Tux: 428, Finally!
#1
Tux: 428, Finally!
hey guys, in a follow up to this thread: https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...akeover-6.html
My engine self destructed. Starting with the cam/lifters not breaking in properly. I used the poper lube, break in oil, etc, everything correct. Cam was sent back to Crane, they said it wasn't their doing. Well I had Rob at Blue Oval Performance in Denver rebuild it. From ground up:
428ci, fully balanced, Crane 344342 cam/lifters, 428CJ intake, polished C7 heads (for now $), high vol pump 80lb oil pressure cold(!), all oil mods and trade secrets done, ARP stuff, motorsport windage tray, Holley 670, headers, full exhaust. Here's some dyno footage from EPS in Evergreen, CO.
So, 428 was well worth the wait all these years. The torque is awesome!
TUX: My 428ci 5-speed 1967 F100 Custom Cab Shortbox Pickup - YouTube
My engine self destructed. Starting with the cam/lifters not breaking in properly. I used the poper lube, break in oil, etc, everything correct. Cam was sent back to Crane, they said it wasn't their doing. Well I had Rob at Blue Oval Performance in Denver rebuild it. From ground up:
428ci, fully balanced, Crane 344342 cam/lifters, 428CJ intake, polished C7 heads (for now $), high vol pump 80lb oil pressure cold(!), all oil mods and trade secrets done, ARP stuff, motorsport windage tray, Holley 670, headers, full exhaust. Here's some dyno footage from EPS in Evergreen, CO.
So, 428 was well worth the wait all these years. The torque is awesome!
TUX: My 428ci 5-speed 1967 F100 Custom Cab Shortbox Pickup - YouTube
#2
Nice
I think, if I were ever to do a "classic" engine rebuild again, I would opt for a roller setup. I've had a cam self-destruct before, on the first 390 I did, and if it was an option at that time, I probably would have gone for it. Well, it probably was an option 20 years ago, but my wallet couldn't take it
I think, if I were ever to do a "classic" engine rebuild again, I would opt for a roller setup. I've had a cam self-destruct before, on the first 390 I did, and if it was an option at that time, I probably would have gone for it. Well, it probably was an option 20 years ago, but my wallet couldn't take it
#3
#7
Trending Topics
#8
#9
#11
#13
Looks AND sounds great!!!
Ya, kinda burst my bubble when you just played with the throttle and didn't make any pulls!!!
I'd like to make a dyno run on my 428CJ motor to see what it actually makes. Nothing fancy, completely stock heads, mild cam, med riser 2x4 intake.
Here's some good noise for you................................
Mine at the dragstrip: 13.40 @ 96 mph
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/hKNw1Xr6HUo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Ya, kinda burst my bubble when you just played with the throttle and didn't make any pulls!!!
I'd like to make a dyno run on my 428CJ motor to see what it actually makes. Nothing fancy, completely stock heads, mild cam, med riser 2x4 intake.
Here's some good noise for you................................
Mine at the dragstrip: 13.40 @ 96 mph
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/hKNw1Xr6HUo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
#15
13.4 @ 96 comes out to around 350 hp, 290 rwhp if your truck weighs 4200 lbs....
ET Calculator
ET-MPH-HP Calculator
I'd bet more since you are also pushing a barn door down the track.
ET Calculator
ET-MPH-HP Calculator
I'd bet more since you are also pushing a barn door down the track.