Register now to get rid of these ads!

Flat'liners

Discussion in 'HA/GR' started by 64 DODGE 440, Jun 16, 2009.

  1. 64 DODGE 440
    Joined: Sep 2, 2006
    Posts: 4,354

    64 DODGE 440
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from so cal

    Well.......my buddy Old6rodder coined the phrase and I'm gonna put it out there and see if we have many of our breed of crazy folks out there.:p

    "Flat'liner".......a contraction of flathead and inliner, be it of the four, six or eight cylinder variety.

    Just seemed to me to be a good term, even if I almost went the other flat line mode back in January '08.

    Seeing as how our build is using the mighty '34 Dodge 218 flattie, how many others of the breed do we have among the HA/GR bunch?

    Chrysler, Dodge, Ford, Hudson, Nash, Oldsmobile, Packard, Pontiac, Studebaker, Willys, whatever, they are some neat engines that all have their own following.

    How many "valve in block" hotrodders are still building, planning a build or just remembering the sights and sounds of the days when overheads were rare and the "flat'liners" were out there holding their own?

    Then again there may not be a lot of us, but what the hell, I had to ask.:cool:
     
  2. PegLegStrick
    Joined: Aug 8, 2007
    Posts: 1,883

    PegLegStrick
    Member

    Building a '54 Pontiac w/268ci eight.
    Sounds GOOD running.
    Be glad when I finally get her on the road.
     
  3. Hudsonator
    Joined: Jun 19, 2005
    Posts: 335

    Hudsonator
    Member
    from Tennessee

    I am a hopeless Flat'liner. I do not know why I expend so much energy on such unlikely projects. Doing the unlikely with the improbable, something I've come to love. How else would a farmer be?

    This flathead started it all for me. A 230 mopar built to compete in the antique outlaw tractor pulling classes around me. Leave the line at 3200, holding 5000 rpms down the track. It amazed me and confounded alot of big cube/high dollar ohv engines when we beat the dickens out of them.[​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    Of course they changed the rules of the class and obsoleted it two years later. A triple carbed, 292 Chevy powered Allis took revenge for my Dad and the little Custom. I, became entirely consumed with Flat'liners.

    Which led me to the Hudson. This is the engine in my '49 driver.
    [​IMG]

    Notice the extra block in the door of the shop. I'm consumed with flat'liners.

    I have a 358 CID stroker project going on, which is how I wound up here. I build odd engines, then worry about what to do with them. This is what I had planned for induction, until I came to this spot and discovered the carbs won't fly in SDRA/HAGR. So, I redirectied and circling like a buzzard until my economics improve.
    [​IMG]


    If my flat'linish fetish isn't bad enough. The reason I've painstakingly mapped out the fuel curve of the old 2641s AFB (the Edelbrock is GONE!) is because I intend on installing a 4psi boost McCulloch VS57 on it using the old tech in my '49 (including 6 volt hardware). I bought the outfit several years ago off another older Hudnut who raced the outfit in '54, but decided to go turbo on his Hudson in '07. I keep the blower mocked up around the shop just to keep me inspired.
    [​IMG]

    I'm a hopeless flat'liner, for sure. Hoping to find a home amongst you SDRA/HAGR guys. Your rules ROCK, and suit me just fine.

    Hud
     
  4. nexxussian
    Joined: Mar 14, 2007
    Posts: 3,240

    nexxussian
    Member

    Hudsonator, I've wondered about the DCOE's, I thought they were old enough, but I agree they seem 'wrong' for the class somehow.


    Or is there something I've missed in the rules (or maybe because they are considered a "rich man's" carb?)?:confused:

    That Flathead 6 is still cool as all get out though.:D
     

  5. Joe Hamby
    Joined: Jun 6, 2005
    Posts: 405

    Joe Hamby
    Member

    I would reallllllly like to see that Hudson run in a HA/GR. In the 60's there was a Anglia in Tulsa with a ford flathead v8, and they switched to a Hudson and went faster, I think. Maybe we can get that full story from Quick 7 if he is watching.
     
  6. I likes me some flathead six!!
     
  7. Hudsonator
    Joined: Jun 19, 2005
    Posts: 335

    Hudsonator
    Member
    from Tennessee

    When I first arrived in this section, I asked about the DCOE's - the answer was "not allowed". I'm not going to question that very much.

    Here's why I'm not arguing the Webers. 1). Clifford did not offer a triple weber intake until after the cutoff date of '62. 2.) If I'm not mistaken, the Weber DCOE is not old enough. The age-correct carburetor would be the original Dellorto sidedraft. Weber left Dellorto and improved the orginal side draft into the DCOE, much like we're seeing Demon, Barry Grant, etc do with the original Holley design today.

    I also agree, they just don't "fit" the class. They just don't look Ol'Timey enough.

    I really don't know what I'll use now on a HA/GR type outfit. If I use what else is laying around, it would be dual or triple WGD Carter 2 barrels. I really like those carbs.

    I wanna see some of these sexadelic little mopars you guys are building!
     
  8. Roughshod Rod
    Joined: Apr 20, 2008
    Posts: 18

    Roughshod Rod
    Member

    I am running the original 239 flat'liner 6 in my 1954 Pontiac. Looking for speed parts - ok, dreaming of speed parts, apparently thats where they are.
    My first car older than me - and a lot of fun.
     
  9. 46fordmaster
    Joined: Jan 19, 2009
    Posts: 41

    46fordmaster
    Member
    from Indio Ca

    :D I got my first flathead itch with my 46 ford truck I bought off
    a fellow H.A.M.B. er. Its all original .I was able to free the stuck valves
    replaced the head gasket and fired her up!!!!:D:D
    purs like a kitten.Just wish I could find some old speed parts like an
    intake,head or headers.....nothin like a flathead 6:cool:
     
  10. 97
    Joined: May 18, 2005
    Posts: 1,976

    97
    Member



    Edoardo Weber began making carbs in the twenties, Dellorto in 1933.
    Side draught twins were on production cars well before 1962, in fact they were fitted to production cars for many manufacturers including Ford, Alfa , Ferrari , VW, Fiat and many others. Aftermarket manifolds may not have been available from Clifford, but were certainly available from other manufacturers in the 50s .
    The carbs were available in the 30s........ so why not ?
    Are Winfield, Miller, Riley etc carbs OK ? Not used on an Amreican production motor? Webers Exotic ? hardly!! SUs were never used on a production US motor as far as I am aware.
     
  11. Hudsonator
    Joined: Jun 19, 2005
    Posts: 335

    Hudsonator
    Member
    from Tennessee

    That's quite a history there, and a good bit of education for me. I would love to run them, but the expense of properly tuning them does scare me a bit - I will openly admit that. I could probably keep that to a minimum with my magic drill bits.

    Maybe I should have contested the issue a little more?
     
  12. quick7
    Joined: Dec 2, 2005
    Posts: 116

    quick7
    Member
    from Tulsa OK

    I ran the Anglia in the very early 60's first with a 3 3/8 X 4 1/8 flathead 21A rods,aluminum heads 3 Stromberg 48's
    Back in 1960 we built the forerunner to the later, ram tuning setups with a set of 6 inch tubes that bolted between the intake and carbs on the engine. We bought an over the counter dual point centrifugal Chevrolet distributor and had the housing machined to fit the stock flathead opening
    and installed the stock cam gear.
    We ran a Isky 400 jr cam,couldn't afford the 404 radius tappet cam.
    In 1963 we switched to Hudson,and built an intake which you could mount up to 6 Rochester 1 bbls, ran best using 3 modified singles.
    With the same body,now about 110 pounds heavier, we ran a little over 1 second quicker.
    Strictly a torque motor,we shifted at 4900 RPM.
    Used a Isky 7X cam,which was stock on some high altitude engines
    of the era.
    Hudson was my first choice for a HA/GR ,but after trying to find one or two for quite a while,I finally gave up.
    I'm currently building a chassis with my son, but haven't decided for sure on an engine.
    Based on what we ran 46 years ago in a chassis that was over 500 pounds heavier, 11's should be no problem at all with a Hudson engine.
     
