Oh, really? How 'bout that, eh!
Is your experimental block a die-cast piece, or sandcast? Is it a test-run piece, (a raw casting) or is it fully machined? Has it been assembled or run?
| Slant Six Forum https://slantsix.org/forum/ |
|
| Aluminum Slant 6 block https://slantsix.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=29659 |
Page 2 of 2 |
| Author: | aluminum 6 guy [ Sun Jul 13, 2008 11:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
This block was being shown at the 2008 Mopar Spring Fling in Southern California. Steve Magnante had a photo and small paragraph about it in Mopar Max.com ,June issue. As far as my contacts, I cannot give that information out in respect to their privacy. |
|
| Author: | SlantSixDan [ Sun Jul 13, 2008 12:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Thanks for sharing. Oops, I didn't mean to imply I was after contact information for your sources, I was just curious where you got your information, is all. Mine's from many years of conversation and correspondence with Bill Weertman and a few others. |
|
| Author: | aluminum 6 guy [ Mon Jul 14, 2008 9:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Out of all your years of research what info do you have about the "1958 experimental " block. |
|
| Author: | SlantSixDan [ Mon Jul 14, 2008 3:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Okay, here's the timeline on slant-6 block prototypes and development, directly from the chief of the project. As you can see, the very first die-cast protypes weren't created until 1959: • Iron LG slant-6 prototype: 26 November 1958 • Sandcast aluminum LG slant-6 prototype: end first week December 1958 • Iron RG slant-6 prototype: February 1959 • Sandcast aluminum RG slant-6 prototype: March 1959 • Die-cast aluminum LG slant-6 prototype: March 18, 1959 • Production Test Request for 2500 LG and 2500 RG die-cast aluminum engines approved in October 1959 for latter half of MY1960; far fewer than 5k engines produced in the second half of 1960 production, of which a couple were installed in vehicles. • Aluminum-bore die-cast LG slant-6 prototypes: March 30, 1960 • PTR approved in August 1960 for 15,000 die-cast aluminum RGs to be made and installed in 2500 Plymouths, 2500 Dodges, and 10,000 Lancers during 1961 production. 10,767 die-cast aluminum RGs were actually built and installed under this PTR. • Regular production release for 1962 model year; 36,000 die-cast RGs built at Trenton Engine Plant and installed in 1962 and early-production 1963 vehicles. • 5000-engine PTR for aluminum-bore engine was being considered when the entire aluminum block program was terminated. Is your experimental block a die-cast piece, or sandcast? Is it a test-run piece, (a raw casting) or is it fully machined? Has it been assembled or run? |
|
| Author: | aluminum 6 guy [ Mon Jul 14, 2008 7:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
My info came from personal conversations with Mr. Weertman and Steve Maganate. |
|
| Author: | SlantSixDan [ Mon Jul 14, 2008 8:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Oh, really? How 'bout that, eh! Is your experimental block a die-cast piece, or sandcast? Is it a test-run piece, (a raw casting) or is it fully machined? Has it been assembled or run?
|
|
| Author: | aluminum 6 guy [ Thu Jul 17, 2008 10:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Mr. Weertman called me yesterday, unfortunatly I was on the freeway. I will be calling him back within the next few days and will have the block in front of me so I can find out the information you asked for. In your time line, out of his book, it seems the publisher left out the small numbers ( less than 40 ) of the blocks that were requested for the Dyno room by Mr. Weertman to be tested than scrapped. As far as being a 1958 Block, that info came from Steve Maganate on a visit from him to take photos of my block. The next time I talk to him I will ask him what info he had to suggest it was a 1958 and not a 1959 like I thought it was. |
|
| Author: | SlantSixDan [ Thu Jul 17, 2008 10:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: I will be calling him back within the next few days and will have the block in front of me so I can find out the information you asked for. In your time line, out of his book
"My" timeline isn't out of the book you're thinking of, but the publisher of that book didn't omit or edit out any aluminum blocks.I'll be interested to hear what Bill has to say about whether your experimental block is a die-cast piece or sandcast, whether it's a test-run piece (a raw casting) or a fully-machined block, and whether it has been assembled or run; please do keep us up to date. I can't help thinking this block as you've described it so far, would go well in a '66 Valiant that's had Mercedes emblems and nameplates pasted onto it: Does he or doesn't he...? Only his ½" wrench knows for sure!  
|
|
| Author: | aluminum 6 guy [ Thu Jul 17, 2008 1:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
According to Mr. Weertmans own interview, which you linked , he states that the publisher edited his writing. What makes you think he didn't edit any of the aluminum info ? Also what do you mean by that last statement? |
|
| Author: | SlantSixDan [ Thu Jul 17, 2008 2:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: According to Mr. Weertmans own interview, which you linked , he states that the publisher edited his writing.
A lot of people helped in the effort for the book you have in mind. Editing is a part of the writing and publication process for all books. The editing in this case was for style, grammar, and syntax, not for factual content. But that doesn't really matter much; "my" timeline did not come from the book you have in mind.Sorry for the confusion on the last comment; I made a markup error. Now fixed. |
|
| Author: | madmax/6 [ Thu Jul 17, 2008 9:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I saw the block in person,looked like poop,had big porus divots in cam bores,had been welded on in a couple spots.there were numbers stamped all over the place on it,in my opinion it would make at least 100 budwieser cans,,,and I dont buy the story,the dates are off,,,i'm no expert,mark |
|
| Author: | SlantSixDan [ Thu Jul 17, 2008 9:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
It's often helpful to have another pair of eyes on the "prize"...sometimes when we own something we really want to think is really cool, that makes it hard for us to see its flaws. We're all only human! |
|
| Author: | aluminum 6 guy [ Fri Jul 18, 2008 9:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
This block was cast at the Cocomo plant in 1958. There were 3 places where it had small casting flaws (about the size of a dime ). They were repaired by welding and the block was shipped to the Trenton plant to be machined. After that it was sent to the Dyno room for testing. There are 4 places on this block where there are letters and numbers hand stamped. These stampings were made by the engineers in the Dyno room to correspond to ledger books reflecting dyno and teardown inspection results. All this information was clearly represented at my display and copies were there for anyone to take. The welding on my block also refutes the myth that these blocks cannot be repaired by welding. |
|
| Author: | SlantSixDan [ Fri Jul 18, 2008 10:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
H'mm. I don't recall anyone claiming these blocks can't be repaired by welding. (Who ya gonna call? MYTH-BUSTERS! ) In fact, I can think of a few people who'd be amused to learn that you "can't" repair these blocks, for they've done exactly that.Chrysler's records and the recollections of those who were actually involved in the aluminum slant-6 engine development project don't seem to support the notion that this block was cast at Kokomo or anywhere else in 1958. The problem isn't a lack of assertions/information — though the questions about sand vs. die casting are still yet to be answered — the problem thus far is a lack of veracity and verifiability to those assertions. But remember what Henry Ford (might or might not have actually) said: "You can say whatever you want about Ford cars...as long as you say it three times an hour!" 
|
|
| Page 2 of 2 | All times are UTC-08:00 |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|