Chuck84TA

Going to swap engines. (305 to 355) and now I am debating the merits of keeping the ccc qjet or removing all computer stuff and going with an older qjet,Holley or edlebrock.


My driving habits are generally street with possible autocross ambitions. I really want a smooth running, non-work intensive (easy to tune and keep a tune) setup.

Emissions concerns are just not an issue in my state.

Frankly, I would just love to pop open the hood and see a motor, plug wires and air cleaner. But I also have the dilemma of if it aint broke don't fix it.

However, an engine swap would be a golden opportunity to make the transistion.

Can anybody shed light of their thoughts on this? Especially if you make the transition yourself and are you happy ?

Chuck

RedLeader289

iTrader: (2)

My car ('83 Z28) came from the factory as a TBI crossfire set up. Of course when my Father and I got the car it was a roller, no engine, or tranny, but had all the harnesses/etc.

Went old school with a holley carb on a crate engine. That was 8 years ago, the tune has been dialed in on the car for almost that long as well. The only thing that I've occasionally messed with is the idle speed.

If you go with an engine swap, you have the opportunity to do this or a high end fuel-injection system. However, I personally enjoy the simplicity of the old school set up.

midias

There is no better carb for your stock engine. If it is running well then leave it. If it is not running well then fix it. When you actually get ready for a swap then come back.

86LG4Bird

iTrader: (1)

Stay with the CCC carb for the swap.
LEAST expensive, LEAST trouble of any other option.
I did this recently. See sig.

MD83Z

With a t-5, I have the old school vacuum advance dist. and regular old non cc carb. Extremely simple and basic. I got better MPG from the computer controlled carb and dist.though.

gearhead141

I want to jump on the wagon of keeping the E4ME. Carbs aren't much more simple than the Rochester. I have a stock LG4 with a 700R4 behind it, and I get fantastic fuel economy out of it (22mpg commuting). If I want a little more giddy-up, I change the hanger and rods which is very easy to do. I don't think the CCC system is going to notice a change from the 5.0 to the 5.7 engine.

Chuck84TA

I will be swapping out the motor in the next 2 weeks. I will leave the qjet in and give it a shot. When I get the carb tuned with the new motor, I'll post my findings

Chuck

midias

You may have to swap a few parts to tune it but it wont be different than tuning another carb

1982Z28Modified

Lots of people have many varied opinions on this subject. Get rid of the q-junk, air pump, cat, and egr. Keep the PCV and EVAP canister. Get a MSD mech/vac distributor, and top it off with a Holley 4175 (080555C). Also do a serpentine conversion. This is the most drivable setup in my opinion. Also put a free flowing exhaust on it.

Some pre-eminent members suggest keeping the q-junk CCC. Why use a POS that was designed in the 70's? It was barely adequate then. When you shine up a turd... you have a shiny turd. When you put lipstick on a pig... it's still a pig.

five7kid

iTrader: (14)

Yep, the CC q-jet is the best possible street/performance carb you can have, emissions or not. Works fine on a 350. Had one on my ZZ4 clone until I pulled the engine for the LS1 swap. Tuning was nothing more than setting everything to factory specs (I had already swapped in hanger & rods with the 305).

I would say if it is running well then leave it. If it is not running well then fix it.

Cheaper than downgrading to a non-CC carb, better long-term results.

86LG4Bird

iTrader: (1)

You, Sir, are a Marketer's dream

Fast355

iTrader: (2)

Yep and he will wonder why his car will not pass an emissions test, gets awful fuel economy, and runs terrible climbing beyond 5,000 ft of elevation. I had a car that I converted away from CCC, however the previous owner had completely butchered the CCC harness and I did not feel like finding another one.

midias

This post has so much misinformation it is actually impressive. The only part anyone should listen to is "Also put a free flowing exhaust on it."

naf

iTrader: (7)

I vote to put the LG4 stuff back on, drive it for a while and see how you like it. Could potentially save some $ in not only parts (new carb/dist) but mileage as well.

