1947 Chevy Truck engine ID?

They didn't make the 235 in 1947, at least that I'm aware of. It is probably the 216, this engine was o.k. unless you ran it hard because the rod bearings are not pressure oiled. I used to have a 1948 car, I think the 235 came along in '52 or '53.

The 216 did not have rod bearings as we think of them today. The rod cap had bearing material "babbitted" onto it. The cap-with-babbitt itself served as a bearing surface. The bottom end of the rod served the crank's top half, likewise. Saw my dad file those old bearing caps and fit them to the crank journals until they quieted down and purred w/o the original knock those worn engines had when clients bro't them in. Just temporary, of course. BTW: some bigger trucks of the late 40's came with 235 inchers. They were much like the 216's, the early 50's w/powerglide (cars), and 1953 sticks and p/g--they all had 235s w/the babbitt bearing surfaces. 1954 was the 1st to come with "inserts"-type bearings, both rods and mains. Man, what an improvement! A few of my lucky buddies found some 261 cubic inch 6-cyl. truck engines (was about 1966 before the 292 sixes came that would really pull). Us with smaller cubes couldn't hold a lite to the 261's! Lotsa fun, altho' none of us, not even the 261s, could "bark" the tires in 2nd! s

"sdlomi2" wrote in news:JiVti.9584$ snipped-for-privacy@bignews7.bellsouth.net:

This truck of mine is a 1947 1 ton pickup. It was built 1 month before they changed the body style. I think is may still be a 235..... not that I care any more. I have a HD 292 to put in it when I get that far. The problem will be with mounting the starter with a automatic trans. The starter on this 292 mounts to the bell housing. maybe there is a trans bellhousing made for this problem?

DB

Another consideration, since I cannot answer your question, is the use of an adapter. Still dunno if one is made for your application, but my next door neighbor found a tranny-and-adapter online from a co. that fitted a GM

700R4 to a '55 Studebaker. Might be cheaper, if you DO find an adapter, to re-consider the use of that 292. What year etc.(4-speed, 3-speed, auto....) did your 292 come from? Sounds like you really want to use it. Armed w/a bit more info, I'll try to help. May be that all we can do is find out it's economically unjustified. But you(we) need to know, even if the knowledge rules out options! s

"sdlomi2" wrote in news:aHiui.9542$Ug2.9493 @bignews4.bellsouth.net:

unjustified.

An adaptor of some kind, maybe custom made is what I have been thinking if there is no other solution. I think my father bought this engine new in 1963 or 64 and it has a 1950

3 speed colum shift trans on it now. This engine has been in the family for decades and still has n=only 40000 miles on it. Also it is a HD truck engine with mains between every rod and other enhancements. I don't know about other 292 engines but this is what I know of this one. :)

Thanks for your help, DB

Hope you don't think I have too little faith, but have you (done the equivalent of) removed the starter and looked at the bottom of the block to determine whether it has the bolt-up-to-the-engine holes already drilled/tapped? Ex: I remember bolting the later-starter-type 327 into 55 Chevy's and using the 55 starter that bolted to the 55 bellhousing--not the later, bolt-to-engine starter that came on the engine with its automatic tranny. Your problem might not be a problem: wouldn't that be nice? Pls. lemme know. s

Hope you don't think I have too little faith, but have you (done the equivalent of) removed the starter and looked directly at the block to determine whether it has the bolt-to-engine starter holes already drilled/tapped? I remember putting 327's into 55 chevy's and using the 55 starter that bolted to the 55 bellhousing--not the bolt-to-engine type that came from the factory with the 327. Won't it be nice if this problem turns out to NOT be a problem? That engine, with so many mains, would have to have a straight crankshaft to ever rotate even once, huh? The old '62 Chevy II's with the

4-banger was similar. A friend put ~400K on the orig. engine, bought another one and did the same with it--plus he had no idea how many miles were on the 2nd engine when he bought it. I always attributed its longevity to so many mains per cylinder. Pls. lemme know. s