Technical 1950 or 51 "sports car"...what engine?

I agree. Cunningham was not interested in making money off the sports car company. He did it because he was a sportsman and he wanted to show the flag in international competition, at a time when no one in the US was building sports cars.

To this end he spent $5,000,000 of his own pre inflation dollars.He was allowed to write off losses on the car business against other income. When this tax deduction was withdrawn, he called a halt.

What I was driving at was this. Even with unlimited financial backing, and the help of the best sports car experts including Cunningham himself, Bill Frick, Ted Tappet and aerodynamicist Wunnibald Kamm, not to mention consulting with Chrysler engineers.

In spite of all this they never sold enough cars to make a profit and neither did anyone else. Tbird, Corvette, Kaiser Darrin, Nash Healey were all subsidized by their parent companies. Smaller independent efforts all ran out of money and died.

By some odd quirk the only specialty cars I can think of that lasted more than a few years, were Studebakers.

Brooks Stevens' Excalibur originated as a Studebaker show car and they made them for years. Avanti was originally a Studebaker product and they too went on for years after Studebaker went bust.

Of course they came 10 years after the period we are talking about and neither was a real sports car.

The point remains that building sports cars in the US in the forties and fifties was a real Don Quixote affair, whether they knew it at the time or not.

 

Just playing devil's advocate here ... So with that logic we should call them a "Fisher", rather than a Chevrolet?

 

No, those bodies were made by Fisher for Chevrolet.

Just like a Lotus Eleven is a Lotus, not a Williams & Pritchard.


I can really see Terry's logic and reasoning here...

If I understand the history correctly, the Ingles car was built by Art Ingles, using a Kurtis chassis.

I'd call it a Ingles Spl.


Edit.

Or, whatever Art Ingles called it.

If he raced it, there are entry lists.

What did he write it down as?

 

Kurtis built hundreds of cars for racers and others. None of them had Kurtis engines, they all had some other make of engine. Some had bodies made by others, or later modified by others, but they remained Kurtis cars because they were built on a Kurtis chassis.

What did Ingles call the car? He had the right to name it if anyone did.

In any case, the Kurtis chassis makes it a Kurtis car, just as a prewar Rolls Royce is a Rolls Royce no matter who made the body. Rolls Royce did not make any bodies at that time. The make of the chassis was the make of the car.

Other examples. Peerless used Herschell Spillman motors, and some of their cars carried custom bodies by outside suppliers, yet they were never anything but Peerless cars.

 

A counter example would be the Cobra. Carrol Shelby bought complete sports cars from AC, less engines. He installed engines made by Ford and called the result Cobra. He had the right to name it even though he did not make the engine, the chassis or the body.

 

I think that was more about Carroll Shelby being who HE was, than following any sort of naming "tradition". I've heard them referred to as "AC" Cobras in many circles as well. When the 427 cars debuted in 65 (I believe?), Shel was building the chassis as well, so then they could rightfully be called "Shelbys", right?

 

Everyone I knew called them AC Cobras. I never really heard them called Shelby Cobras with any regularity till the "Barrett-Jackson" crowd came along...

 

We're getting a bit off topic...

AC demanded that the cars they sold to Shelby be called "AC" and display the AC badge. Shelby, being Shelby, had the Cobra badges made up so they fit in the mounting holes from the removed AC badges! AC, wanting to continue to sell bodies and earn money, looked the other way. Cobras were known as "AC Cobra" everywhere except the US.

I STILL think a Hudson six would be a way cool engine for a sporty-type car...

 

I'm just not in love with the idea of a flathead engine of any sort. Not saying it wouldn't be a good choice power-wise; but for this project, I'm looking for a little more "futuristic" technology.

 

I would second the idea of the Hudson six. It was high compression and had 308cu. Bigger than most V8's of the day. They were massaging it to 220HP with the twin-H carbs. I could envision a Euro-version using 3 Weber dueces. The euro-engineers have always been partial to inline designs. Perhaps a really futuristic version of it using a supercharger? Check out Uncommon Engineerings vision of what the Hudson can be. http://www.uncommonengineering.com/catalog.html

 

That's what I have in mind, but with a centrifugal supercharger. By 1950, OHV and OHC designs had been in production for years. I'm of the opinion that a progressive manufacturer wouldn't ignore the benefits of that setup, regardless of what could be done with a flathead.

 

Gotcha...that's cool. Your Nash idea is good, especially since Healey used them and they did well at Le Mans. It's definitely a different engine, and based on some images I've seen, quite the looker:



For something really different, how about the 262inch OHV six out of early '50s Ford trucks? A different cam, intake, and exhaust and it should be a screamer.

 

A question... what were the shortest I-6s? I've never entertained a straight 6 much, but if the engine wasn't too long overall, I could get some wood going that route. I suppose it would also have a fairly small displacement to keep the overall block length short? Gary

 

I have no idea, Gary; but the Nash has to be in there with the smallest of the period in terms of physical dimensions.

 

Frank Kurtis had originally planned on using a supercharged Studebaker straight six in his sportscar in 1949 (the motor mounts were even welded in for it in anticipation). But when Studebaker didn't deliver as promised, he decided on the "new" Ford flathead. You've obviously given this a lot of thought, and I believe you are definitely heading in the right direction ...

 

Hey, ex;

If you're planning on re-doing a head in ohv or ohc, a good little 6 is the Stude champ/ They do have a history of (some) racing, good block structure, forged crank, good rods, etc. Even as flattie, respond well to S/C. Another to consider is the Stude v8. Same deal, hi-nickle block & heads, forged crank & rods, stainless steel valves (in the 232). Not real hard to knock off 50-75 lbs off the block. Both will rev like crazy - & did back in the day. & it had dohc heads done for it's Indy debut by A.J. Agjamian (sp?). However, good luck in getting speedybill to allow a usage of the patterns - I think hell would freeze over 1st, as he helps *no*one like that. Which of the two used would depend on the size & weight of the Spl. The Willys F head isn't bad either, & well worth the 2nd look. Centrifugal s/c, yes!, & w/either it as a grill or the inlet ducting as a grill feature, you're golden. Nash mill as you've pointed out, is a good choice. I was going to suggest the AMC 196 6cyl, but can't remember when it went ohv, but IIRC, Barney Navarro used it in at least one Indy car, although I think it was in early 60's. Hope you do a long detailed thread on the build. The late 40's/early 50's sportscar scene was "different"...

Marcus...

 

Did the Nash Healys have a factory cast aluminum finned rocker cover? I seem to remember seeing them somewhere.

 

Like this one?

 

Yup!

 

I'd been thinking along those lines, just for the "high tech" aspect; but what the hell, if the Nash was a good runner with pushrods I'd probably drop the supercharger on it and leave it alone.

I have some experience with the Stutz SV16 and DV32 inline 8s. I could see doing that sort of head on a Nash (or Chevy) 6, but then the project gets a LOT more involved and expensive for the customer. I'm more focused on the car as a WHOLE...as I think a period manufacturer (with limited resources) would have been.

 

Just curious, do you have any sketches or plans for what you envision this will look like? Sounds like a fun project.

(I wonder what a OHV conversion on a Hudson 6 would look like... )

 

Shelby Cobras built by Shelby have CSX chassis numbers. AC Cobras built by AC and later as continuation/Autokraft MK IV cars when AC was purchased by Brian Angliss have COX chassis numbers....

 

Yes.

 

I don't know for sure but prewar Hudson engines were very short. They had siamesed cylinders. The 4.2 liter straight eight was shorter than a Bentley 3.5 liter six.

Other compact sixes were the Studebaker Champion and Nash Rambler and 600.

I was surprised to find the Plymouth/Dodge flathead six was considerably shorter than the slant 6 even though the slant 6 had about the same bore and was designed to be a short as possible with the water pump offset to the side.

This is US engines of course. There were some small European straight sixes like the one used in Triumphs.

 

Any progress?

 

I know a 'flat-head' has been rejected outright for whatever reason. But, with Ardun heads you have an engine that combines years of hot rod technology with an overhead and a cornucopia of aftermarket parts --- and they take well to SCOTT blowers. A French block is period (but not approved by some) as the basis of this engine, aluminum flywheel, F1 transmission stuffed with Lincoln gears would complete an almost bullet proof drive train, and for racing add a V8 quick-change and it would be pretty damn versatile on the road and track. Also, if you think old Ford stuff won't race take a look at 'The Eliminator' that ran a small block and four speed (of course) but used the most basic suspension imaginable, but certainly well engineered. It often beat Jags and Ferraris. I know old tin would not a sports car make but another of my favorites, beside 'Old Yeller', is 'El Cabalo' that proved to me, as a kid, that We, meaning Americans could throw it back at 'em with enough grit not only to contend but actually win in the sporty car circles. Yeah, Europeans and certainly Brits were able to build some small displacement, lightweight cars than ran well but on American roads an MG of the period is pretty anemic. A Jag not so much but it was not so lightweight and certainly moved up engine size wise. Good luck on your journey. I know this one will keep a lot of us puzzled. Carl

 

Only reason I skipped on the flattie is the theme is more oriented to european "high tech" for the day.

This one is on hold for now. Had another customer step up for a full recreation chassis for a Devin. Weird how the early sports car thing is really big for me right now...

 

Given the '50-51 parameter I would have to go with the 303 Olds as well. My father was also a rodder at that time. He told me stories how the OHV 303 was changing everything. Some guys would mill the heck out of the heads to up compression then affix studebaker adjustable rockers to take up the slack.

Thanks for sharing the pics & story Detonator. Look forward to more.

 

Ancient thread, I realize, but I saw two homebuilt racers at Hershey last fall, one powered by an Oldsmobile straight eight, and the other powered by a flathead Cadillac.