Last year, Chevrolet Performance unveiled its new 350/265 V8 crate engine, which is described as a budget-minded alternative to some of the more powerful and pricier V8s in the automaker’s crate engine portfolio.
Now Chevrolet Performance has released a short video that provides some more details on this new low-cost crate engine as it joins the similar 350/290 engine in its catalog. In this video, Chevrolet Performance associate marketing manager Bill Martens explains how the 350/265 crate engine differs from the 350/290 and the kinds of customers that the company had in mind when it developed this reliable new low-cost entry.
“Our value-priced engine, the 350/265 comes in at the lower end of the horsepower range in the bowtie portfolio, but it is an excellent choice for a replacement V8 for everyday use,” Martens explains in the video. “The 350/265 engine is delivered as a long block assembly, ready for your intake manifold, fuel delivery system and ignition system. The hydraulic flat tappet camshaft in the 350/265 is less aggressive than the 350/290, which tones down the engine’s sound a bit, making it a perfect choice for those who are looking for reliability and durability, but more power than the original engine.”
Put simply, the 350/265 features a milder camshaft than the 350/290, which gives it a smoother, quieter running operation. This makes the entry-level crate engine the perfect choice for someone that is restoring a vintage Chevy vehicle but isn’t overly concerned with outright performance. This is the engine for those enthusiasts who like to cruise at the speed limit and take in the scenery around them, then, and not those who want to race between the stoplights on Woodward Ave.
When equipped with a Chevrolet Performance ZZ4 intake manifold and Holley 650 carb, (these parts do not ship with the crate engine) is rated at 265 horsepower at 4,300 rpm and 351 pound-feet of torque at 3,300 rpm. The maximum recommended engine rev limit is set at 5,100 rpm. The related 350/290, by comparison, produces 300 horsepower and 335 pound-feet of torque.
Check out the video embedded below to learn more about this new budget-minded crate engine from Chevrolet Performance.
Subscribe to GM Authority for more Chevrolet news and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Comments
What is GM doing? Going back to 1974?then the 2 bbl 350 put out 145 hp nd the 4 barrel wasn’t much better. Come on GM get with it!
That 265 hp is at 4300 rpm. And it’s putting out 350 ft/lb at really low rpms. That means through out it’s rev range it’s putting out power similar to a V8 rated at like 320 hp. But to get that 320 hp you would have to rev it to redline. This is for people who know the wont ever need to go to the redline. They want easy, everyday power. It was rare that i ever got close to redline in my Camaro. But i loved having all that power down low.
Yeah, my 1976 Camaro with the “LM1” 350/4 bbl & a 4 speed stick was only 165 – 175 HP. But it was also only 8.5/1 compression. Hard to make power without spending $$$$$ on those 70’s “smog” motors…
What is gm doing? There are millions of cars and trucks with an emphasis on trucks that need replacement engines and GM wants that business. Are they supposed to let other companies get that business? How does that make sense?
Reports of the death of the Gen 1 SBC have been greatly exaggerated! That engine not going anywhere and will still have a place in the hot rodding and restoration community for many years to come.
This 350/265 motor is exactly what I will replace the 6.2 diesel in my M1009 with when it pukes it’s crank again.
That would be 100 more horse than i have now.
I bet a quadrajet and edelbrock intake and small tube headers will get me about 15 mpg with the 350/265.
My 6.2 gets 17 mpg now.
No intention of turning it into a race truck.
Smooth, quiet, and efficient with just enough power to get out of it’s own way.
I like it.
Good set of heads retofit roller cam kit headers intake and fast efi would put It will over the 350 hp
Why not start with the 350/290 if you’re going to throw away the cam and head’s from the 265?
There’s a market for this. People need basic replacement motors for basic vehicles. But, I see no reason to pay a GM price premium for something this anemic when good remanufactured engines are already available, especially since this is a long block only. Furthermore, marketing this under “performance” seems about as wise as the new V-series that are upstaged in horsepower by grocery-getter Camry etc. Sell this as a Goodwrench engine and retain some sliver of credibility in the performance brand. GM has been so badly neutered it’s embarrassing
I am not sure why they are doing it.
