Chevy guys... 262 V8 questions

i'm not talkin about the 265 from the 55/56 Chevys but the little 262 V8 that i believe came in Monzas for a while (a year or two maybe???). what can you tell me about them? a guy i know has one with 305 heads, says it runs good. i just wondered what anybody knew about this little guy since they seem to be quite rare. are they pretty much interchangeable with all the other SBCs, parts wise??

just lookin for some input, especialy from anyone who may have had one.

thanks.

 

I think Dr. J built one for his truck...you may want to pm him....

Brian

 

Tiny bore, short stroke, smog-era engine. Bigger-valved heads won't clear the small bores. They don't move much air, so they don't make much power.

But, they are small-block Chevys...generally considered to be the worst versions of the breed. But, yes, external parts will swap, and external dimensions are typical sbc. But if I had one, I'd not brag about it...In fact, I'd probably say it was a 305 or 307, since both of those had more performance potential...which isn't saying too much. LOL

You're also right about the Monza applications...that's where it seems the majority of them ended up. I've heard they were also used in some fullsize Impala/Caprice B-bodies of the '80s era, but I've only seen 305s and 350s in these cars.

It';s a thinwall casting with minimal potential and therefore value. If someone wanted to give me one, I might charge them to take it off their hands. It's too easy to get a 350 that could do everything better than the 262.


Scotch~!

 

Had a small Monte Carlo with one for one of our boys at college years ago. It wouldn't pull the proverbial sick ho off a pisspot.

Charlie

 

If I remember right, depending on the year, they were rated between 110 - 125 HP. Not much more than the V6 that was offered in the same years.

Not much you can do with them.

 

I have one sitting in my shop collecting dust - one word describes this powerhouse POWERLESS JUNK unless you have one laying around for free like I do.

Maybe I am a little harsh here, Dr J and the other Gods helped me out here and there is some power to be made. With a dual plane manifold, 305 heads help out, a small cam (268ish), small 4bbl under 600 you can get decent power in a light car and decent milage. Mine was in my 61 Chevy Truck with a single plane and it would run the interstate 70mph with decent power and average 17+mpg, but couldnt turn a tire to save its life

I plan on using this in my modified /RPU /Bucket contraption I am building

 

It was 1976 that Monza made those engines. My dad has one in his 28 A roadster hiboy and it works great. Its been in there since the last major rebuild of the car in '87. Sure there's ways to make more power by puttin in a 350 but for value these are a good lil motor. Dads has a edelbrock performer manifold, and a 500 cfm edelbrock 4 bbl carb, mild RV cam in it and thats it. It runs a 3spd std tranny and 308 gears, and in that rod its a blast. You can smoke the tires into 3rd gear, and is a blast to drive around town. Hiway it is known to get about 28mpg. Sure top end fades out, but the bottom end is fun.

 

Has a stroke of 3.1 vs 3.0 in 302 sbc, if you could find short enough rods.....

 

As George said that can make you a large journal 302 or very close to that with a 350 block. Easy to trim a little off the top if you have forged pistons. I haven't tried it with cast so I don't know how that works.

 

Most were in Monzas. Same displacement as a 4.3 V6. If you wanted to save gas but still want the sound and look of a cool V8 this would be good. Don't put it in anything that a 6 cyl couldn't pull because it won't make any more power than a 4.3V6 and it's a little heavier. But it is lighter than a chevy straight six! One thing about it. Assuming a proper build and maintenance, you could never tear it up! If you want speed and torque only, look for something else.

 

uncle had one
got around 26 mpg with a 3sp auto
had 200k on it when he sold it

 

If you have a boat, you now have an anchor.

 

Those were 350s not 262s. Came standard in the wagons too. We had one (wagon) as a shop vehicle in the 90s, sumbich was stout for a big ole boat!

 

I had one in an o/t '76 Monza hatch back, 4 speed. Put an SP-2P manifold and a 450 Economaster Holley and a Sid Erson RV cam and got 33 mpg. Loved that car.

It out ran my brothers '72 Camaro, stock 350, 2 bbl, auto.

 

Ahhh, a necro post!

 

I think they came in Malibu's also 78-79 or so, that combo had to be painfully weak.

 

Those were 267's. A friend of mine had one in a Malibu.

 

IIRC, Stringfellow and Kirk were using a highly modified turbocharged small engine when they went 263 mph and set a record at Bonneville in 1995. I was there and also had built the driveshaft for that car.
Don used a couple sizes of very small engines to set records. Seems like 10 of them or so over the years.

 

Then there was the 267 a 305 with a 1/4 inch less bore.

 

The dude was correct. They did build a 4.3L small block from 94-96. I used to be a heavy line mechanic at a GM dealer in 1994. I worked on plenty of them.

Here is a quick cut and paste from wikipedia....

"A 260 in3 (4.3 L) was based on a 305 in3 with updated block architecture to be Generation II and a reduced 3 inches (76 mm) stroke. It was designated the L99, and was introduced in 1994 for the Chevrolet Caprice. It was externally identical to the LT1, but the bore was decreased to 3.736 inches (94.9 mm) and the stroke to 3 inches (76 mm) giving it a displacement of 263 in3. The pistons used in the L99 were the same as the ones used in the Vortec 5000, but 5.94 inches (151 mm) connecting rods were used to compensate for the shorter stroke. This was the base engine used on all 1994-1996 Chevrolet Caprice Sedans, including the Police Package vehicles.

Like the LT1, it features sequential fuel injection, reverse-flow cooling, and an optical ignition pickup. Output is 200 hp (150 kW) and 245 lb·ft (332 N·m). Due to its smaller displacement, it provides better fuel economy than the 5.7 L LT1, but at reduced horsepower & torque levels."

 

I think Dave MacDonald and Lionel Pitts used a 262 block and 265 crank to make "E"one year at Bonneville. It broke and they went bigger.

 

Google Richard Graves, Long Beach, Ca. I think he built more than one hot rod with this diminutive Chevy engine.

 

Sorry man, but dude was not correct. Read a little further on the Wiki link. I'm not gonna type it all here, 'cause it's off topic for this site anyways.
No 262 LT1. period. If you wanna believe that there was, cool. Enjoy.

 

Here in Sweden the 262 V8 has one single claim to fame. Thanks to being so weak and small, it is the CSB that puts out the least torque - still a fairly high torque compared to all the comparatively small 4 cylinder engines we are used to, but in V8 numbers it's horribly low.

In most cases that would be bad. However, when there are rules limiting how much power and torque you can (easily) register a car with, a hopelessly underpowered engine can come in handy. The most prominent example is that Volvo 240 can have 220hp and 275Nm, and the 262 V8 just scrapes by the torque limit. Due to smog laws the 262 can only be used in pre 1976 cars, but that leads to a number of 1975 240's legally registered with the 262 V8.
In itself a completely useless build, the stock 4-cylinder was probably faster and the handling doesn't improve by a twice as heavy engine in a car that's slightly nose heavy to begin with - the only improvement is the sound! But most chevy smallblocks share the same general look. So, once you have had the car inspected and registered with the 262, you go home, rip it out, and replace it with a 350 with exterior numbers altered to look like a 262. Once registered, the inspections the car has to pass are much less strict, and usually you won't have a problem.

Somtimes a horrible lack of power can be a good thing.

 

You are correct, they sucked too.

 

Now that I can look at what Donnie Stringfellow sent me, and he and Jim Kirk signed...
Based on small cid late SBC blocks and stock cranks available.
C/BGCC 1994 262.081 Fuel
D Gas 1994 253.221
D Fuel 1995 251.395
D Gas 1995 243.370
E Gas 2001 248.938
You can make power with the right amount of air and fuel with a small combo and parts, and a sleek car, or make the air scream like hell while you through it slower.....

 

The 262 was strictly a Chevrolet Monza-Buick Skyhawk-Olds Starlight/Stardust/Starfire/Starbird/Star Whatever (I think that's the lineup) V-8 engine. It was the 2-6-7 that came in the "other" model cars and some trucks. Of the two, the 262 VS the 267, the 262 "probably" has a little more going for it (shorter stroke and a tiny bit larger bore), but not much. Neither engine had "performance" versions; all were heavily emission ladened, 2 barrel equipped, GM embarrassments. Sure, they can be "hopped up", some. You can pretty much forget about using any kind of larger valve size heads due to the small cylinder bores, and inherent valve shrouding or cylinder wall/block-valve contact. I think the hardest part of building one of these engines now, is just finding one. No one wanted/wants to use one, then or now, and 305's are everywhere. They do have a place in NHRA Stock Class racing, but that's about it. If you have one, and need an engine "just to get by", then use it till something else comes along. Some months back, on that auction site we all know and love, was a NOS set of TRW, forged, high compression pistons for a 262 V-8 (standard size! and NOT the 262 V-6); I considered buying them, but someone else wanted them more than I did. Wonder how that's working out for him?
I am Butch/56sedandelivery.

 

I had one. It was stock 262 block & pieced together with whatever was laying around. Ran great. Smoked like a chimney. Was in a 51 Ford for a short while. Replaced with a 350. Sold to a guy who was buying them to build some kind of small tractor puller, or something. Said they were the hot ticket because of displacement limitations.

 

I have a friend with one in a fiberglass '32 coupe. Was built as a cruiser/driver and works for him just fine. Claims 30 MPG on a long trip.