Peter J.Heizmann

Frank...you did not slight me. Just wanted to be sure you received the information.<P>After studying your photo closer, notice the "dimples" in the center of the recessed depressions. These are commonly used today. The dimples provide a drill bit starting location. They provide more accurate drilling than if 8 separate cores were placed, which would also add to the labor to produce the casting.<P>Overall, a foundry could mount your pattern and run some parts rather easily. Do you have the coreboxes that go with it? <P>Regards, Peter J.

oldford<P>This is a working pattern for sand casting process. It would be screwed onto a board, or, in foundry parlance, a plate.<P>The pattern, when mounted on a plate, is then used to make an impression in the molding sand.<P>In the center of the top row, you will see that lug raised oval section with what appears to be fins going left & right. This is the "sprue" location. The molder pours the iron into the mold at this location. Picture a child's model kit where one would break/cut off the good piece to use and discard the stems, or, "gate" in foundry parlance. <P>At the bottom, there appear to be to posts that, from what I can make out, appear to be coreprint. The core is a separate baked sand piece that is in the shape of the desired hole.<P>To produce the internal dimensions desired, a core would be placed in the mold. The iron, when poured, flows around the cores to create the desired wall thicknesses or hole dimensions. It is hard to understand without seeing the process, but, the core disintegrates about 3-5 seconds after the iron flows around it. Though the casting is still fluid and very hot, this is enough time for the iron to "chill" enough to create the internal dimensions, etc.<P>Also, if you take measurements of overall size, cored hole, etc., and compare them to an actual casting, one will find that the pattern is oversized. Patterns have a metal shrink allowance of .125" per foot built into the pattern in order to allow for the cast iron "shrinking" when cooling. If it is a ductile iron part, it will not shrink as this is a mild steel.<P>Hope I did not confuse anyone, but, it is rather hard to describe.<P>Regards, Peter J. <p>[ 04-28-2002: Message edited by: Peter J Heizmann ]

Critterpainter...I had a few additional thoughts concerning the magnaflux. Looks like you are getting good advice concerning sources on the left coast.<P>However, if you wind up going the magnaflux route to check the severity of the cracks, put the blue dye penetrant onto the cracked area and let it sit overnight, then, spray the magnaflux on for the reading the next day. This will give you a better reading.<P>Regards,<P>Peter J.

Go with what L I stellite suggested about magnafluxing the cracks. It is by far the most economical as compared to full x-ray.<P>Casting cracks are a shot in the dark. Depending on the wall thickness, they could be almost superficial and last forever, on the other hand, they could be ready to break through. The distance from the crack to a heavier section would offer more support for the cracked area to last longer, but, who wants to gamble. <P>My vote is hands down to get the magnaflux, especially on such a prestigous vehicle. In our foundries, we have hand-held units that could check this fairly resonable and quickly. That way you would have data to go forward and see how they could be repaired.<P>Call around to test labs, or, metallurgical services in your area.<P>Regards, Peter J. <P>[ 04-23-2002: Message edited by: Peter J Heizmann ]<p>[ 04-23-2002: Message edited by: Peter J Heizmann ]

Mike: How are you?<P>I just put a dedal on the rear door of my trailer for 2 reasons: 1) Of course, pride in the AACA, however, 2) To hopefully get some respect from the tailgating jerks out there. They may back off a liitle assuming there is an old car inside. <P>I have another for security: A magnetic sign "Hospital Waste Disposal Unit" that goes over the AACA logo when I park in unsecure areas. Just kidding, but, thinking about it. (Nuclear Waste may get me in trouble with the Feds, plus, 98% of the car thieves wouldn't know what it meant.<P>Regards, Peter J. <p>[ 04-18-2002: Message edited by: Peter J Heizmann ]

Tin Lizzy: Go to the home page and browse AACA Products. You can order one from National Headquarters. They come in various colors.<P>Regards, Peter J.

Thank you, Dayton for the update.<P>A bunch of us here in Pennsylvania are planning to attend and look forward to it.<P>Regards, Peter J.

Mike. I went through Hershey on business today & stopped at HQ for a few minutes. Folks there said the Richmond Meet info should be going out early-to-midddle of next week.<P>Earl. Thanks for the Baltimore/Rt.301 input. That's the one I want to try and sell to the convoy folks, however, Winchester may accomodate folks coming from the west. We'll decide in time.<P>Regards, Peter. <P>This is reminding me of the old comedy: "How the West was Won". There was the great scene where, in the fog, the Indians came from the North, the Cavalry from the South, the Wagon Train from the East and a gigantic collision occurred in the fog. (Wheels flying, head dresses, cannons, etc.)<P>In our case, that's why I drive a Triumph...just slide under all the wrecked trailers, dust off, and keep on going. <p>[ 04-11-2002: Message edited by: Peter J Heizmann ]

Hi, Mike. How are you?<P>Normally, I receive the info 4-6 weeks before the meet. At least that has been my experience in our neck of PA.<P>Regards, Peter J.

Ruth:<P>For what it is worth, I had a fire in a 1972 Chevy Nova SS, which, fried the harness.<P>I recall that the agent asked if I saw a flash of flame. I did. The hood was up when I started the car and could see the top of the engine. The flash came from the carbs, or so it appeared with the limited visibility I had.<P>They paid for the damage to include the harness.<P>The unknown due to limited visibility is "did the flash actually come from the carbs, or, apppeared to have..."?<P>Just my experience.<P>Regards, Peter.

Dayton, thank you for your input. Greatly appreciated. <P>Regards, Peter J.

Dave: The 1st TR6 was red as is the current '72. (See if they repainted it blue. I know what you are getting at.) The '72 is like night and day. Never let me down.<P>Regards, Peter.

Bill, hope all is well. No offense on the Leyland cars. You have to be short in stature (I'm 5'6") not to mention a little crazy for driving one.<P>Sal G: Like you, I was stuck with station wagons. I'm the 2nd oldest of 8, so a sedan was non-existent in our household. Based on this, wagons always grab my attention at shows. My Dad's best was a rather rare-today 1956 Pontiac 2-door Safari wagon.<P>Relative to what Bill said, I was envious of the people that had a "Daddy-bought" sportscar. I could afford a '60 VW Beetle. Made up my mind when the TR-6 came out in '69 that I was going to own one someday. I graduated H.S. in 1966, one year of college, found myself in Vietnam from 6/67 until 12/70, finished college in 1973.<P>On a 3 day pass in Saigon, a bunch of us were walking down Tu-Do Street (main drag of sin). I was shocked to see a Leyland Office.<BR>Went in for info. In short, ordered a 1970 TR6, of which, the deal was so much was taken out of my pay until E.T.S. (estimated time of separation). They shipped the car to the Port of Baltimore in 5/70. I extended for 5 1/2 months and, in turn the car sat there for roughly 7 months. My brother and I went to get it from Reading, PA. Car was a total mess (filthy, took 2 hours to get it started, overheated twice on the way back.)<P>Sold it immediately. Bought the current 1972 TR-6 "new" and kept it ever since.<P>Regards, Peter J.

