The 230 Headerfold project

[chriscase]

Hi Chris!
The only thing I 'd add, and this doesn't pertain to I-6's, only V-8's, is that the Try-Y design was about 21% better on the dyno than the conventional long single tube headers.
Harmonic scavenging, or just less turbulence ???

I would assume you are talking a 21% improvemnt over in my case 44% ? So, 21% of 44% is um 9% of the original 45hp?

Hmmm, I'd guess the biggest next restriction on the 230 would be the siamesed intake ports...

To bad there isn't an overhead valve head that would work on the 230... but I wonder if a slant six head would fit on a long block 251/265? Hmm, slant sixes are definitly NOT siamesed, but I wonder.... Anybody got two head gaskets to compare?

[monkeymissile]

Electronic pics of my Command Car:

Anybody here have a hint on how to recover some photos on a floppy? That durn Sony Mavica has a well known problem with erasing the registry on the disc if you take a pic with a low battery. It's my only shot at getting to some old pics of the command car in question. The free downloaded program didn't help, and may have obliterated whatever was left...

Otherwise, I sold the truck to "Dave in Dorris" waaaay north California. He's a friend of Maui Dave, maybe he can be tracked down to get some new pics? Maybe he scrapped the old headers. Maybe he would sell the truck back to me?

Chris,
bummer about the disk. Sorry, but I'm a Mac guy and they don't use registries. If there's an Apple Store near you and they actually have a Mac with a floppy drive (I haven't seen one in years) , they may be able to read it and pull off the data. Good luck.

[monkeymissile]

MM;
If the pipe is oriented so the hot end is above the cool end, no wick is necessary.

mSS,
extremely interesting, I had not heard of these before so just did a bit or research. I read that if the hot end is down THEN you don't need a wick material since gravity brings the liquid back.
Oddly enough I had thought of something similar, but was afraid that internal pressure would burst the pipe if temps got too hot. Would it be prudent to include some kind of check valve?
It would be pretty simple to make a collar around some of the header pipes and run a heat pipe up to the elbow after the air cleaner.
Better yet, what about a double system:
1) fabricate a custom aluminum air cleaner elbow that has both windings of nichrome wire around it as well as a spiral of copper tubing.
2) the nichrome wire is connected to a separate timer switch on the dash and only heats up for a few minutes before the engine is started to preheat the elbow a bit.
3) when engine starts, the heat pipe system kicks in, scavenging heat from the headers and transferring it to the elbow.
4) the idea is that the electric heat-up system would only be used in extreme cold to help heat air while the heat pipe system comes up to effective temps.

I don't know how quickly a heat pipe system would get up to temp, maybe the electrical back-up isn't necessary.
I am liking this idea more and more.....

[chriscase]

Electronic pics of my Command Car:

Anybody here have a hint on how to recover some photos on a floppy? That durn Sony Mavica has a well known problem with erasing the registry on the disc if you take a pic with a low battery. It's my only shot at getting to some old pics of the command car in question. The free downloaded program didn't help, and may have obliterated whatever was left...

Otherwise, I sold the truck to "Dave in Dorris" waaaay north California. He's a friend of Maui Dave, maybe he can be tracked down to get some new pics? Maybe he scrapped the old headers. Maybe he would sell the truck back to me?

[maineSS]

MM;
As far as heating the intake charge, you have two possibilties- heated intake air, or some type of "hot spot". The first would be easiest with headers- just weld an open stainless box with a fitting for corrugated tube to go to an enclosed air cleaner. the second might be possible with a Heat Pipe. A heat pipe is a tube with a wick and a fluid. The fluid boils off at the hot end and condenses at the cooler end. If the pipe is oriented so the hot end is above the cool end, no wick is necessary. They're extremely effective- in one test a 1" pipe moved an instananeous thermal power of 11,000 watts 36" with difference of 1 deg. A solid copper rod the same length & dia would have been hotter than the sun's surface at one end, and room temp at the other end under the same conditions. To dissipate the input effectively, it would have had to be 36" long and 9 feet in dia, weighng~ 40 tons.

[monkeymissile]

nice!

Chris,
dang dude, that's one info-packed stream-of-consciousness style post! Awesome.
So it sounds like you highly recommend some sort of heat riser. Makes sense although that would be difficult (but not impossible) to do with a typical header design. I plan to install an electric tank heater for those cold NH winters. Maybe I can make something using that principle, maybe something like a coolant-heated carb spacer similar to your F250 setup. Oh man, now the wheels are turning in my head again.....
I fully realize whatever I make won't be "tuned" but I bet it will be a lot less restrictive than the stock setup and more durable too.
I was told that I'd have to pair 1+6, 5+2 and 3+4 to get the best scavenging, but you say 1-2-3 and 4-5-6 works. That certainly would be easier to make and I think I'd have room for dual exhaust too.
I still want to use SS pipe and I can easily anneal it to full soft for easier bending.
15 minutes of measuring got me all the data I needed to quickly create a CAD file for the flange. I'd much rather have the CNC mill be making that while I scratch my head over spaghetti layout. I scored some free foam backer rod that's the same diameter as my pipes and I plan to run 1/8" welding rod down the middle to make prototype "pipes" that I can bend as needed and will hold their shape. I figured that'd be the easiest way to work it all out. I hope I can make each primary from a single length of pipe to minimize cutting and welding.

