Belleville, Michigan, located midway between Hagerty’s Ann Arbor editorial offices and Detroit Metro Airport, is aptly named. Some 4000 residents—including this writer—enjoy a magnificent lake, fine restaurants, exotic street art, and a cordial vibe. But Belleville’s most compelling attraction are summer Monday evenings, when two long blocks of Main Street are restricted to classics, customs, hot rods, homebuilts, and the occasional motorcycle.

In that regard, Belleville’s not so different from countless other little downtowns across the country: You know it’s summer when the classics make their weekly gathering.

An estimated 300 cars showed up at this year’s first meet—everything from a chopped ’34 Ford street rod to a pair of Tesla Cybertrucks—to celebrate the joys of motoring before an admiring crowd.

Although civilian traffic isn’t blocked from Main until 5 p.m., the star cars begin gathering in prime spots by three. Event host Egan’s Pub sells portable food and adult beverages. A farmer’s market offers fresh beef, fruit, vegetables, eggs, and honey. A DJ plays a distinctly ’60s soundtrack.

I spoke to a half-dozen car owners, and while domestic brands dominate the turnout, there is the odd import invader.

John Koelber has seized the same parking spot every Monday night for more than a dozen years since he purchased his ’32 Ford coupe, which features a fiberglass Outlaw Performance body riding atop a Fatman square-steel tube frame. He’s especially proud of the 383-cid Chevy V-8 poking out of the hood with its 871 Weiand supercharger fueled by a Holley Demon 775 carburetor. To ease steering effort, Koelber added an electric power-assist unit that mounts out of sight, under the dash.

This pristine ’67 Corvette 427 coupe has had the same owner for 32 years, and he’s piloted it for 5000 of its 80,000 total miles. The only modification to the Vette was upgrading to a five-speed manual transmission with an overdrive top gear, which is better suited for highway cruising.

We last encountered Sonny and Rose Ann Hall’s ’49 Mercury lead sled three years ago. Sonny chopped the top 3.5 inches, dropped the ride height, installed Buick side chrome, and gave his pride and joy a custom grille and a magnificent paint job. Not especially interested in speed or acceleration, he’s happy with the 454-cid Chevy big-block under the hood, which produces an estimated 300 horsepower.

With American Motors rides fewer and farther between these days, Ron Goodnough’s 1970 AMX salutes that manufacturer with a striking red-white-and-blue exterior. He noted that the paint job was applied by his father over the original lime green metallic. “My late pop Pete Goodnough was an AMC employee who helped design the AMX3 prototype,” he told me. “The first mid-engined sports car designed by any American company. Only seven such cars were ever made.” 

Ron’s two-seat AMX two-seater is equipped with five-spoke American Racing aluminum wheels and BFG Radial T/A rubber. The hood has aggressive scoops, and the side sills are decorated with faux exhaust piping, while the growl from the 360-cid V-8 underhood trumpets out the back.

Dave Remus, a proud Hagerty member for 20 years, loves his 1965 Mercury Comet Caliente. We love the fact that a version of the 302-cid Ford V-8 that came from the factory remains loud and proud under the hood. As Remus explained it: “A quarter-inch stroke and a 0.030-inch over-bore have raised the displacement to 331 cubic inches. I’m guessing it makes at least 450 hp in its current state of tune.”

There’s a fresh C4 automatic transmission under the floor to make best use of the small-block’s 6500-rpm redline. Except for additional instruments and fresh carpeting, the interior is all original. According to Remus, the cheater slicks fitted to the rear axle are street legal.

Dawn and Jeff King brought their 2006 Chrysler PT Cruiser convertible to Monday night’s gathering. It looks brand new and has been well cared for during each and every one of the 17,000 miles on its odometer. A turbocharged 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine drives the front wheels. The factory Linen Gold Pearl paint job and stock chromed nine-spoke wheels are to die for.

Belleville has done a fantastic job making its prime downtown streets an ideal place to enjoy a major chunk of what makes small-town summers so great. While my suggestion that adding a side street for sanctioned smokey burnouts has thus far been ignored, there’s always hope in this special corner of Michigan.

***

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. To get our best stories delivered right to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletters.

The post Cars Add Sparkle to This Cool Michigan Town appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Welcome to Homegrown—a limited series about homebuilt cars and the ingenuity of their visionary creators. Do you know a car and builder that might fit the bill? Send us an email to tips@hagerty.com with the subject line HOMEGROWN. Read about more Homegrown creations here. —Ed.

The beauty of constructing a ride at home is that the builder can master his destiny from the tire patches to the roof. That’s how Hagerty member John Augelli, of Watertown, Connecticut, viewed the CORBENZ he created with his buddy Eric Strachan.

By day these two worked as police officers. In their off hours, they toiled over their homegrown ride, investing four years and $80,000 in the effort.

Augelli explains, “When this project started 25 years ago, Eric and I admired the look and feel of the Benz 280SL ‘pagoda’ but longed for the extra guts of a V-8. Simply swapping the German six for an American eight was unimaginative so we connived a more elaborate approach we christened CORBENZ.”

At age 16, Augelli began working on cars, starting with a rust-eradication effort on a ‘59 Ford Country Squire station wagon. “I needed $100 to fund a trip to the Cape so I pitched the repair job and earned the assignment,” he says. “After purchasing a bodywork reference book, a grinder, plastic filler, and steel wool, I went to work. Fortunately, the wagon was white so that my less-than-perfect finished surfaces looked fine.  My persistence yielded a great time at the Cape.”

Thirty-five years later, Augelli had all the skills needed to collaborate with his buddy, who owned the Mercedes SL. “Our donor car was a 1987 Corvette coupe we bought at a salvage auction,” Augelli says. “Most of the Vette’s bodywork was trashed but the parts we were interested in—powertrain, frame, and chassis—were all salvageable. I focused on the labor while Eric covered out-of-pocket expenses—for upholstery, an engine overhaul, chrome plating, and the outside labor that was required.

“Picking the Corvette for running gear made sense because the C4’s wheelbase and track dimensions were close to the 1969 Mercedes we started with. Once I had whacked the lower part of the SL’s unibody structure, there was no turning back. The Corvette also had an aluminum radiator, plastic leaf springs, and aluminum brake calipers, which suited our needs. Its 5.7-liter V-8 with 240 horsepower was mated to a 700R4 automatic transmission. Our goal was tuning this custom’s personality to mimic my loud and obnoxious charm!

“Several of the tasks we faced were challenging.  One was moving the V-8 engine five inches forward in the Corvette chassis. That in turn required relocating the steering linkage for clearance and adding five inches to the long aluminum beam that ties the rear of the transmission to the front of the differential. In addition, the rear wheelhouse openings had to be moved two inches to clear the 17-inch wheels and tires we added. And the original factory headlamps had to be reworked to clear our much wider engine.

“The first test drives occurred in 2004. Practically everything worked as expected with the major exception being GM’s tuned-port electronically controlled fuel injection. After struggling with it for some time, we stripped that off, replacing it with a new more readily tunable Edelbrock four-barrel carburetor and intake manifold.

“Eric enjoyed driving our creation for several years before deciding he’d rather own the 1966 Ford Mustang GT K-code in my garage. After negotiating a swap, my wife and I drove the CORBENZ for thousands of miles. It never ceases to impress enthusiasts we encounter in traffic or at the gas station.

“Entertainment celebrity Howie Mandel once noticed this sports car in Mystic, Connecticut, inquiring if it was for sale! That Cosmos Red finish never hurts.

“Some critic once asked why I messed up such a valuable classic. My answer to him was, ‘Because I could!’”

***

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. To get our best stories delivered right to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletters.

The post Homegrown: The Split-Personality CORBENZ appeared first on Hagerty Media.

In the last seven decades, General Motors has bestowed 113 million small-block V-8 engines upon us—nearly one per American household. Given this engine’s phenomenal success, it’s no surprise that its fundamental architecture and pushrod-actuated, two-valve technology have been stretched and transformed into ambitious projects far exceeding original displacements and cylinder count. A few of these engines have been featured in high-profile builds or found their way into boats or airplanes, but all of them displayed serious ingenuity.

V-12s Then and Now

After running Andy Granatelli’s Indy racing engine program and then collaborating with Carroll Shelby for several years, Ryan Falconer opened his own shop in Culver City, California, in 1966. That year, the Ford Racing V-8 he built powered Graham Hill to an Indy 500 victory. In 2011, Falconer relocated to Chino Valley, Arizona, where this 83-year-old motor maestro is still at it.

Falconer unveiled his V-12, based on the first-generation Chevy small-block V-8, back in 1990. A Corvette powered by this engine topped 200 mph, and another Falconer V-12 propelled the Thunder Mustang, a ¾-scale P-51 aircraft. Prices started at $85,000.

Falconer retained Chevy’s 4.40-inch bore spacing, single camshaft, and pushrod-operated two valves per cylinder. His block and heads were cast aluminum, limiting weight to 520 pounds. This V-12’s crankshaft was machined from a chunk of billet steel and secured in place by a girdle incorporating all seven main bearing caps. A few of Falconer’s engines were supercharged or turbocharged, and dry-sump lubrication was also available. Displacements ranged from 8.6 to 9.8 liters, with naturally aspirated power outputs up to 640 hp at 4500 rpm. One supercharged 8.2-liter V-12 produced nearly 1000 hp in a marine application.

In addition to their power potential, every V-12 has perfect primary and secondary harmonic balance. The only flaw in V-12s descending from 90-degree V-8s is their unequal firing intervals. Instead of a power pulse every 60 degrees of crank rotation, the cylinders light off every 30 or 90 degrees. The Dodge Viper’s V-10 also suffered from this fault, though it never stunted that rabblerouser’s personality. Of course, GM understood the virtues of a 60-degree bank angle, which is why that arrangement was used in V-12–powered GMC trucks in the 1960s.

Over 35 years, Falconer built and sold 55 of his V-12s for auto, marine, and aircraft applications. Currently, he’s focused on selling the Falconer L6, a 5.0-liter DOHC 24-valve inline-six originally built by GM for motorsports.

The V-12 from Down Under

Proving that excellence can have global reach, two Australian entrepreneurs have taken up where Falconer left off. In 2018, Matt and Shane Corish’s Race Cast Engineering in Melbourne began offering V-12s based on GM’s fourth-generation small-block LS V-8. This March, one of their engines sparkled at Detroit’s Autorama under the hood of the TwelveAir sports coupe built by Kindig-It Design of Salt Lake City, Utah. Owners Dave and Tracey Maxwell, of Saltsburg, Pennsylvania, carted home the $10,000 Ridler award won by their TwelveAir creation.

Shane Corish notes, “GM’s superb small-block V-8 provided the perfect starting point for our V-12.” Race Cast uses modern 3D printing technology to cast its blocks in aluminum or iron. (The latter is preferable for boosted applications.) While standard GM 4.40-inch bore spacing is maintained, extra head bolts have been added for improved durability, and the sides of the cast aluminum oil pan are a full inch thick to increase this V-12’s longitudinal stiffness. A Haltech Nexus electronic control unit runs the ignition and fuel injection, while induction air flow is regulated by a standard GM throttle body.

The Aussie V-12s are available as a $49,300 engine builder’s kit, with the block, heads, crankshaft, camshaft, and gaskets included. A smaller-bore aluminum block can be had for an additional $5000.  Power outputs range from 750 hp in the base naturally aspirated 9.5-liter (580-cubic-inch) V-12 up to 1000-plus hp with a 3.90-inch stroke that increases displacement to 9.9-liters (607 cubic inches). Consider this merely the starting point, because Race Cast’s customers have begun toying with boosted engines. One has a quad-turbo build under way, and another has added a pair of Magnuson superchargers.

Small-Block–Based V-16s

Around 2000, GM realized that clever engineering could double its small-block V-8 into a viable V-16. In 2003, the Cadillac Sixteen concept bowed as the center piece of that division’s Art and Science initiative. This effort to nudge Cadillac’s prestige upward evoked the V-16 limos the brand sold from 1929 through 1937.

Tom Stephens, GM’s powertrain operations vice president, guided the XV16’s design and development with an eye toward production. Prototype castings were sourced in Germany, and Katech Performance, the Corvette racing program’s venerable partner, conducted the dyno testing. The goal was a nice round 1000 horsepower and 1000 lb-ft of torque. To reach these lofty heights, the 6.2-liter LS3 V-8’s bore and stroke were both increased 6mm, yielding a 13.6-liter/830-cubic-inch V-16 that weighed a reasonable 695 pounds.

In addition to batting 1000 in output, GM’s XV16 could run on regular fuel and featured “displacement on demand,” which allowed it to cruise on as few as four cylinders. Given full boot, it was allegedly capable of smoking the rear tires of a GMC Yukon durability test vehicle … in three gears.

Unfortunately, GM’s fortunes turned downward shortly after the Sixteen’s arrival. Imports thrived at the domestic brands’ expense. What GM needed more than a Rolls or Bentley beater was a better Chevy Cavalier to fight entry-level Japanese cars. In mid-2009, GM filed for bankruptcy, acknowledging debts twice its assets. By then the remarkable XV16 was but a fond memory.

Another Unhappy Ending

At two 2017 Dubai International motor shows, a budding enterprise called Devel unveiled a sports car prototype called the Devel SIXTEEN with over-the-moon aspirations. Its powerplant was said to be a 12.3-liter V-16 equipped with four turbochargers, boosting output over 5000 horsepower while producing 3757 lb-ft of torque.

The feeling, according to Devel, was that of a road-going jet fighter with a 300-mph top speed. While the flagship car was not intended for road use and no price was attached to it, two additional versions were also planned for production: a $1.6-million 2000-hp V-8 edition and a $1.8-million quad-turbo V-16 delivering 4000 horsepower.

According to Devel boss Rashid Al-Attari, the SIXTEEN’s molded carbon-fiber body would be provided by the Italian coachbuilder Manifattura Automobili, and Scuderia Cameron Glickenhaus in New York would construct the space frame chassis. He also credited Steve Morris Engines, a firm located in Muskegon, Michigan, as the engine supplier.

SME has been in business since 2010. Boss Morris filled us in with a few details: “We built and tested a prototype engine which shared the 4.40-inch bore center dimension and basic configuration of GM’s Gen III LS small-block V-8. With a mild camshaft and 20 psi of boost, it produced 3006 horsepower. With 30 psi of boost, it topped 4000 horsepower. Upped to 36 psi, it made 4515 hp, which was all our dynamometer could handle. More than 5000 horsepower was definitely possible here.”

There is video footage of Devels running 100-or-so-mph on test tracks but those prototypes were fitted with Corvette V-8s, not the anticipated V-16. Notes Morris, “Our experimental engine has never been fitted to a car. Unfortunately, Devel seems to have fallen off the face of the earth. From our engine-development perspective, the project ended the same year it began—2017.”

While Devel’s V-16 stretch appears to be unrealistically ambitious, let us ponder two alternatives. The Corvette ZR1 due later this year will build on the Z06’s LT6 5.5-liter DOHC 32-valve V-8 by adding two turbochargers and intercoolers. That new LT7 small-block will bring an estimated 850 hp to the party.

And to all the wildly creative engineers in the audience, we suggest you aim your most advanced CAD/CAM weapons at what we’ll code name LT12 and LT16: engines rising out of the inherent greatness of the Corvette’s LT7 V-8. An 8.2-liter V-12 should produce 1300 hp, while the quad-turbo 10.9-liter V-16 should make 1700 hp … without straining. All the horsepower addicts pondering Devel worship will surely prefer these heavenly alternatives.

***

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. To get our best stories delivered right to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletters.

The post The V-12 and V-16 Progeny of Chevy’s Small-Block V-8 appeared first on Hagerty Media.

One of the most notable participants in the 2024 Detroit Autorama is a special Oldsmobile 4-4-2 build packing a rare, experimental V-8 engine. To read about the twin brothers from Detroit responsible for this “Killer” project, click here. What follows is a technical and historical overview of the so-called W-43 prototype.

The mythical Dr. Olds was GM’s self-appointed innovation guru, with mass production, speedometers, front-wheel drive, turbocharging, a diesel V-8, automatic transmissions, anti-lock brakes, and chrome plating to his credit. So it should be no surprise that Olds engineers were pioneers in the movement to cram additional valves into their combustion chambers in pursuit of extra power. Behold, the W-43 prototype engine.

Oldsmobile’s special performance packages were generally coded with the letter W. In the late 1960s, the cause was volumetric efficiency: pumping extra fuel and air into—and exhaust out of—the engine to boost torque and horsepower. Work on the prototype W-43 V-8 shown here—a 455-cubic-inch muscle motor topped with heads sporting four valves per cylinder—began in earnest in the fall of 1967, though some of its technology had been in the engine lab for years.

One-upmanship was clearly at play in the W-43’s genesis. In the mid-1960s, Chrysler’s second-gen Hemi was the scourge of street and oval-track competition. Olds strived to trump Mopar by venturing beyond the Hemi V-8’s two valves per cylinder.

For the four-valve W-43 experiment, of which at least two examples are said to remain, a single chain-driven cam between the cylinder banks activates 16 pushrods. Each rod opens one pair of valves via rocker arms. To optimize this geometry, and to trim the mass of the pushrods in pursuit of super-high-rpm capability, the camshaft is elevated in the block exactly one inch in comparison with the 455 donor V-8.

Instead of Chrysler’s spherical combustion chambers, Oldsmobile used a simpler pent-roof arrangement which tipped valve faces toward the bore’s centerline. Spark plugs are centered to minimize flame travel, a configuration that necessitated sealing tubes in the valve covers. Pistons are domed.

To expedite the development of these new cylinder heads, Olds engineers employed a flow bench that could accurately assess temporary mahogany models. Best results were achieved with 1.75-inch intakes and 1.375-inch exhausts. This yielded a 43 percent increase in valve curtain area—likely the reason that figure was selected for this engine’s code name (curtain area = valve circumference x lift).

The 455-cubic-inch block, which continued 4.125-inch bore and 4.25-inch stroke dimensions, included one notable upgrade: To assure durability, new four-bolt main bearing caps were machined from forged steel.

Test results reported by Hot Rod magazine indicated a peak output of 440 horsepower at 4600 rpm with mild valve timing and a 4×2-barrel induction system. Those figures are modest by today’s standards likely because the engine was measured early in the development process.

The late 1960s were Motown’s horsepower heyday. The Hurst/Olds specials introduced in 1968 are now highly prized collectibles. Olds engineers also built hot marine powerplants and twin-turbo V-8s intended for Can-Am racing. A spinoff design was coded OW-43. Experimental dual-overhead-cam, 32-valve V-8s were also constructed for dyno testing.

Unfortunately, doomsday lurked around the bend. In the early 1970s, the feds tightened emissions standards and OPEC triggered an energy crisis with an oil embargo. Exactly what Olds didn’t need was a V-8 which was heavier, bulkier, more expensive to manufacture, and thirstier than conventional designs.

Thus, the W-43 was shelved and never reached production status.

It wasn’t all wasted effort, however, as this fantastic footnote demonstrates: Oldsmobile’s 2.3-liter Quad-Four—produced from 1987 through 2002 and used to power millions of Chevys, Oldsmobiles, Pontiacs, and Buicks—furthered W-43 lessons from the ’60s with the addition of dual overhead cams. The Quad-Four was America’s first four-valve engine as well as the final powerplant wholly developed and manufactured by Oldsmobile.

That legacy also includes an entry in the speed records books. An Olds Aerotech streamliner, powered by a turbocharged Quad Four and driven by A.J. Foyt, topped 267 mph in an epic 1987 measured-mile run at the Fort Stockton Test Center in Texas, seizing the world land-speed record from Mercedes-Benz.

***

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. To get our best stories delivered right to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletters. 

The post Oldsmobile’s W-43 V-8 Engine Was a “Killer” 32-Valve Prototype appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Twin brothers James and John Kryta, 54, and of Romeo, Michigan, are professional car enthusiasts. They own over 40 collector cars, and their livelihood is derived from a popular restoration support business. Their extracurricular activity of choice, oftentimes, is to invest endless hours polishing their rides for the show circuit. Their latest concoction, for the 2024 Detroit Autorama is a prototype 32-valve Oldsmobile V-8 engine that they rebuilt with extremely rare vintage parts and dropped into a yellow 1970 4-4-2. Oldsmobile called this engine the W-43, but the Kryta brothers call it “The Killer.”

Even though they’re identical twins, according to James they do have a few differences. “Yes, we shared a womb and a room. But during our teen years, when we both became hands-on car enthusiasts, our father wisely informed us we’d never earn much of a living with grease under our fingernails. So, I obtained an aircraft powertrain mechanic’s degree at the Pittsburgh Institute of Aeronautics, and John studied architecture and engineering at the University of Detroit.

“My father’s advice was dead nuts. When I was 16, I bought my first car, a ‘71 Olds 4-4-2 W-30, for $2200. A few years later, my second car purchased after I had begun working cost more than ten times that amount.”

Following graduation, James was employed by aviation services company DynAir at various U.S. locations. “One day, while inspecting an extensively damaged aircraft wing,” he recalls, “I noticed it was packed full of fluid lines. When my boss offered me the chance to learn how to fabricate those lines, I wasted no time saying ‘Yes, sir!’”

The knowledge he subsequently gained moved James to create the restoration business Inline Tube in 1995. Brother John joined the enterprise a year later. What began in a two-car garage grew into four buildings staffed with 50 employees shipping a thousand packages per day. Inline Tube currently offers the restoration hobby’s finest brake and fuel lines, hoses, cables, fittings, fasteners, and attachment clips galore.

Much of the sparkle that Detroit Autoama attendees witness is attributable to Inline Tube’s products and the cars the Kryta brothers frequently enter. It’s not unusual to see John’s Pontiac GTO competing against James’ Oldsmobile in the hard-fought Restored class. This year, the year of The Killer, is an exception.

With John’s current project in the paint shop, it was James’ job to bring home this year’s bacon. His Olds had a humble beginning: It was parked outside for years in Indiana, the engine was gone, and it took five years to refurbish. That said, its most remarkable attribute is what now lies beneath the twin-scooped hood.

“Twenty years ago, while shopping RacingJunk.com,” John explains, “I stumbled across a listing for some prototype Oldsmobile engine equipment. While I’d never heard of the 455-cubic-inch, 32-valve W-43 V-8, I was intrigued to say the least. The asking price for this gear was $10,000; naysayers called it a boat anchor and insisted it would never run. Nonetheless, we grabbed that prize for $5000 and what we dubbed ‘The Killer V-8′ will be showcased in James’ 1970 Olds 4-4-2 coupe at this year’s Detroit Autorama.”

The plot thickens. “In the early 1970s,” John says, “shortly after the W-43 lost all hope of entering production, several Olds engineers and PR personnel flew out to California to tout their project for Petersen Publishing Company editors at Car Craft, Hot Rod, and Motor Trend magazines. At that time, this wasn’t a complete running engine but rather a hollow shell suitable for photography and a collection of internal parts highlighting the W-43’s attributes.” (Read our technical breakdown of the Oldsmobile W-43 V-8 here.)

“The trip to California was to gain publicity, after the engineering project had been terminated by GM’s upper management. Given that, the Olds folks asked the writers to chuck these engine parts in a dumpster after their stories were completed. Lucky for us, that request was ignored. These priceless W-43 components went home with someone from Petersen in 1971, only to resurface decades later.

“Cajoling the vintage parts into a running engine was no small feat. The first problem was a parts shortage. One cylinder head was missing, so we had to reverse engineer it and a few other components. Extensive machining was required. All told, 20 people got involved, including one ex-Oldsmobile engineer who requested anonymity. Scott Tiemann, the CEO of Supercar Specialties in Portland, Michigan, quite capably handled final assembly.”

So, what kind of power does this 32-valve V-8 produce? “We were prudent during testing to avoid blowing up our irreplaceable parts. Imposing a modest redline, we measured 560 hp at 6000 rpm and 540 lb-ft of torque at 3600 rpm,” James Kryta notes. “But eliminating the significant restrictions by adding multiple carbs and efficient exhaust headers would easily have improved those figures.”

To inspect the W-43 engine and James’ yellow 1970 4-4-2, we visited a clandestine detailing shop located 50 miles north of GM’s long-gone Lansing assembly plant where this Olds was built. The facility’s proud owner began the tour with an inspection of the car’s sparkling underside. At the rear, there’s an interesting final drive consisting of an aluminum W-27 center section creatively welded to steel axle housings. The driveshaft has twin paint stripes replicating marks that would have been applied by the factory during its spin-balancing operation. Like W-30 4-4-2s of the day, the transmission is a Muncie aluminum-cased four-speed stick. I was amazed at how many undercar parts left the factory without a hint of paint or rust protection, but James insisted this was standard practice back in the day.

This 4-4-2’s scooped hood combines a fiberglass outer element married to a stamped-steel liner ramming cold air to a 750-cfm Rochester Quadrajet. The broad silver-and-blue valve covers pierced by spark plugs will surely attract drooling admirers at Autorama, along with the bright red fender liners. The W-43 emissions sticker, created by James, is another fastidious touch. When asked how or from where he found a perfect vintage battery, he reported, “I made those filler plugs with my 3D printer. In addition, I attend lots of shows to buy up new-old-stock parts for our cars.”

My hour-long inspection revealed that this factory experimental Olds 4-4-2 W-43 is perfect down to the tiniest detail. I will be on hand at Detroit’s Huntington Place, formerly Cobo Hall, to applaud what I suspect will be its victory.

***

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. To get our best stories delivered right to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletters. 

The post How Detroit-Area Twin Brothers Revived a “W-43” Olds V-8 Prototype for Autorama appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Though restorers hold otherwise, immortality lies beyond the reach of ordinary automobiles. Of course, for every hard and fast rule there is an exception. Tip your hat to the recreation/revival/return of the 50-millionth car built by General Motors—this “Golden” 1955 Chevrolet Bel Air sport coupe.

Seventy years ago, GM was the world’s largest industrial enterprise. On November 23, 1954, the city of Flint, Michigan, where GM was founded, closed schools and halted traffic to host a mile-long parade called the Golden CARnival, boasting nine brass bands, 18 floats, and 72 noteworthy GM vehicles. An estimated 200,000 spectators cheered GM’s success and their own good fortune.

• First GM production car—1908 Cadillac
• 1-millionth GM car—1919 Oldsmobile
• 5-millionth GM car—1926 Pontiac
• 10-millionth GM car—1929 Buick
• 25-millionth GM car—1940 Chevrolet

The star of the CARnival was GM’s 50-millionth production car—a gold-painted 1955 Chevy Bel Air two-door hardtop. Barely an hour before the start of the parade, employees at Chevrolet Flint Assembly lowered this car’s body onto a gold-painted chassis while company president Harlow Curtice blessed the marriage. All the interior and exterior trim parts, including front and rear bumpers, were gold-plated!

Turns out that the Golden ’55 was in fact three distinct automobiles. Car number one, assembled a month in advance of the parade, was used in period publicity photos. It also starred at the five Motorama shows GM hosted in 1955 before being sold to some lucky customer.

Thirty-some years ago, that car was tracked down to a North Carolina owner who had no interest in selling, or even talking, about it. Unfortunately, this Bel Air was destroyed in a garage fire in 1996. The owner chopped the burned body into several pieces, scattering them about his property. Last summer, the charred remains, some of which were gold-plated, were purchased by Joe Whitaker of Real Deal Steel (RDS), an enterprise in Sanford, Florida that, last April, began creating the tribute vehicle shown here.

The second Golden ’55 Chevy, also built in October 1954, starred in a GM film entitled Achievement U.S.A. It hasn’t been seen since, and its whereabouts are unknown.

Car three was the ’55 Chevy assembled in November 1954 which rode atop a float in the Golden CARnival parade. Regrettably, this actual 50-millionth car has also been lost to the ages.

Immortality is not beyond the reach of the truly resourceful car enthusiast, however. Proof comes from the RDS enterprise founded in 2011 by Joe Whitaker and Randy Irwin, two of the most dedicated revivalists in collector car history. Over the past decade, they’ve sold hundreds of their products—1955–57 Chevrolets, 1967–69 and 1970–81 Camaros and Firebirds, plus various Chevy IIs and Novas—in the form of brand-new steel bodies to restorers who won’t be stopped in their pursuits.

Rather than starting with a donor Chevy built by GM, the gents at RDS began this project with spanking new electrophoretic-painted steel panels provided by their primary sponsor Golden Star Classic Auto Parts of Lewisville, Texas. Golden Star is the uncontested leader in the manufacture of fresh, top-quality sheetmetal replicating American and VW classics. Headquartered in Texas, they’re backed by a Taiwanese arsenal of CAD/CAM technology, stamping dies, and metal presses. This firm also supplied the new steel frame underlying the Golden 1955 Chevrolet Bel Air.

Paul Hsieh, who founded Golden Star and is now 58 years old, began working in a Taiwanese stamping plant as a young man before immigrating to Georgia where he spent eight years at Goodmark Industries, a leading restoration parts house. He began Golden Star in 2003. He explains how a fresh car body is manufactured from flat sheet steel:

“We start by shipping a complete vehicle to Taiwan. A plaster mold is made for each part before the original donor body is cut apart. A second mold is created after that piece is removed from the donor vehicle. Both plaster castings are digitally scanned and the two images are compared in software. Subtle human interpolations yield one final smooth, symmetrical design.

“That scan data is used to create a full-size foam model of each part. Next, we convert the foam model to a sand casting. Molten steel poured into the casting becomes a stamping die after all its surfaces are milled (using scan data) and hand-polished.

“The typical die set consisting of a male component, a female piece, and a top hat to hold the steel sheet in place for forming weighs 7000 to 8000 pounds. To achieve the desired final shape, multiple press strokes are required. The typical fender takes three to four hits requiring nine to 12 separate dies. Some of our larger presses are two to three stories tall. Excess metal is trimmed after stamping by means of a laser [that is] guided by the digital data file.

“Stretching a flat sheet into a curved, final car panel increases both strength and rigidity. Before we commence volume production, we ship prototype parts to end users to confirm perfect fits. If necessary, die adjustments are made to achieve perfection before we begin manufacturing parts for sale.

“We also supply restorers with steel frames, chrome-plated bumpers, complete glass kits, fuel tanks, door handles and latches, and heater boxes.’

Given this painstaking process and the effort required to assemble panels into a complete body, it’s easy to see how RDS charges $21,150 for a 1955 Chevy body shell fitted with doors, decklid, and dash.

The cadre of other contributors to the cause of the Golden ’55 Chevy include Shafer’s Classic Reproductions, American Autowire, Gene Smith Parts, Auto City Classic, and Ciadella Interiors.

All told, more than 4000 hours of effort and several hundred thousand dollars were invested into the project.

Snodgrass Chevy Restorations of Melbourne, Florida, handled assembly, fitting, and painting of the new body. Steve Blades of Falmouth, Kentucky, served as the project’s historian and researcher, gathering 300 period photos from GM’s Heritage Center, the Sloan Museum of Discovery in Flint, Michigan, and several private sources. He plans on documenting this 10-month restopalooza in a coffee table book.

Snodgrass personnel constructed a new chassis carrying a 265-cubic-inch (4.3 liter) V-8 engine rated at 162 (gross) horsepower, a two-speed Powerglide automatic transmission, and a 3.55:1 rear axle. Tires are 6.70×15 US Royal bias plies from Coker Tire. Instrument panel, steering column, and steering wheel parts are original GM. Interior trim is new old stock (NOS). Nearly a thousand enthusiasts followed the recreation project on Facebook.

The paint used here is a custom Axalta mix logically dubbed Tribute Gold. The finish consumed 5.5 gallons of paint costing $1200 per gallon. The list of 24-karat gold-plated parts includes interior and exterior trim, ID badges, both bumpers, the grille, wheel covers, and over 100 nuts, bolts, and screws. The plating tab alone topped $100,000!

Last December, a few weeks before the Golden body was finished, its chassis was unveiled at the Sloan Museum along with notable memorabilia and salvaged debris from the original Motorama ’55 Chevy. A grander reveal will occur at the 71st Detroit Autorama scheduled for March 1–3 this year at the Motor City’s Huntington Place convention center.

Steve Blades notes, “We believe that our Golden ’55 Chevy Bel Air Sport Coupe needs to be seen and enjoyed by the public at large on a daily basis. The ultimate goal is for it to be housed at either the GM Heritage Center in Grand Blanc, the Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn, or the Sloan Museum of Discovery in Flint.”

Yes, indeed: Homing in on this immortal ’55 Chevy would be well worth your time.

***

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. To get our best stories delivered right to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletters. 

The post Epic Revival: GM’s 50 Millionth Car Rides Again appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Welcome to Homegrown—a limited series about homebuilt cars and the ingenuity of their visionary creators. Know a car and builder that might fit the bill? Send us an email to tips@hagerty.com with the subject line HOMEGROWN. Read about more Homegrown creations here. —Ed.

Hagerty member Bill Papke of Ada, Michigan, is a master of spending his retirement years wisely: His homegrown Raazer is a creative reimagination of Elon Musk’s Cybertruck. The “Flash” project featured here is Papke’s ambitious rethink of an ’86 Pontiac Fiero he purchased on eBay, wanting to add a sports car to his fleet.

In the interests of full disclosure, Flash is a collaborative effort rather than a one-man-at-home build: while the concept and design are all Papke, the ambitious task of reskinning the Fiero was handled by MTV Concepts in Micco, Florida.

Papke explains, “My automotive passions have always focused on exotic concepts, especially those with wedge shapes and knifelike leading edges. My collection includes both a replica of the Bertone Stratos Zero and one of the rare Vector W8s built by Jerry Wiegert.

“First, I sketched front, rear, top, and side views to explore how Flash could best exploit a fresh design. Then I used 1/24th-scale Fiero models to craft the new exterior. Modeling clay helped visualize what I had in mind. Upon completion of the three-dimensional model, I created CAD [computer-aided design] files which were used with CNC [computer numerical control] tools to shape the full-scale, high-density Styrofoam plug. Molds cast over the plug were used to make the final fiberglass panels.

“I hired Mike Vetter, owner of MTV Concepts in Florida, for the hands-on effort. This firm builds TV and movie vehicles from scratch and high-quality futuristic road cars. MTV’s remarkable Extra Terrestrial Vehicles have been sold to customers in Abu Dhabi, Canada, London, Germany, and the United States. I met Mike when I purchased his Slash sports car which combines a futuristic exterior with a C6 Corvette chassis and a 600-horsepower 6.2-liter LS3 V-8.

“Vetter and crew needed only 10 months to construct the full-sized plug, body-panel molds, and new fiberglass panels. They attached the custom panels to my stripped Fiero, applied Corvette Atomic Orange paint, and reupholstered my original bucket seats. New Vors aluminum wheels are fitted with P235/45R-18 Firestone radials.

“The rebody effort was expedited by keeping the original Fiero interior, glass, roof, inner door panels, and most of the rear hatch assembly. The Fiero’s 2.8-liter V-6 and five-speed transmission remain stock. The radiator had to be mounted much lower to accommodate my knife-edge front-end configuration. The front halogen lighting elements are supported by a concealed bar. The rear LED lights are normally found on pickup truck tailgates. Vetter made the Flash nameplate, which I designed, sparkle on cue in living color.”

Beyond the $4800 spent on the donor Fiero, Papke won’t reveal what Flash cost, but he is totally satisfied with the results.

“So far I’ve only driven my creation 250 or so miles to a few shows and cars and coffee gatherings. It always prompts the same burning question:  ‘What is it?’

“I believe my Flash design with hold up long term thanks to its sound basic proportions, overall simplicity, and elegant curves. I wouldn’t change a thing on this car. In other words, I’m ready to move on to the next Homegrown project.”

***

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. To get our best stories delivered right to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletters.

The post Homegrown: This Fiero-based Wedge Is No Flash in the Pan appeared first on Hagerty Media.

In the summer of 1945, only a few months after Allied bombers stopped punishing Italy for its WWII transgressions, Enzo Ferrari summoned his trusted colleague Gioacchino Colombo to Maranello for consultations. Though postwar racing rules had not yet been announced, Ferrari was anxious to build his own cars to compete. Anticipating a 4.5-liter displacement for naturally aspirated engines and a 1.5-liter limit for supercharged powerplants, Ferrari sought the advice of one of Italy’s foremost engine designers.

Asked how he’d construct a new 1500-cc engine, Colombo mentioned ERA’s promising six-cylinder and eights under development at Alfa Romeo and Maserati before proclaiming, “In my view, you should build a 12-cylinder!”

The usually aloof Ferrari lit up like a Roman candle. Turns out the 47-year-old racing don had admired V-12s for years after hearing primo piloto Antonio Ascari rev the engine in his 1916 Packard racer and seeing WWI American military officers cruise Italy in their majestic Packard Twin Sixes. He and Colombo immediately began conceptualizing the Scuderia’s first V-12, the engine destined to become the Prancing Horse’s heart and soul.

Ferrari’s timing was perfect because Colombo had been laid off by Alfa Romeo due to Italy’s postwar economic turmoil. Though the 42-year-old lacked a formal technical education, he had served a lengthy apprenticeship designing engines, including V-12s, under Alfa Romeo’s brilliant Vittorio Jano. Colombo erected a drafting board in his Milan bedroom and in a few weeks completed sketches of both a new V-12 and the Ferrari 125 S sports-racer it would power. His guiding light was versatility in order to serve wide-ranging racing applications and eventual road use.

Packard’s 1916–23 Twin Six, the world’s first production V-12, made 88–90 horsepower from 6.9 liters. The beauty of a dozen cylinders in a V is perfect balance—freedom from the shake, rattle, and roll resulting from pistons starting and stopping at the ends of their strokes. (The same is true of an inline-six; a V-12 is simply two banks of six cylinders sharing a common crankshaft. A 60-degree angle between cylinder banks yields the even firing intervals necessary for smoothness.)

Before we delve into Colombo’s V-12 design features, it’s essential to understand the operational details within every four-stroke engine. First, there’s an intake stroke when one valve opens to admit air (and usually fuel) to a cylinder while the piston moves top to bottom. Next is compression, with both valves closed and the piston rising in the cylinder, squeezing the mixture. Near the top of the piston’s travel, electricity sent across the spark plug’s gap serves as the match to light the bonfire inside one cylinder. Rising combustion pressure within the cylinder drives the piston back down, spinning the crankshaft and driving the wheels through the transmission. Then comes exhaust, when the piston again reverses direction, forcing burned gases out an open exhaust valve and into a pipe connected to the cylinder head through an exhaust manifold. Simply described, the four-stroke cycle is suck, squeeze, bang, blow.

Given that each power stroke lasts the better part of 180 degrees, in a V-12, there are three overlapping power strokes at any given instance to run through all the cylinders in two turns of the crankshaft. As a result, output feels more like a continuous twist than discrete pulses. A V-12’s exhaust note can be whatever the designer desires, between a gentle purr and a coyote’s shriek.

V-12s do have several less sanguine design issues—added friction, heavier weight, higher cost, and their overall length. It goes without saying that when value and mpg are top priorities, carmakers steer clear of V-12s.

To minimize mass, Colombo chose aluminum over iron for the block and head castings. Italy had become an epicenter for bronze casting during the Renaissance back in the 14th century, specializing in statuary, equestrian monuments, cathedral doors, crucifixes, and even dishes.

Combining a 55.0-millimeter bore with a 52.5-millimeter stroke yielded the target 1.5-liter (1497-cc) piston displacement. Cast-iron cylinders wet by coolant were plugged securely into the bottom of the block with a shrink fit (achieved by heating the aluminum block to expand openings before inserting cold iron cylinders. Once the cylinders and block reach the same temperature, they’re securely locked together).

Bolts securing both the heads and the cylinders screwed into the block’s upper decks. Since the block’s side skirts ended at the crank centerline, the cast aluminum oil sump had ribs to radiate heat and to increase the engine’s overall stiffness. The crankshaft was machined from a single billet of alloy steel with seven main bearings and six throws spaced 60 degrees apart to provide even firing intervals. Connecting rods were forged steel.

One chain-driven overhead cam per bank opened two valves per cylinder through rocker arms. Locking screws touching the valve stems facilitated lash adjustment. (Lash is the small space in the valvetrain that allows each valve to seal tightly against its seat in the closed position.) The valves were splayed 60 degrees apart to straighten and streamline ports for maximum flow of air and fuel into each cylinder. A domed (aka hemispherical) combustion chamber topped each cylinder. Colombo screwed the spark plugs in from the intake side of the heads because the bore-center areas were blocked by the single overhead camshafts.

Three downdraft two-barrel Weber carburetors prepared ample amounts of fuel-and-air mixture. Twin Marelli magnetos driven off the tail end of each camshaft supplied the ignition energy. Initial output with a 7.5:1 compression ratio was 118 horsepower at 6800 rpm.

To provide a path to more power, Colombo gave his seminal V-12 three innovative features. The first was what’s known as an over-square bore/stroke ratio (a figure greater than one). The unusually short stroke diminished the pistons’ reciprocating motion, minimized the height of the block, and lowered the engine’s center of gravity. The relatively large bore in turn allowed larger valves (see end-view illustration), a boon to volumetric efficiency (fluid flow in and out of the cylinder head). The net result of Colombo’s over-square design was a rousing 7000 rpm available at the beginning of this V-12’s life. His second fundamental inspiration was 90-millimeter cylinder spacing to facilitate significantly larger bores and additional piston displacement with minimal changes to the overall design.

Colombo’s third special feature was the type of valve springs he incorporated. Instead of the spiral-wound coil springs that are now common practice, he used what was called a “hairpin” design (despite the fact they more closely resembled springs found in clothespins). He was inspired by air-cooled motorcycle engines, which used such a configuration for three key reasons:

The first is that the hairpin design was less susceptible to fatigue failure that, in the worst case, would destroy the engine when an out-of-control valve struck the top of a piston. Second, the hairpin design was a better means of exposing the valves to cooling air swirling over the top of the engine. Third, this design allowed shorter and lighter valve stems. Lighter valves are less susceptible to the fatigue failures common with racing cam lobes. In summary, the hairpin spring design was instrumental in helping Colombo’s V-12 withstand the rigors of racing. Two such springs were fitted to each intake and exhaust valve.

A paucity of intake ports was the most notable shortcoming in Colombo’s V-12. Since Ferrari hoped to add a Roots-type (twin interlocking lobes) supercharger, there were but three intake ports feeding six cylinders per bank. This arrangement made it more difficult to ram-tune naturally aspirated versions of the engine for competitive power at high rpm. (Ram tuning uses fluid-flow momentum to pack the maximum amount of air and fuel into each cylinder.)

With the ink barely dry on blueprints, Ferrari attacked the 1947 racing season with a two-seater dubbed 125 Spyder Corsa. The 125 code referred to the number of ccs per cylinder, spyder is Italian for roadster, and corsa is the boot country’s word for racing. Nine entries yielded two victories by Franco Cortese, two class wins by Tazio Nuvolari, one third, one fifth, and three DNFs. Adding a supercharger for its 125 Formula 1 single-seater yielded 230 horsepower and the Scuderia’s first grand prix victory. By October of ’47, Ferrari was ready to move up with a 1903-cc V-12 dubbed 159, followed by a 1995-cc 166 for the 1948 season.

The rising costs of fielding competitive cars in road races, endurance competitions, and F1 are what moved Ferrari to offer his cars to wealthy customers bent on enjoying them on the road.

In a 1984 test of the first 1947 Ferrari 166 Spyder Corsa delivered to a private owner, Car and Driver clocked 0–60 in 13.1 seconds and estimated top speed at 121 mph. Weighing less than 1500 pounds, this red roadster rode on skinny 15-inch Michelin X radial tires. Respecting the vintage Ferrari’s rarity and fragility, C/D’s test driver used only 6000 rpm, so a run to 60 in under 10 seconds is probably within the Spyder Corsa’s reach.

Bolting on a two-stage supercharger in 1949 raised output to 280 horsepower, earning Ferrari five grand prix wins. In spite of the Scuderia’s early successes, Ferrari demanded more; Colombo fell out of favor and returned to Alfa Romeo in 1951. His successors? First Aurelio Lampredi, a former aircraft-engine designer, then four years later Colombo’s mentor Vittorio Jano, who continued development of Ferrari’s first V-12 another decade.

Colombo’s masterpiece grew from its original 1498 cc to a maximum 4943 cc in its final Ferrari 412i form. The 1957 250 Testa Rossa brought conventional coil-type valve springs, spark plugs relocated to the outer side of the heads, and one intake port per cylinder. These changes yielded 300 horsepower from 3.0 liters, enough prancing horsepower to win 10 World Sportscar races, including three Le Mans 24-hour events between 1958 and 1961. Ferrari 250 GTO sports cars that followed won the FIA’s over-2-liter championship from 1962 through 1964. In 1964, a 4.0-inch stretch of the block increased bore-center spacing from 90 millimeters to 94, allowing 4.0-liter and larger displacements.

Features proved on the track rapidly trickled down to Ferrari’s road cars. Dual overhead cams, still operating but two valves per cylinder, appeared on the 1967 Ferrari 275 GTB/4. The illustrious 1968 365 GTB/4 Daytona came with dry-sump lubrication. (Keeping oil well away from a frantically spinning crankshaft eliminates what’s known as “windage,” frothing of the lubricant, which saps power output.)

In 1979, carburetors went the way of the buggy whip with the introduction of Ferrari’s 400i equipped with Bosch K-Jetronic fuel injection. This added power by diminishing the flow restriction that is imposed by carburetor venturis.

Ferrari’s 1985 catalog listed an amazing 75 60-degree naturally aspirated (no super- or turbocharger) V-12 engines designed over the previous four decades. The venerable Colombo stallion wasn’t dispatched to the glue factory until 1989, by which time Ferrari had shifted its focus to 180-degree (flat) 12s for the 365 GT4 BB (Berlinetta Boxer) and its successors. (They’re called that because the horizontal motion of the pistons resembles boxing gloves smacked together.) Even so, these new engines inherited their pistons and connecting rods from Colombo’s outgoing design.

The V-12 today

Fast forward to the March 2017 Geneva motor show. Although most makers follow new trends like a puppy locked on to a rabbit’s scent, Ferrari used this European gala to toast its 70th birthday with what it excels at building and selling: a fresh V-12 to power its new aptly named 812 Superfast sports car.

The first number in the 812 code refers to this engine’s peak power (in hundreds); the next two indicate the number of cylinders. Translating the 800 metric horsepower to imperial units yields 789 horsepower at a canvas-shredding 8500 rpm. A slightly revised version introduced in May 2021 tops 800 imperial horsepower.

What Ferrari achieved with its F140 V-12 was the most power ever packed into a production engine unaided by a turbocharger, supercharger, or electric motor. Add to that more than adequate torque: a peak 530 lb-ft at 7000 rpm. Those in the audience who favor the lower end of the tachometer will be happy to hear that a stout 425 lb-ft of twist is available at only 3500 rpm.

In keeping with longstanding Ferrari tradition, this is a Testa Rossa engine adorned with striking red valve covers and intake plenums. Naturally the bore/stroke ratio is markedly over-square, with a 94-millimeter bore collaborating with a 78-millimeter stroke to yield 6496 cc (6.5 liters). That 78-millimeter dimension ironically matches the longest stroke ever found in a Colombo V-12.

In contrast to the Colombo V-12s, the 812’s cylinder banks are spread 65 degrees apart. After Ferrari began using this angle in its 1989 Formula 1 V-12s, it trickled down to the 456 sports car in 1992. A 65-degree V-angle provides additional space for larger bores (more clearance at the bottom of each piston’s stroke), room between the cylinder banks for more voluminous intake manifolds, and a slight reduction in overall engine height. While it’s possible to maintain even firing with split-pin crank throws, Ferrari wisely avoided that potentially fragile complication. The result, with six straight crank throws, each carrying two connecting rods, is slightly syncopated firing intervals that alternate between 55 and 65 degrees of crank rotation. This subtle ticktock isn’t detectable from the driver’s seat thanks to Ferrari’s judicious powertrain isolation and intelligent acoustic measures.

Car and Driver’s 2018 test of a $465,509 Ferrari 812 Superfast reported a 3851-pound curb weight with a slight rear bias, 0–60 mph in a remarkable 2.8 seconds, and a quarter-mile clocking of 10.5 seconds at 138 mph. No one has verified the factory’s 211-mph top-speed claim, but that figure is certainly credible.

While all versions of the 812—GTS, Superfast, Competizione—cease and desist after existing orders are filled, Ferrari’s F140IA 65-degree V-12 will continue in the 2024 model year under the hood of the new five-door, four-seat Purosangue SUV.

Though Ferrari has boldly experimented with and/or produced engines with two, three, four, six, eight, and 10 cylinders, it’s most associated with V-12s thanks to its loyalty to that configuration for three-quarters of a century. There’s little doubt that 12-cylinder engines have been instrumental to Ferrari winning respect as a hypercar producer. Last year, the brand built and sold 13,221 cars worldwide, reporting 19 percent increases in both volume and revenue.

Count yourself fortunate if you’ve owned, driven, or even heard more than your share of prancing horsepower!

***

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. To get our best stories delivered right to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletters.

The post Epic Engines: How the V-12 became Ferrari’s heart and soul appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Welcome to Homegrown—a limited series about homebuilt cars and the ingenuity of their visionary creators. Know a car and builder that might fit the bill? Send us an email to tips@hagerty.com with the subject line HOMEGROWN. Read about more Homegrown creations here. —Ed.

The concoctions we cover in our Homegrown feature series are usually the products of simmering adulthood creativity, constructed by individuals with superfluous time and money on their hands. But, as the cliché goes, for every rule there is an exception: The “car” depicted here began as 14-year-old Deacon Fancher’s sketches. It subsequently took shape over five years of effort between Fancher and his grandpa, Bill Spadafora, aka Popops.

Deacon, now 19, is a sophomore at Oakland University in Auburn Hills, Michigan, enrolled in journalism and film studies. He not only dreams about constructing cars, he hopes to someday write about them. (Please don’t hold that against him.) His other fantasy is to add bodywork, lighting, and the equipment that will make his car eligible for plates and street driving.

The term that best fits Deacon’s vehicle is cyclecar, reflecting that it is a motorcycle/car tweener with open wheels. The cyclecar’s brief moment of glory occurred in the 1910s and early ‘20s before the versatile Ford Model T booted them in automotive history’s ditch.

Deacon explains, “To get my project rolling, I bolted an 8.5-horsepower Honda single-cylinder engine and CVT from a snowmobile in the back of a steel-tubing spaceframe bent and welded by Popops in his garage. Grandpa is retired from an engineering career at GM, Bosch, Dana, and BAE in the Detroit area so he brings the expertise I lack to this project.

“Our wheelbase is 86 inches, track widths are 49 inches, overall length is about 11 feet. While the original idea was seating for two, there’s not going to be room for a passenger once I add a shifter and the necessary control pedals.

“Various chassis parts including the rack-and-pinion steering gear, brakes, and wheel hubs came from a Yamaha Rhino 700 side-by-side utility vehicle. Our control arm suspension system is homemade from steel tubing. Here, grandpa used Suspension Analyzer on screen to refine the geometry. The Factory Spec spring-shock units were purchased new via Amazon.

“I admire pre-war cars so we selected Ford Model A wire wheels fitted with Universal 19-inch bias-ply tires. Popops machined the adapters necessary to bolt these wheels to our Yamaha hubs. So far, our investment is about $2800 just for parts. My car runs, drives, and draws smiles wherever we take it. I belong to Oakland U’s Golden Grizzlies Formula SAE racing team so there is ample advice concerning what to do next.

“A 95-horsepower 1100-cc four-cylinder engine and five-speed transmission from a Yamaha Maxim XJ motorcycle are already in hand to add speed. My car’s curb weight is below 1000 pounds so excellent acceleration and decent cornering are assured.

“We’re just starting to think about bodywork. Naturally my SAE team members suggest using molded carbon-fiber panels which would require lots of learning on my part. More realistic options are fiberglass, aluminum, and canvas.

“The current John Deere bucket seat will definitely be replaced by something with a lower hip position to drop the top of my head well below the current 4-foot-tall upper frame loop.

“I feel very lucky on two counts—my family totally supports this fantasy and working elbow-to-elbow with Popops has been amazing fun. Every break I get from school gives us the chance to advance our project another step.”

While it hasn’t been Hagerty’s habit to cover Homegrown builds in progress, with installment reports, that’s precisely what we’re up to here. We’re not only anxious to see Deacon’s car finished, we’re hoping to be near the head of the line for a test drive.

***

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. To get our best stories delivered right to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletters. 

The post Homegrown: Teenager’s snowmobile-powered cyclecar appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Is your Ford Model A crying out for emergency underhood attention? Thanks to a Campbell, California, entrepreneur, you can now update your car’s powerplant with 21st-century design features created using the latest engineering and manufacturing methods.

Enter Terry Burtz, a retired Lockheed mechanical design engineer and 60-year Model A enthusiast. “I believe Ford Model As are the backbone of the antique car hobby—a pastime I definitely want to endure,” he says. After rebuilding several Model A engines, Burtz identified their many weaknesses, including the materials they were originally made of. By inspecting engines that had been modified for oval track competition and Bonneville speed record attempts—plus a few used to power aircraft, where reliability means the difference between life and death—Burtz was able to develop major design improvements.

“Over the years I discovered that only one in twelve Model A engine cores are suitable for rebuild because of rust, water jacket cracks, and/or poor machining by past rebuilders.”

Burtz currently owns half a dozen Model As, and he takes great pride in his $4000 upgrade kit, which consists of a fully machined block, new connecting rods, and a crankshaft incorporating features Henry Ford never dreamed of.

Using computer-based design imaging called Solid Modeling, Finite Element Analysis to measure stress and strain, 3D printing to make core patterns, and CNC machining methods, Burtz created a replacement cylinder block and various internal parts incorporating this wish list of modern features:

• 5 main-bearing supports instead of the original 3
• Larger, 2-inch-diameter crank and rod bearings
• 5 bearing journals to support the camshaft
• Shorter-length bearings to facilitate a stiffer crank configuration
• Commonly available bearing inserts to replace the antiquated poured Babbitt bearings
• Replaceable cam bearings
• A fully pressurized lubrication system with drilled oil galleries feeding 17 main, rod, cam, and thrust bearings—and the ability to add a full-flow oil filter
• 8 crankshaft counterweights to provide primary balance
• A new radial-lip rear main seal
• Thicker block webbing and sidewalls for improved rigidity
• Larger streamlined intake ports for better breathing
• Steel exhaust valve seats to increase longevity

Burtz’s simulations proved his design tough enough to provide 150 hp at 5000 for hours on end. In a 2020 road test, a 5-window Model A powered by the new engine ascended 1700 feet of elevation in just over 7 minutes on a five-mile Colorado mountain run.

In his efforts to improve the A’s engine, Burtz was careful to replicate Ford’s original factory appearance with its exterior. “Having judged at several Model A national conventions and other events,” he says, “I learned that no owner wants an engine or component part at odds with original appearances.” Furthermore, this new gray iron block is machined with all the interfaces and dimensions needed to bolt on original factory components.

Premium materials, including a modern alloy for the cylinder block, forged connecting rods, and a nodular iron crankshaft and camshaft, combined with induction hardening, help assure high-mileage longevity in tough applications such as trailer towing and mountain climbing. “Model A owners want enough power to accelerate well on freeway entrance ramps and sufficient cruising speed to avoid impeding traffic,” Burtz says

“Another notable discovery of mine was that a new Model A engine cannot be affordably made in the USA. I learned the hard way that West Coast foundries are not up to the complex block casting process. Like several OE brands selling vehicles in the U.S., we turned to China for this engine project.”

Burtz’s strategic partner is John Lampl of Leesburg, Virginia, who brings over 30 years of Asia-based manufacturing and product development to this project. Burtz and Lampl shook hands in 2019 to begin collaborations. Lampl had already successfully created a remake of the four-cylinder engine built by Willys and Ford for WWII and postwar Jeep use. Using that experience and the same Asian manufacturing operations greatly accelerated the fruition of the new Model A engine project.

The new parts are being produced in several factories that combine an entrepreneurial spirit with modern manufacturing methods. To date, more than 460 “New Engine” kits from several production runs have been delivered.

In addition to the $4000 block, crank, and connecting rod package, Burtz offers new 30-pound flywheels for $375, cylinder heads with a 6.5:1 compression ratio for $400, and replacement camshafts for $400. All parts are covered by a 1-year limited warranty, so long as they’re not used in motorsport or aircraft applications.

“Our combination of quality, reliability, price, and factory appearance means that we have no direct competitors,” Burtz says. If you’re looking to keep your Model A humming sweetly, now you know where to look.

***

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. To get our best stories delivered right to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletters.

The post Reinventing the Ford Model A four-cylinder appeared first on Hagerty Media.

With eight generations to choose from, you’ve got to be a killjoy not to love one Corvette or the other. What the early roadsters lack in speed they make up with classic charm. The sold-out C8s are America’s feasible Ferraris. The six tweener generations broom away workaday misery in the first mile of any weekend excursion.

But what if you could mix and match your favorite Corvette design features without consuming more than a single slice of precious garage space? That’s precisely what Russ Weid of Chelsea, Michigan, has achieved with his 2013 C6 Corvette dressed as a Mid Year (1963–67). Weid’s hinged headlamps, beefy hood, and flared front fenders match the 1967 Corvette’s nosepiece. The tapered roof and split-window backlight pay homage to the ’63 factory Corvette coupe.

Weid bought his Corvette nearly new in Dallas a decade ago with a base 6.2-liter 430-hp V-8 and six-speed manual transmission. Karl Kustom (KK) over Tuxedo Black paint. Their fastidiously made skins are hand-laminated fiberglass bonded with vinyl-ester resin. KK also fitted new custom bumpers, aluminum grille bars, and door handles to Weid’s Corvette. Known as a “split build” because two model-year designs are replicated, the body makeover cost Weid $95,000. Only 14 of the 64 Corvettes converted by KK embodied this split-year configuration.

To add energy under the hood, Weid added a low-pressure Edelbrock E-Force supercharger. He estimates that upgrade yields about 550 horsepower. A new Billy Boat cat-back exhaust system includes two cross-flow mufflers and a flamboyant quartet of pipe tips. Weid’s wife Diane helped EVOD Industries design the unique custom forged-aluminum wheels wearing P275/35ZR-18 front and P325/30ZR-19 rear red-line radials.

The cost of these mods added to the $50,000 core charge yields a bottom line crowding $170,000. The retired Chrysler test driver and mechanic is convinced he made a shrewd investment. The stock suspension provides a nicely controlled ride and the engine’s thunder never overwhelms conversation. Weid confirms, “Even though I’ve owned my Corvette for a decade, it’s still a thoroughly enjoyable treat. Every spring that I remove it from its winter storage bubble, I feel like a giddy 16-year-old!”

***

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. To get our best stories delivered right to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletters.

The post Mixed Metaphor: Russ Weid’s Corvette blends the breed’s best attributes appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Welcome to Homegrown—a limited series about homebuilt cars and the ingenuity of their visionary creators. Know a car and builder that might fit the bill? Send us an email to tips@hagerty.com with the subject line HOMEGROWN. Read about more Homegrown creations here. —Ed.

George A. Carter III, 78, a Hagerty member residing in Athens, Texas, has enjoyed a fruitful life constructing his playthings from scratch. This started at age 11 with a hydroplane he built from Popular Mechanics plans. Carter obtained his first car at age 14, then won a Fisher Body Craftsman’s Guild award in high school.

This Homegrown genius has four significant inventions to this credit: the first commercial laser tag (Photon), a two-seat Baja racer configured for closed-track use, the first 50-mph ATV, and an Optically Paired Tactical Engagement Simulation System (OPTESS) intended for military use.

Regarding the Prototype’s design, Carter explains, “I was seeking the look and feel of a legitimate Le Mans prototype racer. One of my starting points was a die-cast model of BMW’s V12 LMR. I was also inspired by the Panoz LMP-1’s distinctive front-engined layout.

“To expedite the build, in 2010 I selected a 2002 Corvette Z06 as my donor car. Stripping away the factory bodywork, roof, doors, glass, bumpers, and interior trim dropped curb weight to 2620 pounds, a quarter-ton below that of the Z06.

“I kept the 5.7-liter LS6 V-8, boosting output from 405 to an estimated 445 horsepower with long-tube headers, aftermarket catalysts, a cold-air intake, and tuning revisions. Sliding the engine rearward eight inches within the stock 104.5-inch wheelbase improved weight distribution. This was achieved by shortening the long torque tube between the engine and the rear transaxle. I kept the six-speed gearbox, disc brakes, suspension hardware, and steering equipment with minimal changes. Except for some TIG welding provided by a friend, I did most of the work either in my garage at home or in a bay I rented at a local jet-ski repair shop.”

Simple math yields less than six pounds per horsepower. Add in the Prototype’s pointy nose, low center of gravity, rear weight bias, lack of a windshield, and functional rear wing, and you’ve got performance that is definitely locked and loaded in the motorsports category.

While the forged-aluminum Corvette suspension control arms were retained, Carter increased wheel diameters an inch by fitting CCW forged-aluminum rims made by Weld Racing. The Nitto NT05 295/35ZR-18 front and 335/30ZR-19 rear radials fill the wheel openings quite nicely. Overall body width is three inches greater than the donor Corvette. Coilover dampers from Texas-based LG Motorsports supplanted factory springs and shocks.

“A significant issue with my long front overhang was the likelihood of suffering driveway damage,” Carter adds. “To avoid that, I fit a 4-inch-diameter air bag between each front lower control arm and the frame. I fill a carbon-fiber air tank to 4500 psi, then inflate the air bags by remote control when I need to lift the nose. The tank is large enough that I can pressurize it at home for occasional use, thereby avoiding the weight and bulk of an onboard compressor.

“Keeping the complete original steering column expedited that area of the interior’s construction, though I did swap out the Corvette steering wheel. After adding square steel tubing to reinforce the factory chassis laterally, I realized that starting from scratch with an all new space frame would probably have saved me time. On the other hand, keeping the original instrument cluster and electronic controls for the anti-lock brakes and traction control was definitely a wise move. I also kept the factory 18-gallon fuel tank, though every last connection to it has been altered.”

Carter reports that constructing his racy bodywork consumed the better part of three years. Given the fact that computer-aided design technology was changing almost daily in 2010, he chose hand-drawing body sections on paper over the on-screen methodology. Although the step-in cockpit entry is certainly easier than creating hinged doors, vast amounts of urethane foam and some 50 gallons of Bondo were consumed in mold construction for the fiberglass and Kevlar body panels reinforced with vinyl-ester resin.

“To keep my nine major and several additional small body panels true with the world,” Carter says, “I used thin Masonite templates to define the surfaces. They were positioned laterally adjacent to the centerline and spaced at six-inch intervals the full length of the body. After one side was perfected with Bondo, flipping over each template made sure the opposite surface was a symmetrical duplicate.”

Carter’s gorgeous headlamps were pirated from an Infiniti G35 while the taillamps originally belonged to a Toyota Celica.

Following a 2013 paint job, Carter and a friend with racing experience transported the Prototype to a nearby road course for shakedown runs. His initial observations: “My car feels like a giant go-kart given the low seating and open cockpit. The handling and ride resemble a Corvette except for the fact there’s absolutely no body roll. The exhaust is unruly during full throttle use and while downshifting but it quiets down nicely during cruising.”

Asked if there were any hassles obtaining license plates for road use, Carter replied, “None at all.  The state of Texas thinks my Prototype is a 2002 Corvette!” That strategy has worked perfectly over the 8000 road miles Carter has enjoyed driving his car during the past decade.

“In traffic, I’m surrounded by rolling cell-phone photographers. Once, a crosswalk cop stopped me until pedestrian traffic cleared, then ordered me to ‘get on it.’ Middle-aged ladies waiting for their buses give me thumbs-up salutes. Twenty-something kids in Ford Mustangs are always game for a race (which I decline). The most infuriating question I receive is ‘did you build your car from a kit?’ My admiring family members appreciate the fact that this Prototype is much more practical than some of my other concoctions.”

What’s next on Carter’s agenda? In celebration of his very first automotive project, he’s purchased a 1953 Studebaker coupe to be fortified with a 6.2-liter GM LT1 V-8. In this Texas garage, long afternoon naps are never part of the daily game plan.

***

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. To get our best stories delivered right to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletters. 

The post Homegrown: Carter Prototype, the first Le Mans endurance racer qualified for Texas road use appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Welcome to Homegrown—a new limited series about homebuilt cars and the ingenuity of their visionary creators. Know a car and builder that might fit the bill? Send us an email at tips@hagerty.com with the subject line HOMEGROWN. Read about more Homegrown creations here. —Ed.

Bill Papke, 76, is a retired architect residing in Ada, Michigan. Explaining what moved him to build a car at home, he notes, “I’ve always been fascinated by concept cars, especially wedge-shaped designs. I own a replica of the 1970 Bertone Stratos Zero and also a 1990 Vector W8, both of which excel in this design genre. When Elon Musk presented his Cybertruck, I realized that I could build my own wedge car defined by four flat planes. My goal was to make it look like it had been chiseled out of a solid chunk of aluminum.”

What lies beneath Papke’s Raazer is a Honda Beat, the last car design to be approved by Soichiro Honda, Japan’s Henry Ford.

Honda began by recycling small engines in a wooden shack located in Hamamatsu. In 1948, when war-torn Japan craved transportation of any kind, Honda started selling motorized bicycles. Barely a decade later, the first Honda dealership opened in America. Soon thereafter, Honda motorcycles outsold Triumphs in England and Harley-Davidsons in the states. Today, the globe’s grandest engine producer powers everything that moves, from lawn mowers to jet aircraft.

The Honda Beat was a mid-engine two-seater originally designed by Pininfarina for urban use. Known as kei cars, these machines were powered by engines whose displacements were limited to 660cc and whose output was capped at 63 horsepower. Two years ago, Papke found just the 1991 Beat he needed for sale on Bring a Trailer. He explains: “The Beat I purchased was in excellent shape with only 42,000 kilometers on its odometer. I chose that particular car because of its short wheelbase, seating locations, and convertible body style.”

The design process began with sketches, which were followed by a clay model. Papke adds, “Later I built several 1/24th scale models from my CAD drawings to match the dimensions of the Beat’s unibody chassis.

“The frame supporting my body panels is made of 1/8th-inch wall thickness aluminum extrusions cut to length on a compound miter saw. I hired a mobile welder to assemble those pieces. Another vendor used my CAD files to cut my body panels out of quarter-inch aluminum sheets with a waterjet. The flush-mounted frameless windows are 3/16-inch laminated automotive glass. The bodywork is fastened to the aluminum frame with epoxy and wrapped with titanium-colored vinyl sheeting. In addition to the $12,000 Honda Beat’s cost, I spent roughly $13,000 on materials.”

“The entire construction process took only a year. While Raazer has license plates for legal street use, I drive it only to car shows and exhibits. I’ve entered it in the sculpture category of ArtPrize, a competitive event that will occur this September in Grand Rapids, Michigan. The total prize money at stake in that event is $400,000.”

Asked what project will follow this car, which resembles one of the Great Pyramids of Giza, Papke replies: “Another wedge, of course!  This time it will be an even simpler design with just three flat planes. Fewer than that is impossible. As your article’s title predicts, my next car will be called ‘Edge’.”

***

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. To get our best stories delivered right to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletters.

The post Homegrown: The Raazer’s edge appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Welcome to Homegrown—a new limited series about homebuilt cars and the ingenuity of their visionary creators. Know a car and builder that might fit the bill? Send us an email at tips@hagerty.com with the subject line HOMEGROWN. Read about more Homegrown creations here. —Ed.

The beauty of building your own ride from scratch is that you can indulge your wildest automotive fantasy. Ric Murphy, 77, of Mesa, Arizona, designed and built what he called the Tryon Viper in the 1980s and ’90s, shortly after the unforgettable Battlestar Galactica TV series aired. Murphy sold five Vipers total, in both finished and kit form, with prices starting at $3200. Later, one of his customers sold a finished Viper for $37,000!

Murphy’s current business, Precision Model Distributors, constructs radio-controlled scale models of semi-tractor trucks and earth-moving equipment whose prices range from $1000 to $10,000.

Murphy, of course, also has a Tryon Viper of his own. Though it is licensed and insured as a motorcycle, Murphy built it to be safer, more efficient, and more weather-resistant than any two-wheeler: “A 1/8-inch wall thickness rectangular steel tubing framework encircles the driver and a passenger with substantial protection aligned with a car’s bumper height. Highly aerodynamic bodywork pierces the air with only 1/10th the drag [coefficient] of a motorcycle and rider. A top speed of over 100 mph along with 40+ mpg are well within the Viper’s scope.

“Of course, no motorcycle provides the restraint of seat belts or any significant comfort in inclement weather!

“Key dimensions are a 110-inch wheelbase, a 43-inch overall height, and a maximum width of 76 inches. The rear luggage compartment provides 8 cubic feet of space. A pair of tanks located behind the rear wheels carry 10 gallons of gasoline. The color-impregnated fiberglass bodywork is lined with Core Mat to retain its shape. Interior bulkheads are laminated while the outer shell is still in the mold for maximum strength. To eliminate assembly and alignment issues and to provide maximum strength, the completed body shell is bonded to the steel perimeter frame. Finished weight ranges from 1200 to 1800 pounds.

“The recommended powertrain for a Tryon Viper is a 1969-or-newer Volkswagen 1600 flat-four air-cooled engine with your choice of manual or automatic transmission. There’s sufficient space in the back to bolt in a turbocharged rotary engine from a Mazda RX-7 with up to 250 horsepower but that alternative would require a liquid cooling system.

“The rear suspension is torsion-bar trailing arm equipment from a VW Beetle or Type 3 Squareback. The front end is a single leading arm with motorcycle-type dual coil-over dampers guided by a VW Type 1 steering gear and column. An 8.00-18 trailer tire with high-speed capability is fitted in front while there are 205/70R-14 radials at the rear.”

On-center seating accurately mimics that of an aircraft. According to Murphy, “There’s ample room inside for two large occupants with the driver supported by a fiberglass dune-buggy seat and a tandem passenger in a custom-made seat with knees spread for clearance. The windshield and side glass are made of smoke-tinted acrylic plastic.

“For entry and egress, the entire hinged canopy can be raised at the touch of a dash button or remotely thanks to a 1957 Buick’s convertible top hydro-electric lift cylinder. The instrument panel can be outfitted with standard engine-oil temperature, fuel level, and speedometer gauges along with artificial horizon, vertical compass, and bank-angle indicators for aviation enthusiasts.

“Tryon Vipers have experienced service throughout the galaxy and have proven suitable for combat or merely hopping between star systems. They also make excellent ‘Ground Cruising Vehicles’ except for this concern: They always grab more than their share of attention in traffic including that of law enforcement officials.

“I enjoy informing the curious that neutronic, anti-matter, and quantum propulsion systems are all available in this machine. It cruises at Warp Factor 1 and attacks at Warp Factor 3. And that Tryon Vipers have proven totally effective intercepting Klingon cruisers.”

***

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. To get our best stories delivered right to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletters.

The post Homegrown: Larson’s <em> Battlestar Galactica</em> inspired this ’70s three-wheeler appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Welcome to Homegrown—a new limited series about homebuilt cars and the ingenuity of their visionary creators. Know a car and builder that might fit the bill? Send us an email at tips@hagerty.com with the subject line HOMEGROWN. Read about more Homegrown creations here. —Ed.

Like every car enthusiast, Troy Jensen, of Caldwell, Idaho, harbors fantasies of a Shelby Cobra coiled in his parking spot. What distinguishes this 54-year-old mechanical engineer from most dreamers, however, is that he successfully converted 14 years of spare time into the running, driving homegrown snake you see here. (Use your imagination to see what this sports car will look like once its fiberglass skin is finally finished.)

“From the start,” Jensen explained, “it was clear that purchasing an actual Cobra or even a Factory Five kit was beyond my means. The exhilarating growl of a big-block Ford V-8 was also out of reach. The good news is that my CAD [computer-aided design] skills allowed me to follow cost-conscious alternative paths to my goal line.

“To approach the performance of the third-generation Mazda RX-7 I’ve owned for years, I decided that simply scaling down a real Cobra made the most sense. When a 3/4th-scale design failed to accommodate my 5-foot, 11-inch build, I upped the ante to 8/10th-scale. That approach yielded a tidy 72-inch wheelbase, a length barely over 10 feet, and a 55-inch maximum width. At this juncture, my car is successful in autocross events without a hint of bodywork. Given the fact this is a lifetime project that may never reach what naysayers consider ‘finished’ status, I’m happy to enjoy my pet’s current acceleration, braking, and agility prowess.

“When a friend challenged the ‘go-kart’ descriptor I used to explain this car, I coined the more evocative ‘Rattlesnake’ name. I’m happy to add that friends and family members have supported this fantasy from its start.”

We asked Jensen to describe how he downsized a Ford V-8 to suit his 8/10th-scale predator. He responded: “The syncopated thump of a Harley-Davidson V-twin has always been music in my ears. Then, out of the blue, my close friend Jason’s Buell Cyclone, powered by an air-cooled 91-horsepower, 1203cc V-twin, was wiped out by an errant Saturn. Fortunately, he walked away from the accident with minimal injuries; after the dust settled, he bestowed his bike engine to my cause.”

That begged the question: Is this Rattlesnake a four-wheeled motorcycle? “That’s actually not a bad way to describe it,” Jensen said. “I built the spaceframe out of light, stiff 4130 chromoly tubing. Nearly all the steering, suspension, brake, and half-shaft parts are from a first-generation [NA] Mazda Miata. There’s an unholy mix of other components from Legends-series dirt-track race cars and from snowmobiles, as well as several 3D-printed parts. You wouldn’t be wrong calling my Rattlesnake a junkyard dog.

“One major challenge was adapting the Buell’s integral five-speed, no-reverse transmission. To accommodate my two-seat cockpit, I ran the Buell’s right-side power output back to the car’s centerline via chain into a transfer case providing a reverse gear. A second chain runs from that box to a Miata differential reconfigured for chain drive. Miata half shafts are shortened to provide a 44-inch rear track dimension versus 43 inches up front.

“Shopping for Cobra-esque wheels at Tire Rack, the ones I preferred were of course the most expensive. They’re 7-inch-wide, 12-spoke Enkei RPF1s fitted with Toyo R888R racing radials sized 185/60R14 in front and 225/50R14 at the rear. I found a nice tight pair of bucket seats in the Speedway Motors catalog. A friend donated a Bugeye Sprite’s windshield that I hope to use after it’s been narrowed to fit my cowl.”

One Rattlesnake oddity is what appears to be no fewer than four header pipes collected into one large exhaust pipe running down each side of the car. “I was going for the true Cobra flavor here, even though each side pipe is fed by only one cylinder,” Jensen said. “The other three pipes merging into each collector are capped off. It turns out that this arrangement causes internal reverberation, magnifying the rumble, especially at idle.”

Jensen plans to continue his scaled-down Cobra theme in the bodywork. “I have begun making the smaller inner panels out of 3D-printed parts,” he said. “The outer shell will consist of four molded-fiberglass pieces: a hinged nose section with a forward opening for engine-cooling air, a panel running down each side, and a fixed trunk compartment cover. To avoid the complexity and weight of hinged doors, the driver and passenger will simply step aboard over the side panels. While my current fuel tank holds only two gallons, I intend to install a larger capacity tank in the trunk upon completion of the fiberglass panels.”

Like other home builders, Jensen has avoided keeping detailed estimates of the time and money he’s invested. “I’d guess my parts outlay is around $7000 thus far,” he revealed. “For every hour spent actually cutting, welding, and fabricating, I probably spent 10 hours on the computer designing that aspect of the car. Hands-on construction consumed roughly 2000 hours spread over 14 years. And while I haven’t yet rolled Rattlesnake across any scales, I’d estimate it weighs only 800 pounds, without a driver, which is why its maneuverability is so exhilarating.”

Adding plates to legalize Rattlesnake for road use is another thought-provoking concern. “Thus far I’ve fine-tuned my car during quick jaunts around the neighborhood, using a trailer to attend autocross events,” he said. “I have fond hopes of visiting a road course, drag strip, and possibly the Bonneville Salt Flats to document performance.

“While there are off-road and utility-vehicle categories available for obtaining Idaho license plates once I’ve passed a safety inspection, long trips on major highways are not part of my game plan. The reason is because of the ugly squishing sounds that would result from any confrontation between my ultralight roadster and some hulking semi-tractor trailer rig.”

***

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. To get our best stories delivered right to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletters.

The post Homegrown: Scaled-down Cobra has both bark and bite appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Welcome to Homegrown—a new limited series about homebuilt cars and the ingenuity of their visionary creators. Know a car and builder that might fit the bill? Send us an email at tips@hagerty.com with the subject line HOMEGROWN. Read about more Homegrown creations here. —Ed.

