Noo thats wrong. The 351c4v cj was way more efficient. Its was closed chamber. 351c4v and 429scj ports were way to big. There was no carb signal. Glidden discovered this and epoxied the floors to make smaller ports, then by doing that changed the angle in. Then came the hidden angled welded tunnel rams.
@@tomhowe1510 Glidden gained well over a hundred horsepower upon raising the exhaust ports alone. Leonard Wood and Bud Moore of nascar did the same thing. Glidden was the first to create the heart shaped combustion chambers that are now standard on all hi po heads. A genius at his profession.
@@stealthbomber2127 and 1980. He was good. He was lucky Ford heads were so good but so bad. 351 CJ heads were closed chamber. Ford new Cleveland chambers pinged
A lot of good old video. I'm old enough to have attended some of the Pro Stock races back in the 70's. My favorites were the match races where Dyno Don was lethal. In regards to the exhaust plates, I recall the Ford racers using them back in the early days of the class as well. Those were my favorite Pro Stock racing years. Wheels in the air with drivers rowing through the gears with pro shifted top loaders!
By 1972 they had roller cams. My duster ran roller. Some of the cars ran roller in 1970. If you would like to talk about this. I own the national nostalgia pro stock association
Super awesome vid!! What you are saying is absolutely correct!! My junkyard 8:1 460 60’ is coming in at 1.67. Best et I believe was a 12.68@ 104 mph with 3.89 gear C-6 auto 3000 stall in 3825 lb 72 mustang. Launches with wheels up a little bit but there is no cam or head so she is out of breath around 4800 rpm.
The racing you have footage of is from the time when there was 2 mile per hour lights and a win light in the middle. If a racer lifted at the finish line they would show less MPH than when they stayed in it to the 2nd MPH trap. We all kinda knew when someone was sandbagging because of this fact.
I read Grumpy Jenkins book just recently , and it seems they had Roller Cams from the early 70s onwards.. And most things came from General Kinetics / Cam Dynamics.. Isky were also a big innovator in many classes coming up with things like rev kits and grinds that weren't as harsh on the valve train for the same performance as other grinders. Comp sponsors everything now, so they get all the kudos go figure..
I run an Isky solid roller in my Cleveland headed Windsor. I shift at 7700 and usually buzz the traps at 8000. My Ranger is 2400 lbs and runs almost 138 in the quarter. Now mine is a pump gas street truck so there's a lot of power left on the table.
Bill Jenkins 1970 Camero with the aluminum 430 inch motor put out 710 hp in 1970. His 1972 331 Vega put out 545 initially an 585 at the end of the season. By 1975 according to my issue of National Dragster analysis of Pro Stock engine development by that time the engines were 2.2 horsepower per cubic inch. By 1977 Larry Lombardo according to his words had the 331 inch Chevy putting out 653 horsepower. I think that's consistent with the low 8 second times for that era.
@@brenthill3241 glad you enjoyed it👍🏼, i can prob see the 350’ish Ci guys probably making the mid-700hp range give or take…..thanks again👍🏼 Check out my other Vid on Roush Boss 302 (290ci pro stock build) & what he says it should make, it’s a 77 article / info that i did a vid on. 👍🏼🏁
exactly c351👍🏼, don’t get me wrong a Dyno is a good tool to know what you have & for it to be applied on the track But there can be a heavier car, with less HP that does better in the 60 & et🏁 than a lighter car with more hp if that 60ft isn’t up to scratch on it….. 🤷🏻♂️🏁
Dyno's and flow benches are testing tools. Race tracks are proving grounds. What works during bench testing, doesn't necessarily work at the track. That said, we do race dyno's, Horsepower Hero's and any other dyno shoot out competitions for example. E.T. and mph only gives you the information for horsepower utilised, not for actual power produced. They can potentially be very different numbers. How many times do you see racers adjusting set setup for track conditions, be it clutch, suspension, tune, 2 step etc. An extreme example of what I am saying is to take the excellent blown Capri, do a pass on slicks, then change it to 185/60R14's and do a pass. The horsepower figures based on E.T. and mph will be significantly different, but the motor hasn't changed.
