Jesus! ecmb3 you just confirmed every thought I ever had about a connecting rod... Thats it Im building a set of tubeular or hybrid rods. I figure if it was enginered in the 20s or 30s and worked why does everybody look at you like your nuts when you bring it up now. So 4130 is a chromoly tube right? If you were to graft a different small end on a H beam rod you could fillet the flanks of the H in for more strength at the joint? Ive seen old timers "box" connecting rods with thin plate for more strenght. I guess youed have to be carefull of extra weight.
Well planned is half done, they're half done! In theory this this opens up a wide range of pistons to use. You only need the rods that match the pistons and use the pin eye from them.
Just a few thoughts from a newbie. Check out overhead cam conversions of chev 4 motor on Northwest Speedster web site. takes a bit of searching thorugh countless Ford A conversions. Also - Two piece Tappet covers were standard for 1925 chev and fit 1928 head , they look a lot better than the 26-28 loaf tin - Im having a pair brass plated for my 25 roadster. (I think there is a good illustration in '60 years of chev') Kume
Mac- The pix that you sent of the Saturn tappets looks like there is a chance that they will work. I was envisioning the roller being larger than the OD of the tappet body, but as long as the rollers can go up into the tappet bore at full lift it might be a go. What means does the stock arrangement have for preventing the tappet body from rotating? I fooled around with Indian motorcycles for years, they (along with Harley) have roller tappet cams, and a really wild cam profile was developed way back by a fellow named Shunk. I have a drawing of the profile, but my scanner took a poop. Next will be some comments on cranks. Catalyst huh--you mean that I should be dipped in resin Bill? Herb
Okay, my head hurts from reading all of that (I'm a music teacher- all I ever have to do is count to 4 and start over... unless we're studying early 20th century composers or Dave Brubeck ), but this is REALLY getting me excited!
Good thing i don't smoke, This has become an addiction! can't wait for the weekend so I can finnally lay eyes on my motors again! WOWZA! Herb, YOU ARE THE MAN! No one could ask for better info than what you are giving us!
Took some shots of the Hisso rod, to give an idea of the sort of blend between tube and end that you should aim for. Also a pix of Durant rods that someone (you Jimmy?) sent me, the scale appears to show that they are 3/4" longer than Chevy. Last photo is of a rod that may be too long. Herb
Okay, Bill peaked my curiosity, so I started reading up on these little buggers. Bill, bring your bell-housing with you tomorrow and we can match it up to a T-5. As for the Nissan engine, apparently they were available here through the seventies and eighties, and I even found one in a 97 Pathfinder. everything from 2.4 to 2.7, 3.0, and 3.3. They even put diesels into some of their passenger cars. Looking forward to finding something that will work for you guys. I am the kind of person who hears "you can't do that" and immediately starts looking for ways to make it work.
Ooooo- Stevie's on the HUNT If anyone can sniff up parts to fit our engines, it's Stevie G! Herb, The top of the lifter has flat sides that slide up and down in an alignment plate (which does NOT match the distance between lifters on the '28) much like a late SBC setup. I bet there are lifters that would work even better... which is why I encourage everyone to keep up the search (I found the lifters looking for a suitable rocker). Anyway, I'll bring one with me to Philly in June- and I don't think resin would be suitable Herb... but maybe cutting fluid !
G'day Herb, it wasn't me. I do have some pix of the OX-5 rods. Also a couple of pics of the reliefs needed when running a Ford C crank, Bob Giovanine's '48 block
Engine that is going into the '48 car is another engine built to the exact specs of what was run in '48. It is being built at the moment not sure if it is finished yet.
Here are some pictures of my OEM and new crank,rods, and pistons for my '26 Dodge banger. Which shows what you can do by throwing money at it. The Dodge oil pump did feed the cam bearings but the mains were drip and the rods dipper. I did have a chance to look at a Roof conversion Dodge engine which pressure oil was fed to the main caps and through the drilled cranl to the rods. Which is what I am doing except I am using Mitsubusi/Dodge Colt main bearings and SBC rod bearings. I know of another Dodge running Onan bearings on shimed rods. The Roof has lovely tubular built up rods. The Geovoni roadster ran at Bonneville and El Mirage with a Chevy 4 and did very well but he made his own head and had very long head bolts that really clamped the head and block togeather. If you have ever lookes at a fuel Briggs and Stratton Jr Dragster you know what I mean.
Rich, thanks for taking a look (us other-banger guys need to stick together)- your input is always welcome and highly encouraged!
LONG LIVE THE OTHER BANGERS! Dodge input would be good. wonder what would happen if I had the money to build 2 chev 4s? Oh thats right, one for my chevy and one to pep up the model TT! Now I need a dodge project and the big 3 are mine By the way, no i will not put the chev motor in the ford, I do like to keep with manufacturers drivetrains, might do a model A motor though, Imagine 3 bangers from the big 3 in one garage, and I know were there is a 28 dodge 4 door sedan
Hold up there Kemosaby. Dodge was not part of Chrysler at that time. You need a Plymouth to count as a MoPar. Here are mine. OHV and not. Well the OHV failed. How about an OHV Dodge head? And the good thing about Dodges. Main bearings. Lots of them.
