Ford Forums banner

1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hello, I'm posting for the first time after a substantial amount of researching here. It can get confusing for me. I thought I might get lucky and gain some insight for my project from some more knowledgable wrenchers. Most specifically, the cam. Im pullin my hair out talkin to people and readin up on this part.

I have been restoring a 70 mach 1 w/ a 351C 4V and I am starting on the engine

(original engine ended up being fried & incorrect any way so now the leash is off and I'm gonna do what I wanna do w/ another cleveland block that I sold my soul to get) - its already at the machine shop getting 1 sleeve, bored .030 and misc.

My intentions are to drive the car on the street for fun a couple of times a week and go to the strip a couple times a year w/ friends to really have some fun. I would like the idle to be cool but maintainable, yet I probably lean towards the agressive side of a street muscle car. I have on order a 393 stroker kit from the Mustang Depot w/ cast crank. My other plans or specs are...

-edelbrock aluminum performer rpm heads
2.05/1.60, 60cc CC, 190cc int. runner, < .600 valve lift
-should end up w/ about 10:1 comp w/ 16cc dished pistons
-4 spd wide ration top loader
-3.89 traction locker
-edelbrock air gap (if it will fit under hood)or performer intake
-650-750 cfm carb
-headers & 2 1/2" exhaust
-1.7 roller rockers
-cam? looking @ pbm w/ 224/234 @ .05, .536/.562 v lift, 112 on lobe sep or-
erson w/ 228/228 @ .05, .545/.545 v lift, & 108 on lobe sep.-
A guy from crane recommended 228/232 @ .05, .597/.609 v lift & 112 lobe sep.?

Anybody got somethin like this?,now here comes my insanity...

How does this set up sound for what I want to do? What about the cam - is it too much for my intentions or for the rest of my components? or maybe lacking for the potential of this set up. Would idle be super choppy or cool? What about vacuum to run my brakes? Does the stoker and/or roller rockers/lifters help tame some of the duration/lift? Would the power band be good or staggered towards one direction excessively? Does the compression look right for this?

I dont know what else to say, except that I seriously apologize for the length of this and my bus load of questions. I appreciate any help I could get. Malachi.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
330 Posts
Welcome newbie. My thoughts are too go a bit bigger in the camshaft as you have extra displacement in the stroker bottom end. And maybe a better manifold and fit a recessed air cleaner like a TFC low plenum or Strip dominator if you can get one. If using a shaker scoop this should not be a problem. I dont know much about these new alloy heads, but most guys will steer you towards CHI or AFD as they are a proven head and been around a while now, for a tough manual streeter i would say the CHI 185's but it's not my money to spend is it. Every thing else looks good. The crane cam has a fair bit of lift on it for the duration and i cant help but wonder if it's a hydraulic roller.
AZZA
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
malachi said:
Hello, I'm posting for the first time after a substantial amount of researching here. It can get confusing for me. I thought I might get lucky and gain some insight for my project from some more knowledgable wrenchers. Most specifically, the cam. Im pullin my hair out talkin to people and readin up on this part.

I have been restoring a 70 mach 1 w/ a 351C 4V and I am starting on the engine

(original engine ended up being fried & incorrect any way so now the leash is off and I'm gonna do what I wanna do w/ another cleveland block that I sold my soul to get) - its already at the machine shop getting 1 sleeve, bored .030 and misc.

My intentions are to drive the car on the street for fun a couple of times a week and go to the strip a couple times a year w/ friends to really have some fun. I would like the idle to be cool but maintainable, yet I probably lean towards the agressive side of a street muscle car. I have on order a 393 stroker kit from the Mustang Depot w/ cast crank. My other plans or specs are...

-edelbrock aluminum performer rpm heads
2.05/1.60, 60cc CC, 190cc int. runner, < .600 valve lift
-should end up w/ about 10:1 comp w/ 16cc dished pistons
-4 spd wide ration top loader
-3.89 traction locker
-edelbrock air gap (if it will fit under hood)or performer intake
-650-750 cfm carb
-headers & 2 1/2" exhaust
-1.7 roller rockers
-cam? looking @ pbm w/ 224/234 @ .05, .536/.562 v lift, 112 on lobe sep or-
erson w/ 228/228 @ .05, .545/.545 v lift, & 108 on lobe sep.-
A guy from crane recommended 228/232 @ .05, .597/.609 v lift & 112 lobe sep.?

Anybody got somethin like this?,now here comes my insanity...

How does this set up sound for what I want to do? What about the cam - is it too much for my intentions or for the rest of my components? or maybe lacking for the potential of this set up. Would idle be super choppy or cool? What about vacuum to run my brakes? Does the stoker and/or roller rockers/lifters help tame some of the duration/lift? Would the power band be good or staggered towards one direction excessively? Does the compression look right for this?

I dont know what else to say, except that I seriously apologize for the length of this and my bus load of questions. I appreciate any help I could get. Malachi.
the combination you have there is fine,engine should have an incredible amount of torque and plenty of power. I hear the new edelbrock heads and air-gap manifold are great for a true street car as yours sounds like it is(the heads are edelbrock,so they have to be good for their intended application) If you intend on using aussie alloy heads,go for the CHI's. one camshaft you have there is a sig erson 1H,which works good in clevo's.750 vac sec would be ideal,com ratio at 10:1 is nominal ,10.8:1 would be real nice,idle will have a definate lope to it,the 393 will definetely settle down the cam's attitude,vacuum wont be an issue for brakes.The 393 will have plenty of grunt from idle to 5500 rpm.i would say this combination would easily make 420plus h-power and a very flat torque curve with a peak of 460plus ft pounds of torque,after all you did say it was a 2 day a week car with a little bit ot quater mile action..
 

·
'60 F100 Q-Code
Joined
·
750 Posts
malachi said:
-edelbrock aluminum performer rpm heads
2.05/1.60, 60cc CC, 190cc int. runner, < .600 valve lift
-should end up w/ about 10:1 comp w/ 16cc dished pistons
-4 spd wide ratio top loader
-3.89 traction locker
-edelbrock air gap (if it will fit under hood)or performer intake
-650-750 cfm carb
-headers & 2 1/2" exhaust
-1.7 roller rockers
-cam? looking @ pbm w/ 224/234 @ .05, .536/.562 v lift, 112 on lobe sep or-
erson w/ 228/228 @ .05, .545/.545 v lift, & 108 on lobe sep.-
A guy from crane recommended 228/232 @ .05, .597/.609 v lift & 112 lobe sep.?
Not a bad set of choices overall. Definitely avoid the Performer intake for this kind of engine. It will run out of lungs at about 5000 RPM with a 393" stroker. What you'll want is a Weiand Xcelerator 2V. This intake will really work well for what you're trying to accomplish.

The camshaft you're considering is a bit whimpy for what you've got in inches. I'd recommend pushing it a bit to something like the F-238 Crane cams mechanical flat tappet camshaft. I'd probably recommend a nice solid mechanical lifter camshaft for you that is along the same lines as the F-238 considering that you're running a 393" engine.

You should make well into 520+ HP and 480+ TQ with such a combination. You can probably get by using a set of 3.23-3.55:1 gears and a reasonably tall tire, since the added torque of the stroker will definitely overpower the tires even on the strip without slicks. Your choice of car is heavy in the nose and light in the tail, so traction will be an issue unless you plan to use something like Caltracs.

I wouldn't use a 650. I would use a minimum of a 750 with my preference being an 800 CFM Holley DP. Of course, this is assuming that you go to the track with it and don't want to swap carbs. Use a 750VS around town and swap to an 800-850 DP when you get to the track. That way you can jet the DP way up and keep the VS for maximum fuel efficiency on the street. You're going to have to run premo fuel no matter what carb you're using, so you may want to do what you can to avoid the high fuel prices. If you really don't care about it, then you should be building a solid roller engine with a set of AFD 4V heads and mixing 50% avgas and running 11.5:1 and making upwards of 600+ HP.

