SAAC Forum

I was wondering what the correct heads and cam were for the 1965 R model engine? Also were there any modifications to the intake manifold (porting)? I get conflicting information when I search the internet.

Thanks.

 The heads were production C5OE hipo heads with the banana water ports welded by HydroHead out here in California. Pallets of these modified heads were sent to both Mondello and Valley Head Service for full portind and combustion chamber work along with the "chevy valves".
The intakes were ported ( as the small letter Cobra intakes were small ) and the last runs built in '66 used large letter intakes also ported. The camshafts were ground by Engle ( a California grinder) and often their HL56 profile. One way we used to tell original heads was by the stamp noting how much they were milled and blue anodized aluminum retainers for the valves. I still have one set of original heads and one cam.
   Randy

Quote from: gt350hr on February 02, 2021, 05:22:53 PM
The heads were production C5OE hipo heads with the banana water ports welded by HydroHead out here in California. Pallets of these modified heads were sent to both Mondello and Valley Head Service for full portind and combustion chamber work along with the "chevy valves".
The intakes were ported ( as the small letter Cobra intakes were small ) and the last runs built in '66 used large letter intakes also ported. The camshafts were ground by Engle ( a California grinder) and often their HL56 profile. One way we used to tell original heads was by the stamp noting how much they were milled and blue anodized aluminum retainers for the valves. I still have one set of original heads and one cam.
   Randy

Would you happen to know the specs on the camshaft? Also do you know how much the heads were milled?

Randy, would you happen to know specs of the R-model cam?

According to the 1966 Shelby American Performance Equipment parts catalog, the competition  GT350 road racing engine (PN S1CR-6003-3) had the following cam installed:

Valve lift: 0.445 in
Intake Opens: 29 deg BTDC
   "       Closes: 75 "    ABDC
   "        Duration: 284 deg

Exhaust  Opens: 75 deg BBDC
    "        Closes:  29  "   ATDC
    "         Duration:  284 deg

Intake /Exhaust tappet clearance (hot): 0.018 in

Specifications taken at 0.001 in valve lift

The cam and lifter set was PN S1CR-6250-2

Unknown if this is the identical cam installed in 1965 GT350 R, but it's a start.


As for full competition cylinder heads, the catalog lists PN S1CR-6049

Ports are enlarged and polished.

-Intake: 2 1/16 in x 1 1/16 in
-Exhaust: 1 1/2 in x 1 1/16 in
-I/E Valves: 1.875 in / 1.600 in
-Heads are milled 0.050 in and water ports are welded prior to milling
-Combustion chambers are polished and volume is 47cc.

Hope this helps.

     

Quote from: gt350hr on February 02, 2021, 05:22:53 PM
The heads were production C5OE hipo heads with the banana water ports welded by HydroHead out here in California. Pallets of these modified heads were sent to both Mondello and Valley Head Service for full portind and combustion chamber work along with the "chevy valves".
The intakes were ported ( as the small letter Cobra intakes were small ) and the last runs built in '66 used large letter intakes also ported. The camshafts were ground by Engle ( a California grinder) and often their HL56 profile. One way we used to tell original heads was by the stamp noting how much they were milled and blue anodized aluminum retainers for the valves. I still have one set of original heads and one cam.
   Randy

Rogers Porting Service, North Hollywood were also used by SAI to modify heads.

  SAI also used Lockerman porting service on occasion as well as Slover's. The majority were done by Mondello or Valley. The amount of "deck milling" varied by the "net" combustion chamber volume needed.
     I don't have a cam card for my HL56 IIRC it was similar to the ''not yet made" LeMans cam but a little smaller.

Quote from: gt350hr on February 03, 2021, 10:27:05 AM
  SAI also used Lockerman porting service on occasion as well as Slover's. The majority were done by Mondello or Valley. The amount of "deck milling" varied by the "net" combustion chamber volume needed.
     I don't have a cam card for my HL56 IIRC it was similar to the ''not yet made" LeMans cam but a little smaller.

There wasn't a lot of lift in any of those period cams and a 500+ is very common today.

Was there a tech reason why or is 500 just a waist of time?

Here's a sample of the welded "banana ports"  also note the milling of the head surface essentially took away or removed the "thumb pads" indicating how much of the head surface was removed. In this case these chambers cc measure 47cc's as noted by the "47" stamped on the end of the heads. As others have mentioned SAI had other vendors doing port work, though Valley Head and Mondello did the majority. These particle set were done by Louis Unser having the HU head stamp which Randy G help me identify. These heads I run on my car.

As for the "R" model manifold mods, in addition to the port matching this was another detail which was typically done. (See pic). I got this manifold from Jim Cowles RIP. Even though I still prefer my 48 IDA Weber's.

And lastly, though not THE "R" Model cam but what it became; the C7FE aka LeMans Cam. Later rendition.

Noting Shelby Doug's cam lift  question. As I recall. Longer duration with shorter lifts in or around .500+- profiles provided better scavenging and breathing at sustained higher RPM's versus high lift short duration were better suited to drag applications. This is what I remember. I'm sure Randy will correct me, but again as I recall that was the mind set. Anyway...

Cheers,
~Earl J

   The "around" .500 lift "was" due to stock rocker arm capability , camshaft technology ( at the time .500 was allot) and valve spring materials. The LeMans cam was known at Ford as SK 27337 before being SK 882 ( the H&M version), C6FE-B and eventually C7FE-A. the basic lobe configuration didn't change. This cam was "created" by Don "Pop" Sullivan (rip) a noted camshaft expert at Ford. SAI experimented with cams from Isky , Potvin, and Crane , as well as Ford and Engle "in the day". It is important to remember R model engines were CAST flat top ( reworked valve pocket) pistons with "pressed" pins and "stock" hipo rods for the first year.
   Randy

Earl J,
   what type of piston and what compression ratio is your motor with those 47cc heads?
Thank you, Paul.

Hi Paul,
As I mentioned these heads are on the car. Randy Gillis had a custom set with a -17cc "dished" pistons netting a hair over 10:1 CR (compression ratio) I went with them. A flat top piston with just eye brows would have pushed the CR over 11:1 - 11.5:1 somewhere in that vicinity.
A little too much to run on today's pump gas. I'm good with the performance for what it is for the most part, but every now and then do I wish it were higher? And deal with needing a better grade of fuel? eh? Sometimes
As mentioned before, just about ANY of today's aftermarket aluminum heads will out perform these. Again, it's okay by me. (You know my car).
Cheers
~Earl J

Quote from: 68countrysedan on February 02, 2021, 09:22:26 PM
According to the 1966 Shelby American Performance Equipment parts catalog, the competition  GT350 road racing engine (PN S1CR-6003-3) had the following cam installed:

Valve lift: 0.445 in
Intake Opens: 29 deg BTDC
   "       Closes: 75 "    ABDC
   "        Duration: 284 deg

Exhaust  Opens: 75 deg BBDC
    "        Closes:  29  "   ATDC
    "         Duration:  284 deg

Intake /Exhaust tappet clearance (hot): 0.018 in

Specifications taken at 0.001 in valve lift

That cam has rather wide lobe separation angles at 113/113. The LeMans cam had much narrower angles at 107/109 while the Hipo cam had both narrower (intake) and wider (exhaust) angles at 109/119.

Why was it necessary to weld up the 'banana ports'?

I think I read a long time ago it was part of making the decks more rigid to resist head gasket failure. The ports in the heads were welded up and the steam holes in the block were often drilled and tapped for threaded plugs.  They sometimes used metal  wire or metal o-rings pressed (hammered into) grooves around chambers.  The ex-Le Mans GT40 heads (the GT40 owner traded me for a set of modern aluminum heads and some cash) we are using in our red car got metal o-rings around the chambers in them. When Joe Mondello and I worked on my project he and an engineer at Felpro® determined what modern head gasket to use along with the rings. Mr. Mondello freshened the heads for my project.

I gave away all my GT350 related magazines a long time ago but circa 1965 there was a comprehensive article with lots of pictures of how Cobra / GT350 racing long blocks were being prepared at the time.  Maybe some reader here has a copy and can quote why "banana ports" were welded up.

   Doug ,
      Back in the days of poor head gaskets , the OEM McCord was known to "blow" upwards into the "banana water port as well as the round hole in the block . SAI had a local company ( Hydro Head) nickle weld the banana ports closed and an allen plug was put into the block . Problem solved.

Welding these ports didn't cause any overheating issues or hot spots?

 No and they were removed from the 351W head when it was created.

Quote from: gt350hr on March 09, 2021, 11:38:34 AM
No and they were removed from the 351W head when it was created.

I never found the right combination to make the 351 heads work. The engine ran like ka-ka. Down on power.

  You did something wrong. Thousands of others use them including "most" of our west coast "legal" vintage racers.

Then they must work well on those stroked Dart blocks.  However, won't work on Fords new Boss block.  Go figure!

   Yup , serious water jacket compatibility issue there.

Quote from: gt350hr on March 09, 2021, 11:48:35 AM
  You did something wrong. Thousands of others use them including "most" of our west coast "legal" vintage racers.

I thought that they moved on to the "N" heads?

1/94/1.60. Ported. Shaved .020. Doug's headers, 4776. Crane solid 550/236 on a 302. Crane gold r/rockers,etc, etc.

Nothing off of idle.

No compression if you have a flat top piston.

Quote from: gt350hr on March 09, 2021, 04:02:39 PM
No compression if you have a flat top piston.

No compression or no comprehension? It was thirty years ago and I'm thinking that it measured out as 8.8:1?
I'm into 'luminum now.

We ran a 1966 GT350 in the HMSA sanctioned vintage racing events at Laguna Seca and Coronado, HMSA has ver strict regulations. We ran a new BOSS 302 block with 351W cast iron cylinder heads, that car went like rocket! 

When I took my SAI Valley Head Service cylinder heads to Larry Ofria at Valley Head Service to get them freshened up I asked about the banana port modification. Larry said that the cylinder head combustion area would flex and allow the coolant to enter the combustion chamber during competition use. He said the fix was to weld in the banana port and plug the block.

Quote from: CSX2259 on March 09, 2021, 10:37:05 PM

We ran a 1966 GT350 in the HMSA sanctioned vintage racing events at Laguna Seca and Coronado, HMSA has ver strict regulations. We ran a new BOSS 302 block with 351W cast iron cylinder heads, that car went like rocket!

What was the compression ratio? It sounds like the setup needs something like 11:1?


The old "Ford Off Highway" book states that they are "similar" to the GT40 heads. I don't recall anyone mentioning flow numbers other then Randy saying that the GT40 heads flowed around 240 on the intakes?
What did the 351w heads flow? I know that the "N" heads were acceptable substitutions by some sanctioning bodies.

I believe that Curt Voght prepared 292's were running the "N" heads before he had the GT40 heads recast?

I do not recall the flow numbers of the cylinder heads. The compression ratio was somewhere around 12:1, we were running 100+ octane at the track. I also remember our engine guy filling the heat riser in the cylinder head before doing the porting work.

Quote from: CSX2259 on March 09, 2021, 10:37:05 PM

We ran a new BOSS 302 block with 351W cast iron cylinder heads, .................

     This is not recommended due to the proximity of the lower/outside water relief holes on the deck of the M-6010-BOSS302 block deck being awfully close the outside perimeter of the O.E. production cylinder heads (including the aluminum "Y" & some earlier "X" heads) this perhaps not providing surfaces to adequately clamp the head gasket for sealing or retention.

     But I and others, with close observation, luck in the placement presentation of the water passages on the blocks' deck, and even as I have practiced, the filling of the the this lower/outside row of water passages not communicating with such adjacent in the cylinder head, have gotten away with this.      ;)

     Scott.

I think he is referring to the C8FE boss 302 block?

I suspected that high compression was necessary to make the heads work? I'm not surprized that you were at 12:1 at all.

The leaded racing gas will also change the way things work and how you set everything up also.

I do remember seeing the starter smoke when trying to start a 11.5:1 289 hot. Not my preference for a street engine combination.

Quote from: shelbydoug on March 10, 2021, 06:39:16 AM
The old "Ford Off Highway" book states that they are "similar" to the GT40 heads.

     Based on our experiences in porting both the the C6FE, C9OE & DOOE castings, I would agree perhaps with the word "similar", in a statement from Ford Motor CO. in the context of the period, with the understanding that maybe what they should have said was: For those of you not graced with our C6FE GT40 Race-Program cylinder heads the closest your able to get is going to be the production 351W cylinder head.     :(     

     Scott.

Quote from: shelbydoug on March 10, 2021, 11:23:53 AM
I do remember seeing the starter smoke when trying to start a 11.5:1 289 hot. Not my preference for a street engine combination.

    If one is not confident in the starter motor or the voltage supply circuit's capability in this scenario, then the addition of an ignition timing "start-retard" control devise or just the separation of the start/crank circuit with a separate ignition circuit this providing the opportunity for the starter motor to initiate the rotation process, and then activation of the ignition, and with the inertia value of the assembly already in motion and the stater motor at speed, the load on the starter motor itself and amperage draw is reduced.      ;D

    Scott.

  Doug sees allot of challenges.

Our black Cobra is still using the 1963 model starter Shelby American installed in February 1964.  The prior owner in the late 1960s had the heads milled to get a higher SCR. When I measured SCR during service to deal with cracked original piston skirts I got an average of 11.6:1. When our other car's play engine was built in 2014 we specifically did 11.6:1 SCR. A stock rebuilt 1964 model starter was installed. Both engines start very easily cold and near instantly hot. Both use stock ignition and do just fine puttering along or out playing wide open throttle. We do add octane booster at fuel stops.

   Dan ,
      There is a black cloud that hangs over Doug's house in Jersey. ;D

Quote from: pbf777 on March 10, 2021, 11:42:00 AM

Quote from: shelbydoug on March 10, 2021, 11:23:53 AM
I do remember seeing the starter smoke when trying to start a 11.5:1 289 hot. Not my preference for a street engine combination.

    If one is not confident in the starter motor or the voltage supply circuit's capability in this scenario, then the addition of an ignition timing "start-retard" control devise or just the separation of the start/crank circuit with a separate ignition circuit this providing the opportunity for the starter motor to initiate the rotation process, and then activation of the ignition, and with the inertia value of the assembly already in motion and the stater motor at speed, the load on the starter motor itself and amperage draw is reduced.      ;D

    Scott.

Sure. Now there are solutions that didn't exist 35 years ago. At least to the "common folk" determined to be un-deserving by Ford to get their double secret racing parts.

It is interesting to me, that those small block GT40 heads from the '60s race program never showed up in aluminum? The 427's did. Why not the 289's?

Aluminum was not exactly a new material to the industry. GM had an all aluminum 221 way back in 60 or 61. That engine design they sold to Rover who continued to refine it.

Lots of head scratching about procedures and parts availability. Chevy NEVER had issues with selling you ANYTHING that you wanted. With Ford you needed to go through a CIA security check and I suspect be blood related to the "Royal Family"

The killer is Ford GIVING the racers like Nicholson aluminum blocks.

As Brando said in "On The Waterfront", "you were my brother, I could have been a contender, you should have looked out for me?" :(


As much as I love Ford, there is no love lost between us. I don't particularly appreciate being classified as "one of them, yuck". "Just give 'the kid' a cookie. He'll go away and be quite".

Quote from: shelbydoug on March 10, 2021, 12:51:09 PM

It is interesting to me, that those small block GT40 heads from the '60s race program never showed up in aluminum? The 427's did. Why not the 289's?

Aluminum was not exactly a new material to the industry. GM had an all aluminum 221 way back in 60 or 61. That engine design they sold to Rover who continued to refine it.

The killer is Ford GIVING the racers like Nicholson aluminum blocks.

     I believe the 427 alloy heads were a desperate attempt in a weight reduction program for racing as was the other alloy blocks for say Nicholson, and it was understood that the long term durability expected in production instances where cast iron was utilized and well refined to provide this expectation, was not anticipated, nor would any of these beneficiaries really complain.      ;)

     In the case of GM's Buick 215 & Olds F85 engine one nail in its' coffin may well have been associated with the difficulties GM endured with the poor castings and their propensity to develop fluid leaks.  In era, a friend who was a mechanic at the local Pontiac dealer said that on these they had been advised to fill the cooling systems with straight anti-freeze to try and halt any water induced corrosion coupled with the casting porosity causing leakages.     :o

     There just was a lot yet to be learned in the casting of aluminum blocks & heads.    ::)

     Scott.

     

Quote from: csxsfm on March 09, 2021, 11:59:09 AM
Then they must work well on those stroked Dart blocks.  However, won't work on Fords new Boss block.  Go figure!

I know I'm replying to a post a little ways back, but I run said modern M-6010-Boss 302 block with R model HP 289 heads. And because the block requires .500" fasteners. I had all the head bolt holes enlarged to .530" to accommodate .500" ARP studs with 12 point nuts and washers.
I see what you mean by the water passages. I run the Felpro 1021 head gaskets with no additional sealer, studs torqued to 110lbs. No leaks...

Cheers,
~Earl J

     "This is not recommended due to the proximity of the lower/outside water relief holes on the deck of the M-6010-BOSS302 block deck being awfully close the outside perimeter of the O.E. production cylinder heads (including the aluminum "Y" & some earlier "X" heads) this perhaps not providing surfaces to adequately clamp the head gasket for sealing or retention."

We never ran into an issue with this configuration.

Quote from: CSX2259 on March 11, 2021, 03:04:35 AM
We never ran into an issue with this configuration.

    Yeah, I also inject that with "luck"............, but next time you have the head off, dykem the blocks' deck, place the cylinder head upon (less gasket), trace the lower/outer head perimeter profile, now remove the cylinder head and look at the available margin available to clamp the gasket   :o     

    Generally you'll find it's kinda narrow, if not breached (that would be with bad "luck"), the several machined semi-circle reliefs cut into this perimeter line are of particular concern, bordering several of the blocks' water reliefs.   ;)   

     Scott.

Quote from: pbf777 on March 10, 2021, 05:59:48 PM

Quote from: shelbydoug on March 10, 2021, 12:51:09 PM

It is interesting to me, that those small block GT40 heads from the '60s race program never showed up in aluminum? The 427's did. Why not the 289's?

Aluminum was not exactly a new material to the industry. GM had an all aluminum 221 way back in 60 or 61. That engine design they sold to Rover who continued to refine it.

The killer is Ford GIVING the racers like Nicholson aluminum blocks.

     I believe the 427 alloy heads were a desperate attempt in a weight reduction program for racing as was the other alloy blocks for say Nicholson, and it was understood that the long term durability expected in production instances where cast iron was utilized and well refined to provide this expectation, was not anticipated, nor would any of these beneficiaries really complain.      ;)

     In the case of GM's Buick 215 & Olds F85 engine one nail in its' coffin may well have been associated with the difficulties GM endured with the poor castings and their propensity to develop fluid leaks.  In era, a friend who was a mechanic at the local Pontiac dealer said that on these they had been advised to fill the cooling systems with straight anti-freeze to try and halt any water induced corrosion coupled with the casting porosity causing leakages.     :o

     There just was a lot yet to be learned in the casting of aluminum blocks & heads.    ::)

     Scott.

   

If you are referring to the questionable quality of the aluminum 427 heads I tend to agree but the iron heads have many of the same issues.

They both crack between the valve seats. They both can have gasket sealing issues, etc.

"Racing improves the breed". It's not like Ford wasn't casting aluminum intakes, water pumps, etc.

I have the pictures of the Chevy aluminum engines leaking everything all over the place at their first appearances at I think Daytonna in '65 or 66? The issue there was no one knew how to make a head gasket for them, amongst other gaskets.

My Ford C6FE-6049-B aluminum heads were ridiculous. Just sitting on the engine stand and priming the oil pump, the head gasket would leak OIL out the back corners. Even the Felpro's wouldn't hold.
Considering they were originally run with steel shim head gaskets is just impossible for me to believe.

Considering how many 427 heads eventually fail between the valves, it's not the aluminum's fault, it's just a poor original design.

   Doug ,
       There is at least "one" set of small block , C6FE aluminum head castings "out there" . The late Don Roberts ( rip) had a "raw , un machined" pair that were sold after his passing. The problem would be in the material integrity "IF" the iron molds were used. C6FE small block heads were notorious for cracking externally above the lower head bolts , and an aluminum version would be a bigger contender for that issue. I can't be certain that the castings were from '66 as there was a "continuation" head cast 20 or so years ago.
    BTW a smoking starter is typically caused by a poor ground.

Quote from: gt350hr on March 11, 2021, 11:40:20 AM
   as there was a "continuation" head cast 20 or so years ago.
   

     Those "continuation" heads in my past experience can often be identified by the valve center lines between the intake and exhaust on one of the end cylinders (forget which end?   :-\  ) being approximately .020" closer together than the rest.     :o

     I think if I remember right it was Allen Root who provided the machine work?    :-\

     As far as period aluminum cylinder heads for the S.B.F. I'm looking for a set of the Gurney-Weslake/Eagle cylinder heads (and related parts) for my TVR!  Anybody got any?     :)    I could be your bestest pal!      ::)

     Scott.

Quote from: gt350hr on March 11, 2021, 11:40:20 AM
   Doug ,
       There is at least "one" set of small block , C6FE aluminum head castings "out there" . The late Don Roberts ( rip) had a "raw , un machined" pair that were sold after his passing. The problem would be in the material integrity "IF" the iron molds were used. C6FE small block heads were notorious for cracking externally above the lower head bolts , and an aluminum version would be a bigger contender for that issue. I can't be certain that the castings were from '66 as there was a "continuation" head cast 20 or so years ago.
    BTW a smoking starter is typically caused by a poor ground.

I'm aware of the short comings of the original IRON designs. What I am saying is that I'm surprised that there wasn't more "enthusiasm" for aluminum substitutes, properly reinforced.

For instance, my AFR's have a deck thickness of .750 plus. That's even thicker then Edelbrock guessed on theirs at 5/8". I suppose, "necessity is the mother of invention"? The "427 brute", i.e., 427 light weight, as I know it is a very short life expectancy engine even if used normally. Using iron molds agreed is disasterous most likely.

Now I know that there are 351c  C8 engineering numbered, with 68 casting dates blocks that were part of the "Indy parts" program, and no one has mentioned the DOHC 255 Indy engine. I've only heard of ONE 427 aluminum block and it got blown up before I got to see it.

You got Nicholson's stuff. Did he destroy all of the aluminum 351-c blocks?


The block in this engine came from a Michigan racer. Has a 68 casting date.

  No Don didn't break "all" of the SK aluminum blocks . I still have the one I bought from him as a complete engine. SK aluminum 351C heads as well. I bought it in '78. Kasse freshened it and Don sent it out from Atlanta on a Delta jet. I still have the shipping bill as "I" had to pay it!

    Scott your BFF is Jay Cushman for Gurney Eagle stuff. He owns the rights to them now.

Quote from: pbf777 on March 11, 2021, 12:40:15 PM

Quote from: gt350hr on March 11, 2021, 11:40:20 AM
   as there was a "continuation" head cast 20 or so years ago.
   

     As far as period aluminum cylinder heads for the S.B.F. I'm looking for a set of the Gurney-Weslake/Eagle cylinder heads (and related parts) for my TVR!  Anybody got any?     :)    I could be your bestest pal!      ::)

     Scott.

You are a much more sick and twisted individual then I originally suspected Scott? I must be MUCH more respectful of you in the future!  Cary on! ;D

A Griffith TVR or just a TVR?


Only EVER saw one set of those. They were on William Wonder's GT40  #103 when he brought it to an SOA meeting in '76 in CT. He was with a female F1 driver but I cannot recall her name though. I've got pictures of that somewhere here. but where?

Those heads had the Weber 48 ida's mounted right to the heads. Kinda cool when you are just driving along 'OBEYING THE SPEED LIMIT"   ::)  and a GT40 pulls up along side? One of those unique "for your eyes only" life experiences? ;)

Quote from: gt350hr on March 11, 2021, 12:47:44 PM
  No Don didn't break "all" of the SK aluminum blocks . I still have the one I bought from him as a complete engine. SK aluminum 351C heads as well. I bought it in '78. Kasse freshened it and Don sent it out from Atlanta on a Delta jet. I still have the shipping bill as "I" had to pay it!

Common? It was all aluminum. How much could it have cost to ship?  ::)

SK...OK...forgot...68 casting date, not engineering number. I don't have a museum vault to go check an actual sample. Apparently some do? Go figure?

What you gonna' put that in pal?  8)

Don Roberts (rip) had a lot of "special" parts - heads, 4 bolt 289's.  What was his connection?

 Being a SCCA champion and long time Cobra racer opened a few doors. In later years Click's money helped. He had allot of "friends".

Quote from: shelbydoug on March 11, 2021, 01:02:03 PM

Quote from: gt350hr on March 11, 2021, 12:47:44 PM
  No Don didn't break "all" of the SK aluminum blocks . I still have the one I bought from him as a complete engine. SK aluminum 351C heads as well. I bought it in '78. Kasse freshened it and Don sent it out from Atlanta on a Delta jet. I still have the shipping bill as "I" had to pay it!

Common? It was all aluminum. How much could it have cost to ship?  ::)

SK...OK...forgot...68 casting date, not engineering number. I don't have a museum vault to go check an actual sample. Apparently some do? Go figure?

What you gonna' put that in pal?  8)

$438 in '78 dollars was allot! It's been in a front engine dragster , 7.73@ 177 ( Top Fuel racer Shawn Langdon's mom in '79) , then in a rear engine dragster 7.33@182 ( me driving) then in a '78 Mustang II 8.66 @ 162.( me driving) now it's "out to pasture".

Quote from: gt350hr on March 11, 2021, 04:22:08 PM

Quote from: shelbydoug on March 11, 2021, 01:02:03 PM

Quote from: gt350hr on March 11, 2021, 12:47:44 PM
  No Don didn't break "all" of the SK aluminum blocks . I still have the one I bought from him as a complete engine. SK aluminum 351C heads as well. I bought it in '78. Kasse freshened it and Don sent it out from Atlanta on a Delta jet. I still have the shipping bill as "I" had to pay it!

Common? It was all aluminum. How much could it have cost to ship?  ::)

SK...OK...forgot...68 casting date, not engineering number. I don't have a museum vault to go check an actual sample. Apparently some do? Go figure?

What you gonna' put that in pal?  8)

$438 in '78 dollars was allot! It's been in a front engine dragster , 7.73@ 177 ( Top Fuel racer Shawn Langdon's mom in '79) , then in a rear engine dragster 7.33@182 ( me driving) then in a '78 Mustang II 8.66 @ 162.( me driving) now it's "out to pasture".

So it looks like the original flimsy Ford aluminum was not really an issue for those blocks? That one certainly must have seen some rpm? Did you run the SK heads with it?

The iron "Nascar" block, aka, the "Australian block" is much thicker through the main bulkheads then the production 4 bolt 351c blocks are. Is the aluminum SK block like that or like the production casting?
It would seem that your block has certainly seen some very high rpm and survived or did it retire because it broke one too many times?

What do those heads look like? Are they "Pro-stocked" with raised exhaust through cut in bar stock?

Quote from: shelbydoug on March 11, 2021, 12:59:16 PM
A Griffith TVR or just a TVR?

      Well, mine is "just" a TVR    :(   , it's a '76 3000M series which I actually prefer, as I can actually get into (at least at this point in life anyway) as they're stretched a couple of extra inches in the middle so that Americans can fit, plus they're more pleasant in appearance as they don't look so much like something that was cut-down in length perhaps somewhat amateur in execution as do the Grantura models. It currently has the Ford Essex 3.0L V6 engine and right-hand drive as these were not imported to the U.S. (U.S. version was 2500M with the Triumph 2.5L I6), with a total production of 654 units produced over approximately five year or so period.

      And................. the Ford 289/302 engine "just-drops-right-in-there"!    8)   Well, at least reasonably easily as far as V8 engine swaps into sardine cans go!    :o

      I just wanted the F-O-R-D engine version to start with, and if I can put together a S.B.F. with a little Brit flavor I would make it into a 5000M version (actually no such thing from TVR), although I might be fudging there just a little!   ::)

      Soooo.............anybody got any Gurney Weslake/Eagle heads just laying around collecting dust?    :)

      Scott.

I like the Griffith 200 but just like the F15, I'm not made to fit it.

I altered my Pantera to fit and actually it was the solution to all of the other possibilities. Frankly, the Ford GT is too small to.

I still remember being able to buy a complete set up from Gurney. Sometimes it doesn't pay to have a good memory?

Good luck in finding the heads. That would be a cool set up, especially with a stroker in it.

The only thing is that chassis has a very bad reputation of not going where you point it under power.

When I asked Kopec about the three Griffiths that showed up in Nowalk, he said, "those guys are all dead. They crashed 'those things bad'." So my Pantera with the Webers, A3 heads, lowered floor pans and 180 degree headers makes more sense. That thing ANY idiot can go VERY fast in and survive with no one being the wiser. It just tracks very well.

It's also very cool coming up on cars from behind and the rear license plate staring me in the face. It's 42 inches to the roof.

Let's not forget about the Mirage GT40 aluminium blocks like I used to have Which Jay Cushman now has.  I purchased it from Dyno Don about 40 years ago or so and at the same time I bought his dual dominator intake which I had to go over to Randy's house and pick up. He was a bit pissed about that because he had tried to buy it from Don a couple of times.Here's a couple of pictures of it and a picture of an Indy dry sump block that I also sold to Jay.  I sold him the complete engine as shown in the pictures.

Picked these up about a month ago. Don't look like they were ever bolted onto an engine. NOT MINE!

Don
gt350bp

Quote from: gt350bp on March 12, 2021, 07:13:14 AM
Picked these up about a month ago. Don't look like they were ever bolted onto an engine. NOT MINE!

Don
gt350bp

:o

I'm in lust for them!

Talk about the GOOSE that layed the GOLDEN EGG... That's it, Stuff that dreams are made of!

Quote from: TA Coupe on March 12, 2021, 06:34:57 AM
Let's not forget about the Mirage GT40 aluminium blocks like I used to have Which Jay Cushman now has.  I purchased it from Dyno Don about 40 years ago or so and at the same time I bought his dual dominator intake which I had to go over to Randy's house and pick up. He was a bit pissed about that because he had tried to buy it from Don a couple of times.Here's a couple of pictures of it and a picture of an Indy dry sump block that I also sold to Jay.  I sold him the complete engine as shown in the pictures.

    Only the carburetors Roy . I already had an intake and one original carb from Don Araki (rip). In the end it saved me money because I ran the dual plane regular Holley T/A intake with a pair of "SK" 720s .
   Randy

Quote from: gt350bp on March 12, 2021, 07:13:14 AM
Picked these up about a month ago. Don't look like they were ever bolted onto an engine.

     These Gurney heads seem often to be found in unused condition, as since there never was an O.E. installation they were solely an aftermarket product.  Gurney was selling "kits" which apparently often consisted of the heads w/ valve-train, covers, water manifold, inlet adapters for Weber mounting (as in the photo), but also a single holley flange intake manifold (which doesn't look to impressive!), fasteners, etc.,  and although it probably all bolted-on just fine, (though I suppose you were on your own for exhaust manifolds/headers) the result I guess just proved too intimidating and or just didn't seen to be a good match for many of the vehicles of the time.  So after many of these "kits" were sold, they seem often to have just gathered dust since.    :) 

     A problem at this point in time is that many of the castings that had been set aside decades ago as shall we say, less than ideal, have been released/sold out into the marketplace adding to the number of N.O.S. pieces available, but..................    :o

     Scott

ALL things considered, they are a really nice piece to have even just to display. If I hear of a set I'll let you know.
I'd love to see that set up running in the TVR.

I remember the headers on the Griffiths came forward, then down. The engine drops right in but the plumbing gets tricky.

Quote from: shelbydoug on March 12, 2021, 03:08:21 PM
The engine drops right in but the plumbing gets tricky.

Quote from: pbf777 on March 11, 2021, 07:53:57 PM
    ........................easily as far as V8 engine swaps into SARDINE CANS go!    :o     

     Scott.

This is my 68 TVR Tuscan with original 289 hipo.  With cast iron intake, autolite carb, and air cleaner hood clearance is very tight.  Headers go forward on pass side, back on drivers side.  Cooks your legs in the summer!

Quote from: 6s855 on March 14, 2021, 11:55:31 AM
This is my 68 TVR Tuscan with original 289 hipo.  With cast iron intake, autolite carb, and air cleaner hood clearance is very tight.  Headers go forward on pass side, back on drivers side.  Cooks your legs in the summer!

The first time I got a ride in a 289 Cobra, it melted the glue on my sneakers!

Quote from: 6s855 on March 14, 2021, 11:55:31 AM
This is my 68 TVR Tuscan with original 289 hipo. 

      Very  nice, and thanks for sharing! 

      The V8 Tuscans are even harder to find, with very limited numbers produced, and not being worthy of such, I settled for the M-series, though I still prefer its' external appearance and interior space over others (but it's still a plastic-glass-fiber sardine can!), though in the case of the later, and offered by TVR, yours' is the long wheelbase, but not the wide body model?     ???

      See! It just drops right in there!  The Tuscans' engine compartment as in the photo appear very similar, if not to say the same as in the M-series cars so it is tight, with perhaps some drawbacks, e.g. a little hot shoe, but this just to remind one of the challenges of something from half a century ago    ;) 

      Huuuum........SIDE-PIPES!      :o    Well,.........maybe just toooo American.     ::)

      Scott.

   
     

What are you going to do for headers? Can you fit two driver side 289hp iron manifolds? One backwards on the driver side?
What is the curb weight of the TVR with a Ford small block?

Quote from: shelbydoug on March 15, 2021, 12:15:01 PM
What are you going to do for headers?

     If your asking me, I would fabricate my own headers, even though I really hate doing headers I have done such.  The last header setup we did was for a S.B.F. (347) in an "E"-Type, series I, O.T.S. Jaguar with a turbocharger installation!    :o

Quote from: shelbydoug on March 15, 2021, 12:15:01 PM
What is the curb weight of the TVR with a Ford small block?

     Generally slightly less than the 289 Cobra,..........and slightly faster!     ;)    "The, Cobra Killer"   ::)

     Scott.

Quote from: pbf777 on March 15, 2021, 12:53:56 PM

Quote from: shelbydoug on March 15, 2021, 12:15:01 PM
What are you going to do for headers?

     If your asking me, I would fabricate my own headers, even though I really hate doing headers I have done such.  The last header setup we did was for a S.B.F. (347) in an "E"-Type, series I, O.T.S. Jaguar with a turbocharger installation!    :o

Quote from: shelbydoug on March 15, 2021, 12:15:01 PM
What is the curb weight of the TVR with a Ford small block?

     Generally slightly less than the 289 Cobra,..........and slightly faster!     ;)    "The, Cobra Killer"   ::)

     Scott.

Cobra killer in what sense? You can't steer it and it crashes into the Cobra and kills it? ::)

Oh yeah.  Just like Cobras they won FIA and SCCA National Championships - NOT. 

     

Quote from: pbf777 on March 15, 2021, 12:53:56 PM
  "The, Cobra Killer"   ::) 

     Now calm down, it'll be O.K.!    :)

     I wasn't the first to make this statement, but only a little jesting here, as I felt sure it would at least raise a few eyebrows among this crowd, but let's not go "postal" over it!       ::)

     And to the first response: Yeah, all ya-gota-do is beat the Cobra to the first turn, from then on he'll be too afraid to get close enough (if he could) to pass, the TVR guy instead of admitting the lack of control will claim to have been covering the Cobra guys' ever possible move!  If I remember right, Mark Donahue was involved in some of the development including perhaps acting early on as the test driver for Jack Griffiths' efforts with the 200/400, and although familiar with the effect of putting the V8 in a go-cart sized vehicle as in the Cobra, he apparently wasn't impressed with the results of the same V8 mounted on a roller-skate!     :o

     And to the second response:  Not taking anything away from the success of the Cobras, but c'mon, TVR was never in a position to take on the world, they were generally to busy just trying to keep their head above water with the bill collectors knocking at the door!   :(   But perhaps it could have been a good run for each maker (including Ford) if the added competition of a more like type could have been there.    :-\

     And c'mon, admit the V8 TVR's are little(er) monsters and there's some similarities in intention and even genealogy in the history of the V8 cars of each manufacture that naturally draw comparisons.  You know, like, "brothers from another mother"!     ::)

     Scott.

     

     

     

From looking at the pictures above looks like possibly two left hand shorty headers from a 5.0 Mustang might possibly work on both sides.

     Roy

Quote from: pbf777 on March 15, 2021, 08:33:06 PM
     

Quote from: pbf777 on March 15, 2021, 12:53:56 PM
  "The, Cobra Killer"   ::) 

     Now calm down, it'll be O.K.!    :)

     I wasn't the first to make this statement, but only a little jesting here, as I felt sure it would at least raise a few eyebrows among this crowd, but let's not go "postal" over it!       ::)

     And to the first response: Yeah, all ya-gota-do is beat the Cobra to the first turn, from then on he'll be too afraid to get close enough (if he could) to pass, the TVR guy instead of admitting the lack of control will claim to have been covering the Cobra guys' ever possible move!  If I remember right, Mark Donahue was involved in some of the development including perhaps acting early on as the test driver for Jack Griffiths' efforts with the 200/400, and although familiar with the effect of putting the V8 in a go-cart sized vehicle as in the Cobra, he apparently wasn't impressed with the results of the same V8 mounted on a roller-skate!     :o

     And to the second response:  Not taking anything away from the success of the Cobras, but c'mon, TVR was never in a position to take on the world, they were generally to busy just trying to keep their head above water with the bill collectors knocking at the door!   :(   But perhaps it could have been a good run for each maker (including Ford) if the added competition of a more like type could have been there.    :-\

     And c'mon, admit the V8 TVR's are little(er) monsters and there's some similarities in intention and even genealogy in the history of the V8 cars of each manufacture that naturally draw comparisons.  You know, like, "brothers from another mother"!     ::)

     Scott.

