The Wolseley Forum

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

7 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> C-series article on ARonline, interesting bit about gallery inlet manifold
webmonster
post 15 May 2014, 08:42
Post #1


Wolseley Fanatic
Group Icon

Group: Morris Member
Posts: 1,976
Joined: 28-September 10
From: Taranaki
Member No.: 922
Proud citizen of: nz


I was reading an article on the C-series engine at ARonline:
http://www.aronline.co.uk/blogs/cars/mg-ca...gines-c-series/

There is an interesting view about the 'dreaded' gallery inlet manifold not being quite as bad as often made out, but I found comment #2 really interesting:

"...There was a modification (from Derrington or Downton, I think)which used short bolts in the bottom of the gallery, accessed through larger holes in the top, which were then blanked off. This left the gallery almost unrestricted improving performance & economy. The valve sizes are considered too big for the 2639 & are shrouded by the small bore, but worked well on the 2912, so the engine was probably designed initially to have the larger capacity."

So, can anyone confirm that Derrington or similar modified the head in this way? It's really clever!
Go to the top of the page
PMEmail Poster  
+Quote Post
Danny
post 15 May 2014, 11:48
Post #2


Wolseley Fanatic
*******

Group: Forum Member
Posts: 1,910
Joined: 4-February 11
From: Sydney
Member No.: 1,742
Proud citizen of: au


I have posted this link a few times on various Healey forums and the MGE-MGC forum over the last couple of years and am still amazed at the lack of knowledge about original C series development.

Danny
Go to the top of the page
PMEmail Poster  
+Quote Post
webmonster
post 16 May 2014, 23:40
Post #3


Wolseley Fanatic
Group Icon

Group: Morris Member
Posts: 1,976
Joined: 28-September 10
From: Taranaki
Member No.: 922
Proud citizen of: nz


QUOTE (Danny @ 15 May 2014, 23:48 ) *
I have posted this link a few times on various Healey forums and the MGE-MGC forum over the last couple of years and am still amazed at the lack of knowledge about original C series development.

I wouldn't be too surprised if Healey & MGC bods didn't know about early C-series development; the majority of their vehicles have 12-port heads and earlier gallery manifold heads would be dismissed out of hand as 'a bit rubbish'.

As for us lowly Morris/Austin/Wolseley owners... I think there's not a lot of info in the same way that there is for A and B series engines. Well, I haven't found it... (IMG:http://www.wolseleyforum.com/style_emoticons/default/mellow.gif)

Interesting to read that the 6/110 engine was 'secretly' de-rated from 120bhp to 110 or so whilst the Healey 3000 had a couple of revisions in quick succession.

Certainly the idea of replacing the cylinder head studs with bolts (or very short studs) makes me think that there is much better potential in our gallery heads that I had ever thought, without the expense of a 12-port head+new manifolds and inconvenience of making new brackets etc. for the accelerator & choke etc.

Rather than outright power/speed, I'd be interested in getting the fuel/air mixture evened out between each cylinder; surely the largest shortcoming of the gallery head as it stands.
However, it would be interesting to compare a 12-port head to a modified gallery head for non-racing use.
Go to the top of the page
PMEmail Poster  
+Quote Post
webmonster
post 1 Dec 2014, 09:54
Post #4


Wolseley Fanatic
Group Icon

Group: Morris Member
Posts: 1,976
Joined: 28-September 10
From: Taranaki
Member No.: 922
Proud citizen of: nz


Well, I've got me a 'big log' inlet manifold head.
I'll take the valves and guides out soon and get it cleaned up and crack tested - hopefully all is well...

...then I can start looking at how to best get short studs and clear the inlet manifold.

Any suggestions and ideas gratefully accepted!

Current thoughts/worries:
- is the water jacket close to the holes where the studs go through under the manifold?
- The standard cylinder head nuts are fairly tall. Are there shorter ones available that would take 75ft/lbs OK, or can I fashion a bolt instead of a stud/nut set up?
Go to the top of the page
PMEmail Poster  
+Quote Post
Fred Oldham
post 8 Dec 2014, 12:22
Post #5


Wolseley Fanatic
Group Icon

Group: WOC Member
Posts: 1,518
Joined: 16-August 14
From: Sheffield
Member No.: 19,302
Proud citizen of: en


