Flathead breathing

While we're on the subject of flathead breathing,I'd like to point out an interesting fact about the exhaust. The firing order of the flathead is such that ALL the end cylinders fire first (1,5,4,8), Then the center cylinders fire, but on opposite sides. (6,3,7,2). So the ports are in fact, always clear of any interference form any unwanted pressure. However the center port has a much higher velocity of exhaust gasses. Now if the excess velocity could be used to create a low pressure area in the collector to draw more fuel and air into the end cylinders. Every little bit helps. I like to think that this 83 year old brain iz still working.
 
That 150 was on JWL's engine dyno that was Ol Ron's before JWL acquired it and before I got deadly serious in my performance quest.

Highest chassis dyno number was 187 at the rear wheels I vaguely remember, but made further modifications since that last test and got better strip times.

The dyno guy was surprised and enjoyed the testing so much he refuses to charge. That's a problem for me because I'd rather pay for sessions and get as many as I want whenever I want instead of having to avoid abusing hes generosity. I had gone to another old time dyno place and they couldn't get a number due to tire slippage on the rollers. Funny as hell, they strapped it down and failed, then had a guy sitting on the rear bumper, then two guys and finally those two plus a really heavy third guy.

Ron, I made my latest headers with the center exhaust ports crossed between sides resulting in equally spaced pulses at the collectors and chose the pipe lengths using PipeMax software, they are within 2" of being equal length and length is chosen for my RPM range. I didn't get to fine tuning collector lengths which may be near optimal now, simply not verified.

This is getting too close to a thread hijack.

Flat32
 
I think you've done just about everything to an unblown engine you can do. My last engine that I did the ports and valves got 235 HP @4500 Red Line and 300 ft lbs of torque at 3000. But it had 5 pounds of boost, them blowers do work.
 
So I happen to agree that almost anything you could think of today has probably been tried before.

My question is: Has anyone experimented with intake valve location or more accurately "relocation"?

Allow me to exaggerate for a moment. Let's say the centerline of the intake valve and the centerline of cylinder were about 8" apart instead of about 4" apart. Which version would you think could breathe better? Why?

Now let's go the other way. Imagine if we could put the edge of the valve right next to the edge of the cylinder. Would breathing be improved? Don't even count how the intake port would change with the relocated valve. Would the incoming air charge have a more efficient flow path being aimed basically at the center of the cylinder dome rather than being deflected in the transfer area?

I know this sounds impractical and it probably is, but I think it needs to be investigated to find if there is horsepower hiding here. I believe there is.

I think the only way to accomplish radical valve relocation is by boring into the valve pocket itself and threading in a large cast iron "plug" into which you could remake that part of the intake port and place the valve in the desired position.

I realize this would never be a street modification but for someone who is trying to wring more power out of a Flatty for say Bonneville, I don't think this can be overlooked. Maybe it hasn't been. Come to think of it I don't ever remember seeing the valves and cylinder heads from Kenny Kloth's unreal Merc engine. Could he have found something like this? Doesn't his engine put out like 275 hp naturally aspirated? He's doing something special.
 
Hudson Hornets had the valves closer to the cylinders and, I think produced more peak horsepower per cubic inch, when race modified, than a similarly modified Ford Flathead. If you look at the Ford "transfer area" as a downstream continuation of the intake flow track and re-design it as such where you maintain flow velocity and/or a smoother pressure differential change benefit can be had at high rpm in a race application.

The Lycoming engine had what appears to be the most direct shot at the cylinder from the valve, but I don't know if it gave the overall design any potential advantage over the Ford.

The Harley V twin Flatheads have intake and exhaust routing and design differences so pronounced as to make them not a comparable as most people think.

I'm guessing that moving the Ford intake closer might invite cracking in the area known to crack. Ford decks are relatively thin. As a matter of fact the entire block doesn't have any excess "beef" anywhere except in a couple areas where it was added due to the casting process.

Flat32
 
I have a plaster cast of Kenny Kloth's combustion chamber, but won't show it anywhere without his express permission.

It is unusual and designed for flow over high static compression. In concert with his design cam the combination with at least one Bonneville record that still stands as far as I know. A perfect gentleman in every respect.

