[Paul Gagnon]

Lets see what you all have to say about the "other" GM engine families. Give us the low down on what it takes to get them to work in a 4x4. What are the advantages and disadvantages of running one off road.

 

[sunshineoffroad]

I would have to say that the Olds, Pontiac, Buick, and Cadillac engines are really not given the credit they deserve. they are cheap, reasonably easy to find. Problem is parts are a lil more spendy than your average small block chebby parts. I had an olds with the 455 and it was a monster. ran great, idled down to nothing, barely any problems. Also had mucho torque in low RPM. Two problems were cost to rebuild it and that sucker was HEAVY! I would run one. bgreen has a healthy Caddy big block in his truck, check out his Alaska Offroad website. I dig it!

 

[Cahdealme]

My buddy is running a 472 /caddy in his Sami. All kinds of torque!! Most big Caddy motors came with 400 behing them. Easy to adapt to a t-case. In this case he is running a divorced setup because the parts were there. The biggest downfall is the aftermarket prices. Supposedly the weight of the big caddy's is less than the 454, don't know how true it is. But the low end power is definately there!

 

[Lil'John]

I'm finishing up stuffing a 472(big block caddy) in a project rig.

The main reason I chose it over some of the others was a stock rebuild will out perform most engines. This met my goal of engine longevity for the simple fact that I don't have to do any hop ups that would decrease the engines life.

Here are a couple of numbers:
Engine W L H Weight
SB Chevy 26" 28" 27" 575lb
BB Chevy 28" 30.5" 29" 685lb
BB Cady 28" 30.5" 28" 600lb

1972 472 = [email protected] and [email protected]
500 = [email protected] and [email protected]
1977 425 = [email protected] and [email protected]

I've heard rumors of getting 15mpg+ using a BB Cady.

The "downside" of the BB Cady is the cost of parts and such. I just spent $2k to get mine rebuilt to stock specs. $900 of that was in parts(pistons, cam, etc) There is only ONE common aluminum intake available(Edlebrok @ $265ish). Recently a set of aluminum heads were created... don't recall the price.

The other downside is trannies. In order to use a manual tranny, you need to have the crank machined for a pilot bearing. Also, it used the BOP bellhousing pattern. They normally came with TH400s... but the output shaft is 19" long. Swapping shafts is fairly easy but requires complete disassembly of the tranny.

The last downside I can think of is oilpans. There is NOT an aftermarket pan available. All rearwheel drive cars used a front sump pan which isn't too desirable for use in a 4x4. The rear sump(aka El Dorado) pans are getting difficult to find and fetch around $150-$200 used.

 

[Chief yelling alot]

1972 472 = [email protected] and [email protected]
500 = [email protected] and [email protected]
1977 425 = [email protected] and [email protected]

the 425 maks 320 FLBS at 2000 RPM




I'm rebuilding a Cad 425 for my scout.

A bude had his 62 International pickup body/box sitting on a 79 Cadillac frame with the 425 and that thing was a higway truck the thing hardly broke a sweat when it came to crusing . Such a smoth engine

 

[Lil'John]

the 425 maks 320 FLBS at 2000 RPM

Just pulling the numbers from one of my resources... that is what they had at the time(Chilton) I can't make any assurances as to the accuracy of them. My second different source(thick book at library) and a third resource(Big Inch Cadillac) rates them at [email protected](efi or carb made no difference in torque... hp "jumped" to [email protected])

At least I didn't quote the 1971 and early numbers for comparison(ratings were different) but just to throw them out:
1971
472 [email protected] and [email protected]
500 [email protected] and [email protected]

Out of curiousity, where are you getting your rating?

 

[Chief yelling alot]

Out of curiousity, where are you getting your rating?

well its kida funny but also Chiltons 1979 Motors for 1980 had the same numbers
also look hear
http://100megsfree4.com/cadillac/cad1970/cad79d.htm





that tourqu rating sounds like it should be for the 368

 

[tsm1mt]

This a buddy of mine's tow-rig.

He's on his second 500 Caddy.

He also wore out the D60 rear and is now running a D70 and duals.

4-5mpg.. and with both rigs on the 30' trailer, doesn't pull up hills as fast as it used to with the single trailer (duh), and with the camper thrown in, wind sucks..

But he seems to be happy with the Cad motor, backed up by a TH400, into the (stock) divorced '205.

 

[Lil'John]

well its kida funny but also Chiltons 1979 Motors for 1980 had the same numbers
also look hear
http://100megsfree4.com/cadillac/cad1970/cad79d.htm





that tourqu rating sounds like it should be for the 368

Ahh... I see what happened then. The number I quoted was the first year of the motor. I looked at the 79 ones and they had higher numbers Odd though

 

[Chief yelling alot]

This a buddy of mine's tow-rig.

He's on his second 500 Caddy.

He also wore out the D60 rear and is now running a D70 and duals.

4-5mpg.. and with both rigs on the 30' trailer, doesn't pull up hills as fast as it used to with the single trailer (duh), and with the camper thrown in, wind sucks..

But he seems to be happy with the Cad motor, backed up by a TH400, into the (stock) divorced '205.

dude that pimpen

 

[Binder]

I agree the other GM's don't get the recognition they deserve. No 4x4 experience with them but I built and owned several Pontiacs in the past. Right cylinder head/ cam/ intake combo and those things can make a ton of power.

