Chev 283 Steel crank with no dampner thread

Old 07-10-2008, 11:40 PM
  #1  
jrthone
Senior Member
SENIOR BUILDER
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Wellington , New Zealand
Posts: 122
Default Chev 283 Steel crank with no dampner thread

Do any of you guys know how to attach a crank balancer to a 283 Chev steel crank. It has no thread for a bolt??? What do i do???
jrthone is offline  
Old 07-11-2008, 01:04 AM
  #2  
zipper06
Senior Member
RACING JUNKIE
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: La.
Posts: 2,890
Default

Your only option is to drill and tap a 7/16"X20 hole about 1 1/2" deep. None of the early 265"/283" cranks had drilled snouts they were all press fit balancers.

Zip.
zipper06 is offline  
Old 10-27-2008, 10:25 PM
  #3  
poncholvr
Senior Member
MASTER BUILDER
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 146
Default

THOSE CRANKS WORTH ANYTHING?
poncholvr is offline  
Old 10-27-2008, 11:38 PM
  #4  
zipper06
Senior Member
RACING JUNKIE
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: La.
Posts: 2,890
Default

The steel one's make good 302/331" high reving engines.

Zip.
zipper06 is offline  
Old 10-28-2008, 04:26 AM
  #5  
Tod74
Senior Member
RACING JUNKIE
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,137
Default

I had a LARGE JOURNAL 1178 DZ 302 crank ..it had never been in an engine...my father had it rat holed in his shop all these years..it was still in the GM box until it fell apart...he gave it to me last summer .. I sold it on EBAY for over $900
Tod74 is offline  
Old 10-29-2008, 11:35 AM
  #6  
desoto30
Member
JUNIOR BUILDER
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Childers Australia
Posts: 98
Default

Originally Posted by zipper06
The steel one's make good 302/331" high reving engines.

Zip.
They used to be plentiful & cheap & I've made good 302s from them Never used them in 4.195" bore to make 331 cubes but that'd be a cracker combo for sure
desoto30 is offline  
Old 10-29-2008, 02:12 PM
  #7  
ARUSSELL
Senior Member
MASTER BUILDER
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 192
Default

With that bore BUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
ARUSSELL is offline  
Old 10-29-2008, 03:41 PM
  #8  
zipper06
Senior Member
RACING JUNKIE
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: La.
Posts: 2,890
Default

When you look at it, Nascar is doing esentually just that, they are running 3.2 stroke cranks with 1.880 rod bearings with 6.2 lg rods in the 358"motors and no one can question that they run 9,000 rpms for 500 miles with few failures. The other factor is that is not much torque but a ton of HP, so a light vehicle such as a dragster or 2,000lb roadster would be haul ass. In fact we're looking at trading the 66 3700lb Biscyne for a 1934 chev roadster with a 306" s/blk that runs 8.18 in the 1/4 mile, but my friend don't want the engine he wants to stick with his b/blk and let the guy keep the motor (high maintenence).

Zip.
zipper06 is offline  
Old 10-30-2008, 12:58 PM
  #9  
Racefab57
Senior Member
DYNO OPERATOR
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NC
Posts: 557
Default

Zip, HI,I destroyed a 298 sbc at 11000rpm yrs ago,what a mess but what a FUN ride while it lasted!!!! D.R.
Racefab57 is offline  
Old 10-30-2008, 01:46 PM
  #10  
ARUSSELL
Senior Member
MASTER BUILDER
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 192
Default

We did a 295 4.030X 2.900 comp elimator engine would be fine at 12000 but when when we changed gears it let fo at 13500. Same thing fun ride while it lasted.
ARUSSELL is offline  

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -