The Stovebolt Site Forums The Shop Area Engine Shop Casting serial # says it was made in the 20th century -- UGH

OK I wouldn't bother anyone with this. But after many, many hours of research, and reading through all the literature I had, or could get my hands on. I'm stumped.
I've got a '64 Chev C20 with a 292. The nose of the crank got bent by someone in it's past. I drove it just the same for some 8 years -- you'd be surprised how hard it is to find
any sixty-something (292) core blocks anywhere. Anyhow. My younger brother picked up a '66 C10 from someone on Southern California that claimed the engine was a new Mr.
Goodwrench crate motor. My brother got the thing for the body, and told me to come over, and we could do an engine swap over the weekend -- sweet, a free engine with
free help. Of course I came over, and badda-bing, badda-boom. We managed the whole thing in a leisurely 6hrs. (lots of breaks, and other non-work related interruptions).

So. Here's the thing; I've been driving this thing for awhile. I tried to install an HEI in it without success -- coughed, and sputtered no matter where the timing was,
except at idle. So scrapped that idea, and bought a brand new mechanical distributor, and plugs. Had no idea what the year was, so guessed at 1974.

So here in lies the problem -- I have no idea what year this thing is. Even tho the mechanical distributor, and plugs worked. It has nowhere near the performance
my original 292 had -- even with the bent nose on the crank! So I'm fairly sure it's not the 74 I imagined it might be.

What I know; it is a Mr. Goodwrench crate motor.
[img]http://boltbucket.org/StoveBolt/GOODWRENCH-292_930x508.png[/img]

It is HECHO EN MEXICO (MADE IN MEXICO)
[img]http://boltbucket.org/StoveBolt/HECHO-EN-MEXICO_1328x747.png[/img]
[img]http://boltbucket.org/StoveBolt/89-HECHO-EN-MEXICO_1328x747.png[/img]

It has a serial number cast in the block (GM 4.8 liter 6, sn: 93411147)
[img]http://boltbucket.org/StoveBolt/303-GM-4.8L-6-93411147.jpg[/img]

HOWEVER, and here's the real problem; I can't find anything referencing this number -- nowhere!

Any thoughts, links, tips, or brilliance you'd care to share on this, would be GREATLY appreciated!

Thank you!

Where did the HEI come from- - - -a salvage yard, or Ebay? A lot of the brand new repops from across the Pacific are only good for fishing weights. There's absolutely no reason a good-working HEI can't be timed and tuned as well as or better than a point-type distributor.

A Mexican-made 292 is most likely from the late 1980's or newer. "Mr. Goodwrench" engines were new replacements sold by GM parts departments priced to be competitive with reman engines from private rebuilders. BTW, virtually any good parts store would be able to order a "crankshaft kit" consisting of a reground crank and bearings. Damage like a bent snout on the crank would have generated a core charge, but I'm pretty sure I can order a dozen 292 crank kits before tomorrow afternoon.
Jerry

Thank you VERY much for taking the time to reply @Hotrod Lincoln!
HEI was (is) new (OEM) for a '76 292. In desperation, I even bought a new coil for it (with same results).
It sounds to me as tho the advance on the CAM (camshaft) has a different advance than the distributor. Couldn't make it run worth beans.

80's. I was afraid that'd be the case. I understand that they stopped using them in model year '87. I have the Dealer promo for all the trucks that year, and they specifically stated:

- Note: for 1987, all gasoline engines in these models will be certified using
light-duty emissions test proceedure. This will require the use of a catalytic
converter, unleaded fuel and the GVWR to a maximum of Series 30 Chassis-Cab
models with GVWR of 10,000 lbs. and 11,000 lbs. are discontinued.

- THE 4.8 LITER (292 CU. IN.) L6 ENGINE is discontinued.

- All gasoline engines have Electronic Fuel Injection (EFI).
...

Looking at all the performance specs for this engine over the years. It appears that they simply de-tuned it to complete uselessness. Then dropped it. The compression went from 8:1 to 7.8:1.
The cam timings/durations also followed suit. What started out at 170 hp @ 4000, 275 ft-lb @ 1600. Became 115 hp @ 4000, 210 ft-lb @ 800.
As a result, I'm inclined to think the ignition(s) I have (mechanical, or HEI) is tied close enough to the cams performance "arc" that they don't work well.

As to the crank. I'm very much inclined to simply build up my original 292, and when finished, simply drop the crank out of the "crate motor" to replace the bent one. But, while I'm inclined to believe the lowered compression is either, or both piston/head. I have no specs to prove it. Your thoughts?

Thank you again, @Hotrod Lincoln!

Chris

I believe the compression drop was done by using dish-top pistons instead of the flattops used in the original 292. That's a drop-in change on a rebuild- - - -just order the early piston. The bore size, connecting rod length, and piston compression height will be the same. For even more compression, if you're building a low-RPM torquer engine, find a cylinder head for a 194 inline six and do a little porting, then install bigger intake and exhaust valves. The 194 head has a smaller combustion chamber, and combined with the flattop pistons, it really bumps the compression up. Use a Comp Cams "RV" cam if they make one for the 292. High speed performance will suck, however, because of the restrictive ports. If you've got deep pockets, do the "lump port" modification to help high speed breathing a little.

As always, "There's no substitute for cubic dollars!"
LOL!
Jerry

Right on, Jerry!
I'm more inclined for the low-end torque the 292 delivers. The (stock) nice long slope of the cam adds to that. Combined with the long stroke. So I guess, yeah, low RPM power suits me fine. Not that I'm not interested in any high RPM HP. I just find that most of the grunt I actually use is the low RPM grunt. In fact, the only time I really look to high RPM grunt, is on the freeway, or when passing someone.

Yeah, I figured the pistons, as well as the head was likely the cause for the lower compression ratio on the newer 292s. I'm mostly just interested in knowing if I can get any use of the crank out of the crate motor.

Great tip on the 194 -- thanks! I've heard quite a few talk about the (port) lump for the intake(s) on the head. I'm not sure I can't manage the same outcome by grinding out a little of the top of the intake ports on the head, illuminate the "intruding" head bolts (replacing them with "flush mounted" torx head bolts), and finally, using a sort of lip on the bottom of a custom intake I plan to make anyway. That essentially "launches" the incoming fuel mixture upwards. So as to better drop onto the intake valve.

But in the end; right you are. Nothing a bunch of time, and money won't cure.

Thanks again for taking the time to reply, Jerry!

Chris

Port lumps aren't that difficult to install, and they have the advantage of somebody else already doing the dyno work to get the shape right. When the GM engineers chose to block the middle of the intake port with a head bolt they certainly didn't have volumetric efficiency in mind. One of these days I'm going to build a hotrod 292, but right now I'm working on an idea to build a 261 engine with NASCAR connecting rods and a 4 3/8" stroke, for a displacement of slightly over 300 cubic inches. All that in a package that closely resembles a 235 unless somebody knows where to look!
Jerry

Oooo! Do let me know when it's time to take it to the dyno, or the track. I don't care if I am clear across the country. I'm dying to see it go!

Chris

You're probably right about the lump, but I may just experiment anyway. Only time (and money) will tell.

That's the Casting Part Number, there won't be a real "serial number" on the engine...Chevrolet stopped doing that after 1956.

See if there's an engine code stamped somewhere on it (I don't know where they put it on the 292, but most 6-cylinders had a machined pad near the distributor)...on second thought, being a replacement engine there may not be a code...

Mike B

Thank you very much, Mike B, for chiming in!

Yeah, there's a boss on the left hand side of the dizzy. It's got a bit of grime on it. But I didn't see anything that resembled a stamp. So didn't look any further.
I should wipe it clean, and look, before writing that possibility off tho.
'56? My '64 number tells me plenty about it; the plant, date, whether the cute assembler was wearing a bra that day, and, ... I also saw quite a bit of references deciphering most of the 70's numbers during my research on this (the crate motor) one.
Anyway. I'm glad to get all the input I can on this thing. It's driving me nuts! Never had such difficulty getting all the details on an engine before.

Thanks again!

Chris

That same long stroke modification to the 261 can also be done on a 235- - - -both or them use stock pistons and the deck height only increases slightly, which could be corrected by decking the block, but isn't really necessary. The long stroke 235 goes to 266 cubic inches- - - - -and there are a LOT of 235's out there to play around with!
Jerry

You bet! I still hear, and see a ton of those 325s out there. So looking to turn it into a stroker eh? That kind of thing has always got my blood pumping. I don't know about you (well maybe). But I've always really enjoyed building motors! There's just something about having a conception, and then putting it into action, and if all goes well, reap the reward. Even if things go south, there's always a lesson to be learned to apply next time. Love it! Always have.

Good luck.I look forward to hearing about any progress you make on it, Jerry!

Chris