|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,866
ChatMaster - 1,500
|
OP
ChatMaster - 1,500
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,866 |
Got my '49 home along with 2 motors. The original one has cylinder block casting #3835253. The other has cylinder block casting #3835794. He said it was from a '52. Went to Tech Talk and found that #3835253 was a '49. Couldn't find #3835794 but found out a '52 was 3835849 for a passenger and truck. Is #3835794 for a '52? It is consistent to what Gene said. The fuel pump sticks out a little more and had holes for center mounts. The carbs are different. The '49 casting numbers were by the distributor and the other motor by the fuel pump. Thanks,
Last edited by jerrygolf; 02/28/08 11:05 PM. Reason: change casting #
I think I'm a fairly wise person because I'm smart enough to realise I'm not too bright.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 29,863
Tech Advisor ChatMaster - 25,000
|
Tech Advisor ChatMaster - 25,000
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 29,863 |
Is the casting number 3835749 or 3835794? You list both in your posting. :confused: :confused: :confused: At any rate, 3835794 fits a 1952-53 216 engine.  :) :grin:
The Mangy Old Mutt
"If It's Not Junk.....It's Not Treasure!"
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,866
ChatMaster - 1,500
|
OP
ChatMaster - 1,500
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,866 |
It is 3835794.  At least I got it in the right forum this time. :grin: Thanks Dawg. This is going to be my driver and the '52 motor is in a lot better shape than the '49. He said it was ready to put in. Just have to change the motor mounts. Is the '52 a much better motor than the '49? I plan on redoing the '49 in my spare time but won't get at it for some time. Thanks again.
I think I'm a fairly wise person because I'm smart enough to realise I'm not too bright.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 30,701 Likes: 141
ChatMaster - 25,000
|
ChatMaster - 25,000
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 30,701 Likes: 141 |
There is a lot of confusion with the 1941 - 1953 216 casting numbers. Its because as the newer blocks came out they replaced the earlier versions when purchased through the parts dept. The casting number for a 1948-1949 is 3835253. This block can be further identified by the circle with an 8 in the center between the fuel pump and distributor....large rasied number. The 1950-1951 blocks are the same and have casting #3835497 and the is a O inside of the circle. It also has the main oil gallery sticking out farther on the left side (fuel pump same)....The oil gallery runs the full length of the block and the oil pressure gauge line taps into it. At this time I find the 3835849 for a 1952-1953 216 but can't find the 3835749 number in any parts books. For some reason the 1952 parts book doeen't list a casting number for a 1952 only block but could be 3835749. As you found the side mount bosses/mounting holes indiacte that is a 1952-53 block. The proff would be in the engine number that is STAMPED into the ledge to the rear of the distributor. If the number begins with a K its a 1952 and if it begins with an L its a 1953. The 1953 1/2 through 1 1/2 ton trucks and sedan deliveries used that 216 engine which looks like a 1952. The 1949 had a Carter W! carburetor and the 1952 a Rochester so they will be completely different looking. The casting numbers are in two different locations because of the motor mount boss deal. Send me pictures when you can. :)
Last edited by Chev Nut; 02/28/08 11:24 PM.
Gene Schneider
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 30,701 Likes: 141
ChatMaster - 25,000
|
ChatMaster - 25,000
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 30,701 Likes: 141 |
OK- I found the 794 number on the casting number sheets but find no record of the casting number in a parts book...The sequence number would indicate it as a 1952 casting number. Would have been discontinued as soon as the 1953 came out which had a minor casting change due to the water by-pass hole on the back of the water pump. The 1953 block was also sold as a replacement for all 216's from 1941 and up.
Gene Schneider
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,866
ChatMaster - 1,500
|
OP
ChatMaster - 1,500
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,866 |
Gene, In my first post I put both 3835794 & 3835749 which the dawg caught. It is 3835794. Will send you a picture of them both this week end. Also noticed that for the front motor mounds on the '49 had round holes and the '52 had square holes. I would then think I'd have to use the '52 motor mounts if I put the '52 motor in. Holes look like they would line up. Will be asking you a few more questions as I go along. Thanks.
I think I'm a fairly wise person because I'm smart enough to realise I'm not too bright.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 29,863
Tech Advisor ChatMaster - 25,000
|
Tech Advisor ChatMaster - 25,000
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 29,863 |
For some reason the 1952 parts book doesn't list a casting number for a 1952 only block but could be 3835749. Gene.......are you actually talking about casting number 3835794 instead of 3835749? In your last posting you refer to this casting number as 3835794.  :) :grin:
The Mangy Old Mutt
"If It's Not Junk.....It's Not Treasure!"
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 30,701 Likes: 141
ChatMaster - 25,000
|
ChatMaster - 25,000
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 30,701 Likes: 141 |
Yes, on my print out of casting numbers from some web site they show the 3835794 for a 52-53 216.....and I would bet it would be for a 1952 only as I have good reference on the 1953 numbers....Those sheets are always kind of IFFY. I can't find the 3835749.
Gene Schneider
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,866
ChatMaster - 1,500
|
OP
ChatMaster - 1,500
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,866 |
Gene, The #3835749 was a typo on my part. I just hit the wrong keys. Sorry.
I think I'm a fairly wise person because I'm smart enough to realise I'm not too bright.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 30,701 Likes: 141
ChatMaster - 25,000
|
ChatMaster - 25,000
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 30,701 Likes: 141 |
Don't let it happen again or I will come up and take your toy away... :)
Gene Schneider
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,866
ChatMaster - 1,500
|
OP
ChatMaster - 1,500
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,866 |
I think I'm a fairly wise person because I'm smart enough to realise I'm not too bright.
|
|
|
|
|