SPF #2285 Born, But Still Coming To Life

[Robert S.]

Unfair! Not a level playing field

I read this on your site
I thought 1075 ran a Gurney-Weslake 4.9 liter engine?

I'm not certain what your motive is, nor what you are either asking or stating. You'll have to cut me some slack, since pot is not yet legalized in Kalifornia as it is in Colorado.

I believe GT40 p1075 was a 1968, G.H. Mirage. At least that's how the Auction house and other historians describe it. And, it is a wide body, Mk I.

In '68, one winning car was a Gulf MK I, wide body, with roundel #9, and in '69, a winning car was the same configuration with roundel #6. A winning car as used here, can be one that wins either 1st, 2nd. 3rd, or 4th place at LeMans, and/or elsewhere.

RE: p1075: "02/68 : Daytona, 8,
Ickx/Redman, DNF -03/68 : Sebring, 28, Ickx/Redman, DNF -04/68 : Brands Hatch, 4, Ickx/Redman, 1st – Monza, 39, Ickx/Redman,
DNF -05/68 : Nuerburgring, 65, Ickx/Hawkins, 3rd – Spa, 33, Ickx/Redman,
1st -07/68 : Watkins Glen, 5, Ickx/Bianchi, 1st -09/68 : Le Mans, 9, Rodriguez/Bianchi, 1st -02/69 : Daytona, 2, Hobbs/Hailwood, DNF -03/69 : Sebring, 22, Ickx/Oliver, 1st -06/69 : Le Mans, 6, Ickx/Oliver, 1st"

I elected not to use either a number 6, or a number 9 for my G.H. wide-body.

I strongly believe that wide body MK Is first appeared in '68 and '69.
I also strongly believe that 7L engines first appeared in '68 and '69.

It may be true that 7L were mostly used in MK IIs and MK IVs, but if so, I don't see how that relates to my car, or how my statements may wreak havoc in the GT40 world as we know it.

My statement on my web site regarding my car was that "it may be registered as a '65, which it was/is, but that, I/we can't help but think of it as a '69."

For the short run, and it may be changing, but I think it's still okay for one to have an opinion on one's own car, whether or not such an opinion is in agreement with anyone else's opinion. If I lived in Colorado, or elsewhere, I may hold the opinion that my car IS really a MK IV, who knows.

IHTSTRS (I Hope That Sets The Record Straight) Robert :burnout:

 

[Mike]

What an odd response Robert. I simply was asking because I too built mine with a 7L Windsor engine. I think we are both interested in maintaining period correct features on our cars and I have thought recently that I wish I had done a 289/302 version instead since that was what I thought was used in all MkI's. When I read your site and you seem to suggest that the 7L was ran in a 69 Mk1 I wanted to understand if maybe I had missed something since I was not aware of that. I did wonder why you seem to diminish other GT40s whether they were kit cars, narrow bodies, or other wide bodies with "lesser" engines. That is not something I would do as I think all of us take great pride in the cars we own no matter what they are.

 

[Rick Muck- Mark IV]

The 68/69 Mk Is ran with the 5 liter as that was the max allowed under the rules. The Mirages did run with a 5.8 (351) in 67. The rules change and the homologation requirements are why the Mirage cars were rebodied back to "GT40s" for 68 and 69.

The 7 liter (FE) was only in the MK IIs and MK IVs. There were no "7.0 Windsor" strokers in those days, they are a recent development.

 

[Mike]

Thanks for the explanation Rick. Know anyone looking for a low miles Roush 427W

 

[Robert S.]

Additions

New additions and rewrite of engine description section. 1200 h.p. TT SPF Mark I video, and short video of p1074 created by auction house.

Click Here: GT40 Zone

 

[Robert S.]

LED Lighting For GT40

Indirect pure white LED lighting — no color contamination. Small lightweight aluminum heat/waterproof fixtures. Each fixture uses 1.9 watts. Light source is not visible from anywhere outside, or inside of vehicle, nor from rear view mirror, or driver/passenger seat. Excellent for cleaning polished tranny and other components while on lift. Tested now for over two months. Pictures grainy due to lack of daylight.

 

[Robert S.]

2009 short video p1074 Gulf Mirage

This is not the video made in 2012 by the auction company. This was filmed in 2009 and is very short and with less than great image compression. It's worth a look if you haven't viewed it before. Once you arrive, go to very bottom of page. Just added late yesterday.

GT40 Gulf Mirage

 

[Mike]

That's interesting. I've seen LEDs on cars before but mostly imports. You may be starting a new trend Robert.

 

[Sean]

The scary thing is how much power you can get these days. With solid ifters my 302 based motr is expected to put out somewhere Noth of 550hp and close on 500 Flbs of torque. Of course this si at highe revs 5500 for tq and 7000for hp than with a 351 block motor.

From what I have read Mk1's had 370 odd hp at 6000rpm. Later ones somethig n like 425, so the power of even a mild 302 450 odd is well above what period cars put out.

To the extent a SPf GT40 is a 'recreation" imho it should run a 302 block. But maybe for pure street thirlls a 351 based 427 with its low rev toque is easier and more fun.

 

[Robert S.]

The sounds of a dream come true . . .

The scary thing is how much power you can get these days. With solid ifters my 302 based motr is expected to put out somewhere Noth of 550hp and close on 500 Flbs of torque. Of course this si at highe revs 5500 for tq and 7000for hp than with a 351 block motor.

From what I have read Mk1's had 370 odd hp at 6000rpm. Later ones somethig n like 425, so the power of even a mild 302 450 odd is well above what period cars put out.

To the extent a SPf GT40 is a 'recreation" imho it should run a 302 block. But maybe for pure street thirlls a 351 based 427 with its low rev toque is easier and more fun.

Thanks Sean! Good thoughts.

These are my observations and thoughts on that topic.

During the past two years, I've noticed a way-overdue evolution in both engine technology, as you alluded to, and the historic engine H.P. BASE for performance cars. The top of the H.P. base and desirable goal for street rods and many factory performance cars lingered around 500 for many years. I was surprised two years ago that so many folk in the GT40 industry, as well as the engine builders, believed that 500 H.P. was more than enough, and that solid lifters were always an extreme maintenance issue.

I attempted to explain that I was not pursuing 650 or more because I was racing, or because I was too dumb to know better, it's because big H.P., solid lifters, and a nasty rambunctious cam is what I desired for over 50-years. Lack of funds and smog laws kept me from making those simple dreams a reality.

Fortunately, I kept investigating, and came to learn that 600—650 had been the new performance base for quite a while, but many were not aware. Not only had the engine technology allowed naturally aspirated small blocks to reach 550 and beyond, the new valve-train components meant that frequent valve lashing for solid lifters on high H.P. street cars could be deferred to 30k miles and beyond.

I also agree with your assessment that it is likely the 289 and 302 blocks would be more period correct, and so would real Webers (rather than 8-stack EFI). And, they too have the technology to reach high H.P., even without forced induction.

I could have saved money on a lower powered engine, and enjoyed better gas mileage too. However, because of my age, it's doubtful I would create such a project again, even though only a fool never changes their mind. (I have secretly flirted with several vehicles like the Mark IV as one example).

So far, I am happy and content with my build. Even though I did not strip-out the sound packing from the two silencer tubes, people hear me long before they see me, and they are visually impressed if they are within a 50' circumference at an intersection, or car show, by the idle thumping and unmistakeable rapid tap-dancing of those finely machined solid lifters. The reproductions on the video recordings never do those sounds justice. For me, those are but a few of the sounds of the dream come true.

All good things, and keep your lifters up, :thumbsup: Robert

 

[Sean]

Hi Robert

Can solid lifter really go to 30K miles, I heard every 500 miles or maybe 2000 what is the secret?

Sean

 

[Jack Houpe]

Hi Robert

Can solid lifter really go to 30K miles, I heard every 500 miles or maybe 2000 what is the secret?

Sean

Sean if you really are in doubt about solid lifters go with hydraulic. I really don't see a concern but if you worry about it just install hydraulic.

 

[Sean]

I am interested to know what solids can go to 2k miles or more without adjustment. I know shaft rockers etc help. If its an adjustment every 500 miles, then yes its probably better to go hydraulic and live witht he drawbacks.

There are some better hydraulic tech that can go to 6800 rpm, but not sure how that would live on track and if solids really can doa few K miles solids are the choice. So looking for some real practical feedback with solids..

 

[Robert S.]

GT40 SBF Engine Solid or Hydraulic Lifters

Hi Robert

Can solid lifter really go to 30K miles, I heard every 500 miles or maybe 2000 what is the secret?

Sean

Hey Sean, I do feel your concern!

First, let me say that 95% of the engine builders attempted to dissuade me from installing a high performance race cam. For many months, I did not understand their reasoning. Finally, the light came on and I begin to hear about many who THOUGHT they wanted an extreme cam, but once they had one, they complained about the lack of drive ability on the streets. They became angry at the engine builder, and wanted a more mild cam installed free.

Many, including Roush, would not go as extreme on a cam as I desired, and tried to get me to go hydraulic. They eventually said they would go solid, but only with a 90-day guarantee, and not the normal 2-years.

I have no problem with my car trailering, but the moment it starts, I simply press in the clutch for a second, and it disappears. It's learning how to drive slow with a big cam. Once you learn, drive-ability is no different from mild cams.

Once I began to work with the custom engine builders, rather than the more well known production builders, the song changed. I was able to get much better warranty for solids, and was told that with the correct components (translation-more expensive technology), valve lashing was hardly ever required, except at the end of the first 90-days. BTW, the engine builder included the initial and 90-day lashing in the build price. So, they set the lash and 90-days later one final adjustment, and I have put on 11,000 miles with not a sign or sound of the need for a good lashing, or any lashing. My head mechanic inspects my engine regularly, and so do I.

The below picture shows my valve train that can withstand short bouts to 8,000 RPM. However, I have my ECU shut-off set at 7,000, just because I'm not racing, and mostly wanted high engine specs for my show card.

You can also see my engine specs/parts at: GT40 p2285 Engine & Car Specs|GT40 Engine

Note the parts such as: Jesel 1.70 Shaft Roller Rockers, 3/8" chromoly pushrods, Crower severe duty solid roller HIPPO lifters, and Titanium retainers. There is far less flexing and moving, and that is the technology that all but totally eliminates maintenance lashing.

I'm not a mechanic and didn't build my own engine, but I knew what I wanted the engine to achieve, and the builder made it happen: cam and solids. I don't regret it, I won't abuse it, and it will last a long time.

Be careful not to believe what you hear, and test it by seeking information from others who know both sides of the issue.

Please find others on this forum who own solid lifter machines and inquire. I wish you the best for your project, and hope this helps. Robert

 

[Sean]

Thanks for the response, it is very helpful.

I am doing a very similar valvetrain to you, I think shaft rockers and afew other things make for a relaible solid vavetrain. The builder seemed to say that after the first check the valves could go 10K miles, but to keep an eye on them.

My Crank is one of the lightweight custom ones from crower as are the rods, pistons are from diamond. Heads are the new AFr 195's cnc ported. I think we are looking at 570 hp around 7200rpm and 460 ftlbs at 4500, all that from a 302. Its a dart iron block so as to be able to vintage race. Wea re also going avaid dry sump.

Frankly if I get 15K miles of track time from the motor before a refresh I will be happy.

A question about the clutch, how do you find that driving on the street?
Also the 11.1 compression ratio, I am doing same and plan to mix 50/50 race pump gas, does it work ok with pump in a pinch.

In the end from what I can tell, the power more than anything comes from the heads, and this technology has moved on vastly in the past few years and is lightyears from the 60's. In fact in the last year head tech has made leaps. The rest of the componants are to make it live, well that and lighweight internals make it very responsive.

Apart from motor size another area where we will differ is I am going carburated, a necessity for vintage racing. I was surprised how far carb tech has moved on. They seem to now make the most power and weigh the least, although lacking that open stack eye candy.

 

[Jack Houpe]

Sean I have stated I have solid cam and the car is over 12k miles, no rebuilds, no problems, the only time I have checked the adjustment is before a open road race and one other time. So that makes 5 times I checked them, at least two of those times needed no adjustments at all. I would prefer hydralic as I have my rev limit set to 6500 anyway and that is my plan went I detune it.

 

[Robert S.]

GT40 p2285 Induction|Clutch|Compression|Octane|Lifters

Thanks for the response, it is very helpful.

I am doing a very similar valvetrain to yours, I think shaft rockers and a few other things make for a relaible solid vavetrain. The builder seemed to say that after the first check, the valves could go 10K miles, but to keep an ear on them.

My Crank is one of the lightweight custom ones from crower as are the rods, pistons are from diamond. Heads are the new AFr 195's cnc ported. I think we are looking at 570 hp around 7200rpm and 460 ftlbs at 4500, all that from a 302. Its a dart iron block so as to be able to vintage race. Wea re also going avaid dry sump.

Frankly if I get 15K miles of track time from the motor before a refresh I will be happy.

A question about the clutch, how do you find that driving on the street?
Also the 11.1 compression ratio, I am doing same and plan to mix 50/50 race pump gas, does it work ok with pump in a pinch.

In the end from what I can tell, the power more than anything comes from the heads, and this technology has moved on vastly in the past few years and is lightyears from the 60's. In fact in the last year head tech has made leaps. The rest of the componants are to make it live, well that and lighweight internals make it very responsive.

Apart from motor size another area where we will differ is I am going carburated, a necessity for vintage racing. I was surprised how far carb tech has moved on. They seem to now make the most power and weigh the least, although lacking that open stack eye candy.

Sean, GREAT! You are moving along; I worried you were stuck in first gear. Good show.

I must have missed the information you were going to race/track this car. I suspect you may have to lash sooner than I will, since my driving does not include race/track. However, you surely will not have to lash every weekend as some still remember from long ago, far away.

I think you nailed the whole concept about lightweight strong components. I did use an aluminum flywheel, pistons and such, and I love the quick throttle response of my engine, and it sounds like yours will be very alive as well.

The clutch I ended up with is a double McLeod Kevlar super clutch. It holds the high 645-FP of flywheel torque without slipping. The clutch pedal does not take a lot of pressure to actuate, but some of that is due to linkage and hydraulics. However, while my clutch is extremely heavy duty, it strangely does not like being slipped, and is more susceptible to slipping damage than a typical clutch is. My mechanic, who highly recommended this clutch, has installed them in many high performance Mustangs, but a few of those clutches failed. Once the mechanic took a ride with the customer, he noted how they road the clutch, and over slipped them at graded intersections (Poor driving habits). Apparently, the clutch surfaces (may not be a proper name) are much thinner because it is double, and providing you do not slip it, or ride it, it is the best. I have had no problems whatsoever.

Induction strategy was a struggle for me for over six months or longer. Your assessment that a single four-barrel can produce the same H.P. as an EFI engine, and sometimes more, is correct. I love the sound of the cold start carbureted race engines. However, since my goal was street driving and car shows, I wanted something that appeared more bad azz, and more traditional (For Mark ones) than a four barrel with an unremarkable air cleaner. Then I had to pick between the real Weber set-up, and the 8-stack Weber look-alike EFI. I arrived at my decision when I realized I desired to motor to Lake Arrowhead/Crestline and other destinations with 5 to 6k altitudes, and did not desire to have engine problems because of the thin air on a high performance engine. The other issue was cold starting with Webers, and the occasional backfiring through the stacks. My choice to relieve myself from such worries and problems was the Weber look-alike 8-stack EFI. So, no cold start problems, no altitude change problems, and no backfiring up the stacks.

