Milwaukee Midget

[Rex Schimmer]

Eric,
Your oil test reports are interesting and I agree with almost every thing they said except the part about no contamination. I will guarantee you that your oil has contamination in it, you would be very surprised the amount of contamination that is in new oil much less oil that has been ran hard in a race engine. They test that was done was a spectrometer test which identifies the elements that are in the oil, many of the elements that they show may be part of the oil's additive package. They obviously did not run the oil through a .5 micron test patch to be able to actually see, under a microscope, the particulate contamination that is present in the oil sample.  No big deal but it will actually show you more information about your engines condition than a spectrometer test.

It is very interesting to see the lifter track on the cam shaft, assuming that the width of the track is proportional to the pressure of the lifter on the cam lobe it appears that the cam almost "lofts" the lifter at the cam nose. Just a comment and interesting.

Regarding adding a case vacuum pump to a non dry sumpted engine I would highly recommend not to do it. The engine's oil pump inlet pressure is dependent on the depth of the oil above it and the case pressure in the engine to provide it with enough pressure to not cavitate. When you reduce the case pressure with a vacuum pump you reduce the oil pump inlet pressure by a like amount and you will cause the pump to cavitate and then you will find out the lubrication properties of air. (Hint: air is not a good lubricant) Drag race guys get away with it because they run really deep pans and the engine only runs under load for a few seconds not minutes at WFO like a Bonneville engine.

Rex

[fordboy628]

Well - this just in from Blackstone Oil Testing Service -

CHRIS:  If you're using leaded fuel, that might explain most of the lead. Lead can also be a bearing metal
though, we won't know what's a normal level for your MG until we have trends to look at. The universal
averages show typical wear for this engine type after about 2,000 miles on the oil, but we're not sure how
that equates to hours in this case. Plus, this engine is still relatively new, so it's likely that some of the
aluminum, iron, copper, lead, and silicon are from wear-in. Low insolubles shows effective oil filtration, and
no contamination was found.    This is good news.

There's a full list of numbers, all of which look good, with the exception of one -

Sodium  - 411  Universal average - 24

Wonder where that came from . . .  

Feel free to download the attachment.  This is the kind of information Blackstone provides.  It's $25.00.

DUH!!!

The oil is doing its' job.   It's hard to know who came from where with all the additives/assembly lube/etc used to keep "Franken-Grenade" ALIVE . . . . . .
Re: Race engine oil/additives are just consumables and part of the cost of doing business.    Same for filters/etc.

Very cost effective analysis, although a more thorough one would be pricey.

Engine parts seem to be in a happy place, including cam/lifters/valve springs/etc.   The trick now, is to keep it that way . . . . . . . . . . .
More comments on the parts photos later.   In a big push to finish a "project for the "Red Queen" . . . . . . . . .
 
Fordboy

[Milwaukee Midget]

Not worth a lot but electric water pump?

Wisdonm has been a champion of this idea from the beginning.  Haven't ruled it out, but man, that super- duper underdrive pump set-up Fordboy put together clearly slowed up the pump and is drawing a lot less power than the old set-up.  I'm actually having difficulty getting the engine above 180 - it's running super cool - at least as far as the water temp is concerned.

The rule of thumb with these is about 200 degrees gets you best power.

Eric,

Rex, I didn't know you've heard me play guitar.  Usually, it's pronounce, "ear ache", but my mom calls me Chris. 

They test that was done was a spectrometer test which identifies the elements that are in the oil, many of the elements that they show may be part of the oil's additive package.

Rex

That's precisely right.  There's about a cup of Rislone 3x zinc additive in addition to the Brad Penn racing oil.  Those numbers were about what I expected.

It is very interesting to see the lifter track on the cam shaft, assuming that the width of the track is proportional to the pressure of the lifter on the cam lobe it appears that the cam almost "lofts" the lifter at the cam nose. Just a comment and interesting.

We are right at the limits of what will work with the miniscule lifters and acceleration rates.  It's been a huge challenge up until this point.  I checked valves twice at Speedweek - I had one open up about .001 - the new valve that we replaced after the chassis dyno fiasco last September.  Everything else stayed put, and the cam is in much better shape than after Maxton and the first chassis dyno session -



It's all about compromises - I'm not going to lose the good in search of the perfect.

[JoshH]

I wonder if it would be useful to have them analyze some fresh oil? This way you'd have a better understanding of how the chemistry changed by overlaying the before and after.

[Milwaukee Midget]

I wonder if it would be useful to have them analyze some fresh oil? This way you'd have a better understanding of how the chemistry changed by overlaying the before and after.

A baseline like that would be nice, but I'm not seeing anything so far out of whack as to cause any concern.  I'm going to see if I can find the ingredient list of the Rislone, and see if I can tick off a few of the outliers.  Bill's suggestion of going to a lighter oil is one I'm considering, which will likely give different numbers, but after talking to Fordboy earlier today, I'm thinking the Grenade is healthy.

Oil test numbers don't look bad. I dig that kind of data!

Me too, Trent.  Rex points out it's not absolute, but this kind of information is still good data to have and to track.  It's a tool some guys don't concern themselves with.  But I've gone through the embarrassment of not knowing and guessing, and just barely got by with it.  Comparing this last Speedweek to World of Speed in 2010 and Maxton in 2011, I'm much more comfortable concentrating on making it go faster than simply trying to make it go.

[Jack Gifford]

... Is anyone aware of a similar tool...

Yeah, it's called a milling machine! Okay- it's not 'similar'- but for doing the traditional labyrinth-type O-ring deal (with receiver grooves, as Peter Jack explained), you don't have a choice.

[Milwaukee Midget]

... Is anyone aware of a similar tool...

Yeah, it's called a milling machine!

Yeah, okay, okay. 

I did talk to Mel at C&S about this last year.  They've done great work for me, but he was a little concerned about this.

It's a good shop, but he's not comfortable doing this operation.  While I've pushed him a bit on a few things - the head milling in particular - if he's not comfy making the cuts, I don't want him doing it.  There is no room for error in cutting anything else on this head.  When a guy who refurbishes Duesenberg heads is uncomfortable with a proposed operation, I need to give considerable thought to moving forward.

What I liked about the Isky cutter is that it appears to only cut into the block.  Is that only an appearance, or is that the case with this cutter?  If that is the case, I doubt Mel would have an objection of duplicating the operation with a mill, but I don't see where it would be as effective as receiver grooves in the head as well as in the block.

I just need to make myself more aware of the operation before I can make a decision.

PJ, tell me more . . .   

[Crackerman]

cutting an o-ring in just one side of the gasket is fine. it doesnt necessarily need a reciever groove, as long as the wire pinches the gasket on the back side of the fire ring in the gasket. typically guys do the head, as it is removeable. the groove o matic makes it easy to do the block. and can be done in car.

[fordboy628]

... Is anyone aware of a similar tool...

Yeah, it's called a milling machine!

Yeah, okay, okay. 

I did talk to Mel at C&S about this last year.  They've done great work for me, but he was a little concerned about this.

It's a good shop, but he's not comfortable doing this operation.  While I've pushed him a bit on a few things - the head milling in particular - if he's not comfy making the cuts, I don't want him doing it.  There is no room for error in cutting anything else on this head.  When a guy who refurbishes Duesenberg heads is uncomfortable with a proposed operation, I need to give considerable thought to moving forward.

What I liked about the Isky cutter is that it appears to only cut into the block.  Is that only an appearance, or is that the case with this cutter?  If that is the case, I doubt Mel would have an objection of duplicating the operation with a mill, but I don't see where it would be as effective as receiver grooves in the head as well as in the block.

I just need to make myself more aware of the operation before I can make a decision.

PJ, tell me more . . .   

