LS65Speed

As mentioned by some responders this was done with the open plenum manifolds ...mostly on race cars. A friend of mine (RIP Tony) raced BBC powered dirt track "modified" cars. Modified sure was the word for those old racers...another topic for another time. He was always fussing with the staggard jet idea. His engines we ALL OUT race engines with HUGE cams, aftermarket heads, manifolds and no end of race car engine modifications. I don't know if this staggard jet theory has much value on the street. Something else jumped into my mid. Back in the day there were aftermarket intakes that "twisted the carb" off the centerline of the engine. It looked really funny but I think it had something to do with trying to solve unequal fuel distribution in BBC engines under high RPM race conditions. I thing the staggard jetting was an attempt to get the same results as the "twisted" manifolds.

Andreas I was also refering to the front crossmember. I should not have mentioned the rear crosmember. Looking back on it that reference served no purpose in this discussion, I did some reasearch. Assuming that the engine is further back in the chassis on the MC how do we account for the following. All the Big Block listings in the GM parts books list the same engine pipe for MC and Chevelle Sport Coupe right hand side and left hand side? It would seem to me that if the engine is further rearward then the pipes would have to be different. Also the upper clutch actuator rod is the same for all vehicles from 70 thru 72. I did not research the earlier cars because the MC was not offered before 70. That upper rod is not adjustible. If we moved the engine rearward that rod would have to be shortened or the geometry of the Z-Bar would have to change. Earther a unique MC Z-bar would be needed or the rearward shift of the engine wth the same length upper rod would have the effect of rolling the upper Z-bar "arm" forward toward the rad support. Belive me I am not tryong to pick a fight here. I just am now wondering ..could my Vette oil pan(s)fit in Chevelle frames (70 to 72) ? The Chevelle guys get all wrapped up in Milodon pans and Moroso pans and what not when in effect there is a possibility that those extra capacity pans are useable in Chevelles. I have often thought of suggesting this to Chevelle guys (BB and SB guys) looking for more oil capacity with a stock GM pan but I always refrained. What I am seeing in the parts book tells me that the pans I have used in my MC might clear the Chevelle front crossmember. After what I read today in my parts book and what I know I used in my conversion to stick I think the engine is located in the same place on the MC and Chevelle frames. Too many parts are common between the two cars and any parts I have ever found that are different go forward of the front crossmember. Another item to check..and this would be easy...see if someone has a Chevelle and an MC. As long as the engines are the same series BBC or SBC it would be simple to measure from the coil post of the distrib to the firewall to determine if the engine is further toward the rear of the car. Perhaps the frames are such that the crossmeber sits further forward from the firewall in an MC. That would account for my clearance for the pans I have used. It would be a different thing to say that the crossmeber is farther forward than it would be to say that the engine sits further rearward. Looking at your pivot bracket pictures I think that way back when I did this I had the wrong bracket. That might have been why I needed to weld it on. It might be that the parts book did not list one specifically for MC it might be that the dealer "winged it" when I ordered my parts. There are more than a few sections where the GM parts book does not call out a specific MC part for a given application. The upper clutch rod is such a case. My parts book just ignores the upper rod in terms of any MC listing. I sure don't know why they did that. It would be interesting to see how those brackets of yours line up side by side. If ( IF! ) they used the same mounting holes it would then be easy to see if the bracket positioned the z-bar in a different place. If they don't use the same mounting point on the frame that theory / idea of mine is useless. It is hard to tell from the picture what the comparable dimensions are between the two brackets and how the parts compare. Clearly they are a different shape, therefore they have to be a different P/N (unless one superceedes the other?) ..not sure how they position the Z-bar looking at the picture. Bottom line is that everything points to the same parts from the engine back..exhaust and that clutch rod. The big BUT is that there is room for those larger capacity pans in the MC frame. I know that for sure and that Vette FI SBC pan is certainly much longer in the sump area. I don't have a P/N or a picture but the sump on that pan extends much further forward toward the balancer than other SBC pans. The more I think about this the more I think the crossmember might be further forward. On the other hand Chevelle Steering boxes interchange as do the pitman arms and the steering columns. Something has to be different someplace!!!! The wheelbase is a little longer so perhaps the front crossmember is a little farther forward and they "got by" using a different intermediate shaft between the end of the column and the drivers side of the steering box. If that is the case then I think we know where the extra length is. I am going to research that part number next. If they are different #s that might be the clue that cracks the case!

71 Monte LS6 "....frame bracket will NOT work because the engine is further back in relation to the crossmember compared to a chevelle but they do make one for a monte carlo." Are you sure about this? While your information would seem to be supported by the facts below I never heard that the engine position was different in the MC versus the Chevelle. I am going to look in my parts book and see if parts like the upper clutch control rod (which is not adjustable)is the same for the MC and the Chevelle. Read on...as I said the information that follows supports your statemnt but everything else I ever read says that the engine is in the same place (relative to the firewall and the rear end) in the MC and the Chevelle. Everything I have ever done with the car was done with transplanted Chevelle parts and I never needed anything special to accomodate the different Fore / Aft positioning of the engine that you allude to. I have changed the inner fender wells and used Chevelle inner fender wells with the 3 or 4 inch MC "extensions" that bolt between the front of the inner fender and the rad support. That fact convinced me that the added length of the MC was forward of the engine crossmember as opposed to the engine being set further back int he frame. Years ago I added a 4 Speed ( I now run a Richmond 5 Speed ) and it seems to me that I just bolted the 4 Speed to the TH350 C-member crossmember W/O moving any bolt holes on the frame. I could not bolt the Z-bar pivot onto the frame because there were no bolt holes in my frame so I just welded the bracket in place. Some other data....I have a 72 MC with an LS6 454 that runs a Corvette 5 quart (6 with the filter) GM pan (the standard pan and the only GM BB pan for a C2 and C3 Corvettes). Also this same car once had a 400 SB with the large Fuel Injected Corvette (C2) trap door GM oil pan. That pan is indeed much longer (but shallower) than the standard Corvette pans in the rear sump dimension) In both case the oil pnas cleared the crosmember with no sweat. These two pans fitting support what you say but everything else I ever used was Chevelle sourced when I converted to stick.

