My Block numbers

[pfarber]

So I get around to looking at the 3 motors I have to figure out what to keep and what to sell.

Of the 3 motors, one is definitely at least a later 50s-60s motor (it has the rocker cover held down by 4 perimeter boles, not the two center line.

The first block number: 3692713 tells me that its a 50-52 motor, using the casting numbers from:

http://www.inliners.org/becks/BCN2.html
50-52 Chev Trk 3692713


The second motor is 3764476 this seems to be a a 58-62 motor:
http://www.inliners.org/becks/BCN2.html
56-62 3764476

So if this is correct: http://www.gearheadgeek.com/ghgj/index. ... ?showall=1

235

In 1941, a 235.5-cubic-inch version of the 216 engine was introduced for use in large trucks. Both the bore (3.5625” or 90.49mm) and stroke (3.9375” or 100.01mm) were increased over the 216. This engine also had a "dipper system" as described above, in reference to the oiling system, as in the 216.

The 235-cubic-inch (3.9 L) version was added to cars in 1950 to complement the new Powerglide automatic transmission, and 3.55:1 rear differential. Hydraulic lifters were used in the Powerglide 235 and a fully pressurized lubrication system was introduced in 1953, but only in cars ordered with the "Powerglide" transmission. The 216-cubic-inch (3.5 L) continued to be standard powerplant for cars with the 3 speed manual transmission until 1954 when the 235-cubic-inch (3.9 L) became the standard powerplant on all its cars. Two versions were used in 1954 cars - a solid-lifter version with 123 hp (92 kW) for standard transmissions and the hydraulic-lifter 136 hp (101 kW) version (The Blueflame) for Powerglide use. The major limitation for performance on the 235 was the design of the intake and exhaust ports. Unlike more modern straight sixes, the 235 featured three intake ports and four exhaust ports. This meant that adjacent cylinders 2 & 3 and cylinders 4 & 5 shared a single exhaust port between them, whereas cylinders 1 and 6 had their own exhaust port. Secondly, since there were only three intake ports, each port was divided between a pair of adjacent cylinders: 1 & 2, 3 & 4 and 5 & 6 shared an intake port. The design of the intake manifold also favored the middle port (and therefore the middle two cylinders). This ultimately caused the four end cylinders to receive less mixture, resulting in an unequal and unbalanced work load between the six cylinders.

From 1954 to 1963, the high-pressure 235 engine with mechanical valve lifters was used in some trucks. From 1956-1962, all 235 engines used in cars had hydraulic lifters.

It is interesting to note that the original 1953 Corvette engine was the high-pressure 235 engine equipped with mechanical lifters. A 150 hp 235 engine was used in the 1954 Corvette and into 1955 (until they were all sold). The Corvette 235 was equipped with the same slightly higher lift camshaft as used in the 261 truck engine and used triple side draft, single barrel, Carter Model YH carburetors mated to a PowerGlide transmission and dual exhaust manifold.

Canadian production GMC trucks used the 216 and 235-cubic-inch (1.0 L) Chevrolet Straight-6 engine as their base light duty truck powerplant in the late 1940s and early 1950s in Canada, not USA. The 216 was used from 1947 to 1953, and the 235 was used in 1954 light duty trucks only. Medium duty GMC trucks used US built GMC engines in the 248, 270 and up sizes prior to 1954.

It was optional in Checker Taxis beginning in 1965.

Toyota built the 235 under license as the Toyota F engine from 1955 to 1974.

I have both a babbit/splash oil engine and a full pressure/insert bearing engine.

I know what babbit is, but I guess the odds of getting a babbit block re-babbitted is gonna be expensive and hard to find.

Has anyone had an engine re-babbitted? Was it expensive? I'd rather have the babbit engine simply to say its babbitted... or are they that unreliable that they really should be not be used??

[pfarber]

Decent photo ID guide for 216/235 spray/pressure engines:

http://pugetsoundvintagechevrolet.org/P ... photos.pdf

[pfarber]

Seems that the babbit route may not be as hard as it seems. The big item would be the possibility of line boring poured bearings.... That's not a super expensive proposition.

The other option is to convert the early motor to insert bearings... should be easy also.... there already are inserts and cranks made for the 235.

Ran into price quotes from the stovebolt forums.... $1500-$3500 for a 235 rebuild from a shop.

Gonna have to rip into the engines and see whats doable.