Billet SOHC engine and parts, posted From old FE Forum

[dan schoneck]

For someone marketing to the 2500HP/Cost-is-no-object microniche you seem to be pinching pennies. Is this one of those deals where you guarantee Bailey's 10 blocks ordered in order to get your 1 block with the DCT trans mount?  What if I wanted to run coil packs, a multi-stage drysump system, and adapt the cam drive from a modern Hurricane SOHC? Wouldn't need a stub shaft at all. Or maybe go totally oldschool, just a frontend plate to mount the geardrive for the cams.

And how flexible is the machining options, sounds like "not very".  What if I wanted the heads' exhaust ports to feed into the valley area to make packaging turbos easier?

Of course, how exactly is this an FE anymore?

This deal has nothing to do with baileys engines, it's 100% my responsibility and money to get it going. Just so happens the same company machines his blocks for steve morris.

I'm building cammer valve covers for coil packs also. Daily dry sump billet oil pan and pump too on my build. SO Listen.. IF you have the pockets for any and all the custom shit you want on one of these engines listed above it can be done. BUT you will pay for it not me. So this deal is very flexible. Once you break out your tens of thousands of dollars to pay for all the cad work and cnc programming. I'm assuming your more of a pot stirrer than a doer. I'm a doer and that why this is getting done..

99% of these blocks will be FE, i'm paying extra to have my block done as i please as far as the bell housing goes which is modular ford 1994-2020, NOT just a dct trans which shares the same bell pattern for the last 16 years in the ford modular family.

[dan schoneck]

For someone marketing to the 2500HP/Cost-is-no-object microniche you seem to be pinching pennies. Is this one of those deals where you guarantee Bailey's 10 blocks ordered in order to get your 1 block with the DCT trans mount?  What if I wanted to run coil packs, a multi-stage drysump system, and adapt the cam drive from a modern Hurricane SOHC? Wouldn't need a stub shaft at all. Or maybe go totally oldschool, just a frontend plate to mount the geardrive for the cams.

And how flexible is the machining options, sounds like "not very".  What if I wanted the heads' exhaust ports to feed into the valley area to make packaging turbos easier?

Of course, how exactly is this an FE anymore?

What if you designed your own instead of complaining about everything you don't like about his project? And by the way, the "old school" gear drive still used a stub shaft to drive the upper gears.

Dan, I think it sounds like a really interesting project, and I hope you keep us posted on your progress.

There's always gonna be that one person who wants to hate on someone else's ideas. This is a great project and if you think hard about it it's not out of price range for someone building a cammer and have perfect parts. The only way it could be any cheaper would be for me to find at least 10 guys wanting to do it, which until I get a finished product out there that will be hard. So for now its just my funding and it will get done!
So thank you for the kind words and i will def keep everyone up to date on it!

here's a pic of a billet cammer efi intake.

[Dumpling]

The gear drive could be reconfigured to not need the stub shaft.


He wants to mount a DCT trans; I'd be interested in mounting an electric booster motor on the back.  Something like the ZF DCT/electric booster combo:

https://www.zf.com/products/en/cars/products_34944.html

How are electric motors factored in as power boosters?  Anyway, he leads with "billet" and "We can do anything from raised cam...", but then backs it way down to: we can do optional trans mounts...

How is the OHC valvetrain affected by the wider bore spacing he suggests is also possible?

[Dumpling]

Why would deleting the sub-routine(s) to machine the cam tunnel incur "10's of thousands" of additional CAD costs?

[dan schoneck]

The gear drive could be reconfigured to not need the stub shaft.
He wants to mount a DCT trans; I'd be interested in mounting an electric booster motor on the back.  How are electric motors factored in as power boosters?  Anyway, he leads with "billet" and "We can do anything from raised cam...", but then backs it way down to: we can do optional trans mounts...

How is the OHC valvetrain affected by the wider bore spacing he suggests is also possible?

