S-Series.Org

by **dirty dawg** » Sun Aug 11, 2002 11:05 pm

PURSUIT S-10 wrote:the smallest big block is a 366 which is a piece of junk

Isn't that a destroked 396? What was wrong with the 366?

by **SmallBlock** » Sun Aug 11, 2002 11:13 pm

dirty dawg wrote:
PURSUIT S-10 wrote:the smallest big block is a 366 which is a piece of junk

Isn't that a destroked 396? What was wrong with the 366?

They have the same stroke (same crank i think) as a 396,402 and 427
but the bore is tiny. They have a tall deck height block so a regular Big Block intake won't fit.
I've got one and I would try to stick it in a S10 if it didn't need rebuilt.Too much trouble for a motor thats so little Cubic inches and so heavy.

by **dirty dawg** » Sun Aug 11, 2002 11:25 pm

They were only used in the trucks from like '64-'66 wern't they?

by **SmallBlock** » Sun Aug 11, 2002 11:30 pm

they used them from the late 60s to the early 90s
*EDIT*The internet says 65-90
366 bore 3.935" stroke 3.760"

by **dirty dawg** » Sun Aug 11, 2002 11:38 pm

Hhhmmm.....if they were used until '90, they must have been real damn scarce cuz that's about the only engine I've not heard of being used in the trucks for that length of time.

by **RiceSmoker95SS** » Sun Aug 11, 2002 11:46 pm

probably more in heavy duty trucks in the newer years.

by **SmallBlock** » Sun Aug 11, 2002 11:51 pm

366s are industrial motors so they were used to power dump trucks irrigation pumps and stuff like that. They never put them in cars or pickups.
Most of those big trucks that had V8s were 350s 366s or 427s.

by **Kramer** » Sun Aug 11, 2002 11:58 pm

dirty dawg wrote:Hhhmmm.....if they were used until '90, they must have been real damn scarce cuz that's about the only engine I've not heard of being used in the trucks for that length of time.

but you also never seen a tri power for a small block... :haha:

by **dirty dawg** » Mon Aug 12, 2002 12:26 am

Kramer wrote:but you also never seen a tri power for a small block...

Not for a small block Chevy. Maybe on a Mopar engine or an early Pontiac engine but not on a Chevy. And that would probably be because (1) I don't think they were factory for Chevy and (2) I don't think too many people run them.

by **eagle1** » Mon Aug 12, 2002 11:05 am

Whats up,

Guys, I feel you need to know that I am not trying to stir up ANY arguments at all. I am only tring to ask some thing here. I simply asked why GM cut what was the 5.9liter 350 Big Block V8. I just want to know if you guys have heard any thing and why Gm is doing it. I honestly dont know what the engine vin code and the specs, but all I can say is that it was a 5.9liter V8 which really did produce alot of horse power. This engine was a true work horse in its self. Again, I am not trying to stir up any trouble at all, I am only simply asking a question. I am sorry for any inconvience and if I offended any one at all. All I can say that is I stand by what that 1992 GMC Sieraa did and had in there.

ZQ8's For Ever,

Paul

by **SmallBlock** » Mon Aug 12, 2002 12:19 pm

350 cubic inches is 5.7 liters not 5.9. Plain and simple.

by **Kramer** » Mon Aug 12, 2002 1:10 pm

and its a small block...

Website · by **martin777** » Mon Aug 12, 2002 1:20 pm

5.9 Liters=360.04009 Cubic Inches

5.7 Liters=347.835341 Cubic Inches

by **RiceSmoker95SS** » Mon Aug 12, 2002 1:51 pm

mathematically proven:

4.3L = ~262ci

4.3/262=x/350

4.3(350)=262x

1505=262x

1505/262=x

5.744=x

roughly 5.7L

and I did answer as to why GM is discontinuing it. See my last post.

by **SpaceCowboy** » Mon Aug 12, 2002 3:37 pm

My best friend has a factory all original 100% 71 Buick Skylark with a Factory BIG BLOCK 350. No ish. They really made em.

Uh lets not use innaccurate mathmatical models here guys.

S-Series.Org

GM no longer making 5.9 350 Big Block V8

I just want to know

Who is online