Nick's 308 to 4.0 conversion

As you are sharpening your pencils to do the little math problem referenced above, you might want to consider the following; I am not going to provide enough information so that the 4-liter project can be reverse engineered, nor are my comments intended to be a comprehensive engineering treatise. This would be irresponsible of me to my partners that have invested so much of their time and talent in this project. Admittedly, drive bearings are a small part of the over all scheme of things. I am trying to give a general overview of the goals and direction of something that I care a great deal about.

It appears that by trying to do something different, or perhaps something better, that some has taken offense. I guess that I should have expected that. Regrettably, more time has been spent talking about drive bearings, than some of the more unique aspects of this project. When the LS1 project was unveiled, the chat-sites focused on engine cooling, head gasket sealing, and the suitability of the sleeves. This would appear to be a more logical area to pick a fight. For goodness sakes, we have increased the displacement by over 37 percent without changing the bore centers. Frankly, the 430 increased displacement by increasing bore centers and they still use sleeves of a similar shape and design as their predecessors. I would think that some people might find it very presumptuous of us to nearly achieve the same displacement from a block that was intended for 3 liters..

For the record we have not come to a meeting of the minds on the aggregate amount of axial loads, shock loads, the direction of axial loading or when such loading occurs.

For those that would like to continue this discussion on drive bearings, I would pose the following questions:

What happens to the load calculation when the bearings are cryo’d and the inner and outer races are coated with a Diamond Like Carbon surface? What happens to the loads on the drive bearings if critical parts of valve train have been treated and as a result friction has been substantially reduced? High performance motorcycles engines have seen as much as an 8 hp increase by treating cams, lifters, and valve stems. What is the actual strength of the integral bearing flange after it has been cryogenically treated. Remember that off-roaders and rock crawlers have started to treat their axles to prevent breakage. In fact in some instances breakage has all but been eliminated. The results have been phenomenal.

This stuff is new and very exciting and is beginning to filter down from F1 and other forms of racing. Remember that DLC has about 1/10 the coefficient of friction as the standard bearing race. I wonder how many parts on that red car posted above that have been treated?

Mark Lewis

 

Tillman makes a very honest request. As I have previously stated, I will publish dyno results of the 4-liter engine on this website. Any engine that we release to the public will have been broken in on a dyno and shipped with the dyno results.

Then we can all argue over how has the best dyno. In other words are the dyno numbers bs.

Thanks,

Mark Lewis

 

Well the calculation won't change at all. The nubers will be different but the formula's stay the same.

 

And cryo isn't that new. It's been publically available in relatively "slow" and "low volume" Australia for at least the 5 years that I've been here. And I understand the military contractors have been using it considerably longer.

Mark , YET AGAIN you misunderstand. I'm not picking a fight. I like what you're doing. Out of the whole project, the only thing I had a technical query about was this, and if this is your way to repsond now, I can only imagine the way you might respond if someone has a problem with one of your engines after installation.

If, as you claim, you have done extensive research, a simple answer would be very easy. If however, you're making educated guesses (like I am), just say so. You'll come across far more genuine.

 

Hey Mark

Don't let all the nit picking get you down. I, for one, think it is fantastic what you guys are doing. It take BALLS to do something like this. Look at ol Bob Norwood, I bet back in the day people were all over his case for what he did to Ferrari's, just like what is happening to you. But once you guys are done and it is running, I bet you get loads of praise. What I am curious to see is how much power the new unit will put out. Keep up the good work.

 

Who's nit picking? In the land of liability and lawyers, surely you can all read properly?

I'm repeatedly asking one question and getting palmed off and evaded and avoided.... and I won't give up. Quitters don't get far in life usually.

When my one question has been answered, I'll be as happy as can be. I might even buy one...

 

I would like to thank Ernie and all of those that passed on their encouragement. It appears that the consensus is that the drive-bearing topic is done. I don’t know that there is much more to add.

I think that it may be a good idea to go back to the topic of harmonic balancers of a minute. In response to Ferrarifixer’s previous question on balancers, I have another thought how the 360 and 550 can run safely without a vibration dampener. It is possible that the multi piece flywheel satisfies the dampening function.

