# New To Forum, 67 Linden Green GTO..Pics Included!



## GreenMachine (Jul 1, 2010)

Hey guys I'm new to the forum! :seeya:I finally signed up so that I can ask some questions and get some advice on future changes on my car. I really want to chance the stance of the car by lowering it (lowering springs), the front sits way too high for my liking and i want it give it a slightly racked look. Also I'm thinking about ordering a new set of cragars just so I can go wider in the back (I have to measure my rear wheel width to see how wide I can go...been lagging on that). Last but not least, I'm going to be redoing the rear diff next week, I haven't decided on what gearing to go with, I'm going with an Eaton posi unit, but haven't decided if I should go 3.55 or 3.73... Anyway you will probably be seeing more and more posts on here from me asking for advice from others. I'm the kind of guy that measures twice and cuts once, or in this case, does hours of research before pulling the trigger on a part/mod so that I just replace it ONCE. Hopefully you guys will be able to help me out!  I've included pics and video of my car, let me know what you guys think or if you have any questions!:cheers

Specs:
67 GTO # matching Linden Green post car, remote mirror, A/C (out of car), remote mirror...California Car.

Off the top of my head...400cui bore over .30, forged steel pistons, mild compcam cam, hooker headers, holley street avenger 670 carb, edel performer intake mani, BeCool Alum radiator/elec fan kit, TH 400 trans with 2,400rpm stall and mild shift kit, front disc brakes, stock rear diff, Cragar SS 235/60/14 & 235/60/15.

Sorry I couldnt figure out how to embed the video!


----------



## Koppster (Jul 27, 2008)

Wow! Very, very, very nice!!!!!!!!


----------



## Eric Animal (Oct 28, 2007)

BEAUTIFUL ! I wouldn't go stiffer than a 3.55 rear....personally, I would re-install that factory A/C and put a 3.36 or 3.23 in it....did you buy the car in that condition or restore it?????? :cheers Eric
With the right backspace you can squeeze 11 wide tires into the rear wheel wells. I love the stance as is!!!!


----------



## Rukee (Feb 8, 2007)

Looks stunning!! Awesome job!!


----------



## 66tempestGT (Nov 28, 2009)

nice ride. i see the dyno run but no numbers?


----------



## Kruel (Jun 26, 2010)

wow what a great car, very nice!


----------



## geeteeohguy (Feb 2, 2008)

What a beauty. Love that color!!! I agree with Eric; put the factory AC back on it ( it has tinted glass that matches the paint already!) and leave the gear ratio alone. Factory air '67's were usually a 2.93 gear ratio, which is great if the car is an automatic. I would recommend DRIVING a GTO with a 3.55 or 3.73 gear before you install one. Screaming along running 3000 RPM at 55 MPH getting 8-9 mpg isn't for everybody. Are you in California??


----------



## Kruel (Jun 26, 2010)

geeteeohguy said:


> What a beauty. Love that color!!! I agree with Eric; put the factory AC back on it ( it has tinted glass that matches the paint already!) and leave the gear ratio alone. Factory air '67's were usually a 2.93 gear ratio, which is great if the car is an automatic. I would recommend DRIVING a GTO with a 3.55 or 3.73 gear before you install one. Screaming along running 3000 RPM at 55 MPH getting 8-9 mpg isn't for everybody. Are you in California??



agreed! I have 4.11 in mine and i really cant bring her on the highway.. 3.55s are great though


----------



## Rukee (Feb 8, 2007)

Kruel said:


> agreed! I have 4.11 in mine and i really cant bring her on the highway.. 3.55s are great though


3.55s are great for a 4 speed, but with an auto tranny you want a higher ratio (lower #).


----------



## GreenMachine (Jul 1, 2010)

Eric Animal said:


> BEAUTIFUL ! I wouldn't go stiffer than a 3.55 rear....personally, I would re-install that factory A/C and put a 3.36 or 3.23 in it....did you buy the car in that condition or restore it?????? :cheers Eric
> With the right backspace you can squeeze 11 wide tires into the rear wheel wells. I love the stance as is!!!!



