65’ 355 (original to car) 73’ 350 (code XB) 69’ 400 (code RR) I have recently had the good fortune of meeting an older street racer and shortly found myself in possession of (a long bed pick up truck and trailer full of parts) a set of rebuilt 300 heads and a 300 crank turned 10 under. In addition to the 300 parts I have a rebuilt 73’ 350 and a rebuilt 69’ 400 bored 30 over. I did not receive a build sheet for either engine (which I am due to receive any day now), but determined the safe thing would be to dissemble and check each engine before proceeding with any set path forward regardless of which of the two engines I decide to use. Anyway, all else being equal which engine would you guys go through and install, and what would the rebuild consist of if you were to do the swap. I’m just looking for a general consensus and what way you guys would rebuild the particular engine you pick. Each engine is basically complete except for a decent intake for both and the 400 has a center sump oil pan which I would have to replace to install into the Skylark. Of course the 300 is currently in the car and runs with no known adverse issues. I thought I would swap one of the two engines in (after a thorough going through and check), run the car with that particular engine and slowly over time rebuild the 300 and store it. Anyway any ideas, thoughts, insight and information you guys could provide would be valuable to me. Doug
Most folks here are going to vote for more horsepower. However, if the cost of gas and mpg is a factor, then you'll benefit by staying with the little 300.
Those are all good engines so it comes down to what do you want? Those are all going to be different driving experiences, different costs to setup, and different costs to run. How a guy builds a car is a personal matter that depends on what he wants and what he can afford, so what do you want it to be and what do you want to spend? What do you want to spend when you take it for a drive? Like Jeff said, the 300 is going to be cheap to run and it's respectable to drive. The 350 could be a bit more stout, but it'll cost you to do it and it will cost more to run. Being a 73 motor it needs to be a bit more than stock to be much of an upgrade from the 300. The 400 would be a kick to drive in that 65, but all the costs will be quite a bit more.
Dave, I just want to build a stout, reliable engine that will hold it's own and provide me with some trouble free motoring around. Something that might surprise some people if I decide to get on her. Nothing super intense, just be able to hold it's own and something I can be proud to show. May never hit the strip, but something I can jump in, drive for two or three hours and not worry about having issues with, thats all. Doug
I'm in a 350 mood today. Putting one in my 65 sedan was butter smooth easy. Putting a 455 in my wagon did not go as smooth. I am going to rebuild my stock 300 someday and put it back in the sedan so I can sell it...but also to experience the 300 power. Good problemm to have.
Well Doug, based on that statement I would think the 350 would be a good choice. I know that it can be made to do what you want, probably keep gas consumption down a bit over the 400 also, plus it should be cheaper to setup in the 65. You might take a look at the sticky thread on building the 300 though, just to compare small block options with a few more ideas to bounce around. The 300 is a great engine, but for that hot rod feel and sound that you are going to want, the 350 might be cheaper and easier to get there. I know that I have a 350 from a 69GS sitting in my garage that I have though about rebuilding for the next 65 that comes rolling into my garage (unless I can fund a nailhead conversion).
It's no secret that I love the 300's. The only issue now is that Poston's is out of business, there aren't any decent headers available. sure sandersons (and I think Headers by ed) offer shorties, but in my opinion they're not worth it. But a built 300 with a cam upgrade, full length headers, a good tune, and a TH350 or manual tranny can give pretty respectable performance and still give 20+mpg.
Dave, You make some good pionts to consider. I can not argue the point that the 350 would be an easier install, but after I get done building it and installed do you think I'll wish I had the extra power from the 400? Doug
Big Mat, I hear where you are coming from, the 300 is a great engine, which cam do you perfer to use with this motor. I acquired a new Isky cam for the 300, but I have to do some research on it (I got it without any paperwork, but I believe they guy that I got it from). I just haven't gotten around to it yet! Doug
Crower has a great selection of cams for the 300/340. Aluminum heads will be available for the 300/340 from TA Performance. They're not cheap, but they will breathe!! Another cool option is to install a 340 crank into a 300 block. Again not cheap, but you get a lot of cubes in a small, light package. My personal favorite choice would be to install a turbocharger on a 300. :grin: A boardmember is already planning such a build! :bglasses:
No perfect answer. No matter what you build and put in there, there will be times you wish you would have built it to have more power and sound, and there will be times when you wish you would have built it more economical. Gas could hit $5 a gallon again soon, or go higher. Not a huge deal if you are taking the car down town for dinner and to have a little fun, but if you want to drive it a long distance or just drive it a lot, you will wish you had the 300 and were getting 20 MPG. That's why I say it's a very personal choice what a guy does with his car. Best answer is to have two or three 65's so that you have a fun car for whatever the situation is but most of us have money limits. You will love the car whatever you do so you have some thinking about what your driving is going to be and what you want to spend to build it and to drive it.
Since you used the word "stout" and you said "hold it's own", I will say there is no question you want the 400. While this will undoubtedly bruise some feelings, the 300" is a wimp. The 350 can run, but if you are going to the trouble of a swap, might as well go with the 400. The 400 will be reliable as any of the engines and will have a far easier time "holding it's own".
The 300 is not a wimp in the 11.1 version, in its class at the strip,,, what is a wimp is the gears that Buick put behind it... a 2.93 peg leg just dont get it....:laugh: I would either build a super good 300 or put a good nailhead [basic factory 65 GS set up] in that car.... either one of those routes will increase value and hold together.... but what ever the engine , a lower gear with a posi....
Well, I guess it depends on how each of us quantify "wimp". The only way to clear that up would be to discuss actual measured performance. For me, anything that won't run well into the 13s is a wimp. I don't think a 300" will run 13s in the quarter mile downhill in a hurricane without nitrous.
OOOOk,,,, lets back up and look at my post,,, :laugh: I used the phrase, ''in its class''.... and ''in its class'', back in the day I had good success at wining .... even won ''Little eliminator'' on one occasion... and I agree, it aint gonna be a 13 second car.... but in G/stock/automatic it should be able to do as well as any other.... but nitrous did not exist back then:Smarty: :laugh: and with the non forged rods, it probably would take it apart anyway....:Brow: :Brow:
I was more focussed on what the OP said his goals were than anything. So, my advice was directed at what he said he wanted.
I understand,,,, and its cool,,,,:Brow: for that matter I added some too.... never hurts sometimes a guy gets a new idea that way.....:laugh:
Sean in his '64 Lark was in the mid?? 12's with his 300 powered Lark. Nothing super special other than mostly DETAILS.
Doc, Tom, Steve and Dave, I don't mean to pick on the 300, it is a torquey little engine. It is also (IMHO) harder to get parts for than the other two engines. I would think that between the 350 and 400, that the 350 just might squeek out with more stock parts (due to the number of engines produced), but that they might be equal in aftermarket and performance parts. The 350 from what I've heard would not require any additional oiling mods, where as the 400 would require the oil mods equal to the bigger BBB engines. Am I correct in this line of thought? Doug
