Sell me on your favorite big block V8.

GIRTHQUAKE said:

yupididit said:

Y'all believe anything huh? 

Not without lots of research- besides, if I truly wanted to go fast I'd just go LS. This on the other hand, is for being loud and obnoxious which is apart of Maslow's Heierarchy of needs, along with sloppy top from a goth chick and tax evasion.

(Seriously tho, it's gonna depend on what appears and who actually responds to my messages, I'm holding out for the caddy).

Goth chick.

That reminds me of a great memory.  I was coming home for a holiday weekend back in the early '00's.  Driving my '94 Formula Firebird way too fast.  Or at least I thought so.  And there were some fairly tight bends on I64 where I was for 90 plus mph.  But I kept seeing this black '60 Chevy getting closer and closer.  And you can always tell a '60 because of its distinctive looks.  So there's this one curve coming up and I calculate that if I take it at 95 then the Chevy will have to slow.  Because 1960 cars won't do curves.  So I do.  And it's scary.  But just as I get to the apex, '60 Chevy floors it and passes me!  And as it goes by I catch a glimpse of Goth Chick in the driver's seat grinning at me as she sails past with smoke steaming out of both pipes.  
 

True story and the Chevy had a big block....well um...let's say it did to stay on topic.

In reply to A 401 CJ :

In today's Barn Finds there is a 1959 Cadillac with the engine swapped for a Chevy 454. 
        Hmmmm I wonder if they really fully considered a V12 :-)

In reply to frenchyd :

59 Cadillac made more hp than a Jag V12.  Just saying.  We've already convered how the 454 is better than the Jag V12.  Wait for the net vs. gross rant everyone.

In reply to Stampie :

Really?  Didn't you see the little smiley face?  
    Go back and check 

In reply to frenchyd :

Doesn't mean I can't try and poke the bear more.

In reply to Stampie :

Well I suppose if you keep trying to defend an obsolete old pushrod V8  you do have to run around with a stick.  
 That's OK. You're forgiven. 

frenchyd said:

In reply to GIRTHQUAKE :

 The forged EN40 steel crankshaft weighs 78.8 pounds compared to 21-23 pounds for a Chevy 350 (31 for a 454)   

You fantasize and make these things up. 

Instead of typing a lame ass excuse to try and save face, take the time instead to walk into a machine shop and heft some crankshafts. 

I try to take the high road and ignore things without making a scene but you time and again simply fabricate E36 M3 to see if you can fool the unknowing into thinking you're some sort of guru or something.  If you're gonna spew make believe, go join Facebook and wear yourself out posting over there. That kind of E36 M3 is the norm on Facebook groups. 

(For those readers who don't know what I'm referencing, the weights he posted for Chevy cranks are roughly 50% lower than actual)

In reply to Cousin_Eddie (Forum Supporter) :

Most Chevy crankshafts are cast. Big and small block. The weights I quoted are for cast cranks.  If you weigh the aftermarket forging often used to rebuild an engine yes they get heavier. 
       My point is every Jaguar crankshaft is forged from EN40 steel and after all machine work is done they are then hardened.  That's important because not all machine shops are able to grind a hardened crankshaft. In many cases it won't be needed because it is so hard. 
    

Circle track rulebook says stock SBC crankshaft should be 54lbs.

Pontiac Armasteel crankshafts weigh 66-70lbs, a BBC should be close to this.

Pontiac shaved 24lbs off of their standard crankshaft when they made the 301/265 crankshaft. They did this by lopping of half of the counterweights and reducing the journal diameter. It still weighs 42 lbs.

Hardened cranks are only surface hardened, otherwise they'd be brittle. Usually about 0.010 deep.

It's really not a big deal for an engine machine shop. That's exactly why it's a crankshaft grinder and not a crankshaft lathe.

In reply to ShawnG :

Big journals will do that to you.

Not that Pontiacs were good at revving... supposedly the stock rods would let go much over 5000.

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

Yup, but everything is over by 4500 rpm so it's all a wash anyway.

In reply to ShawnG :

Heh, caught me before my edit.

Something interesting is that Ford made the small inline sixes 4 mains at first, then went to 7 mains because they could reduce the counterweights more than the additional iron in the block for the three additional main saddles, to save a couple cents worth of iron per engine.

Then they reverted to four mains for reduced friction when fuel economy became important.

This is also why they went to 50oz imbalance cranks on the 5.0 vs. the 28oz cranks in the 302... save a few cents of iron per crankshaft.

Pete. (l33t FS) said:

*snip*

This is also why they went to 50oz imbalance cranks on the 5.0 vs. the 28oz cranks in the 302... save a few cents of iron per crankshaft.

But when you make 500,000 of something a few cents matters.

And BACK to the favorite big block.

Pencil me in for a Ford 460.

Pete. (l33t FS) said:

In reply to ShawnG :

Heh, caught me before my edit.

