Mopar L Head Versus Ford Flathead V8 and Chevy Stovebolt 216 and 235 6cyl

[55 Fargo]

Hey all , just finished reading an article on 1940 Chevrolets in an old "2000" Auto& Parts magazine.

This article referred to the Chevy engine as not as powerful or fast as the Ford Flathead V 8, but how the 216 could out perform the Plymouth L head 6 cylinder engine.

Now in the old days, and now, perhaps, how does the Mopar L head 6 cylinder, say the short 230, and the long 251 and 265 stack up against the stock Ford Flahead V8 and the Chebby Stovebolt six.

I would eventure to gusee the Mopar is a tougher, more durable engine than the latter mentoned power plants, and in an equal weighted vehicle, would the Mopar 6, out perform the Ford s and Chebbys too.

Can anyone offer an opinion or some facts on this question....

PS this topic is not intended to tick anyone off, who may enjoy the Ford or GM engines

[Rodney Bullock]

Hey Fred, this question has always interest me as well. I was told that in the old days the Ford with it's 4 cly model A use to eat dirt because everyone was using a 6 cly. Henry and son jumped from a 4 to an 8 in 32. The 8 was ok however it had it's problemd with over heating. The early stovebolt was pretty trouble free after the second incarnation. One must remember that mopar 6cly were pretty strong as well after their second incarnation. Chey developed a v8 in the 1920's but it was recalled and all examples destroyed. I believe the frist Ford 6cly were not good. The later 6cly used in war time were very good.

A flathead 8 is a wonderful thing, it brings to mind the birth of hot rodding. I think the more support a engine has in the aftermarket the better it is, most all aftermarket companies have flathead Ford everything. Cams intake carbs. The flathead world is vast. The flathead used to whip up on the chevy folks until 1955 after that chevy never looked back. They can thank Ed Cole for that.

When it comes to HP the trans used behind the various engines tell the story of who's engine is better. Three-on the-tree hurt the effectiveness. I have cars and trucks with 6cly in them and they all have good and bad points. The Mopar is more interesting as it has small and big block 6cly, chevy 6cly only come one or two ways. The 216 is a babbit, dipper motor. It is reliable however after I think 55 it was a 235 insert bearing beast It is more powerful than a 217 or 218 I can't comment on the big block 6cly as I don't have one. I have driven a ford 6cly and it's only ok. With all the speed equipment there is for chevy 6cly it can be made to run real fast. The mopar has it's folks developing some nice stuff as well. All in all I would like to see some Old style drag racing ith the 6cly manual shift guy's and put it all to rest, wouldn't that be nice:)

[JoelOkie]

I have had several Chevy 216's. I don't think they were as tough as the mopar flathead. I have also had several cars with the 235's, and they are one of the best engines chevy ever made in my opinion. Joel

[oldodge41]

I got to see an original 1918 Chevrolet V-8 in a local collection. Wish I had taken a picture. It was odd looking but definately a V style. This is what I found online.

To me the Ford flathead V-8 is a great traditional hot rod engine for a Model-A. Performance aside they just look cool.

My uncle claims to have beaten all the local flathead V-8 Fords in the fifties with my Dad's flathead 6 Plymouth though.

[Don Coatney]

In my opinion in a 1/4 mile race most likely a souped up ford flathead or shiverlay stovebolt 6 would get to the finish line first. But in a 100,000 mile race the Mopar flathead 6 would come out on top every time.

[PhilJohnson]

Never had a flathead V8 but I've had a few Mopar flat sixes and Stovebolt motors. Chevy ingeniously designed the valve cover so when water leaks through the hood's center line it goes into the motor. Every single one had a gallon of water in it. There isn't a big difference power wise between the 216 or 218, or 235 versus 230. I guess overhead valves made a Stovebolt seem more modern but the oiling system is really prehistoric. Plus when everyone else ditched babbit bearings in the early 30s Chevy decided to keep babbit bearings until 1953. The mopar six is a better motor, it has better oiling, better bearings, and more durability. Some of those old babbit pounding piles would give up the ghost in a large truck after 30,000 miles. I got one right now in my 51 2 ton dumptruck. Unsurprisingly the motor is about shot, another babbit pounding 235 is going in, I got the motor for free. If I had the money I would have went sbc.

Edited September 4, 2011 by PhilJohnson
grammer

[moose]

I am extremely interested in this topic. I have a challenge going with a guy from Rhode Island that has a flathead v8 in his 30 coupe. It's an early style 221 I think, and my 30 sedan with a 218 is going to mop him up someday:D

I will come back with a full report someday;)

[55 Fargo]

In my opinion in a 1/4 mile race most likely a souped up ford flathead or shiverlay stovebolt 6 would get to the finish line first. But in a 100,000 mile race the Mopar flathead 6 would come out on top every time.

Okay, how about say a 1950 Ford stock, versus a stcok 1950 Desoto, with a 251 Chrysler engine?

I also have owned a couple of 235 engine in some old chiverlays they were okay, but seemed like dogs off the line compared to my 47 Chrysler. I attribute this to the fact the Chevys had a 2 spd powerglide and higher dif gears, and the Chrysler has 3 spd standard and 3.73 gears.

I find this topic very interesting, and hope there is some stories to verify any info.

Hey I like the look of the Furd L head V8 too, and the old time custom parts, including a n entire set-up to create and overhead valve engine( Ardun)....

[55 Fargo]

Never had a flathead V8 but I've had a few Mopar flat sixes and Stovebolt motors.Chevy ingeniously designed the valve cover so when water leaks through the hood's center line it goes into the motor. Every single one had a gallon of water in it. There isn't a big difference power wise between the 216 or 218, or 235 versus 230. I guess overhead valves made a Stovebolt seem more modern but it has the oiling system is prehistoric. Plus everyone else ditched babbit bearings in the early 30s and Chevy decided to keep on with them until 1953. The mopar six is a better motor, it has better oiling, better bearings, and more durability. Some of those old babbit pounding piles would give up the ghost in a large truck after 30,000 miles. I got one right now in my 51 2 ton dumptruck. Unsurprisingly the motor is about shot, another babbit pounding 235 is going in, I got the motor for free. If I had the money I would have went sbc.

I agree 100%, Mopar Industrial L head engines were made until 1972, and were used in what , welders , airplane tugs, compressors, combines, swathers, boats, you name it Clark forklifts.

I have never seen any of these with the Stovebolt or flatrhead V8s, has anyone else.... so yes they must have been durable, with plenty of torque...

[T120]

...Published in 1933 Auto Guide,It appears Ford and Chev had a bit of catching up to do. ..This info was included an article submitted to Allpar,discussing fleet vehicles.

Ford V-8 2 door, Chevrolet, Plymouth Six Coupe

0 to 40 (seconds)- 12.4, 17, 11.9

0 to 60 (seconds)- 29.7, 39, 29.0

Top speed- 83 mph, 65 mph , 85 mph

Source: Auto Guide 1933

Edited September 4, 2011 by Ralph D25cpe

[TodFitch]

Can't say about your newer cars from the 1940s, but for the early thirties look to the bottom of this page: http://www.allpar.com/squads/police-cars/police1.html

Chevy had a 3 bearing crank with low pressure to the mains and splash on the rods. I believe it had cast iron pistons too. No way could it out perform a 33 Plymouth especially on the long haul. Basically it was built for 45 MPH which is what the speed limits were back then. Once the speed limits went up, and especially after they started building the Interstates in the 1950s, that engine was toast and needed a major redesign. But the Plymouth L-6 design just needed tweaking to get more power to keep it serviceable to the end of the 1950s in cars (and early 1970s for industrial applications).

I figure if you take a stock 1933 Plymouth, Chevrolet and Ford and set out at highway speeds from where I live to New York that the Chevy would die with shot bearings either on the Altamont Pass or climbing the Sierra. If its summer, the Ford would die of overheating in Nevada or the Salt Lake desert. And the Plymouth would make it to NY.

