FE Power Forums
FE Power Forums => FE Technical Forum => Topic started by: blykins on March 09, 2017, 01:36:02 PM
-
A few weeks back, I built a 445 for a customer. At the same time, Jay was talking about his clear valve covers on this forum, so I shot him a message and asked if I could borrow them for a dyno session. The timing was right, as he was wanting to do some outside testing on them to see how well they seal up.
I got them in and since it was the day before the dyno session, I went ahead and popped the customer's valve covers off just to see if I would need different length fasteners. Got the left side cover off and just happened to notice that one pushrod wasn't even touching the rocker arm. This particular engine was a hydraulic roller engine, that uses non-adjustable rocker arms. Obviously, once the pushrod length is measured, the rockers are just bolted on and you're done. Turns out, when I had rolled the motor over to stab the distributor, the spring pressure pushed the lifter down and due to a manufacturing defect, the lifter plunger would not come back up under its own power. If I primed the oil pump, it would slowly come up, but it was very easy to push it back down with a finger WHILE priming the pump.
If I had not tried Jay's covers on, it would have went to the dyno and made a bunch of racket....maybe bent a pushrod.
Intake came off, lifter pair came out, new lifter pair went in, intake went back on.
Fast forward a week, dyno time comes back around.
Got the engine on the dyno, got it started, and during the break-in time I usually walk outside and look at the exhaust. I noticed a few wisps of steam coming out of the right side but wasn't overly concerned at this point as sometimes water/condensation can get down into the dyno mufflers and then the hot exhaust steams it back up. Just to be safe, I went into the dyno cell, pulled all of the spark plugs on the right side, and rolled the engine over with the starter. Nothing came shooting out at me, so I felt good. All the plugs had a little color in them and didn't look like they had been getting washed off. Pistons had color as well.
Got some break-in time in, and started putting pulls on the engine. Oil pressure looked great, oil temperature looked great, adjusted timing, put more pulls on. Walked back outside, still getting a wisp out of the right side. By this time, I was getting a little concerned. Pulled the valve covers and saw some milk up top. Now sometimes there are reasons for that, that shouldn't cause worry. I had driven an hour and 15 minutes that morning with the engine in the back of the truck. It was 30 degrees the entire time and it was so cold that holding onto the valve covers would actually make your hands start to throb. I told myself that it was plausible that the engine had been sweating inside and just hadn't got the moisture out of the oil yet. We fired it back up and I let the engine run at 2500 rpm with a 100 lb-ft load on it for about 10 minutes until the water temp was 190° and the oil temp was 210°. Shut it down, pulled valve covers. Still milky. That was a "poop the bed" moment.
At this point, I knew that I was going to have to do some serious investigation but I went ahead and screwed Jay's valve covers down so I could honor my word to him and see if they would seal up across some dyno pulls.
Here's what I saw:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfhEuGwkYb8
With no baffles and a very open breather, it was very apparent that we were getting some steam from inside the engine. The valve covers also showed immediate moisture (and milkshake) as the pulls went on.
I pulled the engine off the dyno and immediately ran it over to a buddy's shop (Ray's Crack Repair) and we pressure tested the entire engine. We blocked off every orifice and by the time we were through, we had introduced 25 lbs of pressure into the coolant system. No sounds out of the spark plug holes, no sounds out of the exhaust ports, and no bubbles around the intake manifold gaskets when I sprayed soapy water around them with the valve covers off.
Took the engine home, drained the oil, and before any oil came out, a coffee mug full of water came out first. sad.gif
I went ahead and tore the engine down.
Monday evening I dropped the bare engine block, heads, and intake off with Ray so he could pressure test each piece individually. He called me at 8:20 last night to tell me that he found two cracks, one below #8 cylinder on the inside of the block, and one below #4 cylinder on the inside of the block. He had to pressure the block up to 30 lbs to get them to leak, but we figured under running engine temperature, they opened up a lot easier.
Smoking gun.
A few notes that I can make here:
*This is what really stinks about dynoing and this is why I can't sleep well the night before the session. You can do everything right, even pressure test the block BEFORE assembly, and you never know what may happen.
*Jay's valve covers did not leak and are excellent testing tools. I highly recommend them.
