You mean these ?? You leave them alone!!! It is now part of the casting Here is a 68 327 Block # 3914678 Now would be a good time to measure the bore on your block! It had a transmission conversion ! so who knows ? maybe a 327 conversion as well 327 = 4" 283 = 3.875" [3-7/8"] Edit: Bryan, did you ever find out what rear end ratio you have ?
Yes it had a 4 spd from power glide. Whats the purpose of them? It is a 283 bored .030. And cranks been ground 10/10. Have not checked rear end yet no..
Been watching your thread with interest, love the little 283s Talk about hot rod tradition! I had a 283 with a three on tree, power nothing, in an OT 66 Impala when I was in junior college loved it. A mild cam, 4 bbl, and headers would make a nice cruiser. Back in the day the little 283s were put in everything from school buses to Corvettes. Seems everyone has a 350 these days, not everyone has has a 283. Have fun Dan
Or you can stroke the 283 out to 350 [actually 348"] and leave the stock appearance incl the 283 casting numbers. This would make a torquey "street bandit" that would also be a docile reliable cruiser. Lift the hood and even experts couldn't tell [It'll still have the 283 block and head casting numbers] maybe matching numbers if your engine is the original It can be done cheap using "mostly" stock parts except a cheap "Eagle Crank" and minimal machine work [no boring is needed] It would be a very satisfying build in a big car like an Impala
Those big pipe plugged holes on either side of the cam were to allow the sand casing core (water jacket space) to float within the sand casting mold of the block. After steel was cast into the mold those holes allow for access to the water jacket space to aid cleaning out of the sand core. During machining, those holes were tapped and the plugs installed to keep coolant contained in the water jacket. If memory serves there are also similar holes on the rear. Modern mold making does not require them. In any case, do not remove them unless you have evidence they have been leaking coolant into the oil pan. Standard stroke for Chevy 350 is 3.48"
I think the little 265/283's were one of the best overall engines ever built. Just my humble opinion. Sure there are high HP motors out there, but for all around reliability you can't beat em.
I was hoping it was the 3789817 casting for your year car In 1964 this ^^^ block casting was used for both 283 and 327 engines. So it could be bored out to 4.000 without even bothering to sonic test the bores. If this was the case you could build a 383 small journal "sleeper" using common stroker kits and tunnel boring the block to accept a 2.45" main journal crank with a 3.905" bore you are limited to 348" using available parts [you can't use a 3.75" stroke without custom built pistons]
3.75...327 stroke or..? And 348 cubic inches you mean? Yea that's ok im keeping it pretty tame on this biuld...I my build something later for it and take my time. For now I just wanna drive her again. Maybe a gear change ( still gatta find out the ratio...a posi would be cool too) but the wife does want a 57 somday...
It is easy to make a "348" stroker from your block because it is already 0.030 oversize bores. The secret is the ac***ulation of the correct parts. You need a 3.625" stroker crank , Chevy 400 Rods, and 30 over Chevy 250 pistons / Chevy 307 "Rebuild" pistons. The 3.625 stroker crank is large journal , so you have a choice of grinding the main bearing journals [and rear oil slinger] Or tunnel boring the mains in the block.[and rear oil slinger on the crank] The 400 SBC rods are 5.565" long and the same 2.1" large journals as the crank. The pistons needed are Silvolite Cast Pistons for a 250 Chevy 6 cylinder ,but you would need to buy 2 sets to get 8 pistons [or 1 set and 2 spare pistons] These pistons have a compression height of 1.640" which would have a deck clearance of 0.0075" [7.5 thou] They also have a "D" shaped 7cc Dish so it would net a 10.18:1 compression These pistons are cheap https://www.summitracing.com/search...atch&SortOrder=Ascending&keyword=1446C-.030K1 Northern Auto Parts also sell these pistons individually at $18.25 ea https://northernautoparts.com/piston-chevy-250ci-4-1l-l6-1446-030/ You probably will need to cut valve notches in these for a higher lift cam [but easy to do DIY with the right cutter and a cordless drill] Another [maybe better] alternative is "rebuilder" 307 Chevy pistons Standard Chevy 307 pistons are 1.675" compression height but Rebuilder Hypereutectic Pistons are usually 0.020" further down the hole [with a 1.655" compression height] The whole combo in a standard deck height 283 block will have the pistons 0.0075" [7.5 thou] out of the hole From there you have a choice depending on your heads. If you use low compression heads just