Retirement usually means moving to some southern clime and ceremoniously pitching the alarm clock out the window. Gene Dickirson, 80, who resides in Plymouth, Michigan, only a few miles north of Hagerty’s editorial offices, turned a cold shoulder to those traditions in order to indulge his childhood fantasy—constructing a sports car from scratch.

This ambitious endeavor began in 2000 following Dickirson’s 36-year engineering career at Ford. And instead of consuming decades, his effort produced a running car in less than six years. That’s because step one was to create a miniature Ford Motor Company—minus the bureaucracy—comprised of five retirees, four colleagues still holding down day jobs, and one patient, understanding wife. “Barbara’s most notable contribution,” Dickirson notes, “was the project’s name: Gene Dickirson Team Speedster.

“Before the hands-on work started, we debated ideas during lunch-hour and evening meetings, voting on hundreds of details to achieve a consensus as to what the final design should be. My three-car garage served nicely as our base of operations. We agreed from the beginning that when our creation was finally sold, every participant would share in any profit realized.

“We selected a two-seat roadster body style to achieve an enjoyable summertime ride while avoiding the complexity of top construction. Following standard industry practice, we wrote down key product features and defined our hard points. Ford designers Larry Ronzi and Craig Sandvig sculpted our 1/8-scale clay model. Visteon engineer Keith Rogalski used non-contact scanning to digitize the dimensions before Larry Conger converted those figures to full scale using ICEM Surf industrial design software. A full-size body we made out of foam also came in quite handy.

“Dave Maran fabricated wood models and constructed our welding fixtures. Throughout this endeavor, Chuck Carlson ably served as assistant chief engineer. Once we had finalized door, hood, and deck cutlines, we transmitted our CAD data to Method Industries in Palmetto, Florida, where first molds and then body panels were made using fiberglass and Kevlar doused with vinyl-ester resin.

“Upon receipt of the exterior panels, we designed and developed door, hood, and deck hinges and latching hardware. Other projects included designing the dash, steering wheel, door trim, and an aluminum grille. Visteon engineer James Wilber guided the wiring, A/C register design, and instrumentation effort. Musa Azzouz made sure the occupant-restraint anchors had sufficient strength. Cerullo Performance in California stitched leather upholstery onto our sport seats. The leather-wrapped Lecarra steering wheel came from Lokar.

“A totaled 1994 Corvette served nicely as our organ donor. This $5682 wreck rolled into my garage in running condition but stripped of most of its body and interior parts. The 300-horse Chevy V-8 and Hydramatic 4L60E four-speed automatic ran well, requiring little more than a thorough cleaning before returning to the road.

“Instead of using the Corvette’s twisted frame, we designed and constructed our own perimeter chassis out of 1/8-inch-wall rectangular tubing. Although we farmed out the steel cutting and welding to nearby fab shops, a dozen visits were required to supervise that work. We paid a local Chevy dealer to check the final dimensions to ensure they met factory tolerances.

“Our 96.2-inch wheelbase is shared with the Corvette, along with key body-to-chassis mounting points and suspension hardware. While our Speedster is more than a foot shorter than the Corvette, it’s 3.6 inches wider. Curb weight is more than a hundred pounds lighter. By angling the windshield only 19 degrees up from horizontal, our stance is more than four inches lower than the Corvette’s. Our cut-down 2001 Jeep Cherokee windshield is supported by one-inch steel tubing running about halfway up its sides, while the upper periphery is finished with epoxy resin.

“We made our own 16-gallon fuel tank out of welded sheet aluminum. It sits just behind a luggage compartment accessible by lifting the hinged tail section. Our 18-inch Fikse aluminum wheels wear Michelin Pilot Sport performance radials.”

The team’s final tally listed approximately 2000 components, some 13,000 hours of effort, and $66,364 spent on parts and outside services. The first drive around the block occurred in 2005. “That was a thrill I’ll never forget,” Dickirson recalls. “Our car ran straight and true at highway speeds and felt as agile as any Corvette on winding roads.” Using the donor car’s VIN expedited the licensing process.

While beauty is in the eye of the beholder, the GDT Speedster has earned its share of appreciation. Car and Driver blessed this effort with an Editor’s Choice trophy at the 2006 Rolling Sculpture gathering held in Ann Arbor.

Less than 1000 miles were logged before the GDT Speedster was dispatched to auction, the game plan from the beginning. Hopes were high that a buyer willing to spend $200,000 might be found. While that fantasy wasn’t realized, the late Texas attorney John O’Quinn did add the GDT Speedster to his enormous collection in early 2007 for a gavel price of $60,000.

Dickirson believes the GDT Speedster is now in the hands of an Arkoma, Oklahoma, owner. Without further ado, he and his team promptly began designing another homebuilt two-seater, this time a coupe. Watch this space to see how that effort turns out.

***

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. To get our best stories delivered right to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletters.

The post Homegrown: The GDT Speedster is the ultimate retirement special appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Welcome to Homegrown—a new, limited series about homebuilt cars and their ingenious creators. Know a car and builder that might fit the bill? Email tips@hagerty.com with the subject line HOMEGROWN. Read more Homegrown stories here. —Ed.

***

Before the automotive world earnestly adopted battery-electric drivetrains, amateur and professional engineers competed in recurring mile-per-gallon contests to advance the fuel-economy cause. In the 1980s, Craig Henderson, of Bellingham, Washington, teamed with three fellow car nuts to construct a car they called Avion. The 100-plus-mpg achieved by their homebuilt special on a Canada-to-Mexico border run merited a Guinness World Records entry. Just as important, Avion’s fuel efficiency may never be topped.

Henderson, now 65 and a retiree, explains: “The initial hope was selling mid-engined kit cars built around Volkswagen Rabbit mechanical bits. My friends Bill Green, Russ Moye, and Larry Graft started the project while I was working at Honeywell. Bored with my job, I quit to build the body plug needed to mold the composite body parts. Luckily, I was experienced in constructing prototypes to be tested and refined for sale to consumers.

“The late Dr. Michael Seal, a professor at Western Washington University, where I earned my degree in industrial technology, provided not only advice and encouragement, but also access to the school’s well-equipped shop. I ended up doing a majority of the work on Avion and funding the cost of most of its parts.

“To save weight, we selected aluminum for the monocoque. Steel subframes supporting the suspension, steering equipment, and powertrain enhance crash resistance. Bodywork consisting of fiberglass, carbon-fiber, and Kevlar is riveted and bonded to stiffen the assembly. Our goal was a 1500-pound curb weight, which we beat by 50 pounds. Another goal was ultra-low drag, which we achieved by designing a super-smooth exterior with minimal frontal area.

“I’d estimate the drag coefficient at 0.26. Only five or so horsepower are required to cruise our two-seat coupe at 60 mph.

“Inside, we fit Porsche 914 seats reupholstered in leather. While the roofline is low, there’s room enough for my six-foot-ten brother-in-law. Our dash panel is rosewood. The windshield came from a Toyota Celica, while the side and rear windows are hand-formed acrylic plastic. To obtain license plates, we successfully registered our prototype as a 1967 homebuilt based on [the] VW content.

“Tall tires help minimize the rpm needed on the highway. After Goodyear heard about Avion’s record-breaking efficiency, they provided $10,000 in sponsorship to cover expenses, along with a set of their ultra-low-rolling-resistance CS Fuel Max radials.”

Powered by a diesel engine and manual transmission from that Rabbit, Avon achieved a remarkable 103.7 mpg in 1986 on a two-way, border-to-border run. Switching to a three-cylinder, 800-cc diesel from a Smart ForTwo for a one-way 2010 run upped the ante to 119.1 mpg.

A volumetric fuel meter and GPS equipment ensure fuel-economy measurements are dead accurate. Avion is so efficient, Henderson says, that no refueling is necessary to make the Canada-Mexico trip.

What’s next? “With hopes of winning the $5 million Automotive XPRIZE,” Henderson says, “I began construction of a second Avion. Because that contest was not only poorly run but fraudulent, car two is currently stored. I may convert it to electric propulsion since huge batteries aren’t necessary in an ultra-light, low-drag car. Another possibility is tuning Avion two to run on renewable diesel fuel.” Fuel, in other words, made from natural fats, vegetable oils, and grease, instead of fossil fuels.

“Recently, the director of San Diego’s Air & Space Museum was highly impressed by my photos and description of the Avion. His thumbnail assessment is that [the car is] aircraft technology applied to road use. Thanks to his encouragement, I may loan Avion for display at the museum, so it can be enjoyed by the public at large.”

***

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. To get our best stories delivered right to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletters.

The post Homegrown: The homebuilt 1980s hot rod with 119 mpg appeared first on Hagerty Media.

This story originally ran on this site in November of 2019. It’s reproduced here, with minimal changes, as a riff on the same theme as this 2023 story examining the origins of the GMC name. That piece proved popular, telling us that you have an appetite for accuracy. Cheers to that! — Ed.

Considering how frequently I cringed during my decades as a technical editor at car magazines, it’s a wonder I didn’t develop a nervous tic. There’s a lot of misinformation and nonsense out there among non-experts who parrot certain phrases or terms, without really understanding what they mean. Here are my favorite cringe-worthy gaffes.

All-aluminum engines

I don’t believe any engine manufacturer has made a crankshaft out of aluminum. Same goes for piston rings, exhaust valves, and the fasteners tying everything together. I suspect this expression originated in England as lazy shorthand to describe an engine with an aluminum block and head(s). 

Steel brakes

Brake rotors are made of cast iron or, in some cases, carbon-ceramic material which begins as a mix of carbon fibers bound with special resin. Cooking that blend for an extended period in a vacuum yields a ceramic material that’s excellent for stopping race cars and supercars. For more affordable cars, grey iron provides the best heat transfer while ductile iron’s higher strength is preferred for vented rotors. Motorcycles are a special case where stainless steel discs sacrifice some performance while avoiding unsightly rust caused by splashing through puddles.

Anti-sway or stabilizer bar

This transverse steel rod linked to your suspension system twists to resist body roll in turns. That’s why it’s most accurately called an anti-roll bar. Worried that you’d fret over your car tipping over, manufacturers coined meaningless alternative terms.

“Perfect” or “ideal” weight distribution

BMW and others would have you believe that 50:50 front-rear is the correct answer. Generally speaking, it’s not. Front-wheel-drive cars perform better with more than 50 percent of their weight carried by the front wheels and vice-versa for rear-wheel-drive rides. Cars with four-wheel drive have a more agile steering response with a rear bias. The ultimate balance depends on several factors: center of gravity height, polar moment of inertia, tire size stagger, and spring and damper rates, to cite a few. Supercars like Chevy’s mid-engine C8 Corvette, for example, typically carry roughly 65 percent of their weight on their rear tires to optimize acceleration, cornering, and braking performance.

Strength vs. Stiffness

Car parts that lack sufficient strength will fracture—as in actually crack or break in two. Ideally, that occurs only during severe collisions. Insufficient stiffness means that a suspension member, the body structure, or some other crucial part deflects too much under normal loading, impairing ride quality and handling precision. Every steering system component must be stiff to transport the subtle but useful feedback forces from the tire contact patches to the driver’s hands.

AWD vs. 4WD

This confusing construct was created to distinguish vehicles that employ four wheels for propulsion all the time from those with the means to manually engage a second drive axle when the road is slippery or non-existent. AWD can signify full-time four-wheel drive (such as most Audis and Subarus). Many modern AWD systems have intelligent controls that engage the second axle automatically and temporarily when slip is detected at the primary drive axle. Most AWD vehicles have a third center differential to accommodate the rotational speed differences that exist between the front and rear axles, though the extra diff isn’t needed with automatically engaging AWD.

4WD indicates part-time maximum traction (Jeep Wrangler), often used in vehicles where the driver can select 2WD or 4WD modes with a switch or a button. 4WD is a common feature of modern pickup trucks and heavy-duty SUVs.

Exemplary Aerodynamics

Carmakers love to tout low drag coefficient (Cd) figures to celebrate how readily their bullets pierce the wind. Lower is always better and any Cd below 0.30 is cause for popping a champagne cork. But before you begin swilling the bubbly, understand the rest of the equation. What really matters is drag area, the product of a car’s drag coefficient multiplied by its frontal area (CdA). In other words, a large slippery auto may perform no better than a tidier one with a higher drag coefficient.

Torque vs. Horsepower

This is an epic battle intensified by today’s onslaught of battery-electric cars. First, let’s distinguish between static and dynamic torques. Static torque is what you apply to your engine’s head bolts during a rebuild and is indicated by the dimensional units foot-pounds (or ft-lbs). To cinch the bolts at 100 ft-lbs, you apply 50 pounds of force to a two-foot-long wrench.

Dynamic torque is the rotating force that exits an engine’s crankshaft. The preferred units are pound-feet, lb-ft, or newton-meters if you’ve made the metric leap. When you see units misquoted as lb/ft by some witless writer, please pen a scathing letter to the editor.

Eighteenth-century inventor James Watt observed that a horse powering a sawmill needed one full minute to hoist a 33,000-pound load one foot upward. He defined that work as one horsepower. In his honor, the metric expression for work is kilowatt.

In the greater scheme of things, the amount of torque produced is proportional to the quantity of air flowing through the engine (or the size of an electric motor). The goal is maximum torque at the lowest rpm with the ability to sustain that output for as long as possible. The torque plot for a perfect engine or motor (none exist) would consist of a straight line from idle to the redline—the so-called “flat torque curve.”

Torque versus horsepower discussions inevitably devolve into a debate of which is better. The answer depends on your driving style. If you have an automatic transmission and you hesitate to downshift passing a car in traffic, you want right-now torque—the more the better. Any Tesla Model S or Chevy Bolt owner will spout chapter and verse about the instant torque they enjoy in daily driving. But if you’re a more aggressive driver who dwells at the upper half of the tachometer’s sweep, horsepower is your best friend. Your engine’s bottom range is merely for backing out of the garage. Your throttle is the trigger that unleashes more rpm and maximum power. Bottom line: torque is for painless tooling around, power is what gets you home in time for dinner.

Weight Transfer

Your car’s weight is a vector—a force proportional to its mass directed toward the center of the earth. Think W = mass x g, with g as the acceleration due to gravity. Your car’s mass permanently resides at its center of gravity (C of g), varying only in three specific instances. Its map coordinates change as you drive to work. And your car’s weight diminishes as you consume fuel or drop the kids off at school. During the body’s roll and pitch motion, the C of g also moves slightly from its static location.

What’s popularly (yet erroneously) known as weight transfer is more accurately described as load transfer. Drive around a corner and some of the load borne by the inside tires is “transferred” to the outboard tires. Step on the brake and the rear tires are unloaded while the front rubber is squished more firmly into the pavement. The opposite happens during acceleration. The amount of load transfer depends on the severity of the maneuver and the height of the car’s center of gravity which, as noted above, moves little during the tires’ tap dance on the pavement.

Where the rubber meets the road, dynamic forces point in three different directions. The share of the car’s weight a tire carries, diminished or augmented by load transfer, presses downward on the vertical axis. Increasing the vertical load applied to any tire increases traction—its ability to produce fore and aft and lateral forces. In the horizontal plane, the fore and aft axis represents the acceleration or braking force produced by the tire. Cornering forces reside in the horizontal plane on the lateral axis.

Venial sins of nomenclature

The term “crossover” was coined to describe a blend of car and truck components and traits. Like “wagon” and “SUV,” the crossover label has by now run out of gas. The same is true of import versus domestic ID tags. Given the car business’s world scope, distinguishing between a Ford Fiesta manufactured in Mexico and a Honda Accord made in Ohio is fruitless.

***

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. To get our best stories delivered right to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletters.

The post 10 automotive terms that muddy fact and fiction appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Welcome to Homegrown—a new limited series about homebuilt cars and the ingenuity of their visionary creators. Know a car and builder that might fit the bill? Send us an email at tips@hagerty.com with the subject line HOMEGROWN. Read about more Homegrown creations here. —Ed.

Long-time Hagerty member Steve Heller, 77, has spent half a century selling what he calls “live edge furniture and space age artifacts” from his Fabulous Furniture shop in Boiceville, New York. In spare moments, he mustered the energy to create four wild customs, including his so-called Fintasia 2 presented here.

“In the early 2000s, I needed a long-distance cruiser to travel between my store and the American Visionary Art Museum in Baltimore where some of my sculpture became part of their collection. Since my customized ’59 Cadillac, called Fintasia, was definitely not the right vehicle for such missions, I purchased a Mercury Grand Marquis to serve my hauling needs,” recalls Heller.

“My partner in crime, Mark Karpf, and I reshaped every inch of the exterior in my shop’s driveway, including the addition of ’50s-era DeSoto tailfins. What we christened the Marquis de Soto won the New York Times Collectible Car of the Year award and subsequently best of class at Pasadena and Sacramento, California shows.

“After that custom was sold to a California buyer, I purchased a near new Dodge Magnum in 2011, drove it home, and promptly ripped into it. We called that custom Cro-Magnum. Even though it dropped jaws everywhere I went with it, that custom was a bit too subtle for my tastes, so I bought another Magnum—a 2006 R/T wagon to efficiently transport my creations—and promptly went to town on that.

“For what was soon labeled Fintasia 2, we created the biggest ’59 Cadillac tailfins we could imagine. All the modifications were made of either original 1950s sheet metal or fabricated from scratch. No Bondo was allowed.

“This custom sports a total of eight Cadillac bullet taillamps! The scallops in the paint contain 23k gold metalflake. Construction took two years and cost around $75,000.

“Fintasia 2 also won its class at the Grand National [Roadster] Show in Pomona. While visiting the west coast, I swung by Jay Leno’s garage in Burbank. Unfortunately, the place was locked tight. But just as I was leaving, I heard someone yell ‘Hey! Hey! Where ya going?  It was Jay; he spent some time inspecting my creation and sharing generous compliments.

“We recently repainted Cro-Magnum with the intention to sell it. Those proceeds will hopefully finance my next customizing adventure!”

Anyone interested in seeing Fintasia 2, visiting Heller’s studio, or purchasing his Cro-Magnum Dodge can reach him at Fabulous Furniture, 3930 Route 28 in Boiceville, New York or email him at fabfurn1@gmail.com.

***

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. To get our best stories delivered right to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletters.

The post Homegrown: Fantastic “Fintasia 2” is much more than a Magnum appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Welcome to Homegrown—a new limited series about homebuilt cars and the ingenuity of their visionary creators. Know a car and builder that might fit the bill? Send us an email at tips@hagerty.com with the subject line HOMEGROWN. Read about more Homegrown creations here. —Ed.

Practically every automobile and motorcycle we celebrate at Hagerty employs some form of energy conversion—an internal combustion engine, an electric motor, a turbine, or even human pedaling—to spin the drive wheel(s).

To our amazement, a competitive sport exists in which forward velocity is determined solely by gravitational forces applied on an inclined road surface. What’s known as gravity racing (GR) to a few keen participants is the supreme test of car construction creativity with no help from energy conversion.

It’s Soap Box Derby on steroids.

Doug Anderson, 66, of Fayetteville, Georgia, a retired Delta Airlines technician, built and drove this sleek “Atomic Scalpel” racer in pursuit of gravity-fed glory. Six years ago, at an event called L’Ultime Descente, in Quebec, Canada, the Scalpel became the fastest GR machine in history with a clocked speed of 101.98 mph.

As it turns out, there’s a long history of racing sans engines. Downhill competition began in 1904 near Frankfurt, Germany. The Soap Box Derby was inaugurated in 1934 by Dayton, Ohio resident Myron Scott—the very man who gave the Chevy Corvette its name. In the mid-1970s, racers competed on a 30-percent grade in Signal Hill, California (near Long Beach), where crashes were common and at least one spectator was injured by a flying skateboard. Fortunately, there were no fatalities. Gravity racing ceased at this location in 1978 over obvious safety concerns. More recently, Red Bull, the energy-drink-hawking extreme sports obsessives, started its own downhill derby series with jumps and obstacles.

“I started GR in 1999 by building what’s called a street luge—essentially a large skateboard,” Anderson explains. “Racing all over the country for three years, I became the Extreme Downhill International organization’s national amateur champion. The team I founded—Bodrodz Xtreme Gravity Racing—continued until 2006, earning several visits to the final competitive rounds.

“In 2016, we advanced to an enclosed gravity car with four wheels, brakes, streamlined bodywork, and a drag chute for slowing the car at the foot of the grade. For inspiration I visited Speed Week on the Bonneville Salt Flats along with a few reunited team members. That convinced us to build the chassis as small as possible to fit the driver with clean bodywork covering the working parts to manage airflow.

“Colleagues Jason Camp, Chris Schafer, Scott Holsenback, and John Nichols were instrumental in building and campaigning what we christened The Atomic Scalpel. Construction consumed a full year and the car was painted just-in-time for its debut at the 2017 L’Ultime Descente event in Canada.

“Our car has a mild steel belly pan to smooth under car air flow and to keep the center of gravity low. The structural space frame consists of chrome-moly steel tubing with titanium used in critical areas. The four tires are high-durometer pneumatic designs inflated to high pressure to minimize rolling resistance. Steering is by handle bars guiding the front wheels and there’s a disc brake at each corner for slowing in conjunction with a custom Deist-brand drag chute. The two-piece body with a hinged section for access to the cockpit is molded foam-cored composite material.”

Pictures do a poor job of conveying the scale. “The body is configured to tightly wrap my 5’8”, 190-pound build,” says Anderson. “Its maximum width is 31 inches over a 58 inch wheelbase. That yields a 520 square inch frontal area; lacking wind tunnel testing, my guess for the drag coefficient is 0.175.”

Scalpel, indeed.

“While the rules allow up to 550 pounds for the driver and car, our combination weighs 470 pounds. Because the course is only 1-kilometer long, adding ballast wouldn’t necessarily yield a higher trap speed.

“With absolutely no opportunity to shake down the Scalpel before competition, I made seven passes hoping for the best. On the 18-percent grade adjacent to Quebec’s St. Lawrence River, I joined the exclusive Century Club with my 101.98 mile-per-hour trap speed, only the seventh effort ever to top 100 mph.

“That record stands in part because there have been no recent gatherings of the World Gravity Speed Association. We’re working diligently to revitalize the sport and there’s a steeply graded road in the southeast U.S. with possibility. In 2022, The Atomic Scalpel was retired and donated to the Speedway Motors Museum in Lincoln, Nebraska, where it remains on display.

“I’m fortunate that my family members support this activity. I’m counting on their backing for one more assault on the world speed record with a new car currently under construction.”

When Anderson returns to the grade, we’ll bring you news of the fresh speeds he’s accomplished.

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. 

The post Homegrown: “Atomic Scalpel” tops 100 mph with gravity alone appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Seventy years ago, on January 17, 1953, forty-five thousand people attending General Motors’ Motorama at New York’s Waldorf-Astoria hotel witnessed a sports car revolution. It was the birth of a racing-inspired, American two-seat roadster—at an attractive price. With Chevrolet today unveiling the E-Ray, its first-ever hybrid, all-wheel-drive Corvette, in New York, let’s take a look back.

The Waldorf’s plush velvet grand ballroom was decorated to the rafters hosting what amounted to an early modern American auto show. Guide models were adorned in designer gowns. Choreographed orchestras, singers, and dancers provided background entertainment. While GM’s top four divisions all presented dream machines, it was the company’s entry-level Chevrolet brand that stole the show.

At this juncture, the Corvette was but a hypothetical showroom sibling to Bel Air sedans and Chevy pickup trucks. Leave it to Harley Earl, perhaps the most powerful and influential design boss in automotive history, to ram his Corvette concept through the corporation and to the Waldorf with minimal resistance. Soon, the Vette was on its way to an assembly line.

In the fall of 1951, Earl provided GM’s one-off Buick LeSabre to serve as the pace car at a major Watkins Glen, New York, road racing event. Thoroughly dipped in the day’s European sports cars at that meeting, Earl returned home convinced that America deserved its own sports car capable of running with contemporary British and Italian two-seaters.

“Project Opel” began in a secret corner of GM’s Detroit design department with four of Earl’s most trusted designers diligently advancing his whim toward reality. Half a dozen GM sculptors and engineers soon joined the team.

Project Opel was no pipe dream. With a wide, low body over a lean 102-inch wheelbase, its form blended aggression with Fifties modernity. Chassis and driveline components varied only where necessary from hardware in production throughout GM. Boxing the frame rails was deemed necessary because of the engineers’ desire to experiment with molded fiberglass for the body—a material less stiff than traditional steel stampings.

Less concerned about the mechanical details, Earl’s styling team borrowed an existing Chevy six engine, two-speed Powerglide automatic transmission, and rigid rear axle from GM parts bins. To add zing, the inline-six was boosted from 115 to 150 horsepower with higher compression, more aggressive valve timing, and triple carburetors. With an eye on weight distribution, the engine was mounted as low and as far rearward as possible.

Throughout 1952, Project Opel advanced through clay model to wood and plaster forms for upper management review. While there was widespread enthusiasm for the project, GM President Harlow Curtice withheld production approval until he had some customer feedback in hand. That hesitancy didn’t hinder engineers from assuring that Project Opel could make a swift pivot to the production line.

The first running prototype wearing “engineering car #852” and “EX-52” labels was finished a few days before Christmas 1952. Still missing at this juncture was a compelling name. Myron Scott, a member of Chevy’s public relations department raised his hand to suggest CORVETTE. In 1935, the clever Scott had created the Soap Box Derby with Chevy’s backing.

During World War II, the Corvette name was employed by the British Navy for its compact fast attack ships. Bringing the right ring to the game, the Corvette nameplate replaced engineering code identifiers only days before the Motorama show’s opening.

Attendees were clearly excited viewing the Corvette and were anxious for answers to their how-soon, how-much inquiries. Lacking proper market assessment, Curtice took the pulse of the crowd; on the show’s second day he announced that production would commence as soon as possible.

While there were hopes of eventually using steel for the Corvette, between July and December of 1953, 300 salable fiberglass-bodied Corvettes were built at an interim production plant in Flint, Michigan. Today, those cars are priceless collectibles even though their driving and performance attributes are modest by any standard.

You’d rightfully expect that the 852/EX-52 Motorama show car would be the uncontested Mona Lisa of this limited-production group. That’s not the case; with no thought of saving the show star for future admiration, it was unceremoniously parted out after accumulating 111 miles on the 1953 U.S. show circuit. The chassis was rebuilt and modified for use under the 1954 Motorama Chevy Nomad Station Wagon. The body was shipped to GM’s proving grounds where engineers lit it afire to assess the flammability of fiberglass body panels.

On the brighter side, one individual in the Corvette’s debut crowd was about to greatly energize its cause. Zora Arkus-Duntov, a 43-year-old, Belgian-born, unemployed engineer and race driver, was smitten by the Corvette at first sight. While he thought this was the most beautiful automobile he’d ever seen, he was deeply disappointed by what laid under the fiberglass panels.

Determined to remedy those faults, Arkus-Duntov wrote compelling letters to Chevy’s chief engineer Ed Cole and other GM managers that earned him a job as an assistant staff engineer at Chevrolet. On May 1, 1953, Arkus-Duntov began his GM career and promptly began converting the Corvette from a shallow beauty into a world-class sports car. The rest is history.

Seventy years later, Arkus-Duntov is long gone, but his driving spirit shines brightly, and particularly throughout the Corvette’s eighth generation.

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it.

The post On this day in 1953, America met the Corvette appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Welcome to Homegrown—a new limited series about homebuilt cars and the ingenuity of their visionary creators. Know a car and builder that might fit the bill? Send us an email at tips@hagerty.com with the subject line HOMEGROWN. Read about more Homegrown creations here. —Ed.

Constructing a car at home rarely proceeds beyond the dream stage for most enthusiasts, but Bob Elton of Ann Arbor, Michigan, has two running and driving homebuilts to his credit. Over a span of 15 years, in his spare time, this 75-year-old Hagerty member, automotive engineer, and craftsman designed and constructed the two machines shown here. Each wears fiberglass coachwork atop a steel frame, and each is powered by a General Motors V-8 driving the rear wheels through a Hydramatic transmission.

Elton has been retired for seven years, but he began his career in 1965 as a Hydramatic co-op student—a young engineer on loan to GM as part of school. In the mid-1970s, he ran an independent car-repair and fabrication shop, then earned his degree from the University of Michigan. Over a 50-year career in engineering, he worked for Chrysler, Ford, and GM, plus a few suppliers and consultants.

During that career, Elton was able to get time on manufacturer-owned CATIA computer-aided-design (CAD) software, to shape his bodywork. “The first step,” he says, “was designing a vertical cross-section every 10 inches or so, the full length of each body. In addition to accommodating the driver and passenger, my bodywork had to package the mechanical equipment while embodying the interior and exterior aesthetics I sought. After drawing sketches for years, I spent a year or so per project, advancing my concepts to CAD shapes.”

When he was satisfied with those shapes, Elton printed out the outline of each body cross-section, then glued each outline to a piece of thin plywood. After cutting each of those pieces to match, he assembled them atop a surface plate, to form a full-scale body buck. Gaps between the panels were filled with styrofoam. Pound after pound of plaster followed, to perfect surface details—first rough plaster, then patching plaster, then drywall mud. The result was sanded smooth, then painted with lacquer and polished to facilitate inspection of surface highlights. To perfect the car’s aesthetic, Elton deviated from his original CAD drawings in select places.

This was Elton’s Roadster as full-scale model. That model was handed off to a subcontractor, who created both body molds and finished fiberglass panels. The main body, including the hood and four separate fenders, was completed in 2011. The car’s steel frame, Elton says, incorporates sections from the frames of both a Chevrolet Caprice and a Chevy S-10 compact pickup. His final layout “provided a 126-inch wheelbase while supporting Chrysler power rack-and-pinion steering, front disc and rear drum brakes, and an S-10 live rear axle. The new coil-spring rear suspension I designed has anti-squat geometry.”

After the Roadster passed state inspection, earning a VIN and license plates, it was insured by Hagerty and readied for its first test drive, which came in 2012.

Elton then commenced work on his Coupe. While the Roadster incorporated the grille from a 1938 Cadillac LaSalle and pulled inspiration from Cadillac V-16s of that period, the Coupe ventured in a different aesthetic direction. “I drew inspiration from Virgil Exner’s 1952 Chrysler D’Elegance concept car and added hints of Bentley’s 2003 Continental GT,” Elton explains.

A more direct approach was used to construct the Coupe’s chassis. The 1986 Chevy El Camino possessed the 117.1-inch wheelbase, track dimensions, and coil springs that Elton sought, so he employed a frame from that car with few modifications beyond some rear-suspension refinements.

“Instead of farming out the fiberglass work,” he says, “I crafted all ten exterior-panel molds myself. The windshield and side glass came from a 2000 Ford Mustang, while the rear glass was sourced from a 2017 Chevy Corvette. My Summit Racing fuel cell holds 16 gallons. Final painting will be the responsibility of a nearby shop specializing in Corvette work.”

Prior to completion, Elton’s Coupe was test-driven near his residence sans bodywork. In March 2022, it passed inspection and was issued its VIN and plates.

Elton is hesitant to guess how many thousands of hours and “investment” dollars went into his homebuilt siblings. He does reveal, however, that farming out some of the Roadster’s work drove the car’s total cost over $100,000.

Another requirement worth mentioning is the patience of Elton’s wife, Mary, who tolerated his many late nights on the job. A reminder, then, to all the dreamers: Before you undertake anything of this scope, remember, you’re not just planning for dollars and construction hours. Add in ample moral support.

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. 

The post Homegrown: The V-8 dream machines of a retired Big Three engineer appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Welcome to Homegrown—a limited series about homebuilt cars and the ingenuity, diligence, and craftsmanship of their visionary creators. Know of a killer Homegrown car that fits the bill? Send us an email at tips@hagerty.com with the subject line HOMEGROWN: in all caps. Enjoy, fellow tinkerers! —Eric Weiner

Competing at the Bonneville Speedway is at the top of any speed enthusiast’s bucket list. Whether you buzz the Salt Flats west of Salt Lake City, Utah, at the wheel of your own speed machine or a rental racer matters less than simply experiencing this 30,000 acre playground given to us by Mother Nature.

Of course, storming the salt in a land speed racer of your own design is a powerful statement.

Russ Williams, 75, began working on his streamliner in 2013. “After several decades building and racing sailboats, I hoped to apply my hydrodynamic and aerodynamic expertise to speed on land,” Williams explains.

The first phase of that process was letting his thoughts gel into drawn sketches. These renderings next turned into 1/10th-scale wood models of both Williams’ chassis and body.

From there, with help from friends and the support of his family, Williams honed his speed needle in the 4000-square-foot shop at his Albion, California, residence. TIG-welded round- and oval-section steel tubing supports a Suzuki GSX-R750 motorcycle engine burning ethanol. This water-cooled inline-four slams an estimated 130 horsepower to the chain-driven rear wheels through an air-shifted six-speed transmission. Untold hours were invested making sure the Arrow was fast and safe.

By early 2018, Williams’s J-class (900-1200 cc) gas streamliner, the “Albion Arrow”, was ready for shakedown runs across a Nevada dry lake bed.

To sharpen his spear’s tip, Williams positioned two 13.5-inch billet aluminum wheels in line ahead of the narrow cockpit. “Given the smooth, straight nature of the salt flats and minimal steering requirements, I deemed front tires both unnecessary and undesirable,” Williams notes. “To provide some lateral grip up front, I machined treads directly into the outer perimeter of my compact aluminum rims. That’s right, no rubber touches the ground up front.

‘To minimize my car’s frontal area and drag coefficient, the Arrow is only 26 inches wide and 32 inches tall. Overall length is 23 feet, 5 inches, and the car’s skin is hand-formed sheet aluminum. Fueled and ready to race, it weighs barely a thousand pounds. I’m a tight fit in the cockpit and the view ahead is restricted, but this is the most entertaining ride I’ve ever had on four wheels.’

Williams took to the salt in 2018 with a target in his sights. The record he attacked was a speed of 219.884 mph, set in August of 2011 by John Wright in the Brant-Wright-Speranza Special. After fulfilling his licensing requirements during the fall Bonneville Speed Week, Williams clocked 218 mph on his first pass with an exit speed of 226 mph, proving the car was still gaining speed as it ran through the end of the course. ‘That was the great news! But my bad luck was that I shredded a rear tire at the end of that run and my speed didn’t warrant a return pass,” he explains. “The buzz and vibration scared the bejesus out of me.”

‘The rear tires we ran were rare Top Fuel Dragster rubber from the 1980s, selected to enable a full laid-back driver’s orientation. Unfortunately, they’re rated for only 200 mph so they’ll be upgraded to tires with a 250-mph rating.’

Summer storms have rendered the Bonneville Salt Flats more soggy field than dry lake bed of late. Williams and the Albion Arrow are nonetheless locked and loaded: “As soon as conditions allow resumption of Speed Week, I will be back.”

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. 

The post Homegrown: Albion Arrow devours distance with a touch of salt appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Upon climbing aboard this tall horseless carriage, I’m greeted by unsettling controls. Where you’d expect a steering wheel to be there are instead two levers that hinge down from the B-pillar to horizontal positions. The upper lever, to the driver’s left hand, controls speed. The 10-inch-longer one is the steering tiller.

Just ahead of the chair-high bench seat we find a pedal to engage reverse. Two additional pedals reside at the front of the floor surface; the left one latches and releases the brakes for parking and the right one slows the vehicle in the normal manner.

After twisting a key to unlock the speed controller, a forward nudge of that lever commences forward motion. There is no mechanical commotion beyond a soft moan and the buzz of tires plying pavement. Instead of venturing onto the busy streets surrounding the headquarters of battery manufacturer Our Next Energy (ONE), in Novi, Michigan, we stick to the safe confines of the smooth road meandering through the company’s rambling parking lot.

Late in the 19th century, electrically-powered locomotives and trollies began relieving America’s horse-drawn carriages. Their operation was initially restricted to east coast cities because the electrical grid, connection to which was necessary for the first rechargeable lead-acid batteries, didn’t reach rural communities for decades.

The Anderson Carriage Company of Detroit began producing buggies and carriages in 1884. In 1907, this enterprise began offering its Detroit Electric, powered by a rechargeable lead-acid battery. A top speed of 25 mph was geared to urban streets and a reliable range of 80 miles was impressive for the day. Women and traveling doctors appreciated the easy starting (no hand crank to break your arm) and dependability. Sales swelled to 1000 to 2000 cars per year making the Detroit Electric America’s favorite alternative, such as it was, to a gas car.

Ferdinand Porsche’s first automobile, logically called P1, was the 1898 Egger-Lohner C.2 Phaeton he constructed using a 5-horsepower electric motor providing a 20 mph top speed and 50 miles of operating range. At the turn of the 20th century, the Studebaker brothers, Ransom E. Olds, and Henry Ford all dabbled in electrics. With 300 or so start-ups vying for success in the emerging U.S. car market, steam initially earned 40 percent of the business followed by 38 percent for electrics and only 22 percent for gasoline cars. Mother Nature flipped that in 1901 when oil gushed out of a Spindletop drilling rig near Beaumont, Texas. People didn’t have patience for steam engines to build pressure, and once the price of gas fell below 10 cents a gallon, the internal combustion engine secured its overwhelming advantage.

This particular Detroit Electric’s charmed life includes 60 years of residence in a west coast museum. “I bought it 14 months ago sight unseen following a chance phone call to the second owner,” says ONE chief executive Mujeeb Ijaz. “An ex-factory worker was kind enough to gather extensive files containing original documentation and parts drawings to go with the vehicle after it was repurchased by Detroit  Electric from the cash-strapped original owner and upgraded in the early 1930s. My intention is to enjoy this car’s history while learning from its past.”

Ijaz believes the stunning red and black exterior paint may be factory original. Chrome bumpers and the huge horn trumpet sparkle brightly. Pressing a button in the end of the speed controller warns pedestrians (or horses, in period) to clear a path.

Nudging the speed controller a second notch forward sends additional voltage to the DC motor. Acceleration is modest to say the least so I go for broke into the third and fourth notches which deliver 96 volts and maximum current to the motor. When I yank the lever back well ahead of an approaching turn, the combination of a slight grade and reduced voltage sheds velocity expeditiously.

The speed lever’s operation is clunky because the switchgear it controls must be robust to last the life of the vehicle. In comparison, the right-hand steering tiller’s operation is utterly smooth. Its quirk is effort varying with direction.

Pressing the tiller forward to turn left is a breeze. Yanking it back to go right, the effort demanded is so much higher that I’m tempted to use both hands. For especially tight right turns, this tiller must be moved all the way back to the driver’s rib cage. It’s an example of curious man-machine ergonomics; we humans are typically stronger pressing something away from our torso than yanking an object toward it.

Even though the brakes operate only on the rear wheels, they are quite effective slowing this 3000+ pound horseless carriage. Pulling the speed-control lever rearward applies what is effectively an emergency brake gripping the motor’s output hub. Straight axles at both ends of the vehicle attach to the frame via semi-elliptic leaf springs. Bumps are nicely damped by rotary shock absorbers.

The Detroit Electric’s phone-booth proportions are the result of the vertical stack of 18-inch, 10-spoke steel-rimmed hickory wheels, a voluminous powertrain, and a carriage body carrying two occupants bolt upright. Oddly, there is also room for two “occasional” passengers, provided they ride on fold-down rear-facing perches positioned just aft of the windshield. Interior trim is a lavish arrangement of fine fabrics and carpeting with numerous stitched fleur de lis adornments on the ceiling and side walls.

It’s easy to see why the Electric cost four times as much as a Ford Model T two-door coupe in 1922. According to Ijaz, a toilet could even be purchased for the right-front position for use on trips into the hinterlands.

Looking underneath this vehicle, it’s also evident why it towers some seven feet skyward. The large, round DC motor residing directly beneath the passenger cabin is linked by an open shaft to a bevel gear in the rear axle. Two steel frame members hold everything together. Dog houses at both ends of the body contain a total of 12 modern lead-acid batteries. One thoughtful touch: the batteries are adorned with Detroit Electric script stickers.

Our Next Energy

Ijaz has such an appreciation for battery-electric transportation’s roots perhaps because he’s so invested in its future. His company, ONE, has leased a $1.6-billion gigafactory located 25 miles west of downtown Detroit. This 660,000 square foot—15 acres under one roof!—facility will employ 2100 workers to manufacture 200,000 battery packs per annum. Founded only two years ago, ONE is hustling at warp speed thanks to driven management, shrewd investor backing, and $236 million in Michigan state grants.

Top priorities are driving range, safety, and cost, says Ijaz. To those ends, ONE has developed two proprietary battery architectures. The first, dubbed Aries, contains lithium-iron-phosphate cells that do not use nickel or cobalt. ONE’s Aries chemistry greatly reduces the chance of internal shorting and thermal runaway, which is the cause of most fires in BEVs (a considerably rarer event as compared to gas cars).

Full-scale Aries production begins next year for commercial and fleet applications. ONE plans to source constituent materials in the western hemisphere to maximize sustainability while skirting supply chain issues. Consider that some electric car makers are even considering mining cobalt and nickel from the ocean floor to avoid the cost and hardship of shipping materials to China for refining.

ONE calls its second battery family Gemini. The dual-chemistry design combines Aries cells for daily driving with another technology, shrouded by 14 patents, to provide much greater driving range than what we get from today’s batteries. This second chemistry for the range extender employs lithium and nickel in a unique configuration. By deleting the anode—wherein electrons leave each cell via the negative terminal—graphite is eliminated and the nickel inside Gemini is cut by 75 percent over today’s cells.

ONE claims that its Gemini range extender offers the highest energy density ever produced in large-format cells. A second advantage: this cell can be produced using existing equipment, significantly reducing cost and manufacturing lead time. When Gemini’s daily-driver Aries chemistry cells near depletion on a long journey, the second chemistry automatically kicks in to recharge the pack on the roll.

Another ONE attribute is a more efficient cell arrangement. GM/LG Chem pouch cells and Tesla/Panasonic’s cylindrical cells use up considerable space inside the battery pack. In contrast, ONE cells are prismatic—hard-surfaced rectangular shapes—that squander no real estate while also increasing the pack’s structural rigidity.

As a proof of concept, ONE retrofit a Tesla Model S it owned with densely packed prismatic cells mounted beneath the car in the original skateboard space. The results were impressive: a 752-mile drive on Michigan roads without recharging, nearly doubling the Model S’s EPA-rated range. For another test, the car ran a steady 55 mph on a chassis dynamometer—882 miles logged on a single charge. It should be noted that this latter experiment employed cobalt-nickel chemistry, not the Aries/Gemini batteries ONE will soon produce with lithium-iron-phosphate and lithium-nickel chemistries.

The space between, the road ahead

More than 13,000 Detroit Electrics were sold over three decades. Tight gas supplies during World War I helped Anderson’s cause but by 1925, when the mass-produced Ford Model T cost only $250 (a tenth as much as a Detroit Electric) his company was doomed. The 1929 stock market crash dispatched Anderson to bankruptcy, though leftover Detroit Electrics were available for purchase as late as 1942.

Half-a-century later, battery-electric technology had advanced to the point that it was deemed suitable for NASA’s Apollo moon missions. Boeing and GM collaborated on the 1971–72 Lunar Rovers which successfully transported astronauts on excursions totaling 56 miles during Apollo 15, 16, and 17 missions. The first modern electric car was the EV1 coupe built by GM for lease beginning in late 1996. Using Corvette-like plastic body panels atop an aluminum space frame, this two seater was powered by a 137-horsepower electric motor energized by lead-acid batteries. The second-gen edition used nickel-metal-hydride batteries to stretch driving range from 100 to 160 miles. Disappointed by the EV1’s demise, Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning founded Tesla Motors in mid-2003. Six months later Elon Musk invested in this budding enterprise to become Tesla’s chairman.

Electric cars have never been more popular (nor more controversial) but fears about their utility and limited range remains widespread. Efforts by ONE and its competitors to double today’s battery capacity aim to relieve such range anxiety. Government and private efforts to add charging stations will also help. New tech batteries will diminish today’s electric vehicle weight disadvantage. Lighter is obviously better for acceleration performance. Electrics are already quick responders because of the bounty of torque available the instant their wheels start turning.

Some enthusiasts still regard electrics as soulless transportation modules, but OEMs are keen to demonstrate that car enthusiasm won’t die with EVs. Dodge’s CEO Tim Kuniskis, set on further securing his brand’s reputation for performance, recently announced the all-electric Dodge Daytona SRT muscle concept. “Technology moves forward and the customers and tuners move right along with it,” he said at the concept reveal in Detroit. “We’re demonstrating how old-school hot-rodding will thrive in an electrified muscle-car future.”

We’re not suggesting it’s time to sell our beloved Chargers, Corvettes, and Mustangs. To the contrary, well-kept ICE machines will surely prove to be shrewd investments should the main transportation fleet migrate to electric propulsion.

From 1911 to 1916, Thomas Edison’s nickel-iron batteries were available as a $600 upgrade for the Detroit Electric, advertising 80 miles between charges. Over 200 miles was achieved in at least one reported instance. Ijaz adds, “In the coming years we’ll install ONE batteries in our car to repeat a trip made back in the day from Detroit to Atlantic City, New Jersey. Our goal is completing that 450-mile journey on a single charge.”

My eagerness for full throttle saw our test drive climb to an estimated 25 mph—often quoted as this Electric’s terminal velocity—before we come to the end of the runway. As Ijaz and other electric innovators look ahead, there’s never been more of it.

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it.

The post Driving a 1922 Detroit Electric highlights a century of EV innovation appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Thanks to the astute engineering and fetching design GM invested in the long-awaited, mid-engine, eighth-generation Corvette, it has become the automaker’s hottest property. New Stingrays are sold out. Used C8s command over-sticker prices. For a spot on the 670-horsepower Z06’s waiting list, passionate fans are begging dealers.

Credible rumors and top management projections point to even more excitement on the horizon. Half-a-dozen additions to the C8 family before the clock strikes 2030 will rouse unprecedented interest in America’s only sports car. GM President Mark Reuss recently mentioned two new editions without providing much detail. He differentiated them by referring to one as “electrified” and the other as “full electric” while touting GM’s goal of adding 30 new BEVs to its roster by 2025.

E-Ray

Some of this should sound familiar, especially if you read my deep-dive article from last May on the future Corvettes. “Electrified” is code for the Corvette E-Ray hybrid due in a year or so. A battery pack inside the Stingray’s hollow center spine, coupled with a 100-horsepower AC drive motor propelling each front wheel and a motor-generator within the eight-speed dual-clutch transaxle will provide improved performance and slippery road poise. Critically, it will also add the ability to drive into European urban centers that prohibit tailpipe emissions. While the 495-horsepower LT2 V-8 is the most likely engine to be tapped for the E-Ray, there’s nothing stopping GM from also adding a 670-horsepower LT6 version to the Corvette lineup for those with a thirst for additional speed.

Corvette EV

While Reuss won’t expound on any details concerning the “full-electric” Corvette(s) heading our way, we and others have been busy speculating and poking around for answers. The first most likely possibility is a five-door hatchback BEV constructed atop the company’s Ultium skateboard platform. The role model here is the Porsche Taycan Sport Turismo. If the GMC Hummer is the platinum brick in GM’s BEV family, this as-yet-unnamed all-electric Corvette will be the company’s .50-caliber bullet. GM designers will have their work cut out combining sleekness and reasonable rear-seat access with a credible exterior appearance.

ZR1

To balance out all of these dancing electrons, the coming Corvette ZR1 will be powered by a 5.5-liter LT7 V-8 consisting of the Z06’s LT6 engine augmented by two turbochargers. Expect a monstrous 850 horsepower, 825-850 lb-ft of torque, and enough raw speed to make Ferrari engineers weep. While this Corvette’s timing is unknown, we’d expect it to serve as the meat in the coming BEV sandwich. Pencil the ZR1 in on your 2025 calendar.

Corvette crossover

To continue Corvette’s growth spurt, there are rumblings (from Car and Driver, among others) that a larger BEV crossover will bow later in the decade under a more formalized sub-brand. Imagine a fully electric Porsche Macan or Cayenne. This brief for this vehicle: ample room and comfort for five adults with sufficient cargo space to support cross-country voyages. GM’s hope, one imagines, is that America will be outfitted with conveniently spaced fast charging stations by the time this Corvette SUV hits our highways.

Zora

To close out the eighth-generation Corvette’s lifetime, a remarkable model to be called “Zora” awaits. Picture the union of E-Ray and ZR1 technology, combining forces into a mega C8 good for 1000 horsepower and torque targets GM engineers are striving to meet between coffee breaks. In case you’re behind on your Corvette lore, Zora Arkus-Duntov was the Vette’s patron saint from the mid-1950s through the mid-1970s and the engineer who identified the need for a mid-engine powertrain layout.

For those who can’t afford the $200,000 price tag likely for the Corvette Zora, GM has an appropriate consolation prize in mind: the next-generation Corvette, nicknamed C9. It’s not a stretch to imagine the C9 Vette will be a more affordable BEV two-seater with no internal combustion engine in the mix. (To read our comprehensive design and engineering forecast click here.)

Shedding the bowtie?

The potential flurry of coming Corvettes begs one additional question—is this sporting champion about to snip its Chevy apron strings? Given the fact that today’s C8 already carries crossed flags inside and out, with absolutely no Chevrolet or bowtie identification, one could argue that ditching the “Chevrolet” in “Chevrolet Corvette” would be something of a formality at this juncture.

Three considerations are almost definitely floating around GM headquarters concerning this subject. The first is fear about rocking the Corvette boat with any break from the Chevy fleet. The second is the strategy of mimicking Genesis’ split from Hyundai dealerships, complete with its own distinct (and more high-end) sales and service facilities. The third alternative is Tesla’s successful circumvention of the entire traditional sales and service model.  Instead, the seller-to-customer dialogue would be all digital, via website and cellphones the way Polestar operates. If service is required, the vehicle is hauled off to a facility for work and a loaner if provided to avoid inconvenience.

While GM would show unprecedented courage with such a dramatic expansion of the Corvette product line, we don’t expect the automaker follow Tesla into a fully digital sales and service interface. We’d wager you’ll still purchase the next Corvette in person, perhaps in at a stand-alone showroom in which Le Mans victory décor lines the walls in place of Silverado pickup and Suburban banners.

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it.

The post Corvette sub-brand and SUV on the horizon? appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Don Sherman’s latest entry in our Epic Engines series honors one of America’s best-loved powerplants. For deep dives on the small-block Chevy, Jaguar straight-six, Cadillac V-16, Chrysler Hemi V-8, read more here. -EW

After Chevrolet’s beloved small-block of 1955 earned its Mouse Motor alias, it was inevitable that its younger, larger brother would be called the Rat, if only to distinguish these two Chevy V-8s. Knowing there’s nothing rodent-like about either engine, enthusiasts took these pet names in stride.

In 1958, still celebrating postwar prosperity with ever larger cars, Chevy dumped the dowdy 150 and 210 model names of 1957 and jazzed them up as the Delray and the Biscayne, adding the Impala sport coupe as a sub-model of the top-of-the-line Bel Air. There were 10 separate body styles, with the Blue Flame six as the base engine and a 283 small-block V-8 teamed as the power upgrade, plus an all-new 348-cube V-8 that GM called its W engine, created to empower Chevy’s ambitious longer, lower, wider stratagem.

When engineers working under the direction of their hard-charging leader, Ed Cole, first fleshed out the small-block V-8’s specs in 1952, they deliberately left room in the block to grow. Given the bore spacing and the amount of cooling capacity in the block, the original 265 was thought to be capable of expanding to 302 cubic inches over what was expected to be the engine’s 10-year production run. In hindsight, it’s a quaint notion given that the basic design is still in production nearly 70 years later and its factory displacement peaked at 428 cubic inches in the 2006 LS7, the stroke stretched beyond Cole’s wildest imagination and the bores so enlarged there was no space for coolant flow between them.

However, back in the mid-’50s, it was believed that a whole new engine would be needed for the larger and more powerful cars that Chevy was planning. America was on top, gas was cheap, and a transnational freeway system was under construction that could whisk a fast car across multiple state lines in a matter of hours. Buyers wanted horsepower, and Chevy’s answer for 1958 was the W—which could have stood for weird, considering this engine’s departures from convention.

Among its oddities were completely flat-bottomed cylinder heads, the combustion “chambers” not scallops in the head but rather just the void between the head and the piston top. Obviously, this was easier to manufacture as the heads required less casting and machining work, but it was also thought to aid power.

The odd chamber arrangement was achieved by planing the block deck differently from conventional engines. Normally, the deck—the top of the cylinders where the engine block meets the head—is perpendicular, or 90 degrees, to the direction of piston travel. For the W, Chevy tilted the block decks in the design, slanting them inward toward the engine’s centerline. The W’s block casting had decks inclined 74 degrees to piston travel rather than 90, creating a 16-degree “wedge” shape for the void between the piston and the head that served as the combustion chamber.

The second oddity of the W was that the outboard edges of the heads were cut away to permit nestling the spark plugs as close as possible to the bore centers for quick, complete combustion. The W engine’s pistons also had V-shaped crowns. As a piston stroked upward on compression, the fuel-air mixture was squished across the cylinder toward the spark plug. This stirring effect enhanced fuel-air mixing upon ignition and accelerated flame motion throughout the wedge-shaped chamber. Invigorating combustion in this manner raised power and torque, improved fuel economy, and also smoothed the idle.

Such engineering tricks were necessary in an age before widespread fuel injection, and before modern tools were developed such as computer simulation of combustion flow, which today allows engineers to better understand what happens to fuel and air in the milliseconds before and after ignition. Pent-roof pistons and wedge-shaped combustion chambers are today rustic relics of an earlier era of engine development.

As was Cole’s philosophy with the small-block, the W’s cylinder bores were spaced 4.84 inches apart (versus 4.40 inches for the small-block) to give this engine ample piston displacement and room for growth. Starting with a bore of 4.125 inches and a stroke of 3.25 inches, for 348 cubic inches, the big-block would grow through the years, eventually topping out at 632 cubic inches.

We say 348, but the 1958 birth displacement was actually 347.47 cubic inches. Chevy rounded up because Pontiac already had a different 347 V-8. The use of cast iron for the heads and block yielded a base engine weight of 685 pounds in 1958 (versus 550 pounds for the small-block) but subsequent aluminum dieting dropped the big-block’s assembled mass below 600 pounds.

Stamped-steel rocker arms pivoting on balls attached to the head via screwed-in studs were similar to the small-block’s cost-saving innovations. But the small-block’s valves were arrayed in neat, straight lines, whereas the big-block’s valves zigzagged the length of the head to shorten the intake and exhaust ports for better breathing. The tubular pushrods carrying pressurized lubricating oil from the lifters to the rocker arms and valve stems were also inherited from the small-block.

Chevy’s new Turbo-Thrust 348 V-8 was rated at 250 horsepower when equipped with a four-barrel carburetor, and 280 horsepower in Super Turbo-Thrust form (with no turbo in sight but three two-barrel carbs on top). A high-compression, solid-lifter version was rated at 315. It should be noted that stated output ratings were gross figures, meaning without all the equipment necessary to run and plumb the engine. They were thus somewhat inflated until standardized—and more realistic—net industry measurements arrived in 1972. By 1961, the top 348 used a hotter solid-lifter camshaft to produce 350 horses. Chevy also offered a 409-cubic-inch, bored and stroked version for the 1961 Impala SS, with a forged-steel crankshaft, twin four-barrel carbs, and a 409-hp rating, prompting The Beach Boys to extol the virtues of Detroit’s hottest street racer. In 1965, this engine topped out at 425 advertised horses thanks to higher compression and more aggressive valve timing.

Drag and oval racers fared better. Chevy’s gift to them was the Regular Production Option (though not actually that regular) Z11, consisting of a 427-cubic-inch V-8 with cowl induction (for cooler, denser air), a two-piece intake manifold with two four-barrel carburetors, 13.5:1 compression, and a few aluminum body parts. An alleged 50 such cars were built, plus a few spare engines sold over the parts counter. Z11 Chevys are all but priceless today.

To transition to the second generation of its big-block V-8, Chevrolet supplied southern racers with what is now known as the Mark II Mystery Motor, not because GM had a ban on racing, but because Chevy was striving to hide its latest technology from the competition. Here, the weird block and head design had evolved into a more conventional arrangement. The side edges of the cylinder heads were straightened to accommodate spark plugs angled toward the bore centers. The displacement was limited to 427 cubic inches, to comply with NHRA and NASCAR rules. Combining a 4.312-inch bore dimension from the 409 with a stroke lengthened to 3.65 inches yielded just under 427 cubic inches. For enhanced breathing, all valves were angled toward the center of the bore, a configuration soon nicknamed “porcupine.” Four-bolt main bearing supports were added to improve durability.

Billy Krause earned a third-place finish at the 1963 Daytona 24-hour race driving a Corvette with the Mark II V-8 prepared by Mickey Thompson. The following week, five Chevy Impalas powered by this engine qualified for NASCAR’s Daytona 500. Due to reliability issues, the best finish was Johnny Rutherford’s ninth overall.

When an attempt to recycle a Packard V-8 for Chevy’s use failed, GM skipped the Mark III designation to launch its Mark IV big-block in 1965. Porcupine heads and four-bolt mains made the leap from the Mark II V-8. The dry weight went up 10 or so pounds, in part due to meatier main-bearing bulkheads.

The Mark IVs for 1965 Corvettes and Chevelles displaced 396 cubic inches and produced 375 horsepower with 415 lb-ft of torque. With solid lifters, gross output leaped to 425 horsepower. A slightly larger bore yielded 402 cubic inches, though Chevrolet stuck by the 396 label to avoid marketplace confusion. Camaros, Novas, Monte Carlos, full-size Chevys, and pickups all thrived with these engines equipped with a variety of compression ratios and carburetors to deliver 265–375 horsepower.

Marching smartly along, a 427 big-block debuted in 1966 for Corvettes and full-size Chevys at the height of the muscle car wars. During the next five model years, this Mark IV flexed major muscles in a variety of carburetion, camshaft, and compression-ratio configurations to deliver up to 435 horsepower.

To honor GM’s ban on direct motorsports participation, resourceful engineers crafted special parts on the sly, quietly slipping them to worthy racers. To enhance the 427 Mark IV’s performance, a special L88 package was developed that offered new aluminum cylinder heads saving 75 pounds and a long list of support parts, including a four-bolt main bearing block carrying a forged crankshaft, forged pistons tied to shot-peened connecting rods, triple valve springs, an aluminum intake manifold topped with a monster Holley carburetor, and an aluminum water pump. Roger Penske campaigned a 1966 Corvette powered by an L88 engine in the 24 Hours of Daytona; in spite of a heavy crash, he won his class and finished 12th overall. The following year at Le Mans, an L88 Corvette topped 170 mph on the Mulsanne Straight before dropping out with a broken crankshaft.

Ex-racer Zora Arkus-Duntov, the Corvette’s patron saint, then released what was billed as an “off-road” engine for Corvettes. Only 216 were sold in the 1967–69 model years and survivors are the most valuable Corvettes money can buy. One brought $3.85 million at a 2014 Barrett-Jackson auction. Mandatory equipment included transistor ignition, heavy-duty suspension and brakes, and a limited-slip differential. To discourage road use, heater and ­defroster equipment were not included. The L88’s 430-hp rating was creatively 5 horses fewer than the mainstream 427 engine equipped with three two-barrel carburetors.

In support of the Can-Am competition raging at this time, GM collaborated with Reynolds Aluminum to convert the big-block V-8 to a cast-aluminum design with iron liners fitted for durability. This move yielded an assembled weight of approximately 575 pounds, only a few more than an iron small-block. To prove this ZL1 V-8 was a production configuration, two Corvettes and 69 Camaros rolled down 1969 model year assembly lines with them. At $4718.35, the ZL1 option nearly doubled the price of a Corvette. Advertised output was a grossly understated 430 horsepower. Independent testers found that adding headers upped that figure by nearly 100.

In response to ever-tightening emissions regulations, Ford and Chrysler both pulled the plugs on their NASCAR programs and their big high-performance V-8s in 1970, leaving GM as the sole maker of a NASCAR-worthy engine. Stretching the stroke to an even 4 inches for 1970 yielded (an honest) 454 cubic inches. This big-block delivered a meaty 500 lb-ft of torque in full-size Chevys, Chevelles, Monte Carlos, El Caminos, Corvettes, and GMC Sprints. The top power rating was 450 horsepower at 5600 rpm with a single four-barrel Holley carburetor. When net output ratings and lead-free gasoline arrived in 1972, the same 454 Corvette V-8 topped out at a meager-sounding 270 horsepower. Three years later, yielding to regulations and oil crises, big-blocks were broomed from the Corvette’s options list.

Updates included with the 1991 Gen V big-block were four-bolt main bearing caps, a single-piece rear crankshaft seal, and attractive cast-aluminum valve covers. Provisions for a cam-driven fuel pump and valve-lash adjustment were deleted. The 454 version continued on for five more years, christened Vortec 7400 in 1996 in celebration of GM’s discovery of the metric system.

A 502 big-block also popped up in GM’s 1991 Performance Parts catalog. These crate engines, offering up to 600 horsepower for street and marine use, included throttle-body fuel injection and the electronic equipment needed to control it. A 572 version provided 620–720 horsepower depending on the compression ratio selected.

In 1996, a new sixth-generation Vortec 7400 displacing 454 cubic inches arrived exclusively for truck use. Its claims to fame included roller hydraulic lifters and multi-port electronic fuel injection yielding up to 290 horsepower.

Acknowledging there was more where that engine came from, GM replaced the 7400 with its Gen VII Vortec 8100 in 2001. In addition to a longer 4.37-inch stroke, this big-block boasted a revised firing order to improve smoothness, longer connecting rods, and metric fasteners throughout. In 2009, the last Gen VII big-block left GM’s ­Tonawanda, New York, engine plant, which currently manufactures the Corvette’s LT2 small-block V-8.

Suggesting that Chevy’s big-block may survive to consume the very last drop of petroleum, the performance aftermarket still holds this V-8 dear. Complete engines can be assembled devoid of GM components, and aluminum blocks and heads are readily available. GM recently set its best and brightest experts to work designing a fresh edition to be sold as a crate engine. The result revealed at last year’s SEMA Show is the ZZ632 10.4-liter V-8 that delivers a stunning 1004 horsepower at 6600 rpm and 876 lb-ft of torque at 5600 rpm on 93-octane gasoline. The price: $37,758.

Electrification will eventually send the Chevy big-block and fellow CO2-spewing engines to the boneyard. But until then, the Rat in all its many forms will be revered as a superb means of converting gasoline and air into pure speed.

This article first appeared in Hagerty Drivers Club magazine. Click here to subscribe and join the club.

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it.

The post A Rat’s Life: Chevy big-block V-8s thrived for over half a century appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Welcome to Homegrown—a limited series about homebuilt cars and the ingenuity, diligence, and craftsmanship of their visionary creators. Know of a killer Homegrown car that fits the bill? Send us an email at tips@hagerty.com with the subject line HOMEGROWN: in all caps. Enjoy, fellow tinkerers! —Eric Weiner

Brian Booth, 57, has devoted 24 years, over 20,000 hours, and unmentionable dollars constructing the homebuilt he dubbed “Voo Doo.”

Booth is an artist and designer who spent 19 years at GM before becoming the chief designer at the L.A.-based firm Flyer Defense, which supplies rugged ATV personnel carriers to the U.S. Army. He’s also an instructor at the Los Angeles Art Center College of Design. His portfolio includes Chevy and Olds exteriors, Pontiac interiors, Chevy and GMC light trucks, various Opels, and the MV-1 taxicab.

Voo Doo’s propulsion system resembles something NASA might dream up. Seeking immunity from environmental/geo-political disruptions, Booth engineered his driveline to run on a wide variety of fuels, yielding what amounts to a science fair on wheels.

A 181-horsepower UQM Power Phase 135 DC electric motor drives the rear wheels through a Ford Mustang 9-inch, 5.14:1 differential. Ten LG Chem lithium-ion batteries provide 60 miles of emissions-free range for daily commuting. A Thunderstruck control unit keeps the electric propulsion system happy while an Elcon 240-volt charger sits onboard to replenish the batteries during stops.

When plugging in isn’t practical and charge is running low, a Garrett GTP 60-67 gas turbine spins a pair of ultra-light Auragen generators to energize the battery pack on the roll. “Believe it or else,” Booth explains, “I found this 60,000-rpm whistler—normally used as an auxiliary power unit—installed in a John Deere Gator side-by-side off-roader.”

“In my teen years I was inspired by the McDonnell F-101 Voodoo supersonic interceptor my father flew in the Air Force,” says Booth. “My priority here was more how I conserve energy than outrageous power and speed.”

Operating in its series-hybrid mode, Voo Doo’s range is extensive. The Garrett turbine is happy to swill gasoline, alcohol, diesel, bio fuel, or CNG.

“Thanks to my final drive ratio, low-end electric torque, and light weight, Voo Doo’s initial acceleration should be impressive. But even with an unlimited budget, I’d never want more than 500 hp in this homebuilt. I think the new generation of road-going performance must include responsible fuel consumption.”

Booth’s homebuilt mimics a C8 Corvette’s overall length and height. However, the wheelbase is longer by a foot while track and width dimensions are 4-5 inches greater, all to provide seating space for two adults plus two lucky kids. While he was timely employing an electric driveline, fitting four doors to this sports car must be considered a radical innovation.

The Voo Doo’s ten lithium-ion prismatic batteries are stacked two high inside a tubular stainless steel backbone. “A friend of mine designed the independent suspension systems employing unequal-length control arms at each corner,” Booth explains. The disc brake hardware is a mix of GM and Wilwood components. The unassisted rack-and-pinion steering gear was purchased from Unisteer Performance. Forgiato forged-aluminum wheels, 21×9.6- in front, 22×10.0-in back are fitted with ultra-low-profile Pirelli radials (245/35R-21 in front, 245/30R-22 in back).

Booth employed Alias CAD software to shape his exterior. A friend of his on the east coast milled stiff foam to create the main body mold. Booth helped lay up the fiberglass skin in the finished mold before designing and constructing his seats, instrument panel, center console, and door trim at home. The Aircraft Windshield Company helped shape the crystal clear polycarbonate windshield. Voo Doo’s side glass was custom made by Booth in his garage. In lieu of a back window, three cameras provide a comprehensive rear view.

‘The greatest challenge was a commitment to build my own fiberglass body, which cost ample time and money due to the need to mill the stiff foam used to make the mold,” says Booth. “That phase was done some twenty years ago before the advent of 3D printing. Once that technology became available, I was able to employ it to save cost and time constructing the interior components such as the roof pillar covers.

“Voo Doo has a true four-passenger interior with jump seats in back large enough to accommodate my 6-ft 1-in height. The front seat headrests came from an actual Voodoo aircraft and I installed a working AC system to maintain long-distance comfort.”

As for the weight, Booth hasn’t had a chance to put his homebuilt machine on the scale, but he’d “estimate the curb weight is about 3000 pounds.”

“Near the beginning of design and construction, a close friend counseled against trying to build a car at home. I learned so much collaborating with friends that I’m glad I ignored that advice. California assigned my VIN this August, long after I had enjoyed a few shake-down runs around the block.”

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it.

The post Homegrown: Ex–GM designer’s “Voo Doo” magic appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Welcome to Homegrown—a limited series about homebuilt cars and the ingenuity, diligence, and craftsmanship of their visionary creators. Know of a killer Homegrown car that fits the bill? Send us an email at tips@hagerty.com with the subject line HOMEGROWN: in all caps. Enjoy, fellow tinkerers! -Eric Weiner

Every now and again, some automaker will construct the odd twin-engine car for racing (1935 Alfa Romeo Bimotore), limited production (1958 Citroen 2CV 4×4 Sahara), or auto-show spectacle (2005 Jeep Hurricane). But a car powered by THREE engines? That’s something else.

Unbridled curiosity is part of what motivated Jim Noble of Azalia, Michigan, to spend 15 painstaking years constructing the show-grade homebuilt featured here. This retired truck fleet owner calls his creation “666,” not because he’s a devil worshipper but because the moniker most succinctly sums up what propels his rad pickup.

Introduced in 1929 as the “six for the price of a four,” Chevy’s “Stovebolt” six had a long and fruitful life. After engineers perfected its combustion process, it proudly wore a Blue Flame ID label celebrating what shot out the exhaust ports.

Noble gave his engines an 0.030-inch overbore to increase displacement from 235.5 to 239.5 cubic inches per block, achieving an awesome 718.4 cubic inch total. Fitted with dual-carburetor intake manifolds, tubular headers, and mild Isky cams, this 18-cylinder team delivers 550 horsepower by Noble’s estimate. Not to mention enough torque to rotate the Earth on its axis.

The center six stands tall, while the two outboard engines are each canted 22.5 degrees to make space for intake and exhaust manifolds. Among the premier virtues of any inline-six is the impeccable smoothness and balance inherent to its design. At idle, the Noble trio growls and whirs more like an angry electric motor than any automobile engine. Motorcycle drive chains tie the outboard engines to the center mill’s crankshaft, which spins a Hydramatic 700R4 automatic transmission. One cylinder fires every 40 degrees of center crank rotation. When the six Carter-Weber throttles are blipped, torque gushes forth like water from a fractured dam. Because stealth was not a Noble priority, his six-pack of exhaust pipes wears restrictors but no mufflers.

“My rectangular steel tubing frame provides ample torsional and bending stiffness,” Noble explains. “A step at the front accommodates rack-and-pinion steering and my unequal-length control arm suspension equipped with QA1 adjustable gas-pressure dampers. The rear axle carries a heavy-duty Dana 70HD 4.56:1 motorhome differential equipped with an Eaton E-Locker limited-slip, and there are four trailing links and a Panhard rod.”

A substantial disc brake sits at every corner. The front tires are Cooper radials size 205/65R-15, while the towering rear meats are 455/55R-22.5 Michelins originally intended for semi-truck use. Their cost: $1000 apiece.

666’s handsome grille and cab began life in the same 1954 Chevy pickup truck that contributed one engine to this cause. “I chopped six inches out of the top and four inches from the cab’s bottom to help the engines dominate my custom’s presentation,” says Noble. His homemade cargo box carries a scratch-built 24-gallon fuel cell. The massive aluminum radiator is another prime example of quality craftsmanship; Noble sprayed the Martin Senour base-coat clear-coat paint in a patriotic scheme he conceived at the beginning of this project.

Inside, comfortable bucket seats straddling a massive transmission tunnel are supported by the sheet-steel floor pan. A hinged moon roof brightens the mood and G-Force 5-point racing belts hold the driver and passenger in check.  The 2-foot-long shift lever also came from the Chevy pickup donor. The skull knob topping it a period piece from the 1950s hot-rodding era.

After warming his engine cadre, Noble brake torques 666 to light its rear tires. Because the crankshafts in these sixes are supported by only four main bearings, he’s hesitant to top 5000 rpm. Thanks to the 0.69:1 overdrive ratio in the transmission’s top gear, that modest redline is still enough to hustle this rod to a theoretical 190 mph.

The view through 666’s windshield is like peering between Manhattan skyscrapers. Noble sacrificed three windshields  to the fabrication gods before successfully trimming to fit without cracking. Given that there are only 40 miles on the odometer since departing the fabrication bay, the 666’s acceleration runs during our thrilling ride-along were limited to quarter-throttle. Following our test sprint, Noble shared his prize at the revived Meguiar’s Detroit Autorama held in March of this year.

Asked what he’s got invested in 666, Noble admits to keeping receipts for purchased parts but never adding them up. Nor did he log the thousands of hours spent here. “Thankfully my wife Cindy is all-in,” Noble emphasizes. “Maybe that’s because we’re both horse aficionados. I pursue horsepower through internal combustion and she competes in equestrian dressage with her Belgian Warmblood Adonis.”

Adonis being a figure of Greek mythology associated with death and rebirth, we pronounce this hot rod born from three Stovebolts legendary indeed.

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it.

The post Homegrown: “666” hot rod packs triple the Stovebolt, triple the fun appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Welcome to Homegrown—a new limited series about homebuilt cars and the ingenuity, diligence, and craftsmanship of their visionary creators. Know of a killer Homegrown car that fits the bill? Send us an email at tips@hagerty.com with the subject line HOMEGROWN: in all caps. Enjoy, fellow tinkerers! -Eric Weiner

By day he worked as an engineer at the Ford Motor Company but evenings and weekends were Dave Piontek’s time to shine as a master garage builder. An American “Garagefather,” if you will.

Even before he graduated from the University of Michigan with an engineering degree, he fearlessly converted his ’62 Corvair Spyder into a daunting autocross racer. Riding on a steel tubing frame constructed from scratch and topped with a crude but light aluminum body, Piontek’s first homebuilt was so quick that the club orchestrating his events told him his participation was no longer appreciated.

He then devoted six years to bringing a 1958 Fiat Abarth 750 Zagato double-bubble coupe back from a rusty death. Piontek relined the Italian interior with upholstery he stitched on his wife’s sewing machine. The finished product was profitably sold through an ad in Hemmings. A ’64 Jag E-Type roadster purchased with the proceeds required only a year to restore and remained in his car collection for 24 years.

The Sportech Roadster

Deciding that he preferred creating cars over restoring them, Piontek began what would become his magnum opus in 1986. Inspired by SCCA Formula Ford single-seat racers, his vision was for a street-legal two-seat roadster. Various associates at FoMoCo helped out with suspension design and body construction. He remembers the whole thing like it was yesterday, so we’ll let Piontek spin the yarn from here:

“While I lacked modern design software, I did have a large drafting table at home. So, I used a 3-foot-wide by 10-foot-long roll of paper to lay out the framework constructed using 1.25-inch square steel tubing with 0.083-inch wall thickness. A friend at work contributed the differential from a Hewland transaxle which I fitted with ball bearings and inboard-mounted brake discs.

“Since this concoction would be powered by a Suzuki GSX-R 1324cc motorcycle engine and transmission, I incorporated an electric motor for reverse. My parts list also included a shortened Toyota Corolla rack-and-pinion steering gear, Koni adjustable coil-over dampers, JFZ brakes, a Suzuki hydraulic clutch, and custom-made tubular suspension control arms.

“Particle board atop sawhorses served as my surface plate during frame construction. I used MIG welding for the frame and TIG to construct the control arms. Uprights were fabricated from sheet steel and heavy gauge tubing.  Driveline bearings and half-shafts came from a VW Rabbit. I made a sequential shifter out of a simple lever operating a heavy-duty cable. Goodrich Comp T/A radial tires size 205/50R-15 in front and 225/50R-15 in back ride on 6.5 x 15-inch MSW aluminum wheels.

“Following a year of effort, I took my car to a local drag strip to shake down the finished chassis and running gear. It clocked 112 mph for the quarter-mile in 12.8 seconds. First gear was worth 50 mph!

“At this juncture, I was employed at Ford’s Design Center working on advanced concepts. We did everything from plastic body panels to 48-volt electrical systems to finished show cars. This is where I learned the design process from start to finish, including clay model construction.

“To build a body at home for what would become my Sport-Tech, (later Sportech) Roadster, I used a wooden ‘bridge’ and borrowed measuring uprights from an SCCA racing body builder. The armature was foam over wood with outer surfaces 1-2-inches below what would become the finished form. Some 2000 pounds of used but serviceable Chavant modeling clay was diverted from work to my garage for this effort.

“Ford designers Mark McChesney and Greg Miller produced a one-quarter-scale model that I measured using my Bridgeport milling machine to obtain accurate full-size section dimensions. A large turkey broiler warmed the clay to make it pliable.

“After three months of evening and weekend effort, I had a clay model to show Mark and Greg. They’d critique it for 15-20 minutes, then I’d carve the clay for 10-15 hours to implement their corrections. Once they were happy, I hired a professional clay modeler to add or remove 1/16-inch of clay here and there, including the windshield area, to achieve the final shape. Other pros made the mold and first Kevlar-reinforced body which mounted to my framework at multiple points. In addition to rocker panel attachment points, there were tubes and brackets bonded to the body and welded to my frame.

“Designing the engine cover hinge and latch arrangements consumed six months. Ducts providing air to the engine and radiator and wheel-well liners took additional time. The head and tail lamp covers are molded of acrylic plastic heated and draped over plaster molds. I used my wife’s oven for this … obviously when she wasn’t at home. The windshield was also made of acrylic. A vendor helped avoid distortion in that component.

“Greg Miller was very helpful designing the interior trim panels and bucket seats. A friend at work employed in the trim shop stitched my vinyl seat covers at home.

