good info
thanks paul for the myth buster , good going..., ED
thanks paul for the myth buster , good going..., ED
The D9TE "High Nickel 'X' Block" Fallacy
On several occasions, I have had inquiries or read about a so-called "D9TE high nickel 'X' block," including my seeing them for sale (advertised as such) on Ebay. These blocks are supposed to be identifiable by the distinctive "X" or "X's" in the lifter valley. As the story goes in every one of these cases, the D9TE-AB blocks with the "X" in the lifter valley are supposed to designate a higher quality cast iron recipe in which there is a high concentration of nickel added in these blocks for additional strength.
Having personally modified the 385 Series passenger car blocks to no end (hundreds of them), none of the blocks that I've personally had my hands on seemed downright superior over the other as far as the material is concerned. Of course at the block material level, a few percent of nickel one way or the other might not be readily noticeable to the end user's "feel" with his die grinder or drill bit. Boring bars might be another story, but compared to BBC blocks all the 385 Series blocks prove to have a material that cuts quite differently than the BBC block material. And when boring the cylinders of BBF blocks, we find that the bits on the boring bar regularly need dressing every couple of cylinders whereas the BBC blocks may have all 8 cylinders bored without lapping the bits at all during the process.
To get to the bottom of this "high nickel X" block rumor, I set aside three D9TE-AB blocks: one was your typical D9TE-AB block with no "X" markings in the lifter valley; the next was a D9TE-AB block with a single "X" at the forward-most area of the lifter valley; the last was a D9TE-AB block with multiple "X's" in the lifter valley. We all know what the lifter valley of the 385 Series block looks like; for those that have never seen the "X" markings, here are some pics:
D9TE-AB "X" Block:
![]()
Note the "X" just above the forward-most lifter valley vent hole and next to the "19." This is the specific "X" marking that I have heard many refer to as the designation for a "high nickel" block composition.
To be sure that no-one would come along and insist I analyzed a D9TE block with the "wrong 'X' marking," I also included a second block that was covered with several X's all over the lifter valley:
D9TE-AB "Multi-X" Block:
![]()
Although I have never heard or read about the above style "multi-X" features being referred to as a "high nickel" designation, I wanted to include it in the analysis so that no stones would be left uncovered.
We took iron samples from all three D9TE-AB cylinder blocks, about 1 cc of iron per sample, per block. Each sample was taken into a high tech laboratory and carefully prepared for analysis by using a Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM). The SEM that we used is capable of "seeing" down to the atomic level. For those that are unfamiliar with SEMs, they can see items smaller than a wave of light (can see particles so small that light cannot bounce off the sample). To paraphrase in layman's terms, the ability for the SEM to see things this small is accomplished by literally bouncing electrons off the item and then "reading" the reflected electrons and digitally creating an image of the picture captured. The SEM can also decipher the atomic make-up of the sample at which it is looking. This highly, highly sensitive piece of equipment costs a half-a-million dollars:
![]()
Below are PDF reports of the analyses of these three blocks. Please note that there are several pages of each block report and only the first page of each report tells the story we're all interested in. (The subsequent pages within each report are analyses of casting anomalies that we zoomed in on in order to analyze and further answer questions while we were doing the study.)
Report #1 D9TE-AB block (without any X's): NO NICKEL in the iron alloy compostion. Click Here
Report #2 D9TE-AB block (with the single X): NO NICKEL in the iron alloy compostion. Click Here
Report #1 D9TE-AB block (with multiple X's): NO NICKEL in the iron alloy compostion. Click Here
As is evidenced by the three compositional analyses above, the D9TE-AB cylinder block iron--regardless of whether the casting is marked with a cast-in "X,", cast-in "X's," or no "X" of any kind--is all pretty much the same iron alloy, from block-to-block. Given the mass producton of these blocks (tens of thousands each year of production), it is perfectly fair and reasonable to say that the metallurgical composition of all D9TE-AB blocks is essentially the same and without any nickel in them, "X" in the casting or not.
I wish to emphasize one other thing aside from the primary point of this report: the fact that there is no nickel in any of the blocks is of no consequence to their structirual integrity; they are just as stong as the the day before these findings came to light. The purpose of this particular report is to dispell the myth that "X" blocks are "high nickel" blocks, and that rumor has just been proven a myth indeed.
Paul Kane
p.s.: All metallurgical reports are the intellectual property of High Flow Dynamics
Having personally modified the 385 Series passenger car blocks to no end (hundreds of them), none of the blocks that I've personally had my hands on seemed downright superior over the other as far as the material is concerned. Of course at the block material level, a few percent of nickel one way or the other might not be readily noticeable to the end user's "feel" with his die grinder or drill bit. Boring bars might be another story, but compared to BBC blocks all the 385 Series blocks prove to have a material that cuts quite differently than the BBC block material. And when boring the cylinders of BBF blocks, we find that the bits on the boring bar regularly need dressing every couple of cylinders whereas the BBC blocks may have all 8 cylinders bored without lapping the bits at all during the process.
To get to the bottom of this "high nickel X" block rumor, I set aside three D9TE-AB blocks: one was your typical D9TE-AB block with no "X" markings in the lifter valley; the next was a D9TE-AB block with a single "X" at the forward-most area of the lifter valley; the last was a D9TE-AB block with multiple "X's" in the lifter valley. We all know what the lifter valley of the 385 Series block looks like; for those that have never seen the "X" markings, here are some pics:
D9TE-AB "X" Block:
Note the "X" just above the forward-most lifter valley vent hole and next to the "19." This is the specific "X" marking that I have heard many refer to as the designation for a "high nickel" block composition.
