Thinking about building a rat rod with a 366. Worth it or no?

[71ChevySS(straight6)]

Hey guys. I've done a little reading on 366 big blocks, but there's not much to read.

My girlfriend is addicted to Crosleys (the pre-war to 1952 microcars), and her mom is trying to buy her and I a little station wagon to chop up into a rat rod. I might have a 366, 5-speed, and 2-speed rear axle at my disposal (along with the heavy front axle). Would it be worth it to build my own frame, slap the drivetrain and axles on there, and drop the chopped up body on? Total vehicle weight would only be probably 2,500 lbs. I know the 366s are torque monsters. What do you guys think about them? Would it be a good engine in this application? Input? Advice? Thanks!

[prostreetC-10]

Apsolutely positively NO. They are school bus, dump truck motors and need to stay that way. They are tall decks so certain parts will be a little more expensive and harder to pick up used. It's all about money in and what you get back. On that light of a car, I'd do a 350/350 combo. Cheap parts for days and a weight savings.

[71ChevySS(straight6)]

I have a whole donor truck, an '87 GMC 7000. I could pull all the parts I want from that truck. It has the cast iron headers, I'd just need to make a side-exit exhaust. I wouldn't have to do anything to the engine, it runs perfectly fine the way it sits. The idea of the rat rod project is to go with as little expense as possible. Going out and buying a performance 350/350 combo would completely throw that away.

[TJ's Chevy]

Originally Posted by prostreetC-10

Apsolutely positively NO. They are school bus, dump truck motors and need to stay that way. They are tall decks so certain parts will be a little more expensive and harder to pick up used. It's all about money in and what you get back. On that light of a car, I'd do a 350/350 combo. Cheap parts for days and a weight savings.

350? C'mon. Bout the most boring engine you could put a in Rat rod.

[prostreetC-10]

Originally Posted by TJ's Chevy

350? C'mon. Bout the most boring engine you could put a in Rat rod.

Believe me.....the ONLY reason I suggested that is because I was mearly guessing that money could be an issue which is why he wanted to try the original package. You know me.....it must be north of 454 inches to be interesting.

[71ChevySS(straight6)]

Originally Posted by prostreetC-10

Believe me.....the ONLY reason I suggested that is because I was mearly guessing that money could be an issue which is why he wanted to try the original package. You know me.....it must be north of 454 inches to be interesting.

Was scrolling through old threads I started... I think you'll like what we went with instead How about a Cadillac 500? 8.2 liters of American luxury, factory power just waiting to be unleashed... and instead of those truck axles, we have a Dodge D350 chassis with a Dana 70 rearend, 3.54 gears (I believe).

[61K10]

Do it!! thats what rat rods are all about-------------Axles might be a tad wide lol.

[storm9c1]

I've seen some crazy rat rods. My favorites have always been ones built out of heavy duty trucks and combos that everyone else says is dumb. I like the idea of repurposing an otherwise useless piece of old iron. So go for it. The risk is there -- if something breaks, it may be harder to fix. But until it breaks, there's no reason not to use it, except your time to build it of course.

[cadillac_al]

I could sell you a nice Crosley engine if you need one. The old 366 trucks with glass packs still sounded good around the yard and going down the road imo. If it was free I would use one.

[jjzepplin]

I think free stuff should be used. I thought of this same idea as 366's can be had for almost nothing. My 307 can be abused by many peoples opinions but it was just sitting there free. $100 dollars worth of oil pump, timing chain,and freeze plugs and there you go. Should run long enough to get my 383 going. Then its blown tranny time and etc etc. But running moving vehicle for now.
And just think about the towing capability of the 366.

[71ChevySS(straight6)]

Originally Posted by 61K10

Do it!! thats what rat rods are all about-------------Axles might be a tad wide lol.

That's the idea, have the axles sticking out way past the body :P

Originally Posted by storm9c1

I've seen some crazy rat rods. My favorites have always been ones built out of heavy duty trucks and combos that everyone else says is dumb. I like the idea of repurposing an otherwise useless piece of old iron. So go for it. The risk is there -- if something breaks, it may be harder to fix. But until it breaks, there's no reason not to use it, except your time to build it of course.

I love the crazy rat rod combos too. They just look badass!

Originally Posted by cadillac_al

I could sell you a nice Crosley engine if you need one. The old 366 trucks with glass packs still sounded good around the yard and going down the road imo. If it was free I would use one.

I don't think I need a Crosley engine, but I can let my girlfriend know you have one for sale. She has five other Crosleys lmao
It won't be free, I made an offer of a thousand for the engine, trans, and axles. But it does sound awesome and run awesome in the truck it's in right now!

Originally Posted by jjzepplin

I think free stuff should be used. I thought of this same idea as 366's can be had for almost nothing. My 307 can be abused by many peoples opinions but it was just sitting there free. $100 dollars worth of oil pump, timing chain,and freeze plugs and there you go. Should run long enough to get my 383 going. Then its blown tranny time and etc etc. But running moving vehicle for now.
And just think about the towing capability of the 366.

Like I told cadillac_al, it wouldn't be free, but it would be unique and awesome.

[franken]

The truck engine, and axles will weigh more than the rest of the wagon...
That 2 speed rear will also have ratios that make the freeway a place you don't want to drive.
What trans?

[cadillac_al]

$1000 is kinda high. I see low mileage 454's out of RV's pretty often for under $1000.

[Captainfab]

I will have to agree with prostreetc-10.

In stock form the 366's are turds. Certainly not what I would call a torque monster. I think a 350 would make close to as much torque. Every 366 I have been around, when the time came for a new engine, it was replaced with a 427. Plus then the big 5 speed and 2 speed rear. To package all that together with a tiny Crosley body on top is going to look goofy at best.

For $1000 you could buy a decent running car or squarebody truck and have everything you need that will be much easier to build and make look decent.

[TJ's Chevy]

Originally Posted by 71ChevySS(straight6)

Hey guys. I've done a little reading on 366 big blocks, but there's not much to read.

My girlfriend is addicted to Crosleys (the pre-war to 1952 microcars), and her mom is trying to buy her and I a little station wagon to chop up into a rat rod. I might have a 366, 5-speed, and 2-speed rear axle at my disposal (along with the heavy front axle). Would it be worth it to build my own frame, slap the drivetrain and axles on there, and drop the chopped up body on? Total vehicle weight would only be probably 2,500 lbs. I know the 366s are torque monsters. What do you guys think about them? Would it be a good engine in this application? Input? Advice? Thanks!

Wouldn't be super fast, but it would be Different and would be Cool. Why not use something you have? So I go along with the crowd that says "DO IT!!!!" 366 would be cooler than a boring overused 350.

[D13]

You will quickly find that while it looks cool it will be no fun to drive. Motor is designed to run all day at 2800-3200 rpm, bore is too small for bigger valves, heavy pisotns, etc. In the top range of the 2 speed you will still get passed by everything. Steeering on those axles is poor. tires brakes etc $$$. So if your urge is to build somehting that is basically cool looking but you don't want to drive, go for it. If you want to build a tow rig Crosley then go for it, mount a 5th wheel hitch and be happy. If you want something to cruise in put your Crosley on a 4.3 S10 chassis and get a big grin going.

[cadillac_al]

Yup, no doubt about it, the 366 is the red headed step child of big blocks. As a former farm boy I have had C65's going right side ways through mud holes in 3rd gear with the glasspacks blattin'. I didn't have tachs in them but I'll bet they will rev to 5k rpm. Diesels just sink in the mud because they don't have any wheel speed and no rpm range.

I still wouldn't pay too much for one. A lot of farm vehicles are very low mileage though. If you buy a low mileage one it would last a very long time.

[Tom]

If the engine was free, use it. The axles and trans have no place in a street car that weighs under 6000lbs. Since its not free, scrap this idea. Put a small block in and call it whatever you want to feel unique. Tell everyone its a 265.

[GASoline71]

Just cuz you can... don't mean you should.

Gary

[prostreetC-10]

Originally Posted by GASoline71

Just cuz you can... don't mean you should.

Gary

The great Chris Rock once said "Just because you can drive with your feet don't make it a good f**king idea!!".

[71ChevySS(straight6)]

Originally Posted by franken

The truck engine, and axles will weigh more than the rest of the wagon...
That 2 speed rear will also have ratios that make the freeway a place you don't want to drive.
What trans?

It'd be the truck five-speed. I've never had the truck past third gear, as the soybean tender bed on it is kinda brittle and can't be roughed around and jostled or some of the brackets will break. But, from what I can tell, the trans has pretty good ratios, and with the splitter on the rearend, I feel like it'd have a decent highway gear. Better than my '71 C/10 anyways.

Originally Posted by cadillac_al

$1000 is kinda high. I see low mileage 454's out of RV's pretty often for under $1000.

I have no idea where. Maybe in your area, but in central Kansas I can't find a decent 454 that doesn't need a major rebuild for under $1200 or so. But remember, the $1000 would be for engine, trans, and axles.

Originally Posted by Captainfab

I will have to agree with prostreetc-10.

In stock form the 366's are turds. Certainly not what I would call a torque monster. I think a 350 would make close to as much torque. Every 366 I have been around, when the time came for a new engine, it was replaced with a 427. Plus then the big 5 speed and 2 speed rear. To package all that together with a tiny Crosley body on top is going to look goofy at best.

