Here are a few pictures of the engine so far. Slow progress but at least it is moving along.
Engine progress pictures

Are you multiport injecting it?


Nice progress!

Thanx Tom.

Yup, planning on using Accel DFI system.

Added a few more pics to the link above.
Slow slow slow.......Kinda like ribs in the smoker only slower.

Paul

Looking good!
Tell me about your water pump mod. Flowkooler

What turbo are you going to use?

Have you set the block & head in with the turbo connected?

My turbo was really close to the power steering box. I decided to use a rack & pinion to give it more room.

MBHD

McGoo,

On your copper head gasket, seems most people I talk to about running copper heads gaskets is that have a tendency to leak water.

Did you get a hold of Mike Kirby for a Cometic H.G.?

MBHD

Hank,

The water pump was suggested by my engine builder. He has used their product before with great results.
My Tuner guy is leaning towards a Precision turbo, but I am still looking around. Seems difficult to get a response from some suppliers, not just for turbos, but for just about everything.
Since I don't have the turbo yet I have not done a mock up. Intake and exhaust manifolds are out for ceramic coating right now.
If the steering box is in the way it will be history very quickly. I could stand to lose a few pounds on the front of the car anyway.
I have not been able to get back under the dash to finish rewiring the car, hopefully in the next couple of weeks. Then I can move forward with some of the test fitting using spare block and head.
I never got a reply from Mike Kirby re the Cometic gasket. I did contact Cometic and they mentioned that the only gasket made so far was for a larger bore and not available for sale. I did consider paying for design and build of a gasket, but not sure how long it would take to see a return on the investment so opted for copper gasket and o-rings.

Once the wiring is done and front end back on I want to work on intercooler, piping, and fuel system. Hopefully get that stuff sorted out brfore the snow flies, and that is not too far down the road.

Paul

Here is how close my Hybrid T3/T4 Turbonetics turbo is to the steering box & upper control arm.





One with downpipe.



MBHD

That is close quarters. A T4 exh housing that was On Center would move the turbo up and give better clearance.

I think I would have considered just "shimming" the driver's side motor mount, or a tapered turbo mount plate, no hill for a stepper, out of an aluminum plate for that small amount--unless you really wanted a "upgraded" steering system. just be careful not to roll it off into the pool!

I have not considered using an on center housing because they are not as efficient.

I did not want to spend anymore money on this turbo, it was originally bought to use on my Syclone, but since I just upgraded the stock Mitsubishi turbo for the Syclone.
Stock Syclone turbo:


Upgraded Syclone turbo:


Both side by side:


I just thought, might as well use this dinky turbo for my beater Camaro engine & try to get the EFI install all sorted out.
So if the turbo install does not go as planned, that's OK because this engine is just waiting to get blown up w/25+ PSI boosted runs!

It is really an old, old engine. Did I mention old?

I did always want to use a rack & pinion steering system. I am all about losing as much weight as I can possibly afford.

MBHD

Hank,
Do you have similar pics of the install with the rack? I am pretty well sold on going with a rack to save weight and improve steering. Hoping that clearance is an added benifit.

Paul

Paul,

I do not have any pics of the rack installed, but I can take some.
It is installed, just no pics, can take some tomorrow.

MBHD

You probably should wrap your power steering hose, the heat from the turbo will melt it.

I am no longer using the original power steering box.
I installed a rack & pinion set-up.
But if I were to still use the stock steering box, I would definitely use a turbo blanket & use lots of heat reflecting tape products.
http://www.bing.com/shopping/search?q=turbo+blankets+t3&qpvt=turbo+blankets+t3&FORM=HURE

http://www.designengineering.com/products.asp

MBHD

McGoo,
can you post a pic of your turbo exhaust manifold?

MBHD

Only found this. Need to take more.





McGoo,
can you post a pic of your turbo exhaust manifold?


MBHD

Hank,

I'll toss a few pictures of the manifold and couple other parts that I just had ceramic coated on my photo album. I don't know how to post a picture on the forum, so the other way will have to do.

Paul

Pics are posted Hank updated progress pics

Thanks.
PM sent.
MBHD

Moving at the rate of molasses flowing at -40!

Just about done rewiring the car and have not yet touched the fuel system. Too cold in the garage this winter to accomplish much on the car, so I am getting a real furnace installed soon.

The engine is pretty well done except for the venting system. Going to be on a dyno for N/A break in and few baseline pulls as soon vent tubes welding into the valve cover.

Just waiting to hear back from a couple other turbo manufacturers. My tuner guy sourced one from Precision and they recommended a 71mm compressor 68mm exhaust H cover ported shroud ball bearing turbo is the one for my car. They aren’t cheap however at $3263!! Seems expensive to me. Precission does not return my emails, so I will have to try to call during the day.

