The folks over at Hagerty Redline Rebuild have got their hands on a ’50 Chevy 3600: They have several videos online including a ‘will it run’ attempt to awaken the engine after a long slumber: Redline Rebuild on YouTube
Yeah they have been sending me Emails over that build and many others. I think in one of them he got Zapped off the coil. Mind you it would have been easier to turn the motor over using the Fan and Belt Not that small screw driver. But hey that's just me .
Larry/Twisted6 [oooooo] Adding CFM adds boost God doesn't like ugly.
Indeed. He even went so far as to pull the very same fan that he could have used to turn the engine over.
Nonetheless, what I like about the 'will it run' video is that it seemed an unscripted honest dialog by a mechanic who on more then one occasion admitted he was unfamiliar with these old engines.
He's definitely unfamiliar with breaker points - and while he did use a VOM to verify that the coil was getting juice - he did not verify a path to ground or that the points were breaking the path.
So he suspects the coil and proceeds to swap it out . . . But the old school teaches us that the coil isn't guilty until the condenser is found innocent . . .
The tear down video is the same. He seems to just explore about while twisting on bolts - no shop manual to be found. For example, he puzzles over the oil pump - can't fathom how it is supposed to come out. The shop manual would have told him that the hard line has to come out first . . .
I found it entertaining to watch over coffee.
Hopefully the shop manual will be present when the rebuild commences.
Here's a question for some of you gurus out there.
In this video he's talking about the head and block and mentions that on almost all of the 216s the heads are made of cast iron and have a tendency to crack. He uses some type of epoxy to seal the cracks.
My question is if this is true for all of the Stovebolts? I know that my head is the higher compression 848 head and I was curious if those also have a tendency to crack?
The other thing is that most people say these inline 6s are pretty bullet proof, so even if they do crack it must not be a huge issue or it would be something that people take care of.
See 1:05 in this video where he talks about the cylinders cracking. He also mentions that none of the cracks were all the way through to the water jacket, so it wasn't a current issue for him, but he's repairing it anyway.
"almost all of the 216s the heads are made of cast iron"
Does he really say that? What are the other heads made of...?
Well, I'm not sure but he mentions about aluminum pistons vs. the cast iron pistons used in the Stovebolt. I know there are some heads that are made out of aluminum, such as the '74-'77 911 heads which always crapped out and warped...I'll be honest, I've never rebuilt an engine, the closest I got was on a Range Rover, but the head/valves were gonna cost more than I felt the truck was worth. I vowed I would never get another English vehicle as long as I live...hence the 'ol '46...
Maybe that is why he qualified his statement with "almost".
I think it's simpler than that, I think he just knows that he doesn't know enough about the inline 6 to know if they used other material or not, so he qualified his statement with most to cover his @$$.
I'd say *they* did a pretty darn good job on that rebuild, better than most DIY folks...he obviously had help from a couple other shops, but the works he did was pretty darn good, even the masking/prep. Seemed to be a good rebuild that most anyone owning a Stovebolt wouldn't mind having in their truck.
Seems overkill for a 3/4 ton, when most folks want 1/2 tons. My $0.02...but I couldn't do that type of work myself, he's got a lot more experience as a wrench than I do.
I find the dialog/video at ~32:30 to be most interesting.
Apparently someone tried to murder this old engine with two rounds to the driver's side! The block was not cracked as result of the assault. So they milled the holes round - tapped them - and plugged them . . .
I shot my bulldozer once with a .45. Just put a dent in the back side of the blade. I would have liked to examine the inside of the block to see if the bullets hit anything else. I can't see a small caliber hand gun penetrating the block and I can't see a small caliber centerfire rifle that has enough energy to knock a hole in the block not have enough energy to at least leave a mark on something inside. It makes you wonder.
"I wonder if God created man because he was disappointed in the monkey?" Mark Twain
I shot my bulldozer once with a .45. Just put a dent in the back side of the blade. I would have liked to examine the inside of the block to see if the bullets hit anything else. I can't see a small caliber hand gun penetrating the block and I can't see a small caliber centerfire rifle that has enough energy to knock a hole in the block not have enough energy to at least leave a mark on something inside. It makes you wonder.
I don't think they're bullet holes. They look too evenly spaced on the block, but what seems odd is he mentions that there are no holes in the body...so what would someone do, hold a handgun inside the engine compartment and shoot the side of the block? Seems a bit far fetched to me. He mentions the inside is blown out, but that could happen with a drill also, if done haphazardly. Seems to me it would be more likely that someone was routing the water in/out for something, maybe a heater core or similar. Just seems highly unlikely that someone would shoot the side of the engine without shooting through the body.
There are a lot of easier ways to get water for a heater and you need to get it in two places with a difference in pressure. One on the pressure side of the pump and one on the return side.
"I wonder if God created man because he was disappointed in the monkey?" Mark Twain
There are a lot of easier ways to get water for a heater and you need to get it in two places with a difference in pressure. One on the pressure side of the pump and one on the return side.
Something happened with the media tags where it puts video:youtube as the start tag, but the end tag is video.
Since then the tags don't work...
It's not the media tag that has changed. It's the API on the youtube side. When you use the media tags provided by our Forum you get a blank line. This is because our Forums are recognizing the request to embed the video - but the youtube API is no longer returning a preview image nor start-play link. And this is because of advertising revenue protection settings. They don't want their videos playing 'framed' within another website (without their ads - or worse someone else's ads).
When you changed the [/video] end-tag to match the youtube video prefix tag the Forums php coding didn't know what to do with the undefined tag 'bracketing' the URL so it created a link (which is the default handling when rendering a post).
In the future you are better off just using the "Create link" widget: there are two inputs (the URL to the remote site - in this case a youtube video) and a description.
It's not the media tag that has changed. It's the API on the youtube side. When you use the media tags provided by our Forum you get a blank line. This is because our Forums are recognizing the request to embed the video - but the youtube API is no longer returning a preview image nor start-play link. And this is because of advertising revenue protection settings. They don't want their videos playing 'framed' within another website (without their ads - or worse someone else's ads).
You kind of explained this before but I didn't realize that it was how YouTube handles it in regards to preview, that makes sense...but I'm not exactly sure why they wouldn't want that ability, it spreads their videos....Hmmmm...
I guess it's something we'll just need to live with. It was nice being able to have the videos embedded in a message, but I guess we'll need to live without it in the future...
Originally Posted By: stock49
When you changed the [/video] end-tag to match the youtube video prefix tag the Forums php coding didn't know what to do with the undefined tag 'bracketing' the URL so it created a link (which is the default handling when rendering a post).
So I guess the best I can do is just create a link.
Originally Posted By: stock49
In the future you are better off just using the "Create link" widget:
Will do, thanks for explaining that...I was on the road most of the weekend visiting my Mom with my kids, and my wife is in Japan right now...you kind of explained this to me last week, I guess I'm getting old...
Hope everyone is doing ok during this lockdown. Our local inliners haven't been able to meet for 2 or 3 months and cancelled indefinitely until the Pres. finds out more info on when we might be able to <gasp> be around other people. I guess Cat Stevens said it best...Ooh baby, baby, it's a wild world...and it's hard to get by just upon a smile...
God doesn't like ugly.
