vintage 235 chevy speed equipment

ttt

 

x2 on that there is some neat stuff out there ,just takes some searching -here is an intake i scored at a swap a few yrs ago ,wasnt even intake shopping that day,almost walked right by it -- have not seen another like it , no provision for heat --

 

my ellis intake and edmunds rocker cover on my 50

 

There you go, just like I said, the boat guys would know what it was.

 

thats one of my faves only and one of the only ones I do not own

 

Do you have a "non-dogbone" style Thickstun?

 

here is the 235 off my 54 chevy truck. got most of my stuff from ebay

before




during



after

 

Just got this in the fiddy.... Still fine tuning. Runs great!
261, Weiand intake, 1950 216 leakchester Bs, sitting on factory dual exhaust.....
Gotta find some different air cleaners.

 

coolerthanethan,

You certainly are, runnin' that mill!
Nice work.
...although, the Dodge guys might give you a little stinkeye, for using up all of their green paint.


6narow

 

thats nice !dont see to many weiand intakes ,are you using the vette factory duel ,how was the fit (throttle linkage , e-brake rod ) anyway lookin good --joe

 

Thanks, there arent to many weiands out there, i was pretty stoked when i scored this one... And ya, its the vette exhuast manifold.

The throttle linkage coming up wasnt bad, just took a bit of time to get the bend right.... There is quite a bit of room.

The ebrake is just about touching the exhaust, actually the giant flange. I moved the rod over with some washers where it attaches..... Kinda kloooge, but it works. Sometimes when i get on it hard you can hear the rod and exhaust rattle against each other. Dont think its much to worry about.




The biggest issue i had was that the rear exhaust is right where the rod that comes off the pedal is supposed to go...
Had to make this up to get around it. 1st thing i ever welded!



Also, i drilled out/widened the mounting holes on the 216 carb bases so they would fit on the 235 intake, that fits on the 235 exhaust manifold...

Editted to add...
The exhaust and the ebrake were even closer when i was running the set up on a 235. The rod was even with the very end of the manifold, not the flange like it is now. The manifolds raised up a bit when i put in the 261... I assume that was due to the longer stroke. Regardless, i ran it that way for quite a while, just thought i should throw that out there.

 

your 261 is a stroked 235?
How did you modify the crank?
Did you have to do anything to the block?


6narow

 

No.....
I think i said that wrong.
It seems the 261 i replaced the 235 with is a bit taller, both engines are 1955s. The manifolds sit up about 1/3 inch higher then they did before, and the exhaust had to be reworked. My front pipe turns and goes under the oil pan (never really liked that). I had to make the pipe longer between the manifold and the bend under the pan, cause after the swap the pipe was up on the oil pan. So somewhere between the pan and the manifold the engine seemed to get taller.

Then again, maybe its just worked out that way, and i have no idea WTF im talking about.

 

Odd, indeed.
I always thought everything was pretty much the same between the 235 and 261 blocks, in that respect.


6narow

 

The deck height is the same, but is there a difference in the position of the bolt holes in the block?

I've never heard of a 235 stroked that big, but I'd be interested in how - that's about 4.25" (+ overbore).
For those not familiar: 235 and 261 are the same stroke originally, only the 216 is shorter.

 

^ Im not sure what you are asking panic..... Please bear with my inexperience.

All i can say is that after i swapped a 235 for a 261, using the same mounts, the top of the engine sat a bit higher. There was more clearance between the exhaust and the ebrake, and somehow my exhaust was raised enough to neeed to be lengthened as as i said before.

I just figured that ment the cylinders where a bit taller and the piston had a bit more travel, and that was part of the difference between the 235 and the 261. I fixed the problem, and went for a cruise, never really thought about it again.

I read on another post that 6inarowjoe has the same exhaust manifold (he asked about the clearences), and he decided not to use because of clearance issues with the ebrake. I figured he was asking because hes having second thoughts, and is thinking of using it, so I wanted to try and point out everything that happened when i put this together.

 

the piston had a bit more travel

Again, again: there is no more travel. The stroke is the same.

 

Lolita,

If you want a crazy rare 3x2 carb set up for your engine look for a Harper intake. Extremely rare, I know of about 6 of them in existence. 2 are for Mopar flathead 6s and the other 4 are for GM engines. I think Heathen on this board has one. I dont know if he will part with it, but you might be able to.

Here is an ad for the Harper Intakes.


Here is what the set up looks like(this is a Mopar one though and mine)


here is a picture of a dirt track racer with a chevy set up..

 

I actually did the math and its like 4.36", with a stock (235) bore size.
FWIW, all the stovebolts, from the 194 through to the 216, used a 3 3/4" stroke.
The 235 was then bored 1/16" and stroked out to 3 15/16".
The 261 took the bore out to 3 3/4", but retained the same stroke.
Its my understanding that 3 of the 6 cylinders on a 261 are siamesed, due to the design of the Chevy block.

I wonder if the motor mounts are in the same location on a 261, as they were on Agent's 235?
Maybe they sit lower? (would then, raise the engine).

Here's something else - To the best of my knowledge, the 261 was never offered in a car, only the trucks.
Maybe something was changed with the 261 that differed from the 235, since it was only supposed to be used in the trucks (again, motor mounts?).



6narow

 

The motor mount bosses were the same on a 261 block as on a 235 block for any given year (i.e., '55-'57 blocks differ from '58-'62 blocks). The only passenger cars that were equipped with 261s were Canadian Pontiacs--my first 261 came from a '58 Pontiac Pathfinder.

 

Thanks for the info, Heathen.
I've never heard of a 261 ever being offered in any passenger car, but I'll take your word for it.
What was the difference in the motor mount bosses between the earlier '55-'57 blocks and the later '58-'62 blocks, that you mentioned?...or is there any?
Kinda reads like there might be.



6narow

 

Any '55-'57 block I've seen had side mount bosses at the very front of the side of the block, whereas the '58-'62 bosses are back about 6-8 inches from the front. The '58-'62 bosses are not the same bolt pattern as the '53-4 bosses, but are in roughly the same location--at least they're close enough that I put a '58 235 in my '53 by making a pair of steel adapter plates and welding them to the original mounts.

 

Did you notice any difference in the installed height of the newer engine, once it was in the car?


6narow

 

The text in the Harper ad is very weird.
Stubbies with progressive linkage? That makes the engine run on cylinders #3 & 4 only.
That's what happens when you let salesmen write the ad, instead of the engineers.

 

It is progressive; they just didn't give a full explaination. The throttle shafts of the 97 are split, and they run on the inboard throttle plates until around 1/3 to 1/2 throttle, when the linkage opens up the outboard throttle plates.

 

Heathen...you still got the Chevy Harper set up?

 

Yes.

 

So they work like a "staged" 2-bbl., rather than a "regular" one.
That makes sense.

6narow

 

Which setup works better on a stock 235: 216 dual carb intake(smaller carb base) or 235(bigger carb base)? Apreciate any help, I think there are adapter rings to adapt the 216 intake to a 235.

 

If you're lucky enough to find either a McGurk or Nicson dual intake for the 235/261 port size, they were available with carb pads drilled for the smaller 216 size carbs. I have a McGurk dual with Stromberg BXOV-2s on my street 235, and it works well.