Don Coatney Posted July 12, 2014 Report Posted July 12, 2014 Different piston arms and some design differences on the piston arm caps.....218's arm caps cut for lock washers and later 230's I think ? ...... dropped the piston arm cap lock washers and cut piston arm cap lock washer groove. Just some more minor 218/230 differences Anyone confused yet? I am a bit confused but I think I recall reading something about this in Hot Arm Magazine. 3 Quote
Jeff Balazs Posted July 12, 2014 Report Posted July 12, 2014 I wonder what Wise Way Tu would have to say about this yoke? 1 Quote
Todd B Posted July 13, 2014 Report Posted July 13, 2014 Awesome video, thanks for posting!!!!!!!! Mark, I probably should not tell you this but I needed body parts for DC Pete, so last winter I brought a 50 F into my shop and ended up stripping the complete truck down. I put the parts up in my loft and I wanted to have fun and learn more about the inside of an engine so I pulled apart a 230 block just to see how it works. I drove the truck to my shop several years ago and it ran fine but I did not think there was a market for those old engines. Sorry man. I kept all the pistons and crank and want to possible make art of it someday. I scraped the block because it was to heavy to get upstairs in my loft plus I needed beer money. Quote
Young Ed Posted July 13, 2014 Report Posted July 13, 2014 Awesome video, thanks for posting!!!!!!!! Mark, I probably should not tell you this but I needed body parts for DC Pete, so last winter I brought a 50 F into my shop and ended up stripping the complete truck down. I put the parts up in my loft and I wanted to have fun and learn more about the inside of an engine so I pulled apart a 230 block just to see how it works. I drove the truck to my shop several years ago and it ran fine but I did not think there was a market for those old engines. Sorry man. I kept all the pistons and crank and want to possible make art of it someday. I scraped the block because it was to heavy to get upstairs in my loft plus I needed beer money. The crank and rods would turn his 218 into a 230. Quote
DJ194950 Posted July 13, 2014 Report Posted July 13, 2014 He would need a block too. Don't understand why.? I put a 230 crank and rods in a previously 218 motor. Works great! DJ Quote
ggdad1951 Posted July 13, 2014 Report Posted July 13, 2014 Awesome video, thanks for posting!!!!!!!! Mark, I probably should not tell you this but I needed body parts for DC Pete, so last winter I brought a 50 F into my shop and ended up stripping the complete truck down. I put the parts up in my loft and I wanted to have fun and learn more about the inside of an engine so I pulled apart a 230 block just to see how it works. I drove the truck to my shop several years ago and it ran fine but I did not think there was a market for those old engines. Sorry man. I kept all the pistons and crank and want to possible make art of it someday. I scraped the block because it was to heavy to get upstairs in my loft plus I needed beer money. I can always take the crank and piston rods off your hands JIC. Quote
Dodgeb4ya Posted July 13, 2014 Author Report Posted July 13, 2014 Don't understand why.? I put a 230 crank and rods in a previously 218 motor. Works great! DJ He has a small hairline crack in his 218 block. 1 Quote
Young Ed Posted July 13, 2014 Report Posted July 13, 2014 He has a small hairline crack in his 218 block. gotcha that is true but he could use another 218 block which should be easily found. we just put one out for the scrap guys even Quote
Dodgeb4ya Posted July 13, 2014 Author Report Posted July 13, 2014 Yep.. blocks are the same as most know. Quote
Todd B Posted July 13, 2014 Report Posted July 13, 2014 I can always take the crank and piston rods off your hands JIC. All yours. Quote
