Projects 52 Styline Deluxe 2 dr sleeper

Hey everybody,

I want to put a LQ9 with l92 heads in a 52 2 dr sedan Chevy. Is this possible? I'm think about carbing it and putting in a 700r4. What pitfalls will I encounter along the way?

A mustang II suspension is what I have planned for the front. I'd like to have low profile tires and steel wheels with wider tires in the back and I may minitub it to get there. I'm thinking white walls with trim rings but I need to find some wide steel wheels for the back.

Let me know your thoughts, and let me know what I'm up against. I'm only in the planning stages at this point, but I do have the car and it is a good rust free solid car to build on. This is what it would look like restored to stock.

Thanks in advance!

 

Talk to Hank here on the HAMB...he did his with a twin turbo LS engine...

But if you are putting 18's on this car you are already up against everything we hold dear on this site... traditional hot rods and customs... plus you would be mixing styles which almost never looks good.

pick one and stick with it...

 

i kept mine stock except for a disc brake upgrade, having a blast with it

 

Maybe 18" steel wheels aren't the answer. I've read that you can't put a very big tire back there without minitubbing. My goal is a stock looking car from far away and then you'll know you have a hotrod on your hands when you get close.

 

Help?

 

EFI vs carb is the least of your worries.

you're going to need (working from the rear front):

(1) rear end
The original closed-torque-tube rear end won't work. Look for a 1st gen Camaro or 4x4 Blazer rear end. Or a custom made 9" Ford rear end. Target 59"ish in length, drum to drum. There's NOT a lot of room under there. Go measure.

(1 a) A rear suspension of some kind

You will not last long with the original skinny springs and that LQ6 motor pushing 380 lbs of torque back there, so if you're gonna do this, plan for a spring upgrade. Yes, you can get by with the original springs and cal-traks or traction bars, but then you won't be looking all that stock.

(1 b) Parking brake needs to be considered
On these cars, the parking brake pivots off the factory transmission crossmember. That's gonna hafta go (see below) so consider that you'll need to figure out a parking brake.

(2) driveshaft

On my '51- with a Muncie+350 and a 2nd Gen Camaro rear end, the driveshaft length came out (iirc, hafta go check) to 55" long. It will be a few inches shorter with the 700R4.

(3) A transmission crossmember

The 700R4 is considerably longer than the original powerglide/3speed. A newer powerglide and / or a muncie would land your transmission RIGHT ON THE CROSSMEMBER. Fpr anything longer (TH350, TH400, 200/700R4 etc) - that transmission crossmember not only doesn't line up, it's in the way. It's gotta go. Refer back to #2 above.

(4) New brake MC/Booster

Underfloor brakes are neat, but - they bolt into the k-member to which the transmission crossmember is attached. Since the transmission crossmember's gotta go, you might want to consider the brakes at the same time.

(5) Motor mounts

The CE crossmember can be welded to include motormounts- but they're for the Gen1 not the GenIII small block. You'll need to figure that out too.

(6) Steering

A mustang II swap is a popular choice- but keep in mind in most cases you'll need an aftermarket column too. 30" should do it. Measure though. With the CE crossmember, you NEED to use a support bearing to clear the mounts and tophat. Once that's done you do NOT have a lot of room for the exhaust.

(7) Exhaust.

You're gonna need to look carefully for headers that will fit this application. I'm using truck or early carmaro style rear dump manifolds. Space is limited here.

 

1) I knew I would need a different rear end and will probably go the custom 9" ford route. Are there certain rear ends with parking brakes attached?

2) I live near two drag strips and custom driveshaft shops so I can get a driveshaft.

3) Transmission crossmember. I guess I'll have to make one.
4) I'm moving them to the firewall.
5) Motor mounts. Sounds like I've got a lot to figure out.
6) Steering. I've see some modified stock columns on here and I would like to go that route if possible.
7) I've heard that F-body headers will work. If I could find some rear dump vette manifolds then I would seriously consider them.

Thanks for the help!

