so my gals dad and i were talkin today, and he brought up a good point. Why did ford use the flathead design as long as they did, when the over head valve had been out for as long as it did?
because if you think about it, the flathead ford v8 is a terrible design versus the chevy inline 6 of the same period. Everyone knows of the terrable breathing issue that flathead have, plus non adjustable valves, and low compression.
That terrible design****ed the doors off of millions of Stovebolts from 1932 until 1953. Why not ask Pontiac why they kept their flatheads until 1954?
I understand Ford spent alot of money on developing the tooling/casting procedures for the flathead. I guess they did the job for the times, I think the engines were even used in France or Canada ? (not sure what country) until the late 20th century.
Has any one else noticed that most of the threads that have highly emotianly charged content (Read, **** stiring) are started by Dynaflash 8? Some call them a troll others are not so nice.
Flathead engines of the day ran quieter than pushrod engines. The flatheads put out about the same power as thier competion and the lack of mechanicals made for a quieter running engine. hydralic lifters quieted down the OHV engines but then that required full flow oil filtering and high detergent oil. Things that didn't happen for another ten years or so.
So am I.... I'm not trying to be an *** but the old Flattie was king of the hill for 30 years... stock or modified. By the time a Fireball 8 got up to speed the lightweight Ford was gone... and I love straight 8's! It kind of like asking why did Chevy keep making OHV V-8's for so many years when everyone knew OHC engines were better..... they aren't better. (I'd never, ever thought I'd be defending SBC's...geez!) Actually your post should have asked "why valve in block?"....
Remember Cadillac?? They developed from OHV in their V8-V12-V16 engines in the early thirties to flatheads in the same cylinder configurations in the late thirties. Noise was a big part of this...if you look at patents, everyone was busily trying to develop self adjusting valves to solve this problem. Hydraulics came in the late thirties, I think, but were miserable devices until into the fifties. And OHV does not translate straight into breathing...many of the early OHV engines had DISMAL port designs, and even after '49, look at dyno curves on hotrod Olds motors... the engines dropped dead at about the same RPM level as a mild flathead, and that's after they learned how to gut the hydraulics! It took the Hemi in drag racing and the Chevy on the street to really get the OHV thing going. Last flathead top eliminator at the national drags was in '55 or 6! The dragster that did it was built and raced so it could run a hemi or a flathead, and I think set records with both...they chose the flathead for the nationals!
I have wondered how efficient (fuel use AND emissions) and cheap a "new" flathead design could be with CAD design and electronic engine controls (computer)... But then again, I don't know that a new flathed could be ANY cheaper to actually build than a comparable OHV design... If the efficiency issue could be overconme, I think a flathead engine could help to bring down hood lines on modern cars even iff a car company could not save a dollar on production of the engine itself.
There's only one reason any car company ever did anything, either keeping old designs or presenting new ones, and that was "PROFIT". By keeping the same design they amortized engineering and tooling costs and increased profit for the stock holders / owners. Guess why Chevrolet held on to babbited bearings foir so long, when other divisions of GM went to insert bearings - profit. Same thing with Ford using mechanical brakes long after the rest of the world went to hydraulic brakes and on and on..........
Chrysler stayed with flatheads in 6-8 until 1950. Advertised them as "solid, dependable, proven technology". Then they introduced the Hemi V8 OHV engine in 1951 and advertised them as "modern technology to replace the outdated, out moded, technology" blah, blah, blah. PROFIT.
Chrysler kept the flathead 6 until '59, the French used flatheads into the late '70's at least. Chevrolet made an OHV V8 in 1917, it was a resounding flop! Too expensive and complex for the day. And the splash-oiled Stovebolt was nothing to brag about, even with overhead valves.
Less moving parts = cheaper to build. Bingo. If you think of the time frame and the casting technology of the day, to cast the Ford V-8 was just sort of amazing. I certainly hope you aren't just trying to stir the pot. Different strokes for different folks. We can also do this "what if" type of stuff all day long, but let's not.
It's the old "if it ain't broke don't fix it" syndrome, car companys did'nt just change **** to be like the other guys, or to be different for that matter. it was a pure profit decision to stay with it for so long, and I think we're all glad they did!!!
