|
|
|
|
|
Go back and vote on this image.
|
Picture
Information
|
| URL:
http://riceornot.ricecop.com/?auto=94974 |
|
| Comments: 15 (Read/Post) Favorites: 0 (View) |
Submitted
on: 06-11-2016
|
 View Stats |
Category:
Vehicle Misc |
|
|
Description:
Alright motor, you're coming with me, like it or not. |
Showing page: 1 of 1
[ 1 ]
 |
| #1 |
6-11-2016 @ 06:58:06 PM |
| Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Now if only I could find where I put my gear puller..... I could take that pulley off..... I may have to make a run to Lowes, again.
|
|
| #5 |
7-03-2016 @ 02:03:49 PM |
| Posted By : Sensekhmet |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#4, No, no, you NEVER have to replace a timing chain! [/every Euro car owner's manual in the last decade]
|
|
| #7 |
7-03-2016 @ 04:53:13 PM |
| Posted By : Sensekhmet |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#6, Yup, VW 1.4 TSI was notorious for timing chain stretching and breakage for most of it's production run. It did not stop it from appearing on the "Best Engine" list for years...
|
|
| #8 |
7-03-2016 @ 04:58:27 PM |
| Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#7, Technically there's nothing wrong with the 4.9L Pontiac either.... but 100,000 miles on 70's material technology will do that... (it was a standard motor for non-California Firebirds too, it had to have SOME resiliency)
The only truly bad one was the turbocharged 4.9..... introduced a whole generation to the concept of "turbo lag"
And the "iron duke" 4-cylinder was awful to, but it was designed to be awful under the assumption that people wouldn't waste gas and cause excess emissions street racing something that didn't have any power. They were right, people pulled them out and put V8s in.....
[Edited by Low-Tech Redneck on 7-03-2016 @ 04:59:51 PM]
|
|
| #9 |
7-03-2016 @ 05:06:45 PM |
| Posted By : Sensekhmet |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#8, I think I saw a Big Muscle episode on /Drive with a 4.9 Turbo Firebird... not to offend anyone but what a pile... how do you make a turbo suck?!
|
|
| #11 |
7-03-2016 @ 05:10:03 PM |
| Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#9, Bolt one on to a motor that it was never intended to work with and push it out the factory door
|
|
| #12 |
7-03-2016 @ 07:14:47 PM |
| Posted By : Skid |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#10, Except there wasn't actually anything wrong with the 305. It was just a 350 with a smaller bore.
|
|
| #13 |
7-03-2016 @ 07:38:12 PM |
| Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#12, It only got that reputation because it came along as smog rules did and was less powerful than it's predecessors to start with, and then the knock-on effect of larger combustion chambers, smog pumps, EGRs etc sapped the power even more. Remember, the 403 Olds of 1979 made a BLISTERING 185 HP......
305's with the right heads and pistons and stripped off all the crud make comparable HP to the 350 SBC, it's just that for the money it would cost, you can do that all TO a 350 and get that extra 45 cubic inches....
|
|
| #14 |
7-03-2016 @ 07:46:38 PM |
| Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Oh, and rust never sleeps..... while the motor is still at the machine shop, I got to work on that "yeah I'll fix that someday" spotty rust.
The hood wasn't so bad, cleaned up in 30 minutes.
The "spot" on the rear fender bubbling up from behind the pot metal strip? That was worse than I suspected. It's not only been eaten by rust from the outside, but, the extreme bottom seam of the trunk is right on the backside of the same panel, meaning any water that got in there ended up on THAT side.
Eaten from two sides at once meant the whole section just fell out when I started grinding. And the part I'm holding in my hand is a lump of old bondo the previous owner put in there to stop it..... gonna have to fabricate a new skin, but at least it's a nice flat surface....
https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.ne...amp;oe=57ECB456
|
Showing page: 1 of 1
[ 1 ]
Login to leave a comment
|
|
|
|
|