Flat32
 
Flat32,
Earlier you stated a difference in port shape from the flathead engine blueprint and the block you have. My question is, what's the blueprint date and the age of your block.
The reason I ask is that the valve angle change that happened around the end of the war, changes the port angle into the cylinder. The prewar stuff carries the valve closer to the cylinder edge. Is this the difference you speak of? I'd imagine the flow could be different on these prewar ports. The difference is approximately. 125".

Martin.
 
Hey guys I'm talking RADICAL intake valve placement. Imagine the edge of the intake valve actually intersecting the cylinder bore itself. Imagine the valve opening and the charge being able to "spill" right into the cylinder. This is a situation which mimics what happens in an OHV engine where the charge literally "falls" into the cylinder.

Picture the intake valve so close to the bore that the piston would need to be relieved above the rings to clear that valve.

Flat 32 I see by looking at your pictures that you have looked at the Lycoming- Cord V8. I think that is a sensational engine and if I'm correct provided excellent performance for it's time.

Now I hear what you're saying about the potential for block cracking. I think this theory could only be accomplished as I said with either a cast or steel plug that completely fills the intake pocket. If done right I think there would be sufficient strength for at least a race engine.

Would love to see someone do a computer model of this idea. Hint hint 😉
 
Henry
Look up the old Viking engine design

And Yes, Ken's record still stands after 27 years.
It would be very difficult to break, not because
it's impossible, but I doubt anyone would be
willing to do the required work.
 
Last edited:
Picture the Lycoming setup with the runners more straight, shallow angle to the manifold deck, crossing each other from side to side at the center of the block. It's that sharp turn upwards from under the valve that schitts up the design. Even the modern Formula One engines have gone to runners closer to parallel with the valve stem.

IMHO the turn down into the cylinder is less a problem than the turn upward before the valve. Flathead stroke is too long to allow the high rpm needed for such things to reach their potential, like 9,000 rpm and above.

Myself, I chose to do only minor modification to the basic block. Most extensive modification I did was moving the end exhaust ports outward about 7/16" and I doubt if that resulted in a 2 hp gain if even that much.

Flat32:cool:
 
I believe Mark Kirby's aluminun Flathead has recontured pots which are curved so that they sweep up in a more parallel fashion to the valve stem. He has also done away with the removable valve guide which helps to accomplish this.

His design, I believe, does away with virtual air dam that exists in a stock Flatty's valve pocket. I think a relocated intake valve would take this advantage even further. It would effectively straighten the intake port and as I mentioned earlier would allow the charge to spill into the cylinder more easily.

Combine all these things and I think you could really enhance airflow through the engine to the point maybe where you might start taxing the exhaust ports.
 
The flatfire streamliner is an example of how far folks will go to get more power/speed out of a 59A. It more closely resembles the Cadillac flathead with the exhaust out the top plus 301 CID. This was the easiest way to affect the breathing without valve relocation. The cam location is fixed so moving valves would be difficult.

Mark Kirby has the makings of a decent engine for CID and other mods if he can ever overcome the cost factor. Most folks would shy away from a high dollar engine block until all the old ones still available are gone.
 
Well here's a thought for you guys. As far as the "Big 3" goes, Ford had the Flathead, Chrysler had the hemi and GM had the small block. These are the breakthrough legendary offerings from the domestic automakers.

GM and Chrysler have spent bucks on continued development of their V8's, while Ford had never even given the Flathead a second thought. You're probably saying to yourself why should Ford care? You might be right in that assumption, but I look at it a bit different.

Ford owned the performance market before anyone else. The whole performance industry grew up around Ford, especially the V8's. Why doesn't Ford put a little effort into Flathead engines? If they got behind a few people that have the capability of creating a new block it could have incredible potential. The really good blocks are getting harder to find. The Flathead is prolific enough and important enough to get some attention in my opinion.

I don't understand why they are happy knowing full well that more than half of the early Ford V8 cars are sporting engines built by rival automakers.
 
rotorwrench said:
The flatfire streamliner is an example of how far folks will go to get more power/speed out of a 59A. It more closely resembles the Cadillac flathead with the exhaust out the top plus 301 CID. This was the easiest way to affect the breathing without valve relocation. The cam location is fixed so moving valves would be difficult.

Mark Kirby has the makings of a decent engine for CID and other mods if he can ever overcome the cost factor. Most folks would shy away from a high dollar engine block until all the old ones still available are gone.
Click to expand...

While I love the Flatfire project I'm not totally in love with reversed port situation. Not with the fact that it runs a blower. A turbo mounted up there would be a different story as far as I'm concerned.

Anyways I believe Ford was right on with most aspects of the stock exhaust port design. The exceptions being were the two center ports converge and the exit point of the end ports. I feel like these two things can be "fixed".

I don't like the Caddy ports with the exhaust manifolds crowding the top of the engine. I get the idea that Flatheads tend to run warmer because of the longer internal exhaust plumbing. I personally work on making the ports less turbulent to minimize heat transfer even on stock engines that I build.

The French blocks and the Lincoln Flatheads have better end exhaust port exits that are void of sharp turns and edges.
 
BTW the Caddy's top exhaust ports force the exhaust flow to make a very abrupt change of direction when it matters most. Right out of the cylinder. The Fords curve more gently away and gradually down and out. It would be interesting to see this tested as well.
 
Think about what a passionless corporate entity owned by public investors seeking profit has to do. One passionate individual, working alone, can do whatever he wishes. That same individual is highly restricted as an employee of the corporation.

The answers you seek are in books and archives for the most part. But don't expect to be able to hand someone a book and ask them to tell you what it says.

Just my 73 year old observations.

Flat32:)
 
Flat32 said:
Think about what a passionless corporate entity owned by public investors seeking profit has to do. One passionate individual, working alone, can do whatever he wishes. That same individual is highly restricted as an employee of the corporation.

The answers you seek are in books and archives for the most part. But don't expect to be able to hand someone a book and ask them to tell you what it says.

Just my 73 year old observations.

Flat32:)
Click to expand...

Ford and Harley Davidson are two companies with a healthy amount of family influence still to this day. Both coming into existence in 1903. Look at what HD has done to preserve their heritage. My hopes are pinned on Edsel II, Henry III and cousin Bill. I think they care but have big fish to fry right now.

I nominate you Flat 32. I think you got what it takes to do something like this. 😉
 
I'll assume you're bench racing and let you know I don't do that. I'm not adept at being a social person because of the way I was raised. I am a manufacturer originally trained as a toolmaker, my father was one, and enjoy creating mechanical things. Most people I encounter think me strange, but when they get to know me are tolerant of my strangeness. Accolades I find to be uncomfortably embarrassing while trolling forums for useful like minded people that possibly have or could have a passion for the Ford Flathead. Or have information I am currently seeking about how certain things were done and/or how to manage the same in 1/4 scale.

RalphM may be a real find for me.

Flat32:cool:
 
Flat32 said:
I'll assume you're bench racing and let you know I don't do that. I'm not adept at being a social person because of the way I was raised. I am a manufacturer originally trained as a toolmaker, my father was one, and enjoy creating mechanical things. Most people I encounter think me strange, but when they get to know me are tolerant of my strangeness. Accolades I find to be uncomfortably embarrassing while trolling forums for useful like minded people that possibly have or could have a passion for the Ford Flathead. Or have information I am currently seeking about how certain things were done and/or how to manage the same in 1/4 scale.

RalphM may be a real find for me.

Flat32:cool:
Click to expand...


I can assure you sir that receiving well deserved accolades is a far better situation than not at all. Good work should be recognized. People that do things of construct like you do earn my respect because I have an appreciation for what it takes.

That being said I didn't think I was "bench racing" in a trivial sense. I notice that the people who have contributed to this subject are located in all different parts of the country and even the world. That is an awesome thought and I do not take it lightly.

I'm here to learn. My knowledge compared to many here could not even fill a thimble. I want to gobble up as much knowledge as I can and maybe someday pass it along to the next generation.

The subject of Flathead breathing is a mystical subject at best. I share seemingly outlandish ideas to push people to think out of the box. Guys like Barney Navarro were out of the box thinkers and people may accuse the free thinkers as being eccentric until their work comes to fruition and the ball is moved forward.

Guys like me are like frustrated shower singers. I'll sing in the shower but I'll never perform at the Grand Old Opry. In the same way there are a handful of elite doers that get the job done. They have the brains, the education and the resources to accomplish great things. I'm hoping someone like that will help the Flathead cause.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top