Mogfix; I have a set of '65 heads at the machine shop at the moment. They are installing 1.425" exhaust valves from a 231 ODD-FIRE V6, which were made by Buick in the '75-'77 model years. (Awful motors, by the way.) Anyway, they have the same stem diameter, length and keeper style as the 300. A complete set of intakes and exhausts cost about $160.00, however the cost of cutting the seats and indexing the valves costs about $400. Mark
thnx Ah, yes, I remember the old 225 jeep "dauntless" engine. I had thought that having the larger valves would be about as much as you mentioned, which is why I hesitated. I dont know if I want to put that kind of money into such a small modification. Honestly, for just a little more money, I can get a rebuilt turbo, and make my pawer that way. Kind of build the "Missing Link" between the Olds turbo 215, and the 231/3.8 liter
Valve for the 300 I love the "missing link" theory. The 300 must be a distant cousin to the knuckle dragging Pontiac 301 and Chevy 305. This week I continued my Darwinian pursuit of the past and discover that the 1.50" exhaust valves for the Turbo V6 have the same stem diameter as the 300 and are only .020" longer. It may be possible to mill the end without screwing up the keeper grooves. Maybe possible to compensate for the extra length via adjustable pushrods. Don't know. The keeper is similar to the SBC. Just not 100% certain if there's enough clearance in the stock 300 chamber to take another 3/16" of valve head. I hate to admit it, but when you consider the "uniqueness" of the smallblock Buicks, it's not difficult to understand why the mass of hot rodders opt for the SBC, SBF and SBM engines. Are we a deviant strain of humanity?
Mark, I think your activity in sourcing out upgrades goes to the heart of the issue. SBC/BBC, SBF, et al have so many bolt on engineering solutions that there is no cerebral engineering required. In short, if performance parts can't be found in Summit's or JEG's catalogs, they must not exist and therefore the engine should be ignored, overlooked and/or replaced by a SB'X'. The masses worship at the altar of the lowest common denominator. What goes on with the Buick performance engine world is much more akin to hot rodding as it was in Southern California in the late 1940's to the early 1960's. Just my thoughts. JMC
Sourcing 300 parts Hi John, I'm with you on that point. My ambition for retirement in 15 years is to build a supercharged or turbocharged 320 cid Buick straight eight for use at Bonneville and the dry lakes of CA and Australia. Of course, I'm being very optimistic that either fossil fuel or racing at the lakes will still be accessible then. I very much enjoy talking about the 300 engine when I go to local cruise nights. It's remarkable how many rodders are aware of the 215, yet have little or no knowledge of the 300. I guess being innovative is a part of being different. Last year, I approached Popular Hot Rodding with an article on the 300. I had everybody from a machine shop to dyno shop ready to participate. I even bought three stages of hydraulic cams to test on the dyno. In the end, the editorial person I communicated with was less than mildly interested. As he wrote, they're part of the "mainstream" media. Mark
It is kind of sad to go to a car show and see a classic Mercury, Oldsmobile, and Studebaker each with a 350 SBC. I actually got very interested in my original 300 after learning it's genealogy and history. The 215 to the 300, to the 225, and then the 340, and redesigned 350. Then the 225 was brought back, given the 3.8 inch bore of the 350, and later made an even-fire. Both the Rover V8 and the 231 V6 are still around, and very popular. I've seen what these two engines can do when built right, and it just thrills me to think of the potential the 300 has. And the original 215 was offered with a turbo by Olds, and the 231 has it's turbo history, so a turbocharged 300 doesn't seem too innappropriate.
I think you're on to something there. A turbo would virtually overcome the small exhaust valve limitation. A decent electronic ignition would be needed, either a conversion by IgnitionMan or a store-bought unit like an M$D. A custom exhaust could start with the header flange kit from Poston. I wonder which would make a better turbo motor, the alloy head '64 or the cast iron '65-'67. Hmmm.... Another member of the V8 Buick community, named MyGrain, has a very interesting project on the drawing board. He has an iron head 300 that is destined for an '83 Regal. Just as you point out, the 300 is a V6 on steroids. I imagine that the V6 mounts may work with the 300 and the transmission is standard BOP bolt pattern. This looks like a viable way to build a somewhat contemporary all-Buick machine. If I recall correctly, most of the Regals in the '79-'87 period came equipped with disc brakes, which is a huge benefit over our beloved '64-'67 cars with drum brakes. Plus, there's a ton of lightweight body panels available for the later design models. 8.5" rear ends seem to be readily available from the V8 Monte Carlo and Gran Prix. Hell, toss in a manual steering box from an S10 and you've got a decent Tri-Shield small block machine. I guess the only challenge would be the emission controls. There in Mass the emission inspection is more important than the brake system. If the donor vehicle is originally equipped with a 231 V6, it may be an easy adaptation.
