Does any one want to talk about GM 4 bangers? I just got a '80-'81 Iron Duke rebuilt long block. I thought they used the same bellhousing as our 6s but it's the same as the 60* v6, some S10, Jeeps, and Dodges. I want to use a trans with a standard Chevy bolt patern. It has a cross flow head. They are strange looking. Will the 181 crank fit the 151? Will a SBC flywheel fit? One piece main seal? There are two holes on the right side of the block that have cam drive gears in them. One is for the distributer. What is the other one? I think I may have been better off just buying a 181. Beater

Beater,
From what I have found you have the jeep/ pontiac/ s-10 version. There are performance heads available for that engine. That engine continued and was used in Fiero's.
Super duty parts were avail thru GM, heads, intakes and everything else.
The head bolt pattern is almost the same as the 153/181 GM engines.
I think they share cams, timing components, front covers .

153/ 181 have the standard SBC bolt pattern on the bell housing. The nice thing with 181's is they produced them currently. I have a few from forklifts with 17000 hrs on them! They are a 4" bore engine. One piece rear seal to. Different heads were used.
The forklift engines used a siamesed intke port head.
Boat engines used both a 8 port head and the siamesed head. I think there maybe 2 versions of 8 port head. There is also a aftermarket replacement head.
Flywheels for 153/181 are the same as SBC for the corresponding 1 piece or 2 piece seal.

The 2 holes on yours is to put the Distributor in 2 different locations depending on application.
Not sure on your flywheel or bell for the 151 you have.

Thanks Tom. I have an old Clifford catalog that lists cams for these. The 151 has one part number and the 153-181 have another. They all use the same timing set as our 6s. They share the same cam bearings and timing cover. Valve covers are the same for all heads. The bell housing pattern is called the metric or small corporate pattern.
Valve sizes are 1.5 &1.72 and in some 181 heads Mercruisers 1.6 & 2.0+. Some Volvo, OMC, & Mercruisers ane the 153s and 181s. !20 and 140 hp. The Iron Dukes seem to produce 90 to 110 hp. GM used the Duke in lots of Chevy, GMC, Buick, Olds, Pontiac applications. Jeep used them for a couple of years in CJs and DJs. Mine is going in a '26 Chevy roadster. After the MS of course. Maybe with the MS. They used a single BBL TBI on the Dukes and there is an unmolested '88 Chevy Citation at Pick&Pull. Beater

The 151 VC is different than the 153/ 181.

I'd like to find a intake for the 153/181. Want to put one in a field buggy for the kids. Keep it tamed down with the 4 cyl.

A turboed 181 would be a little beast! The kids could cover the field in no time.

SPA does make a turbo manifold for the 153/181 siamese head. Hmmm.

Well,,, w/you being a dealer for them (SPA), you should be able to get it cheap for him. Correct?


MBHD

There are 3 different 8 port heads,.2 marine and 1 industrial. The only part off the Iron Duke 151 you can use on a 153/181 is the pushrod guide plates. All 3 of the 8 port Gaskets , ., and the 8 port compared to the 5 port ., , the smallest 8 port is the industrial engine.

Here's some more info.,
The 153,230 and 307 all share the same bore and stroke.
The 153,230,250 and 283,307 all share the 3.875” bore and the 181, and 327 ,350 share a 4” bore.
The 153,181,194,230 and 250 and Vega 4 share the same rods, 1.030” wide at the big end.
You can use the stock or aftermarket straight or splayed cap's on your 4 or 6 engine if the are for the small block Chevy & for the small journal crank. >>
if you run a roller cam you use chevy SBC lifters and Olds 350-455 tie bars..>>
The 153,181,194,230,250 all share the same timing gear and the crank gear is shared with the 292
Push rod guide plates you use the 350-455 Olds or the 151 chevy for the 1977-79 engine.

bore and the 181,250 and 327 ,350 share a 4” bore.

250 what,,,,, has a 4"bore?
Typo?

MBHD

Don't we all wish it did!
Pete

Sure do, & a stroke of 3.75- 3.85"

MBHD

Most likely if the 250 = 3.875" bore x 3.530 stroke

The 153 is 3.875 X 3.25 and the 181 is 4.0 X 3.60. Do they both use the same main bearings? Can the 153 be bored .060 like the 6s. Can the use small block rods or is there a width issue like with the 6s? Beater

Yes to the overbore,main bearings show up as different parts numbers, no to the SBC rods (The 153,181,194,230 and 250 and Vega 4 share the same rods, 1.030” wide at the big end)

So , a 153 bored .060 over with a 181 crank would be about 175ci. Custom pistons? Is the valve spacing the same as the 6s? Would 1.60s and 1.94s work? With the 5 port head would you use lumps in the intakes or just skip it and go to the 8 port with the big valves? I kind of like the idea of using a '62 Chevy II 4 banger in a bare bones 1500 lb roadster. The last 4 cylinder I had was a Morris Minor Woody. It was fun to drive. Beater

With a 5 port head the lumps are a dirrect fit. I would use 1.84/ 1.6 for a moderate motor and 1.94/ 1.60 on a hot one.

The 5 port will perform very well.

The good 8 port comes with 1.84 intakes. The individual runners are a plus and will allow for a smoother running engine with better fuel distribution.

Either head will need custom headers and possibly a custom intake.

150-200 HP and 1500 lbs could be alot of fun to drive. Tom

I've been told that you can turn down the 181 mains to use them in the 153 and use Dodge Omni 4cyl. rods and stock pistons? I'm still trying to confirm this. The person who really has the knowledge is Sarge Nichols in Ft. Smith Ark. who is the 4 cyl. advisor for the club.

He should get on here and advise us. Here are some pictures of the Duke .

Phew, I've got to sit down, my head is spinning! Such interest!

All L4 motors are pretty balance-sensitive above about 2.2 liters (134"), it's not an accident many engines fall between 2.0 and 2.2.
It's just not possible to balance them enough to take the shaking out (except a counter-rotating weight, etc.).
The best way to reduce this is:
1. automatic transmission to un-couple the driveline from the vibe
2. big rod ratio to reduce the side thrust (long rod, short stroke, both)
3. absolute minimum reciprocating weight (light rod and piston with short compression distance and small pin)
4. squishy motor mounts
5. high quality damper specifically for this engine

Except for the automatic transmission -- perish the thought! -- that fairly describes my 2008 Mazda Miata, which is smaller but revs freely and gets itself on right well. It is quick and smooth.

God's Peace to you.

d
Inliner #1450

Is the 2.2 Vega or the Quad 4 related to these engines. We know the Vega uses the some rods. What else? The cam in my 151 has two drive gears and hole in the block in the front and back of the right side. Is that two different distributer/oil pump locations?

If you want something different to power that sheet metal you salvaged from Harrah's use your 151 and add a 392 hemi head. That's a SBC head on a 151 in the background.

I'm kinda" going for "cute." How close does the SBC head come to fitting? Would it have an advantage over the cross flow or the 8 ports?

Those engines were at the Arias shop in CA, also saw one of their (Arias) Hemi heads for the BBC on one too. I think they are all one off units to just try and they all probably had one-off cams etc. to make them work.

Do any of the 151s or the 3.8 V6 bell housings have a standard Chevy trany bolt pattern? Do the 151 starters bolt to the bell housing?

I believe the V-6 3.8s are B.O.P.(Buick,Olds,Pontiac) bolt pattern? Not a Chevy engine.

MBHD

OK, Thanks. I didn't know what BOP meant. That will help in my searches. That pattern is also called the small corporate and the metric pattern. Now to find a bell housing that will fit between a 2.5 and a Saganaw. Beater

gearhead (mod for the BB) may know what is needed.

Tom, these sites may help you, http://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/097456.html , http://ironduke7.tripod.com/dukefaq.htm and http://quad4rods.com/index.php?page=shop...t&Itemid=100041

Gary, Thanks! There is a lot to study there. It ought to keep me out of your hair for a while. I just got back From Reno where I ate ribs at the Nugget cook off and made a deal for a 153. Tom

Now we're gettin' somewhere! I shouldn't show you this until I grab a few 181 cranks.
181 Duke

Just to confuse you a little more look at the Mercruiser 470 engine which is basically 1/2 a Ford 460 with a Chev bellhousing pattern. You can 460 pistons and an aftermarket Ford head (Boss?)and upper valve gear. http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=256713&highlight=mercruiser ., and ., http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=289260

You have talked to me, you know how confused I am, why would you throw a whole new engine into the mix? The GM possibilities are almost endless. We have GMs that won't bolt up to GMs and you add a Phord that does bolt to a GM. Man, I thought you were my friend. Beater

A fenderless model a sedan with a merc 4cyl has been on my list of future projects for a while. The potential of the super cobrajet head combined with the ability to bolt to a gm trans makes this a very appealing engine choice.

The biggest problem. with the 470 is the alternator which can be replaced with a kit for a GM single wire. I've seen a single new RHS aluminum 460 head at Summit when they changed models going for under $200.00 bare. I'm pretty sure some Ford racer screwed up one head and have spares around.. ""quote" Man, I thought you were my friend. Beater ", Tom I am being freindly because I never mentioned the Quad 4's that look like Offy engines or the Ecotecs that can put out up to 1400 HP using a factory manual and sourced parts.

Tom how about a Chevy engine (Ecotec) with bellhousing adaptor that we made from a blueprint we got from Jack Roush Performance (Ford) ,

Jalopy, nice job. Put some pics of your dragster here. You guys are beyond me. I'm still trying to get my head around all the interchange on the 151,153, & 181 versions. These are where I'm going. As usual I'm a few decades behind. Were you and Dave still with us at the Nugget when the T with the Quad 4 came by? I know a guy in Carson City who has a built Q4 for sale for way less than he has in it.
Thanks to everyone who is posting here. You are teaching me a lot. This build would be a natural for a megasquirt with two single throat GM TBIs. If I can work it I want to get the Duke at the wrecking yard with the harness and ECM. I need to get rid of some stuff. Beater

I think mopar performance also sells a new 4cyl that uses the new hemi head. I saw one in a mag in some LSR car that George Poteet paid to have built.

I looked at a really cool Quad 4 today! A lot of great after-market goodies and a custom built 3-2 manifold, It is set up for, and has, a Camero T5. I'll try to get back and get some pictures.

Look at these pages for Quad 4 info and parts, http://www.angelfire.com/il2/insig2/quad4r.html , http://quad4rods.com/ ,

Much better designed engine than any iron Duke IMO.


MBHD

Nostalgia styling would call for an Iron Duke or a 153/181, cute styling would be captured by the Quad 4, but for overall power the Ecotec leads the way. I'm glad I don't have to run against this dragster. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xY6tMOfZhIs

I think I'll be happy building the 153 for my roadster, But if not there is plenty of room to grow. I won't be racing that dragster either! Beater

I second Jalopy's recommendation of http://quad4rods.com/. They have some neat stuff and John Ehrlich is a great guy.

will6er

How close will the left header for a small block come to fitting the 5 port head for a 153?

As close as a BB Chevy is to a Briggs and Stratton.

I wonder how it would be to go the other direction and destroke a 181 using a 153 crank. 4X3.25 would be, basically, half a 327, a little easier on the vibrations and a bit quicker reving.

That's a thought. Just thinking of building a header. I need to wait till I get the 153 home. I think the L6 flange plates sold on ebay may be the easy way to go. The front 3 cylinders and the back one should work well. I'll know soon.

Here's my zoomies on 5 port heads,.there is divider plates on the backside and the flanges are made with a file, hole saw and drill press and taps. ,

>the flanges are made with a file, hole saw and drill press and taps.<

That is the way many of us do it. Another approach is to contact Tim Tenold, here on the site. Tim can cut flanges.

