Wet Sleeves?

R

Ross6860

Senior Member
I'm assuming this can be done and what I heard wasn't tongue in cheek.

Anyone have this operation done on their engine? Pros and Cons? Max displacement with a 4.25" crank?

If you have to bore anyhow, how much more work/cost to go with wet sleeves?

Only considering this after reading a couple members books. Sounds like the best bang is more inches (as usual) with stock-ish heads and a a reasonable lift cam. Take the money saved from not using aftermarket aluminum heads and put it into a stroker kit.

I only plan on building one flattie and running it in my '36 Tudor, so I want to do it as right as I can. If we ever get a Coupe the engine will come out and go in the Coupe. My original 21-stud engine runs fine, just pukes oil like a pig. It will go back in (with the oil leak fixed) if I ever sell it.
 
There are a couple of MAJOR problems with wet sleeves, not to mention the cost.
1- You lose deck strength.
2- Any of the available big bore gaskets will hang over with a bore over 3. 438.
 
Pete said:
There are a couple of MAJOR problems with wet sleeves, not to mention the cost.
1- You lose deck strength.
2- Any of the available big bore gaskets will hang over with a bore over 3. 438.
Click to expand...

AND there is no sealing system in place, like those I'm remotely aware of in truck type diesels... Orings and such... You would likely have coolant in places you'ld rather not.
Karl
 
I love big cubes but.... you still have to feed them. I think the key to performance would be better air flow, if we could only put 2" intake valves in one with a blower you would have something.
 
This has been done to get a bigger bore on the early engines and still maintain a controled thickness of the cylinder wall but they had to leave a step at the bottom. The only one I've read about was done this way to make a more reliable and larger bore engine for a 21 stud application (37 block in a 35 Ford coupe) in order to run the great American race. I'm sure others have been done too but as Pete mentioned, it ain't cheep. The 21 stud engine in the article utilized JB Weld epoxy at the top during installation in order to help hold the deck better until torque up of the heads was done. They mentioned that they didn't use a lot of it, just enough to do the job. I don't know if they used sealant or epoxy at the bottom or not. The info I read didn't say. They definitely cut through the cylinder walls on all 8 cylinders.
 
"I thought as much since I never heard of anyone converting an engine to wet sleeves before."

It depends on what level of success you are talking about..I know of 2 that were wet sleeved to 3 7/16 (315 ci) and raced in the USAC modified hardtop division for 3 years. One of them finishing in the top 3 for 2 years in a row. BUT, he had a big bux sponsor and the engine was torn down after every race program to fix leaks.

"I think the key to performance would be better air flow, if we could only put 2" intake valves in one "

There have been literally thousand's of flatheads built with 2 inch intake valves.
Without weld modifying the ports, they breathe better with slightly smaller valves though. The flow bench always wins.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top