Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - andyf

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
FE Technical Forum / Re: Trick Flow heads....
« on: May 12, 2019, 03:50:33 PM »
Quote from: jayb on May 12, 2019, 09:13:55 AM
I thought it would be informative to post some mechanical drawings of what good rocker geometry looks like.  The obvious difference is that with correct rocker geometry the travel across the top of the valve is reduced, and that brings benefits in terms of wear on the valve guide and reduction in friction in the valvetrain, especially if you are not running a roller tip rocker arm.  From the pictures I've seen the Trick Flow heads look like they come out of the box with rocker arm geometry similar to what is shown in the first picture below.  Will they run like this?  Sure.  Will they make power?  Of course.  Is it the ideal setup?  Not by a long shot.  This is why the rocker pads are being cut down by some of the folks here.  Longer valves would also solve the problem.  Since Trick Flow is offering the heads and the valves, it seems odd that they set it up this way.  Seems like a design or manufacturing mistake to me.  I hope they can get it corrected.






Only problem is that your drawing isn't accurate. Do you have a set of TF heads on your bench? Do you have the Comp rocker arms on them? If not you might not have the drawing correct. We didn't see any of the problems that people are talking about. I'm guessing that nobody on here has Comp rockers on the TF heads? If not then why does everyone all worked up? If you haven't built it and tested it then what makes you an expert?


2
FE Technical Forum / Re: Trick Flow heads....
« on: May 11, 2019, 02:50:44 PM »
Quote from: Falcon67 on May 09, 2019, 09:44:36 AM
There is an article on a FE build in Car Craft using these.  They appear clueless and sort of extroll the virtue of the raised pads.  "May require longer pushrods"


We're not clueless, the stock stand height worked just fine for us. That engine made 700 hp and everything looked great. Those heads are a super nice design as were the other parts we used on that engine. The engine took a little more "fine tuning" than a typical Chevy or Mopar engine, but you kind of expect it with a FE engine. Especially when using a bunch of brand new parts. We had one of the first sets of TF heads as well as set #1 of the Comp rocker arms so stuff did have to be tweaked a little bit but we didn't have to machine the stands. Pushrod clearance was tight in several spots and the intake did end up on the milling machine a couple of times.


3
FE Technical Forum / Re: Show us your garage/shop.
« on: October 09, 2018, 11:54:15 PM »
My shop is full of Mopar's in this picture.

4
FE Technical Forum / Re: Fe in 56 Ford
« on: August 05, 2018, 06:08:10 PM »
I bought a '56 F-100 for $350 when I was 14. Took me a couple of years to save up enough money to buy a 351C from a '70 Mustang. I think I was 16 when I got it running. Had to fabricate some stuff but it wasn't a complicated swap if a 16 year old kid could do it. I did it in the driveway using my Dad's tools. He didn't have a lot, he wasn't a mechanic. I had to ride my bike into town to the machine shop to gets parts fabricated since all we had was a hacksaw and a 3/8 drill. I used the four speed from the Mustang but it would've been easier if I had used an automatic. Hooking up that passenger car four speed in the '56 required some fab work. Took me a while to get that all sorted out. By the time I was a senior in high school the truck was my daily driver. I also managed to win a fair number of street races in that thing. Didn't have a ton of traction off the line but it pulled hard once you got the tires hooked up.

5
FE Technical Forum / Re: Progressive throttle linkage?
« on: August 01, 2018, 12:38:22 AM »
The Sniper can be run in progressive mode. You need to change the linkage arm on the throttle body and then check the box in the software to make it progressive and then tell it when the secondaries will open. The secondaries will usually open around 35% or 40% on the TPS.

Having the Sniper run in progressive mode will make it less touchy at low throttle opening. But you'll need to modify the AE tables since the Sniper thinks it needs a lot of AE (pump shot) since it thinks all four barrels are opening at the same time. Progressive linkage on the Sniper is not recommended and is not supported by Holley, but it is possible. I did it on my car and got it working okay but I eventually switched it back to 1:1.

6
FE Technical Forum / Re: Magazine 431 build with 555 hp....
« on: July 25, 2018, 12:21:51 AM »
My guess (based on 20 some odd years of dyno testing performance engines) is that the heads aren't great and the cam is too big. That is a fatal combination. The big cam kills the low end power and the heads kill the top end power. I just saw this recently where a guy had some "custom" heads and a huge by huge cam in his SBC. The heads were big but didn't work very well and the cam was way too big for the engine. We put a much smaller cam in the engine and picked up 100 hp. There wasn't much we could do with the heads since the guy didn't have the money to replace them.


I don't think we'll ever know the answer for this engine though since it would require a complete redo to test the theory. But if a guy came to me with that engine and a stack of money I'd put Trick Flow heads on it and use a much smaller cam.

7
FE Technical Forum / Re: trick flow heads
« on: July 23, 2018, 10:05:46 AM »
Quote from: 427Fastback on July 22, 2018, 11:39:11 PM
Does any one have any feedback/stories or experience with the new TFS heads...I see they are available now.My Edelbrocks have been in engine shop prison for too long now and I am thing of just buying some complete head assemblys.The 70cc chamber will work well for me....
I was told they are cast in the USA....


There is a thread on here from last year on the Trick Flow heads. I used one of the first sets out the door on a 482 inch engine project for Car Craft. It made excellent power. We did not have any issues with the heads, everything looked very nice right out of the box. Engine had the usual assembly issues that you would expect with a pallet load of aftermarket parts but nothing that a good engine shop couldn't sort out. There are two articles on the Hot Rod website, this is the second one:  https://www.hotrod.com/articles/dyno-tested-make-700-hp-trick-flows-new-fe-heads/

8
FE Technical Forum / Re: 660s on 482?
« on: July 18, 2018, 09:51:53 AM »
Having a car that you spent a lot of money on but can't enjoy is no fun. I think you ended up with some race parts on a street car and if you aren't a really experienced tuner, that combo is often fatal to the project. There are lots of abandoned car projects due to the same type of issue. People get talked into cams that are too big or the wrong carb and then the car isn't fun to drive so it just sits.

Dual Holley carbs are going to be a bit tough to get sorted out on anything, especially if there is a large camshaft involved. If you insist on dual Holley carbs for the look then you'll want to talk to someone who has a setup that actually works. Vacuum secondaries is probably the way to go, and the smaller the carbs the better. Dual Edelbrock 500 carbs would be fairly easy to get to work but Ford purists would freak out. Personally I'd use dual throttle bodies on anything I wanted to start, run and drive on a regular basis.

Good luck and don't get too down on yourself. You should be able to sell the 660 carbs for some decent change to a drag racer. You'll need to call around to find someone who can setup dual Holley carbs for a street car. A wideband would be a good investment to make if you try it yourself. It is also a major time investment since the carbs need to come off to make changes and if you have metering plates in the rear then those need to be changed. If you tune it yourself you'll need a decent supply of parts so that is another investment to think about.

9
FE Technical Forum / Re: Magazine 431 build with 555 hp....
« on: July 17, 2018, 10:50:37 AM »
The only information in the article on the heads is that they were done by Maloney Competition in VA. If you do a google search on that you'll come up with a picture of a house on a country road. So your guess is as good as mine.

Personally I think a set of Trick Flow heads and a slightly smaller cam would make that engine work better but we'll probably never know.

10
FE Technical Forum / Re: Magazine 431 build with 555 hp....
« on: July 16, 2018, 08:37:24 PM »
Yeah 240 duration would probably work just fine in that engine. I had a 470 inch pump gas engine in my car with a 236/236 solid flat tappet cam. That engine made 475 rwhp with an Edelbrock 800 carb and cast iron exhaust manifolds. It would scare the crap out of people when I floored it and grabbed the next gear. So I'm not sure why the guy put a 260 degree cam in a 431.

