Engine Blueprints

[sbf]

A couple of comments if I may -

Yeah, well that sum's it up I guess, they asked for peoples submissions and ideas right back at day 1 and seemingly ignored half of it for some reason.  Throwing the toys out of the cot now..... when people question, is petty..... fix it now and move on,  just burying your head in the sand and locking threads does nothing but fuel peoples "imagination".

HOWEVER, in saying that I have never personally seen nor heard of a C block mains failure.  That pic is one of the Kid's blocks that broke the crank and took out the block's main.  I know this, cause I got my arse kicked for posting that pic somewhere, to show that C blocks can fail..... which wasn't really the case.   I'm sure some have (?) but its certainly not a common problem like the 8.2" blocks suffer from.  There are some pretty high hp builds out there too, in pretty much stock (filled) blocks.   
I have had one block that mag testing showed a small crack right on the "big" gallery hole of #1 main but it was out of an stock vehicle and could well have been there since the day it was manufactured....

Food for thought I guess.....   

[Brian S]

...I have never personally seen nor heard of a C block mains failure.  That pic is one of the Kid's blocks that broke the crank and took out the block's main.  I know this, cause I got my arse kicked for posting that pic somewhere, to show that C blocks can fail..... which wasn't really the case.

I had forgotten where that pic came from originally. Maybe KV could shed some light on this. Is it possible the mains failed first and that's why the crank broke? Or, if the crank did break first, why did that happen? Was it a weak crank or did it fail because it flexed too much from it's main journals not being supported well?

If nothing else, the pictures do illustrate how thin the casting was. I wouldn't want to trust an alloy version of that casting. Whoever was responsible for designing the XE blocks, the late 400 blocks, the new Ford blocks, and all the aftermarket blocks I've seen made a conscious decision to add more metal in that area so why not follow what others did unless somehow you're 100% positive the webs are strong enough? I can't figure out the logic. Like I've said a few times before...full main webbing, splayed 4 bolt caps, and an optional 9.5" deck height should have been a no brainer.

A couple other issues...I haven't seen any new main caps for the block yet except the ones purchased from Pro Gram and they retail for $720. If new one's are in the works that's fine but obviously you can't do the machining without them. And one final thought...the castings are said to be the same for both aluminum and iron. Based on the aluminum block weight mentioned, and iron weighing 2.2 times more, I'm guessing an iron block will end up weighing about 230lbs. If so, that would make it over 60lbs heavier than a regular Cleveland block, so all the more reason to invest in aluminum heads I guess.

[sbf]

If I remember correctly, the crank had come out of a previous engine that had a rod failure.... or something along those lines... and was not magged afterwards.  I remember seeing pics of the end of the crank and it was obvious it had a major crack in it for some time.... before it let go.
Am sure the Kid will chime in at some stage and fill us in.

Your right though, mains supports could/can be made much thicker which would "guarantee" structural integrity in that area... and most/all aftermarket blocks are upgraded in that area.   
Yes I remember the 9.5" option being mentioned back in the planning stages and am sure some would take that route as well.... but what would they weigh?  If the weight of an iron 9.2" does come in at 230lbs, thats already substantially heavier than the 9.2"W opposition..... but without some of the strength attributes that those blocks have??

As far as the stock blocks go, the 351W and the 9.2" C's are very similar weight wise....infact the C's are slightly heavier than the W's.   I know the C has its timing cover area cast in the block which will add weight.... but don't forget the W block is .3" taller and generally alittle thicker, bore wise. 
Whilst the stock C blocks may not have the ultimate strength of the aftermarket blocks (especially bore wise),  I think they have more "guts" than alot give them credit for and are fine for most mid performance builds.   

[Tater]

I also have the 1986/87 Ford High performance magazine/catalog. I can't count how many times I've looked at them thru the years for info!

Tater

[Brian S]

I don't know if KV is reading this post but I guess I could send him an email.

I seem to remember reading somewhere a stock C block is less than 5lbs heavier than the Windsor. The '69-'70 W blocks had thicker main webbing than the later blocks so it depends which one they weighed. I don't think a .300 taller block would weigh much more unless the deck thickness were increased as well. 400 blocks don't weigh that much more than the 351Cs.

