|
|
From: owner-perf-list-digest
To: perf-list-digest Subject: perf-list-digest V2 #289 Reply-To: perf-list Sender: owner-perf-list-digest Errors-To: owner-perf-list-digest Precedence: bulk perf-list-digest Tuesday, November 9 1999 Volume 02 : Number 289 ======================================================================= 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 - Windsor SR Heads and Cam Seletion FTE Perf - Re: Oil pan swap ? FTE Perf - ADMIN: (more) New feature for users FTE Perf - Obsolescence of petrolium fueled internal combustion engines FTE Perf - BII Tranny FTE Perf - 351 Crank ======================================================================= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 09:15:00 -0600 From: "William S. Hart" Subject: RE: FTE Perf - Windsor SR Heads and Cam Seletion > Truck is a 2WD, short box, show truck/toy, weighs 3300 lbs, that sees > 3000 miles /year. Drivability - I want to cruise > day long, smoke the tires at the lights, and do some very light utility > trailer pulling from time to time. Wish to have power and torque down in > the lower/mid range. > > Currently I have a set of new 2.02/1.60 aluminium World Products Windsor > SR heads. The heads came assembled, with the 1.25" dia springs (100 > lbs), and the castings appear a little rough in the chamber, so I was > going to clean them up. Am thinking of new Edbk RPM Performer, Crane > energizer roller rockers (1.6), chrome moly pushrods, etc. > > My question is, I have selected a Crane Powermax cam, H-272-2, which is > a hydraulic, dual pattern cam with specs as follows: duration > 216/228, max. lift is 0.484/0.512, lobe separation > > That looks close to the one I put in my 390, and it is a great cam ... I don't know how it will work in the smaller motor, but I wouldn't be surprised to find it worked well ... your truck is a bit lighter than mine, not to mention a lot nicer heads, so smoking the tires shouldn't really be a problem (manual or auto?) I've got some 30x9.5 BFG's that I can spin (can't smoke) off the line with my auto, but that's a 4x4 and a lot of other neat stuff that makes it weigh more (like an FE instead of a W) > Would also like feedback on if this cam will cause piston interference > (stock 351W replacements), do I need to notch them, and finally, do I > need head studs for this application. > dunno, you'll have to check them. Just my $.02 wish 96 Mustang GT 5spd 4.6L 73ish 1/2ton 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 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 19:22:25 -0600 From: galaxie63 Subject: FTE Perf - Re: Oil pan swap ? > Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 >Subject: Interchanging 302 and 351W pans > What is the real differences between a 302 and 351W pan that stops them from > being interchanged with each other? > Jim Kelly ===================================================== Jim- the main caps are a lot bigger on the 351, so the ends of the pan that go over the cap are too big. You'll need a 351W pan unless you want to do a little fab work. Phil ___________________________________________________________________ Get the Internet just the way you want it. Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! Try Juno Web: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 20:41:43 -0500 From: Ken Payne Subject: FTE Perf - ADMIN: (more) New feature for users Just a word of caution on the top sites feature, all IP addresses are logged. Double votes will be removed weekly to foil cheaters. Ken Payne Admin == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 21:11:13 -0500 From: "Steve Midlik" Subject: FTE Perf - Obsolescence of petrolium fueled internal combustion engines Ever since Nicola Tesla demonstrated his remote controlled submarine vechile in Madison Square Garden and secretly perfected his Magnifing Transmitter the petrolium fueled internal combustion engine has been obsolete. Actually for over nintey years the WHEEL has really over stayed it's welcome. Sutable for non-powered friction reduction only. The electrohydrodynamic flying machine silenty negates gravity, and to top it all off the coils are of such immense power that they can refract sonar, radar, and light so the unit is cloaked ! For years after Tesla's secrets and lab work were dechyphered Flying Saucers were seen. But it's our ship they see not that of an alien race. I fully enjoy my FORD truck even if it's obsolete right down to wheels rolling on asphault. If it were coils levitating effortlessly fifteen feet above a grassy course I would still think my FORD electrodynamic wonderful. It would just be harder to work on. EngineSmith == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 22:05:40 -0500 From: J Cope Subject: FTE Perf - BII Tranny Hey all. The tranny in my '88 BII died this week. I'm eventually going to put a 302 in it, but I can't find a conversion kit that keeps the AO4LD tranny (that's what's in there now). I was looking on the Advance Adapters webpage and they recommend the C4 or C5 transmission when putting a 5.0 in a BII. I was wondering if the C4 or C5 transmissions work with the 2.9, as I'm not quite ready to do the swap. Any input is appreciated! Thanks! JC '88 BII XLT 10k tow hooks 40ch CB Removed airbox K&N Light bar Headlight Stone Guards 30x9.5 BFG A/T TA KOs http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://88biixlt.web.com/ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 02:16:04 -0600 From: Ezekial Subject: FTE Perf - 351 Crank I need to know this quickly so I will not send the block off to the machine shop if this won't work. I have a 79 351w block and I want to install my 93 351w crank. Everything looks pretty much the same except the rear is slightly different. The rear main seal is also totally different. I need to know if this crank will work fine in the older block using the older style rear main. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ End of perf-list-digest V2 #289 *******************************.... 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.
|