Compare torque performance Model B vs early v8

[FrankWest]

My 1933 model B car seems to have a lot of pickup/acceleration from 0 to 40mph, And I am glad! But I wonder How the the model B would compare with the 1933 v8 in performance. Do the 4 cylinder engines produce more torque and give you greater acceleration from 0-40 than a v8? At some point I know the increased performance of the v8 must take over.

[supereal]

The Model A and B four cylinder engines produce about 85 foot pounds of torque at 1,500 rpms. The early V8's generate 160 foot pounds at 2000-2500 rpm. The perceived difference in acceleration is probably affected by the larger weight of the flywheel that takes more time to reach speed, with the greater mass more available then. I found out a long time ago that the Model A could break rear axles easier that the V8's due to that difference in stored energy. At a comparable 1500 rpm, the V8 shows about 140 foot pounds.

[FrankWest]

Originally Posted by supereal

The Model A and B four cylinder engines produce about 85 foot pounds of torque at 1,500 rpms. The early V8's generate 160 foot pounds at 2000-2500 rpm. The perceived difference in acceleration is probably affected by the larger weight of the flywheel that takes more time to reach speed, with the greater mass more available then. I found out a long time ago that the Model A could break rear axles easier that the V8's due to that difference in stored energy. At a comparable 1500 rpm, the V8 shows about 140 foot pounds.

Thanks for the info..

[Kurt in NJ]

I thought the A was more like 120 ft lbs so I looked--
http://www.modelaparts.net/dynosheets.htm/dyno1.htm

[FrankWest]

Originally Posted by Kurt in NJ

I thought the A was more like 120 ft lbs so I looked--
http://www.modelaparts.net/dynosheets.htm/dyno1.htm

Thanks Kurt! for the details!

[Admiral]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

The V8 in my '36 Fordor really comes alive at about 40. It seems a touch sluggish in first and second, but once you get it to about 30, 35, 40 miles an hour in high gear it accelerates a lot faster, with surprising vigor in fact. Engine is about 251 cubes matched to a set of 3.78 rear-end gears.

[Bruce Lancaster]

There was a real comparison in Rod&Custom Magazine in the '70's. Harrahs let them road test 2 '32's, I think a B roadster and a V8 Cabriolet, and they included some gentle acceleration tests and a drag race. The B came off the line best and then lost ground to the V8, and the B also showed a spurt forward gaining on the 8 at each shift, with the 8 then gaining at the higher revs in each gear. Pretty much what Fred suggested. I'll try to find the date of that magazine...it was a real goody.

(might be July 1968.)

[FrankWest]

Originally Posted by Bruce Lancaster

There was a real comparison in Rod&Custom Magazine in the '70's. Harrahs let them road test 2 '32's, I think a B roadster and a V8 Cabriolet, and they included some gentle acceleration tests and a drag race. The B came off the line best and then lost ground to the V8, and the B also showed a spurt forward gaining on the 8 at each shift, with the 8 then gaining at the higher revs in each gear. Pretty much what Fred suggested. I'll try to find the date of that magazine...it was a real goody.

(might be July 1968.)

Thanks a million

[Bruce Lancaster]

It's worth looking through the R&C's of that period...they did a road test in each issue for a while, including a test of a Columbia in a '40 woody, a Mexican road race Lincoln, neat stuff like that.

[jim1932]

Originally Posted by supereal

The Model A and B four cylinder engines produce about 85 foot pounds of torque at 1,500 rpms. The early V8's generate 160 foot pounds at 2000-2500 rpm. The perceived difference in acceleration is probably affected by the larger weight of the flywheel that takes more time to reach speed, with the greater mass more available then. I found out a long time ago that the Model A could break rear axles easier that the V8's due to that difference in stored energy. At a comparable 1500 rpm, the V8 shows about 140 foot pounds.

With the compression difference between an A and a B I doubt they have the same torque.

