badinfluenceRS

iTrader: (16)

i have a 283 i got for dirt cheap to use as a practice engine at first. its all disassembled and i was thinking of whether i should just put it back together with new gaskets, bearings, etc.

i am curious, however, to see if these have any performance potential (heads, cam, valvetrain, etc)

it is a 1964-68 block, factory 190-240hp. is 300hp possible with P&P heads/cam/etc

LS1 Coupe

https://ls1tech.com/forums/small-block-big-block-chevy-specific/927439-283-ci-small-block-question.html

http://www.superchevy.com/events/suc.../photo_09.html

firehawk238

iTrader: (1)

283's are definately great engines no matter how you slice it. in mine i have a forged steel crank (factory casting) forged pistons, lunati cam, chromoly rings, patriot aluminum heads with 2.02/1.60 valves, 1.5/1.6 ratio rollor rockers, holley street dominator intake, holley 600cfm vacume secondary with electric choke, mallory HEI with high kilovolt coil, accel 8.8mm wires, flowtech ceramic coated long tubes, 2.5" pipes with flowmaster 40 series dumped before the axle. the cam is the same cam used in the old 350hp 327ci small blocks. it runs good for me. the only difference id recommend is going to a floating pin piston and some better connecting rods when you make your build. get a casting numbers book and you may find that you already have a steel crank in it as most of them did. my forging number is the same as the forgings they used in the 67 302 camaro z28 engines, so i know it will hold up. just a lil insight.

karl

ZONES89RS

iTrader: (25)

I would never build les than a 350 for performance. That motor you have is good for restoration.

LS1 Coupe

And the 283 is better on gas milage!

ZONES89RS

iTrader: (25)

****, i bet not enough to tell if it is modified.

firehawk238

iTrader: (1)

i still pull 18 to 20 on average with it, in a brick in the wind 1966 truck, so your arguement doesnt work here. also my 283 will beat an equal truck with a 350 off the line any day of the week. your much coveted 350 has a 3.48" stroke crank shaft where my 283 has a 3.00" stroke. simple terms, i can reach the redline much, MUCH faster than you can, and can rev it higher meaning better usage of each gear. the 350 may be better for towing to get the lower rpm torque, but the 350 is not a better engine. you can build a 350 to get more power out of it, at teh expense of fuel and driveability, where the 283 can retain some kind of fuel economy.

92builtbird

I had a 283 in my '92 firebird. Block was bored .030 over. 350 heads, milled .030 off intake and exhaust, with copper head gaskets (.020). about 9.5.1 compression. had a medium sized cam, edelbrock intake, and 600cfm carb, hooked up to a 350 turbo and 3.55 posi. It ran "well" but just wasnt getting the job done on the street. sell the block to a 60's impala owner in need of a resto motor, and move on to a 350 or up. The 283 to me, just doesnt have the cubes for the street. And with the mods that it takes to even run with a 350, you can kiss your gas milage goodbye.

T5Malibuwagon

Ive been thinking of putting a 283 with trick flow heads and ever thought about your cam in my rambler (2600lbs). Im looking to get 20+mpg and 300+hp. I dont really know what it will take to get these in combination or even if its realisitic but its what the I6 does with about 200hp more, lol. Sounds like thats about what you have, give or take a little. What gears are you running? Is this with a manual or auto and does it have overdrive? Ive been thinking that I was just going to end up waiting till I could save up and get a 4.8 or 5.3 and t56 but your post gives me hope. Any other pointers? TIA.

Edit: forgot to ask if you know the cc of the heads that a 283 came with? Im lookin in an old motors manual and it shows they had compression ratios of 8.5 for the 2 barrels, 9.5 for fours, and 10.5 for fuel injection. Oh and if that isnt enough they went to 9.25 on all in 63...

firehawk238

iTrader: (1)

the thing with a 283 is that the cranks are strong, but rods are weak and with a shorter stroke you have potential for high rpm capabilities. what youd want to do is use some eagle rods and forged pistons, and then use a roller cam setup. a full roller all forged 283 could turn upward of 9k on the tach and do it repeatedly if properly balanced. what youd lack in power youd make up for in sheer rpms. you would out turn any street engine hands down. just be sure you get a good set of high flowing heads and an even better oiling system.

