We are currently running on the new domain and server: www.Speed-Talk.com

IMPORTANT: Update your bookmarks to https://www.speed-talk.com/forum/
(Right-click the URL and select "Bookmark this link")

14014415 and/or stroked 267

General engine tech -- Drag Racing to Circle Track

Moderator: Team

travis
HotPass
HotPass
Posts: 909
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 5:31 am
Location:

Re: 14014415 and/or stroked 267

Post by travis » Sat Oct 19, 2019 2:51 pm

I seem to remember the 267 coming with 434 casting heads with 63-ish cc chambers, and flat top pistons for right around 8-1 compression. Maybe just a different variation of the 267?

It’s been eons since I’ve even seen a 267. A guy in high school had one in a really slick very early 80’s Monte Carlo. When the stock cam went flat he replaced it with a -929 cam, and added a stock 305 iron intake and q-jet, and dual 2” exhaust with glass packs. It sounded pretty good and run surprisingly well

82c10step
New Member
New Member
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 9:32 pm
Location: Montoursville, PA

Re: 14014415 and/or stroked 267

Post by 82c10step » Sat Oct 19, 2019 7:04 pm

20 years ago I had a Malibu with that engine as a daily driver. Had 3.73 rear and somewhere along the line a th350 swapped in. Girlfriend overheated one day and it popped a headgasket. I did the same thing. I had it zero decked, polished the crank, freshened the heads up. Installed a 69 z28 solid lifter cam, intake, 4 barrel, 3k stall. All junk I had lying around. It would run mid 13's all night long. It was a fun daily beater. Don't overthink it.

tenxal
Expert
Expert
Posts: 572
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 8:48 pm
Location:

Re: 14014415 and/or stroked 267

Post by tenxal » Sat Oct 19, 2019 8:07 pm

travis wrote:
Sat Oct 19, 2019 2:51 pm
I seem to remember the 267 coming with 434 casting heads with 63-ish cc chambers, and flat top pistons for right around 8-1 compression. Maybe just a different variation of the 267?
The 434 heads (354434) came on the '75-'76 262 110 h.p. engines. Chambers were nominally 59.1 cc's with 1.720/1.505 valves, flat tops with valve notches.

travis
HotPass
HotPass
Posts: 909
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 5:31 am
Location:

Re: 14014415 and/or stroked 267

Post by travis » Sat Oct 19, 2019 8:42 pm

tenxal wrote:
Sat Oct 19, 2019 8:07 pm
travis wrote:
Sat Oct 19, 2019 2:51 pm
I seem to remember the 267 coming with 434 casting heads with 63-ish cc chambers, and flat top pistons for right around 8-1 compression. Maybe just a different variation of the 267?
The 434 heads (354434) came on the '75-'76 262 110 h.p. engines. Chambers were nominally 59.1 cc's with 1.720/1.505 valves, flat tops with valve notches.
So they came on a different turd than what I remembered :lol:
The 434’s I’ve had all measured around 63cc’s (off of 305’s). I think the nominal spec was 60cc. 1.72/1.50 valves.

I also remember several different things I had read about the 267 was that for some reason this bore/stroke combo was terrible for detonation. Stroking it may make it worse

econo racer
Pro
Pro
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 11:44 pm
Location:

Re: 14014415 and/or stroked 267

Post by econo racer » Sun Oct 20, 2019 12:01 am

I built a 267 out of a 79 malibu. My Escort was faster. I have also built a 262. It came in the 75 Monza and 75 Nova. With cam headers and intake it ran mid 11's in the 1/8th. #-o Not for me.

turbo camino
Member
Member
Posts: 136
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 11:51 am
Location:

Re: 14014415 and/or stroked 267

Post by turbo camino » Sun Oct 20, 2019 2:53 am

The only (ONLY!) pistons available for the 3.5" bore are full-round dog dish type. There are two variations, the ones I have are 2.7" round and 1/8" deep. The other variant is slightly smaller diameter, I want to say 2.5", and deeper at something like .150". About the same volume though. There is a machined rim around the outside, the actual piston top, that is only .200 wide. This makes for an engine with effectively no quench/squish and even at the stock low C/R very poor knock resistance.

