Hot Rod Forum banner

1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
"But how do it know?"
Joined
·
2,331 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Hi All,


I've noticed that the Chevy 305 and 307 engines often get dogged for, well... beings dogs. Good for fuel economy and emissions, but no out-of-the-box performance. And even when performance upgrades are considered, the cost is always overshadowed by the cost to buildup a 350 with more power being the same, if not less.


I have not heard the same for any particular engine from any other GM, FoMoCo or Chrysler Corp companies. Are there any engines, in your opinion, that could be considered the red-headed stepchild of their respective families? I imagine V8s would be the easiest to focus on, since each company has made and continues to make so many of them. But if you want to include others, go for it.


NOTE: This discussion is not meant to be a GM vs FoMoCo vs Chrysler flame war. Thank you! :thumbup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
When I bought my 32 highboy last spring the writeup said it was a 350. After getting it home and checking the block number, turned out it was a 305 out of an 86 pickup. I was the 4 fourth owner, tracked down the original builder and he confirmed the 305. Not that I can tell from a performance/ driving standpoint, still PO'd me that I have a step child engine.
 

·
www.generationhighoutput. com
Joined
·
897 Posts
I can think of the second run of olds 400 big block engines, especially compared to the vaunted first run of 400 olds engines. The 65-67 had a forged crank and were great mills. The 68/69 400s shared the same stroke as their 425/455 brethren, but were undersquare with a 3.87" bore. Definitely couldn't compete in the same space as the other big block olds mills.
 

·
Semper Gumby
Joined
·
373 Posts
For me the 'ones to avoid" are:

SBC 262 and 267 as well as the 307 (the 305 was nowhere near as bad as those were)

Ford: 260, 352, 360 and 428 CJ

Mopar 273, 318 and 360
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
18,374 Posts
GM Quad 4....If the water pump went south, the coolant went into the oil, not good for bearings
Chrysler Mitsubishi 2.3 (I think) 4 cyl......
 

·
my KARMA ran over my DOGMA
Joined
·
1,142 Posts
352, 360 Ford motors were good to me in complete stock trim anyhow, I never knew the 428CJ and the 260.

I did have a 429CJ and it was the biggest money pit dog POS, I guess it did not help having it built by a pro chevy shop that scorned the idea out of the gate :nono: but I was 19 and at least I learned a lesson :smash:
 

·
Hotrodders.com moderator
Joined
·
9,581 Posts
The 4cyl Vega was really bad..not even a good grocery getter..

Sam
 

·
More bucks, go faster!
Joined
·
1,070 Posts
Let's not forget Old's 350 ci diesel engine 1978-85. There use to piles of them in the wrecking yards.That little beautie put the American diesel back 20 years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Let's not forget Old's 350 ci diesel engine 1978-85. There use to piles of them in the wrecking yards.That little beautie put the American diesel back 20 years.
yep, had 80 Buick Regal diesel, wife got stranded in it about 3 times, me twice. Also had 74 Vega. For a car guy I made terrible choices back then
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,969 Posts
3L mistu V6
2.4 Chrysler V6 (oiling issues)
403 'pontiac' (olds)
267 chev
2.8L V6s in the S10 Blazers
never liked the 390 Ford or 360 mopar
LT1 OEM optispark unit

307 chevs were okay if you don't expect it to be a DZ302; although they did apparently have a run of camshafts that were prone to going flat

Im equally underwhelmed by the 4.6L in my dads F150 as well. Just not enough low end for a pick up truck. The 300 I6 in the previous truck was way better
 

·
Dimwit
Joined
·
171 Posts
The 4cyl Vega was really bad..not even a good grocery getter..

Sam
I had a 4 cyl Vega. I got it from my mother. My step-father would drive it past when the check oil light would come on during a turn, past when it would come on during acceleration, to the point when the light was on all of the time. At this point, it needed 3 quarts of oil to bring it to full. The crankcase only held 4 quarts.

That car consistently got 25 mpg when the average v8 got 16. That Vega was the best mileage car I've ever driven, even to this day.

The engine was fine as long as you kept oil in it. We sold it to some "friend of a friend". I later heard he drove it for three days before it blew up. He should have checked the oil.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,347 Posts
2.8L V6s in the S10 Blazers
the 2.8 motor is actually a very good and stout platform to build on.

the only 2.8 i would call terrible would be the carbed versions, these had smaller journals on the cranks that were prone to breaking and spinning bearings.
the heads on the carbed motors were also very bad with small valves and horrible ports.

once these engines went with fuel injection either mpfi or tbi the heads got redone with larger valves and better ports.

and they also made the cranks alot stronger with larger journals

gm rates the factory fi 2.8's for 400hp and 7k rpms, we routinely take these engines well past those marks today with stock stuff
 

·
www.generationhighoutput. com
Joined
·
897 Posts
3L mistu V6
2.4 Chrysler V6 (oiling issues)
403 'pontiac' (olds)
267 chev
2.8L V6s in the S10 Blazers
never liked the 390 Ford or 360 mopar
LT1 OEM optispark unit

307 chevs were okay if you don't expect it to be a DZ302; although they did apparently have a run of camshafts that were prone to going flat

Im equally underwhelmed by the 4.6L in my dads F150 as well. Just not enough low end for a pick up truck. The 300 I6 in the previous truck was way better
Although I agree with many of your picks (especially the 4.6L, an engine that should have stayed in the lincoln line up) I don't understand the dislike for the 403 olds. Obviously it couldn't fill the shoes of the 455 it replaced (being 52 cubes short, you can't blame it) but given the right parts, these engines can really come alive. The windowed mains aren't the end of the world unless you're trying to spin it to 7k.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,347 Posts
Plenty of 2.8's with spun bearings because of an oiling issue. You can polish a turd, but it's still a turd.
2.8's do not have oiling issues , what they have is owners who abuse them and dont change the oil and maintain the engine like they should

like i said we have these engines pushing 350-450hp reliably for years with stock oil pumps and factory longblocks

i personally have one that turns dam near 9,000 rpms on the drag strip that i dailly drive its nearing 60,000 miles on it and never had an isue
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top