Midget,

The system I came up with while @ P** is as follows:

Hardened piano wire (guitar wire if you prefer . . . . . . ) is inserted in grooves cut in the block only.   (An ARP head stud kit is required with this setup, which you are  already using.)   This REQUIRES the use of a "Cooper's" copper composite head gasket, as it is the only gasket that I am aware of that has the correct dimensions.    THIS GASKET MAY NO LONGER BE AVAILABLE, although I have one or two left in my bits.   I don't think it is wise to modify your setup to use an obsolete part and hope to find NOS parts.    (I still strongly advise against doing "stupid sh**".)    This setup has the benefit of:  No modifications to the head are necessary.   (KISS principal . . . . . . . .)

I think Mini-Maven has found a replacement "Cooper's" gasket that works with this setup.   I also have one of his blocks with the o-ringee dings installed.    You can inspect it when you dip below the Cheddar Curtain . . . . . . .    You may want to give him a call.

If this is unworkable for your situation, then I would recommend "the Full Monty",  ie: solid copper head gasket combined with hardened O-rings in the block and receiver grooves in the head, as used in Top Fuel drag engines.    I am concerned about machining more out of the head however.     The head, IMHO, is "MAXED OUT", and there is some risk with further machining.    I am of the opinion, however, that the MLS gaskets are at their limit, and they cannot be modified for the cooling changes I have recommended.      The hot spot between cylinders #2 & #3 in your photo, is why I started with the block/head/gasket modifications years ago . . . . . . .     Now that the "Grenade" makes "Big Boy Horsepower" (and the resultant cylinder heat . . . . ) you need to take some further steps to insure the head gasket doesn't fail . . . . . . .    (Thanks BMC, for all "3" of those head studs per cylinder . . . . . .  )

Keep in mind that pushing the C/Ratio further up, (which will be necessary to wring more Shetland Ponies from this donk) is only going to stess the head gasket situation even more . . . . . . .

BTW, you can re-invent the wheel if you want, but I've already been down this road . . . . . . .  the Camino de las Yungas.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXLxszv9eCM

It's the law of: Diminishing returns and Increasing costs . . . . . . .      I'm pretty sure that law was not postulated by Newton, Einstein or even Stephen Hawking . . . . .     I'm pretty sure it was: Murphy . . . . . . .
 
Fordboy

[Ron Gibson]

You know what Murphy's wife's law is??    "MURPHY IS AN OPTIMIST"

Ron

[jacksoni]

You know what Murphy's wife's law is??    "MURPHY IS AN OPTIMIST"

Ron

That works, my sources say that is "O'Tool's commentary on Murphy's law". Don't know who O'Tool was.
There are additional:
The unspeakable law: As soon as you mention something... if it's good, it goes away; if it's bad, it happens.
Howe's law: Every man has a scheme that will not work.
Etorre's observation: The other line moves faster.
Law of Selective gravity: an object will fall so as to do the most damage.
Jenning's corollary: The chance of the bread falling buttered side down is directly proportional to the cost of the carpet.
Gordon's first law: If a research project is not worth doing at all, it is not worth doing well.
etc

[Milwaukee Midget]

You know what Murphy's wife's law is??    "MURPHY IS AN OPTIMIST"

Ron

You rarely see that level of spousal loyalty these days.  

I'd say given Murphy's track record, anyone who would remain married to him takes their vows of "for better or worse" pretty darned seriously.

To Mrs. Murphy!      

Now that the "Grenade" makes "Big Boy Horsepower" (and the resultant cylinder heat . . . . ) you need to take some further steps to insure the head gasket doesn't fail . . . . . . .    (Thanks BMC, for all "3" of those head studs per cylinder . . . . . .  )

A thought - would a machined steel girdle incorporating the rocker shaft stands provide us the opportunity for more clamping pressure and better clamping load distribution?

Essentially, the head and the gasket would be sandwiched between the girdle and the block.

 

I keep thinking of the work that the Flat Cad boys have been doing to keep that block alive.

Or is this an application of Howe's Law . . .

Howe's law: Every man has a scheme that will not work.

 

[Peter Jack]

That's why I said "good" machine shop and I'm not criticizing yours who at least knows when to be cautious. Ours were done by Les Davenport (you may recognize the name) on a big block Chev. He'd done several so he wasn't experimenting with ours. This was a long time ago, in the mid seventies.

I'd also take into consideration Mark's concern about the head being a little on the thin side already. Other alternatives may be better.

Pete

[fordboy628]

You know what Murphy's wife's law is??    "MURPHY IS AN OPTIMIST"

Ron

You rarely see that level of spousal loyalty these days. 

I'd say given Murphy's track record, anyone who would remain married to him takes their vows of "for better or worse" pretty darned seriously.

To Mrs. Murphy!      

Now that the "Grenade" makes "Big Boy Horsepower" (and the resultant cylinder heat . . . . ) you need to take some further steps to insure the head gasket doesn't fail . . . . . . .    (Thanks BMC, for all "3" of those head studs per cylinder . . . . . .  )

A thought - would a machined steel girdle incorporating the rocker shaft stands provide us the opportunity for more clamping pressure and better clamping load distribution?

Essentially, the head and the gasket would be sandwiched between the girdle and the block.

 

I keep thinking of the work that the Flat Cad boys have been doing to keep that block alive.

Or is this an application of Howe's Law . . .

Howe's law: Every man has a scheme that will not work.

 

Midget,

Before I would endorse going the "head girdle" route to make 100/105/perhaps as high as 108 bhp/litre; I would vote to begin a K-series engine development program.   The DOHC K-series is going to make 115/125 bhp/litre right off the start, and has the potential to make 135/140 bhp/litre on carbs.   Better numbers could be had with EFI.

Call Mini-Maven.  He knows of a guy (an engineer . . . . . ) who runs a "head girdle" setup of his own design, in combination with a valve train/valve spring setup of his own design . . . . . . . .   Oh, did I mention, the guy is slower than pig poop? . . . . . . nice machining though . . . . . . . . .

BTW, you can re-invent the wheel if you want, but I've already been down this road . . . . . . .  the Camino de las Yungas.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXLxszv9eCM

It's the law of: Diminishing returns and Increasing costs . . . . . . .      I'm pretty sure that law was not postulated by Newton, Einstein or even Stephen Hawking . . . . .     I'm pretty sure it was: Murphy . . . . . . .
 
Fordboy

On second thought, I'm going to take the responsibility of preventing you from re-inventing the wheel, at least Briddish ones fabricated from stone and or steel. . . . .   Now if you want to re-invent something fabricated from titanium/carbon fiber/unobtanium/DOHC's/etc/etc/etc, it might prove useful to analyse the merits of the concept prior to check writing.   IMHO.

Remember waaaay back, when I first got into this soup?    I believe the #1 rule I suggested at the time was:  Stop doing stupid sh**.    Or, unproven sh**.    Unless, you win Lotto big.   Then you can afford to do what you want . . . . . .     Just tryin' to keep you in Beerhaven Vs Australia my friend.
 
Fordboy   

[jacksoni]

Fordboy said: "Midget,

Before I would endorse going the "head girdle" route to make 100/105/perhaps as high as 108 bhp/litre; I would vote to begin a K-series engine development program.   The DOHC K-series is going to make 115/125 bhp/litre right off the start, and has the potential to make 135/140 bhp/litre on carbs.   Better numbers could be had with EFI."

This might run afoul of rule book inconsistencies/interpretation. A basic requirement for "Production" class cars is: "cylinder heads are limited to original number of valves and port configuration." However, in GT as you know, engine swaps (same mfg) are allowed. Considering prior events where interpretations varied ( I am thinking Salt Cat?) this conflict could arise. I don't know how it would play out. It may be that the GT swap rule might take precedence in which case, have at it but it would be worth asking someone who can give a real ruling before going farther down that road.