MG-Cars.info

Welcome to our Site for MG, Triumph and Austin-Healey Car Information.

Parts

MG parts spares and accessories are available for MG T Series (TA, MG TB, MG TC, MG TD, MG TF), Magnette, MGA, Twin cam, MGB, MGBGT, MGC, MGC GT, MG Midget, Sprite and other MG models from British car spares company LBCarCo.

MG MGB GT V8 Factory Originals Technical - Stroked 215 or 302?

I am researching an MGB v8 conversion and I'm debating a stroked 215 or a 302. I like the idea of the 215 being the correct weight for the car and somewhat traditional but I'm afraid I won't get "enough" power from it. The 302 would give me more power but weigh 200 lbs more.

I'm looking to build a very hot but streetable car that can still accomodate a lady friend for a drive up the coast. With a posi rear end I would like it to at least chirp going into second. I guess I'm looking for more than enough power without going overboard.

Does the 302 make up for its added weight with more power to the wheels?

Does it adversely effect the handling of the car due to the added weight?

Or, does the 215 supply more than enough power?

Also, do either have intrinsic cooling problems in this application?

Thank you for your comments, Z
Zach Love

Where'd you come up with 200 lbs more? last I've heard you can get away with between 25 and 40 lbs more then a 4 cylinder. Just use aluminum heads.

Justin

Here in the US hands down (IMHO) go for the 302/5.0 Also like justin said, not sure where you got the 200lbs from. the Buick is ~50lbs heaver than stock and the 302/5.0 with alum heads is anywhere from ~20-50lbs heavier than stock depending on set-up....

Quite simply the 302 has a TON more options for you to set it up, just using factory stock stuff aside from the heads. You can build one with "bolt ons" that you can buy any-place in the US without customization with regards to the engine. The big downside is needing custom headers which I have heard from many are on the way, so that will be just like a buick in that regard. My car even with the EFI is using all stock Ford factory parts except for the alum heads and custom headers. I can go to any schucks, napa, etc and buy a new water pump, alt, timing cover, etc etc etc..

Larry Embrey

z, you are asking tons of questions, most of which have been answered/debated on this board many times, what are the other variables? is cost a factor? do you care about body mods? here is my 2 cents fwiw, power and ease of performance parts? the 302 is the way to go, but i believe more expensive in the long run than a non stroked 3.9 as body mods , crossmember, etc add to cost. 215 or 3.9 the most info and availablity of conversion parts (not bolt on performance) but less output and older technology, and lastly,. v6, not an 8 but pretty comporable to the older 215 in performance, plus is less costly than either of the above and much simpler to complete espcially for a diy, now which one of the options would be better for the lady friend? thats up to her, is she a cruiser or a girl racer?
james madson

Off the top of my head, http://britishv8.org/swaps/motors.htm gives the following figures;

BOPR 215 - 320 lbs
Ford 302 - "519 pounds stock, and 424 pounds in 'fighting' trim"

More than once I've come across the claim that the 215 is LIGHTER than the stock 4 banger. As far as the 302 goes, I took "in 'fighting' trim to mean expensive - yes money is a factor. How much do aluminum heads cost?

>z, you are asking tons of questions

Actually 4, and I'm sure they have been debated here before but I'm new to the list.

It sounds like the Ford owners don't perceive a weight problem up front - in the car that is ;)

Anyone out there have a 215 that chirps the tires going into 2nd? It sure is hard to make this decision without driving either, let alone both. That's why I'm asking...

As far as the girls are concerned - they still come and go (I'm still relatively young). Not dating any racers but everyone knows girls like to go fast every now and then. The current one gets motion sickness in my 65 Riviera! I'm doing the suspension next month but it's still a boat.

Ok, I'll shut up now.

Z
Zach Love

In my fresh '63 Buick 215, I can chirp them in second and sometimes third. The motor is actually lighter than the stock 4 cyl, I think Larry may have mistyped.
Jake

Zach,

Engine weights are hard to compare, you never know exactly what is included in a given weight. The 320 pounds for the BOP doesn't include everything needed to make it run. Below are some actual weights obtained by actually weighing the engines, COMPLETE!

MGB with an overdrive unit: 495 pounds
MGB with 4-speed, no OD: 465 pounds
MGB engine, no transmission: 395 pounds
BOP/Rover with a T5 transmission: 440 pounds
BOP/Rover with no transmission: 355
Ford 302 with a T5 transmission and aluminum heads: 520 pounds
Ford 302 with no transmission and aluminum heads: 424 pounds
Ford 302 with a T5 transmission and iron heads: 570 pounds.
Ford 302 with no transmission and iron heads: 520 pounds
Dan Masters

Z, you do not have to stroke a 215 for more power, Rover has done it for you. Try a 4.2 or 4.6 Rover. The 4.6 is close to the 302 in power, less weight, easy install, with a 215 bell housing, bolts to a T-5.

My first 215 was a bit hot with 10.75-1 compression & would chirp 1 through 3, although the choice of tires might eliminate 3rd gear chirp. My 4.2 in a GT would definitely chirp.

A Buick 300 weighs about the same as a 302 & will give plenty of chirp, is a bolt in, uses the T-5, but does not have much in available speed parts. You would have to be satisfied with 250-350 HP depending on the rebuild specs. I doubt you would get much over 350 HP & be streetable. They are redily available, & not expensive to rebuild to stock specs.
Jim Stuart

Thank you Jake and Dan.

Jake, do you feel like you have more than enough power?

Dan, thanks for the figures - the tranny weights help a lot. What are you running?

Thanks, Zach
Zach Love

Thanks Jim.

Are the 4.2 and 4.6 not larger than the 215?

I guess I should have mentioned, I want a chrome bumper car but I would consider modifying a rubber bumper car with chrome bumpers if it ends up being easier in the end - as long as the interior still has a classic look. The car just has to be 30 yrs old for CA smog.

Thanks again, Z
Zach Love

215 = 3.5L

I've never compared torque specs (which is what counts in this game) but is the 4.6 producing similar torque to the 302? I've yet to hear of a relatively stock 4.6 making 375hp at the flywheel...
Justin

you are right justin, torque is what really matters,do you know what your 302 puts out, i ran my v6 on a dyno earlier this year and my 3.4 with no interior mods put out 225ft lbs at an almost flat curve all across the chart, i have another 3.4 now that i am planning a major rebuild on, Z, jim is right, the buick 300 is also exactly the same displacment as the 302 and easier to complete, if you are looking for one i have one in a crate in my shop that runs, may be willingto part with it, if you end up going the stroker route you will need the crank from one of these and maybe the heads also?, jim
james madson

Jim,

In tests run by various magazines, the 302 as configured and used by myself, Steve Carrick and others, shows in the range of 325 - 360 lbft, and is also nearly flat over the whole rpm range.

225 lbft out of 3.4L is pretty impressive. No doubt about it, the V6 makes a nice conversion, and certainly should be considered as an option. Unless maximum power (torque) is a major concern, it's probably the best option, everything considered.

Do you have weight figures for the V6? I'm sure it weighs considerably less than either the BOP/Rover, the Ford 302, or the Buick 300, but I'd like to have actual data (I'm still working on a V6 article for the newsletter).
Dan Masters

"The big downside is needing custom headers which I have heard from many are on the way, so that will be just like a buick in that regard."


Larry,

Not quite. The Buick/Rover is a true bolt-in swap on a late model MGB and cutting holes in your fenderwells is optional. :)

"Are the 4.2 and 4.6 not larger than the 215?"

Zach, as Justin showed, internally the displacement is larger. In case you are not aware, externally the blocks are the same size.

Like Jim said, the Buick 300 is also a bolt right in, though a bit taller. Mike Moor is putting a bit over 300 HP to the rear wheels in his. Seems like enough for an MG. IF you need more than that go with the 302 AND go to a performance driving school.
Carl Floyd

3.4 with T5 trans and carb for induction, in fighting weight! 438lb in the engine bay ready to run. Add about 20 + lb for FI. Manifold, Computer and wiring (wiring is heavy)

Weights will vary with alum pulleys, or steel, old style alt or the new style, could add alum flywheel, etc. After installing a V6 the front end will pick up an 3/4 of an inch higher in the avg.

