Visit our Twitter feed for more great content
AHExp

The Sprite Forum

Early 948cc Engine Restore

Moss Motors
AutoShrine Sponsor
AutoShrine Sponsor
AutoShrine Sponsor
AutoShrine Sponsor

pinkyponk Avatar
pinkyponk Gold Member Adrian Page
Berwick, NS, Canada   CAN
In reply to # 209032 by refisk If your flywheel only weighs 9 pounds it's not the stock unit. MGBs came from the factory with cast iron flywheels that weighed 21 to 28 pounds depending on the engine type. The heavy factory flywheels were probably chosen because of cost and drivability for the average Joe.

In reply to # 209030 by pinkyponk I'm curious about these flywheels weights. I have an MGB with a 9 pound flywheel and love the improved throttle response. Does the BE need a heavier flywheel because the crank is light or?

Adrian

Definitely not the stock flywheel. It's a Fidanza aluminum one. I'm surprised the factory thought the BE needed the same weight flywheel as an 1800cc motor! I'm interested in a lighter flywheel for my BE because I'm so pleased with my MGB swap from 23 pounds to 9 pounds.

Adrian

. Hide banner ads & support this website by becoming a > Gold Supporting Member <
westburn70 Eric Flack
Glasgow, Lanarkshire, UK   GBR
I think some of these "go faster" people sold bits of dubious quality and performance to young gullible sports car owners. I still have an aquaplane carburettor manifold in aluminium. Its stamped 57 probably No 57 in a rather poor quality sand casting. I had it with some 1 1/2 twin SU carbs. It had some sort of fancy sales extolling its virtues with the "obligatory" racing exhaust system which I had fitted. My dad could her me about half a mile away! Such was the noise-performance? Well it made a noise so you must be going faster and your petrol consumption was going up as well so something was happening! Loss of cash in your wallet! For perhaps a few extra mph!

rhodyspit75 Avatar
rhodyspit75 Ernie Connor
Cumberland, RI, USA   USA
I really don’t want to offend anyone but maybe the flywheel discussion should have a thread of its own and let BMac continue telling us about his engine build. It’s not unusual for things to get off topic.

. Hide banner ads & support this website by becoming a > Gold Supporting Member <
Dimadee Tim Lennon
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia   AUS
Can you post a pic of the manifold? I am interested to see what it looks like



Yours Spritely

Tim


Check out my Bugeye blog here: https://59bugeyesprite.wordpress.com/

westburn70 Eric Flack
Glasgow, Lanarkshire, UK   GBR
This is the aquaplane carb manifold I spoke about


Attachments:
aquaplane 1.jpg    33.8 KB
aquaplane 1.jpg

aquaplane2.jpg    36.1 KB
Sign In or Register to view this photo
Dimadee Tim Lennon
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia   AUS
Wow, that's a bit of a relic. Thanks for posting the pics.

Not sure about the name as aquplaning it is a bad thing when you are driving a car!



Yours Spritely

Tim


Check out my Bugeye blog here: https://59bugeyesprite.wordpress.com/

grey1 Avatar
grey1 Mike H
Delta, BC, Canada   CAN
I am curious about the intake valves. Original to the 629 head was the small 1.094 size if I am not mistaken. I agree this head needs larger intakes, but not having done this before, what is involved in fitting the larger intake valve into this cylinder head? Thanks!

BMac Avatar
BMac Brendan MacRae
Grass Valley, CA, USA   USA
Nothing special is required to replace the valves with the larger size. Of course, the sizes of the valves are limited as there's only so much room that a gap must be left between them (also the seats need a certain amount of room, too). However, you need to be aware that the limit is determined by the shrouding around the valve in the chamber. Normally, it's best to enlarge the chamber and relieve the area around the back side of the valves for better flow if the valve sizes are remarkably larger. But if you do relieve the chambers it can reduce the compression ratio. In this case we've not enlarged the exhausts at all and haven't swept behind the valves either as this is a moderate modification. The owner is planning on using HS2's with this head so it seems an appropriate mod.

In reply to # 209431 by grey1 I am curious about the intake valves. Original to the 629 head was the small 1.094 size if I am not mistaken. I agree this head needs larger intakes, but not having done this before, what is involved in fitting the larger intake valve into this cylinder head? Thanks!

BMac Avatar
BMac Brendan MacRae
Grass Valley, CA, USA   USA
Here's a video I shot about the cam for the 948:




. Hide banner ads & support this website by becoming a > Gold Supporting Member <

To add your reply, or post your own questions




Registration is FREE and takes less than a minute!


Having trouble posting or changing forum settings?
Read the Forum Help (FAQ) or contact the webmaster





Join The Club

Sign in to ask questions, share photos, and access all website features

Your Cars

1968 Austin Healey Sprite

Text Size

Larger Smaller
Reset Save

Sponsor Links