PDA

View Full Version : Did Chevrolet ever make a slant six engine?



winchman
05-30-2012, 08:37 PM
One of the guys in the welding class was talking about having a early-'70s Nova with a 292ci slant six engine.

I've never seen or heard of this engine, and I can't find anything about it by googling. Everything with slant six ends up being Chrysler, Pontiac, or BMW.

Does Chevy slant six really exist? Anybody got a link to a picture of one?

sasquatch
05-30-2012, 08:45 PM
His information is wrong. Firstly the early 70,s nova would have come with a 230 Cu. Inch inline 6. The next was a 250 cu. inch, the only difference was a bit longer stroke. The big 292 engine had the same 3 7/8 bore as the other two, but had an almost 4inch stroke, requiring that the block was way deeper than the other two. (these were truck engines.)

Earlier back before the 230 first came out they had a 194 cu. inch and of course the little "Iron Duke" as they were called,, a 153 Cu. inch 4 cyl.

3jaw
05-30-2012, 08:50 PM
No. The engine was not slanted in the engine bay. But they did come with a STRAIGHT six.

firbikrhd1
05-30-2012, 09:28 PM
Chrysler was the manufacturer of the slant six in 170, 198 and 225 cubic inches. Great engines that ran almost forever.

darryl
05-30-2012, 09:32 PM
Dodge, Plymouth, Chrysler

sasquatch
05-30-2012, 09:35 PM
(Haybines and square balers too!!!!!!!!! ) :D

Great engines!!

dfw5914
05-30-2012, 09:41 PM
Known as the "Leaning Tower of Power":D

sasquatch
05-30-2012, 09:49 PM
Chrysler actually came out with a "Hi-Po" kit for these 225 engines at one time, i believe it was a different camshaft, fourbarrel, and dual point dist. plate.

aww yes the distributor,, one of the stupidest set ups to work on down between the engine and the inner fender.:(

jim davies
05-30-2012, 10:42 PM
"...One of the guys in the welding class was talking about having a early-'70s Nova with a 292ci slant six engine."

probably related to the media "expert" who saw an "AK-16 semi automatic machinegun"

mrriggs
05-30-2012, 11:04 PM
A guy I work with has several times mentioned the 1960 Ford Falcon he owned way back when. He refers to it as having a slant six. Not much point in correcting him, I know what he meant.

saltmine
05-30-2012, 11:20 PM
No "slant six" from General Motors. Chrysler Corp is the only one.

Interesting note on "how it got that way"....

In the late 1950's, Chrysler did a "redesign" of their Dodge Dart, Plymouth Valiant, models. The prototype was lower and wider than previous Chrysler platforms. They wanted to use the ridiculously reliable, low powered, three-main-bearing side-valve (flathead) six that they had been using for too many years to be proud of. It fit, but barely, under the new, sleeker models hood. But the power wasn't there. Chrysler engineers decided to "modernize" the old boat-anchor with an overhead valve cylinder head. The head produced the gain in horsepower they were looking for, but....it was too tall for the body it was supposed to go into.. The solution came when the engineering staff leaned the engine over 30 to the right of the vehicle centerline. To keep the carburetor, and air filter low, they devised a long runner intake manifold, which, quite by accident, improved the power and low-end torque even more. The fact that the distributor, ignition wires and fuel pump was never taken into account, when designed, made them a bit of a job to service. The engine did suffer from poor fuel distribution throughout it's service life, and remains, to this day, as one of the heaviest inline six-cylinder engines ever put in a modern passenger car. Eventually, the crankcase had to be redesigned to allow for a seven-main-bearing crankshaft. And, yes, Virginia, performance options were made available for them, though not many of these parts were ever sold. The "slant six" did lend itself to an endless number of industrial applications, though.

spongerich
05-30-2012, 11:38 PM
A guy I work with has several times mentioned the 1960 Ford Falcon he owned way back when. He refers to it as having a slant six. Not much point in correcting him, I know what he meant.

I think the reason he might refer to the Falcon as a slant six is because at full throttle, the power output was equivalent to driving down a gradual incline.

