John

"CobraJet" <coiled@basking.hiss> wrote in message
news:030120060951272515%coiled@basking.hiss...
> In article <rOruf.875$%G7.721@fe02.lga>, Carl <carl@nospam.net> wrote:
>
>> the part that is for sale is an edelbrock performer rpm manifold for
>> 390-428.
>> it's still for sale. make offer if interested. it has under an hour's
>> run time on it.
>
> I'd be interested but I should direct John to this intake for his
> upcoming build. The RPM is good out of the box, but the general
> consensus is that some port massage wakes it up even more. Unless he
> wants to go to something exotic, this is the ticket. Let's see what he
> says.

I'll send Carl an e-mail.

>>
>> cut-n-paste from the edelbrock catalog:
>> Designed for high-performance street 390-406-410-427-428 c.i.d. Ford FE
>> V8s with standard 390-428 c.i.d., 427 low/medium-rise or Edelbrock
>> Performer RPM FE heads. The dual-plane constant cross-sectional area
>> design builds low and mid-range acceleration while optimized runner
>> paths make exceptional top-end hp. Has provision for adding the PCV or
>> breather flange at rear. No exhaust crossover passage.
>> Performer RPM FE(non-EGR)..........P/N #7105

--
John - ThunderSnake #59
'69 Mach 1 w/ 390 4V
Wide Ratio Toploader
3.50 Traction-Lok
Acapulco Blue

 

Carl

CobraJet wrote:
> In article <rOruf.875$%G7.721@fe02.lga>, Carl <carl@nospam.net> wrote:
>
>
>>the part that is for sale is an edelbrock performer rpm manifold for
>>390-428.
>>it's still for sale. make offer if interested. it has under an hour's
>>run time on it.
>
>
> I'd be interested but I should direct John to this intake for his
> upcoming build. The RPM is good out of the box, but the general
> consensus is that some port massage wakes it up even more. Unless he
> wants to go to something exotic, this is the ticket. Let's see what he
> says.
>
>
>>cut-n-paste from the edelbrock catalog:
>>Designed for high-performance street 390-406-410-427-428 c.i.d. Ford FE
>>V8s with standard 390-428 c.i.d., 427 low/medium-rise or Edelbrock
>>Performer RPM FE heads. The dual-plane constant cross-sectional area
>>design builds low and mid-range acceleration while optimized runner
>>paths make exceptional top-end hp. Has provision for adding the PCV or
>>breather flange at rear. No exhaust crossover passage.
>>Performer RPM FE(non-EGR)..........P/N #7105
>>
>>the guy doing the resto wants to run all the stock stuff. me?? i didnt
>>feel like buying a $300 set of smog tubes and at that point i was sick
>>and tired of refurbishing crap and the box of emission equipment looked
>>like something i could blow off so i said screw this and bought the
>>aluminum manifold. me and that 100 pound POS cast iron stock intake have
>>not had a good relationshiop historically anyway. in the end the smog
>>tubes will be bought and the box of emissions shit will be reworked. dammit
>
>
> The stock CJ intake (feels like 100 lbs, is really 76 on the scale)
> is actually one of the best-flowing pieces around. The RPM has more
> potential, but a *regular* Edelbrock Performer will actually lose power
> up against the CJ.
>
> CobraJet
>
it looks like the original cast iron piece will be ran. i know
personally the stock motor performed very well and since the motor is
out i'm thinking of pulling the crane energizer 272 cam that is in it.
when it came time to buy a cam i looked everywhere i could for a copy of
the stock cam, even chatting with the cam manufacturers and distributors
i could find at my yearly trip to one of the vegas nhra stops. i have
since learned that lunati grinds a copy. the heads have had hardened
seats on the exhaust put in and the compression is at the stock 10.25:1.
questions:
has anyone ran an octane booster here?
do octane boosters also have a lead substitute in them?
will an octane booster be needed at the 91 i can get out of the pumps here?

