226 crankshaft differences.

[MetalMike138]

Hey all! I’m getting ready to swap out my tired 226 for a freshened up 226 in my 55 wagon. The new engine crankshaft flywheel flange is twice as thick as the engine I pulled out. Also the new engine crankshaft is drilled and tapped for bolts where as the old engine has a thin flange with flywheel bolts mounting from the front with nuts holding the flywheel to the crank. Has anyone run into this before or have an explanation as to the difference? I’m concerned about possible interference of the pressure plate and the bell housing as well as starter gear engagement due too everything sitting aft compared to the old engine.

 

[Lookout Ranch]

I’ve only seen cranks with what I’ll call studs (for lack of a better term) onto which the flywheel is mounted and secured by nuts.

I would measure and compare the critical distances between various elements on the two cranks to see how they differ and if they are truly interchangeable.

One thought is you may have a crank from an industrial Continental engine that wasn’t designed for the type of flywheel used in a vehicle ... but this is only conjecture.

 

[MetalMike138]

Copy that! I’ve started measuring and comparing between the two engines. I’ll have my new clutch parts soon, and will mock everything up. The guy I bought the motor from said he had it up and running in a two wheel drive wagon. I wonder is there were any differences between the 4 and 2 wheel drive cranks?

 

[Bottlecapdigger]

"Make sure you put the bolts in for the flywheel before installing the crank!" I didn't and had to remove the back bearing cap to put them in, and in order to do that the oil pan had to come off. There was a lot of &$@$)&$. And I had to leave the shop for a few days. BCD.

 

[Lookout Ranch]

Copy that! I’ve started measuring and comparing between the two engines. I’ll have my new clutch parts soon, and will mock everything up. The guy I bought the motor from said he had it up and running in a two wheel drive wagon. I wonder is there were any differences between the 4 and 2 wheel drive cranks?

Was the L6-226 ever standard equipment in a 2WD wagon? Perhaps. Most 2WDs were 4-bangers, and the ones I’ve seen that were sixes were 161s.

Anyway, I’ve never heard of different crank styles for these, perhaps someone like @diggerG would know. There really would be no point in having different cranks for 4WD and 2WD; they bolted to the same transmission and used the same clutch components.

 

[MetalMike138]

"Make sure you put the bolts in for the flywheel before installing the crank!" I didn't and had to remove the back bearing cap to put them in, and in order to do that the oil pan had to come off. There was a lot of &$@$)&$. And I had to leave the shop for a few days. BCD.

I hear that. The new engine I have has a thicker flange and is drilled and tapped for bolts, so that won’t be an issue.

 

[MetalMike138]

Was the L6-226 ever standard equipment in a 2WD wagon? Perhaps. Most 2WDs were 4-bangers, and the ones I’ve seen that were sixes were 161s.

Anyway, I’ve never heard of different crank styles for these, perhaps someone like @diggerG would know. There really would be no point in having different cranks for 4WD and 2WD; they bolted to the same transmission and used the same clutch components.

I would imagine the flanges would be the same between the two and four wheel drive if for no other reason than simplicity of manufacturing. I’m still new to the Willys game though and don’t know the nuances of things yet. It was my understanding that the four wheel drive used the T90 (installed in my rig) and the two wheel drives used primarily the T96. That was the reason for that thought process.

 

[ndnile]

I would imagine the flanges would be the same between the two and four wheel drive if for no other reason than simplicity of manufacturing. I’m still new to the Willys game though and don’t know the nuances of things yet. It was my understanding that the four wheel drive used the T90 (installed in my rig) and the two wheel drives used primarily the T96. That was the reason for that thought process.

There was a recent thread about a 226 with a factory installed automatic. Could that be it?

 

[Bill Kuran]

I hear that. The new engine I have has a thicker flange and is drilled and tapped for bolts, so that won’t be an issue.

Any chance of photos of the flywheel and crankshaft flange?
What do the the screws look like? Head style, diameter, pitch, grade, shoulder for alignment, flat washer, lock washer, etc.

How thick is the thick flange and how thick is the thin flange? If someone has a 226 crankshaft available, you can compare your measurements with their measurement. Maybe the thick one is the correct one.

Based on the shoulder length (0.710") if an original flywheel bolt, my guess is the the crankshaft flange and flywheel flange are right around 3/8" thick.

It sounds like the pan is on, but if not there should be a part number on the crankshaft.

 

[DriscollsHill]

If you need other comparisons or part numbers I have a 226 crankshaft out of a motor on my workshop floor right now vehicle of origin unknown but it came with a high compression head, and single YF carb manifold setup.

 

[Bill Kuran]

If you need other comparisons or part numbers I have a 226 crankshaft out of a motor on my workshop floor right now vehicle of origin unknown but it came with a high compression head, and single YF carb manifold setup.

Is there a part number on the crankshaft? Maybe 921964 (from master parts list)
What is the flange thickness?

 

[MetalMike138]

Any chance of photos of the flywheel and crankshaft flange?
What do the the screws look like? Head style, diameter, pitch, grade, shoulder for alignment, flat washer, lock washer, etc.

How thick is the thick flange and how thick is the thin flange? If someone has a 226 crankshaft available, you can compare your measurements with their measurement. Maybe the thick one is the correct one.

Based on the shoulder length (0.710") if an original flywheel bolt, my guess is the the crankshaft flange and flywheel flange are right around 3/8" thick.

It sounds like the pan is on, but if not there should be a part number on the crankshaft.

The one with bolts/studs in the flange is the removed engine and the flange measure about 3/8”. Second photo is the thick flange measuring in at about 3/4”. Both pans are installed so no access to cranks at this point. Also as mentioned above, the thick flange crank has tapped holes with threads so you can just bolt the flywheel on.

 

[DriscollsHill]

See below pics of flange the part numbers visible are labeled rear, mid and front I also have pics from on on eBay recently will look at those if I can find it again looks like it has part number 732596 on the crankshaft.

 

[DriscollsHill]

One previously listed on eBay looks identical part number 732596 is the same the mid crankshaft numbers are slightly different maybe manufacturing date not sure.

 

[DriscollsHill]

View attachment 96643View attachment 96644
The one with bolts/studs in the flange is the removed engine and the flange measure about 3/8”. Second photo is the thick flange measuring in at about 3/4”. Both pans are installed so no access to cranks at this point. Also as mentioned above, the thick flange crank has tapped holes with threads so you can just bolt the flywheel on.

Mike sorry can't help very much have never seen that setup on a Super Hurricane before that's a heavy duty flange.

Will be guys with more experience with the industrial motors here that may know.

 

[Bill Kuran]

Mike - yes, very thick. It seems that the flywheel will be moved to rear about 3/8 inch. As you mentioned, starter engagement will change and the flywheel may not have enough room to fit in the bellhousing. Clutch, pressure plate . . .

Where did you get the engine (with thick flange)?

 

[MetalMike138]

Mike - yes, very thick. It seems that the flywheel will be moved to rear about 3/8 inch. As you mentioned, starter engagement will change and the flywheel may not have enough room to fit in the bellhousing. Clutch, pressure plate . . .

Where did you get the engine (with thick flange)?

The engine came from a friend. He had it running and driving in a 62 2wd wagon I believe. He pulled it and rebuilt it about 20 years ago, life happened, it has sat in a crate inside until I bought it from him last year. He wasn’t aware of anything strange about it until I started asking him about the crank flange.

 

[diggerG]

Carter apparently sandbagged me to come up with an answer. Well, I can mess it up some more. I used to sell to an engine rebuilding shop 226 cranks for the Continental Engines, most in fork lifts. He would take in addition to the 226 cranks the 230 OHC cranks, he said there was a little machining needed to make that work.
When Jeep changed out the 2wd planar suspension to 2wd conventional leaf springs in 1954 (5?) they used the regular 4wd frame and T90 trans. Although I never saw one I bet you could get one with the 226. And the T90 trans, maybe even with overdrive.
Also I have never heard of a crankshaft difference with the 226 either. Not saying there never was one but wasn't there a difference with the rear main seal?
Greg (diggerG)

 

[MetalMike138]

So it sounds like the crank may be out of another piece of machinery. The flywheel for the thick flange crank has two sets of holes drilled in it to attach to the crank. I’ll have to see if the bolt patterns match.

 

[DriscollsHill]

So it sounds like the crank may be out of another piece of machinery. The flywheel for the thick flange crank has two sets of holes drilled in it to attach to the crank. I’ll have to see if the bolt patterns match.

Not sure how easy it is right now but if the sump is off be good to get some photos of the numbers on the crankshaft it may help identify it.