http://thekneeslider.com/archives/2009/01/12/ducati-v-one-twin-to-supercharged-single-conversion/ Useful.. very http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7E6KglXPmTs&feature=player_embedded mind=blown
So what i'm wondering is, let's say you totally cut off gas to one, or four cylinders, but only cut off gas not air to them. Would the engine run ok and would there be any damage? 2) Let's say you now cut off fuel AND air to 4 of the cylinders, would this still work with no engine damage? If so, how is this possible specifically the deactivated cylinders----can the pistons move down in the bore and draw in no air at all? P.S. Remind that the original ramjet system had fuel shutoff to all cylinders when coasting and it apparently worked good. So this 4 cylinder idea may not be too far-fetched.
I think newer EFI cars cut fuel to some cylinders when in Economy mode. I have heard that the energy used compressing the air in a dead cylinder is given back after TDC minus any leakage. So your pumping losses aren't that great. That's what I have heard. I didn't come up with it.
As stated in an earlier post the Sesco engine was very popular with the midget racers until eclipsed by the VW's and then the Pontiacs. I would think there around under workbenches across the country. They ran injection, mags, dry sump...everything an engine would want. Stan Lobitz is on this board (member name Slobitz) who could probably provide some leads or, as Stan is noted for, may have half a dozen or more in storage.
i know---i don't think "pumping losses"/compression in dead cylinders would be all that great. That makes me wonder why gm disables the valves with the new cylinder deactivation thing. Also, why bother with taking pushrods out etc to begin with? Why not just take out the sparkplugs, screw a short hose in place and put a filter at the end of the hose(s)?
If memory serves right the four no compressions didn't have tops in them but weighed the same as the other four. That would take a lot of the extra work out of doing the four banger thing with one.
I remember seeing banger motors running 2 cylinders on fuel and 2 that serve as the compressor pump. I wonder if there's a way to not only run half the cylinders, but set up the other 4 to serve as 'boost' pumps to supercharge the system or something similar?
Earl Gearte was famous for cutting sbc and bbc motors in half to make sprint car engines. They haul a$$ !!
Prior to the Sesco [1968] several people adapted the SBC cylinder head to the Chevy II block. We used SBC pistons in our midget's Chevy II along with Pontiac OHC 6 connecting rods. There are plenty of 200 cubic inch [3.3 liters] motors available that make good power on the cheap. Most are V-6s. The Colorado pick-up has a 3.5 liter FIVE cylinder.
Alright, let me ask it this way: If i install a pipe plug in the left side port (as viewed from the front of the engine) and make it, hopefully, flush. And then remove the throttle blade from that corresponding barrel of the carb----to avoid interference with the pipe plug, then it should work? Will it run, will it run reasonably well, and will it run with no adverse effects to the engine---in other words any damage to the engine or ignition? 2) The reason why i want to plug that hole is i can still time the engine if nessesary---cylinder 1 is not on this plane group. One problem with this is that the transmission modulator thing may not work well if at all---note fig. "b". Of course this can be overcome by getting a timing tab and pointer that mounts at the distributor.
If you were to put a pipe plug there (position A), you would probably have to run a spacer to keep the throttle blade from hitting it. Also there is the issue of what to do with the accelerator pump shot.
I think you would be better off to adapt a single barrel carb to the side of the manifold you want to run. An aluminum plate would also serve to block off the other side.
Back in the early '70's gas crunch, someone sold an adapter with divider to set a 4 barrel sideways on a dual plane so the other four cylinders would come in with the secondaries. I recall a test that said pumping losses negated any gains and oil control was a problem as high vacuum in cylinder would pull oil in.
why not just have a crank made destroked to whatever displacement you want? no fussing with counterweights, dead cylinder or anything else...
Well have you priced billet cranks lately? And then you will need a new set of pistons or rods. Now at your house maybe you can just have your butler bring more cash from the safe. At my house the dead cylinder may be more obtainable.
Well yeah, but. I used to date a girl named "Chasity" and everybody around there knew that wasn't true. And that is not my Cessna. It's a posed picture from as magazine shoot long time ago. I just like it.
Ok, then what about the idea to do the above fuel/air shutoff AND take 4 of the plugs out. Attach a short hose to each hole and put a filter on the end of each hose? i mean, there can't be too much compression with the plug removed? i've actually thought about this and scat sells a 3.00" crank for about $630. But for a 305, that's 262". Maybe not enough reduction to justify the expense. Also, would the new crank have to be rebalanced depending on which engine you originally started off with---305, 350 etc? probably=a little more money. Now, if we can sleeve it down about .5" now we're talking (tail starts wagging), because now we can get under 200" cid. Counterweights should not be too hard to make, or maybe use the large end of a rod for a start?
An inline 4 cyl will be more reliable than a V4. Class displacement limits are: D- 305.99 E- 260.99 F- 183.99 G- 122.99 F looks the simplest to make with a cut down V8, 1/2 of 368 max. 4.155 bore, 3.25 stroke, find a single SB2.2 head. That would get you close without blowing a stack of cash on oddball parts.
There are so many ultra double cool 3 liter V6 motors out there I don't know why someone would go to the trouble of a one off 4. Even the twin 'Busa seem like a stretch
As a kid I remember seeing a Pontiac Tempest with 1/2 a 389 (drivers side?) and also used a transaxle, 1961 maybe? Weird little paddle shifter under edge of dash.
Your average 4 cam 24 valve rice burner, or even US made is putting out enough power to make most pushrod 4 cylinder motors look bad. After you remove he rev limiter. Don't look to cool, but I was impressed with the 3 liter Nissans I built for Jack in 99. They didn't really need a lot. Add a baby bug catcher to the stock lower intake. Solid lifters, reground cams. Electromotive ignition, headers adapt a SBC blow shield and run it
i have thought about, and am still thinking about the chevy v-6 because it's basically a bolt in affair, but i was just trying to use what i got if possible, you know? Don't got no butler either.
If you were to plug that hole you would be shutting off the center four cylinders. But when Bonneville racers and others that want to half the size of a SBC do it, they run the two outer on one bank and two center on the other, to get an even fire engine with the Chevy crankshaft. Solomon and Hartsock from Oakland ran their fuel roadster that way for years. Removed the pushrods from those cylinders and plugged the fuel lines to those nozzles. Worked well but now they run a 90 degree Chevy V6 destroker.
The Jalopy Journal