The Weiand Xcelerator is a very good choice for this beast. It is a smallish plenum inlet designed for a 351C with 2V heads. You're basically adding 92 cubes (26% more capacity!) and a dual plane is really not something that I'd recommend for that much engine. It is going to NEED to breathe.

I would probably more vigorously push for the AFD 4V heads if you had any intention of driving the car at the track on a more regular basis. Also, if you really didn't expect to drive on the street very much, I'd say go for more power. If you're going to be running the A/C and full power accessories, then the Edelbrocks are an acceptable choice, though I'd strongly encourage you to review the choices from CHI and AFD. They are worlds above and beyond the Edelbrock part.

With regard to your cam choices, definitely go a bit on the "big" (compared to a 351" engine) side as the extra inches will tame it down a LOT. You can probably run about 238* with a 110* LSA at .560-.580" lift without compromising reasonable streetability given a small plenum inlet and reasonable (1-3/4" max) primaries on your extractors. Ideally, I'd try to get about the following specs out of my camshaft choice:

238* intake duration @ .050" lift
240* exhaust duration @ .050" lift
109* LSA
.565" minimum lift
.586" maximum lift (flat tappet solid camshaft)
.604-.610" maximum lift (solid roller)

Unless you are really planning to run a LOT of street miles on the engine/car, I would strongly encourage you to consider a mechanical camshaft and not a hydraulic camshaft. The Cleveland is really a great mechanical cam engine, even with mostly factory ports/valve sizes in 2V or 302C heads. If you are running (not that you are) a 4V, there is nearly no excuse (except for maximum streetability) for running a hydro camshaft, IMO.

If you want to be on the very conservative side, I'd recommend the following:

Weiand Xcellerator 2V inlet
Edelbrock (if you decide against AFD 2V or CHI 3V heads) heads
234*/238* @ 0.050" hydraulic flat tappet camshaft 110* LSA .565" lift
BEST quality valve springs, stainless retainers, good Ferrea 5000 valves
Holley 650 DP
MSD ignition w/6AL with 6400 RPM rev limiter
Ceramic coated Hooker Super Comps
3.23:1 rear gear with a 26" tire
3.55:1 rear gear with a 28" tire
3.89:1 rear gear with a 30"+ tire

You should make well into the 500+ HP range and idle with a strong sense of performance but no distraction from streetability.


:davis:
 

·
The Deputy Dogg.
Joined
·
1,862 Posts
Davis, i notice you hold the AFD 4v's in high regard, have you any 1st hand experiance with these ?
My 393 under construction is having CHI 4v's.

On topic, that setup seems seriously under cammed, i would look at an F246 for a nice street/strip combo, the same came does well in 351ci so it would be relatively small in a 393.
Why 10.1 comp ? can easily go 11.1 with pump fuel safely.

Also have you looked at the Aussie heads Malachi ?
I believe AFD and CHI outflow Edelbrock.

http://www.airflowdynamics.com.au/
http://www.chiheads.com/
 

·
'60 F100 Q-Code
Joined
·
750 Posts
falcon coupe said:
Davis, i notice you hold the AFD 4v's in high regard, have you any 1st hand experiance with these ?
My 393 under construction is having CHI 4v's.
I have a few sets of the AFD 4Vs and a couple of sets of AFD 2Vs. I've used the 4Vs on three different engines. 410", 383" and a 331" 302W-based application. I haven't yet used the 2Vs on an engine that has seen engine dyno time, only chassis dyno time. The 410" made 758 HP. I pulled the 393" A3 head engine out of my dragster and dropped in the 410. I've been rather slow at updating my timesheet and such, because I've been building a new car. I've been trying to sell both of my 393" A3 engines, but not very vigorously as I've been too busy with other projects. I seriously thought about dropping one of the 393s into the F100, but I didn't want to make it a race-only toy. As it is, I don't have enough space for everything, so I'm going to sell the F100 and the 256" RED (w/wo the 410") and about a half dozen other engines of various dimensions and focus on the new car project.

