1991 GMC Sierra

Home  \  Domestic Cars  \  1991 GMC Sierra

I know this isn't the spot for trucks, but since that truck link at the bottom is pretty much a joke I figured I'd post it here. I'm looking into buyin' my old GMC Sierra back from a kid who has probably ran it somewhat hard. The truck originally had a 305 in it, but he blew it up and dropped a rebuilt 283 into it. I am not familiar with trucks that well and I was wondering how good of an engine the 283 is, and if the truck would be worth buying back.

posted by  Metzger

He put a 283 in it? Did he convert it from F.I. a carburetor? Unless it's a professionally done conversion or you can get it REALLY cheap and aren't afraid to maintain/repair/live with this Frankenstien engine combo, I'd steer clear of it. Something else you need to consider is if it will pass any type of inspection you have in your state either now or in the future.

Just out of curiosity, do you know why he put a 283 into it? I mean 305's are growing on trees and a 350 will also slide right in. The whole thing just doen't compute.

posted by  vwhobo

He did convert it to carb... he didn't drop a 350 in it b/c he couldn't afford it.. or so he says.

posted by  Metzger

350's are cheap and 283's are cheaper... Because for the most part nobody wants them, for good reason. Unless the job was done right it'll probably be more hassle than you want to deal with, unless the $$$ makes it more acceptable.

posted by  vwhobo

Well he's asking 2000 for it..

posted by  Metzger

just out of curiousity, why doesnt anyone want the 283? whats wrong with them?

posted by  glagon1979

You've got one too many zero's on that price. I just got this truck for a tow away, and although it needs a little work it's a way better deal than that.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v325/vwhobo/7e00cb1e.jpg

posted by  vwhobo

Because you can build/rebuild a 350 for less money, make more power, have better parts availability and have a stronger crank all in a package that fits in the same place.

posted by  vwhobo

im not saying you are wrong in any way, but isnt a chevy 302 a 283 with a 327 crank? they proved to be one of the best engines chevy ever built, right? by the way, why did they stop production of the sbc 302?

posted by  glagon1979

No, the 302 may have been one of the coolest and most storied engines they ever made, but certainly not the best. They stopped production because they didn't need to build them anymore for homologation into the TransAm series and because... wait for it... They weren't a very good engine.

EDIT. I just caught this. The 302 is a 327 with a 283/265 crank.

posted by  vwhobo

thanks for clearing it up. i see where you are comming from on the 350 subject. i've built plenty of them with 400+hp for less than $1000, and im sure you have as well. deffinatly a cheap engine to build. i wish the big blocks were as cheap though :doh:

posted by  glagon1979

Well as it stands my choices are the above mentioned Sierra... or a lowered Sonoma with the 4.3 L in it

posted by  Metzger

i need some deals like that, 'cause i totally need that body... (the truck body, perverts... :wink2: )

posted by  dodger65

Quick question.. I currently have a 98 Isuzu w/ the 2.2 I4 .. should I:
A) Swap w/ the 4.3 and go that route
B) Get the Sierra or Sonoma
C) Drop a 350 into it

posted by  Metzger

D) Buy a Dodge.

posted by  vwhobo

That wasn't an option.. and I don't know anything about dodges.. really only grew up around Chevy/GM

posted by  Metzger

those 283's are really good engines. weve ran a couple in a few derby cars and i know guys who have had real good luck with them. they run strong and can take high revs. i know not all motors are the same but just the few we have had and ran against, no complaints at all. they handle the heat well too. if your so worried about the 350 just drop in a cam and wake that 283 up. your not going to find a 350 very easy for under $350. id offer 1400 for the truck.

posted by  adamc44

I was looking through the classifieds this evening at work and spotted a 350 w/ Tranny for $250 ... so would you recommend buyin' the cam for the 283, or purchasing the 350? If I did get the 283 which cam should I buy?

posted by  Metzger

well, it really comes down to a matter of opinion, its what ever you want to put the money and work into. that 283 stock is enough to push that truck around plus its already in there and hooked up ready to roll. parts are a little more and if ya put the effort into installing the cam thats going to be quite a bit of work too. the 350 you'll have to buy pull the 283, drop in the 350 and hook everything else back up and try and sell the 283. its got more displacement and way cheaper parts too. rv cam kit great torque prob a 260 or 268 duration.

posted by  adamc44

how are parts way cheaper? 260-400 are basically the same engine, right? isn't just about every part on those engines interchangable?

posted by  glagon1979

If you don't believe me, believe Marlan;

283-Inch Small-Block Chevy
The Quick Facts
By Marlan Davis

The 283/283hp fuel-injected engine was among the first of the American engines to dispense with carburetion and make 1 hp/ci. Under legendary Corvette engineer Zora Arkus-Duntov's tutelage and encouragement, a slew of factory and aftermarket parts were developed for the 283. With a large variety of parts available, it became easier and cheaper to coax horsepower out of a Chevy small-block than the competition's engines. More enthusiasts gravitated toward the "easy to work on" Chevys, which encouraged the development of even more parts--and so the Chevrolution became self-feeding.

Even after the 327’s debut, the 283 made such a good base engine that it soldiered on through 1967. With its short 3-inch stroke, a 283 can rev as if there’s no tomorrow, but the small bore restricts adding really large valves and, hence, ultimate breathing potential. Except for the Vette 283/315hp option, 283s never came with anything larger than 1.72-/ 1.50-inch valves. You can install only 1.94/1.60 valves without hitting the cylinder walls. The 1.9:1 rod/stroke ratio is on the high side for an acceleration engine but great for an endurance or oval-track engine that runs at a high, constant speed. However, there’s no getting around the fact that a 283 just gives up too many cubic inches (and too much torque). Unless you’re into nostalgia, restoration, or class racing, there is no real reason to build a 283 today.

http://carcraft.com/techarticles/p5061_image_large.jpg

If a truck engine doesn't need torque, what does it need? That Sierra weighs at least 3800 lbs. And after all, let's face it... There's a reason GM quit building 283's.

posted by  vwhobo

i was just going off my past experiences w/ the engine. of course the ones we ran had 4.56 gears to push the car around. i figured if it can handle what we do to the motor its a good motor.....oh yea... 283's from i think 66-68 were made on the same assembly line as 327 and can be bored over .125 to make a 4 inch bore making a 302. also to tell if you can bore it that much you can look in the crankcase and see grooves cut into the block for clearance of the 327 crank wich you could also put in. but i have to admit.........it would be better to build that 350...im actually tearing one down today!!

posted by  adamc44

Your Message