Mystery MKII was 409

M

MK IISS

Guest
Mystery MKII was a 409

"The block stayed basically the same. All I had to do was open up the bottom end so I could put a larger crank in it. It then became the MK IIS, because of the longer stroke"

Dick Keinath's (Engineer in charge of designing MK II) comments describing his actions taken after he was told by Don McPherson to push the MK IIs displacement from 409 to 427ci after NASCAR's late 1962 announcement of the 7 liter engine limit.

"We did continous development of the MK II from the time it came off the drawing board in 1962 until we started development work on the MK IV. I had MK IIs running originally as "409s......"

Comment of Bill Howell, MK II project engineer.

Information from Motorbooks International ISBN 0-87938-725-4
 

Tom Kochtanek

Well Known Member
Supporting Member 12
Funny colors

Does anyone happen to know if the Chevy design engineers had these engines painted up in colors other than the traditional ones? Were these known as "factory experimentals"? Anyone know what might have become of these (destroyed, etc.).

Thanks,
TomK
 

walkerheaders

Well Known Member
Supporting Member 6
this is a little off topic.........i worked with Malcolm Durham when he had a new and current small block vega pro/stocker. state of the art stuff at the time...my point is, we never painted any of the engines, none of the other teams did either. the special stuff we got from the factory........some of it experimental.....no paint either.
Of coarse, as a kid, i was dumb enough at the time to ask Mal, "why dont we paint em"?...."why bother?, it's coming back out soon" was the reply.
 
M

MK IISS

Guest
Bob:
You bring up a good point. When I was going to a lot of NASCAR races in the 70s and 80s I was able to go into the garage area a couple times. Many of the extra engines I saw sitting on pallets were unpainted. I also saw some that were painted an industrial gray (I'm sure some would say "they kinda had a green tint"). I've seen pictures of Smokey Yunick's MK II in '63 which was painted gold. I think he painted most of his race engines gold from at least back to 1957. The surviving Junior Johnson '63 Impala (not the clone) has a MK II painted black. If Chevrolet painted the MK IIs before they were sent to Daytona they may have been Chevy orange.... but then again who knows for sure?

The only thing I'm certain of is the MK II "Mystery Motor" was born and started life with 409 cubic inches....not 427.
 
M

MK IISS

Guest
Tom: Floyd Garrett told me that the MKII, he had on on display in his museum, had a experimental code, which I think was a "0" in the casting #. I don't know much about casting numbers so I'm not sure. I'm also not sure what happened to the engines, but the story has always been Chevrolet called them all back. This may be true but they didn't get all of them.
 

Tom Kochtanek

Well Known Member
Supporting Member 12
Aha!

I asked the question of "color", since I am trying to get some idea of how these engines might have been setup for racing and racing replacements. A buddy of mine has spoken to a local fellow who mentioned that his Dad has a pair of identical "experimental" Chevy engines from the 60s, and that he remembered that they were gray or green, and that his Dad always said "they were 409s". I wonder what they might be?

TomK
 
M

MK IISS

Guest
Tom: Two engines painted gray or green ? Maybe they were marine engines.
 
Truck engines were pea soup green.
Smokey painted his engines gold (at least all the one's I saw at his shop were.

The Mystery motor was a 427, period, end of conversation. I showed Richard the sheet I got from Fred Frinke back in 1986 showing this. Fred was vince Piggins right hand man back then, Billy Howell was a dyno operator back then, quote whatever you want Richard.

Mark I was the 409 with two piece intake and heads.
Mark Is was the Z11 engine, the small s stood for stroke
MarkII was the Mystery motor, there was NO Mark IIs, ALL internal Chevrolet documents I have designate the Mystery motor as a Mark II, NONE, not ONE uses the term Mark IIs. Nor has any Chevrolet engineer I ever talked too.
Mark III was a "paper" engine.
Mark IV we all know.

You guys have to understand, a week ago Richard and I sat down (with 425SS) and went over all this in Florida.

Richard after you saw my photos of the Mystery motor I restored for Chevrolet in pieces you'd think maybe I knew whereof I spoke.
 
M

MK IISS

Guest
Fran: Believe what you want. I have direct quotes from the people involved. You have nothing but an unsigned piece of paper that does not have any letterhead. This so called "proof" has "MK II 427 4.31 X 3.65 Mystery Motor" typed on it. I can type that on a piece of paper and say "this is the final word".

We all know the MK II ended up as a 427 anyway. This is all your "proof" claims...it does not go into how the engine started... which was 409 cubic inches.

Let me repeat: this is all your piece of paper indicates...the MK II ended up as a 427. It does not indicate how the engine started out or how many cubic inches the first prototypes had.

The "427 rule" was not conceived until the summer of 1962 and not put into effect until November 4, 1962. It is ludicrous to claim the MK II started out... from the get-go as a 427....that is.... unless... Chevrolet had a crystal ball in the engineering room.

Fran: How does a photo of a MK II engine being prepared as a display engine have anything to do with any of this? This makes about as much sense as claiming a repainted valve cover is "final proof....the final word" that it was that color when new. I could paint one pink and then claim it was the original color.

With all due respect...it is good thing you are not an attorney. You would get laughed out of the court room.

This is what Bill Howell said: "I had MK IIs running originally as 409s...."

I know, I know....Mr Keinath had a dream...he heard a voice while he was asleep in early 1962......." BUILD IT....BUILD IT ! ! ... a 427......it's a magic number even though no one has come up with a 7 liter rule yet."... the voice said...."and they will come." Come to Daytona that is.
 
M

MK IISS

Guest
"The Mk (Mark) engine designations were first implemented by Duntov. Although the new engine taking shape on the drawing board had the same displacement as the W-409 V-8, Duntov called the new engine the Mk. By default, the W-engine series became the Mk I, and this set a precedent that has followed to this day."

Dick Keinath (actual words of the man who designed the MK II)
 
M

MK IISS

Guest
Bob:

I'm sorry for all this. Gee whiz I thought I had found some interesting info on the MK II that I could share with everone. I backed this info up with quotes from engineers and personnel who were involved with designing and development of the MK II. This...along with a reference that would enable anyone to look this information up so you could all decide for youself. I have also demonstrated how the chronological time line does not work with the claim the MK II started out as a 427 because the "427 rule" didn't even exist yet when the MK II was first designed. As a result it is not my info that is being disputed. It the men who designed and worked with the engine. So I'm done with this. It's impossible to reason with someone who comes to illogical conclusions and is hellbent on re-writting history.
 

walkerheaders

Well Known Member
Supporting Member 6
I would imagine your adressing a different Bob..........however, this one says.....rock on richard....i for 1 am very interested. dont let anybody push any of your buttons. if your right and you know it..........so be it.
I do know very well what your saying, i posted a simple story once.....telling of how my father helped the factory to decide to use 4 headgaskets on the high compression Ws.
my father got paid for his idea....and that was that. END OF STORY.
the story turned into WW3.
my father also came up with the vacuum resevoir on the early 3-2 setups. he got paid for that one too.
my father helped pioneer the use of propane in the US Park police cars.
anyway richard keep up the good detective work...we like it. Bob
 
Richard: except the paper was signed on the bottom by the man who wrote it, Fred Frienke. For those who want to see go to the web site here that shows the Hot Rod magazine article on the 1962 409 service package, it shows Fred standing with Vince Piggin's, Fred was Vince Piggins right hand man. He retired in the early 90's and I had a chance to sit down with him when he visited the Tonawnada plant back around 1990. I had a whole series of questions fofr him and he kindly replyed with written notes a short time later. This was about the Mark IV because the W wasn't at the top of my list (back then). I also talked with Dick Kieneth on the Chevrolet "ty line", a GM direct phone system they had. And I discussed the Mystery/Mark IV head with him. I know what was was sritten, and I have that too, and it odesn't always jibe with facts and/or logic.

To begin: the "mystery' motor was based on a 409 block except it had 90 degree head banks. It was SURELY tested as a 409, simply because the crank and rods would install bolt in, except for custom pistons, and that was a simple thing for Chevrolet to make up. WAS a mystery motor built as a 409?. Absolutely, BUT IT WAS NEVER DESIGNATED AS A MARK II!. The ONLY designation Chevrolet used for the Mystery motor was Mark II. And Richrad find me ANYTHING from Chevrolet designating it as a Mark II AND a Mark IIs. Tell me/us YOUR source for BOTH designations, if you can. For that matter they could have built a Mystery motor as a 348 because the cranks interchanged. They COULD have built ANY cubic inch combination for that matter.

