Yeah. Not wanting to get back into non C4 engines lets just say that a four cylinder engine from the low priced three and not a Chevy or F car that I ran was a flathead. I wanted an OHV engine and had been told that a F car Y block head would fit pretty good. But not great. And they are not the best of the best heads. Still I tried it. the small blue car on the left went a best of 113 mph with the flathead version of this off brand engine. With the Y block head it went 135 mph. All internal parts the same. So going OHV should be some improvement.
RichFox, Let me guess I'll bet your engine is a P-------. I would think that the difference between 113 mph and 135 mph has to reflect at least 100hp in a roadster. Our chevy friends will have to put up with your P------- engine in a F--- roadster. With me they have to put up with is a f--- engine in a F---, but at least I had the decency to put a Chevy head on the F--- engine. I do understand their earlier concern about this thread being unintensionally Hijacked by others talking about other engines. Anyway we are all in this together. We need to be alert to the fact that our State and Federal governments are trying to shut us down in their misguided concern for the environment. Sorry, I don't want to hijack this thread for our concern about our rights either. But we have to be reminded once in a while that we are a band of brothers (and sisters) in this great hobby. Dick
You are so right about this and I am just a lurker here myself. Thanks for input on the conversion head and I too have heard from several oldtimers the the Chevy head on a F motor was a real horsepower addition. The info you posted should be a real benefit to guys building those early Chevy 4's.
I have read in a couple posts the claim that a '28 head will flow as well as a three port. Likely this origionated from one source. I don't have the facilities to prove or disprove this, but having both types, and looking at the ports, I find this claim to be hard to believe, Does anyone have numbers from an actual test, where the two were compared? Herb Kephart
ebtm3, First I want to state that I am in no way arguing that the 4 port chevy heads flow as much as the 5 port Olds heads. I don't know what the ports look like on the inside of the Olds head but the size and shape would better determine the flow than the number of ports. I don't have any Olds heads so I will have to use the chevy heads that I have. One important thing to remember is that the intake side of the equation is more important than the exhaust. In fact the Mercruiser boat engines that I am putting in some of my cars were designed by Mercury Marine with small valve 460 ford heads in order to get high torque over a broad range of rpm. They found that enlarging the exhaust valves actually decreased the torque at low and mid range rpm. The intake valves are quite large but the exhaust valves are quite small. Intake valves have to flow at atmospheric pressure 14.7 lbs @ sea level. Exhaust valves flow at 7 to 8 hundred lbs pressure after combustion. Not being an automotive engineer I won't try to come to a scientific conclusion. I am enlarging the intake valves as large as I can but I am leaving the exhaust valves alone. I will port the head as much as I dare and will remove the cast valve guides that protrude into the ports and I will have shorter and smaller bronze guides installed to support the stainless valves I am having installed. I figure that the relatively low compression and low rpm that this engine will turn will not adversly affect the Small block Ford High performance Stainless Chrome stemed valves that I will have installed. I would imagine that your assumption is right as the land speed record was held with an Olds head. But there aren't enough of the early Olds heads to go around. Those of us who only have the chevy head will have to make do. By the way for those who don't even have the Chevy head Neal Jerg who makes the conversion kits also has a good supply of heads that he sells with the kit at a very reasonable price Since you have both why not share your Olds head with me and I'll build both so that we can get a definitive answer to the question. Just kidding . Dick
Dawford, you wrote-- One important thing to remember is that the intake side of the equation is more important than the exhaust. Exactly my point. The Olds heads have intake ports that look like the ones in a modern engine-they sweep towards the valve, whereas the '28 ports have a lot of square corners in comparison. I know that airflow does funny things sometimes, and I'm not saying that the '28 head can't flow almost as good as the Olds. It just LOOKS like it cant, to me. And I am no way disparaging the '28 heads, or the folks like yourself who choose to use them. For years I thought that the Olds heads were all gone, then one day a friend showed me an ad in the Antique Automobile Club of America magazine, for 2 Olds engines about 50 miles from me, and 5 years after that my son found one on a Chevy race engine at Hershey. Now one is on the engine in my avatar, one is a spare (not for sale), and one I sold within the past year. There was one on fleabay about a year ago, in an Olds chassis that sold as I recall for around $300 for the whole rusty mess---but it was in Europe. There are still some around. Herb Kephart
I talked to Frank and he said he only got one call from a Hamber, and he still has the C4 parts and Olds heads ???
