Thread: tin-man has some questions, it begins.....

Tweet

Originally Posted by Bug

Hay John,

Chevys are easier and cheaper to work on. You can build a Chevy engine for half of what it costs to build a Ford and have the same power (or more).

Don't worry about going over to the dark side. Over here on CHR I think that we are all on the dark side.

Well, a half truth. The chevy will be cheaper for certain, easier can be a relative term,IMHO!

And we are not all on the dark side. Some exercise maturity and patience and are tolerant of the misguided!

My error on the scrub angle deal, should have said scrub line. While Roger is correct for the variations he noted, the scrub line basically involves an imaginary line from the bottom of a deflated tire/wheel to other inflated tires. No portion of the vehicle should be at or below that line so as to come in contact with the pavement to cause loss of control (and of course the additional damage).

As for the Chevy engine thing, it's been beat to death even moreso in rods than in the Cobra world. I'll put more of a historic twist on the story to better frame the argument. If you were a rodder in the early '50s when the flathead Ford V8 was still reigning supreme (though fading a little to the newly minted overhead engines from Olds, Caddy, and Mopar) and you and your bench racing buddies sat down to design the "ideal" engine you'd stipulate things like; compact outer dimensions that would allow fitment in most of the more popular bodies (generally pre-war Ford) without being forced to do major surgery to frame, firewall, rad placement, hoods, etc. Also you'd put the sump at the rear as that would clear the steering and front crossmember configurations on a majority of cars preferred by rodders. You'd make it with the starter on the right side rather than conflicting with the steering box. You'd make it lighter than the flathead because less weight is like free horsepower. And you'd make it so it would produce more horsepower with modest (read lower cost) upgrades. And you'd make it in huge relative numbers so it was, again, cheap and readily available. In other words you'd build the small block Chev. I doubt that Ed Cole and his team of engineers specifically targeted the hot rod community in their design parameters (other than maybe the design elements that supported "easy" horsepower increases).........but for whatever reason it worked that way. It was like a revelation to the rodders of the time. A stock wrecking yard pull out SBC had as much or more horsepower than a built flathead..............and once the yards started getting wrecks, cheaper (and lighter). The hot rod aftermarket jumped on them right away and discovered how readily they responded to traditional hot rod power tweaks, and opened the door to new ones. The SBC grabbed a foothold.

Meanwhile the OHV engine that Ford designed around the same time, the Y block, wasn't nearly as hot rodder friendly, and earned the scorn of all but the most blue oval loyal. It took Ford another 7 or so years to come up with their own small block which is a very good engine. But in standard wrecking yard take out form in many hot rod engine compartments it required modifications to accomodate additional length due to a water pump longer than the Chev, and often, a change in oil pump pickup and sump relocation. There's more to the story, but that should give you an idea. Momentum was on the side of the SBC, just as it had been on the flathead Ford before it. The true blue Ford guys have all manner of rejoinders to this, but they all involve jumping through extra hoops. Which is fine if you don't mind being stubborn, pig headed, and irrational.

In the Cobra replica world there's an opposite convention. Since none of the early advantages of the SBC apply, there's no historical rationalisation, nor any physical restrictions that support NOT using the Ford engine, big or small block. And since it's replicating an historical, iconic car, again the zeitgeist demands a Ford. Put a Chev engine in and it kills the market value (except in Europe for some strange reasion). Anyway, that's my story and I'm stickin' with it, ...................watch for incoming.

Roger, Thanks I will do that. Here is another observation, I have seen builds advertised for sale with an exterior gas tank along where the rear bumper is. Does this present a safety issue, say in Arizona where the summers are brutal? My concern runs along the line of with a half full tank there would be a lot of gas sloshing around and fumes would build up and when taking the cap off the tank, whoosh, extreme hazard. Are my concerns valid?

Cheers, John, AKA, tin-man

“.....why would somebody ever even consider putting a Chevy engine in a Ford? .....and then the fight began.....”


Ahhh Yes, the inevitable engine discussion.



The power train is a BIG factor in hot rods and subject to a lot of individual tastes, preferences, and passions. Hot Rodders go to great lengths to try to make their car stand out from the crowd and it’s something that becomes more difficult to do when you pick a popular body style that might have 3-4 examples of at the same show or cruise.

