Projects plain ole black & white 265 chevy re-build

scored this 265 off Craigslist with the plan to put in my 29 "pea green" tudor.

casting translates to a 1955 or 56 car & truck 2-bolt, the canister oil filter and long crankcase breather tube make it a 1956.

many thanks to my neighbor Tom, for the picking up and tearing apart.

plan to drop off the block to get cleaned and inspected a local NAPA machine shop tomorrow to make sure its good before I get too excited and start buying other parts.


I've done some research (all Google searches lead to HAMB) all thoughts and knowledge appreciated, I've got a few ideas I'm pondering going for 307 cubes

 

So......... 265 pistons are kind of expensive
i'm thinking about using standard 283 pistons, this involves boring .125, I've been reading pro's and cons).

also I figure if I need to get the crank ground for oversized bearings i might as well use a small journal 327 crankshaft, I believe this will make a 307.

what's wrong with this plan?

 

with that block ,i think using a 327 crank with a 3.25 stroke will cause some interference between the rods and the bottom of the cylinder bore...????

i'd stay with the forged crankshaft you have now and have it ground if needed...around here that's about $100

 

It was pretty common to build stroker 265\ 283s using a SJ (wasnt any other kind then) 327 crank.Works fine.If it was me I would bore it to 3 7\8" and keep the crank you have.If you buy 265 pistons be sure they have valve reliefs.

 

A 327 crank WILL NOT FIT without serious recontouring of the counterweights on the crankshaft; then that means serious rebalancing also. E-Bay is your friend for pistons. I have a .030 over set of forged, 265 pistons I got for pretty cheap; I also have steel shim head gaskets I bought off there also. Update the oiling system by connecting the rear cam journal channels, and you won't have to notch the camshaft if you swap to one other than stock. Looks like you have 2 barrel heads so, use some 601 casting number 305 heads with hardened seats; they'll have slightly smaller chambers to boost the CR some also; you may get lucky and find a pair with 1.84 intakes, and the slightly smaller chambers will help bring the CR back up due to replacement pistons having 4 valve reliefs (stock had no reliefs). Use rams horns and not the 265 exhaust manifolds, or go with headers. My machinist thinks I'm a little nuts for building 265/283 engines still, even though he also gets my BBC stuff. I have an early 56 (actually have two), dual quad intake, and a couple of WCFB carbs that could be cloned if you'd be interested; just the intake and carbs without linkage or fuel lines however. My other setup is complete, other than having the correct oil fill tube (it's been ordered though). You might also want to look into using the 2nd stage 327 rods with more metal around the rod bolts; the 265/283/early 327 rods are pretty lightweight; or go with some aftermarket I-beams like I have.
I am Butch/56sedandelivery.

 

I bored a 265 out to .125 years ago and the temp was always at 210. I would go the least with a nice cleanup bore. You have to buy pistons anyway.

 

56sedan; again thanks for comments, I was under the impression that I could leave a small journal 327 crank alone and remove material from the 265 block for clearance.

link to heads i'm thinking about using, http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/...s-on-a-265-w-lots-pics.1012834/#post-11440502

 

Why use a 327 crank .It will not be simple or cheap to put in a at best marginal block. Find a 283 or 327 block use your 265 steel crank. Bore the block as little as possible . better heads intake carb & cam and have a real screamer. Or just find a stock 307. Your idea is a very expensive way to build a engine that is no longer a 265.

 

I hear ya, but i'm determined to use a 265 block, I really like the lack of cast side 3-bolt engine mounts, the large 1" crankcase breather tube off the back, canister oil filter etc... thats make it unique and not just another belly button. I've been thinking about upping the cubic inches to use the 2.02 valve'd heads I already have and pretty much ready to go, but above all I still want a driver/engine that runs smooth.

 

I "thought" .125 was a pretty big chunk to take out of these blocks?? Trying to learn, trying to learn........

 

Old Wolf>>>Bore the block as little as possible . better heads intake carb & cam and have a real screamer>>>

I like this idea best. BTW, the OP never explained why it needs a bore job or even all new pistons. Big cyl ridge? Cracked pistons?

Jack E/NJ

 

Common on an engine that old to need an over bore to remove the taper in the cylinders. Hell even late model engines will commonly have too much taper in the cylinders.

Sometimes when you have a motor that has cast pistons and the cylinder wear is right on the outer edge of tolerance you can get away with swapping to a forged piston and just a good honing for clearance. Forged pistons like a little more slop than cast pistons. Use file to fit rings and not pre sized rings and that will make your rings custom fit you the worn cylinders.

I have stuck a 327 crank in a 283 to make a 307 even after the GM 307s had a bad name. With the proper compression height a stroked 283 can be a little torque little devil. It was a common modification back in the early to mid '60s and isn't any harder to do than stroking a 350. That said I probably would not do that today unless I had a bunch of parts lying around and needed to build an engine from them. If I had a complete 265 or a 283 I would build it that way. They were both good little motors, hell they pulled a tri 5 chevy just fine.

Anyway that's my thoughts for the morning.

 

PnB>>>If I had a complete 265 or a 283 I would build it that way. >>>

I do. And I did. 8^)

Jack E/NJ

 

just grind the side mount bosses of the sides of the block. Every small journal 283 & 327 block has the provision for the breather tube.

 

There was a member here a few years back, that was building a "big inch" motor based on a 265 block and small journal 327 crank. I don't remember his handle however. Maybe he'll chime in, someone will remember him, or someone can find the thread (things changed with the new format and I can't find it ). It took LOTS of work, LOTS of machining to the crank and block for clearance, and I imagine it was $$$. That's really the bottom line, how much do you want to spend? I am Butch/56sedandelivery.

 

If he was building a big inch motor as in had the crank welded up and offset then he would have run into problems with the rod bolts not clearing the bottom of the block at the pan rail and the bottoms of the cylinders, with a stock 327 crank and a 265/283 block it just takes a little clearance with a dremmel.

That said no reason to reinvent the wheel, if the motor is complete a 265 with very little tweaking will move a light car around just fine.

 

The OP,s block looks to be a 56 or 57 block. The 55 block didnt have a oil filter. It used a remote filter with lines like a 6 cyl engine would have. If he already has a 327 crank just find a 327 block. And he can use his 202 heads

 

Look at my avatar. It's a 301.

 

Back 50 years ago there was a guy named Cooper worked at the DX station. He had a 55 and built a 265 engine. bored to 283, 11 to 1 pistons double hump heads ,big cam. Carter afb of a aluminum high rize intake. Got it running and was flogging it across the gas station lot. Taking off and smoking tires ect. That carter carb was off a FE ford. and had a vacuum secondary. He decided the four bbl wasnt opening up. So tied a string on the linkage. And ran it through a hole in the fire wall. It worked he jerked open the four BBL and it was really smoking the tires. And it blew up. Steam and water flew out the hedder on one side. Tore it down and a cyl wall had shattered. Boring the engine left the cyl wall paper thin. A guy gave him a small journal 327 short block from a 63 two ton truck that had spun a rod bearing. He installed the 265 crank and a set of 302 pistons in that 327 block. Put all of the goodies from the 265 on it and it was a fast reliable 55.

 

I look at it this way, the 265 powered corvette ran real well and it was a 3000 pound car. The corvette never has been a light car when you get right down to it.

if we are building a '50s or early '60s style car I don't see it being a real problem if it has '50s/'60s style performance. Granted I like going fast just like everyone else, but for some reason we want our period ride with new millennium performance. Out of the gate GM was getting 210-225 BHP out of the little 265, we know some tricks that don't fit production line motors and I don't doubt that we could get a horse per inch, so that makes it a 250- 265 horse motor easy and still be a reliable runner.

Curb weight on a 29 Tudor with a small block could easily be 2000-2500 pounds so we shaved 500-1000 off the Vette weight and added 30 ponies should scoot around real well. Maybe not new millennium well but fit right into the era we are shooting for.

I'm just throwing that out there if you don't like the way it tastes spit it out.

