The 230 Headerfold project

[Clint Dixon]

Quick photo of a "Dodge" tractor

I'll lay odds that the tractor in question was produced by the Custom Manufacturing Company. The company moved several times, but produced tractors during approximately the 1947-1951 time frame. They were sold under their own name of "Custom Model B" as well as a host of others, including: Lehr's Big Boy, Wards (Montgomery Wards), and Rockol. They were one of those tractors that the company would produce and put about anyone's name on it who wanted to market and sell it.

They used a Chrysler Industrial 6-cylinder L-head engine. Displacement information does not always agree and varies upon what book or website you find it in. They also used a Dodge truck 5-speed transmission, sometimes with Gyrol Fluid Drive, and a large Dodge truck rear axle. They also used hydraulic steering brakes on the rear axle.

The tractors have long been popular candidates as competition pulling tractors, and why not, they used all of the right parts! It is common to see one or more of these tractors show up at the larger Midwestern antique tractor shows.

I will see if I can find links and photos.

Not a real good photo. Regardless of what name the Custom Company put on them, they all looked the same.

Discussions on tractor forums relate how these Customs could travel at a road speed of 50mph and up. Mike Fleig of Fairfield Iowa (Vintage Power Wagon mechanic fame) told me about one they used on the farm for PTO work. He reached down and opened the governor to get out of the way of a semi truck on the state highway and attained some ridiculous speeds with it.

[Clint Dixon]

"Dodge" tractor

...W.A.- The tractor was described as the "Ram-Tough Custom"- I Googled this and "Dodge Farm Tractor", but didn't find much. The Graham Brothers made a farm tractor with Dodge truck parts and a Continental flathead prior to WWII that was sold thru Sears- don't know if it continued afterwards. It's odd that Dodge would make a tractor from truck parts when they were trying to market the PW for the same purpose. If I find more, I'll post it.

I'll lay odds that the tractor in question was produced by the Custom Manufacturing Company. The company moved several times, but produced tractors during approximately the 1947-1951 time frame. They were sold under their own name of "Custom Model B" as well as a host of others, including: Lehr's Big Boy, Wards (Montgomery Wards), and Rockol. They were one of those tractors that the company would produce and put about anyone's name on it who wanted to market and sell it.

They used a Chrysler Industrial 6-cylinder L-head engine. Displacement information does not always agree and varies upon what book or website you find it in. They also used a Dodge truck 5-speed transmission, sometimes with Gyrol Fluid Drive, and a large Dodge truck rear axle. They also used hydraulic steering brakes on the rear axle.

The tractors have long been popular candidates as competition pulling tractors, and why not, they used all of the right parts! It is common to see one or more of these tractors show up at the larger Midwestern antique tractor shows.

I will see if I can find links and photos.

[chriscase]

Here's the link to the tractor pulling:

http://forum.olskoolrodz.com/showthread.php?t=14538

I guess the "transfer port" he mentions is in the combustion chamber, the area between the bore and the valve/combustion area where the valves and spark plug are located. I you have a spare head handy, you can imagine the restrictive size of that zone. But I'm not sure if I would agree with him re: not bothering to make a better intake manifold because the 'transfer port' is a major restriction. The friction caused by restrictions is cumulative. Lessing the number of choke points has to benefit overall flow- the air charge will be moving faster when it hits that ultimate restriction, ramming more air through the restriciton. I wonder if chamfering the lip of the cylinder at that point would help internal flow, or just make some kind of hot spot on the piston? Maybe you would also need to chamfer the piston there, to prevent the lip of the piston from melting from the hot air charge coming from the combustion zone? Durn primitive flat heads... Perhaps there is a book from the 50's on hot-rodding ?

It's been a while since I've had a spare crank to look at, but I do recall that there was something unusual about the stock oil system. Without even attempting to hit 5,000rpm, Our problem rod seems to be #6. I would suspect that #5 sucks the oil out of #6 when, at higher revs, the crank acts like a centrifugal pump? Anyway, his crank mods don't seem complex or risky, probably worth while at overhaul. Or at least use two upper inserts in each main, to get maximum oil headed towards the rods?

[monkeymissile]

MM- I've also been removing snow from my car tent- it's easier to bounce the roof from the inside with your shovel- snow slides right off. I got hours of healthful exercise clearing my driveway, doorway, and car shelter- from 12-2 AM. Now if I could find some useful idiot to benefit from this exercise while I supervise from indoors.... A hotspot under the casrb vaporizes fuel more effectively than heated intake air. For emission control, engineers found it easier to calibrate carbs by heating all the intake air a uniform temp, rather than trying to chase constantly changing outside temps.

