FE Power Forums
FE Power Forums => FE Technical Forum => Topic started by: FESCJ on December 21, 2020, 03:37:41 PM
-
Hey folks, building a 69 Fairlane Cobra formal roof clone. I have a 428 that was built for another car; intended engine mission has changed. I'll list out engine/car specs and we can go from there.
1. First off car; 69 Fairlane formal roof, C6 auto basically stock, 3.89 rear. Probably my last resto due to health.
2. Engine; 428 service block .030 over, Lemans rods, Scat crank, Probe pistons, XE274 Cam, C6AE-R heads with appropriate CJ mods including drilled for 16 bolts. Milodon deep sump pan, Holley street Dominator intake, 3310-1 Holley 780........which I really don't care for. Oh, forgot, 75 cc chambers in heads, Probe pistons -16 cc version. Was suppose to be around 9.6:1 compression.
3. This engine was built nearly ten years ago for a 69 Mustang 4spd car with 4.30 rear. As you can tell by date, life, health and a thousand other things can get in the way.
4. New mission with regard to Fairlane; car must behave.......absolutely must! With my health, wife will probably be driving more than myself. Good idle a must, decent overall manners a must, will have cast iron exhaust manifolds (CJ) and full exhaust. Power brakes a must, etc.
5. I realize what I am giving up here.......at least to an extent to how it was built. Things just change, I need this. I am concerned about cam? I think it will be lopey? I think idle quality will be sacrificed. I am not as concerned about current intake, but wonder if I don't gain anything from something like an Edelbrock RPM?
6. Would appreciate any thoughts on this build? I'd rather make changes now than later.
7. I appreciate this forum very much! Thanks for any opinions, advice, etc!
Brian N
Groveport, Ohio
-
That Holley intake is a really good one, but you will pick up some midrange torque with a Performer RPM. If you don't expect to see lots of excursions past 4500 RPM, I think the Performer RPM would be a better fit.
Does your Holley 780 carb have the provisions for the factory Ford kickdown linkage? If not, I'd try to scrounge that up, would make a big difference in an automatic car...
-
Sorry about your health troubles. It makes it much harder.
I don't think that cam is too radical. It will have a lope, but low end will be okay with a higher than stock stall speed like 2500 rpm or so. So I think it would be "okay" in that case. With a stockish stall convertor I think I might pick a smaller cam. I think a milder cam with different spec's might be better if you are up for a cam change. Your compression ratio does seem to be in the 9.6 range or a little higher depending on how far in the hole your piston is. No doubt a custom cam is best, but something like the old Crane HMV 272 might be good. It is 216/228 degrees with a 112 LSA. I think it would be okay with premium pump gas.
I think Jay's recommendation of the Edelbrock RPM intake is right on the money. And I think your Holley 3310-1 carb is one of the best carb's ever made. I'd consider making sure it is tuned right before giving up on it.
JMO,
paulie
-
After reading your post again, I feel a little more strongly that a cam change is in order. I still don't know your stall speed, but it sounds like it won't be too far from stock. And given your fairly mild compression ratio, you can afford to step down in cam size and still run pump gas, with better street manners.
JMO,
paulie
-
From another formal roof fan...here is a photo I came across online the other day, I had sent it to my dad. We have a '69 428 Fairlane sitting in the barn waiting for it's day. Ours came with the silver rally wheels but I prefer the dog dish on that car.
(https://i.postimg.cc/QtdYm3vC/Fairlane-Cobra-2.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
-
A cam swap would make a world of difference and you have a good set up to go milder. The Edelbrock rpm would be icing on the cake but I don’t even think it’s needed if you pick a cam right
Happy to help if you need it, But if it’s really going to be mama and a cruiser and keep overlap under 50 and shorten up duration
-
I truly appreciate all of the responses! Big time kudos to Jay for such a nice forum! Yes, the health issues suck, but, I'm still standing. I will stand for as long as I can, then, the wife takes over! I honestly wasn't super concerned about the intake, but I thought I'd put it out there under the circumstances of this build. I'm good with running it. I was more concerned about the cam and overall drivability. You have all confirmed my suspicions especially in conjunction with the CJ manifolds less headers.
