|
05-25-2017, 12:13 AM | #1 |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2014
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 45
|
'65 292 Upgrades
I am looking at massaging my 292 a bit, already has a rebuild on it to run unleaded but want to squeeze a little more juice out of it.
I am looking at the 6-8 264 cam, long tubes, and their 4-barrel intake....I am wondering if anyone has run the FiTech efi on the 292? Seems like an awesome setup, I have seen it on small blocks, big blocks, etc...but wondering if anyone has tried it on these stump pullers. Any input on the setup on looking at and the potential Fitech efi would be much appreciated. Cheers! |
05-25-2017, 01:10 AM | #2 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Southern Oregon
Posts: 10,384
|
Re: '65 292 Upgrades
Quote:
Due to the head design fuel injection has never worked all that well on these engines. A 4 barrel carb will give you the same and great results and for much cheaper. Personally I would shy away from Clifford cams and go with a more common trusted brand like 12bolt.com cams or Comp cams. The clifford cam is a rather cheap cam and over priced. For a build like yours that has stock pistons and a stock rebuild on the head I would grab a cam with .480 lift max and a total duration of 250 degrees. That with a 4 barrel and headers would give you a substantial increase in power over the stock setup. Even if you just did a 4 barrel and headers you'd notice a difference. This would be a nice mild cam, you would need springs though. It is specced for a 250, but you can special order it for a 292. My comp cam cost me $220 with cam and lifters when I got mine. http://www.compcams.com/Company/CC/c...x?csid=59&sb=2 Reason I stay low on the duration is that the stock rods and pistons are really not great for more RPM than 4K. I revved my old 292 to 5K a few times.....but that was pushing the limits big time. I went with ross forged aluminum pistons on my new build so I could do 5500 easily if I wanted to.
__________________
1966 Chevy C10 "Project Two Tone" http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=596643 1964 GMC "Crustine" semi-build:http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=665056 My youtube channel. Username "Military Chevy": https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_h...fzpcUXyK_5-uiw Last edited by TJ's Chevy; 05-25-2017 at 01:15 AM. |
|
05-25-2017, 11:17 AM | #3 |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2014
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 45
|
Re: '65 292 Upgrades
Thanks TJ! Great info!
Would you go with long tubes? Or Shorties? Are lump ports worth it with the setup you mentioned above? I have no issue pulling the head and installing those. |
05-25-2017, 11:29 AM | #4 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Southern Oregon
Posts: 10,384
|
Re: '65 292 Upgrades
Quote:
Lump ports in general are a nice add on. With the stock valves you won't be able to take much advantage of the extra flow, but the engine will run smoother overall. If you have the tooling and skills to cut the head bolt boss's out and install lumps then by all means! Even having a machinist do it is fairly cheap to as it doesn't require a whole lot of work.
__________________
1966 Chevy C10 "Project Two Tone" http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=596643 1964 GMC "Crustine" semi-build:http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=665056 My youtube channel. Username "Military Chevy": https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_h...fzpcUXyK_5-uiw |
|
05-27-2017, 07:02 PM | #5 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: southeasternfoothillsofusa
Posts: 1,557
|
Re: '65 292 Upgrades
Quote:
Sam |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|