Category: Engine

What Cars Offered Four-, Six-, and Eight-Cylinder Engines All at the Same Time? – Daniel Strohl @Hemmings

Advertisements

This trait may be the only thing a Sixties Scout has in common with a new Cadillac CT5

By its very nature, the automobile has identity issues. Rarely can automakers afford to conceive, develop, and market a vehicle with just one customer set in mind, so they either find an acceptable compromise or offer a slate of options to reach a broad range of customers. That can then lead to some strange bedfellows on the showroom floor, including dozens of instances of cars, trucks, and vans that offer four-, six-, and eight-cylinder engine options all at once.

While praising the remarkably long-lasting Chevrolet Express and GMC Savana full-size vans, I noted that the vans had, late in their run, joined a small list of vehicles available with factory-available fours, sixes, and eights all in the same model year. Predictably, several commenters noted other vehicles on that list, which of course warranted an afternoon spent further researching all the vehicles I could think of that might qualify for that list.

Not saying I exhausted every single instance of a vehicle offering such a wide variety of powerplants, thus covering the spectrum from economy to power, but I came up with enough to offer some broad generalized insights about postwar American history and to justify that afternoon. (If you can think of any more, keep your suggestions coming in the comments.)

4/6/8 Criteria

First, some ground rules for my search. I didn’t care about the type of fuel or the cylinder configuration, only the actual cylinder count. I also didn’t consider the recent (and not-so-recent) multi-displacement systems that electronically shut off certain cylinders; I wanted actual effort on the part of the automakers to build a vehicle small or light enough for a four-cylinder to push around but also with enough room in the engine bay for a V-8. And I’m not counting versions built with an additional engine choice by a company other than the original carmaker (sorry, Ford Capri Mk1). Some British models did offer fours, sixes, and eights at various times in their model runs, but not at the same time, so I’m not counting them. I am counting vehicles that used engines in a hybrid configuration as well as vehicles that offered fours, sixes, and eights at the same time but not in the same market.

Based on those criteria, this appears to be a phenomenon that generally occurred in three different time periods in postwar history: the mid- to late Sixties, when American carmakers engaged in a horsepower war at the same time that the American car-buying public started to demand greater thrift in their cars; the mid-Seventies into the Eighties, when American carmakers and car buyers, shocked by the oil crises and the need for greater pollution controls, nevertheless still wanted power, still wanted size, and still hadn’t processed the geopolitical implications of the price of oil; and the mid-2010s to the present, when the carmakers’ addiction to ratcheting vehicle size (and ratcheting profits) put them at odds with equally more stringent CAFE figures, leading them to implement technological solutions like turbocharged and hybridized four-cylinders to try to maximize power from minimal engine sizes.

That said, not every vehicle that I or our readers identified fits neatly into those eras, and other than a few gaps here and there, 4/6/8 vehicles have been with us pretty consistently since the Sixties.

Many thanks to those of you who chimed in on the original version of this article with your suggestions for further models to investigate. I’ve tried to include all of those below.

1964 to 1970 Chevrolet Chevy II

The earliest instance of a postwar American 4/6/8 vehicle we’ve found dates back to 1964 when Chevrolet dropped a 283-cu.in. V-8 into the Chevy II. The compact already had the Super-Thrift 153 four-cylinder and the Hi-Thrift 194 six-cylinder, and both engines used the small-block V-8’s bellhousing bolt pattern, so it didn’t take much engineering to add the V-8. In 1966, Chevrolet relegated the 153 to the basest of base-model Chevy IIs, but the division still kept the engine on the books through the 1970 model year.

1966 to 1969 Checker

If thrifty Sixties cars make perfect candidates for the 4/6/8 trifecta, then of course we have to include Checker (we considered Rambler and Studebaker, but both of those carmakers used six-cylinders as base engines), which, as it turns out, qualified for the list sometime in the mid- to late Sixties when it offered Perkins four-cylinder diesels alongside the Chevrolet-sourced 230-cu.in. straight-six and 327-cu.in. V-8. According to the Internet Checker Taxi Archives, the Perkins option lasted from 1967 to 1969 here in the States, while Israel-bound Checkers received the diesels starting in 1966. The ICTA also notes that Studebaker offered a Perkins diesel in 1963, which would put that car on the list as well.

1967 to 1971 International Harvester Scout 800

International Harvester, like Pontiac, took a unique approach to crafting a four-cylinder by essentially lobbing off half of a V-8’s cylinders, so the IH Scout 800, with a base 152-cu.in. slant-four, easily accommodated International’s V-8 starting in 1967. To fill the gap between the two, International used AMC’s 232-cu.in. straight-six for a brief period in the late Sixties, though as we can see from the brochure pages above, the company didn’t seem to publicize that option well.

Read on

According to you: Your favorite name for an engine – Sajeev Mehta

Advertisements

Turns out there are lot of great engine names out there! You, a member of the Hagerty Community, helped fill my list with engine names that stood the test of time. Or at least been memorable enough to never forget. And some were just nicknames that caught on! No matter the name’s popularity or where it came from, here is your list of favorite engine names!

Blue Flame

You just gotta keep the flame for Chevy’s famous inline six cylinder engine. It powered so many vehicles, ranging from the work-ready to the weekend fun generated by the original Corvette. It’s almost a shame we only got two upvotes for it!

Peter: The “Blue Flame Six” baby!!
DUB6: Yeah, I always thought Blue Flame Six was a catchy name for an engine.

HEMI

I was a little surprised to see that only one person (@JBD) mentioned Chrysler’s famous Hemi V-8. Or maybe this comes as no surprise, as the name is so common that the Hagerty Community wanted to dig up other names that we might have forgotten?

AMC Torque Command & Typhoon

Be it the V-8 or the straight-6, AMC’s Typhoon name was so catchy and so perfect for the era. There was even a special edition AMC Rambler called the Typhoon in 1964, but the name lived on in their engines.

Gregory: AMC’s “Typhoon” is my favorite.
Adam: 343 Typhoon by American Motors.

Mopar Grab Bag

Thanks to Commando, Super Commando, Magnum, Wedge motors, and likely many more, the Chrysler brands likely had the coolest engine names of any manufacturer. Be it Chrysler, Dodge, Plymouth, and DeSoto, there are so many names to love:

Safetyguy: My ’63 Plymouth says “Golden Commando POWER” on the fender badge but has a 318 poly head, the “Semi Hemi” small big-block.
Tom: Super Commando is another one I remember from high school days.
JBD: Magnum, Super Commando.
Grant: Sonoramic Commando Power.
Stephen: Plymouth “Golden Commando Power” and Dodge “Super Red Ram” are two of my favorites.
TA: Super Commando, Magnum.
Clare: Dodge’s baby hemi, the “Red Ram.” A fantastic little engine at 241 cubes (basically 4.0 liter), but what a HEAVY SLUG. Just about pulled the chicken barn down pulling the engine and trans out of my ’53 Coronet!!
Paul: Chryslers Golden Lion 361 four-barrel.
WLB: The Chrysler Firepower and DeSoto Firedome Hemis.

Buick: Nailhead and Wildcat

While giving catchy names to engines in more premium luxury cars wasn’t commonplace, Buick had the Nailhead and the later Wildcat V-8s.

Robert: Nailhead by Buick!
DUB6: Not sure if Nailhead was actually a name that Buick coined, but it sure is descriptive enough if one knows what it means (most of the general public doesn’t, I think).
KJ: I’m still ol’ school: 6 – 2s on a 425 Nailhead!
Mark: Nobody mentioned the Buick Wildcat engines? (Sad but true, luckily you resolved that! – Ed.)

Iron Duke

The famous Iron Duke was as tough as the name suggested, if tragically short on power and refinement for many automotive applications where it saw frequent use. Luckily I am not the only person who loves this little motor and its fantastic name.

DUB6: Iron Duke sticks in my mind as memorable.
Mark: My favorite name is Iron Duke.

