Ford 105E Formula 3 engine

Originally posted by Geoff Smedley
John, There were definitely only only 14 full castings ever produced of the alloy heads plus one dud which was cut up for internal measuring purposes, It is possible you have an early test head where an old iron head was bored and steel tubes pressed and secured in place.....

Remiss of me, but sometimes I'm like that...

Geoff sent me some pictures to post on this thread, seeing as the Howard head has been given some airtime. First, here's the port layout Geoff designed:



As can be seen, there was a choice between laying the engine over 30° and using downdraught carbies and standing it upright and using side draught.

This featured in a brochure produced at the time, this appears to be the front of it:



And this page notes early successes:



Here's a bit of a closer look at the head installed on an engine and fitted in the car:



And a pic of Geoff machining a head in the Berala workshop, a workshop that saw a number of famous cars and teams pass... the Matich Brabham and Lotus 19B being the first, then the Howard & Sons team, then Bruce Burr used the place to prepare the Greg Cusack Lotus 32B:



Of the project, Geoff says:

.....the "Howard" head that I started on around 1965 and eventually put into limited production in '66. and yes they were successful and some found their way outside Australia as I recently had a correspondent from the U.K. where one has turned up and before that another turned up in Durban of all places. The head was designed as an efficient lightweight mod. that was simply practical and produced better results than the original crossflow ever did.

Thanks, Geoff.

Edited by Ray Bell, 15 October 2010 - 14:15.

When did Ford 3 and 5 bearing racing crankshafts begin using narrow crankpins?

I suspect they appeared first in 3 bearing motors and Laystall ground them?

Cosworth started the ball rolling - they or someone else would have engaged Vandervell to produce bearings to suit?

Some five bearing racing motors like the SCA and those that followed would have had them from the start?

I wonder which of the Cosworth variant Lotus Ford Twin Cam engines had them?

Hello

About F3 Engines
I have a bare 3 main bearing block with the numbers 681F 015 AA
For what series build this block ? F3 / Fj ???

Hello

About F3 Engines
I have a bare 3 main bearing block with the numbers 681F 015 AA
For what series build this block ? F3 / Fj ???

The 681F blocks I've seen have been 5 bearing blocks, perhaps from early Mk 2 Cortina onwards - suspect FVA blocks had that casting number, conceiveably F3 motors could have been based on this block, but not FJs.

Edited by SJ Lambert, 12 December 2010 - 11:42.

Having only glimpsed through this thread but the firing order may have changed because of the gear drive which if 2 gear reverses the cam rotation. Though new cam blanks would be required anyway.
And FF I am sure always used the 1600 crossflow either Cortina or Capri versions. I am pretty certain that 1600 Capris were 2 bbl carby, as later Escort ones were too. The crossflow came out in Mk2 Cortinas in 67 in the UK and 68 here in Oz. And Capris circa 69.
Really I cannot see anypoint converting a 5 main block to 3 main, the power losses should be very marginal. Though with such a short stroke for 1 litre or 1100 the 3 main would be preferable and a bit lighter too.
And to make you cry, I saw a complete rusty 105E going to scrap on Friday along with a couple of Mk1 and 2 Cortinas, also complete. Someone is having a yard cleanout, they looked like they had been sitting for years.

And to make you cry, I saw a complete rusty 105E going to scrap on Friday along with a couple of Mk1 and 2 Cortinas, also complete. Someone is having a yard cleanout, they looked like they had been sitting for years.

I'm willing to collect as many Mk 1 Cortina motors as anyone is otherwise prepared to scrap! I'll be crying particularly strongly over the 120Es that go for scrap...............

O.K - a mistake !
Today i looked for the 681 F block.
The Letters are 681F 0J5 AA ( 0J5 - not o15 ! )
He have a Bore arround 80.96 mm and have 3 main bearings ( Steel )
The first 0ne have a Gear to drive the Camshaft .
From what car comes the Block and - for what series was it prepair ?

regads Karl

Originally posted by Lee Nicolle
.....And FF I am sure always used the 1600 crossflow either Cortina or Capri versions. I am pretty certain that 1600 Capris were 2 bbl carby, as later Escort ones were too. The crossflow came out in Mk2 Cortinas in 67 in the UK and 68 here in Oz. And Capris circa 69.....

Lee, I've posted this all before on another thread somewhere, but for your interest...



These were the first 'rules' every published in Australia for Formula Ford. they were in the AARC Newsletter of February/March 1969.

You'll note that they do include the 1500 engine, which had only been superseded by a little over a year at the time. If you can find the other thread I gave chapter and verse of the CAMS Manual for the period, too, noting changes for a few years.

And the Mk 2 Cortina sold here for about a year with 1100 and 1500cc engines before the crossflow came out. They also had different front struts and badging.

Lee, I've posted this all before on another thread somewhere, but for your interest...



These were the first 'rules' every published in Australia for Formula Ford. they were in the AARC Newsletter of February/March 1969.

You'll note that they do include the 1500 engine, which had only been superseded by a little over a year at the time. If you can find the other thread I gave chapter and verse of the CAMS Manual for the period, too, noting changes for a few years.

And the Mk 2 Cortina sold here for about a year with 1100 and 1500cc engines before the crossflow came out. They also had different front struts and badging.

It would be interesting to know how many cars ran with the early style engine. They would have been uncompetitive from the start at a guess. But at least out there doing it.
I dont think those engines were legal by the late 70s though when I started reading CAMS manuals.

Problem is, Lee, I can't find the other thread...

But I did follow the rules through for this purpose.

I doubt Stuart even has a Rolt rocker cover kicking around!
If you could borrow a Holbay one it could be reproduced rather easily these days and there are a few people looking for them...

What did the Rolt cover look like - similar to Holbay or Cosworth, just a different name on it or own design ?

When did Ford 3 and 5 bearing racing crankshafts begin using narrow crankpins?

I suspect they appeared first in 3 bearing motors and Laystall ground them?

Cosworth started the ball rolling - they or someone else would have engaged Vandervell to produce bearings to suit?

Some five bearing racing motors like the SCA and those that followed would have had them from the start?

I wonder which of the Cosworth variant Lotus Ford Twin Cam engines had them?

Or did they first appear later on with the production of BDA narrow shell bearings?

A question about 1000 cc F3 engines.
Reading this thread it seems that all engines came from modified stock units; especially the block was, as I understand, stock.
Was it a rule or just builders found it more convenient to use an existing block?
And is-was it feasible for a small builder to cast his own, proprietary design, blocks?

Edited by Paolo, 22 February 2011 - 11:50.

A question about 1000 cc F3 engines.
Reading this thread it seems that all engines came from modified stock units; especially the block was, as I understand, stock.
Was it a rule or just builders found it morte convenient to use an existing block?
And is-was it feasible for a small bulder to cast his own, proprietary design, blocks?

Ford 4 cylinder blocks were often used as a good base for racing engines, some formulae mandated stock block and head castings, some allowed free heads, some may have allowed free blocks, I'm not sure about F3 off the top of my head. I suspect even if blocks were free (and they probably weren't) that proprietary blocks would have been employed in just about all cases - it would have been more feasible to cast heads than blocks.

I'm not sure how Brian Hart went about casting blocks in so far of numbers and whether he used his own or someone elses plant, but later on, beyond the point that 105E blocks were all the rage, Brian's blocks, in aluminium became, I think, a proprietary Ford part, as part of the BD range of engines. Couldn't tell you off hand which formula they were used in.

I don't know who else may have been casting four cylinder blocks themselves. Of course, Clisby cast his own blocks and Repco-Brabham either their own cast, had Clisby do some of their F1 heads and I don't know, but suspect that if they weren't casting their own blocks, that they may have had the Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation (CAC) cast their blocks and heads in later years down under. I may have read somewhere that Repco also had patterns for Coventry Climax engines, not sure about that either, and if they did vwhether they were made to spec patterns or sent to Australia from the UK when Coventry pulled the pin. Of course most of those efforts were aimed at F1, not F3.

Or did they first appear later on with the production of BDA narrow shell bearings?

It was mandated in the regs of F3 and FJ that a production block was used.

It was mandated in the regs of F3 and FJ that a production block was used.

With FJ regulations production blocks and heads were required. I understand that in 1963 Cosworth had Ford surreptitiously cast some non-production shallow combustion chamber heads that were passed off as production heads for the Cosworth Mk XI 1098cc FJ engine. The current Richardson head is based on this Mk XI head.

[quote name='RJE' date='Sep 19 2010, 08:54' post='4597192']
I was always lead to understand that MAE stood for Modified 'A' Engine, as the 'A' referred to the particular series of Ford blocks, as in SCA(single cam A) BDA(belt driven A) FVA(four valve A) etc. and does DFV not stand for Double Valve V (as in V8)?

Hi. Wouldn't Double Valve V (as in V8) be written as DVV (not DFV)? Cosworth threw a bit of a curve in their engine designations when they produced the BDR engine - which possibly stood for belt driven road, but was originally produced by them as a kit of parts to fit onto a modified Crossflow block. Four different horse power versions of the BDR were offered, and mainly saw use in the road-going Caterham 7 for which it was primarily produced. The 'R' may also stand for 'Racing' but as far as the Cosworth literature is concerned, it seems to indicate that it was a kit intended for souping-up road going cars by the 'do-it-yourselfer'.

The 'Kent' Designation. According to Peter Wallage in his book "Ford's Kent Crossflow Engine", quote: "The Crossflow Kent engine, so named because the chief engine designer, Alan Worters, lived in Kent, was one of the most successful engines Ford ever made".

Paul Davies, one time editor of Cars and Car Conversions mentions in his book "Tuning Four Cylinder Fords" that "Despite its fairly obvious parentage the crossflow Ford engine has some very important differences in design from the earlier four-cylinder units. The engines were first introduced in late 1967 as the "Kent" series and although by no means unique, were a step forward in efficiency for mass-produced small British engines" (note: the actual introduction date quoted elswhere in this same book is September 1967). Further information in a couple of other books confirms that the "Kent" designation properly belongs to the Crossflow engines only, and not the pre-crossflow 5 bearing engines or the earlier 3 bearing engines, although most Ford enthusiasts/correspondents/magazine contributors refer to the entire range of OHV 4 cylinder in-line engines as "Kent" (note: the Pinto OHC and CVH are a crossflow design, but are not 'Kent' engines). Unless a Ford expert can advise otherwise, all the literature I have shows that the Crossflow engine was predominantly built in Dagenham, Essex. I do know that a plant in South Africa was producing 711M blocks and engine parts until a few years ago, and many Crossflow engines - up-rated and pre-uprated - were installed in small earth movers ('bob-cats' in North America) and used as pump engines in the oil patch in Canada (I obtained my 711M engine in pretty good condition for the equivalent of £10.00 from an auction of used oil company equipment!).

Regarding Holbay numbering mentioned in one of the posts (how the R65 engine got its designation). Holbay seemed to use the R and number designation to describe the b.h.p. output of engines - thus the R120 1600 c.c. Crossflow engine fitted to the Lotus 7 S was alleged to provide 120 b.h.p. Similarly the R90 camshaft was said to give 90 b.h.p. in an otherwise standard unmodified Crossflow engine etc. Admittedly Holbay also used numbers only to designate various camshafts: M55, BTX, K3A 658, 700 and 747. However the R65 designation for the 997 c.c. race tuned Holbay engine may not indicate b.h.p. (unless an owner/tuner knows otherwise) as the standard 105E 997 c.c. road engine was said to give 39 b.h.p., and possibly (probably?) the R65 generated much more b.h.p. than this? Holbay's part numbers were predominantly the letter 'K' followed by numbers, or just numbers in some cases (no 'R' used). Trust that this information is of some use.

Edited by Spaceframe7, 22 February 2011 - 21:05.

Honda's F3 engines were specially cast throughout, were they not?

That answers one question, anyway...

Ford 4 cylinder blocks were often used as a good base for racing engines, some formulae mandated stock block and head castings, some allowed free heads, some may have allowed free blocks, I'm not sure about F3 off the top of my head. I suspect even if blocks were free (and they probably weren't) that proprietary blocks would have been employed in just about all cases - it would have been more feasible to cast heads than blocks.

I'm not sure how Brian Hart went about casting blocks in so far of numbers and whether he used his own or someone elses plant, but later on, beyond the point that 105E blocks were all the rage, Brian's blocks, in aluminium became, I think, a proprietary Ford part, as part of the BD range of engines. Couldn't tell you off hand which formula they were used in.

I don't know who else may have been casting four cylinder blocks themselves. Of course, Clisby cast his own blocks and Repco-Brabham either their own cast, had Clisby do some of their F1 heads and I don't know, but suspect that if they weren't casting their own blocks, that they may have had the Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation (CAC) cast their blocks and heads in later years down under. I may have read somewhere that Repco also had patterns for Coventry Climax engines, not sure about that either, and if they did vwhether they were made to spec patterns or sent to Australia from the UK when Coventry pulled the pin. Of course most of those efforts were aimed at F1, not F3.

In the 80s, a sports car racer in Canada showed me an aluminium block that was sitting on his company shelf and had sat unused for a few years. According to him, it was manufactured by Cosworth of California (or manufactured for them) in 711M 1600 c.c. form for a BDA engine. It had siamesed bores. He was driving a Chevron at the time with I believe a BMW engine, and wanted to give the BDA a try in his car (which he never did).

Edited by Spaceframe7, 25 February 2011 - 23:57.

Have been doing a bit of relieving work on a couple of 120E blocks so that what is currently a BDJ crank, can rotate without interruption!








BT 35-8 would be proud! (Castings have to be period, internals are "free"??)

Edited by SJ Lambert, 13 March 2012 - 09:26.

Not wanting to muddy the waters but there were also Holbay five bearing camshaft blocks - the fives identified with oil pump & distributor drive from the front of the block. The extra journals were welded in requiring alternative positions for the drive of oil pump and distributor, as a bearing journal took the place of the driving gear.

I was very surprised to come across this thread while searching for something else because as a former Holbay employee I can enlarge on this aspect of the engine's development.Some units being returned for rebuilding had survived over revs of 10000 RPM so it was thought that this could be a safe limit to use as standard.To prove the point John Read duly tied a piece of string around the throttle handle of an engine on the dyno,out through the window and crouched down whilst pulling the string gradually up to 10k.The engine remained intact.With further development,i.e down-draughting,higher RPMs were obtained but there came a point where a dreadful machine-gun crackle of a  mis-fire set in and,eventually,with the assistance of an oscilloscope (and one Jack Brabham was instrumental in setting this up) it was established the the camshaft was bowing either side of the centre bearing.The first solution was to grind less metal off the shaft to leave it fatter (blank camshafts were obtained from Ford and fully machined in house)but due to the increased circumference of the lobes,the followers soon expired due to the increased friction.Next,a hole was drilled right through the centre of the shaft and one through each lobe to improve lubrication but this led,more often than not, to the shaft breaking immediately behind the first bearing.Next trick,pickling the shaft in acid for some hours to toughen it up and this met with a degree of success,basically if the engine survived it's final power test it was a good one,but not ideal.And then of course,the final solution,the five bearing camshaft,the fuel pump and distributor drives could be dispensed with and turned into bearings.Problem solved.I hope this is of interest,

I have in my possion a quite orginial Cosworth built MAE with Charles Lucas D/D manifold with a Weber on top. If anybody would like pics or dimentions please let me know.

It has all steel internals, Laystall crank, and a Cosworth front mounted oil pump.

Cheers,
Leo
html/s401.photobucket.com/user/Snakedriver01/media/Cooper/eng_zps7e5a99be.jpg.html"][/url]

Edited by Snakedriver, 03 May 2015 - 23:42.

I have in my possion a quite orginial Cosworth built MAE with Charles Lucas D/D manifold with a Weber on top. If anybody would like pics or dimentions please let me know.

It has all steel internals, Laystall crank, and a Cosworth front mounted oil pump.

Cheers,
Leo
html/s401.photobucket.com/user/Snakedriver01/media/Cooper/eng_zps7e5a99be.jpg.html"][/url]

That does look strange to me. Seeing unused intake ports and only half a carb being used. The only downdraft head I have seen had two downdraft Webers, or maybe Solexs.. It looked great but I dont think I ever saw it run any good. In a Clubman style car where the engine was up straight and the intake did a bend to put the carbs somewhere near straight

Very interested in pics and spec, please. I will pm you with my e mail address.  Views of the original Cosworth dry sump mechanism from the engine front would be valuable as I have an original setup here, It is  importamnt to know which way what goes etc. ....

Twin DD Webers were pretty standard on Clubmans here round 1970/73. Clean running was a serious problem, partly through breathing, but a lot through difficulties with fuel surge on an upright engine.

Roger Lund

It was very spooky at first to taking a push rod engine up past 10,000RPM...But man, it does run!

 

Cheers,

Leo

 

 

 

 

 

That does look strange to me. Seeing unused intake ports and only half a carb being used. The only downdraft head I have seen had two downdraft Webers, or maybe Solexs.. It looked great but I dont think I ever saw it run any good. In a Clubman style car where the engine was up straight and the intake did a bend to put the carbs somewhere near straight

 

 

 

It's Webers on a 105E head for me!
 

