ith the propagation of crate engines over the last 30 or so years, it’s hard to believe that anyone would bother building a mild street engine from the ground up. Yet here we are, doing exactly that. Why, you may ask? Simply put, we find it to be both rewarding and challenging—two traits not typically associated with a crate engine build (unless you count the unboxing portion!). For those of us wealthy in the time department, taking a couple days (OK, weeks) to build an engine might make sense. Those of us with only a couple hours a week to spare on our project might look at the crate option with a little more regard. Either way, there is no wrong or right, just what works for you.

Something that has gained in popularity thanks to suppliers like Summit Racing stocking a myriad of options is to build an engine from the ground up using an aftermarket block, machined and ready to go. We’ve done a couple builds in the past based around these blocks with great results. Machined to a finished bore, these blocks can be mated with turnkey components without any further machine work.

During a recent conversation with our buddy Zane Cullen at Cotati Speed Shop, the discussion turned to the built-not-bought crate engine topic. We both agreed that in a shop setting, it makes perfect sense to drop a crate engine in a project vehicle when time and labor is such a precious commodity. But given the opportunity, it would be fun to build an engine from the ground up, selecting the components and fitting things together. It was decided to shift gears on one of his current projects, setting aside the GM 350/350 crate engine he’d procured, instead having us build a stroked 350 based on a Chevrolet Performance bare engine block and components from Summit Racing, with the purpose being a budget-friendly, naturally aspirated, mild street engine, in the 400hp neighborhood, similar to that 350/350 combo that Cullen had his eye on originally.

ard as it is to believe, we’re quickly approaching the 25th anniversary of the LS engine and the cultural phenomenon it established within the automotive world.

It started with the 5.7L LS1, but the architecture expanded to include a range of displacements, from 4.8L (293 ci) to 7.0L (427 ci). Most of the variants were used in trucks, with some featuring E85 capability and cylinder-deactivation technology. All told, there were more than two dozen production versions, along with even more crate engine options from Chevrolet Performance—including those built with the racing-bred, cast-iron LSX Bowtie Block.

From the lowest-output base truck engine to the supercharged LS9, each shared the core design elements that made the LS a revolution when new and continue to prove its relevancy two-and-a-half decades later. It’s been an admirably robust and durable engine, but more importantly, its capability to process air greatly expanded its performance range. It makes good torque in truck applications, but from a high-performance standpoint the LS’s airflow capability enables it to rev like no other pushrod engine before it, giving more complex multi-cam engines a run for their money on the dyno.

he big-block Chevy as we know it today was big news in 1965. The Corvette and fullsize cars debuted a replacement for the antiquated 343/409 W engines with some ancestral connections, like the crankshaft. But for the techno-engine geeks, the Rat was noteworthy for the odd valve angle cylinder heads. The 427 and its smaller-inch brother 396 both sported a set of “porcupine” heads, no-doubt offered by some journalist who made the connection between the big-block’s bizarre valve angles and that rodent with its protruding quills.

If you didn’t catch our Part I story on small-block valve angles (July ’21 issue), we’ll step back a moment to define our use of the term valve angle. This is a valve angle measured in degrees that references off of the centerline of the cylinder bore. So if we were to measure the angle of an OE big-block iron or aluminum head, we’d see there is a 26-degree angle to the intake valve from the bore centerline reference point. The stock exhaust angle is a much more vertical 17 degrees. Both valves are canted by 4 degrees in opposite directions.

Oddly, you would think that the big-block might have benefited from additional research and perhaps have utilized a taller intake valve angle, but in fact that angle is actually greater than the small-block 26 degrees versus the small-block’s 23 degrees, but the Rat sports a 4-degree tilt of both the intake and exhaust valves. In a typical wedge combustion chamber cylinder head like the small-block Chevy, the valves are arranged in a single file. But big-block cylinder head designers departed from that concept by tilting the intake valve 4 degrees toward the center of the cylinder. Actually, both the intake and exhaust valves are tilted 4 degrees but in opposite directions to enhance flow.

ot rodding is a complicated, nuanced hobby, but part of its appeal is its science. Bench racing new techniques and analyzing successes and failures make it exciting. The car community is filled with us nerds trying to find our cars’ hidden, untapped potentials.

Suspension is the occasionally overlooked area that can garner huge improvements with your worn-out muscle car, and coilovers are a modern solution to vintage problems. They replace heavy springs and shocks with a package that’s easy to install, tune, and is significantly lighter. They can make drastic changes to your car’s driving characteristics.

Coilovers are a nicely packaged piece of performance goodness, but what should you consider when purchasing, how do you adjust them, and what are their differences? We break it down from a hot-rodding perspective—a degree in fluid dynamics not necessary.

uring the ’60s Chevrolet had endured a barrage of negative publicity surrounding the Corvair (primarily due to Ralph Nader and his book Unsafe At Any Speed), but their reputation would soon be salvaged as they had decided to enter the ponycar wars. The all-new Camaro was introduced in September of 1966 to compete with Ford’s Mustang that had been introduced in April of 1964, and the 1964 Plymouth Barracuda, which debuted roughly two weeks earlier than Ford’s new offering.

The first-generation of Camaros were produced for the 1967-1969 model years and were based on GM’s F-body, rear-wheel-drive platform. For the 1967-1968 model year, the sheetmetal was unchanged, for the most part, but there were a few minor exceptions. The most obvious differences for 1968 were the new front and rear marker lights and the elimination of vent windows in the doors. Then, in 1969, a new body was introduced that looked longer and lower but still retained the appeal that had made the Camaro such a success.

While all Camaros are popular, the first-gen series remained one of the most sought-after cars in the ranks of Chevrolet fans, and every once in a while a solid original example is discovered like the one we have here. This 1969 coupe came from Texas where it had been sitting in a private collection for what was estimated to be 10-15 years. The owner didn’t know much about the car, but the body was surprisingly nice, the engine had a fresh coat of paint, but its condition was unknown (the owner couldn’t verify if it had been rebuilt) and there were a few new parts, like the A/C compressor and hoses.