I have been in touch with Turbonetics and they are recommending a GT-K 650 which is a 66mm compressor w/65mm turbine. A lot cheaper at about $2K.
The Turbonetics rep assures me I can attain my 450-500HP goals with ease, and have a very streetable car at the same time.

I keep telling myself that it will be on the road this year.

P

I have a barely used Garrett GT40 for sale. Its sized well for a 250". Has 2500 miles on - not a thing wrong with it.

PM me if interested and its in NW Calgary.

Thanks for the offer Marc, but I'm running with pretty well brand new everything right now so I'll stick with that plan for now.

Paul

also have a brand new one....

Thanks to Tom Lowe for helping out my engine guy on the phone this morning.

The engine is getting a few break in pulls N/A and the engine seemed to be falling flat on it's face at 5400 RPM.
Going to try a new set of valve springs to see if that helps.

Paul

If its built specifically as a turbo engine with low compression and a turbo specific cam, it may be normally doggish until you start blowing air through it. A lot of nitrous engines are that way, especially with real wide lobe center cams along with low compression. Keep us posted!

brand new everything ?

Difference between a brand-new, box-never-opened turbo and a well-maintained 10,000 mile turbo: several thousand dollars.
Th used turbo will probably outlast the engine.
More expensive isn't better, it's just more expensive.

In some cases yes, but in this case the difference was not several thousand.
Marc's turbo chargers are a great deal, I just chose not to go with them, even though he is just minutes from my front door.

I have seen used turbos for sale that have only been used for a few dyno runs and they would not last very long at all. Not suggesting that Marc's are in that league of course.

Paul

Compression is 9.1:1, using Tom's medium lift cam, Pertronix ignitor and Holley 390 for the break in. A/F is a little fat, but not overly rich by any means.
What got Ryan's (the engine guy) attention was the fact that during some pulls the engine just laid down at 5,400 RPM. It should rev higher than that and show some sort of power.
Ryan is concerned that the valve springs and retainers are showing phyical signs of valve float.
We are turning our attention to the Harland Sharp Rockers after a valve spring swap this afternoon. No significant improvement with the new springs.
Most of this is way above my skill level, but the man at the dyno has a lot of experience with race engines so I do trust his judgement.

What started out as a quick break in, retorque, and base line pulls has turned into a bit of a project.

Paul

Managed to get up to 5800 RPM before it started falling off. We do have valve float with 125 lbs spring pressure at the seat.
Going to look into turfing the hydraulic cam in favour of a custom solid lifter.
Will have video and data available soon.

Thanks to Mike B for touching base with me today. All of the help and opinions are appreciated.

Paul

What engine damper are you using? Stock?

If so, get rid of that piece of %#&*!

MBHD

Which dyno in Calgary are you using?

Ryan Brown's in Strathmore. Great guy!

Hank,

I'm using Walt Pearce's Damper.

Paul

If that is a stock sized damper, I would venture to say it would not be as good as a bigger unit.

I used to go through stock dampers left & right, the previous owner of my Camaro did as well.

They would just shake loose, cause the engine to vibrate.

I just got so tired of them coming loose & not being able to RPM, no matter what camshaft I installed (cams up to 244 degrees duration @ .050") Max RPM it seemed to get w/power was 5800-6000 (but laboring to get there) engine vibes!!
I just decided to try out a standard SBC 300HP 350 style damper.

Guess what happened? The engine totally smoothed out, the damper never shook off the crank & I was able to RPM the engine to 7500 + RPM.

So in short, my friend who owned my Camaro before me shook a few dampers off the engine.
I then shook a few dampers off the engine, about 4-5 myself.

Installed a standard SBC 8" damper 300 HP 350 style, bamm!!! no more vibes, & all the RPM I ever wanted out of my 250 6.

MBHD

Hank, did you do the machine work on your damper or did you buy it ready to go ???

That cam is only rated up to 5000 RPM! So your turning it well past where it has quit making power. That's why it falling off.....

Well doesn't that just make a whole lot of sense!!
I'm sure we all read that somewhere.

My numbers were 260 lbs torque @ 4400 RPM, 242 HP @ 5600.

I'm thinking I just might look at getting a bit more aggressive with the cam , and move to solid lifter. Time for a bit more homework.

Hank, I don't think Walt's damper is an issue. He has had a lot of problems in the past with dampers coming apart so he made the effort to get this unit built.
Not sure if anyone else has run one yet. It sure is a nice piece.

Thanks for everyone's help. Once we get the baseline stuff done I will be installing the engine and turbo on the car then sending it back to the shop for the rest of the work.
Still on the fence for an EFI system.

Paul

It was just a standard SBC damper & I installed it.
I had to relocate the alternator & power steering pump.
Then I cut the nose off of the water pump pulley and welded on a flat steel plate & spaced that accordingly.

It was a lot of work, but worth the trouble in order to make my 6 cylinder rev high and be able to dampen out the vibes.

Any stock size damper is not going to work good on a 250 & that is the problem of not being able to rev it high.


Tlowes dyno testing shook loose a fluid damper, those are known to have these types of problems on other HP engines also.

Good luck with sticking to a stock damper, it will not work. Been there done that, too many times.

I had suggested in the past for somebody to get a 8" SBC damper & have a machine shop machine "V" belt grooves in one & a member did do that here on the BB, but we never heard back about if it worked good or bad.

If you do this type of mod, then you do not need to relocate your power steering pump, alternator, A/C pump etc, & I would think this would be a much better/easier damper to use & still be much better than a stock size damper, I think the stock damper is just too light for it to work properly @ higher RPMs.

Just my thoughts anyways.

Paul , just try & do some research on any HP higher reving 250 6 cylinder, I don't think you will ever find anyone's project ever use a stock sized damper, I doubt anyone will ever suggest you to use one either, unless you only want to turn less than 5000 RPM.

I am not knocking on Walts damper, I am sure it is fine to use on a standard 250 6.

MBHD

Food for thought.
I'll check with a couple other people I know about their choice of damper on their inline 6, some of which are going over 7000 RPM.

I'm looking for a couple of pictures showing rocker arm position with valve fully open and closed using different rocker arms.
My engine builder is curious to see how they compare to the Harland Sharp rockers that I currently have on the engine?

Can anyone help me out with this?

Cheers,

Paul

Just checking to see what info you gathered from the couple other people & their dampers?

MBHD

I should be able to get the pics this weekend.

That would be great.

Thanks Tom.

Here you go. This is a cam with about .480 lift and the hyd lifters are lashed down so the would show full lift. The pushrod is not the perfect size and could have been slightly longer.
Rockers shown are my old rocker CompCams, Harlan Sharp, and my Current Comp offering.

Pretty cool comparison pictures!

Thanks again Tom for emailing those pictures to me, and posting up here.

They were very helpful.

Paul

So..........

It's been a while since I have done anything with the engine.

With the lower speed misfire and poor performance the engine builder took the engine back and did a few things.
We installed a new MSD distributor to rule out any ignition issues.

Back onto the engine dyno and rewarded with pretty good even power up to 6,000 RPM.
Peak HP = 257 @ 5,800 RPM. Peak torque = 270 @ 4200 RPM. (we are not tuning for power, just mechanical issues)

The problem is when we hit 6050 RPM! All hell breaks loose!

It's as if a crude rev limiter kicks in and a destructive misfire event occurs.
I accept the fact that 500 RPM past peak HP the power curve is dropping but the engine should still be able to run fairly well.

Here are a couple of links to show what is going on. The one from the control room is using my phone as a camera, but listen carefully as the tach hits 6K. (Headphones help)
Ugly noise.
The second video shows misfire through the carb and then the timing marks.

View from control room
carb view and timing marks view

Here is a short summary that was sent to Comp Cams to get their input.
______________________________________________________________________________
This engine (chev I6 250cid) was on the dyno last year, and had very erratic curves, and the engine would not rev up clean after about 4800 rpm. Saw that the valve tips were getting a "star" pattern after only a few pulls, so the decision was made to increase spring rate and pressure. Went to an Isky295D spring (140 - 360 pressure, up from 120-330). This helped a bit, gaining about 400 RPM. Seemed to like near zero lash (hyd cam).

Engine went back to the builder, and a tried a few things for round 2.

Limited the hyd plunger travel down to about .025 (running the plunger down about .010).

Swap to a dual LS type 1.290 OD PSI spring, 160 - 390... in an effort to change the harmonics from a single with damper type spring.

Put it on the dyno yesterday and the curves look much smoother, power is up about 20, and engine runs clean to 6050 - 6100 RPM, and then hits a wall. Take a rocker off after two pulls and see a pattern again on the tips, tho faint, but it is only after very little time.

Rockers are Harland Sharp 1.70

Pushrods are Manton 3/8 OD x .120 wall (right around 10.125 OAL)

Lifters are (what I assume to be) the comp hard bottom hyd lifters, now with limited plunger movement to about .025.

Engine is being run NA right now (will be turbocharged once in the car.. just proving engine now).

ANy thoughts come to mind here? Attaching a few pics and the cam card. Cam (X 8754-12) was purchased by the customer and supplied to the engine shop that built it.

On the graph, the blue is HP and green is TQ, it falls off right after 6000 rpm on that pull.

The pic of the valve tip is after just two pulls,

Appreciate any ideas you can come up with,

_____________________________________________________________________________

I don't know how to post pictures here but I can email them to anyone who is curious to see them.

My engine builder is saying replace the cam but the dyno guy says he is not convinced that cam will cause this event.

Maybe I am being unrealistic expecting this engine to rev to 6,500?
Regardless, no boost for baby just yet.

I welcomes anyone's input to the problem.

Cheers

Paul

Paul,

what damper are you using?

I would suggest trying a different damper.

MBHD

Hank,

I am using Walt's damper. Both my engine bulider and the guy running the dyno do no see that as a suspected problem based on the information in front of them.
I did ak about it when I was at the dyno room on Tuesday.

P

My guess little more fuel 2 jet sizes and a little more advance 42*
Timing is jumpy like they are without a crank trigger.
How is the distributer setup. What plugs, gap, heat range, coil just stock?

What exactly is the cam specs?

Specs on the engine, for a quick view here.
Parts, intake manifold, carb spacer, carb size, jetting , plug gap, what distributor, (standard HEI module, new, used, modules do not always just work or do not work, they can still work but give lousy spark, I know this first hand), coil, plug wires, ohms on plug wires,(even new plug wires can be bad, same goes for plugs.

I had a new set of Champion plugs & would miss every once in a while & took the longest time to figure out what the miss was coming from, found the ceramic porcelain collar was sliding down & covering up the spark plug gap.

The video seems to be like a not completely flat camshaft but a wearing camshaft, popping back through the carb.

Ignition problems @ higher RPM, not burning the fuel causing the fuel to back fire through the carb.

How much fuel pressure are you running, stock pump?

What is the A/F ratio showing when the miss happens?

MBHD

Here are the cam specs.

Gross lift:
.521 int, .512 Ex
Duration @ .006 lift: 261 Int, 265 Exh.

Duration @ .050: 218 Int, 212 Exh.
lobe lift @ same: .298 Int, .293 Exh.

valve timing @ .050 :
OPEN Int -1 BTDC, Exh 44BBDC
CLOSE Int 39 ABDC, Exh -12 ATDC

Lobe seperation 114 degrees.

Ignition is my new MSD distributor and the MSD box and coil from the dyno. Known good as he was spinning up a small block to 8,400 RPM on Monday and no issues.

I will find out about the plugs. Pretty sure I have them on one of the invoices (there are many).

Clifford intake, 650 CFM Holley carb. Not sure of the jetting but can find out. Same with A/F. I think it was running a little fat but wull check. The print out I brought home did not show the correct A/F
Dyno fuel pump. Sheet says 6.3 lbs fuel pressure.
Compression 9.1:1
Lumped heads.

Thanks for the help guys.

P

Quite a bit of timing scatter... looks like the distributor weights are bouncing....

You may be hitting valve float when it starts popping. How much seat and open pressure is the valve springs set up for?

Or the ignition system is nosing over ...?

Does that A/F go wonky when it pops?

As the video shows the a/f is on the lean side for max power should be 11.5 to 12.0 then you need more timing 42* to burn the fuel at the correct time.

I would lock out the timing and see what happens, I think it would help.

With the lifters so tight I think they are pumping up and holding the valves open at higher RPM, call Comp. or whoever the cam is from and ask what the setting should be, usually a 1/4 to 1/2 turn.

The cam looks good as is especially for a turbo.

Just looked at the video again and I would bet it too lean and it's a lean pop, the engine is at full throttle long before the RPM starts to climb, then small pops from the rear, could be just too strong of a spring and takes a lot of RPM to open the butterflies.

I agree about the lifter preload, seems a bit too tight.

That camshaft is definitely not made to go to that RPM being N/A.
But, with a turbo it should go to 6000 RPM.

MBHD

Checked in with the dyno guy.

"Not sure the plugs brand, but .030 gap.

Air fuel was 12.4 - 12.6 thru the entire pull.

Timing was 33ish. Timing did not effect it, nor did air fuel ratio changes with jetting. "

The cam is making power at 5,800 so no issues there. If it would behave itself on the downside just to 6400 or 6500 I would feel safe boosting it.
It is the sudden change to a very unhappy engine that is problematic.

Seat pressure with the current springs is 160/390. With lighter springs the condition is happening at much lower RPM.

Maybe my expectations with this cam are out to lunch but we all have a gut feeling that something else is going on.

Paul

Hopefully they are not Champion plugs .

Check out the plugs wires, OHM them out. Could be bad.
Same goes for the plugs, could be bad, did you change them out or have been running the same plugs for all the testing?