@@theshed8802 right on TS….😂185/60s haha that’s gold… nicely put👌🏼. The examples here are for yes Drag racing 1/4m at its greatest effort by individuals or teams…. Dynos & flow benches etc are of course helpful tools no doubt ,that any increase on data (blk n wht) should be looked at for any positive changes at the track also responsible in picking out what’s needed eg: Convertor, Gearing, tyre dia” etc….. But ultimately the 1/4 is a short sprint, & a lot can be told with a pass (on the serious guy) not on 185/60s 😂🤦🏻♂️, I’ve seen heavier cars (well set up) with same or less HP actually 60ft way better than a lighter car with equivalent HP that may be on the money with everything else except an adequate 60ft to suit, so a story can be told on these particular passes in where they can possibly stand in et🏁 or power being shown by at least the trap speeds….. but these early ProStockers aren’t the case in that☝🏼,they are perfect in 60ft times, gearing & crossing thru the traps at absolute peak+ rpm’s 👌🏼 & once you see their mph on the actual weight of that drag car then HP can roughly be determined 💯 hence the Moroso Calc👍🏼🏁
Thanks vrm👍🏼, it can well & truely be up to 3 times that on the end, but say 2.5 times that confidently saying. eg: 11.0 @ 1.50 60 then worked away at susp mods, hook up etc & achieved say 1.45 60 it’ll go at least 10.87et 💯 It’s pretty important that’s why racers chip away at it🤷🏻♂️🏁
I think that you are low by about 75 to 100 hp. Darin Morgan suggested high 700's. I realize that your combo has added weight of turbos, etc, but remember you are running aluminum heads, not cast iron. Two holley dominators surely weigh more than your throttle body, as well as the early cars probably running heavier wheels and tires. fuel cells, batteries, starters, fans, everything is lighter now than in the past. These early racers were making gold out of cast iron, not hot air ( turbos).
Yes , so across the 10yr period with Cleveland ProStock I’ve mentioned here & on other vids/posts that going off the weight class & trap speeds etc that they’re probably started making high 500’s (580’ish)hp early 70s & probably topped out at 750’ish by late 70s/early 80s……. This is going off the information i can see & read & based off my own experiences (30yrs) i have with racing, power to weight, Cleveland’s etc🤷🏻♂️ When someone finds me an actual Dyno result of an early “true Cleveland”ProStock engine that’ll be great? It’s only been speculation otherwise. People love to have high hp figures thrown around, makes it feel cooler…….but unfortunately Stats can show a lot if your experienced at it. & also it’s different if building a replica “ProStock” Cleveland of today, all the little things today to make up that combination & completion are better, lighter & more efficient compared to an actual 70s combination…….. Things like bearings, valve spring’s, piston rings, Oils, etc….. even a modern take on a replica ProStock built Cleveland should show 50+hp compared to if it were actually the 70s versions…… It is what it is 🤷🏻♂️🏁
@@69JANKS Appreciate your answer, but when I read the NHRA rules and the magazine articles from the time, Bob Glidden's Clevelands were 332 to 340 cubes..so de-stroked. The rules were 7 pounds per cube, but Glidden's Pinto was penalized 300 lbs. plugging the Pinto's stats into the HP ET calculator gives 725 hp for the Glidden Cleveland in 1973, and 769 in 1974. Glidden's Fairlane in the late 70's was only penalized 150 lbs, so the ET HP calculator shows 805 HP. Trap speed was slower than expected because the Fairlane was shaped like a brick. Of course this was not a regular Cleveland but a destroked machine whose cylinder heads had days of welding done.
@@kidsteach938 yes check out my Community Post on this☝🏼, the penalty was more so for Cleveland powered “short wheelbase” (pinto) , so there’s an advantage on hard hitting 60ft times achieved being shorter wheelbase Everything is relevant…… then you gotta factor in the ET alongside its MPH & see what the moroso-calc tells also especially at around 2300lb (Lenco backed) Like I’ve said, look at combinations now & compare, i know I’ve gone 151.3mph, 3050lb & it’s 800hp🤷🏻♂️ Imagine adding 700lb to them they’ll barely do 140mph & mid-9s….. Check out some of my other vids on this, even the Aussie ProStock vid of mine “ShotGun” Cleveland powered doing 8.8s et & surprisingly the commentary even states the power they’re making🤷🏻♂️ It’s just power to weight at the end👍🏼🏁
@@69JANKS "Like I’ve said, look at combinations now & compare, i know I’ve gone 151.3mph, 3050lb & it’s 800hp" I understand, but tracks are better today...tires hook better, chassis hook better, lubricants are better, and even the track measuring equipment is more accurate. Please don't think of Bob Glidden as a racer. He dominated for a year with a Mopar/hemi car. Different engine, different chassis. Glidden is better remembered as a 1970's version of Kaase...who can dominate Engine Masters with almost any engine, and competitors a decade later struggle to match his results. I51 at 3050 lbs is amazing btw. Thanks for keeping an amazing engine in the spotlight.
…it doesn’t matter what scale your dyno uses the principle is to tune the engine for the range it works in, comparing numbers is like comparing grandmothers……….
@@69JANKS …people way before you were born used a screwdriver to tune cars, and few of them were the same, some were better than others. To make an arbitrary scale to compare yourself to means nothing. A true experiment requires the use of the same tool, in this case it’s impossible, so you use the tool you have to your advantage…..
I asked Tim Halstead what he thought those prostock clevos were making back then he said about 840hp, I was thinking About 7to750🤔I guess we will never really know😉
Look at it this way DN, Tim has a very stout “drag combination” & it’s a 408ci, alloy A3 high port style heads(Daren Morgan prepped) latest & greatest Carb induction & Cam valve train gear etc & it made 775hp on the best race fuel & 8000rpm & this is all 2023 times…That there should say it all……it’s not 50yrs back man😕🤦🏻♂️but ppl still wanna think they made 840+hp lol You can’t compare a filled intake iron 4V with Hi-Port plates to an all out A3 alloy, because that’s what an A3 is…….an all revised alloy (4V ProStock style head) 🤷🏻♂️🏁
The professor hated when Bob Glidden would whoop him in a race, what a sore looser that dude was, he really didn't like Bob I don't care what anyone says about that
Both men hated to lose and were passionate about winning. I'm sure the relationship warmed a bit after Bob retired. If I recall, Glidden seemed to get along with David Reher, as well as any of his competitors.
@@rotorr22 Bob made it plain in all the interviews and articles I've seen where the subject came up: He respected RMS and always said they were his toughest competition. WJ? Um, a couple of backhanded compliments you would give any decent competitor is all I remember hearing him say about Johnson. I never liked Johnson as a person, from interviews and articles I've seen through the years, but even I will admit that he, like Glidden and any other fierce competitor, never eased off, never ceased trying to beat his own best, as well as everyone else.
@@rotorr22 yeah Janks Bob Glidden got along with all those G.M. guys, including David Reher, and Lee Shepard, I don't think Buddy Morrison cared too much about Bob though, maybe iam wrong but I don't think so😀
"The Professor" was planty sharp, but had more than a bit of attitude - and was an absolute snob. Pretty much thought he was better than everyone else, and he despised Bob Glidden, who was probably the most down to earth guy in Pro/Stock.
Авто/Мото
![Chk Chk Boom - Stray Kids ストレイキッズ 스트레이 키즈 [Music Bank] | KBS WORLD TV 240719](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/63QPwqCRGcw/mqdefault.jpg)
The 351C, Boss 351 cylinder heads were some of the most highly efficient heads of all time.
Noo thats wrong. The 351c4v cj was way more efficient. Its was closed chamber. 351c4v and 429scj ports were way to big. There was no carb signal. Glidden discovered this and epoxied the floors to make smaller ports, then by doing that changed the angle in. Then came the hidden angled welded tunnel rams.
@@tomhowe1510 Glidden gained well over a hundred horsepower upon raising the exhaust ports alone. Leonard Wood and Bud Moore of nascar did the same thing. Glidden was the first to create the heart shaped combustion chambers that are now standard on all hi po heads. A genius at his profession.
@@stealthbomber2127 1979 1980
@@tomhowe1510 Bob ran the Arrow in 79 and dominated with it also. Leonard Wood was raising the exhaust ports in 74.
@@stealthbomber2127 and 1980. He was good. He was lucky Ford heads were so good but so bad. 351 CJ heads were closed chamber. Ford new Cleveland chambers pinged
A lot of good old video. I'm old enough to have attended some of the Pro Stock races back in the 70's. My favorites were the match races where Dyno Don was lethal. In regards to the exhaust plates, I recall the Ford racers using them back in the early days of the class as well. Those were my favorite Pro Stock racing years. Wheels in the air with drivers rowing through the gears with pro shifted top loaders!
