16 replies to this topic

[Belmondo]

Nothing to do with me, but might be of interest to the forum.

 

https://www.ebay.co....:Bk9SR4yn_fW2ZA

[Henri Greuter]

Knowing a bit about how those engines were kept under a tight control by Ford in 1964 at Indy, I assume about the same was valid for those engines that went to the GT40 program for that brief period of time before the bigger capacity pushrods engines came in.

So if this is truly one of the engines used in a 1964 GT40, I have my doubts. 

 

But for sure  an interesting object and it would be interesting to found out its last "job", i.e., out of which car this engine comes from.

[Alan Baker]

Some people, but not anybody who knows what they are talking about, confuse the 1964 quad cam Ford Indy engine with the 1963 aluminium block pushrod Ford Indy engine. The original Ford GT used the 4.2 litre pushrod engine, which was replaced with the cast iron 4.7 litre engine. No Ford GT ever raced with a quad cam centre exhaust Indy engine.

[BRG]

I am glad that some with far greater knowledge than I possess have weighed in on this - I was thinking that I had never seen a centre exhaust engine in a GT40....but what do I know!

[Henri Greuter]

Some people, but not anybody who knows what they are talking about, confuse the 1964 quad cam Ford Indy engine with the 1963 aluminium block pushrod Ford Indy engine. The original Ford GT used the 4.2 litre pushrod engine, which was replaced with the cast iron 4.7 litre engine. No Ford GT ever raced with a quad cam centre exhaust Indy engine.

 

 

were there not a few quadcams involved with testing eventually? I know there were 4.2 liter Pushrod engines involved but I recall I've read something about Quadcam engines being used briefly?

But I'm not 100% sure so I stand corrected in this if indeed not the case. 

[Alan Baker]

were there not a few quadcams involved with testing eventually? I know there were 4.2 liter Pushrod engines involved but I recall I've read something about Quadcam engines being used briefly?

But I'm not 100% sure so I stand corrected in this if indeed not the case. 

The answer is no. The only engines used in the Ford GT programme were the 4.2 litre aluminium pushrod engine, the cast iron 4.7 litre engine (used briefly in 5.3 litre and later 5 litre form) and the 7 litre Galaxie based engine.

The confusion is caused by the fact that the original Ford GT used the 1963 pushrod Indy engine, and many people assume that the Ford Indy engine was always the quad cam.

Edited by Alan Baker, 05 September 2024 - 17:02.

[Henri Greuter]

The answer is no. The only engines used in the Ford GT programme were the 4.2 litre aluminium pushrod engine, the cast iron 4.7 litre engine (used briefly in 5.3 litre and later 5 litre form) and the 7 litre Galaxie based engine.

The confusion is caused by the fact that the original Ford GT used the 1963 pushrod Indy engine, and many people assume that the Ford Indy engine was always the quad cam.

Thks.

 

I was aware of the use of the 1963 pushrod engines for the GT40. These had a fairly active career given the fact that supposedly there have been only 9 of them ever built.

And I am definitely aware of the differences between the 1963 and 1964 Ford engine programs. In fact, I assisted with saving a friend of me buying an item that was said to be a genuine 1964 Ford engine part but when I pointed out ho him some details about the Ford engine program of 1964 at Indy he bowed out of that one instantly and the man trying to sell the items looking at me with a look that, if he had things his way at that moment, I would not be able to write thise lines anymore.

Hence why, even if the GT40 program indeed had used Quadcams during tests after all, the chance that the engine offered in that Ebay offer almost certainly could not have been one such a ( by now hypothetical ) engine.

Ford had such a tight control on the 1964 Quadcams all the time during May. The only thing that did happen beyond their control and without their knowledge was that for the race  AJ Watson had converted the Ford V8 built into Roger Ward's car back into burning methanol again like it had in practice and qualifying instead of keeping the gasoline fuel specs as Ford had put on the engines that were supplied to all their teams for Race day.

 

But I obviously misread that paragraph I recalled, from whatever book, thanks for  putting me straight on this.

Edited by Henri Greuter, 05 September 2024 - 17:29.

[Odseybod]

I was lucky enough to be at the 1963 Le Mans Test Days when the first Ford GTs were running with the Indy engine. Even as a 12-year-old (!), I knew what a racing American V8 should sound like - think Fairlane, Galaxie, etc - and these sounded nothing like that. It was very puzzling for a young chap ...

