The Stovebolt Site Forums The Shop Area Engine Shop Trademaster, Taskmaster, or Workmaster?

Hey Guys,
I have a '59 Apache 3600 with a V8 in it. I didn't exactly know what the kind of engine that was in it, so I bought the truck operators manual for it. In '59, there was 3 different stock engines that were put into the Apaches and those were the Trademasters, Taskmasters, and Workmasters.
In the operators manual I got for it, it listed the following information about each type of engine:
Trademaster:Stroke- 3 7/8" Bore- 3" Displacement- 283 Cu. in. Firing Order- 1-8-4-3-6-5-7-2 Compression Ratio- 8.5 to 1 Horsepower(Rated)-160 # of Main Bearings- 5
Taskmaster:Stroke- 3 7/8" Bore- 3" Displacement- 283 cu. in. Firing Order- 1-8-4-3-6-5-7-2 Compression Ratio- 8 to 1 Horsepower(Rated)-160 # of main bearings- 5
Workmaster:Stroke- 4 1/8" Bore- 3 1/4" Displacement- 348 cu. in. Firing Order- 1-8-4-3-6-5-7-2 Compression Ratio- 8.0 to 1 Horsepower(Rated)-230 # of main bearings- 5
Does anyone know if I could just tell what kind of engine it is just by looking at it?
Any advice would help

If it is the 348 cu.in. Workmaster the valve covers will be shaped like an "M" (or "W")near the exhaust manifild.

If it is the 283 cu.in it will have straight valve covers. Which 283, I couldnt tell you without checking the engine numbers.

You have a Trademaster. The Taskmaster was standard on 5000 series (LCF) trucks, optional on 6000 series w/2bbl, standard on 7000 and 8000 with 4bbl. The Workmaster (348) was only used on the 9000 and 10000 trucks. There was also 1 more V8 engine used in those trucks, I don't think it's mentioned in the '59 supplimant as it was pretty much phased out by then, and that one was the Loadmaster 322. That one was used in 7000-10000 series trucks, starting in '56. It was standard equipment on the Tandem Axle equipped trucks.

Thanks a lot for the great information Bill. Now I know its a Trademaster.

FWIW the Loadmaster 322 was a Buick engine if I recall correctly.(?)

GMC's of that era used Pontiac engines as the V8 before they went the HD V6 route.

Hey Dave,
You are correct. The Loadmaster 322s were Buick engines, but they were used in Chevy trucks from 1956 to 1959. Buick also had Super Loadmasters. Whether they were used in Chevy Trucks or not, I don't know.
Thanks for bringing that good point up.

the Buick 322 54-56 passenger car was used in GMC but not chev l/duty trucks as chev had the 265. Could have been used in chev medium duty trucks though as this application is more than likely why the 348 was developed for 58
ron

Hey Ron,
You are right, the buick 322s were not used in the light duty Chevy Trucks. But, as Bill(Longbox55) had said earlier in the post, 322s were used in Chevy's 7000-10000 series trucks beginning in 1956 and ending in 1959. And as Bill(Longbox55) had also said, it was standard on Chevy's tandem axle trucks.
Thanks for brining up the good point.

another reason the 322 may have been used as there may have been a surplus of 322s as there was a fire I think at buick in 64. they may have also hooked up hydramatics behind the 322 as the fire affected the dynaflow section.
322/hydramatic would have been the eng-a/t setup for a GMC I gather with an a/t option. that would have been the same hydramatic used from 54-62 behind the buick. 6 cyl or poctiac eng
that trans was used in olds and caddies from 54-56 and some buicks
ron
ron

Actually, the fire was at the Hydramatic plant. That's why you see some '53-'54 Oldsmobiles, Pontiacs, and Cadillacs with Dynaflow(Olds and Cad) or Powerglide (Pontiac) transmissions.
GMCs used the Olds V8 in the same applications that Chevy used the Buick. I beleive it was a 371, but the 394 may have also been used in the '58/'59s.

Hy Guys, I believe there have been some mis-statements made, GMCs that were V8 equipped used Pontiac V8s up to the 500 series, above that they used the Oldsmobile V8, the 370 [car 371] being the largest, this was between 1955 - 59. Chevrolet used their own V8 265, 283 up to the 8000 seris regardless of number of axles, begining in 1956 the Buick V8 [322] was used in the 9 - 10000 series regardles of the number of axles. In 1958 the 348 Chevrolet engine came out and could be found in the 9 -10000 series regardless of the number of axles, the 322 was found in the 10800 series. In 1959 the only change from above was that the 348 was now also available in the 8000 series, hope that clears this up, sorry to highjack the thread.

