Late 40s/early 50s engine/transmission options

Justin

I feel as if We are being "set up" for this is that type of question.

Starting with "Option A".
Locate a complete Fluid Torque Drive Unit. Remove your Fluid Drive Unit and
bolt it behind your 236 cubed Engine. This will permit a better 0 to 60 time,
and your MPG Data will improve.

"Option 1-A"
At the same era as you are writing about, The Vehicle Identification Number was
the same as the number stamped on the block. Ones that wanted to "do
sumthin more" purchased The Crank Shaft and Rods from a 251 cubed Chrysler or De Soto Six and just bolted them into their 236 cubed De Soto Engine.

If the person had a 251 cubed De Soto Six ( S15/ 1951 ) or newer they sought
out a 265 cubed Chrysler Six and did the same as above.

and used The Fluid Torque Drive

"Option B"
When De Soto started with their V8 they did this the V8 Bell Housing because
it bolted to the same Transmission. They also did this with the smaller and
lighter Dodge V8 to the same Transmission.

The main problem is the chassis - Steering Box area is not designed for Exhaust
Manifold Space on the left.

The relief came when Plymouth introduced their very own V8 ( which became The
A-318 in 1958 ). These V8's had a Rear Dumping Exhaust Manifold on the right.

This is the closest you will get if you want to keep your same transmission.

"Option 2-B"
Use a Fluid Torque Drive - with the A-318 ( up to a 1961 engine ), you may
keep most the same as what you now see.

Note: If you use any V8 - do have a Fan Shroud attached to the Radiator.

Rodger and Gabby
COS

ps
Remember the steering and the related parts was designed for when the Speed
Limit was mostly still 45 MPH.

Roger, Roger, Roger... what did I do to deserve such a goldmine of a reply? That was exactly the information I was looking for!

I'm not sure what you mean about setting up, though. If you mean you think I'm doing something dishonest, I'm not, just trying to weight my options before I buy (e.g. if I want to upgrade the motor, I don't have to find one with a running motor). I'm looking for a '49 but I'll take most anything with the style I like.

What I'd like to do is put a better motor in it, disk breaks in the front, seat belts, and A/C. Everything else I'd like to keep stock, especially the tube radio, which I believe will take some electronic razzle dazzle magic. I just love tube radios and the way they glow in the dark, the tone, and the atmosphere they create. I want a daily driver.

I didn't know there was a "fluid drive torque unit", I've only known the "fluid drive" on the '49. What's the difference between the two? Model years? Interesting, I'm Google searching it now but not finding much (mostly just "here's how to operate your fluid drive" stuff).

It blows my mind that they could just replace the crank and rods to make a higher displacement engine, haha, what a cool trick! Won't the compression ratio suffer? Then again, I guess that was fixed with a new crank.

Sounds like a A-318 is the way to go. I don't suppose an LA-318 would fit? That engine was produced until 2002!

My desire to upgrade the engine isn't really for hot-rod performance (although it would be nice to change the rear ratio for highway/interstate speeds) but to try to maximize what fuel economy I can (which I realize is a losing battle, trying to haul 4000lbs around) and make every day driving a bit easier. The 0-60 improvements in changing transmissions I'm interested in because sometimes I have to make "quick entrances" to the highway due to rush-hour traffic.

Were you referring to the steering not being power steering or that it gets wobbly at higher speeds?

Thank you again, Roger, I really appreciate it! Now I know there are options and a bit of what they are!

Justin

That was some good info!!!!
I am putting in my comment in regards to your tube radio. A member here, Tim Bowers, turned me on to a guy in Kansas who rebuilds the radios and I had mine rebuilt, new speaker and iPod dock put on it so I could route the dock into the glove box. It was not as cheap as putting in a different radio but I wanted to go with the original look.

Justin

The Fluid Drive is what you and a whole bunch of other De Soto/ Chrysler
Driver's have ( With Dodge's it is what only a few have ).

The Fluid Torque Drive is an Enhanced Performing Fluid Drive Unit. The Package
is a Bell Housing made of an alloy instead of cast iron - A stronger Clutch Pack and of course The fluid Coupling.

