(first posted 8/30/2017) One of the more forgotten engines is the Pontiac 215 six, available on the Tempest and LeMans in 1964 and 1965. It has of course been greatly overshadowed by the OHC six that replaced it in 1966. The 215 was hardly anything that special, as it was nothing more than a Chevy six with a unique bore size (3.75″), which placed it right between the Chevy 194 and 230 cubic inch sixes. The only possible mystery is this: did Chevrolet actually build them for Pontiac, or did Pontiac build them itself? Definitive information is not readily at hand.
What is clear is that bold “PONTIAC” on its block casting. Of course, that doesn’t necessarily negate the possibility of Chevy casting it for Pontiac, but it’s clear that Pontiac was eager to have it be seen as its own engine.
The 215’s power rating was 140 (gross) hp, which was exactly the same as the Chevy 230’s power rating. Presumably Pontiac tuned theirs slightly differently to make up the difference given its smaller displacement.
And here’s an interesting tidbit: the four speed manual was available with the 215 six. Chevy would offer the four speed with the sixes on the Camaro, but not on their other cars. John DeLorean’s influence is obvious.
There’s incredibly little information out there on the 215 six, except that it is often called “Chevy derived”. That’s a bit of an understatement.
The only significant difference is that the 215’s flywheel and/or flex plate had the Pontiac bolt pattern.
So if any of you can clear up a bit of a mystery that I’ve had since 1964, I’d love to resolve it once and for all.
I heard somewhere that the 215 was built in the Pontiac engine plant, but Chevy supplied many components. I suppose the blocks could have been cast by CFD (Central Foundry Division) or Chevrolet. Who knows?
CFD (Central Foundry Division) – there’s a good question.
I know the GM Foundry in Defiance, OH was casting just about everything for everybody as early as my childhood (the 1980s) but the plant had been there since 1948. I wonder if from its early days it was casting for all the divisions?
principaldan, here’s a 1979 writeup of what the Defiance plant is casting—as well as all of GM’s other foundries at the time. I’ll try to find something earlier….
(bottom half of 1979 article:)
Can anyone confirm whether or not the intake/exhaust manifold bolt up spacing is different than the chevy 194-239-250 series ?
The bolt spacing on the chevy is 26-3/4 from outer dowel ctr to ctr.
The intake/exhaust I have is 26-1/4 from outer dowel to outer dowel center to center.
Bolt look identical in port shapes.To the naked eye this combo can fool you into believing its the 194-230-250 chevy combo, but will not fit. Linkage hook-ups,heat risers and choke coil mounting. And look nothing like the 216 and 235. The intake has rectangular cast piping and not the older round shape.
The intake/exhaust is the same bolt pattern as the chevy I6. Installed Clifford Performance intake manifold with 3 Webber 40DCOE’s and headers for chevy I6. I installed a chevy bolt pattern turbo hydramatic 426 transmission. Used a drive shaft from a 64 bonniville fits perfect. This was done over 35 years ago to a 1964 Lemans with 215 cid I6.
I went to school at Defiance College, and I remember that plant, on the shore of the mighty Maumee River. A classmate quit after his freshman year, because of an opening at Ford’s Lima plant. I hope he wasn’t stuck making Pinto 2.3’s.
That sure looks an awful lot like a Chevrolet bellhousing pattern…
It is.
its a Chevrolet 3rd gen six from the Chevy II but had some Pontiac components e.g. the use of a Pontiac flywheel/flexplate and as seen in the pic a ‘Pontiac’ name embossed on the cylinder block (at the time Pontiac did not have its own six – GMC’s Jimmy Six was out of production and this was the first shared technology with 2 GM divisions – a decade later as demonstrated with the 215 where it had its Chevrolet roots (e.g. integrated bellhousing shared with the V8s both SBC/BBC and W-series) the Iron Duke was a Pontiac design using half of its 301 (some of the 301 parts e.g. pistons, rods were used) but it retained the Chevrolet V8 bellhousing pattern using a flywheel/flexplate later shared with the 2.8L and a cam gear borrowed from the third gen six (250 and 292)…
I had always heard this was the “Iron Duke motor that was the Chevyll and Chevrolet’s marine engine four cylinder 153/181with re bopped rods and piston compression heights to make it smoother running and definitely NOT half of the 301 V8–the “half of a v-8” four banger was the Tempest four (194 incher) The chevyll fours and sixes were all from the same family as was the 292 truck six All used gear driven cams. the family included 194,230, 250, 292 sixes and 153 ,181 fours
it is
I wonder what the Pontiac tuners did to add the extra ponies. Looks like stock intake and exhaust. I see it has 8.6:1 compression ratio. Maybe a different cam and valves? I’m always looking for ways to enhance my 250’s performance!
