[twinturrbo406]

Originally Posted by Tom Vaught

I think that you missed the basics of the stuff I posted Bill.

1) Why do you have a full girdle unless you are locking all of the caps together Top and Bottom?

2) The Bottom of the Cap touches the Block. The Top of the Cap is below the normal oil pan gasket surface. The top of the cap moves during normal engine operation. That is a fact.

3) The picture I provided in my post shows one method to keep the top of the main caps from moving as much as well as supporting the caps with a skirted block.

4) We do not have a skirted block, in your design, but we would have a main web structure that could act like a skirted block structure.

5) Making the structure so that the main caps were separate from the structure would eliminate the jack screw requirement. Are you going to add that jack screw feature to your design? The structure will distort with removal otherwise. Read Eric's and Mike's posts.

Just trying to help you look at the big picture vs machining out a web structure that distorts the first time you remove it. Then where is your support or strength?

Tom Vaught

... the design was always going to have lift bolts to remove it evenly, but the design will also have extra dowel pins and i'm not sure here, but you are aware this design is all one piece, meaning all 5 caps are a part of the railing area ?? meaning it's basically one giant main cap ??...

... this material is very dense, and this piece is not what i would call "light", and it is 4 inches tall at the rails Tom, this piece will not distort when removed, at least no more than when you remove steel caps with a slide hammer ...

[BruceWilkie]

Hmmm.... take 7 pieces of wood (hard seasoned oak) All of them 1.5" tall 1" wide... then cut 5 pieces 4 inches long and fasten them to two 12" long pieces in a manner resembling the main/cage assy. Use screws or nails no glue. Take a solid board of hard seasoned oak cut it to the similar shape and size with radiused corners. Which one is going to flex more?? Which one is going to have added stress points? Imo if the board is not hard seasoned oak but good hard pine it still will have far less flex than the multi piece unit. The fasteners and joints are why the multi-piece flexes more.

[twinturrbo406]

Originally Posted by BruceWilkie

Hmmm.... take 7 pieces of wood (hard seasoned oak) All of them 1.5" tall 1" wide... then cut 5 pieces 4 inches long and fasten them to two 12" long pieces in a manner resembling the main/cage assy. Use screws or nails no glue. Take a solid board of hard seasoned oak cut it to the similar shape and size with radiused corners. Which one is going to flex more?? Which one is going to have added stress points? Imo if the board is not hard seasoned oak but good hard pine it still will have far less flex than the multi piece unit. The fasteners and joints are why the multi-piece flexes more.

... exactly ...

[GREATGTO]

Well nothing like good testing will determine the effectiveness of this design which I'm sure Cody will do on his sbo. If distorting the cage on removal is a concern all you have to do is ''clock'' the jacking bolts and use an extra set of hands when removing, will give a nice even lift upon removal.

[mgarblik]

This whole idea is interesting to me as Cody and Bill are basically applying OE current ideas to our ancient engines to make them better. The OE's are doing the same thing to make the blocks cheaper and lighter!! Every design described in this thread is currently being used by some OE. The crappy inline 4-5-and 6 GM engines used in their trucks used the style described by Tom. The 6 cylinder one is 8 pieces! 7 powered metal main caps and 1 girdle holding the thing together. At my school in the next week, we will have several engines down and I will post pics of as many different approaches to this issue as I can find. Anything that will create a structure that will not allow movement of the main caps under extreme load is a great benefit. That's why in my opinion any cross bolted deep skirt block like a Ford FE or a Hemi has a real advantage in that part of the engine.

[mgarblik]

Here are a few pics of a few engines we had apart at school with the "cages, girdles, bridges". Different approaches to the same problem. The first 2 are a GM inline 4/5/6 used in the Colorado and Trailblazer, H3. It is multi-piece with powdered metal caps and an aluminum cage. The second is an "iron cage" for the Dodge Neon 2 liter. Iron block, iron cage, one piece and much better design in my opinion. The rest of the engine is a POS but the bottom end is pretty tough.

[Dragncar]

Why cant someone make us a priority main oiled block with mains cross bolted like Mopar/LS1s and be done with it.
All the Pontiac blocks experience cap walk a very high HP levels.

[Tom Vaught]

The GM engine "Girdle is just that, something to keep the caps from moving at the "top" by tying all of the caps together. Why would GM design a girdle, Bill, to keep the caps from "waving in the wind" when the caps don't move in that location, according to you. Stupid GM Designers and Engineers. (If it allowed their engine to pass their durability tests and was cheap who is stupid?)

I agree, Mike, the second engine has a much better design in a couple of ways by my thinking: Lower Bridge is all one piece but I really like the spread apart main cap bolt on the outside locations. The web obviously will be a much stronger deal.

That would be the design I think would work except that the block would have to be a non-drilled block.

Also the outer bolts DO NOT need to be the same size as the inner bolts. Again you are ok with a 2-bolt main block but screwed with a factory 4-bolt main outer bolt diameter and web location.

So Bill if you are planning on putting these things on factory blocks you will only help the strength of the block a given amount as the web is the weak point not the cap configuration, IMO.

Tom Vaught

[lemans411]

[QUOTE=Tom Vaught;4837284]The GM engine "Girdle is just that, something to keep the caps from moving at the "top" by tying all of the caps together.

Tom Vaught[/QUOTE

i dont doubt that the girdle style will help caps "waving in the wind" as you say . but will it stop it totally or just make them wave less and in unison with each other? im sure the "cage " design will keep it much more stable and not allow the caps to move as it would have to twist the entire piece to move probably not going to stop stock block breakage but im sure it wont hurt. but what the hell do i know? im just a mechanic not an engineer . lol either way i'm glad that our pontiacs have so many options for high performance parts these days. gotta keep up with those chevy and ford guys , we cant let them have all the fun.

[BruceWilkie]

Not concerned about it fitting a 4 bolt factory block... Cody's piece(shown) is for a SB Olds.
The piece for Pontiac is intended for aftermarket blocks including an aluminum short deck that is in development.

It could be fitted to a 2 bolt stock block. But one should consider that even this piece isnt going to allow a stock block to match an IA2.

Its NOT going to get bolted to the thinnest part of web.

Did anyone say factory bolt sizes?(though the center two at each web could be.)

Did anyone say it wouldnt get splayed bolts?

Yes an un-drilled block would make fitting easier. But it really isnt going to be much more work than adding splayed caps.

The pics of the Neon lower unit isnt far off the concept that is in development.

[Tom Vaught]

Originally Posted by BruceWilkie

Not concerned about it fitting a 4 bolt factory block... Cody's piece(shown) is for a SB Olds.
The piece for Pontiac is intended for aftermarket blocks including an aluminum short deck that is in development.

It could be fitted to a 2 bolt stock block. But one should consider that even this piece isnt going to allow a stock block to match an IA2.

Its NOT going to get bolted to the thinnest part of web.

Did anyone say factory bolt sizes?(though the center two at each web could be.)

Did anyone say it wouldnt get splayed bolts?

Yes an un-drilled block would make fitting easier. But it really isnt going to be much more work than adding splayed caps.

The pics of the Neon lower unit isnt far off the concept that is in development.

Then GREAT NEWS BRUCE!

I really like the basic concept. The Ford guys have tried to do the simple girdle on their pushrod 5.0L blocks with limited success on that weak block.

Any one that is pushing a pushrod Ford is using a Motorsports Block minimum or better aftermarket block.

I give You and Bill a great deal of credit for trying to make the basic structure even stronger.

Tom V.

A Powdered Metal Main Cap (if it can meet the design target of the manufacturer) is a proper choice for a OEM application. I can see a lot of commonality between Bob and Frank's Dry Sump pan (made by their supplier) and the thought process for the "Billet Cage".

[taff2]

Is there a problem with the IA11 or other aftermarket Pontiac block with the main caps moving or flexing? If so,at what HP level?
I would think a halo girdle will stop main caps waving in the wind,much like a rocker stud girdle does on the heads.

[blueghoast]

I started useing long dowles on the main, Sure did tighten things up.
That girdle looks like it would really streghten the block. I wouldn't
mind haveing one on my motors.

GT.

[twinturrbo406]

Originally Posted by Tom Vaught

The GM engine "Girdle is just that, something to keep the caps from moving at the "top" by tying all of the caps together. Why would GM design a girdle, Bill, to keep the caps from "waving in the wind" when the caps don't move in that location, according to you. Stupid GM Designers and Engineers. (If it allowed their engine to pass their durability tests and was cheap who is stupid?)

I agree, Mike, the second engine has a much better design in a couple of ways by my thinking: Lower Bridge is all one piece but I really like the spread apart main cap bolt on the outside locations. The web obviously will be a much stronger deal.

That would be the design I think would work except that the block would have to be a non-drilled block.

Also the outer bolts DO NOT need to be the same size as the inner bolts. Again you are ok with a 2-bolt main block but screwed with a factory 4-bolt main outer bolt diameter and web location.

So Bill if you are planning on putting these things on factory blocks you will only help the strength of the block a given amount as the web is the weak point not the cap configuration, IMO.

Tom Vaught

... Tom please dont take this the wrong way, but i will try to say this with as much respect as i can, but honestly, if you have what you believe to be the perfect way of manufacturing a Girdle, Cage, Main Support etc. type of system, then why haven't you built one ?? ...

... 2nd, i didnt call anyone "Stupid Engineers" Tom, those are your words not mine, and your waving in the wind comes from the crankshaft, meaning the loads are "under" the main-caps, if you have a main system that is waving or moving at the top, this is a secondary movement, meaning if the top of the cap is waving or moving, then that means so is the bottom, which is where the starting point of these loads comes from, do you think making it stronger at the top of this secondary movement is really going to have near as much of an effect, compared to making the mains stronger at the parting line of the caps ??? ...

... because that's what the Billet-Cage does, it ties the bed rails of the block with studs all along the rails to the parting line area of the mains, because it's all one solid piece of material as well as at the top of the mains, now would this system be even stronger if it were made of steel, or cast iron, or powdered metal, well i'm sure it would be if they were one solid piece also, but for the cast version you open the door for casting/tooling costs which are exspensive, and you dont even want to know what the machine time of of this design in Steel would be, so either of those approaches will make a system like this unreachable from a manufacture & cost perspective ...

... not to mention it would weight over 100 lbs lbs if it were steel and slightly less if it were cast iron ... there are other factors to consider like thermal transfer, and harmonics through the crankshaft that make the CR30 Billet an excellent choice for this type of design, not to mention machining time, which is of a major concern when manufacturing a piece like the Billet-Cage ...

... so after all of our research, the CR30 6061 Billet was the only choice to make this design, with very high levels of "strength, thermal transfer, harmonic dampening, machine time, weight and also cost" achievable ...

[twinturrbo406]

Originally Posted by BruceWilkie

Not concerned about it fitting a 4 bolt factory block... Cody's piece(shown) is for a SB Olds.
The piece for Pontiac is intended for aftermarket blocks including an aluminum short deck that is in development.

It could be fitted to a 2 bolt stock block. But one should consider that even this piece isnt going to allow a stock block to match an IA2.

Its NOT going to get bolted to the thinnest part of web.

Did anyone say factory bolt sizes?(though the center two at each web could be.)

Did anyone say it wouldnt get splayed bolts?

Yes an un-drilled block would make fitting easier. But it really isnt going to be much more work than adding splayed caps.

The pics of the Neon lower unit isnt far off the concept that is in development.

... we would make one for a stock block if someone wanted one ... the splayed 4 bolt would get in the way if that stock-block had that upgrade, it would be best if it were a 2 bolt to start with, but 4 bolt blocks would work also ...

[twinturrbo406]

... here are some updated pics of what has been done so far on the Billet-Cage ...

... and right now it weighs 42lbs, and with the machining that still needs to be done in other areas, we're figuring about 38-39lbs is what it will weigh once completed ...

... Cody is working on fitting the Titan oil pump we have on the Billet-Cage right now, so the work continues ...

[1320hp]

The closest comparison with the cage design in regard to lower end strength of a high performance application would be the McGee top fuel engine from the 70's or for a later model example, the Cosworth 2ZZ. The McGee block design turned out to be the absolute strongest ever produced for blown fuel engines. The only reason it disappeared from the scene was due to the NHRA banning multiple valve and overhead cam designs under all the pressure that was placed on them by the scores of hemi builders and manufacturers at the time that did not want to see this engine compete. This is a "fact" that I have no need of confirming with anyone because I was there in it's heyday. Also, while we still work with affordability in mind here at Mondello's, we are not hampered like the OEM's are with being forced to use materials that are absolutely the most cost effective (cheapest) and possibly having to settle with designs that have compromises incorporated into them by the time they reach the production line. The 4/5 and 6 cyl. production applications (no offense intended toward you Mike) are of no value for comparison because you are jumping from one end of the automotive spectrum to the other. It would be the typical situation of comparing apples and oranges. Cody designed the cage from the start to strengthen the weak link in the lower end of the engine block in order to handle larger amounts of power for performance and racing applications, because it is a solid billet one piece design and not multiple bolt together components, we don't have to be concerned with the caps moving around.

[Hammertime Mike]

Originally Posted by 1320hp

The closest comparison with the cage design in regard to lower end strength of a high performance application would be the McGee top fuel engine from the 70's or for a later model example, the Cosworth 2ZZ. The McGee block design turned out to be the absolute strongest ever produced for blown fuel engines. The only reason it disappeared from the scene was due to the NHRA banning multiple valve and overhead cam designs under all the pressure that was placed on them by the scores of hemi builders and manufacturers at the time that did not want to see this engine compete. This is a "fact" that I have no need of confirming with anyone because I was there in it's heyday. Also, while we still work with affordability in mind here at Mondello's, we are not hampered like the OEM's are with being forced to use materials that are absolutely the most cost effective (cheapest) and possibly having to settle with designs that have compromises incorporated into them by the time they reach the production line. The 4/5 and 6 cyl. production applications (no offense intended toward you Mike) are of no value for comparison because you are jumping from one end of the automotive spectrum to the other. It would be the typical situation of comparing apples and oranges. Cody designed the cage from the start to strengthen the weak link in the lower end of the engine block in order to handle larger amounts of power for performance and racing applications, because it is a solid billet one piece design and not multiple bolt together components, we don't have to be concerned with the caps moving around.

This would seem to be a big interest to those who want superchargers and blowers on top of their motors. The Olds blocks are notoriously weak. This could change the playing field for them.

[beastmaster]

What you guys thoughts on the average machine shop line honing it. Wouldn't have to be done at a speclalty shop?

[slowbird]

Originally Posted by twinturrbo406

... we would make one for a stock block if someone wanted one ... the splayed 4 bolt would get in the way if that stock-block had that upgrade, it would be best if it were a 2 bolt to start with, but 4 bolt blocks would work also ...

I thought the point of this was for stock blocks but this is being designed for our aftermarket blocks? Is there an issue with bottom end strength on the IA2 & MR1 blocks where this would be needed?