322 engine tear down

[KAD36]

Beemon, for what its worth in your situation my recommendation would be stick with the stock water pump, don't mess with the flow rates unless the factory offered something different for the 322 in 56 with AC.  Its another design point balance between vanes, pulley RPM, engine rpm at a given speed, flow rates through the system, how much the thermostat flows - etc, etc.  Without understanding some of that I think this is a shotgun approach that feeds the aftermarket industry with your pockets unless you can find someone who did the mod before and after and verify the amount of improvement relative to what you need.  You could get an improvement or a negligible improvement, or it will stay the same.

 

Not to hijack the thread, but here's some light reading, noting radiator capacity and airflow considerations are usually first things understood in the system before water flow:

 

http://www.superchevy.com/how-to/project-cars/sucp-1204-cooling-system-basics/

 

For the purposes of a future AC decision, what is the condition of your radiator and what center to center spacing are the rows?  And how many rows?  3?  Is it a factory radiator? 

 

You might have some trouble cooling the engine to under 200 with AC unless you still have a factory radiator in good shape with no restrictions and an equivalent air flow of a 6 blade mechanical fan (see Willies set up - his car is a data point that works as evidenced in the dreaded clutch fan thread).  If you have a standard 9/16 rows on center recore like mine, even with an HD clutch and a big 5 blade fan from a mid 70s Olds wagon, it still will not get below 205ish on a 95+ day. While a water pump, water wetter, putting the impeller as close as possible to the housing and other tricks are all interesting and might "nudge the needle". consider instead a radiator with more heat transfer capacity and build yourself some significant thermal reserve to handle the extra thermal load of the AC condenser- especially if you are going to go across country with it in 100+ degree, 100% humidity days in with the AC on, get stuck in traffic, and want confidence.

 

Additionally, see classic ford radiator website and following quote from their site:

 

The regular core has the tubes on 9/16" centers and the high efficiency has the tubes on 3/8" centers. The high efficiency will cool about 18% to 20% better than the regular core because of the denser design and more surface area.

 

If a higher capacity radiator is outside of your budget, consider putting it off until you are ready for AC.  Needs vs wants.

 

 

 

[1956322]

The factory did use a five vane pump in 56 on ac cars

[Beemon]

The reason I'm asking is because the whole point of the timing cover swap is to finish the transition from "drive it sometimes" to "daily driver". Basically I want to find as many parts over the counter as I can in case something happens when I'm at the university. This is the only car I own, but I am permitted to drive another for the time being. That being said, I don't like being stuck under someone elses nail, especially my mother. 

 

My predicament is, buy the TA Performance timing cover for $300 which is machined for both early and late water pumps, get a $50 cast iron 57 cover that only fits the early pump or get the $10 aluminum 65 cover that only fits the late pump. All three give me access to over the counter fuel pumps, but the aluminum ones also give me access to new water pumps. The new $50 water pump from NAPA is only a 5 vane pump, though. I'll measure pulleys, but I am certain they are all the same size. 

 

I would hate to be out in the middle of nowhere for two weeks waiting on an R&R of a vintage part, or a rebuild kit at the very least. Others may have differing opinions, but to me these changes will make the car very dependable. Not that anything will go wrong, but I've always looked at the worst case scenario. 

 

For the record, I have read Willie's thread about the cooling fans. I'm running a 6 blade HD clutch fan for the summer but was running a regular duty clutch during winter. With going to a 60 amp alternator, I think I might just go to a high flow electric fan that runs off the other temp sensor outlet on the cylinder head. I would be hesitant to run a steel fan, they rob up to 40 HP, if you care about that stuff. Have had no complaints about the HD clutch, though, and I installed it last year when the thread was still fresh. About the radiator, it's a 3 core recore. I'm not sure how hot the car really gets but it never goes into the red on the gauge unless I park it somewhere. 

[KAD36]

3 hours ago, Beemon said:

The reason I'm asking is because the whole point of the timing cover swap is to finish the transition from "drive it sometimes" to "daily driver". Basically I want to find as many parts over the counter as I can in case something happens when I'm at the university.

