I don't remember details, but I recall that some metal had to be removed from
the block to clear the push rods... that the head was only effective with
incredibly large pistons (some incredible size that required the block to be
milled out to accept giant sleeves)... and maybe some more metal removal to
relieve various moving parts, and I imagine a special cam... etc...
I wasn't talking about modifying the old head. --Justin
William G Rosenbach wrote:
> Fascinated by the existence of a X-flow head for TR-3/4's, I've never
> heard mention of it before.
>
> Have I missed something here? If you are fitting a new head, why would
> you need to spend a dime modifying your old head?
>
> If you designed a head for a particular engine why would you do so
> requiring a redesign of the entire engine? I mean, it either bolts on or
> it doesn't. These are not exotic engines, they're very basic. They're
> tractor engines for God's sake. I can see where you may need to redesign
> the cam shaft to accommodate differing valve layout but a good designer
> would try to avoid that problem. Pistons might have to be changed to
> accommodate a new combustion chamber design. Intake and exhaust systems
> would be a necessary and expected change, the rest sounds like excuses to
> discourage interest.
>
> Sounds to me as though Sir Laurance might have been hit with the sword a
> bit to hard by the Queen. Maybe they look so cool as new castings that he
> just can't bear to part with them, or they are holding up a set of
> shelves in his basement with his collection of Motor magazines.
>
> Bill 70 GT-6+
> ________________________________________________________________
> GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
|