New Dart SHP 427w build - Page 3 - Ford Muscle Forums : Ford Muscle Cars Tech Forum

dennis111 · 12-28-2012, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlFairlane

Dennis, the cam you will be running, will it be a standard base circle cam or a small base circle one?

Definitely a standard base circle cam using link bar lifters. There will be no issues with a 4" stroke.

FlFairlane · 12-28-2012, 07:18 PM

Thanks for your replies and info Dennis and Mike. It's much appreciated. As I said earlier, it's a street motor, not race, and the cam is not all that radical with .600 lift and 300 duration. The short block was assembled by the engine builder and the cam degreed in. So, I'm not all that keen on having to remove the cam to change it. I do want to pull the pan back off to install an extra capacity one, so maybe I'll try and see what kind of clearances I have around the cam if I can.
I will be using link bar lifters also. Was not sure about what brand to buy, but seeing that you are going to use the Morel ones, I probably will go with them also. Would they be ok to run on the street?

dennis111 · 12-29-2012, 04:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlFairlane

Thanks for your replies and info Dennis and Mike. It's much appreciated. As I said earlier, it's a street motor, not race, and the cam is not all that radical with .600 lift and 300 duration. The short block was assembled by the engine builder and the cam degreed in. So, I'm not all that keen on having to remove the cam to change it. I do want to pull the pan back off to install an extra capacity one, so maybe I'll try and see what kind of clearances I have around the cam if I can.
I will be using link bar lifters also. Was not sure about what brand to buy, but seeing that you are going to use the Morel ones, I probably will go with them also. Would they be ok to run on the street?

The Moral lift bar lifters will be fine on the street and at the track if you keep it under 7K. There are higher RPM versions, but they are more for full race and I do not know of their streetability. I would prefer the link bars over the dog bone for reliabilities sake in a built performance engine.

My concerns would be if they Morals (or any brand lift bar lifter) are tall enough to clear the lifter towers of the roller block with the reduced cam circle and there is a sufficient oil band. I can point you to someone who should know as designing custom camshafts and selecting a matching valve train is one of his businesses AND he sells the Morals: Email Ed with a brief summary of the problem: info@flowtechinduction.com and he will probably offer a good recommendation in a few days (weekends and holidays excluded of course.)

In the mean time I would ask the short block builder his thoughts and why a reduced base circle cam was used and if it is truly needed for clearance. Also it would be good to know what goals he was trying to fulfill when the cam was ordered. This could open up you options or eliminate them without the guess work or spending lots of money trying to piece something together. I agree in general that a set of lifters or modifying what you have may be the best alternative to help you progress as long as the current cam meets your expectations.

BTW, Replacing the oil pan may open up another can of worms as most aftermarket pans are not built with enormous strokers in mind. I use a common Canton 6 quart road race pan and it fits great with the 4" crank. It also fits great in the Mustang too. I am not familiar with what oil pans that might work in your case.

FlFairlane · 12-29-2012, 12:40 PM

Thanks again for your info and help Dennis. Not sure if I mentioned it before, but I'm new to fords and learning a lot as I'm going, weather I want to or not! I will be going with the Morel lifters if all goes well with the fitment. I did get a set of the Comp solid roller lifters and link bar along the way, and with that assembly in the block, and the cam on it's base circle, I have .017 clearance between the link bar and lifter deck on the block. So if the Morel lifters are similar they should fit. I'll be sure and try and get a dimension from the roller bottom to the bottom of the link bar. I'll need to be sure the oil hole falls within the lifter bore also. The cam choice was from the techs at Comp Cams. I told them the combination I was putting together, and they did the cam choice. The specs on the callout were in the ball park of what I wanted for a street cam so I thougt it was ok. Given the bore and stroke of the motor, I guess they figured I needed a small base circle cam. I have to confess ignorance in that area, as I had no previous experience with small/standard cam cores. Keep in mind that this will be a street motor, and should not see more than 6500 rpm that often. I do want something that will live with normal driving to car shows, and trips to the strip now and then. At this point I would really perfer not to have to remove the cam and try something that may or may not fit. I will write to Ed and get his opinion on my issues, and if his price is reasonable on the lifters, order them from him.
The oil pan is a front sump type in the 64 fairlanes, and there is not a whole lot of room between the motor mounts, so using a "t" or wing type is pretty much out of the question, at least not a large one. I have a new stock one bolted up on the motor now, and everything clears with no problems. I measured the lowest point on the rotating assy and the pan depth before I installed it.
Whose pushrods will you be using in your motor? The reason I ask is that my nievete bit me in the ass again earlier, and I got a "great deal" a pair of ported Ford MotorSports Z304 heads for the motor, but did not realize at the time that they were the earlier castings with the wierd valve train geometry. If you use the normal in line rocker arms as called out, the intake rockers end up angled to the valve head. The later D castings use the offset rocker arms to help the issue, but cannot be used on the earlier heads (don't ask how I know). I found a great article by Jim Miller on rocker/valve train geometry, and realized how screwed up things were. I am dealing with Harland Sharp presently having a custom set of rocker arms made to get things more in line. So......that is why I ask who's pushrods you are using, as the intake pushrod will still be angled going up to the rocker arm. From what I gather, I should be using the stoutest 5/16 rod I can find for that. Trend makes one that has .105 wall thickness, so I'm leaning toward them.
Again, can't thank you guys enough for providing info and guidance to a ford novice.

dennis111 · 12-29-2012, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlFairlane

I did get a set of the Comp solid roller lifters and link bar along the way, and with that assembly in the block, and the cam on it's base circle, I have .017 clearance between the link bar and lifter deck on the block.

Most things that move in a motor should have .050 min clearance to other parts. Not sure if that applies to the link bars, but it might too.

Quote:

The cam choice was from the techs at Comp Cams. I told them the combination I was putting together, and they did the cam choice. The specs on the callout were in the ball park of what I wanted for a street cam so I thougt it was ok. Given the bore and stroke of the motor, I guess they figured I needed a small base circle cam.

Most telephone techs at Comp (and many other places) have little hands-on experience in the products that they sell-especially when it comes to non-chevy stuff. Still, with that stroke, they may have been right in their selection of a reduced base cam core.

Quote:

Keep in mind that this will be a street motor, and should not see more than 6500 rpm that often. I do want something that will live with normal driving to car shows, and trips to the strip now and then. At this point I would really perfer not to have to remove the cam and try something that may or may not fit.

With those RPM's you should be OK using the reduced circle core.

Quote:

The oil pan is a front sump type in the 64 fairlanes, and there is not a whole lot of room between the motor mounts, so using a "t" or wing type is pretty much out of the question, at least not a large one. I have a new stock one bolted up on the motor now, and everything clears with no problems. I measured the lowest point on the rotating assy and the pan depth before I installed it.

My 65' Mustang uses a similar front sump setup and it even has the same 3pc style motor mounts as found in the Fairlane. I would almost bet that the Canton T would fit good too.

Yeah, it was later painted black.

Quote:

So......that is why I ask who's pushrods you are using, as the intake pushrod will still be angled going up to the rocker arm. From what I gather, I should be using the stoutest 5/16 rod I can find for that. Trend makes one that has .105 wall thickness, so I'm leaning toward them.

Ed also sells thick wall pushrods- 5/16" diameter and .116 walls. About $190 a set in what ever length needed. What was the price of the Trends?

Ed's website is FlowTech Induction

Ed does know the valvetrains of Fords motors very well.

hepcat69 · 12-30-2012, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dennis111

dennis, what kind of starter are you running? I have heard of people running a mid 90's model Ford 3.0 or 4.0 v6 starter as a lightweight replacement for the much heavier factory V8 starters. Is that what yours is?

dennis111 · 12-31-2012, 03:36 AM

That was a aftermarket Powermaster which was advertised to be correct for 164 tooth manual flywheel. At first it seemed OK, but it was only engaging half the depth of the flywheel gear teeth and after using it for a few months it couldn't touch enough to spin-just grind and clank.

I later popped it out, accessed the situation, and dug out the old original type Ford starter and stuffed it in and it worked great as it fully engaged the remaining teeth. During the winter teardown I replaced the flywheel ring and have since remained loyal to the stock Ford type starter.

n2omike · 12-31-2012, 06:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dennis111

Ed also sells thick wall pushrods- 5/16" diameter and .116 walls. About $190 a set in what ever length needed. What was the price of the Trends?

Ed's website is FlowTech Induction

Ed does know the valvetrains of Fords motors very well.

Smith Brothers pushrods also has top notch parts. You gain more stiffness by going larger in diameter than thicker wall at the same weight... if you've got room for that. (of course, that's not needed on your street engine) More of a note for racers out there using big cams... and a place to price shop.

I bought a nice set of pushods from them a few years ago for an FE, and was happy. Back then, I think they were around $140 a set.

Smith Bros. Push Rods Bend Oregon

Good Luck!

FlFairlane · 12-31-2012, 08:29 AM

Thanks for the info Mike, I know Smith pushrods well coming from the Mopar community. Unfortunately I am limited to the 5/16" ones. That will be last part of the equasion to be solved.......

