The Stovebolt Site Forums The Shop Area Engine Shop Hoppin' up a 283

Alright - the 283 that came out of my 59 is going to be rebuilt. So - me being the rodder that I am - I was wondering what can be done to these puppies as far as compression/hp goes?

I know they rev like crazy - but how much compression should I stay UNDER - I don't want to blow out the bottom half of the motor.

Further - I believe it has the power pak heads on it - but I cant remember what the criteria were for determining that.

So - what would you do - if you were going for performance?

Thanks,

- Ryan

Prof. Ryan: I would bore it, put a 327 crank in it, Been many years but I think that's how they made 301's. Then Fuel Inject it. Personnally I hope Hot Rod Lincoln or Mr. Houston answers they have pretty good grasp on these things.

popcorn The Truth is Out There (I am going on memory and that ain't good)

Ryan, a recent classic truck edition did a carb comparison test that used a 283. I will try to find it and read it to see what mods they made to the engine. Give me a day or two for this.

If it were me I would stay at 9:1 or under so I could burn reg gas and investigate what Edelbrock may have for your motor. I don't know if they have anything specific for the 283 but it is basically the same as a 350 so their components may work for you as well.

I quick check of the Edelbrock site shows all SBC parts are interchangeable. That would be my recommendation to get more power from your 283 while maintaining reliability and mileage.

I would bore it 60 over. Make shure the heads
have 1.94 dia.intake valves. Use the mildest
edelbrock performer cam & intake. Use a Q-jet
carb or edelbrock performer (carter AFB) carb.
Use dual exhaust with 2 or 2 1/4" pipes & glass-
packs or flowmasters. Headers if you prefer.
The biggest mistake is to put in to much cam.

Power pack heads are identified by looking at the machined shape at the front or back of the head.

A rectangle with a triangle sitting on it means power pack. Double humps is a newer head with big valves.

I'd worry about cam, heads or manifold designed for a bigger motor. Intake velocity is important to responsiveness, and the wrong heads or manifold will hurt you there.

Cubic inches wins on the street, sell the 283 ,drop in a mild 350, you'll be light years ahead in power and economy and few will ever know what size small block it is.

I once built a 350 with 283 heads that was a real snappy performer at street RPMs. It ran out of breath on the top end, but just popping around locally, or crusing the freeway, it was a great motor.

It would not be hard to make a mild 350 look like a 283.

A friend of mine once bought a Ford pickup that he thought had a 360 under the hood. He later discovered that his unusually quick truck had a 428. Those extra cubes worked wonders!

OldSub is correct about the intake velocity. I once had a set Brodix heads and a Victor Jr. intake on a 350. The engine was doggy until about 3000 rpms, then from 3000 to 7000, you better hold on!!! Go with a mild RV cam, 1.94 intake valves, a Edelbrock Performer or Performer RPM intake and a 600 cfm carb. Also, do not put too large exhaust on it. Also get long tube headers instead of shorties. The long tubes give you better bottom end power.

Phil

Thanks for the replies!

Just so you know - we did put a 350 in the 59. This is the motor out of the 59 - but will be used in a different project. Trust me, any more cubes for that project will likely result in MAJOR problems (i.e. speeding tickets, demonstration of acceleration tickets, sideways driving).

So, mild cam, intake, carb, headers (long) and 2.5" exhaust, keep compression around 9.

How about roller rockers and other little goodies?

- Ryan

Another related question:

What is good/bad about power pak heads? Will these support the larger valves?

- Ryan

Ryan: This I can answer honestly! Roller Rockers will add an additional 18 to 30 HP. Well worth the investment dollars compared to HP gain.

Intake and exhaust are best decribed by the (350) 202 heads are the best in my book.

All the other goodies such as roller tip rocker arms, new crankshaft, custom valve/head porting, Hipo distributor, and aftermarket ignition will certainly help to improve the performance but at a cost which returns smaller gains than the basic improvements previously noted. These adders will also go to increase those "Reckless Acceleration Demonstration" awards the local authorities like to bestow.

I have read where using cylinder heads from a 305 HO engine such as was in Monte Carlo SS motors will improve the breathing of your 283.

The power pack heads are ok so long as you're not trying to make a Monster killer motor. If you want something a little better, go find a set of what was known as fuelie heads( double hump heads) Came on early fuel injected vettes, FI engines most commonly found on 327 engines early /mid 60's. Yes the heads were on engines with carbs also. Two versions of this head were made, you want the earlier one with the smaller combustion chambers. One disadvantage of these heads is they do not have the mounting holes on the front of the heads for accs,( alt, p/s a/c) so you would have to find the brackets that mount them. DON'T go looking for angle plug heads 202 intakes and all the fancy goodies for a 350, the reason being the smaller bore of the 283, the larger valves may contact the cylinder walls makeing a real mess of everythng .If you can find a cam that comes close to the specs on a 327/350 hp. engine stock from chevy, that will be a pretty good engine , had a couple set up like that many years ago, I have to look but I think I still have a copy of a hot rod Mag. that compared all the heads, will look for it and get back to you.

I have heard this same thing. That is why I am holding on to the H.O. 305 out of the 1983 Z28 that I had. I hear that the 1983-1984 HO305 heads are the best.

You folks are full of good advice! Sounds like this is going to be a fairly easy build. I will check around for the fuelie heads.....I know a guy....

Hey - pops mentioned stuffing a 327 crank in there - any feedback on that?

