|
|
perf-list-digest Wednesday, March 24 1999 Volume 02 : Number 065 ======================================================================= 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: Re: FTE Perf - Important head question!!!! Re: FTE Perf - new at this Re: FTE Perf - Important head question!!!! Re: FTE Perf - new at this FTE Perf - new triton V-10 FTE Perf - 1999 F-150 FTE Perf - 460 headers FTE Perf - High Octane/Nock Sensor Re: FTE Perf - 460 headers Re: FTE Perf - High Octane/Nock Sensor Re: FTE Perf - High Octane/Nock Sensor Re: FTE Perf - 460 headers FTE Perf - ADMIN: Spamming the lists FTE Perf - ADMIN: Updated charter and FAQ ======================================================================= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 08:38:51 -0600 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Important head question!!!! >by the heat riser passage or on the extreme ends by the water passages. I do >believe it is on the end by the water passage, it has been a while since I >dealt with these older type heads. Yes, there is an extra bolt on the front immediately behind the water jacket if I rem-right, but you are correct they are around the water passages, and there are 2 extras. I dont believe this should cause any >concern as far as bolting on the '4V heads and slapping on a good performer >or stealth intake, whichever your choice may be. It should hold water fine >even with the 1 less bolt, provided you follow the intake mfgrs.reccomended >torque sequence/spec. and use Felpro gaskets. There have been rumors that if you ask you might be able to get these intakes with the second hole, just specify that it is for a 69 head and they might be able to help you out ... > As far as bolting it all togather accessory wise, I do not forsee any >problems there either as the casting bosses should be the same as the late >model ones. Hmmm...I was thinkin there was a change in deck height or something along the way ... like 75 or so ... Also heard rumors that the 2V and 4V heads actually have the same valves and such in them, anyone know anything about this ? Always lookin for more info on the 351W ... we've got one Mom bought new in 69 (69 FB 351 2v) that's never had the valve covers off. A coupe carb rebuilds, a couple water pumps and alternators, that's it 72,000 miles, still goin fairly strong, a bit tired, but no signs of letting up! Also have 2 69 Cougars (1 wrecked when I was 16) and a 74 Gran Torino Elite (GTE?:) parts car ... Just my 2cents wish Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/links.html '73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/truck.html '96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/mustang.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 13:13:33 -0500 From: Bryan G Sheffler Subject: Re: FTE Perf - new at this Stroh, Any thing can be done to an FE engine that you want. It really boils down to, like a Chevy, How much do you want to spend? Ford in the 60's used the FE as their platform to dominate the auto racing world. So there is still plenty of factory stuff available to get you to the grocery store faster than any body else!!!! There are also aftermarket companies that have further refined offerings for the FE like Edelbrock and Dove Mfg. This includes intake manifolds, cylinder heads, rocker arm assemblies, etc...The best book I have found that will tell you every thing that you ever wanted to know about the FE but didn't know what to ask is the book by HPBooks. It is book number 708 entitle "How To Rebuild Big Block Ford Engines" by Steve Christ. It contains a brief history of the FE engine, Hi Perf part numbers, description of the various type of cylinder heads that Ford used, by the way Ford had five (5) different styles of Hi Perf heads!!!!!!! Get the book, it will answer all of your questions, even ones that you don't know you have yet!!! As a side note, has any body else noticed some similarities between the FE and Chevy's new LS1 Corvette engine? Cross bolted main bearing caps, deep skirt block design, evenly spaced, tall/narrow intake ports? Looks like a Bow-Tie version of an FE to me!!!!!! Bryan ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 13:00:16 -0500 From: Bryan G Sheffler Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Important head question!!!! Derrick, The 69/70 heads are the best factory heads besides the original GT-40 heads from the 60's. In 1977 Ford started using the smaller port 302 heads and drilling them for the 1/2 inch head bolts. The chamber size for the '69 is 56-60 cc and the 70 is 59-62 cc. So you will want to find out what the chamber size of the stock heads are to see what impact they will have on compression. One thing that you should consider also is the thermactor plumping. I have a set '70 heads and there is no provision for the tube that runs to both heads to provide the air injection into the exhaust ports. I don't know if Ford made these heads with and with out this provision? Also the earlier heads use L-shaped water passages on the intake manifold surfaces and an extra manifold bolt is located next to each water passage. I'm not sure, but I believe there is a difference in the valve cover bolts (no big deal), more or less I don't remember. A cheaper alternative may be a set of pre 77 351 W heads. Although the 71-76 heads are not as good as the 69/70 