Better yet, drop one of these “Pontiac” sixes in my GMC and I can carry the “Pontiac motor in a GMC Truck” tradition into the 60’s also.
Can anyone tell me what transmission will bolt to this engine? Like a chev turbo 350 or bop turbo 350 ect? Thx
There was also a 155hp version of the Chevy 230. It had a slightly more aggressive camshaft than the 140 hp version. That would do the trick. Quite likely, the two had the same camshaft.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/the-quickest-and-slowest-chevy-turbo-thrift-sixes/
Ah yes, I remember that article now. The image of the beautiful chrome valve cover and air cleaner jogged my memory. Thanks Paul!
rumors had it that the 155hp 230 had a bigger (possibly 292 truck carb) and did use the 292 truck camshaft
When I helped a local racer back in the late 80s with his “street stock” car, the hot ticket then was a 230 block bored a little bit and a 194 head for a compression bump. Maybe that was the extra hp? We weren’t supposed to port or polish, 1 bbl, flat tops, etc. And your 250 might benefit from a 230 head? More compression – seems like there was a reason the 194 didn’t help the 250 – the 250 was the “sportsman” class motor. the big deal at our track was cam, when all other things were equal, which they never were. Cam was unlimited and there was one older owner that had his own grind made somewhere; he happened to build our motors, so we had good stuff. All things equal, the head and few extra ci might be the extra hp?
230s and 250 had the same head, extra compression was the pistons 230s had flat tops and the 250s run dished pistons stock as does the 292 truck motor (all stock with 8.5:1)…The 194 head’s combustion chambers hinder breathing when installed on a serious engine
I would be surprised if Pontiac bought them from Chevy, given the high level of autonomy back then. Olds used Buick designs for the 215 V8 and the V6 but kept the same displacement. It is hard to imagine a Chevrolet foundry that would want to mess with a really small run of a unique block.
I would be curious if the bore centers lined up with either the Pontiac V8 or with the OHC six that followed. The OHC used the same 3.25 inch stroke and a bore only slightly larger at 3.875, so an increase of only .125, a bore and stroke that are identical with the Chevy 230 six.
My bet would be that Pontiac invested in block casting and manufacturing equipment expecting to use it all for the OHC, but buying as many off the shelf pieces from Chevy as it could to keep costs down on a dead-end project like this.
Someone may have already seen the book published about the Pontiac foundry. It was apparently opened in 1928, closed during the Depression, then re-opened in 1936. It does not address our question but makes clear that Pontiac had its own foundry which was surely able to cast the small number of six cylinder blocks needed, particularly if the plan was to cast them for the OHC engine.
Here is the link. https://www.facebook.com/pg/30.Millionth.Pontiac/photos/?tab=album&album_id=1078934745464772
The bore centers are same as the Chevy six. There’s no question that this is essentially a Chevy six with a bore size right between the 194 and 230. Even the OHC six used Chevy crankshafts and connecting rods, as undoubtedly the 215 did too, as well as likely other internal components.
Doesn’t appear Pontiac acquired the 215 from Chevrolet as block was cast with “Pontiac” on both sides so it would not be confused with the Chevrolet six.
the Pontiac OHC motor is very similar to the 194/292 Chevy family they use the Chevy cranks 194, and 230 both have the 3.25 stroke Chevy 250’s stroke is 3.53 and the292’s is 4.12–194 bore is 3.5625, the 230, 250, and 292 all have the 3.875 bore–bore centers are all 4.4 inches the same as the small block Chevy v-8
These days I’d suppose there’d be a disclaimer that the engine “is built by Chevrolet Division to Pontiac specifications.” Who knows, this may or may not have been the case.
