Author Topic: BBM vs Pond Aluminum block for new SOHC build  (Read 11723 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

winr1

  • Guest
Jay, sell me that Pond block :-)
« Reply #30 on: June 04, 2019, 11:51:04 PM »
My iron display mill is way to heavy to move when its blocking something

Ima cut out the insides of the iron heads cept for 2 head bolts, crank will be just the ends



Ricky.

blykins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4858
    • View Profile
    • Lykins Motorsports
Re: BBM vs Pond Aluminum block for new SOHC build
« Reply #31 on: June 05, 2019, 03:59:25 AM »
Don't know if its a certain amount of power, but its definitely a few percentage points.  Have a local shop here that does a ton of really similar rules limited oval track deals and he thinks its about 20HP on his 450ish HP stuff.  So maybe 3-5% is a usable figure. I would expect that compression and quench loss through growth would be a piece of this since the aluminum stuff grows by .008-.010 more at temperature.


That is an interesting thought.  Can the last minute tolerances for compression and quench be compensated for in an aluminum block build? Tighter quench and higher calculated compression?  To gain some of that 3-5% back?  Maybe the block would have to be pre-heated before startup?  Or Just allowed to fully heat up before doing anything above idle?  Different piston to wall numbers?   This might be old stuff for you engine builders, but I had not really thought about it.  I have never had an aluminum block, though.  :)

What I have done in the past is let the pistons hang out of the block so that when the block gets to operating temp you are at zero deck or a hair under.  It’s the same deal as running aluminum rods, you have to allow for it in the design stage.
Brent Lykins
Lykins Motorsports
Custom FE Street, Drag Race, Road Race, and Pulling Truck Engines
Custom Roller & Flat Tappet Camshafts
www.lykinsmotorsports.com
brent@lykinsmotorsports.com
www.customfordcams.com
502-759-1431
Instagram:  brentlykinsmotorsports
YouTube:  Lykins Motorsports

Barry_R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1928
    • View Profile
    • Survival Motorsports
Re: BBM vs Pond Aluminum block for new SOHC build
« Reply #32 on: June 05, 2019, 04:08:15 AM »
So now I believe at my target power level (800hp) the Shelby aluminum or someone else’s iron block are my two best options.  I’m willing to concede 20-40 horsepower for 100+ pounds of weight advantage so the Shelby block is my preference.  Now that I have decided the Shelby block is best for me my next question has to do with stroke. Since crank to cam lobe interference isn’t an issue in a cammer.
Would I be able to utilize a 4.5” crankshaft (with some slight clearancing in the block) and some stroker rods with the rounded/clearances shoulders? 
And if I can get the 4.5” crank to fit would the need for 6.8” or longer rods require oil ring support rails and wrist pin buttons to support the oil rings with such a short compression height? 

Jay, Did you have to do all this stuff on your Shelby strokers?

If you are building a Cammer with any sort of stroke in it you might as well concede to the use of oil groove spacers.  The SOHC dome configuration mandates a really low ring groove position because the intake pocket drops so low along the side of the piston.  At that point you may as well choose your stroke based on your own desires in terms of engine characteristics.

338Raptor

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 162
  • Aerodynamics are for men who can’t build engines.
    • View Profile
Re: BBM vs Pond Aluminum block for new SOHC build
« Reply #33 on: June 05, 2019, 04:58:23 AM »
Brent, Would the use of Aluminum rods eliminate the problem of decreasing quench height as the block heats up?
With a 4.375” or 4.5” stroke in a Shelby block would it be possible to run aluminum rods, or would the dimensionally larger big end of an aluminum rod vs a steel rod create too much of a clearance problem?  I know it’s not common to run Aluminum rods on the street, but I’m not afraid to do so.
ERA 427SC Cobra: Iron ‘67 625hp 482” SOHC, TKX 5 speed, TrueTrac 3.31 IRS, Magnesium Halibrands, Avon CR6ZZ tires. 

