VCCA Home Forums TECHNICAL - 1945 AND NEWER 1949-1954 How tight is too tight!

I recently purchased a 1951 Convertible that had been in storage for 42 years. Just prior to storage, a totally rebuilt 216 ci was installed, but never run. I pulled the head and checked the top end, which looked great. I cleaned up the valve train, a new copper head gasket, and reinstalled. I didn't pull the pan; after seeing the top end I felt fairly comfortable. I wired it, put in a new radiator, and got it ready to fire.

I put in a 6v Optima battery out of another car and it fired right up and ran good. After about an hour of run time, I re-adjusted the valves and re-torqued the head.

Each time I started it, it seemed turn over slower. Ultimately I had to jump it with a 12v battery to start it. Even that seemed to get more difficult with each start.

At that point I was using a standard 6v, 700cca, which would not spin it. There's probably 2 hours of run time on it, including one turn around the block.

Before going any farther, I pulled the starter, took it to a good rebuilder, and had it gone through, new HD field coils and new solenoid. Still would not spin it.

This morning I pulled the plugs, hit the starter, and it appears to spin well. When it was running previously, I checked the temp with a digital thermometer and it never got above 175 degrees. I also pulled the distributor, spun the oil pump and had about a 20 psi on a remote gauge.

My big concern is the bottom end, which I didn't get into. If it spins OK with the plugs out, am I safe to ASSUME that the tightness is not related to the crank/rods clearances? I hate to pull the pan and try to check what-ever.

Any opinions?

I have seen new GM short blocks that sat unused for many years and the oil trapped in the bearings looked like rubber. I am wondering if that is turning to a sticky substance when it gets hot. Adding beutal-celusolve (SPELLING?) TO THE OIL AND RUNNING TIL HOT WILL HELP. yEARS AGO WE USED IT TO FREE UP SIEZED ENGINES THAT GOT ANTI-FREEZE IN THE OIL. GM sold it in a can under the Top Engine Cleaner name and recommended it for that use.
Another thing I would try is removing the plugs and dumping in about 4 Oz of MMO or ATTF in each cylinder and letting it sit overnight or pouring one of those oils through the carburetor with the engine running in case the cylinder walls are dry. I would suggest if you didn't do it, run the engine at a good extra fast idle so oil gets thrown up on the cylinder walls.

Sounds to me like both batteries are bad. Was it charging going around the block? Something may be killing the battery. Investigate that before you pour any of Gene's snake erl in it. Just kidding.

Do you have the same problem when the engine is cold? Check the ground cable, also.

If all else fails, pull the pan. Check the dippers. Are they scooping in right direction?

Consider tossing the 216, if it's not a show, car and stick a 235 or 261 in it. Also, a 53-54 straight drive rear end or a PG rear end in it. The 261 will make it haul a--! Will too!

Charlie

One of my concerns regarding the bottom end involves lubrication at the time of assembly, 42 years ago. Since it was never run, there would not be any "normal" oil in the oil galleys. However, I don't know if it was packed with something like "assembly lube". While that stuff is supposed to last, I've seen it get pretty "stiff" after a period of time.

At least we are thinking along the same lines.

Lubrication is definitely a possibility. I would check all electrical connections between battery and starter. Heat dramatically increases resistance. All it takes is a little corrosion to cause poor starter power. Checking voltage drop before and during cranking is a good test. Another thought is crud between the teeth on the flywheel that partially jams the starter gear and restricts it turning.

When I was younger it was common that rebuilt engines were difficult to restart after they were fully warmed up. It was just a common thing due to tighter clearances resulting from new pistons/rings, and adjustment of bottom end bearings. As I recall my dads car we were told to take it out drive it and varying speeds for at least a couple of hundred miles. I would not be concerned with your engine until it has at least 500 miles on it.

I agree with Glyn.

Way back when, I did rings and bearings on a 1955 265 engine ... in a 210. Same exact symptoms as what the poster is having.

After a few hundred miles( as I recall), all was well.

Read the original post. It states the engine was getting tighter and not looser with each start....that is in reverse of the normal.

As the engine was getting "hotter", the engine was becoming more difficult to start.

Seems the difficulty in re-starting was happening within initial minutes / hours of initial start up.

"Hotter" means less clearance, due to metal expansion .... correct?

Seems like the normal chain of events to me, on a newly rebuilt, tight engine.

Each time I started it , it turned over slower were his words.
Go back and reread his very first post.

Yes, I understand what you are showing me.

It seems like his starting issues are all in one event here, one afternoon of working with the engine, adjusting the valves, restarting, etc. He speaks of a two hour run time.
Thus my thought, concerning a HOT engine on a new rebuild.

Let me quote the poster, a bit further, to his next paragraph.

"Each time I started it, it seemed turn over slower. Ultimately I had to jump it with a 12v battery to start it. Even that seemed to get more difficult with each start.

At that point I was using a standard 6v, 700cca, which would not spin it. There's probably 2 hours of run time on it, including one turn around the block."

Guess we need to get more precise description from gpallen2. If the times it was attempted to be started are all within the same day with the engine hot all but the first time then harder to start may be normal. If there is a cool down time between starts then it is not normal. My and Gene's interpretation is that it was NOT all the same day when the engine was hot after the first start.

A good point.

Well, I think I may be over the "hump" with the engine. I believe I had two problems present and only attacked one.

The engine cranked well with the Optima battery. When I removed it, I took the 700cca battery out of my '52 that was working fine, but is three years old, and replaced it. It did start OK for a few times, and this was over several days. Then my problem started and got progressively worse. The battery checked out fully charged, but only on a voltage test; I didn't have any way to "load" test it.

I had purchased a new battery for the '52 and installed it. After some of the comments, I thought there was a possibility I was chasing the wrong rabbit. Last night I switched the batteries, put the new one in the '51, and guess what; it turned over fine and started!

The engine seems tight, but no more than any new rebuild. I took some of the suggestions and added top oil to the cylinders, all of which probably helped, but my basic problem appears to have been the BATTERY.

The voltage test didn't give me any indication of the reserve power left in the unit. While it worked fine in my '52, which has several thousand miles on it and should be "loose", it didn't have the power to deal with a tighter engine.

Just goes to show that when a problem appears, the process of elimination should always start with the simplest, most obvious, solution.

Thank goodness I tried this before I pulled the pan and made a mountain out of a weak battery!

Thanks for all the suggestions which did make me take a different view from where I was hung-up. As always, the exchanges with the VCCA members is invaluable. Discussing this with my wife only results in a blank stare!

Thanks again,

I guess the moral of the story is only change one thing at a time. If a problem arises then you only have to chase two rabbits. The one you created by the change and the one that the garage gremlins threw at you.

Thanks for posting the outcome....you just never know what to expect.

Your explanation is appreciated. You got to the source of the problem, that's the good news.

It shows that a voltage only test doesn't show the real picture of the condition of a battery. A load test takes the surface charge off the battery and also shows how the battery reacts to the strain of a load.

Just an update; I've driven the car maybe 20 miles in the last two days, first stop at the muffler shop to improve the sound from a straight header pipe, with numerous stops and starts and no problem, even hot.

Looks like my "problem" is solved!

Thanks to all for the suggestions and help,