"Can still accomodate a lady friend for a drive up the coast with a posi rear end I would like it to at least chirp"

Just joking Z :-)
Have a great day!!!

Bill Guzman

Would like to add, the V6 will not chearp the tires in first, second and third and perhaps fourth gear.
It will burn rubber in all four gears with cheap tires.
With good sticky tires will burn rubber in first and chirp in second.
Bill Guzman

Thanks for the info, Bill. I'm a little surprised though, as I thought it would weigh less. That's only 2 pounds less than the BOP/Rover with a T5, and only 27 lighter than the stock B/tranny.

I can relate to your comments on cheap tires. I have a Toyota RAV4 that'll burn rubber in first gear - obviously due to cheap tires, not horsepower!
Dan Masters

This is turning into a great thread. Thanks for all the info guys - keep it coming.

So the 4.6 is the same size as the 215 (3.5) externally? That's pretty impressive. Still seems like a stroked 215 would put out more than a 4.6 by displacement alone, and would probably be cheaper.

Yes, torque is the more important figure - we should just get rid of hp as a concept. Not being familliar with such a small car - I'm more interested in what the car will do. My nailhead puts out over 445 ft/lbs but it weighs almost 700 lbs!

James, I'm a ways away from buying anything but I will look you up if I go the stroker route.

So do I remember correctly that there are headers available for the 215, but any other motor will require customs?

Thanks, Z
Zach Love

Zack, I live about 70 miles east of SF you are welcome to come drive my car. '67 BGT with D&D 293 Rover/Buick. It had a 215 for about 25 yrs. call me 209 823 3057, I don't do this comp. stuff much
robert milner

Robert, I will call you - when I get some free time. Maybe we can get together after the holidays.

Thank you for the offer, it is much appreciated and I will take you up on it.

Thanks again, Z
Zach Love

It's worth noting that a +.030" bore 215/3.5L motor with a 300 crank creates 266 Cubic Inches which is 4.35L. A rover 3.9/4.0/4.2/4.6L motor with a 300 crank and a +.010" bore creates 4.8L.

It is wholly possible that a stroker motor could still have a lower capacity then an existing rover motor and that to me is disheartening.

Officially:

The rover 4.6L motor made 286lb-ft of torque at 3500 rpm.

The 4.0L made 236 lb-ft at 3000 rpm's

The 4.2 made 235 lb-ft.

The ford GT-40 with e-cam officially makes 310 lb-ft of torque

All of these figured are influenced by the induction system, the ignition system, and any changes to compression due to gasket type, piston shaving, or block/head skimming. This should give a pretty good baseline though.

I have a rover 4.2L sitting here, and I've often thought about cleaning it up and putting it back together with its low compression (around 8.5:1) and sticking a vortech supercharger on the front of it. In my particular setup I have room for one, and I bet it would be pretty sweet!

Not that I'm trying to influence anyone in any particular direction, just pointing some stuff out...

Justin

zach, i would think the stroked route is one of the more costly ones as the parts are expensive and lots of work to do, where as you can you use a stock 4.6 with some external mods, and a stoked motor takes longer to wind up the power i believe than a non stroked one? sure, robert offers to let you drive aunt b, he won't even let me sit in her, but maybe thats because i wanted to undo two of the plug wires before i would drive it myself? get hold of bill guzman and take a look at his v6 gt and also some of the other nice cars in your area, best advice is to not rush in to anything and look at all the options,, there are many, and see what best fits the budget. jeez, i can't believe hes going to give up the keys to aunt b, tell you what zach, drive it to my house and i will pay your airfare back. jim

dan: the 3.4 in the rear wheel drive version with a cast block is almost the same as a 215 aluminum motor but i believe the 3.4 front wheel drive version with the aluminum motor, killer b set up, is a fair amount lighter than this?? but than feel free to correct me if i am wrong anyone? jim
james madson

I would not drive Roberts GT, that B does not have any brake lines or wiring, I don't know how he stops that GT! BTW Robert, I am down 10 lb.

Dan, my mistake, 438 lb is with the fuel Injection, with the carb is 20 lb lighter -418 lb. Plus the engine set back.