[40plyrod]

I have had several Chevy 216's. I don't think they were as tough as the mopar flathead. I have also had several cars with the 235's, and they are one of the best engines chevy ever made in my opinion. Joel

X2 I have a 235 chevy motor and it makes really good power and will run no matter what. I drove mine lots before I could afford to rebuild it and when I had it rebuilt we had to source a new crank because mine was cracked. I'm looking forward to running the plymouth six in my 40 and seeing the power difference but I think they're probably very similar in strenght, power, and coolness:cool: As for the flathead vs chevy six 1/4 mile run I think the chevy would take the ford flathead off the line (more torque) but wouldn't be able to keep the lead against the able to rev higher ford. My $.02.

[Flat belt]

I knew a couple of old dirt tracker plymouth guys that put the 251 in Plymouths after the war and in engine class wars they said that they were about even with the Ford V-8 60. They could pull the Fords out of the turns because of the torque but the Fords could usually catch up by the next turn. They said what killed them is When the Hudson big six showed up. I have wondered for years if they changed the trans etc. or just went with the original trans. Unfortunately for me [and everyone else], they have both been gone for many years. I sure wish someone with that type of info on the 217 to 251 quick and dirty race day swaps would pipe up if they know anything about this practice. I've done the take your time, work it out at your leisure 217/251 switch but not the bore it in the morning, race it that night thing [like i did on my dirt tracker in 1982].

[greg g]

How come it took Henry 8 cylinders and 221 cu in to make 85 hp, and a plymouth 6 made 85 with 20 less cubic inches.

Well one question we can always answer NO to.

Yo Dude! Got any lead additive?

[blucarsdn]

I think I can offer a "real-time" opinion about the comparison of the three engines... I have ran several flathead Fords, stovebolt Chevy's and had several friends that tried to run flathead Mopars with the big boys.

The 216 CID Chevy's were great engines.. I never had much trouble out dragging the Fords in street racing with either my '38, 40, 41 or '42 Chevy's.

I put a 270 Jimmy in one of my '38 Chevy's in 1951, there was not a car in Eastern Idaho that could out run that car until a kid put an Old's Rocket V8 in his '36 Ford.

The big problem with the 216 engines was that they were mostly worn out by the time us kids got them.. However they would start at -30 degrees when nothing but a Model A or a John Deere tractor would start.

I had a '41 Ford conv in 1952 that was not much of a car... it got me from point A to point B fairly well then the thing over heated and cracked the block, we pushed the car into a gully and walked away.

The next Ford I got was a '36 5 win cpe... it had 51k + on the odometer when I bought the car for $225. Six months later I had to have a valve job.. I have driven the car 94k+ in the 58 years I have owned it.

My friends that had Mopar 6's did not have very good luck with them, they would not start in the winter and they could not get out of their own tracks.

It is true that the Mopars were great riding and handling cars.

When I started the rebuilding of my 39 Plym I encountered a man that had a '39 Plym that he purchased new... He told me that in 1940 he tried to catch a Greyhound bus that had left town heading to Salt Lake City... Fifty miles into the chase he burnt up the engine in Plym.. He had the car towed into Pocatello to the Plym dealer.. When he picked the car up the service manager told him.."Mr. Cutler, I do not want you to ever drive this car over 45 mph again".. Mr Cutler told me he never has driven the car over 45 mph since that day.

It is not a fair comparison engine to engine for industrial applications. All of the engines were used in all kind of power applications, generators, compressors, welders, boats, etc.. Ford engines were even used in airplanes... Price usually drove the the application, Chrysler had an advantage because they would supply engines on a consignment basis with payment not required until the "machine" was sold. Ford and GM wanted money up front.

The production longevity of the engines is a whole different story. Ford sold the flathead engine design to Verdette, a French company that evolved into Simca.. Ford had the overhead valve Arden (Hemi) heads designed for their trucks but did not use them.. Simca ended up with the design and adapted it to their V8 60 engines which were in production in Brazil until late into the 1960's. Reputedly these late "Aden Hemi" heads will bolt right on the '38-40 Ford V8 60's...

