From: owner-perf-list-digest ford-trucks.com (perf-list-digest)
To: perf-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Subject: perf-list-digest V2 #228
Reply-To: perf-list ford-trucks.com
Sender: owner-perf-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Errors-To: owner-perf-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Precedence: bulk


perf-list-digest Tuesday, September 7 1999 Volume 02 : Number 228



=======================================================================
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 - Valve noise
FTE Perf - splitfire spark plugs
FTE Perf - 400 cam
FTE Perf - ADMIN: Web site pictorial updates
FTE Perf - Fw: 302 rebuild
[none]
FTE Perf - What happened when an "M" fan gets a 385?

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

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

Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 05:01:34 -0700
From: "Hogan, Tom"
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - Valve noise

Could the pushrod be plugged?

Tom H

> ----------
> From: William S. Hart[SMTP:wish iastate.edu]
> Reply To: perf-list ford-trucks.com
> Sent: Sunday, September 05, 1999 10:34 PM
> To: perf-list ford-trucks.com
> Subject: RE: FTE Perf - Valve noise
>
> > > was run. After 1000 miles, I pulled the valve cover (to re-torque
> the
> > head
> > > bolts) and noticed that this same rocker arm was the only one
> > that wasn't
>
> > Perhaps the rocker shaft bolts were not installed in the proper
> > locations? On an FE big block, although they look identical at
> > first glance,
>
> This was a thought I had briefly, but the FE's are a solid push rod, no
> holes, so they have to get their oil through there, I don't think he's got
> a
> rocker shaft setup ...
>
> But I'm stumped too, the lifter would be my guess, especially if you're
> getting a valve tap and no oil ...
>
> Just my $.02
> wish
>
> 96 Mustang GT 4.6L
> 73ish F100 4x4 6.4L
> http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish
>
> == 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: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 08:57:33 -0500
From: "David Claflin"
Subject: FTE Perf - splitfire spark plugs

I used to work at an Autozone part-time, and I always wondered what would
make normally sane people pay $40.00 for a set of spark plugs. After
comparing a splitfire to a motorcraft plug; I noticed the ground electrode
on the splitfires only went halfway over the center electrode. Being a
somewhat clever type I figured I could do the same with a die-grinder and a
regular set of autolites. I shaved off about half of the ground electrode so
the center electrode was unshrouded, exposing more of the spark to the
air-fuel mixture. The result was a noticeable improvement in throttle
response and stronger pull in all the gears, plus the mileage went up. The
good part was it didn't cost me $40.00. Now I do this on every plug change,
even in my bride's Aerostar.
Super Dave

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

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

Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 09:34:42 -0500
From: "David Claflin"
Subject: FTE Perf - 400 cam

Check the crower website http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.crower.com/
They have a 15241 cam that is 112 lobe centers 276/281 214/220 .050 with
.527/534 lift. There are several others for this engine, some wilder, some
milder. I'm no expert, but as I understand it, if you are concerned about
emissions you should opt for the wider lobe centers.
Super Dave

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

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

Date: Mon, 06 Sep 1999 14:11:18 -0400
From: Ken Payne
Subject: FTE Perf - ADMIN: Web site pictorial updates

The following have been added to the web site pictorial:


1950 F1
1956 F100
1966 F100
1971 F100
1973 F350 Super Camper Special Ranger
1986 F350 Ambulance
1990 F150 XLT Lariat
1999 F150


Ken Payne
Admin, Ford Truck Enthusiasts
http://www.ford-trucks.com
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 09:54:25 -0400
From: "Steve Midlik"
Subject: FTE Perf - Fw: 302 rebuild

- -----Original Message-----
From: Steve Midlik
To: Perf-list Ford-trucks.com
Date: Tuesday, August 31, 1999 9:28 PM
Subject: Re: 302 rebuild



-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Midlik
To: Perf-list Ford-trucks.com
Date: Saturday, August 28, 1999 8:07 PM
Subject: 302 rebuild


