The Stovebolt Site Forums The Shop Area Engine Shop 235 Problems?

I didn't want to hijack BryceS rebuilding thread so I thought I would put up a new post. I was at an automotive parts company trade show the other night and met a machinist that works for a nearby engine re-builder.I mentioned to him that I had a 216 and was thinking about getting a 235 and rebuilding or getting a good running 235. He said they are very expensive to rebuild and that they can crack from the rear frost plug to the front along the side. He suggested to stay away from these motors. But from what I've read here over the years is that these engines are quite reliable. I've never heard much about problems with these motors on this site. Any experiences, thoughts or opinions? Thanks

Any block can crack. It Happens to all engines that are left in the cold without antifreeze. These engines have been running for a lot of years, that should speak volumes.

That machinist should never eat beans. Where he's got his head parked will result in blowing his brains out if he gets a little gassy. The basic stovebolt design engine helped us win WW II, and millions of those engines were produced from the mid-1930's to the early 1960's. Very few engines had that long of a production run, and if the design was as flawed as this self-appointed "expert" believes, why were so many of them produced?

The basic Chevy/GMC inline 6 cylinder is not a hotrod, and there are some pretty basic design features that make it difficult to run them at high RPM, but for everyday getting from point A to point B, they're hard to beat. My grandparents ran a couple of 1934 Chevy trucks from Nashville Tennessee to Milwaukee and St. Louis and back on a regular basis, pulling semi-trailer loads of beer. They installed and maintained a lot of hangovers from the mid-1930's through the early 1940's with those rigs! 216 and 235 engine are much better-designed and more reliable than those early-30's engines!
Jerry

Sounds to me like your motor guy is a belly button builder (small block)

I have a friend that builds high end race motors and he tried to talk me out of building my 235. After a while he admitted that he likes to build what he does best, and that is mega horse power small blocks.

I do not blame him for that, but I wonder if he would have admitted it to a customer that he did not know very well, or would he have made an excuse.

Jim

My 235 came out of a '54 hydramatic passenger car and was rebuilt in 1986. Who knows how many miles the car had on it before it was junked. I've put over 70,000 miles on the engine since '86 and maintained it scrupulously. Result - strong engine with no smoking and no oil burning. Leaking, now that's another story...

Harleys, stovebolts, and Detroit Diesels- - - - -when they stop leaking, they're empty- - - -pour some more oil in there!
Jerry

I've never seen any documented evidence that Hydramatics were used in '54 Chevrolet passenger cars.

roger that, a lot of other brands bought them from GM but no Chevy has one that I know of..

No Chevy car was delivered from the factory with a Hydra-Matic.

Chevrolet cars of that era would have had the 2-speed Powerglide.

A friend ran a 55 Chevy 210 on the drag strip with a Hydramatic, but it was a B&M Hydro-Stick!
Jerry