CobraJet

In article <TYTuf.186$dj3.74@fe04.lga>, Carl <carl@nospam.net> wrote:

> CobraJet wrote:
> > In article <rOruf.875$%G7.721@fe02.lga>, Carl <carl@nospam.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>the part that is for sale is an edelbrock performer rpm manifold for
> >>390-428.
> >>it's still for sale. make offer if interested. it has under an hour's
> >>run time on it.
> >
> >
> > I'd be interested but I should direct John to this intake for his
> > upcoming build. The RPM is good out of the box, but the general
> > consensus is that some port massage wakes it up even more. Unless he
> > wants to go to something exotic, this is the ticket. Let's see what he
> > says.
> >
> >
> >>cut-n-paste from the edelbrock catalog:
> >>Designed for high-performance street 390-406-410-427-428 c.i.d. Ford FE
> >>V8s with standard 390-428 c.i.d., 427 low/medium-rise or Edelbrock
> >>Performer RPM FE heads. The dual-plane constant cross-sectional area
> >>design builds low and mid-range acceleration while optimized runner
> >>paths make exceptional top-end hp. Has provision for adding the PCV or
> >>breather flange at rear. No exhaust crossover passage.
> >>Performer RPM FE(non-EGR)..........P/N #7105
> >>
> >>the guy doing the resto wants to run all the stock stuff. me?? i didnt
> >>feel like buying a $300 set of smog tubes and at that point i was sick
> >>and tired of refurbishing crap and the box of emission equipment looked
> >>like something i could blow off so i said screw this and bought the
> >>aluminum manifold. me and that 100 pound POS cast iron stock intake have
> >>not had a good relationshiop historically anyway. in the end the smog
> >>tubes will be bought and the box of emissions shit will be reworked. dammit
> >
> >
> > The stock CJ intake (feels like 100 lbs, is really 76 on the scale)
> > is actually one of the best-flowing pieces around. The RPM has more
> > potential, but a *regular* Edelbrock Performer will actually lose power
> > up against the CJ.
> >
> > CobraJet
> >
> it looks like the original cast iron piece will be ran. i know
> personally the stock motor performed very well and since the motor is
> out i'm thinking of pulling the crane energizer 272 cam that is in it.
> when it came time to buy a cam i looked everywhere i could for a copy of
> the stock cam, even chatting with the cam manufacturers and distributors
> i could find at my yearly trip to one of the vegas nhra stops. i have
> since learned that lunati grinds a copy. the heads have had hardened
> seats on the exhaust put in and the compression is at the stock 10.25:1.
> questions:
> has anyone ran an octane booster here?
> do octane boosters also have a lead substitute in them?
> will an octane booster be needed at the 91 i can get out of the pumps here?

The .533"/272º cam you have now is far more suited to the CJ than
the 10503 Lunati you are thinking about. I'll have more time tonight to
explain. Do you adjustable rockers? Are the heads off?

CobraJet

--
Spokesmodel for Arrogant Bastard Ale

CobraJet

In article <040120061211319938%coiled@basking.hiss>, CobraJet
<coiled@basking.hiss> wrote:

