Tucker, of course. Note the car in he background I did recognize the flat OHV six configuraton. Unique in it’s day. but, Lovell beat me to it.
Yes, the flat head fords were good. Amazingly so, inspite of severe limitations in design. Poor intake breathing somewhat relieved by grinding a better path from the valves to the piston head. Relieved was the term. And smoothening and matching the ports in the head to those in the intake manifold,aka "porting’.
If the thing was to go fast, those were gotta be’s.
The exhaust migtated through the coolant chamber. They ran hot. And exhaust only via 3 ports per side. Extraction poor at best.
Nd, amazingly tough, in spite of only three main bearings.
OTH, the Jimmy won it’s spurs in WWII Duece and a half 6x6 trucks. Also in the DUKW version. For the most part, the US forces got the Jimmy’s and the “lessor” Studebaker’s went "lend -lease’, many via Murmansk.
Indeed, the 270 lived on and powered post war GM trucks and busses in the 302 version.
I do recall the engine buyilders of the day wanting more money to bore the blocks and turn the cranks of the Jimmy’s.
Much harder steel than other engines. Hudson’s excluded.
I recall that Horning did some head work on the sixes.
The early 50’s stove bolt six was indeed, dip and dunk. OK if not pushed over 60 mph for any extended time.
The 235 was a much better, but similar 6. Full pressure, tougher. My first company furnished car was a 54, so powered. Going east toward Carlsbad NM, from El Paso, it
could hit an indicated 94 and stay there w/o coming apart!!!
Carl
