Inliners International Forums General Discussion Hi Performance Cost comparission

Thought it was time to update the cost comparison

The 292 build cost were from another member's recent build.
Performance parts and cost for the 700R4 were from either Summit or 12Bolt.com

The cost of the stock 292 build is $2190 + the cost of the 700R4 from summit is 1843 == $4033 for the stock rebuild and trans. Then the cost of the performance parts for the 292 are listed below that.

The transmission was added in to the 292 build to keep the same engine/transmission configuration as the complete drop out running engine was quoted with the 2wd 4l60e.

FYI the 4l60e is a 700R4 with electronic shift controls.

I posted this on the vortec4200 site since I can directly post attachments. Prices are current.

price comparision

Your costs are based on info I just gave you for my somewhat stock 292 rebuild...
As always you need to consider what vehicle the engine is being swapped into...
In my situation..1968 Chevy K10 original four wheel drive 4 speed...
Is it easy to adapt the 4200 to the SM465 4speed or any older GM manual transmission and or bellhousing? And necessary modifications to the 4200 oil pan to clear front drive axles.
Do you think the 4200 makes the same or better torque than a 292 at 2500 rpm? This is important for a truck used as a truck..

Link to wards site - the power curve is based on the SAE net correction so when compared older engine which were rated SAE gross the difference is ~ 15% lower.

http://wardsauto.com/news-analysis/general-motors-vortec-42l-dohc-i-6

In any case its about 260 lbs/ft @ 2500 rpm. The torque curve is pretty flat from 1500 to 5500. Have a look and judge for your self. This is in full stock emissions trim - once a better exhaust and PCM power tune is installed the engine make more power. The cost of doing this is included in the cost comparison.

Found this for the 292

http://www.chevyc60.com/the_engine_page.htm they claim a stock 292 made 262 lb/ft net @ 2000 rpm.

If anyone has better info - please update.

The cost comparison included the cost of the rear sump oil pan to address the front axle issue.

To adapt the bell housing to the traditional I6 (194-292) bolt pattern the parts are available.

Here is whats needed to do the job:

bell housing adapter plate including 2 long hollow dowel pins $220

Hitachi gear reduction starter - rough cost $175

or a Tilton starter $340

+ starter nose adapter $180

Alternative is to modify the bell housing to add a bump to clear the stock start nose as it protrude past the ring gear.

For an PG/th200/350/400/700 A torque converter spacer (TC) is needed $120 - 140 depending on the trans. This provides support to the TC nose and adds the length needed fill the gap that 3/8" bell housing spacer introduced.

So for an automatic install - this adds $340 if you modify the bellhousing + $540 for the most expensive bolt in starter option.

all the parts to do an automatic transmission conversion are available.


The biggest issue right now is manual transmission flywheels.

There are a number of efforts underway to solve this supply issue.

So? I kept my old straight 6 because, well, it's an old straight 6. If I wanted something modern why the heck would I bother with a 4200 when I can do so, so much more with an LS? Especially when the LS has gobs of aftermarket support.

You keep pushing the 4200 but nobody is listening...

Main reasons are:

1) its different.
2) a near stock 4200 with a chinese turbo is a 450 hp engine.

LS engine swaps are everywhere, just like every one with a SBC had a holley carb, Edlebrock intake and some brand of headers in years past.

This is the inliners right? dedicated to all inline engines.

The reaction that people get to a 4200 swap is a crowd of folks trying to figure out what it is... try asking some of the others that had done the swap.

I've discussed this topic with a few inliners over the years including Tom L. and the more common theme was the assumption that there is no support for the 4200 is no longer true.

4200's are the same as the beer gogglers at the local bar..........Ugly as hell!

Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder. When I'm holding beer I like the looks of the old sixes too. Just clinging to my God, guns, and GMCs.
Here is one of our local member's 4.2 in a '29 roadster. These pictures are from 2013. He has his new turo engine in it now and the hood still fits. It may be different but it's not ugly. Well, unless I'm holding a beer.