To be sure that no-one would come along and insist I analyzed a D9TE block with the "wrong 'X' marking," I also included a second block that was covered with several X's all over the lifter valley:
D9TE-AB "Multi-X" Block:
Although I have never heard or read about the above style "multi-X" features being referred to as a "high nickel" designation, I wanted to include it in the analysis so that no stones would be left uncovered.
We took iron samples from all three D9TE-AB cylinder blocks, about 1 cc of iron per sample, per block. Each sample was taken into a high tech laboratory and carefully prepared for analysis by using a Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM). The SEM that we used is capable of "seeing" down to the atomic level. For those that are unfamiliar with SEMs, they can see items smaller than a wave of light (can see particles so small that light cannot bounce off the sample). To paraphrase in layman's terms, the ability for the SEM to see things this small is accomplished by literally bouncing electrons off the item and then "reading" the reflected electrons and digitally creating an image of the picture captured. The SEM can also decipher the atomic make-up of the sample at which it is looking. This highly, highly sensitive piece of equipment costs a half-a-million dollars:
Below are PDF reports of the analyses of these three blocks. Please note that there are several pages of each block report and only the first page of each report tells the story we're all interested in. (The subsequent pages within each report are analyses of casting anomalies that we zoomed in on in order to analyze and further answer questions while we were doing the study.)
Report #1 D9TE-AB block (without any X's): NO NICKEL in the iron alloy compostion. Click Here
Report #2 D9TE-AB block (with the single X): NO NICKEL in the iron alloy compostion. Click Here
Report #1 D9TE-AB block (with multiple X's): NO NICKEL in the iron alloy compostion. Click Here
As is evidenced by the three compositional analyses above, the D9TE-AB cylinder block iron--regardless of whether the casting is marked with a cast-in "X,", cast-in "X's," or no "X" of any kind--is all pretty much the same iron alloy, from block-to-block. Given the mass producton of these blocks (tens of thousands each year of production), it is perfectly fair and reasonable to say that the metallurgical composition of all D9TE-AB blocks is essentially the same and without any nickel in them, "X" in the casting or not.
I wish to emphasize one other thing aside from the primary point of this report: the fact that there is no nickel in any of the blocks is of no consequence to their structirual integrity; they are just as stong as the the day before these findings came to light. The purpose of this particular report is to dispell the myth that "X" blocks are "high nickel" blocks, and that rumor has just been proven a myth indeed.
Paul Kane
p.s.: All metallurgical reports are the intellectual property of High Flow Dynamics
3
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
Paul, I have also seen mention of a superior block that has multiple x's along the cam tunnel in the valley floor. I believe it was a C9, or D0 block. Maybe you've seen this as well
Whether or not the sellers actually believe they are superior, or are just trying to dupe the consumer IDK.
Whether or not the sellers actually believe they are superior, or are just trying to dupe the consumer IDK.
Lifter valley differences
Paul
Exellent information. Thanks.
I have a question about the difference in the lifter Valley design on the Multi-X block and the single x block.
The center vent is missing as well as what looks to be material in oil return area at the rear of the block.
Is there any gain in having this? It also appears that the rear oil return area is different in the single X block. The oil returns are in the raised portion of the block where the multi-X block has them in the the valley floor.
Not sure if any of this matters based on where the block requires additional strength.
Any advice would be appreciated. I do not have access to a large number of these blocks and I am starting to look for a new block for a 750 horse stroker. Based on this number I do not this I need an eliminator.
Paul
Exellent information. Thanks.
I have a question about the difference in the lifter Valley design on the Multi-X block and the single x block.
The center vent is missing as well as what looks to be material in oil return area at the rear of the block.
Is there any gain in having this? It also appears that the rear oil return area is different in the single X block. The oil returns are in the raised portion of the block where the multi-X block has them in the the valley floor.
Not sure if any of this matters based on where the block requires additional strength.
Any advice would be appreciated. I do not have access to a large number of these blocks and I am starting to look for a new block for a 750 horse stroker. Based on this number I do not this I need an eliminator.
RmK57,
We don't have any C9AE block material over here, but if you want to send a small sample we'll try to get it analyzed. First, please discuss with me where to take the sample BEFORE you go cutting into your C9AE Boss cylinder block.
Also, based on the analyses thus far, I am beginning to believe that there is a specific reason that Ford did not put nickel in their blocks. I think they intentionally opted for a different iron alloy recipe. The jury is still out on this speculation, as we need to study more blocks and then discuss with people knowledgable in iron foundry casting (and also some Ford engineers from back in the day) that we know. Hint: CHROMIUM
Paul
p.s. We intend to analyze material from an A460 block as well.
Have you, or do you know of anyone who's tested what the brand x and brand y guys were doing in their big blocks?Also, based on the analyses thus far, I am beginning to believe that there is a specific reason that Ford did not put nickel in their blocks. I think they intentionally opted for a different iron alloy recipe. The jury is still out on this speculation, as we need to study more blocks and then discuss with people knowledgable in iron foundry casting (and also some Ford engineers from back in the day) that we know. Hint: CHROMIUM
Paul
p.s. We intend to analyze material from an A460 block as well.
interesting to see some of the the different metallugic approaches they took.
ALSO my old man worked in a foundry for years, its not always scientific about what is going in the big pot I/E there could have been some substitutes for certain raw material..... may find differences within each brands stuff, most likely negligible but you never know.
you wont find pop cans going in them though..pop cans = liquid splatter = severe burns.
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
