Notices
1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks 1987 - 1996 Ford F-150, F-250, F-350 and larger pickups - including the 1997 heavy-duty F250/F350+ trucks
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

351w EFI performance upgrades?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #16  
Old 12-26-2011, 09:23 AM
jk89cat's Avatar
jk89cat
jk89cat is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: vernon hills IL
Posts: 1,020
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
lets talk turkey, mine was a stock longblocked 351w, upgrades over the years, edelbrock efi intake, 1.7 rr, kn intake setup, and the bbk 61 dual t/b , each on their own accord made slight differances. we'll see how she is now. with gt40p heads, and a pretty stout comp cam and shorty headers and 24lb injectors. best bang for your buck will always be gears! as far as header clearance i am running the fms truck headers and heres the 2 i had issues with

Name:  Photo658.jpg
Views: 27061
Size:  33.0 KB

Name:  Photo660.jpg
Views: 26640
Size:  33.9 KB
 
The following users liked this post:
  #17  
Old 12-26-2011, 09:26 AM
'89F2urd's Avatar
'89F2urd
'89F2urd is online now
Lead Driver
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5,043
Received 122 Likes on 103 Posts
^^^ nice pics. thats basically what ive found, the shortys are a bit tough to get to work. one glance at the crazy shaped stock manifolds that ford used in the exploders lets ya know that the plug wires have a very small window through which to snipe the plug tips.
 
  #18  
Old 12-26-2011, 10:09 AM
Conanski's Avatar
Conanski
Conanski is offline
FTE Legend
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 30,925
Likes: 0
Received 963 Likes on 762 Posts
Originally Posted by '89F2urd
but someone who is just keeping factory e7 heads wouldnt notice a huge difference between 1.7 rockers and an aftermarket cam.
Depends what vintage engine you're working with, with a '94+ 5.0 or 5.8 I'd agree but with the earlier EFI motors there are big gains to be had with a cam alone.
 
  #19  
Old 12-26-2011, 11:36 AM
jk89cat's Avatar
jk89cat
jk89cat is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: vernon hills IL
Posts: 1,020
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
thanks 89f2urd!
 
  #20  
Old 12-27-2011, 03:50 AM
Jordanangel's Avatar
Jordanangel
Jordanangel is offline
Senior User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
all i know is that i've driven the mountaineer several times and got better then expected mileage out of it, it may not be 17 but still the fuel gauge doesn't drop rapidly like most trucks i've seen. i was thinking about roller cam cuz of the benefits i've been reading but wanted to hear hands on experiences
 
  #21  
Old 12-27-2011, 04:53 AM
lew52's Avatar
lew52
lew52 is offline
Postmaster
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 4,558
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by khadma
What is a good camshaft? Brand, grind profile, etc.
Say for a later 351.
I am thinking about an upgrade too.
....If your 351 is a 94+ model with a roller cam , the 302 HO cam works nice in the 351 , or something similar.....Lew
 
  #22  
Old 12-27-2011, 08:14 AM
Edgethis's Avatar
Edgethis
Edgethis is offline
Lead Driver
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tobyhanma, PA
Posts: 6,302
Received 373 Likes on 283 Posts
Holy crap Jk89CAT! That is a huge ding in your header for a spark-plug (top pic) Thats like halfway into the pipe.

I have also heard that longtubes are much easier to use with the GT40P heads.
 
  #23  
Old 12-27-2011, 08:37 AM
jk89cat's Avatar
jk89cat
jk89cat is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: vernon hills IL
Posts: 1,020
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Edgethis
Holy crap Jk89CAT! That is a huge ding in your header for a spark-plug (top pic) Thats like halfway into the pipe.

I have also heard that longtubes are much easier to use with the GT40P heads.
i know it. its actually deceiving looking its actually not that deep, may bout a 1/4 of the area into the pipe , its also by the collector , but yes it is quite dimpled. used a mack piston wrist pin and a torch and a bfh!
 
  #24  
Old 12-27-2011, 09:56 AM
UNTAMND's Avatar
UNTAMND
UNTAMND is offline
Logistics Pro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Lansdale, PA
Posts: 3,634
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
How much of a compression bump is it for the gt40p heads. About .5 maybe.
If I pull heads I'm definatly gonna do a cam swap. And it will be roller. It's cheap to do and cams aren't that much more for what you're getting.
Roller rockers and valve springs are also on list.
 
  #25  
Old 12-27-2011, 02:16 PM
'89F2urd's Avatar
'89F2urd
'89F2urd is online now
Lead Driver
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5,043
Received 122 Likes on 103 Posts
Originally Posted by UNTAMND
How much of a compression bump is it for the gt40p heads. About .5 maybe.
If I pull heads I'm definatly gonna do a cam swap. And it will be roller. It's cheap to do and cams aren't that much more for what you're getting.
Roller rockers and valve springs are also on list.
yea it puts a stock motor to ~9.4:1, and the gt40p's can be milled to put the motor well past 10:1 without milling so much that intake milling is required also. which means its a pretty cheap way to bump compression. . .75 bucks is about the average that a machine shop will charge to mill a set of small block heads.
 
  #26  
Old 12-28-2011, 12:02 PM
UNTAMND's Avatar
UNTAMND
UNTAMND is offline
Logistics Pro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Lansdale, PA
Posts: 3,634
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Hmm
I thought the 351 only had like mid to high 8 compression. I really only want low 9 so I can boost it without worry. If I had alum heads I wouldn't worry, but I don't really want to invest that kinda money.
Maybe I'll use a MLS head gasket to counteract some of the compression bump. Gotta think about this a little more. Or I'll just pop in a bigger set of valves into the stock heads and port them a little.
I just wanted a little gain until I got my blower intake built. But boost solves lots of inadequate flow issues. LoL
 
  #27  
Old 12-28-2011, 11:10 PM
Conanski's Avatar
Conanski
Conanski is offline
FTE Legend
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 30,925
Likes: 0
Received 963 Likes on 762 Posts
Originally Posted by UNTAMND
I thought the 351 only had like mid to high 8 compression.
These EFI motors have about 8.8:1 with the stock 64cc heads so the small 60-62cc GTP heads will only bump that to about 9.2:1.
 
  #28  
Old 12-29-2011, 02:06 AM
UNTAMND's Avatar
UNTAMND
UNTAMND is offline
Logistics Pro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Lansdale, PA
Posts: 3,634
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Perfect. We are on the same page then. I like that number for compression.
Good for na applications and ok for boosting still. I'm only expecting about 6-7 psi from the setup I'm putting together, but if it goes to 10 I'll have to figure out some more accurate tuning.

First though, is stainless longtubes, 2.5 mandrel bent stainless pipes into dual cats, into a magnaflow muffler and single 3" out the back with single side exit. I may even throw a resonator in there depending on loudness.
From there it will be valve springs and roller rockers and alum valve covers, with probably an intake spacer to clear the covers. (the gtp springs I have noticed are not ideal for 1.7 rockers and high revs)
Next will be mock up the blower intake. You guys will like how this goes, but it's a secret.
While blower intake is being milled and welded, gt40p heads will get worked on, and lower intake (spare) will be milled and ported to match the 5l truck upper intake (bigger ports like systemax intake)
I'm still driving the truck while this is being done. I believe that each step needs to. E tested and bugs worked out in between so you don't have all kinds of problems.
Then there will be a cam and head swap with the ported lower intake but stock 5l upper intake (no blower yet...sorry)
Once this whole combo is running mint, ill have the blower setup complete. Then it will be super fun.

I'm hoping most of this will work with speed density. I've done some radical things with the mustang sd setup. But if I have to swap to mass air, I'll do that at whichever step gives me drivability issues.

(yes I have a lot of spare parts laying around...don't you)
 
  #29  
Old 12-29-2011, 07:27 PM
'89F2urd's Avatar
'89F2urd
'89F2urd is online now
Lead Driver
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5,043
Received 122 Likes on 103 Posts
Originally Posted by UNTAMND
Hmm
I just wanted a little gain until I got my blower intake built. But boost solves lots of inadequate flow issues. LoL
you suggested in another post that you'll be porting the lower to accept the 5.0 upper. . .

the 351 lower needs a ton of grinding to match the gt40 ports, and to remove the choke points in the intake runners (there are giant protrusions just inside the runner if you look from the head side). then there's porting the sharp radius where the upper bolts in order to straighten them up a bit (not such a sharp bend at the bottom). THEN massive grinding is involved to match the 5.0 intake that really cant be perfectly matched for a number of reasons. the largest reason can be seen by placing the 5.0 upper gasket on the 351 lower, some of the "very slim" parts of the gasket dividing the runners protrude into the 351 ports (it would be best, if not required, to use the 351 gasket and trim it to the new shape(s) after porting). another big reason is the direction of the runners in the 351 base vs the 5.0 base, the 5.0 runners are more of a straight shot due to its slightly raised design vs the 351's pancake. ive contemplated doing all this grinding myself, and i still might. however, if i planned on changing it in the future, noway no how would i spend that amount of time at the grinder just to replace it down the road. its A LOT of grinding.

the low 9's in compression ratio is still plenty safe to run a substantial amount of boost, safely on pump gas. also, you should def use a good quality MLS if youre runnin boost (you dont need an MLS to decrease compression). cheap peace of mind as you'd be minimizing the risk of a blown HG so commonly associated with boosted app's.
 
  #30  
Old 12-29-2011, 09:46 PM
Boilertwinkie's Avatar
Boilertwinkie
Boilertwinkie is offline
New User
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by '89F2urd
contrary to the wildly popular belief, true duals are not ideal for your truck. they wont help your 302 at all over a free flowing y-pipe setup. stick to the y-pipe behind the long tubes (long tubes are the only way to go). its cheaper, easier, generates more torque, and is the only way to go in order to achieve max mileage. true duals are pointless for a daily driven truck.



youre not gonna get 17 mpg, and neither is he. 17mpg city with a 302 explorer is bogus, especially with no highway driving at all. hes getting 12-15 at best, and 15 is a long shot.

at any rate, you will squeeze an extra mpg or maybe 2 by givin the 302 some life. the compression bump of the gt40p's alone is worth a slight mileage increase.

the year of your truck (and possibly how much time/money youre willing to spend) determines what cam you can/should go with. roller cam would be the best hands down, but if you dont have a roller 302 already then you have to collect the lifter guides and the "lifter guide tree" out of a junkyard truck (the explorer that you acquire the gt40p's from would be a perfect donor candidate). roller cams are more expensive, but they last forever and create less heat, while freeing up a bit of hp especially in the upper rpm range.

15 mpg might be possible in a 2wd 5speed with all the right parts and a 80lb old foggie driving
 


Quick Reply: 351w EFI performance upgrades?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:10 PM.