I have a chance to get a buildable Chevy 250 straight 6 to replace my tired 235 in my 53. Both need a full rebuild and machine work. SO which one is better? Are the speedparts available for this engine like they are for the 235? I would want finned valve cover, matching side plate , 2 carb intake, Fenton split exhaust or a split maifold. Also what would the pros and cons of this engine vs the 235? Also will a T5 bolt up to this engine? I did a search but I didn't some up with much. I'm also headed over to the stovebolt page to do some looking.
If the 53 is a stick, its a babbit bearing motor, no contest for using the 250. If the 250 is an integeral intake 2 barrel motorthe heads are very prone to cracking. Im sure others more knowledgable can be more help
the 250 is a nice upgrade and gives the option of any trans combo you might want to run by simply bolting it on. the 235 needs adaptors for auto and t-5 needs its share of mods to bolt up to the 235. www.stovebolt.com is another site for info
I know about inliners.org, I know about stovebolt.com. The engine is a '59 235. No worries about the old connecting rods... The 250 is out of a 64 chevy pickup. I'm not a novice here. I know all there is to know about the 235. However, I have never messed with a 250.
They both have advantages and disadvantages. Sounds like you're going for the old-time look, which makes me think that you really want the engine to look like it's from the 50s, and a 250 just won't do that (to those of us who know the difference). But you probably are also concerned about performance, reliability, and cost, and in these areas the 250 is better. The 235 will be easier to install, as the 250 mounts, bellhousing, etc are different. On the issue of the year of the engine, it shouldn't be too hard to find a later 235 to build if your engine now is the babbit bearing version. Tough choice, glad it's you making it, not me!
I believe the 250 is longer and taller, so it may take more work to fit it in and, as someone else said, motor mounts. There are speed parts for the 250, but they won't look as "vintage" as 235 parts. T hen again, you could leave the hood down, show off the car and DRIVE it. With the hood down no one will know what kind of 6 you have
actually you can get vintage looking speed parts for the 250. i have a set of langdon cast iron hedders, and there is a adapter to install a 235 style valve cover on the 250. also the mercruiser/volvo boat motors have some cool valve and side covers,
Go with the 250 a much better engine with better parts etc. I just finished building one ( will do a hamb post this week some time on the build) and the paint is still wet! Tom langdon helped with the side covers,marine camshaft abd split manifold etc. We machined the old intake and plan on using two of the glass bowl holleys etc. The distributor was a ebay special. I cut and polished the crank, new rings, camshaft ( marine for more lift) and dipped the block with new cam bearings etc. Shes a beauty????
good lookin' motor, gmc....what's it goin' in? btw, 194 heads are s'posed to bump the compression on the 230/250's....
I just finished a 250 Look up Clifford Performance and Larrowe and Sons CLIFFORD IS MORE PERFORMANCE BASED I found a 3 single barrel manifold
.....Ditto.....Tom Langdon stovebolt for all the info you need.....the 250 is a great motor ....and mine goes like stink.....lots of dress up and performance parts available.....the 250 and 292 blow the 235 out of the game....I've had them all.....no brainer.....
The problem with putting a 250 in where a 235 was is for the same amount of work you can put a small block V8 in there too. With the right bell, the mods needed to actually bolt the T5 to a 235 are minimal. If you were looking at a motor you could throw in and go with, that would be one thing, but I don't think I'd spend the time to build either one of them, I'd go find a done engine and use that - unless I felt like I wanted to build a motor myself.
If the "250" came out of a '64 truck, you'd better check the numbers; it's probably a 230. There were no 250s until 1966.
That is what I just realized. The guy said it was a 250. I don't know anything about straight 6's after 62. When I ran the numbers it seems that it is a 230. I guess that solves my delima. No brainer there...
A 230 still makes more power than a 235,is 30# lighter,& cheaper to rebuild.If you insist on a 235( which I still think is a better looking engine) try to find a 261( came in bigger trucks & school busses) it won't cost much more to rebuild than a 235 & gives a little more power.
As stupid as it sounds, I agree. I am really trying to keep this car period correct. Or close to it. Everything but the transmission, driveshaft and rear end pre 1960. You just can't dress up those mid to late 60's and early 70's 6's up the way you can one from 54 - 62. Thanks guys. If I can find a 261 I'll go with it but if not I'll stick with the 235.
Sorry to dig up an old post, but can the motor mounts on the 250 be converted to the front style like the 235 has? I understand the 250 has side mounts like a V8. Thanks
It's been done. I rebuilt the '59 235 and have been driving it for close to 2 years now. Thanks for the input
mounts mouts blah blah.. put a 235 in a miata if you have a welder!.. I have a 250 in my 54 in avatar.. hei and dont care about period correct all I know is with the gears in rear camaro rear end and turbo 350 doing 80 down the freeway in Phoenix during summer has not been an issue.. good lil sewing machine motor...I want horsepower I will dump in a small block. lol.... think mines out of a 70's truck..
The Jalopy Journal