Ford's reason wasn't only economics, it was market **********. In 1931 the A was a compe***ive seller, but the "Ford" name was still a cheap car, and could be out-run by many mid-sized mid-price L6 etc. cars. He decided to make the fastest cheap car - and cut costs by using an L head engine. It worked, and the many years of development (by rodders) gave what was originally only a marketing tool a big advantage. By 1937 when Chevy introduced the 216 Fords already had speed equipment and a 5 year head-start on R&D.
Ford kept the flathead after everyone went overhead because he was an old fart who didn't like change. did the same thing with buggy spring suspension and mechanical brakes.
49 RF points out an interesting misperception here. In 1954 all US FoMoCo cars with 6 or V8 engines were overhead valve. Meanwhile GM at Pontiac was happy selling flathead six and eight cylinder cars. Chrysler was also selling six cylinder cars and would continue for 6 more years. Studebaker was delivering flathead sixes and Packard flathead eights. AMC still sold flathead six cylinder Nash and Hudson cars. So just how behind the times was FoMoCo?
Ford continued to build the flahead for as long as they did, because Henry Ford had the incredible foresight to realize that by the year 2000, people would be all over themselves trying to acquire his antiquated engines.
And Ford is also regularly ripped for sticking with Lockeed brakes rather than going to Bendix like everyone else...Ford was I think the FIRST of the lower priced cars to use Bendix Hydraulics! Plymouth, Stude, and Dodge used Lockeed for several more years, Chevy stuck with Huck...The Bendix users were all way uphill in price range. The buggy springs were an albatross in the market, which was rapidly turning to mobile living room standards, but were part of the hotrod success of Old Fords...and old Ford could handel well enough to support rodding, while the IFS cars right through the fifties were roll monsters that strictly enforced slow cornering.
Somewhere along the way, Willys 6 and 4 got F-head conversions to their flatheads. I'm thinking another 6 cylinder got an OHV conversion...cannot remember what is cooking in my memory there. Some upgrade technologies were VERY cost limited...there were OHC engines back to the dawn of time, but use in high production vehicles was always noted as requiring too much expense for the drive mechanism...the use of a flexible reinforced rubber type belt by Tempest in the early sixties was the cost breakthrough here, and now OHC with its porting advantage is the norm.
And there some folks who were very creative with the Ford flathead, making a single exhaust port that went over the top where the two in the middle go together, put forced induction on them. You could make enough power to blow the bottom completly out. Now babbit pounder Chevy, they were good motors too, but they really improved alot when they got bearing inserts. With a blower, measure for measure I don't think there's a lot of difference. OHVs were only making 110-160 hp in the early '50's. The reliabilty of the old flatty Ford Dodge, and Chevy's 216 appealed to alot of people. Face it if it were all about performance, we have a Honda Civic down at the shop with a 1.8 liter engine that dynos 420 hp at the wheels (the wrong ones) I just can't picture it in a '32 Ford.
The 170 inch OHV 6 that came in my Studebaker Lark is very simular to the 169 inch flathead six that came before it. Never looked at the two togeather but that may be what your thinking of.
Valve in head? One of the engines that still amazes me is the 1710 Allison. It was designed in the late 1920's. It was built in large numbers in the 1930's, the first one was built in 1931 and the last one was built in 1948. It had 4 valves per cylinder and one camshaft in/on each head. Lucky667
As already pointed out, Ford was early to convert to OHV, many other manufactures didn't.. Customers are fickle. When the board of governors decided to go with OHV, 'twas the time to change, except I'm sure they had their fingers crossed and ready to go back to flatheads if sales plummetted, with the 'you're fired' list already typed up. I doubt if any reason for that decision has been do***ented. It worked for them. They continued to manufacture flatheads 4, and 8, for industrial use and export. Not much substance with that statement, The off-t******lf 4 banger model A woud outrun a 6 banger Chevy of comparable vintage, hands down. Ask my how I know that. The Six-cylinder chevy motor never outperformed a comparable year of Ford/Merc flathead V8 with single carb required by most stock car track rules, with exception to the 1950-something Jimmy-6s, which competed in a questionable way with the Ford V-8s on the race circuit. With speed e****pent, the flathead Ford/Merc widened the gap. Of course in 1955 all of that changed.
The Jalopy Journal
