perf-list-digest Monday, July 20 1998 Volume 01 : Number 035



=======================================================================
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 - George's Opinions!
Re: FTE Perf - Valve seats, SS Valves, Port Finish
FTE Perf - My last words on the subject, you can go on if you want!
FTE Perf - The Aerodynamics of Golfballs & Intake Runners
RE: FTE Perf - The Aerodynamics of Golfballs & Intake Runners
Re: FTE Perf - The Aerodynamics of Golfballs & Intake Runners
Re: FTE Perf - My last words on the subject, you can go on if you want!
FTE Perf - committed to building a 400 to replace my 351M

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

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1998 07:19:14 -0700
From: "George"
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - George's Opinions!

The weight difference you mention is not just 150 LB. it totals much more!
You forget to mention, or perhaps you don't know, that the extra weight of
the 385 series engines pushes the limit of the Dana 44 front axil should you
ever catch air, I play hard and I have had multiple feet of the stuff (and a
creek)under all 4 corners simultaneously. This combined with excess power
creates a mandatory front Dana 60 or 70 swap, more weight; and the D60/70
should be fully gusset'd; More $$$$, More Weight!
With the Dana 60/70 you must run a 38/9" tire to keep the same ground
clearance as a D/44 with a 36" tire. A 38/9" tire is more then I will run on
a flange type axil, so there goez a bunch of $$$$, and/or the 9" and you are
into a "Corporate" or Dana 60/70 rear axil.
Now the 38/9's are more then should be trusted to stock breaks so we add
aftermarket disks all round, more $$$$ (first rule of High Pro: Make it
STOP). The 38/9's and the 60's are all unsprung weight and even at crawl
speeds that hurts performance. The 385 adds all of its mass to the front of
an already nose heavy truck, not a good thing to do with regards to polar
moment of inertia.

Maybe I've been lucky but my '82 Bronco just turned 160k; 135k of that with
385 series engines, Warn behind the bumper 8000# winch, 31" tires and
factory mounted dual front shocks. Five years of that was spent hauling
enough 3-4' diameter 8' logs out of the woods, real woods, to make from
eight to 12 cords of 18" firewood. We're talking a choker on the log, 50' of
3/8" cable on the rear hitch, get a running start of maybe 10' and then nail
it over creeks, ditches, etc. to the nearest logging road. While seeking
elk it's pulled trailers into and out of places that scared me when I looked
back on the situations. The stock 351W wouldn't do it. The transfer case
let go at 110k, failure due to that simple oiler system, and I've replaced
the winch motor one time.

I'm not going to argue with a pro engine builder (I don't want to get you
mad cause you provide such great technical info) but for we amateurs, it's
difficult to fault the 385 series conversions. That junk yard 385, the
'68-71s are still available, was rated at 365hp from the factory. The core
engine and C6, a stock rebuild with all new components, the oil pan, engine
mounts and remote filter ran me about $2500. I sold my low mileage 351W for
$800 at the time and ended up with a net investment of $1700. You and others
could do it but there's no way I could have achieved that hp/torque level
with a small block for that kind of money.

George Miller

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

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1998 08:52:24 -0700
From: "George"
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Valve seats, SS Valves, Port Finish

Great information, especially about the 30 degree valve seats and combustion
chamber polishing. I always use new valves (maybe because I've always bought
bare heads) and, after reading your text and that of others, am still
wondering why I went to the expense of purchasing SS valves for my next
engine. For a street hipo engine, no serious racing, would you recommend the
SS just as a safety factor and perhaps a better balanced valve train with
appropriate springs/cam or will the stock valves do the job?

George Miller


- ->How does the 30 degree seat measure up to 45 for normal highway driving?

- ->George Miller

The 30 seat will work well on most engines right on up into the 6.5k RPM
range. The reason for this is that the Curtain Area is greater sooner in the
valve event timing. For most streetable cams the amount of time that the
valve spends at 1/3 lift is greater then the time at full lift. The most
critical time is the last or closing side of the event. The closing side is
critical because the air column has reached its maximum velocity, so if you
can improve the flow on this side you will make more power in any engine and
at any RPM (ok, almost any).
The 30 seat will give away some peak air flow to the 45 seat, however from
what I have seen and read it would not matter to most people on or off the
track as the overall flow increase will offset the top end loss. So, unless
you are living and dying by the last horse, particularly in a stock
production head the 30 seat is the way to go.
Down sidez:
The 30 seat provides less self centering action, and tends to be slightly
less self cleaning. Depending on the way (other angles)that the seats are
ground may tend to cause the valve to run hotter. So the 30 seat has a
small risk attached to it, the risk under 6k RPM in an application that is
running appropriate air filter is low. The use of this angle in "Heavy Duty"
or "Severe Duty" applications may not be the way to go for the above
reasons.

