Small block dynos
This engine appeared in the October 99 issue of Truckin Magazine
Cubic inches: 350
Bore X stroke: 4 X 3.48
Rods: 5.7 in. 1.63:1 rod to stroke ratio.
Pistons: SEALED POWER Hypereutectic
Compression: 9.5:1 w/ 76 cc. Chamber
Heads: WORLD PRODUCTS SR TORQUER
Valves: 1.94/1.50
Cam: COMP cams
Cam specs: 203/212* dur @. 050 .421/.451 lift
Rockers: steel, 1.5:1 ratio
Intake/ Carb: EDLBROCK PERFORMER/ HOLLY 650 cfm carb
Power: 317 @ 5000
Torque: 392 @ 3750
Comments: This would make for an excellent daily driver. And the low-end torque that this combo makes would work especially well in a late 2nd gen (75-81) f-body. This combo could work with high (numerically low.) gears. This would work great in a daily driver with plenty of power when you want it.
Gears: 3.08-3.50
Converter: stock would work, but 2000 stall would work better.
Idle quality: smooth, but it would still have a bit of attitude.
What I would do: run 1.6:1 roller rocker arms.

This engine appeared in the October '99 issue of Truckin' Magazine
Cubic inches: 383
Bore X stroke: 4.030 X 3.75
Rods: 5.565
Pistons: TRW. Forged, dished top
Compression: 9:1 w/ 76 cc. chambers
Heads: 72 Chevy Truck
Valves: 194/150
Cam: PAW hydraulic
Cam specs: 214/ 224 * dur @. 050. .443/ .465 lift
Rockers: stock, 1.5:1 ratio
Intake/ Carb: WEIAND dual plane. W/ HOLLY 650 cfm carb
Power: 350 @ 5540
Torque: 385 @ 4220
Comments: here again we have a combo that would work well in a late 2nd gen. With the right gears and cam this could make a great daily driver as well.
Gears: 3.23-3.50
Converter: stock will work in a pinch, but higher stall would bring out full potential.
Idle quality: a little rough, definitely noticeable, but overall pretty tame.
What I would do: Run Vortec heads, S/R torkers or something like that, 1.6:1 roller rockers and 5.7 or 6-inch connecting rods. There is still a lot of power left in this engine and it's only a matter of getting the right combination of parts.

This engine appeared in the October '99 issue of Truckin' Magazine
Cubic inches: 327
Bore X stroke: 4 X 3.25
Rods: 5.7 inch 1.75 rod to stroke ratio
Pistons: K B hypereutectic
Compression: 9.5:1 w/ 64 cc. chamber
Heads: '67 Corvette "Camel Hump"
Valves: 2.02/1.60
Cam: COMP 292
Cam specs: 244/244 * dur @ .050. .501/ .501 lift
Rockers: aluminum, 1.5:1 roller
Intake/ Carb: EDLBROCK performer w/ 650 cfm HOLLEY carb
Power: 411 @ 5765
Torque: 368 @ 4653
Comments: Wow! This little mouse really cranks out the juice! This combo would work best in a 1st gen (67-69) or early 2nd gen (70-73), might work well in a 3rd gen, but nothing heavier than that, don't even think about using this in a later 2nd gen. This is a great candidate for a weekend warrior, but not a daily driver. This one requires really low gears (3.73 at least! 4.10 would be better) that would be hell on the freeway. This combo needs a bit more compression to live up to its full potential, but the 9.5:1 can work.
Gears: 3.73-4.56
Converter: don't even use this one with an automatic unless it's a 700/200 r4, even then you would need a converter with a stall of at least 3000 rpm.
Idle quality: (what? You expect this thing to idle?) Doesn't idle, just runs, brings whole new meaning to the term "rough as a cob." Anyone could figure out that this aint stock.
What I would do: run different heads like Vortec, sure Camel hump heads are good, but for the same cash you could get the Vortecs and have them flow better. Also I would try to make this combination a little more streetable. Here is an area where a Q-jet would help performance. The small primaries would aid bottom-end torque and the large secondaries would give it a big gulp of air at higher rpms. If nothing else the Q-jet would make the power-band a bit wider.

