Any bolt on for a 230 or 250 will work. Not 235 or 261 part. Also the
292 is not light in weight and likely weighs about the same as a 350
but is a lot easier to work on and very excellant low RPM responce.
Well right now I'm just trying to get a general estimate on cost of
building one up. Of course, getting it in the truck will be another
matter, but shouldn't be ridiculous seeing as how that engine was
offered in that truck.
I'm looking into cams, and I'm thinking of going with something with
short duration and little overlap to get a good idle with low-end
torque. Plus if I were to super/turbo charge anything, that cam would
be a good choice far as I can tell. If I plan on doing that, I'll go
ahead and plan on having around an 8:1 compression ratio.
Know of any good sites that detail the specs on the I-6's? Like bore,
stroke, compression, etc...?
Not to rain on your parade but a 350 will out pull a 292 six. And if you
were to start hopping up the six it will cost more per HP gained than a V8.
If you want a lot of low end grunt build a mild 383, 350 with a 400 crank,
or find a stock 400. No matter what anyone here tells you, you will be miles
ahead. There are lots of low buck 383 rotating assembles around. Lots of
early big Chevy's have 400's, and they were in pickups till 79.
No one mentioned this before but the 305 is anemic as produced. They, like
most small blocks, come alive with a tiny bit of work. Cam, intake and
headers will wake it up. It would cost a hell of a lot to get the same
performance out of a 292. Change the pistons and heads and it will really
wake up. Now you're in exotic territory for a 292:)
Well...it's not about what will out-pull what... A Duramax would
out-pull the 350, but I'm not going to install one.
Since this is now my fun truck, and not my daily truck, I'm approaching
it differently than I would've in the past. I will be upgrading some
parts along the way, like axles for instance, but it's not going to be
an offroad beast with 12" of lift, and it's not going to be a towing
vehicle either. It'll probably get a few inches of lift and 33" or 35"
tires max, and I plan on 86-ing the fiberglass top in lieu of a soft
top for cruising up into the mountains on nice days. If I can find a
dirt trail to get into, all the better, but I'm not interested in
competitive off-roading or pulling super-heavy loads, nor the power
levels required to do it.
Not to mention, I like "different". K5's with 350's and 383's are all
too common. Then you have the big-block crowd. I prefer to stand out
in the crowd a bit. If you knew me personally, you wouldn't be
surprised at all, LOL...
And for the record, my 350 won't out-pull anything. Yes, that could be
changed by swapping the cam, but I'm over it. I say bring on the 6.
Big Al wrote:
Not to rain on yours but a 350 is no match for a 292 below 2000 RPM or
so and with a stick is would be a real stump puller with nearly full
torque availble right off a idle. It has low RPM torque that will even
rival some old diesels because you can pull it at 1000 RPM and it will
do so strongly and smoothly. You would need a 400 small block or big
block to match this low RPM torque and a lot more fuel too. Myself I
would be tempted to build one up with 12 to 1 CR or so and run it on
propane as it would make great power, get about the same MPG as gas on
8 to 1 and there would be no carb to flood out or starve out in any
position off road. On top of all of this it would be basically a zero
emission vehicle too. Propane has a octane of 110 plus and while you
have to have a heavier tak to store it, it weighs less than gas (4lb
vs 6.5) which offsets tank weight and it energy density per lb of fuel
is actually a bit higher than gas too. (about 10% more). If you realy
want to get wild, GM made some truck V6 from mid 60's thru early 70's
in 305, 351, 401 and 478. THey all shared same block. THe 305 was used
in GMC pickups through about 70 and the 351 was used in a few too.
These were real stump pullers too. THe 401 and 478 was used in HD
trucks and the 478 saw a lot of use in HD drumptrucks during that time
and was a force to be reconned with as it made almost 450 ftlbs of
torque at 1400 RPM in stock form. Check out link below and check out
the 637 V8 and 702 V12 GM had.
I've considered the propane thing at times myself. It would be
interesting if I were able to plan fuel stops ahead of time.
Concerning RPM and torque... you're basically describing exactly what
I'm looking for. At 80mph in OD, with 3.73 gears, I was right at
2000rpm. I don't need an engine that peaks above that, so again, it
sound like the six is what I need.