The engines in the early Land Cruisers reputedly are Chevy 216's that morphed into the 235..

[greg g]

Ain't it Ironic that the last ford designed flathead V8 was built by chrylser??? Yep they owned most of Simca in France and South America. Aparrently Chrylser engineers cured their ills in the final years of production.

[Rodney Bullock]

I was at a cruz spot this moring with the hawk. A guy comes in with a D14 I think 1940 Dodge sedan nice car. We talk for a while then someone brought up 6cly. The Studebaker 6cly came in two types with a straight 8 The 6cly I have in the champion is 169.6 now that is small. The car accomadates the size of the motor. It also gets better gas milrage then any 6 cly out there and can do 65 miles an hour easy, I have don it. The Commander 6 cly is bigger and faster and more durable. I do not know what that motor can do because I don't have one.

The Chevy 235 I have is a 100 mph motor I have done it so I klnow however That motor is mated to a 4 in the floor trans. Kepp it coming I like this:)

[B-Watson]

The first Chevrolet V8 was built in 1917-18. Back then Chevrolets were not the low-priced cars they became in the 1920's.

The early 1920's Chevrolet that was recalled was the Copper-Cooled model. It was a 4-cylinder, cast iron block, ohv six with copped fins brazed to the block. The idea was that the copper fins would pull the heat from the block and dissipate to the atmosphere. Neat idea in theory, but a disaster in reality.

It was put into production long before the bugs were worked out, although all work on it ceased when production was cancelled. Apparently it sounded like a metal drum filled with nuts and bolts being shaken when it was running. All but one was destroyed, and that one is in the Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn.

As for Mopar's flathead sixes, they were tough. Yes, compared to today's engines they needed overhauling more often, but compared to their opposition they were very indestructable. Oils, greases, metals, etc. have all improved over the years.

Mopar flathead sixes' oiling system, aluminum pistons, and replaceable bearings were decades ahead of Chevrolet and others while Ford's cooling system was primitive compared to the Mopar flathead six. Ford would not get the V8 to run cool until 1949 and it was not until the 235 came out in 1950 that Chevrolet caught up to Mopar's 1930's engineering, although the 215 continued on for three more years. The Chevrolet engines were called "Cast Iron Wonders" due to the cast iron blocks, cast iron heads and cast iron pistons.

In the early 1950's Plymouth Concord coupes and fastback sedans were used for racing - distance racing, not quarter mile and the like. And not due to top speed, but longevity. The Plymouths would win due to the fact they could be driven for 500 miles with no problems while the V8 models, driven at higher speeds, would blow up. Real life tortoise vs the hare.

So those simple, humble Mopar flathead sixes, while not engineering marvels, gave the owner of a Mopar product an extremely reliable, tough, easy to repair, and economical to run engine.

[B-Watson]

Hey Fred, this question has always interest me as well. I was told that in the old days the Ford with it's 4 cly model A use to eat dirt because everyone was using a 6 cly. Henry and son jumped from a 4 to an 8 in 32. The 8 was ok however it had it's problemd with over heating. The early stovebolt was pretty trouble free after the second incarnation. One must remember that mopar 6cly were pretty strong as well after their second incarnation. Chey developed a v8 in the 1920's but it was recalled and all examples destroyed. I believe the frist Ford 6cly were not good. The later 6cly used in war time were very good.

A flathead 8 is a wonderful thing, it brings to mind the birth of hot rodding. I think the more support a engine has in the aftermarket the better it is, most all aftermarket companies have flathead Ford everything. Cams intake carbs. The flathead world is vast. The flathead used to whip up on the chevy folks until 1955 after that chevy never looked back. They can thank Ed Cole for that.