Willys Tornado & Go Devil

Did the Willy’s Go Devil (L134) engine win World War II for the good guys? Not singlehandedly, but it was a big part of getting people in the right place at the right time. But it wasn’t the only name from Willys:

Dean: Go Devil Willys L134.
JohnfromSC: Tornado by Willys.
Reggie: The Jeep Willys “Go Devil.” That’s quite a name; I would drive that into war.
Ren: Willys “Go Devil” flathead four used in WWII jeeps and early CJ

Read on

BB- Rebuilding A Fuel Pump – Nate Cooper @TheFlatspot

Advertisements

To all fuel pump push rod welders. 1932-1948 models

Many years of Flathead experience taught me that the fuel Pump push rod DOES NOT wear down causing pump operation problems. It does wear but how much would be realistic? .. maybe 1/16″ to 3/32″ for 100,000 miles?, Ive measured them and its not much more than this.

What does wear then?. It’s the fuel pump lever/link system!. Most are a laminated riveted plate style with a very small pressure bearing surface which wears very quickly especially as many owners fitted new units without lubing the linkage. Bolt it on!, she’ll be right mate!. We fitted hundreds of fuel pump kits so you get to know them very well.

OK, the linkage wears & the pump cant deliver the 1 1/2 lbs minimum required, so the owner [or the mechanic] then builds up the rod by brazing or welding an amount that is guessed [or measured] & bolts it altogether again & it works fine—must be the right thing to do cos the pump in hand when checked worked fine!, just not enough rod length right?, problem fixed?, not quite!.

If the rod travel was not carefully measured & its now too long, the pump mount will accommodate this by bending & or cracking near the stud holes. How hard is it to find a pump mount that isn’t bowed or cracked?—very!. We probably had in stock 30-40 units & if you found one that was straight it would most likely have a stripped thread or the guide tube was missing etc!.

[49-54 mounts were beefed up in this area so usually the pump linkage bent & the diaphragm stretched some & the camshaft eccentric suffered too!]

When that pump finally wears out, [after the rod has probably been brazed up once more] a new pump is bolted straight on without checking pump travel, the mount now really has to bow or break & they did. A result of this bow was a big gap between manifold & pump base causing a very oily engine. The little skinny gasket supplied for the base was replaced by a fat homemade job to try to stem the flow!.

The correct fix for pump linkage wear is a cup or flat washer fixed to the pump lever. Better still a new pump with a proper lever system instead of the Mickey Mouse design that caused the problem in the first place. Sometimes I would replace the linkage on a new pump with a used preferred design. Sorry I cant remember the brand with the solid pivot stop lever design.

I remember now that for my own 35 Sedan I once made up an adjustable push rod for a special application.
A 1/4″ NF nut was welded to a shortened rod, so the end was hollow, the bolt’s head was rounded off and a lock nut secured it in place. This would be a good aftermarket replacement item I reckon.

If your pump mount is bowed get it straightened or find another, don’t file it flat as that will disrupt the recess for the baffle tube & the mount will bow again or the legs will crack or break off. When all is flat that skinny gasket does the job fine. Would Dennis Carpenter or others have new mounts?
[part # 48-9415]

The correct rod spacer/length for your pump will be determined by turning the motor till the rod is at the crest, popping the pump/mount assy on top, pushing down hard & making sure the mount just sits flat on the manifold without “floating” above it, if it floats you’re going to bend it!. Check several times to make sure you have the rod in the socket.

Kiwi Brian

Please support Nate’s site here

For Sale: A Rare Ford 427 SOHC Cammer V8 Crate Engine @Silodrome

Advertisements

EXTRAORDINARY ENGINES FOR SALE

*This is an unused ex-Holman-Moody Cammer V8 in original zero hour condition.*

The Ford 427 SOHC Cammer V8 is one of the rarest and most desirable big block V8 engines ever made. Unusually for an American V8 it has overhead cams rather than pushrods as it was built specifically for racing.

It’s been called the “90 Day Wonder” thanks to its compressed development schedule, some have gone so far as to call it “Ford’s Greatest Engine” however there’ll be plenty of people who argue that statement, and point to the highly influential Flathead V8 released in 1932 and engines like the more recent Coyote V8.

A Hemi Dilemma

In the mid-1960s Ford was faced with a dilemma, a dilemma in the shape of Chrysler’s 426 Hemi V8 which was an exceptionally capable engine no matter your brand loyalties. In order to effectively race against the 426 Hemi and win Ford needed a new engine, and it needed to be a doozy.

Rather than stick with the tried and tested pushrod V8 architecture so beloved of American automakers Ford decided to develop an engine with single overhead cams per bank allowing higher RPM operation, and hopefully more power

The Development Of The Ford Cammer 427 V8

Ford engineers had developed the Cammer on the 427 FE V8 platform. The FE is a pushrod engine of course so it needed new heads, a timing chain set up, and they designed an idler gear shaft in the traditional cam location in the block that operated the distributor and oil pump.

The FE block was modified with cross-bolted main bearing caps and a revised oiling system to better suit overhead cam and roller rocker operation. Originally the Cammer had an iron block and iron heads, though later engines were fitted with alloy heads to help reduce the engine’s prodigious weight.

Above Video: This episode of Unity MotorSports Garage covers the history of the Cammer, including a range of interesting historic images and video footage.
Though the engine had its issues it likely would have proven competitive in NASCAR thanks to its high-RPM capability that was well-suited to the high speed banked circuits typically used in the racing series.

Though the engine had its issues it likely would have proven competitive in NASCAR thanks to its high-RPM capability that was well-suited to the high speed banked circuits typically used in the racing series.

On its release the Ford 427 SOHC Cammer V8 was rated at 616 bhp at 7,000 rpm and 515 lb ft of torque at 3,800 rpm – excellent figures by the standards of the mid-1960s.

The Cammer’s Achilles’ Heel

They say every engine has an Achilles’ heel, some element of the design that wasn’t particularly well engineered. Some engines seem to be made up almost entirely of them as a matter of fact.

Here with the covers removed you can see the timing chain in all its glory, it’s almost 7 feet long and it would stretch so much that engines needed to have as much as 8º of timing difference between the two heads to compensate. Image courtesy of Ford.

The Achilles’ heel of the Ford Cammer engine was its timing chain – at almost 7 feet long it’s one of the longest timing chains ever used in an automotive application, and as any mechanic will tell you, timing chains take on the characteristics of bungee cords given enough time and use.

The timing chain issues were a result of the compressed development timeline, they necessitated different valve timing for the left and right banks to account for chain stretching, and the camshafts themselves needed to a be a mirror image of one another in order to function.

Sadly the Cammer would never get to turn a wheel in NASCAR as the rules were changed to ban special racing engines, the series was supposed to be for stock cars not prototype specials.

The Cammer Goes Drag Racing

Rather than dump the Cammer project Ford continued to develop the engine in the hopes of changing the minds of those making decisions at NASCAR, in the meantime they sent the engine off into the world of drag racing – where it proved wildly successful.

Many of the big names in 1960s drag racing were putting the Cammer to good use, including Bill Lawton who won the AHRA and NHRA Winternationals in 1966. Other Cammer pilots included Mickey Thompson, Gerry Schwartz, Tommy Grove, Tom Hoover, Pete Robinson, Connie Kallita, and many others.

1967 would see Connie Kalitta’s Cammer-powered “Bounty Hunter” slingshot dragster win the Top Fuel events at the AHRA, NHRA, and NASCAR winter meets – becoming the only “triple crown” winner in the history of American drag racing.

Read on

How to Identify the Ford Flathead V8 – For Newbies – Nate Cooper @TheFlatspot

Advertisements

The Ford Flathead V-8 engine powered Ford and Mercury vehicles from 1932 to 1954. The Ford Flathead is a valve-in-block engine and the valves open adjacent to the combustion chamber, rather than from the top, as in later engines. The four different V-8 flathead displacement sizes between 1932 and 1953 are 136, 221, 239 and 337 cubic inches.

STEP 1 – THE OBVIOUS THINGS TO LOOK FOR

One of the easiest ways to start ID’ing your flathead is to look at the heads. Ignore the castings numbers. Focus on the type of head itself. Flathead heads have 3 main shapes. Your going to mainly focus on the Water outlets.
Also, Don’t assume you know what your flathead is internally because of the casting on the heads. That’s because Flathead heads where commonly replaced. If the motor was not commonly serviced at a Ford dealer, the heads you got where the ones sitting on the shelf. This is why it is almost never accurate to use the Heads casting marks to ID your flathead.

If your heads look like this, you’re rocking a 1932-1936 Ford Flathead. First gen flatty’s are more rare and how the whole things started. Congratulations. This was a great little power hose. The engine is harder to build than others years as the parts can be harder to find and more expensive. But we here in the Flat-Spot can help you find almost anything you need.

If your outlets look like this you have a 1937-1948 range flathead. These where a more common flathead and they are honestly the most eclectically desirable. There are two version of this head early heads had 21 studs where the later engines had 24. So that might also help you when it comes to narrowing your year down.

If you have very small Heads that look like these and your Flathead seems really small. Notice how they don’t have water outlets near the top neck. These heads are off a V860. The mini v8 form 1937-1941 which ford put out to try and capitalize on his company’s popularity for the cheap and economical V8. It was fords original goal to not offer an inline 6. But rather produce a Mini V8 to take on the larger sizes that pushed the inline 4 out of favor. This engine was not ideal for the larger Ford cars, but found a second life in small engine racing. The V860 was very popular with Midget race cars, speed boats, and some industrial applications like welders, compressors and water pumps due to their small size.

If your heads have the outlet in the front then lucky you. You have a 8BA flathead which ran from 1948-1953… 1954 if your Canadian. These engines where the last series in the continental US to be made and have some of the best Flathead’s had to offer when it comes to stock performance and engineering. As many of the issues had been resolved.

COUNTING YOUR STUDS

Take a Look at the Head Studs. Count the number of studs on the cylinder heads. According to Van Pelt Sales’ Ford Flathead Specifications web page, the count is as follows: all 136-cubic-inch engines have 17 studs, all 337-cubic-inch have 24 studs, 1932 to 1937 221-cubic-inch engines have 21 studs, 1938 to 1948 221- and 239-cubic-inch engines have 24 studs. The 1949 to 1953 239- and 255-cubic-inch engines have 24 bolts rather than 24 studs with nuts.

STEP 3 – SPARK CAN TELL YOU A LOT

This is the first gen Helmet style distributor. These are commonly also referred to as the Foot Ball Distributor. They ran from 1932-1941. This style came in with a 2 bolt and 3 bolt coil. I am told that the 2 bolt is the older version

This is the second gen 2 bolt distributor. These ran from 1941-1945 and are commonly called the Crab Style Distributor.

This distributor was common from 1946-1948. Because of war surplus the crab style cap is more commonly seen on the later engines. Due to popularity that style commonly replaced this version. The caps are interchangeable.

If your distributor is upright like a modern ignition system then your engine is a 8ba. This was the first year of adjustable timing, that could be done on the car while it was operating. Before they could only be adjusted on a bench with a specific tool.

Read on

In addition to powering U.S. aircraft in WWI, the Liberty V-12 helped create the Lincoln Motor Co – Mike McNessor @Hemmings

Advertisements

Advanced engine design used overhead cams, an aluminum crankcase, liquid cooling

Aerial combat advanced at an astonishing rate during World War I, and though it seems unimaginable today, there were no American-designed aircraft deemed suitable for battle in the skies over Europe. There was a U.S.-designed engine in the fight however: the Liberty V-12 or L-12.

The L-12 engine was America’s greatest technological contribution to the aerial war effort. Its initial assignment was powering the “Liberty Plane”—a version of the British-designed De Haviland/Airco DH-4 bomber produced in the U.S. by Dayton-Wright in Dayton, Ohio; Fisher Body Corporation in Detroit, Michigan; and Standard Aircraft in New Jersey. In addition to powering the DH-4 and a variety of other airplanes, over its long service life the L-12 powered tanks, high-speed watercraft, and land-speed racers.

The L-12 came about because Packard’s head of engineering, Jesse G. Vincent, recognized the need for a standardized line of aircraft engines that could be mass produced during wartime. The government assigned Vincent the task of creating this engine and teamed him up with Elbert J. Hall of the Hall-Scott Motor Company. The two met in Washington, D.C., on May 29 and, with the help of volunteer draftsmen, created detailed drawings and a full report by May 31. This original design was a V-8, but in their report Vincent and Hall outlined how the engine could be configured as a four-, six-, eight-, or 12-cylinder engine.

By July 3, a V-8 prototype assembled by Packard was running, and a V-12 soon followed. Due to its superior horsepower potential, the 1,650-cu.in. V-12 was given the nod for mass production

An I.D. tag shows the L-12’s firing order and reveals that this example at the Glenn H. Curtiss Museum was built by Lincoln on September 25, 1918.

Not only did the Liberty engine mark a great achievement for American aviation, it was responsible for creating a landmark car company: Lincoln. Henry Leland, who founded Cadillac, and his son Wilfred started Lincoln with a $10 million government contract awarded to build Liberty engines. The Lelands left Cadillac to form Lincoln because General Motors President William C. “Billy” Durant was a pacifist and initially rejected the government’s call for GM to build L-12s. (Durant later recanted and Liberty engines were manufactured by GM.) Production numbers seem to vary for output before and after the war but in total Ford, Lincoln, Packard, Marmon, and Buick produced 20,748 L-12 engines.

Read on

Everything You Need to Know About Piston Rings – Jeff Smith @Hemmings

Advertisements

Everybody wants more power, and that attention has usually been paid to the romance items like cylinder heads, intake manifolds, carburetors, and camshafts. While those aspects of the engine are still essential for moving air, more engine builders are now scrutinizing the combustion space and making sure that all that air and fuel you worked so hard to get into the cylinder actually contributes to shoving the piston down instead of leaking past the rings.

Are thinner piston rings really better?

New technology now calls for not only thinner rings as viewed from the side, but also reduced radial thickness—as viewed from the top or bottom. Newer rings like those for LS engines take advantage of this. A narrow radial-wall thickness allows the ring to conform better to cylinder wall irregularities. This reduces blow-by and improves efficiency.

In the muscle car days of the ’60s and ’70s, production top and second piston rings measured 5⁄64-inch, and this remained the standard for decades. But with the coming of the modern engine era with powerplants like the GM LS, Ford modular V-8, and the Chrysler Gen III Hemi, piston rings began to slim down for many excellent reasons. If you don’t retain anything else from this story, just remember that thinner is better.

To get an idea of the benefits of slender ring packages, let’s start with some basic concepts. A thick piston ring, like the older 5⁄64-inch designs, presents a very wide contact face to the cylinder wall. This requires significant internal pressure exerted by the ring, called radial tension, to help seal the ring to the cylinder wall. The people at Total Seal have invested in an expensive machine that measures this tension and expresses this tension in units of pound-force (lb-f). Simply stated, this is the amount of force in pounds exerted against the cylinder wall after the ring is squeezed into the cylinder. This lb-f number is not a torque number (expressed as pound-feet or lb-ft) so don’t be confused. Nor is pound-force a sliding friction number, though clearly it is directly related to the friction generated as the piston and ring package move up and down in the cylinder

Piston rings are available in a wide variety of thicknesses.

Before we get into the actual numbers, it’s important to understand why a thicker ring must exert a greater force. This force is directly proportional to the ring face area that contacts the cylinder wall. This might be best explained by using the comparison of two different shoes. When walking on damp grass, it is easier to navigate the surface in a typical flat shoe. However, if the point of the heel is narrowed, as in a high heel shoe, the situation changes: the wearer’s gait is changed and the force of the heel is concentrated in a much smaller area, which easily presses the heel into the soft ground.