- Ryan

If my memory serves me right :confused: stuffing a small journal 327 crank and rods in a 283 block, is what chevy did to make the 302 cu in motor. I found the head article in august 1978 street rodder mag. It is a very detailed explanation of the heads out there. Go to you're profile and send me a private message and we can get the info to you.

Nope... 283 bore and 327 stroke makes a 307.

The 302 of early Z-28 of TransAm racing fame was made with a 327 bore and 283 stroke. In theory, you can do essentially the same thing by boring the 283 out to 4.0", but it's 1/8" oversize and you are really taking a chance on thin block walls (sometimes referred to as a "301".

The bore from the old 265 with a 3.48" stroke from a 350 makes the smog master 305.

My dad had a new '64 C-10 shortbed with 283 2-bbl, three speed on the column and 3:73 gears. I drove it a bunch as a teen ager. It had plenty of pep but buzzed pretty high interstate speeds. It could keep side by side in the quarter with another Dearborn pickup with a 302.

He later bought a new '72 longbed C-10 with a 350 and three speed on the column and 3:08 rear gears. No contest in the low end torque or acceleration. The 350 was awesome. 67 cubes will make a difference, all other things being equal.

Unless you are just hung up on the nostalgia of a 283, slap a new Goodwrench 350 in and and you'll love it.

Ryan you've not told us what this 283 will be used for. After reading through here again, I've come to the conclusion its not for your truck, but for some other project.

The right combination of pieces might be different for one application as opposed to another, and the smaller the motor (cubes) the more difference it will make.

What are you building?

Yes Ryan What are you using this for? Then maybe us OLD gearheads can point you in the right direction.

popcorn The Truth is Out There (Wish I could post pictures, show you guys what a 68 Chevelle 300 w/307 did at the Drag Strip, won my class many times, Got to put a gearbox behind those 283's)

Get a rag - this is a coke warning - protect your keyboard!!!

Well, we have been sitting around thinking about various custom projects. After finishing the truck - which will be fairly soon (yeah right ) I'm gonna have to start something different.

I have the 283 on an engine stand and figured I would start building it for something. That something being a honda accord - 1990 (currently my daily driver - but next year it won't be). Got a full frame designed, using my old rear end from the 59 (narrowed of course). Stuff the CSB in there, put a T-56 tranny (six speed from the 1998 ss camaro) - which by the way can be ordered to your specs from a place out of oregon. Haven't decided on whether to use generic A arms up front or put a clip in there. It will be bagged. I got this idea after seeing one on ebay - guy built the heck out of a CSB and did the same thing. Said it couldn't get traction.

So - I want to stay with the 283 for several reasons. First, I have one. Second, they rev like crazy, third - well it's NOT A 350, and fourth - I don't need 500+ horsepower.

I'll keep a majority of the car stock - with those several major exceptions. I PLAN on starting the frame next summer. The goal here is a sleeper honda. Quiet exhaust, and a small hood scoop - people will laugh at the fact it has a scoop until I hit the throttle.

Now you understand why I gave the coke warning and why I was reluctant to mention what it was for!

Anything is possible!

- Ryan

Guys - look at it this way. He could be putting a Honda VTEC rice mill in his stovebolt. HMMMM

Have fun with it Ryan. You may have trouble getting that engine to keep its cool though in that engine bay.

I envy your ambition.

Sounds like fun, but take it a step further- - - -how about 250 cubic inches or so, and 8,000 RPM? I'm building up a super-small displacement smallblock as a sleeper engine for our local round track. A 305 block, with the 3.736" bore, and a 283 crankshaft, with a 3" stroke, works out to just under 250 cubic inches. We're restricted to a Holley 350 CFM 2-barrel carburetor, which acts just like a governor on the 350 engines most of my competitiors run. With a roller cam, roller rockers, and a rev kit, I should be able to turn 8,000 RPM with a well-balanced engine, and all the race will determine is "who ran second?"!!!!

The bored-out 283 was the hot setup, 301 cubic inches, but they were a bear to keep cool. A better way to do it is to find a 327 block, one of the early models with the small main bearing journals, and drop in a 283 crankshaft with the 3" stroke. If it happens to be one of the forged-steel cranks, that's much better. Those shafts are a little scarce, though.

Cylinder heads- - - -Use a set of the 283 "Power Pack" heads, with the pyramid-shaped mark on top of a rectangle on the end of the head, and hog out the valve seat and port area for 1.94" intake valves, and 1.6" exhausts. Don't worry about hard seats, the engine won't live long enough for seat erosion to be a problem, and it usually doesn't happen on engines that have never run leaded fuel anyhow. Pocket-port the heads, and open up the exhaust ports into a "D" shape if you want to, combined with a good set of equal-length tube headers if you've got room. Otherwise, use a set of ram's-horn exhaust manifolds for a 300-horse 327. They have 2 1/2" pipes, larger than the standard exhaust manifolds. Have fun with your sleeper project!
Jerry

Well I didn't spill any coke, but I didn't have any handy anyway...

The only part of the plan I didn't get was why you'd use the rear from the '59?

As for keeping it cool - that's going to be difficult - I guess I'll just have to drive on cold days only:D !!

The basic reason for doing this is just to see if we can. And since it's been done - why not give it a shot (of course this is ALL contingent upon finishing Amy's truck - absolutely the only way she will let me play with another rig!!!)

As for the 59 rear end - It's sitting in my garage, its got short gears, and since the motor came out of there - figured it would be fun to match the rear to the motor.

Honestly though why shoulnd't I use that rear? A f o r d 9" was the other option... any comments?

- Ryan