Interesting stuff guys. Without going overboard on cash, I would like another 20-30 bhp, just to improve the acceleration. I suspect that the cheapest way to achieve this would be to fit a later series engine, rather than mod the original. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/offtopic.gif) Yes, we are starting to digress somewhat. I'll concentrate on making it stop a lot easier for the time being. Can't stop me dreaming about spinning the back wheels though!! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)
Go to the top of the page
PMEmail Poster  
+Quote Post
webmonster
post 10 Dec 2014, 08:56
Post #6


Wolseley Fanatic
Group Icon

Group: Morris Member
Posts: 1,976
Joined: 28-September 10
From: Taranaki
Member No.: 922
Proud citizen of: nz


QUOTE (Fred Oldham @ 9 Dec 2014, 01:22 ) *
Interesting stuff guys. Without going overboard on cash, I would like another 20-30 bhp, just to improve the acceleration. I suspect that the cheapest way to achieve this would be to fit a later series engine, rather than mod the original. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/offtopic.gif) Yes, we are starting to digress somewhat. I'll concentrate on making it stop a lot easier for the time being. Can't stop me dreaming about spinning the back wheels though!! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)


What vehicle have you got with the 2.6L engine, Fred?

I'd probably agree that fitting a 3 litre would be the cheapest. You can't beat cubic inches, and all the 3-litre engines have twin SUs as standard.

However, finding a nice 3-litre engine that needs no work might not be easy.

My cars all have the original engine blocks (matching numbers), so I wanted to retain them, and I'm curious about sensible 'period mods'.

Spinning the back wheels... 1st gear has chipped a tooth, so I'm a bit ginger about taking off at present. Such ungentlemanly behaviour, tsk (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)
Go to the top of the page
PMEmail Poster  
+Quote Post
webmonster
post 10 Dec 2014, 09:12
Post #7


Wolseley Fanatic
Group Icon

Group: Morris Member
Posts: 1,976
Joined: 28-September 10
From: Taranaki
Member No.: 922
Proud citizen of: nz


After a bit of advice I got the valves out of the 'big log' cylinder head I've acquired and I dropped it off at the engine workshop today to be hot-tanked and crack tested.

I briefly talked to Ralph about my idea to fit short studs and modify the head accordingly. He didn't think I was crackers, which was encouraging (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Even better, he told me that they used to do something similar with early Holden engines and he made it all sound quite easy to do engineering-wise.
Go to the top of the page
PMEmail Poster  
+Quote Post
Fred Oldham
post 11 Dec 2014, 17:13
Post #8


Wolseley Fanatic
Group Icon

Group: WOC Member
Posts: 1,518
Joined: 16-August 14
From: Sheffield
Member No.: 19,302
Proud citizen of: en


Getting more and more interesting Webmonster. My car is a 1955 Austin A90. The first Westminster. Like yours, it's got all matching numbers, so if did do any swops,all the original bits would be carefully stored for possible re-fitting.

Looking at the 'log' from the front, it appears that end end could be machined out and the whole gallery line-bored to clean up the casting as well as the short stud/bolt modification. Be interesting to hear your engineer friends opinion and the costs involved. I assume that twin carbs are a simple fit to further improve the breathing. While the head is being worked on, are you going to have it skimmed to increase the c/r a bit?
Go to the top of the page
PMEmail Poster  
+Quote Post
webmonster
post 12 Dec 2014, 04:53
Post #9


Wolseley Fanatic
Group Icon

Group: Morris Member
Posts: 1,976
Joined: 28-September 10
From: Taranaki
Member No.: 922
Proud citizen of: nz


QUOTE (Fred Oldham @ 12 Dec 2014, 06:13 ) *
Getting more and more interesting Webmonster. My car is a 1955 Austin A90. The first Westminster. Like yours, it's got all matching numbers, so if did do any swops,all the original bits would be carefully stored for possible re-fitting.

The only catch with storing original engines and gearboxes to one side is that C-series ones are rather large and heavy!
QUOTE
Looking at the 'log' from the front, it appears that end end could be machined out and the whole gallery line-bored to clean up the casting as well as the short stud/bolt modification. Be interesting to hear your engineer friends opinion and the costs involved.

You probably could line bore the original manifold, but two things come to mind:
1. The later 'big log' manifolds are probably wider anyway
2. Boring out too much material might weaken matters. Probably not a problem if the cylinder head studs are not pulling down on the top of the manifold.

QUOTE
I assume that twin carbs are a simple fit to further improve the breathing. While the head is being worked on, are you going to have it skimmed to increase the c/r a bit?

