1 Ton - Which Engine to Use ???

[billrigsby]

 

Doing some more research, I am finding that my thoughts are correct, I do not have the stock engine for my truck (T146)

I wish I could remember the reasoning for this? It must have had some 'terminal' issue when I broke it down.

 

So, what I do have are; 

T306 23" 218ci Dodge Truck B-3-B, B-4-B  1951-1953 (disassembled)

T118 25" 228ci or 236ci Dodge Truck WF, WFA, WFX, WFXA, 20-22, 30-34, 36 1941-1947 (disassembled)

D34 23" 230ci Dodge Car Dodge 6 Custom 1950 (assembled with transmission) (stuck)

 

So, more questions. The truck should have a 230ci, but I am not sure about using the Car engine in a truck,

• Can I assume that a 218ci, can be made into a 230ci by using the 230 crankshaft/rod combination?
• What issues might I run into going with the T118, being two inches longer than the T306? Plus it has a stuck water tube I need to work on.
• Is the only way to determine between 228ci or 236ci, the bore and stroke? Engine is disassembled so the stroke will be difficult.

 

 

So "what would you do"?

 

 

Thanks, Bill

 

 

 

Edited July 28, 2020 by billrigsby

[Los_Control]

Put together what ya got?

It seems the 218 and 230 is same block, but the rotating assembly is different, crank, rods, flywheel. There may be some advantages to having the 230 crank and the extra bolt holes.

Fluid drive trans comes into mind ... either way you go, is not a numbers matching build ... use the best parts you have and build it ... What is a 230, 5 hp more then a 218?

With fabrication you can make the 25" motor fit ... Is it ready to go, or does it need rebuilt? Without looking it up, I doubt the 25" motor much more HP.

 

Working on my truck and not driving it on the street yet.   The little 218 has a lot of torque, they are not a bad engine. I laugh at mine, A few months ago I was moving my truck in the driveway ... am sitting on a 5 gallon bucket and floor is cut out, gas pedal is hung up by a piece of wire ... a little sketchy ... I by accident left a little burnout patch in my driveway ...Today I moved it, it spun the tires in the gravel ... the little 218 likes to run, was used for decades it is a good motor. Build any of them, do not be ashamed to have a 218.

[JBNeal]

T306 has a more robust rear main seal, timing cover seal, and the internal thermostat bypass head...a good 218 with block decked and head shaved to get 9:1 CR can make upwards of 100-120bhp, especially when outfitted with a 2bbl carb and split headers...230 will get ya slightly more torque but a well built higher CR 218 can give better power than a stock 230...but magnaflux the block + head before getting too carried away...one of the advantages of the 25" engines is that certain configurations had a full flow oil filtration system designed into the block, but for whatever reason they weren't put into Pilot-House production...I hear that 265 can be a monster 

[ggdad1951]

FEF has a car engine and is a 1 ton....hand I was dealt.  Works fine.

[Old CWO]

I would put together the better of your two 23" blocks/heads with the 230 rotating assembly  (assuming it's good.)  You already have it so it's "free" horsepower so to speak.  Small gains in HP/TQ are large by percentage in lower powered engines; you can usually tell the difference in performance.

[Old CWO]

The more I think about it, with the parts you have on hand I might:

 

Use the block with the most wear/taper in the cylinders and punch it big. Egge has pistons and rings in .100 oversize, which would carry the engine up to about 245 CI and make it a tiny bit less undersquare.  Based on a desktop dyno type program I have it theoretically would develop around 150 HP and 220 TQ with 8:1 compression and enough fuel/air.  At .080 over you're still really close to that, at least in theory (148/215).

 

Those numbers (if realistic) are markedly better than the factory ratings on a fresh 218 or 230.  Since there's no additional cost over a stock rebuild and you still have a spare block, I don't see why it isn't worth exploring.  As the old saying goes, "there is no replacement for displacement."

 

 

Edited July 30, 2020 by Old CWO

[48Dodger]

The cars are more likely heavier than a stock truck.

The truck was designed to carry heavier loads.

The difference was mostly handled in the transmission and suspension, not the engine.

Most rebuilds are for nostalgia, not busting a hump.

 

I say build a solid engine of your choice.

Shore up the suspension, tranny, tires a little taller than stock,  and drive it.

 

48D

[billrigsby]

 

Finally got around to measuring the bore of the T306, 218;

 

1=3.256

2=3.254

3=3.248

4=3.2515

5=3.2505

6=3.254

 

Need to at least remove the head from the D34,230 to measure them,

may break down the whole engine, Will give me more room in the shop.

[wallytoo]

1 hour ago, billrigsby said:

 

Finally got around to measuring the bore of the T306, 218;

 

1=3.256

2=3.254

3=3.248

4=3.2515

5=3.2505

6=3.254

 

Need to at least remove the head from the D34,230 to measure them,

may break down the whole engine, Will give me more room in the shop.

averages?  because you want to measure in at least 3 places in each cylinder, to determine how much taper the bore has.

[wallytoo]

On 7/30/2020 at 3:31 AM, 48Dodger said:

The cars are more likely heavier than a stock truck.

 

 

could be true in the 1/2 and 3/4-ton versions, but probably not in the 1-ton and up versions.  the OP, mr. rigsby, has a 1-ton.

[billrigsby]

4 hours ago, wallytoo said:

averages?  because you want to measure in at least 3 places in each cylinder, to determine how much taper the bore has.

 

 

My understanding was top and bottom to figure taper, and side to side to figure out of round?

Probably going to have it bored, but need to measure the second 230 to decide what to do.

[48Dodger]

5 hours ago, wallytoo said:

 

could be true in the 1/2 and 3/4-ton versions, but probably not in the 1-ton and up versions.  the OP, mr. rigsby, has a 1-ton.

 

I have a 1955 Imperial that weighs in @4500 plus pounds.

I have several 1.5 ton trucks that are around the same if not lighter.

That's what I was basing my thoughts with.

 

48D

[wallytoo]

7 hours ago, 48Dodger said:

 

I have a 1955 Imperial that weighs in @4500 plus pounds.

I have several 1.5 ton trucks that are around the same if not lighter.

That's what I was basing my thoughts with.

 

48D

 

 

are the trucks just chassis models with no rear "utility body"?

 

my '48 1.5-ton weighs in at just over 6500 lbs empty.  that's without the wood sides.  those must add another 300 lbs (12 feet long and 3.5 feet high).

[billrigsby]

 

Started to tear down D34 Yesterday got this far.

 

 

Lots of parts to add to the collection

 

 

 

 

Finishing up today, now I know why it was stuck, all the pistons move freely, but the mains!

Glad I did not have to try and lift that crank, flywheel and clutch out by manual labor!

 

 

 

 

Now to the cam and valves.

 

 

[billrigsby]

 

There's always one, isn't there.

Number one intake is frozen solid, trying a soak of acetone and ATF, hopefully it will penatrate.

[DJ194950]

Bill,

 

Manuel would probably have sued you for the new and all future back problems!  ?

 

DJ

[billrigsby]

 

Okay, Cam is out block is degreased, time for a cocktail

[billrigsby]

1 hour ago, DJ194950 said:

Bill,

 

Manuel would probably have sued you for the new and all future back problems!  ?

 

DJ

 

Yeah I already have enough back problems I don't need anymore, one surgery is enough for me in one lifetime

[billrigsby]

 

DONE, for sale Dodge L head engine needs a little work LOL

 

NOT FOR SALE, FAKE-OUT

 

 

 

[billrigsby]

5 hours ago, billrigsby said:

 

There's always one, isn't there.

Number one intake is frozen solid, trying a soak of acetone and ATF, hopefully it will penatrate.

 

And I'm sure that contributed to the fact that the engine would not turn over

[billrigsby]

 

Well a productive weekend to say the least I got the D34 - 230 tore down, all the parts generally cleaned up and put in my crates outside of the shop.

 

While I well definitely go with a 230 block I'm not sure which one yet, but I came upon something that has pretty much made up my decision on the transmission. I remember seeing something that 3 speeds did not take PTOs and the D34 had a PTO transmission and sure enough it's a 4-speed so I will definitely go that route which means no fluid drive. I was al

really looking forward to that but three speed fluid drive versus 4 speed I think I'll go to the four speed route, unless there's really good reasons not to?

 

opinions?

 

Out of room on my cart for any more block/transmission/bellhousing combinations.....

 

Edited August 9, 2020 by billrigsby

[Merle Coggins]

You really don’t gain much with a 4 speed over a 3 speed except for the granny low, which is really only good for pulling stumps, or going really slow in parades. Although, as you mention, you gain the PTO mount. If you plan to use a PTO for something then by all means use a 4 speed. And if you do decide to go the 4 speed route be sure to choose a synchronized version, unless you want to double clutch your shifts. 3 speeds are all synchronized, at least from this era. 

[billrigsby]

11 minutes ago, Merle Coggins said:

And if you do decide to go the 4 speed route be sure to choose a synchronized version, unless you want to double clutch your shifts. 3 speeds are all synchronized, at least from this era. 

 

Well I knew the three speeds were synchros, I did not know anything about the four speeds so I'll have to look into the one I've got if it's not a synchro I'm not going that route.

 

Just when you thought you had it all fitterd out! ?

[billrigsby]

22 minutes ago, Merle Coggins said:

the granny low, which is really only good for pulling stumps

 

YEAH, that ain't happening after I go through all this work. ?

Edited August 9, 2020 by billrigsby

[Los_Control]

Some of us have stumps in our lives ....