yes Frank is one of my best sources to go to for info on a variety of car stuff. He,s my Buick straight 8 info guy. he wanted to build a replica of his chevy touring car but alas too many projects and too little time. We were talking this week and he mentioned his old chevy 4 connection. I had been casually listening here about the chvy 4,s which I didnt know much about He began rattling off all kinds of stuff about them, so i told him about the HAMB, and that he needed to get a PC but he said he just didnt have the time for it with all his projects. ha, I have to agree there.
As I said a while back, I will be running a early 80s toyota rearend, same bolt pattern and width just as herb said, looks pretty low key back there and has hydraulic brakes, whats not to love eh? I know this is a bit off topic, but does anyone know if there are lower cowl patch panels available for the 28 coaches? fenders? I have found the rockers and splash aprons, but no luck on the other pieces, and as of yet I am not a wizard with sheetmetal fab, though I am practicing on my 59, but patch panels would be great. By the way, how do these engines mount? I seem to have holes in the frame, but what about the motor side?
'does anyone know if there are lower cowl patch panels available for the 28 coaches? fenders?' Google 'Oldera Services' Ausy company making many rust repair patches, replacement panels, fibreglass guards etc for 1920s chev.
By the way, how do these engines mount? I seem to have holes in the frame, but what about the motor side?[/QUOTE] Engine bolted directly to chassis - pre 28 one bolt at front and one either side of bell housing at rear. 28 has two additional mount points from bracket bolted between bell housing and gear box. Many restorers have tried rubber mounts with varying degrees of success. Problem with stock restoration is it introduces flex to carb and dizi linkages and clutch & brake pedals are mounted on gear box. All problems easily solved for the rodder.
Farcus- UC with the line between the two letters is Upper Center or TDC. What year is your flywheel? Mine, a '27, has degrees marked for a distance before and after TDC. Cant read the shop manual page in the thumbnail. Mac- Believe it or not, 490 Chevy and T Ford rear ring and pinions are one and the same. Gerber probably took advantage of the various aftermarket ratios for the T rear. Don't know if he adapted T axles, but doubt that he would have gotten far with the Chevy ones. There has been mention of recommendations for a street engine, without the expenses involved in an all out racing engine---My 2 cents--- 261 Chev pistons, Ford A rods, stock crank, counterweighted, but NOT drilled. Flywheel cut to about 35 pounds including modern pressure plate (stock F/W and P/P=70 lbs.). All rotating and reciprocating parts balanced-this is important, not just for smoothness, but also for engine life. Stock oiling system with modern oil filter in place of '28 filter. Larger intake valves by 1/8", modern exhaust valves, same size as stock (better material- getting tired of hearing this?) washers under stock valve springs to get seated pressure to about 60 lbs. Adapters for spark plug holes to take long reach 14MM plugs-get the electrodes as far into the chamber as possible. Stock distributor ('27-'28) fine. Cam with B Ford grind, and lift, flat tappets (Ford B), 1 1/2-1 rockerarms. Too many engines of this type are over carburetored- a single carb with a 1 1/8" venturi is more than enough for the speeds that this engine is going to turn, and will give much better low end response. I have a manifold setup with two 1 1/8 SU carbs, and while it pulls better at 4500 rpm on my full pressure engine than my one carb setup, it is inferior at low speeds---and the described engine should be kept at under 2800rpm cruising, with OCCASIONAL 3500 rpm bursts. 15-40 oil This (in my estimation) will give 60-65 HP, as opposed to 36 for a stock '28. Herb K
Same here on the thumbnail. Thanks for the clarification on the UlC. I used it as TDC and timed the motor accordingly. This motor is stock except the customer complained about low oil pressure, DUH. I fixed this by installing a Billy Possom oil pump which has a pressure relief valve that releases at 60#, should have plenty of oil pressure now. The oiling system is a cross between a 26/7 Model T and a Model A, sort of. Hope it runs good, it is all new, pistons, rings, valves (modern V8), reground seats, mains and ,rods (pour and cut my own babbitt). It should run like a new motor which, will still be a snail.
