my68barracuda
Well-Known Member
an unusually beefy design
there is a lot of weight in the bottom end of a slant, but I do not consider it to be of exceptional strength. The large diameter crank journals help stiffness,
but there are only four mains. An inline six with seven main bearings, like the AMC 197/232 motors of the mid sixties would have better control over crank shaft flex and cap walk. Personally, I believe the architecture of the iron slants is typical of the engines from that era. From back when being a Draftsman was a good career, before Computer Aided Design and Finite Element Analysis and from a time when being able to read a slide rule was a requirement.
Actually it is the charm of pre computer design that I find attractive in Slant Six motors.
originally designed for adequate rigidity and toughness if it had been made out of aluminum
I never had a conversation with Bill W, or any of the other Slant Six Designers, but I will offer that conversations on the design similarity of the iron and aluminum blocks probably was intended to address the facts such as:
regardless of aluminum or iron,
*the same motor mounts would be used
*the same crankshaft, damper & flywheel would be used
*the same intake and exhaust manifolds would be used
*the same timing chain cover, oil pan would be used
the iron and aluminum engines have a similarity because they were both developed at the same time, by the same engineers, using the same design tools of the era and both engines used much of the same hardware.
however there is no doubt that the iron and aluminum blocks would each have their own part print and their own design release, just the difference in shrinkage of aluminum vs iron would dictate that.
I would be willing to bet that the die cast aluminum blocks have section thicknesses that are thinner than the same sections on the iron blocks. Because the die cast aluminum process does not like thick cross sections, where the cast iron process does.
there is a lot of weight in the bottom end of a slant, but I do not consider it to be of exceptional strength. The large diameter crank journals help stiffness,
but there are only four mains. An inline six with seven main bearings, like the AMC 197/232 motors of the mid sixties would have better control over crank shaft flex and cap walk. Personally, I believe the architecture of the iron slants is typical of the engines from that era. From back when being a Draftsman was a good career, before Computer Aided Design and Finite Element Analysis and from a time when being able to read a slide rule was a requirement.
Actually it is the charm of pre computer design that I find attractive in Slant Six motors.
originally designed for adequate rigidity and toughness if it had been made out of aluminum
I never had a conversation with Bill W, or any of the other Slant Six Designers, but I will offer that conversations on the design similarity of the iron and aluminum blocks probably was intended to address the facts such as:
regardless of aluminum or iron,
*the same motor mounts would be used
*the same crankshaft, damper & flywheel would be used
*the same intake and exhaust manifolds would be used
*the same timing chain cover, oil pan would be used
the iron and aluminum engines have a similarity because they were both developed at the same time, by the same engineers, using the same design tools of the era and both engines used much of the same hardware.
however there is no doubt that the iron and aluminum blocks would each have their own part print and their own design release, just the difference in shrinkage of aluminum vs iron would dictate that.
I would be willing to bet that the die cast aluminum blocks have section thicknesses that are thinner than the same sections on the iron blocks. Because the die cast aluminum process does not like thick cross sections, where the cast iron process does.
Last edited:
