Page 1 of 1

262 sbc

PostPosted: Sun Mar 15, 2015 11:02 pm
by mirage_brat
I just tore down my 262sbc and noticed it had flattops already in it... And i was wondering if this was a factory piston with this motor

Re: 262 sbc

PostPosted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 8:59 am
by Monza Harry
I would think so Mirage brat at that displacement with the cylinder heads of the era I would think so, as the heads were built with huge combustion chambers. I never tore mine down I just sold it as it ran great just a lot short on "Get up and Go" but it was fun just the same at the time. I am not sure where you could find out for sure at this time, unless someone has pulled one down and remembers. Even GM doesn't have one of these engines in their collection I was told at a car show by the guy with GM Performance Truck (now Chevrolet Performance) I checked the GM manual and it doesn't show the pistons in the engine pictures, not that it would be a 4.3L for sure. Sorry I couldn't be more help! Harry

Re: 262 sbc

PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2015 9:21 pm
by marco_1978_spyder
If I can chime in here a bit... From my recollection, the 262 had these tiny chambers, some of the smallest ever cast. less than 60.5cc I believe.. but they also had tiny valves and tiny runners which made them useless as any type of performance head. That tiny chamber probably went with the dished pistons like those found in the 305 that replaced it.

The 350's with flat top pistons had the large 74cc chambered heads to lower the compression.

Re: 262 sbc

PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2015 9:22 pm
by marco_1978_spyder
Sure your 262 isnt actually a 307?

Re: 262 sbc

PostPosted: Wed Mar 18, 2015 8:02 am
by spencerforhire
Personally, I liked the 262's way better than any 305 I had. At least they were happy to rev; the 305 had more torque down low, but the 262 didn't fall on it's face at 4500 RPM. 262 was only 3.67 bore x 3.10 stroke while the 305 was 3.736 x 3.48. Back in the early 70's we always made fun of the 307's because they wouldn't rev with their 283 bore(3.875) and 327 stroke(3.25). Then GM made 305's which were even worse. All this has made me remember how much I dislike 305's; I will have to find a 350 TPI for my wagon project.......

Re: 262 sbc

PostPosted: Wed Mar 18, 2015 9:22 pm
by marco_1978_spyder
I liked the little stock 262's I had. Little sizzlers. Real smooth and gutsy. Couldn't kill 'em.
But then again, I like all the gutless underperformer's I owned. lol. even a 307 I had. Now I run the 305 in my spyder. Having a warmed over one isn't bad at all.. it's a, peppy, and quite reliable smile maker. And shares that easy to work on architecture, of all it's better cousins. But I put money into it. The same money people including me would normally put into a 350, for more bang.
I wanted to keep the car (red spyder) original, just warmed over. I'd rather have a plane jane with a 350 or other powerplant for a fast street/strip/sleeper car.

I remember reading a few years back of the new LS 350 for the Vette, was achieved using a similar, smallish bore / longer stroke design similar to the 305 but of course larger to create 350ci.

Re: 262 sbc

PostPosted: Wed Mar 18, 2015 9:46 pm
by spencerforhire
Actually, the Corvette LS1 5.7 (5.665 liter or 345.6 cubes) didn't have all that small a bore- 3.898 and with a 3.62 stroke They rev quite well.

Re: 262 sbc

PostPosted: Wed Apr 15, 2015 11:42 pm
by duckblaster67
Miragebrat's 262 block ended up having a freeze break in it and got scrapped! Anyone looking for a nice standard 262 crank?

Re: 262 sbc

PostPosted: Thu Feb 04, 2016 12:03 am
by MonzaRacer
I always wanted to combine the 262 3.1" stroke with the 267 3.5" block as they are both large journal cranks, the heads for the 262 are same as the 267/305. GM DID seem to neglect "trimming" the chamber's to achieve a bit more compression as I used to work in head shop and tested 6 different sets, all ran from 62cc on down to 54cc but the ports and such were all the same. The biggest issue with 262s was the oe cam, switch in a cs274 stock 350 4 bbl cam and it will run like stink ,for a 262.
And the only issues with 262/267/305 iterations have be been tuning and over use of cams and fuel.
Slap a set of 350 or 400 cast manifolds and they breath as well as most race header equipt lager engines.
305 is a small bore 350, 307 is a small bore 327, 267 is a microscopic 3.5" bore 350, the 262 was a down sized 283, the only issue was it was anemic so GM added .100" to stroke to punch up bottom end.
But still the 262" engine failed miserably in GM terms and was dropped. Namely because it was warranty nightmare in failures of several versions.
Several customers actually talked their way into 350" replacements for their 262" engines.
For the Novas that came with 262 engines then getting 350s , well those do actually benefit, h body cars were strangled by fuel delivery and drive line issues.

Re: 262 sbc

PostPosted: Wed Feb 17, 2016 2:23 am
by duckblaster67
Monzaracer, let me know if you're interested in a polished std. 262cid crank! $100 shipped! BTW, I work in an automotive machine shop going on 21yrs! :th: