Dismiss Notice

Welcome To CK5!

Registering is free and easy! Hope to see you on the forums soon.

Score a FREE t-shirt and membership sticker when you sign up for a Premium Membership and choose the recurring plan.

Chevy 283

Discussion in 'The Garage' started by big4x4ride, Nov 19, 2005.

  1. big4x4ride

    big4x4ride 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Posts:
    216
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Corpus Christi, TX
    I have come across an engine I cna get for a good price, just wondering what kidn of power it may have. Its a Chevy 283, punched .030. It has dome pistons and some 76cc 400 heads. Block casting is 3862194, heads are 3951598. Supposed to be about 11:1 with these pistons and heads(kinda high for 76cc heads??)). It's just a shortblock, and I have most necessary stuff to finsih it of, just curious as to what kind of numbers may be possible. I assumer with teh short stroke it will be a hi revving engine, just dont want some drag car engine here LoL.
     
  2. pauly383

    pauly383 Daddy383 Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2001
    Posts:
    16,217
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Mesa , Arizona USA
    Nova motor it appears , great in its day with some mods . I ended up finding mine in my Chevelle , was supposed to be a 305 . ]

    Mine ran real strong driving the Chevelle home , lots of power at cruise . This was in a car with 235/60/14's and 3.08's though :D
     
  3. u2slow

    u2slow 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    May 9, 2001
    Posts:
    2,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    BC Canada
    My buddy had an old '62 3/4-ton GMC with a 283. He could pull 7000rpm out of it no problem. It was actually a pretty good match for the SM420 and 4.57 gears that truck had.

    IMO it would be pretty decent for a 4x4 if you kept the gearing really short.
     
  4. PsychoticDeadGuy

    PsychoticDeadGuy 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2005
    Posts:
    753
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Fairfield, California
    it is a pretty high revving engine and puts out decent power down low, but they dont sound that great...not that the sound really matters very much.
     
  5. beater_k20

    beater_k20 Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2003
    Posts:
    10,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Elkhart, IN
    not nearly enough torque. unless its free, i'd almost bet you can find a deal on a larger engine (which will realistically work better in all situations) very similar to the deal on the 283. personally, i'd go with a 350 if you're on a tight budget. you can practically buy rebuild parts for them at Wal Mart.
     
  6. stayaway

    stayaway Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Posts:
    59
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    georgia
    Good in its day but bigger is always better 350s are so cheap would be hard to see the reason for the old 283
     
  7. pauly383

    pauly383 Daddy383 Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2001
    Posts:
    16,217
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Mesa , Arizona USA
    I have a good reason to use mine ..... its the only project vehicle motor running right now :D
     
  8. big4x4ride

    big4x4ride 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Posts:
    216
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Corpus Christi, TX
    its free and is completly rebuilt thats why I'm interested
     
  9. beater_k20

    beater_k20 Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2003
    Posts:
    10,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Elkhart, IN
    11:1 means its going to need a HUGE cam to run anything other than race gas. might be a decent LIGHT mud truck motor because of high RPMs, but for a trail rig or a daily driver, id still pass.
     
  10. Z3PR

    Z3PR Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Posts:
    19,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Everywhere
    What would it be going in ??
     
  11. big4x4ride

    big4x4ride 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Posts:
    216
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Corpus Christi, TX
    a SAS 94 s10
     
  12. stano

    stano 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2005
    Posts:
    130
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Iowa
    The older 283's (57-58-maybe61-62 have thicker cylinder walls, I think the later 283 were thinner cylinder walls. If you have a early block bore it 0.125thousandths from stock (3.875 to 4.000) and you will have a 4" bore with 3" stroke and have a (poor mans) 302 with a steel crank. I think 302 pistons will work to rods. Any way it has been done around here a few time already.

    0.125 is 1/8" that would make a 1/16" cut out on each side.

    Remember this 302 motor has power at high rpms, but not so much at lower rpm.

    but personally I go with a 350 "tough motor to beat"

    thank you stano
    87 K5
     
  13. stano

    stano 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2005
    Posts:
    130
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Iowa
    Or get a 327 (3.250 stroke) crank small jornaul steel (They are all steel) and get after market pistons for 3.875- 3.885- or 20 or 30 over for 283 and have a 301 cub inches.

    This motor has a longer arm and pulls a little better a low rpms. A freind had one in high school 1969 and it pulled good all the way through in a 65 Impala.

    But i must remind you that at that time we had no 350's or 400's small blocks. only 265,283 and 327's.

    We have now a 283 with high dome pistons (maybe 10.0 to 11.0 to 1 ratio). It also has 539 small valve, small chamber fuelly heads from 1957. and a AFB carb, with solid lifter cam. It pulls fine, could maybe give a 327 motor a challenge. But still is not the Horse power of a 350 can give you with a few easy modifications.

    thank you stano
    87 K5
     
  14. stano

    stano 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2005
    Posts:
    130
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Iowa
    I just figured 3.250 stroke and 3.875 bore and that comes to 306 or 307 cub inches. So I forgot how we got 301's. it must be 4.000 bore and 3.000 stroke (like the 302 from chevy) to give us the 301 a freind had from a 283 so i have to tri and remember what he did in 1969?????

    Hope my mistake is not goofing you guys up, because it is messing with what I have been always thinking.

    thank you stano
    87 K5
     
  15. beater_k20

    beater_k20 Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2003
    Posts:
    10,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Elkhart, IN
    have you tried to find 302 pistons lately? you cant do it, they're not readily available anymore. with a medium journal engine, you could use 5.94" rods, which are available from GM Performance Parts, and use any 5.7" rod 350 piston with a 3.00" stroke crank.

    GM did just that, they called it a 307. people throw them away, why would you want to spend money to build one when they're so cheap? they're not really that great of an engine anyways.
     
  16. bigjbear

    bigjbear 1 ton status Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2000
    Posts:
    13,973
    Likes Received:
    453
    Location:
    Marietta GA
    Forgive my ignorance, but wouldn't 302 pistons be the same as 327 & 350 pistons? Or is there some sort of rod clearance issue? TIA.
     
  17. big4x4ride

    big4x4ride 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Posts:
    216
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Corpus Christi, TX
    327 and 350 use different pistons, same bore but different ring spacing/location
     
  18. Jagged

    Jagged 1 ton status

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2005
    Posts:
    11,460
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    SWVA

    1965-67 3862194 283 195 220 2 Chevy II

    195-220 HP stock on that block :)

    3951598....70......400..........76cc chambers


    283 = 3.875" x 3.00" (Gen.I, 5.7" rod)
    283...Mains-2.30"-Rods-2.00"

    FYI crap
     
  19. u2slow

    u2slow 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    May 9, 2001
    Posts:
    2,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    BC Canada
    The pistons are probably 11:1 assuming stock heads. Most likely used to yield some decent (9:1?) compression with those large heads.

    Shortblock? That would be without heads and intake.... So are the 400 heads what you will be installing?
     

Share This Page