FE Power Forums
FE Power Forums => Non-FE Discussion Forum => Topic started by: Hemi Joel on November 02, 2020, 08:50:52 PM
-
Sorry, this is not FE, but this place definitely has a lot of smart people, maybe some one knows this? This is a max effort, blown racing ford flathead where the heads and pistons will be custom built. What is the proven best design for power? Thanks, Joel
-
If I were to be going to build a flathead, I believe I'd look at an Offenhauser 8BA head. The only thing better is an Ardun, and since the Ardun has an OHV layout, you can't do any copying. You say you're going with a custom head? I don't think the extra effort would be worth it. Is the engine going to be "ported and relieved and stroked and bored"? :) :)
KS
-
It's not going to be the Ford flathead that you are thinking of. It is the 337 Flathead. So not too many parts are available
-
So, is this going to based in the Lincoln FH?
-
Sorry, this is not FE, but this place definitely has a lot of smart people, maybe some one knows this? This is a max effort, blown racing ford flathead where the heads and pistons will be custom built. What is the proven best design for power? Thanks, Joel
The proven best design for power on a Flathead is to reroute the intake ports and exhaust ports. You mill the lifter valley down so that you expose all the ports. The exhaust ports on the side of the block are covered. The exhaust is routed on top of the engine.
You will also want to relieve the deck of the block around the valves.
Roller cam conversions are also available.
Obviously, lots of block prep is necessary, with only 3 main journals.
-
Barron offered a high dome head&piston design that used a full radius piston dome with a raised hemi shaped combustion which made for much improved breathing.He copied from a Harly Havidson design for flat track racing.
-
While Brent is right (there have been a couple of high horsepower flatheads built using that method), it's an extremely aggressive approach that requires an insane amount of work. The examples I saw also used a lot of epoxy, which I would not consider very acceptable for long term use.
If you're wanting a modern chamber design, this is about the only modern type chamber I've seen. This is an old head that you'll never find, but could be reproduced in a custom head. I saw this recently at the Early Ford V8 Museum. Can't say as I've ever seen anything that was more high tech than this for a flathead head.
(https://i.postimg.cc/bNg14JQc/20200926_115239.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
One of the big issues is getting enough area above the valve to get good flow. If you open that area up, you lose not only compression, but much of the combustion pressure is wasted in the valve area. The head above seems to use a 'depression' from the valve area to the combustion chamber, to help promote that flow. It may not be the best design, but it's a sound idea that could be used in a custom head.
I hope you give some updates on this. This is the Non-FE area, so it fits here. :)
-
While Brent is right (there have been a couple of high horsepower flatheads built using that method), it's an extremely aggressive approach that requires an insane amount of work. The examples I saw also used a lot of epoxy, which I would not consider very acceptable for long term use.
If you're wanting a modern chamber design, this is about the only modern type chamber I've seen. This is an old head that you'll never find, but could be reproduced in a custom head. I saw this recently at the Early Ford V8 Museum. Can't say as I've ever seen anything that was more high tech than this for a flathead head.
(https://i.postimg.cc/bNg14JQc/20200926_115239.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
One of the big issues is getting enough area above the valve to get good flow. If you open that area up, you lose not only compression, but much of the combustion pressure is wasted in the valve area. The head above seems to use a 'depression' from the valve area to the combustion chamber, to help promote that flow. It may not be the best design, but it's a sound idea that could be used in a custom head.
I hope you give some updates on this. This is the Non-FE area, so it fits here. :)
Ole Henry never knew we'd be trying to sneak out these levels of horsepower from the flathead.
What really stinks is that you have two really sharp 90° turns in airflow, it's a like a chicane for flow. I've seen some guys online put a flathead block on a "flow bench" and they can only squeak out about 130 cfm on the intake side.
-
Barney Navarro told me that the flathead had such a turbulent chamber that 18-22 degrees of advance was all they wanted. All that turning and twisting on the way in? Also is was a short distance for the flame to travel.
-
A little knowledge is a VERY dangerous thing, BUT, the OP stated this was going to be a max effort, BLOWN, engine. With a lot of pressure filling the chamber, do you need to really do anythy more than to hog out the ports to get the air in and out? Ardum heads are hemi-shaped? Those with matching pistons with a good blower?
