Register now to get rid of these ads!

Hot Rods 194 chevy 6

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by 36roadster, Dec 11, 2019.

  1. Can the 194 ci 6 cylinder go out to 235 if bored and stroked? Will the stock 235 head fit?
    I am looking at a late 194 to bolt up to a T350 trans, but need the extra cubes to push my big lump (47 Fleetline) around. These SBC trans bolt pattern 6's are hard to find around here (Australia), so I am stuck for choices.
     
  2. squirrel
    Joined: Sep 23, 2004
    Posts: 44,022

    squirrel
    Member

    235 is the old (through 1962) engine design, 194 is the new (starting in 1962) engine design.... no way will a 235 head bolt on.

    But a 230 or 250 head might bolt on, as these engines are just like the 194, only bigger.
     
    LOU WELLS and Old wolf like this.
  3. The 194 like squirrell stated is the 63 and newer shares many parts with a 230 -250 & 292 six. Has the same bell as a small block chevy however it has a small bolt pattern on the crank . only a 194 flywheel will fit on it. The 194 was made for a very small light weight car. It don't have enuf torque to pull a heavy 47 chevy. Its a small cube short stroke engine. Came in early Novas. Squirrel had to replace his 194 with a dual carb blown 427 to get it going.
     
  4. Mr48chev
    Joined: Dec 28, 2007
    Posts: 25,949

    Mr48chev
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    My 48 had a 194 in it when I bought it in 1973. I drove it to the Street Rod Nationals In Tulsa from McGregor Tx that year. Geared out right they move right along on the highway but won't win a lot of races.
    I'm still thinking that we pulled the flywheel off the 194 and bolted it on the 283 without any issues when we swapped the 283 into the 48.
    As others said NO parts interchange with a 235 as they are completely different engines.
    Also as they said if you swap one in place of a 235 you have to use a V8 bellhousing as the bellhousings are entirely different.
     
    Register now to get rid of these ads!

  5. Ive got one over at my other place. It has a little dinky flywheel. and the 292 flywheel has larger bolts than the 230 &250
     
  6. lake_harley
    Joined: Jun 4, 2017
    Posts: 748

    lake_harley
    Member

    My first car was a '63 Chevy II with a 194 w/3-speed trans. I got down the road OK but it was likely lighter than your '47 Fleetline. The combustion chamber of the 194 head is smaller than the 230 or 250 head, so I'd stay with the 194 head to maintain the compression ratio. Like virtually any other engine, a bit of head milling to increase C.R. couldn't hurt, as well as a bit better breathing with perhaps a small 2 Bbl carb or multiple 1 Bbl's, and a header.

    Good luck.

    Lynn
     
  7. Can you get the 194 head breathing better? I have read that the valves are a little puny. Trying to find a 230 or 250 head here would be like trying to find gold .
     
  8. anthony myrick
    Joined: Sep 4, 2009
    Posts: 4,876

    anthony myrick
    Member

    I thought you Australian folks were the kings of inline 6s.
    And interceptors (mad max reference, sorry)
     
  9. I know quite a bit about these inline engines... Heres what I'd do if I was you...
    The 194 is a good head cuz it is a small chamber, put bigger valves in quite easily. If you put it on a 250 then you will get some decent power. We have a few 250s here in Canada that have Holden pistons actually. Aftermarket cams are plentiful. Alot of the 230 and 250 share parts with SBC eh, like 307 stock flat top pistons are a bolt in to a 250, 230s fit a 283 pistons.
    We run 4" TRW pistons in the 250s, .125 overbore!!

    -Shiny
     
  10. lake_harley
    Joined: Jun 4, 2017
    Posts: 748

    lake_harley
    Member

    Lots of food for thought here..... https://www.12bolt.com/ In particular, look into "The Lump" cylinder head intake runner modification. I'm even bold enough to say it might conflict with what I said earlier about keeping the 194 head for C.R. reasons, but I'd rather you had a variety of sources to make wise decisions.

