Author Topic: Crankshaft identification  (Read 5919 times)

Ricks

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3633
  • 1953 Automatic
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Crankshaft identification
« Reply #15 on: September 11, 2018, 11:07:45 AM »
I don't have a stock crank laying around, but I measured Wayne's at .651".  Anybody have a stock one they can measure for reference?
Rick

simplex1957

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
    • View Profile
Re: Crankshaft identification
« Reply #16 on: October 10, 2018, 07:54:32 AM »
My 1955 is .648 and I have smoothed it up just a little.
Don't force it----get a bigger hammer

Ricks

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3633
  • 1953 Automatic
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Crankshaft identification
« Reply #17 on: October 10, 2018, 08:00:11 AM »
My 1955 is .648 and I have smoothed it up just a little.

Thanks!  Pete, I guess it's just you!   lol
Rick

pd

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3130
    • View Profile
Re: Crankshaft identification
« Reply #18 on: October 10, 2018, 11:26:25 AM »
My 1955 is .648 and I have smoothed it up just a little.

Thanks! Pete, I guess it's just you!   lol

 Hmm , wouldn't be the first time . :o ;)

Pete . :)
Goes around , Comes around . :)

Bob53

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 196
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Crankshaft identification
« Reply #19 on: May 15, 2020, 09:12:11 AM »
Hey guys, We were looking at a couple of cranks. The one Wayne rebuilt with a new shaft does have a slightly larger hole. Looks like this is because of the cutter used to hollow out the valve and end of the crank. Question, Will the larger hole create more suction or less? If it creates more it should run a bit better on fuel transfer. Anyone have an idea which runs better or if there is any difference at all. Bob

pd

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3130
    • View Profile
Re: Crankshaft identification
« Reply #20 on: May 15, 2020, 10:19:37 AM »
Hey guys, We were looking at a couple of cranks. The one Wayne rebuilt with a new shaft does have a slightly larger hole. Looks like this is because of the cutter used to hollow out the valve and end of the crank. Question, Will the larger hole create more suction or less? If it creates more it should run a bit better on fuel transfer. Anyone have an idea which runs better or if there is any difference at all. Bob

Bob ,

The intake path should at least match the venturi size for the carb for optimum intake performance .

Manufacturers have gone by the flow velocity . Smaller carbs with higher velocities are better for engines used mostly at mid range RPM. Engines that are mostly used at high RPM were given larger carbs for lower flow velocities.

Not sure just how Simplex calculated the intake , but , according to 'general' practices , smaller would seem better for our relatively low RPM motors . And , the longer intake path ( from carb mount to crankcase ) should also aid low end performance . RPM gain is a bit slower ( pretty sure that's how it is ) .

Of course , if you're building a race version , LOL , all that^ needs revision .

Pete . :)
Goes around , Comes around . :)