing you'd have to weld engine side mounts to your frame.
    The early stick flywheel has a smaller center hole than the later flywheels...same bolt pattern tho. You could open up the center hole in your '59 flywheel and maybe a machine shop could balance it to your 455 but why not just use a 455 flywheel?
     
  25. Just another of his many wild-assed experiments to find the "ultimate truth".
    DR-1101-MT-03.jpg
     
  26. Hey guys, on another note on crank snout strength when using a blower- No one mentioned but, it is important to drive the blower as close to the engine as is possible. I have seen street set ups with huge spaces to clear all the stock pullies/belts. For a performance/durability application, that is a bad idea. design your drive as close to the block as is possible. That will pull less strain on the crank snout. I have several blown Pontiacs and really enjoy them,.
     
  27. The whole idea of a side port set up is actually very brilliant. By running all the ports on the exhaust side, you end up with a much shorter, straighter port. You also do not have to steer away from push rods. About 10 years after M/T played with side port arrangements, Bruce Crower did the same thing with a little chev. It made huge power and the cover of Hot Rod. So, the theory is quite sound for a high hp combo.
     
  28. For all the Pontiac engine fans ( as I am ), I will be hosting the 18th annual Pontiac Heaven weekend in the Phoenix area December 16-18, 2016. In the late 90s, I started running events only allowing real Pontiac power. The idea was and is to promote the use and knowledge of the great Pontiac V8. a few years later, I added a 2nd day of nostalgia racing. This year it is 3 days and we will have drag racing all 3 days, 2 car show days, 1 auto cross day, swap all days, plus a tour of one of my vintage Pontiac storage yards that has about 300 Pontiacs 1955-1981. There will also be tours of classic salvage yards.
    Some of the special displays at this years Pontiac Heaven weekend- The blown fuel Pontiac top fueler from the 1963-4 era ( shown in my avatar ), the only known original an complete M/T HEMI Pontiac engine, my own nostalgia AA/Fuel Dragster powered by a 1959 389, a blown, altered wheelbase '65 Tempest funny car project and more. More info on my site and on face book. thanks , Steve Barcak www.pontiacheaven.org
     
  29. This engine pic is very special! Have never seen it before. Are there any more? This is a side port arrangement with a high exhaust port! very wild and almost unlimited potential. Someone was really using their noodle.
    s s
     
  30. Not to take away from Mickey, but: its very rare NOT to find an inline 4, 6 or 8 cyl inline OHV that has "side ports" aka, intake & exhaust on the same side of the head.

    More than once I've smiled a bit, listening to somebody express their desire to build a "crossflow head" for their banger, when a cross-sectional view shows some obvious advantages to the more staid, traditional "factory" approach.
     
    applekrate and Skankin' Rat Fink like this.

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.