oletrucks
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [oletrucks] 235 Lower End & Cam

To: Hudson29@aol.com, oletrucks@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: [oletrucks] 235 Lower End & Cam
From: Passnb4U@aol.com
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 17:02:59 EDT
In a message dated 7/26/99 11:40:37 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
Hudson29@aol.com writes:

<< This weekend Brian from the Orange County Beater's Club came up to my 
 shop with his stunning '55 second 3600 and together we opened up the bottom 
 end on my used 235. The visible exterior portions of the motor had shown 
 ample evidence of a very low quality of work and I had hopes that perhaps 
the 
 lower end would have been a professionally done "short block" and out tyro 
 mechanic would not have worked his mayhem within.
        What we found inside has so far not been encouraging. First the pan 
 had several missing bolts. The timing cover proved to have three missing 
 screws, two of which we broken off in the block. It also has an ovaled hole 
 here and there and is somewhat beat up, signs of a great struggle by 
somebody 
 in the past.
        Our past mechanic had tried to reuse the lockplate designed to hold 
 the two capscrews into the front main cap and the retaining corners had all 
 broken off. They may well have been part of the mucho particulate debris 
 laying throughout the interior of the crankcase chamber.
        I didn't inspect the entirety of the camshaft, but one portion, the 
 fuel pump lobe, had a concave wear pattern and did not look promising.
        We removed the main bearing caps and had a look at the bearings using 
 the green plasigage. The number 4 main looked reasonably good with .0025 
 tapering to .001 at the rear of the bearing. The number 3 main insert looked 
 a little battered, but still was within spec at .003. The forward thrust 
 surface was just into the copper backing. The number two main looked even 
 more battered, gauged at a little over .003 (but less that .004) and the 
 insert showed some copper on it's sides. The front main was not inspected 
 because a broken bolt from the timing cover prevented it's removal. The rods 
 were not inspected due to an early call by the Boss to take her to dinner.
        What I have seen so far looks marginal at best. My every instinct 
 says that this motor is worn and needs serious work. In this motor's favor, 
 it was running well when removed and probably has some life left in it. I 
 will have to take a look at the rods to see if they can break the decision 
 one way or the other.
        Questions:
 
        1. Can the cam gear be removed and replaced without removing the cam?
 
        2. Is that concave wear pattern on the cam lobe mean this cam is not 
 usable?
 
        3. Is there any necessary problem with the copper starting to show on 
 the inserts if the clearance is still within spec?
 
 Paul O'Neil, Hudson29@aol.com >>


  My opinion would be to mic the crank, compare to spec's to see if it's been 
turned or not, if has been turned, replace the bearings with the appropriate 
sizes mains and rods).

  The copper showing on the insert is signs of the bearing wearing, but I'm 
surprised that you have a good a clearance that you do, which allows me to 
speculate some, the bearing you gauged with a taper to it, make me wonder if 
someone filed the bearing caps instead of replacing the inserts, or I guess 
maybe it's possible the cap was reversed causing premature wear.
  Although I never watsed platigauge on an obviously worn bearing, I'd think 
it would be in the .009 and above range, I think there is supposed to be .005 
of babbiting on an insert, above it, this, and an uneven wear, makes me think 
the cap was filed.

  As far as the concave pattern on the cam lobe for the FP, you can get 
around it if you don't want to spring for a new cam, just run an electric 
pump, once a cam lobe begins to wear, it'll just keep getting worse.

  As far as the cam gear, I haven't taken apart a 235, but if you're 
referring to the timing gear on the front of the block, I don't see why the 
cam would have to come out, if you're referring to the gear for the 
distibutor, then it probably does need to be taken out.

  Good luck.

  Mike
oletrucks is devoted to Chevy and GM trucks built between 1941 and 1959

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>