Jump to content


Which is more streetable : .....


  • You cannot reply to this topic
30 replies to this topic

#1 Monte's Motors

Monte's Motors

    MCM Avid Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 382 posts
  • Location:Illinois
  • Full Name:Roger Boarman

Posted 09 February 2013 - 10:55 AM

..... in the '50's era hot rod.

 

 

Fuel injection

 

OR

 

a blower

 

 

?????



#2 MachinistMark

MachinistMark

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,181 posts
  • Location:nova scotia
  • Full Name:Mark fulmore

Posted 09 February 2013 - 11:14 AM

Fuel injection on a blower? This question has far to many variables to answer.

#3 Art Anderson

Art Anderson

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,755 posts

Posted 09 February 2013 - 11:22 AM

Actually, neither were very popular on hot rods in the 1950's.  Consider that pretty much the only aftermarket fuel injection system available through most of the 50's were the systems produced by Hilborn, and even those were really only practical in constant high speed action, such as AAA/USAC Midgets (for which cars Stu Hilborn developed his first FI system, 220 cid Offenhauser AAA/USAC sprint cars, and of course the setups developed by Hilborn for AAA/USAC Championship Division cars used at Indianapolis and on the so-called "Championship Trail".   It wasn't until Mercedes-Benz developed their fuel injection system for use with the W-196 Grand Prix cars and the 300SLR Lemans-type sports car followed closely by the 300SL series of streetable sports cars, along with the Rochester fuel injection system introduced by Chevrolet on the 1957 Corvette and Pontiac on the '57 Bonneville that FI systems became practical EVERY diesel engine from the gigantic Cleveland Diesel V12 and V16 railroad prime movers used by Electromotive Division of GM, Detroit Diesels, Cummins, and everyone else who built diesel engines from the early 20th Century onward were at least "available", but the learning curve to adapt such to ordinary gasoline engines by home mechanics probably was very daunting.  In addition, the price of buying such a system was well beyond the pocketbooks and bank accounts of the vast majority of hot rodders back then.

 

Not that they weren't talked about, and wished for though!

 

Art



#4 Art Anderson

Art Anderson

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,755 posts

Posted 09 February 2013 - 11:35 AM

Superchargers ("Blowers) also were not particularly popular for street use back then either.  While supercharging for automobile engines was thought of, even installed on a few cars just before 1910,  supercharging, either by Rootes Type units (used by Bugatti and Mercedes by the end of the 1920's) or centrifugal types (made legendary by the likes of Duesenberg, Auburn, and Cord, along with Graham Paige starting in 1932) those disappeared from production cars until Kaiser tried them in 1954-55, in an attempt to pump up sales of the then-failing Kaiser Manhattan, in what Kaiser called the "Dragon"--this done to try and negate that company's stodgy reputation of relying on a rather anemic flathead inline 6.  It did not work, did not save Auburn Automobile Company (who also produced the Cord and owned Duesenberg), nor did the idea save the Kaiser automobile either.   Of course, Studebaker installed a Paxton (made by McCulloch--the chain saw people) supercharger on the 1957 Golden Hawk, and then made Paxton (centrifugal) superchargers available on the Avanti and Larks in 1963, but that was too little, too late.

 

Latham built a curious, "axial flow" supercharger for a few years, which used the turbine technology of the turbo-jet aircraft engine--namely the compressor section of those and the then-new gas turbine concept, but it couldn't be turned fast enough to create much boost--not that very many automobile engines of the time could have withstood much in the way of supercharger boost--they just weren't built for supercharging.  GMC "rootes type" superchargers were, for the most part, far to large for street use on automobile engines.  If not too large (Detroit Diesel built supercharged 2-cycle engines in configurations from 2-cylinder to V16, covering all points in between), but being "positive displacement" superchargers, back off the throttle quickly, you could blow the supercharger manifold to shrapel rather quickly.

 

Art



#5 Draggon

Draggon

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,742 posts
  • Location:Home of the Fremont Drag Strip
  • Full Name:Glenn Asher

Posted 09 February 2013 - 01:20 PM

Art is correct, not street friendly but it was done. And check out this blown flathead Cadillac from 1949.

