Ford Muscle Cars Tech Forum banner

21 - 40 of 53 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
674 Posts
half to wounder if the port work dropped the air flow. Have had quite a few heads with home port work and some supposedly reputable shops on my bench that were compromised. Some could be helped but were just ok others I can clean up but cant guarantee anything. Knowing the flow and at what lift point the flow starts to drop is very important to selecting a cam.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
Discussion Starter #23
Iowan, the cam advancing makes sense. I'll see if we can change that for the next evaluation runs.

Regarding the "porting", they weren't ported, I have discovered they were cleaned up, not opened up. I don't know how much just cleaning them would hurt flow that much.

We are also going to tighten the valve clearance a bit to see if that improves or degrades anything. Hopefully, it improves showing a larger cam is needed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,260 Posts
We are also going to tighten the valve clearance a bit to see if that improves or degrades anything. Hopefully, it improves showing a larger cam is needed.
Although you might gain some power with a "bigger" cam, you will likely gain power with a cam that is better matched to your heads and combo as i previously suggested, but you can simply keep that cam and get better heads.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,982 Posts
The "right" cam for your car may change the characteristics of what you have and is probably worth 15-20 HP more than you have now (with those heads.) You will always be constrained because of the flow limitations of the unported heads.

Is that really worth the effort to experiment with? Find an AFR 195 or better yet due to your drag racing preference an AFR 205 (both inline heads that might match you current pistons valve reliefs) and you will be "worlds" faster. Pun intended. There are certainly other good heads out there but for an"out of the box" type head its pretty hard to beat the AFR's. You could recoup some of the cost by selling your current heads.

I might have mentioned it earlier but a swap from the ProComps to the AFR 205's was worth 1/2 a second using the same basic combination including the custom cam that was spec'ed specifically for the ProComps. That is what I consider real world results that was well worth the effort . . . . .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
Discussion Starter #27
Barnett468, you are correct. What I was trying to say was changing valve lash may give me an indicator as to where the cam may be. I do realize there are waaaaay more variables with this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,260 Posts
Barnett468, you are correct. What I was trying to say was changing valve lash may give me an indicator as to where the cam may be. I do realize there are waaaaay more variables with this.
yes, i understand and its certainly wont cost you anything to do that but the only real way to tell if it makes a difference is by putting it on a dyno and making a couple runs then changing the lash and running it again.

there are too many variables at a track to really tell.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
Discussion Starter #29
dennis111, regarding your reply, "I might have mentioned it earlier but a swap from the ProComps to the AFR 205's was worth 1/2 a second using the same basic combination including the custom cam that was spec'ed specifically for the ProComps. That is what I consider real world results that was well worth the effort . . . . .", was there a significant difference from one cam profile to another to better match the AFR heads vs the ProComps?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,982 Posts
dennis111, regarding your reply, "I might have mentioned it earlier but a swap from the ProComps to the AFR 205's was worth 1/2 a second using the same basic combination including the custom cam that was spec'ed specifically for the ProComps. That is what I consider real world results that was well worth the effort . . . . .", was there a significant difference from one cam profile to another to better match the AFR heads vs the ProComps?
It was the same cam that was custom spec'ed for the Procomp heads-I just simply reinstalled it. It was all in the heads (and the Procomps had some porting done.) :surprise:

What really made the 393 run even better was a custom SR roller cam that I later installed (and what put the car into the 11.20's.) I don't know the specs on it anymore but it had at least 10 degrees duration. I like experimenting with different cams so details are fuzzy. If you are interested in my experiences, they were all fully detailed here on FM from my drag racing infancy beginning in 2007.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,982 Posts
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: http://www.fordmuscleforums.com/drag-racing/505934-gotta-love-night-new-pbs.html

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

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
Discussion Starter #33 (Edited)
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,982 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
Discussion Starter #35
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,982 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
Discussion Starter #37 (Edited)
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.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,982 Posts
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!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
Discussion Starter #39
Thanks for the suggestion dennis111 . That's why I throw these things out there. Other folks see things I haven't thought about.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
496 Posts
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
 
21 - 40 of 53 Posts
Top