sbc 465 np205 swap to 1965 k10 need help

[jboogee]

Hello everyone I am new to the forum and I am restoring a 1965 k10 that originally came with the 4 speed and divorced t221 rockwell. Was wondering if anyone has done the swap mentioned above and a parts list maybe? I have heard that I could use the bellhousing off of a 69-72 chevy truck that would utilize the rear motor mounts on the bellhousing is this correct? Trying to get motor and drive train mocked up before sending frame to powder coat. Thanks in advance tried searching for material but have not found anything for this swap.

[padresag]

I would think that the 69-72 setup would have a trans rear mount versus a b/housing mount
ron

[argonaut]

Perhaps a 69-72 2wd truck would have a cast steel bellhousing, with bellhousing mounts and an input bearing retainer pilot hole diameter of 5-1/8" to mate to the SM465. But the 4wd trucks would only have a mount at the transmission-to-transfer case adapter.

Take a look at some of my pics below. The chassis is a 1966 K10. The powertrain is 402-465-205 from a 73. It these photos the motor is supported by stock 60-66 small block mounts and perches (no crossmember), still has the bellhousing crossmember in the frame (though nothing is bolted to it) and the rear crossmember from a 73 K20 (should be the same for 70+ K series). I am using a mechanical clutch aluminum bellhousing for a 70+ K series pickup.











As you can see the aluminum bellhousing clears the stock bellhousing mount crossmember. However, when I test fit the cab, the valve covers/heads and the firewall were trying to occupy the same space.









Instead of cut the firewall I moved the whole assembly about 1-1/2" forward. I used a 69-72 engine mount crossmember, removed the bellhousing crossmember and used the transfer case crossmember in back.

[jboogee]

yeh I have the exact same setup heard from a guy that has worked on many of these that the bell off 69-72 will work so I am going to pick up one hopefully tomorrow. as far as the crossmember where the adapter bolts it looks like I will have to modify just like in your pics. Did this setup some in 69-72 because then the crossmember from that year should work wouln't it. Seem the frames rails aren't as tall on 73+.

[jboogee]

Sorry forgot to metion isn't 402 bbc so I don't think that I will have the clearance issues running sbc?

[padresag]

Originally Posted by jboogee

yeh I have the exact same setup heard from a guy that has worked on many of these that the bell off 69-72 will work so I am going to pick up one hopefully tomorrow. as far as the crossmember where the adapter bolts it looks like I will have to modify just like in your pics. Did this setup some in 69-72 because then the crossmember from that year should work wouln't it. Seem the frames rails aren't as tall on 73+.

you don't need the b/housing mounting in that application with the rear trans mount. you just require 3 point mounting
ron

[jboogee]

awesome thanks you for the quick reply so just you trans adapter modified crossmember. The other question will 69-72 crossmember work or did they not come with married np205. And thank you don't want to buy parts I don't need.

[argonaut]

I believe the T-221 transfer case was still being used through 69. So most rear crossmembers from 70-92 or so should work for you.

I must have missed the sbc part. In that case you do not need to relocate the assembly forward. It will be a tight fit, but it will fit. That is good because you can leave your existing bellhousing crossmember in place. It would be wise to do so because this crossmember provides good frame rigidity where you need it as the front spring shackle hangers. And if you leave it in you won't need an engine crossmember from 69-72, you can use the stock 60-66 mount perches.

So you need:
- 70-91 bellhousing
- SM465 transmission
- SM465-NP205 adapter
- NP205 Transfer case
- 70-91 Rear crossmember
- Shorter front driveshaft with CV joint at TC end
- Longer rear driveshaft, possibly with a larger ujoint at the TC.
- Modify trans cover shifter holes. Larger hole, further back for the sm465. Hole on the passenger side instead of driver side for the np205.

It would be best/easiest to pull this whole assembly from any 70-79 pickup. I don't believe any of the frames are as tall as the 60-66 in that area of the frame where the rear crossmember bolts in. What you will find is that the lower flange on your 65 frame is not flat, or parellel to the upper flange, in that spot either.

Personally, if my stock SM420 and T221 were in good condition, I wouldn't even bother with this swap. The SM420 is just as strong and reliable as the SM465 and the T221 is as strong as the NP205 if you maintain it properly. You'll also have better drivehshaft/Ujoint angles because the T221 is located smack in the center of the frame.

[jboogee]

Awesome have both setups complete looks like the original 420 t221 are in good condition gonna mock up both that way when the frame gets powder coated won't have to drill or grind coating if I decide to change. Can you send me more detailed picks on how you mounted 73 crossmember to 60' frame. I set the crossmember in the frame rails and have about 3/8" gap at top and want to make sure engine angle sits right. Also do you happen to have pics of the original mounts to the t221 looks like my truck had some jimmy riggin done lol. You guys on this forum are absolutely awesome.

[padresag]

if you have an assembly cataloque you will see how the t/case mounts. it is close to the rear of it. if you are going to use the t221 I would rebearing it before you use it.
if you have a 205 on the back of a 365 mounted under the bellhousing you will have a way to much mass hanging off the bellhousing
ron

[jboogee]

Originally Posted by padresag

if you have an assembly cataloque you will see how the t/case mounts. it is close to the rear of it. if you are going to use the t221 I would rebearing it before you use it.
if you have a 205 on the back of a 365 mounted under the bellhousing you will have a way to much mass hanging off the bellhousing
ron

Where would I get an assembly catalog? Sounds like it would help me out.