FlFairlane · 12-31-2012, 04:48 PM

My 65' Mustang uses a similar front sump setup and it even has the same 3pc style motor mounts as found in the Fairlane. I would almost bet that the Canton T would fit good too.

Dennis, I went out under the Fairlane this afternoon and took some pics and dimensions of the motor mounts. I don't know, it doesn't look too good. The fairlane mounts are actually 5 separate pieces, and the there is an angled piece that sticks out toward the pan that narrows things down a whole bunch. Not sure if the T part of the pan would be below that part of the mounts. The mounts measure about 5" down from the egde of the pan, and are about 6-1/2" back from the front edge of the pan. I was really hoping to be able use a pan like that, as I have both of the canton 8 qt road race unit,and the,6 qt located for $75 each.

dennis111 · 12-31-2012, 04:59 PM

Sorry, you are right in that the motor mounts are definitely different. I was thinking of the Falcon.

Is the L bracket found in the center of this photo doing anything? Curious as it looks like it is a mount for an I6???

FlFairlane · 12-31-2012, 05:23 PM

Rats, I figured as much. Look at the diagram from the repair manual. It is the actual "engine mounting bracket" All the other parts bolt to it, and it is bolted to the frame. Another one of Ford's better ideas......

I was wondering about redesigning the mounts to just use the motor bracket, and then fabricate new brackets to mount to the frame and try and eliminate those angle brackets. The ideal situation would be if I could afford the mustang 2 front suspension.

dennis111 · 01-21-2013, 04:02 PM

Received my cam and valve springs kit from Ed @ Flow Tech Induction (FTI) on Friday. Almost didn't get them as he required that I sign for the package. That is a little hard to do when I am work. Interestingly, I received a call on my cell and it was the Fedex delivery girl. Said it needed signed, but she would drop it off at my work since it was on her way back to the depot. Way cool! Immediately my weekend plans changed from engine compartment painting to motor work.

On Saturday I installed the camshaft and timing chain gears straight up and prepared to degree the cam based on the intake opening at .050. Surprisingly, the intake valve opened precisely at the desired 19BTDC and, just like that, I was done after a couple of seconds of verifying the other cam events. Never in my life have I seen a cam, crank, and timing set that was so accurate together.

Ed's cam card is quite brief in instructions:

From what I can tell from the cam card, it is not a true custom specific for my vehicle and needs. Its one that he has also used before for other vehicles with similar needs. Not an issue if it works. . . .

The Billet HR cam was ground by Comp but was marked as being Ed's:

He ordered it just a couple of days after he received payment.

The given specs look tame compared to last year's solid flat roller. Similar duration, but Ed's cam is shy about .080 in lift. It does have one thing going for it though. The lobes are almost shaped like a dirt track, with flats and similar curves on opposite sides.

Check the high lobe seen just in front of the cam bearing location:

The old Bullet SR cam isn't nearly as wide on the flanks so I envision that Ed is getting the most out of the lift that he is using-something that isn't reflected on the cam card.

Fancy high dollar cam installation tool:

Checking camshaft end play (.006")

Finding true TDC a degree wheel and a piston stop:

Comparing the tech card to the actual cam events:

That was the easy part. Next I checked piston to valve clearance and found my nemesis. I will need to clearance all the pistons approximately .050" for both the intake and the exhaust valves. I used this guys excellent tech article to modify the valve reliefs: http://www.fordmuscleforums.com/engi...-notching.html

Unmodified:

Modified:

I will dremel polish the rough spots after all the pistons have been clearanced.
Clay used to check for valve clearance, both radial and depth:

Lightweight checking springs:

Testing PTV when assembled:

By the end of next weekend I hope to have all the pistons adequately clearanced. Three are done now.

Spring Kit:

Ed pushes his LS-like small light weight valve springs/retainers/locks. They look puny compared to the big SR spring stuff shown on the right.

Supposedly should be good to 7K+.

Ed still owes me a set of Moral/Luniti link bar HR lifters. Once I get them, I'll measure my pushrod length and order the appropriate set. I also need to get the steel gear for the distributor. I am hopeful that the engine will be done and in the car by the end of February/early March so that I can get a few street miles on it and the clutch before opening day.

frdnut · 03-20-2013, 10:45 AM

Any updates Dennis?

Mroldfart2U · 03-20-2013, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dennis111

Check the high lobe seen just in front of the cam bearing location:

WOW will they close long enough for combustion????

Man-o-Man.....

Looking great Dennis...

MRO.....