Robert Pond's FE blocks weight 245lbs, which is more than 2X the weight of his alloy blocks and 50lbs heavier than the originals. We know TB had a hand in it's development. http://www.robertpondmotorsports.com/427-ford-engine-block.htm

After researching a bit more, I may be wrong about the block weight. I think it was based on Tod's early estimate and I read just now the alloy block after machining was 65lbs...minus main caps and sleeves. 65lbs x 2.912 = 189.28lbs + main caps. So it's probably close to the same weight as other newly made blocks.
 
Both FRP and aftermarket blocks make a point of mentioning the reinforced areas in their sales pitch. Both new and old iron C block would be strong enough for most applications but likely no better than a "Sportsman" block at half the cost. http://www.fordracingpartsdirect.com/product_p/m-6010-c58.htm

Wouldn't it be better to design a 9.5 deck block first and cut it down to 9.2 later? If you're starting from scratch, wouldn't the casting pattern of a crankcase having fewer contours be simpler to make? I really don't understand Tod's logic.

The strength of the alloy block would be my bigger concern. IMHO that's the only market he can compete with price-wise at this time.
What do you think Tater?
http://www.fordracingpartsdirect.com/Ford_Racing_Engine_Blocks_s/29.htm
http://www.dartheads.com/products/engine-blocks/ford-small-blocks
http://www.worldcastings.com/products/engine-blocks/small-block-ford-blocks/

Does anyone recognize this block?

[sbf]

Your on the money between W and C weights, I weighed an early W block awhile back and it was 3 pounds lighter than the C.  I try and keep track of the weight of various components, especially valve weights, retainers, springs etc..... they can vary alot depending where/who you buy from and is handy to have.

None of this block discussion fills me with much confidence or has me wanting to buy on of these blocks.... but I guess we will just have to wait and see if they can blow one of these things up first.

Pass on the block,  I see the casting is done by Buddy Bar but don't have any idea who for...

I am very pissed today.... the CNC finally arrived after waiting many months.... and it appears that it does NOT have the extended Y-axis like its supposed to and therefore I probably can't use it for alot of blocks.  It doesn't have the headroom to get the boring tool into the bore and still allow 360 degree block rotation....
I brought the machine from a dealer in LA and SPECIFICALLY asked him on several occasions whether it had the extended Y ...which he assured me it was. I kept all his email responses, one of which has his response in it ... but phuck whats that worth after all the waiting, logistics troubles and expense to get the thing here ??   On be on the phone in the morning thats for sure.........   

[Tater]

FWIW, here's some info I found on complete engine weights.
Boss 302 = 500#'s
351W     = 525#'s
351C      = 550#'s
351M/400= 575#'s

I know when I swapped out a 351C 4V iron- headed combo and added a 351W with Alum heads there was a difference in ride height. I had to adjust the front coilovers to get the same ride height as before. If I remember right an iron 4V Cleve head was about 48#'s and a Windsor Victor Jr head was around 25#'s.

I know some local Buds running the 9.5" deck Dart and the 9.5" World blocks with no issues in some pretty quick cars. (upper 8's in 1/4)

With the Cleve block I seemed to always run into cylinder bore issues even with only .030 bores. But I never had a block sonic tested or filled.

Tater

[Brian S]

None of this block discussion fills me with much confidence or has me wanting to buy on of these blocks.... but I guess we will just have to wait and see if they can blow one of these things up first.
Pass on the block,  I see the casting is done by Buddy Bar but don't have any idea who for...

Generally, I don't think it's good practice to use the same patterns for iron and aluminum. Aluminum is almost 1/3rd the weight of iron, but it's also half as strong. I think CHI did some iron versions of their alloy heads and they ended up being extremely heavy.

Buddy Bar does some castings for Dart but I'm sure it isn't their block. Someone suggested it could be Shelby's new aluminum 351W block but it didn't look the same to me. I haven't seen his block (Fontana's old block) available separately, only crate motors.