I used a wide shop broom from the inside, I think I had to go out at least 6 times. What a pain, too bad both barbs are full and not strong enough to hold the truck.
Now I'm shifting gears to designing a heated carb riser, but since I have both manifolds off, not sure how high I could make the riser and still have everything fit under the hood.

[Marius]

Here's the link to the tractor pulling:

http://forum.olskoolrodz.com/showthread.php?t=14538

[maineSS]

Chris- Waste your money on PW's- impossible! Look on the bright side- YOU got to waste the money, not some bureaucrat.
My reason for favoring long rods is twofold; (1) the regressive burn characteristic of liquid fuels, (2) better use of the cylinder volume during critical parts of the intake/exhaust periods. The ability of fuel to develop gas pressure depends on the amount of surface area exposed to combustion. As gasoline droplets burn, they costantly decrease in surface area, reducing gas production. Meanwhile, cylinder volume is increasing, causing pressure to drop exponentially. Long rods increase TDC dwell, keeping cylinder volume small and allowing higher average pressure on the piston. Long stroke can't contribute much, because piston speed outruns gas expansion speed fairly quickly- like pushing a car downhill. At first you can push, but very soon you're just hanging on trying to keep up. Long rods also increase BDC dwell, allowing more exhaust blowdown, and the increase in TDC time on the intake stroke aloows more cylinder filling- IF you take advantage of it with high velocity intake flow. I bought a set of 38mm Mikuni's from a Polaris triple snowmobile ("Triple Carbs" thread), but haven't got around to fitting them. The only problem I can see is that carb air velocity may be too low at idle compared with a 2-stroke, which would require a different needle profile, otherwise it should all be good.

MM- I've also been removing snow from my car tent- it's easier to bounce the roof from the inside with your shovel- snow slides right off. I got hours of healthful exercise clearing my driveway, doorway, and car shelter- from 12-2 AM. Now if I could find some useful idiot to benefit from this exercise while I supervise from indoors.... A hotspot under the casrb vaporizes fuel more effectively than heated intake air. For emission control, engineers found it easier to calibrate carbs by heating all the intake air a uniform temp, rather than trying to chase constantly changing outside temps.

W.A.- The tractor was described as the "Ram-Tough Custom"- I Googled this and "Dodge Farm Tractor", but didn't find much. The Graham Brothers made a farm tractor with Dodge truck parts and a Continental flathead prior to WWII that was sold thru Sears- don't know if it continued afterwards. It's odd that Dodge would make a tractor from truck parts when they were trying to market the PW for the same purpose. If I find more, I'll post it.

[MoparNorm]

A motor is nothing more than an air pump, albeit explosive air.
Getting the burned air out more efficiently will be helpful and very noticeable.
Getting the air in, compressed and out, is of course much more efficient, but exhaust is better than nothing.....

[monkeymissile]

1/2 battle

The set i did were on a 1/2t, 1941. I was never concerned about the hood height. Thanks for mentioning it, may be a limitation on my '53 FFPW. M37/43s would really limit rise.

I had assumed you would change carbs and air cleaner system. Changing manifolds is only half the battle, with that undersized carb and restrictive filter and ducting. Hmmm, maybe a set of three side draft Mikunis off of a Japanese motorcycle would fill the bill? 32mm would be about 1 1/4" . Or would that look too high tech on that old iron? On the '41 I ran a 2bbl from a '70's 318 van- Stromberg? The GM Monojet one bbl is good, the Duo-jet two bbl Okay also. The small Holley/Weber progressive two bbl (5200?) might get the best milage. Like on Pintos. Holleys have always done a good job of atomizing fuel.

Heating the cooler air after evaporation of gas would be more efficient- more heat to transfer faster with the bigger temperature differential of the hot water vs the colder air after the evaporation of the gas.

Chris,
I realize that I really should also rework the intake side of the system to take full advantage of upgrades. That's going to have to happen later if at all. Do you foresee any major problems if I only upgrade the exhaust and leave the stock carb setup? Again, not really looking to hotrod this 54 year old beast, just make it more reliable.....Thanks!

Justin

[monkeymissile]

my bad

MonkeyMssile, your drawing in post #7 only gives one diameter for a port, 1.25". In your latest post you say exhausts are 1 3/8" Are the intakes 1.25 and the exhausts 1.375?

Chris,
I goofed, all ports are 1.25" diameter. I wrote 1.375" becuase that's the pipe ID I plan to use based on some header calculations. Too much holiday candy has got my brain all frazzled!
Thanks for catching that.

Justin

[chriscase]

MonkeyMssile, your drawing in post #7 only gives one diameter for a port, 1.25". In your latest post you say exhausts are 1 3/8" Are the intakes 1.25 and the exhausts 1.375?

[chriscase]

The set i did were on a 1/2t, 1941. I was never concerned about the hood height. Thanks for mentioning it, may be a limitation on my '53 FFPW. M37/43s would really limit rise.

I had assumed you would change carbs and air cleaner system. Changing manifolds is only half the battle, with that undersized carb and restrictive filter and ducting. Hmmm, maybe a set of three side draft Mikunis off of a Japanese motorcycle would fill the bill? 32mm would be about 1 1/4" . Or would that look too high tech on that old iron? On the '41 I ran a 2bbl from a '70's 318 van- Stromberg? The GM Monojet one bbl is good, the Duo-jet two bbl Okay also. The small Holley/Weber progressive two bbl (5200?) might get the best milage. Like on Pintos. Holleys have always done a good job of atomizing fuel.

Heating the cooler air after evaporation of gas would be more efficient- more heat to transfer faster with the bigger temperature differential of the hot water vs the colder air after the evaporation of the gas.

[monkeymissile]

Stainless would be nice, but Jeez! About $400 for SS parts from Classic.

I used the typical 'crush bender' for the usual exhaust pipe. Like the cheapest headers are made. Obviously, it worked well. But did get crusty in time. Any pics I would have would have been after 20 years- you boys would lose all respect for me if you saw the state they were in 20 years after I made them. I think I had sprayed them once upon a time with gold header paint. Tacky, but functional.

ETA: I probably used 1 1/2" pipe. I doubt if I found 1 3/8" locally, or that we had dies for it. Tubing is by OD, which would make 1 1/2" 16ga tube 1 3/8 ID. How little are the ports in the block?

Maybe I'll eBay a hydraulic bender and go into business? Dyno Shop payed $2500 for theirs, used, in 1982. I wonder what Harbor Freight has?

ETA: I see Harbor freight has a 12t bender for $70. Anybody try one like that on exhaust pipe? Yaknow, the vertical hydraulic jack that you hand pump. It would only need to pump up a couple dozen 90 degree bends, if you didn't screw up any pipes...

I sourced some fairly inexpensive thick-walled SS pipe and I hope to have access to a mandrel-type bender. Exhaust ports are 1 3/8" and the 1 1/2" pipe works out perfectly.

[monkeymissile]

MM;
it would be fun to run a chassis dyno test on your rig after intake/exhaust improvement, and see what it gains.

Finally, a "hot spot" works better than intake air heating for vaporization, heat pipes work very quickly once their vaporization point is reached, but the best thing for power production is not to heat incoming air at all. I did some "cold vapor" experimentation on an Escort in the 80's and was able to get 60 MPG when everything worked (not often, with that system).

mSS,
dyno testing not likely in my case. I would've thought heating incoming air would be better. So is heating the air/gas mix better?
Thanks.

How about this snow, eh? I'm not too far SW from Biddeford and we got almost 24" in these last pair of storms.

Justin

[monkeymissile]

Monkey, is it too late for a 'before' dyno test?

Chris,
I'd have no idea of how to even begin to get it dyno'd and I'd have to repair the cracked stock manifold first anyway. That would make quite the photo though, a 7300lb M43 up on a dyno!

justin

[monkeymissile]

Mu consciousness is steadily streaming:

How about an intake/riser/heater/collector? From one block of aluminum, three holes on the bottom to line up with the required three intake runners, one big hole on top to suit the carb, made from a block large enough to allow drilling lots of interconnecting holes for running hot water through? The three holes would make lots more surface area to conduct the heat from the riser to the air charge.

Chris,
this is the direction I think I am headed. I am not sure how much higher I can raise the carb before hitting underside of hood so I thought maybe making a piece that fit between air cleaner elbow and top of carb instead. Also thought it might be better to heat the air before it entered carb. Thoughts?

Just got through shoveling snow off the roof of my truck's temporary shelter for the 6th time in 3 days. Almost 24" in two storms. Nice!

Justin