72 and 73 they had roller cams and they did run dominator carbs
👍🏼🏁
By 1972 they had roller cams. My duster ran roller. Some of the cars ran roller in 1970. If you would like to talk about this. I own the national nostalgia pro stock association
That’s cool thanks for sharing 👍🏼🏁
Super awesome vid!!
What you are saying is absolutely correct!! My junkyard 8:1 460 60’ is coming in at 1.67. Best et I believe was a 12.68@ 104 mph with 3.89 gear C-6 auto 3000 stall in 3825 lb 72 mustang. Launches with wheels up a little bit but there is no cam or head so she is out of breath around 4800 rpm.
Thanks RN👍🏼, wow that’s actually a very good et & even 60ft 👌🏼🏁
The racing you have footage of is from the time when there was 2 mile per hour lights and a win light in the middle. If a racer lifted at the finish line they would show less MPH than when they stayed in it to the 2nd MPH trap. We all kinda knew when someone was sandbagging because of this fact.
I read Grumpy Jenkins book just recently , and it seems they had Roller Cams from the early 70s onwards.. And most things came from General Kinetics / Cam Dynamics.. Isky were also a big innovator in many classes coming up with things like rev kits and grinds that weren't as harsh on the valve train for the same performance as other grinders. Comp sponsors everything now, so they get all the kudos go figure..
right on C.U.F thanks for sharing 👍🏼🏁
I run an Isky solid roller in my Cleveland headed Windsor. I shift at 7700 and usually buzz the traps at 8000. My Ranger is 2400 lbs and runs almost 138 in the quarter. Now mine is a pump gas street truck so there's a lot of power left on the table.
Bill Jenkins 1970 Camero with the aluminum 430 inch motor put out 710 hp in 1970.
His 1972 331 Vega put out 545 initially an 585 at the end of the season.
By 1975 according to my issue of National Dragster analysis of Pro Stock engine development by that time the engines were 2.2 horsepower per cubic inch.
By 1977 Larry Lombardo according to his words had the 331 inch Chevy putting out 653 horsepower.
I think that's consistent with the low 8 second times for that era.
Sounds reasonable & on the money, thanks for sharing 👍🏼🏁
I enjoyed the video.
On reflection I think Larry Lombardo's engine was a 350 not a 331 as I stated.
@@brenthill3241 glad you enjoyed it👍🏼,
i can prob see the 350’ish Ci guys probably making the mid-700hp range give or take…..thanks again👍🏼
Check out my other Vid on Roush Boss 302 (290ci pro stock build) & what he says it should make, it’s a 77 article / info that i did a vid on. 👍🏼🏁
Spot on
I think a mclaren675lt is trapping at 143 mph, but taking a high 9 to cover the 1/4 mile
👍🏼🏁
My 77 Mustang II weighs 2450 lbs on the scale with a bored and stroked 302. They are very light cars.
Exactly, thanks for sharing some light 👍🏼🏁
That’s insane.
The scales and MPH show the real HP of an engine period ! We dont race dynos.
exactly c351👍🏼, don’t get me wrong a Dyno is a good tool to know what you have & for it to be applied on the track
But there can be a heavier car, with less HP that does better in the 60 & et🏁 than a lighter car with more hp if that 60ft isn’t up to scratch on it….. 🤷🏻♂️🏁
That's forsure👍🏻
Dyno's and flow benches are testing tools. Race tracks are proving grounds. What works during bench testing, doesn't necessarily work at the track. That said, we do race dyno's, Horsepower Hero's and any other dyno shoot out competitions for example. E.T. and mph only gives you the information for horsepower utilised, not for actual power produced. They can potentially be very different numbers. How many times do you see racers adjusting set setup for track conditions, be it clutch, suspension, tune, 2 step etc. An extreme example of what I am saying is to take the excellent blown Capri, do a pass on slicks, then change it to 185/60R14's and do a pass. The horsepower figures based on E.T. and mph will be significantly different, but the motor hasn't changed.
@@theshed8802 right on TS….😂185/60s haha that’s gold… nicely put👌🏼. The examples here are for yes Drag racing 1/4m at its greatest effort by individuals or teams…. Dynos & flow benches etc are of course helpful tools no doubt ,that any increase on data (blk n wht) should be looked at for any positive changes at the track also responsible in picking out what’s needed eg: Convertor, Gearing, tyre dia” etc…..
But ultimately the 1/4 is a short sprint, & a lot can be told with a pass (on the serious guy) not on 185/60s 😂🤦🏻♂️, I’ve seen heavier cars (well set up) with same or less HP actually 60ft way better than a lighter car with equivalent HP that may be on the money with everything else except an adequate 60ft to suit, so a story can be told on these particular passes in where they can possibly stand in et🏁 or power being shown by at least the trap speeds….. but these early ProStockers aren’t the case in that☝🏼,they are perfect in 60ft times, gearing & crossing thru the traps at absolute peak+ rpm’s 👌🏼 & once you see their mph on the actual weight of that drag car then HP can roughly be determined 💯 hence the Moroso Calc👍🏼🏁
Awesome Janks! how much is a .10 quicker in the 60' worth on the big end ET wise?
Thanks vrm👍🏼, it can well & truely be up to 3 times that on the end, but say 2.5 times that confidently saying.
eg: 11.0 @ 1.50 60 then worked away at susp mods, hook up etc & achieved say 1.45 60 it’ll go at least 10.87et 💯
It’s pretty important that’s why racers chip away at it🤷🏻♂️🏁
@@69JANKS thanks!
@@vrm86gt 👍🏼
Lighter weights, huge rears, flywheel weights ?, head work up the yahoo, destrokers, lencos, good stock modifieds imo, ....but then there's buddy....😎
Bob Gliden would know if anyone did.
I think that you are low by about 75 to 100 hp. Darin Morgan suggested high 700's. I realize that your combo has added weight of turbos, etc, but remember you are running aluminum heads, not cast iron. Two holley dominators surely weigh more than your throttle body, as well as the early cars probably running heavier wheels and tires. fuel cells, batteries, starters, fans, everything is lighter now than in the past. These early racers were making gold out of cast iron, not hot air ( turbos).
Yes , so across the 10yr period with Cleveland ProStock I’ve mentioned here & on other vids/posts that going off the weight class & trap speeds etc that they’re probably started making high 500’s (580’ish)hp early 70s & probably topped out at 750’ish by late 70s/early 80s……. This is going off the information i can see & read & based off my own experiences (30yrs) i have with racing, power to weight, Cleveland’s etc🤷🏻♂️
When someone finds me an actual Dyno result of an early “true Cleveland”ProStock engine that’ll be great? It’s only been speculation otherwise. People love to have high hp figures thrown around, makes it feel cooler…….but unfortunately Stats can show a lot if your experienced at it.
& also it’s different if building a replica “ProStock” Cleveland of today, all the little things today to make up that combination & completion are better, lighter & more efficient compared to an actual 70s combination……..
Things like bearings, valve spring’s, piston rings, Oils, etc….. even a modern take on a replica ProStock built Cleveland should show 50+hp compared to if it were actually the 70s versions……
It is what it is 🤷🏻♂️🏁
@@69JANKS Appreciate your answer, but when I read the NHRA rules and the magazine articles from the time, Bob Glidden's Clevelands were 332 to 340 cubes..so de-stroked. The rules were 7 pounds per cube, but Glidden's Pinto was penalized 300 lbs. plugging the Pinto's stats into the HP ET calculator gives 725 hp for the Glidden Cleveland in 1973, and 769 in 1974. Glidden's Fairlane in the late 70's was only penalized 150 lbs, so the ET HP calculator shows 805 HP. Trap speed was slower than expected because the Fairlane was shaped like a brick. Of course this was not a regular Cleveland but a destroked machine whose cylinder heads had days of welding done.
@@kidsteach938 yes check out my Community Post on this☝🏼, the penalty was more so for Cleveland powered “short wheelbase” (pinto) , so there’s an advantage on hard hitting 60ft times achieved being shorter wheelbase
Everything is relevant…… then you gotta factor in the ET alongside its MPH & see what the moroso-calc tells also especially at around 2300lb (Lenco backed)
Like I’ve said, look at combinations now & compare, i know I’ve gone 151.3mph, 3050lb & it’s 800hp🤷🏻♂️
Imagine adding 700lb to them they’ll barely do 140mph & mid-9s…..
