V-12 Cleveland/Clevor

Awesome! Can't imagine it would ever fit in a Pantera, but an awesome project none the less!

I can see this thing in some kind of replica...
GT-40, Cobra or Ferrari replica.

Hi Kelly.

If he needs a car to put it in i have a 1956 Ford F 100.



Kjeld

WOW AMBITIOUS IS AN UNDERSTATEMENT .

Awesome!
The smile on the ol' guys face in the last video tells it all.

quote:

Originally posted by 4NHOTROD:
Awesome!
The smile on the ol' guys face in the last video tells it all.

I think he knows it needs suspension and chassis work?

Certainly doesn't sound like a Viper that's for sure!!!!!
Jeff

Awesome ... those inlines found a nice home ...

552 cubic inches ... solid roller cam?

There's nothing like an in-line 6 or a 60°/180° V12.

But a 90° V12? I'd love to pick his brain on how he reconciled that with his love of the in-line 6.

I can see how he mechanically dealt with it ... the bitchen looking fully counter-weighted crank. Must have cost a mint.

I'm obviously supportive of his choice in cylinder heads.

And I'm quite partial to that cross-ram he cobbled-up. I've been longing for a DCOE/IR cross-ram manifold for my Pantera's motor.

Cool stuff Kelly. Thanks

That sound it makes.....wow!!

quote:

Originally posted by George P: There's nothing like an in-line 6 or a 60°/180° V12.

But a 90° V12? I'd love to pick his brain on how he reconciled that with his love of the in-line 6.

I can see how he mechanically dealt with it ... the bitchen looking fully counter-weighted crank. Must have cost a mint.

I'll give it a try based on my conversation with the builder. There are always trades but there are a few things you don’t get to trade once you make certain choices. The crank is essentially an inline six crank with wider journals so you can hang two rods on each throw. If you are fitting it to a 90 degree V-block you’ve sort of made most of your decisions from a practical standpoint. This engine is set up as essentially two traditional inline six’s sitting next to each other 90 degrees out.

If the engine was in a car, and you were sitting in the driver’s seat, the cylinder numbering convention is just like Ford V8. Start at the front of the right (passengers for left hand drive guys) bank and go 1-6 from front to back and the left (drivers) 7-12. The throws on this crank are oriented and ordered like a Ford inline six and fire 1-5-3-6-2-4. The left bank is the follows same 7-11-9-12-8-10 cylinder across the valley only 90 degrees out of phase. So the V12 order is 1-7-5-11-3-9-6-12-2-8-4-10. Now you could have chosen to change the firing order up and down the crank between cylinders that live at TDC at the same time but that won’t change the phasing of fire in the rotation. Like I said, once you chosen 6 throws, and 90 degree V all you have is the orientation and phasing of each throw/pair of cylinders. For inline 6, the throws are 60 degrees apart with the center two in phase.

So the only way you change the timing of cylinders is change the phasing of the throws or the degree of V between cylinder banks, or try to go to 12 throws. 12 throws would be a weaker crank even if you could make it work in the confines of the Ford V8 architecture. Imagine the cam as well. You can’t change the block architecture if you’ve decided to use a Ford V8. The phasing of the throws is a fairly proven choice with regard to harmonics, crank balancing, and loading for inline 6s, he just has two of them…...so there ya-go. I think Jan basically thought it was the best of the trades given the things that couldn’t be changed. Make sense?

Now how you configure the intake manifold for even fuel distribution may require some attention. You can couple the exhaust on each back just like you would and inline six.

Best,
K

That's really cool.

I bet you could run each half (initially) independently - maybe pull the spark plugs on the opposite bank, and get the timing dialed in.

Then switch to the other side - Then run both. The timing of each bank could be (slightly) independent of each other, obviously you would get best results if they were perfectly matched, but that doesn't really seem to be a requirement.

My buddy with a Lambo Diablo claims he could run his V-12 like that, but I think there would be other practical consideration...

Anyway - very cool motor. It's great to see an example of "good 'ole American ingenuity"! (I hope I spelled that big word right!)

Rocky

sorry , now i can't follow ....

couple sectioned 302 Mexican blocks and Cleveland 4V closed chamber heads.

does this 12 cilinder block exist ? or a massive block machined to 12 cilinders instead of 8 ??? or 2 half 6 cilnder blocks "welded" together ???
and Cleveland heads ? from a 6 in line ? does this exist ?

My old 68 Ferrari had dual distributors. In order to time it you checked and adjusted each side independently as if working on two I6 engines side by side. No problem. No need to disable the opposite bank of cylinders at all.

My deepest respect for people that can do this stuff. Incidentally, wouldn't it be easier to do a V16, just welding two V8s together?

quote:

Originally posted by No Quarter:
My deepest respect for people that can do this stuff. Incidentally, wouldn't it be easier to do a V16, just welding two V8s together?

Not sure about it being any easier but yes, it’s been done many times. If you search Chevy V16 you will get a bunch of hits. There have also been a number of folks that have just mechanically coupled two V8s nose to tail and skipped all the engineering and machining required to make a single block….there are quite a few drag racing examples of this as a less expensive route to more displacement.

I do have great reverence for those that take on such things and succeed. V12/V16 pushrod engines are certainly interesting, at least to me and such incarnations often reflect a fondness for a certain engine (which I share) and the novelty of making something that could have been, but never existed. From a practical perspective, one does have to wonder what/where to use them though. Marine and street rods can accept them more readily than most OE auto candidates. Whether its V12 or V16 it’s just a matter of degree. Jan mentioned he wanted to build a GT40 Mark IV JCar for his V12.....better not dare him

Though not impossible, I think that would be quite difficult given the length of the engine but certainly not more difficult than building such an engine. I suspect it likely weighs a bit more than V8s of comparable displacement. For me, even if I could build such an engine (beyond me) I’d probably conclude I’d get comparable power from comparable displacement V8 but, hey, that’s the beauty of the car hobby, to each his own, and the chances of someone else having one and the satisfaction of having worked it with your own hands…..priceless.

Best,
K

In the 1940's Ford wanted to get into the aircraft engine market.

Mostly they were looking to compete with the Rolls Royce Merlin, so Ford built a masterpiece, a all alloy, water cooled, 27 litre (1647 CI), 4 valve per cylinder, 60 degree, DOHC V12, called the Ford GAC. From memory it was 5" bore, 6" stroke..?

It was built in automotive fashion (as pioneered by Ford with their V8s) rather than the traditional split crankcase design as was used in the Merlin.

Unfortunately the USAAF had already signed contracts to purchase the Rolls Royce Merlin, the Packard Merlin and Allison V12s and the US Navy had decided to go with air cooled radial engines.

The US Army then stepped in and told Ford they didn't have use for a V12 but they did need a reliable big V8 for their armored vehicles (tanks).

So Ford redesigned the GAC to make it into a 18 litre (1100 ci), 4 valve per cyl, 60 degree, DOHC V8. Know as the GAA.

The way Ford got around the 60 degree V8 problem was by using a flat crank (like a 4 cylinder and like current formula 1 V8s).

The engine had a distributor on each bank of cylinders and ran as two 4 cylinder engines sharing a common crankshaft. The 4 camshafts were gear driven from the crank.

It was very successful, reliable and highly regarded.