<VV> 61 Loadside update and questions

[RoboMan91324 at aol.com]

Jamie,

Here are a several points which are subject to opinion, of course.

1.)  The cylinders are fairly robust.  You may be able to use them as-is 
especially if the cross hatch pattern is still good.  Check them for roundness 
with an inside diameter gage and if they are OK and there is no obvious problems 
observed, I would use them.  You should check them for roundness at several 
levels from top to bottom.  If you are still nervous about using them as-is, you 
should feel safe getting them bored out.  ...... or you can send them to me.  
:-)

2.)  The stock 102 HP engine is not a good engine for an FC.  It was only 
offered on the FCs for part of one year (1963, engine code VD) until they found 
that the torque and HP kicked in at RPMs too high to be useful.  In effect, the 
extra weight and poor aerodynamics of the FC, pretty much kept this very high 
compression engine at low RPMs where it would lug and knock.  This may have 
contributed to its premature failure in the truck.  Other than the turbo 
engines, the 102 was the HOT 145 CI engine in the cars at one time.  As you may 
recall, I said the STOCK 102 engine is not ideal for use in FCs.  I have no idea 
if the distributor has been changed, the heads have been modified for better 
quench or if any of a multitude of changes have previously occurred over the 
years to make your particular engine a better candidate for the truck.  In any 
case, I agree that the present heads may have overheated and should be replaced. 
 

3.)  If your engine is a VD or other truck engine, it is valuable simply 
because it is a real truck engine.  Most FCs have car engines in them these days.  
You can take any FC block and turn it into a 110 HP with modification to the 
block and swapping of other parts including the crank from a 164 CI engine.  
You will have an engine identifiable as belonging in a truck and you will have 
more HP and torque where you can use it.  The only original 164 CI engines (95 
and 110 HP) were offered in 1964 and 1965.  They are quite rare and valuable 
especially the 1965 engines.

Good luck,

Doc
1960 Vette; 1961 Rampside; 1962 Rampside; 1964 Spyder coupe; 1965 Greenbrier; 
1966 Corsa Turbo Coupe; 1967 Nova SS; 1968 Camaro ragtop
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In a message dated 11/23/2008 9:00:37 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
virtualvairs-request at corvair.org writes:

> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2008 21:14:04 -0600
> From: "The Reinharts" <jtreinhart at omnitelcom.com>
> Subject: <VV> 61 Loadside update and questions
> To: <virtualvairs at corvair.org>
> Message-ID: <01B9A4B72D444E5A8E7FB2DBAE25C599 at yourrzz82f2v3l>
> Content-Type: text/plain;    charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> All, Spent the last few evenings taking apart the engine in the new 
> Loadside. It appears that is was rebuilt at some point and only had a few miles on it 
> until it was driven until it burned up. The cross hatch pattern is still 
> very visible in the .040 over jugs with new pistons. No. 1 and 3 pistons have a 
> quarter of an inch missing from the bottom of the piston all the way to the 
> oil rings. Cylinders are dark colored and several valves in the 102 HP heads 
> are blue in color. It takes at least 600 degrees to turn steal blue. I would 
> guess the heads are junk. I may bore the cylinders to .060 just for the fun of 
> it or bore some other cyls. Cam and lifters still look new. Rod and main 
> brgs. were new but have had so much alum. from the pistons go through them they 
> are junk. Crank looks ok but I have not measured it yet. Original V block 
> looks ok but I need to clean it, reassemble it and measure the cam bores. If 
> that isn't bad enough last night I decided to drain the rear end and t
> rans. and do a quick visual inspection. Pulled the drain on the rear end and 
> got more water out of it than rear end grease. Pulled the cover off and 
> found there was no gasket under the cover. It appears this rear end layed around 
> outside for some time without the gasket. Trans. and rear end are not 
> original to the truck but has a HE stamp. Some surface rust is visible so I will 
> have to completely disassemble it and inspect everything. Trans. is the same 
> story. Now for some questions. When I rebuild the engine is it ok to rebore the 
> cylinders after they have been so hot or is it better to start with some 
> other cyls.? I have the original 80 HP heads which were not on the motor when it 
> was destroyed. Should I use them or should I use some 102 heads that I have? 
> I am not planning on using the truck to haul much for weight or to tow 
> anything heavy. Is there any great advantages for one over the other. Obviously 
> more HP and possibly a little better mileage with the 102 heads. Also
>   if the rear end is junk I have two options. I have a 3:27 ratio rear end 
> lying around or I know a club member who is willing to sell me a parts van at 
> a great price. I see the 3:27 was an option in the FCs. Is the 4-speed and 
> the 3:27 rear end a livable combination or should I stick with 3:89 gears?  
> Thanks in advance for all your helpful replies.
> 
> Jamie
> ICE member
> CORSA member
> 2010 CORSA Convention Director


**************
One site has it all. Your email 
> accounts, your social networks, and the things you love. Try the new AOL.com 
> today!(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212962939x1200825291/aol?redir
> =http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp%26icid=aolcom40vanity%26ncid=emlcntaolcom00
> 000001)