Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

289 Engine Mods

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Jim K
    replied
    Thanks!,
    I understand regarding the valves - R3 seems more straight forward so that it is, intake only. I have not done any porting on these heads but studied the pictures and read a few interesting articles about flow and breaking thu the push rod ports – ouch. I’ve done lots of 2 strokes for years so should be ok. Rockers I read a lot - interesting to see some mod the stock to change ratios. I’m not sure yet on this as I cant seem to get a good handle on cam specs – any hints? On the carb I have the original AFB and the Eldebrock look alike same size. Again thanks to all for the help.
    Jim
    3 angle valve job, hmm want to do this myself - might make tooling a challenge

    Leave a comment:


  • Mike Van Veghten
    replied
    StudeRich -

    Thanks.

    Yes, the stock valve guide was pushed out, a "new" hole was bored into the head, .050" farther away from the exhaust bowl. An larger diameter guide was pressed into the head.
    There is JUST enough material in the seat to accept a new seat at the same seat height with the 1.875" valve.
    This does several things...all but two good.. The bad thing, a couple of the guide bores went into water during the boring operation. Not too concerned though. We used a sealer on the guide...plus there was many years of the big block Chevy that had water surrounding the guide.
    The other thing, is I am forced to use R3 head gaskets because We unshrouded the valve (chamber) as far as we could.

    On the good, it puts the valve pocket and valve center...on the same center. And another big one, is to be able to form a good bowl shape, without worrying about cutting thru into water or making the wall too thin on the exhaust side of the intake port if the engine gets too hot.
    Doing this allowed me to get just over 200cfm air flow on a flow bench.
    But better than the total airflow, the quality of the air/fuel mixture that goes into the cylinder is better..or a more proper term, cleaner.

    Lotsa work, lots a fun experimenting.

    Mike

    Leave a comment:


  • StudeRich
    replied
    Moved Intake .050?

    Those are beautiful ported Heads Mike, but in the view of the nicely ported Intake bowl that says "Intake moved .050", exactly what is going on?

    I am pretty sure you could not move the entire Valve Guide, Valve Stem, Valve Seat and bowl by .050, so what moved? And to what advantage?

    Leave a comment:


  • Mike Van Veghten
    replied
    Jim K -

    I think what Jack is politly trying to say is....don't screw up the engine AND spend money doing it when valves ARE currently available...AND they can be used without messing with and "spending" (money saved) on modifying stock Stude pieces to work with nonStude parts.
    It makes NO sense to me to screw up perfectly good stuff just to install some oddball parts, when proper parts are available..!
    And I fully agree with what he's saying.

    Just do it the correct way, buy a set of R3 (1.875" diameter) intake valves and stick with the stock (smaller, 1.625" dia.) exhaust valves. If I could figure out an inexpensive way of welding up the exhaust bowls for a 1.500" valve...I would. This size is more in line with the ratio of intake to exhaust valve sizes normally used today.

    Some carefull porting and chamber work will go a long way toward pepping up your Stude engine. Here is some of the work I've done and the flow bench proves it to be fairly good. One guy on the Racing web site has also prooven it on the drag strip.
    http://public.fotki.com/-Mike-/
    Click on the "Stude Porting" pages, double click to enlarge the pictures.
    Some carefull but sorta difficult to do...is rounding off the interior hard edges in the intake manifold. Where the plenum turns into the port.

    This intake work along with a good (smallish!!! 500/550cfm) four barrel carburetor will really pick up the power AND driveability of th eol Stude engine.

    Mike

    P.s - a quality 3 angle valve grind goes with the port work...just to finish off all the hard work..!
    Last edited by Mike Van Veghten; 05-14-2011, 04:33 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Studebakercenteroforegon
    replied
    This information about using these valves in Studebaker V-8 heads came from a local legend - Dan Kilcup of Kilcup Machine. He was specializing in Studebaker engines back in the '50s and '60s. I have sold these valves many times locally with no questions asked afterwards. Probably when creating the larger valve seat any difference is dealt with. I don't have any in stock at the moment, but get one in your hand and check and compare.
    You being a Packard V-8 guy may have heard of Dan Kilcup's 408 cubic inch '56 Golden Hawk. Believe it or not, the car still exists locally.