     

     

   

Hey! I love 'em. I've gotten myself into tighter places then that and not know which way was up.

Scott, I bought my TVR in Dec of 68.  It is a LWB Tuscan, #6 of 13 left-hand drive imported that year, not a later wide-body MAL.  Griffiths were around 1800 lbs, so mine is longer, had thicker fiberglass, and a heftier rear suspension.  I guess 2000 or 2100 lbs.  I lived in GM territory, so there was no shortage of camaros and corvettes to street race.  I could do high 12's in 1969, more than enough for any GM junk.  There were no exotic cars in my blue-collar area, but I did run a 289 cobra once.  I was beating him to 90 but backed off and let him pass before we hit a speed-trap I knew was coming and he didn't.  Oops, sorry about that.  Sadly I saw what was left of his cobra after he managed to get t-boned cutting through highway traffic some time later.  A waste of a fine machine.

     With consideration of the TVR's minuscule size it's actually amazing the amount of space available under the bonnet, as represented in the previous photos with the V8 in place. And particularly with the M-series cars which are slightly longer in the nose, one can remove the spare tire (full-size, relocating in the cabin behind the seats on the shelf as in earlier chassis, also similarly to the early GT350's) which is stowed laying nearly horizontally ahead of the radiator and have more than sufficient space for say a turbocharger installation with both headers sweeping forward or even a remote mounted supercharger, including the inter/after coolers. 

     Just a little hop-up in case those Cobras are getting a little to close!     ::)

     Oh, and at least in the case of the M-series, the pedal distance, separation placement and pedal box area is even quite generous (even for my big feet), again considering the overall vehicle dimensions.  But it still does require a certain level flexibility for ones' ingress and egress!      ;)

     Scott.

Quote from: 6s855 on March 16, 2021, 01:01:35 PM
Scott, I bought my TVR in Dec of 68. 

     Maybe I wasn't paying attention, but do you still own it?     ???

     If so, please put me on the list of people to call when you do tire of it, as I would truly enjoy the opportunity to aid in relinquishing my fellow man of his worries.    8)

     Scott.

All the Brit's '60s cars are tight. They're all made for Jockeys.

There's a scene in a film, the title of which I don't member at the moment, with Clint Walker climbing out of an XKE head first.

He is a little bigger then me but I am the size of an "average' NFL linebacker, so the image isn't lost on me.

Ken Miles might have been the optimum size for these "things". Even Gurney, who is taller but of slight build, like a fighter plane pilot is, was squeezed into the cockpit of the 40's and needed more headroom.

I found that in my Pantera, a quick release steering wheel does help with egress and work under the dash. Of course it can't correct the twisted spine that you get from having the pedal box offset to the center to accommodate the cars wheel wells.

The Europeans really don't like to accommodate even average Americans for sure.


289 Cobras with roll bars push the seats just far enough forward to make it tight whereas the 427's are just about 3 inches longer which helps tremendously.

Remember though that it was "Shelby" that had the US 427 cars extended for more room.

Quote from: pbf777 on March 10, 2021, 05:59:48 PM

Quote from: shelbydoug on March 10, 2021, 12:51:09 PM

It is interesting to me, that those small block GT40 heads from the '60s race program never showed up in aluminum? The 427's did. Why not the 289's?

Aluminum was not exactly a new material to the industry. GM had an all aluminum 221 way back in 60 or 61. That engine design they sold to Rover who continued to refine it.

The killer is Ford GIVING the racers like Nicholson aluminum blocks.

     I believe the 427 alloy heads were a desperate attempt in a weight reduction program for racing as was the other alloy blocks for say Nicholson, and it was understood that the long term durability expected in production instances where cast iron was utilized and well refined to provide this expectation, was not anticipated, nor would any of these beneficiaries really complain.      ;)

     In the case of GM's Buick 215 & Olds F85 engine one nail in its' coffin may well have been associated with the difficulties GM endured with the poor castings and their propensity to develop fluid leaks.  In era, a friend who was a mechanic at the local Pontiac dealer said that on these they had been advised to fill the cooling systems with straight anti-freeze to try and halt any water induced corrosion coupled with the casting porosity causing leakages.     :o

     There just was a lot yet to be learned in the casting of aluminum blocks & heads.    ::)

     Scott.

   

Scott,
I disagree with a whole heart as far as the learnings of casting aluminum. FoMoCo, General Motors, Packard, had all had a huge compressed education 20 - 25 years earlier in making some of the highest quality aluminum castings desired ever. Thousands upon thousands of very high quality castings. In fact I have looked at the quality of the 1960s automotive castings and just shook my head. There were even thousands of magnesium castings that just indicate to me that possibly the auto makers weren't yet ready to make durable alloy castings.
John

Hey John, talking about magnesium reminds me of going to Mickey Thompson's shop in Long Beach back in the eighties and seeing a magnesium 327 Block and I went over and picked it up with 2 fingers. I ended up buying a stroker short block from him and that building had some amazing stuff in it like one of the Bonneville cars up on a rack and pallet loads of boss 429 heads and blocks.  He had an engine dyno there that had been turned into a shock dyno Room. I had my choice of buying the stroker short block or a complete tunnel port 302 that was from the carbs to the Pan. Nowadays I wish I would have bought the complete motor as either one was $1200 at the time.

     Roy

Quote from: JohnSlack on March 19, 2021, 05:37:03 PM

Quote from: pbf777 on March 10, 2021, 05:59:48 PM
     There just was a lot yet to be learned in the casting of aluminum blocks & heads.    ::)       

I disagree with a whole heart as far as the learnings of casting aluminum.

     I suppose the context of my statement was not really that the O.E.M.s were not knowing or capable of how this woulda, coulda, shoulda have been done for best results, that without the automotive industries fervent practice of sometimes excessive cost-cutting short-cuts, bad practices of manufacture, perhaps less than idea materials; and rather as a comparison, most people in this country know and are capable of healthy diets, but that doesn't mean they practice it, and others often will say: well, one day maybe they'll learn!     :)     

     And in the mean time, for those who haven't, please choose an attire that doesn't exemplify your walrus rolls!     :o

     Scott.

Quote from: TA Coupe on March 19, 2021, 07:13:33 PM
Hey John, talking about magnesium reminds me of going to Mickey Thompson's shop in Long Beach back in the eighties and seeing a magnesium 327 Block and I went over and picked it up with 2 fingers. I ended up buying a stroker short block from him and that building had some amazing stuff in it like one of the Bonneville cars up on a rack and pallet loads of boss 429 heads and blocks.  He had an engine dyno there that had been turned into a shock dyno Room. I had my choice of buying the stroker short block or a complete tunnel port 302 that was from the carbs to the Pan. Nowadays I wish I would have bought the complete motor as either one was $1200 at the time.

     Roy

Hey Roy,
Magnesium parts, wow FoMoCo had gone down some limited production rabbit holes with that material. I ran into a couple of 494 magnesium blocks and an FE magnesium block in my adventures in shops in So-Cal. My biggest miss was when I went from Chevy to Ford big blocks. I stopped by Zeuschel's to see if he'd sell me a side oiler block for my first Cobra Jet car. He'd sold all 40 something of them that had been on pallets in the back of the shop the day before to "Big Del Massino" the boat racer. They were still physically there.....they just weren't "Z's" any more. "Z" used to tell us about the toys he'd see over at "Trickey Mickey's" including an experimental spring free valve train compressed nitrogen cylinder system that Dave witnessed Mickey run. All I can tell you was there were a lot of brain cells in the room when those two were in it.
John

I think that largely for Ford, lightweight materials was experimental and as such had limited manpower dedicated to it so to speak?

Much of Ford's developments came out of the "Deuce's" edict to beat Ferrari and  needed development or maybe "perfecting"?

I find some of it disappointing but I say that in hindsight because I know where it all would originally wind up.


Some of that disappointment stems from the "not invented here syndrome" which unfortunately was one of Henry's critical flaws.

Other manufacturers were just as inventive but developed more into practical production applications.


There is no better example of "trickle down economics" then "Detroit" in SO many ways. It's so unfair for me to say that "Detroit" lacked foresight vision. That just isn't true.

I once heard someone say, it might have been Shelby, that when a race car explodes in front of you on the track and all you can see is a cloud of smoke, you aim for the middle of the cloud and drive through it with your fingers crossed. You just don't know what is in the cloud or on the other side.

That's a pretty good metaphor I think for the entire situation.


Yes. I heard of the mag Can Am blocks. Never saw one or even an all aluminum Indy engine in person.

I will say though that I think GM's policy of selling you ANYTHING that they made was a better one rather then you had to be "somebody" to get into Ford's racing stash?



There are only two people that I know of that had the ability as "outsiders" to not just be the "fly on the wall" to these developments, but have the ability to "infiltrate" without security clearances into the manufacturers racing parts world. Jeff Burgy in Detroit, and Randy in SoCal.

Here in the Northeast we were just looked at as "red meat bait for the 'Draft' and as such 'draft dodgers, although in so many fields New York just seemed to be an intellectual wasteland (and still does in so many ways). Males were just looked at as rags to stuff in the hole to stop the bleeding while women were free to go demonstrate and burn their bras without fear of retribution.


