Without seeing it,that is how I imagined it would operate.So the last cylinder head must be the hottest part of the engine.Really speaking the rear pipes need to go.The water pump should have been redesigned to feed both sides of the vee equally,the coolant should have come up through the block deck and into the heads and then out to the top of the rad.The addition of cooling jets run off the main oil gallery which I presume is under the camshaft,central in the block would have eliminated the skirt scuffing.My other gripe is I dislike dry liners.Quite amazing how so many gave reasonable service.
I believe that there is a display sectioned AEC V8 engine in a Birmingham museum if anyone wants to go and investigate its coolant passages. 
ERF:
railstaff:
I cant be sure,but looking at the previous picture of half a v8 it appears to have “end to end” cooling,by this I mean the coolant doesn’t pass through the block deck into the heads.Im I right?No, there are 5 large and several smaller passages between each block deck and head.
There are end connections in each head (and the rear of each bank of the block) which are used to pass the coolant from one side to the other via the external transfer pipes.There isn’t even a coolant flow diagram contained in the service training slides from the BL course designed to train fitters on the engine. There are plenty of oil flow diagrams, but all you get coolant wise is a slide showing the components.
A good clue to the circulation is in the CM launch article, which basically corresponds with how I perceive it to work…
0
It’s interesting to note the comment in there on block water passages, because too close spacing of cylinder centres within a block is a noted cause of piston skirt scuffing, and that is another problem that the AEC V8 in all of it’s capacities suffers from. Yet another problem that would not have existed if the block had been just a few centimeters longer.
Let’s get this right.The right hand bank doesn’t get any of the cold water input directly from the rad and water pump only the left hand bank gets that ?.
While the right hand bank only gets the already heated water from the left hand bank to then have to put its own heat transfer into ?.
Blimey and I thought the side flow 1 1/2 pass rad system in the Jag V12 was bad that alone accounting for a significant difference between the running temps of the left and right hand banks but at least both banks are fed with the same cold water directly from the rad and water pump simultaneously.In which case what’s the radiator spec of the AEC ?.Surely it’s not a similar side flow split pass system added to the right bank being fed with the already heated water from the left bank ?. 
Have you got the temp readings for each seperate bank either way ?.It would be a bleedin miracle if they were even close ?.
railstaff:
The water pump should have been redesigned to feed both sides of the vee equally,
The problem then being that they’ve obviously only designed the block casting to allow one water gallery entry on the one bank from the pump.So not only too low to allow a decent stroke,too short to allow a decent con rod design,but also only one coolant entry from the rad and pump for one bank of cylinders.Roberts really was a genius. 
gingerfold:
I believe that there is a display sectioned AEC V8 engine in a Birmingham museum if anyone wants to go and investigate its coolant passages.
The sectioned display engine you are referring to is one of the four known to have been done in preparation for the 1968 launch, and is currently in the Aldridge Transport Museum. I’m told it is an AV740, but I know it is missing it’s original camshaft and followers, as these were removed back around 2000 to restore the engine in the RTITB Mandator V8. As the sectioned display engines were all ex R&D test units, the parts removed still had signs of wear, but were apparently much better than the originals.
Just out of interest, a second sectioned AEC V8 engine was once in Mick Hayton’s Albion museum in Dumfries. It was sold at the dispersal sale, and it’s current whereabouts are unknown.
A third, and the AEC V8 engine which was from the Radford BL training centre, is an AV800. It turned up in a scrap metal skip in 2016 along with a sectioned 500 series training engine and several sectioned training gearboxes. All eventually found homes, the V8 ending up in Lincolnshire.
The fourth sectioned engine’s whereabouts are unknown, but it is belived it went out to Australia or New Zealand in preparation for the launch of the Mandator V8 there.
gingerfold:
I believe that there is a display sectioned AEC V8 engine in a Birmingham museum if anyone wants to go and investigate its coolant passages.
No need we’ve heard enough.The already hot water from the left bank is used to cool the right bank with the right bank having no access at all to any nice cool water direct from the rad.Or is it vice versa.
Meanwhile this is how they did it with just a 5.3 litre car engine let alone a 13 litre truck engine and that got hot enough. 
gingerfold:
I could provide a transcript of the thoughts of an AEC engine tester who was a driver of the 3VTG concept vehicle when it had the turbo-charged V8 engine fitted, but quite frankly, what is the point anymore?
I have to say that I have come to agree with you ‘gingerfold’.
What is the point?
We’ve got a Loon on here bombarding every single sensible post with his warped and venomous diatribe, and enough is enough.
He has focused in on the V8 cooling issues now, which the rest of us already acknowledge was very seriously flawed. Nobody has ever disputed this, so why?. We are all critical of this machine. The engineers that conceived it were critical of this machine, but venomous and continual diatribe in this nasty and sarcastic manner serves just one purpose, to attempt to discredit the fine reputation of Keith Roberts (and others) from AEC on this public forum. Some of these people are still alive, the others have families. They were all professional and exceptionally talented men, and none deserve this level of contempt and disrespect. I for one find it exceptionally distasteful, and I don’t feel at all comfortable being associated with it by proxy. I fully agree with ‘ramone’ that our moderators should not allow it to happen. If an opinion cannot be expressed here in a respectful and gentlemanly manner, then the poster should be mandated to keep their counsel.
I have spent this afternoon in the company of some very talented Diesel engine development engineers. Time is money, and their time is seriously valuable, but they are interested in the AEC V8 so as a pointless exercise I asked them the key question - using their modern CAD software and immensely complicated computer based formulas, what major design changes really WOULD be needed to the basic AEC V8 design to make it into a reliable engine with a 450 BHP + potential.
But as ‘gingerfold’ has said, what the bloody hell is the point of writing it all up on here only to have it pulled apart to the nth degree and ridiculed by someone with all the professional engineering experience of a Lego builder?. Thanks, but no thanks.
ERF:
gingerfold:
I could provide a transcript of the thoughts of an AEC engine tester who was a driver of the 3VTG concept vehicle when it had the turbo-charged V8 engine fitted, but quite frankly, what is the point anymore?I have to say that I have come to agree with you ‘gingerfold’.
What is the point?We’ve got a Loon on here bombarding every single sensible post with his warped and venomous diatribe, and enough is enough.
He has focused in on the V8 cooling issues now, which the rest of us already acknowledge was very seriously flawed. Nobody has ever disputed this, so why?. We are all critical of this machine. The engineers that conceived it were critical of this machine, but venomous and continual diatribe in this nasty and sarcastic manner serves just one purpose, to attempt to discredit the fine reputation of Keith Roberts (and others) from AEC on this public forum. Some of these people are still alive, the others have families. They were all professional and exceptionally talented men, and none deserve this level of contempt and disrespect. I for one find it exceptionally distasteful, and I don’t feel at all comfortable being associated with it by proxy. I fully agree with ‘ramone’ that our moderators should not allow it to happen. If an opinion cannot be expressed here in a respectful and gentlemanly manner, then the poster should be mandated to keep their counsel.
I have spent this afternoon in the company of some very talented Diesel engine development engineers. Time is money, and their time is seriously valuable, but they are interested in the AEC V8 so as a pointless exercise I asked them the key question - using their modern CAD software and immensely complicated computer based formulas, what major design changes really WOULD be needed to the basic AEC V8 design to make it into a reliable engine with a 450 BHP + potential.
But as ‘gingerfold’ has said, what the bloody hell is the point of writing it all up on here only to have it pulled apart to the nth degree and ridiculed by someone with all the professional engineering experience of a Lego builder?. Thanks, but no thanks.
Spare us all the thin skinned proffesionally offended bollox.You’d hear a lot worse than that aimed at the design of loads of different types of motor at any enthusiast gathering regarding loads of different designs.Much of it just exaggerated banter to the point of often calling much better designs than the AEC,junk.When all that’s really meant is it’s actually great but just could have been done better.Let alone typical GM v Ford v Mopar type rivalry at any car race venue worth the entry fee.
While sorry if the AEC just isn’t one of the greats.The AEC fan boys really do need to get a sense of humour and a thicker skin.We’re truck drivers for FFS and as such shouldn’t be that bothered about a bit of humourous banter aimed at our favourite toys.On that note Bewick among others has called my preferred Detroit types enough names in the past usually meaning junk let alone the names directed at me personally.Did I give a zb and go crying and whingeing to the mods to put him in pre mod etc.No because I took it as intended a laugh and if it’s not who cares.You can take enthusiasm for something to silly over serious lengths in that regard. 
So stop all the PC whingeing and let’s hear more of your ideas as to how you’re going to get 450 hp from the AEC motor without breaking it. 
.Bearing in mind that I didn’t exactly say anything different to railstaff regarding the cooling issue at least and did actually point out a seeming obstacle,which should never have been there at the design stage and which seems to stop his logical solution.
Right boys and girls, listen up, I intend this to be my final word on this in my capacity as moderator.
