Dodge was bragging about having the most power of any of the Big Three trucks in 1957, thanks to their big hemi engines. This ad claims “new giant-power V8’s up to 232 hp!” There must have been an expansion of their engine line-up during the year, because the ’57 truck brochure only shows a maximum of 216 hp, for the 354 CID Chrysler hemi.
There’s also a few other curious details in that brochure…
It lists three V8 engines on the right. The first one, with 314.61 CID is a DeSoto unit, and then there’s the 331 and 354 CID Chrysler units. Did they add the 392 that became available in Chrysler cars in 1957? Or just a bigger carb on the 354?
The flathead sixes with 265.37 cubic inches stumped me a bit, as the ’53-’54 Chrysler six had…264 cubic inches, with the same bore but a 4.75″ stroke to the 265 with 4.766″ of stroke. Did they really make two different crankshafts with that little difference in stroke?
And here’s another tidbit: you could order that big six with dual carbs and split exhaust headers, upping its power from 130 to 141 hp. That would be a cool engine to have in an old Mopar.
mn
Wonder how long did it take that 232hp gasser to climb that hill with 10 tons GVR?
For 1954, pretty fast. Traffic didn’t move much faster than the 45 MPH speed limit. I can recall being stuck behind a labouring truck, since most had only about 150 HP. Passing lanes on hills were built to allow easy passing.
For comparison, in 1951, the Dodge semi had only 101 gross HP.
http://dodge-semis.com/Brochures/1950s/1951HH/pg04and05.html
He won’t have to worry that Dodge has a V-8 emblem on it. Lol.
The small displacement difference is more likely due to a different piston design than an entirely different crankshaft. Truck engines of the era tended to use slightly lower compression rations the counterpart car engine.
But would that change the actual stroke? I don’t see how. Seems to me that the only thing that determines stroke is the crankshaft.
Did they use the same journal size? If the trucks used a crank with bigger rod ends, that could increase the stroke.
Whoops, that’s backwards. They could increase the offset with a more narrow journal.
Piston design can change displacement without changing stroke. As you note, it can’t change stroke and wouldn’t explain the quoted .016” stroke difference. Rounding to the nearest .05” might. Marketing literature likes numbers ending in 0 or 5. Engineering literature favors precision.
Truck engines had a lot of different components that were of heavier service design. Can you imagine a “Power-Dome” V8 sucking fuel like crazy in a highway tractor? Diesel was the only way to go. Yes, in the 1980’s I saw a D-500, if I have t model correctly, as a 25,000 GVW tractor. it was built in 1956 or 1957 according to its owner who was a French Canadian. I had to communicate in my paltry French. he was hauling something with his friend from La Belle Province to New York City. We met in the men’s room where I had taken our boys for a stop. The man was funnier than the old truck. He was about 5’6″ tall and huge. He was at the sink shaving with his shaving mug seated on his hairy chest! It was a funny sight.
The six, single or dual carb, made all of its torque at 1600rpm while the V8s had to spin up to at least 2400rpm. Both sixes had a lower compression ratio than the V8s. Even by the mid- late-50s, the spec’s make it seem like a reliable workhorse. Didn’t the US armed forces buy Chryco trucks by the hundreds of thousands with the same engine? The inline flatheads were probably pretty popular with farmers and other operators looking for the absolute lowest cost for goods transport.
Chrysler flathead 6’s are quite the rabbit hole, there are a number of different families and I am not at all sure the 265.37 inch ‘truck’ 6 belongs to the same group as the Chrysler 264 6. As far as the confusing horsepower claims of this ad are concerned, I have no idea other than it specifically states “of the low priced three” and “15,500 to 23,000 G.V.W. class”. Probably need to carefully examine what Ford and Chevy were offering in that size truck at the time.
I’m only aware of the 23″ and 25″ long block versions, except for two early large sixes (268 & 310) in 1928-1930 for the 77/Imperial. But those have quite different bore and stroke dimensions and almost certainly a larger block.
This 265.37 differs from the 264.5 only in that bit of more stroke. But Googling for it brings up nothing, except a number of “265” Chrysler sixes. But are the the 264.5 or the 265.37? Oh well.
Going back a few years to 1952 there was a 306 cubic inch flathead 6 with a 4.625″ stroke. I think this engine was the smallest of the big dual carb. flatheads that went up to 413 cubic inches. I was under the impression that those were ‘truck only’ engines not related to any car flatheads. Could this 265.37″ engine be related to those? Then again maybe the engine was similar to the 264.5″ but used a different crankshaft for some other reason and it just worked out that way. I am really not sure!
BTW- some of those ‘truck’ 354 and 392 Hemi’s had twin carburetors. Very strange:
https://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/threads/392-hemi-intake-identify-and-info.637876/
a big petrol six works bloody hard in a truck even a little 12 tonner like these are listed for I drove a 300 cube petrol Bedford a long time ago cabover TK model it pulled quite well for what is was but the fuel economy was abysmal and not fast,
Gasoline heavy trucks joined the dinosaurs here a long time ago,@ $3.00 per litre x 4.5 for a gallon gas theres no money in petrol powered working trucks
$3.00 a liter x 4.5 for a gallon? That must be an imperial gallon because an American gallon is 3.75 liters.
In Israel we had a few of those but VERY few, this was really the end of gasoline engines in heavier trucks for us what with the stuff becoming expensive (in comparison with diesel) already back then. Most were owned by government authorities or the military where fuel consumption was irrelevant:)
Trucks didnt rate horsepower (like a tractor, they had brake, and wheel horsepower)see the NEBRASKA TRACTOR TESTS, the same as cars, I/E FIRST GEN. CUMMINS moved mountains compared to.. notice also the prized D-500 riggs of 57 Dodge trucks, but don’t let the dual quad 392′ Chrysler of 57 be forgotten with its near 400 horsepower, or 390 to be exact, an talkin big flathead Dodge 6 cylinders, bet you never seen the BIGBOY, the 331 CID FLATHEAD DODGE SIX? OR THE DODGE DEISEL OF 1939/40, CAME FROM DODGE COVERED IN CHROME IN 39! GO AHEADON, CHECK IT ALL OUT, BUT REMEMBER, DODGE BRAGS A BUNCH! THEY’VE ALWAYS BACKED IT UP BY BACKIN THE COMP DOWN!