I'd rather have my 292 in my 66 then a 4200 any day. Not only does it Match the truck a TON better, it's also original to that year and will perform perfectly fine. Now if I had an 80's or 90's C10 then sure...4200 would fit right in. But to me..even LS swaps are out of place in old trucks and cars.

I will admit that the 29 Roadster is one nice looking setup. Seen it in person.
But normally, the 4200 looks like a bad science project in a older engine bay.

In 1957 I was allowed to hang around when my brother helped his friend put a 283 from a newly wrecked '57 Chevy into his '40 Ford. We thought that itty bitty engine looked funny. For a while there were even after market valve covers that were supposed to make a SBC look like a Flathead. They didn't. The '40 ran so good we just got used to the funny looking engine. I've heard similar stories of how the Flathead was received by some of the 4 Banger guys and we've all seen the 250s and 292s disguised as older sixes. …..in the eye of the ……..

Well, there is a much larger crowd on the 4200 forum that have an appreciation for these newer engines being swapped into other engine bays apparently. There is always going to be those that agree to disagree on the subject, but there is far more swaps being done with these engines than is being discussed here. Leo has even converted to Atlas power. One thing that has remained constant with time is change. I'm glad each generation of engineers at the Big 3 has embraced change, I'd hate for us to still be driving Model A's and T's around today. Having driven some really nice restored ones myself, i'd never purposely drive one again.

Probably none of you have seen Steve's roadster..

Body off

ready to go

For those of you that don't remember, the first engine I built for my 51 GMC was a very well built 292, this was the engine Tom used during his 292 dyno tests. They put 500 pulls on it and then he sold it to someone else. Ask him how well built it was..

I was really disappointed with it, mind you I intended to turbo charge it and never got there. For the money I put into it I could have bought brand new (at the time) 4200 from GM and been $2500 and power ahead.

efi-diy,
That 292 did have a problem, when pulling it apart, it was noticed that the alum gear on the camshaft was coming off. This could have had a severe impact on cam timing.
It did run perfect on the dyno, not quite 500 runs, but a bunch. The only failure during the dyno pulls was the cam bearings.

It is running happily today in a mid 60's pickup. The gentleman loves it. He pulls trailers and uses it for fun. It is a driver.

How would the aluminum gear come off?

Cam gear coming off.
If it was pressed on, metal is distorted in the gear bore and it will lose retention on the cam. Seen this happen with too many customers.
The proper way is to heat the cam gear to about 400-500 degrees in the oven. Maybe cool the cam in the freezer. It should practically fall on or maybe need a gentile persuasion from a dead blow hammer. When it cools, it is set for life.

This thread is as bad as saying you should do a 350 SBC instead of an inline 6 simply because the 350 is Cheaper. C'mon. No one cares. Save your 4200 for a 4200 forum. Obviously by the replies in this thread No one really cares. Just cause You don't like the older gen inline 6's doesn't mean EVERYONE has to have a stinkin 4200! And just cause you had ONE problem with ONE 292 doesn't mean ALL 292's are bad either.

The 4200 is a inline, that's what get's it placed in our club. I respect the guy's who use their talent to get the vehicles modded to accept this engine.

My best advice to efi-diy, keep showing examples of 4200's and let people decide what is best for them.

I think he is doing the best he can at doing that, people are not so receptive of the new technology in their engine bay.

At least efi-diy is working with a inline, has one in his vehicle and is working to further it's development. He is sticking his neck out to develop the parts needed to install this into older vehicles.

There are many people on this forum who do not contribute in any fashion or run or have run a inline in their vehicle in the past 25 years.

I cheer him on!

I hear ya Tom, And yes...It is an Awesome thing that he knows so much about the 4200 series engine. Good on him for being able to make those into a mean engine! But he is a bit pushy about it and I'm not the only one who notices. Plus because of ONE bad experience he's basically calling the 292 a waist. I don't know, I guess you either like things or you don't. Problem for me is I'm still trying to get mine Going! haha! The truck is holding me back....and a thing called Time to.