> In article <TYTuf.186$dj3.74@fe04.lga>, Carl <carl@nospam.net> wrote:
>
> > CobraJet wrote:
> > > In article <rOruf.875$%G7.721@fe02.lga>, Carl <carl@nospam.net> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>the part that is for sale is an edelbrock performer rpm manifold for
> > >>390-428.
> > >>it's still for sale. make offer if interested. it has under an hour's
> > >>run time on it.
> > >
> > >
> > > I'd be interested but I should direct John to this intake for his
> > > upcoming build. The RPM is good out of the box, but the general
> > > consensus is that some port massage wakes it up even more. Unless he
> > > wants to go to something exotic, this is the ticket. Let's see what he
> > > says.
> > >
> > >
> > >>cut-n-paste from the edelbrock catalog:
> > >>Designed for high-performance street 390-406-410-427-428 c.i.d. Ford FE
> > >>V8s with standard 390-428 c.i.d., 427 low/medium-rise or Edelbrock
> > >>Performer RPM FE heads. The dual-plane constant cross-sectional area
> > >>design builds low and mid-range acceleration while optimized runner
> > >>paths make exceptional top-end hp. Has provision for adding the PCV or
> > >>breather flange at rear. No exhaust crossover passage.
> > >>Performer RPM FE(non-EGR)..........P/N #7105
> > >>
> > >>the guy doing the resto wants to run all the stock stuff. me?? i didnt
> > >>feel like buying a $300 set of smog tubes and at that point i was sick
> > >>and tired of refurbishing crap and the box of emission equipment looked
> > >>like something i could blow off so i said screw this and bought the
> > >>aluminum manifold. me and that 100 pound POS cast iron stock intake have
> > >>not had a good relationshiop historically anyway. in the end the smog
> > >>tubes will be bought and the box of emissions shit will be reworked.
> > >>dammit
> > >
> > >
> > > The stock CJ intake (feels like 100 lbs, is really 76 on the scale)
> > > is actually one of the best-flowing pieces around. The RPM has more
> > > potential, but a *regular* Edelbrock Performer will actually lose power
> > > up against the CJ.
> > >
> > > CobraJet
> > >
> > it looks like the original cast iron piece will be ran. i know
> > personally the stock motor performed very well and since the motor is
> > out i'm thinking of pulling the crane energizer 272 cam that is in it.
> > when it came time to buy a cam i looked everywhere i could for a copy of
> > the stock cam, even chatting with the cam manufacturers and distributors
> > i could find at my yearly trip to one of the vegas nhra stops. i have
> > since learned that lunati grinds a copy. the heads have had hardened
> > seats on the exhaust put in and the compression is at the stock 10.25:1.
> > questions:
> > has anyone ran an octane booster here?
> > do octane boosters also have a lead substitute in them?
> > will an octane booster be needed at the 91 i can get out of the pumps here?
>
> The .533"/272º cam you have now is far more suited to the CJ than
> the 10503 Lunati you are thinking about. I'll have more time tonight to
> explain. Do you adjustable rockers? Are the heads off?

First, the stock compression in a CJ is rated at 10.65:1. Which
pistons do you have, 2303's? Do you know the deck clearance in your
engine? This is important if you are concerned about detonation on pump
gas.

Here's my own opinion on mild camming the CJ. The original C6-B cam
was made for the 390 GT with less as-delivered airflow than the CJ. It
was one of the better factory sticks around, but was fairly
conservative for the 428. A bigger cam not only works better, but it
develops cylinder pressure a little later than the smaller cam, and
this helps prevent pinging on pump gas. There are street engines
running around with over 11:1 compression that are not detonating
because they are cammed appropriately.

The Crane will work better than the Lunati. You need to use
adjustable rockers. The .533 lift *is* based on the 1.76 adj rocker
ratio. When I first bought my CJ Cougar, there was an aggressive .590
lift Crane Compucam in it, a solid lifter grind. It ran real well, and
had plenty of vacuum for the brakes.

Back to quench distance. This is more critical than the cam. What do
you know?

>
> CobraJet

--
Spokesmodel for Arrogant Bastard Ale

keller428@hotmail.com

You will need 91 octane (preferably 93) gasoline and a mixture of
octane booster/lead subsitiute-TEL additive or a mixture of 91/93
premium unleaded and 108 race gas, your choice. Anything less can lead
to scuffed cylinder walls (or worse).

I run an (now old) hydraulic Crower 297HDP in my SCJ. .588/.588
236/244 duration @.050" lift.There is no passing it off as a stocker
and has plenty of the "hamburger stand" idle characteristics and BARELY
enough idle for the brakes. As StuK can attest the cam works well BUT
the motor is a little over cammed and I'm giving up much low-end torque
for an extended RPM range. (6500RPM). I recently put the stock exhaust
manifolds and h-pipe on the car. It basically castrated the motor with
this cam. I'll be swapping out cams later this year.

Like CJ recommends, the stock CJ cam is OK but its not quite enough
for the 428. Pick something hotter than a stocker but not quite as
lumpy as mine and you'll be fine. Comp Cams 265DEH is getting good
reviews over on the FE truck forums...but its a trucky cam. The 275DEH
would work well too if you want an aggresive idle. We've put in the
Comp Cams Extreme Energy XE262H on a CJ build that worked very well
with manifolds and stock exhaust system...but not with pump gas. The
next step up (XE 274H) would be helpful in bleeding off some cylinder
pressure at low RPM.

ANY CAMSHAFT WITH OVER .500" LIFT IN ANY FE NEEDS 427 TYPE ADJUSTABLE
ROCKER ARMS. PERIOD. The idiots on the tech lines will tell you that
your good to .530". Don't do it.

