230 main bearings....For Torque Converter????

[kencombs]

I see main bearings speced for 'with torque converter'.  I know at one time a different part number was listed for automatic trans 230s versus a standard shift.  But, the crankshaft dimensions are the same.

 

Anybody know what the actual bearing difference may be?  I suspect a stronger material on the thrust surface, but I'm guessing..

 

And, would these be useable in a standard shift??

 

Edit to add:  AFAIK, all current listings show one PN to service auto and manual trans.  The ones I've seen for 'torque converter' where NOS

Edited October 9, 2018 by kencombs
edited title

[Dartgame]

Interesting. I would think there is little to no difference. For muscle era mopar v8’s there is no difference.

[B-Watson]

The 1953-1954 Canadian parts book shows Plymouth 6 cylinder crankshafts - 1953-54 USA (217.6-cid)

With Hy-Drive - 1531 889

No Hy-Drive - 1531 694

 

1954 USA (230.6-cid - Starting at Engine No. 243001)

All - with and without Hy-Drive - 15570707

 

The bearing cap for number 4 main is different on engines with torque converter -

1953-54 -  Without T.C. (standard size) - 1238 434

1953-54 -  With T.C. (standard size) - 1450 682

 

The number 4 main bearing is listed as 2.5000x1.5890 in Automotive Industries Statistical issue for 1953 and 1954 for all 23" block engines..

 

The V8 engines had no differences between TC and no TC.  Same with DeSoto and Chrysler six cylinder engines. 

 

Canadian Plymouth/Dodge engines also showed differences between engines with and without Hy-Drive.  But the numbers are different from the U.S. Plymouth as the Canadian-built cars used the 25" block.

 

US Dodge 6 changed the crankshaft at 1954 engine serial number 17001 from 870 001 to 1557 707.

 

The only common thread is the Hy-Drive engines, with their engine oil system supplying the torque converter as well.

 

[kencombs]

6 hours ago, B-Watson said:

The 1953-1954 Canadian parts book shows Plymouth 6 cylinder crankshafts - 1953-54 USA (217.6-cid)

With Hy-Drive - 1531 889

No Hy-Drive - 1531 694

 

1954 USA (230.6-cid - Starting at Engine No. 243001)

All - with and without Hy-Drive - 15570707

 

The bearing cap for number 4 main is different on engines with torque converter -

1953-54 -  Without T.C. (standard size) - 1238 434

1953-54 -  With T.C. (standard size) - 1450 682

 

The number 4 main bearing is listed as 2.5000x1.5890 in Automotive Industries Statistical issue for 1953 and 1954 for all 23" block engines..

 

The V8 engines had no differences between TC and no TC.  Same with DeSoto and Chrysler six cylinder engines. 

 

Canadian Plymouth/Dodge engines also showed differences between engines with and without Hy-Drive.  But the numbers are different from the U.S. Plymouth as the Canadian-built cars used the 25" block.

 

US Dodge 6 changed the crankshaft at 1954 engine serial number 17001 from 870 001 to 1557 707.

 

The only common thread is the Hy-Drive engines, with their engine oil system supplying the torque converter as well.

 

Great info!  thanks for posting.  So, if the bearing size is the same, I wonder what the bearing cap difference might be??  And would the TC bearing fit a non TC cap?

After thinking about it some more, I suspect the cap difference is in the oil flow to the Hy-drive, as the engine and trans share oil supplies.

 

I'll see if there is a flow diagram on the net somewhere.

[Jeff Balazs]

I am pretty certain it is just a material based difference. They offered upgraded rear main bearings for the fluid drive equipped vehicles. I fitted this on my Fluid drive truck.

Jeff

[Plymouthy Adams]

the 46-54 Plymouth Repair Manual states on the rear lower bearing half for cars with  HY-Drive Torque Convertor (not to be confused with fluid drive), use a lower bearing half that DOES NOT have the oil drain back groove or hole machined in the bearing surface.  

[Jeff Balazs]

Does the OP actually have Hy-Drive? His initial post included a query as to if these bearings could be used in a standard shift application.....

Jeff

[kencombs]

Jeff, you're right.  Working on a standard shift application, but have seen the TC mains for sale cheaper than 'normal'.  And,looking to see if they could be used.