Just saw over on the banger forum that the Dodge fast four was a one year engine--1928. I take it that there were significant differences between it, and the '27 engines. This is interesting, as the same situation occurred with Chevy- the '28 was a one year engine (the '29's being a six). The parts unique to a "28 Chev are- block, head, valves, rockers, cam, tappets, manifolds, oiling system, and carb (but the carb seemed to change frequently anyway) The '28 car was intended to take the six, and evidently there was some problem with that arrangement, but it seems strange that a complete redo of the four was done. True, Ford came out with a totally different car in late '27--- I guess that it paid off, as Chevy sold more cars in '28 than Ford---where did they all get to? Herb K
If you click on the thumbnail and wait until it opens and then click on the resulting picture it will open in a new page, you MAY then be able to click on the picture once more and get it to enlarge to full page or bigger, depending on what browser settings you are using.
They all went to the same place all the early chevs went, termites, and scrap drives in WWII. not many early chevs left, the 28 being a 1 year only body style is unfortunatly a very scarce find, especially the trucks seings how thwy didn't go from the capitol to the national till mid 28
Alright, this thread has been dormant for too long. With the conversation about CR vs airflow on the monthly banger thread, I was wondering how much anyone has taken a look at the '28 Chevy and/or '23 Olds heads to see what they would do in regard to cleaning up the ports?
What is known about the chevrolet 3 port head fitted to the FB model in the early 20s. I suspect it was the same as the Olds head and I believe they were made at the same Saginaw factory. I have never seen them side by side. Who was first to fit the 3 port head Olds or Chev?
Don't know who was first, but I recall reading an interview with Ak Miller where he spoke of a hot rodded Chevy 4 being his first car in the '30s.
Alrighty, back from vacation, looks like the thread kinda died off a bit there. I was talkin to a guy over in Germany about these little guys and he recalled his brother building one, built it and put it into a 28 chevy woody, from what he says it had over 90 hp out of the engine, he didn't know much about the engine build, except that the rods he used were odd shaped, he said that they were eliptical in appearence. The rod was fairly thin were it met the big and little ends, but the body of the rod was quite thick in the center, he also recalled that his brother made a few different pistons for it, one having a slanted top the he said gave the car a bit more pep, but they had to remove them due to detonation issues. Any of you guys ever heard of a rod like this? Any way to improve a wedge top piston design? Any Ideas as to what the rods could have been from?
Never heard of rods like those, although the design makes sense in light of the way that rods fail--see a previous post that I made. Really don't see a point to a wedge head piston in the C-4 combustion chamber. A stepped piston (GMC straight 6?) with the high side opposite the spark plug might be beneficial. Then again that might be what the German fellow was describing. Did he say what changes they made to the oiling? IF they got 90 HP, the TBO (aircraft term-time between overhaul) was probably pretty short with the stock oiling. Stock oiling will work at reasonable compression ratios, < 6-1 and revs below 22-2300, but I cant see 90HP under those conditions without a blower. Just my opinion-and worth exactly what your paying for it. Kume- the Olds head, and the FB Chevy head one the same, only differing, as far as I can tell, in the cast on part number. Both are Saginaw. The intake and exhaust manifolds are different, but interchangeable. Saginaw also made the 1917 Chevy V8 engine also. For years these engines were called Northway engines, an error that started with the VCCA, but later corrected by them. Northway was an engine manufacturer who sold to various car and truck companies, but not to Chevy. Herb
to jump in here, my old timer info guy said there was some improvements to the oiling system, as was done to a lot of the old engines, pump etc.. It was pressurized, and on another note if its not been mentioned, adapted Ford model B and C cranks. So its evident they made some real HP in order to go 140 mph. 39 cent
As far as the pistons he was describing they were indeed a sloped design making a triangular combustion chamber against the cylinder wall housing the spark plug, but aparently they had issues due to what he guessed was the upper lip getting hot and causing detonation. The guy I talked to didn't have much to do with the engine build, he just remembered little tidbits, he built the wooden body for the car. No luck on a description of the oiling system
Oh, and as far as the hp rating, it was never actually measured, just speculated based upon comparasin to other cars they had built, what I want to know is how they got parts for this thing back in the 70s in germany, leads me to believe that the internals were from a european engine, but that is just my speculation
Was thinking about cooling possibilities- would it be beneficial to run a T-style aftermarket water pump at the side freeze plug on the block or head instead of using the stock pump? Herb, Looking forward to visiting soon!... but it's KILLIN' me that I won't be able to get a hotdog and a black and white at Jimmy John's! My folks were going to go to the 70th anniversary, then decided not to at the last minute- it's a shame that it's gone.
