here's an idea (215 V8)

[Guest Nic-Rebel450CA]

I have been giving quite a bit of thought to the good old 215V8, in searching through the forums I see that this has been done (sorta). It seems that everyone strokes these in one way or another but no one seems to appreciate the 2.8" stroke of the stock form. (Everyone is more focused on the weight).

Since I love high reving engines and I am not going after really high HP or Torque marks this seems to be a great candidate. I was thinking of getting a 215 and supercharging or turboing it and shooting for about 300HP (should be quite do-able). Now, one thing I have been wondering is that someone pointed out to me that supercharging or turboing an aluminum engine might lead to troubles with the head bolts and keeping the heads on the engine. Might a possible solution be to get a Buick 300 and swap in a 215 crank? (I know everyone has done the exact opposite as they are more interested in the light-weight block of the 215)

 

I would love some ideas and feedback, but please dont give any advice about stroking it to get more power or how a ford 5.0 with alum heads can make more power and not weigh much more. I know how to get more torque, and I know how to build a light engine. I am not concerned with either, I want the 2.8" stroke.

I am also aware that a 302 (67-69) has a 4.0" bore and a 3.0" stroke and may also be a good candidate for high reving engine especially if I can find a good quality crank. (BTW, if i could find such a crank couldnt this just be swapped into an old design 350 to yield the same design?)

I have also done a number of calculations for piston velocity as well as piston acceleration and found that a 215 and this old 302 are pretty close. I am looking for an engine that I can pull 5500-6000RPM and maintain for extended distances as it is just plain FUN!

[Lone Star 1]

Stock LS1. All aluimum, 6200 RPM stock, 300 RWHP stock, 25MPG stock. :DI am looking for an engine that I can pull 5500-6000RPM and maintain for extended distances as it is just plain FUN!

[Guest Nic-Rebel450CA]

Stock LS1. All aluimum, 6200 RPM stock, 300 RWHP stock, 25MPG stock.

 

The aluminum aspect is pretty much not important to me, in fact, from what I heard about possibly blowing the heads off with too much boost or supercharging I might actually want iron instead.

 

Also an LS1 has a 6200 RPM redline if I am not mistaken, at 5500-6000 RPM it is so close to being at max safe piston velocity it would not be wise to sustain that RPM for very long at all. In fact, I believe that the LS1 actually has a longer stroke than the old design 350 which would make sense since my 350 in my pickup can hit about 7000

[Pop N Wood]

This idea has definitely gone around several times. Here is one link about short stroke engines

 

http://www.hybridz.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1993&highlight=

 

You may want to search some of Grumpyvette's old posts concerning engine life and high RPM.

 

BTW, the RPM band you are looking for is not that high. GM use to sell new LT4 engines through there catalog and listed the RPM as 6300. Valve float and a restrictive intake usually does more to limit usable RPM than piston speed.

 

One problem with the small displacement V8’s is they generally have smaller bore diameters which limits the flow through the heads. Another issue would be the strength of the block and bottom end of a small V8 that was never built with performance in mind.

 

General consensus of these types of discussions is yeah, you can spend a bunch of extra money to destroke an existing engine. But when you are done you will not be as fast as if you had kept the cubes, so why bother?

 

If you want to rev, why not a 4 banger like an SR20?

[Mudge]

Since I love high reving engines and I am not going after really high HP or Torque marks this seems to be a great candidate.

 

Ford 302 is light, and has a 3" stroke by default. You can squeeze a 5.4" rod in there, I am not sure about larger being possible but I have read of using 5.7" Chevy rods so something must be possible with the stock stroke. Plus you dont have to give up a bootload of cubes and there is plenty of aftermarket for the Ferd. Nice 3" stroke will keep your piston velocity down, but are you really planning on 10,000 RPM? Its going to cost money to build that either way.

 

I am looking for an engine that I can pull 5500-6000RPM and maintain for extended distances as it is just plain FUN!