The entire issue of who built what at GM is decidedly tortured. It was all built by GM, and I have no idea to what degree that the “Divisions” were actually at least semi separate legal entities.
This definition of division speaks to this…..
A corporate division, also known as a business division, is a discrete part of a company that may operate under the same name and legal responsibility or as a separate corporate and legal entity under another business name. Corporations often separate divisions along product or service lines.
No doubt, GM did have several unique divisions that had some autonomy as well as duplicate functions. And, that was part of what was fantastic about GM, you really did have several engineering departments tackling the same issues with different approaches.That’s a lot of creativity under the GM umbrella, with a dose of chaos, of course.
The fun definitely came to end with the Chevymobile scandal. Why that became an issue after decades of dramatic and obvious sharing among the divisions (the aftermath of the 1953 Hydra Matic plant fire being a prime example), is a bit beyond me.
This disclaimer below, now, therefore, attached herein, from the 1979 Oldsmobile brochure, written at the height of the Chevymobile scandal, is probably a pretty accurate statement of how things had been since September 8, 1908 when GM was founded.
It may be time for CC’s legal division to step in, I’m getting in way over my head. Is JPC back from lunch yet?
Guess he is!
The reason that people threw a fit about finding a Chevy 350 in their Cutlass was because they ordered at extra cost the Rocket 350 that many likely new and loved from their previous Olds. Then when the car finally arrived and they opened the hood the engine didn’t look right and that oil filter they had always used on their Oldsmobiles in the past didn’t fit their new car. Plus it wasn’t gold like an Olds engine should be.
You have to keep in mind at this time it was still the norm to sit down and order the exact car you wanted.
what scandal???? Chrysler Corp and Ford motor company had been doing it fo decades !!~ this was really stupid complaint
There was a 214 Bedford six and a 216 Chevy six this falls right between the two are they all different engines or just labelled differently
Don’t know about the 214, but I believe the 216 was Chevy’s original “Stovebolt” six design that grew into the 235 and 261 used until 1962. This 215 was derived from the 194/230/250 engines that arrived that same year from the sounds of it.
The 214 was a bolt in swap for early Chevys with a tired dipper engine and good for an extra 1000rpm it made those old Chevs move pretty well and Bedford 214s were as common as dirt here.
Olds 350 motors were put into the 1976 Seville, before the Chevy-mobile scandal became a joke on Johnny Carson.
Yes but that was just the engine they came with, there was no other (gas) engine. The Olds thing was done because the Olds factory couldn’t keep up with demand. So it was a crap shoot. Order up a “Rocket” 350 and when the car showed up it could have a Olds or Chevy 350 depending on what they had available when your car went down the line.
The intake, carb and exhaust all look like stock chevy bits to me. This pic is of a 292
This book says it is a Chevrolet Six. I know I’d much rather have a 292 than a 194
bear in mind that a 292 is 1-3/4 inches taller than the smaller motors as the blocks are 1-3/4 inches taller–may cause hood clearance problems on some cars
Thanx for this article .
I had a 1964 Pontiac Tempest station wagon with this engine and a Powerglide slush box, power steering and a dead AM radio ~ the car was gold with a gold colored all vinyl interior ~ a few days cleaning made it all look new, the radios’ fault was a damaged antenna wire, I fixed that and it was a great commuter that got good fuel economy *but* the damned oil light came on at idle cold or hot and I didn’t feel like dropping the oil pan to replace the bearings so I let it go .
-Nate
That’s when you run a combo of 20W-50 and gear oil. I mean, if you have to do the bearings, then the top end’s failure point is getting close anyway.
Ask me how I know…but it wasn’t my car or my money
Don’t think I didn’t try that or a wild variety of differing weight mixes….
The damn thing didn’t smoke nor use oil and had lots of pep…..