*Even with making a water pump out of the oil pump (hurt some bearings), this engine made 460 hp @ 5200 and 520 lb-ft. It was a rather mild engine, 445ci, as-cast BBM heads, a Performer RPM intake, 9.5:1 compression, and a custom hydraulic roller stick, 227/227 @ /.050", 112/106, .570"/.570". Destined for a pickup truck, it used a 5 quart Milodon oil pan, along with a standard volume oil pump.
*With the SV/SP pump, oil pressure climbed throughout the pull, to 5500 rpm, with the oil pressure peaking at 60 psi. This engine used new non-adjustable rocker arms with a set of ARP stand studs and POP end stands. With no restrictors and no drip tins, the oil level didn't even get up to the valve spring locators in the heads, as can be seen (if you look through the moisture, hahaha) from the YouTube video. Each rocker did spray a nice little jet of oil at the inside roof of the valve covers. Main/rod bearing clearances were all at .0022-.0023. Used Valvoline VR1 10W-30.
*The customer will get a different engine block and we will re-assemble. I will post back with the new results.
-
Brent,
Very sorry for the result but I loved the video of the valve train running under the covers. Thanks for posting this - I learned a few things from it. BTW, what was the source of the block - an old iron FE?
-
Yes sir, factory 390 block.
-
Was it a well-used 390 block? (Edit - I see you replied above...) That's a crazy one :o
I feel your pain. I went to college in upstate New York, and had an old Monte Carlo. (My uncle gave it to me, so don't whine at me!)
Driving on cold days, the ALT light would come on and the battery would soon go flat. I pulled the alternator a couple of times and tested it in the shop - worked great. Finally the third time I got smart and tested it while still cold.
Turned out a solder joint to a slip ring had cracked, and it would bend away while cold >:(
Sometimes things just happen Brent. I applaud your thorough approach. Some guys would have just given up and shipped it out.
-
Be happy you have a dyno! Most of us have to install the engine prior to testing. You probably saw my thread on my lifter problems. I, too have had cracks and leaking on another engine (427 S.O.) mine was on the deck between the sleeves. Same story, pressure test went fine, a few heat cycles and a little steam out of the passenger side header. I swore I was done with used FE blocks - then I stumbled upon yet another S.O. today. Will it ever end?
-
Brent, you court oddball mishaps by putting your vids in the Comedy category, where Chevy vids belong. Switch to Automotive and your problems will disappear. Plus, you gain 10 hp per build. You may thank me any time.
-
Be happy you have a dyno! Most of us have to install the engine prior to testing. You probably saw my thread on my lifter problems. I, too have had cracks and leaking on another engine (427 S.O.) mine was on the deck between the sleeves. Same story, pressure test went fine, a few heat cycles and a little steam out of the passenger side header. I swore I was done with used FE blocks - then I stumbled upon yet another S.O. today. Will it ever end?
I think he has one because he builds them for a living? BTW, where do you "stumble upon" an FE SO. Thinking I need to walk around where you live while I'd be sad to have a cracked SO block, I'd at least have been happy for a while having found one!
-
FElony.....
Thanks.
-
I think he has one because he builds them for a living? BTW, where do you "stumble upon" an FE SO. Thinking I need to walk around where you live while I'd be sad to have a cracked SO block, I'd at least have been happy for a while having found one!
I was looking for a hood for my '69 Cobra (482 SO). Talking old Fords with a friend of a friend, he has a few (including my hood!), we start talking trades, he shows me the 427, we may end up making a deal. I really want to do an LS motor next but these FEs keep ending up in my garage!
BTW, my cracked 427 was repaired like this 390 was and is now for sale, see the classifieds section.
-
Uncle Will, in case you are interested..... this is the factory correct emblem for a Mustang with an LS in it:
(http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i6/DeepRootsNursery/16298934_10210428567384054_7828128706841765773_n_zpswwzapzsz.jpg)
-
:D
LOL!
I like LS motors - deep skirt block, priority oiling, cross bolted mains - sounds familiar?
-
^ That badge is awesome LOL. A LS has no business in a Mustang. If you really want to play with a LS, why not build a Camaro?
-
:D
LOL!
I like LS motors - deep skirt block, priority oiling, cross bolted mains - sounds familiar?
hahahaha, I know I know. They are what they are, just messing. (ok, I had the meme forever and I barely get to use it).
-
No way I'd put it in a Mustang! Probably a Corvette since they are getting pretty cheap these days. I really like the Ford Coyote engines too but they are bigger than an FE! And the Voodoo flat plane crank isn't available yet. Don't even get me started on my V12 fantasies...
-
There is a biological reason behind today's obsession with LS engines, and thus the creation of Drew's dead-on LS logo.
https://www.endocrine.org/news-room/press-release-archives/2006/testosterone_lvls_in_men_decline
-
There's a financial reason too - brand new factory aluminum block ready to build for $1500!
-
There's a financial reason too - brand new factory aluminum block ready to build for $1500!
Which means that both myself and the Somali immigrant on the guv dole can both afford one. Gee, how exclusive. OK OK, if I HAD to have one, I would put it in an 80's Trans-Am. If. However, being a heterosexual, I don't think I'll be buying any F-bodies anytime soon. Wait... will a Coyote fit in an 80's T/A? I could be a throwback metrosexual!! Exsssssellent.
-
Which means that both myself and the Somali immigrant on the guv dole can both afford one. Gee, how exclusive. OK OK, if I HAD to have one, I would put it in an 80's Trans-Am. If. However, being a heterosexual, I don't think I'll be buying any F-bodies anytime soon. Wait... will a Coyote fit in an 80's T/A? I could be a throwback metrosexual!! Exsssssellent.
The Coyote is so big I don't even know that it would fit in an F-body. Matt Farah drove a Porsche Cayman with a Coyote installed and it is awesome! Vid here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjeKSumjcRA
If only Ford would release the Voodoo flat plane crank as a performance part, we could all have some fun with the Coyote!! Maybe Scat could do up a falt plane for the FE - what a hoot that would be!
@FElony
I'm not sure how things are in your country, but here in America the government "dole" was all but eliminated by The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 signed by Bill Clinton - just ask anyone flying a sign on the exit ramp of the freeway. As to your sexuality, well, that's kinda up to you...I like driving my wife's Miata so don't be too quick to judge. ;)
-
@FElony
I'm not sure how things are in your country, but here in America the government "dole" was all but eliminated by The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 signed by Bill Clinton - just ask anyone flying a sign on the exit ramp of the freeway. As to your sexuality, well, that's kinda up to you...I like driving my wife's Miata so don't be too quick to judge. ;)
In my country, Dole is a banana that is exported from growers duped by your evil CIA into paying slave wages to my beloved brothers and sisters and cousins (lots of cousins) so you porky Americans can buy them cheap and pile ice cream, syrup, whipped cream, candied cherries and sprinkles (lots of sprinkles) on them and stuff it all into your fat faces and I hope you all choke and die.
And we outlawed Miatas so the birth rate would stay high. Takes a lot of cousins to make bananas.
-
I am not all fired up about a Coyote with a flat plane crank, the more I research the Ford design, I realize it's a marketing effort more than a benefit. The firing order does not match a true flat plan and therefore fights (to some extent) the imbalance of a flat plane while not receiving the benefits of exhaust pulse timing with a true flat plane design. The benefit is really the heads, intake, VVT and computer programming, but that is not as Gucci.
That being said, Coyotes run real well, just did an exhaust on a stocker 5.0 that surprised me with more mid range than I expected and took a friend's early Saleen out for a day with an Aluminator supercharged over-the-counter Coyote with upgraded clutch, exhaust, more supercharger, and all the goodies to support it. It was downright brutal.
I'll also taint the waters that my 70 Mustang was very close to a twin turbo LS (painted blue of course) but the combination of gene pool dilution and my cheap-bastardness decided otherwise.
-
Here is an interesting article on the Voodoo:
http://www.powerperformancenews.com/tech-articles/inside-fords-new-5-2l-shelby-gt350-engine/
The most obvious benefit of the flat plane crank is lighter weight allowing 8000+ rpm redline. The discussion gets interesting when they start talking about the tunability with regard to tuning for the weakest cylinder - the new firing order equalizes the individual cylinders allowing a higher state of tune for all. In other words, one cylinders' detonation problem due to the flow regime set up by the firing order is less likely to dictate the tune of the other seven cylinders. The engine has 12:1 static compression so detonation is a key concern.