I've been looking at Ford Racing's block lately, http://www.cjponyparts.com/product.asp?pn=M6010C451&utm_source=google&utm_medium=merchant&utm_campaign=shopping. The cam height has been raised .200, which makes sense because it has an enclosed cam tunnel, but the custom timing chain and gear set is ridiculously priced at $400. The block is priced substantially below the competition so maybe that's one way they make their money back. 

I am very pissed today.... the CNC finally arrived after waiting many months.... and it appears that it does NOT have the extended Y-axis like its supposed to and therefore I probably can't use it for alot of blocks.

Well that sucks...don't it?
I'll do you one better. When my Gorton Tracemaster mill arrived years ago it came with no power unit for the hydraulic motors that run the power feeds and no handles for me to move the carriages manually either. Basically, all they delivered was a three ton paperweight.

I know some local Buds running the 9.5" deck Dart and the 9.5" World blocks with no issues in some pretty quick cars. (upper 8's in 1/4) With the Cleve block I seemed to always run into cylinder bore issues even with only .030 bores. But I never had a block sonic tested or filled. Tater

Of coarse they're not having issues. The Dart and World blocks were designed by real engineers and their blocks are tested before being sold to the public. From what I've read the blocks were built to handle 1500+ HP.

BTW, Joe (Wildcobrar) found a inexpensive sonic tester that has proven to be fairly accurate. You can get one like it for less than $200 on evilbay.

[sbf]

Generally, I don't think it's good practice to use the same patterns for iron and aluminum. Aluminum is almost 1/3rd the weight of iron, but it's also half as strong. I think CHI did some iron versions of their alloy heads and they ended up being extremely heavy.

I'm not a design engineer so I can't really comment on the patterns but there is probably acouple of things that stand out to me. 
Blocks are more under a tensile stress when running, trying to contain whats happening within.
The compressive strength of cast iron is good but the tensile strength is only about half that of its compressive.  I remember an older machinist guy I used to work with telling me that many years ago.... when I used to "test" my hair-brain ideas with him.
They generally don't use straight aluminum for blocks or heads and alot of the alloys, like T6, are pretty tough stuff..... I think its atleast equal to cast iron?

I know those comments don't "prove" anything and are not intended to.... just some thoughts running through my mind.

The cam height has been raised .200, which makes sense because it has an enclosed cam tunnel, but the custom timing chain and gear set is ridiculously priced at $400. The block is priced substantially below the competition so maybe that's one way they make their money back. 

Wow, I see what you mean, thats crazy money !!   I guess it does highlight the fact though....that there are all manner of aftermarket blocks already out there regardless of what sort of configuration/cam size or whatever.... you might require and some are really "cheap". 
I saw some on ebay recently - NIB 9.2" man-o-war's but with a 2.2" main for $1060 ??  Might have been possible to linebore and recut the tangs to 2.75" main.... if you wanted a C type configuration ??

I'll do you one better. When my Gorton Tracemaster mill arrived years ago it came with no power unit for the hydraulic motors that run the power feeds and no handles for me to move the carriages manually either. Basically, all they delivered was a three ton paperweight.

I did my homework ..... its the fact that he has mis-quoted the machine is the problem.  Its abit like buying a long bed truck so you can get a sheet of fibre board on the back.... and getting delivered a short bed instead.    The costs involved to get the thing here changes the bottom line drastically and getting another/sending it back is just not an option.....
I can make it work but it would mean I won't be able to rotate the blocks 360 degrees,  I wanted it to be able probe the mains tunnel for true, cut main webs for 4 bolt conversions etc etc ....   That would be a problem unless I have a "double" setup.   Just unnecessary sh#t that never should have happened.....

I know when I swapped out a 351C 4V iron- headed combo and added a 351W with Alum heads there was a difference in ride height. I had to adjust the front coilovers to get the same ride height as before. If I remember right an iron 4V Cleve head was about 48#'s and a Windsor Victor Jr head was around 25#'s.

