I have been running with the notion that I have a 283 motor (said to be 1967), but yesterday I stumbled across a Crankshaft identification page that has the pic below indicating it to be a 327 crank. The casting numbers on the block are 3849852, which does in fact say its a 283. Any guesses?
the 67 283 has a different block than the 66 and older. It lacks the large cast rib on the front of the block near the oil fill. looks similar to a late 327 &350 block. I bet yours is a 283. Use a piece of stiff wire though a spark plug hole and measure the stroke a 283 is 3 inch a 327 3& 1/4 inch. most 67 283 have a cast crankshaft.
Well there's a lot that can happen in almost 50 years. But if your 283 has a 327 crank in it, it wouldn't be the first time somebody did that. Best thing is to measure the stroke like lone wolf laid out.
All The 67 block,s I ever had did not have that rib as pictured its quite a bit smaller. that looks to be a 66 or earlier.
Sounds like the early-mid 60's method of making a 301 ci SBC......recall you had to be specific on rod/piston combo w/327 crank to achieve correct deck height in 283 block......
Also if you bore a 283, .125 over you will have a 301 Chevy, so there are a couple of way to build the 301. A 283 .60 over is a 292 cubic inch. But yes if you use a stock bore 327 with 283 crank you get a 301, but you have to change the pistons so the pin height is right. Also 283 cranks have a round flange where 327 have a notched flange on the crankshaft.
Hey cool buddy, My 38 Willys will be sporting a 301 when it is done, but as you said, I am going to use a 327 so I don't have the thin cylinder walls that you get when you bore the 283 out too .125 over, makes for better cooling, when I was in High School we built the 283 but the 327 with new pistons is a much better way to go with the build the 301.
Voh-- As far as block dates go; best way to verify is the foundry pad on rear of block on the left side (facing front of engine). I have had quite a few small blocks over the years but never had two in the room at once to really debate the deal with the rib, but here is a shot of my 327 (Nova) block with K 6 5 casting date (November) for early 66 production. The rib on my block seems farther away from the water pump bolt than the one shown. The Nova blocks have always been an animal all their own, so all this may not have much relevance here.
Is your a large journal or small journal Crankshaft that maybe why the block is different i have never own a large 327 so i don't know what that block looks like but if it is large journal it maybe like a 350 block and they don't have that bar like the 283 and 327 with small journal have.
Cool I didn't know I am not a real fan of 350 or 400 small blocks so that could very well be, guess I am to old school, like the 283,327, Small blocks - 396,427, Big blocks.
I never heard of these but did look it up and it didn't say 67 350 blocks were small journal but did list a block, 3892657 64-67 302/327/350 car & Truck 2-bolt. 302's and 327's in 67 where small journal. So this just confuses everything. Think I'll have a drink. Pat
bore x bore x stroke x 8 x .7854 = ci's 4inch bore in a 283 or a std block and a 3inch stroke crank =301. have built them both ways.... a--- 283 .030 over is a 288
Beat ya to it--Nice cold Blue Moon Summer Honey Wheat. I hear this a lot, but the 67 Cacacamaro SS350(295 hp) used them. Cheers--Doug
Funny thing back in 67 all the guys that had those 350/295hp Camaro's where pretty quick in stock trim and most of the guys that had them knew nothing about cars. I always liked small journal motors, Now I know why. Think I'll have another. Pat
3.875 bore with 3.25 stroke is NOT 301, it is bigger - 306.7 or the infamous 307 that nobody likes Smoky and duntov built the first one in 1955 with a stroker crank and pistons . In the early 60s, There'd be special stroker pistons with different piston pin height or a shorter rod with the 327 crank. 4" bore and 3" stroke is a 301 if a hotroder built it. The Same 4" bore with 3" stroke is a 302 if Chevrolet built it.
My recollection from 1967 when the 350 was introduced in the Camaro is that one of the design features of the new 350 engine was larger journals to accommodate the new, longer stroke and maintain adequate crankshaft overlap and strength. The other engines in the family were later converted to the larger journal bores to commonize crankcase machine line tooling. A quick check of the bearing part numbers online confirm that the 67 Camaro bearings are the same as the 68 and later engine bearings. The small journal 350 is a unicorn.
when Chevrolet built the 1967 Z-28's 302 they knew it, formulated out at 301.5936 and SIMPLY rounded it off ... me <---- one of those HOTRODERS would call them a 301 because we were boring and stroking dem 283's long before cheby made the 302.
I'm already drinking. That why that post made no sense. What I would like to know is how much difference is there between a '68 327 and an earlier year.
The Jalopy Journal
