(Note: LANDRACING.COM donations are not tax deductible)


This is a public forum. The opinions expressed here don't
necessarily reflect the feelings of The Folks That Run The Site (that's us)
unless we explicitly say so, ok?


Author Topic: No butterfly engine  (Read 1475 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Stan Back

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5253
  • Location: San Berdoo
Re: No butterfly engine
« Reply #15 on: May 22, 2020, 08:06:31 PM »
That didn't work!  Hard to find good coal this year . . .

Try this . . .
Past Member of the San Berdoo Roadsters -- "California's Most-Exclusive Roadster Club" -- Fifty-Seven Years of Leadership  Is Enough

Offline Stan Back

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5253
  • Location: San Berdoo
Re: No butterfly engine
« Reply #16 on: May 22, 2020, 08:08:46 PM »
You'll notice his head was not perfect.  He didn't even spell his name right on it.  Musta got the "L" out of there.
Past Member of the San Berdoo Roadsters -- "California's Most-Exclusive Roadster Club" -- Fifty-Seven Years of Leadership  Is Enough

Offline desotoman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2622
  • Location: So Cal.
  • Modified Roadster
Re: No butterfly engine
« Reply #17 on: May 22, 2020, 09:40:15 PM »

I found the "pioneer" of the no-butterfly revolution ? Roy Creel. 


Okay Stan now I am confused. So are you saying that Roy ran no butterfly injectors before Datadoc who ran them in 1967?

Tom G.
The rational person lets verified facts form or modify his opinion.  The ideologue ignores verified facts which don't fit his preconceived opinions.

Asking questions is one's only way of getting answers.

Offline Stan Back

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5253
  • Location: San Berdoo
Re: No butterfly engine
« Reply #18 on: May 23, 2020, 09:53:19 AM »
I wasn't confused.  I was just wrong.  Happens even more frequently nowadays.
Past Member of the San Berdoo Roadsters -- "California's Most-Exclusive Roadster Club" -- Fifty-Seven Years of Leadership  Is Enough

Offline Stainless1

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7671
  • Age: 69
  • Location: Near Furley and Kechi KS
  • Robert W. P. "Stainless" Steele
Re: No butterfly engine
« Reply #19 on: May 23, 2020, 12:07:18 PM »
I wasn't confused.  I was just wrong.  Happens even more frequently nowadays.

Comes with age, ability to write and wisdom Stan... two outta three ain't bad  :naughty :cheers:
Stainless
Red Hat 228.039, 2001, 65ci, MSA Bockscar Lakester with a little N20 
MSA Bockscar Lakester #1000 my fastest mile 245 and change, 84 ci turbobusa motor... but Corey's 233 MPH H/BFL record is still 3MPH faster than mine.

Offline desotoman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2622
  • Location: So Cal.
  • Modified Roadster
Re: No butterfly engine
« Reply #20 on: May 23, 2020, 12:14:34 PM »
I wasn't confused.  I was just wrong.  Happens even more frequently nowadays.

Stan, thanks for the reply. I understand what you are saying as I am starting to get into that stage in life now.

Tom G.
The rational person lets verified facts form or modify his opinion.  The ideologue ignores verified facts which don't fit his preconceived opinions.

Asking questions is one's only way of getting answers.

Offline datadoc

  • New folks
  • Posts: 14
  • Age: 78
  • Location: Highland,Utah
Re: No butterfly engine
« Reply #21 on: May 23, 2020, 12:59:27 PM »
To DW230, That sounds like my old car and engine that you mentioned. The type of car, the time period, fuel used and the slant 6 doesn't seem like there could be but one car that fits that description. I wonder if it really did run the 180 plus that I was told. One mph per cubic inch sounds pretty good for the time period.
   Now to try and shed more light on why that type of engine could idle without butterflies. First off both Isky and Mickey and others were with out a doubt correct in their thinking that a engine should not be able to idle without a throttle for the air. You run into the problem of the flammability limits of gasoline. With a cylinder's full complement of air without any throttling and adding enough fuel to to stay within the flammability limits there is no way a normal engine would not rev up. So if your intentions were to run a engine without a throttle one then needs what is called "stratified charge" that is where there would be a rich enough mixture present at the spark plug to support combustion but only enough fuel to make the power to overcome idle friction and no more. One of the driving forces to develop this type of engine process was the fact that at 50 mph the pumping losses to pull down to roughly 1/2 atmosphere and discharge at atmosphere was about equal to the energy to propel the car. During the 60's I knew both Texaco (with UPS as a partner) and Ford were working on such engines. As I remember they had very strange looking spark plugs along with two nozzles per cylinder. I don't remember the outcome.
  Going by what the Cal Tech professor told me at that dinner meeting I referred to, it sounds like the only engine of that era that could in fact run as a stratified charge engine was the slant 6. Given what I observed during the teardown in impound which showed a line coming from the intake valve and swirling around the plug must of meant that there was a rich mixture present at the plug just by the natural process of the port and plug location along with the nozzle position. The stratified charge part of this equation might account for the always rich looking spark plugs. In 1967 when I first ran the engine I made a number of laps in the warmup area (which you no longer can do and before the engine seized up because of the lack of piston clearance) I could never find a jet where the plugs changed color. That is why in the following year I made a in car adjustable return jet. In 1968 the normal meet was canceled after anyone was in Wendover. So without anything to do for a few days I did drive the car around the city and you would never know there was anything different about it. Today I know enough about engines that I would never even entertain the idea of running without a throttle, but that was then. Like someone wrote what a great deal it is to still have Bonneville where a dumb Acura kid can try such things.

Offline datadoc

  • New folks
  • Posts: 14
  • Age: 78
  • Location: Highland,Utah
Re: No butterfly engine
« Reply #22 on: June 24, 2020, 05:32:28 PM »
 Someone was kind enough to call my house with Jimmy Amrheim's phone number. I called him and got to chat with him after about 50 years. He did  say that we ran that slant 6 in his car at El Mirage and it set a record. That part doesn't surprise me because how many people would run a 3 liter engine in a roadster. Must have been a easy record. I forgot to ask him how fast it went. So Stan Back is correct about seeing the roadster at El Mirage with the "no butterflies" slant 6.
  Going back and remembering about this engine brought to mind how blessed I was that a number of owners trusted me to drive their stuff through the years. I got to sit in front or behind a fair amount of different engine combinations. Actually probably more than my share. The following is my list as I remember.
   Ford:  V-8 60, 144 Falcon, Boss 302,  Gurney/Westlake, and a pair of inline SOHC 427 Cammers.
   GM:  Chev 4 cyl, Small block, Big block, overhead Pontiac 6 cyl, V-6 Buick, and a 215 aluminum Olds.
   AMC: 287 V-8
   Chrysler: Slant 6, 392, 273, and a 277 Plymouth.
   Aircraft Engines:  1710 Allison, Rolls-Royce 1650 Merlin, and a 2240 Griffon.

   Note: All of these engines except one did have butterflies.