C1: Crate engine or rebuild?

[David D.]

Re: C1: Crate engine or rebuild?

The engine is a 327 but was a short block, installed in the 70s. So the engine number does not match.

I'm assuming that since the engine number doesn't match, the value will be the same: rebuild or crate.

Should I rebuild the current engine or go with a crate engine?

Robert,
Being it's NOT the original block, I am not sure why so many are arguing for you to rebuild ??? I agree that if you go the crate route you'll have serious problems making it look original.

But, If you go the Crate route, and there are MANY possiblilites, you'll be back on the road much earlier (able to Drive and enjoy) and then you can take time to find correct parts....if funds permit.

If you have the finds and patience, you could probably find the required period correct parts.....but in the mean time, get something in her and enjoy.

JMO - David

[Joe L.]

Re: C1: Crate engine or rebuild?

Robert,
Being it's NOT the original block, I am not sure why so many are arguing for you to rebuild ??? I agree that if you go the crate route you'll have serious problems making it look original.

But, If you go the Crate route, and there are MANY possiblilites, you'll be back on the road much earlier (able to Drive and enjoy) and then you can take time to find correct parts....if funds permit.

If you have the finds and patience, you could probably find the required period correct parts.....but in the mean time, get something in her and enjoy.

JMO - David

David-----


I don't think anyone's suggesting he should rebuild the engine in it now. Rather, he could obtain a correct block with correct casting number and properly dated and rebuild that.

However, I agree that for driving and enjoying the car, the crate engine is the way to go. I even think it would be possible to surmount the crankcase ventilation problem with current design engine blocks by adding a fitting to the rear of the block.

Another way to go would be to obtain a crate engine short block. Obtain new complete heads with perimeter bolt valve cover pattern---like AFR or Edelbrock. Bolt them on. Have an original intake manifold 'hot tanked'. Bolt it on. Paint the whole engine Chevrolet orange. Presto! A brand-new engine configured very much like the original. Yes, there will be some obvious configurational external differences but, for the most part, the engine will look very stock.

[Timothy B.]

Re: C1: Crate engine or rebuild?

Robert,
My vote is to find a correct dated 870 block and rebuild completely stock with original heads and cam. I think going this route will add value to your car and you will have a nice running motor. I would not restamp #'s because it serves no purpose except to deceive someone, just build a nice original engine for yourself. Your Father is the original owner of the car so all the history remains with you and that adds value and in my mind and makes the car worthy of correct componets

I have a spare block for my 63 that's dated three days earlier than the original block that's in the car and if ever needed I would not restamp # to fool anyone, correct cast and date are good enough for me.

[David D.]

Re: C1: Crate engine or rebuild?

I don't think anyone's suggesting he should rebuild the engine in it now. Rather, he could obtain a correct block with correct casting number and properly dated and rebuild that.

Joe, I stand corrected....it's not what I mean't to say. I was trying to address, albeit badly, the getting the correct block and rebuilding as original.

My opinion for crate vs rebuild was to say enjoy. Getting the necessary parts to make an original 'like' motor is TIME and MONEY. I believe a good crate (like 383 stroker or a fast burn) could not only be lots of fun quickly, but would be friendly to pump gas, cruising, etc...I think bottomline, the owner needs to decide what he is going to do with the car. Restore, Street race, Cruise, plus the condition of other parts, such as tranny, rear, frame, suspension etc.....It'd be my opinion that he should dump a crate motor in it, enjoy her, learn the hobby, and decide as time goes on. Instead of potentially burning out before all parts are obtained.

The argument about re-stamping to me is mute, being that to re-stamp, would mean destroying 'potential' broach marks....and from what some one earlier said lots of points are for the correct block casting, and dating, and I would think broach marks are worth more than correct stamping? Maybe not. Plus more than likely an old 870 block would require decking anywho.

I also don't know if I agree that re-stamping is deception, being NCRS recognizes the practice and described in the front of JM. Isn't this correct?
Thanks,
David

[Brian K.]

Re: C1: Crate engine or rebuild?

Yes, Bob, that's right. If you take note of the NCRS guidelines, there is a difference between restoration and counterfeit. A restored car can have a "numbers' matching" engine (i.e.: a restamped, matching , correctly dated block), versus the "original engine". There is nothing wrong with having a CORRECT restamped, matching , correctly dated block for restoration pursposes. When doing this one MUST notifiy any prospective purchaser of the car that such a car has a correct, numbers matching engine, but it is NOT the original engine. To do otherwise would violate the letter and spirit of the NCRS restoration process. Moreover, to make these changes and not tell anyone is FRAUD, clear and simple. Any such fraudulent misrepresentation will certainly form the basis for a civil, if not criminal, law suit.