Spring scale off, operator error? Installed height is different than the measurement checked at?
Just covering the basics.
That is a lot of seat & over the nose pressure for a hyd camshaft.

MBHD

Clifford intake, 650 CFM Holley carb. Not sure of the jetting but can find out. Same with A/F. I think it was running a little fat but wull check. The print out I brought home did not show the correct A/F
Dyno fuel pump. Sheet says 6.3 lbs fuel pressure.
Compression 9.1:1
Lumped heads.

Thanks for the help guys.

P

[/quote]

What type of fuel pump are you using? Maybe??? not enough fuel flow? Just because the pressure looks good does not always mean you have enough flow.

I wonder if the erratic timing could be caused by harmonics. The RPM you experience it at is around the range it could happen at. Every engine is different.

Maybe get a different balancer and try it. A SBC will fit for testing on the dyno.

fuel pump is same dyno pump used to feed bigger and more powerful engines before and after my engine.

The balancer is Walt Pearce's unit. They are supposed to be known to spin over 6K without issues. I believe you had one at high revs Tom?

I hear ya on all the basics Hank. The guy running the dyno is a well know engine builder that does a lot of high revving circle track engines.

I will pass on everyones comments to the engine builder.

I have taken a very laid back approach to the engine as I had a lot of work to do to the car before it would be engine ready. Now I am pretty well caught up on the other work and would like to have the car on the road in July.

I told the engine builder to come up with a solution and costs associated by the 27th.

Paul.

Just curious who is doing the engine work?

I feel like an idiot with the lifters set like you have them they would be less likely to pump up so that's not the problem I think I'l just crawl back in my hole and shut up.

After watching the Video again myself It also sounds Like some really Bad Lag when he puts it to the floor Carb is wide open
THEN slowly the rpms seem to climb. Or am I just hearing & seeing things?

Larry,
The Dyno loads the engine and holds it back from revving. Then they start the pull. The Dyno then let's the engine pull the rpm's up at a determined rate of climb. Like 200 rpm per second or 400 rpm per second.

Okay I under stand that. I'm just used doing a chassi dyno Because I have more interest in RW hp.

Don't crawl back into any holes there Turbo 6! Your input is valuable.

I'm curious what other people are running for timing gear on their turbo 6 engines?
What kind of power you are making at what boost.

I am going to get together with the builder and dyno guy and have a chat about next steps.
Frustrating because I am so close to having an engine that is ready for boost and install.

Tuning for HP etc. will be done on the chassis dyno.

Engine builder is Muscle Motors in Strahmore Alberta. They have a pretty good reputation building high power engines. Dyno guy is Ryan Brown Performance. He too brings a lot of engine experience to the table.

I am confidant that they will make this little inline happy.

Paul

I have a customer with a 292 and that same cam. He only turned it to 4800 rpm on a engine dyno. 450HP and 497 ft lbs tq. The tq was still peaking at 4800. I suspect his boost was also creeping. He said it was 12 PSI.

Impressive!

Hank~ is the BBC dampened the stock style? I'm willing to give it a go for what it takes and costs. I'm pretty sure my stock dampened has started to slip... the timing marks don't really add up.

I do not know if these have been tested & if so what RPM are they good for?

But, these might be an option?
http://www.12bolt.com/250292_products/harmonic_dampers

The SBC Chevy one I used is a 300 HP 350CI SBC 8" damper.
You would need to make brackets & pulley changes to make it work, a lot of work I.M.O.
Their are no V-grooves for belts on SBC dampers.
I was desperate to get my 250 to turn past 5500 RPM so I improvised & installed a SBC damper.

MBHD

So finally got the engine back on the dyno with it's new cam and lifters.
Revs well past 6,000 RPM now and power curve is very good.
Without tuning for anything it made 246 HP @ 5900 and 249 ft/lbs at 4,300 RPM.
The good part is that it did not fall flat on its face at 6,000 RPM. It was able to rev to 6,700.

Car is out getting turbo exhaust and intercooler fabrication work done then time to put the engine in the car.

Will post some progress pics soon.

Paul

Under boost or no? If it is what PSI? That sounds low...

No boost of course.
The purpose of this run was to ensure the engine would not crap out at 6k RPM as it had been doing.
We went with a solid lifter cam and same valve train and balancer as last time.

Once the engine is in the car we will add the boost and use chassis Dyno for tuning.

Paul

Paul

Who are you going to use for your chassis tuning? Only 1 guy in Calgary I trust.