  13. Old6rodder
    Joined: Jun 20, 2006
    Posts: 2,542

    Old6rodder
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from SoCal
    1. HA/GR owners group

    The enigne cut-off of '62 is only to allow engines that were still basically '50s engineering and are more available today, read cheaper as well.

    The carb cut-offs are also about tech advances post '50 that a 1950 rodder wouldn't have had rather than specific dates. As with engines the idea is that later carbs are "grandfathered" in until primary changes hit a given brand.

    Thus actually, the reason for the DCOE thing isn't the period per se, but their modular design. Non-modular Webers should be quite acceptable, but few people say "Weber" and mean anything other than the modulars (bankrolled by and engineered for Enzo as I've been led to understand?).

    Am I wrong and it was the modulars that were out in '30? If that's correct they would be good to go.

    As to whether they were American, that isn't really a factor as hot rodders were using whatever was around and they could afford, so some of'em indeed used foreign parts of the period.
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2009
  14. nexxussian
    Joined: Mar 14, 2007
    Posts: 3,240

    nexxussian
    Member

    The Solex series of carbs like the VW's ran were 'modular' in the venturri bolts in (at least on the ones I've seen).

    Not saying you would want them, but IIRC it was an 'older design' so, maybe the modular Webbers were first, maybe not, I dunno.

    I figured there might have been something to the thought it was a 'spirit violation' (aka rich man's carb) and out under the same theory that Hilborn isn't leagal (as I read the rules anyway) and it was certainly 'around' back then.
     
  15. 64 DODGE 440
    Joined: Sep 2, 2006
    Posts: 4,354

    64 DODGE 440
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from so cal

    Actually, I have had the thought that three Harley carbs would work out pretty good on the 218 Dodge flat'liner. simple to make a manifold with three straight runners of whatever length is needed and a pretty good match for the displacement.

    Three VW carbs would work out pretty well too.
     
  16. 97
    Joined: May 18, 2005
    Posts: 1,976

    97
    Member

    Tuning is easy and all the parts are still available , DCOE are no more exotic than early Corvette Rochester side drafts , or any of the other aftermarket carbs I talked about which were hot rod material in the 30s. What about a couple of big Scheblers off a Duessenberg ???

    I have a book published by Clymer in 1950 called Souping the Stock engine , he talks about triple side drafts, Riley's , Zeniths , and there is even a picture of a Nicson triple side draft manifold for Chevy sixes .
    And the Ford Speed manual from 1952 also talks about them for the Ford six, using Knudsen, Maleo, Nicson , Cyclone and Houghtons.
     
  17. Hudsonator
    Joined: Jun 19, 2005
    Posts: 335

    Hudsonator
    Member
    from Tennessee

    Interesting stuff, I'd like to hear more. I've searched the internet over the past couple of days trying to find info on the dates for DCOE production - can't find anything.

    I'm envious of your books.

    Hud
     
  18. Hudsonator
    Joined: Jun 19, 2005
    Posts: 335

    Hudsonator
    Member
    from Tennessee

    Had I kept progressing with the 230 Puller, I was going to go to triple Keihn's right off the Harley Sportster. I still believe that to be the ultimate setup for the little mopar. I had all the same thoughts you did and kinda fell in love with those simple little carbs while tuning Harleys. I really like the CV arrangement.

    I also like the Amal round slide carbs off Triumphs. No age issue there and lots of tuning parts to tailor them in. Several different throttle bore sizes in that series too. With a simple individual runner manifold, you could sync them right off the manifold by a vacuum gauge as well. I gained some experiance setting them with ram pipes on 45 Harleys (yeah my flathead fetish bled over to 2-wheelers too).