A wider piston ring must use a much greater radial tension to apply sufficient load to the cylinder wall to help seal the ring against cylinder pressure. With a thinner design like a 1.0-mm top ring for example, its static radial tension can be substantially reduced because the area of the ring face contacting the cylinder wall is far less than the larger 5⁄64-inch ring.

Piston ring radial tension, sliding friction, and oil control

Oil rings generate the most amount of friction as evidenced in our radial tension chart. However, Total Seal tells us they can build a 3⁄16-inch oil ring with improved radial tension numbers. The Summit GPX ring package we’re using for a 4.030-inch bore small-block Chevy 355 uses a 3⁄16-inch oil ring producing only 15 lb-f. Compared to a “standard” 3⁄16-inch oil ring’s 20 lb-f rating, the GPX offers a 25 percent reduction in radial tension yet can still deliver the expected oil control for street use.

Again, this radial tension is not the same thing as sliding friction, like that which might be measured with a fish scale pulling a piston with rings up a cylinder wall. But these radial tension loads are still proportional to sliding friction. As a practical example, we’ve installed 4.010-inch LS pistons using a ring package with 1.5 mm top rings, 1.5 mm second rings, and 3.0 mm oil rings into a bore and then pushed the pistons in using mere thumb pressure. But similar bore-size engine using 5⁄64-inch top and second rings and standard tension 3⁄16-inch oil rings demand a hefty hit with a hammer handle to drive the piston into the bore. The difference is the amount of friction produced by the different ring packages. Another way to measure this friction would be to use a digital torque wrench to gauge the friction required to rotate all eight pistons.

A typical small-block Chevy with 5⁄64-inch ring package might require a torque reading of 20 to 25 ft-lb but an LS engine with a 1.0-mm ring package with a similar bore and stroke may require 8 to 10 ft-lbs less torque. At 5,252 rpm, 10 lb-ft of an engine’s torque output is equal to 10 hp. This is not free horsepower because thinner ring packages do cost more and may require new pistons, but other than cost, there are no negatives to this approach.

As an additional benefit, thinner rings also allow the move to higher quality ring materials. As an example, budget ring packages costing $50 most often use grey cast iron that’s rather weak and brittle. Upgrading to a ductile iron will more than double its tensile strength. Plus, many high-quality thinner rings are now made using steel alloys with high-tech face coatings to further reduce friction while improving cylinder pressure sealing capability

Read on

Modernizing The 1929 Ford Model A Valvetrain – Jim’s Automotive Machine Shop, Inc.

Advertisements

An excellent video showing how a top quality machine shop can breath life into a Model A block

https://youtu.be/_ZESBbQ2dew Get yourself a sticker! https://jamsionline.com/jims-automoti… Instagram: @jamsionline Facebook: JAMSI Online TikTok: @jamsionline Website: https://www.jamsionline.com

The V8-60 Engine, Henry Ford’s Baby Often Forgotten by Car Enthusiasts – Silvian Irimia @Autoevolution

Advertisements

In 1932, the Ford flathead V8 began production when the expression game-changer wasn’t around. Ford’s V8 revolutionized the American automotive industry, forcing all its competitors to switch to eight cylinders mounted in a V shape. However, we are here to talk about the V8-60.

The story of Henry Ford’s genius creation, the 60-horsepower V8, starts earlier than 1937 when it was introduced. In 1934-35, Ford designed and produced a smaller, 2.2-liter power unit of the company’s standard V8 for its European divisions in England and Strasbourg, France. With interesting engineering, this first version featured only two exhaust ports per bank and four main bearings. At the same time, it was full of issues, especially overheating. Consequently, only around 3300 examples were produced, and today only a handful of them still exist.

