Captain Obvious

Perfect. Then throw the front cover on and fire that thing up!! Haha! I also noticed that you are running the eccentric cam to drive a fuel pump, but you certainly are not going to be running a mechanical fuel pump with that EFI system. Doesn't hurt anything, just unnecessary.

Looks way better! So I can see the timing mark on the cam sprocket. Using position 1 (which makes sense with new timing components), but I can't see the mark on the crank gear. Are you positive sure you got the timing marks correct?

Well I guess at the end of the day, your wideband would be the best determination of whether those injectors are appropriate. I'm interested because there's a local to me Z guy who is dealing with some injector issues. I've been thinking about just jettisoning the whole stock system like you have and moving to something different. I remember reading somewhere (hoovered) that the flow rate can be considered relatively linear with respect to fuel pressure. At least within a range close to the rated flow. So if something flows "X" at "Y", it should flow 0.83X at 0.83Y. Do you know what GM vehicles used those injectors you have there?

Yeah, that thing about the clamps being asymmetric is really weird. But after seeing so many sets with the same shape, it's clear that it was done on purpose. And I'm still not sure it really matters much. But since I'm a stickler for details like that!

" I thought it would be something more... obvious, like Right." Haha!!

How does the flowrate of those new injectors compare to the originals? I did a very little looking around a while ago and it seems the originals are low flow compared to most of the newer stuff.

I'm doing very similar configuration to what you did. I shaved .010 less than you did, but same P79 head and F54 block and also stock valves. I've got a second set of parts here, slack guide and tensioner. Maybe I'll throw them on just to see if they are any different than what I've got mocked up on the block now. In theory, if a manufacturer put a little extra plastic material on the end of the tensioner shoe or the slack side guide, it would change the positioning of everything. So I've got a different brand of both available.I I'll toss them on just to see how it looks. I think I have an OSK set here as well as an ITM. And sorry to the OP for the thread diversion. I know it's related, but still. Sorry for the sidetrack.

Duh. It stands for "Rear"?

If you look closely, you can see that the steering rack retainer straps are not quite symmetric. I'm not sure we ever reached positive consensus about the correct orientation, but here's a couple threads that talk about it: https://www.classiczcars.com/forums/topic/48621-steering-rack-disassembly-and-refurb/?page=15 https://www.classiczcars.com/forums/topic/65616-putting-in-a-replacement-l-28/?page=11 I don't think there is a left vs. right, but I do think there is a front vs. back.

Thanks for the details on the eccentrics. I was zooming in on your pic to see if I could figure out which eccentric you ended up with, but couldn't tell. Now I know why! Haha! If I would make my eccentrics, I would make them (just under) the full width of the gear web so I didn't have that issue. So, looking back at your .050 off pic again.... Are you sure you didn't use cam tower spacers or something? It just looks so different than what I found!

Neat idea. So why are you going to do both threaded retainer ring and little screws in from the back? Why don't you just concentrate on the threaded ring? You worried you can't get it to work out right? I'd be more worried about the screws in from the back. Such a short threaded length. Fiddly little screws that you're going to drop and lose on the floor. No room for locking hardware and vibrating out, etc.

@Jeff G 78, I also see you are using an eccentric bushing on a modified cam gear. Did you find that you needed to adjust the cam timing after you had the head milled? That's my next step and I'm in process of figuring that out now. I've got a cam gear modified to accept one of those GM style eccentric bushings, but I won't really know for sure until I have a real head gasket installed and the head torqued down. In theory, the milling of the head would retard the cam, so I'm thinking I might be able to just use one of the built in adjuster holes (either 2 or 3) to advance it back to where it should be. I also don't like the sloppy fit of the eccentric bushing on the cam locator pin. Bushing designed for a 1/4" pin, being used on a 6 mm pin. If I find I do need to use an adjuster eccentric, I'll probably make my own.

Yeah, that looks a whole lot better than mine did when I mocked it together. I put mine together with a used FelPro head gasket so there was a little bit of crush there, but I also had my head cut .010 less than you did. In any event, if mine looked like that after just opening up the adjustment slot, I would have been good with that. Maybe there are just differences between manufacturers of chain guides.

I'm thinking the same thing. Stackup of a whole bunch of things. So I test fitted my .040 shaved head and I still had too much stickout even with a whole new timing set. Even with filing the slot longer on the slack side guide wasn't enough to bring the tensioner back to home. I'm surprised you were able to do a simple slot lengthening with your .050 off and ended up with the tensioner all the way in. With my guide, there wasn't sufficient extra meat on the edge the guide to file the slot as long as it need to be. Maybe your guide was a different brand than what I used? I eventually had to take some more extreme measures with the guide. I'll post pics when I get a chance.

I took a look back through some of my notes and here's a couple points of interest: Stock head thickness is 108mm (4.252 inches). Couple USED head gasket I measured - thickness approx 0.045 (1.15 mm) NEW head gasket I measured - thickness approx 0.055 (1.40 mm)

The new timing set will certainly help, but depending on how much the machinist took off your head, even with all new timing parts, you might still find the tensioner sticks out further than it should. I've got typical head gasket thickness measurements around here someplace (not handy right now), but I'm thinking your 1mm head gasket is about .020 thinner than stock? So if the machinist took even .010 off the head, you're at a total of .030 from stock. Even with a new timing set, I'm worried your tensioner will still be out more than it should be. Maybe enough to limp you home, but still something you would need to address. All of this is very fresh in my mind because I'm sitting here looking at my custom chain guide that I'm working on in order to bring my tensioner stickout back to acceptable range with my just completed .040 shaved head. The .015 shims will help a whole lot, but then you run the risk of having your contact patch on the lash pads or rockers in the wrong spots. That said... I'm no engine builder, but I would be more comfortable with running with an incorrect contact patch for 60 miles than I would for that tensioner sticking out that far for 60 miles. And as for the head gasket... Again, I'm no engine builder, but if you haven't run the engine at all, I'd be comfortable with leaving the head gasket in place if you were to pop cam tower shims in there. Follow the correct loosen and re-tighten sequence and procedure on the head bolts and I'd expect things to be OK. Which route to take kinda depends on how quickly you need to get that thing out of your buddy's way.

And I'm not comfortable with this. I don't think you should start the engine like that, let alone try to make it 60 miles. It's just too risky.

So you had the head cut and are using a custom head gasket that is thinner than stock. Both of those will contribute to the issue you are dealing with. What about the timing chain guides (not the valve guides)? Did you replace those with new or are they the same ones that were in the engine when you started? This is one of the guides I'm talking about:

Coincidentally, I've been messing around with the timing chain and tensioner stuff recently and with that in mind, I'm really wondering why your chain has so much slack in it. I've compared a brand new timing set with all new gears, chain, and guides to a used set that has run 150K miles. Of course there was a some difference, but even the 150K used set has way less slack than what you have in yours. Now, of course, yours could be worn and stretched more than the used set I have here, but I'm thinking there could be something else going on. As part of your rebuild process on the engine, did you have the head cut? Having material removed from the head can have a large impact on chain tension. Also, you said you did not replace the chain or the tensioner. So what did you replace? Did you replace the guides with new, or are the guides used as well? I'm thinking if you got the head cut and reused all the old parts, that's what is causing the issue.

Couple comments... As Granny suggested above, that tensioner is sticking out too far. I would not start the engine like that. About the three holes on the upper timing gear... those holes do not adjust the tension on the chain. They affect the cam timing with the respect to the crank location, but don't have any effect at all on chain tension. Moving from one hole to another won't do anything to fix this problem.

Wait. I did wash. I think?

Perfect. Then my work here is done.

I would be disappointed if there weren't. Congrats on moving forward. One step at a time!

The general consensus is that the beveled side of the rubber washers goes on the inboard side towards the control arm. Here's a thread that talks some about it: https://www.classiczcars.com/forums/topic/48661-spindle-pin-rubber-washers/ And about the rear outer control arm bushings... there has been some chatter in the past that they are slightly asymmetric and actually have a longer portion of metal tube sticking out on one end compared to the other. I don't know if you got yours all in the same way, (and I doubt it's worth the trouble to press them back out again and start over if you didn't) but here's some threads that talk about that: https://www.classiczcars.com/forums/topic/64195-rear-control-arm-bush-alignment/ https://www.classiczcars.com/forums/topic/55369-1971-hls30-14938-lily-build/?page=4

To add a little more detail to what Zed Head mentioned... The gas cap (original cap) has a "real" check valve built into it such that it will allow air INTO the gas tank in the even that the tank is drawn down to a vacuum, but it will not allow anything to escape. Now, I'm not really sure why they thought they needed to build a second valve into that little check valve device in the EVAP system. Seems like they only needed one way for air to get into the tank and that was handled by the gas cap. but there are actually two ways for air to get into the tank... Through the gas cap valve, or through the carbon can and then through that in-line check valve device. I wasn't there when they designed it. The reason it got more difficult to blow through (from the engine side) each time was because you were pressurizing the fuel tank a little with each blow. When the pressure got to the point where your lungs couldn't do any more, it stopped and held. The system is designed to hold some pressure, but not enough to damage the tank. In normal operation, the fuel tank will most likely be running under positive pressure as you drive the car. Goes like this... When you start the car with a cold tank, everything should be pretty much at equilibrium. The tank pressure should be right around atmospheric. Then as you drive, you will heat the fuel in the tank... Exhaust pipes close. Warm rear diff close. Gas recirculating up the the warm fuel rail and back again. All that stuff and the fuel heats up and expands causing the tank pressure to go up. If (when?) the tank pressure increases to the point where it will open up* the "check valve" device in the vapor line, it will burp into the carbon can. By operating that way. the check valve allows the system to run at a positive pressure, but not high enough to damage the fuel tank. * known in valve terminology as "cracking pressure". The check valve has an asymmetric cracking pressure design. Lower cracking pressure pointed towards the tank and a higher cracking pressure pointed towards the carbon can.