Jump to content

timkingsbury

Member with a blog
  • Content Count

    792
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    44

Reputation Activity

  1. Thanks
    timkingsbury got a reaction from 55 Fargo in 250 CI engine Versus 265 CI Engine   
    The Serial Number is for a 1954 Chrysler Windsor which engine was made in the Windsor Ontario Engine Plant and the car came from the Windsor Assembly plant. It was a 265 ci motor when it left the factory .    3 7/16" bore and 4 3/4" stroke   That being said the serial as 55 Fargo point out on another one, was not applied at the factory.  The factory used a jig which held all numbers,  letters and any special character together so when the serial number was applied they were absolutely in a straight line.  This is a restamped block.   1954 was the 1st year the Windsor had a v8 in it, although at least in Canada the 265 was an option.
     
     
     
     
    The part number that is cast into the block -1400229-1  was actual a part number used for the 238, 250 and 265 ci engines and was a block number casted from oct 1951 until 1955 actually.   If you looked inside the block you would notice its been carved on the side which allows for the long stroke 265 crank and rods to have clearance. That same carving was
    done in advance of it being known which ci motor it would be.
     
    If you look closer to the oil filler tube, but down by the oil pan you will likely see a Letter (likely a D  and then a number (1 or 2 digets) and then another number (1 or 2 digets) .
    That will allow us to figure out when the block was casted.
     
    You can also look up a little higher and see a clock face cast in the block and a code for what shift it was casted on.    The USA engines are a lot easier to determine the 
    casting date that the later Canadian 25 1/2" engines,  but thats a long story that really doesnt help in this discussion
     
     
     
    Good eye... 55 Fargo your 100% correct.  while the t137 is an excellent resource it really is, it is not without its gaps and Canadian engines are often part of that gap.
     
    A classic example would be looking at a 1949 Plymouth you will see a p18 shown as a 218.   Without getting into a big debate,  it really was known within Chrysler as a 217. The Canadian 25 1/2" engine was a 218.   However the real point is  I have a 1949 Plymouth that my great aunt bought brand new.  Its a p18 serial number.    It was neither a 217 or 218... In canada they were 228 ci 25 1/2" blocks.   On the t137 site it would show the 1954 chrysler 6 cylinder as c62 and that is correct...    Correct for engines which were shipped to the USA for assembly into a 1954 Chrysler.   For engines that were going to the Canadian assembly plant in Windsor, they were marked c54.    
     
    Hope that helps
  2. Thanks
    timkingsbury got a reaction from 55 Fargo in 250 CI engine Versus 265 CI Engine   
    The Serial Number is for a 1954 Chrysler Windsor which engine was made in the Windsor Ontario Engine Plant and the car came from the Windsor Assembly plant. It was a 265 ci motor when it left the factory .    3 7/16" bore and 4 3/4" stroke   That being said the serial as 55 Fargo point out on another one, was not applied at the factory.  The factory used a jig which held all numbers,  letters and any special character together so when the serial number was applied they were absolutely in a straight line.  This is a restamped block.   1954 was the 1st year the Windsor had a v8 in it, although at least in Canada the 265 was an option.
     
     
     
     
    The part number that is cast into the block -1400229-1  was actual a part number used for the 238, 250 and 265 ci engines and was a block number casted from oct 1951 until 1955 actually.   If you looked inside the block you would notice its been carved on the side which allows for the long stroke 265 crank and rods to have clearance. That same carving was
    done in advance of it being known which ci motor it would be.
     
    If you look closer to the oil filler tube, but down by the oil pan you will likely see a Letter (likely a D  and then a number (1 or 2 digets) and then another number (1 or 2 digets) .
    That will allow us to figure out when the block was casted.
     
    You can also look up a little higher and see a clock face cast in the block and a code for what shift it was casted on.    The USA engines are a lot easier to determine the 
    casting date that the later Canadian 25 1/2" engines,  but thats a long story that really doesnt help in this discussion
     
     
     
    Good eye... 55 Fargo your 100% correct.  while the t137 is an excellent resource it really is, it is not without its gaps and Canadian engines are often part of that gap.
     
    A classic example would be looking at a 1949 Plymouth you will see a p18 shown as a 218.   Without getting into a big debate,  it really was known within Chrysler as a 217. The Canadian 25 1/2" engine was a 218.   However the real point is  I have a 1949 Plymouth that my great aunt bought brand new.  Its a p18 serial number.    It was neither a 217 or 218... In canada they were 228 ci 25 1/2" blocks.   On the t137 site it would show the 1954 chrysler 6 cylinder as c62 and that is correct...    Correct for engines which were shipped to the USA for assembly into a 1954 Chrysler.   For engines that were going to the Canadian assembly plant in Windsor, they were marked c54.    
     
    Hope that helps
  3. Thanks
    timkingsbury reacted to 55 Fargo in 250 CI engine Versus 265 CI Engine   
    Note your stamping not quite straight.
    Factory or a rebuilder stamping on numbers?
    The C54 engine nice straight stamping.
    C54 is not identified as a Chryslsr 6 engine on the T137 registry.
    For some real accurate identification I suggest you PM Bill Watson or Tim Kingsbury. Most on here are only guessing.
     
     
  4. Like
    timkingsbury reacted to oldasdirt in Carburetor Jetting   
    1)  yes
    2) just changing jets is not a solution to running ethanol tossed into gas. Using real gasoline is the solution.
    3) no Ansel Grose died, and no one has produced the jets since nor will you find it easy to find them.
    4) I am sure I do, but a d6g1 which is a 1 9/16 throttle bore 1 ¼ venturi carb is not an island on to its own.  Your center sections are more important that the top which can be and
    is often changed around.
     
    As taken from a document I have from Tim Kingsbury - 
     
    3 bolt – center section is 660 for Plymouth – starting 1950
    2 bolt – center section is 635 -  1949 only
    2 bolt – center section is 370 -  1939 – 1948
     
     
     
     
    Answer -  no they are not
     
    THe carb you have purchased  has 1 11/16 throttle bore and 1 11/32 venturi. The main and other jetting can be changed  but there is no getting around the throttle bore and venturi size
    as I think 55Fargo was eluding to.
     
     
     
    Sorry your last statement is just factually incorrect.  Carter ball and ball made carbs for specific purposes and specifications and they provided carbs based on what their customers wanted.  A stromberg 81 or 97 were carbs that the carb maker said -  here is what we have.. its great, it will do what you want.     sounds like another automotive guy -  Henry Ford..   If he had.  The three carbs you reference number in them are the cfm of the carb.  In the case of carter ball and ball they not only ranged way lower and way higher in cfm but
    they also addressed various torque curves and transmission options that manufacturers would come up with.
    his way a model t would still be the only car you would need  and its color would be black.
     
     
    I see so this thread went from you were documenting  carb components which i had some interest in digging out all my carter ball and ball books, to your the 
    expert and your using this to tune your dual carbs this summer..  rofl..    I also see you have bought Don C car which I am sure must be tuned to the nth degree
    because it was dons.      Thanks for the laughs folks..  It reminds me why I dont spend much time on this site anymore.    No offense and best of luck
  5. Thanks
    timkingsbury reacted to 55 Fargo in What did I buy?   
    Ribbed 49 bumpers and 49 tailights.
    Looks like a good project.
    Good luck and keep posting your progress updates.
    Yes just buy a compressor and air up tires...lol
    Unless you already have a compressor...lol
  6. Like
    timkingsbury got a reaction from 55 Fargo in Best 25” Flathead   
    Well you make some interesting observations.    On HP your numbers are not quite correct and what was published was for the 265 coming out in 1952 under valued and with a purpose.  I have uploaded many times and can send it to you, the 1952 poster which was the start of the 265 and as well the start of dual carbs and factory dual exhaust, but also 241 dodge hemi. The Hemi for what they called the medium tonnage field was primarily municipalities and contractors, dump trucks etc. It w4 ould come out at 133 hp.  The 265 for the truck with the truck cam and dual carbs and dual exhaust was 155hp.  That not a guess, thats a fact. But marketing said if you say that we will never sell the hemi, so we want it cranked back. At one point the poster was the hemi at 133 and the 6 and 132,  but when it hit the dealers in December of 1951 the 6 was tucked into the corner and was shown at 136 hp.  Pure marketting. No difference to the 1964 426 hemi being called 425 hp with a single 4 barrel, and in 1966 with a wilder cam, 2 4 barrels it was still 425 hp. That of course was for insurance purposes.    In any case I digress.
    The 265 from the factory with a chrysler car 265 cam in it, was the most hp of the 23 1/2" or 25 1/2" engines.
     
    But connecting rods..  You are correct, the shorter the rod the bigger the angle.    Now its the balanced crank, rods and pistons that offset your concerns it really does.
    Think about it..   GM, FORD, you name the manufacturer.. Who else had forged cranks balanced to a gram..  answer no one..
     
    Back to your point..  Let me just say that in the 238/250/265 series engines, they are all exactly the same bore..  3 7/16"    If your having custom made forged pistons made
    well what you do is take a 238 rod, and raise the pin placement on the pistons.        Longer rod and better angle.  It doesnt work with a 218 and a 201 is smaller rods bearings so not relevant. The point being  on that one point your correct.. long the rod the better..  if..  key word if you not negatively effecting displacement.
     
    As so many would tell you, there is no replacement for displacement.
     
     
  7. Like
    timkingsbury got a reaction from 55 Fargo in Best 25” Flathead   
    Hi -  Well  in the 25 1/2" block engines.. the 201 you maybe referring to was moved from USA production to the Windsor Ontario Canada plant when it opened in 1935 for the 1936 model year.  that engine was produced for 14 months out of that plant.  Among other things you may wish to consider..  The crank has smaller journals, the water jackets, are smaller. the oil galleys are smaller..  It really would be the weakest of all engines ever produced out of the Canadian Plant.    When I say that I am quoting my Grandfather who would be the GM of that engine plant when it opened in 1935, reporting directly to Walter Chrysler (and not the VP of production) and he would still be in charged of the engine plant when the very last 25 1/2" engine rolled out of the plant on Nov 11 1959.  The 230 was 23 1/2" block so not relevant to the big block discussion, beyond the small block has offset rods.    With the 218 and I am assuming your are referring to the Canadian 25 1/2" 218 and not the USA small block 23 1/2" engine that are 217 that are often called 218s.   The next generation block would actually be a changed version of the 228 ci motor which started in Windsor in early 1936. That is often referred to as a generation 2 block.  Definately better than the 201 engine,  but there would be a number of changes to the engine blocks and internal configurations.  Even the 1946 250 ci motor has a different block than would a 250 ci motor made after August 1951.   It would be that later block which has the best water jackets,  best oil circulation, reworking of oil passages and on and on.  By that point you could get a 218, 228 or the  series of 3 7/16" bore which would be the 238,  250 and 265 ci motors.  The difference is the stroke which is accomplished by changing rods, and cranks.    4 1/4" being a 238,  4 1/2" being a 250 and 4 3/4" being a 265.   But there is no question the best ever flathead engines ever built are those generations.
     
    Among other things and I could give you a laundry list..     Your talking forged cranks balanced to 1 gram,  forged pistons,  rods, pistons and cranks as an assembly balanced to 1 gram. That never existed with any other flathead engine anywhere in the world.  In fact my Grandfather often said -  I defy anyone to find a more balanced engine in the planet that came out of my plant.
     
    So if stroke becomes where you wish to draw your battle line..    best try with the 238, 250 and 265 motors..    
     
    But  by 1953 the vast majority of all orders for heavy trucks, commercial vehicles, municipal vehicles, industrial engines, for welders,  water pumps, combines, and on and on were 265s.  One can point ot military orders of 250s and I would suggest the reduction in price was the factor. They didnt want to pay the extra  $.    
     
    One last one, of total production of any single motor the 265 was produced in a volume larger than any other single motor configuation  from the Windsor Engine plant.   From 1946 until the end of the flatheads, the Windsor engine plants warranty numbers as a % of production was not only the smallest of any Chrysler engine plant by over 98% but the smallest of any engine plant in North America.     The reason was simple..  Build it better,  balance it better and you will get less back.
     
    Tim Kingsbury
     
  8. Like
    timkingsbury got a reaction from 55 Fargo in Best 25” Flathead   
    Well you make some interesting observations.    On HP your numbers are not quite correct and what was published was for the 265 coming out in 1952 under valued and with a purpose.  I have uploaded many times and can send it to you, the 1952 poster which was the start of the 265 and as well the start of dual carbs and factory dual exhaust, but also 241 dodge hemi. The Hemi for what they called the medium tonnage field was primarily municipalities and contractors, dump trucks etc. It w4 ould come out at 133 hp.  The 265 for the truck with the truck cam and dual carbs and dual exhaust was 155hp.  That not a guess, thats a fact. But marketing said if you say that we will never sell the hemi, so we want it cranked back. At one point the poster was the hemi at 133 and the 6 and 132,  but when it hit the dealers in December of 1951 the 6 was tucked into the corner and was shown at 136 hp.  Pure marketting. No difference to the 1964 426 hemi being called 425 hp with a single 4 barrel, and in 1966 with a wilder cam, 2 4 barrels it was still 425 hp. That of course was for insurance purposes.    In any case I digress.
    The 265 from the factory with a chrysler car 265 cam in it, was the most hp of the 23 1/2" or 25 1/2" engines.
     
    But connecting rods..  You are correct, the shorter the rod the bigger the angle.    Now its the balanced crank, rods and pistons that offset your concerns it really does.
    Think about it..   GM, FORD, you name the manufacturer.. Who else had forged cranks balanced to a gram..  answer no one..
     
    Back to your point..  Let me just say that in the 238/250/265 series engines, they are all exactly the same bore..  3 7/16"    If your having custom made forged pistons made
    well what you do is take a 238 rod, and raise the pin placement on the pistons.        Longer rod and better angle.  It doesnt work with a 218 and a 201 is smaller rods bearings so not relevant. The point being  on that one point your correct.. long the rod the better..  if..  key word if you not negatively effecting displacement.
     
    As so many would tell you, there is no replacement for displacement.
     
     
  9. Thanks
    timkingsbury got a reaction from 55 Fargo in Best 25” Flathead   
    Anything with a date after august 1951 is the best blocks made.    A bypass oil filter does a better job of filtering oil,  but a full flow starting in 1954 model years will see all the oil passed through a filter.  You can drill into a by pass block and put on a full flow on it.    Here its done on a 1949 Canadian Plymouth block, which started its life as a 228 and is now 125 thou over bored 265.   You can run both a bypass and a full flow if you like. There are 265s with either configuratons that you can consider as durable as anything ever made.  All of the Canadian engines after ww2 in the 25 1/2" series are all forged cranks, balanced to 1 gram,  forged pistons (from the factory unless ordered by a secondary manufacturer) and balanced assemblies of crank, rods and pistons.
     
    You will see lots referring to combines and industrial engines.  You can get into engines that are purpose build, maybe with sodium valves and low rev cams.  Often industrial engines have cams to meet a specific hp configuration but also a per hour fuel consumption number will have a specialty cam.    It is the cam which a lot miss and there are a huge catalogue of cams that were ground for the 25 1/2" engines.
     
    The whole topic can be an explosive one and everyone has an opinion. Sadly I find a lot of opinions can be without any experience or expertise behind them.  As I have read your posts you talk durability, but then I see the thread going in the supercharger and other directions.    I will take a slight tangent here to say, that once you move any engine into a turbo or super charger arena,  a cam with a certain number of degrees of separation between when an intake closes and exhausts opens, and visaversa on exhausts closing and intakes opening, become critical if you doing much more than using them as jewelry.  By that I mean if your just putting it on with a tiny boost as many have ok..  In those cases I can get way way more power out of a naturally aspirated engine.   But if your going to start cranking up pressure, you need separation and no stock cam was ever cam with such seperation.
     
    We are happy to provide without charge the specs for at least a couple of cams for superchargers or turbo charges.
     
    After that,  drop me a note any time..  fargopickupking@yahoo.com   and happy to discuss further.


  10. Like
    timkingsbury got a reaction from 55 Fargo in Best 25” Flathead   
    Well you make some interesting observations.    On HP your numbers are not quite correct and what was published was for the 265 coming out in 1952 under valued and with a purpose.  I have uploaded many times and can send it to you, the 1952 poster which was the start of the 265 and as well the start of dual carbs and factory dual exhaust, but also 241 dodge hemi. The Hemi for what they called the medium tonnage field was primarily municipalities and contractors, dump trucks etc. It w4 ould come out at 133 hp.  The 265 for the truck with the truck cam and dual carbs and dual exhaust was 155hp.  That not a guess, thats a fact. But marketing said if you say that we will never sell the hemi, so we want it cranked back. At one point the poster was the hemi at 133 and the 6 and 132,  but when it hit the dealers in December of 1951 the 6 was tucked into the corner and was shown at 136 hp.  Pure marketting. No difference to the 1964 426 hemi being called 425 hp with a single 4 barrel, and in 1966 with a wilder cam, 2 4 barrels it was still 425 hp. That of course was for insurance purposes.    In any case I digress.
    The 265 from the factory with a chrysler car 265 cam in it, was the most hp of the 23 1/2" or 25 1/2" engines.
     
    But connecting rods..  You are correct, the shorter the rod the bigger the angle.    Now its the balanced crank, rods and pistons that offset your concerns it really does.
    Think about it..   GM, FORD, you name the manufacturer.. Who else had forged cranks balanced to a gram..  answer no one..
     
    Back to your point..  Let me just say that in the 238/250/265 series engines, they are all exactly the same bore..  3 7/16"    If your having custom made forged pistons made
    well what you do is take a 238 rod, and raise the pin placement on the pistons.        Longer rod and better angle.  It doesnt work with a 218 and a 201 is smaller rods bearings so not relevant. The point being  on that one point your correct.. long the rod the better..  if..  key word if you not negatively effecting displacement.
     
    As so many would tell you, there is no replacement for displacement.
     
     
  11. Like
    timkingsbury got a reaction from 55 Fargo in Best 25” Flathead   
    Hi -  Well  in the 25 1/2" block engines.. the 201 you maybe referring to was moved from USA production to the Windsor Ontario Canada plant when it opened in 1935 for the 1936 model year.  that engine was produced for 14 months out of that plant.  Among other things you may wish to consider..  The crank has smaller journals, the water jackets, are smaller. the oil galleys are smaller..  It really would be the weakest of all engines ever produced out of the Canadian Plant.    When I say that I am quoting my Grandfather who would be the GM of that engine plant when it opened in 1935, reporting directly to Walter Chrysler (and not the VP of production) and he would still be in charged of the engine plant when the very last 25 1/2" engine rolled out of the plant on Nov 11 1959.  The 230 was 23 1/2" block so not relevant to the big block discussion, beyond the small block has offset rods.    With the 218 and I am assuming your are referring to the Canadian 25 1/2" 218 and not the USA small block 23 1/2" engine that are 217 that are often called 218s.   The next generation block would actually be a changed version of the 228 ci motor which started in Windsor in early 1936. That is often referred to as a generation 2 block.  Definately better than the 201 engine,  but there would be a number of changes to the engine blocks and internal configurations.  Even the 1946 250 ci motor has a different block than would a 250 ci motor made after August 1951.   It would be that later block which has the best water jackets,  best oil circulation, reworking of oil passages and on and on.  By that point you could get a 218, 228 or the  series of 3 7/16" bore which would be the 238,  250 and 265 ci motors.  The difference is the stroke which is accomplished by changing rods, and cranks.    4 1/4" being a 238,  4 1/2" being a 250 and 4 3/4" being a 265.   But there is no question the best ever flathead engines ever built are those generations.
     
    Among other things and I could give you a laundry list..     Your talking forged cranks balanced to 1 gram,  forged pistons,  rods, pistons and cranks as an assembly balanced to 1 gram. That never existed with any other flathead engine anywhere in the world.  In fact my Grandfather often said -  I defy anyone to find a more balanced engine in the planet that came out of my plant.
     
    So if stroke becomes where you wish to draw your battle line..    best try with the 238, 250 and 265 motors..    
     
    But  by 1953 the vast majority of all orders for heavy trucks, commercial vehicles, municipal vehicles, industrial engines, for welders,  water pumps, combines, and on and on were 265s.  One can point ot military orders of 250s and I would suggest the reduction in price was the factor. They didnt want to pay the extra  $.    
     
    One last one, of total production of any single motor the 265 was produced in a volume larger than any other single motor configuation  from the Windsor Engine plant.   From 1946 until the end of the flatheads, the Windsor engine plants warranty numbers as a % of production was not only the smallest of any Chrysler engine plant by over 98% but the smallest of any engine plant in North America.     The reason was simple..  Build it better,  balance it better and you will get less back.
     