Check out this link and the Cam Doctor analysis of an original (albeit
worn) CJ cam.

http://www.428cobrajet.org/id-cam.html

A word about compression ratios. I have TRW L2445's in my motor. (OK,
the secret is out) They're a 10.1:1 PI slug that drops the compression
slightly compared to the CJ pistons. With 72cc chambers, the pistons
about .015" down the hole and a modern composite head gasket my actual
compression ratio is 9.91:1. My motor with its reduced compression and
way too F'n big cam will BARELY run on pump premium with octane
booster. If you mix 5 gallons of leaded 108 RM/2 race fuel its
perfectly happy.

That being said, the ONLY pump gas concoction I can get my car to run
on is a mxture of Castle Products ZOOM octane booster and Real-Lead (or
CD-2) Lead additive with a full tank of 93 premium umleaded. I've tried
them all over the past 17 years.

I could deck the block and bring the pistons to zero deck which should
help with detonation. Swain technology is also local here and I could
have the piston tops, chambers and valve heads coated which may also
help with the problem as well.....untill then I just keep feeding it
the best gas I can get and doctor it accordingly. I'd love to see some
of these 10:1 plus, iron headed FE's run on todays unleaded, oxygenated
pump premium alone. I have yet to see one that gets away with it
without long term problems.

Good luck with it.

-Mike.

Carl

Bill S. wrote:
> joe wrote:
>
>> got in yesterday evening from about 5 hours of helping the business
>> owner muck his shop out. the wall showed 22" of water. i'm lucky.....the
>> kr is stripped and the unloaded suspension made it ride just high enough
>> that the water just came over the door openings and barely touched the
>> bottom of the trash bag covering the 428. he arranged for a high
>> pressure washer and they washed the body. i'm ok with it. the boxes of
>> paperwork, pictures, etc according to bob didnt get moved and are wet. i
>> just didnt feel like looking but i'll probably run down there tomorrow
>> and dry what i can.
>> there is a white mustang what looks to be about a '66 convertible very
>> near completion that will have to have the interior stripped. there are
>> other examples that i wont bore you with but the bottom line is i was
>> lucky. it sucks to have most likely lost the photo record,the original
>> sales invoice and all the restoration materials i loaned him but it
>> could have been worse. others are in far worse shape than i. a question
>> i'll have to ask in the next few days (in my opinion he has more
>> important stuff right now even though what i have is his prized project)
>> is the location and condition of my upholstery. those items are at some
>> external upholstery shop somewhere.
>> someone asked about why the flood......we had 2 days of pretty hard
>> rains from a pacific storm that dumped on us.
>> as i write this (monday morning) it's snowing pretty hard.
>> cp
>>
>> Wound Up wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Ouch. I hope things are better than you hope. Sorry to hear that.
>>
>>
>> Good thing the 428 and the trans are high and dry. Best of luck with
>> it; please keep us apprised of what happens.
>>
>>>
> From experience, get the box of paperwork as soon as possible. Before
> it dries out at all. Carefully peel the paperwork apart sheet by sheet
> and lay it out flat on wax paper to air dry. Do not put it in the sun or
> near a heating unit of any kind, just allow it to dry naturally. While
> the paperwork will be crisp to the touch afterwards, it will be better
> than if you let it dry in a clump and then tried to separate each page
> from one another.
>
>
> TS#15
>
>
aside from the slight curling of the photos you would not even know the
photos were soaking wet at one point. i was very surprised. the
collection of mustang monthly's and cut articles i had saved over the
past 17 years were beyond saving and went in the dumpster with the
mustang assembly manuals i had loaned out. i had a decent collection of
detailing information related to the kr but the actual photo record of
this car as it was disassembled in intact.

