A guide to building the lil guy. The Mighty 300

Discussion in 'Small Block Tech' started by Joe65SkylarkGS, Oct 27, 2009.

  1. 64G-lark

    64G-lark Well-Known Member

    Heres a article on a stroked 300. Full Article with pictures is here

    http://www.britishv8.org/Articles/MonsterMotor.htm

    Buick Monster Motor
    (originally published in British V8 Newsletter, Volume X Issue 3, September 2002)

    by: Kurt Schley

    Over the years, a few MG V-8'ers have installed the aluminum head 1964 Buick 300 engine into their cars and have been pleased with the results. The '64 300 is not a whole lot heavier than the 215, while providing 85 more cubic inches and gobs of torque. (The 1965 and later 300's have much heavier cast iron heads) For those who speculate about such things, there was always the question: "Would a Buick 350crank, with its very long stroke, 3.85" vs. the 300's 3.4", fit into the confines of a 300 block, yielding a large displacement but still relatively light weight engine?"

    Dave Michel, who has been very heavily involved in MGV8's for many years finally decided to find out. He and 215/300 expert Dan La Grou, proprietor of D&D Fabrications in Almont, MI, discussed the feasibility and obstacles over a period of several months. Then Dave gave the go-ahead to build the engine and Dan promptly began preliminary mock-ups of the combination.
    It was discovered early on that the chief problem was going to be providing sufficient internal clearance for the relatively large Buick 350 crankshaft to be able to swing freely inside the confines of the 300 block. Testing of mock-ups revealed that there were three principle areas of interference:

    1) The connecting rod bolts on four cylinders would not clear the camshaft. Careful measurements and precision grinding of the contacting bolt heads finally allowed the connecting rods to swing past the cam. Slight additional grinding then provided a sufficient safety factor to make sure the bolts and cam did not meet, as internal dimensions changed when the engine heated up and from centrifugal forces when under power.

    2) The ends of the connecting rod bolts on the front two crankshaft journals were hitting the inside of the oil pan. This is the area in the front of the engine where the oil pan is shallow. Note: The shallow area of the pan actually extends further back than the illustration. Reducing the length of the bolts by grinding provided the necessary clearance. The bolts were not ground as far back as the nuts, so there was no reduction in strength.

    3) The largest obstacle by far was that the leading edge of the crankshaft counterweights would not clear the bottom edge of the slipper-type pistons. Careful measurements revealed that an area 0.025" high X 1" X 1" long wide had to be removed from each piston skirt and pin boss per Figs. A & B. After laying out the areas to be removed using machinist's dye, the skirts were ground. The counterweights actually interfered with only one side of each piston's skirt. However to keep each piston in balance, aluminum had to be removed from both sides of each piston.

    A late Rover "intermediate" front cover was used. This cover incorporates a compact and highly efficient crankshaft driven oil pump, as well as an improved water pump design, while still retaining provision for a conventional distributor. It was used chiefly on the Rover 4.2 and late 3.9 Rover engines.

    The 4.0 and 4.6 Rover engines used flywheel triggered electronic ignition and their front covers will not accept a distributor. All later Rover engines, 4.0, 4.2 and 4.6, drive the water pump, alternator and all other accessories with a flat serpentine belt arrangement which rotates the water pump in the opposite direction from the earlier Rover and the 215/300 pumps. The Monster Motor was fitted with custom brackets and billet aluminum pulleys designed by Dan LaGrou.

    The motor will soon be installed by Dave into an MGB. A report on the engine's performance will be forthcoming.

    Engine Specifications: Displacement: 348 ci
    Bore: 3.790"
    Stroke: 3.85"
    Block: Buick 300
    Crankshaft: Buick 350
    Heads: '64 Buick 300, ported
    Intake Valve: 1.720" dia.
    (Stock Buick 300 = 1.625")
    Exhaust Valve: 1.496" dia.
    (Stock Buick 300 = 1.313")
    Valve Springs: Crane 99849
    Head Gasket: 0.040" thick
    Lifter: 896
    Rocker Arm 1.6:1 Buick 215/300
    Camshaft: Crower 50232
    Piston: 258 Jeep
    Rings: 5/64", 5/64", 3/16"
    (Hastings Moly)
    Connecting Rod: Buick 300
    Deck Height: 0.040"
    Chamber volume: 46cc
    Compression Height: 1.630"
    Compression Ratio: 10.2:1
    Carb: Edelbrock 1404
    Primary Jet: 0.086"
    Secondary Jet: 0.095"
    Rod: 65-52

