JV Puleo

My 1910 Mitchell "parts car" project

Recommended Posts

Yes... just grinding compound. It's the stuff mixed with oil, the same as valve grinding compound.

The lap should be softer than the material being lapped. That way, the grinding agent embeds in it and cuts the opposite surface. I wasn't sure if aluminum would work but I figured I'd only be using it a few times so even if it didn't last a long time, it would do. The best laps are made of very fine grain cast iron. Bronze or sometimes brass is the 2nd choice. Aluminum is the "use it a few times and recycle it" choice.

 

The hold downs are readily available. I got mine from Victor Machine in NY but the same set is available from dozens of sources. Presumably, they are Chinese-made. I've never had any problem with them and they are a real help. Actually, I put off buying some for a long time, using odd blocks of metal and various bolts. That was a mistake... using the correct tool is worth the cost - especially when the cost isn't much.

Edited by JV Puleo (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice laps.  I am guessing that you are going to silver solder the copper tubing into the bronze modified fittings?  The good fit you have arrived at will make for a very strong joint.  I should attempt something like that as I am needing to construct an intake manifold for the Wisconsin.  I think I will check to see if typical bronze  fittings could be modified for my application.  Like you project, I would need two elbows a "T" and a flange.

Al

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/22/2018 at 8:05 PM, JV Puleo said:

A few weeks ago I also got this...

 

IMG_0329.thumb.JPG.1027dd6efec3610bb682850ad36b9d1f.JPG

cool clacker box machine   you have there . The power feed looks like it would work fine after you use it a wile you will know why I call it clacker.--kyle 

 PM me if you need some help getting it up and running .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can guess... though I always called it a "clapper" box. I confess I've never seen one work but all my work is "make it up as you go".

Thanks for the offer. If I have a problem I'll take you up on that. Right now, the only thing still stuck is the "up & down motion" of the big projecting arm. I can see how it is supposed to work but it appears to be stuck. Since the flaking is still visible on most of the surfaces, I'm guessing it is just stuck with dried oil and perhaps a little rust. When I get time, I'll back off on the gibs a bit. This machine hasn't been used since the end of WWII though it has been stored inside.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the real test. I put the two pieces on a surface plate with a short length of tubing between them... it looks good. Of course, the advantage to having the flanges threaded on and round is that they can be adjusted to compensate for the inevitable minor differences.

 

IMG_0433.thumb.JPG.9a41638875dca96aee9aba36eadacab4.JPG

 

I worked on another job today but before I left, I soldered the short piece of tube into one of the elbows and set it up to bore out the remaining threads. When these are finally polished and assembled I doubt anyone will be able to tell they began life as pipe fittings.

 

IMG_0434.thumb.JPG.a1698f12893de19a0a690e0295023cbf.JPG

 

IMG_0435.thumb.JPG.4d5006d2cbf9f55bc57193eb1f06785d.JPG

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice job on the manifold building.  You are building a very close design to what I need to build also.  It is interesting that you have gone to great length to keep and assure right angles at all of your joints.  What is the ID of your copper tube or is it pipe?  I need to build my manifold with a clean 2" ID.  I also like the idea of using copper as it is not so quick to fatigue as is brass.  The copper red would not be a big deal as my project will all be in bright nickle when complete.

Al

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting problem. I just took a quick look at my sources but a perfect solution didn't pop out.

Tubing is measured on the OD so the perfect size would be 2-1/4" with a .125 wall. That would be pretty heavy but I think a Wisconsin engine would have no problem with it and it would be durable. I do not know if it is available in copper ... that may take some looking. The sizes of my fittings were an educated guess... the outside diameter of 1-1/4 inch pipe is smaller than the 1-3/4 diameter of my tubing so I was taking a chance that I could bore the pieces out and still have enough wall thickness left. As it is, it worked but you'll have to take a bunch of measurements to figure out if you can do it with a larger tube.

