Engine and Transmission Tech

tips, technology, tools and techniques related to vehicle driveline components

Go to Thread: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicLog In
Goto Page: 123Next
Current Page: 1 of 3


BlownMGB-V8
Jim Blackwood
9406 Gunpowder Rd., Florence, KY 41042
(6468 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 12:59PM

Main British Car:
1971 MGB Blown,Injected,Intercooled Buick 340/AA80E/JagIRS

authors avatar
Buick 300/350 stroker thread
Posted by: BlownMGB-V8
Date: December 04, 2016 02:37PM



MGBV8
Carl Floyd
Kingsport, TN
(4511 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 11:32PM

Main British Car:
1979 MGB Buick 215

authors avatar
Re: Buick 300/350 stroker thread
Posted by: MGBV8
Date: December 05, 2016 10:26AM

Seems I started a lively discussion over there. ;)


joe_padavano
Joseph Padavano
Northern Virginia
(156 posts)

Registered:
02/15/2010 03:49PM

Main British Car:
1962 F-85 Deluxe wagon 215 Olds

Re: Buick 300/350 stroker thread
Posted by: joe_padavano
Date: December 05, 2016 11:19AM

Hot Rod Magazine detailed the build of a Buick 300 with a 340 crank in March 2011.

[www.hotrod.com]


BlownMGB-V8
Jim Blackwood
9406 Gunpowder Rd., Florence, KY 41042
(6468 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 12:59PM

Main British Car:
1971 MGB Blown,Injected,Intercooled Buick 340/AA80E/JagIRS

authors avatar
Re: Buick 300/350 stroker thread
Posted by: BlownMGB-V8
Date: December 05, 2016 11:52AM

I'm afraid that thread went sour in a hurry, and Carl all I can do is apologize for Derek's poor manners. I haven't seen such bad behavior from him since he first started posting. Maybe he was having a bad day and felt he had to share it.

Jim


MGBV8
Carl Floyd
Kingsport, TN
(4511 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 11:32PM

Main British Car:
1979 MGB Buick 215

authors avatar
Re: Buick 300/350 stroker thread
Posted by: MGBV8
Date: December 05, 2016 02:09PM

It wasn't that bad. I guess it's kinda crazy to go on a Buick engine forum & suggest decking a Buick block half an inch. ;)

I prefer oversquare engines for my sports car, Joe. The 340 crank into a Buick 300 turns it in to an undersquare, long stroke towing engine, IMO.


BlownMGB-V8
Jim Blackwood
9406 Gunpowder Rd., Florence, KY 41042
(6468 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 12:59PM

Main British Car:
1971 MGB Blown,Injected,Intercooled Buick 340/AA80E/JagIRS

authors avatar
Re: Buick 300/350 stroker thread
Posted by: BlownMGB-V8
Date: December 05, 2016 04:34PM

Undersquare by .050" doesn't exactly make it a motorhome engine Carl, though I totally understand where you are coming from. We got things straightened out over there though and may have opened a path for you. Have a look.

Jim


pcmenten
Paul Menten

(242 posts)

Registered:
10/08/2009 10:40AM

Main British Car:


Re: Buick 300/350 stroker thread
Posted by: pcmenten
Date: December 05, 2016 06:42PM

Of all the engines to work on, the 300 with the 340 crank has the most appeal. With aluminum heads, it makes for a simple, lightweight engine that bolts up easily and cheaply to a T-5 or a 200R4 transmission. It is compact and reliable. Even with stock parts, such as 340 exhaust manifolds and 64 aluminum heads, it would be a strong performer.

With TA heads, a roller cam, and headers it would be equal to most other engines in its capacity. The long stroke makes it a torquey engine and it's that type of mid-range power that is the most satisfying to drive.

If I were starting from scratch on a project, I'd be building an MGB GT with a 300/349 stroker, a 200R4, and Dana 44. Simple, cheap, and fast.



roverman
Art Gertz
Winchester, CA.
(3188 posts)

Registered:
04/24/2009 11:02AM

Main British Car:
74' Jensen Healy, 79 Huff. GT 1, 74 MGB Lotus 907,2L

Re: Buick 300/350 stroker thread
Posted by: roverman
Date: December 05, 2016 06:45PM

Do we understand that "Coscast", new and improved, RV8 blocks are available ? Some 225 Hydro,( closed course boat racing), builders, would shorten the 215 V8 decks, to get more rod angle and acceleration, off the turns. Taller decks with longer bores, tend to be weaker than shorter decks and bores. art.


MGBV8
Carl Floyd
Kingsport, TN
(4511 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 11:32PM

Main British Car:
1979 MGB Buick 215

authors avatar
Re: Buick 300/350 stroker thread
Posted by: MGBV8
Date: December 05, 2016 08:11PM

My 215 has 2.8" stroke. The Buick 340 has a 3.85 stroke! That is more that a BBC 427. You have to go to the mighty 454 to find more stroke than the 340 has.


BlownMGB-V8
Jim Blackwood
9406 Gunpowder Rd., Florence, KY 41042
(6468 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 12:59PM

Main British Car:
1971 MGB Blown,Injected,Intercooled Buick 340/AA80E/JagIRS

authors avatar
Re: Buick 300/350 stroker thread
Posted by: BlownMGB-V8
Date: December 05, 2016 10:45PM

It's a valid point. And if everything else were equal I'd go along with it. But it isn't, is it. To start with, you can't tell me you are making the most of that 2.8" stroke can you? Not with cast pistons. Not with a hydraulic camshaft. Certainly not with a steel flywheel and pressure plate. If you are still running stock valve springs the very most you could possibly be getting out of the engine is 5500-6000 rpm and how fast you get there is a direct function of load divided by torque.

Say what you will Carl, I think it's a pretty safe bet that my 340 will rev faster in any gear than your 215 and I'm pretty well convinced it'd also do it without any boost.

But still, I get it. I do. You want what you want, and who am I to argue? In fact I think it'd be a pretty cool build. Who wouldn't want a V8 that revs like a motorcycle engine?

So to that end, how about this? Light weight pistons and rods (such as I have for instance), an aluminum flywheel and pressure plate, a long rod ratio perhaps, (and Art, while a long bore may not make a block any stronger, a long rod does reduce the side thrust so it doesn't have to be) a cam that does well on the top end, preferably a roller cam, solid lifters and decent valve springs, then to top it all off a set of CNC ported TA Rover heads. Along with the shortest practical stroke of course. That'd get you there I have no doubt. And it looks very much like you could do that with the 300 block in at least a couple of ways.

Jim


Moderator
Curtis Jacobson
Portland Oregon
(4576 posts)

Registered:
10/12/2007 02:16AM

Main British Car:
71 MGBGT, Buick 215

authors avatar
Re: Buick 300/350 stroker thread
Posted by: Moderator
Date: December 06, 2016 04:14AM

How many 300s were built in 1964? Getting pretty scarce these days.

Anyone thinking of putting a 300 in an MGB should study Chris Gill's build journal. Beautiful car!... but Chris suffered all along the way. Seemed about ready to throw in the towel. Remember, he started with a 215, so all his frustrations were due to the differences between 300 and 215. The extra deck height of the 300 is a big obstacle for an MGB installation, especially if you'd prefer to stay under a stock hood. For BOPR there are about a dozen different intake manifolds to choose from including three distinct generations of Rover EFI manifolds. For Buick 300... not so much. Chris had injector bosses milled into a 4-barrel manifold. Extra deck height makes the whole package wider too, which puts the exhaust ports closer to the steering and the headers closer to the tires. Gee, they never used to rub. Chris ended up with specially modified headers. And then, about 300 posts into his thread, Chris discovered a hairline crack in his engine block (in the valley, just above the lifters). So much for iron blocks being trouble free!


MGBV8
Carl Floyd
Kingsport, TN
(4511 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 11:32PM

Main British Car:
1979 MGB Buick 215

authors avatar
Re: Buick 300/350 stroker thread
Posted by: MGBV8
Date: December 06, 2016 10:13AM

Actually, it revs very nicely. The steel flywheel has been lightened & I used a smaller lighter clutch package (9" pressure plate). I have pegged the tach 3 times. A bit slow grabbing 5th gear on a road course. Plus, I only mash the clutch pedal halfway (old habit from drag racing). The engine routinely sees 6 grand or just over when doing track days, autox, or Slaying the Dragon (ask Max). I am truly amazed it has held together this long (16 years this coming Spring).

While the 1964 Buick 300 is the only year that sported aluminum heads, the engine was in production thru 1967. One of the better flowing 215 intake manifolds could be used on the 300 with spacers. I think those used to be available. Headers? Mike Moor is still using his 215 block hugger hears on his 300. He dynoed at just over 300hp at one of the V8 Meets (2005?)

Yeah, the 300 does not not lend itself to a stock bonnet profile very well. Wish there was a short deck version.

Sure, I would love to have lighter internals & a roller cam (especially after driving Ted's TR6!).


Scott68B
Scott Costanzo
Columbus, Ohio
(561 posts)

Registered:
10/25/2007 11:30AM

Main British Car:
1968 MGB GM 5.3 LS4 V8

authors avatar
Re: Buick 300/350 stroker thread
Posted by: Scott68B
Date: December 06, 2016 10:24AM

Carl,
You seem to be grueling over which way to go. I can totally relate. I seldom make a quick decision when it comes to modifying my car. What would you do if your motor blew up tomorrow? Just curious.


MGBV8
Carl Floyd
Kingsport, TN
(4511 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 11:32PM

Main British Car:
1979 MGB Buick 215

authors avatar
Re: Buick 300/350 stroker thread
Posted by: MGBV8
Date: December 06, 2016 12:14PM

Down here we like to ponder things. :)

I have two Rover 3.9 engines, a 4.2 crank, a set of the very late 4.0/4.6 heads, & a set of Buick 300 heads. I'd likely piece something together. Oh, & a 400hp 350 in my Camaro.


BlownMGB-V8
Jim Blackwood
9406 Gunpowder Rd., Florence, KY 41042
(6468 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 12:59PM

Main British Car:
1971 MGB Blown,Injected,Intercooled Buick 340/AA80E/JagIRS

authors avatar
Re: Buick 300/350 stroker thread
Posted by: BlownMGB-V8
Date: December 06, 2016 12:37PM

Failures can occur in any engine block of course, and because Buick was a pioneer in thinwall casting, this new light weight engine did come at a price. Nobody could have predicted that hairline crack and I really felt for Chris. I had a 300 block that I didn't use because it had a perforation into the oil galley. It could have been repaired, but I went to the 340 instead. You don't hear of those type of failures very often and they happen with all engines. Unfortunate yes, but not really a big deal unless you just happen to draw the short straw as Chris did. Who knows how long those two had been like that, neither one would necessarily kill a lightly used commuter car, though they could cause other problems and early failure. The block does have to be carefully inspected, and a sonic check is highly recommended for any block that will be bored over 0.030". Magnaflux is always a good idea. I remember somebody posted a question somewhere if a 300 could be bored to 4" and the answer is No. There is not enough metal. You'd have to wet sleeve and oven braze it and why bother, the heads aren't designed to take advantage of a 4" bore. Doesn't the 5.3L LS use a 3.780" bore? So what's the big problem here?

As for his earlier issues, they struck me as just the sort of things you have to deal with when building any custom engine, and bear in mind Chris' car is a real beauty simply because he is a real perfectionist. Not all of us are quite as insistent, push it to quite that level, or are willing to spend as much. I'm not sure exactly what his issue was with the headers, might have been affected by his tire choice though, a larger diameter is more likely to hit. I didn't recall the steering being a big deal. But from my perspective with the 455 and the 340, I guess I wouldn't be.

As far as welding on injector bungs, he didn't absolutely have to do that. A carb works, as does TBFI. Some choices just require more work than others.

Chris was a pioneer as well. As was Mike Moor and Jim Stuart. Jim was able to get the engine under the RV8 hood, Mike went to a hood scoop, and lots of people are now using Dave's hood with the bump so it's a lot less of an issue than it once was. I also wonder if Chris might not sort of forget the challenges he had once he's gotten used to driving the car. I am pretty sure Mike would never go back. Jim, of course sold his cars but his opinion would still be valid.

As for intakes, yes, the 4bbl 300 aluminum intakes have gotten scarce and if you run across one you'd better buy it if you can. Nobody makes one. That doesn't mean we are out of options. Last I heard, flange spacers were still available from TRS to fit any BOPR intake. And while a 215 intake is a bit small, it should flow better than a 2 bbl 300 intake. the spacers are going to add some height, roughly 3/8". You could also hog out the top of the 2bbl intake and weld on a 4bbl flange. Or even build a custom intake. It's been done. Recall about a dozen years ago I recommended placing an Eaton blower in the lifter valley and running the ports over the top and now you can buy the LS that way.

As Carl mentioned, the 300 was produced until '67 and a lot of them are still around. '65 to '67 were iron engines and are in the 450 lb range, so a bit heavy for an MGB but not completely out of range considering the SBC conversions and LS conversions. An iron 300 has considerably better heads too, so some might consider that, and they were common with 4bbl intakes (also iron). They will accept the TA Rover heads, or any BOPR head so there is a path to more lightness. It's even possible to use the iron intake with the aluminum heads. Only been done a couple of times but is reported to work.

The 300 is just another option, you have to work with what is available. If you don't want or need the extra strength or power or reliability, choose accordingly. But for what you get, it's well worth the effort.

