FE Power Forums
FE Power Forums => FE Technical Forum => Topic started by: BigNate on April 19, 2012, 09:44:24 AM
-
OK - so this is technical - but not strictly "FE" - so I'm not sure if it belongs here or in the non-technical forum (although the use of any info received will be applied to my FE specific plans...). I wrote all the stuff below and my wife looked at me, rolled her eyes, and said "just ask the question... So - I'll ask twice - once here and once at the end of my rambling... Does anyone know of an established model / tool for calculating forces at the crank journal as a function of reciprocating mass, RPM, and cylinder pressure (as the core variables)? In short I am trying to segregate the forces associated with reciprocating mass from those associated with cylinder pressure.
I asked this on another forum a few years ago - and the topic generally fizzled. I figured I'd give it a shot here. I've always wondered about the "limits" of the basic 390 block. What surprises me is that the general consensus seems to be that the basic 390 blocks tend to split up the mains at about 600 HP. I also know that the consensus amongst the "turbo mustang" crowd seems to be that a "good" early 351W block ('69 blocks are prized) can live indefinitely at the strip at ~800 HP under boost with guys pushing hard blocked units past that for a while.
When I compare the bottom ends of these blocks the FE has a distinct advantage in terms of the mass of material in the mains and I would think structural rigidity due to the block skirt, webbing, etc... I have to assume that the difference in experience (in terms of the strength of these blocks) is either a function of some weakness in the FE bottom end design - or a difference in the how the forces / stresses are applied based on the way that the various crowds make their power. My suspicion is that the latter is cause of the gap in experience - that the FE crowd tends to be "old school" about making horsepower (I know this is changing somewhat) - relying on RPM to pursue peak power while the "turbo mustang crowd" tends to rely on boost. Given that the kinetic energy of an object in motion increases as the square of velocity, the stresses on the block are going to increase exponentially as RPM (and piston/rod velocity) increase - and as a result the portion of the stress on the block that come from cylinder pressures vs those that come from reciprocating mass change as a function of RPM. Given that the N/A motor increases airflow and fuel burn by increasing RPM (among other things of course) and the super/turbocharged motor does this in a manner that is independant of RPM, the point at which the stresses on the block become great enough to see failure can occur at a very different level of power. I suspect that the FE block may be good well past 600 HP if that power is made at 5800 RPM under boost.
I've started working through the math around the forces at the main journal in an internal combustion engine and while I have a decent math background this is pretty daunting stuff... Does anyone know of an established model / tool for calculating forces at the crank journal as a function of reciprocating mass, RPM, and cylinder pressure (as the core variables)? In short I am trying to segregate the forces associated with reciprocating mass from those associated with cylinder pressure.
-
I don't know of a model per se, but I'd think a trip through the physics book ought to yield the answers you are looking for. I'll take a peek at this myself over the weekend and see what I can find out. I'll bet that Bill Conley may have an answer, too. But let's say that you can determine the forces acting on the block. What then? How will you know if the forces are too high?
As far as FE blocks splitting at 600 HP, the only issue is with the non-crossbolted blocks, and they don't split in half like a small block Ford does, they generally just crack along the oil gallery running from the mains to the cam journals. So you will then have an internal oil leak, but usually you won't blow the bottom end out of the motor or anything. Also 600 HP is a pretty conservative value; I know a lot of people who have run 2 bolt blocks harder than that without any trouble. It depends on what you are doing with the engine. If you have a 500 HP motor and you are revving to 6000 RPM and dropping the clutch at the line to get your 14X32 slicks moving, you are more likely to hurt the block than if you were running a 650 HP engine with street tires and an automatic.
My general rule of thumb is that if you are going to exceed 600 HP with the engine it is worth the time and expense to cross bolt it. I'd recommend you just do that if you have any doubts.
-
I personally think you are worried about something that is imaginary in real world usage. All the 5.0 blocks that I am aware of that split were using the 50 oz imbalance crankshaft, damper, and flywheel. If you take a roller cam block and install a lightweight crankshaft, internal balance, and use light pistons, you can get considerably more than 500 hp before block failure. Also, many of those folks sidestep the clutch pedal at high rpm to get the maximum launch, and that is hard on everything. In theory what you suggest of adding boost and keeping the rpm's lower should work, if, and a big IF everything is balanced perfectly, and made light as possible without sacrificing strength. Many folks have raced 390 style FEs for years revving them to 7200+ without splitting a block. Most of the failures were rod bolt related at those rpms due to heavy pistons. I raced FE's since 1969, and I have never broken a block, even when rod broke, camshaft broke, etc. I always went through the lights at close to 7400 rpm with a mechanical tachometer in my 427 FE. Joe-JDC.