T5Malibuwagon

Yeah I know quite a bit about trying to get every last little hp out of a sbc, and rpm is the way with about any of them, but thats not what I want. I dont want to spin the thing like a top and Im not looking for 3hp per ci. All I am after is about 1.1hp per ci and more importantly is the 20+mpg. Hell in 60 or 61 chevy had a 283 that put out 315hp from the factory so I know that getting my hp requirements cant be too hard. I realize alot of people dont drive there old car everyday but I do, and I drive a lot so fuel economy is very important.

My trick flow twisted wedge heads that I would be using have different valve angles to reduce valve shrouding and even with their 2.02 intake they flow great. Ive also heard that their combustion chamber is very detonation resent and helps with economy. I was thinking of running a cam in the 218@.05, .460 lift, and with the widest lsa I could find. Not too much smaller than a 350hp, 327 cam. For an intake I would look at a nice duel plan like a eddy performer air gap or something of the like, topped with around a 600cfm holley. This would all be placed on a stock short block and probably backed with a 4speed. I wish I had the coin for a t56 or tko but those seem a little out of reach at the moment. The car currently has 3.35 rear gear, that I will probably keep till I find a stronger rear with better gear selection to stuff under it. At 2600lbs I dont think this comb will have any problems getting it moving to my liking but I have little to no idea what kind of mpg something like this will pull down. Thats why when I saw your post and read about your comb I thought if you can get 20mpg in a pickup with more cam and regular style heads I might have a chance.

So whats your rear end ratio? And what tranny are you running?

LS1 Coupe

Building a 283 and trying to spin to 9000 rpm is only good if your backing it up with gears, stall with converter and a light car. The early 283 power pack heads had 58cc chambers and smaller valves, the fuelies that people use to use generally had 64cc and 194 valves. The power pack heads on the performance 283's netted about 9.5cr, stock compression was 8.5cr. Running a set of 350 heads could kill most performance on a 283, 2.02 valves would be shrouded and adding anything larger than 64cc would deffinately hamper performance dramatically. 64cc head and standard flat tops would get you about 9.1cr The TFS heads with 56cc, 1.94 valve heads would be an excellant choice for keeping CR up where it would need to be for some descent performance. A very popular cam for these 283's was the Duntov style cam, variations in both solid and hydraulic have been copied by some of the other cam manufacturers. 315HP was the largest HP put out by GM for a 283, Smokey Yunick did 430HP and I saw an article one time showing 800HP with twin turbos. I think with todays technology on heads and camshafts the 283 would be very well worth looking at especially with todays fuel prices. Bigger cubes will always net more HP & TQ, but if your not towing or hauling heavy loads the 283 can be a very fun engine, I have run several 283 in my time and would certainly run/build another.

T5Malibuwagon

I got the nummbers off my friends engine that I was/am planning to get out of him, and it says it has a 61-64 block with 60cc heads. Not really what I was hopeing as it told me nothing about compression ratio or factory hp. Ive known for awhile that its got a old torker intake and we've kinda talked about the chance that its not 100% stock, well I was looking last night and it seems to have a solid cam. Its this factory?

Did they use different chamber size to get different compression ratios? Mortec shows 60cc and 70cc heads, is that 8.5-1 and 9.5=1?

Wonder if my goals are within reach with an old 283?

LS1 Coupe

w/60cc heads this is more than likely the 9.5cr engine if it has the flat top pistons, as for the cam, I do believe GM did put some solid lifter cams in, the orignial Duntov cam was a solid, if you pull the cam chances are there are some marking on the end that may give an indication as to what it is. I liked the old torker intake better than the newer torquer 2, I actually ran this intake on a 283 and the Duntov hydraulic version of this cam, with fuelies, flat top pistons, carter AFB 625cfm, duel point dizzy, Super T10 trans & stock 3.90 gear in a 56 Chevy Pickup and could jump 6packs with it, 60 & newer style pickups have a bunch more weight on the front end. The truck would actually bury the needle and as close as I could tell would top out at 140mph.

T5Malibuwagon

^ Thats kinda what I was thinking about the c.r. I dont know what cam is in there and at the moment its still my buddys so Im not going to go off droping the pan and timing cover just to look. Im sure that if I do end up with it I will more than likely end up putting a cam in it anyway. I just thought it was kinda wierd that it would have a solid cam, and didnt know if it was maybe factory.