falcon coupe said:
On topic, that setup seems seriously under cammed, i would look at an F246 for a nice street/strip combo, the same cam does well in 351ci so it would be relatively small in a 393.
I originally put F238-F246 in my message, but considering that the plan was to use the Edelbrock heads and since the OP seemed very conservatively oriented in this build, I re-thunk it and decided that a F238 would probably be enough for what I considered the OP was trying to accomplish. Both cams will produce a lot of torque in a 393". In reality, if I was building it for the exact same application (and knew more details about it than I do now), I'd use a custom solid mechanical camshaft.

I don't really hear the OP saying "street/strip combo." I hear "mostly street" with maybe two trips a year to the track for fun. I also hear 2-1/2" exhaust. However, these seem to conflict with WR top loader and 3.89:1 gears, to me. I don't know what tire will be used, but if we guess somewhere around 26-28" tall (maybe less?) then there is no way that traction will ever be available in even a basic 393" stroker on the street...but it does sound as if it will be a fun ride! The '70 Mach1 will be a fun beast. I would have a very difficult time not taking it a few levels higher and making a 50/50 car out of it leaning toward very nice strip times and cruise nights. My choice would be to toss the top loader in the rubbish bin (sell it on eBay) and use a 5-speed Richmond with a set of ~2.70:1 gears and a 10.5W ET Street type tire. I'd run a spool and an all-aluminum Strange 9" center section and a set of Caltracs with two-piece leaf springs and adjustable shocks. I'd definitely do a set of AFD 4Vs, flat tops at about .010" deck, 393" with a fairly aggressive solid roller camshaft at about 268*/270* duration on a 106* LSA with about .640" lift and a Parker Funnelweb 4V and a Holley 1000 CFM HP carburetor. The car would easily run low 10s and have an idle-characteristic that would say "we don' need no stinkin' power brakes/steering whatever."


falcon coupe said:
Why 10.1 comp ? can easily go 11.1 with pump fuel safely.
I wouldn't push for more compression ratio for a true streeter as fuel quality seems to be all over the place these days. The extra point in CR probably isn't worth enough under the heated air hood of a hot streeter to make the tires spin in all four gears any more quickly.

falcon coupe said:
Also have you looked at the Aussie heads Malachi ?
I believe AFD and CHI outflow Edelbrock.

http://www.airflowdynamics.com.au/
http://www.chiheads.com/
I believe that the AFD and CHI parts are superior to the Edelbrock parts, too, but I haven't used a set of the Edelbrock 351C 2V heads. If they are a bit less expensive, I'd probably give them a go for a hot street 357", but for a 393" stroker, I'd be very much inclined to ring up AFD for a set of 4Vs.

As it is, I think that the OP wants to drive this car on the street a lot. I personally would lean toward 9:1 with 9.5:1 being the maximum compression ratio that I'd want to use for a true streeter. I'd probably drop the CID to 383", too. I probably would still go with a set of large chamber AFD 4Vs over the 2Vs. I'd add a modest solid roller in the range of an F238 to F246, but on a 110* LSA, something kinda similar to a Comp Cams XE-284, but in a SR and with less valve split. I would then top it off with a Torker, 1" 4-hole spacer and an 850 DP and enjoy it all the way up to ~7000 RPM.


:davis:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
azza said:
Welcome newbie. My thoughts are too go a bit bigger in the camshaft as you have extra displacement in the stroker bottom end. And maybe a better manifold and fit a recessed air cleaner like a TFC low plenum or Strip dominator if you can get one. If using a shaker scoop this should not be a problem. I dont know much about these new alloy heads, but most guys will steer you towards CHI or AFD as they are a proven head and been around a while now, for a tough manual streeter i would say the CHI 185's but it's not my money to spend is it. Every thing else looks good. The crane cam has a fair bit of lift on it for the duration and i cant help but wonder if it's a hydraulic roller.
AZZA
not sure where this will end up but, yes I was looking at hydraulic roller and have started looking at these other heads too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
I'm not 100% in sync w/ this computer thing so I guess I'll try to respond to everyone generally. (trying to do the quote thing)

First of all, things changed alot as far as my mindset when the original engine turned out to be worthless. I was trying to make the car pretty much stock w/ a few improvements here and there but not like some concourse trailer queen. This has been a complete restoration. Although depressed about the motor initially, I said heck w/ it - I wanted something w/ more "go" than stock can give me anyway while still using a cleveland foundation. Im still making the interior/exterior of the car mostly w/ the stock look because I think its such a good lookin car.

As I said before, (and its probably that same old story) I am trying to build something that I can take out on weekend cruises or drive for fun once or twice a week w/ the anticipation of taking it to the track a few times a year. However, I think I feel confident in saying that the performance level I am looking for would be like maybe 50/50 street & strip. I do lean towards the aggressive side yet probably what I really mean is the far aggressive side of steet applications. (I think that sounds about right)

Now about the gearing. I had a new traction lok done w/ 3.89's some time before I found out about the original engine. My thinking was that w/ the original 4V heads and the rumors out there about a severe lacking of low rpm torque and subsequent sluggishness off the line and stop light to stop light, that I would counteract this with a steeper gear. I was thinking of a street tire around 255/60R15 and I already installed traction masters. Now I have a brand new set up installed w/ driveshaft & tranny already in and a whole different plan than before w/ the motor. what to do?

As far as the exhaust goes I had been told that 2 1/2" pipes w/ 1 3/4" primaries on headers would be fine. Thats just one opinion and I thought great, because the largest aftermarket (stock - chrome oval) exhaust tip I can get is 2 1/2" and OE was even smaller. These look awesome on the rear and keep me in the stock appearance. Maybe they arent loose enough?

When it comes to compression ratio I just want to be able to run on readily available premium pump gas. Thats why I figured I should stick to around 10:1. What do you think? I also am aware that this dictates my cam choice as well which to me is just another layer in trying to get it right.

Obviously, I get the picture that you guys think my cam should be beefier in duration and some more lift. Again - here was my thinking, that I wanted more power but keep it in the realm of streetable. Some of the larger cams say that the basic rpm range is higher than what I thought I would mostly be in the (3000-6500)?[or I would lose bottem end]? And I got to be able to run my power brakes - shouldn't have any other major needs for vacuum I think. Then their is the idle... How do I define that I want it to be cool like a tweaked muscle car but not so lopey that it dont want to idle. W/ respect to my choices - they were all hydraulic roller based on the ease of maintenance and some familiarity. I have never had an engine w/ mechanical lifters and there is the unknown w/ that. Why would mechanical be better?

W/ the intake manifold, I looked at the edelbrock air-gap because thats what they tested their heads w/ and are more or less matched. The performer was just another thought because I dont know if the air gap will fit under my hood.? I would have thought that a single plane would want to be steered away from because I was always told that you lose your bottom end w/ a single plane. Heck I dont know, it makes sense that this possible set up will want to breathe though. Just out of curiosity does anyone know if the weiand will fit under the hood w/ air cleaner o.k..?

I have started to research the CHI & AFD heads. I dont know where to start about this subject cuz I just got started but I appreciate the opinions on the alternatives. Are the edelbrocks just that bad or lacking? Are the CHI &/or AFD that much better? Another big thing will be the price tag differences. Heck, Im not even sure if a mechanical fuel pump is gonna do it anymore.

From my point of view, who would have ever thought I would have a problem w/ too much torque or getting the car to hook-up(kinda cool problem). I guess that after rebuilding the top loader and the rear end I am gonna stick w/ em now too.

