The Combine Forum banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,161 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Any noticeable difference on a GMC/Chev 3 ton single axle grain truck with a 366 engine or 427? Will a 366 handle 3-400bus of wheat easy? Have ran a 350 and 427 in a C70. The 350 was underpowered and the 427 had tons of get up and go. Just wondering how close the 366 is to a 427 power wise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
226 Posts
Torque comes from the amount of fuel burned per powerstroke .... in other words from displacement. Power can be achieved with higher revs. We have an old '67 3 ton with a 366 in it that has been rebuilt with an rv cam, electronic ignition and it handled 340 bushels of wheat just fine. I'm sure a 427 with an rv cam would do better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
I have been impressed with 366 in 3 ton single axle truck. Our 427 feels doggy, but it is in a tag axle truck that usually hauls 500 bu compared to the single axle with a 366 and 400 bu load so that isn't a fair comparison. Either motor will work fine, if you are pulling hills then I would give the nod to the 427. Anything with these motors will be old trucks so take your time inspecting them and buy the best one and possibly invest in some carb rebuild and tune.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,042 Posts
Seems 366's were more common in that era.
Was a 427 not just a bigger bore 366?

I think I remember both were better truck engines than the 454 that was kind of the last gasp for gas engines in later/larger trucks of the time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
175 Posts
366

You would be fine with the 366 and 400 bu. I've had both the 350 and 366, the 350 being somewhat underpowered. I don't know that you would gain anything with the 427 being you would be lightly loaded i.e. a tandem setup with
600+bu. would be a better test.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
559 Posts
With the ones we had, the 366 was the better engine. 427's had more problems, took a couple out, replaced them with 366's. 427 is apparently basically the same engine, just bored out. The thinner cylinder walls had cracking issues at times. That's just what I was told, so take it for what its worth.

Bottom line is these Medium duty engines are definitely different from the SBC most guys are used to. There was a thread on a diesel truck forum a couple years back where a guy swapped a built 6.5 diesel in place of a 366 in a gravel truck. Was interesting to see.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top