small six cylinder head performance valve options

A

autoX65

Well-known member
I am in the process of building yet another inline six head for the small 144-250 inline six.

i am aware about the chevy valve options but they have such thick stems and the guide boss has to be reamed a bunch for that. i know classic in-lines has the stainless steel valves i have used before with good success.

how about any Australian companies for the ford six Australian distributors. does any one know any other valve option for the small six other then having some custom made?

Im also willing to buy a set if anyone has some of the classic inlines stainless steel valves they are willing to sell either used or new i will pay top dollar pm me.
 
To restrict a small Ford I6 to less than 490 lift limits peak power to about 285 hp on a 200 engine, and about 315 hp on a well owrked 250. Primarily, its the short production based valve height and lack of FE stlye 1.73:1 lifters that messes up the power apsirations.


The PRIMARY problem is that Ford US developed the I6 off FE 332-428 production engineering, and that they never upgraded to a US made performance version of the small six. Ford has a bucket list of what you need valve wise. (See below).There is a gap in the Le mans quality engineering that was done on the best 289 and 427 engines in the mid 60's.


The stock ~4.73-4.78 tall valves have the same problem early 260/289 engines had, the valvequides are too small for reliabilty and cost, and are too short for more than 470 to 490 thou lift. That's why in 1971, the Aussies

FIRSTLY went up to the next size up on valve guides on all types of their 200/250 engines. Same as the X-flow 200/250 and Cleveland/335/Lima 385 engines. Just like the HP 289 did in the early 60's.

SECONDLY, when raced in speedway at 6500 rpm, the stock 470 maximum valve lift that you can make with the stock vaVle height lookes way too little. The solid lifter FE engines ran 1.73:1 rocker ratios, and tall 5.43" valves, often Sodium cooled on exhaust.

The solution Australians that raced them was to either use a low lift long duration cam (XU1 Torana HX spec, but remastered for the SBF valve lifter. The target valve length to opt for was an oversize version of the last 1973 single cam 280E valves in 5.16" tall size. You'd then raise the rocker shaft pedastools 380 thou,use longer custom pushrods. Later on , they would run a proper Aussie Yella Terra 1.75/1.5" 202 Holden Torana 3300 L6 XU1 to 253/308 Holden V8 valve.

On tiple carb Super Sedan Holden sixes, they'd concentric broach the spring perches down 265 thou, and use slightly taller Yella Terra roller rocker gear to use 283/307 Chev valve springs. Sadly, the Ford small six won't take a spring perch machine to get a taller valve, there isn't enogh cast iron uner the pockets. On the Ford non cross flow I6, they would use the same Yella Terra Holden valves, and shim upthe rocker pedastools so they could get enough lift.

The Aussie engine builders were smart. Anything less than a 280 degree 30/70 at lash cam is seen as a waste of a good cam grind. Anthing less tha 470 thou is seen as a waste of good valve lift. The X-flows all ran 1.73:1 rocker ratios, thick guides, and tall valves to allow you to go for lifts way over 550 thou if you want. That's why a 250 X-flow will make 365 hp with just a 4-bbl 650 cfm carb.
 
sorry for the late reply I just have to keep reading your post over and over ...good info and as far as I know the guides are pretty thick in my eyes on the ford six its just the valves stems that are such a small diameter.

I have seen chevy valves cut to size and they have the right stem but then you have to ream the guides out alot and thats when the guides and guide boss get real thin! such a toss up having the thicker chevy valves (custom cut but recently I found some online with the right height) vs leaving the guides thick and small ford valve stem sizes.

thats about all I have heard of as far as custom valves go on the ford six US.

good points about max lift on the ford head. is there any way around that or are we stuck with .470" max cam lift? ive got a head Im picking up tomorrow just standard stock valves with Clifford performance springs with dampeners and Clifford retainers and locks. Just a street build but do have my performance US head build being built now as well so that one I Am planning to run naturally aspirated and will need a new camshaft design for so what Should I look into on this for a autolite 600cfm .

Id like to at least get the 280 degree duration range but how hi of lift can I go? see my pro fab build thread on it just updated last night. it will be a plenum with tunned runners and custom velocity stacks inside the plenum so what lift range and lobe center should I look for? will be running that head on a 250ci block with autolite 600cfm, custom intake and custom built c4 transmission with lots of custom oil pump and lubrication mods in it along wtih a custom valve body by dana sniff racing with a 1800rpm stall converter. I may go into a higher stall converter for this like even 2800+ range.

anything else I should know about valve and valve machine work that I can do to the US ford six head?
 
Two options.

1. The Aussies way....just deep dished the piston to something like 12 to 15.5 cc for the two compression ratios of the 250 and 200 in 1971. Then they ended up with 27.9 cc in the last canted valve x-flows in 1992. They decided to get a 250 specific piston, and keep the the 200 pistons US style. Ford USA had there reasons, but a 1969 US 250 and a 1971 Aussie 250 were both rated at 155 hp gross, but the US one had the bad 103-120 thou piston lip from a 9.469" deck with a 6 cc 200 piston, and the Aussie one had a 9.38" block deck with a 12 cc piston.

2. In US 250's, Ak Miller was careful to allow for planing the block back 103 to 120 thou, and then used what were commonly available Jahns forged pistons. In high lift applications, they used to make that special forged piston fly-cut using the final valve diameter plus 60 thou as a mandrel. The Jahns forged piston couldn't take too much, as it was a thin forging, but it allowed a few hundreths extra lift.

That's what the high compression flat top 4V 335 series and Boss 302 Windsor engines had done too, a big relief cut.

So too did the four eye brow high compression HP 289 engines.

Its sad that the FE design didn't go all the way to into the little six...it stopped short of having the FE rocker arm ratio, but it still has the normal FE design faults of the un-supported exhaust valves on the other wise pretty good rocker shaft. The team that crash built the engine did so in just 18 months, so a lot of the FE stuff just wasn't used. But its got FE fingerprints on everything else asside from the stupid carb and intake design. You could imagine the FE guys thinking of turning the old log head into a non handed V12 if they'd been asked.... :unsure: the intake port angles are kinda like the FE.


Going to an FE rocker shaft diameter, and reworking the rockers to suit the industry standard work-arounds FE engine builders have done for the last 57 years since that standout engine came in to being is the answer.

Not the early 1973 280 and 280e, which were not twin cam, but the twin Cam Mercedes Benz thin 280E valves (after the 1982 revsions where they took 'em down to a 9 mm quides from the 11 mm monsters from 1974 to 1982 sodium cooled items) are designed to run a lash cap, and its possiable to raise it to a 5.16" working height to get some serious Cleveland and FE type lift.

I also favour the very restrictive FE 427 style restrictive sodium cooled 392 International style valve guide (about 11 mm or 0.433, about the same as some of the Lycoming plane engine valve guides) are fine to use if you are running a split duration Cobra Jet/Super Cobra jet cam profile.

Ford used split pattern cams, they new what they were doing, and every FE feature should be transposed to a small six to get the lift, duration, and exhaust flow dynamics like its bigger brother.

Its early days, but 490 thou isn't enough lift for a 250...it needs to be right up with the Cross flow 250 sixes, and power will skyrocket.

All the US in line Chevy six guys were launching into roller cams and 700 thou and above lifts, often with three Z28 Cross Ram Holley 4-bbls, and getting huge horsepower.

Small six guys need to study the Chevy racers in the late 70's, and get serious with lift, duration and roller cams. You can't show up a V8 without getting into FE rocker ratios and latter Windsor EFI B and E series roller cam profiles.
 
"Its sad that the FE design didn't go all the way to into the little six...it stopped short of having the FE rocker arm ratio, but it still has the normal FE design faults of the un-supported exhaust valves on the other wise pretty good rocker shaft. The team that crash built the engine did so in just 18 months, so a lot of the FE stuff just wasn't used. But its got FE fingerprints on everything else asside from the stupid carb and intake design. You could imagine the FE guys thinking of turning the old log head into a non handed V12 if they'd been asked.... :unsure: the intake port angles are kinda like the FE."

YEs i can imagine it and have thought of surface milling the ford us head at an angle then re drilling the head bolts for a better valve angle.

I think classic inlines was working on a roller camshaft recently.

tough bill though to get the roller lifters in the number 1 and 12 lifter bores or modifying the oil galley and cutting the side of it up then putting a lifter galley cover on it like the big six.

so hard to get performace out of the US small six :(
 
Nah, easy, It was discussed at length in 2014, there are four ways.

Option 1, you just need a factory version of the 1985 on roller cam 5.0, or 1993 on roller cam 5.8 spider. That tang ( a pressed steel item that holds a tang to stop the roller lifter barrel moving around in orbit) needs to be placed in the lifter gallery by drilling 6 or 12 holes beside or between the lifters. The plate needs to be fixed inside an area that has little space, but you can die gring the a$$ outa it since there is a lot of metal there. A fine blank machinist will makes some from carbon steel, and press it in a custom mandrel, and you have to open up the block enough to fit the tangs down the tappet holes, avoiding the water ways. Again, there is not a mile of room, but its doable.


2. The other way is to do exactly as the Argentina TC 3000 engines, and drill 12 holes, and get there own slotted roller lifter. Herceg and Pellegrini make a kit, but it comes with some other bits and needs a 12 bolt locator kit, and its ~ US$3800 all up. It is the whole deal, 100% reliable and used since the year dot.
Jony Banquea used these kits, and makes a perfect solid lifter cam for the 221, and easy swap into any 200 small six.

3. Then there is Jessel slide grove lifter, sleeved

4. The Crower 66274 Groove lock roller lifter, which like the old flathead radius lifter, requires drill jig to install, BUT DOESN'T NEED A SPIDER OR LINK BAR

http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=58661

Also
http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=20545
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4015&start=0
http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php? ... am#p513401
http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=60669
http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=58661
 
So auto x Tell us about your other Engines Time Slips data , anything OTHER THAN BULL / Horse Hockey , You Know NOTHING about FE Engines , please troll under another Bridge This REAL Person is calling you OUT !!
 
I have five engines I run currently and ten years hands on experience with FE engines but only 3 years with the ford six and worked with quite afew top notch people like my grandfather the past VP of Chysler in the 60'S.

I just fiddle with these as a hobby and am still a student and NO master Mechanic but I have had some fast ones in my day.

Where are you located surely if you want to talk times we can set up a meeting to race ill tow my rig out for you if you have any local events or tracks you run.

Im an electronics Engineer so I dont have the experience of some here but im in the game.

YOU would be surpised who I know in the auto industry and the hook ups I get So if you want to run a new fully race tunned BMW against your mustang or want any parts ill see what I can do and hook you up. Try me
 
FalconSedanDelivery said:
So auto x Tell us about your other Engines Time Slips data , anything OTHER THAN BULL / Horse Hockey , You Know NOTHING about FE Engines , please troll under another Bridge This REAL Person is calling you

Ill be sure to submit and post my time slips on this ford six forum and to everyone else around on the unvieling of this build and ill make sure to send you a video with the time slip. I assure you I cleared my 2nd half of the year to tour and show this one all over so ill let you know when im heading your way to set up a race.
Click to expand...
 
Talk . internet poser , magazine story rehash er , looking forward to the call out , but Talk like the Internet is easy , Google me Faron Rhoads , give me Your name I would love to see the results , or lack of
 
super4ord":3p0b432i said:
So, if you are an Electronics Engineer and are also still a student, what year of college are you in? I mean if you are a senior, that would make you approximately 22 years old.
Click to expand...

Don't want to jump into what seems to be a long running dispute but.

Some people get a latter start then others. I myself graduated from the University of Illinois at the age of 28 with a BSEE. So by super4ords logic autox65 would have been 18 when he started building engines. Also he could be pursuing an advanced degree which would make him older. Just speculating.

Not saying it's true or anything else just saying we need the whole story before making judgments.

Hope I don't hurt anyone's feelings.
 
I am an Engineering Technician.

Sure woulda liked an Electrical Engineers help in Electrics, Audio & Electronics on:-

Two wire active abs with toner ring.
Magnetic Gauss change with distance calculations
Ohmeter Sensor adjustable HID replacement lamps levelling
Project SerpenTwin
Electrical Drain: Two alternator, Four battery Solution
I'm stuck in drive way with locked ignition
Running a desktop or tower computer in your car.....

But instead, I just blundered through with my poor spellingand grammar mistakes and even worse, I have real army evidence of my work...

I've checked your profiles,autox65, I think your legit, but we have had a some people here who talk the talk, but then look like our feet aren't big enough to fit the shoe size we claim to have. They end up going when someone calls them on the BS.

I'm sure you'll stay, if you are legit.


You'll understand the healthy skepticism....I confuse people too, but do a search, and I back up my engines, business and profile with...evidence.

One thing I will say, your facebook profile looked darn good for a hot 25 year old, darn good. If I was 20 years younger, American and not with a wonderful woman, I'd have walked on glass to see you....


But I noted that in my last PM, which I carbon copied to the acting board admin....which is now gone, along with some other deletes....

xctasy":3pmltx4e said:
A welcome to the Ford Six Performance board. I'm a former moderator, and people here in the team can help out.

Refer http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php? ... 66#p553866

You'll note your email address. If you are comfortable using that, that's totally okay. Since the internet can be predatory, its best to keep your details like gender and suchlike private. It isn't mandatory, though, and your personal choice. Any one can then search your name in facebook or myspace or yadda yadda, and I'm not certain everyone likes that attention. If its a non issue for you, then okay, fine.

You can have members PM you for parts and details, and keep your email address private.


Regards your other "new 3.3l performance build going for 200+ flywheel HP" post which has a photobucket picture posting, I use, with out " and ", and in lower case, "", and then put in via the clicking on the second Direct link down in your photobucket, and copy , say http://i1215.photobucket.com/albums/cc5 ... ch0003.jpg into the postion L1, and then http://i1215.photobucket.com/albums/cc501/xecute6/th_cpstang43ChrisMillers79Turbo23FoxStangNotch0003.jpg into L2

You then get this



The car uses a Holley 2305, a great carb for a turbo 2.3 Mustang.


Best wishes

x
Click to expand...


Back to the valves....
 
Ok xctasy, back to valves. My 66 200 has a D3DE head with a Weber 38 and headers. It had the LOM distributor until I swapped it for a 67 'normal' distributor and added the Pertronix I, the car came with the Blaster coil. The previous owner recommended running premium fuel, what? Apparently he had the timing set at 51deg BTDC, maybe because of the LOM, I don't know, I'm now running 87 octane with no pinging and the plugs look good. I got it down to 24deg BTDC then learned from the PO it has the 268S Comp Cam with .441" lift, "302 valve springs", 11/32" and 5/8" valve stems (can't remember which is "I" and which is "E"). I'm assuming the bottom-end is stock. I failed to ask if the head was milled/shaved, which may have been a SOP? Your opinion on what this means would be appreciated. It'll spin to 6,000rpms without an issue for just a cruiser SW, Thanks, RodC.
 
MT63AFX":m2dv81xp said:
Ok xctasy, back to valves. My 66 200 has a D3DE head with a Weber 38 and headers. It had the LOM distributor until I swapped it for a 67 'normal' distributor and added the Pertronix I, the car came with the Blaster coil. The previous owner recommended running premium fuel, what? Apparently he had the timing set at 51deg BTDC, maybe because of the LOM, I don't know, I'm now running 87 octane with no pinging and the plugs look good. I got it down to 24deg BTDC then learned from the PO it has the 268S Comp Cam with .441" lift, "302 valve springs", 11/32" and 5/8" valve stems (can't remember which is "I" and which is "E"). I'm assuming the bottom-end is stock. I failed to ask if the head was milled/shaved, which may have been a SOP? Your opinion on what this means would be appreciated. It'll spin to 6,000rpms without an issue for just a cruiser SW, Thanks, RodC.
Click to expand...

