I own a 52 chevy 5 window with a 235 6 cylinder. I also have a 409 that has been in my garage and a friend that has a 283 for sale. Back in the day there were many 283 engine swaps in these models. I want to put one of these in the truck but need some info. Will the 409 need extensive work, steering column etc or would the 283 be a better fit?
Retired Military, Six years Army, Seventeen years Air Force Army Security Agency High Speed Morse Code Intercepter Rigger C-130 Master Sergeant 32nd Aerial Port Squadron Commander American Legion
Neither one is an easy swap, but the 409 would be MUCH more difficult due to size and weight, particularly the width of the engine with those huge heads. Find a driver's side exhaust manifold for a 265 with the front outlet to install on the 283 and it will give you some much-needed clearance around the steering gear on the driver's side. Even with that manifold, the steering gear might have to be moved a little. Jerry
"It is better to be silent and be thought a fool than to speak and eliminate all doubt!" - Abraham Lincoln Cringe and wail in fear, Eloi- - - - -we Morlocks are on the hunt! There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. - Ernest Hemingway Love your enemies and drive 'em nuts!
Thanks Jerry! This might be a job higher than my pay grade.
Retired Military, Six years Army, Seventeen years Air Force Army Security Agency High Speed Morse Code Intercepter Rigger C-130 Master Sergeant 32nd Aerial Port Squadron Commander American Legion
You'll also need a V8 bellhousing for a 55 2nd. series or newer and the corresponding crossmember, and you'll need to convert the truck to an open driveline, which usually involves changing the rear axle or modifying the torque tube rear end to an open style driveshaft. V8 conversions on trucks prior to mid-year 1955 are not quick, simple, or inexpensive, no matter which engine is used. Jerry
"It is better to be silent and be thought a fool than to speak and eliminate all doubt!" - Abraham Lincoln Cringe and wail in fear, Eloi- - - - -we Morlocks are on the hunt! There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. - Ernest Hemingway Love your enemies and drive 'em nuts!
I have a 348 in my 1957 NAPCO, before that I had a 283. The 348 (similar to 409 profile) pretty much fit right in. I only needed to "futz" with the header - steering box clearance. So, on mine the modifications for installing the 283 (side mounts) worked for the 348. However, your year truck, may be more problematic. I have seen a few 409/348s in task force trucks, I just haven't seen any in your era trucks. Seems like it would be difficult.
Steering wise, the 283 and 348 don't seem to be any more effort than the 261 and 235 I had in the truck prior to that. don
You'll also need a V8 bellhousing for a 55 2nd. series or newer and the corresponding crossmember, and you'll need to convert the truck to an open driveline, which usually involves changing the rear axle or modifying the torque tube rear end to an open style driveshaft. V8 conversions on trucks prior to mid-year 1955 are not quick, simple, or inexpensive, no matter which engine is used. Jerry
I'm going to tell my son about your post.
To the OP if you are set on the v8 swap I would go with the 283. I had a 67 283/195hp 2 bl carb Impala with power glide and it had plenty of power and good MPG. Unless you own a lot of oil wells I would not go near a 409. Jeffrey
THE 283 WOULD BE THE CHEEPEST WAY TO GO, BUT I WOULD GO WITH THE 409. EVERYBODY HAS A SMALL BLOCK, I GET TIRED OF LOOKING AT THEM. THE 409 WOULD BE UP ON THE COOL FACTOR. 409 WITH A 700R4 WOULD BE SWEET. Jay D.
"It is better to be silent and be thought a fool than to speak and eliminate all doubt!" - Abraham Lincoln Cringe and wail in fear, Eloi- - - - -we Morlocks are on the hunt! There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. - Ernest Hemingway Love your enemies and drive 'em nuts!