But there is a market of at least 1 guy; me.
You are right that the price would be high for the GM name when I could just put an RV cam in rebuild and achieve the same thing.
I don’t want 290 hp and certainly not 335 hp.
K5 Blazers are bricks and lifted bricks get 10 mpg with 335 hp.
I want quiet, smooth, relatively efficient, without the computer garbage and plastic components of the LS.
A quadrajet carb, basic split plenum edelbrock intake, hei with a standard curve kit and lightning module, and some small tube headers into a pair of 1.5″ exhaust pipes with an h-pipe and flowmaster mufflers.
Between 13 and 15 mpg with 3:73’s and 33 inch tires.
I know it will cause i built very much the same K5 before that tree jumped out into the road.
You could set your coffee cup on the air cleaner with the engine running and it wouldn’t budge.
Smooooth idle.
No center bolt covers is nicer looking, too
I wish it arrived when I wanted to replace my straight six 2.6 Rover SD engine with 3.5 small block V8 then.
What we really need is a strong small block 400. That will hurt many ford and dodge guys feelings. I know many people agree…
Huh. For about $125 more I can step up to the 295 hp. long block. This is kind of silly, IMO.
A motor that gets worse mileage and durability.
Yes.
The money will cost you more money over time.
The 350 is under powered then an is still is today. The LS is the way to go these days they get pretty good gas mileage an are very dependable i know i have 2 trucks with LS motors. An you can buy a LS for under $1000. An can get lots of H.P. for little money
I have put that 350/290 in caprice classic and it was 2500 dollars in 2014 so what is this engine going to cost less than 2k ?why even bother putting that engine in a car if it’s priced above 3k you can get a complete hooptie for 3k that runs decent. Just saying.
Look into the LSmotors there pretty simply. An you can buy one from a junkyard pretty cheap an a few add on will give you pretty good ho increase.
The Gen 1 SBC still has a huge following and the thing is nice and simple. Not taking anything away from the LS but the Gen 1 engine still will have a place for many years.
part number?
Came here for the inevitable LS circle jerk. Lol
You will have a grand or more in an intake and ignition for an LS. They are not cheap.
Yep.
A small block is a direct bolt in replacement for the 6.2 j code diesel in my Blazer.
Why would I want the heartache and hassle of an LS motor with a stinking computer and O2 sensors.
I can go from zero emmisions equipped diesel to zero emmisions equipped gas for 3 grand.
I have an LS in my Tahoe and frankly, it just isn’t that impressive.
Combined with all the fuel injection crap festooned all over the place.. no thanks.
Small Block with a quadrajet;
Simple, reliable, easy to maintain, clean and compact package without excess wiring or a stinking computer.
You do know you can replace the intake an put a carb on a LS to. Fairly cheap an not have to deal with the computer an O2 sensors.
Why?
Because a quadrajet is a quadrajunk !!
If you know how to tune a quadrajet, you will find they are a most superb carburetor.
People that use the term you did are just not smart enough or have never applied themselves to the very simple task of jetting and tuning a carburetor.
The Q-Jet can be a surprisingly economical carb (when driving around on the primaries only) that can make big power boosts IF you know how to set it up. (Which really isn’t that hard) Holley double pumpers are goods carbs, and so are Carter AFB’s, and I know lots of guys who ran them, but in all the small blocks I built and owned (and even a couple big blocks) I never once went away from the Q-Jet and I never regretted it.
Agreed! I do love the old AFB as well. If you ever had a chance to have a Chrysler vehicle with a Carter Thermoquad they have all the great attributes of the Quadrajet.
Quadrajets are awesome carbs! You just have to understand how they operate and how to best optimize them. Guys who only knew Holly’s screwing around with them and messing them up gave them an undeserved bad reputation. Don’t get me wrong the Holly a great competition carb but the Quadrajet a great all around carb and for the time it was developed very sophisticated. So good that Carter basically copied it and came out with their Thermoquad.