Jim



MGBV8
Carl Floyd
Kingsport, TN
(4511 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 11:32PM

Main British Car:
1979 MGB Buick 215

authors avatar
Re: Buick 300/350 stroker thread
Posted by: MGBV8
Date: December 06, 2016 01:21PM

The iron intake ports do not mate with the aluminum head ports exactly.

In case anyone needs a reminder the 215 has OEM forged rods.


Moderator
Curtis Jacobson
Portland Oregon
(4576 posts)

Registered:
10/12/2007 02:16AM

Main British Car:
71 MGBGT, Buick 215

authors avatar
Re: Buick 300/350 stroker thread
Posted by: Moderator
Date: December 07, 2016 02:03AM

Iron intake manifold? Seriously?

You got me curious. Assuming current eBay prices are typical, looks like a Buick 300 aluminum 4bbl sells for about $400 whereas a used Buick 215 4bbl sells for about $100. A brand new Buick 215 size Edelbrock manifold costs $278 with shipping. A brand new Buick 215 size Offenhauser costs $378 from Summit.

Rover EFI manifolds (sans plenum, for someone building their own) are a bargain at about $65. Of course that just gets you started, but you'll be going in a good direction.

I can imagine what flat "flange spacers" must look like to go between the Buick 300 cylinder heads and a BOPR manifold. What do you do at the ends? You must need some sort of curved spacers to fill between BOPR valley pan and engine block too, right? Does someone sell nice billet ones?


BlownMGB-V8
Jim Blackwood
9406 Gunpowder Rd., Florence, KY 41042
(6468 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 12:59PM

Main British Car:
1971 MGB Blown,Injected,Intercooled Buick 340/AA80E/JagIRS

authors avatar
Re: Buick 300/350 stroker thread
Posted by: BlownMGB-V8
Date: December 07, 2016 11:49AM

I like the way you are thinking Curtis, an EFI intake opens several possibilities. They are cheap and a pretty good design. To use any 215 intake with the 300 you need a tray of some sort to block off the lifter valley, as on the 300 the intake serves that function. I do not know that TRS sells a pan for that purpose and I don't know that they don't. On my 340 I bent a sheet of 1/4" aluminum to fit and cut ports in it, using it as a spacer for my blower intake. (With just a bit of mill work I'm pretty sure I could mount that intake on a 300.) It didn't need to be anywhere near that thick, but the extra stiffness made it easy to work with, but 1/8" or 12 gage would be plenty. Even 16 gage should be fine. I wouldn't go much thinner myself, but you could. The bends were made on a press brake. Simple 45 degree bends at the correct distance apart. I simply marked the ports, drilled the corners with a 3/8 drill and connected the dots. Pretty simple really. The bends do need to be accurately positioned.

You can use 4 long 3/8" bolts to position the intake above the heads and level it. It will sit on the bolts with a gap which you can then measure to get your required spacer thickness, subtracting gasket thicknesses as required. Gaskets and spacers can be stacked if preferred. Making the spacers is something anyone could do, using a gasket for the pattern.

Bear in mind, the bolts are not at a 90 degree angle to the intake flange, although the flange IS at 90 degrees to the deck. So your manifold bolt holes are oversized to allow tightening. One is a slot to give fore/aft position.

Jim


MGBV8
Carl Floyd
Kingsport, TN
(4511 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 11:32PM

Main British Car:
1979 MGB Buick 215

authors avatar
Re: Buick 300/350 stroker thread
Posted by: MGBV8
Date: December 07, 2016 11:51AM

Adapting an Intake Manifold from Another Engine

[victorylibrary.com]

Interesting info, but it is in error on the intake port layout for the Buick 300/340/350. It is the same as the 215. See below.

[www.roversd1.nl]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/07/2016 11:56AM by MGBV8.


roverman
Art Gertz
Winchester, CA.
(3188 posts)

Registered:
04/24/2009 11:02AM

Main British Car:
74' Jensen Healy, 79 Huff. GT 1, 74 MGB Lotus 907,2L

Re: Buick 300/350 stroker thread
Posted by: roverman
Date: December 07, 2016 12:55PM

Let's put this in perspective, sbc has only .06" more deck height than 215/RV8. It get's oem stroked up to 3.75", in a 400. Running 3.4-3.5" of stroke in a RV8, still allows for good rod length and ratio. The 305 sbc piston used a 3.450" stroke, so pin offset, to counter lateral thrust, should be acceptable. The Offy single plane 4bbl manifold is easy to port 300 size. With the big increase of low end torque, I suppose this manifold might make it easier to launch an LBC, without needing new rear tires way too often. In summation, how many/how cheap 300"/300lb. V8's are available from other makers ? Onward, roverman.
Goto Page: 123Next
Current Page: 1 of 3


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.