# Sticky  (re)Building my engine - finally



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

FINALLY - in the process of rebuilding my engine. This time, I'll be using Crower stainless rockers and Crower mechanical roller lifters (with their High Pressure Pin Oiling Option). I'm also stepping it up a little :grin2:
This cam delivers 15 degrees more duration and 0.020 more lift than the previous one, and does that with 1.5:1 rockers instead of the previous 1.65's. 
I'm also using file fit gapless (top) rings.

The new cam needed new springs with more pressure to control it, and those springs needed a taller installed height so instead of taking them out, I bought a cutter and machined them myself. Fun stuff!! And I can be positive they're right. The intakes on the drivers side head were already just a touch deeper than my objective of 1.910, so I had to cut them to 1.925 and will use 0.015 shims on those to bring them back to spec.

I'm doing more test fitting and measuring today.

Bear


----------



## PontiacJim (Dec 29, 2012)

Sounds like fun. :thumbsup: I have done the "web research" and book reading and it seems the steel roller rockers are the way to go versus the aluminum. More money, but you won't have any problems. 

1.5 ratio, *in my opinion*, can be a better choice with the roller cam. The 1.65's with a flat tappet cam opens the valves quicker and the "under the curve" slight gains tooted by some of the engine builders are fine for a race engine, but the required heavier valve spring pressures and repositioned pushrod cup on the rocker arm put additional side loading on the rocker arm stud and even the valve guide. I don't think you really need the 1.65's in your application because the roller cams typically have a fast ramp to open the valves sooner and keep them open longer. Isn't that really what the 1.65's are doing in a flat tappet cam in theory anyway? So you compensated for the change to the 1.5's with the slightly higher lift and longer duration - am I right?

I can't tell from your pics, but do you have the lifter bore braces? I read they are highly recommended when using the roller cams as they can add higher side loading to the lifter bores and that's when they can break. Just added insurance in my book and something I would install if going with the roller set-up. :yesnod:

Did you ever decide on double roller timing chain or gear drive?


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

I'm in agreement about the 1.65's, especially since that's what sidelined me last summer - a rocker failure  

That cam was 236/242 @ 0.050 and made .600 lift (110 LSA installed at 106) - all with 1.65 rockers. It too was a solid roller. This one is 251/257 @ 0.050 and makes .615 lift with 1.5 rockers, also with a 110 LSA and will likewise be installed at 106. It's from Bullet Cams and I like their approach quite a lot. The opening ramps are more aggressive than what I had, even after taking the difference in rocker ratio into consideration. However it has closing ramps that are much gentler and don't slam the valves shut like the Comp profile tended to.

Yes, I will be installing a bore brace this time. I'm running a double roller timing set this time, just like last time, but I'm changing brands. 

Bear


----------



## PontiacJim (Dec 29, 2012)

Sounds good. You will have it up and running again in no time. :thumbsup:


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Crank end play...


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Degreeing the cam. I'm using a Romac/Rollermaster timing set, double roller, 9-way adjustable. It's also 0.005 shorter to make up for the block having been align honed. The fit is very good - VERY little slack. 

In order to get the cam intake centerline installed according to Bullet's specs (106 degrees) I wound up needing to use the timing set's 4-degrees advanced setting which, interestingly enough, also caused the 0.050 intake and exhaust opening/closing events to shift about 2-3 degrees from what's printed on the cam card.

I've also included a photo that shows a tip I learned/copied/stole from Paul Spotts. If you file a slight bevel onto the nose of the crank and cam keys, it makes it a TON easier to install the parts that have to engage with the key. Maybe everyone else already knew this, but it was new to me.

Just for grins, I also measured cam lobe lift for both intake and exhaust lobes at every 10-degrees of crank rotation.

Bear


----------



## PontiacJim (Dec 29, 2012)

Gonna be a race engine with those specs. :yesnod:


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Aw, just a plain old pump gas street engine... 0

Bear


----------



## squirrelbox (Apr 25, 2015)

Since I do not have the knowledge to talk tech , I would like to note that in the above picture you did a nice job with the oak chair placement. The back drop of the chair and angle of the timing chain really draws attention to the iron that seems to float in space. All those horses waiting to stampede with fury and fire.. and then the chair beckons comfort and a naturalism to your endeavor. Nicely done. Its that attention to detail that is impressive to me. Keep up the good work. Cant wait to see it all done. Seriously , I envy your ability.


----------



## john23 (Mar 6, 2016)

squirrelbox--humor is always appreciated...


----------



## john23 (Mar 6, 2016)

bear very cool...what is the cc dish of the pistons and what is the cc of the heads? what will be your static compression ratio? thanks john


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Heads are 72cc's, piston dishes are 17.19 cc's, pistons are 0.013 "down", the head gaskets I'm using compress to 0.045 static compression ratio is going to be 10.2:1 (Aluminum heads can run higher than cast iron).

Today I checked and verified all the rod bearing clearances and fit the balancer. The hub was _super super _tight, so I worked it some with a ball hone. It's still a nice tight press fit (I have to use a balancer installer to get it on), it's just not crazy. This is a different balancer, a Romac SFI rated one, and I had to grind some on the bottom edges of the timing cover to open up some clearance so it won't rub. It's a Kauffman repop timing cover.

I also verified that the TDC marks on the balancer are accurate.

Bear


----------



## john23 (Mar 6, 2016)

Heads are 72cc's, piston dishes are 17.19 cc's, pistons are 0.013 "down", the head gaskets I'm using compress to 0.045 static compression ratio is going to be 10.2:1 (Aluminum heads can run higher than cast iron). 

thank you


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Spent a little more time on it tonight. I trial fit the heads last week with #1 valves installed with checking springs so I could measure for pushrod length, and I decided that I didn't like how close the rockers were to the retainers with the valves closed. They were 0.020 or less. So, this past weekend I made a sojourn to the new Summit Racing retail store in Arlington, TX - and bought a set of Isky chromoly valve locks in standard height instead of the +0.050 offset ones I started with. These will give me another 0.050 clearance between rocker and retainer which should be more than enough. They also leave more of the valve tip exposed so there's no chance of the rockers touching the locks --- they were VERY close before.

Of course, this means that I have to re-cut the spring seats in the heads down another 0.050 to get my spring installed heights back to where they need to be (1.910) with these new springs. I got one head done tonight. I'll test fit it tomorrow night and measure again for pushrod length, then cut the spring seats in the other head.

This is fun! 

Bear


----------



## My65goat (Jul 26, 2017)

NICE !!! What are you expecting for HP ?


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

My65goat said:


> NICE !!! What are you expecting for HP ?


Oh, I'm guessing 550 "or so" at the crank >

I got all my spring seats re-cut now and have great clearance for the rockers. I checked for pushrod length and it looks like 9.350" is going to be the number. I'm leaning towards Smith Brothers 1-piece hardened chromoly with .083 wall thickness right now, but I hear good things about Manton also. Pushrods, oil pump, and one intake valve are about all I have left to get at this point. The one intake valve is for the cylinder where the previous rocker failed. It scarred up that valve tip a little so I'm hesitant to try to reuse it. I'll probably go with a Luhn oil pump. They're WAY pricey, but I don't want to ever have problems in that area.


----------



## PontiacJim (Dec 29, 2012)

Checked out the Luhn oil pump just to see what it was. 

I bought the Butler Pro 60PSI pump which I feel is added insurance over the stock 60PSI pump. I see a few differences between the Luhn & Butler pumps, but not sure enough to warrant the cost difference. The High Performance Mellings pump has a .750" dia pick-up while the Luhn version is opened up to .814". Not sure I like the "cone" pickup screen.

Butler has the Pro series in 80PSI and 60PSI. https://butlerperformance.com/i-244...creen-bpi-m54ds-pro.html?ref=category:1234738 They do give you a flow rate of the pump tested included with the pump. Flow rate is what I would compare versus pressure between the 2 pumps.

I don't like the fine mesh screen as pictured as I feel it is too fine, but I assume you have a different pickup screen to match your deep oil pan?


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

PontiacJim said:


> I don't like the fine mesh screen as pictured as I feel it is too fine, but I assume you have a different pickup screen to match your deep oil pan?


I do, the one from Milodon that goes with my Milodon kickout pan:
Milodon 18425: Oil Pump Pickup Tube Pontiac Low Profile | JEGS

I've actually decided that I don't like it though and would prefer a finer screen. Last summer when that rocker came apart, that Milodon pickup did very little to stop the fragments from getting into the bearings and taking them out. My son and I actually briefly considered trying to limp the car home with some big honking magnets on the oil pan to try to corral whatever was in there, after we replaced the one rocker and pushrod in the motel parking lot and got it running again. It's a good thing we didn't. When we did get it home and torn down, there were massive gouges in the cam bearings, and the mains/rods were none too happy either.

Bear


----------



## PontiacJim (Dec 29, 2012)

My opinion is that I don't like the Milodon racing pickup either as the screen holes are too big for a street engine. Fine for drag racing where you want the best flow, but want something to keep the big chunks out of your engine. Figure they tear down and rebuild their engines a lot more than a street car so getting metal in the bearings is just part of the business.

On the other hand, too fine a mesh on the pickup is not good either. Keep in mind that it may screen out more particles, but if it gets to the point where flow is compromised, there is the hole in the center of the screen that will open to bypass the plugged up screen and then you are right back to square one as metal particles can scoot right by.

I got a screen that is in between the big holes on the Milodon racing pickup and the real fine mesh often seen on the typical Mellings oil pump pickup. I got one with a Mellings that had the fine mesh (when I rebuilt my earlier 400CI and it was part of a "rebuild kit") and when I ordered a recent 60PSI Mellings pump with pickup from Butler, it had a screen with the larger mesh. Since Butler came out with the Pro 60PSI pump, I ordered it to replace the standard Mellings 60PSI pump I was going to use on my engine. So I do not know why one pump had a fine mesh screen and the other a larger mesh screen.

Again, just my observation and opinion. :thumbsup:


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Moving forward, slowly. Tonight I intended to tear everything back down from all the measuring/mock up work I've been doing and start cleaning the block, heads, all the parts to get them ready for assembly. I didn't get that far though, I just got it torn down and all the parts packed away. I need to spend some time putting tools and stuff away too, and some general clean up. My tendency is to create huge piles of stuff all around whatever I'm doing that starts to get in my way after awhile.

Slowly but surely...

Bear


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Wow, has it really been since October?

I'm still working on the engine, making slow progress - checking everything to the 9's as I go. The latest challenge has to do with oiling. These new Crower lifters combined with the new cam cause the lifter oil bands to be lower in the bores that usual. I need to really check things out to make sure they'll be ok. I'm going to mock up the bottom end and assemble things just far enough to be able to put oil in it and spin the pump with a big drill so I can watch oil flow around the lifters.

Bear


----------



## bigD (Jul 21, 2016)

Paul Carter grinds a small groove from the lifter bore oil feed hole, down the bore about 1/4", to connect with the Chevy oil band location. 

This might work for you. ?


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

That's eventually what I wound up doing. My first attempt turned out to be quite expensive. Since this engine is the original-to-the-car block, I was really reluctant to cut on it and take a chance on messing up this non-replaceable block. For my first go round, I cut grooves into the back sides of the lifters themselves, figuring that if I messed them up at least I could easily replace them. 










This approach worked just fine for getting oil to them at minimum lift. I mocked up enough of the oiling system to spin the pump with a drill in order to test it. With the lifters sitting on the cam base circle, there was plenty of oil flow to the rollers. the problem was what happened with the lifters at near max lift, close to the nose of the cam lobe. At that point the grooves in the back sides of the lifters cleared the tops of the lifter bores, creating a massive oil leak. :banghead:

So, I let it sit for a month, ordered another set of new lifters (ouch!), thought it over, talked to a bunch of folks .... took a deep breath... got out my Dremel tool and cut grooves into the lifter bores.










This worked, as you can see in this video of my most recent mock-up test.







So now, finally, I'm ready to start putting it all back together.

