Engine Masters Challenge, CHI Heads, and Cobras

[Commander]

Originally Posted by Manowar

We used to cast an 8.7 and 9.2-both have been discontinued for lack of response. We still have about 25 9.2's in both main sizes which is why they're still on the site. We now only cast 8.2 and 9.5 in iron and aluminum.
Those were original Ford deck sizes, but I'm not sure which vehicles they were in. I think the 9.2 was used in passenger cars and possibly the Pantera, which had Cleveland heads.There are many more Windsor experts on the forum than I.

Pantera had a full blown Cleveland engine in it, block AND heads. The 9.2 was the Cleveland block deck height. 9.5 was the Windsor 351 block deck height. The 8.2 deck is for 302's.

The cleveland block should be noticably different than the Windsor block, or are you just casting Windsor blocks in different deck heights? If so, wondering why CHI heads (is that an offshoot of a tea company?) aren't big movers is fairly simple nowadays. It would make a bastardized engine (cleveland heads, that aren't really cleveland heads, mounted on a Windsor block). Everyone nowadays seems to be moving away from mutts into purebreds. They just want to say it's a Cleveland engine, or it's an FE (better yet a sideoiler whatever that is in their minds including aluminum-headed, aluminum water-pumped...). They don't want to be explaining what a 3V head is when they don't even know what the "V" stands for.

There's a shift happening in the "hot rod" world; you can see it in the number of people who buy crate engines instead of building it themselves. Originality, even NOS parts, purebred, in a kitcar are preferred.

edit: by the way, your 8.2 deck block business may decline in the near term as Ford has released their BOSS 302 block which for actual all out performance and strength, looks great. Though I don't believe it will be available in aluminum, just diesel-quality iron.

[Manowar]

Commander,

The primary reason the CHI's are not more prevalent is that Jon is a one man shop and gets out maybe 15 heads a month.
Bishoff and Kaase want them because they make very big power and are cheaper than Yates-style equivilants.
We wish Ford well with their new 8.2-they need some small positives at this time. I will go so far as to say their new block is an improvement to their customary blocks, but I would not characterize it as having "all out performance and strength".
Our block has been available for two years now and Ford would have done well to emulate it's features entirely if they hoped to capture anything above the street rod market. "Diesel" iron is no improvement over 30,000 tensile gray if the thicknesses are thinner. We have .250 minimum everywhere. Their stock is .187-.200 max. Our max. advisable bore size is 4.200 which still leaves .200 stock. The Ford design on the same 4.380 bore center, at 4.125 bore size leaves .130 in areas between cylinders when you consider their "cross-drilled" steam hole feature at .125.
Screw in frost plugs do not a strong block make. Nor do .125 cross-drilled steam holes around the bores or two-bolt mains on front and rear positions. If you have to advertise as a selling point where your blocks logo is located (beneath the starter)-you don't have much to talk about. No provision for 6 bolt head attachment does not invite the big boost and spray racers to try to hurt your parts. Ours has seen 2800HP.
It remains to be seen what impact this block will have on the market. We've gotten a very good reputation with ours and we're thankful for that.

[KevinM]

I think Ford's big area for that block is that if they can get it accepted as a continuation of the Boss 302 block, then it will be legal for racing in a lot of classes that don't allow aftermarket blocks. That would give them a market with no competition.

For pure strength, World or Dart are much better.

Kevin

[Commander]

Originally Posted by Manowar

Commander,

The primary reason the CHI's are not more prevalent is that Jon is a one man shop and gets out maybe 15 heads a month.
Bishoff and Kaase want them because they make very big power and are cheaper than Yates-style equivilants.
...
Our block has been available for two years now and Ford would have done well to emulate it's features entirely if they hoped to capture anything above the street rod market. "Diesel" iron is no improvement over 30,000 tensile gray if the thicknesses are thinner. We have .250 minimum everywhere. Their stock is .187-.200 max. Our max. advisable bore size is 4.200 which still leaves .200 stock. The Ford design on the same 4.380 bore center, at 4.125 bore size leaves .130 in areas between cylinders when you consider their "cross-drilled" steam hole feature at .125.
...

I don't think it's right to back out the little steam tunnel (which yours doesn't have by the way) since for most of the the length of the cylinder, it's .130+.125=.255 vs your .250 minimum. I think you're making an airplane hangar out of an ant tunnel.

Maybe you have better castings, maybe your blocks are stronger and will hold up to 2,800HP, maybe even 5,000HP! For most people though, you know, the ones who make up the vast majority of your customers, 1,000 HP capability, factory Ford origin, and yes, the "Boss" cast right into the block are going to be good enough to make the sale. Plus, I'd be a liitle leery buying blocks from someone who doesn't know the difference between a Cleveland and a Windsor 351.

[KevinM]

Commander,

I agree about his not knowing 9.2" was the deck height of the 351 Cleveland, that is a little surprising.

On the other hand, the Ford name is nothing more than that. 95% of the parts in the Ford Racing catalog are made by outside suppliers who stamp the Ford name on them and then ship them to Ford for sale. In many cases, you can buy the same part with the manufacturers name on it for less.

I don't know who is casting those blocks for them, but I would be willing to bet it is an outside supplier.

Kevin

[Manowar]

Post # 19 Manowar: "Those were original Ford deck sizes, but I'm not sure which vehicles they were in. I think the 9.2 was used in passenger cars and possibly the Pantera, which had Cleveland heads.There are many more Windsor experts on the forum than I."
This doesn't mean I don't know the difference between Cleveland and Windsor. Water crossover from heads, distributor location, thermostat location and deck height-I only stated that I was not clear what vehicles they came in. Yes the Pantera had a Cleveland (9.2 only) as did many Mustangs, Galaxys, Cougars. The picture I took which is posted above is our 9.5 Windsor block with CHI's heads-not Cleveland heads and not 9.2 deck. I also acknowledged that I was not expert in this area. I would have hoped for some instructional clarification rather than a judgement of incompetence and mistrust. Post #24 Commander:"I'd be a liitle leery buying blocks from someone who doesn't know the difference between a Cleveland and a Windsor 351." Post # 25 Kevin: " I agree about his not knowing 9.2" was the deck height of the 351 Cleveland, that is a little surprising."
Post # 21 Commander: "Pantera had a full blown Cleveland engine in it, block AND heads. The 9.2 was the Cleveland block deck height. 9.5 was the Windsor 351 block deck height. The 8.2 deck is for 302's."Agreed and understood. I was informing olddog that OUR blocks were 8.2,8.7,9.2 and 9.5-all Windsors. I do not know the origin of the 8.7 and hope to learn that here.
Post #24 Commander: " I don't think it's right to back out the little steam tunnel (which yours doesn't have by the way) since for most of the the length of the cylinder, it's .130+.125=.255 vs your .250 minimum. I think you're making an airplane hangar out of an ant tunnel." You're entitled to your opinion but here are some facts. We intentionally designed ours to have smaller water jackets and no cross-water feed between cylinders for strength. We figured-out the block didn't need them. The Boss blocks exhibits larger water passages which means less parent material.
Of the 150 or so of these engines we've built, we never had a complaint or warranty claim of overheating or running hot. Also please remember, our max bore size is .075 greater than the OE spec that you're providing the math for. At that size we're .180-.200 parent material in most places. I consider that a significant factor-not "an ant tunnel".
Post #25 Kevin:"I don't know who is casting those blocks for them, but I would be willing to bet it is an outside supplier." The FRPP site states that it's cast in their own foundry and machined in-house.


Finally, I apologize to DavidNJ, the originator of this thread. It was never my intention to divert his question. I prefer that we all be pals and share info.

[KevinM]

That's interesting. I find it very hard to believe they would divert one of their engine casting operations to make a handful of special blocks. They can't machine them on any of the transfer lines for the modular engines, and I'm sure they no longer have the old transfer lines set up from from the 5.0 - 5.8 days. Now I am really curious where they are being cast and machined.

Manowar,

Easy there, I just agreed it was surprising that you weren't familiar with the Cleavland engine dimensions. Since they haven't built them in this country since about 1974, it isn't a requirement that you would be. Nobody (or at least not me) was questioning your integrity, etc.

Kevin

[dlampe]

Come on, Manowar clearly knows his engine dimenisions. I really think you guys are reading his post incorrectly. Thats my opinion. But then again I am building an aluminum 8.7 deck windsor with yates heads. This "mutt" is going to hunt! (as they say down south) If any "pure breds" want to come out and play, bring your title!

[Ant]

dlampe

Originally Posted by dlampe

Come on, Manowar clearly knows his engine dimenisions. I really think you guys are reading his post incorrectly. Thats my opinion. But then again I am building an aluminum 8.7 deck windsor with yates heads. This "mutt" is going to hunt! (as they say down south) If any "pure breds" want to come out and play, bring your title!

I have a 9.2' deck Dart aluminium windsor with Yates heads, 373 cuins, I am a bit interested in what sort of grunt your Mutt is anticipated to have?

[dlampe]

Ant, I sent you a PM so as to not hijack the thread.

