I am a proud new owner of a 1946 Chevrolet 1/2 Ton Pickup, and a relative newbie when it comes to planes, trains and automobiles. I can turn a wrench pretty good... you just have to tell me which size and in which direction. I purchased the truck in the beginning-middle stages of being refurbished. Due to some backfiring and other issues, we decided to remove the head and check the valves, etc... The top half of the motor looked fairly decent. We took some measurements of the cylinders and pistons however that were concerning to those who are more intelligent than me... which was everyone else that was looking over the fender into the engine compartment. At the suggestion of my mechanically inclined betters, I am reaching out hoping I might be able to acquire some well informed opinions from this group.
The motor in question is a 216 with a stamping of AAFII52343. The stamping does not really correlate to the information available on oldcarmanualproject.com. I do not know if the motor is original to the truck.
At any rate, the measurements in question are below and are fairly similar/consistent across the board.
To set my expectations and goals, My plan is to make the truck mechanically safe/sound, lightly restore it and hopefully enjoy driving it a bit. I do not plan on driving it on highways, but rather around town and on short trips at or below 45mph. Total annual mileage will most likely not exceed 1000 miles.
I am on a budget and was not planning for an engine swap or major overhaul, just yet.
With all this in mind, do I have any viable options other than a major overhaul or swap at the moment?
Did you remove the pistons to get those measurements? If so, I hope you saved the shims, if any between the connecting rods and the rod caps and kept them in order. That's how the 216 engines establish the oil clearance for each rod, and that's important. Also, the cylinder measurements you posted indicate very badly worn cylinders. If you measure the cylinders from top to bottom, I'm pretty sure you're going to find they're worn tapered, with the biggest dimension near the top. That makes it virtually impossible for even a new set of piston rings to seal compression and/or oil for very long. .002" under the standard cylinder diameter of 3 1/2" is normal for standard-bore pistons.
We need a little more information about the condition of the engine before we can suggest a course of action. Right now it looks like a complete overhaul or a swap to a less-worn engine is in order. Jerry
"It is better to be silent and be thought a fool than to speak and eliminate all doubt!" - Abraham Lincoln Cringe and wail in fear, Eloi- - - - -we Morlocks are on the hunt! There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. - Ernest Hemingway Love your enemies and drive 'em nuts!
Jerry, Thank you for your response. We saved the 1 and only shim that was on one side of one cap only. We believe someone was in the motor recently. You are correct. The cylinder tapers wider towards the top.
The great news is I Just found out minutes ago that my Friend and auto therapist located a 1955 235 to swap in And has someone interested in the 216 as is so a win win and great end to the day, I appreciate your response nonetheless. As I am new to this forum I would like to either remove the thread or make everyone aware that this is now a moot issue for me as I do not want to waste anybody’s time. Any suggestions. Thank you again! Patrick
I'm thinking the cyls. may be bored 10 over already. How much ridge is at the top of the cyl.? You can't measure the piston accuratly without removing it from the engine. Does the piston rock in the cyl? 005-007 thousands is still a lot of wear but you could get by with it.
George
They say money can't buy happiness. It can buy old Chevy trucks though. Same thing. 1972 Chevy c10 Cheyenne Super In the Gallery Forum
Thank you for your reply. There was a small carbon ridge at the top of the cylinders that we removed with honing stones (gently) prior to removing the pistons. I did not measure it but I would guess it was probably paper or double paper width.
We removed the pistons prior to measuring them or the cylinders. One thing I did not note in my original post was the cylinder measurements tapered to larger towards the top of the cylinder. Also not noted was when I removed the oil pan, there was a buildup of paste in the bottom that, when wiped on a piece of cardboard, had a silvery sheen. We suspect it to be aluminum?
Yes, there is a bit of piston rock/slop when inserted back into the cylinders. We also noted the gap on the rings was quite large (1/8" when measured in in the cylinder).
Not long after posting the original message I was told my friend found a 1955 235 to replace the 216. I replied to HotRod Lincoln's post above and mentioned the replacement 235 but I see my reply has not been approved as yet. I would hate to have someone feel I wasted their time. I see now that I can (and did) change the Thread Title to add RESOLVED so at least folks know. It would still be good for my own education to have others opinions continue.
Until you get a few more posts to your credit, they won't appear immediately. Because of the high volume of SPAM and other annoying problems, a new member's posts are "moderated"- - - -read by a site administrator before being opened up for general viewing. It's a very good way to manage the site, and I believe after you make 4 or 5 posts, the moderation goes away.
