Progress with my project - Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars
Ford Forum Ford Forum

» Auto Insurance
» Featured Product
ยป Wheel & Tire Center

Go Back   Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars > The Garage - Tech Forums > Engine Specific Tech > 429-460 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 07-24-2006, 00:33   #1 (permalink)
Registered User
 
billk460's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 70
Progress with my project

It's been a little quiet on here of late. So I thought I would bore you with a picture of where my project is at.


- The Crank is in, and is now clearing the bottom end after some more machining.
- The heads are finally back, machined and ported. (we just have to sort out the springs)
- We just received a custom cam and according to the DD2000 engine simulator, it appears to be a good choice. 253 /260 @50 with 0.616/ 0.636 Lift on 110 LSA. It seems to keep the torque reasonably high at lower RPM whilst extending the RPM range at peak HP by about 500 RPM, compared to some of the off the shelf stuff.
- We did a piston to valve check on the weekend and there's heaps of clearance.
- The compression ratio is now where we want for a street car, after we machined the domes off the TRW dome pistons. I was originally worried that I wouldn't have enough comp with those huge chambers, but it now all works out to 10.47:1 static CR.
- Hopefully, this weekend I will be preparing the manifold.

(I've only just worked out how to post pictures and the quality may not be real good as the pictures were taken with a camera phone, so please bear with me............)














Any comments or advice is welcome.

Thanks Bill.
billk460 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 07-24-2006, 19:56   #2 (permalink)
429/460 Fanatic
 
Paul Kane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 548
cool Re: Progress with my project

Looking good Bill,

I'm guessing by your comment on the crankcase clearancing that you have an internally balanced (2Y) crank in a D9TE-AB block. And I'm guesssing by the piston choice that it's a .030 overbore 460. By the way, for anyone that is looking at the pictures, it's not mandatory that the entire dome be whacked off the pistons and make a flat top. Taking off .100", .200" or even .336" (or whatever) is fine, provided there is a means to make this consistent from one piston to the next. (If anyone wan't details on methods, just ask). In Bill's case, he seems to be happy with creating the flat top pistons.

One question about the compression ratio, Bill: What is your bore & stroke... 4.39 x 3.85? And what heads are you using? I think D3VE heads with flat topped L2443 TRW's make about 9.25:1 c/r and with D0VE heads closer to 11.25:1 c/r....approximately. But of course, I don't know what specifically has been done to the combustion chamber volume of the heads you are running, deck height, etc. Please elaborate. By the way, nice combustion chamber work (smoothing) on the heads.

Paul
__________________

We're on the web; click below:
High Flow Dynamics
Performance Components for the 429/460 Engine Family
Paul Kane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2006, 22:23   #3 (permalink)
Registered User
 
billk460's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 70
Re: Progress with my project

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Kane
Looking good Bill,

I'm guessing ... that you have an internally balanced (2Y) crank in a D9TE-AB block. ........What is your bore & stroke... ...... L2443 TRW's make about 9.25:1 c/r and with D0VE heads closer to 11.25:1 c/r....approximately. .......Please elaborate. By the way, nice combustion chamber work (smoothing) on the heads.

Paul
Thanks Paul for your kind words and your input on this and other forums. I think that most people on here will agree, that participants like your self, that are experienced and are willing to pass on much of their information learnt, enhance the content within these forum sites.

So I'm hoping that some of you may learn from my experiences/ mistakes by posting this information.

I'm using a D1VE block with an internally balanced 460 crank, and D3VE Heads (it was a 1973 lincoln used motor, from memory). The pistons were bought 12 years ago to be used with std 460 rods. Then a mate of mine, at the time, who had played around with engines, thought up a way to stroke the engine. He suggested I buy BB Chev + .400 aftermarket Lunati rods (6.535") and offset grind the crank to make 488 cubes. He also feared that the Std rods may not be up to the weight of those heavy dome pistons (we know better now). Cheap SCAT stroker combinations were not available back then and as far as I can recall you used Stock Standard stuff or SVO (which was very expensive). So I took his advice, as I thought he knew a thing or two, and ordered some rods from the States.

Whilst the calculation of the deck height worked out spot on, with this revised combo, we overlooked a very basic geometric fact that if you shorten the rod, then you need to adjust the pin height. As I recently found out, the skirts of the pistons were hitting the crank throws, as a result of this oversight. I know now that I could have done things better and cheaper, if I were to start again and buy things from scratch to suite, but my main objective from this is to use up all my bits.

