When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I have a 327 that I pulled out of a vehicle that had been sitting for awhile. I cleaned it up, dissasembled it and took it to the machine shop and had it vatted and checked for cracks. The machinist told me it was fine, but that one cylinder wall would need to be sleeved. He said all the others would clean up when I had it bored .030" over, which I planned to do anyway. My question is: Is there any disadvantage to having that cylinder sleeved? Will it affect strength in any way? I really would like some advice because I don't want to go ahead building this engine if there is something wrong with that.
Thanks
Jason
Done well a sleeved engine would be fine for most street motors. If it were the correct and original block for the car I would say sleeve it. If it's a stock HP driver and you can't afford another block a sleeve would also be ok. My personal preference would be to look for another block instead (unless 327 blocks are real hard to come by, I've never looked for one).
I had one sleeved cylinder in the first motor in the boat. That motor broke a crank (I'm sure not related to the sleeve) so I never got more than 10 hours run time on it. When I rebuilt the motor I went a found a different original bore block to start with instead.
Sleeves are OK even in high hp aplications. You real problem is: What is the journal size? old 302/327 had a smaller journal size than the later 327/350 blocks. I would not put a dime into rebuilding the small very break prone size.
The problem with sleeves is that they leak. The sleeve walls are about a quarter inch thick, and installing them involves cutting into the water jackets. If it's not done just right you'll end up with water in your oil.
I'd seriously consider a custom piston. They can make them any size.
I have forgot most of the trivia on motors, but I think the date would have been 66 and older. The 283/302/327 were very inferior crank shafts. You might even add 307's to that list. So much so that GM redesigned the small block to large journals and 4 bolt main caps
the main size increased in 1967 with the advent of the 350 engine because of the longer stroke making need for more overlap between the mains and rod journals for strength. all other engines got it in 1968 :chevy
I have forgot most of the trivia on motors, but I think the date would have been 66 and older. The 283/302/327 were very inferior crank shafts. You might even add 307's to that list. So much so that GM redesigned the small block to large journals and 4 bolt main caps
What utter hogwash!!!
All early SB crankshafts were FORGED STEEL and the SHP versions were
Tuftrided.
The reason the journal sizes were increased on the '67 350 was to restore journal overlap with the longer stroke, and in '68 the journal sizes were made common across the board in order to have bearing commonality across displacements.
Most of these "large journal" cranks were nodular cast iron. Only the SHP cranks remained Tuftrided forged steel. SHP blocks also had four bolt mains, but they were overkill. I have never heard of a street small block pulling the main bearing caps out of the block.
Back in the heyday of F5000 engines, most of the winners were running small bearing blocks and cranks because they had lower frictional losses.
. I would not put a dime into rebuilding the small very break prone size.
I would disagree here, the small journal cranks are not break prone. I've run several without any crank problem. I still have a 335ci small journal (back up motor for stock car) that spins 8200rpm and makes 500+ hp. It has and will run lap after lap on a 3/8-1/2 mile oval at rpms above 8000, and never think twice! If you,ve had problems before, I'd tend to think it was an isolated case. :cheers: