Slanting the small six.

['68falconohio]

Did a search on the forum and didn't see anything but mention of the chrysler slant-six.

Will the internals of the Ford six work properly if the engine were slanted, say ~30 degrees. The top of the block would be closer to the road side than the curb side of the buggy(U.S.). This would be in an effort to get the intake ports vertical and an extremely straight shot.

I see the following needing modification:
oil pickup
pan/sump
Clocking the bell housing, most probably. I don't know how the gears/fluid in a T5 would like the 30 degree rotation but I doubt they'd be happy. Cut, rotate, weld job. I presume.

Since the oil to the rockers is fed from a port in one of the pedestal bolts they should be fine. What about the lifters? and piston oiling/cooling?

Strange air pockets in the cooling system are lurking too.

Hood Clearance and Intake manifold are of little concern.

I'm just brainstorming/planning ahead. All comments greatly appreciated.

 

[Lazy JW]

..... the engine were slanted, say ~30 degrees. ......... an effort to get the intake ports vertical and an extremely straight shot......

Ummmmmm......... this is a lot of work that will NOT accomplish your stated goal. The critical dimension is the relationship between the port angle and the valve stem, also the centerline of the cylinder bore. These angles are literally "cast in iron", and can only be changed with great difficulty by grinding, cutting, welding, and grinding some more (a LOT more).

Even if the engine were lying flat on its side with the intake ports pointing straight up, the air/fuel mixture still has to turn the same corner to get into the cylinder.
Joe

 

['68falconohio]

Joe,
I understand that the most important turn in the port is at the valve stem. The 'turn' that can be completely eliminated is in the intake manifold. Making the intake manifold runner completely straight AND vertical should net gains in VE, right? Gravity, and less restriction. The choke point is the turn at the valve stem and a little more force pushing the charge past this point should net gains, right? 1 to 3 HP per cylinder??? I don't really know how much. Please let me know if my logic is flawed.

The critical dimension is the relationship between the port angle and the valve stem, also the centerline of the cylinder bore. These angles are literally "cast in iron", and can only be changed with great difficulty by grinding, cutting, welding, and grinding some more (a LOT more).

I'm doing what I can with a grinder to get the included angle between port and valve stem closer to zero degrees. I don't want to weld on the head, as that increases the chance of failure exponentially. But, I will, if I strike water.

Stephen

 

[rocklord]

My 64 Corvair has hydraulic lifters and valves laying on their sides without any problem.
The lifters do bleed done when the vehicle is sitting for a while, but they pump up.

 

[StrangeRanger]

You're still going to have issues because the carb(s) need to be more or less horizontal. Floats work strangely if at all when angled 30°

Why not just do an Aussie 2V head or one of Classic Inlines' heads with sidedraft carbs? Everything becomes a bolt on and you get straight flow from choke horn to valve stem. No extra work required.

 

['68falconohio]

You're still going to have issues because the carb(s) need to be more or less horizontal. Floats work strangely if at all when angled 30°

Yep, I'm making the manifolds so I'm not too concerned about this. 3 X 2bbls, carbs will be parallel to ground with venturi positioned above each runner in the manifold.

Why not just do an Aussie 2V head or one of Classic Inlines' heads with sidedraft carbs? Everything becomes a bolt on and you get straight flow from choke horn to valve stem. No extra work required.

I could run sidedrafts but 2100s are much cheaper/common and don't have all of the tiny tuning components that are expensive to keep on hand and necessary to get it tuned. My cylinder head/intake mani./headers combo will be cheaper than a CI or OZ 250V head. Won't have the same performance, but I'm trying to make it close.

I still wouldn't get a completely straight shot to the valve stem with the CI or Aussie 2V.
http://classicinlines.com/CylHeadCuts.asp

By mounting the six as a 'slant' and using my modded cylinder head, I can run down draft 2100s and not have the bend at the 'head to manifold' junction and the bend at the traditional 'manifold to carb' junction(down drafts).

Does this idea have merit? Is mounting the six at a slant worth HP/Tq?

 

[aussie7mains]

In a word NO, the gain would be so minimal that you wouldnt be able to measure it.
The modified log head is so bad compaired to all the other available alternatives that you just wouldnt bother. No amount of modifiying would get it near a 2v or crossflow.
As to laying the engine over I doubt you'd get it into the car that far over. Dont forget the old slant six was made to be like that and it isnt centred in the car, BTW even that has a way better head than the log.
All the trouble of re-jigging the sump, etc just wouldnt be worth it.
If you want a good head get the 2v style or better still sling that and get an OHC or even the DOHC six, both of which would wipe the floor with the log headed engine.
The stock AU OHC engine is good for 230bhp as a stocker. The DOHC is wvwn higher and the both 240ci.
All food for thought
A7M

 

[Lazy JW]

Tipping the engine on its side STILL DOES NOT IMPROVE the path through the ports. Any grinding, porting, modifying, whatever will work just as well upside down, left, right, backwards, reverse rotation

 

['68falconohio]

aussie7mains,
I understand how bad the log head is, even with the side of it milled flat. But, I think I can get it very close to the 250 2V head in performance, the x-flow and OHC heads are out of reach.

The Aussie stuff wasn't popping up like 'shrooms when I started this project and I want to know how far I can take the log head while not popping the budget I set.

Thank you for the ideas.

Joe,
I fail to understand how a downdraft port/runner will not work better than an updraft port/runner. Why does gravity not affect the air-fuel charge? Why isn't gravity another restriction that keeps the cylinder from filling easier?


Stephen

 

[wallaka]

The force of the vacuum created by the pistons is much greater than the force of gravity, and the suspension is actually in the intake a negligible amount of time, so gravity doesn't have time to accelerate the charge in any direction. Gravity is a very weak force compared to the pressure differential that makes the engine run, and can be safely ignored in any kind of calculation.

If it would make a difference, all racing engines would be this way. You do see some vertical intakes, but it is to give the charge a straight shot into the V of the engine. You'll never see an inline six like that. In fact, the slant 6 and all of BMW's sixes are in the opposite direction. Now, my BMW makes ~345 hp from 3.2 liters. They used every trick in the book to do this...why didn't they use an intake like you suggest?

 

['68falconohio]

wallaka,
I've never seen a S54 engine in person, but from all the pics on the intraweb it seems that they are slanted???
I'm not worried about hood clearance and I don't think BMW could sell many cars with a teardrop or cowl hood.
Thanks for info.

Stephen

 

[wallaka]

It's slanted, but the intake horizontal, the same as Chrysler's Slant 6, and at an acute angle to the head. Intake ports are on the side of the head, not the top.

What you are thinking of is logical, if gravity had any measurable effect on the intake charge. It does not, therefore it's a waste of time and effort to try and make any measurable power by making the intake vertical like you propose.

I'm not slamming you, just trying to keep you from wasting your time.

 

[Lazy JW]

Actually, when Chrysler slanted their six the went the WRONG way for improving breathing

That's because their main goal was lower hood lines by producing a shorter package. For improved breathing you want the intake ports RAISED, Chrysler then had to bend the induction path even further (they still ended up with better breathing than the Ford log head).
Joe

 

['68falconohio]

wallaka,
I don't feel like you or anyone else is slamming me on this. I asked a question, I'm getting answers.

With that said, if gravity's effect is nil.. What about the absence of all turns but the slight turn at the valve stem, that should still net gains over a tradl. vertical engine mounting.

Joe,

...For improved breathing you want the intake ports RAISED, Chrysler then had to bend the induction path even further (they still ended up with better breathing than the Ford log head).
Joe

This is what I'm proposing, eliminating all bends in the induction path.

Stephen

 

[Lazy JW]

......
This is what I'm proposing, eliminating all bends in the induction path.

Stephen

Then you are on the right path, and if laying the engine on its side helps to fit the package into your available space, go for it!

I like what you are doing and most definitely do NOT want to discourage your efforts; just be clear as to WHY you are doing it (gravity won't hurt your cause either).
Have fun,
Joe

 

['68falconohio]

Thanks Joe, I need to draw a picture of what I'm seeing with the side of the head milled off, or take a picture to show what's there and where my thoughts came from. I'm not hell-bent on tilting this thing over, but I am trying to milk it for all it has. A hair lower center of gravity, a few more HP, and 50HP of coolness are all there, along with all the problems hiding in the unknown.

But does anyone have information/thoughts on the oiling system? Cylinder oiling/cooling are an unknown to me.
I'm not against a solid lifter cam, in fact I'm leaning that way anyhow. Thanks for the info on your flat-6, rocklord.
Jacking a corner of the buggy up to get the air pockets out of the cooling system isn't a big deal to me, but I fear it won't be that easy to purge the air out.


Stephen

 

[gb500]

i read on the web that FORD australia made some 4 wheel drive XY falcon utes (rancheros) with the ford 250 6 fitted .

the website i read said that ford australia slanted the 250 by 30 deg to fit the front diff in .

http://phorums.com.au/showthread.php?t=254564

ford made about 450 odd of these.
i searched the web for an engine bay pic -cant find any at moment - but then my work has a photo blocker from some sites



will keep looking as i'd be interested to see how ford did it

 

['68falconohio]

Thanks gb500!
Finally found an engine pic.

http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c219/ ... 222674.jpg


I would slant it the other way! The way it was slanted from factory is just plain backwards. This also means that bellhousing is useless to me... though I doubt I could afford a 1 of 450 produced item.

Link to another thread about them:
http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthread ... ge=2&pp=25

EDIT: Sidenote: They had the steering, intake, exhaust, and starter(can't see it on the left side of engine) all on one side! Wow.

 

[Lazy JW]

Yup, that's the direction to allow raising the ports and still keep the carb level. Sure looks like tight quarters on that side though
Joe

 

['68falconohio]

At this time, my engine/head combo isn't going in my Falcon. Instead it will go in a MUCH lighter, 'fun' car. The vehicle will be built around the drivetrain. That's why I'm not concerned with hood clearance.

Stephen