1955 322 Engine Question

[packick]

I need some help in understanding Buick engineering.

I recently purchased a 1955 Buick Century and have been looking on the Internet at pictures of other 322 cubic inch engines. I have noticed that some of the 322 engines have the oil filler near the manifold while others have the oil filler on top of the valve cover. All claim that they are true 322 engines. Is this simply a case of an early version vs. a later version? If so, which version is the early one and which is the later one?

Thanks for the help.

Edited August 14, 2011 by packick (see edit history)

[Guest NikeAjax]

Hi Joe, um not sure about the 1955's, but pretty sure they were the same as the '56's. If this is the case, there are two different styles, both oil-bath type. One, has the big silencer/snorkel that sticks out, kinda reminds me of a snub-nose 38-special, you know like in all the old gangster movies, this is the higher end option(?). The other sits on top of the carburetor like a mushroom. Hmmmm, hope this was some help?

Jaybird

[Guest NikeAjax]

Hmmm? BTW, you have similar taste in cars to my father: he was a Packard nut, as well as Buicks!

Jaybird

[Bhigdog]

The oil fillers moved from the valve covers to a single filler pipe mid year 55. Some 55's have 2 some have one.............Bob

[Guest NikeAjax]

DOH! Dyslexia strikes again, #$@&*!!~!!! Yeah, pretend like I never said anything...

[packick]

Bob: I assume Buick had some rationale for making that move. So from what you said, the "newer" 322 engines had the single oil filler near the manifold. Then I assume all 1956's had this single filler too. Thanks for helping me out.

[MrEarl]

All 1953, 1954 and early job 1955's had the oil filler tube in the valley pan "near the manifold" as you speak of. It is my understanding that the change was made in mid 1955 production to place the filler tube in the rocker cover in order to improve breathing in the covers and the amount of oil on the rockers. Sadly the change took away the stamped cover with the applied FIREBALL V-8 decal.

Edited August 15, 2011 by MrEarl (see edit history)

[buick5563]

Bob has that backwards. I believe they moved from one filler to two for better breathing.

And for NikeAjax, the different air cleaners are for two vs. four barrels. The two barrel carbs had round air cleaners, the four barrels got the "snub nosed" silencer attached.

[Bhigdog]

Both Lamar and Mike are indeed correct and I too was dislexic and had the breather change over backwards. The shop manual shows and describes one breather but there was a changeover mid year.....................Bob

[Yellowriv]

The original engine in my 1953 Super Riviera 56R. 2bbl carb.

Hope this helps

[Guest 54fins]

I personally like the look of the filler in the valley. However, nailheads had alot of valve problems, for a variety of reasons but oiling being fairly obvious. If you dump the oil into the valve covers, you certainly give the valve train a nice shot of oil. I don't have proof that was the reason, but I do know that Valve oiling was always an issue and one of the reasons they redesigned the engine at the end of the 60's. Filling from the valve covers certainly helped the valve train.

[JohnD1956]

I am not aware that the nailheads had a lot of valve problems. Of course I say this knowing that my 56 did have a burnt exhaust valve on a 70K motor. Does anyone have any knowledge of this and what may be the root cause?

[Guest 54fins]

The nailheads have a very cool valve design. The issues are in the eye of the beholder. A better way to put it would be that a nailhead is not very forgiving of running low on oil, or with old oil. You can't really compare a nailhead to a modern Chevy 350 any more than you can compare a Dynaflow to a modern Automatic tranny. You are comparing a tube radio to a modern computer.:confused:

I would say that the aluminum heads on a vega or a corvair are far worse than a nailhead. the valve seats are very hard to anchor in aluminum, and when they slip it's a mess. Never did have a valve seat slip on a steel head. So keep in mind that the nailhead is getting compared to modern technology. 50's cars didn't go 100K miles- even 50K was considered marginal. Today, most cars go 100K even with no maintenance.

the machine tolerance was 10X less than a modern engine. for that reason alone, everything has to ride on a nice blanket of oil. But the valves were then over the cylinders at a 45degree angle. There is no adjustment as the lifters compensate for wear. Then the exhaust flows through the head. There are some advantages, the fuel gets mixed and burned well. The engine gets a little less width and it really gets some nice torque.:cool:

if the valves don't get a nice shot of oil they can stick. In an ideal senario, the valve is pushed straight down into the cylinder. at a 45 angle, there is some additional shear on the valves. Then you have a rocker train, and the rockers have some funny geometry. It works fine, but it won't tolerate no oil for a nanosecond. A Chevy small block has a nice even push on the valves and better oiling. If you look at them side by side, you can see why the nailhead eventually lost out. But worse, if the valve sticks, it gets whapped at a 45 angle by the piston- bends, then continues to whap the piston until something gives. Many engines can tap back a stuck valve, or don't have the interference. Then the Rocker shaft gets beat up. Bottom line- change the oil on a regular basis and you will probably be fine. Now consider a 60 year old engine that probably sat alot. Consider yourself lucky if it didn't sieze, but do stay on top of all the fluids. It's not a bad design, it's just not forgiving.:eek:

[NTX5467]

JohnD, a valve "burns" when the guide wears enough that when the valve seats, it might not be completely "square" with the seat when it seats. When it's not square with the seat when it seats, then some exhaust gasses can leak past, first barely, then more over time, until a chunk is cooked off of the valve's head, resulting in a compression loss.

From the 1966-72 Chryslers B-engines we've owned, they usually had #7 exh valve "burnt" at 85K miles. That makes your 70K miles figure reasonably decent, all things considered.

Having breathers in the valve covers would result in less moisture being trapped in there in the cooler times of the year. Ideally, as the engine gets to operating temperature AND stays there, it should cook the moisture out, but it might not.

Just some thoughts,

NTX5467