I brought the 153 home yesterday. I picked it up in Reno. The old pickup likes it a lot better than the Big Dodge! Dave and I were able to slide it into the bed on two 2X4s! It is going to be fun to work on.

Beater

Here is a link to a lengthy GM 4 cylinder thread on the H.A.M.B. . All of the information is not 100% correct , like here , but there is some good stuff. There's also an Ansen head if the guy still has it.
Checking out the 153 I see that it has no harmonic balancer just a hub and pulley. It seems a balancer would help but which one? 230? SBC? For the 5 port head it looks like a V8 header is pretty close. At least less welding than building one from scratch. And there are a lot of them laying around.

Beater

After GM went out of production with the Iron Duke, they licensed the design to Kansas Racing Products KRP Website They make new block castiogs that can be had with bores up to 4.125" and that will accecpt v8 heads directly (block is drlled for head bolt pattern) They also have cam blanks and crank blanks and different stroke cranks. These engines were used mostly in midget racing. real expensive but looks like it would be bulletproof.
I would like to see one with a LS7 head the flows 400cfm, you would probably have to rev to 8500 rpm to make use of it.

Thanks Pete. The spin off from the 153 is amazing. 4.125 thats got to start looking like a 400 sb. Keep it coming. Beater

Pete, thanks for the link.

I've been looking for them since Speedweek (the guys that just upped the record I'm after tell me thye are running one of those blocks with a SB2 head on it, 350 HP, out of 2 Liters, on the dyno they claim ).

~179 MPH average. (record)

So now I need at least a 15 layer rated suit and a parachute.

Kinda cuts into the development budget, but if it was easy, everyone would be doing it.

Check with Arias, they had one (Iron Duke) in their showroom they were selling with a SBC head and one with a 392 Hemi head on it.

I pulled the head on the 153 today. It's .040 over. Quite a bit of soft carbon but there are still hone marks in the cylinders and no ridge. The piston is about .050. below the deck. The valves look good except for one intake that doesn't look like it is centered in the seat, but they are going anyway. It's looking like I'll only have to change the things I want to. The 181 crank is on the way.

2 things I can see Beater is that the 153 crank has a smaller mains if I rcall correctly than the 181, so are you going to turn down the mains or linebore the block? As for other heads the 153/181 valve order is E-I-I-E-E-I-I-E, and the SBC is E-I-I-E-E-I-I-E so the head can be adapted but it requirss a special ground cam ,not sure but I think 151p is the opposite.

the SBC is I-E-E-I-I-E-E-I

???

The mains are the same,only the rods are 2.00" on the 153 and 2.100 on the 181 crank.

Yes the mains are the same. I'm still working on rods, pistons, and crank grind to get the deck height I want. A small block exhaust gasket placed on the 153 head lines up fine with the ports. The bolt holes don't match. I'll get some pictures of gaskets to post. Beater

Would the 153 use the same dampeners as the 6s? It just has a hub and pulley now. Are the combustion chambers on the 153 head the same as the standard 6 cyl head? I'm thinking of using a comp 260H cam. It has a 1200-5200 rpm range. I am planning on using 1.60 exhaust valves and 1.85 0r 1.95 intakes. It's a street engine, what do you think? It's .040 over and will probably stay there.

The 4 cylinders dont have the same harmonic issues the 6's have, thats why many of them use a solid hub. So you will probably be just fine reusing it.

There is a lot of talk about vibration in the 4s. It may be due to fewer power strokes per revolution and not harmonics?

It's the firing order.
The harmonics are very different.

It seems that the two added pulses would smooth the engine as would 7&8. So, I should not bother with a balancer?

1,5,3,6,2,4 -L6
1,4,3,2 - L4

L4 engines above about 2.2 liters have a second order problem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L4_engine#Balance_and_smoothness

Thanks Panic, I'm having a hard time getting my head around this part.

"The reason for the piston's higher speed during the 180° rotation from mid-stroke through top-dead-centre, and back to mid-stroke, is that the minor contribution to the piston's up/down movement from the connecting rod's change of angle here has the same direction as the major contribution to the piston's up/down movement from the up/down movement of the crank pin. By contrast, during the 180° rotation from mid-stroke through bottom-dead-centre and back to mid-stroke, the minor contribution to the piston's up/down movement from the connecting rod's change of angle has the opposite direction of the major contribution to the piston's up/down movement from the up/down movement of the crank pin."
I see how the piston speed would vary at different degrees of crank rotation, but I really don't get why the piston would move faster in the top 180 than in the bottom 180. It is what it is whether I understand it or not.

Logic would seem to dictate that the piston is traveling at the same speed at both TDC and BDC which are the 2 apexes when the crankshaft reaches the end of it's stroke and the highest speeds would be at midstroke, either power or exhaust but some resistance would be realized on the compression stroke which would be overcome by the power stroke on the opposite firing piston. If the piston goes slower how long before it gets behind?

The highest piston speed is never at mid-stroke, it's where the rod beam is at 90° to the crankpin, at roughly 70-80° B/ATDC depending on the rod ratio (unless the ratio is infinite).
The exact point is easy to calculate using
sine of rod thrust angle = .5 ÷ R/S ratio (1.8, etc.)
1 Double-click your “Calculator” icon to open it
2 Click “View”, then “Scientific”
3 Input the result from the formula above
4 In the left margin of Calculator, look for the check-box that says “Inv” - check it
5 Make sure the box marked “Degrees” (not Radians) is checked
6 Click on “sin”
7 The rod thrust angle in degrees will show in the window
8 subtract 90 (you'll get a negative number, ignore it)
9 The result is the crank position for maximum piston speed
Example: 1.8:1 rod ratio
.5 ÷ 1.8 = .27778
arcsin .27778 = 16.13°
90 - 16.13 = 73.87° ATDC

Piston speeds around TDC and BDC are always different, except for exactly TDC & BDC, when they're stopped (assuming centered piston pin, and nothing else odd).
90° crank rotation has already done more than 50% of the stroke in all engines (57% in a 1.8:1 rod motor), so the motion around TDC is faster.

The highest piston speed is just before the oil pan slows them down.

Where is that on the calculator?? (V+M)~Ex2?? or some other such garbage :):):) From a technical point I can see the difference, but on a practical level what will it have to do with the average Joe building a street engine? ???

Yes, let's use "logic would seem to dictate", instead of "garbage".

"Logic would seem to dictate", I really like the sound of that and it's even fun to say. Yes, I'm for using that instead of "garbage". You'll be hearing a lot of "logic seems to dictates" from me hereafter.
The 181 crank came yesterday. I haven't had time to fully inspect it yet. It doesn't look like a big stroker crank but 3.60" is only 1.80" center to center right? Now, the 153 rods use the 2.0 bearings and the 181 rod journal is 2.1. Thats .100" to play with + .030 undersize bearing. So is that about another 1/8 stroke if the crank is ground off center? I'm confused. Beater

In this particular instance, "logic" was completely wrong, and "garbage" provided the only accurate explanation.

?

I added a bunch of pictures of 153 stuff. There are the 6cyl flanges I'm going to use on the 4 and some comparison of 4, 6, & 8 gaskets. Sorry i don't have a V8 head gasket but put the SBC head thoughts to rest just laying the 4 gasket on a head. There are some shots of the front sump pan and crank hub. Also the 181 crank in the lathe, and a peek at the aluminum cam gear. It uses an M-62 oil pump like the 6s. Notice the piston order. 1&4-2&3 move together. Firing order is 1-3-4-2. It just has ups and downs nothing extra to smooth things out. 153 pics Beater

I drove into Carson City today to get the rear sump pan, oil pump, and pickup for the 153 from the guy I bought it from (chevy2inreno). I also stopped by Auto Machine Marine to see what my choices are for head and crank work. The main thing I learned is that the difference in the rod journal size of .100" between the 153 & 181 will most likely yield only about +.080 in stroke. It depends on the condition of the 181 crank and availability of undersize 153 rod bearings. I need to take in the crank, talk to Ernie, and contact the actual grinder in SOCAL to see for sure. I'll take the head in to get 1.95 intakes, 1.60 exhausts valves, screw in rocker studs and guides. I'll do the HAMMER removal of intake bosses and installation of my PES lumps. (Sorry Tom, I've had the lumps and hammer for a long time. ) I got 1.70 BBC roller rockers and will deal with Erson for a cam, lifters, and springs. Beater

This sounds like its going to be a fun one. How many cubes as a stroker?
What pistons will you use?

As for the lumps, you know me, a sawszall will do. My install video will work for the PES also. Tom

Well, with the 181 crank and +.080 stroke and the .040 over bore it's not quite 179 ci. If you started with a 181 + .060 bore and .080 stroke you'd have about 190.5 ci. So far I'm looking at some KB 307 pistons. I've got the .050 down the whole # to play with. It's in the planning stage. Tom

It's great to see all the interest in the the 153/181 L4 engine. I may as well throw in my two cents. I am currently building a 153 for a front engine dragster. It has been an education, and I'm willing to share what I have learned, and will learn. I had the head modified by Mike Kirby at Sissel's Automotive. He did all the good stuff: Lump ports, port and chamber work, 1.94/1.60 stainless valves, screw in studs, guide plates, springs, retainers, etc. Mike's work is top shelf, and he is one heck of a nice guy. He is the final word when it comes to head work on the L4/L6 engine series. I highly recommend him. I am working on the short block now. We'll end up with around 12.5/1 compression, and have a custom cam ground to match what we're doing. The object of this whole exercise is to run at our local 1/8 mile strip in brackets, and make some nostalgia and inline events as well. Of course, the main objective is to have fun. I'll post some pics of the head, and give more details later.

That sounds great. I'd like to see pics especially of the head work. That sounds a lot like what I plan for my head.

Another quick note. A good distributer is readily available for the 153/181. The big cap HEI from the 77-78 151 is a direct bolt-in. These were in 77-78 Chev Monza, Pontiac Sunbird, etc. A-1 Cardone part # is 301490. Hope this helps those having problems finding a decent ignition system.

I stopped by Erson Cams today and sat down with Steve Tanzi for about an hour. We discussed the 153 project and he came up with 3 different profiles. Now it's up to me to honestly look at what the car will really be doing. I need to weigh my pile of componants and seriously look a wheel choice and tire size. Whatever Erson will be grinding the cam locally. Beater

Will try and stop by there next week and see you and Steve,if everything works right

I got digging around in the Brazilian web sites and my Portuguese is not as good/bad as my spanish? but after searching Opalla 4 cilindros drag race I found what is supposed to be 2 turbocharged 153's, I think? http://wn.com/Role_de_opala!# then choose Borrachao de Opala

The cast valve covers and side covers show up occassionally on EBay and look pretty good if you sandblast them and then polish them with a buffer. http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Mercruise...essoriesQ5fGear

General Motors Brazil makes a 153 with a 16 valve head they used in rally racing that is a crossflow design. It was a 240 HP twin carb engine. I'm trying to find more references to it. ,

That is 1.5 hp per cubic inch from a naturally aspirated engine! We should vacation in Brazil.

With 16 valves in a pushrod engine it has to have an inticate rocker arm system and they moved the water neck to the side.

Yah, unless there was room (and money) to put more lobes on, the usual method is forked rockers. This does bad things to the tappet face vs. cam lobe loading, but it must work or it wouldn't be so common.
The rockers are really no more complicated than they look, and not much harder to design and make than common; they just have more bending moment in the cross plane, but IMHO this is intuitive and easily compensated for (FEA not necessary except for minimum weight) - you'll know it when you see it.
This is also sometimes used to adapt a DOHC head to a pushrod block, losing the benefit of the cam but keeping the 4 valves.

Are these cool Brazilian GM engines actually designed in Brazil or for Brazil? What about the Cosworth? Don't we have engineers here or is it just more green political correctness?
Beater

Using a Google translator line by line it seems that these were developed in the late 80's in Brazil to compete with the Cosworth Fords and Porsches, etc. on the rally circuit. I'm not sure hfow many were made, I wonder if Douglas Carbonna knows anything about them? Portugese is close to spanish but there are a lot of differences. I found it searching for "4 cilindros Opala"

Don't even worry about getting the best cylinder head possible,,just turbo it & run a lot of boost!

Even w/the lousy siamesed port designed 6 cyl head,they can make a lot of power. Your stock siamesed head is the same port layout.

Unless you just want that something different than most have,go for your search.

MBHD

I am using the stock head on my engine. It will get the same treatment as the 6s lumps, 1.94s, & 1.60s. Also screw in posts & roller rockers. Just a fun driver no boost at this time. But you are right that would be the easy and cheap way to speed.

Turbo's do make power at a reasonable cost but you loose the audible attraction of the split exhaust, Rappin at Minden would become Rumblin at Minden

how's this for a 2cent why not use two small turbos run of one of each set of 3 pipes and then this way you keep your dual exhaust.??

That'll work, here's a couple of youtubes 153's from Brazil with some noice induction systems, first one has Beaters intake he's looking for, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GO74D_Kp0n4 , and one to keep mbhd happy , http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yg9Y6H8zt3A

Found the intake, now to translate and find out where to get some. also the 6 cylinder weber intakes could also be used, made by ,Engine Racing http://www.engineracing.com.br/pecasnacionais.html ,

That first one is just where I'm headed only it will be in an open wheeled '26 Chevy roadster with a 4 speed OD. What fun!

Does any one know for sure if all the 153 heads have the same chamber volume? Are they the same as the 6s, which ones? My head appears to have chambers slightly smaller than a 6 head that is supposed to have 74 cc chambers. Is there a ratio for reduction in chamber volume per .001" removed from the head? The 153 rods big end is for the 2.00 crank pin. The 181 uses the 2.10 crank pin. Both rods are 5.7. Are they the same forging? Can the 153 be bored to take the larger bearing? How much wider are the 4 & 6 cyl rods than the V8 rods?

SBC rods are .940" and the inlines are 1.030" at the big end.

You can still find some Iron Dukes in the wrecking yards, found this one in Riverside CA with a price tag of $325. including the TH350 out of a postal Jeep.,

There was, two weeks ago, a FWD in an '88 Citation for $255at Pick & Pull. It may still be there

Ok,
Closer to using a 153 or 181 in the farm buggy. Picked up a nice 4 bbl LPgas conversion at a swapmeet this weekend. Complete and working. Going to put this on the buggy.

Need help with distributors. The industrial 181 and merc 120/ 140 hp engines used no vacum advance and maybe not even mechanical advance.

Like to run a HEI with vac advance. What application from the 70's/ 80's car will fit and have both advance options? I think 151 dist will fit if they were from the front dist location, like the inline 6 big brothers. Tom

Also need a Clifford intake for the 153 4 cyl engine.

The 151 front mount distributers should work. I'll try to get some info at work tomorrow. I'd look at some late 70s S10s & maybe the Jeeps that used the GM 151. I've seen some Distributers on eBay. Mallory made a duel point and I think an HEI but I don't know if the had advances. Beater

I found some crank casting numbers today.
153 '62-'02 (must include marine engines) These all have 2 piece rear seals, 2.0" rod pins, and 3.25" stroke. # 3788522, #3793082, #5743014
181 '60-'99 2 piece rear seal, 2.1" rod pin, and 3.60" stroke. #N393775N, #N9341352
181 '60-'99 1 piece rear seal, 2.1" rod pin, 3.60" stroke, uses 1"wide rod. #140966
181 "00-'08 1 piece rear seal, 2.1" rod pin, 3.60" stroke, uses .940 wide rod has a torque converter hole. (?) #93436083
181 "00-"08 1 piece rear seal, 2.1" rod pin, 3.60" stroke, uses .940 wide rod has no torque converter hole. (?) #93436083

The .940 rod width of the last two cranks seems the mean that they could be used with SBC rods that has the 2.1 bore. The ones with 1 piece rear seal could be used in a 151. That would add .60" to stroke. Which makes the Iron Duke a 181.

tlowe: scroll up a few posts, I listed the HEI's that are a direct, perfect fit. Jim

Here's Jim's post. And here's a Mallory on eBay.

Thanks for that , guy's.
Ebay does not have any. Where to get one? Those cars are long gone from the boneyards here.

That's cool to hear. I have a 2004 181 from a forklift. SBC rods will interchange? WOW, maybe this one will get built up for alittle 4 cyl power. The 4" bore allows the use of common SBC pistons too. Already did that on another. Tom

Tom, it looks like the .094 rods would be the same as a 350. Those would be for the ones with the 1 piece rear main seal. I'm just learning about these and am not sure. I wish I had parts to compare but the auto parts business is not what it used to be. I'm still looking for a set of 181 rods, the wide ones. Beater

If you want it's fairly easy to convert a 6 cyl. Unilite to 4 cyl by just changing the cap and rotor to get the vacum advance or I can send you the drawing for a collar to fit over the 8 cylinder distributor to fit the block and you just have to attach a 6 or 4 cyl. drive gear. ,

Does anyone know if the 153 & 181 rods are the same forging #? 153 -250 rods are plentiful and cheap, 181s are not. They are the some except for the big end bore. Can the 153-250 rods stand the over bore? Beater

You'll bore into the bolts, there too close to the edge of the inside bore of the cap and rod.

I think I found a source in Reno. If not I'll spend a day driving around Tahoe and visiting boat shops. Tough duty, I may have to spend a night or two. Beater

I got 3 181 rods today at AIMS machine shop in Reno. Casting # 7755. These are the forged rods for the cranks that use a 2 piece rear seal. I'l get pictures soon and compare them to the 153 rods. I bet something else uses this rod. Now I have a number.

Guys:

Something to check when considering the use of SBC V8 rods. The main dimensions may be correct but the V8 rods have an "offset" that the inline sixes (and I'm guessing the Chevy II 4-bangers) do not. That was one of the issues I ran across when having K1 build a set of 6.2" billet rods for my 250ci L6 project and why I couldn't use widely available "small journal" SBC V8 rods. My understanding is that, using rods with the V8 offset will cause "less than optimal results". If you check with Scat or Crower (or ???) you'll find that's why they have a unique rod for the 194/230/250 Chevy six.

Russ

I thought the difference was that the big end width is greater on the inline rods. I read somewhere they they were even the same forging but of course I can't find that now.

Beater:

I'm assuming the Chevy-II 4-banger being the smaller brother to the 194/230/250 six, nearly everything is the same (only minus two cylinders). With that in mind ...

You're right that the big end width of the six rod is wider at about 1.030" where the SBC width is .940" (as I recall). For the six, the big end diameter is the same as the SBC "small journal" (265/283ci) at 2.000" and the small end is the same at .927". The problem is the beam offset for the V8 where the L6 isn't.

Continued ...

The beam, or the pin eye?

Beater:

Continued ...

If you look at a V8 rod from the side and draw a line down through the center of the beam, you'll see that one face of the big end is closer to that center line than the other. The face (larger if I recall) that is closer to the center line is the one that faces the other rod in the V8 that shares the same crank throw. The L6 (not having a neighbor) has the same distance to either face from the beam center line.

Continued ...

Beater:

Continued ...

I don't have a V8 rod to look at but I'm guessing there is not much of a "bevel" on the big end on the side that faces the neighboring rod and there is more of one on the "outside" to clear the crank throw fillet. The L6 rod has identical bevels on both side since it has to deal with the crank throw fillets on both sides. I suspect a V8 rod used on a L6 crank (even with the right 1.030" width) would bind on the one side and I don't know how the beam offset would affect operations - I'm thinking not good.

Russ

Beater:

PS: Sorry for doing this in 3 parts. Have a strange problem with my email support that limits the size of the text I can send in any one message. Can't get a straight answer as to why from any of the tech support people involved.

Russ

Beater:

I know the "pin eye" is evenly balanced on the L6 rod. I'm not sure if it's offset (the same way the big end is) on the V8 rod or not. If I had to guess, I'd say it probably is.

Russ

I'm sitting here with a mike and a set of Manley aluminum rods for a SBC and I'm darned if I can see a difference from side to side???? Where are you getting you info from???

Jalopy45:

The stock V8 rods I have seen were slightly different and I think the Lunati rods in my son's 406ci Chevy were also slightly offset. I've also read about that somewhere and I'll see if I can dig out the article. As far as aluminum (race) rods are concerned, I'm sure you're right. Maybe the offset isn't a big issue in a race engine but perhaps has an impact if you're trying to get 100K+ miles from a daily driver? Let me see what I can dig up but the offset issue was one that was raised by the folks at K1-Technologies regarding the useability of SBC rods in the 250ci six.

Regards,

Russ

Jalopy45, Beater, and others:

I'm beginning to worry that maybe I completely misunderstood what I was told about rod "offset". If I'm not properly informed on this subject I will be back on this thread to apologize for passing on mis-information - that's certainly not my intent. Of course I can't find the article I remember reading that was in one of my vintage Hotrod "Engines" books - ain't that always the way? Let me check with the K1 folks again and I'll pass on what they tell me. But on the issue of the big end width being wider on the L6 (and so the L4?) than the V8, that alone makes the V8 rod an unusable alternative?

Russ

Russ, you are correct about the offset in the SBC rods. The beam is offset from one side on the B/E of the rod. On aluminum rods, it might not be as apparent because the beam is much wider than the beam of a stock forged steel rod, and the offset might not be as obvious to the naked eye. Also as you mentioned, for use in inlines, a chamfer on the ID of the B/E is required to each side of the rod to give clearance for the radius on the crank journals. A SBC(most any V-style engine as well) only has a chamfer cut into the side of the B/E that faces the radius.If you have ever forgotten to number the rods when you disassembled an engine, thats a good way to tell if you are putting them back in the engine with the correct orientation, by looking at the chamfer and making sure they are facing the radius. Also for racing applictaions involving inlines, the rod bearings are often radiused on both sides as well to clear the radius'.

Ok, So that would make me believe even more that they may all be the same forging and that the material taken from the inside creates the off set and causes the rod to be .094". I still would like to know if the later 181 with the one piece seal and .094 big end width might be a V8 rod. V8, L6, & L4 rod bearings are the same width and are either 2.0 or 2.1 depending on which engine. Beater

Russk, I wish some of the people who email me had your server. Short and sweet!

I'm humbled, been throwing SBC's together since the 60's using all kinds of pieces and never noticed the offset. May explain a few of my fireball displays at the 1000 ft. mark?? Never too old to learn.

Beater:

You're right about sending "short and sweet" emails. But the problem I'm having is a pain at times. Now there's no (practical) limit to the size of messages I can receive ... go figure.

Russ

Jalopy45:

I wish I could say my "heads up" on the V8 vs. L6 rod was due to years of hands on experience and sage wisdom. Sadly, it's far from it. My "insight" was due to the fact that just a few weeks ago I was wandering down the same garden path, thinking I might use "small journal" V8 rods in my 250 project. I wrote K1 asking if they would sell six of them and they replied with an explaination as to why that was NOT a good solution (big end width, beam offset, and such). I ended up sending them an OEM 250 rod so they could take all the critical measurements (except for the 6.200 c/c length I requested) to ensure the finished billet H-beam rods I ordered would be correct. So, more of case of dumb luck on my part.

Russ

Looking more closely at the V8-6 rods I can see that one side has been machined than the other. This would account for the off set and the narrower overall width. I would like to know if any one has a V rod with #7755 in the top above the wrist pin bore. If we could get the forging before they were narrowed? Beater

Here are the cams we worked up a few weeks back at Erson. I went by Monday and Steve and I discussed a suggestion Tlowe made. That was to use cam #3s lift on cam #2. I just decided to go with #3. It is the hottest of the three but still quite streetable. It should be fun in a light car. I'm still 1 rod short of a set.

Beater,
Might be able to help you with a rod, soon. We can PM about that.

Got my cam from them. Solid lifter 220 dur @ .050 , .510 lift after the lash. It should run real good in the farm buggy. The boy and I tore down the shortblock and took it in to get machining going.

What did Steve say about the different lobes? I ran into problems wanting a different lift. Tom

Steve said he could do if a lobe plate existed. He even said they could make a new plate but it would cost more. I just went with cam #3. It's a bit hotter than #2 but in my application it will work well. If I doesn't I'll get another one. I've got guys here who are contacting their boat builder friends searching for rods. Tahoe has lots of boat stuff around. We didn't have an Inliner meeting this month so I didn't see the guys. Will see them in January. Mean while I have plenty of work to do. Thanks, Beater

"I'm still 1 rod short of a set. "

I don't know what to say.

Will6er

That's all changed. Now my rods runnith over. I got a full set with pistons on eBay for $75. I'm not sure they are the ones for the 2 piece seal crank buy if not I'll stroke the 151 with a new style 181 crank. They are plentiful.

153 head on eBay. This head must be early. The center exhaust ports are Siamese type. Cast #3788518 or 618?

does anyone have the specs for Corvair rods?? I know some parts interchange with 6's and 8's like the lifters and some of the bearings and pushrods with 8's.

Looks like the standard 5 port head to me. I'll take some pix today of the ones I have and post them.

Check the center port on this one. The exhaust ports are not Siamese. On the eBay head the boss is set back like the intakes.

2 heads only a few years apart, , ,

Mine Is a third form. It has the emission tubes in the exhaust ports. The manifold mating flange on the ends is different.

I got my 181 rods today. I can put the 181 crank in the 153 block and see what deck height I have with the 250 pistons. It should be close.

Bet they will be sticking out of the hole, just barely. Just file them, better yet use a sawzall! Goodluck, keep us posted.

My pistons have a .060 dish. I'm hoping most of that is sticking out. If it isn't right up there I'll have to take the sawsall to the block!

A bastard cut file will do wonders also. An added bonus is that will make a really flat surface.

MBHD

Who did they name those after? They called them that long before any of us were around. Did they know we were coming?

Here's a couple of shots from my phone on an altered V8 HEI to use on a 4 or the 90 degreee V6 could be changed the same way. The housing is shortened and a sleeve placed over the reamainder to match the 4/6 cyl. distributor mount and the 4/6 cyl. gear installed farther up the distributor shaftr to line up with the cam.

Here's what an 8 port 181 head looks like, thewre is one on EBay now with large v alves and screw in studs still @ $200. http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Marine-Ch...=item4cf4639cb6 ,

I don't understand. Do you use the 8 cyl cap for the 4?
Jan

You could just using every other post.9 I'm using one V8 distributor to fire 2 four cylinder engines running in tamden, but I'm converting some Mallory Unilites which you just have to change the cap and rotor to a 4 or 6 cylinder.

I got a pretty hot lil 181 out of a 1950 Willys that I found for a buddy. He didnt want the 4 banger and offered it to me. I have wanted one forever for a lil T modified project that I have been collecting parts for. Anyways mine came with an Erson cam but its done, few lobes are toast. So Beater what were Ersons prices like? I am thinking of cam #2, what lifters are you running?
My mill came with a Clifford 4 barrel intake meant to go on a 153 head, but someone built an adapter to mate them up?? It came with a header too, and a Mallory dual point dizzy too. The Clifford intake has way smaller ports then the 181 head, making it restrictive for sure. I am going to sell the Clifford intake to a 153 owner to pay for the Erson cam and lifters.

-Shiny

Shiny, It sounds like you got a sweet deal! I paid $160 something for my cam out the door. I don't know if that was a deal or not. I didn't ask. Steve said stock lifters would be fine. I'm sure Steve Tanzy kept the profiles we worked up if not send him a copy of cam #2. I drive by there all the time if you need my help let me know. I'd like to see pictures of your engine. I didn't know the 181 ports were bigger. Is yours like the one in Gary's post or does it just have two intake ports? A friend gave me a 181 head but I haven't picked it up yet. I don't know which one it is. I'm getting my 153 head ready to send to Tom Lowe for a treatment. It will get 1.84 intakes and 1.60 exhausts. lumps, porting . and screw in studs. That will make my build, Beater

Jalopy45: I like that distributor mod, thanks for the photo.

Beater are you Six Ball on the HAMB?
The ports are way smaller on the 153 head. You should get the 181 head done its way better flow. Only drawback is you have to build an intake. I will call Steve and will prolly get the same cam you got.
Thanks eh!

-Shiny

No, I just stole that guy's avatar. OK, it's me, I'm busted.

I'm sending the 153 head to TLowe. He says it will flow around 225cfm when done. I've already got the intake and header flanges. It will be fine for my build. I'll take a good look at the 181 head. It may go on the 151 sitting in the corner. It has the cross flow head that reminds me of Swiss cheese.

Tell Steve you heard it from me. It can't hurt. What is your engine going in? Tom

Ohhh great 153 guru's....
I wanted to share a build that I did with my Pops in 1989. I bought a 1953 CJ3-B from a fire department that used it to scout grass fires for about $400.00 and it was a steal. The Jeep had a 45hp flathead ford and the head was toast. Pops's said, "Let's put a 153 in it", so we did. It took some modifications and I will list them later. But for now, It has been sitting for 15 years and I want to freshen it up. My understanding was that 153's were basically a 327 SBC cut in 1/2. Everything 327 went in it. Crank, pistons, rods etc. We did have to lengthen the mainshaft (had it machined in Hayward, CA) to fit the stock T-18 back in it. But the 327 bell housing and started bolted right up. We built it for torque as the main objective was to run it on the Rubicon. We fabricated mounts for a quad core Chevelle radiator and slapped and electric fan on the outside between the grill. This was a great bui;d and made for a rig that wouldn't over heat while idling for long periods of time. That's my inliner story and I'm sticking to it!

Sounds good to me. The 153 is four cylinders of a 230 L6 but there is a lot os early V8 cross over. I just finalized a 151 Jeep Iron Duke deal today. I get it Saturday. Get yours going again and show us how it works.

OK, I picked up the '80 Jeep 151 today. It has a cross flow head like the FWD one I got on eBay but the bell housing pattern is Chevy. It has a coil in cap HEI with vacuum advance. It has a 2 bbl carb and a mechanical fuel pump. The bell housing has the Chevy pattern on the block side and what looks like Ford on the tranny side. It is complete except for the power steering pump and alternator. The guy took it out of his jeep because it didn't have enough power after he put 33" tires on it. It has 80,000 miles on it. I'm not sure but I think it should use the wide rear main bearing. If so it would take a 181 crank and be a 181. That is a gain of 30 ci using stock parts. It could also use a 153 or 181 head. I will get some comparison pictures posted soon. PICTURES

I just finished unloading the Jeep 151, a brake in the snow. I need skis on the cheery picker. Looking at the distributer it is clear that the cap is the same as a V8 only four of the eight bosses have contacts. It is a big ugly unit but is HEI with vacuum and mechanical advance. I matched the trans side of the bell housing wit the T5 from a Mustang. They are the same. An easy way to put those T5s on our L4 and L6 engines. The clutch arm, pivot ball, and throw out bearing are pretty simple too. The bell housing is very light aluminum and is probably not real strong. I don't know yet if it will clear a standard Chevy clutch and fly wheel. The jeep appears to have a 9 or 9 1/2 inch clutch.

Sounds like and awesomne score Beater.... what year was the Jeep? Sounds like it will be the perfect motor for your project. Ski's on the cherry picker sounds like a fun fab job!!! I might be up for that one.... skinny or fat???

The Jeep was an '80. In the next day or two I will try to fire it up. I think fat skis. I don't plan on doing cross country runs.

I was just going through the new Power Manual and was looking at the hybrid heads. What head is that Mercruiser in page 185? None of the 153 or 181 Mercs I've seen are cross flow. It is not like the Iron Duke. Funny I didn't notice that in the old book. That would be another option for the L4s. Leo says the bolt pattern is the same.

Today's lesson. Some 181 cranks have a one piece rear main seal and some use the older 2 piece seal. Some use rods with a bottom end width equal to the sixes and some are the same width as V8s. I thought the one piece seal went with the narrow rods. It seems that some 2 piece seal cranks use narrow rods. It appears that I have one of those. Oh well, those rods are easier to find. I'm going to take a good look at V8 rods.

The small block rods are too narrow. The other 181 rods are just right. I don't know exactly why the first one was so tight. Maybe I didn't press the pin to the right depth. The 250 pistons may not clear the crank.

Rods are fine. Wrist pin was a bit tight. The 250 pistons wont work. They are still a bit down the bore. That plus the dish and a slope shape toward the cylinder wall just wont get it. Tried one of the 153s and it sticks out about half of the top ring land and hits the crank at the pin boss. I could fix that. CRs and 1.779" for the 153 and 1.64" for the 250. If I could find a 307 flat top set at 1.655 I think it would be perfect. Well, close enough. So if someone has four .040 over 307 flat tops laying around.....

Beater,
Remind me what mix of parts you are working with.
Crank
block

The block is a 153 that is .040 over. The crank is a 181. 181 rods are 5.7.

Beater,
Mic the hole and tell me what skirt length you are looking for. Have a ton of flat tops from 3in to 4.125. Confirm wrist pin Dia. 1.655???

CT

307 Chevy small block. 3.875 + .040 over bore. Compression height 1.655. Pin dia. .9273. The flatter the better. I think a standard skirt length will work. 181s use 350 small block pistons. Thanks for the help. Beater

I have used 327 pistons in a 181 for rebuild.

Beater...
My math apparently does not work like your math.... lol
I can get you closer with sbc 400 rods. Measure your block height and I'll try to get you closer. I do not have 307 flat tops... sorry... I have many piston options open. But better with 400 rods.

The V8 small block rods are too narrow. .094 vs 1.030. Using stock parts I'm pretty much stuck with 181 5.7" rods. Tlowe has some very nice 250 flat tops from Ross that are .010 to .011 too tall. I could work with that because the top land is extra thick but my original plan was to use cheap off the shelf components. I don't need forged pistons for this engine. I just want to get to 9 to 9.5 to 1 CR.

Your head is going to be right near 70CC. Why not use the 250 pistons and deck the block?
Check this out.

http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/compstaticcalc.html

I used
3.905 bore
3.6 stroke
.041 head gasket
10 CC dish
Zero deck
70CC head chamber

Get 9-1 compression. If the piston is only 6CC dish then slightly more compression. Tom

This is the piston I have. PISTON

Hey guys,
I have a 153 ci that I need a timing cover for and was wondering where to look. It's in a 1967 boat but the engine was replaced in about 1984. Engine says 2.5L and my parts guy identified it as a 153. My cover has rusted through on the bottom and is paper thin and full of pin holes. Would anyone know if this cover is used on other engines? Thanks.

If i remember right you should be able to grab one off any L6.No pun, But i have a boat load laying around.

Excellent, thanks!!! That helped me find one for $25.00. It's a good thing, the fish are biting.

I got the head back from Tom today. It looks great. I will post pics soon. It will be with me at Rappin' to Minden in June. Beater

Here are some shots of the 153 Lump Port Head Stainless 1.84 intakes, 1.6 exhaust, ported with HI Flow lumps, screw in studs, duel springs, and shaved ,030". Tom says the chambers are near 70cc and it should flow about 225 cfm. Good head for a little street roadster.

I did a little on my intake manifold today. Basically two cuts on the table saw. I couldn't find the sawsall. I'm Turning an Offenhauser 3X1 for a 6 cyl into a 2X1 for a 4 cyl. I think it will work fine and it will look just like Offenhauser made it. A plus is that the cut allowed me to see the exhaust heat runners that run the full length of the manifold. I think I can run water through them pretty easily. I hope they are big enough. Pictures

Clean-up water passages before welding end cap with long drill bit, file ?

Nice job! That is a quick way to come up with a very hard to find part. Nobody has intakes for chevy 4 cyl's.

Mike thanks, I was planning on doing what I could to clean the passages. I may put a fitting on each end and a plate in the old exhaust spot.

TOM,
"Nobody has intakes for chevy 4 cyl's." I do! A 2X1 for a 6 could be turned into a 4bbl. A 3 and a 2 could be turned to a Howard. Just need someone who can weld like Hank's guy.

I'm just glad I got something done even if it was cutting up a perfectly good intake.

Howdy ! New guy here. I am thinking about putting together a project car using the Chevy 153/181 family. The problem is - what body to use ????? The most common vehicle with the 153 is the old mail jeeps and I have been watching CL for a few months. I would prefer something smaller, sleeker and lighter but a mail jeep would do for initial tinkering.

The Vega - Monza, etc H-body cars would be an obvious choice but something a bit newer would be easier to find parts for. RX7's seem to be good candidates for American engines and auto trannies.

I thought about Plymouth Arrows as I am familiar with Mitsu motors and the Arrows, Colts and mini trucks came with 904 auto's but I really want to stay with Chevy's.

My plan is to eventually turbo the engine. How about some input ?

Thanks
Ray

Well....... the 151 is actually the same engine family just a little brother. That would make S10s pickups and Blazers good choices. Everything done and parts easy to come by. A nice turboed S10 4 banger would be a kick. I'd like to find a clean S10 4X4 pickup with a 151 in it. Early 80s ?Js Jeeps used the Iron Duke 151. I don't think the Comanche pickups had L4s but it could be easily done. A friend here has an American Bantam with a 153 in it. That is a BIG engine for that car. Mine is going into a 26 Chevy roadster, Soon I hope.

On the 151 they really took a lot of metal out of the parts. Compare the 151 crank to the 153. The earlier 181 cranks are fully counterweighted and make even the 153 crank look wimpy.

My next door neighbor used to race 2.3 Fords in ministock and he said that the 2.5's as used in the s10 don't hold up. The 153 and the 181 had great reputations in midgets back before the VW/Autocrafts took over. Even today many of the latest custom midget engines use the 153/181 architecture but set up for V8 heads.

Plus I want to stay with readily available v8 bellhousing pattern Powerglide or T350 or 200-4r trannies.

So what do plan on using yours to do? Short track racing is very demanding and specialized. A 153/181 would fit anywhere the RWD 151s fit. I have a 181 crank in my 153. It comes out to 170 something CI. All the heads and cranks interchange. Pans, timing covers, and timing gears swap and cams do somewhat. The RWD 151s I have seen have the same bell housing pattern as late L6s, 90% V6s, and V8s. Lots of options. A 153 would bolt into a 65 Avanti or Lark. No Limits!

Just run errands around town and the occasional trip to the drag strip. I've never had a turbocharged car and also I would like to learn about fuel injection and programmable engine management systems. It would be cool to alter the "jetting" without getting gas on my hands or to modify the advance curve without welding and grinding and playing with springs or vac adv cans.

Have you considered a 2.9 Vortec 4 out of a colorado - they came with manual and automatics. Make 185 HP/190 #tq. EFI from the factory.

I have the 5 cylinder version in my colorado daily driver - on the highway it gets darn close to 30 mpg. And its 100% stock.

You are familiar with CopoRat's fuel injection conversion of a Clifford 6cyl 4bbl intake manifold. There is no reason that intake couldn't be modified like you have done to the Offy manifold, i.e. cut off one branch and block off the resulting hole. The throttle butterfly wouldn't be centered between the cylinders but many modern oem FI setups are the same way. You could have the throttle body be at the front or rear of the head depending on which one best suited your installation.

I checked it out via google and found that the 2.9 has ever feature I DON'T want. Alum block, alum head, balance shafts, chain drive overhead cams, etc.

Well you never did say what you wanted other than EFI. To each there own.

Are there 4 cylinder Colorado/Canyon 4X4s? I may have ti check that out.

Spent some time today checking out used Colorado/Canyons. How'd I miss them? Too new I suppose. I'd like to find a used 2.9, 4X4, Standard trans, extended cab, and locking rear end. What are the best engine years?

I HAVE SOME 4 CYL. CUMMINS TURBOS OFF 4BT'S IF ANYBODY NEEDS ONE.

Did You happen to talk with him about a HYDRAULIC ROLLER CAM? and ask if hyrroroller lifters are avalable?

did you happen to ask about Hydraulic ROllER CAMS and if he could supply Hyro Roller lifters for the 4 cyl?

Beater the 2900 started off as a 2700. When they went bigger it got all the upgrade the late model 4200 got - same engine family. So any 2900 is a good motor.

A 2900 with a turbo at 8 psi would be really close to 250 HP....

The comp eliminator guy are making >400HP NA with these engines. Mind you they don't have to run them for long.

Alan. I didn't talk to him about roller stuff and since that post Earson moved their cam shop to Kentucky. Steve no longer works for them. Too bad it was so easy to get exactly what you wanted. I guess they are all CNC now. They didn't take the old machines.

Marc, I'm going to find one of those. I need a little 4X4 that could get good fuel milage. I looks like the Nissan I 290 is the same also. Crap I'm a parts guy and I've never even looked up a part for one of these! They must be OK. I'd settle for the 3.7 if everything else was what I want. I was thinking about an S 10 with a 151 but the Colorado with a 2.9 would be better.

Are they removing the balance shafts. That's the first thing you do to a Mitsubishi 2.6 that will be raced. The shafts turn at twice crank speed and they have a huge imbalance built in which is rough on the bearings. This is why you don't see any high mileage old Mitsu's. The balance shaft bearing don't last.

I think they leave the shafts and remove the drive chain.

Hi Do You know how to get a hold of sissels automotive nowdays? are they closed down?----- no website anymore.

Alan, That sounds like a great project. Your head sounds a lot like the head that Tom Lowe built for me. Lumps, port and chamber work, Shaved a bit, 1.94/1.60 stainless valves, screw in studs, etc. My purpose is different. Mine will be in a street driven roadster, just a fun hot rod.

yeah the fours and fives are good lil' engines, just not full grown yet-the 3.5L fives have 220hp net as the 4bbl power pak '57 chevies had gross!

I think all of these "Atlas" motors, fours, fives and sixes have the same long 4"(+) stroke lenghts. In the stock automatic pick ups and trailblazers these motors have factory shift points of 6200 RPM. They really have very strong (but Aluminum) bottom ends with at least 4 bolt(or more) main caps. Kevin Self's Bantam goes 10,000 rpms-thats alot of scrap iron flailin' around!

In the stock applications the lack of cubes at bottom end is not noticed because of their long stroke and computerized F.I. Wish I didn't already have a 292.

Bottom ends are not so much of a prob on most of today's inline sixes due to them having the same bearing sizes and two more than their V8 buddies.

The atlas main bearings are very close to 400 pontiac. 2.38" ish size. GM really stiffened the crank up compared to older inline engines.

My heads are all the stock 181 type, i really want to find a cam maker who will sulpply hydraullic roller lifters--I know of off the shelf cams avalable-perfect for a turbo.

I guess I was confused, a senior moment or a '60s flash back? Go figure.

You can or could get a GM hydraulic roller lifter at any Chevy dealership for the 4 cylinder engines with no trouble. I don't think getting any cam company to make them for the 6 cylinder will ever happen, most of them don't even have solid rollers for these engines, and most of them used to when these were more popular engines for racing 20-30 years ago. So getting them to create a new product when they themselves have no desire or interest in them is not likely to happen. Your just going to have to be the Lone Ranger and do it yourself or have someone make them for you custom like Kirby did. Also, don't assume the SBC lifter is the one to use, even if the oil groove is in the right location.

"You can or could get a GM hydraulic roller lifter at any Chevy dealership for the 4 cylinder engines with no trouble."

Which 4 cylinder engine?

The later model Iron Duke. The later 181 might have also been hydraulic roller as well.

I'll have to look into that.

It was around the same time(late 80's) that the SBC(305's and 350's)got away from the flat tappets and went hydraulic roller. The 5.0 Mustangs and all Ford V8's were already using hydraulic rollers and Chrysler followed suit as well, must have been an industry standard for the American auto makers to do at that time.

I'm pretty sure my '89 GMC 305 is is flat tappet but you are right is was at that time. I'll get my hands on some and see what they look like.

If you can use solid roller lifters from a SBC with a 455 Olds tie bar, why can't you use the same combination in hydraulic roller lifters???

Don't ask me I only know what you and Scott post.

I got a PM from Oiler this morning that LOTS of 151 info and also 153-181 stuff. I hope he posts the link here.

Jalopy, once upon a time, the BBC roller lifters were taller and thats what we always used in the 250 and 292's. Just sayin' not to assume the SBC hydraulic roller can work, link bars might interfere with the top of the lifter boss casting. Also, other variables to consider is cam base circle, if it is small, around .875 or .900(from a reground cam for instance), it will cause the lifters to go deeper into the lifter bores and cause possible contact, but a base circle of 1.100" will make the lifters stand taller in the bores, but link bars could still contact. No one has used the retro style(link bar) hydraulic lifters yet to find out all the learning curves. It might be easy as pie or it might be something that can still work with a little modification. Somebody buy a pair of lfters and swap link bars and see.

OK, I hoped Oiler would come back and post this here but here is his link to all sorts of Iron Duke information and parts swapping. Be careful it ate my whole Saturday and I'm not done yet. Also interesting the interaction between members of the S10 BB. Can you imagine the response here to the manner in which the Stroker10 guy treats the others? Or the Mystic person? They put up with it and get a lot of information. We are pretty laid back here but someone would have called these guys on attitude and we most likely would not have all this information.

There was some pretty good info in that link Beater, but some of those guys definately got off on some rabbit trails.

Uhh im almost certain this is incorrect--- The duke roller lifters are a D shaped crosssection and index into D shaped bores and do not have tie bars, im pretty sure, like the later roller cam vortec sbc chevy v8s

I didnT get bad vibes from stroker--only good info, I thought you might be the same guy and sent you an email asking.

Not sure what your looking at that is D shaped, I have built many SBC engines that were factory hydraulic roller engines and all there lifters are round just like they always have been. The only difference is the method in which they are held into alignment, they used a dog bone shaped flat plate that had a double D shape to match the top of the lifters that were machined with a flat on the sides to match the alignment plate.

Each time the topic of roller cams for the street comes up I always ask myself the question

WHY?

I get it that its always neat to have something different from anyone else. Heck, that is one reason for running a six in a hot rod in the first place.

I have done dynamometer comparison testing on various engine components in a previous life. Car manufacturers have incorporated many design improvements in the engine to enhance its efficiency and performance, like smaller journals with aluminum bearing shells, low friction ring packs, low drag oil seals, revised piston designs and rollerized valve trains. Tests I've run on SBF engines showed around 15 lb-ft improvement at 500 RPM and as RPM increased to say, 4500, the reduction in friction vs a flat tappet hydraulic cam diminished to almost nil - maybe 2 lb-ft. So to gain that small slice of the torque pie by re-engineering the cam for roller lifters seems to me to be a large expense for a small gain. You would be better off investing that cash in a stronger piston with smaller, lighter, low friction metric rings.

Even if rollerized lifters could be fitted then the first cut at an optimal cam grind would be a rough guestimate. The big car companies have the resources to beat those cam grinds to death first on the computerized engine analyzer programs and then on the dyno before deciding on the most effective grind.

Vintage inlines are never going to be RPM champions so a good flat tappet grind will suffice in 99.9% of street rod applications.

Has anyone seen analyses or testing of OEM factory roller tappets (any brand) as to prolonged use with faster accel, higher spring tension etc.? As in can you get 50,000 miles with a 500 lb. spring, or 50 miles?
Since the accounting dep't. over-rules engineering pretty frequently, I would guess that the factory tappets are designed and built (strength, material, hardening, tolerances) to run the warranty length with stock springs, with no safety margin beyond this.

BTW: regarding anti-rotation devices.
Under normal conditions, the roller wheel self-aligns to the tappet lobe like wheel caster: the roller cannot clock more than a few thousands without rising in the bore. When it rises to height "X" (whatever, varies with base circle), the corner of the wheel catches the rising lobe and ploughs across it until they both die.
There are 2 major reasons why this is not safe, viz. the tappet will rise and clock.
The obvious one is excessive lash - a maintenance problem (and may be with hydraulics if the local oil pressure isn't always high enough to keep the plunger inflated to full height)
The other one is not enough spring tension, where the tappet is momentarily separated from the lobe, and may not come back where it should.
I'd be interested to see if a solid roller with tight lash but no anti-rotation devices could run a few races without self-destruction...

Greg , thats some interesting observations you were able to see first hand while you were at Ford. I have to ask though, if there were no more gains
or improvements to be had than that with the hydraulic roller cams, why did they proceed with the development of that technology. The flat tappet cam and all its companion components are also much cheaper to produce from a manufacturing standpoint,increasing their production costs to make basically the same engine. From an economic viewpoint that seems like bad business sense if there was not really much benefit to justify the development costs to change it.

Scott:

Wonder if Ford (and others) knew what changes were coming regarding lubricants and their associated problems with traditional solid and hydraulic flat tappet cams, and so the move to the (now) typical hydraulic roller lifters?

Russ

I thought it was for reduced friction and better gas mileage.

Most of those improvements were primarily for improved mileage. A typical sedan needs only about 15 RWHP to move it down the road at a steady 55 mph. When all of the less expensive alternatives to improved fuel economy were exhausted then they turn to the more costly things, like rollerized valve trains and sequential fuel injection.

My son is a bicycle racer and manager at a high end bicycle company(http://www.bikesportmichigan.com/editorials/0000087.shtml). I asked him why the big deal in the bicycle business over saving a gram of weight, especially since it costs a lot and gives miniscule benefits. His answer was that often races like Tour de France or The Tour de California or even The Paris - Roubaix are often decided by a fraction of a second. Over several days of racing up and down the sometime mountainous terrain carrying an extra gram of needless weight can mean defeat. Likewise car companies are willing to go to great lengths to advertise " best fuel economy in its class" and are more and more willing to spend more to get less in return to remain competitive.

Read this somewhere.
20 lb. bicycle: free
15 lb. bicycle: $100
10 lb. bicycle: $1,000
8 lb. bicycle: $10,000
6 lb. bicycle: $100,000

The comp eliminator guy are making >400HP NA with these engines. Mind you they don't have to run them for long. [/quote]


Do you have any info. on these 2.9 comp eliminators? website ect.?

Thanks Steve

I know this has nothing to do with Steve's request but here is a link to pictures of two nice Chevy 4 cyl powered roadsters from the convention. The tan Chevy won the "just because it's neat" award. It's built on a '32 Chevy frame with a custom steel speedater body. I think it has a 181 with custom intake and exhaust. The T has a 153. I didn't get a ride in either one. LINK

Here's a blown 181 Mercruiser in a '53 Stude coupe that turned 131 mph at Bonneville. The owner said it did 133 without the blower.

I was reading on another thread about putting a 292 crank in a 250. I know it isn't easy but it is doable. Here's my question. Could a 292 crank be shortened and put into a 153 or 181 to stroke them? It would add 0.075" to the 153 and 0.040 to the 181. 1" to a 151. If you cut the front there would be no snout for the balancer. If you cut the rear the flywheel hub would have to be reattached. If you cut the middle you'd have two 2 cylinders in the same block. But I bet it can be done.
It would make a 181 or 151 into a 200+ and a 153 into almost 195. All with standard bores. Those would be some snorty torquey 4 bangers!

The throws are 120° degrees apart on the 292 and are 180° degrees apart on the 4 bangers. You would have to figure out how to overcome that.

DUH, I guess I'd have to cut it into a lot more pieces. Talk about odd fire.

A billet crank would be easier, more reliable, and - in the long run - cheaper. At 200 cubic inches you will want all the crank rigidity you can engineer into the engine.

Some of the ingredients in the newer 181's may warrant a closer look like the powdered metal connecting rods, will they also fit the 6's? Stronger and lighter than stock and cheaper than aluminum! When they came out in the SBCs' they were the hot ticket at the time. Also the water pump looks pretty good with the newer style seal. , http://www.gmpowertrain.com/Libraries/Marine_Engines/Vortec_3_0L_I-4_Marine.sflb.ashx

And the industrial version has a MPFI head option and interesting ignition systems., http://www.gmpowertrain.com/Libraries/Industrial/Vortec_3_0L_I-4_Industrial.sflb.ashx .

Those look cool! I've heard bad things about powder rods. Is that just urban legend? Here is a good video , I even like the music.

The belt drive looks interesting, would the water pump etc. work on an american 153,250 etc. as well as the intake? My margarita hazed mind seems to recall that the powdered rods used in the Z28's were referred to as the pink rods and were never know for coming apart.

My rod info could be urban legend.
I think that engine is the same as ours. That is indeed an interesting belt setup. some of the brackets appear a little fragile.Not the quality that Hank turns out for sure. That is one long friggin' belt.

If I'm looking at it correctly the water pump looks like the same mounting as our 4's and 6's, I'll see if my lil brother can get one out of Chile. How do you get a legend out of your urban area, you got bears, racoons, sheep and Vic, and everyone know those sheep are liars...

Vic can make a ewe turn.

So the 181 was faster without the blower.

Yes, That is not uncommon if you scan through the records. There could be many causes, people moving up in class and simply sticking a blower on a N/A engine, fewer people have experience with blown engines,or even people who have more money than brains. Sometimes it just takes a while to sort out a new setup.

No matter a four cylinder '60s design boat motor pushing a ton and a half '50s design full size car at 130+ MPH impresses me. What might my 3/4 ton roadster be like with virtually the same engine? Fun at least.

Hello fellas.

I've got a 153 built for inboard hydroplane racing. We've fired her off, she runs like a dream, except for one thing. We aren't getting any oil coming out of the lifters. We've got Crower Solid Roller lifters, brand new (PN: 66206-8). We had the same issue with a set of hydraulic rollers that were in it when we first got the motor (they were probably 10 years old)

We've got plenty of oil pressure when priming the pump (45+).
With the lifters pulled out, oil comes through the galley into the lifter bores. With the lifters in, oil weeps around the lifters and oozes out the side of the block. Turning the engine over while priming doesn't seem to make a difference.

We've checked that all galley plugs are in and where they are supposed to be. Confirmed that oil is getting to the crank. There are no external oil leaks.

We've missed 3 races this year trying to get this motor to cooperate and are out of ideas. Can any of you help us out?

What are you using to prime the engine with. Are you concerned with oiling to the bottom end or valvetrain, or both.

Had the same problem, oil galley not lined up with band on lifter must be how the base circle is on the cam, anyhow just take a very small grinder .020 .030 and cut a very small grove from the top of the lifter band to reach the oil hole in the side of the lifter.

Harry

I'd check out and try what Harry says. He knows this stuff and the workings of the 6s is the same as the 4s with just a few more parts. Let us know what you find.
Beater

cutting a small groove on the lifter worked perfectly. thanks so much guys! lifesaver!

I just got a 153 to swap into my 47 CJ2A Jeep.Have some interesting spare parts like a cast branched exhaust manifold and fabricated intake.

Show us some pictures. Are you wanting to sell them?

I will in a day or two.

That should be a great little engine for your CJ. I have a 151 Iron Duke that came out of a Jeep 1980 YJ I think.

My engine is a 153,not a 151 Iron Duke. Here's what some of the parts look like.it's a branched cast iron exhaust. The bolt holes line up with a stock 153 head,but the ports are way off? Very thick walls, probably for an industrial version?Or maybe the early 151 Iron Duke with the intake and exhaust on the same side?
If anyone has a use for it let me know



And what appears to be a propane intake.Nice ports but again only the bolt holes line up to the stock head.

Interesting, I'm betting they are for a 181 from a forklift. I think there are 3 181 heads and a couple have 8 ports. There were some pictures of 181 head on this thread but I can not find them. At any rate those are good parts the intake is a natural for a TBI setup or maybe even port injection with dividers. Beater

Thats the wrong gasket for those components. As Beater mentioned, the intake and exhaust are for an 8 port head, and the gasket is for a siamese head that is like the 250/292 engines.

I was using the gasket to show the difference between the two head types

Here's a few pix of 153-181 5 and 8 port intake gaskets and heads. that may help., , , , ,posted these before but lost the link somewhere,

Does anyone have a photo of the engine bottom end showing the oil pump pick up on a front sump 153?

It almost looks like a SBC header?? Was this on the engine or just in the pile of parts??

That cast header does not fit the head of a car 153 engine.It does fit some of the 8 port heads as mentioned above.I also have a steel tube header of the same port design as the cast header shown above.

Tony, I'll take a look. I think I only have one pickup tube and it's for the rear sump pan.

Got it pictures tonight! Never mind here they are. The last 6 pictures in this ALBUM

Got a rear sump 153 pan you can part with? Trade you for a new front sump pan.And thanks for the photo

I only have one rear sump. I don't even know what they came on. Dave, the guy I got the first 153 from swapped it to me along with the other pump and pickup tube in the photos. He views this site maybe he'll tell us where it came from. My engine was from a Chevy II and it was front sump as are the boat motors I've seen.

I'm a bit concerned about the front sump in a Jeep climbing up steep grades generally going forward.Rock climber guys do insane angles side to side with regular wet sumps V-8's so maybe it's not really a big deal.

Try this oil pan.
Fiero
http://www.ebay.com/itm/SPECTRA-PREMIUM-...b3636ec&vxp=mtr

Pickup tube
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sealed-Power-224...24fae83&vxp=mtr

Middle sump oilpan
http://www.ebay.com/itm/OMC-Stringer-Cob...11b173c&vxp=mtr

I just went out to check the 151 I have that came from a Jeep. It has a rear sump. I had not noticed that it is sitting in a wooden cradle that hides the pan. So there is a source. Jeep YJs I think, mine is from a 1980.

I have a 153 engine not the later 151 Iron Duke. Checking the Rock Auto catalog online it appears the 153 and 151 have a different part number for the oil pan gasket.
So...does a 151 pan fit on a 153?,it look s similar but ???

They were used in the Postal Jeeps, white boxes with sliding doors and right hand steering.

I have one of these for a 8 port head...

I saw it on eBay. It would be a good buy for someone.

Here's something I found... This homemade dual intake for a 153 with the stock Siamese port head.I checked it,does fit.A bit crude but well made from steel tubing,welded and brazed.Has fittings for a small balance tube plus the brackets you see.
I'm not using it,might be of interest to you guys?

Yes, crude but interesting. With so few after market intakes out there I'm surprised we don't see more of this kind of stuff.

I finally finished my "Offey" intake and header flange for my 153.

Looks great! Now to get all the pieces in one pile. Jake wants to drive your jalopy.

NOW YOU,VE GOT ME LOOKING FOR A 3X2BBL OFFY FOR MY 181..... TO CUT DOWN TO 2X2BBL. I WAS THINKING ABOUT 2 S&S SUPER "E'S" HARLEY CARBS

On man's trashy intake is another man's inspiration.

The S&S should work, but the mileage will be terrible.
No high-vacuum cruising circuit.

IF IT WORKS ON A HARLEY IT WILL WORK ON A 181. I WAS GOING TO RUN 2 OF THEM. I HAVE 1 ON MY PANHEAD AND ITS THE CATS MEOW...

Depends on your definition of "work".
I accidentally started a H-D panhead by turning the engine over by hand with the key on.
Why unusual?
Because there was no carburetor at all - but there was enough residual gas in the manifold for it to fire.

My dad rented his body shop from the local Ford dealer. Once at the Ford dealer somebody removed a carb from a car, to be rebuilt the next day. That next morning somebody had to move said vehicle and jumped in and started it, not knowing there was no carb on the car. The fuel line connection was left pointing at the intake manifold opening - it lit off and away it went! Revved to the moon.

I have used the 153 for lots of projects. speed parts were available and inexpensive. the first one I saw at lyons drag strip in S.California with a Paxton (?) supercharger awesome! always wanted to duplicate that. here is the latest one a little experiment with a hypercharger for a motorcycle made an aluminum box to mount the unit with a weber carb Clifford intake and exhaust. the 1959 fiat will also have the same config. the '36 dodge and '36 chevy I will go with the 292 six. this next winter. [img]http://<a href="http://s1294.photobucket.com/user/1935truck/media/OWNER-HP/013_zpsa630133d.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1294.photobucket.com/albums/b619/1935truck/OWNER-HP/013_zpsa630133d.jpg" border="0" alt=" photo 013_zpsa630133d.jpg"/></a>[/img] [img]http://<a href="http://s1294.photobucket.com/user/1935truck/media/OWNER-HP/010_zps865447de.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1294.photobucket.com/albums/b619/1935truck/OWNER-HP/010_zps865447de.jpg" border="0" alt=" photo 010_zps865447de.jpg"/></a>[/img] [img]http://<a href="http://s1294.photobucket.com/user/1935truck/media/OWNER-HP/009_zps2761d1d3.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1294.photobucket.com/albums/b619/1935truck/OWNER-HP/009_zps2761d1d3.jpg" border="0" alt=" photo 009_zps2761d1d3.jpg"/></a>[/img]

That sounds interesting but none of the links work. I want to see them. I have a couple of old McCulloch superchargers and I'd like to put one on a 153. The 153 is only half the size of the Stude V8 it came off of. Probably get all the boost you'd need to have a little fun.

LETS SEE IF I CAN GET THE IMAGE. thanks
[img]http://[/img] [img][/img] [img]http://[/img]

Thanks! That is a different approach. I like it. What else was done to the engine? Do you have an idea of power output? Gain with the hypercharger?

hi there, the engine stock bore, mild cam head cleaned up a little. nothing too out of stock. just had the exhaust finished
this week. bed is bobbed about 16 inches to balance the short frame. everything is new except for the sheet metal. finally have a clean title! much more difficult now. as far as the hypercharger I don't know yet same for power output. powerglide trans is an electric actuator shift. experimental. I am ready now to bolt everything back together and send it to be wired. thanks-normanpaul

Let us know how it works out good or bad. Show us some pictures of the truck.

I am ready to actually begin the assembly of my '26 Chevy roadster. I am going to start a build thread somewhere. Not sure where yet but these threads seem to do well on the HAMB. Here are some pictures of some of the pieces I have gathered over the years for this project. LINK

That do be pretty -- all of it!

You have planned well, and you have assembled some mighty fine material. It will be a pleasure to watch it go together. To hear and see it run will be a joy.

Get on with it!

God's Peace to you.

d
Inliner #1450

I want a ride!

The Mallorys look like the best bet, I just got a HEI and the head is huge Dont think there is going to be enough clearance for the Distributor head against the engine on my 1972 l4 153 front mount Distributor location...Ps I have a 2bbl rochester 1972 carb that needs rebuilt anyone on here do it for a fair price?

If it is the tall HEI it will fit. If it is the short later one it wont. I'm modifying an early Mallory Pontiac V8 Duel point for my 153.

can you tell me where you got your header at , i know where to get the intake at i am trying to find a header combow i have a 181 that i am going to trun in to ciecle track motor for a s10 in mini stock racing big daddy doug

e.mail doughotrod22@gmail.com

What was the end result of this build up with the 181? I'm looking to build one for my Jeep over the winter and would like to know what to expect out of it performance wise. I will be going from 2.5 AMC I-4 with an advertised hp of 117 to the 181. I would like to get around 200 hp and keep tbi. Any thoughts on this?
Thanks, Al

J45,
I'd like to see the photo of the 392 headed 151 Iron Duke. I did my Hemi headed Duke with a 1957 Desoto 345 head as the bore center spacing was better. 2.0" intakes, 1.75" exhausts, Edelbrock Fiero TBI intake with adapted 32/36 DGAV Weber, BW T50 5-spd, 3.42 rear, sleeved to 3.875" bore, stroked to 3.6" with MM crank, 292 rods, all in a 1978 Sunbird wagon. 40mpg highway, 20-25mpg city, '78 EPA compliant without Cat, air-pump, etc. And best of all it devoured V-6 H-bodies and even some 305 Spyders. Drove it 20,000 miles in two years here in Denver with no major mechanical problems.
Have you seen Nick Arias's two aluminum Hemi Super Duty 4-Bangers? Thanks in Advance, kalklein.

well, i've been trying to dial all this in had to change the water lines to cliffords specs, the "new" fuel pump leaks oil so that will need to be replaced. the pro shop had the weber carb all jacked so I adjusted it myself. changed the valve cover to a marine mercruiser with side pcv I think the vac.lines are all good. removed the hypercharger until everything else operates properly. the big issue right now is oil blow by pressure.
oil was coming out of the oil filler cap, replaced it with a standard cap oil started blowing out dip stick tube and distributer base and also fuel pump which I may have blown out the pin caps I do not know. other than that it drives and handles well. my plan this winter now is to maybe change the cab to a more modern 1936 cab havn't decided yet

header is a Clifford. it fits nicely I didn't have to re-work at all. sorry I don't get a chance on the computer too often to reply thanks-paul

In the Nick Arias shop.,

MM crank with 3.6 stroke, was that a 181? With 292 rods and 3.875" bore what pistons did you use? Why didn't you stay with the 4" bore? Interesting combination.

BotP,
I chose to keep the deck of the block and the head casting as free of weakening plugs and holes as possible. So I carved an adaptor plate out of 1" thick high-grade cast iron and screwed it to the block with many smaller flat-head cap screws. I then bored the plate with 4" holes matching the cylinders, bored the block plate/block (screwed together) 4.060" and pressed in a sleeves for a 3.875" ID, also the original 153 bore. There was a solid copper gasket between the plate and the block. Water passages were carved through and about the underside of the plate....
And for my next trick, the valve gear. To get the push rods from the lifters to the rockers would require bent push rods or piercing the cylinder bores and pistons, i.e. no direct shot is possible.
Eight 3/4" holes were drilled through the plate where the stock push rods would have most closely passed each other, the stock rocker push rod and the stock lifter push rod ends "intercepting" in the plate.
The hole was drilled to bisect the angles of intersection in both tangential and radial directions thus "eliminating" the edge loading. The holes were press fit with bronze bushings with 1/2"ID in which "slave lifters" about 5/8" long rode between the ends of the upper and lower push rods. GM lifters bled oil into the push rods for upper end lubrication. I drilled the slaves to use this oil supply for themselves.
The Fiero TBI intake had a vertical manifold / head surface; the DeSoto surface was about 25* from vertical so I cut a wedge shaped spacer to fit bewteen. The coolant return from the engine exited the head through this surface between cylinders 1-2 and 3-4 so I drilled through the intake plate, put in hose barbs and routed the hoses to the thermostat and radiator.
Oh, let's not forget the swapping of lobe locations on the cam for two-pairs. The cam was re-ground with a 60's 389 Pontiac HP profile.
Oil return was via external tapping of the standard corner of the head passages via hoses into the pan. The system was augmented by routing the crankcase ventilation through the engine to pull the oil down to the pan.
I ran this combo for two years and 20,000+ milea in Denver, -20F to 100+F. No major system or design problems.
Let me know what you think. KalKlein

Sounds like with all the work involved it should have been a racer instead of a driver. Neat project.

WOW! That's what I think. Nope drivers are my deal. You can drive 'em every day but you can only race 'em when the rule makers let you,
I just came in from whittling down an old Mallory Pontiac dual point to fit my 153 and was feeling pretty creative. Now I'm depressed. Oh well I got to play with the lathe and I didn't hurt anything. Well the Pontiac V8 guys may disagree but they will never see this.

CNC-D,BotP,
The line "Speed costs, how fast do you want to go?" ia followed by "If it don't fit, get a bigger hammer" and both are terms in the equation "Cost, performance, reliability; pick two".
I wanted to put the Iron Duke Hemi a '20s track-T because they are both narrow and the two foot x one foot chrome valve cover with the four plug wires disappearing down the middle sets off an alarm in most peoples minds. A Volvo 544 sedan would look cool with half-a-Hemi under the hood. I've got the motor torn down for evaluation (since 1989) cause most people still like big V-8s. Oh well, some day.
I've also got a Mic-5, 1:1 scale plate of the cast iron one in the engine. If I want to make another Hemi (a 181 would make a race strength short block) all I need to do is send a good machinist the plate and he would duplicate it; you could do most of the block work at home (other than the boring and sleeving).
But trying to find the DeSoto 345 head might be a show stopper. I found one in the Denver area.
We used to have a class of dragster called Junior Fuel, 5 liters, un-blown, nitro fuel, etc. Despite the hordes of SBCs the perennial champs seemed to the Adams/Enriquez DeSoto. It couldn't rev with the Chevies but it would burn the 98% nitro, can, label and all... and give change. The class is long since gone as well as many of the team members with their expertise.
I couldn't find anyone in Denver that had any porting experience with DeSotos so my head is totally stock. Extrude Hone would be my first choice to perk up my little 4 banger. It might be even more interesting than a 292 in my '66 Nova. (I could name it "the Morphodyte". Which part, the GM or Mopar, gives it that name is up for debate.)
If I ever get moved back home I might find my pictures of the little beast; I'll send y'all some copies. kalklein

CNC-D #5585,
No slight intended but I thought I could include you in the post to BotP. I couldn't; I am a slow learner.
I didn't feel comfortable with an Iron Duke bottom-end so I drove the p--s out of it on the street. Never dynoed it past 4000rpm but the torque curve was at 200 lb*ft and still a straight line.
kalklein

No slight taken, its a real work of art to bring two things like the Hemi head and the Chevy block together and make it all work.

kalklein, Thanks for sharing all this with us. What a great engine build. You revived my thoughts of putting a Studrbaker V8 head on a Model A block. A Stude-A- Baker.
It is sad that as the the old racers/roders go they take so much knowledge with them. Often it is because they think no one cares. I know where a DeSoto hemi is but the guy won't get off it. He'll be gone and it will get hauled to the scrap pile. Oh well I can't save it all. They'd just have to haul to the junk yard from here someday.

Beater, a guy over on the HAMB has had a few sets for sale for a while, I started to buy a set myself for a project im working on. He only wanted about $130-$140 bucks a set. I'll see if I can find the link for you.

Thanks Scott, I really don't need any more projects until I complete something. I'm starting to make slow progress on components for the 153/'26 Chevy roadster.

I bought a new reproduction 153 car type exhaust manifold...I never used it because it had a serious casting flaw about the size of a quarter on a port runner.It looks fine otherwise.
If someone here wants it for the price of actual shipping plus 5 bucks just let me know.

The 153 I rebuilt and swapped into my 47 Jeep CJ2A last year runs nice.The only changes from stock is a short tube home built header and distributor advance modification.12 degrees intitial,about 34 total and limiting the vacuum advance to 14degrees gives better throttle response.
.030 stock replacement pistons were sitting .030 down into the bore. So I found a GM .023 shim gasket to get a bit of quench.The Felpro composition gasket is about .055 thick
The aluminum timing gear is a bit noisy at idle...
The Jeep has stock 5.13 gears and the 153 is happy to buzz along at 55 MPH.

Tony, Good to hear the report on your Jeep. What RPMs are you turning at 55mph? I went back through the thread and some of your pictures didn't come up. I bet that CJ is a kick.

30 inch tall tires so about 3300 rpm at 55 mph.It'll go faster but the 2100 pound narrow vehicle gets a bit dangerous .The 153 looks factory and besides more power than the Go Devil it get better fuel mileage. I lost of lot of photos when the hosting site went belly up



And how to make an 1986 S10 151 rear sump oil pan fit on a 153 . Resize the rear main cutout and some hammer clearance where the oil pump is.And it doesn't leak

Very clean install. Sorry about your lost pictures. That pan mod is cool. At 3300 it must be humming. I agree about the squirrelly handling of a lot of short wheelbased 4X4s. A friend turned himself into a vegetable when he put a big block in his CJ. Even my old Blazer is a crazy ride.

I've been making a little progress on my 4 cylinder build. I cut down a GMC valve cover to fit the 153. I now have to make an adapter. Today I made a piston pin that I could press into the rod and piston to check the deck height. Close enough. Now I can haul what needs to be balanced and fitted to the shop.

Now that is cool . . .

Curious: one of the pistons is flat top and the other dished. Undecided?

Thanks. The flat one is the forged Ross. I got them from Tlowe. They are the .040" over 250 pistons that he sells. The other one is from a set of 307 V8 pistons that I thought would work but were too short. This engine is a .040" over 153 with a 181 Mercruiser crank and rods. That gives it a .035" stroke for about 175 CI. I'm happy with the near zero deck height with a stock block. I am also happy with the valve cover. My son did a good welding job. I still have to do some grinding and possibly filling to finish it.

I just saw this on eBay. I'm too far along with my 153 build to go with a turbo on this one but there are 2 more block in the shed.
Manifold

Hi guys, I'm new to Inliners. I have a 81 CJ5 and my Iron Duke is starting to develop a lot pressure in the valve cover. No pressure out of the dipstick. I'm thinking valve seals, but not sure. If I rebuild, I would like to build the motor to around 220hp. Has anyone dome a build up?

Scott

Hi guys, I'm new to Inliners. I have a 81 CJ5 and my Iron Duke is starting to develop a lot pressure in the valve cover. No pressure out of the dipstick. I'm thinking valve seals, but not sure. If I rebuild, I would like to build the motor to around 220hp. Has anyone done a build up?

Scott

I think you would need a turbo to get that kind of power. Check the PCV valve.

Some links that may help.
FIERO
Performance FAQ
Myths and Differences

PCV is good, it's a lot of blow by, oil building up in air cleaner. But it's
Top end only.
Scott

Rings sticking or broken?

Oil control ring not working as it should?

MBHD

Compression is even and runs like a top.

Turbo or nitrous.

I'm a happy guy! I just talked to Patrick Dykes and was able to buy 1/2 a set of Fenton Black Widow cast headers for my 153. One side was broken in shipping so he had one side. I was willing to buy a set but I got the side I wanted for $150. With a little work it will bolt up and clear my 2X1 Offey intake. This little engine is finally coming together.

You'll have to post some pics of it. Sounds like progress.

I'll take pictures when it gets here and also of what it take to make it fit.

My Fenton header got here from Patrick's a few days ago, Quick! I got to play with it a little today and take some pictures. I'll have to mess with the mounting tabs some and do some port matching but it's going to work. It will be great with my Offey 2X1 intake and be way better in my roadster than tube headers. They fit nice and close to the block. It'll be less work too. I'll have to impose on one of my friends who welds better than me unless I decide to braze them.

Black Widow Pics

Nobody? Come on guys this is a breakthrough in using these engines. Here is the answer to unavailable intake and exhaust manifolds for 4 cylinder Chevys using easy to find 6 & 8 stuff. Now that Patrick has good quality SBC Fenton Black Widow cast headers for $300 a set that will do two 153s. The thinking is done!

Beater,
I like it! Question. What are you going to weld?

The way I see it, machine the outside flange thickness to match the intake thickness. It should be .375. You could use a SAWZALL. Build the clamps for the intake and exh a little bigger
.
Do the port matching and you are done.

Where are you going to put the alternator?

It'll have a generator, old school. Farther out, underneath, other side or off the drive shaft if necessary. There may have to be a tab added in a place or two to get it to clamp tight

Cool use of existing parts for sure. The exhaust port sizes between the SBC and the 4 cylinder are a lot different, is that what you are going to weld up?

I have room in the manifold to get a pretty good match. The ports in the head are not quite as big as the gasket and somewhere I have a gasket with a divider between the center ports like the head and the manifold have. Any welding will be to the flanges to get the mounting tabs to work right. One option, the most involved would be to cut the flanges from an inline manifold and weld or braze them to the header. I don't think I'll have to go that far. I mounted an alternator to check clearance and it was fine. I think the generator will be fine too. The header is close to the block so the pipes will be inside the frame rails and under the car.

I'm totally new to GM inliners I'm building a 23 T using a Mercury Marine/Chevy 153 engine rated at 120 HP. I've always like 4s and 6s over V8s for light rods. When given the chance for a free Mercury I remembered that in the 60s they got run in Midgets so jumped on it not knowing that finding manifolds would be a hunt!I'm told the intake can be cut away from the marine manifold and used but haven't tried that yet. This will be strictly a street ride with a 700R4 trans (sorry can't use a clutch ) and an s10 rear in about a 1200 pound glass T. What got me hooked on small engines ? As a teen I watched a 62 Chevy II walk all over a hemi powered 37 Ford Pick up the motor was built to the max with V8 head etc. the car ran Ct. Dragway and was called Mystery 4.

Leon, Welcome to our world! If you read through this thread you will see some ideas for manifolds. Remembering that the 153 is 2/3 of a 230 six and has the same port spacing just with two of the middle ports gone. The exhaust is the same spacing as the small block V8 with slightly larger ports. So any 3 carb manifold for 194-292 sixes is an easy modification. I can not believe that mine is the only one I've ever seen. They may be out there. I have heard of V8 tube headers being used but not a cast one. 4 cylinder headers do show up on eBay sometimes. Clifford made a 4BBL intake. Our own Scott Marshall(CNC-Dude) owns the pattersn and rights to the Duggan 4 and six cylinder engines. He is putting his foundry together now. He also has the ability and means to produce any cast aluminum part needed.

There are a couple of threads on the HAMB on these engines. There are some good pictures that may give you some ideas.
Chevy II 4 Banger
Chevy 153 Four Cylinder

Beater I'm on both the HAMB threads now I'm Leon Renaud on there same as here I missed a stock set of manifolds on the HAMB already and Owens doesn't have any either!been watching your thread on modified 6 stuff. My problem is I'm not up on GM straight engines but like I said that little Mystery 4 has always stuck with me! I'm disabled and building on a very tight budget so I have to pich the pennies and do a bunch of fab work but I'm a forced to retire welder so I kind of like the fab part .

They make a great engine for a lightweight T and they still produce them as an industrial engine If you watch the Vintage Midget race car ads online, go fast goodies still show up from time to time.,

Hey Gary, Good to hear from you I was starting to worry.

Leon, There are guys on eBay who sell flange sets for the Chevy 194-292 sixes. You can use those to make intake and exhaust setups for your 4. Owens? Are you talking about Owens Salvage in Wellington, Texas? Bob is a good friend. Because of so many boat engines there way more engines than auto manifolds. The guy I got my original engine from was cutting down one of the early two carb marine intakes. It wasn't pretty but it would work. I think my modified 6 is the easiest way.

sounds like you are describing a exhaust manifold I saw on the Toyota fork truck that uses the 181 industrial engine (vortec 3000)

If you'd like to fabricate your own intake and header, contact Hells Gate Hot Rods at 208-305-6469. Their online catalog is good, but not complete so call them on the phone. They have everything you need to fab up a header and an intake like you want with nice thick flanges that need no extra work and plenty of mandrel bent tubing in appropriate sizes.

My whole set-up was around $250.00 delivered

Ask for Andy!!

New member here but you guys are right down my alley, In May I purchased a 27 track T out of Carson city NV, Powered by a .030 over 153. Venolia 10.5 Pistons, BMR Alum Rods, A McGurk Roller Cam of unknown specs, Roller Rockers, Balanced and blue printed, Hilborn stack injection, McLcod Clutch and Flywheel and a 5 speed out of and S10. Car is a blast to drive with few exceptions, Car is running a fast EFI computer that is getting a upgrade to a Holly unit.

That sounds like a fun car. Do you have pictures? It was so close to me but I don't think I've seen it.

Welcome Impala!!

I'd really dig some pics of that ride!!

Are you taking off the Hilborn unit or just changing the control box??

Going to a better ECM for better fuel management, Car has Fast EZ EFI that just doesn't let me fine tune Let me round up some good picture and I will get them posted.

Sorry fellows but haven't been on in a while, I do have some good pictures of the car I need to post, car is currently down for some work, has and old McGurk solid roller cam of unknown specs that has had lifter fail on # 2 exhaust, will Small block lifters work as stated at the beginning of this post?

I THINK small block lifters are the same. That's how they're listed in Jeg's and Summit. The tie bars are the part that is different. CNC Dude has the whole low down on what can be made to work and all the prep needed.

Thanks I got whole new set coming from Crower, next problem if I want to change sticks no one has a blank. Would really like to get away from the bronze gear on the distributor. Only cam I have found is a couple of mild street cams.

I'm bringing this thread back to the top.

Impala!! If you're still out there, bring us up to date!!

I've been doing research on these little fellers and have found a couple of roller cams that I can't use on my street engine!! Drop me a PM and I'll fill you in.

Haven’t been here for awhile and the car was on hold, Car now has a isky Hyd cam to replace the old roller, while i was at it a new Holly Ecu was installed as well as a crank trigger. Just starting to tune the car, but will post results as soon as i get some run time

Looking forward to the updates. Sounds good.

Hey, Impala!! What were the specs on that old roller cam?? Would you be interested in selling it?? I've been trying to find a roller that I can use in my 153 build!! If you would, PLEASE PM me at your earliest convenience!!!

Knew you'd be on that!

Yeah!! I'd like to talk to him whether he wants to sell it or not!! How 'bout it, Impala???

Sorry guys, not on here real often lately, the roller cam was toast, broke a roller lifter and killed a lobe, i do however have a set of new lifters in the box. The car is now running a mild isky HYD cam. Changed the car over to complete Holly computer system and still having issues with the injection. Would love to talk with someone who has lots of experience with this engine

That lobe can be repaired.

The lifters interest me of course, but I hope you didn't discard the camshaft!! Like Frenchtown said, it may be repairable and I'd definitely be interested!

Impala, What issues are you having with the EFI? I have been thinking of running the FItech 2 barrel on my 153 in my Nova. Would love to hear how its been working out, or not working out.