Aluminum Head for FC (and S2)

[DaveW]

Actually, the hp gain with the ali head in FF has been a sore point, so avoiding that issue in FC/S2 might be worth the small amount of trouble. I mean, come on, guys, a two-cell table is pretty easy to do. Iron head: 1190 lbs. Ali head: 1215 lbs. What's so difficult about that?

I've already got 15 lb of ballast at 1190. Adding another 45 (20 for the head and 25 for the increase) would be real interesting.

[Stan Clayton]

I feel your pain, Dave! We had to add 45 lbs to get up to the Ralt's minimum weight in Atlantics.

Stan

[Steve Demeter]

Was there a weight increase for the aluminium heads in FF.

I think that there was not.

As far as the cost thing goes, IMHO it is not reasly any different than the guys who spend the money buying the best pro motors and new tires and the like.

What would happen is that these guys would sell their iron heads off when they get aluminium heads working and the have nots will get better stuff in the long run.
Stan you asked.

[Purple Frog]

Read the Frog's lips. No added weight penalty.

[RobLav]

Agree - no added weight penalty necessary.

[Mike Bingham]

[font=Arial][size=2]anyone consider that horsepower may be REDUCED by using an aluminum head?

if..and this is critical..if all head characteristics are same as ported iron head, (i.e. valves, runner length , diameter, plug angle, combustion chamber angle, volume, etc....most importantly if combustion chamber CCs are mandated to remain same as iron head)

and same head gasket must be used,

power will suffer...
[/size][/font]

[Stan Clayton]

The proposal includes a provision to coat the water jackets to retain heat, so I doubt there will be meaningful power loss.

Stan

[Chas Shaffer]

Any thoughts about how an aluminum head would work as a stressed member on a 98 and newer VD or other cars using the engine as a stressed memeber (possibly the Tatuus, Carbir or Mygale)? I'm wondering if we'd have to come up with a new mounting or additional bracing.

The current upper engine mounts that bolt to the head are made of aluminum and I cracked one at the runoffs this year following a bump at the rear of my car. That little piece was $400. I'd hate to destroy a new aluminum head after an incident. I realize aluminum heads have been used as stressed members on many cars for years but I'm curious if our cars were designed with an aluminum head in mind. I'm not sure how the Zetec engine is mounted in this chassis, perhaps that would shed some light.

If strength isn't going to be an issue I would hope the head will be made dimensionally correct so that existing engine to chassis mounts will work.

Any idea what a fully prepped aluminum head would cost? Would the head last longer between rebuilds?

[Mike Bingham]

[size=2]i would have to see some empirical data regarding dyno test before swapping to aluminum head. If all other factors are the same...port size, seat width angle, runner length volume combustion chamber cc etc....i believe the horsepower would be less than cast iron head would make...

it is a known empirical fact that an engines compression ratio may be raised 1 to 1 1/2 points without detonation simply by using aluminum heads...this is because of the heat dispensation rate aluminum has versus cast iron.

Conversely, if compression ratio is locked in by the rules, ( i.e. combustion chamber volume is restricted, piston deck height and head gasket is restricted), then the compression ratio is set in stone. The thermal properties of aluminum will actually hurt performance ( in this particular unique case) relative to the performance of a cast iron head...the only benefit is 20 pounds lighter weight...additionally, head gaskets are more prone to blow out, especially the stock ones that are required...simple because we have two dissimilar materials mating together..iron block, aluminum head...them stock head gaskets were only meant to seal iron head to iron block, and 8.5 to 1 compression at that...ifin you do get these heads accepted, you have to change to new tech gaskets too...

but i digress[/size]

[Stan Clayton]

[size=2]i would have to see some empirical data regarding dyno test before swapping to aluminum head. If all other factors are the same...port size, seat width angle, runner length volume combustion chamber cc etc....i believe the horsepower would be less than cast iron head would make...[/size]

Mike, the proposed head would comply with all current dimensional restrictions for iron heads, except for a slightly thicker valve seat. That will result in a different short side radius which in the FF head made 1-2 more hp. The same may occur with the proposed alloy Pinto head.

All the rest of the issues you mention can be dealt with in testing.

Stan

[Bob Wright]

[size=2]If this is seriously being looked at; ie a proposal to the CRB, why not make it a package of alu head, rods, pistons, etc. to create a 5000 mile motor. A hp jump might be an issue (not for zetecs, those can be dialed up as much as necessary) to the existing pintos, but everyone would have to take that deep breath sometime in the interest of preserving viability.[/size]

[size=2]just a thought...[/size]

[Stan Clayton]

Good point, Bob. Although it may not have been stated as such, the alloy head IS part of a comprehensive upgrade program for the Pinto engine. Before I came on the CRB new high quality forged rods were approved for the class, as were the superior Mahle pistons. A discussion leading to a true forged piston for the Pinto is in its early stages, and the plan is to have it on board before the current supply of Mahle pistons runs out (in 1 to 2 years). We also surveyed engine builders about crankshafts, but the consensus was that an aftermarket crank is not needed at any anticipated hp level. If all goes to plan, within a year or so we will have top quality forged rods, bolts and pistons keeping the bottom end together, as well as possibly an alloy head. All told, it should keep the Pinto viable for many years to come at the present or any reasonable power level.

Edit: I have already spoken with Doug Learned and several of the engine builders about how to dramatically improve the life of the engine. It comes down to lighter intake valves and better follower geometry (probably a roller cam). I don't know that we can get to the 1000 hours mark recently set by Enterprises' 2.3 Duratec dyno mule, but we should be able to significantly improve on the present paradigm.

Regards, Stan

[Curtis Boggs]

You'll have to ask the engine builders, .. but from all the dyno testing
and development work I did with two prominent engine builders, ..
didn't see ANY loss of power going from iron to aluminum.

Also at first there was NO HP advantage to the aluminum head and HP
numbers where identical. Were the extra power in aluminum came from
was the development work done on that head.

We build bracket race drag engines in my shop, . mostly around 500"
big block chevy's, .. some with iron heads but most with aluminum.
We've not seen the "heat dissipation" issue, .. but of course it's harder
to see 1-2 hp amongst 800 or so.

I think if you go to a 2, L head made identical to the iron head it will make
the same power. At the compression ratio in this engine the heat dissipation
will have LESS effect then a higher compression race engine.

There may be a performance advantage, ..
maybe a small one from the improved short turn / valve seat area.

To be honest, .. all the talk about weight breaks, .. for iron heads, .. etc.
is just muddying the water over what will be a very small issue.

It's MUCH more important to get the better parts through to help keep
the class going, .. and work out the smaller details.
If you get hung up on the small stuff, .. it'll never get done.

But then again, I always was a "big picture" type person.

Curtis

[Mike Bingham]

don't git me wrong, Stan

i commend your efforts in the propagation of parts for the race class you have identified as facing obsolescence regarding class..

ifin you want to sell me a aluminum head that is SCCA legal, with new hi tech head gasket, that is SCCA legal, i may buy one..but you still have not presented any empirical numbers about the Horse power..

may i digress and again state that simply replacing a cast iron head with samo samo aluminum head is a HP no go!

note..

[size=2]from Complete Book of Engines ..Petersen Publishing [/size]

[size=2] compression ratio H.P Torque[/size]

[size=2]1971 Ford 2000 cc engine 9:1 100 hp@ 5600 rpm 120 ft/LB @ 3600 rpm[/size]
[size=2]1972 Ford 2000 cc engine 8.2 to 1 86 hp @ 5400 rpm 103 ft/LB. @ 3200 rpm [/size]


[size=2]in both cases same valve size, cam shaft lift, duration...were in effect..[/size]
ifin you remember..the enviro weenies were hyping global COOLING..i say again..COOLING back then..

hence the lowering of compression ratio and the insurance companies were scaling down muscle car HP..

bottom line is you have not proven your case to me about features and benefits of aluminum head...using STOCK head gasket...and mandated compression ratio...as above indicates...

one point loss of compression ration on a small mill like we race is a whole bunch of lost horsepower..

as above demonstrates.. 8.2 vs. 9:1 compression is a bunch...

you have done a good job of making me aware of the need for aluminum head
you did an excellent job of pointing out the features and benifts of the aluminum head..

but you have not sold me on the swap


this is why winter is fer bench racin!

[Stan Clayton]

Not to worry, Mike, I promise not to bite your head off...!

I haven't mentioned a specific horsepower for a very good reason...there are no alloy heads to test. We won't KNOW how much power they make until we get a chance to try one out. Equally obviously, Doug can't risk making the head until we give him the green light that it'll be legal.

I think they call that a catch-22.

That said, what we learned from the alloy FF head is probably indicative of what we can expect from the Pinto head. In the hands of a good porter, the alloy FF head makes 1-2 hp more than an equally well ported iron head, I am told that this is mainly because of the better short side radius introduced by the need to thicken the casting around the valve seat. Doug says that we should expect this same thing to happen with the alloy Pinto head.

FFs are permitted aftermarket head gaskets in addition to the Ford piece, so it stands to reason that we could permit aftermarket head gaskets for the Pinto so long as the maximum CR is not exceeded.

I'm not going to try to sell you on the swap, Mike, but I hope that answers your questions.

Regards, Stan

[Curtis Boggs]

as above demonstrates.. 8.2 vs. 9:1 compression is a bunch...

Mike,

Your not LOOSING a point in compression, .. it's that an aluminum head can
TAKE an extra point more in compression then an iron head
with the same fuel before it detonates.

In the replacement form the aluminum head would have the same compression
as the current iron head.

We've been through this very thing with the FF and it's proven it's self to
be a fairly easy & painless move. We can expect very, very similar results
with the 2.L head.

Stan, .. I really understand Doug's position on making core boxes, molds etc.
for a head he might not be able to sell, .. but there are many more places to
sell this head. I'm doing some 2.L heads for a circle track series right now.

Curtis

[Mike Bingham]

ifin you get it thru Congress, I want one! hope the head gasket thing gets changed too!

btw i had long history running round track with 2300cc..Holley 500 cfm, roller cam, they turned 8500 rpm on stock Ford rods..lot os power and lot of fun..

[Stan Clayton]

Stan, .. I really understand Doug's position on making core boxes, molds etc. for a head he might not be able to sell, .. but there are many more places to sell this head. I'm doing some 2.L heads for a circle track series right now.

You may well be correct about other places to sell a 2L head, Curtis, and tho I can't speak for Doug, I get the impression he is proposing this specifically for SCCA. (Doug is a long time FC competitor.)

Which 2L head are you doing for circle track?

Mike, I too started in roundy-round and still have my roller-cammed 2.3. What a kick a$$ motor...now, THAT would make a hellofa Continental!

Stan

[Curtis Boggs]

Stan,

The circle track heads are the same PITA ( pain in the a** ) iron heads we currently
use in FC, .. the only difference is I'm allowed to add material to the
ports, .. so I fill the floors up, .. fix the velocity gradient, use a better valve, etc.

As for Doug, .. yes I understand he's doing this just for SCCA, .. but
I did want to point out that he may have other places to sell these castings, ..
and may make it less of a loosing proposition from a business stand point.

Curtis

[Stan Clayton]

Yeah, it would be great for Doug to be able to add other markets, and better for everybody.

So what kind of power to they get from a modified iron-headed 2L? Any idea about TBO?

Thanks! Stan

[mbrandt1402]

I could not support this without a commitment to equalizing performance between iron and aluminum heads. Replicating the FF scenario would be unconscionable.

The adjustment may well need to be adjusted down the road as builders "learn" the new head.

If you are challenged to find a place to add weight, I can suggest any number of great restaurants, brew pubs, etc.
[size=2][/size]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2]Stan, Curtis, et al:[/size]
[size=2]EXCELLENT CONTRIBUTIONS![/size]

[Roger Eade]

Very interesting read, but I think there is already a alloy pinto head made, I think Warrior in the UK make a alloy head and block, here in NZ we modify the FC cars that are imported from the states, heads are flowed, longer rods and forged pistons, big cam, and run the on twin carbs side drafts or IDF44 carbs for those cars with bars in the way, these cars put out about 198hp, and will give a slow f5000 car a hurry up, these cars are raced in classic racing as F4 or Monoposto cars, and in that tune give good service.