 

I'd mismeasured something and the measurement I ended up with is just about perfect... but I still have a very expensive piece of 2" brass tube left over!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Alan,

 

On my Wisconsin PT the manifold is brass tubing. The OD IS 1-3/4" with a .065 wall thickness. Interestingly the

pipe connecting the cylinders is all one piece with holes bored to correspond with the T-fitting for cylinders 3 & 4

and the t/elbows that connect to the lower pipe. The fittings are simply bored to diameter and slid onto the tube and soldered in place.

 

Unfortunately I didn't know that until I got to look inside an original and got my hands on a factory drawing so my fittings are simply counter bored at each end and the pipe

is short sections cut to fit. Fortunately once its all together no one will know the difference other than me!

 

5ad1389d8b1b3_Manifold-b.thumb.jpg.49ad8b581b0e4efbddf613150ed892b7.jpg

 

5ad138faae565_Manifold-c.thumb.jpg.63af22fbf3db00c3514672d6240ac4b1.jpg

 

5ad1375d0d9a6_Manifold-a.thumb.jpg.f983b305c38ca99e250b3b213d7bd56e.jpg

 

 

5ad137d3854e3_FactoryManifold.jpg.8cc3847fa21fe36c694983300461445e.jpg

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Terry,  Thanks for your follow-up response.  My Wisconsin, being a 4 cylinder, is a bit like what Joe is building.  I decided to measure the intake ports on my Model M jugs.  They are probably the same as your P Model.  I come up with a good measurement of 1-7/8" ID.  It would not be hard to work it over to be 2" if needed.  I plan to check out some fittings and potentially build something similar to what Joe is doing.  I do like the thought of one piece of tubing with the "T" fitting slid into position then  bored open.  It would sure make for a nice straight manifold.  I may put a bit longer drop onto which I would install the flange to mount the carb.  By so doing, a gravity feed system would work better.  Elsewhere, on my Locomobile or Speedster thread, I am working on that same carb. position issue  currently.  What is the thoughts here regarding the intake manifold ID for a "T" head (low compression) design.  Is a bigger ID better to get a bigger fuel charge or would a bit smaller intake ID increase the velocity of the fuel and air mix to enter into the jug for combustion.   What are your thoughts on that question Joe?  You refer to your vintage engineering book often.  I am inclined to build my intake manifold to either 1-7/8" or 2".

Al

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also using one-piece tubes with the T just holding the tubes together. In fact, I'm going to relieve the end of the piece that goes between the blocks with a 1-3/4 radius so it fits snug against the "cross" on the T. Of course, I knew Terry had discovered that was how Wisconsin did it BEFORE I designed this stuff! Al... measure the width of the opening in the block. That is the absolute limiting factor. You will gain nothing by making the tubing larger. The limiting factor is the smallest opening in the entire intake system.

 

In any case, I'm using the same tubing as Terry... 1-3/4 OD with a .065 wall. It is expensive but having an od that matches standard tooling makes it much easier to work with.

 

jp

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Smaller tube = more drag and thus more pressure loss along the tube. "T" or "L" intersections create turbulence and more drag, which is why sewerage has curves at junctions.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Joe,  I have  measured the opening of intake port on the Wisconsin jugs to be 1-7/8".  It appears that "L" type 2" copper tube has an ID of 1-7/8".  That would make a very good fit for my manifold building project.  EBAY has some of this copper tube.  Now I just need to get a few brass fittings in hand so I can determine what can be modified (as you have built your manifold).  Joe, excuse me for this line of postings on your Mitchell thread.  I should be making this posting over on the Speedster build thread.  Spinneyhill, thanks for your thoughts.  I have a 4 cylinder American-Lafrance "T" head engine with a factory "rams horn" cast aluminum intake manifold.  I am sure they used that design to minimize the drag you mentioned above.

Al

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, alsfarms said:

 Joe, excuse me for this line of postings on your Mitchell thread.  I should be making this posting over on the Speedster build thread. 