Back to the topic...

Your 295 build was downright affordable. My six was double that, but then again, I did ARP studs that caused a bunch of extra labor and there were a few glitches on the way.

I just looked up on Summit, rebuilt performance 4.2L $3419. When I first read about the 4200, I thought dang, I should've done that. Modern engine, throttle body. But then, it's a bigger project than I could handle. Since I had the numbers matching original engine, I stuck with the 230 and converted it to a 250. It's a whole lot easier to drop the original engine in and not have to worry about this and that not working.

Of course, people keep pointing out how you can get an engine from a scrap yard to cut the costs. But that's just buying somebody else's problem and the sixes are really hard to find.

BTW if somebody needs an torn down 250 engine *cheap*, I'll make a deal. It'll cost beer. I've got a lift for your truck. Never been bored, but a little rust in the cylinders. Nothing a nice hone can't solve if you're really tight on cash. But for some reason the crankshaft is from a 230. :-) You can get a new crank and bearings for $200.

Mark

Nothing wrong - keeping it original.

Locally I wait until winter time when the wrecks show up - it then ended up bent around a pole - they were a running engine. If they rolled - that a tougher one - no idea if then ran upside down.

Well the reason i went with upgrading my stock 250 is it did end up being cheaper than building a 350. Taking a 350 block and adding Vortex heads, cam, intake and exhaust may be cheaper than a full inline rebuild. But changing out everything else from starter, fuel pump, alternator, PS pump, radiator, radiator support, engine mounts, HEI, water pump, brackets, pulleys, water neck and vacuum accessories. There just are no parts in common that can be reused when swapping out a Chevy L6 for a SB V8. And then for affordability, the L6 can be upgraded in stages; whereas the V8 has to be done all at once in one major investment. So for my build, L6 was cheaper. The second reason I choose to stick with the L6 is that it got so much attention from people, V8s are pretty common and a bit boring in comparison.

That's a good strategy! Not too snowy here very often to count on that.

Oh, not complaining at all. I hemmed and hawed for nearly a year before deciding to fix up the original. And I decided because it was the original engine. If it weren't I'd probably have done the chevy turnkey 350. Get the theme? Less work...

The hopped up 250 in this '67 Camaro feels at first like too much for this vintage chassis to handle. Glad I didn't put anything too big in it lest I'd be replacing entire suspension.

Now, how long do you think the 3.08 10-bolt rear end will hold up? Is there a tow-truck in my future and a new 12-bolt posi-traction? Not looking forward to either the cost or the hassle. Anyways, really off topic here...

You have all the same reasons I have for keeping mine. A little at a time has made the inline really wake up.

I'll probably keep my compression low, however, so I can increase the PSI in other ways...

Yep, SBC's are boring as heck...I don't even like car shows because everyone is like minded. All the stinkin same engine.

I originally bought the Camaro as a non-runner, and intended a V8 and auto swap. But i played around with it and got it running (fuel lines rotted, 3 and 4 plug wires swapped, negative cable frayed, shift interlock solenoid disconnected, Thermac vac hose off, bad alternator, bad water pump). So when I posted pics of it online, a lot of people said keep the L6 and be different.

My GMC originally came with an inline 6 (no engine when I got it) and after looking at other engine swaps - it stayed an inline.

Most people know what a 250 looks like - no so with the Atlas..

Everywhere I go it draws a crowd.

Well Marc, If you are driving an old GMC pickup with an intercooler up front and the radiator in the bed folks will look it over. I did! Next time I want a ride. By then I'll have ridden in Tom's roadster, Danny's '60 pickup and the rest of the 4.2s that the Northern Nevada Inliners members have.

Hauling a-s with classic iron is priceless

Sorry Marc I had too. Looks like the subject lost a
little steam

I think a thread like this can easily be divided into 2 subforums similar to the HAMB, where they have Traditional Hot Rods and Traditional Customs. We seem to keep having the debate of Originality/Traditional vs. High Tech/Non-Traditional.

