Building a 283 to 301 stroker.

[William V.]

283 to 301

Does anyone remember the specifications to boar and stroke the 283 to 301cu-in?




Thanks

BV

[Bill M.]

Re: Building a 283 to 301 stroker.

Just bore a 283 to 4 inches to get a 301. Chevy did the same thing and called it a 302.

[Mike M.]

Re: Building a 283 to 301 stroker.

before boring a 283 .125" , i sure get the walls x-rayed. most of the old 548 blocks will take 1/8" overbore, but some get thin at .125 over. and almost all will run a little warmer than std bore. they sure as hell wind up nicely tho. mike

[Duke W.]

Re: Building a 283 to 301 stroker.

Early 283s have thicker cylinder walls than later blocks, so many can be bored 0.125" to 4.001" and hotrodders called them "301s" back in the fifties, but if you run the numbers and round, it's 302 to the nearest whole CID.

If you install a 327 crank in a standard bore (3.876") 283 block you get a 307, which GM built circa 1970, and add about 5 CID per .030" overbore.

The OE 305 was a 3.73" bore with a 350 crank (3.48" stroke).

GM was playing around with bore/stroke ratio looking for better emissions performance, low/midrange torque, and fuel economy.

There was also a 262 (3.73 x 3.10), and I remember a short lived 267, but don't recall the bore-stroke.

Duke

[Stuart F.]

Re: Building a 283 to 301 stroker.

William;

I'm thinking what you are recalling are the 352 Cu in Chevys. Sure the 301's were common and popular, but the ones setting the drag strips on fire were the 352's. That was considered the practical maximum of the 283 block back then. I recall one in particular in the midwest was Palmer Lazerus (sp). He had a beautiful brand new 56 Chevy 210 2 door post in that turquoise blue, running a 352 with a 6-71 blower and an automatic tranny. His was the first I recall out there doing "wheelies" and really tearing up the strips in the midwest including Great Lakes at Union Grove, WI.

Stu Fox

[John N.]

Re: Building a 283 to 301 stroker.

Early 283s have thicker cylinder walls than later blocks, so many can be bored 0.125" to 4.001" and hotrodders called them "301s" back in the fifties, but if you run the numbers and round, it's 302 to the nearest whole CID.

If you install a 327 crank in a standard bore (3.876") 283 block you get a 307, which GM built circa 1970, and add about 5 CID per .030" overbore.

The OE 305 was a 3.73" bore with a 350 crank (3.48" stroke).

GM was playing around with bore/stroke ratio looking for better emissions performance, low/midrange torque, and fuel economy.

There was also a 262 (3.73 x 3.10), and I remember a short lived 267, but don't recall the bore-stroke.

Duke

Duke, you refer to a 327 crank into a 283 block. Assume a early 327 forged crank and a pre 63 265 or 283 block. Do they fit without any machining? If they require machining, do you machine the throws or the block? I tried a trial fitting in a 63 283 block once and there appeared to be a slight interference problem.
Thanks
Thanks

[Dick W.]

Re: Building a 283 to 301 stroker.

John, I always ground the block for clearance. Usually was not very much unless you went to a really long stroke crank. Little buggers would run all day at 8,000 rpms as long as you had good (Carillo for me) rods in them. A lot of people tried the aluminum rods back then, but they were not a long life product

[Ted S.]

Re: Building a 283 to 301 stroker.

They were an early version of the infamous Z28 302. 4" bore x 3" stroke. My brother used to have one in a '57 Belair.

[Jim T.]

Re: Building a 283 to 301 stroker.

The bored 283 to 301 as it was referred to brings back memories of the late 50's and early 60's with a solid lifter cam and having the engine parts balanced. What was the real HP of those 301's that sounded so good in the 55-57 Chevy's?

[William V.]

Re: Building a 283 to 301 stroker.

Bill

I didn't know the old 283 could be bored to 4.0 inches. I thought they went 60 over and stroked the crank some how. So what one had was an early version of the 302 z-28 motor. The car I remember was a 57 Chevy with a 301, and Corvette fulie cam and heads. Simply stated, it was an early version of the 302. No wonder it ran so strong.

Thanks

Bill

[Bill M.]

Re: Building a 283 to 301 stroker.

Bill

I didn't know the old 283 could be bored to 4.0 inches. I thought they went 60 over and stroked the crank some how. So what one had was an early version of the 302 z-28 motor. The car I remember was a 57 Chevy with a 301, and Corvette fulie cam and heads. Simply stated, it was an early version of the 302. No wonder it ran so strong.

Thanks

Bill

Yeah, Bill, my buddy Bill had a 301 in a '56 Bel Air! He eventually wound up with a brand new 435/427 triple black '67!

Bill

[Joe L.]

Re: Building a 283 to 301 stroker.

283 to 301

Does anyone remember the specifications to boar and stroke the 283 to 301cu-in?




Thanks

BV

Bill-----


As others have described, the '301' was an overbored 283. Another common configuration of the day which required less overbore was '292'.

These were engine configurations of the 60's when big bore small blocks (i.e. 327 and 350) were relatively scarce and 283 blocks were quite common and cheap.

Today, I would NEVER recommend going with a 283 block bored out to a 4" bore to achieve the 301 cid. It would make no sense, at all. In fact, it did not make a lot of sense back in the 60's but there were lots of folks then "hungry" for cubic inches without having a lot of money to otherwise pay for that.

If, for whatever reason, one wanted a 4.00" X 3.00" small block, just buy a 327 or 350 block (cheap) and a custom-manufactured 3.00" crank (not-so-cheap) and you've got one worth having. MUCH better than a 283 block with paper-thin cylinder walls.

By the way, GM didn't change the 1970 Z-28 Camaro to 350 cid because the 302 was just as good or better.

If one wants a 4.00" X 3.00" 302, consider a Ford. Ford made the 302 engine size for MANY years and there are LOADS of them out there. They're smaller and lighter than a Chevrolet small block, too (except "Boss 302" which is about the same weight or a little heavier than a Chevrolet small block).

[Steven B.]

Re: Building a 283 to 301 stroker.

'Knew a guy who worked for IH in Fort Wayne, In with a '57 faded Venetian Red Corvette, 301, 2X4 AFB's, 097 cam, balanced, 375 HP fuelie heads I believe, 4 speed CR, 4.11 posi that ran the 1/8 mile at Avilla, IN and 1/4 mile at Muncie. That thing went like stink! I was stock except for Atlas Bucrons (7.10 X 15) and he would pulll me like I was standing still, but it wasn't official because we were street racing!

Whatta car!

[Bill C.]

Re: Building a 283 to 301 stroker.

Joe
You hit the nail on the head. It was a matter of money in the early sixties. I blew the 265 ci. motor in my 55 Belair(racing probably at Islip Speedway on Long Island) and replaced it with a 283 ci., out to a 4 in. bore and 3 in stroke. It had fulie heads and I think a Crane cam. I was still in school and it was the least expensive way to go. The car was a terror.
Bill

[Duke W.]

Re: Building a 283 to 301 stroker.

Duke, you refer to a 327 crank into a 283 block. Assume a early 327 forged crank and a pre 63 265 or 283 block. Do they fit without any machining? If they require machining, do you machine the throws or the block? I tried a trial fitting in a 63 283 block once and there appeared to be a slight interference problem.
Thanks
Thanks

Like Dick said... always grind the block to achieve necessary clearance. Grinding the crank will upset balance.

I believe later 283 blocks cast in the sixties will accept a 327 crank without any help from the die grinder.

Duke