Sometimes I think you're smart, other times you astound me. You are ALWAYS
preaching low rear end gears, now you're an advocate for lots of low end
torque. Make up your mind:) Now how much money do you have to bet on what
you just wrote? At 1999 RPM (That's under 2,000 right?) I have a thousand
dollars that says a completely stock 350 will out pull a 292. How about it?
In a offroad machine you need good low RPM responce so that you do not
have to wind it up to pull smoothly idling or have to slip the clutch
a lot in a taller gear to keep engine from racing otherwise. What
works towing and offroad is not that far apart in that you need to
match your power curve to the load at hand. Most V8's (especailly
small blocks that are setup for midrange and top end power do their
best above 3000 RPM pulling hard while sixes are quite happy at 2000
RPM or less and were designed that way. Also you find me a stock 60
era 292 with a stick and a 350 with a stick and pull them at less than
2000 RPM and the 292 will smoke the 350, especailly at 1500 RPM and
less. With automatic the results would be different depending on stall
speed of converter but at low RPM the old 292 is awesome. I know I
drove some of them when they were in their prime and they were is a
leauge of their own at low RPM's with a stick. I would be taking your
Is the low-end "torquey-ness" of the 292 attained by the long stroke??
(more leverage against the crank?)
I found the specs on Chuck's Chevy Truck Pages and noticed that the
stroke is 4.12" whereas the 454 has a 4" stroke, follow by 3.75" for
the 400 SBC, and everything else is roughly close to 3.5". I can see
where that would make a huge difference.
The longer the stroke the more torque you can make with a given bore
size. Think about a wrench, the longer the wrench is the more torque you
can apply with the same amount of force on the wrench.
Tractor engines are another proof of concept item about longer throws
creating torque. The other trade off is that the longer the stroke the
lower the rpm ceiling is for an engine. Cargo ship engines create huge
torque but they turn 250-500 rpm max. They also have strokes measured in
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
True. Also the reason the block is taller is so they can use a long
rod too to limit side forces on piston with a longer stroke. As you
increase the stroke on SB you cannot realy use a longer rod without
putting piston pin up higher which has its own problems too.
Good deal... Well, I've been browsing eBay and Craigslist, haven't
found any 292's locally, and haven't found a bare block. Found a few
complete engines, but they aren't real close to me. I'm not ready to
get one just yet anyhow. I need to do some things around the house to
make room to work on all this stuff--when money and time finally permit
"Shades" <shades_1970(at)netins(dot)net> wrote in message
Yes I'm good.
Found our argument on the web. Enjoy:
You guys can find more and post the links. Was looking for a dyno sheet from
a stock 292 six and could not find one. Lots of small block dyno sheets to
compare if we can find a sheet on the six. Hard to find one that starts at
One weight reduction, aint going to happen with fiberglass panels stout
enough to handle being an everyday driver.
The Chevy 250 long block weighs 440 pounds, I would estimate another 50
pounds for the 292 because of the taller block, and a beefier crank,
The small blocks with cast manifolds (intake and exhaust) weigh 575 pounds.
Of course if you really really want something different, find a Jimmie 478
cid V-6 for it.
235 hp at 3,200 rpm, 440 ft/lb of torque at 1,400 rpm, and a "round"
bolt pattern for use with truck trannies, like allisons.
then there was the 351 cid V-6 that one 180 hp at 3,400 and 312 ft/lb torque
at 1,800 to 2,200 rpm. Course you could go way off the deep end and try and
find one of the Jimmie V-12s, which were basically two V-6s, and back in the
early 60's they out pulled almost any diesel rig on the road
http://www.6066gmctrucks.org/ is good page on these beasts.
As for performance parts, there is only one place, CliffordPerformance.net.
They wrote the book on 6=8.. 4 bbl manifolds, fuel injection, side draft
webers, what's you choice? They build the best headers, damn things don't
crack, don't warp and don't leak. They have cams, as well as blue printed
heads. Old man Clifford tore the race tracks up with Hudsons, everyone for
the them an L-6.
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.