This article made me feel real good about what im doing with my 283. I will be happy with 300HP and 350 TQ. im not looking to race it, however I do have a little more performance parts then this article 283 have. I cant wait to see my "Little Bugger Run".


"One of the mags did an article awhile back on a 283... nothing real powerful, but just a cheap basic rebuild to see what you could get with very stock parts.
The short block was all stock +.040'' overbore. It came out to around 9:1 compression.

The heads were the stockers which had 1.72/1.50 valves. they replaced the intake valve with a 1.84 valve from the 305 head mentioned. They just cleaned up some burrs in the head (no major porting).

The stuck in a Comp XE250 cam (206/212 @.050 lift I think). Topped it off with a Performer intake and 600cfm carb.

Thing only made 265 horses and about 320 ft. lbs., but it was cheap to build and didn't take advantage of the short stroke. Peak power was around 5000rpm if I remember correctly. It has been awhile since I read the article".

 

I had a 283 in a 1958 chevy stepside Pick-up when I was in highschool..it had the truck 4 speed, and I believe 4.11 gears. My brother inlaw built the motor , and put in a th400. That truck would boogie...I think I spent more on tires than I did on gas.
Yep thats the one I wish I still had..it was the " apache". had the indian hood ornimate and all.....I traded it for a gremlin..
Young and dumb.....

 

Next time You got to be more careful!

 

my engine 84 trans am is a

283 .060 over trw forged flat tops
186 camel humps 1.94 valves
350 horse 327 cam 222 duration 447 lift
headers
performer intake
quadrajet
700r4, 3.73 gears

326 hp

 

There have been a few 283's in my life, including the first car I remember, my dad's '56 Bel Air wagon; the orginal engine in the '57 in my sig, and a resto attempt in the early 80's; my HS buddy's first car & pickup; grandfather's '63 Impala - others as well. Also a couple of 307's, including the car in which I got my first moving violation. A couple of 305's.

Whatever you say, you can't get around the fact that power and cubic inches are linked, all other things being equal. More cubes = more power, every time.

A 292 CID 283-based, camel humped headed, 350 horse 327 cammed engine might make 326 HP, but on/in a 355, that'd be 400+ HP. With better, late aftermarket heads and 10:1 CR flat-tops, probably well over 400. A 383, over 430. And yes, any one of them could rev high enough to make that power - lower RPMs, in fact, than the 283 would have to turn. Generally speaking, you want to make the power at the lowest possible RPM, for the sake of expense and durability, at least. And, it's certainly cheaper to build a 350 than a 283.

Look, I have a soft spot in my heart for the 283, and often long for that 327-blocked, 283-cranked, .060"-over 302 (310.7, actually) that I had in the '57 back in the mid- to late-70's. But, fact is, the Camaro runs as good an 1/8 mile (the only run I ever made with the 302) today as that high-reving, tweaky engine did then. The 396 in the '57 now - so much faster.

 

Hey 57kid i totally agree with you about cubes! the pistons alone were like 400 bucks so yea it was alot more exspensive but they are very tough engines, that like to rev for ever... Plus nobody believes me its a 292, by they way it sounds people assume 350 or bigger,btw the 350hp cam sounds pretty healthy in the little 283 alot more noticable than even 327...Kevin