The C6 that I have for this car is a good but stock rebuild. I was thinking shift kit and a street style convertor in the 2400 stall range? Really nothing super fancy, just good reliable stuff. The carb I guess is decent. It's an off the shelf 3310-1 that was previously installed on an LS-6 454 El Camino. The guy who set it up for me did it square, 74 jets all around. He said he preferred it to be a little rich. But, I was concerned because primary accelerator pump arm was bent, and accelerator pump cam was not changed in rebuild? It's a white cam? Anyway, I don't feel comfortable as it sits, so, if any of you do carbs, let me know?
On the cam, what should I run? I've looked at so many specs from Lunati, Compcams and Iskey, I'm seeing double. Thoughts?
Thank you much!
Brian N
-
I have personally run that intake on a 428CJ. It was in a 1966 Fairlane GTA, originally a 390 car. The intake was unmodified and I had a Holley 3310 on it, not a -1. I had a less desirable later version with the straight boosters. I can't remember exactly which one. The 428 had an unknown "RV" cam from the 80's. It might have also been called a 3/4 race cam. I dunno what it was. It was a mild hydraulic flat tappet performance cam. If I had to guess it would have been around 220-228 degrees duration and just over .500" lift with a fairly wide lobe separation angle like 112 or 114. That is just a pure guess based on my memory of how it performed. With a stock C6 and 3.25 gears, and Hooker 1-3/4" headers it pulled to 6000-6200 rpm. Anyhoo.....getting off track. My point was the intake worked just fine. It pulled good from from low rpm to redline with no issues. That was all seat of the pants feel, though. I bet an Edelbrock RPM would beat it up all over the place if measured in any quantifiable way.
Maybe a cam like this?
https://www.lunatipower.com/street-strip-hydraulic-flat-tappet-cam-ford-352-428-270-280.html
paulie
-
Paulie, that Lunati cam looks decent. I was also wondering about Compcams 270H, and or the Lunati factory muscle cam which seems to be the modern day equivalent of the old CJ cam.
Any thoughts?
Brian
-
I had a '69 Formal Roof CJ automatic car with that 270H cam and it was a dog. Didn't seem to come on until 3500 RPM or more. Maybe there were other reasons, but I can't recommend that cam. Idled smoothly though. ::)
-
So here is what I would likely do. However, there are some assumptions here
1 - You want this ready for the wife, easy driving and willing to give up the peak power
2 - No need to change from stock parts to make it work
I would go with a custom cam, add a little taper to ease in break in, use a Camsaver lifter, and make sure spring pressures work with what you have.
Given the engine specs, I'd leave the intake alone, leave the converter stock (or whatever is in it) and run one of the Magnum 270 intake lobes with a 280 exhaust lobe (I say one of, because there are options for lift and ramp speed, not just the 270H), and I would have it ground on 114 (or 112 if you want a little more chop, depends how mild you want it). Install on 106, it will be pump gas friendly and sort of behave like a upgraded CJ cam.
The vacuum will climb high compared to what you have and pull hard on the intake. If you really wanted an RPM intake, it would run well too, but I don't think there is any need to spend the money.
If really on a budget, I have a spare cam and lifters here that would work too. Crane HMV 272-2 that would work too, had it in a temp 390 build until I finished my truck stroker, maybe 500 miles on it, probably closer to 250, and might be interested in a swap if your cam and lifters come out looking good. It's a bit milder than what I am recommending though, but still very CJ-like. 272/284 112 LSA on 108, but the .050 numbers are less, so it likely would be down a bit on power.
-
Hey FESCJ, I have a good used Crane Cams 344341 camshaft.
This came out of my 428 (1966 7-LITRE Galaxie) when I rebuilt my engine.
I purchased and installed this cam years ago and I am pretty sure the cam has less than 8,000 miles on it because I just did not drive the car that much.
I removed the cam from my good running engine and placed it in an oil filled PVC tube, sealed it, and put it on the shelf a long time ago.
Talk this cam over with the guys on this forum.
If it will work I will open the tube, verify the cam is still good, and send it your way to help with the project if you wish.
If the cam will not work, no worries, and no harm in refusing my offer.
-
Hey folks, truly appreciate all of the responses! I will try to nutshell a few things and narrow a few things a bit. I'll list it out.
1. Yes, very important that the car have manners and behave.......especially with regard to lope and sound.My wife is very interested and on board with this car. Just gotta keep it within the parameters listed.
2. All of you are much more knowledgeable about current camshafts that are available and something appropriate for this build.
3.Price is not really an issue. Having said that, I'd probably prefer dealing with an "off the shelf" cam as opposed to a custom grind.
4. My first car in 1979 was a Fairlane Cobra with C6 auto and 3.50 rear. It was a bit rusty and tired, but it still ran great.......basically stock. I want my current car to at least perform like a stock CJ Fairlane would.
5. I feel bad saying what I did in line 4 simply because you are all so very good at building great FE engines and cars. Again, I'm not happy about it, but, my circumstances require me to probably pull some power from this engine in regard to civility.
6. The camshafts and offers regarding Ross and Cleandan are much appreciated! I have no idea how to respond? Thank you.
7. I'm a little frustrated because this thing has been sitting for nearly ten years and it's not done yet. I am trying to do my best. I am better with regard to this forum and knowledge within.
Having said all of that, any thoughts? That's about as straight as I can be on this build.
Thank you,
Brian N
-
The cam you have now would be fine with a 2400 rpm converter
-
So, it would idle ok and be ok by virtue of what I listed? I'm not opposed to running things as they currently sit. I'm just trying to be proactive to my future health wise, etc.
I had planned on a Hughes convertor in the 2400 stall range. Coupled with 3.89 gears in Fairlane.
Would I be ok?
Thx,
Brian
-
Brian I think a situation such as this warrants the small additional cost of a custom cam. But if an "off the shelf" cam is what you want, a mild CJ with an automatic would be the Comp 268H. If you want a little better sound and aggression, go with the Comp 270H.
-
He wants power brakes for a no-doubt dainty wife. Is that going to be an issue with any of the cams above?
-
If he stays in the overlap range I mentioned, he will have plenty of vacuum.
A 268H is likely too small and would put him on the edge of detonation unless he retarded it and/or fought the tune a bit
-
So, it would idle ok and be ok by virtue of what I listed? I'm not opposed to running things as they currently sit. I'm just trying to be proactive to my future health wise, etc.
I had planned on a Hughes convertor in the 2400 stall range. Coupled with 3.89 gears in Fairlane.
Would I be ok?
Thx,
Brian
That combo will run fine, it's not wild by any means but might be a little low on vacuum. Mama will be more unhappy with the gears than the engine IMHO
I have seen that cam in a few 428s and they do run well even at low RPM, but likely not a lot of vacuum
-
Just wanted to reiterate that Brian said he is running CJ manifolds, not headers.
pl
-
To be honest, I think the current cam would meet your needs. I'm reading that Comp XE274H cam as 230/236 @ .050", 274/286 advertised, 110 LSA, 106 ICL. It would have 60 degrees of overlap, which is more than plenty to run power brakes (on a well-sealed engine, 64-65 will often yield 14-15 inches) and it will have a slight lope to it. Nothing radical or thumpy.
I agree that the deep gear would probably wear on someone who wasn't "gear head oriented" but it's still not a deal breaker.
I think that cam with that engine/head combo would probably peak the horsepower at around 5400-5500. Probably a 430 hp engine with 460-470 lb-ft.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a complete hater against the "universal" cams with a 6 degree split on a 110, but if it's already in the car, I'd be hard pressed to do a cam swap and break-in on something else.
-
Maybe advance the current cam another 2-4 degrees depending on where it's at now?
pl
-
I've never seen so much debate over building a 'mild' engine...lol
A stock 428 should be plenty for any normal person to have lots of fun, but we live in an age where everybody wants POWER. This is a good example of NOT everybody. A mild CJ type cam and RPM intake is all it would take to have lots of fun, and be plenty reliable. An automatic can make engines much more street friendly with just about any cam, so as long as the current cam can build the vacuum, like Brent says, why change it? As long as it's not difficult to hold at a stoplight (too tight of a convertor), why risk a new cam break-in?
Unless she's really keen on gearing changes, and the "whys" to it, I don't see gearing being an issue unless lots of highway driving is in the cards. Then maybe. Or you could just stick a bigger tire under it and effectively lower the gearing that way.
-
I wouldn't be afraid of a 3.50 or 3.25 gear for cruising
-
Something along the lines of a 351 CJ C6 converter will be a little looser than the stock converter and allow a little higher gear ratio.Also check your stock rebuild C6 and see what servo they put on it,make sure its not an L,N,or S thats a really small servo that will make for a lazy 2-3 shift even with a shift kit,I went thru that trying to figure it out,it had a nice 1-2 but lazy 2-3, I finally looked at the servo,switched it to a D and presto nice firm but not jarring shifts.
-
The trans servo cover has a G? The trans actually came out of a 68 Galaxie XL convertible with 390......kind of a cool car. Guy had trans rebuilt, drove it very limitedly for a short time, and frame broke. Parted the car out. The convertor I was thinking of was a Hughes, step above stock with 2400 stall. If the 351 CJ convertor is better, I'm not opposed? I guess I also wasn't aware that the C6 convertors were universal? I mean, I figured each convertor was specific to engine line ( trans case style)?
I think I'll start out with the 3.89 gears and go from there. A friend had a similar car and gear and I did like it. Car will stay local, more of a farming community area southeast of Columbus, Ohio. I doubt I would drive this car on any Columbus freeways. Crazy drivers going 80/90 mph........guess they love their jobs and need to get there quick? Lol
I appreciate all of the responses with regard to cam and build. Under the circumstances, seems silly to do anything right now. I'll run it, see how things go and proceed from there. I'll bet the Chevy forums don't have the super nice and knowledgeable people that this forum has! Curious question, Chevy small block=Mouse. Chevy big block=Rat. Chevy LS=Hampster?
Everyone please have a good safe holiday season! My best to you all!
Brian N
-
Sounds like a good plan Brian, always easier to turn the key and see what it does versus changing it
You are in a good place though if you decide to go mild later, the engine and car will likely be a blast with the healthy cam and a 3.89 or fun less cam and gear, really a nice combo no matter what you do.
-
The trans servo cover has a G? The trans actually came out of a 68 Galaxie XL convertible with 390......kind of a cool car. Guy had trans rebuilt, drove it very limitedly for a short time, and frame broke. Parted the car out. The convertor I was thinking of was a Hughes, step above stock with 2400 stall. If the 351 CJ convertor is better, I'm not opposed? I guess I also wasn't aware that the C6 convertors were universal? I mean, I figured each convertor was specific to engine line ( trans case style)?
I think I'll start out with the 3.89 gears and go from there. A friend had a similar car and gear and I did like it. Car will stay local, more of a farming community area southeast of Columbus, Ohio. I doubt I would drive this car on any Columbus freeways. Crazy drivers going 80/90 mph........guess they love their jobs and need to get there quick? Lol
I appreciate all of the responses with regard to cam and build. Under the circumstances, seems silly to do anything right now. I'll run it, see how things go and proceed from there. I'll bet the Chevy forums don't have the super nice and knowledgeable people that this forum has! Curious question, Chevy small block=Mouse. Chevy big block=Rat. Chevy LS=Hampster?
Everyone please have a good safe holiday season! My best to you all!
Brian N
The one step above stock sounds about like the 351CJ it was just a little looser to help the displacement challenged 351,the G servo if I remember correctly was used in the C-6's used behind the 462's and early 460's used in the late 60's Lincoln Continental at least the one I have came out of a 67 462 Continental I've never run it but it looks like it would be OK.I think sizewise the servo's were the R the biggest used in the big block CJ's,then the H used in PI's and taxis,then I think the G,and then the D which was typically the one used in GT's and also commonly found in pickups, but I'm not sure about the bottom 2 but thats what I remember off the top of my head.I found some tables in factory shop manuals from that timeframe that showed the different sizes on the big and small part of the pistons but can't remember if it was in diameter or square inch area.There was a later version of the D that was the rubber coated one with lip seals which had a different letter but was the same size as the aluminum D with O ring seals but I don't remember the letter.There were several other smaller ones but I never paid much attention to them because the ones I had experience with didn't impress me,I'd be curious to find out if anybody had an original 351CJ C-6 to find out what servo it used,I have a hunch t was the D or its equivalent but not sure,the last ones I saw were before I started paying attention to the servos.As far as the C-6 converters,the bolt pattern where it bolts to the flywheel can vary between small and big block and the the converter snout that engages the back of the crank varies in size but can be made compatible by use of a ring bushing when mating small snout to big crank.
