Subject: perf-list-digest V2 #289
Precedence: bulk

perf-list-digest Tuesday, November 9 1999 Volume 02 : Number 289

Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Performance
Visit our web site:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
with the words "unsubscribe perf-list-digest" in the body of the
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 2500 RPM 60 mph all
> 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 0.05 is
> 216/228, max. lift is 0.484/0.512, lobe separation 112, adv. duration
> 272/284. Am I ok with this set up?

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

96 Mustang GT 5spd 4.6L
73ish 1/2ton 4x4 6.4L

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info


Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 19:22:25 -0600
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
> 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:
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info


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

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info


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

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.


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info


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!

10k tow hooks
40ch CB
Removed airbox
Light bar
Headlight Stone Guards
30x9.5 BFG A/T TA KOs

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info


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


End of perf-list-digest V2 #289

+--------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Performance ----------------+
| Send posts to, |
| List removal information is on the web site. |
+---------- Visit Our Web Site: ----------+ ENDTAG; } ?>