 

flathead20Cadillac20engine20vp1-vi.jpg



#6 MachinistMark

MachinistMark

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,181 posts
  • Location:nova scotia
  • Full Name:Mark fulmore

Posted 09 February 2013 - 01:39 PM

OK. Is the question how common were they? Or how "street able" cause for starters no 2 hot rodders are going to have the same def. Of what's street able and what isn't.

That said super charging is one of the best ways to make huge "street able" horsepower.

#7 Harry P.

Harry P.

    MCM Ohana

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,856 posts
  • Location:NW suburban Chicago
  • Full Name:A mere layman...

Posted 09 February 2013 - 01:48 PM

I'm no expert (not even close)... but it seems to me that the relative simplicity of a blower setup (vs. a fairly complex and fussy mechanical FI setup) would have been a lot more "streetable" back in the day before computerized FI became common.



#8 Harry P.

Harry P.

    MCM Ohana

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,856 posts
  • Location:NW suburban Chicago
  • Full Name:A mere layman...

Posted 09 February 2013 - 01:49 PM

Art is correct, not street friendly but it was done. And check out this blown flathead Cadillac from 1949.

 

A blown flathead! Now there's something you don't see on every Tom, Dick and Harry's hot rod! 



#9 rel14

rel14

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 585 posts
  • Location:lehigh acres
  • Full Name:Randy Layman

Posted 09 February 2013 - 02:13 PM

I don't think there's a answer, cause both can be made streetable,  both were use in the 50's, and both worked.

Myself, i want a 57 fairlane, 312 Y block, with the Paxton supercharger,,   Others want a 57 fuel injected vette..

      So, the correct answer is,??



#10 MachinistMark

MachinistMark

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,181 posts
  • Location:nova scotia
  • Full Name:Mark fulmore

Posted 09 February 2013 - 02:19 PM

For instance- the dual quad, 6-71 blown 331 he I we're building with its 4 psi of boost and 9:1 compression will be an absolute pussy cat compared to my naturally aspirated single 4bbl small block Chevy.

#11 Daddyfink

Daddyfink

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 971 posts
  • Location:San Diego CA
  • Full Name:Jesse Chavez

Posted 09 February 2013 - 02:20 PM

Clark Gable thought Injection was nice, but, he liked getting blown! 

 

paxton-gable2_zps89418d2e.jpg



#12 Ace-Garageguy

Ace-Garageguy

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,053 posts
  • Location:Down two, then left.
  • Full Name:Bill Engwer

Posted 09 February 2013 - 03:16 PM

The actual question was "which is more streetable?", the period being the '50s.

 

And Harry's right, for exactly the reason he postulates.

 

The answer is, in the early '50s, supercharging was WAY more streetable. It is the EASIEST way to make power (next to nitrous injection, which was not used then), is simple conceptually and the adaptation and necessary machine work are straightforward. Even low compression-ratio engines respond instantly to pressurized induction. The first surplus GMC blower (looks like a 3-71 in the flathead pic above) setup was built in 1949.

 

Hilborn constant flow injection WAS used on the street, though the tuning was not for the mechanically less-than-stellar. Hilborn-style injection varies the mixture by throttle position alone, and as a function of engine RPM. Tuning is accomplished by varying the 'pill' or orifice in the return line. A larger hole in the pill= leaner mixture as more fuel is returned to the tank, by-passing the injection nozzles. A FEW very capable tuner / machinists made secondary systems that could more accurately tailor the mixture curve based on more parameters. Streetable for wizards, not mortals.

 

The  Bosch 'timed-mechanical-direct-injection' Art is referring to on European makes takes watchlike precision inside the injection pump, which not only varies the injection pulse timing, but also varies the injection-pump piston-stroke. Again, it takes a wizard to tune it, and a six-cylinder injection unit will only adapt to a six-cylinder engine, and so forth. Perfectly streetable on the cars they came on (think 1955 300SL Gullwing Merc) but high in maintenance. Also shortened oil life and possibly engine life, as excess fuel tended to wash down the cylinder walls at shutdown.

 

GM's FI system that debuted in '57 didn't make huge power, was quite primitive, but easily adapted to other engines.

