mgs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Mgs] Mgb engine

To: mgs@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: [Mgs] Mgb engine
From: Charley & Peggy Robinson <ccrobins@ktc.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 11:01:03 -0600
Authentication-results: pacmmta52 smtp.user=ccrobins@ktc.com; auth=pass (PLAIN)
Delivered-to: mharc@autox.team.net
Delivered-to: mgs@autox.team.net
Organization: Computer Helpers
References: <DUB117-W87803B37826A939BBEE487DA5C0@phx.gbl> <201211290458.qAT4wYE0004914@nlpi176.prodigy.net>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2
Good stuff, Barney;

Just a couple of observations for the OP's benefit.  The 3-main engines 
reportedly revved up better because of less friction in the mains.  
OTOH, the 3-main crank flexed quite a bit under load, hence the 5-main  
was substituted to stiffen the crank.

When I built my last 5-main engine, I compared the weight of the short 
valve lifter/long pushrod  combo to the long lifter/short pushrod combo; 
decided there wasn't all that much difference between them.   I used the 
long lifter/short pushrod combo on the theory that the short pushrods 
would be stiffer; a good thing since I was using dual double valve 
springs.  A thing that moved me to this decision was that I had come by 
a used 18V that didn't have a straight pushrod in it!

One could make a decent argument either way, I suppose.

CR
_______________________________________________

Mgs@autox.team.net
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/mharc@autox.team.net

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>