Hot Singles ! - Pictures

[willabee]

.... Is that list only what was the public could get there hands on?

I assume the 1350 stacker was being used in 1970 along side the Twister using your list as reference? Was the stacker used in 1971?

How many years were the t2x and T2 made?

Thank you,
Conrad

Sorry, I missed some of your questions when I responded that the 1350 stacker was on the list.

The list is intended to show when these different motors were on Team boats and their horsepower. A few notes were added about when they were made available to the public.

You are correct in assuming the 1350 stacker ran along side of the Twister in 1970. I think we entered boats with Stackers, Twisters and Cowbells in the Miami 225! We were done with the stacker in 1971, it was all Twister I and C6 development work.

I don't know how many years the Merc High Performance department made the TII & TIIX available for purchase. They were basically one year engines for the Race Team.

[C.G. 125]

Willabee, What's up with this thing?

[willabee]

Willabee, What's up with this thing?

Happy New Year Chick!

Not real sure what you're asking, but I'll take a stab. I just posted that we were done with the stacker in 1971 and you're showing a picture of a stacker at Parker in 1971?

If that's it, the stacker we were talking about is the 1350 water injected 3 pipe. We were done with it in 71 and were racing with TI's and doing C6 development work. As you know, your Zonker and Downard's Molinari pitted next to you are running an early stacked C6 (appears it doesn't even have a bottom pan).

They were pretty fast and sure sounded good, just not ready for nine hours yet!

[milkdud]

Willabee, What's up with this thing?

That motor has the larger SSM MC-1. I like the cowling sticker on the trailer

[Mark75H]

In October and November you are running the next model year motors. The calendar dates are correct, but the model year and effective year they see real production and use is the next year. So, 3 races in 1970 and all the rest 1971 and later for these motors.

I don't think that I agree with you about that ..... We raced nothing but Twisters in at Paris, Berlin, etc. in 1970, even the 9 carb ran a Twister silo exhaust log. We ran the 1350 water injected stacker and Twisters and Cowbells at Havasu in 1970. If we're running that stuff at the biggest events of the year, I believe that is the year they should show up in on the list. The list does say that the Twister was available to the public in 1971 and the Twister I became available in 1972.

Attachment 289986

Renato/Wilson Paris 1970 - Twister

[baldad45]

The original Twister 1 produced essentially the same peak power as did the stacker, but there was very little pipe tuning - - only pulse tuning, and that was true of everything from there on forward. All were pulse tuned. When we went to the Tillotson setup on the TII it was a major disappointment for me. We picked up maybe 10 – 12 bhp but we still had the rpm range limitations which really screwed up the prop/load issue. We did not realize at the time that the piston rings were going into resonance somewhere above 6000 rpm and that phenomena played a major role in extending the power curve to higher rpm’s.

What was done to solve this resonance problem ?

[willabee]

What was done to solve this resonance problem ?

I asked Dick and received the following:

Gees, you are really taxing my memory now! There was so much piston ring development done that I cannot recall even a small fraction of it. We tested regular rectangular rings, L-shaped (dykes) rings, triangular rings (I can’t remember what they were called, but they were a variation of the dykes ring) and rail rings. We even tested two rail rings in one ring groove but most of that work was done to reduce piston scuffing. Anyway, let’s examine the terminology. Ring flutter is typically caused by combustion gases circumventing the ring groove. Typically the piston ring seals the combustion gases from escaping into the the crankcase by a combination of ring tension and gas pressure in the ring groove pushing the ring outward, thereby sealing the combustion gases from escaping into the crankcase. Without any gas pressure behind the ring it will collapse and piston ring breakage is the normal result. Resonance is determined by the spring pressure (stiffness of the ring) and the mass of the ring. To visualize the stiffness factor consider a 1/2 inch diameter steel rod clamped in a vise. When you strike the end of the rod it will vibrate at its resonant (natural) frequency. If you clamp the steel rod on one end, the resonant frequency will be lower than if you clamp it in the middle of the rod. The frequency of the sound emanating from the steel rod will increase as you shorten the rod so one way you can identify “resonance” is by the frequency of the sound caused by the vibration. Likewise, if you substitute a 1 inch diameter rod in place of the original one, when you clamp it into the vise and strike it with a hammer the resonant frequency will be lower as evidenced by the lower frequency sound. If you replace the steel rod with an aluminum rod the resonant frequency will be lower because the steel rod is stiffer than the aluminum rod. Consequently, resonance or resonant frequency is directly proportion to stiffness and inversely proportional to mass. By now you can understand the difference between ring flutter and ring resonance which is important because the “fix” for the two is quite different. Unfortunately, I cannot remember for certain why I recall that the problem was resonance, but I seem to recall that higher mass rings resulted in a steep decline in power somewhere above 6500 rpm whereas the single rail kept on pulling up well above 7000 rpm. The other big advantage with the rails is a much reduced drag due to friction. The record engine when assembled with the crankshaft installed in the block (no cylinder head) would spin with a twist of the wrist on the crankshaft so friction losses at high rpms were greatly reduced. That is the limit of my recollection on the subject.

