Yellow Bullet Forums banner

1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,513 Posts
Here is a little dose of reality. This article was written by Dave Emanuel in 1989 for Super Ford magazine after an interview with Don Sullivan, Henry Ford's "Wild Irishman". Remember this is a first hand account from someone who was really there.......

I'm sure most of you know that 2007 marks the 75th Anniversary of the 1932 Ford and its innovative engine. HRD has a very special connection with this historic accomplishment in the name of Don ‘Sully’ Sullivan. You see, Don Sullivan was one of five engineers picked personally by Henry Ford to design and develop Ford’s Flathead V-8. And, Don Sullivan also happens to be my Grandfather. He was a hell of a guy and a great engine designer that thrived on making things work against overwhelming constraints. He could take ‘boat anchors’ and turn them into explosive power plants of horsepower. He was also gifted with a charming twinkle in his eyes that made those that worked with him enthusiastic and energized.
As a good overall introduction to Sully’s career, I picked from many articles written about him, ‘Henry Ford’s Wild Irishman’, by Dave Emanuel. This appeared in the 1989 February issue of Super Ford. This article has a particularly good account of the early design effort of the Flathead V-8.
Tom Kuhr
Henry Ford’s Wild Irishman

Don Sullivan and the famous Flathead V-8 that was introduced with the 1932 Ford. By Dave Emanuel
SUPER FORD, February 1989

"I've been fired from Ford more times than most people have jobs."
You would expect a statement like that to be made with a good deal of bitterness. But when Don Sullivan talks about his long career at Ford Motor Company, it's always with a sense of pride. What's more, his fierce loyalty to Henry Ford and the company he founded is unshakeable.
Reflecting on his early days with Ford and his frequent firings, he says, "I can't tell you why, but they'd come and say, 'You know you're fired, don't you?' When that happens, you leave before they throw your lunch bucket over the fence. Then in a few days, some big goon who looks like Jess Willard comes up in a Model A car, pounds on the door and says, 'You Sullivan? Come along with me.' And then I'd go back to work. I don't know anything about how all that happened."
Apparently, Henry Ford had taken a liking to the young engineer, and when he found Sullivan was not on the job, he left instructions to hire him back. Henry Ford worked in strange ways, on professional as well as personal levels; he rarely took a direct approach. Sullivan recalls a time when he was trying to fix an outboard motor for a fellow worker. "I was trying to find out why it wouldn't start, and Mr. Ford walks in the back door. I almost died. He said, 'What's the matter?' And I said, 'Oh, I can't get this thing started.' He walked on and didn't say a thing. I was so scared I was shaking. So I unhooked the dam thing and took it out to my car. I shook all afternoon. Then around quitting time, one of these muscle men sticks his head "in the back door and hollers, "Where's da guy dat's got da outboard motor. He was so loud you could here him up at the Dearborn Inn. I told him it was in my car. He said he had to have it. So I went out and gave it to him and he took off.
"Howard Salley, the guy who owned the motor, asked me what happened, and I told him some great big guy came in and asked me for the motor. He said, 'You didn't tell him who's it was, did you?' I told him he thought it was mine and Howard said, 'Good.'
About a week later, the guy came back looking for me, and I thought they were going to take me out and hang me by the thumbs. But he just said that he had it out in the car. And there the motor was, and it had new stickers all over it. Mr. Ford had had the whole thing rebuilt."
At age 84, Sully, as he is known throughout the industry, has been working for Ford for almost 60 years. His experience extends from the design of the original flathead V-8 to the latest addition to the Ford racing stables - the SVO V-6. As a consulting engineer for Ford's Special Vehicles Operation, Sully is at his desk five and a half days a week - not just spending time but making things happen.
Don Sullivan's career has come full circle since 1969, when he reached the mandatory retirement age of 65. After some 40 years in the employ of Ford and countless engineering successes, he had reached a fork in the road. One branch would take him to the ennui of retirement, the other would lead him to a new occupation as an engineering consultant. With his vast experience and excellent reputation, his services were much in demand. But his loyalty was always with Ford, so when an opportunity to work in the SVO group arose in 1981, Sully returned to where his heart had always been. He's been there ever since.
A living legend within the motorsports world, Sullivan avoids publicity and tends to downplay his accomplishments. But whenever there was a problem with a Ford high-performance program, more often than not it was Sullivan who came up with the solution. From pre-war efforts at Indy, to Pikes Peak hill climbs, turbocharged Indy V-8s and LeMans in the '60s, it has been Sully who has turned disaster into victory. And when Carroll Shelby was building Cobras and Shelby Mustangs, he called Sully when he needed assistance with Ford parts and components.


