64 intake on 65 engine

Discussion in 'Small Block Tech' started by Blue Wagon, May 27, 2021.

  1. Blue Wagon

    Blue Wagon Well-Known Member

    Will a 64 300 intake fit on 65 300 engine?
     
  2. Jim Nichols

    Jim Nichols Well-Known Member

    If you use the 64 gaskets.
     
  3. telriv

    telriv Founders Club Member

    Yes, BUT it will be a performance loss due to the smaller ports. I guess it could be "Ported" to help in that department, but who wants to take a chance on making it worse.

    Tom T.
     
  4. wkillgs

    wkillgs Gold Level Contributor

    Yes, I've done it. As Tom mentioned the '64 ports are a little smaller, maybe 1/8". I can't definitively say if the 4 bbl alum intake is an improvement over a 65 2bbl intake or not. It's been about 20 years since I did the swap.
     
    SpecialWagon65 likes this.
  5. Blue Wagon

    Blue Wagon Well-Known Member

    I thought I read some where the performance specs where the same on a 64 4bl engine and a 65 4bl engine?
     
  6. wkillgs

    wkillgs Gold Level Contributor

    The 64 300 had aluminum heads and intake, 65 was cast iron.
     
  7. SpecialWagon65

    SpecialWagon65 Ted Nagel

    64 V-8 -300 cid 250 hp;335 torque; 11:1 compression ( al heads and intake) RP 4GC Carb

    65 V-8 -300 cid 250 HP 335 torque; 10.25:1 compression. Carter AFB Carb

    Both were the optional 4bbl engine.
    Data from Ethyl Corp "Brief Passenger Car Data" 1964 and 1965
     

    Attached Files:

  8. Alssb

    Alssb Well-Known Member

    Info from TA Performance:
    1964 Intake dia. 1.63" Exhaust dia. 1.31"
    1965 Intake dia. 1.812" Exhaust dia. 1.375"
     
    SpecialWagon65 likes this.
  9. jcc

    jcc Well-Known Member

    I recently put a 64 intake and 64 heads on my 65 shortblock, so not exactly what op was asking about. I also put Poston's headers on at same time, so I don't know what apples-to-apples comparison is. It feels a lot stronger at low rpms, but I think it is running out of air at 4500-5000 rpm because of the smaller intake valve. I am also running a Holley 600 cfm carb with an adapter plate. The adapter plate acts somewhat like a Nascar restrictor plate.
     
  10. Jim Blackwood

    Jim Blackwood Well-Known Member

    The difference in the port sizes isn't much. I'd say closer to 1/16" than 1/8". Odds are pretty good that the 4bbl aluminum intake will give more power than the 2bbl cast iron one.

    The aluminum 4bbl intake is much more valuable.

    Jim
     
  11. FJM568

    FJM568 Well-Known Member

    I put the 64 intake on my 66 300 with a 500 AFB. Woke that little motor up. Originally a 2bbl. Ran it like that back in the early 90s.
     
  12. Cast-eye-300

    Cast-eye-300 New Member

    FJM568 did you match the ports or slap it on and run it?
     
  13. avmechanic

    avmechanic Well-Known Member

    I ran a 64' 300 aluminum 4 barrel intake on my 66' 300 back in the day. It The ports were bigger on the intake then the heads. I used the 64' intake gaskets. It bolted on no problem. Only issue I had was that the first time I bolted it up it had a vacuum leak. I took it off again and coated the metal gaskets with a fine layer of silicone then installed again. It ran fine after. I would use spray tack gasket spray nowadays. I ran a 625 Carter AFB carb with it. I also did dual 2 1/4" exhaust at the same time. The car ran significantly better. It was a lot stronger. These days I would maybe gasket match the head ports to the intake ports but they were not that big of a difference. Mine ran fine without doing that.
    Greg
     
    Cast-eye-300 likes this.

Share This Page