1969 Shelby GT350, 4 speed.

1967 Mustang Fastback: Close ratio T56 Magnum, Fab-9, Wilwood superlite brakes, Torque arm rear suspension, TCI-IFS with shock tower delete, (Coming soon, FE motor TBD)

1970 F250 4x4 Mud Truck, 557 BBF, as cast P51 heads, 900 hp @6700rpm, 801 tq, Q16, C6.

2012 Cobra Jet Mustang factory drag car, 5.4 liter 4.0 Whipple, 970 RWHP.

1964 Galaxie 500XL, 35 spline 3.70 Strange S-Trac, 6R80, (Coming soon: Pond Aluminum 525 SOHC, 800hp)

blykins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4858
    • View Profile
    • Lykins Motorsports
Re: BBM vs Pond Aluminum block for new SOHC build
« Reply #34 on: June 05, 2019, 05:16:06 AM »
Brent, Would the use of Aluminum rods eliminate the problem of decreasing quench height as the block heats up?
With a 4.375” or 4.5” stroke in a Shelby block would it be possible to run aluminum rods, or would the dimensionally larger big end of an aluminum rod vs a steel rod create too much of a clearance problem?  I know it’s not common to run Aluminum rods on the street, but I’m not afraid to do so.

Even if they would dimensionally fit inside of a block with that long of a stroke, adding aluminum rods to the mix would throw a million other variables into the situation.   They are not something you would want for a street engine. 

As I mentioned above, you can counter-act the quench height in the design phase of the engine build.  It still will not eliminate the horsepower loss from lack of ring seal.   The Shelby blocks may be more rigid than the other manufacturers' blocks, but you're still putting a ductile iron cylinder sleeve into an aluminum casing, which grows and moves around as heat is introduced.  If you're looking for other options, maybe consider a lightened, large bore cast iron block?  Even relocating the battery would put you 25-30 lbs ahead in the game and give you a head start if your primary goal is weight loss.  It wouldn't take much to shed 125 lbs.  I'll have to go through the calculations but I think you lose a couple pounds just by going to a 4.310" bore from a 4.250". 
« Last Edit: June 05, 2019, 06:49:04 AM by blykins »
Brent Lykins
Lykins Motorsports
Custom FE Street, Drag Race, Road Race, and Pulling Truck Engines
Custom Roller & Flat Tappet Camshafts
www.lykinsmotorsports.com
brent@lykinsmotorsports.com
www.customfordcams.com
502-759-1431
Instagram:  brentlykinsmotorsports
YouTube:  Lykins Motorsports

Dumpling

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 394
    • View Profile
Re: BBM vs Pond Aluminum block for new SOHC build
« Reply #35 on: June 05, 2019, 07:19:32 AM »
Isn't he going to be shedding a 100 pounds just by cutting out the shock towers etc. to fit the SOHC into the Mustang?  Then more pounds  by going to a modern suspension? Then there's all the metal he's going to cut out of the center of the hood to clear the injector stacks...
« Last Edit: June 05, 2019, 07:22:29 AM by Dumpling »

jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7436
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
Re: BBM vs Pond Aluminum block for new SOHC build
« Reply #36 on: June 05, 2019, 07:26:02 AM »
My big SOHC has a 4.600" stroke crank now, and I'm currently waiting for a 4.750" stroke version to up the cubes a little more.  The 4.600" crank uses Crower billet BBC rods, 6.700".  The oil ring rail is required.  For the bigger stroke I've had to go to 6.550" rods.  These components fit in the block but the bottom of the cylinder bores have to be notched to clear the rod shoulders.  Barry is correct about the ring package, with the deep intrusion into the piston dome of the intake valve, you aren't going to get away from the oil ring rail.
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

plovett

  • Guest
Re: BBM vs Pond Aluminum block for new SOHC build
« Reply #37 on: June 05, 2019, 09:14:48 AM »
Is it possible to mitigate the ring sealing losses with different ring and/or piston clearances?  How about honing hot?

machoneman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3856
    • View Profile
Re: BBM vs Pond Aluminum block for new SOHC build
« Reply #38 on: June 05, 2019, 10:54:23 AM »
Has anyone ever experimented with more exotic materials for blocks? For F1 maybe? Magnesium? Titanium? Carbon fiber?

Magnesium banned in F1 for any use for decades as one car went up and melted a hole in the track. Forget if it was a Honda.

Yeah, just found the link and it was the Honda.

https://www.carthrottle.com/post/wy355r8/

Not a magnesium ENGINE. The Honda had a magnesium body and 58 laps worth of fuel onboard when it burned

With liners for cylinders and whatever, why not a carbon fiber block?  Other than cost, why not titanium (reason why I mentioned F1)?

