327 LT1

[zooguy]

I was thinking today and I got to wondering if anybody has built an LT1 down to a 327 cid. By switching out the crankshaft to a 3.25 stroke. I wouldn't consider it unless there was some type of documented repeatable improvements. But you always hear about the old-timers talk about their 327 small block Chevys and how bad them Motors were kind of makes me wonder what's going on?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Cathead]

I've never had a de-stroked reverse cool LT1 but I've had a few 327s. The only difference that I've seen is that they love the upper RPMs.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[joelster]

There is no improvement at all. It will make less power and torque than a 350. No replacement for displacement. On paper, an engine with a shorter stroke can potentially rev higher, but in the real world 350's can rev just as high.

[SSlowBoat]

I was thinking today and I got to wondering if anybody has built an LT1 down to a 327 cid. By switching out the crankshaft to a 3.25 stroke. I wouldn't consider it unless there was some type of documented repeatable improvements. But you always hear about the old-timers talk about their 327 small block Chevys and how bad them Motors were kind of makes me wonder what's going on?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

no torque. high rpm hp. I legitimately looked into doing it since I got punked on a l99 once, but it's really not worth the effort

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Injuneer]

As a highly qualified “old-timer” (aka “senior citizen”) I can explain the place the 327 holds in our hearts.... it was a nice upgrade from the previous 283, which had been a nice upgrade from the original SBC at 265 ci. It’s as simple as that.

I had a 1956 Bel Air convertible with the 265. When I graduated from college in 1963, I sold the 56 and jumped on a 1963 Bel Air I found sitting in a dealer showroom - had a grand total of three options - 300 HP 327, posi rear axle and an AM radio. Base 3-on-tree, no power anything, no A/C. Ran the pi$$ out of that thing. Swapped in a close ratio T10 4-speed and 4.11 gears. No trouble dusting 390 Fords. People had lost interest in the 265 and 283 as Chevy discontinued them. The big-buck guys had their 348 and 409 “big-blocks”.

When Chevy upped the SBC to 350 ci, interest in the 327 died off. The only reason the 302 showed up in the Z28 Camaro was the SCCA's 305 ci displacement limitation set in Trans Am Racing.

The only advantage of the 327 was the fact it had 44 more cubic inches than the 283.

[zooguy]

As a highly qualified “old-timer” (aka “senior citizen”) I can explain the place the 327 holds in our hearts.... it was a nice upgrade from the previous 283, which had been a nice upgrade from the original SBC at 265 ci. It’s as simple as that.

I had a 1956 Bel Air convertible with the 265. When I graduated from college in 1963, I sold the 56 and jumped on a 1963 Bel Air I found sitting in a dealer showroom - had a grand total of three options - 300 HP 327, posi rear axle and an AM radio. Base 3-on-tree, no power anything, no A/C. Ran the pi$$ out of that thing. Swapped in a close ratio T10 4-speed and 4.11 gears. No trouble dusting 390 Fords. People had lost interest in the 265 and 283 as Chevy discontinued them. The big-buck guys had their 348 and 409 “big-blocks”.

When Chevy upped the SBC to 350 ci, interest in the 327 died off. The only reason the 302 showed up in the Z28 Camaro was the SCCA's 305 ci displacement limitation set in Trans Am Racing.

The only advantage of the 327 was the fact it had 44 more cubic inches than the 283.

Well that's extremely helpful and now I know the history behind it ... thank you sir.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[BALLSS]

...ah yes...memories of my 327 with "camel" hump heads (2.02/1.60) right out of a junk yard pull back in '70. Got it for $75 and backed it with a Muncie 4 speed in a 55 short bed truck. Drove it like I stole it and it never missed a beat.