is this part # ( 3866954 ) pistons for a 1962 F/I 327 block ? same as the 1963 327/340 S.H.P. piston ? THANKS
-
-
Re: PART # 3866954
Nancy-----
GM #3866954 must be a casting number for the piston; it's not a finished part number that I can find any reference to. The 3866954 looks to me to be about a 1965 or 1966 issued number. It could be a later application part that SERVICES 1962-63, though.
However, I can tell you that the pistons used for the 1962 FI application and the 1963 L-76 application were the same.In Appreciation of John Hinckley -
Re: PART # 3866954
THANKS FOR RESPONSE. CHECK OUT ITEM ( # 4593022050 )on E BAY . is that the casting # inside ? would you reuse these today or after market aluminum piston ? I have a 327 std. bore block with about .005 runout. std. crank and org.rebuilt small journal rods with 461 x heads . i would love to put together . do you think this is the right piston for me ?? thanks nancyComment
-
Re: PART # 3866954
Nancy
Go with an aftermarket piston. God only knows where the used ones have been, besides who is going to see them. Just my old 2 cents
TerryComment
-
Re: PART # 3866954
Nancy-----
These look like the correct pistons for your application. I can't see the forging number on the underside, but I'll have to accept the seller's word that it's the number you mentioned. This would be the sort of number I described earlier----a forging or casting number and not a finished part number. The seller would have no way of verifying the finished part number since these things, apparently, came out of an engine assembly. In any event, they do look like they are unused.
There's one "fly-in-the-ointment" here. PRODUCTION pistons, in the days of the engine that these pistons were originally installed in, were match-fitted to the block. So, while they will be "standard" size, they may vary slightly to "match the holes" that they originally resided in. I don't think that this is likely to create a significant problem for their use now in a block that they were not fitted to, but there could be some compromise of optimal piston fit. On the other hand, you MIGHT be able to use this fact to advantage if you are able to precisly measure your cylinders and the pistons and "match-fit" each piston to your each of your bores. If you're lucky, things MIGHT work out perfect.
While these pistons would be correct for your engine and even though I do believe that they are, essentially, new, I don't think that I'd use them. For one thing, I don't like forged pistons for street applications. On top of that, these are old-technology forged pistons. For me, the only way to go would be modern hypereutectic alloy cast pistons. You can obtain these in a dome configuration that will provide the original compression ratio (although I usually don't recommend building engines to original 11:1 ratios) and which will work with your existing heads.
You can also purchase modern Federal-Mogul/TRW forged pistons which are manufactured from modern alloys. While they are still affected by factors inherent to forged pistons, they are much better than the forged pistons of days of yore.In Appreciation of John HinckleyComment
-
Re: PART # 3866954
JOE ; I want to thank you . i will take your advice and use other pistons . I will have the cylinders checked again in hopes i don't have to bore it . THANKS AGAIN ... NANCYComment
-
Re: PART # 3866954
Nancy-----
If you do have to go with an overbore, make sure that you go the smallest overbore that you can get pistons for. Generally, this is 0.020". However, there may be some 0.010" out there now. DO NOT let a machine shop talk you into a "standard" 0.030" overbore. You only go 30-over if you NEED to go 30-over. NEVER, EVER as a "matter of routine".In Appreciation of John HinckleyComment
Comment