>
> If you want to make the olds engine more reliable in my opinion the things
> you should consider are 3 inch exhaust pipes and Thorley headers, get rid of
> the J heads, change the intake manifold to an edelbrock performer to
> eliminate the exhaust crossover, change to a roller timing chain. Remember
> torque is more important to us at low RPM than Horse power. Thats one of the
> big advantages of the 455 over the 403, low end torque.
>
> Seems to me that we have two kinds of GMCers. The first bought the coach to
> restore and use it as a very reliable traveller. In original form it is
> fast, maneuverable and is fully supported for parts. The second type puts
> all of the latest engine mods etc on the coach to extract better performance
> from it. In many cases increased performance engines, later brakes, hubs
> etc are not contributing to increased or similar reliability to the original
> coach. We need to keep this in mind. I am looking for reliability and
> safety and everything else is secondary.
Thomas my friend, you're on both sides of your own fence here. On
one hand you recommend some performance mods and then poo-poo
unspecified others. Actually I believe there are four kinds of GMCers.
One believes staunchly in keeping it original(call them wes-ites), a
second believes in using proven modern technology to improve the
coach(sounds like you and I), a third will race after any gimmick to fix
things that aren't broken(and often chase patches that cover up real
problems), and the fourth(and most dangerous) are those that are too
cheap to fix things that need fixing. This viewpoint was reinforced by
my trip to Marion where I observed all four types in attendance.
> One case is the change to the Cadillac engine by some GMCers. The cadillac
> engine is 130# heavier than the olds 455 increasing the alreay marginal load
> on the front end, not as reliable (no nickle content in the block), and is
> not supported by GMC for parts. Is it really an improvement? Not to me.
Heh, I'm beginning to think that the only people still considering the
Caddy have never owned a GMC. If this thing were viable, then Buskirk,
Golby or Sirum would be singing the praises of their "drop-in"
conversions from the roof tops. I don't think I heard the word
"Cadillac" all week in Marion. If anyone is serious about more
torque(at a price), then I'm sure Leigh Harrison's fuel
injection/electronic ignition is the way to go. The "jackrabbit" starts
he did from stop lights were no less than amazing, but I kept wondering
about the abuse his torque converter was taking. For me, I'll keep the
old Qjet and HEI.
My opinions, well worth the price!
Patrick
- --
Patrick Flowers
Mailto
atri63
The GMC Motorhome Page
http://www.gmcmotorhome.com
> If you want to make the olds engine more reliable in my opinion the things
> you should consider are 3 inch exhaust pipes and Thorley headers, get rid of
> the J heads, change the intake manifold to an edelbrock performer to
> eliminate the exhaust crossover, change to a roller timing chain. Remember
> torque is more important to us at low RPM than Horse power. Thats one of the
> big advantages of the 455 over the 403, low end torque.
>
> Seems to me that we have two kinds of GMCers. The first bought the coach to
> restore and use it as a very reliable traveller. In original form it is
> fast, maneuverable and is fully supported for parts. The second type puts
> all of the latest engine mods etc on the coach to extract better performance
> from it. In many cases increased performance engines, later brakes, hubs
> etc are not contributing to increased or similar reliability to the original
> coach. We need to keep this in mind. I am looking for reliability and
> safety and everything else is secondary.
Thomas my friend, you're on both sides of your own fence here. On
one hand you recommend some performance mods and then poo-poo
unspecified others. Actually I believe there are four kinds of GMCers.
One believes staunchly in keeping it original(call them wes-ites), a
second believes in using proven modern technology to improve the
coach(sounds like you and I), a third will race after any gimmick to fix
things that aren't broken(and often chase patches that cover up real
problems), and the fourth(and most dangerous) are those that are too
cheap to fix things that need fixing. This viewpoint was reinforced by
my trip to Marion where I observed all four types in attendance.
> One case is the change to the Cadillac engine by some GMCers. The cadillac
> engine is 130# heavier than the olds 455 increasing the alreay marginal load
> on the front end, not as reliable (no nickle content in the block), and is
> not supported by GMC for parts. Is it really an improvement? Not to me.
Heh, I'm beginning to think that the only people still considering the
Caddy have never owned a GMC. If this thing were viable, then Buskirk,
Golby or Sirum would be singing the praises of their "drop-in"
conversions from the roof tops. I don't think I heard the word
"Cadillac" all week in Marion. If anyone is serious about more
torque(at a price), then I'm sure Leigh Harrison's fuel
injection/electronic ignition is the way to go. The "jackrabbit" starts
he did from stop lights were no less than amazing, but I kept wondering
about the abuse his torque converter was taking. For me, I'll keep the
old Qjet and HEI.
My opinions, well worth the price!
Patrick
- --
Patrick Flowers
Mailto
atri63The GMC Motorhome Page
http://www.gmcmotorhome.com
