Show Posts

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


Messages - JimNolan

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 24
31
FE Technical Forum / Re: Carburetor Jet size
« on: November 04, 2015, 04:18:59 PM »
Confused me too, a 5% smaller airflow carb requires a 17% smaller fuel flow jet. Car seems to be running really good right now. If the plugs look too lean I'll increase the jet size.

32
FE Technical Forum / Re: Carburetor Jet size
« on: November 03, 2015, 12:02:08 PM »
Ross,
 Don't know what I did today, but reset idle, adjusted accelerator pump gap again, took it out on the highway and it is smooth now. When you jump on the gas from a slight roll it lights up the tires immediately. Cruises smoothly now and you can't feel the secondary kick in. I'm done. 54 jets seem OK. I'll keep a check the plugs soon, as long as they aren't white or black I'll be happy.

33
FE Technical Forum / Re: Carburetor Jet size
« on: November 02, 2015, 03:53:05 PM »
Well, I took it cruising and found it acted like it was hesitating constantly (just felt rough, if you know what I mean).  This was going about 55 mph constant in 5th gear. This carb was bought for a 270 HP 390 completely stock except for a 4 barrel instead of the 2 barrel and back then it didn't have headers either.
I tried a Holley classic 600cfm on that same motor with the 65 primary jets and it left my plugs black and a sooty tailpipe. That's why I bought this street avenger 570 carb. From what I'm seeing now I think Katz427 is right, the 62's felt better in this application, ran good, no hesitations etc. I've got some 56 and 59 jets also. If it doesn't smooth out soon I'll go with the 59's and see how it feels.
BTW: I wish I could put a video of the engine and sound coming out the tailpipes. It idles really smooth at 750 rpm and the pipes sound like some of these big cam Chevy's with the expensive mufflers. I put the initial timing at 14 degrees.

34
FE Technical Forum / Re: Carburetor Jet size
« on: November 02, 2015, 10:23:42 AM »
I just got through putting the 54 jets back in the carb and installing new 8.5 power valve it came with. One of the reasons I liked this carb is the 21 mpg. I will not go against experience. Seems to idle good at 750rpm. 17 inches manifold pressure.

35
FE Technical Forum / Re: Carburetor Jet size
« on: November 01, 2015, 07:50:43 PM »
As you can tell I don't know much about carbs. But, when I first got this carb I ended up making my own accelerator pump cam out of a larger one until I got some stumbling issues fixed. It's got a 8.5 power valve in it and since I'm running 17-18 inches of manifold pressure I figure it is more correct than the 6.5 power valve that comes with the 600 cfm classic. And, since I'll never see 8.5 inches vacuum unless I put my foot to the floor, regular driving and cruising will never use the power valve. (BTW, I have run through the gears up to 4750 rpm and see no hesitations or problems.) If I'm going to have a problem with that big of a jet the spark plugs would just show up as black and sooty telling me to go down in jet size for normal driving wouldn't it.
I'm apparently not getting the difference between a 54 jet and a 65 jet when either carb would be correct for my engine (cfm wise)  other than supplying too much gas during normal driving when the power valve isn't kicked in during normal driving anyway.

36
FE Technical Forum / Re: Carburetor Jet size
« on: November 01, 2015, 06:56:26 AM »
Thanks Ross, I'll pull the plugs after the parts use to one another and see what the color of them are.

37
FE Technical Forum / Carburetor Jet size
« on: October 31, 2015, 07:42:43 PM »
Got a question on jet size. I just installed a 390 with C1AE heads, GT intake and 268H comp cam. It's running 9.6 CR and 7.9 DCR. The carburetor I used was a Holley Avenger 570cfm  that I used for years behind a 270HP 390 I had. But, I changed the primary jets to 62 instead of the 54's that came with it. The secondary metering block is a 65 jet equivalent. The question I've got is this: Why does a 600cfm Holley Classic carb come with 65 primary jets and 65 secondary jets and the 570cfm Holley Avenger come with 54 primary jets and 65 secondary equivalency when there is only 30cfm difference between the two carbs.

38
FE Technical Forum / Re: Runout on Flywheel
« on: October 14, 2015, 12:04:16 AM »
Before I made that 50 mile drive over there I checked my 390 cast internally balance flywheel the same way. I came out with .0005" TIR run out using same procedure. It had been laying around a few years and the face was discolored so I thought I'd get it resurfaced also. After the guy resurfaced the 410 flywheel he washed the table and his spacer that he put under the flywheel real good, mounted the flywheel, tapped it around until it turned concentric, locked it down and started grinding. I heard a chirp-chirp-chirp as the wheel began grinding and my heart sank. I knew then his Blanchard was off or I was off on the flatness I'd found on that flywheel. Sure enough, this morning I found out it when I measured it showed .002" TIR.
I've decided to put the 390 back in the 57 Fairlane  and I'll be using the cast flywheel the way it is. It would be nice if it had come out perfect but unless someone decides to drive my car and let the clutch out to where it only engages .001" into the flywheel I can't see trying to make it any better than what it is. And, if someone could ride the clutch that close on my flywheel I'd jerk them out of the car and beat them over the head with a feather duster anyway.
In all seriousness, I'm tired of messing with it and I don't care what it looks like on the crank. They don't resurface it on the crank. I did the best I could, the guy resurfacing did the best he could and I can't see driving all over the country having it reground until it has the thickness of cigarette paper trying to get it perfect.
If I ever use the 410 again or sell it I'll make sure to get the flywheel sent to another state to get it resurfaced.
Thaks guys, I'm just tired of dealing with it. The flywheel I'm using at .002" TIR at 12" diameter isn't going to kill me and McLeod said if I'd use the 500 miles they recommend driving it instead of racing it as soon as the new clutch is installed,  the flywheel wouldn't get eat up to begin with.