There are couple things I would take into consideration when looking for/building a rod. The first would be do I want a closed or open/semi open engine compartment. The second would be the general theme of the car....is it going the high tech route or a more traditional/conventional direction. Especially in an open engine compartment the engine of a hot rod makes as much of a statement as the body itself

As far as brand preference, hot rods start out as pretty much a blank sheet of paper. Although it would probably not be MY first choice the SB Chevy has a place in non-chevy hot rod bodies. Generally speaking when Hot Rodding really took off in the post WWII years, Hot Rodders used the old the old formula of grab a high performance (relatively speaking) engine from a late model wreck and stuff it into an old light weight body. Cadillac, Chrysler and Buick engines were popular as they were some of the first modern post war overhead valve engines, but when the SB Chevy appeared in great quantities starting in 1955 it became a natural due to it’s small size, light weight and availability/price (there were a lot more chevys out there to be wrecked than there were Cadillacs). . A first gen small block Chevy in a Ford Hot Rod is pretty much an accepted fact of life and generally speaking not really looked down upon........it’s just been done to death.

. As far as the high tech cars the more modern and lower production the engine the better. High performance versions of Fords Modular engines, Chryslers 3rd Gen Hemis and of course GMs LS engines go well in these types of cars and properly installed and set up provide miles of trouble free driving.

I personally think going the traditional route provides a few more options, such as Ford Big and Small blocks, Chrysler Hemi and Poly engines, Buick nail heads, Cadillac engines yes and even the Small, BB and W motor Chevy’s. Regardless of other peoples thoughts, the old engines properly set up can provide as many trouble free driving miles as their modern counterparts.

Regardless of whether the car is going high tech or traditional it draws more attention if the engine is not considered cookie cutter.

Just a word of caution here, when looking at the engines I would definitely stay away from engines that have been dressed to look like something it’s not, fake blowers, injector stacks on anything or Hemi, Ardun and the new trend Oldsmobile valve covers on small block Chevys. They are easy to pick out and generally not highly thought of.

I just looked at the thread and see Uncle Bob beat me to a few points (AGAIN ) but I’m too lazy to retype this.


.

This is all good information and I thank you Mike and everyone else for the time and patience you are giving me with what most on this site would consider as pretty obvious questions. That said, please indulge me with a couple more since my selection of the type of hot rod I want to either build or buy is rapidly coming to fruition. Decidedly the choice has narrowed to the 32 Ford 3 Window Coup, the 32 Ford 3 Window Hi Boy Coup, or the 32 Roadster. The picture below represents what currently rings my chimes in this respect and my questions are, 1), what would be the best engine to put in each model: BBF or SBF? Decidedly I like the idea of having a visual engine, thus the question and 2), about coil over shocks. I have seen various pictures of both, the coils over look better in my opinion and I am wondering from a performance point of view what are the benefits of with, or without, this application?

BTW the picture below is in the public domain and is offered for sale and I am using it as reference only. Cheers, John, AKA, tin-man

View image in gallery

Originally Posted by tin-man

This is all good information and I thank you Mike and everyone else for the time and patience you are giving me with what most on this site would consider as pretty obvious questions. That said, please indulge me with a couple more since my selection of the type of hot rod I want to either build or buy is rapidly coming to fruition. Decidedly the choice has narrowed to the 32 Ford 3 Window Coup, the 32 Ford 3 Window Hi Boy Coup, or the 32 Roadster. The picture below represents what currently rings my chimes in this respect and my questions are, 1), what would be the best engine to put in each model: BBF or SBF? Decidedly I like the idea of having a visual engine, thus the question and 2), about coil over shocks. I have seen various pictures of both, the coils over look better in my opinion and I am wondering from a performance point of view what are the benefits of with, or without, this application?

BTW the picture below is in the public domain and is offered for sale and I am using it as reference only. Cheers, John, AKA, tin-man

View image in gallery

JMHO, But everything is WRONG about this car.
As stated, engine angle, tried to get the early look with the wheels and tires, but missed it , as wrong proportion for 50's style.
Note, no radius rods or hairpins,meaning (UGLY) independemt front suspension
The list go's on and on.
Do yer homework tinman.

I'll take a shot at the gas tank question. The short answer is it would not be a problem as long as it's properly vented and not overfilled. The tank can either be vented thru a vented cap or a vent line to a filter of some type. Overfilling any gas tank in the AZ summer will definately end up putting gas on the ground.


.

You guys are the best and I really appreciate the advice, so here are a few more questions and I do hope I am not wearing my welcome thin, here you go:

Are the 32/33 3 window hi boys considered a safe car with a BB in them? What is the average wheel base of these models and would they be subject to the trailing throttle spin outs like the Cobra is? Most of the builds I have been seeing for sale have an automatic transmission, is this just a convenience or is there a reason for this application?

OK that's it, its coming up 11:20pm Tuesday night and I gotta go to work in the morning. Hey, I only got 39 more days to go and I get to hang up my cap for the last time. Light the fire, put on the coffee, tie a yellow ribbon round the cactus, cuz this old fart is headin' home........ yaba-daba-doooooooooooo.

Cheers, tin-man

Amc 343,390,401

Like Mike says, any gas tank is going to see the ambient heat, so it has to be properly vented. Of course the tank between the frame rails gets direct radiant heat, but with proper venting it's not going to be any additional risk. For me it's more of an appearance issue. I like the cleaner look of bobbed frame rails in back (no, it's not my plane) as opposed to the OEM tank, especially on a highboy.
'33 & Funk 019a.jpg

Apart from appearance, the OEM gas tank is totally exposed in a rear collision, but others will argue that having it in the trunk is worse. Mine's trunk mounted, but I did put a solid bulkhead between the trunk & passenger area to at least try to delay the fire path....

Originally Posted by rspears

Like Mike says, any gas tank is going to see the ambient heat, so it has to be properly vented. Of course the tank between the frame rails gets direct radiant heat, but with proper venting it's not going to be any additional risk. For me it's more of an appearance issue. I like the cleaner look of bobbed frame rails in back (no, it's not my plane) as opposed to the OEM tank, especially on a highboy.
Attachment 53288

Apart from appearance, the OEM gas tank is totally exposed in a rear collision, but others will argue that having it in the trunk is worse. Mine's trunk mounted, but I did put a solid bulkhead between the trunk & passenger area to at least try to delay the fire path....

Roger, Good points, I had not considered a rear end collision. The picture above: frigging awesome, now that be the type of fine lookin' piece of workmanship that's ringing my chimes. I saw a few of these at the Barrett Jackson event in Scottsdale and was hooked. The field is narrowing. Cheers, tin-man

oops, sorry, double post.

Originally Posted by gassersrule_196

Amc 343,390,401

OK, I give up, this is code right, you're testing me right?? Is it American Motors Corporation model 343, 390, 401 being the case, I don't have a clue what they are. I remember the Pacer however but somehow I cannot see that as being the stuff of hot rod material. Cheers, tin-man

I think the '32 is 106" while the '33/'34 is 112??

The 1933 revision of the car was substantial, especially considering how important the 1932 change had been. For its second year, the Ford's wheelbase was stretched from 106 in (2692 mm) to 112 in (2845 mm) on a new crossmember frame.

My '33 is pushing 425HP in a SBF stroker - can't say about trailing throttle spinouts as I've not pushed it hard on a road course. My steering rate is a bit slow with the Vega box & small wheel, so it's a cruiser & straight line fun car for me. Mine's a 5spd stick, just what I wanted. Automatics are easier to build - no clutch linkage/hydraulics, and no worries getting three pedals in the small floor area once the larger tranny hump is in place. Plus lots of people simply like the convenience of an automatic. I like playing with the gears.

Tin-man

I would like to add to Bob's reasons for a chev engine over the ford---It had a lot to do with transmissions as Chev you could get 4 speed and ford didn't use it til 62--

The 33-34 car is 6 inches longer than 32 and mostly thats cabin room

Take a look at my gallery here(and on ClubCobra) of the builds there and also on here under latest uploaded pics???

Many details between 32,33,34 builds will be similar with the longer cars having more cabin/trunk room
Check out the fuel tanks and side exhaust(cobra type side pipes on the 32)-that 32 has 540 cid BBC with computer controlled 4l80 trans--