Now- - - -a 1955 model 235 engine might pose some problems, depending on the position of the water pump. 1954 and early 55 engines had the pump mounted high on the engine block, the same as a 216 engine. In mid-year 1955, the pump was lowered a few inches and the length of the shaft was increased, to accommodate the mid-year 55 change in body style. A 54 or early 55 235 will be virtually a drop-in replacement for your 216. A late 55-62 engine will need some modifications to fit properly. One of our resident stovebolters manufactures and sells a conversion plate to adapt the early style water pump to the later model engine. There's also a way to modify the water pump to make a late engine fit an early frame, but there are still some difficulties involving the position of the fan with that approach. A 55 2nd. series engine will also have 12 volt electrical parts installed, but your 216 parts will bolt on. If your electrical system is still 6V, be sure to use the starter, bellhousing, and flywheel for the 216 on the later model engine. A 6V starter and a 12V flywheel do not work well together- - - -there's a difference in the number of teeth on the flywheel and the 6V starter drive does not mesh properly.
Hang in there- - - -the Stovebolt forum members represent hundreds of years' experience on these old rigs, and we love to share information with newbies! Welcome aboard! Jerry
"It is better to be silent and be thought a fool than to speak and eliminate all doubt!" - Abraham Lincoln Cringe and wail in fear, Eloi- - - - -we Morlocks are on the hunt! There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. - Ernest Hemingway Love your enemies and drive 'em nuts!
Jerry, Thanks for the warm welcome and the encouragement! I am looking forward to the Journey and where it will take me with this project. I am not in any hurry. I was told the later model 235's (1955 - later) were/are better than the earlier (1954 - earlier) engines due to the oil handling among other things which is why the later model 235 was chosen. My friend obtained a known good engine at a very attractive price which is more in line with my budget at the moment. I have found a wealth of knowledge on this forum and look forward to having you all along on the journey. Hopefully one day I will have something to add back to the collective.
With a very few exceptions (53-54 Corvette for instance) the switch to connecting rods with replaceable bearings, aluminum pistons, and full-pressure connecting rod lubrication happened with the 235 engine in 1954. The ideal engine for your swap would be the 54 or 1st.-series 55 engine because of the placement of the water pump. Later 235 and 261 cubic inch engines need a little tweaking to fit your engine compartment properly. There was a version of the spray-oiler 235 engine that was used from 1941 to 53 in medium duty and larger trucks that's not as suitable for an upgrade, even though it looks almost identical to a 216. Jerry
"It is better to be silent and be thought a fool than to speak and eliminate all doubt!" - Abraham Lincoln Cringe and wail in fear, Eloi- - - - -we Morlocks are on the hunt! There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. - Ernest Hemingway Love your enemies and drive 'em nuts!
Jerry, I will know for sure when it is delivered tomorrow. From your tone, it does not sound like the "tweaking" will be terribly tough to accomplish. I most likely will not get to installing the engine for awhile yet. I plan on doing due diligence while it is out of the truck. Once I am ready I will revisit this thread, and, if it is alright, I will reach out to you.
So the plot here thickens... The engine my friend acquired for me is a 55+ 235 with a 3 speed (column shifter) transmission that came out of car. I did a few searches here and think I may be in trouble. Can you tell me if I can either A) integrate a shifter into the steering column or B) install my 4 speed transmission onto the 235? My 4 speed has the reverse button if that's important.
If you use the bellhousing, clutch and flywheel from the original engine on the 235, the transmission will be no problem. You'll still need to deal with the water pump position, and possibly a slightly different front engine mount. The old "crash box" 4 speed trans takes a little getting accustomed to, since none of the gears are synchronized, but once you learn not to rush things you should be OK. I believe the switch to a 3 speed that was synchronized on 2nd. and 3rd. gear was done in 1947 or 48, and the rugged SM-420 4 speed will bolt up to the 47-up bellhousing, also. I'm not sure that the 46 torque tube rear end will be compatible with the later trans, but someone else should be along shortly to straighten out that information. Jerry
"It is better to be silent and be thought a fool than to speak and eliminate all doubt!" - Abraham Lincoln Cringe and wail in fear, Eloi- - - - -we Morlocks are on the hunt! There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. - Ernest Hemingway Love your enemies and drive 'em nuts!
Jerry, thanks for your reply. Should I start a new thread? I noticed I changed the subjest on the current thread to RESOLVED a few days ago. That may be making folks pass by it?
Patrick, we ask that any time you change subjects that you start a new thread. As you noted “That may be making folks pass by it?”
Martin '62 Chevy C-10 Stepside Shortbed (Restomod in progress) '47 Chevy 3100 5 Window (long term project) ‘65 Chevy Biscayne (Emily) ‘39 Dodge Business Coupe (Clarence) “I fought the law and the law won" now I are a retired one! Support those brave men/women who stand the "Thin Blue Line"! Hug a cop! USAF 1965-1969 Weather Observation Tech (I got paid to look at the clouds)
It might be a good idea to start a thread in the "Driveline" forum about getting the newer engine mated to the early drivetrain. There's an upgrade available to adapt a 3 or 4 speed synchronized transmission to your original torque tube rear end, but it would involve installing a different bellhousing and crossmember from a newer truck. Jerry
"It is better to be silent and be thought a fool than to speak and eliminate all doubt!" - Abraham Lincoln Cringe and wail in fear, Eloi- - - - -we Morlocks are on the hunt! There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. - Ernest Hemingway Love your enemies and drive 'em nuts!
