This is my first post -- searched for previous posts on my subjects, but couldn't find some issues. I ruined the 400 in my 78 Bronco, and am starting to have a 400 built to replace it. I am building to a static CR of approx 9.5. I bought a set of Aussie 64cc 2v heads, and will change over the Carter AFB (I think this flows 625 or 650 cfm), Edelbrock intake, Ford Total Performance roller rockers, Hooker headers to 3" duals with cat converters, Flowmasters, MSD 6, stock Duraspark distributor. The truck has 34inch tires, a 4.11 rear end, 4WD. It is used mostly on the street, some trips in Baja and the Calif desert. Trans is stock C6. Can anyone answer these questions:

1. I bought a Comp 284 roller cam kit. This grind was recommended by tech support at both Comp and Crane, but I found no comments in the forum on a cam this large. Is it too big? Am I sacrificing too much torque? I'm looking for good low end, decent performance for freeways, and a good, lopey sound. I tow a light trailer carrying dirt bikes or a small (VW) dune buggy sometimes. I will be using 91 octane gasoline.

2. Will this combination degrade NOx emissions significantly? I imagine that the cam will reduce the dynamic CR significantly from the static value of 9.5.

3. Is there any difference in geometry between the Federal Mogul Speed Pro No. 2414 forged pistons and the TMI Hypereutectic step-dish pistons? Any drawbacks to using the Speed Pro pistons?

Any help will be appreciated.

 

Welcome to FTE!
I don't post much anymore, but your thread caught my eye.
It sounds like you have a pretty stout build underway, but the cam sounds way out of line for your intentions.

1. That cam would bleed off a significant amount of compression, possibly leaving you with less low end torque than stock. I can't imagine that cam doing much below 3500 rpms. That's not what you want with bigger tires. Sounds like a mud bog cam, where sustained high rpms are preferred.

2. I can't answer the emissions part.

3. Tim from TMI will probably be along eventually to answer this one, but if not, give him a call. He's very helpful over the phone. He is super knowledgeable with the 400 Ford. Just ask Danlee and a few others who have dealt with TMI extensively.

Anyway, good luck with your build, and I hope this helps.

 

first of all CR should be chosen acording tocam selection and octane selection but ofcorse also to engine functionality, that cam is way too huge for your engine and i would recomnd 10.5:1 scr for some torque to occur around 2500rpm, yes TMI pistons are a better choice due to 0 deck height(helping in detonation prob). the best choice for your build would be an rv cam like the comp cam extreme energy xe262h or xe256h and some forged TMi pistons with around 24cc of costum dishmade to get around 7.9:1 dcr (with xe262h) to use with 91 cotane. With 9.5:1 that 284h camshaft you will be getting ****ty power and a low running dcr, you will also be having to run your engine between 4k and 6k to get some of your engine....that cam will do better with bigger port heads and for drag....

 

I agree with what everyone else is telling you about the DCR being too low with that cam and only 9.5;1 static.

I believe that the Speed-Pro pistons are 'down the hole' and you will sacrifice quench with those pistons.

I run a 274/299 Custom HR cam with 10.8:1 static. I have aluminum heads. I have run the equivalent of a HR284 with about 10.2:1 static. I burn 92 or 93 Octane.

I had a Crane H278-2 in my 400 with 4V closed chamber heads. when I was in CA, and I ran that on 91 Octane. That was about 10.2:1 static, but I had iron heads and no quench. That would start to detonate, if the engine got too warm in traffic.
I have a 3.25:1 rear ratio and 28" tires, so I don't need as much low end, but my dynamic is about 8.5:1.

You should consider different pistons, with zero deck and a little more static CR, but with 91 Octane and iron heads, I wouldn't go over 8.0:1 DCR. The HR284 will probably come right in at 8.0:1 DCR with Tim's pistons. I like a split duration cam, though.

As far as NOx goes, I can't help you, but NOx probably goes up with the dynamic CR.

 

danlee:
I won't have iron heads; I actually have a set of Aussie 2v 64cc heads that I will install on the engine. How does this affect your last statement regarding static and dynamic CRs with 91 octane gas and Tim's pistons? Based on all the advice, I'm considering using a 278 or 262 cam instead of the 284 to prevent sacrificing low end.

 

Aussie 2V heads are closed chamber Iron heads, unless you are talking about aftermarket heads like CHI or AFD aluminum heads. The Aussie iron heads have 58 or 60cc chambers, while the aftermarket heads have 64cc chambers.

Are the heads aluminum?

 

Sorry -- guess I was misusing the term. I have a set of ASD 64cc aluminum 2 valve aftermarket heads. Thanks for the correction.

 

Tim's 30cc step dish pistons will give you 9.5:1 with a 60cc heads. That drops to 9.1:1 with 64cc heads.

With 64cc heads, 0.041" gasket thickness, a 30cc step dish piston, and +0.030" bore, a HR284 will give you a DCR of 7.25:1.

A 275DEH will give you 7.38:1.
A 265DEH will give you 7.64:1.
A XE262 will give you 7.72:1.
A XE256 will give you 7.86:1.
A 255DEH will give you 7.89:1.

With Aluminum heads you should be able to go as high as 8.2:1 and run on 91 Octane. I can run on 92 with CHI heads with fast burn chambers. I don't know if AFD heads have similar chamber design. My DCR is about 8.5:1.

You might think about Tim's 14cc step dish pistons with the HR284 cam. That will give you 10.6:1 Static CR, and 8.4:1 DCR. A little thicker head gasket will get it down to about 8.3:1 DCR. This combo may be OK with 91 Octane. I ran 8.2:1 DCR with iron heads on 91 Octane.

I don't know how much DCR you can have and pass an NOx test. My truck is exempt from emissions testing.

 

Adding a hydrogen booster will ged rid of emissions, but in many cases, will get rid of too much emissions and cause the sniffer to think the exhaust pipe is broken off somewhere! lol

 

Is this something to add to the tank of fuel like octane boost? And will it effect the performance or life of the engine?

TIA, Rick.

 

A hydroxy booster is basically a bucket of water with variations of steel plates in it, a positive wire from the battery to one end, ground to the other. There will be bubbles made when it is running, which is hydrogen and oxygen that have separated from their H2O configuration from the electricity passing through. So now you have HHO. This is in gas form, so it is collected by a rubber line and carried to the engine intake, where it is burned with your gas and air. It uses around 30 amps of power, but with another device, will draw much less power with same HHO production. The engine will burn very clean, as hydrogen burns at 1100 degrees, while gas burns much lower, so the extra heat will completely burn the gasoline instead of coming out the tailpipe as wasted materials (emissions). Efficiency goes up, power goes up, gasoline requirements go down. Win/win, if you ask me!
I like this site and their system. It will tell you more. Protium Fuel Systems Research & Development

 

Trinogt, are you planning on using this? how do you know its not a flawed system¿

 

NOx is formed when the cumbustion gets too hot and the nitrogen in the air combines with oxygen. Devices that reduce NOx cool the cumbustion temps. One of these is the EGR valve. Another is water injection.

 

When a fuel burns it releases stored energy. That energy performs work, which is the power to turn the wheels of our vehicles and drive the accessories, including the alternator. The alternator converts that power into electrical energy.
If we use the electrical energy from the alternator to produce Hydrogen, we are creating a fuel with stored energy. When we burn that fuel we release that stored energy, but it is only the energy that our alternator produced, that came from the work done by our engine. In fact there are energy losses in our engine, so we lose some of the energy from our fuel.

This Hydrogen Generator looks like and smells like 'Snake Oil'.

A true Hydrogen fuel would be made by using a Nuclear reactor to produce the energy to seperate water into Hydrogen and Oxygen. Then delivering the Hydrogen in high pressure cylinders to refueling stations.

If Hydrogen does burn as hot as indicated above, it will also produce NOx as the Nitrogen in the air oxidizes during the combustion process.

 

Well, when I get my system installed and working, I will post back here if anyone is interested. If it is all bunk, I will post that too, as I send the unit back under the money back guarantee of 20% economy increase or better.
Sound fair? You guys will lose nothing, and we will all learn something. Now, I'm sure there will still be those who don't believe what I say if I report it actually works. Nothing I can do about that. If my integrity on this forum isn't enough, I'm sorry.