Carl

Bill S. wrote:

>
how did your motor project/bet come out?
cp

Jason

"Carl" <cpncopper@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:wmbvf.552$vf7.43@fe06.lga...
> Bill S. wrote:
> > joe wrote:
> >
> >> got in yesterday evening from about 5 hours of helping the business
> >> owner muck his shop out. the wall showed 22" of water. i'm
lucky.....the
> >> kr is stripped and the unloaded suspension made it ride just high
enough
> >> that the water just came over the door openings and barely touched the
> >> bottom of the trash bag covering the 428. he arranged for a high
> >> pressure washer and they washed the body. i'm ok with it. the boxes of
> >> paperwork, pictures, etc according to bob didnt get moved and are wet.
i
> >> just didnt feel like looking but i'll probably run down there tomorrow
> >> and dry what i can.
> >> there is a white mustang what looks to be about a '66 convertible very
> >> near completion that will have to have the interior stripped. there are
> >> other examples that i wont bore you with but the bottom line is i was
> >> lucky. it sucks to have most likely lost the photo record,the original
> >> sales invoice and all the restoration materials i loaned him but it
> >> could have been worse. others are in far worse shape than i. a question
> >> i'll have to ask in the next few days (in my opinion he has more
> >> important stuff right now even though what i have is his prized
project)
> >> is the location and condition of my upholstery. those items are at some
> >> external upholstery shop somewhere.
> >> someone asked about why the flood......we had 2 days of pretty hard
> >> rains from a pacific storm that dumped on us.
> >> as i write this (monday morning) it's snowing pretty hard.
> >> cp
> >>
> >> Wound Up wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Ouch. I hope things are better than you hope. Sorry to hear that.
> >>
> >>
> >> Good thing the 428 and the trans are high and dry. Best of luck with
> >> it; please keep us apprised of what happens.
> >>
> >>>
> > From experience, get the box of paperwork as soon as possible. Before
> > it dries out at all. Carefully peel the paperwork apart sheet by sheet
> > and lay it out flat on wax paper to air dry. Do not put it in the sun or
> > near a heating unit of any kind, just allow it to dry naturally. While
> > the paperwork will be crisp to the touch afterwards, it will be better
> > than if you let it dry in a clump and then tried to separate each page
> > from one another.
> >
> >
> > TS#15
> >
> >
> aside from the slight curling of the photos you would not even know the
> photos were soaking wet at one point. i was very surprised. the
> collection of mustang monthly's and cut articles i had saved over the
> past 17 years were beyond saving and went in the dumpster with the
> mustang assembly manuals i had loaned out. i had a decent collection of
> detailing information related to the kr but the actual photo record of
> this car as it was disassembled in intact.


Good to hear you got the photos back. I'm still kicking myself in the ass
for not getting doucumentation on my 69(plain jane though) till I had
already ripped it apart. Minor stuff but real important to the guy who owns
it.


--
>>Jason
TS 47

Wound Up

Carl wrote:
> Bill S. wrote:
>
>> joe wrote:
>>
>>> got in yesterday evening from about 5 hours of helping the business
>>> owner muck his shop out. the wall showed 22" of water. i'm lucky.....the
>>> kr is stripped and the unloaded suspension made it ride just high enough
>>> that the water just came over the door openings and barely touched the
>>> bottom of the trash bag covering the 428. he arranged for a high
>>> pressure washer and they washed the body. i'm ok with it. the boxes of
>>> paperwork, pictures, etc according to bob didnt get moved and are wet. i
>>> just didnt feel like looking but i'll probably run down there tomorrow
>>> and dry what i can.
>>> there is a white mustang what looks to be about a '66 convertible very
>>> near completion that will have to have the interior stripped. there are
>>> other examples that i wont bore you with but the bottom line is i was
>>> lucky. it sucks to have most likely lost the photo record,the original
>>> sales invoice and all the restoration materials i loaned him but it
>>> could have been worse. others are in far worse shape than i. a question
>>> i'll have to ask in the next few days (in my opinion he has more
>>> important stuff right now even though what i have is his prized project)
>>> is the location and condition of my upholstery. those items are at some
>>> external upholstery shop somewhere.
>>> someone asked about why the flood......we had 2 days of pretty hard
>>> rains from a pacific storm that dumped on us.
>>> as i write this (monday morning) it's snowing pretty hard.
>>> cp
>>>
>>> Wound Up wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ouch. I hope things are better than you hope. Sorry to hear that.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Good thing the 428 and the trans are high and dry. Best of luck with
>>> it; please keep us apprised of what happens.
>>>
>>>>
>> From experience, get the box of paperwork as soon as possible. Before
>> it dries out at all. Carefully peel the paperwork apart sheet by sheet
>> and lay it out flat on wax paper to air dry. Do not put it in the sun
>> or near a heating unit of any kind, just allow it to dry naturally.
>> While the paperwork will be crisp to the touch afterwards, it will be
>> better than if you let it dry in a clump and then tried to separate
>> each page from one another.
>>
>>
>> TS#15
>>
>>
> aside from the slight curling of the photos you would not even know the
> photos were soaking wet at one point. i was very surprised. the
> collection of mustang monthly's and cut articles i had saved over the
> past 17 years were beyond saving and went in the dumpster with the
> mustang assembly manuals i had loaned out. i had a decent collection of
> detailing information related to the kr but the actual photo record of
> this car as it was disassembled in intact.

