wallaby

WOW. Nothing beats the pride of doing it yourself! It sure wouldn't hurt to glop some more filler rod on some areas. Also you need to anchor that vertical flange to the round thingy with screw on top...I'd say a minimum of six 4-inch number 10 or 12 screws should establish what you meant.

Tube Nazi.

It means you should have it checked out. Is it truly a whine, or a grumble, or does the noise change under load, coasting, or decellerating? Pretty much everything noisy back there is going to require some kind of repair. I've had axle bearings go bad, and I also had my carrier bearings go bad. Both required replacement, but my ring & pinion survived.

There should be a tin shroud that is connected around the exhaust manifold that has the other tube for the connecting hose. The tin piece is often missing. They vibrate and rattle and get pretty noisy as their attatching rivets get loose with age. But yea, it sounds as if you have the correct air cleaner assy.....If I remember right, the small block snorkel is round at the end and the big block snorkel is oval.

I'm still trying to figure out if my question has been answered!

I just realized it doesn't do it when I use the quick reply....only when I go to the full reply screen.

Windows internet explorer 8 ? I can fill the box, and it will scroll normal for 2 additional lines....then the box stops scrolling. yes. I end up with a view that hides the first two lines of text (at the top), and hides everything below the box.

Maybe I have something set wrong, but here is the problem: When I enter the page for posting or editing I begin to type and everything seems fine....until I get long-winded and fill the entire box. Then, instead of the view moving downward as I add text, the text instead moves downward out of view below the bottom of the box. Does that make sense? I mean does anyone understand my complaint? I can use the scroll bar on the right to view my stuff down below, but when I type anything the window snaps back up and the lower part of the page becomes invisible again. Simple fix? is it me?

Is that cage for locking up your credit card? Here is an option: linky

If you are like me. you're going to love & hate that narrow band AF guage. It will probably have you doing carb adjustments until the cows come home, even when you know the car is running good. I know I can't get you to ignore the gauge; it just seems like it should be SO helpful. But there are some things to remember about using those narrow sensors: 1. Their idea of "perfect" combustion seldom (if ever) exists in our carbureted engines. The engine runs on the rich side most of the time, and sometimes at cruise you will see it run a bit on the lean side. Most of the time however, the mixture fluxuates back & forth depending on RPM, engine load, and ignition timing. It's a rare day when you see the guage running in the middle...and if it does, you're probably running too lean. 2. The narrow band sensor is focused only on that one magic,"perfect" mixture. It looks straight ahead with blinders on and waits for that ideal mixture to happen so it can tell you about it. If the mixture is lean or rich it really isn't concerned, and has no idea how far lean or rich. Imagine you are looking at a tachometer through a piece of pipe. You can't see the entire face of the gauge, so you aim the pipe at the number 6 and you wait. As your engine speed goes up & down, all you know is whether the needle is to the left or right of that number 6000 you are focused on. And you don't have any idea how far left or right, and you don't care. Now imagine installing the pipe & tachometer in your car, and the view is focused on the 4000 position. That's how the narrow band works. You don't idle at 4000 You don't cruise at 4000 You don't over rev at 4000 You don't even make best power at 4000, but darn it, you have a gauge that indictes when you are at 4000!

The biggest change I noticed when installing my 2500 converter, was the loss of engine braking. With the stock converter I hardly had to use the brakes at all exiting the freeway; I just let off the gas and 3000rpm big-block slowed me down like I had opened a parachute. Now with the high stall converter it is almost like shifting into neutral when you let up on the throttle and the car tends to feel as if it is coasting instead of slowing. There is a big difference when driving mountain roads as I'm using the brakes just to keep the car from gaining speed whenever it points downhill.

I think the advantage in HP depends on engine speed. With the mechanical pump being literally tied to the crankshaft, there will be times when engine speeds are slow and the pump doesn't move much water, and times on the highway when it requires considerable power to spin, and times at the dragstrip when high rpm can spin the pump beyond its ability to pump. (cavitation). With an electric pump the pump speed remains constant regardless of engine speed. If the electric pump works best at 1600 rpm, then they build it with a 1600 rpm motor and forget about it; It will forever be working at its best. The alternator will still have to keep the battery charged to keep up with added demand, but for an all-out effort at the strip you can unplug or switch the alternator so your pump (and everything else) runs on the battery until you have finnished your run. You end up with zero drag on the engine and your waterpump is still working. My question is; if the electric pump is better, then why aren't new cars using them? I would expect an increase in mileage using an electric pump, so you would think it's a detail the makers would employ... I can only conclude that there must be an issue with longevity or relability?

I've never done it on my Monte, but the question I have to ask is; is there enough room behind the axle flange to remove the studs? I know on some cars you have to pull out the axles to replace the studs. If that were the case, I think I'd look for a place to safely drill a hole in the brake backing plate to push the studs through. You just rotate the axle to align the stud you are working on with the hole. The problem is that the back side of the stud is pretty large.... anyways, it's food for thought.

