Register now to get rid of these ads!

Technical Smallest Production V8 Cubic Inches

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by 38Chevy454, Sep 1, 2015.

  1. Rusty O'Toole
    Joined: Sep 17, 2006
    Posts: 8,994

    Rusty O'Toole
    Member

    The V8-60 was made because Henry Ford hated 6 cylinder engines (the first one he made was a failure). Other low priced cars had 6 cylinder engines but Ford would not budge, he made a tiny V8 instead, to offer a lower priced, economy Ford.

    There was no reason to use one for performance when the larger 85HP was available. But, they did find a place in racing where the class breakdown went by engine size.

    This meant midget auto racing and speedboats. The usual parts makers offered aftermarket parts. But you could spend a lot of money and barely outdo a stock full size flathead in power so it was kind of pointless, except for class racing.
     
    blowby, volvobrynk and falcongeorge like this.
  2. d2_willys
    Joined: Sep 8, 2007
    Posts: 4,094

    d2_willys
    Member
    from Kansas

    Curious what the Jensen Interceptors had for an engine. Thought it was a V8, but what size.
     
  3. Kerrynzl
    Joined: Jun 20, 2010
    Posts: 2,284

    Kerrynzl
    Member

    383 and 440 mopars
     
    volvobrynk likes this.
  4. F-ONE
    Joined: Mar 27, 2008
    Posts: 1,889

    F-ONE
    Member
    from Alabama

    Well since this is a technical thread I'll clarify on the "Winsdor V8". The Windsor V8 was the 351or 351W only. It was made at Ford's Canadian Windsor plant. The 351W has a slight Y shape to allow for the longer stroke, it's a different casting.

    In period the 221, 260,289 and 302s are called Challengers or the Challanger V8. You could also call them FF engines for Ford Fairlane like they do the FE series for Ford Edsel. Challangers and 351Ws are all considered smallblocks. Many including auto writers and Ford Enthusiasts call all Ford Smallblocks Windsors, which is technically incorrect.

    The first Challanger at 221 CID in 1962 was a tribute to the 221 Flathead V8 of 1932.
     
  5. Kerrynzl
    Joined: Jun 20, 2010
    Posts: 2,284

    Kerrynzl
    Member

    No it didn't.
    all SBF 's have that slight Y near the pan rail.

    Ford increased the deck height to allow for longer stroke and a reasonable rod length.
    Increasing the deck on a 90degree V makes the block wider
    This is why some people think the 351W has a wider V [ it is the same Angle]

    The 221-302 and the 351W have the same crank to cam centreline
     
  6. Deuced Up!
    Joined: Feb 8, 2008
    Posts: 3,532

    Deuced Up!
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    How about the Chevy 267. A bit OT as far as year, but Chevrolet stuck them in the 1980 Camaro.
     
  7. Appreciate all of the replies and discussion, kind of fun to learn some of the non-American stuff.

    Funny typo I noticed in my orig post I listed the 221 Windsor OHC and should have been OHV. Kind of a big difference for one letter!

    Kind of OT for the subject, but the comment about the 2-stroke outboard engine used in a car got me thinking about the most (to me) obnoxious racecar at Bonneville was this little compact car that had a three cylinder snowmobile 2-stroke engine. Sitting there in the line warming up, it sounded awful and was putting out all the smoke. Main propblem was the sound, it was not pleasant at all.
     
    volvobrynk likes this.
  8. RichFox
    Joined: Dec 3, 2006
    Posts: 9,758

    RichFox
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    The Mazda rotatorys with open pipes are terrible to be in line behind. The worst I ever endured was The "Thunderbird" Ermie Immerso?'s 'liner with two Lycoming turbines. I was next to him when he fired it off and got pretty gassed and lots of hot air on a hot day with my fire suit on.
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2015
  9. rooman
    Joined: Sep 20, 2006
    Posts: 3,718

    rooman
    Member

    " Immerso"

    Roo
     
  10. RichFox
    Joined: Dec 3, 2006
    Posts: 9,758

    RichFox
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    Thank you. Change made.
     
  11. Copy on the rotary engines also being awful sound. They sound bad warming up and sound worse going down the track! That 2-stroke swap was even worse though.
     
  12. Dunkmack9
    Joined: May 4, 2014
    Posts: 20

    Dunkmack9
    Member

    The 1963 Special/Skylark had a 215 cid option with 200 HP. I had one.
     
  13. Stan Back
    Joined: Mar 9, 2007
    Posts: 481

    Stan Back
    Member
    from California

    The V-8 60s didn't run "heads up" with the Offys. Losta difference in cubic inches. Same "adjustments" still going on today in Pro Stock motorcycles -- the Suzukis running "heads up" with the Harleys and such. When a Suzuki wins, they re-handicap the pounds/cu. in. to get the crowd-favorite back in contention. I don't know much about motorcycles, but does anyone think an equal displacement Harley can compete with a Hayabusa? A flathead Ford with the same size OHC Offy?
     
    falcongeorge likes this.
  14. Phil1934
    Joined: Jun 24, 2001
    Posts: 2,619

    Phil1934
    Member

    NHRA PSM H-D 625#/160 CID=3.9#/CID, Suzuki 595#/107 CID=5.6#/CID. No 4 valves allowed.
     
  15. falcongeorge
    Joined: Aug 26, 2010
    Posts: 18,341

    falcongeorge
    Member
    from BC

    Scourge of the Monte Carlo, ESPECIALLY with Erik "on the roof" Carlsson driving...
    [​IMG]
    As far as V8-60s running "head to head" with the 97ci offys, well not really. As Stan Back mentioned and I hinted at, the V8-60s were allowed a big displacement advantage over the offys, and as I said, it took a load of nitromethane to make the V8-60s even run with the offys. Most of the offys ran straight methanol.
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2015
    Atwater Mike and volvobrynk like this.
  16. Roupe
    Joined: Feb 11, 2006
    Posts: 719

    Roupe
    Member

    Also the 262 in 1975. Had one in a Monza.
     
    Hnstray likes this.
  17. There was a DOHC version of the OHV 221 Ford, they were a beast at Indy for a few years in the mid 60s, then the Offy made its comeback.
     
  18. Hnstray
    Joined: Aug 23, 2009
    Posts: 10,754

    Hnstray
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from Quincy, IL

    As I recall, that was known as the "Gurney-Weslake" engine..........was it not? If that is the engine you are referring to, I believe it was based on the 289 version of the block.

    Ray
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2015
  19. PackardV8
    Joined: Jun 7, 2007
    Posts: 867

    PackardV8
    Member

    The Ford DOHC was a later 255" version of the 260" SBF. The first couple of years, they ran a mildly modified OHV SBF and then the OHC was designed. The later Gurney-Westlake used OHV heads designed by a Brit named Harry Westlake. He was considered one of the leading air flow experts of the era. The OHV engines were given a displacement advantage over the OHC to help them be more competitive.

    Au contraire - The Studebaker 224"/232"/259" is way taller, wider and heavier by fifty pounds than that Olds 260". The only thing close to the Stude .in pounds per cubic inch is the 241" Red Ram; another buzzing little anvil.

    jack vines
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2015
  20. AmishMike
    Joined: Mar 27, 2014
    Posts: 380

    AmishMike
    Member

    Surprised no one mentioned Lexus V8 - a little larger at 4 liter ( 240 CI & not HAMB friendly ) but: helped son junk one ( pick-a part ) with trashed body & interior. Engine was DOHC, 32 valve, variable valve timing, Factory was EFI & computer controlled auto trans ( someone could fix that ). Believe head was aluminum maybe whole engine. Reads like a mini Indy engine to me.
     
    Odie398 likes this.
  21. volvobrynk
    Joined: Jan 30, 2011
    Posts: 3,588

    volvobrynk
    Member
    from Denmark

    Yes you are correct, maybe head to head in the strictest terms, but non the less, Vic Edelbrock Sr. Ran up to two V8-60 midget cars. And yes he did ran them with a little orange-crate pocket-inprovement. But he was a very competitive guy and he could make em sing. He even took weight out of the crank, to get a higher rewing mill and get faster out of turn 4 at Gilmore. The V8-60 was by all accounts an underdog. And it did good despite the big hard ship that comes of being an "insufficiry" grosery getter turn race engine, but I wouldn't say they could hold there own. Dare I say "the little engine that could" and did.
    And in the matter of horse power, what do you think they made at the crank.
    But an V8-60 out of or intented for a midget most all things a side, give a 85hp a run for its Money and sound awesome! And might win the best exhaust smell test. LOL

    And Carlson was a hard man to beat, he made them little cars fly, sometimes literely.
    And a 3 cylinder 750 ccm 2 stroke motor with 4 gears did make them go very fast, but so did 1.5 V4 and 1.7 V4 (the one pictured above), but they Dident sound as wicket in full racing trim.
    Lol
     
  22. falcongeorge
    Joined: Aug 26, 2010
    Posts: 18,341

    falcongeorge
    Member
    from BC

    that he did!:eek::D theres more than a few photos to prove it!
     
    volvobrynk likes this.
  23. falcongeorge
    Joined: Aug 26, 2010
    Posts: 18,341

    falcongeorge
    Member
    from BC

    I have always thought they had potential.
     
  24. Six Ball
    Joined: Oct 8, 2007
    Posts: 2,728

    Six Ball
    Member
    from Nevada

    About the Studebaker V8s. The 224 and 259 had the same bore. The 232 and 259 had the same stroke. The 289 had the same bore as the 224 & 259. All had forged cranks and with a 2.81 stroke the 224 had a lot of overlap. If you put a 224 crank in a 232 it would be a 201. It might be heavier than a 289 but it could take all the boost you could throw at it. Dick Dodson claimed they would take 85 pounds of boost and make upwards of 900 hp. I don't think he actually ever did it.
     
  25. Kerrynzl
    Joined: Jun 20, 2010
    Posts: 2,284

    Kerrynzl
    Member

    I think he also introduced us to "left foot braking and clutchless shifting" in one of those Saabs
    It's amazing what skills you can develop when you lack mechanical sympathy.

    I place him "up there" with Ari Vatanen [driving the RS1800 Escort]
     
    falcongeorge, volvobrynk and Ned Ludd like this.
  26. Martin Harris
    Joined: Aug 3, 2014
    Posts: 315

    Martin Harris

    That outboard motor would make a really insane showcar engine! Check out those pipes.:D
     
  27. My Rover V8 is 3.9 litre. Bang on your 240 cu/in.
     
  28. Mike51Merc
    Joined: Dec 5, 2008
    Posts: 3,786

    Mike51Merc
    Member

  29. volvobrynk
    Joined: Jan 30, 2011
    Posts: 3,588

    volvobrynk
    Member
    from Denmark

    I know this is thread jacking but, to the best of my knowledge the Scandinavian flick is invented by guy like Karl E. Kristensen (Tom K.s Dad) and a few other guys to beet Carlson and some finish guy left foot braking in FWD cars like the Saab and the Mini.

    Sorry, I just can help my self.
     
    Ned Ludd likes this.
  30. atomickustom
    Joined: Aug 30, 2005
    Posts: 3,227

    atomickustom
    Member

    Thanks, Jack. I forgot about the baby hemi and I didn't even know the Studebakers went that small c.i. in their V-8. I just remember being baffled the first time I popped the hood on that Omega expecting to see something small like a Buick 215 or a SBC and instead there was a "full size" Olds V-8 with the anemic cubes. Ran great, but not exactly a powerhouse!
     
    volvobrynk likes this.

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2020 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.