That's all part of it. That isn't irrelevant at all.

It was Iocooca's concept that Ford needed to beat Ferarri to get "us" as customers and it's quite clear now that he played the "Deuce's ego" against Ferrari to get there. Even so, he just worked there and there was only so much he could do too.

He WAS right but lost that argument in '70 when Ford's study showed that for all the efforts and money spent, Ford's market share had not increased, and heck, how many times do you need to beat Ferrari at Lemans anyway. Program ended for the moment...to be continued at some later point?

Ford beancounters had more influence then and today.  Why I used to get mad when I was buying a hipo 289 at the same price the chevy guys were picking up L88's.  Ford crate engines v. GM.  Ford GT v. C8.

John,  one of the coolest parts I ever had was a magnesium cross ram Weber intake for 58 carbs. I was in the Sacramento area driving around and saw a shop that looked interesting and I stopped in and on the wall behind the counter were to intake manifolds one Of them was the magnesium intake and the other was a 2x4 intake and I asked the guy if he wanted to sell them and he said he would sell one of them and I could buy whichever 1 I wanted so I took the magnesium 1 which I traded to  JIM INGLESE at the SAAC convention in Monterey years ago for a Brand new set of Italian Weber carbs set up for my GT40 Mirage engine.

      Roy

Quote from: TA Coupe on March 20, 2021, 05:45:13 PM
John,  one of the coolest parts I ever had was a magnesium cross ram Weber intake for 58 carbs. I was in the Sacramento area driving around and saw a shop that looked interesting and I stopped in and on the wall behind the counter were to intake manifolds one Of them was the magnesium intake and the other was a 2x4 intake and I asked the guy if he wanted to sell them and he said he would sell one of them and I could buy whichever 1 I wanted so I took the magnesium 1 which I traded to  JIM INGLESE at the SAAC convention in Monterey years ago for a Brand new set of Italian Weber carbs set up for my GT40 Mirage engine.

      Roy

Roy,
One of the coolest parts I have ever owned is an NOS 1969 T/A standard Flange Holley 2x4 dual plane Intake for the BOSS 302. Wait a minute, I got that from you.....thank you again. I'll probably only ever have one of those, and in a year or so it won't be NOS anymore. However once again the quality of the casting is sub-par when graded on a curve.... I'm not complaining and it is still worth every undisclosed penny I paid for it and every agreement I made with my wife to acquire said intake manifold.
John

Yeah John rub it in some more. Where's my hanky?😪 JK   And I am happy with the dominator carb that I got from you also.

     Roy

Got a picture of that dual 4 Boss intake?

   Scott ,
       The 351 (XE 9.2 deck version) was made in iron and aluminum as you know and was "funded" by the GT 40/Can Am program. The 351C aluminum block program was done for the '69 Indy effoert headed by nearby resident Henry "Smokey" Yunick. When the program fell apart , the "inventory" was sent to H&M Charlotte for "sale" Dyno bought the stuff from them. Ford DID give him five or six iron SK 351C blocks with "square" cylinders but core shift was excessive and to the point where they were unusable. After the Factory backed Pinto effort , Don was "on his own" , with ZERO help from Ford.
   Randy

Quote from: gt350hr on March 22, 2021, 11:46:42 AM
   Scott ,
       The 351 (XE 9.2 deck version) was made in iron and aluminum as you know and was "funded" by the GT 40/Can Am program. The 351C aluminum block program was done for the '69 Indy effoert headed by nearby resident Henry "Smokey" Yunick. When the program fell apart , the "inventory" was sent to H&M Charlotte for "sale" Dyno bought the stuff from them. Ford DID give him five or six iron SK 351C blocks with "square" cylinders but core shift was excessive and to the point where they were unusable. After the Factory backed Pinto effort , Don was "on his own" , with ZERO help from Ford.
   Randy

I've known Randy for 40+ years and this has been a constant theme. Randy will turn on a lightbulb with a fairly simple comment leaving you to wonder if he turned the bulb on with purpose. (Usually that is the case.)

In this case I was bemoaning the inconsistent quality of the low production rare alloy castings. Randy once again brings up the universal principal "How did it get paid for?", "What group was funding it?", Who's authority was okaying the pattern making, the quantity, the tooling and research budget? Of course once an item makes it out of the well maybe this direction is a good direction to go, well then better more consistent castings are approved.

John

Quote from: shelbydoug on March 22, 2021, 10:33:27 AM
Got a picture of that dual 4 Boss intake?

Doug,

It is the intake on the left in the picture set below, I knew I had a picture of it just took me a while to find it. You'll notice no cast part numbers, No FoMoCo, and actually when you see it from below the coolant outlets on the intake face are flawed. When I first got it I got all the intakes out of storage for a "T/A Family" picture. The one in the center is the "other" T/A 2x4 intake manifold for 1969, and the one on the left is a Bud Moore Mini-Plenum as used during the 1970 T/A season.
John

Quote from: JohnSlack on March 22, 2021, 12:55:17 PM

Quote from: gt350hr on March 22, 2021, 11:46:42 AM
   Scott ,
       The 351 (XE 9.2 deck version) was made in iron and aluminum as you know and was "funded" by the GT 40/Can Am program. The 351C aluminum block program was done for the '69 Indy effoert headed by nearby resident Henry "Smokey" Yunick. When the program fell apart , the "inventory" was sent to H&M Charlotte for "sale" Dyno bought the stuff from them. Ford DID give him five or six iron SK 351C blocks with "square" cylinders but core shift was excessive and to the point where they were unusable. After the Factory backed Pinto effort , Don was "on his own" , with ZERO help from Ford.
   Randy

I've known Randy for 40+ years and this has been a constant theme. Randy will turn on a lightbulb with a fairly simple comment leaving you to wonder if he turned the bulb on with purpose. (Usually that is the case.)

In this case I was bemoaning the inconsistent quality of the low production rare alloy castings. Randy once again brings up the universal principal "How did it get paid for?", "What group was funding it?", Who's authority was okaying the pattern making, the quantity, the tooling and research budget? Of course once an item makes it out of the well maybe this direction is a good direction to go, well then better more consistent castings are approved.

John

OK. Randy is always "colorful" You won't always get what you were asking about but you will get something interesting to the point of being fascinating.
He has the ability to put things in human terms that otherwise I would have just given up on and kept wondering about. So it's always fun to get his reply. Rarely boring.

I'll throw my wrench in the works now and take the thread further off course. I'm good at that. No need to thank me. Did an intake for the 351c aluminum Indy block ever get made or never quite get to it?

I've heard discussion about the 351c Australian blocks having a lot of core shift and being put in production truck engines in Australia.

Were the aluminum versions cast from the HD block molds with the thicker bulkheads or just the regular molds?


I actually had my first D2AE 4 bolt block that came out of a wrecked Pantera. The shop I brought it to for boring told me never to come back again. Seems they thought I had a special block since he had to sharpen his cutters several times in over boring it. He said I screwed him?

He said that's what all the xxxxyyyy's meant in the lifter galleries but I think he was just used to doing the soft iron Chevy blocks vs. Fords with their higher nodular content? I don't know . Never went back to him again.


I actually expected your Boss 2-4 to be a version of the Shelby Autosport manifold. As I recall, Randy gave that one a poor rating?

Quote from: shelbydoug on March 22, 2021, 03:53:07 PM

Quote from: JohnSlack on March 22, 2021, 12:55:17 PM

Quote from: gt350hr on March 22, 2021, 11:46:42 AM
   Scott ,
       The 351 (XE 9.2 deck version) was made in iron and aluminum as you know and was "funded" by the GT 40/Can Am program. The 351C aluminum block program was done for the '69 Indy effoert headed by nearby resident Henry "Smokey" Yunick. When the program fell apart , the "inventory" was sent to H&M Charlotte for "sale" Dyno bought the stuff from them. Ford DID give him five or six iron SK 351C blocks with "square" cylinders but core shift was excessive and to the point where they were unusable. After the Factory backed Pinto effort , Don was "on his own" , with ZERO help from Ford.
   Randy

I've known Randy for 40+ years and this has been a constant theme. Randy will turn on a lightbulb with a fairly simple comment leaving you to wonder if he turned the bulb on with purpose. (Usually that is the case.)

In this case I was bemoaning the inconsistent quality of the low production rare alloy castings. Randy once again brings up the universal principal "How did it get paid for?", "What group was funding it?", Who's authority was okaying the pattern making, the quantity, the tooling and research budget? Of course once an item makes it out of the well maybe this direction is a good direction to go, well then better more consistent castings are approved.

John

OK. Randy is always "colorful" You won't always get what you were asking about but you will get something interesting to the point of being fascinating.
He has the ability to put things in human terms that otherwise I would have just given up on and kept wondering about. So it's always fun to get his reply. Rarely boring.

I'll throw my wrench in the works now and take the thread further off course. I'm good at that. No need to thank me. Did an intake for the 351c aluminum Indy block ever get made or never quite get to it?

I've heard discussion about the 351c Australian blocks having a lot of core shift and being put in production truck engines in Australia.

Were the aluminum versions cast from the HD block molds with the thicker bulkheads or just the regular molds?


I actually had my first D2AE 4 bolt block that came out of a wrecked Pantera. The shop I brought it to for boring told me never to come back again. Seems they thought I had a special block since he had to sharpen his cutters several times in over boring it. He said I screwed him?

He said that's what all the xxxxyyyy's meant in the lifter galleries but I think he was just used to doing the soft iron Chevy blocks vs. Fords with their higher nodular content? I don't know . Never went back to him again.


I actually expected your Boss 2-4 to be a version of the Shelby Autosport manifold. As I recall, Randy gave that one a poor rating?

Doug,
No the Shelby 2x4 BOSS 302 intake manifold moved the carburetors back to clear the distributor, the Shelby intake also has longer ports in the rear, as well as being tilted front to rear. The Shelby intake manifold is better than the stock intake, not hard. I have obsessed for most of my adult life on the "other" 1969 2x4 intake and have owned several prior to the one in the picture in the last post. Randy and I had discussed the standard flange intake manifold for many years. Occasionally he would tell me that he would sell me his when he was done with it.....he spoke so highly of it that eventually I just had to go on a unicorn hunt. By careful evaluation I was able to find 10 of the intakes in the known world. After another year of talking to different people who owned them I finally listened to the advice of the late great Dave Zeuschel, "There is no obstruction to big that you can't fix with cash." I advertised for the intake that I was searching for someone willing to sell me one, name the price. The price is not to be revealed, the deal I made with my wife is not to be revealed. My deal did not set the price or value of that intake manifold, it simply reflected what in that micro-second in time was the pain threshold I was willing to endure to have that intake. Holman Moody also made an intake manifold similar to the Shelby BOSS  302 2x4.

P.S. this standard flange intake manifold also requires the offset distributor to clear the carburetors.
John

Quote from: JohnSlack on March 22, 2021, 04:47:57 PM

Quote from: shelbydoug on March 22, 2021, 03:53:07 PM

Quote from: JohnSlack on March 22, 2021, 12:55:17 PM

Quote from: gt350hr on March 22, 2021, 11:46:42 AM
   Scott ,
       The 351 (XE 9.2 deck version) was made in iron and aluminum as you know and was "funded" by the GT 40/Can Am program. The 351C aluminum block program was done for the '69 Indy effoert headed by nearby resident Henry "Smokey" Yunick. When the program fell apart , the "inventory" was sent to H&M Charlotte for "sale" Dyno bought the stuff from them. Ford DID give him five or six iron SK 351C blocks with "square" cylinders but core shift was excessive and to the point where they were unusable. After the Factory backed Pinto effort , Don was "on his own" , with ZERO help from Ford.
   Randy

I've known Randy for 40+ years and this has been a constant theme. Randy will turn on a lightbulb with a fairly simple comment leaving you to wonder if he turned the bulb on with purpose. (Usually that is the case.)

In this case I was bemoaning the inconsistent quality of the low production rare alloy castings. Randy once again brings up the universal principal "How did it get paid for?", "What group was funding it?", Who's authority was okaying the pattern making, the quantity, the tooling and research budget? Of course once an item makes it out of the well maybe this direction is a good direction to go, well then better more consistent castings are approved.

John

OK. Randy is always "colorful" You won't always get what you were asking about but you will get something interesting to the point of being fascinating.
He has the ability to put things in human terms that otherwise I would have just given up on and kept wondering about. So it's always fun to get his reply. Rarely boring.

I'll throw my wrench in the works now and take the thread further off course. I'm good at that. No need to thank me. Did an intake for the 351c aluminum Indy block ever get made or never quite get to it?

I've heard discussion about the 351c Australian blocks having a lot of core shift and being put in production truck engines in Australia.

Were the aluminum versions cast from the HD block molds with the thicker bulkheads or just the regular molds?


I actually had my first D2AE 4 bolt block that came out of a wrecked Pantera. The shop I brought it to for boring told me never to come back again. Seems they thought I had a special block since he had to sharpen his cutters several times in over boring it. He said I screwed him?

He said that's what all the xxxxyyyy's meant in the lifter galleries but I think he was just used to doing the soft iron Chevy blocks vs. Fords with their higher nodular content? I don't know . Never went back to him again.


I actually expected your Boss 2-4 to be a version of the Shelby Autosport manifold. As I recall, Randy gave that one a poor rating?

Doug,
No the Shelby 2x4 BOSS 302 intake manifold moved the carburetors back to clear the distributor, the Shelby intake also has longer ports in the rear, as well as being tilted front to rear. The Shelby intake manifold is better than the stock intake, not hard. I have obsessed for most of my adult life on the "other" 1969 2x4 intake and have owned several prior to the one in the picture in the last post. Randy and I had discussed the standard flange intake manifold for many years. Occasionally he would tell me that he would sell me his when he was done with it.....he spoke so highly of it that eventually I just had to go on a unicorn hunt. By careful evaluation I was able to find 10 of the intakes in the known world. After another year of talking to different people who owned them I finally listened to the advice of the late great Dave Zeuschel, "There is no obstruction to big that you can't fix with cash." I advertised for the intake that I was searching for someone willing to sell me one, name the price. The price is not to be revealed, the deal I made with my wife is not to be revealed. My deal did not set the price or value of that intake manifold, it simply reflected what in that micro-second in time was the pain threshold I was willing to endure to have that intake. Holman Moody also made an intake manifold similar to the Shelby BOSS  302 2x4.

P.S. this standard flange intake manifold also requires the offset distributor to clear the carburetors.
John

I feel your pain. You are speaking of love and love is not a rational thing. I also think that it is some kind of a viral infection with mostly symptoms of pain, but that's another story.

I suppose that it is not possible to know every intake that was made but I suspect that many were, just not seen by anyone but the tool makers?


H&M is part of that formula. They made A LOT of manifolds that any of us ever saw.

I SUSPECT that there is a T/A type 2x4 intake for the 351c somewhere. It's said that the Detomaso version of the 48ida Weber manifold was built by H&M, Ford paid for it, and unfortunately shipped the molds to Italy?

Lots of stuff got made in those 'Carolina hills besides 'shine.


I had a "Ford Motosport" A331 intake. It looked normal on the outside but had 302-4v size ports. It was heavy because of all the extra metal cast into it. I suppose that wasn't cheating to them?

Quote from: shelbydoug on March 22, 2021, 04:58:27 PM

Quote from: JohnSlack on March 22, 2021, 04:47:57 PM

Quote from: shelbydoug on March 22, 2021, 03:53:07 PM

Quote from: JohnSlack on March 22, 2021, 12:55:17 PM

Quote from: gt350hr on March 22, 2021, 11:46:42 AM
   Scott ,
       The 351 (XE 9.2 deck version) was made in iron and aluminum as you know and was "funded" by the GT 40/Can Am program. The 351C aluminum block program was done for the '69 Indy effoert headed by nearby resident Henry "Smokey" Yunick. When the program fell apart , the "inventory" was sent to H&M Charlotte for "sale" Dyno bought the stuff from them. Ford DID give him five or six iron SK 351C blocks with "square" cylinders but core shift was excessive and to the point where they were unusable. After the Factory backed Pinto effort , Don was "on his own" , with ZERO help from Ford.
   Randy

I've known Randy for 40+ years and this has been a constant theme. Randy will turn on a lightbulb with a fairly simple comment leaving you to wonder if he turned the bulb on with purpose. (Usually that is the case.)

In this case I was bemoaning the inconsistent quality of the low production rare alloy castings. Randy once again brings up the universal principal "How did it get paid for?", "What group was funding it?", Who's authority was okaying the pattern making, the quantity, the tooling and research budget? Of course once an item makes it out of the well maybe this direction is a good direction to go, well then better more consistent castings are approved.

John

OK. Randy is always "colorful" You won't always get what you were asking about but you will get something interesting to the point of being fascinating.
He has the ability to put things in human terms that otherwise I would have just given up on and kept wondering about. So it's always fun to get his reply. Rarely boring.

I'll throw my wrench in the works now and take the thread further off course. I'm good at that. No need to thank me. Did an intake for the 351c aluminum Indy block ever get made or never quite get to it?

I've heard discussion about the 351c Australian blocks having a lot of core shift and being put in production truck engines in Australia.

Were the aluminum versions cast from the HD block molds with the thicker bulkheads or just the regular molds?


I actually had my first D2AE 4 bolt block that came out of a wrecked Pantera. The shop I brought it to for boring told me never to come back again. Seems they thought I had a special block since he had to sharpen his cutters several times in over boring it. He said I screwed him?

He said that's what all the xxxxyyyy's meant in the lifter galleries but I think he was just used to doing the soft iron Chevy blocks vs. Fords with their higher nodular content? I don't know . Never went back to him again.


I actually expected your Boss 2-4 to be a version of the Shelby Autosport manifold. As I recall, Randy gave that one a poor rating?

Doug,
No the Shelby 2x4 BOSS 302 intake manifold moved the carburetors back to clear the distributor, the Shelby intake also has longer ports in the rear, as well as being tilted front to rear. The Shelby intake manifold is better than the stock intake, not hard. I have obsessed for most of my adult life on the "other" 1969 2x4 intake and have owned several prior to the one in the picture in the last post. Randy and I had discussed the standard flange intake manifold for many years. Occasionally he would tell me that he would sell me his when he was done with it.....he spoke so highly of it that eventually I just had to go on a unicorn hunt. By careful evaluation I was able to find 10 of the intakes in the known world. After another year of talking to different people who owned them I finally listened to the advice of the late great Dave Zeuschel, "There is no obstruction to big that you can't fix with cash." I advertised for the intake that I was searching for someone willing to sell me one, name the price. The price is not to be revealed, the deal I made with my wife is not to be revealed. My deal did not set the price or value of that intake manifold, it simply reflected what in that micro-second in time was the pain threshold I was willing to endure to have that intake. Holman Moody also made an intake manifold similar to the Shelby BOSS  302 2x4.