This engine appeared in the October '99 issue of Truckin' Magazine
Cubic inches: 383
Bore X stroke: 4.030 X 3.75
Rods: 5.7 inch. 1.52 rod to stroke ratio
Pistons: K.B. hypereutectic "D" shape
Compression: 9.8:1 with 64 cc. chamber
Heads: TRICK FLOW
Valves: 2.02/1.60
Cam: CRANE hydraulic
Cam specs: 286/ 296 *dur (dur @ .050 is N/A) .510/ .512 lift
Rockers: 1.5:1 roller
Intake/ Carb: EDLBROCK VICTOR JR. with HOLLEY 750 cfm carb
Power: 450 @ 5750
Torque: 445 @ 4750
Comments: This is on the ragged edge of a daily driver. This could work well in any F-body. This will however require a little "beefing up" of the drive train, a th-350/400 would need a shift kit if nothing else. If you have to have overdrive (700/200r4) use an aftermarket unit, stock ODs wont last long behind this behemoth. If this will reside in a 3rd gen an aftermarket 9 inch/ 12 bolt is mandatory, don't even think about using a stock 7.5-inch rear because it wont last long.
Gears: 3.23-3.73
Converter: stock might work, but here again, in order for this bad boy to live up to its whole potential, use a converter with a stall around 2000-2500
Idle quality: defiantly rough and intimidating, not quite as rough as the aforementioned 327, but definitely not stock.
What I would do: nothing, this is a great combo.

This engine appeared in the September 01 issue of Chevy High Performance magazine
Cubic inches: 355
Bore X stroke: 4.030 X 3.48
Rods: 5.7 in. 1.63 rod to stroke ratio
Pistons: N/A
Compression: 9.25:1
Heads: WORLD PRODUCTS SR TORKER
Valves: 2.02/1.60
Cam: COMP XE250H-10
Cam specs: 206/212* dur @ .050
Rockers: 1.5:1 roller
Intake/ Carb: ELDBROCK performer/ HOLLY 750 cfm
Power: 330 @ 5000
Torque: 410 @ 3500
Comments: 330 ponies doesn't sound very impressive, but 410 ft lbs torque, now that sounds good to me. That 410 ft lbs torque is what you'll feel in the seat of your pants when you hit the gas. This would make for a great daily driver and would work well in later 2nd gens. Everything is all finished by 5500 rpm, but until that, you're in for a ride. This combo would be pretty easy on the gas as well, an excellent choice.
Gears: 3.08-3.50
Converter: stock will suffice.
Idle quality: pretty smooth, but still has a little attitude
What I would do: add 1.6:1 roller rocker arms, other than that nothing. If one were to add on to what already exists, make them parts for torque since the majority of the eggs are already in the torque basket.

This engine appeared in the September 01 issue of Chevy High Performance magazine
Cubic inches: 350
Bore X stroke: 4 X 3.48
Rods: 5.7 in.
Pistons: N/a
Compression: 9.4:1 w/ 64 cc. chamber
Heads: Vortec (pocket ported)
Valves: 1.94/ 1.50
Cam: COMP 268 extreme energy
Cam specs: 224/230 @ .050 .447/ .480 lift
Rockers: 1.5:1
Intake/ Carb: EDLBROCK performer rpm/ HOLLY 750 cfm
Power: 409 @ 6000
Torque: 427 @ 3500
Comments: this one may be a bit aggressive for street use. This is more of a weekend warrior, street strip type combo. This would work well in a lighter car such as a 67-73 or 82-92 f-body, not a later 2nd gen. If you want a driver go for a shorter duration cam such as the COMP 262 (218/224* dur @. 050 .462 .469 lift) or the CRANE POWERMAX xh272 (216/228* dur @ .050 .454/ .480 lift) either of these will make this combo more streetable and fit for use in 2nd gen.
Gears: 3.50-4.10
Converter: 3000 stall, at least.
Idle quality: (what idle?) definitely a fender shaker, doesn't have lope, it has chop. In other words pretty damn rough.
What I would do: nothing, unless you need a commuter car, then go for one of the aforementioned cams.

This engine appeared in the September 01 issue of Chevy High Performance magazine
Cubic inches: 355
Bore X stroke: 4.030 X 3.48
Rods: N/A (assuming 5.7 in)
Pistons: forged FEDERAL MOGUL
Compression: 10.1:1
Heads: AIRFLOW REASEARCH 195
Valves: 2.02/ 1.60
Cam: COMP XR300HR (roller)
Cam specs: 248/254* dur @ .050 .562/ .580 lift
Rockers: 1.52 roller
Intake/ Carb: EDLBROCK VICTOR JR./ 850 cfm SPEED DEMON
Power: 506 @ 6500
Torque: 436 @ 5500
Comments: I wouldn't recommend this one for a daily driver or a late 2nd gen (unless you cut some serious weight off of it). If you want to use this one in a 3rd gen you will need to invest in a whole new drive train, unless you WANT the rear end to grenade. This is an all out wicked street strip beast, not a commuter.
Gears: 3.73-4.56
Converter: I wouldn't even recommend that this dude be used in front of an auto trans unless it's an overdrive unit, even then it will need to be something pretty stout. A 700/200 r4 might have durability issues with this one, if you want to go overdrive and automatic it will have to be a 4l60/4l80E. It will have to stall around 3000
Idle quality: rough, yeah, definitely rough
What I would do: here again, I would leave it be unless you need a daily driver, in which case streetability is only a cam swap away.

This engine appeared in the September 01 issue of Chevy High Performance magazine
Cubic inches: 383
Bore X stroke: 4.030 x 3.75
Rods: N/A assume 5.7 inch
Pistons: SRP forged
Compression: 10:1
Heads: SUMMIT 23* 195cc
Valves: 2.02/ 1.60
Cam: COMP, solid roller
Cam specs: 242/248* @ .050 .570/ .576 lift
Rockers: 1.5:1 roller
Intake/ Carb: EDLBROCK PERFORMER RPM/ HOLLY 750 double pumper
Power: 454 @ 6000
Torque: 469 @ 4000
Comments: this is a pretty powerful combo here. This cranks out awesome torque for a small block. Even at 2500 rpm this makes 419 ft lbs of torque implying a very wide power-band. The best part of this combo is that it is amazingly affordable- even with these aluminum heads. This ones ok for use in later 2nd gens or daily drivers. If you want to go overdrive, leave the 200/700r4s alone as they might have some durability issues. Even having as many cubes as at does, this engine would do pretty good on the gas, well as far as 383s go.
Gears: 3.23-3.73
Converter: 2000-3000
Idle: pretty rough
What I would do: nothing.

This engine appeared in the September 01 issue of Chevy High Performance magazine
Cubic inches: 406
Bore X stroke: 4.155 X 3.75
Rods: N/A assume 5.7"
Pistons: forged
Compression: 10:1
Heads: AIRFLOW RESEARCH 210 cc
Valves: 2.08/ 1.60
Cam: CRANE solid roller
Cam specs: 236/ 244 @ .050 .525/ .543 lift
Rockers: 1.5:1 roller
Intake/ carb: EDLBROCK VICTOR JR./ HOLLY 750
Power: 487 @ 5500
Torque: 494 @ 5000
Comments: wow! That's almost 500 ft lbs torque. This would be a great cruiser even a daily driver if you were in a pinch. There's enough power to move even the heaviest of f-bodies. Also note the very wide torque curve, this doesn't make less then 400 ft lbs from 2500-6000 rpm
Gears: 3.08-3.73
Converter: 2000 stall recommended
Idle: pretty rough
What I would do: fry the tires at 5000 rpm for 15 seconds and enjoy!

This engine appeared in the August 01 issue of Car Craft magazine
Cubic inches: 350
Bore X stroke: 4 X 3.48
Rods: 5.7
Pistons: high silicon aluminum
Compression: 9.97:1
Heads: AIRFLOW REASEARCH 195
Valves: 2.02/ 1.60
Cam: COMP solid roller
Cam specs: 242/ 248* dur @ .050 .578/ .584 lift
Rockers: 1.52:1
Intake/ carb: EDLBROCK VICTOR JR/ 1" spacer/ 850 cfm SPEED DEMON
Power: 522 @ 6600
Torque: 454 @ 5200
Comments: wow! Isn't even enough to describe this engine. While you could build this behemoth in your own garage, I wouldn't recommend doing it, not unless you have years on top of years of experience anyway. This engine would require meticulous blueprinting that would give the novice a hard time. This is definitely not the first candidate daily driver, even though it can run on pump gas. 2nd gens would require some pretty hairy gears to get moving properly. Plan on getting a vacuum pump if you plan on running any power accessories other than a vacuum advance distributor. It's claimed that this bad boy can run on pump gas, good thing because it will probably use quite a bit of the stuff (the obligatory 3.90 gears wouldn't help matters any either).
Gears: 3.90- 4.88 (hey, I told you it would require some pretty wooly gears)
Converter: don't even think about considering using this with an automatic, but if you must have one a 3500 converter might, just might be loose enough
Idle: you HAVE to be kidding; you expect this thing to idle? Well, it will but it sure isn't smooth, in fact it doesn't even idle smooth enough to have idle chop. But it will probably idle at 850 @ 900 rpm
What I would do: can you think of any way to improve on a 350 that makes 520 hp on pump gas, and still have it be all motor? Me neither.

This engine appeared in the 2000 (annual) edition of Engine Masters magazine.
Cubic inches: 355
Bore X stroke: 4.030 X 3.48
Rods: N/A assume 5.7 inch
Pistons: KEITH BLACK hypereutectic
Compression: 9.5:1
Heads: EDLBROCK PERFORMER RPM
Valves: N/A assume 2.02/ 1.60
Cam: CRANE
Cam specs: 286/ 296* advertised dur .510/ .512
Rockers: 1.5:1 roller
Intake/ carb: EDLBROCK (single plane)/ HOLLY 750 cfm
Power: 462 @ 6500
Torque: 398 @ 5400
Comments: this is definitely a healthy 350, but there is still a bit of juice left in this dude. This might not be the best daily driver, as it has such a narrow power-band, mostly due to the single plane manifold. So this build needs to go a bit further in one of two ways. This engine should be left to the 1st and 3rd gens (unless a manifold swap is in the near future), as it might not have enough torque at lower rpms to get all that mass a movin. The good news is that this may be able to run on 87 octane, but you might as well use 92 just to be safe.
Gears: 3.73s are mandatory 4.10 would be better
Converter: 3000 stall might be loose enough
Idle: surprisingly smooth, but still pretty rough. Not as bad as the 327
What I would do: This engine is kind of in a grey area as far as what it could be used for. It's not quite streetable enough to be a daily driver, yet it's not quite hairy enough to be a race only item. So here's the two choices one could have: 1) stab in a bigger, solid (perhaps roller) cam with more duration to take full advantage of the single plane intake. 2) Or use a dual plane such as the ELDBROCK PERFORMER RPM and keep the cam, also consider using a Q-jet to make the powerband a little wider.

This engine appeared in the 2000 edition of Engines magazine
Cubic inches: 383
Bore X stroke: 4.030 X 3.75
Rods: N/A assume 5.7 inch
Pistons: N/A assume forged or hypereutectic
Compression: 9.6:1 W/ 76 cc chamber
Heads: WORLD PRODUCTS SR TORQUER
Valves: 2.02/ 1.60
Cam: COMP
Cam specs: 212/ 218* dur @ .050 .447/ .454 lift
Rockers: 1.52 roller tip
Intake/ carb: EDLBROCK PERFORMER/ HOLLY (cfm N/A)
Power: 338 @ 4800
Torque: 426 @ 3600
Comments: wow! Impressive doesn't do this combination any justice. This engine pumps out perverse amounts of torque down low. This one would work great in f-bodies of all years. You would be in for one wild ride until about 5500 rpm, and then its all over with, but until then, your eyes wont leave the back of your skull. This engine has a very wide powerband, between 3000 and 4300 rpm this never makes less than 400 ft lbs torque. That wide powerband is what you want in a daily driver. This engine would be pretty easy on gas (well, as far as 383s go). So if you want a commuter with gobs of juice, your ship has just come in.
Gears: 3.08-3.50
Converter: stock will work
Idle: smooth, very little lope
What I would do: nothing, just drive like a maniac.