Could the FE benefit from this type of crank? Raising the redline is always a good thing but the pushrods are likely to be the limiting factor, not the crank. Is there one particular cylinder(s?) that is particularly prone to detonation/lean running/low dynamic compression in the FE design which may limit the potential of the other seven (six...five...)? More experienced FE tuners need to chime in here.
It sure would sound cool though!
-
Jay, are you planning on moving forward with more of the clear valve covers? The company right next door to me at work is in that exact business. They're much more highly technical, i'm sure a production run of those would be a simple thing for them. Just the same as every one of these situations......it makes you wonder what their initial tool cost would be.
http://www.tenere.com/
-
Here is an interesting article on the Voodoo:
...
The most obvious benefit of the flat plane crank is lighter weight allowing 8000+ rpm redline.
...
Just a slight correction. Crankshaft weight does not give you peak rpm capability. You can have a 500lb crank rev just as high as a 50lb crank. Of course the heavy crank would accelerate slower in the same engine but it would still get there just fine.
What really gives you that rpm capability is crank stiffness (working in conjunction with good block support and light rods / pistons). A flat crank will indeed be stiffer than a 90 degree crank (generally).
The Voodoo Coyote is indeed a cool package, especially for somebody like me who saw the birth of the original 4.6L 2-valve with all of its limitations and compromises. Who knew such a thing could evolve into a world-beater?
-
Can someone clue me in as to why 8200 is such a big deal, please? I ran there all the time with my 289 back in the 70's with the stock bottom end. I had friends with built 289's and Bosses and Cleves that would eclipse 9000 easily in a street driver. When the injected 5.0 came out in the 80's, Ford bragged about 5500 rpm and I nearly died from laughter. Anyone remember a little class called Modified Production back in the 70's? 11000 rpm, 5 speeds, gearing in the 7's. Sound familiar?
Better rods and pistons and Twisted Wedge 11R heads would put a 302 into the stratosphere today. No Voodoo magic gonna beat that. RPM-wise or power-wise.
-
I am not blown away by it either, but the fact an 8000 rpm engine can idle, pass emissions, and has quite a bit of torque in traffic and can pull the low end of speed limit with a .68-ish overdrive, a/c and street gears is pretty cool.
-
Mine idled at 700 rpm, got 16 mpg around town with no overdrive, never overheated driving SoCal freeways with 4.11's, weighed 2950 lbs, and ran low 13's. No A/C necessary where I lived; no emissions then. Would chirp the 3-4 shift on smooth asphalt with 2800-lb McLeod and L60's.
GT350 starts at 56k plus this and that PLUS dealer markup. For that, it better come with a 6-month supply of hookers and blow. Plus it comes with electronics, which means the CIA will have audio/video of you using up the hookers and blow.
I'll stick to the '68. Gonna go outside and give it a great big hug. A manly hug. No smoochies because it's a tough car, not a Miata.
P.S. Have I ever mentioned I hate the whiny sound of X-pipe exhaust? My car had headers and 2 1/2" exhaust with no crossover and that 289 sounded like a 500. Yeah. Oh yeah.
-
Mine idled at 700 rpm, got 16 mpg around town with no overdrive, never overheated driving SoCal freeways with 4.11's, weighed 2950 lbs, and ran low 13's. No A/C necessary where I lived; no emissions then. Would chirp the 3-4 shift on smooth asphalt with 2800-lb McLeod and L60's.
GT350 starts at 56k plus this and that PLUS dealer markup. For that, it better come with a 6-month supply of hookers and blow. Plus it comes with electronics, which means the CIA will have audio/video of you using up the hookers and blow.
I'll stick to the '68. Gonna go outside and give it a great big hug. A manly hug. No smoochies because it's a tough car, not a Miata.
P.S. Have I ever mentioned I hate the whiny sound of X-pipe exhaust? My car had headers and 2 1/2" exhaust with no crossover and that 289 sounded like a 500. Yeah. Oh yeah.
Amen brother
-
Did I see a lifter collapse after shut down? Sure looked like that was what happened. Joe-JDC
-
I saw that as well....
