From 1929 through 1954, Chevrolet was known largely for its rugged and reliable inline sixes. For 1962, the trusty stovebolt was reborn.
The original Chevrolet inline six, introduced in 1929, redesigned for 1937, and constantly refined through the years, was a key part of the bow-tie brand’s identity. That is, unitl the sensational 1955 V8 appeared. Relegated to the shadows, so to speak, by the small-block V8, by the early ’60s the trusty Stovebolt six had grown obsolete: It was: overweight and and oversized with antiquated oiling and cooling systems. The time was more than ripe for a resdesigned inline six, and this new engine (above) shared a number of features with the wildly successful V8.
The reborn Chevy six first appeared in the 1962 Chevy II, boasting 194 cubic inches, the same displacement as the original 1929 six. Called the Hi-Thrift, it was rated at 120 hp. There was also a four-cylinder Super-Thrift version (above) with 153 cubic inches and 90 hp that was a virtual twin of the six. (The four would eventually develop its own complicated history). For 1963, a larger 230 cubic-inch six with 140 hp, the Turbo-Thrift, became the base engine for the full-sized Chevy passenger car line. In 1966, a longer-stroke, 250 cubic-inch version—probably the most familiar of the this generation of Chevy sixes—joined the lineup.
While the old stovebolt six had gotten by fairly well for decades with four main bearings, the new six sported the full complement of seven (above) with a modern, full-pressure lubrication system. The iron block was a centerline-crank design using thinwall casting techniques and 4.40-inch bore spacing—features all shared with the small-block V8. Considerably smaller than the old six, the new powerplant was also more than 100 lbs lighter. The robust architecture also supported a tall-deck 292 cubic-inch variant for trucks that remained in production in the U.S. through 1989.
Yet another feature the six shared with the small-block V8 was its valvetrain, above. Ball-mounted, stamped-steel rocker arms receive their lubrication through tubular pushrods from the camshaft and hydraulic lifters. The wedge-type combustion chambers are similar, too. While it might not be technicallly accurate to descibe the six as an inline version of the small-block V8, it’s something like that. In the racing categories designed for straight-six engines, the Chevy was a solid performer.
The second-generation six saw duty not only at Chevrolet but at Buick, Oldsmobile, Pontiac and GMC, and was also produced by GM in Brazil, South Africa, and Argentina. (The 215 CID Pontiac version became the basis for the division’s overhead-cam six.) The variants and applications are too numerous to list here. But as packaging requirements evolved, the inline six was eventually moved aside in Chevrolet’s U.S. passenger cars in favor of a V6. Introduced in 1978, the V6 also borrowed much from the ubiquitous small-block V8.
in my opinion the new Chevy inline 6 was superior to the original, which was a good solid engine but had some issues with the oil system and bottom end. I didn’t like the last ones with the integrated cylinder heads. They seemed to hold up but it just didn’t look like a good design.
I have had a ’62 Chevy II with the 194, a ’70 Nova with the 230, and two different ’64 Tempests with the Pontiac 215. All were great engines. Reliable, great fuel mileage, and easy to work on. On the ’70 I used a Clifford Research adapter to mount a Holley/Weber progressive 2-barrel carb from a Dodge Omni. It worked very well, providing a slight increase in economy and power. I love all inline sixes, but especially the GM’s. Oddly enough, I don’t have one at the moment, but I sure wish I had kept the one owner rust-free ’70 4-door.
My first car was ’62 Chevy II with the 194 (Pontiac Acadian). Sedan though, not a coupe. The engine burned oil though so the kids in shop class put in a 3.2L V6 from my friend’s Chevy Monza that he rolled. It was a solid engine.
My first vehicle when I was 17 was a 1968 GMC 2500 pickup with the 292 line-six. Bought it when it was five years old with 97000 miles from a construction company. With a 4:10 axle, it was wound-up tight at 65mph but it could pull down a house. I put another 100000 miles on it with nothing but oil changes tune-ups and a radiator. Never used oil, smoked or ticked. An excellent engine.
I have a 1969 Mercedes Benz 280 SL which is also an inline 6 with Bosch fuel injection. It’s a fine performing engine but does not have the durability of the Chevy 6’s.
my parents bought a new 62 Biscayne 6 4 door, we took off from North Dakota to visit relatives in Anaheim, ca. the car delivered only about 13-15 mpg. Dad was a believer in the 6 and we had many of those. we made it to Salt Lake and went to a Chevy garage to have it looked at. found out the car had a truck carb on it with larger jets than a car came with. after that the milage went to a steady 22mpg, he was smiling thereafter.
You might find this interesting:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/the-chevy-250-six-was-built-in-brazil-until-1998-with-fuel-injection-and-tuning-by-lotus/
I saw this fuel injected six in a custom 1954 Chevy convertible at a car show in Tucson. I’d not seen one prior. The car owners had no idea about the engine. It looked impressive.
We will probably do a feature at one point, but we wanted to cover the original version first as a baseline.
My first car was a General Motors of Canada 1964 Acadian Invader with the 194 “6” (think Chevy II 300, but it looked like a Pontiac version and was sold through Canadian Pontiac/Buick dealers). Cheap and cheerful, it was a terrific first car. Acadians were also sold in Puerto Rico and were built and sold in Chile as well.
We had a 71 C10 pickup with a 250 in it when I was growing up. Tough as nails, could load the 8 foot bed full of firewood and still run highway speeds. Only bad thing was the Rochester carb had a couple of screws that came up from the bottom that would work loose and it would run ragged until you tightened them up, it took a 90* screwdriver because a normal one was too long to fit between the carb and intake. With 3.08 rear gears and the three speed trans it averaged about 15 mpg, not great but not bad considering the weight of the truck.
The GMH (Holden) 6’s, produced from 1963 to the mid 80’s in capacities from 149 to 202 c/i looked identical to this motor
As a Bedford truck driver, firstly for local govt, then as an owner, I get as mad as hell when I read that the 250 and 292 had been available in the US from the early – mid 60s. While I was working for the council, they moved from the long bonneted J series ( 216 + 300 ) which had a bad overheating problem to the TK ? forward control w/ the 250 and 292 engines. Why in hell GMH didn’t import the US engines from their inception and put them in the Bedfords I’ll never know. After leaving the council, I went into business as a contractor and all I could afford was a Bedford. The amount of money I spent on the 300 due to overheating was shocking and it was very rarely worked hard. I had driven a T series w/ the 292 and they were great, heaps more pull and speed than the 300.
I’ve got a 1979 Bedford 4×4 ( what they call an MFR2bh) . Owned it since 1987 . Made in Australia , it has a 308 ( Holden bolt pattern , not Chev btw )
V8 . It was Electricity Commission Victoria truck , and I bought it Ex dispersal to pull bores and windmills in WA . Apparently you could choose a range of engines inc 292 Chev six , the 308 and diesels . It’s got about 110,000 km on it and I still use it . It has an ATLAS 3006 A2 Crane with winch on it .
Great machine , for what it is 👍😁
My first car was a ‘67 Chevelle 300 Deluxe 2-door sedan- a family hand me down. It had the 250 six and really did the job. Always wondered what a high-performance version would have been like!