Register now to get rid of these ads!

chevy 6's

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by cool50chevy, Dec 24, 2012.

  1. cool50chevy
    Joined: Dec 24, 2012
    Posts: 7

    cool50chevy
    Member

    ive got a 1950 chevy truck it is now powered by a 54 model 235 im going to make a switch to either a 261 or 292 i have both engines the 261 is also a 54 year model and the 292 is like a 70 year model "note" the usual SBC route is not an option
    I would like to be pointed in direction of another thread maybe that compared the two engines or just someone out there with and oppinion or knowledge
    I know there both very good engines im looking more into torque and HP because im wanting to hotrod alittle
     
  2. 63 Avanti 3137
    Joined: Dec 23, 2010
    Posts: 160

    63 Avanti 3137
    Member

  3. RJC
    Joined: Dec 29, 2008
    Posts: 24

    RJC
    Member
    from hope bc

    Go with the 70 292 ,tons of power &easy to get 250-300 hp. the only prblem is it,s length, moving the rad forward
     
  4. R Pope
    Joined: Jan 23, 2006
    Posts: 3,309

    R Pope
    Member

    The 261 will bolt up to your bell, and all the linkage fits. 292 will require some fabrication.
     
    Register now to get rid of these ads!

  5. jalopy45
    Joined: Nov 5, 2005
    Posts: 527

    jalopy45
    Member

    Go on the Inliners forum, there is a tech section that covers the swaps, the 261 is the easiest as it uses the same bellhousing ,linkage and mounts the only c thing in common with the 292 is 6 cylinders and gm manufaturing, www.inliners.org
     
  6. Lobucrod
    Joined: Mar 22, 2006
    Posts: 4,118

    Lobucrod
    Alliance Vendor
    from Texas

    i vote 261 also. it fits in more ways than one.
     
  7. bcowanwheels
    Joined: Feb 22, 2010
    Posts: 319

    bcowanwheels
    Member

    Before you consider the 292 better take it apart, i went thru 4 blocks before i found 1 that would take a o/h and it still needed 1 sleeve in #1 hole. Chevy 6's all run hot in the first couple cylinders and hence wear those cylinders the most. I runa 160 degree termostat in all mine. Just fyi
    bob
     
  8. Mr48chev
    Joined: Dec 28, 2007
    Posts: 26,880

    Mr48chev
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    The 292 will fit if you shorten the shaft on the waterpump so you can run a V8 pulley which is somewhat shorter. The problem is you can't fit much of a fan in there and an electric fan might be a better choice.
     
  9. cool50chevy
    Joined: Dec 24, 2012
    Posts: 7

    cool50chevy
    Member

    thanks for advice i actually have a 5 speed out of 92' chevy truck so that has the 292 swap covered but ive been leaning toward the 261 because for one theres not many around but the 292 parts are more readily available and cheaper so idk
     
  10. Normbc9
    Joined: Apr 20, 2011
    Posts: 1,123

    Normbc9
    Member

    Both engines are easy to fit into the pickup and I know of a '50 Chevy pickup from Sturgis, SD that has it built and shifts at 9,000 RPM's and it is impressive. Of these photo there are 2 261's and 2 292's. When built right, all can make some big impressions. I have an Alcohol burning 261 that is setup with a full Roller cam kit and side draft Weber's. It isn't a slouch either. Mike Kirby at Sissell's in West Covina did the head and that made a huge performance difference.
    Normbc9
     

    Attached Files:

  11. cool50chevy
    Joined: Dec 24, 2012
    Posts: 7

    cool50chevy
    Member

    wowthanks for the pics thats awesome my plans for 292 if thats what i use was .60 over flattops reworked head and possibly alil forced induction with that ofcourse a built bottom end
     
  12. Big T
    Joined: Aug 29, 2006
    Posts: 638

    Big T
    Member
    from Florida

    I'd go with the 261.
     
  13. donsz
    Joined: Nov 23, 2010
    Posts: 205

    donsz
    Member

    As stated a number of times, the 261 bolts right in. I had one with 2 2bbls, dual exhaust, and HEI. Good strong engine, liked it very much. I think the trade-off is that the 261 is strong-bolts right in and the 292 is probably a better engineered engine (more mains) but it requires more work to install. I don't think you would be unhappy with either choice.
    don
     
  14. MikeRose
    Joined: Oct 7, 2004
    Posts: 1,570

    MikeRose
    Member
    from Yuma, AZ

    Isn't that one photo of a 194 in kirk's legion special?
     
