Thanks for all of the input. I Considered running a thicker 15/40 but the truck has such high oil pressure as it is, I hate to increase it more. At warm idle its about 30 and any throttle it jumps up to peg the gauge past 60. All of my 454 have been a little noisy, lot of mechanical sounds and clacking, not sure if that's the mechanical fuel pumps, old style belt system, valvetrain or bottom ends. I have tried different oils over the years include 15/40 and the noise level has never changed, better or worse. GM recommended 10/30 factory and since its not using any oil I figured Id stay with what's recommended, especially since I don't use it as a truck, its more a pleasure vehicle on weekends just to cruise around in. It never gets worked hard, hot or loaded.
Oil Confusion - Older 73-87 Chevy 454 Engines
- Thread starter 83K30
- Start date
- Status
( pondering the thought of taking that 454 and dropping it in Chevy Nova . . . )
I was running the Rotella T5 10w30 in my previous BB 454's. Always did a great job at a nice price.
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
It's not about shear, it's about BBCs being sort of unhappy engines with sustained high rpm. In the marine industry, the idea of loading up a 30 weight into a BBC is almost hilarious. The amount of metal they shed in a short period of time is actually kind of astonishing..
In my experience, the BBC (454 with its longer stroke in particular) is a bit of a paradox, and I'e always had a love/hate relationship with it. Its got heads that are capable of supporting a huge amount of power, and the bottom end won't immediately grenade at high RPM so its an economical way (compared to most other big-blocks) to get gobs of power that will make you smile ear-to-ear. However the engine as a whole still has a very short fuse when pushed hard with stock parts (of course you can buy a "BBC" that has no GM parts left at all, and that's a different game). As you said, its just not "happy" when continually pounded. When I was a kid loading hay in summers (itchiest job on the planet, by the way), I saw a few farm truck 454s just puke their spinning parts in the grass doing stuff the Ford 390s, 460s, and Dodge 440s (and SBCs for that matter) would do all day long.
But as far as the iron they shed in UOAs... I think some of that may be the block material and rod angularity of a Chevy compared to a Mopar or Ford, but a lot of it is just characteristic of big-bore engines in general. A big-block with a 4+ inch bore on 8 cylinders still puts the iron it sheds in the same 5-7 quarts of oil as a smallblock, 6, or 4-cylinder with
Shear- again, just part of the equation when you have big bearing diameters as well as non-roller cams that smash the bejeebers out of the oil. I'll bet an Olds 455 is even a little worse than a 454 on that score because of the huge bearings and high oil shear speed for a given RPM.
It's not about shear, it's about BBCs being sort of unhappy engines with sustained high rpm. In the marine industry, the idea of loading up a 30 weight into a BBC is almost hilarious. The amount of metal they shed in a short period of time is actually kind of astonishing..
In my experience, the BBC (454 with its longer stroke in particular) is a bit of a paradox, and I'e always had a love/hate relationship with it. Its got heads that are capable of supporting a huge amount of power, and the bottom end won't immediately grenade at high RPM so its an economical way (compared to most other big-blocks) to get gobs of power that will make you smile ear-to-ear. However the engine as a whole still has a very short fuse when pushed hard with stock parts (of course you can buy a "BBC" that has no GM parts left at all, and that's a different game). As you said, its just not "happy" when continually pounded. When I was a kid loading hay in summers (itchiest job on the planet, by the way), I saw a few farm truck 454s just puke their spinning parts in the grass doing stuff the Ford 390s, 460s, and Dodge 440s (and SBCs for that matter) would do all day long.
But as far as the iron they shed in UOAs... I think some of that may be the block material and rod angularity of a Chevy compared to a Mopar or Ford, but a lot of it is just characteristic of big-bore engines in general. A big-block with a 4+ inch bore on 8 cylinders still puts the iron it sheds in the same 5-7 quarts of oil as a smallblock, 6, or 4-cylinder with
Shear- again, just part of the equation when you have big bearing diameters as well as non-roller cams that smash the bejeebers out of the oil. I'll bet an Olds 455 is even a little worse than a 454 on that score because of the huge bearings and high oil shear speed for a given RPM.
For a pleasure truck, the 10/30 will be more than sufficient.