Check out some of my other vids on this, even the Aussie ProStock vid of mine “ShotGun” Cleveland powered doing 8.8s et & surprisingly the commentary even states the power they’re making🤷🏻♂️
It’s just power to weight at the end👍🏼🏁
@@69JANKS "Like I’ve said, look at combinations now & compare, i know I’ve gone 151.3mph, 3050lb & it’s 800hp" I understand, but tracks are better today...tires hook better, chassis hook better, lubricants are better, and even the track measuring equipment is more accurate. Please don't think of Bob Glidden as a racer. He dominated for a year with a Mopar/hemi car. Different engine, different chassis. Glidden is better remembered as a 1970's version of Kaase...who can dominate Engine Masters with almost any engine, and competitors a decade later struggle to match his results. I51 at 3050 lbs is amazing btw. Thanks for keeping an amazing engine in the spotlight.
@@kidsteach938 right on👌🏼 thanks for tuning in I appreciate it 👍🏼🏁
…it doesn’t matter what scale your dyno uses the principle is to tune the engine for the range it works in, comparing numbers is like comparing grandmothers……….
Yes tuning tools really, but Dyno calibration should be universally even & right…..the results it’s spits out does count at the end of the day💯🏁
@@69JANKS …people way before you were born used a screwdriver to tune cars, and few of them were the same, some were better than others. To make an arbitrary scale to compare yourself to means nothing. A true experiment requires the use of the same tool, in this case it’s impossible, so you use the tool you have to your advantage…..
@@ltv..123 right on LTV , thanks for sharing 👍🏼🏁
Thanks 69Janks
Your welcome brother 👍🏼🏁
I don't know what they made but they definitely had enough to make the GM guys wish they had more
💯🏁
That shows how much you don't know.
Bill Jenkins and Lee shepherd Beat the hell out of them all the time.
600-800hp buddy and haven't even watched the video lol
Thanks for tuning in 👍🏼🏁
I asked Tim Halstead what he thought those prostock clevos were making back then he said about 840hp, I was thinking About 7to750🤔I guess we will never really know😉
@@danonoveh8114 i think you & i are on the same page lol🏁, HP must be a little happier over there🤷🏻♂️🏁
Look at it this way DN, Tim has a very stout “drag combination” & it’s a 408ci, alloy A3 high port style heads(Daren Morgan prepped) latest & greatest Carb induction & Cam valve train gear etc & it made 775hp on the best race fuel & 8000rpm & this is all 2023 times…That there should say it all……it’s not 50yrs back man😕🤦🏻♂️but ppl still wanna think they made 840+hp lol
You can’t compare a filled intake iron 4V with Hi-Port plates to an all out A3 alloy, because that’s what an A3 is…….an all revised alloy (4V ProStock style head) 🤷🏻♂️🏁
@@69JANKS I think you guys make the most horses with those clevos mate👍🏻😀
The professor hated when Bob Glidden would whoop him in a race, what a sore looser that dude was, he really didn't like Bob I don't care what anyone says about that
Both men hated to lose and were passionate about winning. I'm sure the relationship warmed a bit after Bob retired. If I recall, Glidden seemed to get along with David Reher, as well as any of his competitors.
@@rotorr22 Bob made it plain in all the interviews and articles I've seen where the subject came up: He respected RMS and always said they were his toughest competition. WJ? Um, a couple of backhanded compliments you would give any decent competitor is all I remember hearing him say about Johnson.
I never liked Johnson as a person, from interviews and articles I've seen through the years, but even I will admit that he, like Glidden and any other fierce competitor, never eased off, never ceased trying to beat his own best, as well as everyone else.
@@rotorr22 yeah Janks Bob Glidden got along with all those G.M. guys, including David Reher, and Lee Shepard, I don't think Buddy Morrison cared too much about Bob though, maybe iam wrong but I don't think so😀
Oh Iam also looking for a funnel web intake for 4v clevo mate!🤔
"The Professor" was planty sharp, but had more than a bit of attitude - and was an absolute snob.
Pretty much thought he was better than everyone else, and he despised Bob Glidden, who was probably the most down to earth guy in Pro/Stock.