Unfortunately ERF and the rest of you guts, the posts made by Carryfast are within the rules of this forum, so I’m unable to stop him from posting them, I know it’s frustrating, but it’s one of the unintended consequences of free speech.
So here’s an idea…
Any member that does not want to see the posts made by Carryfast should use the friend/foe feature, block him and you will never see another post from him, it won’t stop him, but you won’t see his posts.
Now Carryfast, listen up mate, this thread is about to die, you are responsible, I do not care that you have the right to your opinion, it doesn’t change the fact that once again you have annoyed other members to the point where they stop sharing their knowledge and information.
You are behaving in an anti social manner, to the point that a large portion of this thread is comprised of warnings about your posts, so I’m telling you now to stop, regardless of your right to free speech, the overwhelming majority of posters here do not want to read your opinion.
If you fail to take heed of this final warning, we do have the option of making your account read only, my role as moderator means I have to ensure the smooth running of the forums, clearly your contributions are detrimental to that, so take note or face the consequences of your actions.
Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk
It would be a great pity if ERF ceased to partake in this forum and this particular discussion about what was a significant engine development in British commercial vehicle industry. He has so far shared priceless information about his hands on rebuilding of an AEC V8 engine to meticulous and unprecedented standards. As a former lorry restorer I personally am fully aware of the trials, tribulations, frustrations, and costs in both time and money that this “hobby” entails. I shudder to think what ERF’s final bill will be for his V8 project. I know what I spent in restoring a Seddon and two AECs at a time when spares were far more plentiful than they are now, and mine were far more run-of-the mill drive lines compared with what ERF is doing.
I do find the derogatory comments about individuals involved at AEC and Leyland at the time very distasteful. These were men at the pinnacle of their chosen careers working for what, at the time, was a world class organisation. The criticism of them personally is unwarranted and unjustified. By all means criticise the product, but not the people. Did they set out to deliberately design a suspect engine? No. Several years ago I corresponded with Robert Fryars and I met him once at an AEC Rally. He is a true gentleman and he is revered by his AEC colleagues. As I mentioned a few posts back, the AEC personnel I have met were never complacent about their products and they aimed for continuous improvement. Perfection was their aim and we all know how difficult that is to achieve. As for the V8 engine, even 35 years after its demise the AEC men I met had great frustration that they weren’t given the time, or funding, to get it right. Robert Fryars has submitted several papers about his working life to the University of Warwick Motor Industry Archive, and some of the attention to detail he describes in AEC engine design does make one wonder why they got the V8 wrong to the extent they did.
Like most contributors on this TN forum, and particularly on a thread such as this, I want to discuss matters in a reasonable manner, learning from, and sharing information with other posters. As for Carryfast I do not want to see him banned from posting because the provocation he contributes stimulates me to counter his arguments and prove him wrong. Every pantomime must have a villain, let Carryfast be the TN pantomime villain. (No offence meant CF)
Carryfast:
ERF:
gingerfold:
I could provide a transcript of the thoughts of an AEC engine tester who was a driver of the 3VTG concept vehicle when it had the turbo-charged V8 engine fitted, but quite frankly, what is the point anymore?I have to say that I have come to agree with you ‘gingerfold’.
What is the point?We’ve got a Loon on here bombarding every single sensible post with his warped and venomous diatribe, and enough is enough.
He has focused in on the V8 cooling issues now, which the rest of us already acknowledge was very seriously flawed. Nobody has ever disputed this, so why?. We are all critical of this machine. The engineers that conceived it were critical of this machine, but venomous and continual diatribe in this nasty and sarcastic manner serves just one purpose, to attempt to discredit the fine reputation of Keith Roberts (and others) from AEC on this public forum. Some of these people are still alive, the others have families. They were all professional and exceptionally talented men, and none deserve this level of contempt and disrespect. I for one find it exceptionally distasteful, and I don’t feel at all comfortable being associated with it by proxy. I fully agree with ‘ramone’ that our moderators should not allow it to happen. If an opinion cannot be expressed here in a respectful and gentlemanly manner, then the poster should be mandated to keep their counsel.
I have spent this afternoon in the company of some very talented Diesel engine development engineers. Time is money, and their time is seriously valuable, but they are interested in the AEC V8 so as a pointless exercise I asked them the key question - using their modern CAD software and immensely complicated computer based formulas, what major design changes really WOULD be needed to the basic AEC V8 design to make it into a reliable engine with a 450 BHP + potential.
But as ‘gingerfold’ has said, what the bloody hell is the point of writing it all up on here only to have it pulled apart to the nth degree and ridiculed by someone with all the professional engineering experience of a Lego builder?. Thanks, but no thanks.
