Date: Fri, 8 Jan 93 16:31 EST
From: [email protected] (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Re: Engines of Yore #5

> note:  I did some of these early last year and posted them in
>        rec.motorcycles, as they pertained to motorcycle engines.
>        If our esteemed moderator wishes I can repost them here.
>
> [Absolutely!  JGD]

I second that!  It seams that you can always get info (and parts)
for rodding a more recent V-8 but getting stuff on this type of
equipment is indeed rare these days.


>  Flipping through my 1943 Edition of Dykes' Automotive Encyclopedia,
> we find a set of photos and some text on the Buick 8-80 and 8-90 of
> late 1930s design.  This is an overhead valve straight-eight engine
> of moderate displacement.  The block and crankcase are cast in one
> piece of iron, and the cylinder head is another piece of iron.  This
> was by no means a given in the 1930s, where some engines used multiple
> cylinder heads or barrels.

Music to my ears....  This is the engine I've been working with for
awhile now.  Its just too cool of an engine to swap it out for a modern
V-8.  Unfortunatly, I've had to learn to accept lower HP potential but
its still worth doing.

Since finding parts is difficult (and I don't want to give my second
mortgage to a machine shop) I have to stick to carburation, intake
and exhaust modifications to try and boost power.  I also am replacing
the points with a high energy electronic ignition.

>  Buick used a crankshaft of 8 throws spaced 90 degrees apart, rather
> than the 45 degrees you might expect.  Five very wide main bearings
> support the shaft, which has a front bearing, cylinders 1 and 2,
> another bearing, cylinders 3 and 4, etc.  Thrust appears to be on the
> center bearing.  Several throws have bolt-on counterweights, another
> feature often seen on very old motors.  This allowed simpler casting
> and machining and posed no particular durability problem given the
> low RPMs typically used.  Of particular interest is the harmonic
> balancer, an unusual piece for the 1930s.  It consists of a two piece
> cast iron ring bolted around the rear crank cheek of #1 throw, well
> inside the cylinder block.  The origin of the flexible material is
> not given in my sources, but I expect either oilproof rubber or
> leather.

I didn't get a chance to check this last night but there seems to be
some improvements in this engine over my '36.  I don't think my '36
has this many main bearings.  I'll have to look for a balancer; I've
 never noticed one before but I have'nt split it either.  The engine
is incredibly smooth running (kind of reminds me of an airplane engine)
so I am a little surprised that it would need a balancer.

>  The water pump, generator, and distributor are gear-driven from the
> front of the engine.  The fan belt turns only the fan.  The flange
> between the water pump and generator contains an oil drilling to provide
> full pressure lubrication to the front generator bearing.  This
> arrangement was undoubtedly more reliable than a forest of V-belts,
> particularly considering the state of the art for V-belts in the 1930s.

The '36 uses a belt to drive the generator.  I kind of appreciate this
since it will be load easier to replace it with a modern alternator.

> Carburetion
> was a two barrel updraft device, nowadays seen only on stationary or
> farm engines.  Though thoroughly obsolete by modern standards, the
> updraft carburetor ensured only vaporized fuel entered the intake
> manifold; any cold droplets would fall back into the carb.  Updraft
> carbs were particularly famed for smooth idling and low RPM operation.

Must be another improvement or perhaps something for the larger sedans.
My special had a standard 2 barrel with an oil bath air filter.  It does
sit on top of a heat riser that preheats the fuel but certainly no updraft
going on there.  I know there were different intake/exhaust manifolds
for the different series cars.  Perhaps there was a super high-perf one
available and I haven't located it yet.  Thats why I'm having fun
learning all the details of intake/exhaust manifold design and also
why I purchased a MIG.

Anyway, thanks for the post!  If anyone out there knows of hop up tricks
for these old motors I'd certainly be glad to hear them.
----------
Posted by: emory!anubis.network.com!jmiller (Jeff J. Miller)


Date: Fri, 8 Jan 93 23:54 EST
From: [email protected] (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Re: Engines of Yore #5

-> Music to my ears....  This is the engine I've been working with for
-> awhile now.  Its just too cool of an engine to swap it out for a
-> modern V-8.  Unfortunatly, I've had to learn to accept lower HP
-> potential but its still worth doing.

 Serendipity strikes again!  I've always wanted to tear into some of
those older engines and see what makes 'em tick.


-> I didn't get a chance to check this last night but there seems to be
-> some improvements in this engine over my '36.  I don't think my '36
-> has this many main bearings.  I'll have to look for a balancer; I've
-> never noticed one before but I have'nt split it either.  The engine
-> is incredibly smooth running (kind of reminds me of an airplane
-> engine) so I am a little surprised that it would need a balancer.

 The book didn't actually say what year the engine they showed was, but
it has to be before 1943, since that's when it was printed.  It
definitely has that many bearings; there are two cutaways, the old timey
kind where they airbrush over photographs, it looks like.  The
"balancer" is probably what the Brits call a "damper", the engine should
be in balance to start with, but they probably added the damper to
control harmonics with that long crank.  Some older engines also used
what was called a "pendulous damper", which was a bobweight that swung
off one of the counterweights.


-> The '36 uses a belt to drive the generator.  I kind of appreciate
-> this since it will be load easier to replace it with a modern
-> alternator.

 Hmm.  How about the water pump drive?  The stuff I have shows they were
pretty proud of the direct-drive generator; must've been a later
addition.


-> Must be another improvement or perhaps something for the larger
-> sedans. My special had a standard 2 barrel with an oil bath air
-> filter.

 This is *definitely* an updraft.  Hmm... the general trend was away
from updrafts and toward downdrafts.  Buick evidently went the other
way.  This is kinda weird.


-> Anyway, thanks for the post!  If anyone out there knows of hop up
-> tricks for these old motors I'd certainly be glad to hear them.

 You're welcome!  I'd appreciate any comments you have from working with
the actual engine.  Looks like a nice layout.

 I'd clean out the ports a bit, give it a modern three angle valve job,
see about converting to a full-flow filter system, talk to Isky or Crane
about regrinding the cam, and whatever you can do for intake and
exhaust.

----------
Posted by: emory!chaos.lrk.ar.us!dave.williams (Dave Williams)


Date: Wed, 13 Jan 93 05:14 EST
From: [email protected] (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Buick EightInnaRow

-> Thanks Dave for all the info on Buick Eights. That went into my
-> keeper file.

 Aww, shucks.

 BTW, I found some more info earlier tonight, in my 1935-1949 Motor
service manual.  It indicated half a dozen variants of the straight
eight existed, and shows cutaways of two of them.  Oddly, neither
matches well with the one in Dykes, which is either an oddball or
(possibly) a pre'35 motor.  The Motor engines had flat tappets instead
of rollers,  only five main bearings, belt driven generator instead of
gear driven, water pump is moved from center-side of the block to the
front and driven by a belt, the oil warmer/cooler is not shown or
mentioned, the harmonic balancer on the #2 crank cheek is not present,
what appears to be a small multiple-disc type damper is on the front of
the crank, and post'46 models had a sheetmetal cover over the spark
plugs and wires.  Oh, yeah, and the gear drive to the cam is replaced
with a HyVo type silent chain.  Does this sound more like the engine you
have?

 If so, it makes me even more curious as to what year/model the one in
Dykes is.  Looks like Buick sort of degenerated over the years, though I
guess the newer ones worked just fine too.


 The Motor's also has some more views of the Cad V16, listing it as
'35-'37 only.  What a hawg!  I'd get a kick out of seeing one in a
street rod.

----------
Posted by: emory!chaos.lrk.ar.us!dave.williams (Dave Williams)