#96 heads are the best stock head for a modern 455. Large valves, screw-in studs, all the exhaust bolt holes are there and tapped. Ports are decent.

With few or no mods, they can be bolted on to a 455 and will yield about 9.3:1 compression and produce great performance. With the right set-up for the right cam, they are a great combination.

96's my choice..Or 6X-4..

But prefer the 96's

i'll stick with my #462 humps

What difference would there be between the 455 block with a 455 crank compared to a 400 block with a 462 stroker crank. I know the 400 used smaller two bolt mains. Are there any other differences that change this build?

Rhodes lifters... deliberate leak down is not quite the same thing as a lifter that failed to expand, right? Does the valve train ever see clearance that would cause noisy operation? I read that Jim Hand (in his book) likes them to improve street idle on a livelier cam with a 1.65 ratio. That's why I'm asking about them.

Its a bit off topic but we were debating this earlier. I agree that the first gen f-body isn't up the all this torque. I've seen the 350/two speed automatic coupe with the quarter panel tear. The stress crack and twist is a real issue and a matter of how much abuse and for how long. With enough power hooked up, once might be enough. If you cut the floor pans and install the DSE frame connectors is this enough to stregthen this platform for a 455? What if you flange the floor ninty degrees and weld it to the connectors where the pass through? Are there any other ways to beef up this unibody other than building a cage?

There are and extra 7 cubic inches, which comes from the extra .040" stroke. The smaller mains mean a lower surface speed at the bearing surface, which reduces heat.

The Rhoads lifters do not cause noisy operation. They meter oil through a sized orifice that is blocked by the lifter bore as the lifter rises on the cam flanks. Once the orifice is blocked, the lifter retains it's size. At low RPM, more oil flows out than at high RPM. It shortens cam duration and slightly reduces lift at low RPM.

Body twist is best solved with 45 degree tension stiffeners in addition to the subrame connectors. Have a good look at the convertible pan stiffener. It's basically a big "X." This is a far better solution to stiffening the body than gusseting against the subframe connectors.

the Rhoads lifters i was running in my BBC did have a slight ticking noise, sort of like solid lifters. There are some anti-pump up lifters advertised as not being noisy, but not the Rhoads lifters, and, no, there is no valve train clearance which would cause noisy operation. the lifters themselves have a controlled collapse which causes the ticking noise. yes, they really do work in improving idle and vacuum at low rpm's. :p **********

NOTE: CORRECT SPELLING OF RHOADS LIFTERS

From what I remember, the internal plunger of the lifter is carefully selected and matched to the outside body to allow more annular space for the oil to be squeezed out through. This happens as the lifter is being compressed by the cam lobe. On other brands, a flat is ground along the side of the plunger to accomplish the same thing.

Being a mechanical system, you can't change the duration or the lift without introducing clearance. What I don't like about leak-down lifters is that by shortening the action of the cam they allow the valve to slam shut. There are ramps on the tail end of each cam lobe that are designed to lower the valve gently onto the seat. As noted, most of the leak-down happens at low speed, because the time that the lifter compresses and therefore leaks down is longer, with the effect decreasing as the rpms increase.

The ramps are pretty critical for valvetrain stability and decent seat life. I would rather choose a cam using different parameters, and make use of the countless hours of testing and analysis that have gone into designing the cam lobe profile.

I see we have a "Rhodes" Scholar on board.

http://www.rhoadslifters.com/

Too much time on your hands Q?

Very creative I must say...But expected of such a scholarly guy.

I'm afraid so, Tom. But that's a short-lived problem, I think.

I can't come up with good one liners that fast..either I am anal (no comment needed) or just not funny.

I guess Q just like to take the Rhode less travelled.

"Rhodes" must be the "Made in Thailand" version.

Q says, quote: "The Rhoads lifters do not cause noisy operation" WRONG!, must be hard of hearing you old timer! :p **********

i'm glad you're back Yellowbird as i knew you would be, now go tell Marty to bake me a cake! :p **********

It's probably the gear drive and the exhaust that mask the sound. Of course, it's also in a Pontiac, which idle a little differently than most Chevys do.

It is difficult to determine true performance when one has only inferiority to compare.

yeah...and i suppose Pontiacs exhaust smells a little different than Chevys too! :p **********

It's quite possible. In the stone age, when I was in high school, one of the guys I worked with inherited his grandmother's Cutlass. It was a 350 2-Bbl. He thought that was the fastest car ever built. He just hadn't had anything to compare it to.

It's all about relative perspective.

That being said by a dude who's only muscle car was a 1991 Ford Festiva! you must have been the bad boy of the block! :p **********

Oooooohhhhhhhhhhh ... careful. With a wit that sharp, you might cut yourself! Then you might need one of these ...

I keep wating for someone to take you up on that one Tom. Ill put some cash down on your 326

About 25 watts.

That many?

It's Christmas.

I thought it was 30 watts?

The other one was 25 watts..isn't the one we are talking about 30?

Are we really going to re-live this? It's only been like two weeks!

Nope!