The first z/28's came from gm with 302 cu in and a 800 cfm holley. They ran pretty good also.

rpm!

Yes, they ran well, but with the short stroke, small displacement, and big heads / carb they were pretty soggy on the bottom end. That's why the Z's came standard with a 3:73 gear, and quite a few were ordered with the optional 4:10 or even 4:56 gear. They needed that gear to get it rolling off the line. The whole package was really set up as more of a road race deal than a street car. When the 1970 model year arrived and the Z's got the LT1 350, it was a much better package.

The car ran high 13s to low 14s in the quarter mile stock out of the box. Chevrolet chose not to advertise the fact that the motor pumped out over 350 HP and could twist 7 grand. The motor was rev happy and therefore short on torque in the higher rpms, but it got the job done on the round track and at the strip. I wouldn't call that soggy....but then you are entitled to your opinion.

Point I was trying to make was that the short stroke lacked torque off idle and at low RPM - so yes, it was a bit "soggy" out of the hole unless you had a lot of gear to help with torque multiplication. I never said they didn't run well on the top end. And yes, you are right that GM severely underrated them at 290 advertised HP. Properly tuned, they made more like 400+ at 7500 RPM. I have driven both the 302 and the 350 LT1, and the LT1 was a much better street engine from a driveability standpoint. The one and only reason that the 302 was produced was to satisfy the rules for the SCCA Trans Am racing. It just so happened that the success on the race track translated to sales in the dealerships, as was often the case back in those days.

well not allot of replies to my questions but those who did thanks... Another one theres allot of talk on here about MSD ignitions systems being junk. Why aren't they running the marine distributer like the 83606 that is all in one and doesn't need a remote electronic box.And just to check my basic knowledge what is the procedure for timing one

Well, the only real answers we can give you was done almost right away.

As a possiblity too, this may sound weird, but too many people listen to advertisements about running big plug gaps. I have cleaned up quite a few idle issues with engines and .045" or larger plug gaps (even with larger powered ignitions) by reducing to better .030"-.035" gaps.

A few extreme engines liked down to .020" but these where massive compression, cam, and etc applications in drag type cars.

I think offshore boating, is one of the few, if only, motorsport hobby where you can stand to lose a little low end response and gain some top end response.

In my boat, I'd gladly lose 15ft lbs of torque at 2000rpm if it meant I could gain power at wot. Guys spend thousands and thousands of dollars on labbed props, bottom blue printing , shorty drives, etc to gain a couple mph. But yet freak out that they might lose 12ft lbs of torque at 2000rpm. At 2000rpm my throttles are barely open and are never at full throttle so other than a dyno sheet it's worthless to me

Singles a little different than duals (engines) but, yeh, I'm right with you as many are. I want more power from 3k and up...and many times 4k and up.

Most of my stuff and customers/friends if we hit WOT off idle we'd break drives planing. And yeh, we did.... a lot....LOL.

[QUOTE=fbc25el;4152125]The first z/28's came from gm with 302 cu in and a 800 cfm holley. They ran pretty good also.[/QUOTE


Yes they do run good,, I still have my Original 69 Z28 with the 302 in my garage.