Originally Posted by John Milliman
To your point, Mike, and others above ... Way back when as I was wrapping up the initial layout of the site in November, 1995, I needed a catchy title ... In my research (Tom Brownell's book, I think) is where I first learned that Henry Ford, on seeing the side cover screws and the acorn nuts atop the valve cover of his competition's first I-6, first used the term "Stovebolt" as a pejorative. But the joke is now certainly on him, ja?

To Otto's original questions ... I don't think the original 6 actually used stove bolts ... they just *looked* like stove bolts. Slotted screw heads and square nuts were the industry standard 100 years ago, having carried over from horsedrawn equipment and industrial applications prevalent at the dawn and early and middle stages of the Industrial Revolution. Look at any piece of machinery built prior to the Great Depression, especially horse drawn -- nothing but square nuts and slotted screws. My '27 practically has nothing *but* square nuts holding it together.

Chevy wasn't NASA, the development of the affordable inline "Valve in head" six wasn't the race to the Moon (where keeping R&D costs to a profitable minimum wasn't a consideration) ..... Chevy didn't have to invent everything and develop all new engineering, tools and facilities, nor were they even resourced to do so. It makes sense (to me, anyway ... wink ), that while square nuts and slotted screw heads may seem quaint and archaic to *us* (and to ole Hank Ford, apparently), it didn't to *them* -- They danced with the one who brung 'em, technology wise, I suppose.

And OBTW .... just checked my 5 year old Vermont Castings "Encore" -- not a single stove bolt in it ... frown

That’s a very insightful post.

Makes me think about how that same….”why change what works?”……approach to development really persisted as part of GM’s company culture (particularly in the Chevrolet brand) for many decades to follow. Think about how little the small block V8 changed from 1955 into the 1990s? Even things like brake systems have huge cross compatibility across many models and many years.

I have become more closely acquainted with FJord’s view on parts/ product standardization. My son purchased a vintage Mustang recently. Let’s just say Fjord wasn’t afraid to “try new things” from model year to model year. Not that it’s bad…..just very different and has been/still is quite an adjustment for me. Nearly all of my previous experience with old cars/trucks was on the GM side.

1951 3100