Small Block Chevy Size - Does it measure up?

How about an LT1 manifold with a 500cfm webber hanging off the front of it?

When I was researching TR-6 V8 swaps a while back the SBF was way more popular than anything else. A conservative 350 horse SBF would be a great match for that chassis.

I just went out & measured the Vette - 27.5" from the top of the air cleaner to bottom of the pan, with a Weiand Stealth intake, Holley 650, and 2" air filter in a non-drop base.

of course if you want lighter weight, the Rover 3.9 and 4.0 V8s are basically aluminum buick engines taken to their final evolution. I cannot recommend the 4.6 due to the liner issues

akylekoz wrote: I know Ted and can give him a call and find out what it has for an intake and carb. I have driven this car as an auto and a five speed, it is very well built and fast. Ted is a retired GM tin knocker and has a mill in his shop so it may be slightly custom. You should see his current Lotus 7 style cars, one with a 215 Buick the other with a Porsche engine.

If you could get those details, that would be great.

fasted58 wrote: Chart for popular American V8 engine dimensions: engine dimensions

I checked that sight, and it says the Ford and Chevy are the same height. It just doesn't make sense. I've seen the small block Ford installed in the TR4 without the hood cut, but Never the Chevy

In reply to Homework:

Thanks for the measurement

JBasham wrote: Just FYI, not pushing an EFI Ford 302, but I have the info handy. From the bottom of the Foxbody oil pan, which is lowest at the rear, to the top of the intake on the high side with an Explorer intake, mine is 26.75 inches. But the throttle TPS sticks up a little higher, and that gets it to 27.75. That's measured all the way to the bottom of the oil pan, which is the lowest point. You're measuring 25" from the framerails, but I don't know where the framerails would line up to the motor in your car. If you look at pictures of a Ford 302 with a Foxbody oil pan, you'll see there is a serious hump in the oil pan, which can be positioned over the front cross-member to get the overall engine lower in the bay. I'm 95% sure there are front-sump and rear-sump pans available, with matching oil pickups. Also the intake is higher in the back than it is in the front, so if the hood is sloping down it works out nicely. The motor and T5 transmission are a nice package, and widely available with the EFI wiring harness and computer for reasonable cost. When people are figuring out motor weights, I urge them to factor in what the transmission will add to the package, as there is sometimes a penalty there with Chevy's.

If it can get shorter carb' d I may go with the Ford, but I already have this Chevy lump, so I have to confirm 100% it will or will Not for before I sell this and get the Ford

In reply to frenchyd:

Sorry, no V12 for me on this one. I don't have the skills to dare to be that different

wspohn wrote: The SBF is smaller and lighter and a better bet, but the Chevy has been done. Whatever you do, don't dispense with the cross brace between the front suspension - having them slowly fold in toward each other isn't fun. I always thought this TR-6 Ecotec swap looked pretty neat http://www.britishv8.org/Triumph/AlbertGary.htm

Keep the front crossmember. Got it. Don't want it acting like an accordion.

Sounds like the Ford is in the lead

AClockworkGarage wrote: How about an LT1 manifold with a 500cfm webber hanging off the front of it?

That would be unique for sure, but I don't have skills to pull it off

fasted58 wrote: When I was researching TR-6 V8 swaps a while back the SBF was way more popular than anything else. A conservative 350 horse SBF would be a great match for that chassis.

Another Ford vote. Got it

Pete Gossett wrote: I just went out & measured the Vette - 27.5" from the top of the air cleaner to bottom of the pan, with a Weiand Stealth intake, Holley 650, and 2" air filter in a non-drop base.

Thanks for that Pete. What's this dropped base you speak of? How much lower can that make it???

mad_machine wrote: of course if you want lighter weight, the Rover 3.9 and 4.0 V8s are basically aluminum buick engines taken to their final evolution. I cannot recommend the 4.6 due to the liner issues

I'm a word: transmission. No affordable manual option.

Do you want a measurement of a small block ford with carb? Im betting that they can fit lower in your chassis due to oil pump placement and pan shape, but not actually any shorter overall than a chevy, which i also have. And a mopar. All small blocks of American decent are represented on my property.

In reply to Indy-Guy:

Look at the one AClockworkGarage used in his Camaro thread. It drops the bottom of the filter so the top can be somewhat lower...however that also depends on whether your car has/had a choke, and at a minimum Holley states you need 3/4" clearance above the carb. So while it does gain you a bit of hood clearance, really what you gain is the ability to run a big enough filter for the engine.

In reply to Dusterbd13:

Measurements of the Ford (height) would be welcomed.

This is a very well done Ford in a TR4 with an un-cut hood. It's Jay Smth's from britishv8.org

In reply to Pete Gossett:

Thanks for the info. I'll go check out his thread....

Ill get it in the morning

Indy-Guy wrote: In reply to Pete Gossett: Thanks for the info. I'll go check out his thread....

This one?

Interesting...

That would definitely help

What's the consensus on hanging part of the engine BELOW the frame? It makes me very nervous. An oil pan can be shortened, but then the flywheel and transmission are the lowest point. Hang those 1-2 inches below the frame?

Several of you have mentioned oil pan and sump differences, and usually that would be a big concern, but this chassis has the engine set back behind the cross member. So sump location doesn't matter.

An oil pan and exhaust and trans are normally a couple of inches below the frame on muscle cars. I see nothing out of the ordinary with it.

Dusterbd13 wrote: An oil pan and exhaust and trans are normally a couple of inches below the frame on muscle cars. I see nothing out of the ordinary with it.

So the flywheel being the lowest point on the car is okay? The car sits pretty low as it is. The bottom of the frame rail is 6.5 inches from the ground. That would put the bottom of the flywheel 4.5 inches from the ground.

In reply to Indy-Guy:

Yes, that's it. It should give you a bit more clearance, maybe 1/2"-1" or so.

Like Dusterbd13 said, no worries on everything hanging below the frame. The bottom of my oil pan is only 5.5" off the ground, although the exhaust hangs slightly lower.