Author Topic: Milwaukee Midget  (Read 3255709 times)

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline gearheadeh

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 299
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #405 on: June 19, 2011, 08:15:35 PM »

I do intend to take this thing down to Great Lakes Dragaway for a tune and test night.  Better to embarrass yourself 40 miles from home than 1500.   :wink:

Chris, now you are talking! What does a more or less stock MG Midget do for a 1/4 time? What time are you hoping to achieve with your modified but smaller power plant?
40 is the old age of Youth, 50 is the young age of the Senior years.

Offline manta22

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4137
  • What, me worry?
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #406 on: June 19, 2011, 09:15:34 PM »
"Better to embarrass yourself 40 miles from home than 1500.   "

I dunno.... 40 miles away, too many people would know who I was.  :-D

Regards, Neil   Tucson, AZ
Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ

Offline Milwaukee Midget

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6662
    • Milwaukee Midget Racing
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #407 on: June 19, 2011, 09:47:33 PM »

I do intend to take this thing down to Great Lakes Dragaway for a tune and test night.  Better to embarrass yourself 40 miles from home than 1500.   :wink:

Chris, now you are talking! What does a more or less stock MG Midget do for a 1/4 time? What time are you hoping to achieve with your modified but smaller power plant?

I've got a collection of road tests dating back to 1961 - typically 18 second 1/4's were the norm for 1098's with 4.22's or 1275's with 3.90's.  Shifting at 5,500 was typical.

I'm more interested in my trap speeds - I don't intend to launch it hard, and all I've got for rear tires are a set of sacrificial 155 - 80R 13's that are harder than a bowling ball.

If I can get it to 7500 in third gear by the traps, that'll put me at 85 mph - I'll know at that point if I'm chasing my tail.
"Better to embarrass yourself 40 miles from home than 1500.   "

I dunno.... 40 miles away, too many people would know who I was.  :-D

Regards, Neil   Tucson, AZ

Let me rephrase that - cheaper?  :-D
"Problems are almost always a sign of progress."  Harold Bettes
Well, I guess we're making a LOT of progress . . .  :roll:

Offline Dr Goggles

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3120
  • The Jarman-Stewart "Spirit of Sunshine" Bellytank
    • "Australian Bellytank" , http://thespiritofsunshine.blogspot.com/
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #408 on: June 19, 2011, 11:10:38 PM »
I do intend to take this thing down to Great Lakes Dragaway for a tune and test night.  Better to embarrass yourself 40 miles from home than 1500.   :wink:

I reckon the crowd will be so astonished that you can actually fit in it that they'll be standing there with their jaws on the ground anyway :cheers: :cheers:
Few understand what I'm trying to do but they vastly outnumber those who understand why...................

http://thespiritofsunshine.blogspot.com/

Current Australian E/GL record holder at 215.041mph

THE LUCKIEST MAN IN SLOW BUSINESS.

Offline Milwaukee Midget

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6662
    • Milwaukee Midget Racing
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #409 on: June 20, 2011, 12:00:14 AM »
We've all made fun of it - chief among us myself - but once in place, it verges on comfortable.

Entry and exit IS tough, but once I'm actually IN and buckled, it's good.  The racing seat is set back by the rear bulkhead, which added better than 4 inches of leg room over stock.  The seat bolts to the crossbar on the floor, and at it's lowest point it's about an inch from the floorboard - stock is about 4 inches.  I've maximized every inch I could, and for a driving position, it works well.  The controls fall right to hand, visibility is good, and while I wouldn't want to drive it in a 50 mile road race, I'm sure I could.

About 8 years ago, I was at the June Sprints at Road America, and chatting with a guy out of Colorado racing a Huffaker prepared Spridget. He was about my height, and I asked him how he was able to fit in it.  He invited me to jump in and check it out.  Now granted, SCCA lets you go with no top, no windshield, and the cage is not nearly as complex as what the SCTA requires, but it clearly was doable.
"Problems are almost always a sign of progress."  Harold Bettes
Well, I guess we're making a LOT of progress . . .  :roll:

Offline Milwaukee Midget

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6662
    • Milwaukee Midget Racing
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #410 on: June 30, 2011, 11:20:06 AM »

This should spin pretty tight.