 

Chrysler / Bendix experimented with electronic injection in 1958. It was troublesome, and my understanding is that every unit was recalled and replaced with carburetion. Interesting to note however that it is the basis for the successful Bosch solid-state electronic injection system introduced 10 years later. Zip zero nada useless in the '50s. B)


Edited by Ace-Garageguy, 10 February 2013 - 04:16 AM.


#13 my name is nobody

my name is nobody

    MCM Avid Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 461 posts
  • Location:Ad Free, USA.
  • Full Name:I.B. outtahere.

Posted 09 February 2013 - 07:51 PM

I understand a McCulloch supercharger was an option for the

1934 Ford V8.

 

we built this one for a 3 window '33 Ford coupe.

however, the supercharger is a 1934.

 

 Harmon Collins magneto, Navarro heads, Merc crank,

and a few other goodies. it is very streetable, completely tunable.

 

I do know this combo spit out 249 Horsepower with a nickel plated stromberg 97.

 

 

 

 

HotRods002.jpg

 

 

 

HotRods001.jpg

 



#14 zenrat

zenrat

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 821 posts
  • Location:Mount Martha, Victoria, Australia
  • Full Name:Fred Maillardet

Posted 09 February 2013 - 10:45 PM

No-one has defined streetable yet.  To me means that it will start on the key, idle reliably, drive nicely in heavy traffic and get rubber in all 4 gears.

 

I'd have to say blower but streetability (streetableness?) would depend on what you were using to mix & meter the fuel/air with the blower.



#15 MachinistMark

MachinistMark

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,181 posts
  • Location:nova scotia
  • Full Name:Mark fulmore

Posted 10 February 2013 - 04:12 AM

Street able to me means "runs on pump gas" my SBC is getting a huge single plane, 11:1 car and .575 or .630 lift. Haven't decided which cam yet...
And it'll be "street able" in my eyes

#16 Ace-Garageguy

Ace-Garageguy

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,053 posts
  • Location:Down two, then left.
  • Full Name:Bill Engwer

Posted 10 February 2013 - 04:23 AM

Yeah, Mark's right. Streetable is entirely in the eye of the beholder. To me it simply means something that's not so insanely radical that it can still be used occasionally as actual transportation, but my definition of "streetable" (and Mark's I suspect) would be un-drivable to a lot of folks.

 

The Porsche 959 of the late '80s was probably the most "streetable" high-performance car of all time (IMHO). Good for an honest 200MPH, it would happily idle at 600rpm with the AC running, while Mom got the groceries.



#17 comp1839

comp1839

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,318 posts
  • Location:pottstown, pa.
  • Full Name:dave smith

Posted 10 February 2013 - 04:32 AM

perhaps you are mixing the term "drivable" with "streetable".  my '37 will be streetable but, you all my not consider it driveable.



#18 Draggon

Draggon

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,742 posts
  • Location:Home of the Fremont Drag Strip
  • Full Name:Glenn Asher

Posted 10 February 2013 - 09:59 AM

Clark Gable thought Injection was nice, but, he liked getting blown! 

 

 

 

I bet Jesse's getting some warning points  :lol:



#19 MachinistMark

MachinistMark

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,181 posts
  • Location:nova scotia
  • Full Name:Mark fulmore

Posted 10 February 2013 - 10:14 AM

Yeah, Mark's right. Streetable is entirely in the eye of the beholder. To me it simply means something that's not so insanely radical that it can still be used occasionally as actual transportation, but my definition of "streetable" (and Mark's I suspect) would be un-drivable to a lot of folks.

 

The Porsche 959 of the late '80s was probably the most "streetable" high-performance car of all time (IMHO). Good for an honest 200MPH, it would happily idle at 600rpm with the AC running, while Mom got the groceries.

Larry larsons nova is pretty gnarly too - 6.90's at 200 plus, and will happily idle in traffic



#20 comp1839

comp1839

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,318 posts
  • Location:pottstown, pa.
  • Full Name:dave smith

Posted 10 February 2013 - 10:56 AM

so, rodger, what's your definition of streetable. and while you're at it, is your blower carbed or fuel injected. after all it is your question.