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 - TJ

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 12
31
FE Technical Forum / Re: Edelbrock intake differences
« on: August 17, 2022, 08:27:03 PM »
Thanks to all for the ideas. 

Apologies to Jay for not looking at the Comparo:  I have no good excuse.  I tend to believe there is a time and place for the Ebrock 390.

Dizzy:  Yes, I have a vacuum advance and like it.  I think it's fairly well dialed in but going on personal preferences and a stopwatch there.

HP demand:  I get what FrozenMerc is saying about needing X amount of power at a given speed though I figure this much displacement is wasting more gas just by running than it actually needs when the truck is empty.  Lower rpms should permit it to waste less gas. 

Gear vendor:  Maybe it's costing me power and mpg but sure seams like a lot.  I like it if for nothing else than splitting 3rd and 4th and lower rpms on the freeway.  Perhaps it contributes to the overall stacking of tolerances.

Cam change:  Thought crossed my mind but in no hurry to do that because it costs decent amount of money and time.  Plus I think I have a few other things to try first. 

Engine not meeting my needs:  Thought that comment might have been a joke but in case it wasn't...We have a 2002 Duramax we've used it to pull our fifth wheel through 40 of the lower 48.  And we really like it. If that somehow gets fubarred, I'd seriously consider finding an '80s or 90's crewcab to stick this 482 in and pull our camper around the country because I like it that much.  Really, I'm just puzzled why lower rpms didn't help mpg.  Thought intake was something to consider.  Now I'm thinking carb adjustment might benefit. 

Carb PV:  That's something I need to read up on...as well as get a new O2 sensor.  That's sounding like my first thing to check. 



32
FE Technical Forum / Re: Edelbrock intake differences
« on: August 17, 2022, 06:57:22 AM »
Okee doke.  I'm almost convinced...still curious what would happen in 2200-2900 rpm range...

BTW, the 11.5 - 12mpg is empty.  Roughly 7.5mpg pulling the fifth wheel but haven't pulled enough to be confident in that number. 

I feel my timing is optimal at this point.  Might talk with my guy on carb adjustments for lower rpms. 

To be clear, the engine is doing just what I want.  I'm wondering why dropping 24% rpms (2900 down to 2200) didn't give me at least a smidge better mpg. 

33
FE Technical Forum / Re: Edelbrock intake differences
« on: August 17, 2022, 06:09:16 AM »
Appreciate all the input.  I'll try to gather all the comments so far.

I'm a bit of an oddball not caring what happens above 4000...might have passed that once...rarely pass 3500.  MPG isn't too bad... 11.5 - 12 if I keep it on the freeway and stay out of town.  What made me wonder is the mpg did not change going with the gear vendor. 

O2 sensor (when it worked) seemed good at around 13.  Plugs looked okay (too me). 

If air velocity is what I want then I'd think smaller tunnels would help.  The engine draws a given volume.  Smaller tunnels should force that to travel faster.

Might look at carb adjustments.  I set up my timing curve with my "chassis dyno"...stop watch and freeway on ramp near my house.  Put it in 4th and floor it from 40mph to 60mph.  Adjusted timing rate of advance to get shortest stopwatch time without pinging.

I know some times companies make extra options hoping everyone will buy something but I'm guessing Edelbrock made the 390 intake for a reason.  My RPM intake is installed so I can't see the ports so I was guessing they're bigger than with the 390.  I have a used but uncut 390 that I ran on a 390FE I used to have.  Checking differences on my "chassis dyno" would cost me some gaskets and some time.  If I swap it I won't do it until winter and then test next summer.

Like I said, appreciate the input.  Hope this is an interesting change of engine strategy than talking about boring hot rods  :)

34
FE Technical Forum / Edelbrock intake differences
« on: August 16, 2022, 02:36:53 PM »
Anyone tell me the physical differences between the Performer 390 and the Performer RPM ?  They look like they have the same basic shape but the 390 has smaller tunnels and ports?

Everywhere I read and everyone I talk with says the RPM gives better performance at higher rpm and gives up nothing at lower rpm.  But I'm guessing few have really analyzed the differences in performance in the 2000 to 3000 rpm ranges.  And very few would have a reason to analyze the differences in the 2000 to 3000 range unless you're working the motor hard in that rpm range (like when towing).  Would the smaller tunnels of the 390 give better turbulence and thus better mpg and better power in the 2000 to 3000 rpm range?

In my F250, I have a relatively tame 482 in front of a NP435 tranny and gear vendor.  Rear end is 410.  Adding the gear vendor got me no noticeable improvement in mpg.  My guess is my particular build is more efficient around 2900 rpm (where I used to cruise on the freeway) than it is at 2200 rpm (where I freeway cruise with the gear vendor).   Perhaps the lower rpm results in less turbulence and a "lazier" air:fuel mix with my current RPM intake.  In theory, the smaller tubes in the 390 intake would make for a better air:fuel mix at low rpm?   BTW, my engine hits peak torque at 3700 rpm.

35
FE Technical Forum / