Click on image for the lowdown. 
====
| | |
0 members (),
191
guests, and
2
robots. | | Key: Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod | | | Forums66 Topics128,089 Posts1,056,141 Members48,436 | | 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! | |
#79005 06/20/2007 6:25 PM | Joined: Jun 2007 Posts: 21 Apprentice | | Apprentice Joined: Jun 2007 Posts: 21 | I am going to throw this out to your vast knowledge and experience. I am soon to begin an amateur teardown/rebuild of my late grandfather's 46 half ton 216 into a (hopefully) reliable daily driver that can make safe minimum roadway speeds while bing reasonable on gas. I am curious if anyone has attempted a downsize swap of the 216 for a fourbanger like the GM 2.5 liter distributorless and fuel injected 4 found in the S10. I would probably find a donor and transplant the entire driveline engine to rearend. This may be heresy, but it is still Chevy, is easy to get parts for and simple and longlasting to maintain. I would greatly appreciate any opinions or direction you all could provide. I have owned this truck for 15 years and it has resided next to my father's garage up in Virginia since then. I am going up there to get it next month. Thank you all again for your time and advice. - Chris | | |
#79007 06/20/2007 9:08 PM | Joined: Jun 2004 Posts: 8,597 Riding in the Passing Lane | | Riding in the Passing Lane Joined: Jun 2004 Posts: 8,597 | It,s interesting. It would be sluggish but would have more power then the old 216. The S-10 runs pretty good with it. It would take a lot of weight off the front end & make the truck steer easier. I,d shure want to go with the manual trans. You would need to use an electric fan because the space between the front of the engine to the radiator would be awkward for a shroud & fan extension. They say money can't buy happiness. It can buy old Chevy trucks though. Same thing. 1972 Chevy c10 Cheyenne SuperIn the Gallery Forum | | |
#79008 06/20/2007 9:18 PM | Joined: May 2005 Posts: 8,878 . | | . Joined: May 2005 Posts: 8,878 | I am installing a 4 cylinder in my 48 2 ton. It is 212ci 185 hp and 435 lbft stock. I still exepct to use it like a truck.
Grigg | | |
#79009 06/20/2007 9:25 PM | Joined: Oct 2001 Posts: 3,458 Extreme Gabster | | Extreme Gabster Joined: Oct 2001 Posts: 3,458 | How about the 5 cylinder from a Colorado?
I would use a megasquirt fuel injection system, but I like to tinker.
You may find that a bigger engine geared tall gives you better gas milage than the 2.5, but maybe not. A half ton AD only weighs 3800 pounds.
If I was going outside the GM engine family I would probably do a BMW six.
Paint & Body Shop moderator A lone amateur built the Ark. A large group of professionals built the Titanic. | | |
#79011 06/20/2007 10:25 PM | Joined: May 2005 Posts: 8,878 . | | . Joined: May 2005 Posts: 8,878 | Well, he was looking for something different right?
Diesel's have so many advantages over gas. There are very few good arguments for a gas engine today, especially for a truck. In a few years I think diesel engines will be all you see.
Grigg | | |
#79012 06/20/2007 11:11 PM | Joined: May 2006 Posts: 8,351 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: May 2006 Posts: 8,351 | If you were going to try the 3.5 5 cylinder Colorado engine, you would be better off going for the 4.5 6 cylinder from the Trailblazer/Envoy. That 5 cylinder is underpowered, even compared to the old 4 cylider S10. I've measured the 4.2 (Parents have an Envoy), and it measures pretty close overall to the 216/235. I think it'ld be worth it to get the extra power, especially since you would have to make the same mods either way.
Bill Burmeister | | |
#79013 06/21/2007 2:25 AM | Joined: Oct 2003 Posts: 5,152 Cruising in the Passing Lane | | Cruising in the Passing Lane Joined: Oct 2003 Posts: 5,152 | I once saw a '59 Ford pickup that had a Vega four under the hood. The owner claimed it ran well and was pleasant to drive.
I prefer to overpower my trucks so I'm the wrong one to ask about this. The truck I drive most has a 454.
1955 1st GMC Suburban | 1954 GMC 250 trailer puller project | 1954 GMC 250 Hydra-Matic | 1954 Chevy 3100 . 1947 Chevy COE | and more... It's true. I really don't do anything but browse the Internet looking for trouble... | | |
#79014 06/24/2007 6:44 AM | Joined: Apr 2005 Posts: 2,832 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Apr 2005 Posts: 2,832 | Hope this doesn't get me banned from the forum but if you can do all the swapping it sounds like you can do then I'd consider the 2.3 turbo ford 4 cylinder. They would make a heavy T-bird turbo coupe really scoot and turbocharging is the one thing that gives both more power and better economy. An engine supercharged in any way really gets a boost in torque. There are other turbo 4's around but most were for front wheel drive.
Evan
| | |
#79015 06/24/2007 7:15 AM | Joined: Mar 2006 Posts: 72 Wrench Fetcher | | Wrench Fetcher Joined: Mar 2006 Posts: 72 | If I was looking to stick a non-GM engine under the hood of an old pickup, I'd be looking at a Mercedes 300D engine (either the 5 or 6 cylinder) with transmission. Like Grigg said, diesels have a lot of advantages over a gas engine.
Willy | | |
#79016 06/24/2007 11:38 AM | Joined: Apr 2005 Posts: 641 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Apr 2005 Posts: 641 | i think if you were going to do it i would just mount the cab on the s-10 truck and get wheels to fit but why i like stock better but its your truck | | |
#79017 06/24/2007 4:08 PM | Joined: Jun 2007 Posts: 21 Apprentice | | Apprentice Joined: Jun 2007 Posts: 21 | I truly appreciate all of the advice and counsel. I am still thinking through what course to follow with the 46, and I will surely be seeking more ideas in the upcoming months and probably years as the work begins. To Mr. McCoy, about a year after I got the truck in '93 or so, I almost dropped $200 for a good running but very, very rusted out 1964 Mercedes with a clean and smooth running dual carb inline six and 4 on the tree. Almost prophetic, i thought about the engine, tranny, and steering column with that big white steering wheel in the truck, but I was young, recently divorced and not quite ready to tackle the job. Again, I appreciate everyone's input, and will definitely seek it out all over the forum page. - Chris | | |
#79018 06/24/2007 4:27 PM | Joined: Oct 2000 Posts: 804 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Oct 2000 Posts: 804 | Why not just bolt in a 250 or 292? How many miles are you going to be driving it a year? Why look for the "ultimate" mileage? Won't a 250 or 292 get you "good enough" moleage still maintaining some power to pull a trailer or something if you need to? Easy to maintain? Chris, there has NEVER been a motor easier to maintain than a stovebolt Chevy six! There have neen equals, but never anything easier.
Brian
1948 Chevy Pickup Chopped and sectioned owned since 1974 when I was 15.
| | |
#79019 06/25/2007 8:23 PM | Joined: Oct 2001 Posts: 3,458 Extreme Gabster | | Extreme Gabster Joined: Oct 2001 Posts: 3,458 | I'm not sure a turbocharged gas motor is going to get better gas milage than a normally aspirated one.
If you really want good fuel economy then dump the carburator, fuel inject the engine you have, and gear it really tall.
Paint & Body Shop moderator A lone amateur built the Ark. A large group of professionals built the Titanic. | | |
| |