Not sure how the serp conversion helps, especially if you're trying to keep it simple and cheap. Would require a different water pump, extending wires for the alt and new refrigerant lines. Did you have to swap out the compressor? Looking at different part numbers for the later model?

1982Z28Modified

Wow Midias thanks for the complement butt-munch. Your q-junk is GM mass produced garbage from the 70's. It's so crappy with its internal leaks that are never completely repaired. The computer would be a bad calculator.

What would you have people do? 86LG4Bird is another "keep it stock" numbnutts.

Everything I suggested can be done and the cost is under 500. I got serpentine brackets out of a j-yard for $30 and a alternator for $30. New reverse WP for $50, AC pump for $100. PS pump for $50. Belt for $25. Used Holley and kit for $150. Now the engine runs. The only thing you might not find cheap is the Holley 4175. Got mine on Craigslist. You can save $90 and delete the AC for a bypass. Extending the wires is child's play. You can buy an adapter 10SI to CS130 for $20 at summit.

And I completely disagree with 57kid. The CC q-junk is fit for scrap. I am sure some people swear by it... I swear at it. It was designed not for performance but emissions.

And I thought the purpose of this board is to help and offer ideas. It usually turns into what this thread has become.

midias

The 4175 is older tech than the CC q jet. The CC q jet is a far superior design than the 4175 for any stock or sear stock engine. You will make more power and get better MPGs. The holley is in no way better from a production stand point. I understand you don't have the skill or knowledge to work with a CC qjet so you bash it and go the simple route. No problem I understand but don't try to mess up other people as a result.

Chuck84TA

Well my decision is to stick with the qjet.


Tomorrow I begin the process of taking out the L69 and the rebuilt 355 will be installed next week (L98 short block, 062 Vortec heads ported to 230+cfm, with cam shaft specs 226/234 -112.


I have recently rebuilt my qjet with a Cliff Ruggles hp kit, I also had the idle tubes enlarged, throttle plates go to 90 degrees... I gave those cam specs and engine specs to Cliff so the parts in the kit should work quite nicely with the aggressive cam.

The engine builder that I'm working with is in that "Crapjet, buy a Holley" crowd so he was trying to convince me to dump all the emissions stuff (air pump will go, but everything else will stay) and get a non computer carb. He definetly knows engines. He has been building them for over 20 years and has a great reputation with those in the area but his knowledge of qjets and the possibilities that come with a properly tuned carb are nil.

I have read many articles from Sean Murphy, Ray Bohacz, and personally talked to Cliff Ruggles a few times to get the idea that a properly tuned, rebuilt qjet is the best overall option.

naf

iTrader: (7)

When you get the rebuilt qjet on there you'll need to set the dwell for the motor change underneath. Pretty simple process. If you need some help when you get there just post back up.

I will note that on my 84 LG4 I had to use an actual dwell meter. My Autoxray would not provide correct dwell readings for that motor. Could have been my particular scanner though.

Oh, and 'butt-munch' and 'numbnutts'? Really? I apologize for our young member 1982Z28Modified. I hope we can let this go now.

Scorpner

iTrader: (4)

I didn't read the whole thread but you might want to check the throttle shaft bores while it's out. They tend to loosen up and create problems.
Here are a couple of links to explain it.

http://rmcavoy.freeshell.org/Q_Jet_bushings.html
http://home.comcast.net/~rhodes/Tech...ng_Reaming.pdf
http://quadrajetparts.com/rochester-...tion-a-19.html

Chuck84TA

Got it done. Both the primary and secondary shafts have bushings and they are tight. No wiggles. The throttle plate itself was also sanded down since these carb throttle plates were prone to warping due to over tightening

Chuck84TA

Thanks Naf!

Just got called out for a trip so when I get back, it's swap time! Probably have the carb on in a week .

I've got the autoxray as well.. I'll keep you posted

Chuck

1982Z28Modified

Where to begin? Midias, do you work for the big three? No? I do. I work for Ford for the last 20 years. I have friends that work for GM and Chrysler.

