Does anyone know if the 346 cad engine they used in tanks in wwii is the same one used in cars. I have access to one that i am thinking about trying to install in an oldmobile. I dont know if there are provisions for mounts or how the tank engine was confugured compared to a car.thanks for any info you care to share as i know very little about flathead cadillacs
http://www.robertsarmory.com/m5.htm hope this helps Figure 6 is a view of one of the two Cadillac 346 cubic inch flat head V8 engines as viewed from the rear of the engine compartment. The engine utilized the General Motors Hydramatic transmission making shifting easy, along with reduced training time for new drivers. The engine and transmission were nearly unaltered from the automotive application, which was usually found in the Cadillac LaSalle and other top of the line General Motors civilian vehicles. Since the Ordinance Department had failed to anticipate tank engine development requirements for future tank design, civilian automotive engines, especially those in large supply, were hurriedly adapted for tank usage. The Cadillac engines operated reliably but were underpowered. With one engine not functioning, the vehicle had difficulty operating without disconnecting one of the driveshafts, a time consuming task. The gasoline fueled V8's ran very quietly unlike the noisy radial aircraft engines in previous models.
Thanks for the info. It sounds like it may work in a car. Anyone else have anymore info they want to share ?
Here's 3 threads with TONS of info on the Caddy flatheads. Also, visit www.flatcaddy.com. http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=496866 http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=332457 http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=430439
IIRC, there was a bulletin just after the war warning about trying just this - tank engine in a car. Apparently there were more than a few folks who tried, and it seems that it is doomed to fail. According to Cadillac. YMMV Cosmo
There may have been a bulleton, but it's simply not true! There are a LOT of cars, especially overseas, that run tank engines. The accessories are different, but the blocks and internals are the same as the passenger cars- no problem with the switch.
Here is a reference for the compatability of tank engines in cars. http://books.google.ca/books?id=kex...wAjgK#v=onepage&q=cadillac tank engine&f=true The paragraph is on page 21 about 1/2 way down the left column. To paraphrase, some of the engine trans combos may not be compatible because they were reverse rotation units. Makes sense, like reverse rotation inboard boat engines. Dave....
Can anyone verify if the engines really turn backwards or was that a gm scare tactic for after the war?
Can't think of any good reason for a tank engine to run backward. Not sure how the HydroMatic would like that. I remember the little adds in the back of car books back then. "346 cubic inch Cadillac V8 engines. New in crate" I should get an old book and see how much.
I would guess that a Mil Spec Cad V8 would be some what like a Mil Spec GMC 302 in how different from civilian versions. The GMC had shielded ignition and was made to be water proof with a snorkel for the air intake. Also the Mil Spec block had different motor mount bosses cast into it as well as no place for a fuel pump. But I ran Military and civilian blocks interchangeably in my race car. Just a little more fooling around.
It just so happens that both engines are shown running on utube start up and they both are turning the right direction so I am satified that the reverse rotation deal is a myth designed to discourage engine swaps after the war.
The Jalopy Journal
