Hi Scott.
I don't know about the head and valves but a 1300cc engine, particularly the
early small crank, (journal size) engines are extremely good, virtualy bomb
proof and will rev repeatedly past 4000 rpm without the need to worry that 5
seconds spent at this rpm is worth 10,000 miles at a lower rpm.
I know this as I did thousands of miles in my herald at valve bounce. When I
got it I got frightened by the start up rattle and fitted new shells to the
engine the journals were fine (experience says the shells were too). Wrong
oil filter (without valve) caused the rattle. I proceded to run them in for
about 50yds when the throttle stuck open during
a gear change, 7000 rpm was indicated, after this I concluded they were run
in or run out and nothing I did would change this. The car did 50-60,000
miles bringing the total to 120,000 miles before the body was lain to rest,
the engine was trans-planted and I lost track of it. It was this car that
got me the nick name Valvebounce, I hope this will impress on you the
robustness of the 1300 engine.
When they are twin carbed with 1500 HS4's they have bags of torque and
they rev too. They make very tractable everyday drivers.
Good luck making a decision.
Graham
----- Original Message -----
From: Scott Ruffner <jpr9c@cs.virginia.edu>
To: Joe Curry <spitlist@gte.net>
Cc: Spitfires list <spitfires@autox.team.net>
Sent: Friday, January 14, 2000 2:19 PM
Subject: Re: Best 1500 head
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2000, Joe Curry wrote:
> > I suggest chatting with your local machine shop. They can probably
> > suggest the largest valve seat that will go in that particular head and
> > matching valves as well.
>
> Yes, I was figuring on doing this regardless...actually, I probably
> wouldn't go with the absolute largest possible size, but would leave
> myself some room to oversize at least once should I burn a seat or
> something.
>
> I was reacting to a post I saw from someone else on the list (I remember
> who) that made it sound as if the '74 had a significantly different set of
> valves (like the '76 had the flat top pistons). I'm really wondering if
> there's a particular year when the 1500 heads were significantly
> preferable for some reason. If not, then I'll stick with what I've got.
>
> I am planning on CC'ing the head, milling to get the compression back up,
> then CC'ing again. I'm also planning on spending some time polishing
> intakes with the dremel. I do have a set of HS2's and an intake to match
> them with the 8 port head.
>
> I'm curious what your thoughts on are putting the effort into a 1500
> engine versus the small-rod 1300? I like low-end torque, so I think the
> 1500 is the way to go, but I think I'll be changing the bearing shells
> every 30k or so. This isn't the end of the world, but I wonder if my
> effort wouldn't be better spent on a 1300 engine.
>
> Scott
> --
> Scott Ruffner Computer Science Department
> Systems Engineer 226E Olsson Hall
> ruffner@cs.virginia.edu University of Virginia
> (804)982-2219
>
>
|