FYI...

Do you think thats why there is a plethora of matching #'s cars everywhere at auction or for sale? It never seems to be disclosed on tv by the narrators. Hemmings has more big block mid years for sale than anything these days and they all seem to be matching. I guess they eventually disclose prior to sale?

[Gary B.]

Re: C1: Crate engine or rebuild?

Robert: I have a '62 that had a replacement 327 short block. (I brilliantly turned in my original block back in '72 for the core deposit - who knew). Anyway, I finally reminded myself that I originally bought the car to do what any true corvette owner did, do something to hop it up. So I pulled the replacement 327 and had someone make me a 383 - 350 block and 400 crank. I used a 340 set up and AFR aluminum heads so the original aluminum valve covers bolt up. I am running a solid lifter roller (picked for torque) with competition roller rockers, they fit under the original valve covers. I also had the exhaust manifolds NC matched to the heads (a guy in Wisconsin does this). Most people see what it is, a small block that looks right. Now I have the one issue to solve, the need to vent the engine. Since I have a 340 HP intake with the standard oil filler (with the vented oil cap- non 340hp) I am having a problem with oil being blown out of the filler cap. I bought a pair of original aluminum valve covers(that someone had put holes in them) at a swap meet - cheap. I am now going to have a set of baffled tubes welded in (Moroso #68800) with breathers. We will see if this works, otherwise I will have to convert one to a pvc hookup into the back of the carb (the California requirement). My only other problem with this setup is it is difficult to get the no. one plug in and out as the Aluminum heads are thicker and therefore wider so the clearance to get a wrench in by the steering box is tight, but I did it. Otherwise only the pros know its not a 327 and I always get a positive or envious response when I tell the guys it is a 383 with a solid roller. I am running a 3:70 posi - stock rear and a wide ratio transmission so I have a lower low than the close ratio that you have. AS to the rear-end holding up, I was reminded that the 425 hp 409's ran the same rear. As long as I run the stock street tires, they will be my safety outlet. My wheels are American Torque Thrust D's -6", MY car is a driver. The original AFB is fine for the street. I would have to step up if I were to go to win at the strip. I get a lot of compliments at the cruises for the memories.
Good luck on your decision.

[Stuart F.]

Re: C1: Crate engine or rebuild?

Gary;

Did you go so far as to paint the aluminum heads to match the block?

Have seen C-1's with the old cuved aluminum beathers on the sides of the covers and a breather cap on the oil fill tube. One even used a filler tube w/pcv from a later 60's car. The engines were later types, but unknown as to which one.

Stu Fox

[Gary B.]

Re: C1: Crate engine or rebuild?

I did paint the aluminum heads to match the block. So far, everything appears to be working with the paint.

I have seen those side breathers and have one valve cover with a set of small breathers on it that I bought at a swap meet years ago. That did not solve the problem. I am having two baffled breather tubes welded into a set of original valve covers(one on each cover) that already had holes cut by someone. I will test that. If that doesn't work, then I will try a PVC on one of these tubes in place of a breather. I am trying to stay away from the tube on the filler pipe. I have an original breather on the filler pipe now.

[John D.]

Re: C1: Crate engine or rebuild?

GM Performance Parts markets a 350/290 hp crate engine under part number 12499529. "New spark for an old flame" they say.It's a complete engine with 4 bolt mains minus intake and exhaust manifolds with a 24 month/50,000 mile warranty. List price is $2600. dealer cost is $1820.

Has anyone used this engine in a C1 or C2? Is this a made in mexico engine with a bad reputation? At that price does it makes sense to spend a lot of money and time on a correct but unoriginal block?

[Duke W.]

Re: C1: Crate engine or rebuild?

Quality-wise, it's probably fine - look at the warranty, but there are almost always "integration issues', which usually get resolved with a kluge - PCV, fuel and coolant lines, front end accessories, etc.

It's the configuration that is poor - low compression and the 3896962 L-46/82 cam, so it will have rather poor torque bandwidth, but will consume regular fuel and have a "noticeable idle." I have to laugh about the "4-bolt mains" because this engine probably won't make usable power much beyond 5000.

The previous 300 HP crate engine was basically the same except it had the 14088839 "300 HP" replacement cam, which would make better low end torque, maybe a little less top end, idle smoother and get better fuel economy.

But Billy Bob probaby prefers the somewhat lumpy idle of the 962 cam. Power and fuel economy don't mean much to him because he can't count beyond ten.

I would not put a crate engine into a fairly original vintage Corvette. It's not a '72 Nova. If you don't have the original block I would get a period correct core and go from there. This will maintain the car's value better than a low end crate engine.

There's and old expression - you get what you pay for.

Duke

[Joe L.]

Re: C1: Crate engine or rebuild?

GM Performance Parts markets a 350/290 hp crate engine under part number 12499529. "New spark for an old flame" they say.It's a complete engine with 4 bolt mains minus intake and exhaust manifolds with a 24 month/50,000 mile warranty. List price is $2600. dealer cost is $1820.

Has anyone used this engine in a C1 or C2? Is this a made in mexico engine with a bad reputation? At that price does it makes sense to spend a lot of money and time on a correct but unoriginal block?

John-----


The 12499529 is a good engine. Yes, it is made in Mexico (as are currently all other small block engines and major components thereof). However, I think they've come a long way quality-wise at the Toluca engine plant. I've looked these Toluca-manufactured engines over carefully and they look to be of great quality, at least from what can be externally seen.

The bad rap for the Mexican engines was based on problems GM had MANY years ago with "Target" replacement engines. They actually shut down the line there for quite some time to get things right. Chrysler makes all the Hemi engines in Mexico. Plus, Corvette 6 speed manual transmissions (Tremec) are made in Mexico. So, one doesn't have to buy a GM crate small block engine to get Mexican-manufactured pieces.

[Stuart F.]

Re: C1: Crate engine or rebuild?

Duke;

Sounds like good advice - the same I took from you a while back and happy I did. Like you say, it's not a Nova. It's a heck of a lot more valuable both monitarily and intrinsically. It's a classic Vette.

Stu Fox

[Joe L.]

Re: C1: Crate engine or rebuild?

Quality-wise, it's probably fine - look at the warranty, but there are almost always "integration issues', which usually get resolved with a kluge - PCV, fuel and coolant lines, front end accessories, etc.

It's the configuration that is poor - low compression and the 3896962 L-46/82 cam, so it will have rather poor torque bandwidth, but will consume regular fuel and have a "noticeable idle." I have to laugh about the "4-bolt mains" because this engine probably won't make usable power much beyond 5000.

The previous 300 HP crate engine was basically the same except it had the 14088839 "300 HP" replacement cam, which would make better low end torque, maybe a little less top end, idle smoother and get better fuel economy.

But Billy Bob probaby prefers the somewhat lumpy idle of the 962 cam. Power and fuel economy don't mean much to him because he can't count beyond ten.

I would not put a crate engine into a fairly original vintage Corvette. It's not a '72 Nova. If you don't have the original block I would get a period correct core and go from there. This will maintain the car's value better than a low end crate engine.

There's and old expression - you get what you pay for.

Duke

Duke-----


The GM #12499529 is, basically, the same engine as the 73-80 L-82 used in Corvettes. The only significant differences are as follows:

1) 8.5:1 CR versus 9.0:1 for L-82;

2) Forged Powder metal connecting rods versus forged steel "pink" rods for L-82 (the forged powder metal rods are well over TWICE as strong as the "pink" rods);

3) Cast nodular crankshaft versus forged steel for L-82 (cast nodular crank will support more power than the L-82 EVER made);

4) Hypereutectic cast pistons versus forged pistons for L-82 (hypereutectic cast, not available when the L-82's were originally built, will support more power than the L-82 originally produced);

5) 1.94/1.50" valve size versus 2.02/1.60" valve size for L-82. (I doubt that any significant power difference is generated by the larger valve size used for the L-82. The smaller valve size might actually be better).

The same, basic engine with the 14088839 cam is still available from GM. It's just not a GM Performance Parts engine; it's just a plain, old GMSPO SERVICE engine. It's pretty much the same as the 12499529 except for cam.

[Stewart A.]

Re: C1: Crate engine or rebuild?

I'd kill for an original one owner family Corvette. All that history in a Classic Corvette please dont hot rod it keep it all original and go buy a Chevelle do do skids in. You have somehing very special.

[Jim T.]

Re: C1: Crate engine or rebuild?

Horsepower on the Spike tv channel has done some perfromance testing of the crate engine "529" more than once. Here is some information of one of their tests. http://www.powerblocktv.com/bangforbuck.html

For those interested, Horsepower is doing a 409 build on SAT 24th 11am CST.