Signet-ficant Other

If it takes that long to recharge you either need a bigger, better pump or a smaller tank. :)
It didn't take that long, I just stopped when the die grinder had run the pressure down to about 60PSI. I started doing a chamber and when I finished it, the compressor was back up to 130 and had a couple of minutes to cool off. Polishing a chamber only took a few minutes--much quicker than expected. But yes, the compressor pump is rather tired, because I used to run it constantly for an hour-plus at a crack when blasting or running a grinder. I rarely let it stop and even more rarely let it cool. In its current sad state, it will still maintain 65PSI with the blasting gun wide open, which is more than can be said for just about any pther 110V, 1.7HP (running, not the bullshit startup/peak number used by most compressor manufacturers), 22-gallon compressor on the market.
 
Yep that's impressive for a little guy. Run er till she blows.

I got this one free when the motor gave out. I run the tits off this one too when I use it. 5HP, 80 gallons. It really needs a drier on it but I'm stubborn about taking apart fittings that aren't leaking.

IMG_0614.JPG

The photo's from 2013 so that photo's misleading. There's crap piled up all around it now, and more stickers on the door although not as many as you'd expect because I'm trying to avoid duplication. Covering the door with Jeg's stickers would look pretty dumb.
 
see now thats a nice old big single, ive basicaly got the slightly newer slightly taller vtwin version of that
 
see now thats a nice old big single, ive basicaly got the slightly newer slightly taller vtwin version of that
Mine has two cylinders, side by side. Low pressure feeds into high pressure feeds the tank.

I would rather have a horizontal tank to avoid the need to climb up on something to work on it. Lifting that pump and then the motor up that high was a helluva thing.
 
Mine has two cylinders, side by side. Low pressure feeds into high pressure feeds the tank.

I would rather have a horizontal tank to avoid the need to climb up on something to work on it. Lifting that pump and then the motor up that high was a helluva thing.
no shit, i mean i may be 6'4, but i did have to replace the motor, and do an oil change to synthetic, ive also had to re-plumb it a few times as it vibrates the joints loose, next time i swear im going to get some rubber hyd lines made up for it just so it can have actual machine crimped ends with threads not copper crush bs..working on it means grabbing one of my lil plastic seated working benches(they are for gardening but ive painted engine blocks on em) and standing on one of them
 
Imagine being 5'8" and working on the thing.

The last big compressor I had before this one was horizontal and it sat in exactly the same space that one does so they don't really take up that much more space either.
 
Since I like to get ahead of myself, I started pondering everything I'd need for reassembly. I ordered some SCE exhaust gaskets since I'm fresh out of W2 stock, but otherwise I've got gaskets covered.

Or so I thought.

The head gaskets I used when I originally assembled the engine were Mr. Gasket 1121G, which have a compressed thickness of .028". I used those to bump the compression up a bit with the ~70cc heads. I planned to use another set of the same, but (luckily) I remembered that I've got positive-deck pistons. Per the Speed-Pro specs, the piston would be .018" out of the hole @ TDC with a perfect 9.6" deck height. I can't find the photo--probably somewhere on my long-dormant Facebook page--but as I recall the measurement was higher than that, maybe .024"? .004" is a wee bit tight on piston-to-head clearance. Even the de rigeur Fel-Pro 1008 would be tight @ .039" compressed. Digging around the basement, I've got a set of Fel-Pro 521SD gaskets which are .051-.054" once torqued, which is still a wee bit tight but should survive. Unfortunately, those gaskets also effectively kill any increase in compression. Well, shit. You piss with the cock you've got, I guess. I also have a set of Cometic MLS gaskets, but due to expense I didn't even bother checking the specs on those. I'm not putting $150 head gaskets into this pig, especially not at ~10:1 compression.

Since I'm sitting around just drinking coffee and dinking around on the internets, I decided to run some simulations in Engine Analyzer Pro, which is a program I've discussed in the past. It's considered one of the best engine simulators; of course the more parameters you use (head flow numbers, port dimensions, valve angle, timing curve, etc.), the more accurate it gets. I have most of that stuff, or a reasonable representation thereof. At first, I had the flow depression incorrect on the heads and came up with a whopping 545HP @ 6,750RPM. I knew something was wrong. Correcting that issue put me in more-sane territory, in the mid-490s in the mid-six-grand area... then I realized I had too much compression entered (the .028" head gaskets and wrong valve-pocket CCs). After fixing those errors and making sure everything else was entered correctly, EAPro shows the engine peaking at 466HP @ 6,400RPM. It still makes 425HP @ 7,200RPM but it's on the decline. I may not have to spin it as high as expected, which is always nice. On the flip side, the torque really doesn't wake up until 4,600RPM--which means launching will be tricky--but it stays near or above 400lb/ft for 1,800RPM, with a flat peak of 417lb/ft from 5,000-5,400RPM. If I can make it hook, ol' Stan Weiss seems to think it'll do close to 11 flat @ 120+MPH. Not bad for an engine slapped together from other people's leftovers, I suppose.

Just for shits and giggles, I ran one simulation changing nothing but the stroke, from 3.31" to 4.00". Yowza. Peak torque moved down to 4,600RPM, registering a staggering 503lb/ft. The curve is flat as Iowa, too--400+ from 4,000 through 6,100RPM. Horsepower was also at a lower RPM, making 492HP @ 5,600RPM with 450+ from 4,800-6,300RPM. There's your argument for stroker cranks, but it comes with a caveat: those numbers were generated using excellent cylinder heads--i.e., it ain't happening with production, Eddy, etc. It sounds like fun... too bad I won't build one that way.
 
After much concern on my part and further research into the subject, the Fel-Pro 521SDs just aren't thick enough. Well, they could be but from what I've gathered the only real way to find out is to assemble it, run it repeatedly to redline under load, and see if the bearing clearances/rod stretch/heat expansion will allow it. That sounds like an expensive way to discover something wasn't right. You may recall that I've got some experience in that department, with this specific engine no less. :unsure: 😁

I determined that a .060" gasket would be nearly ideal, but that's not an easy gasket to find. OK, it is but it's not an easy gasket to find that doesn't have an 8-11 week lead time at the moment, which is Cometic's current backlog. I don't want to assemble this thing on Thanksgiving or Christmas Day. While looking, I stumbled across a company called Flatout Racing that makes head gaskets. Summit had one set of Flatout's .064"-thick gaskets with a 4.150" bore. Unfortunately, I don't deal with Summit anymore. Plus, since the gasket bore directly affects my precious compression ratio, I wanted a smaller gasket bore if possible.

I called Flatout directly, and got a delightful woman named Candi on the phone. I know better, but wrongly assumed they had a receptionist. They don't, and Candi knows her business very well. I told her what I had and what I thought I wanted. She said that in their experience you want a gasket bore at least .020" larger than the bore, so my 4.080" gasket was not a good idea.
"What's the next size up?"
"We can make them to whatever bore you want. We can do 4.090" no problem. That would be ideal."
The time involved was an immediate concern. I don't want to do this in the snow. "How long does something like this take?"
"If you'd have called before 10 we'd have gotten them shipped to you today. I can put a rush on it and probably still ship them this afternoon Next Day. Would that work?"
Jesus. "No, that's not necessary. If they go out in the next week that's sooner than I'll be able to use them."
"OK, well we can make it happen if you need 'em quickly."
We went through the finalization process and she verified I had a W2 340 with a 4.07" bore and that I wanted .064" RCC* gaskets with coolant passages (they make them either way) with the 4.090" gasket bore. She took my card info, gave me a total, and we were done.
* RCC stands for Rubber-Coated Copper. It's a copper gasket with a thin rubber coating to improve passage sealing.

The phone call alone was one of the best customer-service experiences I've had in a long, long time. Candi made the call a lot of fun in addition to being very capable at her job. Imagine my delight when I got a UPS ship notification and tracking number around 4PM the same day. The gaskets were already in UPS' possession, it wasn't a "shipment arranged" email. She rushed 'em anyhow at no additional charge. I would've had them Friday but for some reason UPS screwed up and sent them to the wrong distribution center (they'll still be here Monday).

Inexpensive? Nope. My total came to about $185, but there's not much else I could do at this point. Pinching nickels has cost me dollars so I'm done screwing around. With service like that, I'm not going to complain one bit. In fact, I saved about $50 over the Cometic MLS gaskets that would've taken two months or more to get here, which weren't available in that bore size anyhow.

From the service standpoint, I can't recommend Flatout highly enough. I've no doubt the gaskets will work well but I'll report back with parts in-hand and in-engine when those events occur. If you need bespoke head gaskets, give Candi a shout.

The new gaskets put my carefully-calculated static compression ratio at exactly 9.80:1. I'd be happier with half a point or more beyond that, but it would require milling the heads. On the flip side, dynamically it puts the engine well into pump-gas territory--even cheap 87 octane (not that I'll use it)--so I can stop using expensive race fuel mixed with pump 91. I could get the dynamic compression up with a different cam (or advancing what I've got), but we'll see how it all shakes out with what's in there now.
 
EAPro shows the engine peaking at 466HP @ 6,400RPM. It still makes 425HP @ 7,200RPM but it's on the decline. I may not have to spin it as high as expected, which is always nice. On the flip side, the torque really doesn't wake up until 4,600RPM--which means launching will be tricky--but it stays near or above 400lb/ft for 1,800RPM, with a flat peak of 417lb/ft from 5,000-5,400RPM.
Yeah man 👍 (y)

While looking, I stumbled across a company called Flatout Racing that makes head gaskets.

Sounds like a company to be remembered.
 
Sounds like a company to be remembered.
The gaskets arrived early this AM, and look really good. They even threw in a couple of go-fast decals and a T-shirt, with a hand-written thank you from Candi. Very nice touch.

I forgot how heavy copper gaskets are. I'm gonna lose a tenth with these things. 😄
 
Water jet cut sheet copper? Or lasered?
Judging by the walk-through-sized machine shown on one of their site pages while I was trying to find your answer, I'm going to say laser-cut. 😁

That machine looks like it could laser-cut a new unibody from an enormous steel billet. I bet it was cheap.
 
feeling dumb and qondering...wont a copper gasket outlast any other gasket material?....ie worth every penny even if you didnt need it as a 1 off?
 
feeling dumb and qondering...wont a copper gasket outlast any other gasket material?....ie worth every penny even if you didnt need it as a 1 off?
I'm not 100% sure about that, to be honest. My only concern would be the lack of a fire ring and the combustion temperature's long-term effect on the edge of the gasket that faces the chamber. All the pros tend to use copper, but they also tend to O-ring the block--neither desired nor necessary on my low-compression wonder dog.

That being said, I have no worries about whether they'll blow. The sheer strength of copper, at least in the short term, is much better than just about anything else except probably MLS. Speaking of MLS, I looked at the specs on the Cometic gaskets I have in the basement. The 340 gaskets are .027" compressed with a 4.080" bore, which is absolutely perfect for the Challenger engine's 4.06" bore. Ironically enough, the 15° W2s I'm using on Agnes would be nearly ideal for that shortblock with those gaskets... too bad @dodgedifferent2 already sold his W2 Six Pack intake.
 
Dear ARP,
When I pay almost $200 for a set of head studs, is it presumptious of me to think their hex-socket ends should be strong enough to overcome the blue Loctite you told me I needed to use on said studs? Just curious, because I had to destroy four of them* to get my cylinder heads off. Sure, I'm partially to blame for having an engine bay so cramped that the headers can't move far enough away for the head to clear the studs while lifting, but c'mon--there was exactly zero load on those studs. The sockets literally rounded before the weak threadlocker let go. The last individial head stud I bought--way back when you boxed my W2 studs wrong but refused to do anything about it--cost me almost $25. I guess I'll have to drop another almost-C-note just to have a complete set of usable studs, huh?
Looking forward to your excuses.

Much love,
Hugh

* "Destroy" is a pretty strong word, but I'm guessing the tensile strength takes a big hit with Vise Grip marks all over the shank and or/threads. Sure, they could be reused but would I trust them to hold a torque spec? Not likely.
 
If all goes well, the Challenger will leave Saturday 11/06 for body and paint. That will include both hoods (R/T and T/A) as well as a front spoiler I picked up for it that is absolutely not a T/A spoiler, and laying the yellow stripes as my '73 had back in '88, sans the "340" cutouts. I have a different plan in that area this go-round.

Also, yesterday's warehouse truck dropped off a brand-new forged steel crank for the Challenger's 340. I have the pistons, rods, rings, and crank ready to ship out for balancing, but I still need to get bearings (the rod caps have dowel pins). I need to call Bill Miller for those; nobody makes dowel-pin bearings for Chrysler small blocks.
 
I love my paint scale. 😁

Goofing around in the garage a little last night, I did some comparisons between factory bits and what's going in the Challenger's 340. The piston/pin assemblies are 220g lighter each, which is a total difference of 1,760g. The BME connecting rods are significantly lighter than OE--300g each. That's another 2,400g, for a total of 4,160g or 4.16kg.

If you're reading while this sitting in a country with a flag on the moon, that means I'll have removed around 9.2 pounds from the rotating/reciprocating weight attached to the crankshaft. Roughly estimated, they'll have to remove another 6 pounds from the crankshaft just to get it in balance. A 340 is a quick-revving engine in the first place; I can't wait to see how quickly one will rev with ~15 less pounds swinging around inside it.
 
Well, the Challenger just rolled away in my trailer along with a significant downpayment on the work to be performed. He found a few things he didn't like and a couple I hadn't noticed (it's probably going to need a LH inner fender up front) but that's why I'm letting a pro handle it.

It's very strange to open the garage door and see a Challenger-sized hole in there, but that gives me some room to maneuver and straighten the place up a bit.
 

SiteLock

SiteLock
Back
Top