@@chicanou-turn5056 good question and before my time..lol..I think the 461 heads will fit on both..Maybe not the 265 block but probably the 283...I'm sure you can find the answer on the internet
I am a road racer but drag racers were running engines like that to 9000 plus, even 350s to 8500. Stock cranks and rods with good bolts. Ported fuellies and tunnel rams. Nothing under 6000 but went fairly hard, as hard as anyone. Just a bit short of durability. Though F5000s were running 8500 and doing that for hour long races. Usually had better rods but not always. And even the best 292s on a later 70s 5000 engine flow less than a out the box Dart2.
I had a 69 z/28 for 13 years it had a stock 302 that had good power i pulled it and did a bunch of block and head work after it was finished it dynod almost 500 horse to rear wheels it to a lot of money to make that power they are 290 horse stock but with 4:11 gears a ram 4 inline shifter lakewood ground grabber traction bars it would wheelie out of the whole and turned 10 second quarter mile was very impressive power never really got to race many other small block cars everything was big block but it pissed of quite a few of guys i dragged against lots of fun
Well if that is the same motor in the video of him running it, I played that video and he definitely was well over 7000 rpm sounded to me like he was shifting over 8.Especially on the 1 2 shift almost sounded close to 9. So therefore the stock valve train if that is what he was running would still make that rpm. I have run my share of stock small block 283 and 327 engines and they freaking scream. Just need to adjust the valves with 1/4 turn on hydraulic.
For our junior year class project we built a 10.90 bracket car out of a 66 Chevy II with a overbored 283, punched out to 292 cubes. It ran a 1050 dominator which required the used of a roller cam, and a tall single plain manifold along with 2.02's and 1.6's for valves. We used the 6" pink rods available at the time, shot preened and polished to make them live longer along with a high volume oil pump and deep sumo Moroso pan with windage screen. The motor retained its 2.0" rods and two bolt mains as the rotating mass wasn't too heavy, but top quality fasteners were used thought the longblock. It was a damn consistent car that took us to second place where we broke out by .01 seconds in the final round. Themotor spun upwards of 9.000 rpm through its journey, so this 301 should be capable of the same rpm if built right!
@@chicanou-turn5056 yes, a bored out 283. In fact a 283 can be bored out to 302 cubic inches, but the cylinder walls might be too thin. Core shift is the limiting factor there. TRW sold rings and pistons for both when they were popular.
@@kennethcohagen3539 Nice but I heard some camel hump heads would not fit on some 283 blocks but I love the bread box on top of this engine making me wanna go get one so how much was it bored out to
I like the way they used production blocks cranks and heads and built engines now days people just buy parts and bolt together but i like all engines turn that thing about 9500
Back in the 70s, NHRA MODIFIED Production class cars were spinning small cube engines like this up over 10,200rpm. Ole Grump had em up there too. This guy is just a little spooked since he's probably using the most high end latest parts himself. But racers back in the day were a different breed. We live in a society of pussies now.
And even a super stock cylinder head which most of the time is a stock casting extensively ported and flowed make huge power for a small motor 278 inch motor can make 650 700 horse but that's an 10500 11000 and makes absolutely nothing down low and the RPM range but that's exactly what this recipe is and you better have extra valve springs laying around you'll need them
Nike shoes purple jogging suits and rolls of nickels and quarters in their pockets crazy knows no boundary ,drink up the comet is getting close and the mother ship is going to beam us up!
If Grumpy were alive, from what I have read he detested gear drives, no matter how good they claimed to be, due to the additional harmonics that play havoc on valve trains.
Patrick Joseph I would have to go with Smokey on that one. Hell he developed alot of the parts Grump used. Smokey was Chevies go to guy when they needed more power. Not saying The Grump didn't know what he was doing.
My 355 sbc stock bottom end just me and my dremel cleaned it all up 292 turbo heads max ported old vic jr also ported yada yada It took my 3100lb car with 4.56 gears deep into the 10s shifting at 8k. Never had a problem. Cam was the old comp 306s
A 355 chevy, vortec heads 1.6 rockers, headers , air gap Edelbrock intake topped off with fast EFI, magnaflow mufflers is the most fun with mild street cam 114 overlap for torque and miles of smiles banging through the gears on a Richmond five speed super street!
@@Jay-fb2lvWell that's funny The first three gears the tires won't stop spinning when I dump the clutch and my C modified Trophy from last season of the eastern region of SCCC competition must be Lame as well or maybe your just an Idiot!
With a good set of aluminum rods and very high strength valve spring settings the Grump would turn the rpms up over ten thousand and more for Pro stock racing.
@@dalegosnell3930 Read Grumpys book on the small block chevy racing engine and stop eating bull poop and two things will happen. One; you might learn something and two; you will have sweet breath and more close contact with human company you moron.
" At 7000 RPM you're probably OK , but I don't think you have the valve train or the damper to do that" UMMMM Whilliam Tyler "GRUMPY" Jenkins would beg to differ and inform you to spin it to 8500 RPM. I'm SURE OF IT.
Other than the fact that he was at least a semi-trained engineer, understood engines and knew how stupid it was and is to rev engines outside of their powerband. Revving an engine to 8500 when the horsepower curve starts falling off is STUPID.
The factory parts are indeed a little dicey to take to higher RPM, but bear in mind that modern Pro Stocks were spinning nearly 12,000RPM with 2.5" main journals and 1.888" rod journals. It's not the journal size that would kill it. The balance style/quality and weight of the pistons and rods would factor heavily. Yeah, they spun them even higher then, but we don't want to blow up rare old stuff. No need to.
Does anybody know anything some of these comments wow here's the question is something capable of spinning eight nine or ten thousand RPM is one thing how strong is the bottom end obviously is the first concern second will a cylinder head you are using slow enough there to make power up there now you need to write bump stick to make sure we can utilize your choice of cylinder head
Way too much carburation on that engine, and intake isn't doing any good at all. How did you get to 301 cubic inch, bore a 283 and try too stretch it to 302? That would mean it's a small journal, steel crankshaft 🤔
a 327 block 4 in' bore and a 265 /283 crankshaft 3 in stroke = 301 cid , some not all 283's could be bored to 4'' duel quad tunnel rams work better than you think 1320 cfm no problem even on a street motor
@@davelewis2174 I was running 2, 600 CFM carbs on mine, had to play with jetting for a bit to fine tune it. High rpm was good but wanted to stumble a bit, off idle😒
Some of the early 283's had enough meat to bore the cylinders .125 oversize. I loved seeing the shoeboxes run all day at Lion's running a 301 with 4spd! Great memories!
@port nut Look dummy, a vacuum secondary carb only runs in the primary side untill needed, so a 3310 is at 375cfm on the primary side, and carb CFM ratings are theoretical anyway, just because a carbs rated at 750cfm don't mean it flows 750cfm everytime the engine is running. I have over 100+ carbs in my shop, done many experiments trying different carbs at the track. I've seen the differences myself. My daily driver SBC makes alittle more than 450hp, I've tried a 1850 600 vac, 600DP, 650DP, 700DP, 750DP and a 750 vacuum secondary, it runs the best with the modified 3310 750. Gets the best mpg and has the best throttle response, but if I listened to all the internet experts, I'd have a 600 edelbrock on it. I've been doing this for 35+yrs.
@port nut Chevy also used a 585cfm Holley, a 780cfm, and a 850cfm. They weren't completely stupid, but I'm sure you know more than the engineer's at GM.
Bill didn't mess with gear drives, preferred the early link belt timing sets with the nylon cam gear.
It's not a gear drive. Look at the belt around the water pump, it's a gilmer belt. That's belt whine like a blower
Thats for sure
That's a high rev'n son of a gun.
Old ISKY solid roller cam I bet, with Rev kit. Those cams had so much overlap they idled at like 1500 rpms.
Stock 301 will turn 8 grand all day long...l know cuz l did in the 80s and never blew up...still have the motor today👍
So what is a 301 Is it a 283 board out need some info
I think it's 327 block with 283 crankshaft..same as 302 Z28s
@@buff6637 ok But some of the camel hump heads do not fit on the 283 motors is what I was told
@@chicanou-turn5056 good question and before my time..lol..I think the 461 heads will fit on both..Maybe not the 265 block but probably the 283...I'm sure you can find the answer on the internet
On my 3 video channel I have a 55 chevy 355 with the camel hump heads..check it out!
the sound of the rev on this motor,, daymmm,,,
I am a road racer but drag racers were running engines like that to 9000 plus, even 350s to 8500. Stock cranks and rods with good bolts. Ported fuellies and tunnel rams. Nothing under 6000 but went fairly hard, as hard as anyone. Just a bit short of durability.
