The 3970010 Block [Archive] - Chevy Nova Forum

: The 3970010 Block


FST_FWD
26th-October-2010, 12:25 AM
Getting into the tear down on the engine that came in the car. It is a 3970010 four bolt block which sounds like it was produced from 69-79. It appears to be a higher nickel block as it has the 010 casted behind the timing chain cover and the back of the block above the crankshaft flywheel flange.
Be nice to know what year it was casted. I have 3 E 17 on the right side between the frost plugs. Would that be 1973 May 17 ?
Can anyone confirm this as correct?

infotom
26th-October-2010, 01:12 AM
I have the same numbers and I think mine is out of a 79 chev. truck, but I haven't pulled the numbers off the side of the block. I'm pretty sure it is 79 because the numbers on the heads tell me it is 79 and it looks like the motor has never been apart.

bowtie0069
26th-October-2010, 01:48 AM
010 blocks can be 2 or 4 bolt mains from several years, but I have yet to see any actual proof of the "high nickel" fairy tale. Are all the numbers missing from the front of the block?

veno
26th-October-2010, 09:44 AM
on the bell housing mounting flange on top of the block next to the lifter valley end wall.. opposite the casting number there will be a cast in sequence...

like... b 26 9 or some such thing...

A=JAN.
B=FEB.
C=MARCH
D=APRIL
E=MAY
F=JUNE
G=JULY
H=AUG
I=SEPT.
J=OCT.
K=NOV
L=DEC.


Next sequence is day of the month

last sequence is year

veno
26th-October-2010, 10:05 AM
as for the High Nickel block... I read back in in the late 1970's in "HOT ROD MAG, OR CC, OR SS&D OR SOME OTHER RAGE SHEET... that a series of numbers behind the timing cover and and some where else would be the content of two elements, tin and nickel. the first number was to be tin the second was nickel, if only one number was present it was the nickel content.

so a block cast with 10 / 20 was 10% tin and 20% nickel, if it was 10 /10 the numbers were reflective, if only a 10, then it was only the nickel content...


I have see this High nickel block thing argued till the cows come home.. the only way to resolve this would be through testing.. either element make up or a brinnel test.... so to save argument I never bring up the block elements....

Like wise I also read in the rag sheets, that the 307 block was not as hard, in other words in had reduced tin and nickel as compared to the standard block... and were prone to cylinder bore wear more so.. and I do recall a ton of smoking 307's but were they any more or less that any other CI?

only testing will confirm or belay till then I neither affirm nore deny the existance of such..

But I will say I look for the 10/20 350 blocks... does that prove anything? no just makes me feel better:D


if some one would like to invest in a portable tester...

http://www.indentec.com/Resources/item7a1ae.jpeg


EDIT.... the Quote "higher tin/nickel blocks were used in heavy duty trucks and SHP engines".. the extra tin and nickel provided a more rigid block and harder cylinder bores for increased load and longevity according to the rag sheet I was reading...

veno
26th-October-2010, 11:28 AM
it would seem that david vizard and and Mark Edmund both agree to the Nickel content...(true)

I googled "350 high nickel block"
and found may a naysayer and yeasayer.. but I found this most interesting on Nastyz page its from a Claimed foundry worker during the time.. here is his take

http://www.nastyz28.com/forum/showpost.php?p=71341&postcount=12 and I do disagree on the cast stamps that cant be changed...cause I have one BBC that proves fun at the foundry is possible....

this is published on NastyZ28's site
Q: What is a Bowtie, or heavy duty (nickle) block and do I have one?

A: Tin and nickel are two metals that are commonly alloyed with cast iron to improve durability, hardness and heat dissipation. Some production engine blocks have the numbers "010", "020" or both cast into their front face, just above the main bearing bore. (The timing cover must be removed for these numbers to be visible.) If both numbers are present, one about the other, it indicates that the block alloy contains 10% tin and 20% nickel. A single number, either a "010" or "020" represents the amount of nickel and indicates negligible amounts of tin. No numbers, other than the casting numbers that are typically found beneath the timing cover, translates to only minor amounts of tin and nickel being present in the block alloy.

However, cylinder wall thickness is the overridering consideration - and a block with no tin or nickel and thick cylinder walls is generally preferable to a high nickel block with thin walls.

I also did a google search "david vizard high nickel blocks" turned up some interesting stuff to...

but to resolve this....

buy one of these
http://www.niton.com/Metal-and-Alloy-Analysis/Metal-Analysis/metal-video-app.aspx?sflang=en

as with any foundry the metallurgical content of the castings will vary by batch poured... powered metal has alleviated that as it can be weighed before batching, each element can be positively controlled as to volume by weight.. guaranteeing consistency to .01%

I have neither see proof that the content is true or false from an authoritative source.. no one can offer documentation either way...

FST_FWD
27th-October-2010, 09:27 PM
010 blocks can be 2 or 4 bolt mains from several years, but I have yet to see any actual proof of the "high nickel" fairy tale. Are all the numbers missing from the front of the block?

Numbers on the front deck (stamped) K05 22 TJC forward of the right bank head. But seem to correlate with nothing.

This block is clean and stripped on an engine stand. Rotate it and can find nothing except whats between the frost plugs on the right side.
Where the 3970010 is cast it just has a GM id above it and to the right of the number it has K 11 but thats it.
Seems to be a bit of an oddball.

As far as the 010 behind the timing chain there is a larger number 2 just above it but with no zeros.
The higher nickel/tin is what I found in trying to research this block casting on the internet. And yes there seems to be arguments for and against it. I have heard some Asian manufacturers have used higher nickle alloys in some of their engines however.

Looked up block casting identification prior to the post of this thread but it left me scratching my noggin. Same info that Veno has offered here. Don't look like it wants to surrender any information.

Maybe the 3 E 17 sequence between the frost plugs was put into this casting in the wrong order. On the block it is cast upside down so maybe it is possibly 17 E 3.

Casted 3:00 PM on a friday afternoon prior to the start of two weeks vacation maybe. Looks like I'll never know for sure?

Thanks for the help guys.

veno
27th-October-2010, 10:24 PM
if that is the suffix TJC

it equates to



Drum roll please...........




TJC = year 1973 ci= 350 HP=160 4 BBL application = conv.cab

bowtie0069
28th-October-2010, 02:30 AM
Built at St. Catherines, Ontario May 22 for a 73 truck.:)

fasteddie
28th-October-2010, 03:09 PM
My 350 010 block has the 010 020 behind the timing cover and came from the factory as a 2 bolt main, I have added billet 4 bolt splayed caps to correct that issue!:D

FST_FWD
28th-October-2010, 09:50 PM
Hmmmm.... My head ain't wrapping around this thing so I'll take you (words) on it.
So I'll say four bolt is cool, hopefully the 461 heads which I'm tearing down this weekend show no signs of cracking.

Hey this thing is all old school.:rolleyes:

stock z/28
30th-October-2010, 10:36 AM
I always find that 010 with 020 stuff interesting, but I have never seen any evidence of extra hardness, with a tester (rockwell with a specific test with a wilson tester or an Ames tester) or machining them for that matter.


There are also many variations of 010 blocks and in my opinion some are superior to others, if you are looking for a performance application.

Paul Wright
30th-October-2010, 10:55 AM
We have a thread on the myth of the high nickle block in Best of PT. Too little nickle and the block is soft. Too much nickle wears out tooling and drives up production costs. GM works real hard to optimize production costs down to the penny when dealing with volumes in the millions of units.
I verified this when I was down at Callies taking the tour. They CNC cranks and they have to balance cutter speed vs. output. If they cut too fast it wears out cutters and is hard on the machine. If they cut too slow they don't get as many parts.

By the same token, GM knows what the best block alloy is for production purposes and doesn't monkey with the recipe.
Because of that, the 010 block is probably the most common block you can find and isn't some rare object made out of unobtainium.
Ask yourself this: If there is a "high nickle" block, does that mean there's a "low nickle" block and why would they make one? If so, show me one.

FST_FWD
30th-October-2010, 11:51 AM
isn't some rare object made out of unobtainium.


That is reassuring to know because when the forces went in and blew the hell out of that giant tree I just about cried. Seriously!

stock z/28
30th-October-2010, 04:11 PM
We have a thread on the myth of the high nickle block in Best of PT. Too little nickle and the block is soft. Too much nickle wears out tooling and drives up production costs. GM works real hard to optimize production costs down to the penny when dealing with volumes in the millions of units.
I verified this when I was down at Callies taking the tour. They CNC cranks and they have to balance cutter speed vs. output. If they cut too fast it wears out cutters and is hard on the machine. If they cut too slow they don't get as many parts.

By the same token, GM knows what the best block alloy is for production purposes and doesn't monkey with the recipe.
Because of that, the 010 block is probably the most common block you can find and isn't some rare object made out of unobtainium.
Ask yourself this: If there is a "high nickle" block, does that mean there's a "low nickle" block and why would they make one? If so, show me one.


Hi Paul,

Im not sure there are not better production blocks in regard to metallurgy of the block.

I have seen some blocks that I think are better than others.

If I had to make an example I would have to say some of the 010 blocks from 60 series style trucks, and/or some of the Taxi-Police vehicle blocks appear to be a very different casting. I have several of these I have "saved" over the years.

My opinions are basically about the 020 designation.

71SS427
2nd-December-2010, 07:53 PM
In my vast experience have found that the SHP and SOME 350 4 bolt truck blocks have the 10/20 casting marks also have the # 2482 nodular main caps and bars cast into the lifter galley sides. These caps have a darker color and are cast with 2482 on them. I have an original 1970 4 bolt LT1 Block with the 2482 main caps and the bars in the lifter galley and the 10/20 designation and steel crank. I also have a 1972 truck block out of a C20 truck, same block, but cast crank.
I have 1971 C60 truck short block with steel crank and 10/20 and no bars in lifter galley or no 2482 main caps.
So if you want the ultimate OEM 350 block, look for 2482 main caps, bars in the lifter galley and 10/20 cast into the timing chain area. I believe it is also cast into the bellhousing area on the rear. Look for centered lifter bores in the casting. This is a good indication of core shift.
All 400 SB blocks I ever had, also had the bars in the lifter galley, 4 and 2 bolt. But not 2482 main caps.
How about a 305 4 bolt block? Have one of those too. OEM out of a Grand Prix 1978.

taz3
2nd-December-2010, 08:03 PM
You're for real, you have a 4 bolt 305?:eek:

I know one thing, all the circle track racers are convinced you need a 010 block.:yes: I wonder if there is more to the 010 casting designation, because the blocks are found in heavier duty applications, commercial use and Vettes.
It's the same myth a 4 bolt vs 2 bolt SB, 4 bolts are weaker unless the caps a splayed.

stock z/28
4th-December-2010, 03:59 PM
In my vast experience have found that the SHP and SOME 350 4 bolt truck blocks have the 10/20 casting marks also have the # 2482 nodular main caps and bars cast into the lifter galley sides. These caps have a darker color and are cast with 2482 on them. I have an original 1970 4 bolt LT1 Block with the 2482 main caps and the bars in the lifter galley and the 10/20 designation and steel crank. I also have a 1972 truck block out of a C20 truck, same block, but cast crank.
I have 1971 C60 truck short block with steel crank and 10/20 and no bars in lifter galley or no 2482 main caps.
So if you want the ultimate OEM 350 block, look for 2482 main caps, bars in the lifter galley and 10/20 cast into the timing chain area. I believe it is also cast into the bellhousing area on the rear. Look for centered lifter bores in the casting. This is a good indication of core shift.
All 400 SB blocks I ever had, also had the bars in the lifter galley, 4 and 2 bolt. But not 2482 main caps.
How about a 305 4 bolt block? Have one of those too. OEM out of a Grand Prix 1978.

Hello,

I would really like to see a pic of that "original" 305 4 bolt block? Would be cool, I guess.

As far as the "bars" in the lifter valley goes, in my experience it seems they were on the 69-70? era blocks, maybe a little later?

In my own opinion there are several very different versions of 010 blocks that have been cast over the years. I guess there are good and bad in about all versions.

I dont buy into the 020 nickle thing.

veno
4th-December-2010, 05:41 PM
Jeff I bet you have a few scarp blocks around....

anyone know a CSI person??? send out several pieces for a Gas chromatography inspection..:D


that will settle it once and for all

stock z/28
4th-December-2010, 05:59 PM
Jeff I bet you have a few scarp blocks around....

anyone know a CSI person??? send out several pieces for a Gas chromatography inspection..:D


that will settle it once and for all

Hi Veno,

As I have mentioned before I have checked a lot of these blocks, and I have never seen any 020 cast block have any appreciable hardness advantage over another "non-020" block.

This is just my opinion, but the nature of material in blocks becomes somewhat apparent when you machine them, especially boring/honing. From my limited experience there is very little difference in stock blocks. Bow Ties are another matter, as well as most aftermarket blocks.

There are some slight differences, but I personally have never seen the 020 thing hold up.

As much as I hate to say it some Ford blocks are much harder that OE Chevrolet. (again my opinion and I apologize)

firebird69racer
4th-December-2010, 11:31 PM
I have one for you guys.
I have a 1969/300 HP/350/4 bolt/cast crank, with 014 cast under the timing cover.
Came out of a 69 Camaro.
I was told back in the early 70's that the 014 and 016 blocks were the hi tin alloy blocks?
It also came with 041 heads with an X on the bottom of the intake port. But it only had 1.94 intake valves.

I have never seen a block with a 10/20 cast under the timing cover. Just 010/014/016.

bracketchev1221
6th-December-2010, 01:04 PM
Mine has the 010/020 under the timing cover. And on the side it has cast in, going back in no matter what cuz I don't have money for anything else!!!:D

stock z/28
6th-December-2010, 01:12 PM
I have one for you guys.
I have a 1969/300 HP/350/4 bolt/cast crank, with 014 cast under the timing cover.
Came out of a 69 Camaro.
I was told back in the early 70's that the 014 and 016 blocks were the hi tin alloy blocks?
It also came with 041 heads with an X on the bottom of the intake port. But it only had 1.94 intake valves.

I have never seen a block with a 10/20 cast under the timing cover. Just 010/014/016.

I think that was a pretty common engine in 69. I think it was typically rated at 300 HP. I think that casting number is what was typically used for the DZ 302 block and possibly the early 70 production LT1s?

In my opinion the 041 head is probably the best common "hump" head Chevy offered. I think it was better than the 186 head that was also used in 69-70. I personally have never seen an OE 041 with any other valve sizes than 1.5 and 1.94, but as Al says I havent seen the all.

veno
6th-December-2010, 04:04 PM
Hey jeff. I believe ya.. but I also know what was reported by hotrod, or some other rag sheet that started this mess some 35 years ago( I remember reading it).. and perpetuated by the likes of well known name engine builders... all with out fact that I can find.. however a Gas chromatograph would settle its compositional condition once and for good...

still, each batch of casting per cauldron, its make up should vary by about 1% if not as much as 10% due to measuring methods of the time...

stock z/28
6th-December-2010, 06:15 PM
Hi Veno,

I can say with out reservation that I am no metallurgist, and know "0" about it.

I have just used my own my own crude methods for my own testing.


I do have a lot of various blocks Veno, and I would be happy to provide some "pieces" for someone to test if desired.


I really dont even know what would be an "ideal" formula?

It would seem to be very dependant on the application?

Way too many variables for me to even guess what is correct.

veno
6th-December-2010, 08:35 PM
Jeff I'm not looking to do a OIL thread on blocks!:devil::doh:

woodnmetal
30th-January-2011, 08:41 PM
I have read that the 010 is used for signifying that 1 percent more tin was used to help molten metal flow unto the casting mold. the 020 indicates that 2 percent more nickle was used in this block , which helps make the cylinder barrels harder and more durable,, these blocks are highly desirable, I also have an LT1 with the 010 and 020 under the timing cover.:D

Professor Fate
30th-January-2011, 09:37 PM
I have read that the 010 is used for signifying that 1 percent more tin was used to help molten metal flow unto the casting mold. the 020 indicates that 2 percent more nickle was used in this block , which helps make the cylinder barrels harder and more durable,, these blocks are highly desirable, I also have an LT1 with the 010 and 020 under the timing cover.:D

That's the myth and until any metalurgy is produced it will remain a myth.

It's all a mythtery to me.:devil:

Paul Wright
30th-January-2011, 11:07 PM
I have read that the 010 is used for signifying that 1 percent more tin was used to help molten metal flow unto the casting mold. the 020 indicates that 2 percent more nickle was used in this block , which helps make the cylinder barrels harder and more durable,, these blocks are highly desirable, I also have an LT1 with the 010 and 020 under the timing cover.:D

It's a very old urban legend myth that the 010 and 020 means nickle content. I think Big Al found out from someone who worked at the plant it is a PN to identify the sand casting mold.

The mold is for the 3970010 and 3970020 blocks.

firebird69racer
31st-January-2011, 02:05 AM
It's a very old urban legend myth that the 010 and 020 means nickle content. I think Big Al found out from someone who worked at the plant it is a PN to identify the sand casting mold.

The mold is for the 3970010 and 3970020 blocks.

I wonder if that TV Show Mythbusters would solve this for us? :devil: :D

woodnmetal
31st-January-2011, 08:25 AM
It's a very old urban legend myth that the 010 and 020 means nickle content. I think Big Al found out from someone who worked at the plant it is a PN to identify the sand casting mold.

The mold is for the 3970010 and 3970020 blocks.

okay now,,, don't get me wrong, I really am not arguing here and don't really care about how much whatever is in the block as long as it runs..

but I have read a ton of posts on several forums about this subject, all you guys will not give an inch on this!!! I can find new books on the shelf saying the same stuff about the nickel and tin... why are you guys so not believing this...?? I am just curious to know. I have heard people that have worked at the plants know or think it is not true. I can't find any documentation saying it is not true. But I find allot saying it is true....

edit: May I add that the part number on the casting has nothing to do with it!! the 010 and the 020 under the timing chain cover is what designates the tin and nickel content I don't think they put the numbers under the timing cover for good looks

Paul Wright
31st-January-2011, 09:39 AM
okay now,,, don't get me wrong, I really am not arguing here and don't really care about how much whatever is in the block as long as it runs..

but I have read a ton of posts on several forums about this subject, all you guys will not give an inch on this!!! I can find new books on the shelf saying the same stuff about the nickel and tin... why are you guys so not believing this...?? I am just curious to know. I have heard people that have worked at the plants know or think it is not true. I can't find any documentation saying it is not true. But I find allot saying it is true....

edit: May I add that the part number on the casting has nothing to do with it!! the 010 and the 020 under the timing chain cover is what designates the tin and nickel content I don't think they put the numbers under the timing cover for good looks

The numbers under the timing cover just happen to be the same as the ones as the block casting number?
When the cast an engine there are several core pieces that are used.
Here's an example (not chevy)
http://www.225.ca/tech/images/racing/rn0003.jpg
The front end core has the number in it that corresponds to the block it is used for.
I think Al needs to get a notarized statement from his source.

woodnmetal
31st-January-2011, 09:41 AM
okay this is getting somewhere,, best I have seen yet!! let me ask you this.... if there are 010 and 020 under the timing cover, how do both numbers correspond to the part number?

Paul Wright
31st-January-2011, 10:13 AM
Because the 3970010 4" bore block and the 3970020 307 block came out in 1970. Al's story goes they both used the same front core piece.
Foundry workers selected different bore cores but the same front core. Simplified production.

Someone got a 307 they can take a picture of the timing area?
If it has the 010 and 020 markings, seems unlikely they'd make a high nickle 307.

woodnmetal
31st-January-2011, 10:17 AM
Because the 3970010 4" bore block and the 3970020 307 block came out in 1970. Al's story goes they both used the same front core piece.
Foundry workers selected different bore cores but the same front core. Simplified production.

Someone got a 307 they can take a picture of the timing area?
If it has the 010 and 020 markings, seems unlikely they'd make a high nickle 307.


good point, I am still having trouble with this.

veno
31st-January-2011, 10:56 AM
Paul heres another myth for ya.. that maybe true.... back in the day ... ooooo around 1975.... it was published in one of the mags. that the 307 block was made with less nickel and tin... there for was a softer iron and was not suitable for hipo use as the bores would wear faster....

I remember reading that.. and thinking about it.. and how many smoking 307 I see driving down the street and how many 307s I had seen in the bone yards with junk cylinder bores.. the magazine publication lent credence to the fact of my direct observations... (when I say Smoking I mean oil burning foggers)

Like I said.. the 10/20 thing I read it one of the rag sheets in the 1970's and the same for the 307 softer iron...

back in the 70's hotrod, carcraft, ss&drag, were on top of their game...I never saw a retraction on either of those views

chevguy65
31st-January-2011, 11:04 AM
the 010 produced between 69-79 and identified the 327 and 350.
the 020 was a 307 between 69-73 and the 014 was between 70-73 350 ci.

woodnmetal
31st-January-2011, 11:17 AM
the 010 produced between 69-79 and identified the 327 and 350.
the 020 was a 307 between 69-73 and the 014 was between 70-73 350 ci.

remember we are not talking about part numbers on the casting.

The Big Al
31st-January-2011, 11:21 AM
If you look at this front of the block, what do the 5 numbers have in common?

512 = 3959512, 327
532= 3959532, 283
010= 3970010, 350
509= 3951509, 400
020= 3970020, 307

IMO this proves even more, the number on the front sand molds correlate with the casting being made. No more, no less. The front half of the Gen1 SBC are the same. The block molds are put together with multiple pieces to make the casting.

http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/6922/4boltfrontofblock.jpg


Al

woodnmetal
31st-January-2011, 11:29 AM
okay,,, question,,, (hope I can ask this correctly) if the front mold we are looking at is for the motors you noted, and it makes sense to me, how come some motors only have some of the numbers under the timing chain cover and not all of them? You would think since they are all Chevy small blocks and should interchange.??

The Big Al
31st-January-2011, 12:07 PM
okay,,, question,,, (hope I can ask this correctly) if the front mold we are looking at is for the motors you noted, and it makes sense to me, how come some motors only have some of the numbers under the timing chain cover and not all of them? You would think since they are all Chevy small blocks and should interchange.??

My answer is a assumption,

casting dies and needs are constantly changing.

Once new dies are made for the sand molds, and engine production stops for a certain model engine, they have no purpose to reference a discontinued engine. Or a engine they are not casting during the life of the die.

Have to remember, there were no computer controls. Everything was on paper. Clip boards were the norm. Every number had a purpose.

We we see a 010 020 block, and for Chevrolet, the 307/350 was a high percentage of engines made in the 70's.

At one time, the Chevrolet division had more model engines than all the other GM lines combined. 1960's 70's
Pontiac, Buick, Oldsmobile, Cadillac had mostly one design engine. with 2-3 cubic inch separation 350/400/455 Cadillac 472/500

The inline 6cyc was the first crossover engine for GM used in multiple lines. Second was the Buick V6.


The casting process was always improving.

The only engine GM will say has more tin is the marine specific castings, and this is done to reduce corrosion. They cost more not because of casting but machine cost. I do believe Paul has discussed the influences of machining the different types of iron.
GM reference casting GM232-M on marine blocks.

Al

woodnmetal
31st-January-2011, 12:11 PM
well thanks Al... I find this very interesting, Thank you for taking the time, I know you have been over this a few other times. someone here mentioned Myth finders...
Now that's a show I would love to watch.:yes:

The Big Al
31st-January-2011, 12:17 PM
well thanks Al... I find this very interesting, Thank you for taking the time, I know you have been over this a few other times. someone here mentioned Myth finders...
Now that's a show I would love to watch.:yes:

If we all write enough letters they will do it.

Al

woodnmetal
31st-January-2011, 12:22 PM
If we all write enough letters they will do it.

Al

If we have enough people interested, I will put all in.

Paul Wright
31st-January-2011, 02:51 PM
I found pictures of the SBC casting process.
Here are the sand cores and how they are put together.
The end cores hold the middle ones together. It was important because as noted all Gen 1 SBC's look similar, that the correct cores needed to be properly assembled when making specific blocks. ID'ing which cores go with a specific casting was easier if they were numbered.

Starting in 1969 and certainly by 1970 when the 010 and 020 blocks were first introduced, they made some revisions to the casting that made these preferable to the older blocks. This is also when the numbers show up under the timing cover. As time progressed the additional casting model numbers were added to the front end core as shown in Al's photo.

The blocks are improved over the older blocks, but not because of some magical nickle content. People made that explanation up and it's been repeated so many times it's become legend.

Cast iron nickle content is a compromise between optimum hardness for durability and long tooling life. GM made millions of these blocks and they didn't waste money by making blocks that would wear out tooling too rapidly. Even pennies saved over millions of blocks add up. It's a business, not a charity. For the "High Nickle" myth to be true, it would mean GM management approved making all 010/020 2 bolt main plain jane passenger car 350 and 307's with a more expensive mixture that caused more down time and tooling wear. Absurd to the point of ridiculousness.

I equate this crazy legend to another block casting myth. The "freeze plug" is often called that because it's supposedly there to protect the block from freezing. Totally false!

They are called Welch plugs. They are only there to plug the hole that they remove the casting sand out of the block.

Trouble is the legendary name and function has stuck and the true name and function is hardly known.

As far as why the "high nickle" myth is in books and magazines. Many car mag writers don't research as well as they should. Often regurgitating what they are told or read on the internet (not a reliable source with little, if any citation of original sources).

woodnmetal
31st-January-2011, 03:01 PM
Thanks Paul,,, I liked it better when the 010 020 really meant something.. ha ha :D
I have that book, I was going to post those pictures, was not sure they really told anything. Send up the picture of all the z28 rods. people here would be drooling over that one.

veno
31st-January-2011, 04:18 PM
Paul.. in or by 1975 the internet did not exist.. it was ARPnet... and only MIT, UCLA, and CHICAGO had it... so how could the mag journalist have read it on the internet? are you discounting what I read in 1975? by saying he did not do his research? when these guys were constantly up the BIG three BUTT for a first scoop? is it perhaps that GM told this journalistic moron this now protracted myth/fact as it is in print by several big name engine builders of today.....

look.. I'll take a pic tonight.. to show you guys that the numbers are not cast in stone.... they are changable...

I have in my shop a 1970 454 LS5. 512 block.... if your familiar with the MKIV engine.. they have cast in the timing cover " Hi Perf Pass" Respectively by case

my block has all upper case lettering.. and is cast "HIPER A>S>S" I use the > because of board censorship to the word... so if it was a part of the end mold... how the hell did they change it to read what mine does?

Paul Wright
31st-January-2011, 05:42 PM
Please cite your sources.
What article are you referring to in 1975? I have almost all going back decades. How does a "High Perf Pass" BBC relate to SBC 010/020 markings? apples and oranges.

woodnmetal
31st-January-2011, 05:49 PM
so forgive me for asking,,, but is this confirmed that the tin and nickel crap just does not exist? I always tend to think, this stuff was said somewhere somehow and most of the time it ends up true... who would make this up and why?? maybe just to pizz me off.:devil:

veno
31st-January-2011, 06:02 PM
Please cite your sources.
What article are you referring to in 1975? I have almost all going back decades. How does a "High Perf Pass" BBC relate to SBC 010/020 markings? apples and oranges.

pretty sure it was hot rod or could have been popular hot rodding.... 1975 or 1976.. I read it paul... you calling me a lier?..

as for BBC ?SBC it not apples to oranges when the casting process is the same when it comes to changing the Alpah/numerics in the timing cover area whether its a SBC or a BBC.. I called it and still do.. fun at the foundry day

taz3
31st-January-2011, 06:18 PM
so forgive me for asking,,, but is this confirmed that the tin and nickel crap just does not exist? I always tend to think, this stuff was said somewhere somehow and most of the time it ends up true... who would make this up and why?? maybe just to pizz me off.:devil:

It is usually started to persuade a sale, like dog dish hub caps for the 3rd gens, all ads say they COPO caps, or I have a Corvette part like an 010 block, it's the same block as an 010 truck block. I have no input on the 010 blocks other than I own a few of them, from Vettes, and trucks.

SB 2 bolt blocks are stronger then 4 bolt block too!:yes::devil: Yet everybody wants a 4 bolt block.

woodnmetal
31st-January-2011, 06:36 PM
It is usually started to persuade a sale, like dog dish hub caps for the 3rd gens, all ads say they COPO caps, or I have a Corvette part like an 010 block, it's the same block as an 010 truck block. I have no input on the 010 blocks other than I own a few of them, from Vettes, and trucks.

