perf-list-digest Tuesday, August 4 1998 Volume 01 : Number 050



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Performance
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
majordomo ford-trucks.com
with the words "unsubscribe perf-list-digest" in the body of the
message.
=======================================================================
In this issue:

FTE Perf - Valve springs
Re: FTE Perf - Fans/Shrouds
Re: FTE Perf - building a 400
Re: FTE Perf - building a 400
FTE Perf - Which Timing Chain?
Re: FTE Perf - building a 400
Re: FTE Perf - Fans/Shrouds

=======================================================================

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 06:44:21 -0500
From: "Mike Morton "
Subject: FTE Perf - Valve springs

>Anyone know where I can get a set of Isky valve springs #6005? I can't
>find anyone that sells Isky springs.

>Thanks,

>Mike

You can go to www.iskycams.com/ and they have a dealer locator. Enter
your state or Zip Code
Mike
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 14:05:38 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Fans/Shrouds

From: "George"
Subject: FTE Perf - Fans/Shrouds
Date sent: Sat, 1 Aug 1998 05:56:10 -0700

> How close should the cooling fan be to the radiator? This application also
> has a/c.

I don't know what the rule is George but I like to keep at least 2" just for
frame flex and engine flex and fan blade flex considerations. Other than that
I'd say closer is better although with a shroud it should be dictated by the
shroud opening and with such shouldn't matter as much since all air is being
directed by the shroud anyway.

Greed is the Creed of the Breed
who did away with the Steed...

- -- Gary --
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 12:57:58 -0600
From: "Dave Resch"
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - building a 400

>Date: Sat, 1 Aug 1998 19:17:02 -0500
>From: "Dale and Donna Carmine"
>Subject: FTE Perf - building a 400
>snip
>If you build it, the ponies will come!

Yo Dale:

Those are my sentiments, exactly!

A couple of interesting notes regarding the Hot Rod M-block build-up:

456 ft/lb 4400 rpm, 382 hp (unstated rpms) w/ all emissions systems
intact!

1. Those results were obtained w/ a Holley 550 cfm 2V carb.

2. This build-up used no really trick parts that are advertised to increase
power, such as roller rockers, or even headers! All the manifold (intake
and exhaust) porting and head porting was simple, DIY clean-up work. The
only "non-standard" machine work was shaving the deck mating surfaces to
bring up the CR. The only real trick components were stainless steel
valves, which I can't imagine adding any significant power (longevity,
maybe).

Frankly, this is the kind of "basic" performance re-build that is well w/in
the scope of a novice engine builder and it clearly demonstrates (and
publicly documents) the real power potential of the woefully ill-regarded
M-block engine. Had the Hot Rod build-up objectives been a little loftier
(and the budget a few hundred $ more), the results could have been even
more impressive by doing some serious port work, adding some of those high
tech goodies they left out, and running tri-Y headers.

Even so, this article confirms my assertion that 500 ft/lb and 400 hp is
not an unreasonable expectation from a properly built M-block, and indeed,
one that will last for at least 150K trouble-free miles. Oh sure, the
M-block will never have the absolute power potential of a 385-series big
block, but when reasonably well built, an M-block will go toe-to-toe w/
most garden variety 460s and do it w/ less weight penalty.

Dave R. (M-block devotee)


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 15:26:43 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - building a 400

From: "Dave Resch"
Date sent: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 12:57:58 -0600
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - building a 400

> Oh sure, the
> M-block will never have the absolute power potential of a 385-series big
> block, but when reasonably well built, an M-block will go toe-to-toe w/
> most garden variety 460s and do it w/ less weight penalty.

But, if you do the same thing to the 460 then............:-)

Greed is the Creed of the Breed
who did away with the Steed...

- -- Gary --
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 03 Aug 1998 20:25:46 -0500
From: Mike Schwall
Subject: FTE Perf - Which Timing Chain?

Ok, here we go again with the which is the best timing chain thread. This
is for a '78 302 with an Isky 270 Mega Cam (~300 lbs open spring pressure)
and with adjustable stock type rockers. RPM range will peak close to 6000.

I'm faced with three brands: FMS Roller, Dynagear Roller, and Cloyes True
Roller. The above have a 3 keyway crank gear, except for the FMS chain.
It has a 9 position indexed gear. I will be installing the cam 4 degrees
advanced.

I'm looking for ownership experience. I know everyone has an opinion and
can't help themselves to express it, but I would like to narrow it down to
actual first (or second) hand experience with either chain set. I'm
interested in chain stretch (excessive or minor), gear teeth wear, and
whether it stayed together in your engine, etc.

Thanks in advance,

Mike

_____________________________________________

Email: mschwall texas.net or mike fordfan.org
Home Page: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://mschwall.home.texas.net
FORD FAN PAGE: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.fordfan.org

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 18:53:01 -0700
From: "George"
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - building a 400

Oh sure, the M-block will never have the absolute power potential of a
385-series big
block, but when reasonably well built, an M-block will go toe-to-toe w/most
garden variety 460s and do it w/ less weight penalty.

150 lbs? And if you put the same coin into the 385? The streetables M versus
385 has been argued so many times that, like most arguments, it always boils
down to what each participant is actually running or plans to run. In most
cases, economics and fear of change seem to dictate. Before Chris jumps all
over me, there are valid exceptions.

In general, those with the M series are probably wise to build what's
already in the rig if they're after a reliable driver with enough hp/torque
to accomplish most driving requirements. It eliminates messing with the
wiring, linkage and, well, that's about all I can think of. A 385 series
swap is probably more expensive. You need to add up the oil pan, motor
mounts, flywheel and a remote oil filter, about $350. If you add that to a
PAW long block with your choice of goodies (new intake/exhaust manifolds,
carb, water pump & ignition costs would be applicable to both engines)
you're going to end up spending roughly $2,500. But it won't be a garden
variety 385. That's the economic 385 swap side versus rebuilding an M.
What's it going to take to get the M up to HR's published numbers if you're
not in the business?

The first engine I totally and seriously rebuilt was manufactured by someone
other than Blue Oval. When I added up all the associated costs (you have to
hot tank it twice? I have the start of a hairline crack where? blah, blah,
blah), it shocked me. Then, like now, I could rationalize anything
associated with one of my hobbies. But I sure wish places like PAW had been
around at that time.

Again, preferences are always personal. Drive whatever gets you excited.
Peterson Publications, never known to favor the do-it-your-selfer and often
lacking in factual technical advice, cost me some good money before I
realized that they always have advertisers to pay the bills.

George Miller

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 19:08:08 -0700
From: "George"
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Fans/Shrouds

I appreciate that. I couldn't find anyone else to verify what I think; all
the shroud does is direct air, not assist in pulling colder air through the
radiator.

> How close should the cooling fan be to the radiator? This application also
> has a/c.

I don't know what the rule is George but I like to keep at least 2" just for
frame flex and engine flex and fan blade flex considerations. Other than
that
I'd say closer is better although with a shroud it should be dictated by the
shroud opening and with such shouldn't matter as much since all air is being
directed by the shroud anyway.

Greed is the Creed of the Breed
who did away with the Steed...

- -- Gary --
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------....


To access the rest of this feature you must be a logged in Registered User Of Ford Truck Enthusiasts

Registration is free, easy and gives you access to more features.
If you are not registered, click here to register.
If you are already registered, you can login here.

If you are already logged in and are seeing this message, your web browser is blocking session cookies. Change your browser cookie settings to allow session cookies.




Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - Jobs

This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.