Bill Guzman

Zach,
The 215 in my car puts out more than enough power for me, but thats just me. I used a RB body and modded it to look like an early CB car. I just always though that the MGB was rather anemic, and wanted something that would get out of its own way when I hit the accelerator. I also keep a stock GT, it has its own charm instead of power. I guess it all depends on what youre looking for. If youre interested in seeing what I did to my car, the website is
http://www.roverv8.com
Cheers,
jake
Jake

The rover block, although lighter, extends further forward than both the V6 and 4.

I have wondered what the ride height would be with the "AC mounts".
jegawatt

Zach,

I can't comment on the 3.5 vs 302 debate (I'm using a 3.5 in my conversion mainly because I wasn't that aware of the 302 when I started this 4 years ago and I like the idea of an "all-British" car) but I can comment on the use of a CB or RB car to start with.

RB is easier to install the Rover in to but the amount of work in a CB isn't overwhelming. The only mod to my shell was a vertical extension to the transmission tunnel as the Rover 'box is taller than the MGB unit. This extension is hidden under the consol so you won't see it.

I've converted my '79 shell to CB and one would have to look close to see it isn't an original CB car. I didn't use a kit to install the bumpers but did it like the factory built with the original rear brackets and front brackets extended to look like originals.

Ride height has been lowered with new springs. I haven't compared it to my '74 but side-by-side, they're pretty close.

The interior is set up with the '72-'74 dash so that's no giveaway as to it's real age.

I've had the car out on test drives (not yet licensed for the road) and I can tell you this engine has plenty of power and torque (it was rebuilt to stock specs). Don't know about the 2nd gear tire-squealing as haven't pushed it yet but I left a couple of nice lines on the road the other day.

Welcome to the forum. You'll have a great time here. I've picked up a wealth of info that's really helped on this project.

Cheers
Simon
Simon Austin

Nothing beats the sound of a SBF!
The G

"...where as you can you use a stock 4.6 with some external mods, and a stroked motor takes longer to wind up the power i believe than a non stroked one? "

But a 4.6 is a factory stroked 3.9. :)


"Nothing beats the sound of a SBF!"

A big cam SBC does, every time!


Carl Floyd

i did not know that, i thought it was cast bigger, how about the 4.2 than? samething?
james madson

The Buick/Olds 215, Rover 3.5, 3.9, 4.0, 4.2, 4.6 all have virtually identical external dimensions including interchangability of cylinder heads, front covers, intake & exhaust manifolds. Additionally, the engine mounting points & bell housing bolt locations are the same.

Every version after the 215/3.5 is either bored or stroked or both. 215/3.5, 3.9, & 4.2 cranks interchange. The 4.0 & 4.6 cranks can also be swapped with each other, but not with the earlier engines without modifications.

Many parts will also swap each way with the Buick 300, including front covers, cylinder heads, & exhaust manifolds.

With slight mods to the oil pump, The U.S. Delco or many aftermarket distributers can be used with any of the British engines eliminating the Luminition problems & higher cost of the caps, rotors & points.

I drive a 215 Buick with Rover 4.2 serpentine front cover & Rover F.I., Delco dizzy with Mallory cap.

Jim Stuart

Dan, there is something odd about these numbers. The weight difference with and without the T5 tranny is not consistant. I presume that the bell housings will be different, but there seems to be too much weight variance?

MGB with an overdrive unit: 495 pounds
MGB with 4-speed, no OD: 465 pounds
MGB engine, no transmission: 395 pounds

BOP/Rover with a T5 transmission: 440 pounds
BOP/Rover with no transmission: 355
>difference is 85 lbs

Ford 302 with a T5 transmission and aluminum heads: 520 pounds
Ford 302 with no transmission and aluminum heads: 424 pounds
>difference is 96 lbs

Ford 302 with a T5 transmission and iron heads: 570 pounds.
Ford 302 with no transmission and iron heads: 520 pounds
>difference is 50 lbs

?????????????

Nice weekend in sunny SoCal. A bit of wax today and a drive tomorrow :)

Edd Weninger
Edd Weninger

Make that a SBF with a good Exh and flowmasters... HEH

The "classic" differences between a stroked and stock motor (racing set-ups aside) are that the stroked motors do not rev quite as high top end due to greater rotating mass and stresses, but that they produce lots more torque at an earlier point in the RPM curve..

