Help: Chevy 305 and 350 build questions

"aarcuda69062" once again showed his ignorance in message news: snipped-for-privacy@newsclstr01.news.prodigy.com...

You are so dumb man! You posted the I.S.P. number. Don't you know how to read it?

You had the full headers. You just don't know how to read them.

It's right there under your nose dumb-ass! Do you need someone from "Canaduh" to show you how to read I.S.P.'s? Your slur against our country tells the entire NewsGroup a lot about you - redneck! You show us once again that the definition of "Duh" = "aarcuda69062"

There is none so blind as he who will not see. Or in your case is too dumb to see! ;-) It's all there under your nose little man. Just as we all know that your I.S.P. is

I.S.P. Southwestern Bell Internet Services, Address: 2701 W 15th St PMB 236 City: Plano StateProv: TX PostalCode: 75075 Country: US

Have you figured it out yet, you poor excuse for a man? You are one sorry representative of an otherwise great country! Heh, heh!

Why would anyone bother to memorize such minutia? Because some wet dream might post about the fuel mileage he got in his 1974 Monte-Hooptie? That might be the high point of

-your- life, but certainly not anyone else's.

This is your ID that shows in the header: "StingRay" It takes an entirely different menu command to open the full header to reveal the ISP. Not a question of who can and who can't read headers, it's a matter of how apparent it was or wasn't (it wasn't).

Actually, it wasn't, s*it fer brains. It takes a separate menu command to open the full header to show your ISP.

You mean so we'll all know for sure whether you're talking about imperial gallons or not?

Hate to break it to you but the "redneck" comment merely shows how much you don't know about tracking down where a usenet post originated from.

So, according to you, we should all waste screen space, display full headers on the off chance that some self absorbed nimrod might be making claims about the fuel mileage he experienced based upon measurements done in imperial gallons. Again;

Oooo, he's going to show us how smart he is....

Yup, I've figured it out. I'm no where near Texas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Arkansas, or Kansas you techno-twit. I DO NOT do business nor -can- I do business with Southwestern Bell Internet Services (geographical impossibility), as a matter of fact genius, you're at least 1200 miles off. Here's a clue for ya: Southwestern Bell is a subsidiary of my parent ISP. Nice try, thanks for playing, you lose, to bad.

You know, I did not want to get in this little argument between you two, but all I am going to say is you both seem like small children. Especially you 'aarcuda69062'. You get pissed at one person so you insult his country. I happen to be Canadian and do not care much for your insult. Take your crap up with the guy not his country.

Well, if you resemble him, take offense.

Otherwise, bear in mind, he started with the insults, and if he can't handle the insults, he shouldn't be using them.

As for my using the term "canaduh." he's the one who trotted out the 'country' card... guess the ice was thinner than he thought.

Since your countryman fancies himself to be such an expert (not) have him teach you how to kill-file me if you find my posts so distasteful.

No skin off my nose.

Well said. I took an easier approach and killfiled both.

Hey, I found his 30mpg to be a little off too, and I did not think to look at his headers, but that still does not warrant insulting his (my) entire country. You yourself are acting pretty childish as well, yet you do not see me insulting the USA. That was my point.

That is a good idea, but I myself have never killfiled anyone in my entire time on Usenet, so I really do not want to start now :-P

"80 Knight" wrote in message news:XPOdnT9zo6L2dO3enZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@rogers.com...

80 Knight, this whole thread started when I responded to Bill's request for help with his Monte Carlo, which he said was getting 11-12 m.p.g. He also asked for help in finding an engine rebuild kit. I responded that "I got close to 30 m.p.g. on highway trips" with my '74 Monte and I gave Bill a link to an engine rebuild kit for his 305. So I was doing what this NewsGroup was intended for. Helping a fellow hobbiest. I failed to qualify that we used Imperial gallons in Canada, prior to metric conversion and I found myself under attack by no less than 3 people. I stand by the 30 m.p.g. figure because I know that it is the truth. I clarified the Imperial gallon issue and the 3 individuals who initially attacked my credibility stopped their attacks, presumably because they found the numbers feasible. Once the whole issue seemed settled, "aarcuda69062" decided in his wisdom (or lack thereof) to instigate further discussion by showing us all what a redneck Bubba he is. 80 Knight, I have said nothing but the truth in trying to help the original poster with his problem and I refuse to be flamed by the likes of such low-brow Bubbas as "aarcuda69062". Canadians as a group are oft accused of being apathetic when attacked, but I don't put up with dimwits like "aarcuda69062". I am compelled to let him and his ilk know that when it comes to a battle of wits, they are completely unarmed. I regret if my poking fun at "aarcuda69062" has caused you or any other NewsGroup reader undue distress. For your sake and the sake of the non-Bubbas in this NewsGroup, I will now cease and desist my dialog with "aarcuda69062".

Excellent, you can blab like a 16 year old. Now shut the F up and go find something else to bitch about. You got all indignant over someone elses comments when you are the one who started with the whole name calling episode.

(quote) "I always find it fascinating that Bozo's like you three challenge someone's credibility without substantiating your comments". (end quote).

All you had to do was state that the fuel measure was in Imperial and that would have pretty much been the end of the matter. Is this how the schools teach you to behave in Canada, leap before you look? Maybe if you thought things through all the way the rest of us wouldn't have to wade through the b.s.

I personally find these little pissing matches entertaining, after all it is only usenet, invented to allow information to be moved from place to place efficiently no matter how immature the comments.

...Ron

--

68' Camaro RS 88' Firebird Formula 00' Mustang GT Vert

Hey, you two seem like you can be civilized people. My only problem was 'aarcuda69062' was insulting an entire country based on only one person. I am not saying you're Monte could get 30MPG, but I do admit that with you being the owner, you should know. Other then that, I had no idea you were in Canada either until I saw Rogers.com in your headers when they were posted. Anyhow, crap happens in newsgroups, we all must let it go and move on.

Just so you know where you (and I) heard it first...

And just to refresh, stingray felt the need to resort to name calling long before I added a comment.

I hear yah!

"RSCamaro" ranted and screamed like a girl in message news: snipped-for-privacy@news.verizon.net...

Let me see now - The first nasty word in the string was when "TheSnoMan" wrote "That is pure BS, 30 MPG on a trip with a Monte." Well RSCamaro, that may not be name calling, but it sure is inflammatory. My "Bozo" comment followed that comment, if you care to be honest.

Uh, RSCamaro, that's what I did, long before aarcuda69062 entered the fray.

Yes RSCamaro, schools in Canada do teach us that the best defense is a good offense. I know that no-one in the U.S. would leap before they looked. (for weapons of mass destruction)

Now that's a contradictory comment, if ever I saw one. Read your next comment to see why.

I find them entertaining too Ron.

no matter how immature the comments.

You've proven that!

So, BS, MS and PhD would be really, really, really inflammatory, right?

Doesn't matter whether -he- cares to be honest. You've already proven yourself incapable.

Interestingly, it was -you- stingray who neglected to substantiate your comments.

But not long before you chose to start calling people "Bozo."

When I entered the "fray" is immaterial.

So you admit to being offensive.

looks like Red Herring season has started in Canada.

Not contradictory at all. He's referencing that your original post was BS, the rest of your back pedaling, rationalizing and offers of Red Herrings are entertaining. I agree!

Would that include the ones that you originated?

As have you.

If you do decide to rebuild it, be sure if the block is over-bored

0.030 inch, that the pistons you buy are also 0.030-inch over--and just as important, be sure both dimensions are measured using *English inches*!!! Seriously, IMO, it hurts NOT the value of the car if you use a 350 to replace the tired 305. Both run regular fuel, both use a catalytic convertor, neither is going to set records being stingy on gas, and the 350 has more meat in the water-jacket area for freeze-resistance and for maybe yielding greater overall strength. It seems to me that 1977 models weren't known for surprisingly great fuel mileage; however, 11-12 mpg seems low for either 305 or 350. I'd be checking the timing elements for being out of spec. and causing such poor mpg. Both distributor timing as well as timing chain stretch can result in timing being off. As the chain wears, the timing becomes retarded and over time attempts have quite possibly been made to compensate by advancing the distributor. And as has been suggested earlier, 70-K miles seems immature for the 305 needing a total rebuild. You did not say how much oil it was burning--but you did mention the possibility of its being due to (valve) seals. I think this is a good guess, and quite possibly new valve seals with a total *cleansing* of the engine's interior, verification of proper cat. convertor action, proper distributor function(including its advance characteristics), checking the *slop* in the timing chain's operation to determine its need for replacement, and a thorough tune-up(including new quality wires, dist. cap, rotor, pcv-valve, plugs, & carb-service)--all this may please you with how much better it operates. You might be wise, though, to not expect even close to 30 mpg--either US-gal. or Imperial-gal! I have seen some quite unreal vehicles that yielded phenomenal & unexplainably good mpg(like the one S/R described), but they were definitely among the minority. Just like I've also seen vehicles perform on the other end of the economy spectrum: one I remember quite well as being the most disappointing was a low-mileage 1973 Chev half-ton, 6-cyl w/3-speed on column--no ps, no ac, no pb--truly a plain jane: it would NEVER yield over 8 mpg, driving around my rural town or driving 55 mph along a 2-lane, low traffic road, to and back from a 30-mile-away larger town. Started, ran, and performed as sweet as a 6-cyl could be expected. No leaks, no cat. conv., of course, rolled freely, adequate power, poor mpg. It was so bad, I refused to retail it in my small home-town. Wholesaled it to a dealer and even told him it was rough on gas. He called me when he got home to tell me he had to stop 3 times and put gas in it--apparently not filling it, as dealers tend to do!. (Other 2 he bought did ok, I guess.) And he lived only like 40 miles away. This was in 1975-1976 during tight gas supplies and recent price-hikes. Luck to you. s

I see, so calling someone out on a statement that they made is no better than calling someone a name? OK, I'll try to remember that.

It wasn't inflammatory at all in my opinion. They just stated that they thought that your statement was hogwash with the information that you gave them. If you stated that you were using Imperial gallons to prequalify your calculations, this thread would have been done long ago. I'm not even going to comment on the rest of your reply to me as it shows just how thin a skin you have with the need to attack anything that might make you look... Hmmm, less than the petty person you really appear to be. Maybe outside of this computer you are different, I see you that way with how and what you have typed so far.

...Ron

--

68' Camaro RS 88' Firebird Formula 00' Mustang GT Vert

I got lost for a while reading the flip/flap over that guys 74 monty getting

30mpg.

Anyway, I am in the process of dropping the oil pan (it has a crease and is leaking oil). I will inspect the rod journals and after that decide what to do about the rest of the motor. I did feel pretty strong.

I will probably eliminate the cat. It is not needed in Texas (I believe) when the car is registered as an antique.

What is your (and others) opinion of this web site and the builders results from modifying a 305 without machining the short block:

If I can get 20mpg with a base Edelbrock 2101 manifold and a 600 Edelbrock carb, I would be VERY satisfied.

Bill

I had a 73 Malibu SS 350 4 bbl & dual exhaust. Got 14.7 MPG doing a steady 55 on the NJ Turnpike,

WVK

*lol* That's too bad! You have our sympathy! Not many people would admit to owning what was arguably the ugliest Malibu ever built!