    Tim Kingsbury
     
  12. Like
    timkingsbury got a reaction from HotRodTractor in Best 25” Flathead   
    Well after my 7th note from someone I guess I will wade in.   I have no idea what Don's picture is or what the story line there is, but here   Here is the answer to your question.  Yes,  every single dual carb dual exhaust manifold that came from the factory was equipped with govenors and balance tubes.    You could buy the intake assembly which was the intake and balanced tube, the exhaust maifolds (front or back) as individual assemblies from dealers.   Lots of stock car builders would drop the govenors. If you also drop the balance tube as many do, you will find you loose torque and hp.  You will gain rpm if you are simply removing the balance tube from the truck engine that it came from the factory with.  But and here is the key but,  all of those engines that came equipped with the setup and purpose built cams.  So  you only need to take a cam from a 1952-1953 chrysler and put it into the truck engine to raise the rpm, keeping the torque curve. It actually will develop 8 more hp with nothing more than that cam swap.        Again, I am not talking putting in a custom cam or making any other changes, beyond putting in the period car cam into the truck engine. The dual carb/dual exhaust intakes were all produced in Windsor Ontario Canada, and were available at dealers as parts starting in march 1952.  I clearly cant speak to all dealerships but can say the Wellington Motors in Guelph Ontario Canada could still get you the dual carb setup in june of 1974.  I have a receipt for a complete setup purchased that way.
     


  13. Like
    timkingsbury got a reaction from HotRodTractor in Best 25” Flathead   
    Well after my 7th note from someone I guess I will wade in.   I have no idea what Don's picture is or what the story line there is, but here   Here is the answer to your question.  Yes,  every single dual carb dual exhaust manifold that came from the factory was equipped with govenors and balance tubes.    You could buy the intake assembly which was the intake and balanced tube, the exhaust maifolds (front or back) as individual assemblies from dealers.   Lots of stock car builders would drop the govenors. If you also drop the balance tube as many do, you will find you loose torque and hp.  You will gain rpm if you are simply removing the balance tube from the truck engine that it came from the factory with.  But and here is the key but,  all of those engines that came equipped with the setup and purpose built cams.  So  you only need to take a cam from a 1952-1953 chrysler and put it into the truck engine to raise the rpm, keeping the torque curve. It actually will develop 8 more hp with nothing more than that cam swap.        Again, I am not talking putting in a custom cam or making any other changes, beyond putting in the period car cam into the truck engine. The dual carb/dual exhaust intakes were all produced in Windsor Ontario Canada, and were available at dealers as parts starting in march 1952.  I clearly cant speak to all dealerships but can say the Wellington Motors in Guelph Ontario Canada could still get you the dual carb setup in june of 1974.  I have a receipt for a complete setup purchased that way.
     


  14. Like
    timkingsbury got a reaction from ushp12 in Dual carb intake - any interest   
    Howdy  Folks -
     
    As some may know my father Eddy Kingsbury and George Asche along with myself and a buddy developed a triple carb intake
    for the Canadian 25 1/2"  big block flatheads.  We used the 50's triple that Eddy  Edmunds produced and dramatically improved the flow of the intake as well as made a number of changes to the design.
     
    We did so not so much for commerical purposes but for use on our rear engine dragster and a couple of personal projects.
     
    I put the setup on my 1949 plymouth business coupe (sporting a modified 265 ci motor) and am currently getting ready to put it on a 1956 Fargo pickup.
     
    If you want to see it in action on my car or the dragster I have uploaded a view video's on youtube
     
    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8y7yB5J7YNWI2Rnnvn8rig
     
    But the reason for my post is to gauge if there is interest in making a dual carb setup that could be used on not only cars, but trucks and older cars.  The big difference as I am sure you guys know is the tabs on the outside of the intake for mounting linkage. That is something the edmunds, offy or other intakes dont have.
     
    It would be for the USA small block engines. We bascially already have all the research and testing done when we created our triple for the big block.  We have had a number of car guys who are unhappy with the performance of the offy's (lots of rev but looses torque over stock) and who are seeing huge prices for vintage edmunds intakes ask us to consider making a dual carb setup.
     
    We also know with lots of our triples out there to confirm our triple is outperforming the super rare edmunds triple, so we are confident a dual carb setup would outperform any similar intake ever produced. 
     
    Our big advantage is not only is there better flow testing instrumentation available today, but foam core casting just allows for a product that could not have been made in the 40's-60's when all of the dual carb intakes were designed.
     
    Right now it is looking like an AoK dual carb intake,  machined, with the truck linkage tab(s) drilled and tapped are likely going to
    retail for $400-$425
     
    Is there any interest from the flathead truck world ?
     
    Thanks for your time and any input is appreciated
     
    Tim  Kingbury and George Asche
     



  15. Like
    timkingsbury got a reaction from Reg Evans in ENGINE IDENTITY   
    Howdy Shull  -   The fact that there is no stamped number of the block likely means at some point in time the block was cracked or could not be bored out any further and someone bought a replacement block.   The casting number on the block and the head actually do not  really provide you the information one might hope it does.   For the year of the block,  on the oil filter side of the block,  right close to the oil pan and close to the oil filler there will be the date of casting.   It was used for internal purposes as  blocks became generational items that often were used over several years and several engine sizes.   The last generational change for the 25 1/2"   Canadian engine was october 1951.At that point the block was carved internally to
    allow for the 4 3/4" stroke motor for the 265 ci motor, however that block was also used for the 238 and 250 ci motors.    Same block same bore for those 3 just different stroke.
    After 1955 the year was actually dropped as there was no further block generation.  So if your block has a month and day  but no year code is was cast after Jan 1955.
     
    So your back to the strokes  using the method BobK outlined will tell you if it happened to be a 238 (4 1/4" stroke)    250 ( 4 1/2" stroke) and 265 ( 4 3/4" stroke)  although you could also have a 228 ci motor or several other cubic inches with a spitfire head  on it.  As well while the 238, 250 and 265 are 3 7/16"   bore stock you would have to remove the head to  know for
    sure the cubic inch.
     
    I would however do as BobK suggested as a start. Pull the brass plug and measure the stroke. That really narrows things down quickly.
     
    Tim

  16. Like
    timkingsbury got a reaction from oldasdirt in Overdrive frustrations   
    Well here is the wiring diagram (courtesy of George Asche.  Yes bypassing the circuit certainly tells you whether that was an issue.  The electronic ignition by itself really doesnt have anything to do with anything assuming everything is wired correctly.   Ill drop you a pm.
     

  17. Like
    timkingsbury got a reaction from belvedere666 in Split exhaust/heat riser   
    Sadly this is an idea that may work with other engines, but it most certainly does not work with the flathead.   We have done extensive tests. Shortly I will do a complete blog entry on it.  But the short version is that when an engine 1st starts up the temperature of the water/antifreeze is the outside air temperature.  I dont want to get into a big technical arguement as I
    know at minus 46 degrees the antifreeze isnt minus 46 so save the comment.     Are the water is moved by this plate at start up you are actually drawing heat away from the intake. Heat that even with the split i the exhaust is naturally coming from the exhaust and hitting the intake.    Now  headers made from stock exhaust actually have a closer profile to the intake than
    does say fentons, so there is more heat coming from them.    
     
    But with the water heat attached  you have no positive effect until the engine has actually reached close to or reached operating temperature.  My then you dont need it.  Prior to that point you are actually drawing temperature away from the intake.      I can say that with absolute certainty. I have tested it at multiple temperature ranges.  Just like I have with the couple of generations of edmunds that offered water heating.
     
    So save your time and money.  It doesnt work as one might expect and the icing of carbs, Ive heard this story many times and  have see many cars do it, but none where flathead mopars
    until we are talking very cold temperatures which there are some on the forum that drive in them. Absolutely no doubt about that.   In that case  split your exhaust internally and leave it connected to the intake.

  18. Like
    timkingsbury got a reaction from belvedere666 in Split exhaust/heat riser   
    Sadly this is an idea that may work with other engines, but it most certainly does not work with the flathead.   We have done extensive tests. Shortly I will do a complete blog entry on it.  But the short version is that when an engine 1st starts up the temperature of the water/antifreeze is the outside air temperature.  I dont want to get into a big technical arguement as I
    know at minus 46 degrees the antifreeze isnt minus 46 so save the comment.     Are the water is moved by this plate at start up you are actually drawing heat away from the intake. Heat that even with the split i the exhaust is naturally coming from the exhaust and hitting the intake.    Now  headers made from stock exhaust actually have a closer profile to the intake than
    does say fentons, so there is more heat coming from them.    
     
    But with the water heat attached  you have no positive effect until the engine has actually reached close to or reached operating temperature.  My then you dont need it.  Prior to that point you are actually drawing temperature away from the intake.      I can say that with absolute certainty. I have tested it at multiple temperature ranges.  Just like I have with the couple of generations of edmunds that offered water heating.
     
    So save your time and money.  It doesnt work as one might expect and the icing of carbs, Ive heard this story many times and  have see many cars do it, but none where flathead mopars
    until we are talking very cold temperatures which there are some on the forum that drive in them. Absolutely no doubt about that.   In that case  split your exhaust internally and leave it connected to the intake.

  19. Like
    timkingsbury got a reaction from belvedere666 in Split exhaust/heat riser   
    Sadly this is an idea that may work with other engines, but it most certainly does not work with the flathead.   We have done extensive tests. Shortly I will do a complete blog entry on it.  But the short version is that when an engine 1st starts up the temperature of the water/antifreeze is the outside air temperature.  I dont want to get into a big technical arguement as I
    know at minus 46 degrees the antifreeze isnt minus 46 so save the comment.     Are the water is moved by this plate at start up you are actually drawing heat away from the intake. Heat that even with the split i the exhaust is naturally coming from the exhaust and hitting the intake.    Now  headers made from stock exhaust actually have a closer profile to the intake than
    does say fentons, so there is more heat coming from them.    
     
    But with the water heat attached  you have no positive effect until the engine has actually reached close to or reached operating temperature.  My then you dont need it.  Prior to that point you are actually drawing temperature away from the intake.      I can say that with absolute certainty. I have tested it at multiple temperature ranges.  Just like I have with the couple of generations of edmunds that offered water heating.
     
    So save your time and money.  It doesnt work as one might expect and the icing of carbs, Ive heard this story many times and  have see many cars do it, but none where flathead mopars
    until we are talking very cold temperatures which there are some on the forum that drive in them. Absolutely no doubt about that.   In that case  split your exhaust internally and leave it connected to the intake.