This is definitely not a shoestring budget one but darn they are pretty when decked out. 409 high deck truck block with a 454 crank makes it a 503ci but what really makes a "W" engine come alive is to completely change the rocker arm geometry and DECREASE the exhaust port size. Many hours spent on the flow bench with this one because they were terrible from the factory. http://s32.photobucket.com/user/coilover/media/1213081217.jpg.html
The Tennessee state trade school where I taught auto mechanics for several years had a brand new, never-run 1965 production 409 engine that had been donated by GM when the school opened. We disassembled it once, and found felt tip marker numbers on all the pistons that turned out to be their weight in grams. I had several very tempting offers to take a long coffee break while somebody swapped it out for a worn out 348, but it just wasn't worth risking my job over a couple of thousand dollars! After I left to become a training manager for Sun Electric Co. the engine "disappeared". Jerry
"It is better to be silent and be thought a fool than to speak and eliminate all doubt!" - Abraham Lincoln Cringe and wail in fear, Eloi- - - - -we Morlocks are on the hunt! There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. - Ernest Hemingway Love your enemies and drive 'em nuts!
given the choice between a "W" series engine and a run of the mill sbc, regardless of displacement, I would take the 348-409 like a duck on a junebug!!
1949 Dodge Coronet 1955 2nd Chevy 4400 1.5 ton 1955 2nd Chevy 3100 1/2 ton 1955 2nd Chevy 3100 1/2 ton 1957 Chevy 5400 LCF 2 ton 1966 Dodge D100 Sweptline 1968 Chevy P20 stepvan 1969 GMC LWB pickup 1972 GMC Sprint 1974 CP30 shorty bus
There are three things that I've learned never discuss with people: religion, politics, and the Great Pumpkin.----Linus Van Pelt Trying to understand the behavior of some people is like trying to smell the color 9
given the choice between a "W" series engine and a run of the mill sbc, regardless of displacement, I would take the 348-409 like a duck on a junebug!!
Looks are less important then visiting the gas station more often and leaving a lot more of one's money there.
Exxon and the rest do not need my help to get richer.
Besides unless you plan on racing "The Farm Truck" you will never use what the 409 has. Jeffrey
Putting a 409 in a truck is really a pretty good idea- - - -that's what the "W" engine was designed to be. Back in 1957, Ford's supercharged 312 engine option was showing the new 283 Chevy engine its heels on the drag strip on a regular basis. Chevy had the 348 engine ready to go into medium-duty trucks- - - -it was never intended for passenger car use. They fitted it with a pretty radical cam and a 3-2 barrel intake and put into the 58 Impala as an attempt to regain drag strip dominance.
Two problems- - - -the engine was heavy, and it was built for torque, not RPM. Above 5500 RPM it had a nasty habit of swallowing valves. The guys who were used to flooring the throttle on a 265 or a 283 and counting to 10 before shifting scattered the big blocks by the truckload! Going to 409 cubic inches and even 427 with a few NASCAR experimental W engines didn't help the poor valve train design, or the oddball angled top of the block that put the combustion chamber in the cylinder, not the head. Eventually guys did learn NOT to use super low rear end gears and start watching the tach instead of waiting for the valves to float before shifting.
A low compression version of the 409 was made for dump trucks in the early 1960's, and it was pretty successful as long as people didn't mess with the governor and over-rev the engine. Jerry
"It is better to be silent and be thought a fool than to speak and eliminate all doubt!" - Abraham Lincoln Cringe and wail in fear, Eloi- - - - -we Morlocks are on the hunt! There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. - Ernest Hemingway Love your enemies and drive 'em nuts!
Had a 348 in a 58 impala. Ran good and nice car but used a LOT of gas. Traded it for a 58 wagon with a 283. Bigger,heavier car with a smaller engine but used less gas. Cant figure that one out.
Had a 348 in a 58 impala. Ran good and nice car but used a LOT of gas. Traded it for a 58 wagon with a 283. Bigger,heavier car with a smaller engine but used less gas. Cant figure that one out.
Weeds
My uncle had a 59 impala 6 cylinder.
When he bought a new Impala in 64 or 66 his son was wanting him to get a v8. My uncle said no I do not need a gas guzzler.
My dad said get the v8 but not the one your son wants, get the 283 you will get better mpg then a 6.
Well my uncle went for the 283 and was surprised he was getting better gas mileage then his old 6.
My 67 Impala with a power glide would get 22 highway. Once I got 25 mpg doing 55 mph on a long road trip.