For $1000 you could buy a decent running car or squarebody truck and have everything you need that will be much easier to build and make look decent.

Then why was the 366 only used in school buses and dump trucks if it doesn't have a lot of torque?

427s are bored out 366 blocks.

I think the industrial look with the Crosley body will look cool.

Originally Posted by TJ's Chevy

350? C'mon. Bout the most boring engine you could put a in Rat rod.

EXACTLY my thoughts.

Originally Posted by TJ's Chevy

Wouldn't be super fast, but it would be Different and would be Cool. Why not use something you have? So I go along with the crowd that says "DO IT!!!!" 366 would be cooler than a boring overused 350.

350s are nice, but way overrated. Everyone uses them.

Originally Posted by D13

You will quickly find that while it looks cool it will be no fun to drive. Motor is designed to run all day at 2800-3200 rpm, bore is too small for bigger valves, heavy pisotns, etc. In the top range of the 2 speed you will still get passed by everything. Steeering on those axles is poor. tires brakes etc $$$. So if your urge is to build somehting that is basically cool looking but you don't want to drive, go for it. If you want to build a tow rig Crosley then go for it, mount a 5th wheel hitch and be happy. If you want something to cruise in put your Crosley on a 4.3 S10 chassis and get a big grin going.

But just slapping the body on an S10 chassis is too easy and too boring!

Originally Posted by cadillac_al

Yup, no doubt about it, the 366 is the red headed step child of big blocks. As a former farm boy I have had C65's going right side ways through mud holes in 3rd gear with the glasspacks blattin'. I didn't have tachs in them but I'll bet they will rev to 5k rpm. Diesels just sink in the mud because they don't have any wheel speed and no rpm range.

I still wouldn't pay too much for one. A lot of farm vehicles are very low mileage though. If you buy a low mileage one it would last a very long time.

It's currently used as a soybean tender truck, but it doesn't leave the lot, we just load beans on it and weigh them across, the farmers come in and load out from it. So mileage should be fairly low, I've never bothered to look. I'd be getting the engine, trans, and axles for the price I'd pay ($900-1000).

Originally Posted by Tom

If the engine was free, use it. The axles and trans have no place in a street car that weighs under 6000lbs. Since its not free, scrap this idea. Put a small block in and call it whatever you want to feel unique. Tell everyone its a 265.

It won't be a racecar by any means. Just a cool cruiser. Why do you think I should go the boring route that EVERYONE goes?

Originally Posted by GASoline71

Just cuz you can... don't mean you should.

Gary

Again... Wanting to be unique, and not boring.

Originally Posted by storm9c1

With the peak power down low, that would make a good engine in front of an overdrive. You could undergear that thing and cruise at 1500 RPM at 65MPH I bet with how light it would be.

How to do that, I'm not sure. I think the 366 has a standard bolt pattern, so any Chevy transmission should bolt up. Or add an OD unit instead of the splitter. I'd be tempted to try it. I would definitely try to take advantage of the torque and lightness of your chassis. Ditch the governor if it has one. Don't get too attached to the axles, they may hold you back. If you want a light-duty dually with the HD appearance, find someone with a Dana 70U and highway gears (ie: 3.07 or less if you can find it!). Folks usually want to give those away. And forget trying to rev it and lay tire. It won't be a good setup for that. But you can use the torque wisely and still have fun.

Definitely gonna get rid of the governor. However, I have to disagree slightly, I've watched a video of a 366-powered C65 do a burnout. lol thanks for the actual advice though, instead of just telling me to be like everyone else and buy a 350.

Originally Posted by TJ's Chevy

I'm assuming the 366 is like my GMC's 305E V6. Torque down low and not fast by any means. I will say though that with the little mods I did to my V6 it pulls 100% better than before. It'll lay tire rubber no problem at 2000-3000 rpm. lol Have bumped it up to 3K, but nothing higher. Buddy of mine has a propane powered 366 in a school bus.....moves that thing along with no problem.

You're absolutely correct, lots of lowend, and not a lot of speed. But, I've never had it split in fifth. Like I mentioned previously, I have only had it in third gear buzzing around the lot.

[storm9c1]

With the peak power down low, that would make a good engine in front of an overdrive. You could undergear that thing and cruise at 1500 RPM at 65MPH I bet with how light it would be.

How to do that, I'm not sure. I think the 366 has a standard bolt pattern, so any Chevy transmission should bolt up. Or add an OD unit instead of the splitter. I'd be tempted to try it. I would definitely try to take advantage of the torque and lightness of your chassis. Ditch the governor if it has one. Don't get too attached to the axles, they may hold you back. If you want a light-duty dually with the HD appearance, find someone with a Dana 70U and highway gears (ie: 3.07 or less if you can find it!). Folks usually want to give those away. And forget trying to rev it and lay tire. It won't be a good setup for that. But you can use the torque wisely and still have fun.

