|
|
perf-list-digest Monday, December 7 1998 Volume 01 : Number 164 ======================================================================= Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Performance Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe, send email to: majordomo with the words "unsubscribe perf-list-digest" in the body of the message. ======================================================================= In this issue: FTE Perf - roller rockers? FTE Perf - Long rods Re: FTE Perf - Super Chip FTE Perf - super chips FTE Perf - cocked piston FTE Perf - 460 into 66 FTE Perf - Re: Superchip RE: FTE Perf - cocked piston ======================================================================= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 06 Dec 1998 11:06:48 -0700 From: Neil Johnson Subject: FTE Perf - roller rockers? Hey yall, Perhaps you guys can help me out here. I have a 72 Ford F-100. I'm rebuilding the 390. I have invested in a Lunati cam..230/230--duration lobe sep Holley, compression stock heads for now, but I hope to change that in the future. Here is my question, would roller rockers fit this cam better than the mech. because of the lift? The shop said that the mech. rockers are still good, but he suggests that I go with rollers. My budget is pretty tight, if I went with rollers, it would be around $400 vs. new mech around $240. $400 is alot of money to dump into stock heads Thanks for your time! Corbin 72 F-100 390 == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 11:42:36 -0800 From: "Chris Samuel" Subject: FTE Perf - Long rods The theory on long rods goes like this. At least as I understand it. The longer rod changes the geometry that is described by the relationship between the Main journal, the Rod journal, and the Piston pin. The longer the rod the less acute the angles. This in and of it self is a good thing as it tends to lessen the thrust loading on the cylinder wall. However it is not the true reason; the real reason is that the longer the rod the slower (relatively) the piston passes through Top Dead Center (TDC). Or to put it another way; the piston dwells longer at TDC. The Air Fuel Mixture (AFM) is compressed and then ignited some how. The AFM then burns quickly. This burning releases the chemical energy of the AFM creating pressure in the now closed cylinder; this is turned in to mechanical energy by pushing down on the piston, rod, and thus rotating the crankshaft. The higher the pressure the more mechanical energy produced. This is why raising the Compression Ratio (CR) makes more power; it raises the pressure both before and after ignition. Increasing the length of the Rod has a similar effect but the mechanism is different. Instead of simply increasing the pressure; the long rod keeps the piston higher in the bore for a given number of crankshaft degrees; it increases the amount of time that the pressure is on the piston. This creates a similar effect as simply raising the CR; there is more pressure pushing on the piston for a given number of degrees of crankshaft revolution. One of the potential benefits of the long rod approach -Vs- the High Compression approach is that the octane requirements of the engine "should not increase" because the maximum pressure did not increase. In the real world the pressure did increase. Not the Maximum pressure as with CR increase but the pressure during the first few degrees of crankshaft rotation as the piston moves down the bore. If both the Air Fuel Ratio and Ignition lead are not optimized detonation can occur; until ether a higher octane fuel is used or both of the systems are optimized. Often (IME) the engine will only respond to the higher octane fuel AND having the Ignition/Induction systems optimized. There are some things to keep in mind through all of this. Not all engines respond to a long rod configuration with measurable power increases. Camshafts should be selected with the long rod configuration in mind. Intake systems will need to be reviewed as the long rod can create a stronger intake signal allowing the use of bigger Carbs. Pistons must be designed for the Block, Crank, Rod Length. Stock pistons will not work. Some engines are long rod engines such as the 460 and 351M. Many engines (IME most) will require higher octane fuel due simply to the increased pressure. Engines that are required to pull at low engine speeds may not be good candidates for the long rod configuration as the engine loading causes exactly the same problems as a high compression ratio. In this situation a camshaft with a late intake opening event may be a better choice to build a higher dynamic compression ratio. As there are a lot of people on these here lists with the most excellent and prestigious name: Chris Because I am confused easily! And it confuses me to see this outstanding name on things I don't remember writing:-) To ease my confused mind I have decided to use my Chicken Band, Wheeling, Handle. Later. Muel == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 06 Dec 1998 18:45:00 -0600 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Super Chip At 11:43 AM 12/5/98 , you wrote: >Has anyone installed or heard any first hand reports on >"Super Chips" new chip for the F250 V10? They claim 29 hp >and 36ft/lbs increase for $495 the down side being high I've seen specs on the Mustang boards about chips like this, they all seem to agree that its much better (and you get more power) if you have a chip custom burned. Most of them have some modifications, so there are certain things they can do to enhance these mods. Most chip tuners will have some ideas about timing advance, and mixtures that work well for what you have. Don't know if any of them do chips, but some offer a return policy, so if you decide to add a super charger or something, they'll let you send your chip back and get a new one ... might check mustangworld.com or corral.net for some of these ... Just my 2cents Bill Auto Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://ranger3.cc.iastate.edu/cars.html '73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://ranger3.cc.iastate.edu/Trucks/truck.html '96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://ranger3.cc.iastate.edu/Cars/mustang.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 19:20:20 -0600 From: "Dale and Donna Carmine" Subject: FTE Perf - super chips >Has anyone installed or heard any first hand reports on >"Super Chips" new chip for the F250 V10? They claim 29 hp >and 36ft/lbs increase for $495 the down side being high >octane fuel and " a slight decrease in mpg" at 10.5mpg right >now on reg. unleaded I'm not sure I can afford the chip but >if the specs. aren't inflated I'm going to try it. Last week someone posted a link to Auburn Performance. On their homepage they are selling an EEC-IV replacement that they claim gives the user full programmability using any "windows computer". The system is called "SpeedBrain", sells for $500, and is manufactured by Automotive Computer Corp. Has anyone ever heard of these people or seen one of these systems??? If this is for real, I'd sure rather spend $500 for this unit than for a super chips prom. From the description it sounds like the calibrator that Mike Wesley had promised for years......but never delivered 'cuz he knew it would kill his business. I hope you late model guys will continue the perf discussions about efi..........helps me to stay up to date. Someday I hope to swap an efi set-up onto my '79. later, dale c == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 19:48:46 -0600 From: "Dale and Donna Carmine" Subject: FTE Perf - cocked piston Azie said; >Not in your favor!!! You did say it was running, so there is a slight >chance, but the chances of reboring being required is much greater in my >humble opinion.!!!!!!! Well Azie was right, (why am I not suprised?), the piston had sheared at the pin boss. The pieces from the lower half of the piston were in the pan......rod was twisted and had been riding up and down the cylinder wall....ouch!! The cylinder wall way badly damaged. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 06 Dec 1998 18:52:11 PST From: "Joe Swinko" Subject: FTE Perf - 460 into 66 I was wondering if anyone has put a 460 into a 61-66 f-100. I have a 66 and was wondering if it was worth the trouble and money. Also i was wondering if anyone has used an aftermarket wiring harness to wire their truck and what benifits they have Joe Swinko ______________________________________________________ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 22:54:47 EST From: FLR150 Subject: FTE Perf - Re: Superchip I would have to tell you that I bought the chip for my '94 F150 and I have been completely satisfied with its results. It produced more power than the company claimed and is completely REPROGRAMMABLE. If you ever have the chance to do upgrades, pull it out and send it back with a check for $75 and they will reprogram it to include the upgrades for you and ship it back to you. That alone would make it a great investment and be worth the extra price. Wayne Foy '94 Flareside Supercab == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 23:19:09 -0500 From: Sleddog Subject: RE: FTE Perf - cocked piston that sucks... sleddog - ---------- From: Dale and Donna Carmine[SMTP:dcarmine Sent: Sunday, December 06, 1998 8:48 PM To: perf-list Subject: FTE Perf - cocked piston Azie said; >Not in your favor!!! You did say it was running, so there is a slight >chance, but the chances of reboring being required is much greater in my >humble opinion.!!!!!!! Well Azie was right, (why am I not suprised?), the piston had sheared at the pin boss. The pieces from the lower half of the piston were in the pan......rod was twisted and had been riding up and down the cylinder wall....ouch!! The cylinder wall way badly damaged. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://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 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.
|