Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Tigers\]\s+Roller\s+289\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Tigers\]\s+Roller\s+289\s*$/: 9 ]

Total 9 documents matching your query.

1. [Tigers] Roller 289 (score: 1): Author: Jeffrey Nichols <jxnichols@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 06:24:49 -0700 (PDT); "He is wondering if he can use the roller cam/follower kits on this block, or if you have to modify it to mount them? Is anyone running a 289 5 bolt with a roller setup? If so what type and did you h; /html/tigers/2009-08/msg00199.html (7,075 bytes)
2. Re: [Tigers] Roller 289 (score: 1): Author: Tony Somebody <achd73@yahoo.com>; Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 10:34:21 -0700 (PDT); Jeff- have you dynoed your engine? Just wondering what kind of HP you managed to massage out of a 260 block. To others who started this thread, I have a 5 bolt 289 and have had it in several cars, in; /html/tigers/2009-08/msg00201.html (8,346 bytes)
3. Re: [Tigers] Roller 289 (score: 1): Author: "Scott Hutchinson" <shutchin@netjets.com>; Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 13:49:55 -0400; I think I used edelbrock drop in roller lifters with tie bars. No machine work. Couple hundred bucks for the lifters. Comp custom grind roller cam. Uses the same firing order as original. Comp pro ma; /html/tigers/2009-08/msg00202.html (8,200 bytes)
4. Re: [Tigers] Roller 289 (score: 1): Author: "Smit, Theo" <Theo.Smit@dynastream.com>; Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 12:03:11 -0600; Hi Tony, You shouldn't use a roller lifter with a non-roller cam because (besides the cam hardness issue) the cam lobe profile is totally different. A flat tappet cam is designed to push a flat surfa; /html/tigers/2009-08/msg00203.html (8,742 bytes)
5. Re: [Tigers] Roller 289 (score: 1): Author: Tony Somebody <achd73@yahoo.com>; Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 11:10:10 -0700 (PDT); Theo- My line of thinking as well. I thought I read in an earlier thread where the person wanted to add roller lifters but changing the cam wasnt mentioned. I may have not read it correctly or misund; /html/tigers/2009-08/msg00204.html (9,748 bytes)
6. Re: [Tigers] Roller 289 (score: 1): Author: Sandy Ganz <sganz@pacbell.net>; Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 11:11:40 -0700 (PDT); I have used mechanical rollers in SVO and Dart blocks with no machine work. Not sure if the same for later model Stock type Hydraulic Rollers or for early blocks but I would check with CompCams, or; /html/tigers/2009-08/msg00205.html (9,723 bytes)
7. Re: [Tigers] Roller 289 (score: 1): Author: "Scott Hutchinson" <shutchin@netjets.com>; Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 14:32:15 -0400; My understanding is that one of the advantages of a roller cam is that it allows much higher valve spring tension and faster opening and closing of the valves. This is accompished by having much stee; /html/tigers/2009-08/msg00206.html (8,178 bytes)
8. Re: [Tigers] Roller 289 (score: 1): Author: Jeffrey Nichols <jxnichols@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 11:46:11 -0700 (PDT); No dyno yet for my engine. Someone else on this list did dyno a 260, .030 overbore, street roller cam, Edelbrock F4B manifold and saw 279HP on a dyno. So I'm hoping for 275HP give or take a few horse; /html/tigers/2009-08/msg00208.html (9,080 bytes)
9. Re: [Tigers] Roller 289 (score: 1): Author: Tony Somebody <achd73@yahoo.com>; Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 11:56:58 -0700 (PDT); Thanks all but Im not going to change my old 5 bolt 289. I have a couple of roller engines when it comes that time. This all started from someone else asking about using roller lifters BUT it is good; /html/tigers/2009-08/msg00209.html (12,093 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 9
Page: [1]