Go Back   The Ford Barn > General Discussion > Early V8 (1932-53)

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-25-2013, 07:54 PM   #1
Jim
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Alto, Tx.
Posts: 299
Default 337 vs 239 engines

Besides displacement what are the differances between the two engines? Thanks Jim
Jim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 08:13 PM   #2
ken ct
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: stratford,ct
Posts: 5,971
Default Re: 337 vs 239 engines

Completely diff. mtrs. and much heavier. ken ct.
ken ct is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)
Old 03-25-2013, 08:16 PM   #3
Ol' Ron
Senior Member
 
Ol' Ron's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Chester Vt
Posts: 8,860
Default Re: 337 vs 239 engines

250 lbs
Ol' Ron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 08:39 PM   #4
Binx
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Gloucester VA
Posts: 1,042
Default Re: 337 vs 239 engines

Harder to find useable and affordable parts for since the seller thinks they're sitting on a gold mine. Some aftermarket speed parts show up on ebay now and then at a premium. Most NOS parts cost twice as much as regular flathead which are expensive in their own right.

Lonnie
Binx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 08:49 PM   #5
ford3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: oroville calif.
Posts: 1,453
Default Re: 337 vs 239 engines

bigger all the way around, basically a truck engine and used some in lincolns, about 20 h/p more than a stock ford engine, scarce parts and virtually no speed parts, not worth much, doesnt work well in a ford as a trans plant engine, find a ford or merc engine , it costs cubic dollars to rebuild one
ford3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 08:51 PM   #6
Straightpipes
Senior Member
 
Straightpipes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ballston Spa, NY
Posts: 789
Default Re: 337 vs 239 engines

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)
337 boat anchor.
Straightpipes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2013, 10:22 AM   #7
Dale Fairfax
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 250
Default Re: 337 vs 239 engines

It's like an 8BA on steroids. The only interchange is the sparkplugs. Yes, it IS heavy but so is a flathead Cadillac, which doesn't seem to attract the negativity that the 8EL/8EQ does. If you're looking for something different but not wanting to set the world (or the pavement) on fire, it could be the answer. There are several street rods running them (You're more likely to find references to them on the H.A.M.B.-along with many of the same negs you'll see here.) I have one in a '53 F-100 and love it. The original advertised H.P, was in the range of 145-154 which was about 30-40 more than a Ford and 25-30 better than a Merc. However, the torque ratings were 265-275 #/' at 2000 vs the '53 Merc at 217 @1700. You can definitely feel that.

Parts are not so impossible to find as most would have you believe. All you have to do is develope some contacts. Speed parts are available from Ken Austin's Rod Shop in Oregon. Most repair/overhaul parts are available from Bob Selzam in Jackson N.J. My local Flathead machinist seems to be able to find almost anything .

A homebilt set of tubular headers saves 25-30#. One of the worst aspects is trying to find an engine with a flywheel and clutch. Most '49 lincolns came with B-W T-85/R-11 three speed/overdrive transmissions. Those are user friendly . So are the '48-'51 Ford F-7 & 8 trucks which had big 4 or 5 speed transmissions but could readily be adapted to later style gearboxes. The '50-'51 Lincolns are problematic since they (almost) all had the G.M. 4 speed Hydramatic with an exclusive bell housing and no real flywheel.
Dale Fairfax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2013, 10:54 AM   #8
Mike51Merc
Senior Member
 
Mike51Merc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Northeast Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,582
Default Re: 337 vs 239 engines

239 = one version of the beloved, revered, and coveted Ford flathead

337 = a truck engine that was used in some Lincoln cars
Mike51Merc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2013, 11:53 AM   #9
Dale Fairfax
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 250
Default Re: 337 vs 239 engines

Or how about a Lincoln engine that was used in "some" Ford trucks.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike51Merc View Post
239 = one version of the beloved, revered, and coveted Ford flathead

337 = a truck engine that was used in some Lincoln cars
Dale Fairfax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2013, 12:06 PM   #10
Mike51Merc
Senior Member
 