Thanks for all the help from you guys - their has been a wealth of information given to me. Do any of you have a car that you use for similar uses as I plan? If you do, what kind of set ups are you using? appreciate it - malachi
 

·
'60 F100 Q-Code
Joined
·
750 Posts
I can tell you right now that your mind is set on issues surrounding mostly factory stock engines AND factory stock displacement engines. If you drop a 393" stroker kit into your bottom end, those factory 4V CC cylinder heads are definitely not going to be lazy at any RPM below about 6500.

You definitely do not need aluminum heads if you already have a set of iron 4Vs, though, if your budget supports them, I'd highly recommend them for many good reasons.

Let's review some of the details about the 393" stroker combination. What you're doing is adding 26% more capacity through displacement. That is like a quarter more engine than before. That's like the bottles of dish soap at the market that say 25% More FREE...except that the stroker kit isn't free. What I'm trying to tell you is that your engine is going to DEMAND 26% more air flow at all RPMs than anything that may already be stuck in your brain from good and/or bad sources.

Now, the whole "lazy 4V" issue is much, (very much) over-used and misunderstood. Back in the "day" when the 4V Clevo first appeared and people started trying to BOLT ON parts like a tunnel ram to make their 4V look (and hopefully perform) like one of the pro stockers of that era...well, their crappy factory camshaft engines would barely run below 3500 RPM. The 4V got the moniker of "lazy" (at low RPM) and to add to the problem, most of the cars that the Clevelands were installed in were heavy, too. All of it contributed to the myths that surround one of the best performance potential engines of all time.

If you do nothing more than go with a 393" stroker kit in your otherwise factory Cleveland, with good valves, springs, screw-in studs and guideplates, hardened exhaust seats and a maximum compression ratio of 9.5:1, you can easily make 450 HP and much more torque. I would suspect a number around 480 TQ to be very realistic.

I have a "pure street" 357" 4V Cleveland that I can tell you a bit about to help you better understand that the 4V heads can be made to work very well at "reasonably" low RPM. What this means is that they start at around 2000-2200 RPM and go way up from there IN a 357" engine. With all things being fairly equal, if we subtract 26% from 2100 RPM (the average) we should end up with the "starting RPM" for a 393. You following me? 2100/4 = 525. 2100-525 = 1575.

What this means is that your 393" engine will pull well (with the right components) from ~1600 RPM to the maximum capability of the design, which I would think should be about 6400 RPM with a hydro cam and 7000 with a bit more in a mechanical profile. We can probably manage well into the 7500+ RPM range, but for what benefit? The thing you need to ask yourself is whether or not the 600 RPM difference between 6400 and 7000 is worth anything to you. If you're running the factory iron heads with just the basic rebuild and machine operations for performance valve train, then the answer (at 393") is probably not. I'd go with a reasonably fun XE-284 like hydraulic roller camshaft and focus on great streetability. Absolutely do not be worried that the engine will fall on its face at low RPMs. The 393" will pull harder than your banker when they feel like you owe them money. With any sort of reasonable build and quality of construction whatsoever, it will break loose the tires everytime you step on the throttle and nearly at any streetable speed limits, too.

My 357" engine is in a HEAVY (about 2 tons by my estimates) 1960 F100 truck. This is a 4V engine with a Torker intake, 1" 4-hole spacer with an 800 CFM carb and a C6 transmission with a 3100 stall converter. My camshaft is a fairly mild Lunati solid flat tappet grind producing .550"/.570" 238*/248* @ .050" w/1.70:1 rocker arm ratio. I am running a 3.70:1 gear with 28.5" tall tires. It pulls very, very well for an intentionally street vehicle. I'd love to have a 3.850" arm in it, as it would need to use the wheelie bars it has on it then!





...it should be out of the paint shop later this month.

To be fair, I recently went completely through the engine that was originally in this truck (another 357" Cleveland) and it should make 420-ish HP, I'll be dynoing it in another week or so (after the holiday for sure!). It is a hydro cammed "pure street" engine with 4V heads and a Torker with a 750VS carb.

To give you an idea of what a reasonably capable Cleveland can do at 393", my 11.25:1 made over 600 HP on the engine dyno. It uses A3 heads and a solid roller cam.




There are a lot more talking points that I can add to this conversation, but I'm on vacation and I'm not coming back for awhile! <grin>


:davis:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
falcon coupe said:
Malachi, have a look at Jim's setup, he runs very good times with iron 4v's on a 393.
http://www.fordforums.com/showthread.php?t=116569
I know for a fact, on a stroked clevo 383-393-408 ,4v's cant be beat..!! Great to see 4v's making big hp and fat torque curves.Pretty damn good for a cyl-head many people beleave is a bad design.!!Maybe theres question marks about 4v's on a 351 but certainly not on a stroker..!!:hy:
 

·
The Deputy Dogg.
Joined
·
1,862 Posts
no1gxl said:
I know for a fact, on a stroked clevo 383-393-408 ,4v's cant be beat..!! Great to see 4v's making big hp and fat torque curves.Pretty damn good for a cyl-head many people beleave is a bad design.!!Maybe theres question marks about 4v's on a 351 but certainly not on a stroker..!!:hy:
Agreed, but they can be beat by.........Alloy 4v's :hy:

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
falcon coupe said:
Agreed, but they can be beat by.........Alloy 4v's :hy:

possibly,but has any one seen the alloy 4v's on a 600plus hp clevo? I know of plenty of cast headed 4v strokers making that type of power and 500 ft/pounds of torque..!..! Im in the process of building my 4v -393c to these figures, 10.8 comp-ratio,flat tappet solid cam ,tfc-intake,1-7/8 pipes,ect ect and pump fuel ofcourse..
 

·
74 XB Fairmont
Joined
·
5,113 Posts
no1gxl : I'm close enough to the torque figure and only 12hp shy of 600hp with a solid flat tappet and out of the box alloys (588hp/499ftlbs of torque from pump fuel Mobil Synergy). A bigger carb on mine takes me beyond 600hp. My cam has [email protected] duration. Drives as sedate as a Crane F238/F246 solid in a 351ci engine. My combo's nothing special in the scheme of things. I wanted reliability. All of the parts are off the shelf parts nothing custom apart from the lift on the camshaft. The CHI 4V's and the new 225cc 3V are a revision of the heads I run 218cc 3V's. I'm sure I can manage more with a complete custom camshaft too but it's not something I want to look at just yet. The duration I run isn't ideal.

With the setup you were playing with the AFD and the cast irons. I've got no doubts that the CHI 3V/4V wouldn't come up with good numbers. No porting required. Those cast iron 4V's you have are pretty stout heads from the figures you stated in another thread.

I'm in the process of sorting some custom extractors or headers for you US guys. 1 7/8" primaries and a 3.5" collector. Had to go custom as I run a powerglide. Then I'll be concentrating on traction a little more.

In my opinion. If I had stock 4V's. I'd put them away for nostalgia resons if I had a GT, then purchase alloys. If I had a set of modified ones sitting there? I'd run them. I think the cast iron 4V head are under rated by most. I wouldn't want to have the experience you had with alloys. Thats a pain in the arse.

A bloke I chat with occasionally has 650-660hp N/A but runs a solid roller cam and yates heads. He's ran 9.90 on the gas. I wouldn't push that hard hp wise unless I could drive on the street without getting unwanted attention. I'm not to far off him powerwise/torque wise so I'm pretty happy. He has one major thing I don't. :) Traction and n2o.

As we all know. The right head for the right application. Otherwise we come unstuck :hy:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
brenx said:
no1gxl : I'm close enough to the torque figure and only 12hp shy of 600hp with a solid flat tappet and out of the box alloys (588hp/499ftlbs of torque from pump fuel Mobil Synergy). A bigger carb on mine takes me beyond 600hp. My cam has [email protected] duration. Drives as sedate as a Crane F238/F246 solid in a 351ci engine. My combo's nothing special in the scheme of things. I wanted reliability. All of the parts are off the shelf parts nothing custom apart from the lift on the camshaft. The CHI 4V's and the new 225cc 3V are a revision of the heads I run 218cc 3V's. I'm sure I can manage more with a complete custom camshaft too but it's not something I want to look at just yet. The duration I run isn't ideal.