39
FE Technical Forum / Re: Runout on Flywheel
« on: October 12, 2015, 05:44:35 PM »
KMcCullah,
I've done that, comes out the same. My crank is good. This is the way I check it. I've got a 4" X 4" steel block that I machined smooth when I was working. I place the center of the flywheel on that and draw a circle inside the flywheel flange onto that chunk of steel to keep the flywheel centered as I rotate it. I place a 1" plunge indicator with magnetic base on a plate of steel beside the flywheel with the indicator on the flywheel. I rotate the flywheel to different degrees getting my results. It's foolproof and the results are duplicated no matter how many revolutions I make with the flywheel. That part of checking it isn't rocket science.
BTW: The second guy that ground it said it had been ground on a Blanchard also. He could tell by the marks. One thing I did notice about the two grindings, the first guy put a super smooth finish on the flywheel, the second guy left it somewhat more rough.

40
FE Technical Forum / Re: Runout on Flywheel
« on: October 12, 2015, 05:10:02 PM »
Russ,
I'm so tired of trying to do the right thing and ending up with less than I pay for I can't hardly stand it. I just wish I had a machine shop. I built my own 215 mph all metal airplane and rebuilt the IO-320 Lycoming engine that went in it. I put all the IFR avionics in it and flew that airplane trouble free for 1400 hrs. and 14 years. It really pisses me off knowing I can learn and do anything and I have to trust other people in a field I'm not that familiar with. I feel like I'm stuck out here in the boonies with tractor mechanics. I'll probably wish I hadn't said that but I'm a little disgusted right now.

41
FE Technical Forum / Re: Runout on Flywheel
« on: October 12, 2015, 03:53:01 PM »
Well, I checked my old 390 flywheel to see what it was like. It measured .0005" TIR.  I loaded up everything ( both flywheels) and took it 55 miles to Ft. Wayne to a place that does my driveshaft work. They've been in business since 1966. They guy let me come back and watch it being ground on a Blanchard machine with all the coolant being poured on the surface while it was grinding. Sure enough, he was taking metal off in one spot for a while. Really looked good after he got through. Then he ground the 390 flywheel and it too was touching on one side for awhile. But, these guys knew what they were doing.
Took the flywheel back to the hanger and put it on my level block and spun the flywheel around checking every 90 degrees at a 12" diameter. I had .004" TIR. I never checked the 390 flywheel, don't want to check it.
I threw everything down, turned the lights out and when home and had a sandwich. Don't know if I'll go back out there this week.

42
FE Technical Forum / Re: Runout on Flywheel
« on: October 12, 2015, 08:15:54 AM »
KMcCullah,
Yes I did, it came out .000". That was the first thing I thought of because I'd heard that people had trouble with Eagle Cranks. I could kick myself in the ass every time I think I could have had an internally balanced Scat crank from Barry's shop. I'm debating even putting the engine back in my 57. I drive that car all the time, go all over the country in it and drag race it maybe 4 weekends in a year with an occasional street encounter. The guys that put a belt sander to my flywheel said they took out almost .040" to get it flat. If that's the case, why would I want the damn thing back in my car if I'm afraid to drag race it every now and then.

43
FE Technical Forum / Re: Runout on Flywheel
« on: October 11, 2015, 07:54:36 PM »
HolmanMoodyStroppeGang,
I know this took you time to write and I'm really appreciate you doing it for me. I will call around tomorrow to Ft. Wayne and South Bend and ask if they have the machines to do the job right. I had the engine out to replace a leaky Cam Plug and while I was there lifted the crank to replace the rear main oil seal also. The main bearings looked good. I'll get the flywheel re-surfaced just to make sure I keep it that way. Thanks again.

44
FE Technical Forum / Re: Runout on Flywheel
« on: October 11, 2015, 04:21:48 PM »
I put the flywheel on a level surface that set on the mounting face of the flywheel only. I spun it and ended up with .007" TIR on an 11" diameter. I then indicated the crank flange and it came out perfect. I called my machinist ( the one that does my engine work ) and he said .007" would be OK and I'd never feel a problem. There were no burn marks on my flywheel and with the amount of material they said they took off it to make it flat I assume when McLeod says to not dump the clutch on their setup until you've got 500 miles of regular driving, they mean it. I'm using the same clutch and pressure plate as I started out with. When I first got the Tremec 5 speed I went through Mike Forte for the kit as he more or less started putting the Tremec's behind FE Ford engine's. That's the clutch he recommended and sent with the kit.
Thanks guys for your comments, I'm back on the road again. A little wiser now.

45
FE Technical Forum / Re: C3AE-6090-C Heads
« on: October 11, 2015, 07:20:06 AM »
I run a set of those on my 63 Galaxie, 65cc chambers with 1.65 " exhaust valves, The guy I bought them from sold me a aluminum intake for a 63 B code as well and said they came off a 406. Someone else told me the 406 head had 53cc chambers and what I had was a 390 head that was made for mountain areas of the country to increase hp on the 390's. He said they call them mountain heads. I use my car for show and travel so I don't really get into the performance part of it.  I had the new type valve seals put in it when I had them rebuilt, wish I hadn't done that, didn't need them.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 24