 

[charlo]

You gotta respect a man who runs a caddy 500(or 513). But for the money cant you get more power from the chevy stuffs.

1972 472 = [email protected] and [email protected]
500 = [email protected]pm and [email protected]
1977 425 = [email protected] and [email protected]

Chevy
89 454 = [email protected]????rpm and [email protected] or so rpm
87 350 = [email protected] and ???
I guess these numbers arent fair because of the FI but parts availablity and price make these fairly similar numbers look a bit better than the caddies numbers. The caddy takes the lead by far in the bragging rights category.


Charlo

 

[tsm1mt]

You gotta respect a man who runs a caddy 500(or 513). But for the money cant you get more power from the chevy stuffs.

Charlo

Well, that same friend with the 500 runs Chevys in most of his other stuff.. including a 14:1 454... but for some reason he opted for the 500 for his tow rig.

That said, last I heard his new tow rig is getting an IH 392. Might just be a stop over to a 6.9/7.3 though..

 

[Lil'John]

You gotta respect a man who runs a caddy 500(or 513). But for the money cant you get more power from the chevy stuffs.

Chevy
89 454 = [email protected]????rpm and [email protected] or so rpm
87 350 = [email protected] and ???
I guess these numbers arent fair because of the FI but parts availablity and price make these fairly similar numbers look a bit better than the caddies numbers. The caddy takes the lead by far in the bragging rights category.


Charlo

For a better comparison to your numbers above, lets use the EFI 500:
76 [email protected] and [email protected]

You are forgetting about two important things on the Caddy when compared to the Chevy:
1) BB Cady weighs 100lbs less than BB Chevy and maybe 25lbs more than SB Chevy
2) Quality of parts... in general, Cady engines are use better materials/design than comparible Chevy engine. A good example is the high nickle content of the BB Cady block.

Also, as I mentioned above, as you start using hi-po stuff, you decrease the longevity of an engine Not important for many but for me, I'd like to have a bit of power and NOT have to worry about when the engine will blow up.

Also, from what I've seen, availability of the performance BB Cady parts is increasing lately and the prices are just slightly more than a SB or BB Chevy. (Example headers are ~$250, aluminum heads are ~$2000, intake is ~$250, cams are ~$250)

I'm not sure there are any bragging rights assosiated with BB Cady since most don't think a Cady engine is worth a damn Good for me to find used parts, bad for me to find new parts

FWIW, once my caddy is up an running, I'm going to dyno it to get a hp/torque reading for a stock rebuild. Then again when I upgrade to an EFI system and intake.

 

[ChiScouter]

In July of 2000 Hot Rod mag did a junkyard buildup of a 500. Maybe there was some dyno trickery, but here are some of their numbers.

Basic boneyard trim
303hp @3900, [email protected]

Headers & alum intake
[email protected], [email protected]

They went further with a cam and super high compression and got a lot more. Their numbers, not mine fwiw.

Street Rod mag did a buildup using a offset ground crank, and BBC rods and a mild overbore and got 537ci. The thing had diesel like hp and torque numbers. I believe over 600lbs. Very low rpms. Doc Fromader wrote a book spelling out the whole engine. It was actually a pretty mild buildup. MTS sells a kit to build your own version.

In my view lack of headers are the biggest hassle. I am using sanderson block huggers, and while a good header, the design isn't great for my 4x4 application. Al at MTS has some nova headers that might work well, otherwise reworking BBC or ford headers is the way to go.

I believe that there are at least 2 companies marketing aftermarket rear sumps. Potter Automotive, and FlashCraft.

 

[bgreen]

From what I have read, most built caddys make so much power down low that your average dyno cant even read it. Thats why some dyno numbers seem low.


I read the following on the MTS board (someone elses build up, notice the readings start on the down trend of the torque readings. This prolly means that the peak torque is substatially higher than the best recorded torque. Pretty impressive numbers especially considering that he is using a stock intake manifold)

I had the heads machined to pro-street specs with oversize valves
I had the stock intake ported & polished for better specs.
I had the quadrajet carb rebuilt & jetted
I put in a 300T cam
I added forged rods & Pistons
I added a Stage II rocker set
I added an HEI system
The block was bored .60 over to 507 CID

RPM's Torque Horsepower
3750 525.2 375.0
4000 503.1 383.2
4250 485.7 393.0
4500 470.1 402.8
4750 442.1 399.8
5000 418.8 398.7
5250 394.8 394.6
5500 363.9 383.1
5750 326.3 357.2

 

[Cliffy [JD]]

True. Most BB Caddy engines have over 400ft lbs @ around 1200 rpms.

Here's another cool spec some of you may not have

1970 Caddy 500 (stock form)
Max HP- 400 HP
Max Torque- 550ft lbs

Also due to a change in HP ratings from GM, (went from measureing at the flywheel to the rear wheels) you should almost always add 125hp to most readings you get of engines from 1972 through 1976

 

[Chief yelling alot]

add 125hp to most readings you get of engines from 1972 through 1976

what about after 76

 

[brokentoy]

I was at this site about caddys and for the 1972 They list the gross at 400 hp and the net at 365hp. The tq number was 535. The 1970 and 1971 numbers gross were 400hp and 565 tq. Compare that to the new 8.1liter chevy at 340hp and 455 tq. And would cost a lot more to get one of those.

Bryan

 

[ZAG]

I run olds 350 68-72
it has mercedes k-jetronic and other home made stuff, works fine for me and olds engines are cheap here in finland