SB 2 bolt blocks are stronger then 4 bolt block too!:yes::devil: Yet everybody wants a 4 bolt block.

that is correct!!!! not many people know that. but you know what that will start here:devil:

chevguy65
31st-January-2011, 06:52 PM
that is correct!!!! not many people know that. but you know what that will start here:devil:
LOL...yup:D

veno
31st-January-2011, 11:15 PM
here's a post over on NastyZ28.. from a CHEVY foundry worker who was there in the 60s and 70s...

http://www.nastyz28.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10896&highlight=nickel+content

Also DAVID VISARD Accounts for spreading the MYTH as well.

David Vizard says this in his book "Budget Building Max Performance Chevy Small Blocks:"

"The best blocks to get are the blocks that have a number 10 or 20 under the timing chain cover. These have 1% tin, and 2% nickel. The tin is used to help the metal flow better into the casting mold."

So WHY NOT GO TO HIM and ask him where this came from? OK? or tell him he's got it all wrong?


David Vizard is published... hows that for an account of reference?

published here too
http://www.nastyz28.com/faq/engine.htm#alloy...

I am not trying to dispel this one way or the other.. ... just saying that it has been published and is still in print....and I read it .... and until credible accounting's can be referenced to dispel I will tend to believe the published accounting...

The Big Al
1st-February-2011, 12:09 AM
What this guy wrote on the Nasty site caries a lot of weight.
He goes into the very intimate process of casting manufacturing.

A very good read.

I like this part of his posting.

""Once all the cores are screwed together to make a core package, the package assemblies can sit on shelves for days before they are placed in the mold for an iron pour. And... once all the core pieces are screwed together to make a core package, there is no possible way for us to see inside to verify what core numbers were used to make the core package.... Because of this, we cannot follow the myth that 010 ID's mean "high nickel", because it's impossible to view the 010 ID once the package is screwed together & shelved. The only ID we have is the part number.""

The Big Al
1st-February-2011, 12:14 AM
More:



What you wrote was how it was supposed to be. But once it was put through the system, engineering realized that their intent could not be efficiently tracked. So the plan was abandoned, but it would have been too costly to rework all the patterns in the core machines, so those were left alone.

When engineering originally developed the plan, they needed a way to identify the metallurgy after the block was poured, thus the fabled "stamp" But engineering soon realized that the same block part number could posess one of 3 different mettalurgical blends. Because of this, it was near impossible to trace or efficiently logistically locate castings from pourtime to end customer use, as well as service parts orders.

So it was abandoned, because with the original idea, you wouldn't be able to call any GM parts office & locate a "nickel 010 block", because there was not a specific part number associated with it. Parts are organized by part numbers, not core stamps.

Now, to straighten this out, they did change the casting part number to correspond with the metallurgical content. This is true for only older blocks (pre 71) Blocks after that just used the same sand cores as the older ones until pattern changes were made, which will give false hope to many.


Hinging on that, many cores were interchangeable. Today, error proofing measures have been installed, and it is impossible to assemble mismatched pieces without destroying a section of the core.

Processes were brutal years ago, and it was very common to grab the pallet of cores with the 010,020 stamps to keep the mold line running (even though the current run was not supposed to have the 010,020 stamps. The wost thing we could do, was to stop a mold line. If we did, the iron would cool, and we could freeze up the system with solidified iron. Always keep the mold line running! So, you cannot base your "nickel" block, solely on the 010 stamp on the timing face. Desperate times call for desperate measures, and cores have been switched in the past.

Today, most owners do not understand that the 010 on the side of the block has nothing to do what the metallurgical content is, or if it's a 4 bolt main.

Baddbob
1st-February-2011, 12:30 AM
Ok, so that 010/020 2482 capped 70 350 block I've been saving for a 383 build because I though it was high nickle probably isn't any better than that cast in Mexico block I just gave away?

Paul Wright
1st-February-2011, 12:32 AM
I did some research and couldn't find ANY older reference to "high nickle" 010 blocks and I looked from 1979 all the way back to 1973.
Hot Rod shows a picture in March of 1975 of an 010 block with core shift. No mention of the high nickle legend, only watch out for less than desirable blocks.
I checked all the notable Engine Performance books of the era.
Smokey Yunick
Rick Voegelin
John Lingenfelter
All have sections on block selection but none mention the 010 means high nickle. All say to select blocks carefully for thickness and watch for core shift.

Bill Jenkins was interviewed in 1975 by Car Craft candidly talking about his methods and even though he talks about using production LT-1 heads, he says nothing about special block metallurgy.
Bill Jenkins does makes a reference to block hardness in his book "Power Secrets" copyrighted 1976:
As far as we know the original block material has not changed since 1955. It is possible, though, that the iron alloy mix has been adjusted slightly to make it as soft as possible to gain maximum life from production tooling.

So even Bill Jenkins merely checked blocks to make sure they aren't too soft.
If it was known by 1980 (a full decade after the 010 block was first produced), I can't find a reference.
Even the Chevy Power factory performance manual makes no mention.

Colvin's 'Chevrolet By the Numbers' book has extensive factory research on block casting info makes no mention of any change to nickle content with the 010 block.

Only until Dave Vizard put it in print in 1999 (internet era) does it show up. I don't know where he got the idea. He doesn't give any reference to the source of his "fact". Why does he know this and Bill Jenkins Smokey Yunick, Lingenfelter and even the factory Chevy Power manual doesn't?

The more I research this, and from what I know about factory production methodology, in my expert opinion, it's more than likely to be bogus rumor that's been spread by misinformed people.

The Brian Berry postings on Nasty Z-28 confirm the truth that "010" doesn't mean it's high nickle.

Therefore this particular FAQ posting (http://www.nastyz28.com/faq/engine.htm#alloy) on Nasty Z-28 is not true.

Dave Vizard is wrong.

Baddbob
1st-February-2011, 12:36 AM
http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/6922/4boltfrontofblock.jpg


Al

Al, that looks like a late 400 2 bolt block? I just had three 400 blocks side by side for comparison. Just by visual inspection it looks like they trimmed a lot of weight off the later 400's. Judging by that pic the core shift is quite a bit to the left side on that one.

Baddbob
1st-February-2011, 12:41 AM
Bill Jenkins liked part number 3970016 because it had thicker main webs and came with nodular caps.

Paul Wright
1st-February-2011, 12:52 AM
Bill Jenkins liked part number 3970016 because it had thicker main webs and came with nodular caps.
...and he could get all the "010/020" blocks he wanted..AND he had a hardness tester! I think this myth is busted.

FST_FWD
1st-February-2011, 12:55 AM
Hmmm, you guys seem to be making a whole lot of sense here. With how many who seem to be getting lead astray with this, it's odd that this would have not been put down already. Amazing how many times misleading info gets recycled by even many who are "in the know".
I'm sure the Mythbuster dudes would probably end up losing ratings on this question however.

Quite interesting to us maybe, to others we might end up looking like a collection of car dipsticks.
Now if such a supposed high nickle block could better resist total destruction when subjected to TNT that might fly. Ratings would go through the roof.:yes::turn::D

The Big Al
1st-February-2011, 01:00 AM
Ok, so that 010/020 2482 capped 70 350 block I've been saving for a 383 build because I though it was high nickle probably isn't any better than that cast in Mexico block I just gave away?

The cast in Mexico block has been found better quality and light weight.

Al

bowtie0069
1st-February-2011, 01:32 AM
that is correct!!!! not many people know that. but you know what that will start here

That 2 bolt vs. 4 bolt myth still hasn't been proven to my satisfaction--I have a number of both and see no measurable difference other than the amount of material removed by the extra holes; all the webbing is the same, everything I could see looks the same...:confused:

stock z/28
1st-February-2011, 07:37 AM
Wow, this 020 stuff just keeps going.

Out of all of the blocks I have machined over the years I have seen very little difference in any of these blocks

I have said this before, but there is a lot of variations in 010 block castings. Just because its an 010 block means very little to me. There are variations of the 010 that I prefer, and its not 020.

I dont think it would take all the drama of Myth Busters to resolve this. I would seem to me that if you find some specs that you think represent what a "normal" 010 casting would be, simply have a few blocks tested.

I test these casting using a few different testers mainly Wilson and Ames portable testers and some Wilson bench testers that I can check "parts" of a casting with, but the tests are really only a comparison as I have no way to calibrate the tester load and/or penetrator settings to what real industrial methods are, so its just valuable to me. So I guess I am saying is I could not test or give you the results of my tests on these castings for any real evaluation. You need someone that knows what they are doing, and thats not me!


I would be really surprised if there is any validity to the 020 stuff.

woodnmetal
1st-February-2011, 08:27 AM
That 2 bolt vs. 4 bolt myth still hasn't been proven to my satisfaction--I have a number of both and see no measurable difference other than the amount of material removed by the extra holes; all the webbing is the same, everything I could see looks the same...:confused:

OMG here we go again.. another 500 posts on the way:eek:

woodnmetal
1st-February-2011, 08:29 AM
What this guy wrote on the Nasty site caries a lot of weight.
He goes into the very intimate process of casting manufacturing.

A very good read.

I like this part of his posting.

""Once all the cores are screwed together to make a core package, the package assemblies can sit on shelves for days before they are placed in the mold for an iron pour. And... once all the core pieces are screwed together to make a core package, there is no possible way for us to see inside to verify what core numbers were used to make the core package.... Because of this, we cannot follow the myth that 010 ID's mean "high nickel", because it's impossible to view the 010 ID once the package is screwed together & shelved. The only ID we have is the part number.""



sounds like the 010 020 thing IS TRUE GM had good intentions, but had no way to control it.. so some guys got good blocks and some don't
I got a good one:D

woodnmetal
1st-February-2011, 09:02 AM
I got another for ya,,, a 2 bolt has the SAME cross sectional strength as a 4 bolt!!!!!!!!!!:devil::eek: stick that in the parts tray:horse:
Now I do know that drag motors need the 4 bolt for the downward force created.

veno
1st-February-2011, 10:10 AM
Paul the Myth is not busted.. there are factory production run 1% and 2% blocks out there.. pre 1971 blocks can be identified... starting in either 1971 or 1972 based on production run not physical year its a toss up... again I would rather have thick walls cylinder walls and a softer block than a harder block and thinner walls... which we all know how bad the cores were in that era...

