What was or is seen as the best 60's V8 ever build in the USA? Not talking about performance but longevity when serviced at a normal interval? Thanks
That is a pretty tough call. There are pros and cons to pretty much every design out there. Overall it is pretty hard to beat a Small Block Chevy. That doesn't mean it is my favorite engine. Maybe big block Chevy. It really is a tough call. I quite like engines from all the big three. I feel GM has the best of them though. Greg
Chrysler 318 was a real good engine. the 440 and the 426 Hemi has to be up there a long with the Buick 401-425 nail head.
The BEST engine I've seen and ran is the 1964 SB Chevy 327. It it truly a work horse of an engine with great longevity. Remember, oil quality wasn't that great like it is today. So comparisons is difficult. I also had a 1964 Chevy 230ci straight 6 banger that was very strong. I'am sure some Mopar guys will say the old slant 6 banger was also a very strong engine too. Vet
BEST is that the key word? If yes. The SBC & BBC is far from good.... In fact chevy was and is just a cheap POS affordable car . I know I have a few to this day...... Now for the BEST USA made V8 made in the 60's Is the 215 Buick/Olds Aluminum V8... The End
Everyone knows the Chevy small-block would have hellacious ridges at the tops of the cylinders at 60K miles, maybe less. BBC didn't seem to have as much problem with ridges, but then there were also a lot fewer of them relatively speaking. Pontiac--Olds--Buick--Caddy are all "known" to have more "nickel" in the iron, making the iron "harder" and more "wear resistant"; able to leap tall buildings in a single bound, faster than a speeding locomotive... Of course, nobody has ever sent a reliable set of samples to a lab for analysis of this "nickel" content. When Chevy was selling over-the-parts-counter blocks for performance use, they bragged-up the TIN alloyed into the iron, not nickel. Ford "Fairlane" small-blocks were at least as bad as Chevys; and with more inclusions in the iron. The "best" V8 engines for durability were the ones that had the chokes adjusted properly, got the oil changed on schedule, were run with functional thermostats controlling the flow of anti-freeze having sufficient freeze and corrosion protection, had iron blocks and heads, and weren't Chevy or Ford small-blocks.
The straight 6s were naturally balanced. Which makes them very durable assuming the bare minimum maintenance happened. I change my vote to a straight 6. Doesn't matter who builds it.
It's easy to be "durable" when the engine doesn't make enough power or rev high enough to hurt itself. American six-poppers of the '60s were nearly always poor-performing turds suitable only for low-rpm torque. There are a few exceptions, but they don't typically make the "most durable" list. Inline sixes are not "naturally" balanced; but they can have perfect primary and secondary balance if the folks who do balance the assembly pay attention.
This is WHY it's very difficult to pick a 60's engine that has the best Longevity. I don't believe there is the perfect answer, there's too many variables to this question of longevity. Vet
You need to look at build / manufacturer details to see which has the most potential for longevity to start with. The first things that come to mind are. 1) a few motors by the early 60s had double Moly rings. 2) Cam ground Pistons . 3) cast iron parts that are aged longer before machining is commenced 4) Combustion chambers that are machined. 5) Blocks that are cast with the head bolt bosses as part of the the deck and not attached to the bores making for rounder longer lasting Bore and long term ring seal 6) oil control, as in a windage tray and a baffled valley pan that the PCV valve draws thru. 7) cast iron oil pumps that have the body submerged in the oil so there pickup revives atmospheric pressure fed oil and not have to first suck it up a tube. 8) Oil pumps that are NOT bolted to the rear main cap! 9) True duel valve springs and not just one coil with a oil scorching failure prone flat wire damper. A few different V8 CID motors from one manufacturer cover all these of these points
Yes. V8 and just in stock form. Ofcourse serviced once in a while. There's got to be one or more automakers that would stand out and called these engines bullit proof. Engines that would go past 100.000 mls without a problem in the 60's-70's. I am sure Buick belongs on that list too. Thanks.
I will say this, if we are to base this on material durability, I have had hundreds, if not thousands of BBB engines apart over the last 40 years.. And I have seen exactly 1 67 430 with exhaust valve recession, and never seen a ridge on the top of the bores. To this day, I don't own a ridge reamer. Only ever used one once, when I was taking apart a SBC when I was 14.. it was a '58 vintage 283 my dad was "saving" for something.. and he was not happy to see it in a million pieces. Years later, being the business now, I was going to collect it out of his garage, and put it back together, and put it in his favorite car.. a 60 impala Coupe or convert and give it to him, but he died before I got a chance to. The Buick BB has to be counted out of this, it's right up there when you talk materials, but the oiling system was not tolerant of abuse/lack of maintenance. Not so much the oil pump deal, but more so the front cam bearings/early oil thru the head designs... And of course the ever present nylon coated aluminum upper timing gear. The winner would have to be a motor that did not have that tech in it.. which I think you will be hard pressed to find, in the GM lineup. JW
I didn't know that about no ridges on top of the bores when it comes to a BBB. Sounds like really good strong quality and longevity. Would you add Pontiac's and Olds 455's to that same quality list with your experience?
I know nothing about Oldsmobiles, never had one apart.. did exactly two pontiac 400/455 motors. While I have forgotten more about BBB's that most folks will ever know, I will be the first to tell you that I am only slightly familiar with the other GM V8's of the era. I fussed with a SBC in my youth, and helped on a few BBC motors, and in my professional career did a lot of service work on domestic V8's, but not hardcore rebuilding type stuff. Learning the hard way on the LS motors now in my and my friends trucks (6.0 cam bearings.. aaaaaahhhh), and just dragged an 8.1 in the shop to put in TSP-TOW.. my Quadrasteer 05 Surburban 3/4 ton.. man what a beast that 8.1 is.. damn thing weighs nearly 800 lbs.. but makes torque and HP comprable to the old BBB's, and was an option for that truck, so everything will work as it should. Have it ready to re-gasket, as soon as I can get time, but need to get it done, since it will be making the trip the nats this year, with a GS behind it. JW
Okay. Maybe someone on the board knows about the other two. My guess would be the Cadillac 472 as said before is a longevity beast as well. Made out of a high nickel material as well that is.
Buick claimed that the new BB's were suppose to be better running and easier to work on than the Nailheads according to the new BBB pamplet. Other than Nailheads rear distributor being in the back "which wasn't a huge problem" I just about threw everything at my Nailheads and more and they put up like a troupers.. My 455's had decent miles on them and my 73 Riv got really tired at the same mileage. Not a fare comparison as I don't know just how well the Riv's 455 was upkept? 2 Relatives and and friend had Caddys with 2 472's and a 500. They all seemed to get tired once they hit the 100,000 mile mark. They did run smooth though. Whats different between a 472 and a 500 that make the 472 more reliable? Iv'e seen the 472's mentioned a couple times..
A 100.000 miles isn't that much for a low rpm V8 engine i would say? I've also read board members wrote they'd go as far as 225.000+ miles with the stock engine 430/455... i guess that's because due to good service and no rusted out cars before the engine gave out.
