Click on image for the lowdown. 
====
| | | Forums66 Topics128,060 Posts1,055,835 Members48,426 | | Most Online14,466 Apr 26th, 2026 | | AD Chevy Trucks Over 6,000 pictures Brad Allen has an awesome collection of Chevrolet factory pictures that he has set up from film strips. Check them out!
Lots of work on Brad's part ... pure enjoyment (and references) for you!
| | THANKS!
For helping keep this great
old truck web site
on the Internet for over 30 years! and not clogged down with Ads! Again, thanks! | |
#35093 07/12/2003 11:49 PM | Joined: May 2003 Posts: 18 Junior Member | | Junior Member Joined: May 2003 Posts: 18 | Well guys the saga continues, for those of you who dont know, the last episode was about putting a 283 in my 57 3600. And I have come to yet another decision, I now have access to a 75' 350 (friend wrecked his camero). In my last post I was told that the 283 I already have will fit no problem, and all I had to do is get different bell housing and motor mounts. To get to the point will the 350, or any small block, fit the same as the 283?
thanks for your help, GrannyLow | | |
#35094 07/13/2003 2:03 AM | Joined: Jul 2001 Posts: 3,887 Cruising in the Passing Lane | | Cruising in the Passing Lane Joined: Jul 2001 Posts: 3,887 | the 350 will fit about the same but instead of being able to use the OEM style front mounts on the 283, yu'll have to use the aftermarket crossmember for the later sidemount blocks Bill | | |
#35095 07/13/2003 2:40 AM | Joined: May 2003 Posts: 18 Junior Member | | Junior Member Joined: May 2003 Posts: 18 | Well, now that I know the 350 will fit, what do you guys think 283 or 350?
grannylow | | |
#35096 07/13/2003 3:00 AM | Joined: Jul 2001 Posts: 3,887 Cruising in the Passing Lane | | Cruising in the Passing Lane Joined: Jul 2001 Posts: 3,887 | hay, 350's are like flys - they're everywhere - but a nice 283 w/ the original front peg mounts nested where it was designed to be is gettin to be unusual
283's are good strong motors w/ good lo end torque + the ability to rev well, and can be tweeked a million ways - if ya want a bit more oomph make it a 327, tho they're a bit more 'high strung' and aren't as likely to last forever
Bill | | |
#35097 07/13/2003 4:52 AM | Joined: May 2003 Posts: 53 Member | | Member Joined: May 2003 Posts: 53 | I agree with squeeze 283 or my personal favorite 327,but its your ride the final decision should be yours just addin my .02 cents Wayne
1956 GMC TF 1/2 ton 1955 GMC 500 model (Gumby)
| | |
#35098 07/13/2003 4:58 AM | Joined: Apr 2003 Posts: 140 Wrench Fetcher | | Wrench Fetcher Joined: Apr 2003 Posts: 140 | Tough call. A '75 350 is probably a low-compression motor, but for a truck application that might not be so bad. Is this thing gonna be a daily driver, or more for show, or what? If I was gonna drive it much, I'd put the 350 in. OTOH, if you were to fix up the 283 with correct period valve cover, air cleaner, etc than would look neat.
FWIW, if I recall correctly, the early (circa 57, 58, etc) blocks could be bored to 4.00, giving an original 302. Short stroke, with good cylinder heads it can be a real screamer. I built one once, years ago....
Good luck! George | | |
#35099 07/13/2003 6:59 PM | Joined: May 2003 Posts: 18 Junior Member | | Junior Member Joined: May 2003 Posts: 18 | My Truck is going to be a daily driver which I plan to use for a long time. My future plan is for a t5 or 700r4 ( for the overdrive), and a GM 14 bolt rear with 3.42 or 3.73 gears. So, which engine do you guys think will work best for that setup. I want it to last a long time.
GrannyLow | | |
#35100 07/13/2003 7:35 PM | Joined: May 2003 Posts: 57 Member | | Member Joined: May 2003 Posts: 57 | I'm going to have to give a 283 vote. Your basic plans mirror mine with my 65 C-10. Hope all goes well,Tom.