Just because you did not find my source I cited in either 1975 or 1976 does not mean it's not true and I did not read it... I have read from 3 different foundry workers of various forums that worked in Saginaw that GM did in fact use a 1% and 2% .... the tin is for pourability, the nickel was for rigidity.. the mix did exist.. and it was GM engineering that set the numerics in place... however casting numbers do not correlate to part numbers.... according to the 3 foundry workers you have as good a chance of getting a high nickel block using the 010/020 as you do not getting one..so it cant hurt to look...

But I put it to you Paul.. since I have shown that in at least 2 places a published accounting of the blocks in question by authoritative reputable source .. yet you can not find any published accountings either by book or magazine to dispel the high nickel block in authoritative print by reputable authors...

you have not produce one accounting of authoritative printed literature to reinforce your stand that directly states that the 010/020 stands for nothing.. the only thing you can find in your research is its not mentioned... just because you cant find it does not mean its not true...you can not repudiate with out citation and proof.. your research has not quelled the so called myth.. you found nothing to say it does not exist..you provided not one citation stating that the block in question is a fallacy..

If you can find one authoritative source in paper print publish by a reputable printing house I will say we have a conundrum...

The Big Al
1st-February-2011, 11:02 AM
you have not produce one accounting of authoritative printed literature to reinforce your stand that directly states that the 010/020 stands for nothing.. the only thing you can find in your research is its not mentioned... just because you cant find it does not mean its not true...you can not repudiate with out citation and proof.. your research has not quelled the so called myth.. you found nothing to say it does not exist..you provided not one citation stating that the block in question is a fallacy..

If you can find one authoritative source in paper print publish by a reputable printing house I will say we have a conundrum...

Veno, I understand how you feel and until a few weeks ago I would have walked the plank with you.

We now have 2 employees who say the numbers correlated the the parts used to assemble the sand mold. One I know for a fact was a foundry employee, the person on the other site I give real merit, he knows exactly how the process worked. I believe he worked at the plant.

One thing that I have found is 2 versions of the rumor. 010/020

010/020 means 1% nickle 2% tin some say 10% nickle 20% tin.

It's all false, it's a id number for the sand cast part. No more no less.


No one as reason to publish a rebuttal.

sbc1320
1st-February-2011, 11:10 AM
sounds like the 010 020 thing IS TRUE GM had good intentions, but had no way to control it.. so some guys got good blocks and some don't
I got a good one:D

I don't know either way, but seems like they could control it like they do in other methods such as chalk markings,etc., if they really wanted to.

stock z/28
1st-February-2011, 11:28 AM
That 2 bolt vs. 4 bolt myth still hasn't been proven to my satisfaction--I have a number of both and see no measurable difference other than the amount of material removed by the extra holes; all the webbing is the same, everything I could see looks the same...:confused:

Mike see if there is not a hifference in the the length of the cyl wall, with the 4 boly being longer.


Veno, How do I spot the the high nikle/tin pre 72 blocks?

You know Veno, it will probably sound stupid and I sure it is but on the old 307 (and others) that were observed to wear worse than others, I dont think the blocks were softer than others, I "think" the reason was such a poor cyl head combustion process and poor fuel metering, especially whwn cold. I think this may have led to a lot of cyl wear from fuel dillution of the oil.


I think you will find some superior 010 (and other castings) but I dont think its going to be indicated by an 020 number.

Veno, I may missed this in this thread but what is the casting number on most of the the 307s?

veno
1st-February-2011, 11:38 AM
AL....

http://www.ironcasting.org/Gray%20Iron%20-%20A%20Unique%20Material.htm

The beneficial effect of relatively small additions of tin (less than 0.10 percent) on the stability of pearlite in gray iron has been reported by Davis et al[11]. The results of extensive use of tin in automotive engines has been reported by Tache and Cage[12]. Its use is particularly helpful in complex castings wherein some sections cool rather slowly through the Ar3 temperature interval. It has been found that additions of up to 0.05 percent antimony have a similar effect. In larger amounts, these elements tend to reduce the toughness and impact strength of gray iron, and good supervision over their use is necessary.


Copper and nickel behave in a similar manner in cast iron. They strengthen the matrix and decrease the tendency to form hard edges on castings. Since they are mild graphitizers, they are often substituted for some of the silicon in gray iron. An austenitic gray iron may be obtained by raising the nickel content to about 15 percent together with about 6 percent copper, or to 20 percent without copper as shown in ASTM Specification for Austenitic Gray Iron Castings (A 436-63).

chevguy65
1st-February-2011, 11:52 AM
For the amount of power your going to make with an 010 block does it really matter how hard the block is?

Personally I would be more concerned with the thickness of the cylinders.

John65ss
1st-February-2011, 12:05 PM
I think you will find some superior 010 (and other castings) but I dont think its going to be indicated by an 020 number.



OK... I gotta ask....

besides core shift, what would make one 3970010 block superior to another? All castings are made to the same print? Isn't that what the casting number dictates? I suppose there were likely ECRs and drawing revs over the years that could have changed things a bit, given the long production run? :confused:

The Big Al
1st-February-2011, 12:22 PM
AL....

http://www.ironcasting.org/Gray%20Iron%20-%20A%20Unique%20Material.htm

I don't understand your post in relation to what the 010/020 stand for.

I am very aware of the use of tin and nickle in all blocks.

The 010/020 has nothing to do with the makeup used for the block. It is a cast part number, no more no less.

I believe when the 010/020 showed up, the casting quality for the small block was well improved over the older 60's blocks.
Class racing in the old days I stopped using the old 283 block and stared using the 307 blocks with crank spacers for the small journal crankshafts.

It was hard to find a good 283 block, at one time I had 3 of them and all 3 were crap once machine work started. It was never a quality casting. It was core shift. I remember I had one block, it had .030 in the hole on one side a -.005 on the other, and the core shift look good. Lot of the blocks had thin spots in the cylinders.

The blocks of the 70's were better. And maybe they were made with better process and more tin & nickle.

In the past when we saw the 010/020 we knew it was better than the older blocks. I believe this is what lead to the rumor.
It was easy to believe when you have junk older blocks and how well a 3970010 // 3970020 blocks are.

And today it is a un-admitted truth, the Mexican blocks are one of the best!

Al

Paul Wright
1st-February-2011, 12:24 PM
I think the mixture of tin and nickle is determined by the production engineers and 1% and 2% seems likely to be true, but it's used extensively for all small blocks for the casting reasons that were mentioned and isn't some special high nickel formula. It's just the best mix for production.

Here's a credible paper on Grey iron metallurgy from the Iron Casting Research Institute
by D. E. Krause, Executive Director 1940-1973

http://www.ironcasting.org/Gray%20Iron%20-%20A%20Unique%20Material.htm

The ideal percentages of cast iron additives have been well known for years.

Foundry iron takes a lot of energy to get hot and they have to keep it hot, even when the factory is not producing parts. It's real hard to toss out an old mix and make something different. It's really a continuous process.
Here's the old Ford Cleveland engine foundry.
http://media.cleveland.com/business_impact/photo/8983195-large.jpg
Look at the man compared to the size of the vats!

As Bill Jenkins mentioned, They really haven't changed the tried and true formula, and the only variations might be slight due to how much they actually toss in.

These blocks are so common and most were destined for ordinary use, it really isn't plausible that GM would waste expensive nickle and risk wearing out high dollar tooling faster to make a special high nickle mix.

A raw 010 casting might become a 4 bolt a two bolt or wind up in a Caprice or a dump truck, but it doesn't know until it gets machined. There's no way to know if any 010 block has a particular tin/nickle mix without testing.

I think it's merely a coincidence that the 010 & 020 numbers are similar to tin and nickle percentage numbers. They could be mistaken as meaning .010 and .020. The evidence seems to indicate that they are just the last three digits of the casting number to identify the sand mold and have nothing to do with the metallurgy.

levisnteeshirt
1st-February-2011, 12:29 PM
i say is you gotta love that block ,,,, its more tough than a battleship anchor ,,,, i always was seeing 230-240 water temp coming back down the return road for 8 years of use ,,, some years i didn't get to race it as much as others , ,,, never had a problem with it ,,, it wasn't poured , let it cool off and it was fine ,,, gotta love the 010 block

veno
1st-February-2011, 12:33 PM
Mike see if there is not a hifference in the the length of the cyl wall, with the 4 boly being longer.


Veno, How do I spot the the high nikle/tin pre 72 blocks?

You know Veno, it will probably sound stupid and I sure it is but on the old 307 (and others) that were observed to wear worse than others, I dont think the blocks were softer than others, I "think" the reason was such a poor cyl head combustion process and poor fuel metering, especially whwn cold. I think this may have led to a lot of cyl wear from fuel dillution of the oil.


I think you will find some superior 010 (and other castings) but I dont think its going to be indicated by an 020 number.

Veno, I may missed this in this thread but what is the casting number on most of the the 307s?

as for 307 JEFF.. I never paid any attention to them.... besides... 350 were far more plentifu


Jeff.. this is from the foundry worker... he denotes that there were different batches...3 in all he notes for block casting....


his name is Brian Berry..

http://www.nastyz28.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10896&highlight=nickel+content

Like I mentioned before, we have poured iron to what the part number is, not what the core stamps say. If I had 2 assembled core packages next to each other, you would not be able to tell if one had 010 on it, unless you destroyed & dissected it or poured iron into it & removed the iron to see. The one thing that is consistently 100% validated is the part number, which is part of the drag mold and is the seat for the upside down core package to rest in, before the cope is placed on the mold package, sealing it off.

In the end, if you have a 60's block with these stamps, there is a 95% chance that it is what you think it is. But it can be your luck that the 5% of mismatched core packages could be one of yours. If you have a 70's & up block, don't count on it, unless it's a bowtie (but only some bowties had different metallurgical qualities)

Hope that helps explain it.


After the early 70's blocks were cheapened, and less quality materials were placed into them. If you want a high nickel block after the early 70's, then you would have to go to a specialty block. No, I don't keep a listing of obsolete casting numbers.


heres the full article By Dave Emanuel
printed 11/1/1996

http://www.enginebuildermag.com/Article/2577/performance_small_block_chevy_engines_.aspx

John65ss
1st-February-2011, 12:39 PM
I think the mixture of tin and nickle is determined by the production engineers and 1% and 2% seems likely to be true, but it's used extensively for all small blocks for the casting reasons that were mentioned and isn't some special high nickel formula. It's just the best mix for production.

Here's a credible paper on Grey iron metallurgy from the Iron Casting Research Institute
by D. E. Krause, Executive Director 1940-1973

http://www.ironcasting.org/Gray%20Iron%20-%20A%20Unique%20Material.htm

The ideal percentages of cast iron additives have been well known for years.

As Bill Jenkins mentioned, They really haven't changed the tried and true formula, and the only variations might be slight due to how much they actually toss in.

These blocks are so common and most were destined for ordinary use, it really isn't plausible that GM would waste expensive nickle and risk wearing out high dollar tooling faster to make a special high nickle mix.

A raw 010 casting might become a 4 bolt a two bolt or wind up in a Caprice or a dump truck, but it doesn't know until it gets machined. There's no way to know if any 010 block has a particular tin/nickle mix without testing.

I think it's merely a coincidence that the 010 & 020 numbers are similar to tin and nickle percentage numbers. They could be mistaken as meaning .010 and .020. The evidence seems to indicate that they are just the last three digits of the casting number to identify the sand mold and have nothing to do with the metallurgy.

I agree with Paul. This makes practical sense from a production point of view.

veno
1st-February-2011, 12:43 PM
Let me say this.. in a rap up... according the foundry worker.. prior to 1970 the 010/020 block had credence... after 1971 its a tossup....so there is merit to the 010/020 but it is date restricted

The Big Al
1st-February-2011, 12:45 PM
i say is you gotta love that block ,,,, its more tough than a battleship anchor ,,, gotta love the 010 block


I have to agree, it really is a good block.

Al

PS: I do have a BBC Dart Big M block in the shop, all I can say is WOOOOO!!!!!
http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/252/sengine003a.jpg

woodnmetal
1st-February-2011, 12:56 PM
:yes::yes:Paul the Myth is not busted.. there are factory production run 1% and 2% blocks out there.. pre 1971 blocks can be identified... starting in either 1971 or 1972 based on production run not physical year its a toss up... again I would rather have thick walls cylinder walls and a softer block than a harder block and thinner walls... which we all know how bad the cores were in that era...

Just because you did not find my source I cited in either 1975 or 1976 does not mean it's not true and I did not read it... I have read from 3 different foundry workers of various forums that worked in Saginaw that GM did in fact use a 1% and 2% .... the tin is for pourability, the nickel was for rigidity.. the mix did exist.. and it was GM engineering that set the numerics in place... however casting numbers do not correlate to part numbers.... according to the 3 foundry workers you have as good a chance of getting a high nickel block using the 010/020 as you do not getting one..so it cant hurt to look...

But I put it to you Paul.. since I have shown that in at least 2 places a published accounting of the blocks in question by authoritative reputable source .. yet you can not find any published accountings either by book or magazine to dispel the high nickel block in authoritative print by reputable authors...

you have not produce one accounting of authoritative printed literature to reinforce your stand that directly states that the 010/020 stands for nothing.. the only thing you can find in your research is its not mentioned... just because you cant find it does not mean its not true...you can not repudiate with out citation and proof.. your research has not quelled the so called myth.. you found nothing to say it does not exist..you provided not one citation stating that the block in question is a fallacy..

If you can find one authoritative source in paper print publish by a reputable printing house I will say we have a conundrum...

I am with this 100 percent.. :yes::yes::yes::yes::yes:

Until something substantial materializes...let's stop making excuses

veno
1st-February-2011, 01:14 PM
Ok, so that 010/020 2482 capped 70 350 block I've been saving for a 383 build because I though it was high nickle probably isn't any better than that cast in Mexico block I just gave away?

actually the 2482 caps are the nodular iron caps(prefered)... as for the block.. if the walls are thick.. you have a winner...

veno
1st-February-2011, 01:27 PM
You know Veno, it will probably sound stupid and I sure it is but on the old 307 (and others) that were observed to wear worse than others, I dont think the blocks were softer than others, I "think" the reason was such a poor cyl head combustion process and poor fuel metering, especially whwn cold. I think this may have led to a lot of cyl wear from fuel dillution of the oil.



you may be on to something there jeff.. I cant say one way or the other you most likely have machines hundreds of 307's.... I have come to trust your analytical skill set very well.. you diagnostic abilities in these areas are top notch based on the evidence left behind....

though makes one take pause.. I remember how cheap GM was in the 1970s...they pinched ol Abe till he squealed... It would not surprise me to learn of a batch processing with cheap grade of iron.. the 307 was the base V8...in and around that time. while the 250L6 and the 153L4 were bottom rung engines..

stock z/28
1st-February-2011, 01:46 PM
OK... I gotta ask....

besides core shift, what would make one 3970010 block superior to another? All castings are made to the same print? Isn't that what the casting number dictates? I suppose there were likely ECRs and drawing revs over the years that could have changed things a bit, given the long production run? :confused:

John, in my experience I have seen atleast 6-7 major variations in 010 blocks, some in the same production year. If they followed the same print, someone didnt do a good job implementing it.

In my opinion, in any batch of castings there is a very good chance there will be some that are superior for some reason, a bunch that are "average" and a few that are "not so good", but passable. Kinda like a medical school graduating class.

In my opinion there are 010 blocks that are far better for performance applications, but I dont look at the 020 as any thing but a mold number.

Over the years I have used a 1 1/2 hole saw and cut "samples" out of a lot of blocks. Probably over 100. Just to test for hadness and thickness etc.. I even milled the deck off of one to look at the core layout. I was a good learing experience.

I cant post pics here or I would show you a few of the variations.

I think there may be a pic of the 010 that I cut the deck off of in the Pics that John posts for me?

try this?
http://rides.webshots.com/photo/2087591300058614284ocsJyf

http://rides.webshots.com/photo/2455173630058614284upIkuC

Paul Wright
1st-February-2011, 04:03 PM
heres the full article By Dave Emanuel
printed 11/1/1996

http://www.enginebuildermag.com/Article/2577/performance_small_block_chevy_engines_.aspx

Since 10% is too high a percentage for tin,
The beneficial effect of relatively small additions of tin (less than 0.10 percent) on the stability of pearlite in gray iron has been reported by Davis et al[11]. The results of extensive use of tin in automotive engines has been reported by Tache and Cage[12]. Its use is particularly helpful in complex castings wherein some sections cool rather slowly through the Ar3 temperature interval. It has been found that additions of up to 0.05 percent antimony have a similar effect. In larger amounts, these elements tend to reduce the toughness and impact strength of gray iron, and good supervision over their use is necessary. and 20% is the high side for nickle and would make the block unreasonably hard to machine, Dave Emmanuel clearly has his facts wrong. Dave Vizard says it's 1% & 2%. Dave E.'s Tin percentage is off by 100 times normal and Dave V. is off by ten times. 20% nickle is "high nickle" and 2% nickle is not "high nickle" only normal nickle.
Both authors are off.

Since the block numbers don't actually jibe with real world percentages, it's clearly an assumption based on similar but unrelated numbers.

It's like the "freeze plug" story a made up story that sounded plausible but totally untrue. Repeated so many times it becomes "fact".

Since the first hand knowledge reports of hardness testing blocks are saying the actual is not any one percentage, therefore you can't make a blanket statement that the 010/020 block is a "high nickle block". In fact the high nickel stories so far don't make sense when examined closely. Some are saying you must have both numbers and others say just one number.

Again these types of undocumented facts in articles are not good research much less good reporting. Dave once worked for Pop Hot Rodding and is so far is the oldest printed source of the "010/020" myth.
Someone started this rumor. We'll track him (or her) down. If Veno read it in Pop Hotrodding in 1975, it might have been Dave who started it.

My guess is GM's "proprietary mix" used 0.1% tin and 2% nickle for optimum durability and tooling life and the casting numbers similarity is just a coincidence that got spun into a legend over the years.

CNC BLOCKS
1st-February-2011, 04:22 PM
The only differance we see between the 010 blocks and the 010/020 blocks is the the 010 block which is 98 percent of the time has K on the main caps and and on the bellhousing area. From what we have seen over the years is the K-Cap blocks have a weaker webbing in them compard to the 010/020 blocks. Look on a K cap 4 bolt block where the outter bolts go though the webbing as we have seen many blocks crack in that area do to bad casting design.

That being said look at the webbing of the 010/020 lot better design. No block is any good at our shop unless it passes a sonic test first then a mag test. And by the sonic tests we have done neither block is any better then the other and people say the older blockhave thicker cylinders so far I have not seen that to be true.