 

The only thing holding you back is you possibly using an old old old junkyard block. I ran 7k RPM on my 3.48" stroke LT1 on the stock bottom end, with NO problems, 2 bolt caps and all. 6k RPM is NOTHING, and this is exactly why it is ridiculous to go for an ultra short stroke giving up cubes on a street car, there are 3.875" stroke /6" rod cars doing 7k RPM all day long. Alot of these setups are not even running full floating wrist pins.

[flibuoy]

It sounded like you were thinking weight as well as RPM in the first post. By the time you hang a turbo or supercharger a good bit of the weight advantage would be lost. Now that is a neat engine, having put one in an Austin Healey Bugeye Sprite a long time ago. It was light years beyong the stock 948 cc. I do doubt the swap would be worthwhile in the much heavier Z. The Ford 302 or a short stroke Chev will wind awfully tight if built right from beginning, without much "trick" stuff. Keep us all posted if you do the 215....always interesting stuff going on. john

[Heavy Z]

My Z is being painted but should be done no later than mid-next week. Email me if you want a ride, as you may benefit from seeing how a 327 feels in a Z. You could also use a 283 crank to make a short-stroke 302.

[Guest Nic-Rebel450CA]

GM use to sell new LT4 engines through there catalog and listed the RPM as 6300.

This is a redline, I wouldnt keep it up there very long.

Valve float and a restrictive intake usually does more to limit usable RPM than piston speed.

The Buick 300 head is a bolt-on and should flow much better. Especially being forcefed.

General consensus of these types of discussions is yeah, you can spend a bunch of extra money to destroke an existing engine. But when you are done you will not be as fast as if you had kept the cubes, so why bother?

No need to destroke, the 215 already has the shortest stroke of any V8 (unless you can find me a good used Mercedes Indy V8 )

If you want to rev, why not a 4 banger like an SR20

What is the stroke of an SR20?

[Mudge]

This is a redline, I wouldnt keep it up there very long.

 

Its got a 4 bolt bottom, it doesn't make power past that because it has a tiny cam, there is nothing wrong with revving it to 7k other than the crappy valve springs and the fact that it wont make power anyway.

 

I repeat my 2 bolt say 7k RPM with no problems and many of us have done so, with a 3.48" stroke, and all the way up to the 4.25" stroke guys have done so as well. Now I'd prefer shorter stroke of course, but if all you want is around 6k any engine will do virtually if the top end will take it and the bottom end is not ready to die. This isn't the 1940s anymore.

[fl327]

Hey Rebel, you have my buddies old car, is the shifter still in the tranny tunnel or really near it? He owned it before the guy you bought it from had it. He lives in Sac now, youll probably run into him soon, or he will run into you.

 

Rover techs dont like the 215 too much. All I hear from them is early head gasket failure and that it leaks alot. Im not saying that its not a nice little engine, but if the techs dont like em, It does say something. There used to be a few european guys with 215 engine swaps, with supra trannies behind them, I dont know where they went though.

 

The 327 is pretty nice, I dig them out of nostalgias sake. I had one in a Z before, with a four speed manual, Powershifting at 6400 in a Z with a lot of hp and even more tq is fun as heck!! Took 100 nitro plate shot pretty good too. Factory 2 bolt v8 engines dont like spinning 6000 for long periods of time, shoot-some 4 bolts dont like that kinda Rpm.

They rev slightly faster than a 350, but yes, more cubes, more horse

 

If you are going to do a turbo or supercharger setup on any of these engines, weight should be the least of your concerns, You will have to re-engineer a lot of things with your ride, especially with it being a 70.

Like Heavy Z was offering, go get a ride from him, and see if you dont need a nice SBC in your life.

[Guest Nic-Rebel450CA]

An interesting note of feedback was adressed regarding the fact that the 215 bottom end may not even be able to hold up.

 

on second thought this may be quite true, what good is a 2.8" stroke if the darn crank wont hold up anyways. (and I doubt that I could find a 215 crank from any performance house anywhere)

 

Oh well, guess that idea is pretty much dead.

Anyone know how to get ahold of used Indy engines?

 

So how about that 302? Can I buy a new (forged?) 3.0" crank for a SBC? I have a great SBC 350 in my classic pickup that I was originally thinking of putting into my Z. The engine is an 88 so that would be the old style, right? If so, could I just swap out the crank in this?

