Why not a new casting

woodiewagon46 said:
Nick, Donovan has what they call the "Model D" engine. It looks similar to a Model A four cylinder, but it's not for the Model A restoration people. The block is $5000 alone and the crank is $3000. Once you add up all the unique parts that are needed for the engine the bottom line isn't for the faint of heart.
Click to expand...

I'm assuming it's legal to use for land speed racing or is that not a correct assumption?

Seems like a lot of dough for even the die hard banger guys if it can't be used legally in racing events.
 
itslow said:
A flathead block wouldn't be much more complicated to cast than a SBC. Just a few more cores to deal with.
Click to expand...

You have got to be kidding here. A small SBC or SBF is a piece of cake, a flathead is about as difficult as it gets.
 
woodiewagon46 said:
Nick, Donovan has what they call the "Model D" engine. It looks similar to a Model A four cylinder, but it's not for the Model A restoration people. The block is $5000 alone and the crank is $3000. Once you add up all the unique parts that are needed for the engine the bottom line isn't for the faint of heart.
Click to expand...


Is the Donovan still around? I remember reading about it in the early-mid '70's.
 
Welp, I never could understand why or how Ford Motor Company could find no interest in pitching in.

I know how budgets work so I really don’t need to be corrected here but my point is it’s all about priorities.

If Ford prioritized a Flathead block they could do one in their sleep. All it would take is one or two Early V8 enthusiasts inside the halls of Ford Performance and it could happen.

FoMoCo would create a sensation and a lot of buzz around their performance division. The Flathead is an icon for Ford as much as if not more so than a sbc is for Chevy or a Hemi is for Chrysler.

A clever engineer could have concept drawings by the end of the week and be making test pours within a matter of months if not weeks.

The problem is ROI. How do you sell that idea to the bean counters. Would every Ford Barn member or Early Ford V8 club member be willing to fork over $50 or $100 and establish a development fund? I know I would donate to that even if I wasn’t planning to buy a new block.

What we are talking about is economics more so than technical complexity.

IT CAN BE DONE.
 
Henry Floored said:
Welp, I never could understand why or how Ford Motor Company could find no interest in pitching in.

I know how budgets work so I really don’t need to be corrected here but my point is it’s all about priorities.

If Ford prioritized a Flathead block they could do one in their sleep. All it would take is one or two Early V8 enthusiasts inside the halls of Ford Performance and it could happen.

FoMoCo would create a sensation and a lot of buzz around their performance division. The Flathead is an icon for Ford as much as if not more so than a sbc is for Chevy or a Hemi is for Chrysler.

A clever engineer could have concept drawings by the end of the week and be making test pours within a matter of months if not weeks.

The problem is ROI. How do you sell that idea to the bean counters. Would every Ford Barn member or Early Ford V8 club member be willing to fork over $50 or $100 and establish a development fund? I know I would donate to that even if I wasn’t planning to buy a new block.

What we are talking about is economics more so than technical complexity.

IT CAN BE DONE.
Click to expand...

Yep, but doesn't seem to be something they are interested in. I remember reading about a time period when Ford decided to get out of producing engines for boat applications. It was stated that they could produce enough engines to met demand in 1/2 of one day and it wasn't worth messing with the setup time.
 
Yes, Donovan Engineering is still around. As for Ford Motor Company getting involved with a new flathead motor, I don't see that happening. Ford history is one thing, but as Henry points out, pouring big bucks into something that has a very limited ROI, would piss off the bean counters and stockholders as well. There are diehards that will continue to try and breathe life into flathead motors, but sometimes things just need to run their natural course and die a quiet death.
 
Probably more likely that the next available option will be a 3D printed flathead block with an electric motor hidden inside. Or is that sacrilege?

Don't get me wrong, I'd love the availability of a new block but don't foresee it with the misguided push for abolishing the combustion engine.
 
Fo Mo Co isn't financially interested in reinventing the past.
They decided that when the Y-block came out.

1953
In 1953, Ford made the final flathead V-8. It displaced 3.9 liters and made 110 hp. As engineers sought more power, Ford scrapped the design in favor of an overhead-valve engine. Thus the flathead V-8's tenure came to end.
 
How much did the aluminum or steel 4 bolt main flatheads made by Mark Kirby of Motor City Speed Equipment, out of Dundee, Michigan cost? Did they sell a lot? I don't ever see them used for sale
 
JSeery said:
You have got to be kidding here. A small SBC or SBF is a piece of cake, a flathead is about as difficult as it gets.
Click to expand...

Yes, as someone who's designed sand, die, and investment castings, the flathead wouldn't be that much more difficult.

What makes you think the flathead would be substantially more difficult than a SBC/SBF/BBC/BBF/etc?
 
itslow said:
Yes, as someone who's designed sand, die, and investment castings, the flathead wouldn't be that much more difficult.

What makes you think the flathead would be substantially more difficult than a SBC/SBF/BBC/BBF/etc?
Click to expand...

How about the intake and exhaust passages, the valve pockets, and everything else associated with them? Did you forget about them?
 
Having made my own moulds for aircooled cylinder heads and a v-twin crankcases I agree on the high complexity of the Ford flathead block. Especially the long exhaust tracks inside the hollow casting will give some extra "fun"
 
itslow said:
Yes, as someone who's designed sand, die, and investment castings, the flathead wouldn't be that much more difficult.

What makes you think the flathead would be substantially more difficult than a SBC/SBF/BBC/BBF/etc?
Click to expand...

In part because I have worked in a foundry and designed molds.
 

Attachments

  • Flathead Casting Cores.jpg
    Flathead Casting Cores.jpg
    89.8 KB · Views: 55
If anyone could do this, my money would be on Tod. He has the experience and equipment to do it and that hasn't gone anywhere so far.
 
tubman said:
How about the intake and exhaust passages, the valve pockets, and everything else associated with them? Did you forget about them?
Click to expand...

No, I didn't. What makes you think those would add substantially to the complexity? You're aware that OHV engines have numerous cores in them, too, right?

For a pattern maker or foundry man, a Flathead isn't an "OMG, this is too complex, we can't even fathom how to handle it" proposition that some of you seem to think.

With the advent of printed cores that such a low-volume project would be perfect for it becomes even less so.

This is like someone being, "XYZ OHV heads are too complex. They can't possibly be made," because of the extra intake and exhaust cores.
 
Well, is sounding easy enough, should be lots of folks jumping on this? Don't think so, but a lot of flathead lovers would like a new block when someone wants to give it a try.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top