We had a '65.. we used to refer to the accelerator as the "Volume Pedal" because when you pressed it, the only effect it seemed to have was to make the motor louder.

saltmine
05-30-2012, 11:44 PM
Funny you should mention it....Back in the 1960's Pontiac was using the GM 250 sic-cylinder as a "base engine" in some of their smaller cars Le Mans, Tempest) In a quest for a sporty engine, Pontiac engineers designed a single overhead camshaft head, with hydraulic lifters for the 250. It was never popular, since one could have a V-8 for a few dollars more...But, the OHC engine did find it's way into the Jeep Gladiator truck, and saw extensive use as a military vehicle.

Early Pontiac Tempests were about as close as you can get to a "slant" engine in a GM car. The Tempest sported a front engine-rear transaxle design with GM's famous "speedometer cable" drive. The transaxle was from the Chevy Corvair, as was the rear suspension. Pontiac Marketing boasted of the "nearly flat cabin floor" due to the curved flex-shaft that drove the rear wheels. The engine chosen for the car was a Pontiac 389 V-8....sawed in half, to achieve an inline four cylinder of 195 cubic inches. (International Harvester did the same thing for an engine in their "Scout" series of vehicles, too) The engine was referred to in advertising brochures as the "Trophy" four-cylinder, and as a performance option, had a Rochester four-barrel carburetor.
The infamous "speedometer cable" drive shaft was actually a steel rope, bound & wrapped in a protective casing. To guide it along it's curved path, and prevent whip and vibration, four large sealed ball bearings were installed along it's length, which fit into cavities in the sub-frame. (BTW, they were a real monster to change, too.)

They probably referred to the Ford Falcon six-cylinder as a "slant-six" because motor mounts used to fail at an alarming rate. We used to have customers come in when the mounts got so bad, they were breaking spark plugs.

hardtail
05-31-2012, 01:53 AM
I think the reason he might refer to the Falcon as a slant six is because at full throttle, the power output was equivalent to driving down a gradual incline.

We had a '65.. we used to refer to the accelerator as the "Volume Pedal" because when you pressed it, the only effect it seemed to have was to make the motor louder.

Now I'm a bowtie guy through and through BUT this reminds me of GM pickups with the early Detroit, can't recall if they had a 5.7 in trucks or this was an early 6.2? Helped move a girlfriends furniture in 1982 with her dads pu, came up to a yellow light in the city and I stepped on it heavy, there was a roar and commotion but I swear at no time did the speedometer ever show signs of increasing......I thought to myself these things are dangerous.....the funniest part is her dad owned a diesel injection shop so I would assume his was a souped up version........LOL

RacinNdrummin
05-31-2012, 02:14 AM
Now I'm a bowtie guy through and through BUT this reminds me of GM pickups with the early Detroit, can't recall if they had a 5.7 in trucks or this was an early 6.2? Helped move a girlfriends furniture in 1982 with her dads pu, came up to a yellow light in the city and I stepped on it heavy, there was a roar and commotion but I swear at no time did the speedometer ever show signs of increasing......I thought to myself these things are dangerous.....the funniest part is her dad owned a diesel injection shop so I would assume his was a souped up version........LOL

Yeah if your going to drive an IDI, you gotta do it with the right one ;)...

Willy
05-31-2012, 03:44 AM
One of the guys in the welding class was talking about having a early-'70s Nova with a 292ci slant six engine.

I've never seen or heard of this engine, and I can't find anything about it by googling. Everything with slant six ends up being Chrysler, Pontiac, or BMW.

Does Chevy slant six really exist? Anybody got a link to a picture of one?

There are no slant six Chevrolet engines.

The 292 cu. in. six was strictly a Chevrolet Or GMC truck engine. It was basically a tall deck 250 cu. in. Chevy six intended for truck use.

You friends Nova was either a 230 cu. in. six or more likely a 250 cu. in. six from the factory.
The 292 as noted is the step child of the 250 and this may be where the confusion in pedigree may have come from.
Someone in the life of you friends Nova may have transplanted a 292 into it, but it did not leave the GM factory as such, and it is not a slant six in any way unless it has a broken motor mount.;)

BigMike782
05-31-2012, 03:40 PM
The nice part about a 225 slant 6 is you always know just when to pull over......if it quiets down,pull over,it's about to blow up LOL

I worked with a guy that had a friend with a 440 Hemi......uh,yea,OK:rolleyes:

Steelspinner76
05-31-2012, 04:08 PM
my first car was a plymouth duster with a 225 super6 (2bbl carter model bbd carb) that engine went through 3 diffrent bodies and had over 700 thousand
on the clock when i swapped it out of the last one for a 318 v8.

