Unique 500+ Cubic Inch Engine Swap

[Dukk]

I vote the 500 Caddy. I had a 66 Caddy with a 429 in it. It moved that 6600lbs with no complaints. I can just imagine what the extra grunt of the 500 would do.

[palallin]

Originally Posted by Dukk

I vote the 500 Caddy. I had a 66 Caddy with a 429 in it. It moved that 6600lbs with no complaints. I can just imagine what the extra grunt of the 500 would do.

I had a '78 Caddy with the 472. It was a dog, just as sluggish as my old '66 Bel Air with the 230 I6.

[HO455]

Originally Posted by palallin

I had a '78 Caddy with the 472. It was a dog, just as sluggish as my old '66 Bel Air with the 230 I6.

Was there ever a 1978 engine that wasn't a dog?

Here's a couple of torque monsters.
First one is a 30 cylinder Mopar and if that is too hard to accept.
The second one is GM's 12 cylinder version.

Here's the whole story.

http://www.theshermantank.com/sherma...to-production/

[Jrainman]

Originally Posted by palallin

I had a '78 Caddy with the 472. It was a dog, just as sluggish as my old '66 Bel Air with the 230 I6.

Your 78 caddy had a 425 not a 472 , The 500 is the engine to go with , the install would go easier if it was a 500 out of a eldorado then you would not have to find a oil pan for clearence issues . and if you took all the money that it would take to build that V6 to 530 hp and put it in a true 500 not 472 you would proberly be on the threshold of 800 hp. and also understand that these engines were built by cadillac so they recieved the best of the best, those blocks were the best and strongest Gm ever built in that generation.

[palallin]

Originally Posted by Jrainman

Your 78 caddy had a 425 not a 472 , .

You're right: my brain hiccough.

Still, I have no respect whatever for the supposedly awesome Caddy engines. It was disappointing in every way and not fundamentally different from the "superstar" 500.

[kwmech]

From about 1973 and newer all the big cube engines were facing lower compression and retarded cams to meet emission requirements. I think the 454 got down to about 7.5 to 1 compression. Doesn't take much to wake them up. Jump them up to about 9-1 and add a mild cam and make those cubic inches come alive. Night and day difference

[Jrainman]

[QUOTE=kwmech;8627468]From about 1973 and newer all the big cube engines were facing lower compression and retarded cams to meet emission requirements. I think the 454 got down to about 7.5 to 1 compression. Doesn't take much to wake them up. Jump them up to about 9-1 and add a mild cam and make those cubic inches come alive. Night and day difference[/QUOTE

EXCACTY Sleeping giants just waiting to be woken up , with little effort. and a great $ to HP gain value.

[toolboxchev]

The pre DEQ, EPA Cad, Buick, and Pontiac Big Blocks were flat out ground pounding torque monsters stock, your looking at Pre 72.

Anything after that is junk, low compression, weak cams and low numbers.

I can recall a drag race in a downtown area 18 years ago. My buddy picked up a low mile 4 door Delta 88 in mint metallic green with a big block and posi. 69 or 70 I believe. Fricken bench seat in it was larger than my trucks.

Raced a couple of dark haired swave guys in a 77 vette, stoplight to stoplight.

Flat out, smoked both of the rears, marked the pavement, and clouded the entire block going by those two swave gents.

When we got to the stoplight, a bystander commented: That was "THE" ugliest drag race he had every seen!

Find the right Caddy block and Heads. Add a Turbo later. I know I would be happy!

[Steeveedee]

I have a stock 400/400 with a 3.54 axle, and I'm happy with it. I got a hole shot on some dork in an Infinity with fauncy wheels and a 4 inch fart can on it. Or maybe two fart cans. He was winding it up at the light, so I couldn't resist. OK, I only beat him across the intersection, because I was doing 40 MPH by then, and I'm no longer the rebellious law breaker that I used to be.