• Steel Soldiers now has a few new forums, read more about it at: New Munitions Forums!

  • Microsoft MSN, Live, Hotmail, Outlook email users may not be receiving emails. We are working to resolve this issue. Please add support@steelsoldiers.com to your trusted contacts.

removing the governor?

JasonS

Well-known member
1,650
144
63
Location
Eastern SD
I have, chekout my trucks on the dieselstop.com or powerstroke.org same username just felt like it was better to not mention it in the end.


Jason I did not realize neither of them have dynoed it, how can you be so sure? I know tom has dynoed these trucks before, probably not this exact combination though I suppose. The info you have supplyed is good, its just alot deeper than I'm interested in going at the moment. That's why I'm choosing to go with more bolt on parts. If im not satisfied with them perhaps I will venture deeper.
I cannot say with any certainty that either has dyno'ed this combination. However, based on conversations with Clifford, this engine is outside of their main business focus. It is, however, EXACTLY what Patricks specializes in. But, I could be wrong; ask Clifford or Tom for ANY dyno results for the 302 (bet they don't have them). Further, nobody would build up an engine with this combination as it does not make sense with the very heavy stock pistons/low compression. You can put a nice modern Holley 2300 2bbl for <$100, keep the stock exhaust, use a civvy distributor with pertronix, and have a nice driveable truck. The headers, intake, and expensive Weber are, IMHO, a poor use of (what would be for me) limited funds. There is no point of making a race engine to use in a heavy truck. You will spend more than a 5.9 cummins and still be stuck with a 1930s era engine with four main bearings, no full flow oil filter, poor head design with siamesed ports, etc ad naseum. GMC's sixes were used FAR past their expiration date and were very dated even in 1950s. I will stop just short of saying that they suck.
 

blizzardwarrior7

New member
72
0
0
Location
Northampton, MA
Would the 2300 be a better choice than the 4412 mentioned earlier? I still think headers would be neat, as it would also give me dual exhaust. If money wasn't an issue would you go with one of those carbs rather than the Weber?

I've seen dyno sheets from tom, but not with this combo, pretty sure just a stock 302.
 

JasonS

Well-known member
1,650
144
63
Location
Eastern SD
Would the 2300 be a better choice than the 4412 mentioned earlier? I still think headers would be neat, as it would also give me dual exhaust. If money wasn't an issue would you go with one of those carbs rather than the Weber?

I've seen dyno sheets from tom, but not with this combo, pretty sure just a stock 302.
The 2300 is the large base Holley 2bbl series. The 4412 is the 500cfm model. I would suggest getting the 2300 series 320cfm ecnoomaster. It is similar to 350cfm but has better wagonwheel boosters, two stage power valve, and reverse idle ciruit. I used this on my 331 Reo and it vastly improved the starting and driveability over the stock carb. Plus, you can get gaskets and hard parts locally. Can't do that with the stock carb and Weber where I live.

I used Clifford's intake and headers for about 10 years. Overall, I am neither impressed with the quality or customer service. The intake was poorly machined; had to manifold surfaced. The headers didn't fit and had to be bent (these were supposed to fit this vehicle). The delivery was weeks late and Jack Clifford was dismissive of my frustation. I could have purchased the same thing from Patricks for less and he has excellent customer service. A problem with the headers is that you lose the exhaust heat on the intake manifold. If you only drive in hot weather and don't care about good fuel distribution, then this is not a big deal. I ended up adding a water heated carb spacer. I noticed NO increase in seat of the pants improvement with the 4412 and headers over the stock intake/4412 and homemade split manifold. I didn't run the stock exhaust so I don't have a baseline.

I would be shocked if what Tom had was something besides a chart out of a military manual. The horsepower is so low that few bother with it. One of the few that I have seen was on a no-expense-spared 321 cubic inch gmc which netted ~340 HP and ~400ft*lb torque. I guarantee you that you could have purchased a 5.9 cummins for what he spent.

If money were no option, I'd ditch the 302.

Put a good carb on it, civvy distributor, and see how you the truck.
 

saddamsnightmare

Well-known member
3,618
80
48
Location
Abilene, Texas
October 12th, 2011

Gents:

I have enjoyed this thread immeasurably, and every time I read about the money getting thrown at a 302 Chevy engine, it just makes me value the Multifuel and the M35A2 better, as I have driven the stock M211 and M135 GMC's back when, and while they are simple, they can't get out of their own way on a hill. No matter what the OP does, he's still stuck with a primitive GMC engine in a very heavy truck. Chances are it will turn about 2.00 minutes to the quarter mile.
These M135/M211 trucks were an attempt to improve on the CCKW which was no great shakes as a two and a half ton truck, and GMC shot itself in the foot further by not licensing the M135/M211 design. REO's engineers came up with a better truck and the government farmed it out to about, what, seventeen builders?
We used two M211's to death hauling barrels up off of Ohio River barges in Follansbee, and if I could have got my hands then (1970's) on a NA Multifuel M35A2, we'd have let those two trucks go for junk much sooner. I love watching guys try to reinvent the wheel or the engine, my Unimog S404.114 has the same limitations, but it will turn 60 briefly with the stock NDT's and good fuel, and still go off road, but outrun anything faster then a turtle.... it ain't going to happen. Have fun, throw your money around, five years down the road someone else will be looking for parts to restore the OP's truck to stock... it's happening with hot rods from the 50's, it will happen to the messed up military vehicles except for the bobbers.... it's like money in the bank.fat lady sings Besides, Uncle put the governor on there to protect the truck from lead footed GI's...Who could still blow a governor with a few tricks..... Where there's a will, there's a way, just don't have your head under the hood when the engine lets go!
 
Last edited:

blizzardwarrior7

New member
72
0
0
Location
Northampton, MA
As I mentioned in one of my earlier threads I'd love to swap the engine, I just have a few other projects and don't want to bite off something I'm not going to have time to complete. I have to have this truck and two other builds done by February. Is there a motor you know of that would be a fairly simple swap? I ve considered a 6.2 but is there something that would be better? Sounds like the 2300 is the way to go than. You didn't mention earlier your bad experience with Clifford.
 

Oldfart

Active member
1,063
26
38
Location
Centennial,CO
Consider the relationship of the carb governor and the gas linkage adjustments that are critical to transmission shift points on the GMC 302/Hydramatic dual range. There is information on this in the TM's. You can get some performance improvments with a civilian carb, but you are still moving 13 to 15K pounds with an engine that had a compression ratio of 6.5 or 6.8 to 1. Wayne made a cross flow head and multiple carb manifolds for this engine. High compression domed pistions were available as well. So there are parts that made these engines race winners in their time, but those applications were not in 6x6 trucks.
 

nattieleather

Well-known member
1,882
142
63
Location
Cleveland, OH
I too have owned and driven the M211 and the M35A2 and though I enjoyed the M35A2 road speed and being able to keep up with traffic on the highway I didn't enjoy the ride. The M211 was a much smoother ride for a big truck than the M35.

If you are looking to repower the truck you are going to have to look at a big truck motor like a GMC 6500 size truck. Again it's been 12-15 years since I've owned and played with the M211 but I would think a GM 350 or BB 400 etc would be a realtivly easy swap with the stock transmission. Or swap the engine and transmission out of another vehicle. A GM setup should be easy to get and relatively cheep.

If I were you I would save my money and either swap the motor completely out or take the time and fix the stock motor right. Sometimes the quick fix isn't the right fix.
 

Oldfart

Active member
1,063
26
38
Location
Centennial,CO
Gunfreak is working on a 6.2 diesel conversion for his M220/211. I am very interested in his project as it would seem to me it would be some improvement in power without too much risk of ripping out the driveline because too much power. (When I was much younger, I swapped my straight 8 Olds engine for a 1956 GMC V8 10 ton dump truck engine. I lost count of the drive shafts and U joints I tore up playing green light go. I changed the rear end ratio to stop that bleeding only to start snapping axles. I changed differential ratios again to something of a middle ratio which caused the failures to move to the ring gear and pinion. ~~ I solved the whole thing by buying a 55 T'Bird for the green light go.)
 

blizzardwarrior7

New member
72
0
0
Location
Northampton, MA
Consider the relationship of the carb governor and the gas linkage adjustments that are critical to transmission shift points on the GMC 302/Hydramatic dual range. There is information on this in the TM's. You can get some performance improvments with a civilian carb, but you are still moving 13 to 15K pounds with an engine that had a compression ratio of 6.5 or 6.8 to 1. Wayne made a cross flow head and multiple carb manifolds for this engine. High compression domed pistions were available as well. So there are parts that made these engines race winners in their time, but those applications were not in 6x6 trucks.


As I've mentioned before, I have no shift linkage between my Carb and tranny. I have a reb shift kit.