-
By the way I really like sound of your project I've always been partial to the formal roof coupes.
-
My 71 Ranchero 429 CJ came with the D servo stock. When I ordered the race rebuild kit for it I asked my trans rebuilder if I needed to order a D servo and he told me I all ready had one.
Greg
-
My 71 Ranchero 429 CJ came with the D servo stock. When I ordered the race rebuild kit for it I asked my trans rebuilder if I needed to order a D servo and he told me I all ready had one.
Greg
Is that an anomaly, did the R servo not continue into the 429 CJ?
-
Greg, I personally don't know about the C6 trans.....well, I don't know much. I've been a 4 Spd car guy until recently when my health slipped. Anyway, I need to do some more research to be better informed. I appreciate John427's input. He knows much more than I do, and his responses are very much appreciated!
I understand what you are saying regarding the 351 CJ C6 trans torque convertor. John427, your input has helped me much. Currently, (as opposed to 351CJ) I am looking at a Hughes FE large pilot torque convertor that has an advertised stall of 2200/2500 rpm. It would seem appropriate for my "mild" build and affordable at about $250 from Jegs, which is just up the street from me.
I really like this car I am building. It is a clone formal roof 69 Cobra. The paint will be 69 Thunderbird/Lincoln mid night orchid. Actually, if I'm totally correct, it will be a 69 Cobra Clone SCJ/Drag pack car. I pretty much decided that my final car restoration would be something that I would have ordered in 69.
Just to put it out there, special paint back then was around $100 per car. They hand sprayed stuff then, much much easier for special paint then, as opposed to now.
Thanks much,
Brian N
-
Never play with different servos unless you know what your application lever is. A 'R' servo with anything but an 'A' or a 'B' lever may cause the case to crack. There are 6 lever ratios and 9 different servos that I'm aware of and each is for a particular application and should not be mixed unless you really know what you are doing. For example: a common mod would be putting a shift kit in the valve body to boost line pressure, that can cause even quicker damage as now you have increased the total apply pressure to a servo not intended to handle that increase in pressure plus couple that with a high ratio lever such as 'H' lever [2.18 to 1] or an 'F' lever that is 2.30 to 1 even a small increase of line pressure using a 'H' servo [2.34/3.02] or an 'R' servo [2.48/3.50] may break the case. In fact a full throttle/high rpm shift from low to 2nd with the wrong combination of levers and servos trying to stop the high/rev drum instantly is almost guaranteed of case breakage. May not happen the 1st time but your C6 is living on borrowed time.
-
Never play with different servos unless you know what your application lever is. A 'R' servo with anything but an 'A' or a 'B' lever may cause the case to crack. There are 6 lever ratios and 9 different servos that I'm aware of and each is for a particular application and should not be mixed unless you really know what you are doing. For example: a common mod would be putting a shift kit in the valve body to boost line pressure, that can cause even quicker damage as now you have increased the total apply pressure to a servo not intended to handle that increase in pressure plus couple that with a high ratio lever such as 'H' lever [2.18 to 1] or an 'F' lever that is 2.30 to 1 even a small increase of line pressure using a 'H' servo [2.34/3.02] or an 'R' servo [2.48/3.50] may break the case. In fact a full throttle/high rpm shift from low to 2nd with the wrong combination of levers and servos trying to stop the high/rev drum instantly is almost guaranteed of case breakage. May not happen the 1st time but your C6 is living on borrowed time.