Yep, you can certainly get some weight off the front with abit of alloy hardware Tater !! 
Here's afew weights I have measured that might interest you  -

351C block  -   171 lbs
351W block  -  168 lbs
302W block  -  129 lbs
4V heads (C) bare -  52lbs
302C aussie heads bare  - 55lbs
CHI heads bare  -  29lbs
Yates bare  -  27lbs
289W heads  bare -  41lbs
TFS R's bare (W)  -  25lbs
Funnelweb intake (C)  -  23lbs
Torker intake (C)  -  15lbs
TFC intake (C)  -  18lbs

There's afew eyebrow raisers in there......

[Brian S]

I'm not a metallurgist or designer so I'm not sure why things are made a certain way. I think cast metals are usually high in compressive strength but low in tensile strength. T6 I believe refers to how much Tempering was used to harden the metal. IIRC Forged 6061-T6 aluminum is almost as strong as mild steel. Top fuel blocks and heads are machined from a solid forged aluminum billet.  7075 forged aluminum is sometimes used for main caps. 356 aluminum alloy is typically what's used for casting blocks.

Do you know anything about Compacted Graphite Iron?
http://www.precisionenginetech.com/tech-explained/2009/07/02/compacted-graphite-engine-blocks/
This is what Robert Pond uses for his FE blocks.

Any luck with your CNC dealer?

http://www.precisionenginetech.com/tech-explained/2009/05/22/computer-aided-block-machining-part-1/
http://www.precisionenginetech.com/tech-explained/2009/05/22/computer-aided-block-machining-part-2/

http://www.precisionenginetech.com/tech-explained/2009/06/02/cnc-machining-an-engine-block-part-1/
http://www.precisionenginetech.com/tech-explained/2009/06/02/cnc-machining-an-engine-block-part-2/


41lbs for a 289 head? I thought they were a bit less.

[sbf]

I messed up there abit Brian didn't I,  blurted out T6 without thinking.... which is ofcourse as you state, one of the tempering processes used. 
I think you can heat treat most grades to T6 ?   I remember Tod mentioning getting the blocks heat treated at one point but can't remember if he mentioned which treatment he was going to use ?

Yes, I had a talk to the dealer.  I expected him to be defensive but he wasn't.    Due to the time that elapsed since I actually brought the machine (prior to xmas last year!), he wanted time to dig out the file on the deal.  Have tried to ring him back acouple of times but hes been "out" or "unavailable"..... will try again tomorrow.
I guess I should mention that some of the wait was due to the height of the machine and the need for a high-cube container to get it in.... but have found the counterweight was pinned in the normal location and the head was therefore left 12" off the table.... hence the height       
He did mention he remembers me asking about the Z-axis and sending one of the techs to verify the Z travel .... so thats a start I guess.  I also have a copy of their spec sheet for the machine which states 28" travel..... buts its actually 24".
He also said there is a riser block made for the column which would allow me to use the machine as intended.  The trouble with that is, for general machine work most tooling won't then reach the table.... so if you are machining plates or whatever, they must be raised (off the table) to the same height as the column was raised......PITA
I initially spoke with RMC when I started looking for a cnc. They make a purpose built machine/s for doing blocks etc (like in your links) and have all the programs/tooling/fixtures available.  Apart from the expense of a new machine, which was too much for me, the biggest problem was the same as above.... they have the height but do not have a full travel Z, so general machining was out.
Now it looks like I'm back at square one again...... 

Yes, the W heads are a surprise..... thought that would get a comment sooner or later. 
World Sr's come in at nearly 48lbs .... bare !!   All but the weight of a 4V iron......

[Brian S]

Tod said the alloy blocks were heat treated prior to machine work but I don't know if he gave a number. See Wiki for Temper designation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium_alloy
------------------------------------------------------

That sounds pretty stupid about the way the machine was shipped. Why use a special height container if it's easily avoided by lowering the head/spindle. I thought 24" was a decent amount of travel for the Z plane but you still should get what you asked for. Obviously a riser block does nothing to increase travel, it only increases the clearance. Specifically what machining operation do you think you'll be unable to perform? Is it a 4 axis or 5 axis mill? Also what's the taper for your tool holders? My Gorton has a V40.

[sbf]

Wow, there are certainly alot of grades and heat treatments available for aluminum ..... thought there was afew but thats quite a list !!

Yep, not putting the head right down is pretty dumb alright......   

Specifically what machining operation do you think you'll be unable to perform? Is it a 4 axis or 5 axis mill? Also what's the taper for your tool holders? My Gorton has a V40.

Boring and possibly decking on some tall blocks.  The typical way cnc block machining starts is by probing the location of the mains tunnel.  To enable the probe to reach the bar located by the mains, the block must be rotated upside down and depending on the block.... there goes atleast 12" of the available headroom right there. It is really, the only way the process can be started, you must locate that C/L.    Then the block is righted and the cam tunnel C/L is found and the rest of the measuring is done. 
The boring head and extension I have is around 9" long (the machine has no extendable spindle, so you need all the boring length in the tooling).... so to bore a C block for example you need the 12+" to rotate the block, plus the 9.2" block height, plus the 9" for the boring bare length..... and alittle working clearance ofcourse, say 0.3"  =  30.5" absolute minimum head clearance.   The bigger the block the more room you need ofcourse ..... plus the tool changer may need some room to work as well ... if I can't shift the block out of the way enough during tool changes.   See where I'm coming from ??

There is not enough straight block work around this area to keep the machine running anywhere near its potential, so that is why I need a multi-purpose machine so I can do general machining as well.
I should throw in that I never intended to get into the major machining side of engine building, I have been sending all that work out.  Problem is that our nearest machine shop is over 60 miles away and the standard of work coming back is mediocre at best.... I got tired of the mess-ups and sub-standard work as it wasn't doing me any favors and the cost/time involved with shipping stuff back and forward after mock-up etc was crazy, hence the decision to buy a machine.

The machine is 3 axis but has all the electronics and electrics for the 4th.   After talking with cnc owners, I was told a good 4th axis is a must to get the accuracy (due to the distance from the rotary's center to block height being so far) and I stumbled across a brand new Nikken table (one of the best) already wired for this machine, for 1/4 of new price.... so I grabbed it.  Depending on whether I keep or sell it, I will keep an eye out for a 5th axis and controller boards for it, would make life easier for canted valve heads etc etc, but can't see me getting into the porting side of things.  I do see some use for doing combustion chambers, which I can do without the 5th anyway.

Its cat40 taper which I think is the same as V40 like yours is ?   It's good, alot of used tooling out there as it such a common size and even new stuff is reasonably priced.  I got a reasonable selection of new stuff sent out with the machine and should cover most of what I want, for now anyway.  I have a Bridgeport and afair bit of R8 tooling .... but its too small for the hp and spindle speed of this thing anyway.

[Brian S]

I didn't realize there were that many heat treatments either until I looked it up. Dart blocks are said to go through 7 heating/cooling cycles to make sure they're seasoned properly and they use 355-T61 alloy. Cryogenic tempering is another method.

If you're not planning to bore the full length of a cam tunnel or the mains or anything like that it doesn't sound like the Z travel is the problem with the machining operation. You're main concern sounds like it's about tooling clearance...and if there isn't enough, you'll have to get a riser block for the head's support column because the bed height is fixed? I considered doing that with my bench top mill for the same reason but never got around to making one.

My Gorton is a knee mill so the whole bed raises up and down. I don't have a 4th axis to complicate things just yet.


You may not need 12" to rotate a block upside down...about an inch more than the deck height should be enough to clear the bed but obviously the minimum axis height is set by whatever device (a 4th Axis or rotary table or dividing head) used to make the block rotate. If a locating bar is perfectly concentric within the main bores, the bar extends beyond the front and rear of the block, and that's where the probe takes it's measurements...it shouldn't matter where the block is rotated. The bar should measure in the exact same location whether block is upside down or not. I'm guessing the main reason the block is measured while upside down during cnc measuring is so the probe doesn't interfere with the other locating bar that would extend from the cam tunnel. Am I making any sense?

