Do believe there was a couple of other Bills around that time------think Seebold may have been a Bill and i'm quite sure there was a Sirois ?????????????
Printable View
Do believe there was a couple of other Bills around that time------think Seebold may have been a Bill and i'm quite sure there was a Sirois ?????????????
I got a pic sent to me from a friend at Merc of a 6 pipe 1100. he said they didn tmake many because they found out really quick about the difference in performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by willabee
Willabee- I sure would like to pick your brain for info on the early days and 1100stackers. I am almost finished with the resto and still working on the history of who had access to them and where this one might have come from.
I certainly have lots of circumstantial evidence who probably owned it.
Jackie - Jackie - Jackie :nonod:Quote:
Originally Posted by jackie wilson
I see we're starting the new year just as sharp as ever! Please take a peak at the 2nd paragraph of post # 2811 and then go back to bed. :nonod:
I believe BP motors were:
1000 BP 89 CUBES Conventional Crossflow
1250 BP 99 CUBES Conventional Crossflow
1000 SBP 89 CUBES Direct Charge
1250 SBP 99 CUBES Direct Charge
:iagree: ..... 1968 for the crossflows & 1969 for the direct chargersQuote:
Originally Posted by milkdud
MrB...
(1250)BP135 hp-----------------------------------------125 IMO The 1250 fishing block was rated @ 5300 RPM the BP was @ 5600. If it had more hp than the fishing block it was an RPM thing.
(1250)BP Stacker140 hp -------------------------------143 IMO Stack add 15%?
(1250)Super BP145 hp ---------------------------------135 IMO This was pretty much the "new" preproduction 1350 direct charge block.
(1250)Super BP Stacker-150 hp -----------------------155 IMO And add another 15%
Conrad
You need to go back and catch up to the discussion.... Sirois and Seebold are tied at the top.Quote:
Originally Posted by jackie wilson
While I have great respect for Bill Sirois Having him lap me several times in Havasu, Billy Seebold was second to none in Alky now Pro and a short time in Inboard driving Les Brown's Long Gone. No one can match those achievements ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by T2x
Soooooo, I don't read EVERY post------------your just pissed at me over the DON AMECHE remark.Quote:
Originally Posted by willabee
Wait 'till you get to four score and then some, see how bright your buttons shine Billy Boy, hell's teeth I have to be reminded this is 2013, isn't it ?
Hi John: How's it going?Quote:
Originally Posted by John Schubert
I am truly conflicted in this. Seebold was amazing, consistent, dominant and multi-talented, but so was Sirois. While Seebold excelled in outboard tunnels, hydros, and Inboards and developed his own hulls, Sirois was almost unbeatable in dual outboards followed by a short stint in singles, added a major Offshore career and had successful forays into Inboard marathon racing. Many on this site did not see Sirois during his Offshore years where he not only raced the top Kiekhaefer Open boats (Ol' Yellar), later started and ran a world class race shop, and ultimately served as throttleman, team manager and innovator for the Popeye's team (originated the 4 engine Superboat cats, created the 8 outboard powerhead sterndrive Cougar, etc, etc, etc). I guess Seebold gets the edge as a driver and Sirois in development snd engineering. Their setup/tuning skills were probably equal. What I find most troubling about this is that I have a problem saying that anyone is/was "better" than either of them, and am honored to have known both. Seebold's 1000 race wins stand atop all other boat racers without doubt, but in their brief time racing each other heads up I think Sirois was on top.
In conclusion, I can say without any hesitation that the greatest boat racer of all time was Bill S----, and everyone else is competing for 3rd place. Happy New Year to all
I'll never appear four score and change, will always look like one score and a bit :thumbsup:..... now let's get away from BS and get back to HP. :reddevil:Quote:
Originally Posted by jackiewilson
Here is the next email from Dick, again I removed some comments unrelated to the questions I asked which show up below his response. In this exchange I was mainly hoping to obtain some info on the 1100 stacker for Tom's resto project.
