Page 11 of 11

Re: 96' 383 build

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 2:26 pm
by GEJ
nitropyro wrote:i think everyone including vance knows the right way is to rebuild it but sometimes we take chances. it is his sole decision not ares. we all keep thinking if bearings go bad and timing chains go bad things will break well it doesnt matter if that stuff goes it need rebuilt anyways.

dad and i were talking today and were gonna suggest checking vaccum if there is un steady vaccum he my have slightly bent a valve alreay but not enough to cause major failure. if that shows good run it. we have already ran this thing hard its gonna be drving that way we are young dumb and you know the rest. he knows it not gonna last 200k this was built to drive and drive hard it will be rebuilt again im sure and i bet he will put the slugs in right next time lol.
So i say vance do as what will make you happy im there either way. and either way i dont think wrong of you or will think you hacked something as i know you have learned from this error
Danny
ps. i like all the help that has been givin out but i have a serious question we know that they are normal pistons so there cant be any extra wear if he leaves it this way but if the vavles DO NOT hit what does this hurt? i cant find any legit answer.
After I called Jeg's and Summit tech lines the only question none of us could answer was if the intake charge,given the intake valve and piston position,was shrouded and if there was any proforance loss as a result.If after bore scoping it,you find 100's clearance-you "could" just run it as is.Not that I sponor(sp) that move.

Sure enough-here I set on the clean side of the screen without spending any money of my own so advise from me is a hell of alot easier.

Whatever you decide-I'll pay for gas for a ride to scare the begeeis out of this old man. :supz: :muhaha: :muhaha:

BTW-the Jeg's tech said the valve position on the newer style heads is just about the same as the older ones still being 23 degree heads.I was thinking the same thing,but I wanted him to confirm it.If they a different in anyway it would be only 100 thosands.

Re: 96' 383 build

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 7:55 pm
by phatmaxx87
Thanks everyone.

I have come to a decision on this. I am going to run as is. It will be fine. With the cam and compression that I am running, I could run flat top pistions if I wanted to. Technicly, the valve reliefs in these pistions on my application is useless in my oppinion. I hope knowone thinks less of me for this, but everyone is intitled to thier oppion.

Anyways, I hope to set this behind me and continue on with my project.

I will post pictures and videos as soon as I can figure out why I cant upload to photobucket. )>) Thanks again.

-Vance

Re: 96' 383 build

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 8:15 pm
by Smiliesafari
Well, it looks like a mistake that has no consequences. You gotta love that. Keep up the good work. Your van ROCKS. \:D/

Re: 96' 383 build

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 8:44 pm
by GEJ
phatmaxx87 wrote:Thanks everyone.

I have come to a decision on this. I am going to run as is. It will be fine. With the cam and compression that I am running, I could run flat top pistions if I wanted to. Technicly, the valve reliefs in these pistions on my application is useless in my oppinion. I hope knowone thinks less of me for this, but everyone is intitled to thier oppion.

Anyways, I hope to set this behind me and continue on with my project.

I will post pictures and videos as soon as I can figure out why I cant upload to photobucket. )>) Thanks again.

-Vance

Good to hear you make up your mind on this.Got to respect that for sure.Now to move on to the break-in process and then go and enjoy having fun with the van.Your da-man Vance. =D> =D>

Re: 96' 383 build

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 10:17 pm
by nitropyro
hey gary thats all we could come up with also. thanks for all the help and thanks for calling jegs and summit i thought about calling gm myself.
Danny

Re: 96' 383 build

Posted: Sat Nov 08, 2008 11:38 pm
by original_balzer
WHAT A NAIL BITER!

Wish you luck!