[baldad45]

Thanks for the detailed explanation . Maybe the difference between the T-ll and T-llX is mainly in the pistons and rings.

[baldad45]

Here are some thin ring pistons and a couple finger ported.

[Mark75H]

The name of the triangular shaped ring is keystone ... like the wedge shaped keystone at the top of an arch

[Mark75H]

Thanks for the detailed explanation . Maybe the difference between the T-ll and T-llX is mainly in the pistons and rings.

In an earlier email, Mr Lanpheer said it was in the porting.

[Dave S]

Merc ...... used stock rods..... ring flutta....long rods ... less flutta....the piston ring location shows how long they sholda been......Short rods are for fishing motors......

[willabee]

In an earlier email, Mr Lanpheer said it was in the porting.

Asked Dick about pistons and rings, when you read his response I think you'll find that he is saying pistons & rings as well as porting is what they were concentrating on. He also names the other ring as "keystone" as Mark75H has already stated, good job!

Before you read his response there are a couple of things I'd like to point out. You have to remember that back then, Dick was an engineer. He wore a white smock, carried a clipboard and a pencil everywhere he went and, like Rotary John, spent waaaay too many hours, alone, in a dyno cell. That fact will become evident when you read his tale about "Scotty"!

The other thing I believe happened was that he thought I was asking about the TII+ that Plt #6 built for Mert's record run when I asked for a comparison between the TII & the TIIX. Disregard his comments at the end of his email about that because he is talking about a different powerhead. I have sent him another email to get that cleared up, but received no response as yet.

Don't know if this matters, but when he refers to Plt.#6, he is talking about the two cycle development facility that was on Murdock street in Oshkosh. Plt.# 38 is the headquarters for the OPC racing team which was on Wisconsin street in Oshkosh.