With the setup you were playing with the AFD and the cast irons. I've got no doubts that the CHI 3V/4V wouldn't come up with good numbers. No porting required. Those cast iron 4V's you have are pretty stout heads from the figures you stated in another thread.

I'm in the process of sorting some custom extractors or headers for you US guys. 1 7/8" primaries and a 3.5" collector. Had to go custom as I run a powerglide. Then I'll be concentrating on traction a little more.

In my opinion. If I had stock 4V's. I'd put them away for nostalgia resons if I had a GT, then purchase alloys. If I had a set of modified ones sitting there? I'd run them. I think the cast iron 4V head are under rated by most. I wouldn't want to have the experience you had with alloys. Thats a pain in the arse.

A bloke I chat with occasionally has 650-660hp N/A but runs a solid roller cam and yates heads. He's ran 9.90 on the gas. I wouldn't push that hard hp wise unless I could drive on the street without getting unwanted attention. I'm not to far off him powerwise/torque wise so I'm pretty happy. He has one major thing I don't. :) Traction and n2o.

As we all know. The right head for the right application. Otherwise we come unstuck :hy:
That particular 393clevo you know about from a previous thread made 557hp with "ported "afd 4v's and 600hp with cast 4v's(that were a little tired as far as soft-springs go and milege/usage),dont know what you think brenx but 600 is better than 557 i reckon.!! I have had the pleasure of meeting John from CHI and he is going to supply us with a pair of 218cc-3v's to bolt onto this 393,in order to see how they all fair as far as out-put goes.Should'nt be too much trouble at all for chi's heads to exceed the 557hp mark,but will be interesting to see the comparison with the cast 4v's...It will make for a most interesting thread..!!
 

·
74 XB Fairmont
Joined
·
5,113 Posts
I think it'll do well with the CHI alloys. I've got no complaints in regards to how easy it was to extract the power. Mine cracked 580hp on its 1st full pull on an engine dyno. I was spewing it didn't crack 600 as that was my aim but it's close enough. I could clean mine up or port them a little but I don't think thats necessary. I'm interested in seeing how the new 225cc 3V fair against the 218cc 3V's.

ps..557hp is pretty ordinary :whoaa:
 

·
The Deputy Dogg.
Joined
·
1,862 Posts
And to add to the mix, my CHI 228cc 4V's are ready to pick up, i'm aiming at 570hp with a mildish flat tappet cam and strip dominator manifold, all under bonnet.
 

·
74 XB Fairmont
Joined
·
5,113 Posts
falcon coupe said:
And to add to the mix, my CHI 228cc 4V's are ready to pick up, i'm aiming at 570hp with a mildish flat tappet cam and strip dominator manifold, all under bonnet.
bah damn you conservative types! I reckon it'll go more :driver:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
brenx said:
I think it'll do well with the CHI alloys. I've got no complaints in regards to how easy it was to extract the power. Mine cracked 580hp on its 1st full pull on an engine dyno. I was spewing it didn't crack 600 as that was my aim but it's close enough. I could clean mine up or port them a little but I don't think thats necessary. I'm interested in seeing how the new 225cc 3V fair against the 218cc 3V's.

ps..557hp is pretty ordinary :whoaa:
Your 393 made made 580 hp 1st pull,which is great and i reckon with a scratch around in the ports you will achieve 600hp,thats because now i beleave they are a good product,the feedback on the forum backs that up..!Our 393 made a poor 521hp on its first pull..!!!How piss poor is that? and what we went through to eek another 36 out of it ( oh after another 20 odd pulls)was'nt even worth the bull****,did i mention the afd-4v's were ported as well.? Enter the closed chamber cast 4v.!! 1st pull, 600 on the knocker,say no more.!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top