Mike51Merc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Northeast Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,582
Default Re: 337 vs 239 engines

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale Fairfax View Post
Or how about a Lincoln engine that was used in "some" Ford trucks.
From Wikipedia:

337
This engine was designed for large truck service. When Lincoln could not produce the V12 engine it wanted for the 1949 model year, the 337 motor was adapted for passenger car use. The 337 features a 3.5 in (88.9 mm) bore and a 4.375 in (111.1 mm) stroke.
It was introduced in the 1948 two and a half ton and three ton Ford trucks and the 1949 Lincoln passenger cars. It was produced through the 1951 model year. In 1952 it was replaced in the Lincoln passenger cars and Ford three ton trucks with the Lincoln Y-block 317 cu in (5.2 L) overhead-valve V8. The two and a half ton Ford trucks got a 279 cu in (4.6 L) version of the 317 motor.
Mike51Merc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2013, 02:49 PM   #11
Dale Fairfax
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 250
Default Re: 337 vs 239 engines

Touche'



Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike51Merc View Post
From Wikipedia:

337
This engine was designed for large truck service. When Lincoln could not produce the V12 engine it wanted for the 1949 model year, the 337 motor was adapted for passenger car use. The 337 features a 3.5 in (88.9 mm) bore and a 4.375 in (111.1 mm) stroke.
It was introduced in the 1948 two and a half ton and three ton Ford trucks and the 1949 Lincoln passenger cars. It was produced through the 1951 model year. In 1952 it was replaced in the Lincoln passenger cars and Ford three ton trucks with the Lincoln Y-block 317 cu in (5.2 L) overhead-valve V8. The two and a half ton Ford trucks got a 279 cu in (4.6 L) version of the 317 motor.
Dale Fairfax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2013, 10:57 PM   #12
Ralph Moore
Senior Member
 
Ralph Moore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North Pole, Alaska
Posts: 1,470
Default Re: 337 vs 239 engines

As said, nothing the same, I picked up one last year, I had never heard of them before I got one. I will never do anything with it, but it is unique.
Ralph Moore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 05:33 PM   #13
37slantback
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 172
Default Re: 337 vs 239 engines

Wasn't the 337 Flathead used in the Muntz Jet as well?

Edit:
Yup, you can hear it run here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJ2NTpD1N1s
37slantback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 07:56 PM   #14
Straightpipes
Senior Member
 
Straightpipes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ballston Spa, NY
Posts: 789
Default Re: 337 vs 239 engines

I had a 337 in a towtruck years ago. It was a momster as far a flathead V8 goes. Drank gas awful and smoked so we pulled it out and put a Ford in it.
This clarifies my "boat anchor" statement as today it is resting in about 20 feet of water in the Sacandaga Resevoir holding down a floating pier.
Straightpipes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2013, 07:49 AM   #15
jimvette59
Senior Member
 
jimvette59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Perry OH
Posts: 1,330
Default Re: 337 vs 239 engines

I think the were used in Tanks and military trucks. Lets hear from some WWII mechanics.
jimvette59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2013, 08:48 AM   #16
Dale Fairfax
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 250
Default Re: 337 vs 239 engines

The Cadillac flatty was used in tanks in WW II but the Ford/Lincoln didn't exist until '48-a little late for that war.



Quote:
Originally Posted by jimvette59 View Post
I think the were used in Tanks and military trucks. Lets hear from some WWII mechanics.
Dale Fairfax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2013, 09:07 AM   #17
jimvette59
Senior Member
 
jimvette59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Perry OH
Posts: 1,330
Default Re: 337 vs 239 engines

Thanks for clearing that up Dale. Jim.T.
jimvette59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2013, 10:32 AM   #18
Kerk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 642
Default Re: 337 vs 239 engines

I drove one in a 49 F-8 with a 5 speed. Usually ran it on the governer for shifting as that gave me the least trouble. Wish I had bought the truck when it was surplused. $ 900.oo with no rust !
Kerk is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:27 PM.