About two weeks ago I made the plunge and ordered the full long block w/efi from clifford performance. I am really excited about it, and just wanted to share with all you six guys, see what your reactions/comments would be. has any one here ever had experience with a motor built by clifford?

 

Do you have a link to the long block you ordered?

Thanks

 

I wish ya luck......your probably gonna get the usual hail storm of comments about how clifford sucks.

However, I have not had a bad experience, yet.

Good luck


This is about all the info the clifford site provides.

*We now offer a Blueprinted Long Block, complete with Fuel Injection for $5,800.00 +
shipping. It is a truly balanced Engine overbore to .060, using higher compression pistons, chrome rings and cam of choice. Your cylinder head is benched and built only the way Clifford knows how. It will create 70% more power and torque than your stock head and will make you very happy.
Your stock engine is creating around 110 HP and 160 ft lbs of torque.
Our Blueprinted Long Block, carbureted will create 210 HP & 360 ft-lbs of torque at 3300 rpms
Fuel Injected Long Block will create 325 HP at the flywheel and up to 450 ft lbs of torque at 3300 rpms.

 

Thanks for the info.

 

Congrats on your crate engine.

I think you'll wind up happy with your purchase.

What cam did you choose?

 

Don't believe what they say about the fuel injected long block. There's no way you're gonna get 450 lb/ft at 3300 rpm out of their motor, fuel injected or not. Period.

Please look at the numbers for the carbed version as being much more realistic. Your fuel injected motor will be making power numbers much closer to the carbed claims than their fuel injected "325 HP, 450 at 3300" fantasy. A 309 cubic inch NA motor ain't gonna make 450 lb. ft. at only 3300 rpm. No way. Please reference the post about this at fordsix.com for specific comments on the likelihood of the Clifford product producing the power they say it will. The consensus is the Clifford claims for the EFI engine are greatly exaggerated.

The link:
http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=26086

Incidentally, the stock EFI Ford six makes 145-150 Hp and 260-265 lb. ft, not 160 lb. ft.

For whatever it's worth, you could have built a motor of comparable power, using parts equivalent or better than Clifford makes, for about half the cost.

 

You'd agree col. flashmans build up is pretty accurate, his tq peaked at 3200 rpm...400tq.

Now why wouldn't and engine that were running a camshaft with more lift and degreed just so, be capable of gaining another 50 lbft via efi, which is known to be more efficient, which usually translates to more torque?

Since we are speculating, would it be a fair assumption, that whoever is doing the machine work on the ford head for clifford, has probably done it for years and knows what and how vs a shop that does general engine builds of all makes and models?

 

FWIW, there was a fella running the 270H camshaft, ported head, larger injectors, otherwise stock untuned efi 4.9, he managed 365tq at the rear wheels@ 2100 rpm so you believe whom you want...his username was Traildawg.

 

Because it's unlikely that the air/fuel needed for 450 lb/ft is going to come at that rpm, given the level of porting needed to make the air restricted head of the 300 breathe better and generate somewhat higher torque numbers. Increase the flow capability, and the rpm at which peak torque occurs HAS to move higher in the rev range. This same porting/breathing enhancement kills low speed torque. Add a cam that peaks higher, and your maximum torque rpm also must peak higher. Remember that we are also working with limited displacement here.

Both the Ford 7.3 and Cummins 5.9 diesels, when first introduced, were around the 420-450 lb. ft region. These motors have much higher compression, much larger displacement, and a turbo. Yet, somehow, a smaller motor which lacks these torque boosting features will outperform/outtorque them? Not likely. The NA 300 has hit a displacement/breathing wall, and I believe it is considerably below the "450 lb ft at 3300" claim by Clifford.

Unless Clifford can show certified dyno testing of their motors, I remain an extreme skeptic. I don't think they're going to provide anything but sales gimmick advertising to back up their claims. As stated, there's nothing an EFI system is gonna do to raise peak torque numbers 90 lb/ft over the carbureted version. That level of increase can't be had. Reread the listed post; the fordsix.com site raises some questions about the claims that Clifford did not answer or avoided with careful word selection.

Ask Clifford for certified, verifiable dyno results before you buy. That will resolve the issue. You ought to be able to obtain such information before laying out 5800.00 for a motor that may produce nowhere near that level of low speed performance.

Funny that I hear all this talk about 400-450 lb. ft. 300's at low rpm yet a dyno sheet is nowhere to be found.

 

I am not able to give definitive proof about the capabilities of a 300 and its potential. However, I have discussed the issue with engine builders and they seem to think it is quite posssible to get 400 ft pnds and 300 hp.
Keep in mind that Clifford also changes their exhaust and intakes. Consider that stock motors produce close to 300 ft pnds of torque. 400 ft lbs is not a very far leap. Also consider that comparable to v8's the rpm range is low.

 

I think we agree here, just not on the details.


Is your argument, it can make 450 tq below 3300 rpm, just not at or above?


The example I provided and cliffords "combo", have a few different variables: Compression, intake flow and port work, all in favor of the clifford setup. Do you feel its possible, 50 extra torque could be found by a properly tuned engine, improved intake, added compression and potentially improved port work? I do.




One problem with that, it never was determined if the efi was the only thing changed, as in nothing internal. It only states there are two variations, one carbed and one efi. I don't think 90tq would be gained by a simple efi bolt on. Thats why I think a proven third party 400 tq efi setup claim vs clifford efi claims, heck, another third party entry, col flashman got 400tq with a carb...kinda convincing when you put the possibilities together, if you ask me.

 

My belief is that while 450 lb-ft may be possible, it is not gonna occur at 3300 rpm. Only with a serious breathing head and high airflow will this occur, at at 3300 there just isn't the air moving through the motor to generate these kind of numbers. At that rpm, we're producing around 290 HP (assuming 450 lb. ft), which is double what the stock EFI gets at 3500 rpm, the horsepower peak rpm for the unmodified motor.

Yeah, put in SBC valves and P&P the head and airflow increases greatly, but we're still feeding 309 cubic inches of displacement with only 6 intake valves. The motor's gotta rev to make the 450 lb ft claimed. I could see maybe 450 lb. ft at, say, 4300-4500+ a lot more easily than I could at 3300. Then you've got the air moving through the motor, and are revving it at a speed that the P&P will really benefit the torque numbers.

To make the motor produce that kind of torque, you're gonna have to abandon the stipulation that it produces low rpm torque and turn in into a pseudo-V8. Limited displacement only produces limited torque at low rpm.
If more is needed, I believe you'll have to increase displacement or go to some kind of forced induction.

I'll lay odds that if the motor is dynoed it'll produce more like 360-380 at 3300. Keep in mind that's equivalent torque to a 3 valve 5.4 engine out of a 2006 Ford F150. With less displacement and inferior breathing to the 3 valve V8. At less rpm. I think that's enough credit for the Clifford rebuild. Attributing any more to it than that is getting a little ridiculous.

 

Not sure the 300 head is incapable, one fella opened it up so much, he said it looked as if he could literally stick the intake port, of the aftermarket intake, insde the heads intake port.


I am not really impressed by the 3300 peak rpm claim, what I am impressed by, is what others are getting from their 300's with slightly less, if the clifford "crate engine" consists of what they claim it does, then it should be everything a 300 enthusiast could want and then some. Lets say it will peak at 2000 rpm making 450 tq, dunno about you but I would still be impressed.

 

If it could produce 450 lb. ft. at 2000 rpm I would be looking at the world's best towing gasser 300.

In reality it would take at least a 450-500 cubic inch motor to do that.

I haul stuff with my 300, and I'm looking for as much low speed torque as possible for what I do. Even a 3300 rpm torque peak seems kinda high, but if such a motor produced more torque at off idle speeds than a mild one with a lower torque peak it would be the way to go (if such is even possible). Since I have a stick shift, a low, LOW torque peak is desirable for me, the lower the better, and the more torque at low rpm's the better.

That's where my interests lie, which is why I asked Col. Flashman if he could show us a dyno chart of the output of his motor. I'm trying to evaluate the utility of a buildup like that for an everyday hauler truck.

 

Appears we just can't agree then, I made reference to a 300 ci engine, using a stock tune efi eec making 400 ftlbs @ 2100 rpm...unless you feel a stock tune is optimal here? Also considering its a 270H cam, there is plenty room to go up or down with the duration/lift and make more or less hp/tq.....


FWIW...the link you posted, the general conversation doesn't say 450tq is NOT possible, it just states NOT LIKELY at 3300rpm.