Technical 265 Chevy build ideas

I've got a friend that is planning to build a 265 sbc. His target for this is that it still be very streetable with a nice healthy sound at idle and decent power at all rpm range. He is planning to put on a fuel injection assy (similar to 90's tuned port). This will be going into a 55 Chevy car.
Do any of you have suggestions... cam specs? He has a set of 50's power Pac heads as well as 1.94 double humps. Let's hear your thoughts.

 

IMO, the best thing he can do is find a 1957, 265 block; they will accept a block mounted starter motor should he decide he wants a later model automatic transmission. And, they will take a .125 overbore to 283 specs, and come with the updated oiling. The 55-56 blocks would need an adapter to mount a starter motor to. Really hard to build any kind of compression ratio with these small bore, short stroke engines; cast pistons are easily found, forged, not so much, and would need to be special ordered. As far as FI goes, I'd use one from the aftermarket that essentially takes the place of a carburetor in how they bolt on. Not going to need any bigger than 1.84 replacement valves in PP heads (55.6 to 60 CC chamber heads, unless you wind up with some truck PP heads that may have 70 CC chambers, and you don't want those), and the 1.94 double humps have larger, 64 CC combustion chambers that will just drop the CR even more. Dart used to make some 49 cc chamber heads that would help boost the CR. With flat top, 4 valve relief pistons, you're only looking at 8.0 to 9.0:1 CR, at best. Hunt down some steel shim head gaskets and don't use the "universal", one size fits all, head gaskets; they just kill the CR even more. 262, 267, 305 Chevrolet engines all came from the factory with steel shim head gaskets; it may take some hunting to find replacements, but it's the way to go Surfacing the heads and decking the block will help to boost the CR also.. I have tons of 265/283 parts I've collected for my projects over the years; any time I see something I "think" I "might" need, I grab them. In all honesty, u nless he's really dedicated to the idea of a 265, I'd start with at least a 327, and use the double hump heads on it. Parts are a LOT easier to come by too. I am Butch/56sedandelivery.

 

No 265 blocks have side mounts so you need to consider this.
The 57 265 block is the same casting number as the 283 [casting #3731548] so they all bore to 283. [thats what the factory did]

The 55 block doesn't have an oil filter pad ,and both 55-56 265 blocks have pulse oiling system on the rear cam bearing. You will need to put a groove in the rear of the camshaft [or modify the rear cam bearing oil groove to use a modern camshaft] . They also have an odd ball rear cam freeze plug.

These engines also have rope rear oil seals that leak so this needs converting to neoprene.

You can not stroke an early 265-283 because the shape of the cylinders at the bottom [unless you use a custom cut down crank.

Find a 1962 or newer 283 and sonic test the bores. [or a 327] , Then line-bore it to fit a large journal 350 crank. Use some 65 327/283 60cc power pack heads and fit 1.84 valves [305 chevy intakes]

The engine will look like an old timey 283 but is displaced at 350. The power pack heads will make very responsive just "off the throttle"

It would be very streetable

 

two stories. Things have changed, since then. But you can still do it the old way, mostly, if you try hard.

 

second story

 

Well if all that info doesn't scare the OP away nothing will, no wonder a lot of now a days rodders buy crate engines.......................................................

 

Great thread as my son will hopefully soon be starting a 1956 265 (mild) build.
Great information!

 

It costs more to build a 265 than a 350.If you do one there is a replacement neoprene rear main seal that replaces the factory rope seal.The modern rope material is smaller than the 50"s rope so they are prone to leak.Do that up date.

 

I'll be darn, I've seen and heard the remarks about a "3/4 cam" and there it is in print and a explanation.

 

I only read the first article so far, but it sure is good to read factual, well written and researched material.
But interestingly, the writer didn't seem to know that the Power Pak option had different heads.

It's also impressive how fast speed equipment came on line in those days. In July 1955 you could buy an Edelbrock 3 x 2 intake!

 

Thankyou guys for all the suggestions here. I have zero experience with 265 and limited with 283 even. He is a fantastic body guy but limited in his engine ability. He is also a big 55-57 Chevy guy and was pretty determined to begin with to use a 265. That is until he has since opened up the 265 he was thinking of using and has found it to be in near mint original shape. He is leaning towards a 327 now as I've suggested to him.

 

Post 3 and 4 tell you pretty well all you need to know. Personally I'd tuck the 265 back in the corner to wait for a stone stock correct year body that dearly needs it to have a "correct" restoration.
A later 283 or that 327 would be a better candidate. I've got to agree on the bolt on replace the 4 barrel fi. With the right aircleaner it may be well hidden enough that no one really notices it but you have all of it's advantages.