[DavidG]

I've had multiple examples of both versions of '32s and in a 50 yard drag race the B wins, even with a heavy body like a station wagon. At 100 yards, the V-8 is the winner. Ford dyno tests in '32 gave the edge to the B at 127 foot pounds compared to the V-8s 125. That's a negligible difference, but with the B it is all there at the low end while with the V-8 it occurs at a relatively high end hence the short distance performance advantage of the B. As the only thing that changed between the '32s and '33s was the addition of aluminum cylinder heads on the V-8, the Bs low-end advantage was likely retained. (All '33s are likely a bit slower off the line compared to their '32 counterparts due to their heavier weight.)

[mhsprecher]

I really liked Rod & Custom back then. Hot Rod, too. Both good mags. I think I subscribed to Hot Rod, but not R&C. I was not then, nor am I now, a hot rodder, but I guess I had dreams....

[FrankWest]

Originally Posted by DavidG

I've had multiple examples of both versions of '32s and in a 50 yard drag race the B wins, even with a heavy body like a station wagon. At 100 yards, the V-8 is the winner. Ford dyno tests in '32 gave the edge to the B at 127 foot pounds compared to the V-8s 125. That's a negligible difference, but with the B it is all there at the low end while with the V-8 it occurs at a relatively high end hence the short distance performance advantage of the B. As the only thing that changed between the '32s and '33s was the addition of aluminum cylinder heads on the V-8, the Bs low-end advantage was likely retained. (All '33s are likely a bit slower off the line compared to their '32 counterparts due to their heavier weight.)

Interesting! From a crude uninformed standpoint..it would seem that those Big 4 cylinders would off a larger initial punch..And the smaller v8 cylinders that provide a smoothness to the rotation at the expense of the initial punch.
You never get something for nothing in a trade-off.

[DavidG]

It's not quite that simple. The length of the stroke is also a factor (among others) and in this particular instance, the B has the longer stroke of the two engines.

[FrankWest]

Originally Posted by DavidG

It's not quite that simple. The length of the stroke is also a factor (among others) and in this particular instance, the B has the longer stroke of the two engines.

interesting. I remember reading about old farm machinery that made use of a giant single cylinder engine.

[aonemarine]

Just out of curiosity, How high can you rev a banger before things start letting loose?
and same question about a v8 60?
I recently picked up a 60 and ran it today for a little bit. im curious why many say a banger is a better bet than the v8 60. Yes i get the whole no replacement for displacement thing, but I feel a 60 should stop the shit out of a banger....
OK who threw the wrench ?!?!?

[scooder]

A V8 60 likes rpm, the four cylinder engines not so much, the B is stronger than the A, especially with the counter balanced crank.
The V8 60 will cruise at a much higher speed before you run over the crank, it does seriously lack torque. Around town, a stock Model A will run circles around a 60, even without changing down from top. Which is why the 60 was run through 4.55 rear gear, and the A had a 3.78 most often.
Martin.

[Bruce Lancaster]

Look up the 60's power and torque curve chart...I think it was in a '37 Service Bulletin.
The interesting thing is that most Ford dyno charts are cut off about where the engine runs out of breath and power starts to drop off sharply...in the 60 chart, the power curve is headed UP where they cut off the chart. It is cut off very short, so you cannot tell how much longer power is going up, but there it is...Ford could obviously rated the thing at some higher number right from its own dyno chart.

[JSeery]

Originally Posted by Bruce Lancaster

Ford could obviously rated the thing at some higher number right from its own dyno chart.

I would guess they didn't want the power to appear to close to the 85. Another thought is the performance was poor enough that rating it higher might have increased the dissatisfaction this engine experienced with some owners. If it was not sold as a powerhouse but for economy it's performance could be overlooked. Again, just guessing here. I have owned 60s, but never really driven them, so little personal experience.

[Bruce Lancaster]

It really needed a little 1500 pound car and a 5 speed!

[JSeery]

Originally Posted by Bruce Lancaster

It really needed a little 1500 pound car and a 5 speed!

Yep, the engine was capable of good things in the right applications!

[jerseyboy]

Originally Posted by Bruce Lancaster

It really needed a little 1500 pound car and a 5 speed!

Bruce, like the the V8 60 that Jax put in a little Bantam on the HAMB.

Keep V-8ing and 4-banging!

[keith oh]

There were more reasons than it's small size that the midget racers used the little 60s and fared very well against the more expensive engines of its time. How well I can remember those little bumble bees sounded wound out on the dirt track races.

[aonemarine]

im sure the lil 60 would benefit greatly from an increase in carburation, the little 81 on it looks like it should work well on my riding mower! LOL
I think I need to find someoen who was into midget racing back in the day to see what they did to these little engines (and find a copy of that book)
I did find somewhere here on the net where one 60 in a midget made 115 hp @ 6500 rpms. Seems like alot of info is MIA though....

[scooder]

Extra carburation would not help the gutless low torque of the 60. Easiest ways to increase engine low down torque are displacement, higher compression and supercharging of these, higher compression is the easiest by far, so I'd start here.. Externally to the engine, as suggested above is gears, proper 5 speed transmission ratios (not a T5 out of an S10 with its abominable first gear and jump to second!) nicely spaced close ratio, with a really stout rear gear, talking 4.55 and lower, combined with the overdrive 5th gear. Get the combination right, and it'll be a blast. Compromise at any point will hurt a lot. The F150 four speed with the overdrive fourth would be a compromise, the ratios are to gappy, this is not what you need.
A mild 221 flathead would still beat it everywhere in the same car!
Lets face facts, in the early Ford flathead world, if you want something quick with good manners, you don't pick a 60. A regular flathead 221 or 239 or the inline six are much better starting points.
I don't hate the 60, its a damn cool little thing, it's just well, truth is, it's gutless in comparison to the other period of offerings from Ford. Including the four cylinder Model A/B, if you want some old world torque.
Martin.

[aonemarine]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Piranio's antique automotive
dyno sheet
run number: 1
customer: Shop date: 2/15/2006
address: Phone:
Engine: Dyno stock time: 11:00 am
barometric pressure: 29.93 elevation: 690 temperature: 70
station pressure: 29.1906 correction factor: 1.080969
humidity: 68
engine temperature: 180 fuel: Gasoline, regular

rpm gauge torque horsepower corrected
reading horsepower

1200 23.5 129.70 29.63 32.03
1300 23 127.01 31.44 33.98
1500 22.4 123.78 35.35 38.21
1700 20.2 111.94 36.23 39.17
2000 18.1 100.64 38.33 41.43
2200 16.4 91.50 38.33 41.43
2500 13.3 74.82 35.61 38.50
2700 11 62.44 32.10 34.70
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
description:
Stock engine 30 degrees timing

[JSeery]

Originally Posted by scooder

proper 5 speed transmission ratios (not a T5 out of an S10 with its abominable first gear and jump to second!) nicely spaced close ratio, with a really stout rear gear, talking 4.55 and lower, combined with the overdrive 5th gear.

Music to my ears! I never understood the fascination with the S10 t5s with the ridicules low gear and wide gear spacing. Close ratio gearing and a low final drive is the way to go even on the bigger engines (and of course the overdrive!)

[aonemarine]

I just cant picture the v8 60 being so gutless... Looking at the torque cures yes it is a little lower torque at a higher rpm, but also the dyno sheet says it was with 2' ign timing compared to the banger running 30.
Sometimes I wonder if all the bad pr the 60 gets is from people just repeating what they have read on the net??

I just spent 4 hours getting the head studs out of the little motor (only broke one) and maged the top of the block (all good!!) now im trying to get the valves and guides out and the valve tool for the 8ba doesnt work on the 60. Think I might have to make up my own tool to get these buggers broke free.
as long as everything else checks out ok on this motor it will get punched out and some head milling before dropping it into an A.

[JSeery]

Originally Posted by aonemarine

Sometimes I wonder if all the bad pr the 60 gets is from people just repeating what they have read on the net??

