| Author |
Message |
80 Knight
Guest
|
 Posted:
Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:57 am Post subject:
Re: Chevy 305 and 350 build questions |
|
|
"StingRay" <StingRay@Vette.com> wrote in message
news:16ydnQ5RGLWItuzeRVn-qw@rogers.com...
| Quote: | "80 Knight" <80_knightREMOVEME@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:XPOdnT9zo6L2dO3enZ2dnUVZ_s6dnZ2d@rogers.com...
Hey, I found his 30mpg to be a little off too, and I did not think to
look at his headers, but that still does not warrant insulting his (my)
entire country. You yourself are acting pretty childish as well, yet you
do not see me insulting the USA. That was my point.
80 Knight, this whole thread started when I responded to Bill's request
for help with his Monte Carlo, which he said was getting 11-12 m.p.g. He
also asked for help in finding an engine rebuild kit. I responded that "I
got close to 30 m.p.g. on highway trips" with my '74 Monte and I gave Bill
a link to an engine rebuild kit for his 305. So I was doing what this
NewsGroup was intended for. Helping a fellow hobbiest. I failed to
qualify that we used Imperial gallons in Canada, prior to metric
conversion and I found myself under attack by no less than 3 people. I
stand by the 30 m.p.g. figure because I know that it is the truth. I
clarified the Imperial gallon issue and the 3 individuals who initially
attacked my credibility stopped their attacks, presumably because they
found the numbers feasible. Once the whole issue seemed settled,
"aarcuda69062" decided in his wisdom (or lack thereof) to instigate
further discussion by showing us all what a redneck Bubba he is. 80
Knight, I have said nothing but the truth in trying to help the original
poster with his problem and I refuse to be flamed by the likes of such
low-brow Bubbas as "aarcuda69062". Canadians as a group are oft accused of
being apathetic when attacked, but I don't put up with dimwits like
"aarcuda69062". I am compelled to let him and his ilk know that when it
comes to a battle of wits, they are completely unarmed. I regret if my
poking fun at "aarcuda69062" has caused you or any other NewsGroup reader
undue distress. For your sake and the sake of the non-Bubbas in this
NewsGroup, I will now cease and desist my dialog with "aarcuda69062".
|
Hey, you two seem like you can be civilized people. My only problem was
'aarcuda69062' was insulting an entire country based on only one person. I
am not saying you're Monte could get 30MPG, but I do admit that with you
being the owner, you should know. Other then that, I had no idea you were in
Canada either until I saw Rogers.com in your headers when they were posted.
Anyhow, crap happens in newsgroups, we all must let it go and move on.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
aarcuda69062
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Nov 09, 2005 7:06 am Post subject:
Re: Chevy 305 and 350 build questions |
|
|
In article <FuGdnWMO0vKQu-zeRVn-hg@rogers.com>,
"StingRay" <StingRay@Vette.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Why would anyone bother to memorize such minutia?
Ooooh, minutia! We're truly impressed Bubba!
|
That's a good thing stinkray, shame you couldn't achieve the same
results for yourself earlier in the thread.
| Quote: | Because some wet dream might post about the fuel mileage he got
in his 1974 Monte-Hooptie? That might be the high point of
-your- life, but certainly not anyone else's.
Bubba, if I may speak in your language, UR anus may be the center of your
universe, but it's not ours. Although you have proven to be a perfect
a**hole! ;-)
|
Of course I have, what else would a reasonable person expect from
someone such as yourself who needed to resort to derogatory
comments so early in a discussion?
| Quote: | This is your ID that shows in the header:
"StingRay" <StingRay@Vette.com
It takes an entirely different menu command to open the full
header to reveal the ISP. Not a question of who can and who
can't read headers, it's a matter of how apparent it was or
wasn't (it wasn't).
Repeat after me Bubba - StingRay, I don't know how to track someone by
their I.P. # and I'm too small a man to admit it. That's why I'm such a
Bubba.
|
You still don't get it. Probably never will.
| Quote: | Actually, it wasn't, shit fer brains.
It takes a separate menu command to open the full header to show
your ISP.