[MoparNorm]

Hi Chris!
The only thing I 'd add, and this doesn't pertain to I-6's, only V-8's, is that the Try-Y design was about 21% better on the dyno than the conventional long single tube headers.
Harmonic scavenging, or just less turbulence ???

[chriscase]

Some more thoughts:

Making an intake is no different from the exhaust, and only three ports.

You need heat to the intake on anything but WFO operation, like drag racing. Otherwise, the vaporisation of the fuel soaks up the heat, then can't vaporize anymore. You can't burn liquid gas. 5 mpg off road means you vaporise one gallon of gas in 12 minutes. Lots of coldness. Even stock heat risers heat the intake in the summer position. Maybe thin walled intakes will grab some of the heat given off by thin walled exhaust?

From my experience installing headers in the early 80's, Tri-Y designs were for fit, not horsepower. Probably not pertinant to straight six engines, since they would take up more space than a tri-y on a v-8. You'd be talking six-to-three, then three to one. I'd guess that after all the work of building headers, you'll want to pitch that single exhaust system anyhow.

Some of the tri-Y headers came apart in the two-tube section with a simple pair of flanges- 6 bolts required. I think there were different tail-sections for different chassis?

My best luck with gaskets was two layers of the foil-backed stock ones.

I've often wondered if the first step in designing headers ought to be firing it up with only an intake, in the dark. Pay attention to the exhaust flame direction, and build you pipes to keep that momentum going.

Different body styles may require different designs, eh Norm? The set I did were for a 1/2t, 1941. Being a straight frame, not a drop center, and a single speed transfer case, there was plenty of clearance for the two mufflers next to each other, ovals vertical. Think a pair of turbo muffs, but I recall the Auger Powers were some slimmer. I think it would fit under the FFPW?

I did 123-456 splits, with the output flanges in front of the bell housing- there was only enough space under the 'ears' for the two exhaust pipes. I'd guess 2 1/4". 123-456 fires every 120 degrees into each header.

Building a high-rise intake gave me plenty of room for the head pipes to exit horizontaly from the block. That length gave me plenty of lee way to adjust the bends, to maintain somewhat equal length. Plus, it would help with room to gain access to the side covers. But you still won't want to try adjusting the valves while hot and running- feeler gauges and oily welding gloves don't mix well.

Exhaust pipe was something called 'aluminum killed'. I always took that to mean it was alloyed to make it dead soft. Other tubes will be tougher to bend.

On the 428 CJ in my F250, I made an aluminum water heated 'riser' under the carb. Think four 4" lengths of aluminum tube surrounded by a 6" dia piece of aluminum tube. Pipe fittings front and rear for heater hose connections. Longer tubes and water heat made it very smooth on the street. It would peg the chassis dyno at 200hp at only 2800 rpms. 11:1, Doug Thorley tri-y's, Ford C60Z-6250BB cam. I decided on the height of the riser by placing a beer can on the air cleaner and slamming the hood. A truly tuned intake would need runners four feet long. Same for exhaust. So headers are only free-flow designs at 3,000 rpms. Anyways, making a heated spacer for under the carb could be done on a drill press. Use a block of aluminum, and drill passages that cross, and plugging with pipe plugs. Lots of passages, lots of pipe plugs.

Who needs cad/cam, or technical programs? Lessee what parameters are given: tube size is set by the ports, length by chassis, bends by how you have to cram all the spaghetti in there. Plus access to various maintenance requirements. But I guess reverse engineering the flange will help with getting it computer cut.

If you have to use bigger tubing, port match the block with a die grinder. Steps are NFG, either way. To prove that to customers, I would have them blow through a straight spark plug boot. Then turn it around, and blow the other way. Just a little step in there. While you ain't no way ending up with a tuned exhaust, you do want to take advantage of whatever reversion you happen to find.

I'm guessing that the 'bendable paper tubes' mentioned up-thread is like defroster duct? or the intake heat stove stuff? Interesting idea. Something else is nagging at the back of my head... pool hose? vinyl electrical conduit? vacuum cleaner? pretzel dough?... PVC tubing and a heat gun?

Oh well, maybe I'll dive into a set for my FFPW...

[monkeymissile]

coats

MM;
Looks like things are progressing nicely. I saw a photo of a set of "take-apart" headers- wonder if coatings would be a problem in the socket area? It would be interesing to see if you better these numbers:
"When I worked at the Dyno Shop in Santee in '83, I built an intake/headers for my 230. We had an exhaust tubing bender. I had to order out 1 1/2" tubing. Burnt a single flange out of 3/8" plate, mig welded the tubing. With the left tail pipe up and over the drive shaft, three cylinders out each side, Auger Power mufflers, it sounded like a hot Porsche. High-rise intake to make longer runners for better low end, and a small 2-bbl from a 318. I brazed some copper tube to the bottom of the intake runners for fuel-vaporization. It improved power to the ground from 45 hp to 65! Not many trucks I modifyed then for on road use made a 44% improvement!

I suppose you could buy some U-bends, and fabricate the flanges for the face, and make a 3-into-1 header-like collector to a carb base. If you can weld aluminum, maybe one the the injected intakes from a Ford with the long u-bends would give enough material to make a rust proof one? Mine looked like scrap tin after a few months."
This came from Chris Case iin the "Intake Manifolds For the Flathead" thread (http://www.powerwagonadvertiser.com/...ead.php?t=4848). My math shows ~29% improvement (45/65), but it shows that restriction reduction appears to have a big payoff.

mSS,
Somehow I missed this thread. I'd be psyched to get that level of improvement, but think I'd have to beef up the intake/carb system as well and I'm not prepared to go there right now since it ain't broke! If I was so inclined, I'd probably just get a dual carb intake manifold rather than make one.
Unfortunately I don't think I'll be able to spring for any sort of coating, at least for this prototype. I understand how at high temps the metal can oxidize rapidly, but I plan to use stainless pipe with an .140" wall so I think I'll be ok for a while. I hope my headers won't get up to 1200F, that's super toasty!
BTW, I just bought a copy of this book and it has a great section on header design and fabrication.

http://www.amazon.com/Metal-Fabricat...8700652&sr=1-1

[OLD DODGE]

New Math?

The original math was correct at 44%.

[maineSS]

MM;
Looks like things are progressing nicely. I saw a photo of a set of "take-apart" headers- wonder if coatings would be a problem in the socket area? It would be interesing to see if you better these numbers:
"When I worked at the Dyno Shop in Santee in '83, I built an intake/headers for my 230. We had an exhaust tubing bender. I had to order out 1 1/2" tubing. Burnt a single flange out of 3/8" plate, mig welded the tubing. With the left tail pipe up and over the drive shaft, three cylinders out each side, Auger Power mufflers, it sounded like a hot Porsche. High-rise intake to make longer runners for better low end, and a small 2-bbl from a 318. I brazed some copper tube to the bottom of the intake runners for fuel-vaporization. It improved power to the ground from 45 hp to 65! Not many trucks I modifyed then for on road use made a 44% improvement!

I suppose you could buy some U-bends, and fabricate the flanges for the face, and make a 3-into-1 header-like collector to a carb base. If you can weld aluminum, maybe one the the injected intakes from a Ford with the long u-bends would give enough material to make a rust proof one? Mine looked like scrap tin after a few months."
This came from Chris Case iin the "Intake Manifolds For the Flathead" thread (http://www.powerwagonadvertiser.com/...ead.php?t=4848). My math shows ~29% improvement (45/65), but it shows that restriction reduction appears to have a big payoff.

[Irish]

Yep it's on there but I have no clue where it came from. The engine was rebuilt and I'm guessing was installed at that time.
I was talking to an old time hot rodder and he said splitting the manifold was common practice. No big deal he said. Give it a try.

[monkeymissile]

funky!

Irish,
is this manifold on your truck? If so, where did it come from? I would think that this design would work much better than the stock one since exhaust gases from 1-2-3 would have a place to go when using the heat riser valve.
Thanks for sending this, it just gave me another idea......
And yes, I have seen this guy's site. Looks like he went through a couple of options himself!
Have a great holiday!

Justin

[Irish]

Here is something for you to see. After looking around, it seems it is just a factory passenger car exhaust manifold.
Look closely. Dual dumps. Not quite as clean a tubular headers but kinda cool.
And I applaud your header design. Good work!
And I'm sure you seen this fellow's site. Some nice mods on his car. Nice headers from Langdon's.
http://www.50plymouth.com/04-eng/eng.html

[monkeymissile]

progress

cool, thanks for the info.

some minor progress in recent weeks:
- finalized on 1 3/8" primaries and have just located a good source for thick-walled stainless pipe
- scored some free 1 3/8" backer rod to help mockup primary configurations
- I am pretty confident that I'll be going with a 6:2:1 setup for simplicity of construction
- I may try to develop a removeable design for better access to valves, pumps, etc
- Now I want to see if a simple heat riser can also be incorporated