225 6 the undying engine only problem i ever had was mine liked starters
could to this day change one in 10 min flat. I took the engine apart out of curiosity. thing was built like a Tank the counterweight on the crank could have crushed a smart car :)

Wayne

co_farmer
05-31-2012, 04:35 PM
I was going to mention the 4 cylinder Scout engine was a slant. We bought a new 1978 Scout and drove it for many years. Problem with Scout was identifying replacement parts. You almost had to compare an old part to an assortment of new parts to see what they had used that week!

Our Scout had an electronic ignition that drove the emissions testers crazy. Would begin firing at the correct time, then would continue firing that plug for several more pulses.

When we moved to the Seattle area, the more strict emissions test made us sell to friends moving to Spokane.

We still miss our old friend, the Scout.

Paul


Funny you should mention it....Back in the 1960's Pontiac was using the GM 250 sic-cylinder as a "base engine" in some of their smaller cars Le Mans, Tempest) In a quest for a sporty engine, Pontiac engineers designed a single overhead camshaft head, with hydraulic lifters for the 250. It was never popular, since one could have a V-8 for a few dollars more...But, the OHC engine did find it's way into the Jeep Gladiator truck, and saw extensive use as a military vehicle.

Early Pontiac Tempests were about as close as you can get to a "slant" engine in a GM car. The Tempest sported a front engine-rear transaxle design with GM's famous "speedometer cable" drive. The transaxle was from the Chevy Corvair, as was the rear suspension. Pontiac Marketing boasted of the "nearly flat cabin floor" due to the curved flex-shaft that drove the rear wheels. The engine chosen for the car was a Pontiac 389 V-8....sawed in half, to achieve an inline four cylinder of 195 cubic inches. (International Harvester did the same thing for an engine in their "Scout" series of vehicles, too) The engine was referred to in advertising brochures as the "Trophy" four-cylinder, and as a performance option, had a Rochester four-barrel carburetor.
The infamous "speedometer cable" drive shaft was actually a steel rope, bound & wrapped in a protective casing. To guide it along it's curved path, and prevent whip and vibration, four large sealed ball bearings were installed along it's length, which fit into cavities in the sub-frame. (BTW, they were a real monster to change, too.)

They probably referred to the Ford Falcon six-cylinder as a "slant-six" because motor mounts used to fail at an alarming rate. We used to have customers come in when the mounts got so bad, they were breaking spark plugs.

HWooldridge
05-31-2012, 04:52 PM
Friend of mine in high school owned a '63 Valiant with the push button transmission and a 225 slant. In order to get a microsecond of "scratch", he would get the battleship rolling backwards then punch the D button and the gas simultaneously. If we were lucky, we'd hear a little "u-r-r-rk" from the rear. However, that old Valiant saved us one night when a drunk in a VW Bug hit us from behind. The Bug exploded but about all that happened to the Valiant was some mud knocked out of the bumper...

He loved riding in my '68 Galaxy with a 390. I could stomp the gas and burn one tire down to the wheel...of course, the gas gage was also moving downward at the same time. I also had a '65 Comet with a 200 straight six. Like the Falcon, it wouldn't get out of its own way but got damn good mileage for that day and time - about 20 mpg on the highway. I attended a college 250 miles from my home but driving back and forth was pretty cheap when gas was less than a buck a gallon.

gvasale
05-31-2012, 05:40 PM
I started driving in 1965 and the car was a 61 Dodge Lancer with a slant six and a three speed on the floor. It was the model that had the fake continental trunk and slanted tail lights. I saw another one about 5 years ago, but it wasn't in my plans, but it was fun back then. Too bad it didn't stay in production as long as the Plymouth Valiant.

Willy
05-31-2012, 07:02 PM
.............. Chrysler engineers decided to "modernize" the old boat-anchor with an overhead valve cylinder head. The head produced the gain in horsepower they were looking for, but....it was too tall for the body it was supposed to go into.. The solution came when the engineering staff leaned the engine over 30 to the right of the vehicle centerline. To keep the carburetor, and air filter low, they devised a long runner intake manifold, which, quite by accident, improved the power and low-end torque even more. The fact that the distributor, ignition wires and fuel pump was never taken into account, when designed, made them a bit of a job to service. The engine did suffer from poor fuel distribution throughout it's service life, and remains, to this day, as one of the heaviest inline six-cylinder engines ever put in a modern passenger car. Eventually, the crankcase had to be redesigned to allow for a seven-main-bearing crankshaft. ...........

