[ProMetalShop]

How do we arrive at a particular cubic inch when stroking or destroking ?

First one is the 277 cui small Chevy, how do we get there, and from what ? And dose it exist ?

 

[ProMetalShop]

And just to recap as I searched for a 277 cui on line just for reference I ran into a thread with another fellow with the same cui in mind. Here is a copy from our friends over at TriFive :


nj1956
Senior Member
*

*

Join Date: Jun 2008
nj1956's Garage
Location: NJ
Posts: 117
Member #5661

Tom,

Sounds like we are building twin engines!! LOL I to have a 60's era 283 with all the machine work done too. Got is from a machine shop in town that was going out of business. It would be alot cheaper to build that one and the 62-67 283 blocks can be bored .125 over stock! I also have a 327 short block. I could use that block and a 283 crank, with mu 462 heads, a 30/30 or dz302 cam and 2x4's!! I wanna build them all!!!

I will keep you posted as I progress. This is still in the idea phase. I need to take some of these parts to the machine shop and see if they can even be used. They have been sitting awhile!

Jake

PS- A friend of my fathers use to race through the 60's and 70's and he had a 57' 2dr hardtop fuelie car. He said the best the car ever ran was with a 277cui motor. 265 crank in a 283 block!!! Talk about a sewing machine!!!

Now he seems to be making about the same reference which Mark has clearified that there both 3 inch strokes

Again were am I getting this cube number ? As well as this fellow on trifive ! Two gum balls to the first to come up with the formular

 

[ProMetalShop]

Ok I read on another forum and the 277 is not stroked it's a bored 265..... So now I'm not sure what was in my 33

 

[1946Austin]

Had me puzzled with the 277 thing, and even more so when I read the 265 crank in a 283. Being their both the same stroke it sounded strange. I love short stroke motors, and high winding engines. Seems most people are going the other way when they stroke and engine today. Always trying to go for longer stroke and more torque engines, than high winding engines.

 

[ProMetalShop]

Ya ! Vall I did however read on one site the fellow saying a crank could be purchased to turn a 350 into a 277 but it was in answer to another fellow looking to build one. So my thoughts are there is more then me out there that heard of the 277 destroked from something ! ! I also noticed that most of the postings were from the east coast. Is this just something that caught on in the east and not practiced to many other places.
Really don't matter just fun doing the hunt for info

 

[OpelGasser]

As I remember..... the popular 265 hop up back in the early days was (as I recall) boring the engine to "272 cubic inches" ...... or something like that!!!! HA!!!

 

[1946Austin]

The 272 was just a .030" bored 265. Kinda like the 350 to the 355, or the 283 to the 292.

 

[Marks63PontiacGasser]

During the hayday of Modified Production classes, they were destroking to all kinds of combinations. Most were 283 blocks and destroked cranks. That is why I was wondering how you got to the 277 number. Then I thought maybe you meant a 377, which is a 400 block and 350 crank, an engine I built for my '67 Nova ( really, really sweet combination). It's been so long since I've even considered a 265 that I forgot all about those. Mark L

 

[1946Austin]

The 265 had such a short run that most people didn't use them for racing, unless they came stock in their car. Not sure how many were built in two years, but can't be a whole lot.

 

[OpelGasser]

The 265 had such a short run that most people didn't use them for racing, unless they came stock in their car. Not sure how many were built in two years, but can't be a whole lot.

I do remember quite a few people who successfully used 265 engines..... this of course was during "class racing" where cubic inches to weight ratio determined classifications. As I recall, as bracket racing became more popular it killed off "class racing" as it was once known..... and the smaller cubic inch chevy motors gave way to 327's & in time 350/400's.

 

[1946Austin]

I do remember quite a few people who successfully used 265 engines..... this of course was during "class racing" where cubic inches to weight ratio determined classifications. As I recall, as bracket racing became more popular it killed off "class racing" as it was once known..... and the smaller cubic inch chevy motors gave way to 327's & in time 350/400's.

Bracket racing is the worst thing that ever happened to drag racing! It killed the heads up racing in anything but high end pro classes. I sure miss seeing guys trying every minute to make their cars go faster each week.
And don't even get me started on computers in race cars!

 

[Cptnbob]

I agree!

 

[casey w]

its all about bore and stroke. My buddy and mechanic has a high winding 276. 4.03 bore and 2.7 stroke

 

[OpelGasser]

Bracket racing is the worst thing that ever happened to drag racing! It killed the heads up racing in anything but high end pro classes. I sure miss seeing guys trying every minute to make their cars go faster each week.
And don't even get me started on computers in race cars!

I totally agree.

When I think about how it was back then it bears NO resemblance to the drag racing of today.

Fortunately we only live a few hours from drag strips that have very successful nostalgia events.

 

[casey w]

You nailed it with that statement. We had a local heads up track that was built in 66. Got shut down in 2008. I I loved heads up racing, bracket racing isnt racing at all!

Bracket racing is the worst thing that ever happened to drag racing! It killed the heads up racing in anything but high end pro classes. I sure miss seeing guys trying every minute to make their cars go faster each week.
And don't even get me started on computers in race cars!

 

[casey w]

Here is a link to a clip of my buddies 276 cuin sbc. Its heads up lbs per cuin. Watch the nova is the far lane. 9500 rpm burnout and 10,200 launch. His nova is a 10.5 lb per cuin car 276 with g force 5 spd and a 6.67 rear gear. He is racing a 2250 lb camaro with a 500 cuin prostock hemi, the camaro is 4.5 lbs per cuin thats why my buddies nova gets the head start. Nova runs 5.80 1/8 mi
http://youtu.be/xv251lDtGu0

 

[1946Austin]

Here is a link to a clip of my buddies 276 cuin sbc. Its heads up lbs per cuin. Watch the nova is the far lane. 9500 rpm burnout and 10,200 launch. His nova is a 10.5 lb per cuin car 276 with g force 5 spd and a 6.67 rear gear. He is racing a 2250 lb camaro with a 500 cuin prostock hemi, the camaro is 4.5 lbs per cuin thats why my buddies nova gets the head start. Nova runs 5.80 1/8 mi
http://youtu.be/xv251lDtGu0

Holy crap! That Nova is quick!

We have a local outlaw track nearby where they still run heads up racing, so it's pretty cool to watch. Mostly street driven cars too, and not all trailered in cars. That's where they held the Billetproof Drags in August, and they're always a blast to watch or race in! Had a great time there in August!

 

[casey w]

lol yeah its my buddies!! Gotta love the high winding mouse motor.

Holy crap! That Nova is quick!

We have a local outlaw track nearby where they still run heads up racing, so it's pretty cool to watch. Mostly street driven cars too, and not all trailered in cars. That's where they held the Billetproof Drags in August, and they're always a blast to watch or race in! Had a great time there in August!

 

[casey w]

Sorry guys for the misprint. The engine is actually 289 cubes in this video. He just built it and pulled the 276 out.

Here is a link to a clip of my buddies 276 cuin sbc. Its heads up lbs per cuin. Watch the nova is the far lane. 9500 rpm burnout and 10,200 launch. His nova is a 10.5 lb per cuin car 276 with g force 5 spd and a 6.67 rear gear. He is racing a 2250 lb camaro with a 500 cuin prostock hemi, the camaro is 4.5 lbs per cuin thats why my buddies nova gets the head start. Nova runs 5.80 1/8 mi
http://youtu.be/xv251lDtGu0

 

[T-Bob]

hey guys...just gathering info ( and parts when possible)...so a 283 crank in a 327 block..301?...what rods would you use...?