i really dig engines this is an interesting thread , why couldnt school have been as interesting as the HAMB ? think of the possibilities ,
More thoughts on welded rods. It would make sense for those without machine shop facilities to use at least the crank end of some rod, rather that make that part from scratch. The wrist pin end is nothing more than a piece of tube. I see a potential problem where the tubular center section is attached to the big end, in that the large blend radius (see pix of Hisso rod) would be missing, and the addition of reinforcing gussets would mean running a weld bead inside a small corner. I have a proposal that would eliminate this, and still be a tubular rod. For purposes of explaining this, think of a modern H section rod. It has a center "web" section, and two "flanges" on either side. The web spreads out at the lower end, to better blend in with the big end. So, lets make the rod from 4130 sheet. The sheet is rolled at the mill as a long piece, later cut into 4X8 pieces. the direction of rolling, the 8' way, is the direction that the grain runs. Rolled and forged metal has grain, just as wood does, and we want the grain of our rod to run vertical, just as we would if we were working with wood. I would suggest making the top end the same as the OX5 rods that Jimmy kindly posted photos of- with the top width of the rod the same as the outside diameter of the wrist pin tube. Cut two "webs" to fit the tube at the top, and the big end piece at the bottom, with both those pieces the correct vertical distance apart, and the bottom of the webs with as much sweeping blend radius as space within the block will allow. A lengthwise taper can be incorporated, if desired (and space permits). Now tack weld (I would suggest TIG welding although 4130 was developed during WW2 as a material for aircraft that could be gas welded in the field for repairs) the two web plates and the top and bottom pieces together with the webs say 3/4" apart, equally spaced either side of center. Now two flanges can be cut and bent to turn the web/flanges into a box section, and having the best possible distribution of forces into the big end. The flanges could also be extended a short way above the wrist pin center line, and formed partially around the wrist pin tube. All welds are easily accessible. The vertical joints on the tube section should not have the webs overlap the flanges, or vice-versa but the two pieces should just touch on their inside corners, and the 90 degree groove filled in with a rounded bead. Of course some sort of a fixture should be used to ensure that the big and little ends are the desired distance apart and PARALLEL WITH EACH OTHER IN BOTH PLANES- you're not going to twist or bend this rod into alignment like you can a H section one, and this parallelism is extremely important- so much so that if you have the facilities to do it, the wrist pin end hole should be left undersized until all welding is finished and then bored true. When finished try to get the top ends of all rods weighing the same, and also the bottom ends the same. I am going to abandon my machined (round) tubular rods, and when I get back to the project, fab rods up this way. Herb
Rich- Very nice looking pieces for your Dodge. Did you do the machine work?. I have always wanted a PB Plymouth engine to play with, but they were hard to come by 50 years ago when a fellow that I knew put one in a '48 Plymouth coupe. I'm by no means brand specific with the Chevy 4, I have a full pressure B with a Miller-Schofield head in a '30 Ford tudor, also a Isuzu diesel in a '28 Chevy coupe. I like to hear the sound of a four running-- Who needs more cylinders? Herb
I dug out a stock '28 intake manifold today and found that if you flip it upside down and slot the carb mounting holes, you can bolt either a Holley 1904 or Rochester B single barrel from a 216 to it and the throttle plate will open fully without interference. Both carbs have throttle plates that are recessed up into the base plate. I think I'll try modifying it to take a 97 sideways.
At the risk of getting OT, do you remember anything else about your Harley/Gravely conversion? Like, how did you get the Gravely T head cams (one on each side) to actuate the Harley valves (both push rods on one side)?
Alright Bill, I will need to actually measure the Trans and the bellhousing to get it all to fit, but this should give you some idea of how we can mount the T5 to the 28.
I made the main caps but the crank is a Crower and the rods are Cunningham. Little to much for me and my Bridgeport.
Amen, to that shit. The first thing Chrysler did after buying Dodge Brothers Co. in '28 was kill the banger that made the Brothers rich and famous.
I wouldn't normaly get into a "Ford is better than Chevy" type disscussion, let alone Dodge and Plymouth. And I like my Dodge. I have a Dodge Truck. I had a 241 Dodge in mt American Austin. But I liked my Plymputh PB a lot. Set a record at Muroc that will stand at least untill we get to run there again. Set tha first V4F record at El Mirage. First Hop Up Magazine 100 MPH club entrant. And it was pretty enough that Bill Smith bought it for his museum. And Chrysler did bring us the 354-392-426 Hemis that ruled and rule in Top Fuel. Can't be all bad
Uh oh- I miss a day by mowing my weeds and noboD starts chiming in ! Good to see you Doug (got your email the other day). Stevie, the rear mount looks great- I'll have to loan you my stock one to take a gander at. To me, unless there's nothing you can do about it (like using a T5) the closer parts look to stock, the better- especially when it's something as exposed and spindley as a sprint/speedster type build. Herb, I like the route you're going with the con rods, and once you have a jig things should move along more easily. Remember folks, this thread was started to focus on one particular engine. All are invited to chime in, as your thoughts and opinons are highly valued (with many advisors, victory is assured), but let's keep it to early Chevrolet 4 so as not to get confused.
Some pics from here and the net to keep you all inspired and thinking (a Roof OHV conversion, a couple of an un-named SOHC conversion at Speedy Bill, and a nice little "Beach Racer"): PS- Does anyone know where John Gerber's stuff wound up? I know it's a display somehwere (thought it was Speedy Bill's), but don't remember!
The Jalopy Journal