G'day 39cent, could you ask Frank if he has a '24 Chev timing cover and oil pump or a Jewett oil pump? Did Frank run at the dry lakes or circle tracks?
Just a little update- Went salvage yard hopping with Brad54 and Stevie G last week to look for the elusive Nissan diesel rockers with no luck! We DID get some interesting info though... Looks like the 3.0l and 3.3l were also used in the Chevy S10 AND that there is one company (if you believe it) that makes/supplies the diesel engines for all of the Japanese imports. SO, if you know of any import diesels running around, they may have the rockers we're looking for! Lastly, I'm in Philly for the next week and a half, so of anyone knows of a yard that might have diesels, let me know!!!
Mac, call Harry's U Pull It in Hazelton, up rt.81 from there. ALL like items are the same price, like distributors may be $6 for example. Don't wear sandles though, you can't get in.
Ive been following this thread with great interest. I bought three 28 engines (one complete) and parts of two more plus several transmissions a year ago. I had some vague idea of putting a Chev head on a Model A. Then I found a couple of 24 25? Chev cowls. The idea then became a Chevy lakester. For the past several weeks Ive been running around looking for pistons based on ideas gleaned from this thread. I already had 300 Buick pistons so I went looking for 261 Chevys. I rummaged through several stacks of pistons at Old Car Parts in Portland til I found some. I bought those and another prospect mentioned on the thread, 292 GMCs. Ive spent the past week cleaning rust off a crank and block and finding the main caps and bearings in the junk box. I started fitting things together yesterday. I used the Model A rod, but had to narrow the conrod end to fit the GM pistons. The 300 Buick pistons are because it is shorter than the 261. The 261 piston and ford Rod will work, but the conrod end will have to be narrowed and will need a bigger bushing. If I remember right the 261 pin was press fit on the conrod and the Ford was circliped to the pistons, so that would need to be addressed. With this configuration the piston is about 0.8845 in. below the deck. Note: All measurements are approximate because loose fit of some of the parts. Ill try to clarify as I go. The block I used had been bored at some point so the cylinders were sloppy, the bearings were used, etc. etc. I next tried the 292 GMC piston on the Ford rod. The GMC pin is large but the pin bushing on the Ford is even larger. The sloppy-ness? could mean a few thousands error in my calculations, but not a deal breaker. The dome of the piston extended 0.0938 above the deck. The flat of the piston was 0.5665 below the deck. Next was the 292 GMC piston on the Chev rod. In order to do this I had to use the Chev pin and find a bushing to fill the gap in the piston pin boss. I found that a 3/4 inch copper plumbing connector gave me a rattle fit for the pin. Again several thousands, but livable. The dome of the piston is now 0.0625 below the deck. The flat of the piston is now 0.6890 below the deck. The 28 heads valves extend 0.0625 out of the head. So the dome and the valve should be touching if the measurements are correct. I measured piston dome thickness at 0.370 inches so clearance could be made for the valves by machining releafs in the domes. Im guessing that the dome will fill about one third of the combustion area at tdc. Any guesses as to the compression ratio? Ive bought a three port head from the Frank that 39 Cent wrote about and should have it this week. I went yarding for Saturn roller tappets but couldnt figure what year or engine they came in. Harley tappets? Cam shafts? Any ideas? Also interested in bearings. Inserts? Babit material? Babit services? Any help along these lines would be great.
As far as I know the motors you are talking about in Chevy Luvs and S10s are Isuzu.....Different animal. I have avoided a full run down here because it is so far off topic, but here goes. Guys these were not used in small pickup trucks as far as I know. They were in Japanese domestic market trucks and buses of approx 4 -6 tonne capacity. I know it seems improbable looking at the American market model for a truck that size to have a 4 cylinder, 200 cu in , 90 horsepower motor!! But that is the reality. They don't go far and they don't go fast ... Nissan Atlas trucks and Civilian Buses of around 1990-1996 vintage had these motors. The engine/motor model is either ED30 or ED33. The reason we have them in New Zealand is that there are hundreds of cars and trucks imported here from Japan second hand, I don't beleive they would have even had a place in the American market. What I am prepared to do is go to the truck wreckers here, buy a complete rocker shaft and send it to Mac or someone else who has the time and the Chev Head to experiment on. I will do that for the cost price of the parts and shipping etc.......... If it works out I will also be prepared to find them in the future and send them to the USA for interested parties, but as import/export is my business I will have to be paid for my time... Firstly I will remove a rocker from our engine and clean and measure it properly ..... No problem now, the motor is in what you would call a bus conversion ...it is only used in Summer and it's winter here now...actually a mini bus conversion. So , if someone wants to step up ?? I will check it out this weekend . I expect the truck wreckers ( salvage yard) here will want NZ $50-100 bucks for the parts that's NZ bucks so much less in US dollars. ... ABOUT 35-70 US.
97- go for it! I'll be happy to pay for the parts and shipping. PM me when you're ready. If anyone else wants a set, speak up- it'll be cheaper for 97 to send one larger shipment to me and then distribute from GA. You would need to pay 97 up front for the parts and me the shipping (should be cheap from the post office).
Norsonauto Ignoring the area atop the dome, and any cuts made for valve clearance, and using your guess of 1/3 the chamber taken up by the dome- I get about 8.5-1 with the Chevy rod. This is IMO, way too high for the thick babbit shells in the Chevy mains, and probably bend the rods like a wet noodle. In their advertising at one point Chevy showed a pix of a conrod, twisted between the wrist pin and the crank end five (as I remember) complete turns-which was supposed to convince the buyer of the "strength" of the rod. All it really proved was that the rods were made form a material (probably plain carbon steel- today's "cold rolled") that was too soft and weak to be good. As for inserts, you can probably find ones that the rods can be machined to fit- do some research on what the Ford A guys use--they should also work on the Chevy rods. The mains are a completely different story. Each main is a different diameter. The front and rear mains are thick cast babbit shells- way thicker than any modern insert. The center main is a bronze shell, that takes the end thrust, which has a babbit lining that probably could be bored to take an insert- BUT--My experience is that the three bores in the block are not in line with each other as they came from the factory. Factory replacement bearings were made undersize in the crank dimention, and after installing, had to be line reamed with a special reamer to ensure that they were all in the same plane--SO--The block would have to be line bored in all three mains to get them in line. Then brass (front and rear) and bronze (center) shells made up--the stock center main shell won't fit now, because the block hole is larger-- and either lined bored for inserts, or babbited and then line bored. Some restorers have cast babbit right into the block holes, and line bored that to size, but that way you again end up with babbit that is way too thick, and it will squeeze out under load over time. Not a big factor at 37 HP, and 4-1 compression--but you want to hop one up --right? I personally would NOT use inserts, unless the crank was drilled for oil pressure, and an oil filter was used. The engine in my avatar car has a drilled and counterbalanced (and balanced) crank ,50 PSI oil, a filter, and homemade inserts--and Ford rods. No one should think that hopping up a Chevy is easy--or cheap Herb Kephart
Hey I think I should do the measuring and better pictures etc first , Then see if I can find them and get a price.... I understand your urgency...... will move as fast as I can...and get some firm prices...... I really think you should make sure the first one is going to work before you commit to a box ful.... I WILL do it this weekend....
Speaking of mains my experiance has been with brands of engines that won't be mentioned here. But what I understand has been done with the thick bronze backed mains is look in my Federal Mogul book to find bearings that would fit the shaft. Then Brass sleeves were made and screwed in place with small counter sunk screws. These sleeves were then bored to fit the OD of modern bearings that fit the crank. This also lined things up which really needed it. More rcently I measured the bearing bores at 2 inches and found a Mitsubusi/Dodge Colt main bearing that had a bearing bore of 2.047. And had a thrust bearing. So I made new main caps cause I wanted better ones and then sent the block and caps out to be line bored and honed to the 2.047 diameter. Now comes the hard part. Then I spent $2500 or so for a billet 4350 crank to fit the bearings. But I got a counter weighted crank with weights on every throw. drilled for oil, With rod jurnols that fit the rod bearings I wanted to use (SBC) A flywheel flange that fit the flywheel I wanted to use and a snout that fit a SBC harmonic dampner. It's new, it's straight. and should be good.