Henry Ford and his revolutionary V-8. Don Sullivan's career with Ford began April 12, 1928. With a degree in mechanical engineering from the University of Michigan, Sully began working on engine development almost immediately. And it's the early years, working directly with Henry Ford on the design of the first flathead V-8, that he remembers most fondly. Back then, engineering was carried out a bit differently than today. A group of 30 to 40 draftsmen would be charged with designing components for all the cars and trucks sold under one name plate. Work was assigned on a somewhat random basis, and as Sully puts it, "You had a chief draftsman who kept track of what everyone was doing, and you just did whatever had to be done. One day you might be laying out a radiator, and the next day you'd be working on a chassis part. And they kept you busy. There was always a pile of work waiting to be done." Sullivan first worked directly with Henry Ford, who called him "my wild Irishman," in 1930 when he was involved in the then highly secretive V-8 project. To keep the project under wraps until he was ready to expose it, Henry Ford had moved the entire works to Greenfield Village where an assortment of noteworthy buildings had been moved from all over the country and assembled as a tribute to Americana. A cadre of five engineers set up shop in the building that had once been Thomas Edison's laboratory in Fort Meyers, Florida. It was here that they proceeded to bring Ford's first V-8 to life.
As Sully recalls, Henry Ford was involved with the project on a day to day basis. "Every day, Mr. Ford would come in the back door and say, 'Hello boys,' and then start looking things over. The man who ran the job was Carl Schultz, but very little communication came through him. He took care of some of the basic things, but Mr. Ford took care of all the details. I remember one day Mr. Ford came by and said, 'What are you doin'?' - he always asked you, 'What are you doin'?' I said, 'Making a connecting rod.' At the time there were a bunch of big, crude vertical steam engines right outside, and he said, 'For what, one of those things out there?' Then he just walked away.

The graceful lines of the Ford Flathead connecting rod. "So I made a real thin connecting rod. Everybody thought it would never work, but that's what he wanted. It wasn't weight consciousness, he was concerned about the amount of steel that would be needed to make an engine because he knew we'd be building millions of them. They had to develop a special steel, but we broke very few of those rods." As he was prone to do, Henry Ford got what he wanted. According to Sully, everyone knew that Henry Ford ran the shop. And even if it was wrong, it was right if Mr. Ford wanted it that way. Although Sullivan recalls that Ford was a very reasonable man to work with, there's evidence that his tunnel vision did create problems. One of his major concerns in the design of the flathead V-8 was with keeping the engine simple. Consequently, early production models had the water pump mounted on top where it was accessible. But the pump would cavitate in that position and ultimately, after a considerable amount of "band-aid engineering," it had to be relocated to provide adequate cooling. By most accounts, Henry Ford was more than a little eccentric, but Sully has a different point of view. He says, "He wasn't wrong about very many things. I thought a lot of times he was out of his mind, but it would usually turn out that he wasn't far off. He wasn't eccentric, he was just very positive in his thinking. Now if you didn't like what he was thinking, he was eccentric. He was concerned about the product more than anything else. Things had to be done so that anybody could fix the engine, and it had to be designed so that you couldn't do things wrong."
In his quest for simplicity, Henry Ford tried to eliminate as many components as possible from the flathead V-8. Sully recalls that the pre-production engines had no oil pump and no water pump. Thermo-siphoning controlled coolant flow and cup-like shaping of the ends of the crankshaft counterweights splashed oil inside the engine. Sully didn't much care for the system, and during check-out runs with test driver Howard Salley at the wheel, the engines failed routinely. Knowing that a splash system was inadequate, Sully had the driver swing the car from side to side as if he were driving through a slalom. With oil sloshing back and forth across the pan and staying out of reach of the crankshaft dippers, it wasn't long before oil starvation led to engine failure. Consequently, production flathead versions all had oil pumps.
Another facet of the engine that Sully didn't care for was the initial placement of the distributor, down low on the front of the engine. He states, ''You couldn't run through a puddle of water without the distributor getting wet. The oil pump was driven by a vertical shaft, and there had to be an idler gear between the cam gear and the oil pump. It worked out that there would be very little tooling change to relocate the distributor. That's how it got moved up on top."
As much admiration and respect as Sullivan has for Henry I, he has dislike for Henry II. When Henry II took over control of the company, Sullivan didn't see much of a change. He states, "The 'Whiz Kids' [a group of Henry II's college buddies] ran the company. That *&I\%! kid didn't do anything; it was McNamara and Breech and those guys. He wouldn't be tied down running the company. He gets a lot of credit, but his mind was never on business."
Sully's feelings about Henry II also stem from his attitude towards his grandfather. Not only did Henry II auction off a lot of the furnishings in Fairlane (Henry Ford's mansion), he senselessly destroyed a lot of records documenting family and company history. But what irritates Sully most is a comment Henry II made after Henry I had passed away. "A group of people were taking a tour of Fairlane and they came across a room loaded with books. Someone said, 'Your grandfather must have liked to read' and Henry Ford II said, 'I don't think the bastard ever read a book.' The only one who was loyal was Mrs. Edsel Ford [Henry II's mother]. She turned all her interests over to a foundation to preserve the mansion."
As might be expected, Henry II's treatment of Lee Iacocca didn't set well with Sully either. He states, "Iacocca was a hell of a good guy; he worked his way up through the company. The way I get the story, the trouble began when Henry Ford II asked him to take one of his sons and groom him to run the company someday. Iacocca told him that he didn't run a kindergarten, he built cars. That's what started all the trouble. He had a hell of a time figuring out how to get rid of Iacocca, and 1 don't know how he came up with the solution. Somebody must have advised him, because he wouldn't, couldn't have come up with it himself."
After finishing up the flathead and a few other projects, Sully became resident engineer at the Cleveland engine plant where six-cylinder and 256 cubic-inch Mercury flatheads were built. But by the early '50s, he had been transferred back to Dearborn to apply his talents to Ford's NASCAR efforts. Later, he was charged with improving camshaft, valve train and oiling system design on high-performance versions of the 292 and 312 Y-block V-8s. However, before he could bring about any significant changes, the 1957 AMA ban on racing took effect, and performance activities were temporarily put on the back burner.
Although the classic American rivalry is between Ford and Chevrolet, Sully remembers that Chrysler and Pontiac were the chief competitors in the early '50s. Remembering the teams fielded by Carl Keikheifer he states, "I'll tell you they were bad news. That old Keikheifer was a cheater and wouldn't quit. He had Chrysler engines that weren't even painted, they came right from Highland Park [Chrysler headquarters] all ready to go."
With the 1957 factory agreement "banning" racing activities, Ford, GM and Chrysler ended their visible support of NASCAR race teams. And while the performance image was downplayed, racing activities merely shifted from the front door to the back door. By the early '60s, most of the automakers were playing the same game, paying lip service to the agreement while" actively supporting race teams as "research and development" efforts.
Ford had introduced the "FE" engine series in 1958 and from the original 352, the engine had grown to 390, 406 arid finally 427 cubic inches. It was the 427 that ultimately carried Ford to victory at LeMans, and Sullivan became involved in grooming the engine for road racing. With its roots in NASCAR and drag racing, the racing version of the 427 wasn't particularly well suited for the road course.
"We had low-riser, medium-riser and high-riser heads for the 427 and all that stuff was a disaster;" said Sully." At that time, it had to be big to be better, and they had the ports way too big. The carburetor was way too big - you had no velocity and you got no performance at all because it had no torque. But it had a big horsepower number. Everybody had to have a big power number. They had the same problem with camshafts - no torque. You couldn't use those engines in road racing because they just didn't nave enough torque. The 302 we used in Trans-Am had the same problem. The ports were too big and so was the carburetor. I designed a new camshaft to make more torque, and the guy who was my boss at the time wanted to fire me. He said, 'This hasn't got any power.' I told him that to run the camshaft we had been using, you'd have to have a ten-speed gearbox because you couldn't get off a corner with it. So we used the E2 camshaft and that worked pretty good."




When Ford went to Indy in the '60s, they went with specially built engines based on the 221-289 small-block. As might be expected, Sully was in charge of the project. Sully's involvement with the LeMans effort centered around the 289 (and, later, the 302) GT40s, but they were overshadowed by the 427s. Although the small-blocks produced excellent power and had good durability, they were no match for the bigger engines. What Sully remembers most about LeMans is the victory in 1967 and the man he feels is the unsung hero of that effort - Mose Nowland (who still works for Ford in the SVO division). As Sullivan recounts the story, "It was in the middle of the night and the car came into the pits and had a lifter clicking. Now Mose wasn't even supposed to be in the pits, he was just there as an advisor. Anyhow, he just happened to have some rocker screws in his pocket when he was standing behind the wall in the pits. When the car came in and he heard the lifters clicking, he jumped over the wall, grabbed a speed wrench and yanked the valve cover off. He replaced the rocker screw and that's how we won the race. And you know, I've never heard anybody say anything about that."
Although Don Sullivan retired from Ford just a few years after the LeMans effort, he continues to leave his mark on the Ford racing program. He's currently working on the SVO V-6 and at this point he says, "I did all the layouts on the engine, but right now, I'm sweeping up the chaff and making sure that everything is all right. I think that engine is going to work out pretty well."
After 60 years in the business, Don Sullivan should know.
By Dave Emanuel
SUPER FORD, February 1989