There was NO "Mark" motor, not designated by Chevrolet or Duntov or anyone. Duntov used the "Mark I" designation on the 409 with the special heads and two piece intake. It was the FIRST itteration of the 409, it was "special", developed for RACING USE ONLY!. So the Mark I was the first engine, the SECOND engine was the SAME AS the Mark I except it was stroked to 427 cubic inches, hence the designation Mark Is, or "stroked" Mark I.

As to WHEN Gm, and the other manufacturers along with NASCAR and NHRA came up with the 427 cubic inch limit I would have to do some research to find that out. I DO know, and sent you information, as to the change to 396 cubic inches, (I believe for 1964) for an engine size for the new intermidiate size cars ALL the manufacturers were developing. Then you get into why's and wherefores for the 400 cubic inch limit GM placed on the intermidiates. No matter, Chevrolet had multiple cubic inches set for the W block engine FROM IT'S INCEPTION!. These ranged from the W-1, which was a 307, the original cubic inch to start with up to the W-8 which was a 454 engine. Inbetween was the W-2 (a 327), and a the W-3 the 348 engine. All this is based on the BORE SPACING off the big block Chevrolet engine (ALL of them) which was 4.84 inches. No matter, with that bore spacing Chevrolet could build almost ANY realistic cubic inch displacement based on bore and stroke. The W could go to 454 because it had a 4.310 bore with no problem. As far as the STROKE was concerned the block was not designed to handle much more than 3.75 (Do the math for me someone, 4.310 bore and 3.75 stroke, what's the cubic inch displacement?. I'm lazy.

There was NO Mark II and Mark IIs, Chevrolet designated the Mark II as that and that only. I'm not saying they COULDN'T built a 409 Mystery motor, of course they could, the argument here is was the first Mystery motor ever DESIGNATED as a Mark II as a 409. No, it never was. :cuss

Richard won't admit when he's wrong, I will, this time he is and I'm not. And Richard you know how much internal documentation I have, someday you'll be up here and we can go over EVERYTHING. Next.
 
Dick Kineath and the Mystery motor head. To begin........................................

General Motors put out a request for proposels for NEW big block engines to replace the first big blocks which were designed in the 40's and early 50's. Each car line was to come up with them for the early 60's. What was designed back then was crude compared to what was developed thru out the 50's. Thumb nails:
Cadillac: designed in the mid 40's, changed about 1964
Olds: designed in the mid 40's, changed about the same year
Buick: designed in the very early 50's (first built in 1953), re-designed and released in 1967
Pontiac: designed in the early 50's and a SLIGHT redesign released in 1967
Chevrolet: designed in the early 50's and COMPLETELY redesigned for release in 1965. This "new" Chevrolet big block quote "went in a new direction" in February 1964, this "new direction' was a COMPLETE redesign that used the basic Mystery motor architecture but MUCH heavier, for use in medium duty trucks. This was the princilple reason why the motor came out in 1965, the tooling was much different.

During the time the W block was in production, particularly the 348, 96% of ALL production went into passenger cars, from the very start the W was NOT designated as a "truck" engine. Subsequent production proved that out. FYI, Tonawanda was the ONLY engine plant for the big block. And "Summeries of Engines built and shipped" per model year are the figures I use. These are the ONLY official Chevrolet numbers, they are beyond dispute. Just like the records from assembly plants for the numbers of cars and options produced year by year.

All GM big blocks were COMPLETELY redesigned with the exception of Pontiac. Now, the "Mystery heads". next
 
A YOUNG, and I specify YOUNG Chevrolet engineer, Dick Kieneth (and I'm SURE I've spelled that wrong from time to time) came up with an idea, CANT THE VALVES TOWARDS THE PORT!. WOW, WHAT AN IDEA!. Frankly, it was a geat idea for a racing engine but not worth the extra work it caused the manufacturing guys. Honestly, if you got the engineering group together from back then, all of them, and gave them the option of "turning back the clock" they'd build a straight wedge instead. But Duntov had the ear of Ed Cole and he wanted this new canted valve design.

