grass roots movement for a new cast iron cleveland block

Come on George put up the cash !!! LOL

I'm in favor but it sounds costly, and what comes to mind is if the money was put togther, who has the rights and pattens ???? I say that SJ Perf considers a iron block casting. I think if we pose the question they may consider.

Ron

I agree, I've already challenged them to build the block in iron. Not a word back.

All you have to do to support this thing is lend your voice, say yes, you want a new block. If the numbers are there, somebody will see dollar signs. Joe has connections, he may find a set of blueprints if he shakes enough trees. Plus, you never know who is lurking on these web sites.

I think Dart is very well poised to cast a Cleveland block, if they thought the sales numbers were there to justify the effort.

George

George,

I read the posts in the Cleveland forum and am stoked about the idea. I am by no means a Cleveland oiling expert, but would this scenario work? Assuming the XE tooling still exists, simply (and I use that term loosly) cast the blocks, but rather than use "Old School" cam bearings, block off the cam bearing oiling passages and install the much desired splash oiled roller bearings in their place. I would assume this would enhance the current oiling system enough to end any possible oiling woes.

Other than that, your Dart idea is the most viable option.

Ron

Ron,

a "caged" bearing assembly is a one piece assembly. To install it on a multi-journal crankshaft, the crankshaft must assemble in pieces by pressing it together. This is how it is done on motorcycles, which use splash lubrication for the cranks. Lord knows, those motorcycles can spin to F1 rpm levels, but it would be very expensive to do this on an american V8. I'm not aware of any other method to employ a one piece bearing on a crankshaft.

Roller bearing assemblies are used for camshafts however, because the camshaft can just slide through the bearings, it doesn't have throws like a crankshaft.

I thought of promoting the idea of an improved oiling system (i.e. 427 side oiler) but no, I decided it is better to keep it simple and as close as possible to what's already available, and to keep costs down. The more we complicate the block, the less likely it will become a reality.

The Cleveland oiling system really isn't that bad, like the Cleveland block's weaknesses, the short comings of the oil system are overblown. In fact, the Cleveland's oiling system isn't any more convoluted than many other American push rod V8s. I plan on writing about this subject this coming Friday unless something comes up to take me away from the computer.

I'll give everyone something to think about. The 3 middle bearings are where the bearing failures occured, and the 3 middle bulkheads are what tended to crack. If a bulkhead is twisting or displacing, the bearing saddle is going to move with it. So was the oiling system the problem to begin with? Perhaps the engineers were on to something when they had the NASCAR block cast with thicker bulkheads.

In the mean time, everybody please give Joe your support for a new, race quality, cast iron Cleveland block.

your "lubricated" friend on the DTBB, George

George I thought of the roller bearing delema too, but have you ever heard of needle bearings?? They are like little logs that the crank can ride on, only metal and not wood, and what you do is kinda glue them in place with greese as you assemble it. If you have the race thing that holds them front to back they stay in ok. And you have to make sure you use enough needles so they don't get twisted in there at all. Not as slippery as a ball bearing, but still better than a flat surface I bettya.

DeTom, that race that holds the needle bearing in place, is that one piece or two pieces?

Actually, the heavily loaded, splash lubricated needle bearing assemblies used in IC engines are normally held in a cage. I've never seen the kind held in place with grease & end caps in a similar application.

Keep trying.

George

Nope. The race would need to be two pieces. One in the block on either side of the main bearing area and the other right on the main caps on both sides of it. That is why you need greese to assemble it, so the little needles don't fall out while you are trying to put it together. I didn't say you could buy such a thing, I was saying that is how you and me are going to do our super motor. BTW, I found out last night that Honda stole my idea. But I am sure we will beat them to the punch because you and I are smarter than they are.

Oh boy, looks like a little mis-communication here. I guess in my origional post I should have said "needle" is stead of "roller" bearings since I was describing the camshaft. Bearings like I mention are on page 88 of the 2006 Ford Motorsport parts book, although not offered for the Cleveland off the shelf.

Ron

You're right Ron, you did write cam bearings, I misunderstood, it's my fault, I humbly apologize.

I'll quickly write a little story (do I write anything quickly?)

Most of the Clevelands I've disassembled have had the oil passages to the cam bearing plugged with old dry oil sludge. The bearings aren't being force lubed anyway, completely splash lubed. Sometimes I laugh at the oil restrictor kits, because with time the passages plug up anyway, the restrictor kit will actually accelerate the process!

So the needle bearing for the cam makes perfect sense, but I would prefer to see it as an aftermarket installation, not incorporated into the new block, I say keep the block simple, inexpensive, easy to manufacture.

If people start racing Clevelands again, parts like that will become available.

I apologize again Ron.

your friend on the DTBB, George