I'm going to check the local junkyards for any GM engines, about how old should I be looking for, for an easy swap? I want to figure out cost and labor in getting a new engine or modifying the current one.
 

Oldfart

Active member
1,063
26
38
Location
Centennial,CO
Blizzard warrior 7,
I forgot you had the shift kit. That said, you can swap to several civilian carbs that will improve power. The transmission is a GMC Hydromatic, which during that time frame was a Cadillac, Olds, Pontiac bolt pattern. (Not CHEVY) At that time, the bell housings were seperate. I can't remember when the Hydromatic bolt pattern changed, but there are bell housings that will fit older Hydromatics and later 50's GM V8 engines (not Chevy). The 302 inline 6 should fit most period engine transmission bell housings for the Cad style pattern. As I indicated late 50's belhousing can be found that will mate the dual range Hydromatic to newer engines. Period V8 engines were only slightly larger displacements than the GMC big inline 6. The Olds was 324, the Pontiac was 336 and the Cad was 331 compared to the GMC 302. If you are going to swap for more power, you might as well look for a early 70's vintage Cad 500 ci which was about the peak of power. From 72 on power was restricted. If you want really big, you could check out some of the GMC truck V6 engines of the 50's and 60's. They could be ganged together into V12's of more than 800 ci.
 

blizzardwarrior7

New member
72
0
0
Location
Northampton, MA
Well I will have to spend some time doing some research on what I want to do exactly...4bt seems like it would be kind of a pita swap, without that much gain, 4bts were stock at about the same power as a 302...so without modification and alot of wiring work on it doesn't seem worth it.
 

Gunfreak25

Well-known member
1,561
620
113
Location
Yuma, AZ
Im just happy to see all the people who have been migrating south the early deuce section this past year. I don't want to sound egotistical but I'd like to think I have in some way done my best to bring a little enthusiasm to this section. Lots of good information being posted, I hope these trucks become popular again like they were 30 years ago.

FYI, the 6.2/th400 is all set to go and now I just need a day of free time to hoist it in.
 
Last edited:

nattieleather

Well-known member
1,882
142
63
Location
Cleveland, OH
If the time is right and I have a place to store it and the price is right and a M211 or M220 which I would love to have falls into my lap I would have one again. I've said it before I've had a M211 and a M35A2 and I loved the 211. Only thing I would do is look for a good diesel from like a GM 6500 or like truck with Allison trans to swap in and maybe figure out how to put a NP 205 transfer case in place of the M211's case so I could get low range again. Anyway I've been a fan since before you were born Gunfreak.... :p
 

nk14zp

Active member
2,636
17
38
Location
Columbia Falls Maine
Well I will have to spend some time doing some research on what I want to do exactly...4bt seems like it would be kind of a pita swap, without that much gain, 4bts were stock at about the same power as a 302...so without modification and alot of wiring work on it doesn't seem worth it.
Not sure what year they went electronic but I would look for a 4bt with a P pump. There is no way you can compare the power to your 302.
 

Gunfreak25

Well-known member
1,561
620
113
Location
Yuma, AZ
If the time is right and I have a place to store it and the price is right and a M211 or M220 which I would love to have falls into my lap I would have one again. I've said it before I've had a M211 and a M35A2 and I loved the 211. Only thing I would do is look for a good diesel from like a GM 6500 or like truck with Allison trans to swap in and maybe figure out how to put a NP 205 transfer case in place of the M211's case so I could get low range again. Anyway I've been a fan since before you were born Gunfreak.... :p
You can ditch the stock GMC transfer case and go with an NP205. The easiest option is to ditch the front prop shaft and forget about front drive capabilities all together, since the output on the GMC Tcase spins the front driveshaft in reverse. OR, if you still wanted front wheel capabilities you could flip the front third member. It requires a lot of work though. So, the easiest/cheapest option is to simply drive the stock Tcase with an Np205 and in the case of a short shaft Th400, you have plenty of room for such.
 

hendersond

Well-known member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
1,171
29
48
Location
Galesville, WI
Im just happy to see all the people who have been migrating south the early deuce section this past year. I don't want to sound egotistical but I'd like to think I have in some way done my best to bring a little enthusiasm to this section. Lots of good information being posted, I hope these trucks become popular again like they were 30 years ago.
So ya wanna get going and post some more pics of your progress????????

:razz:
 
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website like our supporting vendors. Their ads help keep Steel Soldiers going. Please consider disabling your ad blockers for the site. Thanks!

I've Disabled AdBlock
No Thanks