[TJ's Chevy]

Originally Posted by storm9c1

With the peak power down low, that would make a good engine in front of an overdrive. You could undergear that thing and cruise at 1500 RPM at 65MPH I bet with how light it would be.

How to do that, I'm not sure. I think the 366 has a standard bolt pattern, so any Chevy transmission should bolt up. Or add an OD unit instead of the splitter. I'd be tempted to try it. I would definitely try to take advantage of the torque and lightness of your chassis. Ditch the governor if it has one. Don't get too attached to the axles, they may hold you back. If you want a light-duty dually with the HD appearance, find someone with a Dana 70U and highway gears (ie: 3.07 or less if you can find it!). Folks usually want to give those away. And forget trying to rev it and lay tire. It won't be a good setup for that. But you can use the torque wisely and still have fun.

I'm assuming the 366 is like my GMC's 305E V6. Torque down low and not fast by any means. I will say though that with the little mods I did to my V6 it pulls 100% better than before. It'll lay tire rubber no problem at 2000-3000 rpm. lol Have bumped it up to 3K, but nothing higher. Buddy of mine has a propane powered 366 in a school bus.....moves that thing along with no problem.

[68Gold/white]

I was going to put a 366 in my 67. Decided no to. A lot of customizing needed.

There's a lot of good things, like a Holley carb fits the intake, trans bolt pattern, motor mount holes all same as a 454/350.

The 366 that I DID have, now gone was out of a bus. It had the high mount water pump (the fan position was about a foot higher than the standard water pump fan. I guess trucks use the standard water pump.

You HAVE to use a 366 water pump because of the water pump bypass. I've seen one tall deck 427 in a pickup with a standard pickup/car water pump. A bypass setup was corn cob engineer ed to function, it was not pretty.

1987 was the first year for fuel injection, although not all 366's were injected that year, is yours injected? If it was, that would be awesome, although creating another problem, delivering fuel to engine w/ correct pressure, and return line to tank...

The 366 was engineered by old timey thinking, some good, some not.
The small bore allowed tight control of the combustion event, more effecient, especially under heavy load, less likely to ping, Controlling ping in an engine that's over taxed is important. 366 has same stroke as the 396 and 427, 3.75, excellent torque producer!

The 3 compression ring was not really needed, but may have been needed for production line machining tolerances, who knows, it made the pistons a lot heavier.

If you have the standard water pump, your only big hurdle is adapting the radiator hoses down to standard car/pickup hose sizes. The hoses used on 366's are way bigger that standard car/pickup hoses. There's a company that makes these adapters, was an ad in a magazine long time ago. Adapters could likely be made at local machine shop.

If you have any other questions, let me know. I WAS going to do this, to much life happening at that time, I sold the 366....

[71ChevySS(straight6)]

Originally Posted by 68Gold/white

I was going to put a 366 in my 67. Decided no to. A lot of customizing needed.

There's a lot of good things, like a Holley carb fits the intake, trans bolt pattern, motor mount holes all same as a 454/350.

The 366 that I DID have, now gone was out of a bus. It had the high mount water pump (the fan position was about a foot higher than the standard water pump fan. I guess trucks use the standard water pump.

You HAVE to use a 366 water pump because of the water pump bypass. I've seen one tall deck 427 in a pickup with a standard pickup/car water pump. A bypass setup was corn cob engineer ed to function, it was not pretty.

1987 was the first year for fuel injection, although not all 366's were injected that year, is yours injected? If it was, that would be awesome, although creating another problem, delivering fuel to engine w/ correct pressure, and return line to tank...

The 366 was engineered by old timey thinking, some good, some not.
The small bore allowed tight control of the combustion event, more effecient, especially under heavy load, less likely to ping, Controlling ping in an engine that's over taxed is important. 366 has same stroke as the 396 and 427, 3.75, excellent torque producer!

The 3 compression ring was not really needed, but may have been needed for production line machining tolerances, who knows, it made the pistons a lot heavier.

If you have the standard water pump, your only big hurdle is adapting the radiator hoses down to standard car/pickup hose sizes. The hoses used on 366's are way bigger that standard car/pickup hoses. There's a company that makes these adapters, was an ad in a magazine long time ago. Adapters could likely be made at local machine shop.

If you have any other questions, let me know. I WAS going to do this, to much life happening at that time, I sold the 366....

You're awesome! lol

I have the whole truck (rather, will have). Meaning I have the truck radiator, truck hoses, everything I need. I just need to adapt those items to fit on a custom frame.

Mine is not fuel injected, no, just carbureted.