Hey Eric, thank for the kind words, the stance looks OK in those pics but honestly the front wheel gap is like 3 inches and I'm not a fan of it. 

The factory AC got "misplaced" by the paint shop a few years ago, so I unfortunately haven't done my research yet on what to do in that category. Try to find an original unit? comparable aftermarket unit, etc. You think 3.55s would be too much on this car? I'm going to be adding a posi and gears next week and I haven't made up my mind yet! I wish there were some local cars in So Cal that I know about to get a ride and see the difference.

I bought the car when I was 15 years old for $10k from San Diego. I'm 26 now. I haven't touched the interior except for repainted the lower dash and added that vinyl would grain that is horrible(going to replace that soon), I also added a autometer tach where the broken clock was and then an oil and h20 gauge under the dash. other than that the interior is still all original and how I purchased it.

I rebuilt the motor when I was 15 and added the bolt ons, kept all original parts (except for the a/c as mentioned). Put the exhaust on it and hidden MSD box/HEI. I put discbrakes on the front of the car and then 4 years ago I had it taken down to metal and repainted, I had two rust spots in the corners of the back window, cut that panel out and replaced it. Had all the trim and chrome re polished/re chromed. That's all I can remember off the top of my head. But hear it is 11 years later...


----------



## GreenMachine (Jul 1, 2010)

66tempestGT said:


> nice ride. i see the dyno run but no numbers?


haha yeah, I got numbers, but they are disappointing and didn't make much sense to me. The shops mustang dyno took a crap when they had an electrical outage that morning so I had to wait 3 hours for them to get everything back up and running and they were having issues with the read out. The dyno pulls weren't really for numbers, but a 5 hour dyno tune package I paid for for the car. He ran the car to about 4k rpm for tuning then did one run to 4200 and here is the dyno sheet for that run.

Everyone else that's driven the car that knows has their own muscle car say the car definitely makes more torque...

Eitherway here are the numbers according to their mustang dyno, definitely let me know what you think... If it's hard to read, max says 320wtq 244whp


----------



## GreenMachine (Jul 1, 2010)

geeteeohguy said:


> What a beauty. Love that color!!! I agree with Eric; put the factory AC back on it ( it has tinted glass that matches the paint already!) and leave the gear ratio alone. Factory air '67's were usually a 2.93 gear ratio, which is great if the car is an automatic. I would recommend DRIVING a GTO with a 3.55 or 3.73 gear before you install one. Screaming along running 3000 RPM at 55 MPH getting 8-9 mpg isn't for everybody. Are you in California??



The glass isn't tinted, front windshield has that slight green tint up top though.

I wish there was a GTO in the area with gearing, I know one guy that's stock and another guy that doesn't know if he has gears or not but the car is a resto mod he bought finished. 

Yeah I'm in So Cal though, right on the boarder of LA and OC county.


----------



## Kruel (Jun 26, 2010)

GreenMachine said:


> Hey Eric, thank for the kind words, the stance looks OK in those pics but honestly the front wheel gap is like 3 inches and I'm not a fan of it.




I feel the same about mine with the wheel gap on the front tires. I plan on having my front end lowered as well. Let me know what you end up doing.. im not sure how low i should go.


----------



## GreenMachine (Jul 1, 2010)

Kruel said:


> I feel the same about mine with the wheel gap on the front tires. I plan on having my front end lowered as well. Let me know what you end up doing.. im not sure how low i should go.



I think I'm going to go with the Hotchkis lowering spring kit for all 4 corners. I heard that it lowers the car anywhere from 1-1.3 inch in the front and 1 inch in the rear. It's really hard to pull the trigger on what to do. I heard OPG has 1, 2 and 3 inch lowering springs too but haven't heard any reviews on them.


