T Performance

Topics Last Day Last Week Tree View    Getting Started Formatting Troubleshooting Program Credits    New Messages Keyword Search Contact Moderators Edit Profile Administration
Model T Ford Forum: Forum 2016: T Performance
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Brian Healey on Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 12:42 pm:

I feel like playing around with my T and spicing it up a little. Mainly looking to pull hills better, certainly not looking to go fast as I am still using standard brakes, steering etc. I have a 1919 Touring with a 3 year old motor rebuild. About ready to install a aluminum low head that I bought at Hershey last year. Thinking about a NH straight thru as well. I see new intake manifolds that offer 60% more CFM, is that worth it? If I am increasing the intake are there options to increase the exhaust sizing? What else might increase the performance that is a reasonable bolt on? I am still using coils, rebuilt last year by Ron the Coilman. Runs great on mag and starts on mag, not looking to abandon coils and Mag. Thanks


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Dan Treace, North FL on Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 12:56 pm:

If the alum head you purchased is a high compression one, that will help a lot. Seat of the pants difference.

For my setup, Prus alum. head, Stipe 280 cam, reg. NH, and iron intake put 17.3hp at the rear wheels on the dyno. Others like the oversize intake, but tried that and seemed the lower end pull was affected. So changed back to std. iron intake.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By John Doolittle on Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 01:01 pm:

Unless you just want to "play around", and who doesn't, go one step at a time. This way you can tell what upgrade made the most difference for your application.

My preferences in this order:
* Z- head (never tried a Prus- but there are good reports)
* Chaffin"s 280 cam that is 7.5 degrees advanced
* Dan McEarchern's 7.5 degree advanced bronze timing gear if you don't want to change the cam.

The high volume intake is pretty far down my list. I tried one and couldn't tell much difference in hill climbing ability.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Richard Gould, Folsom, CA on Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 01:17 pm:

I combined a Ricardo head with a Chaffin intake and an NH. All three together made a very noticeable difference.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By doug hauge upstate NY stittville 13469 on Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 01:28 pm:

the head will make a lot of difference. I also like the nh straight thru. (I have them in stock)not sure what cam or timing gear you have but the 280 is a must. , but would be a hassle to change it now. you will do fine with the head. your rear end will also make a difference. has it been rebuilt?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Bob Coiro on Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 01:51 pm:

Low gear in a Model T is a real stump-puller. _Its ratio is so low and slow that a high-compression head, NH carburetor, high-flow manifold, snakey cam, etc. aren't going to significantly improve performance there.

That stuff goes to work after you shift up into high gear and when you apply the extra power that equipment provides, you're putting increased stress on that Achilles' Heel of the Tin Lizzie: the crankshaft. _Do that on a steep hill and the increased stress gets even worse. _What the car really needs is an intermediate gear and unless you have a Ruckstell or Warford or something like that, you really need to downshift and just accept the slow ascent. _That's not a big problem unless you have to deal with a line of impatient drivers behind you. _My solution has been to re-route my trip in such a way as to avoid steep hills by taking the long way around on secondary and tertiary roads.

Bolting on high-perfomance parts isn't going to help much unless you're willing to shove the throttle wide open and punish your engine. _If you're not already doing that, forget the whole thing.

But hey, I could be wrong—happens all the time—just ask my wife._:-)


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Brian Healey on Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 02:15 pm:

Doug, sent you an email this morning looking for Russ potter email, the one I had didn't work. Looking for him to rebuild a straight thru for me. As for the rear end, is questionable the guy taught me was questionable in many ways...


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Gene Carrothers Huntington Beach on Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 02:24 pm:

No one has said an Stromberg OF or the Etimer after the head, the camshaft and intake.

A warford or some aux tranny or rear end is high on the list.
The new camshafts don't need the gear advanced I understand. Now all you'll need is how to stop it down the other side.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Gary Tillstrom 30 miles N of Memphis TN on Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 02:24 pm:

Find out from the engine builder what cam is in it. Unless it's one of Chaffin's, you can remove the cam gear and drill new index holes to advance it by 1/2 tooth. Recent cams from Chaffin's have this feature in the grind so re-clocking the gear would be too much.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By doug hauge upstate NY stittville 13469 on Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 02:30 pm:

I do have a spare straight thru in stock, and also an e timer. but the e timer will not work on mag and your 19 is a non starter generator car. but I love the e timer in my speedster. rear end rebuilder (brennan)


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Ross Harris on Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 02:45 pm:

Russ Potter email I have is carbking@soltec.net


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Brian Healey on Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 03:19 pm:

Doug, sent you an email this morning looking for Russ potter email, the one I had didn't work. Looking for him to rebuild a straight thru for me. As for the rear end, is questionable the guy taught me was questionable in many ways...