They made two design's ( version's ). One was fed fluid from the engine --- to
the Fluid Coupling and then returned to The Engine.

The other design (version ) is All The Fluid is kept in The Fluid Coupling.

*
You can think of The Torque Fluid Coupling/ Fluid Coupling as The Torque
Converter.
*

The first series A-318 Family of engines ( until the end of the 1961 Production
Year ) all had The Location Pin for the Bell Housing to Engine in one location,
and The end of The Crank Shaft Flange Extended farther out ( away ) from the engine.

From 1962 to the end of The 1966 Production Year All A-318 Family of Engines
have the Bell Housing Location Pin in a different "spot", and The Crank Shaft
Flange is closer to the back of the Engine Block.

Note: The LA-273, the LA-340 and of course every LA-318 all use the same
Crank Shaft as every 1962 to 1966 A-318 ( they use the same Bearing Number's ), . All you need is your Tool Set and new bearing's/ gasket's.

Note #2: The pre-1962 A-318 Crank Shaft ( the one which sticks out more )
will bolt into a 1988 LA-318 ( they both use the same Bearing Number's ),
and you can use the 1953'ish Fluid Torque Drive Bell Housing - as long as you
stay away from being active at a NHRA or NASCAR Event.

All of this V8 stuff "sounds Great". In reality the Fluid Torque Drive and your
six will be a power boost with an improvement in the MPG Data ( as long as
you keep your foot "out of it" when leaving the inter-section ).

Rodger & Gabby
COS

I have a '47 that is in the 4800 pound range and a '49 that is in the 3700 pound range. The '47 has a 251 and the '49 has a 237.

The difference in the acceleration between these 2 cars is great. That extra 1000 pounds makes a large difference on a flathead six.

The '49 moves out in modern traffic just fine. I use high-range (3rd) to start about 90% of the time here in San Francisco. Only at lights or stop signs on larger hills do I need to shift into low-range (1st).

I have to disagree with Roger on one point however. The Fluid-Coupling Cars get better gas mileage than the Fluid-Torque cars. Here is the reason. A stator, which is what separates a fluid-coupling from a fluid-torque, allows slippage once the power is being transmitted to the transmission. Generally in the area of 5%-10%. Now you make a little of that up due to the torque multiplication but based on what I have read it is like 1% or less. That is why they went to lock-up torque converters on modern cars. A true fluid-coupling car locks to 98%-99%.

I have not taken the '49 on any long trips yet. Heck, I only have 200 miles on it since I finished the restoration. So for the lighter car smaller engine I have no gas mileage data on it yet.

I took the 1947 to the Reno Convention. We went from San Francisco to Reno up I-80. We played around that week in Reno. We drive back via Lake Tahoe and Highway 50 back down to highway I-80 and back to San Francisco. The combined mileage was about 20 MPG. This was with 2 people, luggage, and a 4900 pound car.

A nice running stock flathead six is a fine commuter. I would convert the brakes to disc and leave the rest of the car stock.

James

Roger, you're a treasure. What's it like to walk around with that much information in your head? Can you fit through the door? Haha

What I'm basically getting, and correct me if I'm wrong, that it would be possible to fit an '88 LA-318 (which was, apparently, in production from '88-'91 and after '91 only LA-318 "magnums") with a pre-'62 crank shaft into a '53 fluid torque drive which through some kind of magic will fit in a late 40s DeSoto? That's just wonderful. Sounds ideal, even. Why, I bet the '88 even has A/C compressor mounts built into the case. Very convenient.

Of course, if I get one and the engine runs, I'd try to keep it as is. I mean, I'm not looking to reinvent the wheel, here and I don't have the cash to go around replacing parts willy nilly. Maybe just replace the fluid drive with fluid torque drive. Of course, I'd have to do some mpg tests stock to see if it's worth the investment, following James caution. Hard to imagine those old cars got 20mpg...

Justin

There are a lot of these cars around and they are affordable. I'd recommend you get a nice driver and just drive it.

After getting to know it, you might not feel the need to modify it.

Have a nice day
Steve