How about Nolan for some tuning?

http://www.morettomotorsportz.com/services.php

MBHD

I am planning on using Eldon Cottingham. He is no longer in Calgary so it means a trailer road trip to BC interior.
Eldon has been helpful in this process and he has tuned a lot of well known and powerful cars.
Who were you thinking of Marc?

Funny thing Hank about your recommendation, i called Cambell Automotive way back when I started down this path. They were not interested. Too busy they said.
I heard that they have since closed that business and it is now Moretto. Not really sure about that but since there was no interest from Campbell's I never kept up to date with the shops north of me.

Paul

I use Toma, way better than anyone else. I'll reserve comment on your buddy in BC - he knows what I think of his work.

I know Toma and yes he is very good.
Not sure what your issue is with Eldon, but everyone I know has had great success with him.

One thing this last go 'round proved is that Walt's balancer is indeed capable of meeting the needs of my engine.
Tom's cam made great power and is more than sufficient of meeting the needs for most engines.

That's the fun thing about this hobby. Learning!!

Paul

Got the car together and running. EFI on and tune just getting started.
Then the distributor gear piles up and takes the cam with it.

So gotta haul the car back to Calgary and get that crap sorted out. Looks like it's going to be a next year project now.

Paul

Well,.....according to the engine builder the reason the distributor gear roll pin came out of place is harmonics due to oil pump cavitation.

Im using a Melling M62HV oil pump. Anyone ever had any issues with that?

Paul

I've seen distributor gear pins staked or bradded. You'll have to use a slightly longer pin and maybe a little heat!!

They are tacking it in place with a spot weld, and machining the distributor collar to get a better fit to the cam gear.

That Camaro is awesome. That is some mighty fine 250 pron. Amazing work.

I had nothing but problems running the Melling HV oil pump. I t wiped out 3 different cams and distributor gears. I switched to a standard volume pump and never had a problem since
MBHD

The two cams were Clifford's and one American camshaft all new distributor gears were installed.
If you insist on using a HV oil pump I would install a bronze distributor gear so it won't wear out the camshaft, but the distributor gear will need replacing after it gets worn, but it will save your camshaft.

Thanks for the tip Hank.

Anyone else had issues with the Melling pump? Melling states that they have no known issues with the pump and they would like to have the old pump back.
The engine builder is absolving himself of any fault in this so I am looking at another few $K gust to get this thing running again.

If this keeps up I think it will be time to drop the 6 and go for an LS conversion.

Paul

A rule of thumb for SBC does not really apply to our 250 inlines about for every 1000 rpm you need 10 psi of oil pressure.
IIRC Mike Kirby had told me 40 psi at 6000 RPM would be OK for oil pressure.
There has been others that have had the same problem with that high volume pump causing wear on the camshaft and distributor gear.

MBHD

Thanks, I just wish I had the chance to drive it this summer.

But, hot rod weather is just 6 months away so lots of time to get it ready.

Paul

Don't "tack" the distributor gear on the shaft. Drill the roll pin hole to 1/8, make a solid pin from 1/8 welding rod, and with a TIG torch ball up one end, insert pin and ball up the other end. Failure proof. I doubt the pin failure was caused by oil pump "cavitation". All HD Melling pumps I've used on O/T brand have work flawlessly

I have had problems with Melling pumps in Chevy big blocks and in Pontiac v-8. I will be hard pressed to use Melling pumps again and several other builders I know will not use them.

I guess I've been lucky then. Just out of curiousity, what was the nature of the failures you have experienced with them? Loss of pressure? galling / seizure? "cavitation"? Did the other builders experience the same kind of failures or different?

Dibs on your six stuff.

Well,.......

Can't get the car to run properly on the FAST XFI system.

After a lot of head scratching and a couple of beers, and great advice from Tom Lowe I am ditching the TBI and going with port injection.
Head is off and intake port dividers are going in.
Hopefully going to see some results in a few weeks.

Maybe some day I will actually get to drive this car.

Thanks again to Tom Lowe. His research, advice, and parts have been a good influence on this project.

Paul

Persistence goes a loooooong way.

Here is a question for the masses.

Knowing that the fuel atomization from the FAST TBI is not the greatest, is it worth it to even consider trying to run with boost using the TBI and the dividers, or am I likely to run into the same lean outside cylinders vs rich inside cylinders?

I'm thinking best option is cut to the chase and finish off the port injection, but I am curious if anyone has successfully run a boosted inline with TBI and the dividers?

Paul

My understanding from people who have done per cylinder O2 monitoring is the modern TBI fuel distribution problem is because the fuel is injected right into the plenum, and gets the full air distribution issues every intake manifold has. The old GM and other OE TBI's had the injector above the throttle blades which mixed the fuel into the air more evenly as it passed by the blades. Even when you can see fuel puddling up on the blades at part throttle! Basically equivalent to a carb.