    Intake manifold: '64 Buick 300
    Ignition: OEM Delco w/ Pertronix kit
    Flywheel: Buick 300
    Pressure Plate: 10.4" Weber
    Clutch Disc: 10.4" Weber
    (1-1/8 x 26-spline)
    Front Cover/Water Pump:
    Late Rover w/ serpentine belt
    A/C Compressor: Sanden 508
    Starter: D&D gear reduction
    Alternator: Chrome one-wire
     
  2. 87GN@Tahoe

    87GN@Tahoe Well-Known Member


    This is FALSE; The v6 and 350 have a bore size of 3.8" whereas the 300 and 340's have a bore size of 3.750"... So unless you are going to bore your 300 or 340 out .050", it's not going to happen...

    Just had to clear this up before someone made the mistake of buying a set of .030 over V6 pistons:Dou:
     
  3. I have done this twice and a 300 will easily take a V6 or 350 piston. as a matter of fact i just saw a 300 built with a .030 oversized 350 pistons. so dont say something is false if you have no experience with it. if you don't believe it then have a 300 sonic checked.
     
  4. 87GN@Tahoe

    87GN@Tahoe Well-Known Member

    yes, but you have to make sure that people understand that they will have to over-bore a signifigant ammount to make them work

    the original post made it sound like one could just "throw them in"

    sorry if i sounded testy, that was not my intention
     
  5. 87GN@Tahoe

    87GN@Tahoe Well-Known Member

    .050" to make stock v6/350 pistons work, more if you're working with "oversize" pistons

    *300/340- 3.750" bore
    *v6/350- 3.800" bore

    just FYI
     
  6. 64G-lark

    64G-lark Well-Known Member

    I know of several members who bored the 300 .050" over and are running forged 350 std bore pistons.

    Dont forget Sean Etson (BuickCityPsycho) he built a 64' Special with a NA 300 that went 12.52@104. Below is 2002 post from Team Buick (Buicks net) by Sean Etson about his 300 combination that runs 12s:

    Car--1964 Buick Special 2dr post
    Fiberglass hood,deck lid and rear bumper, front comeing this winter.inner fenders removed core support swisscheesed.

    Rear end is from a 72 skylark 8 1/2" housing with a strange spool and 4.11 gears and G body alum. drums.
    Suspension-rear-Metco lowers stock uppers (custom made adjustable this winter)C/E no hop bars-front-stock with C/E adj. shocks,alum GS drum fr brakes S10 master cyl. wilwood adj. proportioning valve.

    Trans.-TH350 custom built by a friend, a rebuilt B&M converter(not enough stall)an 8" 4000 stall to come ,hopefully. Headers are from Poston's 1 5/8"primaries 3" collectors

    Now for the topsecret part. 64 300 block .030" over bore,line honed zero decked, oiling system mods,front cover new GM ported oil passages blue printed oil pump Dynagear double row timing chain.custom ground cam by ISKY .535"int. .525"exh 110` lobe center 304`@.050 dur. stock crank blueprinted stock rods w/ARP bolts.high comp. pistons w/costom owner done valve reliefs with owner made tools.

    Heads-64 aluminum 300 head castings stock size valves pro done race valve job extensive porting(owner done)

    Intake-started life as a Huffacker for a 215" single plane w/ a 2" spacer my adapter plates are 1/2" thick alum. 1/4" valley plate. a 650 Holley HP series carb tops it off.

    Ignition is a Mallory unilite triggering an Accel 300+.
     
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2009
  7. Big Matt

    Big Matt Well-Known Member

    I think that it would be helpful if anybody has engine blueprinting info and physical dimensions for the 300 to post it. The only thing that seems easy to find is stock bore/stroke/rod length. At various places online I've seen 3 different compression heights, 2 different deck heights, etc, etc. Or if anybody has a secret link to this info that would help too.

    That way the numerous "Just use [insert whatever engine here] pistons/rods/whatever" can be evaluated in context.
     