My taper, I guess technically it would be called NMTB 40 is probably the same cat. It's fairly standard and about the minimum I think needed for a serious machinist. I already have mostly R8 tooling from my bench mill so one of these days I need to get an adapter so I can use all my previous tooling in both mills.

If you don't want to get into stuff like cnc porting it wouldn't be too hard to make a couple mounting jigs at a 3 and 4.25 angle for holding Cleveland heads at the correct cant angle for machining.

[sbf]

You're main concern sounds like it's about tooling clearance...and if there isn't enough, you'll have to get a riser block for the head's support column because the bed height is fixed?

You've got it Brian .... and the taller the block the less I've got.  The tool changer is side mounted (so they tooling is not hanging down to get tangled up with large items like blocks!) but ofcourse the changer arm lowers itself when its tool swapping.  That lowering action also adds to the tool length/head room available as the head can only be in its "change" position during the swap.  I should be able to shift the entire table/block far enough away for clearance but am not sure yet.

You may not need 12" to rotate a block upside down...about an inch more than the deck height should be enough to clear the bed but obviously the minimum axis height is set by whatever device (a 4th Axis or rotary table or dividing head) used to make the block rotate. If a locating bar is perfectly concentric within the main bores, the bar extends beyond the front and rear of the block, and that's where the probe takes it's measurements...it shouldn't matter where the block is rotated. The bar should measure in the exact same location whether block is upside down or not. I'm guessing the main reason the block is measured while upside down during cnc measuring is so the probe doesn't interfere with the other locating bar that would extend from the cam tunnel. Am I making any sense?

Yep, your making perfect sense.....   To rotate a block though, I must allow for the tallest block that might go on it which is why I was allowing 12+ " .  My intention is to use the machine to measure the main tunnel's integrity as well. Alot line hone the mains for piece of mind but they are usually the most stable part and not "usually" out.  A quick measure would be nice to do.... plus the ease of doing four bolt conversions, cylinder relieving for some stroker combo's  etc etc.
The 4th axis rotary is very heavy, its a two man job to lift it, so having different heights for different blocks is out..... plus you would also need multiple end supports for each setup.

I could go just for a bank to bank tilt but even to allow a 45 degree tilt, which is what I think your getting at.... but I have to have clearance for the rear bell boss to not hit the table, which means I would need around 8 inches anyway.   It looks like they fit the thru-bar and 4th axis fixture off the machine and then load it all assembled which would be much easier than doing it on the machine table, especially if its low down. 
I think once I start looking at going down that road,  I have immediately "limiting" myself and the machine.... you could do the same thing with a Block-Tru fixture and dial indicator.
The block is measured upside down because the probes are not long enough to reach the mains bar from above.

If you don't want to get into stuff like cnc porting it wouldn't be too hard to make a couple mounting jigs at a 3 and 4.25 angle for holding Cleveland heads at the correct cant angle for machining.

True Brian.   I saw a very smart design for a tilt and swivel head/intake holding fixture that I was going to duplicate using the machine but then I thought.... if I make a similar fixture that utilizes the 4th axis and block end support plate (as in a "drop in" type deal) I could do away with the swivel of the fixture and make life one step easier.  I think thats the way I'll go....     I had been using the Bridgeport for that sort of work as its got the tilt and swivel head, but using this machine should make setup easier and it also has rigid taping for doing stud conversions etc.
Its not really that I don't want to get into the cnc porting side of things, I would really enjoy the challenge,  buts its more a demand vs expense type deal.  There are only around four million people in NZ and only four sanctioned drag "strips" in the entire country (and 1/2 of them are just on race circuits/airstrip runways etc).  The percentage of petrol heads is very high but money and facilities are lacking.  The guys with the serious money just get their stuff from the states, they wouldn't even look "internally" for stuff like cnc'd heads.

Am not familiar with the Gorton machines but by the look of the pic they appear to be a very sturdy machine.... looks like a Bridgeport on steroids!!  Looks like it has a powered knee (which I wish my BP had) ? I assume the table is powered but can't see any motors.....hydraulic I think you said?  Fixed head?

Right better get to bed.... but here's a pic of the machine nearly re-assembled,  just the doors and afew covers etc to go on...