Jeff Balazs Posted July 13, 2014 Report Posted July 13, 2014 This brings up something that I have been puzzled by since I started learning about these engines a couple of years now. There are a few vague references to the idea that the engines used in the trucks were purpose built for the trucks. And then of course there is the engine numbering system that clearly denotes a truck engine from those produced for the cars. This has had me wondering what those differences might have been? Surely the most obvious one is the sump pan......but what are the other differences? Why develop and use an entirely separate engine numbering system for this very obvious but superficial difference? Unless there were some less visible differences to go along with it......??? I don't have enough experience with these engines or access to shop data to come up with any answers. But I did come up with something interesting about a potential difference between the 218 and the 230 engines. Looking through the Chrysler Industrial engine manual I found one notable difference in the fact that the original pistons used in the 6 & 6A engines (230's) were specified as Aluminum as opposed to Cast Iron as used in all the other models (218, 236 & 250) Again I am no expert but this would seem to imply that a different balance factor was employed for the 230's crankshaft. I started getting curious about all this when I discovered that the engine in my 52 was not the original engine. It is a T342 which would have been fitted into a 54-56 medium wt. truck. It is a 230 which I verified during a partial tear down. It is a bit interesting as it was mated to a fluid drive 4 speed in my truck and I doubt that it was fitted to one of these originally. I never tore it down far enough to determine exactly how this was accomplished.....or if it was just a simple factory bolt up. Jeff Quote
48Dodger Posted July 13, 2014 Report Posted July 13, 2014 Technicially you would get more pep out of a 218......with the longer stroke of a 230 you get more leverage and low-end torque. That extra torque or "pep" would be the first 10 feet off the line and then you'd top out. You could increase the HP to make more high rpm power....but that's not the point of the 230, it was made for that first 10 feet....it's a 1 ton work truck...not a 1 ton race truck. Since the 218 is a shorter stroke motor than the 230, it would respond better to the increase in HP in the high rpm range. Of course I'm just comparing a 218 and 230....they use the same block and outboard euipment....the only difference being the crank and connecting rods to increase leverage. Leverage is the point I'm making here. HP is the ability of the system to replenish the cylinders with fuel, to meet the demand in other words. Torque is the final product, based on gearing etc. A Bulldozer can knock over a house using as little as 80 to 120 hp....it's all leverage. If a race car was to run the 1/4 mile twice, using two different motors, say a 440 big block and then a 340 small block, and both had 500 hp......the 440 would win...leverage. If you change the race to a road course, the 440 would lose. HP and Torque always cross at 5250 rpm....HP dropping at that point and Torque rising. So leverage is always king....gears rule. These are generalized thoughts of course, and you can always find exceptions.....but as far as 230 vs 218?....meh. Both awesome motors. 48D 1 Quote
48Dodger Posted July 13, 2014 Report Posted July 13, 2014 Hey Jeff. Its been my understanding its mostly routing the parts with numbers. You and I look at engines and body panels and identify them visually. The factory worker isn't trained that way. So even thou it might be the same block or same this or that...it the routing number that directs the flow of traffic. 48D Quote
Young Ed Posted July 13, 2014 Report Posted July 13, 2014 This brings up something that I have been puzzled by since I started learning about these engines a couple of years now. There are a few vague references to the idea that the engines used in the trucks were purpose built for the trucks. And then of course there is the engine numbering system that clearly denotes a truck engine from those produced for the cars. This has had me wondering what those differences might have been? Surely the most obvious one is the sump pan......but what are the other differences? Why develop and use an entirely separate engine numbering system for this very obvious but superficial difference? Unless there were some less visible differences to go along with it......??? I don't have enough experience with these engines or access to shop data to come up with any answers. But I did come up with something interesting about a potential difference between the 218 and the 230 engines. Looking through the Chrysler Industrial engine manual I found one notable difference in the fact that the original pistons used in the 6 & 6A engines (230's) were specified as Aluminum as opposed to Cast Iron as used in all the other models (218, 236 & 250) Again I am no expert but this would seem to imply that a different balance factor was employed for the 230's