-
Probably the biggest impediment to a mathamatical formula is all blocks aren't created equal. And neither are all builds.
-
Hoo boy! Calculating actual loads in a multi-cylinder engine block is a major job. It's a three-dimensional problem since loads / vibrational energy are traveling along the crank. Throw in some external balance, like on a 428, and it gets crazy.
My resource on this matter, "The Internal-Combustion Engine in Theory and Practice", by Charles Fayette Taylor, devotes about forty pages of scary- looking equations to this subject.
Yeah I was a Ford Engine Engineer, and I have designed engine blocks, but today I wouldn't even attempt such a calculation. This is why God invented finite element analysis ;) Yes it is a big FEA model you would have to build for an FE, but at least it would give you excellent data that points out where the weak areas are for your given load case.
FEA is how the big boys do it now. It's relatively routine for them, and possible (but very difficult) for someone like me with a reasonably normal computer and software. I would rather let somebody else do the heavy lifting ;D
Oh - and despite all of the computing power in the building at Ford, the first pre-production modular v8's were lining the teardown room with rods through the blocks. There's still stuff going on in these engines that demands experience and talent to get right.
So my message would be to maybe try some calculations as a very rough baseline, but then ask the guys who are really building and racing the FE. Here's another thing we got wrong with the Ford Modular V8: All of the FEA analysis optimized the block so that the bottom end would withstand no more than 460 HP. (It was felt that 100 HP/Liter at the 4.6L displacement was more than the engine would ever need to put out.)
Today that same block architecture, with some development mind you, is supporting over 1,200 HP in race trim. No one back in 1990 would have ever believed it was possible, even if you made the block out of titanium. Even if we had been able to study today's 1,200 HP Ford GT or Shelby version of the Modular, we would have figured maybe 500 or 600 HP tops. That's where years of building, racing, and tinkering can make the formulas and FEA models look pretty bad.
-
Thanks gents. I guess my question is not as much about "proving" something - but rather trying to build a general understanding of the range in which the lines merge - and that mostly to satisfy my own curiosity.
I agree with the assertion that there is a lot to be done to reduce the likelihood of this kind of failure and that balancing, lightening, and properly assembling the rotating assembly is all at a premium. I also agree that I'll never get an absolutely accurate "number" at which failure occurs, for all of the reasons mentioned (inconsistency in the blocks, differences in driving style and uses, etc...)
I had done some digging and found models for estimating forces associated with rotating and reciprocating masses etc - and I know I can calculate force associated with pressure etc... I guess I was just hoping to find that someone geekier than me had modeled it on-line and saved me the work... :-)
I'll fiddle with it and if I get anywhere I'll post what I come up with in case anyone feels like tearing it up or validating... Like I said - it really is more a question of curiosity.
I am sure that most definitive option is to put something together that I can throw boost at and see what happens...
-
BigNate -
In my estimation it's pretty hard to break an FE block with boost, if you're not zinging it. The inertia loads go up with the square of rpm, and quite often will vastly exceed the combustion loads at higher rpm. If you're building power with boost at 5,000 rpm, you'll be able to support a lot more than naturally aspirated at 7,000 rpm. As you mentioned, light, well balanced reciprocating components pay big dividends here.
If you encounter detonation though, all bets are off. Higher rpm detonation is death to lower end bearings, if your piston crowns survive long enough. That's a real concern in a boosted application.
-
BigNate -
In my estimation it's pretty hard to break an FE block with boost, if you're not zinging it. The inertia loads go up with the square of rpm, and quite often will vastly exceed the combustion loads at higher rpm. If you're building power with boost at 5,000 rpm, you'll be able to support a lot more than naturally aspirated at 7,000 rpm. As you mentioned, light, well balanced reciprocating components pay big dividends here.
Yep - it is these two lines that I'm trying to mock up (inertial load @ RPM + NA combustion load vs inertial load @ lesser rpm + increased combustion loads associated with boost)...
If you encounter detonation though, all bets are off. Higher rpm detonation is death to lower end bearings, if your piston crowns survive long enough. That's a real concern in a boosted application.
My detonation avoidance plans are based on running E-85, an inter-cooler, a good wide-band O2 sensor, relatively low static CR, and having a very slow and methodical hand with the waste-gates, timing and jets (or eventually fuel map)... Mitigation will include reasonable quality rotating assembly components... :-)
-
A fascinating and not esoteric topic BigNate. The model I'm sure does exist but it's in the province of OEM engine manufacturers like Ford, Cummins, GM, etc. and something probably not available to the public. Likely the independent crank/rod makers like L.A. Billet, Crower, Lentz also have developed some pretty sophisticated models. Bill C'.s comments on tinkering that can FEA models look silly is a testimony to hot rodders (factory based or mere mortals!) running stuff till it breaks and then making it better.
This topic begs the question though: which aftermarket FE block is the absolute strongest?
-
I case others are chewing on this... I have found the following which appears to be course content from an ME course at Chulalongkorn University in Thailand... :o Anyway - it is distinctly oriented to the student / layman to a greater degree than most of the more scholarly papers that I have found on the subject - and it appears to provide the basis for distinguishing (at least in a simple system) between the kinetic energy associated with rotating / reciprocating mass and force exerted by cylinder pressure.
Sorry for the lengthy URL - I tried to attach the PDF but no-joy.... The link below goes directly to a download of the PDF...
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=calculate%20forces%20internal%20combustion%20engine&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCgQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcu-ocw.eng.chula.ac.th%2Fcu%2Feng%2Fme%2F2103471%2Flecture-notes%2F14-2103471%2520Dynamic%2520Analysis%2520of%2520the%2520Internal%2520Combustion%2520Engine.pdf&ei=Xu6VT4GDNqibiALc1_GICg&usg=AFQjCNG1GyIttmjFBxmVvdfLSCfOr-fatg
-
Over five years ago I witnessed Joe's TT FORD GT go to the 1,000- 1,200+HP zone on the stock FORD GT longblock and do so time and time again. I think it's simply a byproduct of proper engineering that says "keep everything rigid" that it still does so at many times the rated limit. When I was a Factory Rep on 10,000psi working pressure hydraulic systems I would never let on what the lab burst pressure's actually went to. There is a bunch of safety margins.....
Re:" Here's another thing we got wrong with the Ford Modular V8: All of the FEA analysis optimized the block so that the bottom end would withstand no more than 460 HP. (It was felt that 100 HP/Liter at the 4.6L displacement was more than the engine would ever need to put out.)
Today that same block architecture, with some development mind you, is supporting over 1,200 HP in race trim. No one back in 1990 would have ever believed it was possible, even if you made the block out of titanium. Even if we had been able to study today's 1,200 HP Ford GT or Shelby version of the Modular, we would have figured maybe 500 or 600 HP tops. That's where years of building, racing, and tinkering can make the formulas and FEA models look pretty bad."
-
Yeah you're right there BB. What we would consider "living" at 460 HP involves a 200 hr durability test on the dyno. (Remember that thrash Ford did on the EcoBoost V6? That's what I'm talking about.) I bet a GT longblock would have a hard time staying together at 1200 HP for 200 hrs, but it's still super impressive that it can stay together at all!
Despite all of the torture tests we did on our engines, deep down we all knew that you could still give a car to a 16 year old and it would be toast in one afternoon ;D
-
I think there are so many factors it's unreal. Stroke, Bal, is it detroit or zero, RPM. The the casting inconsistencies, not like every FE was cast perfectly the same. Just look at the bore and the core shift as a example. I think it's hard to pin down an Exact number and say and FE lives to this number for life. it's all a crap shoot when running on the edge. Kinda like driving a car on thin ICE. sometimes you can and sometimes you go through the same thickness.
-
So maybe someone can answer this one for me. All I know is FE's are 5.0's and most other platforms, call it the norm, that the opposing cylinders are offset? Take a look at a FE from the bottom and notice how the cylinders across from each other are offset. I was told that this is where a FE falls short. That this offset creates a twisting force in the block. This is what causes a FE to split up the mains.
-
I think all V-8s are offset like that. It is not an FE specific characteristic.
-
It's "our fault" that we do not really know how far you can push a garden variety FE under boost. Most FE guys are pretty old school and pretty conservative by nature. In comparison, the LS, modular, and 5.0 guys are more attuned to the idea of the engine as a sacrificial, disposable item. Throw nitrous or boost or both at it until it goes kaboom and then replace the "bullet".
I have a sneaking suspicion that if you handed a forged piston 390 to a tuner he'd be making absolutely stupid power on boost & EFI before anything would break.
Hey Jay - I have a perfectly good 390 block with a broken bellhousing ear and a nice cast crank. Wanna throw the ProCharger from the Mach on it and see how far it'll go with the intention of destruction? All we need is to bung a Streetmaster up and I can run my stand alone EMC FAST harness on it. We can flip a coin on who's dyno room get the oil dri treatment :)
Might make us famous on Youtube..... 8)
-
I have some old Edelbrock heads that are new/ported/experimental, and the Streetmaster that won the FE shootout for torque. I'm game to lend them out. Also have a Victor, StreetDominator, that might work. Joe-JDC.
-
I have no parts to offer in this adventure, but I do like the idea of scientific destruction. I'm darn curious what a mildly built 390 would put out before ungodly boost destroyed it. Later, Travis
-
Oh wow ;D
I bet you'd be amazed at how much the ole' deep skirt block can take, at least for a short flog. Let's make it fun and add nitro to the fuel :P
-
Hey, wait up guys! I can source about 5 gallons of 100% nitro and cut it with alky to say 90%.
Wow, with the charger pulleys on 'kill' and 90% in the tank .....an easy 2,000 hp+....or bust! LOL!
Geez, I go so excited I missed that Bill said the same above!
-
I have a ProCharger and intercooler for 4.6 SOHC, if someone had the brackets for a FE, or I have a S trim Vortec pullied for 14 psi and 8 rib belt, just need brackets for FE. The possibilities are endless---. Joe-JDC.
-
Boy, this sounds like too much fun to miss out on. I have two turbos sitting here, each one good enough for 1000 HP. I also have the Blue Thunder MR heads from my supercharged motor, and that Victor I bought from you Barry that would just bolt right on. I could build a grenade in no time, and just keep turning up the wick on the turbos until the rods went flying. Or the crank. Or the block. Whatever.
Problem for me is that I'm officially pressed for time now to get ready for Drag Week. Can we table this grenade project until October?
-
Yes, please do. Whatever it takes, I will wait patiently. If I was closer I would offer up grunt work to help out. I have wondered the same thing "what is a 390 good to with low rpms and a lot of boost?" I have dreams of building up my 64 comet and using turbo'd low buck 390's.
About the block layout, good to know. If Shoe was around I would ask him for more detail. I wonder if the casting is too thin in the critical areas that the twisting motion shows up as the first failure mode.
-
I`ve never played with blowers or turbos, although I have run plenty of nitrous oxide thru FE`s years ago. My nearly bone stock R code 69 Mach 1 improved from mid 13`s in the 1/4 mile, to high 11`s at 115mph with a 125HP NOS kit. Stock exhaust manifolds with crappy crimped 2 1/4" $100 dual exhaust system, stock torque convertor, 3.50 gears, cast pistons, stock fuel pump, the only problem I ever experianced was bending several stock pushrods when the engine overrevved due to wheelspin on the street "on the bottle" in low gear. Shifting at 5600 RPM, this combination was virtually bulletproof for the 2 years I ran it like that. However, the first 390 I had in my Fairmont suffered major destruction "on the bottle". It used a "105" D4TE block, main studs, new Lemans rods with forged pistons, and ran mid 11`s @ 114 MPH with a foot braked C6. A 175HP NOS kit pushed the car to 10.2-3ETs at over 130 MPH, but after about a season of such useage, ALL the main webbing between the cam & the crankshaft tore out of the block, the crank was in 5 pieces. The right side of the oil pan rail area was bulged out noticably, the starter nose snapped off, and the flexplates starter teeth had carved a large groove in the bellhousing area, as well as splitting the entire bellhousing area from pan rail to pan rail. The front pumps stator support was also snapped off. The photos were posted on the FE forum about 10 years ago by Dave Shoe. This carnage happened in 1989 or 1990, and I`ve been naturally aspirated ever since. I think Jays analogy of the big tired, 6000 RPM clutch dumps being hard on the non crossbolted FE have much merit: after the 390s demise, I have ran 4 or 5 different 428`s thru the Fairmont. 2 died from broken connecting rods after years of racing, when used with the C6, but the several split cylinder walls,& cracked main webbing has all occurred in the last 12 years since I replaced the C6 with a 4 speed Jerico & clutch. The performance improvement with the 4 speed is considerable, but it sure appears the added stress to the block is as well. Although a crossbolted block would certainly help, its no garantee that split main webs will never happpen. The 427 block in DaleP`s 67 Mustang suffered a split main web, right thru the main bearing oil hole, just like my 428 did.
-
When considering how an FE will act under boost, it might be well to consider Pete Robinson and some of the other pioneers who ran Cammers on boost-'n'-pop.
KS
-
Sounds good Jay. All the more time to pass the hat around and at least get a set of forged pistons into the thing.
Maybe somebody has some old TRW's lying around. They're bomb proof and the noise will probably delay you shutting the test down until the crank really is on the floor ;)
I like the idea of boosting the snot out of it and keeping the revs down. Maybe we can put some Caterpillar emblems on the valve covers.
-
Well Jay if you are serious, October works for me :)
And yes, Robinson, Kalitta, and other did run about 90% (and often less for match races) with cross-bolted 427 blocks and often Milodon's steel main cap support. But, they didn't last long per testimonials by Ed Pink and other SOHC builders with the mains cracking up through the unused cam tunnel. The latest nostalgia fuel car (and also the fastest drag racing SOHC of all time) was/is the Bach & Gould supercharged F.E.D. and they also lost too many stock block engines at least until they had some late model Shelby or Pond blocks. Btw, dream wheel work on Kalitta's triple win '67 rail showed between 1,900 and 2,100 hp for his best 7.17 e.t IIRC (Schiefer slipper clutch, smallish 6-71, single pump, single mag).
Best to skip the nitro come to think about it (too prone to detonation) and instead go for max turbo or 'charger boost on gas. 'Course, these aren't my parts....LOL !
-
Very likely the way to go about things would be to use some of the characteristics Jim Dove has incorporated into his 'Funny Car' engine. The (Cammer) heads have the intake and exhaust runners from KB 'fuelie' heads grafted in and the block doesn't have a cam tunnel.
On an allied note, the Jag aj27 engine in my ECTA car has water jackets that only extend down the cylinder walls about an inch-and-a-half and are solid from there on down. The sleeves are cast in place, and both the head studs and the plethora of studs that come up from the bottom are very long to make use of the entire mass of things to help hold it all together.
KS
-
It's "our fault" that we do not really know how far you can push a garden variety FE under boost. Most FE guys are pretty old school and pretty conservative by nature. In comparison, the LS, modular, and 5.0 guys are more attuned to the idea of the engine as a sacrificial, disposable item. Throw nitrous or boost or both at it until it goes kaboom and then replace the "bullet".
I have a sneaking suspicion that if you handed a forged piston 390 to a tuner he'd be making absolutely stupid power on boost & EFI before anything would break.
Hey Jay - I have a perfectly good 390 block with a broken bellhousing ear and a nice cast crank. Wanna throw the ProCharger from the Mach on it and see how far it'll go with the intention of destruction? All we need is to bung a Streetmaster up and I can run my stand alone EMC FAST harness on it. We can flip a coin on who's dyno room get the oil dri treatment :)
Might make us famous on Youtube..... 8)
I'd gladly send up a streetmaster if you send it back with injector bungs installed when you are done with it... :P (I've given some thought to getting a running JY 390 and putting boost on it, keeping it in a very safe A/F range, and seeing how far it can go... - but so far time and money have not played along)
My turbo obsession started with this guy who is the consumate "do something with what you have and see how far you can take it..." kind of guy...
(http://members.jasnetworks.net/mjsitar/Images/supermike.jpg)
Who took this car
(http://members.jasnetworks.net/mjsitar/DadTT/Images/dadscar.jpg)
Added slicks, boost, and a JY windsor to make it do this...
(http://members.jasnetworks.net/mjsitar/DadTT/Images/CJTT1L.jpg)
And started collecting things like this (left column)...
(http://members.jasnetworks.net/mjsitar/DadTT/Images/Dadslip1101-2.jpg)
If memory serves he had less than $3000 in a car that went 110 in the 1/8th in a 3200lb + car.... :-) His "spec sheet" reads:
Specifications for 2000:
1972 351W short block, all stock, new rings and bearings.
Oil pan and pickup from a 351W Crown Vic.
GT-40 iron cylinder heads all stock (produces 8.0 to 1 CR.).
2 - Garret TO3s from 85-86 Tbird TCs, .63 exhaust A/R.
Custom Upper Intake
1990 Ford truck EFI lower intake
75 mm throttle body
Crane camshaft 216/228 @ .050" duration and .482/.496" lift.
Electromotive TEC-II DFI system
24x9x3" air - air custom intercooler
8 - 54 lb/hr low impedance injectors.
1.5" shorty headers, flipped upside-down and elongated bolt holes to align with exhaust port.