Most recently, I've fit the lifter bore braces:


















...and the one-piece rear main seal. I had to trim a small bit of material from one face because this block has been align honed - twice - so when I first fit it and tightened down the cap, it wanted to distort and buckle up where the two faces meet. Even though the installation instructions say that it's not needed, I'll probably put a tiny dab of "The Right Stuff" on that joint for insurance.










Bear


----------



## PontiacJim (Dec 29, 2012)

Here is the tool to groove the lifter bore and the instructions. Seems pretty easy to use. Tool: COMP Cams 5003: Lifter Bore Grooving Tool Standard Chevrolet | JEGS Here are the instructions: http://news.compperformance.com/Instructions/170.pdf


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

PontiacJim said:


> Here is the tool to groove the lifter bore and the instructions. Seems pretty easy to use. Tool: COMP Cams 5003: Lifter Bore Grooving Tool Standard Chevrolet | JEGS Here are the instructions: http://news.compperformance.com/Instructions/170.pdf


Yes, I found that tool. Thing is, it cuts grooves all the way to the bottom of the lifter bore which allows additional oil to get to the cam lobes. It has a cutter on it, and the way you use it is to insert it from the underneath side an pull it upwards with a tool. As far as I was able to tell, it's not possible to use that tool to cut a partial groove that doesn't extend all the way to the bottom of the bore. Additional oil to the cam lobes is not what I wanted, or needed.

Bear


----------



## PontiacJim (Dec 29, 2012)

BearGFR said:


> Yes, I found that tool. Thing is, it cuts grooves all the way to the bottom of the lifter bore which allows additional oil to get to the cam lobes. It has a cutter on it, and the way you use it is to insert it from the underneath side an pull it upwards with a tool. As far as I was able to tell, it's not possible to use that tool to cut a partial groove that doesn't extend all the way to the bottom of the bore. Additional oil to the cam lobes is not what I wanted, or needed.
> 
> Bear


Ok, I am admitting my ignorance on this one. Never used roller lifters/cams so if you were not trying to get additional oil to the cam/bottom rollers, then what is it that you wanted to achieve?

Are the oil grooves too narrow around the lifters - is that it?


----------



## integrity6987 (May 10, 2017)

BearGFR said:


> Crank end play...


What is the design spec if you don't mind me asking? Is the crank cast iron like the block? .0035 does not sound like much to me.


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

PontiacJim said:


> Ok, I am admitting my ignorance on this one. Never used roller lifters/cams so if you were not trying to get additional oil to the cam/bottom rollers, then what is it that you wanted to achieve?


Sort of a long story.... On this build I'm dropping back to 1.5:1 rockers but actually will wind up with more lift and more duration than what I had before. To get that much lift with 1.5:1 rockers and still be able to install the cam (.4300 lobe lift), the cam base circle has to be a little smaller than stock. This winds up making the lifters sit a little lower in the bores. Low enough, in this case, that the oil bands aren't exposed to the feed holes. They start to "see" oil pressure at about .250-.300 lift on the lifters. These are Crower's with the High Pressure Pin Oiling option. Each one has a tiny feed hole that picks up oil and sends it to the roller bearings. That feed hole is in the oil band, so in this case there would not have been any significant oil flow to the rollers until .250-.300 lift. After talking with Crower, they were "ok" with that but I wasn't sure that I was. Cutting those grooves like I did had the effect of lowering the bore feeds just enough to get oil into the oil bands 100% of the time, even when the lifters are sitting on the cam base circle --- like is visible in the video.

Bear


----------



## PontiacJim (Dec 29, 2012)

BearGFR said:


> Sort of a long story.... On this build I'm dropping back to 1.5:1 rockers but actually will wind up with more lift and more duration than what I had before. To get that much lift with 1.5:1 rockers and still be able to install the cam (.4300 lobe lift), the cam base circle has to be a little smaller than stock. This winds up making the lifters sit a little lower in the bores. Low enough, in this case, that the oil bands aren't exposed to the feed holes. They start to "see" oil pressure at about .250-.300 lift on the lifters. These are Crower's with the High Pressure Pin Oiling option. Each one has a tiny feed hole that picks up oil and sends it to the roller bearings. That feed hole is in the oil band, so in this case there would not have been any significant oil flow to the rollers until .250-.300 lift. After talking with Crower, they were "ok" with that but I wasn't sure that I was. Cutting those grooves like I did had the effect of lowering the bore feeds just enough to get oil into the oil bands 100% of the time, even when the lifters are sitting on the cam base circle --- like is visible in the video.
> 
> Bear



OK, I understand what you are doing now. Better safe than sorry in my book. :thumbsup:


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

integrity6987 said:


> What is the design spec if you don't mind me asking? Is the crank cast iron like the block? .0035 does not sound like much to me.


Forged crank. Pontiac blueprint specs for crank end play say .003 to .009

Bear


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Good thing I called and visited with the folks at BOP. I learned some stuff that they don't publish in their installation instructions, notably that they don't want the inside diameter of the seal (relaxed, like it would be installed with no crank present) to be any more than 0.020 smaller than the sealing surface of the crank. Since my block has been align-honed twice, it was "way out" from that measurement. Turns out, the right way to address the problem is to sand down/remove material from the *outside diameter* of the seal. So, I bought another seal and did that. Fits just right now. I shot some video of the process that I intend to edit together into sort of an instructional. Right now though, I'm busy loading bullets and getting the short block done.

Another *REALLY* good thing I did installing pistons. I'm running Total Seal gapless top rings this time. Their installation instructions are specific, right down to how they want all the ring end gaps aligned. I found out that using the adjustable band type ring compressor I have, getting it onto the piston without disturbing the ring gap alignment was next to impossible so I stopped and instead ordered a fixed diameter tapered ring installation tool from Summit. Oh my gosh!!! Talk about nice, I'll never wrestle with one of those adjustable band type ring compressors again.










































Bear


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Fitting the new crank scraper from Spotts Performance.









Bear


----------



## 1968gto421 (Mar 28, 2014)

Wow, great work, Bear. Looking forward to your BOP instructional.


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

More done so far today. This time, I'll be running a custom-built 80psi oil pump from Luhn Performance, Inc. It's a gorgeous piece with some really nice enhancements. 

