We have used many K block for some of our circle track builds and have used splayed center caps to compensate for the bad webbing of those blocks.

Never seen a differance in cylinder wear between the 010/020 and the 010 blocks so the 010/020 with more nickel seems to wear the same as the 010 blocks.

The 010/020 block does have a place above the front timing cover to feed oil for our dry sump engines.

CNC BLOCKS
1st-February-2011, 04:26 PM
I have to agree, it really is a good block.

Al

PS: I do have a BBC Dart Big M block in the shop, all I can say is WOOOOO!!!!!
http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/252/sengine003a.jpg

I think I have about 8 brand new Big-M blocks in the shop for cam tunnel and lifter bore work, line honing, decking, boring and plate honing!!

sbc1320
1st-February-2011, 04:35 PM
[QUOTE=stock z/28; I "think" the reason was such a poor cyl head combustion process and poor fuel metering, especially whwn cold. I think this may have led to a lot of cyl wear from fuel dillution of the oil[/QUOTE]

I tend to agree with this also. A lot of cylinder washing going on. I have torn apart some good old motors that were set up right and lean(not to lean) and they had minimal wear issues.

veno
1st-February-2011, 04:59 PM
Since 10% is too high a percentage for tin,
and 20% is the high side for nickle and would make the block unreasonably hard to machine, Dave Emmanuel clearly has his facts wrong. Dave Vizard says it's 1% & 2% but tin is still off by a point
Since the block numbers don't actually jibe with real world percentages, it's clearly an assumption based on similar but unrelated numbers. It's like the "freeze plug" story a made up story that sounded plausible but totally untrue. Repeated so many times it becomes "fact".

Since the first hand knowledge reports of hardness testing blocks are saying the actual is not any one percentage, therefore you can't make a blanket statement that the 010/020 block is a "high nickle block". In fact the high nickel stories so far don't make sense when examined closely. Some are saying you must have both numbers and others say just one number.

Again these types of undocumented facts in articles are not good research much less good reporting. Dave once worked for Pop Hot Rodding and is so far is the oldest printed source of the "010/020" myth.
Someone started this rumor. We'll track him (or her) down. If Veno read it in Pop Hotrodding in 1975, it might have been Dave who started it.

since you like my reference from castiron.org.. please inculed the part I referenced about nickel as well

http://www.stevesnovasite.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1541743&postcount=73

Copper and nickel behave in a similar manner in cast iron. They strengthen the matrix and decrease the tendency to form hard edges on castings. Since they are mild graphitizers, they are often substituted for some of the silicon in gray iron. An austenitic gray iron may be obtained by raising the nickel content to about 15 percent together with about 6 percent copper, or to 20 percent without copper as shown in ASTM Specification for Austenitic Gray Iron Castings (A 436-63).

Paul your Citation is incorrect.... I have been looking for this publication.. and I cant find it....

Tache. A. J. and Cage, R. M., "Tin-Alloying Speeds Production of Gray-Iron Cylinder Blocks." Journal, Society of Automotive Engineers, Vol. 73. No. 1, Jan. 1965, pp. 66-69.

sbc1320
1st-February-2011, 05:08 PM
My father in law was a machinist for BP until he retired. I remember him saying there was a guy(matallurgist) down there that a small machine( I believe) that you could put a scraping of the metal in it and it would identify the contents of the metal.

woodnmetal
1st-February-2011, 05:44 PM
yes I know of a spectrometer here in Franklin owned by Thermo Environmental
that can tell you the properties of a material.
Actually I made the shell for this equipment.

edit... actaully. I am not sure how much good it will do, from what I am getting out of all this, GM , although had good intentions, did not have a handle on
the process, and some say it was not practical from a manufacturing standpoint. So it seems like you could have good blocks and bad blocks floating around out there.

veno
1st-February-2011, 06:01 PM
It all done by batching... with Tolerance stacking built in.... with the size the cauldrons they used... over all 1to 2% difference per batch was probably the norm in over all metallurgical values..

pouring temps play a huge part in cast iron.... there is a range at which the iron will flow and cohesion effectively... too cool a pour temp and you get tiny holes.. to hot and it makes it brittle.( If I am recalling this right)...

there is a small window that the iron can be in the copula before it has to be returned to batching...

taz3
1st-February-2011, 06:45 PM
From what I read of your link Veno, it seems after 1970 they're all the same, so this must be what has created all the hype on the 010 blocks. I'll have to decode the dates of my blocks, one is a new L82 from the late 70's, so it's nothing fancy.

veno
1st-February-2011, 07:07 PM
Paul.. I cant say for sure about the L82 blocks... the Corvette was Gm's premier high performance platform... One of my oldest friends ordered a 1978 L82 4sp/3.73(last year the 3.73 was offered) triple red... the engine had 4 bolt mains, steel crank, forged flat tops pistons, and large chambers 2.02 heads with screw in studs and guide plates...

IF gm was still doing different castings with stiffer properties.. I would think that GM would have made sure the corvette received such....

thats opinion and that is all...

taz3
1st-February-2011, 07:22 PM
My block is a 2 bolt, which I was surprised to find out, but it did have a steel crank, and forged flat tops, but the heads were nothing special at all, small valves, with push in studs.

Novahead
1st-February-2011, 07:24 PM
:2cents: This reminds me of a block I baught back in the day. A freind and I went to this local junk yard and was looking for a 350 to build. The farmer that owned it told us that he had a 350 70 or 71 it happened to be in a dump truck, he told us it was the origanel block. He told use we could have it if we pulled it as his son left water in that winter. We took the block and let me say that every freeze plug was pushed out every one. being young and nothing else to do we stripped it and found no cracks. This block had dish pistons a factory steel crank four bolt main and the only lettes on it were HD. We took it to a local shop, the owner called us a few days later and asked us if we would be willing to sell it. We got this free but for some reason it got us 1,000 back in 1985. I became very good friend with this local shop and a few years later he told me that this was a very rare block and it was exstreamly hard and a saut after for its durabilety. Unfortunetly I don't now much more about it but it seams to be what every one is talking about.

John65ss
1st-February-2011, 08:20 PM
Guys... just think about this for a minute.

The foundry had NO IDEA where the casting was to be used. They made the block to the specifications called out on the 3970010 block drawing. This casting would then get used in all kinds of assemblies from LT-1 solid lifter 4-bolts to 2-bbl Impala 4-drs. If there was anything different about a certain block, it would have had a DIFFERENT casting number. Otherwise how would the engine plant identify that the casting was truly special? They were not looking for codes behind the timing cover.

I can buy what Jeff says about different 3970010 blocks due to running changes, or maybe multiple foundry sources, but I refuse to believe that there was different metallurgy reserved for "special" engines when the part number on the block DID NOT CHANGE. How would anyone doing final machining and assembly seperate the "special" block from the one cast with "normal" material??? Why would the foundry and GM Engineering create a HUGE opportunity for mistakes by not changing the casting number?

Baddbob
1st-February-2011, 10:53 PM
And if different molds were used with different numbers there should be differences in the castings that correspond with the differences in the molds-besides just the numbers. If there were enough blocks on hand to compare the differences it would be easy to sort out.

I think I've seen some main caps with the HD mark.

taz3
1st-February-2011, 11:08 PM
Guys... just think about this for a minute.

The foundry had NO IDEA where the casting was to be used. They made the block to the specifications called out on the 3970010 block drawing. This casting would then get used in all kinds of assemblies from LT-1 solid lifter 4-bolts to 2-bbl Impala 4-drs. If there was anything different about a certain block, it would have had a DIFFERENT casting number. Otherwise how would the engine plant identify that the casting was truly special? They were not looking for codes behind the timing cover.

I can buy what Jeff says about different 3970010 blocks due to running changes, or maybe multiple foundry sources, but I refuse to believe that there was different metallurgy reserved for "special" engines when the part number on the block DID NOT CHANGE. How would anyone doing final machining and assembly seperate the "special" block from the one cast with "normal" material??? Why would the foundry and GM Engineering create a HUGE opportunity for mistakes by not changing the casting number?

The 010 blocks are not found in all applications, only performance and trucks used these blocks, even after the the blocks were all the same, they were still only found in Vettes and trucks.

John65ss
1st-February-2011, 11:37 PM
The 010 blocks are not found in all applications, only performance and trucks used these blocks, even after the the blocks were all the same, they were still only found in Vettes and trucks.

Not true. I had a 010 block that I pulled from a '78 Caprice Classic my grandfather bought new, and it wasn't any kind of COPO. I think the 010 was one of the most common 350 blocks of the 1970s.

stock z/28
2nd-February-2011, 12:47 AM
:2cents: This reminds me of a block I baught back in the day. A freind and I went to this local junk yard and was looking for a 350 to build. The farmer that owned it told us that he had a 350 70 or 71 it happened to be in a dump truck, he told us it was the origanel block. He told use we could have it if we pulled it as his son left water in that winter. We took the block and let me say that every freeze plug was pushed out every one. being young and nothing else to do we stripped it and found no cracks. This block had dish pistons a factory steel crank four bolt main and the only lettes on it were HD. We took it to a local shop, the owner called us a few days later and asked us if we would be willing to sell it. We got this free but for some reason it got us 1,000 back in 1985. I became very good friend with this local shop and a few years later he told me that this was a very rare block and it was exstreamly hard and a saut after for its durabilety. Unfortunetly I don't now much more about it but it seams to be what every one is talking about.

I would have to say that if I was looking for a possible "better" block the 40-60 series trucks would have (in my opinion) the best bet.

Some of the best blocks I have found have been from large trucks and/or buses.

As John said I think 010 blocks were in about everything in the 70s.

