Jump to content

Matt Wilson

Members
  • Posts

    630
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Matt Wilson

  1. Nice work! What was the original M/C bore size? And based on your other commentary, it sounds like you retained the original drum brakes at all four wheels, correct?
  2. Hmmm, interesting. It's generally regarded that Chrysler used the approach of offsetting the rods to shorten the engine, for considerations of space within the engine bay and the overall car. Anyway, both the 23" and the 25" engines seem to be very good, solid, reliable engines.
  3. I don't think they are too much of an issue. They just don't spread the load out quite as evenly over the bearing and crank journal as the 25" engine rods do, so in theory, there is probably some added wear, but not a major thing.
  4. I see. Yeah, I definitely get not wanting to continue addressing that bearing. Also, I must say, it's nice seeing photos of these trucks being used for some real work and yours is a particularly good photo, with the wood stacked up high.
  5. Wow, what a mess! I'm sorry to hear that it went south like that. What was the motivation behind annually cleaning the insert and journal? Did you see that there was more than the desired clearance when you took it apart that first time (after the knock during the first run)?
  6. Todd's description of the pair rods is good. Here's an image to help too. Rods #1 & 2, #3 & 4, and #5 & 6, respectively, are "paired." The easiest ones to see are #3 & 4, but you have to look somewhat carefully. They are mirror images of each other. You can also see the offset pretty easily in rod #1.
  7. One thing I'd like to mention, and maybe you've already addressed this, is that you need to be sure to re-torque the head bolts after the engine warms up the first time after a rebuild, and again after 500 miles (and some manuals may specify different internals and I would say it doesn't hurt to do it a few times). If you overlook that, then there is a high likelihood of blowing a head gasket. If you haven't done it yet, then I think it's a good idea to do it soon - better late than never. I only bring this up because you said you didn't do the rebuild and don't know much about the engine, and it could be easy to overlook this crucial piece of the post-rebuild maintenance for these engines.
  8. Ughhh.... That's terrible. I'm sorry it turned out that way. I'll try to remember that about the Wilson starters. At least you found out that the shims are not needed. Hopefully you can find another starter that will fit, or maybe get the Wilson unit rebuilt? Just to update everyone on my situation....I have no update yet on the starter or filter. I still have a ways to go with my engine rebuild before I'll get to the starter and filter. Hopefully later this year?
  9. Wow, what engine do you have in it? Even though there seems to be a good amount of evidence that these engines will do it without much ill effect, I don't think I'd have the guts to do it. I'm too afraid that my engine would end up as one of those few that didn't handle it.
  10. No problem. One manual says the pistons are made of an aluminum alloy and another manual says "special aluminum alloy." Pure aluminum is rather soft and weak, generally considered no good for structural applications. It pretty much has to be alloyed (combined) with other elements (mostly other metals) to have decent strength. I've heard of people spinning bearings in these engines, but I don't know that they are particularly prone to it. A couple of folks who said they've spun bearings said that there were warning signs ahead of that, meaning knocking noises, and I seem to recall one of those gentleman, who visits this forum, saying he was too young and ignorant to realize what was going on before catastrophe struck. If the engine is in good shape and maintained well, then I'm told it will do ok at higher rpms for extended periods. Mind you, for most people, higher rpms are 3000 -3200 or so. I've read about a number of folks who say they cruise at those speeds often. When I was driving my Power Wagon with a 230, I didn't have a tachometer or a good working speedometer, but I think I was cruising at close to 3000 rpm some of the time. I ended up tearing down the engine for reasons not related to speed, and the bearings, crankshaft, pistons, rings all looked fine. As for much faster speeds, it seems they will do it, but I wouldn't do it. Too much risk for me. But for some more interesting reading, you can do a Google search on Hudsonator, and you should come up with another example of some high-speed engine usage, discussed on forums (mainly on H.A.M.B., I think). The guy and his father used to use a Dodge 230 in tractor pulls, about 20 years ago. (Despite his forum name, he isn't only into Hudsons.) He said it would reach engine speeds of 5500 - 6000 rpm (for short bursts) without failure. He said they had to do some oil system mods, like cross-drilling the crank, but otherwise, it sounded like it was fairly stock, except for mods to gain more power, of course. Here's also an article by a gentleman who drove his early 50's Desoto with a 251 (later converted to a 265) all over the U.S., towing a heavy trailer and cruising at 3200 rpm or more, all day long, and his engine lasted pretty well (for back then), about 85,000 miles before the first rebuild, and then another approximately 85,000 miles. It's a long read, but interesting. He was meticulous about his documentation, just as he was with his maintenance. https://www.allpar.com/threads/the-1951-desoto-suburban-long-term-owners-report-of-a-truly-noble-motor-car.236556/ I just find this stuff interesting because, for so many years, I heard people say that these engines wouldn't tolerate high rpms, meaning anything beyond around 2500 (some people recommended even lower speeds than that), but as time has passed, I've read and heard more and more stories about people who don't baby their engines nearly that much and the engines are doing fine, unless the engine is pretty worn out to begin with, or there is poor maintenance involved.
  11. Most of the Dodge/Chrysler flathead engines had aluminum pistons. I've never heard anyone on these forums, or other forums, talk about anything but aluminum pistons. Also, I have four factory or Army manuals, and they seem to indicate that nearly all of the engines came with aluminum pistons. The only place I have seen an exception to that is in the Chrysler Six Cylinder Industrial Engine manual, from the early or mid-50's, which lists the industrial versions of the 218, 237 and 251 as having cast iron pistons, but oddly, it lists the industrial version of the 230 as having aluminum pistons. My other manuals all state that the pistons are aluminum. These include: -1942 manual TM 9-808 covering repairs of the 3/4-ton Dodge WC trucks used in WWII, which were equipped with the 230. -1948/49 Dodge Truck Shop Manual (civilian vehicle manual), covering all sizes of trucks, which were fitted with the 218, 230, 237, 251, 282 and 331 cid engines. -1952 Army 3/4-ton truck manual, TM 9-1840A/TO 19-75B-15, covering the M37 and M43 trucks, which were fitted with the 230 engine. I've never heard of cast iron pistons in any truck or car equipped with these engines. The only place is in those industrial engines, but not in any road vehicle or off-road vehicle.
  12. Assuming they were stock, and if 5200 RPM is even remotely close to what that engine was running, then that's impressive. I realize it may not have been 5200 for the entire 500 miles, but even if the average was in the mid- to upper 4000's, then it's still impressive. I would imagine some careful checking of weights was done to ensure good balance and maybe some polishing of the bolts to remove nicks and such, which could be stress risers where fatigue cracks could start (since bolts might be less visible to judges or inspectors who would be inspecting the parts). Regardless, it's kind of mind-blowing to run a long-stroke engine continuously at such speeds. I also realize it's probably the shortest stroke of all the DPCD flatheads, but still a long stroke by today's standards, for sure. Interesting story about Smokey Yunick too. I imagine every team was doing what they could to get around the rules without getting caught. Speaking of high-rpm driving, I was taking with George Asche a few years ago, and he described a time when he and some buddies drove his flathead six at an estimated 4000 - 4500 RPM continuously for something like 8 or 9 hours while on a trip out west. This was back in the early 50's, I believe, when they were practically just kids. I'm pretty sure he said it was either a 251 or a 265 and it had the stock bottom end, but some other mods to increase the power output. He says there was no sign of any engine issues after the trip was finished. Again, kind of mind-blowing. With my luck, if I were to try something like that, it would instead be engine-blowing.
  13. How do you like it? Do you notice a performance improvement?
  14. I know this is an older thread, but I am really curious about whether Mr. Petty was using stock 218 rods and rod bolts. I don't suppose there's any way for us to know for sure, unless it was known that he said that stuff was stock. But I'm curious.
