HO-HO-HO December monthly BANGER meeting

Hey looks good, but what do you use the hammer for?

 

should be called arjunk not ardun
ask the guy who owns one
Ken

 

So to keep my mind busy I have been working out some engineering on my new T motor. And that brings me to a known issue on T engines: intake flow and port velocity. T motors like A's have the same scavenging issue, but T's have the additional problem of even poorer intake path design, especially when you start hanging larger carburetors on. As with all of my retardness, I try and keep all my engineering at least looking period "correct" with period parts (Winfield V, Miller or Master carburetor).

<O</OWhat I would like to look at is the intake tract from the ports to the carburetor inlet, as it would appear that most people want to talk about shiny intakes and pretty carburetors, rather than port velocity and cylinder filling, so hopefully we can learn something here beyond the HAMB semantics of polished case 94’s v bead blasted 97’s and which gives a better sounding exhaust note through smithy's.<O</O
<O</O

I am going to leave all my calculations out, so instead we will deal with theories...if this is to ambiguous please let me know and I will post my math.

<O
Situation:

<O</OThe intake flow of a hopped up T/A with a larger carburetor and after market intake motor goes like this: in the carburetor inlet (low pressure) through the carburetor, where the fuel is atomized (high pressure/ acceleration) into the intake manifold, at this point on most intakes it appears that the air/ fuel mass slows down: (This has the potential to cause the fuel to fall out of suspension and puddle on the floor of the intake tract, this was a very annoying problem with my last T mill, which used a modified aftermarket A intake, and led to constantly fouling plugs.), the mixture then hits the intake port where it accelerates again, on a T motor it enters the chamber under the intake valves, where it then expands and slows back down filling the under valve chamber, only to accelerate once more through the valves. This has the potential to cause the fuel to fall out of suspension and puddle on the floor of the intake tract, this was a very annoying problem with my last T mill (which used a modified aftermarket A intake), and led to constantly fouling plugs. As a note the intake would be covered in sheet ice whenever the ambient temperature dropped below 70, I rectified this by building a stove around the intake, which meant it would turn to sheet ice at 65.<O</O
<O</O

Engineering 101:

<O</OSome genius said that the intake tract should have and included -7 degree drop from the opening of the carburetor to the underside of the valve seat (which is not possible in a stock T configuration due to intake port design...but if anyone is interested I can show how to overcome this). Also stated is that the intake charge residing immediately under the intake valve to represent 70% of the surface area of the intake valve (I think I screwed that one up, will review when I get home). The intake I will be building is a tunnel ram to maximize the advantages of sine wave harmonics to provide additional chamber filling. Other givens are that the intake charge travels along the floor of the intake valve, every bend in the intake tract causes a reduction of efficiency = straighter is better, and Newton was “right”.

<O</OAnyone up to look into this question for the benefit of all bangerdom?<O</O

 

You might go to the S O S S archives and search for an article by Wayne Atkinson (not sure of spelling) He wrote regarding porting and flow of the "A" block. He actually cut a block so he could check his modifications on a flow bench. An old race engine builder I once worked with stressed clean smoothed but not polished surfaces in the intake. Manifold/header fit with no obstructions at any or all fittings or joints are critical.

 

There's a lot to comment on here so here goes...

You say that the intake charge slowed down so much when entering the inlet manifold that the fuel fell from suspension.
If that is true then your inlet is way too big.
If the inlet manifold is smaller than the port in the block you'll be wasting volume and if its bigger you will have a step entering the port and this will not only be a physical obstruction but will also cause turbulence around the port opening causing an even bigger restriction.
The manifold should only be as big as the port opening in the block and in a perfect world would taper from big at the carb end to small at the port end to keep the velocity of the charge up as it naturally slows as it moves away from the carb.

You say your using an 'A' manifold? Stock, aftermarket? Doesn't an 'A' manifold have much bigger ports than a 'T'?

You seem to be putting way to much effort in to the inlet tract.
The two biggest restrictions and problem areas are to be found at each end of the inlet tract. The carb and the valve/valve seat.
The bit in the middle is simply a tube with some bends in it that connects the two.
The manifold and port on there own will ALWAYS out flow the valve/valve seat and carb.

Icing of the manifold is going to happen if the manifold and carb are hanging off the side of the engine without no form of heating.
In the winter the idle circuits always freeze on my 97's, but quickly defrost after its stalled.

"-7 degree drop" That sounds like a load of snake oil to me, but I am interested in seeing how you overcome this problem!

I don't understand what you mean with this. Are you talking about port size again?
The valve bowl area under the valve should be 70% of the valve area?

Unless your going to build an inlet manifold that is capable of adjusting its fixed length while in use then I can't of anything that will be gained here.
If the manifold is only one constant length then it will only pick-up on the intake pulsing at one "sweet spot" and then be doing nothing at all other times.
Unless that's what you want of course?

 

I'm contemplating head to piston clearance. As suggested in th Nov. meet. I won't be stacking gaskets like I was wondering. Thanks Crazydaddyo and others for input.

Any HAMBers interested in trading a new Winfield with no relief (7 to 1)for something with a 'lil bit-o-piston clearance?
How about a PM me if any interest fellas.

Chris, ya' killin' me with that roadster

 

Yes I am putting alot of work into the front side of this engine. The last one was built out of what I had laying around or could modify. Which is why its performance was marginal for a model T: 2,700 RPM, 70-80 mph over the road, 3.5:1 Compression.

I build my stuff to be driven, so I look at different operating parameters, than say a guy at bonneville.

To address your comment about building a tunnel ram: the sine curve on the intake wave happens on all engines...you can not get around it, call me stupid, but if I am going to build it, why not take advantage of the free potential HP gains?

will address the rest when I get home.

 

I took the Car out for it's first trip with the Weiand headed B engine this Saturday. I and a neighbor met up with the Bad Bob caravan to Mooneye's Xmas party. Engine worked great and aside from some piston blowby, the little engine impressed me. Here is some pics.

 

Hey Chris nice score. Is that another Montana find?

 

That RPU looks great. Can we get a business-side shot of it?

 

The best I can do for now

 

I got the following to run on my 31 Tudor. The head has "A6050B SPEED HEAD" cast into it. The combustion chambers are heart shaped, I'm guessing this is one of Ford's 5.2 CR heads.
Two questions:

A). There are two cracks that have already been repaired in the combustion chambers of the center two cylinders (looks like stainless or nickel). There is a crack still remaining in the center of the head from one coolant port to another. I took the head to an old time hotrodder he said to leave it alone and run the damn thing the gasket will seal it. Should I at least braze the crack?

B). If this is a 5.2 CR , and the head is .008 uneven now how much do you think it would be safe to mill the head to and keep the the CR to a level that won't beat up the babbit bearings? the engine is .106 overbore with with pistons that protrude out of the block at TDC.




I guess I have a third question, I like the fact this appears to be an old head (cast dated '35) . Is it worth running? would I be better off with a new reproduction performance head?

 

very cool head pm me if you want to sell it or if someone else have a cool head for sale

 

What are using for your intake? Is it shop made?

 

Bill,
I got it as a kit from here:
http://www.lakeheaders.com/model_A_Banger_intake.html

He was running a HAMB special last month.
.

 

neat maybe i should pull the guards off my old girl and slam it looks great good one

 

Thanks for the side view Crazydadddyooooo Real nice I say.

PETRITL, cool head. Pipe in fellas. What's to make of it?

 

Interesting site, some neat stuff.

 

Well, not much new on my front. I've been trying to recoup from a bad cold I've been fighting with bare knuckles for the last week or so.

The weather isn't condusive to getting much done in the garage either,...no heat except for two electrical radiators. I STILL have to finish some paint work on the decklid and repair the cowl gas tank, then parimer and paint that too!

In between working crazy hours I have been playing around with a "T" chassis I was practically given as I've privately toyed with the notion of building a 1920s dirt track car. If I had an hour to myself I went out and did a little bit of cutting, grinding and so on with it. Easy to do, doesn't require specific temps for paint to adhead properly!!

Since my workspace is a 1920s garage, so i'm currently braving the weather to work on the T chassis, as my '29 roadster is occupying the garage currently. Soon they'll be trading spaces back and forth as the weather and such permits.

For now, I'm hashing out the small details of a flipped suspension on the front end, (as per the "Voboril" and "Gerber" dirt track cars) and although this photo does not show it,(it was a few days old) I have since modified the drive shaft and torque tube subtracting 8.5" from it as per the Laurel chassis design back in the day. Thus setting the engine back the same distance. Another crossmember has been installed taking up the front of the engine to its old stock riding height.

Engine is being created in a garage in the midwest region of Ohio at a small little known builder's humble abode complete with Bosch magneto side drive, high speed pistons, lightened flywheel, modified oil flow, (no pressure yet, maybe later if cash allows?), Model A crank, etc. etc. Later to see an OHV setup.

Rear springs to be two quarter ellipticals made from one model t front spring, as per Gerber's car, just a bit different.

Wheels will all be 26-27 Ford wires,....knock offs to come later,...well, realistically, probably never! HA!

Body style to be a bob tail or possibly a simplified version of the traditonal sprint car with a small tail section.
The idea is to do some nostalgic/historical exhibition racing with it at different venues and bring something new to the wacky world of hot rodding as we know it! I'm trying to work with some businesses to do some promo stuff for them when its done.

Here's a half ass teaser.... (HA!)... For those of you with a visionary mindset you'll get it,....for the rest,...see the guys with the visionary midsets..... he, he.... wink wink

 

I HATE YOU. (watch your scrub line). Should have my T up from San Diego next month. Then I will like you again. Until that time is jealousy and HATE.

 

Not much with my car latley...It got REALLY cold the last week (down to -13) and then we got 2 feet of snow in 24 hours. Yesterday morning when I went to work, this area was completly bare. Work got cancled and I spent all day shoveling.

So, hopefuly work on the car will continue realy quick I am also in a big hurry to drive to Denver, CO to pick up my new roadster body, but with this weathe rit may take a while

 

HA!

Yeah I'm thinking the scrub line is shot with this setup!
Hell, I'm looking to do a dirt track car, not a streetable one really,....I mean, well, maybe if I had something i could throw on it to get it from point a to point b I suppose thus making it legal and all.
But really its not being built as a anyting to be driven on the street. I'm thinking "special construction" on this one for a title??

Yeah I think the scrub line is done for,...the stance will be similar to this one(below), but lower in the rear, thus giving it almost a perfectly even stance. A little more of the stance of the john Gerber car (BW photo).
(Voboril Car)

 

Chris if you do go to Denver to pick up your roadster, you need to pay VAPHEAD (Eric) a visit and have a beer. He's good friends with a lot of us on the Western side of the state. Keith

 

as a note, Gerbers car doesn't run a T block or pan, which is why his car is so low...but his heads were so cool! How do you like how he converted the T to have 3 speeds ahead?

 

I'm ahead of ya and already talked to him about meetin up yesterday...he even offered up a room to stay


Heres the car I'll be taking to get it, along with a small trailer (and less snow )

 

Free room and free beer. Can't beat that!

 

Coaltown,

Would you give me, er... "us" some more detailed pics of your front suspension setup PLEASE???!!!

 

Oh,

Now that I actually read your whole post ( that part about your frame running flat) could we have pics of the rear suspension TOO???!!!

I'm trying to achieve the same chassis idea and really like what you're doing!

Thanks, Bill

PS- I grew up right outside of Philly, so if I get back up there at some point, I'd love to stop in and compare notes.

 

Yeah the stuff he did with the chevy engine!!...I wish someone with the means and time would repro some of the stuff he made! Especially the "Gerber" rods heads and the blocks he had specially casted!!!

The car can still sit that low as the early 1920s car Rajo Jack ran sat at about that height. If you have Radbruch's book "Dirt Track Auto Racing" there's Rajo Jack's car...(one of the pics from the book)



Yeah I have my copy of "Outlaw Sprint Car Racer" by Gerber, that was a great book. I gave it a review of it on the website of a vintage lifestyle and living history group we started and that I belong to....

http://www.earlyera.com/thelibrary

*(complete with some old 1920s Bix Beiderbecke playing in the background! )

 

I only had that photo I took last week.

Been under the weather so if I get a chance maybe tomorrow I'll take some.
I don't have the rear suspension set up yet, but its going to be based on two cars, that will end up my own design inspired by the both. One is the early Rajo Jack car (see post above) as I've been blessed having had the opportunity to talk with a fellow writing a book on Rajo Jack right now and he sent me two really clear shots of the Rajo car (that's one real rare care, only two photos of it in existence) that I was shown to work from. The other car is pictured on I think page 275 in the Don Radbruch book "Dirt track Auto Racing".

I contacted the fellow who supplied Don with that particular photo and there's just no other info on that car,...so its up to me to study it for hours on end, which I normally do anyway,..yeah I'm nuts! I was also able to talk with Don't wife, since Don has since passed away earlier this year. Wonderful woman. Wish i would have met Don! Total shame....

Yeah if you get up this way shoot me a heads up and we'll get together!

I'm hoping to get more people who like these early eras involved in things, with or without a car, via our "early era" living history group. Doing reenactment/living history time line events, exhibition races, school displays and programs, etc.
Everything from auto racing to the portraying WWI vets in the 1930s in the "Bonus Army" (if you don't know about what the "Bonus Army" was, everyone should look that up! Seriously!!! ) Share history, love of the eras, the clothes,etc. and the whole mindset and ideals that made us pull through WWI, a national depression of 1929, and win WWII!