HO-HO-HO December monthly BANGER meeting

Stromberg CFM's

81 130
97 150
48 170

These figures will vary at least + or - 5 depending on who's article you read.

 

Merry Christmas to all you bangers
Bill

 

I wasn't saying the stated cfm for the various Strombergs ratings are wrong.

There is a formula that works out the (theoretical) volumetric efficiency of an engine in cfm and takes the cfm of a Stromberg to give an idea of how much carb is needed.

Its way to complicated to reprint it here, but the whole thing is explained in Secrets, vol. 13 no. 3.

If you followed it to the word you would need no more than a single 97 for a flathead and no more than dual 81's for a full house OHV.

 

What are the plugs showing? I would guess pretty white?

In my single carb days I was running 0.047 mains. I picked up 10 bhp on the dyno going from stock 0.045's to the 0.047's.

My dad has the single carb manifold on the coupe now and is also running 0.047 mains.

 

Just out of curiousity, what plug ratings do you and your Dad run, Clark?

 

Merry Christmas from our family to yours!!

Bang-On!

 

MERRY CHRISTMAS AND A HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL THE BANGER BOYS AND GALS HERE ON THE HAMB!

 

I've always run NGK B7ES.

I've tried a B8ES which is colder but it never looked right and it would start to soot up when sitting in traffic for a period of time.

I run BP7ES now as they are slighlty easier to get a hold of in the shops and also have the advantage of having extended electrodes which puts them deeper into the combustion chamber.

My dad uses what I throw away.

 

Thanks Bill, those are the numbers that I have always worked with too.

Enbloc,
I had found those results as well, but have not found a formula that resulted in numbers that related to real world experience>
Thanks.

 

Fur Biscuit-
Was it you that asked to see more of the T racer I'm building? Someone PM'd me....

Anyway, I did a little today. Cut the T front spring I had to make two quarter ellipticals for the rear, ala John Gerber's #15 car / Robert Roof's Ford Flyer car.
Also just realized through a finding the tag I took off the new front spring that its a "low" spring,... in other words its a 26-27 front spring, which were lower than the earlier ones. So, to give myself what I'll be needing to make some room for movement at the front end over the axle, I'm exchanging the one I have for the taller one I need. I fully endorse Snyders for my T parts!!! Never had an issue, and they can't do enough for you! Wonderful people!!

Still have to make period looking rear brackets to affix the rear springs...more to come! (those pieces welded to the fame are only to brace it as I work on it,....nothing more)

 

Senor Coal Town Bambino, what is the wheel base going to be? Looks like you are going for a 12" engine set back. I shot you a pm to give me call.

On my last T, I went with a 10" set back on a 99" wb, I also used a 5" passenger set back, which helps keep the passenger out if your elbows (ask Redbeard here, he rode in the car for 200 miles and didn't seem overly beat). I am about 6' and needed all the leg room I could get. My current project is going to be 92" - 94", with a 4" engine set back.

At 10" set back and 99" wb, the car was very stable at speed, 65 you could drive it with 1 hand. Also used a late Model A Gemmer box for steering, not super fast at 3 turns lock to lock, but very easy to install and looks right.

You may end up softening the front end a hair as the load is taken off it substantially (remove the 2nd to the largest leaf spring...do not remove the small ones) A quick way to control rebound is to wrap the springs in 2 sided electricians tape. Ace Hardware has it. You will be surprised by how little "shock absorption" you really need.

you know on that front spring you need to bend it to look like smiley face from the top, that is how you get the front axle to clear the front of the frame.

 

Haven't had the pm come through yet,...I'll call ya!

Also on the front spring bend, actually you don't have to bend it unless you want to. The Voboril car and several others I've seen show you only need to notch out the frame and weld in some pieces to stiffen it back up. I just need the earlier, pre-1926 spring to gain height and not hit the axle.
That's the way I'm heading, unlike the Gerber setup with the "smiling" spring front end.

 

Coaltown,

It was me that asked, but you can blame it on fur b.!

I like what you're doing with the front, including the double bracing of the crossmember to keep the axle under the spring to avoid going suicide!

Just an idea, would "flattening out" the front crossmember a bit help gain you some clearance???

 

Not sure if I mentioned it in the last post,....
BUT,....

I was not aware that the pre-1926 front T springs had a higher arch to them,....a "much" higher arch. This is why I started asking around and contacting people that were familiar with this old racing setup of the 1920s and so forth when I saw that there was no clearance but I was still using the old forulas of design, but it just wasn't working out.

So, with the new spring installed (should arrive early next week actually!) that issue of nowhere for the spring and front end to travel will be solved!

But, for now, yes, it wouldn't work at all! Its just there for the sake of holding everything together and so on, as I work on it.


Here's what it will look like with the proper spring installed in it next week,...(barring bad weather??!!)

 

Jim Brierley, who doesn't post here but is well know in F.A.S.T circles, says it's hard to over-carburete a banger. His speedster is set up for three carbs. Says it ran great on one, better on two, and better still on three Strombergs. Riley Two-Port, I believe. Check out <hotforhotfours.com>. BTW, he rarely agrees with agrees with Charlie Yapp and Secrets, but does sometimes.
Fearless

 

I was curious if it is possible to install the couterbalance weights on a crankshaft
yourself, or does this require special tools or the knowlege of a rocket scientist.

 

From what I understand, they are bolted to the crank, spot welded and then balanced. I can't do it as I am skill and tool limited. I think if you have a Bridgeport and high skill level you could do it and then have it balanced at a machine shop.

 

Regardless of whether Jim agrees with Yapp or not is not even relevant,... Jim, being a larger wealth of mechanical knowledge by far, not to mention a very a good man. Great guy, and has always been a helpful gent to me since we first talked!
I'd trust his studies on carburetion any day! They ran the salt flats this past year and Jim is into his 70s!

 

This should be dome by an experienced and TALENTED welder and machinist. I've seen guys who've "welded for years" and their welds are still filled with porosity, undercut, or without full penetration of the metal, just to name a few issues. Just because you're melting the metal doesn't mean it will be strong. Take it from someone know's been on both sides of the fence!

Anyone can "weld," but not just "anyone" can be good at it! Anyone can run a bridgeport, and so on,....

The weights can either be bolted on, welded on, or a combo of both.

 

There are crankshaft weights for sale that are shrunk on and are supposed to be very successful if done right. They involve turning the crankshaft to a specified diameter and then heating the weights in order to install them. These are not the same style that Ford used on the "BB" cranks which are shrunk or pressed on and then pinned. In the reprint of Riley's "100 MPH Model "A"" there were instructions regarding the bolt on style of weights. This little booklet was reprinted by Dan Iandola for several years. Not sure if it is still available.

The best source for the type of information is the archives of the S O S S magazine. C YAPP has an Index on his website for most of these articles but you must find someone with the issue of the magazine that the article appears in.

 

This is embarrasing, but thanks guys! I do post here on occassion, under the name 4-port Riley. And you are right about me and Charlie. I not only post but have spies looking out for me so be careful of what you say. Jim Brierley in beautiful Temecula.

 

Moron carbs. I ran three 97's most of the time on my Cook at the drags, on gas. Ran four 81's on fuel to get more fuel capacity in the carbs. The Cook always ran well with lots of air.

 

Coaltown,

You DID put that in the last post- I didn't read it well enough (trip back from Charlotte had me a little wiggy last night)!

Looks like the higher arch will do the trick... now if you don't want that lousy later spring...

 

You should post more often Jim this is a great site and has a wealth of information however at times the information is wrong or even dangerous[someone read it in a book somewhere] im no saying that people post misinformation on purpose but at times we need the guiding hand from those who know your opinion is valued have a good new year its a priviledge to talk with you regards rusty

 

Enbloc,
I had found those results as well, but have not found a formula that resulted in numbers that related to real world experience>
Thanks.[/QUOTE]

In what way? Over or under carbed?

 

Jim!

Merry Christmas! Did you get your card from us yet? Oh the slow mail! I know we got out a lot of ours a bit late,..ha,ha....

Take care!!

 

In what way? Over or under carbed?[/quote]


I used the formula for my stroker and it said that it needed 2 81's and I was running three 97's with good results. I'm running dual 81's now on my B that is stock except for the 7:1 head and it runs great. I'm running #36 jets and it could probably use a little bigger ones. I may put dual 97's on it next and see how that works.

I've been running b7es plugs and they seem to run good. But I just picked up some bp7es plugs today to try them out. What gap are you running?

.

 

What the f#$)& does a mill have to do with this......if the crank is not couterbalanced at all how bad can you mess it up....I think I'm callin bullshit on this one , so you measure shit out, bolt/weld these things on and have the whole mess balanced with your flywheel something tells me it ain't as hard as its made out to be.

Someone school (scold) me on this.

 

I had to take the radiator out of my coupe to have a small leak addressed. While it was out, I decided to make a timing pointer. I made this from a 292 timing pointer I had lying around. Had to cut, weld, drill and bend, but turned out nice. I then marked the balancer with a chisel. Still gotta clean and paint it, but you get the idea. Now I can get it on TDC without "guessing" around with the little pin-in-hole on the cam gear.

 

I used the formula for my stroker and it said that it needed 2 81's and I was running three 97's with good results. I'm running dual 81's now on my B that is stock except for the 7:1 head and it runs great. I'm running #36 jets and it could probably use a little bigger ones. I may put dual 97's on it next and see how that works.

I've been running b7es plugs and they seem to run good. But I just picked up some bp7es plugs today to try them out. What gap are you running?

.[/QUOTE]

0.036 mains are one up from the stock 0.035 in 81's?

What jetting did you have when you was running triple 97's?

I've got the plugs gapped to 16 thou because of the mag. I think I used to run 25 thou with the Mallory but I'm not sure as it was so long ago.