Just admit you don't know how Bubba.
|
Why would I admit to not knowing how to do something when I've
already demonstrated in an earlier post and included in that post
that I do know how? You're really starting to sound quite
desperate in your rationalizations.
| Quote: | It does not take "a separate menu
command". That comment makes no sense whatsoever.
|
Of course it makes no sense, you (obviously) have limited
knowledge of the various news readers being used and arrogantly
assume that everyone uses the same crap news reader that you do.
| Quote: | You mean so we'll all know for sure whether you're talking about
imperial gallons or not?
har
Oh, I thought you said they were Canadian gallons before Bubba. Maybe you
can learn. ;-) <har
|
I never used the term "Canadian gallons." Scott did, so as we've
seen before, you obviously aren't as smart as you think you are.
Of course, if you believe otherwise, post the message number
where I used the term "Canadian gallons."
| Quote: | Hate to break it to you but the "redneck" comment merely shows
how much you don't know about tracking down where a usenet post
originated from.
Redneck has more to do with your boorish behaviour than your geographic
location Bubba.
|
Good god, you're positively delusional.
| Quote: | So, according to you, we should all waste screen space, display
full headers on the off chance that some self absorbed nimrod
If you don't want to waste bandwidth Bubba, stop posting your arcane
comments and hold your breath.
|
When and where did I mention anything about "bandwidth?"
Choosing to NOT display full headers has nothing to do with
"bandwidth."
Some expert!
| Quote: | might be making claims about the fuel mileage he experienced
based upon measurements done in imperial gallons.
It seems that you're still shocked to learn that there are some measurements
in the world other than U.S. gallons.<har
|
Not shocked at all. What shocks me is that you'd make such an
issue when your country (admitted by you) doesn't even use that
unit of measurement anymore.
| Quote: | Oooo, he's going to show us how smart he is....
Oooo, Bubba's going to show us how dumb he is....
|
Classic statement coming from someone who can't read the
attributes and confuses the few posters participating in this
thread.
| Quote: | Here's a clue for ya:
Southwestern Bell is a subsidiary of my parent ISP.
Nice try, thanks for playing, you lose, to bad.
Bubba, you are truly as dumb as a stump. You've got it completely
ass-backwards. Your I.S.P., rback8b.milwwi, is a subsidiary of Southwestern
Bell Internet Services and buys bandwidth from them. S.B. is your ultimate
provider dumbass! You have once again proven that old adage "A little
learning is a dangerous thing". <har
|
Sorry, wrong again.
(maybe you looked up scott instead of me, because it wouldn't be
the first time you got us confused)
Do keep trying though, your hilarity is endless. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aarcuda69062
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Nov 09, 2005 7:15 am Post subject:
Re: Chevy 305 and 350 build questions |
|
|
In article <J4OdnatuNa_E1OzeRVn-oQ@rogers.com>,
"80 Knight" <80_knightREMOVEME@rogers.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Hey, you two seem like you can be civilized people. My only problem was
'aarcuda69062' was insulting an entire country based on only one person. I
am not saying you're Monte could get 30MPG, but I do admit that with you
being the owner, you should know. Other then that, I had no idea you were in
Canada either until I saw Rogers.com in your headers when they were posted.
Anyhow, crap happens in newsgroups, we all must let it go and move on.
|
Just so you know where you (and I) heard it first...
| Quote: | In article <lZGdnZor0p37U_PeRVn-pQ@rogers.com>,
"StingRay" <StingRay@Vette.com> wrote:
Canada. Duh!
|
And just to refresh, stingray felt the need to resort to name
calling long before I added a comment.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StingRay
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:38 am Post subject:
Re: Chevy 305 and 350 build questions |
|
|
"80 Knight" <80_knightREMOVEME@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:J4OdnatuNa_E1OzeRVn-oQ@rogers.com...
| Quote: | Hey, you two seem like you can be civilized people. My only problem was
'aarcuda69062' was insulting an entire country based on only one person. I
am not saying you're Monte could get 30MPG, but I do admit that with you
being the owner, you should know. Other then that, I had no idea you were
in Canada either until I saw Rogers.com in your headers when they were
posted.
Anyhow, crap happens in newsgroups, we all must let it go and move on.
|
I hear yah! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StingRay
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:54 am Post subject:
Re: Chevy 305 and 350 build questions |
|
|
"RSCamaro" <rscamero@hotmail.com> ranted and screamed like a girl in message
news:4371450f.569210375@news.verizon.net...
| Quote: | Excellent, you can blab like a 16 year old. Now shut the F up and go
find something else to bitch about. You got all indignant over
someone elses comments when you are the one who started with the whole
name calling episode.
|
Let me see now - The first nasty word in the string was when "TheSnoMan"
wrote "That is pure BS, 30 MPG on a trip with a Monte." Well RSCamaro, that
may not be name calling, but it sure is inflammatory. My "Bozo" comment
followed that comment, if you care to be honest.
| Quote: |
(quote) "I always find it fascinating that Bozo's like you three
challenge someone's credibility without substantiating your comments".
(end quote).
All you had to do was state that the fuel measure was in Imperial and
that would have pretty much been the end of the matter.
|
Uh, RSCamaro, that's what I did, long before aarcuda69062
<nonelson@sbcglobal.net> entered the fray.
| Quote: | Is this how
the schools teach you to behave in Canada, leap before you look?
|
Yes RSCamaro, schools in Canada do teach us that the best defense is a good
offense. I know that no-one in the U.S. would leap before they looked. (for
weapons of mass destruction)
| Quote: | Maybe if you thought things through all the way the rest of us
wouldn't have to wade through the b.s.
|
Now that's a contradictory comment, if ever I saw one. Read your next
comment to see why.
| Quote: |
I personally find these little pissing matches entertaining, after all
it is only usenet, invented to allow information to be moved from
place to place efficiently
|
I find them entertaining too Ron.
no matter how immature the comments.
You've proven that!
| Quote: |
...Ron
--
68' Camaro RS
88' Firebird Formula
00' Mustang GT Vert |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aarcuda69062
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Nov 09, 2005 9:14 am Post subject:
Re: Chevy 305 and 350 build questions |
|
|
In article <ELedncCDabVV-ezenZ2dnUVZ_sOdnZ2d@rogers.com>,
"StingRay" <StingRay@Vette.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Let me see now - The first nasty word in the string was when "TheSnoMan"
wrote "That is pure BS, 30 MPG on a trip with a Monte." Well RSCamaro, that
may not be name calling, but it sure is inflammatory.
|
So, BS, MS and PhD would be really, really, really inflammatory,
right?
| Quote: | My "Bozo" comment
followed that comment, if you care to be honest.
|
Doesn't matter whether -he- cares to be honest.
You've already proven yourself incapable.
| Quote: |
(quote) "I always find it fascinating that Bozo's like you three
challenge someone's credibility without substantiating your comments".
(end quote).
|
Interestingly, it was -you- stingray who neglected to
substantiate your comments.
| Quote: | All you had to do was state that the fuel measure was in Imperial and
that would have pretty much been the end of the matter.
Uh, RSCamaro, that's what I did, long before aarcuda69062
nonelson@sbcglobal.net> entered the fray.
|
But not long before you chose to start calling people "Bozo."
When I entered the "fray" is immaterial.
| Quote: |
Is this how
the schools teach you to behave in Canada, leap before you look?
Yes RSCamaro, schools in Canada do teach us that the best defense is a good
offense.
|
So you admit to being offensive.
| Quote: | I know that no-one in the U.S. would leap before they looked. (for
weapons of mass destruction)
|
looks like Red Herring season has started in Canada.
| Quote: |
Maybe if you thought things through all the way the rest of us
wouldn't have to wade through the b.s.
Now that's a contradictory comment, if ever I saw one. Read your next
comment to see why.
|
Not contradictory at all. He's referencing that your original
post was BS, the rest of your back pedaling, rationalizing and
offers of Red Herrings are entertaining. I agree!
| Quote: |
I personally find these little pissing matches entertaining, after all
it is only usenet, invented to allow information to be moved from
place to place efficiently
I find them entertaining too Ron.
no matter how immature the comments.
|
Would that include the ones that you originated?
| Quote: | You've proven that!
|
As have you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sdlomi2
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Nov 09, 2005 9:14 am Post subject:
Re: Chevy 305 and 350 build questions |
|
|
If you do decide to rebuild it, be sure if the block is over-bored
0.030 inch, that the pistons you buy are also 0.030-inch over--and just as
important, be sure both dimensions are measured using *English inches*!!!
Seriously, IMO, it hurts NOT the value of the car if you use a 350 to
replace the tired 305. Both run regular fuel, both use a catalytic
convertor, neither is going to set records being stingy on gas, and the 350
has more meat in the water-jacket area for freeze-resistance and for maybe
yielding greater overall strength.
It seems to me that 1977 models weren't known for surprisingly great
fuel mileage; however, 11-12 mpg seems low for either 305 or 350. I'd be
checking the timing elements for being out of spec. and causing such poor
mpg. Both distributor timing as well as timing chain stretch can result in
timing being off. As the chain wears, the timing becomes retarded and over
time attempts have quite possibly been made to compensate by advancing the
distributor.