I'm reusing my pump drive shaft from Nitemare. It's stronger than stock and also has a sleeve on the drive end for positive retention.









I also now have the new windage tray from Paul Spotts fit and installed. I had to clearance it some to fit around the oil pump. I also modified the tray by welding two nuts onto the back side of it so that I could secure the lower dipstick tube. That's my original lower tube that was formerly secured by being sandwiched between the middle tube and the factory windage tray, but since I can't use the factory tray due to this being a longer stroke (it won't clear the crank, and besides it was a 3/4 length tray anyway and I've heard that they tend to develop cracks over the years). The Spotts tray is a big improvement. I welded a tab onto the lower tube so that I could secure it.










































Bear


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Had to make a slight modification to my Milodon oil pan in order for it to clear the pick-up on the Luhn pump.

Having to do stuff like this used to bother me, but I've come to just expect it. The biggest concern on this little job was trying to make sure I got the pan perfectly clean on the inside after cutting on it.

Bear


----------



## Shake-N-Bake (Jun 16, 2015)

The tapered install tool for pistons are super nice. Luckily I saved my set from H.O Racing that I bought 30 years ago. I did have to grind a notch in the exterior to clear the pins in the deck but that was an easy modification. Love using those things....have the band style ring compressor somewhere but haven't used it in decades.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

More progress. I degreed the cam and found that to have the intake centerline at 106 as Bullet specified, it needed to be installed 4-degrees advanced.

Plus, an idea I had to make it much easier on myself to drain the cooling system.


































Bear


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Leak test. It's got 2 gallons of oil in it right now, enough to fully submerge the rear of the crank and the rear of the oil pan. If there are no leaks in the morning, I'm declaring a victory.










Bear


----------



## Shake-N-Bake (Jun 16, 2015)

That chain looks nice and tight. Did you line bore the mains? And if so, did you have to get an undersize chain? I have always wondered how one determines if a smaller chain is needed.....??

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

The block has been align honed - twice in fact. Once when I built it the first time 5 or so years ago, and again this time because I'm converting to main studs instead of bolts. Yes, I did go with an under size timing chain (from Butler). There's probably a proper way to measure for what you need, but I don't know what it is. I just went on a wing a and prayer, crossed my fingers, and ordered one, and it turned out to be right on the money - not too tight, just right. Whew... :wink3::laugh2:0

Bear


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Well...dagnabbit. This is why we test, right? :cuss:










Bear


----------



## 1968gto421 (Mar 28, 2014)

Wow, very nice work, Bear. That new shop you built has really made a difference for you!


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Welp, I started assembling my heads today. Things got "interesting"when my valve spring compressor decided to abandon me and let one of the springs slip out as I was trying to install it. These springs make 245 lbs. of seat pressure at an installed height of 1.910, so things got really interesting for a brief moment. Thankfully, I'd had the presence of mind to make sure none of my anatomy was in line with any of the springs so nothing bad happened. Tomorrow I'll be visiting my local Summit store in Arlington to get a new heavy duty valve spring compressor. I really don't need that kind of excitement. :surprise:

Bear


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Ok, so new compressor in hand --- results:










































Bear


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Getting ready for Round 3 of the contest to get this thing sealed up so that it doesn't leak out the rear. I've had two 'hang test' failures so far. (Hanging the engine from the hoist, tail low, so that the rear of the crank is submerged in oil to check for leaks.) I'm using a Milodon aftermarket pan and the arch in that pan that fits over the rear main cap isn't tight enough to compress the gasket enough to create a good seal at that point. After discussing the problem with Wade at BOP (I'm using their 1-piece rear main seal and 1-piece pan gasket), I decided to try to make the pan tighter there by using my mig welder to lay some metal into that arch and then shape it with hand grinders. It took some time and a few go rounds of adding metal, grinding, re-shaping, and re-checking but I think this has a good chance of working for me if I combine this with a thin bead of that good GM silicone sealant.


















Bear


----------



## tiretread (Sep 28, 2015)

Give'em Hell, Bear!


----------



## PontiacJim (Dec 29, 2012)

Why didn't you just cut/add a strip of cork gasket at the rear of the pan as a filler rather than build up a bead of weld? Seems like more work and if it is off..............


----------



## 64GTOConvertible (Aug 28, 2016)

^^^ That's what I said! (Too late, of course)


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

PontiacJim said:


> Why didn't you just cut/add a strip of cork gasket at the rear of the pan as a filler rather than build up a bead of weld? Seems like more work and if it is off..............


I did consider that, but I was concerned about the possibility of the cork getting misaligned or getting squeezed out over time with heat cycling. In all honestly, it might have worked.

Bear


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Round 3 in progress. So far so good. "Rocky" stumbled momentarily at the beginning of the fight, but recovered quickly when the trainer found one rear pan bolt that needed a little more torque. He's been clean ever since. Fingers crossed. :boxing_smiley:

Bear


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

It was still clean and dry after 12-hours, but after 20 hours there had been exactly 1 drop. :banghead:

I still think this is the right approach though, so I'm trying this one more time and changing the 'set up' time I'm allowing the sealant before I torque the pan down fully. I think I may have let it set up too long the last time.










Bear


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Finally!!!! 26 hours hanging tail down with 3.5 gallons of oil in it, and it's dry as a bone.

Now I can continue.

Bear


----------



## tiretread (Sep 28, 2015)

Great news!


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Still getting it buttoned up, ready for paint. Today I working on mocking up the accessories to make sure the pulleys are all lined up as nicely as I can get them. I made a tool out of an aluminum bar to help check alignment.


----------



## 1968gto421 (Mar 28, 2014)

Neat tool...well done.


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

1968gto421 said:


> Neat tool...well done.


Thank you. I had the devil of a time getting this thing not to throw or roll belts. 