[Pop N Wood]

If you read the thread I posted earlier, you will see that a Cheby 302 can be made by putting a 283 crank in a small journal 327 block. Or you could call Scat. I am sure if you pony up enough $$$ they can give you a 302 rotating assembly for a 350 block.

 

But back to where we started from, unless you can find a deal on a 302 crank at a swap meet or something you are going to pay a premium for the smaller stroke. If you keep the 350 you started with, add a decent valve train and a single plane intake (build for high RPM power instead of street torque), then you should have an engine that revs. Put enough cam in there and you can have an engine with the same low RPM torque characteristics as a 302, but much more high end horsepower.

 

I hear you, I have always wanted a 1969 Z28 with a 302. My original plan was to put such an engine in my Z since light weight cars have trouble making use of a lot of low end torque anyway. But since then I have decided it makes a lot more sense to throw out all the Hot Rod and Car Craft articles geared toward building street engines for a 3600# street car and instead build a 350 with a lot of cam and intake. Trade low end torque for high end HP and be dollars ahead in the process.

 

But if you really want to put in a 215, then by all means do so. Just understand what you are trading in the process.

[Guest Nic-Rebel450CA]

....If you keep the 350 you started with' date=' add a decent valve train and a single plane intake (build for high RPM power instead of street torque), then you should have an engine that revs. Put enough cam in there and you can have an engine with the same low RPM torque characteristics as a 302, but much more high end horsepower.

 

I hear you, I have always wanted a 1969 Z28 with a 302. ....... Trade low end torque for high end HP and be dollars ahead in the process.

[/quote']

 

Sounds like you have very similar thoughts to mine. I just want a GM V8 engine that will REV and be borderlined "insanely high reving"

 

I ran my mild 350 in my in my pickup about 5500 rpm down the freeway for a couple miles and it sounded so awesome. I would love to build an engine for my Z that would run 5500 or higher without a sweat for nice long distances.

 

What do you have/plan to have in your Z right now?

[Scottie-GNZ]

Great thread and one that has my interest because I have experience with the 215ci and the 302 SBC, both in hybrids. The 215ci in a 73 Vega GT and the 302 in a 73 914. I do not want to bust anybody's bubble but I am sure many will agree with me that by today's standard, a 215 is woefully inadequate. Back in the early days, the hot ticket was to swap on the 300 heads because the stock 215 has a bad cause of asthma. I do not think the average Joe could afford what it would take to extract 275RWHP from a NA 215, and if you could, why would you?

 

As for the 302, making a 302 with the correct bore and stroke gets you nothing more than an engine with 302ci unless you have the key ingridient, the heads. Go back in history and look at some of the early carb'd OEM small block monsters and you will see they all had one thing common. The 302 SBC, the 327/375, the early LT1, the Boss302 and the Mopar 340 all had heads with huge ports and 2.02 intake valves and would rev until kingdom come. The free-flowing heads and cam was a big factor in the attaining the RPMs.

 

One last thing. I keep seeing references to the added weight of forced induction as if it is a negative and that is not a good argument, at least from a power standpoint. The power gain far outweighs the added weight.

[Guest 305240]

Back in high school, I run a 62buick skylark 2drhdtp. I dont' remember how much it weighed, but it was pretty light. It come with a small 4v carb and a 2 speed automatic. I remember the width of the engine was small compaired to the olds 215. I think the heads were different. Anyway, the car was really quick, and I beat a lot of heavier cars with larger engines. My top speed was around 110mph. The tranny didn't hold up to my driving tho. I know they used to make speed equipment for then at one time, IE headers cams, and intakes. It might be fun to put one of those in a Z car. Lord knows I have enough of them.(Z cars that is)

[Guest Sloparman]

If you are really wanting to build a 302 chevy I have a 327 small jurnel block and a brand new 283 crank, I would like to get 200 for them im located in central cali. Small jurnel 327's are a dime a dozen and a new 283 crank cost about 120 bucks, so it may be cheaper to buy both locally if your across the nation from me.