Hello
I have an AC Ace with an Oldsmobile 215 engine -
i dont know much abt its spec since i have never had it open - but need to do an rebuild now since the headgasket is gone -
and i am not sure of the how the compression should be - i understand there were 3 different cylinderheads from olsdmobile -
the number stamped on the block says CFD-PM6 1347044 Q
there is a casted number on the cylinderheads - CFD 581829
and there is a stamped number on one cylinderhead saying S190863G - as photo
i am considering what to do - rebuild this engine or change to a ford 302 - i prefer the olds - but not sure if it is worth
rebuilding it - do you have an idea of what output i can expect without too much work -it has had a Holley 600 cfm -
but never really run very well - but i have learned that this is the wrong carb and i should put on a edelbrock/weber500 -
anybode ot there with good advices
best regards
kim
olds3.jpg
olds215.jpg
Kim, The Olds and it's Buick cousin are good motors. Being small displacement you are limited in power. 200-250 HP is fun though. I like the 450cfm Quick Fuel over the Edelbrock.
Kim, S= 2 barrel head 8.25 compression. SG= 4 barrel head 10.25 compression.
http://www.britishv8.org/articles/gm-215-engine-identification.htm
> there is a casted number on the cylinder heads - CFD 581829
Heads ending with 829 were nominally 43 ccs and Olds 215s using those heads were rated at a 10.25:1 compression ratio with flat top pistons. Note that the actual compression ratio is usually a bit lower than the rating which assumes a stack up of production tolerances. Egge makes flat top replacement pistons for the Oldsmobile 215, specifically part number L2153.
> do you have an idea of what output i can expect without too much work
Ted Schumacher (TSI Imported Automotive) dyno tested a Rover 3.5L. With 10.5:1 compression, unmodified cylinder heads, TR8 tri-Y long tube headers, Isky 264 hydraulic flat tappet camshaft (264/264 degrees advertised duration, 0.480"/0.480", 108 LSA), Edelbrock Performer intake manifold, a Holley 390 carb and 30 degrees total timing, it made:
RPM Torque HP
4000 232 177
4500 230 197
5000 222 212
5500 215 226
5700 217 235
5900 207 232
Ted said MGBV8 style block hugger headers gave up a fair bit of torque and HP but I don't have the numbers. Similar builds with lower compression and milder cam timing typically make around 200 HP. If you want more power, porting the heads (or using 1964 only Buick 300 aluminum heads) and/or stroking the engine with a Buick 300 crankshaft can make more power.
Dan Jones
Kim, wow!, what a cool combination. How does it perform?
AC Ace has aluminum bodywork, right? I think there's something very cool about an aluminum engine in an aluminum bodied car. I'm sure you have to work within a budget and you're wondering what makes the most sense. I hope that it makes more sense to fix the leaking heads. I vote for keeping the Olds engine. It's a similar concept to the first 'Shelby Cobra' but with a better twist - an even lighter engine. It's too bad Caroll Shelby didn't do this exact same combination.
There are smaller Holley carbs, but I'd agree that the Carter/Edelbrock 500 is a better choice and is less expensive. You can easily sell the Holley 600 to help pay for the fix. Also, think about converting the ignition to the HEI system.
I'd say you can get an honest 180-200 hp from a well-tuned 215.
You might look for some Buick 300 exhaust manifolds.
I have the same Olds engine with the 4bbl heads. Olds engines came original from the factory with beehive springs. The valve stem/valve guides are tapered, so if your machinist tells you the guides are wonky, gently inform him that is how they are designed. One of my all-time favorite machinists was surprised by both the beehive springs and the tapered guides.
If you rebuild it and replace the pistons, it's important that you zero-deck the pistons. If you have the means to do it, I would consider swapping in a crankshaft from a Rover 4.6. Obviously, you would have to have a machinist turn the mains of the crank to fit the block, and mill the rear of the block to fit the rear main seal. It gives you the chance to use a one-piece rear main seal, and it will increase the displacement to something like 247 cubic inches, about 4.0 liters.
Finding pistons would be the challenge for the stroker kit; you'll need something with a dish, and, again, you'll want to zero-deck the quench areas.
If you live in an area where the T-5 five-speed transmission is available, that might be worth your while. If you already have something like a T-10, then I wouldn't be in a hurry to change that.
Awesome car.
