Frankie the Fink

MikeM

I think this means you and one other has no use for my opinion if you think I made a snarky post.. The desirability differences between a base engine and an optional engine is verified, especially by the numbers sold at a higher cost. Those cars are in the majority. Nobody fakes a base engine. Read it here many times.

Does it make you feel any better that I have attended a number of shows starting in the late '50's but have only taken my car(s) to several and never bothered to open the hood. Maybe this is because some here don't think I paid enough for my paint jobs so my cars aren't worthy somehow. But I have always noticed the crowds walk on by the rather unexciting looking/sounding Corvettes to get next to the ones that I described. Just like the new car buyers did, years ago.

Also, when people start talking about torque of these engines vs the SHP engines and seem to think there is some great advantage there, they are just blowing smoke. Either one of my two will pull away from 10 mph in fourth gear (third gear for the 250. It's a three speed), 3.36 axle, without hesitation, bucking or jumping.. No need to down shift at any speed to pass another car. Plenty of torque for whatever.

I well understand the feelings of inferiority with a base engine car. I've been bearing the load of this now on my base engine '65 for 46 years now. Friends/neighbors never did look at the engine or talk about how good it sounds even though it has GM factory side pipes. It just sits there and smoothly idles at about 500/550 and goes putt-putt-putt-putt-putt-putt. That all changed when I built the engine for my '63. I had enough junk laying around here for years to build a couple of 327/360's. Just needed the car to put it in so I bought one. Snatched the (almost) base engine out and dropped this one in. When the hood is up, people look. When it starts, people listen. Idles about 750 rpm with a rather rough, rhythmic rumplety- bumpity-bump and people listen and say, "that sounds good".

So yeah, I'm satisfied with what I posted. If you want to draw a crowd, don't buy the base engine. They're even harder to sell when that time comes.

hcallaway

"Does it make you feel any better that I have attended a number of shows starting in the late '50's but have only taken my car(s) to several and never bothered to open the hood. Maybe this is because some here don't think I paid enough for my paint jobs so my cars aren't worthy somehow."

At 70 something, I would wonder how you could end up so bitter. Let me lay it out for you.

BITTER
(of people or their feelings or behavior) angry, hurt, or resentful because of one's bad experiences or a sense of unjust treatment.
"I don't feel jealous or bitter"synonyms:resentful, embittered, aggrieved, begrudging, rancorous, spiteful, jaundiced, ill-disposed, sullen, sour, churlish, morose, petulant, peevish, with a chip on one's shoulder
"a bitter woman"

How you make the leaps you do goes to being irrational.
This is the conversation:
1 A base 327 250 HP does a good job in a C2. (Unlike you, no one thinks that makes any other motor in a Vette a bad choice.)
2 People don't have to disparage any car, motor, wife, religion to make themselves feel part of a group in order to feel better themselves. (If your cars or yourself have been made fun of because of the cost of your paint jobs, I am truly sorry.) In this thread there has not been any reference to your paint or being worthy. This is a discussion about having a 327 motor that was installed at the factory after a decision by GM Engineers.
3 There are plenty of threads about LS Motors, 427, 396 and any variation of small blocks.

MikeM

Well, I can see you don't value my opinion at all but I value yours. As I stated, other opinions may differ. Just because you just purchased a base engine car probably qualifies you to be offended and make personal remarks at my post instead of being objective about it.

I hope you enjoy your base engine '64 that you purchased. When you start it up beside your Bug Eye Sprite, they'll make a nice duo.

PUTT-PUTT/putt, PUTT-PUTT/putt, PUTT-PUTT/putt, PUTT/-PUTTputt, PUTT/putt.

Have fun. .

edit. I thought I'd change the PUTTS to reflect the 8 cyl vs 4 cyl engines.

Frankie the Fink

Railroadman

When I was 19, the measures of how cool a car was were 1) how fast it would accelerate and 2) how mean it sounded.

50 years later, I feel no need to out-accelerate anybody else - if an Obamamobile ("Smart Car") wants to floor it off the traffic light, I'll let him go. Likewise I enjoy the looks and fun of my Corvettes and really don't care how they sound.

I don't tell other people how to live their lives. If rough idle, loud exhaust, and tire-frying acceleration are your thing, that's fine with me. Been there, done that, moved on.

Nowhere Man

in 65 GM was smarter then most on here. they knew there buying market and offered a engine combo for EVERYONE. if you wanted a daily driver and didn't want to go fast you bought a base motor car. you wanted a little more pep you got the 300 hp motor, even more pep you got the 350, even more pep you could have got the 365. but wait there is more you can get even more pep with a fancy fuel injected motor. but if that was not fast enough you could have got that new porcupine 396 motor. seems like they had something for every use you could think of

MikeM

Can't disagree with that. Take yer pick! Most didn't pick the top one for various reasons.. Probably some noted by me.

Gavin65

It amazes me how far off base this discussion went.

Railroadman

In that case, you must be new here.

mexicruiser

Well 250hp is still plenty of power, and it is also a very beautiful car so no surprise you are enjoying! To me my cars all have different personalities and I try to enjoy each as much as I can. It is like when you have several sons/daughters, each one is different but you still love them all.
My SWC is originally a 340hp car but the previous owner didn’t like its “personality” so he put a stock hydraulic cam, low compression cast pistons and late model 350 heads on it, he also swapped the 4 speed for an automatic and installed power steering, so I guess everybody has different priorities. I confess I’m now in the process of returning it back to original specs, but it is not because I need more hp but because I would like it to be original.
I also enjoy driving my Volvo P1800 or my Porsche 912, these cars have one third of the power but are still a lot of fun, I just try to love them for what they are, because to me each one is like a time machine, able to transport me to a different moment in car history.

AmericanPie

I have a '65 Impala SS with its original 327/250 and PG. The engine has never been apart and is leaking/burning some oil, so eventually I'm going to pull it for a rebuild. It's a great engine with lots of low end torque which I really like (esp. with the PG and 3.31 gears), but it does kind of hit a brick wall at about 4800 rpm.

I have an intake manifold and Carter AFB that were original equipment on the 300HP version and am thinking of installing them (plus a very mild cam) to bring it up to 327/300 HP specs during the rebuild. I'd expect the motor to pull harder to about 5500, but how much low end torque and response would I likely lose due to the manifold's larger ports and larger carb? Admittedly, this car's a cruiser and will very seldom see aggressive driving, so I've been wondering if maybe I should just re-install the stock parts. Opinions?

SWCDuke

What is the head casting symbol? At least in the Corvette, the '65 327/250 had big port 461 heads rather than the earlier 896 heads that had 283 size ports valves. I expect the same with the passenger car version, so if you do have double humps heads replacing the small port manifold and WCFB with a big port manifold and AFB will yield a 327/300 configuration. The big port manifold and AFB would do nothing for the earlier heads due to the small ports and valves.

With PG and stock heads you can't beat the OE cam. If you want to massage a set of OE big port heads or install a set of better flowing heads like the Trick Flow "double hump" aluminum heads, the McCaw Special cam will make more top end power without any significant sacrifice of low end torque because it has the same low effective overlap as the OE cam, but more inlet duration with later phasing.

Your so-called "mild cam" will likely have more overlap than the OE cam or McCagh Special, which will hurt low end torque... not a good idea with PG in a heavy car and a relatively tall gear.

Duke

AmericanPie

Thanks for chiming in, Duke. Yes, it does have the double-hump, -461 heads. The cam I had in mind is one of several "RV" type hydraulic grinds with ~205-210 degrees duration @ .050" lift. But I'm sure any of them would still move the torque curve up slightly from stock, which would compromise some low-end power. I've never really heard anything bad about the stock -929 cam, so maybe I'll just stick with it.

I'm assuming that the only noticeable difference between driving a 327/250 and a 327/300 is that the 300 HP pulls a few hundred rpm higher.

I'm curious what a "McCaw Special" cam is; I've been out of this for awhile and have never heard of it.

68hemi

I believe the 250 and 300 h.p. Corvettes used the same cam??? I think the h.p. difference was in the heads and the carb.

W Guy

Yes. Short block is the same. 300hp added intake, carb, heads and 2.5" exhaust.

Verne

68hemi

The intake should be the same just a basic cast iron 4 barrel intake for both engines. The exhaust size will vary with year and trans.

AmericanPie

For the 1965 model year they also used the same -461 heads, so the only real difference that year was carb and intake manifold. I don't know about the exhaust manifolds used on the 327/250 Corvette, but on the full-size cars like mine they used the 2" outlet manifolds (with single exhaust pipes standard and duals optional).

68hemi

Railroadman

See post #52 - we're actually talking about a '65 Impala.