 

 

I understand your situation.  30+ years ago this was also my daily driver, it was all I had, and it got me through 4 years of college with 320 mile 1 way trips from home and also through my first year in industry with a box of spare parts in the trunk.  Back then you could still find some junkyard generators and starters that would work good enough to get you through an R&R wait for a college student price.  I think the only things new I carried were a rebuilt fuel pump (I rebuilt two and kept them in rotation - this was before electric pumps were available), voltage regulator, a coil, radiator hoses and some fuel line.  Oh, and a can of Bars Leaks, just in case.  Oops - and duct tape

 

When Rain-X came out it sufficed as a backup for a spare wiper motor!

 

Do you have an electric fuel pump on your car?

3 hours ago, Beemon said:

For the record, I have read Willie's thread about the cooling fans. I'm running a 6 blade HD clutch fan for the summer but was running a regular duty clutch during winter. With going to a 60 amp alternator, I think I might just go to a high flow electric fan that runs off the other temp sensor outlet on the cylinder head. I would be hesitant to run a steel fan, they rob up to 40 HP, if you care about that stuff. Have had no complaints about the HD clutch, though, and I installed it last year when the thread was still fresh. About the radiator, it's a 3 core recore. I'm not sure how hot the car really gets but it never goes into the red on the gauge unless I park it somewhere. 

 

Thats right - forgot you joined in that "experiment"!

[Beemon]

7 minutes ago, KAD36 said:

Do you have an electric fuel pump on your car?

 

No I do not, but have considered it. I have an old Luber-Finer under the hood from when the car was contemporary. I always thought of turning it into a sump tank for a high pressure EFI fuel pump, maybe I'll install a fuel pump in it and run it as an auxillary for just in case. But with the mechanical pumps for $50 over the counter with 2 day lead at the most (first thing I'm doing when I get to college town is ordering some shelf items at the local NAPA just so its there if I need them), I don't think I will have anything to worry about.

[NTX5467]

Using the LuberFiner as a sump for a high pressure EFI pump is not necessary as Edelbrock has such a device already.  The stock fuel pump supplies fuel to the sump, then the high pressure pump supplies fuel to the EFI components.  Holds about a gallon or so of fuel, altogether.  At first I thought it was kind of hokey, but then realized the genius of it in not having to completely replumb the fuel lines or install an inline high pressure pump in the existing fuel lines.  Finding the space to install it can be an issue, though.

 

I found the Schneider Racing Cams website and their many Nailhead cams.  The smallest one looks pretty decent, but might be a tad wild for a stock 322 engine.  The timing events quoted are for the 1.6 rocker arms, so substituting 1.5s might make it pretty close in specs that would be more appropriate for the 322 rather than a 364 with the 1.6s.  Haven't dug up the old specs for the "replacement" stock cam from possibly Sealed Power or similar.  Their cam specs never do exactly match the OEM cam, for obvious copyright issues, but can usually vary a few degrees here and there, "close match" of sorts.

 

I fully understand the desire to upgrade certain parts to later model items with greater availability.  Just make sure that in doing such upgrades, you don't upset any existing "combinations" that might require further upgrades as a result.

 

Enjoy!

NTX5467

[NTX5467]

As for "cam numbers", there are several good explanations of how the numbers all fit together.  One is on the Lunati Cams website and also on the Comp Cams website.

 

NTX5467

[1956322]

Hey beemon interesting pcv set up looks real simple and cheap.. How does it seem to like it??

[Beemon]

33 minutes ago, NTX5467 said:

Using the LuberFiner as a sump for a high pressure EFI pump is not necessary as Edelbrock has such a device already.  The stock fuel pump supplies fuel to the sump, then the high pressure pump supplies fuel to the EFI components.  Holds about a gallon or so of fuel, altogether.  At first I thought it was kind of hokey, but then realized the genius of it in not having to completely replumb the fuel lines or install an inline high pressure pump in the existing fuel lines.  Finding the space to install it can be an issue, though.

 

The FAST EZEFI company makes one, called the Fuel Command. Looks much better than the Edelbrock one for half the price. I figured the LuberFiner would be an adequate candidate since they don't make filters for it anymore (well they do, but you need to buy a pallet...) and it has a screw on nipple on the inside that would be perfect for mounting a pump on. You would just have to fashion a needle and seat like a float bowl so it doesn't completely fill up and over pressurize. A vent could be drilled into the top bolt and wires could be fed in from the bottom extra port with an appropriate seal. It would look functional and fit right at home. Everyone always asks about it, so I haven't removed it. In fact my grandfather was upset I replaced it with a toilet paper roll for about a month, since he installed it himself.

 

Speaking of my grandfather, the car is back home.

 

I originally lost my spot last year when my cousin let this drug dealer move into the spare bedroom. My grandfather doesn't know how to say no, so there was this sort of falling out. We eventually kicked him out after his third trip to the precinct. That was a few months ago and I've been hesitant to take the car over there because my cousin still has questionable people by. But there is really no other way for this to go down without the car being on concrete. This is by no means an extended stay and as soon as the engine is done, the car is back out in the open. I would rather have it in the rain than be subjected to being leaned on or "accidents" occurring by drunk, high young adults who can't grow up. it is still bitter sweet... here is the car seven years ago when we first pushed it out on it's H78 bias ply tires:

 

it came with one white wall, the original spare in the trunk. Here's how we started 3 years ago (engine was just a shortblock in the car since the 80s):

 

And this was 2 years ago, right after the Dynaflow came back from the shop and right before we put the rebuilt engine back in.

 

The first week it was on the road "test driving" around the neighborhood, it looked like something out of Mad Max. It ran so poorly, we couldn't figure out why until we later found out the same guy who built the engine switched the check balls in the 4GC and it wouldn't transition properly. Should have been an indication... the rest is history, and that was when I started really getting involved asking questions on the forums.

 

As always, it has been a pleasure to know you all and I continue to learn from you all every day. My experience with my Buick has been a sour one, but also sweet. I know who I can count on to steer me right.

[Beemon]

2 minutes ago, 1956322 said:

Hey beemon interesting pcv set up looks real simple and cheap.. How does it seem to like it??

 

PCV works really well. I forget the part number for the one I used, but it's basically the late Nailhead PCV valve with a 90 degree bend. Difference PCV valves have stamped letters on the piston indicating spring pressure. Basically, look for something that has about 16"Hg at idle, like a high torque low RPM engine from the 70s. I think I used a BB Corvette? I'll dig around. The breather cap is off a 1975 Ford Country Squire, it's solid with a sponge mesh on the inside and a rubber grommet for the PCV system. The other breather cap is also a Stant cap, which you can look up on RockAuto for a stock 322. I had redone my original breather caps, but having one looked out of place so I put the Stant cap back on to match the PCV cap. If you go PCV, though, you have to plug the road draft tube otherwise it won't evacuate properly and you'll end up sucking things up the pipe.

[Beemon]

Well not even 24 hours and I am inconveniencing the delinquents. Guess I go to Plan B, on the street in front of the house...

[Beemon]

So after reading through Ken's rebuild again, I've concluded I'm going to bite the bullet and get new valve springs, "just in case". He's already nailed it down for what I want to do. Also, I normally go through my parts guy at NAPA but apparently NAPA doesn't stock the 401 stock camshaft anymore. So I'll be going through AutoZone this time. NAPA is Sealed Power and AutoZone is Melling, and is cheaper and I can get the cam, lifters and springs all in one go. Here's the numbers (with NAPA cross reference):

Melling Cam SBC-3 (came with high regard from Ken, and others who have used it in their 322s on other websites): $121.99

Melling Hydraulic Valve Lifter JB896 (Sealed Power HT896): $7.49 (x16: $119.84)

Melling Inner Spring VS2203 (Sealed Power VS932): $4.99 (x8: $39.92)

Melling Outer Spring VS540 (Sealed Power VS680): $5.99 (x8: $47.92)

Total: $329.67 (Adjusted for 10% tax: $362.64)

Then add turning down the cam journals would be another $100 under the table.

 

The project is getting a little bit pricey, but my machinist said I would regret putting in a 60 year old used cam with a lot of heavy mileage on it. I tend to agree with him. Without knowing what lifters were put in there, the condition of the cam during assembly the first time and the rest of the valve train quality of 60 year old parts, it's better to start fresh. Plus with everything I've read, especially through Ken's post, you don't get any information with a "stock cam" from any vendor. Who knows, we might even be able to make an accurate measure of the stock 56 cam and then find a blank to grind down. It would be as easy as just bringing the Melling cam back to AutoZone with the receipt. And of course, per Ken's advice and pressure from the machinist, we'll dial in the cam to confirm valve lift, coil bind, or any other gremlin that may come our way.

 

Was surprised to hear the news today that my dad would front $400 as a graduation/moving up gift. Didn't see that coming, but that will most likely go to Greg for a set of fresh, clean 56 heads.