Though F5000s were running 8500 and doing that for hour long races. Usually had better rods but not always. And even the best 292s on a later 70s 5000 engine flow less than a out the box Dart2.
I had a 69 z/28 for 13 years it had a stock 302 that had good power i pulled it and did a bunch of block and head work after it was finished it dynod almost 500 horse to rear wheels it to a lot of money to make that power they are 290 horse stock but with 4:11 gears a ram 4 inline shifter lakewood ground grabber traction bars it would wheelie out of the whole and turned 10 second quarter mile was very impressive power never really got to race many other small block cars everything was big block but it pissed of quite a few of guys i dragged against lots of fun
Todd from Delta? They made 355 HP stock despite the 290 rating...
No bottom end . We supposedly have one of his 327s. 718 lift cam . Power range 4800 to 7800. He wasn't playing. He was turning the fire out of them.
Well if that is the same motor in the video of him running it, I played that video and he definitely was well over 7000 rpm sounded to me like he was shifting over 8.Especially on the 1 2 shift almost sounded close to 9. So therefore the stock valve train if that is what he was running would still make that rpm. I have run my share of stock small block 283 and 327 engines and they freaking scream. Just need to adjust the valves with 1/4 turn on hydraulic.
For our junior year class project we built a 10.90 bracket car out of a 66 Chevy II with a overbored 283, punched out to 292 cubes. It ran a 1050 dominator which required the used of a roller cam, and a tall single plain manifold along with 2.02's and 1.6's for valves. We used the 6" pink rods available at the time, shot preened and polished to make them live longer along with a high volume oil pump and deep sumo Moroso pan with windage screen. The motor retained its 2.0" rods and two bolt mains as the rotating mass wasn't too heavy, but top quality fasteners were used thought the longblock. It was a damn consistent car that took us to second place where we broke out by .01 seconds in the final round. Themotor spun upwards of 9.000 rpm through its journey, so this 301 should be capable of the same rpm if built right!
So what kind of Motor is this a 283 board out
@@chicanou-turn5056 yes, a bored out 283. In fact a 283 can be bored out to 302 cubic inches, but the cylinder walls might be too thin. Core shift is the limiting factor there. TRW sold rings and pistons for both when they were popular.
@@kennethcohagen3539 Nice but I heard some camel hump heads would not fit on some 283 blocks but I love the bread box on top of this engine making me wanna go get one so how much was it bored out to
Looks like to me the hp was 510. The torque gauge was harder to read but looked somewhere around 460 to 480 lbs feet. Did u watch the video?
I like the way they used production blocks cranks and heads and built engines now days people just buy parts and bolt together but i like all engines turn that thing about 9500
Back in the 70s, NHRA MODIFIED Production class cars were spinning small cube engines like this up over 10,200rpm. Ole Grump had em up there too. This guy is just a little spooked since he's probably using the most high end latest parts himself. But racers back in the day were a different breed. We live in a society of pussies now.
YEAH, I CREWED ON MIKE WILLARDS PRO GAS 57 CHEVY WITH A 331 SBC. HE LAUNCHED AT 11 GRAND AND SHIFTED THE NASH 5 SPEED AT 10.5.
watching the grump,sox,and dyno shift was like watching a magician make a spell
obviously this tool is a wannabe!
+11secghia Yep,different breed these days.
Your dam right!
Amen to that
I think I would worry more about the flywheel exploding thru the floor rather than the balancer.
And even a super stock cylinder head which most of the time is a stock casting extensively ported and flowed make huge power for a small motor 278 inch motor can make 650 700 horse but that's an 10500 11000 and makes absolutely nothing down low and the RPM range but that's exactly what this recipe is and you better have extra valve springs laying around you'll need them
This engine sounded like it hit hard after 5,000 RPMs...
Superstock 327s are making 600+HP these days with modified doublehumps.
461x doublehump heads flowed very well stock compaired to 461@@72troy455
Saw the haters comments down below You think they know more than the grump. Lol! Nonetheless, I would love to see the engine curves!
I know all there is to know about this motor and its history these people have no clue. And probably dont even have cars
How much power did it make?
Looks like it has Rev Jim Jones heads with Marshall Applewhite headers......
Nike shoes purple jogging suits and rolls of nickels and quarters in their pockets crazy knows no boundary ,drink up the comet is getting close and the mother ship is going to beam us up!
Nice video of the phone on the wall
Cast crank 2 bolt main 350s in my day would turn7500 8000. Stock balancer etc. I've run 396 and 427 BBC over 7000 many times
Will it hold 9 Grand
I don’t see Bill anywhere, probably outside smoking his cigar.
Hahaha. Wow!
If Grumpy were alive, from what I have read he detested gear drives, no matter how good they claimed to be, due to the additional harmonics that play havoc on valve trains.
OK, who was better with the SBC? Grumpy or Smokey?
I'd have to go with Smokey on that one... The Grump was a damn good SB guy, but it was able to make the BBC do what few could...
Patrick Joseph I would have to go with Smokey on that one. Hell he developed alot of the parts Grump used. Smokey was Chevies go to guy when they needed more power. Not saying The Grump didn't know what he was doing.
Thanks George and Mark; both were great. @@georgedennison3338
Smokey was the guy Chevy called when they had a problem.
No one knew the SBC like Smokey!
Was it a stroked or destroked motor
Probably a destroked 327
My 355 sbc stock bottom end just me and my dremel cleaned it all up 292 turbo heads max ported old vic jr also ported yada yada It took my 3100lb car with 4.56 gears deep into the 10s shifting at 8k. Never had a problem. Cam was the old comp 306s
A 355 chevy, vortec heads 1.6 rockers, headers , air gap Edelbrock intake topped off with fast EFI, magnaflow mufflers is the most fun with mild street cam 114 overlap for torque and miles of smiles banging through the gears on a Richmond five speed super street!
Lame combo
@@Jay-fb2lvWell that's funny The first three gears the tires won't stop spinning when I dump the clutch and my C modified Trophy from last season of the eastern region of SCCC competition must be Lame as well or maybe your just an Idiot!
With a good set of aluminum rods and very high strength valve spring settings the Grump would turn the rpms up over ten thousand and more for Pro stock racing.
bullshit
@@dalegosnell3930 Read Grumpys book on the small block chevy racing engine and stop eating bull poop and two things will happen. One; you might learn something and two; you will have sweet breath and more close contact with human company you moron.
" At 7000 RPM you're probably OK , but I don't think you have the valve train or the damper to do that" UMMMM Whilliam Tyler "GRUMPY" Jenkins would beg to differ and inform you to spin it to 8500 RPM. I'm SURE OF IT.
Other than the fact that he was at least a semi-trained engineer, understood engines and knew how stupid it was and is to rev engines outside of their powerband. Revving an engine to 8500 when the horsepower curve starts falling off is STUPID.
Spin a factory small-journal SBC and cheap parts store balancer to 8500 and see what happens. You DO know what "small-journal" means, right?
your an idiot ,,lol ,, they stand it all the time ,, what do you think they had back in the 70's ?
we spun my friends 283 to 7000 for 7 miles once ,, it was wound to 8000-8500 almost daily
The factory parts are indeed a little dicey to take to higher RPM, but bear in mind that modern Pro Stocks were spinning nearly 12,000RPM with 2.5" main journals and 1.888" rod journals. It's not the journal size that would kill it. The balance style/quality and weight of the pistons and rods would factor heavily.
Yeah, they spun them even higher then, but we don't want to blow up rare old stuff. No need to.
1500cfm. Way to much. 650 is efficient
A dyno video is useless unless you post the numbers what a waste of time
He was too afraid to find out, but that engine should make over 2hp per cube.
It sounds terrible
You watched that and didn't learn anything? Your loss.
I hate the sound of those gear drive timing gears! They literally drown things out while tuning and when you are just listening to the motor!!!!
according to the computer screen it said 500 hp and 400 ft lbs of torque at around 7-8,000 rpms
Does anybody know anything some of these comments wow here's the question is something capable of spinning eight nine or ten thousand RPM is one thing how strong is the bottom end obviously is the first concern second will a cylinder head you are using slow enough there to make power up there now you need to write bump stick to make sure we can utilize your choice of cylinder head
small main journal mains
How much horsepower for how long? Oh, I just needed overnight.
Iron American Dream on CZcams
I see no evidence of this motor being a Jenkins piece or that facility being Jenkins Competition...That guy definitely not Jenkins....Clickbait !
Because nobody ever bought a Jenkins engine huh dummy.
Montgomery Green shut up 🤐
Learn the story first you nimrod its not explained in the video but theres a pretty good story behind it
I remember a 331 engine Grumpy built but not a 301, and no numbers to back up the claim , so I say fake.
Correct
He built the 301 that was in Strickler's D/S Z-28 record holder.
301= a 283 125 over?
jim dandy 283 with 327 crank
@@slowride55 sure it wasn't a small journal 327 with a 283 crank
guys it is a 3 in stroke or 283 shaft in a 4 in bore block like a 327 or a 350 block with bearing spaces.@@slowride55
Let the engine do the talking you obviously don't have the thinking 🙄
Tryna make a sell
A dino pull no numbers, wast of time
Watch the computer screen are you blind?
Why would you do a dyno video without the numbers? That makes absolutely no sense.
Watch the computer screen you jack wagon
pull the carbs apart and fix them so it runs , runs like shit
Definitely a clickbait video, didn't even tell how much horsepower or torque It had
It made 510 h.p.
i would not let this guy touch my lawnmower engine
me either hes only a 2 time world champion and holds many records first door car in the 4s 1/8 mile
@@ixharley now thats funny
jeff55 h
Me either.
Obviously it would be a friggin waste of the mans time.
That's only Andy Jensen of Jensen engine technologies. He probably knows a thing or two..look him up if you dont know.
Lol did you think I thrill one was going to make anything down low
Way too much carburation on that engine, and intake isn't doing any good at all. How did you get to 301 cubic inch, bore a 283 and try too stretch it to 302? That would mean it's a small journal, steel crankshaft 🤔
a 327 block 4 in' bore and a 265 /283 crankshaft 3 in stroke = 301 cid , some not all 283's could be bored to 4'' duel quad tunnel rams work better than you think 1320 cfm no problem even on a street motor
@@davelewis2174 I was running 2, 600 CFM carbs on mine, had to play with jetting for a bit to fine tune it. High rpm was good but wanted to stumble a bit, off idle😒
Some of the early 283's had enough meat to bore the cylinders .125 oversize. I loved seeing the shoeboxes run all day at Lion's
running a 301 with 4spd! Great memories!
@@wedge4hire I ran a 283 in my 66 Chevy II back in the day. My first car, and a great, dependable engine.🤗
@@aumetalmental8403 So true! It was super dependable and I'll bet it ran really good in that light Chevy II. Great combination!
Put on a holly singel holly 650 with a excellerator singel plane it probley run much better lol
I doubt it. This engine ain't like your 305 with a 600 elderbrock, this engine needs a big CFM carb.
@port nut Look dummy, a vacuum secondary carb only runs in the primary side untill needed, so a 3310 is at 375cfm on the primary side, and carb CFM ratings are theoretical anyway, just because a carbs rated at 750cfm don't mean it flows 750cfm everytime the engine is running. I have over 100+ carbs in my shop, done many experiments trying different carbs at the track. I've seen the differences myself. My daily driver SBC makes alittle more than 450hp, I've tried a 1850 600 vac, 600DP, 650DP, 700DP, 750DP and a 750 vacuum secondary, it runs the best with the modified 3310 750. Gets the best mpg and has the best throttle response, but if I listened to all the internet experts, I'd have a 600 edelbrock on it. I've been doing this for 35+yrs.
@port nut Chevy also used a 585cfm Holley, a 780cfm, and a 850cfm. They weren't completely stupid, but I'm sure you know more than the engineer's at GM.
@port nut Plus they used AFB Carter's and Q-jets. Crazy bastard's....
@port nut OK.
You're all a bunch of asso's