1967 Firebird Drag week car?

[Saz]

This is a bit of a re-post from the Turbo forums, but I am looking for some more feedback. Here is the plan so far.....

"As the title says, I just bought a 67 Firebird which is in decent shape and a good driver as is. I am planning on building the car inside out, back to front- planning on a 8 point cage allowing for full interior, 9" rear and a calvert leaf setup. So the big question is do I go with a big single on a BBC, or jump on the band wagon and go LS. Before everyone shouts LS, I would give the shortblock a full rebuild with full forged bottom end same as the BBC, so slapping a junkyard engine in the car and pulling a Richard Holdner is out. Building either engine will be pricey regardless. I have a local builder that will build me a very stout 4L80 with a manual VB and brake, who also swears it will hold up to my goals for the car. Which way to go?!?"

I am heavily leaning toward a 496" BBC, big single turbo, and Holley super sniper TBI. The goal for the car is Rocky Mountain Race Week (lots closer, since I live north of Denver), then Drag Week later on. I want the car in the 9's on pump gas. Pump gas is non negotiable. I want to be able to jump in the car, and take a road trip without worrying about fuel availability. Thoughts?

[squirrel]

if all you want is 9s, just get a junkyard LS and slap a chinese turbo on it, and have fun

But seriously....does it need to run on pump gas at the track? or only on the street?

What engine type you choose should depend on what you know (or want to learn), not on what other people think.

[DanStokes]

What engine is in the car now? My natural inclination is to go with Pontiac power (we have a guy on here who REALLY knows them and is willing to share that knowledge) rather than build another clone of so many Camaros (after all, the 'Bird is almost a Camaro). To me, the point of building a car, regardless of intended use, is to make something that is new or at least rare (says the guy with a Mercedes Diesel in an S-10, putting my build where my mouth is). Or maybe a DuraMax??!!

Dan

[squirrel]

That goal is fine for you and me, Dan, but lots of the rest of the world wants to be like the crowd.

[Gateclyve Photographic]

BBC. No replacement for displacement. There have been plenty of "miracle" LS engines blow up on Drag Week. Don't be another statistic.

More cubes means less boost and more reliability. More cubes means better spool with less parts-killing "bang bang" Have fun.

Car Craft got an almost nothing BBC to almost the number you;d need with a heavy street Firebird. See https://www.hotrod.com/articles/ccrp...uild-part-iii/

When Lutz, Larsen, Schroeder, Bailey etc show up with an LSX, I'll rethink it. But if you've got the budget, there's no reason not to go B-I-G.

As for building an aftermarket block "Pontiac" write to Big Chief at Midwest Street Cars, 7025 S Council Rd, Oklahoma City, OK 73169 about how many stacks you'll need to bring for a Butler-built turbo bullet. https://butlerperformance.com/

[squirrel]

The big names running 6 second unlimited cars, are pretty much irrelevant to building a 9 second car. Keep in mind that I got my old Chevy (mid 60s technology) into the nines with a mild 6-71 on not much of a 427. Taking weight out of the car helps a lot.

[Gateclyve Photographic]

You can run 8s with a 10,000 RPM 2.3 and a ton of boost. He asked for reliable and pump gas. That means more cubes and less boost.

9 second racers can learn a lot from what the big'uns run. Or they can chase their tails and spend huge dough trying to make some fad-mill live. Unless you're trying to hit some restrictive class standard or obsess about fuel economy. GO BIG!

In the grand scheme of things an aluminum-head BBC really isn't that big of a deal in a 3,500 pound street car. I'd gladly trade the extra pounds for extra cubic inches. Big cube miracle-motors aren't cheap. RPM isn't cheap. It's hard to replace the 50+ years of development behind high-output BBCs

At a relatively pump-gas friendly 135 horsepower per liter, an 8.1 liter BBC will make nearly 200 more horsepower than a 6.0 LS. And the hit will generally be at a lower RPM with more "area under the curve."

Of course if one has his or her heart set on "LS fest" or just needs to do the same old thing as every other cheapskate, follow the herd (and eventually get beat by someone with more boost and cubes . . . . )

Knock yourself out if you want to run a mini-motor in a flyweight car. Just don't be surprised when someone with an anvil blows by.

