46-7 Which is better 6 or 8?

[m-mman]

Hello, in the back of my mind I have an interest in someday 'stepping up' and buying a 46-7 Hudson. They just seem like neat cars. I am not in a rush, I would only want a car that feels right. (I am sure you know what that means) Body style isnt that important but the Commodore trim seems to be worth it. 

 

Decades ago I had friends with Hudsons and I learned why the Hornet deserved its reputation.  But for the earlier years what is the difference between the 6 and the 8?

I understand they are both 'splasher' engines(?)  not full pressure lube. 

I remember my friends being very down on the 8 ("The 6 is a way better engine") but I never understood why. 

 

So 6 or 8? What is the difference and which one is better? power, driveabilty parts, durability, fuel mileage. etc., etc.

Is there anything about these cars that I should beware of?

Thanks for any input

[Jon37]

The eight is a very smooth engine but, as you say, it's a splasher dating back to about 1930, so by 1947 this was old technology. (It would continue to be offered in Hudsons through 1952, though.)  With babbited bearings it requires a lot of knowledge to rebuild.  So does the splasher six, of course.  The six is just a more popular car so the parts and expertise are fairly readily available.

 

If you want to ask Hudson-specific questions I would suggest you post your questions at the Hudson Open Forum as well as here, at the AACA forum.  The Open Forum is quite active and is populated with many Hudson experts. https://forum.hetclub.org/

[Bloo]

6 hours ago, m-mman said:

I remember my friends being very down on the 8 ("The 6 is a way better engine") but I never understood why. 

 

I can't help but wonder if they were comparing the splasher eight to the pressure-oiled Hornet 6 (and its smaller-displacement relatives).

[Marty Roth]

In what year did the 262ci "6" go to pressure lube?

Was it pressure in 1949?

[Bloo]

I think so.

 

IIRC the 232-262-308 engine family were all pressure oiling and the first ones were in 48 models. So, in a stepdown the choice would have been a pressure oiled 6 vs a splasher 8, but in the 46-47 models mentioned in the original post, it would have been the old 3x5 (212ci) splasher 6 vs the splasher 8.

 

 

[m-mman]

The 212, yeah that's what one friend had in his 47 coupe.

His brother had a 53 Hornet coupe. Corvair bucket seats and 3 speed Hurst floor shift. 

it was 1973-4. . . .

[54Coupe]

15 hours ago, m-mman said:

The 212, yeah that's what one friend had in his 47 coupe.

His brother had a 53 Hornet coupe. Corvair bucket seats and 3 speed Hurst floor shift. 

it was 1973-4. . . .

This sounds like it might have been the Gould family.

[m-mman]

Yup, that was them. 

They/dad had a disassembled 46-7 conv in the garage 

[paulrhd29nz]

The 254 8 over the 212 all day long , but the 262 and the 308 trumps all. 

I have the 8 in my 46 truck and love it. Peppy and fun to drive. Looks great under the hood. 

[StillOutThere]

On 8/3/2019 at 10:20 PM, Marty Roth said:

In what year did the 262ci "6" go to pressure lube?

Was it pressure in 1949?

The "splasher six" engines discontinued after the 1947 model year.   With the introduction of the 1948 stepdown cars came the new pressure oiler 262" flattie six.