Over on Facebook I found this: 215 Buick in as 62 Rambler cl***ic I asked questions and got a response Automatic or manual trans? Did you use Rover/Buick bell housing? More info please auto. Borg Warner 35 or the Flash-o-matic as AMC marketed it Yeah rover to BW35 bellhousing. Bolts straight up at both ends No torque tube change etc. Custom motor mount. New radiator. Poster said it took 48 hours for the swap Nick
No. The Buick aluminum 215 V8 used a head design that mimicked the Nailhead appearance. They are single rocker shaft with conventional combustion chamber shapes. They were introduced in the 1961 model year in the then new GM compacts marketed by Buick, Olds and Pontiac. The Olds version used the same block ***embly as the Buick but the head design mimicked the appearance of then current big Olds V8s. Pontiac Tempest was marketed primarily with the slant four, half a 389 V8, but they also offered the Buick version V8 as an option. I think the latter was fairly rare. Ray
The Buick 215 heads have hemispherical shaped combustion chambers, whereas the Olds 215 heads have wedge shaped chambers. Good technical reading here: http://www.seight.com/images/tech/magreps/1961hrm.pdf
I've owned a few of these motors and none had the hemi heads - not even the HP 4 bbl version. If you really want to hop them up, the Land Rover 3.5 is the same motor, built all the way up to a 4.6 with a supercharger in the Range Rovers. The ports got MUCH bigger when LR bought the design, and the sleeves stopped shifting in the block too. Olds motors were basically the same, with a few extra head studs? A lot of the rebuild components are still available from D&D Fab at AluminumV8.com.
The way I see it, you're replacing a cast-iron boat-anchor of the original AMC 327 with an aluminum boat-anchor of the Buick. Way better investment would be changing both engine AND trans to something compatible and practical. Of course, that means doing away with the Torque tube, rear axle, etc... It's a rabbit hole I've been pondering the past few years because I have an awesome 1965 Marlin but I'm not about to sink serious cash into rebuilding the 327 V8. Literally ZERO aftermarket support and even OEM parts are hard to come by. Also, the Buick 215 tops out at roughly 200hp in stockish form, while the 1st Gen AMC engines were conservatively 255hp/275lb ft. So really the only advantage would be slightly less engine weight...
I read the technical article you linked and it says “oblong hemispherical chamber”…..which is a contradiction in terms. Further, the valves are arranged in a straight line, parallel to the engine centerline. That is not at all like the typical actual hemispherical chambered heads with splayed valves at right angles to the centerline. The author was a knowledgeable, well known and respected automotive writer. However his characterization of the Buick chamber was inaccurate. Ray
I just re-read it, and the caption with the image of the combustion chamber states "Buick's chamber is semi-hemispherical in shape..." so, I guess we all use our best judgement in this case. I think the author's intent, and least for the two images of the head's combustion chambers, was to show the difference between the Olds vs. Buick chambers first and foremost. At any rate worth the read IMHO if you have interest in a lightweight, unique, H.A.M.B. era appropriate V8 engine.
Well you may be better off with a later Rover engine if you can find one from a Range Rover. 300 hp from one of those is not unrealistic and would make that rambler plenty fast. Another advantage (with any of these engines, Buick, Olds or Rover) people seem to miss is you lose at least 150 lbs over the front wheels which would improve handling in big way (you will most certainly have to either chop or replace the springs and shocks to get the full advantages + readjust camber/caster etc. but then have a car which should have a neutral handling going through corners). Also, less weight means shorter braking distances. For the bellhousing you'd have to find a Rover P5B or a P6 with an auto box - each of which was offered with the B-W T35 (the only auto box they had ever) and they were sold in the US. I know I speculate, but those as far as I'm aware are not highly desireable cars in the US, so if you find one at a junkyard the price for the bellhousing should not be high.
Back in the 70s a local rambler dealer had a 1963 770 that had 270 HP 327 swapped in replacing the 250 v8 the car ran low 13s he clamed the engine was stock . Don't write off the old 327
Nope, the later 304-401 V8s use either the M11 from BorgWarner or a modified 727, you'd have to swap the transmission from the later V8 as well, or at least the bellhousing and make your own Frankenstein transmission. Plus the later AMC V8s can still be rather expensive to locate and build, so that's why I still recommend swapping out the entire drivetrain from a donor, that way you can skip the parts-hunting nightmare of trying to build something from obsolete components. Don't get me wrong, the early AMC/Ramblers are great little cars and can be a lot of fun to drive and work-on, but the part-availability was never great, and is only getting worse.
I did, maybe I missed something but it was talking about a 215 Buick which is not the same as a late Rover. Not sure whether the FB post was yours or someone else. If it was you and you already have a good Buick, hell yea finding a Rover engine, not just a bellhousing, means spending more and I get why that may not be an option.
The 215 became the Rover engine with improvements. Rovers in the 60s used the same bolt pattern bell housing because the transmission was the same as the Rambler automatics. Look at the wiki I provided there arre different HP variations. Rovers are sold in the US, Land Rovers.
The 2004 Land Rover Discovery was the last year the Buick based engine was used. They used the same bell housing pattern throughout production in both Buick and Rover products.
The Jalopy Journal