We also overlooked the fact that the Chev rod has a different pin diameter to the Ford Piston. It's all been finally sorted, with a little more machining of the crank throws and rods and lot of messing about. (I'm now led to believe that Lunati sold a custom piston years ago that could be used with this exact combo).

My combo is
Bore (plus 30) 4.390
Stroke 4.030
Gasket (est) 0.040
Chamber 92.6 CC (it must of been decked a couple of times)
Deck to Piston Zero
Valve Relief 3.0 CC (estimated)

My calcs work this out to be around 10.47:1. With the 12.1 CC dome it was around 11.5:1, which I think will be too high with pump petrol.

Sorry about the long post. I just needed to explain the chain of events that led to my train of thought (or lack there-of).

Thanks. Bill
billk460 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2006, 23:09   #4 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Black XW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brisbane
Age: 49
Posts: 88
Re: Progress with my project

Nice to see some progress on the engine Bill and hope all goes smooth for you .Is the cam a flat tappet or roller & what hp & tq & at what rpm did the simulater suggest for that cam .Don't want to seem nosey Bill but just asking as I had a bad experience with comp roller lifters on the street ,but since found that I should have had the ones with the oiling hole for the rollers & I have bought a lunati with very similar specs.What is your plan for size of carb.
Dale.
__________________
we cam , we ford , we conquer.
Black XW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2006, 23:52   #5 (permalink)
429/460 Fanatic
 
Paul Kane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 548
cool Re: Progress with my project

Bill,

Now that you mention it, I remember that I was staring at the rods in the picture and wondering what the hell was going on there...hey you designed your own stroker kit and that's kinda neat, if you ask me.

Yes, there was indeed a Lunati kit some years ago and it used the chebby 6.535" connecting rod. They came with Taylor pistons which had a 1.675" compression height pin (chebby .990" pin diameter). The TRW 460 pistons you used have a 1.756" compression height, and you simply altered the stroke of your crank to get proper deck height with your piston/rod combo. I commend you; you're a true Ford fanatic...a thinking man and not like those chebby guys who buy pre-fabbed parts and screw them together...their plethora of aftermarket parts. (But Ford owners have quite a bit to choose from these days, too.) You created your stroker. We Ford campers don't see this as much as we used to.

On the filpside, I imagine you feel you really went a long way to make this particular combo work. I can't say I've ever heard of your combo before, and there are other proven old school stroker methods that were around before all these shelf item stroker kits became available. Besides the Lunati stroker kit mentioned above, there was also the Drew Backlund 540 Stroker that used the Ford 240 6-cylinder rod (from the 1960's) and custom pistons, for example.

As you noted, these days the stroker lits use a longer rod which helps maintain a good rod ratio, among other things such as the piston/crank clearancing issue you encountered.

You've ironed the bugs out and I'll bet it's smooth sailing from here; good luck with the build and keep us updated.

Paul
__________________

We're on the web; click below:
High Flow Dynamics
Performance Components for the 429/460 Engine Family
Paul Kane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2006, 03:45   #6 (permalink)
Registered User
 
billk460's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 70
Re: Progress with my project

Quote:
Originally Posted by Black XW
Nice to see some progress on the engine Bill and hope all goes smooth for you .Is the cam a flat tappet or roller & what hp & tq & at what rpm did the simulater suggest for that cam .Don't want to seem nosey Bill but just asking as I had a bad experience with comp roller lifters on the street ,but since found that I should have had the ones with the oiling hole for the rollers & I have bought a lunati with very similar specs.What is your plan for size of carb.
Dale.
Hi Dale,
I'm running a Solid Flat Tappet Cam from Camtech (in Sydney). We based it on my head flow, which was (at 28" H20)
Lift Intake Exhaust
.100 69.3 56.0
.200 141.7 107.0
.300 206.2 147.0
.400 256.4 171.5
.500 290.0 190.0
.600 305.4 195.9
.700 315.7 190.0

We tried to use the head porting tips as outlined in Scott Johnson's awesome site, but as the head porting had been started years ago by the mate I mentioned in the first post, it was hard to match certain parts. We purposely kept the intake on the smallish side to promote torque. For our first go, I'm happy with the exhaust flow, even though it's not as good as Scott's flow figures. The intake could have come out better, though. I would imagine that your Edelbrocks would flow heaps better, especially at low lift.