  15. The article I linked earlier in this thread supports your statement about the durability and longevity of these cars. Pretty impressive.
  16. Thanks, Merle. I like mentally collecting little data points like this, showing that these engines are tougher than people often give them credit for. When I first bought my Power Wagon, over 30 years ago, I had a lot of people tell me these engines wouldn't tolerate anything over about 2500 rpm for any length of time. As time went by, I started learning that this doesn't seem to be true.
  17. Hey Merle, mostly just curious, but which engine do you have in your truck? Also, how many miles on your engine since the rebuild? Thanks!
  18. Here's an extremely detailed accounting of one original owner's experience with his 1951 DeSoto Suburban. He talks about driving his car many tens of thousands of miles between engine rebuilds, much of it at 3200rpm, and sounds like he occasionally went beyond that for brief periods, but generally avoided reaching 3600 rpm, his "mental redline." This car was equipped with a 251 cid engine (which was later converted to a 265), so it's a 25"engine, which some say are more durable in terms of the rod bearings, than the 23" engines, with their offset rods, such as the 230. Nonetheless, I think it points to what these engines are capable of, if in good shape and well-maintained. This article is a long read, but worth it. https://www.allpar.com/threads/the-1951-desoto-suburban-long-term-owners-report-of-a-truly-noble-motor-car.236556/
  19. Over on dodgepowerwagon.com, there is at least one guy who says that when he was using his 3/4-ton WW2 trucks with the 230 engine as his daily drivers, he routinely cruised at 3200 rpm. He says he put around 250,000 miles on his trucks when they were his primary transportation (I don't think it was a single truck and probably not a single rebuild), but he says he never noticed any ill effects from driving that way. Mind you, the engine has to be in decent shape and maintenance is important to be doing this, but that can be said for any engine that is being pushed a little. Just a possible data point for consideration. I've heard similar stories from other people. But ultimately, it's up to you and your comfort level.
  20. I bought my pistons from JE Pistons, for my 251 (25" engine) that I'm converting to a 265 by swapping the crankshaft and rods (same bore and piston sizes for both engines). The pistons are the same compression height as the stock pistons (1.977"), and the compression ratio will be the same as if I had used stock pistons. The sales person at JE recommended their ring set JG2206-3484, which is for a 3.484" bore. My bores are actually 3.480", but the sales guy said the rings would accommodate that difference without issue. This is 0.0425" above standard piston size (3.4375"), which is not a standard oversize for this engine, but was greater than the existing 0.030" overbore that my previous machine shop messed up (a separate story) and it's a more modern ring set that should work for my application. The two compression rings are 1.5 mm thick, and the oil ring set is 4 mm thick. The top compression ring is made of steel (not cast iron) and has a barrel-shaped face with a gas nitride coating. The second compression ring is cast iron and has a different shape. These rings are lower in tension than the stock rings originally used in our engines, but not as low in tension as the most modern ring sets, but I figured it would be a good improvement, nonetheless. I ordered the ring set through Throtl.com, as they had a much better price than JE themselves did. I think the price at JE was around $225, while Throtl was something like $160, if I recall correctly. The pistons are forged 4032 aluminum and weigh about 455 grams, whereas the 0.030" pistons I was originally going to use, from Sealed Power, are cast aluminum and weigh about 540 grams. You can see the difference in appearance between the JE pistons and the OEM-style pistons from Sealed Power in the photo below. The Sealed Power pistons are nearly identical to the OEM pistons that I pulled from the engine when I disassembled it, with the most obvious difference being that the OEM pistons used three rings, while the Sealed Power pistons use four. I opted to use the wrist pins from my Sealed Power pistons that I'm not going to use, and I had already gotten the rod bushings sized to fit those pins by a shop that has a bushing burnishing machine that is rare to find, so I didn't want to change pin size. Consequently, JE had to fabricate the pistons to fit my pins, which are not a standard size they normally use. The pins are the standard size for our flatheads, which is 0.8592" in diameter, and the nearest size that JE typically uses is 0.866", so they had to trick their system to get it to size the pin bores correctly. They got it wrong the first time, but made it right with the second piston set (no charge to me, and in fact a little bit of a discount for my inconvenience). One thing I should point out is that they sent me wrist pin retainers (wire locks) that are made for their standard 0.866" wrist pins, and after trying for hours, I finally gave up on trying to get even a single one installed. I found some Manley wrist pin locks, p/n 42270-16, which are a little smaller in overall diameter than the ones JE had sent me, but they are the same wire thickness (diameter), and I was able to fit both of the ones I tried in just a few minutes, so I think they will work fine. Cost for the pistons, including shipping and tax, was just under $900, before the discount I mentioned above, but that was in February of 2022 (yes, this project is taking me a long time) and when I had a need to talk again with JE a few months ago, they said the prices had gone up several percent. Hopefully this info is of some help.
