I found an elusive "Brass Thingie" !!!!!!!!!

Lemme' know how it works out, Gordon. Everything I've ever heard tells me to steer clear of the Dellorto "update" (horizontal tube).

Yes Gordon, you are now amongst the anointed!  Trust me when I say that THIS is the True Madness to be welcomed to.  

Wonderful write up Gordon, with extensive detail, but you have one glaring error there.

It is Earl Grey tea, not Earl Gray tea...it's English, you know. 

The other mistake you made was finding your own brass thingie BEFORE telling us about what happened so we could all guess at where it went, what's going to happen next, and how to fix it.

Bob: IM S6 posted:

Wonderful write up Gordon, with extensive detail, but you have one glaring error there.

It is Earl Grey tea, not Earl Gray tea...it's English, you know. 

Earl Gray tea, whala; we have to teach these guys everything, Bob...

Al, it's voila (French-meaning: "lookie there")

...not whala, do I have to teach you everything?

Really? I guess Gene Berg (he got downright ornery when I corrected him over the phone) and probably 3/4 of America have got it wrong...

  It worked!  It worked!!

@Stan Galat

After driving my car for 18 years with a slight hesitation whenever I stepped on  the gas (which I've gotten used to, but still hated it), I have FINALLY gotten rid of the acceleration "Bog".  It now drives just like my EFI Rogue (and just about any other modern car out there).  I was a bit surprised that it now takes off a lot quicker than before - no waiting for a second for things to catch up, just instant GO! when you push the gas pedal.  THAT was a surprise, but a very pleasant one!

So what do I have that works?  Here goes, from my service manual:

2.3.1.1: Carburetor Overview

The carburetors are Italian Dellorto DRLA 40mm carbs bought from CB Performance (P/N: 3242) in 1996.  First rebuilt in 2016.

2.3.1.2 Horizontal Discharge Tubes:

The carbs have been modified with CB’s #7345 horizontal discharge tube upgrade kit which includes new venturiis to accept the horizontal tubes.  My venturiis had to be reworked slightly as there was interference with the accelerator jets - no big deal, just a little time with a Dremel tool.

2.3.1.3 Jet Sizes that work:

65 Idle (I tried 60's and they were too lean (15.5) and 70's are rich (12.7)

1.625 mains (1.50 jets reamed to 1.625 with a jet reamer)  165's would be OK IMO

160 Air Correction (thank you @Pat Downs!)

.55 Accelerator Pump jets (pump stroke is about mid-range)

This combo gives me close to 14 at both idle and on the mains, from past runs.  I'm pretty happy with that.  On a blast down my closest freeway, the mains sat at 14.5,  close to the 14.2 that I see at idle:

As a contrast, this is what comes in a "Stock" 40mm Dell from CB:

45-50 Idle

150 Mains

180 Air Correction

.35 Accelerator Pumps 

Using the stock settings with horizontal discharge tubes makes it run lean across the range and will not deliver enough fuel in the transition from idle to main jets.  In fact, that .35 accelerator jet is not enough to compensate for the instantaneous lean condition on just the idle jet as the throttle opening is increased.  Maxing out the accelerator pump stroke with that jet is far from enough and the engine "bogs" on even slight acceleration.  My A/F gauge would swing  toward 16-17 lean and then return to normal whenever the throttle was increased (1-2 seconds).  Moving to a .55 pump jet gives enough added "squirt" to keep the A/F close to nominal and the needle swings are very slight.  

This has made an already "stout" 2,110 a very quick 2,110.  That's why Snoopy is dancing up above!!!!  I'm a slow learner, though - it only took 18 friggin years!!

I don't know about anyone else but I'm changing out my ac pump jets when I get home.

Wow! Very cool.

Yep, yer "Bona fide, the Paterfamilias"  of carbs. 

Pete

Glad you got it figured out, Gordon!

Nice going, Gordon. 

Remind us: what's the rest of your engine? compression ratio, cam, rockers, header, ignition, etc.?

And how high does it rev with power?

ED - The specs:

2,110 cc

MOFOC heads  35.5 and 40 oval port valves with single HD springs

1.25 rockers

8.5/1 compression (when new) 

Engle 120 Cam

Intake manifolds are CB Performance for DRLA matched to the head ports

Ignition is an early CB MagnaSpark (2033)

Plugs are W8AP Platinums, gapped at .034

Exhaust is a Berg GB 902 Extractor with dual mufflers

It will wind to 6,500 in 2'nd and 3'rd (has some left, but why push it?)

edsnova posted:

Nice going, Gordon. 

Remind us: what's the rest of your engine? compression ratio, cam, rockers, header, ignition, etc.?

And how high does it rev with power?

So, Ed, you're asking all the important questions; just knowing it's a 2110 isn't enough, is it?

When I spec'd it, I started with the heads (knowing I was building a 2,110 and didn't want a really high C/R so it would like pump gas) and then got the specs for the carbs (Weber and Dells) and headers (whatever was available in 1997).

Then, one of my mechanical guys set it up to show flow rates on a CAD system (either Pro Engineer or Computervision, I can't remember) and we played with things til I had something that I liked the flow of, one end to the other - and, of course, the whole department had to get involved, so that slowed things down a bit).  We had to guess at the extractor flows based on photos of systems (lengths and bends) but I think my guy Ernie was pretty close.  Ended up with a Berg GB 932 DP, NOT the 902 mentioned above.  The 932 is 1-1/2" tubes.

I could have wished for slightly longer intake runners, but we have this "Speedster rear deck height restriction" so it is what it is.  Still, the parts are available and the only "magic" was matching the Intake (some Dremeling) and exhaust systems (size, length, # of bends) to the heads.  It didn't like the dual valve springs (and they kept breaking, anyway) and the Engle 125 was just a touch too radical (rocked when idling) so this is what I ended up with.  It works.

Thanks, boys. As discussed, I intend to build (or have built) a 2110. Looking for 150-ish hp and a redline above 6k. I think Gordon's engine would be about right for my Spyder project.

If I were doing this again (and believe me, I'm not), I'd do the following:

• Mag case, full-flowed, Hoover mods if I could find somebody to do it.
• CB Pancitos heads, machined chambers
• 92 mm AA thick-walls with JE pistons.
• 82 mm Demello (or similar) welded German crank
• CB 4.3 H-Rods
• .045 deck, 9:1 CR
• W120 (or very similar) cam
• CB lightweight lifters
• Port-matched big-beef intake manifolds (not offset)
• Dellorto 40s
• Sync-Link throttle linkage
• 1-1/2" sidewinder
• One of CB's many electronic distributors (or distributor alternatives)
• 96 plate EMPI oil cooler w/ thermostatically controlled fan, MOCAL sandwich bypass (a Setrab would be better, but the EMPIs are everywhere).

Such an engine would be dead-nuts reliable, oil-tight, and would make 150-ish HP all day long.

Alas, I've drained my fun-bucket in the pursuit of bigger/badder. Of all the "super-duper" stuff I've done over the years, I've been happiest with the dry-sump, but it is pretty complicated and added thousands to the cost of doing this (custom stuff isn't cheap-- and the headers, etc. are custom).

It'd be perfect in a Spyder.

What would an engine like that cost @Stan Galat ? Approximate of course.  

Marty Grzynkowicz posted:

What would an engine like that cost @Stan Galat ? Approximate of course.  

Starting from scratch I think you're looking at 6500-$7,500. If you used CB Perf. 1183 engine kit with Panchito heads as a base-                   https://www.cbperformance.com/product-p/1183.htm                                                           with balancing and combustion chamber reshaping, cost is about $4400. There is no sheetmetal, distributor, carbs, fuel pump or exhaust, so add $2,000 and (if you don't do it yourself) someone to assemble- 750-$1,000.

Stan specced a couple different items (the JE pistons comes to mind; Stan, if you read this could you expand on that?). He also mentioned finding someone to do the Hoover Mods - a friend and I just drilled out a case to connect the last cam bearing the other night (I will reveal all in a thread later) and I can tell you that if you're careful and use some common sense it's not a big deal. The long drill bit needed isn't even all that expensive; I paid 15 or $20 for a 10 or 12" long 3/16" bit up here in Canuckland, so I'm sure you guys Stateside should be able to find it for $10 (or thereabouts). This is something anyone with a little engine building experience shouldn't be afraid of, and the benefits are huge!

Ed- A Panchito headed 2110 that revs to 6500rpm with power is going to make 165 or 170 hp (which is close to the limit of the heads) and in a light car like a Spyder would be a blast to drive (very similar to what Danny P has, I think). Given the car weight, I think you could step up to some 42x37 heads, make 15 or 20 more hp (and not really lose any bottom end/lower midrange) and the thing  would be a monster! If starting from scratch, plan on an FK8 (or anything similar) with 1.4 rockers, which will give more lift and be easier on the valve train than a W120/1.25 combo.

Gordon- I've run a W125 in a 1750 and it purred like a kitten at idle; when people saw the dual Webers and found out what cam was in it they were surprised it idled so smoothly. I would hazard a guess that either carbs, intake ports in the heads, or exhaust wasn't big enough. A rough idle in an engine like that is usually a sign that the combo isn't "quite right". But I'll be it was a lot of fun...

Yoda out (for now, but back you know I will be!)

ALB posted:

Stan specced a couple different items (the JE pistons comes to mind; Stan, if you read this could you expand on that?). He also mentioned finding someone to do the Hoover Mods - a friend and I just drilled out a case to connect the last cam bearing the other night (I will reveal all in a thread later) and I can tell you that if you're careful and use some common sense it's not a big deal. The long drill bit needed isn't even all that expensive; I paid 15 or $20 for a 10 or 12" long 3/16" bit up here in Canuckland, so I'm sure you guys Stateside should be able to find it for $10 (or thereabouts). This is something anyone with a little engine building experience shouldn't be afraid of, and the benefits are huge! 

Sure thing, Al.

 AA makes the cylinders, and I've got nothing against the cylinders themselves. I'd rather not use their (non-forged) pistons, or rings, however. JEs aren't cheap, but they are undisputed in quality, and the rings would be nice as well.

It's probably overkill, but if you are going for the best possible ring-seal you can get (with the thick-walls), why not just go all the way?

You're probably wondering about the welded crank as well. German steel, baby.

Stan Galat, '05 IM, 2276, Nowhere, USA posted:

You're probably wondering about the welded crank as well. German steel, baby.

I had already guessed that part, Stan

So, Gordon, your Engle 120 has a little less lift than the Eagle 2246 CB packs with its Builder's Choice 2110, but your 1.25 rockers make it a lot hotter—very near .500 lift in your engine vs .452 in the CB package. And putting ratio rockers in that package would seem to be an invitation to complications and spending: "This cam requires special cylinder head modification to use with High Lift Rocker Arms."

BTW, what's "running duration" mean on your sheet? Is that at .050? If so, CB's Eagle cam has a bit less duration as well, which is interesting because CB advertises a slightly higher static compression ratio than your engine: 8.8-to-1.

Still, the CB package looks pretty stout. Probably tops out a little under 6,000? I think I could live very well with that. And for high, flat torque, the Panchitos seem like the way to go for virtually any non-all-out-race Type 1, no?

My goal is a rock-solid, no-drama 140-150 horses in an engine that can be revved like a Spyder should. I don't want a 7500-rpm screamer but I'm not looking for a monster truck stump-puller either. Something with 150 ft-lbs at or about 4400 and 150 hp at or about 6000, with some head room above that so you don't get instant valve-float 100 rpm above the power peak. I plan to limit the revs with the spark system but I want the engine to be a bit forgiving to the enthusiast's foot. 

Thanks, all, for you knowledge.

Ed- Running duration is the same as advertised duration. CB tends to make their cams with really long ramps- usually about 50 degrees between advertised dur. and the dur. @ .050" figure, where most of Engle's cams generally have 40' between the 2.  When comparing cams, look at the dur. @ .050" figure; it will give you a better idea of what the cam will do. With the CB 2246 having 260' dur. @ .050" and the W120 at 252' the cams aren't really that similar. The 2246 is closer to the W125  (in lift and duration) and will go to 6500rpm (or a little more) if intake (carbs, intake manifold porting, intake port volume in the head) and exhaust is right, while the W120 is done by 6-6200. Add 1.25 rockers to the W120, though, and now it will rev to 6500 and have enough lift to more fully utilize a good set of 40x35 heads. Adding 1.25's to the 2246 would allow it to rev to 7,000rpm (or very close to) and lift the valves up around .535" or so, making maximum use of the valve and intake port sizes. 2 issues (that I know of) with the 2246/1.25 combo though- some people don't like making that much lift with 1.25 rockers (the angle of the foot to the adjusting stem at some point gets too much, so they don't last), and you'd have to talk to CB about using higher ratio rockers with that cam.

In those engine builder kits, the cam listed isn't the only 1 available; you can have any cam you want to customize the engine to what you want. Al

Yeah.........What Al, said.  

Gordon, I agree with you -- but what DID he say???  I recognize all the English words Al used there, but what does it MEAN???

As Al said, the difference between Advertised/Running Duration (they're both the same thing) and Duration at .050" is where you measure it from.  Camshaft builders compute the "Advertised" duration at some point above the .050" cam lobe circle - .004", .006", etc, but this makes it look like the duration is longer or shorter than it really is, based on measuring it with an industry standard.  So the industry set the cam lobe "circle" at .050" as a standard so you could compare one maker's cam to another, while still letting the makers define their own duration, based on where they measure it from.

Confused?  Don't be.  It's just marketing hype.

So if the duration at .050" is 253º, that is the number of degrees of rotation that the lobe height is above the .050" circle (called, 'creating lift').  This is what you use to compare different camshafts from different vendors.

The "Advertised Duration" is the same concept - how many rotational degrees a cam lobe is higher than a defined circle, but this time the maker measures from a point different than .050".  If they measure from a circle that's .056" and you have a cam measured at a .054" circle, your cam would "look" like it's creating lift longer, but in reality you're measuring the lift from farther away (.002" - doesn't sound like much, but it adds up to a few degrees of crankshaft revolution).  Both cams might be identical, just measured differently.  However, any particular maker will measure all of their cam products the same way, so you can use their measurements to compare their different camshafts.  when comparing those from another vendor, it's best to use the measurement at .050".

That's about all I know.  I had a cam in a Flathead V8 once, with the sharpest lobes I've ever seen - they almost came to a point.  That engine had very little vacuum at low speeds (almost nothing at idle) and I learned what little I know just trying to figure out why it ran so poorly.  That's also why you don't want a racing cam grind for the street.........  I showed it to an old oval racer who said "You can't run that thing on the street!  It's ground for an alcohol engine!!"  Hey....What'd I know????

Anyway, I think I got the stuff above right, but it's been 45 years or so.....

Thanks, Al. 

Of course, I just now measured my exhaust primaries and discovered they're 1 3/8 instead of the 1 1/2 I'd assumed they were. We all know what happens when Ed assumes. 

(He puts himself on the hook for another $1,000).

Where's that exhaust header v displacement/rpm chart?

UPDATE: found the chart, learned it refers to O.D., which means my pipes are 1 1/2 as I'd thought, which is good.

Yah thanks. Key word: "outside." Re-checked and they're right. So they'd work nicely with the combo I'm contemplating.

Yeah, and besides........If you went with bigger zoomy pipes they'd give you more power farther up in the RPM range, versus more torque in the mid-range with slihtly smaller pipes.

1-1/2" is a nice compromise.  And how often did you expect to be consistently reving above 6,500??

Hardly ever. 

The motor should peak about 6k. I want that last 500 RPM just in case Danny P or Cory Drake is trying to get away.

Planning on a 3.44 R&P as well, because I like it so much in the TD. So 6k in 3rd will be about 100 mph. 6k in 4th about 140. 

Don't let people sell you on over-carbureting, either. 40s and 1-1/2" is pretty hard to beat with a 120-ish cam. 1-5/8" is noticeably soggier under 4000 RPM.

edsnova posted:

Hardly ever. 

Planning on a 3.44 R&P as well, because I like it so much in the TD. So 6k in 3rd will be about 100 mph. 6k in 4th about 140. 

Just asking, Would you fancy taking it upto 6k in 4th..

I've been there a few times (always on a track   )  Well, maybe not 6K, but it felt like 6K rpm.  And as I remember it, I was running a 4:12 rear end back then, so reaching 100 was a REALLY BIG DEAL!

Roebling road track, near Savannah, Georgia here in the 'States.  The front straight is a little over 1/3 mile and I was chasing a 911 C4 (it was fun - he couldn't shake me no matter what he did.)  I peaked out at an 'indicated' 108mph, but my GPS data dump had me at 103.4   

The car was surprisingly stable over 85mph and downright civilized at 100, but at the end of the front straight is a big, 100º sweep to the right.  Two laps around at "cruising speed" and it was asking a lot of Karman Ghia front disks to haul me down to make the turn.  That C4 never shook me, but it had a Whuss for a driver..........  He deserved it.

356's aren't supposed to be quick, are they?

I don't know. My red car gets pretty nose-light over 85 mph, which is the middle of third gear. So that car has never seen the high side of 90 and probably never will. I expect the Spyder would be a little better, but having never driven one I can't say. 

What I like about the 3.44 R&P is that 70 mph comes at about 3000 rpm, which means you can have a conversation with the passenger at highway speeds.

The other thing I like is that it makes 1st gear usable (13-to-1), and much closer to what a 356 or 550 had (13.7-to-1) than what a mid-'60s VW had (15.7 to 1). 

Gordon Nichols posted:

 356's aren't supposed to be quick, are they?

They say, "Speedster" right there on the side.