FE Power Forums

FE Power Forums => FE Technical Forum => Topic started by: Nightmist66 on August 16, 2020, 09:29:34 PM

Title: Another FE Build
Post by: Nightmist66 on August 16, 2020, 09:29:34 PM
Let the nitpicking begin...

https://youtu.be/3rksPj1tu3o

Title: Re: Another FE Build
Post by: cammerfe on August 16, 2020, 10:23:36 PM
Need to do a footrace with each type of spark plug stuffed in your sock. It'd be just as germane as the timed run of the Winney with the megs against the go cart. :)

KS
Title: Re: Another FE Build
Post by: Barry_R on August 16, 2020, 10:39:59 PM
nitpicking - why would we do that?

Would it be the $7,000 block and $6,000 induction coupled with the $1,600 heads and the $65 passenger car gasket set?
Or would it be about the throttle body gasket that got kicked out by the wiring during the install?
Title: Re: Another FE Build
Post by: 475fetoploader on August 16, 2020, 11:24:40 PM
It did peak at 501 h.p. There’s probably people on this forum that could do that with a 352 and iron heads.
Title: Re: Another FE Build
Post by: 427Fastback on August 17, 2020, 12:14:50 AM
I couldn't watch the whole video...I stopped when he was running a bead of silicone around the intake ports.(WTF) To me that's up there with silicone on your carb base gasket and Teflon tape on your inverted flare fuel lines...JMO
Title: Re: Another FE Build
Post by: blykins on August 17, 2020, 05:01:57 AM
I couldn't watch the whole video...I stopped when he was running a bead of silicone around the intake ports.(WTF) To me that's up there with silicone on your carb base gasket and Teflon tape on your inverted flare fuel lines...JMO

I bead the intake ports.....before gasket and after gasket.  Not big honkin beads, but just enough to seal her up.  IMO, that's where a lot of guys make mistakes with FE intake manifold installs. 

Now, as for the rest of the engine....that's stupid money for 500 hp.   
Title: Re: Another FE Build
Post by: chilly460 on August 17, 2020, 06:58:41 AM
I sit in wonderment at the hardware, roller setup...all the fancy business....and heads I wouldn't put on a 400hp 390 build. 
Title: Re: Another FE Build
Post by: turbohunter on August 17, 2020, 07:38:01 AM
Well they did say a couple times that big horsepower was not their goal at around 500. They certainly achieved that. ::)
But the heads with the rest of that setup is kinda like sittin’ at a strip club.
Title: Re: Another FE Build
Post by: Joe-JDC on August 17, 2020, 01:55:39 PM
Bone stock Edelbrock heads?  Combustion chamber had metal overhang in one picture.  Joe-JDC
Title: Re: Another FE Build
Post by: KMcCullah on August 17, 2020, 02:39:25 PM
I was surprised to see a 8554pt head gasket used. Thought that style of gasket was a no-no on an aluminum block?
Title: Re: Another FE Build
Post by: mbrunson427 on August 17, 2020, 03:03:35 PM
Point of discussion here, I always believed that individual runner intakes liked lobe separation more near 115? They stated that this cam had 110.

The Borla system does not negate this rule right? I know the Borla intakes have that plenum system underneath them where all cylinders talk, but I still wouldn't imagine that the cam could have less lobe separation because of it?
Title: Re: Another FE Build
Post by: blykins on August 17, 2020, 03:09:19 PM
Point of discussion here, I always believed that individual runner intakes liked lobe separation more near 115? They stated that this cam had 110.

The Borla system does not negate this rule right? I know the Borla intakes have that plenum system underneath them where all cylinders talk, but I still wouldn't imagine that the cam could have less lobe separation because of it?

It would depend on the total amount of overlap on the cam.  You can actually have a 115° LSA cam that has more overlap than a 110° LSA cam if the advertised durations are spec'd as such.

It would also depend on how the plenum is arranged.  I've never used one of those, but if there is a common plenum, then that would create more of a signal on each stack.   The reason a lot of guys go wide on the LSA on individual stack intakes is because you can get into a reversion situation and actually make a fuel cloud that hangs up above the intake.  If they're all hooked together commonly, then it's less of an issue.
Title: Re: Another FE Build
Post by: fryedaddy on August 17, 2020, 06:27:38 PM
I couldn't watch the whole video...I stopped when he was running a bead of silicone around the intake ports.(WTF) To me that's up there with silicone on your carb base gasket and Teflon tape on your inverted flare fuel lines...JMO

I bead the intake ports.....before gasket and after gasket.  Not big honkin beads, but just enough to seal her up.  IMO, that's where a lot of guys make mistakes with FE intake manifold installs. 

Now, as for the rest of the engine....that's stupid money for 500 hp.
I got broke from not using silicone on the intake ports.i have a rpm intake i took off three times,it sucked oil till the third time.thats when i tried putting a bead around the intake ports. no more sucking oil down the intake ports!
Title: Re: Another FE Build
Post by: cammerfe on August 17, 2020, 09:47:01 PM
Point of discussion here, I always believed that individual runner intakes liked lobe separation more near 115? They stated that this cam had 110.

The Borla system does not negate this rule right? I know the Borla intakes have that plenum system underneath them where all cylinders talk, but I still wouldn't imagine that the cam could have less lobe separation because of it?

It would depend on the total amount of overlap on the cam.  You can actually have a 115° LSA cam that has more overlap than a 110° LSA cam if the advertised durations are spec'd as such.

It would also depend on how the plenum is arranged.  I've never used one of those, but if there is a common plenum, then that would create more of a signal on each stack.   The reason a lot of guys go wide on the LSA on individual stack intakes is because you can get into a reversion situation and actually make a fuel cloud that hangs up above the intake.  If they're all hooked together commonly, then it's less of an issue.

In my experience, there is virtually no 'plenum' in a manifold like that. There is a hole from end to end in the casting that connects all of the runners. One might call it a 'balance tube'. It makes it less likely that there will be more signal in one runner than the next. When I used a set-up like that, with 45 DCOE Webers, it was a bit easier to do the tuning. The 'draw' on each barrel was easier to get synchronized.

KS
Title: Re: Another FE Build
Post by: turbohunter on August 17, 2020, 09:49:48 PM
I was surprised to see a 8554pt head gasket used.
Caught that also.
Title: Re: Another FE Build
Post by: wayne on August 18, 2020, 04:10:36 PM
I just dont know how ford built all the fe's they did with out two tubes of silicone
Title: Re: Another FE Build
Post by: blykins on August 18, 2020, 04:40:14 PM
I just dont know how ford built all the fe's they did with out two tubes of silicone

Well, first of all, they leaked.... ;D

They also didn't have to jack around with all the aftermarket parts that we have to mess with today. 

I don't even use side seals anymore and haven't for a couple years.  Silicone in those cavities as well.  I don't see any need to keep using 60 year old practices on modern engines.   Go back to rope seals and generators I guess?

With that being said, I don't use "beads" on anything, just a very thin layer on parts. 

I think most guys use some flavor of a silicone or sealant...whether it be weatherstrip adhesive, RTV, silicone, gasket tack, etc.