262 vs 267 sbc

brian schuetta · 05-22-2014, 08:50 PM

Which of these is the more under factored and would be worth working with? The 3.50" bore sounds way to small but didn't one of those engines qualify well at Indy one year in an El Camino? Dime rockets or?

Adger Smith · 05-23-2014, 07:17 AM

Call or PM Billy Nees. I think He has experience with both those. He is the expert. PM me and I will give you his number.

Steve Williams · 05-23-2014, 08:37 AM

I think you are referring to an El Camino that had a 262 (4.3) V-6 that was near the top at Indy a few years ago. I think the last name was Fickler. Was the wife of a guy that worked at Aeromotive. Now the best 262 V-8 I know of, is a guy out of Div 1- Brian Philbrick(sp?) out of Ontario, Canada. I have been working on the 267 combination for a little while and have found good things and some bad things about the 267. Some can be cured with money and others, well you just have to live with. The big issue with either combination is going to be finding good cores to work with, especially the 262 V-8. I have collected a bunch of 267 stuff and more carbs than should be allowed in one shop.

Dan Fahey · 05-23-2014, 09:45 AM

This is interesting because I saw Briane's (car at the Class Nationals.
We had a short conversation about the small engines.
Great guy.

Curious these two engines so close in cubic inches.
Kind of wonder why GM made them in the first place?
Then they the different displacements?

Wondering which of these two engines GM used to manufacture the mini LT1?
OR was it a whole new bore stock combination?

Dan

Adger Smith · 05-23-2014, 10:08 AM

Probably an emissions experiment.

Chipper Chapman · 05-23-2014, 10:46 AM

Mini lt1 different again, went back to 265 same dimensions as the fifties engine.

FED 387 · 05-23-2014, 10:47 AM

interesting original 265 is 3.75bore X 3 stroke- small dimension rod bearings
262 is 3.67 bore X 3.1 stroke-large dimension rod bearings
267 is 3.5 bore X 3.48 stroke-also large dimension rod bearings

262 was a popular engine in the Monza it replaced a 350 that was substituted at introduction in 1975 due to engine shortages -only available for 2-3 years

k.pascoe · 05-23-2014, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Williams

I think you are referring to an El Camino that had a 262 (4.3) V-6 that was near the top at Indy a few years ago. I think the last name was Fickler. Was the wife of a guy that worked at Aeromotive. Now the best 262 V-8 I know of, is a guy out of Div 1- Brian Philbrick(sp?) out of Ontario, Canada. I have been working on the 267 combination for a little while and have found good things and some bad things about the 267. Some can be cured with money and others, well you just have to live with. The big issue with either combination is going to be finding good cores to work with, especially the 262 V-8. I have collected a bunch of 267 stuff and more carbs than should be allowed in one shop.

I believe that El Camino was Bob Shaw's old car. And I think it was a 229 ci.

Steve Williams · 05-23-2014, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k.pascoe

I believe that El Camino was Bob Shaw's old car. And I think it was a 229 ci.

You may be right. I do remember he had one, but can't remember much more than that. Debra Fickler was the lady I remembered in a 4.3 V-6-262 EFI El Camino. Seems like the Fickler El Camino was usually a good qualifier. 262 V-8 was 75-76 only and 267 V-8 was 79-82. The 267 is auto only, although I saw one with a 4 speed in a Malibu at GM. If Dad was still living, he could tell me why they had that car, built that way.

Chris Hill · 05-23-2014, 06:04 PM

Shaw's elCamino was 4.3 v6 (262 cid) with TBI fuel injection.

It's a 350 v8 with two cylinders removed.

Everything equal and same displacement, more cylinders will make power than smaller number of cylinders up a v10/v12.

More small intake strokes per four stroke cycle makes more power than fewer and larger intake strokes. The carb acts larger than it actually is with more cylinders.

05-22-2014, 08:50 PM	#1
brian schuetta Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: san antonio tx Posts: 259 Likes: 5 Liked 28 Times in 15 Posts	262 vs 267 sbc Which of these is the more under factored and would be worth working with? The 3.50" bore sounds way to small but didn't one of those engines qualify well at Indy one year in an El Camino? Dime rockets or?

05-23-2014, 07:17 AM	#2
Adger Smith VIP Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Texarkana Ark/TX Posts: 2,446 Likes: 575 Liked 880 Times in 311 Posts	Re: 262 vs 267 sbc Call or PM Billy Nees. I think He has experience with both those. He is the expert. PM me and I will give you his number. __________________ Adger Smith (Former SS)

05-23-2014, 08:37 AM	#3
Steve Williams Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Detroit, Michigan Posts: 352 Likes: 0 Liked 1 Time in 1 Post	Re: 262 vs 267 sbc I think you are referring to an El Camino that had a 262 (4.3) V-6 that was near the top at Indy a few years ago. I think the last name was Fickler. Was the wife of a guy that worked at Aeromotive. Now the best 262 V-8 I know of, is a guy out of Div 1- Brian Philbrick(sp?) out of Ontario, Canada. I have been working on the 267 combination for a little while and have found good things and some bad things about the 267. Some can be cured with money and others, well you just have to live with. The big issue with either combination is going to be finding good cores to work with, especially the 262 V-8. I have collected a bunch of 267 stuff and more carbs than should be allowed in one shop.

05-23-2014, 09:45 AM	#4
Dan Fahey VIP Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 2,128 Likes: 1,084 Liked 184 Times in 113 Posts	Re: 262 vs 267 sbc This is interesting because I saw Briane's (car at the Class Nationals. We had a short conversation about the small engines. Great guy. Curious these two engines so close in cubic inches. Kind of wonder why GM made them in the first place? Then they the different displacements? Wondering which of these two engines GM used to manufacture the mini LT1? OR was it a whole new bore stock combination? Dan

05-23-2014, 10:08 AM	#5
Adger Smith VIP Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Texarkana Ark/TX Posts: 2,446 Likes: 575 Liked 880 Times in 311 Posts	Re: 262 vs 267 sbc Probably an emissions experiment. __________________ Adger Smith (Former SS)

05-23-2014, 10:46 AM	#6
Chipper Chapman Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Belmont N.S. Canada Posts: 473 Likes: 246 Liked 166 Times in 71 Posts	Re: 262 vs 267 sbc Mini lt1 different again, went back to 265 same dimensions as the fifties engine. __________________ Chris Chapman 1969 Chevelle NHRA F-G/SA 1090

05-23-2014, 10:47 AM	#7
FED 387 VIP Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 3,416 Likes: 522 Liked 330 Times in 178 Posts	Re: 262 vs 267 sbc interesting original 265 is 3.75bore X 3 stroke- small dimension rod bearings 262 is 3.67 bore X 3.1 stroke-large dimension rod bearings 267 is 3.5 bore X 3.48 stroke-also large dimension rod bearings 262 was a popular engine in the Monza it replaced a 350 that was substituted at introduction in 1975 due to engine shortages -only available for 2-3 years

05-23-2014, 06:04 PM	#10
Chris Hill Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 655 Likes: 8 Liked 244 Times in 26 Posts	Re: 262 vs 267 sbc Shaw's elCamino was 4.3 v6 (262 cid) with TBI fuel injection. It's a 350 v8 with two cylinders removed. Everything equal and same displacement, more cylinders will make power than smaller number of cylinders up a v10/v12. More small intake strokes per four stroke cycle makes more power than fewer and larger intake strokes. The carb acts larger than it actually is with more cylinders. __________________ Chris Hill https://ihmusedparts.com