I don't want to hijack. 2v headers sit lower than 4v headers, then right? Does Sanderson shorten the tubes on a 2v to compensate? Sandersons, for the most part, hug the block, don't they?, what tranny are you using? clearance issues there? Sorry, hijack over. I've been following this build for quite some time. I love it. To all the naysayers about the 351M/400 being a boat anchor, I love to prove them wrong. You guys are truly putting the 400 into greatness. Rock on.
I just checked the Sanderson website. They list the both the FC-2, and FC-3 headers for both the 2V and 4V heads on a 351C in a '53 and up F100. Mine are the FC-3s. They are all block huggers. I am using a C6. The right FC-3 header exits above the starter. Since I have a 400 block they are just exit a bit higher. I suppose by the same logic these headers on 2V heads will be a bit lower.
BTW they are 1 7/8" tubes.
I thought that there was some difference between the header bolt locations and the ports locations on the 2V and 4V heads. I know that CHI made the bolt locations compatible with most headers.
__________________
62 UNI Wide Window SWB 390 C6
66 F350 Flat Bed Hi Pro 427 4 speed
7 4X4 Rangers 84 - 89
55 Fairlaine Town sedan 272 Ford O Matic
Show all the luv ya can while ya can. Or one day ya may be alone Don't just Modify it Fordifiy it
2v-4v bolt pattern same,, only difference is the port size. 4v bigger hole.
OK, I'm confused. The bolt patern is the same. The 4V port is larger, and taller. The 4V headers will fit the 2V heads. It is CHI 3V heads where the ports and the bolt holes are raised, so that all headers fit.
If I was at the shop, I have some gaskets to compare. But I am pretty sure the 2V & 4V bolt pattern is the same. 4V is just bigger, but yet I think it is centered. The CHI 3V head require the 4V headers, just that the ports will be located in the upper part of the header. The 2V header covers the upper part of the CHI port. I can get some pictures of gaskets on the heads to see the difference.
It is CHI 3V heads where the ports and the bolt holes are raised, so that all headers fit.
makes sense to me...to clear the taller port of a 4v header, right? While at the same time 2v headers will still fit evenly on a chi 3v head. I'm actually guessing.
__________________
The going, the journey, should be the objective of a trip in a built old Ford, the destination always secondary.
The bolt patterns are the same. I have a set on my 400, sanderson sends what they refer to as an adapter plate for them to fit to 2V head port size. The adapter plate is nothing more then a copper gasket with the ports cut to fit the 2V head. Bolts right up, I love 'em. BTW I currently running a C-6 and a married transfer case.
We will see how the headers go Tim. I like the flow of the 1 3/4 in but I see what you are saying on normal driving. I still have lots of time before I need to make that decision.
__________________
434 cu in Stroker build in progress!!
I've been wondering about some of the parts that interchange. If the rollmaster timing set up fits the smaller diameter 351W snout, can I assume a different set is required for the 335 series cranks? How about the H-balancer? Is it a W or C part?
I know reduced base circle cams for 335 series are the most common from manufactures, How are you able to use a standard HR cam in a 400 using OEM lifters? Is it an M-block vs Cleveland thing?
The reason I mentioned the wide LSA is because I have an article in my Files section that showed changing only the separation angle from 108 to 112 netted a peak 24HP increase on dyno. I wonder if this would be consistent with a desktop dyno program.
What was the reasoning behind the 224/244 split in duration? I can't say I've seen another cam with such a large difference.
Was there any indication as to why the head gasket blew?
When comparing header primary diameters I've always gone by OD. To avoid confusion, which is correct?
I was under the impression the Sanderson headers were 1-7/8.
What carburetors were tested other than the 775 Demon?
Are the 3V CHIs 218s the same heads used on the 360 Boss and the 434 Pantera engines dynoed earlier this year?
25-26 ign. doesn't seem like much. Does this indicate an efficient chamber design or could it mean the dynamic compression is too high? I wonder what retarding the cam 4-6 degrees would have done to raise the RPM peaks. My guess would be 300-450.
Take you time answering, I'm not going anywhere.
__________________
<!-- No promotion in sigs please. -->
[quote=Brian S]
The reason I mentioned the wide LSA is because I have an article in my Files section that showed changing only the separation angle from 108 to 112 netted a peak 24HP increase on dyno. I wonder if this would be consistent with a desktop dyno program.
Increasing the separation angle from 112 to 114 reduces the overlap and increases the torque at low RPM, there is a small loss of peak HP.
What was the reasoning behind the 224/244 split in duration? I can't say I've seen another cam with such a large difference.
This was a result of simulation. I ran iteration testing to select maximum area under the torque curve, keeping the peak power in the same RPM range. The results produced a cam with lobes similar to what I have, but the LSA was 117.5 degrees. I found that I was not able to get this cam at a reasonable cost, because it would have to be ground from a billet and heat treated. I was able to get close to the desired lobes at a 114 LSA from Comp Cams.
Was there any indication as to why the head gasket blew?
The answer that I got was that it was too lean. It must have occurred during the EFI tuning.
When comparing header primary diameters I've always gone by OD. To avoid confusion, which is correct?
I was under the impression the Sanderson headers were 1-7/8.
Sanderson's spec is 1 7/8" tube, I wll check to see if that is OD or ID.
25-26 ign. doesn't seem like much. Does this indicate an efficient chamber design or could it mean the dynamic compression is too high? I wonder what retarding the cam 4-6 degrees would have done to raise the RPM peaks. My guess would be 300-450.
The CHI heads are very efficient chamber design. The dynamic CR is quite high at 8.48:1, but this should be OK for alloy heads.
The simulator indicates that retarding the cam 4 degrees raises the RPM peaks a few hundred RPM. However the sim also indicates higher peak HP at a higher RPM than we are getting. There appears to be a small discrepancy in the torque figures between simulation and measured. There also appears to be another discrepancy in the RPM between sim and measured. These discrepancies compound in the HP calculation.
QUOTE]
[quote=Brian S]I've been wondering about some of the parts that interchange. If the rollmaster timing set up fits the smaller diameter 351W snout, can I assume a different set is required for the 335 series cranks? If you use a 335 series crank, then the typical Cleveland chain will work.
How about the H-balancer? Is it a W or C part? Since this was a Windsor crank, it was also a Windsor balancer, if you use a Cleveland crank, then the Cleveland balancer will work. That was one of the issues I noticed in the "Hot Rod" magazine article, they offset ground a 400 crankshaft, but used a 302 balancer. This should not fit naturally, extra machining or somthing.
I know reduced base circle cams for 335 series are the most common from manufactures, How are you able to use a standard HR cam in a 400 using OEM lifters? Is it an M-block vs Cleveland thing?
Tall block
Are the 3V CHIs 218s the same heads used on the 360 Boss and the 434 Pantera engines dynoed earlier this year?
The 360 Boss was a 218-3V, if I remember the Pantera was also a 218-3V.
We currently have a 351C on the dyno, we were given a warning from the local police about not having the mufflers on.
So we installed the mufflers, a pair of 5" mufflers from a semi.
On this 366 HP engine we lost 13 HP, and 20 torque.
Now Dan's 434 was run with mufflers on the whole time, how much increase is there without???
I would have never thought there was that much back pressure.
The sim indicates 27 HP difference between large tube headers with mufflers and without on my 434.
One area that we didn't look at on my motor is head flow. My simulations use the CHI published data. If the head flow is not as good as published, there could be some loss across the RPM band.
the length and diameter of exhaust tubing plays a big role too, the more volume the system can hold, the longer the engine can rev with less backpressure before the pipes fill with smoke and limit the engine.
Somehow I missed the intake manifol type/manufacturer. Looks like a single plane. Does the engine make enough torque down low to work on a street truck auto with say a 2300rpm stall?
__________________
Bear Tracks
1977 F-100 Ranger XLT,400,C6,GV
Mod's Listed in Gallery
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. FordŽ is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.