65 C10 292/700R4 long fleet...Gettin closer by the day.
| | |
#35101 07/13/2003 8:21 PM | Joined: Jul 2000 Posts: 504 Member | | Member Joined: Jul 2000 Posts: 504 | As you open the hood and someone asks you what engine is in your truck, watch for the yawn as you tell them it is a 350..
Give that truck a little pizazz and stay with the 283..
Bill M 53 GMC Hydra-Matic
Home Page http://home.comcast.net/~bd97/index.html
When you argue with a fool, two fools are arguing..
| | |
#35102 07/13/2003 9:43 PM | Joined: Jul 2001 Posts: 3,887 Cruising in the Passing Lane | | Cruising in the Passing Lane Joined: Jul 2001 Posts: 3,887 | save the work of fitting a new rear, and just get the 3.38 gear set for the original rear, also, what's the point of an OD T5 with the 3.38 or even 3.42 gears? my 283 pullin a stock 3spd and 3.9 gearset has immense pulling power, more acceleration than a sane person needs, and will cruise at 60-65 easy - w/ the 3.38 gears my mileage will increase, highway speed jump prolly 10mph at least w/ lower RPM, and everything else will still be great!! course, others might need somethin to fill the time and use up all that xcess cash on hand Bill | | |
#35103 07/14/2003 3:26 PM | Joined: Jun 2000 Posts: 2,773 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Jun 2000 Posts: 2,773 | The 283 will get you better fuel milage, those mid-70s 350s are fuel hogs. Were talking 18 mpg versus 12. With the smog restriction of the stock 350 there isn't much power difference.
Fred 52 3600 69 C-10
| | |
#35104 07/15/2003 12:38 AM | Joined: Oct 2001 Posts: 130 Wrench Fetcher | | Wrench Fetcher Joined: Oct 2001 Posts: 130 | hello there gl57.you'll have a great truck no matter which you choose, but my vote is for the 283. looks,good torque, but not too edgy, easy still to find service parts for. i agree the 350 might be a low h.p. version. just a note, i think the 350 has the provisions for the stock front mounts that your truck already has, that is the four holes to fasten the front mounts. but watch out for the vibration dampener at the front of the 350 engine. it is a larger diameter than the 283 and will hit the mount brackets unless you cut a notch in them. good luck.
our garage is a non-profit organization
| | |
#35105 07/15/2003 1:48 AM | Joined: May 2003 Posts: 18 Junior Member | | Junior Member Joined: May 2003 Posts: 18 | Well it seems that we have come to a conclusion, and it seems that the 283 is the way to go. That is now my definite decision since I ran the stats for both engines on my desktop dyno. The 283 was beating the 350 in both torque and horsepower, untill 5000 rpm. That's good enough performance for me plus the 283 is way cooler.
GrannyLow | | |
#35106 07/16/2003 6:33 AM | Joined: Apr 2003 Posts: 608 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Apr 2003 Posts: 608 | Depending on the year the older 350s were not drilled on the left side bosses especially the 2 bolt main car motors.some 307s 305s and even 327s didnt have threads on the l.f. boss. Every small block ive been around is drilled & tapped on the r.s. the upper hole being in line with the fuel pump push rod/bore...leave out the bolt, youve got an oil leak that looks like a front seal or timing case cover prob. put the wrong length bolt in instead, it binds the pump shaft and sheesa no run on her own  | | |
#35107 07/16/2003 10:38 PM | Joined: Feb 2001 Posts: 1,897 Member | | Member Joined: Feb 2001 Posts: 1,897 | You can use a longer bolt in that hole to run a bolt in to just make contact with the fuel pump rod. Not too tight, just enough to hold the rod while you replace the fuel pump if it ever goes out I would go with the 283 as they are pretty good little engines and parts are still available 
There is enough good in the worst of us and enough bad in the best of us that it does not behoove any of us to criticize the rest of us. - - Be yourself. If you are ever lost, It will be much easier to find yourself if you know who you are!
| | |
| |