I agree that Jerry is right that the 409 was meant to be a truck engine. Hundreds of them hauled grain from the Texas High Plains to Texas ports during the 60's. They ran over 3,000 miles a week and engines would last a year. They seldom blew up. Just wore out and the guys would go to the Chevrolet house and buy a new long block and run another year. But they are big. They are similar in size to the Olds Rockets. The only project I can remember giving up on was putting an Olds into a 1951 GMC. I decided there was too much modification.
I don't like to do what every other one does. Therefor I don't care for small block 350s. The 283 is a small block, but there aren't many of them around any more. They are good performing motors. They were pretty tough competitors against my Y-Blocks.
I wouldn't mind putting a 283 in an AD Chev. The big issue is the steering box. But thousands of them have been moved to accommodate a SB.
When I was building small block engines for a local round track with a carburetor CFM limit, I came up with a bore/stroke combination that showed all 305 cubic inch casting numbers during a tech line inspection, but actually had a CID of 255. Most of the competition was running 350's with a .030" overbore, for 355 cubic inches. My engines could run more than 1,000 RPM faster on the same carb, so if my guy ever got out front, there was no catching him. As an added benefit, my engines sounded like a bumblebee on steroids, and nothing but a complete disassembly would reveal what was going on.
It was a lot of fun, beating a bunch of guys with 100 cubic inches more engine! Jerry
"It is better to be silent and be thought a fool than to speak and eliminate all doubt!" - Abraham Lincoln Cringe and wail in fear, Eloi- - - - -we Morlocks are on the hunt! There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. - Ernest Hemingway Love your enemies and drive 'em nuts!
right now I'm in the process of building a 350 "sleeper" for my '55. when I'm done it will look like a 265 but run like a scalded ape!!!! not so much a HP build, but torque is what I'm after. a stock 348-409 seems like it would put out more torque than a built 283-350 could on a shoestring budget, is this about correct?
1949 Dodge Coronet 1955 2nd Chevy 4400 1.5 ton 1955 2nd Chevy 3100 1/2 ton 1955 2nd Chevy 3100 1/2 ton 1957 Chevy 5400 LCF 2 ton 1966 Dodge D100 Sweptline 1968 Chevy P20 stepvan 1969 GMC LWB pickup 1972 GMC Sprint 1974 CP30 shorty bus
There are three things that I've learned never discuss with people: religion, politics, and the Great Pumpkin.----Linus Van Pelt Trying to understand the behavior of some people is like trying to smell the color 9
I would absolutely put the 409 in instead. The w motor is unique and I am putting a 348 in my '48 that I rescued from a '59 Impala that was heading to the crusher. I built my own mounts and it was a simple install. They aren't cheap though, so expect to pay more than a SBC will cost you to put together. I would do it again without hesitation and in fact chose not to put a fresh 383 stroker/blower motor I had on a stand in instead.
Here is the link to my build with it if your interested.
I think I may go with the nostalgia look with a dual quad 283. I saw a few in the 60's and they were fearful. No one had the money in those days to buy a 409. I also am buying an original radio for the looks. I read that an S-10 4-speed tranny will hook up with the 283. I plan to change the rear end and have the drive shaft modified.
Retired Military, Six years Army, Seventeen years Air Force Army Security Agency High Speed Morse Code Intercepter Rigger C-130 Master Sergeant 32nd Aerial Port Squadron Commander American Legion
Here's a sneaky trick to make that 283 a sleeper. 58CC 305 cylinder heads have the same combustion chamber volume as the old 283 "Power Pack" heads, and they've got the bolt holes on the ends of the heads for accessory mounting. They're also 40 years newer and you're much more likely to find a set of heads in good condition without a massive rebuild. The 305 heads will take bigger valves than the 283's and a little pocket porting will really make them breathe. Couple that with enough valve spring to turn about 7500 RPM, and you'll have a real screamer! Jerry
"It is better to be silent and be thought a fool than to speak and eliminate all doubt!" - Abraham Lincoln Cringe and wail in fear, Eloi- - - - -we Morlocks are on the hunt! There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. - Ernest Hemingway Love your enemies and drive 'em nuts!
The boat was too big for a small block to anchor it? Jerry
"It is better to be silent and be thought a fool than to speak and eliminate all doubt!" - Abraham Lincoln Cringe and wail in fear, Eloi- - - - -we Morlocks are on the hunt! There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. - Ernest Hemingway Love your enemies and drive 'em nuts!