 

Cam specs are as follows for the SBC-3 cam: 207 IE duration @.50, .269 IE cam lift, 114 LSA (I centerline 112, E centerline 116). With 1.6:1 rockers, this is .430 valve lift. From Ken's thread, this was pretty close to his intake cam specs, but from reading his was a split cam.

 

Also going to the junkyard tomorrow (today) to pull an aluminum timing cover and valley cover off one of the 401s, and order on the shelf a fuel pump and water pump for the 401.

Edited May 30, 2017 by Beemon
forgot to post cam specs (see edit history)

[old-tank]

See if any of those parts are available at Summit Racing... usually cheaper and no sales tax.

[60FlatTop]

On 5/29/2017 at 0:41 AM, Beemon said:

And this was 2 years ago, right after the Dynaflow came back from the shop and right before we put the rebuilt engine back in.

You know, I guy dressed in white with a trash bin doesn't look so promising by a disassembled car.

 

Maybe dressed all in red and carrying a sack would give a cozy feeling. Can you get him to do it?

Bernie

[SpecialEducation]

fwiw... Melling probably made the OEM cam in that engine. They are probably still making it to the original 1956 drawing. When this car was new, the drop hammers at Melling Forge used to sing my dad to sleep at night...

[Beemon]

Willie, thanks for the tip. I usually don't go through summit so I didn't think about them. 

 

Matt, no one makes a 322 cam anymore. From Ken's thread, his replacement cam seemed to be a cut down 401 cam with no spec sheet. 

[Bloo]

Delta cams in Tacoma will regrind a cam to original spec or whatever you specify. I have had good luck with them in the past.

[Beemon]

Bloo, I have heard of them but forgot they exist. I'll give them a call. I'm assuming you're local? 

[Bloo]

I'm in Central Washington, former Seattle resident .

 

I sent lots of stuff to Delta years ago, as did several of my friends. The prices were good and the quality excellent.

[old-tank]

14 minutes ago, Beemon said:

Bloo, I have heard of them but forgot they exist. I'll give them a call. I'm assuming you're local? 

Sounds like what you need.  They may even have the elusive specs for your stock profile.  If possible buy the lifters from them too.

[1956322]

If you do get the actual oe specs please share:)

[NTX5467]

The Melling "buyers guide" listings lists the SBC-3 as "57-66  364,401,425"  The cam should come with a "cam card" listing the specs so the cam can be "dialed-in" when installed.

 

The Automobile Manufacturers Association (aka "A.M.A.) has specs on every basic vehicle produced in the USA.  I found the 1957 form online.  The particular sheets I found include cam event listings (per SAE checking methods).

 

1957 Buick Series 40                 Int Open  26      Int Close    77      Exh Open    65     Exh Close    37        Int    283        Exh    282    Overlap   63 

1957 Buick Series 60-50-70       Int Open  34      Int Close   83       Exh Open    76     Exh Close    41        Int    297        Exh    297    Overlap   75

Intake Valve Lift  40-60-50-70        .423"

Exhaust Valve Lift  40-60-50-70     .423"

 

While the ".050 Lift" spec came about about 30 years ago so that aftermarket cams could be compared against each other, on a "level playing field", no such duration at .050" lift figures (that anybody knows of) are available for the earlier engines.  Some have claimed that factoring the SAE duration down to about 80% of that value can get close.  In that case, the Mellings cam might be a little "short" on duration.  But in some cases, it might be more dependent upon how the actual valve event times compare.  Reason I say that is a while back, a friend had a '66 Corvette that was a factory 350 horsepower car.  The engine had been rebuilt with a Mellings cam which had the same specs as the Chevy cam for that engine (all  of the numbers for duration and lift matched), but it had a stronger exhaust sound to it, as I'd never heard a 350 horse Chevy V-8 sound that way.  Obviously, when they changed the open/close degrees, yet still with the same overall duration and lift, SOMETHING changed.  It could not be an exact duplicate of the factory cam (due to copyright issues), but they could make it "close match" with the same "numbers".  Normally, "close match" aftermarket cams, for stated particular factory camshafts, usually have a little variation in lift and duration, per the cam vendor's orientations.

 

IF the Melllings cam's .050 spec is a little short, if you know how it works in a 364, in the slightly smaller 322 that "shortness" can result in a comparatively "wilder" cam than stock.  That might explain the glowing reviews it seems to have in 322s.  Especially if the ports are cleaned-up a little (remove casting flash and enlarge the ports to gasket dimensions at the intake manifold joint).