When it comes to HP the trans used behind the various engines tell the story of who's engine is better. Three-on the-tree hurt the effectiveness. I have cars and trucks with 6cly in them and they all have good and bad points. The Mopar is more interesting as it has small and big block 6cly, chevy 6cly only come one or two ways. The 216 is a babbit, dipper motor. It is reliable however after I think 55 it was a 235 insert bearing beast It is more powerful than a 217 or 218 I can't comment on the big block 6cly as I don't have one. I have driven a ford 6cly and it's only ok. With all the speed equipment there is for chevy 6cly it can be made to run real fast. The mopar has it's folks developing some nice stuff as well. All in all I would like to see some Old style drag racing ith the 6cly manual shift guy's and put it all to rest, wouldn't that be nice:)

The first Ford six was the 1907 Ford Model K. It was not successful and Henry vowed to never build a six again. Thus the jump from a 4 in the Model A and B to the V8 for 1932.

Ford introduced a smaller V8 for 1937, 2.2-litre, that was popular in Europe but a bit of a dud in North America. Thus the flathead six of 1941 (not available in Canada) which turned out to be more powerful than the V8 used in the Ford. Which is why Ford adopted the Mercury 239 V8 in 1947.

An ohv Ford six replaced the flathead for 1952, and though smaller than its predecessor, was just as powerful. (And not available in Canada, this time until mid-1956). A new ohv Ford V8 appeared for 1954 (1955 in Canada).

The babbit bearing Chevrolet six was used through to 1953 and was mated only to a 3-speed manual transmission. It also had a dipper lubrication system and cast iron pistons. The 235 of 1950 introduced for the Powerglide models caught up to Mopar's 1930's engineered flathead six - aluminum pistons, pressure lubrication and insert bearings.

Small block Mopar flathead 6 engines appeared for 1933 and the large block for 1934. Both received full length cylinder cooling for 1935. And that was about it through to the end in 1972. Changes over the years were increasing compression ratios, sizes and minor improvements. They all had exhaust valve seat inserts.

As for power, the Mopar sixes were no slouches against their respective opponents. From the factory none of them were balls of fire.

[Rusty O'Toole]

If we are comparing like to like, let us stick with the engines used from the mid thirties to the early fifties when the flathead Ford, Chev OHV six and the Plymouth and Dodge flatheads were the most popular cars.

In this group the Ford was definitely the hottest performer when it came to sheer speed. It also had the hottest ignition system and would start in extreme cold weather when other cars would not.

It was prone to overheating if the cooling system was not in top notch condition. The exhaust passages went through the water jackets and put a lot of extra heat into the cooling water.

Fords at this time made their name on their motor and nothing else. Their suspension and brakes were primitive. They still had mechanical brakes up to 1939 and leaf springs and solid front axle till 1948. Plymouth had hydraulic brakes from the first, in 1927, and got independent suspension on all models by 1939.

Chevrolet offered IFS, first the Dubonet knee action system which was on the lousy side, but they soon copied the Chrysler system. They also adopted hydraulic brakes before Ford but after Plymouth.

Chevrolets were good reliable cars but not made for high speed. I have been told by several people that if you took one over 50 MPH you were asking for trouble. Either a burned out bearing, or if you pushed it hard enough, the top would come off the #6 piston. I was in a 51 Chev one night when this happened. My dad was at the wheel. The Chev had given us good service for a year or 2 but he could not resist the temptation to "see what she would do" on the new 401 Hiway, the first hi speed 4 lane hiway in our area. This must have been in 1961. The piston did not "pop" at speed, but when he lifted his foot off the gas. Possibly the combination of high revs plus the vacuum sucked the top off the piston when closed the throttle.

Plymouth was considered reliable and a plugger but not a performance car. The design of the motor was biased towards simplicity and long life in many ways. However if you beat on them they would haul pretty good. In the end, high speed would take its toll usually in the form of the rings breaking up and the top ring land breaking off the pistons, or burned out rod bearings. They would stand the gaff longer than a Chevy though. In fact I have seen them still running without protest with the rings shot and the pistons breaking up. They were well down on power but still started and ran.