[jboogee]

Originally Posted by padresag

if you have an assembly cataloque you will see how the t/case mounts. it is close to the rear of it. if you are going to use the t221 I would rebearing it before you use it.
if you have a 205 on the back of a 365 mounted under the bellhousing you will have a way to much mass hanging off the bellhousing
ron

Thanks Ron and if I did use the bellhousing mount I would also fab up the adapter crossmember just don't want anything binding or working against eachother.

[padresag]

Originally Posted by jboogee

Thanks Ron and if I did use the bellhousing mount I would also fab up the adapter crossmember just don't want anything binding or working against eachother.

you don' want to use the bellhousing mount if you are going the use a rear trans mount
ron

[padresag]

Originally Posted by jboogee

Where would I get an assembly catalog? Sounds like it would help me out.

you can get them at just about any place that sells restoration parts for these vehicles
ron

[argonaut]

[argonaut]

Originally Posted by jboogee

yeh I have the exact same setup heard from a guy that has worked on many of these that the bell off 69-72 will work so I am going to pick up one hopefully tomorrow. as far as the crossmember where the adapter bolts it looks like I will have to modify just like in your pics. Did this setup some in 69-72 because then the crossmember from that year should work wouln't it. Seem the frames rails aren't as tall on 73+.

The final installation of the 205 crossmember didn't look exactly liket he photo. It doesn't sit on top of the bottom flange. Instead it is pushed up and the upper part sits under, and is bolted to, the upper flange. Then the lower part doesn't sit on the lower flange, it mounts to that piece of angle that I then bolted to the sidewall of the frame.... Hope that makes some kind of sense to you. I don't think I have any pictures of the final bolted in, but I could snap a couple.

You can kind of see it a little in the left of this picture:

[jboogee]

Originally Posted by argonaut

The final installation of the 205 crossmember didn't look exactly liket he photo. It doesn't sit on top of the bottom flange. Instead it is pushed up and the upper part sits under, and is bolted to, the upper flange. Then the lower part doesn't sit on the lower flange, it mounts to that piece of angle that I then bolted to the sidewall of the frame.... Hope that makes some kind of sense to you. I don't think I have any pictures of the final bolted in, but I could snap a couple.

You can kind of see it a little in the left of this picture:

awesome thanks did you have any problems with the cast iron shackle mount being work the pins sit in kinda loose before I put lock in.

[argonaut]

I'm not sure if you mean the front or rear shackle hangers, but either way I'm not using the stock 60-66 parts anymore.
In the front I have a custom fabricated mounts and in the rear I have 73 K20 mounts.
You have to be really good about keeping the factory type mounts lubricated because they all used metal bushings. The brass and other metal bushings are actually stronger and will have a tighter suspension feel, but only if it is well maintaned and lubricated. Unfortunately, 50 years later, most all of these work trucks are worn out and loosey goosey.

[jboogee]

Originally Posted by argonaut

I'm not sure if you mean the front or rear shackle hangers, but either way I'm not using the stock 60-66 parts anymore.
In the front I have a custom fabricated mounts and in the rear I have 73 K20 mounts.
You have to be really good about keeping the factory type mounts lubricated because they all used metal bushings. The brass and other metal bushings are actually stronger and will have a tighter suspension feel, but only if it is well maintaned and lubricated. Unfortunately, 50 years later, most all of these work trucks are worn out and loosey goosey.

the rear that is riveted to the frame and yeh thats what happened previous owner didn't grease and shackle locked to pin, doesn't seem like there was any bushings in the mount the I am refering to though.

[argonaut]

All three pivot points in the rear use bronze bushings if i remember correctly. But its probably long gone by now, completely worn away by lack of maintenance.

[jboogee]

Thanks for all the help but I think since I am not moving the motor forward I need to use the 67-72 bellhousing have mocked up and frame is powder coated will post pics. I think that the 73 bell will hit the original crossmember but might try to mock to see either way its going good just got to get brakes situated. Quick question my rearend is 12bolt seems original but when trying to order brake cables they said that the retainer is bolted and mine snaps into the dust cover. So I took diff cover off and looks to be a 64 3.73 which could have been used in a 65. Your thoughts need cables to button up rolling chassis.

[jboogee]

Sorry for not asking but I would love to see how your project is coming also.

[argonaut]

When using a sbc-sm465-np205 you need to use the two forward motor mounts and the transmission-to-transfer case adapter mount. You will not use the bellhousing mounts.

Which bellhousing do you currently have? A cast iron one or an aluminum one? Does it have the mounting "ears"?

Are you using the 60-66 motor mount perches or a 67-72 motor mount crossmember?

Have you mocked it up and do you have any pictures?

[61K10]

my 221 in my 61 mounts completely different than your 66? thought they were the same. t/f case is the same, just how it's mounted.

[jboogee]

I have the cast iron bellhousing I will not be using the bellhousing mounts, only the adapter mounts. Using them to mock then I will remove the mounts under the bellhousing. I will post pics as soon as I figure out how lol.