Bristol Cars - Owners and Enthusiasts Forum  

Go Back   Bristol Cars - Owners and Enthusiasts Forum > Bristol Forums > 8 & 10 cyl Bristol cars

8 & 10 cyl Bristol cars Type 407 onwards - restoration, repair, maintenance etc

Bristol's Chrysler Engines

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 09-11-08, 01:54 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 27
Default Bristol's Chrysler Engines

Forgive me interrupting, but would it be imprudent to suggest that one of
you ring Toby Silverton at the Kensington showroom and ask him about the
Chrysler engine modifications performed by Bristol cars Ltd? I have always
found him and his staff to be very friendly and helpful, in stark contrast
to the "old regime".


Regards

Richard
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 09-11-08, 12:31 PM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,173
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Levine View Post
Forgive me interrupting, but would it be imprudent to suggest that one of you ring Toby Silverton at the Kensington showroom and ask him about the Chrysler engine modifications performed by Bristol cars Ltd? I have always found him and his staff to be very friendly and helpful, in stark contrast to the "old regime".

Regards
Richard
It's good to know things have changed. Last time I rang up the showroom the chap I spoke to wasn't very helpful at all, but then I was asking probing questions about the Brigand as I was thinking about buying one. He did take my details and said he would contact me if one came up. The following day my representative at a London auction was outbid by Bristol on a Brigand. Despite the fact they had just acquired a Brigand I never heard from the chap at Bristol but I suppose they might have already had a buyer lined up.

Last time I was actually in the showroom, with a few fellow BEEFers who had just had lunch in the West End, I don't think the Bristol staff showed any interest in us at all. But then it was probably obvious that we were just a bunch of "enthusiasts". Toby Silverton wasn't there, although I think he was with Bristol by then.

I feel it would be a bit disingenuous if I rang up now and started asking about the available engine mods, given that my own engine is already rebuilt. But if someone is actually intending to spend some money with them it would be interesting to hear what options are available, and at what cost, although I guess that would depend upon the condition of your original engine. In particular I would be interested in V8 "Sanctions 1&2" (sounds reminiscent of Aston Martin DB4 Zagato).

My personal view is that unless your own V8 engine is in very good condition, it would make more sense to replace it with a modern Chrysler engine. If I had my time again that's what I would do, rather than rebuild and modify an old one. The only thing we ended up using from mine was the block! (although it would have been a different story if I'd had an earlier 411 with a pre smog 383 engine).
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 09-11-08, 06:01 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 27
Default Bristol's Chrysler Engines

Kevin

Would you please expand on the last point you made about the 383 engines, I take it that if you owned one of these you would have considered rebuilding it rather that replacing it with a more modern unit. I have a 411 /S1 with the 383.

Gavin
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 10-11-08, 10:46 AM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,173
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by legavroche View Post
Kevin

Would you please expand on the last point you made about the 383 engines, I take it that if you owned one of these you would have considered rebuilding it rather that replacing it with a more modern unit. I have a 411 /S1 with the 383.

Gavin
Gavin,

I suppose it also depends on what you want to do with it. If you intend to do a basic rebuild/recondition without any improvement (increase in performance) then it wouldn't make much difference. But if you did want to do some tuning then it is more worthwhile on a pre 1971 383.

The main issue is the cylinder heads. The 400 CID engines used by Bristol have a head designed to lower the compression ratio and comply with the pollution controls introduced in the US in the early 1970s. They have a different intake port design so they don't flow anywhere near as well as the early 383 heads, so there's not much point in increasing the valve sizes and doing any porting.

You can of course buy aftermarket heads for the 400 CID engine, but they're not cheap!

I now have a pair of early 383 heads on my 400 CID engine (with larger valves and mild porting). The casting number of the pre smog 383 heads is 2843906, (sometimes referred to as '906 core' heads).

The other benefit of a pre 1971 383 is it will have a forged steel crank shaft, whereas the 400 CID engine has an inferior (cheaper) cast iron crank. This is less of an issue than the heads, although I don't how much you can do with the cast iron crank in terms of welding, machining and polishing.

I was persuaded to "stroke" my engine, so we put a 440 forged steel crank in it, which was "worked" a fair bit to streamline the counterweights.

That said, if you want multi point fuel injection and sophisticated engine management, then it's probably cheaper and certainly a lot less hassle to simply buy a modern replacement engine, regardless of whether you have a 383 or a 400 engine.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 11-11-08, 12:16 AM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,173
Default Carburetor selection

I came across an article I wrote back in 2001 for the old BEEF mail list, thought it might be of interest to anyone considering a carby change or rebuilding an engine.

---------------------
There must be many a V8 Bristol out there with a tired or non original carburetor, so for those who are thinking about fitting a new carburetor I thought I might share a few facts I which learned recently about carburetor selection, and possibly explode a few myths in the process. This is a fairly simplistic view but it should at least point people in the right direction!

Carburetors are rated according to the airflow capacity, that is the volume of air which they can supply or 'flow' in one minute, this is measured in Cubic Feet per Minute or 'CFM'. The air of course combines with a measured quantity of fuel on the way through, which ideally will be vaporized by the time it gets into your engine's cylinders. There is a 'rule of thumb' formula which can be used to match carburetor size or capacity to engine size;

engine capacity (CID), multiplied by maximum engine speed (RPM), divided by 3456 = Carburetor CFM

CID x RPM
__________ = max CFM
3456

For example for a Bristol 411 series 4 or 5 the formula would be (400 x 5500) / 3456 = 636 CFM

However this formula assumes 100% volumetric efficiency (VE), which means the 400 CID engine actually consumes 400 cubic inches of air/fuel mixture for every two revolutions. Which in the case of a normal 400 CID Chrysler engine produced in the 1970's, it doesn't. In fact of the Chrysler V8's used by Bristol, the 400 CID engine, fitted to the 411 S4 & S5 and 412 S1, probably has the lowest VE because of the anti pollution, or 'smog' measures in force in the USA at that time. It is effectively 'de tuned' and probably has a maximum VE of about 70%. All other V8's used by Bristol probably have a maximum VE in the region of 80% to 85%. An engine's VE varies with engine speed and is highest when peak torque is produced.

So taking into account the VE of the 400 CID engine fitted to Bristols, it really only NEEDS a carburetor which flows about 445 CFM.

CFM ratings are only a guide and it is possible for a four barrel carburetor to flow at least 20% more air than it is rated. At the other end of the scale they can of course flow a lot less, in fact the secondary throttles on some four barrel carburetors are activated by manifold vacuum controlled air valves (commonly known as 'Air Valve Secondaries'). If these are working properly the carburetor will only flow the amount of air required by
the engine. (Manifold vacuum varies with engine speed and load)

However, most carburetors are fitted with jets, metering rods, etc, which provide a fuel supply in keeping with their air flow rating. So the greater the CFM rating the bigger the standard jets will be and vice versa, (to allow the correct maximum air/fuel mixture). Jets are of course changeable (as are often metering rods ) so there's nothing stopping you from re-jetting a carb that is slightly too small or too large for your engine to make it more suitable. There are however, other specifications which may need to be modified to achieve optimum performance from a wrong sized carb. Including but not limited to; metering rods, air valve adjustment, inlet 'needle and seat' size, air bleed, float level, float drop, accelerator pump adjustment, enrichment circuit timing. Most of these modifications should not be attempted by anyone other than an experienced specialist.

When a carburetor is significantly larger or smaller than the engine requires, these issues are exacerbated because the manifold vacuum becomes too high or too low. Larger carbs, for example, have larger throttle bores and venturi area, which means the manifold vacuum will not reach anywhere near that which the carb is rated at WOT wide open throttle (1.5-inch/Hg), unless the engine is highly tuned to a greater volumetric efficiency and probably higher maximum engine speed. Generally speaking any significant variance in manifold vacuum from the standard at which a carb is rated will make carburetor tuning very difficult.

Many people have been, and probably still are, led astray by the carburetors fitted as standard by American muscle car manufacturers in the 1960's. According to the formula given above, it would seem they fitted oversize carburetors to some particular production model Corvettes, Camaros and Mustangs. Well they did! But that's because these cars were frequently entered in sanctioned competition events where the standard equipment carburetor had to be retained. So when competing they tuned the engine 'up to' the capacity of the carb.

The moral of this story is, if you need a new carburetor for your Bristol, unless the engine has been seriously modified for performance, use the formula above to correctly size your carburetor and it will likely work very well 'straight out of the box' with very little alteration.

NB: Carter, and most other manufacturers of 4 barrel carbs, made different models for different engines (Chevrolet, Pontiac, Ford, Chrysler etc). Make sure you get the correct one for your engine or the throttle linkages won't be correct, the choke actuation will likely be incorrect, and it probably won't fit your intake manifold without an adapter plate!

Kevin Howard
--------------------------
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 16-11-08, 05:28 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 88
Default

I remember seeing a 410 being auctioned at Sothebys in the late 80's or early 90's with a 440. It was well maintained and well used and had a estimate of £10,000. It was also on a set of minilites. It was described as the 'perhaps the fastest road going Bristol' (faster than the turbocharged models?). Haven't seen it in the BOC listings and wonder if it is still on the road???
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 19-11-08, 02:24 PM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,173
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimfoz View Post
I remember seeing a 410 being auctioned at Sothebys in the late 80's or early 90's with a 440. It was well maintained and well used and had a estimate of £10,000. It was also on a set of minilites. It was described as the 'perhaps the fastest road going Bristol' (faster than the turbocharged models?). Haven't seen it in the BOC listings and wonder if it is still on the road???
Interesting. Do you remember if it had a modified bonnet?
The 440 was/is an "RB" engine, which some say stands for "Raised Block". Which means it's a bit taller than the 363 and 400 engines used in the 411 and 412. The air cleaner on my 411 with a 400 engine is a pretty snug fit under the bonnet, so much so that it leaves an impression in the under bonnet sound insulation. So unless the 410 had a bit more room it wouldn't be possible to fit a 440 in there with a standard air cleaner.

I was going to say I doubt very much if it was faster than the turbocharged Bristols. For some reason Bristol didn't release power figures in that era, but a Jensen SIII with a 440 engine and would do 0-60 mph in 7.7 seconds. The turbocharged Beaufighter weighed a 1 cwt more than the Jensen, both had 15" wheels and a 3.07 rear axle ratio, but the Beaufighter did 0-60 in 6.7 seconds!

BUT, the 410 was 3.5 cwt (or 10%) lighter than the Beaufighter. Would that 392 lbs (Imp.) make the difference of more than 1 second 0-60 time?

It would be a very close thing!

Last edited by Kevin H; 15-03-22 at 04:00 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:50 AM.


This is the live site

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2