Sounds like you had a nice set up. What kinda mileage did you get? Im sure that a built up 283 would be more than that little car or I need but like I said mpg's are a must. I wish we still had >$1.00 gas as I wouldnt be posting all the questions about economy but I end up driving it around 400miles a week and even at 20mpg it gets to me a little.

LS1 Coupe

MY fuel milage in the 56 was about 16mpg no matter how I drove (also considering it was not by anymeans aerodynamic), with todays OD trannies sporting the right gear choice with cam, Milage should have no problem moving well up in to the twenties, keeping everything in perspective even with proper exhaust setup, I wouldnt go anything larger than 1.5" headers and max 2.5" exhaust piping. In another pickup I had 62 Chevy, I had a 283 60 over and 12.5cr, 4spd and 3.90 gears, I used to average the same gas milage, Drove it from Dallas, TX to NH fully loaded and an over loaded trailer and still got 16mpg with it. Another car I had 61 Impala Sport Coupe with stock 283, w/4spd and 3.12 gears I used to average 21mpg.

T5Malibuwagon

Thank, thats really nice info to hear. In the Impala did it have a 4bbl or a 2bbl? By the sounds of it I could run a 283 and if I keep my foot out of it I might just about afford to put gas in it, lol.

After putting a t5 in my malibu, I swore that I would never put another on in anything I own, but Ive been thinking that in this case I might make an exception. I think that if I could pick up the stuff to put a phord t5 behind a sbc than I wouldnt be so worried of breaking it. It's just so hard to find a good chevy t5 and when you do they are always twice the price of a ford. I bet with a t5, a 283 like I described, and a wide band I could get a pretty respectable runner that didnt kill me at the pump.

LS1 Coupe

MY impala was a 4barrel, one of the best carbs out there for fuel economy is the Quadrajet, small primarieys for fuel ecomomy and big secondarys to let people know your coming. As for transmissions, I have not run the 6speed, but it appears they are holding up well behind a lot of the LSX's that are laying down some descent power. I have blown countless GM 4speeds and that is pretty much why I have opted to go with auto's behind anything with good power. Sticks have less drivetrain loss and I still do a stick in my DD just for getting the best mpg possible.

T5Malibuwagon

Ive heard that with the small primaries of a quadrajet I would be better off than with a two bbl, as long as I can keep my foot off the secondary's, fat chance. I got a 4165(think thats the model #) holley thats a spreadbore thinking that it would be the best of both worlds but have yet to run it on anything. I guess that with a 283 it would be a really nice carb but the smallest one I know of is a 650cfm, guess it would be real happy on the top end, lol.

As for the tranny, Im really torn. I know that the one to have is a t56 but they also run about $1200+ used, and thats more than I would have in the aluminum headed sbc. If I go this way I might as well just bight the bullet and drop in a 5.3 or 4.8. Ive thought about a tko but that seems to be about the same price as a t56 and its got one less gear. Theres always runnin a t5 like I said, and there nice trannys, but weak and going up in price. Then theres the trusty old 4 speed, what can I say, pay now, or pay at the pump.
Im a manual guy all the way, out of my 4 cars only ones got a auto and Im sellin it before I got to do a manual swap, even got the pedals and tranny, lol. I dont know why but I hate to drive a auto, its really unnatural for some reason. Some days I wish I was an auto person, I can get a pull out 5.3 and auto for the price of a worn out t56.

LS1 Coupe

I like sticks as well, but having a nicely built Auto is sweet without a doubt, I have had mush box auto and hated them, I have a TCI Built 700R4 behind in my 67C10 behind a 427sbc pushing over 525hp/550tq and beat the daylights out of it, and no issues, I am also building currently a 48 Chevy Coupe w/LS1 and using the stock 4L60E for right now, the engine is slightly modded and the car main purpose is cruising w/ fuel economy as its strong point. I have a 16yr son with a 76 Nova that we will start restoring after the first of the year, I am thinking a later model roller 350 block and using the 94-96 carpice 4.3L V8 crank and making a fuel injected 302 to put in it, nothing is final at this point except we have the Nova, new sheet metal and I already have 89 350 roller short block. His choice if Momma doesnt get in the way!!