 

For your LQ4 needs.. go to LS1tech.com. They have a conversion section and a carbed section.
http://ls1tech.com/forums/carbureted-lsx-forum-172/
http://ls1tech.com/forums/conversions-hybrids-28/

I'm putting a carbed 5.3 in my 1953 Chevy 210. I'm putting a CE mustang II in. So I had them to build the front crossmember for a chevy 350. You can buy the 1" setback motor mount adapters, and they are supposed to put the LS motor in the exact same location as a 350. So I'm HOPING my motor will bolt in place. I'm going to run factory manifolds until I can have a custom set of headers built. Then, I have to worry about is my crossmember for the 700r4. I'm going to run an 94-2000 or so Explorer rear axle.. 31 spline, posi, on the cheap. The axle measures 59.75 inches.

 

I want to put a LQ9 with l92 heads in a 52 2 dr sedan Chevy. Is this possible?

no. you better just sell that late model shit to someone on another auto related site and get yourself a nice vintage 60's 327.

 

My advice is whatever you do... Don't tub it. People usually regret big changes like these on their cars later on.

Ask me how I know...

 

Most of the things you're considering are just a matter of sitting down and nuttin' 'em out before you start any cutting. There's a lot of good advice on the thread already..

The white walls on low profile tyres might be a bit more challenging though.....

 

I'd rather have this cammed, late model shit.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrMMhDP1EJY&feature=feedf

compared to a vintage 327 anyday.

To the original poster, the guy in the video is a moderator on LS1tech.com. That car has a cammed, carbed 5.3. Those guys are very helpful in trouble shooting any problems you may have. That LQ9 will scream with just a cam. Good luck.

 

good. then the both of you can go hang out on a site dedicated to late model shit and leave the HAMB for those of us who like the old stuff...

 

amen brother

 

Can you get Chevy wheels to bolt onto that rearend?

 

theres more work involved then you could ever imagine and it wont be worth it...

 

If you are asking this question, it makes it seem that you are bench building and don't really have the experience to dive in to a project of the proportions you are fantasizing about. Maybe start simple

 

49RatFink,

I rather have something with some power. A 327??? BORING! It looks boring. It's been done a few thousand times.

I understand that you like the old stuff engine wise, but I don't understand your definition. The Ratfink name, does that mean you run a RAT motor? How old is that? What is old? 1950's? A 265, 283 Chevy, a straight eight, a flat head Ford should be more in line with what you're preaching. A 327 is from the 60's and not the 50's so I don't think that is "correct" either. When I rebuild a 6.0 it will be around 10 yrs old so it's not "new." The 6.0 is bulletproof. The l92 heads have huge 2.19 inch intake valves to make power with a small cam. Even though you don't think so, I think I'm old school hot rodding, using a cheap truck short block $500, adding corvette heads $800, and putting very few $(cam) into the engine. I'll give you the nod that this isn't the best looking engine in the world but it's also not as boring as a 327,350,383,396,427,454, etc.

I'm learning here about all different types of cars. I appreciate different types on here. I read the post for newbies and I know you are old school. I even kinda understand your attitude until to the point where you don't make any sense and attack new people. Keep in mind that I am a newbie and trying to find a direction for the build and taking constructive ideas into consideration and changing my mind as I go if it makes sense or looks good to me. I have the car and ideas, that's why I'm on here. I have seen many great cars on this site and my ideas are changing as far as the look of the car.


I, like you, have opinions:

• I don't like air bags and cars sitting on the ground they are just not for me.
• I don't like flat paint or faux paint for my car.
• I don't like stock engines that are weak in power or durability, not my style.
• I don't like fakers. Cars that look like they will run but won't, not for me.

The difference between you and me is that I think all those styles have something to offer. I "like" to look at them and figure out how other people made their ideas work out. I don't criticize them just because their ideas are different.