Mac- The reason that some people have put T type pumps on the side of A and B engines, is that the stock water pump sucks water out of the engine, which , to a certain extent lowers the water pressure in the block and head. Lowering the pressure also lowers the boiling point of the water- (remember- pressure cooker raises boiling point, Denver altitude lowers it?) By putting a pump on the side of the block, the water is pulled from the radiator and forced into the block. Only a little bit of temperature difference, but every little bit helps. Dear old Henry made the same mistake on the early V8's, but later put the pumps down on the block. The Chevy pumps the water into the block, and has enough coolant flow if the pump vanes are not rusted undersize. Milkshakes- Charcoal Pit-3-4 mi S. on 202 from JJ (ask for extra thick) . Burgers- Five Guys 1 mi. S on 202 from JJ Dogs, no place but SPCA. See ya soon Herb
Hi Chevy guys, I am putting a 28 chevy head on my model a block. About a month ago I was buying some model A parts from a man who had bought out an old junkyard. As we were looking thru the junk on the ground he pointed out a 28 Chevy head. Back in the recesses of my memory I recalled that someone told me that these heads could be made to work on Model T's and model A's. Being a horse trader at heart I immediately asked how much as we looked the head over we noticed 3 more that were in way better shape and I ended up buying all 4 of them. At the time I figured that I would use them as trading fodder to get things that I really needed. After doing some reseach I decided to buy one of Neal Jerns conversion kits to adapt the Chevy head to my model A Ford. Since that time I have found out how that I am going to procede with my conversion. Some of these Ideas may be helpful to you guys in regards to making the head work better. I am going to use Chevy 6 Rocker arms and shafts. I will cut the Chevy 6 rocker shaft standoffs down just below the shaft. Then I will machine the standoffs on the 28 heads just enough to remove the 1/2" channel that the original rocker shaft fit in. I will then drill and tap a new hole slightly offset towards the exhaust side of the head. This hole cannot be more than 3/4" deep to avoid going into the water jacket. A bolt will go thru the cut down 6 cyl. standoff and thru the shortened 6 cyl. rocker shaft and into this threaded hole to secure the rocker shaft. This will of course be repeated on the other 3 original standoffs. This will give me hollow shafts that can be oiled easily. It will also replace the original rocker arms with stronger ones. The other modifications will include Stainless Steel Ford small block valves, VW springs and bronze valve guides. The Ford exhaust valves are the same size as the Chevy's but the intakes are larger than 1 3/4" I have removed the restrictive intake port inserts and plan to port the intakes as much as is safe. With the Model A conversion I will get the added benifit of the model a cam lift of aproximatly .3" times the 1.5 rocker arm giving me about .45 valve lift. I have a stock 28 exhaust manifold that I intend to use. I also have a 28 intake that someone blob welded a 3 bolt 97 type flange and tubes to but it is very restricted by the small diameter of the original manifold tubes. I will cut off the top and the bottom flanges and fabricate a proper intake manifold for a 97 type carb. The Model A can easily use that much carburation as it displaces 200ci. I hope some of what I have shared with you guys will help you with your Chevy bangers.
Dawford- What year Chevy six rockers? Are you using all intake rockers, or all exhaust rockers from Chevy six's? I remember looking at six cylinder rockers years ago, for use on three port heads, and for some reason deciding that they weren't suitable. I seem to remember that the arm was at an angle other than 90* to the shaft-----but it's been a long time-- Herb
235s used three each of four different part number rocker arms--LH intake, RH intake, LH exhaust, and RH exhaust. I'm not sure how any of them work out lining up with the inline valve arrangement on the four.