“Since I had already painted a dozen cars, I did the final prep work and sprayed the Sportech at home. My son, who was 12 at the time, designed the nose badge on his Mac Plus computer.

“Following two years of effort, I began driving my Sportech to work. After catching wind of this project, Ford’s Design Vice President Jack Telnack invited me to display the car next to some of the company’s clay models and show cars. Asked how much had been spent on the project, I replied, ‘about $15,000.’

“When my manager and supervisor heard that figure they were highly annoyed, given the fact our concepts cost millions to create and were at best drivable only at low speeds. Ultimately, 300 people from various supply firms viewed the car on Ford’s turntable. Unfortunately, my Ford career took a turn for the worse because of my bosses’ embarrassment.

“Shortly thereafter, Ford’s Engineering VP Neil Ressler asked me to drive the Sportech to his building. Following a 30-minute test, he noted that race driver Jackie Stewart would be in town the following week to critique some pre-production Fords. Asked if I’d be interested in Jackie’s evaluation, responded ‘Hell yes.!’

“When that day came, I had an instrument called G-Analyst installed onboard the Sportech. In every corner, Stewart reached and held 0.99 g of lateral force. Later, racing instructor Skip Barber drove my car at Lime Rock and Jay Leno tried it in California.

“Other kudos include a two-page story in Car and Driver wherein my 1234-pound car accelerated to 100 mph in 10.6-seconds, half-a-second quicker than a Lingenfelter Corvette tested in the same issue. It also earned the Design and Originality Award at Detroit’s 1989 Autorama.”

Electric Acorn: Sportech as inspiration

Alan Cocconi of AC Propulsion, the company that helped create GM’s EV1 low-volume production electric car, was intrigued by Piontek’s Sportech. The ultra-light weight, compact size, and gorgeous bodywork were perfect for a BEV in the planning stages on the west coast.

Piontek converted one Sportech to BEV operation using a 200-hp AC motor, Honda transaxle, and 28 lead-acid batteries. Renamed ‘Tzero’ this car made its debut at the 1997 Los Angeles Auto Show. Six years later, Elon Musk joined the AC Propulsion team. Impressed by the possibilities following a test drive, he raised $7.5-million of start-up capital resulting in the 2008 launch of the Tesla Roadster, using Lotus Elise chassis and body components. [For a full account of how Tesla’s towering electric oak tree grew from this little-known acorn, click here.]

Geo-based “Fun Car”

Meanwhile back at the Ford ranch, Piontek cashed out his Dearborn chips to become the American Sunroof Company’s R&D supervisor. He earned five patents in five years at that job.

Next, he moved to Ticom—a composite-plastics supplier to General Motors originally owned by Northrop Grumman. While working as a plant manager, Piontek pitched the idea of building a concept car for presentation at trade shows aimed at expanding Ticom’s business. Here’s how it came together, as told by the man himself:

“What I had in mind was a modern Jeep-like Mini Moke. We selected a Chevy Metro chassis as the substructure in hopes of re-bodying the car with a rudimentary composite body to be called ‘Fun Car.’

“I found a low-mileage wreck and had it hauled to my garage where I stripped off the sheet metal above the rockers and shock towers. To elevate the driver’s vantage, the instrument panel, steering column, and seats were raised four inches.

“My ex-Ford colleague Mark McChesney supplied a rendering of the finished product, which was handed off to Special Projects, a Detroit area show car builder. Roy Bonnett, a structural composites expert hired by Ticom, outlined the process by which the Fun Car could be manufactured using equipment already in service at Ticom. Foam cores wrapped in fiberglass would be molded in a large press. Powertrain and suspension parts would be supported by steel inserts integrated with a composite frame.

“When we presented the finished prototype at the SEMA show, lots of folks assumed it was electric. That kicked off a second edition built atop a four-door Metro floorpan powered by a Solectria AC motor and 12 lead-acid batteries. At an EV conference in Costa Rico where we showed Fun Car, the country’s president encouraged Ticom to establish a new manufacturing base capable of mass producing the car.

“Unfortunately, neither Ticom nor Northrop were interested in the considerable investment required, so only three Fun Cars were ever built. When the economy turned down, both firms said adios to the challenging automotive market.”

Necessity is the mother of invention

Luckily, Piontek landed on his feet. Jay Novak, a close associate at Ford had moved to the company’s NASCAR racing department, needed a program manager to reside in North Carolina to assist Ford teams at 26 races a year. That necessitated shutting down all garage construction operations and a full household relocation south.

Though his NASCAR assignment lasted just over three years, Piontek’s creativity never ceased. To help teams precisely set their racers’ corner weights (the vertical load carried by each wheel), he invented a tool called Scale Mat. This consists of a 4×12-foot sheet of 0.030-inch plastic that readily folds down to a 2×4-foot piece for transport. The mat shows exactly where the aluminum plates under the weighing scales must be positioned for consistent measurements. This handy device reduced the time required to accurately locate the set of four scales from half-an-hour to one minute. Eighteen years after his Ford Racing stint, Piontek still sells 30 to 40 Scale Mats per year.

Harley-powered TwinTech

Before returning from North Carolina to Michigan, Piontek hatched his next homegrown car project: a two-seat roadster powered by a Harley-Davidson V-twin driving the rear wheels through a VW transaxle.

“Jay Novak designed what we called the TwinTech in Michigan, and I constructed the exoskeleton frame in North Carolina,” Piontek explains. “We used 1.75 x 0.062-inch round tubing for the frame members, oval tubes for the control arms and CNC-machined billet aluminum for the front uprights. Start to finish, this project took but nine months.

“While the powertrain did require some development, the Twin Tech won another Design and Originality Award at the 2006 Detroit Autorama show.

“This was the best ride and handling car Jay and I had ever created thanks to its ultralight 1200-pound weight, stiff chassis, and rising rate suspension systems. There were hopes of building and selling 100 of them a year until the 2007 recession hit. Only one was ever made and it’s still in my garage.”

Formula for success

Upon his return to Michigan in 2005, Piontek turned his attention to elaborate rotisserie restorations. At least, that is, until his buddy Novak suggested converting Van Diemen Formula Fords competing in SCCA road racing to motorcycle power. Ultimately, eight kits were created and sold to enable car owners to handle such conversions on their own.

Phase two focused on the SCCA’s Formula 500 class where a rules change allowed use of 600cc motorcycle engines. Ten different cars were converted here with spectacular specs—125 horsepower driving an 875-pound (including the driver!) package. “One of our NovaBlade cars was clocked at 160 mph on the Daytona International road course while winning the SCCA’s National Championship,” says Piontek. “Another one of these open-wheelers converted to electric propulsion competed successfully at the Pikes Peak Hill Climb in 2012.”

Piontek’s most recent project was reengineering a Novak-designed SCCA D sports racer to accommodate a Suzuki Hayabusa motorcycle engine. The finished result was 200 horsepower and 125 lb-ft of torque from the 1340cc bike engine in a 1180-pound (including driver) package.

All told, Piontek constructed 30 or so cars in his garage. Factor in the scope and breadth of his creativity and you’ve got a craftsman truly deserving of the “Garagefather” appellation.

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it.

The post Homegrown: “Garagefather” Dave Piontek has built dozens of visionary cars appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Cars of yesteryear are our passion. We dig fins, muscle cars, and vintage Corvettes without prejudice. But seldom arises the chance to set the Wayback Machine for 1906. Thanks to Rich Robell of Novi, Michigan, we have the privilege to share a few moments from the driver’s seat of an utterly amazing 1906 Cadillac Model K runabout. After more than 115 years, it’s still vibrates with the ambition of creators eager to brave the road to tomorrow.

Going into our drive, Robell was impressed neither by the thousands of road tests under my belt nor my 200-mph passes across the Bonneville Salt Flats. To merit a spin in his Cadillac, I had to first prove I could start its engine. How hard could that be, when this car’s original owner was his 5-foot-tall great-great aunt Beatrice? Turns out, cranking the old beast is tougher than the measly 10 pushups I manage at the gym every morning.

Step One: Click the ignition switch and prime the carburetor by tugging a rod until fuel drips onto the pavement.

Step Two: Insert the crank handle into a hole in the runabout’s left frame rail. Awkward as that location seems, Robell explained that Cadillac chose it for safety reasons. A common accident for early cars with front-located starting cranks was flattening the driver when the engine fired. A second thoughtful measure was to block the crank’s access hole until the spark advance lever had been set to its fully retarded position, where backfiring is less likely.

Step Three: Grasp the crank handle. Per Robell’s counsel, I resisted the urge to employ both hands. I used my left, heeding advice to refrain from wrapping a thumb around the handle; doing so typically yields severe pain (if not broken bones) in the event of a backfire.

Step Four: Heave the crank smartly upward to spin the flywheel counterclockwise. This is more difficult than it sounds. Luckily, moments before exhaustion did me in, the single-cylinder 98-cubic-inch (1609 cc) engine popped to life and began quivering, presumably with enthusiasm for my test drive.

Climbing into the tall driver’s seat is the next arduous procedure. While it’s tempting to grab the (fragile) headlamp, Robell insisted I pull myself up with my left hand on the dash and my right hand gripping the curved edge of the body. Even with a handy step pad provided, mounting the saddle is another aerobic exercise.

In case you hadn’t noticed, the steering wheel is located on this Cadillac’s right side. It would remain until well into the 1920s. By then, road design had progressed to two lanes, prompting adoption of the left-side driving position for a centralized view of both oncoming traffic and roadside hazards. Given the fact that Robell and I are both huskier than the average early-20th-Century human, we rode elbow-to-elbow in his Cadillac.

So daunting were the Model K’s unlabeled controls that I was happy to have the accommodating Robell aboard as my coach. With three levers, two pedals, and a shaking steering wheel to operate, driving this centenarian demands every limb.

Depressing the pedal on the left tightens a band in the two-speed planetary transmission to get you rolling in the 3.1:1-ratio low gear. The right pedal applies rear-wheel brakes. To complicate matters, there’s a ratchet that keeps the brakes engaged until you release them with a tap from the left edge of your shoe.

The top brass lever, attached to the right side of the steering column, controls ignition timing. “Up” is the retarded position used for starting and idling. When the 10-horsepower engine begins pounding as the Cadillac starts moving, adjusting that lever downward advances spark timing to settle down the thumper beneath the seat.

Amazingly, this Cadillac’s updraft fuel-air mixer lacks any kind of throttle! The steering column’s lower brass lever controls engine load (power), rpm, and forward velocity by increasing intake-valve lift. It’s a fascinating mechanism: The lever operates a roller rocker arm via contact with a curved plate, varying intake valve opening from 114 to 245 degrees of crankshaft rotation. Cadillac engineer Alanson Brush earned a patent for this innovation in 1904. Variable valve timing arrangements by Alfa Romeo, BMW, and Honda came decades later.

The substantial handle swinging fore and aft at the cockpit’s right side is the Model K’s gear selector. Its center position maintains neutral until you step down on the left pedal, tightening the aforementioned band to initiate forward motion. Moving the handle rearward selects reverse, also engaged by depressing the left pedal. Forcing this long lever smoothly forward tightens a band clutch operating top gear, which is a direct 1:1 ratio.

Given the fact that a heavy steel piston is thumping a full five inches up and down inside its water-cooled 5-inch-bore cast-iron cylinder, there’s more than enough vibration here to rattle your dentures. The Model K’s gait does calm nicely once top gear is engaged and the rpm drops. With the power of ten horses propelling this 1370-pound carriage, rather than one or two that drop excrement, performance had to have impressed early adopters.

Thankfully, there is minimal traffic and no bumps in the roads circulating the Gilmore Museum in Hickory Corners, Michigan, where this Cadillac resides under national Cadillac & LaSalle Club care. After departing the club’s museum, a left turn on Duryea Drive carried us to Buick Circle, a quarter-mile-long test track.

Once the column stops shaking in my hands, the steering feels light and responsive. Robell was nervous about the right-front wheel’s wobble, resulting from the combination of a pneumatic tire supported by a steel “clencher” rim and a 12-spoke wooden wheel. Respecting his concerns we kept an easy pace, and it’s doubtful we ever topped 20 mph. This Cadillac’s alleged 30-mph top speed must have been exhilarating in period, like knocking on the sound barrier. Pedestrians would have been awestruck at time when rutted mud roads and horse-and-buggy traffic were the norm.

The engine’s heavy, shaky putt…putt…putt smooths into a relatively easy gait. Cadillac founder Henry Leland dubbed his original four-cylinder powerplant “Little Hercules” when he carried it under his arm to the 1902 receiver’s meeting that ended up converting the failed Henry Ford Company into Cadillac. That engine, proposed to but deemed too expensive for Ransom E. Olds’ use, got Cadillac off and running with its first deliveries following a New York Auto Show introduction in January 1903. The company logged 2000 firm orders from the get-go.

The Model K runabout in this test drive had a base price of $700 plus $50 for the optional leather top, or roughly $22,000 in today’s dollars.

Over a six-year production run, Cadillac built and sold 16,000 single-cylinder cars. Acknowledging that engine’s limitations, Cadillac introduced a four to power its more luxurious 1905 Model D luxury touring car. By then, Cadillac rightfully claimed to be the world’s largest auto producer. Fully enclosed bodywork arrived in 1906. William Durant added Cadillac to his cadre of General Motors brands in 1909, enabling leaps forward such as electric starting (1912) and the first mass-produced V-8 engine (1915).

The beauty of experiencing this 116-year-old crock is that it deepens our appreciation of everything that designers and engineers have contributed to modernize transportation. Best of all, Robell’s ride wears its patina with pride. Only two items have been changed over a century-plus of use—the cockpit’s floor mat required replacement after spilled gasoline dissolved part of it, and the leather soft top had to be renewed when some thoughtless leaner poked a hole in the factory-original folding roof.

Black-painted steel fenders wear the original paint applied by the Cadillac Automobile Company, at the time located at the intersection of Cass Street and Amsterdam Avenue in Detroit. There are hints of maroon paint visible on the flaking oak and poplar wooden bodywork. The tufted leather seat upholstery is worse for wear but still largely intact. Occasional polishing has kept the brass steering column, Dietz kerosene lamps, and body trim looking bright and new.

Robell, who recently retired from his Marathon Oil security director’s position, inherited this Cadillac from his grandmother Elizabeth Sherk. During their 1979 visit to the Gilmore Museum, she conveyed her desire for the car to eventually end up here.

Robell’s great-great aunt Beatrice Wynhoff purchased this Cadillac from dealer C J Bronson in Grand Rapids, Michigan, and drove it for six years. Fred and Elizabeth Sherk took possession in the early 1940s, dutifully maintaining and occasionally driving the car for decades. Robell inherited the car in 1989, donating it to the Cadillac & LaSalle Club’s Gilmore museum just last year (2021).

Robell chuckled when I guessed that his unmolested, single-family-owned, prize Cadillac might be worth a million dollars. Digging in to ascertain its true value, I found that a similar 1907 Model K blessed with a two-year restoration sold for $121,000 in 2007 at a Barrett-Jackson auction. All the king’s horses and valuation personnel at Hagerty dug deeper to arrive at this lower range—$55,000—$64,000. I stand corrected.

Clearly I’m not a valuation connoisseur. But now that I’ve driven (and started!) the car that got this marque rolling, I can legitimately consider myself a true Cadillac connoisseur.

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it.

The post 20 mph in a 1906 Cadillac Model K Runabout is controlled mechanical violence appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Welcome to Homegrown—a new limited series about homebuilt cars and the ingenuity, diligence, and craftsmanship of their visionary creators. Know of a killer Homegrown car that fits the bill? Send us an email at tips@hagerty.com with the subject line HOMEGROWN: in all caps. Enjoy, fellow tinkerers! -Eric Weiner

After completing a couple of projects, including a Lamborghini Countach built from a kit, Bryan Ferguson sought a machine capable of astonishing his circle of car enthusiasts. Upon discovering that a Chevy small-block was cheaper than hotting up the flat-four in his ‘72 VW Beetle, his course of action was set: in January 2019, Ferguson began constructing a V-8 “peoples’ car” in his garage.

Growing up Ferguson dreamed of becoming a professional baseball player. Knowing that such hopes seldom pan out, his wise father encouraged him to prepare Plan B. So, Ferguson followed high school with mechanics classes at a vocational school, acquiring skills he’s used ever since.

“Dad was right,” this 60-year-old craftsman confirms. “Once I became a professional mechanic, I never looked back!” Ferguson spent his career working as an automotive technician for the local Post Office. As a service to his community, he is also the current Chairperson of the Board of Police Commissioners for the city of Detroit.

Beetle hot rods are nothing new, but Ferguson’s home-built Bug is especially creative. The standard approach to marrying a V-8 to a Beetle is to erect the concoction atop a Chevy S-10 pickup frame. Knowing he could do better, Ferguson designed his own chassis from scratch. “My perimeter frame made out of 2×2- and 2×4-inch welded steel tubing keeps my engine from poking like an iceberg out of the hood,” he explains. “Casual observers don’t realize what they’re up against at until they discover my V-8 emblem or hear the rock and rumble out the back.”

Ferguson bought a wrecked ’69 Camaro to obtain the 350-cubic-inch V-8 and Turbo Hydra-Matic 350 automatic he needed. That car’s front subframe and control arm suspension integrated neatly with his tubular support structure. A GM 10-bolt rear axle with a 3.73:1 drive ratio was narrowed seven inches and secured with three trailing links and a Panhard rod. The GM recirculating-ball steering gear guiding the front wheels is power-assisted and connected to a tilt-and-telescope Camaro column and Grant flat-bottomed steering wheel. The disc/drum brake system incorporates a Toyota master cylinder and vacuum booster.

Centerline aluminum wheels carry Continental Pro Contact radials in front (size 155/60R-15) and Firestone Firehawk Indy gumballs in back (size 295/50R-15). Ferguson constructed a 3-inch exhaust system out of stainless steel.

For the bodywork, Ferguson bought his Beetle years ago in running condition. If the standard VW resembles an undersized running back, his 4-inch windshield chop with stock height rear roof pillars yield the look of a hunkered offensive lineman. The wide fenders and adjoining sills are fiberglass moldings. Modern-era BMW kidney grilles, along with a lower opening, feed air to the radiator and transmission fluid cooler. The sparkling headlamps are LED units designed for use in Jeeps while the teardrop taillamps are trailer components.

Ferguson sprayed the black urethane exterior finish at 4:00 a.m., when it was cold, to keep the insects in his garage paint booth at bay.

This master scrounger equipped his cockpit with buckets from a VW GTI, an aftermarket dash panel, and a homemade center console. Ferguson stitched the fresh upholstery, including a few red threads, to accent the black interior theme. The custom windshield and side glass are about the only components Ferguson didn’t construct personally in his garage. Start to finish, he needed just under a year to get his V-8 Beetle running. At the 2020 Detroit Autorama, Ferguson earned a first place trophy in the radical customs class.

The result is something that would definitely lift Dr. Porsche’s eyebrow a notch or two: 300 horsepower combined with an 1850-pound curb weight. “Wheelspin is never a concern,” Ferguson notes. “When I nail the throttle, the sticky rear tires are so nicely loaded they leap my car smartly into the next block.”

Behind many a sports car sorcerer you’ll find a patient spouse. Ferguson’s wife imposed only one rule. No work after 10 p.m. or on Sundays. Now that it’s done, she forbids the sale of this particular project: “Considering everything he built in our garage over the years, this VW V-8 impresses me the most.”

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it.

The post Homegrown: V-8 Speed Beetle packs 300 Detroit horses appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Following the 1955 24 Hours of LeMans debacle, when a collision between two competitors resulted in 82 spectator deaths, American automakers put heads together to keep their motorsports participation from attracting the attention of Congressional meddlers. In early 1957, a “gentlemen’s agreement” was contrived to cease and desist direct racing involvement.

That prompted two GM divisions—Chevrolet and Pontiac—which were genuinely serious about motorsports to simply hunker down and keep low profiles. Stealthy cloaks and daggers were implemented to enable continued competition—and victory.

With tantalizing youth market stakes in play, Henry Ford II grew tired of GM (and to a lesser extent Chrysler) eating his company’s lunch. Alas, in 1962 he let loose by announcing the Total Performance advertising campaign. This global initiative authorized direct support of Ford-powered Le Mans racers (GT40s), NASCAR stockers, NHRA drag cars, and Indy 500 machines.

Meanwhile, top GM executives feared a U.S. Justice Department anti-trust investigation of how, exactly, the company had earned more than a 50 percent share of the U.S. car and truck market. That worry kept in place the General’s ban on building and campaigning hotter models for the track. Remember: low profile.

1963: The original Z06

Enter the Corvette’s patron saint (and after 1967, chief engineer) Zora Arkus-Duntov. Having driven five years at LeMans in the 1950s and earning class victories in ‘54 and ’55 factory Porsches, he was no stranger to motorsports politics.

Following the arrival of the (Ford) Shelby Cobras in 1962, Arkus-Duntov understood that Corvette owners needed competition parts to safeguard their Sports Car Club of America’s (SCCA) A-Production turf. The trick was developing a clandestine strategy that would avoid alerting GM’s upper management. To draw potential competitors, Arkus-Duntov gave a new-for-1963 racing package the codename “Zora’s Option 6.” The Z06 (with a zero substituted for the sub-rosa O) was listed as a regular-production-option.

Z06 hardware, offered on coupes for $1818.45, included a 360-horsepower, 327-cubic inch V-8 engine; center-lock aluminum wheels; a limited-slip differential with various final-drive ratios; a 36-gallon fuel tank in the luggage compartment; and a heavy-duty suspension with stiffer springs, larger front anti-roll bar, and larger rear shock absorbers.

When issues with the wheels arose, they and the large fuel tank were deleted from the package, lowering the retail price to $1293.95 (almost $12,000 today). Z06 equipment was also fitted to a few 1963 convertibles, lifting the total volume for the introductory year to 199 cars. Given the base Corvette’s $4037 price, Z06 was obviously intended only for those with serious off-road intent. To reduce the sting a bit, deleting the heater and defroster yielded a $100 credit.

An epic confrontation transpired in October 1962, when three Corvette Z06s faced off against one of the first Shelby Cobras at the Los Angeles Times three-hour invitational road race staged in Riverside, California. While the Cobra driven by Bill Krause was competitively quick, it DNFed after 90 minutes with a failed rear hub carrier. Two Corvettes suffered major engine issues but the third—fielded by Mickey Thompson and driven by Doug Hooper—beat a Porsche 356 to seize an overall victory.

Shortly thereafter, Chevrolet Engineering purchased one of the early Shelby Cobras, a white car acquired for Arkus-Duntov’s evaluation. The Cobra’s 900-pound weight advantage inspired his 1963 Corvette Grand Sport, a hoped-for 100-car run of ultra-light sports cars which GM nipped in the bud after only five were built.

C5 Z06: 2001 resurrection

For the 2001 model year, decades since the one-and-done 1963 model year, the Corvette team, now headed by Dave Hill, resurrected the Z06 option code. After disappointing sales of the C5 generation’s low-content, manual-transmission-only fixed-roof Z51 coupe, Hill and his team wanted to pursue a higher-performance model from the same body structure. A Z06 arrived for the fifth model year of the C5 generation, fewer than five years after Arkus-Duntov’s 1996 passing..

Higher volumetric efficiency in the C5 Z06 was achieved in the new LS6 5.7-liter V-8 via improved porting and manifolds, more aggressive valve timing, and a redline boosted to 6500 rpm. Titanium exhaust pipes trimmed 19 pounds while special Goodyear Supercar radials shed an additional 23 pounds. Peak output was 385 horsepower—10 percent more than base Corvettes, and output later increased to 405 hp. A six-speed stick-shift transmission was mandatory. Suspension upgrades included a larger front stabilizer bar, stiffer rear springs, and more aggressive camber settings. The unique wheels were one inch wider than stock, while the mesh grille and brake duct behind each door helped distinguish the Z06 from other C5s.

Available only in the fixed hardtop body style for four model years, Z06s cost roughly $7000 more than a base coupe. Overall performance was competitive in its day, with a power-to-weight ratio of 8.12 pounds per hp—better than the 911 Turbo and Ferrari 360 Modena.

C6 Z06s

The 2005 model year brought us the C6 Corvette, and just one year later the Z06 returned true to form, combining minimal weight with maximum power. An exotic hydroformed aluminum frame supplied by Dana Corporation was 30 percent lighter than the steel alternative. Both the engine and the fixed roof were supported by a cast-magnesium structures. The front fenders, wheelhouses, and parts of the floor structure were molded carbon fiber.

A new LS7 small-block V-8 produced 505 horsepower from 427 cubic inches (7.0-liters) of displacement, making the C6 Z06 the most powerful (and fastest) Corvette to date. Special engine features included an aluminum block and heads, dry-sump lubrication, titanium connecting rods and intake valves, and a 7000 rpm redline. Even with larger tires and braking equipment and the larger dry-sump engine, the net weight savings over a base Corvette was 50 pounds.

Car and Driver clocked the 2006 Z06’s zero-to-sixty in 3.8 seconds and the quarter-mile in 11.8 seconds with a 125 trap speed and a 198 top speed.

In spite of its $65,800 base price, over 20 percent of Corvette buyers opted for this Z06 edition. Amid gradual price increases eventually reaching $76,575, it lasted eight model years, closing out the C6 generation in 2013.

Hagerty community editor Gene Leeds has owned a C4 Grand Sport, C5 Z06, C6 Z06, and C7 Z06, but the C6 was by far his favorite. “The C5 was the most fun but build quality was questionable,” says Leeds. “The C6Z truly is the sweet spot, and if I could have one Corvette to daily drive it would be the C6 Z06 Carbon. That 427 was shockingly quick-revving. Sublime. It handled well enough but had great communication and balance, which made up for the lacking steering feel.”

C7 Z06

Following another single-year hiatus, Z06s returned for the seventh-generation Corvette in 2015. Now available as both a convertible and a coupe, customers had the choice of the C7’s seven-speed manual or eight-speed automatic. Adding a belt-driven supercharger to the 6.2-liter small-block boosted the new LT4 V-8’s output to 650 horsepower, again making it the most power Corvette to date. (A feat surpassed later by the 755-hp C7 ZR1.) Variable cam phasing and dry-sump lubrication continued.

The new Z07 option for Z06s included adjustable spoilers, racier Michelin tires, and Brembo carbon-ceramic brake rotors. Two different carbon-fiber ground effects packages were also available. Though sticker prices topping $100K with options (up from the roughly $79,000 base price) were now within easy reach, more than a quarter of Corvette buyers purchased Z06s.

2023 C8 Z06

Recent Corvette customers have had to suffer three model years (2020–2022) without Z06s, creating a waitlist frenzy. Chevrolet will likely make the delay worth their while, with its totally new Gemini LT6 small-block V-8 engine sharing only a 4.4-inch cylinder bore spacing and dry-sump lubrication with its predecessors.

The new two-piece aluminum block is topped with cylinder heads boasting four camshafts and 32 valves. In spite of a displacement decrease to 5.5 liters, output rises to a potent 670 horsepower—nearly doubling the original Z06 engine’s ponies. The domed aluminum pistons and titanium connecting rods are both forged for durability.

A new flat-plane crankshaft with less rotational inertia allows spacing the exhaust pulses evenly to optimize volumetric efficiency. The new LT6 has a screaming exhaust note in place of the motorboat rumble common to every other small-block V-8. The 8600 rpm redline hoot is allegedly capable of rousing the dead.

Up top there’s a pair of molded-nylon intake-air plenums with internal trumpets to expedite flow. Special Helmholtz tuning helps top off the cylinders at a slight pressure without the complication of a supercharger.

The new Z06 bodywork includes wider fender, larger scoops and brake ducts, and an optional carbon-fiber wing. To help stop this hyper-‘Vette, brake calipers are fitted with six pistons in front and four in back.

The new Z07 option now includes carbon-ceramic brake rotors, which are 15.7-inches in diameter in front and 15.4-inches in back. The FE7 Magnetic Ride Control and Michelin Sport Cup tires also part of Z07. Possible additions include a full carbon aero package that produces 734 pounds of down force and carbon-fiber wheels that trim 41 pounds of curb weight.

Production at the Bowling Green, Kentucky, assembly plant has already begun. The base price is $109,275 including gas guzzler charge but without the typical dealer greed adjustment. If you didn’t plan ahead with an early deposit, you’re definitely late to this Z06 party; the 2023 model year is sold out. And that glow you see in the heavens?  That’s Zora beaming down in delight.

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark us.

The post How the Corvette Z06 went from ’60s racing package to modern monster appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Welcome to Homegrown—a new limited series about homebuilt cars and the ingenuity, diligence, and craftsmanship of their visionary creators. Know of a killer Homegrown car that fits the bill? Send us an email at tips@hagerty.com with the subject line HOMEGROWN: in all caps. Love the JS Special? Read about more Homegrown creations here. -Eric Weiner

Jerry Shuck spent over three decades designing and building his stunning sports roadster. Among this candy blue delectable’s many virtues—gorgeous design, thoughtful engineering, fastidious attention to detail—the most compelling is that it is a product of patience. Decades of it.

The seed of this stunning Homegrown machine, the JS Special, started germinating in 1989. After pondering several kit car options dating back to his high school days, Shuck, of Mendocino, California, began building his dream machine. Thirty years of inspiration, perspiration, and state-of-the-art craftsmanship yielded a sub-2000-pound, 300-horsepower, Can-Am-worthy weapon.

“My father warned me not to get too fanatical,” Shuck notes, “but I ignored that advice.”

Shuck, 66, became an automotive da Vinci by studying sculpture at the California Institute of Arts. That education paved the way to employment as an aerospace and architectural modeler at Pacific Miniatures, Dimensional Presentations, and the Ralph M. Parsons Corporation. During spare moments while on assignment in Saudi Arabia, Shuck crafted 1/10-scale models of his dream car, first in wood, then fiberglass. “Luckily I had an abundance of time available at this stage, so I was able to devote full attention to the early models,” Shuck explains.

Upon his return to the U.S., Shuck became a clay modeler at GM’s Advanced Concepts Center (ACC) in Newbury Park, California. The expansion of his skill set would prove fortuitous. After helping shape the 1992 Corvette Sting Ray III concept and GM’s EV1 electric car, he hauled home the Chevant clay from those projects as raw material for the full-scale model he was sculpting in his garage.

Before ACC closed in 1996, Shuck learned digital sculpting via Alias software, another skill that came in handy for his off-hours project. Weekend, holiday, and vacation hours over seven years were spent shaping and perfecting clay. Shortly before GM moved Shuck and his wife back to Warren, Michigan, to continue work at the Tech Center’s advanced design studios, he and two friends laid up the primary body molds from the model.

The JS Special then went on hiatus for several years while Shuck created suitable garage space at his Michigan residence. In those days, he pondered the car “on a daily basis and created many worthwhile sketches.” To polish his fabrication skills in the meantime, he took TIG welding classes at a nearby community college to prepare for the space frame construction phase.

Before race car designers adopted monocoque aluminum construction, the accepted standard was an elaborate array of welded steel tubing that combined strength and stiffness with minimal weight. Drawing inspiration from the Maserati Type 61 “Birdcage” and Lamborghini’s LP400 Countach, Shuck created his space frame out of triangulated thin-wall 1.25-inch-diameter chrome-moly steel tubing. Using modern computer aided design (CAD) technology facilitated the process. ERA Replica Automobiles of New Britain, Connecticut, helped by supplying the suspension math model for the outfit’s (now discontinued) Ford GT40 replica. To suit his needs, Shuck added one inch to ERA’s 95.5-inch wheelbase and 57.0-/58.0-inch front/rear track dimensions.

Shuck purchased unequal-length control arms, aluminum uprights, and front anti-roll bar suspension components from ERA. “Unfortunately [ERA was] difficult to work with and their prices are outrageous. Luckily, Bob Putnam, ERA’s chief engineer, did supply a floppy disc revealing suspension attachment points,” says Shuck.

The rack-and-pinion steering gear is from an MGB, with minor mods to suit this installation. Coilovers were engineered by Performance Shock of Sonoma, California. Brake calipers from a C4 Corvette grab Wilwood rotors. The aluminum 15-inch wheels cast by Phil Schmidt are accurate replicas of the circa-1965 Lola T-70 sports racer’s center-lock design. Roger Kraus Racing’s vintage Dunlop tires with appropriate tread patterns mount to the 8-inch-wide front and 10-inch rear wheels.

The JS Special’s engine began life as a 1963 Oldsmobile 215-cubic-inch V-8, selected because of its compact dimensions and aluminum block and head construction. Increasing displacement to 262 cubic inches, bolting on Buick 300 heads, and installing a quartet of Weber two-barrel carburetors yielded an estimated 300 horsepower. Phil Baker in Washington state built the engine while John Harcourt in New Zealand supplied the induction system. In Shuck’s estimation, “These experts were instrumental in my achieving a great powerplant for my car.”

Kennedy Engineered Products devised an adapter to bolt the JS Special’s V-8 to a Porsche 914 transaxle, reconfigured by Transaxle Engineering with 901 gearsets.

Shuck fabricated one five-gallon sheet-aluminum fuel tank to reside in each side sill.  He also built the exhaust system using bends and “baloney” tubing purchased from Stainless Specialties. Pipe wraps and insulation materials came from Design Engineering. Engine cooling is provided by a custom Griffin aluminum radiator.

While constructing the chassis took only a couple of years, molding body panels consumed nearly a dozen. First a rotisserie was built to facilitate dividing the body shell into 19 primary molds. A couple dozen other molds were created to make the instrument binnacle, wheel tubs, inner body panels, and bucket seats. Then each panel was laid up using eight layers of carbon-fiber cloth and Nomex honeycomb bonded with epoxy resin. Every part was vacuum-bagged and oven-cured. “A mold for every panel was necessary because of my hope to enter mass production,” explains Shuck. “They’re still consuming space in my garage awaiting their ultimate owner.”

While inspiration for the bucket seats’ design came from the Lotus Europa S2, backrest and thigh-support angles and widths were adjusted to suit this application. Shuck built a wood pattern to mold the carbon fiber and Kevlar seat forms. Foam pads of different durometers (stiffnesses) were carved to provide suitable thigh and lumbar support.

Painting the JS Special was another serious ordeal. Fortunately, Shuck’s wife Kimiko is an automotive paint chemist. Her network yielded John Zerucha at PPG in Cleveland who spent months formulating the perfect shade of candy blue before donating materials to the project. Motor City Solutions in Taylor, Michigan, spent a year applying five base coats, eleven candy mid coats, and five clear coats of paint. The result is magnificent, but it’s one of the few elements of the JS Special that did not come out to Shuck’s maximum liking. “This stage of the project was a nightmare I’d like to forget,” he recalls. “While everyone loves the color, the finish on my car is annoyingly fragile.”

After 27 years as a clay and digital sculptor, Shuck retired from GM in 2016 to focus on completing his homebuilt. With the project’s ledger showing a total investment of $85,000, full running, driving status was finally reached in 2019. Shuck’s crowning achievement was obtaining registration documents and license plates in Michigan’s “specially constructed vehicle” category. Hagerty provided appropriate insurance coverage.

Three years ago, Shuck and his wife relocated to California, where Michigan’s registration documentation was irrelevant and not recognized by state authorities. He’s currently struggling to convince the California Air Resources Board and other state agencies that his car merits their approval.  In the meantime, driving opportunities are limited. The JS Special’s odometer has yet to top two digits. “There’s gas in the tank awaiting my chance to clock lots of miles,” Shuck laments.

With a little luck, Shuck and his wife may yet clear this final tall hurdle. They’ve certainly been patient.

Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it.

The post Homegrown: The JS Special, a Can-Am racer for the road appeared first on Hagerty Media.

A foremost tenet of journalism 101’s tenet is sensationalism. To earn front-page, first-edition play, a feature story must boost the reader’s pulse. To preclude page turning, every print, digital, or podcast journalist’s goal is to set the plot hook fast and deep.

Flaming Ford Pintos were once hot news. In 1979, after three Indiana teens perished en route to soccer practice in a Pinto, the Ford Motor Company was accused of reckless homicide. Though the jury’s verdict was not guilty, Ford soon thereafter recalled Pintos to improve their rear-end crash performance and fire resistance.

The burning sensation du jour? Battery electric vehicle (BEV) fires. In 2018, British television director Michael Morris’s Tesla Model S suddenly burst into flames while stuck in Santa Monica Boulevard traffic. He expeditiously abandoned his hot seat while his wife Mary McCormack recorded the calamity on her cell phone.

Fortunately, there were no injuries. Unfortunately, Morris’s Tesla was a total loss. McCormack’s video depicting a blow torch erupting behind the left-front wheel went viral. Hollywood could not have contrived a more sensational spot of evening news.

EVs rising

At Tesla’s recent annual meeting, CEO Elon Musk forecast his company’s prospects:

• The Tesla Model Y is on track to become the world’s best-selling car next year
• Tesla’s current sales rate of 1.5 million vehicles per annum should reach 2 million units globally by the end of 2022
• Constructing another dozen or so “giga” factories around the world will enable Tesla to top Toyota and VW’s combined manufacturing volume

Factor in equally ambitious plans by Ford, GM, VW and others to convert their ICE fleets to battery-electrics and you’ve got a lot more of this technology hitting roads than ever before. So how much of a potential risk do EV fires represent?

Facts, not fiction

According to the National Fire Protection Association, a gasoline-fueled car fire occurs every five minutes. From 2013 through 2017, there were 117,400 U.S. car fires per annum. Given the 261 million vehicles on the road at the time, the incident rate was 0.045 percent.

Since the Chevy Bolt was introduced in 2016, GM has sold over 140,000 of them on four continents. We bring up the Bolt because it recently underwent very public recall after several incidences of fire relating to its LG-sourced battery (costing the South Korean conglomerate $1.9 billion). Globally, there have been 16 fires caused by battery pack faults prompting a production interruption and across-the-board pack replacements. The incident rate for the Bolt is 0.0107 percent, or 1/4 of the average ICE car’s stat. Nevertheless, BEV fires have replaced gasoline fires on the evening news and across the internet.

The third-party online organization AutoInsuranceEZ recently published additional information after diving into data from the National Transportation Safety Board and government recall statistics. Hybrid vehicle fires ranked first with 3474.5 fires per 100,000 vehicle sales (16,051 fires). Next came ICE cars with 1520.9 fires per 100,000 sales (199,533 fires). BEVs were at the very bottom of this calamity heap with only 25.1 fires per 100,000 vehicle sales (52 fires).

In the 2020 recall category, nearly a million Hyundai Elantras, Kia Cadenzas, Kia Sportages, and Honda Odysseys (all ICE vehicles) were recalled due to electrical shorts. Compare that to 152,000 Hyundai Kona EVs and Chevrolet Bolts recalled in the same period over potential battery faults.

How lithium-ion works

Lithium-Ion (LI) designs replaced lead-acid and nickel-metal-hydride batteries in electric vehicle applications a decade ago, because they’re far more efficient and cost-effective. Constituent parts include a cathode serving as the current collector and positive terminal, an anode for the second current collector and negative terminal, an insulating separator between the terminals, and a liquid electrolyte containing ethylene carbonate. Other materials inside LI batteries are aluminum, cobalt, copper, graphite, iron, manganese, nickel, and phosphorus.

Lithium ions (electrically charged atoms) travel through the separator to the positive terminal producing an electric current capable of powering an electric motor. When the battery is connected to a charger, that flow is reversed—from the cathode to the anode where the lithium ions remain on standby.

Today’s LI batteries operate at up to 900 volts. A Tesla Model S, for instance, contains 7920 cylindrical cells, designed by Panasonic.

In addition to the sensational Model S meltdown mentioned above, LI batteries have failed in other applications. In two separate incidents, Boeing 787 Dreamliner auxiliary power packs fitted with such batteries caught fire, prompting temporary grounding of the entire fleet of those planes. LI fires have also occurred in cell phones, hoverboards, and e-bikes.

Boiling batteries

As EV buyers manage their range anxiety, fears of fire may loom larger. Manufacturers and safety organizations well aware of these concerns have been quietly addressing the issue for a decade or more.

Tesla, for example, investigates such incidents and includes battery failures in its warranty coverage.

There are two common paths to LI battery meltdown. The first is when the driver accidentally runs over debris in the road, resulting in a hole poked through the bottom of the battery pack. Most makers guard against such damage by protecting the pack’s vulnerable bottom surface with a quarter-inch thick metal plate.

Injection-molded composite-plastic designs that are more puncture resistant, lighter, and hopefully less expensive are under development to replace today’s battery pack housings.

The second adversity is an internal short circuit resulting from a manufacturing defect. In both this case and in the event of a puncture, the results are the same. Heat generated by the short ignites ethylene carbonate in the liquid electrolyte. Thermal runaway—when heat from one shorted cell lights a neighboring cell—ensues and fire spreads throughout the battery pack.

Packs have vents to relieve excessive pressure in a controlled manner, and cooling systems diminish the chance of overheating. But when a chain reaction occurs, the resulting heat and flame rapidly consume the entire vehicle.

Mitigating efforts to date

Like every vehicle sold in the U.S., BEVs must pass stringent National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) tests. This includes severe frontal barrier, rear and side impact, roll-over, and partial-front-overlap collision tests. Any short circuit within the battery pack would result in a failure to earn NHTSA’s blessing. In addition, manufacturers test to assure that no BEV subjected to flood water poses a hazard to occupants or responders.

Recently, the U.S. Department of Transportation has required every EV maker to submit specific recommendations for extinguishing fires which are summarized and forwarded to responders.

Three years ago, SAE International published a Recommended Practice document addressing EV and hybrid-vehicle chemical, electrical, and thermal hazards. This publication includes recommended procedures for emergency responders as well as those who tow and salvage such vehicles.

According to Andrew Klock, emerging technologies manager at the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) in Quincy, Massachusetts, “Because BEV fires are significantly different from ICE car fires, firefighters need training focused specifically on this issue. We’re gearing up to provide that education.”

Founded in 1896, the non-profit NFPA offers multiple forms of responder training: in classrooms, via online webinars, and by live-virtual programs. It also has a certification process. NFPA’s expertise comes from partnerships with EV makers, the Fire Protection Research Foundation, and 15 other global organizations.

“Thus far over 300,000 first responders have been trained but another 800,000 firefighters still need our expertise,” Klock adds.

Earlier this year, GM gave the NFPA $225,000 to fund training to 12,000 volunteer and “underserved” U.S. fire departments. (Roughly two-thirds of U.S. fire departments are part-time or manned by volunteers.) GM has also initiated a first-responder training effort. Joe McLaine, a GM product safety and systems engineer, explains that “[GM] training offers unique material and hands-on experience to help responders’ awareness while safely interacting with BEVs in distress.’

In GM electric vehicles, orange-colored wiring indicates high voltage. Yellow stickers indicate where to disable the vehicle’s 12-volt circuits.

Fighting BEV fires

There are two competing fire-fighting strategies. GM’s preference, McLaine explains is to apply “large volumes of water to suppress LI fires.” NHTSA advises fire departments to simply allow lithium-ion fires to burn themselves out if there’s no immediate threat to life or nearby property. This diminishes the chance a responder will receive a high-voltage electric shock and the likelihood of re-ignition after the residue is transferred to a salvage yard. It’s all too common for BEV fires to relight several days—or weeks—after they’re extinguished.

Europe may be the global leader fighting BEV fires. A year ago, Austria-based Rosenbauer introduced an interesting Battery Extinguishing System Technology (BEST). This $30,000-$35,000 tool consists of two units—a controller and an extinguisher which is slid under the burning vehicle. Upon the operator’s command, a “stinger” rises vertically to pierce the battery pack’s bottom surface, then sprays water inside to cool the blaze. For low-slung EVs, use of the BEST device requires some lifting or tilting of the burning vehicle.

One benefit of this device is that the operator stays 25 feet from the fire; another is the 8 gallons per minute fluid flow is far less than what’s normally used. Rosenbauer claims that as little as 500 gallons can extinguish a BEV fire in less than an hour, versus the several thousand gallons and up to 24 hours normally required. Long-duration fires are a concern in part because they can result in the total depletion of a responder’s self-contained breathing apparatus.

No U.S. dealer we spoke to has delivered BEST equipment but sales are expected once departments begin budgeting for the tool in response to the rapid increase in the volume of EVs on the road.

A second procedure popular in Europe is to submerge the entire vehicle in a tank of water for 24 hours to cool residual hot spots.

According to David McInally, the chief at a Michigan township fire department near Detroit metro airport, “The use of fluids to extinguish battery fires is now in flux partly because there’s little data available thus far from car makers. Due to the vast quantities of water required, hydrant hook-ups are preferred if they’re available. Transferring the burned-out vehicle to a water-filled pit is also under consideration.

“Because there is [an EV] car maker in our township, we monitor building codes applicable to the manipulation of cells within packs and the storage of LI battery materials. We tap on-line multi-media to learn more on this subject. With more and more traveling our roads, it’s definitely a pressing issue.” Asked if he fears electric shocks traveling from a burning EV to the firefighter via the extinguishing stream, McInally rates that “a very rare possibility.”

Eliminating flammable electrolyte

In 2017, John Goodenough, who received the Nobel Prize for inventing LI batteries, published a treatise outlining a new type of battery—the solid-state design. The breakthrough here is replacing flammable liquid electrolyte with a non-combustible solid polymer, ceramic, or glass material. Other benefits include up to three times the energy density of today’s LI cells, longer life, faster charging, minimal cooling requirements, and better performance at sub-zero temperatures.

While miniature non-rechargeable solid-state batteries are already in use within human heart pacemakers, scaling them up in mass production for BEV use poses a major challenge. A joint venture between Toyota and Panasonic claims well over 1000 patents in this field and Toyota previewed autonomous people movers powered by solid-state batteries at the 2020 Tokyo Olympic games. Nissan and Mercedes-Benz are next in line. Hybrids and/or BEVs with solid-state batteries should appear relatively soon and hopes are widespread that this breakthrough will begin supplanting today’s LI batteries by the end of the decade.

An auspicious new player

While there are already a dozen major LI battery manufacturers around the globe, start-up organizations aren’t afraid to disrupt the status quo. Mujeeb Ijaz founded ONE in Novi, Michigan, two years ago, bringing ample experience to the energy storage party: sixteen years developing EVs and fuel cells at Ford, a combined nine years of effort at Apple and A123, and eighteen patents in his name.

ONE—standing, ambitiously, for Our Next Energy—currently has 153 personnel, plans to begin production by the end of 2023, and an engineering office in Fremont, California, aimed at tapping West Coast talent.

Ijaz’s intention is a reinvention of the LI battery without resorting to a solid-state design. His goals are to double vehicle range with improved energy density, eliminate any chance of meltdown, and offer a chance at a supply chain resistant to global conflicts (all materials sourced in the Western Hemisphere).

Last December, a Tesla Model S equipped with an experimental ONE dual-chemistry battery logged 752 miles over Michigan roads. The BMW iX is next in line.

“We are thrilled to be working with BMW to demonstrate our Gemini long-range technology to consumers,” Ijaz adds. “We plan to pack twice as much energy in our batteries so BEVs can handle long-distance driving during winter, climbing mountains, and while towing.”

BMW just led ONE’s $65-million funding round, suggesting that OEMs are both on the lookout for battery innovation and willing to pay up for it.

Let us return to the admittedly sensationalist question posed at the beginning of this story—is a raging BEV fire heading toward your garage? Statistically it’s very unlikely. The data is crystal clear; such incidents are far rarer than gasoline fires. If that doesn’t allay your concerns, comprehensive efforts are underway to control BEV meltdowns when they happen, and brilliant engineers are working to improve and reimagine battery technology as we know it.

Like you, as long as we can keep our beloved cars on the road we’ll refrain from cutting up our Shell credit card. But if we are going to be critical of BEVs, as we should of any new technology, let’s do it armed with the facts. Anything less is fanning the flames of misinformation.

The post EV Fires: Not coming to a garage near you, statistically speaking appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Car makers are striding toward the full digital operation of brake, clutch, throttle, and shifter control systems. Soon, mechanical levers, links, and hydraulic piping will be replaced by software and wires linking the driver to all of their vehicle’s powertrain and braking equipment.

Italian brake specialist Brembo recently announced a new by-wire system called Sensify, a combination of the words sense and simplify based on a forward-looking approach: to integrate human perceptions more efficiently with vehicle design. While Brembo won’t say exactly which brands will use Sensify, it promises this system will reach production in less than two years. (The fact that Brembo demonstrated its technology on Tesla Model S sedans suggests that Elon Musk is first in line for public introduction.)

Founded just over 60 years ago as a repair parts producer, Brembo has expanded its reach into 15 countries and three continents to specialize in state-of-the-art braking systems for car, motorcycle, and motorsports use. Brembo also manufactures clutch systems and cast-magnesium wheels for racing bikes.

Brake-by-wire is not a new technology. It initially gained popularity in the late 1990s among OEMs developing electric and hybrid vehicles that rely on regenerative braking, such as the GM EV1 and Toyota Prius. In place of a conventional hydraulic braking system (in which the driver’s force on the brake pedal has a mechanical link to brake actuation), a brake-by-wire system functions with sensors and computers to calculate braking force, with electric motors that apply the braking force to the hydraulic system.

Given the lack of physical connection to the driver, tuning brake pedal feel and response to seem natural can be challenging.

The C8 Chevy Corvette is so equipped and Formula 1 racers have used such an approach to decelerate their rear wheels since 2014. Other models that have offered brake-by-wire include the Toyota Prius, Lexus RX400h, Mercedes-Benz E-Class and CLS-Class, and the Alfa Romeo Giulia. A competing system offered by Continental Automotive called MK C1 is specifically aimed at enabling full autonomous driving. This design combines the brake master cylinder, power booster, ABS system, and electronic stability control into one compact package.

Under development for a decade, Brembo’s Sensify offers the flexibility to suit needs ranging from sub-compact city cars to large commercial vehicles as well as top-flight racing applications. Every arrangement has a brake pedal “simulator” to accept driver commands while providing intelligently programmed feel and feedback. Wires dispatch signals from the pedal to two brake control units, one per axle. Then a choice exists: Each brake control unit can send either an electric signal to calipers equipped with an integral electro-mechanical actuator (essentially an electric motor) to squeeze the brake pads into contact with their rotor or hydraulic fluid under pressure to activate a conventional brake caliper. In other words, the vehicle maker can choose between full by-wire operation, thereby eliminating brake fluid entirely, or a mix of hydraulic operation of the front brakes with electric actuation at the rear.

Brembo claims multiple benefits, including faster ABS and traction control response, shorter stopping distances, more programmable driver feedback, reduced maintenance, and elimination of friction caused by unnecessary pad-to-rotor contact. While Brembo doesn’t claim that Sensify is less expensive to produce than today’s brake systems, the possibility of lower cost to the vehicle manufacturer definitely exists.

Francesco Mosti, a Brembo North America engineering manager, adds, “Providing a separate actuator at each wheel enables better control at all four corners. That results in smoother, more linear response and safer braking over wide-ranging road conditions.”

By-wire technology isn’t going anywhere. But if faster, more efficient, and more reliable braking is the result, and driver feedback can be carefully tuned for maximum confidence, we’re excited to try out Sensify when Brembo’s first examples hit streets.

The post Brembo wants brake-by-wire to feel less alien appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Welcome to Homegrown—a new limited series about homebuilt cars and the ingenuity, diligence, and craftsmanship of their visionary creators. Know of a killer Homegrown car that fits the bill? Send us an email at tips@hagerty.com with the subject line HOMEGROWN: in all caps. Enjoy, fellow tinkerers! -Ed

While Noah Webster may not concur, we’d define a serious auto enthusiast as an individual who continues fiddling with cars in the evening after a long day toiling over them at work. Garrick Zack, 47, a designer in GM’s Advanced Studio in Warren, Michigan, fits that description to a T. While Zack won’t disclose the future products he’s working on by day, we’re frankly more interested in what he’s cooking up by night, in his garage. He proudly shared with us the replica Lancia Stratos HF kit car he assembled from Lister Bell, at his home north of Detroit.

Over the years, Lister Bell (now LB Specialist Cars) has sold roughly 150 Stratos kits to customers around the world who admire the design and performance of one of history’s most legendary rally cars. Homologated for the FIA’s Group4 competition in 1974, the Lancia Stratos HF (High Fidelity) won five Tour de France competitions and the World Rally Championship from 1974 through 1976.

Zack notes, “My kit came in a box larger than a full-size van. Each of the fiberglass body pieces was wrapped separately; the space frame was assembled but no driveline components were included. The quality of the panels facilitating tight gaps and perfect alignment impressed me from the start.

“Because the white exterior color is molded into the gelcoat, no painting was required. My initial cost was around $50,000 though it’s hard to guess what it might be today due to fluctuations in the international currency exchange rate and other variables. My total investment was approximately $100,000. Initial construction took place in my mother-in-law’s one-car garage. Later, I was able to use a friend’s two-car garage.”

LB is based in Newark-on-Trent, Nottinghamshire, U.K., north of London. This enterprise isn’t currently selling its STR kits due to pandemic- and Brexit-related challenges. While Lancia originally built nearly 500 Stratos cars for homologation, LB has sold around 150 of its STR replicas to date. Factory originals bring $500,000 or more depending on their competition record in the rare instance one reaches the auction block. And then there’s MAT in Italy that charges $600,000+ (not including the cost of a Ferrari F430 donor car) to make its modern-age New Stratos.

LR’s tubular spaceframe provides engineered mounting points for all suspension and driveline components. There are control arms in front and struts in back with a dual-rate coil-over damper at each corner. This arrangement provides a pleasant ride with excellent balance and body control during the inevitable aggressive driving. The brake system includes opposed-piston calipers and slotted discs made by HiSpec in England. Compomotive “coffin spoke” aluminum wheels are shod with aggressive Michelin Course radial tires, size 215/55VR-15 in front and 335/35VR-15 in back.

While the rally pod lamps look like they’d be excellent for urging laggards out of the passing lane, Zack doesn’t use them. The pop-up fender headlamps and low-mounted fog lamps provide ample night-time illumination, he reports.

Zack’s engine is the 3.0-liter four-cam 24-valve V-6 that powered Alfa Romeo 164 sedans in the late 1990s. After suffering the failure of the first used engine he purchased, Zack found a fresh replacement still in its crate. This fuel-injected V-6 provides around 230 horsepower and is married to a five-speed manual transaxle. LB made the entire exhaust system, including mufflers, out of stainless steel.

The custom-made bucket seats are included in the kit. All the Veglia instruments are common with a Fiat 124, except for the Auto Meter fuel gauge. Door and panel latch hardware also came from Fiat parts bins.

The biggest issue Zack experienced was persuading the Italian electrical system to behave. “Thankfully, Brian Scott, an electrician I know at work got my car to start and run perfectly,” he notes.  “Also, I’d be remiss not mentioning my wife Renee’s contributions. She not only kept our two kids out of my hair when I was busy working, she pitched in repeatedly, trial fitting and removing the engine. Her support made this a totally enjoyable project.”

Since completing the project five years ago, Zack has enjoyed driving his homebuilt Stratos some 3000 miles. “It’s a time machine with roots deep in the past yet capable of drawing attention today,” he adds.

“The compact size, light weight, and quick steering make my Stratos feel like maneuvering a go-kart. My kids love taking rides.  The best part is the satisfaction I realized from assembling this car myself.”

Climbing into the driver’s seat over the guard beam that intersects the door opening is a major challenge but much easier than escaping this Stratos’s grip on my un-limber body. There’s more room and far easier entry and exit on the navigator’s side of the cockpit.

Zack demonstrated the agility he adores on a quick lap of his neighborhood. Forward visibility is excellent, especially to the sides of the car, though the view to the rear is full of black louvers. The exhaust note is just right—assertive but never oppressive or annoying to neighbors.

The designer also admires the interplay between function and form evident in his homegrown Stratos. We’d say it’s a stunning result from a serious car enthusiast burning the candle at both ends.

The post Homegrown: GM designer’s Lancia Stratos HF kit car appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Welcome to Homegrown—a new limited series about homebuilt cars and the ingenuity, diligence, and craftsmanship of their visionary creators. Know of a killer Homegrown car that fits the bill? Send us an email at tips@hagerty.com with the subject line HOMEGROWN: in all caps. Enjoy, fellow tinkerers! -Eric Weiner

Every now and again, from across the lake where I reside, the captivating sound of a Rotax aircraft engine powering a small seaplane reaches my ears. This is my cue to cease what I’m doing to witness the tidy water-and-air craft slip Earth’s surly bonds. This week I met the man behind the machine, 62-year-old retired Ford engineer John Hickey, who combined Kitfox aircraft components with floats thirty years ago.

Imagine my delight when this new neighbor friend also presented six of the eight three-wheeled HyperRocket “autocycles” he’s built at home in his pristine southeast Michigan shop.

Hickey spent 30 years at Ford specializing in fuel economy development—a worthy cause in the current moment of $5 gasoline and the industry’s transition toward electric propulsion. It was the unlikely combination of his professional expertise and his experience building the seaplane that led to his creation of the HyperRocket. Combining lightweight aircraft aerodynamics with the performance of a sport motorcycle produces what Hickey calls a “crotchless rocket,” named so because no frame or fuel tank resides between the driver’s knees.

For each HyperRocket he produces, Hickey spends approximately six months on design and analysis, followed by six months of fabrication. The gas-powered versions boast a wide front track, handlebars and controls from a Suzuki motorcycle, a single rear drive wheel, and room for the driver and one passenger. Hickey sought to optimize performance while minimizing fuel consumption, focusing on ample stability, accurate control, and light weight.

How light? One version creatively combines a Suzuki Hayabusa 1340-cc inline-four motorcycle engine with turbocharging and intercooling to achieve a phenomenal 500 horsepower in a 585-pound, ready-to-rumble package. That machine has topped 200 mph on Hickey’s secret test track.

“While my job at Ford maximizing fuel efficiency provided much of the expertise required for this project, there were significant engineering gaps that had to be filled,” Hickey explains. “The most notable was every aspect of vehicle dynamics—how the suspension design interacts with the physics of motion to determine stability. A software called Wishbone was instrumental in laying out the front suspension.

“Aerodynamics is the second performance concern. Here, JavaFoil software helped optimize drag, lift, and directional stability. A third software obtained from Performance Trends predicted engine output considering bore, stroke, and boost pressure parameters.”

The complete suite of Computer Aided Design (CAD) and physics-based analysis software helps optimize all aspects of the design including performance, fuel efficiency/range, stiffness/stress, aerodynamics, suspension dynamics, and braking ability.

“Using software to model and predict performance is standard OE car-manufacturing methodology,” says Hickey. “You start early—long before production commences—to assure that essential safety and performance goals are achieved in your final design.

The high-strength-steel chassis tubing is cut on a purpose built CNC machine to exacting tolerances. Borrowing a page from historic aircraft manufacturing procedures, Hickey covers his structures with ultralight polyester fabric drawn taut with heat. Paint and/or a wrap gives each HyperRocket constructed thus far a unique appearance. The nosepiece is made of thin fiberglass molded locally by a shop using a form created by Hickey. Two options are available to minimize the ill effects of cockpit buffeting: wear a helmet or add the optional windshield shown here. One such HyperRocket entered in the Vetters Fuel Economy Challenge achieved 140 mpg.

“My goals were light weight, low aerodynamic drag, and minimal frontal area,” explains Hickey. “What I ultimately achieved in the HyperRocket an 0.27 drag coefficient, and a frontal area below one square meter. For reference, the drag coefficient for un-faired motorcycle and rider typically tops 0.75.

“Achieving suitable stability became a development effort. My first two HyperRockets demonstrated less than perfect stability in crosswinds, gusts, and while passing other vehicles on the road. Anything this light can become a kite in certain circumstances, so I fine-tuned steering, suspension, and external shape details to remedy those issues.”

Hickey’s crowning achievement is the pearlescent-painted, fully electric tandem-seat HyperRocket featured here. Combining Tesla Model S battery cells with a Netgain HyPer9 AC motor and direct drive yields a machine that’s simultaneously zero-emission, quiet, and the arch enemy of inertia.

I know that’s true because Hickey (foolishly) allowed me to terrorize a nearby neighborhood in his stealthy electric HyperRocket. While the chain-drive noise produces a soundtrack that is louder than he’d like, the most noise I heard came from the Toyo Proxes R888 205/45ZR-17 rear tire scratching the asphalt beneath its tread. I found the three-wheeler to be an ideally quiet means of scooting to 60 mph in less than five seconds, and adjustable brake regeneration makes this a true single-pedal machine for most situations. There’s some feedback from the road through the rack-and-pinion steering that guides the Federal 14/7 low rolling resistance front tires.

The streamlined shape and 780-pound curb weight for the HyperRocket EV yields 260 miles of around-town range and 150 miles of highway range. The front seat slides fore-and-aft to accommodate various body builds, and a sleek windscreen serves nicely as a wind deflector Bringing a companion requires removal of the clear plastic cover over the second seat. Alternatively, that rear space can accommodate up to 500 pounds of cargo.

Hickey adds, “The relatively easy part of this project was achieving good correlation between simulated and real-world results. Once my engineering models were perfected, I used them to predict the performance of rockets, Teslas, and electric motorcycles … with excellent correlation.”

The mainstream auto industry’s move to BEVs should advance the home-built cause, because electric motors are easier to integrate than combustion engines with their fuel, intake, and exhaust systems. At last year’s SEMA show, Ford introduced its Eluminator crate motor, essentially the same 281-horsepower AC motor and gear reducer that drives the Mustang Mach-E. That $3900 propulsion package weighs but 205 pounds. As you might imagine, neither batteries nor electronics controls are included.

Exposure to his HyperRockets convinced me Hickey’s ambitions are practically unlimited. At present, he is examining means of integrating the electric motor within the rear wheel’s hub to provide additional seating space while also eliminating drive chain noise. A more long-view goal is to explore the feasibility of selling his homebuilt three-wheelers in higher volume, which would require a deep-pocketed backer in the Elon Musk or Henrik Fisker vein. We wish him nothing but good luck and great success.

Any reader (or investor) anxious to learn more about Hickey’s gas and electric-powered creations can reach this modern-day Orville Wright at: HyperRocket1@gmail.com

The post Homegrown: HyperRocket autocycle is retired Ford engineer’s “crotchless” creation appeared first on Hagerty Media.

The latest Bronco is a real HOSS that will never get your GOAT.

At first blush, you might imagine Ford would launch the newest version of its kicker Bronco in the Florida Everglades, the natural wonder that inspired its name. Turns out our Dearborn hosts had one of their classic “better ideas.” While America’s southernmost National Park sprawls over 1.5 million acres of water-soaked sawgrass and mangroves, it’s stocked with pythons up to 17 feet long, alligators, crocodiles, endangered turtles, and the odd Florida panther. Though the Everglades’ slow-moving river flows only a foot deep over its limestone bed, there are spots where this marsh is eight feet deep. Temperatures there top 90 degrees in the summer, the air so thick with humidity you can practically drink it.

In lieu of the Everglades, Ford vectored us in the opposite direction—as far north as possible without bringing a passport. Drummond Island in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula knocks on Canada’s basement door. Readily accessible by ferry, this scenic locale is a favorite playground for off-roaders, and, as we found out, the perfect place to froth the Everglades’ shock oil to a fare thee well.

The new Everglades package comes on the larger of the two Bronco siblings. Available only as a four-door, it costs $56,190 with destination fees and is positioned between the Wildtrak ($52,820) and the range-topping Raptor ($70,095). A turbocharged 2.3-liter four-cylinder engine delivering 300 horsepower and 325 lb-ft of peak torque (running premium fuel) drives all four wheels through a 10-speed automatic transmission. While stick-shift fans are surely disappointed that no H-pattern can be had here, we were duly convinced after roaming Drummond that Ford engineers know best what works off-road.

Sixth-generation Bronco underpinnings originated in the body-on-frame Ranger pickup. Anchored by the fully boxed frame, there’s an independent front suspension with coil springs and Bilstein dampers up front and a live axle located by five links and similar spring/shock equipment in back. The new Everglades package builds on the Sasquatch option’s hardware which includes H.O.S.S. (high-performance off-road stability suspension) 2.0 with Bilstein position-sensitive dampers, locking differentials, 35-inch Goodyear mud-terrain radials, and appropriately wide fender flares.

An intake snorkel adorning the right-front windshield pillar minimizes the chance of fouling the engine with water, dust, or sand. In addition, there are extended vent pipes for the transmission, transfer case, and both differentials. The Bronco’s tender parts are protected with a reinforced front bumper with a bash plate, side-sill rock guards, and stout skid plates beneath the engine and fuel tank. A Warn winch tuned up with Ford refinements is prominently attached to the front bumper. It’s rated at 10,000 pounds of pull and its 100-foot-long cable is made of synthetic material (think nylon) to a save weight and for safety’s sake in the event this line snaps under load. The Everglades is crowned with a handy roof rack.

The 315/70R-17 Goodyear Territory tires mounted to 8.5-inch-wide painted aluminum wheels provide 36.4-inches of fording ability, 10-30-percent more than competitors according to Ford. Wheel travel is eight inches in front and ten inches in back.

The interior is shared with Bronco’s Black Diamond trim level. Seats are upholstered in water-repelling marine-grade vinyl while floor surfaces are covered in rubber matting with handy drains. The center-console mounted G.O.A.T. (goes over any terrain) twist knob provides seven suspension and driveline settings: normal, eco, sport, slippery, mud/ruts, sand, and rock crawl. In addition, two dash-top rocker switches allow locking the front and/or rear diffs at appropriate times. Dual zone automatic air conditioning is standard.

After crossing the stunning Mackinac Bridge linking Michigan’s Upper and Lower peninsulas and a ferry crossing from the intriguingly named De Tour Village (pronounced de Too-ûr VIL-ij), we reached Drummond Island with our entourage of Bronco Everglades test vehicles. Local residents probably thought we were Vasco da Gama surveying fresh territory.

During two long sessions interrupted by lunch on a picturesque beach, journos showed minimal mercy traipsing woods in the Bronco Everglades. The rule of the day was “slow and steady” with astutely placed wheels and gentle throttle applications negotiating the million and one hazards. A heavy rainstorm doused this region, as if on cue, 24 hours before our arrival.

Let’s review the list of impediments we faced:

• Water ponds too deep (three feet in places) and broad for traversing on foot
• Submerged mud
• Boulders up to 40 inches in diameter
• Tree roots, dead and alive
• Standing trees hugging the path
• Branches sometimes caressing both sides and the Bronco’s top at the same time
• Marble staircases compounding grade climbing with jagged stone edges
• A gravel beach lapped by Lake Huron

The only wild beast we sighted was an inquisitive spring-born deer. (We saw nary a partridge nor a pear tree.)

Ford’s recommended tactic was to center one tire on a boulder when it was impractical to maneuver clear of that rock. The Bronco’s rack-and-pinion steering helped select the best path with utmost precision. While twisting the steering wheel full lock generally sufficed, there were a couple of hazards that demanded the classic three-point procedure, including a touch of reverse. On two occasions, a guide was posted to suggest the best steering inputs while spotting rock hazards and other impediments.

The Bronco’s general attitude can be summed up most succinctly in two words: Amazing Grace. Traction in mud was never a real concern. The front bash plate and fender extensions did an excellent job keeping the bow wave from gushing onto the windshield. I don’t recall ever hearing this beast slamming down on a rock due to insufficient wheel and body damping. There wasn’t a hint of wheel spin even with one tire clawing air. Engine calibrations were perfect for applying just the right amount of throttle for any occasion. The sheer toughness, grip, sensitivity, and suppleness engineered into these tires is extraordinary. What must have been months of work calibrating the mud/ruts and rock crawl G.O.A.T. modes we used paid off handsomely. Water-sodden brakes came back to life by applying gentle pressure to the pedal a few extra feet before any slow-down was desired.

While 35 miles of this torture doesn’t sound that daunting, our average speed below 5 mph gives an idea of what an ordeal our Drummond woods invasion truly was. By the end of the day, our upper body might as well have spent hours in a hardware store paint shaker. Never in the motoring journalist annals, shy of some outrageous Land Rover adventures, has a manufacturer invested so much effort proving that their product tops such wild expectations.

The only blemishes we detected were hints of snorkel sizzle on the highway with the front passenger window rolled down and slight seepage through one floor drain plug. An interesting discovery was a smart means of reentering the cockpit when the outside door handle is caked in mud: if you plan ahead by lowering the driver’s side window, you can maintain tidy hands by reaching over the glass to use the inside door-latch release.

Any Ford fan who’s matured out of their tire-melting Mustang days finally has a new flavor of fun to sample. This is a tough sportster offering entertainment a growing family can experience, and the Bronco Everglades beats any other day in the park. To SUV shoppers wobbling between the Wrangler Rubicon and the Everglades, we’d vote in Ford’s favor. Jeep will be challenged equaling this long run down the off-road trail. And, thanks to Bronco’s independent front suspension, shrewd suspension calibrations, and state-of-the-art Goodyear radials, the Everglades is a well-composed highway companion, particularly on Michigan’s war-torn roads.

The only suggestion we have for Ford is to reconsider the Everglades name. Since that place intimidates in so many ways, why not instead christen this confident new Bronco the Drummond?

***

2022 Ford Bronco Everglades

Price: $54,595 before options

Highs: Peerless confidence off-road. Stupendous powertrain tuning. Refined suspension.

Lows: No manual gearbox.

Summary: A rugged Bronco with a factory winch and snorkel that tackles the harshest conditions even better than you’d expect.

The post Off-Road Review: 2022 Ford Bronco Everglades appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Human nature is such that even in the darkest of hours, people can still imagine a sunnier future. Thus was it in the depths of World War II, as Luftwaffe bombs rained down on a burning Coventry in Britain’s industrial heartland, that a group of engineers standing fire watch with helmets and sand buckets began to plan one of the greatest sports car engines ever to burn gasoline. Their creation would remain in production for over half a century, it would be installed in everything from Le Mans winners to army tanks, and it would help revive Britain from the bitter economic malaise that followed its triumph in World War II.

Perhaps most important, it would become forever famous as the gorgeous inline powerplant with the polished aluminum cam covers that purred under the bonnet of the Jaguar E-Type, what auto journalist Henry N. Manney III dubbed “the greatest crumpet-catcher known to man.”

Origin of the species

Jaguar’s XK-6 engine is a rare instance where exotic aircraft technology successfully executed the leap to a production automobile. World War I aircraft engine designers adopted overhead cams because pushrods between block-mounted cams and distant overhead valves suffered intolerable thermal expansion issues, leading to valve-clearance problems and failures. What they called “tower shafts” linking the crank to the cams proved to be the viable solution—that is, before chains or belts became common drivers of overhead camshafts. Up to the start of hostilities in 1939, such shafts were employed in some exotic and racing car engines as well as V-configured aircraft mills like the famous Rolls-Royce Merlin.

In the teeth of WWII, William Lyons (Sir William after 1956) and his engineering team pondered future engine designs during long hours on fire watch duty at their SS Cars factory in Coventry, which besides repairing aircraft during the war also produced military sidecars and trailers. The team included Walter Hassan, Claude Bailey, and William Heynes, who was well established after stints at Humber and Rootes but who was still subjected to five interviews with the finicky Lyons before being hired as the chief engineer of SS Cars in 1935.

Because the infamous Nazi Schutzstaffel had rendered the SS trademark distasteful by 1945, Lyons rechristened his enterprise Jaguar Cars Limited as the team pondered its role in a world without war. Times were tough all over the globe, but the stiff-upper-lip Brits, desperate for the hard currency won through exports, couldn’t wait to resuscitate their beleaguered car business. In 1947, Britain’s John Cobb became the quickest man on earth, running 400 mph across the Bonneville Salt Flats. And at the 1948 Earls Court Motor Show in London, Jaguar, which hadn’t finished its new sedan in time, instead unveiled a lascivious two-seat roadster that wasn’t supposed to do much except grab people’s attention at the show. Instead, it became the world’s fastest production car powered by what would become one of history’s most remarkable engines.

With America’s overhead-valve V-8 revolution a year away and the rest of Europe still licking its war wounds, the new Jaguar XK 120 roadster landed with a cymbal crash. Its voluptuous exterior was the perfect antidote to the late-1940s doldrums in England, where shortages and rationing were still in effect. Companies that could export got favorable allocations of raw materials, so Jaguar set its sights on over-sexed, overpaid (but no longer over here) America. And under this sports car’s priapic hood, the 3.4-liter dual-overhead-cam inline-six glistened like the crown jewels.

Initial goals for Jag’s new engine were top performance, refined manners, a long shelf life, and a delightful appearance. Engines had been made beautiful before by such marques as Bugatti and Duesenberg, but Lyons wanted to build the first ravishing engine to be accessible to a wider audience. At the time, the engines in comparably priced Cadillacs and Lincolns were mere iron lumps. Over a production run spanning six decades, nearly 700,000 of the engines were built in displacements ranging from 2483 cc to 4235 cc, and the XK-6’s distinction as one of history’s most stunning pieces of engineering art proves that Lyons’s lofty aims were exceeded. Added to the engine’s long list of accomplishments is a brilliant competition career, including five outright victories at Le Mans.

Inspiration oven

To organize their thoughts and studies, Lyons’s crew assigned the letter X to stand for experimental, followed by a second letter for each specific design. Four- and six-cylinder configurations were considered but the large-displacement four-cylinder prototypes were deemed too uncouth to serve Jaguar’s upmarket aspirations. Inline-fours lacking balance shafts suffer prodigious shaking forces, while inline-sixes are inherently balanced. (Mitsubishi did solve the four-cylinder palsy issue with counterrotating balance shafts, but not until the mid-1970s.) Sixes also provide a power pulse every 120 degrees of crank rotation versus 180 degrees (half a turn) for fours.

To achieve high volumetric efficiency—expeditious fluid flow in and out of the head—Lyons’s team concluded that large valves residing inside a domed (a.k.a. hemispherical) combustion chamber were essential. By 1947, after 10 alphabet letters had been consumed during experimentation, Jaguar engineers finally agreed on a production design: a 3441-cc DOHC engine designated as XK-6.

The numerals in the 1948 Jaguar roadster’s XK 120 name were code for its top speed. To foil the skeptics, Jaguar engineers dispatched a prototype to Belgium in the spring of 1949. There, a local motor club clocked an unmodified car at 126 mph on a straight stretch of highway. With its windshield replaced by a short driver’s screen, the two-way average topped 132 mph. Fitting a tonneau over the passenger seat upped this Jag’s peak velocity to 135 mph. The following year, similar XKs averaged 130 mph lapping the French track at Montlhéry for an hour and over 100 mph for 24 hours. In 1952, an XK 120 coupe averaged 100 mph during a full week of endurance running. Credit the Brits for using decisive actions instead of words to prove they were back in the automotive game.

Jaguar was not the first maker to produce dual-overhead-cam engines. Peugeot racer Georges Boillot won the 1912 and ’13 French Grands Prix with a 7.6-liter DOHC four-cylinder. In road-car use, Sunbeam’s 1926 3.0-liter Super Sports led the way, followed by Duesenberg’s 1928–37 Model J, SJ, and SSJ cars, all powered by DOHC eights with four valves per cylinder.

Core design attributes

Jaguar engineers filled the available underhood space with a gloriously long inline-six, even though doing so yields a crankshaft more likely to “wind up” (twist about its centerline) under load. A V-6 architecture would have solved that issue, but those were ruled out because they required two separate cylinder heads, they weren’t attractive, and they’re not as smooth.

The Jaguar cylinders were arrayed in two sets of three with a wider space in the middle to accommodate extra lateral coolant flow at that location. The cast-iron block extending down to the heat-treated steel crank’s centerline provided seven main bearings for excellent support of the rotating and reciprocating parts. A damper bolted to the crank’s nose diminished residual resonance vibration.

Another attribute provided by a single row of cylinders is that it’s easy to keep the hot (exhaust) side from heating the cool (intake) side, a boon to volumetric efficiency. Such a “cross-flow” design keeps the intake airflow cold and dense to maximize power and torque. Segregating the ports also allowed making the passages entering and leaving the head larger. The alternative, preferred by most makers at the time, was interweaving both manifolds on the same side of an inline engine to simplify plumbing and to use exhaust heat to help vaporize fuel leaving the carburetor.

Using a stroke longer than the bore diameter was common in the 1940s. The small bore minimized overall block length while the long stroke yielded the desired piston displacement. Combining an 83-millimeter bore with a 106-millimeter stroke in the XK-6 at the beginning of XK 120 production yielded 3441 cc, 160 horsepower at 5000 rpm, and 195 lb-ft of torque at 2500 rpm.

Chief engineer Heynes, whose later claim to fame was implementing disc brakes for racing, cast the head in aluminum instead of iron to trim roughly 70 pounds off the curb weight. The XK-6’s front timing cover, oil pan, and polished cam covers were also aluminum. Still, the cast-iron block and cast-iron transmission case meant a fully dressed powertrain weight of over 700 pounds.

Aluminum castings did cost significantly more than iron parts, taking them beyond the reach of carmakers not on a performance bent. Durability was a second concern. Iron and aluminum thermal expansion rates are dramatically different, so extra care must be invested in the development of reliable head gaskets.

Harry Weslake drew on experience gained developing the indomitable Rolls-Royce Merlin V-12 aircraft engine to spread the XK’s valves 70 degrees apart. That wide spacing allowed fitting larger valves in the combustion chamber, thereby enhancing flow in and out of the cylinder. Adding curvature to the intake ports helped the incoming air-fuel mix swirl around the spark plug, which was positioned as near as possible to the center of the bore.

One of Weslake’s notable contributions to engine development was an innovative testing tool, a flow meter to accurately measure the volume of air moving in and out of the combustion chamber. This in turn allowed for evaluating multiple port and combustion chamber designs before choosing one for production.

Cast-aluminum pistons were fitted with two compression rings and one oil ring. To minimize friction, the wrist pins were a full-floating design, meaning the pin was free to slide inside both the connecting rod and the piston. (The cheaper alternative was a press fit in the rod to avoid the snap rings in the pistons that keep the wrist pins from rubbing against the cylinder walls.) A smooth dome atop each piston set the compression ratio; most markets used a ratio of 8.0:1 at the beginning of production.

Inverted bucket tappets containing shims to adjust valve lash were fit between each valve stem and its cam lobe. A two-stage drive spun the overhead cams: one chain from the crank nose up to an intermediate sprocket with a second chain linking the intermediate sprocket to the two cam sprockets. These roller chains were double wide for long life.

Ready to rumble with stylish twin SU side-draft carburetors and Lucas ignition, the XK-6 engine alone weighed 560 pounds, while a base XK 120 roadster’s curb weight was listed at 2920 pounds thanks to the aluminum bodywork fitted to the first 200 cars. Acceleration from 0 to 60 mph took about 10 seconds.

Variations on the XK-6 theme

Although the XK 120 roadster was a sensational means of introducing Jaguar’s notable technological stride, it was merely the low-volume start of spreading dual overhead cams, aluminum engine castings, and a stunning underhood appearance throughout the company’s mainstream models. Jaguar’s Mark VII four-door sedan arrived in 1951 to share 150- and 160-hp versions of the 3.4-liter XK-6.

A low-volume (only 53 built over three model years) racing-oriented XK 120C enjoyed several notable upgrades. This speedster with its aluminum body over a steel-tube frame had a wheelbase 6 inches shorter, no top, and only one door. Wilder valve timing, larger valves, more efficient porting, higher compression, and larger carburetors raised output to 200 horsepower at 5800 rpm. The XK 120M (modified) edition that arrived in 1952 contained suspension upgrades and knock-off wire wheels. A two-seat convertible with roll-up windows and more elaborate folding top—known as a drophead coupe in Britspeak—came in 1953, followed by the D-Type sports racer in ’54, powered by a 250-hp version of the XK-6 and benefiting from a new cylinder head and three carburetors. Only a handful of Ms were built, with a price roughly triple that of a standard XK 120.

In the 1950s, Jaguar sports cars were all-conquering at Le Mans, with overall victories in 1951 (XK 120C), ’53 (C-Type), and ’55–57 (D-Types). In the 1957 24-hour race, five of the top six cars were D-Types campaigned by privateers.

In ensuing model years, Jaguar nurtured its DOHC six like a loving parent. The 1955 XK 140 brought notable power and torque gains from the same 3441 cc, raising horsepower to 190 at 5500 rpm and torque to 210 lb-ft at 2500 rpm. To extend the model range downward, a smaller version of the XK-6 arrived in 1956 in a less expensive sedan called the 2.4 Six. This 2483-cc DOHC engine with a shorter stroke and deck height produced 112 horsepower at 5750 rpm.

Fresh sheetmetal and more power came in the 1958 XK 150 two-seaters, which offered 210 horses at 5500 rpm. A new 1959 Mark IX sedan was equipped with a 3781-cc six with a bore 4 millimeters larger and 220 horsepower. The 3.8-liter engine was available in the Jag sports cars in three forms: 220 horsepower with two SU carburetors, and 250 or 265 horsepower with higher compression and three side-draft carbs. To accommodate larger bores, the cylinder walls were slotted for coolant flow and wet liners were pressed in to provide sealing.

Because this engine was failure-prone, Jaguar recently began offering new 3.8-liter blocks through its service channels for about $18,000. That’s a lot of cash, but it does help keep vintage Jaguars on the road.

Jag’s sensational E-Type arrived halfway through the 1961 model year in coupe and roadster form, with the triple-carb 3.8-liter six delivering 265 horsepower at 5500 rpm and 260 lb-ft of torque at 4000 rpm. For 1965, Jaguar shuffled cylinder spacing in a new block to accommodate a bore increase, from 87.0 millimeters to 92.1 millimeters, raising displacement to a husky 4235 cc.

In contrast to the original layout of two sets of three cylinders with a wider space between cylinders three and four for coolant flow, the bores were now evenly spaced. A new crank had repositioned throws and mains. Oddly, the cylinder head was not reconfigured, resulting in a small misalignment between each combustion chamber and its corresponding bore. Because the diameter of the combustion chamber was smaller than the bore diameter, the only negative consequence was a slight sacrifice in peak power.

Maximum output in the 4.2 remained the same as the 3.8—265 horsepower—but at a slightly lower 5400 rpm. The 4.2’s torque swelled to 283 lb-ft at 4000 rpm, leading to 4.2 owners claiming better low-end torque while 3.8 owners say their engines are more eager to rev. In 1969, engineers dropped one carburetor and switched from SUs to Zenith-Stromberg units, which were better able to meet America’s tightening emissions standards. That lowered the engine’s output to 246 horsepower and 263 lb-ft of torque. Making amends, Jaguar introduced an all-new 5.3-liter V-12 in 1971 rated at 250 horses and 283 lb-ft at 3500 rpm (both ratings now compliant with the new SAE net power-measuring standards).

Though the venerable XK-6 was phased out of E-Types in 1971, it did continue powering Jaguar XJ-6 sedans. In 1978, the addition of Bosch L-Jetronic fuel injection kept this classic engine gainfully employed through the 1987 model year.

Endgame

Without retiring its beloved XK-6, Jaguar introduced a clean-sheet AJ6 (for “Advanced Jaguar 6”) engine in 1984. While the rest of the world was migrating toward tidy V-6s, the Coventry crew stuck by what it knew best, investing $45 million and a decade of R&D into a new 3590-cc inline-six, only the third all-new engine that Jaguar had ever produced. The AJ6 brought aluminum block and head components, dry steel cylinder sleeves, dual overhead cams opening four valves per cylinder, pent roof–shaped combustion chambers, electronic fuel injection, and a cost-saving cast-iron crankshaft. This new 430-pound six arrived in downsized 1988 XJ-6 sedans with 181 horsepower at 4750 rpm and 221 lb-ft of torque at 3750 rpm. For European markets with less stringent emissions standards, the AJ6 delivered a more impressive 225 horsepower and 240 lb-ft of torque.

Meanwhile, the XK-6 remained in service for Britain’s Scorpion light tanks and Scimitar armored reconnaissance vehicles. XJ-6s not imported to the United States offered 2.8- and 3.4-liter versions of the engine from the late 1960s through the mid-1980s.

The final hurrah was a 4.2-liter XK-6 engine Jaguar supplied to power the very last 1992 Daimler Sovereign limousine—in essence, the poor monarch’s Rolls-Royce Phantom. Properly cared for versions of these swoop-tailed limos are still in service around the globe. (See them on Netflix’s The Crown docudrama series.)

Plenty of specialists in England and elsewhere are busy keeping XK-6 engines in fine fettle, and British tuners Eagle and Vicarage have continued serving E-Type customers with 4.7-liter versions of the XK-6 providing 370 or more horsepower.

What Jaguar’s XK-6 proves is that thoughtful updates—what the British call their “make do and mend” spirit—can keep a brilliant engine design thriving for half a century. Thus, what initially seemed like a risky undertaking for a group of engineers trying to figure out how their small company would make its way after the war, soon made Jaguar Britain’s most adored carmaker.

The post One Sweet Six: The engine that made Jaguar appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Never mind America’s crying need for road, bridge, and tunnel repairs, our tax billions are about to fund a return trip to the moon. NASA’s Artemis program, involving multiple domestic contractors and several international partners, hopes to deliver humans to the dark, frigid, rugged lunar south pole by 2025. Missions lasting up to two months are planned for completion by 2033. In case you napped through Greek mythology class, the lunar goddess Artemis was Apollo’s twin sister.

We bring this to your attention because, as part of its preparations, NASA is once again shrewdly tapping auto industry expertise. Long before SpaceX emerged as the prime contractor of choice, Chrysler constructed the Redstone missiles that rocketed Mercury astronauts into space. Ford-Philco built and operated Houston’s Mission Control Center. GM supplied inertial guidance and navigation systems for the Apollo program. GM was also Boeing’s mobility systems subcontractor for the Lunar Roving Vehicles (LRVs) that successfully explored the lunar surface half a century ago.

Early last year, GM and Lockheed Martin announced a collaborative agreement to design, develop, and manufacture exploration vehicles to visit the southern reaches of Mother Earth’s only child. Thanks in part to its Apollo experience, GM is a world leader in battery-electric propulsion systems and autonomous guidance technology. Three other partnerships are competing with GM and Lockheed Martin for Artemis funding, two of which list Michelin and Nissan North America as allies.

At this stage, little is known about the Artemis LRV beyond GM’s conceptual illustrations shown here. Insights as to what lies ahead can however be found in the 20th Century’s most advanced vehicles: the LRVs driven on the moon during Apollo 15, 16, and 17 missions in 1971 and ’72. In addition to the three buggies still parked there, several test prototypes and replicas remain as popular museum attractions, including the unit shown here photographed at the Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn, Michigan.

Developed and constructed in 17 months by 600 engineers, the LRVs were built by Boeing in Seattle. GM was the “mobility” supplier responsible for motors, wheels, and suspension systems. NASA’s cost for the 4-unit production run was $38 million when one million was still a major heap of cash.

Boeing missed the LRV’s 400-pound design target by sixty pounds in spite of measures such as shaving metal from the aluminum alloy frame tubing in low-stress areas. The 1080-pound payload included two astronauts belted into what looked like lawn chairs, their tools, and material samples excavated from the moon’s surface. Given the moon’s gravity—only one-sixth as much as Earth’s—the half-ton payload was a bearable burden.

Each LRV had 90-inch wheelbase, a 72-inch track, and a 10-foot overall length. Unequal-length control arms fitted with torsion bar springs and tubular dampers supported each wheel. Four-wheel steering provided a 20.3-foot turn circle. To accelerate, brake, and steer, the mission commander operated a central T-handle.

A quarter-horsepower DC motor, a small drum brake, and a harmonic gear drive multiplying torque 80 times were built within each wheel hub. Tight seals were essential to avoid dust intrusion. Twin 36-volt silver-zinc potassium-hydroxide batteries stored 8.7 kWh of energy, about 10-percent of a Chevy Bolt’s capacity. The batteries and all control electronics were secured beneath thermal blankets at the front of the LRV.

For the journey to the moon, front and rear sections of the LRV jackknifed together. Wheels, seats, and other gear folded to fit the LRV into the landing module’s storage bay. Upon landing, deployment and start up took but 15 minutes.

Six astronauts rode three LRVs 56 miles during 11 hours of lunar surface exploration. While the rated top speed was 8 mph, Gene Cernan topped 11 mph during a downhill sprint on the final Apollo mission in December 1972. Trips varied between 2.8 and 4.7 miles from the landing module, what was dubbed the “walk-back” limit.  If their LRV broke down, the astronauts’ only option was returning to their Lunar Module on foot.

Navigation was supported by wheel-driven odometers, a directional gyroscope, and a signal processor calculating speed, heading, and distance. Range and bearing to the Lunar Module were displayed to guide each return leg. Throughout the three Apollo missions, this rudimentary nav system never missed a beat.

The single LRV component most crucial to mission success was the space buggy’s innovative wheel and tire system. In 1969, Apollo 11 and 12 astronauts—the first to walk on the moon—brought home samples, photographs, and vivid descriptions of the dust and rubble “regolith” blanketing the moon. In fact, studies aimed at optimizing traction and mobility actually commenced two decades before those missions, just after the Russians beat us into space in 1957 with Sputnik 1.

That year, Ferenc (later Frank) Pavlics arrived in America penniless. Luckily, GM hired the 29-year-old engineer fleeing the Hungarian Revolution to study how tire design could improve the traction of off-road trucks and military vehicles.

A decade later, Pavlics was tapped to create wheels and tires for the Apollo program. His all-metal system consisted of an aluminum hub surrounded by a titanium inner wheel serving as the tire’s bump stop. Each 32-inch-diameter tire was woven out of zinc-plated piano wire. Treads consisted of narrow titanium strips riveted to the tire in a chevron pattern. The wheel-tire assembly weighed 12 pounds.

Extensive R&D was conducted for years. To ascertain how much dust these tires would whip up, they were tested in flight conditions replicating moon’s gravity. To contain dust and debris, each tire was surrounded by a fiberglass fender fitted with flexible end flaps.

On the moon, Pavlics’ tires and the LRV’s suspension provided excellent traction and a resilient ride. Astronauts praised the LRV’s hill-climbing ability, responsive steering, and excellent maneuverability. Their gripe list mentioned excessive body roll and bounciness over irregular surfaces. Action photos captured several short four-wheels-in-the-air flights over hillocks.

The most notable LRV failure was fender breakage caused by accidental bumps by astronauts. Their bubble-faced helmets unfortunately limited close-by visibility. Repairs were mandatory, especially at the rear, to avoid clouds of lunar dust enveloping the LRV while underway. On the final mission, Gene Cernan effected a repair using a plastic map and duct tape carried aboard the LRV. Brought home as a souvenir, his fix is now on display at the National Air & Space Museum.

Tougher fenders for the Artemis LRVs are inevitable but don’t expect significant changes to the brilliant tires developed half a century ago. Still kicking at 94, Pavlics will surely cheerlead the coming mission to the moon.

The post Artemis: Rover heading back to the moon … and soon! appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Fulfilling long-held rumors, our beloved Chevy Corvette has officially begun its journey toward full-electric propulsion. On April 25, GM President Mark Reuss announced two near-term Corvette variants—what he called an “electrified” model due early next year to be followed by a fully electric, Ultium-based vehicle. Confirming this was far more than corporate hyperbole; a 25-second video depicted a camouflaged C8 prototype spinning all four wheels while drifting furiously across a snow-packed test track. Fans of fiery combustion engines will surely appreciate that the prototype’s soundtrack suggests that a hot V-8 continues as part of the deal.

Now that the Chevy Volt has been retired from production, GM prefers the term “electrified” over “hybrid” to indicate a thoughtful blend of electric and combustion propulsion elements. Ultium is GM’s combination of a massive lithium-ion pouch-type battery pack in a “skateboard” layout with one or more AC drive motors. Deliveries of the Ultium-based 2023 GMC Hummer EV pickup have just begun and the SUV version will follow for the 2024 model year. We have every reason to believe that when an electric Corvette finally lands, it will utilize this same fundamental architecture.

2024 Corvette E-Ray hybrid

In 2015, while plotting the future that is just now coming true, GM applied to the U.S. Patent Office for exclusive ownership of the CORVETTE E-RAY and E-RAY trademarks. Rights to these names were granted in December of that year for “motor land vehicle’”use.

While GM has yet to officially confirm it will use the E-Ray name on its coming electrified Corvette, the expectation is that a pair of 83-hp AC induction motors will reside just ahead of the passenger cabin to drive the front wheels. The current 490/495-hp LT2 V-8 will drive the rear wheels through today’s eight-speed dual-clutch automatic transaxle. The hollow cavity serving as the backbone of the C8 Corvette’s aluminum spaceframe is approximately 2.5 cubic feet in volume, enough space to house over 100 Ultium battery cells.

It’s a good guess that the E-Ray’s pilot will be allowed to choose between rear- or all-wheel drive. During cruising, we expect that an engine-driven alternator will replenish the battery pack; a port to plug in at home for battery charging is not likely.

Electric motors providing torque to the front wheels will enhance the Corvette’s agility spiraling into a turn. The added traction will also improve mobility in wet and snow conditions. In spite of a curb weight increased by an estimated 700 pounds, the E-Ray’s AWD and instant torque will likely trump the standard Stingray in a drag race.

Beyond E-Ray, pure electric

The Hummer EV’s battery pack consists of 576 individual pouch-type lithium-ion cells storing 200 kWh of electrical energy, worth roughly 450 miles of driving range. Given the 4-inch width of each cell and the fact they’re stacked in modules two high, the resulting battery pack is some 8-inches in overall height.

Cramming an 8-inch tall skateboard under the passenger cabin would yield a Corvette that’s notably taller than the current 49-inch high C8 Stingray.

In other words, the fully electric Corvette with this same arrangement of cells would need to be a stylish sport utility vehicle, not a pavement hugging two-seat supercar. (For an imaginative vision of what a Corvette SUV might look like, check out our 2019 rendering here.) Further evidence that this is the case was revealed by GM in November 2021 when the company began polling Corvette owners regarding their interest in an “electric sport vehicle.” If it works for a Ford Mustang recast as an electric Mach-E, why wouldn’t it work here?

C8’s ZR1-shaped endgame

Following the Z06 and E-Ray in the C8 generation’s roll forth sequence, a mega-hot ZR1 is expected circa 2026. The Z06’s 670-hp DOHC LT6 V-8 will be enhanced with two turbochargers to vault peak output over 800 hp in an engine designated LT7.

The fifth and final variation on the C8 theme will be the Zora—named after Corvette patron saint Zora Arkus-Duntov.  Here, the combination of LT7 combustion energy in back with two AC motors in front will be tuned to shatter the 1000 hp barrier with highly satisfying performance consequences. We anticipate Zora’s triumphal return to Chevy showrooms before the clock strikes 2030.

C9 EV in the pipeline, other electric musings

Click here for our detailed vision of what the future might bring when the Corvette reaches its inevitable full-electric destination. Fear not, ye of little electric faith, GM will likely keep combustion in production at the Bowling Green, Kentucky, manufacturing plant as long as possible to serve old-school diehards.

In the summer of 2020, several months before the U.S. election, now-President Joe Biden espoused his love of American performance cars in general and Corvettes in particular. (He owns a dark green ’67 small-block roadster that he’s not allowed to drive while in office.) Biden’s 80-second campaign banter included this prophetic side note: ‘They tell me that GM is making an all-electric version of its iconic sports car that will go 200 mph.”

We’re guessing the “they” in this scoop was Mark Reuss.

#BARBIE
July 21, 2023
Only in theaters pic.twitter.com/mauCGpizD1

— Warner Bros. Pictures (@wbpictures) April 26, 2022

Then, at the end of April 2022, Barbie joined the electric Corvette cause. Movie production company Warner Brothers announced a July 2023 release date for the latest Ken and Barbie romantic adventure film. Margot Robbie, who will star in the movie, was presented in the front seat of a radiant pink 1957 Corvette with two scintillating touches: a flap cut into the left front fender for likely access to an electrical battery charging port and a CHEVROLET script on the side of the car featuring bright-blue accents for the EV letters in that logo.

Certainly there have been electric Barbie-branded toys in the past, but this particular iteration for the film could hint at something more. Requests to both Warner Brothers and Chevrolet for added comment have thus far generated no response.

A bright future

Assuming Reuss, Corvette engineers, and GM’s top management don’t become intoxicated over their future Corvette prospects, the electrification movement should provide a lasting role for America’s only two-seater. Balancing style, technology, performance, and price will pose a significant challenge to be sure. But there’s no reason why Corvettes shouldn’t thrive in the AC age to come.

The post Future Corvettes: E-Ray, ZR1, C9 EV, and more appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Every car enthusiast knows that the Tin Lizzie put the world on wheels. Ford sold over 15 million Model Ts between 1908 and 1927, a volume topped only by VW’s Beetle. The 1932 Model 18 successor to the T is equally revered for delivering speed to showrooms. Ford’s new flathead V-8 armed working stiffs with 65 horsepower, enough to middle-finger Chevies and Plymouths of the day.

But what’s almost a CIA-grade secret is the great leap Ford accomplished between its Model T and Model 18. Momentarily bored by building cars, Henry and Edsel Ford launched commercial aviation with their aptly nicknamed Tin Goose. Though only 199 Tri-Motor aircraft were produced, Ford’s big bird was instrumental in lofting passengers, mail, and freight heavenward in the Roaring Twenties and Tough Thirties.

A Stout foundation

Ford ally Bill Stout was the jack of too many trades. He studied engineering at the University of Minnesota though illness caused him to miss the final exam needed to earn a degree. Undaunted, he served as the chief engineer for Packard’s aircraft division and later created the Stout Scarab precursor to Volkswagen’s passenger van.

During his lifetime, Stout was second only to Thomas Edison in the number of patents earned. He designed scores of model toys and covered automotive and aviation advancements for the Chicago Tribune and his own Aerial Age magazine. For years he employed the clever pen name Jack Knieff to shroud his identity. Stout’s credo—”simplicate and add lightness”—was cribbed by Colin Chapman in the 1950s.

During World War I, the global aircraft fleet consisted largely of open-cockpit biplanes with wood framing covered by fabric and reinforced with guy wires. Inspired by Fokker and Junkers’ advancements with metal construction and multiple engines shortly after the war, Stout designed and built what he called his Air Sedan in 1922.

Ford and Stout join forces

Thanks in part to Stout, the Fords became intrigued by the aviation business. When the company’s corporate charter was rewritten in 1919, a provision for aircraft manufacturing was added. At that time, dirigibles were considered the most practical form of air travel, so the Fords founded their Aircraft Development Corporation to pursue the manufacture of a lighter-than-air transporter made of metal.

Coincidentally, Ford’s material of choice was a new aluminum alloy called duralumin already in use by Stout. Formulated by the Aluminum Company of America (now Alcoa), this mix of aluminum, copper, manganese, and magnesium doubled ordinary aluminum’s tensile strength without increasing its weight.

Stout established the Metal Airplane Company in 1922 when a hundred Detroit industrialists were solicited to invest in his startup. Auto magnates Chrysler, Olds, Fisher, and Dodge and a dozen or so other investors took the bait.

In 1923, the Ford Motor Company’s chief engineer William Mayo paid Stout a visit to arrange a meeting with the Fords who were then producing two million Model Ts per year.

Hoping to retain control of his enterprise, Stout imposed a $1000 limit per investor. The wily Henry Ford was intrigued by the opportunity but sought a greater slice of Detroit’s newest enterprise. After a moment’s hesitation, he proposed a $2000 investment—$1000 from father and son. The shrewd Stout quickly agreed. When the news media caught wind, the senior Ford was quoted philosophizing that mass-produced aircraft would not only shorten distances between the globe’s citizens but also erase their misunderstandings.

Air sedan and air transport

Stout’s first all-metal plane was fitted with four seats. Initial tests were disappointing due to the Air Sedan’s modest 90 horsepower. Undaunted, Stout shared his thoughts with the Fords about the Air Sedan’s successor, dubbed Air Transport. This new high-wing, corrugated-duralumin aircraft, which was coded 2-AT, was powered by a single, 420-hp Liberty V-12. Its mission was transporting eight passengers or a ton of freight.

The Fords were sufficiently impressed to join other investors kicking in additional funds to keep Stout solvent. The 2-AT was christened Maiden Detroit, a play on the Made in Detroit label.

Despite two failed test flights, Stout’s 2-AT proved so airworthy that more than a thousand passengers reveled in joy rides in the summer of 1924. This rising enthusiasm for aviation underlined the need for a viable airport near Detroit. In pursuit of such a facility, Stout and a local dirigible manufacturer were invited to tour a 12,000-acre site the Fords owned in Dearborn.

The Blue Oval’s airport

Henry Ford offered to build Stout the world’s best landing field on property previously reserved for an employee subdivision. In addition to a pair of intersecting half-mile-long runways, Ford suggested construction of an adjoining factory for aircraft and dirigible construction. Following Stout’s eager acceptance of that proposal, Edsel Ford penned a Nation’s Business feature story declaring 1924 as the dawn of the aviation age.

The day following the Stout-Ford property inspection, hundreds of workers began reshaping the landscape with trucks and tractors. The senior Ford hired architects to design a sprawling factory and visited the construction site on a daily basis. Stout concluded his first sale—the Maiden Detroit to the U.S. Post Office for airmail transport—and the Ford Airport was officially dedicated in January 1925.

After constructing two grass runways, the Fords invested another $4 million in further improvements. Adding a dirigible mast, a passenger terminal, a restaurant, hotel accommodations, and concrete runway paving soon made this the world’s finest airport. With safe air travel as the goal, a weather bureau, traffic-control center, and radio communication office were also added. 70-foot-tall letters spelling FORD in white paint helped incoming flyers spot the airfield.

Ford’s 200-foot-long plant offered ample manufacturing space and offices for Stout engineers and executives. Stout christened the first 2-AT to roll of the line the Maiden Dearborn. Half a ton lighter than the typical car of the day, it had a 60-foot wingspan, a 46-foot length, and $20,000 price tag. 

Ford takes over

More interested in operating an airline than manufacturing planes, Stout was immediately responsive to Ford’s take-over overtures. Cashing out other investors tried everyone’s patience but on July 31, 1925, Stout’s company became the Ford’s Metal Airplane division.

Three months earlier, Ford’s Air Transport Service had made its inaugural flight to Chicago carrying half a ton of freight. The round trip took five hours. Following the ship’s return, Edsel Ford reported to the press that the goal was not only carrying mail and freight between Ford plants but testing the company’s aviation advancements before carrying passengers. Round-trip service between Detroit and Cleveland commenced at the end of June.

Enter the Tri-Motor

Discussions with the U.S. Air Mail Service in Washington DC revealed that the 2-AT was deemed too large and cumbersome to efficiently carry mail. What was needed was a faster, multi-engine plane with the ability to fly through the night in adverse weather.

Stout, the Fords, and Ford chief engineer William Mayo agreed that a triple-engine plane was essential to progress. Luckily, the Wright Aeronautical Company had a new 200-hp, air-cooled, 9-cylinder radial ideally suited to their task. Three such engines were shipped to Dearborn and Stout begun designing another new plane. His game plan was to add two engines while retaining as much as possible of the 2-AT’s successful design.

By now, Henry Ford was more intrigued by aviation than by the car business. But when the Shenandoah dirigible crashed in September of 1925, killing all but one of the 41 passengers onboard, the Fords abandoned all hopes of manufacturing lighter-than-air craft to focus on Stout’s triple-engine design.

3-AT crashes and burns

Unfortunately, what Stout created was an ugly duckling. On its first test flight, the 3-AT lacked both stability and cruising speed. It couldn’t haul enough payload and was a handful to land. The two test pilots who flew it concurred that the design was a total bust.

Stout pleaded for time to develop his creation but the impatient Henry Ford had him banned from the design office. Overnight, trusted Ford engineer Harold Hicks became head of the airplane division while Stout remained on the payroll to promote Ford’s aviation interests.

Then a fire of suspicious origins wiped out the 3-AT prototype, all of Stout’s jigs and tools, four nearly finished 2-ATs, and the aircraft manufacturing building. Ford consoled Stout by noting: “It’s the best thing that could have happened. Now we can build the kind of factory we should have built in the first place.” Work immediately began to construct a three-times-larger factory and a 15-plane hangar.

Rising from the ashes

In June of 1926, barely six months after the $200,000 fire, a vastly improved 4-AT was ready for its test flight. The center engine was positioned low in the nose and the fuselage tapered elegantly towards the tail. A thicker wing spanned 74 feet and overall length was just under 50 feet making the Ford Tri-Motor the largest plane built in the U.S. to date. Like automobiles of the day, the 4-AT used interchangeable parts instead of far less-efficient handicraft construction.

After the initial test flight, pilot Major “Shorty” Schroeder rushed up to Henry. “This plane’s got what it takes!”

Boasting 600 total horsepower and a streamlined design with no exposed struts or guy wires, the 4-AT could top 120 mph and cruise over 100. It could carry 1725 pounds, climb at 900 feet per minute, and reach 15,000 feet of altitude. For corrosion resistance, its duralumin skin was clad on both sides by pure aluminum and coated with lacquer. Feeding this Alclad sheet material between rollers created the distinctive corrugations that increased the finished panel’s stiffness. Wing tanks carried 271 gallons of gasoline.

The cockpit provided dual pilot and copilot controls, excellent visibility, and Model T steering wheels atop the control sticks. Cables to the rudder and elevators were routed externally.

Separated from the cockpit by a bulkhead, the 450-cubic-foot passenger compartment was furnished with an entry door and eleven wicker-covered, aluminum-framed seats. Lacking sound proofing, early passengers described the din as “a hundred gremlins hammering a barn door.” Cotton earplugs were provided free of charge. While cabin heat, tray tables, and seat belts were not yet fitted, every passenger did enjoy a spectacular view through large shatterproof glass windows.

The Tri-Motor’s selling price was $50,000 including a full tank of fuel. No competitor could match its combination of size, performance, safety, and all-metal construction. The first public demonstration of the plane awed representatives from four U.S. airlines.

Ford’s new 60,000 square foot factory was completed in early 1927 with two parallel lines producing two planes per week. Within the first month of production, the company had 15 Tri-Motor orders in hand. Initial customers included the U.S. Navy, Standard Oil, and Texaco. Ford car dealers became sales agents, and the company established a pilot training school in Dearborn synched to aircraft deliveries. One Ford dealer operated 16 Tri-Motors transporting freight up and down the West Coast, an operation later bought out by TWA.

Stout Air Services bought six Tri-Motors to carry passengers between Detroit, Cleveland, and Chicago, charging $35 for a round trip from Detroit to Cleveland. That organization’s firsts included uniforms for flight attendants, hot coffee and sandwich meals, and limousine service connecting Detroit’s Book Cadillac hotel with the Ford airport.

In early 1927, a Tri-Motor flew from Dearborn to Dayton Ohio’s Wright Field guided solely by a radio beam operated by two Ford engineers. That technology was soon adopted by all airlines with Ford’s best wishes and no royalty fees.

Ford’s Air Transport Service became the world’s largest private airline by flying Model T parts and bulky manufacturing tools to car assembly plants around the Midwest.

Lucky Lindy comes to town

In May of 1927, Charles Lindbergh completed his flight across the Atlantic, giving aviation a major credibility boost. Three months later, when Lindbergh conducted his nationwide celebration tour with the Spirit of St. Louis, a second seat was fitted to that craft so that both Henry and Edsel Ford could enjoy their first flights over Dearborn.

Later that day, Lindbergh flew the Tri-Motor for an hour with the senior Ford again aboard and Ford’s chief pilot Harry Brooks serving as copilot. Ford likened the rides to going on a picnic, and said he wouldn’t mind taking a spin every day. But, except for one more flight several years later in a Douglas DC-3, Henry never again broke Earth’s surly bonds.

Aircraft business takes off

Contracts to fly mail by air on assigned routes for the U.S. Post Office prompted several airlines to purchase Tri-Motors beginning in 1927. Twenty-three new airlines were soon established to bid on airmail contracts and to fly executives and freight. There were 12 Tri-Motors sold that year followed by 39 more in 1928. The Ford factory was expanded to produce a plane a day.

As commercial aviation evolved from freight and mail service to passenger carrying, over 100 airlines ultimately flew Tri-Motors in the U.S., Canada, Mexico, Central America, China, and Australia. During their fruitful life, Tri-Motor advertisements bragged that “no Ford plane has yet worn out in service.” They successfully flew sightseers over the Grand Canyon for 65 years. In 1932, presidential candidate Franklin Roosevelt began replacing his whistle-stop train trips with Tri-Motor hops.

Epic expeditions

In 1929, a special Tri-Motor was prepared for Rear Admiral Richard Byrd’s first-ever visit to the South Pole. Alterations included a larger wingspan, a 525-hp Wright Cyclone center engine spinning a three-blade prop, and additional fuel capacity. Byrd and a crew of three flew 1600 miles in 18 hours in late November but had to dump 250 pounds of food to clear a 10,000-foot pass en route. After achieving its flyover, Byrd’s team left their plane in Antarctica to journey home. Five years later, Byrd returned to find his Tri-Motor snow-covered but otherwise in excellent condition. In 1935, the craft came home by boat and remains on display at Dearborn’s Henry Ford Museum.

Continuing development

Over the years, Wright Whirlwind engine output rose from 200 to 300 horsepower, gradually improving the performance of the 79 4-AT Tri-Motors manufactured from 1926 through mid-1929. Following a suggestion from Lindbergh, Ford engineers redesigned the plane around new Pratt & Whitney Wasp engines developing 420 horsepower. The new 5-AT Tri-Motor was 1000 pounds heavier, 5 mph faster, and could carry twice the payload thanks to its longer fuselage.

Four distinct 5-AT generations were built from mid-1928 through mid-1933 with prices starting at $65,000, increasing the total Tri-Motor run to 199 planes, not counting experimental builds. Adding floats or skis expanded their service to otherwise inaccessible destinations. During World War II, the Flying Tigers successfully flew Ford Tri-Motors in Italy and China.

Ten Tri-Motors were purchased in 1929 by Transcontinental Air Transport to initiate coast-to-coast passenger service. Lindbergh lent his name to the enterprise which flew by day and used Pullman rail service and comfortable hotel rooms at night. A one-way trip cost $352.

Following rail service from New York to Columbus, Ohio, passengers flew to Waynoka, Oklahoma, with four intermediate stops followed by ground travel to Clovis, New Mexico. The final leg was via Ford Tri-Motor to the Los Angeles suburb of Glendale. Cruising speed was 100 mph, soaring over the rutted, single-lane mud roads below. The entire trip consisting of 2343 air miles and 970 rail miles took 48 hours, roughly half the time required by rail alone.

For reference, the first ever cross-country trip by car in 1903 took 63 days. When the paved Lincoln Highway opened a decade later, a trip across the country could be completed in as little as 20 days.

Flights of fancy

Henry Ford’s imaginative mind wandered in some unlikely directions. Convinced that 100-passenger seating capacity would be necessary to make scheduled service practical, he had Ford engineers investigate a six-engine craft boasting 6000 horsepower, a 125-mph cruising speed, and 700 miles of range. At the opposite end of the spectrum, his tiny single-seat “flivver” was aimed at inexpensive commuter travel. Lindbergh, who barely fit in an experimental example, did succeed in flying it briefly.

Ford’s chief pilot and close friend Harry Brooks broke the distance record for small planes in the flivver. Unfortunately, he disappeared off the Florida coast in February 1928 after the engine in his aircraft sputtered. That loss prompted Henry Ford to abandon his pursuit of a Model T for the air.

Endgame

In the fall of 1929, the Wall Street crash triggered the Great Depression, driving customers contemplating the purchase of an expensive aircraft into hiding. Except for a few planes sold to the U.S. Army Air Corps and the Marine Corps, sales were bleak. Government subsidies kept the major airlines alive by paying them to fly mail and passengers over long distances. Small airlines were quickly purchased by the majors resulting in conglomerates such as TWA.

The last Tri-Motor was finally built in mid-1933 for Pan American Airways. At this juncture, the car side of the business was equally dismal. Ford’s hot V-8 struggled to draw customers into showrooms, achieving barely 300,000 sales per annum. Ford’s seven-year Tri-Motor production run quietly ended, in large part because it was never a profitable enterprise. The 1932 books recorded a net loss over $5 million.

Once the global economy finally settled down, Boeing and Douglas took over as the dominant aircraft manufacturers with 247s, DC-1s, -2s, and -3s. James McDonnell, who later established the McDonnell Douglas combine, learned the ropes of the aviation business as a fresh-out-of-MIT Ford/Stout engineer.

The Tri-Motor was the first practical, modern commercial aircraft. It was instrumental in carrying freight, mail, and passengers in relative comfort. The Ford Airport was the prototype of all subsequent fixed-base operations. The Ford Motor Company convinced Americans that aviation was both safe and dependable.

Postscript

Henry and Edsel Ford did enjoy one more aviation fling. During World War II, they constructed 8685 4-engine B-24 bombers in a huge plant they built on farmland 18 miles due west of the company’s Dearborn headquarters.

The post Tri-Motor: When Ford gave the world wings appeared first on Hagerty Media.

America’s traditional performance path starts with a smoking heap of piston displacement under the hood. With the arrival of the 2020 Chevrolet Corvette, a.k.a. C8—a mid-engine first, after 67 years of front-motor Vettes—a radically different strategy emerged. To endow Chevy’s halo car with true supercar verve, the traditional combo of pushrods, long-stroke geometry, and cast-iron block was ditched to create the technologically advanced powerplant presented here.

Later this year, those wise enough to bribe their local dealer with an early deposit will take delivery of a Corvette Z06: 670 hp and a rousing, 8600-rpm redline. The LT6 V-8 makes it happen. Let’s dive in.

Gemini: The new small-block

If you’re lucky enough to see a ’23 Z06 in person, ask to peek under the hood. The 54 rocket insignias GM engineers hid around engine represent the “Gemini” code name used during the project’s eight-year development. The symbol carries multiple meanings. Early Corvettes were admired and driven by the first NASA astronauts. Also, Gemini is Latin for “twins,” a nod to this engine’s double overhead cams and prominent pair of intake plenums.

Only one dimension—the 4.4-inch cylinder-bore spacing—made the leap from the five previous generations of Chevy small-blocks. While the LT6 shares no parts with its predecessors, that carryover spacing provides a historical link to engines that have powered Chevrolets since 1955. The 104.25-millimeter bore is one of the largest cylinder dimensions ever used in a Chevy small-block, while the 80-millimeter stroke is one of the shortest. The combination yields a modest 5.5-liter piston displacement, which also happens to be ideal for the Corvette C8.Rs that compete against Porsches and Ferraris at the 24 Hours of Le Mans. The LT6’s deck height (the distance from crankshaft center to cylinder-head sealing surface) is ten percent shorter than the deck height of the base C8’s 6.2-liter LT2 V-8. The new block’s mass is 16 percent lower. Dividing the Z06’s 670 hp by its 333 cubic-inch displacement delivers a nice round ratio of two horsepower for every cubic inch.

Flat-crank fashion

The LT6’s signature feature is a crankshaft with four throws located in a single plane. This leaves those throws 180 degrees apart—the layout is colloquially called “flat”—versus the usual 90 degrees of a traditional, “cross-plane” V-8. This arrangement is standard in racing and Italian supercar V-8s but rare in American engines. A century ago, Cadillac moved from 180-degree crankshafts to 90-degree units in order to reduce shaking forces, and most other V-8 makers quickly followed suit.

Flat cranks bring significant advantages, one of which is significantly less rotating inertia, especially when a short stroke is part of the deal. Perhaps the biggest benefit is that flat cranks enable spacing the four exhaust strokes in each of a V-8’s two cylinder banks 180 degrees apart. Thanks to LT6’s ultra-short stroke and light connecting rods, this crank’s counterweights are lighter and its rotating inertia is significantly reduced.

The loping sound commonly associated with American V-8s comes from how some of those exhaust strokes are staged at 90-degree intervals. Flat cranks increase that spacing to 180 degrees, maximizing scavenging—the effect where exhaust gas from one cylinder actually sucks spent gases out of an adjoining cylinder’s exhaust port, aiding flow and efficiency. The Z06’s tri-Y exhaust headers further exploit this effect. The evenly spaced combustion pulses also benefit intake air flow.

Flat-crank V-8s respond righteously to every jab of the throttle; their firing pulses, which alternate between banks, help give these engines a banshee wail at high rpm. To make the LT6’s crankshaft as light as possible, GM bores unnecessary metal out of the rod and main bearing areas. While flat-plane engines offer increased vibration, Chevrolet engineers claim this shortcoming has been minimized by securely attaching ancillary equipment such as the alternator, and by carefully tuning powertrain-to-chassis mounting systems.

During development, GM engineers discovered that vibration was causing the LT6’s oil filter to unscrew itself. That issue was remedied by locating the filter element inside a substantial aluminum canister, instead of the more common spin-on arrangement. The LT6’s eight-quart, molded-plastic oil-storage reservoir is also mounted to the block through rubber isolators, to protect it from vibration damage.

Doing the splits

The LT6’s 90-degree cylinder block is split horizontally, assembled from two separate castings that mate at the crankshaft centerline. The cylinder case and the oil sump are both made of A319 aluminum alloy, which is heat-treated after casting. A special talcum additive smoothes areas in touch with coolant and oil. Four vertical bolts secure each of the five main-bearing caps. The crank is forged steel, and the Austrian-sourced connecting rods are forged titanium. Super-short-skirt, forged-aluminum pistons are supplied by CP Carrillo, a highly respected racing-parts vendor. Piston rings and cam followers are coated with a friction-reducing material made of diamond-like carbon.

Shrunk-in-place cast-iron liners assure long-haul cylinder-bore durability. They’re arranged in a “Siamese” configuration—the outside of each adjoining liners touch—so there’s no lateral coolant flow except through small, drilled passages near the block-to-head interface.

The LT6 has a multi-purpose intermediate shaft rotating between the cylinder banks just above the crank. This shaft is driven off the crankshaft by short chain, and it, in turn, drives a secondary chain running to the cams in each cylinder head. Lobes on the shaft activate two 5000-psi fuel pumps located in the engine’s valley, or vee. Another chain from the nose of the crank drives the seven oil pumps. One of those pumps distributes lubrication to the main bearings, the four camshafts, and the cylinder-bore oil squirters. Others evacuate the four sealed crankcase bays and drain-down cavities located at the front and the rear of the block.

Scrapers cast into the block in close proximity to the four counterweights skim oil off the crankshaft. The partial vacuum created by scavenging the lower crankcase in such a manner reduces the windage losses created when a crank spins through oil mist. Only half a quart of oil is circulating around the engine at any given time, even at peak rpm.

The head of the matter

LT6 heads are cast in A356 aluminum and heat-treated. Intake and exhaust ports are fully CNC-machined, as are the 12.5:1 combustion chambers. Each of the four valves above each cylinder is operated by a short finger follower located between each valve stem and the corresponding cam lobe. Oil squirters there keep all contact points well-lubed. Intake valves are titanium to save weight, while the stainless-steel exhaust valves are sodium-filled to help evacuate heat. Cast-iron valve seats are fitted for longevity. Direct fuel injectors are located outboard of the exhaust valves to promote air-fuel mixing as air tumbles into the combustion chamber. Each injector features six spray holes, laser-drilled to optimize the fuel mist pattern.

Variable valve timing improves both around-town drivability and high-rpm output. The timing of the intake valves can be adjusted by up to 55 (crankshaft) degrees, while the exhaust valves can be retimed up to 24 degrees. Two coil springs per valve prevent float at ultra-high rpm.

GM uses a robotic system to measure the thickness of each lash shim for the engine’s 32 valves. The engine assembler at the Corvette’s manufacturing plant, in Bowling Green, Kentucky, installs a shim under each finger follower; thanks to fastidious lubrication and minimal wear, GM claims that this setting will last the life of the engine. If a lash adjustment becomes necessary for any reason, the work can be accomplished by removing the camshafts.

An exotic breather box

In order to produce its stupendous horsepower, the LT6 must inhale massive quantities of air. The two-piece intake manifold residing atop this V-8 brings to mind the black crown of an evil prince. Made of injection-molded, glass-reinforced nylon and stiffened with molded-in ribs, this manifold lives just above a pair of 87-millimeter throttle bodies. Each of the manifold’s two intake plenums has an internal volume of 5.5 liters, coincidentally identical to the LT6’s displacement. That huge size, crucial to power production, is enabled by the fact that mid-engine Corvettes carry their engines low, behind the driver; unlike on front-engine Vettes, C8 intake manifolds can be quite sizable without inhibiting driver visibility.

The good stuff is inside. Each plenum contains four molded intake-port extensions resembling small trumpets. Between the plenums live three servo-operated “communicator” valves; they take advantage of the pressure waves created inside the plenums every time an intake valve opens or closes, helping maximize engine output. Two of those valves share a common shaft, opening and closing in sync. The third one operates independently. One valve opens at around 2000 rpm. The others open on a schedule that varies with driving mode and rpm. All valves close shortly before the engine’s 8400-rpm power peak.

The net result: Four distinct communicator operating events inflate the LT6’s torque curve from 3500 rpm to 8600 rpm. The cylinders receive greater-than-atmospheric air pressure while running, with air volume exceeding piston displacement by 10 percent.

That constitutes 110-percent volumetric efficiency, virtually unheard of in naturally aspirated engines. This is essentially supercharging without the complexity of a crank- or exhaust-driven blower.

A landmark, for a landmark era

The LT6’s torque curve is essentially a flat line, with a subtle pip located at the engine’s 460 lb-ft, 6300-rpm peak. Combined with the astounding 670-hp at 8400 rpm, that stands as a new record for naturally aspirated V-8 engines, eclipsing the 622-hp achieved by Mercedes-Benz with its 6.2-liter, V-8-powered AMG Black Series coupes of 2013–2015. Energized by this new V-8, Z06 C8s are expected to click off the 0–60-mph run in just 2.6 seconds.

There’s more good news: The LT6’s son will be aimed at the upcoming Corvette ZR-1 and soon follow. That monster, logically labeled LT7, will offer twin turbos and at least 800 hp.

Given how the sun is setting on the internal-combustion era, it seems fitting to drag out the finest champagne and toast the arrival of these remarkable V-8s.

The post LT6 Breakdown: The Z06’s 670-hp V-8 is a landmark achievement appeared first on Hagerty Media.

The C8-generation Corvette’s shift to a mid-engine layout was the biggest transformation in the sports car’s storied history and, for me, the culmination of decades reporting and advocacy. A tough act to follow in other words. Yet the C9 Corvette, already in the works, will bring a change far more dramatic: electric propulsion.

Consider the evidence:

• GM Chair Mary Barra has long touted the company’s all-electric future. GM has $35 billion committed to the introduction of 30 BEVs by 2025, with hopes of selling a million electrics by 2030 and plans to convert even heavy-duty trucks to electric drive by 2035.
• During a comprehensive overhaul of its product development group, most of the Corvette engineering team was reassigned to GM’s Autonomous and Electric Vehicles organization.
• Chevy recently began polling C8 owners about their interest in an “electric sport vehicle.”

Greasing the skids of this transition, two hybrids will round out the C8 family—something we started reporting on as early as 2017. Following the just-announced all-gas 670-hp Z06, the Corvette E-Ray will supplement the 495-hp LT2 V-8 with two electric motors driving the front wheels. The last hurrah will be the king-hell Zora, promising electric motors and a twin-turbo V-8 to top 1000 total system hp.

What follows is our informed speculation about the next-generation Corvette—the C9—that promises pure-electric battery power. Yes, it’s a ways off, but we’re betting that some of our dream will come true by the time the clock strikes 2030. By then, today’s GM bosses—Corvette’s global chief engineer Tadge Juechter, GM President Mark Reuss, and Barra—will be retired and sipping umbrella potions.

Of course, some of you will loathe the electric C9 forecasts that follow. Feel free to let us know your passionate thoughts in the comments section. We’ll relay your heartfelt opinions to the above GM bosses while they’re still plotting our beloved Corvette’s fate.

C9 Design: Exterior

Our thinking here is perhaps optimistic—lofty even, in certain ways—but it is rooted in both tradition and real-world expertise. We’ve gathered the work of three veteran designers to assume the weighty responsibility of pondering what the Corvette of the future might look like. At the very least, these drawings illustrate how Corvette design language might marry with the distinct costs and benefits of an electric powertrain. If we were in the big seat at the Ren Cen, certainly, the final product would look a little something like the collective visions of these three brilliant minds.

During 41 years at GM, Dick Ruzzin worked on 140 programs as creative designer, studio head, or director of design for Chevrolet and GM Europe. The inspirational mid-engine Corvette sketch he created fifty years ago is presented here with minor retouching. The stunning piece looks futuristic even now, half a century after its completion, and in many ways the long-awaited C8 of today owes its existence to the high-minded scribblings of GM designers like Ruzzin. The colorful drawing serves as the foundation around which our next two designs were born.

At 19, Pete Brock was the youngest designer GM ever hired. His 1958 Sting Ray racer sketches evolved into the beloved 1963 production Corvette (C2). Following a stint as an instructor at his LA Art Center alma mater, Brock designed the Cobra Daytona Coupe at Shelby American. He then founded Brock Racing Enterprises (BRE) to road race Datsuns, Hinos, and Toyotas. Later, he manufactured hang gliders followed by ultra-low drag car hauling trailers. His BRE enterprise still thrives today.

Brock provided us with a hand-drawn sketch of his C9 brainchild, complete with detailed annotations as follows:

• Narrower wheels and tires diminish unsprung weight and inertia, reducing the energy required to accelerate and brake those assemblies.
• Narrower wheels also increase the room available inside the chassis, reducing rolling resistance and aerodynamic drag.
• Ride is improved by increased tire compliance.
• Roof and windshield design features: moving A-pillars inward increases the side window curvature. Peak roof height is over the driver’s head. Increased roof radius diminishes side wind sensitivity. Roof slopes forward from peak height to minimize the angle between windscreen and roof.
• Cockpit: wider at driver’s shoulder height.
• Rear body area provides maximum storage space. Upper rear body line is 7 degrees downward from horizontal to improve attached air flow.
• Side body: beltline crease is homage to 1959 XP87 Sting Ray racer design. 4.5-inch ground clearance.  Aero fences along inside rear tire surface prevents air flow out of rear diffuser. Body rises aft of rear wheels at 7-degree angle. Width at rear wheels diminished by 3 inches.

Kunihisa Ito, our lead designer and author of the three drawings below, retired last year following 16 years as an instructor at Detroit’s College for Creative Studies. Following graduation in 1977 from LA’s Art Center School of Design, Ito joined GM. A consultancy he ran in Japan from 1989 to 1999 yielded the Jiotta Caspita, considered Japan’s first supercar. During stints at Ford, Ito contributed to Mazda’s RX-8, Ford Edge, and Ford GT designs. At Nissan, he helped shape Sentra and Maxima production models. Over the years Ito’s reach has stretched to design projects in China, Germany, and Korea.

Using Brock’s sketch and specifications as a basis for his renderings, Ito’s C9 is clearly inspired by Bill Mitchell’s famed ’63 split-window design. Also note the doors that cut into the roof for both practical ingress and aesthetics.

Because full-electric propulsion dramatically diminishes the amount of air penetrating outer body surfaces, our imagined electric C9 Corvette eschews any showy grille or scoop openings. A flat floor and an aggressive rear diffuser remain to aid aerodynamic downforce.

“The proportions that the C8 pioneered with the mid-engine layout could be modified with the flexibility that the components for an electric powertrain allow,” Ito explains. “This would make the C9 Corvette smaller in overall length than any iteration since 1962. As electric autos evolve, we must think creatively to reduce weight and size is the most efficient way to do this.”

The major C8 carryovers are a low, short nose and a passenger cabin positioned well ahead of the rear axle. In other words, we expect the electric C9 to bear a familial resemblance to its revolutionary mid-engine C8 predecessor. A generous overall width provides the space required for ultra-low-profile tires. Height will be slightly lower than C8 because the bulky battery pack won’t be located beneath the driver and passenger as is common practice with GM’s other BEVs that employ a skateboard-type platform. Keeping the C8’s rear-biased weight distribution is essential to maintain launch traction, appropriate steering effort, and minimal understeer at the adhesion limit.

Today’s body styles—a targa with a single-piece lift off roof and a convertible—will remain. That said, we hope GM’s future Corvette designers dispense with today’s hideaway hardtop, which necessitates unattractive buttresses to house the hinge hardware.

C9 Design: Interior

The best guess as to what the inside of C9 will look like is the 2016 concept sketch shown here, which GM Design shared on its Instagram channel. Drawn by GM’s interior design manager Tristan Murphy, it reveals a low beltline, a sporty steering yoke, and a prominent center tunnel that would perfectly suit the next Corvette. Murphy should know—he designed the C8 Stingray’s interior as well as the cockpits for Cadillac’s Lyriq and Celestiq BEVs.

C9 Structure

The welded, riveted, and bonded aluminum spaceframe introduced in 2006 for the C6 Z06 has proven its mettle as a light, stiff, and cost-effective structural solution. It should live on with appropriate changes to accommodate coming propulsion, braking, suspension, and battery-stowage needs. Advanced carbon-fiber composites will continue in structural roles such as bumper beams and floor panels.

C9 Steering, suspension, braking

Corvettes have long been a showcase for advanced chassis materials such as molded fiberglass springs, magnesium subframes, and cast- and forged-aluminum suspension linkages. The just-introduced Z06 offers optional carbon-composite brake rotors and carbon-fiber wheels to save weight.

C8s benefit greatly from electronic control of power steering effort, suspension damping, and brake modulation. We expect C9 might employ a more comprehensive "by-wire" approach—electronic controls unassisted by mechanical connections. The onus will be on development engineers to provide credible steering and braking feel in addition to astute suspension damping for street and track.

Brake supplier Brembo’s new "Sensify" approach employs digital controls to manage the stopping force produced independently at each wheel. While hydraulics still activate the front brakes, rear brakes are engaged solely with electric servos. It’s a safe bet that discussions between GM and Brembo are well underway to incorporate Sensify in the C9.

Return of the third pedal?

Carrying "sim" tuning to its logical extreme, we believe that C9 could (and should) reintroduce the joys of stick-shift driving. That option disappeared because so few C7 customers bought sticks, three pedals were difficult to package with the cockpit shoved forward between C8’s front wheels, and GM couldn’t find a supplier willing to build manual gearboxes at a reasonable price. Last, routing shift linkage around the engine to a rear-mounted transmission would have posed an onerous engineering challenge.

The classic clutch pedal and H-pattern shifter could return with those controls providing signals to three electric propulsion motors (two up front, one over the rear axle) in combination with appropriate driver feedback.

Audi’s E-Tron GT and its Porsche Taycan sibling both offer two forward speeds, rather than the single-speed transmission favored by nearly every other EV. A three-speed in the C9 Corvette could be achieved with one overdrive, one underdrive, and one direct gear ratio integrated with the rear differential. First would melt the rear tires during full-bore acceleration, second would be the daily driving go-to gear, and third would act as a range extender.

The powertrain control computer would assign appropriate propulsion duties to the two small motors spinning the front wheels and the larger motor driving the rears. At the adhesion limit, the front motors would provide aggressive torque vectoring to help nudge the C9’s nose around corners. For those who don’t miss the Corvette's clutch pedal, the C9’s motor calibrations would simply optimize acceleration and handling performance without driver intervention.

Ultium Drive electric motors

Last fall GM unveiled three AC propulsion motors it plans on producing for its Ultium BEV platforms. They are scalable designs with the flexibility to handle wide ranging electric vehicle needs. (For the record, GM’s electric motor expertise dates to 1912 when it introduced a Cadillac with Delco electric starting, a world first.)

GM’s largest AC motor is a permanent magnet design rated at 255 KW or 342 hp. The 2022 GMC Hummer EV employs three of these units providing a combined output of 1026 hp.

Permanent magnets made of neodymium, iron, and boron are built into the motor’s rotor. The stator surrounding this rotating cylinder is lined with square-section copper wire bent to fill the available space. Electric current sent through the stator windings creates the moving magnetic field that forces the rotor to spin. More current equals more spin with ample torque and rpm readily available with no combustion engine commotion.

Another electric motor attribute: no multi-speed transmission is required to multiply low rpm torque. These beer-keg-shaped energy converters are so compact they can sit atop the differential to provide drive without a power-sapping bevel gear.

Electric motor cooling needs are dramatically lower than any combustion engine. No induction air or exhaust system is required. As a result, an electric propulsion system is notably lighter and more compact than your typical internal-combustion powertrain.

We’re guessing that the C8 E-Ray, Zora, and C9 will all employ a pair of 83-hp induction motors driving their front wheels. (The alternative is a motor mounted inside each front wheel hub; unfortunately, this approach increases unsprung weight potentially degrading handling.) Add to that a 342-hp permanent magnet motor powering the rear wheels and you’ve got just over 500 hp, conveniently close to today’s base 490-hp Stingray. When more oomph is desired for upmarket C9 sisterships, Ultium’s easy scalability can be exploited.

One of the most attractive aspects of an electric Corvette is its weight-trimming potential. The C8 Z06 weighs nearly 3600 pounds due to its wider wheels, tires, and fenders. With the elimination of cooling, induction, and exhaust systems and the conversion of a gasoline tank to a battery pack, the C9 could possibly be lighter than its predecessor. An astute chief engineer would target a 3000-pound curb weight even if some sacrifice in wheel and tire width is necessary. By 2030, it's safe to assume that battery technology will have advanced to be even more compact, lightweight, and efficient than what we have available today. (More on that below.)

C9 Battery pack

In a joint venture with LG Energy Solution, a South Korea-based enterprise, GM invested $2.3 billion to build America’s largest battery plant in Lordstown, Ohio, to manufacture Ultium battery cells. Each of these pouch-type lithium-ion cells is 23 inches long, 4 inches wide, and 0.4 inches thick. It weighs approximately 3 pounds and produces 0.37 kWh of energy. A 200-kWh pack delivering 450 miles of range would consist of 576 cells and weigh about 1600 pounds, comparable to 260 gallons of gasoline.

We provide these stats as reference points because battery technology is rapidly advancing with more efficient materials and construction formats arriving daily. For example, solid-state battery construction will obsolete the liquid electrolyte present in today’s cells. A lithium-sulfur design by the startup Lyten promises to eliminate cobalt, nickel, and rare earth elements while tripling energy density and accelerating recharge time. Bottom line: GM might have to consider a battery supplier other than its partner LG.

The C8 has a handy rectangular-section backbone cavity build into its spaceframe that’s ideal for battery storage. The internal volume is well over two cubic feet, enough to house more than 100 Ultium cells. Assuming that this cavity grows a bit, and factoring in battery advancements, the backbone could provide a home for at least a third of C9’s cells.

C9’s front AC motors will inevitably consume some the space currently used by C8’s handy frunk compartment. But in back, a significantly larger cargo hold should be feasible thanks to electric propulsion’s all-around compactness.

Stay of execution

In the event Corvette fans don’t enthusiastically embrace GM’s move to an electric future, there is a means of continuing today’s combustion-powered sports car. GM’s Bowling Green, Kentucky, manufacturing plant is a sprawling facility with enough space to allow C8 and C9 generations to overlap for a while. Other ICE products will likely persist in GM’s 2030 lineup, despite any grand claims to the contrary, so it’s possible that hardcore C8 fans might enjoy one final opportunity to buy their V-8-powered Corvette dream machine after the C9’s debut.

Like it or not, an all-electric Corvette is inevitable. The low-volume sports car has persisted through the decades—and a corporate bankruptcy—because it has been a platform and a showpiece for General Motors' best thinking. And make no mistake, the company is thinking almost exclusively about electric propulsion. Moreover, the move to electric provides opportunity for a shrewd step forward in both design and performance. Now that we’ve shared our crystal ball, let us know your thoughts about the coming Corvette revolution.

The post C9 Corvette: Pondering the next generation of an American legend appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Like it or not, our beloved pistons are going the way of the buggy whip. The latest proof is this 1972 Chevy El Camino propelled by an AC motor pirated from a Chevy Bolt.

Collaboration between Chevrolet Performance and Lingenfelter Performance Engineering resulted in this, the fifth in a fleet of concept vehicles aimed at purging pistons from performance addicts’ daydreams. An eCOPO Camaro kicked off this march to the future at the 2018 SEMA show. An electric C-10 pickup followed in 2019, an electric K5 Blazer in 2020, and a Project X ’57 Chevy in 2021. Chevrolet presented the El Camino shown here at last December’s PRI (Performance Racing Industry) gathering in Indianapolis. The machine’s powertrain is a standalone package that GM plans to offer for sale as an “eCrate,” for installation into a vehicle of your choice.

In 1973, Ken Lingenfelter turned his car-collecting hobby into a tuning business specializing in GM products. In 2008, he acquired the Decatur, Indiana, engine-building enterprise founded by his distant and deceased cousin John Lingenfelter. With its engineering efforts ranging in focus from competitive drifting to chassis tuning, Lingenfelter Performance has evolved into one of the aftermarket’s most respected brands.

Lingenfelter calls this car the eLcamino. Save its hunkered stance, aftermarket wheels and tires, and center-stripe decor, the Chevy appears little different from the machine that left a GM assembly line half a century ago. Under the hood it’s vive la différence: bright orange power cables and inscrutable electronic control boxes atop an AC motor with the business end aimed rearward.

Before starting the drivetrain conversion, Lingenfelter techs in Wixom, Michigan, powder-coated the car’s frame and treated the Chevy to fresh exterior paint. Then they bolted in the eCrate kit: a standard Bolt electric motor rated at 200 hp and 266 lb-ft of torque, plus associated controls. The motor’s output is mated to a GM 4L60 four-speed Turbo-Hydramatic transmission. A conventional driveshaft delivers torque to a stock live rear axle. A 66 kilowatt-hour battery pack consisting of 288 lithium-ion cells and weighing nearly 1000 pounds rides in the bottom of the El Camino’s cargo bed.

While 200 hp might not sound impressive, the motor’s instant torque multiplied by the transmission’s short first gear and 5.37:1 axle ratio yield impressive wheelspin on demand. Aside from the whirr of rubber melting into white smoke, the soundtrack is eerily calm.

Lingenfelter personnel built and tuned this package over a six-month period in 2021. The transmission was modified to incorporate regenerative braking, stretching operating range. While it’s premature to speculate on the coming eCrate’s price, traditional piston engines sold by GM in crate form currently run from less than $10,000 to $29,500. (The latter figure represents the 1004-hp, ZZ632-spec, big-block V-8. Get it while you can.)

To ensure that future car modifiers aren’t slowed down with technical headaches, Chevy’s eCrates can only be installed by factory trained Electric Specialty Vehicle Modifiers. Lingenfelter Performance is the first such organization. According to Lingenfelter, Chevy Performance will officially launch its first eCrate package this spring. For those tired of engine oil spots on their pristine garage floor, salvation is just around the corner.

The post Lingenfelter’s electric El Camino is a sign of crate motors to come appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Following the invention of the gasoline and diesel internal-combustion engines at the end of the 19th century, engineers concentrated on raising power output. In 1885, Gottlieb Daimler of Germany experimented with a crankshaft-driven supercharger. In 1905, Alfred Buchi of Switzerland, and in 1916, Auguste Rateau in France, independently patented devices then known as turbo-superchargers. What we now call turbocharging utilizes the same principle: recycle waste exhaust energy to spin a compressor boosting intake pressure, and power output rises accordingly.

Were it not for World War I, this technology might have languished in labs for decades. Enter General Electric engineer Dr. Sanford Moss. In 1918, he was tapped to employ turbocharging to diminish horsepower losses resulting from flying through thin air at altitude.

Moss, born in 1872, studied steam turbines in his University of California mechanical engineering classes. His master’s thesis proposed replacing locomotive piston engines with smoother gas turbines. His doctoral thesis at Cornell, dubbed “The Gas Turbine, An Internal Combustion Prime Mover,” piqued the interest of General Electric executives interested in powering their electric generators with turbines. In 1903, Dr. Moss was hired by GE to serve as the company’s resident turbine expert.

During World War I, German aircraft engine builders BMW, Maybach, and Mercedes built fighter-plane engines featuring monstrous piston displacements and high compression ratios, to offset the losses from breathing thinner air at altitude. Those engines employed three throttle levers opened progressively to keep the engine from imploding at sea level, and they successfully climbed to 20,000 feet.

In France, engineer Rateau turbocharged a Renault aircraft engine toward the same end. His work increase climb rate and top speed by 15 percent. To keep America competitive in the global fight, turbocharger experimentation began in the same period at the U.S. Army Air Service’s McCook Field, in Dayton, Ohio. William Durand, chairman of the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (a NASA progenitor), who was familiar with Moss’s turbine expertise, petitioned GE to reassign him to Ohio.

Moss’s initial studies employed 10-inch turbine and compressor wheels spinning at 20,000 rpm. On a 27-liter Liberty V-12 aircraft engine producing 400 naturally aspirated horsepower at 1700 rpm, those components raised output to 470 horses at the same speed. The V-12’s exhaust manifolds wore wastegates for the expulsion of excess boost pressure. The added stress caused spark-plug failures and other issues, but the government nonetheless issued GE its first production turbocharger contracts in 1918.

That’s when Moss’s brainstorm kicked in. To avoid subjecting a pilot and aircraft to risky in-flight experimentation, his inspired alternative was a mobile laboratory: He mounted the turbocharged V-12 and its dynamometer on the bed of a Packard truck, then shipped the whole assembly 1300 miles by train to Colorado Springs, for high-altitude testing.

When the rig arrived, Moss and his technicians proceeded to drive it up the unpaved Pikes Peak Auto Highway, some 23 miles, to the 300-foot pad at mountain’s 14,115-ft summit. Work began there on September 10, 1918.

In the month that followed, Moss orchestrated around 25 test runs. Each evening, the test rig was covered in canvas before the team drove down the mountain to rest. On a few occasions, Moss’s equipment grew frozen inside a cocoon of snow. A small shack on the mountaintop served as repair shop. Major repairs would have necessitated lugging the whole test assembly back down the mountain; fortunately, that was never necessary. The most notable issues were clogged carburetor jets, leaks in the exhaust manifold and compressor housing, failed turbo thrust washers, and a few broken exhaust-manifold bolts. “There were many pleasant days when work could be carried on with facility,” Moss later noted, stoically.

Moss’s experiments decisively proved the merits of turbocharging. Baseline sea-level tests conducted at McCook had the Liberty producing a maximum of 354 hp at 1800 rpm. Atop Pikes Peak and without the turbo, output plummeted to 230 hp. Equipped with boost there, the V-12 peaked at 377 hp, though that maximum could be sustained for only 30 seconds before spark-plug failure set in. (The turbo Liberty did successfully survive a four-hour endurance test while producing 313 hp.) All of these measurements were taken while the engine was driving a spinning propellor, with the attendant drag load, in contrast to the 400–470 hp unburdened output quoted earlier.

After ongoing development, Moss installed a turbo Liberty in a LePere biplane, aiming to challenge the international altitude record. That aircraft topped 40,000 feet in 1921, double what a naturally aspirated LePere could achieve.

Moss retired in 1938, two years before he was awarded the Collier Trophy for his achievements. During World War II, he consulted with GE and the Army Air Force, developing experimental turbine engines for the Bell XP-59A, America’s first jet.

Turbos arrived too late for use in World War I, but they soon became decisive military assets. GE and Ford manufactured more than 300,000 during World War II.

Moss died in 1946 at 74, in Lynn, Massachusetts. In 1953, on the fiftieth anniversary of powered flight, Air Force lieutenant General James Doolittle placed a monument at the top of Pikes Peak to commemorate Moss’s achievements. They were deemed instrumental to high-altitude aviation.

Inevitably, turbos descended from the sky and benefitted ground transportation. The most significant firsts are:

1950: Cummins introduces turbodiesel truck engines.

1952: After qualifying on the pole in a turbocharged car, Fred Agabashian leads the Indy 500 for 70 laps.

1962: Oldsmobile introduces the seminal turbocharged Cutlass F-85 Jetfire. The car is quickly followed by Chevy’s turbocharged Corvair Monza Spyder.

1966: The Indy 500 sees its first turbocharged Offenhauser engines. The venerable four-cylinder, long the dominant engine at the Speedway, would earn its first win with forced induction in 1968.

1968: BMW wins the European Touring Car Championship with a turbocharged version of its 2002 sport sedan. A production variant followed in 1974.

1969: Turbochargers arrive in the Canadian-American Challenge road-racing series—a.k.a. the Can-Am—eventually providing for outputs in excess of 1000 hp.

1972: Porsche and Penske team up to race turbocharged, twelve-cylinder 917s in the Can Am. The cars are so successful that they essentially kill the series.

1974: Porsche launches its road-going 911 Turbo.

1976: Turbo engines dominate the Le Mans 24 Hour race.

1977: Renault introduces its landmark RS10 Formula 1 car, one of the earliest turbocharged open-wheelers. Turbos will dominate the sport in a matter of years.

1982: Honda launches its CX500T, the first turbo production motorcycle.

1983: Nelson Piquet wins the Formula One Championship with a turbocharged, four-cylinder Brabham-BMW. Qualifying outputs reportedly crested 1000 hp. Exact measurements aren’t known, as BMW’s dynamometers could read no higher.

1987: Limited-edition turbocharged Buick Regal GNXs wear bumper stickers bragging, ‘We brake for Corvettes.’

1989: Chrysler launches a turbocharged minivan.

2002: Honda introduces a turbocharged personal watercraft.

2006: Some 41 new vehicles in the American market are turbocharged. Just 17 wear superchargers.

2008: Every U.S. car and truck powered by a diesel engine comes equipped with at least one turbocharger.

Today we take this horsepower helper for granted. Seventy-five years after his passing, Dr. Sanford Moss deserves appreciation for turbocharging our power and performance.

The post Spin Doctor: 100 years ago, one man proved turbocharging’s worth appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Here at Hagerty, we are reminded that the word driving has meant since pioneer days the controlling of the movement and direction of a powered thing. Nature’s four hooves eventually gave way to man’s own engines as the power source, and the latter became the canvas for mechanical geniuses such as Ferdinand Porsche. Well before putting his name on his own automobiles, Porsche was prone to the kind of audacious engineering that produced feats worth remembering and celebrating today, such as the Auto Union V-16.

Grand Prix competition was turned topsy in 1933 when the sport’s organizers broomed antiquated “monster” single-seaters in favor of much lighter racing sculls. The 900-kilogram (1984-pound) minimum weight became a new 750-kilogram (1653-pound) maximum weight exclusive of tires, fluids, and the driver.

Anticipating an opportunity for the Fatherland to shine on the world motorsports stage, German chancellor Adolf Hitler chipped in 500,000 Reichsmarks of government sponsorship, or about $2.4 million today, toward the further development of his Silver Arrow racing cars. Imagine the chagrin at Mercedes-Benz when upstart Auto Union, the new firm formed by the merging of Audi, DKW, Horch, and Wanderer, raised its hand for a slice of the backing, intending to field a brilliant race car designed by Ferdinand Porsche.

Though he never completed any formal engineering training, Porsche’s résumé was already long before he set upon the task. He had built the first hybrid-electric car, in 1901, fitted superchargers to Mercedes-Benz SSK race cars in the 1920s, and drew the first sketch of the original VW Beetle on the back of an envelope. He was also a brilliant organizer, harnessing the talents of those working in his engineering consultancy such as chassis specialist Karl Rabe and Josef Kales, an aircraft-engine designer whom Porsche put to work on the Auto Union.

The jewel at the center of Porsche’s mid-engine P-Wagen was racing’s first V-16 engine. Although Cadillac, Marmon, and Peerless powered their early-1930s flagships with V-16s, the engine configuration was untested in motorsports. Instead, Alfa Romeo, Bugatti, Maserati, and Mercedes-Benz preferred supercharged inline-eights. Auto Union’s gambit was to double the number of cylinders in order to cram more displacement under the new 750-kilogram weight limit. Instead of chasing horsepower with a soprano redline, Porsche sought tire-melting torque for the Auto Union delivered at a lower, more basso profundo rpm.

Why exactly Kales picked 16 cylinders isn’t known, though it was likely to maximize engine torque by the use of low-stressed reciprocating parts offering the largest possible displacement. Torque is directly proportional to displacement, and if the pistons and rods don’t have to rev to the sky, they can be leaner and live longer. Rather than use fewer but larger cylinders, as were some of Auto Union’s competitors, more cylinders with smaller bores kept the engine’s length reasonable. Notes Porsche historian Karl Ludvigsen, in this period, Bugatti had tried to build a 4.9-liter straight-eight that was heavy, unbalanced, and unsuccessful, while Alfa Romeo had experimented with a twin-crankshaft 4.9-liter U-16 that broke many a track record (and a lot of engine components). With such ideas and inspiration flying around, a V-16 was almost bound to come along.

The only real drawback to extra cylinders was some increase in friction plus the extra cost of making them, though that was obviously not a racing issue. Yes, this V-16 was intentionally contrary to conventional high-rpm motorsports thinking. But don’t forget that the whole car could not top 750 kilograms. A major benefit of the novel mid-engine layout was the integration of the engine, transmission, and differential components, thereby saving the weight of a driveshaft.

Indeed, everything about the Auto Union V-16 was revolutionary. A 45-degree V-angle provided even firing intervals and narrow width. Common practice in the 1930s to forestall sealing issues was an integrated head-and-block assembly made of welded iron and steel bolted to an aluminum crankcase. Instead, to save weight over that construction, Kales tapped his aircraft-engine experience to cast the crankcase, block, and heads all in aluminum. Forged-steel bore liners, so-called “wet liners” as they were surrounded with coolant, were retained by the cylinder heads.

Since the redline was a modest 5500 rpm, dual overhead cams were deemed unnecessary. Instead, to further save weight, a single camshaft supported by nine bearings operated all 32 valves. Finger followers nudged the intakes, while each exhaust valve was opened by a cam follower moving a horizontal pushrod in touch with an outboard rocker arm. This clever arrangement had never been used before the Auto Union V-16, nor has it been seen since.

The two valves at the top of each cylinder were spread 90 degrees apart inside each hemispherical combustion chamber. While the small bore and domed combustion chambers minimized heat loss to the cooling system, Auto Union’s decision to go with a larger cylinder count did increase friction over competitors’ inline-eights.

To spare the weight of an intake manifold, a semicircular channel ran the length of the engine between the heads. Fed at its aft end by a Roots-type supercharger, this passage delivered the fuel-air mix prepared by a side-draft two-barrel Solex carburetor to the cylinders via short intake ports. Backfires were a real danger, requiring a novel solution. In those days, they were caused by the carburetor’s inability to respond promptly to abrupt changes in throttle position, such as a quick lift to arrest a sliding tail out of a bend (the Auto Union was notoriously squirrelly). Air and fuel mixtures momentarily went out of whack, causing the engine to stutter, a pop you can hear in many carbureted cars from either the exhaust or the intake.

When the Auto Union’s cylinders misfired, it sent flame from the combustion chamber back up the intake and ignited the fuel-air mixture within, to potentially disastrous results, especially for the supercharger. Thus, a simple spring-loaded plate was added at the channel’s forward end to vent the excess pressure of the misfire to the atmosphere before it could do damage. It also served as a wastegate to limit the peak boost reaching the cylinders. One bad side effect was venting toxic fuel to the atmosphere, which sent a trail out the back of the car and into the face of anyone attempting to pass. Thus, the great Tazio Nuvolari raced with a wet handkerchief in his mouth to minimize ingestion of this stuff. He suffered from severe asthma and coughed blood while racing, often staining his yellow jersey. Nuvolari was seriously allergic to the fuel constituents common in the 1930s.

One pump scavenged oil from the pan for cooling and containment in a reservoir, while a second pump delivered lubricant to the V-16’s moving parts. Block skirts extended well below the main-bearing bulkheads to enhance the engine’s stiffness. The lower edge of this casting dropped at a 7-degree angle below horizontal to provide extra material at the rear where the engine was bolted to a five-speed transaxle.

A forged alloy-steel crankshaft supported by 10 main bearings provided one throw for each pair of I-section forged-steel connecting rods. The engine could have gotten by with nine main bearings, but an extra main bearing was added to support the clutch and flywheel, located aft of a gear-driven vertical shaft that spun the overhead camshaft, supercharger, oil pumps, and pair of Bosch magnetos. Flat-topped pistons fitted with three rings were held to the rods by full-floating wrist pins.

By early 1934, Auto Union’s Type A racer was ready for competition. Its 500-pound, 4358-cc V-16 sported a 68-millimeter bore and a 75-millimeter stroke. A 7.0:1 compression ratio with 9 psi of boost yielded 295 horsepower at 4500 rpm and a mighty 391 lb-ft of torque at only 2700 rpm. A table-flat torque curve allowed lapping most tracks using only two gears, and tight courses such as Monaco could be driven entirely without shifting. Mercedes drivers revved their 3360-cc W25 straight-eights a full 1200 rpm higher to achieve a peak output of 314 horsepower, but they fell 10 percent below Auto Union in torque production. None of the French and Italian rivals topped 250 horsepower at this juncture, so despite the V-16’s extra complexity, the design gambit was outwardly successful in packing more torque within the rule limits.

Gasoline in the 1930s lacked the octane necessary to forestall detonation, so a witch’s brew of fuel was used consisting of 60 percent alcohol, 20 percent benzol, 10 percent diethyl ether, 8 percent gasoline, and traces of toluene and castor oil. Since that concoction’s energy density was lower than gasoline’s, the Auto Union’s 55-gallon fuel tank required at least one refill per race.

As a warmup exercise, driver Hans Stuck (father of the more contemporary pilot Hans-Joachim Stuck) ran his Type A open-wheeler to 157 mph on the Milan-to-Varese autostrada before setting a 135-mph one-hour endurance record at Germany’s AVUS track in March 1934. Still, Mercedes remained a fierce competitor, harnessing its greater resources to enter more and better-prepared cars piloted by talented drivers to win four GP races in the 750-kilogram formula’s inaugural year versus three victories each for Auto Union and Alfa Romeo. Fortunately, the Porsche wizards had designed their V-16 with ample room for growth. As competition intensified in subsequent seasons, much more power and torque would be needed to seize the laurels.

Responding to Benz’s first-season success, Auto Union fielded an upgraded Type B for 1935 with the bore increased from 68.0 to 72.5 millimeters, compression raised from 7.0 to 8.25:1 via domed pistons, and two additional psi of boost. Sixteen pipes now spit exhaust thunder skyward. Revving this 4951-cc V-16 to 4800 rpm yielded 375 horses, while torque climbed to 478 lb-ft at 3000 rpm. By midyear, the team implemented another upgrade for use on speed-record runs, a stroke increase to 85 millimeters, which hiked the total displacement to 5610 cc.

In the interests of durability, the connecting rods were upgraded to stronger single-piece units with an integral cap, each fitted with 28-needle roller bearings at their big ends. That, in turn, necessitated use of an assembled multipiece crankshaft to facilitate slipping a pair of rods onto each crank throw. The crankshaft’s pieces connected to each other by means of couplings designed for aircraft engines by Hellmuth Hirth, who trained in America at Edison’s General Electric and helped found the German auto parts giant Mahle. These joints, called Hirth couplings, resembled meshed gear teeth and were clamped together with a through-bolt at the center of each throw. Hours of high-precision machining were required to make each assembled crankshaft.

The relentless Mercedes team also turned up the heat with intensive car development for 1935, resulting in nine season victories versus Auto Union’s four wins in a series of hard-fought contests. Wily Alfa Romeo driver Tazio Nuvolari earned a surprise win at the German Grand Prix on a wet track, an embarrassment to the home teams of Mercedes and Auto Union. Joining Auto Union midway through the ’35 season was former motorcycle racer Bernd Rosemeyer, who proved fearless at the wheel of the loose and demanding Auto Union but who needed time to adapt to the new sport.

Car and driver eventually gelled for the 1936 and ’37 seasons, as Auto Union punched its V-16’s bore out to 75.0 millimeters, yielding a total capacity of 6006 cc, the largest piston displacement used by any manufacturer in this era. At the time, displacement was unlimited, there being no caps until the 1938 season. Wisely, Porsche had entrusted his engine man, Josef Kales, to engineer the V-16 with future displacements bumps in mind, so bore spacing and cylinder-wall thickness were not issues. This new Type C had a 9.2:1 compression ratio fed by 14 psi of boost and pumped out 520 horsepower at 5000 rpm and a potent 630 lb-ft of torque at 2500 rpm. Rosemeyer won the 1936 championship.

Further upping displacement to 6330 cc with a 77.0-millimeter bore gave 545 horsepower in a special Type R engine used mainly for record breaking (though Auto Union may have also slipped that V-16 into a car for a couple of races). As always, painstaking diligence finally earned rewards: six victories in 1936 went to Auto Unions to Alfa’s four and Benz’s two. The following year, once Mercedes finally got its new W125 up to speed, the Stuttgart star scored seven victories to Auto Union’s five.

After the 1937 GP season’s dust had settled, Mercedes and Auto Union continued their rivalry with streamliners, competing on a closed section of the autobahn north of Frankfurt, Germany. Rudolf Caracciola was first out on a chilly January morning with a two-way run averaging 269 mph, establishing a new 1-mile speed record. A few hours later, Rosemeyer took his shot, achieving 267 mph warming up his V-16–powered ultra-low-drag Auto Union. On the first leg of his record attempt at an estimated 270 mph, an intense crosswind bunted Rosemeyer’s car off course. As his streamliner tumbled out of control, the 28-year-old fair-haired Rosemeyer was spit from the cockpit. The exact spot where he perished with a broken neck is marked by a memorial at a rest area near the Mörfelden-Langen autobahn exit.

Considering the 200-plus-mph speeds achieved on long circuits, and the number of drivers killed in action, rules makers were forced to tap the brakes on Grand Prix racing. For 1938, naturally aspirated engines were limited to 4.5 liters while blown powerplants could be no larger than 3.0 liters. By this time, the Porsche organization’s assistance had moved to Mercedes, so Auto Union engineers had to comply with the new rules on their own. Their remarkable V-16 was replaced by an interesting new 3.0-liter V-12. The wider 60-degree V-angle necessary to achieve even firing of the V-12 meant that now three camshafts (one per head for the exhaust valves and a single central camshaft operating the intake valves via finger followers) were needed to open the more widely spaced valves. The new short-stroke crankshafts had roller bearings at both rod and main locations. A smaller cast magnesium supercharger was driven 2.4 times crank speed to produce 17 psi of boost, yielding 460 horsepower at an ear-tickling 7000 rpm. A new two-stage supercharging scheme was implemented halfway through the 1939 season to deliver 500 horsepower at 7500 rpm and 405 lb-ft of torque at 4000 rpm.

Mercedes fielded comparable power in a new W154 racer powered by a supercharged 2962-cc V-12. Once again, the Stuttgart steamroller was not to be stopped. The Benz boys earned a dozen wins in 1938 and ’39 versus Auto Union’s four victories. The red flag finally dropped on this era in September 1939, when the Nazis invaded Poland to begin World War II.

Nearly every trace of Auto Union’s racing glory was annihilated by relentless bombing followed by the seizure of anything of value as reparations. After a 25-year hiatus, the four-ringed logo finally reappeared in 1965 on Audi road cars. More recently, Bugatti, a sister brand under the VW Group umbrella, has thrived building remarkable W-16s, but in light of the current rush to electrification, the days are numbered for these distant descendants of Auto Union’s mighty racing mills.

The post 16 cylinders and 270 mph, in 1938: The Auto Union V-16 was an audacious engineering feat appeared first on Hagerty Media.

In the 1950s, auto engineers began to ditch unruly carburetors in favor of the fuel injection that winners and losers alike had successfully employed in WWII aircraft. Mercedes-Benz was first to bat in 1955 with a direct-injection system—squirting fuel into each cylinder instead of mixing it with air in the intake manifold—on its spectacular 300 SL sports car. Of course, the Americans had other (some say better) ideas.

Instead of employing bulky and expensive injection pumps originally developed for diesel engines and refined in aircraft applications, GM and Bendix Aviation devised two innovative approaches: simpler mechanical injection for Pontiacs and Chevrolets, followed by the world’s first electronically controlled fuel injection for select AMC and Chrysler models.

Fundamental injection patents date back to the 19th century and the dawn of the diesel engine. The world’s first V-8 engine built in France for speedboat and aircraft use was so equipped. Fuel injection is required in compression-ignition engines to assure that combustion doesn’t occur until the dickens is squeezed out of the incoming air. In 1935, Mercedes-Benz diesel cars, trucks, and buses began using pre-combustion chambers fed by fuel injection pumps. Practically every WWII aircraft engine maker employed similar technology because carburetors failed miserably at altitude compensation.

Post-WWII developments

Stu Hilborn’s mechanical injection system developed on the Bonneville salt flats showed up on Meyer-Drake Offy engines at the 1949 Indy 500. Bosch in Germany and Bendix in the U.S. began simplifying aircraft systems for automotive use. At GM, the aggressive and innovative Ed Cole put his engineering staff, the Rochester Products Division, and Zora Arkus-Duntov (Corvette’s patron saint) to work developing a mechanical injection system later called Ramjet. Having created the seminal small-block V-8 for Chevrolet, Cole’s second mission was making that engine exemplary in performance and efficiency.

Gasoline will not combust with air until it’s converted from a liquid to atomized droplets, which vaporize when heated. The amount of heat must be carefully regulated to avoid vapor lock (blocked fuel flow) after the engine reaches its normal operating temperature. The second challenge is distributing the ideal amount of fuel to each cylinder.

GM’s Ramjet was a continuous-flow injection system with atomized fuel squirted toward the back of each intake valve. A necked-down port called a venturi, positioned between the air filter and the intake manifold, measured the mass of the incoming airflow. The venturi’s air pressure signal operated a control diaphragm in a fuel chamber, fed by a small pump that drew fuel from the car’s tank. The diaphragm moved to regulate fuel delivery to the cylinders in proportion to the incoming airflow. Ramjet’s air-fuel ratio was calibrated at 15.5:1 at light loads and up to 12.5:1 at full throttle.

Fuel delivery nozzles attached to the intake manifold and aimed toward the intake valves had openings approximately 1/64-inch in diameter. Filtered air mixed with the fuel near each nozzle enhanced atomization. Long intake ports ducting air from a plenum atop the manifold to each cylinder used the kinetic energy of the flow (momentum) to raise the pressure of the air reaching each cylinder above atmospheric, a phenomenon called dynamic supercharging.

While peak power gains over a four-barrel carburetor were modest in initial development tests conducted by Arkus-Duntov, performance gains did come from fuel injection’s more consistent fuel-air mixtures. To obtain maximum benefit from fuel injection, various compression ratios, cam designs, and intake runner lengths were evaluated. Also, the location and aim of the injection nozzles were varied in testing. Duntov personally drove test Corvettes at Pikes Peak and at Daytona Beach.

Introduced on the 1957 Corvette and Bel Air, Ramjet fuel injection cost $538 and delivered exactly one horsepower per cubic inch—283 hp (gross) at 6200 rpm. While Chrysler had already demonstrated similar specific output in its 1956 Hemi V-8s, the lighter Corvettes outran the heavy 300Bs to sixty mph in 5.7 seconds and to a top speed of 132 mph.

GM’s Rochester Products also supplied its mechanical injection systems for installation on a few Pontiac Bonnevilles. Those V-8s, which lacked Ramjet-style intake manifolds, delivered 315 hp at 4800 rpm from 347 cubic inches.

Bendix Aviation’s Electrojector

Concurrent with GM’s development of mechanical fuel injection, longstanding auto industry supplier Bendix began working on its own system in the early 1950s, adapting Korean War technology. The notable difference with that what Bendix called Electrojector was the first attempt at regulating fuel delivery with electronically-controlled, electrically-activated port injectors.

After sensing intake manifold pressure, engine rpm, ambient air pressure, and temperature, the all-knowing Electrojector controller sent timed pulses to solenoid-type injectors fed by a 20-psi fuel rail. The controller was programmed to regulate air-fuel ratio, provide start-up enrichment, a faster idle when the engine was cold, and total fuel cut-off during deceleration to diminish exhaust emissions. Each injector was held closed by a spring until its solenoid coil received a pulse from the controller. A major distinction from Rochester’s approach was that Electrojector was a timed system with fuel injection in sync with each intake valve opening.

A set of breaker points added to the engine’s ignition distributor provided the rpm signal. For applications where distributor height was a concern, a separate shaft-driven speed sensor was employed. A simple electronic sensor reported intake manifold pressure to the controller. Another sensor enabled altitude compensation.

Bendix originally intended to use vacuum tubes in its controller until engineers discovered they required a few seconds to warm up. That prompted a shift to new-fangled transistors which also lowered the electrical current draw to just a few amps. The width of the electrical pulses dispatched to each injector determined the quantity of fuel delivered to each cylinder.

Bendix tests revealed a 10 percent power gain over a carburetor-equipped V-8. Fuel economy gains ranged from 0.5 mpg at 45 mph to 2 mpg at 70 mph.

AMC and Chrysler both took the Bendix bait. AMC planned a 1957 Rambler V-8 application but teething problems during development—such as hard starting in cold weather—resulted in no cars reaching the buying public. Chrysler offered Electrojector systems on its 1958 300D, DeSoto Adventurer, Dodge D-500, and Plymouth Fury. Factory records show that 54 cars were equipped with this $600 option.

Alas, the day of electronically controlled fuel injection had not yet arrived. Electrojector suffered from two fundamental flaws. The wax-paper-wrapped capacitors failed as a result of temperature and humidity changes. And AM radio station transmitter signals occasionally caused Electrojector V-8s to rev up, surprising the driver. When customers complained, Chrysler had them return their cars to the dealer in order to replace the troublesome injection system with a proven dual four-barrel-carburetor setup.

The Chrysler 300D owned by Per Blixt, a faithful employee at Jay Leno’s Burbank, California, garage, is a rare car that escaped with its Electrojector system intact. True to form it ran poorly, so Blixt spent a decade tracking down spare OE parts during his fastidious restoration. Though only a few Bendix parts survived his rebuild process, Blixt’s 300D does run powerfully and dependably.

EFI development in the 1960s and ‘70s

Lacking the patience to fix the Electrojector’s flaws, Bendix packed up its research documents and patents for sale to Bosch in Germany. It re-emerged as Bosch’s D-Jetronic EFI the 1967 Volkswagen 1600 Type 3. Several other automakers bought the improved system from Bosch and it enjoyed a fruitful life of more than a decade in production.

Bendix re-entered the EFI game with 1976 applications on Chevy’s Cosworth Vega and two Cadillac V-8 engines. Digital controllers began supplanting slower analog computers in 1979. In 1986, a modern-style fuel injection armed the Fox-body 5.0-liter Mustang GT with a potent 200 (net) hp worth of kick. Mitsubishi introduced direct injection for gasoline engines in 1997.

Today, automotive carburetors exist only on vintage cars and in museums. EFI will reign as standard operating equipment as long as internal combustion holds the fort against the inevitable electrification attack.

The post The long, winding road to EFI appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Automakers rarely agree on anything, but several are seriously considering the possibility that hydrogen will eventually power all of our road-going vehicles. That would make the transition to battery-electric vehicles (BEVs) merely a waypoint on the road to truly green transportation.

Hydrogen is the most abundant material in the universe. Our Sun is hydrogen in the plasma state (electromagnetically charged gas). On Earth, hydrogen exists in water (H₂O) and in organic compounds such as methane (CH₄). Unfortunately, Mother Nature’s most prodigious fruit requires considerable effort to harvest. Like gasoline, hydrogen must be refined to prepare it for service as a portable fuel.

Two centuries ago, Great Britain’s Reverend Cecil was the first to use hydrogen to fuel an internal combustion engine. Before carburetors arrived, the German Nikolaus Otto, inventor of the four-stroke combustion cycle, considered gaseous hydrogen safer to use for experimentation than the gasoline that existed in 1870.

Today we know that hydrogen is easily ignited, it can be used over a broad range of air-fuel ratios, and high compression ratios are feasible—resulting in high thermal efficiency—because of hydrogen’s elevated auto-ignition point compared to gasoline. A notable downside is that combusting hydrogen with air produces NO_x, a subset of troublesome greenhouse gases. Nonetheless, Mazda built a rotary (Wankel) engine fueled with hydrogen for evaluation. Ford and BMW both used piston engines for their hydrogen experimentation. BMW’s Hydrogen 7 achieved 187 mph in straight-line runs and its H2R streamliner, powered by a liquid-hydrogen-fueled V-12, set nine international speed records. Hydrogen-fueled applications ranging from forklifts to city buses, boats, and aircraft have also been examined.

Today’s more popular gambit is to use hydrogen gas, stored onboard the vehicle, and oxygen, drawn from the atmosphere, in fuel cells to produce the electricity needed to power an electric motor. Scientists began studying fuel cells nearly two centuries ago and NASA has used them to power satellites and space capsules for sixty years. Like batteries, fuel cells generate electricity with the flow of electrons from an anode to a cathode through an electrolyte inside a sealed chamber. A catalyst of some sort accelerates this chemical reaction which yields a DC current with water as the only byproduct. Since carbon plays no role in this energy conversion, no harmful CO₂ is produced. A power inverter converts the DC current from the fuel cell to AC for the vehicle’s drive motor. A battery is necessary to provide the instant energy needed for bursts of acceleration because a fuel cell’s response to demands for more output is lackadaisical. Fuel cell catalysts are most often platinum, one of the most expensive materials on Earth.

The most common means of producing hydrogen is to expose hot, pressurized natural gas to a catalyst to convert it into hydrogen, carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide. Electrolysis of water is an alternative method. While hydrogen gas is a natural byproduct of some nuclear powerplant processes, that form of energy generation is unfortunately out of favor these days.

Through 2019, more than 18,000 fuel-cell-powered vehicles had been sold or leased worldwide. They typically offer 300-plus miles of range and refueling in five minutes or less. In 2013, after 15 years of R+D, Hyundai set the fuel cell stage with a few converted Tucson FCEV crossovers, followed by the Hyundai Nexo SUV in 2018 for California only. The first dedicated fuel cell model was Toyota’s Mirai sedan launched in 2015, followed by a fresh second-generation design for the current model year. Honda’s Clarity four-door is currently available for lease in California for $379 per month, but given that the model has been effectively killed after the 2021, it won’t last much longer.

Given the cost of advancing the state of the technological art, manufacturers typically partner with one another to share development costs. In the fuel cell domain, GM has a longstanding relationship with Honda. BMW’s licensing agreement with Toyota dates to 2013. Ford teamed with Mercedes and Nissan that same year.

The Hyundai Motor Group (HMG), deeply committed to hydrogen fuel and fuel cells, recently announced what it calls a “Hydrogen Wave for everyone, everything, everywhere.”

In early September, HMG chairman Emulsan Chung proclaimed, “Our vision is to apply hydrogen energy in all areas of life and industry such as our homes, workplaces, and factories. We want to offer practical solutions for the sustainable development of humanity and with these breakthroughs, we aim to help foster a worldwide Hydrogen Society by 2040.”

Specific HMG game plan initiatives are:

• Two third-generation 100 kW (134 hp) and 200 kW (238 hp) fuel cell systems by 2023 demonstrating twice the power, 50 percent cost reductions, and 30 percent smaller volume than the company’s gen-two designs.
• To become the world’s first manufacturer to apply fuel cell systems to all its commercial busses and trucks by 2028.
• To match the price of a BEV with a fuel cell electric vehicle (FCEV) by 2030.
• To apply fuel cells to all types of mobility while extending hydrogen technology into homes, buildings, and powerplants.

Proving HMG is serious about this major commitment, chairman Chung unveiled a 570-hp Vision FK high-performance sports car (unfortunately camouflaged), a huge autonomous Trailer Drone vehicle, and a fleet of emergency rescue vehicles—all powered by fuel cells and all intended for production. Another HMG invention is the H-Two, a portable hydrogen fueled charging station intended for emergency power at remote locations.

To gauge the likelihood of HMG’s hydrogen dream coming true, we referenced it to current attitudes on this subject. A credible point of view comes from the Hydrogen Council (HC), a global organization founded in 2017 and led by 92 CEOs from leading energy, transport, industry, and investment firms.  This organization expects that hydrogen will account for 18 percent of the global energy demand by 2050, that CO₂ emissions will be diminished by six billion tons annually, and that 30 million new jobs will be created.

Bill Visnic, Automotive Engineering magazine’s editorial director offered a less sanguine point of view:

“Commercial vehicles definitely represent the path of least resistance for the adoption of FCEV technology. Their longer service lives make it easier to amortize the high costs. Larger vehicles are better suited to the bulky, heavy tanks needed to carry the hydrogen fuel.

“Given the major R&D investments under way, it’s realistic to assume that fuel cell cost, efficiency, and power output will see dramatic improvements. That said, matching the cost of BEVs will be difficult given the concerted efforts of both the auto industry and the global battery makers that are progressing. Bottom line: HMG faces major challenges advancing hydrogen’s cause.”

Addressing the weight of portable hydrogen storage tanks, Jeff Sloan, editor-in-chief of CompositesWorld magazine notes that “During the past year, hydrogen has vaulted near the top of the non-petroleum-energy source list, joining wind, solar, and hydro energy. Programs using hydrogen to power long-haul trucks, busses, trains, cars, and aircraft are advancing rapidly around the world and carbon fiber has become a prime candidate for hydrogen pressure vessels. Unfortunately, the supply chain is not sufficiently evolved to quickly and easily respond to emerging opportunities. So one must wonder if hydrogen expansion is real and sustainable.”

Inevitably, a few hydrogen naysayers have surfaced. Volkswagen believes that fuel cells have “no future in the automotive market.” Mercedes-Benz recently backed out of its cooperative fuel cell agreement with Ford and Nissan. And the learned Elon Musk has dubbed this technology “fool” cells out of skepticism that hydrogen will ever be a practical automobile fuel.

There are other issues to consider. The range anxiety currently frustrating BEV adoption may persist when HCEVs arrive with their own operating limitations. And, given the challenges President Biden is facing raising funds to build BEV-charging infrastructure, his successor won’t have it easy investing in hydrogen generation and distribution systems. The Hydrogen Council estimates that $300-billion in global spending will be required to expand infrastructure by 2030.

Last, mere mention of hydrogen gives some consumers the willies. Many of them recall Nazi Germany’s Hindenburg fiasco, while others associate hydrogen with thermonuclear bombs. Even if HMG is somehow proved correct in the long run, the company is bound to suffer some major wipeouts while surfing its Hydrogen Wave along the way.

The post Think batteries are bunk? Hydrogen’s long-term prospects aren’t much better appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Now and again, lightning strikes the Motor City. These rogue bursts of energy once nudged Stevie Wonder and Aretha Franklin to R&B magic, and they still drive the occasional auto icon down an assembly line. Heavenly magic is how the ’32 Ford, the ’55 Chevy, and the ’65 Mustang came to be. In 1988, one of these lightning bolts moved Bob Lutz to conceive the Viper.

We’re here to celebrate the super snake’s 30th birthday by revisiting its life and times, spanning 25 model years. Though the wily serpent has slithered out of Dodge showrooms, its ardent admirers aren’t about to let it rest.

Legend has it that Bob Lutz was inspired to build the Viper by driving his Autokraft Mk IV Cobra replica. Carroll Shelby, the original Cobra’s progenitor, frequently reminded Lutz that his rustic roadster formula deserved a reboot. Following stints at GM, BMW, and Ford, Lutz joined Chrysler in 1986 as the company’s product guru. His boss, Lee Iacocca, was in the thick of a buying spree, adding AMC, Jeep, Lamborghini, and later Maserati to the fold. It was Lutz’s job to make this FrankenMotors walk and talk.

A hallway encounter between Lutz and design director Tom Gale set the “what if” stage. Bored with the K-car and its many derivatives, and impatiently anticipating the arrival of the cab-forward LH sedans (Chrysler Concorde, Dodge Intrepid, etc.), Lutz suggested that a revived Cobra could be a lightning bolt to energize the troops and signal to the automotive world that Chrysler had turned the K-car page. Like a school kid splitting for recess, Gale hustled back to his design studio to massage the clay.

Gale’s first creation perplexed Lutz because it was more reminiscent of Jaguar’s low, shapely E-Type than AC’s simpler, blunter Ace, the forefather of the Cobra. The voluptuous bodywork was accented by a low windscreen integrated with the mirrors. Exhaust header pipes elbowed out of fender vents. Gale’s inspiration was unspoiled by side windows, door handles, or the targa bar that would later rise out of the deck surface. It was surely more than Lutz had expected.

The auto journos who witnessed Gale whisk the wraps off that clay model were shocked to their boxers. Its Viper name paid homage to the Cobra while confirming Dodge’s predatory intent. A barely running mockup was quickly constructed for a public debut at the 1989 Detroit auto show. Roush Engineering brazed two  additional cylinders onto a Chrysler V-8, fabrication specialists Metalcrafters converted Gale’s clay exterior to sheet steel, and hot-rodder Boyd Coddington concocted a tubular space frame to support everything. The V-10 rattling the rafters moved showgoers to reach for their wallets to post a deposit. At the subsequent  Chicago and Los Angeles shows, the Viper was again lauded as the most exciting Detroit development since the Corvette. Scores of newspapers and magazines splashed red ink celebrating the super snake’s arrival.

Why a V-10?

By 1988, Chrysler’s Hemi V-8 was ancient history, and a V-12 was too sophisticated for this malcontent. A V-10, created by tacking two cylinders onto the company’s 5.9-liter V-8, made perfect sense for Chrysler’s nonsensical sports car.

This was hardly the auto world’s first V-10. Audi, BMW, Lamborghini, and Porsche have all used them at various points, and Honda won Formula 1 races with such engines. Chrysler conveniently had a macho V-10 under development for Dodge Ram pickups when the Viper was conceived.

The one reason not to stretch a V-8 into a V-10 is that the V-8’s even firing intervals are lost. A cylinder fires every 90 degrees of crank rotation in a V-8, but adding two more cylinders results in firing intervals that alternate between 54 and 90 degrees. The syncopation moved one critic to liken Viper’s exhaust note to an angry UPS truck.

One lucky stroke was that Lamborghini, by then a Chrysler subsidiary, was available to help refine the Viper’s V-10. The brilliant Mauro Forghieri—who had recently moved from Ferrari to Lamborghini—guided the design of an aluminum block fitted with iron cylinder liners. His aluminum heads topped with magnesium valve covers had efficient combustion chambers and porting. The crankshaft and connecting rods were tough forged steel. The cast-iron truck V-10 that followed the Viper by two years never enjoyed such nurturing.

At birth, the 8.0-liter Viper V-10 produced a healthy 400 horsepower at 5200 rpm and 465 lb-ft of torque at 4000 rpm. During the four generations that followed, it grew to 8.4 liters and rose to a stout 645 horsepower at a rousing 6200 rpm and a meaty 600 lb-ft of torque at 5000 rpm. Of course, competition versions were even more potent.

Sequential electronic fuel injection, long intake runners, and tubular exhaust headers were instrumental in fattening the Viper engine’s output curves. While only two valves per cylinder operated by pushrods and rocker arms now seems mundane, Chrysler engineers cleverly implemented variable valve timing for this V-10’s fourth generation.

It was achieved by means of an unusual cam-within-a-cam arrangement, developed by German suppliers Mahle and Mechadyne. Their design uses two concentric shafts, a solid shaft inserted into a hollow one. During assembly, all 20 cam lobes for the engine and the six support journals for the shaft are installed onto the outer tube. The 10 exhaust lobes and the support journals are locked precisely in place with a press fit. The other 10 lobes for the intake fit loosely on the tube so they can move. They are secured in place by pins extending to the inner shaft. An electronically controlled phaser device, basically rotary vanes pushed by oil pressure, turns the inner assembly with up to 36 degrees of timing difference possible between the inner intake camshaft and the outer exhaust camshaft. Retarding exhaust valve timing at low rpm yields a smooth idle and low emissions. Advancing the exhaust timing at high rpm greatly enhances peak power and torque. To date, the Viper V-10 is the only engine in the world to employ this clever approach to variable valve timing.

Viper’s skunkworks

To study production feasibility, the seminal show car was handed over to an engineering team. Lutz specified three ground rules: a $50 million budget, a 36-month deadline to complete the effort in time for a 1992 Detroit auto show debut, and no shortcuts that would aggravate Chrysler management.

Roy Sjoberg, who joined Chrysler in 1985 after serving as Corvette godfather Zora Arkus-Duntov’s right-hand man, was appointed Viper’s chief engineer. He began by inviting a few dozen race-bred Chrysler engineers to a recruiting meeting. When word shot through the ranks at the speed of light, 300 showed up to offer their services.

Sjoberg selected 85 engineers, designers, and mechanics, many of whom had pro rally, Team Shelby road racing, or amateur track experience. He favored racers because he believed they could be trusted to work their butts off for long hours and modest pay. Sjoberg was inspired by Lockheed Martin’s Kelly Johnson, who developed the P-38 Lightning and U-2 spy plane in an agile organization known as the Skunk Works.

Sjoberg’s own skunkworks tapped Chrysler’s deep resources without getting mired in bureaucracy. Every engineer was authorized to make decisions on the fly. Members were instructed to act as if they had mortgaged their homes to underwrite this entrepreneurial enterprise. Chassis manager Pete Gladysz, who had headed Team Shelby’s SCCA racing program, explains: “Many of us had already worked together seven or eight years. We knew what the next guy needed and how he operates. You could hand such an associate a task and never worry about it being completed.”

Two mules were built with a $50,000 retail price in mind. The first one was powered by a V-8, the second by a cobbled-up V-10. Though the company had no experience manufacturing composite body panels, a craftsman appropriately nicknamed “Bondo” splashed fiberglass parts off Gale’s clay model. Upon driving the first prototype in December 1989, Lutz decreed, “You know what? You’ve got it!”

Iacocca’s turn at the wheel came less than a year later, in the second prototype. Upon completing a quick drive, he seconded Lutz’s motion, asking, “So, what are you waiting for?”

Driving toward the assembly line

Naturally, there were potholes in the road ahead. Getrag, initially tapped to develop the Viper’s six-speed transmission, couldn’t grasp how abusive American drivers could be burning rubber and slamming power shifts. Borg-Warner quickly stepped in to develop a gearbox with two overdrive ratios and a mechanism that forced first-to-fourth shifting during gentle driving to boost gas mileage. After a shootout between Goodyear and Michelin tipped the balance strongly in favor of the French brand, Chrysler’s purchasing authorities said no to using a “foreign” supplier. However, an expeditious phone call from Lutz resolved that issue.

In 1991, when the UAW objected to Chrysler’s use of a Japanese-built Dodge Stealth to pace the Indy 500, a preproduction Viper served as pinch hitter with Carroll Shelby at the wheel. That fall, scribes were treated to a scintillating week of Southern California preview driving. In addition to a trip through the Angeles National Forest, there was hot-lapping at Willow Springs Raceway followed by a freeway run south, during which California Highway Patrol officers stopped a few of the preproduction Vipers for close scrutiny. Phil Hill hosted an epic feast at his Marina del Rey restoration shop attended by several American Sports Car Heritage club members, including Carroll Shelby, Dan Gurney, Zora Arkus-Duntov, George Follmer, Sam Posey, and Parnelli Jones.

A key Viper mission was popping the Corvette’s bubble whenever possible. The timing was perfect to challenge the 1991 ZR-1 Corvette powered by a Lotus-designed DOHC V-8. The Viper’s 400 horses compared nicely with the Corvette’s 375, as did the Dodge’s $50,000 base price versus the Corvette’s $64,000 sticker. Car and Driver tests spotted the Viper a few tenths quicker to 60, while the ZR-1 won the quarter-mile race by two-tenths and 2 mph. From that confrontation onward, the Viper frequently served as the foil keeping Corvette engineers busy between coffee breaks.

Production of the Viper RT/10 commenced at Chrysler’s New Mack Avenue plant in Detroit in January 1992. The 150 or so workers initially built three cars per day, with a target first-year volume of 200–400 cars. True to the Viper’s rustic persona, the top was canvas material stretched between the windshield header and the targa bar. Side curtains were vinyl assemblies that plugged into place. Since there were no door handles, access to the cockpit was via inside latch releases. No options for air conditioning, airbags, antilock brakes, or automatic transmission were available. Due to the weighty V-10 and the heavy suspension components, the curb weight was 3450 pounds, well above the engineering team’s perhaps overly ambitious hopes of 3000 pounds, but hardly an issue given the car’s horsepower.

The second-generation Viper arrived in 1996 with notable upgrades. Engine output, heat management, and the soundtrack were all improved by a new exhaust system that replaced the blistering side pipes with mufflers hung under the tail. Actual sliding-glass windows were provided along with a removable hard top. The performance got hotter due to the addition of 15 horsepower and the loss of 60 pounds via lighter suspension components. Racy center stripes were available as optional equipment.

The grander 1996 news was the stunning GTS coupe with standard airbags, air conditioning, power windows, and power door locks. That warranted another stint as Indy 500 pace car, this time with “Maximum” Bob Lutz at the wheel. Both the coupe and the RT/10 roadster enjoyed a boost to 450 horses thanks to more aggressive valve timing and more efficient exhaust manifolds. Anti-lock brakes were finally added in 2001.

A GTS-R concept car revealed in 2000 previewed the fresh bodywork arriving on the third-generation 2003 coupe and convertible, both of which wore an SRT-10 nameplate. Sharp edges and angled lines supplanted the previous zaftig surfaces. Now the soft top was a clever folding design with the forward section doing double duty as a tonneau cover in the down position.

Both the V-10 engine and the chassis were notably lighter. A larger bore upped the displacement to 8.3 liters (506 cubic inches) and hiked output to a hearty 500 horsepower (later, 510 horsepower). When funds were too tight to develop a new aluminum space frame then under consideration, parent Daimler exported that technology to Germany for use on the Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG gullwing sports car.

For the fourth-generation 2008 Viper, V-10 displacement was increased to 8.4 liters. New cylinder heads boasting larger valves and more efficient ports were fed by dual throttle bodies. Adding variable valve timing enabled more aggressive cam timing, which boosted the horsepower to 600. An improved Tremec-built gearbox brought stronger synchronizers on all six forward gears, while a new speed-sensing limited-slip differential aided launch traction. To accommodate new Michelin Pilot Sport 2 tires, the chassis was retuned with spring-rate, antiroll bar, and damper revisions. A more modern electrical system improved engine cooling, throttle control, and fuel delivery. In spite of these fruitful upgrades, Dodge’s vice president and CEO Ralph Gilles announced that Viper production would cease in summer 2010, a victim (temporarily, as it turned out) of Chrysler’s 2009 bankruptcy.

Contradicting that edict, faithful owners and Dodge dealers were shown a fifth-generation 2013 Viper prototype in fall 2010, after Chrysler had begun merging with Italy’s Fiat. The public was taken with that car’s remarkable performance stats at the spring 2012 New York auto show: 640 horses, 0–60 mph in 3.5 seconds, and a 206-mph top speed. Larger Brembo brakes with ABS, traction and stability controls, and Pirelli P Zero tires brought improved braking and handling. The cockpit featured an electronic instrument cluster, a virtuoso Harman/Kardon sound system, and improved seating.

Unfortunately, when the fifth-gen Viper finally appeared in 2013, sales were lower than hoped for the Conner Avenue-built supercar, the result of base prices hiked to $100,000–$140,000. A desperate $15,000 price cut came with the 2014 model year. Chrysler finally pulled the plug in 2017 after a total of 31,069 Vipers had been sold globally.

Why the Viper died

Three years into the fifth-generation Viper’s five-year run, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles chairman Sergio Marchionne acknowledged, “The economics of the Dodge Viper’s exclusive architecture don’t add up to me.” What he didn’t mention was the major cost of meeting future side-impact collision standards.

The first year of any new model is often its best, but only 591 cars were sold the year the expensive fifth-gen Viper arrived for the 2013 model year. The later price cut sparked interest, but it didn’t stop average annual sales for that generation from dipping below 650 cars.

After the last Viper left the assembly line in August 2017, Lutz explained: “The Viper ran out of good reasons to live. The original premise was ‘more power and speed than anyone else.’ But the Viper was, in recent years, trumped by the Corvette Z06 and ZR1—and even in its own family by the Hellcats.”

Gilles, the fifth-gen Viper’s architect and now Stellantis’ global head of design, is more succinct when explaining his hero’s demise: “It was time. The Dodge Viper was an American supercar cloaked in mystique and legend. There will never be another car like it.”

We can only hope that Gilles is mistaken.

The post How a band of motorhead execs hatched the Dodge Viper appeared first on Hagerty Media.

You may have hard the term “lead sled.” In the 1950s, these were the radical customs that nudged hot rods out of pole position. For a decade or so following the 1955 release of the epic James Dean flick Rebel Without a Cause, they were the rides of choice for every kid who didn’t squander prized lawn-mowing earnings on comic books and bubble gum.

Sonny Hall of Belleville, Michigan, was a teenager when he first saw Rebel. In 1993, he began the painstaking process of building the car shown here, beginning with a $3500 rust-free 1949 Mercury two-door coupe that spent its youth on South Dakota roads. Though the engine, transmission, and interior were long gone, this Merc’s frame and body were commendably straight and rust-free. Over six winter breaks from his business running state fair demolition derbies, Hall performed the no-holds-barred makeover that transformed well used car parts into his pride and joy. His $46,000 expenditure pales in comparison to the hundreds of hours of effort he invested in the project.

Mercury enabled this Frankenstein process by launching a mid-priced sedan that looked half customized from the factory. The ’49 Mercury Eight, the brand’s first totally new design following World War II, embodied a concept known as “ponton” styling with integral sweeping fenders, a flowing hood, and a fast roof. Potent flathead V-8 power was standard equipment and prices were barely more than what a boxy Ford of the day cost.

The most celebrated Mercury custom was created by George and Sam Barris at their Lynwood, California, Barris Kustom Cars shop for Masato (Bob) Hirohata. Fresh out of the Navy in 1953, this wealthy Japanese-American handed over his ’51 Merc for alteration without budgetary or creativity constraints. Frank Sonzagni, police officer by day and a craftsman by night, chopped four to seven inches out of the roof (front-back), shaved extraneous decoration, molded in the headlamps, and stuffed a chrome bar made out of three 1951 Ford grilles into the Merc’s mouth. A ’52 Buick side spear separated seafoam green upper surfaces from the dark green bodywork between the wheels. Skirts hiding the rear wheels from view were adorned with scoops sporting three bright teeth per side.

Constructed in only 97 days with up to ten Barris craftsmen toiling at once, Hirohata’s custom earned multiple car magazine covers in the 1950s. In 2015, it topped its class at the prestigious Pebble Beach Concours. Experts agree that this is the most inspirational custom car in history. In 2017, following a painstaking restoration by owner Jim McNeil, the Hirohata Merc became the 17th of 29 cars listed on the National Historic Vehicle Register. Backed by Hagerty, this elite group of cars is jointly exhibited by the U.S,. Department of Interior and the Library of Congress.

What Hall’s custom lacks in flashiness compared to the Hirohata Mercury, it more than makes up in tasteful elegance and in practicality. Sonny and his wife Rosie have racked up 35,000 miles visiting major Midwest car shows. Outfitted for cruising with A/C and a modern sound system, this car has proven itself both reliable and comfortable during long hours on the road. The Halls even visited James Dean’s burial site in Fairmont, Indiana, to pay their respects.

Hall began his build process by mounting his body on a dolly for ease of access. While clipping the roof required only a couple of days work, several weeks were spent finishing the joints with lead to achieve visual perfection. (Lead, as in Lead Sled, is a filler material far more durable than Bondo applied over welded body seams.) The net chop amounted to 3.5 inches at the windshield and 4 inches at the rear. The backlight consisting of three pieces of curved glass was angled downward to match the lowered roof. Flat glass panels in the split windshield, doors, and quarter windows were carefully cut to fit the leaner greenhouse.

Every exterior metal panel was modified in some way. Lower door corners were rounded, the hood and decklid were shaved of ornamentation. Factory joints between the rear fenders and upper body–provided to facilitate collision repair–were eliminated. Aprons were added between both bumpers and the adjacent bodywork. To enable curved corners at the rear of the hood, new transition bodywork was necessary.

The gorgeous fender skirts were cut from 1955 Mercury roof panels; they’re retained by two upper pins and two lower bolts per side. The lower body areas immediately behind the door openings were lengthened to provide suitable mounting surfaces for the polished stainless steel side spears. Both rocker panels were replaced and covered with fairings that shroud the forward ends of the decorative side exhaust pipes. In contrast to the Hirohata custom, Hall left the factory side body curves and upper bright stainless spears alone.

Both factory bumper beams were retained with minimal modification. The added bumper arches are from a 1952 Kaiser. The new grille consists of seven bright teeth from a ’55 DeSoto. An upper accent bar supports red LED lights to add sparkle at night. The requisite ’52 Buick curved side sweeps required countless hours of stretching here and shortening there to suit new front fender and door opening dimensions.

Seven-inch LED headlamps are “frenched” inside revised front fender openings. The taillamps were mail-ordered from Gene Winfield’s California customs shop. A mini camera below the rear bumper feeds a back-up display screen in the dash.

Hall’s chassis and driveline mods are equally extensive. His power source is a 454 cubic inch Chevrolet V-8 requisitioned from a pickup truck. Sanderson headers route exhaust to Flowmaster mufflers connected to four Cadillac polished stainless-steel exhaust tips. The big-block thumper is mated to a three-speed Turbo-Hydramatic 400 automatic transmission. A GM 10-bolt rear axle attached to longitudinal leaf springs via 3-inch lowering blocks carries a 2.73:1 final-drive geared for quiet, relatively efficient cruising. Front steering and suspension equipment is supported by a half-frame sourced from a 1972 Chevy Nova. The 15-inch Colorado Custom Segundo billet wheels mimic ’57 Cadillac hubcaps. Coker radial tires sport wide white walls from a bygone era.

The deep purple exterior finish is a 1993 Chrysler factory shade called Director Red. Hall applied the first base coat/clear coat paint job nearly 30 years ago, then had it refreshed by a local body shop in 2019. You’d need a magnifying glass to spot a flaw.

Hall’s tuck-and-roll leather interior is simply stunning. Trimmer Kevin McArthur spent three years re-upholstering lowered ’72 Cadillac power bucket seats and building aggressively curved rear cushions from scratch. His molded fiberglass door panel spears reprise the Buick exterior brightwork. There’s a handy center storage console and a matching overhead divider. Factory instruments were replaced by 12-volt gauges from a 1985 Ford Mustang. The 14-inch Billet Specialties steering wheel is supported by a tilt-adjustable column pirated from a Chevy van. Hall fabricated an add-on panel running the full width of the dash to carry his Vintage Air A/C controls and registers. The in-dash Sony cassette deck is wired to a CD changer in the trunk. Custom sill plates spell out MERCURY boldly in stitched letters. Because McArthur is a former employee and close friend, he charged Hall only $5000 for his impressive interior work.

The Hirohata Mercury is now so valuable that it spends its days safeguarded inside a glass case. Fortunately, Sonny and Rosie Hall’s beloved “Rebel” has a cause: to keep Dean’s lead sled concept going strong.

The post This custom ’49 Mercury keeps the lead sled tradition alive and kicking appeared first on Hagerty Media.

We’d all be lost without a congenial mechanic to keep our lawn mowers and garden tillers in tip-top shape. Rich Brooks, a kindred spirit at the opposite end of the mechanical spectrum, specializes in American supercars. If your 2005–06 or 2017–20 Ford GT needs anything beyond a lube job, Brooks’s GT Garage in rural southeast Michigan is your go-to destination.

Ford’s revival of the Le Mans–conquering GT40s from the 1960s are the most exotic and expensive sports cars ever conceived in America. Powered by a supercharged 5.4-liter, 550-hp DOHC V-8, the 2005 edition started at $139,995. Just over 4000 first-gen GTs were built by Mayflower Vehicle Systems and Saleen Special Vehicles under the auspices of Ford’s Special Vehicle Team (SVT). The mid-engine layout, Ricardo six-speed transmission, low-drag bodywork, and aluminum-cum-magnesium chassis provided the ideal platform for analog performance.

The second-generation GT is a more ambitious blend of molded carbon fiber, structural aluminum, and Gorilla Glass. This time, Ford opted for an EcoBoost V-6, initially rated at 647 horsepower, bolted to a Getrag seven-speed dual-clutch automatic transaxle. Upholding their lineage, a pair of these GTs in LM GTE-Pro trim finished first and third in class at the 2016 24 Hours of Le Mans. Since 2017, about 1000 of these GTs have been sold, for roughly $500,000 apiece.

Brooks established his garage complex less than 10 miles from his birthplace. “My dad began coaching my mechanical inclinations at the bicycle stage,” the bright-eyed 40-something wrench explains. After earning an associate’s degree at Henry Ford College in Dearborn, Brooks began his career at Roush Industries as a technician-mechanic in 1995. That was an especially rewarding time, because John Coletti ran Ford’s SVT department full-throttle, and Roush was contracted to execute many of its projects. Brooks personally stuffed a Contour V-6 into a Ford Focus for Coletti. He helped develop the 2003 Mustang SVT Cobra and the second-generation F-150 Lightning pickup. His luckiest stroke was being present in 2003 for the creation of the first Ford GTs under Coletti.

After a dozen or so years at Roush, Brooks felt the urge to steer the skills and knowledge he’d acquired in a fresh direction. In 2008, he began a double-shift routine—clocking in at Roush by day and getting his fledgling GT Garage up and running during evening and weekend hours. By 2010, his GT customer base had grown sufficiently to enable snipping the Roush apron strings altogether.

What resembles a classic red barn on the outside houses nearly 5000 square feet of space for repairs and storage. A dozen or so free-range chickens help the complex blend into the farming-oriented neighborhood.

Brooks’s shop is clean enough for surgical procedures thanks to work habits inspired by his Army veteran father, whom he describes as a clean freak. “Frequent cleaning is essential in my work,” Brooks says. “I sweep work areas every time a car leaves and power-wash the floors once or twice a year.” White-finished metal walls ricochet illumination provided by more than a dozen fluorescent light fixtures. The concrete floor is as smooth as a sheet of plate glass, interrupted only by the well-worn paths of GoJak wheel dollies.

Since Brooks’s home is only a short hike from his shop complex, there are no bathroom facilities, though creature comforts include Wi-Fi, a wall-mounted TV, Bose satellite radio typically wailing ’80s and ’90s rock, and a stocked fridge.

Acknowledging that there are only so many tunes a one-man band can play, Brooks subcontracts paint jobs to focus on mechanical work. He also relies on a web of collaborators for heavy collision repairs, machining, and full engine overhauls; GT transaxles are so intricate that they’re generally replaced rather than rebuilt when they suffer major internal wounds. Alongside an array of hand tools, Brooks has a Miller TIG welder, drill press, hydraulic press, band saw, tire changer, and four-wheel alignment system. A new tire balancer tops his wish list.

A pair of two-post lifts reside in the main work area, and three four-post lifts stash inventory in the storage room. The standby list there includes Brooks’s high school ride (a 1987 Ford Ranger stuffed with a 302-cubic-inch V-8), his wife’s 2003 Thunderbird, his 2014 Shelby GT500, a 2014 F-150 SVT Raptor pickup, one of only four remaining GT workhorse prototypes, and a dozen-plus customer cars. Brand-new body shells bought from Ford at attractive prices are on hand to resurrect first-gen cars seriously damaged in crashes.

Because the second-generation GTs are still under-warranty newbies, Brooks focuses on 2005–06 cars. “With over 2000 owners on my client list, I’ve worked on at least half of the production run,” he notes. Supplementing his base of wealthy car enthusiasts, Brooks services GTs owned by Ford royalty: Edsel Ford II; Henry Ford III; the company’s current CEO, Jim Farley; and Multimatic’s president and CEO, Raj Nair.

Instead of using an hourly shop rate, Brooks quotes projects on a fixed-cost basis. For example, removing and replacing a GT’s front fascia runs $600. “After customers submit a list of what they want done, I respond with a total cost analysis to avoid surprises,” Brooks says. Additionally, he has flown all over the country to assess for-sale GTs for prospective buyers.

One of his most fruitful relationships is with ex-Ford designer Camilo Pardo, who operates studios in Detroit and Southern California. Working with customers, Brooks and Pardo have built a dozen Signature Series Ford GTs—including Brooks’s personal car—with performance upgrades and stunning exterior treatment. Paint jobs mimicking the most memorable Le Mans racers are the preferred schemes to date.

If there’s one thing Brooks doesn’t put much effort into, it’s selling himself. Instead, he simply attends annual gatherings for members of the Ford GT Forum in order to stay in touch with current clients and to meet new ones. Framed posters from these family reunions adorn the walls of the shop.

Customer satisfaction is another reason why Brooks spends little time marketing his skills. “Ninety-eight percent of my customers are happy with the service I provide,” he says. “While pleasing everyone may be impossible, I haven’t stopped trying to win over the remaining 2 percent.”

The post GT Whisperer: The Michigan shop keeping Ford’s supercars on the boil appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Now that your bank balance has topped seven figures, the time may be right to indulge your favorite fantasies. If one of those dreams is owning your own race track, you’ve got until the end of July to rescue Michigan’s Milan Dragway from receivership.

Royal Oak, Michigan, attorney, and car enthusiast David Findling is the court-appointed receiver responsible for identifying those with the means and the will to restore Milan to its previous glory. Thus far he has received a half-dozen or so bids to shoulder Milan’s debts topping $2,500,000. Findling notes his task is three-fold: identifying the highest-dollar and best offer, confirming the viability of those funds, and determining the likelihood the new owner will fulfill future obligations related to Milan’s operation.

Findling adds that once his determination is made, the judge who appointed him must approve the sale in an open hearing. Since the final closing is unlikely before October 1, there’s little chance racing activities will resume until next year. Revenue exceeding the amount needed to settle the track’s debts will go to the current owner Bill Kapolka.

After Kapolka suffered ill health 18 months ago, Milan’s maintenance activities were suspended. In addition to repairing the strip’s weathered pavement and cleaning up spectator facilities (grandstands, parking lots, restrooms, food stands), the new owner faces two additional hurdles: remediating any environmental damage identified on the Dragway’s property and diminishing some of the noise radiated during racing to appease neighbors. An excavation crew to remove soil contaminated with traction compound, fuel, and drain oil will have its hands full; some combination of vegetation and earth berms may help reduce the din escaping the track.

In addition to IHRA sanctioned weekend drag racing, Milan has potential as a swap-meet, campgrounds, and rock-concert venue. There’s ample real estate to support motocross, go-kart, and speed boat competition. Michigan-based car makers and suppliers may be interested in renting these safe and secure facilities during the week for private testing. What better place is there to develop Amazon’s air-delivery drones?

If Milan piques your interest, don’t waste a moment getting in touch with Findling. Send your sincerest pitch and most generous offer to david@findlinglaw.com. And when you get Milan back on its feet, we’ll report that great news to the waiting anxiously fan base.

The post Milan Dragway to remain dormant for 2021, hope lingers on horizon appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Southeast Michigan, the home of three domestic car companies, is the center of the auto universe to millions who live and work there. But as a place to take your favorite ride for a Sunday afternoon blast of legal speed, the Detroit area today ranks near the bottom of the hospitality list. Though amateur drag racing was nurtured if not invented here, drag strips struggle making a go of it. Milan Dragway, located 35 miles west of the Motor City—and less than 20 miles south of Hagerty’s editorial offices in Ann Arbor—is the latest quarter-mile track to keep its gates padlocked long after warm weather’s return.

In 1957, Motor City Dragway, one of the country’s first paved tracks, opened at a rural site 35 miles northeast of Detroit. Before electronic timing equipment was created, racers were hand flagged at the start and finish lines. So many cars came to race that aircraft spotting lights were used to stretch running deep into the night. But after 21 years of competition, civilization closed in and noise complaints shut Motor City down. Though the place has been abandoned for decades and grass grows through cracks in its asphalt, retired racers still come to pay their respects.

Detroit Dragway, located only 16 miles south of downtown Detroit, followed in 1959. This time it was industrial growth that shut the track down after 37 years of racing in 1996. Today, GM assembles electric car battery packs in the quiet manufacturing park that replaced Detroit Dragway’s sound and fury.

Milan Dragway opened in 1964 on repurposed farmland unlikely to be plagued either by civilization’s creep or noise complaints. Entrepreneur Bill Kapolka bought the facility in 1989. Over the years, Milan hosted both NHRA and IHRA national drag racing events as well as frequent swap meets, car shows, and rock concerts. A pond on the property supported marine drags and corners of the facility were groomed for mud racing and motocross events. Both Car and Driver and Automobile magazine rented access to Milan for occasional car tests.

Kapolka survived one brush with bankruptcy in the early 1990s. More recently he was tardy repaying funds borrowed from Les Gold, a Detroit pawn shop owner and reality TV star known as the “street-level economist.”

This March, Judge Daniel White of the 38th Circuit Court in Monroe, Michigan, placed Kapolka and the American Jewelry & Loan pawnshop in receivership. Proprietor Gold claimed to have a buyer approved by the International Hot Rod Association (IHRA) ready to assume ownership and operation of the drag strip. Such a sale would relieve Kapolka of bankruptcy and, hopefully, restore Milan Dragway racing sometime this summer.

In spite of Milan’s distress, the drag racing sport is thriving. The largest organizer, National Hot Rod Association, claims 40,000 active competitors. The second largest International Hot Rod Association’s reach extends to Australia, Europe, South America, Russia, and other foreign countries. Recently, boutique organizations such as the National Electric Drag Racing Association have sprung up to support the growing popularity of motorcycles and cars powered solely by electricity.

The beauty of drag racing is that any participant’s skills are highly portable.  Once the nuances of the starting line’s Christmas tree are learned, successful procedures can be taken from one track to the next. In spite of the various lengths are now in use—1000-feet and 1/8th mile in additional to the traditional quarter-mile—the racing game is the same track to track. This sport’s fast pace and accessibility also helps keep the spectator stands packed during major weekends. Television coverage of the major national events has also prospered over the years. Four-wide competition supported by the top tracks is, in the eyes of many, far more exciting to view than any NASCAR race.

While Milan competitors and spectators are surely disappointed about their home track’s current closure, ample opportunities for them to scratch the racing itch remain. There are two active drag strips—Lapeer International and Ubly Dragway—located in Michigan’s “thumb” 100 miles north of Detroit. The Mid Michigan Motorplex in central Michigan offers test and tune sessions, junior dragster classes for kids as young as seven years old, and cash payouts for winners in several classes every summer weekend. US 131 Motorsports Park, 165 miles west of Detroit, which claims to be Michigan’s fastest track, operates every weekend from April through early November.

We can only hope Milan’s setback is temporary and that a new owner/operator with better finances and an upbeat vision rises to the occasion. Anyone interested in exploring this opportunity further should get in touch with Les Gold at American Jewelry and Loan in Detroit.

The post Michigan’s Milan Dragway is on the ropes appeared first on Hagerty Media.

The pandemic aside, Toyota sold more than 9 million cars and trucks last year around the world. The key to this company’s prosperity is its broad portfolio of affordable models and a list of attributes that is topped by value and followed closely by quality, reliability, and durability—QRD, in industry shorthand. No other brand has polished QRD to such a brilliant sheen. Peel back the Toyota onion and you’ll find 1001 seemingly trivial things that register positively in the back of every owner’s mind: tight panel gaps, no ruckus as the transmission cycles through its gears, and faithful service over years of use.

Tracing Toyota’s impeccable QRD to its origin could fill a book, but one waypoint is well-known: the 20R four-cylinder engine introduced for the 1975 model year. No stranger to inline-fours, Toyota built 14 four-banger families in the 20th century. Its R series, manufactured from 1953 through 1997, was offered in nine different displacements ranging from 1.5 to 2.4 liters.

In 1968, Toyota’s 1858-cc 8R engine came with two notable advancements: a five-main-bearing crankshaft and a cam elevated from the block to the head. Cranks with only three mains save cost, weight, and friction, but they lack the rigidity needed for smooth running in engines topping 100 horsepower. Eliminating pushrods with an overhead camshaft trims the valvetrain mass, which enables higher rpm, and clears space for straighter, more efficient intake and exhaust ports. Higher rpm plus greater flow-through yields more torque and horsepower.

Enter the 20R inline-four under the hoods of 1975 Toyota Coronas, Celicas, and Pickup trucks (the previous Hilux nameplate became Pickup in the ’75 model year). A 9-millimeter stroke increase over the immediate predecessor 18R’s 80-millimeter stroke upped the displacement to 2190 cc. The distributor was relocated, and other technological strides lowered exhaust emissions and improved gas mileage, the most pressing issues of the mid-1970s.

The new cast-aluminum cylinder head was a crossflow design—fuel and air in one side, exhaust out the other. This facilitated efficient airflow and assured that exhaust heat wouldn’t reduce the intake charge’s density. The spherically domed combustion chambers accommodated larger valve diameters and allowed locating the spark plugs near the center of the cylinder to shorten flame travel during combustion.

The 20R’s cast-iron cylinder block had deep skirts to securely support the crankshaft and the cylinder head. The five main bearing caps were extra-robust, and the overhead cam was driven by a stout double-row timing chain. In the interest of longevity, both the crankshaft and the connecting rods were made of forged steel instead of the more common cast iron. To save weight, the head and cam drive covers were tidy aluminum castings.

A new transistorized ignition system, then fast becoming the standard industry practice, assured quick starts and more miles between tuneups. An electric fuel pump reduced the chance of vapor lock in hot weather. Squirting extra air into the exhaust manifold cut emissions by continuing combustion of the unburned fuel exiting the cylinders. To minimize weight and clutter, the air-injection plumbing was neat and tidy. The choke mechanism of the 20R’s two-barrel carburetor was heated by engine coolant instead of exhaust gas for more consistent operation. Intake air was warmed by heat radiated from the exhaust manifold following a cold start. A large-diameter seven-blade fan drew ample air through the radiator in traffic, its temperature-sensitive viscous drive allowing the fan to free-wheel to diminish power loss during cruising. While these measures seem rudimentary compared to today’s era of electronic controls, in 1975, they helped achieve Toyota’s high standards of driving poise.

Less evident is the development effort Toyota invested in 20R engines using the painstaking trial-and-error methodology necessary before the advent of engine design by computer. Thousands of durability test miles were logged on experimental engines. Hot, cold, and high-altitude environments were used to validate every possible driving circumstance. Hours of flat-out running in dyno cells proved the concept, and fine-tuning minimized the need for valve-lash adjustments and oil additions between changes. The engine mounts were calibrated to dampen vibrations from the four-cylinder. Then the design was turned over to Toyota’s famously lean, just-in-time production system, which used the Japanese concept of kaizen, or continuous improvement, to hone the manufacturing precision to a level as yet unseen in the auto industry. Unlike in U.S. factories, where the production rate was king, assembly workers in a Toyota plant could stop the line when a defect was discovered, a signboard called an andon lighting up to alert the plant of the station having the problem. Thus, defects were caught and fixed much sooner by a quality-obsessed system that would eventually be copied around the world.

In production form, Toyota’s 20R combined a 3.48-inch (88.5-millimeter) bore with a 3.50-inch (89.0-millimeter) stroke, yielding 133.6 cubic inches, or 2190 cc. Peak power ranged from 90 horsepower with California emissions controls including a catalytic converter, to 97 horsepower at 4800 rpm in 49-state applications. Maximum torque ranged between 119 and 122 lb-ft at 2400 to 2800 rpm. The 20R served faithfully during its six-model-year run powering U.S. Coronas, Celicas, and Pickups. A Car and Driver test of a ’76 Celica GT clocked the 0–60 run in 9.6 seconds, a quarter-mile time of 17.6 seconds at 77 mph, and a 102-mph top speed, beating a Dodge Colt GT and a Ford Capri II S. City and highway mpg figures were in the mid-20s. Reviewer Ted West griped about his test Celica’s poor throttle response and rubbery-feeling driveline but was impressed by the value represented by Toyota’s reverential salute to the Mustang.

The 20R’s legendary reliability and low maintenance requirements were instrumental in Toyota motoring past Datsun to become America’s largest importer. Many served repeat assignments after the vehicles they were born with were totaled and dispatched to the salvage yard.

The 20R engine’s successor, the 22R, brought a larger 92-millimeter bore, lifting displacement to 144 cubic inches, or 2366 cc, and boosting output to a maximum 135 horsepower. This edition hosted both electronic fuel injection and turbocharging during its 1981–97 lifetime. The R series forged an empire by branding Toyotas with an unshakable quality reputation and giving generations of Toyota vehicles, and especially Toyota trucks, higher resale values than their counterparts. First-gen Toyota 4Runners from the 1980s have some of the fastest rising values of any vehicles tracked by Hagerty.

George Nodarse of Escondido, California, has a typical story: He logged over 370,000 miles—equivalent to nearly 15 laps around the Earth—in his 1985 Toyota 1-Ton Pickup powered by a 22RE equipped with fuel injection. Nodarse bought the vehicle in 1986 for use in his custom cabinet business. A local upfitter replaced the factory bed with a stake bed and added a dualie rear axle. Nodarse’s son Tanner recently commenced a nut-bolt restoration. Upon completion, George and Tanner plan on presenting their handiwork at the All Toyotafest show held annually in Long Beach, California.

A rare Toyota misstep was converting the cam drive chain from a double-row design in the 20R to a less durable single-row arrangement. Nonetheless, the 22R played an instrumental role in the final phase of the 1983–87 conflict between Chad and Libya, nicknamed the Toyota War because both sides used Toyota Hiluxes for transport. Four hundred of these trucks were armed with antitank guided missiles. In this instance, the oft-quoted bulletproof tribute fits.

The post Dissecting the four-cylinder engines that helped Toyota dominate the world appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Sports cars and supercars are faster and more capable than ever. A base C8 Corvette can bang off a 0–60 sprint in under 3 seconds, territory not long ago inhabited solely by six-figure exotics. The degree to which this performance is usable on the street is open for debate, but there’s no mistaking the fact that bragging rights still matter. And short of pitting cars head-to-head on a closed course, performance testing by the automotive media is still the best way for the public to compare cars by the numbers and validate automakers’ claims. In a century of this tradition, while the mission has remained the same, the methods and tools of the trade have transformed just as dramatically as the vehicles themselves.

Britain’s Autocar began clocking performance in the 1920s, at a time before most cars could run a mile in a minute. Nonetheless, 0–60 mph acceleration was the performance staple that early car enthusiasts enjoyed deliberating over a pint. Or three.

In 1947, Road & Track waved the green flag on car enthusiasm in America. Hot Rod chimed in for 1948, with Motor Trend following suit in 1949 and Sports Cars Illustrated in 1955. SCI changed its stripes to Car and Driver in 1961.

Mystery meter

An odd British import was the Tapley Meter which R&T used to measure and report data labeled “lb/ton @ mph.” Long-time staffer Dennis Simanaitis, acknowledging that he wasn’t sure exactly what this information meant, has at least revealed that the device was a pendulum-driven accelerometer. Most likely it was R&T’s attempt to quantify deceleration during coasting and braking from various speeds.

The stopwatch era

Hand-timed acceleration tests on straight sections of public road were the early norm. C/D, for example, used a remote section of the Jones Beach Causeway on Long Island. Key distances were tape-measured and marked with reflectors unlikely to draw law-enforcement eyes. In 1959, editor Karl Ludvigsen began using a special stopwatch purchased in Germany which deposited a tiny dot of liquid on the clock face each time a button was pressed, enabling accurate time-to-speed measurements.

Advanced testing technology

Inspired by equipment in use by domestic car manufacturers, Motor Trend and R&T began using “fifth wheels” strapped to the test car’s rear bumper to obtain speed readings. The only real benefit was less speedometer error; an onboard observer was required to click the bank of stop watches indicating time-to-speed increments.

Against the drag-strip clock

C/D’s Patrick Bedard refused to impede a test car’s acceleration with the weight of a stopwatch-clicking assistant. His late-1960s strategy instead employed drag-strip timing gear in combination with a technique called graphical integration. Quarter-mile speed and elapsed-time data were used to plot a trial speed-versus-time curve on a sheet of graph paper. The curve’s shape was then adjusted until the area beneath the curve exactly matched a quarter-mile.

Weather corrections

R&T and MT conducted their tests on the West Coast where good weather was the norm. C/D, on the other hand, had to contend with East Coast winters that wreaked havoc on acceleration reporting consistency. Luckily, Chrysler’s drag race team had created an elaborate chart of weather correction factors they had determined by logging how a given racer’s performance deviated with changes in air temperature and barometric pressure. After Hot Rod magazine published the chart, C/D began using it to improve the consistency of its acceleration test data.

Microprocessors arrive

In the mid-1970s, physics genius Paul Lamar invented the modern fifth wheel. His first design recorded distance pulses on a cassette tape for playback through a strip chart recorder which plotted an accurate speed-versus-time trace. Adding a microprocessor facilitated real-time measurements with the pertinent data automatically printed at the end of each test run. Acceleration, passing, and braking test formats were held in memory and a dash-top display kept the driver in the info loop.

C/D took this opportunity to improve the Lamar fifth wheel’s mechanical design. Relocating attachment from the rear bumper to the side of the vehicle kept the test equipment visible in the driver’s rear view mirror. A large suction cup secured the wheel to the car. A gas-pressure damper originally intended for lifting tailgates kept the 16-inch tire in touch with the pavement over bumps. While this arrangement may seem sketchy, C/D’s fifth wheel did once endure a 180-mph ride while attached to a Le Mans-winning Kremer Porsche.

Breaking the fifth wheel habit

In the late 1980s, a German-made Correvit device rendered ground-contact test equipment obsolete. Also mounted to the side of the vehicle, this electronic gear consisted of a light source that illuminated a spot of pavement near the car and a scanning device that “watched” that spot blur while the vehicle was underway. A microprocessor in the car converted the optic signal to performance data. The Correvit equipment was so sensitive that it even worked on wet pavement.

In 1992, British car enthusiast and inventor Julian Thomas began bending GPS technology to his will for car testing at the Racelogic enterprise he founded. Roof-mounted sensors communicating with satellites signaled an onboard processing unit. The best part of Thomas’s gear was its expeditious analysis that yielded accurate acceleration and braking measurements in just a few passes. In 2000, the U.S. government helped out by descrambling the GPS signals available for civilian use, thereby improving accuracy by a factor of 33. Racelogic’s VBox quickly became the preferred means of testing for both magazines and car manufacturers the world over.

Early handling tests

In the 1950s, a traffic circle located near Ludvigsen’s residence was used to examine cornering characteristics. Instead of whizzing around that bend with the tires howling, the driver merely recorded the degrees of steering lock required to keep the car tracking the roundabout as speed was gradually increased. Called “Steering Behavior” on C/D’s test results page, this was a readily understood measurement of understeer.

A decade or two later, car magazines hammered test cars around a painted circle while an observer clocked the time required for each full lap with a stop watch. A simple calculation yielded adhesion-limit cornering g.

MT’s Kim Reynolds advanced that state of the art with a procedure that required neither an observer nor the driver removing hands from the steering wheel to punch a stop watch. Instead, Reynolds carried the timer in his mouth; then, at the proper instant, he bit down on the stop button to register the time required to complete a lap of the pad.

Fellow MT tester Ron Grable noticed that left turning was invariably the quicker way around the pad because of the driver’s location in the car. Since the underlying goal was topping the competition’s test numbers, MT simply dropped right turning from their agenda. That saved time, tire tread, and stop-watch bite marks.

A variety of courses defined by traffic cones have been used over the years to quantify maneuverability. In the 1980s, C/D replaced the evenly spaced line of cones approach with an uneven array requiring 500 feet of deceleration followed by 500 feet of acceleration. Double lane-change maneuvers simulating a real-world evasive maneuver have also proven useful.

Stopping distance

When brake testing began in the ’60s, an electrical contact attached to the brake pedal fired an explosive charge which shot a splotch of paint onto the road to indicate the beginning of each deceleration test. A tape measure from that mark to the test car revealed braking distance.

The proving grounds era

In 1977, when C/D’s move from New York to Ann Arbor, Michigan was reported in The Ann Arbor News, the chief engineer at Chrysler’s nearby proving grounds graciously invited the magazine to rent access to his facilities for car testing. This godsend greatly advanced the scope and accuracy of all subsequent C/D performance measurements. Using a dead level “black lake” facility allowed cornering adhesion measurements at speeds closer to those seen in the real world. Two long straightaways were handy for safely reaching the top speed of most test cars. Precisely calibrated scales took the guesswork out of weight measurements.

In 2000, C/D discovered that tragedy could occur even during the most carefully controlled proving grounds conditions. Tech editor Don Schroeder perished due to a crash during his top-speed test of a RENNtech-modified Mercedes-Benz at a Texas track owned by Bridgestone. While the exact cause was never revealed, the suspicion was failure of a brake system component. C/D reacted by ceasing high-speed tests of cars modified by tuners.

Public road exploitations

Around 1980, in the teeth of the second energy crisis, C/D dispatched a letter to a Michigan official requesting access to a nearby freeway not yet open to traffic for fuel economy testing. To the editor’s everlasting chagrin, this request was granted and M-14 became the go-to location for all manner of “special” tests far beyond mpg measurements.

One of the more interesting examinations was the maximum distance for a police radar gun to register the velocity of an oncoming speeder. One finding was that a Corvette’s fiberglass body and tipped-back radiator made it more difficult to clock with radar than conventional cars. C/D also measured how readily a radar gun shifted its mph reading from a semi-truck onto a car passing the truck at felonious velocity.

Mrs. Orcutt’s driveway was another creative use of a public—make that semi-public—highway in the ’70s and ’80s. Located 100 miles northeast of Los Angeles, this 4.1-mile stretch was built in the late 1960s to preserve a widow’s access to her property after the I-40 interstate was constructed. The fact that this road was rarely used and that it crossed a dry lakebed made it perfect for high-speed measurements. C/D tester Csaba Csere reached 204 mph here in a Pontiac Trans Am concocted by Gale Banks, consuming only a couple of engines in the process. Today, the unmaintained pavement is too rough for such exploits, though magazines still visit the site for old time’s sake and to take spectacular comparison test photos.

Fuel economy measurements

Logbooks have long recorded fuel additions to magazine test cars during their evaluation stints. In the grip of the first energy crisis, C/D collaborated with the EPA to conduct fuel-economy measurements indoors on a chassis dynamometer using its own city and highway driving cycles.

After 2010, C/D began conducting highway mileage measurements on a stretch of interstate near its Michigan office. In addition to cruising at a true 75 mph for 200 miles, testers methodically fill their tanks at the same gas pump, using a particular number of nozzle clicks to achieve consistent mpg results.

Practical matters

In the 1970s, most magazines added interior noise measurements obtained with precision sound-level meters. This helped distinguish annoying tire and wind noise from the more endearing motor music heard during full-throttle acceleration.

One procedural change at C/D is subtracting 0.2-second—what’s known as “rollout”—from acceleration figures. This well-meaning adjustment is aimed at correlating printed results with what a reader might measure at a drag strip. Unfortunately, it mainly causes confusion because few car enthusiasts grasp the subtleties associated with drag racing.

Creative coast down measures

In the 1960s, R&T supplemented its acceleration curve plot with a descending line revealing how quickly the test car shed velocity coasting in neutral from 80 mph.

After the EPA began conducting coast-down measurements in the 1970s to allow simulating real-world conditions on chassis dynamometers located indoors, C/D created its own version of that procedure. Analysis of the data so obtained allowed splitting drag into two categories: The first was the number of pounds of force corresponding to driveline friction and tire rolling losses. The second was aero drag, which increased with the square of velocity. Added together, these measurements allowed staffers to distinguish efficiently designed cars from road slugs. For example, a 1982 Lincoln Town Car consumed 19 horsepower cruising at 50 mph; a Toyota Starlet, only 11 hp.

C/D’s coast-down procedure also allowed determining aerodynamic drag coefficients without a wind tunnel. First, frontal area was determined by measuring the car’s maximum cross-section in a photo taken with a telephoto-lens camera. (A carefully placed yardstick provided scale.) Plugging frontal area and aerodynamic drag data into a simple equation yielded the test vehicle’s drag coefficient, which was handy for cross-checking figures touted by manufacturers.

Regrettably, most of the creative test procedures invented by buff books over the ages have gone the way of the Tapley meter. The next generation of testing will likely focus on obtaining the truth behind various claims made by manufacturers of electric vehicles. While most outlets do some basic range testing now, there is plenty of room to add precision in the way we measure battery storage, power draw, and efficiency. Could this result in some strange and esoteric machinery to give the old Tapley a run for its money? Let’s hope so.

The post Car testing’s first century has been a fascinating ride appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Hemi is the Greek word for half. That makes a hemisphere exactly half of a perfectly round bubble. Unfortunately, the engineers who created Chrysler’s 1951 FirePower V-8 didn’t need that much bubble. In lieu of a full hemisphere, they capped each cylinder with a spherical shape whose height is significantly less than half its diameter. Prompted to explain what they had wrought, the Chrysler motor maestros must have been at a loss for words. While the shape depicted on their blueprints is best described as a spherical cap or dome, those terms lack cachet. Instead, the engineers chose the more evocative Hemi name, even though it’s not strictly correct.

DeSoto tried harder by labeling its version of this V-8 FireDome. According to Chrysler Corp. veterans we contacted, no sleep was lost worrying about the legitimacy of the Hemi name. Over the decades, these V-8s were such potent weapons in the horsepower wars that the company trademarked its vaunted nickname for the third-generation version, which arrived in 2003. Two decades later (and with no hint of a hemisphere remaining in any Chrysler engine), the Hemi thrives as one of the most beloved V-8s money can buy.

Imagine being a fly on the wall at GM headquarters in 1951 when news of Chrysler’s FirePower V-8 arrived. In many respects, this newcomer copied the Cadillac V-8 born two years earlier; the bore, stroke, and compression-ratio specs were an exact match. Yet, somehow, GM’s crosstown rival managed to squeeze 20 more horsepower, or 180, out of its 331-cubic-inch V-8.

The boardroom erupted, engineers were dispatched to their labs, and dynos howled in an earnest attempt to raise output at any cost. Motown’s horsepower war was on. The following year, Cadillac added a four-barrel carburetor to retaliate with 190 horsepower, topping Chrysler’s 180. By 1958, Chrysler had upped the ante all the way to an impressive 390 horsepower with more displacement, higher compression, larger valves, and electronic fuel injection. By then, every Detroit brand had crashed the horsepower party.

Turns out Chrysler was wielding a not-so-secret weapon in the form of a more efficient combustion chamber design. While every carmaker had modernized its engines with shorter piston strokes to boost rpm, and more compression to exploit the high-octane gasoline developed during World War II, Chrysler dusted off a technology invented at the dawn of the 20th century to build the truly better mousetrap. What Chrysler had in 1951 that competitors lacked were hemispherical combustion chambers.

During WWII, the U.S. Army Air Forces hired Chrysler to design and develop a 2220-cubic-inch, 2500-hp V-16 for use in the forthcoming P-47 Thunderbolt fighter. Like nearly every aircraft engine of the era, Chrysler’s XI-2220 featured hemispherical combustion chambers with boost provided by both a turbocharger and a supercharger. Though development wasn’t finished by war’s end (especially after it became clear that jet engines would soon replace piston power), one test flight to 20,000 feet did top 380 mph. Calculations projected that 414 mph might be achievable at 30,000 feet.

Knowledge gained from this program was instrumental in Chrysler’s use of hemispherical combustion chambers in its 1951 FirePower V-8, which was offered in a range of cars starting with the 1951 Chrysler New Yorker, identifiable by its large “V” on the hood and trunk. Barely a year later, Briggs Cunningham bolted the new Hemi (as the FirePower came to be known) into his C4R sports car because it was the most powerful domestic V-8 then available and earned a fourth-place finish at the 24 Hours of Le Mans.

Topping each cylinder with a machined dome instead of the wedge shapes used by GM and others expedited the flow of fuel and air into the combustion chamber and the exit of burned gas out of each cylinder. Engineers use the term “volumetric efficiency” to gauge this flow. Pumping 300 cubic inches of fuel-air mix into a 300-cubic-inch engine in one complete cycle constitutes 100 percent volumetric efficiency. Most engines pump less. Adding a turbo- or supercharger to overfill the cylinders is the easiest way to achieve significantly more than 100 percent volumetric efficiency, but at the price of weight, cost, and complexity.

Of all the possible combustion chamber shapes, from wedge to flat to pent-roof, a hemi provides the minimum surface area relative to the total volume of the chamber. This is a good thing in engineering because less surface area means more of the fuel’s heat energy stays in the cylinder, where it presses down on the piston to maximize the torque produced. Heat transferred out of the combustion chamber to the cooling system is simply dumped to the atmosphere by the radiator.

Using hemi chambers enabled Chrysler to arrange intake and exhaust valves in a pattern distinctly different from the contemporary Cadillac and Oldsmobile V-8s. In the GM engines, all the intake and exhaust valves stood next to each other in a line, like a rank of soldiers at attention. Chrysler instead rotated each pair of valves 90 degrees, so that the intake and exhaust valves now were opposite of each other above the cylinder. Also, both of the valves were canted at angles to align better with their ports. The resulting fluid flow was less restricted by tight corners, significantly increasing volumetric efficiency.

The third advantage of the dome shape is that it allows positioning the spark plug closer to the geometric center of the combustion chamber to minimize flame travel during ignition.

Of course, there are always a few downsides. The Chrysler V-8’s cylinder head width and weight were significantly greater than those of the Cadillac and Oldsmobile V-8s. Also, centering the spark plugs in the combustion chambers required long tubes through the valve covers, which created sealing challenges. Operating valves that were splayed 58.5 degrees apart were another challenge; instead of the single long shaft supporting eight rocker arms that GM used, Chrysler V-8s required two such shafts per head. In addition, the long pushrods and rocker arms needed to open exhaust valves positioned far from the camshaft added weight to the valve-train that hampered high-rpm operation. To address these issues, Chrysler introduced lighter, simpler, and lower-cost V-8s for several 1955 models with what engineers dubbed “polyspherical” combustion chambers.

That same year, Chrysler commenced a four-year run of 300 “letter” cars powered by Hemi V-8s with two four-barrel carburetors and 300 or more horsepower—what some historians consider the first true muscle car.

Marine magnate Carl Kiekhaefer built NASCAR’s first truly professional stock car team around an armada of C300 super coupes. His star driver, Tim Flock, won 18 races and the championship in 1955, followed by Buck Baker with 14 wins and season laurels in ’56. In only its second year, this team scored an amazing 16 straight wins. The clever Kiekhaefer also invented dry-paper air filters for his race engine, which remain in use today. In 1956, drag racer Don Garlits bolted a Hemi he found in a salvage yard into his slingshot dragster.

Chrysler supplied only advice and spare parts because Kiekhaefer had deep pockets and sponsorship from his lucrative outboard-motor business, which became Mercury Marine. But early in the third season of Kiekhaefer’s campaign, GM president Harlow Curtice waved a red flag. At a 1957 meeting of the Automobile Manufacturers Association, Curtice urged Detroit execs to cease their direct motorsports participation out of fear that the federal government might step in with regulations that would make their lives miserable. Whether this was a clever ploy on his part or a truly valid concern isn’t clear, but by June of that year, every car company had signed on to the AMA ban.

Satisfied with its achievements on and off the track, Chrysler sent its first-generation Hemis to the retirement home after the 1958 model year. Their 361-426-cubic-inch replacements all had wedge-shaped combustion chambers similar to GM’s designs. But, like distant thunder, the racing rumble never subsided.

Gen II: Race and Street Hemis

Instead of overt racing participation, Chevy and Pontiac soon created low-profile ways to grab checkered flags while Chrysler and Ford watched and waited. After five years of suffering, Chrysler had a belly full of defeat. As the company’s chief engine engineer, Willem Weertman, noted in a technical paper, “In December 1962, engineering staff was requested to develop an engine and vehicle combination capable of winning stock car competitive closed-circuit track events. In addition, a version of this engine was desired for use in timed vehicle acceleration drag events.”

With only 15 months between the above memo and NASCAR’s 1964 Daytona 500 race, Chrysler engineers had no time to dither. The decision was quickly made to retain the existing Chrysler 426 V-8 block. To better support the crankshaft, the block’s side skirts were extended 3 inches and cross-bolted main bearings were added. When cracks appeared in the cylinder walls, their material thickness was increased to 0.30 inches.

The new Hemi head designs—first cast iron, then aluminum—developed from the previous lessons learned. Like Gen I, the Gen II design lacked a truly hemispherical combustion chamber. Weertman listed a dome diameter of 4.84 inches with a center depth of 1.34 inches. However, were it a true hemisphere, the depth would have equaled the dome’s radius, or 2.42 inches.

The previous 58.5-degree angle between each intake and exhaust valve was retained, and volumetric efficiency was improved by straightening the intake ports. They were as large as possible—a full 3 square inches in cross-section—while a cross-section of the exhaust ports had an area of 2.24 square inches. Spark plugs were spotted as close as possible to each combustion chamber’s center.

A creative measure used to improve head retention with five instead of the previous four fasteners per cylinder necessitated screwing a stud into the floor of every intake port. That stud extended down through the block’s deck into its center valley, where a nut was added and tightened.

To comply with rules, a 426-cubic-inch displacement (with a 4.25-inch bore and 3.75-inch stroke) was selected along with single four-barrel induction for NASCAR events and two four-barrels for drag-racing. Experimental engines were running by December 1963, and plans were laid to produce a few hundred of the new Hemis for the 1964 and ’65 racing seasons.

Weertman recalled witnessing the new engine’s trial by fire at Daytona: “I was one of the few Chrysler people present aware of a disastrous failure that occurred during durability testing.” Likely the failure was the previously mentioned cylinder-wall cracking. Unfortunately, the engineers lacked the time to prove that the fix was totally effective, “so it was a huge relief when three Mopars finished the 500-mile race one, two, and three.” Richard Petty won with an engine block that had been cast only 13 days before the race, Weertman said.

Naturally, the race engines were loaded with premium materials. The rocker arms and crankshaft were steel forgings, the cranks heat-treated and shot-peened. After machining, a dip in a nitride solution hardened the working surfaces. Finally, the crank journals were hand-lapped. Camshafts were made of heat-treated cast iron and the aluminum pistons were impact-extruded.

The twin-rocker-shaft valvetrain actuated 2.25-inch-diameter intake valves and 1.94-inch exhaust valves. A special fixture that spun that hardware to 8000 rpm used a stroboscope to freeze motion so that natural frequencies, vibration, and surge characteristics could be studied.

According to Weertman, the open-plenum single four-barrel intake manifold used in NASCAR achieved an impressive 102 percent volumetric efficiency at 5600 rpm, meaning that cylinders were nicely overfilled during the intake stroke. A transistor ignition system triggered by a dual-point distributor fired the spark plugs.

Fed by two Carter four-barrel carburetors atop a dual-plane aluminum intake manifold, the Street Hemi achieved 90 percent volumetric efficiency to deliver 425 horsepower at 5000 rpm and 490 lb-ft of torque at 4000 rpm in 1965 model-year Dodge and Plymouth intermediates. The single four-barrel oval track engine produced 550 horsepower at 6800 rpm. Revving to 6400 rpm, the two four-barrel drag Hemi delivered 600 horsepower.

To support a 1965 speed record attempt by the Summers brothers of Ontario, California, Chrysler engineering equipped four Hemi V-8s with fuel injection, low-profile intake manifolds, and shallow oil pans to fit inside the Goldenrod’s 23-inch-high streamlined body. Tested in the Caltech wind tunnel, this bullet boasted a modest 8.5-square-foot frontal area and an extremely slick 0.1165 drag coefficient. Each Hemi V-8 was tuned to 600 horsepower, and two of them powered each axle. On November 12, 1965, driver Bob Summers averaged 409.3 mph across the Bonneville Salt Flats to bring the wheel-driven land speed record home to America.

As with its predecessor, the second-gen Hemi lasted eight years (1964–71). Tightening emissions controls and rising insurance premiums finally retired this Mighty Misnomer mighty warrior after nearly 11,000 of them—far more than anticipated—had been sold.

Gen III 5.7-Liter “HEMI” V-8

Midway through the ill-fated DaimlerChrysler marriage (1998–2007), the need for a fresh, affordable, and efficient V-8 cropped up. Even though everything associated with Hemis was oh-so-last-century, some unsung Chrysler hero had the bright idea of trademarking America’s most prestigious engine nameplate.

So, the new 5.7-liter V-8 manufactured in Saltillo, Mexico, initially for 2003 Dodge Ram pickups (before they became RAMs under their own brand), rolled forth as a HEMI®. Forgive us for not honoring the all-caps style plus registered trademark symbol from here on.

This new V-8 was another shrewd design but not enough to prevent Chrysler’s 2009 bankruptcy. It did uphold one long-standing tradition: As in its ancestors, the third-gen combustion chamber is anything but a hemisphere. In fact, close examination reveals a very shallow bowl with two sides partially filled in to encourage quench. The term refers to the tight squeeze between a rising piston and the cylinder head that generates mixture turbulence and speedy combustion after ignition. Twin plugs fired simultaneously lit the flame. The chamber volume is barely half that of the Gen II Hemi.

Other carryover artifacts in the new Hemi include pushrods, two rocker shafts per head, and splayed valves lying in planes perpendicular to the crankshaft. In the new compressed combustion chamber design, the angle between the valves is a modest 34.5 degrees (versus the 58.5 degrees used previously). This new Hemi followed in-depth examination of two-, three-, and four-valve-per-cylinder designs operated by pushrods and overhead cams (including Porsche’s flat-six!). Advanced computer-aided design and engineering tools were extensively employed.

The cast-iron block has a so-called “dry valley” between the cylinder banks, meaning no oil passes through here to the crankcase. Its cam is elevated above the crank by a greater than normal distance to shorten pushrod and rocker arm lengths to reduce the valvetrain weight. For manufacturing simplicity, a single aluminum casting is used for the heads of both sides of the block, with machining operations employed to modify the casting into left- and right-hand parts. The tunnels through the aluminum die-cast valve covers for the spark plug leads are cast in place to avoid oil leakage. Cast-iron exhaust manifolds, which resemble headers, were carefully tuned to optimize flow efficiency. Forged powdered-metal connecting rods tie the cast-aluminum pistons to the crankshaft. The camshaft is an assembly of forged-steel lobes and powdered-metal journals. The oil pan consists of two laminated steel sheets sandwiching an inner plastic layer to cut noise, vibration, and harshness (NVH). A tray skims oil off the crankshaft to minimize windage losses.

What Chrysler calls “an integrated air-fuel module” tops this V-8. This complex part is composed of seven chunks of injection-molded nylon plastic welded together. The savings over an aluminum intake manifold are an impressive 13.7 pounds. A built-in three-chamber Helmholtz resonator reduces NVH. The throttle is electronically controlled.

Delivering 345 horsepower at 5300 rpm, Chrysler’s new 5.7-liter V-8 topped the outgoing 5.9-liter engine’s output by a fruitful 41 percent. The torque plot was even more impressive: The new engine peaked at 375 lb-ft at 4100 rpm, a 12 percent gain, while its torque curve whipped the retired engine soundly from 1500 rpm. Compared with the 5.9 engine’s molehill, the 5.7’s torque mountain soars much higher to 5800 rpm. The best news: This was only the beginning for an engine that’s still thriving today.

Over the next three model years (2004–2006), this Hemi began powering more trucks, Jeep’s Grand Cherokee, and large Chrysler and Dodge sedans. Tech changes started arriving in 2005 when some applications began using a multi-displacement system (MDS) which switched from eight- to four-cylinder operation in only 1/25-second for improved light-load efficiency. Early durability issues were addressed and more changes came in a 2009 V-8 code-named Eagle: new cylinder heads with improved flow, plus variable valve timing and a dual-mode intake manifold to boost torque. Revised output ratings ranged from 360 to 399 horsepower, and torque peaked between 390 and 410 lb-ft depending on the application.

A new 6.1-liter edition with a larger bore, revised cooling, a forged-steel crankshaft, stronger rods, and lighter pistons cooled by oil jets came in 2005 for SRT8 applications. The plastic intake manifold and MDS were both omitted here. Power climbed to 425 horses at 6200 rpm and the torque peak was 420 lb-ft at 4800 rpm. Marcus Braun of Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, won Chrysler’s “What Can You Hemi?” contest by building a Big Wheel powered by a Hemi V-8.

To salute the original Hemi of the 1950s, a new 392 V-8 was introduced in 2011 for the Dodge Challenger SRT8 and subsequent Charger SRT8, Chrysler 300C, and Jeep Grand Cherokee models. With a 4.09-inch bore and 3.72-inch stroke, the actual displacement was 391 cubic inches (6.4 liters) yielding 470 to 485 horsepower and 470 to 475 lb-ft of torque. Cylinder deactivation and variable cam valve timing were used only in models equipped with an automatic transmission. Code-named Apache, this Hemi was also sold as a crate engine.

Hell Yes! Cat

Chrysler’s now-we’re-talkin’ move for 2015 was the 6.2-liter V-8 appropriately named Hellcat, with a nod toward the WWII-era Grumman F6F fighter of the same name. Combining the Apache’s bore with the Eagle’s stroke and adding an intercooled IHI-brand supercharger inflated output to 707 horses at 6000 rpm while hiking torque to a stout 650 lb-ft at 4000 rpm. The power peak topped the 2015 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 by 57 horses thanks to 11.6 psi of maximum boost.

Hellcat applications included the Dodge Challenger and Charger SRTs and the Jeep Grand Cherokee’s SRT Trackhawk. A crate version of this engine came in 2018.

And there’s more: For 2018, Dodge rolled forth its mean Demon edition of the Challenger SRT with a 15 percent larger huffer, recalibrated valve timing, and tougher internal components. Pump the tank full of 100-octane fuel and you’ve got 840 horsepower on tap according to Dodge—or 808 horsepower if you can only afford 91-octane premium. Either way, bragging rights over the 755-hp 2019 C7 Corvette ZR1 are yours. Only 3300 cars were built and sold with a $1 kit of wheels and tires intended solely for drag strip use. Guinness World Records certified this beast’s ability to wheelie during launch. Without ever testing one, Car and Driver guessed this Dodge would clock 60 mph in about 2.5 seconds and the quarter-mile in less than 10 seconds. The manufacturer claimed launch acceleration of 1.8 g’s while a YouTube video whisked you down the Kennedy Space Center’s 3-mile straightaway to 211 mph. We’re talking Porsche 918 Spyder performance for one-tenth the price.

Whether or not you believe the hemi designation is valid for any of these engines, what Chrysler achieved beginning in 1951 and continuing well into the 21st century is astonishing. These race-winning, tire-burning, and grocery-getting V-8s power cars that mere mortals can afford. It’s not Greek to us that the Hemi deserves everyone’s respect and adulation.

The post Hemi: How Chrysler drew a dome and forged a dynasty appeared first on Hagerty Media.

In his wildest fantasies, did Elon Musk ever envision that Tesla—in under two decades—would grow from a wobbly startup into the world’s most valuable car company? Or that his role as the auto industry’s grand disrupter would make him, as of this writing, the second-wealthiest individual on earth? How about that a Michigan engineer would build a home-grown roadster that would eventually inspire Tesla to become the planet’s leading electric car brand?

During the 1980s, Musk spent his teenage years with his face pasted to computer screens. Dave Piontek, Musk’s unwitting benefactor, was then a Ford engineer who spent leisure hours fiddling in his Canton, Michigan, garage. Hired in 1972 to engineer air cleaners, Piontek raised his hand for a more interesting assignment at Ford’s Design Center after spotting a prototype circulating the company’s Dearborn proving grounds.

“Always fascinated by cool cars, I spent 2000 hours constructing the first Sportech roadster,” recalls Piontek. This homemade Lotus rode on a steel-tube frame with independent suspension at each corner and was powered by a Suzuki four-cylinder motorcycle engine mounted amidships. Wrapped in Kevlar-reinforced-plastic bodywork sculpted by Piontek’s work colleagues Greg Miller and Mark McChesney, the 1234-pound Sportech was the ideal medication for soothing 9–5 headaches via an evening buzz around the block. In a 1989 Car and Driver test, this concoction hustled from rest to 60 mph in 4.5 seconds and circulated the skid pad at 1.00 g.

“Upon its completion, I proudly presented my creation at Ford Design’s courtyard. Design chief Jack Telnack complimented the effort but my boss and supervisor were embarrassed by the meeting,” Piontek notes, “because Ford couldn’t get anything resembling my car running for less than a million bucks!” That seemingly minor affront led to an abrupt career change. In 1990, Piontek left Ford to join ASC (American Sunroof Company), where he earned five patents.

Piontek built and sold six Sportechs (Sport-Tech at birth) with prices ranging from $32,000 to $53,000. One was purchased by the San Dimas, California, firm AC Propulsion (ACP), an enterprise founded in 1992 to advance the electric car cause. When General Motors needed propulsion and control expertise to advance its Impact Experimental electric coupe to production status, ACP was contracted to supply the required expertise.

In 1997, ACP showcased its capabilities in a sports car called “tzero” presented at the Los Angeles Auto Show. Armed with electric vehicle rights purchased from Piontek, ACP constructed three tzeros with revised exterior design, an AC motor for propulsion, and a vast array of lead-acid batteries providing the mobile energy.

In 2003, after logging 63,000 miles in one tzero, ACP replaced the original batteries with 6800 lithium ion cells ordinarily used in laptop computers, tripling the available energy while trimming some 500 pounds of road-hugging weight. Zero-to-sixty acceleration dropped from 4.1 to 3.6 seconds and the ACP car offered more than 300 miles of driving range.

Tesla Motors was incorporated in July of 2003 with the desire (but not yet the technology) to build electric cars. Founder Martin Eberhard’s shopping effort soon turned up ACP, which had the expertise, but not the desire, to manufacture at scale. Eberhard borrowed a tzero for three months to serve as his daily driver, and in doing so he became convinced that a bright future did indeed exist for electric cars.

Musk entered the picture when friend J.B. Straubel, who later became Tesla’s chief technology officer, insisted he test-drive the tzero. Musk later acknowledged that the car “didn’t have doors, or a roof, or any airbags, or an effective cooling system for the battery. It was not safe or reliable.” Nonetheless, Musk was smitten and did his best to convince ACP management to commercialize its design. Not interested in doing so, ACP did at least introduce Musk to Tesla’s Martin Eberhard, Marc Tarpenning, and Ian Wright, who shared the same electric production car enthusiasm.

Within six months, the budding Tesla enterprise had raised $7.5 million in start-up capital, $6.6 million of which Musk provided from funds acquired by his sale of PayPal. The aim from the beginning was a combination car maker and technology company with proprietary battery, motor, and software control systems. Initially, Musk served as chairman of the board of directors, Eberhard was CEO, and Tarpenning was the chief financial officer and vice president of electrical engineering. Straubel joined the firm as the technology chief. Cofounder Ian Wright departed in pursuit of other opportunities after a year at Tesla.

In 2008, Musk took over as CEO when Tesla’s first product, the Roadster, was introduced. That seminal model followed the ACP tzero’s strategy by combining a few Lotus Elise chassis and body components with an all-Tesla electric driveline.

Last year Tesla assembled four different electric vehicles (Model 3, Model X, Model Y, and Model S) in plants located in California and Shanghai, China, with production topping 500,000 units. Additional factories are under construction in Texas and Germany. The revived Tesla Roadster, a planned $200,000 2+2 Targa with stowable roof panels, is expected later this year.

Asked if he’d be interested in purchasing a new Tesla Roadster, Piontek replied, “Probably not. Its range and carrying capacity don’t fit my current Michigan-to-Florida migratory lifestyle. But if Elon Musk offered me a Model S as a thank-you gesture, I’d happily accept that.”

The post Tesla’s towering electric oak tree grew from this little-known acorn appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Charles Richard Patterson, born a slave on a Virginia plantation in 1833, became patriarch of the first and last automobile manufacturing enterprise organized by Black Americans.

At age eight, Patterson escaped bondage in Virginia with his parents and a dozen siblings and traveled via the underground railroad to Greenfield, Ohio, a small town between Cincinnati and Columbus. Lacking much formal schooling, Patterson worked to become a skilled blacksmith with a local carriage and coachmaker. Before he left that job for greener pastures, Patterson oversaw the efforts of several white workers.

In 1873, Patterson joined another Greenfield carriage builder founded by James Lowe. Twenty years later, he bought out his employer, renaming the company C.R. Patterson and Sons. Soon his enterprise had a staff of 10–15 employees that manufactured 28 distinct body styles ranging from $120–$150 each.

Racism and discrimination at first prevented Patterson’s son Frederick from access to Greenfield’s only school, but thanks to a favorable 1887 legal judgment, he did ultimately attend and graduate from high school before enrolling at Ohio State University in 1889. There, Frederick became the first Black varsity football player and president of the class of 1893. His two sons also studied at Ohio State.

Upon the death of his brother Samuel in 1899, Frederick returned home to work at his family’s carriage business. Production swelled to some 500 horse-drawn buckboards, buggies, phaetons, surreys, and doctors’ jitneys per annum.

Of course, coachbuilders eventually shifted their attention to newfangled horseless carriages. Without abandoning their existing trade, C.R. and Frederick founded the Patterson-Greenfield Automobile Company and commenced repairing cars. Unfortunately, C.R. died in 1910 before any serious effort could be devoted to manufacturing automobiles.

In 1915, Patterson-Greenfield finally introduced a touring car and a roadster for sale. Advanced features included a 30-horsepower Continental four-cylinder engine, electric starting and lighting, a windshield split for ventilation, cantilever springs, and a full floating rear axle. At a time when the less-sophisticated Ford Model T roadster started at $390, the Patterson-Greenfield autos ranged from $685–$850.

Competing against dozens of budding automakers, Frederick Patterson and his sons built and sold only 30 or so cars, none of which survive intact today, before reverting to the repair business. In the early 1920s, under the Greenfield Bus Body company name, they began manufacturing truck and bus bodies to be used atop chassis built by Ford, GM, and others.

Frederick Patterson died in 1932. Six years later, his sons Frederick Jr. and Postell again restructured the business, moving what became the Gallia Body Company to Gallipolis in the southeastern corner of Ohio. With the Great Depression still raging, investment funds in 1939 were impossible to find and the Pattersons were forced to shutter their company for good.

Except for records compiled by the Greenfield (Ohio) Historical Society, the Smithsonian, and the Historic Vehicle Association, the Pattersons’ efforts remain largely unknown. Their achievements were modest but quite significant when you consider the family’s enslaved origins and all they were up against.

The post C.R. Patterson, sons, and grandsons: Black pioneer car builders appeared first on Hagerty Media.

The life and times of Tazio Nuvolari—nicknamed the Flying Mantuan to honor his speediness and his hometown of Mantua, Italy—are littered with shattered car parts, empty champagne bottles, and insightful anecdotes. The most telling story is from Enzo Ferrari’s autobiography Le Mie Gioie Terribili (My Terrible Joys):

One day in 1931, during practice for the Circuito delle Tre Province, I asked [Nuvolari] to take me along with him for a while on the 1750 Alfa that my Scuderia had allotted him. It was the first time Nuvolari had competed in the race, and he was a little diffident because he had seen me at the wheel of a new Alfa 2.3-liter eight-cylinder that was more powerful than his own car. Anyway, he made no objection to my request and told me to get in.

At the first corner, I was certain that Tazio had taken it badly and that we were going to end up in the ditch; I braced myself for the shock. Instead, we found ourselves at the beginning of the straight with the car pointing down it. I looked at Nuvolari: his rugged face betrayed not the slightest emotion, not the slightest sign of relief at having avoided a 180-degree skid. At the second bend and again at the third, the same thing happened. At the fourth or fifth, I began to understand how he managed it, for from the corner of my eye I noticed he never took his foot off the accelerator, but kept it pressed flat to the floorboards. Bend by bend, I discovered his secret. Nuvolari went into the bend rather sooner than would have been suggested by me by my own driving instinct. But he went into it in an unusual way, this is to say, suddenly pointing the nose of the car at the inner margin just where the bend started. With the throttle wide open—and having changed down into the right gear before that frightful charge—he put the car in a controlled four-wheel skid, utilizing the centrifugal force and keeping the machine on the road by the driving force of its rear wheels. Right round the whole of the bend, the car’s nose shaved the inner margin, and when the bend came to an end, the machine was pointing down the straight without any need to correct its trajectory.

Despite my more powerful engine, Nuvolari won our race. I came in second, 32.9 seconds after him. Tazio said to me afterward, ‘I’ve never worked so hard in my life!’

Ferrari’s testimony affirms that Nuvolari invented the four-wheel drift. The year after their epic lapping, Ferrari retired from driving with 11 Grand Prix wins to his credit to concentrate on a grander calling: managing Italy’s most successful racing team.

Nuvolari, also nicknamed Nivola, was born on November 16, 1892, near Mantua in north-central Italy to affluent parents. His uncle Giuseppe was a champion cyclist and his first mentor. As with most successful racers in the early 20th century, Nuvolari began his career on motorcycles. In spite of two World War interruptions, he earned 15 motorcycle and 55 car victories over the span of three decades.

Nuvolari received his motorcycle-racing license in 1915 but didn’t begin competing until 1920 at the Circuito Internazionale Motoristico in Cremona where he failed to finish. The following year he started racing cars, scoring a victory in the Coppa Verona reliability trial. By the mid-1920s, he had won championships in 350cc and 500cc motorcycle classes and victories in 1.5- and 2.0-liter sports cars.

That success caught Alfa Romeo’s eye. Seeking a replacement for Antonio Ascari who perished on July 26, 1925, Alfa gave Nuvolari a test drive at Monza. Unfortunately, transmission failure resulted in a major crash. The up-and-coming driver sustained a serious back injury and wasn’t picked for the team, though that didn’t slow Nuvolari down. Two weeks later, he had his doctor wrap his torso so he could mount a motorcycle. His mechanics hoisted him aboard his Bianchi 350 with a pillow cushioning his chest. Following a push-start, Nuvolari won the Nations Grand Prix at Monza in the rain.

This was hardly the last time Nuvolari raced impaired. After breaking two ribs racing his motorcycle in the summer of 1929, he finished second in the Coppa Ciano driving an Alfa with his chest secured within a plaster corset. In 1934, he finished fifth at Germany’s AVUS Rennen with his right leg in a cast and his Maserati 8CM rigged so he could operate all three control pedals with his left foot. In 1936, after being thrown from his Alfa and sustaining cracked vertebrae, Nuvolari scored an eighth-place finish at Tripoli. In 1938, he struck a deer practicing for the Donington GP and broke a rib; the next day he won the race in his Auto Union D-Type. Nuvolari’s Alfas caught fire at speed in 1937 and ’38.

While leading the Coppa Brezzi in 1946, the steering wheel of Nuvolari’s Cisitalia D46 came off in his hands. Frantically waving the errant wheel to alert his mechanics, Nuvolari completed the lap before pitting by grasping the steering shaft with his free hand. After repairs he returned to the race to finish 13th. When he resumed racing after World War II, Nuvolari steered with one hand, the other holding a bloody handkerchief over his mouth. His lungs had been damaged by the toxic fumes he had breathed while closely trailing the prewar German Silver Arrow racers. At some point in his career, Nuvolari lost an index finger and one leg was more than an inch shorter than the other. However, even his sacrifices pale in comparison with the fates of fellow drivers who gave their lives for the sport.

Proving his tactical skills, Nuvolari switched his headlamps off to sneak up behind his teammate Achille Varzi, who was leading the 1930 Mille Miglia in his Alfa 6C 1750. A few miles before the end, he switched his lights on and flew past Varzi to victory. Another ploy was dispatching his riding mechanic under the dashboard to lower his racer’s center of gravity. One such helper reported spending an entire race as Nuvolari’s hidden ballast.

Nuvolari drove Bugatti Type 35s he owned from 1927 through 1929 to five major victories. He piloted Alfas from 1930 through 1937. In 1931, Nuvolari finally parked his motorcycles to focus on four-wheeled racers. The following year, Italy’s beloved poet Gabriele D’Annunzio invited him to his estate to present a golden turtle badge inscribed with “To the fastest man in the world, the slowest animal.” That keepsake became Nuvolari’s good-luck charm, which he carried in his pocket at all times. He also embroidered the turtle image on his racing jerseys and personal stationery along with stylized initials. The bright-yellow jerseys and blue slacks Nuvolari wore made him the most eye-catching driver on the grid.

The Alfa Romeo factory relinquished all of its racing efforts to Scuderia Ferrari in 1933. After Nuvolari’s victory at Le Mans that year, disagreement with Enzo prompted his move to Maserati 8CMs. Nuvolari’s victories continued at the Belgian and Nice Grand Prix events and the Coppa Ciano.

Thanks to intervention by Il Duce—Italy’s prime minister, Benito Mussolini—Ferrari and Nuvolari reconciled before the beginning of the 1935 racing season. Their renewed collaboration yielded eight victories in Alfas that year, followed by seven more in ’36 and ’37.

Nuvolari’s most memorable win came during the 1935 German Grand Prix at the Nürburgring. Driving an outdated Alfa P3, he faced five Mercedes-Benz W25s and four Auto Union Type Bs, all factory backed. On the rain-slick, 14.2-mile, 174-turn Eifel mountain track, Nuvolari mercilessly hounded the Mercedes-driving leader, Manfred von Brauchitsch, until the German wore out his tires. In spite of one long pit stop caused by a broken refueling pump, Nuvolari won the four-hour race by more than two minutes. Officials of the Third Reich were mortified when 300,000 spectators cheered his success.

By 1938, Nuvolari was tired of racing uncompetitive Alfas against state-of-the art Silver Arrows. After Auto Union hired him to replace their fallen star Bernd Rosemeyer, Nivola returned the favor with two victories in 1938 plus a win at the 1939 Belgrade, Yugoslavia, Grand Prix—just two days after the Nazis invaded Poland.

Nuvolari competed in 33 more races and hill-climbs after the war in spite of his deteriorating health. His final stint at the wheel was the 1950 Palermo-Montepellegrino hill-climb, where he won his class in an Abarth-tuned Cisitalia Spyder.

Following two paralyzing strokes, the great Italian maestro died in bed at home in 1953. Thousands of friends and fans attended his funeral. Ferdinand Porsche offered the most succinct eulogy, calling Nuvolari “the greatest pilot of the past, the present, and the future.”

The post Legends of Motorsport: Tazio Nuvolari appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Mere mention of Woodward Avenue accelerates the heart rate of enthusiasts itching to burn rubber and speed shift their way through Detroit’s northern ‘burbs. Unfortunately, traffic lights are still flashing yellow on the hallowed Dream Cruise route because of the pandemic. Fortunately, we have this side trip to recommend: a visit to the Detroit Institute of Arts at 5200 Woodward Avenue, three miles due north of the Detroit River.

Through June of 2021, DIA is proudly hosting Detroit Style—Car Design in the Motor City, 1950–2020, consisting of a dozen remarkable concept and production cars supplemented by paintings and sculptures created by local artists. One show star is GM’s 1959 Stingray Racer which inspired second-generation Corvette design. To awe Ford fans, the 1956 atomic-powered Nucleon is here along with its modern counterpart, the 2017 Ford GT. Mopar enthusiasts will relish the 1970 Hemi Barracuda flaunting its muscle.

According to DIA Director Salvador Salort-Pons, “The automotive industry and the city of Detroit are synonymous with one another, so it seems only fitting that the DIA be the museum to showcase the rich history car design in the city. This exhibition will showcase the similarities between the art of car design and the creative process sculptors of the past used to create their masterpieces.” Exhibition curator Ben Colman adds, “It is a privilege to share some of the stories of the Detroit designers who transformed the modern world with their work.”

The Beaux-Arts Italian Renaissance style DIA museum was built nearly a century ago using white marble for the exterior. Two black granite expansion wings were added later. This 100 gallery, 658,000 square foot facility houses 65,000 works of art worth over $8 billion. The Encyclopedia Britannica called the DIA “the perfect modern art museum.” Whether your personal tastes lean toward Rembrandt, Degas, Cezanne, Van Gogh, or Picasso, you will receive an exceptional art fix here, in addition to a steady diet of automotive fodder courtesy of Rivera’s Detroit Industry Murals.

Admission is free for those residing in one of the three counties surrounding Detroit. Everyone else must purchase a $6-14 ticket. Reservations are required. To schedule your access day and time, visit the DIA website at www.dia.org.

The post The Detroit Institute of Arts celebrates 70 years of American automotive style appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Picture a 20-something biker slaloming his motorcycle between overhead trolley piers while standing nonchalantly atop its saddle. That’s how Zora Arkus-Duntov—the then-future patron saint of the Corvette—met Bernd Rosemeyer in 1931 when the two worked at competing Berlin motorcycle shops.

The fearless Rosemeyer won the first time he raced his 250cc Zundapp motorcycle and a dozen more grass-track events in the early ’30s. That success inspired the Belgian-born Arkus-Duntov to pursue his own ambitious speed dreams, first in Europe, then in America.

Born in 1909 in Lingen, a small town in northwestern Germany, Rosemeyer was oblivious to the global conflict about to explode as Hitler rose to power. His 1934 success racing a 500cc DKW caught the eye of Auto Union manager Willy Walb who was seeking recruits for his budding open-wheel racing team. The arranged marriage of Audi, Horch, Wanderer, and DKW was attempting the impossible: competing against Mercedes-Benz in the new 750-kilogram Grand Prix series with the Nazi party financing the cause.

The Ferdinand Porsche­–designed Auto Union racer was the era’s boldest stroke: 16 cylinders situated in the middle of the car with a tight cockpit scrunched just behind the front axle. The rules did not dictate engine size, design, or fuel limits as long as the car’s weight didn’t exceed 750 kg (1653 pounds) without tires, fluids, or a driver. To save weight, Dr. Porsche skipped a driveshaft and employed a single overhead camshaft to open 32 valves. The first GP car with more than 12 cylinders was oddly proportioned but delivered haunting motor music when its supercharged cylinders fired.

Skinny tires and a swing-axle rear suspension meant the word “handling” had not yet entered the race-car designer’s lexicon. Having no clue as to how a competition vehicle of this sort should feel in his hands, Rosemeyer was comfortable in the cockpit. Upon scoring lap times near the top of the heap of candidates trying out at the Nürburgring, Walb signed him as a cadet driver for the 1935 season.

Rosemeyer’s first race was at the AVUS (Automobil-Verkehrs-und-Ubungs-Strasse or “auto traffic and practice street”) near Berlin. The inaugural German Grand Prix was held there in 1926 on a course consisting of two six-mile straights connected by a 180-degree hairpin at one end and a sweeping bend at the other. Because Formula Libre rules governed AVUS, larger engines and streamlined bodywork were standard practice. Alfa Romeo fielded twin-engined cars. Unfortunately, the tires on Rosemeyer’s Auto Union were not up to the task, forcing his DNF (did not finish). Two years later, after the North Curve was reconstructed with 43-degree banking, 380,000 spectators watched Rosemeyer top 220 mph here on his fastest 173-mph lap.

In his second race start at the daunting Nürburgring Eifel Grand Prix, Rosemeyer had a better opportunity to show his stuff. In spite of wet conditions on part of the 14.2-mile course, damage to his windshield and goggles, and a misfiring engine, Rosemeyer led two of the event’s eleven laps and finished only 1.9 seconds behind veteran Mercedes pilot Rudolf Caracciola. His tactical error was a premature upshift on the final straight which allowed Caracciola to whistle by. During the victory celebration, the veteran presented the upstart with a swizzle stick and the suggestion that he use his head better in the future. That he did. The following year Rosemeyer won two GP races at the Nürburgring while Caracciola was sidelined on both occasions.

Rosemeyer’s first victory came at the Czechoslovakian GP at the end of the 1935 season. On hand to toast his win was the world’s premier aviatrix, Elly Beinhorn, who earned her celebrity on solo flights crisscrossing the globe. The two were so instantly smitten with each other that a crowbar couldn’t pry them apart. They wed the following September between the Italian and German Grand Prix races.

Rosemeyer and his wife were all smiles through 1936 when Bernd’s skills and Auto Union’s engineering expertise reached their apogees. While Mercedes struggled developing its redesigned racer, Rosemeyer won eleven events, including five August and September races in a row, an accomplishment that earned him the European Championship. To further exploit the daunting speed of its Type C single-seater, Auto Union entered Rosemeyer in hill climbs at Freiburg, where France, Germany, and Switzerland meet and at Feldberg in the Taunus mountains west of Frankfurt. Victories in both events earned Rosemeyer the German Mountain Championship in his banner year.

Mercedes bounced back in ’37 with notable engine and chassis improvements yielding a major edge versus Auto Union racing its ’36 Type C with only minor refinements. The new Mercedes W125 delivered 646 hp at 5800 rpm versus the Type C’s 520 hp at 4000 rpm. Softer springs, a longer wheelbase, and improved suspension yielded significant handling gains over the tail-heavy Auto Unions.

As usual, the British (ERA) and Italian (Alfa Romeo, Maserati) teams were out of the hunt. Mercedes won seven ’37 GP events to Auto Union’s five, with the European Championship going to Caracciola. Rosemeyer prevailed in four events, only two of which were full GP races. The more exciting competition occurred between the two German rivals post season when they raced for speed records on a 20-mile-long, four-lane-wide stretch of Autobahn between Frankfurt and Darmstadt.

This is where Mercedes first topped 200 mph in a 600-hp streamliner driven by Caracciola after the 1936 GP season. For ’37, the Benz boys showed up with a 700-hp, 5.6-liter V-12 wrapped within bodywork boasting an incredibly low drag coefficient of 0.18 as measured in the company’s wind tunnel. While their goal was 264 mph, that speed proved elusive due to front lift issues. Above 237 mph, Caracciola’s steering and forward visibility were both nil, a condition known back in the day as “aviating.”

Auto Union had better luck. After Dr. Porsche left the firm in 1937 for greener pastures, his successor Robert Eberan von Eberhorst headed up Auto Union race-car design and development. The magnificent streamliner fielded for Rosemeyer following the GP season broke 16 records in two classes and ran 252 mph in the flying mile. While that sounds relatively straightforward, Rosemeyer described running flat out for ten miles on a 30-foot-wide section of pavement as requiring more effort than driving an entire GP race.

Considering the Berlin Motor Show publicity value associated with speed records, Mercedes had no intention of showing up for that august gathering empty-handed. Appeals lodged with der Führer yielded a second access to the Frankfurt-Darmstadt Autobahn at the end of January, a few days before the motor show opened. Both teams returned to their drawing boards, wind tunnels, and dyno cells in pursuit of more speed.

By 9:00 AM on January 28, 1938, Caracciola and Mercedes team manager Alfred Neubauer were celebrating their new 269-mph speed record over breakfast at Frankfurt’s Park Hotel. Two hours later, Auto Union took its shot at the prize even though weather reports warned of rising winds. The fearless Rosemeyer logged a warm-up pass of 267 mph with more available, he felt, from von Eberhorst’s radical racer.

Like Mercedes, von Eberhorst blocked off the nose of his streamliner except for a tiny port that admitted a jet of air to feed the hungry V-16 and to supplement its ice-based cooling system. Vertical skirts nearly touching the pavement extended down the bodysides, past the rear wheels, to the very end of the car. The underside was sculpted into what we now call a diffuser: a flat surface between the side skirts rising at a slight angle to the very end of the car.

Wind-tunnel measurements conducted by von Eberhorst suggest he realized that aerodynamic downforce would be useful for keeping the Auto Union streamliner and its drive wheels in touch with mother earth. Unfortunately, there were subtleties he missed.

Rosemeyer never completed his record run’s outbound leg. At a speed later estimated to be 270 mph, his car was struck by a burst of wind that blew perpendicular to his path out of a clearing. His tires left 400 feet of skid marks verging toward the Autobahn’s median. When the tires tripped on grass, this poorly guided missile took flight in somersaults. Lacking restraints and a helmet, Rosemeyer was flung from his streamliner and landed 75 feet off the roadway next to a tree. Crew members found their hero with a weak pulse, no obvious injuries, and a pleasant expression on his face. His shattered bolide came to rest in pieces against a bridge berm.

The 28-year-old Rosemeyer died of a broken neck at the scene of the crash. A five-foot memorial at a rest stop south of the Morfelden-Langen Autobahn exit still marks his final resting place. His grave site at Germany’s Waldfriedhof Dahlem cemetery is but two miles from the AVUS course where his GP career began. His wife, who passed in 2007, and teammate Ernst von Delius are buried nearby.

Regrettably, von Eberhorst never addressed side-wind sensitivity during his wind-tunnel testing. His other crucial error was fully enclosing his streamliner’s front wheels, severely limiting the amount of counter-steering lock Rosemeyer had at his disposal.

These lessons were swept under the racing rug when World War II began 19 months after Rosemeyer’s demise. As a result, ground-effect race-car aerodynamics had to be re-invented: first by Jim Hall for the 1969 Chaparral 2J “sucker” car, then by Colin Chapman for the 1978 Lotus 78 Formula 1 single-seater.

Though his career lasted barely three years, Rosemeyer’s zest for speed and beaming smile will never be forgotten.

1936 Auto Union Type C specifications

Engine: Roots supercharged 45-degree 6.0-liter V-16 with aluminum head and block, steel cylinder liners, 6-main-bearing crankshaft, and needle-bearing steel connecting rods

Bore x stroke:  2.95 in x 3.35 in

Maximum boost pressure:  13.8 psi

Fuel constituents: 60-percent alcohol, 20 percent benzol, 10 percent diethyl ether, 8 percent gasoline, 1.5 percent toluene and nitrobenzene, 0.5 percent castor oil

Power:  520 hp @ 5000 rpm

Torque:  629 lb-ft @ 2500 rpm

Transmission: rear-mounted 5-speed

Wheelbase:  114.2 in

Front, rear tracks:  55.9 in

Race-ready weight: 2180 lbs

F/R distribution: 42/58 %

Front suspension:  two trailing links, torsion bars, adjustable friction dampers

Rear suspension:  swing axles, torsion bars, adjustable friction dampers

Brakes: Lockheed finned drums, hydraulic actuation

Tire size:  f 5.25 x 17 in; r 7.0 x 19 in

Fuel capacity:  53 gallons (positioned between the engine and the driver’s seat)

The post Legends of Motorsport: Bernd Rosemeyer appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Even hardcore sports car addicts acknowledge there are situations where only a Hummer will do. Say, when the day’s work is done and the back forty beckons for an hour of berm bouncing. Or when a left-lane creeper needs a full-mirror-visible suggestion to get the hell out of the way. When garage space appears and there’s no towing/hauling/camping/weather-beater in the fleet. Yes, Ford Broncos are sweet, but Hummers truly thrive at the apogee of SUV need.

Like many American icons, Hummers are rooted in military service. By the mid-1960s, it was clear that service Jeeps designed in the heat of World War II were due a serious rethink. The Army’s more versatile replacement was dubbed High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle—thankfully abbreviated HMMWV. Manufacturers as unlikely as Lamborghini vied for the contract to supply the new combination weapons carrier and recon vehicle.

Design specs were finalized in 1979 for an unstoppable combat vehicle with excellent on- and off-road performance, the ability to carry heavy and bulky payloads, and the guts to take a bullet without flinching. Though 61 companies nibbled at the bait, only three—American Motors’s subsidiary AM General, Chrysler Defense, and Continental—submitted working prototypes. Eleven experimental units were tested for over 600,000 miles in conditions ranging from deserts to arctic climes. The initial M998-series specs called for a 5200-pound curb weight, a 2500-pound payload, 16 inches of ground clearance, 5 feet of fording capability, both gas and diesel engines, and a three-speed automatic transmission. Prices started just over $200,000 and the production run eventually topped 280,000 units. They are likely to remain in some form of service—in disaster relief assistance roles, for example—until 2050 or beyond.

In 1983, AM General won the initial contract to supply 55,000 vehicles over five years. By 1995, more than 100,000 units had been built for U.S. and friendly foreign customers. In 1989, when the U.S. invaded Panama, Hummers tasted battle for the first time in Operation Just Cause. During the Gulf War, the need for greater protection from small arms fire became evident, resulting in the deployment of the M1114 with added armor, a more powerful turbocharged engine, air conditioning, and a tougher suspension. Added occupant protection consisted of hardened steel plating and bullet-resistant glass. During its distinguished career, the flexible Hummer platform has borne weapons ranging from machine gun turrets to surface-to-air missiles.

Following the September 11 terrorist attacks, Hummers were deployed to Afghanistan where they served well in spite of their vulnerability to Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs). By 2007, the Marines had better luck with their Mine-Resistant, Ambush-Protected (MRAP) vehicles equipped with serious armor. By 2012, the Army deemed Hummers “no longer feasible for combat.”

Hummer’s civilian life commenced in 1992 when AM General began offering H1s for sale to the public, the combined result of their high visibility role in Operation Desert Storm and support from actor Arnold Schwarzegger’s. From its launch to its showroom departure in 2006, the H1 offered a choice of three different Detroit Diesel V-8s, one Duramax V-8, and one GM gasoline V-8. These engines providing propulsion through a three- or four-speed automatic transmission, although the final model year offered a five-speed auto paired with the Duramax. The list of body styles included a four-door hard top, a wagon, a two-door pickup, a four-door “slantback,” and a soft-top convertible. With corners as crisp as a drill sergeant’s hat brim and barn-flat sides, the H1 prowled suburbs with authority.

In 1999, GM purchased the Hummer brand outright from AM General and added two new variants for sale at GMC dealers. The H2 used full-sized pickup underpinnings while the smaller H3 borrowed chassis parts from GM’s Colorado/Canyon compact pickup. All had four doors and a choice of SUV or open bed-body styles. AM General manufactured H1s and H2s in Indiana while GM built H3s alongside Chevy Colorados at its Louisiana plant. The greater Hummer family was sold in 33 foreign countries via export or local manufacturing.

After a decade on the market under GM ownership, poor fuel efficiency and mediocre demand caught up with Hummers. Attempts to pawn off the brand in 2009 never panned out, so leftover stock was sold with deep discounts as GM wobbled into bankruptcy.

Rising like Lazarus

Following GM’s resurrection and raging customer interest in SUVs, the Hummer nameplate stashed in a back closet could turn out to be the General’s lucky stroke. Another godsend: a Detroit plant perfect for manufacturing the coming wave of electric trucks as well as the batteries needed to power them.

During UAW contract negotiations, GM threw its workers a bone by offering them a chance to build new electric Cadillacs, Chevrolets, and mysterious “M-brand” models. In late 2019, without decoding the M label, CEO Mary Barra acknowledged that GM would be selling the new family of electrics two years hence.  During 2020 Super Bowl ads, NBA star LeBron James announced more details: that GMC dealers would sell a model labeled Hummer EV endowed with a remarkable 1000 hp. Chalk this up as the home team’s most aggressive response to Elon Musk’s auto industry disruption. The Detroit Free Press reports that 10,000 pre-orders are in already, and 1900 GMC dealers (about half) are planning to invest as much as $140,000 for the privilege of selling the Hummer EV.

Formerly called Detroit-Hamtramck Assembly, GM’s new factory ZERO will use 5G connectivity to expedite computer-to-machinery communication. Nearly 1000 workers stripped away walls, the roof, and obsolete machinery to refurbish this 4.1-million-square-foot, historically significant plant and 2200 workers will eventually be employed there. In lieu of a moving assembly line, vehicles will move via automated carts that rise on cue to ease assembly operations. GM’s Ultium lithium-ion pouch-style battery cells and packs will also be made here. The total investment in factory ZERO will top $2.2 billion.

First out of the box will be the 2022 Hummer EV Edition 1, starting at $112,595. This flagship will be equipped with every imaginable feature: three AC motors totaling 1000 hp, air suspension, four-wheel steering with in-phase (Crab Mode) and out-of-phase (for tighter turning) modes, two electronic dash screens, removable transparent roof panels, a stepped tailgate, and Super Cruise hands-free driving. An awesome 11,500 lb-ft of torque at the axles hustles this EV to 60 mph in a claimed three seconds flat. It will provide 15.9 in of ground clearance, five drive modes, 32 inches of fording capability, and 350 miles of driving range. The EV’s crew cab body with 5-foot open bed will be supplemented by an SUV later. Additional models with prices well below $100,000 will follow.

Whether this outrageous EV redefines the Hummer brand for a new age remains to be seen, but for now there appears to be sufficient demand for such a sideshow. Without disclosing exactly how many customers bought a $100 reservation, GM announced that its October 21, 2020, Hummer EV Edition 1 offering was sold out. In all likelihood, it’ll come to market well before the Tesla Cybertruck.

The post Hummer history: Where it came from (and where it’s heading) appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Today’s twist on the old saw about racing improving the breed is that competition also benefits the breeders’ skill set. General Motors confirmed that theory five years ago when the company’s Performance Driving Team (PDT) got a green light. The reason you probably haven’t heard of it is that they spend their time racing instead of tooting horns.

The PDT’s aim is to provide fresh engineering recruits a tantalizing opportunity to indulge their driving passions. Instead of sending them forth on dicey road-racing excursions, Wayne McConnell, GM’s executive director of performance integration and head of the company’s Milford, Michigan, proving grounds, selected a safer path: the Sports Car Club of America’s Autocross field. There, the most serious crash scenario is a spin-out that topples a traffic cone or two.

McConnell, with GM for 37 years, brought no personal motorsports experience to the party but was quick to realize the potential benefits of an in-house team of driving enthusiasts when that idea was proposed by a couple of young engineers with barely a year of employment under their belts. “The team quickly became a powerful recruiting tool,” McConnell explains. “We haul interviewing engineers by the busload to the Milford Black Lake dynamic test facility for hot laps in one of the autocross cars. Those who join GM invariably confirm that this experience is what tipped the employment balance in our favor.”

Support for the Performance Driving Team idea started with two Camaros that couldn’t be sold to customers, along with a $50,000 budget to cover tire and replacement part expenses. As the project gained momentum, the annual budget grew to encompass travel and lodging expenses.

Aside from its safety benefits compared to road racing, the SCCA Autocross series offers countless competition classes, several of which have minimal rules, thereby enabling creative tuning strategies. The street tire classes require rubber with a 180-tread-wear rating. Minimum curb weights are defined but this competition is for all intents “run what you brung.”

The two SS Camaros provided for the 2016 season were powered by 455-hp V-8s. Thirty team members began practicing every Saturday on a cone course laid out at the Milford Proving Grounds. At the end of the 2017 season, Shaun Bailey—who joined GM in 2012 with ample motorsports experience gained as Road & Track’s technical editor—won the CAM-C (Classic American Muscle, Contemporary) class championship with a Camaro SS 1LE equipped with Camaro ZLE 1LE suspension and an electronically controlled limited-slip differential upgraded via a team-designed calibration. His margin of victory over 52 competitors was half a second. By this point, the team had swelled to a couple hundred men and women.

Then, the team donned thinking caps. Realizing that handling invariably trumps horsepower in this venue, they “downgraded” their ride to a Camaro Turbo for 2018. Powered by a turbocharged 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine rated at 275 horsepower, their new Camaro cut curb weight by a significant 300 pounds and shifted the car’s balance decisively rearward. Tuning measures included further lightening to reach the CAM-C class’s 3300-pound minimum weight, revised intake and exhaust systems, and higher turbo boost. The team ultimately achieved an estimated 375 horsepower running on higher-octane fuel.

“One nagging issue was throttle response,” Bailey notes. “Fortunately we have several talented engineers on the team capable of producing special tuning calibrations.”  The solution, created by Matt Busch and Dave Schmitt, was continuing to inject fuel into the combustion chamber after the throttle was closed to maintain the exhaust turbine’s spin and boost. The result was more torque available upon corner-exit tip-in than their V-8 racer had provided. The downside? The closed-throttle fuel injection was, in Bailey’s words, “mean to the turbo.” Several failures ensued but, luckily, none in the heat of battle.

Upgraded chassis components—wheels, shocks, suspension hardware—came from the Camaro ZL1 1LE. An electronically controlled limited-slip differential was developed (and added to the GM Performance catalog for dealer installation) but the team’s SCCA car kept its simpler mechanical differential because the eLSD posed an installation hassle.

Out of the box, the team scored a 1-2 finish with the win earned by Alexander Doss and Bailey taking second against 56 competitors. At the 2018 SCCA Solo Nationals held in Lincoln, Nebraska, the two swapped places. Competing in the rain, Bailey was top dog with a 1.235-second margin of victory.

GM’s Performance Driving Team quickly grew to include 20 drivers and a variety of cars, an effort that earned nearly 100 trophies. During a typical weekend, at least fifty out of the 100-strong team enjoy their time converting gasoline to noise and tires to dust at either practice or an SCCA event. Bailey was too busy to participate much in 2019 but teammate Alex Doss did run a prepped Cadillac ATS-V successfully at the SCCA Nationals achieving his third third-place finish in so many years.

A side benefit is an expeditious path from handling advancements to GM production line changes. McConnell adds, “the Performance Driving Team has created numerous tuning packages we offer as aftermarket upgrades.” Another plus is young engineers reporting for work six days a week with smiles on their faces. The pandemic halted all 2020 activities, but the team is champing at the bit to return to competition as soon as possible.

The post GM fields a semi-secret autocross team for young engineers appeared first on Hagerty Media.

The specialty-equipment business that feeds the go-fast habit is a $46 billion industry. We salute some of the pioneers and their innovations that transformed jalopies into rods while building brands that are household names today.

The Holley carburetor

In 1897, only a year after Henry Ford enjoyed a test drive in his experimental Quadricycle, George Holley built and drove a three-wheeler near his Pennsylvania home, topping 30 mph. Two years later, Holley and his brother Earl established the Holley Brothers Company to build and sell motorcycles, followed by the Holley Motorette, a 5.5-hp two-seat horseless carriage. In 1904, this budding enterprise introduced its “iron pot” carburetor for use on curved-dash Oldsmobiles. That fuel-air mixer worked so well that it was soon found on Buick, Ford, Pierce-Arrow, and Winton automobiles.

After selling 600 Motorettes, the Holleys stopped building cars to focus their energies on carburetor production. Legend claims that Henry Ford backed that move, saying, “If you stop making cars, I won’t build carburetors.”

To burn all the fuel during each combustion stroke, engines require 14.7 parts of air for one part of fuel (by weight). Providing that ideal mix throughout the full operating range from idle to the redline and at every throttle setting is no small feat. One could make the case that the carburetor was the auto engine’s hardest-working and most sophisticated component before it was replaced by fuel injection.

Holley thrived by supplying tens of millions of carburetors to Ford and other American makers. When the horsepower race began with the introduction of Chrysler’s Hemi in 1951, Holley responded with its first four-barrel design for the 1953 Lincoln. Holley’s 4150 four-barrel, what some call a masterpiece of engineering and the first true performance carburetor, followed in 1957 on Ford V-8s.

The 4150 is a modular design with ample airflow capacity and astute fuel metering. Through the ’60s and ’70s, Holley never flinched when emissions controls arrived and more power was demanded by Trans-Am and NASCAR racers. The 4150 and its 4165/4175 spread-bore successors still serve classic car owners today.

Building on the respect earned supplying car makers and aftermarket customers, Holley evolved into the hot rod industry’s largest and best-known nameplate. Nearly 40 other brands now operate under the Holley umbrella offering fuel injection, turbo kits, mufflers, wheels, ignition systems, nitrous oxide kits, and brake parts. We’re guessing that the dearly departed brothers would smile knowing that carburetors are still a mainstay product at Holley.

The Flowmaster exhaust

Self-taught engineer Ray Flugger launched Flowmaster in 1983 to create a more efficient motorsports muffler capable of reducing noise at racetracks surrounded by residential neighborhoods. Stock mufflers, which are necessarily inexpensive, inhibit exhaust flow to curb the rumble—to the detriment of horsepower. More creative designs with internal chambers and/or sound- absorbing material such as fiberglass cut the din without impeding flow at high rpm.

Building on experience he gained making mufflers for Volkswagens, Flugger invented several chambered, laminar-flow, and straight-through silencers that allowed customers to fine-tune their performance and sound levels. He followed his motto, “Hit the gas till you see God, then brake!” until he died at age 79 earlier this year. Flowmaster was purchased by B&M, the automatic-transmission specialist, in 2011. That enterprise merged with Holley in 2018.

The Isky camshaft

Ed Iskenderian is showing signs of immortality. At 99, he’s still toting his trademark stogie and still making camshafts under his trade name, Isky Racing Cams. Beginning with the Ford T-bucket he assembled in 1938 to race across the dry lakes north of Los Angeles, Isky has experienced enough speed and power for three lifetimes.

Swapping camshafts was a favorite mod in the flathead days from the 1930s to the 1950s because it was a cheap and effective means of upping power. This shaft opens intake and exhaust valves on cue by means of an egg-shaped lobe aligned with each valve stem. Lifting the valve higher and holding it open longer allows more fuel-air mixture to enter the combustion chamber while also providing a more expeditious exit for exhaust gases.

While car manufacturers configure their camshafts for quiet running, smooth idle, and peak torque at moderate rpm, racers give no hoot about those concerns. What matters buzzing across a miles-long lake bed or around an oval track is peak power during the last few hundred rpm, so wilder cam timing is always better.

Camshafts are manufactured by spinning the shaft while an abrasive wheel is rocked closer—then farther—from the shaft’s centerline, which grinds one lobe at a time to the desired shape. While sophisticated mathematics and automatic controls are used today, trial and error was common practice in the flathead days. In Isky’s words, “Cam grinding is some part science, some part math, some part luck, and a big part educated guesswork.”

After completing his World War II Army Air Corps service, Iskenderian set up in the back of a friend’s shop and modified a $600 grinding machine to manufacture camshafts. Inspiration for how to shape his cam lobes came from studying an Offenhauser racing engine and, later, the pointy end of an egg. When his first $30 “fast action” cam proved successful on the dry lakes in 1946, Iskenderian was off and running. He was also one of the first recipients of the new small-block Chevy V-8 in 1955 to accelerate that epic engine’s adoption by hot-rodders.

Advertising in Hot Rod magazine, artful T-shirt designs, and sponsoring successful racers shot Isky’s name recognition skyward. Isky cams remain in high demand in part because this brand’s distinctive sticker is essential equipment for any contemporary hot rod.

The Edelbrock intake

Imagine running a marathon with one or both nostrils pinched closed. If you’re fit enough to finish, your time will still be far off the mark. Engines must also breathe freely to reach their power potential. The more air and fuel that enters the combustion chamber during each intake stroke, the more power is produced by combustion. In pursuit of better breathing, hot-rodders resorted to multiplying the number of carburetor throats feeding their engines.

Vic Edelbrock wasn’t the first to bolt on extra carbs, but he soon became one of the best at tuning engines capable of setting speed records on the dry lake beds of the Mojave Desert. By 1940, his ’32 Ford roadster equipped with high-compression heads and a 2×2-barrel intake manifold was crowding 120 mph. When manifold maker Tommy Thickstun refused to incorporate improvements suggested by the Los Angeles racer and shop owner, Edelbrock combined his ingenuity and notoriety to manufacture and sell his first Slingshot manifolds, which adapted a pair of Stromberg 97 two-barrel carburetors to the Ford V-8.

Step two was adding cast-aluminum cylinder heads to the Edelbrock product portfolio. Squeezing the air and fuel mix tighter during compression intensifies the bang upon ignition and extracts more energy from the charge during the power stroke. A popular expedient was simply bolting on factory heads Ford intended for high-altitude locations such as Denver, where more compression was needed to compensate for the performance loss attributable to thin air. Taking that idea to its logical end, Edelbrock raised the Ford flathead’s compression further, improved the combustion chamber’s shape, and cast his new heads in aluminum to trim weight. The addition of cooling fins and an attractive Edelbrock product logo made these cylinder caps the ideal accompaniment to a Slingshot manifold.

Twin carbs led to three-in-a-row carbs. After World War II, Edelbrock began servicing drag, oval-track, road-course, and Bonneville racers as his business grew. When the small-block Chevy V-8 arrived in 1955, GM dispatched early production engines to Edelbrock’s shop to give him a leg up making aftermarket speed parts.

Vic Jr. took over when his father died from cancer in 1962. Under his watch, the company grew exponentially by adding carburetors, fuel injection, valvetrain components, superchargers, and exhaust systems to its product range. Unfortunately, Vic Jr. died three years ago, leaving three Edelbrock daughters to keep this revered brand name kicking.

The Hurst shifter

America’s whirling dervish of the 1960s, George Hurst never allowed his eighth-grade education, 11 years of military service, or three wives to slow him down. In 1958, after founding Hurst-Campbell with Bill Campbell, the engineering brains of the organization, Hurst burst into the hot-rod business with three-and four-speed floor shifters engineered to replace the clunky factory equipment. He helped Pontiac become America’s hottest car brand with Hurst shifter and custom wheel adornments. His wild Hemi Under Glass Plymouth Barracuda traded drag-strip speed for quarter-mile-long wheel-stand spectacle. In 1964, he partnered with Smokey Yunick to race a bizarre Indy car with the driver seated in an offset pod positioned between the left-side wheels, and Hurst’s four-engined Goldenrod set a Bonneville record of over 409 mph. By the end of the ’60s, Hurst had partnered with Olds and American Motors, producing the Hurst/Olds 455 plus some drag specials and off-road ventures.

Hurst’s most memorable promotion was appointing Linda Vaughn as his Miss Golden Shifter. She and her 40-or-so accomplices became royal drag-strip queens grasping 10-foot-tall Hurst shifters towering over a custom convertible’s decklid.

After going public in 1968, Hurst-Campbell bought the Schiefer clutch, Gabriel shock absorber, and Airheart brake companies. Appliance maker Sunbeam purchased Campbell’s stock in 1970 to seize control, but Sunbeam and Hurst were oil and water. When the new management expressed disinterest in Hurst’s innovative Jaws of Life car-crash-victim extraction equipment, Hurst walked out in December 1970. Some 35,000 Jaws of Life tools were built and sold, and they saved thousands of lives. Many are still in use today.

Charged with tax evasion, Hurst spent time behind bars in 1971 and served an 18-month prison sentence in the early ’80s. He finally eluded the taxman for good in 1986 while sitting behind the wheel of a car with its engine running inside a closed garage.

That same year, the Mr. Gasket company purchased what was left of Hurst Performance. Like practically all things hot-rod related, these remains made their way to Holley in 2015. New and improved Hurst shifters are still available thanks to Holley’s enduring support.

The Hooker header

Within two hours upon arriving home in his new 1962 Chevy 409, Gary Hooker had stripped the heads off his engine. Since he couldn’t afford to buy headers to hot up his 409, Hooker decided to make his own replacement pipes using longer and larger-diameter tubing than was common practice in the ’60s.

Drawing again on our reference to the challenged marathon runner, headers work on the exhale side of aspiration. In engines, they raise power by diminishing exhaust restriction at high rpm. Headers provide a separate flow path for each cylinder with smooth bends, larger inside diameters, and longer lengths before the individual tubes combine into a common exhaust pipe. When properly designed, the flow from one cylinder helps suck exhaust out of another bore. They are also typically lighter and more attractive than factory exhaust manifolds.

Hooker, an electronics technician at General Dynamics in Southern California, combined his fascination with cars, his drawing ability, and his mechanical insights to outdo existing header makers in the 1960s. Dynamometer and drag tests proved his first 409 design delivered a significant power gain. Only a few months after Hooker had established his first manufacturing shop, six of the top 10 Super Stock drag racers were using his equipment. By 1970, Hooker Headers was a $3 million business.

Without forgetting his racing roots, Hooker shifted his focus to customer satisfaction to foster growth. In 2000, he sold his business to Holley, and he was inducted into the Specialty Equipment Manufacturers Association (SEMA) Hall of Fame in 2012.

Thanks in part to this hot-rod pioneer’s painstaking effort, original equipment makers have upped their game; a case in point is the 2020 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray’s stock headers, which sweep majestically upward before connecting to the catalytic converters. Another advancement in this field is cost-no-object designs such as those by Ultimate Headers, which employ cast stainless-steel flanges and elbows to enhance beauty while accommodating tight engine compartment clearances.

The post These 6 performance parts are true hot rod heroes appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Like it or lump it, cars and trucks powered by solely electric motors and batteries are inevitable. While it will be decades before gas pumps go dry, all of us will surely own electrics during our lifetime. Look at the bright side: snappy response attributable to an electric motor’s instant torque, a low center of gravity, no tailpipes to spew pollutants, and fewer parts and systems to maintain. The most annoying pothole on this road to the future is the loss of more than pistons and basso exhaust pipes. Every electric thus far has dispatched our beloved clutch pedals and stick shifters to the retirement home.

Fifteen years ago, when Tesla introduced its Roadster, there was an earnest effort to equip that seminal electric with a two-speed automatic transmission. Unfortunately, efforts by XTrac and Magna didn’t pan out, so the 2450 Roadsters delivered in 30 countries from 2008 through 2012 were all fitted with a single-speed transmission.

Recently, however, evidence has emerged that manufacturers might solve the riddle that stumped Tesla. ZF in Germany and Inmotive in Canada have both shown compact, affordable two-speed automatics suitable for electric car use. Turbo and Turbo S editions of Porsche’s Taycan super sedan are equipped with a planetary two-speed automatic built into their rear axle as standard equipment.

Domestic makers are rising to the cause with high-visibility show pieces displayed at recent SEMA (Specialty Equipment Market Association) events. Chevy’s eCOPO Camaro presented in 2018 is a drag-race special powered by two electric motors with a combined 700 horsepower melting the rear tires through a three-speed Turbo 400 automatic transmission.

Ford responded with its Mustang Lithium one-off at the 2019 show. Built in collaboration with supplier Webasto using Swiss-sourced Phi-Power electric motors providing a rubber-roasting 900 horsepower and 1000 lb-ft of torque, Lithium is equipped with a stout Getrag six-speed…wait for it!…manual transmission. The Calimer race shop fortified this stick-shifted box to withstand the electric gaffe sent through it. This prototype is no mere show queen, either; Webasto hosted a few demonstration rides before parking its mighty Mustang due to COVID-19 concerns.

To avoid being upstaged by its archrival, Chevy rolled out what it called an E-10 for the 2019 SEMA event:  a 1962 C-10 pickup with a double helping of Bolt EV components delivering ample twist through a 4L75E SuperMatic four-speed automatic transmission.

At this year’s virtual SEMA360 gathering, Chevy followed through with what it calls an eCrate package to be sold over the parts counter. The guts of the system are a complete Bolt EV motor, battery pack, control system, and wiring combined with a performance-oriented four-speed automatic transmission. A nicely-restored 1977 K5 Blazer showcased the hardware and e-ware aimed at Silicon Valley smart tuners.

Let’s ponder where this trend should head next. Acknowledging that it’s Ford’s turn, we’d select the 2021 Mustang Mach-E as the ideal project car platform. Starting with the $42,895 Select trim edition with rear-wheel drive and 266 horsepower, we’d add a pedal-actuated multi-plate clutch and a three-speed manual transmission to the propulsion package. Those parts should fit neatly in back with minimal disturbance of the stock battery pack.

Launched into showrooms with a price tag below $50,000, “our” Mach-E manual would make amends for hanging the sacred Mustang nameplate on an electric crossover. While three speeds are sufficient to boost both acceleration and range (not to mention driving fun), Ford should also consider a four-speed alternative to sway die-hard skeptics. (We know that many of readers hold such qualms.) Tremec, the transmission supplier that developed  the new Corvette’s dual-clutch automatic, would make an excellent partner in this venture.

Considering the century-plus longevity behind the piston-powered cars and trucks we admire, it’s understandable that electrics have won minimal passion over the dozen years they’ve been on the market. They are, however, climbing a steep improvement curve. The first electric with a well-implemented stick shift might remembered as a genuine breakthrough.

The post Would adding a stick-shift help you love an EV? appeared first on Hagerty Media.

At the 1921 Berlin Motor Show, the first gathering of the car faithful following World War I, a decidedly bizarre machine wowed the crowds. Edmund Rumpler, a Vienna-born engineer who made his name as Germany’s first aircraft manufacturer, presented his Tropfenwagen (“water drop car”) with coachwork resembling a Zeppelin airship’s gondola.

While contemporary autos were steamer-trunk boxy, Rumpler’s car was designed to gently embrace the wind. One could imagine air flowing over its airfoil-shaped roof and around its pointy nose with hardly a ruffle. In place of air-churning fenders, the Tropfenwagen had thin, horizontal slats. Its greenhouse was made of curved glass, an innovation that wouldn’t reach the automotive mainstream for decades. The wheels were smooth, flat discs.

In 1979, curious Volkswagen engineers decided to measure the drag coefficient of a Tropfenwagen residing in a German museum. To their amazement, they discovered a Cd of 0.28 (for those keeping track, that’s notably better than the 2020 Chevrolet Corvette’s 0.32 aero score).

We’re celebrating the Tropfenwagen’s 99th birthday here because its genius ventures far beyond its streamlined wrappings. Rumpler located the driver dead-center for optimum forward visibility, à la the later McLaren F1. The rear wheels pivoted independently on swing axles, an arrangement Rumpler patented in 1903. While most car makers placed their engines ahead of the driver when they progressed from single- to multi-cylinder power, Rumpler stuck with a mid-mounted 2.6-liter, 36-hp W-6 engine bolted directly to a three-speed manual transaxle.

Rumpler’s bold stroke never achieved commercial success. The public didn’t know what to make of the car’s odd shape, and quality issues hampered the Tropfenwagen’s profitability. Most of the 100-or-so cars Rumpler built from 1921 through 1925 were employed as taxicabs thanks to their roomy cabins and smooth ride.

Tropfenwagen’s true legacy, however, lies in racing car design. Carl Benz’s Berlin agent Willy Walb urged his bosses to adopt Rumpler’s ideas for both Grand Prix and sports car applications. Benz’s chief engineer Hans Nibel created the Typ RH (Rennwagen mit heckmotor or “rear-engined race car”) to campaign in the 1923 season. A 2.0-liter DOHC inline-six mounted just behind the driver delivered 90 hp to a four-speed transaxle, yielding a top speed of 115 mph.

Of the three RHs entered in the Grand Prix of Europe at Monza, two snagged fourth- and fifth-place finishes. While the wily Benzes demonstrated excellent handling, they lacked the power of the supercharged Fiats which finished first and second. Drivers Walb and Adolf Rosenberger also drove RHs in local German events, earning a win at the 1925 Solitude road race near Stuttgart.

In 1930, Walb and Rosenberger joined forces at Ferdinand Porsche’s Stuttgart design house. There they convinced Dr. Porsche to spot his remarkable V-16 engines in the middle of the car, a strategy that allowed Auto Union to win their share of Grand Prix races from 1934–39.

A decade after Mercedes (Daimler) and Benz merged, lessons learned from the Benz RH were invested in a run of two-seat 150H roadsters powered by a 1.5-liter SOHC inline-four located just behind the cockpit. Twenty such cars plus five coupes were built and sold from 1934 through 1936. In essence, they were accurate previews of today’s sports cars. The program ceased only because Mercedes chose the front-engine alternative for its 1930s-era Grand Prix cars. Worried about confusing its production car customers with competing powertrain layouts, Mercedes focused solely on front-engine designs.

After World War II, John Cooper resurrected the mid-engine layout for his 500cc racers powered by motorcycle engines. Ferry Porsche’s successful 550 sports car arrived in 1953 followed by BRM and Lotus Formula One racers in 1960. Jack Brabham’s ninth-place finish at the 1961 Indy 500 in a svelte mid-engine Cooper Climax was instrumental in sending the classic Indy roadster the way of the buggy whip. By the end of the decade, the entire Brickyard field was mid-engine.

In the road-going realm, Lamborghini’s V-12 Miura introduced in 1966 is widely regarded as the seminal supercar thanks to its combination of exotic exterior design, mid-engine layout, and spectacular performance. Pontiac’s humble Fiero sold in the mid-1980s brought the idea to the American masses.

While front-engine sports cars are clearly not obsolete, no contemporary race car designer would adopt that arrangement when the rules allow a mid-mounted layout. You can thank Edmund Rumpler for inventing the way forward nearly a century ago.

The post How the 1921 Rumpler Tropfenwagen foreshadowed today’s mid-engine race cars appeared first on Hagerty Media.

The most abundant material in the earth’s crust is rapidly becoming every car maker’s favorite structural element.

In case you hadn’t noticed, Elon Musk is the 21st-century’s Henry Ford. After disrupting the car business with battery-electric propulsion, he’s now on a mission to revolutionize how cars are manufactured.

Next year, Musk hopes to commence building his Model Y crossover at an innovative plant under construction near Berlin, Germany. Of course, this Tesla will be powered by AC motors supplied current by onboard batteries. Musk’s stride forward—which he acknowledges as risky—is integrating 70 separate aluminum structural components into a single aluminum die casting. While the current Tesla Model Y has a rear underbody consisting of just two elaborate castings, the next edition will use eight Italian-made 6200-ton presses to pop out 213,000 supersize castings per annum at Berlin. If this “experiment” works, Musk hopes to spread his technology to U.S. and Chinese manufacturing plants within two years.

This is highly ambitious news, moving us to dig back in time to recall previous aluminum advancements aimed at making cars lighter and more efficient. The number of examples we found surprised us.

German engineer Heinrich Durkopp showed the first sports car with an aluminum body at the 1899 Berlin Motor Show. Two years later, Karl Benz raced a car of his design in France employing an engine made mostly of aluminum. Aluminum pistons and transmission housings soon became common practice. In 1912, Pierce-Arrow began building cars with cast aluminum bodywork and Packard’s seminal 1916 V-12 featured a weight-saving aluminum crankcase.

Ettore Bugatti’s brilliant Type 35 two-seat racer introduced in 1924 integrated a stylish wheel assembly with a brake drum cast in aluminum. That original eight-spoke design was reverently mimicked in the 2011 Bugatti Veyron, though with the spoke count upped by 50 percent.

In the 1930s, some makers began integrating their body and frame designs into a single lighter, stiffer assembly made of steel. Body-on-frame construction remains popular today for trucks though it began dying off for cars in the 1960s.

Inevitably, car makers began pondering the substitution of steel with aluminum to save weight. Extruded components, stampings, and die castings were all considered because each approach offers certain advantages.

In 1953, the French maker Panhard began using stamped sheet aluminum in volume production. At the 1981 Frankfurt Motor Show, Porsche presented an all-aluminum 928 concept car. Audi followed with an experimental aluminum four-door unibody that, it proudly proclaimed, could be carried by two women. However, Acura beat the Germans to the production punch with the 1989 NSX, the first production car using an aluminum unibody. The weight savings over steel construction was an impressive 500 pounds.

Audi and Alcoa teamed up to invent aluminum spaceframe technology for the 1994 Audi A8 sedan. Ferrari joined the club in 1999 with its first structural use of aluminum in the 1999 F360 Modena. Lamborghini adopted the Alcoa technology in the Gallardo sports cars beginning in 2003, and four years later Audi followed suit with the R8. BMW’s Z8 roadster made extensive use of extruded aluminum beginning in 1999.

The aluminum revolution reached America well before the turn of the century. GM’s EV1, leased from 1996 to the end of the decade, combined electric propulsion with a spot-welded and adhesively-bonded aluminum unibody and dent-proof molded-plastic exterior panels. At Chrysler Corporation, the low-volume 1997 Plymouth Prowler hot rod salute consisted of an innovative mix of aluminum castings, extrusions, body panels, and suspension parts.

Jaguar advanced the cause in 2003 with the XJ sedan, the first high-volume production model with an aluminum unibody. Castings, stampings, and extrusions were ambitiously joined with self-piercing rivets to achieve notable weight savings and stiffness gains compared to the XJ’s steel competitors. Later editions employed hydroformed A pillars. The BMW-designed Rolls Royce Phantom launched in 2003 was the largest production car to employ an aluminum spaceframe. Mercedes-Benz presented its AMG SLS gull-winged sports car revival in 2009 with an aluminum spaceframe to significantly lower its center of gravity height. Land Rover followed suit in 2012 with its aluminum-unibodied Range Rover, the first such design in the sport ute realm.

Enter Lotus in 1996 with its aluminum-intensive Elise sports car built atop a chassis comprised of 63 straight and two bent extrusions and five sheet panels joined with adhesive bonding and self-tapping screws. A decade later, Tesla’s Elon Musk collaborated with Lotus to introduce his first electric-powered Roadster. Time magazine dubbed the car a Best Invention for 2006. Approximately 2450 were ultimately sold in 30 countries around the world; two years ago, one was launched into space aboard a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket.

Aston Martin also shared Lotus technology beginning with the 2001 Vanquish V-12 which added a molded carbon-fiber tunnel to the construction mix. Corvette combined a welded aluminum spaceframe with a few carbon-fiber body panel reinforcements beginning in 2006.

During the first two decades of the 21st century, BMW, Audi, Mercedes-Benz, and Porsche each invented ways to combine aluminum and steel in unibody structures in pursuit of lighter weight and higher strength. A second trend currently underway at Audi, Lexus, and Mercedes is marrying a carbon-fiber body tub to aluminum chassis subframes.

In 2012, Tesla introduced its remarkable Model S five-door battery-electric sedan with an all-aluminum unibody designed and manufactured in-house. Its floor-mounted battery pack contains over 7000 cylindrically shaped lithium-ion cells. Consumer Reports lavishly praised this design and Motor Trend dubbed it the ultimate Car of The Year.

Every automaker’s goal is to use the best material at specific points throughout the car to meet crashworthiness requirements, structural stiffness, and minimum weight goals at a reasonable cost. Towards that end, the world is watching—and rooting for—Elon Musk’s current attempt to use one elaborate aluminum die casting to serve a multiplicity of needs.

The post From Durkopp to Musk: The 120+ year story of aluminum in the auto industry appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Today’s car enthusiasts adore BMW’s remarkable inline sixes (L-6s), but it’s worth recalling that these engines descended from one of the world’s most astute L-4 designs.

After WWII allies bombed their factories to smithereens, German makers needed a decade or more to rejoin the car business. In 1960, following the failure of the Bayerische Motoren Werke’s attempt to return Germans to the road with Isetta-designed microcars, the company was bailed out of bankruptcy by industrialists Harald and Herbert Quandt. (With assets topping $39 billion, the Quandts are still Germany’s wealthiest family.) That rescue enabled another go in 1962 with a range of small sedans BMW called its New Class.

Engine chief Alexander von Falkenhausen was tapped to design the New Class powerplant. Certain that larger, more powerful engines would be essential to fulfill BMW’s aspiration—cars aimed at aufsteigers (social climbers)—von Falkenhausen unceremoniously rejected the 1.3-liter displacement he was assigned. Instead, he convinced his bosses that 1.5 liters was the appropriate starting size, with room for growth to 2.0 liters absolutely essential. This wisdom ultimately paid dividends neither von Falkenhausen nor his BMW colleagues could have imagined.

Von Falkenhausen—later dubbed BMW’s Baron—joined the Werke in 1934 as a racing motorcycle rider and designer upon graduating from Munich’s Technical University, where one of his professors was aircraft genius Willy Messerschmitt (who later became a leading German armament manufacturer). Von Falkenhausen earned victories in the 1936 and 1937 International Six Day Trials using an experimental rear suspension, which convinced BMW to approve that feature for series motorcycle production. In preparation for WWII, he worked on sidecar applications and armored vehicles, including a tank powered by BMW’s nine-cylinder radial aircraft engine.

After the war, von Falkenhausen won the 1948 German Sports Car Championship driving a BMW 328 and other home-built cars. His own AFM race car manufacturing enterprise failed in spite of his decent Formula 2 finishes in 1952 and ’53 (against Cooper, Ferrari, and Maserati), prompting his return to BMW in 1954. After three years onboard, he became head of engine development.

Defying BMW’s prewar tradition of powering its cars with L-6s, von Falkenhausen selected an L-4 design for his M10 engine to maximize the New Class cars’ cabin space. BMW had ample experience with aluminum for aircraft and motorcycle engines, but von Falkenhausen picked cast iron for the block for two reasons. Though iron weighs nearly three times as much as aluminum per unit volume, it’s 50 percent stiffer. And, unlike aluminum, the iron bore surfaces would be durable without liners or expensive surface treatments—important considerations for a carmaker striving to get back on its feet.

Von Falkenhausen did select aluminum for the cylinder head before that was common practice. One notable exception was Chevy’s Beetle-inspired Corvair, which had aluminum crankcase and head components. Bolt-on parts such as the M10’s front cover, intake manifold, and clutch housing were also aluminum.

A key von Falkenhausen achievement was convincing company superiors that a forged-steel crankshaft supported by five main bearings was a necessary expense. His bosses would have preferred a simpler cast-iron crank carried by three bearings to cut costs. In addition, von Falkenhausen extended the sides of his block (a.k.a. skirts) well below the centerline of the crankshaft to enhance the stiffness of the engine and transmission assembly. A more rigid powertrain combo minimizes flexing at high output levels, thereby reducing noise, vibration, and harshness in the car’s cabin.

Bottom-end rigidity is crucial in any engine with performance aspirations because the crankshaft—a long, kinked rod with each offset mated to a connecting rod—effectively serves as the powerplant’s legs. At high rpm, significant flexing can trip the engine, resulting in the car equivalent of a broken leg.

Tapping his decade of motorsports success, von Falkenhausen configured the M10’s valvetrain with a chain-driven overhead camshaft opening two valves per cylinder via rocker arms. Hemispherical combustion chambers and a bore significantly larger than the stroke provided room for large valves, aiding volumetric efficiency (flow in and out of the engine) at high rpm, thereby raising power without harming fuel economy.

Canting the block 30 degrees from vertical lowered both the New Class’s hood and its center of gravity. Doing so necessitated a specially shaped oil pan.

The resulting M10 1.5-liter with an 82-millimeter (3.23-inch) bore and 71-millimeter (2.80-inch) stroke delivered 80 horsepower at 5700 rpm and 87 lb-ft of torque at 3000 rpm, potent figures for a small engine in the early ’60s. The torque curve was nearly flat from 1750 to 4850 rpm. BMW’s new L-4 weighed about 350 pounds, only 100 pounds more than the VW Beetle’s 40-hp, 1.2-liter flat-four.

Car and Driver first experienced the M10 in its review of a 1963 BMW 1500, calling that boxy four-door “an extremely pleasant and sensible automobile capable of outperforming more powerful cars, including some two-seaters.”

After progressing through 1.6- and 1.8-liter editions, BMW launched its 2.0-liter 114-hp 2002 two-door on a 2-inch-shorter wheelbase for 1968, moving Car and Driver to religious fervor. Reviewer David E. Davis, Jr., rated this BMW “the best $2850 sedan in the cotton-picking world,” and told readers to turn their hymnals to page 2002 to “sing two choruses of Whispering Bomb” (the 2002’s nickname). A 1970 road test of a 2002 equipped with a four-speed manual transmission reported 0–60 mph in 9.6 seconds and a top speed of 111 mph. What BMW had wrought here was the seminal compact sport sedan.

Replacing the M10’s single-barrel carburetor with twin Solex two-barrel side-drafts brought 20 more horsepower and a ti suffix to the 2002’s nameplate. In 1972, fuel injection arrived, raising output to 140 horsepower and changing the model designation to 2002 tii. (The 2002 ti wasn’t imported to the U.S.)

For combustion to occur, gasoline must be vaporized and mixed with air. Unlike carburetors, which simply add liquid drops to the airstream, injection atomizes the fuel into microdroplets that quickly vaporize when exposed to cylinder-head heat. The 2002 tii’s Kugelfischer system was timed to squirt a precise dose of fuel into each intake port in synch with the opening valve.

In general, longer intake manifold runners enhance low-rpm torque due to resonance effects that ram more air into the combustion chamber. Shorter, less restrictive runners increase high-rpm output. While electronically controlled fuel injection had been introduced in the early ’70s to meet tightening exhaust-emission requirements, BMW was late to join that party. The strictly mechanical Kugelfischer system added 26 horsepower, trimmed precious tenths off the 0–60-mph time (9.0 seconds), and added a few mph to top speed.

The M10 L-4 powered more than a quarter-million cars by 1970, becoming so dear to BMW that Austrian architect Karl Schwanzer was commissioned to configure its new Munich world headquarters as four round office towers. Instead of resting on the ground, these 22-floor cylinders are supported by a low-key center structure. A nearby bowl-shaped building resembling a cylinder head houses the company museum. Following four years of construction, BMW’s striking headquarters opened just before the start of the 1972 Summer Olympic games.

The following year at the Frankfurt auto show, BMW presented a 2002 Turbo, the brand’s first car equipped with a boosted engine. The KKK turbocharger teamed with Kugelfischer injection hiked output to a hearty 170 horsepower. Unfortunately, BMW’s timing could not have been worse. Mere weeks after the Turbo’s debut, OPEC switched off the taps, plunging the world into the first oil crisis. Only 1672 Turbos were manufactured, distinguishing that 2002 as one of the rarest and most prized BMWs.

A new 320i, code-named the E21, replaced the aging 2002 in 1976, the year von Falkenhausen retired from BMW. (He died in 1989 at 92.) The faithful M10 carried on in 2.0-liter form in this first 3 Series, now fed by Bosch K-Jetronic fuel injection, a more sophisticated but still purely mechanical system. Emissions controls dropped output to 110 horsepower. That plus 300 or so pounds more curb weight resulted in the 320i’s 10.5-second run to 60 and a 108-mph top speed (clocked by Car and Driver).

In the late ’70s, turbo kits were all the rage to counter the evil effects of emissions controls. Reeves Callaway, a Connecticut motorsports entrepreneur, created an ingenious bolt-on turbo kit for BMW’s 320i in 1977. This $1200 package, distributed through aftermarket specialists Miller & Norburn, worked quite nicely, trimming 2 full seconds off the quarter-mile elapsed time and adding 17 mph to the 320i’s top speed. Callaway went on to turbocharge several other cars, including factory-fresh Chevy Corvettes dropshipped to his installation center. His tuning businesses located on both coasts thrive to this day.

BMW’s venerable M10 also played a pivotal role in motorsports. Von Falkenhausen’s stout 1.5-liter L-4 was relabeled M12/13, bored and destroked to 2.0 liters, equipped with tougher titanium connecting rods, and fitted with a gear-driven twin-cam 16-valve cylinder head for Formula 2 competition, where it produced 300 horsepower. The new head designed by Ludwig Apfelbeck had hemispherical combustion chambers and an unusual radial intake-exhaust-intake-exhaust valve array intended to generate swirl in the cylinder, which enhanced exhaust-valve cooling.

Valve stems poked out the top of each combustion chamber like coronavirus spikes. Intricate rocker arms opened the valves and exhaust pipes sprouted out both sides; intake ports were atop the head between the camshafts. In spite of its complication, BMW’s M12/13 dominated Formula 2, winning six championships in March cars between 1973 and 1984.

In 1982, BMW progressed to Formula 1 with the only engine in the series derived from a mass-produced block. Nelson Piquet had an auspicious start, winning the Canadian Grand Prix in a Brabham powered by a 1.5-liter aggressively turbocharged M12/13 boosted to 640 horsepower. Simplicity versus the twin-turbo V-6s raced by Ferrari and Renault proved to be the M12/13’s secret weapon. Piquet won the World Drivers’ Championship in 1983, the first for any turbocharged single-seater.

By 1986, engineers had tuned this screamer to an awesome 1400 horsepower for qualifying, an intelligent guesstimate because BMW lacked a dynamometer capable of measuring such lofty outputs. That said, there’s little doubt that the BMW turbo M12/13 was the most powerful Formula 1 engine ever to race. During five seasons, it helped earn 15 pole positions, 14 fastest race laps, and nine victories in the hands of Brabham, Arrows, and Benetton drivers.

One snippet of lore shared by Britain’s Ridgeway Racing Engines is that M10 blocks were requisitioned from road cars that had logged 60,000 or more miles to rid their castings of residual internal stresses. The blocks were allegedly seasoned outdoors for several months and occasionally urinated on to infiltrate their cast iron with nitrides for added strength. (Urine contains urea, a hydrogen-nitrogen-oxygen compound, and treating iron with nitrides is a common means of increasing surface hardness.)

In 1987, BMW introduced its fresh M40 L-4, ushering the venerable M10 into retirement. Let the record show it served magnificently for more than a quarter-century, supplying dependable power to 3.5 million BMW automobiles.

Clearly, the visionary von Falkenhausen had wielded a magic wand designing an engine that endured a 17-fold power increase—from its 80-hp beginning to 1400 in F1 qualifying trim. And when BMW needed a potent L-6 to power its upmarket sedans in the late 1960s, the astute von Falkenhausen created fresh 2.5- and 2.8-liter M30 L-6s the most expeditious way possible—by simply tacking two more cylinders onto his celebrated M10. With von Falkenhausen’s brilliance calling the engine-design shots, BMW was off and running with new L-6s that earned lasting admiration from car enthusiasts.

The post BMW’s most significant engine didn’t have six cylinders appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Breaking into the car business, Henry Ford failed twice.  To make his third attempt stick, he became the fastest man on earth and beat rivals at racing.

In 1901, shortly after dissolving his Detroit Automobile Company, Henry Ford challenged Alexander Winton to race around a one-mile horse track in Grosse Pointe, Michigan. Winton, a Cleveland-based car maker and the favored entry, seized an early lead. Driving “Sweepstakes,” a car designed by his partner Oliver Barthel, Ford hung in with his riding mechanic Spider Huff leaning into bends to help maintain the cornering line.

On the fourth lap, smoke began pouring out of Winton’s exhaust. Ford gunned his two-cylinder, 26-hp engine to pass his opponent, averaging 44.8 mph for the 10-mile race. In addition to $1000 in prize money, Ford took home a lovely crystal beverage bowl with matching cups.

A month later, Ford used this new-found cash and notoriety to establish his second enterprise, the Henry Ford Company. Unfortunately disagreements with investors led to his departure after only a few weeks.  But this time, thanks to Henry Leland’s reorganization efforts, Ford’s start-up survived. In August 1902, the Cadillac Motor Company rose from the HFC’s ashes.

By then Ford and his colleagues had a more ambitious racing enterprise under development to challenge the 69.5-mph land speed record set by Frenchman Henri Fournier on New York’s Coney Island. Ford’s four-cylinder monsters—one called “999,” after a speedy locomotive, the other dubbed “Arrow”—produced 70–100 horsepower. Ex-bicycle racer Barney Oldfield was recruited and trained to drive the racers, which he described as “an engine on four wheels with brute strength but none of the qualities of a modern automobile.”

The resulting October 1902 race pitted the novice Oldfield in 999 against a never-say-die Alexander Winton and two other competitors. It was déjà vu all over again; when his car misfired on the fourth lap, Winton dropped out and Oldfield prevailed with a 54.9-mph average. Oldfield’s distinction as the first driver to lap a one-mile oval in less than a minute quickly spread. He ultimately won 20 or more races in Ford’s racers before retiring at age 40 in 1918.

After founding the Ford Motor Company in June 1903, Henry’s attention again ventured toward motorsports. The Arrow racer was shipped back to Dearborn for reconstruction in preparation for a land-speed-record attempt across Lake St. Clair’s Anchor Bay. Once that inlet iced over, a three-mile-long course was marked and groomed for attempts to top the existing 76.6-mph record held by Henri Fournier, driving a French-made Mors. Since Oldfield now drove for Winton, Ford took the driver’s seat with the ever-faithful Huff along to help hold the throttle open over the bumpy surface.

On January 12, 1904, Ford’s Arrow bounced off snow banks a few times before crossing the finish line with a record-smashing speed of 91.4 mph over one mile. What the two-man crew neglected to prepare for was stopping from such velocities. Their brakes were rudimentary, and there was inadequate distance to slow their 2730-pound monstrosity. To avoid colliding with a schooner locked in the ice, the wily Ford spun his Arrow into a nearby snowbank.

Ford’s success as a speed merchant again helped his budding Motor Company gain traction. Unfortunately, his reign as the fastest man on earth was fleeting. On January 27, 1904, on Florida’s Ormond Beach just north of Daytona, William K. Vanderbilt, one of the world’s richest men, drove his 90-hp Mercedes a mile in 39 seconds, raising the land speed record to 92.3 mph.

Florida beaches were first identified as the ideal place to worship the velocity gods in 1902 when Alexander Winton and Ransom E. Olds drove their latest creations there. Two years later, Ford and his wife, Clara, were on hand to witness the loss of the speed record he held only 15 days. A driver was hired and the Arrow was readied for shipment south to defend the Ford Motor Company’s honor, but that effort never bore fruit.

In 1905, Ford’s new six-cylinder Model K did venture south to meet the boss, residing in a tent and subsisting on cheese and crackers until funds arrived to mount his speed runs. Meanwhile, the record was lifted to 104.6 mph by a Napier, then to 109.7 mph by a twin-engined Mercedes. Realizing that this was beyond the reach of his Arrow, Ford headed north for summer beach racing in New Jersey.

The course at Cape May, New Jersey, wasn’t that fast, suiting Ford just fine. The top runners included A.L. Campbell, who achieved 94.7 mph in an 80-hp Darracq, and a 120-hp Fiat driven to 91.4 mph by Swiss mechanic Louis Chevrolet. Chevrolet went on to beat Barney Oldfield three times in 1905. The best Ford could do before 20,000 spectators in his 60-hp Model K was 90 mph. Failing to earn enough funds to pay his way home from New Jersey, he was forced to sell his Model K on the spot for $400.

This 1905 confrontation was the first and last time Henry Ford took on Louis Chevrolet. The next year, Ford hired Frank Kulick, one of his company’s first five employees, to drive a Model K tuned to 100 hp for the Ormond Beach speed week. The best Kulick could do in qualifying was 90.0 mph, versus Chevrolet’s 117.6 mph in a Darracq. Worse, Kulick spun out in a 30-mile race for American touring cars and Fred Marriott boosted the land speed record to 127.7 mph in a Stanley Steamer.

Rising velocities prompted Florida locals to consider a permanent course unimpaired by the vicissitudes of tides and erosion. Bill France Sr. (yes, of NASCAR fame) started competing there in 1937, when the course was a mix of beach sand and a portion of concrete highway adjoining it. France also saw the need for a better track: It took another 20+ years for his 2.5-mile paved Daytona Beach oval to come to fruition.

Louis Chevrolet and his two younger brothers, Arthur and Gaston, gained sufficient fame as race car builders and drivers that they drew the attention of William C. Durant, who had founded General Motors as a holding company before leaving that enterprise in 1910. The success of the Chevrolet Motor Car Company, established the following year, enabled Durant to regain controlling interest in GM by 1917.  But by then, Louis Chevrolet was long gone.

While Chevrolet’s next attempt at car building, the Frontenac Motor Company, ultimately ended in bankruptcy, he did compete in four Indy 500s with cars he designed, with a best finish of seventh in 1919. His brother Arthur also ran two 500s and his brother Gaston won the 1920 500 race driving a Frontenac. Following his death in 1941, Louis was honored for his motorsports contributions with a memorial erected near the Speedway Hall of Fame Museum.

Upon the introduction of his wildly successful Model T in 1908 and the opening of the Indianapolis Motor Speedway the following year, Ford helped his driver Kulick earn victories around the country in stripped and reworked Fords. When he filed an entry for the 1913 Indy 500, officials insisted that 1000 pounds be added to the Model T. Ford’s apt response was, “We’re building race cars, not trucks,” and he promptly withdrew his entry.

Citing dissatisfaction with trivial rules and classifications, Ford imposed a moratorium on motorsports that lasted more than two decades. With his plate full building cars to suit overwhelming demand, there was no need for racing-related publicity.

Shortly before the 1935 Indianapolis 500, Ford’s son, Edsel, teamed with the brilliant Harry Miller and promoter Preston Tucker to build no less than 10 racers with front-wheel drive, fully independent suspension, and flat-head V-8 power. To make the ’35 race, Ford engineers toiled 12 hours a day, seven days a week. Half the fleet was finished in time for qualifying and four of these striking racers lapped between 110–113 mph to qualify for the race.

Unfortunately, these Miller-Fords suffered a design flaw.  A universal joint connecting the steering shaft to the pinion shaft was positioned too close to the left exhaust manifold. Heat build-up during the race resulted in u-joint failure and a total loss of steering control. After all four entries DNFed, a disgusted Henry Ford locked them away in storage in Dearborn. One car later finished third at the speedway, powered by an Offenhauser racing engine. In 1947, the Granatelli family ran a Miller-Ford with a Ford V-8 to 12th overall.

The Chevy-versus-Ford rivalry that began in 1905 quickly achieved immortal status. Today, there is no greater battle throughout the car business and motorsports. Honing their products to win has elevated both brands to the auto industry’s highest plateau.

The post Ford vs. Everyone (including Chevrolet) at the dawn of American car making appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Conventional gas and diesel engines do a commendable job serving car and truck owners’ needs, but futurists insist that electric motors will eventually supplant them as the power source of choice. Some 50 years ago, a similar situation cropped up: Mazda’s ultrasmooth rotary engine had bright hopes of sending pistons the way of the buggy whip. With Mazda celebrating its 100th birthday this year, what better time to toast the brand’s most ambitious technical stride?

First things first: Mazda didn’t invent the rotary. It was German Felix Wankel who, in the 1920s, drew inspiration from pumps, compressors, and turbines to create an engine without the stop-start, up-down reciprocating motion of pistons and connecting rods. After working on disk valves and rotary compressors, the self-taught engineer earned a 1934 patent for an engine consisting of components that rotated, with no hint of reciprocation. Since the Otto-cycle gas engine (which powers most of our cars today), Rudolf Diesel’s compression-ignition concoction, and Karl Benz’s two-stroke all arrived late in the 19th century, Wankel’s rotary was the 20th century’s only new engine type.

Following more than two decades of experimentation, in 1957 Wankel finally persuaded NSU Motorenwerke, a leading German motorcycle manufacturer, to construct a prototype engine. It produced 28 horsepower at 17,000 rpm from only 125 cc of displacement. But the 1957 design was flawed. Both the rotor and its housing rotated, an arrangement totally impractical for mass production; changing the spark plug required a complete teardown. Unbeknownst to Herr Wankel, Walter Froede, a fellow NSU engineer working down the hall, created an elegant variation with a fixed housing. Though Wankel scorned, “You have turned my racehorse into a plow mare!” the rotary we know and love today descended from Froede’s simplified design.

In 1960, NSU and the U.S. aircraft manufacturer Curtiss-Wright (CW) signed an agreement to promote the new engine’s development. Wowed by performance claims, more than 20 British, European, Japanese, and American manufacturers took the bait, signing licenses in hot pursuit of rotaries for automotive, aircraft, marine, motorcycle, farm implement, and military applications. The Soviets also carried out experiments without paying a ruble in fees. Recognizing the rotary’s tremendous potential, Mazda was an early adopter. The formal agreement between NSU and Mazda was signed in July 1961.

Rotaries are fundamentally simpler, lighter, and more compact than piston engines. A triangular-shaped rotor orbits within a chamber to convert combustion energy to torque delivered to a shaft rotating at the engine’s center. There are no connecting rods or camshafts opening and closing valves. Instead, as the rotor sweeps past ports in its housing and/or side covers, a fresh mix of fuel and air enters the moving combustion chamber while spent gases are swept out the exhaust port. Counterweights attached to the output shaft cancel vibration. Thus the rotary’s ace in the hole is supreme smoothness: one power pulse every turn of the output shaft versus one every other turn for single-cylinder four-stroke piston engines.

Touting the rotary’s size and weight advantages, CW compared its RC2-60 rotary engine to a 1960s-era 283-cid Chevrolet V-8. The 185-hp rotary weighed 237 pounds compared to the 195-hp V-8’s 607 pounds. Although the rotary occupied only 5.1 cubic feet of space, the V-8 was more than four times larger, at 23.2 cubic feet. The number of individual components in each engine was also dramatic. The Chevy engine had just over 1000 parts, 388 of which moved, as opposed to the rotary’s 633 parts, only 154 of which moved. The rotary’s size, weight, simplicity, and smoothness were undeniable.

In our cutaway drawings, take note of the center of the engine. That’s where the eccentric shaft resides, a device functionally similar to a piston engine’s crankshaft. It is supported by a bearing at each end, also like a crankshaft. Near its middle, there’s an offset journal called an eccentric, which functions exactly like a conventional crank’s throw.

The rotor is a triangular-shaped component about 3 inches thick. The distance from its center to each tip, or apex, is roughly 4 inches. This hardworking element performs piston, connecting rod, and valvetrain duties. A plain bearing lining the rotor’s center mates with the aforementioned eccentric shaft journal.

The rotor’s orbital motion is a two-part symphony driven by combustion pressure on one flank following ignition. This pressure forces the rotor to spin like a pinwheel on its eccentric journal. The eccentric also moves because the rotor pressure is asymmetrical (offset, from one flank only). To keep this compound motion in sync, there are two phasing gears. The smaller one, located at engine center, is fixed; this gear’s external teeth mesh with the rotor’s internal gear teeth. A 2:3 gear ratio yields three full turns of the eccentric shaft for every 360 degrees of rotor motion. To visualize the overall kinesis, think hula hoop: rotor spin compounded by eccentric-shaft rotation.

The moving rotor’s apexes define a path called an epitrochoid. (Google this word for an extra helping of confusion.) The rotor housing mimics this shape—what resembles a figure eight in our illustration—to keep the apexes permanently within half a millimeter (0.02 inch) of their confines. Think piston-to-bore clearance. Add a plate covering each side of the rotor and you have a contained volume. As the rotor orbits, the changing space between each of its three flanks and the rotor housing supports the four standard Otto-cycle operations: intake, compression, expansion (power), and exhaust. The rotary’s parlor trick is that three of these cycles occur simultaneously.

As with a two-stroke engine’s pistons, the rotor exposes ports as it rotates to admit fresh fuel-air charges and to broom out exhaust. Ignition occurs when spark plugs fire on cue through small holes in the rotor housing. Due to the long, thin shape of each combustion chamber, Mazda uses two spark plugs firing sequentially to light the compressed fuel-air charge.

The rotary engine’s operation sounds simple and elegant once you grasp the subtleties, but developing one to provide years of faithful service was a feat; there are vexing issues galore. The hardworking rotor and its housing must be kept within tolerable temperature limits. Air cooling has worked in a few applications, but the more common approach is to circulate the lubricating oil through the hollow rotor to cool it while also routing a water-antifreeze mix through internal passages to cool the rotor housing and side plates. Unlike a piston engine’s cylinder, which is cooled by the fuel-air charge once per cycle, the spot where combustion occurs in a rotary remains permanently hot. As a result, keeping ample cooling flow through that area of the engine is critical—and difficult. Seals that keep the cooling, lubricating, and working fluids in place have posed the tallest developmental hurdles. For some idea, compare the five-part piston ring set of a conventional engine with the 30-or-so parts required to seal each rotor’s apex and flank surfaces.

Following years of development, NSU won the race to production with its 1964 Spider. Unfortunately, the single-rotor engine’s apex seals weren’t perfected by the time the two-rotor NSU Ro80 luxury sedan arrived three years later. A common salute when one Ro80 owner encountered another such soul on the road was a multi-finger wave to signal the number of engines replaced. Modest sales and high warranty claims drove NSU so near bankruptcy that in 1969, its assets were taken over by Volkswagen.

The first durability issue Mazda discovered after commencing rotary research in 1961 was chatter marks across the inner surfaces of the rotor housing caused by apex seals resonating (skipping along) as they swept over that area. The Japanese termed these “nail marks of the devil.” Before Mazda launched its first rotary, the 1967 Cosmo 110S two-seat coupe, engineers made sure that chatter-mark and apex-seal issues had been resolved. A small flat spring combined with combustion pressure behind each seal helped press them in touch with the rotor housing. For the seals themselves, Mazda experimented with self-lubricating carbon, various sintered metals, and cast iron “chilled” and shaped by an electron beam. To ease the seal’s sweep over the housing surface, oil was metered with the incoming fuel-air mix, a technique borrowed from two-stroke engines. Ultimately, Mazda achieved a durable rotor housing by lining an aluminum casting with a thin sheet of steel finished with an electroplated-chrome wear surface.

Strapping several rotors together to build a larger, more powerful engine is complicated by the fact that each rotor must be inserted from the opposite end of the eccentric shaft during assembly. That’s easy in a two-rotor setup, but combining three or more requires an awkwardly long eccentric shaft or an intricate coupling of two eccentric shafts.

The mix of materials Mazda chose to make its engines durable—aluminum housings, cast-iron rotors and side plates, steel eccentric shafts—resulted in widely varying expansion rates, which hindered the design and development of the O-rings responsible for sealing coolant passages. Since the rotary was born when gas cost pennies a gallon, fuel mileage wasn’t a concern. But in the mid-1970s, following the first energy crisis, the EPA began measuring and reporting mpg, exposing the Mazda rotary’s poor efficiency.

The problem of efficiency was two-fold. The ample surface area defining the rotary’s combustion chamber results in substantial energy loss to the cooling system. In addition, a portion of the unburned fuel-air charge is simply swept out of the engine as exhaust. To curb tailpipe emissions in 1970 U.S. models, Mazda employed a thermal reactor that mixed fresh air with the exhaust constituents to continue combustion outside of the rotor housing.

Bitter fights soon ensued between Mazda and the EPA over urban mileage tests that included cold starting. Mazda demonstrated real-world results better than EPA figures, and the government did begin efforts to align its procedures more closely to customer experiences, but the damage was done: Mazda’s rotary-powered cars were stuck at the thirsty end of their size class. During a 40,000-mile test of a Mazda RX-2, Car and Driver recorded city driving mileage as low as 14 mpg and rarely topped 18 mpg on the highway. The only saving grace was that rotaries were happy swilling regular-grade gasoline.

Emissions were a related issue, but here the rotary enjoyed one advantage. Because its peak combustion temperatures were below those typical of a high-compression piston engine, there was less formation of polluting oxides of nitrogen (NOx). Unfortunately, that plus was offset by the rotary’s long, flat, moving combustion chamber, which is hardly the ideal way to achieve a complete fuel burn. As stated, unburned fuel-air mix was simply swept out the exhaust port, raising hydrocarbon (HC) and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions in the process.

General Motors, the world’s most prominent rotary license holder, invested heavily in this engine. This included a manufacturing plant tooled and ready to produce what it called a Rotary Combustion Engine for the 1975 Chevy Vega and for AMC’s Pacer. Difficulty meeting emissions standards and poor fuel economy forced cancellation of those plans. In fact, the plug was abruptly pulled the instant GM president and rotary advocate Ed Cole retired in September 1974.

If GM could not solve the rotary riddle, who could? Hercules/DKW, Norton, and Suzuki did enjoy modest success building and racing rotary-powered motorcycles. Arctic Cat and Outboard Marine offered them in snowmobiles. Mercedes-Benz had high hopes with its magnificent three-and four-rotor C111 Gullwing sports cars, but Citroën went bankrupt developing its Comotor engine. There have been plenty of aircraft and helicopter experiments and hundreds of home-builts powered by Mazda engines. Ultimately, though, Mazda became the last manufacturer standing mainly because of its patient, persevering rotary engine devotion.

Such devotion was certainly encouraged by motorsports success. Along with turbines, rotaries thrive on track. With no reciprocating parts or valvetrain fragility, they love to rev. Huge intake and exhaust passages with minimal flow restriction are an easy upgrade. Except for their notably high fuel consumption, rotaries run for hours on end with minimal need for pit stops. They also shriek like furious banshees, requiring huge mufflers to curb their din, because hot, flaming exhaust gas leaves the combustion chamber unimpeded by valves. Even with earplugs inside a helmet, your author suffered two days of partial deafness after codriving an RX-7 at Daytona in 1979. Bonneville spectators wince every time a rotary leaves the starting line.

Sanctioning bodies struggle comparing rotary engine displacement to that of piston engines. The Southern California Timing Association, which oversees salt flats competition, bought the one-power-pulse-per-output-shaft-revolution argument (versus a piston engine’s two turns) to assign rotaries a 2:1 “correction” factor. Other bodies, such as the FIA, justified 3:1 by the fact that each rotor has three working side surfaces. Some agencies simply banned rotaries outright, especially after witnessing their speed and reliability. In 1968, anxious to strut its stuff, Mazda campaigned two race-prepped Cosmos at the 84-hour Marathon de la Route staged at Germany’s Nürburgring. One entry dropped out after 81 hours with axle failure; the other finished a surprising fourth behind two Porsche 911s and a Lancia Fulvia.

By 1976, Mazda RX-3 coupes had logged 100 victories in Japan. In 1979, the RX-7 launched its illustrious competition career with first-and second-place GTU class finishes at the 24 Hours of Daytona. Mazda’s sports car ultimately earned the GTU series championship 10 times, including eight consecutive titles.

Privateer assaults on Le Mans commenced in 1970, with the first rotary finish requiring a decade of effort. Respectable class finishes followed in the 1980s. Mazda’s day finally arrived in 1991 when its wailing four-rotor 787B thumped the Jaguar and Mercedes factory efforts to win overall, the first Le Mans victory by a Japanese manufacturer.

Even without seemingly essential all-wheel drive, Mazda RX-7s finished as high as third overall in World Rally Championship events during the 1980s and ’90s. And in 1994, Norton won the British Superbike Championship with its RCW588 ridden by Ian Simpson.

Unlike 20 or more enterprises around the globe that failed to advance the rotary’s cause, Mazda stuck with this engine through thick and thin for 44 years. Production ceased with the last RX-8 in 2012. In truth, the introduction of the magnificent piston-powered Miata MX-5 sports car in 1989—only a decade after the RX-7’s birth—marked the beginning of the end.

Despite its relative longevity beneath a Mazda badge, the rotary’s service record was hardly perfect. A rash of O-ring seal failures in the 1970s forced Mazda to operate an engine rebuild center near its U.S. headquarters in Irvine, California, to service warranty claims. RX-8s had a reputation for high oil consumption, and poor gas mileage was a concern from the start.

Piston engines got lighter, more powerful, more efficient, and cheaper to build at a faster rate than the rotary, mainly because only Mazda championed its cause. When Mazda’s engineering, manufacturing, and ownership allegiance with Ford ended in 2015, the small Japanese brand became totally responsible for its future. In 2017, Kenichi Yamamoto, who guided rotary development from the beginning and later served as Mazda’s president and chairman, went to rotary heaven without a successor who shared his passion.

That said, various Mazda powertrain directors have touted the rotary’s suitability as a range extender for gas-electric hybrid applications. The engine’s size, shape, and centered output shaft match electric generator characteristics nicely. And operating the rotary at a constant speed and load would diminish its emissions and fuel efficiency shortcomings. If the brand is truly serious about advancing the hybrid cause, there’s a chance the rotary just might outlive its piston engine nemesis. That was the hope all along.

As the rotor turns

10A:

1970–’72

A 982-cc two-rotor with 4-bbl carburetor making 100–120 hp in the R100 coupe. Built under license from NSU, Mazda’s first rotary sold in North America incorporated notable advancements in apex-seal design to improve durability. The water-cooled rotor housings were aluminum castings; rotors and side housings were made of cast iron.

12A:

1971–’78

An 1146-cc two-rotor with 4-bbl carburetor making 120 hp in RX-2 and RX-3 coupes and sedans. To add power to propel larger and more sporting models, rotor width was increased by 10 mm (0.39 in). Basic engine design and materials were otherwise carried over.

1979–’85

An 1146-cc two-rotor with 4-bbl carburetor making 100 hp in the RX-7. Like the 10A design, the larger 12A featured intake ports in its side housings and peripheral exhaust ports. Peak torque occurred at 4000 rpm, and the power curve crescendoed at 6000 rpm.

13B:

1974–’78

A 1308-cc two-rotor with 4-bbl carburetor making 135 hp in RX-4 coupes and sedans, Cosmo coupes, and pickups. Another 10-mm (0.39-in) increase in rotor width boosted displacement, torque, and horsepower. The torque peak remained at 4000 rpm, but peak power now occurred at 6500 rpm.

1984–’86

A 1308-cc two-rotor with fuel injection making 135–146 hp in the RX-7 GSL. The addition of Nippondenso electronic fuel injection yielded a broader torque curve peaking at a streetworthy 2750 rpm. A sophisticated engine management system, relocated spark plugs, dual mufflers, and lighter rotors for 1986 raised output to 146 hp at 6500 rpm and boosted torque another 4 percent to 138 lb-ft at 3500 rpm.

1987–’95

A 1308-cc turbo-charged two-rotor with fuel injection making 182 hp in the RX-7. Adding a twin-scroll Hitachi turbo (6.2 psi of boost), an intercooler, and a detonation sensor yielded speedy throttle response, with peak power at 6500 rpm, and a healthy 183 lb-ft of torque at 3500 rpm. Remarkably, there was little or no loss of fuel economy over the previous naturally aspirated rotary.

1991-’95

A 1308-cc twin-sequentially-turbocharged-and-intercooled two-rotor with fuel injection making 255 hp in the RX-7. Bosch D-Jetronic injection metered fuel to three side intake ports per chamber. Torque peaked at 5000 rpm, power at 6500 rpm, and the redline was an enthusiastic 7500 rpm.

20B:

1990–’95

A 1962-cc twin-sequentially-turbocharged-and-intercooled three-rotor with fuel injection making 276 hp in the (Japan-only) Eunos Cosmos. Internal dimensions were identical to 13B engines, but a two-piece eccentric shaft and special assembly procedures were required.

R26B:

1991

A 2616-cc four-rotor with fuel injection powered the 900-hp 787 and 787B sports prototypes at Le Mans, winning the 24-hour race in 1991. The engine had three spark plugs per rotor and peripheral intake and exhaust ports.

Renesis:

2003–’12

A 1308-cc two-rotor with fuel injection and side exhaust ports making 207–247 hp in the RX-8 2+2 coupe. This was a new design with exhaust ports moved to the side housings for improved efficiency. Two versions were offered, with modest and competitive power outputs and a remarkable 9000-rpm redline.

The post Engine revolution: Mazda’s rotary and its uncertain future appeared first on Hagerty Media.

We’re happy to report that GM’s Bowling Green, Kentucky, plant has overcome the debilitating UAW strike and the crippling COVID-19 pandemic to resume C8 Corvette production. Assembly operations restarted at the end of May with workers toiling 10 hours a day, five days a week. Approximately 5000 new Stingray coupes have been built thus far, with convertibles likely to roll next month and the 2021 model year slated to begin in November. As soon as suppliers are able to meet Bowling Green’s rising needs, a second shift will be added.

One anomaly: The number of C8s that have made their way to a two-block stretch of my suburban-Detroit neighborhood. No less than three 2020 Corvettes have already been shipped from Bowling Green in response to orders from this micro-locale, with a fourth due here next year.

I began the order process for my Stingray two years ago with a deposit at a local dealer who had no idea the mid-engine C8 was coming. That car arrived three weeks ago, and my thumbnail review of it is at the end of this article. Respecting my neighbors’ privacy, their names have been changed for this account.

A pampered 2017 C7 Grand Sport coupe lives next door. Shortly after owner Bob got a good look at my Shadow Gray Metallic C8, he felt the itch to call his dealer and investigate trading up. Bob’s only tactical error was checking with his wife. Apparently, the strides made relocating the Corvette’s engine were lost on her: the word on our street is that Bob’s better half said no. I’m guessing that the give-take negotiations are well underway.

Bob’s next-door neighbor Les is the proud owner of a 1978 Silver Anniversary Corvette. While he’s not in the market for a 2020 upgrade, Les is interested in selling his bought-new, stick-shift pride and joy for $14,000. The odometer reads only 38,000 miles and two engines are part of the deal. The anemic (220-hp) L82 V-8 was upgraded ages ago with a more enthusiastic 350-hp small-block that currently powers this Corvette. After the factory silver exterior faded, Les had his car fastidiously repainted; the original black leather interior is in excellent condition. (Leave a comment with us if you’re interested in contacting Les.)

Pizza man Jim lives across the street from Les. Earlier this year, he ordered a Rapid Blue C8 from the Chevy dealer nearest his pizza parlor. Unfortunately, delays ensued and Jim’s car missed the 2020 cut. He’s hoping for his Corvette to arrive sometime next year.

My pal Harry, who is certifiably speed mad, lives three houses down the street from Jim. More than a decade ago, he and I rented access to two Michigan test tracks in a concerted effort to top 200 mph in his C6 ZR1 for Automobile magazine. When we fell 3 mph short, Harry raised his supercharger boost to muscle up what was already one of the fastest cars on the planet. When he heard a hotter C8 was under development, Harry sold his ZR1 to a close friend.

Last Friday, Harry and I picked up his aptly named Accelerate Yellow C8 at Les Stanford Chevrolet in Dearborn, Michigan. This car’s option load—2LT trim, Z51 performance package, magnetic dampers, and the high wing—bumped the sticker more than $84,000. Before his joyful first ride home, Harry had already begun the search for a shop capable of fitting a twin-turbo upgrade.

Tom, who lives at the end of our two-block street, is the exception to my “Everybody lusts for a C8” rule. Anticipating a trade of his 2014 C7 coupe for a new Stingray, he placed an early order with the same Dearborn dealer mentioned above. Unfortunately, the process was scrambled by personnel changes, resulting in the late arrival of a car with specs drastically different from what Tom wanted. Instead of the Blade Silver Metallic paint he preferred, Tom’s Corvette arrived painted Long Beach Red Metallic. Sitting in the car, he was unimpressed by what he calls the TV screen on the dash. And, in contrast to Harry, Tom is a law-abiding driver only mildly interested in C8’s heightened speed and performance.

After a day pondering his situation, Tom decided to scotch his deal. Even though flipping new Corvettes—registering a new one, then tacking on $10,000 or more to resell it—is now common practice, Tom had no interest in going through that rigmarole. Stanford immediately sold this C8 to the next eager customer in line for a reported $12,500 over sticker.

Which brings this report to the third-week anniversary of my C8’s arrival. Thus far I’ve enjoyed one excursion to Michigan’s west coast with my wife and countless quick show-and-tell drives. Cutting to the chase, I’m totally satisfied with the $63,295 (plus tax and plates) I spent on this car, thrilled with how it drives, and quite satisfied with the modest optional equipment I selected.

Lapping a track in this car is an eventual likelihood but not a priority. With that in mind, investing $5000 for the Z51 performance package would have been ludicrous. I don’t consider the stouter brakes, summer performance radials, and tighter suspension calibrations essential to enjoying a few cautious hot laps. The Brembo brakes on my car are surely adequate as long as care is exercised to avoid fade. The all-season Michelin radials will allow me to enjoy my toy early in the spring and late in the fall, in contrast to the Z51 summer tires, which are unsuitable for driving in temperatures below 40-degrees F.

The $1195 I spent for the performance exhaust option adds a useful 5 hp, extra snarl, and four sparkling pipe tips. The 1LT leather upholstery is gorgeous and durable looking. The base seats fit me nicely and are beautifully designed.

The Adrenaline Red upholstery I selected cost not one penny extra, while the $395 Torch Red seat belts coordinate nicely. I picked Shadow Gray Metallic paint because it blends well with the countless black scoops and grilles that route cooling air into and out of the Corvette’s exterior. Add to that $995 for the split-spoke black-painted rims and $595 for red brake calipers to enliven the wheel wells. Thus far, I’ve received universal adulation for my Corvette’s color combo, sort of a contemporary update of my ’67 Corvette roadster’s red and black theme.

The dual-clutch automatic is more entertaining and easier to live with than I imagined. Full-throttle upshifts at the redline sound and feel like a firearm’s recoil. The shift paddles work perfectly, and the entire driveline serves better than a professional butler when left in automatic mode.

Sifting through 400 pages of owner’s manuals, I’ve discovered interesting ways to tailor operating modes and the display cluster to my liking. Clocking 0–60 sprints is easy, and there are two distinct means of measuring g-forces.

I am gratified that my wife loves driving and riding in our new family member. It rides remarkably well over Michigan’s fissured pavement and is comfortably relaxing during long hours on the freeway. The trip meter reported more than 30 mpg while averaging 75 mph during our recent round trip to Lake Michigan. Stashing the roof is a one-man exercise, and there’s no cockpit buffeting below 80 mph.

Fifty years in the review business has honed my ability to whine about flaws I discover in cars. In this case, I harbor but one gripe: C8’s foot-thick doors and broad shoulders slow the garage parking procedure and inflict pain during entry and egress. Let’s hope an hour of yoga this evening helps ease those contortions.

The post ’Vette Central: Eight Corvettes inhabit my neighborhood’s two suburban blocks appeared first on Hagerty Media.

To celebrate the end of the Malaise Era (circa 1973-1983), when cars struggled to accelerate out of their shadows, car magazines kicked off a period of unadulterated craziness. One highlight I fondly remember from my career in those days was a twin-engine Honda we constructed at Car and Driver: Project Synchronicity CR-X2. During a recent trip to Florida, I was fortunate to reconnect with my old Honda sweetheart.

I acknowledge that the idea sounds preposterous. Imagine keeping a straight face sitting across a conference table from Tom Elliott, president of Honda North America, proposing this undertaking. Then we asked for the car … and second powertrain to make it happen. When he said yes, we teamed with Southern California’s Racing Beat to load the second 1488-cc four-cylinder engine, with its three-speed automatic, into the back of one unsuspecting 1984 Honda CRX.

Part of my sales pitch was reminding Elliott that all this had been done before. In the 1930s, Alfa-Romeo’s Bimotore Grand Prix racer needed two engines to keep pace with the Germans. The Fageol Twin Coach Special qualified second for the 1946 Indy 500 (before crashing on the race’s seventh lap). Exactly two decades later, another car showed up at Indy with a Porsche flat-six at each end. Also in the ’60s, Citroen built 700 Saharas with two engines powering all four wheels for desert use. Britain’s brilliant John Cooper built (and crashed) a Twini Mini with 180 hp. The arrival of Oldsmobile’s front-drive Toronado in 1966 inspired a handful of tuners to double up their powertrains under one roof.

What made the CR-X2 a slam dunk (sort of) was its compact engine-transaxle package and the fact that it used handy torsion bar springs in its front suspension. In essence, our fabricators created support structure in place of the Honda’s cargo hold and slid in a second complete propulsion system, front suspension, and brake components with minimal anxiety.

Contact with mother earth was enough to synch engine rpm. Our creation ran nicely on- and off-road using front, rear, or both engines. A favorite moment was watching jaws drop at the gas pumps when we started two engines sequentially. We used the stock three-speed automatic to ease construction (avoiding clutch and shift linkage) and because Honda’s transmission remains in neutral when the engine bolted to it is switched off.

Sure, there were issues. While we had little difficulty dialing in the handling with camber settings and anti-roll bar sizes, balancing the brakes was a chore, resulting in lengthy stopping distances. And while we doubled the available power to 152 horses, we also drove curb weight to 2450 pounds, a gain of 600 pounds. As a result, our best runs to 60 mph took 8.0 seconds and a quarter-mile required twice that time with a trap speed of only 85 mph.

So, without hesitating, we mounted Plan B: replace the stock CRX powertrains with a pair of 1.8-liter Honda Accord engines along with their four-speed (+1) automatic transmissions. Luck was with us. Elliott was immediately on board in large part because he had a few zero-mile Accords in inventory that couldn’t be sold after they were wadded up during an Oregon shipping accident.  Two were delivered to Racing Beat so their powertrains and wiring harnesses could be stripped for the second phase of this zany project.

Racing Beat worked magic a second time to wedge in the larger powertrains, adapt the oversize radiator fitted previously, fabricate new exhaust systems, and solve a myriad of small and large problems. We seized the opportunity to doll up the exterior with larger MSW wheels, Goodrich Comp T/A radials, and Mugen body panels imported from Japan. Inside we added custom Recaro bucket seats and a cool four-spoke leather-wrapped steering wheel.

While curb weight climbed to 2700 pounds, we topped the 200-hp hurdle—nearly three times a stock CRX’s allotment—with 101 horses at each end. We achieved shorter stopping distances, decent slalom speed, and 0.82 g of cornering grip. We clocked a top speed of 147 mph and 0-60 in a quick (for the day) 6.2 seconds. What we called Super Synchronicity beat a contemporary Porsche 928S running from 30 to 50 mph and Chevy’s IROC Camaro in 50 to 70 mph acceleration.

Sadly, the day came when we had to bid adios. After the C/D CR-X2 was sold to pay our shop bill, it enjoyed several years and thousands of miles of faithful service in the hands of its second owner. Several auctions and a few cross-country trips later, Hagerty member Joe Dunlap took possession in 1996.

During a meeting early this year at his home in rural Sumter County, Florida, Dunlap recounted his favorite incident: beating an E30 BMW M3 running flat out near Sebring, Florida. Since the car lacks air conditioning, it’s not much fun to drive in the summer. That said, during his first decade of ownership, Dunlap advanced the Honda’s odometer over 50,000 miles, fairly remarkable for such an odd, elderly concoction. Except for replacing the starter relay on the rear engine, it has been “dead reliable” he adds. Were it not for a major leak in its 10-gallon fuel cell that cropped up in 2006, Dunlap would be driving this car today. Because his 1500-ft garage shop is stocked with four other project cars competing for his time, the CR-X2 must wait its turn for fuel system repairs and general maintenance.

Dunlap is adamant that his Honda is not for sale. Those of you with the urge to change his mind might be able to track him down through central Florida Corvair Club Facebook sites.

The post Revisiting a special twin-engine Honda CRX appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Give Ford dual kudos: for reprising one of its most iconic nameplates and for equipping its 2021 “built wild” Broncos with the style and substance necessary to succeed in the fierce SUV arena. Riding on two different platforms and available in two- and four-door body styles, the new Bronco brand will be the eighth member of Ford’s rambling SUV/crossover household when it reaches showrooms at the end of this year. A standard 4×4 driveline underlines these new models’ off-road chops. Due in showrooms for spring 2021, the base two-door Bronco will start at $29,995 including destination fees, while the four-door starts at $34,695; base price for the Bronco Sport that goes on sale by the end of 2020, including destination, is $28,155. A $100 deposit will hold your place in line a Bronco starting today.

Bronco Sport

This bright-eyed four-door dispatches the familiar Ford oval to its rear hatch so no one will miss the BRONCO script splashed across its face. It’s a five-passenger unibody design with key chassis parts—strut-type front suspension, semi-trailing-arm independent rear suspension, a coil spring at each corner—shared with the Ford Escape. While the wheelbase is a longish 105.7 inches, the Sport’s 172.7-in overall length falls between the 1966–77 first-generation Bronco and the 1978–96 second-through-fifth-generation big-boy designs. (Smallish Bronco IIs were offered from 1984 through 1990.) The new Bronco Sport is a sub-compact SUV aimed at customers who take their off-road weekends seriously. Access to its cargo hold is provided by a rear liftgate equipped with a hinged window.

Engine choices include a 1.5-liter three-cylinder turbo producing 181 hp and a 2.0-liter turbo four delivering 245 hp. An eight-speed automatic is standard and paddle shifting is optional with the larger engine. A twist knob labeled G.O.A.T (goes over any terrain) selects one of three off-road modes, including Baja, Mud/Ruts, and Rock Crawl. Add to that four on-road modes: Normal, Eco, Slippery and Sand, and Sport. Chassis and powertrain functions are automatically tailored to suit the occasion. A special “trail control” setting maintains a steady off-road speed both forward or in reverse via automatic throttle and brake applications.

There are five distinct Bronco Sport trim levels (the base model, Big Bend, Outer Banks, Badlands, and First Edition) and a wide assortment of 17- and 18-inch steel and aluminum wheels offered with all-season and all-terrain radials. Badlands and First Edition models get the 2.0-liter engine as standard, along with unique tuning for the front struts and hydraulic rebound stops to help smooth out off-road driving. Ground clearance ranges from 7.8- to 8.8-in and fording ability varies from 17.7-in with the base all-season tires to 23.6-in with the all-terrain tires.

There are four steel bash plates included to help protect the Bronco Sport off-road, and Ford offers frame-mounted  front tow hooks. Cloth and leather seat trim are both available. An overhead rack is standard equipment and a stepped roof accommodates two bikes in the cargo hold. Thoughtful touches include available washable rubber flooring, silicone-sealed control switches, and a storage bin below the second row passenger seat for wet or muddy gear.

Bronco two- and four-door

The two larger, more capable Broncos share a platform with Ford’s mid-size Ranger pickup including body-on-frame construction, a control arm front suspension, a live rear axle located by five links, and coil springs all around. The two-door edition seats four while the four-door accommodates five. A side-hinged tailgate with fixed glass carries the spare wheel. These Broncos, engineered for customers who venture off-road weeks at a time, ride securely on a fully-boxed steel frame.

While the two-door is only slightly longer and taller than the Bronco Sport, the four-door is notably bigger than any past Bronco thanks to its 116.1-in wheelbase, 189.4-190.5-in overall length, and up to 78.7-in of height.

Two engines are offered here: a turbocharged 2.3-liter I-4 rated at 270 hp with 310 lb-ft of torque, and a 2.7-liter twin-turbo V-6 producing 310 hp and 400 lb-ft of torque. A seven-speed Getrag manual transmission (with a creeper first gear) is available with the four-cylinder engine while a 10-speed Ford automatic can be had with either engine.

Two different two-speed transfer cases are geared for off-roading, the more advanced of which has an electromechanical transfer case and the ability to automatically switch between 2H and 4H. Pick the base engine with stick shift (and the more aggressive transfer case) and the total first-gear low-range torque multiplication is an awesome 95:1. That combo won’t top Mt. Everest but it should earn king of the hill honors at your local mudhole. Every large Bronco has 33.5-in of fording ability and at least 8.3-in of ground clearance. With the largest 35-in tires fitted, ground clearance is 11.5 in. The Bronco employs a Dana 44 AdvanTEK solid rear axle and Dana’ independent front axle unit, both of which can be optioned with Spicer Performa-TraK electronic locking diffs.

Ford designers invested extra effort in making these big Broncos proficient off-road. Plastic fender flares are easily removed to increase lateral clearance or to remedy scrape damage. The aluminum doors are fitted with frameless glass to minimize their size and weight. That in combination with quick-disconnect door stops, wiring, and hinges allows the owner to strip the doors and stash them in zipper bags for storage at home or in the cargo hold. The five hard or soft roof panels are also easily removed for open-air motoring.

The interior switchgear is rubber covered without gaps to block moisture intrusion. There are four grab handles for bracing over rough terrain. The rubber floor covering is equipped with troughs and drain holes to facilitate quick rinsing after a dusty day in the saddle. The standard seat trim is marine-grade vinyl capable of taking a (wet) licking without damage. Leather is optional for those less interested in exploring their back forty. Prominent front fender loops (Ford calls them “trail sights”) serve two functions—they pinpoint the forward corners to help clear boulders and they provide a secure means of tying down kayaks and other gear loaded onto the optional roof rack. Readily removable covers integrated with the windshield frame ease the addition of overhead lights for deer spotting. Four-door models come standard with a cloth soft top, but a hard top is also available. Hard tops feature removable rear quarter panels that can be lifted off with the roof panels still attached.

In addition to seven distinct trim and equipment levels, there’s a cool Sasquatch package that includes 17-in forged-aluminum wheels and bead-locks available across the board. While 16-in all-season radials are standard with base trim, 17-in all-terrain or mud-terrain tires come in the six other trim packages. Off-road-friendly technology arrives in the form of the Bronco’s so-called Trail Toolbox, which bundles low-speed cruise control, torque-vectoring turn radius assist, and one-pedal acceleration/braking controls for slow rock-crawling. Steel shields are in place to protect the Bronco’s otherwise vulnerable bits, but higher-level trim packages are outfitted with protection for the engine, transmission, transfer case, and fuel tank, plus a front bash plate. Ford says that its available side rock rails can “support the weight of each side of the vehicle.”

Clearly, Ford has the Jeep Compass, Cherokee, and Wrangler fixed in its sights. These new Broncos are a shrewd mix of fresh appearance, aggressive functionality, and technological reach that will make them serious contenders. As Ford confirms all pricing, offers driving opportunities, and outlines the full roster of more than 200 factory-supported aftermarket accessories, we’ll be back with pertinent updates.

The post Revealed: 2021 Ford Bronco and Bronco Sport appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Toasting Mazda’s 100th birthday is just cause for rolling my trusty RX-7 out for a zing or three past its 7-grand redline. While you savor these shots of my favorite family heirloom, I’ll reveal how I became a staunch rotor head (Wankel engine aficionado). In 1972, shortly after the earth was deemed round, I enjoyed a journalistic boondoggle to Unterturkheim, Germany, to visit Mercedes-Benz’s main manufacturing plant. Hemmed in by Stuttgart sprawl, the wily Germans doubled the length of the test track adjoining their facility by erecting a near-vertical 180-degree turnaround loop. That atypical feature was promptly nicknamed “The wall of death” because it scared the bejesus out of everyone who experienced even one pass around it.

Our hosts were too savvy to allow any journalist to risk their neck actually driving through this treacherous bend. Instead they offered thrill rides in their most spectacular vehicle—the experimental Mercedes C111 gull-winged coupe—with their most illustrious engineer, Rudolf Uhlenhaut, at the wheel. In the 1950s, Uhlenhaut’s hands were the last to touch this brand’s Formula One single seater’s steering wheel before Juan Manuel Fangio strapped in to race.

Originally powered by a three-rotor engine, the C111 had been upgraded to a 350-hp four-rotor Wankel shortly before my visit. Though he would retire later that year, Uhlenhaut radiated utter confidence in the task at hand. After the starter whirred and the C111’s engine wailed like a fire engine, a smile of satisfaction spread across his face. What Uhlenhaut knew was that my three-lap ride in his sports car was about to be forever etched in my memory.

We never ventured anywhere near the C111’s 185-mph top speed. In the vertical turn, the windshield displayed nothing but warped cement. Hanging on was unnecessary because g-force pressed my torso deeply into the bucket seat.

Uhlenhaut’s hands held steady, applying not one smidgen of steering correction. The four-rotor sang like Celine Dion belting out Bizet’s Carmen aria.

Regrettably, Mercedes-Benz lost not only the Wankel scent but interest in selling a proper mid-engine sports car. Permanently and irrevocably addicted to rotaries, thanks to this C111 experience, I pursued such engines with utmost vigor throughout the ’70s and ’80s.  A few highlights:

In 1973, while at Car and Driver, Patrick Bedard and I campaigned a Mazda RX-2 in IMSA’s RS road racing series, racking up two wins and one second-place in five events. We were so uncatchable that our rotary ride was banned at the end of the season.

In ’74, I built and drove a Mazda RX-3 powered by a potent Racing Beat two-rotor engine to set a 160.3 mph G-Production record at the Bonneville Salt Flats. Spectators pawed their ears each time I left the starting line with my Celine Dion exhaust shredding the air.

In ’78, I advanced the rotary cause to 183.9 mph in a Mazda RX-7 constructed by Racing Beat, earning an E/GT record on the salt.

In ’79, the RX-7 I co-drove at the 24 Hours of Daytona broke an axle housing weld, DNFing the Racing Beat-built ride during the 17th hour. RX-7s campaigned by Mazda’s factory team fared better, earning first and second places in GTU and fifth- and sixth-overall standings. This time the Celine Dion din rendered me deaf for two days.

In ’80, while campaigning an RX-7 borrowed from the press pool at the Nelson Ledges Longest Day 24-hour race, my team suffered defeat by Road & Track due to high consumption and the fuel pump’s inability to drain the bottom half of the tank. After finishing second, three laps in arrears, our tailpipe glowed red several hours after the race.

In ’86, I logged a two-way blast across the salt flats in an RX-7 Turbo aggressively prepared by Racing Beat, averaging 238.4 mph (best pass 244 mph), earning the C/GT record, still in the books.

While the occasional race or burst of speed placated my rotary withdrawal symptoms, the permanent fix is the ’79 Mazda RX-7 I purchased new after attending the car’s 1978 launch in Hiroshima, Japan. With lots of help from Recaro, Racing Beat, and other tuning vendors, I constructed what was dubbed Tech Director’s Toy when it appeared on C/D’s January 1981 cover.

My goal was moving the 100-hp, first-gen RX-7 in the Porsche 928 direction. In retrospect, that seems slightly ludicrous, but the corners of this car’s performance envelope were stretched and it did become a significantly more entertaining car to own and drive.

To boost power, I yanked the original rotary to install Mazda’s 13B engine containing rotors 0.39 inches (10mm) wider than the stock 12A engine. The new powerplant dropped in nicely because its exterior dimensions match the 12A except for an overall length greater by 0.79 inches.  To finish the swap, I bolted on Racing Beat’s Holley four-barrel carburetor intake and tubular exhaust package. The end result was a 50-percent gain in output to 150 hp at an estimated 6500 rpm.

Unfortunately, the RX-7 was born with feeble brakes, including narrow rear drums incapable of slowing a baby carriage. Here I attacked with vigor reminiscent of my uncle William Tecumseh’s Civil War sweep through Georgia. The only factory parts that survived my assault were the front calipers. I installed Mazda Cosmo discs in the rear, AP-Lockheed vented rotors in front, an adjustable balance bar to regulate effort distribution, twin Hurst Airheart master cylinders operated by a significantly stiffer brake pedal, and flexible hoses jacketed by braided stainless steel (to further diminish that annoying squishy-pedal feeling).  Eliminating the vacuum booster raised effort appreciably, but my new system was linear acting and totally fade free.

Other chassis mods included clipping one coil from each spring to raise their rates while lowering the ride height, a new Quickor adjustable rear anti-roll bar, and installation of a trick Racing Beat strut tower cap that lowers the car’s nose without loss of wheel travel. The factory 13-inch wheels were replaced by 15-inch Hayashi Racing center-lock rims shod with BFG G-Force 195/55VR-15 radials. Moving the battery to the trunk helped shift the weight distribution to 50.7 percent front/49.3 percent rear.

To invigorate the exterior, I installed MazdaSpeed front and rear spoilers and a molded fiberglass front bumper that trimmed a few pounds off the nose. Exterior mirrors pirated from a Dodge Colt were more attractive to my eye than the factory originals.

Thanks to my close friend George Venieris at Recaro USA, the interior makeover was creatively comprehensive. Heated and power-reclining Recaro buckets were swathed in pigskin hides and striped-velour center panels. VDO gauges reporting oil pressure and temperature were installed on the passenger side of the dash. A leather-wrapped Nardi steering wheel enhanced my nine and three handshake. The sound system was upgraded with a new Alpine control panel and subwoofers built into open space behind the seats. To complete the package, George concocted a pig-skinned case filled with Craftsman tools.

Over the years I swapped tires, upgraded the sound system, and kept tabs on my homemade brake hardware. The performance we measured way back when—0–60 in 7.9 seconds, 128 mph top speed, 0.85g on the skid pad—is modest by modern standards, but this car still sparkles in fun-to-drive. The tuned rotary has never missed a beat, and my trophy case has benefitted from this RX-7’s occasional car show attendance.

I do harbor two regrets: that the opportunity to share my rotary with Rudolf Uhlenhaut never materialized and that I’ve logged only 22,300 miles over four-plus decades.  The good news is that today’s assignment is complete, local roads are dry, and it’s time to let Celine Dion sing.

The post RX-7th Heaven: Venturing far beyond Mazda’s affordable sports car intentions appeared first on Hagerty Media.

What qualifies the 1998 Dodge Viper GT2 as a truly exceptional supercar is the fact that only 100 such cars were ever built and sold. Owned by Hagerty members Brian and Laura Willey, the example presented here is further distinguished by the fact it’s the first of two pre-production GT2s Dodge constructed.

While the Willeys purchased this GT2 from Ralph and Lynn Ronzello of North Carolina last year, their saga really began in 1963 at the dawn of Chrysler’s motorsports heyday. That’s when Roger Lindamood, a technician in Chrysler’s transmission lab, bucked convention by convincing race teams that the company’s Torqueflite automatic was significantly quicker on the drag strip than the four-speed stick-shift alternative.

Lindamood partnered with Dick Branster during his initial racing years. The 36-year-old originally resisted drag racing because he deemed straight-line speed boring and, in his words, “not worth a nickel to watch.” Little did he realize his “Color Me Gone” coupes and funny cars would make him one of drag racing’s all-time favorite forefathers.

Lindamood’s Chrysler allies helped him build a 1963 Plymouth Savoy into a viable Super Stock racer with motivation supplied by a 426-cu-in Stage II Max Wedge rated a conservative 425 hp. The distinctive Color Me Gone trademark was inspired by a pop tune wherein the crooner pined the loss of her boyfriend with the dialogue “Color him gone!”

In 1963 at the NHRA Nationals, Lindamood lost in the championship round to Chrysler’s in-house Ramchargers team.  Lindamood mounted a vigorous campaign the following year with a ’64 Dodge 330 dubbed Color Me Gone II. This time he won the Top Stock national title against the Ramchargers, an accomplishment he long touted as one of his greatest racing achievements.

Not one to let asphalt stick to his feet, Lindamood was an early adopter of radical car modifications.  He shifted  front and rear axles several inches forward to enhance traction as part of Chrysler’s 1965 effort. His 1966 Dodge Charger was one of NHRA’s first funny cars. Before hanging up his helmet in the late 1970s, Lindamood built and raced two dozen Color Me Gone drag machines. He died in 2018 at 91.

Ralph Ronzello, a Lindamood admirer from his teenage years, grew up near Detroit. He attended Detroit Dragway events and other nearby strips to cheer for Lindamood and Color Me Gone whenever possible. Years later, Ralph and his wife, Lynn, constructed and campaigned their own “nostalgia” stock and super stock cars before recreating both the 1963 and 1964 Color Me Gone race cars. Their winning formula was Ralph overseeing the vehicle build and Lynn driving it. In 1991, Lindamood endorsed and supported efforts to recreate his successful cars by supplying original parts and his knowledge of the car’s special features. This resulted in the most accurate “tribute” Color Me Gone vehicles. Roger, his son, Randy, and the Ronzellos trademarked the Color Me Gone race cars in 1991.

In fact, these recreations were so admired that they enjoyed long careers and won top trophies on the auto show circuit. Plastic scale model kits were made for kids and metal scale models were created for adult collectors. Lindamood did his part by patiently signing autographs at major events such as Detroit’s Autorama, the Meadow Brook Concours, and the Chrysler Nationals in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. A stroke of luck was the timing of the Color Me Gone celebrity tour which coincided with the creation of the Walter P. Chrysler Museum in Auburn Hills, Michigan.  Between that facility’s groundbreaking in 1996 and its opening in the fall of 1999, negotiations between Chrysler and the Ronzellos began in earnest to provide a permanent home for the 1964 Dodge Color Me Gone.

This is when the Ronzello’s son, Dominic, proposed exchanging the 1964 Dodge 330 Color Me Gone replica for a 1998 Viper GT2.  The deal was signed and Color Me Gone became one of the featured cars at the Walter P. Chrysler Museum grand opening. It remains with Chrysler to this day.

The Dodge Viper RT/10 roadster went on sale in 1992 with the Viper GTS coupe following in 1996. The GTS-R race version also began campaigning in ‘96.  Success throughout the ‘97  season earned the Dodge Viper the driver and manufacturer championships in the FIA’s highly competitive GT2 series.

To celebrate those accomplishments, a street-legal GT2 commemorative edition was proposed by Team Viper and approved by management. The design was frozen in January 1998 and parts were promptly ordered. In April, the special Viper was announced with a price of $85,200 and a production run of exactly 100 cars.  These GT2s were built in sequential order with the last three digits of their VINs beginning with 001 and ending with 100.  The corresponding number was engraved on an ID plate mounted prominently on each car’s dash.

The GT2 design scheme copied the winning GTS-Rs with white paint with two wide blue center stripes. Aero touches included a prominent rear wing, front splitter, corner dive planes, and side sills. BBS aluminum wheels, a discrete American flag, and special GTS-R badges also graced the exterior. Inside trim was matching blue with Oreca five-point racing harnesses. Adding a low-restriction air filter and intake ducting under the hood boosted engine output to 460 hp, a gain of 10 hp.

Following the construction of a prototype for testing late in 1997, two pre-volume-production pilot GT2s were built in May 1998, a month ahead of production. The pilot with a VIN ending in 847 was the brochure vehicle, sent to various Chrysler events, and loaned to multiple enthusiast publications and television producers for publicity. The second pilot, VIN 848, was the Viper Team’s engineering evaluation vehicle. Production GT2s were delivered to eager owners during the last half of 1998.

By the time the swap between the Ronzellos and the Chrysler Museum got down to brass tacks in 1999, all the production GT2s had been delivered to eager customers. Fortunately, the two pilot cars remained eligible for trade. Papers were drawn up to enable the trade of the GT2 Pilot 847 for the 1964 Color Me Gone. A semi delivered the GT2 to the Ronzellos and they in turn delivered Color Me Gone to the museum. GT2 Pilot 848 went on Museum display and remains in Chrysler’s possession.

In a 1998 test, Car and Driver clocked a standard Viper GTS’s acceleration to sixty mph in 3.9 seconds. In a run from zero to 150 mph and back to rest the GTS beat an Acura NSX, a Chevy Corvette, and a Porsche 911 Carrera by 4.3 to 13.6 seconds and by 687 to 2428 feet.

Enter Brian Willey, a 1999 Viper ACR owner, and Viper Owners Association (VOA) Regional President of the Capital Vipers. Having little knowledge of the GT2 program and intrigued after a conversation with Herb Helbig (retired Viper Team member known as the Grailkeeper), Willey expressed an interest in knowing more about the “un-numbered” GT2 after seeing a social media post from the July 2018 Carlisle Chrysler Nationals. Willey subsequently heard the GT2’s story from Ronzello in August of 2018 during an hour-long phone conversation.

After researching the GT2 with the Viper Team for the better part of a year, Willey purchased the Viper GT2 pilot car from the Ronzellos last August for an undisclosed sum. Hagerty’s valuation experts say a best-in-the-world, #1-condition Viper GT2 is easily in the six figures. The car shown here, of course, was driven hard for 9900 miles by Viper engineers and the unforgiving press. That said, its pilot car status and press exposure definitely enhances this car’s level of intrigue.

Brian and his wife reside near Fairfax, Virginia, and regularly drive their Viper GT2 to VOA and other events. Its odometer currently reads 11,500 miles. With many of the GT2s stored away in collections, Brian and Laura enjoy sharing their car with others and recounting Roger Lindamood’s epic influence on the sport of drag racing.

Asked to explain his fascination with venomous snakes, Willey revealed, “I loved the Viper since I first saw one in 1989 and watched it pace Indy when we attended two years later. It only took 28 years to achieve my dream. I tell every Viper Team member I meet that their sports car was the last great automotive development program that should have never existed and that their creation could have been killed at any moment. This car was engineered under the brilliant leadership of Roy Sjoberg guiding a passionate team. The primal lust the Viper evoked in millions around the globe exists to this day.”

We couldn’t have said it better.

The post This Dodge Viper GT2 pilot car keeps the “Color Me Gone” drag legacy alive appeared first on Hagerty Media.

In 18 months, Andrew Saul, CEO of Genovation Cars, intends to start building what he touts as the world’s fastest and most entertaining battery-electric automobile. Now that we’ve enjoyed a few miles at the wheel and the chance to abuse the $750,000 GXE’s accelerator, we believe this tuner is to electrons what Reeves Callaway, John Hennessey, and Ken Lingenfelter are to internal combustion. Trust us: the GXE’s middle initial (X, for extreme) doesn’t lie.

After fiddling with a Ford Focus electric conversion and one ground-up green machine a decade ago, Saul, 54, switched gears in 2011 to concentrate on electrified Corvettes. Starting with a bare C7-generation Corvette aluminum frame rescued from the recycle bin, this Rockville, Maryland, self-funded entrepreneur has purchased, stripped, and re-powered several Corvettes to make them quicker, faster, and more thought provoking. Proving his effort is dead serious, Saul and his team have made a dozen treks to the Johnny Bohmer Proving Grounds (formerly NASA’s shuttle landing facility), in Merritt Island, Florida, to study the aerodynamics, stability, and cooling performance of these modified Vettes at speed.

“We’re proud of being the first pure electric to top 200 and later 210 mph” Saul beams. “In 2016 we achieved a Guinness World Record by accelerating from rest to 189.48 mph in one mile.”

Under the hood of what began as a 2018 Corvette Grand Sport, every trace of internal combustion is gone. Beneath a carbon-fiber top panel there’s a lithium-ion battery pack (one of five), as well as a pair of 400-hp electric motors snuggled tightly between two DC-to-AC power inverters. On the driver’s side, two vacuum pumps supply the power brake booster, while on the passenger side three pumps circulate water and antifreeze through four elaborate cooling loops.

More than 4900 Samsung lithium-ion battery cells (18650 cylindrical format) are packed inside five aluminum containers manufactured by Saul’s collaborator, Hybrid Design Services of Troy, Michigan. A tube circulating coolant is in contact with every cell. In addition to the battery pack under the hood, there’s one in the Corvette’s center tunnel, two where the fuel tank once lived, a fifth in the cargo area. Today’s battery capacity is 53.4 kWhr (versus 100 kWhr in a Tesla Model S) with 61.6 kWhr planned for the near future. While the claimed driving range is 175 miles, installing batteries with greater energy density (albeit less power) can double that figure, according to Saul. Rinehart Motion Systems, an Oregon firm purchased by BorgWarner, manufactured the power inverters. Stafl Systems, located in San Francisco, created the GXE’s battery controller software.

The AC permanent magnet induction motors manufactured by AM Racing (now owned by Borg-Warner) were originally developed for racing motorcycles. Joined together in a pancake arrangement, these motors can spin to 10,000 rpm to deliver 800 combined hp and 720 lb-ft of torque, though revs are limited to 7000 rpm out of consideration for the original Corvette driveline components that remain downstream. The motor pair bolts directly to the C7 Corvette’s original torque tube. Heat exchangers that are fed cool air via the factory scoops in the rear fenders cool the transmission and differential. In addition to the reprogrammed eight-speed automatic transmission in the GXE we drove, Genovation has also built and tested an electric Corvette equipped with a traditional clutch and seven-speed manual transmission. When production begins, customers will be able to choose the paddle-shifted automatic or a stick.

The GXE chassis is a mix of GM and Genovation engineering. Brembo carbon-ceramic brakes and Michelin 19-inch Pilot Sport Cup 2 carry on. Exotic Carbon Revolution molded carbon-fiber wheels trim a few pounds per corner. In place of the original factory shocks and fiberglass buggy springs, Saul’s team has installed coil springs and programmable dampers designed by DSC Sport of Jessup, Maryland. DSC principal Mike Levitas, a highly successful road racer, and his driving partner Randy Pobst are responsible for tuning the new suspension for optimum track and road performance.

What impressed us most about Saul’s sorcery is how much of the Corvette’s original character is intact in spite of the wholesale alterations throughout the chassis and driveline. Steering response is crisp, as usual, and there’s little hint of body roll during maneuvers. The greatest change is to the soundtrack. Following the short push-button start-up ritual, the needles swing to life in total silence. There’s minimal whine and whir as you roll forth. Left to its own devices, the transmission obediently ascends to an appropriate cruising ratio. With no V-8 rumble or vibration, tire tread noise and wind ruffle dominate the sensory dialogue. NVH has all but left this building.

Michigan pavement heaves and surface flaws do bang through as usual, especially when Tr (Track) mode is dialed into by the chassis mode adjuster. But if the surface is smooth, this Corvette beckons toward long open-road trips between charging stops.

Though you don’t notice it through the driver’s seat, the GXE weighs a porky 4600 pounds. Saul has a laundry list of mods planned to trim that by 200 or more pounds: lighter carpeting and insulation, a 12-volt lithium-ion battery in place of the lead-acid version, carbon fiber versus aluminum for the battery enclosures, and other material substitutions. One reason he’s not particularly interested in the new C8 platform for his car is because he’s already achieved a fruitful 45/55 percent front/rear weight distribution. Nonetheless, Saul hopes to shift that balance a bit closer toward 50/50 while dropping the GXE’s center of gravity.

This is not to suggest he intends to reduce the quality of his presentation or the GXE’s entertainment value. A powerful Harman 10-speaker sound system will warn pedestrians a muted car is coming and regale occupants with a broad choice of sound tracks including stereo music, coordinated IC engine sounds, and amplified electric motor whine. A new dash-mounted touchscreen is twice as large as the factory C7 unit. Quality diamond-stitched leather with Alcantara accents embellish the seats, headrests, and the steering wheel. A two-post roll bar—unfortunately blocking the inside mirror’s view rearward—is standard equipment.

No less than 15 coats of paint—base, color, clear—in whatever color the customer deems is also included. Other exterior distinctions include new grille, hood, and fender vent designs, as well as a rear bumper fascia containing round taillamps. The front “fangs” and mirror supports are loaded with LED lights that report the batteries’ state of charge when prompted. While a front splitter is standard, a choice between a low-profile spoiler (better for top speed) and an active rear wing (preferred for hot lapping race tracks) will be offered.

In contrast to electric cars erected atop their batteries (the so-called skateboard platform), you drop into the GXE’s re-skinned bucket with your buns inches off the pavement. The instrument cluster is familiar looking, with a conventional tach and speedometer and the fuel gauge reprogrammed to indicate the battery’s state of charge.

To trigger the thrill ride, you leg the accelerator with criminal intent. The 13-inch-wide rear Michelin treads vaporize struggling to deliver thrust. The GXE’s tail yaws gently right as the car’s nose knocks a clean hole in still air. The forward lunge doesn’t wait for the tach needle to start its swing toward the 6500 rpm redline. Acceleration feels more like an elevator in free fall than any assembly-line Corvette. Saul has programed regen on the manual transmission to simulate downshifting a V-8 engine, and regen levels will be dialed into the automatic GXE based on feedback from Pobst and Levitas.

GXE production is slated to begin at the end of 2021. Saul hopes the cachet of the world’s fastest and best-handling electric car will prompt prosperous car enthusiasts to reach for their wallets. The anticipated price for this electric dynamo is $750,000, plus the donor coupe or convertible C7 Corvette of your choice. Genovation’s conversion partners will need a couple of months to tailor each of the planned 75 GXEs to suit finicky expectations. (Consider anything within reason except, perhaps, loading in four AC motors.) Given the numerous two-seat hypercars already on the market with price tags topping $1 million, Genovation’s GXE celebrates a longstanding Corvette virtue: good old fashioned, all-American value.

The post The Corvette-based Genovation GXE is an 800-hp, all-electric vision of the future appeared first on Hagerty Media.

In the fab ‘50s, when GM and Ford blessed America with tantalizing two-seaters, Chrysler failed to rise to that challenge. Who says that misstep can’t be fixed, no matter how many decades have passed? Certainly not Murray Pfaff, Royal Oak, Michigan’s most creative and industrious automotive imagineer with some 300 car, truck, and motorcycle designs to his credit.

During one of his many daydream moments, Pfaff decided to design and build the Chrysler sports car that always should have been. His father helped locate the perfect donor car—a 1959 Imperial Crown four-door that had been slumbering for 35 years in an upstate New York barn. After it was transported to Michigan in 2007, the conversion work began in Pfaff’s 2.5-car suburban garage.

When it comes to hands-on skills—wrenching, welding, hammer-wielding—Pfaff is more apprentice than an expert. Luckily, his cadre of close friends filled in those gaps. Ten of them showed up on evenings and weekends for four years to invest a documented 10,000 man-hours, converting artistic renderings into a unique sports car. Without shorting his day job, Pfaff put in 60 hours a week in the garage.

Welding the bare Imperial body to a telescoping three-axis jig made of square-section steel tubing (before the hacking began) was an inspired stroke suggested by a colleague. This jig and numerous stabilizing struts kept the pieces properly aligned throughout the chopping process. Pfaff’s ultimate vision for his Imperial Speedster was to compress the land yacht into a sports car with the svelte proportions of a Shelby Cobra.

Another sage move: preserving every Forward Look feature that Virgil Exner gave the Imperial at birth. Exner joins Harley Earl and Bill Mitchell in the pantheon of brilliant designers, having created enduring classics for Pontiac, Studebaker, Lincoln, and even Volkswagen (the Karmann Ghia 2+2). Exner’s original soaring tail fins, sparkling grille teeth, bright bumpers, and “sparrow strainer” taillamps are all reprised in Pfaff’s Speedster.

Sawing the original body into 46 chunks and disposing of extraneous pieces shortened the overall length by 48 inches, width by 8 inches, and section height by 3 inches. Stock-length doors consist of the front two-thirds of the original front doors married to the rear third of the ’59 back doors. The decklid was cut into five separate pieces before reassembly. The wheelbase was chopped 38 inches (from 129 to 91 inches) and the finished body was channeled four inches over a new tubular frame supplied by Schwartz Performance. In keeping with classic speedster themes, the custom Lexan windshield constructed by Pro Glass has no top bar. Door latches are magnetic. Seats from a Toyota Celica GTS were upholstered with Rolls-Royce chocolate-brown leather. The Alpine sound system pumps 300 watts through five channels.

The new Schwartz Performance G-machine chassis includes a control-arm front suspension, Ridetech coil-over dampers, power rack-and-pinion steering, and a 2009 Viper independent rear suspension and differential. Up front, a 2009 6.1-liter Hemi V-8 rams 425 horsepower through a modified four-speed Chrysler automatic transmission. Stainless steel exhaust pipes feed Flowmaster mufflers. A four-piston Raybestos monobloc brake caliper grips a slotted brake rotor at each corner.

Paint, chrome plating, and interior trim are the only details Pfaff farmed out to others. The new two-dial instrument cluster and push-button shifter were pirated from a 1960 Chrysler and the chic rectangular steering wheel came from a ’60 Imperial. The engine topper is a period-appropriate flight of fancy. More than 100 hours were invested in the construction of custom valve covers. The 17 crown insignia sprinkled around the car are plated with 24-karat gold. Paint was applied at PPG’s Technical Training Center in Wixom, Michigan.

The completed Speedster debuted in 2011 at the 59th Detroit Autorama to kick off a whirlwind show tour with trophies earned at most stops. Notable wins include the Mothers Choice Award at SEMA, the Go For Gold award in Tulsa, Oklahoma, and an outstanding engineering award at the 2012 Autorama. The Speedster has lapped the Indianapolis oval, participated in two Hot Rod Power Tours, and competed at drag strips and in slalom events. It wowed the crowds at the Playboy Mansion in Beverly Hills and at Detroit’s Eyes on Design concours.

In 2018, after 7000 miles on the road, Pfaff decided some freshening was in order. The rolled and pleated interior trim was replaced with more contemporary plaid cloth stitched by Shawn Paul at SPC Interiors. Instrument faces sporting a new Pfaff-designed font were produced by CON2R. The exterior finish went from champagne and orange to a PPG Envirobase candy-pearl color dubbed Evolution Green by the owner. The Daytona wire wheels were replaced with Schott Throttle billet-aluminum knock-off wheels. New 18- and 19-inch Nitto goldline radials came from Diamond Back Classics.

To fund his next project (or two), Pfaff is now willing to pass the Speedster on to its next caretaker. Without revealing exactly how much it would take for him to relinquish his dream machine, Pfaff notes that you can put a figure on a to-build cost for a car that took so much labor to create, and that he has had a couple offers north of $200,000 that almost hit the mark.

During a chance meeting with the car, Virgil Exner, Jr., who spent twenty years at Ford Design, offered this heartfelt endorsement: “I know my father would have loved the Imperial Speedster. Murray Pfaff’s creation is beautiful, well-thought out, and very nicely presented.”

The Imperial Speedster is truly a one-of-a-kind custom hot rod—a Forward Look beauty that pays respect to the past and reimagines it with masterful detail for the present.

The post Murray Pfaff’s ’59 Imperial Speedster is the Mopar moonshot that never was appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Sixty years ago, General Motors was nothing like the company you know and (maybe) love today. In the 1960s, the firm was well-stocked with the industry’s smartest designers, engineers, sales experts, and division managers. No technical hurdle was too high, no engineering feat too far-fetched, for the colossus that bestrode more than 50 percent of the market and had no Asian competitors to fear. So when someone raised a hand and suggested that a nice, fresh V-12 engine would add luster to Cadillac’s prestige, there was broad consensus and no fiscal concern.

Indeed, there was plenty of precedent for the idea, both historic and recent. From 1931 to 1937, Cadillac built and sold just over 10,000 Series 370 and Series 80/85 models powered by V-12s serving as the base engine. (The upgrade was a V-16 offered from 1930–40.) In 1960, GMC introduced a 702-cubic-inch “twin-six” truck engine consisting of a 60-degree V-12 block topped by four V-6 cylinder heads. (See what we mean by “no fear”?) Around that time, engineer Paul Keydel was assigned the task of designing GM’s ambitiously-named “V Future” program—a fresh V-12 for Cadillac’s exclusive use. He picked a 60-degree layout with a single chain-driven, overhead camshaft per bank. A horizontal distributor poking out of each cam carrier fired six spark plugs. The block and heads were both aluminum castings. To make the blocks, GM invented a technique called Acurad, which injected high-silicon aluminum into steel dies at high pressure. The beauty of this arrangement was that it yielded bore surfaces tough enough to resist piston wear and abrasion without ferrous-metal (iron or steel) cylinder liners.

Finger followers with hydraulic lash adjusters were fitted to the heads. Cadillac built six V-12 prototypes for testing and development, with displacements ranging from 7.4 to 8.2 liters. However, when the first engine fired on a test stand in 1963, results were deeply disappointing. Power and low-speed torque barely topped Cadillac’s existing 7.0-liter V-8. Switching to individual intake and exhaust pipes and adding fuel injection to optimize fuel-air distribution eventually raised output to 394 hp and 506 lb-ft of torque, beating the V-8 by roughly 100 hp. Unfortunately, engineers then sacrificed half the V-12’s advantage over the V-8 by adding Cadillac-quiet mufflers, though they continued experimenting with various cam profiles and single 4-barrel, 2×2-barrel, 3×2-barrel, and 2×4-barrel carburetor setups.

At the same time, GM product planners expected the V Future engine to power the new Cadillac Eldorado coupe planned for the 1967 model year, which would arrive one year after the launch of the all-new Oldsmobile Toronado. Both were radical (for the era) front-wheel-drive cars, and the folks designing their automatic transaxles assumed the engines in each would be transversely mounted. Cadillac quickly raised both hands in protest, stating that there was no way its new V-12 would fit sideways.

This forced the engineers to create a new, three-speed Turbo-Hydramatic 425 design that shared parts with the existing Turbo-Hydramatic 400. Here, the torque converter bolted to the engine’s crankshaft as usual. Next came a multi-link Morse chain that dispatched torque to the left (in plan view) to drive the remaining transmission and differential components snuggled against the engine with a “backwards” north-south orientation. Torque to the left wheel departed the left side of the differential. Torque to the other side was via a driveshaft which went through the oil pan and under the crankshaft before reaching the right-front wheel. This design became known as the Unified Powerplant Package.

While the UPP design sounds like it was heavily influenced by Rube Goldberg, it worked reliably as intended. There was zero detectable torque steer; the only real drawback was that any engine mated to the 425 transaxle had to be mounted a bit higher in the chassis to provide driveshaft clearance beneath the crankshaft. Using the 455-cu-in Oldsmobile V-8, the UPP would go on to power that brand’s stylish new Toronado—and, when mounted under a pair of space-age seats, would also motivate the radical front-wheel-drive GMC Motorhome. (Later variants of the UPP would have a 403-cu-in V-8 in place of the 455.)

When the UPP appeared in the Eldorado, however, it was mated to an 8.2-liter V-8, not a V-12. What happened? Contemporary sources believe that GM was worried about releasing an engine which exceeded the V-8’s thirst by a considerable amount without having a similar power advantage. Expanding the Cadillac V-8 to 501 cubic inches closed the gap to the V-12 with significantly less investment. Given the GM design staff’s unshakable preference for long-hood, short-deck proportions, they weren’t about to protest an engine compartment that was only 2/3rds full. Ultimately, all that really mattered was sales volume. Even though it had no V-12 about which to crow, Cadillac easily doubled the sales of its arch rival Lincoln Continental 2-door hardtop coupe with its stunning new Eldorado during 1967 and ’68 model years. Shortly thereafter, federal emissions and mileage requirements gave the engine design department much more to worry about than cramming extra cylinders under Cadillac hoods.

The post Why GM’s V-12 “Engine of the Future” never made it to production appeared first on Hagerty Media.

The need for speed is common among car enthusiasts. While there is no cure for that affliction, there are various ways to scratch the itch. Take a trip to Montana where long, straight, open roads abound. Or visit Merritt Island near Orlando, Florida, to experience what amounts to the car junkie’s Disneyland. JB Proving Grounds: maybe the best place on mother earth to go fast safely and without breaking the law.

In the 1970s, NASA built its Shuttle Landing Facility (SLF) here to support its space missions. A 2.8-mile-long runway was constructed of concrete poured to compensate for the earth’s curvature. This strip is 300 feet wide and has an extra 1000 feet of smooth asphalt at each end, yielding a total length of 3.2 miles.

The Space Shuttle Columbia arrived here aboard its modified Boeing 747 mothership in 1979. The first shuttle landing occurred in 1984. Nine years later, Discovery touched down safely at night. In total, there were 78 shuttle landings at SLF before NASA’s program ended in 2011. Space Florida assumed the lease in 2015 and changed the facility’s name to Launch and Landing Facility (LLF) in 2019.

Current users include contractors that launch satellites aboard F-104 jets, the United Launch Alliance which delivers rocket stages, and car companies that test aerodynamics and other performance variables.

In 2009, veteran car and motorcycle racer Johnny Böhmer signed an agreement with NASA to manage vehicle testing on the runway. Since then, several dozen manufacturers and private teams have tested here, many topping 200 mph. Some of the fastest runs were the Bugatti Chiron in 2018 at 261 mph, McLaren’s 2019 run to 250 mph in its Speedtail, and Genovation’s GXE electric Corvette at 212 mph. Böhmer personally tested his 2006 street-legal Ford GT adorned with the Florida vanity plate BADD GT and equipped with a stereo sound system and air conditioning to 293 mph. Remarkably, he needed only one mile of acceleration to crowd 300 mph.

Drivers must of course wear appropriate safety gear including a full Nomex fire suit and a certified helmet. The paperwork and tech inspection prior to admission are daunting. Given the fact this is a U.S. government operation, every applicant must prove they’re not listed on any terrorist watch list.

The price of admission depends on the scope of the test program. One crucially important word of advice: those hoping to drive here must not divulge any speed demon dispositions. Instead, you must convince Böhmer that you are earnest in advancing the automotive engineering cause. Visit www.jbprovinggrounds.com to apply.

The post This former NASA shuttle runway now hosts high-speed vehicle testing appeared first on Hagerty Media.

The 1960s were prime time for undeclared war: America versus Russia in space, and the Big Three carmakers on race tracks and the street. This is the era when the muscle cars we cherish prowled the avenues searching for someone, anyone, to challenge. Back then, stupendous horsepower and acceleration were within reach of your average grocery-shelf stocker.

The fact that Ron Herring is too young to have experienced the dawn of the muscle-car era didn’t hinder him from rolling his grandfather Odell Tidwell’s 1963-1/2 Ford Galaxie 500 XL out of the garage for its second life. In addition to their blood ties, these men are Ford Motor Company family. Tidwell, who died in 2015, worked at Wayne Assembly near Detroit for 53 years. Herring, 49, has for 29 years worked at the same plant.

As a youth, Herring spent every spare moment in the back seat of grandpa’s Galaxie with his Hot Wheels toys. He often tagged along to races at drag strips near Detroit. Tidwell bought this Ford in 1967 with no intention of driving it on the street. Instead, he boosted his firepower to 427 cubic inches and added three two-barrel carburetors. Flat-towing the Galaxie to local strips well into his eighties, Tidwell clocked 12.70-second ETs and 102-mph trap speeds on good days.

Ford launched the industry’s first “mid-year” model in 1963-1/2, with a more aerodynamic “sports hardtop” replacing the previous notchback roofline, in the interest of improving the Galaxie’s prowess in NASCAR racing. The new wind-tunnel-tuned roof trimmed both drag and rear lift. Ford’s FE-series 390-cubic-inch V-8—401 hp and three two-barrel carburetors—carried on, while a hotter, 425-hp 427 with two four barrels soon followed, for drag and road-racing competition.

To trim weight, Ford constructed a few cars with fiberglass body panels and other lightening measures. A handful of Galaxie 500 Sport Special R-code 427s were hand-built to drag race in NHRA’s Limited Production class at the Winternationals. The Holman and Moody shop in North Carolina also prepped a few of these missiles for Sir Jack Brabham and Graham Hill to road race in England, Australia, and South Africa.

Herring’s Galaxie is a facsimile of those rare R-code models. He rolled grandpa’s car out of storage six years ago and hired Holbrook Racing Engines in Livonia, Michigan, to build a fresh 427 using contemporary hardware like aluminum heads and two-four-barrel induction, but neat period touches like the original factory long-tube cast-iron headers. The engine’s dyno-verified 609 hp is routed through a Borg-Warner T-10 four-speed equipped with a Hurst shifter, and then a 3.50:1 Detroit Locker.

MPB Restorations in Willis, Michigan, returned the original sheet metal to showroom condition by mounting the body on a rotisserie for access to every nook and cranny. All of the original 80,000-mile metalwork was preserved with repairs where necessary. Herring added a fiberglass teardrop bubble hood manufactured by Crites Restoration Products of Ashville, Ohio, mimicking the Thunderbolt blister hood used by the factory. The fresh Corinthian White paint is both flawless and true to R-code specs. The interior trim was restored with period-correct white vinyl upholstery and door panels. “The black dash top was in perfect shape, so we didn’t have to touch that,” Herring says. He added an 8000-rpm Sun tachometer and Stewart-Warner oil pressure and temperature gauges to stay in sync with the 1960s.

Power steering and brakes are not part of this package. Modern BFG radials are fitted all around. Even with mufflers, this vintage warrior sounds like hell boiling over.

“This Ford is so much fun to drive that I seldom bother towing it,” Herring notes. “Instead, weather permitting, I simply fire up grandpa’s Galaxie and head off to every show I can find within range.”

The post This 609-hp 500 XL is a Galaxie beyond stock appeared first on Hagerty Media.

The hot rod business is one of America’s best kept secrets. We drool on cue when the Ridler Award is presented at the Detroit Autorama and hold our collective breath when informed that CadMad, the 2019 winner, involved 15 years of effort, required some 4000 hours of craftsmanship, and consumed $2.3 million of the owner’s net worth. But CadMad is, literally, a once-per-fortunate-lifetime experience.

Contrast that with the thriving horde of coupes and roadsters still saluting ’30s-era design. Ford stopped making them ages ago. Virtually every shred of original factory metal has either dissolved to rust, been crushed and land-filled, or was long ago exhumed for rejuvenation. Yet fresh hot rods show up every cruise night and at the major custom shows around the country.

To explain a few hows and whys while delving into this semi-sub rosa business, we visited Phil Davie at the American Speed Company (ASC), located in Plymouth, Michigan, only 16 miles from Hagerty’s Ann Arbor editorial office. Inside this 10,000-square-foot shop, the American hot rod business is prospering.

Mark Trostle, a 40-year design veteran with stints at the Ford Motor Company, American Sunroof, and (currently) Roush Industries, founded ASC in 2007 to indulge his passion for hot rodding and to return a favor to the industry that had enriched his life with assignments ranging from Buick’s mighty GNX to Porsche’s 944 cabriolet. Trostle’s gambit was to use what he calls the “steel canvas” approach to construct brand new hot rod bodies. Instead of hand-crafting metal or molding fiberglass, ASC builds bodies using the newest and best techniques that exist in the Motor City and at every other major car manufacturer around the world.

It begins with two-dimensional thematic sketches drawn, in this case, by Trostle. After the design evolves  into the best and final example of the artist’s dreams, the magic happens. Accurate front, side, and rear illustrations are converted to two-dimensional “blueprint” drawings. Then, with computer-aided-design (CAD) software tools such as Alias, CATIA, and Unigraphics, the design is scanned from paper to the computer screen. The final three-dimensional digital data is then used to guide water jets and/or milling machines to replicate the creation in full-size foam blocks for refinement if necessary. Once every detail is finalized, the digital data can be used to mill full-scale kirksite (a zinc-aluminum-alloy) dies for pressing flat sheets of steel into hot rod body panels. Detroit-area stamping shops employ the dies to make the panels under contract and they’re joined together by ASC using precise assembly fixtures.

ASC’s Speed33 is a brand new 1933 Ford Roadster updated here and there to suit contemporary hot rod needs and tastes. Metal gauges are heavier than original to insure high-quality fits, perfect surface finish, and indelible structural integrity. The original Ford wood body framing has been replaced by tubular steel internal reinforcements. Both the doors and the cab are longer to provide easy entry and room for today’s well fed owners. The dash panel is removable for customization and service. The stainless-steel windshield frame is chopped slightly, formed into U-channel shape, and canted back a bit for a racier appearance. The top is two-inches lower in height for convenient folding under a hinged cover panel. The beautifully polished windshield pillars begin as solid stainless-steel castings. The curved door glass is raised and lowered via electric motors and full molded-rubber weather sealing is included in the Speed33 kit.

The price of a bare body is $22,000. That rises to $29,750 with a folding top, fully functional doors (including side glass), and windshield assembly. While that price of entry is a bargain compared to recycling salvage yard metal, a finished hot rod can burn up $1 million if the goal is a top show car. Davie advises that even a nice ’32 Ford rendered in fiberglass can cost $100,000–$300,000 after the dust settles. To date, ASC has sold an amazing 154 Speed33 bodies, one of which ran 235 mph at Bonneville in 2009, another of which was a Great 8 (top contender) finalist at Detroit’s 2012 Autorama.

Davie is both ASC’s owner (since 2018), and the one and only craftsman in the building. On the day of our visit, he was hard at work on a project for Floridian John Wise and his son Scott.  The goal is a car for cruising only—with full creature comforts but no major show expectations—with completion targeted by the end of this year. Gathering the parts and pieces began last summer. After paint and upholstery work, the project will be shipped south for the Wises to wrap up remaining details.

Davie acknowledges that this is a $200,000 (or so) project, half of which is attributable to parts, including the Speed33 body, and more than 1000 hours of his labor.  (The shop rate, which is negotiable for repeat customers and special projects, is a reasonable $75/hour.) Here’s a list of a few suppliers for this particular Speed33:

• Chassis by Precision Hot Rods, including a Ford Mustang II front suspension, Kugel Komponents independent rear suspension, Wilwood disc brakes
• Roush Performance 347-cu-in (stroked 302) Ford small-block V-8 engine delivering 436 hp and 399 lb-ft of torque, fed by a Holley four-barrel carburetor
• Sanderson Block Hugger exhaust headers
• Performance Rod and Custom aluminum radiator
• Rootleib hood
• ASC grille
• Wheelsmith 16-inch chrome-plated steel-laced wheels
• Coker American Classic radials, P185/70R-16 front, P235/70R-16 rear
• United Pacific Industries fenders and fuel tank cover panel
• Ididit steering column with Limeworks 16-inch banjo style wheel
• Classic Instruments gauges fitted to a modified 1933 Packard bezel
• Wiseguy bucket seats with six-way power adjustment
• Relicate butter rum top grain leather upholstery
• German-sourced black square-weave carpeting.

After the Wises wrap up this Speed33’s construction, we’ll check back in and hopefully be able to reveal exactly how their hot rod revival turned out.

The post American Speed Company’s Speed33 kit is hot rod heaven appeared first on Hagerty Media.

In response to the current pandemic, GM’s executive director in charge of program management, Michelle Braun, recently issued a blanket order pausing all future car and truck development—including for the Corvette. Industry leakage dropped this document in our editorial laps.

While there is (understandably) no forecast indicating when work will resume and what the new timing for these projects will be, this communication does at least provide insight as to what the General had planned for future Corvettes. The chart that follows mixes some of our speculation with accurate details from the hold order and other leaked documents. When businesses resume normal operations, what follows could come true a year or so after the indicated model years. In particular, the power and torque figures presented below are estimates consistent with our previous reporting.

Though it might be delayed, along with the Stingray convertible, plenty of additional Corvette goodness is awaiting us in the years ahead.

*Credible industry feedback suggested reduction in output compared to our original estimates

The post GM to supply partners: Hold your horsepower appeared first on Hagerty Media.

The cost of the breathing machine most commonly called a mechanical ventilator—hereafter referred to simply as a ventilator—ranges from $25,000–$50,000. But, when the need for one arises, that price tag is the least of your worries.

Ventilators are the hospital’s version of a supercharger. When your breathing is impaired by a COVID-19 infection or other lung-related issue, a ventilator goes to work saving the day. These handy devices automatically fill the lungs with the appropriate mix of air and oxygen with no patient effort required. The oxygen needed to sustain life is delivered to the bloodstream and carbon dioxide is transferred via capillaries into the lungs and out the ventilator’s exhaust port. A patient under duress pants at 30 or so breaths per minute; the ventilator’s inhale/exhale cycle is roughly half that rate and the supply pressure is only a few psi to prevent lung damage.

Ventilators are most commonly found in a hospital’s intensive care unit (ICU) which has ready connections for electrical power and pure, pressurized oxygen. They’re typically rolled to the bedside along with a monitor capable of displaying heart and respiratory rates, blood pressure, and the extent of oxygen saturation in the blood stream.

Roughly the size of a countertop microwave, the ventilator is filled with electronic circuits, computer-controlled valves, and plumbing that delivers the breath of life to one—or, in a pinch, two—patient(s). External knobs and switches allow care providers to regulate the number of breaths per minute, the pressure of the gas that fills the lungs, and other variables. The portable units employed by emergency responders are battery powered and carry their own oxygen supply. Don’t even think about trying to cobble one up at home.

ICU intubation means jamming the ventilator’s delivery cuff several inches down a patient’s throat. That tube is inflated to form a tight seal with the trachea, thereby preventing leakage as well as speaking, eating, drinking, and coughing. Less invasive masks sealed tightly over the nose and mouth are also used. The third choice is a throat incision beneath the larynx (where the vocal cords reside) to provide a ventilator connection without impairing speech. Nutrients are “fed” to the patient intravenously.

It goes without saying the intubation isn’t a time-honored birthday party activity. Patients are typically sedated to let them rest comfortably when mechanical breathing is deemed necessary. The air-oxygen mix delivered to the lungs is automatically moisturized and heated to a comfortable temperature. Along with carbon dioxide, mucus exits the respiratory system on the exhaust stroke.

The nagging question that no one we asked was able to address is “what happens to the presumably germ-laden fluids that a COVID-19 patient exhales?” Our best guesses: Most ICUs operate at negative (less than atmospheric) pressure to move fluids away from patients and caregivers, into the air conditioning system, and out of the building. In emergency and temporary indoor or outdoor settings, natural ventilation carries the nasty fluids up, up, and away. That said, comprehensive personal protective equipment preventing direct contact with an infected patient and ingestion of their bodily fluids is the most important part of every caregiver’s functional wardrobe.

Watching the auto industry rise to the critical need for ventilators cause has been interesting.  The government’s goal, according Peter Navarro, Assistant to the President and Director of the Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy, is production of 5000 ventilators by the end of April plus another 100,000 by the end of June. Ford is busy rehabbing a Michigan parts plant only a few miles from Hagerty’s Ann Arbor editorial office to team with General Electric in the manufacture of 50,000 units within 100 days.

By mid-April, GM will employee 1000 workers at its cleaned and retooled 2.6-million square foot Kokomo, Indiana, plant to build 10,000 or so units per month in collaboration with ventilator maker Ventec Life Systems of Bothel, Washington. And in a 31,000 square foot Warren, Michigan, facility, GM worked around the clock to begin production of Level 1 surgical masks with the goal of turning out 1.5 million units per month.

The post Here’s how a ventilator actually works appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Mankind’s list of significant 20th century achievements includes space flight culminating in travel to the moon, personal computing and the Internet, and life-saving medicines such as antibiotics and vaccines. Add to that the small-block Chevrolet V-8 (SBC), the most prolific engine ever made. Since its 1955 introduction, more than 108 million have been sold. It may be the most beloved internal combustion engine of all time, thanks to its performance, durability, adaptability, and accessibility. Well into its fifth generation, the SBC is showing no hint of fatigue and is more than ready to power the eighth-generation Corvette to ambitious new heights.

Though not one small-block bolt or bobbin has made the trip from 1955 to 2020, every SBC shares these architectural threads: cylinder bores spaced 4.40 inches apart and a simple valvetrain with two overhead valves per cylinder operated by one camshaft and 16 pushrods. By the 1980s, when the Japanese were eating Detroit’s lunch, the lowly pushrod was the perfect exclamation point for skeptics convinced that U.S. engine tech was antiquated.

Conventional wisdom insists that pushrods are obsolete, that engines breathe better and produce more power when they’re topped by multiple camshafts operating four or more valves per cylinder. This notion began when Peugeot won a Grand Prix race with its seminal dual-overhead-cam (DOHC) engine in 1912, 40 years before Chevy chief engineer Ed Cole put his team to work designing an overhead-valve (OHV) small-block V-8 for the 1955 Chevrolet. (Side note: In 1917, Chevrolet introduced the Series D, which was powered by a 288-cubic-inch OHV V-8 producing 36 horsepower; it lasted but two model years.)

After World War II, GIs returned home anxious to own new cars with modern technology such as the muscular V-8s replacing prewar flathead and inline engines. This movement began with the 1949 Cadillacs and Oldsmobiles, quickly trickling down to Chryslers (1951), De Sotos (1952), and Dodges (1953). Cole’s mission was to beat Ford and Plymouth to market with an OHV V-8.

Kicking the hell out of the status quo

Born on a Michigan dairy farm, Ed Cole was not one to let muddy fields slow him down. During his teen years, he was a tractor field rep armed with knowledge gained rebuilding cars and farm machinery. Following a stint at community college, Cole attended the General Motors Institute of Technology (renamed Kettering University in 1998) with Cadillac’s sponsorship. Graduating early, he joined Cadillac in Detroit and quickly ascended the division’s engineering ladder.

The war years provided Cole a sense of urgency that served him well throughout his career. The fact that Cadillac built no cars from 1942 to 1945 gave engineers an excellent opportunity to plan new models for sale when peace returned. Designed by Cole, Harry Barr, and Chris Bouvy, Cadillac’s first OHV V-8 was ready for introduction in 1949. At 34, Cole became Cadillac’s chief engineer responsible for manufacturing tanks in support of the Korean war effort.

The success of Cadillac’s first postwar models prompted Cole’s next promotion, in 1952, to head of Chevrolet manufacturing. While some would have grabbed that assignment, Cole held out for the role he really wanted—chief engineer—a position already occupied by Ed Kelley. Fortunately, Kelley was amicable to a job swap largely because the chief engineer and the manufacturing manager enjoyed equal ranking on Chevy’s organizational chart.

Cole’s oft-spouted motto was “kick the hell out of the status quo.” Upon moving over to Chevy in May 1952, he convinced GM’s upper management to expand his staff from 850 to 2900 people in support of the radically improved 1955 Bel Air and 210 models, which the company expected would top a million sales per annum. Cole became the employee who switched on the GM building’s lights every morning.

Kelley’s team had toiled for years over the 231-cubic-inch OHV V-8, imagining it might power what would hopefully be America’s bestselling car line. Unfortunately, the engine fell short of Cole’s expectations. It was for all intents a downsized Cadillac V-8, out of sync with the lighter, more agile cars Cole had in mind for Chevrolet. Kelley’s design was heavy, expensive to manufacture, and lacked growth potential. That prompted a clean-sheet restart in spite of the fact that barely two years remained until the ’55 Chevy’s launch.

No time for memos

The last thing Cole needed was an intricate, expensive, or finicky engine, so he made his priorities clear: Chevy’s new V-8 would be a breakthrough in terms of size, weight, and manufacturing cost while providing class-leading power. The only design feature carried over from Chevy’s successful Stovebolt inline-six and Cadillac’s V-8 was a conventional pushrod valvetrain.

Cole wasted no time on memos or paperwork. He seldom required more than a quick glance to recognize a clever design. Reviewing cylinder-head sketches offered by engineer Don McPherson, Cole exclaimed, “That’s it!” McPherson was less confident in what he’d drawn, but his design did pan out in development. What most impressed Cole was that this cylinder head featured wedge-shaped combustion chambers and required minimal machining after casting. Valves were supported in the heads without separate guides; placing the four intake valves and four exhaust valves per head in the same plane expedited machining.

Former Cadillac colleague Barr headed Chevrolet’s chassis and drivetrain development while Al Kolbe, who had previously worked on Packard’s V-12, oversaw engine design. Fourteen draftsmen worked 60 hours a week designing the new V-8 in a skunkworks across the street from GM headquarters. Cole made frequent visits and seldom skipped his Saturday morning stroll past the drawing tables.

In this era, each GM division proudly designed, developed, and manufactured its own engines. This longstanding tradition didn’t stop Cole from shopping throughout the divisions and the corporation’s Research Laboratories—responsible for longer-term development—for fruitful ideas. At Pontiac, he found an interesting valvetrain feature that engineer Clayton Leach had created in his home’s basement machine shop when he couldn’t convince his bosses that his idea was worth spending the corporation’s money to develop.

Instead of rocker arms pivoting on a tubular shaft that ran the length of the cylinder head (common practice in the 1950s), Leach’s design had a concave surface stamped into each rocker arm that engaged half a steel ball, which was secured in place by a stud pressed into the head. This arrangement was lighter, cheaper, self-aligning, and low in friction. Using slightly different radii for the ball and rocker surfaces allowed lubricating oil to readily enter their interface. Galleries in the cylinder head delivered oil to each fulcrum (pivot point).

Beginning with Leach’s patent, Chevy engineers refined the design in several areas. Hollow pushrods (not a new idea) delivered oil from the block-mounted valve lifters to the rocker arms. Oil bleeding out at the pushrod-to-rocker contact point flowed down to lubricate the fulcrum, then the valve stem. To regulate the amount of oil sent to the heads, there was a small disc in each lifter with a calibrated bleed hole. Another Chevy-exclusive feature (later adopted by Pontiac along with the hollow pushrods) was lock-nut retention of the pivot ball to facilitate valvetrain lash adjustment after the engine was assembled and running. Although none of these details were considered a monumental breakthrough, in combination they advanced the engine design art.

Creative casting

Cole tapped GM engineer John Dolza to create expeditious manufacturing methods. Working on a stillborn Pontiac V-6 in the late 1940s, Dolza had invented a means of simplifying how cylinder blocks were cast at GM’s foundries by using a creative mix of green (uncured) sand and fewer baked-sand cores. The green sand was simply poured then shaped in the bottom of the mold box, the way sand castles are built at the beach. The cores, which defined cooling passages and bore cavities, were locked together, then positioned upside down in the mold over the green sand. This methodology allowed reducing the 22 cores required for Cadillac’s V-8 block to only 12 in the SBC. The quantity of sand required and the assembly time were both significantly diminished. More significant, this new precise casting technology allowed halving the crankcase wall thickness to only 0.156 inch, yielding major weight and cost savings.

To minimize the block’s height, the team settled on a 3.00-inch stroke with 5.70-inch-long forged-steel connecting rods. Though some automakers, such as Ford, extended their block skirts several inches below the crankshaft centerline (a so-called Y-block design), the SBC’s corresponding dimension was 0.125 inch, just enough to securely register the main bearing caps. (Using the minimum material required to support the crankshaft was one of Cole’s smartest weight-saving moves.) A 4.40-inch separation between bore centerlines allowed ample space for a 3.75-inch bore and coolant passages between each cylinder, with room for larger bores in the future. Cole allegedly set initial (1955 model year) displacement at 265 cubic inches to duck under the existing 266-cubic-inch displacement limit for hydroplane racing so that the new Chevy engine could be used in that venue.

The SBC’s intake manifold was a prime example of functional integration. One elaborate casting provided a mounting pad for the two-barrel carburetor, eight intake runners, an exhaust crossover to warm the carburetor after a cold start, a coolant passage containing the thermostat, a distributor mounting pad, an oil fill port, and the valley cavity cover.

Five bolts per cylinder sealed the heads to the block. The head was designed to fit both sides of the block by simply rotating that part 180 degrees. (While this cost-saver was not brand new, it was not yet a universal practice.) The wedge-shaped combustion chamber produced high mixture turbulence in the vicinity of the spark plug.

Instead of the more common cast-iron material for the crankshaft, a stiffer, stronger forged-steel design minimized weight. Eliminating the usual oil groove from the bottom half of each main bearing insert doubled the bearing’s load capacity by reducing oil seepage out the side of the bearing. To prevent catastrophic failure, the crank must always be supported by an oil film between its journals and bearing caps. Perfecting this lubrication detail gave the SBC the extra bearing capacity it would exploit in the distant future when combustion pressures were doubled to deliver 755 horses in the 2019 Corvette ZR1.

The cast-aluminum slipper-type pistons were fitted with steel inserts, which helped maintain their round shape under severe heat loads. (With a slipper design, there are two narrow lower skirts wrapping less than halfway around the piston to minimize weight and friction.) Wrist pins were pressed into the connecting rods’ small end to eliminate the need for retaining clips.

Working long hours and most weekends, Dolza’s team of engineers completed the SBC’s design in three months. Three weeks later, the first prototype engine was assembled. Production tools were ordered straight from the drawing boards before the first engine had run. By early 1954, a mere 15 months after the design effort began, tools were in place and ready to commence pilot production. Dyno tests revealed a peak output of 162 horsepower at 4400 rpm with a two-barrel carburetor and single exhaust. Adding a four-barrel and dual exhaust pipes bumped that to 180 horsepower at 4600 rpm. The 1955 Corvette V-8 delivered 195 horsepower at 5000 rpm.

A canvas for hot rodders from the get-go

Ford ended up beating Chevy to the punch with its 239-cubic-inch OHV V-8 in 1954, followed by Plymouth with its 259-cubic-inch V-8 in ’55. In finished form, Chevy’s new V-8 engine weighed 531 pounds, 40 pounds less than the brand’s inline-six and 100–150 pounds less than other contemporary V-8s. The SBC was a design triumph, the lightest V-8 on the market when it arrived in 1955.

Across the street in the GM building, Cole directed the design of Chevy’s new car line, which consisted of 150, 210, and Bel Air series available in several body styles. Their shared frame had tubular-steel main members to reduce weight by 50 percent while increasing stiffness 18 percent over the ’54 design. Front suspension spindles pivoted on ball joints and were supported by unequal-length control arms. Rear semi-elliptic leaf springs were nine inches longer than those fitted in ’54 to improve the ride. Finished body weight was trimmed by 52 pounds. Overall height was reduced by six inches, the windshield was a wraparound design, and two-tone paint schemes were offered. Styling’s crowning touch was an egg-crate grille inspired by contemporary Ferraris. Start to finish, the design of the ’55 Chevrolet spanned but 28 months.

Zora Arkus-Duntov, who later became the Corvette’s spiritual father, admired Cole’s work. After he joined GM in 1953, the outspoken Arkus-Duntov circulated a memo titled “Thoughts Pertaining to Youth, Hot Rodders and Chevrolet.” Duly impressed, Cole willingly shared his pet V-8 with the 1955 Corvette. By 1957, Duntov and Dolza would develop a wilder camshaft along with mechanical fuel injection for Corvettes and other Chevy models.

To pique interest in the new SBC, three early engines were shipped to Southern California’s Vic Edelbrock, the leading prophet in the budding hot rod industry. Edelbrock’s three-two-barrel intake manifold hiked output by 20 horsepower. Exhaust headers fabricated by Bob Hedman added 20 more. A new, hotter ignition system from the Spalding brothers yielded another 10.

Several cam grinders were also invited to help tune the SBC. The best of the bunch was Ed Iskenderian, who upped the redline from 5000 to 6500 rpm. A long run of valve covers, aluminum heads, induction systems, and fully tuned crate engines ensued. One of the first three engines shipped west served in an Edelbrock test car for years. Another was shipped to Florida to power a hydroplane, and the third powered a sports car in road races. Paul Pfaff of Pfaff Engines was one of the first to graduate from Ford’s flathead V-8 to the Chevy small-block; he called it “the best thing to happen to hot rodding since the 1932 Ford roadster.”

Interviewed by author Tom Madigan for his 2012 book The Chevrolet Small-Block Bible, revered engine builder Ed Pink called the 302-cubic-inch SBC (created for drag and road racing) a “graceful deer at full speed.” In contrast, Pink deemed the supercharged, nitromethane-fueled Chrysler Hemi V-8s he built for Top Fuel and Funny Car drag racers “water buffalo charging through the brush.” Pink admired the SBC’s innovative rocker arms and called the engine’s overall balance “near perfect.” Bill “Grumpy” Jenkins advanced the cause on the East Coast with his screaming drag-racing SBCs.

To fan flames in the NASCAR camp, SBCs were dispatched to Smokey Yunick in Daytona Beach and leading car builder Junior Johnson. Driving a Chevy prepped by Yunick, driver Herb Thomas passed 67 cars to win the 1955 Southern 500 at Darlington.

The success of the ’55 Chevy—1.7 million were sold—and its revolutionary V-8 shot Cole up GM’s corporate ladder. He became Chevrolet general manager in 1956 and the company’s president in 1967. Not all of the causes he championed during his career panned out as well as the SBC. The rear-engine Corvair, the aluminum-block Vega, and GM’s rotary engine were Cole’s three problem children. They did not, however, hinder this genius from kicking the hell out of the status quo with his catalytic converter and airbag advancements.

After leaving GM in 1974, Cole guided ambitious plans at Checker Motors and at a budding air freight company. He perished at age 67 when his aircraft crashed in severe weather. Cole’s legacy, the SBC, thrived more than three decades in millions of GM cars and trucks with relatively minor changes. Its successors have a bright future as noted below.

Secrets to success

The use of advanced digital analysis and development aids has eliminated most of the shortcomings associated with the pushrod, two-valves-per-cylinder valvetrain. Modern materials have shed unwanted pounds. The astute thinking that made this engine compact in 1955 still pays dividends.

Asked the secret to the SBC’s long-lasting success, Jordan Lee, the current global chief engineer for the engine, explains, “While engineers come and go, the team nurturing the small-block invariably loves this design and takes great pride in making each new version more modern, powerful, and fuel efficient than its predecessor.

“In the old days, engine development was ‘cut and try.’ You make a good guess, build prototype hardware, and strive to improve it. Now we have analytic tools that assure we extract every bit of energy from each drop of fuel. There’s finite element analysis to minimize weight while keeping the moving parts and the crankcase as stiff as possible. Computational fluid dynamics improves flow in and out of the combustion chamber. Other tools scrutinize the combustion process in remarkable detail. GM takes pride in developing proprietary analytic tools that are superior to what competitors have at their disposal.

“That said, we never pursue technology for technology’s sake. In keeping with Ed Cole’s original philosophies, we want the simplest design that meets or exceeds our performance targets. What matters more to customers than the number of valves or how they operate is the power, torque, and fuel efficiency we provide.

“We’re convinced that this engineering persistence will deliver new and better small-block V-8s in the future.”

Small Block, Big History

Generation I

1955 The small-block is the lightest V-8 on the market and makes 162 hp at 4400 rpm in base form.

1956 The three Corvette V-8 choices included a 210-hp version with a four-barrel carburetor, 225 hp from two four-barrels, and 240 hp with two four-barrels and a high-lift camshaft.

1957 A 1/8-inch-larger bore (to 3.875 inches) raised all small-blocks to 283 cubic inches. Outputs ranged from 185 to 283 hp. Fitted with new Rochester Ramjet mechanical fuel injection, the small-block yielded one horsepower per cubic inch, only the third American-made engine to do so.

1962 New block castings combining a 4.00-inch bore with a 3.25-inch stroke upped displacement to 327 cubic inches, with power outputs ranging from 210 to 375 hp.

1964 The 327-cubic-inch L76 (above) and L84 V-8s producing 365 and 375 hp, respectively, were the most potent naturally aspirated small-blocks until the LS6 arrived in 2001.

1967 To comply with the Sports Car Club of America’s Trans-Am road racing rules, Chevy combined a 4.00-inch bore with a 3.00-inch stroke in a 302-cubic-inch small-block for the Camaro Z/28. A special induction system, a wild camshaft, and tubular headers (shipped in the trunk) were included. The L48 350-cubic-inch V-8, also introduced for the Camaro, spread to the Nova in 1968 and throughout the Chevy lineup in ’69.

1968 A 3.875-inch bore with a 3.25-inch stroke yielded 307 cubic inches. Larger-diameter connecting rod and main bearings facilitated the change from forged-steel to less expensive cast-iron crankshafts.

1970 With the arrival of metric displacement designations, lower compression to use lead-free fuel, and net power ratings, the 5.7-liter LT1 (above) became the ultimate engine for Camaro Z/28s and Corvettes, with 360–370 hp. Chevrolet was able to cram a 4.12-inch bore with a 3.75-inch stroke in the small-block, increasing displacement to 400 cubic inches (6.6 liters).

1973 The L82 small-block produced 250 hp in the Corvette and Camaro, falling to 205 hp in 1975. The Corvette’s base ZQ3 engine fell to 190 hp with the added emissions controls.

1975 A new 262-cubic-inch small-block combined a 3.67-inch bore with a 3.10-inch stroke to produce 110 hp in the Chevy Monza and Nova and the Pontiac Ventura.

1976 The first energy crisis prompted the creation of a fuel-efficient 5.0-liter small-block fitted with a 3.74-inch bore and a 3.48-inch stroke, which shared many 5.7-liter parts. This “corporate” engine quickly spread throughout the GM lineup, with applications ranging from pickups to Cadillac Broughams to California Corvettes. The 5.0-liter, GM’s highest-volume V-8, lived until 2003. Bare blocks are still produced by GM for sprint car racing.

1982 New twin throttle-body fuel injection, called Cross-Fire, upped Corvette output to 200 hp in its L83 V-8. A similar 5.0-liter engine was labeled LU5 in the Pontiac Trans Am. Early service problems prompted the nickname “Cease-Fire” for these engines.

1983 The L69 high-output 5.0-liter V-8 for the Firebird Trans Am, Camaro Z/28, Camaro IROC-Z, and Monte Carlo Super Sport had an electronically controlled Rochester Quadrajet carburetor, low-restriction exhaust, higher compression, and an aluminum intake manifold. Output ranged from 180 to 190 hp.

1985 Tuned-port fuel injection inspired the 5.7-liter L98 Corvette engine to 230 hp. Top Camaros and Firebirds, powered by engines coded LB9, had 190–230 hp.

1986 After years of development effort to ensure durability, the first cast-aluminum cylinder heads were fitted to some Corvettes, Chevy Camaros, and Pontiac Firebirds powered by L98 small-blocks. LG4 V-8s now came with aluminum intake manifolds (replacing cast-iron).

1990 Though not really a member of the GM small-block family, the Lotus-engineered DOHC 32-valve LT5 V-8 introduced for the Corvette ZR-1 with an initial 375 hp is worth mentioning because it shared certain dimensions, such as a 5.7-liter displacement, with the mainstream GM design. Nearly 7000 Corvettes powered by this engine were produced over six model years.

1996 The 5.7-liter L31 truck engine was the final first-generation small-block V-8 design. It lasted through the 2002 model year powering trucks, vans, SUVs, Isuzus, and the Oscar Mayer Wienermobile. Gen II cylinder heads with improved ports and combustion chambers were added during the L31’s life.

Generation II

1992 Though Gen I V-8s persisted as Vortec truck engines through 2003, Chevrolet revived the LT1 (below) small-block code in a new small-block design for the 1992 C4 Corvette. Reversing the direction of the coolant flow—first to the heads, then the block, then back to the radiator—allowed higher compression, more spark advance, diminished piston-ring friction, and greater output. The block, heads, and intake manifold were new while the crank, rods, pistons, and flywheel carried over. The 4.40-inch bore-center spacing and the two-valve pushrod valvetrain also carried over. Corvettes, Camaros, and Firebirds received aluminum heads while Buick, Cadillac, and other Chevy models powered by this engine were equipped with iron heads. Corvettes also received four-bolt main bearings. Multi-port fuel injection and an ignition system mounted to the front of the block were standard across the board. LT1 Corvettes were rated at 300 hp.

1996 A new LT4 engine upped the ante, with wilder valve timing, aluminum roller rocker arms, larger fuel injectors, higher compression, and a more efficient intake manifold. With 330 hp, it was optional in manual-equipped Corvettes and standard in Grand Sports.

Generation III

1997 The fifth-generation Corvette’s LS1 small-block was essentially a clean-sheet design that kept the 4.40-inch bore spacing and pushrod valvetrain. The new aluminum block was a deep-skirt design with two vertical and two horizontal bolts per main bearing. Iron cylinder liners were cast in place. The camshaft was positioned higher above the crank to shorten the pushrods while clearing room for larger bores and longer strokes. In lieu of a distributor, eight ignition coils were triggered by the engine control computer, and the firing order was altered for improved smoothness. A 3.90-inch bore and a 3.62-inch stroke retained the 5.7-liter displacement. Output began at 345 horsepower, rising slightly with the addition of more efficient intake and exhaust manifolds.

1998 Chevy’s Camaro and Pontiac’s Firebird received LS1s rated 305 hp. Holden in Australia followed a year later, tuning the engine during its seven-year production run to 400 hp.

1999 A smaller (4.8-liter) LR4 V-8 for truck use produced 255 hp, climbing later to 285 hp. Various 5.3-liter versions were also produced for Chevrolet, Cadillac, and GMC trucks with 270–310 hp. LQ4/LQ9/Vortec 6000 truck engines with iron blocks displaced 6.0 liters and produced 300–370 hp.

2001 The Corvette Z06 introduced a hotter Gen III V-8 coded LS6 with 385 hp, subsequently upped to 405 hp, with higher compression, improved lubrication, and wilder valve timing.

2004 Cadillac’s hot CTS-V received LS6 engines rated at 400 hp.

Generation IV

2005 For the sixth-generation Corvette, GM launched a fourth-generation small-block V-8 with the potential of growing to 7.4 liters. New features included displacement on demand (the ability to shut down half the cylinders at will for improved mileage) and variable valve timing (achieved by changing the crank-to-cam phase relationship on the run). The 6.0-liter LS2 (below) featured a 4.00-inch bore and 3.62-inch stroke inside an aluminum block topped with aluminum cylinder heads, yielding 400 hp. The LH6 truck version displaced 5.3 liters and produced 300–315 hp. The LS4 5.3-liter V-8 developed for transverse-engine front-wheel-drive cars produced 303 hp.

2006 Built for Corvette Z06, Camaro Z/28 (later), and aftermarket use, the racing-inspired 7.0-liter LS7 featured a 4.125-inch bore and a 4.00-inch stroke. The LS7 featured siamesed cylinders, pressed-in steel bore liners, titanium connecting rods, and a forged-steel crankshaft. Intake and exhaust ports and combustion chambers were CNC-machined for optimum flow and to achieve an 11.0:1 compression ratio. A standard dry sump sustained lubrication during 7000-rpm track driving. The LS7’s 505 hp at 6300 rpm made it one of the world’s most powerful naturally aspirated engines.

2007 The 6.2-liter L92 V-8 for full-size pickup and SUV applications delivered 403 hp. The L76 6.0-liter truck V-8 produced 367 hp. The LY2 4.8-liter V-8 for trucks delivered 260–295 hp. The 5.3-liter LY5 produced 315–320 hp.

2008 The Gen IV LS3 V-8 introduced as the Corvette’s new base engine brought improved cylinder heads, more aggressive valve timing, higher compression, and a freer-flowing intake manifold to produce 436 hp with the optional dual-mode exhaust system.

2009 The new Corvette ZR1 came with a 6.2-liter LS9 (above) equipped with an Eaton Roots-type supercharger, good for an impressive 638 hp. A similar LSA engine for Cadillac’s CTS-V and later the Camaro ZL1 delivered 556–580 hp. Jets squirting oil onto the bottom sides of the pistons for cooling were used on both engines

2011 GM assembled its 100 millionth small-block V-8 in LS9 trim. This heirloom is on display at the company’s powertrain museum in Pontiac, Michigan. (Side note: Your humble writer loaded the no. 6 piston and connecting rod assembly into this engine.)

Generation V

2014 To power its new seventh-generation Corvette, GM created a fifth-generation small-block coded LT1, which retained the sacred 4.40-inch bore spacing and simplistic single-cam valvetrain. New cylinder heads incorporated direct fuel injection. A variable-displacement oil pump minimized parasitic losses. Active fuel management and variable valve timing both carried over and piston oil squirters made their naturally-aspirated debut. The 6.2-liter LT1 engine delivered 455 hp as the base Corvette engine. The 6.2-liter L86 engine for trucks and SUVs delivered 420 hp while the 5.3-liter L83 version provided 355–376 hp.

2015 GM introduced a more potent 6.2-liter LT4 Corvette V-8 with an Eaton TVS supercharger (smaller but spinning faster than in 2009), specially cast aluminum cylinder heads, titanium intake valves, forged pistons with an ambitious 10.0:1 compression ratio, stainless-steel exhaust manifolds, and dry-sump lubrication. This new blower motor delivered a nice round 650 hp in the Z06 and the 2017 Camaro ZL1, with 10 fewer ponies in the 2016 Cadillac CTS-V.

2016 Chevy put the Corvette’s LT1 V-8, still producing 455 hp, into the Camaro SS.

2019 Reviving the revered LT5 production code previously used for the 32-valve DOHC Lotus V-8, a new supercharged Corvette ZR1 engine had an improved intercooler force fed by an Eaton TVS supercharger. It also combined port and direct fuel injection systems to produce an earth-rattling 755 hp at 6400 rpm.

2020 The C8 Corvette’s base engine (below), called the LT2—a code from a stillborn 1970 aluminum big-block V-8—is a 6.2-liter powerhouse delivering 490–495 horsepower (exhaust-dependent). It features dry-sump (and valley) lubrication with a storage reservoir bolted directly to the block, free-flowing intake and exhaust systems, heads passed down from the LT1, and gorgeous red-painted valve covers. A 6.6-liter iron-block pickup engine coded L8T makes 401 hp.

The post Chevy small-block: The little engine that did appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Two days dicing three Corvettes on California’s heavenly Highway 33 north of Ojai is as close as any mortal will come to a taste of the afterlife. Three Hagerty scribes and a photo crew binged on this banquet of lefts, rights, climbs, and dives on the impeccable asphalt meandering through the Los Padres National Forest and the Topatopa Mountains. Ravines were dabbed in brown, green, and fire-ravaged black, peaks were crowned with sunbeams, and we enjoyed glimpses of the sky-blue Pacific. That old chestnut, “…to die for,” was surely coined here.

The mission was to put the already well-publicized 2020 Corvette Stingray into historical context and thereby determine if the new car is indeed a true Corvette or, as some cynics would have it, just a cut-rate Ferrari pretender. Over eight generations of production, the American dream machine has endured, through 67 years of station-keeping and also moments of radical change. Surely relocating the engine behind the seats qualifies as the latter. So we gathered up a new C8 as well as two generations of Corvette that were also turning points in the model’s bloodline. An immaculate 1956 C1 stood in for the first Corvettes to get V-8 engines, while our well-preserved 1986 C4 represented GM’s first all-in effort to give the Corvette truly modern performance through a whole-car approach to chassis rigidity and suspension tune.

With our two veterans flying in formation with the C8, we hoped to glean answers to our burning questions: Was moving the engine behind the cockpit wise? Has advanced technology drained fun-to-drive from the Corvette’s soul? Is this newbie a legitimate heir to the Corvette throne?

Let’s start with a spoonful of history. Like every worthy performance stride, the mid-engine movement began in motorsports. A 1925 Benz Tropfenwagen piloted by Adolf Rosenberger was the first mid-engine Grand Prix winner, followed by Dr. Porsche’s indomitable Auto Unions in the 1930s. After World War II, single-seaters by John Cooper and others revolutionized Formula One before modernizing Indy. The seminal mid-engine sports car for the road was the Mercedes-Benz 150H, twenty of which were sold in 1935–36. Thirty years later, Lamborghini invented the supercar with its stunning transverse mid-engine Miura, while the Lotus Europa served as the supercar-lite archetype. The Toyota MR2, Pontiac Fiero, and many more mid-engine two-seaters followed. Today, front-engine sports cars are a dying breed.

Corvette patron saint Zora Arkus-Duntov joined the club in 1957. After his front-engine, magnesium-bodied Corvette SS racer cooked driver John Fitch’s feet at Sebring, Arkus-Duntov concluded the “heat source [the engine] must be behind the driver.” The Auto Union victories he witnessed before WWII, and his 1954 class win at Le Mans driving a mid-engine Porsche 550 Spyder, also shaped his thinking. Before retiring from Chevrolet in 1975, Arkus-Duntov built half a dozen mid-engine prototypes; after his departure, like-minded GM engineers and designers created six more. Unfortunately, the “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” mindset ruled GM then, delaying the mid-engine Corvette for decades.

Finally, in 2005, the year the C6 Corvette launched, assistant chief engineer Tadge Juechter convinced his superiors that the front-engine gambit was tapped out—that adding more power up front accelerated nothing but the generation of tire smoke in back. Although bosses Tom Wallace, Bob Lutz, and Rick Wagoner all became believers, GM’s bankruptcy would delay the arrival of the mid-engine Corvette another 15 years.

Physics is what drives engineers to the mid-engine format. Shifting engine mass rearward improves acceleration by increasing rear-wheel propulsion traction. During hard braking, vertical loading shifts forward, allowing all four tires to contribute more equitably to the deceleration cause. Another important variable is the polar moment of inertia about a vertical axis through the center of gravity. Minimizing the polar moment by locating heavy engine and transmission parts near the center of gravity expedites turn-in and diminishes the tire force required to straighten the car exiting a bend.

But such science wasn’t part of the equation way back when GM’s designers sculpted the 1956 Corvette bodywork over chassis and powertrain parts sourced from Chevy sedans of the day. The fact that rack-and-pinion steering, disc brakes, power assists, and electronic gadgets were far in the future didn’t matter, because these creators knew beauty when they drew it. So they made the second iteration of the first-generation Corvette an art object, with alluring proportions, attractive details like the famous side scallop, and a sporting mien. Their reskin, extinguishing the Blue Flame six-cylinder engine and adding power to the new 265-cid small-block V-8, didn’t do much to dent Ford Thunderbird sales, but the 1956 update did set a performance-oriented course that has served the Corvette well for decades.

Hagerty father/son members Harry and David Bogosian, of Santa Clarita, California, have owned this Arctic Blue ’56 for only four months. It has enjoyed a frame-off restoration, an engine rebuild by California’s Corvette Mike, a stunning base-coat/clear-coat paint job, and two upgrades from factory specs: a four-speed manual transmission (up from three) and the installation of 205/75R-15 radial tires.

Hagerty magazine editor Aaron Robinson’s preliminary assessment of the C1 says it all: “America’s Jaguar XK120 is lovely to look at, but the driver seems to have been left out of the design equation.” Indeed, cockpit entry by today’s drivers is a challenge. Even with the seat slid fully back, scrunching is required to slip behind the wheel and to wriggle lower limbs through the tight door opening. The vinyl-clad seats are, in essence, solo benches lacking any hint of a bucket’s lateral restraint.

The Bogosians’ 210-hp V-8 topped with a single four-barrel Carter carburetor murmurs contentedly, delivering satisfying spurts of torque. It’s easy to see why V-8s became America’s ultimate gift to the motoring world. The old Corvette loafs along with snorty grunts best enjoyed with the top stowed. At 50 mph in fourth, the tach registers only 2100 rpm.

This Corvette’s dirty little secret, however, is the “praying mantis” driving position, with forearms cocked and your chest only a few inches behind the steering wheel. It was deemed necessary back then because the steering effort, especially at parking speeds, is abysmally high. Once you get rolling, there’s steering slack to deal with, which makes us wonder how drivers like Bob Bondurant enjoyed so much success racing Corvettes in the ’50s.

Finding first in the H-pattern was a challenge, but the synchros worked as intended and shift efforts were light. Our drivers reported smooth clutch takeup and reasonably good braking performance, and they enjoyed wrapping thumbs around the plastic steering wheel spokes in cruise mode. There was no hint of brake fade when this veteran Corvette had to hustle to keep pace with its descendants. Our man Cameron Neveu observed: “This Vette handles like a sedan with some body roll and noticeable pitch when you brake hard for a tight bend.”

It’s clear the Corvette’s engineers and designers weren’t sitting on their hands during the 30-year span between our elder test cars. Though the Stingray badge was collecting dust on the shelf in 1986, every pore of Chevy’s fourth-generation sports car was crammed with notable advancements: Tall peripheral frame rails for major improvements in chassis rigidity. More precise power rack-and-pinion steering, instead of the manual worm-and-roller gear. Fat radials supported by a fully independent suspension system, with fiberglass leaf springs at both ends of the car.

Realizing they had a weapon capable of fighting sports cars from Mazda, Nissan, Toyota, and Porsche, Corvette engineers used showroom stock road racing to develop the Corvette’s brake system. As such, meaty disc brakes with Bosch ABS were part of the package. Two transmissions were offered: a four-speed Doug Nash manual with a two-speed electric overdrive, and a four-speed automatic with overdrive top. The convertible was back (after a nine-year hiatus) and the base coupe had a removable roof panel. The fully electronic instrument displays were reoriented to improve direct sunlight legibility.

Hagerty father/son members Vince and Armen Kachatorian of Glendale, California, have owned the C4 we enjoyed on Highway 33 for 14 months. It’s an original California car powered by a 230-hp 350-cid V-8 and the automatic. The most notable option is the Z51 performance handling package, which includes 16-inch radials; stiffer springs and anti-roll bars; firmer Bilstein dampers and stiffer suspension bushings; quicker steering; and an engine oil cooler.

Next to the pierced, winged, and scooped C8, the C4 is a composition of simple, elegant forms. Its long nose has few curves or creases. The basket-handle Bpillar rises proudly over the sweeping lower body. There’s ample glass to provide occupants with a clear view of their world. Compared with the C8, the C4 is a tidy two-seater: its wheelbase is 11 inches shorter and its overall length is 5.8 inches less. The fourth-generation car is 5.1 inches narrower in width, and it’s 1.9 inches shorter from road to roof. Our calibrated eyeballs rated the C4 “tiny” in comparison with its C8 successor. “Today’s cars—not to mention the people they transport—are, in my opinion, just too damn big,” read one logbook entry.

The 1986 Corvette’s handling doesn’t bowl you over after you’ve driven the C8, which benefits from more than three decades of improvement. The steering lacks linearity, and there’s minimal road feel. When you’ve pushed the C4 to the point when its tires are howling, you’re not sure which end of the car is about to break loose. Though the transmission holds each gear to 6000 rpm, the power-to-weight ratio (13.4 lb/hp) isn’t that terrific, and I was surprised to find the brakes less impressive than I remembered from my days racing them in the SCCA. This car clearly illustrates just how far Corvette speed and agility have advanced.

Others thought the C4 felt good considering its age. “Flat in the turns, solid grip, reasonably fast,” said one logbook note. “While the Las Vegas light show instrumentation is fun to look at, it’s tough to read at a glance.” The tall sills and a center tunnel that dominates the cockpit make this interior feel small and cramped.

Emissions controls had taken the edge off the original exhaust note, so the Kachatorians fitted smaller cans to the back. The melody they produced provided all the more reason to remove the roof when possible. There’s surprisingly little cockpit turbulence when the sun shines in.

The preproduction 2020 Corvette loaned to us by Chevrolet came loaded with practically every available extra-cost upgrade: the top 3LT trim, the Z51 performance package, magnetic dampers, nose-lifting equipment, competition seats, spiffy wheels, and more. Options totaling $23,830 drove the $59,995 base price to $83,825, which still undercuts a base Porsche 911 Carrera by nearly $15K.

Moving 500 pounds of engine back several feet and shuffling 250 pounds of transmission parts aft of the rear axle yields a front/rear weight bias of 40/60, a notable improvement over the C7’s 50/50 disposition (a rear weight bias is better for handling). Even in the car’s “burnout mode”—which disables traction control and engages the clutch in first gear at the 6500-rpm redline—there’s precious little tire spin accompanying the head-yanking forward acceleration.

Corvette chief engineer Tadge Juechter is deathly afraid of lift-throttle oversteer, the result of trauma he experienced riding with a fighter pilot father who owned Porsches. So, in spite of the C8’s rear weight bias, we noticed no hint of loose-tail shenanigans on Highway 33. Even lifting late into bends and tromping the right pedal hard upon exit won’t disrupt this Corvette’s secure grip. We saw several 1.1-g readings in the g-meter that is part of the head-up display, and without sensing much under- or oversteer. The steering feels almost telepathic. The driver picks a spot on the road where she wants to be, commands the car through the steering wheel, and is instantly locked onto the heading of her choice with no second thoughts or corrections required.

The magnetic dampers are simply magnificent in how they contain body motion without imposing harshness, and the car gives the driver a choice of modes depending on his mood. It can seem a lot smaller and lighter at speed than it looks. The steering and brakes both feel organic, and the chassis digests the road with unflappable competence. The squirming and porpoising that testers once felt in previous Corvettes are absent.

Surprisingly, no one griped about the lack of a clutch pedal and shift lever in the new Corvette. The transmission interacts with the shift paddles in so many ways that there’s really no loss of entertainment with the new powertrain. As you attack Highway 33 flat out, your hands and thoughts are fully occupied, so we found it a relief not to have to deal with clutching, rev matching, and shifting procedures. With eight ratios to choose from, the dual-clutch automatic is astute at serving up the right gear for practically every occasion.

Even though the C7-to-C8 weight gain is roughly 70 pounds, the fortified LT2 small-block feels energetic at work. The combination of enhanced traction and slightly improved power-to-weight ratio (7.21 vs. 7.25 lb/hp) yields 0–60 acceleration below three seconds and quarter-mile trap speeds topping 120 mph, according to Chevy. That’s enough to meet or beat a 911 in straight-line acceleration. Nonetheless, our logbook reflects mixed emotions about the latest small-block: “The engine is quiet and subtle back there, but the discordant clicking of injectors is audible, and the 6500-rpm redline feels low in a supercar that isn’t turbocharged.”

Still, there are inevitable trade-offs between low-end punch and top-end verve. GM’s engine team has wrung an amazing amount of vitality out of its 6.2-liter small-block without the added expense and weight that the overhead-cam, multi-valve alternative would impose. In other words, given the $60K base price, a buyer should be very happy with everything the small-block and dual-clutch pairing brings to the Corvette party.

The cockpit is riddled with switches, but we all came to terms with it quickly. Outward visibility, however, was another matter. Some of us couldn’t believe GM thought the huge over-the-shoulder blind spots would fly. “It’s not driving, it’s spelunking,” commented one wag. One problem is the vast sweep of bodywork behind the B-pillars over the engine bay. The other is that the hatch glass tapers aggressively toward the rear and is angled so close to horizontal that reflections yield a largely opaque view.

To solve this dilemma, a two-way center mirror is standard equipment. One setting provides a conventional look through the two glass panels between the cockpit and the outside world. The other setting is an HD camera view unobstructed by the aforementioned reflections. The downside with the second mode is that your eyes need a split second or two to focus in on the electronic look at what’s behind the car.

There is no such complaint about the C8’s overall quality, however, especially as fitted with the $11,950 3LT trim. The stitched and ventilated leather, the nappy suede, the polished metal accents, and the matte-black display frames are impeccable, while color-keyed hard plastic tactfully guards the door openings.

There’s no doubt that the C8 is a real Corvette. Moving the engine to the middle of the car is an initial step (or three) up the performance ladder while also enabling enticing future possibilities. Electrification, all-wheel drive, and forced induction could all arrive in this generation.

Like the stingray from which it takes its name, the Corvette will thrive by swimming forward. GM knew that as long ago as 1955, when it executed the first significant changes to the model. Since then, each successive generation has moved the needle to varying degrees—but they have all moved it. Those hoping the Corvette will remain the same forever are hoping for extinction. Instead, GM has chosen to draw from its history what it needs while sending its beloved sports car off and running toward its future.

Corvette Lineage 101

C1

1953–62 Born with a modest 150-hp inline-six and a two-speed automatic, the Corvette roadster received a 195-hp 265-cid V-8 and three-speed stick option in 1955, followed by a reskin in ’56. The next year, a 283-cid V-8, fuel injection, and a four-speed stick were added, followed by a 327-cid V-8 in ’62.

C2

1963–67 A comprehensive body and chassis overhaul resulted in the addition of a coupe body style and independent rear suspension. A 396-cid big-block and four-wheel disc brakes arrived in 1965.

C3

1968–82 The “Shark” era began with fresh styling, standard T-tops on the coupe, and a three-speed Turbo Hydra-Matic automatic option. Small- and big-block V-8s both grew in size. In 1979, sales topped the 50,000 mark for the first time. Production moved from St. Louis to Bowling Green, Kentucky, in 1981.

C4

1984–96 Chevy skipped the ’83 model year because the new C4 Corvette met ’84 federal regs and was unveiled in March 1983. High-sided frame rails increased structural stiffness, and a digital electronic instrument cluster revolutionized the cockpit. Engine advancements included Bosch fuel injection, a Callaway twin-turbo option, and a Lotus-built DOHC V-8 producing 405 hp.

C5

1997–2004 Were it not for Chevy general manager Jim Perkins, Corvettes would have expired after the C4. Perkins appropriated $2.5 million from his marketing budget to construct the C5 prototype, which earned production approval. The C4’s high side-frame rails were replaced with a backbone design facilitated by an 8.3-inch wheelbase stretch and by relocating the transmission to just ahead of the differential. The new-for-2001 Z06 hardtop provided 385 hp (later 405).

C6

2005–13 The sixth-gen Corvette was shorter but rode on a longer wheelbase; design efficiencies yielded more luggage space. The headlamps were fixed for the first time since 1962. A new 6.0-liter V-8 provided 400 hp. A six-speed paddle-shift automatic arrived in 2006. The V-8 grew to 6.2 liters (coded LS3) in 2008, increasing output to 430 hp. For 2006, the Z06 rode on an aluminum space frame and was powered by a 7.0-liter 505-hp V-8 with aluminum block and heads. In 2009, the ZR1 debuted with dry-sump lubrication and a supercharged 6.2-liter V-8 delivering 638 hp.

C7

2014–19 Designers borrowed exterior details from the C8 for the comprehensively reengineered C7. Notable features included a new 455-hp LT1 V-8, a seven-speed manual transmission with rev matching, an aluminum space frame for all trims, and a few carbon-fiber body panels. The 2015 Z06 supercharged LT4 V-8, delivering 650 hp, was available with a new eight-speed automatic transmission. The ZR1 returned for 2019 with 755 supercharged hp and a 212-mph top speed. The last C7 was manufactured November 15, 2019.

C8

2020–? The new Corvette’s wheelbase, length, width, weight, rear tire size, and rear wheel width are all greater than those of the C7. Occupant space has been increased by longer seat travel and greater backrest recline. Coilover suspension units replaced the C7’s composite leaf springs. The new LT2 V-8 features dry sump lubrication, while a paddle-shift dual-clutch eight-speed automatic is the sole transmission choice. Production commenced in February.

The post Well Vetted: Uniting the mid-engine C8 Corvette with its C1 and C4 brethren appeared first on Hagerty Media.

America’s Presidential election process could learn a thing or two from the efficient method used to winnow 800 entrants at this year’s Detroit Autorama spectacle down to a single best-in-show Ridler award winner. According to event co-chairman and chief judge Butch Patrico, the first step is thinning the herd of 21 hopefuls down to the Great 8 group of finalists.

That phase took place as entrants arrived at the TCF Center (formerly Cobo Hall) February 27–28 in preparation for the public opening at noon on Friday, February 28. A crack team of six judges inspected the premier hand raisers while they proved their cars capable of propelling, steering, and braking themselves on a several-hundred-foot-long indoor “road course.” Towering Great 8 banners showcased these semi-finalists, which were positioned near the entrance portals to command the attention of every Autorama visitor.

The Ridler winner was announced at the final awards ceremony on Sunday, March 1. From start to finish, the whole process took only three days. And the winner of the $10,000 top prize, sponsored by Meguiar’s car-care products? A radically customized 1963 Chevrolet Bel Air station wagon appropriately named IMPRESSIVE.

Although this is the 68th year for the Detroit show, the Ridler award was inaugurated in 1964 to commemorate the role that Don Ridler played in promoting the event to national prominence. This esteemed Michigan Sports Hall of Fame member was not only a capable athlete and coach, his creativity was instrumental in elevating the visibility of numerous entertainment groups as well as Michigan’s best dead-of-winter excuse to toast custom cars, trucks, motorcycles, and a speedboat or two at the Detroit convention center.

The judging team ultimately agreed that the custom 1963 Chevy wagon constructed by the father-and-sons team of Brad, Brady, and Cory Ranweiler was indeed the most IMPRESSIVE. What’s so impressive about this two-box family hauler? Its tasteful elegance; its long, sleek lines; its conservative use of bright accents; its magnificent oxblood leather interior; and, most of all, the brilliant black paint job. Judges and spectators alike agreed that every IMPRESSIVE detail was perfected to the fare-thee-well.

The Ranweilers’ livelihood is their Show Cars Automotive business, in New Ulm, Minnesota, which sells restoration parts for 1958–64 Chevy Impalas. In 2010, Brad Ranweiler declared the moment right to customize the 1963 Bel Air four-door wagon rattling around their business. The father’s creativity and inspiration, blended with his sons’ hard work and dedication, turned into a decade of effort. Add up their hours of sweat and contributions from sympathetic suppliers and you’ve got a trophy winner they estimate is worth $2.5 million.

Not much of the core car survived the journey to the IMPRESSIVE finished product. The chassis is a custom design by Art Morrison Enterprises on a 121.0-inch wheelbase with Uni-Steer Performance and Chassisworks electrically assisted rack-and-pinion steering. The front suspension is a control arm design, while the live Ford rear axle is located by four trailing links. Evod Custom Industries manufactured the gorgeous 8×18-inch front and 12×20-inch rear aluminum wheels shod with Pirelli radial tires. Wilwood supplied the 14-inch disc brake rotors and calipers.

A 409-cubic-inch Chevrolet V-8 was bored and stroked to 509 cubic inches, in-house. Edelbrock aluminum heads with Hilborn electronic fuel injection, David Walser nose cone air cleaners, and a Joe Hunt Magnetos billet distributor yield 615 horsepower and 685 lb-ft of torque. The multi-layer valve covers provide the clearance needed for the roller rocker arm valve train and a means of hiding the ignition wires. GP Headers built the 2-inch headers and 3-inch exhaust pipes out of stainless steel. The transmission is a GM 4L80E automatic supplied by TCI Automotive. Griffin Thermal Products supplied the custom radiator and cooling fan components. The stainless steel fuel cell is by Rick’s Tanks.

By the time the body shell was switched to a more svelte two-door configuration and channeled over the new frame, only snippets of the factory sheet metal remained. The hood is new, the Dynacorn International front fenders are welded in unit with the main shell, bumpers are modified for a tighter fit with their surrounding sheet metal, and the roof is altered. Dropping the roof height three inches and relocating the B-pillars rearward necessitated totally different pillars, glass contours, and bright trim components.

The grille began as a 1000-pound chunk of aluminum but ended up as 69 separate bar-and-surround pieces. When a dozen or so parts farmed out to fabricators returned with expensive invoices attached, Cory Ranweiler signed up for a two-week training course to polish his CNC machining skills. This allowed him to craft the next 320 metal parts totally in-house. 

The greatest challenge, according to Brady Renweiler, was perfecting the black paint job, which is precisely why that color was selected from the beginning. Brad Renweiler brought to the party 40 years of painting experience and challenged his sons to aim for perfect surfaces before the first drop of PPG paint was sprayed. The sanding and polishing process lasted years. A chunk of aluminum measuring 6-feet long by a half-inch thick, wrapped with sandpaper, eliminated any hint of waviness in the long side-body panels.

M&M Hotrod Interiors created the black, burgundy, and chrome inside trim. Evod Industries machined the steering wheel parts as well as the custom tail lamp rings. The billet switchgear came from Watsons Streetworks, and the custom instruments are by Dakota Digital. Advanced Plating applied a sparkling finish to the custom trim parts, which were made by the Ranweilers. The in-car entertainment system is by Kenwood USA and Kicker Performance.

There’s no doubt that the creative force behind this project exceeded some ambitious goals. The boys made their father proud and vice versa. Their Ridler win proves it was a decade very well spent.

The post IMPRESSIVE: 2020 Detroit Autorama Ridler winner’s name says it all appeared first on Hagerty Media.

Now that I’ve enjoyed two days driving a pre-production C8 Corvette Z51, I am still smitten with the car. Slapping down a few dollars to secure my place in the order line two years ago was one of my more brilliant car-purchase moves. That said, I do harbor these reservations:

1. 1. The new Corvette’s exterior is a cavalcade of creases, ports, grilles, and surface embellishments. While most details do serve a worthy function, some seem gratuitous. My personal tastes run more in the sculptural elegance direction. I rate Audrey Hepburn over Zoe Kravitz in the all-time beauty hit parade.

1. 1. While I appreciate the rear-wheel loading generated by the wing/spoiler device tacked onto the Corvette’s tail, I do not find that appendage attractive. And considering it knocks 10 mph off the car’s bar-bragging-rights top speed, I happily left the $5000 Z51 option (containing the spoiler/wing and other track-focused hardware) off my order form.

1. 1. Rear-side visibility is too horrible for any array of mirrors and cameras to remedy. I blame the blanked-off tapering roofline combined with a too-small hatch glass. I do not fault the engine location, which is far below the ill-conceived upper body surfaces.

1. 1. Speaking of the engine bay, the LT2 V-8’s shroud does not flatter its intrinsic mechanical beauty. I acknowledge the need for sound deadening and to mask the underlying plastic intake manifold, which resembles an ice cube tray. But please give us a cover with actual engine flavor—tubes, fins, ribs, runners—not a mammoth insect shell.

1. 1. In theory, eliminating C7’s bulky torque tube by combining the engine, transmission, and differential in one handy bolt-together unit should yield more tidy exterior dimensions. Why exactly the Corvette team stretched the wheelbase, length, and width is beyond me. My mission is to find out why they birthed a baby that’s stouter than its siblings.

1. Changing the steering wheel from a circle to a square is one of the C8 team’s boldest moves. When I saw that touch in early photos, I feared dissatisfaction. Now that I’ve lived with the square wheel for two days, I agree it works as advertised. Thigh clearance is enhanced for easy entry. There’s an expanded view of the instrument cluster and suitable three- and nine-o’clock hand grips to suit practically every driving circumstance. So why is this item on my gripe list?  Because Corvette engineers were so busy fine-tuning their square wheel that they neglected to route any genuine road feel from the pavement to the rim via C8’s electrically assisted power steering. My fond hope is that production versions are better than the pre-prod car I experienced in California.

Now that my mid-March build date is in hand, the countdown to arrival at my dealer has begun. Watch this space for a detailed look at the Corvette I spec’d out and more driving impressions.

The post 6 gripes holding the Corvette back from mid-engine greatness appeared first on Hagerty Media.