My next debate: origins of the canted valve Ford cylinder head.

Engine tech, for those engines, products, and technologies of yesteryear.

Moderator: Team

Geoff2
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1980
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 4:36 pm
Location: Australia

Re: My next debate: origins of the canted valve Ford cylinder head.

Post by Geoff2 »

Michael,
With all due respect, you are missing the point. Yes, the Hemi had big ports, but if you want to compare it to the 351, it had an extra 75 cubes to feed! And the 426 was designed/built to win races. Built with a specific purpose in mind, in which it excelled! Without blowing up or needing modifications &/or redesigning.

What about the 351C. Was it designed for racing or street use? Whatever. It failed at both for reasons already discussed in previous posts.
Ron E
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2085
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2005 9:35 pm
Location: nc

Re: My next debate: origins of the canted valve Ford cylinder head.

Post by Ron E »

Even with the extra displacement the OE ports on a 426 hemi weren't as large as the 4bbl Cleveland or a rectangle port BBC. None of them had a good exhaust port.
User avatar
frnkeore
Expert
Expert
Posts: 825
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2019 3:06 am
Location: Oregon

Re: My next debate: origins of the canted valve Ford cylinder head.

Post by frnkeore »

Another thing I remember about the 426 hemi, is that it took at least 1 year, maybe 2, to even beat out the 392 based hemi, even with factory support.
MichaelThompson
Member
Member
Posts: 148
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:25 pm
Location:

Re: My next debate: origins of the canted valve Ford cylinder head.

Post by MichaelThompson »

Kazoom wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:10 pm The "Cleveland" base block had absolute issues with oiling with Sustained high rpm, in the mid/late 70's my uncle sponsored a few 351C circle racers through his auto shop, i still remember back of a pickup truck at his shop FULL of bad 351C cranks/rods/blocks from spun rod/main bearings, it got to a point he stopped sponsoring guys with these eng's, i understand thats why Ford stopped using the 351C block in nascar also. The 351C block can handle high rpm for a few seconds at a time like in dfag racing but in real/road racing its a different story.

a real shame ford did/could not develop there 9.2" deck W race block more instead of flip flopping to a olds inspired block.

also some of the BEST! iron heads Ford ever cast were the 4VBoss Trans-Am heads ... these where NOT! cleveland heads.
I respectfully disagree with you on some points here.

First of all in my neck of the woods the 351 Cleveland was mostly outlawed in the lower classes of circle track racing. Only in the top tier Modified Sportsman division were Cleveland’s allowed because the engine of choice there was eventually the 427 Chevy. The Boss 302/351 heads were considered “exotic” pieces.

I think the preparation required on a 351 Cleveland is singled out by some people while the prep work needed to make other designs last is temporarily forgotten. Take for example press in rocker studs. Do these studs not require specific machine work to make them live with higher rpm’s and spring pressures?

The aforementioned oiling system was completely addressed by guys like Bud Moore. The key was careful preparation. The NASCAR Cleveland’s could reliably run 5 or 6 hundred mile endurance race.

The NASCAR guys didn’t worry about exhaust port plates either. They filled the dead space in the exhaust port floor with braze. This achieved about 75% of what a port plate did without compromising the cylinder head’s reliability.

The 351 Cleveland block was robust in design with a superior main cap and register. The camshaft was large in diameter by comparison to the competition’s engines and it was located high up in the block.

Lastly I don’t know where this Oldsmobile inspired block comes from. The 351 Cleveland is inspired by Ford’s own research. The 351 Cleveland has an extension cast on the front of the block to facilitate getting the water out of the intake manifold. It contains the water crossover and thermostat housing in the block extension.

Also the Cleveland has essentially an “air-gap” intake with a “turkey pan” beneath it.

These two points are in contrast with the Olds. The Olds is typically GM with the intake manifold incorporating the water cross over and it also forming the top cover of the engine.
MichaelThompson
Member
Member
Posts: 148
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:25 pm
Location:

Re: My next debate: origins of the canted valve Ford cylinder head.

Post by MichaelThompson »

Okay fair enough but I’m gonna have to think about how Bunkie Knudsen influenced the 385 series Ford that came out in 1968 but began it’s development in 1965.

The 385 series had canted valves and the same oiling system as the 351 Cleveland.
MichaelThompson
Member
Member
Posts: 148
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:25 pm
Location:

Re: My next debate: origins of the canted valve Ford cylinder head.

Post by MichaelThompson »

Okay well let me tweak this conversation just a little bit.

Firstly I’m well aware of all the experimentation Ford was doing during the Total Performance era. They left no stone unturned.

But let’s back up just a little and think about the big picture just a minute.

Take a look at the “big 3” in total. What were Ford’s main competitors doing? Well Chrysler had 3 different hemis in the 1950’s one for each division except Plymouth.

General Motors had a Caddy, an Olds a Pontiac A Buick and a Chevrolet V8 engine just in the 1950’s. Then when the 60’s rolled out Caddy, Olds and Buick came with entirely new designs.

Each division had a unique power plant with unique characteristics that made each division special in my opinion. You may remember the scandal GM faced when they started using sbc’s in Olds and called them “Rocket” V8’s.