Well not exactly.
The Chrysler slant six engine was a clean sheet design engineered for the newer low profile bodies that were on the drawing boards as well.
The engine was not only lower in profile but due to the 30 slant the designers were also able to make it shorter because the water pump could now be taken from it's usual place on the front of the block and moved to the side.

The extremely efficient long runners for the intake and the factory exhaust were by no means an afterthought or accident, Quite the contrary, Plymouth and dodge divisions were very much in the loop so to speak when it came to ram induction and efficient exhaust systems. Their exploits into this realm is more than evident in the record books of the NHRA and NASCAR during those years.
Also the fuel mixture distribution was very even and was light years ahead of the log style intake and exhaust systems of it's competitors.

As far as being hard to work on, well what can I say. If one has trouble with this design perhaps he should just stick to repairing garden tools.:)

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j31/250willy/4e0ed5e7.jpg


The fact that it was heavy was partly due to the fact that it was originally slated to be an all aluminum engine. When foundry issues canceled that thought the engine was put into production in cast iron without any changes for the different material. This fact and the extremely heavy forged steel crank, whose main bearings were not only identical to the those of the 426 hemi, but whose central axis sat well above the oil pan mating surface, made it an extremely durable passenger car engine and industrial engine.


Originally Posted by saltmine
Funny you should mention it....Back in the 1960's Pontiac was using the GM 250 sic-cylinder as a "base engine" in some of their smaller cars Le Mans, Tempest) In a quest for a sporty engine, Pontiac engineers designed a single overhead camshaft head, with hydraulic lifters for the 250. It was never popular, since one could have a V-8 for a few dollars more...But, the OHC engine did find it's way into the Jeep Gladiator truck, and saw extensive use as a military vehicle.




The Toranado 6 OHC engine used by Kaiser Jeep was a Jeep designed engine and had nothing to do with GM.
Introduced in mid 1962 it was also the first US designed mass produced OHC engine to see passenger car/light truck service.

saltmine
05-31-2012, 07:23 PM
I hate to be the one to tell, ya, Willy, but the Crosley was the first OHC engine in a US made passenger car. First manufactured in 1939 it was originally powered by a two-cylinder, air cooled Waukesha 150 Cub twin engine. In 1946 Crosley designed and built a 44 cubic inch OHC four-cylinder engine Weighing less than 1000 pounds and selling for $250 out the door, Crosley produced the car until 1952. Crosley was also the first US manufacturer to use caliper type four-wheel disc brakes, and has the dubious distinction of inventing the SUV.

Crosley was probably more famous for their record players, radios, and broadcast equipment. All made by the Crosley Radio Corporation.

If the OHC six-cylinder engine was a Jeep design.....why does so many GM parts fit on it?

saltmine
05-31-2012, 07:37 PM
Strange, Willy. I've had slant six Chrysler engines apart, and you can still see the blank pockets for the side valves in the block.

I never thought much about the 30 slant, until a friend, who happened to be a Chrysler Engineer, told me about the reason for it. And the fact that early three-main-bearing blocks were fully interchangeable with the engine blocks in the A-57 Chrysler tank engine, used briefly in the M-4 Sherman tank. My reference books on the subject identify these engines as "Dodge truck, 25 hp, side valve engines". Each A-57 used six of them mounted in a cradle, driving a common output shaft. They were eventually replaced with 1000 cubic inch Ford GAA V-8 engines. Ford originally designed this engine as a 12 cylinder aircraft engine, but when the Air Corps turned it down, they sawed four cylinders off and offered it as a replacement engine in Sherman tanks. Most Sherman tanks used in Europe were powered by GAA engines.

Strangely enough, the V-8 Ford GAA tank engine looks very similar to the DOHC Ford 5.4L Mustang engine used today.

sasquatch
05-31-2012, 07:38 PM
Nice clear pic Willy, thanks for posting that, haven't seen one in quite awhile.

(Looks like that engine has a flex fan?)

I believe these engines (The 225 ) had a 4 1/8th stroke, the little earlier 170 had a 3 1/8th stroke, but the bore was the same.

