And a really nice '58 Desoto Convertible:
http://www.madwhips.com/1958-desoto-firesweep-convertible/image/1958-desoto-firesweep-convertible-2.html
.....That is certainly a nice rendition of the '58 Desoto convertible Murray....White walls & wires...
Could not pull the previous post's photo up.
Quentin
I've always admired the '58 model Desoto......nicely designed automobile.
Sorry about the other pic........I'll try to fix that in a day or so......
....We'll watch for it. As you can see, we visit this thread often.
DeSoto were something of their own , they were the only one to offer 'gold effect anodized wheel covers , not too far out once you have accepted white off-set color on exactly those parts of the lower sides that get dirty first and most - this division of the Chrysler Corporation like Imperial was later closed down in an effort to concentrate on a few major names like Plymouth and Dodge , both late became active in muscle car 'sculpturing' of the early 1970s - an era which in a curious way meant to classic American Muscle Cars what the early 1940s had been to Super Power steam some 30 years before .
Regards
= J =
what if I had been born in 1950 ?
I guess - hope - dad would have bought a big Chrysler , like this-here 1958 NewYorker 392 hardtop
( from a vintage Chrysler ad - graphics of child and car modified by = J = )
edit: replace q++++ with curious
I don't know folks, but my dream car has been a 1939 Lincoln Zephyr V-12 ever since I saw the ad on the back cover of a 1939 "National Geographic" one of the neighbors was throwing out around 1968 or so. Twelve cylanders! WOW! Got to see one at a "boat-and-car" show about 6 years ago, just as cool as I thought it would be! No, it wasn't for sale. couldn't have afforded it anyway.
Hi Firelock
>> Got to see one at a "boat-and-car" show about 6 years ago <<
You mean a 39 Lincoln Zephyr or a V12 motor ?
To go V12 *would* have been what I *would* have suggested to Chrysler when they decided to stop making their 392 Hemi on account of extra production costs .
"and what about extra costs for a V12 engine ?" you might ask .
Sure - yet instead of hemisperical heads you would have had that exclusive number of cylinders which has a technical 'raison d'être' since it combines full self-equilibration of a six-in-line with easing of the reciprocating / rotating mass balancing problem ( calibrating balancing in counterweights on crank shaft ) in a V-type block . Hence twelve cylinders in 60 or - preferably - 120° V are about perfect - a V16 can't do better , V10 isn't good enough although providing an interesting sound , somewhat in between - small wonder at first glance yet somewhat surprising on second thought - a V8 and a V12 . I just like the idea had Chrysler offered a V12 - concept providing both performance and smoothness - they would have placed their cars above those of the other companies . A top class model had an image promoting effect on more decent models , too , this is well established sales policy today .
Maybe I take too much of an engineering point of view , yet something deep down in me likes to clings to the idea of creating true , honest value in engineering . believing that quality will in the end serve best and in the case of Chrysler should have established a convinced clientele for the make - on which to build in doubl sense in varying times . There is a lot of talk in high class car design today about 'creating emotion' , meaning to build not just what does the job but what has a distinctive character of its own : an automobile that is as much an engineering and styling asset as it is a practical and long-lasting personal transportation vehicle .
Maybe it's just that I cherish the idea Chrysler today could be the American car manufacturer in the ranks of Bentley and Mercedes ...
Juniatha
Hi Juniatha! It was the Lincoln Zephyr V-12 car I saw at the show. Quite an impressive "tank" it was, too. There's nothing really unusual about a V-12 engine, especially at the time the car was built, although it WAS unusual to find one in a car. American PT boats of World War Two fame (think John F. Kennedys PT-109) were powered by V-12 engines.
Radio talk show host G. Gordon Liddy tells a tale of when he was in college in the years after the war he had a friend who had a Zephyr V-12. They were going out, Liddy got in the car and asked his buddy "Aren't you going to start it so we can get going?" "It IS started!" his friend replied. Liddy said it was the smoothest running engine he had ever experienced, couldn't tell it was running at idle at all.
.....The owner of the Drug Store in the very small home town of mine back in Pennsylvania, had a maroon Lincoln Zephyr...Believe it was a 1937 model....and it was a classy appearing vehicle....Extremely clean lines.
And along comes the Continental right before the War....with it's V-12 engine. Reading the history of that engine....and in several years it varied in C I size....it had more than it's share of problems.
It certainly was smooth, but believe it was one Ford Motor Co. might have been glad to get rid of....believe about 1948.