And as has been suggested earlier, 70-K miles seems immature for the 305
needing a total rebuild. You did not say how much oil it was burning--but
you did mention the possibility of its being due to (valve) seals. I think
this is a good guess, and quite possibly new valve seals with a total
*cleansing* of the engine's interior, verification of proper cat. convertor
action, proper distributor function(including its advance characteristics),
checking the *slop* in the timing chain's operation to determine its need
for replacement, and a thorough tune-up(including new quality wires, dist.
cap, rotor, pcv-valve, plugs, & carb-service)--all this may please you with
how much better it operates.
You might be wise, though, to not expect even close to 30 mpg--either
US-gal. or Imperial-gal! I have seen some quite unreal vehicles that
yielded phenomenal & unexplainably good mpg(like the one S/R described), but
they were definitely among the minority. Just like I've also seen vehicles
perform on the other end of the economy spectrum: one I remember quite well
as being the most disappointing was a low-mileage 1973 Chev half-ton, 6-cyl
w/3-speed on column--no ps, no ac, no pb--truly a plain jane: it would NEVER
yield over 8 mpg, driving around my rural town or driving 55 mph along a
2-lane, low traffic road, to and back from a 30-mile-away larger town.
Started, ran, and performed as sweet as a 6-cyl could be expected. No
leaks, no cat. conv., of course, rolled freely, adequate power, poor mpg.
It was so bad, I refused to retail it in my small home-town. Wholesaled
it to a dealer and even told him it was rough on gas. He called me when he
got home to tell me he had to stop 3 times and put gas in it--apparently not
filling it, as dealers tend to do!. (Other 2 he bought did ok, I guess.)
And he lived only like 40 miles away. This was in 1975-1976 during tight
gas supplies and recent price-hikes.
Luck to you. s |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RSCamaro
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Nov 09, 2005 5:05 pm Post subject:
Re: Chevy 305 and 350 build questions |
|
|
On Tue, 8 Nov 2005 21:54:01 -0500, "StingRay" <StingRay@Vette.com>
wrote:
| Quote: | Let me see now - The first nasty word in the string was when "TheSnoMan"
wrote "That is pure BS, 30 MPG on a trip with a Monte." Well RSCamaro, that
may not be name calling, but it sure is inflammatory. My "Bozo" comment
followed that comment, if you care to be honest.
|
I see, so calling someone out on a statement that they made is no
better than calling someone a name? OK, I'll try to remember that.
It wasn't inflammatory at all in my opinion. They just stated that
they thought that your statement was hogwash with the information that
you gave them. If you stated that you were using Imperial gallons to
prequalify your calculations, this thread would have been done long
ago. I'm not even going to comment on the rest of your reply to me as
it shows just how thin a skin you have with the need to attack
anything that might make you look... Hmmm, less than the petty person
you really appear to be. Maybe outside of this computer you are
different, I see you that way with how and what you have typed so far.
...Ron
--
68' Camaro RS
88' Firebird Formula
00' Mustang GT Vert |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bill
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Nov 11, 2005 1:04 am Post subject:
Re: Chevy 305 and 350 build questions |
|
|
I got lost for a while reading the flip/flap over that guys 74 monty getting
30mpg.
Anyway, I am in the process of dropping the oil pan (it has a crease and is
leaking oil). I will inspect the rod journals and after that decide what to do
about the rest of the motor. I did feel pretty strong.
I will probably eliminate the cat. It is not needed in Texas (I believe) when
the car is registered as an antique.
What is your (and others) opinion of this web site and the builders results
from modifying a 305 without machining the short block:
http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1494
If I can get 20mpg with a base Edelbrock 2101 manifold and a 600 Edelbrock
carb, I would be VERY satisfied.
Bill
On Wed, 9 Nov 2005 00:29:04 -0500, "sdlomi2" <sdlomi2@spam.yahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: | If you do decide to rebuild it, be sure if the block is over-bored
0.030 inch, that the pistons you buy are also 0.030-inch over--and just as
important, be sure both dimensions are measured using *English inches*!!!
Seriously, IMO, it hurts NOT the value of the car if you use a 350 to
replace the tired 305. Both run regular fuel, both use a catalytic
convertor, neither is going to set records being stingy on gas, and the 350
has more meat in the water-jacket area for freeze-resistance and for maybe
yielding greater overall strength.