I should have answered differently. Yes, the Honda was mag bodied but after the fire, F.I.A. banned any use of magnesium, block included. Today, decades later, some rules changes did allow limited use of magnesium sheet but no engine nor transaxle 
nor suspension parts. Funny though, at that time carbon fiber came into being and due to stiffness, I'm told,it's a far better choice.. which is why all F1 cars use it instead. Btw, my rules book is old or else I'd post some fascinating passages here. 
Bob Maag

gt350hr

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 941
    • View Profile
Re: BBM vs Pond Aluminum block for new SOHC build
« Reply #39 on: June 05, 2019, 11:19:22 AM »
Is it possible to mitigate the ring sealing losses with different ring and/or piston clearances?  How about honing hot?

    Hot honing was more of a fad IMHO. The Nascar guys began doing it almost 20 years ago and it was a sketchy process. They ended up using heated cooking oil and reverse flowing it to get consistent results. Most stopped doing it.

       Pistons ( especially custom pistons) can and should be made  different ( dimensionally) for aluminum blocks. Cold piston to wall should be tighter as well. "Modern" ring technology is helping a bunch in  the way of ring seal . Many current production engines have aluminum blocks and no ring seal issues.
    Randy

machoneman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3856
    • View Profile
Jack of Dart fame and Jason of Brodix both say iron=aluminum these days and why that is true. Note too what Dart says about a back-to-back test. Perhaps that's why Jay hasn't seen any difference: all his FE blocks are modern creations and not 30-40 year old versions of essentially old FE cast iron blocks.

"Aluminum Blocks
Jack McInnis: "The perception that aluminum blocks lose power through decreased ring seal, as compared to iron blocks, is largely based on early aluminum blocks, which lacked the integrity we can achieve today. Aluminum blocks might have sacrificed power many years ago, but that's not the case anymore. A properly engineered modern aluminum block will make the same power as an iron block. We were recently involved in a direct comparison test with a big-block dragster engine making in excess of 1,100 hp. The engine was assembled and dyno tested with an iron Dart block, then disassembled and rebuilt using an aluminum Dart block. At the end of the day, the power figures were nominally identical for the iron and aluminum blocks."

Jason Neugent: "In the early days of manufacturing aftermarket aluminum blocks, the material that was used did indeed move around a lot under heavy abuse. This caused the cylinder sleeves to move, sink, or go out of round. The consequence was that this deflection would cause water leaks and poor ring seal, which are prime ingredients for poor reliability and power loss. Today we have solved these problems with the use of our virgin A-356 aluminum recipe, tighter tolerances, and more rugged sleeve materials. In independent testing, Brodix has witnessed our own aluminum blocks seal as well as a quality cast iron block.""
Bob Maag

blykins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4858
    • View Profile
    • Lykins Motorsports
Jack of Dart fame and Jason of Brodix both say iron=aluminum these days and why that is true. Note too what Dart says about a back-to-back test. Perhaps that's why Jay hasn't seen any difference: all his FE blocks are modern creations and not 30-40 year old versions of essentially old FE cast iron blocks.

"Aluminum Blocks
Jack McInnis: "The perception that aluminum blocks lose power through decreased ring seal, as compared to iron blocks, is largely based on early aluminum blocks, which lacked the integrity we can achieve today. Aluminum blocks might have sacrificed power many years ago, but that's not the case anymore. A properly engineered modern aluminum block will make the same power as an iron block. We were recently involved in a direct comparison test with a big-block dragster engine making in excess of 1,100 hp. The engine was assembled and dyno tested with an iron Dart block, then disassembled and rebuilt using an aluminum Dart block. At the end of the day, the power figures were nominally identical for the iron and aluminum blocks."

Jason Neugent: "In the early days of manufacturing aftermarket aluminum blocks, the material that was used did indeed move around a lot under heavy abuse. This caused the cylinder sleeves to move, sink, or go out of round. The consequence was that this deflection would cause water leaks and poor ring seal, which are prime ingredients for poor reliability and power loss. Today we have solved these problems with the use of our virgin A-356 aluminum recipe, tighter tolerances, and more rugged sleeve materials. In independent testing, Brodix has witnessed our own aluminum blocks seal as well as a quality cast iron block.""

That's all fine and good except for the fact that we are seeing horsepower differences *now*, not years ago.   I also wouldn't say that new aluminum blocks are copies of 40 year old factory pieces.  The 40 year old factory pieces don't have lifter valley ribbing, etc, etc.   I know that Pond also uses a 356 alloy. 

So what's "nominal" at 1100?????  25 hp?  50?

Since we're offering up quotes, here's one from Darin Morgan from a few years ago on Speedtalk:

"We see the EXACT same thing. The Billet blocks are the only aluminum block I have seen that makes the same power as a cast iron block. Aluminum blocks take longer "season" and stop moving around as well. The second or third rebuild always nets anouther twenty HP. Also, as the aluminum block engines get hotter on the dyno the crank case pressure rises dramatically and the power goes south in a hurry! They just expand and move around so much its impossible to maintain any semblance of stability."  Im assuming reher Morrison has some experience with aftermarket block offerings.

A lot of guys always point to the OEM on how well aluminum blocks work, but I will say that the OEM spends millions upon millions of dollars on R&D for one particular engine.  They will also give up a few ponies in order to recoup some much needed fuel economy.

The thing that bites my booty is that guys are always eager to spend so much money on aluminum pieces.  A few years back on Club Cobra, I asked the general population why they were willing to pay so much for them.  The majority vote was for "bling" purposes.  All I can say is that there's a lot of guys out there with money to blow, if they're willing to spend an extra $4000 to just say "I have an aluminum block" or to justify that they need 100 lbs taken off the front of the car. 

I had 3 issues in a row with some aluminum FE blocks.  Two of them cost me lost time and one cost me a nice little chunk of money.  I decided after that, that the other builders could take all the all-aluminum FE orders. 
« Last Edit: June 05, 2019, 12:46:14 PM by blykins »
Brent Lykins
Lykins Motorsports
Custom FE Street, Drag Race, Road Race, and Pulling Truck Engines
Custom Roller & Flat Tappet Camshafts
www.lykinsmotorsports.com
brent@lykinsmotorsports.com
www.customfordcams.com
502-759-1431
Instagram:  brentlykinsmotorsports
YouTube:  Lykins Motorsports

jayb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7436
    • View Profile
    • FE Power
Re: BBM vs Pond Aluminum block for new SOHC build
« Reply #42 on: June 05, 2019, 01:10:19 PM »
Pricing on aluminum blocks didn't used to be so ridiculous.  For a long time Pond's aluminum block was about $1000 more than his cast iron block, the difference being the price of the Darton sleeves that are used in the aluminum block.  Now the price differential has gotten out of hand, that's for sure. 

When I start to manufacture my FE Power aluminum block, it will be reasonably priced.  Couple years away on that, though...
Jay Brown
- 1969 Mach 1, Drag Week 2005 Winner NA/BB, 511" FE (10.60s @ 129); Drag Week 2007 Runner-Up PA/BB, 490" Supercharged FE (9.35 @ 151)
- 1964 Ford Galaxie, Drag Week 2009 Winner Modified NA (9.50s @ 143), 585" SOHC
- 1969 Shelby Clone, Drag Week 2015 Winner Modified NA (Average 8.98 @ 149), 585" SOHC

   

cjshaker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4474
    • View Profile
Re: BBM vs Pond Aluminum block for new SOHC build
« Reply #43 on: June 05, 2019, 01:37:38 PM »
When I start to manufacture my FE Power aluminum block, it will be reasonably priced.  Couple years away on that, though...

When will there be a thread on what to name it? Just asking because I want to make sure I'm on vacation that week. ;D
Doug Smith


'69 R-code Mach 1, 427 MR, 2x4, Jerico, 4.30 Locker
'70 F-350 390
'55 Ford Customline 2dr
'37 Ford Coupe

thatdarncat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1871
    • View Profile
Re: BBM vs Pond Aluminum block for new SOHC build
« Reply #44 on: June 05, 2019, 01:50:13 PM »
When I start to manufacture my FE Power aluminum block, it will be reasonably priced.  Couple years away on that, though...

When will there be a thread on what to name it? Just asking because I want to make sure I'm on vacation that week. ;D

 ;D
Kevin Rolph

1967 Cougar Drag Car ( under constuction )
1966 7 litre Galaxie
1966 Country Squire 390
1966 Cyclone GT 390
1968 Torino GT 390
1972 Gran Torino wagon
1978 Lincoln Mk V