I'm still undecided on the carby. I have a 1050 Dominator that I will use for the sake of dyno data, but I'm tossing up between a 950 and 850 Holley. I think the 850 will be better on the street, but everyone is telling me to go the 950.

Here's what Dyno 2000 says with the 850 (only 6 HP less than the 950).

RPM Power Torque
2000 169 444
2500 226 475
3000 283 495
3500 350 525
4000 416 546
4500 472 550
5000 514 540
5500 524 500
6000 510 446
6500 478 386

I have set the exhaust system as "small tube headers with mufflers" to simulate the poor bends with those CAE extractors. If it makes these numbers on the dyno without mufflers, then I would be happy.
billk460 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2006, 05:19   #7 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Black XW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brisbane
Age: 49
Posts: 88
Re: Progress with my project

Just before my engine became unwell I was trying out a 1050 Dominator & all though I never made it to the track to check it sure felt like it was running a lot stronger then with my 950 HP, I was even thinking it might be worth looking at an even bigger carb , but that will have to wait as the budget just took a hit with the new 35 spline detroit sheetmetal I just fitted to the XW.I do not know how better the fuel consumption is between 850,950 & 1050 Dom but bang for buck I will pay the extra fuel cost.
Dale.
__________________
we cam , we ford , we conquer.
Black XW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2006, 05:19   #8 (permalink)
Registered User
 
billk460's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 70
Re: Progress with my project

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Kane
Bill,

Now that you mention it, I remember that I was staring at the rods ........ On the filpside, I imagine you feel you really went a long way to make this particular combo work. ...........You've ironed the bugs out and I'll bet it's smooth sailing from here; good luck with the build and keep us updated.

Paul
Thanks Paul, it looked good on paper. That's been my problem till now. It's all been theory, with no practical know how. I work in an office by day and this is my hobby. I've been "gunna" (going to) do this project for many years, but with works, marriage and mortgage comittments over the past 12 years, its been put on the back burner. This project is more about finishing what I started and learning something along the way. Well I think I've learnt heaps of late, particularly from these forums and finally doing it. So, the extra heart ache with all the extra machining, has been worth it in the end.

I used to envy the choices the Chev guys had compared to the ford guys, but in some ways the Chev guys have way too much choice. It must be hard to make the right choice when its hard to sort of see the tree in amongst the forrest. At least with Ford stuff there are less choices, but its all good gear. Its good to see the vast array of choices now for BB Fords, in particular.

Here's how I calculated whether the stroker would work...

484 Stroker Stats
Deck Height 10.322 inches
Bore 4.390 inches
Stroke 4.030 inches
Rod Length 6.535 inches

Piston Compression Height 1.772 inches


Crank Journals - Main 3.000 inches
Crank Journals - Rod (Std) 2.500 inches
Crank Journals - Rod (Stroker) 2.200 inches




1) Standard Stroke Minimum Deck Height

Rod Length (std Ford) 6.605
Crank Throw (Stroke/ 2) 1.925
Piston Compression Height 1.772
-------------------------------
Minimum Deck Height 10.302



2) 484 Stroker Minimum Deck Height

Rod Length 6.535
Crank Throw (Stroke/ 2) 2.015
Piston Compression Height 1.772
--------------------------------
Minimum Deck Height 10.322


It has all worked out with the extra machining, in the end.

Here's are better pictures of the rods. Sorry about the grainy camera phone pictures. One day I may invest in a proper digital camera.




billk460 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2006, 06:19   #9 (permalink)
Registered User
 
billk460's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 70
Re: Progress with my project

Quote:
Originally Posted by Black XW
Just before my engine became unwell I was trying out a 1050 Dominator .....850,950 & 1050 Dom but bang for buck I will pay the extra fuel cost.
Dale.
Hmmm, I guess, I'll have to try one of each, if I can.
billk460 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2006, 16:51   #10 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Black XW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brisbane
Age: 49
Posts: 88
Re: Progress with my project

Bill I just thought of something you need to check . When I pulled my engine down I noticed the extractors flange was not lined up with the head port .I took a die grinder to the flange and that fixed it. Not a huge deal but it all helps.
Dale
__________________
we cam , we ford , we conquer.
Black XW 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 > 429-460 Tech



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


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.2

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:03.



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.