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Hap Tucker in Sumter SC on Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 03:25 pm:

Brian,

Because the T is such a detuned engine you can add some things to obtain a better hill climbing car. None of them will make your T comparable to a V-8 powered SUV as far as speed, pulling power or your ability to stop. But with the light (compared to a Sedan) body, well tuned engine with a Z-head or similar higher compression head and good original stock cam or Stipe 280 cam you should easily be able to ascend a 10 - 11% hill in high gear. (Ref: Tulsa Web site: Dyno Data Summary at: http://mtfctulsa.com/Tech/DynoSummary.htm and the Power and Torque at: http://mtfctulsa.com/Tech/power_and_torque.htm . ) Key take away for you since you mentioned you are more interested in hill climbing than top speed are the following paragraphs:

“We believe this data gives a general picture of the effect of cams and high compression heads. For a stock T engine a reground cam can cost you 10 to 15 percent of torque with little or no benefit in peak horsepower. A new Stipe cam is very close in performance to a new stock cam (no wear). A high compression head can give a 25 to 30 percent increase in torque and 40 to 45 percent increase in peak horsepower. Limited testing with a distributor versus vibrator coils gave a small increase in power and torque. We have done no testing of carburetors. To get a better idea of what this data means in terms of performance, check out the Power, Torque and Model T Peformance page.” From Dyno Data Summary.
Side note the Over Head Valve (OHV) setups increased the horsepower a lot but many of them did not increase the torque that much more than the flat head high compression head and in some cases the flat head had more torque. [Two of the OHV set ups clearly beat the torque and horse power of the flat heads. But for four of the other 5, the Z Flat Head engine had more torque. ]. Again from the Dyno Data Summary.

If you are more interested in being able to pull the hills in high gear, then you should look at peak engine torque, gearing and weight. From Power, Torque and Model T Performance web page. Power, Torque and Model T Performance .

Note they did not evaluate carbs or distributors.

Also they commented “We estimate that for every 150 to 200 pounds the weight is reduced, the maximum percent grade will increase by about one percentage point. It doesn’t matter where the weight reduction comes from. Reduced passenger weight, less luggage, fewer spare parts all work just as well as removing weight from the car. Ruckstell axles and auxiliary gearboxes are heavy. A car with a good strong engine should not need one. Since a new billet cam and Z head costs about half as much as a Ruckstell axle, this approach is also cost effective.” http://mtfctulsa.com/Tech/power_and_torque.htm So having skinny friends riding with you is a plus for climbing hills.

Note looking at the entire engine combination is also important. Putting dual large volume weber carbs on a VW air cooled engine doesn’t help performance much but it does look neat.

While not a Model T engine there is an excellent article about the 200 cubic inch Model A engines at: http://www.amuffler.com/content/Dyno_test.htm shows various combinations used with that flat head.

Finally with in the last 6 months one of the national Model T magazines had a dyno test of cars on the tour etc. (Or at least I finally read the article within the last 6 months?) They had engines ranging from 11 hp to way above 22 hp. But you want your engine to be sound and producing near the 20 hp with 90 ft lbs of torque and it should be a good hill climbing touring. (All that assumes I read and understood the articles correctly. Your reading and mileage may vary.)

Respectfully submitted,

Hap l9l5 cut off


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Norman T. Kling on Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 03:29 pm:

I would recommend a Ruckstell. Not only does the Ruckstell give you an intermediate gear range for better pulling power with more speed than Ford low but it also increases the braking power from the standard Ford transmission brake. However, if you use any type auxiliary transmission, you should also have rear wheel brakes, just in case you get stuck in neutral which is freewheeling in a T without rear wheel brakes.
Norm


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Brian Healey on Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 04:39 pm:

Doug, sent you an email this morning looking for Russ potter email, the one I had didn't work. Looking for him to rebuild a straight thru for me. As for the rear end, is questionable the guy taught me was questionable in many ways...


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Hap Tucker in Sumter SC on Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 06:03 pm:

Brian,

Russ Potter's e-mail address and phone number are posted on the forum at: http://www.mtfca.com/discus/messages/118802/179326.html?1293721069

That is the same phone number, e-mail address, and mailing address that he has listed in the Mar-Apr 2016 "Model T Times" page 27 advertisement he ran.

If the e-mail doesn't work for some reason -- just give him a call.

Respectfully submitted,

Hap l9l5 cut off


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Royce in Dallas TX on Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 06:22 pm:

The dyno tests I saw had the etimer within the margin of error of the test equipment compared to a stock ignition system. That's not a performance benefit worthy of note.

The stock intake is sufficient for any of the stock type carburetors. The biggest performance increase I have noticed from any of the modifications was when I switched to a balanced intake. The Winfield carb is an amazing difference compared to a straight thru NH. Same for a U&J - I have a feeling the intake runners being split evenly has a lot to do with the performance gain.

U&J:



Winfield:


I did try the bigger intake with the NH straight thru and noticed no difference compared to a stock iron intake. My '15 has a high compression aluminum head, and a Stipe 280 cam. The cam is sort of a compromise, it hurt low end torque but helps a bit at higher speeds compared to a stock grind.

Stromberg OF is certainly a great carb too - I used one for several years. An upgrade from the NH straight thru - maybe it would benefit from the larger aluminum intake.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Brian Healey on Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 07:37 pm:

Couple questions,

Royce what model Winfield are you running..Model M? I found a few other posts that you had that suggests it is a M and you seem pretty happy with the performance. Next thing, where do I find a set up? anyone have one they want to part with?

