Horseman, if he doesn't block the unused ports, he'll be blowing raw fuel and air into the exhaust. Also what should make the motor run slowly is to remove all the possible lumpiness, preserving the momentum from the #1 power stroke to deliver it into the next compression stroke -- or at least so goes my theory.

Horseman, if he doesn't block the unused ports, he'll be blowing raw fuel and air into the exhaust. Also what should make the motor run slowly is to remove all the possible lumpiness, preserving the momentum from the #1 power stroke to deliver it into the next compression stroke -- or at least so goes my theory.

We are on the same page it would seem. At the moment it idles slow enough to hear the firing strokes.I think to run on one, It just needs added weight to the flywheel to keep the momentum going till the next firing stroke.And remove the rings from all the remaining pistons to reduce drag.

I have had people say this would not run on three--I would like to see if it can run on one. It might sound a little odd though.:classic:It would not really have to run slower than at the moment.

Edited January 4, 201213 yr by olzed

Great idea, something like this would be a heck of a learning tool. I've seen non-operating cutaways (with small electric motors turning them over) in aviation museums quite a bit.... was a great way for me to learn about how some of the older jet engines were designed.

Although an operational L6 would be a challenge to build, and very cool to see, I am not sure how the investment would be all that beneficial over a full cutaway engine. I mean, you would spend an extraordinary amount of time just getting the thing to run. The time could be spent on color codes, documentation, and videography.

For me, I'm still waiting for someone to replicate the cross flow head.

m

There have been so many cutaway NON runners done over the years, of so many types of engines. I wanted to see if I could achieve a runner L6 The only investment is really only my time. Parts were donated. When one is in his late sixties I do have time. Z cars are my hobby.

How about removing the cam followers on the "unwanted" cylinder rather than messing with block off's in the manifold. Easier to "un-do" the modification if necessary.

^^^^ great idea!

I had an idea on the flywheel weight as well, use an automatic converter, cap the input shaft opening and put a fill plug in the cap. You can easily adjust the weight using ATF, and it will balance itself while it spins.

I have to chime in here...

Great job. It looks fantastic. Can't wait to see it running on one cylinder (with the added flywheel mass).

Al

How about removing the cam followers on the "unwanted" cylinder rather than messing with block off's in the manifold. Easier to "un-do" the modification if necessary.

That is a darn good idea. Thanks 5th.--- I will keep that in mind when I next get involved with this. Won't be for a little while though. Late March prob.

A little update on my engine project.

Still no further alterations to the engine, apart from new paint, and carbs polished up a bit, all ready for our show on 12 Feb.

Did some calculations with an eyeometer on the timing chain, which rotates 80 turns per minute.

Edited January 31, 201213 yr by olzed

Your cam turns 80 RPM, i.e. 160 RPM at the crank? Not bad!

Video????

Yes, video at the show Sarah. --I was surprised when I counted the cam RPM. At 160 engine RPM, it is slower than I first thought.

If I try to idle it any lower it gradually comes to a halt. More flywheel weight needed??

Brian.