  20. Like
    timkingsbury reacted to Ernie Baily in Overdrive frustrations   
    Well, I did some further testing of both the new and old relays and found out the new one had a closed circuit and was causing the clicking every time I connected the Batt cable. I put the old one back one and it seems to work OK! I then took it for a test drive and would hear a clicking once in a while, so I pushed in the kickdown switch and that was the same click, so I believe the new kickdown switch is bad. I put in my old kickdown switch in and now no clicking. I have contacted George Asche several times and he now suggests to bypass the Governor circuit all together and use a ground switch to activate the solenoid at speed like the governor would normally do and see it shifts into overdrive. I hope to get this done later today.  We'll See!
  21. Like
    timkingsbury got a reaction from Blue in Gear Oil Recommendation   
    Here is what we use in every vintage overdrive transmission (R6,  R7 ,  R10G1)  and every straight vintage 3 speed,   4 speed and yes even the 5 speeds in our heavy 1952-1956 Dodge trucks.  We have trannys with over 100,000 miles on them using it,  as would the recognized expert in vintage trannys George Asche.    He has taken apart a tranny with tens of thousands of miles on it using Fuel Synthetic oil that yes is really designed for Diesel engines and the internals were perfect.
     

  22. Like
    timkingsbury got a reaction from thebeebe5 in Open Topic Engine Thread?   
    Well Don as usual despite your attempt to be an try and suggest your expert on every topic,  as evidenced by your over 18,000 posts, your true expertise is making it up as you go along and trying to make everything a conspiracy. So lets look at your latest rant.
     
    Don says - " Is the film clip of running of a full race engine for a few seconds with no load and under 3 grand supposed to be proof of dependability?"
     
    Tims response -  did you really think that engine only made it to something under 3000 rpm ? and yes, we all realize if it isn't your car, that you had someone do, it couldn't be reliable.   So Don, just assume it only lasted for 2 minutes and 11 seconds.. it never ran again, never will and don't go away mad, just go away.
     
    Don says - "Proof of racing capabilities with no speed or time results shown?"
     
    and he rants on and then  Don says - "Claims of horsepower at given RPM's have little meaning without documentation"..
     
    Tim says -  Well Don I am not sure who died and made you King, but  I don't need to prove anything to you... period.  .. I have never claimed how fast it goes, what horsepower it is, what eta it would run or anything...  I realize that pains you being everything is a conspiracy and as the self style expert you are, "proof it" is your common theme, when we both know.. no such proof would ever be enough, because if it wasn't done your way and you don't have it, it cant be any good or it cant be true.   So sorry Don to break the bad news to you, but  I have more horsepower than you do, 
     
    Now if you still haven't caught on despite making it very clear, I have no intention of ever providing you with anything... I don't care what you think, and  yes, I know after your 18000 posts, with your chest puffed out continually I should in your mind be impressed..  Unfortunately I am not. 
     
     But if you would like to bring your car and race the dragster or my 49 Plymouth, bring it on.  Put your money where your mouth is, or continue to rant about what is it up to now, your 800 miles a day claims and extreme reliability...  because Don, we have no proof you have ever driven 800 miles in a day in your car, and given your credibility, no amount of proof would every be sufficient if the shoe was on the other foot, so why should we believe your claim.
     
    Now Don, I am sure your blood pressure will rise, and you will head off to the chat room and huff and puff, and should have lots of  private messages complaining to moderators. and to your pose of friend(s). That is fine, but by the number of notes I have had from a great deal of members of this forum, there are lots waiting for someone to call you out..  But the reality is I like a huge amount of people would prefer you just go away..  If you don't agree, super.. but your act is wearing a little thin so please.. save your breathe because I have no interest in what you have to say..  and yes, I have repeated that a few times so  you get it.. No please.. go away !  This thread was on "The ? Of Chrysler Flathead Hi Performance"  not lets get Dons take on why Hi Performance isn't the way to go, and the only thing that makes sense is a 500 miles a day,.. I mean now 800 miles a day flathead..  if you want to start a thread on that topic, please do and I promise you I will stay well away from it.
  23. Like
    timkingsbury got a reaction from 55 Fargo in Will not Cross Drill my crank   
    While a pre oil pump or sump design is certainly an improvement, its over kill and definitely not anything  your going to need.
     
    On pistons,  again, for what your talking its over kill. Cast pistons with 4 rings  are more than capable of running a couple of hundred thousand miles.  Now in terms of original pistons and rings, well right off the bat it depends on what engine your talking about. There were forged pistons and cast pistons, as well as chrome rings and cast rings used over the decades in flathead mopars.   But for a discussion on  which is better, original 1930-1959 technology verses modern forged pistons and modern rings well there is little question which is better. We use custom pistons are rings all the time. The biggest issue is simple.. They are expensive.
    But in my 1949 Plymouth or our dragster,   they are Venola Top Fuel Pistons,  coated with plasma moly rings. They are smaller, lighter, stronger  and....  expensive. I will attach a picture of a modern forged piston sitting beside an OEM 265 ci piston from 1954.   The last 6 pictures are the pistons we had custom made for the 1933 Plymouth race car, and as you can see the rings are super thin.
    But back to your engine your describing, you dont need that.  You should be able to do a rebuild with  decent cast pistons,   decent bearings etc and never have to rebuild it again. Even if you want to bore it out a bunch, regrind the cam to some mild custom grind, deck the block, shave the head etc,  you dont need pre-oil pump and custom pistons.  But then, lol, there is lots I dont really need but I have anyways, so by all means fill your boots.







  24. Like
    timkingsbury got a reaction from classiccarjack in Will not Cross Drill my crank   
    Hey John -  Just to clarify as I sit here laughing while reading your post,  I am definitely not taking over George's business or anything close to that. Ive know George for over 20 years. George has been building performance flathead engines for over 60 years. His 1929  Desoto which he still owns was undefeated at the Flying Mile on Daytona Beach in 1955 at 142 mph. That highly modified 265ci engine was built by George.  George built the engines for his Uncle Harry Hiens who is in the nascar hall of fame. Those flathead engines were legendary for beating all kinds of v8s.   My family background dates back to my Grandfather who worked for Chrysler starting in the 1930s, my Dad who was also an automotive engineer, who build flathead stock car engines in the 50s and 60s, later moving on to building engines for a number of well known top fuel racers.  My background really pales in comparison to all of those, although have grown up around some of the best and brightest in the industry.While I do have an automotive engineering degree, it was definately not where the bulk of my career focused by any stretch.  I did run a car in the pro stock class in the 1970s and owned the track record at Toronto International when it closed. While I helped build a couple of engines for that car, it was really as an assistant as it was primarily both of my grandfathers that were the primary builders along with my Dad.  
    I have been fortunate to have known George Asche Jr and he and his family have enjoyed a special bond with my family for a long time. From that yes with George, my Dad Eddy along with a buddy I went to school with and myself we did come up with a couple of performance intakes.   As you point out that is likely where George and I are likely better known  and your also correct George  would be pretty well known for his building of overdrives, carbs, linkage etc.
    But that really is a tip of the iceberg in many ways.  George had built likely 50 performance engines since I have known him, and maybe that is a conservative number.   In the last 5 years I know he has build 18 of them.  Now I think its safe to say that he would say, as my Dad would have while he was still alive as I would, were always interested in learning more about flathead mopar engines, and improving them. None of use pretend to know everything about them in terms of improving their performance.
    That being said,  let me say this about the topic of oiling.  There are lots of things you can do to improve the oiling.  1st thing with any rebuild is to simply turn the two cam bearings from using the big hole, which is how they came from the factory, to using the small hole.  There is way more oil hitting the cam than was ever needed.  Next make sure you have good oil pressure, which really is a way of saying make sure you have a good oil pump.  Yes there were higher volume oil pumps for trucks. Yes we try and use them on higher rpm builds but for 99% of every engine I hear being built its not required.
    I could go though a bunch of tips but unless your planning on spinning your engine above, let me peg it at 5000 rpm regularly and your running a long stroke engine,  you dont need it.   Use the small hole in the cam bearing, make sure your have a good oil pump and drive on drive on.
    In terms of a couple of race engines.. Attached are pictures of a 1933 Plymouth. Its spent its life as a road racer. It was highly competitive at the Brickyard at Indy and was a engine build by a well known engine builder.    Its owner found out the hard way that yes there is a portion of the track with a bank on it, and as he rode up the bank to pass a Porsche   and a Ferrari he lost oil pressure and it locked up. It literally bent a rod and  another rod broke loose and went through the block.   George  was called on to build the new engine for the car, and what I will say is in this years season, the car  which has always been competitive, rose up the ranks significantly  and the performance improvements were categorized by its owner as "simply incredible how much additional power it has"..  Here is was recently as it has finished off the race season and was brought back to George for some further improvements, including changing the fuel distribution, and changing the rear end gearing. This engine is capable of in excess of 6000rpm
     
    and of course another video of the AoK dragster (which for you trivia fans, AoK was a name George came up with..  It stands for Asche over Kingsbury)..    and George's official answer to the question of  -  " how fast is that car"..     Answer - "Its faster than the average Echo"  Aka The Toyota Echo.. 
     
     
     
    A couple of things off topic I like to note here putting to rest the myth that you need electronic ignition for a performance engine, this engine runs an original Chrysler dual point distributor with points!  Yes its been modified, but there is no electronic ignition.   Yes we also do have a magneto set up for the car to eliminate the battery but what we were puddling with here is trying to get the idle off of the stall which used to be around 2000 rpm.  Now down to just over 1000 rpm, its quite easy to drive.
    Back to the oiling in the engine. Yes we  grooved bearings, and did some internal drilling and modifications to get oil return. We have a windage tray with crank scrapers for pulling off oil as this engine spins well above 7000 rpm.






  25. Like
    timkingsbury got a reaction from 55 Fargo in Will not Cross Drill my crank   
    While a pre oil pump or sump design is certainly an improvement, its over kill and definitely not anything  your going to need.
     
    On pistons,  again, for what your talking its over kill. Cast pistons with 4 rings  are more than capable of running a couple of hundred thousand miles.  Now in terms of original pistons and rings, well right off the bat it depends on what engine your talking about. There were forged pistons and cast pistons, as well as chrome rings and cast rings used over the decades in flathead mopars.   But for a discussion on  which is better, original 1930-1959 technology verses modern forged pistons and modern rings well there is little question which is better. We use custom pistons are rings all the time. The biggest issue is simple.. They are expensive.
    But in my 1949 Plymouth or our dragster,   they are Venola Top Fuel Pistons,  coated with plasma moly rings. They are smaller, lighter, stronger  and....  expensive. I will attach a picture of a modern forged piston sitting beside an OEM 265 ci piston from 1954.   The last 6 pictures are the pistons we had custom made for the 1933 Plymouth race car, and as you can see the rings are super thin.
    But back to your engine your describing, you dont need that.  You should be able to do a rebuild with  decent cast pistons,   decent bearings etc and never have to rebuild it again. Even if you want to bore it out a bunch, regrind the cam to some mild custom grind, deck the block, shave the head etc,  you dont need pre-oil pump and custom pistons.  But then, lol, there is lots I dont really need but I have anyways, so by all means fill your boots.







×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Terms of Use