|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 28
Active BB Member
|
OP
Active BB Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 28 |
Question here. I have a 230 from a '69 Camaro. It seems that the 230 is an under-dog here. I seldom see any posts regarding a 230. I would like to do a split exhaust, perhaps even a dual intake someday. Rare to find any discussions on these topics for a 230. And parts??? Good luck huh? I am putting a T-5 from a Chevy S-10 behind it and then to a rear from an S-10 4x4 truck. All this parked in an Essex Coupe from 1929. Looonnngg way to go still, but it looks like a car now! Thanks. Perley
Every purchase has it's price!
Smile - It makes people wonder what you are thinking!
Perley
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 114
Contributor
|
Contributor
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 114 |
I think highly of the 230, If you read my posts you'll see I have a 66 Chevelle with a 230. I'm also building a a 69 Camaro with a 230 for NHRA Stock Class Drag Racing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 493
Contributor
|
Contributor
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 493 |
Me too. I've a 230 build planned but not yet executed with a forged crank in a '64 block, TRW flat tops, and Crower rods. I say planned because I've got the parts but homeowner projects have temporarily taken priority. Vehicle is a '72 Nova.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 79
Active BB Member
|
Active BB Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 79 |
Oldrodder, any recommendations made regarding the 250 also apply to the 230. In the late 70's there was a class of modifieds that ran six cylinder engines; we sometimes ran the 230 in the lighter cars due to the shorter stroke (3.25 vs 3.53). Induction was limited to a single two barrel so the volumetric efficiency was better with the 230 at higher rpm. I liked the flat top piston combination; it appeared to have better flame travel when used with the 194 head. The 305 1.84 intake valve is an easy installation or you can turn 1.94's back to a 1.875; I never liked the 1.94 in the 230 but some guys ran them. They are still a viable engine choice, just keep in mind that they have less low end torque than the 250 so "cam" accordingly for the street........fats
fats
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 534
Major Contributor
|
Major Contributor
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 534 |
Since your Essex will likely weigh about the same as an early Nova (2800 lb or so with a 194/230/250) and you have the T5 for takeoff, the missing low end from the 230 vs the 250 shouldn't matter as much.
Maybe since the Essex came with a six, people will think it's the original engine!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 28
Active BB Member
|
OP
Active BB Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 28 |
Thanks very kindly for the responses. I think the 230 and the T-5 are going to be a great combination, if and when I get it on the road. Progress is slow on it. The motor supposedly came from a '69 Camaro and had an automatic behind it. I've had a devil of a job finding parts, flywheel, pressure plate, especially a clutch. I finally had to have the people of Ft. Wayne Clutch build one. Perley
Every purchase has it's price!
Smile - It makes people wonder what you are thinking!
Perley
|
|
|
|
|
|
|