Thread: 283 Hp/torque Question
-
01-15-2007 01:58 PM #1
283 Hp/torque Question
need to know amount of hp/torque you can get out of 283 sbc. Is 325 hp attainable. Should i use aluminum heads or cast iron.
Thank You
-
Advertising
- Google Adsense
- REGISTERED USERS DO NOT SEE THIS AD
-
01-15-2007 03:45 PM #2
I forgot to mention I'm building a 66 chevy pickup and I want a different setup than the typical 350. I also have a 427 but I'm looking to drive the truck as much as I can, so decent gas mileage is a plus. Any help will be nice, I'm not totally sold on the 283.
Thanks
-
01-15-2007 04:20 PM #3
The 283 was a great rev engine. With your short 3" stroke you could really wind them out but the heads were small and with the lack of CI you couldn't really build them up. Of course this is my opion but the largest 283 made was for a vette and it was 315HP. Your better off with a 327 or 350.Keep smiling, it only hurts when you think it does!
-
01-15-2007 04:26 PM #4
so that must mean bigger heads is out of the question??????? what i find truly funny is when people give credit to 305 builds but not 283's HA senseless, you have a pm sc454
-
01-15-2007 04:41 PM #5
305's are a bit more common engine, 283's are scarce... Some good aluminum heads sized and flowed correctly for the 283 would probably help a lot... As with any short stroke, high winder cam selection and a valve train that will stand up to high rpm's is essential for performance applications. I know, the old parts work, but that's just it, they're old parts..... Take advantage of the new technology and realize even more poential out of the mouse motors.... I like my Blue Oval 289's, too. It's just that I know I can produce more torque and have a much more streetable engine going with a long arm, long rod 408 and have better street manners then I would with a roller cammed, ultra lightweight everything 8500 RPM small cuber....
Old pickups are heavy, takes torque to move them...... 283's are probably more better suited for lightweight cars with 4 and 5 speed transmissions so you can keep the rev's up and stay in the power band.... Not a put down on small engines, just a fact.Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, Live for Today!
Carroll Shelby
Learning must be difficult for those who already know it all!!!!
-
01-15-2007 04:41 PM #6
I run a 305 in my chevy and had it bored out to 315 ci which gives me a better chance of larger heads. What I meant on the 283 was it was and is still a good engine but not one that you could realy build up to the HP you want. I had one in my 56 chevy and I loved it and it was rated at 240HP and I blew the doors off many cars because I could wind it up to 6500rpm with no valve float. I truly loved that motor but went on to better thing like a 348.Keep smiling, it only hurts when you think it does!
-
01-15-2007 06:44 PM #7
Originally Posted by SC454
-
01-15-2007 08:57 PM #8
Originally Posted by gassersrule_196
SC454, here's the scoop. You can build a 283/301 that will scream, if you want to build horsepower in the upper rpm ranges. In order to get a 283/301 to work, you have to rev it. It's all a matter of passing air through the motor. "X" cubic feet per minute passed through a motor equals "X" horsepower. A larger motor (350/383) will pass the same amount of air at lower rpm's than a smaller motor will at higher rpm's. Now, if you have to run a smaller motor at higher rpm's, then you will also have to cam the motor to run at higher rpm's, which means that you will have to raise the static compression ratio so that the intake closing point on the cam matches the c.r. When you run the longer cam, you have a very soggy bottom end (any cam you choose has an effective operating window of about 3,500 rpm's, so it will be effective, for instance, from idle to about 4,200 rpm's or from 1,500 to 5,000 or from 2,000 to 5,500 or 2,500 to 6,000 or 3,000 to 6,500 or 3,500 to 7,000 or whatever) which means you have to run a very loose converter (if you are running an automatic trans) and a lot of rear gear. A four or five speed trans might be a better choice. With the exception of Scooter and a few others on this forum, most of us would counsel you to start with a larger motor so you could keep the revs down, use a more civilized converter and keep static compression low for use with pump gas. Now, that's not to say you couldn't build a screaming 283/301 to run on pump gas, I'm just saying a larger motor will be a better choice for doing what you want to do.PLANET EARTH, INSANE ASYLUM FOR THE UNIVERSE.
-
01-15-2007 09:26 PM #9
I just ran across this thread on another forum and thought it appropriate to post here......
http://www.hotrodders.com/forum/buil...evy-57753.htmlPLANET EARTH, INSANE ASYLUM FOR THE UNIVERSE.
-
01-16-2007 02:51 AM #10
i just felt a bit finicky today!
-
01-16-2007 05:45 AM #11
In 1967 I built a .040 over 283 with 'Vette heads and a Duntov cam for my '54 Bel Aire. Good power at high revs, not much bottom end, but 4.11 gears and 14" tires made it work. For a while. When the 3-speed w/overdrive blew, I replaced it with a non-OD trans. The little winder didn't last the summer!
For what it's worth, I now have a 350 to put in it. 283 was the "hot setup" back when it was pretty much all you could get, but you can't beat cubic inches.
-
01-16-2007 04:00 PM #12
sure ya can, ya gotta know how to do it
-
01-16-2007 05:31 PM #13
Originally Posted by gassersrule_196Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, Live for Today!
Carroll Shelby
Learning must be difficult for those who already know it all!!!!
-
01-16-2007 07:01 PM #14
Originally Posted by gassersrule_196
-
01-17-2007 02:02 AM #15
hasnt anyone ever heard of the 402 stroker kit for 283's ????????
Thank you Roger. .
Another little bird