This engine originally was an early production '69 that had the short 4" snout water pump, and factory A/C. When I built it 6 years ago, I went with a long snout aftermarket high flow water pump, an SFI rated harmonic balancer (that wouldn't allow the original A/C drive pulley to fit), a different and "stouter" power steering pump with a different pulley offset in order to power both the steering and the hydroboost brake system, and a 115 amp alternator because the factory 65 amp unit couldn't keep up with the load. So I quite literally changed "everything" on the front of the engine. As they say, "and then the fight started". :banghead:

Bear


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Finally ---- I got my video of the rear main seal installation put together and posted.

Find it here:






Apologizes for the noisy audio. I forgot to take my GoPro out of the water-tight case when I shot this so I had to futz with the levels to make it audible. Unfortunately, that also raised the background noise levels.

Bear


----------



## WheelHorseman (Oct 15, 2017)

Thanks for making this video, Bear. I bought the same BOP one-piece seal and I was "not excited" about installing it in my 428. I'll be more comfortable now that I've seen it done. Thank you for the idea of using your engine hoist as well- controlling the "lay in" of that heavy crank sure adds confidence.


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

WheelHorseman said:


> Thanks for making this video, Bear. I bought the same BOP one-piece seal and I was "not excited" about installing it in my 428. I'll be more comfortable now that I've seen it done. Thank you for the idea of using your engine hoist as well- controlling the "lay in" of that heavy crank sure adds confidence.


You're welcome. What I mentioned briefly a couple times was that this was my second installation. The first time I had my wife help me by guiding the seal into place while I laid the crank in by hand. That was definitely not the way to do it because the way I had to hold the crank made it really hard for her to see, plus like you said - it's heavy. The other significant thing about fitting one of these is making sure that when it's installed the 'relaxed' inside diameter of the seal is no more than 0.020" smaller than the crank sealing surface. You want it to be 'some' smaller to get a good seal, but no tighter than 0.020. Wade at BOP told me about this and said if it's any tighter than that then the crank spinning will very likely tear the seal. He said they'll be adding that information to their installation instructions "soon" (probably whenever they deplete their inventory and need to print up more.)

Bear


----------



## 1968gto421 (Mar 28, 2014)

Thanks much, Bear. This is a very well done video and leaves nothing for guys like me to guess. Appreciate it!


----------



## renorealtors (Apr 7, 2018)

Nice video makes me think I can do my 389 rebuild " NOT " The crank looks so nice!


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

renorealtors said:


> Nice video makes me think I can do my 389 rebuild " NOT " The crank looks so nice!


Sure you can. The biggest challenge is to not allow yourself to get in a hurry and rush things. That'll make you say, "Oh, it's good enough" too often and usually with undesirable consequences. If something is not right, stop and go back until it is. That crank is a forged one from Eagle. I bought a complete rotating assembly through Butler that included that crank, bearings, 6.800 forged H-beam rods, and custom Ross pistons. They balanced the whole thing and provided the detail balance info with the kit.

The previous incarnation of this engine used a cast Eagle crank and also custom KB Icon pistons, also forged 6.800 rods. The only reason I bought a new rotating assembly was because originally this engine was built with iron heads and I had to do some ugly things to get compression in the correct range for those heads - namely running round dished pistons (which destroyed the quench charactersitics) and fat head gaskets. That got it to 9.5:1 with the heads I was using (#722 Ram Air IV's). However when one of them developed a problem, I switched to aluminum 72cc round port Edelbrocks. Even going back to stock thickness gaskets, those pistons still had no quench because of the round dishes and also were still too low for aluminum at barely 10.0:1 when these heads really need to be around 10.3-10.5:1. I could have kept the same crank and just bought pistons, but I would have had to get the whole thing balanced again and I really wanted a forged crank anyway, so I bought a complete assembly ready to go.

Thanks for the kind words on the video. I should dig around and see if I can find a piece of software that'll clean up the sound.

Bear


----------



## My65goat (Jul 26, 2017)

Excellent information Bear! Thank you for sharing your wisdom with us.


----------



## renorealtors (Apr 7, 2018)

Thanks for the encouragement Bear. I am loving the idea of stroking the 389 with edelbrock heads to fix the compression issue. My only issue is that I am finding nothing but correct #s on this car " what a terrible problem to have! I have seen people doing lots of things inside but keeping the exterior of the engine stock? Lots of thinking to do. Your build is helping me immensely! Is it rude to ask what I would pay for a butler set up like what you got from them? Thanks Reno


----------



## 1968gto421 (Mar 28, 2014)

Reno,
Your best buy is the 4.25" stroker kit. Here's the link:

https://butlerperformance.com/c-123...es-stroker-kits-389-blocks-421-480-cu-in.html

Hope this helps.


----------



## renorealtors (Apr 7, 2018)

That is some serious eye candy! I will keep thinking and looking at posts for a way to get some bigger power but keep the stock heads using pump gas.


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

If all your numbers are pointing to it all being original, I'd think long and hard about sacrificing that. However... It's possible to still build a stroker out of it without having to sacrifice 'numbers' if you want. The challenge is going to be finding pistons - at a reasonable price. Companies like Ross (Butler sells them) can always make a set of custom pistons to match whatever you need in terms of bore size, compression height, pin height, and valve relief's/dish ---- so it's not that you can't get them, but they may be expensive if they have to make them 'one off' custom for you. Still, you could build a strong engine 'for fun' and still not burn any bridges, numbers-wise. You could always go back to a stock stroke crank, stock rods, stock cam, etc. --- that is as long as you don't get too carried away and grenade it, and ruin the block. 


Bear


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

So. some of you may remember that years ago, not too long after I got the car together, I had an engine fire. (The way Hagerty treated me afterwards is the reason I'll be a customer for life.)

Anyway, since it's still apart I decided to take the opportunity to do some more cleanup "remediation" of things that I couldn't get to easily with the engine still in the car, and repaint the engine compartment while I'm at it. One of the things I'm changing is the supplemental transmission oil cooler. When I had this tranny gone through I asked the folks that did it to add a supplemental cooler. They did, but they installed it in front of the radiator between the radiator and the A/C condenser. I've been suspicious of it having a negative impact on engine cooling and also A/C efficiency, so I decided to take this opportunity to change it. I'm going with a better cooler - a Flex A Lite plate and fin cooler instead of the previous generic tube and fin version, and I'm moving it away from the radiator and A/C. But where? I had some inspiration: I fabricated some bracketry to place it behind the core support and near the window washer reservoir. To get air to it, I'm using a short piece of flexible 2" duct hose connected to a "scoop" made out of a (don't laugh) shop vac attachment I'm going to mount down low in the valance. Seems like it should work, you think? 


