440: The Mopar B/RB engines sure do seem a lot more comfortable with the larger end of the rpm range. Very unusual for a big block, but not all that surprising given the engine design. Chrysler really put a lot of thought into that design. Compare it to the BBC and it looks really intelligent.
Shaft mount rockers, external oil pump, dry intake manifold, cartridge oil pump, front mount distributor.
The geometry of the engine was always very friendly to high rpm as well. Those 440 TNT engines would spool out all day long, with a conventional 440 bottom end. Same goes for the Six Pack. The short stroke 383 laughed at high rpm as well.
Where the Ford 390 was concerned, I don't think any of the FE engines ever had a problem revving out. We all know there were plenty of seriously high rpm FE engines built using traditional geometry in the bottom end.
I think to a certain extent, the BBC suffers from valve train stress as well. Those off kilter angles the pushrods have don't like big rpm either. Seen a decent amount of busted valve springs too, usually the forward intake valves. They should really stay at or below 4000 rpm constant, and never more than 4600 rpm intermittent from the factory.
The big bores and bearings are a good point, but it is worth mentioning the marine versions run 8-10 quarts. We have brought the iron levels down appreciably by using stouter oils, but does not ever match the small blocks.
I've driven the older Chrysler and Ford big block marine engines, and I felt they were better engines. Especially the high-nickel Ford 428. That thing is a scary beast, but most 428's were.
But of course the BBC is still a darn good engine when doing almost anything, but for dedicated high rpm, it's more comfortable with some key mods. It's undeniably the king of mod big blocks as well.
440: The Mopar B/RB engines sure do seem a lot more comfortable with the larger end of the rpm range. Very unusual for a big block, but not all that surprising given the engine design. Chrysler really put a lot of thought into that design. Compare it to the BBC and it looks really intelligent.
Shaft mount rockers, external oil pump, dry intake manifold, cartridge oil pump, front mount distributor.
The geometry of the engine was always very friendly to high rpm as well. Those 440 TNT engines would spool out all day long, with a conventional 440 bottom end. Same goes for the Six Pack. The short stroke 383 laughed at high rpm as well.
Where the Ford 390 was concerned, I don't think any of the FE engines ever had a problem revving out. We all know there were plenty of seriously high rpm FE engines built using traditional geometry in the bottom end.
I think to a certain extent, the BBC suffers from valve train stress as well. Those off kilter angles the pushrods have don't like big rpm either. Seen a decent amount of busted valve springs too, usually the forward intake valves. They should really stay at or below 4000 rpm constant, and never more than 4600 rpm intermittent from the factory.
The big bores and bearings are a good point, but it is worth mentioning the marine versions run 8-10 quarts. We have brought the iron levels down appreciably by using stouter oils, but does not ever match the small blocks.
I've driven the older Chrysler and Ford big block marine engines, and I felt they were better engines. Especially the high-nickel Ford 428. That thing is a scary beast, but most 428's were.
But of course the BBC is still a darn good engine when doing almost anything, but for dedicated high rpm, it's more comfortable with some key mods. It's undeniably the king of mod big blocks as well.
A hot BBC is the cheapest ci/$ big block on the planet
I don't say they will live 125,000 miles being spun up to 6,500 night after night, but while they are together, they will run
And they can go 7,500 with serious coin in the valve gear ... But we are talking almost home down payment money here
I don't say they will live 125,000 miles being spun up to 6,500 night after night, but while they are together, they will run
And they can go 7,500 with serious coin in the valve gear ... But we are talking almost home down payment money here
Originally Posted By: BrocLuno
A hot BBC is the cheapest ci/$ big block on the planet
I don't say they will live 125,000 miles being spun up to 6,500 night after night, but while they are together, they will run
Yep. The heads can very cheaply make enough power to eventually blow the bottom end all over the pavement
BBC's are a lot of fun, no question about that.
A hot BBC is the cheapest ci/$ big block on the planet
I don't say they will live 125,000 miles being spun up to 6,500 night after night, but while they are together, they will run
Yep. The heads can very cheaply make enough power to eventually blow the bottom end all over the pavement
BBC's are a lot of fun, no question about that.- Status
Similar threads
