Got a 1/4 mile time for the Laurentian

Canadian Poncho · A Poncho Legend!

Got a 1/4 mile time for the Laurentian

4SPEED427 · A Poncho Legend!

That's pretty decent Todd considering it must be crowding 4500 pounds.

You also put in an L79 cam too, right?

The speed is on the low side in relation to the ET for the 1/8th mile.

Canadian Poncho · A Poncho Legend!

I forgot the most important mod! Thanks Carl.

73SC · A Poncho Legend!

Good times, surprised me, but you convieniently

forgot to mention the L79 cam as Carl has pointed out.

Here is a quote from a 2004 Motor Trend retrospective:

"The 389-cubic-inch, four-speed-equipped GTO we tested for our January 1964 issue went 0 to 60 in 7.7 seconds, clearing the quarter mile in 15.8 seconds at 93.0 mph."

-- Edited by 73SC at 18:39, 2008-10-19

4SPEED427 · A Poncho Legend!

73SC wrote:
but you convieniently forgot to mention the L79 cam as Carl has pointed out.

Kind of the same deal as the 64 GTO test car with the 389 (421).....

Astro Jet · Poncho Master!

Carl Stevenson wrote:

That's pretty decent Todd considering it must be crowding 4500 pounds.

You also put in an L79 cam too, right?

The speed is on the low side in relation to the ET for the 1/8th mile.

I don't think Todd's Laurentian is that heavy. It is pretty light on options. I have a 69 428 Bonneville wagon that is loaded (A/C, power everything) and it tips the scales at about 4600 lbs. I don't think the trap speed is that low either, given the economy rear gears. I have to say I don't know too many people who think those G tech meters are too accurate. Take it to St. Thomas next year and get some real numbers the good old fashioned way. wink

2drpost · Uber Guru

todd, once you get that '427' settled in, you'll need to gear it, to wake up that '427' and get that barge moving.

427carl · A Poncho Legend!

15.77 is pretty good! I am impressed.. With the big block stock, I bet it will go a second faster, and that would be fast for a "Heavy weight".. I have a tip to make it go another second faster... I will post a picture..lol a PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS...

4SPEED427 · A Poncho Legend!

Astro Jet wrote:

Carl Stevenson wrote:

That's pretty decent Todd considering it must be crowding 4500 pounds.

You also put in an L79 cam too, right?

The speed is on the low side in relation to the ET for the 1/8th mile.

I don't think Todd's Laurentian is that heavy. It is pretty light on options. I have a 69 428 Bonneville wagon that is loaded (A/C, power everything) and it tips the scales at about 4600 lbs. I don't think the trap speed is that low either, given the economy rear gears. I have to say I don't know too many people who think those G tech meters are too accurate. Take it to St. Thomas next year and get some real numbers the good old fashioned way.

I'm including driver in that. Would that car not be at least 4300?

My 66 Grande Parisienne (with no air) was 4350. My 67 Grande Parisienne wagon 396, air, power options etc. was 5040 full of fuel.

73SC · A Poncho Legend!

Carl Stevenson wrote:

73SC wrote:
but you convieniently forgot to mention the L79 cam as Carl has pointed out.

Kind of the same deal as the 64 GTO test car with the 389 (421).....

LOL,

but I posted the real time for a real 389 4 speed car.

The 421 NASCAR motor job was 4.9 to 60 and 13.3 in the quarter at 103 MPH I believe.

427carl · A Poncho Legend!

427carl wrote:

15.77 is pretty good! I am impressed.. With the big block stock, I bet it will go a second faster, and that would be fast for a "Heavy weight".. I have a tip to make it go another second faster... I will post a picture..lol a PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS...

ta da!

Canadian Poncho · A Poncho Legend!

It would have been nice to get it to the track. There's one more weekend at St.Thomas so maybe next Saturday I could go to the "Run what ya Brung" event. I have an original road test of the 66 396 Chevelle and it ran a 15.7 as well. Dave, what gears are you running in the Bel Air? I figured 3.55 or 3.73 would be the max I'd want to run.

2drpost · Uber Guru

it has 3.73s. with the 2.52 1st gear, it gets off it's butt pretty good.
i would go with 3.55s, they're more hwy friendly.

-- Edited by 69 belair at 20:02, 2008-10-19

73SC · A Poncho Legend!

69Laurentian wrote:

. I have an original road test of the 66 396 Chevelle and it ran a 15.7 as well. Dave, what gears are you running in the Bel Air? I figured 3.55 or 3.73 would be the max I'd want to run.

My 86 Monte Carlo SS ran the same times as those 396 Chevelle SS cars. When yoy tell guys that and even with your car Todd they don't believe you. It seems that the "muscle car" image is these blazing fast rockets and like I posted before my Deville will walk from most muscle cars from the day. I guess at the time they were fast cars.

427carl · A Poncho Legend!

I saw quite the change, with addition of 327 Ventura with 3.73's I keep looking for another gear! But its does make it pulls like a BB lol The "big Boy" Chief has so much torque, that 2.73's are perfect for cruising! even gets decent fool mileage... I will try a taller rear tire to get Ventura, to get it to act like 3.55's that Dave recommends weirdface

67BBSD · Canadian Poncho Superstar!

73SC wrote:

69Laurentian wrote:

. I have an original road test of the 66 396 Chevelle and it ran a 15.7 as well. Dave, what gears are you running in the Bel Air? I figured 3.55 or 3.73 would be the max I'd want to run.

My 86 Monte Carlo SS ran the same times as those 396 Chevelle SS cars. When yoy tell guys that and even with your car Todd they don't believe you. It seems that the "muscle car" image is these blazing fast rockets and like I posted before my Deville will walk from most muscle cars from the day. I guess at the time they were fast cars.

I had a 1967 beaumont 396/325 400 turbo 273 gears, stock from carb to manifolds, best time was 15:29 91 mph

I had a 3900 lb 73 corvette convertible 454 400 turbo 323 gears, had a holley spread bore, headers and a 280 duration 526 lift cam went 13:91 102 mph,

as you can see muscle cars didn't wake up until they got headers/cam-a carb would have helped too

good time Todd

Astro Jet · Poncho Master!

I don't put much stock in those magazine road tests. The cars were often "ringers", with professional drivers, optimum track conditions, at sea level tracks, etc. I relate much more to actual results from actual tracks from around here. It's good to hear results from those of you who have actually run at the track. That's how you can make valid comparisons. I haven't had the Laurentian at the track but it would probably be a good idea to get a few base runs in before I start making modifications. For what it is worth, at St. Thomas in mid July, my 97 Z28 convertible, 6 speed, 3.42 axle ratio, bone stock with 250 rwhp (dynoed) ran 14.1 @ 99 mph. Car weighs approximately 3850 lbs with 1/2 tank of fuel. It now has approximately 350 rwhp with a 3.73 rear end and I've managed to squeeze out a 12.8 @ 110, and I certainly don't profess to be a professional driver. wink

4SPEED427 · A Poncho Legend!

Agreed about the magazine tests.

We had an 87 Grand National for 9 years before trading it on the Impala.

All the magazines said about 14.20 to 14.30 stock but I think the best I ever managed with it (stock) was 14.70. Our altitude is 750 feet, so we can't use that as an excuse.

67BBSD · Canadian Poncho Superstar!

Astro Jet wrote:

I don't put much stock in those magazine road tests. The cars were often "ringers", with professional drivers, optimum track conditions, at sea level tracks, etc. I relate much more to actual results from actual tracks from around here. It's good to hear results from those of you who have actually run at the track. That's how you can make valid comparisons. I haven't had the Laurentian at the track but it would probably be a good idea to get a few base runs in before I start making modifications. For what it is worth, at St. Thomas in mid July, my 97 Z28 convertible, 6 speed, 3.42 axle ratio, bone stock with 250 rwhp (dynoed) ran 14.1 @ 99 mph. Car weighs approximately 3850 lbs with 1/2 tank of fuel. It now has approximately 350 rwhp with a 3.73 rear end and I've managed to squeeze out a 12.8 @ 110, and I certainly don't profess to be a professional driver.

LT1 or was 97 already LS1 too bad its such a "non performer" and poor on fuel and has so many quality problems-should have bought something off shore to see how it would do at the track.

gparis7 · Canadian Poncho Superstar!

Astro Jet wrote:

I don't think Todd's Laurentian is that heavy. It is pretty light on options. I have a 69 428 Bonneville wagon that is loaded (A/C, power everything) and it tips the scales at about 4600 lbs. I don't think the trap speed is that low either, given the economy rear gears. I have to say I don't know too many people who think those G tech meters are too accurate. Take it to St. Thomas next year and get some real numbers the good old fashioned way. wink

_____________________________________________________________

Hillar,

Can you post a few pics of your 69 Bonneville wagon? I'm sure folks would like to see that one too. You have some cool cars.

73SC · A Poncho Legend!

gparis7 wrote:

Hillar,

Can you post a few pics of your 69 Bonneville wagon? I'm sure folks would like to see that one too. You have some cool cars.

I feel lucky, i have seen 5 of the 8.

I'd say the Bonneville is pretty neat.

-- Edited by 73SC at 23:35, 2008-10-20

Astro Jet · Poncho Master!

67BBSD wrote:

LT1 or was 97 already LS1 too bad its such a "non performer" and poor on fuel and has so many quality problems-should have bought something off shore to see how it would do at the track.

Where did I say it was a "non-performer"? I bought it because I wanted a classic American rear wheel drive convertible muscle car, something the Asian market doesn't offer but you are right about quality, I put up with it in spite of it's problems, not because it doesn't have any. With just over 100,000 kms on the clock - let's put that in miles, only 65,000, so it sounds as bad as it really is, I am already on my third, THIRD! opti-spark distributor. There is a reason they call it an "opti-puke". I've also had to replace the fuel pump which involved dropping the entire rear end in order to drop the tank, or you could have cut a hole in the trunk floor to access the pump, a process GM actually recommends as the standard replacement procedure! I have also had to replace both power window motors. You should see these things, they are literally one half the size of the power window motors used in 64-72 A bodies, even though they have to lift a larger heavier piece of glass. Plus they are riveted into the door frame! You have to drill the rivets out to replace them. Before I decided to rebuild the engine it had the typical LT1 intake and rear seal leaks. Plus it has an inordinate amount of squeaks, rattles, groans, the leather seats are disintegrating,etc. Oh, did I mention the driveshaft, U joints, alternator, wiper motor? Good thing I don't abuse it by expecting it to be a daily driver! I own 8 vehicles, 7 of which are GM, but sometimes my loyalty gets pushed to the limit.

Astro Jet · Poncho Master!

gparis7 wrote:

Hillar,

Can you post a few pics of your 69 Bonneville wagon? I'm sure folks would like to see that one too. You have some cool cars.

LOL, once again, no digital pics, these are from Dave Plummer's website:

http://memturbo.com/pontiac/images/Photos/wpe8.jpg

http://memturbo.com/pontiac/images/Photos/wpe10.jpg

http://memturbo.com/pontiac/images/Photos/wagonside.jpg

-- Edited by Astro Jet at 03:09, 2008-10-23

73SC · A Poncho Legend!

In case the link won't open...

-- Edited by 73SC at 09:24, 2008-10-23

Canadian Poncho · A Poncho Legend!

That's one cool wagon. I bet you get what, about 8mpg with that puppy?