Bear


----------



## Shake-N-Bake (Jun 16, 2015)

Bear,
I think the best place is where you had it originally. Other choice is in front of the A/C condenser. The cooler will be far more effective out front with the other heat exchangers. Your idea seems reasonable but you will likely reduce the effectiveness of the cooler by relocating it to that spot.

I didn't believe it either until I had an opportunity to participate in a fleet test with Ford engineers with our work fleet. Those guys put dozens of sensors all over the place and I learned a ton about how they cool things. When it comes to high horsepower diesel trucks....it's all about managing the heat the power train produces. Manage the heat effectively and the parts will perform best.

In our case, the optimum transmission fluid temp is about 60-80 degrees over ambient....which is always lower than the engine coolant temp so you definitely do not want to locate the trans cooler after the engine radiator. The A/C Delta is lower than the trans so the order should be A/C condenser, trans cooler and then radiator.

For vehicles with the trans cooler in the radiator tank....the heat exchanger is located on the cool side of the radiator, after the engine heat has been removed from the coolant.

My $0.02...

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Shake-N-Bake (Jun 16, 2015)

One other thing.....the engine radiator was least affected with the trans cooler located in front of the cool side....the side closest to the return nose. On our trucks that was the lower part of the radiator. 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Shake-N-Bake said:


> One other thing.....the engine radiator was least affected with the trans cooler located in front of the cool side....the side closest to the return nose. On our trucks that was the lower part of the radiator.


That was my main motivation for wanting to move it: to keep it from affecting the radiator _at all_. This cooler is a lot better than the one it's replacing because it's a plate/fin cooler. The other one was tube/fin. There's also a cooler built into the radiator and I'm going to keep it in the circuit. I'll send the trans fluid through the radiator cooler first, then through the aux cooler. I have no reason to think that running on the radiator cooler alone wouldn't be sufficent. The aux one is mostly 'insurance'. 

Bear


----------



## Shake-N-Bake (Jun 16, 2015)

You are correct. The plate style is much more effecient. I have used the Tru-Cool Max coolers with great results.
Another option is you can use a thermostatic bypass valve so there would be no heat transfer penalty for the engine coolant unless the trans fluid temps reach a critical level. Keep in mind there is positive pressure under the hood at speed so the alternate location may not flow as much air as you expect unless of course you are not using a hood or have some extraction vents.


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Yeah, I've been considering putting a vent in the front of the inner fender to let the air out. I reckon if it gets to be a problem I could 'upgrade' to one of those Derale or similar coolers that has a fan attached to the face. 
Thinking about adding a trans temp gauge too. It never ends...

Bear


----------



## Shake-N-Bake (Jun 16, 2015)

BearGFR said:


> Yeah, I've been considering putting a vent in the front of the inner fender to let the air out. I reckon if it gets to be a problem I could 'upgrade' to one of those Derale or similar coolers that has a fan attached to the face.
> Thinking about adding a trans temp gauge too. It never ends...
> 
> Bear


Yes....but it sounds like the fun per gallon ratio is going to be pretty nice when you are done with the build. 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

"The last time" I had the devil of a time getting all the accessories lined up well enough to stop throwing belts. I worked out a solution in the past few weeks that involved using stacks of washers to line things up, but the more I thought about it the more I didn't like that - because it looks really '*******' and also the smallest adjustments I can make are a washer's thickness. Today I decided to go a different route. I bought some pipe nipples from the local hardware store and cut sections out of them to make spacers in exactly the thicknesses needed to line everything up as perfectly as I can. That's all I've done all day today. It'll look a lot better once I get all the parts and pieces painted, and now I know exactly what goes where - and have saved all that information for when I need it again.

Bear


----------



## PontiacJim (Dec 29, 2012)

BearGFR said:


> "The last time" I had the devil of a time getting all the accessories lined up well enough to stop throwing belts. I worked out a solution in the past few weeks that involved using stacks of washers to line things up, but the more I thought about it the more I didn't like that - because it looks really '*******' and also the smallest adjustments I can make are a washer's thickness. Today I decided to go a different route. I bought some pipe nipples from the local hardware store and cut sections out of them to make spacers in exactly the thicknesses needed to line everything up as perfectly as I can. That's all I've done all day today. It'll look a lot better once I get all the parts and pieces painted, and now I know exactly what goes where - and have saved all that information for when I need it again.
> 
> Bear


Here is an idea. Once you get your spacers exactly as you want, why not transfer those lengths to a piece of round aluminum bar stock, cut, and center drill? Or, what I would do, just bring the small pieces to a machine shop and say "here are the lengths I need, make them in round aluminum stock "X" diameter, and drill a center hole for a 1/2" or 9/16" bolt." The bring them home and paint them up.

I had my local machine shop make me some center spacers for the rims I am using - 15 x 10 big hole 4-wheel drive "D" slot steel rims onto the much smaller GM axle hubs. Not too pricey and works perfectly. :thumbsup:


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Finally! It's together and in my homemade paint booth. Ready for some primer and color.


----------



## Shake-N-Bake (Jun 16, 2015)

Looks great. Very muscular. Anytime I see those spacers under the valve covers I know there is some serious business lurking inside. Bet it will sound great once it's fired up!


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Shake-N-Bake said:


> Looks great. Very muscular. Anytime I see those spacers under the valve covers I know there is some serious business lurking inside. Bet it will sound great once it's fired up!


You noticed those, did you?  Lots of folks don't because I paint them engine color. Here's what's under them:










Bear


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Engine is back in...

Bear


----------



## Cafr119 (Dec 9, 2017)

Sweeet !!


----------



## PontiacJim (Dec 29, 2012)

BearGFR said:


> Engine is back in...
> 
> Bear



Yawn. Wake me up when you get the darn thing running. Been waiting so long for you to finish up that my excitement has turned to a dark depression. LOL Man, can't wait to here that thing fire up and you post a video!!!!! Shut up, sit down, and hang on!!!!! And why did they delete those GTO passenger side grab bars????? Oh, I know. Pontiac engines kept getting more and more powerful and the scared sh*tless passengers were hanging on for dear life and ripping 'em loose. :thumbsup:


----------



## integrity6987 (May 10, 2017)

Looks mean just sitting there.


----------



## geeteeohguy (Feb 2, 2008)

Rob, I know that you're doing the engine, but why is the front clip off the car? Did you wreck it, or are you working on fine-tuning your attention to micro-details?(don't want to use 'Anal' here....) Thought of you over the weekend...attended a 4th of July event with friends up in Nevada City, and the host had a whole bunch of vinyl, which we played....nothing like spinning some Grand Funk Railroad 45 RPM singles turned up to 'eleven'!!! The guy even dug out his Santana reel-to-reel tape and cranked that up.....I haven't rocked out _that_ way in 50 years!! LOL..........


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Hey Jeff, 
The front clip is off because I fell victim to several iterations of "while the engine is out I might as well do's"... one of them being to repaint the engine compartment, another being to have new a/c and ps/hydroboost hoses made a I could hide them behind the fenders, another being to clean up the wiring and brake lines, add some supplemental aftermarket gauges that have data logging capabilities (oil pressure, water temp, trans temp, and wide band air/fuel), relocate and upgrade the auxiliary transmission cooler, reroute the trans cooler lines far away from the headers (also behind the fenders), get the headers re-coated with one of Jet-Hot's higher temp coatings, repaint the 'mesh' areas of the grilled to reflect the presence of a Ram Air system (when I built it the first time I didn't realize there was a difference), and fabricate out of sheet metal a new panel where the a/c and heater hoses pass through the firewall (the previous one was fiberglass and it was looking pretty funky still from that fire I had several years ago). 
So that's why I went ahead and pulled off the front clip.

Bear


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Some photos of the work I'm doing to make things more presentable. I had some longer hoses made for my hydroboost braking system so that I can route them behind the fenders. I'm doing similar things with the A/C hoses and transmission cooler lines on the passenger side.


----------



## Instg8ter (Sep 28, 2010)

Great work as usual Bear, here we go again....im back uo and running for the last week shaking it down and fixing Gremlins. think i have all but a radio short figured out. Will be down at Michigan Ave. cruise this weekend hope to see some members down there.


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

New digital AEM gauges are in and connected. These have data logging capabilities, though I haven't added the logger yet. I connected the battery to verify they're working, also the cooling fans. Have myself another heart attack. It's not ready to start yet but I wanted to bump the starter just a bit to make sure it engaged the new flex plate. CLANG! CLANG! CLANG! ... the sound of something rotating and banging into sheet metal. My heart sank..... it turns out that one corner of the converter dust cover was twisted in just enough for the bolts to hit it. Whew. 

Gauges left to right: oil pressure, water temperature, transmission temperature, and air/fuel mixture. 

Bear


----------



## RMTZ67 (Mar 12, 2011)

*Spacers*



BearGFR said:


> "The last time" I had the devil of a time getting all the accessories lined up well enough to stop throwing belts. I worked out a solution in the past few weeks that involved using stacks of washers to line things up, but the more I thought about it the more I didn't like that - because it looks really '*******' and also the smallest adjustments I can make are a washer's thickness. Today I decided to go a different route. I bought some pipe nipples from the local hardware store and cut sections out of them to make spacers in exactly the thicknesses needed to line everything up as perfectly as I can. That's all I've done all day today. It'll look a lot better once I get all the parts and pieces painted, and now I know exactly what goes where - and have saved all that information for when I need it again.
> 
> Bear


 Hey Bear just went thru your whole thread. Looks like you got in there pretty deep. But looks like its coming along well. Hopefully when I start putting my engine back together I wont have to use very many of those little headbangers:banghead:lol. chances are probably good i'll have several. Oh and a few of these:willy::frown2: Well keep up the good work and thanks for your input on my threads.:cheers Oh and by the way I had to to do a lot of belt aligning on my Z28 I believe I was able to pick up different size spacers at Ace hardware. They have just about everything nut and bolt/clip wise for cars. Just don't know if you have any there. RMTZ67


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

It's alive - finally...

(Skip down to about the 5:00 mark for the 'good part' if you don't want to listen to a bunch of my yammering)






So far, I've worked through a few minor problems but it's coming along. The carb was leaking on 'both ends' and I thought it was coming from the float bowls. I called the vendor, AED, and learned that it's common for these carbs to leak from around the fuel inlet fittings, the reason being the gaskets fit over a small 'shoulder' on the fitting that's very easy to miss, such that when you install the fitting they get cocked and pinched. That was the problem. In my defense, this is my first ever "Brand H" carb so I have a lot to learn still.

Bear


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Today's challenge: Making the factory (reproduction) Ram Air system fit and work with a Northwind intake (approximately 1.5" taller than the factory intake) and a "Brand H" carburetor. 

Current plan: Cut a big round hole in the middle of the upper ram air pan so that the air cleaner can fit "inside" it. That's the easy part. I'm also going to have to try to "narrow" the vacuum operated temperature control doors too, or just delete them completely (which I'd prefer not to do).

I'm also going to have to cut holes into the lower pan so that it will sit down over the float adjustment screws on the float bowls, then make some "dimples" over them so that they don't leak unfiltered air into the engine.

::cue Jeopardy theme::

Success --- and unless you know what a 69 Ram Air system is supposed to look like, you might not even notice the changes.








Bear


----------



## Instg8ter (Sep 28, 2010)

Hey kinda like cutting a 67' tri-power pan for dualies and making it fit with 1" risers off a single plane....lol. LOOKS GREAT, i would expect nothing less, time to get her out and shake it down. 

Been getting all the seat time i can the last few weeks doing the same and fixing all the gremlins, car is running great less a little exhaust leak because they burned my 40.00 exhaust gaskets on the dyno (they did get me a new set from RA Resto) and i had to use the re-useable "NOT" multi alum ones i had when putting the engine in but i'm having too much fun to mess with it until the weather gets bad. Dream Cruise is this weekend so keep an eye out on the Cable for it.


