[PureC4]

Finally Id the motor it's a 292 six between 63/72. I know nothing about these motors except that I read they were built for the trucks and had a taller deck... So please chime in as to weather its worth working on or switch to a SBC. I dig the looks of the inliner, but is it going to be trouble. Wanting to build a driver.... thanks Also how do I ID the trans?

[Blazin72]

The 292 is a great engine. What would it be going in? Heck, it's nearly the same size as Fords 302 and Chevys 305

[PureC4]

It's in a 54 3100 pickup, has an offy 2x1bbl carb intake

[OneMoreTime]

Cool deal.. www.inliners..org

Sam

[Blazin72]

Keep the 292! It would be great in that truck!

This would look cool:

[Dogbreath077]

You can take advantage of the I-6 torque over the V-8 by balancing the engine, porting the head, bump the compression a little, free flow the exhaust, and install a larger carb or a multi carb set-up. The overall weight will be less than a V-8, so your power to weight ratio will be better, you are starting out with more torque due to the inline config, so breathing better, and higher compression will make for a very nice hot rod.

[Irelands child]

The only things wrong with that engine is trying to find someone who still knows much about them. And of course the price and easy availability of speed parts.

Then a sweet dual exhaust with a set of glass packs - your truck will NEVER be identified as having a belly button engine

[DoubleVision]

The 292 will certainly have a nice rapping exhaust note to it with hot rod pieces. A gent I knew who`s now deceased was a logger in his early years.
He was a 100% pure bonafide Ford man. But he would often say "Chevy only made one good engine and it wasn`t the small block, it`s the 292 Straight six. I had one in my pulpwood truck when I was still logging. It was the hardest pulling engine we had, even more torque than the V8`s of the later trucks plus it was dead set reliable. Miles in the woods, forest trails, low gear, high RPM trip for several miles back to the highway with a full load of logs. She never ran hot, never broke down, she wouldn`t struggle to haul a full load of logs up a steep hill. Best of all, maintainance was a breeze"

[oldbogie]

Originally Posted by PureC4

Finally Id the motor it's a 292 six between 63/72. I know nothing about these motors except that I read they were built for the trucks and had a taller deck... So please chime in as to weather its worth working on or switch to a SBC. I dig the looks of the inliner, but is it going to be trouble. Wanting to build a driver.... thanks Also how do I ID the trans?

Pick up a copy of this book "Chevrolet Inline Six-Cylinder Power Manual" by Leo Santucci. It gets way into the nitty-gritty of making the GM inlines into going machines.

The 292 is the best choice to hop up because the raised deck provides better head bolt bite than the lower deck blocks. The low deck blocks have a habit of either pulling the threads or cracking in the corners when those bolts are cinched up real tight.

Bogie

[willowbilly3]

I have seen several 292s hot rodded over the years and they work out pretty well. Just keep in mind that they are a gas hog and don't get better when you hotrod one. Personally I'd go with the 250, same basic engine except for a shorter block and they were good on gas.

[techinspector1]

I've owned several Chevy pickups with the 292/4-spd in them and always thoroughly enjoyed driving them.

Stay modest on the cam, this is not a high-winding motor that you want to buzz to the moon. It also is a low static compression ratio motor, so will not run well with too much cam. Usually, the first cam offered for the motor in the manufacturer's list of cams is the one you want for a street-driven truck. If you're looking for a lumpy idle, then tear the motor down completely and build it with more static compression ratio (piston change) so that it will match up with a stronger camshaft. 2 or 3 one-bbl carbs along with long-tube, tuned header(s) will wake it up.

In my opinion, six cylinder motors sound sucky with an automatic transmission.

To really enjoy the truck, true the flywheel, install a Centerforce diaphragm clutch and completely rebuild the clutch linkage with all-new pieces oiled well. If using a column-shift linkage with a 3-spd trans, also remove all linkage pieces and rebuild with new, well oiled components. When everything works like brand new, you will want to drive the truck more.

[junker]

Keep in mind, this is the heavy duty truck engine. It was not intended to be a high rev piece, a lot of the 194/230/250 parts will not fit. It's similar to the old 302 "Gimmy" truck engine in regards to it's limitations. Proper gearing, and not going overboard with camming, and carburation, instead concentrating on it's torque curve will make a fun driver. However, revs will not do it, neither will modifications enhancing it's rpm limit.

[willowbilly3]

Most of my big six wrenching experience is with the 300 Ford but some of the same basic principals apply. As mentioned those engines were designed for torque and that is where their true function is best. I have a Comp 260 cam in my 300 and would gladly go back to a stock cam because it lost some of it's off-idle grunt.
With the 300, the best torque and mileage cam is the one they came with or an Isky Mile-a-more.

[kellogs]

I'm considering a six banger project in a 1968 c10. It's more of a low buck cruiser with patina paint,lowered stance, torque thrust wheels. It's not a speed machine but I would like to do a hot six but not sure of a 250 or 292 with a 4 speed. Which is better to invest in?

[oldbogie]

Originally Posted by kellogs

I'm considering a six banger project in a 1968 c10. It's more of a low buck cruiser with patina paint,lowered stance, torque thrust wheels. It's not a speed machine but I would like to do a hot six but not sure of a 250 or 292 with a 4 speed. Which is better to invest in?

292 is the better choice. It's bigger, for a heavy truck that's important in bottom end torque production, but more importantly it's stronger in the head bolt areas especially around the ends of the block. The block is taller than the 250, this is accomplished by raising and thickening the head deck which provides a stiffer mounting surface for the head. This is especially needed by the water pump which is very crack prone in the 250 so the thicker deck provides more thread depth for the head bolts and distance from the intersecting water pump bolt which greatly reduces the tendancy to crack the block in that particular spot as well as the other end head bolts. The 292 is a true heavy duty design where the 250 is compromised for cost and design concerns for light automotive duty in less expensive vehicles.

Bogie