  15. blucar
    Joined: Nov 3, 2009
    Posts: 118

    blucar
    Member

    The 292 is by far the better of the two engines.. The advantage, and/or disadvantage of the 292 is that it will bolt up to the later model transmissions, auto or stick.. Of course this will require changing the rear end and springs to eliminate the closed torque tube drive line..
    I had a built 292 in a '37 GMC for awhile.. It had a Clifford intake... (6=8), 4 barrel carb, headers, a TH350 trans, Jag front and rear suspension.. The engine put out over 300hp on a dyno.. The truck would run off and hide from most V8's.. Unfortunately a man offered me twice what I had in the truck...needless to say he bought the truck..
    I have gathered up another '37 GMC 1/2 ton, a couple of 292's, and a TH350... Still thinking about the Jag suspension in lieu of a modern front clip and conventional rear axle..
    I had no trouble fitting the 292 into my '37, just made sure I used a short water pump and an electric fan...
    About 60 years ago I put a 270 GMC in a '38 Chevy 2 dr. sdn.. just had to move the radiator to the front side of the core support.. There was nothing in eastern Idaho that could catch that car....
     
  16. jalopy45
    Joined: Nov 5, 2005
    Posts: 527

    jalopy45
    Member

    Last edited: Dec 25, 2012
  17. have the same problem with mine ! other than electric any blade options found? that fit? (late water pump bolt pattern on later is larger than stock fan blades on the 216-292 I've found ) not to hi jack but seems pertinent :confused::)
     
  18. cool50chevy
    Joined: Dec 24, 2012
    Posts: 7

    cool50chevy
    Member

    what is everyones oppinions on where to pick up go fast goodies for the 235/261 engines? i know about clifford and EGGE machine i know theres probly tons more
     
  19. pdq67
    Joined: Feb 12, 2007
    Posts: 787

    pdq67
    Member

    WAY off topic but to me still interesting!

    I seem to have read somewhere that the old 308 inch flathead Hornet 6-banger can be bored and stroked out to 355 inches or so.

    Just food for thought.

    And if I was to hop up a 6-banger Gimmie, it would be the 300+ incher engine!

    Add a set of TUNED trip carbs, a "3/4 race cam", (i.e., 275 to 280 duration old school cam), plane the head to get the CR up there some, along with decent valves and springs.

    Then install either a homemade split exhaust manifold or a set from someplace like Cliffords and full duals with Smitties out the back!.

    Put an M-20 behind it along with 4.88 or 5.13 gears and go new car 1/8 mile hunting!!

    pdq67
     
  20. Snarl
    Joined: Feb 16, 2007
    Posts: 1,639

    Snarl
    Member


    On a 292, if you need to shorten up the space in front, use a 1980-89 style 292 pump instead of the earlier pumps with the large bypass hose. The 80-89 pump is the same depth as the 194-250 pump. Pullies and balancers can be an issue to get lined up, but I can give advice on combinations that will work.

    Or you can ditch the bypass hose alltogether and use a 250 pump, provided you drill a hole in the front of the block for the bypass as found on the low deck engines.
     
  21. Snarl
    Joined: Feb 16, 2007
    Posts: 1,639

    Snarl
    Member

    The 261 has a little better torque curve than a 235, but not as much as people would have you believe. If you have a 235 that is solid, then switching to a 261 isn't worth the expense and effort unless you just really wanted to. If you were planning on a rebuild of the 235, but you have a 261 available, then go with the 261.

    Also, unless the 261 is a '54 or '55 first series, it's going to be too long also. Best solution is to buy an adapter plate to allow you to use the earlier style water pump. This will make everything fit, and the centerline of the water pump will be centered on the radiator. shortening the later '55-62 pumps works, but it puts the fan about 4" lower than it should be and can lead to cooling issues if stuck in traffic on a hot day. Moving the radiator to the front edge of the core support will allow you to run the stock '55-62 pump, but you will still have the centering issue.
     
  22. KIRK!
    Joined: Feb 20, 2002
    Posts: 12,032

    KIRK!
    Member

    Yep.
     

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2020 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.