perf-list-digest Wednesday, April 7 1999 Volume 02 : Number 079



=======================================================================
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 - Rebuilding a 302
RE: FTE Perf - Rebuilding a 302
Re: FTE Perf - Emissions
Re: FTE Perf - EFI on new 460 engines
RE: FTE Perf - Rebuilding a 302
Re: FTE Perf - 4/1/99 no real Ford content
FTE Perf - 302 to 347
Re: FTE Perf - Re: A/F monitor.
Re: FTE Perf - Emissions
Re: FTE Perf - 302 to 347
Re: FTE Perf - Rebuilding a 302
FTE Perf - My new 351

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

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

Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 06:56:53 EDT
From: FLR150 AOL.COM
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Rebuilding a 302

Yep, I sure have had some troubles with the AODE/4R70W tranny. BUT, I have
gone the Art Carr route to solving these problems and I haven't had even a
hint of trouble (knock on wood). I believe the easiest way to make sure
anyone doesn't duplicate my success ripping up the tranny is to make sure you
get the largest and highest flowing transmission cooler you can fit and to
install a trans. Temp gauge to monitor the temps. As far as my experience
goes, you live and learn. I am only 29 but boy have I got a hell of a truck
going now...=). Last time slip....10's at the 1/8 and that's WITHOUT the
chip. I am still in the process of setting up the Dyno time at Superchips in
Longwood, FL so I can get it tuned right the first time and not have to
experiment through the mail. I'll let you all know the numbers again as soon
as I get them. New additions to the beast are:
BBK Dual 58 mm Throttle Body, BBK High Flow Ypipe, Went back to the Flowtech
coated headers, Dynomax catback ran Super Truck style out in front of the
rear wheels. Gears/Locker and either Huffer or NOx next. Motor can easily
handle 125 shot,but Whipple looks really profitable. You really outta see the
faces of the Ch*vy drivin IROC and Z71 owners when my beast eats em alive....
Nuf Said,
Wayne Foy
'94 Flareside SC
"Hazardous Material" (To Ch*vy owners wallets)


In a message dated 4/5/99 7:24:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time, baldwin ti.com
writes:


success with this engine (and also some success ripping up AODE trannies).
I would not go to the extent that he has with the mods because of the trans.,
but how much can that thing take? It may be marginal, even with the engine
in stock form. I noticed in the sales brochure that the engine output was
higher for manual than automatic applications. They may have "de-tuned" the
engine to make that light-duty transmission last a little longer in a rather
heavy vehicle.... >>

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

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

Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 08:47:18 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - Rebuilding a 302

>A '95 F-150 SC w/5.0. I saw the reference to tri-Y's and I didn't know they
>were available for this engine. I don't have emissions testing, but may in
>the future, so I may stick with a shorty when the time comes.

With the FI, they probably won't list them for that specific application,
and I'm not sure how well they would fit the rest of the vehicle (ie. hang
down? too short?) So the shorties may be the best answer for now.

Probably not
>worth the trouble unless the heads change, too.

The exhaust is probably the most restrictive part of any factory engine.
It needs to be quiet and clean, so they usually make them small and pass
through a ton of odd things (like 6cats on my 96 stang!) Anything you can
do to open this up will help your engine out, if only in efficiency and
longevity. My g.f.'s brother just fixed his muffler/tailpipe combo (2.5 in
1.5 out originally), went to 2.5 all the way back ... 15hp! Granted it was
a brand x, but the Fords suffer from the same problems (you think ford
suffers, look at a d*dge ... talk about a mess!)


>I would not go to the extent that he has with the mods because of the trans,
>but how much can that thing take? It may be marginal, even with the engine
>in stock form. I noticed in the sales brochure that the engine output was
>higher for manual than automatic applications. They may have "de-tuned" the
>engine to make that light-duty transmission last a little longer in a rather
>heavy vehicle....
>
I think the lower hp numbers reflect a weaker trans, but also the need for
more torque and a smoother power curve. Auto's don't react well to peaky
motors since they don't know when to shift. If you have a manual, then you
control it. But you are probably right that the tranny is border line for
the application, especially if you have 4wd.

