In case you want to know the whole story, or an update

[Oldbluoval]

The ultimate defense of slander is truth

[P.S.]

John- Sorry I missed this post. I'm responding on the other forum now.

Brent- You're right.

Jeff- I agree.

Jack- You're still convinced I smeared Terry and it was all calculated and done purposely. You're wrong and now just being a bully and trying to keep things stirred up. Go ahead and hate on me some more. But, what if I'm right? Will you stop bullying me? I doubt it.

Guys- I'm looking forward to working with John and Terry and sharing it with Model A people on YouTube. I look at this as a wonderful opportunity to improve my product or Terry's. Most likely both.

[todd3131]

I apologize for this question but can you tell us what is the official forum and thread you are going to be updating so we can follow the process in one place?

[CWPASADENA]

[QUOTE=BRENT in 10-uh-C;2162544]Chris, I am not choosing sides here, but as an engine rebuilder myself who also does crankshafts in-house, measuring something between centers is not necessarily an inaccurate way. I shared with several people that Willie could have measured between centers and then rotated the crank within the centers by 90° and then remeasured to see if the errors repeated. If they did, then there is nothing incorrect about using centers. FWIW, I actually grind my cranks between centers on my machine and use a gauge to verify.

Brent,
You are absolutely correct. you can measure a crankshaft using the centers and doing the math. However, it is much easier and much more straight forward to use "V" blocks or a similar means of being able to support and rotate the crank. In the video, I did not see any discussion about having to do any math to compensate for any errors due to the centers not being exactly on the center line of the shaft. I just saw the dial indicator. My philosophy is when doing this type of thing is use the most straightforward method you can to eliminate errors.

I would have felt better about the findings reported by the machinist if the depiction of how he was making the measurements was clearer.

Again, it came across to me that the mechanist was saying that it would take a lot of expensive re-work in order to make something out of these components. To me, this was a bit misleading, but please understand Brent, this was my take on the video and as this whole discussion has proven, there are a lot of differing opinions.

My experience has been that while the Burtz components are not perfect, they are very good and with a little effort, the result can be a very good engine.

Chris W.

[Dino's A]

I think what took me back the most was when the machinist (Willie) mentioned that
he has a customer that has a Burtz motor and is charging $8,000 to assemble it.

I get this stuff isn't cheap. and finding the right person is important, but that seems a bit
high. Am I wrong? Tell me if you wish, I can handle it!

[Terry Burtz, Calif]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Originally Posted by Dino's A

I think what took me back the most was when the machinist (Willie) mentioned that
he has a customer that has a Burtz motor and is charging $8,000 to assemble it.

I get this stuff isn't cheap. and finding the right person is important, but that seems a bit
high. Am I wrong? Tell me if you wish, I can handle it!

Dino A's, you are not wrong.

Before we authorized production, we had the very first "New Engine Kit" sent to Bert's in Englewood, CO, and we arrived a few days later.

This was the first time that we saw the hardware, and we had a running engine in a test stand in less than 3 days in spite of having to solve a connecting rod bolt interference problem.

The "New Engine Kit" is an assembly job as there is no machining required.

To deburr and clean the parts should take no longer than a day, and to assemble a short block should take no longer than a day assuming that all parts are available.

Most of our "New Engine Kits" are being sold to individuals who have had no problems.

The following paragraph is in the latest "Builders Guide".
If you are not able to build the engine yourself, we strongly recommend that you have your new engine built by a professional mechanic that has the knowledge, experience, and equipment to ensure a product where he can guarantee his work. THIS IS NOT AN ANTIQUE ENGINE. You or your professional mechanic must be familiar with new MODERN engines. Please do not let your engine builder talk you into any cylinder block modifications that may void your warranty. To save money, you can do the de-burring of new parts and clean up the bolt-on parts which is time consuming. Several cautions in this guide are here because home builders and “Old Time Model A Engine Builders” do not have experience building a modern engine.

[wrpercival]

Originally Posted by Dino's A

I think what took me back the most was when the machinist (Willie) mentioned that he has a customer that has a Burtz motor and is charging $8,000 to assemble it.

I get this stuff isn't cheap, and finding the right person is important, but that seems a bit high. Am I wrong? Tell me if you wish, I can handle it!

I believe it takes most builders (skilled mechanics) about 2 days of focused work - let's say a full 20 hours - to complete a Burtz build. Based on the above estimate, that translates to $400 per hour.

Assuming that rate is widely accepted within the Model A community, then yes, you are wrong!

[P.S.]

Originally Posted by Dino's A

I think what took me back the most was when the machinist (Willie) mentioned that
he has a customer that has a Burtz motor and is charging $8,000 to assemble it.

I get this stuff isn't cheap. and finding the right person is important, but that seems a bit
high. Am I wrong? Tell me if you wish, I can handle it!

Willie quoted that customer that price to do EVERYTHING to make it a running motor. He clearly mentioned that it included purchasing everything that did not come with the Burtz block kit like pistons, valves and springs, keepers, tappets, and other parts, oil pump, side cover, oil pan, head, gaskets, cam, dist., etc. etc. and then run the engine on the engine stand and ship it to the customer.

You assumed something incorrect.

[Kurt in NJ]

the 1934 Chiltons has a full overhaul at 20.6 hours, including babbitting the block ( not the caps), including boring cylinders, cutting valves and seats, fitting bearing

Just replacement of the block was 7 hours

A worn crankshaft can seem bent on V blocks, proven straight on centers.

I would like to have the measurements and tolerances for reference and comparing to Fords

[Dino's A]

Originally Posted by P.S.

Willie quoted that customer that price to do EVERYTHING to make it a running motor. He clearly mentioned that it included purchasing everything that did not come with the Burtz block kit like pistons, valves and springs, keepers, tappets, and other parts, oil pump, side cover, oil pan, head, gaskets, cam, dist., etc. etc. and then run the engine on the engine stand and ship it to the customer.

You assumed something incorrect.

Yes, I assumed the customer had a complete motor. He does not, and that's a different story. I stand corrected, thank You.

[P.S.]

Originally Posted by Dino's A

Yes, I assumed the customer had a complete motor. He does not, and that's a different story. I stand corrected, thank You.

Glad to help, brother!

[The Master Cylinder]

Originally Posted by Terry Burtz, Calif

Most of our "New Engine Kits" are being sold to individuals who have had no problems.

I should stay out of this "discussion" as I have no investment in this, I don't have a Burtz engine, know Terry Burtz or know Paul Shinn but I have to ask. How many of these individuals even check or have the ability to check for the things Willie has concerns and just assembled their "kits" believing everything is correct.

I don't remember Willie (or Paul) saying in the video the Burtz engine will not run or have problems as is. I do recall Willie stating he was concerned of the longevity of the engine if the items he found out of spec were not adressed.

Seems to me some who are making comments here didn't even see Paul's video before he took it down.

[SonicRaT]

Originally Posted by The Master Cylinder

I should stay out of this "discussion" as I have no investment in this, I don't have a Burtz engine, know Terry Burtz or know Paul Shinn but I have to ask. How many of these individuals even check or have the ability to check for the things Willie has concerns and just assembled their "kits" believing everything is correct.

I don't remember Willie (or Paul) saying in the video the Burtz engine will not run or have problems as is. I do recall Willie stating he was concerned of the longevity of the engine if the items he found out of spec were not adressed.

Seems to me some who are making comments here didn't even see Paul's video before he took it down.

Based on the builders guide and what I've seen on the facebook group, I'd believe the vast majority of builders, both home-grown and professional, are performing very similar measurements or at least performing other measurements that would reveal or indicate issues with the measurements performed in the video.

I built my own Burtz block and checked all of the measurements covered in the video and had no issues. The only "corrective" work I had to perform on my block was some very minor interference with the front counterweight and an oil passage along the inside of the block. I was able to file the area down slightly and made plenty of clearance with minimal effort.

If the crank was as far off as reported, there would be some significant issues from the very beginning and I'd expect it to bind up pretty badly if assembled as-is.

[jack backer]

Exactly, if the main bearing caps are torqued with .005 crankshaft journal runout it would bind on assembly.. I offered to buy the kits in question if the cranks were fitted and spun.. no response..

[Terry Burtz, Calif]

Originally Posted by SonicRaT

I built my own Burtz block and checked all of the measurements covered in the video and had no issues. The only "corrective" work I had to perform on my block was some very minor interference with the front counterweight and an oil passage along the inside of the block. I was able to file the area down slightly and made plenty of clearance with minimal effort.

As a "Home Builder", I want to congratulate you on your build and thank you for your report about the first crankshaft counterweight hitting the cylinder block.

There are 3 variables that make every "New Engine" cylinder block unique.

1) The raw casting of every "New Engine" cylinder block is slightly different because there may be minor core shifts and the workman that grinds the parting lines may remove more or less material.

2) All machining uses the same CNC programs, but there are slight variables that can occur if the part and machine tool are not at the same temperature or if there is an unnoticed chip between machine tools at the interface between the part and machine tool.

3) The third variable is when the machinist picks a starting point on the raw casting for all machine operations. In the case of your new engine, I would guess that the starting point for the machining on your cylinder block is slightly aft of where it should be.

Thanks for following the "Builders Guide" which says to rotate the crankshaft 2 full turns whenever a part is installed to check for interference.

[Terry Burtz, Calif]

Please stop posting on this thread.

We agree with Paul Shinn that his 2 "New Engine Kits" may be out of tolerance and have problems.

Please give Paul a break and allow him and his engine builder, Willie, to measure the dimensions in question and post them on this forum.

I will respond with drawing dimensions.

If the measured and drawing dimensions are different, we will have the dimensions measured by a modern machine shop and post the results here.

[SonicRaT]

Originally Posted by Terry Burtz, Calif

As a "Home Builder", I want to congratulate you on your build and thank you for your report about the first crankshaft counterweight hitting the cylinder block.

There are 3 variables that make every "New Engine" cylinder block unique.

1) The raw casting of every "New Engine" cylinder block is slightly different because there may be minor core shifts and the workman that grinds the parting lines may remove more or less material.

2) All machining uses the same CNC programs, but there are slight variables that can occur if the part and machine tool are not at the same temperature or if there is an unnoticed chip between machine tools at the interface between the part and machine tool.

3) The third variable is when the machinist picks a starting point on the raw casting for all machine operations. In the case of your new engine, I would guess that the starting point for the machining on your cylinder block is slightly aft of where it should be.

Thanks for following the "Builders Guide" which says to rotate the crankshaft 2 full turns whenever a part is installed to check for interference.

Hello Terry! Thanks for all of your time and what I consider an absolutely amazing product. I'd been quietly following your endeavor for quite some time and can't fathom the patience and dedication it must have taken to see it through.

The interference I had was very minimal. The crank would actually rotate freely, but you could faintly hear a metal-to-metal brushing noise in one particular spot of rotation. I tracked it down to the location pointed out in the picture below. It took minimal effort to file the area down slightly which gave the counterweight plenty of clearance.

This is not my picture, I believe it is Leonard's that I swiped from the facebook group, but used for reference to the area I filed:



I figured that since the area is not a machined surface that it was likely just some variation from the casting process. The builders guide mentions these tight clearances and, as you mention, to double check as you go, so I was on the lookout for any possible issues and it was extremely easy to remedy.

Ironically enough, I had more issues with a batch of bad Hasting's 665 rings. Thankfully I ordered a backup set in the event I snapped a ring installing them. One entire set was all 0.010" off -- then I opened the backup set and they were all where they should be.

I had actually filmed and documented my entire build from the very first unboxing all the way through the first startups in hopes of editing and putting out a video to encourage more people to take on building their own, but unfortunately my GoPro decided to nuke over half of my footage...

Originally Posted by Terry Burtz, Calif

Please stop posting on this thread.

Ooops.

[shew01]

Originally Posted by Terry Burtz, Calif

Please stop posting on this thread.

Uh, okay…. Which is the “real” thread we’re supposed to use?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[shew01]

Originally Posted by shew01

Uh, okay…. Which is the “real” thread we’re supposed to use?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’m asking because I’m genuinely interested in the outcome of this debate. When it comes time for engine work on my car, I’m considering a Burtz block instead of a rebuild on my original block. I’d like to know where the latest information is/will be posted.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[The Master Cylinder]

Originally Posted by shew01

I’m asking because I’m genuinely interested in the outcome of this debate. When it comes time for engine work on my car, I’m considering a Burtz block instead of a rebuild on my original block. I’d like to know where the latest information is/will be posted.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good question... I would like to know too.