My engine compression was originally 10.5 to 1 and was designed to run on pump gas. I guess that was at my insistence due to what I now believe was my dire concern about engine detonation. After six months, I realized how cold blooded my engine was, and that media articles concerning detonation were truthful, but with careful planning and no engine abuse, 11:1 could be employed. Therefore, we changed it by installing new pistons, and it has been fine ever since.

Now that I have actual experience, I understand that my race engine was built correctly with lose fitting pistons and other components, and that because of the large radiator, and powerful twin fans, and the larger water content in the radiator system (Because of travel distance because of rear engine) the car runs extremely cool. If anything, I worry that the oil runs too cool. However, your track/racing use will generate more heat and for longer periods. I would guess that for street use of your car, pump gas alone would suffice.

Onward! Robert Sackett

 

[Mike]

To the extent a SPf GT40 is a 'recreation" imho it should run a 302 block. But maybe for pure street thirlls a 351 based 427 with its low rev toque is easier and more fun.

Easier? I think you mean balls all the time vs balls between those two little hashes on the tach yes?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYDQRHreLbM"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYDQRHreLbM[/ame]

 

[Sean]

Easier? I think you mean balls all the time vs balls between those two little hashes on the tach yes?

GT40 - YouTube

In the end a good strong single cam V8 is going to have a 2-2.5 K torque and Hp spread, its the limits of the cam. On a 302 based motor this spread is going to be higher up the rev range and both torque and Hp may be a little less than a 351./427, or depeding on spec close in torque and higher in Hp.

My assumption is that a 302 motor done right will have an affinity to rev just not possible with a long stroke big bore 351. Then there is also gearing and final drive ratios optimised for one powerplant or another.

Clearly a 302 motor is going to be more busy and reguire a bit more work to get the optimium performance. I am not sure that a 550hp 302 is going to perform any less than a 550hp 351 stroker. What I do think is that when out of the powerband at say 3krpm a 351 based motor is going to have such excess torque that it will not need to spin up nearly as hard to really get moving, but then a 302 motor can have a 4.22 rear ratio.

In the end though a 351 motor is going to hit harder and sooner from cruising speed and without a downshift. A 302 motor once wound up may have better optimised gearing and a 7.5k redline or more, and may make for a faster acclerating car between say 70-160. Its like the differeces between a vette and a ferrari, same hp, simlar accleration very different powerbands.

For the track I assume that the driver will be keeping the motor within its optimum pwerband, so any surefeit at lower revs is irrelevant. Then there is the issue of weight. A 9.5(351) block weighs 50 lbs more, and all that weight is up top. The heads are also a bit heavier as is the intake. Crank journals are much bigger and there is crank weight.

A normal forged 302 crank is 48 lbs, mine will be 36 lbs, lighter conrods and pistons too. It all adds up, what value does one place on loosing 50-70 lbs off the top of the motor, what value does one place on a 75-90lbs lighter package, because that affects braking and tires, two very important issues on track. Some say each lb is worth 4 hp in accleration and for braking and tires its just huge too.

Lastly yes a car can be floored with a huge amount of hp from low revs on the street, ona track past a certain point extra power is of no value, braking later carrying more speed through bends, and being able to finely modulate and put the power down out of bends counts possibly for more.

Horses for courses, I think each is optimised for where one runs. Now if you are talking an aluminum block 351 with cleveand journals very very light crank
you might have the best of all worlds, but such a motor migh put out so much Hp that it is pure overkill. Lets not forget that in period GT40s raced with 375 and then maybe 425 hp, and MK2's had 475 Hp.

All of which is to say that past a certain point the interplay between wiegh power tires brakes are going to net more gain.

We will see by mid summer when my car is hopefully running on track. The one GT40 I have driven was Mk2 with a FE motor, and when it came on cam it was like meeting the almighty, and epic experice, the only other car I have driven that felt this was was a porche carrera Gt, I hope my one will feel the same, and also be light on its feet..

 

[Mike]

So you're saying a 302 is a better track engine and the stroked 351 is a better street engine? I'm still trying to understand why both Olthoff cars are running stroker 427s?

You ever consider becoming a site sponsor?