The Stovebolt Site Forums The Shop Area The HiPo Shop How about a hydraulic lifter "216"?

Give me a calculator and a parts catalog- - - - -and "Stand back!"

Here's a pretty recent Rube Goldberg pipe dream- - - - -

I did a little number crunching on a possible 216 modification :

216 engine block
2.8 Liter Chevy S-10 V6 pistons, 1MM oversize
235 crankshaft, stroked to 4 1/8"
Big block Chevy V8 connecting rods 7.1" long
Total displacement 247 cubic inches.

A 4 1/4" stroke (more torque) and a 7" long flathead Ford V8 connecting rod gives 254 cubic inches with the same pistons. Uses 350 Chevy V8 rod bearings.

Compression ratio approximately 9:1 with flat top pistons. Use ARP cylinder head studs, not bolts to avoid blown head gaskets.
Melling CCS-1 camshaft
Stainless steel exhaust valves for a Chevy 350 V8
Probably 150+ Horsepower- - - -smooth idle- - - -looks like a stock 216 engine.
Capable of 65+ MPH with the original size tires and rear end gearing.

Now- - - - -since I'm working on building a fixture to drill stovebolt blocks for a hydraulic lifter oil gallery, and sleeving the lifter bores down to use MOPAR/AMC lifters, why not take advantage of that hole through a 216 water jacket for rocker arm oiling, increase the size of the copper tube to 5/16"or maybe3/8", disable the oil distributor to provide full oil flow, and plumb oil to the newly-drilled lifter gallery to oil the lifters? It would be possible to tap off that gallery under the pushrod cover to oil the rocker shaft- - - - -with its modified roller bearing rockers.

A Melling CCS-6 camshaft with the bearing journals ground down to 216 diameter is already ground for hydraulic lifters. Or, the 216 block could be line bored for 235 cam bearings- - - - -there's plenty of material in the casting to do that, since 216 cam bearings are getting scarce and expensive. Would that become a "sleeper 216"?????
Jerry

That would be super awesome! An externally stock appearing 216 that could be driven in modern day conditions.

I drive a stock 216 in modern conditions as regular transportation all the time .

The extra torque available from the stroker crankshaft will allow a taller rear end gear ratio and "keep up with traffic" road speeds, while keeping a "stock" appearance in the engine compartment. Juice lifters and roller rocker arms will quiet the engine noise down considerably, as well as eliminating the need for periodic valve adjustments.
Jerry

That would be a neat project, and an interesting way to liven up a 216.

What is the difference between the CCS-5 and CCS-6 cams by Melling? They are both for hydraulic lifters, but the CCS-6 is for the later 235 engines.

It looks like the CCS-5 is for 1955-58 engines, which would have a slightly less aggressive grind. The 59-62 cams had just a bit different timing, and possibly lift, I believe.
Jerry

Well yes you can, but a stock 216 doesn't make 150hp, does it? It would be a whole lot easier if the rig could merge with highway traffic like a car from the '60s versus one from the '40s.

I have attempted to contact several custom camshaft manufacturers about the possibility of grinding a roller lifter cam for stovebolt engines. So far, none of them have had the common courtesy to respond to my inquiries!
Jerry

After a pretty long conversation with a custom cam grinder in North Carolina, it seems that having a roller cam ground for a stovebolt engine is sort of a "lipstick on a pig" approach. Bragging rights are pretty good, but an actual improvement over a properly ground flat tappet cam on a good original core would be minuscule, and extremely costly. The cylinder head design effectively prevents RPM much over 4500 or so, and a pretty aggressive rate of lift on a short duration/high lift cam lobe can be achieved without going to a roller follower. Smith Brothers Pushrods ( www.pushrods.net ) says they can build a correct length tubular pushrod to mate a stovebolt rocker arm adjuster ball to a MOPAR lifter- - - -solid or hydraulic. I have lots of dreams and schemes underway- - - - -let's see just how many of them I can actually turn into reality!
Jerry

Would that stroker 216 have full pressure oiling.

The 235 crankshaft would do that. I went that route with my 216.

Jerry, it's going to take more than stroking a 216 and adding roller rockers and roller lifters to break a Stovebolt crankshaft.
You need to come up with forced induction like a turbocharger or a supercharger, or Nitrous to force enough through those stuffed up heads to see what the ultimate failure level of the crankshaft is.

It's possible to put a full pressure 235 crankshaft into a 216 by either widening the thrust bearing faces on the 235 crank, or narrowing the #3 216 block main bearing web to take the 235 thrust bearing. It's also possible to get a LOT more stroke from a 235 crankshaft- - - - -like 4 1/8" or even 4 1/4" stroke by offset grinding the rod journals and using a smaller rod bearing. Stovebolt crankshafts are forged steel, not cast iron, and they're tougher than woodpecker lips!
Jerry

Modifying the 216 block is the better way to go as you can then use 235 main bearings as 216 mains are getting hard to find.

Someone just gave me a 235 crankshaft because the thrust face was badly worn- - - - -I suppose his machinist didn't know how to weld! I've got a roll of nickel alloy wire for my MIG welder so building up that thrust shoulder shouldn't be a problem at all. I've also got a Eutectic spray weld setup that can be used to rehab worn rod and main bearing journals, but I'm going to have to do quite a bit of practicing with that before I try to build up a crankshaft.
Jerry