Paul
Kim, OR= you could just cut to the chase and install a 4.6L RV8. It does everything better than the 215. Higher flowing cylinder heads, 1.1 litres more displacement, 1 pc. rear seal, cross bolted main caps and a better oil pump. Then you can consider what vintage/exotic induction, to suite this rare combination. Cross ram with four Webber DCOE's or Del Orttos, would look very proper. Good Luck, art.
Tks you all for comments and advices - good to know this place
Dan - tks for yr comments abt the compression - this makes me decide to go for this engine
i will change the camshaft - not sure yet whats in - it will be out tomorrow - but it has solid lifters with adjustable pushrods -
and i think hydraulics will be better - or ? is the solid lifters original?
if i can get near to the spec you mention of the rover 3,5 i would be happy
when i check for isky cams at summit racing i find only 262/262 - is the 264/264 a special?
Paul - yes the ac ace is alu bodywork - and this was original with an Bristol engine with app 150 hp - so if i can around 170-200 hp
it will be fine for me - and it seems i can with the olds engine so i prefer this - as the weight is closer to the original engine -
it has an T10 4 speed and i prefer not to change that.
i am not sure what you mean with beehive springs?
i agree with you that shelby should have made is this way - but as i understand GM would not allow him back then.
Art - yes that would be the easier way - and costier - i have the 3,9 rover v8 in my morgan +8 -
but the engine in the ace has been in there since the 60s - the car came from the states to uk in the 80s - i bought it in
94 - and i prefer to keep this engine as it is part of its history - like the look of it with the offenhauser valvecovers
i enclose some more photos - and will be gratefull for comments and advices
olds20.jpg
olds10.jpg
olds16.jpg
olds12.jpg
few more photos
olds13.jpg
olds21.jpg
olds22.jpg
olds18.jpg
gratefull for all comments
kim
hi again
sorry - forgot to ask - should i go for studs - instead of the headbolts ?
kim
Kim, based on what you've said and shown in your photos you have a great starting point.
Just the lightened flywheel and the adjustable pushrods are evidence
that something well above the ordinary is going on here and the head casting numbers confirm it. Be sure to inspect your pistons and rods carefully to see if they are OEM or possibly forged as that would be consistent with the other details.
The lightened flywheel and solids scream RPM. What you have there is an engine that should have been capable of going over 7000 if the pistons would take it.
As to the cam, it might be a great one already, I hope you kept the lifters with their respective cam lobes so you could consider reusing it. Many here have used the Comp Cams line, their solids pretty much begin where the hydraulics leave off. There used to be a 268H grind but it hasn't been available in decades, it was the top of the hydraulic lineup. I ran one of those in a Buick 215 with long tube headers, 10-1/4 compression and both a 600 and a 650 Holley carb and it was a screamer. Dan's posting of 235hp is spot on my estimate at the time of 240hp out of that motor. Don't let anybody tell you that your 600 Holley is too big, on the top end that's really going to let this engine breathe if your headers are good enough. Now admittedly idle and economy could have been a bit better, but it was bearable. Anyway, with forged pistons those solids will easily let you go over 7 grand. You might want to start thinking about upgrading the rods though. SBC rods can be made to work without too much trouble and nascar take-outs on ebay are plentiful and cheap. With the car you've got, my inclination would be to get a set of those with a suitable matching set of forged pistons and rebuild it with the existing cam. If head work is needed, consider installing larger valves and seats. That is going to be a fun little engine.
Jim
(formatting buggered by some weird problem I can't solve. But at least I did finally get all the text in.)
hi
today i got the cam and pistons out - enclose some pics
its a crane cam - SF-238/3200 - do you know this ?
the pic of the piston and rod - is this a standard rod?
Jim - i like your comments abt the lifters - actually i though that the solid lifters and adjustable rods were outdated - but understand
from you that it is for high reving?
what do you think about the cam, pistons and conrods and rockers?
can i reuse the solid lifters and pushrods on a new cam - the lifters has no sign of wear ?
lookinf forward to your comments and advices
best regards
kim
Kim, Pretty hot cam. Look at last thread for specs:
http://forum.britishv8.org/read.php?6,3823
You would need to put the lifters back in the same holes they came out of because the lifters develop a wear pattern with the matching cam lobes. If mixed up, your best bet is have the cam Tuftrided, Nitrited or Parkerized and use new lifters. I like the solids with the little hole in the bottom to lube the cam lobes.
