Register now to get rid of these ads!

History Drag cars in motion.......picture thread.

Discussion in 'Traditional Hot Rods' started by Royalshifter, Dec 12, 2007.

  1. saltflats
    Joined: Aug 14, 2007
    Posts: 10,929

    saltflats
    Member
    from Missouri

    My good friend and mentor ran a triple engine pulling tractor, he built a out of the hole engine a mid rage engine and a top end engine, said the engines work in there RPM but never pulled down the other.
    I see where your headache comes from.
     
    bchctybob, loudbang and Deuces like this.
  2. 65pacecar
    Joined: Sep 22, 2010
    Posts: 3,436

    65pacecar
    Member
    from KY, AZ

  3. 65pacecar
    Joined: Sep 22, 2010
    Posts: 3,436

    65pacecar
    Member
    from KY, AZ

  4. Mike VV
    Joined: Sep 28, 2010
    Posts: 2,440

    Mike VV
    Member
    from SoCal


    Some years back I know of a guy (Mike Sullivan & Steve Haight of "Fuel Altered fame) that put two NITRO powered Buick V-6 engines together in a dragster.
    As above, no matter how they were connected, what crankshaft phasing or who built the crankshaft connector, they ALWAYS broke them. They tried the big tractor builder guys, didn't work. They even had other chassis builders check the alignment, they stiffened the chassis around the engines, nothing worked.
    Yeah, they finally gave up.

    Mike
     
    bchctybob likes this.
  5. bschwoeble
    Joined: Oct 20, 2008
    Posts: 693

    bschwoeble
    Member

    Good info. Never considered the loads as you described. Thanks for the detailed information.
     
    loudbang likes this.
  6. bschwoeble
    Joined: Oct 20, 2008
    Posts: 693

    bschwoeble
    Member

    loudbang and 65pacecar like this.
  7. George Klass
    Joined: Dec 31, 2007
    Posts: 965

    George Klass
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    In many cases, inline dual-engine dragsters worked fine, there is nothing wrong with the chain-coupler set up, provided the crankshaft on the rear engine could deal with the additional torque applied by the front engine. Gasoline powered engines worked fine with that combination (they made less power). Fuel burning 283 and 327 SB Chevy's, not so much, each of our engines were making about 900+ HP. Nitro creates a violent explosion inside the combustion chambers, that and a somewhat flexible crank has limitations. The next iteration SB Chevy engines (350 inch) may have been the answer, with their stouter cranks. Another answer would have been the upcoming 396 Big Block Chevy as the rear engine, with a SB in front (dual engine in-line combinations do not require that both engines be the same). Or, instead of an in-line set up, a side by side arrangment like Tommy Ivo's would probably have worked with fuel, where the engines are connected at the back of the crankshaft (with one engine running in the reverse rotation).
    dualflywheels_zps8896a4c8.jpg
    This was the age where everone was trying different combinations to try and gain an edge. Chet Herbert was supplying us with SB Chevy engines and he always liked the in-line set-up. Ivo's side by side Buick gas dragster was very successful, but Tom sold the car and built an in-line dragster, with the same two Buick engines. It was a nice car, although I don't remember if Tom ever drove it. About the same time that his in-line Buick dragster was ready to go, the NHRA fuel ban was over, and Tom then had a fuel Chrysler dragster to play with, and sold his in-line Buick dragster.
     
  8. 65pacecar
    Joined: Sep 22, 2010
    Posts: 3,436

    65pacecar
    Member
    from KY, AZ

    From Tom Nicklin on FB. FB_IMG_1634865447182.jpg FB_IMG_1634865452808.jpg FB_IMG_1634865447182.jpg FB_IMG_1634865452808.jpg FB_IMG_1634865450128.jpg
     
  9. Jalopy Joker
    Joined: Sep 3, 2006
    Posts: 27,427

    Jalopy Joker
    Member

  10. rudestude
    Joined: Mar 23, 2016
    Posts: 2,842

    rudestude
    Member

    20211022_010226~2.jpg Just picked up another large collection of old magazines to flip through...hot rod and others 1951 to 71...start with this one.
     
    das858, EVL401, bchctybob and 7 others like this.
  11. Deuces
    Joined: Nov 3, 2009
    Posts: 21,279

    Deuces
    Member
    from Michigan

    Wonder why they quit with the centerfolds????....:(:(
     
    loudbang likes this.
  12. Fordors
    Joined: Sep 22, 2016
    Posts: 3,849

    Fordors
    Member


    I imagine the accounting department didn't like them.
     
