I'm not sure it's a 216, but why would anyone put it on a dyno unless it was GM wanting to write the specs?

http://pugetsoundvintagechevrolet.org/Programs/6%20cylinder%20engines%20with%20photos.pdf


WAITA MINUTE...where's the oil leak? Someone posted a while back that 216/235s leaked from the factory.


Take a guess.

There are lots of reasons for having an engine operating on a dyno in a testing situation. The photo shown was taken in one of the six dyno cells that Chevrolet had at their Engineering Test lab facility which at the time of that photo was located at the corner of Dequindre and St Albin in Hamtramck, MI.

I didn't know Dynos were around in the 30s. I guess the aircraft industry used them but I wonder when autos used them in a testing situation? Any ideas?

Anyone that says Chevrolets always leaked oil is a person or mechanic that does not know how to repair an engine. Believe me when they were new and had an oil leak the owner would bring them back to the dealer and complain. We had very few oil leaks back in the 1950 which is great when you consider gaskets were wll just pain cork.
My 1939 has no oil leaks My 1950 has a very slight leak at the rear main only.

Now that I use the PCV , I don't have any leaks either. Replacing the Ball/Bell gaskets helped a bunch also. The old breather tube dripped everytime I parked it. The 235 doesn't use any oil either.

I think the crux of the controversy of whether a 216 loses oil or not is in terminology. Some of us who use the term "leak" do not mean it in the sense of "pouring", "pumping", "slinging", or "bleeding." Technically speaking, I suppose our argument is that owing to the cork gaskets and rope seal they are pretty much doomed thereby to early seepage. Over time (and not really that much when compared to other manufactures of the era) the seepage would increase and/or collect to the point they would begin to drip a noticeable drop now and then when parked.

Of course, some of us have not had as an extensive career or experience in repairing engines as others. Nonetheless, when we see how long it takes, after a good rebuild, before a faint oil discoloration starts to manifest itself on the pushrod cover, valve cover, crankcase vent tube and at the flywheel cover, etc we recognize it for what it is. You can call it whatever you want but we at least know oil residue when we see it.

It is acknowledged that some old 216 owners tend to hold to an exaggerated notion that they are prone to seepage and, over time, leaks. Most times installing gaskets imperfectly merely means seepage or leaks and the resultant drip is manifest sooner.

Still some of us do know what we are doing and hold to the expectation that that old 216 is really hard to keep clean if you are going to drive it and not have it in storage most of the winter, which may start in some places as soon as September and last through May.

Competing drivers at shows must decide whether they are going to drive the distance necessary or trailer. If the driven distance is relatively long, they will either be seen with a rag under the hood wiping the engine down or hoping the judges will skip the white glove inspection. Why is that?

Some of us have labeled the 216 as a "leaker" far greater than is warranted. I have been one of those. Such over-the-top statements should not be taken seriously.

Gene = almost zero seepage or leaks. Seems that some 10w-30 has begun to get by the rear seal.
Steve = Zero leaks but he cheats (the engine).
Charlie = Some minor seepage or leaks so far but I drive and lie a lot.

This is merely my opinion. And, isn't worth much. You know.
Charlie