perf-list-digest Saturday, July 18 1998 Volume 01 : Number 032



=======================================================================
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:

RE: FTE Perf - (Fwd) Re: 460 builds
Re: FTE Perf - (Fwd) Re: 460 builds
RE: FTE Perf - (Fwd) Re: 460 builds
FTE Perf - Cali smog check
Re: FTE Perf - Cali smog check

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

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 12:39:06 -0400
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - (Fwd) Re: 460 builds

i think you can. but i can't tell you how. but, what is "nice flat torque
curve starting way down low?" maybe i have a different definition of that!
you can get alot, but you cant have EVERYTHING!

what you want most is power under the curve. a bigger cam will give you
more top end, and most likely (properly chosen of course) more under the
curve, but you must give somthing up somewhere after a certain point, and
where that is for you i don't know. don't want to tell you to use a bigger
cam and then find out it was a bad choice.

i don't mind engines that run rumpety rump at idle and need 2000 rpm t/c
and only give real torque at 4000 rpms. i think you'll love 450 hp as much
as 480.

sleddog

- ----------
From: Darryl A. Regan[SMTP:dar6 jps.net]
Sent: Friday, July 17, 1998 2:17 AM
To: perf-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - (Fwd) Re: 460 builds

From: Sleddog
To: "'perf-list ford-trucks.com'"
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - (Fwd) Re: 460 builds
Date sent: Thu, 16 Jul 1998 10:58:51 -0400
Send reply to: perf-list ford-trucks.com

> i'd say 430-450 is reasonable. a little bigger cam and a solid 460-470
> would be reasonable, assuming no accessories and good tune of course.
>
> sleddog
>
> ----------
>
Yeah but could I make that 470 and still maintain my nice flat torque curve
starting way
down low? And if so given my combo what cam grind would you reccommend to
do it??





dar6 jps.net
78 Bronco Ranger XLT (460 powered)
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html




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

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 09:59:59 -0700
From: "George"
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - (Fwd) Re: 460 builds

I think it's kind of funny; here we are talking about an engine with a cam
lift of under .500 with a conservative amount of degree that will probably
last 200,000 miles, makes 450hp with torque that slops over the table. When
I read how much money some of the small block people spend to get MAYBE
400hp and 350lb torque in a 50,000 mile engine I just have to smile.

George Miller


i think you can. but i can't tell you how. but, what is "nice flat torque
curve starting way down low?" maybe i have a different definition of that!
you can get alot, but you cant have EVERYTHING!

what you want most is power under the curve. a bigger cam will give you
more top end, and most likely (properly chosen of course) more under the
curve, but you must give somthing up somewhere after a certain point, and
where that is for you i don't know. don't want to tell you to use a bigger
cam and then find out it was a bad choice.

i don't mind engines that run rumpety rump at idle and need 2000 rpm t/c
and only give real torque at 4000 rpms. i think you'll love 450 hp as much
as 480.

sleddog

- ----------
From: Darryl A. Regan[SMTP:dar6 jps.net]
Sent: Friday, July 17, 1998 2:17 AM
To: perf-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - (Fwd) Re: 460 builds

From: Sleddog
To: "'perf-list ford-trucks.com'"
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - (Fwd) Re: 460 builds
Date sent: Thu, 16 Jul 1998 10:58:51 -0400
Send reply to: perf-list ford-trucks.com

> i'd say 430-450 is reasonable. a little bigger cam and a solid 460-470
> would be reasonable, assuming no accessories and good tune of course.
>
> sleddog
>
> ----------
>
Yeah but could I make that 470 and still maintain my nice flat torque curve
starting way
down low? And if so given my combo what cam grind would you reccommend to
do it??





dar6 jps.net
78 Bronco Ranger XLT (460 powered)
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html




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


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

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 10:19:13 -0700
From: "Darryl A. Regan"
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - (Fwd) Re: 460 builds

From: Sleddog
To: "'perf-list ford-trucks.com'"
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - (Fwd) Re: 460 builds
Date sent: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 12:39:06 -0400
Send reply to: perf-list ford-trucks.com


> i don't mind engines that run rumpety rump at idle and need 2000 rpm t/c
> and only give real torque at 4000 rpms. i think you'll love 450 hp as much
> as 480.
>
> sleddog
>
> ----------
Thanks for the opinion and I couldn't agree with you more. That is kind of what i was
saying with my question. You have to give up something somewhere.


dar6 jps.net
78 Bronco Ranger XLT (460 powered)
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 12:31:45 -0700
From: "Darryl A. Regan"
Subject: FTE Perf - Cali smog check

If anyone is interested these are the things that had to be checked for a 78 Ford truck
(bronco too) in order to pass smog:

1. PCV system
2. thermostatic air cleaner
3. catalyst
4.fuel evaporative controls
5. exhaust gas recirc
6. ignition spark controls
7. vacuum line connections to sensor/switches
8. carburetor
9. other emission related components.

This is exactly how the printout reads. Plus fuel fillpipe restrictor and where the timing is
set. My smog check actually reads that it is a 78 bronco with a 460. Only discreprancy
is that it shows single exhaust and I have duals and the mileage is off. Says I am putting
out 99ppm HC and .04 Co at 2500rpms. At idle it is 95HC and 1.45 CO. Has readings for
other emissions but these are the only two regualted.





dar6 jps.net
78 Bronco Ranger XLT (460 powered)
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 14:24:38 -0700
From: "George"
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Cali smog check

Gee, 450hp with all that. Clever disguises you made on some of those items
to pass.


If anyone is interested these are the things that had to be checked for a 78
Ford truck
(bronco too) in order to pass smog:

1. PCV system
2. thermostatic air cleaner
3. catalyst
4.fuel evaporative controls
5. exhaust gas recirc
6. ignition spark controls
7. vacuum line connections to sensor/switches
8. carburetor
9. other emission related components.

This is exactly how the printout reads. Plus fuel fillpipe restrictor and
where the timing is
set. My smog check actually reads that it is a 78 bronco with a 460. Only
discreprancy
is that it shows single exhaust and I have duals and the mileage is off.
Says I am putting
out 99ppm HC and .04 Co at 2500rpms. At idle it is 95HC and 1.45 CO. Has
readings for
other emissions but these are the only two regualted.





dar6 jps.net
78 Bronco Ranger XLT (460 powered)
== 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.