And for the record I would build a newer 4200 if I was doing a scratch build. I like the newer stuff but just don't have the time or energy to build and maintain another one. We have talked about going to one years ago but didn't want to cut up the truck to do it.

Lessee:
You spent 3x what a used 700R4 and a rebuld kit would cost. Not to mention I/m using A833 O/D which was $400 + $300 in cluch ect.

Had to rebuild his 292. Given the end of productin for the 4200 was some time ago, can we assume that they do not need rebuilding?

As far as appearacne fun etc, each to their own. Personally I have been giving thought to '06 trailblazer frame put under an 80's truck. A little frame and drive shaft work and somewhere to hide all those modules and you'd be golden.

GM tested these engines to 300,000 miles, 3 reasons newer engines last what they do:

- better oil ( ok not for flat tappet camshafts)
- no choke
- coil near plug ignition

The last 2 means that the engine needs way less enrichment/duration during cold starts so less oil wash down.

For sure an early (say 2002) 4200 might need to be gone through but the cost of the engine is going to be a lot less also.

Later engines bolt them in.

My 2006 Colorado has 140,000 miles on it and running strong.

I know a guy that slid an '06 trailblazer frame under a '50 Chevy PU. Shipped the untested truck from Alaska to Seattle - drove it from the ferry dock to the nearest alignment & exhaust shop. Then they went on a tour of the NW including a stop at Bonneville.

Just for giggles I poked ebay to see how much an earlier 4200 was going for - this a long block engine - $375.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/03-04-TRAILBLAZER-ENGINE-4-2L-VIN-S-8TH-DIGIT-464196-/141997558969?fits=Model%3ATrailblazer&hash=item210fb6ccb9:g:aCwAAOSwmc1XPPUr&vxp=mtr

Since D13 asked..

crankshaft with bearings $421.99
head complete with cams $668.99
rings $66.89
head gasket $44.79
head bolts (required) $44.79
oil pump repair kit $91.79
timing chain $53.79
chain guide both ~$31
front and rear main seals ~20

This is enough for a backyard rebuild >> ~1400
Give it a light ball hone, wash and assemble.

Pistons if needed $61 ea.
Con Rods if needed $40 ea.

Only machine work if needed to go OS pistons bore/hone and deck the block.

Main bearing housing line hone - this would need to be determined when the engine was torn down.

All prices are current from Rock Auto.

Put my spare 250 shortblock on Craigslist. Guy contacts me, says he's got an overhauled 250 plus working power glide he'll sell me for $400.

I almost want to cry, but then remember how awful my overhaul was done before I bought it. I've got quality.

If you need a working 250, I'll pass along the contact.

Bringing my recent find into the cost comparison discussion..... my neighbor found a truck for free, from one of his contacts, and I'm getting a free chevy 350 and a 350 trans any day now.... free.... as in no money, just yank them out and scrap the rest, might get some money for the shell even Not sure about the trans but the engine is destined to go in my Volvo 740...

I just did the same thing with an Econoline van 300 that had a bad trans. Pulled the engine and bits and re-sold the rest. As a matter of fact I've never had to pay more than $50 for a rebuildable core, and I've bought / been given dozens. If you are patient deals will find you. Kinda like looking for pearls in oysters.

I was more active in the Inliners club in the 90's before the Internet became popular. We had to discuss this stuff in person... And like today there was the " old school" and "modern" engine discussions, but it was the GMC 302 or Chevy 261 VS the Chevy 250-292...
Not everyone needs or wants a modern looking engine in their vintage car/truck or needs the performance potential..Open the hood and it all looks so simple with an old inline.
On the other hand, if I wanted a powerful 6 cylinder in a more performance oriented vehicle I would consider a more modern engine.

If I wanted a more powerful, modern inline engine it would be an S54 from BMW.