[Rick Parker]

I think Bernie already has this engine done and in a car? 8.2 Aluminum block (RDI?) with Yates heads AND Webers on a fabricated manifold, and yes it makes big power. It has been fully detailed here previously. As far as the quality and intended market of various blocks is concerned, the Boss block was developed by Ford to keep them in the game that they invented. Their stock of 5.0 blocks is probably severely dwindled and the Boss block appears to play well on a known name by immediately being identified with the Boss 302 Mustang, and fills a need between a basic block and an all out race piece. The intended market would thus be considerably larger than one for an all out race engine.
The Man-O-War block is indeed a very well designed item intended for huge power levels, anything below those are not begining to tax it's ability whatsover. It offers huge "Insurance" for the above average street or open track type engine. The designed ability to use 5 studs/bolts per cylinder increases it's appeal to the superchaged and spray crowd in Drag Race Mustang applications but the head choice is obviously limited at this time, but will surely be addressed by other manufactures as demand warrants.
It's no secret that the 5.0 Mustang was the "Torch Carrier" for Ford that led to all the development of parts for the 289/302 of which many could be ultimately utilized on the 351W. But there was a time not too long ago when the 351W didn't receive a second thought. It was essentially strangled with cylinder heads with port sizes designed for and engine with 130 fewer cubic inches (221). It was just there to fill the need for an engine to compete with the 350 in GM's lineup without any thought of a performance varient. The Cleveland was thought to have more potential, and so hot rodding efforts were directed towards it, for a few short years.
With the advent of 5.0 Fox Bodied Mustang and its underhood dimensions, coupled with impending EPA restrictions, Ford was able to get more continued bang for the buck from the inline valve headed 302.

[Commander]

Originally Posted by KevinM

That's interesting. I find it very hard to believe they would divert one of their engine casting operations to make a handful of special blocks. They can't machine them on any of the transfer lines for the modular engines, and I'm sure they no longer have the old transfer lines set up from from the 5.0 - 5.8 days. Now I am really curious where they are being cast and machined.

Kevin

could it be they've set up for Hurricane production, which'll use the same block material?

The original thread started out wondering why the CHI heads weren't seeing more purchases with the most recent results from a contest. I read the rules of that contest and it severely limits the heads that are allowed in. Race heads are specifically excluded. Some people are interested in performance for its own sake, many are here, but a large volume of customers will only be interested in re-creating a memory, and those memories will be of "pure" Clevelands or "Side-Oilers".

I don't mind that people don't know every lit bit of trivia about a subject. I get a little bent when they denigrate a competitor undeservedly though.

[ERA Chas]

Commander,
I agree with your above statement entirely.
I can see now the source of the misunderstanding between us. The following quote from your post # 21: "by the way, your 8.2 deck block business may decline in the near term as Ford has released their BOSS 302 block which for actual all out performance and strength, looks great. Though I don't believe it will be available in aluminum, just diesel-quality iron."
I inferred from this that you meant that the Boss block was superior to ours in terms of "...all out performance and strength...". I responded to your assertion by comparing our part and it's features to the OE to demonstrate the fact that the Boss is not. My view is that the Boss is an improvement to other existing FRPP offerings but is designed to a less-demanding audience than ours.
I appreciate and agree with the following from Post # 32: "I don't mind that people don't know every lit bit of trivia about a subject. I get a little bent when they denigrate a competitor undeservedly though."
I am scrupulous in all my advertising for our Company to never diminish a competitors products as that's a very unethical and hazardous game to play. If you think you've got something good, it's OK to tell the world-the public will "get it" without attaching a stigma to the competition.
My only agenda for you was to explain in detail, superior features-which are not known to the casual enthusiast-because you have the technical understanding to appreciate them and I wished to enlighten your opinion and change your mind. All because I thought you meant that the Boss was going to hurt our sales with a superior product.
At no time did I wish to denigrate Ford-for as I believe Rick Parker said, they are attempting to recapture the market they invented-or words of substance.
Companys like ours and our competitors owe a great debt to the OE's so we might develop improvements to the always difficult to accomplish original design.
Finally, I can see how my comment about the priority in the FRPP advertising of the location of the Boss logo can be viewed as "bashing". If that's so, I apologize to those who thought so. My intention was to point out the dearth of engineering features which would constitute a superior design.
My only intention here on CC is to inform the group about our stuff, and when compared by the members to other designs, discuss frankly any differences in a factual way. We wish to offer our parts as a quality alternative choice to the highly popular manufacturers and builders here and to answer questions about them.
Thanks,

[KevinM]

The Hurricane is using a completely different block, from what I know, it will be an overhead cam engine like the Mod motors. Probably an aluminum block also.

As far as the CHI heads, you can get 550 HP from ordinary heads (AFR 205s, etc.) on a 427 Windsor motor. For street use or even open track use, I don't imagine most people could use any more power than that. (In fact most people, myself included, couldn't begin to use that much power).

Kevin

[Manowar]

Post # 33 is really me posting incognito...

[Damn Yankee]

Manowar, what will be the maximum allowable bore for the 8.2 deck aluminum block, and what is the maximum allowable crankshaft stroke ?

Thanks, Andy

[Manowar]

Yankee,
(I hate to start a post with "Damn") Max recommended bore size is 4.155 and stroke is 3.470. Our largest crate combination for this deck is 4.125 x 3.470 for 371 cubic inches.