leave the pistons as is ,and use 0.041" compressed thickness head gaskets. This leaves 0.033" quench. If you're running power packs , I recommend increasing the intake valves to either 1.84" to 1.94" and de-shroud the chambers around the valves near the bore. [this should add a couple of cc to the chambers] Then you cut 7.5 thou [0.0075"] off the piston crowns to zero deck This would net a 10.6:1 compression ratio If you cut 17.5 thou off the piston crowns [for 10 thou deck clearance] it would net approx 10.2:1 compression I have safely cut 35 thou off pistons in a Road Racing engines Silvolite hypereutectic pistons have a bevelled crown, so cutting the crown does not compromise the top ring land [and they are 1.655" comp height] These pistons are Silvolite Piston Set 1438.030 https://www.heavydutypros.com/silvolite-piston-set-1438-030.aspx so you need to weigh up whether buying 2 sets of 250 pistons is cheaper than the cost of machining the crown on 307 pistons [there is 2 choices] The crankshaft is cheap at $745 made by Eagle from Forged 4340 which is overkill https://www.summitracing.com/parts/esp-435036255700 It is internally balanced , but I would recommend a 350 balancer instead of the thin 283 balancer [this would be the only telltale on what could appear to be a stock engine] The rod stroke ratio with 400 rods is better than a stock 400 SBC and slightly better than a 454 BBC [so don't over think this] Add a torquer cam and a dual plane manifold and it will "pull like a schoolboy" Here is an early small and later large journal bearing cap for comparison [they are the same except the machine work] There would be no strength issues should the block be tunnel bored The oil slinger groove on the large journal is deeper , so the easiest method is to cut down the slinger on the crank. And you can get the main journals ground down while you're at it [and leave the block alone] The crank would be no weaker than if it was originally a small journal crank [and Forged 4340 is overkill anyway] You could lift the hood and find a stock looking 348" wolf in sheep's clothing Also when using Hypereutectic pistons, you MUST use the piston manufacturer's recommendation for the top ring gap [not the ring manufacturer's recommendation] The top ring groove is closer to the crown on Hypereutectic pistons .so there is greater ring /heat expansion. I know of many experienced engine builders ignore this and it results in piston failure [faulty parts blah, blah, blah! It's never their fault]
Thats impressive but all a little over my head at this point in the game. Im going to keep this biuld fairly simple and use it as a learning experience...the next one I do is going to be something different/ more involved though...and may swap it in there for some fun down the road
I didn't go back and review the thread but if you are not going to be raising the compression to at least 10-1 or so I would use the cam highlighted here- The next listing, with .447 lift, is the cam Chevy used in the 327/350 horse engine and it likes compression. You will be happier with a mild so-called RV cam which the MTC-1 is.
That sort of chicanery is mainly used in Nostalgia Racing or if somebody is pedantic about matching numbers. It would be easier to simply use a roller 350 shortblock under your top end in a future build. There is nothing wrong with a 283 [or even a 307 build] Remember these cars were brand-new daily drivers at one stage in their life. Just nowadays our highway cruising speeds are a lot higher. So value for value you would get more gains / satisfaction from the transmission [eg modern 5 speed] If you consider mechanical performance advancements in cars over the years , apart from electronics....... the biggest gains were in transmission ratio spreads [modern cars are really low geared in 1st ,and high geared in top ] For comparison your '64 impala is 50 lbs lighter than a 302 powered 1990 Crown Vic' and those things went good enough to be police cars. They had 150hp SAE Net [185hp SAE gross] a 2.73 rear and got 20 mpg You could easily get better performance from your 283 Chevy with careful intelligent parts selection [as long as you resist the urge to "hotrod" the engine with romantic parts] Just don't over cam a 3" stroke engine [they become a turd below 3000 rpm] Try and get the lift as high as possible but the duration as short as possible. This is something that needs serious consideration if a high ratio or overdrive is being considered [the baby 283 still needs to push that brick through the air] The one that @Fordors circled above is a good choice I chose an Elgin #CL1787PK 1200-4200 rpm 204/204 dur @ 50 .427 .427 lift Which is very similar [but not split duration] My cam had a 110° lobe separation [vs 112° above] which helps low end power and gives it a nice "burble" at idle What cam grinders do is widen the lobe separation to minimalize valve overlap when they increase duration. The cam listed above had increased exhaust duration so it can use a more restrictive exhaust [over open headers] That Melling MTC-1 cam is a very good choice [you wouldn't regret using it]
