[tom s]

Dont think it has,maybe Dave will see and reply.Tom

[72blackbird]

Tom,
What kind of mods were done to the 326 crank to make it fit in the 301 block?

Geno

[tom s]

Geno,nothing,as you can see from the pics the bearings and crank are right out of the 50 year old engine with no clean up.There are a couple spots in the block I might clearance as they are very close to the counter weight but dont touch.Maybe a few thou.Tom

[Donovan]

I'm watching the thread with a big grin. I wanted to do the same thing. Figured I could use my spare 3.75 crank and a TII I have laying about as well as a set of #17 heads I ported to 245cfm. At one point I was looking at TI rods from an LS7 to see if they would work in there...

I put ads up here and in local craigs list. Could not come up with a 301T block in 2 years.

I'm enjoying the ride. More please! hehehe

Seems like the intake mods to narrow are a lot harder than they would appear, is there a good deal of epoxy in the ports to blend?

[tom s]

No epoxy

[Skip Fix]

I still never understood why the Pontiac engineers used such a crappy head on their 301-when even Chevy 302s(heck 265s!) have at least one intake port per cylinder! You couldn't even blow enough air down those to make much HP.

Neat project Tom!

[gtofreek]

One word, emissions?

[tom s]

Hope Dave jumps in but I think he cut the flanges off,bolted a set of heads with a head gasket to the block,bolted the flanges on the heads with a intake gasket and then cut the intake at the proper angle and welded it back on?I already had the 301 water X over.Tom

[paul s.]

What makes you think you will need alot of cam? You're only feeding 377" with good sized intake ports and valves. Perhaps I missed it, how much compression are you running? Concerning power potential: I think the intersection where the intake and cylinder head meet will make or break this combo, although, I'm sure Dave at SD has got it under control.

It's gonna be a screamer! Cool build, Tom.

[tom s]

9.5 CR,plenum is very large,not sure what that will do.Tom

[Steve Barcak]

Originally Posted by Skip Fix

I still never understood why the Pontiac engineers used such a crappy head on their 301-when even Chevy 302s(heck 265s!) have at least one intake port per cylinder! You couldn't even blow enough air down those to make much HP.

Neat project Tom!

The reason was for low rpm throttle response. If you have driven one you will understand. The stockers are quite torquey and responsive off of idle. It is hard to notice the different between a 400 and 301 of the same era during normal street driving- idle, off idle and crusiing.


This build seems to be a 389 with a slightly smaller bore and short deck. correct? The real difference being the shorter deck.
Most people on this board hate the little Pontiacs because of its shorter deck. Yet, this build has interest. my Point? There are all Pontiac V8s 265-455 regardless of deck height.
Neat looking build Tom. Best to you with it.

Other than the deck height, what is the real difference than building a 389 though?

Do you think the short deck ( than standard deck ) will make more HP or torque?

[BruceWilkie]

Shorter deck = lighter recip parts. Also shorter deck aids manifold runner length more suitable to higher rpm power production without needing too large a plenum. And for those with late model 3rd/4th gen Birds and other vehicles with low hood lines a shorter deck does help.

IIRC all the 1980 up 301's were same block as the 79 T block.

[tom s]

Steve,no clue.Joe just thinks it will be like a 383 SBC.Lighter everything inside might let it live longer,less strain on everything?As I said before,most dont think they make a good anchor.Tom

[tom s]

Im thinking about just buying stock GM Performance L88 rods.Tom

[77 TRASHCAN]

The short deck Pontiac engine experiences are either, negative (broken cranks), moderate (yeah, it was O.K.) or the few high mile units, still running....in the day

This is (thankfully) a completely different deal. The weak link(s) in the short deck engines are the crank, and those crazy dual velocity siamesed port heads, BOTH eliminated in this build.

Tom, Is the intake re-produceable??? or can it be???

An intake for for the old school heads on a 301 block has kept a bunch of folks from building one.....ONLY reason....

Finally a N/A 301 build, w/ some performance potential.

My bias against 265's and 301's is their overall weak crank, and economy heads, nothing exciting.

Steve, I hope your little engine is progressing the direction you hoped for....

Keep up the good work!!!

[tom s]

Dave said the only way he would do another is to start with new,the old alu had too much impuritys.Tom

[72blackbird]

Hi Tom,
So how long will the rods have to be for this 301/383 stroker? Will L88 rods require a custom piston, or can a SBC production piston be used with the 3.75" stroke crank?

This 301 build has the potential to bring the 301 into the fold as a true performance Pontiac engine, at least with the stroker crank. I guess it would be a good idea to pick up a few 301 blocks now while they're cheap and before the word gets out. An intake cast to work with regular iron heads and the 301 block would make the 301/383 stroker a popular stroker build.

Geno

[tom s]

Joe said the L88 rods are heavyer and no cheaper than SCAT H beams so will be getting them.No clue about a piston yet.Was palnning on a custom from the start,might try to figure if ANY stock 4.030 piston would work with the 6.135 rod.Tom

[wrenchmen]

Are there many differences between the 301 and 301T blocks?

[tom s]

Im told there is but have never had a std block to compare.Tom