What are the attributes of a BM block?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/351-CLEVELAND-AUSTRALIAN...IAN...QQcmdZViewItem
thanks
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
John,
that's the block commonly called the NASCAR block, the XE block or the Australian block.
They were cast for Ford's race teams, because the production blocks would crack under hard use, the Cleveland was making more bhp per cubic inch than any other small block Ford ever had, and the good ol' thin wall casting was biting Ford's racers in the butt. The production blocks were cracking in the bulkheads above the main bearing saddles and in the cylinder walls.
The NASCAR block has thicker bulkheads above the main bearing saddles. Plus the pan rails are thicker as well. The block weighs about 20 lbs heavier than the production block. The cylinder walls may be a tiny bit thicker than those of the production block, but they are not siamesed. Core shift has always been a problem with thin wall cast blocks, sometimes resulting in cylinder walls that are marginal in thickness. This was the case with the NASCAR block as well, so the blocks were tested in Australia and only those with minimal core shift were exported to the US for Ford's race teams. Those that were left behind were installed in production vehicles in Australia.
A later batch of NASCAR blocks, cast around 1980, had bulges in the side of the block to increase the water jacket area around the cylinders. These lumpy looking blocks are referred to as "pillow blocks". They have the same XE192540 casting number.
I have read in the past that the blocks were cast from iron with higher nickle content, but that would be hard to prove without some sort of hardness testing. That same claim is made for other blocks cast in Australia too.
Normally the NASCAR block does not fetch so much money, as is being asked in the auction on e-bay. This one has never been used, and istherefore more valuable than a used block. But $4K seems high, I think it would sell quickly at $3K. I saw that same block being auctioned at the same price a couple of weeks ago, so it didn't sell the first time around.
Your friend on the DTBB, George
below is a side by side pic of a production block & the NASCAR block. I hope you can make out the difference in bulkhead thickness in the picture. The NASCAR block is on the left.
that's the block commonly called the NASCAR block, the XE block or the Australian block.
They were cast for Ford's race teams, because the production blocks would crack under hard use, the Cleveland was making more bhp per cubic inch than any other small block Ford ever had, and the good ol' thin wall casting was biting Ford's racers in the butt. The production blocks were cracking in the bulkheads above the main bearing saddles and in the cylinder walls.
The NASCAR block has thicker bulkheads above the main bearing saddles. Plus the pan rails are thicker as well. The block weighs about 20 lbs heavier than the production block. The cylinder walls may be a tiny bit thicker than those of the production block, but they are not siamesed. Core shift has always been a problem with thin wall cast blocks, sometimes resulting in cylinder walls that are marginal in thickness. This was the case with the NASCAR block as well, so the blocks were tested in Australia and only those with minimal core shift were exported to the US for Ford's race teams. Those that were left behind were installed in production vehicles in Australia.
A later batch of NASCAR blocks, cast around 1980, had bulges in the side of the block to increase the water jacket area around the cylinders. These lumpy looking blocks are referred to as "pillow blocks". They have the same XE192540 casting number.
I have read in the past that the blocks were cast from iron with higher nickle content, but that would be hard to prove without some sort of hardness testing. That same claim is made for other blocks cast in Australia too.
Normally the NASCAR block does not fetch so much money, as is being asked in the auction on e-bay. This one has never been used, and istherefore more valuable than a used block. But $4K seems high, I think it would sell quickly at $3K. I saw that same block being auctioned at the same price a couple of weeks ago, so it didn't sell the first time around.
Your friend on the DTBB, George
below is a side by side pic of a production block & the NASCAR block. I hope you can make out the difference in bulkhead thickness in the picture. The NASCAR block is on the left.
Attachments
Images (1)
This is an interesting discussion. I have heard before from several sources that the "good" block is about 20 pounds heavier. I am looking at the pictures and the only difference that I see is the solid pan rails.
I have read and heard also that the bulkheads are thicker. One source told me that the cylinder liners are thicker as well. My machinest is very experienced in Cleveland blocks and is a Motorsport distributor as well.
I asked him if the NASCAR block can be bored more then the production Cleveland and he said no. He also said that it requires the same prep for racing as the production block does. I know that includes at least sleeving the lifter bores to restrict oil to the valve train.
I have an Australian D2AE-CA block. When I had it bored by another machinest he wanted to charge me double. It was more difficult to bore and he suggested that in the future I might be happier with another machinest. The production US blocks are said to be softer and the cylinder can be bored in one pass. The Australian block cannot.