    Leave a comment:


  • PackardV8
    replied
    Look at intake valves from a '54 to '60 Ford six-cylinder. Right length,
    * Length: 5.110"
    If the 5.110" length is correct for the Ford valves, isn't that .060" shorter than the Studebaker valves?

    jack vines
    Last edited by PackardV8; 05-14-2011, 03:15 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Studebakercenteroforegon
    replied
    Application is '54 - '60 223 cu. in. six cylinder. Head diameter 1.780" Granted, not a huge diameter increase but many people in this area have installed them and all say it made a noticeable performance improvement while remaining streetable. TRW 2056X or Sealed Power V 1115. Very recently Schnell Custom Automotive in Portland, OR put a set in a R-2 Avanti rebuild. He dyno'ed it - I'll have to ask him about the results.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jim K
    replied
    Thanks!! - I had no idea how much info was there, won't be bored for sure just need to sift thru to find the right matches.
    Regarding the rockers - just seemed to be one of the things i could do - therefore i will try it. I have a mill with x,y&z DRO on it and can get material easy. We (son and i) make all sorts of parts for other projects so - heck why not.
    It's the same with the valve machining. Why not try everything I think I can do, at least once for the challenge.
    Jim K

    Leave a comment:


  • PackardV8
    replied
    Look at intake valves from a '54 to '60 Ford six-cylinder. Right length, right stem diameter, correct locks - but bigger diameter.
    Yes, Ford valves do cost less than Studebaker valves and not doubting some will fit, but a quick search is coming up with several different dimensions, none of which are the right length. Can you get us to the catalog page you use to order the correct valves?

    New Set of Intake Valves Ford 223 6 Cylinder Engines steel intake valves made by Elgin Industries. Set includes 6 valves.
    * Intake Part Number: I-920B
    * Head Diameter: 1.780"
    * Length: 5.110"
    * Stem Diameter: 0.34195"
    * Lock Style: Single Groove
    These valves were used in many of the 1954-1967 223 Ford 6 cylinder engines used in Ford, Lincoln, and Mercury vehicles as well as Ford tractor and industrial engines. Please measure your old valves to ensure the correct size you need.
    Ford + Edsel + Ford Truck 223 1954 - 1960 - Valve Dimensions -
    Head Diameter = 1 25/32
    Stem Length = 4 15/16
    Stem Diameter = 0.342
    Seat angle = 44
    Clevite Intake Valves (6) 211-1970 1.844" Head Diameter, fits the following:
    Ford Car1965-72:240 CID 4.0L 6 Cyl.
    Ford Truck:300 CID 4.9L 6 Cyl.
    thnx, jack vines

    Leave a comment:


  • Studebakercenteroforegon
    replied
    Look at intake valves from a '54 to '60 Ford six-cylinder. Right length, right stem diameter, correct locks - but bigger diameter. Also they are flat instead of cupped so will add slightly to your compression ratio. These are readily available at an affordable price.

    Leave a comment:


  • PackardV8
    replied
    1. You need to sign on over at http://racingstudebakers.com/foo/index.php that's where the most knowledge about modifying Stude V8s is found.

    2. There are at least fifty previous threads here on the SDC forum on how to modify Studebaker V8s, cam options and the like. Do a search and you'll have a week's reading.
    3. Care to share how and why you'd make your own rocker arms? This would be new info, as few CASOs have ever done this.

    (I realize the partial flow issues).
    4. FWIW, the only partial flow issues exist in the minds of those who do not understand engine lubrication and hydraulics. I've never in fifty years of building Studebaker V8s seen an engine problem caused by the partial flow system. This is not to say if engine parts begin to self-destruct and the driver doesn't have an ear for the noise or an eye on the oil pressure gauge, the damage from circulating hard bits will be worse than if it were a full-flow system, but the damage wasn't caused by the partial flow system.

    Bottom line, a well-built, well-maintained engine has nothing to fear from a partial flow oil filter system.

    We'll follow your build with interest.

    jack vines

    Leave a comment:


  • Jim K
    started a topic Engine: 289 Engine Mods

    289 Engine Mods

    detailed
Working...
X