Piston reversal.

[andypdq]

Mike, are you disputing the fact that the Ford flathead V8 did have an offset crank relative to the centreline of the cylinders? There's evidence aplenty that it did.

[andypdq]

Matt, I have a 4.6 Rover V8, i'm waiting to drop on a good 4.0 engine at the right price, the plan is to use the 4.0 pistons and with the 4.6 crank and rods, which will give a higher CR than standard. I'll reverse the pistons and see what happens. I have an Edelbrock performer inlet manifold, an Edelbrock 500 cfm carb, a jet and metering rod tuning kit, and a wideband AFR system to monitor the AFR.

As for the transit, the combustion bowls are central, have yet to measure pin offset.

It's interesting to experiment.

[andypdq]

Offset crank Ford Flathead V8, which Mike said was impossible:

https://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/att ... g.2789549/

Similar significant evidence for offset of A series 1275 would be welcome....

[Mike]

You’re right, well done. You’d better get moving with your experiment then, it’ll be sure to show massive gains

[andypdq]

The interesting thing with this is is increased mechanical advantage vs reduced dwell time at high cylinder pressure. dt/dx.

V8 first in my SD1,

[andypdq]

Hi Matt, I very much doubt whether BL would have invested money in tooling up to offset the crank, small ends, maybe

Why would they not invest in tooling when the 1275 was a completely new block and would have been tooled pretty much from scratch anyway?

Anyway Andy... how are you getting on with your build? Any results yet?

The A+ was engineered and first produced in 1980 I believe, the 1275 was first produced in 1964, was the crank offset tor those 16 years? Was it offset after 1980. I'll happily eat my words if it was. Evidence please.

[MinorMatt]

Hi Matt, I very much doubt whether BL would have invested money in tooling up to offset the crank, small ends, maybe

Why would they not invest in tooling when the 1275 was a completely new block and would have been tooled pretty much from scratch anyway?

Anyway Andy... how are you getting on with your build? Any results yet?

The A+ was engineered and first produced in 1980 I believe, the 1275 was first produced in 1964, was the crank offset tor those 16 years? Was it offset after 1980. I'll happily eat my words if it was. Evidence please.

You have read something that isn't in that comment Andy.... Please provide evidence where I said the crank was offset?

I was referring to your comment about tooling costs, not whether there was an offset or not. They had to invest in new tooling for the 1275 block anyway, so why would tooling costs stop them from offsetting? The A+ block is a different casting, but I can't see any reason why the machining ops would be different to the earlier engines...

[andypdq]

Point accepted, I don't think it's likely that they altered the crank offset either. I believe the 1275 was a bit of a stretch anyway, regarding bore size, head gaskets and clearance for block waterways etc.

[andypdq]

I might add, my experience of the A series in my student days was a 1098 Minor, a tower of power relative to a gutless worn out 1969 850 Mini van which I owned for a short time, purchased for the princely sum of £40, they kept going with a bit of cajoling, despite knocking big ends on start up and almost no compression, a very resilient engine. Fords of the day wouldn't start on a damp winter morning... If the battery was knackered in your Minor, you hit it with the starting handle, they started really easily. The A series was a champ.

[V184]

I might add, my experience of the A series in my student days was a 1098 Minor, a tower of power relative to a gutless worn out 1969 850 Mini van which I owned for a short time, purchased for the princely sum of £40, they kept going with a bit of cajoling, despite knocking big ends on start up and almost no compression, a very resilient engine. Fords of the day wouldn't start on a damp winter morning... If the battery was knackered in your Minor, you hit it with the starting handle, they started really easily. The A series was a champ.

[andypdq]

V184 what's your problem? In in reasonable order they were great engines, even when knackered they would still start and run and get you there, despite reduced power, huge clearances etc. A good engine, you can't get round to fixing it because you're using it, a bad engine you can't use it because it needs fixing. The A series was the former.

Perhaps a few less and and a little more elaboration of your thoughts would help.

[V184]

V184 what's your problem? In in reasonable order they were great engines, even when knackered they would still start and run and get you there, despite reduced power, huge clearances etc. A good engine, you can't get round to fixing it because you're using it, a bad engine you can't use it because it needs fixing. The A series was the former.

Perhaps a few less and and a little more elaboration of your thoughts would help.

Before my time Andrew just found your description a bit sad hows the bosch pump conversion going was you up at G20 demo ing it ?

[andypdq]

As a totally skint student in 1981, any way to access cheap motorised transport was welcome, whatever it took. BL models being the cheapest, hence the A series. They were remarkably resilient engines, even though at 19 I had little experience, I was surprised that anything so worn out would actually run and get you there.

Very little measured compression, and very little power, knocking big ends on start up, rattling timing chains, but they still started on the button, damp mornings or not, the big ends stopped knocking if you made sure there was enough 20/50 in the sump and you had at least a small amount of oil pressure.

Second class transport beats first class walking.

Greta says she doesn't like remaps, will exceed particulate emissions on the NS door post sticker, ref Paul's posts.

[andypdq]

Another point, the A series was always very economical even when worn out, performance would drop but fuel economy remained about the same, IF they had the Skinner Union carburettor. My mum had an Austin A40 with a fixed jet zenith carb and the 950 engine, always used more fuel than the 1098 Minor with the SU. My Dad fitted an inlet manifold and SU carb to the A40 and instant noticeable increase in economy, with no noticeable decrease in performance.

[MinorMatt]

Another point, the A series was always very economical even when worn out, performance would drop but fuel economy remained about the same, IF they had the Skinner Union carburettor. My mum had an Austin A40 with a fixed jet zenith carb and the 950 engine, always used more fuel than the 1098 Minor with the SU. My Dad fitted an inlet manifold and SU carb to the A40 and instant noticeable increase in economy, with no noticeable decrease in performance.

SU Carbs were owned by Morris since the 1920s - hence why the Austin didn't have one but the Morris did! It then became part of BL and was finally killed in the mid 1990s before Burlen took over a few years later