Jump to content

1951 230 Flathead 6 rebuild


51Meadowbrook

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, dpollo said:

I would be concerned that a connecting rod bearing is available  -.040 for this engine.       

I was thinking the same thing when I read the measurements but I checked Andy Bernbaums (oldmoparts.com) and they list up to 0.030 for mains and 0.040 for the rods.

I read into that they are available in general up to 0.040 for the rod ends.

I did Not do any further checking however.

DJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎6‎/‎2‎/‎2017 at 3:52 PM, DJ194950 said:

I was thinking the same thing when I read the measurements but I checked Andy Bernbaums (oldmoparts.com) and they list up to 0.030 for mains and 0.040 for the rods.

I read into that they are available in general up to 0.040 for the rod ends.

I did Not do any further checking however.

DJ

Do you have a micrometer or set of calipers available to you? A quick check would answer your question. But I would have to agree with Don the machine shop would know best and should be able to order the correct ones at a reasonable price.

Edited by Silverdome
missed a word
Link to comment
Share on other sites

.040" is not what I would use either.... .030" max for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My motor's previous incarnation had .050" under rod journals. These very very tuff to find at the time, apparently.

well, that crank did not last long, but there were other issues that were the culprit... Bell mouthed honing job on the rods and improper radii at the sides of the journals. When the crank was magged after disassembly, it was found to be cracked in several places.

but yeah, have the machine shop get all the bearings...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 5/31/2017 at 4:45 PM, Merle Coggins said:

Flathead engines don't use push rods. Push rods are used on overhead valve engines. They go between the cam tappets and the rocker arms to push the valves open. Connecting rods connect the crankshaft to the pistons.

Exactly...  This is why I scratched my head on the pushrod bearing reference.  I was questioning the meaning and wanted to know what exactly he meant by it.   The term "pushrod bearing" did not originate from me, just in case some  folks have misread something here....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/16/2017 at 9:03 PM, keithb7 said:

I call 'em connecting rod, big end bearings. Of course at opposite end of the small end bearing. Aka piston pin bearing. 

Due to occasional 18+ hour work days, I can totally relate to this.  Especially when your totally exhausted and can't find the right words!  LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I'm back! The engine's back from the machine shop and starting to reassemble! One thing I was able to get done easy, and was sweating it was the water distribution tube .  I bought a cool tool that attaches to a slide hammer 1/2 " shaft. And pulled it right out both pieces! 

http://www.vintagepowerwagons.com/online-parts-catalog

image.jpeg

Edited by 51Meadowbrook
Added content
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

New wrist pins pressed in the piston rod. New rings for the Pistons, new cam bearings. Valve job , piston walls light hone. The head and  engine resurfaced, new crank shaft bearings, new piston rod bearings. New oil pump, new water pump. New freeze plugs. All new gaskets

image.jpeg

Edited by 51Meadowbrook
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 51Meadowbrook said:

New wrist pins pressed in the piston rod. New rings for the Pistons, new cam bearings. Valve job , piston walls light hone. The ad and  engine resurfaced, new crank shaft bearings, new piston rod bearings. New oil pump, new water pump. New freeze plugs. All new gaskets

 

Sounds like you are doing it up right. Keep us posted on your progress 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Plymouthy Adams said:

it is the lack of head and manifold and other parts not show that show this to look disproportional to size...an optical conclusion 

yup the missing head it is!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Plymouthy Adams said:

it is the lack of head and manifold and other parts not show that show this to look disproportional to size...an optical conclusion 

 

38 minutes ago, medium_jon said:

I love optical delusions - "misunderstanding all you see"

I back off my original inclusion and will go with a exclusion on believing anything about the two above posters comments as my conclusion. There comments are delusional.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • 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