Who's the go to for /6 motors?

Have a strange project involving a 50 nash. Motor and transmission is gone. I'd like to buy an already rebuilt /6 and automatic. I'm out of my element in this world, who's the respected go to in this area? I need to do some measuring, but think we're good. Power isn't a concern, here is my problem:

www.slantsix.org might have a local member in your area or place a local CL ad

or go with a 4.0 setup from a jeep?

I think this is a very good idea.

Prefer not to go that route.

You can PM Slantzilla on this site and he will get you to the proper experts!

Yep, he's the go-to guy in Chicago for anything /6..

The first name that comes to mind is Doug Dutra.

Website that comes to mind is www.slantsix.org, as suggested above by Blazin' Bob.

R.

I thought just about anyone could put one together? a /6?

I rebuilt 2 of them when I was a teenager trying to keep my DD going for me and my girlfriend. Both times I took the best parts from 2 engines and made a good one with used parts. They seem to be a very tough forgiving engines to me.

Make sure you have enough room lengthwise, a Slant is longer than a smallblock.

I traded messages with Doug this week. He is in the middle of building a new house and shop and will not have time to do any motors for a while.

Mike Jeffrey in Lexington, NE is THE go to guy for Slants. He does motors when racing and farming are done.

Ron Hamby in NC may do motors. He's a bad man with a Slant too.

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't your car small and light. Slant six's have a big weight problem as they were originally supposed to be aluminum blocks. Production problems made them switch to cast iron which makes them heavy but durable. I also think the 4.0 would be a better choice.

Here's the deal...No matter what the weight is, the Slant 6 is not going to fit in that long narrow engine compartment.
It's also not the best engine for the car. Here's why.....

As far back as the '20s, the Nash was a big car. It was powered by a decent sized overhead valve six. I believe the architecture of this six was carried over into the '50s. I will try to attach a picture of the engine, maybe two. The '50 Nash engine was 234 cubic inches.

As the car manufacturers thinned out, Nash became part of American Motors and I wouldn't be surprised to find that the Rambler six that we knew in the 1970s as the AMC 232 and the 258 were somehow related to the original Nash 6. They were available in AMC cars with a Torqueflite.

When Jeep was purchased by AMC the weird assembly of engines Jeep had been using were phased out and AMC engines were used to replace them. The last gasp for the AMC 258 six was the 4 liter 6 and 2.5 liter 4. The cylinder head from the 258 was redesigned and is much higher performance than the 258. The crowning touch came when the 4.0 was given fuel injection. There are hundreds of thousands of these engines running around and many if not most of them are bolted to Torqueflites.

Along the way, the crank from the 258 was used in the 4.0 for a stroker by the aftermarket and us hotrodders.

To my way of thinking the fuel injected 4.0 or its stroker variant is what belongs in the car, because of its heritage. Also weighing in on the 4.0s side is the configuration, the rock-solid durability of the engine, the wide availability of parts if any are ever needed, and the fact that it looks a lot like the original engine.

If you want carburetion, the 258 is out there in the same physical package.

R.

The problem with aluminum blockes is the open deck. The cylinders are floating free at the top. That lets them move around and pop head gaskets.

I've often wondered about picking one up and welding plates between the top of the cylinder and the block. A quick clean up bore and deck should have it ready to go.
Might be able to make some power after that.

There are guys out there racing aluminum slant sixes so I'm sure they have figured it out.

Another vote for the jeep 4.0
Rock solid have had several go over 320k plus and still going after I gave the vehicles away!

Even a titanium slant six wouldn't fit in that engine compartment! It needs an engine with the pistons moving vertically. Perpendicular to the earth.

Plus the long stroke makes a very thrashy sounding engine. The AMC motor has it beat every way, including having enough main bearings, as in seven, rather than four.

The Ford 300 is even better, but it's the bigblock of sixes. The Chevy 4.2 DOHC inline 6 could be a very nice piece but it seems to have slowly died. Same displacement and layout as the classic Jaguar 6, I had high hopes for the motor.

The Slant6 lasted so long because it couldn't make enough power to hurt itself. Sorry, but true.

R.

Sometimes the truth hurts...

I was only looking for something already done for convenience. Too many projects going on right now. Putting a 5.7 in a 60 Plymouth wagon, 360 in a 65 cuda and redoing suspension/rear in a 300c.

I've looked for a rebuilt Nash motor, to no avail. I may just sell the car as a project and call it a day. Was a mistake from the start.

There are Jeep/AMC sixes everywhere, many sources for a rebuilt. IIRC many came stock with AMC style Torqueflites. The 258 was carbureted into the '80s. They used the A-998 from 1972 thru 1987 behind the 258 carbureted motor. These Torqueflites use an AMC-specific case but are all Chrysler inside.

Think Gremlin or Pacer.

Heck, the Pacer kind of looks like the '50 Nash!

R.