Go Back   The Ford Barn > General Discussion > Early V8 (1932-53)

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-25-2015, 02:29 PM   #21
29AVEE8
Senior Member
 
29AVEE8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Redlands, CA
Posts: 148
Default Re: 97/48

The third engine replaced the driver compartment in the center of the car and the driver was moved aft.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 20-21-KenzLeslie777Streamliner.jpg (76.5 KB, 24 views)
__________________
Ignorance of the laws of physics does not mean they do not apply to you.
29AVEE8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2015, 03:49 PM   #22
scicala
Senior Member
 
scicala's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Detroit suburb, MI
Posts: 3,697
Default Re: 97/48

"Do you know of any 3" test numbers for these 94/97 families?
Thanks
Martin."



Martin, I'm afraid we just have to assume carbs that are flowed at 3" hg will be higher flow. Would be nice to know how much, but would need to have access to a flow bench, or someone who has done it. Maybe somebody with more brains than me could come up with a formula that could calculate it.

Sal
scicala is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)
Old 10-25-2015, 04:21 PM   #23
scooder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,593
Default Re: 97/48

Sal my friend,
There are formulae for doing the conversion from 3"-1.5" and 1.5"-3". My problem with this is that's it becomes a theoretical figure. This is fine for some. To me, I want facts, cold hard facts. I get that what ever The factual number comes out at, doesn't prove that this carb is better than that carb, I do fully understand that, but like I said, I want facts. I don't have a flow bench, probably never will, if I do get one I'm sure you can guess what's gonna be shoved on the sucker before its even out of the box!
My problem with theoretical numbers is that they can "proved" wrong with another theory.
Martin.
scooder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2015, 06:33 PM   #24
V8 Bob
Senior Member
 
V8 Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Granger (Northern) Indiana
Posts: 1,517
Default Re: 97/48

Quote:
Originally Posted by V8COOPMAN View Post
Most-definitely only three carbs on the closest engine. Note only three fuel lines, as compared with four lines and carbs on the other two. Obviously, fuel is fed from the opposite side as well. Even the water plumbing is different on this rear engine for some reason. DD..
The 3 engine car was rebuilt with 4 wheel drive. The 3 carb engine drives the rear axle, and the coupled front engines are reversed 180 and drive the front axle, if I remember the build article correctly. I think the single engine brought the car up to some speed, and the dual engines ran the high end. All three were built by Edelbrock, were 296" and ran an alky/nitro mix for around 250 hp each.

Correction-the car was converted to 4-wheel drive in '54 while still running two engines.

Last edited by V8 Bob; 10-26-2015 at 08:32 AM.
V8 Bob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2015, 08:54 PM   #25
Ralph Moore
Senior Member
 
Ralph Moore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North Pole, Alaska
Posts: 1,470
Default Re: 97/48

Did some research on this car and it topped 250 mph in 1952( with only two flatheads), and was retired in 1957 when it reached a top speed of 270 mph.
Ralph Moore is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:13 AM.