[Stan Clayton]

Hey guys,

We are half way through our commentary period, and so far the CRB has received exactly ONE email on this subject. There is a great discussion in this forum, but that is not a substitute for writing a few sentences to the CRB. Please take a few minutes to review this thread and send us your inputs at crb@scca.com.

Please let us know if you support the idea, oppose it, have questions, want a comp adjustment if it's permitted, whatever...but PLEASE let us know officially.

Thanks! Stan

[Chas Shaffer]

Stan,
I've sent my letter. I hope to hear something back on my concerns.

Thanks,
Chas

[greg pizzo]

Stan and Doug please continue on with you excellent work to help strengthen the FC class
I sent my letter encouraging the compboard to approve the new head !!

keep us posted !

Greg

[Stan Clayton]

Thanks for writing guys!

Chas, I will watch for your letter on the CRB forum, and let you know when it appears.

Regards, Stan

[Stan Clayton]

Hi guys,

The comment period for this proposal has only another week or so to run before the F/SRAC makes a recommendation to the CRB. Thus far we have only 8 letters from FC guys (plus 11 more from S2 folks). If you planned to comment on this subject, now is the time. The email addy is crb@scca.com.

Stan

[Stan Clayton]

We've only received about 7 more letters since I posted my latest reminder on May 22nd, and there is only another day to get your letters/emails in to before it closes out at the end of the day on Firday. Email addy is crb@scca.com.

Stan

[tommurphy73]

I am very interested in the aluminium head concept. Here in Ireland the 2l pinto is still very popular in many forms of motorsport especially tarmac rallying. However the engine is becomming less compeditive each year. Since there is not limitation on compression ratio, valve size etc except that the engine has to be 8 valves and normally aspirated it would be possible to run very high compression ratio and get all the benifits of the aluminium head. Does anyone have a target price for such a head?

[Stan Clayton]

Tom, I have sent you an email with contact info for the builder of these heads. Stan

[tommurphy73]

Thanks Stan, Appreciate the info.

[Keith Carter]

Excellent work guys on the recent CRB approval in Fastrack!!

I want to be on the waiting list! Any ideas from the motor guys what a fully prepped head would cost?

[David Ferguson]

Remember that the proposed rule is going to be submitted to the BOD for approval. It is generaly at this stage that those against write their letters. We'll see what happens -- I hope it goes through.

[tommurphy73]

HI,

What is the current status on the Aluminium head.

Regards

[Stan Clayton]

HI,

What is the current status on the Aluminium head.

Regards

The proposal is at our Board of Directors for consideration. If it is approved, Doug should have heads available for sale around the end of the year. Stan

[Modo]

i saw a FF advertised with 116HP.....I suppose that came from the old parts.....HA HA....well I can kiss my pro Quicksiver goodbye or at least count on another $5K for 3 HP with the new head ...... whoopeeee! how about a spec cam to boost us all up to Zetec HP for $75

I have a spare junk yard head if anyone needs it

for the newbies...they were lucky to get 105 or 108 HP out of a FF engine

new head a good idea I suppose, but can we push it out 2 years??

[Chas Shaffer]

Stan,
When will we know if this has been approved and when it will take effect? I along with many other competitors need a head and have absolutely no idea what to do since no testing what so ever has been performed on this proposed head. No one knows what this will cost, what performance advantage or disadvantage it will have and when it will be available. Do we have any guarantees when heads will be available in quantity and at what cost? Can we expect on the fly rules changes if an advantage or disadvantage is found? Who will be on the hook if we find the heads can't take the stresses in our cars (there are lots of broken aluminum engine mounts and frames out there)?

I sure wish there was some formal, unbiased, testing performed on this before presenting it to the board. I'd feel a lot better if one existed. I'm not a big fan of guessing and I'm not arrogant enough to think I know it all.

[anthonywill3]

Chas (and Stan)...
I am in the same boat... I need a new head, and I am unsure which way to go at this point. Hopefully we will get some answers (soon)..
Tony

[M.L.Sauce]

Call Curtis Boggs.He will tell you all about it.

[Steve Demeter]

Mike,
Does that mean it has been approved by the BOD?