alsfarms Posted May 31, 2019 Share Posted May 31, 2019 Your engine is going to be a way better and more "bullet proof" product when you are done. Al 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted May 31, 2019 Author Share Posted May 31, 2019 That's the intention in any case... Actually, I think it will probably develop 25 to 50% more horsepower than it originally did...but that is taking into consideration the usually poor workmanship of the factory. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted May 31, 2019 Author Share Posted May 31, 2019 (edited) Today I made these little brass bits to go in the end of the hold-downs. I'd intended to just use washers but these weren't difficult to make and they will center automatically. The studs are 7/16-14 - something I'd forgotten. I ordered 3/8 acorn nuts for them then ordered 7/16, only to discover that the 7/16 nuts are too big to fit easily between the lifters. They fit but there is no way to get a wrench on them. So, I decided to make special studs. I wasn't able to find what I wanted so I was slated to make them in any case. These will have a 7/16-14 thread on one end and 3/8-16 on the other end. I cut 4 pieces of 12L14 - which threads very well. When using acorn nuts, it's critical to get the height exactly right otherwise you can't tighten it down properly. I calculated all this and set up my old B&S vernier height gage to take the measurement. Then machined them all so that they would be identical. I put in the relief for the 7/16 thread before I was called away so I'll get back to this tomorrow or Sunday. Edited May 31, 2019 by JV Puleo (see edit history) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted June 1, 2019 Author Share Posted June 1, 2019 (edited) Just as I was getting ready to leave last night - after I'd posted my days production, the new spring and spring stock arrived. McMaster Carr had a spring in the right dimensions that was weaker so I bought that and some spring stock even lighter in case I had to make one. I put the spring in and tried it and the result was perfect so when I came in this morning I expected no issues at all. I was wrong. When I started the pump, the pressure shot up to 50 lbs and the relief valve didn't seem to be working. I tried several things - removing the spring, removing the piston from the valve and that didn't help so I took the oil filter housing apart and removed the screen. Why that would be a problem I've yet to discover but it did make a substantial difference. Here's the remote pressure gage - you'll notice it doesn't go all the way back to zero. I forget now why but it has been 35 years since I last used this. With the piston and spring back in and the filter screen removed, I started the pump again. You can just see the oil oozing out of the edges around the "crankshaft" – exactly what it is supposed to do. Here's the gage.... It held this pressure steadily. I adjusted the pressure by putting a little more compression on the spring which raised it to about 22 lbs on the gage. It held that steadily too and there is more adjustment if I want it. All in all, I call this a success (so far). I will have to figure out what went wrong with the screen but all I can think of is that the output end was somehow blocking the hole into the oil manifold... that's really all it could be as there isn't anything else in there. It's possible that the edge of filter screen is bearing against the O ring I put in to seal it... in fact, I'm pretty sure that is what is happening so I'll address that over the next few days. That's why we test things. Edited June 1, 2019 by JV Puleo (see edit history) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinneyhill Posted June 1, 2019 Share Posted June 1, 2019 5 hours ago, JV Puleo said: That's why we test things. Is that what they call "prototyping" in management-speak these days? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chistech Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 Joe, just a thought. Your test oil is currently cold so wouldn’t it’s viscosity be thicker than once the actual engine oil heats up causing the oil to flow easier out of the bearings and lower the oil pressure? Possibly the screen would have less effect with the thinner, hot oil. I don’t personally know much on oiling systems or oil viscosity so my question is meant as an inquiry to learn more rather than any real statement of actual knowledge. (My little disclaimer for ignorance of the subject!)😆 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinneyhill Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 Very good point. The dynamic and kinematic viscosity of SAE 30 oil at 90 oC are about 5% (1/20th) of the value at 20 oC based on these tests. https://wiki.anton-paar.com/en/engine-oil/. For 0W-30 they are about 8% (1/12th) and for 5W-30 they are about 7% (1/14th). Notice that the viscosity of 0W-30 at 20 oC is about 142 mPa.s vs 239 mPa.s (about 60%) for SAE 30 - clear demonstration of the purpose of the "W" part of the oil viscosity classification. Oh dear, Joe might have to test with hot oil now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Macartney Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 (edited) This is a good site about engine oil:- https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/motor-oil-101/ Edited June 2, 2019 by Mike Macartney Added a bit more (see edit history) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted June 2, 2019 Author Share Posted June 2, 2019 I am pretty certain this is purely a mechanical problem...the system worked Friday evening and didn't work on Saturday morning so something moved. I'll have to take it apart but I'm not all that worried that I can arrive at a solution. I had considered heating the oil - and may still do so if I can think of a safe way to do it in the shop but I'm not terribly worried about that test. If I have pressure cold and the pressure is adjustable it stands to reason that it can be adjusted while the engine is running. Chances are, whatever I do as a test it will still have to be adjusted after it's assembled. Fortunately, the test stand has no other use so there is no hurry to take it apart. It can sit on the table for another year or more and not make a difference. That will give me plenty of time to test various tweaks. It doesn't have to come apart until it is time to assemble the engine and it may be a good idea to leave it assembled until then as I can't misplace any of the pieces. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted June 2, 2019 Author Share Posted June 2, 2019 When I came in this morning I started the pump and tried the pressure adjustment just to make certain it really did work. It appears to... and I stopped at a reading of 25 lbs. I'll let it run for hours just to make sure. I'm thinking that another 20 hours running should give me the confidence I want to use this... I also may have found a paper filter that fits the filter housing. If so, I may change to that but I do like the idea of a cleanable screen rather than a paper filter that may have to be changed. Of course, if the filter lasts 10,000 miles that likely more than the car will ever travel in my lifetime. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted June 2, 2019 Author Share Posted June 2, 2019 The special studs to hold the cam followers down. Threaded 3/8-16 on one end. It's too out of focus to see properly but that isn't a nut, its a thread repair die. I took it down to very close and ran the die over the threads to get a really uniform thread. It also takes all the burrs off. Then I turned them around and threaded the other end 7/16-14 - except that I stupidly chipped the point of the threading tool and decided that I'd better quit while I'm ahead and finish this tomorrow. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Macartney Posted June 3, 2019 Share Posted June 3, 2019 17 hours ago, JV Puleo said: It doesn't have to come apart until it is time to assemble the engine and it may be a good idea to leave it assembled until then as I can't misplace any of the pieces. That sounds very sensible. Often, I have put 'stuff' in a safe place, so it doesn't get damaged or lost, and then can't find it! It would be very difficult to mislay the test rig! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chistech Posted June 3, 2019 Share Posted June 3, 2019 5 hours ago, Mike Macartney said: That sounds very sensible. Often, I have put 'stuff' in a safe place, so it doesn't get damaged or lost, and then can't find it! It would be very difficult to mislay the test rig! I’m realizing that I need to keep a note book of parts and write down exactly where I store them. My idea is to do it alphabetical with one page devoted to each letter. That should be enough room. I was just going crazy looking for the passenger side bell crank pivot pin that mounts on the firewall. I knew I had it but couldn’t remember where. Thought about for a few hours and decided to look at my last option, all the shock linkage that is part of that whole system. Sure enough, in a small zip lock bag, taped to the rod assembly and clearly marked “pivot pin”, was the missing part. So I determined my wife is wrong, I’m not always losing something, I’m putting it away too good and knowing that I put it away properly, relaxes my brain. Problem is because it’s at ease, the memory forgets! I just started with the notebook so it’s going to take a few memory lapses to know if it works! Memory will be sharp as a tack for now on. If I could just remember where I put that notebook! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted June 3, 2019 Author Share Posted June 3, 2019 I had to build a set of shelves just for the Mitchell parts but if something happened to me it would not be easy to identify everything... My feeling is that a dismantled project car has a value of zero...almost regardless of what kind of car it is. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Macartney Posted June 3, 2019 Share Posted June 3, 2019 46 minutes ago, JV Puleo said: My feeling is that a dismantled project car has a value of zero...almost regardless of what kind of car it is. I agree, apart from the spares value, but try telling the seller that! Thinking about it - our posts on this forum are actually quite useful for anybody taking on one of our projects 'if we fall off the perch'! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chistech Posted June 3, 2019 Share Posted June 3, 2019 1 hour ago, Mike Macartney said: I agree, apart from the spares value, but try telling the seller that! Thinking about it - our posts on this forum are actually quite useful for anybody taking on one of our projects 'if we fall off the perch'! That’s how I got my 31’ Chevy. Owner had passed, left a basket case, and parts in three different buildings. I got the car cheap as no one wanted to touch it. No pictures and no notes were taken but it was 100% complete. What was surprising was most all the chrome had been redone along with a new interior, etc., was in those boxes of parts. Being able to get into the hobby for a fairly reasonable cost and having a very nice complete car when I was done totally “hooked” me. I’m sure if we do fall off the perch mid job, there just might be another who takes it up and gets hooked like we did. At least, it’s all we can hope for. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted June 3, 2019 Author Share Posted June 3, 2019 (edited) What leaves me slightly perplexed is that cars are relatively simple machines - at least early ones are, maybe through about 1930. (I have no experience with the late 30s, multi-cylinder cars like the V12's and 16s. The only V12 I've ever worked on was a PIII RR.) Virtually everything is logical. I agree that when surveying a pile of parts you have no idea if everything is there - that is a drawback but from a mechanical perspective they aren't particularly challenging. Reassembling my B&S #2 Heavy milling machine using only the parts manual was far more challenging. I bought it disassembled so I didn't even have the advantage of having taken it apart. The seller was an accomplished machinist and both he and I agreed that it required some thought but that if taken gradually, everything had to go back together in a logical fashion. Based on what I've seen, and Edinmass's comments on high-end restorations, I'd prefer an unrestored car or a basket case even if I could afford a restored car. (And that is out of the question in regard to anything I'd want.) Doing mechanical work on a car that has been painted and upholstered does not appeal to me. When I bought the Mitchell all I was concerned about were the major castings. I couldn't replicate those with the equipment and skills I have. I think the low value assigned to projects is a great advantage to the guy who is willing to do the work but, more often than not, the seller has a grossly unrealistic notion of how much time it takes to assemble a pile of parts into a running car. I hope these posts are useful to others...that was the goal in the first place. Edited June 3, 2019 by JV Puleo (see edit history) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted June 3, 2019 Author Share Posted June 3, 2019 The four studs finished. Of course, the last two went perfectly. It's too bad I only need four. I had to open up the holes in the brass insert just a tiny bit with an expansion reamer. I don't use these very often but they do come in handy when you want to open a hole only a few thousandths. The stud screwed into the crankcase. They will eventually get castellated nuts on the inside to lock them in place. And I assembled one just to see how it looked. I also tried switching the hold-downs around just to see if they were interchangeable. They are which is very satisfying. Making interchangeable parts is a lot more difficult than anyone who hasn't done it can imagine. There are very good reasons why it took until the mid 19th century to accomplish. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinneyhill Posted June 3, 2019 Share Posted June 3, 2019 Every time I see you assemble something, it brings a smile to my dial. Xclnt work. I remember my father's notebook of things in the garage cum workshop cum shed. It was always in a central position: near the vice. And don't allow just one page per letter - not many things start with "K" for example. I do similar things with my address book, but use pencil so I can update or delete unwanted items. I also did something similar with my parts boxes for the Studebaker: each item in each box is listed. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Harper Posted June 3, 2019 Share Posted June 3, 2019 Quote Making interchangeable parts is a lot more difficult than anyone who hasn't done it can imagine. Great progress Joe! Interchangeable parts is all about tolerances and understanding that precision only needs to be where its needed to maintain design intent. There is no such thing as the perfect part. It only needs to fall within the specified minimum and maximum tolerance. I think a lot of the issues with the early automobile industry and interchangeability was mind set (small volume artisans) and the available tools and techniques of the day. Remember that the closets industry that approximated the precision required to manufacture a motor was probably the firearms industry with all its hand fitting. Blueprints and drafting standards including calling out tolerances and fits as well as precision measuring instruments were in their infancy. Today we take for granted Geometric Dimensions and Tolerances (GD&T) with those wonderful symbols and reference frames that tell us so much. I believe I read somewhere that machinists at Sharps Rifle didn't work from a set of prints but by taking measurements of a master model. Its amazing they produced what they produced so well. But then again it was a different age, different work ethic and economics. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted June 4, 2019 Author Share Posted June 4, 2019 I would say firearms and sewing machines. The first successfully mass produced complicated device with completely interchangeable parts was the M1842 percussion musket. At that point, the Springfield Armory was probably the most advanced manufacturing facility in the world. Quite literally, engineers came from all over the world to see it, including Sir Joseph Whitworth who purchased a large amount of American machinery for the Royal Small Arms Factory at Enfield. It isn't surprising that Henry Leland worked at the armory during the Civil War and then went on to Brown & Sharpe . 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted June 4, 2019 Author Share Posted June 4, 2019 Finishing the lifters is giving me a chance to correct some errors I made previously. None were "do it over" errors but the more I do this sort of thing the more I think of ways I could have done something better. The first error was to thread the lifters 7/16-14. I was thinking of the exhaust valves for which the adjustment is at the top and neglected to think of the intake valves. You really want a fine thread for that otherwise, it may be a chore to set the valve clearance accurately. I can't take the lifter apart so I experimented with making a sleeve I can insert threaded 1/2-20 ton the outside and 3/8-24 on the inside. Fortunately, this is one of the few jobs I've done where I made a prototype so I have an extra lifter to experiment on. I made the test sleeve out of threaded rod but may make the finished ones out of brass. Having decided that would work, I went on with the sockets that will hold the bottom end of the pushrods for the exhaust valves, made from 5/8 hex stock. Machined to a uniform length of 1-3/4" The threaded end turned... And then the socket end... If I have the time tomorrow, I'll finish these but I have a job to do that may take most of the day. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chistech Posted June 5, 2019 Share Posted June 5, 2019 (edited) I see what looks like a musket cap tin on that lower shelf in the bottom two pictures.🧐 Edited June 5, 2019 by chistech (see edit history) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted June 5, 2019 Author Share Posted June 5, 2019 (edited) I think those are revolver caps, probably #11s. I do have 5 tins of musket caps if you need some. I'm not sure how long I've had them - maybe 30 years? I think I have 2 percussion rifles - a converted M1187 Common rifle and a British Volunteer rifle c.1855-60 but it has probably been 10 years since I shot one of them. I should have said percussion rifles that use musket caps. I have a lot more that use smaller caps. Most are converted flintlocks - I'm not too interested in anything made after about 1830. Edited June 6, 2019 by JV Puleo (see edit history) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted June 5, 2019 Author Share Posted June 5, 2019 (edited) I had one of those frustrating days that, in the end, turned out ok. I went on with the sockets for the pushrods and wanted to try this... It's an ER32 collet holder for a lathe with a 3MT taper shank. In order to get a flat bottom hole, I wanted to use a center-cutting end mill. I'd done it in the drill chuck but it ran out quite badly. Drill chucks just aren't made for that so I indulged myself in a new tool and bought this. Unfortunately, the runout was even worse but that was caused by the hex stock not being uniform. I'm sure it's fine for most things but I should have marked one of the flats on the stock and the collet and put it back in the collet the same way each time. I bored three of the holes and, on the third, decided that I had better do this over. It wouldn't have affected how it worked but it would bother me until I fixed it so I might as well do it now. I then did an experiment with another piece of hex stock. this time I faced it off, drilled a center hole, drilled a hole with a regular twist drill 1/64 smaller than the finished size and then bored with the end mill, all without taking the piece out of the collet. This went perfectly - I doubt there was .002 runout in the cutter so that is obviously the way to do it. The day being largely shot, I went on with more experiments. I got one of the new valves out to check how it aligned with the lifters. Not surprisingly, it's doesn't align perfectly. I can adjust for this by making sure the head of the adjustment screw is large enough. I also realized I have to cut the stems down about 1/2" - I think I knew that once but it has been two or three years since I looked at these. There is also a problem threading the sockets and the adjuster screws in that, with a large head it will be very difficult to get the threading tool in close. So, I dug this out...it is a lathe die holder which is supposed to make it easy to get a perfectly straight thread on a piece by using the lathe to align everything. I've used it twice before without much success but it occurred to me that perhaps I was simply asking too much of it - I think the last piece I tried was 5/8-11 which is really much too big for a tool like this. I tried it here with the 3/8-24 thread. A shallow thread on leaded steel is probably what it's good for because this time it worked brilliantly. Tomorrow I'll start over but this time I think