1915 Engine Rebuild

A couple weeks ago I had to replace the starter on my car. when bolting it back together i noticed the threads of the engine bolt were beat up. So, i ordered a new one. Since it take 4 days or so and I already had one of 4 bolts out I decided to pull the motor. I had an issue with a spark plug i wanted to get taken care of and was pushing oil out of the main seal. As of today i am replacing cam, lifters, new CB 044 heads, etc. etc.

TC has a thread going on with many of the same parts and peoples opinions were good to read.

so, what i want is a very driveable motor with fun power that will get me quickly between stoplights, handle 12 hour roadtrips to atlanta, and last.

couple questions:

1. should i keep the dual springs or remove and install single scat heavy duty springs.

I have taken the engine up beyond 6K in the past. pretty frequently, mainly in first gear. my thinking is that the single HD springs can handle this kind of driving while not beating the crap out of the valve train

2. staight cut cam gears... how loud are they. the question is will i hate that i have them during my trip to atlanta in April?

i should also say i am not rebuilding the motor. leaving it up to a professional. clearly i dont know enough about these things.

Perhaps ill give CB a call per Steves suggestion on TC's thread.

anyone with a similar set up? would like to hear what you think about it. good and bad.

paul

It is very likely that your heads were modified for dual springs.

If so, you can't go back to single springs.

Couldn't you try to find some proper sized valve spring locators to do just that?

If you go over 6000 rpm, dual springs ARE NECCESSARY....

Will dual springs drastically reduce the life of the engine? Sounds like if I go single... I could have bigger issues anyway.

I disagree about dual springs being mandatory for engines exceeding 6,000 RPM's. That statement is far too general.

Dual springs were originally designed for engine builders that didn't want to take the time to figure out which single spring was correct for the application and/or for engines with steeply ramped cam lobes. The duals ensured that the valves closed promptly.

Dual springs put quite the load of the cam, lifters, pushrods, and your rockers. A matched set of springs a bit heavier than stock are usually more than enough for 7,000 RPM's The advantage is an engine producing more power to the wheels and less to the valve train.

Larry is, as usual, quite correct.

In a non-turbo form, I can't think of a single reason why one of these engines (including T-4's) would ever need dual valve springs if it's properly designed. Those that have them are probably prematurely wearing their cam lobes and lifters, especially with today's crummy oils. If it's designed to rev over 6 grand, then the owner is probably planning for max power and short life.

I've taken Pearl up beyond 6,500 only a few times and in 2-3'rd and I believe that she'll last a long, long time. If I were to take her up there a lot, or do lots of hole shots off the line, I would expect her engine to last a couple of years and then be, basically, junk. Along with the transmission, if it's neither a 901 or 915.

good to hear. My engine build sheet from Thunder Ranch stated the car was installed with heavy duty springs. I certainly drove it like it had them. We got into the motor last week and found stock springs. So, stock springs have taken me beyond 6k. Ive always known the rocker shafts were stock. Also, the valves arent sized as quoted on my build sheet. I now know why my brothers porsche 912 motor in a much heaver steel bodied 356 coupe was able to run right next to me off the line.

All in all, its been a good engine for the past 3.5 years (38k miles). The stock adjuster feet were pretty beat up where they tap the end of the valve. THe pistons looked realy really good. they still had the black paint in a majority of loctions. The machine marks are still clearly visible with very little scifing in the opposite direction. the outermost rings (at the top of the piston) have lost spring. THe lifters were shot, really pitted up. Ill see if i can figure out which brand. Ive heard SCAT has this problem. The case came from SCAT.

This is a motor that was broken in driving from San Diego to San Francisco and back down within a matter of 5 days before being shipped to Baltimore. I did vary the speed on the highway driving. I found hills outside of San Diego and loaded the motor up a good bit. I did not keep it under 3,000 rpm. I did adjust the valves during the trip and change the oil. All in all, the motor has been pretty good to a "newbie". BUT.... im ready for more. this is too much fun!

Gordon,

you say you've taken pearl up beyond 6,500. what is your motor, valvetrain and head spec?

Paul - I have the same size engine as yours, but it was built by Pat Downs and feels pretty strong to me. It's not as fast as Gordon's car, but it's been solid for >30k miles. You're welcome to give it a try in Carlisle, but that'll probably be too late to influence your decision.

I'll just race you in Carlisle ;)

Another question. will installing a breather box within the engine compartment stink up the "fresh air" in the cabin when I have the heater on? The box I have vents to the atmosphere and is designed to be located between the fan and passenger side carb on the firewall. It will be venting right next to my fan.

Well, it may or it may not... Consider this, the air from the fan blows across the cylinders and a portion of the engine case then is routed into the heater boxes then to the cabin. It's already smelly air so a bit more probably won't make much of a difference..

:) it IS already smelly air, you are correct. i threw an engine case in that i have sitting around, threw on my old cylinder tin and a pair of heads and carbs to figure out where i want the breather. i dont like it on the firewall behind the shroud and carb. im thinking about locating it on the side toward the back of the car. issue there is getting oil in the breather to drain back anywhere. because it would be mounted so low the lines to the valve covers would be more or less flat. i think i would have to have a drain tube to a dump can off the bottom.

The easiest thing to do is to run a hose from the fitting on the oil filler to the top of a carburetor air cleaner. You can drill and tap the top to accept a barbed fitting. It will create some negative pressure (vacuum) in the engine case and remove any pressure from within the case. The down side is that carburetor gets a bit dirty

Paul:

The specs for my engine are in my notebook in Grafton, 1,000 miles from here, but, basically, it's a stroker 2,110 with Mahle short skirt racing pistons and modified Chevy rods. The cam is an Engle 120, lifters are stock VW, pushrods are chromoly and the springs, if I remember correctly, were single HD units good for about 250 lbs. at 1" which I got in CT. I would consider them to be "Hot Street" and not really for the track, especially for drags. The counter-weighted crank was balanced as a unit, then with the flywheel/clutch, then everything else going onto it was balanced during the build (by me). 12.5 lb. Berg dowelled flywheel. I tried a 7.5 lb. flywheel, but didn't like it much. I replaced all of the valve springs when I changed to HD rocker shafts a few years ago, but got the new springs (same spec) from the same place, recommended by a bunch of stock-car racers in New England (but I can't recall the name of the place - sorry). The heads are MOFOCO 044 big-valve heads, finish-ported by me, and the intake manifolds were relieved (by me) to match the larger head ports. (sure wish I had type-4-style intake flanges!) Lastly, the header/extractor is a Berg 933S (1-5/8", I think) with the dual muffler assy. Wish it sat higher, but I bought it because it matched the flow rates of the rest of the engine. That's important - the flow rate through the engine has no unexpected resistance.

On paper, this engine should pull to 7,500 rpm in third, but my tach only registers (poorly, I might add) to about 6,250 and then you have to guess, so I used my Snap-On, Dwell-Tachometer and found that it'll pull to 7,500 in 2'nd, but loses wind just above 7K in Third and I wasn't going to go that high in 4'th anyway. I suspect my extractor is the choke point.

Lane has been on the exhaust end of Pearl roaring up past 6K as we pulled away from him. It's an awesome sound....But then, Carey Hines' big-engine 550 Spyder was pulling away from him, then, too. Gets kinda loud around Carlisle......

These days, since I'm now a double grandfather and want to stay around to see my grandkids grow up, I don't push my shifts much beyond 4,500. That feels nice and I don't have anything to prove anymore, anyway.

You guys might be interested in NASCAR's secret weapon a few years back, the lowly valve spring and how they can now "cruise" at 10 grand rpm in a race:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/news/vintage-speed/the-spring-that-revolutionized-nascar-6643778

I think im going to go with the engle 110 cam, the 120 was brought up. i realize the easiest way to get a a lot of low end torque is to stroke the motor. I dont have that option at this point. i have read that the big valve heads (40x35.5) will actually hurt the torque coming on early in a 1915. i think im just going to tell the builder what i want out of the engine and leave it up to him. i am out of my league here.

By today's standards, a 40x35.5 head is fairly mundane. I would think they would work great in a 1915, and give it plenty of torque.
Ron

On VW engines where air hoses come off the fan shroud, I don't think air for the heat goes past the cylinders.

On my '60 VW it did. There were flaps at the back of the engine that, when open, dumped the hot air out the back of the car and, when closed, redirected the air to the heater outlets.

The flaps your probably referring to were part of the engine thermostat and were mounted in/on the front of the fan shroud It/they allowed the engine to warm up then the flaps closed allowing the air blow across the cylinders

Nope, Mike's right. I know what the thermostat vanes are and these were different. The blower hose to heater box locations with their integral flapper valve didn't happen until the 40hp engine, I think. I can't recall hose outlets on the face of a 36hp shroud, but then I'm getting older every day, too.

On 36hp cars back before 1960 or so ('58 and earlier?) there were some rectangular flaps at the rear of the lower shroud (below the pushrod tubes) that were pulled up and down by a cable attached to that little knob on the tunnel in front of the shift lever. Turning it one way almost closed those flaps (but never fully, it seems) and the other way almost opened them up all the way. SOP around Thanksgiving was to turn the knob to "max heat" and then get under the car and drive a screw up into the flap and tinwork above it to really force that flap closed to get as much of the 10 available BTU's coming out of the heater boxes into the cab a possible. We usually removed the screw and reversed the process whenever we remembered to (around Memorial Day).

Honestly, I think it just made us feel better - it never really did get any warmer in there.

I was just thinking, though......a bunch of us were looking at a 1954 356 Pre-A last Spring and I think it had those same rectangular flappers at the bottom of the engine......

the earlier beetles had a "stale air" system. The later had a "fresh air". Larry is correct in saying that some of the air that is swirling around in the fan shroud is cooming in contact with the top of the cylinders and top of the case.

so, back to business. the following are my two options (i just cant leave it alone)my transmission is the 3:88

Option 1:
69 mm crank, forged, counterweighted (re-use)
CB 044 heads 40x35.5 valves and intake opened up, matched manifold
Dellorto 40's
Engle 110 cam
sing heavy duty springs
solid shaft rocker 1:1
CB lightweight race lifters
aluminum pushrods
019 distributor - electronic
case is AS41 full flowed and I am asking to have it welded behind No. 3

Opton 2:
69 mm crank (same as above)
CB 044 heads 40x35.5 valves (same as above)
Dellorto 40's (same as above)
Engle 120 cam
dual springs
solid rocker shaft; ratio rockers 1.25:1
CB lightweight race lifters
chromoly pushrods
straight cut cam gears
019 distributor
case same as above

I may have said it before... i just want solid power. I do most of my driving through the city. never get out of third. I do take long trips down to atlanta and florida, the carolinas a couple times a year. run to the beach and racetracks 2-4 hours every other weekend during the summer.

i get on the pedal, dont really baby the engine. any thoughts on which combination would be best? some say the 120 in a light car is fine to go ripping around town, plenty of power around 3K but comes to life at 3500 and is a blast all the way to 6500. it would not be suggested for a heavier vehicle, say a bus. my car is just over 1700 lbs (without me in it).

Also, ive read that the Engle cams are "old technology" and that there are better grinds out there. One that seams to keep coming up is Web Cam. I keep reading that Jake Raby is a fan, but cant find the exact write up. of course, Jake could have been a fan of it years ago and has since found something better. Anyway... suggestions/thoughts/words of wisdom on cam type and set up would be greatly appreciated.

paul

You'll be happy with either one of these combinations however, I'm not a big fan of aluminum pushrods. Chromoly, in my opinion is the way to go. If the engine is built right, you set them at 0 lash and they stay that way. Aluminum grows when it gets hot and the clearance changes. (This can cause unsettled nerves as this topic has the potential of being like "which is better, Ford or Chevy")

What you are proposing is a good idea. It's really, really easy to get carried away when you've got a blank sheet of paper in front of you. The direction you are headed is going to get you the most bang for the buck.

That said, and since you asked-- I'd probably do a bit more with the heads no matter what. I'd recommend buying a complete set of heads from one of the big-name Orange County guys (Steve Tims, et al). You'll make more power with a good port-job than a "fluff-n-buff".

The heads will determine the cam and carburators. If you If you really want to stick with what you've got, I'd run a mild cam and 36 DRLAs rather than 40s.

I really like the FK series cams from Engle, but they are hard on lifter bores. The cam Jake liked so much a couple of years ago was a Web 86b. It's probably too big for what you have. I really doubt you'll need to weld behind number three with a modern case. I'd spend the money on the "HVX" (Bob Hoover) oiling modifications if I had my case apart again. I'd recommend windage pushrod tubes to keep the oil where it belongs.

What to do for cam gears and push-rods is a trade-off. Straight-cut gears and cro-moly pushrods work flawlessly, and are easy to set up. They are also loud. If I was running AL pushrods, I'd get the H/D ones from John Connely. You'll need to adjust them religiously if you run them.

Get everything balanced. Run a true merged header with primaries sized for your cam selection. You'll love it.

I appreciate all the advice, ive decided on the following:

CB 044 heads
42x37.5 stainless valves
engle 120 cam
CB straight cut cam gear
chromoly pushrods
CB windage pushrod tubes (stainless)
28 mm CB lightweight race lifters
welding deep sump oil pick up tube (was installed with a hose clamp)
new clutch (was running stock clutch w/ kennedy stage 1 and killed the springs)
ARP 2000 rod bolts
40mm dual dellortos (going to rebuild the ones i have)
Gordon Nichols 5 cent racing carb linkage upgrade
SACO torsion bar bushings
CB RHINO engine and transmission mounts
German engine tin powdercoated by awesome powder coat
fastfab 1 quart breather box

and to think, this all start with replacing a starter and trying to fix some oil leaks. This, folks, is what they mean by slippery slope.


i really hope this engine runs well.

Best of luck with your engine project, Paul. That will be a sweet upgrade from your previous engine.

thanks Jim. i really really hope it turns out well. ill let you take it for a spin at Carlisle and you can tell me what you think.

Paul, that's cool. When do you get to go pick it up?

Paul how many ponnies do you expect from that spec? approximately

Cory. I still have to order everything. So in a couple weeks... I am not sure what power I will get out of it. I may sign up for a couple pulls on the dyno at Carlisle this year. That thing scares me, but if I do I'll post back with numbers.

Does anyone have experience with a Web Cam 110? It has the same lift as the engle 120 but the duration is 10 degrees less. My interpretation would be power comes on sooner and pulls just as long as the 120. Would that be correct? A fella did mention the web cam felt "too smooth". He preferred the 120 because it gave you that kick in the pants.

web cam 110

adv. duration - 284; lift at rocker .435"
power through 1500-5800 rpm

engle 120

adv. duration - 294; lift at rocker .435"
power through 1500-5500 rpm

it is stated on aircooled.nets site that if 1.25 rockers are used with the webcam power can be increased from 5800 to 6000 top end.

Paul, there's no way you're going to sustain above 5,000 rpm with your driving needs, and those specs are near enough so as to make no real difference in that neighborhood.

If you drive in Baltimore the way I do, you'd be shifting between 4,500 and 5,000 on a rare occasion, but five grand is a bit past my 3,000-3,500 city-driving shift range.

I've always heard good things from Sean, Dave, Jimmy and Warren connected with the Engle 110, and haven't heard of the other company until you mentioned them here.

Is there an appreciable machining or cost difference?

Sean mentioned if it was his, he'd go with the Engle 120.

CB performance has a #2242 cam that put up decent numbers. here is the link to the Dyno:

http://cbperformance.com/dyno/dynocharts.html

CB 2242

Adv Duration 298; Lift - .428"

The engle 120 duration @ 294 had me a little nervous. But looking at the CB 2242 spec and seeing its duration is 298... and seeing the torque it is putting out in the lower RPM's, i am feeling better about the 120.

Paul- When looking at cam specs, pay more attention to the duration @ 0.050" number; it will tell you more about the rpm range than the advertised duration number. The dur @ 050" for the W120 is 253' and 256' for the Web110, so that tells me that the 110 will actually let the motor rev just a little bit higher than the W120, but for all practical purposes they are very similar. Also, look at the difference between the adv and 0.050" duration numbers for each cam; the W120 (294-253) is 41' and that tells you it has reasonably gentle ramps; using 1.25 rockers to get enough lift to properly utilize some ported heads and make the most power possible is within the cam's design parameters. The Web110 (284-256) is 28', meaning very fast valve actuation, which is harder on the valves, seats and springs (and lifter bores), and (if longevity and reliability is important) not a candidate for use with 1.25 rockers. I would want to speak to the people at Webcam to see what they say before trying it. When using a cam originally designed for 1.1:1 rockers with 1.25's it also adds 4-5' to the dur @ 0.050" number as well. Now the W120, which will normally peak at 6000 (or a little more, depending on the heads, carbs and exhaust) will rev about 300rpm or so higher.

For a 1915 with a W120/1.25 cam/rocker combo, 40x35 ported heads will be more than enough. Properly ported, those valve sizes will support 170-180 hp, so using bigger valves in your motor not only is pointless, it's counterproductive. The bigger valves are heavier and are harder to control, and wear valve springs out earlier. In a smaller motor (<2 liter) like yours, intake ports that big will also kill power in the bottom and lower midrange revs; the airspeed isn't enough to keep the fuel in suspension and it collects on the intake port walls. A lean air/fuel mixture is delivered to the combustion chambers and the motor doesn't have the lower rpm power it should. Since most street driving is done in this range it shows up as poor mileage.

Some properly ported 40x35 heads, the W120/1.25 combo, your 40mm Dels and a 1 1/2" exhaust will be a nice motor for your car. I noticed that straight cut cam gears are on your list; fyi they can be noisy and you might want to rethink that. These cars are noisy enough on their own...Hope this helps. Al

PS- As Stan mentioned, consider the Bob Hoover HVX engine mods for more oil to the lifters, heads and rocker arms. If you haven't read about them, here you go http://bobhooversblog.blogspot.com/2007/05/hvx-mods.html
And too bad CB didn't dyno the motor with the 2242 with 1.25 rockers...