-
At full lift with >350 lbs of spring pressure on it and no oil pressure, I don't really find that abnormal.
If you notice on first fire-up, all the lifters were very quiet. I will check it though to be safe.
-
@wconley True, a heavy crank will spin to high rpms, but the supporting mechanisms will need to be heavier which increases the weight of the whole package and on and on. I had a large centrifuge years ago which spun to 24,000 rpm, but it took a long time to get there and a long time to stop.
@FElony 8200 rpm is nice on a road course especially when "Ford says the Voodoo delivers 90 percent of peak torque between 3,450 and 7,000 rpm." That's a lot of flexibility! You can spin a 302 to 9000 but you will sacrifice low end torque. The Voodoo's 1.67hp/cu in is also quite amazing - a 427 would make 713hp with that specific output. The value proposition you bring up is very relevant. You'd have to be a real piece of fruit to pay dealer markup on these cars as every dealer in my area has at least one of these cars languishing in the showroom right now, but, even at sticker price, you are looking at a $20k premium over a 5.0 Mustang. That's a lot of scratch. I still want one though!
What I find most interesting and relevant about this discussion is the reminder that ALL ENGINES ARE LIMITED BY TUNING FOR THE WEAKEST CYLINDER. A strong case for absolute equalization of all variables between cylinders when building an FE. Intake air volumes and velocities, exhaust air volumes and velocities, fuel mixtures, dynamic compression, component temperatures, ignition, valve lift and timing - it's kinda blowing my mind to think of all the variables which must be equalized!
Now I need to go tongue kiss my Miata...
;D
-
Will,
Because I am the worst about driving a post further into the weeds.... cylinder equality is kinda one of my weird pet peeves at work. I spend countless hours trying to get engines to run the same load on all 16 cylinders.
Many years ago, I showed up to a boat where the engine was all sortsa out of tune. The Captain was complaining that the engine would only come up to 1550rpms at full power and would shake like mad. So with my feeler gauges and infrared gun I set about getting the cylinders equal. This engine a 2stroke Detroit was a 16v149 and should have run 1800rpms at load, and 1875 or so at no load. I spent a few days changing injectors, adjusting valves and setting the rack for each cylinder so I could get a certain temp... these settings weren't by the book, I kinda just made them up as needed to get the desired result.
Once finished, it was obvious that at some point the previous engine had turned up the max speed on the governor in order to get more engine rpms..... I found that after my tuning we were running 2050rpms at full load! To the Captain's dismay I turned it down before it hurt someone :P Then I painted everything because I'm a freak.
Video of that max load run:
http://vid68.photobucket.com/albums/i6/DeepRootsNursery/Detroit149.mp4
-
@Drew
Nice! My yacht had a Perkins 4-107 which is as deep as I've gotten into marine diesels - Oh to have so much space to work around the engine! My wife once had to help pull me out of the engine compartment by my feet! But balancing 16 cylinders... This is for sure the difference between me (hobbyist engine builder) and real professionals (engine builder/tuner) and why I have mad respect for the gang on this forum.
-
@FElony 8200 rpm is nice on a road course especially when "Ford says the Voodoo delivers 90 percent of peak torque between 3,450 and 7,000 rpm." That's a lot of flexibility! You can spin a 302 to 9000 but you will sacrifice low end torque.
Let's look at real the real world. OHC Modulars have no low end torque compared to pushrod engines. Every video review and owner feedback on the Coyote remarks that the car is a slug under 4 grand, which endorses the factory claiming peak torque at 4250. The reason these cars do OK out of the hole is not torque from the engine, it's torque to the wheels from the 4.17 1st gear of the 6R80 or the 3.66 1st in the MT82. Curb weight of a '17 GT is 3705 lbs, so they had to play the ratios to get it to move.
The Voodoo's 1.67hp/cu in is also quite amazing - a 427 would make 713hp with that specific output. The value proposition you bring up is very relevant. You'd have to be a real piece of fruit to pay dealer markup on these cars as every dealer in my area has at least one of these cars languishing in the showroom right now, but, even at sticker price, you are looking at a $20k premium over a 5.0 Mustang. That's a lot of scratch. I still want one though!