[SuperBuickGuy]

I think the Aussies really did have a point with their Ford motor/turbo.... run it on regular gas on the street and E85 at the track. It's kind of best-of-both-worlds because with e85 you have natural cooling and better knock control - which allows you to turn up the boost. Best part is you can run a higher compression ratio and lower boost on the street, and get some pretty impressive numbers for that 1/4 mile when you need it.

[Gateclyve Photographic]

SBG, interesting that you bring up the dual fuel idea. SOCONY (a "Baby Standard Oil "predecessor to today's ExxonMobil) was testing a clever dual fuel carburetor in the late 1940s . . . It would mix in the high octane stuff on demand.

The advantages of alcohol under boost were decisively proven in the first couple of decades of forced induction. . . almost 100 years ago.

I also recall a rather heated discussion almost 15 years ago on the old Car Craft board . . . in which I got roasted by those who "knew" in suggesting that fuel swapping/dual fuel systems and turbos would become a thing if this crazy Hot Rod Drag Week idea of DF's took off. . . .

As it turns out, turbos have won something around 11 of 14 Drag Weeks (my numbers might be one or two off -- shooting from memory here) and there are plenty of dual fuel or fuel swapping methods routinely employed.

There's really "nothing new under the sun". . . just more refined (or sometimes more crude) applications of it . .

[SuperBuickGuy]

SBG, interesting that you bring up the dual fuel idea. SOCONY (a "Baby Standard Oil "predecessor to today's ExxonMobil) was testing a clever dual fuel carburetor in the late 1940s . . . It would mix in the high octane stuff on demand.

The advantages of alcohol under boost were decisively proven in the first couple of decades of forced induction. . . almost 100 years ago.

I also recall a rather heated discussion almost 15 years ago on the old Car Craft board . . . in which I got roasted by those who "knew" in suggesting that fuel swapping/dual fuel systems and turbos would become a thing if this crazy Hot Rod Drag Week idea of DF's took off. . . .

As it turns out, turbos have won something around 11 of 14 Drag Weeks (my numbers might be one or two off -- shooting from memory here) and there are plenty of dual fuel or fuel swapping methods routinely employed.

There's really "nothing new under the sun". . . just more refined (or sometimes more crude) applications of it . .

The Bara powered Camry was running 9s.... he was running dual fuel but one tank and a sensor to move the fuel map into an e85 tune when it detected 70%.... I'm still leaning towards NOx as the second fuel in my Buick - then no need for a sensor and no worries about ethanol levels. Best of all, I could really move that hp level by simply changing the jet.... and no need for an intercooler.

[Gateclyve Photographic]

Yeah, that Barra-powered sedan was sweet. They were jamming huge boost through it.

But you lost me with "I'm still leaning towards NOx as the second fuel in my Buick." I thought NOx is oxides of nitrogen which is a pollutant, not a fuel. Maybe it means something else now. School me . .. I'm ready to learn.

[BBR]

2 ebay GT45's on a basic 454 will be faster than most people ever need to go. 9's would be easy.

[squirrel]

you could probably do the same to a 5.3, and save 300 lbs or so.

[fatguyzinc]

hmmmmm... i know a guy with a code YC 455 pontiac............

im pretty sure a regular old 454 with 2 junkyard 7.3 powerstroke
turbos would be super scary fast...if i ever get the money to do
all the assorted upgrades needed--fuel system, turbo plumbing,
bulletproof trans & rear, etc... imma try it one day.

[AndyB]

In the big engine vs small engine debate:

Big engine parts often cost a lot more. So you can build a better small engine and get more power that way. (Sub in whatever terms you want and it still holds true, for example a SBC will be cheaper/easier to get good parts than a BBB, etc.)

Instead of hassling with dual fuel setups and swapping to E85, why not just run water/methanol injection atop the best pump gas you can find? You'd lose some of the E85's charge cooling effect, but not having to screw around with finding it and having to watch the actual percentages that you're pumping would be awfully nice. It's hard to get a tune dialed in if you're fighting weird mixtures of fuels.

Speaking of, if you're going to a forced-induction motor, definitely plan on spending the money on a good dyno tune. Often overlooked, but frequently some of the best money you can spend, both in terms of outright power but also in reliability.