Piston rings, a subject I could have written a book on at one time. To begin, I would be inclined to agree that the original Twister ran the production 3-ring setup. One of the first races for which we built the original Twister was in Scotland. I recall that the Marketing Dept. was attempting to woo an OMC dealer, known by the name of “Scotty” (he was Renato’s cousin) to switch to Mercury from OMC. Anyway, I was new to all of this crap that was going on between OMC and Mercury but I was told to build two engines and get them boxed so that they could be flown to Scotland. I seem to recall that Scotty built tunnel boats under the “Shakespeare” name but I may be mistaken. Anyway, we built the engines, shipped them and Scotty put the first engine on his boat and went out and set a lap record on the first lap! The word came back that he was delighted and he wanted to run the second engine just to make sure that we hadn’t slipped one by him, so he ran the second engine. The next thing I heard was that both engines failed because after testing them he ran both of them without any oil in the gas and fried them both! Needless to say, we were had by OMC and that was the beginning of a long period of bad feelings I had for OMC. Back to piston rings – the original Twister I had the production 3 rectangular ring setup and we had lots of scuffing problems, particularly in long races. The pistons would overheat and the rings would coke up and stick in the grooves and then the piston would scuff because the heat wouldn’t transfer into the cylinder wall because the top ring was stuck in the ring groove. At that point we began developing pistons with Keystone rings (trapezoidal shape with a taper on the top and bottom of the ring and, of course, the ring groove. The concept was really quite effective because the rings were constantly moving in and out in the ring groove thereby scrubbing the surface and working the carbon out of the ring groove. The problem was that machining the groove to the correct depth and matching the ring to the groove required some development and some precise machining. I seem to recall that we experimented with a Keystone ring on top and a rectangular ring in the second groove and possibly a third groove. Eventually we most likely settled on two Keystone rings in an attempt to reduce ring drag (two rings instead of three) and I assume that the TII engines built at #38 were most likely that configuration. My recollection is that all of the TII engines were configured with the revised transfer passage cover that facilitated the boost port. Things get messy when we talk about the TIIX. I do not recall engines built at Plant 38 that were designated with the “X”. Ray Reid and Ron Anderson were working on a turbo charger for the TIII (V-6) and that was such a mess because ...... was insisting that the Speed Master would not handle the power produced by a turbo charged V-6. ....... insisted that we design and build four-shaft gear cases which cost a ton of $$$ and lots of midnight oil. He also insisted that we build and ship turbo V-6’s to the ‘73 (?) Paris race. We were getting ~350 bhp out of the engine but matching a propeller to the torque curve was impossible without a vertical lift on the transom because we couldn’t get the damn thing on plane. Anyway, I disobeyed orders and sent naturally aspirated engines to Paris with the stupid four shaft gear case. We lost the race because no one was strong enough to steer the boat for any length of time and we consequently scrapped the turbo and the four-shaft. I guess I got off the track regarding the TIIX but my memory is fuzzy with all that was going on at that time. If you built a TIIX at plant 38 I don’t know anything about that. When I talk about the TIIX engines we built at #6 there were two basic areas of effort; Pistons and rings Transfer and exhaust ports I am virtually positive there were less than a half-dozen engines built with rails and I doubt if any of those engines were raced because the pistons were good for about an hour and then they would coke up and stick. We also ran engines with five and seven transfer ports and I think that Merten’s record engine had five transfers and we raised both the transfer and the exhaust ports. That engine worked out very well in terms of matching the propeller with the power curve because we extended the power curve by ~1000 rpm. I apologize about the later stages of development of the TII(X) because of all the things that were going on with the V-6 development for both racing and production. You may recall that In ‘73 we had an oil embargo and good old Jimmy Carter announced a possible ban on weekend boating. Needless to say, Brunswick reacted as expected - - they ordered me to discontinue development of the V-6 because no one would buy a gas-guzzling big old V-6 outboard! Lucky for them, I paid no attention, although they cut the V-6 budget to zero so we had to improvise. Nap time. Dick p.s. I don’t remember Molly but I do recall Buck Thorton. It is sad that life .......

[jackiewilson]

Hiya Bill, Just me putting in my four pennorth for what it's worth.
Scotty ( as you well know ) lived the other side of Lake Como, and had great difficulty speaking English let alone Scottish.
MR. K. gave Shakespeare the Black Max he won Paris with so I can see a connection there.
Dave Burgess was the " Chippy" who built the tunnel boats at that time.To my knowledge there has never been a major race in Scotland, but the Scottish Daily Express did put on a race in Edinburgh on Hogganfield Loch in 1965, ( only know this because I won it ).
Renato and Cesare
were cousins, rivals AND friends.
If there was even the slightest chance either factory could score points over the other, each one would go to extraordinary lengths with the three D's -------DEVIOUS, DOUBTFUL AND DUBIOUS deeds.

[willabee]

Hiya Bill, Just me putting in my four pennorth for what it's worth.
Scotty ( as you well know ) lived the other side of Lake Como, and had great difficulty speaking English let alone Scottish.
MR. K. gave Shakespeare the Black Max he won Paris with so I can see a connection there.
Dave Burgess was the " Chippy" who built the tunnel boats at that time.To my knowledge there has never been a major race in Scotland, but the Scottish Daily Express did put on a race in Edinburgh on Hogganfield Loch in 1965, ( only know this because I won it ).
Renato and Cesare
were cousins, rivals AND friends.
If there was even the slightest chance either factory could score points over the other, each one would go to extraordinary lengths with the three D's -------DEVIOUS, DOUBTFUL AND DUBIOUS deeds.

For openers, you have to love how Dick recalls the boat building "Scotty" from Scotland! I was thinking there might be a race for the first "Scotty" story response ..... my guess is that the others were sure that yours would be more entertaining, so they let you have it .... once again, you didn't disappoint (without taking a shot at the wankel guy).