Sounds like you got the most important stuff. Most of the rest can be
culled from a library. Sorry you lost some of it, but hey, not so bad

--
Wound Up
ThunderSnake #65

AHPBBFM posting rules: http://tinyurl.com/ak694
AHPBBFM links page: http://tinyurl.com/a9qsx

CobraJet

In article <1136446378.244517.198950@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
<"keller428@hotmail.com"> wrote:

> You will need 91 octane (preferably 93) gasoline and a mixture of
> octane booster/lead subsitiute-TEL additive or a mixture of 91/93
> premium unleaded and 108 race gas, your choice. Anything less can lead
> to scuffed cylinder walls (or worse).
>
> I run an (now old) hydraulic Crower 297HDP in my SCJ. .588/.588
> 236/244 duration @.050" lift.There is no passing it off as a stocker
> and has plenty of the "hamburger stand" idle characteristics and BARELY
> enough idle for the brakes. As StuK can attest the cam works well BUT
> the motor is a little over cammed and I'm giving up much low-end torque
> for an extended RPM range. (6500RPM). I recently put the stock exhaust
> manifolds and h-pipe on the car. It basically castrated the motor with
> this cam. I'll be swapping out cams later this year.
>
> Like CJ recommends, the stock CJ cam is OK but its not quite enough
> for the 428. Pick something hotter than a stocker but not quite as
> lumpy as mine and you'll be fine. Comp Cams 265DEH is getting good
> reviews over on the FE truck forums...but its a trucky cam. The 275DEH
> would work well too if you want an aggresive idle. We've put in the
> Comp Cams Extreme Energy XE262H on a CJ build that worked very well
> with manifolds and stock exhaust system...but not with pump gas. The
> next step up (XE 274H) would be helpful in bleeding off some cylinder
> pressure at low RPM.
>
> ANY CAMSHAFT WITH OVER .500" LIFT IN ANY FE NEEDS 427 TYPE ADJUSTABLE
> ROCKER ARMS. PERIOD. The idiots on the tech lines will tell you that
> your good to .530". Don't do it.
>
> Check out this link and the Cam Doctor analysis of an original (albeit
> worn) CJ cam.
>
> http://www.428cobrajet.org/id-cam.html
>
> A word about compression ratios. I have TRW L2445's in my motor. (OK,
> the secret is out) They're a 10.1:1 PI slug that drops the compression
> slightly compared to the CJ pistons. With 72cc chambers, the pistons
> about .015" down the hole and a modern composite head gasket my actual
> compression ratio is 9.91:1. My motor with its reduced compression and
> way too F'n big cam will BARELY run on pump premium with octane
> booster. If you mix 5 gallons of leaded 108 RM/2 race fuel its
> perfectly happy.
>
> That being said, the ONLY pump gas concoction I can get my car to run
> on is a mxture of Castle Products ZOOM octane booster and Real-Lead (or
> CD-2) Lead additive with a full tank of 93 premium umleaded. I've tried
> them all over the past 17 years.

Hey, Mikey, how much carbon ya tink ya gots on them pistons?

>
> I could deck the block and bring the pistons to zero deck which should
> help with detonation. Swain technology is also local here and I could
> have the piston tops, chambers and valve heads coated which may also
> help with the problem as well.....untill then I just keep feeding it
> the best gas I can get and doctor it accordingly. I'd love to see some
> of these 10:1 plus, iron headed FE's run on todays unleaded, oxygenated
> pump premium alone. I have yet to see one that gets away with it
> without long term problems.
>
> Good luck with it.
>
> -Mike.
>

--
Spokesmodel for Arrogant Bastard Ale