Two fuel pumps routed in parallel - one in-tank (255 L/hr), one in-line (~100 L/hr).
Specifications for 2001:
1972 351W short block, bored .030, crank cut .010/.020, line honed, zero decked.
Sealed power hyperutectic pistons with 0.190" deep dish (8.5:1 CR)
Resized 351W truck connecting rods.
Crane Cam 228/228 @ .050" .512/.512" lift.
Crane valve springs.
Gasket matched lower intake manifold
-
If you are looking at going down this road you could very easily hang a big single industrial junkyard turbo (industrial - diesel truck unit) off of a couple of factory log exhaust manifolds (perhaps two of the ones on top here)
(http://www.fordfe.info/ExhaustManifolds/FactoryEx/FE76Both-A.jpg)
I dug up an old spreadsheet and my rough math says that a 390CID engine at 24 PSI and a .8 VE @ 5000RPM would eat about 96 lbs/min and be making about 1000 HP (again very rough model).
I'd think that an old HX60 would do the trick... Spool will be slow and you'll have to support the behemoth with something - but it will move more air than needed... ;D
-
AS cool as it would be I ain't talking about some billet crank Cammer megadollar deal.
I'm thinking of a one step from stock 390 with forged slugs and a couple bolt ons. Kinda like the kids are doing with LS, mod, and 5.0 stuff. Going after four digits with a turbo would be hilarious.... Probably won't get there but I wager we'd get way more than anybody would expect... NOT OSHA approved for sure... 8)
-
If it is going to be real world, then it needs to be a 390 crankshaft, Scat/Eagle rods, forged pistons, good bearings, Edelbrock 2.09/1.655 with pocket porting, good springs, Victor with bungs, gasket matched, good ignition, front sump oil pan with windage tray, and at least a 2" header tube. Better heads if you can't break it with this. JMO, Joe-JDC.
-
AS cool as it would be I ain't talking about some billet crank Cammer megadollar deal.
I'm thinking of a one step from stock 390 with forged slugs and a couple bolt ons. Kinda like the kids are doing with LS, mod, and 5.0 stuff. Going after four digits with a turbo would be hilarious.... Probably won't get there but I wager we'd get way more than anybody would expect... NOT OSHA approved for sure... 8)
I truly would not be terribly surprised if you were able to get to 10XX at the crank on a hard-blocked 390 under a turbo - especially if you take the right steps to reduce imbalance. I went digging for an old thread that I remembered from theturboforums (formally TurboMustangs.com) regarding how far folks were getting on their stock 351W blocks. I found it here : http://www.theturboforums.com/smf/dyno-results-and-track-times-forum/let's-see-those-stock-block-351w-turbo-combo's!!/ There is no doubt some bench racing going on here - but a number of the guys who posted are solid, long time members and racers. This is one such entry...
351w .030 - DSS Pro XR max quench dish 30cc dish, 4340 h- beam rods, STOCK CRANK & no main girdle, no block filler!! F4TE block
AFR 205's - $30 head gaskets - never had problem!!
AMF B-451 cam - stock 200,000 mile lifters
Victor Jr. Intake
750 CSU - Kevin did a great job on the carb it looks Bling-bling
S400 -75mm no race cover with 1.32ar - Thanks to www.turbodaves.com - Highly recommend him for any turbo purchase.
60mm wastegate - ebay wastegate
50mm BOV - of them (ebay BOV)
Powerglide with Edge - Pro series convertor
Magnafuel Pro Star 500
13202 Regulator
Dynojet WideBand Commanders
MSD Boost Launch Control
MSD 7531
60' - 1.329
330 - 3.576
mph - 100.65
1/8 - 5.458
mph - 128.26
And it still has more left
Car has been 1.2x on radials and has seen 129 in the 1/8th. Car runs 5.4x on radials and 5.4x on slicks!!! We all thing the car has 5.3x with current setup and if we change to a s480 we could dip in the .20 range if not more. BTW we had 110+ passes on the motor this year before a lock busted and we dropped a valve!! So currently we have to identical motors being built at the machine shop (same as listed above) - we already had the backup parts and this roller blocks are a dime a dozen down here in texas.
Don't we scared of the 351w roller blocks!! We have a few other guys down here running 5.7x or better on them (some for years) and turbostang had 300+ passes on his old motor at 700-800hp driving to the track and back with ac at 3300lbs running 5.9-6.1 - this is with stock 351w short block (crank, rods, trw pistons)