So one line of reasoning is that when you go stroker you build the drivetrain with taller rear end ratio or taller tires (or both) to harness that torque and not over-rev the motor..
Larry Embrey

Edd,

You're right, thanks for pointing that out. I mis-matched my data.

Here's the correct data:

This info is from my own actual weighings:

Ford 302 with aluminum heads: 424 pounds

T5 transmission and bell housing: 85 pounds.

This info is from the Ford Motor Company:

Iron heads weigh 50 pounds more than aluminum.

Of the above data, I'm sure.

From that, we have:

Ford 302 with a T5 transmission and aluminum heads: 509 pounds

Ford 302 with no transmission and aluminum heads: 424 pounds

Difference is 85 lbs

Ford 302 with a T5 transmission and iron heads: 559 pounds.

Ford 302 with no transmission and iron heads: 474 pounds

Difference is 85 lbs

Where I made my error is in the 520 pound figure for the 302 with iron heads. The 424 figure for aluminum heads is also for a 16 pound light weight flywheel (the recommended weight for our light weight cars). The standard "performance" flywheel from FMC is 27 pounds.

27 - 16 = 11
509 + 11 = 520!

With the standard flywheel, the aluminum head version weighs 435.

The 302 Ford aluminum head crate engine, straight from the factory without the accessories, weighs 350 pounds, and that's with the 27 pound flywheel. I have photos of this engine on the scales as well as the stock MGB engine on the scales (both with and without the standard 4-speed transmission) if any one is interested.

I hope I got it right this time!
Dan Masters

Thanks Dan,

Good info for the archives.

Anyone know what the SD1 tranny weighs vs the T5?

Thanks,

Edd Weninger
Edd Weninger

Hi guys,
This thread is very similar to my thread regarding large aluminum V8 engines posted earlier. As with Zach (and other MG guys) I am interested in obtaining the most amount of reasonable and cost efficient HP. From this thread, I have learned a lot about both the Ford 302 and the BOP 215 (stroked or otherwise). From the info listed here, it seems the 302 w/aluminum heads is a do-able project with very repectable horsepower. Now that brings me to my original question, what about other aluminum V8 engines. For example, I know Chevy makes an aluminum Vortec 5.3 L (approx. a 327 c.i.), Rover makes the 4.0 L and higher, while there is also the Buick 300. All of which sound as viable options. But does anyone know if Ford (or an after market company) makes either an aluminum 4.6 L (approx. a 489 c.i.) or an aluminum 5.0 L (approx. a 302 c.i). If so, what kind of modifications would be necessary? Would the Chevy Vortec 5.3 L work with a T5 tranny? What modifications would be necessary for the Chevy? I would love to hear any thoughts from guys who have experienced such. Thanks.

Eric
Eric Vandermey

IF you happen to have $3500-4000US laying around (ABOVE AND BEYOND buying a base 5.0L rebuildable motor and alum heads.) You can get a alum block from Ford. I am not sure the weight savings, Dan might know, but it is a fully race prepped and built block.. It is a "bolt in" replacement for a sock 5.0 iron block.
Larry Embrey

Ford sells two aluminum 302 blocks - one weighs 92 pounds and can be bored/stroked to 380ci, and one weighs 100 pounds and can be bored/stroked to 396ci,

A stock iron block weighs 127 pounds and can be bored/stroked to 347ci.

I'm not sure, but I believe either of the aluminum blocks requires some machining before they can be used.

The current catalog doesn't list a price for them, but as I remember, they were close to what Larry quoted.

Both blocks have steel liners, and have siamesed cylinder bores - probably not the best for street use.

Anyway, that's a LOT of money to pay for 27 - 35 pounds weight savings.

Dan Masters

Dan and Larry,
Thanks for the info. You are right, I do not think the weight gain is worth the cost issues. guess, I will either stick with a BOP 215, a Rover 4.0 L, a Buick 300, or a Ford 302 (non-aluminum). In all reality, I really just want to hit 300-350 hp, which can easily achieved with a Ford 302 and probably even a stroked (and well tuned) 215.