    Hud
     
  19. 97
    Joined: May 18, 2005
    Posts: 1,976

    97
    Member


    I have been in the carb business for nearly forty years, Weber dealer from 1977 and never heard them referred to as modular before?????

    If you mean having venturies which can be changed , All Webers , even the smallest for Fiat 500s have a removeable venturi.

    Weber indeed began making same size twin throat carbs in the 30s.

    Ferrari were fitted with huge 58 DCOs in 1950 or thereabouts , but they were /are a different thing altogether.Similar but a different animal.


    Shelby had 4 40s on a 260 inch Ford in 1962, ...dyno picture .
    [​IMG]


    The H 6 SUs were orginally developed for Jaguar.for the XK120..just as much an expensive sports car as Enzo's toys methinks. The different needles , slides (pistons and springs ) are the equivalent of changing venturis for Webers or Dellortos.

    I don't really care whether they are allowed or not, I have no intention of using DCOEs on an HA/GR , but I cannot see the problem with the Hudson running them, in reality they are no different to the SUs on your car.
    We all know the limiting factor is the tires anyway, horespower is a moot point once traction is lost.
     
  20. nexxussian
    Joined: Mar 14, 2007
    Posts: 3,240

    nexxussian
    Member


    Amen to that.
     
  21. 64 DODGE 440
    Joined: Sep 2, 2006
    Posts: 4,354

    64 DODGE 440
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from so cal

    And the more power you have, the harder it is to hook up once the traction is lost.
     
  22. Old6rodder
    Joined: Jun 20, 2006
    Posts: 2,542

    Old6rodder
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from SoCal
    1. HA/GR owners group

    As we proved yet again on a cold strip last weekend. :eek:

    97, Do I (mis-?) understand "modular" to refer to screw-in, pit changable rather than at home on the bench; jets, throats, etc? Two things appear to flow from this.
    Readily changable internals were around in our 1950 base date.
    Even given my understanding, SUs are indeed technically "modular" anyway and would be proscribed.

    (side bar) Did Ferrari go to Weber because Weber already had these advances?

    I also tried to find the reference to modular (it isn't in the actual rules of course) that led me that way. So far I've not found it, so it looks as if in addition to being plain wrong I'm not able to say why yet.
    This is getting embarrassing.

    It's beginning to look like the rule was actually intended to restrict carbs to what was in more or less common drag racing use at the time, perhaps for visual reasons as well, (just as the whole design and concept of the class is meant) and I've gotten it wrong about the tech reasons.

    In part, the original carb rules were intended to limit performance, in an open effort to keep the class in the 12s and avoid incurring some of NHRA's more expensive rules. That may be where I extrapolated it, I'm still looking for the "modular" reference I recall.

    Propinquity has our car with a two barrel (upright, fixed throat but with screw-in jets) at this time anyway so we'll keep it that way for now and see where it all goes.

    As far as the "rich boy's toys" goes, I don't believe it's a direct intent but more an indirect result of the actual state of the sport in '50.
    It was mostly a low buck, back yard sport then after all (it'd be years before some road racers would stop sneering at it), so there were likely few Webers or SUs of any sort lying behind rodders' garages rusting.
     
  23. Dick- I think the reference you are looking for might be in the earlier versions of HA/GR rules, or possibly in the SDRA rules. I thought it was in reference to some kind of racing 4 barrel.
     
  24. Old6rodder
    Joined: Jun 20, 2006
    Posts: 2,542

    Old6rodder
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from SoCal
    1. HA/GR owners group

    I have all the iterations of the HA/GR rules and I checked the SDRA site's rules, nothing.

    I think you may have it on the quad reference, that seems to be hitting a memory. Looks like an unwarranted assumption (non-dictionary definition all too accurate here :eek:) on my part .


    Now back to Flat'liners (HA/GRs, not the hypoxia "sport" :D).
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2009
  25. Hudsonator
    Joined: Jun 19, 2005
    Posts: 335

    Hudsonator
    Member
    from Tennessee

    My driver runs a 4 barrel. My personal opinion is that it is a terrible waste of horsepower. I say that because you have 3 pairs of fuel mixes, no matter how well you've tuned it. 1&6 will be lean, 2&5 will be dead on the money, 3&4 will be rich. Out of 6 cylinders, you'll have 2 that are making max power, the other 4 robbing you just a tad. This may get better whenever I get around to slightly boosting it - but I doubt it.

    The longer your six is, the worse this gets. Just by the physical distance the A/F mixture must travel from the center to the outer cylinders.

    Duals are much better, probably the most practical.

    Triples are the best. (God help you keep them synchronized!)

    Hud
     
  26. Ron Golden
    Joined: Jan 30, 2005
    Posts: 513

    Ron Golden
    Member

    Hud,
    I agree, and you can see the poor mixture results when you have an engine on the dyno and monitor exhaust temperatures. However, some of the V8 manifolds designed by Jim McFarland address these issues and are much better. Unfortunately manifolds designed for inline engines date from the 40's and just provided a way to hook the carbs to the engine. I've seen V8 engines with a 250-300 degree EGT temp spread. Bad manifold design.

    We built a tunnel ram for a 572 cid Chrysler and the EGT temp spread was only 95 degrees. A little knowledge and a lot of luck. (1032 hp) Fuel injection systems are much better.

    Ron
     
  27. 64 DODGE 440
    Joined: Sep 2, 2006
    Posts: 4,354

    64 DODGE 440
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from so cal

    As long as they are reasonably close to synchronized, a log type manifold will help balance things out. Individual runners take a bit more to make things happy.

    For street use, the old style progressive linkage is a good compromise.
     
  28. CrkInsp
    Joined: Jul 17, 2006
    Posts: 513

    CrkInsp
    Member
    from B.A. OK

    Having run a lot of combinations on chevy 6cyl..
    From; 1x1bbl,2x1,3x1,
    1x2bbl - 3x2,
    1x4bbl, 2x4,
    Webbers
    Injection
    I had the best results with the 3x2's. That gives you 6 jets to get the air/fuel mix the way you want or need it to be with the odd firing order of the end ports. Don't forget the eccelerator pumps and how they can be tuned also. Well that's enough food for thought for now. I'll let you chew a while.
     
  29. Ron Golden
    Joined: Jan 30, 2005
    Posts: 513

    Ron Golden
    Member

    I'm running 3 Rochester 2 brls on a plenum manifold and picked the large base, mediun cfm carbs (249 cfm each) for our 321 cid GMC. I built a progressive linkage system so the car would be easier to drive around the pits and stage at the line.

    I also taped the 1/4 x 28 stock jets out to 1/4 x 32 so I could use Holley jets. Much easier to find, and cheaper. I also plugged the power valves since their pretty crude and don't always work right.

    So far the carbs are working well. I'd love to have a set of Hilborn injectors, on alcohol, but I'm not going there. I'm tired of getting my butt spanked for thinking out loud. LOL.

    Ron
     
  30. 348chevy
    Joined: Apr 2, 2007
    Posts: 431

    348chevy
    Member

    I run three 250 cfm Rochester 2 jets on a log type manifold. There is not 50 degrees difference in exhaust temps at wide open throttle. I run Holley jets and power valves. I cut 4 coils off the springs so it won't load up at idle. I do not know how anyone can run a 4 barrel on an inline engine and get good fuel distribution. If you tune for wide open throttle that is what is important. In 1961 I bought the first set of gas mechanical injectors that Kent Enderle made, Pete Jackson was working for him at the time and we worked and worked trying to get them to idle right but if you got them to idle they leaned out on the top end. I was running 6 Stromberg 97's before and they idled great. Multiple carbs for an inline engine is the smart way to go because the engine will preform at it's best. Now with electronic fuel injection that is another ball game. Of course that is just my opinion which with a dollar you can buy a cup of coffee.:D Roy
     

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.