 

IF somebody has the software to turn the AMA specs into a lobe configuration, then the LSA and lobe centerlines could be discovered.  Reverse engineering of sorts.

 

In 1965, Petersen Publishing started doing "Engine Annuals" yearly.  The first pages were ALL of the engine specs, including "advertised" camshaft specs.  The 401 and 425 specs should be there.  Including tune-up and distributor advance specs.  The individual engine write-ups (including "What's New . . ." for that model year, plus the spec pages, are about as complete of a listing as can be found for ALL USA brand vehicles in that particular model year.  Some "dealer-installed" engine kits were not listed, typically.  Some specs as camshaft "base circle" diameter, piston dome/dish capacity, combustion chamber volume, head gasket thickness, and a few other "blueprint specs" a machine shop or engine builder might need (which are available elsewhere).  This series of Engine Annuals lasted into the earlier 1970s, as I recall.  

 

"Hot Rod" magazine got into the "Annual" situation a little earlier, as in 1960.  Being their orientation, the factory high performance engines were detailed.  No charts, so everything is in the text.  Some good pictures, too!  Some great articles on many different subjects related to high performance engines and drivetrains.

 

Enjoy!

NTX5467

Edited May 31, 2017 by NTX5467 (see edit history)

[NTX5467]

Here's another AMA sheet I found.  I think the SAE file was linked here a while back.  Lots of interesting details in it.

 

Enjoy!

NTX5467

CAR__1950_Buick_Super_AMA_Specs_1-10.pdf

BUICK__NAILHEAD_1953_SAE_Paper_-_V8_Buick.pdf

[KAD36]

Beemon - remember to check on how the cam is timed if you go with the SBC-3.  Maybe follow up with that person on the 401 cam in the 56 buick thread from the rebuild post.

 

I had tried to use 401 cam gears on the 322 and they would not line up, and the 401 is timed different (marks line up between the gears) vs the 322 (count the links between the marks).  My hunch is you will need a 322 crank gear, a 322 timing chain, and a 401 cam gear to mount on the cam, then you would time it like a 322.  Assume you are reusing your timing set?  Maybe someone who has tried this mod will know the details.  It will take a little thought, but can be solved and verified when you dial in the cam. 

 

Points of reference for anyone interested in some reading:

 

Early nailhead cam thread:

http://www.v8buick.com/index.php?threads/early-nailhead-cam.141755/#post-1094102

 

Importance of understanding net valve lift considering rocker ratio, lobe lift and resulting spring bind spec, which in this case was the limiting factor

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/threads/engine-builders-why-is-my-new-322-breaking-rockers.986654/

 

Alternative to the VS2203 inner valve spring, albeit at a higher price point, make sure springs used will compress below 1 inch similar to factory if you go 1.6 rockers and a higher than stock cam lift (measure it!). Good you found the VS2203, for some reason I couldn't find those at the time.

http://www.sbi-e-catalog.com/PartDetail.aspx?PartNumber=160-1252&PartType=Valve Springs

 

NTX - wasn't the pre-.050 spec (advertised duration) taken at .006 lift for the start of the duration measurement as a rule of thumb?  It was not as standardized as the .050 spec.  Just curious and piecing together various research.

 

Jeese - this is getting fun 

 

[NTX5467]

I believe the SAE spec was .006" intake and possibly .008" exhaust, if it was not .006" for both.  The way some OEMs could game the system, for longer cam duration numbers (and bragging rights to "bigger" cams and possible horsepower, back then) was by making "the ramp" where any slack in the valvetrain is "taken up" (before actual lift starts), longer.  The .050" spec was devised so that the actual "meat of the lift curve" was happening.  The ramps on mechanical cams are different than the ramps on hydraulic cams, which is probably one reason you can't put hydraulic lifters on a mechanical-lifter camshaft and it work right.

 

As to the difference in cam sprockets, crank sprockets, and such . . .However the cam is designed, 401 or 322, will determine the timing chain sprockets to be used, I suspect.  If you use the crank sprocket for a 322, but a cam sprocket for a 401, it might be necessary to re-drill the dowel alignment pin hole in the sprocket in order to use the "side" timing mark orientation of the 322?  Otherwise, the phasing of the cam might not match the crankshaft position.  I haven't read your links, but it seems that mix-n-match might not work!