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,513 Posts
Here is an inhouse Ford project that might be interesting to you. I might point out as the article does that the Quad Cam Indy V8 is based on the SBF. In fact block, crank, rod, piston and oiling technology developed on this project was also implemented on more conventional engines such as the Boss 302. The current Boss 302 and Boss 351 found in today's Ford Racing catalog can trace their lower end design roots directly back to this Indy project. I got this article from the Quad Cam Ford website. http://quadcamford.com/development.html

Development

This is a short story on the development of an engine by the Ford Motor Company. This engine was the subject of many books, articles, and technical reports. I have seen this engine referred to as: the Dearborn Ford, the Ford DOHC, The Quad Cam Ford, the Cammer Ford, the fourteen gear Ford, and the Foyt Ford. The meat of this story has been plagiarized from several sources, but primarily from the Design and Development of the Indy Car by Rodger Huntington, The Racing Fords by Hans Tanner, and the S.A.E. report on the Ford DOHC Competition Engine by A.J Scussel along with the update second addition by Ak Miller.

The story begins shortly after the 1962 Indianapolis 500 race. The intent was made by the Ford Motor Company to launch a multi-million dollar Ford Indianapolis racing project to enhance their image in the mushrooming youth / performance market. Bill Gay, Executive Engineer of the Advanced Engine Department of Ford Engine and Foundry Division, assembled a team of engineers including Joe Macura and Richard Chen. Their objective was to build a racing engine of 255 CID, producing at least 325 hp, and weighing no more that 350 lbs.

The decision was made to start with the 260-CID production engine used in the Fairlane, Falcon, and Comet cars. The design project was divided into two phases. First, to baseline the 260 Fairlane engine that was to be the basis of the new engine. The second phase was to develop a reliable aluminum version of the engine. The stock 260 CID was dubbed the Stage 0 engine. The Stage 1 engine had revised intake and exhaust ports and 12.5:1 compression. The special intake manifold carried four 46mm downdraft Weber carburetors. The Stage 2 engine was an aluminum version of the pushrod engine reduced down to 255 CID. The block and heads were cast with stock patterns, but the cores were trimmed to change wall thickness, cylinder – head intake and exhaust port contours, block deck thickness, etc. Bosses were cast in the block to accept four additional cylinder-head studs per side. Forged crankshafts and pistons were used. Other major changes included shaft mounted rocker arms, gear camshaft drive, cast – magnesium oil pan, dry sump lubrication, electronic ignition, aluminum water pump, and vacuum-melt-steel valve springs.

The new engine was strong, and the engineers quickly exceeded 350 HP by experimenting with radical camshaft grinds, high compression ratios and the switch from dual throat 46mm Webers to 58mm Weber downdraft carburetors. Soon they were pulling 376HP at 7,200 rpm on 103 octane gasoline and getting 500 mile reliability. This new configuration came in at 344 lbs. complete with stub exhaust pipes.








Clark’s good showing in the 1963 500 race fired up the enthusiasm of the Ford company officials to develop an even better engine with the potential to dominate the Indy scene for several years to come. The new design objectives were to increase output by 50 HP over the 63 push rod engine, with a weight gain not to exceed 50 lbs.

At this point it was decided to lay out a new three-phase development plan for the new race program. Phase I would involve the design, fabrication, and evaluation of a double overhead camshaft engine that would utilize as many as possible of the basic components of the 1963 phase 2 pushrod engine. Testing of the Phase I engine confirmed that the cylinder block and reciprocating and rotating components carried over from the 1963 engine were more than adequate to withstand the higher demands in speeds and loads which would be made by the 1964 competition engine. These test showed that the new design would permit more than 400 horsepower to be achieved at approximately 8,000 rpm. Phase II would provide for a new series of experimental engines, incorporating design changes resulting from analysis of Phase I test results with special attention to combustion chamber configuration, induction system design, and to multiple ignition points in the combustion chamber. As a matter of interest, the dynamometer testing in Phase II was sufficiently conclusive to do away with the need for the testing of the Phase II engine in a vehicle. Phase III would be essentially the Indianapolis race engine, incorporating all design changes validated by the tests and evaluations resulting from Phase I and II. Testing during Phase III would result in the incorporation of design refinements of the final engines, right up to race day.








A few other components were carried over from the 63 engine. The cast-magnesium oil sump lubrication system with dual internal scavenge pumps were carried over with minor improvements. The ’63 pushrod engine had already been fitted with a gear drive for the camshaft, water pump, oil-pump and alternator in the magnesium front housing. For the new engine it was merely necessary to run an upper gear train off the center cam gear to drive the overhead cams. An aluminum tube was cast in place of the original cam for oil drain-back and block strengthening for 1965. The water pump, oil pumps and alternator, were retained.

For 8,000 + rpm operation, it was decided to beef up the connecting rods and pistons considerably. Very little weight was added, but the metal was more carefully distributed to reduce stress concentrations. Both rods and crankshafts were forged from chrome-moly steel, then hardened and shot-peened. Tri-metal bearings capable of sustaining 10,000 psi loads were used.

It was determined early in the program that the 58mm Weber downdraft carburetors used in ’63 would not be adequate for the increased air-flow demands of the four-cam engines. Ford technicians turned to the Hilborn fuel injection system. They literally re-engineered the metering system for more precise air/ fuel curves. Spring-loaded economizer valves and secondary by-pass jets shifted the curves to more closely match the engine’s fuel demand when accelerating off the corners, and on through the speed range to peak straightway RPM.

The following is what finally evolved; four valves in a pent-roof shaped combustion chamber, single plug at the center, with the intake port routed between the two camshafts. The exhaust port went inward and exited on the inside of the cylinder banks. This layout had two important advantages. Flow test showed the vertical intake port gave slightly better volumetric efficiency than a conventional horizontal port. It also had the benefit of accessibility of carburetion between the camshafts with the V-8 cylinder arrangement. Bringing the exhaust ports out in the center of the V also gave more flexibility for designing tuned exhaust-pipe systems. This had been a problem with the 63 pushrod engines. Ford engineers experimented with six to eight exotic pipe layouts, all giving significant power boost over conventional straight stacks.











The 1964 dual overhead cam engine, gave maximum output on 103 octane gasoline, developing 425 HP at 8,000 rpm and weighing in at 395 lbs., less flywheel and exhaust pipes. Five hundred mile reliability was confirmed by dynamometer cycling instead of tedious track testing. This method seemed to work as well above 8,000 rpm as it had at the lower speeds used in 1963. Several vital design changes were made in rods, bearings and valve train parts as a result of this testing. The design was frozen and declared race ready in April, 1964.

Some major improvements were made in 1965, by putting small booster ventures in the main throttle bodies, and discharging the fuel into the low pressure area at the venture throat. This broke up the fuel droplets into a fine mist, assisting vaporization and speeding combustion. They lost 5-10 HP due to the booster restriction in the air passages, but fuel consumption was reduced 10-13 percent. Oil flow was increased 50% by enlarging passages, and oil-feed pressure was increased from 65 to 90 psi. Oil filtration and cooling also got attention. Rod caps and bearing shells were strengthened to reduce distortion and bearing pressures more evenly. Ford engineers felt confident in extending the red line to 9,000 rpm after these changes.








Ford Motor Co. never actually sold and serviced the four cam V-8 engine. Once the engine was basically developed and firmly established as a winner in 1965, Ford contracted with Louis Meyer to distribute and service it. Ford manufactured parts at their Cleveland engine plant or jobbed them out, assembled the engines in Dearborn and shipped the engines and parts to Meyer in Indianapolis for distribution. The first year, 1966, they produced 20 complete engines to be retailed for $ 23,000. The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis- Consumer Price Index Calculator equates $ 23,000.00 of 1966 to $ 152,950.00 at 2008 values.

Even with the hefty price tags that followed, there’s no question that the four cam engine project cost ford a bundle of money. They say nearly $10 million, or approximately 66.5 million in 2008 dollars. The project was then turned over to Ford engineer Dan Jones with the help of Don Hayward to continue refinements and adapt turbo charging in the late 60’s Then Henry Ford II suddenly decided to pull out of all forms of racing in 1970. It is said that Henry appeared at a senate comity hearing, and when asked how much he invested in the racing project as opposed to how much was spent on auto safety, he promptly pulled out of racing. At this time the four-cam engine business was given over entirely to A.J. Foyt, to handle from his large shop facility in Houston, Texas. Foyt with his engine man Howard Gilbert, had been especially innovative in developing his own stable of Ford engines in the late 60’s. The Ford brass felt he would be the ideal one to carry on the work. Ford gave him the patterns and tooling to make the parts, and more than $200,000. worth of spare parts from shelves in Dearborn and Indianapolis.

In order to meet the rules for running a turbo charger, the cubic inch displacement was reduced from 255 CI down to 160 CI. In order to accomplish this reduction changes were made to a shorter stroke crankshaft, and rods and pistons were redesigned. The heads block, and oil system remained basically the same as the 255 CI engine. Because the Ford engines had removable cylinder heads, as opposed to the one piece block of the Offys, the four- cam Ford V-8 engine never seemed to be as comfortable with turbo charging as the Offys. The Fords never could use more than 80 – 85 inches of manifold pressure without damage to the engine. Some of these problems might have been solved if Ford hadn’t pulled completely out of racing. A.J. Foyt took over the four-cam engine business, but he didn’t have the resources or facilities to do the extensive kind of development needed to sort things out. Foyt and Howard Gilbert experimented with several piston designs and ring combinations. They even tried to increase turbulence and speedup combustion by inserting sleeves in the intake ports to increase gas velocities entering the cylinders. With all their testing and experimenting, they were not able to use more that the 80-85 in. manifold pressure for any length of time. The engine would develop about 825 HP at 9,600 rpm at this boost.

Under these conditions it’s not surprising that Foyt wasn’t competitive in qualifying for the race in 1972 and 1973 when the top Offys were running 10-20- and 30inches higher manifold pressures. His qualifying speeds were down 7-10 mph and he couldn’t keep up in race traffic either. When he tried screwing up the boost without richening the fuel mixture, the engine would fail. If he ran rich enough to save his pistons, he lost time making extra pit stops. In the early 1970s the Offys had the advantage.

This situation was reversed in1974 when USAC went to an 80 inch manifold pressure limit for qualifying and put a cap of 280gallons of total fuel consumption for the race. The boost limit was an attempt to slow the cars down a little for safety reasons. The new rules gave the Ford engine a new lease on life. With twice the valve and port area per cubic inch of displacement of the Offy, the Ford developed about 50 HP more at a given manifold pressure. Foyt reported 825 HP at 9,600 rpm for his ford at 80 inches of boost. A typical Offy was good for 770 HP at 9,000 at 80 inches of pressure.

Foyt’s qualifying speeds were suddenly 2-3 mph faster than his opposition. He sat on the pole in 1974 and 1975 and was 2nd row in 1976 and 1977. He finished in 2nd and3rd places in 1975 and 1976. He won in 1977. As the saying goes all good things must come to an end, so it was with the Ford Dearborn DOHC V8 engine.

It was about this time that, Dan Jones, the man in charge of the Quad Cam Ford Turbo Development, along with George Bignotti, and Sonny Myers, had Fords design engineer, Donald Hayward, design a new engine. The new design was a much smaller, and lower profile, Quad Cam Flat Six engine of which two were produced. This new flat six engine showed great promise for Ford, but the British Ford Cosworth division, also a four cammer V8 was in a more advanced stage of development, so Ford allowed the Cosworth to claim the new glory. And so the teams moved on to the new Cosworth power, and the Dearborn Fords became obsolete. If Ford had put their backing behind the new Don Hayward designed engine, the new Ford Dearborn DOHC F-6 may have provided the winning combination for the next ten years or so.

In closing on the development of the Ford engine, I would like to include a point of interest that I was told during my visit with Howard Gilbert in 2005. Howard said that he had just finished building up a turbo charged Ford and had it installed on the dynamometer in Foyt’s shop, when in walks A.J. and says “ I wonder just how much horse power it will put out before it blows “. At that Howard let her rip and the indicator went to 1,440 HP as the engine came apart. A truly amazing engine developed and refined by truly amazing men.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
26,908 Posts
Oh, but according to Ellis Brasher, the 289 Ford was "a copy of the small block Chevy". Of course it began as a 221, then a 260 before it grew into 289 and 302....so he randomely picked one size that was halfway thru its displacement growth. Nice!!

Seeing how theres nothing remotely similar between the two designs, other than they both run on gasoline, its easy to see why Ellis Brasher has mental problems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,141 Posts
Oh, but according to Ellis Brasher, the 289 Ford was "a copy of the small block Chevy". Of course it began as a 221, then a 260 before it grew into 289 and 302....so he randomely picked one size that was halfway thru its displacement growth. Nice!!