Where can I get the info to identify a 302cdi engine block & heads by
their casting numbers ?
I was told it came from a cop car, and it has some sort of roller lifter
design.
The cam, lifters, push rods, rockers are missing . I have the block with
crank, rods, pistons,
sheet metal at rear end, starting gear & heads with valves installed.
I want to build an engine that will also pass emissions and not
stupify the computer
and other controls that are stock. If I need to update the computer I
will.
I am thinking about a Jacobs Ignition, Mileage Master .
Because this ignition will benefit a built engine better than a worn one
it is a good investment.
I don't want to make a mistake & over-build the engine. Are there
different heads that can
be fitted ? Perhaps some one can suggest a comprehensive manual or site
devoted to the 302.
I have built many engines large & small but always stock except for
somesimple porting &
multi angle valve fitting. Never any cams or cc'ing or fancy tricks.
My left bank exaust manifold is cracked so I suppose another good
dollar spent would be
headers and hi-flo cat-back system. Are there system sources that
provide the connection
parts between header and cat or does this area have to be welded up
custom with mandrels ?
I know it's a small engine so I don't want to break the bank. The
truck is a 91 F-150 4X4.
Bill sez it won't burn barns but the original engine is 140,000 years
old and before it blows
I would like to have a solid power plant waiting to go in.
Any suggestions ?


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

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

Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 20:13:17 -0400
From: "Steve Midlik"
Subject: [none]

- -----Original Message-----
From: Steve Midlik
To: Perf-list Ford-trucks.com
Date: Saturday, August 28, 1999 8:07 PM
Subject: 302 rebuild


Where can I get the info to identify a 302cdi engine block & heads by
their casting numbers ?
I was told it came from a cop car, and it has some sort of roller lifter
design.
The cam, lifters, push rods, rockers are missing . I have the block with
crank, rods, pistons,
sheet metal at rear end, starting gear & heads with valves installed.
I want to build an engine that will also pass emissions and not stupify
the computer
and other controls that are stock. If I need to update the computer I will.
I am thinking about a Jacobs Ignition, Mileage Master .
Because this ignition will benefit a built engine better than a worn one it
is a good investment.
I don't want to make a mistake & over-build the engine. Are there
different heads that can
be fitted ? Perhaps some one can suggest a comprehensive manual or site
devoted to the 302.
I have built many engines large & small but always stock except for
somesimple porting &
multi angle valve fitting. Never any cams or cc'ing or fancy tricks.
My left bank exaust manifold is cracked so I suppose another good dollar
spent would be
headers and hi-flo cat-back system. Are there system sources that provide
the connection
parts between header and cat or does this area have to be welded up custom
with mandrels ?
I know it's a small engine so I don't want to break the bank. The truck is
a 91 F-150 4X4.
Bill sez it won't burn barns but the original engine is 140,000 years old
and before it blows
I would like to have a solid power plant waiting to go in.
Any suggestions ?


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

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

Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 23:03:28 -0700
From: "Chris Samuel"
Subject: FTE Perf - What happened when an "M" fan gets a 385?

George, posed this question and I think I'll attempt to answer it. I am not
sure that the answer belongs on the O.R. list so I'll post it to the Perf
list too.
I'll even put a disclaimer here:
Please understand that this is purely my opinion.
This could get long...

- -> I know you've always favored a 400 engine over a 429/460 as the
- -> ideal 4x4 engine and now you have a 429/460 4x4 for a 'seat of
- -> the pants'comparison. I value your engine knowledge and
- -> experience and, as a 385 series fan, I'd like to hear your general
- -> comments. Not the 160lbs of extra weight, gas mileage,
- -> F250 suspension stuff but the given a final choice opinion of
- -> engines. Sorry for the off-topic; maybe another thread?

- -> TIA,

- -> George Miller

- -> Chris Samuel wrote:
- -> >
- -> > Ok, so I bought this 75 F250 with a swapped in 429 or 460;
- -> > I'll have to pull the pan and run the number on the crankshaft
- -> > to know for sure. But the heads are 429. Anyway the beast
- -> > has no want for power, will not tolerate less then 92 Octane.

