im actually building a 48 chev car with a 6 because i have other fast cars and don't need the temptaion of well i might as well put a big cam in it , then well alum heads , well more compresssion. then im $6000 into another v8 that i just wanted to be able to hop in and cruise not run premium and stop at every gas station to begin with.
Hey you can have the same temptations with the 6!! I started out just wanting a mild 300 for my project. Now my plans have morphed into a full rebuild with higher compression, decent size cam, lots of head work, multi-carbs ( running on E85 ) and a supercharger. The 6 is just easier to work on, takes up less room in the engine compartment and and has fewer parts to break!
Fordman75 that sounds great and looks good..but some body done went and put your carb on the wrong side
That one I posted isn't mine. Just one I really like. And as far as the carb being on the wrong side goes. I just think you bowtie guys/gals are backwards that's all!!
because this is alot more fun! Was able to out-pull the flathead ford guys going up snoqualmie pass with this motor is a 47 plymouth more-door. <iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/QfDw94-f_04" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
just sat and read the entire thread, really interesting read on other opinions. i have a 59 apache that came with a 235, ran ok. never did drive it just went for mot to get it registered (i live in the uk) so my story is slightly different in a way that i never really drove mine, my first plans was a SBC and i got a cheap tunnel ram from a swap meet. dad has a 292 in his 66 c10, after a few outing in it i love how easy it seemed to pull, its pretty standard and does go well! i recently sold my 235 and on the quest to get some good power from the 292 i have. on the expence side, yes it is expensive in comparrison especially in england, all my parts pretty much will come from america as theres only one shop i know that i can buy off the shelf parts, but still nothing to extreme. this is my 292 thats going in the truck, pretty cool i think! # and a couple videos just for some nice sound http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZRhCtnDtGM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQKvdHkfTms
to me sixes r the BOMB lookin cleaned up with a header , finned valve cover and a couple of 2s.Ans as for me my tire melting daze are long over I just WANNA CRUISE
can't help you with this one. I've thrown two in the trash. Now that they've become "the thing" I still wouldn't take them back for free if the inline fairy brought 'em back.
along the same thought, I once considered building a V6, to be different. I looked up the price of a steel crank, pistons, and a blower intake...that thought didnt' stick around too long.
I like the inline's great simplicity and the fact that at our local cruise-ins and shows I have the only t-bucket with an inline.
How about a sraight 8.dual carbs.straight exhaust,non rubber motor mounts,3 speed,370 gears. Vibrates like hell but?? Its cool....
Everyone has a V8. I like my inliner, I am not out to set speed records, or rattle my kids teeth out with a big cammed engine. I want a family friendly cruiser, I can afford to drive it whenever and wherever I want to, and really have no money into it. You can pic up reat running 235's for $200 or so.
When it was time to get cars for the kids, it just seemed natural to make them deal with the same crap I had to deal with when I was a kid....dad got me an old truck with a six, and it was up to me to make it go fast if I wanted to. Although somehow my kids didn't feel it was necessary to do the big block swap while they were still in high school...they've kept the sixes for over 5 years now!
Straight-8s shouldn't vibrate unduly; no more than a V8 and certainly less than a straight-4. Both 4-4 and 2-4-2 cranks should give running almost as smooth as a six. The problem is torsional springiness in so long a crank, which is why some of the most sophisticated straight-8s have taken drive from a gear between cylinders 4 and 5.
ok,my story is a bit different.I bought an old car with a flat6 in it.If it aint broke.I plan to do the old style car. dual carb,split exhaust.satin black. painted rims moons and trim rings.a lot like dads old Plymouth.I'm sticking with the flat6 as I never worked on one and thought it would be a learning experience to do it the old way.the old car is 2 years older than me so I have seen pics of me in it but don't remember it much.just a path i wanted to take.
Horizontally-opposed fours are also intrinsically balanced, e.g. air-cooled VW, Subaru, Alfasud, Honda Goldwing etc. Horsepower is a function of torque, so one can't really have one without the other. Surely this has been gone through a few times on the HAMB? I think a lot of people say 'torque' when they mean low-rpm power, and 'horsepower' when they mean high-rpm power. Sixes may broadly tend to undersquare dimensions and bottom-end-oriented cam profiles, but some emphatically don't.
No luck. I didn't take many pictures in those days of film and prints. But it was a 270 bored to 3 15/16 (292), 302 head, Potvin cam, Two Corvair turbochargers and a Holly 4 bbl. Went 158 and ran record off the trailer.
I bought the jimmy 302 in the '37 chevy pickup that hamber "truckedup" built. It may not be greased lightning but it is certainly in scalded dog territory. He trued up everything and blueprinted it, more or less. It has about 9.5 to 1 compression with Venola slugs fitted with BBC wrist pins. Assemblies were balanced. Has a 3/4 cam. Heads and rocker arms were reworked for SBC stainless steel valves. It has early HEI w/vacuum advance from an early S-10 2.8 Chevy v6. It has a 400 CFM Carter AFB on a Clifford mainfold and homebrew header dumping into a 3" flowmaster. It does not sound like a typical six. I ran it on desktop dyno using the most conservative settings I could guess at (Truckedup and others helped me get a few specs corrected, like rod length, but it didn't change things enough to repost the report). The link below is to the desktop dyno report in PDF format. http://www.laroke.com/larryk4674/2008/GMC302DynoSim1.pdf The engine connects to the rear wheels with a Hayes clutch in a '47-'53 Chevy truck bellhousing. Tranny is a Camaro T5 with S-10 tailshaft that Truckedup rebuilt with world class parts. Rear end is from a '57 Chevy powerglide car with 3.36 gears. The truck moves smartly on the interstate. As someone mentioned, power to weight ratio is important and this truck weighs in at about 2900 lbs. Truckedup made a short youtube vid of the truck's sound when he still owned it. Here's the link to that. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZPkYL8QdX0 I drive this old boy everyday and have logged over 40,000 miles since I bought it a little over three years ago. There's a chance I may wear it out before I get too old to drive so, I've bought a Buick 322 nailhead to build as a replacement. If I do get to the point of swapping engines, I will start rebuilding the Jimmy when I take it out. At least that's the plan. I'm not against bent-eights. I just wanted to throw some desktop dyno projections into the discussion as the OP suggested.
Your are quite correct about the 'boxer' engines cited....I forgot about those in the context of this thread though I have a history with VW's way back. I also understand that horsepower is partly a function of torque....but impressive HP can be made with very little torque if the rpms are high enough. My comment was based on the idea that strong torque through low to moderate rpms is (to me at least) more satisfying than a lower torque, higher revving engine if I actually have to drive the damn thing. Ray
I also like lots of torque in a useable rpm range....which is why I ditched the sixes in my stuff a long time ago and stuffed big blocks in them, and one has a blower which really helps the torque.
Oh, what's a rodder to do????? I have a 500 Caddy, a 390 Caddy, 331 & 354 Chrysler Hemis, a couple of 340 Buicks, a 300 inch Ford 6, a 263 Buick straight punched to 270, a 270 GMC and a later 250 & 292 Chev....all sitting around the shop...........and that's not all, but it's enough to illustrate my schizophrenic dilema......... Ray
I have two flathead powered model A's, one a bone stock 9T, the other a 276" 59a. I have a '58 283 in a '36 pickup, and a 261 inline with Fentons and a Holley 94 carb n a '51 Chevy pickup. They're all a lot of fun to to drive, each in its own way and each one with its own personality and each one dredging up specific, great memories of cars and times past. Which is what it's all about....at least for me. As far as things like cost and performance... The inline will run with all but the hot flathead. The flatheads are insanely expensive. 261s are right up there, too. SBC is the cheapest but easily the least fun per dollar.
desktop dyno is worthless in my opinion. a decent machinist can tell you better horsepower numbers than that silly program can. how can you even come to a conclusion of power from that program with a "3/4 cam"? i always giggle when i hear that term. go put it on the dyno rollers. its cheap for a few pulls. i hate speculation and "estimated" horsepower. call it a pet peeve. my engine dynoed 350hp/490tq 351M turned 409 with almost all stock parts would consistently SMOKE other mud trucks when i raced in mud truck drag races (hell i even won first place for the year's season with it!) that made "yea- 'bout 450 howrse powa. gots me a seta headers' and a six fitty double pumpa on that sum'bish- she runs like a mo-fo"...... really? is that why its back firing/runs like crap and im doing the same mud strip 3 seconds faster? real numbers>estimation/guessing/desktop dyno.
my 31 pontiac is getting a OHC-6 I could have used one of the pontiac V-8's i have lying around but I wanted something different, its not going to be cheap but im not looking to make a profit just build the car i want and i think 260hp is enuf for a 2000lb car.
I have seen that if someone KNOWS exactly what they have and knows how to enter it desktop dyno is very consistently within 5% of actual dyno numbers. I know this because many many engine builders and home builders use it rather than guessing which cam works better at very specific RPM ranges. Then after the real build you put them on a real dyno. If all the flow data from the heads is known as well as very specific cam info, intake, carb, ACTUAL compression ratios, etc you WILL be within 5%, I have seen it time and again with my own eyes and a real dyno.
point taken- but most people dont have flow numbers on their cylinder heads, cant figure out what their lobe seperation/valve lift and true cam timing is/was/should be, know what "true" volumetric efficiency is, and the key ingredient: experience.
Absolutely. But times they are a changing. Most people are running out of the box heads these days that come with a card with flow numbers. Most cam cards have good info, but your right, usually not everything you want to know. A quick call to the cam manufacturer will get you that info. I do agree that without all the info its worthless, but I use it, all my drag racing buddies use it, and most of us use the dyno after a build for initial tune and to find optimal timing and fuel etc. Pretty good stuff if you take the time. Sorry for the sidetrack, I'm still in shock with the guy that posted 3 HP per cubic inch out of an under 200 CI engine, I don't care if its a V8, straight 6 or 4 banger, 3HP per CI is like wow...LOL Scot
The Jalopy Journal
