The Ultimate IH Fourbanger

A few shots of the rods. Still don't have the crank back. Guess the word I got was incorrect and the crank had not made it to the welder then the grinder. It was at the balancer but to be mag'd prior to the weld/grind. It will be touched by no less then 5 guys during this first proto run.

Scat would always be my choice because Tom leib is a good old hotrod'r and while they source imported forgings, their incoming quality is second to none and they do all machining and sizing right here in the usa. Not so for the other guys like eagle etc who have the whole deal done in who knows where.

These scat rods are "I" beam not h beam by choice. The I section is an ultimately stronger design then the h beam. The h is great if light is the goal. A total waste other wise. Carrillo developed the h rod section for racing high rpm applications not. While this May see 6k it is still slow. This bottom end will take 8k+. In bbc configurations they turn this rod to 8500 with a 4 1/4 stroke and a big heavy piston. We are well under those numbers.

P1010662 (Medium).JPG

P1010661 (Medium).JPG
 
Last edited:
So sent the replacement crank and a sample rod to the shop and he found my original one. Wtf!!!!! :confused5:

so the original one is at the crank shop I suppose it is in line waiting for it's turn (pun intended).
Why has this project been such a f'ing pain in the a&&.
 
I think the crank is finally making progress. The guy who we trust to do the stroking and narrowing of cranks was going through some serious health issues. He is now back to it.
I had a long talk with him last week to explain where I was going with the project and what I wanted to have after we were done. He agreed that using the off of the shelf rod would be a good way to go. The rod journals will have to be narrowed and welded for the large offset I want... Now let's see how long it takes to finish the crank work...:confused5:

now on to the induction system. Originally I planned on using the dellorto dhla-h carbs in a blow threw configuration. I've had plenty of time to mull it over and I'm now not sure the complexity will be worth it. I will have to inter cool the compressed air before it enters the dellortos to prevent fuel boil and also increase the fuel pressure along with a rising rate fuel pressure regulator. That is a lot o crap to pack into the Scout 80 engine compartment..... I'm now leaning toward a simple draw threw setup. Utilizing a small 390cfm vacuum secondary Holley #0-8007. I will boost referance the power valve run a max of 8.5 pounds of boost initially. I rangled up a very nice nos cast aluminum carb to turbo adapter from an local auto swap meet that should be perfect. Even has provisions for carb heat by coolant circulation. These things are rarer than hens teeth. The only options I have found have been crappy fabed up aluminum jobs made for the turbo vw bug market. I attached a couple pix of the adapter... Simply junk in my opinion.

My calculations based on rpm, displacment and, volumetric efficiency point to a lot of horse power all in by 5000. Looks like 260-270 with my ve estimates being very conservative... Also this makes the 370 cfm rather necessary. I don't think it will be to much.

The turbo I already bought (gt2554r) it small too. It was ok with the 152 but with a 190 inch mill it will run out of gas. The mass flow is right off the right of the compressor map. Also none of the ball bearing garrett turbos have the carbon seal option needed to control oil while the compressor is under manifold vacuum. I have to find an appropriate journal bearing unit with enough capacity while not being gigantic... I think I have that sorted out. Garrett has a couple to chose from. I think I'll wait until I'm farther along to buy another one.
19206d1361206913-ultimate-IH-fourbanger-p1010702-medium-.jpg

19207d1361206913-ultimate-IH-fourbanger-p1010705-medium-.jpg
 

Attachments

  • P1010702 (Medium).JPG
    P1010702 (Medium).JPG
    63.2 KB · Views: 1,143
  • P1010705 (Medium).JPG
    P1010705 (Medium).JPG
    60.1 KB · Views: 1,166
Last edited:
Cant wait to see this come together! Any updated hp/tq guesstimates, since some changes will happen? What will be the projected redline?
 
Based on mass flow and rpm I conservatively estimate 240-275hp@ 5000-5500. The garrett calculator estmated 250hp@5500/240ftlb of torque @ 3000 with 8.5 pounds. Again this is with below normal ve one could expect from mildly massaged IH heads.

The rod, stroke and piston configuration will be good to 7500-8000. It'll never see that either... The bbc 4 1/4 + stroke, swinging a 4 1/2 inch piston with this rod will do 7500 continuously in roundy-round boats. This little 4 banger will have an easy life in comparison..

Red line won't be limited by the bottom end but where I decide to spring the valves. I would shoot to float @ 6000 but I will never run it there. Forced induction puts a premium on intake spring pressures because the high manifold pressure is working against the valve's under head area to push the valve open. Turbo charging adds to the exhaust back pressure and that can effect closing events on the that side but not so much as the latter.
 
Where will the turbo be mounted on your 152? Any pics of a mock-up? Or still unknown? Just wondering at how tall that carb will set when it is set on that adaptor.
 
Patience my son... :p
the carb will end up at about the top of the adapter outlet connection. The turbo will be on the passangers side ov the valve cover for the most part. Also above and as close to the exhaust manifold..
My plan is to place the carb in the general area of the intake. I think I will end up running a water to air intercooler so it'll go over there to between the compressor and intake plenum... They are fairly small and easy to fit in small spaces.. The intake can and probably will be lower hung than the factory on so that will give me some more space.

Luckily I can leave my Scout in running condition until the new engine is 100% ready to drop in.... I have all of the parts that will need to be duplicated. Still need a 345 head... I think nos ones are around or at least I have seen them in the past...
 
Not having an early engine bay in front of me to compare (but just going from memory and pics I see here), you'll have more height than I have in an Scout II engine bay, to mount a down-draft carb on that adaptor. That's one reason I'm going draw-through - no vertical room. Unless I could figure a way to pressurize a stock-ish carb and go blow-through.

In the old days adaptors like those were also made for the corvair - the outlet was triangular, though. Guys would put them on their buggies.

Since I have the rayjay compressor housing with that large 3" inlet, I'm thinking of casting an adaptor to couple right up to it, and slope downward while making a 45 degreeish turn so the side-draft runs crosswise in the engine compartment. I've discovered the "lost foam" method and hope to experiment with that this spring. Makes casting complex shapes a lot easier. Regarding using coolant to heat the base of that adaptor. I had envisioned doing this too, and believed that it would be possible to use one of those low-temp tvs to cut off flow to the adaptor (iirc GM used a vacuum controlled water valve to cut off coolant flow) at, say, 130 degrees. That way you wouldn't overheat the the intake charge once the engine warms up. I could see how such a simple modification could cut off flow to the 152t adaptor and maybe improve its function. The corvair simply used warm air to aid in warm-ups and prevent icing. If I can't improve my casting skills to include a core, I'll go this route.
 
I've thought about this too. First thing is getting a rising rate regulator that runs in the pressure range for carbs - lots of them out there for efi systems. Since blow-through was your first plan, what were you going to use?

Second is clearance. I really don't know the feasibility of building a box until I bolt up the carb and the turbo, and see what problems the turbo outlet causes.
 
I'm leaning towards a 390 cfm Holley 0-8007 on top of the adapter and draw through. May utilize a water to air intercooler if I want to run more than 7 pounds.
 
The crank is done. I asked about price but never herd back. That is a little unsettling to say the least. Will call him again next week..

Another development is that during my move to a new home the movers dropped the original engine off of a flat bed and shattered the bell mounting flange. F&%k!!!! Luckily I made contact with an ohio IH parts dealer we all know "Jeff campbell" who had some nos 152 blocks. I arranged to buy one and have it shipped along with some parts I needed for the t-ette..

More updates coming soon.
 
I May have a Holley 390cfm, that would need to be gone through, due to being involved in a barrel roll and had a little small fire. I currently don't remember what the part number is, for you, cheap. I don't think I will ever get around to using it again for awhile
 
Hey scooter, thanks for the offer.
I think this build has to many floating points to pindown a fuel delivery system just yet. I will be there a bit farther down the road im sure and will keep your Holley in mind...
 
I was pleasantly surprised when I paid for the crank work.... Just a bit over $400.00 that is more gooder than I expected given the number of hours he put into it... :arf:
I could have cut $200 off of that is I used a wide big end rod.
A nos block is in transit and the crank is wrapped up in my garage at home... Have not had time to look at it..
 
Mark pietz said:
I hope to finish my project before I die, at least. :rolleyes5:
Click to expand...

That's a good goal to shoot for Mark. :icon_eek:

some how I ended up with 2 1984 land cruisers, one of which I will keep. The other will be sold after it donates it's 5 speed trans and gets a 4 speed and becomes 100% road worthy. Bet you didn't know toyotas have donor cards.

The stroker 152 has a nos block, a stroked crank and a set of built proof rods. I just need to mock it up design, and order pistons, decide on a head, have a cam made, plumb the turbo and drop it in my Scout.
 
Is there a major reason why you went with the 152 block v.s the 196 block for this other than the .800 deck height difference? I noticed the rotating mass difference was mentioned, but I wouldn't think it would be much different, now that you went with the 196 crank. I would think the ability to increase the cid of the 196 more so than the 152 would be useful, but I'm also younger with less experience than you.

I'm not bashing your choice, you seem to know what you're doing, but I'm planning a similar build and am making sure I think of everything beforehand. Planning this is my stress reliever while I'm at college, so I have plenty of time to finish figuring this stuff out.

Thanks for the help,
Craig lenoir
 
wlenoir said:
is there a major reason why you went with the 152 block v.s the 196 block for this other than the .800 deck height difference? I noticed the rotating mass difference was mentioned, but I wouldn't think it would be much different, now that you went with the 196 crank. I would think the ability to increase the cid of the 196 more so than the 152 would be useful, but I'm also younger with less experience than you.

I'm not bashing your choice, you seem to know what you're doing, but I'm planning a similar build and am making sure I think of everything beforehand. Planning this is my stress reliever while I'm at college, so I have plenty of time to finish figuring this stuff out.

Thanks for the help,
Craig lenoir
Click to expand...
The operative word is reciprocating mass not rotating mass that effects efficiency. While I am not using the 196 crank but a modified 152 crank, it will be substantially lower in rotating mass and accelerate easier it will not improve constant speed efficiency.

With the tall 196 block you have to either run a super long rod or a super tall piston. That is not the case with the 152 block.

The stock 152 and 196 pistons are super heavy, going on memory 900gm +. With the stroke and a proper piston I will be south of 50% of that weight. The rods I have for the project will be stronger and 40% lighter in recip mass also.
 
The stock 152 and 196 pistons are super heavy, going on memory 900gm +. With the stroke and a proper piston I will be south of 50% of that weight. The rods I have for the project will be stronger and 40% lighter in recip mass also.[/quote]


I have the balancing ticket from my 196. Those pistons do, indeed, weigh well north of 900 grams. Heavy suckers!

So exactly what will your displacement be?
 
Robert kenney said:
the operative word is reciprocating mass not rotating mass that effects efficiency. While I am not using the 196 crank but a modified 152 crank, it will be substantially lower in rotating mass and accelerate easier it will not improve constant speed efficiency.

With the tall 196 block you have to either run a super long rod or a super tall piston. That is not the case with the 152 block.

The stock 152 and 196 pistons are super heavy, going on memory 900gm +. With the stroke and a proper piston I will be south of 50% of that weight. The rods I have for the project will be stronger and 40% lighter in recip mass also.
Click to expand...

Was going through some paperwork and found the balancing ticket from the machine shop. Here's the weight of a silvolite 196 piston (0.020" over), pin and connecting rod. All weights in grams:

piston: 846.6
pin: 164.8
total: 1,011.4

rod:
recip, top end: 252.2
rot, bottom end: 695.8
total: 948.0

heavy suckers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top