-Nate
Hey pal thanks for the info … One thing I’m pretty sure the used a super turbine 300 2 speed not a glide. not 100% sure i just recently acquired a 215 gonna play with it … there is zero demand for them but I noticed it does have oil light blinking as well
I still have my 1964 LeMans with the factory 215/auto 2-speed slush box. Works good and is my daily driver in the summer!
Still runs great!!!
I picked up a 64 215 and 2 speed this year. Runs great but would like some more pep. I know that little engine has more to offer. More fuel and more spark should wake it up a bit.
1964 Pontiac Lemans 215 CID inline six cylinder
Rebuilt 40 years ago 0.030“ over =218 CID race cam.
3 Weber DCOE’s 6 barrel’s with Clifford intake manifold and headers.
Weber’s required monthly linkage adjustment.
3 in the tree transmission. 14.88 sec 1/4 mile.
Ran good broke 2nd gear, installed Powerglide transmission 2 speed, very poor performance. P.S. has a chevy bell housing bolt pattern.
Installed Turbohydramatic 426 6 speed Automatic ran much better,
Until 6K miles later, the dual point distributer gear ate the gear on the cam. (had wrong hard steel gear) replace by factory service.
Replaced cam stored for 35 years.
2022 Just started restoration replaced all rubber parts on engine.
Installed Atomic EFI, ran 20 minutes @ 2K rpm to brake in cam.
Sounds great no load acceleration.
Needs brake restore.
Retired, bad knee, unknown completion date.
I’d say that they were almost certainly cast and machined at a “Chevy facility”. It would not make sense to set up a completely new production line for what was certainly going to be a low volume engine. I’d say Chevrolet employees were the ones that most likely assembled the basic long block too, again because it would not have been enough volume to make it worth a new assembly line.
One little tidbit in that brochure that I’d like to point out is the line about certain gear ratios being available on special order. In other words those weren’t boxes that could be checked, the order sent in and it be produced. It needed approval from someone located in the Central Office and is why there is the big fuss over COPO Chevys. COPO stands for Central Office Production Order, in other words an approval from the “Central Office” to build something that is not a standard order combination.
So when people say that they, their dad or the previous owner “special ordered” a vehicle, they almost certainly mistaken, they car was just ordered like many if not most cars in this era.
I’m inclined to agree with you; that’s the assumption I’ve been making for some time. I suspect Chevy cast and machined the blocks and heads, and Pontiac assembled (“built”) it. Undoubtedly most of the parts in and on it it were Chevy too.
A better picture of the Pontiac in the side of the block could possibly reveal something. When I zoom in the letters look distorted. That means it is possible that was created by scraping out a little sand, possibly with a template.
FWIW, here’s a little “press-release journalism” from fall 1963, where they *are* promoting it as “Pontiac-built” (alas, Detroit has always used the term “all-new” VERY loosely):
Keep in mind Olds A bodies up to ’65 had the Buick 229 V-6 as the standard engine.
It’s interesting that the above advertisement implies “all Pontiac”, when in fact the ’64-65 sixes were “all-Chevy” design and the automatic used with them was a Powerglide.
I’m thinking the chart that says 4-speed was available with a six is incorrect; and to my knowledge a 4-speed was not mated to a six in a Camaro either (until much later on.)
After further review, I guess I’ll have to correct myself, that a 6 cylinder Camaro could be had with a 4-speed, so maybe the Pontiac listing is correct too. I’d love to see one! Anyone know if a factory 4-speed six exists in a ’64 or 65 Tempest/LeMans?
This is from the October 1964 NADA magazine—the New 1965 Cars Preview, with specs from all the (Detroit) manufacturers. Four-speed does indeed indicate “with all engines”:
My mother had a 1964 Pontiac Tempest-Lemans Convertible with a 215-I6 and a 4-speed. She was hit in the front passenger corner (like a T-bone, but not the middle) which totaled the car with less than 10K miles on it whilst she was pregnant with me. She bought a 326 hardtop with a 4 speed to replace it.
The automatic wasn’t the Powerglide, it was the 2-speed Super Turbine 300.
atta boy !!!
My mother had a 1964 Lemans convertible with a 215-6 and 4 speed manual. It was totaled when she was pregnant with me right before the 65’s came out so she got a 64 coupe with a 326 and 4 speed to replace the convertible.
