| |
Click on image for the lowdown. 
====
| | | Forums66 Topics128,092 Posts1,056,040 Members48,433 | | 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!
| | | | Joined: Mar 2008 Posts: 6 New Guy | | New Guy Joined: Mar 2008 Posts: 6 | I read and followed with interest Doc Frohmander's Stovebolt stroker article. One question remains.. How big can I go with a 235 when it comes to Bore size? The 261 is hard to find. I would like to bore the 235 to use the 261 pistons from egge components. Can I take away that much metal? | | | | | Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 1,513 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 1,513 | No. You will strike the water jacket and that is why the cylinders are siamesed on a 261 and .080" over is generally the safe limit. If you haven't been here you may find some other useful info: http://www.inliners.org/
1952 1300 Canadian 1/2 ton restomod You Tube | | | | | Joined: Feb 2004 Posts: 29,792 Kettle Custodian (pot stirrer) | | Kettle Custodian (pot stirrer) Joined: Feb 2004 Posts: 29,792 | I did a little math, and it appears to be possible to use the 292 piston and rod in a 261, but not the 235. Offset-grind the crank to the 292 stroke, and you'll have a 292 cubic inch engine that looks like a 235/261. It gets the 261 cylinder wall a little thin, but it appears it wouldn't hit water. Boring the 235 to 261 diameter definitely isn't doable.
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!
| | | | | Joined: Jun 2005 Posts: 388 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Jun 2005 Posts: 388 | I recall that in the golden age the maximum bore increase for a 235 was 3/32", which would create 248 cubic inches with the stock stroke. This would be a bore of 3-21/32", still 3/32" less than a stock 261. What Jerry described above is similar to that which Tom Langdon calls his "Cadillac 261", which he wrote up in the 12-Port News a few years ago. Bob Torros also sold stroker kits for the 261 in the late fifties.
Hoyt | | | | | Joined: Dec 2008 Posts: 1,922 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Dec 2008 Posts: 1,922 | +.090" is a good place to stop. This pretty much limits the engine size, since the biggest you can offset the 292 rod is .211", and allowing only .002" to clean up the journal, the new stroke is only 4.1465". Total = 262".
If you want more stroke you either have to use a rod with a smaller journal such as Buick 248 (2.00"), or weld the crank.
Add up the cost of the rods, machine work etc. - much cheaper to just get a 261. | | |
|
|
| |