Sounds like ill go with it then. I think a gear change and 5 speed would benefit me a lot .will be interesting to see what its turning now that the tach is working when its back together
Also be careful of the rear cam bore plug on a 283 . The depth is very important , so measure and keep records before you knock it out. The best way is to use a hammer and a block of wood and hit the old camshaft through knocking it out. [then it can be reused if you cant find a replacement] The early ones are very shallow and an oddball size [2-1/64"] Later ones are 2-7/64" and a lot deeper ,and these always come in universal 283-350 freeze plug kits. So try and save it [and definitely measure it]
Well ...to late for that! Lol I just figured was a regular freeze plug...does it have to do with setting cam position as well?..engine has been at machine shop for a few days
The cam lobes are slightly tapered so the lifters "spin" ,this causes the cam to thrust rearwards and not walk. The rear face of the timing gear controls the distance of the cam on Chevys. When an engine is converted to roller cam [with parallel lobes] a cam ****on and/or thrust plate is needed to prevent "cam walk" Also when you buy an aftermarket timing set [eg: Romac] they come with a bronze thrust bearing or Torrington thrust bearing . If the front face of the block is damaged, a Torrington is a bolt in repair. [on race engines we cut a small groove in the front cam bearing bore [to allow a Torrington to be lubed at high rpm] Get the machine shop to install the cam bearings and freeze plugs [and gallery plugs] They can do this cheaper than hiring a cam bearing install tool. Ask him about the rear cam bore plug. [there is a change over year in 283's] The best DIY method is to install the old camshaft and timing gear [which runs against the front of the block] then you know how deep the rear of the cam journal is.
The chamfer on the bottom allows for a longer stroke [327 crank and 307 pistons] The 3789817 casting can be BORED to 4" so it can take longer stroke AND larger bore' Chevy used the 3789817 casting for both 283 and 327 bores [3.875" and 4.000"] Most early 283 [and some 265] blocks without the chamfer at the bottom can go out to 4.000" BUT they cannot take a longer stroke because there is water jacket issues. [unless the crank counterweights are cut down] Some of the later 283's [67-68] can also be bored to 4.000" but not your mid-year block. Personally , I would use a 327 crank [while the engine is apart] and cheap ***ed 0.030 over 307 pistons and stroke it. [It helps the engine to be lazier and not work hard] and dirt cheap. They are both internally balanced 307's only got the bad name because they were the little brother to the 350 [from 1969] whereas when the 283 was released in 1957 it was King **** until the 327 came out. [305's suffer the same fate]
That all depends on whether you want to keep the original car's DNA! power packs keep that vintage look to the engine [and power packs were used on 327's in Impalas] A 307 stoker is totally invisible, even an expert couldn't tell when the engine is installed And every thing appears to be period correct! But crack test your heads first, you may have no choice. If I was considering 305 heads, I'd hunt down some L98 C4 Corvette aluminium heads. But "Less is MORE" keep the power packs if possible. They have withstood 60 years of use [and suit the character of the car] Maybe give them a good valve job [1.84 intakes]
Ok guys...its been a while but machine shop has had it for months ( there behind)...they want to go to 040 on the. Bore to clean up a good ridge at the top. And turn crank another 010 so it would be 20/20..was hoping could be polished ..I mentioned possibly going to 1.94 intake valves( or 1.84..or 305 heads? He didnt seem to think putting 305 heads on it was much of an improvement...said ya 1.94 valves would be good..I'm wondering if he's just picking my pockets.). ...here is the quote I was givin..let me know your thoughts...still planing on 4 bbl carb and Intake ( edelbroke) headers...still undecided on the rest.. slight cam upgrade..have these heads redone with slightly bigger valves...? Push compression up a tad? Rebiult rods new flat top pistons..? What do u guys think..or just using a rebiuld kit from northern auto parts in it with a cam upgrade and the above mentioned stuff. Again, just wanna pep her up a little and do what makes sense. I don't wanna over complicate this biuld.
The Jalopy Journal