Re: Allen's post-this is one of Hoover's more interesting posts. I would add that extreme cam specs might call for lifter-bore liners (silicone/bronze). Thanks for the Hoover post.
SS
Add/aside-Hoover's article mentions Reimspeiss as the "boxer" designer but I think it was actually inspired by Hans Ledwinka

Allen: Great post, and I hope it gives us engine-builder-wannabees a little better insight into the thought processes behind a well-thought-out engine build versus something more-or-less thrown together with available parts.

There's a BIG difference.

Allen,

thank you. that is exactly what i was looking for. I realize the people on the other end of the phone get guys (and girls) like me calling up all the time with the same questions about engine combinations. I heard a lot of "yea, that'll work". by the time i read your post i had already put my order in to CB. I called back and asked if I could make changes.

I can have the crank, flywheel, pressure plate, pulley, rods and pistons dynamically balanced for $180 locally. Im going to do it.

Will also look into the hoover oiling mods.

thank to all that have had input. this has been a great learning experience. and to think 3 1/2 years ago when I had this car built for me i did not own a single wrench.

It will be a fun motor. The CB2242 cam is very similar to the Engle W110 (check the dur @ 0.050 figures- 247 vs 248) and the lift at the cam is only .004" different. With about .430" lift at the valve and heads that flow with well over 1/2" lift, you should feel the difference when you decide to put 1.25's on it. Please report back when you do; I'd like to hear your observations.

People say that with the Hoover mods the motor (specifically the heads) will actually run slightly cooler; there being more oil to remove heat from the heads and better lube the valve springs, stems, and rockers. When I get off my ass and get back in the garage (3 kids seem to take up so much of my free time!!!) I'm going to take apart my shortblock (86x94) and do the oil passages, lifters and bores and rockers. I may also have piston squirters installed as well. The VW oil system was designed for low rpm, low output use and these mods specifically target it's weak points when the revs and power go up. Another trick is to drill a hole in each pushrod (right below the end) so they spray oil into the rocker area, further cooling the springs. The heat duals develop (from friction) is a big factor in why they die.

Don't get too caught up in the hand vs cnc ported argument; either will work equally well. If you were trying to extract the last hp out of a high strung race motor then it would be a discussion, but the Los Panchitos will work great. The cost is fantastic for what they offer. IIrc I've seen pics of the Los Banditos with the valves out and yes, they are pretty much stock heads with big valves and seats, but the Los Panchitos are what you need. As I said earlier though, to take full advantage of the porting you paid for, they are going to need more lift....

Scott- Yes, I think that cam (and several other Webcam grinds) is probably hard enough on lifter bores that, like the FK40's and VZ's, sleeving the lifter bores with silicon bronze material is a good idea. If you look at the numbers, all those cams have about a 30' spread between the 2 duration figures. Good call.

And Gordon, you're right- it's all in the combo.

Any time you've got a question, ask. If I can help you, that's what it's about. Al

Excellent posts, Allen.

Paul, I completely missed the "044" part of his heads, and went straight to the valve sizes. I thought you were reusing some stock Mexico/VW heads with a fluff-n-buff, not CNC ported heads from CB. Allen's right-- they'll be great.

Did I also miss what kind of rods you were running?

I think you'll love this thing.

Just as an aside, the guys in the local club just finished putting back together the engine for their LeMons race car, a Honda H22 motor, soon to become a turbo version from a turbo my son found for them. We've also recently acquired a new club member who started building engines for Formula Vee many years ago, then went on (as a hobby) building engines on the West Coast for SCCA cars and now works as a Designer for XRDi here in beaufort, working 2+ cylinder, horizontally opposed engine designs for airborne drone airframes (and I finally found out why I occasionally see a drone flying out over the river, here - always thought that was out of place for our local Marines!).

This guy has forgotten more about building engines than I'll ever know and has every type of tool needed (and at his fingertips) to get the job done right. He helped us A LOT during the H22 build, we (and, especially, ME) learned a ton and the end result was truly amazing - the thing idles so smooth we actually sat a drink on it and it hardly jiggles, and on the track last weekend (in the downpour rain in Kershaw, SC) it performed FAR better than it ever did before the rebuild, even without the turbo installed as of yet.

Truly knowledgeable engine builders are worth their weight in gasoline........

i woulndt think of straight cut cam gears, tried them years ago on 356 race engine, they wore out real quick, but after measuring the contact tooth area we found out the helical cut ones gave more engagement. bill