Looks like cast pistons and rods. Too bad about the lifters and cam, once you lose the pairing of the lifters and lobes you might as well throw them out if the engine has been run at all. Better to buy new parts than have to tear it all back down to replace them, a rounded lobe is no fun. New lifters won't save the cam and you wouldn't want to use those lifters with a different cam either. I've known of people getting by with it but those were mild cams with soft valve springs. With that cam your springs are likely to be pretty stiff and your chances of it working are not good. Shouldn't be a problem reusing the pushrods.
Definitely use studs when you reassemble. TAPerformance should be able to help there. Do all the oiling mods (at a bare minimum enlarge the suction side, do a search for "oiling mods") and hold your bearing clearances tight on reassembly. Shoot for 0.0010 to 0.0015" on the main and rod bearings, and have your machine shop check your cam bearing clearances. 0.002" would be a good number here. If it's too open it can be corrected. Loss control is the key to superior oil pressure.
BTW, what do your cylinder bores look like? I see you are at 0.040" over on your pistons already. You can go 60 over if you have to but better if you can avoid it of course.
Couple of quick questions here: Was it running when you got it? How did it perform? Why did the engine need to come apart?
Jim
> i enclose some more photos
Very cool car.
> sorry - forgot to ask - should i go for studs - instead of the headbolts ?
Studs on the heads are good. Some also recommend studs on the main caps but ARP says you have to align hone the mains when you do that.
> Looks like cast pistons and rods.
The rods appear to be the stock Buick/Olds 215 which are forged steel (SAE 1141).
> I see you are at 0.040" over on your pistons already. You can go 60 over if you have to
Egge lists the L2153 Olds 215 flat top piston in oversizes to 0.060".
The 3 digits in front of the +0.040 may be the piston part number. It looks like 839 or maybe 339 but neither are familiar to me. On the side opposite where it is marked by the +0.040 oversize, there are some markings. What do they say? You might check another piston to see if the markings are clearer. Also look under the piston near the pin boss to see if there are any markings. The pistons look to have a shallow dish and single valve relief. If you intend to re-use them, you should measure the dish and valve relief volumes. That way we can calculate an accurate compression ratio. The dish will lower your compression and that Crane F238 cam has a lot of overlap and really needs 11:1 compression. Also, Crane recommends a 3400 to 3800 cruise RPM for that so it really won't much in the way of low end response. Do they heads show any signs of port work. It appears they still have the stock diameter valves. Without port work to allow the engine to breathe at higher RPM, a big duration cam like that would be wasted.
> and i think hydraulics will be better - or ? is the solid lifters original?
Hydraulic flat tappet was original. Which is better depends upon the RPM range you intend to operate in. Note you can use the adjustable pushrods with hydraulic lifters as well to set the pre-load. You can re-use them as long as the range of adjustability is correct. Even if it's correct now, it could change if the new cam has a different base circle or the block or heads get milled. The previous owner of my TR8 installed adjustable pushrods but the range of length was incorrect and the cam wore prematurely. I've also had to install shims under the rocker stands to get the rocker geometry correct (on an engine with block and heads milled).
> when i check for isky cams at summit racing i find only 262/262 - is the 264/264 a special?
It's a custom that Ted at TSI stocks. Woody carries the Erson line, including some customs and hydraulic rollers and TA Performance has there own line of cams, including hydraulic rollers.
> There used to be a 268H grind but it hasn't been available in decades.
A Competition Cams 26H would be easy to replicate and improve on with today's lobes. The 268H specs were:
268/268 degrees seat duration
218/218 degrees @ 0.050"
0.456"/0.456" lift
110 degrees LSA
The Isky 264 that Ted used is:
264/264 degrees seat duration
214/214 degrees @ 0.050"
0.480"/0.480" lift
108 degrees LSA
An Erson cam in that range would be the RV15
288/288 degrees seat duration
214/214 degrees @ 0.050"
0.458"/0.458" lift
111 degrees LSA
> if i can get near to the spec you mention of the rover 3,5 i would be happy
That should not be a problem. What sort of exhaust manifolds or headers do you have? What RPM range do you wish to operate in? When the rest of the rebuild has firmed up, I can help you with a custom solid or hydraulic grind using modern lobes.
> Just the lightened flywheel and the adjustable pushrods are evidence
Someone spent a bunch of time boring holes into that flywheel. That will make a noticeable difference in lower gears.