Best answer was bubba22349....

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=72066&p=553408#p553408

bubba22349":m2dv81xp said:
The 289 / 302 V8 valve springs are a good swap for any small six even with a stock cam gives you a just little more revving RPM over the low seat pressure stockers. Using a smaller valve stem and tapering the valve guide in the valve bowl are ways to get better flow too, the small six can use all the help it can get to let it breath especially on the intake side. On porting intake side of head open up the carb opening depending on what carb you plan to run (ie stock type 1V, 3 x 1V's, a 2V adapter or with a 2V direct mount plate) like with most other engines opening up the valve bowls, tapering the guides, and reaching back into the port opening an blending as far as you can helps a lot. Your done at that point unless you want to open the top of the intake to gain access to top op intake ports and then make a plate to seal it again and or install multiple carbs. The exhaust is easy to open up with access from both ends. What size vales did they install in your head? Many performance builds go with a 1.750 intake and a 1.50 exhaust to help the small sixes breath. Good luck :nod:
Click to expand...


What's there now should be okay. If you have 440-441 thou lift, that's all you need. All this talk with autoX65 is about working the log head way beyond the Outer Limits. FalconSedanDelivery found that using 460 thou lift, there was still 220 hp hiding in there, or whatever it takes to make a 2600 pound automatic car do a low 14 second quarter mile, almost 100 mph ET's. He decked 120 thou off his 250 block, and 120 on the head, and got a huge compression ratio perfect for a drag car.

For all of us Ford sixers, the only way to establish compression is via complete cylinder head removal, cylinder head gasket identification, and then cc'ing the head and measuring the trough in the piston, and its depth below the cylinder block top at TDC with a straight edge and some feeler gauges.

Later heads aren't as thick as the earlier castings, there is a nominal 187 thou deck to water jacket clearance on Fords factory blue prints , and with age, they don't take much more than 90 thou of 'planeing'. Old small log heads can take 120 thou without issues.FalconSedanDelivery got away with 120 on the late 170 large log head, but he's always been a bit more mercenary than the rest of us...

90 thou off any large log head is less than 15 cc off the combustion chamber. Stock 1968 on wards heads, non 170 heads for 200 and 250's its 59 ccs nominal, so compression wise on a 200 engine, most large log heads give an 8.5:1 compression from 1968 to 1983 with the stock piston and factory 22 thou head gasket. Adding a 45 thou gasket, you can plane down to a nominal 52 cc via a 45 thou head plane. The modern 23 thou thicker gaskets lower the compression 1/2 a point to 8.1:1, the 45 thou head plane raises it almost one point to about 8.8:1.

Most blocks deck at at 7.834" from crank centre-line to the tippy top, but need about 25 thou to get a perfect zero deck. That isn't worth doing, so most fiddle with head plane and gaskets to bump the compression up some.There are pistons without the trough the 200 has, nominally 5.5 cc over the years without change, HSC 23000/2500 and 255 1980-1982 pistons hike up compression, but hurt the space for more valve lift. Classic Inlines uses a 490 lift cam, which is just fine with a stock aftermarket thick gasket and stock 200 pistons with a Classic Inlines or un-planed stock head.

Using the http://www.csgnetwork.com/compcalc.html Compression ratio site, and feeding in the factory figures

Enter Bore/Stroke Designation Type
1 = Inches 2 = Millimeters 1
Enter Cylinder Bore Size 3.68
Enter Piston Stroke Length 3.126
Enter Head Gasket Bore Diameter 3.75
Enter Compressed Head Gasket Thickness 0.022
Enter Combustion Chamber Volume In CCs 59
Enter Piston Dome Volume In CCs Negative For Dished Pistons (Use '-5.5')
Enter Piston Deck Clearance Negative If ABOVE Deck (Use '-', but this is Positive, so use +0.025) :

Calculated Engine Compression Ratio 8.48:1
 
If i was a betting man FSD could get another 25HP out of the engine.
At .550" lift you are hitting the max flow of the head twice instead of once with less lift.
X tells it all & more.
 
FalconSedanDelivery":9aynhml7 said:
Love Your posts , Always Informative , and matter of fact to the extreme :beer:
Click to expand...



wsa111":9aynhml7 said:
If i was a betting man FSD could get another 25HP out of the engine.
At .550" lift you are hitting the max flow of the head twice instead of once with less lift.
X tells it all & more.
Click to expand...

I've already picked on Will in the past....but :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod:


but Hugh :oops: :roll: Yeah, but FSD, you just say an awful lot less than me, yet I have to


1.go over and
2.over and
3.over each of your posts
4.again and
5.again and
6.again, just to realize...you already told me the answer twice, and I didn't get it the first time.... :banghead:

When I found all Ak Millers old stuff, I then realized your a true engine building disciple/apostle. You've first Been there, then built that, and then dealt with really sick people who keep screwing up with the same old wrong thinking bull pucky, but here you are, here to help, and give the simple a few clues.Thanx. American know how is typified (made an example of) in the things you say on

1.Real world Ignition operation verses convention, um, logic
2.Supercharger drag car set up
3.carb position,
4.cam timing,
5,stall converters,
6.actual transmission losses in the sling-shot of a drag race are no where near what they are on a chassis dyno.

ITS LIKE ANOTHER SIX OF THE BEST FROM THE PRINCIPLE FOR BEING NAUGHTY.

I tell ya, I've learned me a little..MAYBEE I might get a couple of points clear in my mind.....

I was a typical theoretical engineering technician, still am a bit, but now I'm a more a disciple of traditional effective American Hot Rodding. I'M NOT THERE YET. BUT I'm CLOSER....

For example, Ak Miller was a European born car nut, but he sure as heck didn't follow Eduardo Webers Aero engine carb venturi sizing diagram and look for suitable carb sizes to fit. I did. But Bracket Racing and NASCAR prove that IVE GOT A HELLUVALOT TO LEARN ABOUT automotive ROCKNROLL. I've learned so much from you in the last 3 years, I was away form this forum for two, and YOU forced me to understand stuff from a different perspective when I came back.


Others around me have tired, you've just put more spin on the process.

My mate has old 73 to 1981 Pontiac F body's, and he keeps asking me to quit with the just the theory and find the fact.

"Dean, Siamese port 301 Turbo? You tell me why, and I'll give you a cigar."

"Dean 400, 421, 428 and 455 Poncho, why do they perform as good as they do when YOU think the combo is bad".


Then my other FE friends.

"Dean Why do you think an FE is better than a canted valve Boss 302, 335, or 385 Lima".

"Dean, why is the non independent runner FE 427 Dual Quad so much better than Quad Webers

These are four questions FSD answers when he just posts his talk.


A 301 is turboed with highly atomized air fuel mix that gets evenly placed to all 8 cylinders when a 800 cfm Quadrajet feeds a turbo. So why would you need 350, 400 or 455 heads. This is a real world answer from the flow bias discussion Faron has continually, quietly talked about.

The 400, 421, 428 and 455 Poncho is almost an FE engine...


FE engines don't have the rough cylinder characteristics of the canted valve engines, allowing them to survive detonation on set with more margin. Cam to cfm matching has to work on the transitional state, not mere dyno figures.

Idealized Weber venturi sizes only work on a dyno, but drag racing engines work on a drag strip, and the artificial fresh of opening secondaries creates supercharging effect that an IR system cannot. And aspects of AK millers carb sizing who FSD has used proves that an old log head with odd ball carb sizes with technically wrong port diameters aren't technically wrong at all, done right, it can simply flow better than the sum of its components.


I'm back searching your posts again.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top