Hot Rod Forum banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I know this is going to be a budget answer, but has anyone had experience with sleeving a cylinder due to pitting? My car is a '74 TR6, already at +0.20, and a set of pistons is about $600 plus the cost of boring. I'm contemplating putting a Buick 215 in it (just happen to have one laying around) but that represents a whole 'nuther set of costs. I digress...

My question is: Sleeve the one cylinder for ~$175 or "do it right" as my wife always tells me, and bore to +0.40? Or go all out and put the 215 in with a T5?? I'm just dying to use the 215 somewhere, but this may not be the right place...

Thanks for the help!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,338 Posts
install a stockish 350 v-8 and save 40 plus pounds and have a reliable engine. Its been done many times. Lots of information available. The Buick 215 is a very small v-8 that makes very little power, but it will cost a lot to use it,,,
put the 215 in a go-kart
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,031 Posts
215 and a T5 is a slam dunk in the brit car community...wanna get weird? An aluminum block LS.

If you're planning on the drivetrain swap next year; sleeve the 1 hole and be done with it, then do the powertrain swap in a couple months...otherwise? do it right.

N.
 

·
Hotrodders.com moderator
Joined
·
9,581 Posts
I would just move the swap up a year and get it done.. By the time you pull the engine and sleeve it and get it back in it is a lot of labor. Might as well bite the bullet and do what you want to do..

Sam
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,132 Posts
I would keep the 6-banger and sleeve it. The Buick swap will be a lot more than fixing what you have. If you have 1 bad piston, just replace that one. I've had engines before with 1 odd bore in them and they ran fine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Thanks all! I should have noted that the block needing the sleeve is out and stripped, all done before I purchased the car. I should have also said that I generally bring these home like a lost puppy needing a good home....:)
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,623 Posts
At some point plan B needs to be the focus as a better spend of your money, I don't see the 215 as that plan myself only because there are better alternatives that cost less, provide better performance and are not any harder to adapt.

The other side of this is resale, lets face it an LS will increase the value of the car and give upgrade paths for the future, cheapest would be a SBC and you can't go wrong there either...next would be a SBF which would be a little easier to fit and also cheap.

Leave the retro stuff for the purists, I believe in practicality, value, performance and cost as drivers of what I do. Very few people outside the british car community believe a 215 swap is worthwhile today even if it was commonplace back in the day when there were few choices especially overseas.

Myself, I would drop in a SBF...they fit better and the distributor up front will make your life easier to get the engine back as far as it will go and a rear sump Bronco pan will clear your steering as a SBC would.
 

·
Old(s) Fart
Joined
·
5,729 Posts
The Buick 215 is a very small v-8 that makes very little power, but it will cost a lot to use it,,,
put the 215 in a go-kart
The 215 weighs about 200 lb LESS than a belly button Chebby 350, so save 240 lbs right off the front wheels. You care about power to weight, not total HP. Buford 215s came with 200 hp stock. 225 is not hard. Drop in a 300 Buick crank and 270 is not hard. Still only weighs 320 lbs soaking wet.

Not every car needs the SBC sledgehammer...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,031 Posts
Would a Ford 60* V6 fit easier? that was a thing for awhile in Sunbeam Alpine track cars; they handle better and brake better than the Tiger clones; at least that was a thing 20yrs ago. Same with the Opel GT.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,338 Posts
silly attack on me, why?

The 215 weighs about 200 lb LESS than a belly button Chebby 350, so save 240 lbs right off the front wheels. You care about power to weight, not total HP. Buford 215s came with 200 hp stock. 225 is not hard. Drop in a 300 Buick crank and 270 is not hard. Still only weighs 320 lbs soaking wet.

Not every car needs the SBC sledgehammer...
My answer is significantly better than yours and self explanatory.

If you want better power to weight then a 13b 1/2 bridge port turbo will eat the 350 never mind the out dated low power expensive 215. A work mate put a 215 (with cam and mods) in his BMW 325. It sounded great, reacted well to the transmission/gear ratio combo in the BMW but didn't scare anybody.
Any modern Japanese 2 liter turbo would be better. A JZ would be crazy fast.

A stock 350 making even a lowly 260 is a huge improvement. Easy swap. Cheap. And it is lighter.(virtually the same).

In my opinion the 215 is antiquated and expensive and not a great performer by my standards even 20 years ago. Sell the engine to someone that thinks it is a good engine.
 

·
Old(s) Fart
Joined
·
5,729 Posts
A stock 350 making even a lowly 260 is a huge improvement. Easy swap. Cheap. And it is lighter.(virtually the same).

In my opinion the 215 is antiquated and expensive and not a great performer by my standards even 20 years ago. Sell the engine to someone that thinks it is a good engine.
I want to be sure I have this straight...

The all-aluminum 215, which was first put into production for the 1961 model year is "antiquated", but the almighty SBC, which was first put into production for the 1955 model year is not. :rolleyes:

Might want to look up the definition of "hypocrisy".

I find that the people who claim that an Olds/Buick/Pontiac is more expensive to build have never actually built one. And yes, I agree that a modern turbo four cylinder will make more power than either for less weight than the iron lump Chebby, anyway. That doesn't make me want one.

My apologies to the O.P. for derailing this thread. I'll stop now.
 

·
More for Less Racer
Joined
·
19,897 Posts
I want to be sure I have this straight...

The all-aluminum 215, which was first put into production for the 1961 model year is "antiquated", but the almighty SBC, which was first put into production for the 1955 model year is not. :rolleyes:

Might want to look up the definition of "hypocrisy".

I find that the people who claim that an Olds/Buick/Pontiac is more expensive to build have never actually built one. And yes, I agree that a modern turbo four cylinder will make more power than either for less weight than the iron lump Chebby, anyway. That doesn't make me want one.
I'd like to see the 500HP small block Olds, small block Buick, or 350 Pontiac that doesn't cost any more than an SBC to build...with new parts it can't be done.
300hp, sure...they all can get there with stock parts and cost doesn't vary much....but get more serious and the off brands get more expensive. Plus, 300 Hp isn't "built", it's just a warmed over stocker.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,031 Posts
If the Original Poster is truly trucking along on wire wheels and associated hardware, 300hp is about the max for a sanity check. The original GT40 had wire wheels and a smallblock...something made them change that.

Since (for me) the limit is 300hp...put whatever engine in it trips your trigger; not everyone wants to build a magnum load for their car - and thats okay. Nailhead Buicks are still cool, 215s are cool, supercharged V6s are cool, turbo 2.3 fords, turbo 3.8s, BLOWN FLATHEADS...ALL cool and all typically sub 300hp.

It would be a boring place if it was only about max power...
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top