A neat derivative that I didn’t know about, thanks for the education. I had extensive experience with a Canadian McKinnon 194 in a ’66 Studebaker. Propaganda has it that it used stouter forged internals than the U.S. versions. That little motor loved to rev and delivered 20 mpg with a 3.73 rear ratio. That was a fun car.
This was still in the era when the public expected the engine in their favorite car brand be manufactured specifically by that division, especially for GM cars. While they advertised “So much of the buy is in the body” to promote Fisher bodies, or “Hydra-Matic only by General Motors” as superior, buyers accepted those major but ancillary components as shared throughout the corporate products.
But, when it came to the engine, they perceived those as a specifically superior product by that division which made it worth the premium price to obtain that car brand over the other choices. When the Chev-mobile engine scandal broke, it was one of a recognitions by GM buyers that they had been fooled by paying a Olds price for a car no better than the Chevrolet they’d bypassed.
Fortunately for Cadillac in 1934, LaSalle buyers weren’t so sensitive to which division build their car engine: while it was assembled by Cadillac, it was part and parcel the Oldsmobile 240 c.I. straight eight.
Paul, the best way to CONFIRM which division produced this engine, would be the GM part numbers for the crank and rods. It is likely the Chevrolet block, but due to the smaller bore diameter, it will have a different casting number. The head may even have the same casting number as the Chevy 3.8L I-6 engine, because knowing GM, they probably used the same cylinder head.
According to Hollander Interchange System, which uses the GM parts numbers as a cross reference, the Crankshaft can be interchanged from a 230 Chevy I6 into the Pontiac 215 I6.
http://www.car-part.com uses the Hollander Interchange system, which is what salvage yards use to cross reference and inventory recycled auto parts.
Found a yard, with 5 crankshafts in stock, in Minnesota. They list as both Chevy Trucks/Novas, when selecting the Pontiac 215 six. All of them are 3.8L 230 engines.
If Joshua’s crankshaft information is correct then the described “Pontiac flange” is out.
Which would make sense… why create a custom crankshaft that uses a Pontiac flywheel when there’s already a workable crank and flywheel in the Chevrolet bin?
In which case the trans really WAS a PG, not an ST300.
Notice the “A” shape cast at the top of the 215’s transmission bolt-up? It appears that the “trough” created by the “A” would probably mate with a Pontiac bellhousing. That unique casting didn’t just happen by chance, if the block was simply “borrowed” from Chevrolet.
It’s as if Pontiac was working up to the six utilizing Pontiac’s bolt pattern, rather than the block’s usual Chevrolet pattern. Too, soon after 215’s time the OHC six went into production, with Pontiac bolt pattern.
Could it be that messing with 215 production was part of the development work leading up to Pontiac’s OHC six production?
The automatic transmission was stand-a-lone, for the 1964-1965 Pontiac Tempest, and here is a link to what one looks like. The yard doesn’t list Powerglide or 3-speed. Shows to be Hollander 400-00884 part number.
https://www.hollanderparts.com/used-auto-parts/1965/pontiac/tempest/transmission/400-transmission-transaxle/400-00884-at,-6-215/part-234660-3314-1
https://www.hollanderparts.com/used-auto-parts/1965/pontiac/tempest/transmission/400-transmission-transaxle/400-00884-at,-6-215/part-234660-3314-1
here is a picture of the Tempest transmission. It was a stand-a-lone interchange, for ONLY 1964-1965 Pontiac Tempests.
I have a Pontiac 215 6 cylinder engine mated to 3 speed stick shift transmission in a 1964 LeMans. I would like to keep the engine because it’s an original, and somewhat of an oddity, but I would like to build it up for performance. I see from the previous comments that many Chevy 230 parts will interchange, but how about the Chevy 250? Is this series totally different from the 194/215/230 engines? Will some parts interchange?
I can shed a little light on the Chevy 216 and Pontiac 215 similarities- there are none, other than both being inline 6’s. The 216 evolved from the Chevy 206 in 1937, and continued in production up until the early 50’s, when it was replaced by the 235. It had a heavy wall casting and splash/semi pressurized oiling system. The 215 was totally different, manufactured with a modern thinwall casting and up-to-date full pressure oiling system.