Here is a fact. Your q-junk was designed in the 60's to be mass produced. By the millions. It's simple and straightforward. A monkey could rebuild it. But that's the point. They put the same carb on all V-8's in the 60-80's.

Holley is a company that builds performance parts.

Let's see... mass produced junk from GM, or performance built stuff from Holley.

BTW midias, the q-junk design is from the 60's. If you knew anything about what the big 3 does I might be inclined to take your advice. I suppose you never saw a real factory? Let me tell you how they operate. Produce as many as you can for the lowest cost. Quality? Not even considered. Does it work? Ship it. Broken? Ship it. Salvaged? Ship it.

Good Luck Chuck84TA. I think you would be happier with a Holley. The q-crap will get you by, but remember, it was not designed to deliver performance. It was designed to run a V8 on all GM cars. Rebuilding it with advice from Ruggles is OK. But he was right about q-crap. If he does it for a living, I'd listen to him, not Midias or NAF.

Fast355

iTrader: (2)

AND HERE YOU ARE THINKING HOLLEY IS NOT THE SAME JUNK!!!! I put one on recently for a guy, the thing ran horribly, obviously way too rich. Took it apart to find that the primary main jets where never even installed!!! Rather than forcing me to wait for a replacement from Holley, Pepboys took the correct base jets off the shelf and gave them to me. Holleys have always been mass produced as well and not always with great results.

RedLeader289

iTrader: (2)

If every part was maintenance free and totally perfectly working then we would have absolutely nothing to talk about/discuss.

"oh guess what guys?!? I just changed my oil. Welp, maintenance for the next few months-DONE."

-boring-

"hey guys! when I give it gas my car turns into a fire-breathing dragon! *insert image of roasted air cleaner and or giant black burn on underside of hood* what do I do???"

-NOT boring-

Some parts/cars/etc are made better than others. Some that are poorly made can still be very good in the right hands (or by freak coincidence). And some that are 'great' can turn out to be crappy in the right hands (or by freak coincidence).

I have no experience with the factory carbs on these cars. I can say that the 4 barrels that came on the 1st gens were fairly decent (rochesters & carters).

In my opinion, Holley is not junk. I have a 750 double pumper that was bought new, not used, and has been properly maintained and holds a good tune. It gives me 0 issues.

anyways, just my .02

86LG4Bird

iTrader: (1)

Hi, Numbnutts here
I don't think there should be an argument about which carb is better quality.
Holleys are good in their proper application.
Q-jets, including the CCC, are good in their proper application.

This thread is about using a carb where there is already a well-engineered system, that offers better sustained performance and certainly better fuel economy, that happens to be built around the CCC Q-jet.
If you want performance + economy with the least amount of hassle and expense, then the stock Q-jet is the answer.
If you don't care about that and just want a certain underhood look, then a Holley may just be your answer.

midias

I have done consulting for one of the big 3 and it sucked. Low pay so I moved on.

So what part of EMS did you work for at the Rochester / Delphi corp that made you an expert?

Maybe you let poor quality crap out the door where you work but at the factory I am sitting in we dont. Although none of this make you an expert on the Q jet or holley. The fact that you would recommend anything else for a stock or near stock application really hurts your argument.

1982Z28Modified

I never said I worked for GM making carbs. But I have seen it time and again that all decisions are based on cost. What GM did was make a carb adequate for a wide variety of engines that could be mass produced by the millions to be assembled by anyone.

Why do you think the q-junk is prone to internal leaks? The molds were so worn out after years of use and millions of units produced.

And I never ship poor quality. I cant speak for GM.

I am not an expert. But my experience as a mechanic tells me the Holley is a better choice.

The fact that you don't know how a big 3 factory works hurts your argument. As I said, cost, cost, cost, is the GM way. If GM figured a way to save a dollar on the q-junk production, they would. And they did. All the time.

Holleys are not mass produced. At least, not like q-junk.

naf

iTrader: (7)

C'mon guys. Let's have a little more respect for Chuck and no longer clutter this thread. He can go with the qjet for now and if he decides later that it isn't right for him, he's only out the cost of the manifold gaskets at most. He's got a sweet TA by the way.