75 lbs of shavings later -






Off to heat treatment on Monday.

THANKS, GREG!
"Problems are almost always a sign of progress."  Harold Bettes
Well, I guess we're making a LOT of progress . . .  :roll:

Offline 4-barrel Mike

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3173
  • Any fool can drive a V8
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #411 on: June 30, 2011, 01:06:18 PM »
75 lbs of shavings later -

How much did that thing weigh stock  :?

Mike
Mike Kelly - PROUD owner of the V4F that powered the #1931 VGC to a 82.803 mph record in 2008!

Offline Milwaukee Midget

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6662
    • Milwaukee Midget Racing
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #412 on: July 01, 2011, 09:38:36 AM »
Mike, Greg said he was going to put the billet on a diet.  Maybe he was being facetious - I never weighed the billet.  But given that the crank has the throw of a Cox 0.49, it wouldn't surprise me.  :wink:

"Problems are almost always a sign of progress."  Harold Bettes
Well, I guess we're making a LOT of progress . . .  :roll:

Offline Koncretekid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1203
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #413 on: July 02, 2011, 07:12:07 AM »
MM,
A couple of weeks ago, you mentioned the following (sorry, I'm always a couple weeks behind, it seems):
    "And after a talk with Sparky a few months back, he recommended placing some small oil nozzles directed to the back of the piston for longevity. After seeing Grummy’s teardown of the J/S tank, and the heat on the small ends of the Holden V6, I’m thinking that’s not a bad idea."

Enlighten me for being dense, but which is the back of the piston?  I wanted to add something like this on my BSA single (front being the exhaust side), but didn't have time to come up with any solutions.  I thought about drilling the big end of the connecting rod with a small hole, maybe .040", that would direct a small squirt of oil up onto the inside of the piston on the exhaust side, but didn't know if this would compromise the strength of the rod, or even work at all. BSA did it on their 650 twins to squirt oil, apparently onto the main crank bearing (ball or roller in a dry sump motor.)  I have no idea if it actually worked.  Any ideas?
Tom
We get too soon oldt, and too late schmart!
Life's uncertain - eat dessert first!

Offline Milwaukee Midget

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6662
    • Milwaukee Midget Racing
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #414 on: July 02, 2011, 12:32:11 PM »
Enlighten me for being dense, but which is the back of the piston? 

Tom, you're not dense - I'm just sloppy with language. :-D

I'm glad you brought it up, because I'm rethinking my position.

The underside of the piston is what I should have said.  I was planning on tapping into the oil gallery and plumbing a line in the crankcase with 4 small jets to bathe the underside of each piston.  This is more to take heat away than to lubricate.  The plan for the jet is simply a tip from a wire welder  It's a suggestion Sparky made to me, and it all has merit.

My concern has become whether my oiling system has sufficient capacity to deal with four additional "controlled leaks" of this nature.  If I were running a dry sump, I don't think it would be an issue, but my oiling system is essentially stock.

So as we speak, the jury's out.
   

"Problems are almost always a sign of progress."  Harold Bettes
Well, I guess we're making a LOT of progress . . .  :roll:

Offline grumm441

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1447
  • HK 327
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #415 on: July 03, 2011, 02:11:21 AM »
Get the pistons coated instead
G
Chief Motorcycle Steward Dry Lakes Racers Australia Inc
Spirit of Sunshine Bellytank Lakester
https://www.dlra.org.au/rulebook.htm

Offline Milwaukee Midget

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6662
    • Milwaukee Midget Racing
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #416 on: July 03, 2011, 03:18:03 AM »
Get the pistons coated instead
G

I like your thinking - rather than trying to draw the heat away, keep it out in the first place.

If it were supercharged, I'd do both.
"Problems are almost always a sign of progress."  Harold Bettes
Well, I guess we're making a LOT of progress . . .  :roll:

Offline Koncretekid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1203
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #417 on: July 03, 2011, 08:26:57 AM »
MM,
I agree with you on the additional 4 leaks in the oiling system.  I don't think the British overbuilt very many parts, and the oil pump may be at it's limit.  One of our BSA B50 forum members actually measured oil pressure and found that at high RPM's, it became negative.  His reasoning was that the centrifugal pump effect of the rotating crank was actually sucking more oil than the pump could provide.  So just when you need it most, the squirters could fail.  Scarey. I like the idea of ceramic coating of the piston, but with only 10 days til Loring,  I won't have enough time. At least at Loring, I won't have to hold it WOT very long (I'll probably ride the 1st mile quite leasurely, then open it up).
Tom
We get too soon oldt, and too late schmart!
Life's uncertain - eat dessert first!

Offline grumm441

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1447
  • HK 327
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #418 on: July 03, 2011, 08:50:59 AM »

MM,
I agree with you on the additional 4 leaks in the oiling system.  I don't think the British overbuilt very many parts, and the oil pump may be at it's limit.  One of our BSA B50 forum members actually measured oil pressure and found that at high RPM's, it became negative.  His reasoning was that the centrifugal pump effect of the rotating crank was actually sucking more oil than the pump could provide.  So just when you need it most, the squirters could fail.  Scarey. I like the idea of ceramic coating of the piston, but with only 10 days til Loring,  I won't have enough time. At least at Loring, I won't have to hold it WOT very long (I'll probably ride the 1st mile quite leasurely, then open it up).
Tom

I got the crowns ceramic coated and the skirts moly coated after seeing the disaster that was the last engine that I didn't build

The negative oil pressure could also be a combination of the centrifugal crank filtering setup and a cavitation problem at the oil pickup. this is usually where Dr Goggs pipes in about not getting me started on cavitation and oil or fuel pumps.
But it made me laugh thinking of negative oil pressure. Only the English could make an oiling system that worked in reverse
G
Chief Motorcycle Steward Dry Lakes Racers Australia Inc
Spirit of Sunshine Bellytank Lakester
https://www.dlra.org.au/rulebook.htm

Offline Milwaukee Midget

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6662
    • Milwaukee Midget Racing
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #419 on: July 03, 2011, 12:09:18 PM »

MM,
I agree with you on the additional 4 leaks in the oiling system.  I don't think the British overbuilt very many parts, and the oil pump may be at it's limit.  One of our BSA B50 forum members actually measured oil pressure and found that at high RPM's, it became negative.  His reasoning was that the centrifugal pump effect of the rotating crank was actually sucking more oil than the pump could provide.  So just when you need it most, the squirters could fail.  Scarey. I like the idea of ceramic coating of the piston, but with only 10 days til Loring,  I won't have enough time. At least at Loring, I won't have to hold it WOT very long (I'll probably ride the 1st mile quite leasurely, then open it up).
Tom

I got the crowns ceramic coated and the skirts moly coated after seeing the disaster that was the last engine that I didn't build

The negative oil pressure could also be a combination of the centrifugal crank filtering setup and a cavitation problem at the oil pickup. this is usually where Dr Goggs pipes in about not getting me started on cavitation and oil or fuel pumps.
But it made me laugh thinking of negative oil pressure. Only the English could make an oiling system that worked in reverse
G

Tom, Grummy, thanks for the info.

It's occurred to me that since I've actually shortened my crank throws by three quarters of an inch, and that the Midget has a fairly deep pan, if I build a windage tray, I could likely throw an extra pint or two of oil into it with little negative impact.  I've also got an adjustable oil pressure regulator/valve.

It's a balancing act with the A-block - too much pressure and it blows out the seal - too little, and - well, let's not jinx ourselves.

Tom - best of luck at Loring.

Grummy - I can just hear that call from the engine room - "Main Bearings!  This is the sump calling!  Send me more oil!"

Hail Britannia. :wink:
"Problems are almost always a sign of progress."  Harold Bettes
Well, I guess we're making a LOT of progress . . .  :roll: