Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

 There are smaller coolant holes between the cylinder block and cylinder head in authentic Paxton R3-4 engines, reason being.................?

Posted
26 minutes ago, Nelson said:

Maintain or increase distance from cylinder bore edge to hole edge in water jacket.

Perhaps...however, I tend to think the smaller passages are there for an entirely different reason!

Posted

HINT!.....Think of who built those engines...and then consider what other major engine project they, at the time, were working on!

Posted

Are you talking about the 342 block? I think the hole needed to be smaller for the increased bore diameter on this block. Bore diameter and chamfering made it useful for the R3/4.

Posted
1 hour ago, Gunslinger said:

Prototyping for the 340cid engine?

Not easy to get one by Gunslinger!!

Posted
1 hour ago, Nelson said:

Are you talking about the 342 block? I think the hole needed to be smaller for the increased bore diameter on this block. Bore diameter and chamfering made it useful for the R3/4.

Well, I was told it was something north of 350 CI....Anyway, an unfinished block was brought up this way in '67 or '68...it came from a SB scrap dealer, and a Studefan from Dedham grabbed it as an oddity....along with some other 'normal' parts....I didn't pay much attention at the time.....He said regular 289 heads would not fit it, and coolant passages were drilled half size to increase internal block pressure  (never was sure what that meant!)

Posted

Well, here are two photos of the 342 block with standard size Avanti piston in the bore to show the difference in bore size. The small hole is between the cylinders.

40A6ACE8-377C-4B1F-A218-C91F84F330EC.jpeg

655902EA-3644-4058-ABE5-BF44BE580D65.jpeg

Posted
19 minutes ago, Nelson said:

Well, here are two photos of the 342 block with standard size Avanti piston in the bore to show the difference in bore size. The small hole is between the cylinders.

40A6ACE8-377C-4B1F-A218-C91F84F330EC.jpeg

655902EA-3644-4058-ABE5-BF44BE580D65.jpeg

It's really too bad Studebaker could not have hung on a bit longer and got this engine fully developed and released to the public.... They were, obviously, very close!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...