 

It will be important to know something too!  For example, when a Chevy V-8 timing set is "dot-to-dot", #6 cylinder is firing.  When the timing set it "cam dot at Noon, crank dot at Noon, #1 is firing.  NOT what myself or others had always suspected!  We always considered "dot-to-dot" to be #1 firing as that's what all of the manuals said to match.  Not so!  We also discovered that the "180 degrees out" orientation also works on Chevy-designed V-6s, too!

 

So the location of the locating dowel on the 401 cam will need to be considered in comparison to that of the 322, with both motors at TDC on whichever cylinder is firing.  In the case of the Chevy and others, #6 is 180 degrees away from #1 in he firing order.

 

I know the focus on the SBC-3 cam is the 401, plus related front cover castings, but how are they different from the earlier and smaller 364?  Just curious.  Or was the 1957 364 when the 401 orientation was first changed from what the 1956 and back Buick V-8s used?

 

NTX5467

[Beemon]

Willis, to answer your last question, the 364 was the first year for the larger cam journals, which followed in the 401 and 425. That's why 364/401/425 gets all the aftermarket love, leaving the 264/322 in the dust. I think I'm leaning more towards KISS and will go with a cam regrind on my original to match the 401 specs or something else. That way I'm not playing with cam journals, cam sprockets, etc. That being said, when I have it in my hand I'll call the shop and announce to the world the rare findings of the 56 stock cam grind. It will be the biggest archeological dig since King Tut's tomb. That way, we're not all limited to Nailhead experts handing off cams without a spec sheet!

 

In other news, I saved myself $300 at the junkyard today. I couldn't believe it honestly, not a stuck bolt, no threads messed up, a perfect aluminum 401 timing cover (albeit a little dirty). There does seem to be one water pump hole that is messed up, but it looks like a casting defect because it's partially filled with aluminum and was milled over. I guess I could drill it out, but it held water. Also electrolysis damage doesn't look bad. You can still see the casting marks on the inside where the impeller goes, which tells me this will work just fine. And, it was all for $16, too. The benefits of finding old cars in a junkyard. It was actually kind of an interesting day, while I was out there, the previous owner of the 64 Riviera said that the car had been in a flood and the engine was froze, so he gave it back to the yard. His loss, everything else looks good on my end.

 

I'm going to pick up a 455 timing cover seal, hand them to the machinist, and have him work it in (the 455 is the one that works, right?). I can still get a 57 cast iron one, but the guy wants $50 for that at the other yard. I tried my hardest to bust that one loose... this one came off pretty easy, I was surprised I didn't have to grunt once.

 

[KAD36]

KISS principle is smart thinking Beemon.- match up your 56 cam or get a profile of your choice.

 

There will be lots of new puzzles that present themselves to solve, no use creating any more.

 

Press!

 

NztX - thank you for posting the SAE paper.m. Great reading!  Any papers from the day for a 55/56?

[Beemon]

I'm at a loss for words. 8 thousand miles, an 8th inch thick carbon build up, valves don't look like they seated properly and there's cross hatching on the cylinders - the rings never seated. You can see the blow by on the Pistons....

[KAD36]

Mixture? Engine running too cold?  Timing retarded?  Cold plugs? Valves?

 

i would think you'd still see some cross hatching if you didn't use iron rings.

 

What tells blow by from the picture?  Isnt carbon in the crankcase a sign of blow by?

 

Thanks for pics

 

 

[NTX5467]

Seeing "cross hatch" on the cylinder walls has NOTHING to do with ring sealing.  It means "no wear", basically, but after 8K miles, I'd suspect any cross hatch that was put there in the machining process should still be there.  Blow-by won't show up on pistons, BUT oil coming up past the oil rings will.  Or oil rings which aren't working well, I suspect.  That oil "up from below" (on the vacuum side of things at part throttle) can also be the result of rings with not enough tension against the cylinder wall, too, or oil scrapper rings installed upside down, so they only scrape going up rather than down.  My machine shop operative noted that a guy brought in a Chevy 350 that he'd always run (a noted syn oil from the 1970s, still around), with the recommended filter they sold, and the engine had 100K miles on it  . .  still could see the factory cross hatch on this unmolested, first time apart, block.