I put a 254/260 solid roller in that 482 inch engine I did for Car Craft. That engine ran nice on the dyno but I won't be surprised if the owner wants to go one size smaller once the car is on the street. The car I have now has 512 inches with a 246/246 hyd roller and I think next time I update the engine I'll go one step smaller on the cam.

Of course some of this has to do with age. I reduce my cam size by a degree or two every year as I get older. When I was in my 20's I was okay with a 260 cam but these days 240 is more than enough. I really don't need to keep rapping on the gas pedal at every stop light to clear the engine out like I did when I was in high school.

11
FE Technical Forum / Re: Magazine 431 build with 555 hp....
« on: July 16, 2018, 02:51:55 PM »
Quote from: plovett on July 16, 2018, 12:01:25 PM
A 431 with decent induction peaking at 6000 rpm with a 260 @ 0.050" cam makes no sense.    When I see an article with something that makes no sense and it is not explained, I pretty much ignore it.

JMO,

paulie

It makes sense if the cam is too big for the application. That engine would most likely have the same peak power at the same point if the cam was 10 degrees smaller. Unless a person does a lot of similar combinations it is easy to mis-match the parts. Overcamming an engine is probably the second most common mistake after using too big of a carb.

12
FE Technical Forum / Re: Magazine 431 build with 555 hp....
« on: July 16, 2018, 10:48:22 AM »
The article was just published but it appears to be an older build. Maybe something the author started a couple of years ago and it just took a long time due to funds or something. They did their own heads but didn't show any pictures of the head. It is an EFI article but they don't show details of the EFI. Instead the author spends 1/3 of the article talking about the history of the FE which was a waste of time since there are books written on the that subject. If I was the editor I would've cut out all the FE history stuff and asked for more details on the heads and EFI. I wonder how it drives with that cam in a Galaxie? Be interesting to find that out. EFI can tame down a big cam better than a carb, but it can still be a handful at low speeds.

13
FE Technical Forum / Re: Beehive valve springs on FE Heads ??
« on: July 07, 2018, 03:14:14 PM »
Quote from: plovett on July 06, 2018, 10:52:27 PM
Aren't there dual conical springs?

Here is an article I did recently for Car Craft on the dual conical springs. I don't see any downside to the dual conicals other than cost. They worked just fine at 7000+ rpm with a super aggressive QRI roller lobe. The QRI is more aggressive than anything I'd put in a real car, it is basically a super stock type of lobe. I've used the dual conical with other lobes and they work just fine. The engine will buzz as hard as you want. Just finished up some dyno testing with a big block Mopar that sounded like a buzz saw on the dyno with dual conical springs and a Mike Jones inverse flank cam.

As for beehives, I've used them for years with hyd roller cams. I have beehives with a hyd roller in my daily driver. Nice and smooth but pulls hard up past 6500 rpm. Not bad for a 500+ inch big block with cast iron exhaust manifolds.


https://www.hotrod.com/articles/dyno-tested-dual-conical-valve-springs/

Andy

14
FE Technical Forum / Re: New Stroker Running Rough
« on: July 03, 2018, 08:06:43 PM »
Quote from: Barry_R on July 03, 2018, 05:19:23 PM
Quote from: Thumperbird on July 03, 2018, 12:19:18 PM
Not sure how many people are running Holleys on the Edelbrock dual manifold.

The answer to this question is probably "one" - and its "you".

Those wide angled spacers are introducing a wild card variable that nobody has worked with...

Sometimes the weird stuff doesn't work. I've built plenty of weird stuff over the years that didn't work so I'm familiar with the drill.

15
FE Technical Forum / Re: New Stroker Running Rough
« on: July 02, 2018, 09:57:41 PM »
With as much money as you have invested in that engine you should have a wide band in the exhaust. If the carbs are off you can ruin a new engine pretty quickly. We see it all the time at the engine shop. Guys pay $10K to have a performance engine built and then they don't tune the carb and before long they are back in the shop with cylinders wiped and valve guides shot.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10