Twin SUs from a 6/99 or 6/110 fitted and only one choke control bracket needed modifying for my Isis. I also moved the front fuel bowl around to the front of the car (facing the radiator) a la 6/90.
It's probably safe to say that the single 1.5" SU and extra inlet manifold with hot-spot was restrictive.
The A105 got 102bhp from 8.3:1 and twin SUs, didn't it? Pretty sure its camshaft was the same as 6/90, A90, Isis etc.
Isis with 8.3:1 gets 90bhp according to the factory data.

I will certainly be looking at what extra work can be done to the cylinder head. Hardened exhaust valve seats for sure and any other 'best bang for the buck' work as advised by the engineer and you lot (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)
Will be considering :
the overall c/r and evening up of each combustion chamber, removal of sharp edges, 3-angle cut for seats and your idea for polishing the inside of the manifold. Not sure if any port work would make much of a difference.
Go to the top of the page
PMEmail Poster  
+Quote Post
Nishka
post 12 Dec 2014, 09:52
Post #10


Administrator
Group Icon

Group: Root Admin
Posts: 7,280
Joined: 13-November 08
From: Wolseleyland near the Guild City of Preston, Lancashire
Member No.: 2
Proud citizen of: gb


While I have the books out looking for camshaft timing for a 1500, I might as well give it for the 'big Farinas', so:

6/90 - Inlet valve 5/45, Exhaust valve 40/10, Duration 230, Lift .3145", Inlet valve dia 1 11/16" (42.87mm), Exhaust valve dia 1 27/32" (36.00mm)

6/99 - Inlet valve 5/45, Exhaust valve 40/10, Duration 230, Lift .314", Inlet valve dia 1 11/16" (42.87mm), Exhaust valve dia 1 27/32" (36.00mm)

6/110 - Inlet valve 5/45, Exhaust valve 51/21, Duration 230/252, Lift .314", Inlet valve dia 1 11/16" (42.87mm), Exhaust valve dia 1 27/32" (36.00mm)

So a slight increase in compression and a longer duration of exhaust timing on the 6/110, would account for a large part of the power output increase it would seem.

Nishka
Go to the top of the page
PMEmail Poster  
+Quote Post
Danny
post 12 Dec 2014, 11:31
Post #11


Wolseley Fanatic
*******

Group: Forum Member
Posts: 1,910
Joined: 4-February 11
From: Sydney
Member No.: 1,742
Proud citizen of: au


The 6/110 actually had two cam grinds during it's run. The first was as Nishka states above and then;
Inlet TDC/50, Exhaust 35/15.

The early timing above (5/45, 40/10) was sort of a standard BMC duration and appeared on A, B, and C Series engines.

Danny

PS I think A Series, better check that.

This post has been edited by Danny: 12 Dec 2014, 11:31
Go to the top of the page
PMEmail Poster  
+Quote Post
Fred Oldham
post 12 Dec 2014, 12:37
Post #12


Wolseley Fanatic
Group Icon

Group: WOC Member
Posts: 1,518
Joined: 16-August 14
From: Sheffield
Member No.: 19,302
Proud citizen of: en


So, a bit of head work and a hotter cam grind should yield some useful horse-power without sacrificing reliability. It would probably give better mpg with the increased efficiency. I'm liking this more and more. Just need to find a spare engine, or at least a decent head. Anybody got one for sale?
Go to the top of the page
PMEmail Poster  
+Quote Post
webmonster
post 12 Dec 2014, 21:57
Post #13


Wolseley Fanatic
Group Icon

Group: Morris Member
Posts: 1,976
Joined: 28-September 10
From: Taranaki
Member No.: 922
Proud citizen of: nz


QUOTE (Fred Oldham @ 13 Dec 2014, 01:37 ) *
So, a bit of head work and a hotter cam grind should yield some useful horse-power without sacrificing reliability. It would probably give better mpg with the increased efficiency. I'm liking this more and more. Just need to find a spare engine, or at least a decent head. Anybody got one for sale?

Better mpg would be great - my last tank gave me just 17mpg, but to be fair that was just tootling around town; short trips and little chance to even warm up properly.

A bit of head work will certainly help, not sure about changing the cam profile from standard.
I've got a hotter cam in my Isis engine - specs unknown.
I'd be interested to know if the 6/110 cam profiles would make a good difference in our 2.6 litre engines. From what I've read the valves are considered to be a bit too big for the 2.6, but good for the 3-litre.

The standard exhaust manifolds should be OK too - Healeys appear to have used identical ones until a slight change on the very last Healeys. From what I can gather tubular extractors make a bigger difference at higher rpm.