  8. Greg

    Greg Well-Known Member

  9. DEADMANSCURVE

    DEADMANSCURVE my first word : truck

    just rec'd my latest BPG magazine tues pm - TA ad in back says they just bought up last of KB stock and included in that is a few 215-300-340 cams ( and some springs etc plus some older V6 and 455 cams ) . a 2A and a 3A and a 5RS i think . $100 plus SH each to BPG members . 2A is gone unless they had more than one . i will edit in KB specs from old catalog when i get home . del
    edit : info from a 1989 KB catalog
    KB2A - hyd , intake .475 lift/270 duration , exhaust .488 lift/278 duration , 110 lobe center , 1400-6000 rpm range
    KB3A - hyd , int .518/305 , exh .523/310 , 108 lobe center , 3000-6500 rpm range
    KB5RS - solid , int .600/305 , exh .592/318 , 106 lobe center , 4000-7500 rpm range
    fyi - info was not on TA website , had to call . thats all i know . del
    *** nice "sticky" by the way ***
     
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2009
  10. Jim Blackwood

    Jim Blackwood Well-Known Member

    Here's another possible combination for the 300.

    Quote:use the "Honda" journal size to monster up the stroke to 3.96". Using the 6.2" "Honda" rod and the Ford "truck" 2.3 piston 20 over you'd get 3.8" bore x 3.96" stroke:
    A 400 lb. 360cid (5.9l) Buick 300 with a very Chevy like 1.58 rod ratio.

    I don't know the specifics of how that combination works out on deck height and compression but it might be worth looking into.

    Jim
     
  11. wkillgs

    wkillgs Gold Level Contributor

    Some tips from Sean, owner of the 12 sec 300, here:
    http://forums.aaca.org/f118/little-engine-could-151456.html
    A quick summary:
    ....ARP rod bolts for a 283 Chev fit perfectly.
    ....Cam with more than 0.480" lift will need retainer/guide clearance corrected.
    ....Valve-piston clearance becomes an issue with big cams.
     
  12. wkillgs

    wkillgs Gold Level Contributor

  13. Sleekcrafter

    Sleekcrafter Well-Known Member

    Make sure you use 64 intake gaskets, the others don't have the exhaust blocked off and they won't match the ports as nice.
     
    Smalldog221 likes this.
  14. DEADMANSCURVE

    DEADMANSCURVE my first word : truck

    does schneider make the cams for TA ? i think i've seen the schneider emblem on the butt of more than one TA cam . and joe , i'll check my old KB catalog and see what was involved with the bigger cams as far as clearances/specs etc . del
     
  15. wkillgs

    wkillgs Gold Level Contributor

    Cams formerly offered by Poston. The sb 110 had some good reviews.
     

    Attached Files:

  16. wkillgs

    wkillgs Gold Level Contributor

    Isky Cams:
     

    Attached Files:

  17. Lightningbird

    Lightningbird Well-Known Member

    KB used to sell some hot N/A V6 cams from the early 80's that took advantage of the short runner large plenum volume of the V6, especially the 4.1 liter. Try having a custom ground that is based off of those camshafts, since it would be exactly the same.

    There are a bizillion piston and rod combos for the 300 using off the shelf parts. If a 340-350 crank is used there are even more. I would look at destroking the 350 crank and coming up with something close to 320 cubes to keep the engines optimal bore to stroke ratio along with staying under the heads max flow point.
    The intake port volume will be maxed out with the 320 buzzed way up there around 6500 with out some serious head work. That is where the volume vs pressure or vacuum in this case starts to slide the other way using the stock heads. The stock intake ports then become an orifice plate. I have no idea with the TA alums.....I guess we will see.
     
  18. wkillgs

    wkillgs Gold Level Contributor

    The K-B cams from an old catalog....sometime in the early 80's?
    I don't see a Mark 2A that was mentioned, just a Mark 2. The Schneider 270-84H is very close to to it, but with a 110 lobe separation instead of the K-B's 112.
     

    Attached Files:

  19. DEADMANSCURVE

    DEADMANSCURVE my first word : truck

    walt : listed 'em towards end of page #2 . they were .475 intake , .488 exhaust ( pretty close to your listing - musta been a slight design change ) . that info is outa' a 1989 KB catalog . for me no dif , always should plan on a little "extra work" anyway . del
     
  20. complete centrifugal supercharger kits are 3500.00 :beers2:
     

Share This Page