I have a lead on a 62 327 with the PCV built into the block out of an Impala SS. This would be perfect for me cause i got NOS Cal Custom 8 Fin valvecovers that I don't want to put breathers in, but everyone tells me it's a must to run a breather in each. True?
That's the way they came and it worked fine.My '65 Malibu SS 327 had the same set up from the factory and I never had a problem with it.200K miles !
You have to run a breather somewhere. If you have an intake with an oil fill you can put your breather on the top of the oil fill tube. There are probably better ways to do it but that's doable.
Run an early style intake manifold with the oil filler neck on it and put a breather on it. That should allow all of the internal pressure to escape and run some thicker valve cover gaskets if you can find them and make sure you run the cork ones! christian
The early SBCs had the breathers in the intake, not the valve covers. You need one somewhere though. I would NOT add breathers to a nice set of Cal Custom or any other early style valve covers. Doing that will not only ruin the look, but also the value.
Who have you been talking to? It's a must to run breathers in each valve cover? The engineers at Chevrolet must have really been retarded, because every small block from '55 to '68 had solid valve covers and an oil fill tube/breather in the intake. Just don't be like the genius I knew that ran early valve covers and a late intake with no oil tube, and wondered why the dipstick kept blowing up out of its tube.
The tube on the flywheel end of the block is not a pcv. It's just an open tube. If you use that, you do need the oil cap breather that everyone has mentioned.
Chevy PCV's were plumbed into the same block hole that was formerly the attachment for the road draft tube, roughly '63-68.
I have my model a that has the rear under intake breather and a front fill tube with a breather and it sends oil out of the front breather pretty regular, but my 57 with a front fill tube and no rear tube works awesome. I dont know why two similar setups have such diffirent outcomes.
The 62 engine is precisely why the finned valve covers of that era had no provisions for breathers. They weren't necessary for that year engine (with the block mount PCV or road draft tube and the front oil fill tube/fresh air inlet) The newer blocks without the rear block PCV or road draft tube connection needs a different set up.
If you do not have an intake with the hole for the oil filler tube you can cut it out of the intake if you have an aluminum intake that has the casting but no hole. I recently cut one out with a holesaw & a round file on an Edelbrock Performer intake.
I bet yours have either 6, 7, or 9 fins. For SBC, Cal Custom didn't make 8-finned covers. Dave http://www.roadsters.com/
I have an early 283 with an early intake, I have a breather cap on the fill tube, a PCV in place of the road draft tube (which is going back in this weekend) When I drive @ highway speeds, I get oil all over my windscreen & cowl, I put some early Cal Custom 6 fin (I think) covers on and added some early Offy aluminium breathers (on the top edge, nearest the intake, not in the fins) Now when I drive @ highway speeds, the oil stays in the crankcase, if it was me, I'd run breathers.
My 62 has the stock alum intake with the front filler and a road draft tube, no breathers. Havn't had a bit of trouble in over 100k. BB
nope, that's why i'm looking for one. you have the can under the intake, running out the back of the block. you can either run road draft or run it to the carb and you need a breather cap on the oil fill tube............then your golden.
No. All of the early passenger car 327s came with flat top pistons, except for the HP engines, which came with pop up pistons and fairly hot cams from the factory, and they all used the same crankcase breathing system.
The Jalopy Journal