I think that there is a problem with the terminology. Maybe a big problem? People are refering to the Australian block meaning the NASCAR block.
The Australian version of the Cleveland is a production block like the US block. The NASCAR block is not a production block, it is a race block. The NASCAR block was also offered by Ford Motorsport as the A3 block for a short period in the early 80's.
The reality is that each will hold a certain amount of horsepower for a certain amount of time and then break. The debate is over how much horsepower and how soon it will break.
Nascar engines I believe are in the 800hp area.
Also remember that it was the 4 bolt Boss 351 production block that was run in NHRA Pro stock by the likes of Gapp & Roush, Don Nicholson and others, 9,000rpm power shifts and all. It can't be all bad.
How many of us are running under those conditions?
I have read and heard also that the bulkheads are thicker. One source told me that the cylinder liners are thicker as well. My machinest is very experienced in Cleveland blocks and is a Motorsport distributor as well.
I asked him if the NASCAR block can be bored more then the production Cleveland and he said no. He also said that it requires the same prep for racing as the production block does. I know that includes at least sleeving the lifter bores to restrict oil to the valve train.
I have an Australian D2AE-CA block. When I had it bored by another machinest he wanted to charge me double. It was more difficult to bore and he suggested that in the future I might be happier with another machinest. The production US blocks are said to be softer and the cylinder can be bored in one pass. The Australian block cannot.
I think that there is a problem with the terminology. Maybe a big problem? People are refering to the Australian block meaning the NASCAR block.
The Australian version of the Cleveland is a production block like the US block. The NASCAR block is not a production block, it is a race block. The NASCAR block was also offered by Ford Motorsport as the A3 block for a short period in the early 80's.
The reality is that each will hold a certain amount of horsepower for a certain amount of time and then break. The debate is over how much horsepower and how soon it will break.
Nascar engines I believe are in the 800hp area.
Also remember that it was the 4 bolt Boss 351 production block that was run in NHRA Pro stock by the likes of Gapp & Roush, Don Nicholson and others, 9,000rpm power shifts and all. It can't be all bad.
How many of us are running under those conditions?
PD, I'll try to answer the points you've made:
Your friend on the DTBB, George
quote:Originally posted by PanteraDoug:
I am looking at the pictures and the only difference that I see is the solid pan rails.
I have read and heard also that the bulkheads are thicker. I am sorry that the picture on the right isn't better, the oil black color on the bulk heads of the production block make it hard to see that they are scalloped, much thinner, you should be able to see on the pic on the left that those bulkheads are as thick as the bearing journals the entire length & width of the bulkhead.
One source told me that the cylinder liners are thicker as well. Wrong!
My machinest is very experienced in Cleveland blocks and is a Motorsport distributor as well.
I asked him if the NASCAR block can be bored more then the production Cleveland and he said no. listen to your machinist
He also said that it requires the same prep for racing as the production block does. listen to your machinist
I know that includes at least sleeving the lifter bores to restrict oil to the valve train. please see my essay on that subject I posted last year
http://pantera.infopop.cc/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/5650045562/m/5810061293/p/1
I have an Australian D2AE-CA block. When I had it bored by another machinest he wanted to charge me double. It was more difficult to boreperhaps there is truth to the assertion that Ford of Australia used a higher nickel content in their iron
and he suggested that in the future I might be happier with another machinest. he's right too, you don't need to give your business to somebody who doesn't want it
I think that there is a problem with the terminology. Maybe a big problem? People are refering to the Australian block meaning the NASCAR block. I didn't know there was a problem. what's the problem?
The Australian version of the Cleveland is a production block like the US block. The NASCAR block is not a production block, it is a race block. right! but both were cast in Australia. that's why I choose to use the term NASCAR block, but just be aware some folks do call it the "Aussie block"
The reality is that each will hold a certain amount of horsepower for a certain amount of time and then break. there's a big difference between the 2 blocks
The debate is over how much horsepower and how soon it will break. debate?
Also remember that it was the 4 bolt Boss 351 production block that was run in NHRA Pro stock by the likes of Gapp & Roush, Don Nicholson and others, 9,000rpm power shifts and all. are you sure about that, or had you just assumed that. Don't believe everything you read in magazines either. Some of those guys were running aluminum block Clevelands! they had access to all the experimental parts, all the parts you were never told about
It can't be all bad. the production block has it's limits, respect the limits and it is good!
Your friend on the DTBB, George
The XE race blocks were cast and machined at the Geelong foundry in Australia.
The first batch were manufactured in 1975. These blocks were available over
the counter, if you knew enough to ask for the right part number ad had the
cash. They were listed under the catalog part number D1ZZ-6010-T and were
quite expensive for the time, about $1500 in 1976. Some people believe that
they origianlly designed for use in Australian Ford trucks but that is not the
case (Aussie Ford trucks used plain old open chamber 2V engines with 2 bolt
main blocks). They were specifically designed for racing use. The blocks were
completely machined, except for the cylinder bores which were semi-finished,
being rough-bored at 3.990". A number of these blocks were shipped to Holman
and Moody and I Gapp and Roush. Holman and Moody used to list these blocks
under the part number D6HM-6010-1.
When Ford (U.S.) decided to get back into racing in early 1980's with the SVO
parts program, they placed an order with the Geelong foundry to cast and
machine a second batch of XE blocks. These were manufactured duing 1982 and
1983. There were quite a few of the second batch that didn't meet minimum
specs with respect to core shift and other defects. Some of these blocks were
subsequently transferred to the standard machining production line and were
sometimes fitted with two bolt main bearing caps (depending on when they were
discovered to be defective) for use in a standard passenger car engine. The
blocks that passed inspection were originally listed in the U.S. SVO catalog
under the part number M-6015-A3 with a price of around $900. An Australian
racer of the day told me he was perturbed at the U.S. price as he had to pay
a jobber or dealer net price of $1765 for the same block. He also mentioned
a truck-load of those blocks disappeared somewhere between the engine plant in
Geelong and the Parts Division in Broadmeadows (Melbourne). At the time,
there was speculation that it was an "inside job," for whoever was involved
would have had to have known where they were kept or when they were in transit.
> I am looking at the pictures and the only difference that I see is the solid
> pan rails.
I've had one of each of these blocks. As to differences, they carry the XE
casting number prefix (e.g. XE 192540), have thicker, non-contoured main
bearing webs, a thicker non-sculpted block skirt (oil pan rail), beefier high
nodular iron four bolt main caps, and supposedly 0.165 inch minimum thickness
cylinder walls. I've not yet verified the latter but Kip (formerly of Pantera
Performace in Colorado) has had several XE 4 bolt main blocks in the shop and
said they were all great (no core shift problems) and he's bored them out as
much as 0.187" over (to fit a sleeve) and never gone through a wall. Jon Kaase
mentioned that he sonic tested the block I sold him and it had a couple of
thin spots (for an XE) at 0.160". However, that block had been bored 0.030"
over. I plan to purchase a sonic tester in the near future and will test my
current XE block and several 2 bolt and 4 bolt main U.S. blocks. My XE block
also had larger oil drain back holes in the valley area above the cam. Also,
some of the first batch blocks had the locating lug milled off the rear R/H
side of the block to allow fitment of Australian market Bosch starter that had
a solenoid mounted on the side of the starter housing that would interfere if
the lug was present. There were slight external casting differences between
the two XE block batches. The later batch have bulges cast into the external
walls above the core plugs to provide additional cooling around the cylinders.
These are the so-called "pillow blocks". As near as I can tell, neither of
the XE production batches had Siamesed cylinder walls, though some people
believe they existed. I know Jon Kaase said he once had a Siamese XE block
but I wonder if it was really an SK block. Neither of my blocks were Siamese
nor were the others I've examined but Kaase said he came across an SK block
that had Siamese cylinders but paradoxically had the thinner lower end of a
standard production 351C block. Kaase considered the thicker bottom end more
important than Siamesed bores for his Engine Masters entry and purchased my
first XE block. IIRC, it had a "24C2" date code which would indicate it was
cast on 24 March, 1982. The proper convention for the date was to place the
year (first digit), followed by the month (alphabetical letter from A to Z
excluding "I"), and then the day (one or two digits). I'm told there were
anomolies with the date codes on occasion as the guys who were responsible
for the date code tags got lazy with the proper proceedure. Also, some of
the early blocks had Grade 5 3/8" bolts on the outer main bearing caps, likely
for the same reason. My current XE block has a 5M2 date code (December 2, 1975)
and a 1975 in a circle. This block does not have the bulges cast above the
core plugs. Though it was cast at the Geelong plant, the block has a "CF"
(Cleveland Foundry) mark at the rear of the block. The 351C tooling and
casting patterns from the Cleveland, Ohio factory were shipped to the Geelong
plant in Australia after production of the 351C ceased in the U.S.
Pictures of my first XE block are here:
http://www.bacomatic.org/gallery/dan-ausclv
note the straps on the caps were added later.
> Normally the NASCAR block does not fetch so much money, as is being asked
> in the auction on e-bay.
The last one I sold went for $1200 but I've seen them go for as much as $2000.
Price is highly dependent upon condition, of course.
> This is an interesting discussion. I have heard before from several sources
> that the "good" block is about 20 pounds heavier.
I thought I had the weight for my first XE block but I can't find it. I've
got another on the stand at them moment. I'll put it on the scale and see
what it says.
> I asked him if the NASCAR block can be bored more then the production
> Cleveland and he said no.
I'll see what the sonic tester says.
> I know that includes at least sleeving the lifter bores to restrict oil to
> the valve train.
The XE block has the same oiling system as a standard 351C. Some engine
builders bus the lifter bores, others do not.
> I have an Australian D2AE-CA block. When I had it bored by another machinest
> he wanted to charge me double. It was more difficult to bore and he suggested
> that in the future I might be happier with another machinest. The production
> US blocks are said to be softer and the cylinder can be bored in one pass.
> The Australian block cannot.
He must not bore late 5.0L blocks either. The iron used in the 5.0L block was
revised for better wear and is harder to bore than early 302 blocks which my
machinest says were harder to bore than 350 Chevy blocks to start with. When
I pulled my 5.0L HO out 163,000 miles it had absolutely no cylinder wall wear.
No ridge at all and the factory home marks were still present and sufficient
to break in the new rings I installed. FWIW, I don't think these blocks are
any stronger as to the maximum power levels they will sustain but they do wear
better.
Dave Williams bored my first XE block to fit a sleeve. I'll have to ask him
if he noticed it was harder to bore. Be aware there are differences in the
2 bolt Aussie blocks. I believe it is the later "black blocks" that are harder
than the earlier "blue blocks".
> I think that there is a problem with the terminology. Maybe a big problem?
> People are refering to the Australian block meaning the NASCAR block. The
> Australian version of the Cleveland is a production block like the US block.
> The NASCAR block is not a production block, it is a race block. The NASCAR
> block was also offered by Ford Motorsport as the A3 block for a short period
> in the early 80's.
Yes. There are unscrupulous vendors who try to pass of plain old Aussie 2 bolt
main bocks as the XE race blocks.
> are you sure about that, or had you just assumed that. Don't believe
> everything you read in magazines either. Some of those guys were
> running aluminum block Clevelands! they had access to all the experimental
> parts, all the parts you were never told about
True but those parts were typically reserved for match racing. I've got one
of the Ford XH1 steel forged 351C cranks that weren't supposed to exist.
However, there were racers who spun 351C's to 9500 RPM with production iron
blocks, cranks, and heads. There were also guys who ran them in NASCAR Grand
National competition but the XE blocks and forged cranks lasted longer. Mario
Rossi said they would pitch the iron cranks after a single 500 mile race but
the billet cranks could last up to 6 races.
Dan Jones
The first batch were manufactured in 1975. These blocks were available over
the counter, if you knew enough to ask for the right part number ad had the
cash. They were listed under the catalog part number D1ZZ-6010-T and were
quite expensive for the time, about $1500 in 1976. Some people believe that
they origianlly designed for use in Australian Ford trucks but that is not the
case (Aussie Ford trucks used plain old open chamber 2V engines with 2 bolt
main blocks). They were specifically designed for racing use. The blocks were
completely machined, except for the cylinder bores which were semi-finished,
being rough-bored at 3.990". A number of these blocks were shipped to Holman
and Moody and I Gapp and Roush. Holman and Moody used to list these blocks
under the part number D6HM-6010-1.
When Ford (U.S.) decided to get back into racing in early 1980's with the SVO
parts program, they placed an order with the Geelong foundry to cast and
machine a second batch of XE blocks. These were manufactured duing 1982 and
1983. There were quite a few of the second batch that didn't meet minimum
specs with respect to core shift and other defects. Some of these blocks were
subsequently transferred to the standard machining production line and were
sometimes fitted with two bolt main bearing caps (depending on when they were
discovered to be defective) for use in a standard passenger car engine. The
blocks that passed inspection were originally listed in the U.S. SVO catalog
under the part number M-6015-A3 with a price of around $900. An Australian
racer of the day told me he was perturbed at the U.S. price as he had to pay
a jobber or dealer net price of $1765 for the same block. He also mentioned
a truck-load of those blocks disappeared somewhere between the engine plant in
Geelong and the Parts Division in Broadmeadows (Melbourne). At the time,
there was speculation that it was an "inside job," for whoever was involved
would have had to have known where they were kept or when they were in transit.
> I am looking at the pictures and the only difference that I see is the solid
> pan rails.
I've had one of each of these blocks. As to differences, they carry the XE
casting number prefix (e.g. XE 192540), have thicker, non-contoured main
bearing webs, a thicker non-sculpted block skirt (oil pan rail), beefier high
nodular iron four bolt main caps, and supposedly 0.165 inch minimum thickness
cylinder walls. I've not yet verified the latter but Kip (formerly of Pantera
Performace in Colorado) has had several XE 4 bolt main blocks in the shop and
said they were all great (no core shift problems) and he's bored them out as
much as 0.187" over (to fit a sleeve) and never gone through a wall. Jon Kaase
mentioned that he sonic tested the block I sold him and it had a couple of
thin spots (for an XE) at 0.160". However, that block had been bored 0.030"
over. I plan to purchase a sonic tester in the near future and will test my
current XE block and several 2 bolt and 4 bolt main U.S. blocks. My XE block
also had larger oil drain back holes in the valley area above the cam. Also,
some of the first batch blocks had the locating lug milled off the rear R/H
side of the block to allow fitment of Australian market Bosch starter that had
a solenoid mounted on the side of the starter housing that would interfere if
the lug was present. There were slight external casting differences between
the two XE block batches. The later batch have bulges cast into the external
walls above the core plugs to provide additional cooling around the cylinders.
These are the so-called "pillow blocks". As near as I can tell, neither of
the XE production batches had Siamesed cylinder walls, though some people
believe they existed. I know Jon Kaase said he once had a Siamese XE block
but I wonder if it was really an SK block. Neither of my blocks were Siamese
nor were the others I've examined but Kaase said he came across an SK block
that had Siamese cylinders but paradoxically had the thinner lower end of a
standard production 351C block. Kaase considered the thicker bottom end more
important than Siamesed bores for his Engine Masters entry and purchased my
first XE block. IIRC, it had a "24C2" date code which would indicate it was
cast on 24 March, 1982. The proper convention for the date was to place the
year (first digit), followed by the month (alphabetical letter from A to Z
excluding "I"), and then the day (one or two digits). I'm told there were
anomolies with the date codes on occasion as the guys who were responsible
for the date code tags got lazy with the proper proceedure. Also, some of
the early blocks had Grade 5 3/8" bolts on the outer main bearing caps, likely
for the same reason. My current XE block has a 5M2 date code (December 2, 1975)
and a 1975 in a circle. This block does not have the bulges cast above the
core plugs. Though it was cast at the Geelong plant, the block has a "CF"
(Cleveland Foundry) mark at the rear of the block. The 351C tooling and
casting patterns from the Cleveland, Ohio factory were shipped to the Geelong
plant in Australia after production of the 351C ceased in the U.S.
Pictures of my first XE block are here:
http://www.bacomatic.org/gallery/dan-ausclv
note the straps on the caps were added later.
> Normally the NASCAR block does not fetch so much money, as is being asked
> in the auction on e-bay.
The last one I sold went for $1200 but I've seen them go for as much as $2000.
Price is highly dependent upon condition, of course.
> This is an interesting discussion. I have heard before from several sources
> that the "good" block is about 20 pounds heavier.
I thought I had the weight for my first XE block but I can't find it. I've
got another on the stand at them moment. I'll put it on the scale and see
what it says.
> I asked him if the NASCAR block can be bored more then the production
> Cleveland and he said no.
I'll see what the sonic tester says.
> I know that includes at least sleeving the lifter bores to restrict oil to
> the valve train.
The XE block has the same oiling system as a standard 351C. Some engine
builders bus the lifter bores, others do not.
> I have an Australian D2AE-CA block. When I had it bored by another machinest
> he wanted to charge me double. It was more difficult to bore and he suggested
> that in the future I might be happier with another machinest. The production
> US blocks are said to be softer and the cylinder can be bored in one pass.
> The Australian block cannot.
He must not bore late 5.0L blocks either. The iron used in the 5.0L block was
revised for better wear and is harder to bore than early 302 blocks which my
machinest says were harder to bore than 350 Chevy blocks to start with. When
I pulled my 5.0L HO out 163,000 miles it had absolutely no cylinder wall wear.
No ridge at all and the factory home marks were still present and sufficient
to break in the new rings I installed. FWIW, I don't think these blocks are
any stronger as to the maximum power levels they will sustain but they do wear
better.
Dave Williams bored my first XE block to fit a sleeve. I'll have to ask him
if he noticed it was harder to bore. Be aware there are differences in the
2 bolt Aussie blocks. I believe it is the later "black blocks" that are harder
than the earlier "blue blocks".
> I think that there is a problem with the terminology. Maybe a big problem?
> People are refering to the Australian block meaning the NASCAR block. The
> Australian version of the Cleveland is a production block like the US block.
> The NASCAR block is not a production block, it is a race block. The NASCAR
> block was also offered by Ford Motorsport as the A3 block for a short period
> in the early 80's.
Yes. There are unscrupulous vendors who try to pass of plain old Aussie 2 bolt
main bocks as the XE race blocks.
> are you sure about that, or had you just assumed that. Don't believe
> everything you read in magazines either. Some of those guys were
> running aluminum block Clevelands! they had access to all the experimental
> parts, all the parts you were never told about
True but those parts were typically reserved for match racing. I've got one
of the Ford XH1 steel forged 351C cranks that weren't supposed to exist.
However, there were racers who spun 351C's to 9500 RPM with production iron
blocks, cranks, and heads. There were also guys who ran them in NASCAR Grand
National competition but the XE blocks and forged cranks lasted longer. Mario
Rossi said they would pitch the iron cranks after a single 500 mile race but
the billet cranks could last up to 6 races.
Dan Jones
Dan,
I've been guilty of this error myself for my entire life, until recently corrected by an Australian friend. I always assumed the Geelong Foundry was located in Geelong Australia, just like the Cleveland Foundry was located in Cleveland! WRONG!
The Geelong Foundry is located in Norlane, Victoria, Australia. It did not get it's name from the city in which it is located.
Also, 20 or so years ago I built a motor for a client with a XE block he had acquired. That motor had siamesed cylinders, I am almost certain, I don't think I would have been mistaken about that. The block was also substantially heavier than the production block, more than "just" 20 pounds difference. In my younger days I could heft a production Cleveland block, but not this one, I tried lifting it & it felt like it was bolted to the floor.
You have owned & been around more of these blocks than I own underwear (lol..), and your conclusion is that none of these blocks were siamesed, and they weigh only 20 pounds more than the production block. I respect your opinion tremendously. It makes sense to me as well that the blocks were all cast identical.
For years I went through life assuming all XE blocks were like the one I had worked on, then seeing posts by you & others on the 'net, I began to doubt myself, wondering, how in the hell I had been so mistaken. About 6 months ago I found my answer.
The block I worked on definitely had an XE number cast into it, but I did not have the rest of the numbers memorized (i.e. 192540) and I did not look it up & verify the numbers cast into the block were the NASCAR block numbers. It said XE, I knew NASCAR blocks were XE blocks, that is as far as I went with it back then, I assumd I was working on a NASCAR block. I did not know other XE blocks & SK blocks even existed, I had never heard of them.
Last fall I ran across a picture on the 'net of an XE block with the casting number XE182540. So, there are other XE blocks floating around out there beside the NASCAR block.
So, in my opinion, when you find somebody who swears they have had a Cleveland block with siamesed bores or some other odd feature not found on a NASCAR block, I believe the explanation is that it WAS NOT a NASCAR block, but it was an XE block. Make sense? I'm sure that explains my situation.
I also wanted to thank you for adding to the topic with your abundant knoweldge. Sincerely, thanks.
Finally, for everyone else, here's a couple of Australian block pics for you, to illustrate some of the features Dan mentioned.
Your friend on the DTBB, George
I've been guilty of this error myself for my entire life, until recently corrected by an Australian friend. I always assumed the Geelong Foundry was located in Geelong Australia, just like the Cleveland Foundry was located in Cleveland! WRONG!
The Geelong Foundry is located in Norlane, Victoria, Australia. It did not get it's name from the city in which it is located.
Also, 20 or so years ago I built a motor for a client with a XE block he had acquired. That motor had siamesed cylinders, I am almost certain, I don't think I would have been mistaken about that. The block was also substantially heavier than the production block, more than "just" 20 pounds difference. In my younger days I could heft a production Cleveland block, but not this one, I tried lifting it & it felt like it was bolted to the floor.
You have owned & been around more of these blocks than I own underwear (lol..), and your conclusion is that none of these blocks were siamesed, and they weigh only 20 pounds more than the production block. I respect your opinion tremendously. It makes sense to me as well that the blocks were all cast identical.
For years I went through life assuming all XE blocks were like the one I had worked on, then seeing posts by you & others on the 'net, I began to doubt myself, wondering, how in the hell I had been so mistaken. About 6 months ago I found my answer.
The block I worked on definitely had an XE number cast into it, but I did not have the rest of the numbers memorized (i.e. 192540) and I did not look it up & verify the numbers cast into the block were the NASCAR block numbers. It said XE, I knew NASCAR blocks were XE blocks, that is as far as I went with it back then, I assumd I was working on a NASCAR block. I did not know other XE blocks & SK blocks even existed, I had never heard of them.
Last fall I ran across a picture on the 'net of an XE block with the casting number XE182540. So, there are other XE blocks floating around out there beside the NASCAR block.
So, in my opinion, when you find somebody who swears they have had a Cleveland block with siamesed bores or some other odd feature not found on a NASCAR block, I believe the explanation is that it WAS NOT a NASCAR block, but it was an XE block. Make sense? I'm sure that explains my situation.
I also wanted to thank you for adding to the topic with your abundant knoweldge. Sincerely, thanks.
Finally, for everyone else, here's a couple of Australian block pics for you, to illustrate some of the features Dan mentioned.
Your friend on the DTBB, George
Attachments
Images (1)
Thanks for the pictures Daniel.
Two things that I find interesting about the Xe blocks in general.
First, if the bulkheads are thicker, how do they not interfere with the bore? Engineering wise, to me the bore, center to center spacing would create the dimension for the main cap. You can't change that dimension unless you make the block longer.
Second, I thought the trick of using screw in water plugs wasn't a trick but virtually a necessaty? I've heard it strengthens the block about 10%. I expected to see them in an all out race block like the XE.
The 427's, the Boss 302's, Boss 429's, GT40 blocks all used them.
Also, I would run a full girdle.
In my personal experience all the best parts break. It just takes the more expensive ones longer to get there.
The unbreakable ones are made from unobtainium.
Two things that I find interesting about the Xe blocks in general.
First, if the bulkheads are thicker, how do they not interfere with the bore? Engineering wise, to me the bore, center to center spacing would create the dimension for the main cap. You can't change that dimension unless you make the block longer.
Second, I thought the trick of using screw in water plugs wasn't a trick but virtually a necessaty? I've heard it strengthens the block about 10%. I expected to see them in an all out race block like the XE.
The 427's, the Boss 302's, Boss 429's, GT40 blocks all used them.
Also, I would run a full girdle.
In my personal experience all the best parts break. It just takes the more expensive ones longer to get there.
The unbreakable ones are made from unobtainium.
I know a siamese port when I see one, and a siamese cat too. But what is a siamese bore?
> The Geelong Foundry is located in Norlane, Victoria, Australia.
Interesting. I hadn't heard that.
> That motor had siamesed cylinders, I am almost certain
Did you check to see the liners touched? I also came a cross a block that
seemed to weigh more than it should. In that case, it turned out to have a
half fill of hard block.
> It makes sense to me as well that the blocks were all cast identical.
It's certainly possible there was a third batch made. If so, they are
exceedingly rare. I tend to believe someone like Kaase when he says he had
one.
> It said XE, I knew NASCAR blocks were XE blocks, that is as far as I went
> with it back then, I assumd I was working on a NASCAR block. I did not know
> other XE blocks & SK blocks even existed, I had never heard of them.
I'm told XE means experimental and SK stands for sketch. Lots of low rate
or even one-off parts got these part number pre-fixes. I wouldn't rule out
anything.
> Last fall I ran across a picture on the 'net of an XE block with the casting
> number XE182540. So, there are other XE blocks floating around out there
> beside the NASCAR block.
Agreed. I've heard of the XE182540 part number but haven't come across one.
> So, in my opinion, when you find somebody who swears they have had a Cleveland
> block with siamesed bores or some other odd feature not found on a NASCAR
> block, I believe the explanation is that it WAS NOT a NASCAR block, but it was
> an XE block. Make sense? I'm sure that explains my situation.
Makes sense to me. I wouldn't even rule out a third batch of XE192540 part
number blocks.
> First, if the bulkheads are thicker, how do they not interfere with the bore?
> Engineering wise, to me the bore, center to center spacing would create the
> dimension for the main cap. You can't change that dimension unless you make
> the block longer.
I'm not exactly sure to what you arre referring but, in general, it's not that
all the dimensions are greater. It's that the dimensions are not reduced in
certain areas. An example is the pan rail. A standard 351C pan rail is
scalloped below the rail. The XE block carries the full thickness all the way
down.
> Second, I thought the trick of using screw in water plugs wasn't a trick but
> virtually a necessaty? I've heard it strengthens the block about 10%.
Some XE blocks have had them added after the fact. It just takes a big
honking tap but the Boss 302 screw-in core plugs are available.
> Also, I would run a full girdle.
Girdles seem to come in and go out of fashion. Some builders like 'em and
others hate them. The Roush type straps on my first XE block are for
minimizing cap walk, the tendency of the bolt head on one cap to move towards
and way from each other under high RPM. This can cause the main caps to fret
against the block. A friend had that happen to a 5.0L block that had a full
girdle. If you go with a girdle, I'd stick with one that is made of iron or
steel on an iron block. I don't like the idea of aluminum girdles on iron
blocks given the difference in thermal expansion.
> But what is a siamese bore?
Siamese bore means the cylinder liners within the block actually touch so that
no coolant flows between adjacent cylinders.
Dan Jones
Interesting. I hadn't heard that.
> That motor had siamesed cylinders, I am almost certain
Did you check to see the liners touched? I also came a cross a block that
seemed to weigh more than it should. In that case, it turned out to have a
half fill of hard block.
> It makes sense to me as well that the blocks were all cast identical.
It's certainly possible there was a third batch made. If so, they are
exceedingly rare. I tend to believe someone like Kaase when he says he had
one.
> It said XE, I knew NASCAR blocks were XE blocks, that is as far as I went
> with it back then, I assumd I was working on a NASCAR block. I did not know
> other XE blocks & SK blocks even existed, I had never heard of them.
I'm told XE means experimental and SK stands for sketch. Lots of low rate
or even one-off parts got these part number pre-fixes. I wouldn't rule out
anything.
> Last fall I ran across a picture on the 'net of an XE block with the casting
> number XE182540. So, there are other XE blocks floating around out there
> beside the NASCAR block.
Agreed. I've heard of the XE182540 part number but haven't come across one.
> So, in my opinion, when you find somebody who swears they have had a Cleveland
> block with siamesed bores or some other odd feature not found on a NASCAR
> block, I believe the explanation is that it WAS NOT a NASCAR block, but it was
> an XE block. Make sense? I'm sure that explains my situation.
Makes sense to me. I wouldn't even rule out a third batch of XE192540 part
number blocks.
> First, if the bulkheads are thicker, how do they not interfere with the bore?
> Engineering wise, to me the bore, center to center spacing would create the
> dimension for the main cap. You can't change that dimension unless you make
> the block longer.
I'm not exactly sure to what you arre referring but, in general, it's not that
all the dimensions are greater. It's that the dimensions are not reduced in
certain areas. An example is the pan rail. A standard 351C pan rail is
scalloped below the rail. The XE block carries the full thickness all the way
down.
> Second, I thought the trick of using screw in water plugs wasn't a trick but
> virtually a necessaty? I've heard it strengthens the block about 10%.
Some XE blocks have had them added after the fact. It just takes a big
honking tap but the Boss 302 screw-in core plugs are available.
> Also, I would run a full girdle.
Girdles seem to come in and go out of fashion. Some builders like 'em and
others hate them. The Roush type straps on my first XE block are for
minimizing cap walk, the tendency of the bolt head on one cap to move towards
and way from each other under high RPM. This can cause the main caps to fret
against the block. A friend had that happen to a 5.0L block that had a full
girdle. If you go with a girdle, I'd stick with one that is made of iron or
steel on an iron block. I don't like the idea of aluminum girdles on iron
blocks given the difference in thermal expansion.
> But what is a siamese bore?
Siamese bore means the cylinder liners within the block actually touch so that
no coolant flows between adjacent cylinders.
Dan Jones
The straps are the old Pro Stock trick. I remeber those days. The air was clean and sex was dirty. Ah for that clarity again!
My problem is I need my own XE block right here in front of me so I can awe in wonder at it's beauty and pitty the poor mortals stuck with their pittyful D2AE-CA american blocks. Here, here XE, come to Daddy.
Seriously though Dan, TY very much for the info. It isn't easy to aquire this information. There are a lot of misconceptions.
My problem is I need my own XE block right here in front of me so I can awe in wonder at it's beauty and pitty the poor mortals stuck with their pittyful D2AE-CA american blocks. Here, here XE, come to Daddy.
Seriously though Dan, TY very much for the info. It isn't easy to aquire this information. There are a lot of misconceptions.