The Stovebolt Site Forums The Shop Area General Truck Talk 6 CYL. UPGRADE ?'S

My 216 in my '41 will have to be re-built so I've decided to upgrade to a later 235 or 261. My neighbor has a '63 Nova with a running 230 and powerglide. I'm not too interested in the powerglide although I've seen them installed in the '41-'46 pickups, there's one on e-bay now w/6 cyl and powerglide. Is a 230 a good suitable choice for my '41? Will the original trans. bolt up to the 230 or will I have to go with a later 3 speed full synchro? I'd like to keep as much stock appearance as I can. I want to keep the original looking floor shifter even if I go with a later 3 spd. What would be a good choice for the trans.? Just wanted to get your expert opinions since I have no idea what the best set up would be. Or should I continue my search for a good 235 or 261? Thanks in advance!

Mike

Mike-

I am by no means an expert, but here is my opinion. The 235/261 will basically be a direct bolt in replacement for the 216. They use the same motor mounts and the same bell housing pattern. The 230 will not be so easy. The 230 uses the more modern V-8 style side motor mounts and bell housing pattern. So, basically, to install a 230 would take the same amount of customization and effort as to insall a 350. If it were me, I would definately hold out for a 235.

As far as the trans goes, I don't think you can get a full synchro'd unit to fit with the torque tube. The three speeds that were used until '54 (the last year for the torque tube) were only synched in 2nd and 3rd. I don't see any reason you couldn't use one of these, but keeping the stock floor shift may be a sticking point. As I recall, the non-synched shifter dropped directly into the top of the trans, where the later trans used linkages that exited the side. I'm sure you can add a floor shift to the later trans, but I'm not sure about keeping the stock appearance.

I am certain that somebody else will reply that has more knowledge than I. Good luck!!

I think you're right. I thought about that since the original tranny is a direct top shifter. I sure would like to get rid of the torque tube and have a later rear end but my ultimate goal is to have an original as I can truck but with an upgraded engine. Maybe I should just keep the original tranny,rear etc. and just find a good 235. I won't be taking this truck on any road trips when I get done. It'll just be something to get out and drive to town or parades or a nice weekend cruise around the country side. I've never owned a vehicle with the old torque tube drive shaft set-up so I'm curious as to why every body tells me to get rid of it. My Father even said he didn't like them and to get rid of it but he gave me no real reason. He just said it's junk in his book. So what problems come with them?

Mike

Chevy did not have a good differential for years. The reason is the load is carried through the axle to the bearings, resulting in axle fatigue and wear. They tend to get real noisy at times. If you're not making a daily driver, keeping the old axle should be fine.

Nothing wrong with the closed driveshaft, except for the oil drip at the tranny ball, and being a pain to disconnect from the tranny.

On the engine, the 230 is a better engine, but it won't look right if you're want an original look. I would continue the search for a 235 or 261.

M. Smith,
out of curiosity, if you are not going to do long road trips, why wouldn't you get the 216 rebuilt instead of rebuilding a 235? A good 216 will give you good service.

If you go with the 235, you can use the old valve cover to retain the original look.

I may try and re-build the 216 if I can't find a good 235 close by. I'm afraid the old 216 won't be any good once we tear it down, she's really stuck and there was a lot of water that came out when I drained the oil/sludge. I pulled down the dust shield last night and all the teeth on the bottom of flywheel were rusted completely off from water sitting in there with the rats nests. How can you use the old 216 valve cover on a 235?

Mike

i have a 235 in a 61 apache with a burned exaust valve.i haven't decided what im doing with the truck yet.if you can't find a 235,let me know and we'll talk.

Thanks, Let me know.

Mike

The 61 235 would be a huge improvement over the old 216, and 99 of 100 people would never notice it wasn't original. I'd put a little more scoot in the giddy-up; better-bigger carb, perfomance cam, et, but that's just me.

Boo Radley

I just finished putting a 1975 250ci Chevy 6 in my 54 6100. It bolted right up to the transmission. I cut the motor mount platforms out of the donor truck, held the motor in place and cut the platforms to fit, because the 54 frame is narrower, drilled holes and bolted them in. I haul 8000# of water with it every day and it has performed flawlessly for the past 2 months. The engine has a lot more power, has an easy to replace spin-on oil filter and the price was right. I paid $300 for the whole donor truck.

To run the 216 valve cover on a 235 all that is required is to replace two bolts in the valve assembly with studs from a 216. In my experience, removal of the studs has been difficult. I have bought the stud kit from one of the vendors.

The 216 cover, if properly straightened and installed, leaks less than the 235 cover.

Thanks for the info on putting the 216 cover on the 235. I found a 235 today right up the road from me. It is a runner from a '60 pickup. $150.

Mike

MSmith,
my 216 studs came out pretty easily, so I guess that I was lucky. I used two nuts, locked them together and turned the studs out. I had to remove them to get the head serviced.

Some get concerned about the low position of the fan on the block of the newer 235. There should be a thread on this site showing a plate that can be mounted to the front of the block, to use a 216 water pump up in the original position. A friend of mine used the 235 with the water pump as is, with of course the short shaft, and he had no problems.

Oh, you will need the manifolds from the 235 to use with it, I believe. This is going to be a pretty nice old truck!