There is a trend towards lightening rotating mass by eliminating the vibration dampener. I have done this on another engine and I am going back. An article that I recently read on this issue was alarming. The article concluded that on tuner engines that have eliminated the balancer and have opted to use extremely light cam pulleys they are experiencing problems with broken timing belts and skipped timing cogs. They found that without a balancer that timing belts would whip violently. This goes to the heart of the issue of having the optimum vibration dampening setup.

We have a new pulley setup on the way that is not only adjustable but has the teeth that will accept the new type of timing belts. Between the balancer, the bearings, the pulleys and the timing belts each component has a longer useful life. We hope this will lead to longer service intervals. Time and testing will tell.

Thanks,

Mark Lewis

 

1.What is this DLC treatment for bearings? Where can I get it.

2. We used to take the cages out of transmission bearings and pack in twice the number of roller or ball bearings. This prevented the transmission gears from deflecting under load. It seemed to work, no more syncro failures. Will packing the bearings with double the number of ball bearings work in the case of the cam drive bearings? I haven't taken my engine apart yet, so I have not seen the bearings, maybe they don't use cages.

 

I don't think the drive bearing topic is done yet. I'd like to know how much axial load the cam drive produces, and how much the new bearings can handle, and while we're at it, how much the std ones are rated to also. Only then, will we have enough information to truely say the topic is done and whether the modification is a good one or not.

So far all we have is hypothesis and estimation. I'm incapable of calculating the loads, and was hoping either an engineer of the modifier could answer my questions.

Engine vibration........well, the 360 and 550 do NOT have multi piece flywheels, only the 348/355 have those. As far as I can see the only concession to vibration on 360 is rubber engine mounts and a rubber mounted cam belt tensioner on the LH side of the engine only. The RH one is solid. I'd like to know what the 430 hasas vibration control...anyone?? (we can start a new topic for this, wouldn't want the focus taken away from the 4 litre conversion....)

 

Just had a look at this conversion, I really admire the amount of work that has gone into such a venture, well done.

Just a few questions, I'm curious to know what the problem is with the 308 water pump? AFAIK, that set is the same impeller that runs in the F40 LM car that have up to 800 HP and they have no cooling issues. A 308 has no cooling issues either if it's well set up.

Secondly, I'm curious as to the performance of the 308 2V heads on the flowbench. The tests that I witnessed some yeas ago were completely the opposite, there was little that could be done to improve the 2V heads from stock.

 

Carl,

The 4-liter project will place more demands on the cooling system than even the F40 that you have mentioned. This is because we are reducing the available volume within the water jacket of the block.

It has been my experience that the 308 GTSi that my father owned routinely ran a little hot during the summer. This would prove to be catastrophic for the 4-liter engine. The cooling system of my dad's car was professionally maintained.

By going to a scroll type of water pump impeller we will be nearly doubling the pumping capacity of the new water pump over that of stock. The water pump is also more efficient and less propone to cavitation. Our water pump manufacturer estimates that the stock pump reaches maximum output around 4000 rpm’s. These are all very important design factors for our project, and we believe that the new pump will provide an additional margin of safety that will be appreciated when it come time for anybody to replace the stock unit.

In addition, the stock pump housing tends to corrode. This new casting is made from a better quality of aluminum. The stock water pump also has lower quality set of bearings, shaft, and seals. There have been several threads on this website that have been geared to upgrading the bearings and seals. Our housings are machined to receive a performance set of bearings and seals. In other words, the stock innards are completely replaced with little regards for the original design. The stock unit is typically replaced after 25,000 to 40,000 thousand miles of service because of the failure of the stock mechanical parts.

In short we feel that a better water pump is essential to the success of our project. Steps have taken to insure that we have a design can be reproduced at a reasonable cost. Substantially upgrading the durability and pumping capacity of water pump will shortly be an option afforded to any 308 own

I will try to get some pictures.

Thanks,

Mark Lewis

 

yes but what are the axial loads???

 

Okay, I know I am new to this forum, but as I have been reading along on this thread, some things have begun to bother me. First off is the Kermit thing. I have talked to the guy, and as a mechanic, felt he had a good understanding of mechanics, and a good "feel" for Ferrari in general. I don't know his buisness practices any more than I know anyone else's on here. But one person shouldnt be able to do what I have seen done here.

I felt he asked good valid questions, and found none of those questions were ever answered. Never! I myself felt overboring the block would weaken it while at the same time you are loading more stress into it. In regard to the valves, Kermit was correct in asking about the valve spring length, as it would be an issue. But next thing we know, someone has a complaint against Kermit, and I waited for his response. As I never seen one, I felt the allegations against him must have made him quiet, that he either did'nt have a response, or couldnt formulate one. But, I did wonder to myself with my own heads, how much metal you could remove before puncturing the coolant passage. It happens all the time with any engine in the world, all day long. Somehow I feltl there was more to the story. Is the guy with destroyed heads in cahoots with the guy with the 4 liter project who is also a friend of Forza? I don't like this deal and I think something smells somewhere.

Now I see Ferrarifixer is asking questions, and instead of answers, he gets belittled as some nobody noname back alley car mechanic. I don't know any of you people from Adam. But I can read, and I can ask questions, and I do have my own mechanical knowledge. How many times does Ferrarifixer need to ask a simple question to get a simple answer? How many times does someone need to explain how something goes together, in order to get some BS response? If you don't recall the question, I will ask it.

The rear cam drive bearing, the one in the block, is fixed in the block with a snap ring. The shaft, the one that drives the cam belt, the one with the gear on it thats turned by the crank, "slips" into the rear bearing. It "slips" in. Nothing "holds" it in the rear bearing. What I am saying here is, NOTHING HOLDS IT IN THE REAR BEARING! You can push it in all you want, it will hold some axial load in THAT direction, But... IT WILL NOT HOLD ANY AXIAL LOAD IF YOU PULL OUT ON IT! I Repeat... IT WILL NOT HOLD ANY AXIAL LOAD IF YOU PULL OUT ON IT!

To repeat Ferrarifixers questions, How can it provide any "significant" thrust load in an outward direction if the shaft will just slip out? Axial load MUST be carried in the outer bearing. Note here, I said, "significant". I am hoping you are not going to come back with your big interference fit deal, as its not enough force to provide any "significant" thrust.

Ferrarifixer repeatedly asked for numbers as to the loads on the bearings, he even helped you by providing a formula he was given by the manufacture YOU claim is providing the bearings, yet you offer no numbers but only further insults.

I wonder if I will banned next, for questioning a sponser, but I dont care. If someone in this forum can ban a member for asking a question so he can not respond any further, or even redeem himself, I question the entire forums usefullness.

I have many of the same questions, but I also wonder what some of you are trying to accomplish with a 30 year old design. Some glorify Ferrari out of one side of thier mouth, and cut it down out of the other. Once those engines are weakened and destroyed by overboring, where will you find replacements 30 years from now? Wait. If the original has only barely laster 30 years, how long will a weakened one last with more stress added to it? To quote an old term, there aint no free lunch. But perhaps there is no freedom of opinion in this forum any longer either. I think I will contact Kermit just to get his side of this, seeing as he had no chance to answer.

 

.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Krowbar,

This thread is an advertisement, hence the questions are a nuisance ... pity 'cause they could be used as a positive.

Why anyone would buy a 30+ year old Ferrari and want it to perform like a 10 year old Ferrari is beyond me ... just go and buy a 10 year old Ferrari!

In the end you add power or torque or whatever to something, something else will break. Thus you drop a much more powerful engine in a 30+ year car, and by the time you engineer out of the weak points ... the 20 year younger Ferrari will look like a bargin.

Ferrari (er, any manufacturer) do this every time they develop a new model ... and have a look at the changes between say a 360 and 430 ... massive and probably cost close to a billion in R&D.

Yep it is all good fun but in the end you are reducing resale value (for most) and your once almost reliable Ferrari will be showing signs of age very quickly. We all forget that Ferrari are in the game to make money, thus they do not design a car for a 3 ltr engine by making it handle easily a 4 ltr engine producing X more torque and power ... that would make their accountants go nuts.

So I come back to ... why?

I can understand the GM and Viper engines ... but not a ancient Ferrari engine (as much as I have enjoyed the pictures, etc.)
Pete

 

Sam,

Thanks for you question. We are hopeful that the August target date will be met. There have been no engineering snags, to date. The delays that we have encountered deal with the lead times necessary to fabricate one-off parts from third parties. For example the crank took over nine months. We ordered our crank at the same time that the crank manufacturer was receiving orders from NASCAR. Other parts are being produced from small companies and they seem to take longer than we would like at times. We are not only building 2, 4-liter engines, we are also setting up the infrastructure to have them reproduced for the marketplace.