This engine appeared in the 2000 edition of Engines magazine
Cubic inches: 355
Bore X stroke: 4.030 X 3.48
Rods: 5.7
Pistons: cast
Compression: 9.95:1 w/ 71 cc chamber
Heads: stock "882"
Valves: 2.02/ 1.60
Cam: N/A hydraulic
Cam specs: 230/230* dur @ .050 .480/ .480 lift
Rockers: stamped 1.5:1
Intake/ carb: HOLLY CONTENDER/ HOLLY 750 cfm
Power: 318 @ 5200
Torque: 368 @ 3400
Comments: This engine could make much more power if different heads were used. On the other hand, this is about one of the most budget wise combinations around. So you could build this engine for around (this of course is dictated by the amount of machine work that needs to be done) and could easily knock down 15-20 mpg (with the right gears, transmission and converter), and would be a perfect candidate for a daily driver, even in 2nd gens.
Gears: 3.08-3.50
Converter: stock would work in a pinch, but 2000 stall is recommended.
Idle: a bit rough, nothing too intimidating, but a little rough
What I would do: well, I believe I would start with a different set of heads, VORTEC or WORLD PRODUCTS SR TORQUERs would be perfect for those still on a budget. If I couldn't get my hands on a set of good heads, I would go with a set of roller rockers if nothing else.

This engine appeared in the 2000 edition of Engines magazine
Cubic inches: 383
Bore X stroke: 4.030 X 3.75
Rods: 5.7 inch
Pistons: KB hypereutectic
Compression: 9.8:1
Heads: TRICK FLOW, TWISTED WEDGE
Valves: 2.02/ 1.60
Cam: CRANE hydraulic roller
Cam specs: 214/ 224* @ .050 .488/ .504 lift
Rockers: 1.5:1 roller
Intake/ carb: EDLBROCK VICTOR JR. HOLLY 650 cfm
Power: 451 @ 6000
Torque: 445 @ 4500
Comments: this engine could be used as a daily driver, just barley, but it could. This bad boy sure can run, but like the saying goes "If you get more ponies, ya gotta feed 'em," meaning that more power necessitates more fuel, so this one might have a bit of an appetite for gas, not like a big block, but plenty bad. That must be why it's safe to feed this beast 92 octane. As for use in 2nd gens, well... I'll leave that up to you.
Gears: 3.23-3.73
Converter: 2000-2500, stock is NOT recommended, but may work if just temporary.
Idle: rough, no sugar coating it, just plain rough.
What I would do: well, if I needed a daily driver, I would go with a shorter duration cam. If I just wanted a wicked ride that could take me to the store once and a while, I would leave it be.

This engine appeared in the February 01 issue of Chevy High Performance magazine
Cubic inches: 355
Bore X stroke: 4.030 X 3.48
Rods: N/A assume stock length
Pistons: SPEED PRO, forged, dished
Compression: 9.4:1
Heads: TRICK FLOW23* 64 cc
Valves: 2.02/ 1.60
Cam: COMP 268 EXTREME ENERGY
Cam specs: 224/ 230* dur @ .050 .477/ .480
Rockers: 1.5:1 roller tip
Intake/ carb: N/A
Power: 411 @ 5600
Torque: 433 @ 4000
Comments: this dude can run on 87 octane, assuming you keep the timing in line and the operating temp in optimal condition. This one can be used for a daily driver, and also is ok for those heavy 2nd gens. Horsepower starts getting pretty good about when torque starts dropping off, so you will have a super wide powerband here, that's a good thing.
Gears: 3.23-4.10
Converter: 2000 stall, looser wouldn't hurt.
Idle: kinda rough, not like the 327, but rough
What I would do: nothing, this screams.