I think I have changed my mind 50 times but the more I read the more I think the easiest decision is to go with the 283 even though I have a 409 truck engine. I say this because it looks like to much cutting and chopping to stuff that big block in position, not even mentioning changing the front end, brakes and steering. I also realize that the 283 will require some cutting and steering box shifting but not nearly as much.
Retired Military, Six years Army, Seventeen years Air Force Army Security Agency High Speed Morse Code Intercepter Rigger C-130 Master Sergeant 32nd Aerial Port Squadron Commander American Legion
If I were to ever put a V-8 in my truck the 409 would be right at the top of the list. In this day and age putting electronic fuel injection on an engine is easy and not really all that expensive in the context of how much this swap will cost. The end result would be much improved fuel economy along with good power as well. There is many setups that give you the vintage look. It would be worth looking at anyway.
Just to add a thought: As a choice for a engine swap from 6 to 8, the 350 is an option. Their are probably many more of these around now than any other therefore parts are cheaper and easier to find.
Just to add a thought: As a choice for a engine swap from 6 to 8, the 350 is an option. Their are probably many more of these around now than any other therefore parts are cheaper and easier to find.
Huh?
The 350 externally is the same as the 283. Not only that, but performance parts fit both engines. Why would he buy a 350 when he has a perfectly good 283?
Does not matter if it was a truck motor or if it has speed or if it's hard to fit. It's looks, the fact you can say it has a 409 in It, is way more desirable. What other motor has a Beach Boys song named after it? Are you kidding? A 409? Dual Quads? Do it, she's real fine. Giddy up!
P.S. Very valuable $$$$$$ motor. The "nostalgic effect".
Does not matter if it was a truck motor or if it has speed or if it's hard to fit. It's looks, the fact you can say it has a 409 in It, is way more desirable. What other motor has a Beach Boys song named after it? Are you kidding? A 409? Dual Quads? Do it, she's real fine. Giddy up!
P.S. Very valuable $$$$$$ motor. The "nostalgic effect".
Exactly. I would absolutely put the 409 in instead. The w motor is unique and I am putting a 348 in my '48. I built my own mounts and it was a simple install. They aren't cheap though, so expect to pay more than a SBC will cost you to put together.
[quote=Woj]I think I may go with the nostalgia look with a dual quad 283. I saw a few in the 60's and they were fearful. No one had the money in those days to buy a 409. I also am buying an original radio for the looks. I read that an S-10 4-speed tranny will hook up with the 283. I plan to change the rear end and have the drive shaft modified. [/quote
Be sure you have a good supply of T-5's stockpiled. That hotrod 283 will peel the teeth off the gears like shelling an ear of dried field corn! Jerry
"It is better to be silent and be thought a fool than to speak and eliminate all doubt!" - Abraham Lincoln Cringe and wail in fear, Eloi- - - - -we Morlocks are on the hunt! There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. - Ernest Hemingway Love your enemies and drive 'em nuts!
I've watched this thread with interest because I had the same dilemma, 409 or 283. I chose the 283 for several reasons. The smaller size makes fitting it in the engine bay much easier. My truck has a camaro subframe, and I was concerned the heavier choice would have a negative effect on handling. My truck is a driver so the mileage potential of the 283 was also a plus. My engine wound up a dual quad or almost. Keith Black flat top hyper pistons, compression ratio of about 9.4 to 1. Heads are late 90's 305 Vortecs casting #059. Essentially 350 Vortecs with smaller intake valves and 58cc chambers. The cam is a mild Howard's hydraulic roller. The block was decked, bored .040, and align honed, the rotating assy was balanced. If you want to save money build a 350, if you want a 283 this makes a great cruising motor with a little punch. My truck runs an Edelbrock C26 dual quad intake converted to port fuel injection, with a pair of Dodge Dakota 3.9 throttle bodies to control airflow. The computer is a Megasquirt 2 which is a batch fire system. Over the winter the plan is to upgrade to Megasquirt 3 xtra which will gain me sequential injection, better idle control, and a few other things. Attached is a link for a YouTube video for some possible ideas. If the link doesn't work just search Megasquirt 283 on YouTube.