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

What you did with that dual quad setup is nothing short of amazing. I continue to be a big fan of your car.

Bear


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

I just drove it. First time it's been off the reservation in two years. Nothing exploded. So far so good. arty:


I really need to clean it up and maybe shoot some video.

Bear


----------



## geeteeohguy (Feb 2, 2008)

Great news! I'll bet that felt pretty good! And I _suspect_, although I can't be certain, that some rubber may have been burnt.


----------



## Ebartone (Aug 18, 2019)

PontiacJim said:


> My opinion is that I don't like the Milodon racing pickup either as the screen holes are too big for a street engine. Fine for drag racing where you want the best flow, but want something to keep the big chunks out of your engine. Figure they tear down and rebuild their engines a lot more than a street car so getting metal in the bearings is just part of the business.
> 
> On the other hand, too fine a mesh on the pickup is not good either. Keep in mind that it may screen out more particles, but if it gets to the point where flow is compromised, there is the hole in the center of the screen that will open to bypass the plugged up screen and then you are right back to square one as metal particles can scoot right by.
> 
> ...


My dumb question, doesn’t the oil go from the pump to the filter? Small shavings should they be picked up should be filtered, I thought, unless the bypass is open which I assume is not (?)


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Yes, they do - and "should" get caught by the filter. However, they will go through the pump first before getting there so there's a chance they could damage the pump, get lodged in the relief valve, or the bypass valve, etc.

I'd prefer not to be exposed to all that if I don't have to be. 

Bear


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Resurrecting this old thread....

Well crap - sometimes I wonder what in blazes ever made me think I could build an engine...

Recap of previous episodes: It ate a rocker arm on the 2016 Power Tour going into Wichita KS, and was down until the Summer of 2018. During the process I stepped it up and reworked a lot of other areas while it was apart. As part of that rebuild I took it to my previous machine shop to have it honed and checked out before I ordered pistons, so as to make sure I got the right size. (Another long story - new pistons to "correct" the compression ratio for the aluminum heads I was more or less forced into back in 2011 when the exhaust port in #6 of my previous heads, real 722 RA IV's, cracked and started leaking coolant into that cylinder.) #6 had some visible roughness from the coolant leak that I wanted to get cleaned up during the re-honing in 2018. There are only 3 machine shops in the entire DFW area that I know of that have a Pontiac torque plate, the shop I took it to being one of them. When I got the block back from that machine shop in 2018, the guy told me "it was fine" even though there was still some spots in that cylinder I could both see and feel. Like a dummy, I believed him and built the engine - after all, the guy has been in business for years and builds race engines. Ok, now you're caught up.

So I built the engine. It was already a 461 but this time with quite a bit more cam, (solid roller: 251/257 @ 0.050, 110 LSA, 0.620 net valve lift - and that with 1.5:1 rockers), more intake, more carb (AED 850-HO with annular boosters), all Crower lifters (Cutaway HIPPO's), Crower Rockers (Stainless full roller 1.5's), new rotating assembly (forged crank, long rods, Ross custom pistons with good quench - 10.3:1 static compression - Total Seal gapless file fit rings) etc. etc. etc. --- New BOP 1-piece rear seal, meticulously installed, following instructions and including tips I got from BOP during multiple phone conversations. I tested for leaks by hanging it butt down from my hoist for a week with 2 gallons of oil in the pan. It was dry as a bone.

Put it in the car and got it running. Fought with that @#$%^&*() "Brand-H" carb for _12 solid months_ trying to correct an extremely rich condition at cruise, but was finally (mostly) successful. Thank Heaven that another enhancement I added during the down time was a brace of AEM digital gauges, including a UEGO wide-band air/fuel meter. During that same time,it started leaking from the rear (grrrrr). And after running so rich for so long, I was really worried that fuel wash was killing the rings, so earlier this year I ran a leak-down test.

All cylinders showed 1% leakage or less -- except for #6 -- which showed 20% leakage. I moped around feeling sorry for myself, wondering why the Universe hates me for a few months, then I pulled it out again and tore it down. I'd originally thought (hoped) that the oil leak was actually coming from the pan because this Milodon pan I'm using fits very poorly over the rear main cap. It's very 'loose' in the center of the arch and only barely touches the gasket in the middle. When I had it apart I went so far as to lay a bead inside that arch in the pan with my mig welder and shape it with a grinder to try to make it fit better. As I said, I tested it hanging and thought I had it sealed.

When I took it apart, it was painfully obvious where the leak was and it wasn't the pan.










I was super careful installing that seal, as I said. My working theory at this point is that the combination of the align-honing operations that have been done on this block (I converted to main studs) and the serrations on the crank took it out. When I put it in, I even made a video of the process and shared it. Sigh..

1-Piece seal installation video

"This time" I've decided to go with one of the graphite impregnated rope seals because it seems logical to me that they should be more tolerant of the align honing operation's effect on the shape of the seal groove. 

I'm also using a different machine shop this time. (duh) The only one left in the DFW area that 1) has a Pontiac plate and 2) I haven't (yet) had an unsatisfactory experience with. I'd talked with them via phone a couple months ago and the conversation was really pleasant, they listened to me, we actually interacted, they answered all my questions, and didn't seem like they were in a hurry to get rid of me. I also bit the bullet and ordered my very own Pontiac plate from BHJ (which hasn't arrived yet because they have to _make_ it first) because I'm tired of having my options limited by that.

I'm hearing that right now, a set of pistons from Ross will have about an 8-week lead time due to COVID. Dang, I hope I get it right this time. It's discouraging.

Bear


----------



## Mine'sa66 (Oct 30, 2019)

BearGFR said:


> Resurrecting this old thread....
> 
> Well crap - sometimes I wonder what in blazes ever made me think I could build an engine...
> 
> ...


Ouch.
Look at it this way...we're all out here dealing with our own nightmares.
You just made us all feel better...it's not just us!
May the automotive gods smile upon your project!


----------