The latest thinking on seat prep is not to grind a radius after the blend
into the valve pocket but to run a series of descending angles. The
reasoning is that Air can't see these small angles at speed but it does see
the radius and so the radius develops a greater boundary layer and
turbulence. The old 3 angle valve job has turned into a 5 to 8 angle (or
more) affair on high output engines. In a modern shop all of these angles
are machined and not ground, so it is not that much more expensive then the
old 3 angle. A lot of people are still paying top dollar for the radius
work, oh-well you got to have what you got to have.

Reason to run Stainless Steel Valves?
Stainless offers a higher strength potential at elevated temperatures. If
your application will introduce this type of condition, like starting the
engine, you MAY benefit from SS Valves.
Why? Because the SS Valve is stronger less metal can be used to give the
same or often greater strength when compared to the stock valve.
If you reduce the weight of the valve you can run a lighter spring; lighter
spring gives you power. Lighter spring and valve allows a higher
acceleration rate of the valve and more importantly a higher closing rate,
this allows the valve to get farther open sooner, and be held there longer
in a given duration, of course that would be a custom camshaft.
Running a SS Valve and optimizing nothing else can extend the RPM's before
Valve Float destroys something, and that can give some power. But if you are
going to order a camshaft telling them that you are running a "Super Trick
Lightweight Valve" may allow them to change the springs and Camshaft giving
you a more optimized Valve-train and therefore more power.

On the street SS Valves in a relatively stock application may yield nothing
in any measurable terms. But... If "I" am building a "Hi-Pro" engine and
starting with used components like heads, "I" replace the valves, ETC. just
for safeties-sake, all metal fatigues and "I" find the risk of 25 year old
valves or even 2 year old valves to be unacceptable. That's my problem
though...

Intake and Port Surface Finish.
I have watched this thread with interest. Here is what I have learned
working with max-effort engines, the principals and applications of them
directly apply to street engines.
Polishing is a waste of time!
The Manifold and Runner need to be smooth in the sense that the contours
need to be. But the actual surfaces want to be rougher then most people
would like to believe. Most of the super smooth surfaces are there not
because they make power but because 'you' the customer would feel cheated if
they were not!
The A/F mixture is not mixed on the Plenum, the mixing is done in the Carb,
or at the Injector. Fuel is placed in the air stream in the form of tiny
droplets. The size of these droplets is directly proportional to the power
made: smaller is better. As the droplets move through the manifolding they
bump into each other making bigger droplets; or they bump into the walls of
the manifold and stick there. The bigger the droplet the more likely it is
to bump a wall and the more fuel falls out of suspension. This happens with
the glorified EFI systems even worse then Carbs because the droplets start
out bigger! Anywayz quite soon you have a river of fuel, yes literally,
running back and forth in the manifold.
As you can see the last thing that you would want is "Mixing" happening
anywhere in the manifold. What you want is a nice smooth orderly flow to
keep the fuel mixed in the air. (note: sometimes raising the Carb or T/body
will help in sorting out the flow and yield a dramatic increase in power) So
the trick is to get that fuel back up into the air stream. If the manifold
is a poor design or designed for emissions sometimes the only way to do this
is to heat the manifold with the exhaust and boil the fuel back into the air
stream. A good manifold design may need this heat feature while the engine
is cold but not after that point.
When air moves through a tube it is not all moving at the same speed. There
is a layer that is in direct contact with the wall that may not be moving at
all (called the Boundary Layer) while the air in the center is well above
the average velocity creating a speed gradient between the two extremes
(AFAIK all gasses and liquids act this way). As the speed of the air through
the tube increases the thickness of the Boundary Layer increases; this is
the reason that high RPM manifolds have bigger runners. If you increase the
speed enough the Boundary Layer will be the same thickness as the diameter
of the port and you will "stall the port".
If the wall is mirror smooth the air will simply push the liquid fuel and
the Boundary Layer will still be there but on top of the fuel; but if the
walls are rough there is a change that happens in the Boundary Layer; it
lifts off the wall taking the fuel with it. Presto Fuel back in suspension.
Real big drops perhaps but a big drop is better then a river any day! This
"turbulence" is a good thing!) not too much mind just the right amount. With
the turbulence you can still stall the port, and it may happen sooner then
otherwise. An interesting thing happens when the port stalls, the fuel falls
out of suspension and the engine goez lean and meltage happens shortly there
after.
I know that the conclusion reached logically that the rougher wall texture
the more the increase in the Boundary Layer thickness and reduces the CFM
capability, and the sooner it happens speed wise appears to be all bad.
Most of us will never demand enough air to come close to stalling the port.
The apparent and popular conclusion is that you should have the smoothest
port as possible to reduce it. If you have time or money you can achieve a
mirror everywhere. You might measure an increase in CFM but how much is from
polishing and how much is from the enlarging and contour smoothing, like
Extrude Honing. For example smoothing the bumps in the 460 heads is worth
around 20 or so HP, but polishing the port makes an inconsequential
difference.
So what is the ideal surface finish?
Depends on the application but vary generally the finish produced by the
first tool used in actual porting is correct: the Carbide Burr. Don't grind
or sand after hogging out the ports, just go back over them and smooth them
with the Burr and your done; unless your going to sell it, then polish them
ports!
The Exhaust ports do however like to be real smooth so finish them off with
a Mounted Point, you don't need to sand or polish these ether unless your
going to sell them.
Here is another general rule don't sweat the bottoms of the ports, most
dramatic improvements will be found in the sides and tops of the ports;
particularly Ford exhaust ports. All of them! and watch out for water!
You can guess what I am going to say about the Chambers Nope you dont need
to polish these ether; just smooth them out with a Mounted Point. The poor
quality of gasoline sold in this country will put a layer of carbon on a
polished surface just as fast as a surface that has only smoothed, another
popular myth blown away! Sorry.

The above is a much simplified outline based several documents in my
possession:

Several articles, by David Vizard
"4 Stroke Performance Tuning", by Sorry I can no longer read it.(what a
name)
"Air Flow through Engines", By Superflow Corp.
"Impact of Accelerative Forces on Performance in Race Engines with Wet-Fuel
Manifolds", By Andrew L. Randolph and Alba L. Colon
"Internal Combustion Engine Fundamentals", By John B. Heywood
And a bunch more; Also a bunch of my experiences, both bad and good!

CS.


== 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: Sun, 19 Jul 1998 12:42:39 -0700
From: "Chris Samuel"
Subject: FTE Perf - My last words on the subject, you can go on if you want!

- ->Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1998 22:15:10 -0700
- ->From: "Darryl A. Regan"
- ->Subject: FTE Perf - gary's stuff... my opinion
- ->
- ->Just wondering why we aren't hearing about tons of breakage from the
hardcore wheelers
- ->who have a few extra hundred pounds of winch and bumper hanging over the
front of
- ->their trucks.

IME most people don't go around bragging about broken parts! Most
"Hard-core" wheelers that I know don't run with people who break regularly,
who wants to run with someone who constantly breaks parts? Elitist?
Perhaps... TS!

- ->Also show me where it cost more to build a 460 than a 400.

I just quickly flipped through Summit and Jegs looking at median quality
parts and there is several hundred between the two, then add the cost of the
Swap to the cost of the engine. Consider your self shown.

- ->I cant find this info.

Did you look? I did in less then 5 min.

- ->Kind of like the guys saying it would cost so much moe to build a 351C
than a 351W.
- ->I have some pretty good catalogs that say otherwise. Oh yeah everything I
read says the 460 is about 145 pounds heavier than the 400.

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

Obviously you missed my point!
If YOU like YOUR truck... COOL!
I am NOT knocking the 460.
I have built several 460's from stockers to the 600+ HP level!
I am NOT putting down the swap!
I have done the swap, more then once!
I even acknowledged the potential of the swap in the last post!
I do not need a 385 to go where I go and or do what I do.
If you do... Fine!

Darryl, and anyone else.
Do not based on only your opinion tell me that I, or anyone else needs
a 385 series to do anything!
The fact is that I can build a truck that will shut you down on the strip;
Drag you down the street; go anywhere you can;
and do it all with a 302 and less money.
You could not drive it the same way, and the engine wont last as long.
Would more inches be desirable? Yes!
The point is simply that I could do it, regardless of your opinion,
that is known as a fact.
Perhaps one day we can meet on some trail someplace,
have a cold one, and you can try to convince me.
Until then...