>By the way, I noticed the Iowa State address. A few years ago, I ran across
>an engine simulator called "dynomation" on the web, with an "iastate"
>reference. Are you familiar with this?
>
Not familiar with it, have heard the phrase before. Seems like it hides
out in Black Engineering Building, something M.E's get to tinker with.
They have an engines class where they put tons of sensors on a 2.5L G*
motor ... I knew a couple kids in the class and told them the whole problem
with the motor was that it was G*, if they had a Ford block they wouldn't
be having those sensor problems (readings out of bounds and such:) They
also have a chassis dyno, for all of 35HP, what good does that do???


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, 06 Apr 1999 11:18:24 -0700
From: "Rob Bryan"
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Emissions

WOW! BBK made a Y-pipe for a Chevy engine in a Ford? And your friend has a
350 in his regular cab? What is this world coming to? Doesn't anyone use the
5766cc (5.8L or 352ci) "351W" anymore?

Rob

> According to EPA regulations, it is BY LAW illegal to alter the configuration
> of your vehicle emissions system as it came from the factory. Example, my
> Flareside has the standard header-ypipe-dual cat- to single out exhaust. I
> CANNOT change the original configuration before the cats, even if I wanted to
> pay the extra for the dual cats and such. That's why I am so pissed off that
> BBK had a mold and production run on an after-market high-flow ypipe for the
> 5.0 and 5.7. Unfortunately, many owners didn't know about this product, so
> they didn't sell many, and consequently stopped production and broke the
> mold. There are a few of these gems left and I am in the process of procuring
> one. I have a friend with a standard cab F150 (5.7/E4OD) who has one of
> these. After this was installed, he dyno'd it and came up with 20 more rear
> wheel (corrected) horsepower...but it was pricey. The part itself without tax
> and shipping was over $300. But you have to pay to play.
> My 2 coins,
> Wayne Foy
> '94 Flareside SC
> "Hazardous Material"
> Website under construction

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

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

Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 11:21:51 -0700
From: "Rob Bryan"
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - EFI on new 460 engines

> Do the new 460 engines use Port Fuel Injection or are they still TBI?

460 engines never had Throttle Body Injection. From 1988 to 1997 they had
Multi-port Injection. Most were bank-fire, but the later CA-emissions
vehicles had sequential.

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

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

Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 17:08:20 -0500
From: "Baldwin, Dave (CPCP Design)"
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - Rebuilding a 302

Wayne,

You pass an emissions test with all this yet?

Dave

- -----Original Message-----
From: FLR150 AOL.COM [mailto:FLR150 AOL.COM]
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 1999 5:57 AM
To: perf-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Rebuilding a 302

...I am only 29 but boy have I got a hell of a truck
going now...=). Last time slip....10's at the 1/8 and that's WITHOUT the
chip. I am still in the process of setting up the Dyno time at Superchips in

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

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

Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 22:20:42 -0400
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - 4/1/99 no real Ford content

"C. K. Hartline" wrote:
>
> DOH!! Got me! April Fool, gee thats me!!
> Geez what some folks do to pull off great pranks...

A radio station here was saying there was a new law enacted barring
smoking in your OWN vehicle and police were issuing citations...
SWAMPED with outraged phone calls! ;-)

I got my boss pretty good too. Had a friend call around lunch time then
acted 'odd' the rest of the day. Around 8 PM or so I called Chip and
said that my old job had an employee hurt and quitting and asked what
I'd take for working there and I said $12/Hr over my current but settled
for $10; knowing it'd put Chip in a bind as Rodney was on vacation I'd
negotiated with another mechanic I know to come in at my rate and take
my place... (I thought a *lot* about this gag!) I could have kept it
up for a good while, but I could tell Chip was taking it pretty badly so
I stopped.. He said I got him "hook, line, sinker, gaffed and in the
boat!"... Actually I still feel kinda bad about it! I'm sure next year
will be my turn though.

