XXO/BVGC '38 Chevy Coupe Build

[Jack Gifford]

The FlatCad made it into Hot Rod Magazine- congratulations!

The reference to Harman-Collins roller lifters is probably to the the ones that were sold about 1960 - 1963 (briefly marketed under the Schiefer name, I think in '63/64). I'll need to search old pieces to get a photo (I used them initially in my M/T hemi engine). They used custom-cast bronze sleeves in the lifter bores- the sleeves had slots on the bottom that the wheels travelled in to keep them aligned. The sleeves in turn had anti-rotation tie bars (across the valley). They didn't work for the loads in my engine (625 pounds-open springs), since the narrow wheels and small body diameter (~.600") severely limited their strength.

[Pete1]

The FlatCad made it into Hot Rod Magazine- congratulations!

The reference to Harman-Collins roller lifters is probably to the the ones that were sold about 1960 - 1963 (briefly marketed under the Schiefer name, I think in '63/64). I'll need to search old pieces to get a photo (I used them initially in my M/T hemi engine). They used custom-cast bronze sleeves in the lifter bores- the sleeves had slots on the bottom that the wheels travelled in to keep them aligned. The sleeves in turn had anti-rotation tie bars (across the valley). They didn't work for the loads in my engine (625 pounds-open springs), since the narrow wheels and small body diameter (~.600") severely limited their strength.

I had mine (a Cad) in 1955 and got them direct from H&C.
We put them in 3 sprint car engines, a Dodge and 2 Desoto's.
They worked fine there and would turn 8000 easily.

[Jack Gifford]

I assume this is the H-C lifter mentioned? (Ignore the pushrod seat which I made up).

[Roseville Carl]

Was that made from oillite material or brass??

[Jack Gifford]

They are a bronze alloy, but I don't know the detail composition. Doesn't act to me like Oillite. There was no need for them to be Oillite, as they receive plenty of full-pressure engine lube.

[Roseville Carl]

looks like pretty easy to duplicate..........

[SPARKY]

Darn  plywood sure has gone up 24.00 per sheet  for BC 3/8 for a shipping crate for the Flat Caddy stuff almost have the shipping crate done..

[Milwaukee Midget]

Darn  plywood sure has gone up 24.00 per sheet  for BC 3/8 for a shipping crate for the Flat Caddy stuff almost have the shipping crate done..

Unfortunately, a lot of plywood has been diverted to New York and New Jersey.  Same thing happened during Katrina.  I did some rehab work with a church group in Biloxi, and 7 months after the storm, materials were still in short supply and demanding high prices.

[BoredAndStroked]

RE:  Harman and Collins Original Roller Lifters and T-Slot Bronze Guides.

I also happen to have a set of the original H&C roller lifters - used a small diameter body and a .750 roller . . . very light weight.   Don Garlits was after me a few years ago to acquire a set - decided to hang onto them (he wasn't exactly wanting to spend much of anything on them!).   The bronze T-Slot bushing used a guide plate that slid into a slot in the brass bushing - then it had a cross-bolt to pickup the guide plate on the other side - which kept them indexed.

Many of the early H&C roller cams used a 'hollow flank' or what is also called an 'inverted radius' profile - just like the Harley KRs had.  The challenge in today's world is that in order to create the inverse radius, you need a very small diameter wheel on your cam grinder -- which almost nobody has today.   About the only guys that I know that have them are guys that grind special Harley cams on older Berco (sp?) grinders . . . and they're not usually setup to think or care about custom V8 automotive stuff.

I'll post some pictures of the H&C lifters tomorrow - kind of cool to at least look at  (though they're not really what we need for the FlatCad).    The big issue with the H&C or Harley KR style of lifter is that the bronze bushing (or lifter block in Harley's case) had a T-Slot that indexed on the roller itself . . .which limits the amount of lift you can have (as the roller comes out of the T-Slot).  Even with an .850 roller, you are really stretching it to get to .500 lift with the body size of a Harley lifter.   Harley's biggest factory race cam on the KR flathead was about .440 lift.

Cool conversations . . . keep em' coming!

B&S

[BoredAndStroked]

RE:  Thanksgiving Forensics on the Condition of the FlatCad . . .  Gobble Fricking Gobble!  

Been working over the holidays to clean up all the internals from the FlatCad, do some more forensics on the parts and get ready for the freshen up, numerous modifications and rebuild for next year.

A little history on the motor: This was the first year that it has been ran - just finished it in early spring, brought it to John Beck to dyno, managed to get it ready for Bonneville . . . ran it hard there and REALLY ran it hard at the Ohio Mile. It has gone through various issues with fuel problems, it has been over-revved (yes - I was the guy that floated the valves  ), it was thrashed hard at the Ohio Mile to see if it could handle it, etc..  Buddy decided to 'see what it could do' . . . which makes me shiver and shake like an old dog passing razor blades . . . . God love him!   All I could think about was the conversation of "Well - guess we need to make another one . . . ".  

Frankly, when we took it apart . . . we had no clue as to what we were going to see.

We found that 5 of the intake lifters had adjuster issues and they'd backed off about .250 (out of .510) . . . which means not only did we have very little lift, we had very little duration - but it still ran really hard. Cheap repop lifters caused the issue - in 2013 we're going to a custom roller cam to hopefully give the valve train a bit more reliability and take some drama out of it.

Three Mains a Go Go . . .

It was the lower end that Buddy and I were most worried about - as we'd thrashed it hard, had thrown a LOT of horsepower at it and we have no clue as to how strong these blocks actually are???  There is really no tribal knowledge on what was weak, what will fail first, etc . . . so it was a big ole' guessing game.  Though - we'd done everything we could think of to design a really strong lower end . . . steel mains, big thick girdle, billet Crower crank, billet rods, etc..   Don did some unbelievably beautiful machine work . . . based on my 3D CAD designs - everything was spot on.  With only 3 main bearings, 4 5/8 stroke, 8.75" rods, 6000+ RPM and 550+ horsepower . . . what were we in for?

Well - attached are the pictures of the key lower end components - everything looks really normal . . . better than we had expected.

You'll see the crankshaft journals -- the mains are in good shape, the rod journals have a bit of wear on the back side. After close inspection today, I believe that they'll need to be ground under size to .010 . . . as I can feel some grooves with my fingernails.

Take a look at the bearings - in pretty dang good shape. Maybe our 'priority main' oiling system kept them happy?  

A piece of crap went through the center main, but all-in-all, they were in nice shape for what they went through.

You'll also see a couple pictures of the pistons. They were coated by our sponsor (Finishline Coatings - great people!) - with a ceramic coating on the tops, a friction reducing coating on the sides and a oil shedding coating on the undersides. Given the extreme piston speed we experienced, they look really good.

Even though we're running a dry sump and this beast has an extremely tall deck (8.75" rods), there was plenty of oil up in the pins, the skirts looked really good and the Akerly HTD rings showed a really consistent sealing surface all around.

Everything looked really normal/good - especially considering that this engine had quite a bit of time on it (for a 100% purpose-built race engine) . . . with no checks or freshening up since the dyno.

Good stuff gang . . . gives us a lot of encouragement for where we're headed. Hopefully - stronger, faster and with more HP . . . and still reliable!

We'll keep posting as we get into the next stage of things . . . should be some real fun!

Thanks for listening to my Holiday Babble . . . tell me when you've heard enough!

B&D

[Captthundarr]

Keep it coming. Glad to see your forthought on adding strength to the bottom end paid off. Hope to see you in Ohio in 2013.

Happy holidays Frank and Amy.

[BoredAndStroked]

Whups - didn't post the rod bearing.   If you look at it, notice that it is wearing more on the sides then the center . . . my guess is that we're seeing some crankshaft deflection (remember 3 mains and 550+ HP).   I'm going to review the rest of the rod bearings and talk to some of my expert crankshaft folks - I think we need some more clearance on the journals to handle the 3-main deflection/bending.

Here yah go:

[BoredAndStroked]

I assume this is the H-C lifter mentioned? (Ignore the pushrod seat which I made up).

Yes, that is a H&C lifter  . . . with your custom gonzo top!      What are you up to with that setup? 

I was pondering using mine for an Ardun setup years ago - but since that time have decided that I need much longer lifters for better geometry in an Ardun . . . so they sit in a box.

[saltracer1]

Why didn't you coat the rod and main bearings? Just curious...

[Pete1]

Whups - didn't post the rod bearing.   If you look at it, notice that it is wearing more on the sides then the center . . . my guess is that we're seeing some crankshaft deflection (remember 3 mains and 550+ HP).   I'm going to review the rest of the rod bearings and talk to some of my expert crankshaft folks - I think we need some more clearance on the journals to handle the 3-main deflection/bending.
Here yah go:

As we discussed before, you need more clearance with 3 main cranks, both rods and mains...Some more than others depending on the girdle. You need more rod side clearance also. You have dry sump oiling and that is almost a requirement with big clearances. We run AT LEAST 100 lb oil pressure also.
Some of this stuff doesn't equate to modern engine practice but we are not dealing with a rigid block with 5 mains.
As one who was getting over one hp per cubic inch from a 315ci naturally aspirated gas flathead Ford in the early 50's and well over 400hp on straight nitro, I have been through all this stuff and fairly well know what works.