    Lynn
     
  11. Hnstray
    Joined: Aug 23, 2009
    Posts: 10,915

    Hnstray
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from Quincy, IL

    @36roadster ......you are getting a mish mash of info here.....go on line and order a copy of the Leo Santucci book about building the 194/230/250/292 sixes. A very comprehensive manual that is well illustrated and has part numbers, casting numbers, compatible parts listings, and details the lump port mod.

    I recently had a warmed up 250 built by a local race shop and I am quite happy with the results. Leo’s book is the Bible for these engines, mostly because it is a compendium of experiences and development by several big name racers that built the modern Chevy/GMC sixes. It will be the best money you can spend on the subject.

    Ray
     
  12. 56sedandelivery
    Joined: Nov 21, 2006
    Posts: 5,869

    56sedandelivery
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    I built a 250 six once, and used a modified 194 head (milled .060, bigger valves, spring kit), a too big of cam for the 3.08 gears in the rear, Clifford 4 barrel intake with a holley 2 barrel carb adapted, Mallory distributor, Judson coil/magneto, and a 4 speed trans. Fast little car after it got moving. My personal experience with a 63 Chevy II Station Wagon, with a 194 and 3 speed trans, was suprising. I bought the car for my sister, but I used it to move my 56 Chevrolet Bracket Car to the painters and back, moved it to a storage complex, moved it home, and I even used it to bring a fiberglass front-end to where the car was; I just strapped the front-end onto the back-end of the Wagon "backwards". Got lots of looks that day! It flat towed the 56 fine, but the brakes were a little concerning, so I kept it slow. It's true the 194's have a smaller manual flywheel, but it's not how it bolts to the crank, those are the same, it's for the tiny .little clutch and disc. In some cases, the flywheel clutch surface is recessed. That little Chevy II Wagon had a very straight body, the paint was faded and worn out, and the floor boards were almost gone (fixed them as best I could). It was a fun car, and had decent power, until my sister wrecked it, and turned the car lengthwise into the shaped of a subtle "Z".
    I am Butch/56sedandelivery.
     
  13. Which 194 are you talking about?

    The early BlueFlames 1929-1934 were 194 CID with very little in common with the latter 235/261 Chevy.

    Or the Chevy II 194 (230,250, 292 High Deck) which has nothing in common with the BlueFlame family, and has more in common with the small block chevy.
     
  14. Six Ball
    Joined: Oct 8, 2007
    Posts: 2,879

    Six Ball
    Member
    from Nevada

    On this family of GM sixes there were basically two heads, the 194 and the rest. The 194 was a quick compression boost bolt on from the wrecking yard. Pretty sure they all used the same valves. The 194 chamber is smaller hence the compression boost. As soon as you attempt to improve the breathing by adding bigger valves you have to un-shroud them and lose the small chamber advantage. These heads all have shared intake ports with a head bolt boss obstructing the flow. 10 + hp can be gained by just removing the boss and using a short bolt in those 3 ports. Several outfits sell lump port inserts that bolt into the port floor and redirect flow and add substantial power maybe 25-30 hp. The 250 is a stroked 230. The 292 has a taller block to accommodate a longer stroke. A 250 can be fitted with a 292 crank making a 292 that will fit in Chevy cars. Some work involved there. These engines have 7 main bearings and use the same rod bearings a small block V8s. The bottom end is built proof. .060 is said to be the max over bore but some have gotten away with more. I have a 250 that has .080 pistons in it. I don'r know it's story. I don't know if the 194 had thicker cylinder walls than the rest which are 3.875 bore. But it had a shorter stroke crank making it have more overlap between main and piston crank pins than the rest. That would make the crank stronger. The 194 could likely take a bunch of boost and be a real little bad ass. Boost would take care of any breathing issue.
     
  15. squirrel
    Joined: Sep 23, 2004
    Posts: 44,022

    squirrel
    Member

    looks like he's talking about the late 194, eh?
     
    Hnstray likes this.
  16. Six Ball
    Joined: Oct 8, 2007
    Posts: 2,879

    Six Ball
    Member
    from Nevada

    Oh, flywheels/flex plates. They use the same flywheels as the two piece rear main seal small blocks. The cars use the 12" 153 tooth and must trucks use the 14" 168 tooth. Some 292s use 1/2" bolts. They use the same bell housings as small blocks and can use the same transmissions both stick snd auto.
     
  17. Mr48chev
    Joined: Dec 28, 2007
    Posts: 25,949

    Mr48chev
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    My 292 has the 1/2 inch bolts. Looking back to when I bought my 48 with the 194 in it in 1973 and then drove it to Tulsa for the Street rod nationals from McGregor Tx that year and pulled the 194 and swapped in the 283 a couple years later the truck had a V8 cast iron bellhousing and matching V8 flywheel and starter on it when I bought it. We left the bellhousing and trans in place when we swapped the engines in it. Back in the days when you started a project at 5 pm on Friday and worked all weekend and drove it to work on Monday.
     
    Six Ball and Hnstray like this.
  18. The exhaust manifold from a 292 is larger and has a three bolt flange. should help performance.
     
    Hnstray likes this.
  19. belair
    Joined: Jul 10, 2006
    Posts: 8,166

    belair
    Member

    had one in a 66 El Cam. Wouldn't pull a sick woman off the pot. Put the head on a 250 and you have the start of cool engine.
     
  20. JWII
    Joined: Jul 17, 2012
    Posts: 13

    JWII
    Member

    The early Chevy 6 from 1929 was a 196 c.i. not 194 c.i.
     
  21. 56sedandelivery
    Joined: Nov 21, 2006
    Posts: 5,869

    56sedandelivery
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    Lets not forget the Olds/Pont application "small six", that was 215 CID. Those were used where a 194 would have been if the car was a Chevrolet. So; 194, 215, 230, 250, 292 is the order. I am Butch/56sedandelivery.
     
  22. pontiac 215 001.JPG
     
    X-cpe likes this.
  23. Six Ball
    Joined: Oct 8, 2007
    Posts: 2,879

    Six Ball
    Member
    from Nevada

    You are right but not all 292s had the three bolt exhaust manifold. There were at least 3 292 cranks as well. There were also some 230-250 heads where the intake was part of the head. Many of the blocks cast in Mexico had the least core shift. This is why Leo had to write a book about them.
     
  24. Mr48chev
    Joined: Dec 28, 2007
    Posts: 25,949

    Mr48chev
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    That book is one of the best investments you can make when you have one of these engines even if you don't do a lot of mods to it. I've got mine in the bookshelf behind my chair.
     
  25. At present I have over a dozen of the sixes from 1963 & newer. I like the 250's the best. I even have one of those early pre stovebolt engines it has a updraft carb. I have used a intergrated head 250 that is the one bbl version. it got really good fuel economy. and was reliable. I never had a two bbl intergrated head engine that the cyl head wasn't cracked. The 292 is a torque monster however they guzzle fuel. The 63 and up engines are RPM engines they can hold up at high rpm much better than the 235 and 261 engines.
     
    Hnstray likes this.
  26. Six Ball
    Joined: Oct 8, 2007
    Posts: 2,879

    Six Ball
    Member
    from Nevada

    I spent a few years on a non-HAMB friendly project prepping my '68 flatbed for a turbo/TBI injected 292. After gathering all the parts and building a Megasquirt board I got sick of it. The 350 in the truck finally wore out so some sort of 292 build is back in the mix. Head work, the right cam, the right gears along with better fuel delivery can help with the fuel consumption. So can lighter foot but I don't know where to get those.
     
    Hnstray likes this.

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2020 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.