Pin, the E-check is just another reason to hang on to those older cars. And, for weirdos like me who actually like 4-doors, old cars are pretty cheap. If it were me, I'd rather put late model upper control arms, spindles, and disc brakes in my '65 than put the motor in the regal. But, of course, finding a '65 coupe in good shape for the kind of money you could get that regal for....
10-4 Mogfix. I didn't know that you can use later model spindles, etc. to convert to disc brakes. Can you tell me what year/model donor cars to look for. BTW, there's a '65 GS for sale locally for $12,000. About twice a year, a '65 Skylark or Special will come up for sale locally. The typically go for less than $1000, but they all have lots o' rust.
I have an old magazine article about putting new knuckle/spindles on the 64-67 A-bodys, (specials and skylarks, chevelles, etc.) Obtain bone-yard knuckles and steering arm from 1970-81 F-cars (Camaro/Firebird) 1975-79 Novas (and their BOP siblings) 1973-77 A-bodies (includes A-specials) 1976-79 Cadillac Sevilles (1976 Sevilles came with 11 inch rotors) 1977-96 GM full size (except the Cadillac limosuines).The knuckles are 1 1/4" taller than the stock A-car pieces, and gives better handling. You may need shim packs or a moog offset shaft for the upper control arm to get your alignment right. The rotors measure either 11 or 12 inches. Get the whole shebang, from master cylinder to calipers, dust shields, rotors, and all. Then you have disc brakes and better handling. There are a thousand little details to the conversion, but, like building an obscure engine, the fun is in putting all the pieces together. It's very satisfying to be able to pull your laminated build sheet out of the console and show the guys at the car show how you built the car piece by piece. As to that $12,000 GS, I like sedans. easier for the kids and groceries to be loaded in, and nobody wants them, so they're cheaper. I traded a dewalt 7" polisher, (my cost: $150) for my '65 four-door skylark, and then I put a quart of dexron in and drove her home, 20 miles, at 60 mph. Can't get a 2 door that cheap.
Mogfix; Thanks for the info. I really appreciate it. If I don't get a buyer for my Skylark, I'll start scouring the bone yards for the conversion pieces. I understand what you're saying about the four-door cars. They're a ton less expensive around here too. Makes it easier to take the dogs along for a ride. Mark
Before going ape on the boneyard bits to update the '64-'67 A body front end, there are a couple of problems with the 'el cheapo' route: The B body spindles (and others) will require a large fist full of shims to get even close to the correct geometry. Not an ideal or safe solution. There are several fabricators that make tubular A arms for these cars that allow the easy adaptation of B body spindles and thier larger brakes. They aren't cheap, but they aren't a fortune either. In addition to getting the bigger car brakes, the new A arms also correct the ludicrous understeer/camber change problems inhernent with these A bodies. In the bargain, the new alignment will stop the 'scrub' wear you get with modern radials. For a more complete review, see: http://www.globalwest.net Cheers, JMC
I'm familiar with the upper control arms, HO racing used to offer them, as well as Hotchkiss, and Malibu, Global West, and others. They are really cool, but are $400 bucks or more, and you still have to buy bucket loads of other parts to complete a disc conversion. Again, we are at the bolt-on or build debate. If so inclined, I could just torch off the frame forward of the firewall, and weld in a '96 Impala front end, big discs, LT1, and all. But that's not the point. The MOOG offset shafts take care of the shim problem. Some shims are always neccessary to gain correct camber, that's what they do when they re-align the sagging frame of a 30+ year old car. And, as soon as I can, I'm also going to check into the possibility of relocating the upper ball joint hole on the existing upper arm, or modifying a B-body arm. It is a matter of locating the hole correctly. Remember, those new tubular upper control "A" arms operate on the same mounting shaft, therefore, their arc will neccesarally be the same as the original arm. They will eliminate some clearance problems between control arm motion and steering shaft, but in the buy and bolt on vs build debate, they are not strictly a must-have item. (Properly set up, my cousins '66 Chevelle pulled .9 lateral G's with F-body spindles and original '66 control arms) I do not discourage the purchase and use of any aftermarket part, b ut in the interest of disseminating information to the general public, I have outlined some other choices, and my own peculiar choices among them.
The vendor I linked above also offers the offset shafts. As you say, it's all about the Law of Equal Finality... or, there's more than one way to skin the cat... JMC