TRAINGUY:<P>As posted earlier, I know little about pistons, however, my best "guesstimate" as to why modern cars use aluminum pistons is alloys have been improved, not to mention, "weight reduction".<P>Have no idea how much a cast iron piston weighs as I sit here. Let's pull a figure using a 6-cylinder car and the "cast iron" piston weighs 6 pounds each, and, the aluminum piston weighs 2 pounds, just for discussion:<P>--A known: The ratio is 1 pound of Aluminum equates to 3 pounds of cast iron.<P>Cast iron: 36 pounds<BR>Aluminum : 12 pounds<P>24 pounds is quite a difference in the board room.<P>Car manufacturer's (not to mention the "bean counters") obviously love the 24 pound weight reduction.<P>Obviously, aluminum is better for weight reduction that all of the modern cars are based upon from a cost standpoint and fuel consumption.<BR> <BR>--Characteristics / capabilities:<P> Iron: Better distortion resistance.<BR> Better wear resistance.<BR> Better vibration damping.<BR> <BR> Negatives: Weight compared to Al.<P> Aluminum:<P> Alloys today can compete with Fe (in<BR> certain atmospheres, such as <BR> pistons, valve bodies, pressure<BR> vessels, etc. ZA (zinc/aluminum) <BR> practically has the same weight as<BR> Fe.<P> Almag (aluminum & magnesium) has<BR> similar wear characteristics as<BR> Fe.<P>--Misc:<P> Fe (class 30-35) is poured at 2650 degrees on an average.<P> Al is poured at 900 degrees on an average.<P>Just my 2 cents. If aluminum works, fine. If cast iron has always worked, fine.<P>Sort of boils down to what a lot of topics we discuss over time generate: If it suits you and it works fine, go for it. However, I personally am not one to venture into the unknown only to ruin what was fine in the first place concerning "cars only".<P>Regards, Peter J. <BR> <p>[ 04-02-2002: Message edited by: Peter J Heizmann ]

There have been numerous discussions concerning castings, mostly in the Technical threads. They have varied from restoring-to-properties. What has not been discussed is the unintentional destruction of a cast part.<P>This can happen at various phases of restoration, or, mechanical work. One thing for certain, it has happened in the "industrial use of iron castings". I have been called out on quality complaints (more times than I care to remember), wherein, the customer says our castings are failing due to fractures. Not to belabor the subject, the following is a classic:<P>--An un-named account complained, that after putting big machining dollars into our castings, they fractured when a serial number was stamped using a die. Turned out, they machined the section of the number from 1/2" raw casting dimension down to 3/8", thus weakening it to the point any blow would cause cracks.<P>My pointers to enthusiasts that are either in a junk yard using a sledge hammer to free up a part, an enthusiast that is sweating trying to free up a starter motor housing with a hammer, the enthusiast that throws a cast part across the garage floor thinking the part is cast so it can take the shock:<P>--Temperature: In a junk yard smacking a part in i.e.- 30 degree weather can cause hairline cracks that the eye will not see.<P>Ductile Iron is basically a mild steel. Guess what: At 0-degrees it becomes brittle if stresses are put onto the part.<P>--Throw a thin sectioned cast bracket, manifold, etc., and guess what: You can cause cracks.<P>--Do not think just because a cast part is bolted to a solid item, such as a block, and I will smack it with a sledge to free it up it should work. The same: It can crack. (I shutter to think that a "hard to find part" is ruined by doing this.<P>My point is be careful how you treat them. Human nature is to think just because the part feels "heavy" to the touch it cannot be ruined if I get mad and throw it while frustrated.<P>Just a tip.<P>Regards, Peter J.<P> <p>[ 03-31-2002: Message edited by: Peter J Heizmann ]

Stllrng.<P>I know little about pistons, especially if aluminum is better than iron, and vice-versa.<P>If it helps, the comparison weight range is 1 pound of aluminum would be 3 pounds of iron.<P>As for the soundness of your existing Fe pistons, you could take them to a metallurgical lab and have them "Magnafluxed" - blue dye penetrant. It would be a lot cheaper than getting an X-Ray.<P>As for vibration, the iron would have better damping properties than aluminum, which is just my opinion.<P>Best regards, Peter.

Reid, nice memory. Thanks for sharing it.

Rich. <P>stude8 hit it right on the head. Pre-heating is critical to prevent crystallization of the carbides. Read his post and adhere to it.<P>Tomorrow, I will talk with one of our metallurgists for input on the best route for repairing. Don't quit. There are good methods. I'll get back. <P>Regards, Peter J.<p>[ 03-27-2002: Message edited by: Peter J Heizmann ]