This engine appeared in the July 01 issue of Car Craft magazine
Cubic inches: 401
Bore X stroke: 4.030 X 3.875
Rods: 6 inch
Pistons: MANLY PLATIMUN SARIES
Compression: 10:1
Heads: AIRFLOW REASEARCH
Valves: 2.05/ 1.60
Cam: COMP hydraulic roller
Cam specs: 236/ 242* dur @ .050 .555/ .540
Rockers: 1.6:1 intake/ 1.5:1 exhaust
Intake/ carb: EDLBROCK PERFORMER AIR GAP/ 750 cfm HOLLY
Power: 554 @ 5900
Torque: 538 @ 4500
Comments: in the article that this build came from said that 1.6:1 rocker arms were used on the intake and 1.5:1 rockers were used on the exhaust, at first I thought that was a typo, turns out that it wasn't a typo. This is kind of odd because usually the same 1.6/1.5 combo is used only vice versa. This practice is supposed to make the powerband a little wider. 92 octane is mandatory here, as well are some pretty wooly gears. 2nd gens may have a problem here and daily driving can be done "can" being the operative word here.
Gears: 3.50-4.56
Converter: 3500 might work... maybe
Idle: rough
What I would do: nothing, its fine.

This engine appeared in the October 00 issue of Chevy High Performance magazine
Cubic inches: 377
Bore X stroke: 4.155 X 3.75
Rods: 6 inch
Pistons: JE
Compression: 9.5:1
Heads: SUMMIT 23* heads 64 cc chamber
Valves: 2.02/ 1.60
Cam: COMP solid roller
Cam specs: 242/248* dur @ .050 .570/ .576 lift
Rockers: 1.52 roller
Intake/ carb: EDLBROCK VICTOR JR. BARRY GRANT 750 cfm SPEED DEMON.
Power: 454 @ 6100
Torque: 450 @ 4900
Comments: this engine was compared to a 383 almost exactly the same parts, only difference between the two is the bore and stroke, other than that, they are pretty much the same. This particular engine will make gobs and gobs of horsepower. Not the best choice for a daily driver, nor would it be best suited for 2nd gens.
Gears: 3.30-4.10
Converter: 3000 stall
Idle: pretty rough
What I would do: nothing unless I wanted a daily driver, in which case I would use a different cam/ intake for a bit more low end torque.

Big block dynos
This engine appeared in the September 01 issue of Chevy High Performance magazine
Cubic inches: 502
Bore X stroke: 4.47 X 4
Rods: N/A assume stock length
Pistons: forged
Compression: 10.1:1
Heads: DART 320 cc, rectangle port
Valves: N/A
Cam: COMP solid roller
Cam specs: 260/268* dur @ .050 .714/ .714 lift
Rockers: 1.7:1 roller
Intake/ carb: Dart rect. Port (single plane) HOLLY 1050 cfm DOMINATOR
Power: 664 @ 6500
Torque: 605 @ 5000
Comments: Price would surely be an issue here; this wouldn't be very cheap at all. As for being a daily driver, well that's not a good idea either. Even at 2000 rpm this engine makes 441 ft lbs torque, so it has a pretty wide powerband. It would be streetable but like all rat motors it would be a gas-guzzler, even as far as big blocks go, so keep it out of your commuter car. Don't even think of overdrive with this dude, unless it's a 4L80-E, even the legendary TH-400 will need some improvements here. It's got the green light for 2nd gens since it makes enough torque to move about anything. Don't expect too many miles from a set of tires, as traction will most definitely be an issue.
Gears: 3.23-4.10
Converter: 2000-3000
Idle: uh, rough describes it pretty good
What I would do: well, let me get back to ya on that one.

This engine appeared in the September 01 issue of Chevy High Performance magazine
Cubic inches: 468
Bore X stroke: 4.31 X 4
Rods: N/A assume stock length
Pistons: forged
Compression: 10:1
Heads: EDLBROCK PERFORMER RPM
Valves: 2.19/ 1.88
Cam: EDLBROCK PERFORMER RPM
Cam specs: 240/ 246* dur @ .050 .488/ .510 lift
Rockers: 1.7:1 roller
Intake/ carb: EDLBROCK PERFORMER RPM/ 750 cfm
Power: 540 @ 6000
Torque: 539 @ 4500
Comments: this makes real good power with a great torque curve to boot.
Gears:3.30-4.10
Converter: 2500 stall
Idle: just a bit rough
What I would do: nothing, this is a great combo as is