I know how to go about things. Edited June 5, 2019 by JV Puleo (see edit history) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chistech Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 Joe, as I mentioned in my PM. Most often his clients send him old photos or drawings that they want duplicated. It’s pretty amazing how he does it and it’s actually not much different than mold making as he works in reverse from how you would think it’s done to get the results you see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted June 6, 2019 Author Share Posted June 6, 2019 (edited) That is how scrimshaw was originally done... Having done my experiments, I ordered some 11/16 hex stock last night and I'll go on with the parts I do have the materials for in the meantime. The first item was the four lock nuts for the intake valve adjusters. These are 3/8-24 with an outside measurement of 3/4" across the flats. This is not a size that is made. I cut four pieces of 3/4" hex, 1/2" long and made this little "nut turning" took I thought of last night. It is a piece of 1" bar with a threaded hole and a 3/8-24 cap screw. I put the pieces of hex in the lathe, faced one side then drill and tapped 3/8-24. And ended up with these... Then put the tool in the lathe, screwed the pieces on so the flat face was against the tool and faced it down to .300. This leaves a burr on the inside edge so I just rant the tap through again. Having gotten the first one right, I set a stop on the lathe bed and didn't touch the cross slide. Then I screwed on another piece and just the saddle down a little at a time nitil it his the stop. That way all four pieces came out exactly the same thickness. The last step was to put the little chamfer on the edges. The beauto of this is that you can just take the piece off and put it back without affecting anything. All done... I suppose that making your own nuts is a bit extreme but brass era cars pre-date the adoption of SAE standards (which came after WWI) so they often have fasteners that are no longer available. It would be much more likely to have to make extra thick nuts but. It's quite easy to do...and adds just another touch of verisimilitude. I had to stop to take some photos for a book but when I came back I started on the eight threaded sleeves that will go in the lifters. I will turn these on a mandrel so the first order of business was to make a little tool to prevent damaging them when pressing them on and off. It's just another piece of 1" bar with a hole in the center 1/64 larger than 5/16. I cut eight pieces of brass that I faced on one side, drilled and reamed to 5/16. Edited June 7, 2019 by JV Puleo (see edit history) 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted June 7, 2019 Author Share Posted June 7, 2019 I trimmed the 9/16 diameter pieces to 3/4" and drilled and reamed a 5/16 hole in them. Then turned them down to 1/2". If I had some 1/2" bar I'd have used it although this system is really more accurate. They were pressed on to the mandrel with my arbor press... I made the base for this press out of an old railroad switch. I also made an error and ruined one of them so I had to go back and make another - actually I made 3 more. My one consistent superstition is that something will go wrong if I don't prepare for it. Then they went back in the lathe to be threaded. Right about this time I realized I'd been really dumb about this. I could have just gotten some 5/16 x 1/2 bushings and saved myself a lot of work. but, of course I didn't think of that until the job was nearly done. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alsfarms Posted June 8, 2019 Share Posted June 8, 2019 Hello Joe, What source do you use to the purchase of specialty machine tooling? Al Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted June 8, 2019 Author Share Posted June 8, 2019 ebay. I think about the only bargains available on ebay are old industrial tooling. Remember, CNC has largely replaced manual machines so tons of the tooling is not wanted any longer. Add to that my machines are so old that none of them can use carbide tooling very well - they just don't spin fast enough. I use high speed steel almost exclusively. This is all stuff that is still available but has dropped out of widespread commercial use. Another very helpful factor is that I have big machines - much larger than the average "home shop machinist" wants or has room for. The bigger machines, which are so much more capable, are usually the cheapest. I've bought some Chinese and Indian tooling. I think the Indian is just a little nicer but I haven't been disappointed in either. That especially true with taps and dies. For some reason, the Chinese are producing a lot of obscure taps and dies - things that would cost a minor fortune if made domestically. It's a "niche" market but I think they are on the way to cornering it. The best domestic supplier I know of is Victor Machine in New York. They also have all sorts of odd taps, dies and reamers and are very reasonable. The only drawback is they have a minimum order of $25 and often I need something that only costs $5 or $10. Probably 90% of the machine accessories I don't make myself are used. Big deal - the car is "used" too and the tools will be as soon as I've had them a week. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted June 8, 2019 Author Share Posted June 8, 2019 I had intended to burn my brush pile today but it has been too dry and the fire department isn't issuing permits. so, I came into the shop and finished the threaded inserts. I drilled and tapped them to 3/8-24/ Then I drilled and tapped the prototype lifter to 1/2-20. And everything worked. The actual lifters will be a little more complicated because I have to do those in the 4-jaw chuck. To use a collet, I'd have to remove the rollers and I don't want to do that since the pins are an interference fit. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted June 11, 2019 Author Share Posted June 11, 2019 I now had to install the threaded inserts in the lifters. There are actually two operations that require disassembling the lifters and they can't be done at the same time. To avoid having to take them apart twice I made this tray to hold the pieces while I worked on them. The lifter assemblys themselves are interchangeable but I am not confident all the internal parts are so I did not want to mix them up. I set the lifter up in the 4-jaw chuck so I could leave the rollers in place. Then drilled and tapped each one and inserted a threaded sleeve with a little high-strength Loctite on it. Because I had to wait 20 minutes to face this off, this took quite a long time. When those were done, I cut these four little pieces of 1/2" O1 drill rod. These will be the little hardened pads that are soldered into the heads of the intake valve adjusters. They got faced off to a thickness of 3/8". When they are done, they'll be surface ground. I also put the lifter housings back in the lathe to take about .100 off the top edge. Now that I have caps for the lifters it's important to make sure that when they are down as far as they can go the caps don't hit the top of the housing. I put the old camshaft in the engine to check this. Then went on and did the rest of them. The material I ordered to make the adjusters and the sockets for the push rods arrived at the end of the day so I'll be on those tomorrow. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted June 12, 2019 Author Share Posted June 12, 2019 I made the sockets for the push rods today. The first step was to turn one end down to 3/8" and thread it. This lathe threading tool worked a charm. I'd say it really only good for fine threads and even then maybe not larger than 1/2" but for the smaller sizes it's a lot faster than single point threading. All four done. I did these one at the time to avoid the problem of getting the piece perfectly centered when gripping it by the hex. Then about half of the other end was turned round. In this case, I gripped it by the threaded portion in a 3/8" collet. And then set up my jig for drilling to a specific depth. The drill is 1/32 under the finished size. With that done, I did the same thing with a 1/2" end mill held by an ER32 collet. This worked so perfectly that the runout I'd expected to make the push rods fit easily in the holes didn't happen. Now I'm going to have to polish the ends of the push rods. I finished up around 4:30 and didn't feel like starting on the intake valve adjusters...there is time for that tomorrow. The push rod is 1/2" aluminum rod with a 3/8" low profile cap screw in the bottom end so that the bearing surface will be steel rather than aluminum. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alsfarms Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 Joe, I simply do not recall, did you have an original lifter to base some of your design on or is your design strictly your creation? I am very impressed with your outcome. I am certainly in amazed at the thought that you have put into your design and they will, without doubt, be better that the original units and last longer also. You probably do not want to but you could go into the business of custom lifters for the brass era cars! You have my vote of confidence! Al. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted June 13, 2019 Author Share Posted June 13, 2019 (edited) I did have the originals. They had cast iron bodies, were very heavy, not very well made and quite worn. They also included some features that PM Heldt disapproved of as not being the best engineering. I gave the set to a friend who is restoring another Model T Mitchell and is much more concerned with "exactly as made" than I am. He had a couple of originals so I'm hoping he can make a workable set from them. They may have been rebuildable but I think that would have been more work than making new ones. My goal here is to eliminate as much valve train noise as I can - Henry Royce once commented that he didn't have to enclose the lifters on the SG because all the parts fit so well they didn't make noise - though I have to say that SG lifters are much simpler. I have an unused one but it wasn't practical to adapt the design to the Mitchell. I took the measurements I used from the originals, adding some height to them because I had no idea how to make the caps. Its only recently that an idea came to me - in any case, you can remove material but it's pretty difficult to add it so slightly oversize is good when you are flying half blind like this. The hold-downs are entirely my design - in this case to come up with a way of securing them in alignment with the cam without using the pin