Roller 351 economical and effective.

[myrl883]

I'd heard about the 3-5 cracks that have been discussed.

Good thing for me the local u-pull yard only charges $60 for short blocks no matter the unit. Cylinder heads are $30 each. At these prices and with the yard about a mile from the house, I think I don't have a choice.

Since I'll have the engines open I'll be able to see anything that is horribly wrong with the exceptions of the 3-5 cam journal cracks. Napa can hot-tank and do the clean-ups to ensure the block is worth moving forward with or need replacing.

At this price I may just get two short blocks to have insurance, if they are both solid I can hand select the best components.

The real cost is my time to pull the parts.

To shift the discussion slightly, has anyone heard of the Speedmaster PCE-265.1045 small block front cover?

It looks like a universal W/P front cover.

This would give a choice of W/P spin direction.

It also is said to have mechanical F/P accommodations and dipstick options.

This may provide the option to use a mechanical F/P and the CCW W/P with the serpentine system.

Anyone have any first-hand knowledge of this front cover?

Thanks, MJ

Interesting timing cover, but I really don't see the point. It would taker no longer to pull a factory cover than that one...

I used my original '81 timing cover for CCW pump and mechanical fuel pump. I did have to clearance the P/S bracket to clear the fuel pump.

[Rodeoclown]

Interesting timing cover, but I really don't see the point. It would taker no longer to pull a factory cover than that one...

I used my original '81 timing cover for CCW pump and mechanical fuel pump. I did have to clearance the P/S bracket to clear the fuel pump.

Interesting, while I was researching the different W/P options I saw a picture of the different front cover and W/P options. As I interpreted the options to be, first front cover for CW normal W/P only(the passage ways are swept to accommodate the flow) mechanical F/P is an option. The second front cover option is for CCW reverse flow WP(serpentine belt), the passage ways sweep in the opposite direction and no F/P option. They showed pictures of the two gasket options super-imposed on each other. NO-GO. I then found the third option--the non-swept gasket with round holes, this requires a universal cover and universal W/P backing plate. I guess a traditional cover could be used with a universal back plate W/P. The only issue is that there would be some potential for less effective water flow caused by the swept passageway of the older style front cover going into the round hole of the W/P. I'd rather have a round hole front cover matching up to a round hole W/P. Less chance of water flow disruption. If I'm going through he whole re-building process, I think for the $100, I'd just as soon know I have the best water flow potential. I do respect the budget concern. Until I find the tree that grows cash, I'm stuck trying to find the most effective parts with reasonable pricing. This is a slow project, so if I need to save a couple more weeks to get a particular part that makes everything easier, I can wait. Now that I look at the direction of water flow, it would be less of a disruption problem but a lot of unsupported gasket. I think I'll still stand by my original round peg into round hole solution. Thanks for the input, it makes me think about the details, and we all know that is where the devil lives.