Well since the thread has been running for over 10 years I don't think a 1 or 2 month absence counts it as dead. This is a really neat build and I am excited to see it finished. the builder has stuck with it this long I think he will probably finish.
The new clutch hub came in yesterday, 1" x 23 spline to fit Ford, Porsche, and Getrag F40. I figure this way if I decide at the last second to use a G50, I'm covered lol
So what happened? Life, love, etc? Did you sell the car? What up?
if I had to venture a guess, I would say it was sarcasm. if you look at this thread overall, there are gaps with no post for a while, then posts, then gaps, ect.
So what happened? Life, love, etc? Did you sell the car? What up?
quote
Originally posted by ericjon262:
if I had to venture a guess, I would say it was sarcasm. if you look at this thread overall, there are gaps with no post for a while, then posts, then gaps, ect.
Spot on. The big gaps are due to a simple fact: I'm trying to get steak results on a hot dog budget. I do okay, but I still only have an average paying job and this stuff is really expensive. (Yes, I have other occasionally expensive hobbies also). As an example, nabbing the clutch that I was planning on spending $4K for $1K instead probably cut a year or two off my build time. I'm still always planning on how to get this done.
Here's a look at an excerpt of a small part of my up-to-date build sheet:
That just covers the EFI and dashboard.
So to answer a question, no the project is not dead. Not even remotely close. Yes, progress is slow and will continue to be slow for the foreseeable future. If you're in to immediate gratification this is not the thread for you. If you want to see something cool done with pieces of extremely rare racing history, stick around. Right now the priority is drivetrain. Electronics advance at a pretty steady and rapid pace so that's last on the list.
[This message has been edited by FastIndyFiero (edited 08-04-2016).]
A buddy had an Iron Duke AMC Spirit dirt track car that i helped develop/build the engine. He bought an aluminum SD head from Jegs that was fully ported (probably too ported for dirttrack), some 6" C&A aluminum small journal small block rods (7), Diamond pistons, Ultradyne cam, Crane rockers, Edelbrock intake. A local machine shop narrowed the big end of rods by .077" from memory to match the Duke stock crank. When scrounging for bearings, only place that would make a set wanted $200.00 just for cutting the width of "stock" SB rod bearings. I made a mandrel out of a PVC fitting with a freeze plug in one end to stiffen it to clamp the bearings to with a hose clamp. Cut .030" off one side & .045 off other in lathe. Radiused inner edge of bearing using edge of a file. Took less than an hour to make tooling and do a set of bearings. We originally had serious oiling issues till a competitor told us to see if the oil filter bypass valve had been pushed into the oil galley. BINGO! Removed and plugged hole then used a different oil filter with bypass built in.
It never ran to full potential IMO due to his choice to use BB Chevy rockers (1.72?) instead of the rec 1.55 ratio. It sounded sweet though...so i am very interested in seeing this get done. Money is always an issue. How fast can you afford to go?
Looks like Photobucket finally bit the dust on free hosting. I'll have to go through all the old posts and relink = /
I'm in the same boat, makes my stomach turn thinking about it. I have been downloading all of the pictures I had on there, and I'm going to delete my account. I'd be willing to pay a reasonable amount, but they want $500 per year to host them...
------------------ "I am not what you so glibly call to be a civilized man. I have broken with society for reasons which I alone am able to appreciate. I am therefore not subject to it's stupid laws, and I ask you to never allude to them in my presence again."
I acquired a 3L Cosworth SD4 years ago to use in a Bonneville Land Speed Record Car. It was one of the 3L IMSA engines for the Pontiac backed Fiero effort (really a Spice chassis). I freshened it, built mounts for it and fabricated the headers.
Later I ran across a brand new Cosworth 'kit' to convert a 2V SD4 to the (Cosworth) 4V version. All parts were cataloged and in individual boxes or packages. There were no subassemblies. The throttle bodies, for example, came as bare castings and all the throttle body related hardware in individual packages. There were quite a few components for each TB.
The engine was built using the Cosworth parts, a 3.625 SD crank, Carrillo rods, new (lower compression) JE pistons, and a new KRP block. I can't imagine there's another NEW Cosworth SD4 anywhere.
The new engine belongs to my friend David Wilson and his son, and will go into a street car and be either supercharged or turbocharged. He's looking for a nice Pontiac Astre, but may have to settle for a Chevy Vega. Please pass on any leads since nice ones are hard to find.
Should be fun!
[This message has been edited by michaelmount123 (edited 05-25-2020).]
Thanks for sharing Michael, I've never seen such a clean representation of this setup before. A highly modified SD4 by 'FieroSound' is my all time favorite.. I hope to see that car in person one day.
Does anyone know if the Original thread poster 'FastIndyFiero' is still working on this project?
I acquired a 3L Cosworth SD4 years ago to use in a Bonneville Land Speed Record Car. It was one of the 3L IMSA engines for the Pontiac backed Fiero effort (really a Spice chassis). I freshened it, built mounts for it and fabricated the headers.
Wow Mike! I'm excited to see another one of these built. You're definitely the right person for it. Is KRP still producing new blocks? What size head studs did you use?
As far as I know, KRP is not making blocks. Surely a low demand issue. We got a new one along with the Cosworth kit, and a GM SD block as well.
I used the head bolts that are part of the Cosworth conversion kit. I think they were 12mm, but not sure. Torque was 80 ft. lbs. I expect to run fairly low boost, so not concerned with head lift at the moment.
Spent some of my day off designing a rocker girdle:
Do you still have the CAD file for this? I am wondering if the valve spacing works with the '801 head as well. Trying to get my SD4 build some slick upgraded hardware too.
Do you still have the CAD file for this? I am wondering if the valve spacing works with the '801 head as well. Trying to get my SD4 build some slick upgraded hardware too.
I'll check, but I should have a model. If you don't hear anything back from me by tomorrow, I've forgotten, send a PM or post again on this thread.
There's a few things I'd probably change on it though, looking back at the design. Relocating the clamp bolts from the inside of the posts to the outside would be number one on my list. I can't recall the difference between 433 and 801 stud locations, that's something I haven't thought about in a long time. The main thing that's harder to quantify is the tolerances on the existing cylinder head, and whether installation of the girdle will cause deformation in the rocker posts. Ideally you want a very stiff girdle (that's the whole point), but the stiffer it is the more ability it has to make the stud deform into the girdle's position. If it's close enough then it's a net win because even if you have a large load from the girdle, there aren't as large of stress reversal ratios and fatigue life will improve.
If I were to design one now with little regard to price, I'd probably make the shaft bores oversized and include O-rings and a system to inject something like DWH 310 to take up the gap on final install. I did something similar on a work project that needed a fitup in the 0.0001's for perfect load transfer. Then as long as the rocker polylock OD is concentric to the shaft threads, you can separate the parts, make rocker adjustments, and get a good clamp-up even with slight variations in stud angle.
There's a few things I'd probably change on it though, looking back at the design. Relocating the clamp bolts from the inside of the posts to the outside would be number one on my list. I can't recall the difference between 433 and 801 stud locations, that's something I haven't thought about in a long time. The main thing that's harder to quantify is the tolerances on the existing cylinder head, and whether installation of the girdle will cause deformation in the rocker posts. Ideally you want a very stiff girdle (that's the whole point), but the stiffer it is the more ability it has to make the stud deform into the girdle's position. If it's close enough then it's a net win because even if you have a large load from the girdle, there aren't as large of stress reversal ratios and fatigue life will improve.
The clamp bolt hole relocation makes sense as far as clamp load and load distribution.
The epoxy filler, could be work around to deviation, provided one maintains the ability to loosen the clamps and adjust the rockers for lash, otherwise basic maintenance becomes much more complex. The design should be oversized on the adjuster shaft enough to allow for deviations within a "tolerance", and take up of these clearances would be accommodated as much as feasible upon clamping.
And if this gets too expensive and complicated, Jesel (as of 10-28-2022) will make their adjustable shaft rockers at any desired ratio, KPS-02716, for $1400.
Pontiac states relocated valve centers and rocker stud holes on the valves with regard to the 801 head literature. But there were incremental changes from the 433 to the 437 and 801 head, and I havent seen any definitive information what all was changed at what time and how much.
quote
10045437-Aluminum cylinder head This 2.5 special aluminum cylinder head is a race winning design for the four cylinder Pontiac Aluminum "Super Duty" that's proven itself in IMSA road racing and Competition Eliminator series. This rugged, lightweight head gives you Pontiac and NASCAR quality with plenty of extra metal, and proven performance with totally redesigned, super free-flowing ports. Oversize ductile iron seats and phosphorus bronze guides are standard. Intake volume is 178cc. This head accepts standard four-cylinder intake port centerline manifolds.
quote
10049801 — Super Duty Four High Port Special Aluminum Cylinder Head This version of Pontiac’s Super Duty four-cylinder aluminum cylinder head's are designed for maximum-effort competition engines. The intake runners and water jackets are raised .670" to improve flow. In the Special High Port casting, the two center intake ports are moved .800" closer together to straighten the path to the valves. Both heads’ rocker cover rails are raised .300", and the exhaust ports are raised .600". The valve centerlines are relocated to unshroud the valves, and the rocker stud holes are moved to match the new valve locations. The valve seats will accept 1.94–2.08" intake valves and 1.60–1.625" exhausts. The combustion chamber volume is 67cc. Technical Notes: Valve guides are supplied but not installed. A template is provided for redrilling headers to fit the revised exhaust flange bolt pattern. An intake manifold must be fabricated to fit the High Port Special's port spacing. and
Assuming this magazine photo and blurb feature the known 3 aluminum heads, the bottom "current" head is mentioned in the article as 10038433, I assume the center design is the 10045437, as the port height layout matches other photos I found, and the top is 10049801, since it matches the marketing description and port layout. being as a 437 and 801 head appear to match exhaust ports, but not intake ports, and the 433 and 437 heads match port spacing on the intake It could be entirely feasible that each Super Duty head would (except iron heads) require their own stud girdle due to valve positions differing on each design.
I even emailed Brodix last fall to ask if they had any data from when they made these heads to find out how far the valves moved on the 801 head. They told me they forfeited designs/drawings and molds to Pontiac when it folded, I assume it's all gone forever.
Assuming this magazine photo and blurb feature the known 3 aluminum heads, the bottom "current" head is mentioned in the article as 10038433, I assume the center design is the 10045437, as the port height layout matches other photos I found, and the top is 10049801, since it matches the marketing description and port layout. being as a 437 and 801 head appear to match exhaust ports, but not intake ports, and the 433 and 437 heads match port spacing on the intake It could be entirely feasible that each Super Duty head would (except iron heads) require their own stud girdle due to valve positions differing on each design.
I even emailed Brodix last fall to ask if they had any data from when they made these heads to find out how far the valves moved on the 801 head. They told me they forfeited designs/drawings and molds to Pontiac when it folded, I assume it's all gone forever.
I do still have the models, I was messing around with them last night. It looks like I had modeled the rocker studs based on the head drawing shown in the Pontiac Performance magazine. I don't believe I ever vetted that back to the 433 head that I actually have. I'm happy to generate a model with your stud locations, if you want. I don't think it would be very costly to find someone with a CMM or just a mill to slap the head on and locate the stud centers. Of course, getting the girdle fabbed could be a different story. If it was me, I'd have the main girdle and the clamp blocks milled, then 3D print drill guides for the clamp holes.
[This message has been edited by FastIndyFiero (edited 01-20-2023).]