 

Think about "cam regrinds" a few seconds.  In order that more lift and possible duration to be achieved from a cam core with less of each, the regrinder starts by decreasing the cam lobes' "base circle" of the cam, the part of the lobe when the valve is closed.  I know this was an accepted practice in the earlier days of hot rods, but that was also when all of the "hot cams" were mechanical cams.  To me, this is NOT something to trust an OEM pre-364 cam core to just anybody.  Turning the journals down to the smaller diameter, then micro-finishing the resulting smaller journal, to me, makes much more sense.  OR, depending upon the amount of cam bearing size difference, you could possibly find a machine shop with a line hone to enlarge your existing cam bearing saddles to 401 size, but that would then make it a 401-cam block for ever and ever.

 

Remember, too, that cam lobes are not completely parallel to the longitude of the camshaft blank.  There has to be a small degree of side-to-side taper for the flat tappet lifters to "rotate" in use, for better wear characteristics.  Similarly, the "flat" of the bottom of the lifter has a slight crown to them, for the same reason.  If a cam is "no taper", it needs to have "no taper" lifters.

 

The two cylinders with the "white" exhaust valves appear to be the only TWO cylinders which might have been operating correctly.

 

I suspect you might be desiring to find "wrong" with how the engine was rebuilt, but reserve judgment for when the pistons come out and the bearings are looked at, please.  KISS and get the SBC-3 cam and use appropriate timing sprockets.  Get that dial indicator and check the cam in there, now.  You can post those results.

 

NTX5467

[Beemon]

Found out the issue. It was the rings. Also the wrist pins. Looks like my block is toast. Wrist pins took out the cylinder wall. On. Every. Piston. Sorry guys, I'm going to prison for a while because that guy is dead. 

 

Also cam is OK. 

[Beemon]

Ken, you can tell it's blow by because the whole piston isn't covered.where the piston is clean is where the wrist pin damage is. 

[JohnD1956]

Oh man!  Sorry to see this damage. 

[NTX5467]

Looks like some +.040 or +.060 pistons are needed. Stay out of jail, even if you're not playing Monopoly.

 

How do you have "blow by" on the piston crowns, up from the bottom, when "blow by" is pressuring down past the rings, into the crankcase?  Looks like the "oil washed" area on the piston crown is pretty much all the way around the tops, rather than localized.  Or am I not seeing something in your pictures?  Your first pictures of the short block seem to have the "washed" areas being about the outside 180 degrees of the piston crown, from what I've seen.

 

Now, as I recall, piston pins are normally installed "centered" on the rod and are  "press fit",in the piston, centered laterally in the piston.  What happened to the "press fit" situation which would allow the apparent movement?  The piston pins are pressed into the piston with a hydraulic press and appropriate piston holding fixture.  They should NOT be moving in the piston as the rod is a loose fit to pivot on them as the piston goes up an down.  The rod can also move side to side, until it's installed to the crankshaft journal.

 

"Floating" piston pins are a slip-fit into the piston and must be held in place with Spirolocks or similar to keep the piston pin from moving to contact the cylinder wall.  Press-fit piston pins don't need that due to the tight "interference fit".

 

Concentrate on further diagnosis for why what you've found happened in the first place.

 

NTX5467

[Beemon]

I don't know how to explain it Willis, it's just... well, there it is. I was getting blow by and oil consumption, that's the reason why. 

 

I don't think a .040 or .060 over bore will save the block, the gouges feel like a 32nd to 16th of an inch deep. And it's on both sides of the cylinder wall, not just one side - 4 grooves per cylinder. 

 

I do have a back up plan, however this is now out of the realm of affordable and the car will sit for another 3 years at the least. 

[MrEarl]

don't snooze on this

 

https://boise.craigslist.org/pts/6155259909.html

 

 

[1956322]

I'd have the shop measure the block and go from there before writing it off.. This definitely explains the problems you were having... I'm sorry man what a sloppy job done

[1956322]

I'd have the shop measure the block and go from there before writing it off.. This definitely explains the problems you were having... I'm sorry man what a sloppy job done

[Kosage Chavis]

Maybe a dumb question, but are the piston pins even the correct ones?  If the damage is on both sides of the cylinder wall, the pins are obviously moving freely meaning no interference fit. Maybe this guy cut a corner here.  

[1956322]

I'm not so sure the block you pictured is any better off.. Now that one on Craigslist that's a steal...