I'm not backing down from anything. I'm building this using as much cammer stuff as possible why would I want to change the whole chain operation or have to redesign something not needed?  We can do raised cam option. IF you're not buying a block then i don't need to worry about deleting the cam journals.

The ohc valve train is not effected if a person wanted to widen the bore spacing. The cam cores would just need to be a little wider also or machined different for the 4.700 bore spacing. Also the rockers could just be machined with a little offset for the change in bore spacing with stock cam shafts.. Jay brown has already made a large bore space cammer block with standard bore space heads with custom pistons that have the valve reliefs in the right spots for the bore space being changed. So 4 outer pistons are the same and 4 inners are different on his cammer. I could eliminate that buy making the bore space the same on the block and the heads and its simple to do with programming and cad changes..

[dan schoneck]

Why would deleting the sub-routine(s) to machine the cam tunnel incur "10's of thousands" of additional CAD costs?

How bout this to simplify things for you and anyone else that is curious. Anything done out side of what i'm doing and paying for will cost the end user for the changes to cad work and cnc programming> whether it be $100 or $10000+ dollars. Anything you want done is possible but you will pay for those changes out side of what i'm doing. SO Anything you can dream of can be done but again you will pay for it. I hope this helps. 

[Barry_R]

mainly large 4 3/4 stroker crank clearance and 600+'' like what jay is doing.

We did a 4.750 stroker SOHC a little while back for a gentleman form the Chicago area.  Used a Pond block and a billet crank, with custom rods from R&R.
Took a ton of clearance machining to make that combination come together - re-profiled the counterweights to clear the pistons, had to run a rather short rod because the SOHC requires a fairly tall compression distance due to the valve reliefs dipping into the ring pack area.  And had to clearance a bunch out around the internal sides of the block.

Holding the block thickness dimensions in the crankcase sides to a tighter and thinner wall than the casting requires will give you added clearance.  If you have the option of raising deck height ('cuz a Cammer needs to be bigger - right?) you could get a bit longer rod and reduce the counterweight and piston boss clearance issues.

[428kidd]

I'm with Doug, Dumpling. You really complaining about "penny pinching" to some one that is offering billet stuff at a very reasonable price all things considered. Maybe you should put some skin in the game . Then you can have it with or with out the cam tunnel and adapt it to 18 speed Eaton if you want!

[mbrunson427]

Very cool project. I hope to see it run eventually.

I want to know more about the car! '62 Galaxie, Pro touring, 600+ inch SOHC, twin turbo's? 

[dan schoneck]

Very cool project. I hope to see it run eventually.

I want to know more about the car! '62 Galaxie, Pro touring, 600+ inch SOHC, twin turbo's?

Car will be Na and i'm aiming for about 950hp on e85...  I'm doing a billet tri power intake with 3 71mm twin drive by wire throttle bodies. I've bought 3 g codes, 1 z code and two z code wagons in the last 2 months to pick and chose all the nice stuff i need. Now i'm gonna start selling the rest of it i don't need.  I have a loaded up roadster shop chassis here already. Hopefully will have drawings done in the next month and can post up the build. Doing some cool stuff with carbon fiber to show case my business.

[mbrunson427]

I saw you on the '62 Galaxie FB page, wondered what the heck you were up to. Makes sense.

I like the tri-power idea. I looked around for a long time for a 3x2 tunnel wedge intake for my '62 because I thought running tri-power on a '62 is cooler than a 2x4.

[dan schoneck]

I saw you on the '62 Galaxie FB page, wondered what the heck you were up to. Makes sense.

I like the tri-power idea. I looked around for a long time for a 3x2 tunnel wedge intake for my '62 because I thought running tri-power on a '62 is cooler than a 2x4.

haha yes. I can wait to show the drawings of the car... i'm doing something no one has done to a 2 door that i know of. Some may hate it but its gonna be unique and the way i'm doing it cool.. The tri power fits the era of the car and they never made a cammer with a tri power so that's my reasoning for it.