I am having trouble understanding your post Dave. Are you asking if you should order a short water pump version of a CS130 because your engine has a short water pump? Are you asking if Monte Carlos came with short waterpumps? Are you not sure if you have a short or a long water pump and therefore asking what to order? First and foremost we gotta know what pump is on there. There is no end of info about how to tell a short pump from a long pump. If your engine has a short water pump (I don't think it should from the factory but there are a lot of cars out there that have been cobbed together by Bubba in the Backyard with whatever parts are available at the time) then all my info is useless to you till you get a long pump. I have no idea what happens when you try to load a CS 130 onto brackets for a short pump. I dont know if there are short pump compatible CS130's might be both short and long pump installations could use the same CS130..I have no idea. For the sake of clarity...My car has a long pump, power steering A/C and the AIR system still intact. My alternator is on the passengers side of the engine and it is mounted using all stock GM BBC brackets the only modification I made are outlined above. Under the alternator is an AIR pump and all stock pulleys are used on the engine. I simply bolted the alternator onto the same brackets that were on the car when it had a stock external requlator 1972 low output alternator. I just did the rework as noted and the pulleys and everything just work. I think you are saying you have purchased a car just to get the 402 and you think that the engine has a short pump. Could well be it does like I said there is a lot of half baked work out there. You gotta determine what brackets and pump you have before you go any further. If it were me and that engine has a short pump just move on and get the right parts. All you are doing is buying into a parts compatibility nightmare if you stick with that short pump (assuming it is a short pump in the first place). The short pumps went away after 1967 or 1968 I honestly don't know when. Whatever the case an MC should not have a short pump so if you donor car has a short pump it is a mismatch for the car.

I am having trouble understanding your post Dave. Are you asking if you should order a short water pump version of a CS130 because your engine has a short water pump? Are you asking if Monte Carlos came with short waterpumps? Are you not sure if you have a short or a long water pump and therefore asking what to order? First and foremost we gotta know what pump is on there. There is no end of info about how to tell a short pump from a long pump. If your engine has a short water pump (I don't think it should from the factory but there are a lot of cars out there that have been cobbed together by Bubba in the Backyard with whatever parts are available at the time) then all my info is useless to you till you get a long pump. I have no idea what happens when you try to load a CS 130 onto brackets for a short pump. I dont know if there are short pump compatible CS130's might be both short and long pump installations could use the same CS130..I have no idea. For the sake of clarity...My car has a long pump, power steering A/C and the AIR system still intact. My alternator is on the passengers side of the engine and it is mounted using all stock GM BBC brackets the only modification I made are outlined above. Under the alternator is an AIR pump and all stock pulleys are used on the engine. I simply bolted the alternator onto the same brackets that were on the car when it had a stock external requlator 1972 low output alternator. I just did the rework as noted and the pulleys and everything just work. I think you are saying you have purchased a car just to get the 402 and you think that the engine has a short pump. Could well be it does like I said there is a lot of half baked work out there. You gotta determine what brackets and pump you have before you go any further. If it were me and that engine has a short pump just move on and get the right parts. All you are doing is buying into a parts compatibility nightmare if you stick with that short pump (assuming it is a short pump in the first place). The short pumps went away after 1967 or 1968 I honestly don't know when. Whatever the case an MC should not have a short pump so if you donor car has a short pump it is a mismatch for the car.

All this is for a long shaft water pump installation. I don't think any MC had a short pump. Once you have the belt adjuster nut tight and the alt flange snugged up to the slot in the brack your alt pulley should be aligned with your other pulleys perfectly.

CS130 bolts right on the stock mounts for the BBC. You need to fool with the spacer that positions the alt fore and aft on the long bolt that it pivots on. The long spacer goes over the long bolt that the alternator rotates on. If I recall right you need to shorten the stock length small block spacer and then fab up a smaller spacer (or use some washers) to replace the amount you ground off the long spacer. The long spacer needs to be shorter to move the alt foreward and the short sleeve is placed "in back" of the alternator to take up any space caused by shortening the long spacer. I fear this sounds like some kind of retard writing this but it really is easy. Lets try a different explanation...this might be clearer. Position the alternator on the pivot bolt with no spacers. Tighten the adjuster bolt into the stock BBC alternator bracket drawing the alternator toward the front of the car. Remember the CS130 belt adjustment bolt is a METRIC bolt!!!!!!! Now look at the pivot bolt. it should be obvious how much you need to shave off the long sleeve and what size the additional short sleeve has to be.