spridgets
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Responses to Pontiac 151 Query

To: "Richard D. Arnold" <richard.arnold@juno.com>, spridgets@Autox.Team.Net
Subject: Re: Responses to Pontiac 151 Query
From: Les Myer <lmyer@probe.net>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 17:35:38 -0400
References: <19980713.102946.5183.6.richard.arnold@juno.com>
Reply-to: Les Myer <lmyer@probe.net>
Sender: owner-spridgets@Autox.Team.Net
> 
> Would anyone happen to know the approximate weights of a Buick V6, a
> Chevy V6, and a Pontiac 151?
> 
> My thought are to install one of these to an early RB MGB.  I want to
> avoid modifying the suspension as much as is possible, am pretty sure I
> will need to have a driveshaft made, and am considering both an automatic
> and standard transmission.  I know, it's heresy to put an auto in an
> LBC....
> 
> Rich

2.8 Chevy V-6 will fit in a 77 Midget if you use the Chevy S-10
bellhousing - I know because I am in process of doing this and have
trial fitted it already - Don't know about a MGB.  All the GM automatics
are too wide at the rear of the pan to fit without butchering the trans
tunnel and legroom (tried that too).  I have opted for an 87 Z-28
5-speed overdrive which has also been trial fitted but requires removal
(as in cutting out) of the original trans crossmember and subsequent
sub-framing to make up for the loss in structural integrity.  Any of the
engine you list will toast the stock rear end and/or axles.  I have
obtained an 87 Z-28 posi housing/gears that will be narrowed.

The 4.3 Chevy V-6 is like a small block Chevy with the front two
cylinders lopped off - heavy, wide, and very powerful.

The Pontiac 151 (2.5 liter) has always been a boat anchor (I have had
several) - why bother.

The Buick V-6 is fairly light, powerful, but very wide.  Not a bad
choice if you have the width.

The 2.8 is a 60degree engine - narrow, decent power, very light, but
tall. See: 
http://www.probe.net/~lmyer/midget1.jpg
http://www.probe.net/~lmyer/midget2.jpg

Les

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>