stude8: Very interesting & informative. Never thought about the stainless bolt concept as I have never dealt with it on my car.<P>What I forgot to mention (and you indicate) is what "good, solid metal" is in the section size. An area of a casting that has a 1/2" wall thickness, or, above, would be more condusive to Rich's plan. I agree that the wall thickness where he is contemplating returning to original would be a gamble I would not want to take. A block, or, any casting, looks huge by the naked eye, BUT, it naturally varies depending on the contour.<P>Manifolds, blocks, etc., all have variations in wall thickness. Take a manifold. The mounting flange is obviously thick. The side walls of the contoured areas are, as you indicate, a lot thinner. There is the gamble. Human nature would be to think, well, if the mounting flange is 1/2 - 3/4 thick because I can see/measure it, never assume the same dimensions hold true for the whole part. <P>I am rambling, but, I have never seen any cored castings, utilizing green sand molding processes, that have the same thickness throughout, whether by intentional design or process variations. <P>Regards, Peter J.<P><BR>

Rich, the way I see it is your call totally.<P>Personally, I would not fool around with the block. Fe (iron) will oxidize to a point then act as a protectant. (Ever notice those guard rails along highways that are rust covered?).<P>I concur with what Howard is alluding to in that would you want to replace the block, or, open up the covers?<P>If a judge docks you points, he either has God-given micrometers in his eyes, or, he will actually use one.<P>A known, in my thoughts, are no one knows how much oxidation is on the I.D. of the block. If you start reaming, re-tapping, etc., who knows how much oxidation will chip off the I.D.? <P>Regards, Peter J.

Virginian:<P>Please clarify. If you received a Grand National First Prize (correct description) are you puzzled why you did not receive a Grand National "Senior"? <P>I am a little confused with your post. If you won a Grand National First, you should be fairly pleased, I would think.<P>Regards, Peter J.<p>[ 03-24-2002: Message edited by: Peter J Heizmann ]

Ernie. No problem. We'll all have enough cleaning materials and hands-on-deck to clean up.<P>Again, there will be plenty of room for your gear to lighten your weight load.<P>Just a thought concerning your new tires: Do not use any tire sheen media to make them look pretty. Use just soap and water. I am convinced there is absolutely no tire products that do not create a build up once you start applying them. Over the years, the "red bands" will be less "red" looking and you won't be able to restore the color. Just an opinion from experience.<P>Regards, Peter J. <p>[ 03-23-2002: Message edited by: Peter J Heizmann ]

Earl, thank you very much for the input.<P>As the time gets closer, I was going to suggest the "301" route just for safety and less tension, especially with a convoy.<P>As you mention, there may be some traffic lights, but, it is more scenic and relaxing.<P>Best regards, Peter J.

Ernie. I was in the same boat last year. When a lot of apprehension builds up: "Do I, or, Don't I". Concerning tires, go for it.<P>In my case, the car is 30 years old. Replaced the originals 19 years ago. Last year, I bit the bullet and bought the third set, Michelin 185-15 Redlines.<P>In my case, I want it to be original.<P>Observation: The 1983 (2nd set) cost $49.95 each. The 2002 (3rd set) cost $170.00 each.<BR>One thing for certain, I feel safer with the new ones, not to mention looks. You cannot go wrong with Coker. I am very satisfied.<P>Regards, Peter J.

Rich: <P>Let me tag onto what Howard mentioned. Very true that galvanizers are almost as extinct as foundries are becoming.<P>My thoughts:<P>1. To avoid a high price of a special 2 piece run, call around to a galvanizer and ask what the cost would be if they could put your shields onto some customer's production run while it is being processed. Who knows. You may find a friendly company that would agree to it. Same goes for the following...<P>2. Investigate if the original finish was Hot-dipped galvanize (results are very ugly finish, but, functional. Usually you will see pipe fittings in Hot-dip at a hardware store, for example.) Be careful, as Hot-dip ain't going to come off with paint stripper!!<P>3. Look into "E-Coating" which is an electrolysis process. Finish is nice and smooth with a good texture, and, will protect very well. It will also withstand "heat" for the your application. Simulated Cadmium Paint will not hold up from what I know.<P>Regards, Peter J. <p>[ 03-21-2002: Message edited by: Peter J Heizmann ]