Inliners International Forums General Discussion Hi Performance 216 Build - Post 3 Shortblock - Fun with Dippers

Greetings . . . This past spring and summer has been very productive . . . now that it is cold again I thought I would post some updates on build progress in '14.

As I have mentioned previously I am fitting a 235 Hi-Tork crank to the original 216 - stroking it 3/16". Coupled with an overbore of .030 this means it is technically speaking a 230.

One of the details I have puzzled over is the setup of the Jet oiling system given the additional stroke:

The jets in the pan are 'aimed' based on the position of the dippers on the big end of the connecting rods. Studying this alignment reveals an elliptical dipper motion:

Even more interesting is the fact that the jet is only pressurizing the connecting rod bearing for around 60 degrees of crank rotation:

leaving the rod bearing effectively coasting on 'retained oil' for 5/6ths of the rotation!

My '49 Master Parts catalog shows only one pan for 216s and 235s alike. This ultimately makes sense because the shallow end of the pan shows that there is no room for the jets and troughs to be fitted any lower. But with 3/16" of additional stroke the 235 crank changes the position of the dippers by 3/32" at BDC - with the dippers moving further to the right and lower into the troughs.

This lead me to believe that the jets should perhaps be aimed lower:


But the Ken-Moore tooling for targeting and alignment suggests otherwise:
Kent-Moore Tooling
there is only one pan targeting tool for both 216s and 235s alike.

Chevs Of the Forties rents this tooling - I ordered a set early last spring. Curiously, the shipment included two pan targets each with the same part number. Some side by side photos reveal that one targets/aims slightly lower then the other:

I used the one on the right to check the alignment of my original pan:

I made a few minor tweaks to left-right alignment on the number two rod - but suffice to say that the pan the was basically in-spec as it came off the engine. Pictures don't do the alignment tool justice so I made a brief video:
PanTargetVideo

The one difference in the Kent-Moore tooling is the trough depth gauge:

seems the stock '49 216 pan has troughs that are much to deep for the 235 crank. This must be related to low speed operations when oil pressure drops off. There are no drain holes in the troughs so oil must pool there. Perhaps too deep is counter productive?


The other curious result was that the dippers from the original engine where all to short. None extended far enough to touch the 'Go' gauge. I bought several sets of NOS and aftermarket dippers. Some of them seemed to be hammered flat from the factory. Others were rounded proud. Most of the rounded ones reached the 'Go' dimension. Some had to be coaxed with needle nose pliers to sit proud enough.
I think that this taller dipper configuration is what allows the pan jets to be aimed at essentially the same spot for both 216 and 235 engines. The taller dipper comes in contact with the jet at 60 degrees before BDC in spite of the fact that it is further to the right than in the 216 configuration:


Based on the pan trough depth gauge I ground off atleast a 16th of material (semi circle) in the center of the troughs.

I primed the pan with POR 15 and used the balance of the blue-grey enamel as a top coat. The Best Gaskets cork set fits nicely. I used Kopper Coat on both sides for a tacky seal to pan and block.

The cam installation was the text book "cam in the freezer" and "cam gear on the barbecue" affair. I put the cam/retainer/key in the freezer overnight. In the morning I heated the cam gear for about 20 minutes in the grill on high (600 plus degrees). It dropped in place with no need for coaxing from my dead blow hammer . . .


With the Pan in place the engine could be righted on the stand - allowing me to proceed with turning it into a long block - the road draft tube being step one.
Complete Short Block (seems there a limit on the number of pics in one post?)
More installments to come . . .

regards,
stock49

Thank you very much for the info and pics. Understanding how the craziest oiling system ever designed by man has been made much easier thanks to you. Isn't This the same setup used in WW2 Chevy trucks? I have a question. Doesn't it take a bigger oil pump to keep those jets spraying like in the vidieo? It's wonderful to see real craftsmanship in action. Has the head been put on yet? Jay 6155

Thanks for the post and pictures and thanks for building a 216 stroker. Although I don't have a 216 at this point I have had several in the past and I am a big fan. The 216 is a much better engine than the " Babbit Beater" slur implies. It is the backbone the hot rod GM 6s.

Intergrated. I think the oiling system of my 1919 Essex engine might be crazier. It is total splash with adjustable oil pressure, up to 4 pounds, via a connection to the throttle. I haven't actually seen it yet still reading about it.

Wow! Please describe in detail how the Essex system works. Somehow, someway, both of these oiling systems worked. In the case of the Chevy millions of times over the years. I consider myself lucky to be able to see how it is done thanks to people like Stock 49, and others. Unbleavable reliability from something that looks like it won't work. In the first post only 60 degrees of pressure and coast the rest of the way! How far is that from a cross drilled crank! Can't wait to see the next installment on this build. Jay 6155

Here is the thread I started about my Essex engine. I'll add something about the oiling system if it's not there. We'll leave this one for for Stock49's 216 build. I want to see the rest of it and know how it all works out.

In post #82412 there is a link to a manual. Page 15 describes the oiling system.

Essex

This is a cool thread. Thanks!!

Stock 49, I can't wait to see more pictures as the engine is put together! Is that aluminum cam gear how they came from the factory? Or is it an improvement that you made? Would you be kind enough to post the cam specs in this thread, both stock and what you are running please. Am I correct that there were nothing but solid lifters In 1949? Thanks again for letting us in on this build! Of course if I had a new stovebolt book to read it would help. (hint,hint) jay 6155

I always wondered how the alignment tool worked. A great video. Impressive the accuracy that can be achieved.

I can't believe that two years have passed since I yanked the engine just after Christmas of twelve:


The grease and grime was everywhere:

As for some of the questions above. I am not sure what the flow rate is for the stock pump but I do know (first hand) that it moves a bunch. Last weekend I was priming the system with an electric-drill & empty dizzy body and neglected to cap the oil pressure gauge opening in the main gallery. The result was a half pint burst of oil squirting at least three feet . . .
California Bill talks about fitting the GMC oil pump to Chevies - but the hard-lines need to be re-plumbed so I did not go down that path. The pump that came out of the engine seemed in good working order - so just replaced the impeller guts using a rebuild kit from Tygart's Obsolete Chevy.

As for the cam gear - it is not original to the 216. These engines were shipped with a so called 'fiber' cam gear (epoxy resin and fibers). They are designed to be quiet. If starved of oil they can quickly breakdown - even with oil the teeth degrade:

which is what I found inside my engine. And this engine was rebuilt somewhere along the way (don't know if the gear was replaced at that time or not) I know it was rebuilt because I found fresh plug in the rear cam shaft opening - and the connecting rods were marked by Federal Mogul Babbit Bearings "RECOND BY FM BB INC".

The aluminum gear was created for the high performance 235 found in the '54 Corvette. Eventually the fiber gears were obsoleted. As for lifters - there were no hydraulic lifters until the Power Glide car's shipped in '50. Stick cars continued to get solid lifters.

As for the cam specs - I am running a regrind based on an ancient Isky specification (DP#2)
Inliners Post circa '04
Isky advertised it as a 250/280 affair.
Stock spec is 220/231.
I asked the guys at Delta to regrind a cam to the Isky DP#2 spec. The cam doctor report for the stick indicates:
248/264 @ .020
205/233 @ .050
Lift is .41/.40 with stock 1.5:1 rockers.

Happy Holidays to all. More posts to come.

regards,
stock49

Thanks for the info. Cam gears are the same deal on 250 engines. I didn't know that some type of fiber gear was used that far back. Are you still going to run 1.7 rockers? Do you know the duration at .050 for the stock cam? That is a lot of oil! Don't know how fast the drill was turning, but when we had a new Kenworth with too much oil I would pull the line for the oil psi gauge and have someone start the engine. A good rate of flow, 1/2 gallon in about 45 seconds with about a 1 foot spray. Way less than you have described! Are those stock pistons flat top? Hard to tell from the pics. Jay6155

The original 216 engines shipped from '37 to '40 used a domed piston and a relief area cast into the cylinder head (from the center of the bore toward the intake valve pocket - corresponding with the dome on the piston). From '41 on flat top pistons were fitted and the head was simply milled flat with round recessed pocket for the intake valve. California Bill's book suggests that the earlier cylinder heads were thicker as he indicates that they could be milled as much .187" whereas the later design would only tolerate .125".

I have a couple sets of Barker high lift rockers (sold in sets of 6 for intakes only):
Inliners Post circa '04
But I am already getting .41" lift. The Barkers would extend that to .46" . . . but what would I gain for the excess wear and tear on the valve train? Given the limits of the head design I am doubting that flow is much different at .46 versus .41. I also fear that I would be close to coil-bind on the inner springs.

The head is back on and the valve train goes in soon. I will be measuring actual lifts shortly thereafter . . .

Though there are a few different part numbers, some indicating fiber cam gears, the timing set from 216 through 292, GMC, Chevy @ Mercruiser 4s and even the Iron Dukes are interchangeable. There might be some timing mark differences.

I guess if something works why change it. I wish that would be applied to computers! I have read somewhere that the stove bolt head is "lift limited" that going past a certin lift just doesn't help. Glad to hear the head is on! Please keep us posted. Jay 6155