Detergent or Non Detergent oil? 1954 Chevy 235 inline-6

53 was the last year that the 235 ever had the dipper style rods. If your engine is an honest all 54 motor, then it's for sure got pressurized con rods.

My dad's 53 pickup had splash lube bearings and even when the motor was relatively fresh it had a lot lower oil pressure than SubZero350 mentioned.

Personally, I've got a 51 1.5 ton with a 55 235 in it. I don't put a lot of miles on it, but its been happy wth conventional 10w-30. Modern detergent oils don't magically break off big chunks of sludge. They mainly just keep particles in suspension and prevent them from adhering to surfaces in the engine.
 
Go ahead and run the detergent oil. What's the worst that can happen? It's a hobby car, with a non-original motor, that's super easy to pull and reseal.

I'd worry about chunks of leaded gas lead sludge popping loose but those were probably scooped out 30 years ago when (if) the thing was last overhauled.
 
I'd run a good synthetic detergent oil, Castrol Edge Euro A3/B4 in either 0w40 or 5W40, or Mobil 1 5W40 TDT. ESP 5W30 would be another good choice imo.
 
I went down this rabbit hole shortly after acquiring the truck. The original 216 engine did indeed have babbitt bearings; and in that engine, the camshaft and crankshaft main bearings were pressure lubricated by the oil pump, but the rod bearings were lubricated by dippers.

I posted the casting numbers I found on my 235 engine over on the stovebolt forums and the consensus was the engine block was cast in 1954 as the passenger car version of the 235 that does indeed have the full pressure oiling system, but it is not the higher compression blue-flame engine (unfortunately). That being said, this engine does run very strong, so who knows what was done to it during the rebuild.

There are also some over there of the opinion I should NOT run detergent oil in this engine, especially if the rear main seal wasn't changed from the original rope type to a newer neoprene type seal.
What are the casting numbers on the block and cylinder head? Do you have the stamped/engraved numbers from the flat next to the distributor?
 
Does that replacement engine have an oil filter? In those years they were optional.
This was my first thought as well. If it's had non detergent oil and you switch to modern style oil and there's nothing to catch any impurities that break loose that could be bad. If it has an oil filter I'd run something fairly standard. I wouldn't go for some heavy detergent or high mileage oil.
 
What are the casting numbers on the block and cylinder head? Do you have the stamped/engraved numbers from the flat next to the distributor?
The serial number stamped into the block next to the distributor is: 0392325F54Z

Block casting number is 3835911

The cylinder head casting number is: 3835913
 
Go ahead and run the detergent oil. What's the worst that can happen? It's a hobby car, with a non-original motor, that's super easy to pull and reseal.

I'd worry about chunks of leaded gas lead sludge popping loose but those were probably scooped out 30 years ago when (if) the thing was last overhauled.
Plus the fact that many people don’t know what “detergents” in an oil actually do (and don’t do).
 
The serial number stamped into the block next to the distributor is: 0392325F54Z

Block casting number is 3835911

The cylinder head casting number is: 3835913
54Z - 1954 115hp engine, passenger car - which you know.

It has full pressure oiling and did not originally come with hydraulic lifters. Its a Blue Flame 115, just not the 125 hp version for Powerglide cars (hydraulic lifters and different cam profile) or the 150 hp Corvette 235.

Head is for 1954 and very early 1955. Probably the original.
 
I went down this rabbit hole shortly after acquiring the truck. The original 216 engine did indeed have babbitt bearings; and in that engine, the camshaft and crankshaft main bearings were pressure lubricated by the oil pump, but the rod bearings were lubricated by dippers.

I posted the casting numbers I found on my 235 engine over on the stovebolt forums and the consensus was the engine block was cast in 1954 as the passenger car version of the 235 that does indeed have the full pressure oiling system, but it is not the higher compression blue-flame engine (unfortunately). That being said, this engine does run very strong, so who knows what was done to it during the rebuild.

There are also some over there of the opinion I should NOT run detergent oil in this engine, especially if the rear main seal wasn't changed from the original rope type to a newer neoprene type seal.

There are thousands of vintage Mustangs with rope type rear main seals that are using Mobil 1 without any complications. A hundred or so having pasted thru the vintage shop I worked at.
 
Had a 51 with PG and babbit bearings then a 54 blue flame six, both had an external filter. Had the pan off both and each had a 1/4 inch layer of gray lead sediment due to several reasons. Were I to have one of these today I would use 30wt nondetergent until the pan was removed and cleaned then install a bypass filter. At this point a so called muscle car oil would be used of appropriate viscosity for operating conditions.
 
This is what I used in my 235.
 

Attachments

  • Mobil.jpg
    Mobil.jpg
    106.8 KB · Views: 14
Non Detergent is for air compressors and electric motors. Non detergent may work for a while but not ideal. 10w40 or 0w40 Mobil 1 euro formula or anything for that matter. Better off with a higher zinc and the Rotella t4 has this. Oils now are far superior to anything years ago except for the zinc. I dont have ant experience with rope seal however lots and lots of engines had the rope and was using detergent oils. If this wasnt running detergent oils before (which I seriously doubt) you may get more leakage there. MO
 
There's no reason for using non-detergent oil. I run into this discussion in the Model A club I'm a part of. Non-detergent oil may have been spec'd back then because we didn't have much of anything better. We do now. I've heard the argument that detergents will keep crud in suspension and that's not good when you don't have a filter. The fact is detergents will keep such sludge from forming to begin with. Detergents are acid neutralizers, preventing acidic growth (from fuel and water dilution, soot, and ambient contaminants) from attacking the oil. Some soot/particle loading is to be expected without a filter, but it's not going to harm much until it starts exceeding ~2%. There's also the myth that detergents will clean dirty seals and cause them to leak, but that's not how detergents work. Besides, modern detergent oils have seal conditioners to help with old seals. If you're worried about that, run a short change with HPL EC. I personally would put Mobil 1 FS Euro 0W-40 in it and forget non-detergent oil exists, if you're looking for something easy to get off the store shelf.

A good friend and mentor has a '31 Model A that called for non-detergent oil and was what he'd been running. It had a good bit of valvetrain rattle, along with an overheating issue, so we pulled the head and oil pan to investigate. The oil pan was completely full of sludge with valleys in the sludge where the rod dippers were swinging through it. It was clogging the distributor tube feeding oil to the valvetrain. It took a good bit to clean it out. I ran two quick changes with HPL EC through it before putting it on a diet of HPL HDMO 5W-40 from then on. Smooth and quiet.
 
HPL stands for "High Performance Lubricants." It's a specialty oil blender who is also a sponsor of the site. Their EC product is a 30w oil that is intended to be used for gentle cleaning similar (but superior?) to how you would use Rislone if you're familiar with that product.
 
HPL stands for "High Performance Lubricants." It's a specialty oil blender who is also a sponsor of the site. Their EC product is a 30w oil that is intended to be used for gentle cleaning similar (but superior?) to how you would use Rislone if you're familiar with that product.
Thanks!
 
Back
Top