Eric
Eric Vandermey

I'd be surprised to see the 215 stroker hit 300 hp, but I've yet to see actual numbers. Of course, its light weight close to makes up the difference.

I'm still running the numbers myself.

302 aluminum heads on ebay for $785 right now.

Z
Zach Love

"Of course, its light weight close to makes up the difference."

Zach,

In a 2400 pound MGB with a 300 HP BOP/Rover V8, you'll have 8 pounds/HP. To get 8 pounds/HP in the same car (now weighing 2480 pounds) with a 302 Ford, you'd need to have 310 HP. Ten extra HP is not hard to find in a 302. With 350 HP, you'd have only 7 pounds/HP, more than enough to offset any weight penalty.

Do the F/R weight distribution math, and you'll find the difference is not as much as you might think either.
Dan Masters

Dan, As you know Barney weighed in at 2240 lbs and dyno'ed at 323 hp at the show this last summer, that's just under 7 lbs per hp. On another note, THE HEADERS FOR THE 302 CONVERSION ARE NOW AVAILABLE, THE FIRST SET IS BEING SHIPPED OUT TODAY !!!

steve
Steve Carrick

And then of course there are the other options. (I just had to chime in here of course)
Mike Domanowski has a very nice nitrous installation on a stroker Olds 215. I don't know the HP or torque figures but it's impressive. My car runs an eaton blower atop an essentially stock Olds 215 and the power output is enough to break the tires loose at 70 mph in 5th gear, though I hope the extra downforce I've dialed in will control that next time out.

From my experience with the BOP's I'd say just about any of them are going to be more than enough to put a grin on your face, even a bone stock 3500 with SU's. How rowdy you get with it is just a matter of personal choice and dollars. I really liked the hot Buick with big headers, big cam, and big 4 bbl, and pegging the tach between shifts was a gas. But it wasn't all that fun as a daily driver. The ultra low compression Olds was fun too but not nearly as much and got bad gas mileage. But it was easy to drive. With a turbo it was more fun but a whole lot more treacherous, so much so that I now firmly believe a turbo on these cars is unwise. At least with nitrous you can choose not to hit the button in a curve. And as far as chirping the tires, My 4 banger would do that if pushed hard enough. But the blower motor is just ungodly. It doesn't matter what tires it has on it, too much loud pedal and they're gonna fry. But the good thing is that the power is smooth, and around town the drive is docile. So it's all in what you want and what you can do. For most people the BOP/Rover is the best place to start. For an increasing number the 302 gives a lot of rewards for not too much extra effort. And the 3.4 is coming into it's own as a swap of merit. But of course there will always be a few of us on the fringe who just have to have something different. http://www.mgbconversions.com/photoalbum/variousv8s/JimBlackwood.htm

Jim
Jim Blackwood

So what's the story on these 302 headers? Who's making/selling them? and for how much?

Jim my hat's off to you. But that's definitely more than I want to do right now. I want a sleeper, maybe even a nice quiet muffler. And... unholy power. I sincerely hope you don't light them up at 70. That's a little scary.

Z
Zach Love

That it is. Be careful what you wish for.

Jim
Jim Blackwood

Zach, I have developed a header for the 302, simular to the RV8 style header, that exits through the fender, is tucked in tight to the frame for tire clearence. They come with a 2 1/2" mandrel bent 90 degree tube. 1 1/2" primary tube, mild steel is $500.
And 1 5/8" primary tube, mild steel is $600.

Contact:
Steve Carrick
Coyote Engineering LLC
11475 Ridge Point dr.
Middleville MI 49333
269-795-1148
mgbv8@iserv.net
Steve Carrick

Hey Steve,

That's great - how a bout posting some pics?

So where do these headers end? Inside the fender well or under the car?

Thanks, Z
Zach Love

Zach,

You can find a picture of the prototype at:

http://members.aol.com/danmas/headers.jpg

Steve,

Hope you don't mind me posting the picture here.
Dan Masters

"that's just under 7 lbs per hp"

At least, 'til you get in. ;)
Carl Floyd

Carl - Where are you sleeping in January ?????
Steve Carrick

Steve,

Probably in TN. :(

I am coaching Upward youth Basketball Jan-Feb.
Carl Floyd

How many SBF conversions have ben done? I have a 1980 roadster, will it be anymore difficult than BOP 215?
Joe Rushing

To hard to count how many have been done. There are a bunch on this board, plus the many that are not MG enthisiasts like the guy I work with, he did his over 7 years ago...

The number is constantly rising here in the US as the engines and hop-up parts are very easy to come by..
Larry Embrey

"will it be anymore difficult than BOP 215?"

The short answer is "Yes". Not many swaps any easier than BOP/Rover into a late rubber bumber MGB.

If you want more torque/HP then it will be worth the extra effort to go the small block Ford route.
Carl Floyd

Well guys I just got back from a dyno session on my 302. I got 362 ft pounds of torque at 4600 rpm. Max HP for what it is worth was 355.
I did not go very radical. It idels smooth with the roller cam and sounds scary.
I went with longer rods to bring the max touque up. The edelbrock 2121 limits the numbers.

The fun now starts.
Garret
Garret

Congrats Garret!!!!!

Was that motor or RW numbers?? for RW that is quite impressive, which cam did you end up using?? Pistons?? I am praying everything will be 100% for a Mustang dynoe (lower numbers) run on the 15th.. I have a noise in the rear suspen I HAVE to get straightened out 1st.. sounds like a shock body or arm bolt is loose...

Larry
Larry Embrey

larry
That is at the flywheel.
I don't have the cam #'s handy. I will forward them but it is not too radical.
I went with 5.4 rods and custom forged pistons. There were none with the correct pin height for the longer rods.
Heads are Pro Action alluminum with port work done.
I will keep you up on the progress. We will get together when it is done.
Garret
garret

Sounds good man!!!

Mine is nothing special to look at or drive, she runs but needs lots of work...

I hope to get some decent numbers when I do that dyno on the 15th.. not looking to be as high as your numbers, but hopefully able to say over 300/300 at the crank..
Larry Embrey

I ran across this thread searching for other Buick 215 conversion, hope you don't mind the butting in.

I have been converting a Buick 215 in a Datsun 510. The stock, tired and very noisy lower end 215 motor that was originally placed in for fitting was ran for about 50 miles. With 245 tires I could lay rubber in all four gears. I just got the parts back from the machine shop for the 266 stroker and can not wait to get this car back on the road.

Now that being said, I can compare this ride to a Mustang GT 5.0 that I have owned and other Datsun 510s with the Nissan 3.0 V6. Weight to power on the driving end of things the stock 5.0 and 315 in the lighter ride (about 2100 lbs) were very comparable. The Nissan 3.0 was much more impressive in the lighter car; My decission for the stroker was to keep from being beat by the V6 boys.

I am now thinking about suspension and braking upgrades, probable from a 300Zx donor.

On the back burner I have a hacked up 59 Healy which I pulled a nose heavy 3.8 Buick V6 out of. Even though I have a good running Rover 3.5 in storage, I'll probable transplant the Nissan 3.0 from the 300 ZX donor when located.

Hope this helps Z

WB
William Barnes

I am going to build a 3.5 for historic racing and want to know if anyone can suggest if it is worth going to 6" rods over 5.66 or 5.7's
I have an alloy flywheel, & need an alloy front balancer.
Are gear drives available, and are they worth using.
I guess the Chev boys know all the right bits to use to make the SB motors go, but are any similar items available for the BOP 215, (ie) roller cams etc.
Adrian Akhurst

www.djev8.com
regards
michel

Adrian-I've looked for the gear drive and other high performance items for the 215 without luck. I've located different EFI and super chargers on e-bay that all have gone for more than $600 US. There are a wide range of cams, a few after-market intake manifolds, and the newer style distributors are the same as the Buick 300.

For your questions on the rods and pistons I would refer you to D&D Fabrications out of Almont, MI. He has a web site with all the specks of which rods and pistons to use. In order to use the SBC rods, they have to be machined down. He carries these, and I found his price to be a bit better than purchasing and machining my own.

WB
William Barnes

This thread was discussed between 13/12/2004 and 01/01/2005

MG MGB GT V8 Factory Originals Technical index

This thread is from the archives. Join the live MG MGB GT V8 Factory Originals Technical BBS now