heads, their ports are still better (1/8 inch wider ports) than the 77 and later ones. Something else that you might want to consider is that the Explorer 5.0 heads are the Factory's latest refinement of the GT-40 (except for GT-40 Turbo swirl). There is a Mustang place that has these sets ready to bolt on for about $800, sorry I don't remember the name of the place. These would be an exact bolt on for you. Although if you could find a set of the 69/70 heads ready to bolt on for about $300, then you would be money ahead!!!! There have been a few sets up for auction on eBay.com. No one has met the reserve selling price yet and they are bare. In the Cleveland area, I have seen a few sets for sale in the local newspapers from time to time. So they are available. Hope some of this helps and happy hunting!!! Bryan ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 12:36:03 -0600 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE Perf - new at this > As a side note, has any body else noticed some similarities between >the FE and Chevy's new LS1 Corvette engine? Cross bolted main bearing >caps, deep skirt block design, evenly spaced, tall/narrow intake ports? >Looks like a Bow-Tie version of an FE to me!!!!!! > The intake will tell the tale won't it ? :) The exhaust port thing kills me ... supposedly they went to the even spacing for better heat dissipation and hence better efficiency, but they didn't go to OHC because they didn't feel it would increase the efficiency enough! Okay, I know I didn't see the studies, but from my limited knowledge of thermodynamics and mechanical engineering, I have to wonder how much heat they really think they are dissipating by moving the exhaust ports! Also semi-ironic, the LS1 vette came out in 97 with the "new" F.I. 347 V8 (still 5.7, just not quite 350) ... exactly 40 years after Pontiac introduced Fuel Injection on their new Bonenville ... engine displacement ? 347ci Just my 2cents wish Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/links.html '73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/truck.html '96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/mustang.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 16:40:09 EST From: Metalsped Subject: FTE Perf - new triton V-10 I was wondering if anyone out there knew what the cubes were for the new Triton V-10? Thanks in advance Rich May 1999 F250 Super Duty 1989 Centurion C350 == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 17:02:07 -0500 From: Eric Subject: FTE Perf - 1999 F-150 Hi all, New to Ford trucks. Unfortunately I have driven Chevy's most of my life (work vehicles) but now I went out and bought me a new F-150 XL with the 4.2L V-6. Oh, it's the OD auto tranny. I am happy with the power and torque out of the box. I am not really in to towing yet but may be in the near future. What I want to know from the guru's out there is what can do to this motor to give it a little more than it has? I'm talking mostly about minor tweaks and stuff to add a little more. Once my warranty is up I will likely do some major engine mods, but I've got to survive the next 36,000 miles with what I have. Any ideas? I've already ordered a K&N air filter. Also, can anyone recommend a good bed liner. I had a Duraliner on the last GMC truck and I liked it, but I'm wondering if there is better. One other thing....this morning (my first REAL day with the truck) I hit a small patch of ice and the truck went ape sh old tail like nothing I can remember ever doing before. Luckily I caught it before whacking a large oak tree. What I'm wondering is can I do anything to the rear suspension to make it a little more stabile? I don't have the rear sway bar, but will adding it make a real difference? Short of putting a couple of hundred pounds in the bed I'm hoping to keep it a little better planted. TIA Eric == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 18:48:50 -0500 (EST) From: Justin Farcas Subject: FTE Perf - 460 headers I am having a pretty hard time finding some good 460 bbl headers for my 79 1/2 ton 4X4. Anyone know where I can get some inexpensive, quality headers? -Justin Farcas 1979 Ford F150 4X4 460 "Big Daddy Torque" -- == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 20:15:23 -0500 From: J Cope Subject: FTE Perf - High Octane/Nock Sensor I drive an 88 BII, and correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure it's got a nock sensor. Now, correct me again, but wouldn't the presence of a nock sensor let me get better performance out of higer octane gas? I run 89 now, and it's fine, but I'd pay the little extra for a boost in performance... Thanks! JC == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 21:25:10 -0500 From: Brad Smith Subject: Re: FTE Perf - 460 headers At 06:48 PM 3/23/99 -0500, you wrote: >I am having a pretty hard time finding some good 460 bbl headers for my 79 >1/2 ton 4X4. Anyone know where I can get some inexpensive, quality >headers? > >-Justin Farcas > > >1979 Ford F150 4X4 460 "Big Daddy Torque" -- >== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html > > Jeg's and Summit both had header for my 78... They weren't listed in the catalog, but they had them when I called. I think Jeg's had Hooker's and Summit had Hedman headers. I already have header on my truck but they are rusty and I was gonna replace em if they were cheap, but no such luck. I think the Hookers were $349, and the Hedman's were $389. The ones on my truck now are Hooker's and they are made in about 3 or 4 pieces. That may explain why they are so expensive. Oh yeah, those AREN'T stainless either.... The two best times to go fishing are when it is raining, and when it is not... == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 18:38:41 -0800 (PST) From: canzus Subject: Re: FTE Perf - High Octane/Nock Sensor At 08:15 PM 23:3:99 -0500, you wrote: >I drive an 88 BII, and correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure it's got >a nock sensor. Now, correct me again, but wouldn't the presence of a nock >sensor let me get better performance out of higer octane gas? I run 89 >now, and it's fine, but I'd pay the little extra for a boost in >performance... >Thanks! > No, the knock sensor won't allow you better performance from higher octane fuel. The simple explination is; higher octane fuel is less likely to detonate in a higher combustion engine than low octane fuel. If you don't have a 9.5:1 compression engine, you don't need to run 92 octane fuel. In other words, if it's running fine on 89, why waste the money? You won't be gaining anything in your 2.8L. Steve & the Rockette == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 22:24:01 -0500 From: "Thomas J. Teixeira" Subject: Re: FTE Perf - High Octane/Nock Sensor At 06:38 PM 3/23/99 -0800, canzus > No, the knock sensor won't allow you better performance from >higher octane fuel. The simple explination is; higher octane fuel >is less likely to detonate in a higher combustion engine than low >octane fuel. If you don't have a 9.5:1 compression engine, you >don't need to run 92 octane fuel. In other words, if it's running >fine on 89, why waste the money? You won't be gaining anything >in your 2.8L. > > Steve & the Rockette The engine computer CAN advance the spark slightly more with high octane fuel and the knock sensor. However, this apparently doesn't do anything at wide open throttle. See http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.shotimes.com/SHO3gas.html for an explanation of this for a different Ford/Yamaha engine. Tom Teixeiramailto:tjt 94 Taurus SHO 5-speedNESHOC/SHO Registry '66 Mustang convertible (200 cid auto)http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://world.std.com/~tjt '35 Ford Pickup (flathead V8) == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 00:04:39 -0500 (EST) From: Justin Farcas Subject: Re: FTE Perf - 460 headers Ok, thanks man. I'll have to braek out the ole Summit catalog. > > At 06:48 PM 3/23/99 -0500, you wrote: > >I am having a pretty hard time finding some good 460 bbl headers for my 79 > >1/2 ton 4X4. Anyone know where I can get some inexpensive, quality > >headers? > > > >-Justin Farcas > > > > > >1979 Ford F150 4X4 460 "Big Daddy Torque" -- > >== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html > > > > > Jeg's and Summit both had header for my 78... They weren't listed in the > catalog, but they had them when I called. I think Jeg's had Hooker's and > Summit had Hedman headers. I already have header on my truck but they are > rusty and I was gonna replace em if they were cheap, but no such luck. I > think the Hookers were $349, and the Hedman's were $389. The ones on my > truck now are Hooker's and they are made in about 3 or 4 pieces. That may > explain why they are so expensive. Oh yeah, those AREN'T stainless either.... > > The two best times to go fishing are when it is raining, and when it is > not... > == 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 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 00:04:49 -0500 From: Ken Payne Subject: FTE Perf - ADMIN: Spamming the lists Just wanted everyone to know that before they buy anything from Superior Carburators that this company thinks its ok to spam our mailing lists. As usual, our list filters caught the spam. I've cc'd the spammer if anyone else wants to discuss this with the spammer. Ken Payne Admin, Ford Truck Enthusiasts == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 00:51:15 -0500 From: Ken Payne Subject: FTE Perf - ADMIN: Updated charter and FAQ Hi gang, The FAQ and charter have been updated to duplicate information found elsewhere on the site (i.e., the link at the bottom of the charter). This update was done in order to clarify the position of Ford Truck Enthusiasts concerning non-Ford power plants in Ford trucks. During the Summer/Fall of 1998, several people on the "core" list made a decision concerning a club charter which would exclude Ford family trucks which were powered by non-Ford family engines (engines not made by Ford but installed by Ford are acceptable, see the charter for details). Ford Truck Enthusiasts, although a separate entity from the club (yet to be incorporated as a non-profit), keeps itself "in sync" with this tenant of the club. For those that don't know, the core list is a group of volunteers who act as advisors to myself/FTE and it also facilitates communication for the formation of a national Ford truck club. The core is open to anyone willing to volunteer their time to discuss the direction of FTE - its not there to air your dirty laundry but complaints are acceptable. Ken Payne Admin, Ford Truck Enthusiasts PS- Give a round of applause to Keith Srb (herbie.... 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.
|