John, would you expect any issues with the advanced timing gear and crank starting? I would hate to introduce something that bites back. Who sells the gear?

Thanks all


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Gary Tillstrom 30 miles N of Memphis TN on Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 09:31 pm:

Not John but, with the advanced gear you will need to re-set the linkage to buzz at the right point. Otherwise, when cranking on battery it could kick on you.

I don't care for the idea of replacing one gear only. I would just drill new dowel pin holes and make a new timing mark on the existing gear.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Seth in Alabama on Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 11:48 pm:

Brian, Stan Howe is the man to talk to for an aftermarket carb. He doesn't mess with anything aluminum like the Winfields but he'd be your best bet for a U&J or a Stromberg OF.

The beauty of one of Stan's OFs is that it bolts right up to your stock intake and will really liven your car up. A period correct aftermarket carb is the easiest way to make a noticeable improvement to your T's performance. I'd definitely get a carb before fooling with anything like a new head or cam or auxiliary transmission.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Stan Howe Helena, Montana on Monday, March 28, 2016 - 12:39 am:

Seth is right. IMHO -- which certainly doesn't include every carburetor or any real tests -- is that there is nothing that will add more performance for the money than a good head and a good carburetor. I don't really see the value of the larger intake, the flow is determined by the venturi in the carb, the valve opening and duration and the exhaust scavenging the spent charge to prepare for the next one.

My ranking of the carbs I have tried that are readily available.

All are set and forget adjustments.

1. U & J: Performance improvement, no economy improvement. Start and idle both good.
Has a dedicated manifold.

2. Stromberg OF: some performance improvement, better economy and less plug fouling. Excellent start and idle. Uses T manifold.

3. Zenith S4BF: Considerable performance improvement, no change in economy. Starts and idles OK. Dedicated manifold.

4. Rayfield UF: Some performance improvement. Good top end, good start and idle. Uses T manifold.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Dave Wilson, Saint John NB, Canada on Monday, March 28, 2016 - 11:26 am:

I have what looks like a NOS Swan carb and manifold. Does anybody have any experience with this carb?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Rob Heyen - Eastern Nebraska on Monday, March 28, 2016 - 01:42 pm:

The test data I've seen comparing stock T ignition, Bosch distributor, and E-Timer.

Link:
http://www.modeltetimer.com/uploads/Ignition_Dyno_Testing__1_-267231.pdf

Excerpts:






Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Walt Berdan, Bellevue, WA on Monday, March 28, 2016 - 02:16 pm:

Thanks for posting this. Seems like an unbiased test of the available systems.

My read is that for those who spend the bulk of their time in the 800 to 1600 RPM range, all are pretty even except for coils on 6 volts falling off. For those who want to get peak performance over 1600 RPM the modern options have some advantage.

One note of interest to me in the article was the final paragraph saying the performance was smoother with the E-Timer. This mirrors my experience in my 26 Coupe with a Z head and Stipe 280 cam that is otherwise stock. At various times I have used a set of coils redone by Ron Patterson, a distributor, and an E-Timer. I just thought the E-Timer was an interesting device I wanted to try. All three systems worked well on the car (coils running on mag) but it seems consistently somewhat smoother under power with the E-Timer.

What would have been nice, and may have been tested elsewhere is a performance comparison of the E-Timer in automatic mode vs. manually optimizing the timing setting.

End result - for most moderate touring there is no major advantage of one system over the other IF all are properly set up and maintained. I have found that to be a pretty big IF when using the stock ignition system. Great when it's right, not so much when it isn't.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Tony Bowker, Ramona, CA on Monday, March 28, 2016 - 07:46 pm:

That looks like a very unbiased report. To me the results make sense with the four options I have used over the years, no experience (yet) with the Etimer.
The mag has failed after 40 years on the coupe, yet the motor is quite strong, so I added a distributor. However I miss the buzz of the coils, so the Etimer looks like a possible option. I seem to remember that the are now sold by a new supplier, can anyone remember who?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Rob Heyen - Eastern Nebraska on Tuesday, March 29, 2016 - 08:20 am:

Tony,
I thought so too. Appears to be "outside the margin of error" at higher rpm to me. Of course, I don't know what the margin of error is.
Rob


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Bob Jablonski on Tuesday, March 29, 2016 - 08:34 am:

Tony: Contact Tip Top Timers


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Bob Jablonski on Tuesday, March 29, 2016 - 08:39 am:

Tony:

www.modeltetimer.com

Presently sold out, new production soon.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Glen Chaffin on Tuesday, March 29, 2016 - 10:17 pm:

Brian, Tests have shown that our high volume intake manifold adds 2 HP. Our Dual exhaust n=manifold adds 3 horsepower for a total of 5 HP. Our new 280 high performance cam is advanced and has a great low end as well as a great high end. This was accomplished by our optomized design. Satisfaction guaranteed.


Add a Message


This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Username:  
Password:

Topics Last Day Last Week Tree View    Getting Started Formatting Troubleshooting Program Credits    New Messages Keyword Search Contact Moderators Edit Profile Administration