 

It didn’t take long for everybody to realize what a vastly superior engine the Chevrolet was!
Ok, I’ll duck now before the shooting starts!


Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

just a fact....no need to duck. History shows how well it worked out.

 

I don't know where in Canada you are but I have a virgin, 1964, never assembled 327 bare block with new factory pistons and rings for sale. Also a standard bore 1963, 283 block, an unlimited supply of original '55 '56 '57 chevy parts! Lots of heads, cranks, carbs, manifolds, etc.! If you live north of Washington State it might be worth a look!

 

I worked over a few of these many moons ago........If my memory serves me correctly.......those early 265 motors need a notch in the rear cam journal to get oiling correct. I used to mill the notch in the new 283 "Duntov" cams.....pretty easy to do. Don't know what happens if you skip this step.

 

Thanks Jim! I think Chevrolet’s are the best engines, but I know how some people get with the “every body has a Chevy” stuff.


Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

No oil to top end I believe.

 

Correct.

 

Easier to connect the channels in the rear cam journal; makes them full pressure oiling instead of pulse oiling. The 57 blocks don't require either one of those mods. I am Butch/56sedandelivery.

 

Listen to these guys^^^^^^^, well most of them anyway.
The only thing left is an appointment with your accountant, and don't make your decision based on the old "265, 283, 327's cost more to build than a 350" blather, as an individual you'll do what you're gonna do, regardless of the cost.

No doubt crate engines have their benefits, one being an attractive warranty.
In certain circles, the term "crate engine" has become a near mantra and just rolls off the tongue but in other circles it is close to blasphemy!

 

The 265's are great little motors. As said above, the notch in the cam and the rear seal are the only real difference. The rest is sbc.

 

I am not promoting "crate motors", never have bought one, well at least not an American motor one. Still do it the old fashion way! I can see where the machine shop prices could scare the young in's off the idea of building from scratch..............................................

 

If y’all have access to the motor trend app check out this episode of hot rod garage they talk about building a 265


Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

Wayne Jesel, in his re-creation of the 1956 Chevrolet, Sedan Delivery, Junior Stock Class, drag car, "Yoo Hoo Too", has a pretty good documentation of his 265 engine build. Course, there's NO way the engine would be legal per 60's rules, let alone the current ones. But, it's a good build just the same, right down to the factory dual quad setup, and the Stahl fender-well headers. Google and Facebook both have articles on the car's, and engine/trans, builds. My plan is very similar for my 57 block based 265, Pseudo-Junior Stock engine, and using one of my own aluminum Powerglide transmissions. It's interesting, to say the least, after having been building 327 and 350 engines for the last 35 years or so, and then building a 265; just handling the 265 crankshaft alone, and comparing one to a 350 crankshaft, is like comparing a lightweight boxer/fighter, to a heavyweight. Same with the early 265/283/327 small journal connecting rods, placed up against the second design, small journal rods, and to the large journal rods. In fact, "back-in-the-day", they used to use the early, lightweight connecting rods, just because they were "light", and sacrificed that over strength of the later style/second design rods. Using the lighter weight components, the engines would rev quicker. Comparing the #5306, 265 Power Pack heads, to even low performance 350 heads, really is eye-opening on the intake/exhaust, port sizes; those 265 ports are SMALL!!! I've sold some of my 265 parts, like to Mike Z here on the HAMB, who has re-created the George Cureton, 1956 Chevrolet, Sedan Delivery, "Tokyo Rose" (in the early color scheme)-(I don't believe he has actually used any of it on the 350 he has in the car however), Pseudo-Junior Stock Class drag car. Lots of photos on here, in magazines, and on the net. Same with Yoo Hoo Too. I am Butch/56sedandelivery.

 

Mike has a 327 in the “Rose”

 

That sure brought back memories of racing my 57 Nomad in stock eliminator with a factory dual quad 283 in 1967. Before I went Modified eliminator and started running D/MP and later C/MP with a bigger small block. Still staying with small journal stuff.
In 1969 I went to a big block and it was 40 years before I ran a small block in anything other than a dirt late model.

 

Odd, in the second article it says the compression ratio of the '56 engine is 9-1/4 to 1, but later that it is 8 to 1.
Nonetheless a very good article.

 

Might be that there were two different engines available in 1956?

 

Yes
The difference between 205hp,single Rochester ,and 210hp ,single Carter bigger cam and 225hp 2x4 Carters and the bigger cam.