 

Something interesting is that Ford made the small inline sixes 4 mains at first, then went to 7 mains because they could reduce the counterweights more than the additional iron in the block for the three additional main saddles, to save a couple cents worth of iron per engine.

Then they reverted to four mains for reduced friction when fuel economy became important.

 

This is also why they went to 50oz imbalance cranks on the 5.0 vs. the 28oz cranks in the 302... save a few cents of iron per crankshaft.

Pete.  
There is a Jaguar machinist in Australia who because a V12 is inherently balanced removes all the counterweights.  Creditable or not? 

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

The factory Super Duty rods are forged. You can take them higher but there really isn't a need.

Those engines are designed to make all their power down low, Pontiacs are street engines, lots of torque and a wide power band that finishes up around 4500 RPM.  Chevy guys have a hard time wrapping their heads around the fact that you don't need to beat it like a redheaded stepchild to make power.

The 303, Ram Air V they designed for Trans-Am and the 366 for NASCAR are screamers but they're not really for street use anyway.

Really, I like anything that burns gas or oil.

Fun bit of trivia. When they brought out the Super Duty, factory workers stole enough forged connecting rods that it held up production of the SD engines.

I still like the Caddy 500.  

I like big cubes.

frenchyd said:

Pete. (l33t FS) said:

In reply to ShawnG :

Heh, caught me before my edit.

 

Something interesting is that Ford made the small inline sixes 4 mains at first, then went to 7 mains because they could reduce the counterweights more than the additional iron in the block for the three additional main saddles, to save a couple cents worth of iron per engine.

Then they reverted to four mains for reduced friction when fuel economy became important.

 

This is also why they went to 50oz imbalance cranks on the 5.0 vs. the 28oz cranks in the 302... save a few cents of iron per crankshaft.

Pete.  
There is a Jaguar machinist in Australia who because a V12 is inherently balanced removes all the counterweights.  Creditable or not? 

Wholly uncreditable.  "Perfect balance" is true, in terms of firing impulses and end to end rocking motions and other stuff. (It's true of any inline six with a 153624 firing order, and by corollary, any V12 or W18 or asterisk-30 that shares crank journals) But you still need the counterweights to offset rod and piston weight.

I have absolutely no idea how to find it, now, but there was an interesting book about the development of a certain Rolls-Royce engine's crankshaft, from the 30s or somesuch.  Might have been a six, might have been a twelve.  The crankshaft originally had no counterweights.  As power and engine speed increased, they kept incrementally running into issues, and the end results involved full counterweighting.

Any inline engine can be "balanced" with no counterweights at all, but the main bearing loads get crazy-high because you're balancing one piston with a piston 4 inches away, putting a bending load on the crank across the mains.

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

Thank you Pete.  Very clear and understandable answer.  My intuition had said no but I couldn't find reasoning to refute.  Thanks 

wheels777 said:

The OP asked to be sold on your favorite big block V8.  Why is so much time being wasted on the Jag V12?  It's not a big block.  It's not a V8.  It's not a good engine for transplants.  It's too expensive with upgrades.  It has limited transmission options.  

Before arguing, please re-read the thread title and the OPs initial post.  

William Lyons designed the V12 to go out to 500+ cu in which clearly puts it in big block territory.  Right now there are engines out over 9 liter (550 cu in )     Aside from that, stock it makes more power than a Chevy 454.  
As for transplants, hot rodders not enslaved to Chevy, have used it for decades. It's compact, only 22 inches wide at the exhaust manifolds. And 32 inches long. It uses a GMTurbo 400 tranny stock  and adapts to manual transmissions easier than adapting the 4200 to the Turbo 400. 
    Modifications to increase power abound  like any engine.  Hot rodders  have increased power from dual 4 barrel holley's manifolds. To Turbo's, to superchargers. Isky and Crower both offer several regrinds for the camshafts. As does my local cam grinder.  Ford changed later versions to use more modern coil on plug and crank fired ignition.  So it's even an American Big Block post 1989 

Explain to me please how can a 348 be a big block and a 350 or even a 400 be a small block ?  

In reply to frenchyd :

My good Sir,

Please stop. 

-Respectfully, not-management 

frenchyd said:

Explain to me please how can a 348 be a big block and a 350 or even a 400 be a small block ?  

Deck height and bore spacing.  It's literally block dimensions.

In reply to wheels777 :

When you're talking aftermarket blocks, big block or small block is just a way to identify what engine family it most resembles 

I have heard of 8.2" deck height big block architecture engines, to get better intake runner lengths/plenum size in Pro Stock.  Note that a deck height this low is smaller than the Chevy bellhousing pattern...

In reply to wheels777 :

IMO once you deviate from production bore center, engine family doesn't matter.  You're using one-off cam cores and crank forgings and gaskets and everything else, the whole engine is more inspired-by than based-on.

Sure you might use production based accessory drives from X,  but that doesn't necessarily mean anything.  Fords could use Chevy rockers, GM's distributor adapter for LS engines uses a Ford distributor...