-
https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=HwMGd24R&id=3E523AADD81D31963464ADD97805659307437691&thid=OIP.HwMGd24RiYatSvwuqYnL4AAAAA&mediaurl=https%3a%2f%2fwww.blossomracingengines.com%2fimages%2fsP1010012.JPG&exph=150&expw=200&q=junior+dragster+rhino+cylinder+head&simid=608030239762550508&ck=8E842E4604350B9B22B858DC748306A0&selectedIndex=14&FORM=IRPRST&ajaxhist=0
the block being relieved is just as important as the cylinder head , if you want to see the best shape for a flathead look no further than a 7.90 junior dragster engine
-
My answer would be to do all you can to unshroud the vales and even more important help the exhaust as much as possible. Give it an 8:1 open chamber. 20 psi of boost will cure a lot of design sins.. LOL Find an old guy that runs a blown flathead on nitro.. See what they did..
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2E9LOddDk6g
-
I'd reach out to Ron Main and get some ideas from his group. They had 700hp out of ~300cu/in. http://speeddemon.us/flatfire.html
-
I wonder if this is an application where you could go with a piston deep in the hole, use the valve area for most of the combustion and build a wedge that protrudes into the cylinder to get the compression back.
It'd be full custom, but you may be able to then relieve to the point that the new "chamber" acts more like a modern design, just offset
-
I'm busy at work today so I don't have time for a full reply, but you guys are awesome! Great stuff coming out here! Thanks
-
Joel hasn't said if he's going to be working with the 239/255 Ford/Merc or the 337 Linc. I don't know anything about the Linc but, the 239, is a real challenge.
The first problem, is finding a sound block, to start with. I know of people that have spent more than $2000, just trying to find a block that will mag & pressure test!
3 mains isn't to much of a problem, a girdle and a 180 crank, will solve most issues. Farmall "H" tractor cranks, with welding and machining, can make a 180 crank, for a FH.
337 is attainable but, it takes 8, 3.5" sleeves and a 4.375 crank. The bore centers are 4.000 and 5.125, in the center. If try to go bigger than 3.5, you run into the center exhaust port.
After that, induction and exhaust are the main problems. Not so mush as being a L head but, the size and routing. The intake port, is almost unusable. It's design never changed from the orginal, 221 ci, '32 engine. The intake port, is only 1.312, in diameter and narrows, in the valve guild area, to about .85. As Brent says, the flow is very limited, compared to any OHV engine. I'm adding a actual flow bench test, as well as Ford's drawing of the port. They got this one to 144 cfm. The exhaust ports flow much better but, they are in the cooling system and heat and block, the coolant, as well as being Siamesed, for the center ports.
Using the intake ports, for the Ex is a way to go and make your own, intake tract, with 1.75+ valves, not much you can do, using the intake ports, as ex.
Compression, is your only friend and even that, is hard to get. With the overlap, that you will have, 9/1 should be minimum.
There are modern F head conversions out there but, the Ardun, is the only real way to make hp on a FH.
Like I said, I don't know anything about the Linc, 337 but, it might be a better starting point, although it's very heavy.
In my oppinion, the best hing to do with the original FH, is to build a small 221 engine, for class racing. It's much easier to feed a small cylinder, with what you have available, with the FH.
-
This is the lincoln/ ford f8 337 flathead. I can't do valves in the head, and the cid limit is 375 - class rules. So if the intake ports are small, can that be overcome with more boost, or does it hit a wall where more boost just makes heat and no more power?
We have a scrap block to cut up and look at the port wall thickness. I did sonic test it, and a .100 overbore is feasible.
Considering the risk of destroying blocks while racing, I would like to keep the amount of time and $ inverted into the block down. The major moving around of ports would be a last resort.
-
Without speaking out of turn, Joel is talking the 337.. Lots of new ground to plow on this one.. I am still under the opinion that enough boost will get the power to where he wants it to be And, the 337 is one stout MF block.. BUT ... 3 bearing crank..
-
Someone versed in fluid dynamics could probably created a pressure vs flow graph to estimate the point of diminishing returns. The import guys do 40 lb , but that's with a turbo.. A screw or centrifugal type blower should not heat up the air as bad as a rootes type
-
I would give Ted Eaton a call. He is very innovative and has some real experience with the 239 FH. I don't know if he has ever worked with the 337 though but, he would be the first one that I would ask about this.
https://www.eatonbalancing.com
-
Hemi Joel,
The problem with a flat head is the lack of separation between the valve area and the bore. This creates allot of "chamber volume" so to speak. Obviously "any" combustion that isn't directly "on" the piston is wasted energy. Please consider a "high wall , dished " piston design. By that I mean one that comes "above" the deck and within about .060-.080 of actually hitting the head. Keep following me as it's tough when you can't draw a picture ( well I can't) for you to see. What I am suggesting is that at or approaching TDC the outer "ring" of the piston coming above the deck would shut off flame travel into the valve area BUT on the "down stroke" after ignition, the piston will scavenge that area , plus it still had some pressurized air trapped, and burn any residual fuel. At the same time , the "round dish" traps "most" of the energy on the piston instead of losing some "sideways" to the valve area. Higher energy pushing on the only movable object. I also feel it would be easier on the head gasket as it wouldn't "see" direct cylinder pressure. I'm pretty comfortable that if I had some dimensions from you, I could make a piston like this.
Randy
-
The 337 is very underappreciated from a performance standpoint. Remember, at the time, the 337 was competing directly against the OHV Cad 331 and was very comparable in power output (154 hp vs 160) and torque (265 ft-lbs vs. 292 ft-lbs). That said, there is lots of room to improve. I would start by studying the Harley Davidson KR engine. Harley coaxed 60+ hp out of 45 ci in order to exploit a loop hole in the flat track rules at the time that gave flatheads a LARGE displacement advantage. HD achieved this incredible 1.333 hp/ci with only 6:1 compression. This would be perfect for a highly boosted application. Imagine a 337 Lincoln with this same hp/ci ratio would produce 450 Hp! The other place to look would be to get ahold of Rick Schnell up in Anoka. He has the word's quickest flathead powered dragster. The "Slider" is a 950 Hp+ Nitro huffing FED. Obviously Nitromethane and a 4-71 blower will cover up a lot of sins, but I guarantee you Rick has a few flathead tricks up his sleeve.
(https://www.harleykmodel.com/phpBB3/download/file.php?id=1373&sid=2b7881bc24e86da132e3296b52f96d91)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-OXWC7Ufv4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-OXWC7Ufv4)
-
Many years ago I looked into supercharging the 239. The problem was getting the exhaust out of those ports without over heating the engine. The center siamesed ports seemed to want to boil the coolant. Yes you could get a lot of combustible air into the engine, but it seemed to hit a early limit because the exhaust gas just couldn't get out.
Using an early opening valve to push the exhaust out just added to the coolant problem as the mixture wanted to burn in the exhaust port.
-
Following!!!
I have a Cccp era motorcycle project with 750->900cc plus project.
I tig welded the chambers an re machinined and reshaped the combustion chambers.
I'm not certain that I made all the right moves because way I think the flattie combustion chamber is balancing act between flow and compression ratio.
This kinda freeflowing project with only ambition to make as much my own engine parts:stroker crank ,rods,cam,etc.
Will it ever run probably not but if it will it will see some flat track action(http://)
-
Bob Sprowl nailed a really important point about the flathead V8 architecture. I got to spend a bit of time looking at the Flatfire streamliner at Bonneville a while back. They had the reversed ports and handled all induction / exhaust in the valley. This eliminated the cooling issue. Read here:
http://www.flatfire.com/flatfire2.htm Very cool engine!
Even early stock engines had cooling problems because of the way the exhaust was run. This will most likely be the big power bottleneck if you want to run hard for more than a few seconds.
-
What I am suggesting is that at or approaching TDC the outer "ring" of the piston coming above the deck would shut off flame travel into the valve area BUT on the "down stroke" after ignition, the piston will scavenge that area , plus it still had some pressurized air trapped, and burn any residual fuel. At the same time , the "round dish" traps "most" of the energy on the piston instead of losing some "sideways" to the valve area. Higher energy pushing on the only movable object. I also feel it would be easier on the head gasket as it wouldn't "see" direct cylinder pressure. I'm pretty comfortable that if I had some dimensions from you, I could make a piston like this.