If your piston rings and bottom end are in good condition then getting hold of a 6/110 cylinder head and twin SUs should be OK. I'd strongly suggest joining a Wolseley car club. I've been a member of the NZ WCC for ages... even though I've never owned a Wolseley! (yet..)
For whatever reason Wolseley clubs (in NZ and Australia at least) have much better parts schemes and sheds than many other car clubs. They're always keen to have members help out in the sheds, and that is where you can find cool stuff - whilst tidying and sorting.

Go to the top of the page
PMEmail Poster  
+Quote Post
Fred Oldham
post 13 Dec 2014, 18:08
Post #14


Wolseley Fanatic
Group Icon

Group: WOC Member
Posts: 1,518
Joined: 16-August 14
From: Sheffield
Member No.: 19,302
Proud citizen of: en


I have joined the WOC even though, like you, I don't and never have owned a Wolseley. My very first car was a ZA Magnette. What a pile of rust that was! I learned a lot from the endless catalogue of disasters it suffered. It was basically a Wolseley in the disguise of a sports car. It was the only car I've ever seen with cooling fins on the rear shock absorbers!
Go to the top of the page
PMEmail Poster  
+Quote Post
Penguin45
post 13 Dec 2014, 18:38
Post #15


Administrator
Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 6,657
Joined: 26-November 08
From: Soviet Republic of West Yorkshire
Member No.: 56
Proud citizen of: aq


You can have A LOT OF FUN WITH A MAGNETTE. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

P45.
Go to the top of the page
PM  
+Quote Post
webmonster
post 29 Jan 2015, 09:01
Post #16


Wolseley Fanatic
Group Icon

Group: Morris Member
Posts: 1,976
Joined: 28-September 10
From: Taranaki
Member No.: 922
Proud citizen of: nz


Slight set back with the C-series head project. The one I grabbed turns out to have a crack so we can't use it for fitting to a car.

Ralph and I decided that it would be interesting to cut it in half where one of the studs goes through the inlet log.

This way we can see how much metal can be milled out to try and get the stud & nut as low as possible - preferably completely out of the way of the air flow!
Go to the top of the page
PMEmail Poster  
+Quote Post
Fred Oldham
post 29 Jan 2015, 10:00
Post #17


Wolseley Fanatic
Group Icon

Group: WOC Member
Posts: 1,518
Joined: 16-August 14
From: Sheffield
Member No.: 19,302
Proud citizen of: en


Unless it's too late, have you investigated a repair? There are some clever welders out there.
If you do chop it, post up lots of pictures please.
Go to the top of the page
PMEmail Poster  
+Quote Post
matthew.h
post 30 Jan 2015, 06:03
Post #18


Wolseley Fanatic
*******

Group: Forum Member
Posts: 466
Joined: 24-June 12
From: Chch, New Zealand
Member No.: 9,890
Proud citizen of: nz


Depends where the crack is. Often it would be near a water passage or near a Valve If you got heaps of heads you wouldn't worry about repairs unless it's only one in 20 the world
Go to the top of the page
PMEmail Poster  
+Quote Post
webmonster
post 10 May 2015, 08:57
Post #19


Wolseley Fanatic
Group Icon

Group: Morris Member
Posts: 1,976
Joined: 28-September 10
From: Taranaki
Member No.: 922
Proud citizen of: nz


I had an interesting chat to another Isis owner in NZ some months ago about cylinder head modifications. He told me he still had a cyl. head from an Isis many years ago that was quite heavily modified - the log manifold was removed and triple SUs fitted!
The original owner was able to burn rubber in 2nd gear, apparently (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif) ...and this on a 2.6L block!

He sent me a few photos of this still extant head:
Attached File  isis_head_003.JPG ( 250.34K ) Number of downloads: 0


This is probably further than I am prepared to go although this mod looks better than I imagined it would.

I am still thinking about keeping the log manifold but shortening the studs; this way I can keep all the standard twin SU linkages.
Go to the top of the page
PMEmail Poster  
+Quote Post
Danny
post 10 May 2015, 10:00
Post #20


Wolseley Fanatic
*******

Group: Forum Member
Posts: 1,910
Joined: 4-February 11
From: Sydney
Member No.: 1,742
Proud citizen of: au


Very interesting that Robert, I wonder what happened to the fabbed up inlet manifold?

Danny
Go to the top of the page
PMEmail Poster  
+Quote Post

7 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18th January 2018 - 10:08