(So, if you had a 225 you could brag that you had a "Stroker" motor in it!!):D

Willy
05-31-2012, 07:50 PM
I hate to be the one to tell, ya, Willy, but the Crosley was the first OHC engine in a US made passenger car. ................
.........
If the OHC six-cylinder engine was a Jeep design.....why does so many GM parts fit on it?

I didn't say it was the first US OHC engine....just the first mass produced engine.

As to the parts interchangability with GM, well I was not aware of that.
Perhaps this question would be better directed at GM.:D

From The International Full size Jeep Association (http://www.ifsja.org/tech/motors/tornado.html):



Credit for this engine, which Willys identified as the Tornado OHC went to its Chief Engineer since 1952, A. C. Sampietro who had come to Willys at that time from Europe where he had worked for Donald Healy of the Austin Healy empire. In that context Sampietro had attracted attention by developing a cylinder head for the Nash engine that increased its output from 140 HP to 189 HP.

Willy
05-31-2012, 07:56 PM
Nice clear pic Willy, thanks for posting that, haven't seen one in quite awhile.

(Looks like that engine has a flex fan?)

I believe these engines (The 225 ) had a 4 1/8th stroke, the little earlier 170 had a 3 1/8th stroke, but the bore was the same.

(So, if you had a 225 you could brag that you had a "Stroker" motor in it!!):D

Thanks Sasquatch, the pic is not mine.
Just one I grabbed to illustrate a point.

The 225 had a taller deck height to utilize the increased stroke in order to make it a 225. Lots of similarities between the two but the blocks are unique to each.

Edited to add: despite reports to the contrary all slant six motors were 4 main bearing engines...there are no 7 main bearing slant six Chrysler engines.

sasquatch
05-31-2012, 08:21 PM
There is a "Slant six" performance club in the US, mostly guys Drag racing modified slant six engines in various bodies. Some of those cars are quite fast!!

If you "Google" - "Inliners International" you'll see that the inline engine of any type is still pretty popular.

Somewere on that site is a link to these slant six drag racers. Quite interesting!!

sasquatch
05-31-2012, 08:34 PM
Ok go here: Interesting stuff.


http://www.slantsix.org

(Then click on galleries.)

Spin Doctor
05-31-2012, 08:34 PM
Even in the Slant Six the pan rail and deck are parallel. Same thing with BMW's slant installations. It's is more about packaging than anything else. I wonder if they ever thought about mirroring it for a V12

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_Slant-6_engine

Chrysler's Australian operations built a "Hemi" version

sasquatch
05-31-2012, 08:38 PM
Spin Doctor,, I believe the Hemi version was not a slant engine from what i read on the pic of it on the "Inliners International " site.

Modified with weber side drafts that 6 put out i think 430 Hp.
Brian Cannell is the owner of that car.

Spin Doctor
05-31-2012, 09:10 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_Hemi-6_Engine

True the Ausie version was not slanted but then the Slant Six is just a straight 6 leaned over. And one of models they put them in looks like a reworked 67 -69 Barracuda

sasquatch
05-31-2012, 09:22 PM
Back in Post #30 of spin doctor he mentioned two sixes being used as a V12 engine.

There actually was one of those engines built as a truck engine by GM in about 1960. A 702 Cu. Inch with a 4.56 bore and a 3.58 stroke using two 2 barrel carbs w/4 exhuast manifolds and twin front mounted distributors.

This site will have that info:

http://www.6066gmcguy.org/TwinSix.htm

A very rare engine today.

tdmidget
05-31-2012, 10:22 PM
Back in Post #30 of spin doctor he mentioned two sixes being used as a V12 engine.

There actually was one of those engines built as a truck engine by GM in about 1960. A 702 Cu. Inch with a 4.56 bore and a 3.58 stroke using two 2 barrel carbs w/4 exhuast manifolds and twin front mounted distributors.

This site will have that info:

http://www.6066gmcguy.org/TwinSix.htm

A very rare engine today.

And those who bought them wished that they had been even rarer. Rough running boat anchors introduced after diesels had driven the last nail in the truck engine coffin.

sasquatch
05-31-2012, 10:31 PM
No doubt about that!!:D

But still kind of an interesting if not stupid design.