Seeing how theres nothing remotely similar between the two designs, other than they both run on gasoline, its easy to see why Ellis Brasher has mental problems.
And according to Ellis Brasher everyone copied the 1951 Chyrsler Hemi, but admits they did not invent the design!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,097 Posts
Come on mr moparitis POST UP!! This one is dedicated just to you! ps........ It is in the right forum as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,513 Posts
From the HAMB,

moefuzz
Alliance Member



Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Under A Clean V8
Posts: 4,468


Re: Henry Ford facts needed
Quote:

Speaking of Hitler...look into the relationship between the two. Crazy stuff there.

There was no relationship, Hitler awarded several manufacturers medals for their triumphs in industry.
The rumors still fly about Ford and Hitler but nobody ever speaks of the Grand Cross that
Hitler awarded to GM executives James Mooney (among others) at the same time as
Ford received an unsolicited medal.


-Hitler Admired The American car manufactures and hence awarded Both GM and Ford Chief
Executives with honorable medals.
Hitler wished that he could build an automotive industry as grand as the American's, and so he based
'His' Volkswagen on American models and production.

btw, Similar medals were also sent to executives at IBM as well as General Electric.

Probably the biggest reason that the rumors still exist (and are aimed at Ford) is because people
have never read up on the subject, they didn't live during that time period, and therefor just repeat
age old rhetoric,... perhaps because some have a certain dislike for the man or his company?
I don't know.



This is part of my collection on the man and the Industry


(missing are The Terror of The Machine', Henry Ford's FBI files, My Forty Years with Ford By Sorensen,
Henry Ford an industrial pioneer, Triumph of an Idea, Henry Ford’s Own Story and
Ford Ideals Being For Good -all of which I have on hard drive).


Besides the FBI files on Ford, Probably the most accurate book not written or co written by
himself is 'The Public Image of Henry Ford' by David Lewis.
Everything stated in that book is based on historical articles from Institutions like Michigan's
Wayne State University, the Society of Automobile Engineers Archives, Government Contracts
and Fact sheets, Automobile Almanacs as well as from 10's of thousands of newspaper articles
dating from 1900 up. The book states facts and does dispel age old rhetoric like "the history of
Hitler and Ford', of which there is none.

Regarding the Jews and the Dearborn Independent,
FBI files/investigations clearly state That Ford, while in his 60's, was led down the garden path by
the publisher, writers and editors of The Dearborn Independent, a small newspaper and just
one of some 500 companies that Ford owned during the 1920's.

As far as

Quote:
Speaking of Hitler...look into the relationship between the two. Crazy stuff there.
There never was 'a relationship', only age old rhetoric and rumors that liable The man,
Family and the company that bear his name.
Hitler admired The Ford Factories and the way that Ford put America on Wheels.
The two never met, never stood in the same room together, never held a conversation
and Ford was not a supporter (unlike GM) of the German War Machine, before, during or after WWll.

Repeating age old rumors/rhetoric just proves that the masses care not to read and/or learn.


Irregardless, Some might find it interesting that GM, not Ford, supplied both the allies and the Nazi Regime with Parts before, during and after WW11, and Alfred Sloan, CEO of GM, ordered all the files burned in order that no one at GM be implicated by Federal Committees when the war ended.




"In August 1938, a senior executive for General Motors, James D. Mooney, received the Grand Cross of the German Eagle for his distinguished service to the Reich. "Nazi armaments chief Albert Speer told a congressional investigator that Germany could not have attempted its September 1939 Blitzkrieg of Poland without the performance-boosting additive technology provided by Alfred P. Sloan and General Motors".
Charles Levinson, formerly deputy director of the European office of the CIO, alleged in his book, "Vodka-Cola":
"Alfred P. Sloan, James D. Mooney, John T. Smith and Graeme K. Howard remained on the General Motors-Opel board . . . in flagrant violation of existing legislation, information, contacts, transfers and trade continued [throughout the war] to flow between the firrn's Detroit headquarters and its subsidiaries both in Allied countries and in territories controlled by the Axis powers. The financial records of Opel Russelsheim revealed that between 1942 and 1945 production and sales strategy were planned in close coordination with General Motors factories throughout the world.... In 1943, while its American manufacturers were equipping the United States Air Force, the German group were developing, manufacturing and assembling motors for the Messerschmitt 262, the first jet fighter in the world. This innovation gave the Nazis a basic technological advantage. With speeds up to 540 miles per hour, this aircraft could fly 100 miles per hour faster than its American rival, the piston-powered Mustang P51."
David Farber, author of Sloan Rules: Alfred P. Sloan and the Triumph of General Motors (2002), stated that:
"GM destroyed Sloan's files to protect itself from lawsuits regarding antitrust issues, the neglect of automobile safety and its investments in Nazi Germany."
"

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,513 Posts
http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/member.php?u=7190
Alliance Member



Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Under A Clean V8
Posts: 4,468


Re: Henry Ford facts needed
.

Henry thought that a man should have time to go out and visit the folks on the weekend,
up until 1914, All industry followed a 50 hour week.
5 days at 9 hours and Saturday at 5 or 6 hours

This scheme didn't allow for a man to recuperate from the previous days work,
it didn't allow for time to visit with your family, it didn't allow the young man to
help on the farm (a subject dear to Ford's heart).

The standard wage prior to the $5 - per 8 hour day was ~$2.34 per 9 or 10 hours and this wage
was barely enough to put shoes on your kids feet or milk on the table.


Ford changed all that with the introduction of the 40 hour week and a new
idea called 'profit sharing' in the form of a $5 - 8 hour day.

Ford also set up a company health unit designed to help wife's and mothers take better care of the family.
Ford built Hospitals and opened them Free to the public when all others demanded money.
Ford hired Blacks, Jews, paraplegics, Quadriplegics, blind, mute, deaf, Emigrants, Illiterates and
even hired the bed ridden to do tasks for the mighty Model T.
In the mean time, he built Schools for under privileged children/orphans that would otherwise not afford school.
He set up classes for the many immigrants that poured in from the barrios of New York and Los Angeles
in order that they could learn to speak English.

But the real helping hand came in the form of the $5 day that put food on the table and shoes on the children's feet.

In 1914, This was Much to the dismay of American Manufacturers and especially GM.
Ford had single handily unchained the worker from the plant and given him money, freedom and a hand up.



__________________
.. Wise men talk about ideas, ordinary men talk about things, fools talk about each other
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,513 Posts
moefuzz
Alliance Member



Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Under A Clean V8
Posts: 4,468


Re: Henry Ford facts needed
Quote:
Originally Posted by lippy
You wouldn't happen to be a die hard ford guy would you? LOL.


Not particularly, As far as Ford goes, I have read 100's of biographies and because I'm a car guy, Ford's life is an interesting one.



The much maligned Ford cared about his product, cared about his workers and cared about the welfare of Americans (and the world) as nations, all of which the share holders of other companies could care less about as they filled the dumps with planned obsolescence in hopes of selling you another one in a few years in order to line their pockets.

The 'style' of competition that Ford Motor Company and rival GM (Alfred Sloan CEO) went head to head in is commonly known as Fordism vs Sloanism,
In the late 20's and up into the 30's Sloan's Planned Obsolescence proved to be popular amongst the dishonest and greedy industrialists of this world.
Ford would not have it that way.

Fordism vs Sloanism = Ford, the industrialist who stood for quality and Alfred Sloan, the man who invented the idea of planned obsolescence and who had fully implemented a 'death date' into every part of every car that GM built (from 1927 up).

Ford wanted to sell you one good car that would last a lifetime (and he did, we still enjoy them today, I have a 31, 39 and a 49 all fully operational)
And Sloan, who wanted the car to break in your hands (and they do) in order to force you to come back and buy over and over again, whether from the parts counter or from the new car sales team/show room.

Fordism vs Sloanism is a point/counter point as to which is/was better.
Things that were properly designed to last for ages (like my Fathers '35),
or things that were designed to fill the share holders pockets as well as the city dumps.


To say I am a Ford 'fan' is wrong,
I admire the integrity and the style that Ford (and others) had prior to GM introducing the world to the idea that every part of every car should be designed to die in X days/months in order to fill someones pockets.

-Ford's Legacy is the cars we still enjoy today based on affordability, style and durability.

-GM's Greatest invention is and has always been "Planned Obsolescence" -Sloan, CEO GM 1923 to 1956

For those that don't read or don't read history, the choice of manufacturer has put the greedy shareholders in top spot.

For those that read, the choice is obvious.


If I were a fan of anything, I wouldn't be a fan of the faceless sheeple running out to buy the absolute newest, most shinny chrome plated new cadillac (or chevy truck) that has and will wear the cam lobes down and the transmission out -just after warranty, all to the delight of the General Motors Share Holders.

And in part my bias would be based on the fact that GM invented Planned Obsolescence while Ford brought us the 40 hour work week, better wages and clean/safe factories with things like hearing and eye protection long before the cross town rivals $upplied them.

. .
__________________
.. Wise men talk about ideas, ordinary men talk about things, fools talk about each other
 
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
Top