|
|
|
EVENTS
Check in for status!
Jump over to the
Events Forum, to post events -- new ones or the ones we have been enjoying for some time.
Look to see what's been cancelled or postponed.
Encourage one another!
|
|
|
|
Forums50
Topics120,550
Posts966,273
Members43,699
| |
Most Online1,229
Jan 21st, 2020
|
|
 261 vs 292
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 291
OP
Shop Shark
|
i am a real rookie when it comes to the 292. i was considering a 261 for my chevy 46 1/2t as it is a direct bolt in replacement for my 216. what are the differences between the 261 and the 292. are they that different that it would be "major fabrication" to get a 292 into the 46? has anyone done this already with some real world advice!! thanks
"it's only old if you can't find a use for it; otherwise it's cool and i'll use it."
|
|
|
Re: 261 vs 292
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,736
Shop Shark
|
The good news is that the 292 is a little shorter than a 235-261 and about 20% lighter. It's height is approx. the same so the fit is good. It uses the same bellhousing design as SBC V8's so all the trannys work well with it. The bad news is the motor mounts are in the middle of the block so mounts must be fabricated. If you get one from a large truck it may have the 90 degree oil filter on it and that might cause some problems as it sticks down pretty low. Nothing that a remote mount filter wouldn't cure however. I don't think your current transmission will bolt up to this engine. They are pretty powerful engines as stock and can be made to produce a great deal of power/torque with a few goodies. The lighter weight and siamesed head design make it a worthwhile swap.
|
|
|
Re: 261 vs 292
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 42
Shop Shark
|
one thing i wanted to point out is that one of the motor mounts on a 292 is in the middle and the other is closer to the front (cant remember which side is which but i think the pass side is the one closer to the front of the engine) if i am incorrect someone will help, or if i remember to check of my truck. but just my $.01 worth
army truck
|
|
|
Re: 261 vs 292
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,736
Shop Shark
|
Not that it matters since a complete new mounting must be adapted or fabricated but for you technocrats it is the drivers side that is near the front and the passenger side that is near the center.
|
|
|
Re: 261 vs 292
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,899
Shop Shark
|
292 has 7 main bearings. The 261 only has 4. The 261 would definetely be eazier to install with a manual transmission in a 1946. The brake and clutch pedals mount to the bellhousing on trucks till the AD body change. You would be kind of limited to transmissions with the stock bellhousing, but you could always have an adapter made to sit between the bellhousing and the transmission. An A833 (Dodge) overdrive transmission would work real well behind a 261.
I mention the dodge transmission because the input shaft on dodge transmissions is typically 1 inch longer than the input shaft on the gm transmissions, which gives you the ability to make a 1 inch thick adapter to have everything mesh correctly. You can usually hook up your stock mechanical speedo to the mopar speedo gear, and change the speedo gears to suit your axle ratio and tire size.
I will be putting a dodge NV4500 behind my 302 GMC inline 6 in my 1940 GMC. I will be able to use the stock clutch linkage, but the brakes will take some engineering.
John
|
|
|
Re: 261 vs 292
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 291
OP
Shop Shark
|
is there a good (easy) recommended transmission swap to go with the 292 into a 46 1/2t. what are the production years on the 292?
my orig plan was a 261, stock bellhousing, clutch, and trans, w/a patricks 3:55 ring and pinion conversion.
but nothing is in stone right now, so parts and plans are easy to change.
thanks for the help
"it's only old if you can't find a use for it; otherwise it's cool and i'll use it."
|
|
|
Re: 261 vs 292
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,899
Shop Shark
|
I guess you could put just about any transmission you like behind the 292. You are likely going to use a hydraulic clutch, for a manual transmission, so you will have to figure that part out. Once you figured out the hydraulic clutch the rest should be ez. As far as transmissions to reccomend...maybe a hybrid T5, but I would think the T5 to be light duty behind a 292. The good news is that your 46 probably won't hook to well, so the spinning of your tires will be the safety valve that keeps your transmission together. Again the A833, this time the GM version would be a great transmission, and you can find them with the gm bolt pattern so it will bolt up the the v8 style bellhousing. The hardest part of the whole 292 swap will be setting up your brake and clutch pedals.
|
|
|
Re: 261 vs 292
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,045
Shop Shark
|
Last edited by carolines truck; Tue Mar 04 2008 06:35 AM.
Jim & Caroline The highway is for gamblers Better use your good sense." Gooday that's my 1¢ answer due to the lousy economy ~ cause I ain't got - no . mo . doe Lucinda Otter-Purr our 51-3104 bolt http://s67.photobucket.com/albums/h298/1951otter/?start=all Inliner #4655 Every Shaver Now Can Snore Six More Minutes Than Before ... Half A Pound for Half a Dollar Spread On Thin Above the Collar BURMA-SHAVE
|
|
|
Re: 261 vs 292
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 343
Shop Shark
|
There was a guy out on eBay that was selling an adapter plate that let you bolt up the 292/v8 pattern directly to a stock 50s bell housing.
I was thinking of doing that and getting the Buffalo Engineering bell housing with the welded on break and clutch pedal mount.
Anyhow I haven't gone that route yet as I still have a few 235s sitting around. That is a very simple swap and is enough power to be scary with original equipment in my 1940 trucks.
I would like to put a 292 in my 1 1/2 ton but I don't know how to stop it yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
