My new combo - comments please - Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars
Ford Forum Ford Forum

» Auto Insurance
» Featured Product
» Wheel & Tire Center

Go Back   Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars > The Garage - Tech Forums > Engine Specific Tech > Cleveland Tech
Register Home Forum Active Topics Photo Gallery Auto Loans Garage Mark Forums Read Auto Escrow

FordForums.com is the premier Ford Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-07-2005, 18:55   #1 (permalink)
Registered User
 
STROKEXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,373
My new combo - comments please

Fairly sure that I have reached the limit with my current stroker combo, and with some more funds coming in soon I've decided to up the ante. Any feedback would be appreciated..

Keep my current 378 stroke crank, but crack test etc.

Freshen up block, new bearings and 1/2 resin fill as added insurance. (it's a late model black block 30" over in good condition)

Replace current Chevy OEM conrods with Eagle H-beam ESP 4340 forged steel H beam connecting rods

JE forged pistons. Still doing research to find a catalogued item that suits the planned 12:1 compression/Chev rod combination.

Scrap the 2V heads and fit CHI 218 heads with all the good gear because of cam choice ie stud girdle, Crane RR's

Crane R252 solid roller: 252/262 @ 50", .727/.727 lift

Replace Weiand inlet with Parker Funnelweb

Replace 750DP with BG Mighty Demon 825

As my plan is to send the work out, can anybody from WA recommend someone in the trade who's work is impeccable? XD408 who did your engine assembly?
__________________
STROKEXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 01-07-2005, 19:55   #2 (permalink)
74 XB Fairmont
 
brenx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Cranbourne, Vic
Posts: 5,113
Re: My new combo - comments please

Any reason you wouldn't go with the matching CHI manifold?? I think your undercarbing for a engine that CI with a cam that large. Falcon Coupe got a little more duration but less lift and runs a 850dp on the 351. The engine makes more power with a 950 but not enough to warrant a $1600+ carb! I reckon your entering 950dp teritory.

The funnel web and CHI are the same height if I remember correctly and the CHI's cheaper than the funnel web when buying the heads @ the same time.

Brenden
__________________
XB Fairmont (street car) 11.07@123.02mph.
brenx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2005, 20:21   #3 (permalink)
Registered User
 
xdclevo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Cairns
Posts: 1,946
Re: My new combo - comments please

I like most of the combo, including the carby.
The only things i would personally change:

Compression. I would limit to 11.5
Cam lift/dur. I would like to see more duration and less lift(lift looks huge)
Manifold. As brenx said, why not go for the one designed for the CHI's?
If you are going to make a killer hp combo, you will be testing the block.
Is it going to be street car still??

Did you choose the cam using flow figures from the CHI 218's?
__________________
10.70 @ 125.00 on the black fun top
408 Cube Cleveland.
xdclevo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2005, 20:31   #4 (permalink)
74 XB Fairmont
 
brenx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Cranbourne, Vic
Posts: 5,113
Re: My new combo - comments please

Dion with that size cam and the CHI's, it more than likely won't detonate anyway. John @ CHI is quite experienced in how much comp and what type of fuel can be run. If Johns suggested 12:1?? STROKEXD will be fine. I'm heading that way myself with comp due to the combustion chamber design and alluminium of the CHI's. Makes life real easy.

John and I have been conversing lately regarding the compression you can run with the CHI's. It's rather impressive. Part of our conversation goes like this (every knows I have 11.2:1 compression anyway).
Do you get any detonation? Nope.
What timing you run? 36-38 total. John I ran out of fuel in the garage while tinking and I threw the fuel in the for the lawn mower in the tank. It's 91-92ron standard unleaded and it didn't detonate!
Whats your cyl pressure @ cranking? 185psi all cyls.
Jist of the conversation was we should try some more compression. I'll try anything once

Brenden
__________________
XB Fairmont (street car) 11.07@123.02mph.
brenx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2005, 20:49   #5 (permalink)
Registered User
 
xdclevo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Cairns
Posts: 1,946
Re: My new combo - comments please

Quote:
Originally Posted by brenx
Dion with that size cam and the CHI's, it more than likely won't detonate anyway. John @ CHI is quite experienced in how much comp and what type of fuel can be run. If Johns suggested 12:1?? STROKEXD will be fine. I'm heading that way myself with comp due to the combustion chamber design and alluminium of the CHI's. Makes life real easy.

John and I have been conversing lately regarding the compression you can run with the CHI's. It's rather impressive. Part of our conversation goes like this (every knows I have 11.2:1 compression anyway).
Do you get any detonation? Nope.
What timing you run? 36-38 total. John I ran out of fuel in the garage while tinking and I threw the fuel in the for the lawn mower in the tank. It's 91-92ron standard unleaded and it didn't detonate!
Whats your cyl pressure @ cranking? 185psi all cyls.
Jist of the conversation was we should try some more compression. I'll try anything once

Brenden
Sorry dudes, i didn't relize thats what CHI had recommended. Oviously if he had consulted CHI for the best setup, the CHI manifold would have been on the list??
But you did ask for feedback, and that is MY opinion.
What sort of power are you after?

edit: I wouldnt mind doing a compression check. Can you still use the old steel type head sparkplug fitting to check compression.
__________________
10.70 @ 125.00 on the black fun top
408 Cube Cleveland.
xdclevo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2005, 21:01   #6 (permalink)
74 XB Fairmont
 
brenx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Cranbourne, Vic
Posts: 5,113
Re: My new combo - comments please

Dion you missed my "If John's suggested 12:1?" statement. I wouldn't know if STROKEXD has convsersed with CHI regarding the comp hence the "if". I know, I have. I would have thought the manifold would be on the list??

I stated what I did due to it being common knowledge that big cams bleed off compression. In english for the ones that are thinking WTF's he on about. You can run for example 12:1 static but with a big cam the compression might only be 10.5:1 dynamic for arguements sake.

Theres two types of compression:

Static : thats the compression you work everything out to be without taking the cam into consideration
Dynamic : is the real compression. Cyl pressure @ cranking/running. Which decreases with each increase in cam size.

STROKEXD : You should make loads of hp and torque regardsless

Brenden
__________________
XB Fairmont (street car) 11.07@123.02mph.
brenx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2005, 21:26   #7 (permalink)
Registered User
 
TruBlu351's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 2,398
Re: My new combo - comments please

Sounds good. The racing carb size equates to 850, using all those calculators etc (378 @ 7000rpm)..........but.........Sandro decided to put on a 1050 dominator on similar combo (just to be different: gave him great results).......in his mid 10 sec XD. Anyway, that's just something to experiment with afterwards.

I know this is an engine thread, but..........

What you also need to do is pick up a second 9" diff centre with low gears. As you know, a real quick job to change over, but would give AWESOME results when racing every 6 months or so. Then you can just swap your 3.2 back in..........I'll bet you'd keep 'em in though

Put some slicks on and.............HOLD ON!! A COMPLETE drag package.

Is bore sleeving a worthy investment on a clevo pumping out real big HP? I believe it's rather pricy?? Or is the resin by itself sufficient enough?

Can't wait to see it!
__________________
XE Falcon
393 Tremec TKO 9"
TruBlu351 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2005, 21:41   #8 (permalink)
Registered User
 
xdclevo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Cairns
Posts: 1,946
Re: My new combo - comments please

Quote:
Originally Posted by brenx
I stated what I did due to it being common knowledge that big cams bleed off compression. In english for the ones that are thinking WTF's he on about. You can run for example 12:1 static but with a big cam the compression might only be 10.5:1 dynamic for arguements sake.

Theres two types of compression:

Static : thats the compression you work everything out to be without taking the cam into consideration
Dynamic : is the real compression. Cyl pressure @ cranking/running. Which decreases with each increase in cam size.

STROKEXD : You should make loads of hp and torque regardsless

Brenden
Oviously it wont be anywhere near 10.5 dynamic or your in big trouble, but i know where your coming from. I know about static and dynamic compression.
My comments were to STROKEXD anyhow, not you, as he was asking the question.
__________________
10.70 @ 125.00 on the black fun top
408 Cube Cleveland.
xdclevo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2005, 22:09   #9 (permalink)
'60 F100 Q-Code
 
davis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Washington, USA
Posts: 750
Re: My new combo - comments please

Quote:
Originally Posted by STROKEXD
JE forged pistons. Still doing research to find a catalogued item that suits the planned 12:1 compression/Chev rod combination.
You're in custom piston territory. No sense in trying to make an off-the-shelf piston work with what you're trying to accomplish. Considering the lift of your cam, you'll want to be very certain to specify fly-cuts for valve clearancing. Most stocking pistons don't have enough exhaust valve clearance. Don't waste your money buying and off the shelf piston only to have to spend more money on it (than custom would cost from the outset) to make it work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by STROKEXD
Scrap the 2V heads and fit CHI 218 heads with all the good gear because of cam choice ie stud girdle, Crane RR's
I'd recommend going straight over to the AFD 4V heads. The money is the same, so why spend this level to only do it again when you want more in another 6 months? Also, when you blow up your factory block and decide to buy an SVO block, the 4V heads will support a big inch engine with a big bore. That's what I'd try to talk you into if you wanted to listen to it. Sell your current set up. You don't have enough value in the factory block and your 378 rotating assembly to justify keeping it together and using only the crank and block in a new engine. If you're going to buying pistons, buy an SVO block and run the bore out to 4.125 or larger, run a new forged 4340 3.850" crank and end up with a 411 CID engine with big 4V heads that will easily make 600 HP and 550 TQ on 11:1 then run your compression out to 12:1 if it makes you happy.

You're attacking this "problem" with some notable "conservatism" yet your apparent desire is to get a lot more power. Everyone is on a budget, so sell your current combination as it is and add your new dollars and you've got a real engine that you can clearly say that it isn't a big compromise. By the time you hard block the 2-bolt block, you're back to reboring it and re-align honing it anyway. What cost does that add? Why even touch it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by STROKEXD
Crane R252 solid roller: 252/262 @ 50", .727/.727 lift
I'd go back to the idea of a custom SR camshaft. You can probably get away with a lot less overlap between the intake and exhaust valves with the CHI or AFD heads as they are not as disparate as the factory iron heads. It sounds to me like it is definitely time for you to quit thinking "off-the-shelf." Obviously, if some DD2K time suggests that it isn't "enough better" with a custom cam to warrant the extra $50 USD cost, then go ahead, use the shelf cam.

As soon as you say 12:1 compression, you're really entering into a whole new world of "off-the-shelf doesn't fit with something else somewhere else in the combination."

Let me put it in other terms. My silly 393 combination was obviously destined for a very light car (compared to any street car). The chrome moly dragster isn't very heavy until you add me! My parameters for it were much different too. The car would only be strip driven (duh). It didn't need to be an "ϋber" anything, it is a "play car." With that in mind, and taking into consideration that I was more interested in driving it than dicking around with it every couple of minutes, I definitely opted for 'lower' compression than is typical of all-out race vehicles. 11.28:1 isn't billy bad-ass. One point to note is that the higher the compression ratio, the more important absolutely "fine tuned" the engine needs to be for performance and longevity.

12:1 isn't the end of the world or even that finicky, but it does depend on the fuel used. You can get away with loosing a bit of static compression for building a bit more dynamic compression, especially with the alloy heads. Unless you're planning on shifting at 8000, you may want to reconsider the entire combination from a perspective of how you're actually intending to use it. It sounds like you're putting it into the same chassis, using the same transmission and same converter and same gear set and same tires. If this is the case, then work backwards and let your "unchanged" elements dictate where the camshaft, compression, flow, carburetor and other factors be determined.

Quote:
Originally Posted by STROKEXD
Replace Weiand inlet with Parker Funnelweb

Replace 750DP with BG Mighty Demon 825
You're changing a lot of variables at once. You must really like tinkering with your combination. Considering the price of the parts you're considering, why not take a look at a 4500-series HP Holley? You'll have a lot more carb for not much more/about the same or even less money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by STROKEXD
As my plan is to send the work out, can anybody from WA recommend someone in the trade who's work is impeccable? XD408 who did your engine assembly?
If you find that someone, then you should also be able to take that person's advice on what to build and what you'll get when you're done. I'd ring up or email Ken Lowe and ask him who he trusts for killer Cleveland engines. I would also open my mind to outside of WA, if that's what it takes to get it right.

I think that you're on the right track, but I also think that you're attacking the problem from your own (sorry, rather limited) set of skills/experience in high performance engine building. For a guy moving from bolt on roller rockers who was very recently still in hydraulic cam territory to moving up to 12:1 with a SR, alloy heads and more...(nothing wrong with all of it at all), you're probably better off developing your combination from a statement of purpose. What is it that you want to achieve? Don't be general. It doesn't help to say "more power." You need to decide what performance test will validate your accomplishments so that you can aim for that achievement and verify that you've made it with the money and time you spend to get there. You're not at the "bolt-ons" phase any more. It isn't as if a set of mail-order extractors and a chrome dress-up kit are going to accomplish your goals. Don't get me wrong, there are nothing wrong with even THOSE modest "performance" goals, rather, it isn't a part of the solution in your case. Neither is about 9 million other choices for parts. I believe that you really need to start thinking about producing a solution for your particular problem set. Identify the "problem" and work toward that goal. Take the advice of trusted professionals and forget about 99% of what you read on forums, as you're in a territory that is alien to at least 90% of others from what I read you're trying to accomplish "on the cheap."