Spare us all the thin skinned proffesionally offended bollox.You’d hear a lot worse than that aimed at the design of loads of different types of motor at any enthusiast gathering regarding loads of different designs.Much of it just exaggerated banter to the point of often calling much better designs than the AEC,junk.When all that’s really meant is it’s actually great but just could have been done better.Let alone typical GM v Ford v Mopar type rivalry at any car race venue worth the entry fee.
While sorry if the AEC just isn’t one of the greats.The AEC fan boys really do need to get a sense of humour and a thicker skin.We’re truck drivers for FFS and as such shouldn’t be that bothered about a bit of humourous banter aimed at our favourite toys.On that note Bewick among others has called my preferred Detroit types enough names in the past usually meaning junk
So stop all the PC whingeing and let’s hear more of your ideas as to how you’re going to get 450 hp from the AEC motor without breaking it.
If I may say one last comment.I wish I hadn’t opened my gob but,
Carry fast you do not even grasp the fact why AEC design engineers choose to use that type of system.Because I’m patent I,ll try to explain,quite simple the rear cylinders will get the same amount of coolant passing around them as the front cylinders.I am not saying the temperatures will be the same though.The system is not floored,infact its a primitive form of end to end cooling and infact it is used today by MAN in their D20,D26,D38 range and it is excellent.Another merit is it gives more deck area(lack of coolant pass through orifices) to the block which on a wet liner engine is critical concerning counter bore stiffness and gasket sealing.
Please listen to those who know best and there is some serious talent on this forum especially concerning the 740/800 project.I know very little specifically about the AEC but I enjoy learning from those who know best.
gingerfold:
It would be a great pity if ERF ceased to partake in this forum and this particular discussion about what was a significant engine development in British commercial vehicle industry. He has so far shared priceless information about his hands on rebuilding of an AEC V8 engine to meticulous and unprecedented standards. As a former lorry restorer I personally am fully aware of the trials, tribulations, frustrations, and costs in both time and money that this “hobby” entails. I shudder to think what ERF’s final bill will be for his V8 project. I know what I spent in restoring a Seddon and two AECs at a time when spares were far more plentiful than they are now, and mine were far more run-of-the mill drive lines compared with what ERF is doing.I do find the derogatory comments about individuals involved at AEC and Leyland at the time very distasteful. These were men at the pinnacle of their chosen careers working for what, at the time, was a world class organisation. The criticism of them personally is unwarranted and unjustified. By all means criticise the product, but not the people. Did they set out to deliberately design a suspect engine? No. Several years ago I corresponded with Robert Fryars and I met him once at an AEC Rally. He is a true gentleman and he is revered by his AEC colleagues. As I mentioned a few posts back, the AEC personnel I have met were never complacent about their products and they aimed for continuous improvement. Perfection was their aim and we all know how difficult that is to achieve. As for the V8 engine, even 35 years after its demise the AEC men I met had great frustration that they weren’t given the time, or funding, to get it right. Robert Fryars has submitted several papers about his working life to the University of Warwick Motor Industry Archive, and some of the attention to detail he describes in AEC engine design does make one wonder why they got the V8 wrong to the extent they did.
Like most contributors on this TN forum, and particularly on a thread such as this, I want to discuss matters in a reasonable manner, learning from, and sharing information with other posters. As for Carryfast I do not want to see him banned from posting because the provocation he contributes stimulates me to counter his arguments and prove him wrong. Every pantomime must have a villain, let Carryfast be the TN pantomime villain. (No offence meant CF)
Credit,that sums it up.
Graham, I completely agree with you on everything you said there. Especially the bit about Carryfast, so much good information has been revealed in answer to his posts purely out of anger at his comments, he does occasionally post some interesting stuff himself too. It’s just the manner in which he posts it that causes the problems.
I also agree with his last post, to a point, yes we may all be lorry drivers or related to the industry, but that doesn’t mean that everything we say should be said as if we were stood in the yard, this thread in particular is an example of that, imagine that we’re all sat in a posh restaurant having an after dinner chat, smoking a cigar and sipping a nice cognac, that’s the tone of this thread, a bit more civilised than a chat around a fire in an old drum whilst drinking tea from a mug without a handle.
Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk
newmercman:
Graham, I completely agree with you on everything you said there. Especially the bit about Carryfast, so much good information has been revealed in answer to his posts purely out of anger at his comments, he does occasionally post some interesting stuff himself too. It’s just the manner in which he posts it that causes the problems.I also agree with his last post, to a point, yes we may all be lorry drivers or related to the industry, but that doesn’t mean that everything we say should be said as if we were stood in the yard, this thread in particular is an example of that, imagine that we’re all sat in a posh restaurant having an after dinner chat, smoking a cigar and sipping a nice cognac, that’s the tone of this thread, a bit more civilised than a chat around a fire in an old drum whilst drinking tea from a mug without a handle.
Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk
Changing the mood a little and well off topic , if you were over here nmm what would you be running now , who do you regard as the one getting it right?
ramone:
newmercman:
Graham, I completely agree with you on everything you said there. Especially the bit about Carryfast, so much good information has been revealed in answer to his posts purely out of anger at his comments, he does occasionally post some interesting stuff himself too. It’s just the manner in which he posts it that causes the problems.I also agree with his last post, to a point, yes we may all be lorry drivers or related to the industry, but that doesn’t mean that everything we say should be said as if we were stood in the yard, this thread in particular is an example of that, imagine that we’re all sat in a posh restaurant having an after dinner chat, smoking a cigar and sipping a nice cognac, that’s the tone of this thread, a bit more civilised than a chat around a fire in an old drum whilst drinking tea from a mug without a handle.
Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk
Changing the mood a little and well off topic , if you were over here nmm what would you be running now , who do you regard as the one getting it right?
A Mammoth Minor with a V 8 engine I would think Cheers Dennis.
I came down here in response to hearing the fire alarm.
It’s OK lads, it’s only a false alarm caused by an excess of convected hot air from Carryfast.
Carryfast can’t blame this on a cooling system though because the diagnostics say that this fault can only be attributed to an overactive keyboard rather than any other cause.
Not many people know this, but the current Carryfast (MK 99 and still littered with faults ) engine is prone to frequent governor failure, which causes it to over-rev and spew out all kinds of verbose crap as it does so. 
Carryfast is now issued with a PG9 for excess emissions. </TIC mode>
The venom towards all things AEC possibly has something to do with seeing the favourite and most treasured rattle run over by one of A E Evans’ Mk III tankers sometime around 1960.
The AEC and its products played an important role during a particularly interesting period in this country’s engineering and commercial history. It would be a great pity not to hear what genuine research engineers from a later period, furnished with the knowledge of 50 and more years of engine technological development make of this failed project. Many times it has been said that the greatest advances come from the failures of others’ efforts. At the end of the day the development of a new engine is probably over 95% science, but the remaining 5% is an Art, and a craft based upon experience; often hard won.
dieseldave:
I came down here in response to hearing the fire alarm.It’s OK lads, it’s only a false alarm caused by an excess of convected hot air from Carryfast.
Carryfast can’t blame this on a cooling system though because the diagnostics say that this fault can only be attributed to an overactive keyboard rather than any other cause.
Carryfast is now issued with a PG9 for excess emissions.
But DD which orifice does he emit the excess emissions from ?
Ramone, to be honest I think the lorries of today are all pretty much the same, my number one priority would be dealer service, previously I had good luck with IVECO, the trucks give a big bang for a small (ish) buck, the engines are bulletproof and I had a good dealer workshop close by.
The other option would be Scania, V8s of course (relevant to the thread) but not the fire breathing 730, the lowest rating they do, 560 I think, a nice unstressed engine, reliable, reasonable economy, very good residuals and desirability amongst drivers.
A bit of a contrast I know, but the middle ground is of no interest to me, you go cheap and cheerful and make as much money as you can, or you go premium and make as much money as you can, the difference between the two boils down to initial purchase price and residual value, the bit in the middle works out almost the same for both.
Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk
Don’t let the Loon spoil it ffs. Just skip over the opinionated stuff, and digest the real information. The disrespect in the silly posts is nothing to the awe the rest of us feel for the superb technicians and engineers who are, gradually, finishing the work that was abandoned on 1971.
- Can the cams be reground with a bit of a cone on them, to promote some follower rotation? Maybe this could be in a part of the profile where the contact loads are low by the base circle? A judicious stroke of the file…
- Cam followers are quite simple things. The ones Ihave seen are quite easy to machine from a billet. If they are in short supply, could more be made?
- The plate woth the holes in the wrong place could be made afresh. Laser profiling is cheap. If the engine os metric, it should be easy enough to guess what the nominal domensions should be. If some of the details need to be accurate, some machone shops can profile mill thin sheet, using a disposable backing pad. CAD drawings drive tje processes, and they are cheap also.
Bloody small keyboards. Back on ttje office tomorrww;-).