GT40 race car engines

Can someone break down a few of these components? Like the upper reservoir looks like quick access oil filler. Bottom reservoir is for adjacent radiator coolant for brakes. Large sheet metal box looks to be cold air box? Is that for brakes too? I'd love a break down of all of this.



Also, this is Dan Gurneys MkIV, but does anyone have more of these or any other HQ race car engine pics? Thanks.
 
Can someone break down a few of these components? Like the upper reservoir looks like quick access oil filler. Bottom reservoir is for adjacent radiator coolant for brakes. Large sheet metal box looks to be cold air box? Is that for brakes too? I'd love a break down of all of this.



Also, this is Dan Gurneys MkIV, but does anyone have more of these or any other HQ race car engine pics? Thanks.
OK, just guessing based on memory:

The big sheet metal box at the back is the FIA mandated luggage box.

The sill holds the oil cooler and tank, and ducting to the cooler.

Tall reservoir on the bulkhead is the coolant overflow/expansion tank.

Ian
 
OK, just guessing based on memory:

The big sheet metal box at the back is the FIA mandated luggage box.

The sill holds the oil cooler and tank, and ducting to the cooler.

Tall reservoir on the bulkhead is the coolant overflow/expansion tank.

Ian

I feel like I should have known that.

But luggage box? Seriously? Sort of sounds familiar. And I figured the cooler was for brakes being so close.
 

Mike Pass

Supporter
The box with the X on it looks like the aircraft style oil cooler which I think was Lycoming. It is laid down in this pic but which was usually fitted standing up on the Mk2 cars.
Cheers
Mike
 

Brian Stewart
The box with the X on it looks like the aircraft style oil cooler which I think was Lycoming. It is laid down in this pic but which was usually fitted standing up on the Mk2 cars.
Cheers
Mike
I think they were Continental oil coolers Mike.
 

Howard Jones

Supporter
You guys have me thinking. What were the most common engine specs for the 289,302 variant as raced by the factory team during the height of the program. I KNOW that things change from race to race but the basic package does usually remain pretty to the most common specification.

It would be interesting if someone had specific engine build data. Not much would be useful nowadays unless some one wanted to replicate a specific engine. Modern engine technology has come so far especially with roller valve trains and computer aided head porting but it would be to make a comparison.
 
I agree with you Howard when it comes to the engines. We just finished the build for our RCR mk-4 it is a 66' 427 side-oiler with a whole lot of internal changes. It is now 482 ci forged crank h beam rods full roller cam lifters and rocker set up,aluminum flywheel all the modern bells and whistles. Its even funny that we use Chevy bearings and 426 hemi intake valves.

When it comes to the oil cooler my plane has a continental IO520 with an almost identical oil cooler. It was built in 1967 and the only difference on the cooler is the hose connections for auto use or in my planes case, an end plate where it basically bolts to the block.

When we looked at building the side-oiler It just made more since to me to put IMO the most modern pieces into the motor. Our mk-4 is a replica if it where original I would retire...............M
 
Looking at the car in the photo recalls my conversation with Fran Kress at Amelia Island a few days ago. Fran's new MKIV was used in the Meguiars Polishing Products display out front. Fran's car was front and center and looking damn good. That car is a WOW! Not cheap but I could see why. Sorry, I took no photos though.
 
You guys have me thinking. What were the most common engine specs for the 289,302 variant as raced by the factory team during the height of the program. I KNOW that things change from race to race but the basic package does usually remain pretty to the most common specification.

It would be interesting if someone had specific engine build data. Not much would be useful nowadays unless some one wanted to replicate a specific engine. Modern engine technology has come so far especially with roller valve trains and computer aided head porting but it would be to make a comparison.

From what I have read and its somewhat vague. the 289 motors put out 375 hp, the later 302's 425hp. Considder that today a arce 302 motor is an easy 500 hp maybe 50 more than that at serious 7.5k+ revs. Wheras int he 60s 6.6K revs was a lot. Rech has really moved on even with the same architecture. Aftermarket blocks can also handle 700+bhp whereas a 289 supposedly split in two when going past 450ish and a stock 302 still supposedly splits down the middle at 500..
 
Top