I am done with this thread.
EVERYONE...
Enjoy your truck!
CS


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

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1998 19:17:57 -0400
From: "Don & Teresa Neighbors"
Subject: FTE Perf - The Aerodynamics of Golfballs & Intake Runners

Try as I might, I could not resist the temptation to put in my $.02 about
this intake runner debate. As I understand it, polishing the intake runners
will increase the velocity of the intake charge, which I guess means
increased throttle response, and promotes swirl in the combustion chamber
and a better burn of the intake charge. As for golf balls, the little
dimples on the surface help induce a spin on the ball, stabilizing its
flight, thus allowing it to fly farther and more accurately into the rough.
:-)

Don Neighbors
'54 F250 Named Grover

"Any dropped tool or part will automatically fall into the most
innaccesible part of the vehicle."

kyneighbors kih.net


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

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1998 20:56:22 -0400
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - The Aerodynamics of Golfballs & Intake Runners

i have heard now that some high priced racing intakes have a dimpled inner surface. i am really starting to ponder this one now.

sleddog

- ----------
From: Don & Teresa Neighbors[SMTP:kyneighbors kih.net]
Sent: Sunday, July 19, 1998 7:17 PM
To: FTE Perf List
Subject: FTE Perf - The Aerodynamics of Golfballs & Intake Runners

Try as I might, I could not resist the temptation to put in my $.02 about
this intake runner debate. As I understand it, polishing the intake runners
will increase the velocity of the intake charge, which I guess means
increased throttle response, and promotes swirl in the combustion chamber
and a better burn of the intake charge. As for golf balls, the little
dimples on the surface help induce a spin on the ball, stabilizing its
flight, thus allowing it to fly farther and more accurately into the rough.
:-)

Don Neighbors
'54 F250 Named Grover


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

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1998 18:20:24 -0700
From: "George"
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - The Aerodynamics of Golfballs & Intake Runners

What application(s)? Drags, NASCAR, sprint, CART, pullers?

George Miller



i have heard now that some high priced racing intakes have a dimpled inner
surface. i am really starting to ponder this one now.

sleddog

- ----------
From: Don & Teresa Neighbors[SMTP:kyneighbors kih.net]
Sent: Sunday, July 19, 1998 7:17 PM
To: FTE Perf List
Subject: FTE Perf - The Aerodynamics of Golfballs & Intake Runners

Try as I might, I could not resist the temptation to put in my $.02 about
this intake runner debate. As I understand it, polishing the intake runners
will increase the velocity of the intake charge, which I guess means
increased throttle response, and promotes swirl in the combustion chamber
and a better burn of the intake charge. As for golf balls, the little
dimples on the surface help induce a spin on the ball, stabilizing its
flight, thus allowing it to fly farther and more accurately into the rough.
:-)

Don Neighbors
'54 F250 Named Grover


== 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: Sun, 19 Jul 1998 23:27:27 -0700
From: "Darryl A. Regan"
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - My last words on the subject, you can go on if you want!

From: "Chris Samuel"
To: "Perf-List"
Subject: FTE Perf - My last words on the subject, you can go on if you want!
Date sent: Sun, 19 Jul 1998 12:42:39 -0700
Send reply to: perf-list ford-trucks.com

> ->Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1998 22:15:10 -0700
> ->From: "Darryl A. Regan"
> ->Subject: FTE Perf - gary's stuff... my opinion
> ->
> ->Just wondering why we aren't hearing about tons of breakage from the
> hardcore wheelers
> ->who have a few extra hundred pounds of winch and bumper hanging over the
> front of
> ->their trucks.
>
> IME most people don't go around bragging about broken parts! Most
> "Hard-core" wheelers that I know don't run with people who break regularly,
> who wants to run with someone who constantly breaks parts? Elitist?
> Perhaps... TS!

I am also on the BigBroncos mailing list along with a couple of others on this list (Hi gary!!)
Guys on the list don't mind telling you about things they break while wheeling. Still have
yet to hear about a D44 going south on someone.
>
> ->Also show me where it cost more to build a 460 than a 400.
>
> I just quickly flipped through Summit and Jegs looking at median quality
> parts and there is several hundred between the two, then add the cost of the
> Swap to the cost of the engine. Consider your self shown.
>

I just got done ordering some things for my 460. Remember it originally had a 351M in it.
Thumbing through the catalogs and comparing is one of the reasons I went with the 460.
What is the cost of the swap?? If you have a complete motor the your cost is mounts.
Everything I needed came cheap.


>
> Obviously you missed my point!
> If YOU like YOUR truck... COOL!
> I am NOT knocking the 460.

I haven'tmissed the point. Just found fault with a couple of yours which is all I addressed.
I am one of the last defenders of the 351M-400.


> I have built several 460's from stockers to the 600+ HP level!
> I am NOT putting down the swap!
> I have done the swap, more then once!
> I even acknowledged the potential of the swap in the last post!
> I do not need a 385 to go where I go and or do what I do.
> If you do... Fine!

My 460 makes it alot nicer to drive around the big city. Merging in highway traffic is alot
nicer and easier than when I had the 351M.

> Darryl, and anyone else.
> Do not based on only your opinion tell me that I, or anyone else needs
> a 385 series to do anything!
> The fact is that I can build a truck that will shut you down on the strip;
> Drag you down the street; go anywhere you can;
> and do it all with a 302 and less money.
> You could not drive it the same way, and the engine wont last as long.
> Would more inches be desirable? Yes!
> The point is simply that I could do it, regardless of your opinion,
> that is known as a fact.
> Perhaps one day we can meet on some trail someplace,
> have a cold one, and you can try to convince me.
> Until then...
>
> I am done with this thread.
> EVERYONE...
> Enjoy your truck!
> CS
>
You sound a little upset. All i said was that the 460 weighs 145 pounds more.. give or
take a few pounds and that the D44 can handle this with ease. Also dollar for dollar you
will get alot more out of a 460 than a 351M. For example,, Edelbrock Performer intake for
the 460 in the PAW catalog is $163.95 for the 351M-400 and $161.95 for the 429-460.
Isky cam is $84.95 for the 429-460 and $84.95 for the 351M-400.

I am not telling anyone they need to go with a 385 series motor but would appreciate the
facts when someone is defending either way.


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

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1998 23:22:49 -0700
From: "Chris Samuel"
Subject: FTE Perf - committed to building a 400 to replace my 351M

- ->From: "Dale and Donna Carmine"
- ->Subject: FTE Perf - roller rockers
- ->
- ->Crane claims a 25 HP gain using their roller rockers. Anyone out there
with
- ->opinions and/or experience to back this up? They sell a "roller
conversion
- ->kit" that fits inside the stock sled type fulcrum (351M/400), these are
- ->attractive because they are only $112, but they don't provide the roller
tip
- ->to push against the valve. Is this a good alternative to the full race
- ->rollers that run over $300. What is the best option for the budget
- ->conscience street builder looking for the most HP/$$$.
- ->
- ->I would also like opinions for the best HP/$$ build-up in general engine
- ->building terms.........NO engine wars please!! I am committed to
building
- ->a 400 to replace my 351M.
- ->later,
- ->dale c

I doubt that you will get anything near 25 HP out of just a set of these
"semi" Roller Rockers. The main thing that these will do is reduce the
friction created at the pivot point. I have never seen any accurate data on
the amount of friction at this point. It may in fact be 25 Friction Horse
Power (FHP). If you are looking to gain a reduction in FHP it is "My
Opinion" that you would get close to this with a good quality synthetic oil
(Mobil 1, amsoil, etc.). That is only "My Opinion" though. It is a fact that
reducing FHP is a good thing to do!

>>>I am committed to building a 400 to replace my 351M.

You should be committed!-)

Engine build up on a 400M on pump gas:
Nominal 9.0:1 Compression Ratio achieved with a set of Hypereutectic type
Pistons.
Have the heads Mag'd., replace the cracked ones. Then smooth out the
Chambers. Match the ports in the intake side. Only match the sides and top
on the exhaust side. Do not mill the heads for a CR increase.
Use the Edelbrock Performer 4BBL Intake Manifold (unless you have something
else). Top it with the Carter AFB 625 CFM Carb, or the Edelbrock unit. You
may find that a 1" thick 4 hole spacer makes a big difference.
Supplement the factory Ignition with a MSD or Crane Box and Coil.
Slow down the Mechanical advance in the distributor and limit the total
advance. Then add more to the static timing.
All of the rest of this engine should be rebuilt using standard practices.
Any time you replace the pistons you should rebalance the rotating assembly.
A set of Hooker Headers and a full dual 2.5 In. Exhaust system with a
balance tube should be part of the build.
I have left the camshaft out of this as I do not know enough to address it.
Do you need to pass an emissions inspection?
Automatic or Manual?
Street or off road?
Final Gear Ratio and Tire Size?
Are you looking for pure bottom end Torque so that you can drag your buddy's
460 powered truck down the street? :-)
Is this thing going to wind up to 7500 RPM and kill BBlks at the strip? ;-)
Generally you will want a longer duration number and wide lobe centers.
The higher that you want to run in the RPM's the narrower the lobe centers
with the same duration for about a thousand RPM's then you must increase the
duration again and you can widen the LC again. You are looking for a longer
EX timing then intake. This engine likes valve lift but you have to have all....


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.