Register or Log In To remove these advertisements. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
03-14-2018, 11:42 AM | #1 |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Campbellsville, KY
Posts: 888
|
Inline six curiosity (194 vs. 250)
Just a curiosity question:
Main journal sizes are the same on a 194 and 250, so... will a 250 crank fit in a 194 for a (when bored .030") 215 stroker?
__________________
Alex V. ------ 1967 C10 Suburban, 350/NP435, Green/Green, PS, PB, HD cooling, charging, shocks, and springs. 1985 GMC C3500 SRW, Sierra Classic, 454/TH400, white/blue. |
03-15-2018, 02:05 AM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Tucson, AZ USA
Posts: 7,018
|
Re: Inline six curiosity (194 vs. 250)
Interesting question. I can't really say, not having much contact with L6s smaller than a 292. I know the prior generation of Chevy L6s were sold in 215, 235 and 261 CI displacements. Heavier cast iron blocks, though. The next Generation, from 1963-87[?] ran 194, 230, 250 and 292. 230s were not used in trucks after '67.
I have heard of racers building "Cheater 292s" by using a 292 crank in a [1-7/8th inch lower] 250 block with oversize diameter pistons, for getting around racing class rules. I don't race so I only have heard of it in passing. You might ask around at Inliners International. Someone there might know about it. www.inliners.org
__________________
Every 25 years I like to rebuild that 292, whether it needs it or not. Last edited by '68OrangeSunshine; 03-16-2018 at 01:55 AM. |
03-15-2018, 06:09 AM | #3 |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Memphis MI
Posts: 1,851
|
Re: Inline six curiosity (194 vs. 250)
Yes it will fit, basically need to drop in the 250 pacakge with only the pistons from the 194. A 230 has the 250 bore and 194 stroke.
Check the rod clearance at the bottom of the bores as the 194 has the smaller bores. An unusual combination, as the small bore of the 194 limits valve size and breathing potential.
__________________
1987 2 ton 1982 250/TH350 beater in progress Dad's 1981 3/4 L6 3 on tree posi and no options, awaiting restoration or scrapping Plus a mess o' tractors |
03-15-2018, 11:52 PM | #4 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: MD
Posts: 1,937
|
Re: Inline six curiosity (194 vs. 250)
There are a couple good reasons you do not see this.
One - it would require custom made pistons. Shorter pin height because of the longer stroke. Two - being under square (stroke longer than bore size) it would not be conducive to performance.
__________________
1969 c-10 Step Side Long Bed. I-6 250cid = = 1969 Pontiac GTO hard top. 400, 4-speed. |
03-16-2018, 06:28 PM | #5 | |
driving is in my blood
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Mesa AZ
Posts: 5,690
|
Re: Inline six curiosity (194 vs. 250)
Quote:
Oversquare does not equal performance. The thing here is enough bore size to fit big enough valves and them not be shrouded. Once you've accomplished that then added stroke will just add HP.
__________________
-78 c10 short/step: 388cid, M20, 5/5 drop, lots more. Playtoy and first vehicle. -98 c1500 x-cab: 5.7L, 17" rims, 5/6 drop, flowmaster, helper bags,NBS rear disk brakes. -02 Suburban 4x4: leveled front -CBR600F4i, CBR600RR, CBR1000RR, and standup skis DISCLAIMER: I cant spell for the life of me. |
|
03-17-2018, 12:03 AM | #6 |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Campbellsville, KY
Posts: 888
|
Re: Inline six curiosity (194 vs. 250)
Not everyone wants to build for horsepower - torque in the usable RPM range can be conducive to economy, and stroke can be conducive to torque. It was a question out of curiosity.
__________________
Alex V. ------ 1967 C10 Suburban, 350/NP435, Green/Green, PS, PB, HD cooling, charging, shocks, and springs. 1985 GMC C3500 SRW, Sierra Classic, 454/TH400, white/blue. |
03-18-2018, 10:01 AM | #7 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: MD
Posts: 1,937
|
Somewhat apples to oranges comparison regarding valve train designs and related performance characteristics, but yeah. My bad for not being more specific.
__________________
1969 c-10 Step Side Long Bed. I-6 250cid = = 1969 Pontiac GTO hard top. 400, 4-speed. |
03-18-2018, 12:33 PM | #8 |
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Overland Park, Ks.
Posts: 5,190
|
Re: Inline six curiosity (194 vs. 250)
I understand all the heads for those engines used the same size valves. The 194 heads had smaller combustion chambers to keep the comp. ratio the same as the others. Some use this head on the larger engine for more comp. There was a 215 version of this engine. Pont. used it in Tempest models. Some had the standard head & some had o-head camshaft with a cog belt drive.
George |
03-18-2018, 04:35 PM | #9 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Tucson, AZ USA
Posts: 7,018
|
Re: Inline six curiosity (194 vs. 250)
Quote:
__________________
Every 25 years I like to rebuild that 292, whether it needs it or not. |
|
03-19-2018, 06:01 AM | #10 |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Memphis MI
Posts: 1,851
|
Re: Inline six curiosity (194 vs. 250)
The 194 head has smaller chambers, which raises compression, but has siamesed exhaust ports, degrading ability to use headers. Also the smaller chamber and small bore will shroud valves larger than stock, limiting the upper RPM breathing if used on a 250.
The crank will drop in but the compression height on the pistons is different, so custom pistons or rods will be needed. Custom rods with 50 year old piston technology... better off doing the pistons. Unless your racing class has a CID limit, for the same cost, you can build a 250, use 305 1.8" intake valves, 1.6" valves on the exhaust, and make more power. Or leave it stock and use the longer stroke and 50 extra CID to make more torque. Kind of why GM only put the 194 in the Nova - wouldn't pull a truck or Impala. Increased bore to make the 230 then stroked to make the 250, which is a pretty decent engine.
__________________
1987 2 ton 1982 250/TH350 beater in progress Dad's 1981 3/4 L6 3 on tree posi and no options, awaiting restoration or scrapping Plus a mess o' tractors |
03-23-2018, 12:49 AM | #11 |
Post Whore
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Southern Oregon
Posts: 10,384
|
Re: Inline six curiosity (194 vs. 250)
Or leave it stock and throw 5 PSI on it.
__________________
1966 Chevy C10 "Project Two Tone" http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=596643 1964 GMC "Crustine" semi-build:http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=665056 My youtube channel. Username "Military Chevy": https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_h...fzpcUXyK_5-uiw |
03-23-2018, 09:03 AM | #12 |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Campbellsville, KY
Posts: 888
|
Re: Inline six curiosity (194 vs. 250)
That's within the realm of possibilities. But if it's possible, why not add 21 cubes (mostly in stroke) *then* boost it?
__________________
Alex V. ------ 1967 C10 Suburban, 350/NP435, Green/Green, PS, PB, HD cooling, charging, shocks, and springs. 1985 GMC C3500 SRW, Sierra Classic, 454/TH400, white/blue. |
03-23-2018, 09:05 AM | #13 |
Post Whore
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Southern Oregon
Posts: 10,384
|
Re: Inline six curiosity (194 vs. 250)
That works to haha Best thing in my book would be to get a 292 and boost that....so now your adding almost 100 cubes!
__________________
1966 Chevy C10 "Project Two Tone" http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=596643 1964 GMC "Crustine" semi-build:http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=665056 My youtube channel. Username "Military Chevy": https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_h...fzpcUXyK_5-uiw |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|