 

E-Bay for 265 pistons; not expensive at all. I bought a 57, 265 the other day; the block is in really good shape, but the crank is covered in surface rust. Today I wire brushed the rust best I could, used Easy-Off oven cleaner to remove some more along with the crud, and a brush to clean the oil passages, and now the crank's in a molasses soak. When I get it "presentable", I'll take it to my machinist, along with some aftermarket I-beam rods, and a set of NOS, TRW, forged, .030 flat top/4 valve relief, pistons. He'll turn the crank, drill/tap the snout, and do a precision balance for me. I think I'll put my 5603 heads with 1.84 intake valves on it, the "boat" aluminum intake with a plate for an AFB, and the staggered M/T valve covers. I've got some other Power Pack heads off a former NHRA Junior Stock Class record car I'll use on the 283 going together with the dual quad/WCFB setup. Not quite the "welfare motors" being done and discussed here, but old school just the same. I am Bjutch/56sedandelivery.

 

That was Brian Bass, there are a couple of threads where he talked about how he did it ...

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/...ke-327-crank-or-long-rod.284958/#post-3022409

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/...smallblock-recipes.302087/page-3#post-3224443

 

Butch I have put a 327 crank in a 283 block and dont remember it being all that much work.Of course it had to be balanced,but as far as actually putting it in the block it wasnt bad.

 

Actually, although both those threads are interesting and on topic, they are not the one I was referring to. Wish I could remember the guys name/handle. It was a fairly long thread, and he was in the process of actually doing the assembly work; he was well past the planning stages. I am Butch/56sedandelivery.

 

It it's a post '62 block, it goes straight in as the bottoms of the bores are scalloped to allow clearance.

 

Jeffery James ?
http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/threads/lets-build-a-265-chevy-v8.416175/

 

Yeah, can't help with your CRS

Bass did get it running in the end so it did get past the planning stage - the machining was done by another Hamber (E.C.) but I couldn't find anything like that under his posts either.

 

IF you're using the 62 and later 283 blocks that were casted using the same sand plug molds the 327 blocks also used, then there's more room to work with, but to just slip a 327 crank into a 265, or a 57-61 283, it's not going to happen without MAJOR machine work. Look at the old articles that have been posted, and you can see the crank weight re-contouring involved. When this stuff was being done, the 327 was still fairly new, and after the 350 came out, it all virtually went away. There was no longer a real need for it. Times have changed, the people who used to do the work are for the most part no longer, and now crate motors are the flavor of the day. Lots of us still mess around with the old stuff, just not on the same scale. Not a lot of 301 Chevrolet motors out there anymore, running B and M Hydro Sticks behind them, with a 57-64 Olds/Pont. rear end rounding out the package. There's a few around, just not on the same level from back in the day; nothing is. I've got a few small bore, short stroke projects, but I've also got the 468 BBC to offset things, and bring me back to today's reality. Every time I take my small engine stuff to my machinist for work, he's more than glad to take my money, but he still shakes his head. I am Butch/56sedandelivery.

 

Ive never wanted to stroke any engine. I always wanted to have a big bore and short stroke. Ive got the book published in 76 by Bill Jenkins on the small block chevy. On page 11 It outlines the procedure for putting a small journal 327 crank into a 400 block. And he only bored the block .020 . Here is a guy that could afford any kind of parts. and he preferref a 100 thousand mile used seasoned block . frowned on line boring and used the short stroke small journal 327 crank. And he did win a race or two. long strokes and thin cyl walls build much more heat then the opposite. Back before the big starters many guys would have a 327 bored .060. and when warmed to normal operating temp the starter could barely turn the engine over. those guys usually parked on a grade so they could roll start the engine. A friend had a 56 four door htp . stock 265 with a carter wcfb 4 bbl and powerglide automatic. It turned a consistiant 75 MPH in the 1/4 mile. And he beat a lot of bigger engined stick cars. Because he just took off at the starting line. No setting there spinning tires. The street tires where narrow tread designs until the later 1960,s

 

My man. ^^^^^ I knew that with time you would influence me into liking you (well just a little bit don't get all swolled up).

I have still got it in my head that I am going to build a destroked 283 one day. To come up with the same bore to stroke ratio as a 302 a 283 has to have a 2.91 stroke as opposed to a 3.00 stroke. All it takes is money and this is what I have wanted to build for a long time. I still got a few good years left.