She'd be a PIG on fuel at todays prices!!:eek: :eek:

Willy
06-01-2012, 12:20 AM
Back in Post #30 of spin doctor he mentioned two sixes being used as a V12 engine.

There actually was one of those engines built as a truck engine by GM in about 1960. A 702 Cu. Inch with a 4.56 bore and a 3.58 stroke using two 2 barrel carbs w/4 exhuast manifolds and twin front mounted distributors.

This site will have that info:

http://www.6066gmcguy.org/TwinSix.htm

A very rare engine today.

Thanks for the link Sasquatch. I still have a shop manual for that one, come to think of it, probably starting to get a bit rare.
I actually drove one of those way back when in a GMC dump truck!
Although I don't remember having any issues with it, maybe due to the relatively short seat time (2 mon.), I do remember it was a torquey old girl, and yes it sure liked gasoline.
When cold you almost had to choke it with a 5 gal. pail of gas.:D

Peter S
06-01-2012, 09:37 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_Hemi-6_Engine

True the Ausie version was not slanted but then the Slant Six is just a straight 6 leaned over.

Yeah, but they are not the same engine. Aussie-made Valiants were once very popular cars in this part of the world, I remember when my parents bought a brand new Valiant Ranger in 1973 with 245 and two-barrel. The Valiant sixes always seemed to have more power than their Falcon and Holden competition, (and better upholstery). In NZ anyway, the Valiants used to do well in touring car races (Leo Leonard, B&H 500 anyone?), their hot sixes were pretty impressive, e.g. E49 option 265 had triple dual-throat side draft Webers and about 300 hp. From memory a hot 265 could keep up with the V-8's until about 100mph... I doubt you guys saw these engines in the US, this was in the 1970's.

Just found this about Aussie-made Valiants. Before the Charger I seem to recall the "Pacer" was the hot Valiant sedan...long time ago, school boy memories...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_Valiant_Charger

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_Valiant

sasquatch
06-01-2012, 10:00 AM
Peter, thanks for posting those very interesting reading sites.

Those inline sixes were very unique especially to North America.

justanengineer
06-01-2012, 10:06 AM
Back in Post #30 of spin doctor he mentioned two sixes being used as a V12 engine.

There actually was one of those engines built as a truck engine by GM in about 1960. A 702 Cu. Inch with a 4.56 bore and a 3.58 stroke using two 2 barrel carbs w/4 exhuast manifolds and twin front mounted distributors.


Those werent inline sixes though, those were made from the big block v6. IMO both the v6 and v12s that were made were great engines and simply lasted forever. Unfortunately for the v12, most mechanics are piss poor at tuning more than 8 cylinders, especially when every system is mechanically actuated, so they developed a bad reputation through no fault of their own.

Bill in Ky
06-01-2012, 11:13 AM
My first car was a '61 Pontiac Tempest and it had a slant 4.
We ran a Case combine that had a slant 6.

The Artful Bodger
06-01-2012, 05:16 PM
My James Cadet was a slant one.:D

gvasale
06-01-2012, 06:17 PM
too bad you who live on the other side of the world never got to drive any of the Mopars with the B, RB engines or 426 Hemi.

smalltime
06-01-2012, 06:48 PM
I had two dusters, both had the 225 slant 6.

I once drove a doaner 225 from Monroe, Michigan to Toledo, Ohio With a hole in the oil pan and NO OIL. It made it all the way. Then after half an hour to cool down, it restarted. Ventilated block and all.

As an aside, I also owned a wooden Criss Craft boat with twin 225s in the engine bay.

Peter S
06-01-2012, 07:39 PM
A few years ago I sold a 1966? Chrysler service manual (which included 426 option) to a guy with a Plymouth Fury...with 225 engine. Fury? More like 'Slighty Annoyed' I reckon ;)

sasquatch
06-01-2012, 08:14 PM
Over 50 years ago there was a cartage company in town where i lived then, and i think the highway tractor was about a 53-54 dodge single axle.
One day on the way from school i happened by just as the driver had the hood open checking the oil.
That engine was of course the old reliable dodge flat-head inline six, but it had two single barrel carbs and i think a cast iron split exhaust manifold.
I believe that truck engine was a 250 Cu.Inch, But i never ever saw another dodge engine like that.
Always wondered about that truck.

sasquatch
06-01-2012, 09:26 PM
Just found the info on my twin carbed flathead dodge truck engine.

