Genesis 427 side oiler

[jdog]

I should have said: an original Ford fe block, "with a few new parts"!

It's all about air flow! I have a turkey pan for shows. But remember 427sc's were competition cars, they ran a single carb & turkey pan w/out air cleaner! The street cars had 2 carb's and small air cleaners. The turkey pan only works well without an air cleaner. I don't want to drive without an air cleaner, & the small ones are too restrictive. So, for daily use, I have the larger air cleaner.

But the block is an original 1966 FORD block. = Braggin rights!

jdog
P.S. That is, with a few new parts!

[olddog]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Just the opposite, the valve lash is very tight when the engine is cold, about 0.013" for an all aluminum FE. Solids are not a problem.

For some reason I was remembering the lash gets tighter, as the engine heats. After I wrote that, I kept thinking about the block expanding (growing taller), and I kept coming up with it would be the other way around. It was driving me nuts. Thanks for setting me straight. I feel better now.

I am surprised that running solids in an all aluminum big block engine is not a problem. Again thanks for the info.

I'll have to re-read on the 4.6 modular. I thought it was steel sleeves, but my darn memory is getting so bad I could have that wrong too.

[olddog]

Originally Posted by Woodz428

I think you are coming to a conslusion that is waaay off. Since the introduction of low tension piston rings in mass production in the 80s(created as a way to elevate CAFE) cylinder wear is much less than it once was. I have pulled down several 5.0 roller motors with over 120K and they have minimal wear also. I think the reduction in wear you are seeing is a result of the ring design and has nothing at all to do with the block metallurgy.

I'm sure the rings would make a differance, but back in the day (60's & 70'S) I have pulled engines with 100K miles apart that had 0.030" taper worn into the cylinders. Generally the bottoms of the bores would be way out of round from the thrust of the piston skirts. I suspect rings alone do not explain it all. In fact the 4.6 modular pistons have the skirts coated to reduce piston wear. I would assume this would make the piston harder, which should cause even more wear to the bore. However your 5.0 observation is an interesting data point.

[KM480]

Precision Oil Pumps of Madera CA is another source for Genesis blocks, iron and aluminum. As well as blueprinted oil pumps and shaft rocker systems.

Prices might be the best.

[Carnut427]

Originally Posted by Commander

...everyone is implying that siamesed cylinders can be bored to the extreme of a .10 wall shared by two cylinders. Not so.

a siamesed cylinder works better generally because it is thicker overall, stiffer, less prone to distortion.

it IS connected to the next cylinder(s) along a line though. Heat these cylinders up, and constrained as they are by their neighboring cylinders, you'll get out-of-round distortion. bore these connected cylinders and you'll experience MORE of this out-of-round distortion than you would if the cylinders were free 360* around. So siamese cylinders CAN be good, just don't take all that metal as a free pass to bore the daylights out of them or you'll have ring seating (and other) problems like you wouldn't believe.

This is the point I was trying to make with my earlier statement "Another thought is how much metal must you have minimum around the siamesed bores for the process to work?". Thanks for explaining what I was trying to say.

Originally Posted by farmallmta

...While various truck and heavy duty engines earlier had used siamesed cylinder design for low RPM applications, the Hudson 308 inline 6cyl developed in the late '40's and first installed in the Hornet line in '51 had siamesed cylinders and was intended to be capable of all-out sustained high RPM racing. This application most closely tracks our interest in this forum and is probably one of the first American applications of cylinder siamesing as we would use it.

The Hudson 308 engine was a bored version of the 262ci engine which required strengthening as the original design limitations were exceeded. The high chromium content of the block alloy minimized cracking of the siamesed cylinders under ordinary use conditions but an overheated block would occasionally crack under severe (race) use. Despite this, the Hornet was THE car to beat in NASCAR (a brutally harsh racing environment in those crude dirt track days) from '51 up into '54. Anyway, the best overhead valve V8-equipped Olds and Mopars found it very difficult to beat the 308ci (FLATHEAD no less) 6 banger in a Hudson Hornet. The other marques (ESPECIALLY Chebby) were completely outclassed and not even close to being serious contenders.

Doc (The Fabulous Hudson Hornet) Hudson sends his kind regards!

THANKS for the history lesson, Doc. While I've certainly heard of the Hudson Hornets and their domination of NASCAR, I saw my first one just a few weeks ago at a local car show. When I came upon it, I first thought it was a '50 Merc, but the side sculpting wasn't exactly the same. Once I got to the engine compartment and saw the dual carbs on the straight six. I realized what I was looking at. Neat car.

Dan

[farmallmta]

Originally Posted by jdog

I put a 66' 427fe in my car for the bragging rights.

I could have built any number of other engine combo's for less $$.
But just look at this and imagine saying "Yes, it's an original 1966 FORD 427fe side oiler"!
I did, and pony'ed up for the bragging rights!

jdog
P.S. You can't take it with you, might as well enjoy it while your still here!

jdog, how do you sleep at night? How do you get any work done? What keeps you from just standing beside your excellent Cobra with its hood up and staring 24 hrs a day at that jewel of a powerplant under the hood?

I know I'd be worthless for anything else!

Very nice ride!!!!

[Commander]

That's why I pulled the original motor and trans and slid them down to the basement.

No qualifying descriptions needed when the hood opens: "Yeah, it's an FE, but not original. I wanted to update the motor's internals and see if I couldn't get more power out of it. I keep the complete original together at home in case there's ever a time I want everything to match."

And if I want to look at gem motors, I just go downstairs.

[Woodz428]

Originally Posted by olddog

I'm sure the rings would make a differance, but back in the day (60's & 70'S) I have pulled engines with 100K miles apart that had 0.030" taper worn into the cylinders. Generally the bottoms of the bores would be way out of round from the thrust of the piston skirts.

I ran an Automotive machine shop for several years in the late 60s into the mid 70s and again in the later 80s. It is my recollection that most of the wear is at the TOP of the cylinder( that's why the lip). The heat ,etc. makes the wear more prominent at the top. Piston skirts of aluminum are going to wear themselves away much faster than it could ever wear the wall. That's why they went to aluminum from the cast iron they used to use for pistons. The rings, always under extreme tension to keep a seal, are much harder and do much wearing. If you examine a worn cylinder closely, you see that the wear starts at the top and tapers off to less wear as you go down, hence the word taper. The wear in a cylinder, while not exclusively in the ring travel area, is mostly confined to that area. I will credit some of the newer ring coatings for some of the reduction in wear also. But the low tension rings have more overall impact on wear reduction.

[Commander]

could it be that his experience with one of the new modulars was because they are so undersquare? there isn't nearly as much force applied against the side walls as there would be in an engine (like those from the 60's) that were squarer with lower rod/stroke ratios.

[blykins]

Could be longer rod lengths....less of an angle and less of a sideload on the cylinder wall.

[Barry_R]

The answer is actually "all of the above"...

Newer engines have cast in place ductile iron liners - decidedly better material than old block were made of. They often have a "spiny" or textured OD for retention in the casting so they're not as easy to replace as you think.

Newer rings are either ductile iron or steel with a plasma-moly face - - much like racing rings and very durable.

Computer controlled timing and mixture greatly reduced detonation and fuel wash - - major causes of accelerated bore wear.

Hypereutectic pistons are common in OE engines, and will last a very long time due to the hardness of the silicon entrapped in the alloy.

All of this is due to mileage and emission requirements....and the need for them to comply over 50,000-100,000 miles.

[jdog]

Originally Posted by farmallmta

jdog, how do you sleep at night? How do you get any work done? What keeps you from just standing beside your excellent Cobra with its hood up and staring 24 hrs a day at that jewel of a powerplant under the hood?

I know I'd be worthless for anything else!

Very nice ride!!!!

Thanks, both sleep & work are over rated!

jdog
P.S. I do seem to spend a lot of time in the garage with the hood up for no good reason.
Life's too short! You had better grab you some fun while you can.

[olddog]

Originally Posted by Woodz428

I ran an Automotive machine shop for several years in the late 60s into the mid 70s and again in the later 80s. It is my recollection that most of the wear is at the TOP of the cylinder( that's why the lip). The heat ,etc. makes the wear more prominent at the top. Piston skirts of aluminum are going to wear themselves away much faster than it could ever wear the wall. That's why they went to aluminum from the cast iron they used to use for pistons. The rings, always under extreme tension to keep a seal, are much harder and do much wearing. If you examine a worn cylinder closely, you see that the wear starts at the top and tapers off to less wear as you go down, hence the word taper. The wear in a cylinder, while not exclusively in the ring travel area, is mostly confined to that area. I will credit some of the newer ring coatings for some of the reduction in wear also. But the low tension rings have more overall impact on wear reduction.

Hard to argue with your logic. I know the top of the cylinder is where you get the ridge line (still at original bore above where the ring stops at TDC). What I have seen (granted much less experiance than you) is that the wear at the top of the bore is even, as the bore is still fairly round even though it is worn. As you go down the bore, the wear is not even. The cylinders are out of round. Very little wear when you measure in a line drawn front to back of the engine across the cylinders. However when you measure perpendicular to that line there is much more wear. The wear will also be on the side of the cylinder that the rod thrusts the piston into, if you measure the radious from the center of the bore. I base this on a 327 375 HP Vette engine that the bore was worn 0.030" in the perpendicular plane, with 0.025" of that on the thrust side. The shop said I would have to bore it 0.050" just to get the cylinders round again. This engine had seen a lot of WOT high RPM duty. So it may have had much more side thrust wear than the average family car. In fact when I think about it, almost every engine I pulled appart, back in my puppy days, had been abused and ran hard.

It would be logical that the maximum wear from the side thrust caused by the rod angle would be part way down, where the crank is turned 90 deg from TDC. I had assumed the piston caused this wear, but your arguement that the piston is a soft aluminum and rings are harder makes perfect sense. I have to agree that the rings are doing the wearing in the bore. I said the bottom of the bore was out of round, when I should have said partway down the bore.

I will point out that there is a ridge line at the top of the cylinders where the rings never travel, however I have never seen one at the bottom of a cylinder. The compression rings are designed to allow cylinder pressure to go under the ring and push the ring outward into the bores (I have not explained this well as it if fairly compicated to explain). There is more pressure in the cylinder when the piston is at the top than when it is at the bottom. Therefore the rings push harder against the cylinder wall at the top than at the bottom. I believe this is why there is no ridge at the bottom. This factor, I suspect is significantly more than the tension in the rings at WOT. I had originally discounted the lower tension, but less tension would make a bigger differance at idle and low power, where most family cars spend the vast majority of their time. So you have convinced me that the low tension rings has made a difference. Also this supports your statement that your experiance showed the most wear at the top of the bore. The side thrust wear may not show up in mildly operated engines.

I looked it up and the 4.6 Modular, and the sleeves are ductile iron as others have stated. I was flat wrong, when I said steel. However, I do have to wonder if ductile iron is more wear resistant than cast iron. I think Barry_R indicated it is, but I'm not certain that was what he ment.

Thanks to all for the conversation. I learned quite a bit.

[Excaliber]

I missed this thread! Had to travel to the mainland on short notice and didn't have internet access (REMOTE location).

Now where was I...

Oh yeah, as long as it's 'only a replica' why not run a VW motor? the argument of only being a replica just doesn't cut it for me. We all have different standards of whats acceptable, thats cool. Just don't get to carried away.

My side oiler is a later model hydraulic or solid lifter block, a 'service block'. My friend has a genuine date coded 1965 vintage side oiler block. Like JDogs block, I'm jealous! I would love to have the really really real block. But I'm doing the best I can with what I got.

[Archrms]

Excalibur,

I just find it funny how some people get all fired up about authenticity when the car itself is not an authentic 1960's vintage Cobra. However, everyone is entitled to their opinions and should equip their cars with what makes them happy.

That being said, after much debate and input from all of you on Club Cobra, I just purchased a 1968 427 side oiler with dual quads for my car that has yet to be ordered. Maybe my priorities are a little backwards, but at least I know the car will definitely have plenty of go-power, and the looks to back it up. Thanks to everyone out there who replied to my inquiries about engines and helped me get to this point. As soon as I figure out how to post pictures here, I'll put them up.

[Carnut427]

Originally Posted by Archrms

...I just purchased a 1968 427 side oiler with dual quads for my car that has yet to be ordered. Maybe my priorities are a little backwards...

Congrats, Archrms, this is really one area where you can't go wrong either way...and I bought my motor & trans before I ordered my kit too...

Dan

[Excaliber]

Your priorities seem just fine to me!

Excellent choice going with a real side oiler.

[Lowell W]

ARCHRMS,

You'll love this car regardless which engine you put in it.

Your priorities seem just fine to me.

Excellent choice going with a real Superformance!

Lowell

[sidewaysinthird]

Archrms,

I ran a couple of 427so blocks in a Mustang when I was much younger and all these nice pretty new blocks weren't available as yet. I still have one left over and it will not be going in the ERA. Even a good original block will require lots of cash to get it right. I'm going with the aluminum version myself. I love it when someone asks a simple question here and everyone chimes in. Almost all of these guys have lots of experience one way or the other with these blocks. Its always a wealth of information that you couldn't find anywhere else. Thanks guys, no kidding!

Mike

[ceslaw]

Finished my Everett Morrison Generation IV and registered it about three weeks ago. We have a Genesis 427, which we picked up about one year ago. Have driven it over 450 miles to date. Both the engine and the car have performed flawlessly. It starts with minimal cranking. We let it warm up before driving, given the 20-50 oil and air temperatures hovering around freezing for that last month. (Yes, we have a top and a heater). Once warmed it idles with the characteristic lump around 950 RPM. Pulls really well above 3000 RPM, but cruises well at 75 MPH in fifth gear around 2200 RPM. Although there were a few oil drips initially, the seals have apparently seated and there are no leaks whatsoever at the present time.



We dressed the engine with a turkey basket and original style expansion tank to add to the 'original' look. We are partial to the black / silver look, opting for a black distribuor cap on the MSD distributor and a black coil. We even opted for K & N oil filters, not necessarily because of their quality, but because they were white and the labels easily removed, thus fitting in with our monochromatic theme!



Cruising at a farily steady 70 MPH, 30 degree air temperature, for 100 miles in fifth gear running about 2100 RPM yielded about 12 miles per gallon this past weekend. Hey, no one ever said this was an economy car!

So to answer the original post question: I would have no reservations about the Genesis iron block 427.