That's a tricky thing to do; every different trans kit seems different from another....how could you tell what's been changed? I think most kits have you slightly enlarge holes in the spacer plates, and relocate or eliminate check balls. I have always chosen the "heavy-duty" or RV shifts for mine. I don't know how the mods are made for the race shift setup. There might be something done with the acumulator or governor, but I would expect most of the mods are all about increasing line pressures to apply the clutches without slippage. A trans that shifts hard is supposed to be a good thing to keep the trans clutches from slipping and generating heat but as you are finding out, it's hard on everything else. I think if it were me, I'd think about getting a higher stall converter. You still have the hard shifts, but there is some slippage to keep them from feeling so brutal.

So did you find the actual problem?

Can't you just go buy a big cork from the hardware store? Or maybe one of those big wooden type like they hammer into wine barrels? Now that would look industrial. You could have a logo branded on the end of the cork to read something like: "Boones Farm 1970"

I just went through this change, and although the Edelbrock measurements tell you the RPM is a little taller than the standard performer, I could not detect a difference. I had just made myself a new hard-tube fuel line to work with the performer, and surprisingly it fit beautiful with the RPM also. So as near as I could tell the distance from the fuel pump to the carb fuel inlet is the same for both intakes.

I guessed a bent shaft, or buggered splines, but twisted shaft is a good guess also! Whatever it is, it sounds like it's going to be a problem with the output shaft.

He's going to be stunned. LOL

Alright, you tried two differnt yokes, and they both behave the same, so we can probably rule that out. My next guess is either a problem with the splines on your output shaft (a burr or dent) or the shaft itself isn't straight. I guess it wouldn't hurt to inspect the rear bushing to be sure it's fully seated in position and not slightly crooked. So to sum up the problem; you have two yokes and neither one will slide all the way into the trans. If you apply force, the yokes will travel a bit further in (still not far enough), but then become bound up on the shaft? I think you are going to need to remove the extension housing and really inspect the output shaft and see if the yokes slide over it when the extension housing isn't there. It looks as if you just remove the speedo gear, undo the bolts that hold the extension to the transmission case, and then pull the whole extension rearward to expose the output shaft. It's that simple. Nothing is going to fall out except some gear oil.

Kevin, it looks as if you DO have a tail housing that can be removed and leave the tailshaft sticking out in full view. It also looks like the yoke simply slips in as far as it goes and bottoms out on the speedometer gear or reverse gear....either way, the two gears are positioned on the output shaft by snap rings, and are non adjustable. There really isn't any way those gears could be installed wrong unless they are too thick and the rear snap ring was left out. The other possibility is the wrong length tailshaft housing? If you measure the depth from the rear seal to the face of the gear inside the trans, does it match with the depth the yoke is going in? or is the yoke stopping before it gets that far? Here is an explded view if it helps ya http://www.nastyz28.com/tech/bw-t10.html

That's some good stuff there. I didn't even know about the gas buildup problem. I thought the cross-drilling was done to give the rotor more surface area for better cooling. You would loose some surface for braking, but gain some for cooling. The problem I still have is in the heat cycles they talk about. They generally say that bigger heavier rotors are better at managing heat. I didn't see anywhere in the article where they talked about cooling. I would think that a heavier rotor would take longer to heat up, but also be slower to cool down. I suppose the idea is to have them so large that they never get hot enough for heat to be an issue.

Yep...the bad hose will cause the trans modulator to get a poor vacuum signal. When the trans modulator gets poor vacuum, it delays the upshifts and makes them firmer.

I think the clean air fitting is on the extreme back of the carb way up high...right below the surface the air cleaner sits on. There might also be a vacuum fitting on the underside of the air cleaner assy for this purpose? You are looking for a fitting that simply leads to an area between the carb and the air filter element....it will be a fitting that never pulls any vacuum. Could the brass fitting be the connection tube that pulled out of the carb when the hose was removed?, or maybe it is like a restriction or air bleed with a tiny hole running through it? My stuff is long-gone, but I'm trying to help anyway.

As you add mods to the engine it will want more fuel and more timing. Adjust the idle screw to bring up the engine speed to around 3,200 and with your hand, begin to restrict the airflow going into the carb. (you can also do this by slowly tilting the choke plate if you prefer). This will give you an idea of how well it is jetted for cruise conditions. If the engine speed increases as you restrict airflow, the engine wants more fuel. If the jetting is correct, you should notice only slight speed increase or none at all. It would be normal for the engine to slow down as you choke it, so in this simple test you are just looking for speed increase to ballpark your jetting on the primary side. If the engine only slows down as you restrict airflow, you are probably running rich already. AFR numbers are nice to have but are only part of the puzzle. You need to determine what the engine WANTS and aim for that. Try the above test and see where the engine runs best and then take note of that AFR number. That will be your ideal cruise AFR, or perhaps a bit leaner. ...and I can't say enough bad stuff about my experience with the Edelbrock Performer 2-0 intake. My 468 made much more power with its original factory intake. IMHO, you have done everything correct except that. The Edelbrock performer RPM is much better at making power with no downside. I'm liking my RPM intake and have no complaint with it at all.