It seems to me that 1977 models weren't known for surprisingly great
fuel mileage; however, 11-12 mpg seems low for either 305 or 350. I'd be
checking the timing elements for being out of spec. and causing such poor
mpg. Both distributor timing as well as timing chain stretch can result in
timing being off. As the chain wears, the timing becomes retarded and over
time attempts have quite possibly been made to compensate by advancing the
distributor.
And as has been suggested earlier, 70-K miles seems immature for the 305
needing a total rebuild. You did not say how much oil it was burning--but
you did mention the possibility of its being due to (valve) seals. I think
this is a good guess, and quite possibly new valve seals with a total
*cleansing* of the engine's interior, verification of proper cat. convertor
action, proper distributor function(including its advance characteristics),
checking the *slop* in the timing chain's operation to determine its need
for replacement, and a thorough tune-up(including new quality wires, dist.
cap, rotor, pcv-valve, plugs, & carb-service)--all this may please you with
how much better it operates.
You might be wise, though, to not expect even close to 30 mpg--either
US-gal. or Imperial-gal! I have seen some quite unreal vehicles that
yielded phenomenal & unexplainably good mpg(like the one S/R described), but
they were definitely among the minority. Just like I've also seen vehicles
perform on the other end of the economy spectrum: one I remember quite well
as being the most disappointing was a low-mileage 1973 Chev half-ton, 6-cyl
w/3-speed on column--no ps, no ac, no pb--truly a plain jane: it would NEVER
yield over 8 mpg, driving around my rural town or driving 55 mph along a
2-lane, low traffic road, to and back from a 30-mile-away larger town.
Started, ran, and performed as sweet as a 6-cyl could be expected. No
leaks, no cat. conv., of course, rolled freely, adequate power, poor mpg.
It was so bad, I refused to retail it in my small home-town. Wholesaled
it to a dealer and even told him it was rough on gas. He called me when he
got home to tell me he had to stop 3 times and put gas in it--apparently not
filling it, as dealers tend to do!. (Other 2 he bought did ok, I guess.)
And he lived only like 40 miles away. This was in 1975-1976 during tight
gas supplies and recent price-hikes.
Luck to you. s
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WVK
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 19, 2005 11:55 pm Post subject:
Re: Chevy 305 and 350 build questions |
|
|
gfulton wrote:
| Quote: | "Scott" <homealone.com> wrote in message
news:11mrapbrt9cme18@corp.supernews.com...
"StingRay" <StingRay@Vette.com> wrote in message
news:H4adnTgILZBkCfDeRVn-jQ@rogers.com...
"James Goforth" <jamiegoforth@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:16843-436D86AC-169@storefull-3277.bay.webtv.net...
I know it's not exactly an economy car, but eleven mpg still seems
pretty darn low.
I've had several full-size chevy pickups of the same vintage which
would do better than that, 3/4 ton, 350 4bbl.
I agree. I had a '74 Monte Carlo with the 350 engine, 4bbl & dual exhaust
& I got close to 30 m.p.g. on highway trips.
That was about the mileage a Pinto of that vintage got.
A Monte Carlo of that year getting that kind of mileage
would be nothing less than a miracle.
Absolutely. There just isn't any way.
I had a 73 Malibu SS 350 4 bbl & dual exhaust. Got 14.7 MPG doing a |
steady 55 on the NJ Turnpike,
WVK |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Grayfox
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Nov 20, 2005 12:23 am Post subject:
Re: Chevy 305 and 350 build questions |
|
|
"WVK" <wvk@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:IGJff.14800$BZ5.14371@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
| Quote: | I had a 73 Malibu SS 350 4 bbl & dual exhaust. Got 14.7 MPG doing a
steady 55 on the NJ Turnpike,
WVK
|
*lol* That's too bad! You have our sympathy! Not many people would admit
to owning what was arguably the ugliest Malibu ever built! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WVK
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Nov 20, 2005 4:46 am Post subject:
Re: Chevy 305 and 350 build questions |
|
|
Grayfox wrote:
| Quote: | "WVK" <wvk@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:IGJff.14800$BZ5.14371@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
I had a 73 Malibu SS 350 4 bbl & dual exhaust. Got 14.7 MPG doing a
steady 55 on the NJ Turnpike,
WVK
*lol* That's too bad! You have our sympathy! Not many people would admit
to owning what was arguably the ugliest Malibu ever built!
Yes ugly and a dog, ended up with the ex wife. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in