  21. Sniper, I think you're right. I went out and looked at the 230 pistons from the engine I rebuilt 20 years ago (and took apart about 10 years ago), and they have four rings. Also, the Sealed Power pistons I have for a 25" block (237, 251, 265) use four rings as well. I had forgotten about that. The custom pistons I ordered for my 265, and the original 251 pistons from the early 60's 251 I disassembled do indeed use only three rings (see photo of original piston below), so that's probably where I got mixed up.
  22. According to my Chrysler Six Cylinder Industrial Engines Manual, No. D-12154, Second Edition, sodium-cooled exhaust valves are standard equipment on some models - In. 7, 7A, 8 and 8A engines, which are the 236.6 cid and 250.6 cid engines. It seems that your engine would have come with sodium-cooled exhaust valves, originally. The manual goes on to say that engines equipped with sodium-cooled valves were fitted with a plate, attached to the right side of the engine, just behind the engine serial number. Of course, that might be gone from yours by now, after all these years. I don't see anything in the manual about valve rotators for any of the engines. As for full-flow filter capability, look for a diamond-shaped raised pad on the left side of the block, just behind the distributor, below the freeze plug (see attached photo). I don't know the answer to your question about the flywheel/crankshaft flange/starter gear aligment. As for pistons and rings, the industrial engine manual show images of pistons with four rings, and contains discussion of there being two compression rings and two oil rings, and I believe all of the early flatheads (industrial and otherwise) came with 4-ring pistons. However, the later flathead six engines came with 3-ring pistons. I know this because I took apart a 251 from an early 60's Power Wagon, and I'm quite certain it had never been rebuilt, and it had 3-ring pistons (it's not an industrial engine, though). The newly made pistons I've ordered for these engines, such as those made by Sealed Power, are made to accommodate 3 rings and are made of cast aluminum. Interestingly, the pistons for the Ind. 5, 5A, 7, 7A, and 8, 8A engines (217.8 cid, 236.6 cid and 250.6 cid) came with cast iron pistons, according to the industrial manual. Only the Ind. 6, 6A (230.2 cid) engine is stated to have come with aluminum pistons. Having said that, I would have no hesitation in using aluminum pistons in their place. I'm not sure if cast iron pistons can even be found for these engines now. If they can, they would be NOS, and I've never heard of such pistons.
  23. Thanks, Jim! That's interesting stuff. Sounds like my valves and seats are just about right the way they are, in that case.
  24. Be careful when removing the coolant temperature sending unit from the side of the head. Make sure the little tube that goes through the middle of the nut does not twist with the nut, or it will twist off into two pieces (believe me, I know). Your engine could be a 218, as you said, or could be a 230. Either way, the head gasket should be the same. Vintage Power Wagons self the Best Gasket brand (or used to, anyway).
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Terms of Use