132 vs 138

Includes fuel system, cooling system and exhaust.

Moderators: reidy, Blacky

Post Reply
ash
Posts: 82
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:50 am
State: NOT ENTERED

132 vs 138

Post by ash »

Hey all

How much difference is there between the 132 and the 138?
Is it just larger bore and different head or is there more to it?

I am contemplating getting a 132 (FJ) to replace the 138 in my EJ, purely because the 132 is available and sounds a good deal.
If its likely to be even more gutless than my existing motor I might pass though.. :wink:

Also, are carbs, dizzys etc interchangeable from 138 to 132?

Cheers
Ash
User avatar
Cal
Posts: 2796
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008 8:07 pm
State: NOT ENTERED
Location: Sydney

Re: 132 vs 138

Post by Cal »

I do know the 132 has a bit less power than the 138, but it's like saying the one tortoise is slower than the other tortoise. :mrgreen:

If I'm not wrong the difference is less than 10 bhp
User avatar
Harv
Posts: 5649
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:00 pm
State: NSW
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: 132 vs 138

Post by Harv »

Ash,

132's and 138's both had Strommie BXOV-1 carbs. The carb specs changed (ie the internals are a little different - for example the FX humpies ran richer mixtures when flat-out but leaner cruise mixtures than the other greys), though they will run if swapped (might be a little rich or lean and need some rejetting down the track). Throttle linkages changed a bit but should bolt up as long as you have most of the bits on the car you're swapping into. The later red engine carbs are harder (albiet not impossible) to swap onto a grey as the flange bolt spacing changed from SAE-1" to SAE-2" for the reds.

Dizzys were common from mid-FJ to FC for the 132's. FB/EK 138s had their own, as did EJ according to the Master Old Farts Cattledog. I'd hazard a guess they would be pretty similar though.

Cheers,
Harv
327 Chev EK wagon, original EK ute for Number 1 Daughter, an FB sedan meth monster project and a BB/MD grey motored FED.
ash
Posts: 82
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:50 am
State: NOT ENTERED

Re: 132 vs 138

Post by ash »

Thanks for the info fellah's. 8)
Ill be using the carb and dizzy off the EJ, hopefully she runs properly. (ill keep an eye on the mixture as mentioned Harv)

Is there a significant difference between the 132 and 138 head?
I plan to rebuild the 138 head and fit to the 132 - assuming its a simple bolt on affair. (dont want to bugger around with length of pushrods etc)
Is it worth doing?
User avatar
Cal
Posts: 2796
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008 8:07 pm
State: NOT ENTERED
Location: Sydney

Re: 132 vs 138

Post by Cal »

Just reading through an old workshop manual, the pushrods are different length between a 132 and 138, though oddly enough the EK/EJ also had different pushrods to FE/FC/FB.

Inlet valves on the 138 were also slightly larger
FB MAD
Posts: 2725
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 7:59 pm
State: NOT ENTERED
Location: Upper Hunter N.S.W

Re: 132 vs 138

Post by FB MAD »

6 cubic inches is not a lot of horsepower difference if identical engine spec comparisons are considered.It may make a difference down the quarter on a high perf engine and you are chasing a couple poofteenth of seconds, but these grey motors are no drag strip engines.

I haven't got a shop manual in my lap ( up in my cold, dark shed ATM ) to compare actual specs. There are some relatively minor spec variations from FX through to EJ, however it is highly likely that you would notice little ( if any ) difference in actual driving comparison between a 132 and 138.

As an example:-

I drove an FB from Newcastle to home a couple of years ago ( about 250 kms ) and had no idea that it was sporting an L prefix 132 cube FC engine until I popped the bonnet and saw the engine number.It just performed like any other grey motor would, the 6 cubic inch deficiency made no difference at all.

It would be hard to find a virgin bore 132 nowdays still in original and good running condition, most would have at least been through a rebore, and at the very least 20 thou ( thus increasing cubic inch capacity up a couple of inches ).

If the 132 you are thinking of buying is a good runner with good compression it would create more horsepower than a 138 that is a bit tired.

You can rebore some 138's up to 149 cubes ( about 125 thou rebore from memory ) and even at this capacity increase the amount of extra power gained is not really substantial.

If it was me, I would fit a 132 if it was priced well and ran OK.The horsepower difference compared to 138 is bugger all in reality.
I can't think what to write here so this will do.
User avatar
Harv
Posts: 5649
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:00 pm
State: NSW
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: 132 vs 138

Post by Harv »

Well said Terry. :D
327 Chev EK wagon, original EK ute for Number 1 Daughter, an FB sedan meth monster project and a BB/MD grey motored FED.
ash
Posts: 82
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:50 am
State: NOT ENTERED

Re: 132 vs 138

Post by ash »

Here here. 8)
My current engine is half dead so I take your point about new 132 vs screwed 138.

I'm heading out on Saturday to pick the "beast" up, ill let you know the result!
ash
Posts: 82
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:50 am
State: NOT ENTERED

Re: 132 vs 138

Post by ash »

Well, its almost ready to go in!
Ill swap some ancillaries off my 138 this weekend and fit the new motor the following - should be awesome.

The motor was fully redone in 2004 and has not been run, im going to be stoked to fire it up for the first time. 8)

Thanks to Graham for the deal, legend.
Attachments
138 Grey.jpg
138 Grey.jpg (200.01 KiB) Viewed 2384 times
Post Reply