----------



## 66tempestGT (Nov 28, 2009)

GreenMachine said:


> haha yeah, I got numbers, but they are disappointing and didn't make much sense to me. The shops mustang dyno took a crap when they had an electrical outage that morning so I had to wait 3 hours for them to get everything back up and running and they were having issues with the read out. The dyno pulls weren't really for numbers, but a 5 hour dyno tune package I paid for for the car. He ran the car to about 4k rpm for tuning then did one run to 4200 and here is the dyno sheet for that run.
> 
> Everyone else that's driven the car that knows has their own muscle car say the car definitely makes more torque...
> 
> Eitherway here are the numbers according to their mustang dyno, definitely let me know what you think... If it's hard to read, max says 320wtq 244whp


rear wheel numbers are lower than numbers at the flywheel (which is what the factory uses) due to parasitic losses. it takes power to turn the trans gears, turn the rear gears, tires and such. every combination is different 


Crankshaft horsepower vs. true rear wheel horsepower. That's a tough one. As each vehicle is different, the best way is to dyno the engine and then dyno the vehicle to see exactly what the loss is. The best estimate I can give you based on experience and research is take crankshaft horsepower, subtract 14.5% ( search SAE ), take that, and subtract around 10% to 15% and you'll get about true horsepower at the rear wheels. The actual formula contains a curve for power loss through gears and there's another curve for power lost in a tire. Remember, too - that unless you dyno your engine you are only likely to get a crankshaft number from the manufacturer and that's probably a "good" one that the marketing department is providing.


----------



## GreenMachine (Jul 1, 2010)

66tempestGT said:


> rear wheel numbers are lower than numbers at the flywheel (which is what the factory uses) due to parasitic losses. it takes power to turn the trans gears, turn the rear gears, tires and such. every combination is different
> 
> 
> Crankshaft horsepower vs. true rear wheel horsepower. That's a tough one. As each vehicle is different, the best way is to dyno the engine and then dyno the vehicle to see exactly what the loss is. The best estimate I can give you based on experience and research is take crankshaft horsepower, subtract 14.5% ( search SAE ), take that, and subtract around 10% to 15% and you'll get about true horsepower at the rear wheels. The actual formula contains a curve for power loss through gears and there's another curve for power lost in a tire. Remember, too - that unless you dyno your engine you are only likely to get a crankshaft number from the manufacturer and that's probably a "good" one that the marketing department is providing.



Yeah I'm pretty knowledgable on dynos and what not. I have a 02 Audi S4 twin turbo that's been modified and dyno'd more than a few times. I was just hoping for a dyno chart with 400wtrq, but then again it is a heartbreak dyno (mustang dyno) and not a dynojet. But it is what it is, the car looks, sounds and rungs good. It's quick enough, I don't see myself adding any more power adding mods anytime soon.


----------



## Rukee (Feb 8, 2007)

I wonder why they only pulled to 4,000rpms?


----------



## 66tempestGT (Nov 28, 2009)

looks like it was about done.


----------



## Rukee (Feb 8, 2007)

The HP #s are still going up @ 4k. Also the air/fuel ratio seems lean, 12.7 average? Shouldn't it be closer to 14.5?


----------



## GreenMachine (Jul 1, 2010)

Rukee said:


> The HP #s are still going up @ 4k. Also the air/fuel ratio seems lean, 12.7 average? Shouldn't it be closer to 14.5?


I'm not positive, but I think at 12.2-12.8 is ideal for safe max power @ WOT, that's what I've heard at least. Also they did most the pulls at 4k then this last one at 4200rpm. Like I said it was a 5 hour dyno tune and they weren't there to get big numbers or push the motor, just to tune it so that it was running perfect. 

If someone is more familiar with dynoing these poncho motors and can chime in on the A/F ratio I'm all ears, I have no problem taking it back to the shop and saying retune it for this or that.

Also anyone know the redline on these 400s? And what CFM carb are most of your guys with 400s running? I'm at 670 because if I remember correctly that was the prime CFM for a car making anywhere from crank 300-450hp. The next one up was a 770 and I felt like that would have been too much carb for the car.


----------



## GreenMachine (Jul 1, 2010)

Here's a walk around video guy...


----------



## Eric Animal (Oct 28, 2007)

5200 rpms and you can go 750 cfm....


----------



## geeteeohguy (Feb 2, 2008)

14.7 is stochiometric, or "ideal" air/fuel ratio. 12 to 13 is on the RICH side, ok for power. The old Lean Burn mopars of the late '70's and early 80's ran 16:1, which was so lean they ran poorly. 14 parts air to 1 part fuel is what all modern computerized cars like to run at cruise. It's the most efficient for emissions, power, and mileage. The stock CFM for a '67 400 GTO is 750, and the redline is 5200 rpm. If power (not torque) is peaking at 4000 rpm, there is an issue: weak valve springs/head flow/ignition/exhaust restriction/etc. etc. Your "at the rear wheel" numbers look good to me. Torque is a bit low, but I only know that the flywheel torque is factory rated at something like 440 foot pounds. Also, be aware that factory HP ratings were gross, not net HP. The more I see of your car, the more I like it. Especially the color!


----------



## GreenMachine (Jul 1, 2010)

YIKES! I got a scary story for all of you that just happened. But before I get to it, I checked my rear gears by using the lift/spin technique and it came out to ~2.73. That sounds correct huh? Cruising at 60-65 at about 2200-2300rpm with a 235/60/15 rear tire.

With that being said, I have a leaky master cylinder, I took it to the shop to get it replaced (I have no time to do it myself anymore). They kept getting sent the wrong MC so they didn't get to swap it, long story short they are closed saturday-monday, so I didn't want the car sitting at the shop til tuesday so I went to pick it up...

I was driving to the gas station to add some 100octane to half tank of 91 when I decided to open her up a bit. I wanted to pay attention to the shift points with the 2.73 gears...

I get a rolling start with a nice open straight away, punch it at about 2500rpm and go WOT at about 3300rpm, car loses traction at the top of 1st and the front end comes up a bit(no flaming, obviously not off the ground just springs decompressed) , shifted into 2nd and right after the chirp gained traction back, took her to the top of 2nd and granny shifted into 3rd and let off... 

Felt strong and powerful. I was happy. That's when the **** hit the fan...

I was coasting back down and was at about 60mph when I LIGHTLY pressed on the brake pedal, car JOLTS and pulls HARD to the right...Now I'm staring at the curb, I fight it back and saved it. WOW, that was scary...

Drove slowly back to the shop, check the master cylinder, fluids are topped off, check the lines in the engine bay, everything's fine, no flat no nothing. Get back in it to recreate, wow does it again when braking. Get under the car, turn the steering column, there's play, noticed that the center link has a lot of play, figured I'm going to replace that next week, still not the problem though... 

Checked both the lines to the front disc brakes, no leaks no nothing. THAT'S WHEN I SAW IT! The line to the driver side disc brake was INBETWEEN THE SPRING COIL getting pinched hardcore. Pushed up on the left front and pulled it out...bounced the car and wants to go back in... bent the clamp a bit and looks OK now. But WOW what a scare, must have gotten sucked inbetween the coil when the front end lifted a bit. I haven't driven her like that since the dyno tune and it seemed like its running a lot better since then, pulled hard.

Anyway, sorry for the rant, but man, check your lines! I'm going to have them shorten some of the slack or something on tuesday when I take it in for the MC replacement!

PHEWWW!


----------



## Eric Animal (Oct 28, 2007)

BUY A LOTTERY TICKET.....lucky day!


----------



## Mike_V (Mar 10, 2006)

Car is AMAZING. That was some great luck saving it.


----------



## GreenMachine (Jul 1, 2010)

Took her for a 4th of July cruise to Huntington beach all the way down to Newport and Laguna and back again. Total driving time was 3 hours non stop and never saw a temp higher than 195(bumper to bumper in huntington beach). Car handled like a champ! Here are some pics!


----------



## 66tempestGT (Nov 28, 2009)

now thats how you do it!


----------



## BCsGTO (May 17, 2010)

Hey GM what a beatiful car. That's where my GTO grew up. We lived in Anahiem but regularly took it to Newport Bay on fishing trips and yes we got stuck in that same stop and go traffic too! She'll be back on the road soon but we're in OR now so I doubt she'll ever see SoCal again


----------