Still, the effort was not in vain and actually inspired a second redesigned V8 for Europe. Later, in 1937, it was introduced on the United States market as the V8-60. While in Britain, it was commonly known as the 22 hp V8 (in reference to its taxable power rating), the Ford ad writers for the US called it the “Thrifty Sixty.”

The updated V8-60 was an identical and much tinier version of the original flathead Ford V8 introduced in 1932. The displacement was scaled down by Ford engineers from 221 cubic inches (3.6-liter) to a shabby 136 cubic inches (2.2-liter). The power output was 60 hp (61 PS) instead of 85 hp (86 PS) for the old 1937 V8.

One of the particular features of the V8-60 was the front engine support casting, which doubled as the timing cover and mounts for the ignition distributor and twin water pumps. The small and big Ford V8 powerplants are so similar in appearance that ordinary people are often confused. Looking at the head bolts makes it easy to see the difference. The V8-60 has only 17 per cylinder bank, while the big V8 has 21 or 24 fasteners per side. Another interesting and particular feature was the cooling jacket on each bank that was closed out with a sheet metal plate. This metal plate was electrically welded in the proper position.

Ford customers were attracted to the V8-60’s fuel economy, so sales were outstanding initially. However, sales quickly fell as word got out about the engine’s poor acceleration. You see, despite its tiny displacement, the power unit produced 60 hp at 3500 rpm, which for 1937 was quite decent. Unfortunately, the engine had a significant downgrade. The peak torque was less than 100 lb-ft (136 Nm) at 2500 rpm. The available torque was 50 percent behind its V8 larger brother. As a consequence, The V8-60 was discontinued in the USA after 1940, when Ford introduced an L-head straight six engine as its economic engine.

However, this tiny powerplant found its true potential in racing. If you didn’t know, there was a time before and shortly after WWII when American citizens were absolutely captivated by a new racing competition known as the Midgets. In the 1930s and 1940s, these small cars, modeled after their larger siblings from Indianapolis, raced on tracks in baseball and football stadiums on quarter-mile ovals specially built for them

Read on

A Short History of the Flathead -@ModernDriveline

Advertisements

A Short History and Evolution of the Flathead V8, and Making It Modern

Back in 1932, Henry Ford introduced the 221 cubic inch Flathead engine producing 65 HP. And by 1935 HP was increased to 85 HP. Those engines were produced from 1932 to 1938 and were commonly known as “21 stud engines”, due to the head design using 21 head studs

In 1937 Ford introduced a 136 cubic inch variant, producing 45hp.
This engine was only in production from 1937 through 1938.
Although the engine was efficient, it was not very popular with the American public, who were now used to the 85 HP engine.
The 136 cubic inch engine was discontinued at the end of 1938 when the new Inline 6-cylinder Flathead was introduced.

1938 saw the first major redesign of the 221 cubic inch Flathead engine, with the addition of more head studs, now totaling 24 studs. In 1939 the cubic inches were increased to 239 cubic inches and produced 95hp. These engines remained in production until 1948.
During World War II, 1943-1946, no engines were manufactured for the public due to the war effort (or at least, that I am aware of at the time of this writing).

**The main characteristic of Flathead engines relating to Modern DriveLine, is the back of the engine block.**
**The 1932-1947 59A block casting utilized a ½ bell ring over the flywheel. The lower ½ ring was removable to provide access to remove and replace the Clutch, flywheel, and rear seal.**

In 1948-1953 8BA/RT blocks no longer had the cast ½ ring.
Ford now used a single stamped metal bell ring for cars or a cast metal bell ring for trucks.

The intermediate ring with 3” depth, was used over the flywheel and clutch and used to attach transmission to the engine.
In 1948 to 1951, Ford produced the 337 cubic inch engine used in Lincoln cars and the F7 and F8 trucks.
Known as the 8EL in the Lincoln cars and 8EQ in heavy-duty trucks, these engines produced more horsepower and torque and weighed over 850 lbs.
These engines are physically larger and used 27 head studs and used a 12” clutch. Although this is a V8 flathead, very few parts from the 59A or 8BA engines are interchangeable.

Read on