First when comparing "Stock for Stock" engines, for "power", such as any
stock 400 to say the stock 385 series of still unknown displacement in my
new truck, there is no comparison! The 385 wins period. I never ever meant
to say otherwise.
But is it a fair comparison?
In my opinion: No.
For the sake of discussion I am going to say that the 385 in my truck is a
429 that it is a 1970-1971 and has an 11.0:1 CR and a factory 4BBL Carb.
This is what the heads are telling me at this time.
This engine in factory trim makes more then 2 times the power then any 400
was ever offered with from the factory. Even the highest compression 400 was
2 points lower, and never had a 4BBL.
So how can the comparison be made?
Use one of the late 70's 460's with the low compression, and; unstrangle the
400 by adding an aftermarket 4BBL manifold and Carb and now you have a horse
race. Or better yet, let me build a 11.0:1 CR, Big valve 4BBL, 411 CI, 335
series and see what happens.
So now we are talking modified engines.
(I have never owned a stock engine for long, SWMBO's Aerostar is stock but
IT AIN'T MINE!! and she would have it no other way!)

I can up to a point, coax exactly the same power out of the 400 as the 385.
When you reach some point, say 450 BHP; you reach a point of diminishing
return on investment. The problem with crossing the 450 number in the 400 is
that the block is simply not strong enough to live at a sustained 450 HP
output level long. The 385's have much more mass in the block and crank, due
to this will live longer at higher power outputs.
When comparing similar build ups: Carb, Manifold, Home Ported Heads,
Headers/Exhaust.
The 400 will by nature deliver a stronger punch in the bottom-end to mid
range then the 429, and easily match that of the 460. It can not be argued
that nothing beats cubic inches, except cubic dollars, and knowledge.
With a shorter stroke in both of the 385's they tend to rev higher and can
make big numbers at the higher revs.
Ok, I'll admit that I have had my eyes opened in the last 4 or 5 years as to
what 450 horses is in reality. And I contend that what most people think is
450 HP is really more like 275-300 HP!
Rice Boys are so confused as to be irreconcilable!
I'll go farther and make a flat statement: 85% of the numbers in the Mags
are PURE BULL!
Now this "prejudice" on my part makes me highly skeptical of the numbers
that are so easily bandied about when talking power.
Will a 460 CI engine make more power then a 400 CI engine?
Do Fords simply annihilate Chevys?
Of course they do!

So now it would appear that I have contradicted my position on the
335 -Vs-385 issue.
Here is the crux of my position.
I can not "ignore" the 160+ pound difference.
When coupled to the type of power delivered, and to the weight bias of the
"Toy" in question. The 400 is simply in my opinion the better choice!

When I build a serious Off Road Toy I have several criteria that I have
found to be inviolate.
The wheel base should be over 104 and under 120.
(Gives the best ride to wheeling capability)
It must be able to turn as tight as possible.
(1/2T Ford is the best here, often out turning a rig with a shorter WB)
Build as light weight as possible and center the mass if possible.
(Less "sinkage" and power to weight ratio, also climbs better)
The rig that fits the above is not the best "Bogger", or "Puller", but it is
a good wheeler!
Nothing above rules out the 385, except the weight, and as moderate builds
yield vary similar power, the weight simply can not be ignored
The key for me is this. To build a truly great O.R. Toy you must built a
system where all of the parts are in balance.
MEGA-POWER is in reality only necessary to sell magazines!
Oh-yes I hear you! and I too believe that "too much" is not enough!
As experience has dope-slapped me enough to get my attention the "too much"
does not apply to power, but to overall competency!
Why do the 66-77 Bronco, 6 CYL and a T-18, do so well? They are incredibly
balanced machines; the small block is great too. But when you get to the
351C well it takes a good driver to make it shine! Why? the Cleveland likes
to rev and unless your in the sand, or, desert that "like" is a detriment.
I do not wheel in the flatlands of the Midwest, or bottomless boggs of the
county of my origin in Louisiana. I play in terrain best described as the
"Deep and the Steep". Where is not uncommon to go from a Bogg that will
simply render a 44" tire ineffective to technical rock crawling coated with
wet slime! So while my friends that only bogg may need a "Built 460" I only
need a "Built 400".
My position has not changed.
For a Tow truck I choose the biggest engine that I can get.
For a Bogger I choose the biggest engine that I can get.
For a drag racer I choose the biggest engine that I can get.
For a serious Off Road Toy I choose the 400.....


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.