Spot on for the servo swapping,D's and G's are relatvely safe to swap,but the H's and R's are risky without looking up at the lever to see what letter it has the same tables I saw in the shop manuals also listed the lever ratios.The R in combination with high ratio lever can easily crack a case,thats why they are not recommended by themselves but in conjunction with the matching lever.As far as the 429CJ trans having a D servo it defintely should have had the R servo and cast iron tailhousing but over the years if it had been rebuilt by an unscrupulous shop it was not uncommon for those to have been swapped with garden variety stuff,its pretty easy to say"I had to replace these because of this" to the average Joe.The cast iron tailhousings were also used on some PI's and Fleet apps.(taxis)but not by all by any means and as the 70's progressed they pretty much disappeared.I wouldn't be afraid to put a D on any C-6,but tread carefully when going larger than that.
-
Aftermarket servo covers are commonly sold with a matching lever. The spec sheet will give info about what to do regarding line pressure.
KS
-
I appreciate all of the responses on trans and torque convertor! As I said, it came out of a 68 Galaxie with 390 and has G servo. The trans has few miles on it since stock rebuild, but, I am now thinking it might be better to open it up and see what they did? Might be better, I'd rather know, and I could make a few changes.
I haven't had time to research convertor much. Having said that, I'll need the large pilot FE convertor. I know Hughes makes a nice one in the 2200/2500 stall range. Jeg's might have one in their own brand, and they are only a few miles away. Anyway, few things to consider.
Just as a note, the car will be painted in 1969 Thunderbird/Lincoln midnight orchid. I love that color. Kinda rare.
Thanks to all!
Brian N
-
I appreciate all of the responses on trans and torque convertor! As I said, it came out of a 68 Galaxie with 390 and has G servo. The trans has few miles on it since stock rebuild, but, I am now thinking it might be better to open it up and see what they did? Might be better, I'd rather know, and I could make a few changes.
I haven't had time to research convertor much. Having said that, I'll need the large pilot FE convertor. I know Hughes makes a nice one in the 2200/2500 stall range. Jeg's might have one in their own brand, and they are only a few miles away. Anyway, few things to consider.
Just as a note, the car will be painted in 1969 Thunderbird/Lincoln midnight orchid. I love that color. Kinda rare.
Thanks to all!
Brian N
You shouldn't have to disassemble it,pulling the pan and getting a light up there should allow you to see the letter on the lever,worst case scenario a snake camera.Another converter that worked good for me was an ACC Boss Hog this was years ago and I've seen disparaging remarks about them since,but it worked really well in my street/bracket car 70 Torino 500 formal roof coupe with a somewhat built 429.This is the same car that I did the servo switch on.I got it all put together and tested it and it ran great except for the slow 2-3 shift.The engine pulled so hard I was certain the slow shift was going to kill the tranny in short order,I was ready to pull the tranny out and decided to try that D servo and it made a world of difference.
-
Unless I missed it , not a word about Ignition Curve,?????? that's a MUST it will especially help with manifold vacuum , drivng manners and to be safe with pump gas , I would put a 11 inch converter in it ,( ive used these with great success in the past and recommend https://www.summitracing.com/parts/tci-441100 drop the gear to 3.50 and enjoy , I have a 428 68 Cobra Fairlane Clone at my shop and it has good Vacuum with a bigger 282s cam , it didn't at first but the owner was smart enough to have the Dist gone through it had been done by Tim O'conner ,( good guy IMHO ) but the curve was what he called the Tasca Curve , maybe good in 69 but NOT with today's gas
-
Good point Faron, and I should have mentioned this. The distributor was recurved and has Pertronix. Having said that, I don't remember the curve? I cannot find the engine info folder. As I stated way earlier in the thread, the engine was built nearly ten years ago. Much has gone on in my life since and folder misplaced. I just don't know?
I'll take a look at the convertor you suggested.
Thanks,
Brian
-
Brian if your distributor is the original CJ piece you should be able to tailor your curve to what ever you want within the limits of the advance slots,even if your large one is only the 13 slot that will allow you dial in 26* of mechanical advance preventing you from having to use excessive initial to get the total you want.The late 60's vintage vacuum advance cans with the removable vacuum nipple is not only adjustable on vacuum setpoint but also on limit of amount of advance.Its kind of tedious changing,shimming,or cutting the spring and the phenolic mechanical stop,but you have the ability to dial in what ever you want,unlike the later allen wrench adjustable units which are easy to adjust for vacuum setpoint,but not so easy for advance limit,that will require some fabrication.