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

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

Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 22:10:36 -0400
From: Brad Smith
Subject: FTE Perf - 302 to 347

Anyone out there ever turned a 302 into a 347? I hear this is one of the
toughest engines on the strip, and I am thinking about building one. Just
wondering specs to do this? Stroking involved, or just boring? Any help
would be appreciated...
Oh yeah, anyone know what trannies (manual) will hook up to a small block?

Thanks,
Brad

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, 06 Apr 1999 23:11:27 -0400
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Re: A/F monitor.



Chris Samuel wrote:
>
> From: Tim Turner
> Subject: Re: FTE Perf - A/F monitor
>
> SNIP

Also

> If expense isn't a concern you
> could fit exhaust gas temperature units to the manifolds as is common
> with piston aircraft...

Your point is valid; I should have mentioned it's used more during a
steady state of straight and level cruising unlike the dynamic needs of
a towing vehicle. I wasn't thinking I guess.

>
> Maybe just carry an assortment of jets and swap 'em as needed at fuel
> stops? ;-)
>

Actually the 'metering rod' swap mentioned by another sounds like a good
plan; been a while since I played with a AFB.

> Tim
> _______________________________
> I can give some limited information on the O2, EGT issues.
> These are just my conclusions based on my research and experiences,
> agree or not as you see fit.

Numerous s follow.

>
> For example the A/F R can
> be perfect and if a load is placed against the engine the EGT will rise
> which would be interpreted as a lean condition, however the A/F R can
> still be perfect.

Yep. Love the look/pictures of an engine on a dyno with the manifolds
glowing red hot from the load.

> Yes, I know that they have been used in Aircraft
> forever, they fail there too BTDT.

Always hated it when the instructor would slap a suction cup device over
one or more of the instruments to simulate a failure. ;-)

> The O2 sensor however is cheap $35 or so; relatively
> accurate, and more so then the EGT by a factor of 100; significantly more
> reliable then a T/couple will ever be.

$20 if you really shop around.

>
> The "inaccuracy" of the O2 sensor comes from it's misapplication, or
> more correctly miss-understanding how it works by the market place. The
> O2 sensor delivers a variable voltage based on a comparison of the
> amount of Oxygen on the sensor side and on the outside. If you test O2
> sensors, you will find that they are to a degree individuals in their
> output. This variation is vary narrow, but it does exist.

Hence the need for 'compensation' by the PCM to suit the individual
vehicle/sensors, (SFT/LFT)

> constantly bouncing high low due to lag in every system.

'Feedback' Too rich, too lean constantly and averages out to near
stochiometric. A good 'scope or graphing DMM will show the 'pattern' of
the response well.

> There is a
> controversy as to weather the O2 sensor is linear in its operation, or
> when it is not at 0.47VDS, what exactly does it mean?

Agreed.. especially with an older sensor.

> When combined with a vacuum gauge you have a monitoring system that is
> capable of giving you real time information on the operation of your
> engine.

Very agreed there. I'm a fan of as many gauges as possible.

> So why are O2 sensors not used in Piston Engine Aircraft? The simple
> answer is Lead. Ave-gas has many times more lead in it then Auto-gas.

Even the 'low lead' 100 Octane is pretty rife with Ethyl. ;-)


>
> For more information there is an archived FAQ at the following address.
> It is a few years old but the basic data is there.
> I am not affiliated with this FAQ in any way. Thanks to Mr. Alex Smith for
> keeping it on line.
> http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.engr.ucdavis.edu/~avsmith/o2sensor.html

Interesting reading. As you said, some of it is a bit dated but seemed
pretty pure.


>
> My conclusion is different then Tim's as I would definitely recommend the O2
> sensor for this purpose and would not recommend an EGT

Probably correct; I dropped the ball. I'd suggest in a towing situation
to stay a bit on the rich side though.

> The more that I learn about Aircraft, and the FAA, the less I want them
> anywhere near me.

Amen.. even in 'experimental' aircraft their presence is quite
obtrusive. It seems if *one* plane crashes with an odd failure all of
that type get an "A D" (Airworthiness Directive) requiring inspection or
repairs. Seems like the FAA doesn't want any VFR recreational pilots in
inexpensive aircraft anymore.

> And I love prop driven planes particularly P-47's, P-38's
> and of course P-51 Mustangs! Oh, and weren't that B-17 a awesome piece of
> sculpture...

All WW-I aircraft, Beech Staggerwings, DGAs, Stearmans and Bi-planes in
general for me. :-)

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

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

Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 23:20:28 EDT
From: FLR150 AOL.COM
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Emissions

OK SMARTA$$. I don't claim to be perfect..So I missed it by one-tenth...ohhhh
I think everyone else got the gist of what I meant. Jeesh..thousands of
comedians out of work and he wants to be one....
Wayne Foy
'94 Flareside SC
"Hazardous Material" (To my sleep)




In a message dated 4/6/99 3:08:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
rbryan netgate.net writes:


350 in his regular cab? What is this world coming to? Doesn't anyone use the
5766cc (5.8L or 352ci) "351W" anymore?

Rob >>

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

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

Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 23:33:25 EDT
From: FLR150 AOL.COM
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - 302 to 347

Pick up a copy of Muscle Mustang/Fast Fords. There is actually a company in
there that has greased enough palms to get their stroker kit a CARB
#!!!!!!!!! Must be nice to have THAT kind of money.
Wayne Foy
'94 Flareside SC
"Hazardous Material"
hmmm..a stroker next.....?
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 23:29:24 EDT
From: FLR150 AOL.COM
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Rebuilding a 302

Dave,
Believe it or not YES! I took it to the local Ford place where my buddy
works. He ran the same emissions sticker number in and plugged it in somehow
so that if it failed I would not lose my present "clean" status. Anyway. I
don't have the actual numbers here but the truck blew MUCH cleaner than stock
and he even suggested that I may try removing the second cat and just running
off of the front one.....hmmmm as long as I can take it back to him...I'm
safe.......decisions, decisions.
Wayne Foy
'94 Flareside SC
"Hazardous Material"
New website in the final production phase..look for it soon at a monitor near
you!


In a message dated 4/6/99 6:09:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time, baldwin ti.com
writes:



You pass an emissions test with all this yet?

Dave >>

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

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

Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1999 02:09:51 -0500
From: Ezekial
Subject: FTE Perf - My new 351

Well several weeks ago I had a post stating that I messed my motor up,
bent 2 rods and broke 2 pistons, by sucking water up in the intake.
Well anyways my new motor is underway and I thought I would make a post
with the details.
351W, bored .30
- -TRW forged pistons, 9.0:1 CR
- -ported factory heads, considering shaving to bump up the CR
- -magnafluxed & shotpeened factory rods w/ ARP studs
- -Crank turned 10 under
- -Clevite 77 bearings
- -Fel-Pro gaskets
- -headman headers/no cats/flowmaster 2 chamber
- -Crane cam #363902(I think) 204intk. duration/216exh. if I remember
correctly
- -custom Superchip from superchips.com
- -melling or miloden hi volume/hi flow oil pump
- -block acid tanked to clean it thorougly
- -painted everything up: block+oil pan+engine lift brackets are all dark
ford blue engine paint : valve covers are dark dark metallic blue :
upper & lower intake and front cover, cast coat aluminum engine paint :
and the pullies/fan/shroud/egr pipe are black.

- --
1993 Ford F-150 4x4 Off-Road, ext.cab short bed, 351(5.8)
3.55 gears, 31x10.5 Daytona Stag LT
1988 Ford F-150 2wd 302(5.0) auto, long bed-reg cab
Has been totaled and I am re-building it
Was my Grandpas truck, so theres sentimental value
It had the meanest factory 302 I have ever seen
1966 Mustang Fastback 289HP heads, 302block, Holley 4bbl,....

---

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.