The 250 is in the same family of engines as the 194, 215 and 230 and 292. I assume most performance-type parts will interchange, but you’ll want to do some research to determine that for certain.
I have a 65 pontiac tempest with a pontiac 215 6 bolted to a chevy th350 turbo transmission with a B and M shift kit. I just rebuilt the engine from the crank out. bigger oil pump, better crank bearings,connecting rod bearings, piston rings, a new camshaft, camshaft bearings, fiber timing gear,lifters,pushrods,springs and valves. I made a turbo manifold out of pipe and mounted a turbo with intercooler,blow through style and all the fixin’s. Upgraded coil wires and distributor. A transdapt carb adapter to a 2 barrel instead of my Rochester 1 barrel. I am working on boost referencing the mechanical fuel pump and I put an electric inline fuel pump, inline with it. still in the works getting ready for a startup soon. ran before the turbo install.
use the 292 cam timing gear as it will never shed teeth as the fiber gear will !!
As Ed mentioned : fiber cam gears are a serious mistake, scrap them any chance you get and always use an aluminum one and change the steel crank gear at the same time using only the one brand for both gears .
It’s your money, replace both if you want to….They are not sold as matched sets so anybody’s 292 cam gear will mate with the stock or aftermarket crank gear perfectly
You’re wrong Ed ;
I’m old and did lots of this job back in the day and using different brands of timing and crank gears always resulted in a howler that pissed off the Customer .
-Nate
I aint no spring chicken either at 76 !!….the noise was because of them both being metal gears which is why the factory used the fiber gears on the passenger car motors and using the metal gears only on the truck use engines–I’m sure the metal gear combos were not “howlers” and the use of the same brand gears would have not solved the problem, as I said before they are not a matched set (they may come in the same box, but are not matched by any means) Chevy did this probably beginning in 1950 with the arrival of the PowerGlide transmission to suppress any engine noise — to provide the guise of an expensive quiet automobile only the PowerGlide cars engines went to hydraulic lifters for the same reason
here is progress so far
here is another shot.
Tom, Do yourself a favor and ditch the fiber cam timing gear in favor for a Chevy truck aluminum unit (fits all 194-215-230-250-292 engines)–it won’t let you down like the fiber one will–you probably won’t notice the extra noise, but when the fiber one sheds its teeth–the silence will be deafening ! Tomkyle64 referenced Leo Santucci’s book (now in revised blue cover edition) it is nearly the Bible on the 194/292 engine series–the Chevy/Olds “scandal” is a joke–what about the other “big two” they had “corporate” motors years before GM
Car is all together and Im making 6psi of boost on stock manifolds. i built a box around the stock carb and the damn thing works.
I am revising my turbo setup and buying a turbo manifold from 12 bolt.com and also the bigger 4 barrel clifford intake. I will post how it goes. so far i have put 2000 miles on the car with the turbo but i had to build a box around the stock carb to blow boost into the equilize the pressure. That way the pressure on the outside of the carb is the same as the inside, so the carb acts normal just in a boosted atmosphere i didtched the rochester 1 barrel carb and added a rochester 2 barrel. I can run 5 pounds of boost on a regular car with this method. I am excited to see what these new manifolds will do.
Hey Thomas I would love to see what parts you used in this build as I’m going to try and do the same! Please feel free to email me at
metcalfx@gmail.com
Tom:
I have a 63 Nova wagon that has a Pontiac 215 inline 6 and saw your post about turbo’s on it. I would like to pick your brain a little about it because I would like to do the same.
here is my email if you wouldn’t mind helping me out a little. thanks Brian
brianfunk40@gmail.com
Add me on Facebook we can chat in messenger if you want. My name is Tom Cooley. There are a few of us. Im a younger guy with a beard. Add me on there
In earlier days most folks had turbos arranged in a “draw-thru” fashion and they worked fine read this from “!2 bolt Tom’s” site — very simple–almost crude, but it worked wonders with no air boxes
https://www.12bolt.com/turbo-tornado.html
I had a 1965 Pontiac LeMans with a 215 straight 6. 3 speed on the floor. Had it from 1983 to 1992. One of the most reliable vehicles I have ever owned. I wish I still had it. Bought it for $325 and sold it for a hundred and sold it for $155. 💚💛💜
Does anyone know where I can get a standard fly wheel for the 215 Pontiac six
Wow, I love to see all these comments about this obscure engine. I learned to drive in my dad’s 1964 LeMans, 215 six and two speed automatic. I bought my first car in the summer of 1973, a different ‘64 LeMans with this inline six and three-on-the-tree. It got me almost all the way through commuting four years to Engineering School until the frame cracked in Spring 1977. I was fortunate to find a factory console and floor shifter between my freshman and sophomore years, and I also found a genuine ‘64 GTO hood with the fake hood scoops which I repainted along with the rest of the car. It was still an inline six rated at 140 gross HP, and the period-correct Thrush muffler must have surely added at least one more horsepower.
For all these years I assumed the 215 was obviously based on the Chevy 194-230-250 given the overall appearance, essentially same carburetor, valve train, oil filter, etc. FWIW I easily dropped a ‘65 Chevy 230 into a ‘67 Firebird with its original Muncie 4-speed using Camaro motor mounts for my first winter beater car. But I have always been curious about my dad’s ‘64; was it a Powerglide or something else out of the GM parts bin? I’ve read both sides in this thread.
Being a salesman of manufacturing capacity has given me a rudimentary understanding of quite a few manufacturing processes. Based on that understanding, my GUESS is that the Pontiac 215-6 was most likely assembled on the same lines as a Chevy 6. I can find no info to back up my guess, but an understanding of the process economics gives me quite a bit of confidence in that guess.
Assembly lines are incredibly complicated and interconnected. The assembly equipment orientations required of an inline engine versus a v-type engine are very different. Even today with the wide use of computerized servos, I doubt it would be economic switch an engine assembly line back and forth between inline and v-type assembly. It is far more practical to use an assembly line dedicated to a particular engine orientation and deal with the issues of production line changeovers for varieties of engines using the same orientation.
One of the reasons Pontiac designed their original 4 cylinder engine as a slant engine was that it could use the same assembly line equipment as their existing v-type engines. Same reason Buick designed a V6 rather than an inline 6 for the early 60s Buick Special.
Even though it wouldn’t make economic sense, I can’t rule out that Pontiac set up their own separate 6 cylinder assembly line. Pontiac division would likely have had to buy Chevrolet assembled engines. GM was GM after all and it retained a sharper divisional setup in the 1960s. It wouldn’t be the first case of intercompany transfer pricing leading to a stupid decision.
As to the special emboss on Pontiac blocks, this would be a relatively minor change in the sand casting process commonly used to make engine blocks. Keep in mind that the sand molds used to cast the block are used only once. A new sand mold (with reused sand) is made for each engine block. Since the sand used is comparatively easy to form and can be done with low cost materials, adding or subtracting engine block embosses is a fairly easy and low cost process.
If you’re interested in how engine blocks are cast, I’ve included a link to a web site that gives a far better overview of the process than I could include in a comment.
https://www.studocu.com/row/document/university-of-engineering-and-technology-lahore/manufacturing-process/manufacuting-of-engine-block/11439511#
Back to what automatic transmissions were used with the 215, I wonder if they didn’t use a Powerglide with these rather than the ST300. The 215 clearly has a Chevy bell housing bolt pattern, and I can’t recall ever seeing a Chevy-pattern ST300. No question an ST-300 would bolt to a Pontiac V-8 as the ST-300 had a B-O-P bell houisng bolt pattern.
I just checked the ’64 tempest brochure. It says that the automatic had a 1.76 Low gear ratio (both 6 and V8s), which is what the ST-300 had. The PG had a 1.82 ratio for six cylinder cars.