I'm only looking to turn it into a true quench design with a flat top piston. The only way to do that without using Ford 3.0 V6 pistons (bore the block, resize pin bores to Chevy size) is to add some stroke to push the pistons out the hole then chop off whatever sticks out. Or, I guess, stock stroke with 5.85" rods, but I don't have any of those, and the math there works out to cutting the pistons by .106", and the dish is .125" deep, so the center of the piston would end up uncut and still .020" below deck, and if the piston to head clearance is the normal SBC .040" that leaves the center quench area at .060" clearance, too much. Local machine shop quoted $400 to deck the block which is almost half the cost of either a set of custom pistons or a complete running 4.8L truck motor.

I suppose the cheapest fix for the compression issue with the 400 crank is a set of 305 heads, should come out to (on paper!) at 9.5:1, with good quench that should be workable given the small bore. I have a pair of 305 castings but I think they need guides and valves. Anybody have a set laying around ready to run for cheap?
econo racer wrote:
Sun Oct 20, 2019 12:01 am
I built a 267 out of a 79 malibu. My Escort was faster. I have also built a 262. It came in the 75 Monza and 75 Nova. With cam headers and intake it ran mid 11's in the 1/8th. #-o Not for me.
Most everyone who knows stuff knows that there's little real-world difference between a 350 & 305, the 267 is nothing but a smaller-bore 305 (with no decent pistons available). That said, I am not looking for even 300hp, just an engine that runs properly on pump fuel with normal ignition timing. All the 267 needs to accomplish that is some quench. Got it?
DON'T PANIC

turbo camino
Member
Member
Posts: 136
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 11:51 am
Location:

Re: 14014415 and/or stroked 267

Post by turbo camino » Sun Oct 20, 2019 4:01 am

Went digging thru the hoard and found a set of '416s. Not terrible, guides might be passable, definitely need surfaced.

Also found... ready?... a set of '081s! Non-swirl port 305 TPIs. May need guides, didn't check them closely yet.

Believe it or not 1.94/1.60 valves clear the cylinder walls to over .600 lift, very shrouded of course. 2.02 is a definite no-go. 1.84/1.50 should be no issue since lift is only in the .450 range. 081 chambers are a bit larger than the stock gasket opening but it ain't terrible, there are plenty of options for 305 HGs.
DON'T PANIC

travis
HotPass
HotPass
Posts: 909
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 5:31 am
Location:

Re: 14014415 and/or stroked 267

Post by travis » Sun Oct 20, 2019 4:18 am

https://www.summitracing.com/parts/uem-s1119-std/

Possibly an option? You still have some pin size difference to deal with but these are the closest I could find in pin size, plus being a pure flat top you will have to cut some valve reliefs. Probably a much bigger PITA than it is worth.

I quick search revealed, like you said, practically no options for pistons. All I found were .020” reduced height pistons with a big dish.

I guess the big question here is...what are you trying to accomplish? You could probably find a decent running 305 or 350 for peanuts that would run rings around any budget built 267. TBI 305’s and 350’s are generally your cheapest option from what I’ve seen over the last few years, and even with high miles the FI seems to have cut bore wear drastically over older carbed engines.

travis
HotPass
HotPass
Posts: 909
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 5:31 am
Location:

Re: 14014415 and/or stroked 267

Post by travis » Sun Oct 20, 2019 4:28 am

Another thing to consider if your ultimately looking for just a cheap throw together deal. Any 3.75” stroke crank with your setup is going to need balance work that is most likely going to be expensive. And there is a good chance that stock 267 pistons won’t clear the counterweights with stock 5.7” rods. And even if the pistons clear then you have to whole rod bolt to cam interference deal unless you use a small base circle cam or switch to a “stroker” con rod.

I’m just not seeing a cheap/easy way to accomplish anything here. To me, it looks like the best option would either be decking the block or custom pistons if you just have to use this 267 block.

travis
HotPass
HotPass
Posts: 909
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 5:31 am
Location:

Re: 14014415 and/or stroked 267

Post by travis » Sun Oct 20, 2019 4:53 am

At the risk of posting like f’bird... :lol:

Cheapest option I see, and I’ve done it many times myself on detonation prone early 305’s, is to swap the stock 178/194@.050 cam (designed for low end torque in these little 267’s and 305’s with tall gears) with a 194/202@.050 stock 350 cam, or something small aftermarket like a crane 260 energizer or comp 252h. The single pattern and small duration helps low end torque, and then you can run a more aggressive spark curve with the reduced cylinder pressure and still stay out of detonation. Not ideal, but it works better than you would think.

turbo camino
Member
Member
Posts: 136
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 11:51 am
Location:

Re: 14014415 and/or stroked 267

Post by turbo camino » Sun Oct 20, 2019 4:56 am

I don't have a real use in mind for this engine, or really a need for another complete running engine at all. I've just always been curious if the crappy ping-monster 267 could be 'fixed' if it had a proper quench design. It's sitting here doing nothing, the bores & deck surfaces are perfect, it had less than 30k miles when pulled. If I build it this will be just a "Was I right about what made it such a turd?" kind of thing. Just curiosity. Hence the zero-dollar budget.

I have enough parts here to build probably two 350s and a 383, albeit with some machine work required. One needs 1 sleeve, one needs complete bore/hone/decking, one needs a line hone, etc. Cost to bore & deck the 267 would be the same to bore & deck one of the 350s, that's why the 267 experiment only makes sense if there's no machine work required that I can't do myself (cutting piston tops etc.).

This crank is a factory 400 piece turned to 350 mains. I've run it before as a 383 with 5.7 rods and KB pistons that are beefier under the pin boss than these 267 pistons so counterweight clearance isn't an issue. Used with factory 5.7 rods with the grinding at the corner of the rod bolt for cam clearance and had no issues with a variety of everything from solid roller to mild hyd cams. Block does need minor notching at the cam tunnel and pan rails. Crank balancing for a sub-5000rpm 'throw it together and see if it works' experiment? Let's not go there. (also, I'm one of those weirdos who thinks dynamic balancing is mostly snake oil anyway except for very specific applications)
DON'T PANIC

turbo camino
Member
Member
Posts: 136
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 11:51 am
Location:

Re: 14014415 and/or stroked 267

Post by turbo camino » Sun Oct 20, 2019 5:06 am

Cam I have set aside for it is a Comp XE: https://www.compcams.com/xtreme-energy- ... block.html

If I could throw in a solid roller of ~240/250 on a 106 the +10.5:1 static compression wouldn't be a problem... but that would kinda defeat the purpose of the experiment. ;)
DON'T PANIC

turbo camino
Member
Member
Posts: 136
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 11:51 am
Location:

Re: 14014415 and/or stroked 267

Post by turbo camino » Sun Oct 20, 2019 5:10 am

And... I'd very much prefer to build it with the stock stroke for a more apples-to-apples answer to the quench-vs-no-quench question. But with no affordable (free) option for flat tops the options are limited to what we see here...
DON'T PANIC

travis
HotPass
HotPass
Posts: 909
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 5:31 am
Location:

Re: 14014415 and/or stroked 267

Post by travis » Sun Oct 20, 2019 5:20 am

A big part of the problem with the ping happy engines of that era was the tune. Slow ignition curve, very little initial timing, EGR, very lean carbs, etc...in heavy cars with really tall gears. Put a restrictive catalytic converter behind it and you end up with a monumental turd lol. Just adding a non EGR intake, a little fatter jetting, a more normal advance curve with more initial timing, and opening up the exhaust makes a world of difference...especially if it had a little gear behind it. I’ve done this too on 305 trucks, and it works.

Years ago I bought a worn out ‘86 3/4 ton Chevy truck with a 305. As purchased it got about 14 mpg on the highway but would barely keep up with traffic. I swapped on a bunch of parts I had laying around...performer 2101, 600 edelbrock carb, accel stock replacement HEI, and added headers and dual 2.5” exhaust with some generic turbo mufflers. It was a night and day difference...19 mpg highway and I was shocked at how well that worn out thing ran. And...no more pinging.

turbo camino
Member
Member
Posts: 136
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 11:51 am
Location:

Re: 14014415 and/or stroked 267

Post by turbo camino » Sun Oct 20, 2019 5:49 am

The shortblock is still assembled, I could just throw the cam in it and put the stock heads back on but... I know what getting the quench right does for a typical SBC and these dog-dish pistons just make my skin crawl whenever I think about leaving them in there. Yuck!

Clevite TC-2042s. I've cut a reference surface on the pin bosses to use later when it's time to cut the tops. Pin bosses to pin C/L now all measure to within .001 of each other.
Image

Dog dish, sans kibble.
Image

'081s found in the pile-o-stuff
Image

More dog dish goodness
Image
DON'T PANIC

Post Reply