We all know building a 301 but what about a 352 ? My dad says he had a friend back in the goo old days (that had a lot of hot rod money to spend) and he built a 352 out of his 283. He couldn't remember what company made the 3.5 in stroke crank but with all the other nostalgic engine builds going on, I haven't seen anybody post info. about one of these. I think it would be cool to here any old stories of someone running them back then too.
Where I come from, back when 283s were common, no one did much stroking, everyone wanted bigger bores so you could get bigger valves for more RPM capability. The "torque motor" was a later craze! I always wanted to do a 283 crank in a 400 block, think it came out to 320 c.i.
Thought the 352 (and 377) came from a small block 400? With that 3.5 stroke crank you mentioned you'd have roughly a 4" bore in your 283 block or a belly button treefiddy mostly.
i believe Tom Mcmullen's roadster had a 352 chevy in it at first? a 283 bored and stroked if i recall correctly
352 chevy with a 4" bore (.125 over 283) would use a 3.5" stroke, which is a half inch more stroke than a 283, or 1/4" more than a 327.
I knew somebody would come up with a company. My dad said it was sometime around 1962-64 that his friend had it.
Back in the Day around 1960 you could purchase a Balanced & blueprinted 352 small block chevy From the Don Garlits Speed Shop.
This 352 from a 283 is a brand new discovery for me. 400 sbc based 352 3.25 stoke X 4.155 bore and would be a completely different animal.
In the late 50's before there was a Chevy 327; the 283's were bored to 4" and stroked by welding crankshafts and regrinding to make 3/8" stroke 339 cu in and 1/2" stroke 352 cu in engines.
So, why did Chevy decide to go with a 3.480 crank to make 350 rather than go with 3 1/2 to make 352, before this all there small blocks were nominal fractional dimensions? Was it because Ford had the 352 that was not all that exiting a motor?
all the crank companies now make 3.50 sbc crankshaft very common now it puts the piston .010 higher in the cylinder when using stock sized parts
There were a number of gas dragsters that ran SBC engines in the early 1960-s. 332 and 352 were the sizes as I recall. Before the Super Stock wars of the early 60-s a big engine was mid 300-s cubic inches. Joe
283 with a stroker crank is very possible. The only benefit I see is to visually use a 283 block and have some extra power. If you're looking for max power with rpm potential a large bore short stroke will perform better. If the 283 stroker interests you, there's articles on putting a 4" stroke crank in a 350 block, the same could be applied to a 283. You're still stuck with a small bore and limited on valve size. http://www.hotrod.com/how-to/engine/ccrp-0908-chevy-350-engine-build/. A 3.75 crank (400 crank) in a 283 would be an easier fit, aftermarket cranks are available internally balanced to avoid a lot of issues. a 377 400 block with a 350 crank and spacer bearings is a high rpm monster, a juiced up 302. Better plan on good heads and valve train to feed it, double humps willl just limit you. but you lose the visual appeal of the 283.
We happen to have one, Came out of the Burnum & Bradshaw 39 Chevy coupe. They ran at Great Bend, from 1959 to 1963. The crank was built in Wichita by who I don't know.
I don't remember any details, not even sure if it was @ Lakewood Speedway, oir Atlanta Motore Speedway, there was a race for open wheel cars. They had at least one 2 both tracks in years gone by, but there was an old style Indy car, the ones that predate the roadsters, configured like a sprint car. The car was yellow in color and sponsored by a Wilson Automotive "Home of the 4X4 Chev.". So I assume it was "4X4". Did the math on that and it's 402 cid, and this was in 283 days.
We ran We ran a "4 x 4" in the Panneton Christensen & Jones '56 Chevy B/G, in 1967. It used a new standard bore (4.00) 327 block. The crank started life as a 259/289 Studebaker, which has a 3.625 (3 5/8) stroke, & the same main journal size and spacing as a 283/small journal 327. C&T welded the throws, and offset ground the crank to a 4.00 stroke. The Stude crank has center thrust, but the rear main seal lip is a miniature of a Chevy thrust. C&T also welded up the Stude seal lip, and machined it into a rear thrust for the Chevy block. The rods (also prepared by C&T) were '56 Buick Nail head jobs, with the big end "fork" area ground for cam clearance, and were converted to short Allen head cap screws instead of nut & bolts, as original. These rods are nearly 6" long (5.960 I believe), the small ends were bushes for .927 (small block Chevy)wrist pins. The piston were Forged True flat top 2 ringers, Dykes top ring (no second ring), and used nylon pin buttons. With home ported 461x heads at 58 cc chamber volume she was in the 12.5-12.75:1 compression ratio zone. The heads had pinned (not screw in)studs, and stock rockers "long slotted" by dad. The cam was a Sig Erson flat tappet, .500 lift & 340' Advertised duration (probably 240-250 @ .050 back then). Erson springs etc. & Corvette push rods with no guide plates. Corvette 6 quart pan, pickup & pump. Fuel came from a set of Pete Jackson Injectors, and was lit by the new at the time GM, " Magpulse" CD ignition system. The headers were 4 into ones made by dad, and when the car was chassis dynoed on Rex Carsons 400HP Clayton in Glendale, it ran off with the dyno at 5000 rpm. The engine most likely made in the 500-525 range at the crank. This engine, with the big stroke, wouldn't pull much past 6000 rpm. This pic is with the 402" engine @ San Fernando. I have seen it said several times, that when the Kohler Bros. first ran their Anglia, it was in A/Gas without the supercharger, and that they ran a 415" mouse. (4.065 x 4.00).
The three common hotrod sizes for 283's when they were the biggest available cores were 292 and 301 for overbored engine with stock stroke, with 301 being the biggest sane bore but slightly risky bore. A 301 with stroker crank, too expensive for most, was the 352. I think a lot more people said they had a 352 than actually did because of the cost...but when a 283 needed an overhaul, most went straight out to 301 for the best bang for buck. I actually have an ancient article on building a 400 cube 283, done by a shop here in NJ that still exists. It was bored out to nothing and given wet sleeves, probably produced more leaks than horses...but it was done!
There used to be a couple of cars in the Fresno area that were said to be 352" 283's. Memory says they had Crankshaft Co. strokers. One was a 57 Chevy that ran at Raisin City-about 63-65 I think.
Bruce That's funny ( although probably not far from the truth). We used to build a lot of 301 or destroked 327 (301s) if we could afford a block and tell everyone that we had 265s. Guess I never played in the right neighborhood, I never heard of a 352 chevy. Obviously I have not heard of everything, just don't remember anyone mentioning one.
The 352 was something beyond because of the crank $...don't remember, and don't have catalogs here, but probably an amount that sounds pathetic now like $250. It was an ideal for people who had lots more money that anyone you actually new, kind like an aluminum block 426 SBC now. A 301 was something approachable, because once you wore out your 283 big pistons didn't add much money to the overhaul...unless your machine shop hit air during the boring.
That's awesome, real pioneering stuff! Can you imagine stumbling across that engine today and pulling it down for a rebuild - there would be a lot of WTF moments trying to work out what is going on in there.
Panneon Bros, that was some trick stuff in 1967. Got any more info on wild set ups from the time period?
The Jalopy Journal