This is getting interesting. FWIW, Wikipedia says the ST-300 was never produced with a Chevy bolt pattern. Most aluminum ‘Glides used with V-8’s had a 1.76 low gear ratio. If there were no ST-300’s with Chevy bolt patterns, either the Tempest brochure is wrong or Pontiac used a V-8 ‘Glide with the 215.
My first car was a ’64 Pontiac Tempest Custom 4 door with this drive train combo. It was SLOW, and mostly got 17 mpg no matter what. However, I did get @ 48,000 miles of use out of the car in the 13 months I had it. Therefore even tho I had to $pend $433.68 to have the engine rebuilt at Community Pontiac in Whittier, CA…..I can say I got my money’s worth out of the Tempest…..even including the $600 purchase price!! 🙂 Driving back and forth from MCB 29 Palms, CA to Whittier and Long Beach ran up the miles, fast. Aaahh…true love, now 55+ years later.
Yup, those were the day$!!! DFO
Those were pretty solid cars .
I bought a super clean ’64 Tempest station wagon for $150 off an old high school mate’s mom, it had the 216 and two speed slushbox and poser steering and a basic AM radio that played fine once I fixed the antenna lead .
The car was all one color inside and out ~ bronze .
Slow but only when compared to Hot Rods, Caddies etc. ~ it was just one more inexpen$ive GM product that did what it was designed to do very well indeed .
-Nate
It is NOT Powerglide. Pontiac didn’t use the ST-300 identifier (which was a Buick thing), but the SAE paper on the 1964 Tempest describes it as “a new two speed fixed vane torque converter automatic transmission” in two versions (air-cooled for sixes, water-cooled for V-8s, with different torque converters) and, significantly “vacuum electric type controls for the automatic shifting.” Powerglide had a vacuum modulator, but shift were not actually vacuum-controlled; ST-300 is vacuum-controlled like THM.
O.K., I’ll buy that. So there must have been an air cooled ST-300 with a Chevy bolt pattern used only with the 215, or GM made an adapter plate to mate a Chevy pattern 215 engine to a B-O-P pattern ST-300 transmission.
This is right up there with the Chevy pattern Borg-Warner automatic that Checker used for a couple of years! .
(This was supposed to be in reply to the comments above; it didn’t nest properly, for unknown reasons.)
The air-cooled ST-300 was apparently exclusive to the six-cylinder Tempest. Buick and Oldsmobile versions were water-cooled even with the V-6. I don’t know what bolt pattern the air-cooled units used, but it seems reasonable to assume it was tailored specifically for the 215, since that was the only engine those transmissions were mated to in 1964–65. The ST-300 used in V-8 Tempests was water-cooled and had a different torque converter (albeit still with a fixed-vane stator), so I don’t see any particular reason it would necessarily have had the same bolt pattern as the lighter-duty air-cooled units.
In any case, having a different bolt pattern or an adaptor for the automatic is a pretty trivial expense compared to the cost of engine or transmission production lines.
Also, while a number of period sources claim Pontiac used a hotter cam to justify advertising the same gross horsepower rating as the Chevrolet Turbo-Thrift 230, that’s not borne out by the AMA specifications, which indicate that the 215 and the 140 hp 230 have the same cam specs (and thus quite possibly the same cam), the same valves, and the same carburetor.
Pontiac claimed a fractionally higher compression ratio, 8.6 versus 8.5:1, but even if there was an actual measurable difference in real (rather than just nominal) compression, a tenth of a point increase wouldn’t make up for the loss of 240 cc displacement and 14 lb-ft of torque.
This fascinating CC discussion of the differences between the Chevy 194/230 and Pontiac 215 sixes (particularly regarding Powerglide and Super Turbine-300 applications) highlights how, while any business tries to keep their products fresh but still hold development costs down, there was no auto manufacturer better at it than GM among their separate divisions (at least for a very long time).
Even though the engines were quite similar, GM management back then was shrewd enough to have differences, minute as they might be, to qualify them as division-specific. The Chevy 230/Powerglide and Pontiac 215/ST-300 might have been alike, but they were still different enough to call them unique.
Sadly, in the extreme effort to maximum profits at the cost of division identity, those distinctions disappeared in the seventies and went a very long way to the demise of Oldsmobile and Pontiac.