Shelby Tax is like Apple Tax; you're always going to pay more for the name. In a perfect world, Ford would give us a new Torino with a modernized 427W (for which they have most or all of the parts). Better odds of Un bombing Los Angeles. However, to me, it's not always about horsepower. Feelses and soundses that catapult your memory back several decades have more allure. Watch this 289 in this car and know what I mean: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5jckqmGH30
Now I need to go tongue kiss my Miata...
;D
Please, no video. We are all getting older and cannot survive such an assault on our senses.
-
FElony, I love them all, but I sure don't remember any 289 that made big power having any low end torque either. Luckily they were in very light cars with stiff gears.
That being said, I think Coyotes are cool, but they are just too big for me. That size packing 500 cubes with all the same advances, that'd be cool, but too much cutting on an old car to fit something wide and tall with little cubes.
Also, driving something every day, I like silence and a cup holder, but let me hit the weekend, that Shelby sound will do better than my AM coffee!
-
What was this thread about again? Oh yeah. Please viciously insult me if this has been covered previously, but what is going to be used to coat the inside? Repeated heat cycles is going to dry successive film layers until they are not transparent any more. Looking at the video, one can imagine vertical tiger striping. In the 70's, a local guy with a Chevelle had a clear hood and clear valve covers. He had to relegate the clear covers to "show day only" because they would be turn opaque after a couple days of running around. Maybe something like http://www.hydrobead.com/
Also to be ignored because it comes from FElony is the potential market for clear and translucent distributor caps. They were around back in the day, so they make for retro nostalgia. The rotor is fun to watch, like rocker arms. They can pair up visually with clear valve covers. A standard Ford size will fit more than just the FE, and will outsell valve covers at least 1000 to one, both initially and as replacements for worn units. These exist for Chevys so vendors could be queried about sales. Feel free to berate me again for thinking. Thank you.
-
FElony, I love them all, but I sure don't remember any 289 that made big power having any low end torque either. Luckily they were in very light cars with stiff gears.
Right. 289's with autos sucked hugely. As mentioned, I had 4.11's and a 2.78 TL. My first clobberator was a Holley 6619 600 cfm. From a low rpm traffic start response was "not bad". The carb was finished at 6-6500. After I killed the stock-spec clutch, I was advised by R.A.C.E. (the local SBF shop) to accompany the new McLeod unit with a flywheel they made that was FE-sized with SB bolt pattern at a whopping 40 lbs. I was told this would "solve" any low torque issues and they were right. Sounds contrary to modern thinking, but that flywheel allowed me to dial in clutch engagement (slippage) according to the street surface I was racing on as well as rpm out of the gate. The extra mass spinning during shifts kept the 289 up there, welcome with a wide ratio box.
I ousted the 600 in favor of a 4779 750 DP. Again, unconventional thinking. Max rpms went over 8000 with mo power in the process. The mechanical secondaries eliminated any semblance of throttle response under 4000, though. Cunningly, armed with needle-nose pliers, I would remove the cotter pin for the secondaries for the weekday surface-street commute to college. Operating on half a carb, acceleration off idle was brutal (in context). The car fell off at 5000 rpm like it hit a wall, but driveability was much improved so I didn't care. Friday afternoon I clipped the secondaries back into service and once again became an outlaw, a pariah, a rancid reminder that humanity can sink no lower. Just like today.
That being said, I think Coyotes are cool, but they are just too big for me. That size packing 500 cubes with all the same advances, that'd be cool, but too much cutting on an old car to fit something wide and tall with little cubes.
Also, driving something every day, I like silence and a cup holder, but let me hit the weekend, that Shelby sound will do better than my AM coffee!
Yes, new cars are cushy. For sure. Longevity is a factor, too. For me, I don't drive more than 6k or so a year, so there is no allure in something that can last 200k. I'd rather beat the tar out of a cantankerous engine that maybe makes it 10k. More smiles to the gallon.
Anyway, budget aside, I think this new new kit would be a great home for either engine. I have to think if the Coyote will fit, so could an FE. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNZA8KrQmkQ
-
"I have to think if the Coyote will fit, so could an FE."
Scares me that I agree with you so much FElony but, amen again. Guess that makes me/us old farts.
And I remember also trying to get my mustang to move with a C4 and no money.
As for all this thinking....it's over rated. I think.