crankshaft. I started getting curious about all this when I discovered that the engine in my 52 was not the original engine. It is a T342 which would have been fitted into a 54-56 medium wt. truck. It is a 230 which I verified during a partial tear down. It is a bit interesting as it was mated to a fluid drive 4 speed in my truck and I doubt that it was fitted to one of these originally. I never tore it down far enough to determine exactly how this was accomplished.....or if it was just a simple factory bolt up. Jeff The factory marked all the engines. Not just the truck ones. As Tim said I'm sure a lot of it was to identify them as built and later on. Just like having a number stamped on a fuel pump or a carb so you can get the right rebuild kit. The cars as far as I've ever seen also had aluminum pistons. The only really truck only diff I've heard of was sodium filled valves on the really HD trucks and I'm not sure even a 1ton would have gotten those. You might have gotten a little more HD set of rings too. Quote
Don Coatney Posted July 13, 2014 Report Posted July 13, 2014 Any difference in cam specifications car to truck? Quote
Young Ed Posted July 13, 2014 Report Posted July 13, 2014 I show the cam as part # 869997 being used in 1941-48 plymouth cars and 41 plymouth trucks and 41-47 dodge 1/2 to 1 ton trucks. Interesting that plymouth cars and trucks 1940 back to 36 all use 601266. Something must have changed for 1941. Quote
Dodgeb4ya Posted July 13, 2014 Author Report Posted July 13, 2014 (edited) There are at least four different cam part numbers for the 23" engines from 1941-54. Don't know whats different. Edited July 13, 2014 by Dodgeb4ya Quote
ggdad1951 Posted July 13, 2014 Report Posted July 13, 2014 (edited) just blame the engineers and their numbering fetishes....everyone at my company does.... He has a small hairline crack in his 218 block. the crack in the water jacket has been "sealed" for now. The POR exhaust manifold patch goop is holding pretty well for now. If I ever have to pull the engine, yah, I'd look for a better block. Edited July 13, 2014 by ggdad1951 1 Quote
TodFitch Posted July 13, 2014 Report Posted July 13, 2014 I show the cam as part # 869997 being used in 1941-48 plymouth cars and 41 plymouth trucks and 41-47 dodge 1/2 to 1 ton trucks. Interesting that plymouth cars and trucks 1940 back to 36 all use 601266. Something must have changed for 1941. Make that back to 1933: The 1933 PC, PD as well as the 1934 PE and PF used 601266 as well. Quote
Jeff Balazs Posted July 13, 2014 Report Posted July 13, 2014 I suppose Tim probably is correct........tracking numbers for the factory is about as good as an explanation as I can imagine. Makes Don Bunn's statement about these engines being purposely built for trucks all that more mystifying though. It is interesting to try to get a handle on all the many permutations that were created over the long production time. Especially when trying to decipher it all 60 years later. Some of it is pretty straightforward.......but then I come across a specific part number like 1122-511for a 230 bare block and I begin to wonder. Perhaps there is more to this than meets the eye? Why a different part number if it is exactly the same as a 218 block? Jeff Quote
Don Coatney Posted July 13, 2014 Report Posted July 13, 2014 Perhaps it came from a different foundry. Quote
Jeff Balazs Posted July 13, 2014 Report Posted July 13, 2014 Well I missed a note......the different number is for block assemblies not bare blocks. So much for that mystery. Jeff Quote
Dave72dt Posted July 13, 2014 Report Posted July 13, 2014 (edited) It doesn't take much to warrant a number change. Change an oil passage, coolant passage, add a bolt hole to accommodate a different or new accessory, size of a seal bore and it needs a new number or as simple as tracking for warranty reasons or quality control. A block set up for bypass or full flow oil may take a different number for example. It's not that you can't make a 218 work as a 230 or a bypass as a full flow, something is specific to those 230s. Or something not too subtle, like an engine assembly compared to a bare block. I can see a number change for that Edited July 13, 2014 by Dave72dt Quote
ggdad1951 Posted July 14, 2014 Report Posted July 14, 2014 Engineering rules on part numbers are the three f's. Fit Form Function. Any one of the the changed on a part requires a new number. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.