Hi Chevy guys, I'm not sure what years the rocker arms are that have the big hump on the top because the guy that I bought the heads from gave it to me. I suspect that they are off a 235 6. The other set are off a 40's vintage 216 6. The 216's seem to have bronze bushings so I will probably use them. The 216s are probably easier to find anyway because a lot of earley Chevys are getting the more reliable late 235 engines and the earley 216s are often worn so bad that they are not much good anyway, Yes there are innies and outies just like belly buttons but that is good. I have set them on top of the head to see if they will line up and they seem to line up well. If they were a fraction off a little grinding on the side of the shaft hole would take care of that. But I don't think that will be necessary. On a Model A Ford, (there I go with the F word again ) , the cam followers on the F--- don't line up with the Chevy anyway but the long push rods take care of the problem as the angles are so slight that they don't propogate any appreciatable side thrust on the rocker arms anyway. I will have the machine work, Installing the valves, guides and taking off the top 1/4" of the 28 Chevy standoffs done before cutting off the Chevy 6 standoffs because the modern valve stems are about .40" longer. I will put washers under the valve springs to adjust the valve spring seat pressure. The VW valve springs work well with the F--- conversion because they don't put an unrealistic pressure on the cam that is not designed for the 1.5 ratio that the rocker arms exert. I imagine that they would work well with the Chevy engine also as long as you weren't trying for a high RPM engine. The Model A engines with this conversion work well at 3500 rpm. A friend had this conversion in a Model A he used to have and he said that he drove it at 70 mph 30 miles each way to work for a long time with the stock 28 size valves. I am also going to put a Chevy S10 T5 5 speed overdrive transmission behind it so that I will be able to drive freeway speeds at much lower RPM. And I will modernize the chassis because any stock Model A or Chevy is a handfull at 70 mph and they stop like a freight train. Dick .
dawford, Thanks for the info and pics! Rockers are definitely one of the hot topics for the C4- please let us know (and see) how things progress with the rocker/head mods. I have post-planning next week and hope to finally get to a salvage yard with Stevie G to see if we can find those diesel rockers- will let you know what we find. Bill
They look like the earlier, 216 style rockers. When you get it buttoned up, you should do an in depth how to article on the conversion---it's definitely information worth having.
Hi Chevy Guys, I started wondering why I would have to drill the hole off set from the original 28 Chevy hole and realized that the Chevy 6 rockerarms have a slightly different geometry than the 4 cylinder arms. The exhaust or the intake one or the other, on the Chevy 6 rocker arms have a downward angle on the valve end of the rocker. This might help or hurt the geometry if it hurts it, it might take several sets to get enough to use all streight ones. Early on in this thread I read that the 28 rocker arms are 3.25" center to center. If that measurement is correct there is a .05" difference that is not going to make any appreciable difference anyway. Upon measuring them I found that the length center to center is 3.30 and the valve stem center to the center of the rocker shaft is 2". The center of the pushrod ball to the center of the rocker shaft is 1.30" making the ratio 1.54 to 1. And I think thats a good thing as It will increase my lift to .47" I think that additional valve lift will give an advantage that is diss proportional to valve size advantage. With the much larger valves than the Model A flathead and the greatly increased valve lift of the Chevy head this engine will overcome the slight dissadvantage of the 2 port exhaust over the 4 port exhaust of the model A flathead. The funny thing about this is that the majority of the F--- guys on this HAMB forum think that I can get as much or more out of a good flathead F--- setup than I can out of this Bastardized 28 Chevy head setup and that I can do it cheeper at that. I think it is just a F--- thing. I just tell them time will tell. Not every expert is an expert. I am certainly not one and will be anxious to find out who is right. The Ford sorry, F--- thing and the Chevy thing don't really mean anything to me. The main thing is to make these old cars go fast with old parts. I cheat anyway for safty and reliability sake with newer parts, 48-52 F1 drum brakes, Ranger pickup rear end, 4 bar suspension and 5 speed T5 overdrive transmission. If I want real Hot Rods I am also putting some Mercruiser 224ci 4 cylinder engines that produce 230 reliable HP in a couple of Model a pickups. They will also be modernized but will look as stock as possible. I love a good sleeper. The important thing is to have good friends that have similar interests and to have a lot of fun in the process. Good luck with your Chevys. Dick
The Jalopy Journal
