393W not running up to expectations - Page 3 - Ford Muscle Forums : Ford Muscle Cars Tech Forum
 1Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #31 of 53 (permalink) Old 11-06-2015, 10:26 AM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: So-Cal
Posts: 148
Re: 393W not running up to expectations

I couldn't go back far enough in the archives. Was it ten degrees more overall duration for both in/ex or ten degrees more exhaust duration?

Racing Cougars (the other Mustang), for four decades...

Last edited by k718cougar; 11-06-2015 at 12:49 PM. Reason: Incomplete.
k718cougar is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 53 (permalink) Old 11-06-2015, 03:02 PM
Tech Contributor Gold
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Amish Wonderland Of Central PA
Posts: 4,909
Garage
Re: 393W not running up to expectations

Quote:
Originally Posted by k718cougar View Post
I couldn't go back far enough in the archives. Was it ten degrees more overall duration for both in/ex or ten degrees more exhaust duration?
I believe it was both, but that was a long time ago.

Actually I still have the cam card from the Bullet custom SR cam that gave me the best track times with my 393w. It was spec'ed for the AFR 205's, 1.6 rockers, 10.8:1 compression, Vic Jr, 950hp carb, 1 3/4" tube headers, 4 speed stick, 4.11 gears, 26" tall slicks, and 93 octane fuel:

Duration @.050: 251/259
Lift: .688/.688
LSA: 109
Intake Centerline: 106

He always tells me the primary tubes are too small on my motors so he would love yours @ 1 7/8".

It was installed at 106*, although 105* was preferred but caused valve clearance issues. That was OK though as I didn't need more low end torque at our crappy track. The cam is somewhat aggressive and requires a "good" spring like a PAC 1243.

I shifted at 6600rpm and went through the traps around 6500 with the 4.11's. It went its fastest with 4.33 gears and went through the traps about 6800 with a 3500lb race weight.

The Bullet cam was spec'd by Mark, who is my go to guy at Bullet. He has a great reputation, knows his stuff and takes his work seriously. He used to do the custom stuff for Comp Cams back when. He also designed the cam I have been currently using and will spec the new one when I redo stuff this winter. Another cool thing is If I order a cam on Monday, its on my porch by Friday of the same week.

Oh, I found one of my old racing post with the 393w and the above cam/combo actually gave me a [email protected]! Here is the link: https://www.fordmuscleforums.com/drag...t-new-pbs.html

BTW, where did you get your 1 7/8" tube headers??? Are they for a stock suspension or R&P???

Dennis

65' Stang Street/Strip. Dart 434W NA, Victor heads, G101A 4 Spd, 4:56 rear gear, on 93 octane pushing 3550lbs. [email protected]

Last edited by dennis111; 11-06-2015 at 04:43 PM.
dennis111 is offline  
post #33 of 53 (permalink) Old 11-07-2015, 12:23 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: So-Cal
Posts: 148
Re: 393W not running up to expectations

Thank you for the information.

The headers were adapted from a set of Hooker four-barrel Clevelands for the '67 - '70 Mustang/Cougar. As crude as it sounds, the beginning portion of the primary tubes were removed and three-inch bolt pattern, SBF plates were attached with the corresponding amount of 1 7/8" tubing connecting it all. The headers fit stock steering and all related components. They will not fit clutch linkage, but everything else. So, custom maybe with help from Hooker. I have before and after picts of the tubes filed somewhere.

Racing Cougars (the other Mustang), for four decades...

Last edited by k718cougar; 11-07-2015 at 12:25 PM. Reason: Incomplete
k718cougar is offline  
 
post #34 of 53 (permalink) Old 11-07-2015, 02:23 PM
Tech Contributor Gold
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Amish Wonderland Of Central PA
Posts: 4,909
Garage
Re: 393W not running up to expectations

Thank you for the header info.

I had considered doing something similar, but couldn't find any for a factory Z-bar except for a 2 1/8" primary tube set that was much too big for what I am after. Also I really wasn't sure about the Cleveland vs Windsor tube spacing. I got something else in the works for now.

Dennis

65' Stang Street/Strip. Dart 434W NA, Victor heads, G101A 4 Spd, 4:56 rear gear, on 93 octane pushing 3550lbs. [email protected]
dennis111 is offline  
post #35 of 53 (permalink) Old 11-09-2015, 09:16 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: So-Cal
Posts: 148
Re: 393W not running up to expectations

The Cleveland ports are pretty close to Windsors, but remember the Cleveland ports are angled a bit vs. the more straight-up Windsor ports. The job was not all the complicated, just time consuming.

Racing Cougars (the other Mustang), for four decades...
k718cougar is offline  
post #36 of 53 (permalink) Old 11-10-2015, 03:30 AM
Tech Contributor Gold
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Amish Wonderland Of Central PA
Posts: 4,909
Garage
Re: 393W not running up to expectations

Thank you for the additional info. I believe it was an earlier post from you that gave me the idea but without me finding any desirable big tube Z-bar capable donors it no longer seemed like a viable solution. I appreciate being able to put this one to bed for now. Hopefully my chosen solution pans out to be close.