In California Bill's 1947 "Four Barrel Manual" (all 28 pages of it) he devotes a page and a half to the Chevy four. Olds head, 1-5/8 intake valves, 60 degree overlap Winfield cam, specially ordered from Ed!, WWI Jenny aircraft rods are desired over the weak Ford rods and 14 to 1 compression ( pistons to be cast by builder) is what he recommends as well as running a C crank. The crank is to be turned to 1-3/4 mains, drilled for pressure, and the block has to be ground away to clear the counter weights. The first sentence of the second paragraph says..."Requiring infinite pains, sufficient money and excellent mechanical knowledge, the Chevy four will be just the engine for you if you like hard work and many hours of it". lol
I used Chev V8 exhaust valves for intake and exhaust in the 28 head, and 216 rocker arms. Along with porting, making my own intake manifold, with a Ford 6 carb. Also made headers. The 28 valves are really small with 5/16 valve stem.
Here is my 1928 Chevy dragster whipping it on a Camaro in high altitude air. http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/picture.php?albumid=18013&pictureid=191083
So the 216 rockers are the same length? Are they the same rocker arm, or a better design than the '28? little skeet, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE more info!!! I did some searching last night and there may be some Cummins diesel rockers that are similar in length... gonna keep searching to see if there's a match!
Boy, am I feeling old. I misspoke in my last posting. The GMC pistons I was talking about were "270" pistons from the 50's not 292's. Rich fox, thanks for the Fedral-Mogal idea. I got a spec manual today and will start working that angle tonight. Others on this thread have mentioned John Gerbers book. I read it the other day. Talk about a guy that was willing to try anything. He didn't know the meaning of the word can't.
NORSONAUTO, I keep going back to his book again and again- please share your findings regarding the Federal Mogul route- would love to see what you come up with!
I also have made good use of a National Oil Seal Spec manual. Handy things to have around when you are thinking about what might work.
The Gerber Book is a great source of inspiration, as well as entertainment. It's kind of like sitting back and just listening to the old guy tell you bench racing stories.
Hi Chevy guys, Mac said So the 216 rockers are the same length? Are they the same rocker arm, or a better design than the '28? little skeet, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE more info!!! Yes they are the same length and they are a better design. They do have what I call Innies and Outties. Those are offsets to the right and left and some are about streight. I have laid them on the 28 head and with the help of the 6 cylinder rocker shaft springs and a few washers they will work fine. Earlier in this thread I suggested chevy 6 rocker arms and shafts but was ignored. "I am going to use Chevy 6 Rocker arms and shafts. I will cut the Chevy 6 rocker shaft standoffs down just below the shaft. Then I will machine the standoffs on the 28 heads just enough to remove the 1/2" channel that the original rocker shaft fit in. I will then drill and tap a new hole slightly offset towards the exhaust side of the head. This hole cannot be more than 3/4" deep to avoid going into the water jacket. A bolt will go thru the cut down 6 cyl. standoff and thru the shortened 6 cyl. rocker shaft and into this threaded hole to secure the rocker shaft. This will of course be repeated on the other 3 original standoffs. This will give me hollow shafts that can be oiled easily. It will also replace the original rocker arms with stronger ones. The other modifications will include Stainless Steel Ford small block valves, VW springs and bronze valve guides. The Ford exhaust valves are the same size as the Chevy's but the intakes are larger than 1 3/4" Since I wrote that thread I found a valve spring that is about 1/2" longer than the original 28 Chevy spring. As soon as I identify that spring I will post that information. The advantage of that spring is that the small block Ford valves are about that much longer than the 28 Chevy valves. These valves and springs along with the late standoffs and rocker shafts will work very well and will allow for pressure to the rocker arms. Dick
The Jalopy Journal
