Technical Chevy 235 to ‘52 Buick standard transmission

I have a 1952 Buick Special with a manual transmission that I am having a hard time finding a reasonable price, running engine for, so I thought, in the meantime a Chevrolet 235 would work for a while and cheaply until a straight eight comes along. Anyone know of an adapter plate for it . I don’t want to change the drivetrain, I may as well do the S-10 route then. I also figure most people would not know the difference. Some may comment on the roominess of the engine compartment!

 

Waste of time and money. Save your money to do the build you want or find another straight eight rather than have a cobbled together mess.

A junk ass S 10 is about a foot too narrow to stick under a Buick, that is not going to work no matter what the clowns at the spit and whittle club say.

 

S10 chassis?
You already have the best fitting chassis you can get under it

 

Have you thought of a Buick V8? No idea if one will fit, but if it will it would greatly expand the possible motor options.

 

I think the OP @Rusty Heaps is referring to using an S-10 transmission, not the chassis. In any case the 235 Chevy is a non-starter regarding adapting the Chevy bell housing to the Buick trans. I am eating lunch right now and do not wish to further delay that with all the reasons why. But, will come back and post more later.

edit: the Buick, Olds and Pontiac’s transmission to bell housing design is totally different the Chevrolet (and any other more common design). On the BOP’s there is no front bearing retainer on the Buick trans case. It is ‘built in’ to the bell housing and the mating surfaces require a gasket because trans lube is supplied to the front bearing. There is a provision for drain back passage to the trans case.

In theory, it might be possible to fit (adapt) a conventional front bearing retainer to the Buick trans. But from what? The input shaft length is another unknown. If you are adventurous, and have access to machine shop services, you may be able to make it work. But if the Chevy engine is only a stop gap measure, well....you gotta ask yourself if it would be worth it.

Ray

 

It was tongue in cheek that I mentioned the S 10 chassis, as too many people would start telling me what transmission to install without realizing that the car has a torque tube and the rear suspension is firmly attached. As for the Buick V8 the ‘53-‘56 nailhead should work without changing the transmission. Perhaps one could change out the transmission too, and do the Chevy torque tube era transmission and 235 engine. Any idea as to whether the U-joint is the same?

 

You are trying to push the meatball with a soggy piece of spaghetti....

 

My understanding is this: the Chevy torque tube and the Buick torque tube are not compatible.
The 235 Chevy engine mounts are all different from the Buick engine mounts. Etc.
But, hey, anything is possible... and sometimes we might consider anything to get our car back on the road.

 

Not in this universe. Way too many reasons not to do it.

 

They both are torque tube driveline and in that way, they have a few general similarities . However, in actual specifics, the u-joint coupling is considerably different. Once again, with luck, determination, and some machine shop work, it could probably be accomplished.

Ray

 

I was always told that was the reason for the nail head design was to keep the engine narrow to fit in the engine compartment of the straight 8.

 

Straight 8 and v8 we offered in the same year buick

 

''
Not sure but wasnt that only in the 1953??

 

Yes.
And the straight 8 was the standard, and only, engine in the Special Series 40. The Super and Roadmasters got the 322 V8. The Special was built on the GM B body shell (new body in 1951), the others on the GM C body variants which were carryovers from the 1950 models.

For 1954, all series got a new body shell, though it was still B body for Special and reintroduced Century. The Special got a small cube 264 version of the Nailhead and the Century got the 322. The senior series were C body and 322 engines.

Ray

 

When I was in high school, my girlfriend's folks had a '54 Century 2d HDTP, Chinese Red body with a Black top.

It was a beautiful car.

I know it's kind of of diversion, but Ray's post brought it back to mind; I would love to have that car today.

Ray, didn't the Century use the Special body with the 322?

 

Hi Denny,

Yes, the Special and Century were built on the same body/chassis ......the latter got the 322 and a 4th porthole!

Ray

 

Back in the '50's there was a popular mechanics (or something like that) article about a geezer that put a briggs and stratton engine in a '50 (or so) Buick. The thing actually moved.

 

I guess the best answer is to find a Buick straight eight. They can't be all that rare. Will the big Roadmaster engine fit the smaller chassis? The smaller engine was more common, and should be easier to find anyway.
What is wrong with the old engine? Why can't you rebuild it?

 

I thought the 4th hole came into being on the Century, and Super in 1955

Ben

 

Try to find a Buick straight eight 263 cui as original. Great engines and no hassle to fit to your gearbox.

Hennie

 

Rusty,

The 320 engine is four inches longer (and a bit taller & heavier) than the 248/263 and it is that length that would be problematic. All 320 equipped Buicks were built on an extended wheelbase (ahead of the firewall). Like everything else, many things are possible, but it's a complication guaranteed to create some headaches.

Ray

 

Ben,

I just researched that and you are correct, the Century and Super didn't get the 4th porthole until 1955 models. Guess my dessert tonight will be a serving of 'humble pie'.

Ray

 

LOL. Well, I had to eat the same years ago when I loudly proclaimed a "4 hole" 1955 HAD to be a Roadmaster.

Ben

 

My understanding is that the nailhead from ‘53-‘56 will mate up to the transmission in the 40 series Buick. I’m also aware that the 320 straight eight will not fit in the 40 series. Part of my reasoning behind this line of thought was to possibly goad some of the Buick fans into coming off their stash of straight eights!

 

@Rusty Heaps

Part of the problem with sourcing another straight engine for your car is the changes made in motor mounts in ‘49. ‘48 and earlier engines used a front mountIn plate system Behind the timing cover. Starting in ‘49 models, the engines were fitted with front side mounts. This consisted of four bolt bosses on each side of the block and pedestal mount arrangement.

This change make retrofitting an earlier engine in the ‘49 and later chassis more difficult. Otherwise, there are likely some 248’s available as they were produced longer than the 263.

Ray

 

1948 was first side mount

Ben

 

That’s what I was thinking

 

Ben,

Don’t you have anything better to do with your time than fact check my posts??

And, to top it off, I owned a ‘48 for awhile about 35 years ago. Either didn’t notice the mounts at the time, or it’s like so many other things I might have known at one time but have forgotten.

Ray

 

LOL. Things just happen that way!
I read all your posts. One of the favorites. You will get me, I expect, sometime. You are one of the few on here I would care/want to spend time with.

Ben

 

I think it was cool how Buick got oil to the hydraulic lifters in straight 8s