Another word of advice, bite the bullet. If you're willing to compromise, ensure that you have some reasonable data to support your compromises so that you are more willing to accept moderate over absolute when the time comes. Otherwise, eat a piece of lead and buy the parts that it takes to accomplish your goals as set forth by your statement of the problem. I always want more power, too, but at the same time, I know that I'd rather just drive and not have to touch the tune-up, so I'm perfectly satisfied "giving away" a lot of power so that I won't have to fiddle with the combo. The more you know about your own preferences and what you're trying to accomplish, the more reasonable you're going to find the solution--in whatever form it takes. Speculating on parts choices does little to solve the "problem" when it hasn't been stated. Choosing a carb without understanding how the static versus dynamic compression value with your engine displacement in your transmission/differential/chassis combination will react to it is a waste of time and energy...and probably money if you buy the wrong carb for the combo.

I typically spend about 6 months choosing the combination for my car(s). You seem to change them every 6 months :) Not to worry, we're obviously different and have different needs/desires/interests.

Of course, I am also a hypocrite in at least the case of my latest engine, which is an engine without a chassis or "other combination parts" to round it out and therefore select important things like cam/carb/etc., but it is really a different animal from what it sounds like you're trying to accomplish. My iron headed 4V, flat top, solid flat "modest" cam, 4-bolt "Q-Code" engine (but with closed chambers) is a general performance part destined for a lightweight chassis, or otherwise a whole lot of converter and gear in a heavier car. I balanced it with a flexplate and a flywheel so that I'd have the option based on whatever chassis I eventually find for it. I can always gear/tire/converter/trans the chassis accordingly...or at least arrive at a suitable compromise considering that I'm not expecting it to be anything more than a "lively performance" piece. If it makes 430 HP/TQ on the dyno, I'll be satisfied with it...and most of it is from used/reconditioned factory parts and low cost parts, like a used Torker inlet and a used 800 CFM DP that I rebuilt to factory specs.

My performance goals for whatever chassis it finally finds a home in is currently nothing. I want only a "lively" ride that is also reasonably streetable for the occasional cruise or other function. I really should have put a SR camshaft into it, but couldn't justify the money for what I want out of the engine and without having an idea of transmission/gear/tire/weight, I'd be buying a "generic" SR camshaft when what I did do was buy a "general purpose" mechanical flat tappet camshaft. I already recognize that my power band is likely to be about 3800-7000 RPM in this engine.

What power band do you want? What is your intended usage? A big-inch engine with good RPM range will nearly always be more "fun" than a smaller, narrow-banded engine in every case but a true racecar. Your H-beam choice sounds like you're thinking of extending your RPM range and safety at RPM. Seriously, a set of I-beam 4340 rods will easily accomplish what it sounds like you're trying to achieve...for about half the cost and significantly less weight.

You're on the right track in terms of thinking alloy heads and solid roller cam, but I think that you need to fine tune what you want out of it before you spend money on parts. Since no one wants to read long posts, I shut the hell up now.

:davis:
davis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2005, 00:36   #10 (permalink)
BLOWNXD
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Perth
Age: 35
Posts: 429
Re: My new combo - comments please

Hey Strokexd i had my mechanic whos a good friend of mine build my engine for me as far as it goes with building it right, clean and being impecably maticulous he's great he wont rush thru it and wont rip you off I had SQP dummy the whole thing up as i bought most of things thru them (the 3vs) and had my mechanic do the final assemble (of which it went together and apart 2 times), he relieved the block stud girdle as well as make and fabricate alot of custom shit, Ive seen alot of other mechanics who dont take the time and just slap them together some who werent checkin bearings etc.. and assembling in a dirty workshop near where metal filings and dust were flying around so id say be careful check around look at were there engines are assembled and speak to the guy whos actually building the engine not the guy behind the counter. If you want my mechanics number just PM and ill send it to you you can have a chat to him or come to Motorvation next weekend ill be in the Stones Racing Trans. Marquee and speak to him then as he's camping with us other than that Dereck from Kwinana prformance and John from SQP, or Ranch automotives are really good hope that helps good luck :)
XD408 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars > The Garage - Tech Forums > Engine Specific Tech > Cleveland Tech

Related Reading: My new combo - comments please


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
combo settled on azza Cleveland Tech 17 11-08-2004 02:34
How about this combo? DUKE Cleveland Tech 8 11-07-2004 00:30
Best Wheel Tyre combo for a 66 coupe ? srv dt Ford Mustang Forum 2 09-01-2004 03:47
new monthly photoshop comp comments danxagt PhotoShop Forum 21 07-02-2004 05:20
Opinions on this combo Ruger Trans | Driveline 10 05-31-2004 00:42

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.2

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 21:35.



Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.