3B, after checking the shop manuals, I have to say you are correct. I could have sworn I saw in the manuals that the 322 was standard with the Tandem option. It might have been in some original advertising I rather than the manual.
Thanx for the help clearing it up.

If I've read right you could never get a 348/409 W-motor in a Chevrolet truck 1-ton or lighter. It was '68 before a Mark IV new style big block could be had in a light duty pick-up.

Thanks 3B,
Thanks a lot for helping for clear this whole situation up. I also think there were a lot of statements made that weren't going anywhere, but now corrected.
Thanks Again.

I knew that it was one way or the other.
371 was 57-59. 394, 60-64?
ron

Hey Ron,
I know in 1959,Chevy did not put the 371s into any of their trucks. The biggest engine that was put into those trucks were the 348 Workmasters. Whether they used that in '57 or '58, I don't know. I am also not sure about whether the 394s were used from 60-64.

348 was used in production in 58.
I doubt that the 394 were used in trucks as chev had the 348 and noyt sure of the 409 production years. 1962 for sure , not know whether or not that they were in productin use in 61
ron

True, Chevy would not have used the 394, but GMC may have since they were using the 371. If they did, it would have been '59, which was the first year for that engine in passenger car use.
As far as the 322 goes,by '58/'59, it had been relegated to School Bus use, as the 348 replaced it in all other applications.
Did a little checking in the Standard catalog of American V8s, couldn't come up with anything specific about Olds engines in GMCs, and it was a bit fuzzy about 409s. Could only get truck specific casting numbers '62-'62 for the '09.

The Beach Boys recorded "She's so fine my 409" in 1962. That would suggest the motor was in cars at least that early.

Gitty-Up 409 1961-1965

Did a bit more checking in a shop manual I have. The 409 is only listed for '62-'65 in truck use. Passenger cars did start using them in '61, and the casting numbers and shop manuals back that up.

Do you guys realize that NONE of those engines are produced today? And don't tell me the replacements are better. The new 5.3 has extremely thin cylinder walls, so much so that it can't be safely rebored.

I long for those glorious days of yesteryear.

Hey Crabbyappleton,
I completely agree with you. I miss those good ol' engines from back then. Nowadays, car manufacturers don't care about how long they last or if they do the job right, as long as it's cheap.

not defending anything here , but you never got the miles from those old engines that they are getting from todays engs
It is also more of a throw it away society now then it was then
ron
they were also much simpler times. there were only a couple of wires and a fuel line to hook up. you had room to work around them. everything was in the open

That's a whole new topic.

Better lubricants and better fuel metering likely have a lot to do with the longevity of today's motors. Another factor would be overdrive transmissions.

I have a '91 Chevy 350 with more than 190,000 miles on it. I agree cars today do seem to last longer but there are reasons that you can apply to the old motors and get better life from them too.

The 409 was only used in big trucks that required a larger engine. The 348 was still used during these years also. The W motor was not ever factory in 1 ton and smaller trucks.
As Steve says, car today do last much longer. One item that adds to the longevity is the use of unleaded gas believe it or not. Lead deposits are very tough on valves. Today it is rare to do a valve job with 60K on a motor.
Don

You also have to remember that they alloys used to build todays engines are much better that what they used back then. But then again, I've seen old engines with just as many or more miles than the average late model with no rebuild. Good example, my own 235. 236k miles, head had never been off. It did have a burnt valve on #5, and broken rings in every cylinder, but it ran very well and didn't smoke much at all.

In which areas? I don't doubt what you say is correct, but I would like to know in what areas these superior alloys are used. When the old engines wore out, usually it was the cylinder walls. Is today's cast iron better?

The 3970010 blocks starting in 1969 have higher nickel content. I would also assume that todays methods and castings are better than that of old.

Cast iron is not an chemical element or a chemical compound (they do not change in quality or characteristics). Cast iron is an alloy which has varying amounts of non-iron elements.

You were lucky to get 50K miles before having to rebuild a block and/or a head on the Chevrolet 216/235/261 engines. This could have been due to fuel, lubricants, filtration systems, etc, but it is still a fact that the engines did not last as long as modern engines, no matter how well you maintained them.

Even back in those times, some engines had better cast alloys. GMC engines had more nickle in the castings and were considered to be longer-lasting than Chevrolet engines (this more than made up for their homelier grills between 47-54).

There are many reasons why modern engines are better and last longer. Better fuel, better lubricants and filtration systems, better materials, and better production techniques and standards.

Also, government standards are now much stricter (not only for pollution but also for how long the anti-pollution equipment had to last) - how the companies have met these standards have also influenced increased engine life.

Another factor that has led to longer engine life is competition - in particular, the quality of Japanese engines forced other manufacturers to increase reliability and engine life.