Here is my plan as of now:The body will be stock factory combo maroon with a black top and with all the chrome. Still debating removing hood ornament. Lowered in the front with CE or fatman MII and rear slightly lower than stock with black steel wheels and an S10 rear with disc brakes, stock 5" rims in front running bias ply or radial (bias ply look)WW's and widened stock wheels and either Hurst or TowelCity WW cheater slicks in back. I may even go to 16" wheels because of a 53-54 I saw on here. Stock interior, stock wheel, stock shifter in honor of my Dad.

I'll stick with the engine I mentioned and I am still debating over transmissions. Dyno results showing 500hp+ and 465 ft lbs of torque in a non-stroked Chevy engine with a torque cam gets my attention no matter what year it was made. All this power is made under 6,000 rpm. I could stroke it to get a 408 but that pushes power to the 625 range and that would break more parts and be mean a more expensive engine, trans, and rear. They call these 6.0's with l92 heads mini-Rats so you should look into them.

I've had a big cammed 350 that couldn't idle. I helped a buddy with a race built 340 with a tunnel ram that he tried to run on the street, (a nightmare), I've helped another friend work on with a 440 six pack car that gave him troubles all the time. I don't want that type of hot rod!

I guess could do a 383 stroker like many I've seen and put old valve Chevrolet script valve covers on it then that would look old and be "cool?" Not to me.


Don't get me wrong, I like to look at the old engines just like anyone else, but I know their limitations. Old hemi's, old Caddies, 409's are all cool options but I want to build an engine that will run off and leave those old motored cars AND the new muscle cars. You know, FUN!

Bottomline; I want a HOT ROD that will run, not a rust bucket with an anemic old engine that can't really do anything. If I wanted that then I would keep the stock 216.

 

Thanks.

 

I thought there may be an swap that could be performed. It seems that this place isn't for asking questions. I am planning a build, not throwing it together without thinking options through. Looks like it's back to the S10 rearend.

 

Thanks.

 

I understand that you like the old stuff engine wise, but I don't understand your definition. The Ratfink name, does that mean you run a RAT motor?

there should be a test before a person is allowed to sign up.

posting about an LS motor here is like putting picture of your Mustang on a Camaro forum.

 

If our cars are boring, why come here and ask for help?

 

Don't hate 49, he's just putting what we're all thinking into words. Sometimes he can be a little harsh but most of the time he's right on track.

 

I'm with you on the LS motors. They make great power and get fairly good mpg. MOST guys here are very helpful. SOME are hard headed/unhelpful. I've got some great info about my 1953 Chevy. Hard to find that info somewhere else. I go somewhere else for info on the LS motors because of the "dislike" for them here.

It's funny how putting a Mustang II in/bagging is the norm/acceptable around here. But putting a LS motor in one is out of the question. I personally don't see a difference.

 

It's funny how putting a Mustang II in/bagging is the norm/acceptable around here. But putting a LS motor in one is out of the question. I personally don't see a difference.

funny how that works. maybe because a motor is more a part of the visual aspect of a custom car. suspension can't be seen, while motors can't be seen most of the time part of checking out someones car is looking under the hood. I think a car should be built to a visual theme, with the motor being an important part of that. a late model FI motor in a traditionally styled custom is just as wrong as 20" Boyd wheels on the same car.

here's a good way for the uninformed to maybe understand what the HAMB is about. go look at the latest issue if HOT ROD magazine. I haven't looked at HOT ROD for quite some time, but I imagine there is a little bit of everything in ther. then go look at HOT ROD Deluxe. the HAMB is HOT ROD Deluxe.

 

There should be a test to see if someone is an a--hole before they can post too! I know they don't want a street rod forum. I get it. I'm with you jsanford. It's cool to put in a 70's front suspension but when we want to actually make a hotrod perform like one, then we get bashed.

 

So how is a carbed 327 from the 60's that looks like a 350 from the 90's any different than a carbed 6.0?

 

clueless fuck. you don't even know who/what RATFINK is. I suggest you sell your cool Chevy and buy a Camaro.

 

If he puts it up for sale I would seriously consider buying it,just a thought.


'no problems,only solutions '