Juniatha To go V12 *would* have been what I *would* have suggested to Chrysler when they decided to stop making their 392 Hemi on account of extra production costs . "and what about extra costs for a V12 engine ?" you might ask . Sure - yet instead of hemisperical heads you would have had that exclusive number of cylinders which has a technical 'raison d'être' since it combines full self-equilibration of a six-in-line with easing of the reciprocating / rotating mass balancing problem ( calibrating balancing in counterweights on crank shaft ) in a V-type block . Hence twelve cylinders in 60 or - preferably - 120° V are about perfect - a V16 can't do better , V10 isn't good enough although providing an interesting sound , somewhat in between - small wonder at first glance yet somewhat surprising on second thought - a V8 and a V12 . I just like the idea had Chrysler offered a V12 - concept providing both performance and smoothness - they would have placed their cars above those of the other companies . A top class model had an image promoting effect on more decent models , too , this is well established sales policy today .
Chrysler's hemi engines were inspired by their making radial air cooled aircraft engines, where cooling requirements dictated that the exhaust valves be angled out, with the intake valves angled out for symmetry. There was some advantage to the cross-flow arrangement of the valves, but the hemi head apparently had little advantage over the wedge head with the squish zones (for inducing turbulence in the fuel air mixture). Doing the angled valves with pushrods was complicated, but still simpler than the pushrod actuated 4 valves per cylinder design on the Duramax engine in my truck.
I would think that a 60 degree V-12 would be preferable to a 120, since the power impulses come naturally at 60 degree intervals. IIRC, American locomotive V-12's are usually 45 degree bank angles to make the engine narrow enough to fit in a carbody and leave walking space on each side. Presumably the crankshafts are relatively beefier than on the 45 degree Liberty V-12, which was notorious for torsional vibration problems.
A 45 degree 4 cycle V-6 or V-8 is out of the question, hence Caterpillar and GE using the in-line configuration for their 6 and 8 cylinder engines. The downside of the in-line configuration is that the weight isn't much less than a Vee with double the number of cylinders. In-line 8's were pretty common in American automotive practice up to the early 1950's - a better fit to the long, narrow hoods that were common in that era. Packard was probably the last holdout, going to a V-8 in either '54 or '55.
As for V-10's, I recall that Ford also had a V-10 for truck use in the mid-1990's to compete with Chrysler's detuned V-10, where GM simply came out with an 8.2 liter V-8 (which went out of production a few months ago).
- Erik
A Nash moment:
http://collectiblecars.nytimes.com/View_Listing.asp?ListingID=COL701262&From=F
Ok , sure the V12 wasn't exactly an unknown engine - yet it remained tolerably rare in the late 1930s when it appeared as a 'non-plus-ultra' in top-class models . All auto makers dropped it though and by coming of the 1950s the concept of a V8 with one centrally positioned camshaft actuating valves via push rods had become universally accepted for powerful car engines in American car production with a slant six as an economy engine alterrnative in most cases and a 'four banger' for compact cars , too . Just becasue of experiences with the early V12 - which were not too bright it would seem - in fact the industry was unanimous in rejecting another V12 venture .
Exactly that is my idea : If in this situation you succeed in building an engine all others shrink of risking again you are singular , you have placed your company above the others . As long as there was no V12 V8 were top . As soon as there would have been a well designed large V12 all V8 would have been secondary to it .
Building a good V12 wasn't trivial - mind Jaguar ventured to double number of cylinders from their usual slant six to a V12 top engine in the early 80s and what a variety of trouble they experienced ! Fuel consumption was forbiddingly high , oil consumption was at least remarkable and electronic ignition didn't always play it 100 % straight plus some odd mechanical trouble , too .
Erik
V12 at 60° and at 120° are equally good concerning eveness of spreading ignition over crank turns , you need to adapt setting of crank throws however . While in a diesel loco frame and body space is high in relation to width so a big engine will rather have the narrow angle , in a full size US sedan front bay space is lower than wide - for that and in view of keeping centre of mass lower above ground ( for better handling ) and for better arrangement of intake and exhaus mamifolds I would prefer a 120° setting , the engine itself also builds significantly lower than the 'standing' 60° type . If you are prepared to accept a little compromize in overall smoothness of engine running you might as well use a 90° setting since banks at right angle are optimum for balancing of the two conrods per single crank and six cylinders in line on each bank are self-euilibrating with the proper crank setting down the crankshaft .
45° in a V12 , let alone V8 don't make sense to me , small wonder they had trouble with proper frequency vibration , probably having caused fatique cracks . Someone possibly wanted to standardize bank angle for making a family of engines with various number of cylinders of standard d x s dimensions which might have made sense with large engines having a built up motor block that you could simply adapt to having various numbers mof cylinders . Yet , as my saying goes :
Nothing gained for free
in engineered technology !
Murray
oops ! interesting link - I guess that was a try to hovercraft-style a car's gown , was it ?
With the mentioning of the GM "rat" motor, 8.2L engine going out of production recently, is kind of sad. Very much liked that series of engines.
Perhaps they really got started with the "W" series engines when they needed a larger and heavier torque engine for truck use. I speak of the 348 cid engine which advanced to the 409, etc....
Z-11 {performance verison}, of series too...Then we get into the "Rat" motor semi-hemi series of valve arrangements.
I liked the performance of these engines. Brutal torque ability allowed them to move out a rather heavy automobile....
Had two versions of it: A 402 and a 427 cid.
I too thought the Rat motor has gone out of production, but I'm not sure it might be still available as a "crate" engine....??
Murray, thanks for posting the link to the Nash automobile. I got a kick out of the reference to the old "Superman" TV show. When I was in high school circa 1971 all the kids called the big, blocky cars from the early 50's "Superman Cars" as we all grew up watching the show in re-runs. Some of us (not me, though) drove "Superman Cars", although it goes without saying they were just "bombs" at the time and not the classics they were going to be. No doubt a lot of the kids of the time wish they still had those cars now!
As a corollary, the girls used to call womens fashions of the early 50's "Lois Lane Outfits". AND remembering the "more powerful than a locomotive" voice-over during the show's opening, some of us called the old cab units "Superman Diesels".
I'll tell you, that show really captured the imaginations of a lot of us, maybe more than we realized. And God bless George Reeves, the perfect Superman!
Hi Juniatha,
The GMC division of GM made a V-12 truck engine at the end of the 1950's and early 1960's. It was the equivalent of two of their V-6 blocks cast as one, and used two pairs of the V-6 cylinder heads. I'm not sure how many trucks actually used the V-12, however the trucks made to haul the Minutemen missiles to the silos were powered by the GMC V-12's.
The V-6's were 60 degree engines, so naturally the V12's were also 60 degree engines.
A V-12 GMC truck engine {gas}, must have been a rare bird...I have never seen one.
Which GM V-6 was used to do that.....? Don't remember a 60 degree V-6 back then....
Quentin,
GMC made a 60 degree V-6 from 1959 to somewhere in the mid-1960's. The V-6's were available in either 305 or 350 CID (may be worng on the second figure) with vague recollection of a third size. The V-12, IIRC, was somewhere around 700 CID. There was an article on the engine series in a 1959 issue of Popular Science - which is available on Google Books.
The 305 CID V-6 was an option for the GMC pickups and Suburban - remember this was back in the days that the various divisions had their own engines.
Erik:
Interesting subject. Just went thru a long, long list of GM {and some others; used}, engines.
I actually did find a V-12 called "twin six"....and used in some trucks in the early 60's. It listed it as 10.4L...Boy...????? It was kind of murky from which V-6 it originated...but it was listed. Not much info about it.
I know GM has experimented with various V-12 designs....and I mean since back in the 30s, etc.....
And there is some in design, proto form running now from what I can learn. Interesting.
Anyway, Erik...thanks for the response.
Edit: just found a figure of 637 cid for it. Guess that's: {2} roughly 318 cid units married together.
.....Murray, enjoyed the Nash info....
Trivia: Believe Nash was the first US mass produced automobile, of "unit construction"....Not a separate frame / body. Believe around 1939.
By the way....their "weather-eye" was an early improvement on auto heaters for inside comfort.
I checked the PopSci collection on Google, the article was in the September 1959 issue, starting on page 94. The "twin -six" was credited with a 702 CID, being two 351 CID blocks put together. Quoted power was 275HP at 2400 RPM. The other displacements for the V-6 were 305 cu in (got that one right) and 401 cu in. Getting back to the V-12, it also used two intake manifolds, 4 exhaust manifolds and the throttles on the two carburetors were synchronized.
The first I heard (well read) about the GMC V-6 was in an early 60's auto shop textbook that was surplussed by my high school in the '71 or '72 time frame. The book did say that the engine was designed to be made into a V-12. Next reference that caught my eye was a 20 years ago piece in Four Wheeler magazine, mentioning test driving a V-6 powered Suburban. I did see a couple of GMC V-6 engines in the OERM boneyard maybe 16 - 18 years ago. By the time I got my license in 1970, the GMC V-6's were history (along with the Corvair's, Pontiac SOHC in-line 6, etc.).
Packard also referred to their V-12 as a Twin Six, but the GMC really was twin sixes, albeit V-6's instead of inline sixes. Hmm, if I'm not mistaken, the only inline six sold by the Big 3 is the Cummins engine in the Dodge trucks.
Since this thread gets to be off-topic, and it's populated by automotive / engineering types, I have an off-topic, automotive / engineering question. Can someone explain just what it means, when they say that Chryslers have "hemi" engines?
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
"Hemi" is short for hemi-spherical (half spherical) head. This was thought to give better combustion than a flat type head and the angled valves arguably gave better breathing - less restriction for the intake of fuel-mixture and less restriction to let the exhaust gases out. One more or less undisputed advantage was that the sparkplug was in the center of the head, thus shortening the path for the flame front after ignition.
Chrysler made hemi V-8's from the early 1950's to 1970, with the last engines being the dual quad 426 CID street hemi's (1966 - 1970). This engine was credited with ~430 HP, though actual power output was higher. There has been some discussion that the wedge head used on the high output 440's was more effective, primarily because the squish area created more turbulence in the combustion chamber, which increased flame speed and a bit more power.
A similar effect goes on in diesel engines where the top of the piston is shaped to promote turbulence right before injection, which improves mixing of the fuel spray with the air in the cylinder. Poor mixing leads to incomplete combustion and smoke.
Ford recently made some V12s off the modular engine platform, One a 90 degree V, in the GT90, and a 60 degree V, for Aston Martin. Ford had the 90 Degree V8 for a while,and added some cylinders. The 60 degree V was pretty much 2 V6s stuck together.
For automobile engines, if the power output is the same between V8 and V12, the fewer moving parts of the V8 would probably win out in the long haul. Easier to maintain, 4 fewer spark plugs, plug wires, etc. Keeping the longer engine in the proper temperature range would be more of an issue as well, might be hot in the front, but colder in the back, with expansion-contraction difficulties, gasket sealing issues, etc. Usually I feel simpler is better, less to break, and sometimes easier to fix.
As for EMD locomotive engines, V12 and V16 have the same angle. The V12s seem to vibrate more, especially at idle. EMD uses a fabricated crankcase, and similar manifolding and such in the engine family.
Mike WSOR engineer | HO scale since 1988 | Visit our club www.WCGandyDancers.com
....Noting "Hemi" engines in our conversations here....And when we do, we're referring to Chrysler Corp. Pushrod...2 overhead valves / cyl. Always meaning from Chrysler.
I wonder why the 4.2L straight 6 cyl. of GM's used in the Trailblazer....can't, didn't, carry some reference to performance I D via "Hemispherical head design".
I believe If one takes a look at that engine's combustion chamber we find the angled valves, and "Hemi" shaped combustion chamber. I've never heard that term associated with that engine. It did produce a good HP and torque rating for it's size.
Some where in the area of 3L {V-6}, in my opinion, is a pretty good "fit" for an automobile power plant now with the size of many vehicles and the modern engines being effecient and producing good power.
Further back when our cars where much more heavier...My choice then, {liking GM stuff}, was the "Rat" motor series. Lots of torque available to move a heavy car off dead center.....Just a thought.
Here's a '57 Corvette for you Quentin:
http://collectiblecars.nytimes.com/View_Listing.asp?ListingID=COL607252&From=F
.....Every time I see a photo of a '57 like this one you showed, Murray...I wonder if it possibly might be the one I had, and restored currently....?? There were not too many produced in '57...believe something like 4,000 plus units.
Makes one wonder. This is a very nice restoration from what I can see in the photos. It is identical to the one I had, but it appears it might of had just the one top. I had both tops. The removable hard top was great for Winter. It seemed like a different car with the hardtop in place....Reduced the dash shake to almost nothing. It really wasn't bad with just the convertible top in place though....
Very nice.
Eleanor's quote of the day:
"Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people."
Eleanor Roosevelt
Both American LaFrance and Seagrave (of fire engine fame) built their own V-12s. Seagrave's may have ranged from around 560cid to upwards of 900cid.
Some sources say Seagrave's may have been based on a Continental or Pierce model, but that's an issue for another day.
The big engines were superceded by the beginning of common use of Diesels in fire trucks.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Here is some pretty fancy truck shifting:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-aDqAWkZHQ
Murray Here is some pretty fancy truck shifting: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-aDqAWkZHQ
Johnny
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.