Good luck with your projects.

Dennis

65' Stang Street/Strip. Dart 434W NA, Victor heads, G101A 4 Spd, 4:56 rear gear, on 93 octane pushing 3550lbs. [email protected]

Last edited by dennis111; 11-10-2015 at 03:32 AM.
dennis111 is offline  
post #37 of 53 (permalink) Old 09-19-2016, 11:11 AM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: So-Cal
Posts: 148
Re: 393W not running up to expectations

Here is to reviving an old thread, again, but who doesn’t want an update or closure. As you have already read last year, the 393W was not running up to expectations. Over the past year, there has been a lot of head scratching, consulting, and analyzing. This was in an effort to make the Fun Ford Weekend event this year at Famoso. The payoff was more than satisfying, but another problem arose. We’ll talk about that later. The end result was a small list of things that needed attention. First off, the camshaft seemed a bit short and was changed to another solid roller:
• 258/266 @ .050”, .672”/.656”, 108 lobe separation and installed at 105 intake centerline
• Matching valve springs, 1.6 ratio shaft rockers and .116” wall pushrods
• Lowered octane to 100 (compression was later found to be 10.54 to 1)
• Replaced the stock Ford vacuum advance distributor with a mechanical advance MSD
• The converter was replaced with another that flash-stalled at 4700 (it was not designed for this car. It was tried over the original lower stalling 3700-3900 converter)
• Raised shift RPM to 6800
• Replaced the open-hole spacer for a one-inch, tapered four-hole
Over the weekend. the car ran a best of 11.50 at 119 MPH. A marked improvement over last year, but there was a small hindrance as mentioned earlier. 60’ times were horrible at 1.68 -1.72. These times were associated with what looked like Pro Stock “tire shake”. The tires looked like they were hopping all through first gear. After the shift to second and third, the car stopped hopping and turned into a monster and took off like it had never done before…MASSIVE ACCELERATION! It is now a completely different car. It runs great and HARD after the tire shake. A variety of tires pressures and launch RPMs was tried. Everything netted the same hop. Although, with the higher the tire pressure (20 PSI), less hop was felt/observed.
Some of the launches were videotaped and after some slow-motion examination, we could see the traction bar bumpers were literally slapping up & down on the spring eyelets during the hopping phenomenon. I remember something like this before with another car that had the same problem that had a manual transmission. The phenomenon was call leaf spring ‘S” shaping or something like that. We couldn’t actually see the springs, but this thought was based on the way the tractions bars were moving up and down during the launch, tire sidewall distortion and an old racer that observed it and said, “those rear springs are worn out, you need new ones”. We are pretty sure it has something to do with the rear springs or simply the wrong traction devices. I’ve seen the same exact setup on another car that was running 1.40/1.50 60’ times with no hop so it is possible it can work. Along with the stock rear leaf springs, it has 50/50 drag shocks with extensions and aforementioned slapper/traction bars. The car is consistently pulling both front tires evenly about six-inches during the hop and the slicks seemed to have really good bite. If the hopping can be cleared up, I’m sure the 60’ times will decrease as well as the ETs considerably. Anyone else out there have this problem?


A while back, I mentioned grafting Cleveland headers to fits a Windsor, but I never backed it up with pictures. Here is a set of Hooker Headers that were originally made to fit a ’69 Mustang/Cougar with a 4V Cleveland. They show some surface rust, but the metal beneath was good to work with. With a few u-bends, a pair of flanges by Stahl, and a few weekends of test fitting, I have a set of, don’t laugh, custom headers that fit my car and engine requirements. Perhaps a bit cheezie, but it kept me busy by practicing my welding and metal work and it was cheaper than buying a real custom set.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	PA160049.jpg
Views:	94
Size:	211.0 KB
ID:	125753   Click image for larger version

Name:	PA160053.jpg
Views:	93
Size:	238.0 KB
ID:	125761  

Racing Cougars (the other Mustang), for four decades...

Last edited by k718cougar; 09-19-2016 at 01:05 PM. Reason: Photos added.
k718cougar is offline  
post #38 of 53 (permalink) Old 09-19-2016, 02:48 PM
Tech Contributor Gold
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Amish Wonderland Of Central PA
Posts: 4,909
Garage
Re: 393W not running up to expectations

Glad to see that you kept at it and got the motor to run well!!!

One thing to check on the rear is if the shocks are maximum extended during launch (even with the extenders.) If so it will also cause the situation that you described. For me it also takes stiffening the shocks on compression (Dual adjustable now.) I know that you don't have that option with the 50/50's. You might consider a set of Rancho 9 ways as I could also tame the wheel hop with them.

Thanks for the update on the headers. I bought a 1 7/8" tube Windsor set from Accufab and modified to use a z bar. They work well but the collectors are too low for my liking so over the winter I plan on doing some more modifications.

Good Luck!

Dennis

65' Stang Street/Strip. Dart 434W NA, Victor heads, G101A 4 Spd, 4:56 rear gear, on 93 octane pushing 3550lbs. [email protected]
dennis111 is offline  
post #39 of 53 (permalink) Old 09-19-2016, 06:13 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: So-Cal
Posts: 148
Re: 393W not running up to expectations

Thanks for the suggestion dennis111 . That's why I throw these things out there. Other folks see things I haven't thought about.

Racing Cougars (the other Mustang), for four decades...
k718cougar is offline  
post #40 of 53 (permalink) Old 10-05-2016, 11:04 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Anaheim CA
Posts: 454
Re: 393W not running up to expectations

k718cougar,
I'm out here in So Cal like you are. I race a '66 GT350 with a 331 and a C4 . "I" use Chrysler "Super Stock" rear leaf springs and Koni shocks with extensions , but I have tried other shocks as well. My 60's are usually in the 1.50 range ant ETs are in the 11teens at 120+mph in decent air at Fontana. I run a 10x28 [email protected] Granted I have less torque and a 5" shorter wheelbase , but I only had "tire shake" like you are experiencing once when I forgot to lower the tire pressure from the "towing" psi of 25. It sounds like you have "slapper bars" rather than Cal Trac bars. I could never get slapper bars to work with an automatic.
Randy

Experimental Ford parts collector.
GT350HR is offline  
post #41 of 53 (permalink) Old 10-12-2016, 06:25 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Central West Virginia
Posts: 7,357
Re: 393W not running up to expectations

First thing I would do with the rear suspension, is get a set of Calvert split mono-leafs. They are 10 lbs lighter per spring than what you have, and the leaves are super thick, at 0.450", so they don't wrap up and wheel hop. This might be enough to cure all your problems. At least, I would consider it the first mandatory step. If the car still needs help, you can look at a set of Cal-Tracs. But, first thing I would change, is the springs. If you still want to optimize things, you can go to better shocks. I'd recommend Viking. They are double adjustable, but cost around $250 each.

As for making power, a better set of heads would still provide a massive improvement. If you are in love with the ones you have, a professional port job by Mike Curcio would be my FIRST choice. Look up MCRP. He's not going to be the cheapest, but if you want to breathe some SERIOUS life into those old heads, he's your man!

Good Luck!
n2omike is online now  
post #42 of 53 (permalink) Old 11-05-2016, 06:49 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: So-Cal
Posts: 148
Re: 393W not running up to expectations

I believe the problem is mostly in the springs, or at least the lack of taming them. I know the Mustang and Cougar springs have different lengths, but do you have an idea of what the Calvert mono-leaf springs cost?

$398 for both springs and hardware...WOW & YIKES!

Racing Cougars (the other Mustang), for four decades...

Last edited by k718cougar; 11-06-2016 at 10:56 AM.
k718cougar is offline  
post #43 of 53 (permalink) Old 04-20-2017, 12:38 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: So-Cal
Posts: 148
Re: 393W not running up to expectations

More updates...CalTracs and their mono-leafs have been installed with a spec'd A-1, 8" torque converter. After the car makes it to the track, I'll post the results. Should be quite interesting.

Also, updated info from the very first post. The mentioned 4000'ish converter was found to be really broken inside and according to the converter people, it would idle and then lock at 3000 RPM. It was a hindrance and didn't work at all. Therefore, it was scrapped in favor of the spec'd converter. A-1 says the car will pick up a LOT with the new converter.

Last edited by k718cougar; 04-20-2017 at 12:43 PM.
k718cougar is offline  
post #44 of 53 (permalink) Old 11-09-2017, 05:52 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Central West Virginia
Posts: 7,357
Re: 393W not running up to expectations

Quote:
Originally Posted by k718cougar View Post
More updates...CalTracs and their mono-leafs have been installed with a spec'd A-1, 8" torque converter. After the car makes it to the track, I'll post the results. Should be quite interesting.

Also, updated info from the very first post. The mentioned 4000'ish converter was found to be really broken inside and according to the converter people, it would idle and then lock at 3000 RPM. It was a hindrance and didn't work at all. Therefore, it was scrapped in favor of the spec'd converter. A-1 says the car will pick up a LOT with the new converter.
Curious... Any updates?
n2omike is online now  
post #45 of 53 (permalink) Old 11-09-2017, 08:55 AM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: So-Cal
Posts: 148
Re: 393W not running up to expectations

Yes, but before I do, I need to look over the time slip to give an accurate account. Everything was a positive improvement with a surprise ending to the weekend.

See next page--->

Last edited by k718cougar; 11-10-2017 at 03:33 PM. Reason: Incomplete
k718cougar is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Muscle Forums : Ford Muscle Cars Tech Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
393W not running up to expectations k718cougar All Ford Techboard 0 10-11-2015 04:39 PM
power expectations mustangpete69 Stroker Engines 0 02-15-2010 08:31 PM
power expectations mustangpete69 Stroker Engines 0 02-15-2010 08:30 PM
Cam expectations?? Kermit69 Mustang Pages (1965-1973) 0 08-29-2008 10:01 PM
GT expectations v8shadow Fairlane Pages 6 04-27-2006 08:00 AM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome