David,

By any chance, do you still have this crank? It would be interesting to see.. do you have any photo's? Any idea where we could get some? I imagine there wouldn't be many if any still in use... You said you made yours out of L7 yeah? Where they in production at the time you were working there?

Yes. Paul is Franks son
http://www.ecoforce.com.au/news_frame.html

_________________
Member VMCI #19

Mate, I gotta say, I think that's pretty cool

Thanks to all for your kind comments

And I have to agree with Matt,,,,,,,,,



Mate, get the low down on what your dad did, well, when your sober....

_________________

Hi Mini Maxx
Sorry I haven't replied before this but I have been trying to get myself and other people to race meetings. Four race meetings all on top of each other and I don't have time to sit on the computer day and night. I am here now.

In regards to the testing, all I can say is, different methods may come up with different results, but if this is what these people found I can accept that and that is not a problem.

But, can you have a look at the email below.
Re drawings I am still trying to get hold of them from Paul Ivey.

Attached is an email from Keith Calver


In regards to the stiffness of the crankshafts, I still believe I am right. If you have a look at a genuine ENB40 Crank(Cooper S) you will find that the webs are very light and thin compared to the late model cranks.

There are two ways to stop the crank from twisting and that is with heat treatment or making the crank alot heavier and stronger. BMC used the heat treatment nitriding to get the stiffness, now when they stopped nitriding and tuffriding cranks they then made a much heavier and bulkier crankshaft by getting more overlap between the mains and the big ends. they did this by using 1 3/4" crank pins and making them narrower whilst reducing the width of the center main (by 0.30") so that the crank webs could be thicker (up to 0.060") This then made the crank less prone to twisiting forces.



GT Mowog, I'm glad you brought this article up from the REPCO book. Which was written in 1972. You are wrong in your quote that Frank was talking about the cooper crank. He was reffering to to Three main bearing north south motor's, not the east west mini. I know franks son's Andrew and Paul very well from boat and motor racing. When I spoke to Frank in the late 80's, when group N was really taking off, about the balance of mini motor's his quote was "they are a motor all of there own"

How can you calculate what is going to happen to the mini crank (Cooper S) when your on and off the throttle at 6000 revs and hard on the brakes with a 11" diameter, 20lb mass mounted 5 or so inches from rear main bearing. It is trying to twist the crankshaft to pieces, hence the need to stiffen the crank in some way or another. The mini motor unique in its design. I have spoken to alot of people, both in the UK and the USA, about balancing but when you tell them you have a mass hanging 5" away from the rear main bearing and unsupported and the fact that it is a flat plained crank which has inherent problems anyway, they laugh and say how can that ever work. The flat plained crank may make more HP at times, but that has now been proven wrong with modern crank design. They still make the HP without all the balance and harmonic problems. There comments are make the crank as stiff and as sturdy as possible. This is what I have done with my crankshafts to try and cure this design flaw.

Now if you have a look at what the Japanese did on the colt KE43/44, they increased the main bearings to 2 1/8 or 2 1/4" and much bigger diameter pins to get as much overlap as possible. They then added counter weights to the flywheel and the pulley on the front to try and get rid of Torsional Vibration and the inherent balance problems. They do not use a flat plain crank.

GT Mowog, if you had gone onto page 37 of the REPCO book to vibrational dampers you will notice Frank Hallam refers to modern 4 cyl engines not needing vibrational dampers because of the fitment of relativley short stiff crankshafts possessing a high natural frequency of vibration, whilst the exciting forces occour at a lower frequency than the engine with a greater number of crank throws. They do not therefore need normally require any special attention to torsional vibration. Unlike the 6 cylinder inline crankhsaft which is very long and has alot of twisting forces. ( this is mostly quoted from the book, so best to scan the page and stick it up if you can as I can't)
SO WHY DID BMC FIT A TOSIONAL VIBRATION DAMPER TO THE NOSE OF THE COOPER S?
Maybe just maybe the STD Cooper S Crank had many inherent problems, as in twisting(torsional vibration)

Graham Russell

Please excuse any typo or spelling errors as I hate computers.

_________________
"It's better to be not informed than ill-informed"

Hi GR,

Yes, we all know that you do get busy, and we all know what it's like.

What you said regarding different testing produces different results in this case simply does not wash;-

1) I posted here specifically the tests to be done and you had concerns regarding the hardness test method (not that it would have made any difference), so we changed that and you did agree.

2) These test methods are done to international standards and are directly comparable to any that BMC would have done.

3) BMCs official Factory documentation in no way supports any Nitriding beyond 0.020" and gee wizz, our test result confirm exactly that.

You also said that if there was any Nickle present that it would 'reject' the Nitriding. Again, Nickle is part of the international composition of EN40B and was found to be present in the sample, but golly, it clearly accepted the Nitriding.

You are clearly in error - on all accounts - and have to accept that.

Those of us who do know a thing or two about this stuff have said so and that has been since backed up by NATA test results, with I might add, your blessing.

You did say that the very same sample that I had tested was also tested by Steve Hooker. I asked you for the tests certificate / results and as yet we still have not seen them.

Nitriding processes and methods today are better than they have ever been. There is a Company in the USA which is now only just achieving 0.030" depth of Nitriding and, amongst the heat treaters, these guys are 'rock stars' for achieving that depth. So regarding your comment (something like) "ask these Heat Treatment guys (about Nitriding to 0.060") and they just say it's all BS" well, perhaps you should listen to them, they are professionals and that is what they do for a living. If, If they could achieve 0.060" depth of Nitriding, I recon that they'd want to do that so that they could make some serious money from it, but it ain't yet possible, so since these guys are professionals at Nitriding, they seem to prefer to tell you the truth, rather than rip you off.

Regarding what you say about the Cooper Crank that I refered to in Frank's Book, well, Frank has passed away so we cannot confirm that either way, however I do know that they (Repco Engines) did do some very intensive reseach into the 998 Cooper Engines and there are many specific references to this thoughout the Book. I know through my own associates at my former employer, Repco, that this was a 998 Cooper Crank. They had some very close links to John Cooper of Cooper Garages through Jack. Further, if you read the second paragraph of the section under the header 'Crankshaft Rigidity', this quite contradicts what you suggest about making the crank 'stiff' (in your words). I did ask you previously for clarification on your comment.

Regarding what you say about hanging the mini flywheel 5" off the end of the crank, well, ever heard of 'Gyroscopic Effect' and what that would do?

Now, it does seem that you might have a copy of Frank's Book, but it does not appear that you have read page 191 or you might know about the Nitriding of crankshafts;-



Granted, that is regarding crankshafts in general, not Mini ones specifically, however Frank would have noted that some cranks do go deeper if they did (especially since he had good access and co-operation with BMC), but there is no mention of it.

Pages 36 & 37 of Frank's book, that covers Tortional Vibration, he disccuss's the problem in general terms although he does touch on 6 cylinder engines, he does not specifically mention 4 cylinder ones at all.

BMC fitted Harmonic Dampers to the engines that needed them, including all capacities of the Cooper S.

<EDIT> Send Keith (Calver) a copy of the Test results. I'd be interested in his comment and also, if you could, ask him what heat treatment was done as he doesn't say.

And, while your at it, ask Keith if he has ever had tests done to these cranks.

<EDIT> My mention of Nitriding to 0.060" being impossible refers to ferrous materials.

_________________

So what do you want GT? Do you want an apology from GR for being wrong?

You yourself have been wrong on many occasions and we have never received any signs of an apology or any admission of guilt.

Gt mowog
Forget about Keith go straight to the horses mouth ring Paul Ivey and he will tell you all about the R and D work he did on the S motor.
Also you might like to know any deep nitriding that has to be done in the aircraft industry is sent over seas as no body here in australia can get it deep enough.
The only imput into the Mini cooper that John Cooper had with BMC was to modify the cooper, he had no imput into the design or the r and d of the cooper S engine but BMC did build him a special engine the one that i wrote about in my article for his FJ race car.
Speaking of which it's funny how people around the world have now changed the way they wedge cranks and have copied the design of my counterweighted crank shafts.
Its funny how you don't want to turn the page, Vibration Dampers page 37 bottom right hand corner continued on page 38 saying that they require no special attention to torsional vibration. please put it up so people can read it, like i said the mini is a motor all of it's own.
Now while your sitting at home draging up stuff that is 40 years old and hiding behind your key board,im still doing a lot of R and D work on the mini motor as things have changed in the last 50 years .
I redesign parts test them and race them, and if they don't work every body knows about it, but what i can tell you my crankshafts DO WORK
they have fixed a lot of problems with the mini motor when it comes to making good HP at high rpm, thats why they are copied by people,and i can tell you one thing they are a lot stiffer than the orignal crank,
And yes 850 man my car did fail to finish on the week end split in the hose, and me not checking my gauge all the time it pumped all the water out and Lindsay burst to gear you get that now and then when you trying to put a lot of hp through the old 3 syncro gear box.
But both these cars were on the front row after practice and the yellow car by a long way so some where a long the line i must be doing some thing right.
Now i have to get back to getting my ready for Phillip Island see you there.
Graham Russell

_________________
"It's better to be not informed than ill-informed"

Funny, I was talking to someone else on the weekend that also mentioned Paul Ivey and the Cooper S motor.

I am not in the office and so I don't have a scanner handy, but no worries, I'll post it when I can.

<EDIT> Tell you what, when you post the info that I have asked for to back up your claims, I'll scan and post the pages from the book then <END EDIT>

However to quote it;-

"Four cylinder engines of modern design are generally fitted with a relitively short stiff crankshaft......"

and it goes on from there.

Well, this doesn't sound in any way, shape or form like a mini crank and so is doubtful in it's application to a mini crank, T/V and dampers. The A Series Engine dates back to the early 50's, so even in 1972, it was hardly 'modern'.

Regarding going to the source, I have and it was posted way back in this thread.

Coming back to Nitriding and (if it were possible) deep treatment of cranks. It has been established that Nitriding does produce a hard surface, however it is brittle. The crank has to possess elastic properties to cope with flex and T/V. So why would you embrittle a crank?

The guys you say are getting 'deep' Nitriding of Aircraft Parts, can you ask them to read this thread and comment?

Myself and others have spoken here on what is being done overseas.

<EDIT> I don't recall Paul Ivey working at BMC or Morris Motor, he did his apprentiship with Downton and then started working for himself in the early 50's. Paul did go on to do further development of the Cooper S (once released) and other cars.

_________________

MORRIS 1100, I have lost count of how many times you have pulled someone up about being wrong in making a "incorrect "statement concerning minis and you always quote the facts from the books that you have.
I think that the point of this thread to get to the established facts and get away from the folk lore stories that are around.

Now no-one has all the answers and I learnt a long time ago to stop listening to the folk lore stories and get off your arse and find out the FACTS. The problem is that no matter what you proove and what you do and submit verified facts there is always "some one" who will not accept the facts and just wants to throw crap around.
Unfortuneately many of these discussions just end up as a sh*t fight due a personal dislike of another person and nothing is achieved.

OK at this stage we have a verified fact from the testing and a heap of "what some one else has said" and some discussion about other problems with mini cranks.

Now back to topic and just out of interest the statement that "grinding/rolling" a radius in the center main brg journal stops mini cranks from breaking the web between the journal and No.2 big end.
Could someone please explain why this is so or am I missing something.


PHAT KAT
These cranks were a experiment that Don was doing as he was building many individual billet cranks at the time. Unfortuneately we only made a few as minis had lost their appeal for racing by the early 70's. and there was nothing in it for Don. He was concerntrating on cranks and other engine componets for formula 5000's and other "paying" cars. Don allowed me to use the spare machines to make my own crank in my time.

I do not have any pics of the crank or even the car any more, but I will PM you a sketch of the design and a bit of info on them. I will just leave it at that on here before some one elses jumps down my neck.

_________________
Research is the difference between speculation and investment. Anyone who copys some one else will always be second
www.minisprintgt.com

David, when I quote something from a book I try give the details of the book I am quoting from.
I try to leave it to the individual to make their own decision as to the accuracy of the stuff in that book.

Well I think its safe to say that there is no better way of 'leaving it to the individual to make up their own mind about the accuracy of the stuff in the book' then to actually scan a page out of it so that there is no room for tainting its content.... and in fairness Morris, I can't recall you giving out details for the books you're quoting from too many times...

Anyway, this has nothing to do with crankshafts.
.
.
.
Thanks for your offer David, I look forward to reading your message (I should have my email working again sometime today if you would prefer to send it there instead..)





....... Maybe I "will" do an "EPIC POST" on heat treatment..... again just for a little "clarity" .... I'll do that later, right now I'm starving and a little hung over

Crankshafts? I thought the topic was bash a tall poppy?
It was one page of crankshafts and thirteen pages of your dad trying to prove GR wrong.

Don't feed the troll.

_________________
Have a Nice Day.
If already having a nice day please disregard.