Good 4x4 engine combo

[Jason915]

Just thought I'd share my experience with anyone interested.

My engine started out as a warmed over L82 spec 355 engine with 882 casting cylinder heads milled 20 and larger valves 2.02/1.60 It had the L82 regrind from GM, I had a Edelbrock RPM intake with a 600CFM Edelbrock carb. To make a long story short this engine ran very good in the upper RPM's but lacked low end power for towing and climbing even with 4.10 gears. No power under 2500 RPM in my heavy truck.

Last weekend I replaced the cam with a Comp Cam EX-4X4 cam and replaced the RPM intake with an Edelbrock EPS intake, my results are very satisfying I have monster low end torque, wonderful throttle response, and a real nice smooth idle. I haven’t towed with it yet but I am sure it will do much better. I didn’t get on it too hard yet but revved it to 4K and it felt just as strong if not stronger than before. I love the low end torque the most I can lug it clear down to 400rpm’s in 3rd and just pull right out by taping on the gas pedal. It would never do that before W/O chugging and bucking around. Anyone looking for more low end torque this is the way to go if anyone is interested in cam specs I can post them up.

[Jason915]

I posted this on the engine and drive train board but thought that some of you guys on the 4x4 form would like to read this

Just thought I'd share my experience with anyone interested.

My engine started out as a warmed over L82 spec 355 engine with 882 casting cylinder heads milled 20 and larger valves 2.02/1.60 It had the L82 regrind from GM, I had a Edelbrock RPM intake with a 600CFM Edelbrock carb. To make a long story short this engine ran very good in the upper RPM's but lacked low end power for towing and climbing even with 4.10 gears. No power under 2500 RPM in my heavy truck.

Last weekend I replaced the cam with a Comp Cam EX-4X4 cam and replaced the RPM intake with an Edelbrock EPS intake, my results are very satisfying I have monster low end torque, wonderful throttle response, and a real nice smooth idle. I haven’t towed with it yet but I am sure it will do much better. I didn’t get on it too hard yet but revved it to 4K and it felt just as strong if not stronger than before. I love the low end torque the most I can lug it clear down to 400rpm’s in 3rd and just pull right out by taping on the gas pedal. It would never do that before W/O chugging and bucking around. Anyone looking for more low end torque this is the way to go if anyone is interested in cam specs I can post them up.

[chevy72blu]

the L82 wasnt near enough cam for those heads. Just curious, what is the lift/adv duration of your cam now?

[Jason915]

I'll have to look at the card again but its a very conservative grind, but that is what I wanted something for low end torque, I went from 115 lobe seperation to 111 and I think that is what really helped.

[1FaastC10]

heh... L82 was a Vette engine, and a sucky one at that. that engine sucked in the lightweight fiberglass car it was meant for, so its not surprising that it sucked when it was in your truck.

[Jason915]

Originally Posted by 1FaastC10

heh... L82 was a Vette engine, and a sucky one at that. that engine sucked in the lightweight fiberglass car it was meant for, so its not surprising that it sucked when it was in your truck.

L82's were the higher output Vette engine offered from 73-82 the standard being the L48, in the Vettes yeah they weren't anything special but what was after 72. I wouldn't say the engine "sucked� though they have a lot of potential they are a 4 bolt main with decent flowing heads you open them up a bit and they’ll wake up easy. Like I said in my post this engine was warmed over a bit also it has been balanced the heads have been milled as well as the deck, and 2.02/1.60 valves with full length headers, aluminum intake, Edelbrock 1406 tuned, a good ignition it ran good as hell after 2500 rpms just lacked low end power that I wanted for towing and fourwheeling. I personally think that the cam and the low compression was the sucky thing about the L82, but that has been addressed with my L82. Now It has the best of both worlds It has great low end torque, and it will still rev up and haul ass if I stick my foot in it, but I doubt it’d be no match for your 5.7 TBI or your 77 350 I may even have problems with your 305, LOL!

[1FaastC10]

not real sure what kind of response you were looking for, but apparently that wasnt it.
1973-1983 werent good years for ANY GM engine, regardless of what it was in.
the L82's factory specs:

L82 - 350, 4bbl, 9.0:1, 245hp @ 5200 rpm, 280 ft/# @ 4000 rpm

seems a little on the low side for a 3500# "supercar" to me. throw in the extra 1500# or so (my C10s weighed 4600#) of your truck, and suddenly bad things get worse. i'm sure the cam swap helped you immensely, by not only replacing it with a higher performance (for your RPM range) cam, but also replacing 30 year old technology with something a bit newer and more advanced.

but I doubt it’d be no match for your 5.7 TBI or your 77 350 I may even have problems with your 305, LOL!

i never once said anything i had was better than anyone else's. my L05 in my daily driver has almost 170,000 mi on it, and is 100% bone stock. as is my '77 350 in my K20. the LE9 that is in my 86 has been recammed for more torque, but is otherwise stock. oddly enough, all of my trucks still have truck engines in them (or in the case of the 86 FOR them). i have never once put a light car engine in a heavy truck and complained about the output of said engine. if you want to talk truck performance, lets chain em together, and see who pulls who where. contrary to my username, i dont own anything that i claim to be fast.

[Jason915]

Actually I simply started this thread to help anyone that was looking for a good upgrade for low end torque I have been seeing a lot of people on this board running RPM intakes and stuff and I know from personal experience that it’s not the best combination for a heavy truck. I didn’t start this thread to “complain� about the engine I put in my truck or the performance that it lacked down low. I just wanted to share with anyone my experience with the products that I recently purchased and installed and the difference it made. Your response to my thread was basically “well you damned idiot what did you expect the L82 was a sucky engine� you missed the point that this engine wasn’t just pulled out of a car and dropped in my truck it was worked over very well and runs much better than what it did in production form. Also in the defense of L82 Vettes I have seen them in the mid to upper 13’s with just a few nicely picked boltons and a relatively stock engine that’s not anything worth bragging about compared to today’s performance cars but I feel that it’s respectable in spite of the gas crunch that killed the muscle cars. And I was just giving you a hard time when I made the comment about your truck engines to get back at you for the comment you made. It would be fun to hook a chain to both our trucks and see who pulls who, I have had a lot of fun doing that before, you might be surprised my shortbed can pull with the best with a gearless posi 4.10’s and a 4 speed with some nasty 33x12.50’s I have pulled plenty of heavier trucks than mine and earned lots of cases of beer while doing it lol.

Oh yeah BTW I wouldn’t call a Corvette a supercar more like an American sports/performance car.

[krue]

Originally Posted by Jason915

I posted this on the engine and drive train board but thought that some of you guys on the 4x4 form would like to read this

Read this thread...this means you!
http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s....php3?t=149975

[nu2-72]

I appreciate the info.
Vettes of the period are not supercars but very fun to drive and enjoy. I get your point. They really are sleepers.
Gee, lets run your truck and my Vette through the Autocross. Not a good comparison.
L82's had several differences. Heads, cam and transmissions. The L48 with automatic and the L82 with the same auto had different size torque convertors as well as other changes. It was not all cam.
The 882's are prone to cracks and known as smog heads. But they have potential as well.
Build what you like and keep letting us know how it works for you.
Mine will be powered by an LT1. Not everyones choice but that is what makes the world go round.

[Mudder]

Threads merged.........

[Jason915]

Originally Posted by krue

Read this thread...this means you!
http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s....php3?t=149975

Opps, sorry I will note that. Thanks

[Jason915]

Originally Posted by nu2-72

I appreciate the info.
Vettes of the period are not supercars but very fun to drive and enjoy. I get your point. They really are sleepers.
Gee, lets run your truck and my Vette through the Autocross. Not a good comparison.
L82's had several differences. Heads, cam and transmissions. The L48 with automatic and the L82 with the same auto had different size torque convertors as well as other changes. It was not all cam.
The 882's are prone to cracks and known as smog heads. But they have potential as well.
Build what you like and keep letting us know how it works for you.
Mine will be powered by an LT1. Not everyones choice but that is what makes the world go round.

Ok so last weekend I built a new exhaust and did some carb tunning and drove it around a bit, All I can say is WOW this thing really runs now it got a real broad torque curve I would have never though that this engine was capable of the sweet low end it has now. Are you going to power yours with a Gen 1 LT1 or Gen 2, If my 882's crack that's ok I'll just get some Performer heads, lol Thanks for the info

[nu2-72]

1972 LT1. The engine is done and ready to go in.
Rule is the bigger the valves the higher the RPM range and the smaller the valves the low end torque comes on. There is more to it but you get the idea.

[OLDCHEV4X4]

What are the specs for a 72 LT1?? I race my blazer in 4x4 dirt drags and you can go in the slower class if you have a stock engine. They check casting numbers too.

[nu2-72]

The 72 LT1 in stock form maxed at 255 HP with 280 ft. lbs. torque. This at 9.0:1 compression. The 400 came in at 170 HP and the 402 at 210 HP.
I have added an Edelbrock Performer, HEI, lifter valley baffle, crank scraper, 2.5" Ramhorns, undercut and swirl polished stainless valves, roller rockers in the 442 heads and a few other items. Everything should look like it belongs there with the exception of the intake. The HEI will hide behind the stock breather (which will have a K&N inside). I am also running the stock valve covers. You will never see the ported heads or roller rockers. The Ramhorns look just like the stock 2".
I wanted a fair HP engine with good torque for the 4x4. This should work nicely.

[Jason915]

nu2-72 what cam are you going to be putting in your LT1? If you want super good torque I can't be happier with the one I just put in if you want my specs.

[nu2-72]

I would have to look up the specs but it is already in and is the LT1 cam.