This engine appeared in the 2000 edition of Engines magazine
Cubic inches: 556
Bore X stroke: 4.566 X 4.25
Rods: 6.386 inch
Pistons: forged
Compression: 10.25:1
Heads: BRODIX -4
Valves: 2.35 1.88
Cam: CROWER (custom grind)
Cam specs: 262/ 270* @ .050 .649/ .676
Rockers: 1.7:1 roller
Intake/ carb: BRODIX DOMINATOR/ 1,050 cfm HOLLEY
Power: 713 @ 5900
Torque: 694 @ 5100
Comments: All this power happened on nothing but motor. The article that this came in said that this could run on pump gas. Good thing it can, because it will use a lot of it. That same article said that this can be built in your own garage, that may be so, but I wouldn't recommend it unless you have many years of experience. Every part MUST have perfect clearance; no stone can be left unturned here. This isn't the kind of job that you and a buddy do in a weekend with a couple 6-packs. This would take about 3 months of spare time and a lot of money, I mean a LOT of money. 2nd gens are ok here, daily driving? Well.... You decide on that.
Gears: 3.08 3.73
Converter: 2000-3000
Idle: uh... Well, rough
What I would do: can you think of any way to improve on a 700 hp pump gas engine? Me neither

This engine appeared in the 2000 edition of Engines magazine
Cubic inches: 502
Bore X stroke: 4.47 X 4
Rods: 6.135
Pistons: JE forged
Compression: 8.5:1
Heads: GM SIGNATURE SERIES, aluminum, oval port
Valves: N/A
Cam: CRANE hydraulic
Cam specs: 240/ 250* dur @ .050 .547/ .568 lift
Rockers: 1.7:1
Intake/ carb: ACCEL EFI 1000 cfm
Power: 529 @ 5300
Torque: 528 @ 3500
Comments: For a low compression engine this makes some good power. It probably wouldn't have a problem with 87 octane, but most people would probably use 92. This one has the green light for those heavy 2nd gens, but here again the 3rd gens spindly 7.5" 10 bolt will have some issues with going to pieces. So for those of you in the 3rd gen crowd, a built 9"/ 12 bolt will be required. As for those of you in the 2nd gen crowd, you will need a better rear as well. Daily driving is ok with this one, but like most (read "ALL") big blocks, this behemoth will have an appalling appetite for gas.
Gears: 3.08-3.73
Converter: 2000 stall wouldn't hurt, but stock might work
Idle: A little lope, nothing too intimidating.
What I would do: raise the compression to about 8.9-9.5:1 if you plan on using 92 octane anyway, if you still plan on taking the 87 octane path leave the compression as is.

This engine appeared in the 2000 edition of Engines magazine
Cubic inches: 468
Bore X stroke: 4.131 X 4
Rods: N/A assume stock length
Pistons: TRW forged
Compression: 10.2:1
Heads: stock, ported
Valves: N/A assume stock diameter
Cam: CROWER hydraulic
Cam specs: 246/250* dur @ .050 .578/ .593 lift
Rockers: 1.7:1 roller tip
Intake/ carb: HOLLY DOMINATOR/ HOLLY 850 cfm carb
Power: 512 @ 6200
Torque: 500 @ 4800
Comments: wow! Pretty mean. This dude may have a slight problem with accepting anything less than 98 octane. It might not be too streetable, so I wouldn't recommend it for daily driving. The good news is that it could definitely be used in 2nd gens, or anything else for that matter. Now, anyone with a brain in their head can figure out that this just wont work in a 3rd gen, not for too long anyway. Even the big 'ol 8.5" 10 bolt might have some durability issues with this one (could you imagine what it would do to a 3rd gens 7.5" 10 bolt?) If you need daily transportation (who uses a big block powered car for daily driving anyway?) the compression will have to be dealt with. This will make the power suffer a bit, but at least you would be able to run cheap gas.
Gears: 3.30-3.73
Converter: 3000-3500 stall, may work well.
Idle: just a bit rough
What I would do: lower the compression so that this beast can tolerate 92 octane a bit better.




Need Pontiac dynos? go here