I have not seen tests of the MSD Atomic unit, but the injectors are above the throttle blades so I'm assuming better fuel distribution.

Finally running at starting to feed it some boost.
this has been quite a wallet draining experience for many reasons but it is finally starting to look like I will be driving this thing soon. (not too soon as we are still enjoying winter weather).

https://youtu.be/U1UhIJ69BQk

The "10 psi per 1K RPM" works well in part because the manufacturers have cleverly sized the journals to provide enough bearing speed (opposing rotation) to make local (at the actual journal surface) pressure high enough - far more than the relief valve and gauge pressure.
This is one reason why slow-turning engines like the 235, GMC, Pontiac L6 have such large journals and safe operation with low gauge pressure - it increases local pressure from the same oil pump output.
Yes, that might be dangerous if using Honda 48mm rod pins, the local pressure is proportionate to the pin radius so 1.89" vs. 2.20" (BBC) is 14% less - with the same gauge pressure and pump output volume in GPM. Luckily there's a considerable safety margin or there would already be many loud noises!

Throw to distributor and oil pump away. I'm going with crank fired ignition and external oil pump on my blown 292.

I would definitely do crank trigger ignition if I was to do this again.

My Camaro has come close to being on the road but keeps coming up with issues.

Using the FAST EFI on my car we had horribly lean conditions on the outside cylinders. Couldn't even get the car to idle properly.

With Tom Lowe's advice we added intake port dividers. Then thought what the heck, lets spice things up a bit and went to a batch fired port injection system using the FAST ECM. It has made a huge difference overall but the material the shop used (thin gauge aluminum) to make the dividers folded over with boost and effectively throttled the two end cylinders. They have to go back in and use a heavier gauge material.

I have been reading through the various posts regarding intake port dividers (no shortage of posts on this topic!!) to try to determine what the best approach would be when the existing dividers are replaced. I want this to be the last time we have to take things apart so since it has been a while since much discussion on the divider topic, I have a couple of questions to toss out there for some discussion.

Is there any advantage to extending the dividers deeper into the intake manifold?

Should I stick with the lumps or ditch them?

Hopefully we get this sorted out and I can drive this thing. Might even catch up to you some day. My brother lives on the island and I might drive it out there for a visit once all is working the way I want it to.

Paul

Click the link below and this will be very similar to what you can expect by creating a divided port head. Start at page 13 and read to the end. The true EFI intake shown was designed exclusively to be used with divided ports on these heads, and you've already seen the benefits of dividing your head until the unfortunate hiccup with your dividers. But you can get there again. No, remove the lumps, they are no longer needed when you divide the ports, the divider creates the same high velocity because the ports are now singular and not siamese. HERE

Thanks!!

I do appreciate the help.

I wish I had that Marshall intake manifold. Too late right now to get into a change like that.

I will discuss the feasibility of yanking the lumps when the dividers are redone. It looks like it might be worthwhile to push the dividers into the intake a certain amount.

I seem to recall seeing some photos of various versions of intake port dividers that went deep into the intake manifold. Not sure what the advantages or disadvantages are but the fact that the Marshall intake has completely divided runners suggests that the more separation I can get, the better?

My budget has run out a couple of years ago so if I can manage to get this right on the next go round I will hopefully have a car that I can drive this summer.

Paul

Not personal experience, but I would extend the divider into the manifold runner as far as possible.
Chrysler used the divider length as a tuning aid in the 1960-61 "long ram" B/RB 2 X 4 manifolds.

That does make sense but looking at Tom's pictures from last April it looks like his divider extended slightly into the intake manifold. From what I have read here that setup has worked well.

I would love to have the budget to get the intake and head onto a flow bench and see what the effects are for future projects here, but I do have to stop spending money on this engine at some point.

Of course had I foreseen such issues, I would have spent the money on a 12 port head, intake and exhaust a few years ago and probably be enjoying the car right now.

Paul

Been there and done that! Panic is correct about extending the dividers as far into the I take as possible. It's hard to Do without a purpose built intake like mine though. Do the the same in the cylinder head as well.

Paul,

We did discuss the alternative and the 4200's are readily available in picknpull in Calgary for C$400 complete with harness and PCM .... put in new rings, bearings, timing chain, and new oil pump....

If you sold everything you have - at the end you would most likely come out $1000 ahead.... And make more power..

One day Marc I might just go that route.
But not in this car.

Paul

The Marshall intake is beautiful! I'm tempted to pick up a second one, but I need to get this one running first!

Finally!!!!


After dealing with all of the setbacks and snails pace progress the engine is running to a level where it makes consistent and reliable power.

Best pull so far is 375 HP and 380 ft/lbs. torque to the rear wheels. this gives me my 400 HP at the flywheel that I was looking for.

Video below was a little less but still acceptable for now. I'll drive it a bit in the spring to sort out the car and enjoy it for a while. Then back to the dyne and some tweaks for more
power.

https://youtu.be/INknS0tmDAA

wow, huge congrats on getting your engine running! Looking forward to 400HP! Please post updates!

panic...you mean where they issued a service "how to" to shorten the long ram intake internally to raise the power/torque happening rpm level by removing the "roof" of the ports near the carb end and cutting out the dividing wall then rewelding the "roof" back on??

Never read that, just 2 different part numbers. Jetting and other changes: unknown.

it helped marginally on dragstrip but with 4.56 on the street was not worth all the work...car went faster with a plain ol' Edlebrock high rise and single holly 780 on his bored to 426 413 block '65 Belvedere body. original design was fine for highway driven heavy 300 car...really had boot at 70 for passing.

McGoo,
nice work. That should be a pretty quick 6 congrats!

I have not been on for a long time because the only way to post was through my phone. P.I.T.A.

MBHD

I’m new to inline engines, and I’ve been following this thread with interest. I have a similar project in process for me and my wife. It appears that one of the big keys to success is dividing the intake tract from the plenum to the valve; did you end up leaving the lump port inserts in, or did you take them out?

The chassis dyno video looked great. It’s smooth as silk! What camshaft numbers did you end up with for the solid flat tappet? How much boost did it take to make those power numbers?

Good job, and I salute your perseverance!

Thanks Hank.

It's not over yet.
I have been busy with work and life so have not been able to get into the details.

I will admit that I was ready to pull the plug and part out the whole project about three months ago.

The good thing is I have learned a lot and hopefully will have an opportunity to share with others that are heading down this path.

I can certainly appreciate Tom Lowe's efforts to document his build project . His input, yours, and others, has been very helpful.

How is your Firebird coming along?

Paul

Travis,

I cannot say enough about port dividers. It is a must do.
My choice to use lumps and not dividers early on cost me a lot of money.

I will post pics or links of the final dividers used as soon as I can.

PM me if you have any questions.

Paul

PM sent!

It's a 69 Camaro.
Not much progress. I mini tubbed it. Setting up a 4 link rear set-up w/a new rear end.
Still need to put together the front suspension.
I am on furlow because of the goverment shutdown, so cant spend $$ , story of my life.
Keep up the great work!

MBHD

Why did I think you were working on a Firebird?? I knew it was a Camaro.
Brain fart

Hope you get back to work soon!

P

So, I wish I had re-read this thread about a dozen times.
My engine is now ready... we were dissuaded from using port dividers in favour of lumps. So, we did.
So, my question is this... are the lumps the source of the lean condition on the outside cylinders? Or, is it the lack of dividers (head design)?
I’m worried because I’ve gone well past budget to get my engine together.
I will be blow through carb for the time being... is that going to be the difference?

No its a port configuration/valve timing problem.

This is for a austin mini 4 banger - but the problem is explained.
port_cam

Interesting.
I’m still a little confused by this because L6 does not have a firing order that shares ports. 1-5-3-6-2-4. So, there is no intake overlap.
I guess I am stuck on the thinking that if the charge is sitting on the valve, it can’t be stolen by the Siamese cylinder.
So, the ultimate solution to keeping cylinders 1 & 6 from going lean, is port dividers (or 12 port head). That will control the charge going to each cylinder?
😒 wishing I’d continued with the dividers.

Well after all the turmoil I wish I had gone straight for a 12 port head. Probably would have been a lot less expensive in the long run. A hybrid head would have been interesting.

I did get a few miles on the car this year, but didn't beat on it too much. It runs quite rough at idle. More like a miss than a cam roughness, and it tends to load up. A good tuner will probably make some improvements.

I managed to get 25 miles per gallon on the highway just cruising at about 60-65 miles per hour. The car is not intended to be used for drag racing, but hopefully I will get a chance to make a few passes next year just for fun.

One thing I have discovered is the the gear ratios in the TKO 500 transmission are not ideal. The super low 1st gear is a pain in the butt, was better when it was just a 4bbl and header car. I'm looking at going with a TKO 600 close ratio. Will have to crunch that a bit once I decide on rim and tire combination.

I am happy with the result, and am looking forward to tweaking it a bit after some other changes are made to the car.

With luck and a some good planning I would like to drive it to Miden in 2020.

L6 does not have a firing order that shares ports

Both the 1-2 and 5-6 have alternate 240°-480° firing. Any cam with more than 240° will have leakage.
Only the 3-4 pair are completely separated.