 

Nonsense... if anything I'd like this tread to be open to ideas and the problems faced by those of us who do this sort of thing. Truth to tell, my real motivation is solving problems. I'd much rather spend Saturday in the shop making something than go to any of the local car shows.

 

jp

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JV Puleo said:

 

Nonsense... if anything I'd like this tread to be open to ideas and the problems faced by those of us who do this sort of thing. Truth to tell, my real motivation is solving problems. I'd much rather spend Saturday in the shop making something than go to any of the local car shows.

 

jp

JV puts his machining skills where is mouth is as well... I wouldn't have my Hendey lathe running if it weren't for him.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joe, I have a question for you.  You suggested that you used 1-3/4" OD Copper pipe with 1-1/4" threaded brass fittings.  You determined that your fittings had enough meat that they could be machined on both the ID and the OD to achieve a configuration that would work for your manifold.  I studied your postings and certainly agree.  Now for my question.  I need to use 2" OD copper pipe and if the ratio is the same as what you have used, I should be using 1-1/2" threaded brass fittings for my build.  In your mind, do you think that the 1-1/2" threaded brass fittings will have enough meat that I can complete a similar build that you have completed?  The 2" copper "L" type pipe will have a 1-7/8" ID which is just what I need.  That will give me a 1/16" or .064 wall.  I think the wall will be just fine.  I am a 2 hour drive to the nearest fitting outlet that would let me evaluate (up close and personal) some 1-1/2" threaded brass fitting to make my own determination.  I am after your thoughts or any other posters thoughts on this subject.  I did troll the WEB but could not find specifications that included the wall thickness.

Al

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The OD of 1-1/2" pipe is 1.9 inches so 1-1/2" fittings should be perfect. Actually, it is a much closer fit than I had with the 1-1/4 fittings. I was going to used 2" tube until I had to deal with the problem of passing the manifold between the blocks.

 

j

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the complications of making new parts like this is that they have to fit and not interfere with the other parts. I think I have the intake sorted out but, in order to make things work well I have to take into consideration what is going on on the opposite side of the engine, This led to thinking about the exhaust manifold. I don't have one of those so I was always going to have to make one. I had a plan, but when I finally took some measurements, realized it wouldn't work at all. Here is the exhaust side of the engine...the downturn for the exhaust manifold has to be 90-degrees and it has to start about halfway across the opening for the rear exhaust port. That is a problem and I've been wrestling with it for a couple of days. It is further complicated in that the manifold has to stand out from the blocks much further than I'd like in order that the exhaust pipe clears the lower edge of the crankcase. The framing square in the picture will give you an idea what I'm dealing with.

 

IMG_0438.thumb.JPG.f7ddcd5d4ee743a567538e646c3a7be0.JPG

 

After mulling it over, I have a plan, again using my ubiquitous pipe fittings to get the curved right angle. Ths is for 2" pipe which has a nominal outside diameter of 2.375" I think this will work but I am going to have to machine the parts and have them welded together. Strange as it may sound on this forum, I've never learned to weld because welding has very few applications in the sort of work I do... it was almost never used on either brass cars or RRs which is about 90% of the work I've done. Does anyone know a good welder in the Providence / Boston area?

 

IMG_0437.thumb.JPG.f660cf9b8626fece8fb7114c618309cf.JPG

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joe,  Doe your exhaust header mostly drop down before both exhaust headers get to the collector (where both pipes join into one).  Or do your pipes sweep toward the back then join together before they drop down past the frame rail and all that other stuff that gets in the way?  It is too bad that you and I are across country from each other.  I worked for years in our Power Generation Station as a high pressure boiler repair welder, (tig, tig, stick all to code).  Have you considered butt weld fittings?  They are available in long sweep, short sweep etc., (long sweep may make for a nice smooth header pipe creation).  You need to have a good eye for fitting with butt weld fittings.   They would give you a full penetration weld, with all exterior surfaces of the fittings and pipe being smooth and in line.  It would make a nice clean build.  Just my "two cents".  I am still chewing on my intake manifold project and will be asking a few more questions.