The Triumph TR8 and Rover SD1 came with front covers that used an oil pump with taller gears than the Buick/Olds 215. The pre-SD1 Rover 3.5L engines had the same shorter oil pump as the 215s and spacer plate kits are available in England that allow you to use the deeper TR8/post-SD1 oil pump gears in your current front cover. That plus the bypass plate and externally adjustable regulator (and Jim's suggestions on clearances) are good things to do. Don't use the U.S sourced taller oil pump gear and spacer sets as they are too tall.
Dan Jones
The 215 had forged rods? Guess I'd forgotten that detail. It's bigger brothers used cast, well at least one of them did for sure, I have a couple broken ones that say so. Didn't bend well. They were 300 or 340 rods, I was using them on the tongue of a wagon. Welded up just fine though with the mig. Probably was 340. Anyway the width of the parting line on the side of the beam should tell the tale.
Be sure to use the double groove front cam bearing also. Dan's right about the main studs, that could be an issue and the bolts should be fine there but since you had a head gasket failure already studs there would be a great idea. If you plan to wind it up much main studs would be good too.
Jim
More info for you:
https://www.teambuick.com/reference/library/affordable_aluminum_v-8.php
https://www.teambuick.com/forums/content.php?370-Excerpt-from-a-1960s-Buick-racing-book-on-the-215-sports-car-and-Indy-racing
http://www.britishv8.org/Articles/Speed-Mechanics-GM-215-V8.htm
http://www.britishv8.org/Articles/Rover-Autocar-Article.htm
Another showing larger valves in Olds heads:
http://www.britishv8.org/articles/strokedoldsmobile215v8.htm
Here is a shot of the stock springs for my Olds SG 534 heads. Notice the tapered, beehive shape of the spring.
olds215valveSpring.jpg
Someone hot-rodded that engine. The pistons look great. I can't tell if they're zero-decked. Looks like composition head gaskets were used. I can't tell how that flywheel works but it looks very bespoke.
I don't like the adjustable pushrods because they will be heavier. It's too bad the original valve springs are gone.
You might want to see how far down in the hole those pistons are and order MLS gaskets aiming for .040 of deck clearance. If the head gasket blew, you might want to check the block deck and the heads for flatness.
Hi there again
sorry it has been quiet from me for a long period - been ill + lots of other things to do
meanwhile we have got the block and heads back from shop - it has been welded where it had some corrosion and
4 new sleeves put in - new piston rings - and the valve seats has been redone - pressure tested - so now it looks all fine
my builder has convinced me to put it back together as it was original - with these parts we have - everything has been
marked up so we can put it back as it was
the only thing we are not sure of is the timing setting with this crane cam F-238 -
i have googled - but only find the standard timing saying 5dgree - is that right - pls can you help?
kim
Plenty of timing sets available including reduced centerline for after align boring of the mains. Sets are also available with extra keyed slots for changing the indexing of the cam. TA Performance is the best single source but by no means the only one. However if you call them they usually either have or can get what you need.
Jim
Kim, That's a pretty hot cam. I'd try 10 advance to start. After warmed up it would not surprise me if you didn't need about 15 or so.
hi
tks yr replies
we have a new timingset - edelbrock - 7828 - from Summit
my enginebuilder ask for the cam settings - he thinks it is 5dgree - is that correct - or have i misunderstood -
the ignition timing we can work with when we have the engine installed - but the cam settings should be right first time
can you comment
kim
Kim, I apologize I thought you meant ignition timing. Earlier in this thread I found duration and lift. Some cams have 4 degrees or so advance built in. With that high of duration you will need to have the cam advanced. I am at work now, but when I get home I can run it on the Desktop Dyno/Cam Analyzer.
Kim, I can't get my program to work but these specs may help:
http://www.cranecams.com/234-235.pdf
I found the SBC version with the same specs and it shows 5 degrees advance built in. So at straight up you should be 5 degrees advanced.
Jim - tks - thats what we also concluded - so now when you agree we do it so
tks
kim
clutch11111111111111111111.jpg
clutch5.jpg
clutch222222222222222.jpg
clutch3.jpg
hello
we are now near completing the assembly - now i start thinking of changing the clutch -
i cannot identify the old - just some numbers on it - no brand - pls can you help - or can you suggest an alternative -it has the 10 spline shaft - 1.125 inch - the clutchplate diameter is app 266-67 mm
pls any suggestions?
best regards
kim
Kim, What transmission do you have? My guess is GM (Muncie or Saginaw) 4 speed. Probably GM pressure plate. I may have guessed wrong. I looked up Model 10CF and come up with 65-70 Mustang. I would replace the old Long style 3 arm with a diaphragm type for an easier pedal.
Hi Jim
my transmission is a borg wagner t10 4 speed
and yes i would like to change to diaphragm type
pls can you come closer to what i should go for?
kim
Kim, I have a Ford Toploader with the same old style clutch. I was told the 83-93 Fox Mustang 10" diaphragm will interchange. Take your pressure plate to the auto parts store to compare mounting patterns.
Jim - thats my problem - i dont have a parts store with this kind of clutches to compare the mounting patterns -
any suggestions of which clutch to choose
i lkooked at summit - they have the hays 85-103 clutchkit - or the RAM 92760 kit - they have both the same spec re sizes
and splines - but no mounting spec - and hight size of the pressure plate house
does anybody know if these kits will fit ?
Kim
QuoteI was told the 83-93 Fox Mustang 10" diaphragm will interchange
Fox body Mustang clutch is 10-1/2" x 1-1/16" x 10T Spline. Might have to go aftermarket to get bolt pattern/dia/spline that is suitable.
Kim, where are you located?
graham
my gearbox has a shaft has diameter 1.125 inch - and 10 splines - and size 267 mm
it is a standard T10
The old clutch which are model 10CF - is from Hays - i have been in contact with them out to find out if they have a clutcdh
with the same spec and mounting holes that can replace their old model - but they dont know their old clutches spec -
i asked for a drawing of the mounting holes for one of their new clutches which i thought could be used - but they couldnt provide
that -
so no i am searching for somebody who have replaced a model 10CF clutch with a similar
Graham i am in Denmark - and we have no warehouse where i can go and look at several clutches -
so what do i do
kim
Valveclearence
we are about to set the valves - we use the old setup - pls any advice of valve clearences?
tks
kim
You may have to drill your flywheel for the diaphragm pressure plate. The older long style has 3 x 2bolt pattern, diaphragm equally spaced 6 bolt pattern. Some flywheels are drilled for both. Crane F238 valve lash is .022 from old Crane catalog:
http://www.cranecams.com/uploads/catalog/cranecamscamlobeprofilecatalog.pdf
Hays clutches are now under the Edelbrock umbrella of companies - check out the Edelbrock website for photos and specs.
I did find two Hays clutches listed that are 10.5" dia, 1-1/8 x 10 spline diaphragm style...part numbers #85-100 and #85-103.
both are listed for GM (General Motors) applications.
https://www.holley.com/brands/hays/products/drivetrain/clutches/classic_clutches/
EDIT: Just reviewed the clutch specs and the 85-100 is a lighter duty version suitable for your application - the 85-103 is a heavier duty clutch with subsequent heavier pedal effort.
If there is a bolt pattern mis-match to your existing flywheel, and assuming you'll get the assembly balanced at some point, it's certainly possible to get the flywheel drilled for the new clutch.
There is a 10" diaphragm clutch with the old long style pattern. It was used in early Fox Mustang, Fairmont and Granada. Here is a pic of one bolted to a 215/Rover flywheel.
10inchmustangwithlongpatternon215flywheel.jpg
part numbers #85-100 and #85-103
Those are what I call old school small block Chevy clutches, Graham. Of course, they fit millions of GM cars.
I actually bought a 10.5" clutch & PP for my 215. but decided I couldn't hang something that heavy on my newly lightened flywheel.
Not sure how the pressure plate bolts will line up, but there are S10 Super T10 clutch kits that will have the 10 spline clutch.
https://www.amazon.com/Clutch-Chevy-Blazer-Sonoma-Hombre/dp/B073ZJJ77F
Carl, That is a 11" clutch. The pressure plate has evenly spaced mounting rather than the old Long style that I show above. He does need the GM 1 1/8" x10 clutch spline though. His flywheel is already drilled for the Long style pressure plate.
Oops. I used a 9 1/8 S10 PP & a Mercedes clutch disk with 26 spline. Wasn't sure if that would be enough, but 17 years later it is still doing the job.
It appears that Kim's options are quite limited. May have to go with one of the two Graham mentioned.
.