? from a new guy

[Anonymous]

#1) have a line on an engine need to know if it's a 200 or 170. I hope it's a 170. #'s on side of block are
C6DE
6015-A
Is this a 200 or 170?

#2) As I am going to be building an all out 170 for HA/GR (see my intro) I'll be leaving the line at 3500 to 4000 RPM. So I thought I'd run a homemade Tri Power with 3 small (170 or 180cfm) Holley 1940 carbs. I thought I might dig up a few Log carb mounts from Bad Heads and have one welded on each end of the log. I thought that buy cutting out the carb mount then machine it and the ends of the head they could be Welded (brazed) to the head to make a Tri Power setup. I'd like to use the 500CFM or 350cfm Holly 2barrel but it's not allowed in the class.
#3) Has anyone ever built a 170 stroker using the 200 crank? I know the 250 crank will not fit, but the 200 crank would pick me up about 15" or about a 185CID engine. The engine will be Hard Blocked up to about 2" from the top. That way only the top of the motor and the head will being cooled. It will also increase the strength of the engine and cut down on blowby.
#4) I was reading about the Aussi bellhousing adapter they built for the early engines. Will this bolt to an American 170 and allow the use of a 289/302 Bellhousing? If not does anyone make an adapter so you can run a 289/302 Bellhousing on a 170? I need to be able to run a Shatershield for the HA/GR class and would like to run a small block Ford one.

 

[Abandoned67]

I beleive you can tell by the number of freeze plugs on the side, although that might only work for telling the diference between a 200 and 250.

 

[wallaka]

Count the freeze plugs under the exhaust manifold. Five means it's a 200, 3 means it's a 170. Not many other visible differences until you pull the oilpan. A 170 has four main bearings whilst a 200 has seven.

A 200 crank won't work for the above reason. Hmm. Well it's possible but not likely. If the places where the bearings sit was open, it would work.

 

[Anonymous]

Thought the 170 had the same # of mains as the 200 after 1966?

 

[Mercury Mike]

I heard Addo talking about 188 strokers for the 170... =P And yeah, count your freeze plugs. =)

 

[wallaka]

Thought the 170 had the same # of mains as the 200 after 1966?

Hmmm...forgot about that. I heard that too but haven't confirmed it. The chart here says it's a 200 but there's no info on 170 casting numbers. They wouldn't be the same.

Does anybody know if the later 170 bellhousings were double drilled or did they stay with the earlier 4 bolt pattern?

 

[shmoozo]

I'm not an expert on any of this, but I have a spreadsheet set up to do the bore-stroke-displacement math and a willingness to toss out ideas even knowing that some of them will prove to be foolish or downright stupid. Consider the following thoughts in light of that disclaimer.



I wonder if it would be possible to destroke a 250 (which already has the proper bellhousing pattern) down to a displacement he could use in this class. It would be slightly heavier than the 170 or 200 because of its taller deck height, but it would have the larger bore of the larger displacement sixes (3.68 used in the 200 and 250 as opposed to the 3.50 used in the 170 and 144) and if I am not mistaken no adapter would be needed to fit a small block Ford V8 shattershield.

If he could get a crank ground with a stroke of 2.90 his displacement would end up at a tick over 185 cubic inches using the stock bore, a tick over 188 cubic inches with a 0.030 overbore and a tick over 191 cubic inches with a 0.060 overbore (just to toss out some numbers). Note that I'm not suggesting a 0.060 overbore would be a good idea, mind you, just letting him know what happens to the displacement if he has to clean up the bores a bit. (This can be important in some racing classes.)

Assuming a 0.030 overbore to clean up the bores of an old engine to prepare it for new pistons, the bore and stroke would be 3.710x2.900 which looks to me like it might be a fairly good combination for drag racing.

The same general thing could be done with a 200, of course, and that would create a slightly lighter engine which wasn't quite as tall, but that would require a custom shattershield or perhaps a bell housing adapter (if one is allowed in this class) and I don't know if one even exists. The real trick here seems to center on the issue of displacement. If an engine displacing 250 or even 200 cubic inches is too big for the class, he'll either have to destroke one of those engines or find a way to sleeve down the bores a little to reduce the displacement.

Destroking the engine requires a custom ground crankshaft and perhaps some custom rods and/or pistons though it's possible that some combination of stock rods out of one engine and stock pistons out of another could work. (Somebody more familiar with this sort of thing might have some more useful input on that subject.)

Sleeving down the bores may raise concerns related to valves hitting the cylinder walls, though using a 170's head on a 200 which has been sleeved down to 3.50 inch bore might be a solution to that concern (if that could be done).

On the other hand if a 200 or even a 250 head would work on a 200 block sleeved down to a 3.50 bore (which was, after all, the standard bore for the 144s and 170s) then that might not be a problem at all. Displacement for a 200 sleeved down to a 3.5 inch bore and using a 200's stock 3.126 inch stroke crank would be a tick under 180.5 cubic inches.

Clearly there are possibilities here, but the question of whether or not any of the solutions are actually viable is one I cannot answer. The racing class in which he wishes to run may have rules which would make some (or all) of these solutions invalid, and there's also the question of cost. Custom ground cranks, sleeved down bores, custom shattershields, custom pistons and custom rods can get expensive, to say the least.

Oh, well ... I warned you that these were going to be just some random, stupid thoughts.

Viva el Whoopie!

 

[CZLN6]

Howdy back DT and All:

That casting numbers for a '66 engine casting used with both 170s and 200 engines. IF it has 3 freeze plugs under the exhaust it is either a 144 or a 170. Since the 144 only uses the C0DE casting code a C6xx will either be a 200 or a 170. IF it has 5 freeze plugs it is a 200.

Your approach to a 3 x 1 setup will be time and labor intensive since the carb flanges set in the log- not on top of it.. If you must DIY it will be quicker and easier to make the end carb mounts from some exhaust tubing and flanges.

Adios, David

 

[shmoozo]

Oops ... I just read his intro (linked HERE) and I see that virtually everything I posted above is completely irrelevant given his need to run a 170 block. Looks like I should have read that first.



Okay, so he needs a 170 block, which has, what, 4 main bearings(?), and he's looking to perhaps stroke it a little to get more displacement.

If a 200 crank can't be made to fit he's looking at either using a custom ground crank or sticking with the stock displacement, right?

Also, if I'm not mistaken he'll need either a shattershield to fit a 170 block (perhaps a custom one since I don't know if anybody makes one to fit that bell housing pattern) or a bell housing adapter (which might also turn out to be a custom one) to mount a standard small block Ford V8 shattershield.

It may be that Lakewood can provide a "specialty bellhousing" which has been custom built to work in this application. Their catalog seems to indicate they can make one to fit almost anything.

See page 7 (9 of 38 in the pdf file) of the 2006 Lakewood Performance Safety and Suspension Products catalog for more details about that. Yes, that blue text is a link to the pdf file of the catalog I found on their web site.



Here's how they describe their "specialty bellhousing" products:

Lakewood Specialty Bellhousings are designed with the serious competitor in mind. They are made in configurations to fit dragsters, funny cars, pro stock, truck and tractor pullers, etc. These bellhousings are stocked in unfinished form, and are individually machined and drilled to meet your requirements. This way, almost any engine, transmission and clutch combination can be accommodated. These bellhousings are available with or without provisions for a starter, and several clutch linkage options are offered. Lakewood Specialty Bellhousings can be built to meet S.F.I. Specs 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3, and are approved by all major sanctioning bodies. These are the bellhousings that allow you to use the optional inspection cover for fast, simple, clutch adjustments between rounds.
NOTE: THESE BELLHOUSINGS ARE AVAILABLE BY SPECIAL ORDER ONLY.
Due to the special nature of these bellhousings, they are available on a special order basis only. You will need to know the following information:
application, engine make, transmission style, clutch type, and clutch linkage requirements. Please call our Technical Service Dept. at 216.688.8300 for ordering information, part numbers and pricing.

Oh, by the way, I also found a a link to a pdf version of their Specialty Bellhousing Order Form. Click HERE for that. It'll give you a good idea of just what sort of things they need to know to make you a custom safety bellhousing.

My guess is that a custom bellhousing will be costly, but it may be the only available option in a case like this.

Disclaimer: I don't work for Lakewood and have no connection with the company whatsoever, but I do know they have been a fixture in the racing world for decades. They are currently a part of the Mr Gasket family of companies if that tells you anything.

Oh, hey, I think I found a web page with info on the type of racing he's planning to do. That looks like some serious fun! Guys, you have GOT to check this thing out!

HA/GR Drag Racing

By the way, the image on that page is of a vary famous dragster from the early era of drag racing. It may look hideous and crude to our eyes, but back in the day that thing was a serious competitor.

Click around on that web site for a few more images of more current vehicles. (at least I think they are more current ... )

 

[CZLN6]

Howdy All:

I just looked up HA/GD! What fun!!

There were 4 main bearing 200s in '64 & '64 Fairlanes. I seem to recall a few in the '64 1/2 mustangs too. That may be an option for a longer stroke.

The other way to increase displacement that crossed my mind is to off-set grind the rod journals to gain maybe .040" in stroke increase.

I saw no prohibition of using a later stock-type log head for bigger valves and intake tract volume.

Adios, David

 

[shmoozo]

I saw no prohibition of using a later stock-type log head for bigger valves and intake tract volume.

Actually, the wording doesn't seem to prohibit the use of an Aussie 2V head (which is a factory iron head, after all), though it requires old style carbs, so some ingenuity might be needed on the intake side if a fellow wanted to use one.

Then again that might not be in keeping with the spirit of the class.

 

[addo]

Yes, triple SU HS-6s would be ideal carbing for this class. Probably on a 2V head.

The only potential issue with mix and match crank/block combos, is rod length, as mentioned.

Rod length for the 170 and 200 I have listed as 4.715 - this is the shortest rod by a bit, of any of the sixes. So fitting the 200's crank into the 170's block will probably see you looking for a +40 thou piston with 90 thou or so less in crown height.

Overall, sounds like a decent contest.

Cheers, Adam.

 

[wallaka]

Also, maybe this is against the spirit of the rules. If the 170 and 200 have the same casting codes, wouldn't they technically be the same engine? So maybe it wouldn't matter.