Demise of 348 Engine?

[Mike B.]

I was bored last night so I thumbed through my 1961 Chevy passenger car service manual. I got a good look at the 348 engine which seems to be an odd duck but an interesting engine just the same. The heads were particularly unusual looking.

Does anyone know the history of the engine and why it didn't last very long in the line up? Just curious.

[Clem Z.]

Re: Demise of 348 Engine?

I was bored last night so I thumbed through my 1961 Chevy passenger car service manual. I got a good look at the 348 engine which seems to be an odd duck but an interesting engine just the same. The heads were particularly unusual looking.

Does anyone know the history of the engine and why it didn't last very long in the line up? Just curious.

the big problem was since the combustion chamber was in the cylinders not the head these engines would over heat when used hard like circle track racing. they made great drag race engines.

[William C.]

Re: Demise of 348 Engine?

Actually they weren't great drag engines either as the crown of the piston configured as it was to provide the combuston chanber made it a very heavy piston and limited the RPM capability.

[Joe T.]

Re: Demise of 348 Engine?

It became the 409 (Mk1?)

[Tom S.]

Re: Demise of 348 Engine?

If I am not mistaken they were designed to be truck engines. I know they were used in trucks longer than they were cars. I had a 60 Impala 348, not really all that good a car! My buddy had a 59 Impala 409 with 3-2's and that was fast! No problems that I can remember!

[Chuck S.]

Re: Demise of 348 Engine?

It became the 409 (Mk1?)

Mmmm...No, I think the "little 409" was the last iteration of the 348. I think the "Mark" engine was the first of the famous Big Blocks that went from 396 to 427 to 454 cu in.

I've heard the 348/409 was too heavy, too complicated, too expensive to build, and didn't deliver the power per cu in. In other words, if you don't have one as an original engine (tri-power) in a 58 Chevy Impala sport coupe/convertible, they are more useful as large ship anchors.

[Joe T.]

Re: Demise of 348 Engine?

Chuck:
I think you're correct. My error (CRS). I had a 1959 3x2 348 that had a penchant for the center carb to catch fire at start-up. It was fun to drive at the time and was, for its day, as good as any engine on the raod (except for the then current chevy small blocks). Even the 409 (small version) of this motor was something for its day.

[Clem Z.]

Re: Demise of 348 Engine?

[quote=Chuck Sangerhausen (20817);339335]Mmmm...No, I think the "little 409" was the last iteration of the 348.

this engine made it all the way to 427 cu in. called the Z-11. it was used in the aluminum front end impalas for drag racing. the best part is this engine,the 409, can be fitted with a mark IV 454 4.000 stroke crank and end up with close to 470 cu in. not little by any means

[Jim S.]

Re: Demise of 348 Engine?

The 409 (W Block) ended passenger car production with the introduction of the 396 Mark IV engine in February 1965. I don't know how much longer the 409 was available in trucks.

Jim

[Chuck S.]

Re: Demise of 348 Engine?

Mmmm...No, I think the "little 409" was the last iteration of the 348.

this engine made it all the way to 427 cu in. called the Z-11. it was used in the aluminum front end impalas for drag racing. the best part is this engine,the 409, can be fitted with a mark IV 454 4.000 stroke crank and end up with close to 470 cu in. not little by any means

Yes, you're right Clem...I was thinking of the Mark II "Mystery Motor". A 427 cu in W Series engine was available in the 63 Chevrolet Impala as RPO Z11, a special drag racing package...it would be interesting to see the production numbers on that one. The quote "Little 409" is a term of endearment from a Beach Boys song...not to be taken literally or as derogatory.

The link below has answers to most all potential Big Block Chevrolet engine questions, and promises to be more than anyone ever wanted to know. Because of its short service life, the W Series portion is particularly interesting read. (I was going to include the text here, but I found we're limited to posts of no more than 10000 words. ) :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Big_Block_engine

[Richard P.]

Re: Demise of 348 Engine?

"Little 409"?? The Beach Boys sang about a "dual quad, 4 speed, positraction 409" other groups sang about "Little GTOs" or "Little Cobras" but 409s were HUGE!! Just my $.02 worth. Cheers!

[John H.]

Re: Demise of 348 Engine?

For those who haven't seen one, photos below are of a 1963 Z-11 owned by a friend of mine, Hank Gabbert; taken at the Meadow Brook Concours d'Elegance in 2006. It was campaigned in 1963 by Larry Wilson and tuned by Ronnie Sox, and Hank's meticulous 4-year restoration was completed in 2005.

[Ridge K.]

Re: Demise of 348 Engine?

Great pics John. Thanks for sharing them.

[Joe L.]

Re: Demise of 348 Engine?

I was bored last night so I thumbed through my 1961 Chevy passenger car service manual. I got a good look at the 348 engine which seems to be an odd duck but an interesting engine just the same. The heads were particularly unusual looking.

Does anyone know the history of the engine and why it didn't last very long in the line up? Just curious.

Mike----


During the 1950's and 1960's, Chevrolet was in a very tight competitive situation with Ford. In 1955, Ford introduced the "Y-Block" 272 cid OHV V-8 and Chevrolet introduced the 283 cid OHV V-8. The engines were more-or-less competitive as far as street cars go. Without a doubt, there must have been "corporate spying" of some sort going on in those days because in 1958, history repeated itself. Ford introduced the "FE" series "big block" engine at 332 and 352 cid displacements and Chevrolet introduced the big block 348 cid engine. Since engines have a fairly long "gestation period", both Ford and Chevrolet had to have known what was going on with the other side for these two "coincidences" to occur.

At some early stage, the folks at Chevrolet must have realized that the "W" series engine wasn't really going anywhere and was certainly not an "engine for the future". So, efforts got underway for a re-designed big block about the time that the 348 first "hit the street". That effort came to fruition in 1965 with the introduction of the Mark IV 396. That proved a much better design. In fact, so good that it, basically, survives right up to the present, 43 years later.

[Chuck S.]

Re: Demise of 348 Engine?

Mike----


During the 1950's and 1960's, Chevrolet was in a very tight competitive situation with Ford. In 1955, Ford introduced the "Y-Block" 272 cid OHV V-8 and Chevrolet introduced the 283 cid OHV V-8. The engines were more-or-less competitive as far as street cars go. Without a doubt, there must have been "corporate spying" of some sort going on in those days because in 1958, history repeated itself. Ford introduced the "FE" series "big block" engine at 332 and 352 cid displacements and Chevrolet introduced the big block 348 cid engine. Since engines have a fairly long "gestation period", both Ford and Chevrolet had to have known what was going on with the other side for these two "coincidences" to occur.

At some early stage, the folks at Chevrolet must have realized that the "W" series engine wasn't really going anywhere and was certainly not an "engine for the future". So, efforts got underway for a re-designed big block about the time that the 348 first "hit the street". That effort came to fruition in 1965 with the introduction of the Mark IV 396. That proved a much better design. In fact, so good that it, basically, survives right up to the present, 43 years later.

Joe, Ford actually beat Chevrolet to an OHV V8 by first introducing the Y block in 1954 in a 239 cu in version (same displacement as Ford's predecessor flat head design). We had a 54 Fairlane sedan with one...I learned to drive in that car; not exactly a hot performer. I seem to vaguely remember the 272 cu in, but that engine eventually became their workhorse 289 cu in.

In view of the way things worked out, Ford should have availed themselves of another year to perfect their design ...the SBC Chevy was by far the better performing, more efficient engine during the fifties, sixties and seventies. Ford eventually retired that old Y small block about 1963, and replaced it with a design very similar to the SBC...I believe those were the engines that went into the small block Cobra.