Chevrolet 216 - engine bearings

[Richard Farrant]

Originally Posted by motto

Although the packaging is different (the packet that I have looks more modern) the big end shells that Mike found on E-bay appear to be similar in thickness to the Michigan 77, CLEVITE set that I purchased from Jim Carter a few years ago.
The shells appear unusually thin as the rods were not made to take shells.
I'm sure that 's what the reference to 're-manufacturers assemblies' is all about. The rods need to be precision bored.
This brings us back to the original question posed by Richard, 'what is the bore diameter of the big end to take these shells?'
I would also like to know the answer.

David

Thanks Dave,
There is more to this saga, on inspecting one con-rod so far, the big end cap joint faces looks to have been ground roughly and on laying the faces on a surface plate, it rocks! Not looking good

I fear more will be revealed tomorrow.

Thanks for all the responses so far

[John Mackie]

Richard, Repco Australia sold slipper bearings fit the 216 chev, part # 6B3308 in std, 002 , 010 , 020 , 030 , 040 , and 060. The dimensions quoted are shaft 23.311 / 2.312 tunnel 2.403 / 2.404 wall o.0452 / 0.0455 .
there is a page showing the machining necessary. if you need it I will have to go elseware to have it scanned.
They also made slipper bearings for Ford 100E (E93A ??)

[Richard Farrant]

Originally Posted by John 4172

Richard, Repco Australia sold slipper bearings fit the 216 chev, part # 6B3308 in std, 002 , 010 , 020 , 030 , 040 , and 060. The dimensions quoted are shaft 23.311 / 2.312 tunnel 2.403 / 2.404 wall o.0452 / 0.0455 .
there is a page showing the machining necessary. if you need it I will have to go elseware to have it scanned.
They also made slipper bearings for Ford 100E (E93A ??)

hi John,
Thanks for the dimension of the tunnel, I will check that out and see how it works out.

I may be back!

regards, Richard

[Richard Farrant]

Thanks John for your help. The inside diameter of con-rod (without shell fitted) was just what I needed.

Also thank you to everyone else who responded, much appreciated.

regards, Richard

[motto (RIP)]

Thanks John. That dimension of 2.403/2.404 is what I wanted.
I would very much like a copy of the page that you mention giving machining requirements if convenient.
No hurry at all but it would be nice to have.

David