In regard to the fuel - cyl wear issue I was talking about, back in the mid 70s to early 80s I did a lot of vehicle service and I noticed that the engines that were ran on propane would have almost no cyl wear with 100,000 miles and back then that was a lot of miles.

Paul Wright
2nd-February-2011, 01:26 AM
The 010 blocks are not found in all applications, only performance and trucks used these blocks, even after the the blocks were all the same, they were still only found in Vettes and trucks.
I have several I pulled out of my old 77-79 Caprice wagons. Two bolt main, cast cranks. The 010 block was used extensively for everything from low performance 2 bolts to high performance 4 bolts to dump trucks. They literally made millions of them. They didn't pour them any different whether or not it was for a Corvette or a Caprice. It's not a bad block, but it's not special, rare or high nickle.

Paul Wright
2nd-February-2011, 11:44 AM
I've been doing some more research on the subject since my college classes were canceled due to the snow storm. My University library closed early so I couldn't research their book collection, but I did find out some cast iron specifications.
SAE standard J431 and ASTM A159 standards give a lot of the metallurgy for standard automotive casting formulas. There's a good reference book from ASM International by Joeseph R. Davis ($262!) on Cast Iron.

Anyway, for automotive blocks,
Tin (Sn) values should be in the 0-0.1% range not 1%-10%.
Nickle is typically in the 0.1%-1.5% range but could be 2%, but not 20%.

Nickle (Ni) values in the 18-37% range put the iron into Austenitic category.
Really high nickle iron is similar to stainless steel (but with more carbon), resistant to corrosion and non-magnetic. I just checked an 010 block and it is quite magnetic and rusty.

High alloy irons (over 3%) are a special class. A 20% nickel iron would be used for exhaust manifolds or turbo housings, not engine blocks.

I found some Ford anecdotal casting information on adding 2% nickle to blocks caused machining problems so they reduced it back to 0.5%
I don't know for sure what the Chevy blend was, but I would be willing to bet it was the best standard mix to yield long tooling life and maximum production.
Of course, I could cut off a section of a Chevy 010 block and send it for analysis to get the precise blend. If the nickel tested to be 1% or 1.5%, that would put a hole in the legend but I don't think that's really necessary.

My educated guess based on research so far is the Tin will be about 0.1% and the nickle is in the 0.1-2% range.

The 10% and 20% values printed in Pop Hotrodding and Engine Builder are clearly out to lunch.
Vizard's nickle value may be closer to what's plausible, but the tin value is still off by a factor of ten.

The numerical format of the assumed true blend doesn't jibe with the numerical format of the casting number.
Someone jumped to conclusions and made up the connection.

This myth is based on misconstrued facts and coincidental casting numbers.

woodnmetal
2nd-February-2011, 12:05 PM
This myth is based on misconstrued facts and coincidental casting numbers.

well this makes a little more sence... I always agreed upon the casting number mistake, Paul, the numebers don't lie, if your research is correct, the .10 and 20 percent thing is OUT TO LUNCH FOR SURE. Is it possible they are referring to .1 and .2 percent instead.. I am just wondering if there is ANY truth to this tin and nickle thing at all.???

Paul Wright
2nd-February-2011, 12:28 PM
:2cents: This reminds me of a block I baught back in the day. A freind and I went to this local junk yard and was looking for a 350 to build. The farmer that owned it told us that he had a 350 70 or 71 it happened to be in a dump truck, he told us it was the origanel block. He told use we could have it if we pulled it as his son left water in that winter. We took the block and let me say that every freeze plug was pushed out every one. being young and nothing else to do we stripped it and found no cracks. This block had dish pistons a factory steel crank four bolt main and the only lettes on it were HD. We took it to a local shop, the owner called us a few days later and asked us if we would be willing to sell it. We got this free but for some reason it got us 1,000 back in 1985. I became very good friend with this local shop and a few years later he told me that this was a very rare block and it was exstreamly hard and a saut after for its durabilety. Unfortunetly I don't now much more about it but it seams to be what every one is talking about.

This is an example of how myths are constructed from anecdotal facts.

I have no doubt your story is true. It could be easy to jump to the conclusion that just because the welch plugs were pushed out and the block didn't crack, the plugs were designed to save the block from cracking. For every one of these lucky stories there are many more that the block cracks.

The truth is the plugs are only there to plug the hole the foundry casts in to remove the core sand. If they didn't put those holes there, they couldn't remove the sand. Once the sand is out they have to plug the holes. End of story.

The sad truth is people would rather believe legends over reality. I don't know why that is. Because of the legend, Welch plugs are colloquially called "freeze" plugs.

stock z/28
2nd-February-2011, 12:44 PM
Paul, I must say that I am impressed with the amount of effort you have put into research.

I think there is a better grade of cast iron, but I dont know what it involves. You may look into what Caterpillar uses for cast on their blocks, as it seems to me that GM had them casting the DRC series of Pro Stock blocks for a while and I think some of the Bow Tie blocks may have been cast their as well.

I think there is a lot of new materials/methods used now like the Compacted Graphite, for example.

In my opinion their is some difference in some blocks and it shows up in machining and honing, but I dont think its related to the 020 thing.

veno
2nd-February-2011, 12:56 PM
Paul.. you may find theses interesting

http://www.network54.com/Forum/74182/message/1033508302/www.sae.org

640070 01/01/1964 The development of tin as an alloying addition in gray irons-Joseph B. Long Tin Research Institute, Inc.

610128 01/01/1961 Automotive cylinder block materials Cast iron -H. N. Bogart Ford Motor Co.

320038 01/01/1932 Characteristics of alloyed cast-iron -F. W. Shipley Caterpillar Tractor Co., Peoria, IL


540240 01/01/1954 Measurement and control of residual stresses in cylinder-block castings-Forest McFarland-R. E. VanDeventer Packard Motor Car


http://osdir.com/patents/Metal-founding/Method-manufacture-gray-cast-iron-crankcases-cylinder-heads-06973954.html

woodnmetal
2nd-February-2011, 01:05 PM
This is an example of how myths are constructed from anecdotal facts.

I have no doubt your story is true. It could be easy to jump to the conclusion that just because the welch plugs were pushed out and the block didn't crack, the plugs were designed to save the block from cracking. For every one of these lucky stories there are many more that the block cracks.

The truth is the plugs are only there to plug the hole the foundry casts in to remove the core sand. If they didn't put those holes there, they couldn't remove the sand. Once the sand is out they have to plug the holes. End of story.

The sad truth is people would rather believe legends over reality. I don't know why that is. Because of the legend, Welch plugs are colloquially called "freeze" plugs.

also called "manufacturing holes" they are used throughout the manufacturing industry for (manufacturing aids)(to facilitate a manufacturing method)

veno
2nd-February-2011, 02:32 PM
I think there is a lot of new materials/methods used now like the Compacted Graphite, for example.




read some stuff when looking for this amalgamation of cast iron properties referring to Compacted Graphite, and the slag that forms in the iron... a property of titanium is also found when the graphite is used...

and were worried about nickel:rolleyes:

woodnmetal
2nd-February-2011, 03:31 PM
Is thing over? I must say I am a little disappointed, having thought things were true for years and then finding out otherwise.

so where exactly are we on this 010 020 thing... is it solved yet:horse:

CNC BLOCKS
2nd-February-2011, 03:48 PM
Is thing over? I must say I am a little disappointed, having thought things were true for years and then finding out otherwise.

so where exactly are we on this 010 020 thing... is it solved yet:horse:


Buy a Dart SHP block at least those are high nickel castings!!

woodnmetal
2nd-February-2011, 03:52 PM
Buy a Dart SHP block at least those are high mickel castings!!

so if the dart block has high nickel,, then there is an advantage in the nickel content. not many have expressed that. some say too hard, too hard to machine, too much nickel makes the iron inferior,etc.

Paul Wright
2nd-February-2011, 04:14 PM
Buy a Dart SHP block at least those are high mickel castings!!

I don't know what "mickel" is but can you find out what percentage nickle Dart uses in their block?

CNC BLOCKS
2nd-February-2011, 04:41 PM
I don't know what "mickel" is but can you find out what percentage nickle Dart uses in their block?


It was a typing mistake for sure I changed it thanks!! I think you was the only one the did not have a clue what I meant to say!!! Interesting HMMM

CNC BLOCKS
2nd-February-2011, 04:49 PM
so if the dart block has high nickel,, then there is an advantage in the nickel content. not many have expressed that. some say too hard, too hard to machine, too much nickel makes the iron inferior,etc.

I would say there would be an adavantage as far as cylinder wear as the higher nickel blocks are harder and stronger, We had the SHP and the Little -M Brinell tested a few years ago.

The Little-M and Big-M blocks do hone a little harder then the SHP blocks as far as decking and boring my CNC machine it does not know the differance and I can't tell the differance by the load meter.

The CG blocks are very hard to machine and should to be diamond honed!!

woodnmetal
2nd-February-2011, 04:51 PM
I would say there would be an adavantage as far as cylinder wear as the higher nickel blocks are harder and stronger, We had the SHP and the Little -M Brinell tested a few years ago.

The Little-M and Big-M blocks do hone a little harder then the SHP blocks as far as decking and boring my CNC machine it does not know the differance and I can't tell the differance by the load meter.

The CG blocks are very hard to machine and should to be diamond honed!!

well isn't that interesting!!! did you read this guys!!!

71SS427
21st-February-2011, 08:14 PM
I mention again that all the 020 blocks I have, also have the 2482 Nodular main caps. Corvette LT1 , Early L82, a 1970 Nova 300 horse 350 Block, I think it is CNR, Two medium duty truck blocks. Did you ever notice that the SHP engines bores do not seem to wear as much as the regular production?