As orignially put on paper Dick had the intake ports individual as opposed to siamesed which was a MUCH better design for racing. But that required two different heads, a left and a right and NO mass produced American V-8 ever had or ever would have two individual heads, the cost was prohibitive from a manufacturing stand point and was changed to a common head. No pictures of a non-siamesed Mystery head have ever surfaced and ALL photos of Mystery motors show and intake that looks almost identical to a Mark IV intake which of course had siamesed ports. Did they ever build a individual port head?. I've seen EXPERIMENTAL double over head valve engines designed by Olds, Buick and Chevrolet (and probably Pontiac), what they built EXPERIMENTALLY is open (just as the 409 Mystery). Nonetheless, every photo of a mystery show a siamesed port head. But try and convince Richard that!. So if Kieneth says he origially designed it as an individual port head he's telling you the truth, but in the same breath he'll say that manufacturing shot him down.

Duntov wanted the original Mystery engine, but with a longer that 6.135 rod. It was smaller, and lighter, it's that simple. Chevrolet wanted a much heavier engine that could be put into heavy duty trucks. A common engine?, or two different?. You know who won! Then too, they were developing aluminum heads at the time and i suppose Duntov was calmed down when he found out the new, heavier engine could be lightened up with aluminum heads, considerably. And there was talk of an aluminum block, maybe, down the road.

As a matter of FACT Chevrolet had the L-88 down on paper as early as early in 1964 but with iron heads. Sure, it was HEAVY, but even so it was quite an engine (for the time). As things turned out the aluminum heads didn't have the bugs worked out until 1968 (but they were testing them in 1966/67).

But then, what do I know, Richard is the "expert". And other so called experts don't have all the documentation i have, and if I sat down with Dick Kieneth today he might tell a slightly different story, if his memory was "jogged'. To bad that won't happen.
 
M

MK IISS

Guest
All the information I have shown are not my opinions. They are quotes of the individuals who were involved with the development of the engine. I gave a reference source so they can be verified. The NASCAR 7 liter rule is a matter of documented NASCAR history. Hey !!.... don't take my word for it....look it up. How many times do I have to say this?

The "proof"....a piece a paper with the MK II specs at 427 cubic inches is not signed. It has a typed name on it. A typed name is not a signature. This complete lacking of the ability to understand the difference between a typed name and a signature kinda says it all. The same goes for stating opinions and actually believing they are facts.

I don't claim to be an expert on anything. Just passing on historical information, which is backed up by references and documented facts...not opinions.

Just so you may better understand, Fran. This is a quote: "We did continuous development work on the MK II from the time it came off the drawing board in 1962 until we started development work on the Mk IV. I had the the MKIIs running originally as 409s...."

Key words here, Fran......."MK IIs running originally as 409s"

another example: "It then became the MK IIS, because of the longer stroke," Keinath said... Key words here again, Fran: "MKIIS, because of the longer stroke"

An example of a fact: The 7 liter rule was first implemented on November 4, 1962. This is an historical NASCAR fact....and as I said before, don't take my word for it look it up. Page 190... Forty Years of NASCAR Racing...ISBN 0-9621580-1-1

Starting to catch on yet, Fran?

This is an opinion: There never was a MK IIS (an opinion is simply a belief not based on a certainty...key word here, Fran...."a belief"....not substantiated)

Another helpful hint, Fran. Claiming you talked to so & so and he told me this.......
This is called hear-say information....not proof of anything.

One other point. A common ploy (a/k/a a SMOKE SCREEN) used by people who can't prove their case is to bring up a whole bunch of other information that has nothing to do directly with the subject at hand. An example of this would be early iron head L88, other engine history, etc., etc., etc., etc., most of your last two posts.
 
Richard there's a big difference between MK IIs and MK II's, one means there was a Mark II stroke (the 427 race motor), the other means there was more than one Mark II, as in different versions. Curiously your statement that NASCAR put the cubic inch limit at 427 in November 1962, when did NHRA put THEIR limit at 427?. When did they first build a Mystery motor?, do YOUR sources provide that date?. And. curiously, both Ford and Mopar had 426's to race in February 1963, a short 2 omths later than your date (and the Pontiac 421). Could it be the 427 (7 liter) limit was a done deal BEFORE November 1962 but only made official on that date?. And an "artists rendering" of a 1962 Ford with a fastback roof is even MORE disputeable than my letter from Vinve Piggins second in command stating the progression of big block engines. That photo was obviously doctored on a computer well after 1962. No matter, Ford developed a fastback roofline for the 1963 Ford in time for it to be used at Daytona.

There is no dispute that there were two versions of the "Z-11" engine, the Mark I which was the 409 version released for use in the summer of 1962 at the NHRA Summernationals and the Mark IIs which was the engine used in the Z-11 package. And that engine is listed in Chevrolet documents variously as "MK IIS, MK IIs and MK II (s). I never read a document from back then nor ever saw an article about there being a Mark IIs, or Mark IIS, or MARK II(s), only as a Mark II. But if it makes you happy go ahead and claim there was a Mark II and a Mark IIs, no skin off MY teeth. And at least I actually TALKED to Kieneth!. which of course to you is hearsay because I didn't tape record it.

The point is, and what you keep missing, is the Mark II was ALWAYS refered to as a Mark II back in the '60's, you'll never see it refered to as a Mark IIs. It was released for racing as the Mark II, not the Mark II stroke. If your trying to be historically ACCURATE use the terminology Chevrolet used back then, Mark II. I said throughout my missives that there was most ceratinly 409 versions of the Mark II engine, simply because the crank and rods were drop in and all they needed was a different piston than the 427 version. And actually they could use the SAME piston with a different piston pin location. And the difference in rod length between a Z-11 motor and a 409 was?. How much Richard?. Clue, the difference in stroke was .150 (3.500 vs 3.650), but the rods weren't exactly that much in diffrence. They could raise or lower the pin height by .125 with no big deal. If your going to call the Mystery motor a Mark IIs, then don't call it anything BUT a Mark IIs, after all it would HAVE to be if there WAS a Mark II which was based on a 409 (which no one back then ever heard of).

By the way, any document YOU'LL ever see, EVER!, will be a copy of the original. And anything you've ever read, EVER, was based on someone's "memory", or "recollection". And every book you've ever read (with the exception of Paul Van Valkenburgs) was written by someone who doesn't/didn't know squat about the way things were, and/or were engineers. Fast Chevy's is a pewrfect example of what I'm talking about. No one EVER put all these guys from "the day" together in one room and picked their collective brains, and now THAT can never be done.

Did they build a 409 version of the Mark II mystery motor?. Yes they did. Did they call it the Mark II and the 427 version a Mark IIs, no. But be mule headed, I'm not going to argue with you about it any more.

I broke my replies down into segments to try and explain the progression of the Mark IV. Go to : corvetterepair@yahoo.com, the guy who runs it was very interested in a 1964 version of a 427 version of the L-88. But your right Richard, in my simplified explaination of the growth of the Mark II into the Mark IV I could have/should have left it out, all of it really.

This ends my replies to this discussion/topic.
 
M

MK IISS

Guest
I'm growing very tired of all this, loosing interest, want to put it to rest and move on. As I've said several times now...I was only sharing information on the MK II I found interesting. This information is made up of quotes from the gentlemen working with the new MK II and some historical NASCAR information.

I really don't care if Mr Preve accepts any of it. I bet no one else cares either.
 
M

MK IISS

Guest
I agree, no need to be sorry. I thought "the other 409 engine" part was kind of interesting though. The "S" label was dropped later anyway.......after the engine was fully developed. It was simply an "in house" term or label used for a period of time during the engine's development.

In addition all W engines are MK Is (oh, oh, there's that pesky confussing "s" again.) The small s.... in this case.... means the plural or more than one or.....in this particular case more than one MK I engine. To continue... the 348, 409 and Z11 427 are all MK I engines. Now again you don't have to take my word for it. These are the words of Dick Keinath. By "words" I mean quote. A "quote" means: to repeat the actual words spoken by another individual. Again....in this particular case the words of Dick Keinath: "...by default the W-series became the MK I "....
 
Top