Randy
I'd respectfully have to disagree with some of this. I don't believe that any part of the piston that isolates the valve area is going to help performance in a flathead. It will only hinder flow and exhaust functions. And I highly doubt that you'll "trap" anything above the piston. Pressure always finds the escape route, and the only thing that would be trapped would be spent combustion gasses, which just dilutes the incoming charge. Another thing, plugs on flatheads are always centered over the valves, so a piston that traps or isolates that area will hurt power in a major way and create all sorts of flame front issues. Sure, the plug can be moved to center over the piston, but Ford did it the way they did for a reason, and I'm guessing that would lead to other issues in regards to burn characteristics. Starting the burn over the piston sounds good, but as the piston starts on its way down, the burn front would be working its way into the valve area. So starting the burn in the valve area prevents those issues. It would be easy enough to double tap heads to try each spot and see what works best, but I'd bet it's location was not just a best guess, even back in the day.
One last thing, later flatheads (24 stud, and I believe the Lincoln engine has a couple more) have 8 studs for each cylinder. That's a LOT of clamping force...more than Top Fuel or any other type of engine that I know of, so boost and head gaskets should not be an issue as long as the head is thick enough, and the gasket is correct for the application. This is one area where the flathead shines! Of course all that pressure is also exerted to the lower end, so the 3 mains becomes the limiting factor, but not the heads or head gaskets. Old head gasket failures were almost always related to overheating.
And yes, Flatheads used to have overheating issues, and yes, much of it is centered around the exhaust ports, particularly from the siamesed center ports, but modern water pumps and better radiators have pretty much eliminated those issues with modern builds.
I recently spoke with the owner of this car about this subject. He can drive this car anywhere, in any temps, and it never overheats or gets hot. These cars have very limited space for extra cooling capacity when it comes to radiators, but good tuning, modern pumps and a modern radiator have made it a non-issue. That may not be the case on a max boosted build, but I'm not sure extended street use is the goal here.
(https://i.postimg.cc/jdFPHXtj/20200919-122106.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
(https://i.postimg.cc/Vk0MDCkW/20200919-122116.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
-
Doug ,
I am sorry I forgot about the spark plug placement on a flat head V8. I was thinking in terms of the Kohler stuff I had done extensive work with where the plug WAS over the piston where it should be. The dome + dish did work there.
"Dual plugs" have been used on the "Flatfire" and other cutting edge flatties. Lighting the spark in the valve area wastes allot of energy before it moves the piston , though the down stroke does pull the "fire" into the cylinder with it.
My apologies for misleading anyone.
Randy
-
A thing i thought about a flathead, How would it be with a popup
piston and a deeper chamber abow the cyl to get better flow without relieving
the block.
-
Randy, no need for an apology. I don't think you were misleading anyone by your idea, because Joel is talking about a custom head, so spark plugs can be placed wherever they're desired.
There are certain design limitations for any flathead engine. I wonder (just bench racing here), if 2 plugs would create 2 flame fronts? That would be a bad thing. If the plugs were side by side, it wouldn't be an issue, but spaced apart (one over the valves, one over the piston) it may become an issue. Just something to think about.
Edit to add that even the lowly little Briggs and Stratton flatheads placed the spark plugs over the valves. I'm sure that's not just a coincidence.
A thing i thought about a flathead, How would it be with a popup
piston and a deeper chamber abow the cyl to get better flow without relieving
the block.
Heo, domes are known to be a problem with flame travel, so I'm not sure how well that would work out. Plus, you'd have to make the head really thick to retain the strength over the piston, especially with boost. Then there's the issue with adding more head volume over the valves. This is the area that needs the most help in promoting flow from the valves, so I don't believe a dome over the piston would help much in terms of flow. Like Randy said, that area around the valves is basically dead air space, and cylinder pressure in that area doesn't contribute to any force being transmitted to the piston on the power stroke. I'd bet that there would be some advantage to your idea, but that you'd quickly reach a point of negative returns with the added volume, and no way to compress it.
If you look at the picture of the head that I posted earlier, you can see it's been opened up a bit to promote flow. Very similar to what you're suggesting. But I think the things I mentioned earlier might make it more of a problem than a solution. Again, walking that fine line between 'help' and 'hurt' is what making power is all about. Back in the day, there were probably 30 or more manufacturers that produced heads....at least. There may be a reason that nobody ever took that design and built upon it. Like I said, it's the only head I've ever seen made that way, and I've seen quite a few flathead heads.