    427 sleeper and loudbang like this.
  13. jnaki
    Joined: Jan 1, 2015
    Posts: 6,226

    jnaki





    Hello,

    As a photographer/journalist, the goal was a centerfold photo in any magazine. It was as large as a magazine could make a photo. The late 60s-early 70s were a time for posters, rock music, concert photos and to see a large photo in the middle of a magazine was amazing. Not only to see the color photo in the middle of a magazine, but the payout was better to purchase more photo equipment and better cameras.

    But, as some folks did have a ton of those large centerfold photos on their walls, something was not right. Those creases and staple holes were ruining the actual photo. Sure, from across the room they looked like large concert posters, but, up close, those staple holes ruined the photos.

    It was as if the publishers thought it was really something to have a centerfold. But if the same photo was enlarged to the full 8x10 magazine page, it would have almost the same effect without the crease and staple holes/tears.

    Jnaki

    As a person on the other side of photography, it was "quality" not just a large photo for effect. When I did a photo shoot for our business, I always made a 11x14 full color photo print, mounted on backing board and sometimes, if the customer wanted, it was put inside a custom-made floating, redwood frame. That size did not distort the photo and looked good hanging on a wall.

    One of my experiments was a drag race photo, plus another, a car portrait developed and shot onto a 30 x 40 photo poster. They were ok, but the idea of being "large" played a good role in the presentation. As far as clarity, posters are left to the big name companies with their large format camera and their products. It was not my thing for our business.

    upload_2021-10-22_5-21-30.png
    As nice as some centerfold photography looked, it just was hard to keep the eye off of the crease and staple holes. YRMV
     
  14. So did this require some variation in spark timing between the front and rear engines? Maybe some changes in fuel metering?
    o_O
     
    loudbang and Deuces like this.
  15. 1934coupe
    Joined: Feb 22, 2007
    Posts: 4,648

    1934coupe
    Member

    Eddier Sanzo and George Montgomery, it is Indy I think it was 65 bschwoeble but it could be 64, doesn't really matter it is still a great shot.

    Pat
     
    Last edited: Oct 22, 2021
  16. 65pacecar
    Joined: Sep 22, 2010
    Posts: 3,436

    65pacecar
    Member
    from KY, AZ

  17. George Klass
    Joined: Dec 31, 2007
    Posts: 965

    George Klass
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    No, not at all. Both engines had their own ignition system, and it didn't seem to matter if one engine fired cylinder #1 at the same time that the other engine fired cylinder #7. You might wonder why we wanted to run top fuel with two unsupercharged Chevy engines. The average supercharged AA/FD 392 Hemi Chrysler was making about 1,500 to 1,600 horsepower in the early 1960's, on typically about 85% nitromethane. Our 364 inch Chevy's each made 900 horsepower naturally aspirated on Chet Herbert's engine dyno, so two of them should equal 1,800 horsepower. Our dual engine dragster weighed in at just under 1,200 pounds, at the starting line, which was about the same weight as a supercharged Chrysler dragster at that time. This would give us a 200 to 300 horsepower advantage if all was well. On top of that, a 1,500/1,600 HP Chrysler divided that HP over eight pistons and eight connecting rods, 194 HP on each rod and piston. Our combination divided 1,800 HP over 16 pistons and rods, or about 112 HP per rod and piston, which in theory offered more reliability. Our problem however is that we never could get both engines running together to make 900 HP. The front engine would, but the rear engine banged the main bearings out of the block. So, we would rebuild the rear engine and stick it in the front, and the other engine, the one that used to be in the front, we put that one in the rear. The exact same thing would happen again, the rear engine now in the front ran great, and the rear engine that had been in the front and was now in the back, banged the bearings out of the block. 283 and 327 Chevy cranks on nitro cannot take 900 HP on the nose of the crankshaft without going into some kind of harmonics...
     
  18. noboD
    Joined: Jan 29, 2004
    Posts: 7,772

    noboD
    Member

    Bluto explained that when the front of the crank was flexing that part of the crank actually ran backwards for a milisecond.
     
    lurker mick, loudbang and Stan Back like this.
  19. rudestude
    Joined: Mar 23, 2016
    Posts: 2,842

    rudestude
    Member

    The one shot maynot be in motion...but its cool. 20211023_013524~2.jpg 20211022_122813~2.jpg
     
  20. George Klass
    Joined: Dec 31, 2007
    Posts: 965

    George Klass
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    I don't know if that is true, the dual-roller chains and sprokets have 99.99% zero slack.
     
    loudbang and Deuces like this.
  21. rudestude
    Joined: Mar 23, 2016
    Posts: 2,842

    rudestude
    Member

    What a rush it would of been to be the photographer getting this shot ....if they hadn't invented remote cameras and mounts yet. 20211023_095516~2.jpg
     
    550Coupe, ClayMart, loudbang and 3 others like this.
  22. rudestude
    Joined: Mar 23, 2016
    Posts: 2,842

    rudestude
    Member

    I noticed some discussion on multiple engine early dragsters....and while flipping through the old magazines in a new collection I got ,I have been running across some very interesting drag vehicles.
    Including twin engine type ....mounted in different configurations .....this particular one has a pretty good article on it , with alot of tech info.
    If anyone is interested in the info.... PM me and I will PM you the complete article , about 4 or so pages + pictures.
    My collection ranges from 1951 to 71
    Hot Rod , Car Craft, Rod & Custom, Popular Hot Rodding , and others.
    Thanks
    Terry (aka Rudestude) 20211024_012411~2.jpg 20211024_012600~2.jpg 20211024_012702~2.jpg
     
  23. jnaki
    Joined: Jan 1, 2015
    Posts: 6,226

    jnaki





    upload_2021-10-24_4-8-46.png
    https://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum...-picture-thread.1219009/page-12#post-14135634

    Hello,

    When we were active in drag racing and taking films with our little movie camera, there was a certain spot that most pro photographers were allowed to stand to get some good shots. It was right in front of the spectators stand, inside of the chain link fence on the grass area, next to the dragstrip surface. With their high powered cameras and telephoto lenses, nothing was left to chance to get the “best of the best shots” at any drag race event held at Lion’s Dragstrip.
    upload_2021-10-24_4-9-36.png
    Pro photographers at Lion’s Dragstrip in 1964 All Gas Coupe/Sedan Meet. Big John Mazmanian at the starting line
    1964 Lion's Dragstrip


    If the pro photographer was on assignment for a big publisher of magazines, they got the best location with added support of the dragstrip workers and management. We little guys still had to stand far away from the action and hope that our films and photos were going to be ok for later showing to our friends.

    The pros? They were up close and personal with the race cars and nearness to the action. Who couldn’t get a great shot being inside of the fence, that close to the action? Ladders, tripods, telephoto lenses, fast automatic advance film cameras, etc were all of the professional packages that we mortals could only dream of using.

    Jnaki

    Wow, think of my movies from being that close. Perhaps, I could have gone into movie making and with my dad’s new 16mm Beaulieu Camera, built in telephoto lenses, and mouse ears. It would have looked much better in closer action. We did the best that we could with what we had at the time. A point and shoot 16mm color movie camera as simple as possible for a young kid making movies that all of our friends liked a week later after developing.
    1959 Lion's Dragstrip


    Kenny Lindley’s “Misfire FED” with Don Hampton driving…





     
    bchctybob and rudestude like this.

  24. I know these cars weren't roomy by any means, but day-um! The driver's seat was no place for a claustrophobic . . . :eek:
     
    loudbang and Deuces like this.
  25. 65pacecar
    Joined: Sep 22, 2010
    Posts: 3,436

    65pacecar
    Member
    from KY, AZ

  26. 65pacecar
    Joined: Sep 22, 2010
    Posts: 3,436

    65pacecar
    Member
    from KY, AZ

  27. ttwomotor
    Joined: Jul 26, 2012
    Posts: 602

    ttwomotor
    Member
    from Illinois

    Here is another shot of the Chuck Tanko Twin.
    c-tanko-1opt.jpg
     
    427 sleeper, Deuces, slayer and 3 others like this.
  28. 65pacecar
    Joined: Sep 22, 2010
    Posts: 3,436

    65pacecar
    Member
    from KY, AZ

  29. 65pacecar
    Joined: Sep 22, 2010
    Posts: 3,436

    65pacecar
    Member
    from KY, AZ

  30. chase knight
    Joined: Jul 2, 2007
    Posts: 130

    chase knight
    Member

    On Bob Stratman's inline unblown gas SBC A/Dragsters, we used the double-row chain coupler with 36-tooth sprockets. Easy to change phasing between engines. Best performance was with both #1 TDC firing at the same time. Phasing 45 degrees out sounded good, but was down nearly 2 MPH. Important to keep the kill switch wires isolated from each other. I've seen a photo or two, where Chet had made a true V-16 by welding two blocks together with a one-piece crankshaft. Didn't see much of it, so any additional info on it would be appreciated.
     
    Deuces and loudbang like this.

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.