(800) 853-2651
SHOP NOW

Chevy 6 cylinder....

C

centash

Well-known Member
Contemplating an upgrade to my 1977 Nova....instead of going the SBC way, I thought
I would upgrade the 250 in it to a 292 and build that engine up a bit....so, a
couple of questions.....will the 292 fit, being a bit taller than the 250?....will
the oil pan on the 292 interfere with the suspension and steering on the car?
...and will the flex plate from the 250 fit to the crankshaft on the 292 which was
originally fitted to a manual trans? ....

Thanks for all answers or suggestions!

Ben
 
I think the answer is yes to all your question. I have right behind me in this room a 292 that is bored 60 over sand a high pro. cam and a shaved head to up compression but I don't see it ever being finished.
 
That sounds like the engine I need....kinda far to get it....I may just need some of your advice as I build mine.

Ben
 
Working strictly from memory from a long time ago...

A 292 is about 2 inches taller, so if the 250 is still in it, you can take a hood clearance measurement.

I 'think' the 250 oil pan will fit, but never tried. The bolt pattern should be the same but could be crank clearance problems

The crank bolt pattern, bell housing bolt pattern, starter mount, all should be the same. Best look at the flywheel and harmonic balancer for external balancing, not sure, just something to check. That could be a problem as the truck flywheel is larger.

Be sure the block has motor mount bosses on the sides.

Not sure how far you intend to take the engine, but the original intake set up was not good. Center cylinders got more fuel than the ends. If it's in the budget, devising multi port injection would be a huge improvement, or at least 3 carbs or 3 throttle bodies.
 
I raced 292 engines on 1/4 mile dirt track 50 years ago. My engine was bored to 4, stock bore was 3.875. Yes, you could do that. Total 311 ci. 12 1/2 to 1 pistons, big valves, Man a fre intake with 3 2GC Rochester carburetors.aluminum Weber flywheel Modified weighed 2100# Engine dynoed at 300 hp. What a ride.. Chevy engines after 1962 all used same bolt pattern wether it was 4,6 or 8 cylinders. Flywheel and. Starter also worked. 292 uses different Right side motor mount location than 250, everything else is the same.I still have a stash of engines buried in the garage.
 
the 292 has a longer stroke than the 250 with the same pistons. it is a real gas burner too. it is more of a work horse engine than for speed. it also has a bigger carb bore. and the motor mount on the right side is not the same location. i used to play around with them engines 40 years ago. even some combines used the 292. i even saw one in a massey 44 pulling tractor with 2 transmissions. they are a power house but as a highway unit its not something i would do.
 
I would consider a 283 or 305, 327. Before a Truck 292.
Better mileage and more parts available

Or keep it the same.

And add a 340 Duster to your fleet.
 
As I recall, air cleaner clearance is tight, RH motor mount needs to be relocated, fuel line is different because 292 has mount and pump swapped. Oil pan should work but you will need to reuse the oil pump pickup for your pan. Balancers are different. Flywheels are different.

Highly recommend a book by Leo Santucci, get the 2nd edition. Many available online.

Nova specifics, you may not have room for aftermarket intake, headers will be tight.

I've also been working on a straight six for 5 years. Just no time. I've got 6 230-250-292's laying around, got tired of boring 350's.
 
My vote would be for a Pontiac OHC 6, 230 or 250. Way more exotic engine, and way more potential.
 
I had a 292 in a '64 panel truck. You could pull stumps with it. It got the worst gas mileage of anything I ever owned.
 
From memory I swapped a 292 for the original 250 The crank bolts were larger so had to drill the fly wheel for the4 speed. Those are tough to drill, it was a GM target engine as they were called. Brand new and was reassured by the dealer it was a direct swap. It was in a P30 can chassis and I regretted not going to a v8 or back to the 250. On that unit the mounts were fixed in the frame with rivets and had to be cut, drilled and relocated along with modifying the cross over mount bracket. It was a great deal of work to make it fit and dropped from about 11 mpg to 6-7. It would pull anything you hooked to it if you could afford the fuel. Put the 350 in it have the exhaust done and be happy.
 
Best of luck whatever way you go, but if it were mine I'd be looking at a 4.3 v6 instead of an inline. Much better parts availability and probably lower cost per horse.
 
(quoted from post at 06:56:47 11/04/22) My vote would be for a Pontiac OHC 6, 230 or 250. Way more exotic engine, and way more potential.
Click to expand...
Hey !!
Does this suggestion indicate that you are the owner of a Pontiac with such engine??

As your moniker??

Edited due to my mistake thinking it was a Canadian only offering.

Thanks to miangus.

This post was edited by DoubleO7 on 11/04/2022 at 12:35 pm.
 
leave the 292 in a truck like they were made for. Every one is going to LS motors so sbc parts are plentiful and cheap. I know the feeling of wanting to do something different. I just lay still till the feeling goes away.
Ron
 
The Sprint 6 package was available in the US in the Tempest/Lemans and the Firebird I believe from 66-67 maybe 68. 10.75 compression a hot cam, factory headers topped with a Rochester Q-jet. The Pontiac overhead cam engine standard version was also available. That engine uses the Buick/Pontic bell housing bolt pattern. I would suggest hot rodding the 250 Cubic Inch Chevrolet engine if you want a six. Port the head get a more aggressive cam, increase the compression and add headers. Do not be afraid to turn it hard, it is short stoked and has steel rods, routinely turned small journal SBC with factory rods 8,200 with no issues (roller cam 331s). I had a 66 Tempest with the Sprint 6 Package, and it would run with a lot of V8s. However, I think it ran lean on 1 and 6 when that Q-jet opened. I lost number 1 piston then number 6 piston then cracked the head in number 1. Pulled it out and replaced it with a 400 out of a 68 Catalina. With the dual Thrush I didn't fool anybody even with the 6-cylinder badges.
 
Bingo.

Great engine and a real sleeper.

Back in the late 60s, a local guy had a 66 Tempest Sprint with the OHC 6 HO and 4 speed. It never lost to any Chevrolet 327/250 (8.5:1 regular fuel engine but with Rochester 4GC and dual exhausts), whether PG or 4 speed. 327/300s were quite another matter.

Sadly, in the era, no one wanted a 6 cylinder so the innovative concept did not catch on.

What might have been in another era....
 

......................... trying to wrap my head around the concept of having a vehicle engine in the house and still being married.............. :shock: :shock:
 

In the '67-'72 trucks, the mounts are considerably different on one side between the 250 and the 292. I know that finding the necessary frame parts to do this swap is hard and expensive. Whether that is true for the '77 Nova or not, I don't know, but find out ahead of time.
 
(quoted from post at 12:24:39 11/04/22) leave the 292 in a truck like they were made for. Every one is going to LS motors so sbc parts are plentiful and cheap. I know the feeling of wanting to do something different. I just lay still till the feeling goes away.
Ron
Click to expand...

A pox on the LS! That everyone is doing it is a pretty indicator that it's a bad idea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
Decided on the Cub Loboy
Replies
9
Views
569
Jim Becker
J
John M
Chevy Gurus - Follow up!
Replies
4
Views
768
John M
John M
M
172 Gas 4 cyl - general advice and cylinder bore specs?
Replies
9
Views
977
Maine4140HD
M
jon f mn
Working on Onan Kabota engine swap in 1818
Replies
6
Views
707
MAS1866
M
V
I don't know where to begin...
Replies
16
Views
4K
Jim WI
J
Tractor Parts Tractor Manuals

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Copyright © 1997-2024 Yesterday's Tractor Co.

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters
Website Accessibility Policy

Back
Top