-
HEO, your suggestion is exactly what Harley came up with called the high dome concept. raising the combustion chamber in a hemi shape with a matching piston with close quench. Gives a straighter intake & exhaust shot at the valves.
-
The 337 is very underappreciated from a performance standpoint. Remember, at the time, the 337 was competing directly against the OHV Cad 331 and was very comparable in power output (154 hp vs 160) and torque (265 ft-lbs vs. 292 ft-lbs). That said, there is lots of room to improve. I would start by studying the Harley Davidson KR engine. Harley coaxed 60+ hp out of 45 ci in order to exploit a loop hole in the flat track rules at the time that gave flatheads a LARGE displacement advantage. HD achieved this incredible 1.333 hp/ci with only 6:1 compression. This would be perfect for a highly boosted application. Imagine a 337 Lincoln with this same hp/ci ratio would produce 450 Hp! The other place to look would be to get ahold of Rick Schnell up in Anoka. He has the word's quickest flathead powered dragster. The "Slider" is a 950 Hp+ Nitro huffing FED. Obviously Nitromethane and a 4-71 blower will cover up a lot of sins, but I guarantee you Rick has a few flathead tricks up his sleeve.
(https://www.harleykmodel.com/phpBB3/download/file.php?id=1373&sid=2b7881bc24e86da132e3296b52f96d91)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-OXWC7Ufv4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-OXWC7Ufv4)
https://www.cycleworld.com/flat-head-motorcycle-engine-examined-kevin-cameron-top-dead-center/
-
My ideas on this subject will be a bit different. I like the idea of FT pistons, with a enhanced, transfer area. Flow bench the transfer area to see what flows the best.
What I learned about fluid dynamics, say that the pressure will be equal, within any given space and that pressure will exerted by the square inch area, regardless of shape.
Flame travel is very different from pressure and I agree with moving the spark plug. I would put it on the edge of the transfer, angled to the cylinder. It's my understanding that Ford put it near the exhaust valve, to keep it clean but, with modern extended plugs, I don't think it's relevant now.
As for the valves and getting flow, since there is virtually no flow over the valve, you need to work with the curtain. Larger valves, have larger curtains so, I would install the largest valves possible at a 85% ratio and work the contour around them on a flow bench. Everything needs to be as tight as possible in the chamber but, give the transfer and the area around the valves, everything they need. i.e. min piston to head and min head gasket shape and min clearance for the valve head, to back of the chamber, to promote forward flow.
I would also use as large a radius as the top ring to top of the piston will allow, to gain flow in the transfer area.
-
https://www.jrracecar.com/engines/?sort=featured&page=18 zoom in on the relief work of the 3.5 bore block , I can't find a chamber side but it mirror's the block with enough clearance for .580 lift in the valve area , Outlaw Jr Dragsters are making 55 horse from a single cylinder 3.5 bore X 3.0 inch stroke and buzz 10,000 rpm , my own kids 7.90 et 3,5x3.0 will make 45 horse power and buzz 8500 rpm for 400 passes in a season back in the late 2000's
-
This is what the FT piston, '34 - '36 Ford, aluminum head chambers and the '37 dome chamber look like.
-
Here is a Navarro Blower head
https://handhflatheads.com/product/navarro-8ba-blower-heads-75cc/
-
Doug, im talkin about the area abow the piston.Raising it about the same as the relieve (1/8 or so) in the block
and have a piston that fill that area when at tdc. And leaving the area abow the valves"untouched. If Joel is
going to cast new heads he can probably compensate the ticknes abow the chamber
Now i see the harley head is somthing like what i was thinking. I notice the plug is centered over the exhaust valve
on them
The head you have pics of looks verry much like the german Wood gas head i have on the Model A
8.5 CR Made for the German Army during WW2
You know how astock A idles i think? with this head the idle became super smoth and you can idle it
down till it just tick over and gained a lot of low rpm torque topspeed became scary...not that it is that
fast in otherwise unmodified A ;D ;D
-
Barron offered a high dome head&piston design that used a full radius piston dome with a raised hemi shaped combustion which made for much improved breathing.He copied from a Harly Havidson design for flat track racing.
how high of a dome was at? Was it a partial hemisphere all the way around, or did it have any irregularities to the shape?
-
While Brent is right (there have been a couple of high horsepower flatheads built using that method), it's an extremely aggressive approach that requires an insane amount of work. The examples I saw also used a lot of epoxy, which I would not consider very acceptable for long term use.
If you're wanting a modern chamber design, this is about the only modern type chamber I've seen. This is an old head that you'll never find, but could be reproduced in a custom head. I saw this recently at the Early Ford V8 Museum. Can't say as I've ever seen anything that was more high tech than this for a flathead head.
(https://i.postimg.cc/bNg14JQc/20200926_115239.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
One of the big issues is getting enough area above the valve to get good flow. If you open that area up, you lose not only compression, but much of the combustion pressure is wasted in the valve area. The head above seems to use a 'depression' from the valve area to the combustion chamber, to help promote that flow. It may not be the best design, but it's a sound idea that could be used in a custom head.
I hope you give some updates on this. This is the Non-FE area, so it fits here. :)
that's a really cool and interesting looking chamber. I wonder if it worked very well? It looks like it was designed to introduce swirl.
-
My answer would be to do all you can to unshroud the vales and even more important help the exhaust as much as possible. Give it an 8:1 open chamber. 20 psi of boost will cure a lot of design sins.. LOL Find an old guy that runs a blown flathead on nitro.. See what they did..
having boost should eliminate the need for a very high compression ratio. Hopefully 7 1/2 or 821 will not to do occult to achieve.
-
Someone versed in fluid dynamics could probably created a pressure vs flow graph to estimate the point of diminishing returns. The import guys do 40 lb , but that's with a turbo.. A screw or centrifugal type blower should not heat up the air as bad as a rootes type
Royce, do you know someone versed in fluid dynamics who could figure this out for me?
-
I'd reach out to Ron Main and get some ideas from his group. They had 700hp out of ~300cu/in. http://speeddemon.us/flatfire.html
I have seen pictures of the flat fire engine with the heads off. Landy built that engine and he moved all of the ports into the valley. That's more work and it depends on the block than I care to do.
-
I would give Ted Eaton a call. He is very innovative and has some real experience with the 239 FH. I don't know if he has ever worked with the 337 though but, he would be the first one that I would ask about this.
https://www.eatonbalancing.com
Ted is now on my list of people call, thanks very much!
-
Many years ago I looked into supercharging the 239. The problem was getting the exhaust out of those ports without over heating the engine. The center siamesed ports seemed to want to boil the coolant. Yes you could get a lot of combustible air into the engine, but it seemed to hit a early limit because the exhaust gas just couldn't get out.
Using an early opening valve to push the exhaust out just added to the coolant problem as the mixture wanted to burn in the exhaust port.
The 337 does have much better exhaust ports in the block then the smaller 24 stud flat heads.also the heat riser comes up to the intake manifold from the center exhaust port. That could be pretty easily converted into a fourth exhaust port. The front and rear exhaust ports can be shortened pretty easily by making a hole in the front and the rear of the block and hooking the header up there. That should reduce heating. hopefully the problem can be overcome. This engine only needs to run for about three minutes at a time
-
The 337 is very underappreciated from a performance standpoint. Remember, at the time, the 337 was competing directly against the OHV Cad 331 and was very comparable in power output (154 hp vs 160) and torque (265 ft-lbs vs. 292 ft-lbs). That said, there is lots of room to improve. I would start by studying the Harley Davidson KR engine. Harley coaxed 60+ hp out of 45 ci in order to exploit a loop hole in the flat track rules at the time that gave flatheads a LARGE displacement advantage. HD achieved this incredible 1.333 hp/ci with only 6:1 compression. This would be perfect for a highly boosted application. Imagine a 337 Lincoln with this same hp/ci ratio would produce 450 Hp! The other place to look would be to get ahold of Rick Schnell up in Anoka. He has the word's quickest flathead powered dragster. The "Slider" is a 950 Hp+ Nitro huffing FED. Obviously Nitromethane and a 4-71 blower will cover up a lot of sins, but I guarantee you Rick has a few flathead tricks up his sleeve.
(https://www.harleykmodel.com/phpBB3/download/file.php?id=1373&sid=2b7881bc24e86da132e3296b52f96d91)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-OXWC7Ufv4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-OXWC7Ufv4)
thanks for the pictures of those heads, I like the looks of that and it is definitely something we could try. I will be getting a hold of Rick Schnell as well, thank you
-
My ideas on this subject will be a bit different. I like the idea of FT pistons, with a enhanced, transfer area. Flow bench the transfer area to see what flows the best.
What I learned about fluid dynamics, say that the pressure will be equal, within any given space and that pressure will exerted by the square inch area, regardless of shape.
Flame travel is very different from pressure and I agree with moving the spark plug. I would put it on the edge of the transfer, angled to the cylinder. It's my understanding that Ford put it near the exhaust valve, to keep it clean but, with modern extended plugs, I don't think it's relevant now.
As for the valves and getting flow, since there is virtually no flow over the valve, you need to work with the curtain. Larger valves, have larger curtains so, I would install the largest valves possible at a 85% ratio and work the contour around them on a flow bench. Everything needs to be as tight as possible in the chamber but, give the transfer and the area around the valves, everything they need. i.e. min piston to head and min head gasket shape and min clearance for the valve head, to back of the chamber, to promote forward flow.
I would also use as large a radius as the top ring to top of the piston will allow, to gain flow in the transfer area.
we can put the spark plugs wherever we want, and uses many as we want. Maybe I will start out with two separate locations test each.
-
Barron offered a high dome head&piston design that used a full radius piston dome with a raised hemi shaped combustion which made for much improved breathing.He copied from a Harly Havidson design for flat track racing.
how high of a dome was at? Was it a partial hemisphere all the way around, or did it have any irregularities to the shape?
I believe the dome was a true radius of the piston diameter with no features. I remember it was critical that the chamber had to be true on center with the cylinder so a very close quench could be maintained.
-
That Navaro blower head loos simpler than the Harley KR heads.
I need to see more details on the JR. dragster stuff. That is VERY interesting, considering 1.96 hp per cube naturally aspirated.
We are building the heads on the cnc machining center. there will be a bottom and a top plate with water jackets and support ribs milled in between, with O-rings as needed. We are thinking the top plate will fit multiple different design bottom plates, so we can experiment with different combustion chambers but reuse the tops.
-
Barron offered a high dome head&piston design that used a full radius piston dome with a raised hemi shaped combustion which made for much improved breathing.He copied from a Harly Havidson design for flat track racing.
how high of a dome was at? Was it a partial hemisphere all the way around, or did it have any irregularities to the shape?
Here you have the High Dome head
https://handhflatheads.com/product/navarro-high-dome-heads/
-
Air doesn't like to turn so a radius chamber helps air flow because of the "arc" instead of a sharp 90*corner.
-
Air doesn't like to turn so a radius chamber helps air flow because of the "arc" instead of a sharp 90*corner.
I figure the right shape of the chamber roof is important for the flow
I think there was a British guy named Ricardo or something like that.
That worked a lot with combustion chamber shapes, and Diesels
If my memory is correct lost a lot of my memmory after my strokes
-
I know you said you dont want to modifie the block a lot.
But here is a interestig video look how packard angeled the valves
toward the cylinder almost 45 degrees. I think that benefits the flow
a lot, but i could be wrong
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=packard+v12&docid=608043034507937497&mid=613D99F4D1AEA6791B39613D99F4D1AEA6791B39&view=detail&FORM=VIRE
-
I like the 1936 Cord with the Lycoming-type valvetrain. With some work this is something that could be utilized on the Ford block. I would like to see a Ford flattie with a 5-main mod (like Uncommon Engineering performs) and the ghost-main billet crank modified for oil feeds at the "extra" main journals. It would be a fun project.
I tried to attach images from my computer, but........ >:( >:( >:( >:(
Here are the links, I hope.
https://www.speed-talk.com/forum/download/file.php?id=23446&mode=view
https://www.speed-talk.com/forum/download/file.php?id=23447&mode=view
-
The Cord / Lycoming system, is diffidently the best but, I think you'd have to start with a clean sheet of paper for the block, as well as the heads.
I don't think the 3 mains are a problem if, you use a 180 crank. The Novi (Indy engine) was reliable with 3 mains at 8k+ rpm.
-
The above files won't open for me.
KS
-
Here you go:
-
Thanx!!
KS
-
Interesting concept. I thought Lycoming was only involved in airplane engines.
-
Lycoming, Continental and Hercules, and there were others, were particularly popular engine suppliers to the as were sometimes referred to as "component-car" or "assembly-manufactures" in the passenger car and "light" truck market; the height of popularity for this process being practiced between the wars, and fading as many of the smaller vehicle manufactures faded in the thirty's due to the economics of the Depression (e.g. E.L. Cord folded Auburn, Cord and Duesenberg into one, before they then as a whole folded) and the weeding-out of the marketplace of the then labeled as "Independents" post W.W.II. :)
Scott.
-
The angled valve concept is good, but definetly tough to pull off if you have to stick to a stock Lincoln block. Packard even did it on their big straight 8's, though I think the angle was only 10 deg, much less than the V12's.
(https://hq-ma.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Straight-eight_Packard_engine_rebuild-4-225x300.jpg)
Also, Don't overlook the Seagrave / American La-France / Pierce Arrow V12's for inspiration. They tried some really unique setups, like in the 906. Is this a OHV, or a flathead???
(https://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/attachments/dscf0002-jpg.788804/)
-
Side valve. Unlimited lift and duration cams
-
Frozen, the Ford valves is angeled to, about 10 degrees dont remember the
corect amount now. dont knowhow much the lincoln is angeled
Those Lincoln Flathead you could still buy new in Sweden in the 80s.
Beacuse the Army had them in assaultgun, IKV72. They upgraded to a
Volvo aero engine and sold the spare engines. many probably lurks in barns
and under garage benches, i know of one guy who put one in a Willys Jeep
I was offered two new ones as Ford flatheads, but dont bougt them
when i saw they where Lincolns, big lumps
-
Also, Don't overlook the Seagrave / American La-France / Pierce Arrow V12's for inspiration. They tried some really unique setups, like in the 906. Is this a OHV, or a flathead???
(https://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/attachments/dscf0002-jpg.788804/)
Just a note: Seagrave introduced their 906 cubic inch V12 engine in 1931, and Pierce Arrow's V12 at 398 cubic inches wasn't in production until the following year. This makes for a curious thought of who may have copied who; but I believe that I remember reading somewhere that perhaps Seagrave had investigated, or perhaps were courted by Pierce as an engine supplier, but after realizing the engine, although a V12, was still not of sufficient capacity for their big fire apparatus, Seagrave may have "barrowed" some of Pierces' engineering witnessed to produce their own more suitable example and at a cost savings vs. purchasing such from Pierce.
Later, (1938 +/-) after Pierce Arrow faltered, Seagrave purchased the tooling for the Pierce V12's then having been produced in 398, 429 and 462 cubic inch capacities and set off with the Seagrave 462 and 531 cubic inch models used in the smaller fire apparatus examples with some re-engineering making the engine series more suitable for their needs.
There, more useless information for ya! ::)
Scott.
B.T.W., which engine is in the picture? :-\
-
That Seagrave / American La-France / Pierce Arrow, really muddy's waters, to call it a "flat Head". The valve is completely "over" the cylinders.
Actually, I really like the Cord/Lycoming but, I think it would be would be iffy since FH's are generally considered "L" heads. In a competition that is for "flat heads", I'm sure there would be a protest on the Cord type, valve arrangement, that would have to be decided by who ever makes the rules.
-
Also, Don't overlook the Seagrave / American La-France / Pierce Arrow V12's for inspiration. They tried some really unique setups, like in the 906. Is this a OHV, or a flathead???
(https://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/attachments/dscf0002-jpg.788804/)
Pictured is the Auburn V12, which was sold to American La France after Auburn folded. It was a clean sheet design by Auburn, and at $1100 an Aunburn V12 car was one of the greatest automotive bargains ever. Since Cord owned both Auburn and Lycoming, all Cord and Auburn engines of that era were built there.
-
We have some great ideas to get started with, thanks for all the help.
-
I don't think the 3 mains are a problem if, you use a 180 crank. The Novi (Indy engine) was reliable with 3 mains at 8k+ rpm.
Why is that? Is the 180 crank stiffer?