As far as starting in bad weather goes, they had a reputation for not starting when it was wet. But if you look at illustrations of the flathead six when it was new, it came with special rubber spark plug boots to keep off dampness. I have never seen a car that still had these on, they got discarded after a few years or the plug wires replaced with cheap generic ones and after that, the dampness got in. In stock form they would start fine.

The Canadian Dodge Regent wasn't bad in its day. It was a Plymouth body with Dodge trim and the slightly larger Dodge motor. They could give the Fords a run for their money but the Fords would pull ahead.

......................................................................................

Here is a story told me by an old time truck driver. He held the Dodge flathead six in high esteem, and considered it superior to the Ford V8 in truck service. Here is why.

During WW2 he drove a 5 ton truck delivering "wartime houses". These were small prefab 2 bedroom houses. I 1/2 story saltbox type frame houses that were built by the thousands to house workers at the new war plants that were being built.

His job was to deliver the houses with a 5 ton truck. At first they delivered a house on 2 trucks, later they added a trailer and delivered a whole house with 1 truck.

Usually he drove a Dodge but one day his truck was in for service and they gave him a Ford. When they told him his delivery was to Hamilton he protested that the Ford would never pull the Hamilton Heights hill. The dispatcher would not listen, as he had delivered to the same area before with no problems.

So he left the yard but sure enough, he got half way up the hill and the Ford stalled out. Nothing he could do would get it up the hill (remember he was towing a trailer as well).

He had to block the wheels and leave the truck in the road until a cop and a tow truck could be summoned. In the end he got up the hill with the aid of the tow truck.

At that time a Ford just did not have the power of a Dodge when it came to pulling a heavy load.

Edited September 4, 2011 by Rusty O'Toole

[Rusty O'Toole]

As for the larger 251 and 265 engines they were used in DeSoto and Chrysler which were heavy cars, and were handicapped with Fluid Drive.

They were very smooth running, quiet, and comfortable cars but not known for speed. Compared to competitors like Studebaker Commander 6, Packard 8, Pontiac 8, Buick 8, Mercury V8 and Hudson Hornet 6 they were on the slow side. On the other hand they were as fast as, or faster than the Frazer 6, Pontiac 6, Hudson Wasp 6 or Nash 6.

The transmission meant they did not take off like a ball of fire but once they got rolling they could cover ground pretty good. Cruising speeds of 60 to 70 MPH were no problem.

[40plyrod]

As far as starting in bad weather goes' date=' they had a reputation for not starting when it was wet. But if you look at illustrations of the flathead six when it was new, it came with special rubber spark plug boots to keep off dampness. I have never seen a car that still had these on, they got discarded after a few years or the plug wires replaced with cheap generic ones and after that, the dampness got in. In stock form they would start fine.

.[/quote']

That's funny.... a little while back I was trying to get my plymouth motor starting for the first time since I bought it and my dad came by and said, "not a good day to try son....Too cloudy" These motors are tough as guts though. We have one in are sawdust truck and it gets no maintainence, hasn't had an oil change in this century( and most of the last), has frozen and cracked the block twice, no air breather (sawdust enviroment) and still starts and runs. I'm amazed by it and it's one of the reasons I'm keeping the six in my 40.

[Rusty O'Toole]

If you want your Plymouth or other flathead Chrysler product to start in damp weather, Andy Bernbaum has the ignition wire kits with spark plug galoshes.

[Young Ed]

I just returned from a 5 day trip during which it rained 4 of the 5. My car started every morning without difficulty. I suspect most of the hard to start rumors are based on when the cars were just plain worn out. My grandfather had a 39 plymouth business coupe either new or close to it. That lasted him through the war when he got on a waiting list and was able to buy a d24 I think a 47 model. His next one was a 51-52 dodge bought just out of warranty that had a squeak that the owner couldn't get rid of. Grandpa took it to sears for new shocks and cured the noise after buying it cheap. I never heard him comment on any of these 3 being hard starters.

Edited September 5, 2011 by Young Ed

[Plymouthy Adams]

I have seen only one set of these ever installed on a working running flathead...must be a miracle they made it to the show..