Click on image for the lowdown. 
====
| | |
2 members (Shaffer's1950, 1 invisible),
36
guests, and
2
robots. | | Key: Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod | | | Forums66 Topics128,035 Posts1,055,443 Members48,422 | | 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!
| | | | Joined: Nov 2009 Posts: 639 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Nov 2009 Posts: 639 | I have two engines:
Casting #s from one (3835911) are for a '54 first series 235 with Power Glide.
Casting #s from the other (3733949) are for a '55 first series 235 without the Power Glide.
Is there a difference between the '54 and the '55 235s?
What is the difference between the Power Glide 235 and the non Power Glide 235?
Both of these engines have been rebuilt. Which one would you use? | | | | | Joined: Sep 2001 Posts: 29,269 Bubba - Curmudgeon | | Bubba - Curmudgeon Joined: Sep 2001 Posts: 29,269 |
The Powerglide 235 would have hydraulic lifters.
All truck 235s had mechanical lifters.
I'd use the truck engine (in a truck).
| | | | | Joined: Jul 2004 Posts: 39 Wrench Fetcher | | Wrench Fetcher Joined: Jul 2004 Posts: 39 | Wouldn't the hydraulic lifter engine be quietier and need less adjusting? | | | | | Joined: Sep 2001 Posts: 29,269 Bubba - Curmudgeon | | Bubba - Curmudgeon Joined: Sep 2001 Posts: 29,269 |
Yes, usually. That is why some people prefer hydraulic lifters.
| | | | | Joined: Nov 2009 Posts: 639 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Nov 2009 Posts: 639 | Is it true that a Powerglide 235 has more horsepower? | | | | | Joined: Oct 2009 Posts: 419 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Oct 2009 Posts: 419 | I'd use the truck engine (in a truck). Tim- Any particular reason? | | | | | Joined: Jun 2005 Posts: 388 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Jun 2005 Posts: 388 | The 1954 PG engine was rated at 125 HP and the truck engine at 112 HP. The PG engine cam provides about 30% more valve lift. More engine spec data is in Resto-Packs for the Powerglide engine and the truck 235. Hoyt | | | | | Joined: Nov 2006 Posts: 2,544 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Nov 2006 Posts: 2,544 | The difference in actually driving your truck with each engine would be hardly noticeable. As said above, if you don't want to adjust valves put the powerglide motor in. | | | | | Joined: Nov 2009 Posts: 639 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Nov 2009 Posts: 639 | I'd use the truck engine (in a truck). tclederman, if the power glide 235 has more horsepower and has hydraulic lifters, why would you run the 'truck' engine instead? I don’t question your infinite wisdom, but I do wonder what makes the one more suited to truck use when ‘on paper’ the ‘car(?)’ 235 makes more sense to a novice. Teach me! | | | | | Joined: Sep 2001 Posts: 29,269 Bubba - Curmudgeon | | Bubba - Curmudgeon Joined: Sep 2001 Posts: 29,269 |
It's got nothing to do with any wisdom. It's just my opinion (and the fact that I am, sadly, sort of a truck "purest").
It's got nothing to do with what is more suited for a truck, unless you plan on high revving the engine (as GM might have been thinking when it put mechanical lifters in its Corvette "high hp" 235, which came with a Powerglide transmission).
| | | | | Joined: Nov 2009 Posts: 639 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Nov 2009 Posts: 639 | That's good enough for me. I kind of like that sewing machine sound of mechanical lifters anyway  | | | | | Joined: Sep 2001 Posts: 29,269 Bubba - Curmudgeon | | Bubba - Curmudgeon Joined: Sep 2001 Posts: 29,269 | . . . . I kind of like that sewing machine sound of mechanical lifters anyway I was going to post that but I thought you might think I was joking. | | |
|
|
