Ok, I finally found a good, real OilLite bronze bushing from NAPA, part number 615-1161. It is 1.097 OD and .591 ID off the shelf.
-----Too big for my 1957 Powerglide 283 bushing hole which is 1.089. I removed .006 from the OD of the pilot bushing by making a homemade mandrel from a bolt, washer and nut and ugh, tape!
-----But it works! Chucked it into my drill press, and then used a flat steel block and 200 grit black emory paper to work it down, .001 at a time.
-----Result is a 1.091 OD, .0005 concentricity just like before I started, and no taper. The Oillite ID is still mint original "porous" surface, just what I wanted.
-----Hope this helps other people doing Powerglide to stick conversions. I would not trust any other pilot bushing manufacturer. Most have concentricity in the .0025 range, included original GM, really pretty poor. Also watch out for steel/bronze alloys.
----- These are the tools and the finished bushing.

 

Thanks for posting the NAPA part # and for keeping everyone informed of your findings adn to everyone else who contributed. I've been around a long time but this has been one of the more interesting (3?) threads I've seen in awhile.

 

Many yrs ago I used an adjustable reamer as an arbor for the bushing to turn it down using a 12" mill bastard file and a drill press. Put a '53 PG 6 in a standard shift car.

 

67L36, I too did several trial pieces with large mill file and it worked fine. I went with the emory paper for surface finish and a little by little approach.
-----The main thing that I learned is that a crude or sloppy arbor doesn't really matter. Even thought the bushing is wobbling back and forth a few thousands, the constant pressure of my hand follows it back and forth also. So what ever concentricity is there to begin with is preserved.

 

I just dealt with this issue and found that the NAPA pilot bushing #690-034 solved the "powerglide engine to manual transmission" dilemna. I probably missed some prior threads here but what led you to go to all of this trouble? Should I be concerned about the composition of my present bushing?

 

Vette66, If you have a succesfully running car, I would not worry about it. I have a stock 57 283 engine that has a 1.089 pilot bushing hole, this is a matching date code engine in a car thats history is known since new.
What happens is that when I take a stock "off the shelf" pilot bushing with a 1.094 to 1.097 OD, and drive it into that hole, the ID collapses and the tranny main shaft will not go into the now "too tight" bushing. If it is forced in, by using the tranny mounting bolts to draw it in, then the steel mainshaft will grind out the brass bushing on start up and it will not be good for a long life. I measured many brands of pilot bushings including your part number and they all were in the same size range.
All of this discussion is meaningless about bushings, and bushing vs. bearings, unless the ID of the hole and the OD of the bushing is measured and known. I have a 1.089 hole. I made a 1.090 bushing. It is driving fit into the hole, but not enough to collapse the ID.
I guess most engines have a lot bigger hole and also the older tranny shaft can often be smaller to. So things usually fit ok and work. But I will never do a clutch job again without measuring the pilot hole and bushing ID and Concentricity, and then adjusting things if needed. Especially with a tight tolerance tranny like a TKO.