Thanks,

Mark Lewis

 

I had Mark post some photos I took of the cam drive bearings, gear etc. on this site. Perhaps you didn't see them.

In any case, the bearing that goes in the block, the one we are replacing with a double row ball bearing, does not take any axial load. It is also not held in the block by a clip. It is a slip fit in the block. I would think this was done by Ferrari to provide for the differential expansion between the shaft and aluminum block - cover.

The front bearing, the one that goes in the cover, takes care of whatever outward thrust load is produced by the gears. This bearing is held in the cover by two circlips, one in the front and one in the rear. The gear shaft itself is pressed into this bearing. It is quite true that a roller bearing is not the ideal choice for thrust loads and my preferred choice would have been a double row ball bearing for this position as well. The problem is there is NO ROOM within the confines of the cover for a double row ball bearing. The chosen roller bearing has a thrust load capacity rating as "fair", by SKF. If the bearing were totally unsuitable for axial loads it would be so listed.

Without assembling an engine with complete valve gear it is impossible to calculate the loads on the gears. Also, some of you may be unaware that the gears themselves are different from early to later models of the 308. Ferrari kept the gear ratios the same, 75%, but changed the number of teeth on each of the gears.

Mark mentioned in one post that we intend to make a billet front cover for dry sump applications. This cover can and will be designed to take a large diameter double row ball bearing. I expect those wanting dry sump to run the engine much harder than those sticking with wet sump lubrication.

Regarding the valve springs. There is more than sufficient height for valve springs in this engine to get the valve lift close to .500" without coil bind. I know where to get the springs and have successfully used this suppliers springs on many inport applications. I am not going to go into details on how to fit larger valves in the head, how to provide clearance between the valves and so forth. I will however provide photos of some aspects of the work.

Whenever one does porting on heads one should procure a similar head to dissect to see what the expected wall thickness range will be in those locations of the port that require rework. If one goes in and hits water without doing this work, who is to blame? I had Mark get me a junk 2V head for the sole purpose of doing development work. My finished flow tested port profiles will then be digitized so additional customer heads can be duplicated via CNC porting then hand finished. This process will ensure consistent results with little chance of break through.

Mark posted my answers to Kermit's questions in a letter I sent Kermit last year. If you go back a few pages in this post you will see my answers to his questions. For some reason, Kermit ignored my answers and again asked for answers I already had given him. He futher went on to bash Nick which is why he was banned from posting for thirty days I believe. You should read Nick's response again.

The Ferrari block is more than strong enough to handle this modification. I have performed similar work on hundreds of various blocks, including: GM LS1, Ecotec, most models of Honda blocks including NSX, Mercedes, Porsche, Ford - many varieties, Alfa, Nissan VQ35, etc. I have my own line of sleeves for the Dodge Viper and make sleeves for special applications. Some of these engines are modified to produce well in excess of a thousand horsepower. I have a Viper block on the street six months now producing 960 blown horsepower at the rear wheels. This fellow does not baby his car at all.

I am co-patent holder 6,799,541 of Darton's line of MID wet liner retrofits for these above mentioned engines and do R&D work for all kits that Darton comes out with. In other words, I am more than qualified to make a judgement whether the Ferrari block is strong enough to handle the expected four hundred horsepower after modification with large bore sleeves. In fact the block was so well made that the basic structure of the Ferrari block is pretty much been left unchanged up to the newest models some with much higher output than four hundred horsepower.

Sincerely,

Steve Demirjian
Race Engine Development

 

This thread was started by a fellow Ferrari owner & enthusiast who wanted to know more about the 4 liter project that he saw on my website. www.nicksforzaferrari.com

I believe Sam contacted me approx a year ago. This thread is not an advertisement, as for any personal attacks on anybody, that is not what this site is for. I have said what I needed to say as a rebuttal with respect to any personal attacks on myself & my Family or my Corporation.

Mark Lewis (a fellow Ferrari owner) has spent hours trying to answer questions for Fellow chat members & Ferrari owners on this 4-liter project. I guess some of you don’t like 308’s or don’t own one; I myself own 3 of them. You can go buy a new 430 or a used 360 or 355 but they are not a 308. My 308 black GTBI does it for me PERIOD! It holds it’s own if not more so even when parked next to a newer model Ferrari. There are many of us out there that feel that way about their own 308’s.I am not knocking any of the other Ferrari models by any means, it just seems some people may have a problem with,” why modify this car” well why not! A example, I was so impressed years ago when Mark Eberhardt called me & we talked & sent me pictures of his supercharged 308 that he was building, I thought that was awesome & some F chatters that I had talked to thought that was sacrilege, well his car Kicks ass! Also the 12 cylinder 308’s, (I believe ATLANTAMAN has one), that’s awesome modification! This is what its about, having fun with these cars, doing some great new things, it wasn’t but 7 –10 years ago that if you owned one of these cars you were pretty much stuck with OEM parts & OEM thinking, this new stuff keeps the Ferrari mark alive with respect to the older cars.

There are enough customers already on the 4.1-liter engine to keep everybody involved busy for a year! The 4.1 liter engine is not going to be for everyone, nor is the price, the plus for the 308/328 guys is some of the parts that are being fabricated for this project, such as the new harmonic balancer & pulley, radiator, waterpump & the new timing belt system ( probably have a kit avail for the lower drive gears & front timing cover update) dry sump, carbon fiber intake system, plus down force, rear valance updates, add ons etc, will be avail for your own cars as bolt on items, this stuff is exciting! Having Clive Reed on board with his Carbon Fiber & interior & exterior expertise is a real asset to us & the rest of the Ferrari community.

This site is for all of us to talk & discuss Ferrari related topics. There is some technical data that Steve & Mark or myself are not going to talk about on this site, I assure you that all valve train related issues or other potential problems have been addressed or are being addressed, they have to be I am very hard on my cars! I will repeat this again; the goal is the Monterey Concorso Italiano in August. We will have dyno numbers posted on the website when Mark’s car is completed, my car will be completed after Marks as mine will be a little different than his, (Probably SUPERCHARGED so more parts can break!) interested parties can also fly out & either one of us can take you for a road test! If you like it fine, get on the waiting list, if you don’t we will not take offence. Mark, Steve & myself will continue to address all related questions with respect to this project as best as we can with out revealing all the secrets & post more pictures for those intrested.
Nick Scianna
www.nicksforzaferrari.com
Ferrari Chat’s First & oldest running sponsor

 

Nick, your out of control! That is going to be a torque moster!...I thought I had torque. Cool.

I think the whole bearing thing came from slightly evasive answers. To me it seemed like a good question and had the answer simply been “we are using a bearing rated to handle axial loads”, the issue would have been closed I think, at least it would have been for me.

Great project anyway, I can’t wait to hear how it drives!

 

Steve,Mark,
If Mark had said something like the above when FerrariFixer, others, & I had originally started asking about handling axial loads. I'd have taken it as an honest answer & waited till you had the engine running. It was when we didn't appear to be getting answers that made technical sense, or even acknowledged that there was am axial load concern that we started pushing back harder.

AMEN,
Nick,
AMEN

If you come out with a supercharger kit for a QV, I'd seriously consider it. Another 100-150 hp or so would be wonderful.

 

Nick,
Thanks for trying to answer the why ... appreciated. My views are that you like the look of the 308 and thus are creating as good as a replica. To me a 308 Ferrari has a 3 litre engine and one with something else is no longer a 308 Ferrari but a bitsa, with a 308 chassis/body. Bit like plastic surgery on a gracefully ageing lady, should have been left alone and let mother nature finish the job.

But each to our own, and the hoon in me can see she'll be fun
Pete
ps: Personally I think it is time for the 308 to be thought of like other ageing classic Ferraris and be treated as such. I say hack the much newer cars and leave the older stuff so we can admire what was a massive achievement by Ferrari and Pininfarina so many, many years ago.

 

The 308 is one elegant Lady that is going to stretch her legs and dance a little before she is done. In fact, by the time Steve is done with her, she is going to scream like a ***** in heat. Ahhhh….now that puts a smile on my face. Just thinking about it makes me feel warm and tingly all over. Steve…lets put a blower on her!!!


Thanks,

Mark Lewis