[Henri Greuter]

I was lucky enough to be at the 1963 Le Mans Test Days when the first Ford GTs were running with the Indy engine. Even as a 12-year-old (!), I knew what a racing American V8 should sound like - think Fairlane, Galaxie, etc - and these sounded nothing like that. It was very puzzling for a young chap ...

 

I presume you mean the 1964 Le Mans test days? Or is my (atmitted limited and already proven incorrect ;)  )  knowledge about the early days of the GT40 project so incomplete that I overlook the 1963 tests being held after all?

 

Funny, it reads a bit as if, at least at that time, you rate that first (indeed 1963 origins) Ford Indy engine as being kind of inferior to what a American V8 should be like.

Yet I think it is fair to say that the '63 Indy `Fairlane Derivative` was about the most advanced and most thoroughly developed Ford engine built for racing duties ever being introduced by Ford up until that time. Though it was surpassed in that honor by the Quadcam that was developed out of it during late '63 and early '64.

Edited by Henri Greuter, 06 September 2024 - 06:01.

[Odseybod]

Sorry, slip of the creaky memory - it was 1964, of course.

 

Certainly not suggesting the Ford GT's engine was inferior - just that having (just about) come to terms with the all-conquering Jaguar 3.8s being trounced in saloon car racing by the newly arrived US heavy metal brigade (assuming it didn't rain or the circuit didn't require a lot of braking), we died-in-the-wool 13-year-old experts thought we knew what sort of sound to expect - yet these Le Mans cars were making a completely different noise, more of a howl than a rumble. We were Shocked ...

[Henri Greuter]

Sorry, slip of the creaky memory - it was 1964, of course.

 

Certainly not suggesting the Ford GT's engine was inferior - just that having (just about) come to terms with the all-conquering Jaguar 3.8s being trounced in saloon car racing by the newly arrived US heavy metal brigade (assuming it didn't rain or the circuit didn't require a lot of braking), we died-in-the-wool 13-year-old experts thought we knew what sort of sound to expect - yet these Le Mans cars were making a completely different noise, more of a howl than a rumble. We were Shocked ...

 

 

Sorry, my choise of words about your feelings wasn't very well, my apologies for that.

 

 

I could add a comment on your observations but by now I am so insecure about what kind of engines were used from when on and on what events within the GT40 time line that I hardly don't dare to add them anymore!

 

Maybe one comment in general and made with the benefit of hindsight: At least for the '63 origin Fairlane derived Indy engine. I don't think it is fair to compare that type of engine to the ones you have heard in Saloon racing at that time. Those first Ford Indy engines were way more advanced and benefitting from the input of well qualified engineers and designers then what you found in the hopped up saloon racers of the same time frame.

Edited by Henri Greuter, 06 September 2024 - 09:40.

[Magoo]

The DOHC Indy engine was indeed considered for the Ford GT but was found to be unsuitable and the pushrod V8 was substituted, and later the 427 V8. 

 

Not at all surprising as the DOHC V8 was a notorious "light-switch" engine with a high, narrow output curve. 

[BRG]

So...what is this engine on ebay?

[Henri Greuter]

So...what is this engine on ebay?

 

 

Assuming that Alan Baker is indeed correct and the Quadcams never been used in a GT40, then it is most likely one with an Indycar history. from before 1970 or maybe one that was used in a Champcar dirt car. for the USAC championship before 1971. Dirt track racing was gone from the USAC trail since the very early 70s but some of those dirt cars were fitted with such Ford engines. 

Edited by Henri Greuter, 06 September 2024 - 14:21.

[Ray Bell]

The 'howl' of the engines was achieved by the same means as the early Coventy-Climax V8s set about getting their power...

 

Still using the 90° cranks, they linked two cylinders from each side of the engine to two on the opposite side and that left the convenient outlet as being in the centre. The engines therefore sounded like a pair of fours linked together.

[Bob Riebe]

The 'howl' of the engines was achieved by the same means as the early Coventy-Climax V8s set about getting their power...

 

Still using the 90° cranks, they linked two cylinders from each side of the engine to two on the opposite side and that left the convenient outlet as being in the centre. The engines therefore sounded like a pair of fours linked together.

AH yes, I remember , fairly well, when some of the SCCA/IMSA Cat. II/AAGT  V8 cars started running that setup, made a unique sound.

[Lee Nicolle]

The 'regular' 289 based engines often had bunch of snakes tuned firing order pipes out the back and had the higher pitched scream in comparison to the deeper rumble. 

Nascar at one stage used 'pan warmers' and had a similar sound but from what I have read while effective it was really not worth the effort.