Thank you Dean Yoder!
While I do the writing, poor Dean is stuck doing the real work:
The other title could have been "now you know why the hood is so long."
Wow....Rob, I pictured the K crank as being a bit stouter then the T. I can see the rod and main journals are certainly larger however.
Great picture! How is your K racer coming along?
I was just going to post, someone told me (email) that Dean also began a post with this pic. Sorry for the duplication, I did not see it.
The K crank looks "flimsy" compared to the T crank, but only because it is so long it makes the journals look small in comparison. I think Dean will probably see this and put the dimensions on later. He (Dean) is going through the engine now to see what we have (for the "K racer").
I guess this explains why your so cranky sometimes!
Rob only gets cranky when he gets Royced around. Scott
Holy cats - look how long the rod journals are. They surely must be four-bolt rods. It is much longer and much skinnier than I imagined. That is an impressive bunch of machining, there. I was also not aware they had seven-main bearings.
At first glance it reminds me of those cranks made by the guys who have made straight-eight T engines.
I should confine my comments to the other Model K thread, but this works, too; Rob, I always enjoy the research you do and I hope you continue to post it. I am happy to admit that I am among those who have had my thinking changed with regards to the Model K.
T journal - 1.248, K - 1.615 in.
And a hinged rod (same as our Model N).
I don't know what your budget is for this project Rob, but if there is room, you ought to consider having a better crankshaft made up by Bruce Crower or Velasco. That crank is a pretty frail piece, and completely unbalanced. Given the length and flexibility of the chassis and crank case it is not likely to last long. The price of a custom billet crank with counterweights might seem high until you start shopping for a person to make patterns and then cast / machine a replacement crankcase.
I would think one would need to be careful where to pick it up to avoid bending it from it's own weight.Bud.
This is an example of the evolution of technology that eventually would be the Model T.
The Model K while being successful to some degree was becoming a dinosaur. Just to big and costly to build and maintain.
The Model T was a more practical car to build and market. 15,000,000 plus has to be a success.
Time was marching on and the K was left behind.
Gotta go with Royce on this one. That crank looks even more spindly the the T crank. I could imagine that there would be lots of twisting just under normal running! I think that a new custom-made crank would be a huge improvement.
Not to mention the fact that I bet it's very hard to make sure that the crank is perfectly straight and in alignment with all seven main bearings!
Just as with all the Pre Ts, the Model K was a financial and sales success. I was just working on "filing" a few news clips and came across this October 1906 newspaper. I think we perceive the Models B and K to have been a "failure" due to only selling 500 B and 1000 K models.
However, this newspaper article about 1905-1907 car sales puts sales of high end cars a little more in perspective.
In addition to saying that Ford planned to build 1000 Model K, the article mentions sales of Thomas and Pierce cars.
This portion says Pierce Great Arrow cars sold 350 in 1905, 700 for 1906 and planned 950 for 1907, among three models. For a comparison, Ford sold about 440 Model Bs in 1905 and over 300 Model K in 1906 (of three models offered by Ford).
The Thomas portion of the article says they built 420 cars in 1905 (of three models), 615 in 1906, and planned to build 800 for 1907.
These two makers were among the best known and respected of "high end" automakers, and after reading this, their numbers are comparable to Ford's production numbers. Unfortunately, I don't have a breakdown of their (Pierce and Thomas) production by model.
Lastly, we know from Ford financial records Models B and K were the profit leaders for Ford in 1905 and 1906. For 1907 Model K generated significant revenue while selling 457 cars.
The crank at 1.6 inches, with seven mains, is actually very stout looking. It's misleading when looking at the entire length of the shaft because the length is so long.
If one compared the journal size relative to the distance between main bearings I think it would change this perception. I guess we should contrast it with other newer straight six or eight crank dimensions for a better comparison..
I've seen a lot of your posts and I have come to respect your opinion. If you say it looks pretty stout, then who am I to argue?
Thanks, however I don't know how it would stack up to other long cranks. Dean Yoder told me he thought it looked like it was strong enough for the motor. Does anyone know dimensions of other long crankshafts?
It is not polite to ask someone how long there crank is and wether it will stack up against someone else's crank!
But we're all friends.......
After supposing the rods to be four-bolt, I was NOT prepared for them to be ONE-BOLT! LOL.
I'm impressed with the early pre-T Fords and love learning, vicariously through Rob's hands-on process, of their innards.
The fact that the crank has 7 mains makes it strong. The crankcase is the week link. Additional weight would stress it more.
A 6 position E-timer would be mice !