Author Topic: The revival of 650143R, 1970 with TS.  (Read 34491 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline GavinT

  • Super Member
  • *******
  • Joined: Oct 2016
  • Location: Queensland, Oz
  • Posts: 1,165
Re: The revival of 650143R, 1970 with TS.
« Reply #540 on: Friday,August 18, 2023, 01:17:38 AM »
Thanks, JB.
Do we know who tried this - a forum member, perhaps? I'd really like to know the 'why' of it.

I measured the area of the Banks duct inlet and it's larger than a 3 inch (75mm) round duct commonly used here on big V8's putting out much greater horsepower. My working assumption is that should provide sufficient flow.

Having read the original NASA paper on these ducts, I expect the Banks implementation looks to not conform in multiple aspects - one side isn't vertical, the corners aren't sharply defined etc. And that's before we consider proportions or the fact that it's curved.

Nevertheless, my consideration is merely access to fresh ambient air, not a duct induced air flow rate above zero. Has anyone tested the flow rate of a Banks duct. A wool tufts exercise would be sufficient, I reckon.

Anyway, I'm not wedded to this, so if it's is all wrong, I'd really like to know - much better to find out now before investing time and resources.

Offline jbcollier

  • Super Member
  • *******
  • Joined: Nov 2013
  • Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
  • Posts: 5,827
Re: The revival of 650143R, 1970 with TS.
« Reply #541 on: Friday,August 18, 2023, 08:03:07 AM »
It was a member of this forum or the groups.io list.  Can’t remember which.  They fit the 47 ducts and plumbed one to the carbs.  Fine at idle but very obviously restricted at speed.  Might work if you plumbed both ducts to the carbs. YMMV

Offline RoddyMac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Joined: Nov 2013
  • Location: Vancouver, BC
  • Posts: 527
Re: The revival of 650143R, 1970 with TS.
« Reply #542 on: Friday,August 18, 2023, 09:21:10 AM »
JB,
It was SwiftDB4 who did the real world test:

Quote
Yeah, that maybe, JB.
Can you recall who the lister was?

That was me. I hooked up 3" hose from my Banks NACA duct to my sealed carb box (twin 45DCOE's feeding a Zetec). Tested on a track day power was down drastically from no ducting and individual air horns with foam socks.
NACA ducts are only effective if they're in the airstream. That far back on the body they actually get less airflow at speed.
Installed 47 style snorkel with sealed connection to air box. 500 rpm more in top gear on track day.
I agree snorkels are not aesthetically pleasing. I only use my snorkel for track days.

He posted this on Mecky's thread.

Offline jbcollier

  • Super Member
  • *******
  • Joined: Nov 2013
  • Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
  • Posts: 5,827
Re: The revival of 650143R, 1970 with TS.
« Reply #543 on: Friday,August 18, 2023, 09:53:36 AM »
Thanks

Offline Richard48Y

  • Super Member
  • *******
  • Joined: Oct 2020
  • Location: No. Nevada
  • Posts: 1,539
Re: The revival of 650143R, 1970 with TS.
« Reply #544 on: Saturday,August 19, 2023, 12:46:43 AM »
Tried to give up on the 6mm stem valves and just order the 7mm from Europe.
I know I saw them available a few months ago but cannot locate them now.
Either Mecaparts dropped them or have hidden them on their site.
Maybe it was another site I saw them on, in any case I cannot locate them now.
Guidance appreciated!

Offline jbcollier

  • Super Member
  • *******
  • Joined: Nov 2013
  • Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
  • Posts: 5,827

Offline Richard48Y

  • Super Member
  • *******
  • Joined: Oct 2020
  • Location: No. Nevada
  • Posts: 1,539
Re: The revival of 650143R, 1970 with TS.
« Reply #546 on: Saturday,August 19, 2023, 09:22:30 AM »
Maybe I saw the 7mm stems at another source.
Wishing I could recall who it was.

EDIT: As usual the easy way out is to just contact Salv Sacco.
He has them, originally "Hot-Rod" Ford cross-flow parts.
He may be a bit more expensive, I do not begrudge him a fair profit as the lack of language barrier and assurance the parts will be right is very much worth it.
41.25mm Intake is probably close enough.
Should still be a bit lighter and may let me complete the Beehive spring quest.
« Last Edit: Saturday,August 19, 2023, 09:39:27 AM by Richard48Y »

Offline GavinT

  • Super Member
  • *******
  • Joined: Oct 2016
  • Location: Queensland, Oz
  • Posts: 1,165
Re: The revival of 650143R, 1970 with TS.
« Reply #547 on: Saturday,August 19, 2023, 07:45:34 PM »
JB,
It was SwiftDB4 who did the real world test:


He posted this on Mecky's thread.

Thanks, Rod.
That's all rather disappointing so a revisit to the drawing board is probably in order . . and to dig out my copy of 'Tune to Win'.

Offline Richard48Y

  • Super Member
  • *******
  • Joined: Oct 2020
  • Location: No. Nevada
  • Posts: 1,539
Re: The revival of 650143R, 1970 with TS.
« Reply #548 on: Saturday,August 19, 2023, 09:50:22 PM »
I have been taking measurements and perusing specs.
From what I can see Beehive springs can be done fairly easily but will require a custom bottom spring seat.
The Beehive which appears to be a good match is shorter than stock springs.
The disappointment is that seat pressures are still nearly the same as stock, I am hoping for lighter.
If the spring pressures are nearly identical it kind of makes the exercise fruitless unless the resonance issue is greatly decreased over original dual springs.
They may be closer to my goal at only 10mm open?
I will have to make a call about that.

https://www.supertechperformance.com/p61511-beehive-valve-springs
Seat Pressure: 67 @ 35.5 (A little short, but that leaves room for custom seats).
Open Pressure: 182 @ 11.5 (I will have to see what this would be at 10mm).
Max Lift: 13.00mm (I only need 10mm and even the racers max at around 12mm).
Coil Bind: 21.50mm
OutSpr.ID: 19.70mm (Too small to clear the head boss, use the seat spacer to fix).
InnSpr.OD: 23.20mm
InnSpr.ID: 15.20mm
Rate: 10 (This may be the deal breaker, I really need to know my desired rate).

There are a couple more springs that may work but they are even stiffer than these.
There is at least one with a better length but the head might have to be modified.

Yes, I am probably making life unnecessarily difficult for myself with this exercise.  :confused:

Offline Richard48Y

  • Super Member
  • *******
  • Joined: Oct 2020
  • Location: No. Nevada
  • Posts: 1,539
Re: The revival of 650143R, 1970 with TS.
« Reply #549 on: Friday,August 25, 2023, 05:03:39 PM »
Drop back and punt?

Roller rockers are "possible" but difficult.
And a very long lead time from Now.
So it looks like I am sending my original rockers and shafts to Rockers Unlimited.
They will stress relieve, balance, and rebuild them.
The shafts will be hard chromed and center-less ground.
The tips and balls will get an MOS2 coating for reduced friction.
Not as trick as rollers but much faster and far less expensive.
Should still be a nice upgrade.

Now I'm wondering about the MOS2 for cam faces.
And of course cryo treat, as there seems to be some debate as to the longevity of billet cams.
« Last Edit: Friday,August 25, 2023, 05:21:24 PM by Richard48Y »

Offline Richard48Y

  • Super Member
  • *******
  • Joined: Oct 2020
  • Location: No. Nevada
  • Posts: 1,539
Re: The revival of 650143R, 1970 with TS.
« Reply #550 on: Friday,August 25, 2023, 06:56:05 PM »
(Grumble) I wish parts suppliers could be just a little more informative.
I've ponied up for a billet Cat Cams sport cam.
I would like to know if it is gun drilled as they mention on their site, has it been Nitrided or some other surface treatment?
Maybe more detail will be included with the instructions supplied with the cam.
Assuming there ARE some instructions.
I hate waiting on parts!

Offline Richard48Y

  • Super Member
  • *******
  • Joined: Oct 2020
  • Location: No. Nevada
  • Posts: 1,539
Re: The revival of 650143R, 1970 with TS.
« Reply #551 on: Saturday,August 26, 2023, 04:22:03 PM »
Transfer tubes, price and shipping.  :huh:
I've made an inquiry with Lotus Supplies as even with the exchange rate creeping up they appear to be half the price of domestically supplied.
Final expense depends on shipping cost.
At around $700-$800 a set I can buy my own dies for $220 and just bend my own pair.
Or several, I already have a nice tube bender.
Really trying to not add to the side project list.
If I am bending my own, go Aluminum or Stainless?
Aluminum may be a little harder to bend without flattening, might have to try the sand trick.

Offline Richard48Y

  • Super Member
  • *******
  • Joined: Oct 2020
  • Location: No. Nevada
  • Posts: 1,539
Re: The revival of 650143R, 1970 with TS.
« Reply #552 on: Monday,August 28, 2023, 08:31:34 PM »
.065" wall for stainless transfer tubes?

Got tracking info stating my new cam will be here Wednesday.
Hoping the package may contain more information regards surface treatment.

Salv Sacco is back from holiday so the 7mm stem valve quest should conclude soon.

Offline TurboFource

  • Super Member
  • *******
  • Joined: Sep 2019
  • Location: Maryland
  • Posts: 1,946
Re: The revival of 650143R, 1970 with TS.
« Reply #553 on: Tuesday,August 29, 2023, 03:07:40 AM »
You could buy mandrel bends and save the cost of the dies and weld them together, I did this with aluminum….
The more I do the more I find I need to do....

Offline Richard48Y

  • Super Member
  • *******
  • Joined: Oct 2020
  • Location: No. Nevada
  • Posts: 1,539
Re: The revival of 650143R, 1970 with TS.
« Reply #554 on: Wednesday,August 30, 2023, 10:48:00 PM »
Today was almost productive.  ;)

New cam from Cat Cams arrived, looks very nice as a $550.00 (Over $650.00 with shipping!) billet cam should.
It is gun-drilled for weight reduction and to allow pressurized oiling of the lifters via ports in the heel, unless blocked off.
A new distributor drive is included.
It has some type of black coating applied but I have no idea what it may be.
Shiny, not dull, so doubt it is Parkerizing.
No additional information beyond what is posted at their site was included.

Got a suggestion from Salv Sacco to run BMC A Series valve springs as the weight savings is substantial, 57 grammes for spring and cap, standard Renault is 125 grammes.
Of course being the extremist I am I have found Ti. retainers to bring the reciprocating mass down even further. >:D
The Ti. price is ridiculous, but I am so far into this build now it seems comparatively cheap.  :o
This does require some modification of the head so not to be taken lightly.

I have also decided that I am buying a valve spring tester.
I have at least three options for the TS head now but need to test them.
1. The too easy path, reuse my old springs, they may be fine, or one or more may have lost some tension while the car sat. Ti. retainers are available.
2. Pursue the Beehive Spring option. Since they do not publish specs at my mere 10mm lift I would need a sample to do my own testing. The smaller retainers probably make Ti. moot.
3. The BMC A Series conversion, which Salve has used before. Ti. retainers are available.

It is probably worth mentioning that I will be using 9/32" (7.14375mm) stem valves.
The valves come from the English Ford "Kent Cross-Flow" hot-rod world.
This should be a little lighter, less expensive, and more reliable than almost any other available custom valves.
The small increase in flow will also be welcome.
I did talk to Ferrea, call it $80.00 per valve and the intake blanks are out of stock anyway.

So I'm going a bit extreme but WILL be setting a rev limiter to curb my over-enthusiasm.
Much of this is an effort to preserve the spendy cam and prevent valve float that I suspect parked the car in the past.