Edited by SJ Lambert, 20 March 2015 - 12:53.

One of the first meetings I did with my BT15 F3 MAE was at Phillip Island back about 2005, and managed to select 2nd instead of 4th at the end of the main straight with the gear-change linkages a bit wonky before I fixed them. Worked out on the graph it buzzed to 13000 rpm. Needless to say I took it very easy next few laps but nothing untoward happened, so pressed on. 

 

That engine went another 12 meetings before I gave it to Larner's to rebuild when it came up clear of cracks etc. The valve springs were perfect too and reused, they were Rocket ones. Interestingly the Cosworth crank was a 5 bearing one but using just the 3 bearings of a 109E block.

 

Always had the rev limiter set at 9200 but very last race I did - I turned it off and the tell-tale afterwards was sitting on 9800 - can tell you that extra 600 revs made a HUGE difference, but the wear rate would have been substantial. On the other end of the scale with the Cosworth A8 cam not much torque or power under 6700 rpm with its 56 / 76 timing. Wished I still had the car, was a lot of fun with little power makes you learn to make the car flow better.

Here is a couple more pics from when I opened the "time capsule".  The last pic is of the MK 17 head.

 

Again, If anybody knows anything about my car, please let me know!

 

Cheers,

Leo

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Snakedriver, 04 May 2015 - 00:43.

Talking of Holbay Engines, I was looking for something else in old Autosports, and came across their ad in the Dec 29 1961 issue, and whilst they list the various 997,  1100, 1340 and  1475cc variants and bhp etc, they also cite a 750cc engine offering a max of 70bhp.  What is that all about? Which engine, I wonder..  Any thoughts?

Roger Lund

Bump, see post above. Any ideas?

Roger Lund

 

Just enjoyed grazing through this thread in the hope of finding out why, if only a single choke carburetor was permitted for the 1 litre F3 cars, a blanked off twin choke Weber was the best solution ?

 

Also does anyone know if Novamotor, Italian I believe, used Ford or some other proprietary, like FIAT for example, block ?

 

TYIAOYR

 

Edited by arttidesco, 13 November 2015 - 00:28.

The single barrel was a reg, to help control cost I believe. Cosworth figured out that the Weber worked much better that the single barrel units of the day.

Leo

That's right, cost and power...

They didn't want a silly power race in the minor formula. I'm pretty sure there was a limiting 'washer' in the inlet tract as well.

In the end, of course, that kind of thing just leads to more expensive development going on.

Yes 36mm restrictor fitted between carb & manifold.

Artidesco- Look at the "split Webers" that used to be fitted to Minis, MGB and other siamesed inlet port engines. The Weber offers the least resistance to flow of the choice of carbs.

ˆˆ Thanks Snakedriver, Ray, John and David   

I can't add much about the engines except to recall the importance of the special Cosworth cams  A6 and A8 etc.Tthe master blanks for the MAE engines were machined by Edmonton Tool and Die about 1/2 mile from the Cosworth Edmonton factory. Apparently Mike Costin would hand finish the multitude of tiny flats from the indexing process to reduce costs!

 

When the 750 club held its North Lonodn Lotus tour  two years ago Mike Costin very kindly drew up a skecth of the Cosworth Edmonton factory and gave his brief description of the operation, I hope he doesn't mind me repeating it here.

 

"The whole of the Edmonton workshop covered only 1700 sq feet and I cannot see how we managed to get all the stuff into that space.

 

The dotted area shows where Keith and myself worked.  We got up to it by a vertical ladder screwed onto the wall and the ladder was made from timber of a packing case.  I would be very interested to see if any of the interior is still as it was in 1961-64.  Perhaps your people may take some photos and you could send me some.

 

The Schenck Dyno was for development testing and the DPX2 Heenan & Froude was used for running in and the engine complete was swung over by hoist and mounted onto the EH 300 Dyno for power test.

 

We had 4 engine builders who would build or overhaul a Formula Junior in a full day so we were doing a lot of testing.  The ladder end of our "office" was open and I used to get Keith's 60 fags a day smoke from one side and welding fumes coming up from below for good measure."

Edited by mariner, 14 November 2015 - 02:11.

Bradbury West,

 

The 750cc engine would have been for a Le Mans class car as Lotus had run 750cc Climax Lotus X1s to try and take the win which had always

been a French domain and I suggest Holbay ventured into this area , whether they actually supplied any I haven't a clue.

 

Just enjoyed grazing through this thread in the hope of finding out why, if only a single choke carburetor was permitted for the 1 litre F3 cars, a blanked off twin choke Weber was the best solution ?

 

Also does anyone know if Novamotor, Italian I believe, used Ford or some other proprietary, like FIAT for example, block ?

 

TYIAOYR

 

Holbay,of course,used to cut the carburetor in half. Vic,the machinist's face was a picture the first time he saw John Read clamp a 40 DCOE in the vice and attack it with a hack-saw!

Holbay,of course,used to cut the carburetor in half. Vic,the machinist's face was a picture the first time he saw John Read clamp a 40 DCOE in the vice and attack it with a hack-saw!

 

I was wondering about the unused extra weight of the blanked off bit

The carburetor was not a 40 DCOE they are side draught carb. I think it was a 48 IDA Weber carburetor we used.

We also used a slide throttle, so that on full throttle there we nothing to restrict the flow into the engie.

 

The F3 & later F4 regs said you could only use a single choke carb. . At the time there was no better carbutetor available, if there had been someone would have used it.

 

Because of the inlet ristrictions they ran very high compression ratios 10-1 or more, & wild camshafts( A6 or A8 for Cosworth) & ran to 10,000 + rpm. (We normally used 10500 rpm some used 11000 rpm) with points & condenser ignition.

 

When I have time I will tell the story of two Holbay R70 engines, it was 40 years ago but I still have nightmares

 

Note.   reading through this thread again I see I did tell the story of our two Holbay R70s back in post 30.

Edited by John Saunders, 06 January 2016 - 14:57.

John,

Im looking forward to it, esp as a current F3 racer.

Leo

John,

Im looking forward to it, esp as a current F3 rac

 

John,

Im looking forward to it, esp as a current F3 racer.

Leo

Sorry Leo,   Unfortunately Im not a current F3 driver (I last raced in 1974). But I did run a team in F4 in the late 70's using these engines

 

 I will try to post something next week, as Im dyslexic (yes I did look that up) it takes me a long time.

Artidesco- Look at the "split Webers" that used to be fitted to Minis, MGB and other siamesed inlet port engines. The Weber offers the least resistance to flow of the choice of carbs.

Wasn't the reason for the use of separate halves of 2 Webers that regulations required that the cars had the same number of carburetters as production? A single 40 or 45 DCOE would have worked too.

No, the split webers were used in order to give a straight inlet to each port.

Even on the restricted Mini7 formula

In some classes the split Weber was to keep the stock inlet manifold as required by the rules.

My buddy managed to pry some information out of Cosworth. Below is a scan of the actual dyno sheet from my engine.

Cosworth sent this document to us...The actual 50 year old piece of paper with oil stains and all.

Edited by Snakedriver, 17 March 2016 - 13:57.

What a lovely piece of history to have. I was lucky enough to receive a copy of the 1970 dyno report from the Broadspeed dyno for one of the engines in one of the cars from my researched marque. It helps to complete the circle of history. It is the sort of stuff you cannot invent.
Roger Lund

Right you are Roger.

Now if I could only find any history about my car. We were hoping that there would be some information on who bought it. That would help in discovering the history of the car.

Cheers,
Leo

It can be tough with Fords ...

E93 and prior
100E side valve 1172cc
105E ohv 997cc Anglia
107E ohv 997cc Prefect
109E\112E ohv 1340cc Classic\Capri
115E ohv 1198cc Anglia
122E ohv 1498cc Cortina

source Ford advertisment Motor Sport page 720 September 1963

e&oa

Just to amend this list:

 

123E Anglia Super: 1198 c.c.

109E: Consul Classic:: 1340 c.c.

110E for LHD:

116E 1500 c.c. (1498 Kent Engine)

117E LHD:

 

The 123E and the 109E were dreadful engines, at first, as the crank breathing was wrong and they used to sludge, dreadfully.

Titan: Roy Thomas made perhaps the first MAE downdraft, by dint of milling out a standard head casting, Aralditing in a block of mild steel (baked in his wife's oven! She was not pleased with the lingering smell of old fish!) and then milling out the new ports and adding half an IDA Weber with a slide throttle.

 

In his first raaces in the new downdraft, Charlie Lucas was unbeatable, until Novamotor came onto the F3 scene.

 

http://vintageraceca...1967-titan-mk3/

 

We used to use Tom's (As he was known) dyno facilities.

 

Very clever man.