Author Topic: Milwaukee Midget  (Read 3297078 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Milwaukee Midget

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
    • Milwaukee Midget Racing
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #1050 on: April 08, 2012, 01:23:09 AM »
http://www.ebay.com/itm/200739639193?item=200739639193&viewitem=&sspagename=ADME:B:EOIBSA:US:3160&vxp=mtr

As per a post by Andy Cooke in Great Britain, and the suggestion by FB, I sourced a set of standard ratio rockers for the Midget.  Come dyno day, we'll see if indeed I might have too much lift.

Picked up yet another set of spare pushrods in of the deal . . . let's hope I don't burn through all 24 in my arsenal . . .

Killer price for forged rockers - usually the stamped ones go for WAY more.
"Problems are almost always a sign of progress."  Harold Bettes
Well, I guess we're making a LOT of progress . . .  :roll:

Offline fordboy628

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2342
  • GONE FISHIN' . . .
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #1051 on: April 08, 2012, 08:36:21 AM »
Quote
Come dyno day, we'll see if indeed I might have too much lift.

Midget, et all,

I know this is hard to visualize without a graph or chart, but please read along and I can answer anyone's specific question in a later post.  In a phrase, "It is more complicated than that."   And what I mean by that is, that changes in the rocker ratio change more than just the lift curve.  Although 'overlifting' valves is related, the other change is to the EFFECTIVE duration of valve timing events.  Because higher ratio rocker arms increase the valve displacement at EVERY POINT on the valve displacement curve, they also have the NET effect of increasing the EFFECTIVE duration of ANY cam used.  Now we could argue all day about what net valve lift value constitues "EFFECTIVE" camshaft duration, but I'm going to get all passive/aggresive on you guys by saying: "The only valve event I care about on this engine @ this time is: 'EFFECTIVE' inlet valve closing".   And I reserve the right to change my opinion, at any time, without notice.

IF, substituting a lower ratio rocker arm assembly produces more torque at a given rpm, (& therefore more hp) the inference is that the valve events are too "long", ie, too much duration,
OR, the inlet valve 'effective' closing point is too late for the engine's combination of build geometry & gasflow,
OR, the engine does not have enough compression ratio to take advantage of 'long' duration valve events,
OR, a combination of the above,
AND/OR, other build geometry/gasflow factors I did not include, etc, etc, etc.
Also a factor here is that the smaller the displacement of an engine's cylinders (and this is different from TOTAL engine displacement) the more 'sensitive' it is to 'effective' valve timing events.

The risk of this test is that peak hp MAY be compromised by the gasflow loss at net total valve lift at, and around, full open intake/exhaust valve events.  However, an increase in peak torque, even coupled with a loss of peak hp, (subject to analysis) would typically indicate the engine needs 'less' cam duration and/or more compression ratio.  These types of tests are part of the engineering/tuning process.  I am expecting to see a rise in peak torque AND, a slight loss in peak hp, and analysis of the data generated will indicate what other changes (if any) should be made.  I am particularly interested in seeing what sort of BMEP this engine produces, regardless of rocker ratio.   See how simple that was........

Kind of like a chess game, lots of pieces, lots of moves, net result: It's complicated.  Lots of guys smarter than I am spend endless amounts of time debating about this stuff.  As for me I'm simple, all I care about is: net results.
 :cheers:
Fordboy


Science, NOT Magic . . . .

I used to be a people person.  But people changed that relationship.

"There is nothing permanent except change."    Heraclitus

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."     Albert Einstein

Offline Milwaukee Midget

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
    • Milwaukee Midget Racing
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #1052 on: April 08, 2012, 11:40:46 AM »
That's a lot of cam for a small engine, I ran a megadyne 310 in a 1293; below 4K it ran like 3 leads were unplugged and came on like a switch.  It revved plenty, but I'm pretty sure a milder cam would have made more power.  You might find you make more power with standard ratio rockers?  Anyway, good luck with it all, I'm looking forward to seeing the results :)
Andy

We share common doubts, and it's a thoughtful critique.  I questioned it, too, and it wasn't my first choice - the SPVP3-BK was.  My nature is to go conservative, and for precisely the reasons you stated - crummy idle, peaky output.  And I'm the first to admit that I'm in uncharted territory.  While the factory supported the 970 in the Mini for a couple of years, and produced a few Formula Junior engines to approximately this spec, they built less than 1000 970's, and there is virtually zero information on setting them up compared to the long stroke A-blocks. 

But Dave Anton at APT has built a few 970's, and after spelling out the objectives, the consensus was the SPVP5-BK was the best bet.

Here are the driving forces in my decision making -

The goal is 123 on the salt.  I'm running 23" tires and 4.22 gears - hardly a traditional LSR setup, but that puts me wanting peak power at ~7500 and 8000 RPM.

The valve sizes are virtually ideal for this combination, and I didn't have to offset the exhaust valves to do it.

I'll be running standard ratios in the transmission, so to fall back on the power band, I'll need to be able to rev past peak in 3rd.  The billet crank, Saenz rods and J&E pistons should be up to the task - this cam should go there.

If I were doing ANY OTHER type of racing, this combination wouldn't receive a second thought.  Part of the trouble I've had sussing out information is that when people talk Sprites/Midgets/Minis, they're almost always talking road racing, hill climbing or rally - poked and stroked up to 1500 cc's - and with good reason - that's where the racing history and engineering of this engine has been grounded for better than 50 years. 

With this application, my only concern is that the power band needs to occur on the east end of the tach, and that it can live there for a few minutes.

The die is cast, and I'll keep you posted!

Cheers, Mate!  :cheers: 







"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: 6663
    • Milwaukee Midget Racing
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #1053 on: April 08, 2012, 11:56:33 AM »
From a previous post by Andy -

That's a lot of cam for a small engine, I ran a megadyne 310 in a 1293; below 4K it ran like 3 leads were unplugged and came on like a switch.  It revved plenty, but I'm pretty sure a milder cam would have made more power.  You might find you make more power with standard ratio rockers?  Anyway, good luck with it all, I'm looking forward to seeing the results :)
Andy

We share common doubts, and it's a thoughtful critique.  I questioned it, too, and it wasn't my first choice - the SPVP3-BK was.  My nature is to go conservative, and for precisely the reasons you stated - crummy idle, peaky output.  And I'm the first to admit that I'm in uncharted territory. 

The cam recommended by Anton is the one in the engine right now, with the objective being max hp, and midrange and idle be damned.  What we'll have with this rocker ratio test is either a confirmation of the choice, or a direction to travel, although not necessarily a roadmap.

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

Offline fordboy628

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2342
  • GONE FISHIN' . . .
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #1054 on: April 08, 2012, 12:19:48 PM »
Quote
The cam recommended by Anton is the one in the engine right now, with the objective being max hp, and midrange and idle be damned.  What we'll have with this rocker ratio test is either a confirmation of the choice, or a direction to travel, although not necessarily a roadmap.

Midget,

Lest anyone think otherwise, I am in complete agreement.
Best regards &  :cheers:
Fordboy
Science, NOT Magic . . . .

I used to be a people person.  But people changed that relationship.

"There is nothing permanent except change."    Heraclitus

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."     Albert Einstein

Offline Geo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 563
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #1055 on: April 08, 2012, 12:56:33 PM »
Chris,

I am following this with great interest.  Don't really have any application, perhaps it's the discussion about the build and all the details to make it work. Looking forward to the dyno session.  Good luck!

Geo

Offline fordboy628

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2342
  • GONE FISHIN' . . .
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #1056 on: April 08, 2012, 07:12:45 PM »
Midget,

Some of the possibilities for gilmer belt water pump drive using .375" pitch x .50" width:







Still exploring possibilities on .200" pitch x .50" width.

Happy Easter,
 :cheers:
Fordboy

Science, NOT Magic . . . .

I used to be a people person.  But people changed that relationship.

"There is nothing permanent except change."    Heraclitus

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."     Albert Einstein

Offline Milwaukee Midget

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
    • Milwaukee Midget Racing
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #1057 on: April 08, 2012, 07:53:01 PM »
Chris,

I am following this with great interest.  Don't really have any application, perhaps it's the discussion about the build and all the details to make it work. Looking forward to the dyno session.  Good luck!

Geo

Well, it's been an education for me, and the only way I was ever going to know for sure was to just jump in and do it.

It's easier than creating a raised port Studebaker head, hey, Rich?  :wink:

Hey, Geo, where were you when we were arguing Whitworth a few weeks back?  :-D

For those keeping track, keep this in mind - the last few weeks have been discussion to dial in the engine/carb/ignition combo and move toward the Gilmer drive to redirect a pony or two to the wheels.  What still lies ahead is -

Notching the frame for the Gilmer drive
Installing the Air/Fuel gauge and sender
Fitting the head restraint
Installing the door net
Installing the window latches
Installing a second 5lb fire system

And about two dozen of the piddly things just to get this sucker past tech.

The engine is the fun work - it's the "work" work, listed above, that I've been really putting off.  :-D

Looking ahead, likely years down the road, I'm trying to hunt down a Leyland Marina Ute to slide this engine into and take a shot at I/MMP.

But not this week.
"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 #1058 on: April 08, 2012, 08:00:06 PM »
"The Marina has been described as one of the worst cars of all time, although it was one of the most popular cars in Britain throughout its production life, and compared to many of its competitors, such as the Lada 1300 range, however, a fair buy both new and secondhand."

- Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leyland_Marina



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

Offline fordboy628

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2342
  • GONE FISHIN' . . .
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #1059 on: April 08, 2012, 08:10:43 PM »
Midget,

In order to keep me interested, I am thinking the next project needs to be along the lines of a Humber "Super Snipe".  (Sorry, no picture available.)  Not just a regular Humber "Snipe" mind you, has to be a "Super".   And the "Super" engine would have to be someting like a Cosworth Ford 1.0L 4 valve Lucas injected 10,000rpm "screamer" maybe with blow-through turbo.   Not sure what class that car would be, however, am pretty sure how the builders of said project might be "classified".   Sure it would be a creative description............................. :roll:
 :cheers:
Fordboy
Science, NOT Magic . . . .

I used to be a people person.  But people changed that relationship.

"There is nothing permanent except change."    Heraclitus

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."     Albert Einstein

Offline Captthundarr

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1475
  • In line
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #1060 on: April 08, 2012, 08:14:45 PM »
Chris, been following this invigorated thread as well, remember I have a '63 spitfire waiting to see speed in the future.Seems like Mr. Fordboy got the info to spread :-)
I been busy finishing Amy's camaro for the end of the month. :cheers:

Frank.
Live,Laugh, Love /  Jack Scratch Racing /ECTA   
Amy Hartman-Driver, Frank Hartman-everthing else.
C/GALT 137.65 Ohio Mile check that 144.12 2013, AA/GALT 159.34 Ohio Mile 2014. B/GALT 180.577 RECORD 6/15

Offline Milwaukee Midget

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
    • Milwaukee Midget Racing
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #1061 on: April 08, 2012, 08:16:14 PM »
"The Marina has been described as one of the worst cars of all time, although it was one of the most popular cars in Britain throughout its production life, and compared to many of its competitors, such as the Lada 1300 range, however, a fair buy both new and secondhand."

- Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leyland_Marina



Mike

Yes - on all accounts.  

All the more reason to do it!  :cheers:

Midget,

In order to keep me interested, I am thinking the next project needs to be along the lines of a Humber "Super Snipe".  (Sorry, no picture available.)  Not just a regular Humber "Snipe" mind you, has to be a "Super".   And the "Super" engine would have to be someting like a Cosworth Ford 1.0L 4 valve Lucas injected 10,000rpm "screamer" maybe with blow-through turbo.   Not sure what class that car would be, however, am pretty sure how the builders of said project might be "classified".   Sure it would be a creative description............................. :roll:
 :cheers:
Fordboy

I'll bring you a rule book, and I suspect you'll figure out what that won't work -

BUT -

A Cosworth belly tank, perhaps?  :roll:

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

Offline fordboy628

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2342
  • GONE FISHIN' . . .
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #1062 on: April 08, 2012, 08:20:56 PM »
On second thought, maybe some sort of Ford powered Turner would be a sleeper in some class.  Some came equipped with 1500 Fords, so any Ford engine derivative would be a simple conversion..............

OR, a small block chevy stuffed in the back of a late model Chevy Corvair "Corsa" or Yenko "Stinger"............

Ugh oh, I can feel my brain starting to swell........

F/B
Science, NOT Magic . . . .

I used to be a people person.  But people changed that relationship.

"There is nothing permanent except change."    Heraclitus

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."     Albert Einstein

Offline fordboy628

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2342
  • GONE FISHIN' . . .
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #1063 on: April 08, 2012, 08:26:14 PM »
Capt thundarr,

Quote
Chris, been following this invigorated thread as well, remember I have a '63 spitfire waiting to see speed in the future.Seems like Mr. Fordboy got the info to spread.

Is that Spitfire an 1147 or the 1500?  Lots of experience with G-prod 1147's

Best,
F/B
Science, NOT Magic . . . .

I used to be a people person.  But people changed that relationship.

"There is nothing permanent except change."    Heraclitus

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."     Albert Einstein

Offline fordboy628

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2342
  • GONE FISHIN' . . .
Re: Milwaukee Midget
« Reply #1064 on: April 08, 2012, 08:28:18 PM »
Quote
A Cosworth belly tank, perhaps?  

Start with a Ralt chassis . . .

Where do I sign up??  Even willing to travel to Utah.........   How big can we punch out the engine???  Oh boy, oh boy, I see 2.3 Cossie YB TURBO...............

F/B
« Last Edit: April 08, 2012, 08:32:10 PM by fordboy628 »
Science, NOT Magic . . . .

I used to be a people person.  But people changed that relationship.

"There is nothing permanent except change."    Heraclitus

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."     Albert Einstein