Chrysler also had a transitional engine, the “Poly” and then that lead to the LA “small block” engine.

So Ford on the other hand did things a little differently at least as time went on. The Ford Y-block, the LYB and the FE and MEL were Ford’s first efforts to put different character into their various car lines and models just like GM and Chrysler.

The Y-block was kind of doomed early on because it was a very premium engine with a fully skirted block, a big structure surrounding the valley and a shaft mounted rockers that cost A LOT more to produce than the sbc.

What’s more and maybe more importantly the Volkswagen Beetle arrived in the 50’s and a mini revolution occurred. Ford’s answer to the economy car question was the 1960 Falcon with the 144” six. This new six cylinder could really be considered the first truly modern lightweight engine from Ford. It’s where Ford began using their modern casting techniques in earnest.

Lots of people say that thin wall casting is used to save money by using less material but I say that’s bullshit. It is 100% to save weight and improve efficiency. In my opinion it’s more likely cheaper and easier to just cast with more material and scrap less due to core shift etc.

It’s interesting to note that Ford V8’s were not popular supercharged nitro burning drag engines by comparison BUT in the road racing and oval track racing world where total vehicle dynamics counted the lighter Ford engines shined. The more archaic but thicker walled engines from other automakers were more suitable for the loads that nitro and supercharging placed on them.

(Side note: I always said a Ford Y-block bottom end with a hemi head bolted to the decks would have been the toughest hemi one could conceive of in the 1950’s) Kind of eerie that the 426 hemi is exactly that.

Back to the subject at hand. Ford did have massive changes going on in the performance arena. Certain people were brought in and certain outside shops were contracted to help. Probably one of the most notable hires was Joe Macura, and he was from GM.

I have read that the canted valve Cleveland head was his conception. He and George Stirratt were tasked with coming up with an ideal mid displacement engine to compete with the offerings from GM and Chrysler.

Stirratt was the one behind the 351 Windsor and Joe Macura decided that a medium sized engine needed more airflow than the inline wedge design could provide.

Regardless of all the experimental stuff the article showcases Kazoom Ford still is in the business to sell cars. Combine that fact with the thought of one engine plant producing ALL the engines necessary for the bulk of Ford vehicle production is a lot to ask.

Hence the 351W and the 351C were born as production engines.

Both engines have good and bad like any engine ever designed. The mighty sbc has a tiny camshaft base circle, smallish head bolts that go into water and are placed in such a way as to cause unnecessary bore distortion when tightened and that terrible idea of running water through the intake manifold that is being pulled in two different planes by the fasteners.

The question is what is the builder’s choice? Take a 350 Chevy with the best production line heads and take a 351 Windsor with the best production line heads and take a 351 Cleveland with the best production line heads. Which one comes out on top in almost any horsepower/torque comparison?

The most recent EMC competition had two classes. LS Spec I think and Vintage Muscle. Funny thing about the rules in the Vintage class though was that the cutoff date for these vintage engines was 1968. Exactly one year before the Boss 302 came out and two years before the Cleveland.

I’m sitting here trying to think why that ☝️rule exists?
User avatar
frnkeore
Expert
Expert
Posts: 825
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2019 3:06 am
Location: Oregon

Re: My next debate: origins of the canted valve Ford cylinder head.

Post by frnkeore »

Getting back to the OP.

As I said at the beginning, Ford copied the GM design and I think this latest revelation, mostly proves it.

This is the summation of the OP:
So is this a discussion worth having? Was Ford plagerizing the bbc head or did Ford actually come up with an idea on their own.

As I said I’m in the production Tunnel Port camp while I think many casual observers would just call a 351 C a “baby bbc”

Who’s right? Was anyone there? Somewhere I read or found something alluding to the tunnel port theory I put forth. Just can’t remember where I found this.

Would be fun to hear your thoughts. Thanks in advance.
And then apparently, this is the proof:
Back to the subject at hand. Ford did have massive changes going on in the performance arena. Certain people were brought in and certain outside shops were contracted to help. Probably one of the most notable hires was Joe Macura, and he was from GM.

I have read that the canted valve Cleveland head was his conception. He and George Stirratt were tasked with coming up with an ideal mid displacement engine to compete with the offerings from GM and Chrysler.
Ron E
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2085
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2005 9:35 pm
Location: nc

Re: My next debate: origins of the canted valve Ford cylinder head.

Post by Ron E »

I don't know. One round cylinder with two round valves. Not many layouts that weren't tried before WWII. a 26° intake vs. a 9.5° intake angle doesn't sound like they were following the same game plan though.
MichaelThompson
Member
Member
Posts: 148
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:25 pm
Location:

Re: My next debate: origins of the canted valve Ford cylinder head.

Post by MichaelThompson »

Ron E wrote: Thu Feb 25, 2021 4:52 pm I don't know. One round cylinder with two round valves. Not many layouts that weren't tried before WWII. a 26° intake vs. a 9.5° intake angle doesn't sound like they were following the same game plan though.
Ron I agree 100% and here’s a little bit more on why I think this way.

First in the case of the 385 series heads it’s quite obvious that Ford was putting tunnel ports in the design but without the impractical (from a mass production standpoint) pushrod in the intake port.

Second among several other key differences Ford was obviously going for 8 identical ports which put the emphasis on balance and the intake port’s angle and direction caused the charge to enter the cylinder and use the cylinder wall to keep the charge moving and mixed.

The Chevrolet philosophy on the other hand seems to place emphasis on locating the intake ports nearer the center mounted fuel source.

Later on during the early Trans Am era, Chevrolet experimented with canted valve heads for their small block. The big difference there between the 385 and the Cleveland heads was that the port in the Chevy heads was aimed at the center of the cylinder in contrast to the aforementioned Ford method of using the cylinder wall to continue the charge motion.

This canted valve sbc head was basically like a typical hemi head that places more emphasis on max air flow as opposed to max combustion efficiency.
MichaelThompson
Member
Member
Posts: 148
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:25 pm
Location:

Re: My next debate: origins of the canted valve Ford cylinder head.

Post by MichaelThompson »

Just another quick note about the canted valve sbc heads. They were symmetrical ports aimed at the center of the cylinder as I stated before and I believe the combustion chambers were open and curved like a hemi.

Ford was putting in shallow and tight heart shaped combustion chambers in the Boss/Cleveland and to a certain degree the 385 heads as well.

Chrysler wasn’t doing this and GM was doing wedge chambers in the sbc and bathtub chambers in the bbc.

I think history has shown and by examining what modern heads incorporate that on normal gasoline fuels Ford had it right.
Geoff2
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1980
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 4:36 pm
Location: Australia

Re: My next debate: origins of the canted valve Ford cylinder head.

Post by Geoff2 »

Michael,
If you want to see a shallow, unobstructed, free breathing head, have a look at the chamber on the Chrysler Poly 318 engine, 1955-66.

My mate with a 63 Plymouth, 318 Poly 2bbl, 9:1 CR, beat a 1971 GT HO Falcon, 351C, in a standing start acceleration race. People here used to dribble from the mouth about the 351C.
A drag race conducted here between a 340 powered Valiant charger & a Falcon hardtop with a 351C saw the Falcon beaten..
MichaelThompson
Member
Member
Posts: 148
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:25 pm
Location:

Re: My next debate: origins of the canted valve Ford cylinder head.

Post by MichaelThompson »

Geoff I 100% agree the Chrysler Poly head and the open chamber 2V and 4V Cleveland head share a similar combustion chamber.

I’m not throwing stones at other engines, I’m simply on a quest to examine the development history of the engine I think laid out the basic blueprint for all modern contemporary 2 valve pushrod performance engines except for the hemi.

The 4V Cleveland, despite a few drawbacks that were ironed out over time in my humble opinion is the engine that had all the ingredients.
User avatar
frnkeore
Expert
Expert
Posts: 825
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2019 3:06 am
Location: Oregon

Re: My next debate: origins of the canted valve Ford cylinder head.

Post by frnkeore »

I don't know. One round cylinder with two round valves. Not many layouts that weren't tried before WWII. a 26° intake vs. a 9.5° intake angle doesn't sound like they were following the same game plan though.
Just a revision of the BBC. If I change the valve angles on a Mopar Hemi, does it make it a new design?

Again, I'm NOT a Chev guy, I'm a Die Hard, Ford guy but, with clear vision and can see things that others can't? I don't think so!

Regardless of when and where the canted valve head was invented, GM came out with it first, in mass production and Ford followed, very closely (after hiring GM personnel) with a very similar design.
MichaelThompson
Member
Member
Posts: 148
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:25 pm
Location:

Re: My next debate: origins of the canted valve Ford cylinder head.

Post by MichaelThompson »

frnkeore wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 4:15 pm
I don't know. One round cylinder with two round valves. Not many layouts that weren't tried before WWII. a 26° intake vs. a 9.5° intake angle doesn't sound like they were following the same game plan though.
Just a revision of the BBC. If I change the valve angles on a Mopar Hemi, does it make it a new design?

Again, I'm NOT a Chev guy, I'm a Die Hard, Ford guy but, with clear vision and can see things that others can't? I don't think so!

Regardless of when and where the canted valve head was invented, GM came out with it first, in mass production and Ford followed, very closely (after hiring GM personnel) with a very similar design.

The engineer credited with the Boss/Cleveland cylinder head was Joe Macura, hired by Ford from GM in 1956. This is well before the Mystery motor the Rat motor and even before the 348/409 came about.

Chevrolet did have a funky angle on the intake valve of the Blue Flame six. Is that the engine that launched all of this? Hard to say.
SchmidtMotorWorks
Vendor
Posts: 11003
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 2:30 am
Location: CA

Re: My next debate: origins of the canted valve Ford cylinder head.

Post by SchmidtMotorWorks »

Anyone with experience in head design has discovered the 6 or so viable valve-port layout options (ignoring the combinations of mirrored layouts).
It was never an issue of inventing any of the designs of the time. It was just a question of what was chosen to manufacture.
Helping to Deliver the Promise of Flying Cars
Post Reply