Hi Bill,
..............
Anyway, regarding 1100 stackers, I am afraid I won’t be much help. The first race engine I worked on was the 1000 BP but I don’t think that engine or at least the engines that I worked on were stackers. Regarding the 1100 stackers I think they were most likely built at Plant #6 but I think that Roy Rauchle may have been responsible for that project. Consequently, I have no idea of how many were built but I faintly recall the machine shop building a bunch of stacks and that’s all I remember. I did develop a 16 degree 3-stacker that had a broader power range than the 6-stacker with ~10% more bhp but good old ..... said the old man wouldn’t like it so the stacks were hid behind the stove at Plant 6 so Karl wouldn’t see them. Stupid is as stupid does.
Regarding the Synthane reeds (fiber reinforced sheet in a Phenolic resin), we purchased the sheet stock (brown color) and manufactured them in the machine shop at #6. I was tasked with the job of working out the dynamics of the reeds in that confounded center reed block with the objective of making the stainless reeds work in a race engine because the Synthane would burn when the engine backfired. I spent lots of hours with a strobe light peering through a fiberglass window in an 1100 crankcase but it wasn’t until I started working on the Twister that I finally figured it out. We would build an engine and install it on Bob Hering’s boat and it finally dawned on me that when he (Bob) would decelerate to set the boat for a turn, the SS reeds would chip. So I went back to the dyno engine with the hole in the crankcase and ran the engine at part throttle, mid rpm range, the reeds would hit the reed stop and the reed would curl up and slam back into the reed block tip first. I knew enough about aerodynamics to understand that the damping characteristics as a result of reduced air flow at high rpm was causing the reeds to curl up and come down tip first. My first attempt was to reduce the length of the reed stop and I even tried eliminating the reed stop entirely. To cut this short I finally lengthened the reed port so that when the reed curled up and then hit the reed block the tip of the reed didn’t hit the reed block and the problem was solved by making investment cast reed blocks for the TII. Are you bored yet? Anyway, if you know anyone running an 1100, the solution to reed chipping is to lengthen the reed port so that the reed barely covers the port in the closed position.
Let’s see, regarding S/N’s I have no clue and I do not remember Jan Schoonover.
Finally regarding the C6, .............. As it turned out he was doing his best to encourage competition between Ted and I while at the same time he was always looking for information ............... I think you indicated that Ted said the 6C put out 200 bhp, ............ I think that was a bunch of bull. When I finally got permission to build a new crankcase for the TII (Ted got the same permission a year earlier) we finally had a competitive engine. Later we went on and solved some of the piston problems and the last two engines we built were for the record run at Kaukauna ran at ~ 7500 rpm (new porting, new pistons, etc.)
Stay well!
Dick
From: bw@
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 1:03 PM
To: Lanpheer, Dick
Subject: stacked 1100's .....
Hi Dick,
Don't know if you were involved with 1100's back in their day, but have a couple of questions:
how many were built
who built them
were they shipped as stackers or were they stock engines that someone converted
did they have stainlees or phenolic (sp) reeds
did plant 6 stamp a serial number date on the front covers when they built an engine like this
do you know who built Jan Schoonover's 1100's
For some reason I think Jimmy Kubasta was involved, I think he was sent by Bill Steele to a few guys like Jan and Jimmy converted their powerheads to stackers?
BTW - you didn't finish answering my question about HP. I asked why you say the TII series was about 175 and I remember Morgan was telling me the C6 was 200.
Hope you're doing well.
Bill
<!VMDG>
While we are on this subject can someone please explain the difference between crossflow and "Direct Charge" motors. Owned and raced both.
see pics below for difference . One on the left is a standard cross flow piston. The other is a direct charge piston
Mr Smyth great visuals with the photos. Ill add that they are both "crossflow" motors. The "direct charge" was the new generation of crossflows that started in 1969 and continued the same basic design until the end in 1988.Quote:
Originally Posted by 2us70