![]() |
Register or Log In To remove these advertisements. |
|
|
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
![]() Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,396
|
Re: 1967 GMC V6 305 cu in...
The Ford 240 and 300 heads have alternating valve positions with individual ports, compared with the Chevy 6's siamesed intake ports. The center exhaust ports of the Chevy are also paired. The Chevy straight 6's use a number of 'Small Block' V-8 parts including pistons, valves, and rocker arms. The Ford 240 and 300 borrow some parts from the Windsor and FE V-8's. Cylinder head notwithstanding, I always thought the 292 was a better engine than the 300 because of its tall deck block and much better connecting rod ratio. The oiling system is better as well (Ford feeds the cam bearings before the mains). The 300 is something of a mythical engine among Ford fans (it is one of the better Ford engines no question) but I think the 292 was tougher and pulled harder at low r.p.m.'s.
The GMC V-6 was something else entirely, a purpose built heavy duty commercial engine that compares to the International Harvester V-8's and Ford Super Duty V-8's.
__________________
1967 GMC CM-2500 Camper Cruiser, 351E V-6, NP 435 4 speed, Dana 60, and factory A/C. 2012 GMC K-3500 WT regular cab, 6.0L Vortec, 6L90. Last edited by Bob B.; 04-19-2024 at 09:58 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Senior Member
![]() Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Tucson, AZ USA
Posts: 7,641
|
Re: 1967 GMC V6 305 cu in...
Quote:
My 2005 build of a 292 block uses Intake Valves that would be standard on the Chevy 307 V8 -- 1.84'' instead of the stock L6 1.6''.
__________________
Every 25 years I like to rebuild that 292, whether it needs it or not. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|