The info states they came in 230 cu. in. , 251,265,331, and a stump pulling 413!!

The 413 cu inch truck engine i had seen as a kid was the one that came with the two single barrel carbs.
This engine must have been very torquey as it had a 4 5/8 inch stroke!!:eek:

smalltime
06-01-2012, 10:24 PM
Just found the info on my twin carbed flathead dodge truck engine.

The info states they came in 230 cu. in. , 251,265,331, and a stump pulling 413!!

The 413 cu inch truck engine i had seen as a kid was the one that came with the two single barrel carbs.
This engine must have been very torquey as it had a 4 5/8 inch stroke!!:eek:

Sounds like you live in lumber country:D

I've driven up the 101 thru Mendocino and on to Eureka. Probably the most beautiful drive I know of. Every spring I look forward to it.

sasquatch
06-01-2012, 10:27 PM
Doing a further search concerning this 413 engine on "Yesterday's trucks", there it states about 3000 of these engines were built for the armed forces fuel trucks.

That engine they claim had a 4 1/16 bore and a wopping 5 5/16 stroke!!

Now that is TORQUE @ say 1600 RPM!!:D

saltmine
06-01-2012, 10:29 PM
My first car was a 1951 Plymouth convertible. Of course, it had the long, side valve, ironing board of an engine in it with Chrysler's own 3-speed manual transmission. The body was blue, with a black top, and the interior was a tan mohair. I saved my money from working in a car wash for over a year to pay for it ($100). The guy who sold it to me was the nineteenth owner (and had the certificates of non-op to prove it) When I asked him about the suspiciously rough running engine, he calmly said, "It needs a tune-up."

It only took me three days at California's infamous DMV to get it registered in my name....it cost more than I paid for the car...
But, I was happy, I had my own car, finally. The next day, it only took me an hour to get it started, and one of the horribly weather checked bias-ply tires blew out on my way to work. Fortunately, I was only an hour late for work. A friend of mine, who was a mechanic at the garage next to the car wash, let me borrow various tools...as long as I brought them back the next day. I bought six spark plugs, a set of wires, cap & rotor, and a new set of points & condenser for $12, I also got a whole can of spray carb cleaner.

After I got it all done, it ran the same. I asked my buddy at the garage about it, and he lent me a compression gage. The results were not good. I had two cylinders out of six with no compression....bad valves. Anyway, I didn't have the experience or the money to replace the valves, so, I drove it.
Then, I noticed it had an alarming lean whenever I went around a corner.
Checking with my pals, I decided to put "helper" springs over the rear axle, and twist-in spring blocks in the front. It rode like hell...and still leaned badly while cornering....Then one day, a buddy was following me, when I took a turn...."I don't think all of those helper springs are gonna help." He said. "The frame isn't leaning...it's the body." Sure enough, I discovered that under the shiny blue paint, the "metal mice" had been hard at work. Most of my Plymouth was iron oxide. I eventually sold it, and became the proud owner of a questionable vintage Ford sedan....

sasquatch
06-01-2012, 10:35 PM
Neat story saltmine,, always enjoyed reading "Tales from the street".

There are some GOOD ones out there!!:D

The Artful Bodger
06-02-2012, 01:38 AM
too bad you who live on the other side of the world never got to drive any of the Mopars with the B, RB engines or 426 Hemi.

The first car I owned was a 1951 Riley sedan with a twin cam hemi engine, it was a great gravel road car.

gvasale
06-02-2012, 08:04 AM
Artful: Stylish in their typical British manner. I'd like to see a photo of the cylinder head showing the combustion chamber. The earlier photo showing the cylinder head in this thread is not a "true" hemi. A "true" hemi engine has a straight path for airflow from intake to exaust in addition to the hemispherical combustion chamber.

Also like we say over here, there"s no substitute for cubic inches.

The 2.5L is still less than 150 CI. Chrysler B engines started out with 350 CI. Most popular were the 383 CI and later the 400 CI.

RB engined started out with 383CI (known as the 383 High Block because of the 3.75" stroke) the 413 CI, the 426 CI (also known as the 426 Wedge) and finally the 440 CI.

The 426 Hemi was a redesigned 426 Wedge engine fitted with hemi heads, a different bolt pattern for the heads and a cross tied main bearing cap setup.

justanengineer
06-02-2012, 08:57 AM
too bad you who live on the other side of the world never got to drive any of the Mopars with the B, RB engines or 426 Hemi.

I wouldnt say theyre lacking for opportunity, "original" hemi cars are probably like big block mid year Corvettes and early Camaro SSs - there are more of them today than produced originally.

I had the "fun" of driving a truly original (1 owner) hemi Road Runner a few years back bc I am good friends with both the car owner and shop owner who restored it. In the shop owner's words, "Treat it like a Farmall tractor. Forget about the gas pedal. Put it in gear and let out the clutch. Once its rolling steady, then CAREFULLY feather the gas." Huge torquey engine + skinny tires + trying not to harm someone else's expensive restoration = not my kind of fun. Now had it been an "original" poser/clone car, that would be fun to beat on.

gvasale
06-02-2012, 05:45 PM
Justanengineer: Right on the money with an original car. I owned a 67 Dodge Charger originally equipped with a 383 2bbl and 4 speed. Over the 19 years I owned it I put on a ton of miles swapping engines as needed. I drove it for the last five years I owned it with a 440. At one time this engine had the hemi grind camshaft and 4.10 rear axle gearset. It had the 8 3/4 rear so I knew I couldn't hammer it like if it had the Dana 60 and the coarse spline tranny. But that never stopped me from stomping in it and listening to the roar of an AFB carb which sounded much better than a Holley. When gas was no longer cheap a mild cam and 3.23 gears were called for. Didn't need to downshift once you were in the 30 mph range. At that speed unless you wanted to get crazy, even with the mild setup just step on the gas and go.

The Artful Bodger
06-02-2012, 06:04 PM
Artful: Stylish in their typical British manner. I'd like to see a photo of the cylinder head showing the combustion chamber. The earlier photo showing the cylinder head in this thread is not a "true" hemi. A "true" hemi engine has a straight path for airflow from intake to exaust in addition to the hemispherical combustion chamber.


Sorry, cant find a picture of the internals.


http://www.pioneer-automobiles.co.uk/Resources/library/riley%20rmb%20engine%202.gif

The Riley engine has two cams, operating inclined valves in a hemispherical shaped combustion chamber, inlet on one side of the head and exhaust on the other with the spark plug vertical between them.


Also like we say over here, there"s no substitute for cubic inches.

Yeabut... a 1 1/2 ton car with a top speed of 90mph is not too shabby on 2.5 litres, I suppose if I had grafted another engine (or two) on to bring it up to 'acceptable cubes' it would have gone better, in a straight line.



The 2.5L is still less than 150 CI. Chrysler B engines started out with 350 CI. Most popular were the 383 CI and later the 400 CI.

RB engined started out with 383CI (known as the 383 High Block because of the 3.75" stroke) the 413 CI, the 426 CI (also known as the 426 Wedge) and finally the 440 CI.

The 426 Hemi was a redesigned 426 Wedge engine fitted with hemi heads, a different bolt pattern for the heads and a cross tied main bearing cap setup.

You are making the assumption that a huge heavy engine must be better, the biggest engine I have ever rode behind was nearly 10 litres and althought it was very good at pulling stumps out it was not so flash on the road...

http://www.sa-transport.co.za/farming/lanz_bulldog_05_dvdb09.JPG

BTW, when I had the Riley I could drive a particular route in 1 hour 35 which included a climb to over 2000' in the first 12 miles followed by a deep gravel, narrow twisting, alpine road. I sold the Riley and brought a fine product of General Motors with a 308 V8, the same route took me 1 hour 45 no matter how hard I tried.

sasquatch
06-02-2012, 07:53 PM
Bodger do you know the bore and stroke of that tractor?

Is that possibly a "Lanz" ?

The Artful Bodger
06-02-2012, 09:24 PM
Bodger do you know the bore and stroke of that tractor?

Is that possibly a "Lanz" ?

Yes, it is a Lanz. Similar tractors were made in various countries including the UK (Field Marshall), Australia (Imperial and Lanz), South America (Lanz?), France, Soviet Union.

They are single cylinder 2 stroke 'semi-diesels' on the Hornsby-Ackroyd principle, IIRC.

There were various models and the big one had a 225mm bore 260mm stroke. (10.266litre)

Honest tractors and no good for anything except pulling stuff!