Think all you have to do is talk to someone who has owned one! It's not the engine per say, it's the engine in the application. It a lightweight car and geared correctly fine. In a heavy car, you get what people report.

[V8COOPMAN]

Originally Posted by JSeery

Music to my ears! I never understood the fascination with the S10 t5s with the ridicules low gear and wide gear spacing. Close ratio gearing and a low final drive is the way to go even on the bigger engines (and of course the overdrive!)

Of course, you're absolutely right with keeping the gear ratios close, as well as that S-10 trans having stupid gearing for anything but what they came in. I feel that MOST folks have no idea how versatile the T5s are, and that you can EASILY assemble a very nice trans, gearwise, using T5 parts. Again, many folks don't have any idea what gearing can do TO ya, or FOR ya. I really believe people want the S-10 T5 for the tailshaft housing with the forward shifter location, and figure that's the way it is with the gears. They fail to realize that the housing and short shift rail are ALL that most folks need from an S-10 T5. Custom T5s are COOL, and work wonders, too. DD

[JSeery]

Originally Posted by V8COOPMAN

Custom T5s are COOL, and work wonders, too. DD

Agree 100%, I like the T5z gearing. I was considering the S10 tailshaft and shifter swap but decided to go a different way.

[aonemarine]

Originally Posted by JSeery

Think all you have to do is talk to someone who has owned one! It's not the engine per say, it's the engine in the application. It a lightweight car and geared correctly fine. In a heavy car, you get what people report.

Basically im comparing it to an A engine in an A.
A engines have a very limited power band compared to the 60. I would much rather have 90 ft lbs of torque over 4k rpms than 130 ft lbs over just 1k....

[JSeery]

Don't think v60s came in an A! Like I was trying to say, light car and proper gearing works fine. Heavy car not so much.

[aonemarine]

I got that, Just trying to explain my thoughts and intentions
I wouldnt put an a engine in a 40 P/U LOL

[Kurt in NJ]

the model A/B engine is at it's best under 2500 rpm, the 60 is at it's best over 2500 rpm, gear accordingly----the 60 in the 39 sedan worked best downshifted as soon as speed dropped to 40---this got the best fuel mileage and performance

[koates]

Interesting to note how did the later V8 60 engine jump into Franks original question of comparing the 1933 4cyl 50 HP engine to the 1933 V8 75 HP engine. The 75 HP V8 has not received a mention. The 1932 V8 was 65 HP and the 1934 was 85 HP in comparison. What you all say. Regards, Kevin.

[scooder]

Koates,
Original question was answered early on, the V8 60 compassion was a question asked later in the thread by "aonemarine" .
Martin.

[scooder]

Originally Posted by aonemarine

I just cant picture the v8 60 being so gutless... Looking at the torque cures yes it is a little lower torque at a higher rpm, but also the dyno sheet says it was with 2' ign timing compared to the banger running 30.
Sometimes I wonder if all the bad pr the 60 gets is from people just repeating what they have read on the net??

I just spent 4 hours getting the head studs out of the little motor (only broke one) and maged the top of the block (all good!!) now im trying to get the valves and guides out and the valve tool for the 8ba doesnt work on the 60. Think I might have to make up my own tool to get these buggers broke free.
as long as everything else checks out ok on this motor it will get punched out and some head milling before dropping it into an A.

The 60 has earned its reputation, in original fitment it was gutless. When taken out an put in a Model A or similar, it was still pretty gutless. I'm comparing the 60 too Model A/B four cylinders and full size flatheads. I've driven the mentioned stuff in stock form and modified. In importance to you is, I have driven a 60 powered model T hot dog, lightweight glass body 1926 roadster. Also the same lightweight builds with the four cylinder and full size flatheads. And you had my opinion of the V8 60.
This absolutely is not me repeating what I read. Just because you disagree with other folks opinions, doesn't meen they made it up, or are just repeating hearsay!
If you want to put your little 60 in your Model A, go ahead, it's your money. Go with close ratio 5 speed and proper rear gear, to give it some help.
I do feel you maybe disappointed, based on your loads better than the four cylinder statement. The real world driving and graphs on paper are very different things, Ford graphs of the period were also very different to reality, there dyno was a very happy chap.
Martin.

[FrankWest]

I ordered this magazine, should be here this week. I will share the details.

[aonemarine]

Originally Posted by scooder

The 60 has earned its reputation, in original fitment it was gutless. When taken out an put in a Model A or similar, it was still pretty gutless. I'm comparing the 60 too Model A/B four cylinders and full size flatheads. I've driven the mentioned stuff in stock form and modified. In importance to you is, I have driven a 60 powered model T hot dog, lightweight glass body 1926 roadster. Also the same lightweight builds with the four cylinder and full size flatheads. And you had my opinion of the V8 60.
This absolutely is not me repeating what I read. Just because you disagree with other folks opinions, doesn't meen they made it up, or are just repeating hearsay!
If you want to put your little 60 in your Model A, go ahead, it's your money. Go with close ratio 5 speed and proper rear gear, to give it some help.
I do feel you maybe disappointed, based on your loads better than the four cylinder statement. The real world driving and graphs on paper are very different things, Ford graphs of the period were also very different to reality, there dyno was a very happy chap.
Martin.

Sorry if i offended you with my hear say comment, it was not my intent. I have never driven a vehicle of any sort that had a v8 60 in it, so i really have nothing to go on other than what i have been reading on the net. And many many times i have run across things posted on linethat were just plain false. Im sure everyone can relate to this at some point in time.

[JSeery]

Originally Posted by aonemarine

Sorry if i offended you with my hear say comment, it was not my intent. I have never driven a vehicle of any sort that had a v8 60 in it, so i really have nothing to go on other than what i have been reading on the net. And many many times i have run across things posted on linethat were just plain false. Im sure everyone can relate to this at some point in time.

Little different here, most of the folks have a lifetime of expertise in every area of flatheads and older cars in general. I would go so far as to say some of the most knowledgeable people on the subject in existence lurk here. At times it is very mumbling to be in there presence.

[aonemarine]

And now to get the thread back on topic....
Some of the stories about Clyde Barrow and his v8 powered ford should sum up the B engine and the 65 hp v8 pretty quick

[FrankWest]

Clyde Barrow and Dillinger too were trying to outrun the model A Cop Cars.
I image a model B could out run a Model A cop car too.

[4t8v8]

Looks like a rig should be built for how it will be used. My F1, like me, has to work for a living. As such the 8BA and S10 T5 are an excellent combination. Sometimes it has to haul heavy loads over rough ground and the low 1st gear is a blessing. On the highway the other gears work great. If I had built it for cruising or racing I would have used a different tranny. The 4 banger is great for low RPM work but not so for hauling a load down a hilly or mountainous highway.

[JSeery]

Originally Posted by 4t8v8

Looks like a rig should be built for how it will be used. My F1, like me, has to work for a living. As such the 8BA and S10 T5 are an excellent combination. Sometimes it has to haul heavy loads over rough ground and the low 1st gear is a blessing. On the highway the other gears work great. If I had built it for cruising or racing I would have used a different tranny. The 4 banger is great for low RPM work but not so for hauling a load down a hilly or mountainous highway.

Yep. That's what the S10 T5 was designed for!

[FrankWest]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

The 1932 sales booklet states the new 1932 4 cylinder car has Flashing acceleration and top speed of 65-70 mph!

[FrankWest]

I received the magazine today.
Pretty much was has been said on this board was reported in the magazine.
The model B takes off faster but will be gained on by the v8 after 50 yards or so. They joked that in city traffic the model B would easily win out over the v8! The model B had a noticable kick over the v8 in low gear!
The maximum speeds clocked were 67 mph for model B 76 mph for the v8
In short, the model B is not that bad at all..

[aonemarine]

Frank, does it give any data like rpms, gears, anything???

[FrankWest]

Originally Posted by aonemarine

Frank, does it give any data like rpms, gears, anything???

yes...what do you want? I can't copy the article and paste it on here.

[aonemarine]

Rear end ratio, shift point rpms, and final rpms @ mph.

[Kahuna]

Just a few thoughts, not meant to dis-sway you from the task
In 37 when the 60 was introduced, the car weight was about 2700#.
A Model A coupe is about 2200#, so you're already about 500# ahead.
This is good.
Now, If you do you your homework (research) especially on the gearing,
you will find that for the most part Henry had it right:
For your needs, you would probably want a first gear ratio of around 12 or 13:1.
That is trans ratio times rear axle (most 60's had a rear end with the 4.44:1).
So, if you are contemplating a 5 speed, the Mustang T-5 with a 2.95 FGR
with a 4.11:1 (OR) the 4.44:1 would probably do well for your application.
But, I have no idea if the 60 would pull the Overdrive in that T-5. Maybe?
Then you need to consider tire sizes as part of your gearing solution, along with
capable engine RPM: Where is the 60 happy? Where is it's power range?
If I were going to do this, and I probably would, I would make that engine as big as I could (can a 60 be 150 CI or bigger?). I don't know.
I'd want a big cam, 2 carbs, higher compression and anything else I could do to make more power.
When I was a kid, there were 2 guys with 60's in MG's. One in an MG TC and one in a TD. Both seemed happy.
Just my 2 cents
Jim

[aonemarine]

Originally Posted by Kahuna

Just a few thoughts, not meant to dis-sway you from the task
In 37 when the 60 was introduced, the car weight was about 2700#.
A Model A coupe is about 2200#, so you're already about 500# ahead.
This is good.
Now, If you do you your homework (research) especially on the gearing,
you will find that for the most part Henry had it right:
For your needs, you would probably want a first gear ratio of around 12 or 13:1.
That is trans ratio times rear axle (most 60's had a rear end with the 4.44:1).
So, if you are contemplating a 5 speed, the Mustang T-5 with a 2.95 FGR
with a 4.11:1 (OR) the 4.44:1 would probably do well for your application.
But, I have no idea if the 60 would pull the Overdrive in that T-5. Maybe?
Then you need to consider tire sizes as part of your gearing solution, along with
capable engine RPM: Where is the 60 happy? Where is it's power range?
If I were going to do this, and I probably would, I would make that engine as big as I could (can a 60 be 150 CI or bigger?). I don't know.
I'd want a big cam, 2 carbs, higher compression and anything else I could do to make more power.
When I was a kid, there were 2 guys with 60's in MG's. One in an MG TC and one in a TD. Both seemed happy.
Just my 2 cents
Jim

Thanks Jim. I think I need to start my own thread so I stop derailing this one. Block is all torn down and maged. will be proceeding on rebuild

[scooder]

If go with a big cam the 4.44 or 4.55 would be a good as it gets. A 4.11 + overdrive I feel have you to low in rpm at cruise. The 60 loves rpm and best cruise is at or close to torque peak, this holds true for mpg too.
Martin.

[Fred A]

I agree that this should have been a V8-60 thread, but... My 60 powered '26T coupe suffered serious aerodynamic issues trying to push a final ratio 3.78:1 (16" wheels) beyond 60MPH. Sure was not out of RPM but could not buck that wind. My latest 60 project is using a 4.55:1 + overdrive an open wheel roadster. Still may be too tall, limiting me to 16" wheels again. It's all about the arithmetic. I know the word can frighten some, but I live for the numbers. I have no doubt about the 60s ability, but the large dollars offered for 022A, V8-60 is becoming a great temptation. Plenty of strong bangers lined up to take its place but I still want a V8. Good Luck: Fred A

[willowbilly3]

Here's a B model I ran into about 15 years ago that ran 10.90 quarter miles.

[Kahuna]

Very Cool