| |
Click on image for the lowdown. 
====
| | |
1 members (Otto Skorzeny),
36
guests, and
6
robots. | | Key: Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod | | | Forums66 Topics128,012 Posts1,055,315 Members48,419 | | Most Online14,466
Apr 26th, 2026 | | AD Chevy Trucks  Over 6,000 pictures Brad Allen has an awesome collection of Chevrolet factory pictures that he has set up from film strips. Check them out!
Lots of work on Brad's part ... pure enjoyment (and references) for you!
| | THANKS!
For helping keep this great
old truck web site
on the Internet for over 30 years! and not clogged down
with Ads!  Again, thanks!
| | 
#29299 01/03/2005 4:16 PM | Joined: Jan 2005 Posts: 4 Junior Member | | Junior Member Joined: Jan 2005 Posts: 4 | I have a 54 Chevy with a 235, but it has a cracked number one cyilinder. I was thinking about replacing it with a rebuilt 235, but I now have a chance to buy a 48 Chevy with a 216 cheaper than the rebuild and I hope to use some of the body parts. Since I have been contemplating the rebuild route, I have done some research on the 235, but know nothing about the 216. Could I get some information and pros/cons of the 216 for use in a weekend hauler ocassional commuter situation? | | |
#29300 01/03/2005 11:35 PM | Joined: Jun 2004 Posts: 8,597 Riding in the Passing Lane | | Riding in the Passing Lane Joined: Jun 2004 Posts: 8,597 | The 54 up 235 is a much impoved engine over the earliar ones & the 216. I wouldn,t dream of putting a 216 in it. 
They say money can't buy happiness. It can buy old Chevy trucks though. Same thing. 1972 Chevy c10 Cheyenne SuperIn the Gallery Forum | | |
#29301 01/04/2005 2:16 AM | Joined: Jun 2004 Posts: 19 Junior Member | | Junior Member Joined: Jun 2004 Posts: 19 | Can the cracked cylinder be resleeved? May be one option. | | |
#29302 01/04/2005 2:32 PM | Joined: Jan 2005 Posts: 4 Junior Member | | Junior Member Joined: Jan 2005 Posts: 4 | I thought that the 235 was the better option, and I have gotten estimates to rebuild the engine and sleeve the cylinder, but they are in the $2,500 to $3,000 range, and I can buy a rebuilt for half that and the 216 for less. I am trying to strikle a balance between best and least expensive. | | |
#29303 01/04/2005 4:27 PM | Joined: Jun 2000 Posts: 2,773 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Jun 2000 Posts: 2,773 | The 216 is still a good engine, you just have to know the differences and be willing to live with a few restrictions.
The 216 has poured babbit rod bearings, the 235 has insert bearings, babbit with a steel backing.
Oiling - 235 is full pressure oiling at 30 psi, the 216 has splash oiling for the crank and a 15 psi pump.
Neither engine should be driven at over 2,700 rpm on an extended basis due to rod stretch, the 216 I would limit to 2,500 rpm.
Fred
52 3600
69 C-10
| | |
|
|
| |
