Engine Conversions

[HJ-ETEX]

Barnum: I too thought an early Olds V8 would be an easy swap into a 51-55 Kaiser. Well...there was such a car at the KF National in Oshkosh. The steering has to be moved and the drivers side exhaust manifold still has to be modified. I was disappointed.

[HJ-ETEX]

boothguy: A AMC 6 is certainly an interesting possibility for a swap in a 51-55 Kaiser. What most people miss is that the oil filter on the post 1965 AMC 6s is in the middle of the block. Chevy, Ford 6s have the oil filter at the front of the block which precludes designing simple & easy engine mount brackets.
I don't believe in remote oil filter adapters because I believe they are GOOD possibilities for failure.

[Barnum]

Well, any conversion will require modifications. There is a video on youtube that claims Kaiser made a deal with GM to put Olds V-8's in 54/55 Kaisers  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwVUeQvzbqU  If I did it...I'd also use the supercharger

[boothguy]

I need to find out the length of the AMC 6, It might be too long since it has 7 main bearings- also dont know if it has rear sump.

[joefrazer]

KF was going to use Reo engines in their 51-5 cars but that deal fizzled so they also looked at the 265 V8 that GM was developing. KF also worked on a V8 of their own but beyond one or two running test engines, the project never bore fruit.

A former member had an Olds 303 in his 49 Virginian and the installation was relatively clean. I've seen a Mopar 318 and a 225 slant 6 in Kaisers as well as a Chev 250 6cyl in a HJ. I've also seen a Pontiac straight 8 in a 48K. To make it fit, the firewall was slightly modified.

[HJ-ETEX]

Boothguy:
 Of course the later series of AMC 6 is too long. A casual measurement on the engines in my 71 Hornet and 73 Commando show it is 33 inches from the mounting face for the bellhousing to the pulley flange on the water pump (3 inches longer than a 226). This is essentially the same as the Chevy 230-250-292 and the Ford 240-300. This isn't all due to the 7 main bearings, though. These 6s are based on modern V8 cylinder large bore/short stroke dimensions so they tend to be 2 cylinders longer than a V8. If you want something shorter, there is the MOPAR slant6 and the 170-200-250 Ford 6 (both about 30 inches, but with features that make them less than desirable).  But if you can figure how to make up the extra 3 inches, which will have to be from the radiator yoke forward, without being crude, the AMC could be a nice swap.
BTW, both AMCs I have have rear oil sumps. The water pump outlet is on left (driver's side) unlike the majority of other favorite engines.

[FrazerWill]

I'm a ford inline 6 guy with 4 econolines pickup/vans in my yard. My pickup has a stock 250 inline 6 in it I really like. I have a 300 EFI inline6 for my van when I get to it. The log head on the 250 is a bit of an issue but if HP is important they are vary buildable. If you don't mind a floor shifter a T5, 5 speed will bolt on a 250. Here's some links to show how..
http://falconperformance.sundog.net/

Check out the dyno's on these... and the rest of the site.
http://classicinlines.com/DynoRoom.asp

[HJ-ETEX]

Frazerwill: The 250 I was thinking about was used in the 71-73 Torinos & Mustangs - NOT trucks. That made it somewhat rare since by that time the Torinos & Mustangs usually had base V8s at least. One of the Colorado KFOCI members used such a 250 in his FC170.

[FrazerWill]

Yeah my 250 is out of a ford Granada. It came with a 170. I don't know if ford had a truck version. I still see 250's at the local pick a parts now and then. Another thing that makes these a nice motor is it had a front and a rear oil pan versions.
  I always thought a flat head V8 would look original in my 49 Frazer with a automatic. Or that straight 8 if I could fit it in without cutting anything.
  I still like the good old inline 6's be it the 226 flathead or a 250.

[HJ-ETEX]

Well, I am at a loss here because my digital camera has decided that ANY battery I put in is low on charge. But basically I built an engine cradle with casters to store & move a 51 Kaiser 226 I have. I built a duplicate cradle to develop motor mounts to fit in 51-55 Kaiser chassis. After 5 days of work, I managed to have the second cradle with a Chevy 6 side by side with the cradle with the 226. From what I see so far, you can put a Chevy 250/292 in a 51-55 Kaiser and you can make it a bolt-in swap. BUT: 1) you have to run a remote oil filter and the remote adapter and fittings can only be 2 1/4" tall. 2) There is plenty of room for an HEI distributor and the stock mechanical fuel pump can be used. 3) Not all Chevy 6 blocks have mounting bosses on the front of the block by the oil filter. A mount to the stock Kaiser frame tower can be much simpler  if the engine has such a boss. 4) there is still the problem that the Chevy 6 is 3 inches longer than the 226, but I think the needed sheet metal alterations can be subtle. 5) I am not sure about interference between the exhaust outlet and the steering box and this also depends on whether the Chevy 6 has a separate intake manifold or if it is integral with the head because outlets are different. This is something that would be decided when the engine is placed in the chassis. Note that a Chevy 6 block is NARROWER than a 226 by approximately the width of the valves. 6) The 1/2 ton 6 that I was using for measurements looks to have an oil pan that has a sump similar in length (about 10 inches) to that of the 226. I know the 292 version of the Chevy 6 may have a longer sump. Again, it is unfortunate that I don't have photos since they would say a lot more.

[HJ-ETEX]

I would like to make a comment that is prompted by kenneth's post on Jan 14. When I initially set up a Chevy SB V8 in a Kaiser back in 1983, I used a dummy block and I set the engine as far back as the 226. Things really looked good until I set heads on the block and I discovered that #3 spark plug stuck into the steering box. To correct this, I moved the engine forward 4 inches and the steering box fit between #5 & #7 spark plugs. Since the SB Chevy is lighter than the 226, moving the engine forward didn't make the steering any heavier. Moving the engine forward actually made the transmission crossmember simpler and allowed for an off-the-shelf driveshaft to be used.The drawbacks were that the stock mechanical fuel pump could not be used and the front of the sump on the oil pan had to be reshaped to clear the steering linkage. In fact the oil pan modification was about the only part of the whole swap that couldn't be easily done in a driveway because it really required a dummy block, oil pump & pickup, and heating the oil pan.
Between Ben Walker's car, my brother's car, and my car, we put at least 65,000 miles on this technology. Pretty impressive for how simple it was.

[dusty]

Seems most city or freeway driving intimadates our members , the el dorado meets usually have 10-12 cars show up and were driven rubber on the road for some 100 to 300 miles round trip. what we have established is the thought that the TRUCK speed limit is 55 MPH and they travel 55-57-mph independent drivers go 60-62 MAX in California so we are comfortable at those speeds. and stay a comfortable distance behind the big boys,

[dusty]

Has anyone looked into the AMC v8 engines as I believe they were originally from the kaiser design ??

[pnw_oldmags]

Ask Kaiser Bill about the AMC connection.  He has a Kaiser/AMC V8 on display in his museum in Utah I do believe.
www.kaiserbill.com

[HJ-ETEX]

dusty - You would be referring to the pre1966 AMC V8s. The earlier AMC V8s seem to be reasonable designs (especially when compared to Y-block Fords) but weren't all that common even when compared to Olds, or Pontiac V8s (Ramblers had tended to have a higher % of 6s). Unless you are restoring an AMC, I think you had better forget about those engines. ... AMC had a 327 before Chevy did and Studebaker had a 289 before Ford, but your general car enthusiast also isn't aware of Kaisrs.