holes. I am certain those holes were drilled with the lifters in place but I'd have to calculate where to drill them in the lower rim of the lifter body and, given the "flexible" nature of Mitchell measurements, that would be a daunting task. As to making them for another car, even now, after I've done it and feel comfortable with the process the cost would likely be astronomical. Edited June 13, 2019 by JV Puleo (see edit history) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted June 13, 2019 Author Share Posted June 13, 2019 This is a Silver Ghost lifter... it came from a box of miscellaneous parts a friend bought from the estate of the late Henry C. Wing. Wing was one of the original members of the RROC. Here are the intake valve adjusters all threaded, It was the same procedure as done with the push rod sockets but the threads are longer. Then the adjusters were drilled to a uniform depth, 1/64 smaller than 1/2" I reduced the height and "reamed" them with a 1/2" end mill. This gives it a flat bottom hole. When that was done I reduced the height further, to 3/8". Here they are with their inserts. Tomorrow I'll trim the inserts down about 1/8", harden them and solder them in place. Then all that is left is to put a little chamfer on the edges of the hex section. I also have to make a fixture to hold all four in the grinder so I can surface grind them but we'll see if I get to that. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alsfarms Posted June 14, 2019 Share Posted June 14, 2019 Joe, I have lost track, how many separate individual pieces make up your new lifters? What a task and to keep them mostly interchangeable? That is a daunting task! Al 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted June 14, 2019 Author Share Posted June 14, 2019 (edited) Oddly enough I was wondering that myself. I'll count them and let you know. As to keeping them interchangeable, it's all a matter of machining the parts in fixtures. I am certain the complete lifter assemblies are interchangeable. I only have reservations about the internal parts - the lifter itself and the body. Those were individually lapped to each other so while they should be interchangeable I don't see any reason to mix the parts up. Once assembled for the final time it is very unlikely they will ever be taken apart again. This is no different from the better quality work of the period. Final hand fitting was taken for granted if you wanted a really perfect fit. That is why Henry Leland won the Deware Trophy - until then it wasn't even presumed that finely fitted parts could be made to such close tolerance by machine. If you allow greater tolerances, as most makers of lesser quality automobiles did, interchangeability was readily achievable. I did have a thought based on one of your posts. The Mitchell is almost exactly the same size as your Locomobile, The engine is about 300 cubic inches (really 298) - it even has a full floating rear axle. Essentially, I have the same number of parts doing the same things but the original price of the Loco was at least twice, if not three times that of the Mitchell. It was the precise fitting and attention to small details that made the Loco such a superior machine. EDIT: It is very common to see little numbers or marks on various parts - those were assembly numbers, used to put things back together as they had come apart when it was necessary to disassemble things for another operation. I'd very much like to disassemble a Loco engine because I am curious about what degree of uniformity they achieved and how they did it. Edited June 14, 2019 by JV Puleo (see edit history) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV Puleo Posted June 14, 2019 Author Share Posted June 14, 2019 (edited) I counted. Not including fixtures, fasteners and pins (which I did not make), I made a total of 104 separate parts. I started the day by taking the inserts down to .250 and the adjusters to a thickness of just over .300. I also put a slight chamfer on the edges. Then I hardened the inserts. The trick is to heat them bright red - until they are no longer magnetic and then drop them in oil. The MAP gas didn't work - or at least I didn't have the patience to wait for it so I used acetylene. The first one went right through the bottom of this plastic container so I had to find a metal one. but after that it went smoothly. Then I soldered the inserts into the adjusters. Like all these jobs, there is a technique to it so it took me longer to do the first one than the remaining three. All cleaned up. This will be a fixture to grind all the tops flat at once. That went without a hitch though it is interesting how un-flat things are when you put them in the grinder and take them down .001 at a time. And one pair assembled as they will be on the finished engine. I think these parts are actually FINISHED! Now I have to get back to sorting out the oil pump. Edited June 14, 2019 by JV Puleo (see edit history) 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Macartney Posted June 15, 2019 Share Posted June 15, 2019 Wonderful work Joe, your posts give me the courage and enthusiasm to have a go at stuff I haven't done before. Keep up the excellent work. (Sorry, I didn't mean to sound like a school teacher writing an end of term report!) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now