P.S. this standard flange intake manifold also requires the offset distributor to clear the carburetors.
John

I feel your pain. You are speaking of love and love is not a rational thing. I also think that it is some kind of a viral infection with mostly symptoms of pain, but that's another story.

I suppose that it is not possible to know every intake that was made but I suspect that many were, just not seen by anyone but the tool makers?


H&M is part of that formula. They made A LOT of manifolds that any of us ever saw.

I SUSPECT that there is a T/A type 2x4 intake for the 351c somewhere. It's said that the Detomaso version of the 48ida Weber manifold was built by H&M, Ford paid for it, and unfortunately shipped the molds to Italy?

Lots of stuff got made in those 'Carolina hills besides 'shine.


I had a "Ford Motosport" A331 intake. It looked normal on the outside but had 302-4v size ports. It was heavy because of all the extra metal cast into it. I suppose that wasn't cheating to them?

Doug,
Over the years I have seen BOSS 302 intakes that have had the snouts cut off of the front of them and been used with spacers for a 351C build. I've owned a 2x4 Dominator intake that had been welded up with adapters on the carburetor pads that had been used for 351C stuff in Australia and New Zealand. So I think that was taken into mind when FoMoCo had an intake for a program that was over that could adapt that easily.. Besides the world was changing, FoMoCo was getting out of racing, Joe Boghosian told me that one of the higher ups came to the track where they were testing and said get rid of this stuff. He went to get a couple of box trailers and loaded them up. NASCAR 427 engines and parts, Indy DOHC motors, BOSS motors, just load em up and get out. Engineers moved to emissions programs, the world had changed and the Cleveland got screwed.
John

These days I wouldn't hack up a T/A intake but if you see one that's available I might be able to be talked into it?
I don't know if the offset distributor will fit in a Pantera though and I've really got the Webers dialed in.

What do you guys think this head is?

     Roy

Lets see... Staggered valves, small ports- Tunnel port 302 ?

Tunnelport 302 has ports like a 427 Tunnelport so not even close. 🙄

     Roy

That's that secret, non-existant head, made from unobtainium that Randy mentioned that matches that 289 T/A, non-existant intake.

It actually resembles the C302B aluminum '80s "Motorsport" head a little?

I think it's made out of radioactive materials to keep the tech inspectors away as well?

Wasn't it cast at Area 51 or Studio 54 or something like that?

    Roy,
      That is another of the "low cost" "Boss" heads configured to use the 351W intake. The heads  were made ( like your 302 versions) to accept a "conventional" wedge intake like yours do. "I" was not aware Ford Engineering tried "that" combination , only the 302 ci version. I learn something new every day.
   Neither combination made it to production status.
  Randy

Quote from: shelbydoug on March 22, 2021, 04:58:27 PM
I SUSPECT that there is a T/A type 2x4 intake for the 351c somewhere.

     In the early '80's, I think it was the Columbus Ford event, I held a 351C, dual plane, dual four of Holley pattern, magnesium cast intake manifold, this with no markings to identify it and unmachined.  The guy wanted $500. bucks for it, wouldn't budge a bit on the price, so I decided I would just pass on this one, and would probably find a nicer, more finished piece for less at a later date.  Oh well..........    :(

     Scott.

 Sean Rogan bought it at that event. The manifold is a single plane dual four and to date , two of the five made are known to exist. ( one of the two is marked $5 which is example #5) .

  Doug , since the 351C was not a T/A engine , the above mentioned dual four was the only one made as a part of the "366 engine program".

    "Colorful?"  Howard Pardee is colorful. I am just fixated on the experimental stuff and have been for 50+ years. My study effort allows me to define what guys like you guess about , and I don't mean that in a negative way. There are MANY things I can't do or have a clue as to what they are because it's not my "niche". Don't ask me to "tune a Weber carb" , I can't do it. You can.

Quote from: pbf777 on March 23, 2021, 12:06:22 PM

Quote from: shelbydoug on March 22, 2021, 04:58:27 PM
I SUSPECT that there is a T/A type 2x4 intake for the 351c somewhere.

     In the early '80's, I think it was the Columbus Ford event, I held a 351C, dual plane, dual four of Holley pattern, magnesium cast intake manifold, this with no markings to identify it and unmachined.  The guy wanted $500. bucks for it, wouldn't budge a bit on the price, so I decided I would just pass on this one, and would probably find a nicer, more finished piece for less at a later date.  Oh well..........    :(

     Scott.

There was one that Art Miller tested for Ford back around 1970 or so but it was the same manifold as the 3-2 with a changeable top.
Because of where Miller's head was at at the time, it didn't do well in HIS testing.

I know Jeff Burgy had a 3-2 and his usual story was he found it at a swap meet in Detroit. Sure Jeff.

The timing on the Cleveland developement wasn't good from Ford. Everything got cancelled with the "end of racing edict".

One of the issues the racing Panteras had in Europe was that the engine hadn't been developed for racing yet. Detomaso was the first one and they had little idea what to do with it.

The crankshaft Ford had made for them came from Hank the Crank and they three all of the counter weights off in competition.


B\Never saw or even heard of a dual four for the C. Seems like it went strait to the Wieand tunnel ram?

Quote from: gt350hr on March 23, 2021, 12:50:15 PM
Sean Rogan bought it at that event. The manifold is a single plane dual four and to date , two of the five made are known to exist. ( one of the two is marked $5 which is example #5) .

  Doug , since the 351C was not a T/A engine , the above mentioned dual four was the only one made as a part of the "366 engine program".

    "Colorful?"  Howard Pardee is colorful. I am just fixated on the experimental stuff and have been for 50+ years. My study effort allows me to define what guys like you guess about , and I don't mean that in a negative way. There are MANY things I can't do or have a clue as to what they are because it's not my "niche". Don't ask me to "tune a Weber carb" , I can't do it. You can.

I stand by colorful. Must be all of that grey hair thing you have going?


So if the aluminum block was part of the Indy program, that's as far as they got? I know you had aluminum sk heads. No intakes?


That dual four is a collectors item. I don't think you can make it worth more then a roll of nickels?


Almost got Price to make his W dual to adapt to my A3's but he got busy tuning someones go cart or something?

  Kelly Koeffel (sp) has a picture of a manifold for Webers that "I" believe was destined for that engine. It is "not" like any other I have ever seen except for the carburetor mounting pads. The Indy program had two potential sizes based on the same block. 305 and 320 neither made it to the track.

     While the hair is turning color it is STILL THERE unlike many of our associates. LMAO.

Quote from: gt350hr on March 23, 2021, 02:07:35 PM
  Kelly Koeffel (sp) has a picture of a manifold for Webers that "I" believe was destined for that engine. It is "not" like any other I have ever seen except for the carburetor mounting pads. The Indy program had two potential sizes based on the same block. 305 and 320 neither made it to the track.

     While the hair is turning color it is STILL THERE unlike many of our associates. LMAO.

Kelly, thorn in my side, Koefeld? Everytime I tried to buy an Autolite inline, he got there first then wanted $3500 to sell it to me. That guy?

I had the HARD part to get, the Doug Nash split manifold machined for the Autolites. Bummer, but that's another story.


I honestly don't know what manifolds he has because he was buying them up at any price seemingly.
What I think you are refering to is the manifold he made for fuel injection? That one got rifle bored and the throttle bodies installed right into the manifold.

Injector ports right into  the manifold. The thought was to have an eight stack system that would fit under the screen.

I haven't heard from Kelly in about 5 years. He must have sold all of his castings. He had a 68 GT500. Don't know if he still does.

   He's fine and still the Autolite inline master. You need to reach out more often.

Randy, the picture I posted is of the heads I have on my car. Just a crappy pic.

     Roy

Quote from: gt350hr on March 23, 2021, 04:17:59 PM
   He's fine and still the Autolite inline master. You need to reach out more often.

He definitely is no longer in my contacts list.

Quote from: shelbydoug on March 23, 2021, 04:04:47 PM

Quote from: gt350hr on March 23, 2021, 02:07:35 PM
  Kelly Koeffel (sp) has a picture of a manifold for Webers that "I" believe was destined for that engine. It is "not" like any other I have ever seen except for the carburetor mounting pads. The Indy program had two potential sizes based on the same block. 305 and 320 neither made it to the track.

     While the hair is turning color it is STILL THERE unlike many of our associates. LMAO.

Kelly, thorn in my side, Koefeld? Everytime I tried to buy an Autolite inline, he got there first then wanted $3500 to sell it to me. That guy?

I had the HARD part to get, the Doug Nash split manifold machined for the Autolites. Bummer, but that's another story.


I honestly don't know what manifolds he has because he was buying them up at any price seemingly.
What I think you are refering to is the manifold he made for fuel injection? That one got rifle bored and the throttle bodies installed right into the manifold.

Injector ports right into  the manifold. The thought was to have an eight stack system that would fit under the screen.

I haven't heard from Kelly in about 5 years. He must have sold all of his castings. He had a 68 GT500. Don't know if he still does.

Kelly Coffield,
Good guy, I talk with him often. Once upon a time I worked in the shop for Dwight Thorn, people used to tell me that they were so tired of Dwight buying up ALL of the Rolls Royce and Packard Merlin engines and parts. Well the reality was if people had extra engines and parts they would call Dwight and offer to sell to him. I've talked with Kelly and he has told me he gets cold calls about people looking to turn their carburetors into cash. One story two people, each with their own side. Call him, tell him what you are doing. I can PM you his number.
John