Al

PS:  Butt weld fittings can be had in sched. 40 (good for your project) and can come in SS, also which would be nice to have a surface that may never rust.  You could then use light gauge tubing to keep the weight down.  (more two cents)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is basically what I have in mind, except that I couldn't find a butt weld elbow. Here is a picture of an original. This a car that was listed on ebay a few years ago. If you are prepared to give it a try, I'll gladly pay to ship the stuff to you when I'm done machining the parts. My design is a little complicated... I plan to make the front and back pieces, where it attaches to the blocks, separately. When those are assembled, I will join them by adding a fluted tube between them. The result won't look much like the original but by making the pieces separately I avoid a host of other problems. I could assemble the pieces and "tack" braze them so everything was in place if that wouldn't make the welding more difficult.

 

Horseless_Carriages_017.jpg.7f3da09d3e37f54fda78bded5b5998da.jpg

 

Edot... when I didn't see buttweld elbows in the McMaster Carr catalog I just presumed they weren't made. Thanks to your suggestion, I looked further and found some. Yes, that is definitely a better way to go. I really only need one short radius elbow. The rest of the parts will be relatively easy to make and I've plenty of material on hand. Also, getting something that is intended to be welded removes a certain amount of the "mystery metal" factor!

 

Thanks,

 

jp

Edited by JV Puleo (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something worth checking before you get too far with the exaust manifold is the steel pipe fittings like you have pictured.  A lot of these fittings are made from Malleable steel which is extremly difficult to weld as they are a bit like cast iron and will crack with the heat from the welder. 

 

 

Edit.

Sorry, posted at the same time as your reply

Edited by DavidAU (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is something I'd thought of - which is why I'd prefer to use a fitting that is intended to be welded. So far, however, I find that the buttweld fittings are either too small or too big... so now I'm looking for a good quality regular pipe fitting where I know what the material is beforehand. The one I bought this morning was mostly to get the size though I would use it if I had to. For the amount of work involved, a few extra dollars for a high-quality fitting is well worth the effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joe They sure made things more complicated than they needed too! Its like every pipe they decided just HAD to cross over to the other side of the block!

 

I can't help in regards to the exhaust manifold other than if you were to cast it the pattern wouldn't be too difficult. You would need a follower to maintain the part line due to the inward angle at the down pipe connection.

 

My beast is a different problem - The one piece manifold is interesting. It actually connected to a cone shaped blast pipe (similar to that used in a steam locomotive) projecting into a tin shroud/stack.

You can see all the welds and repairs - that's from the expansion and contraction due to the distance between the blocks. The other pieces are the stacks that replaced it. The complete unit has a heater box attached. If I end-up with it in a speedster I thought about running three cast iron horizontal stacks with that neat rectangular profile out through the side of the hood but somehow I think people would have a problem with the side of their cars being blow torched (aka Beast of Turin!)

 

100_3368.thumb.JPG.abe5504585546194b45fb318bffcf3a7.JPG

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Joe,  If the elbow is threaded, use caution as David has suggested.  Your elbow does appear to be the garden variety threaded elbow.  If you have a hard time finding true butt weld elbows, give me a holler as they are very available, mild and high carbon, SS in several grades.  I would really look closely at either 308 similar welds and material or 309 dis-similar welds/materials and evaluate long sweep fittings.  You could almost build the manifold to be exactly like the original.  If you want to use steel look at F-11 or F-22.  F-22 is good for more heat, maybe better for an exhaust manifold.  Weld with 9018.

Al

Edited by alsfarms
spelling (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Al... I found the butt weld elbows. I'll have to rethink my plan though. Now I'm thinking I'll go with 2-1/2 fittings which will give me an outside diameter of 2.875. That is a little bigger than I intended but ultimately all that will do is lower the back pressure which isn't a bad idea. The buttweld fittings will also same me a lot of fussy machine work so it is clearly a better alternative.

 

jp

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joe,  You would only need to use schedule 40 as you are not dealing with any pressure, just some heat.

Al

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now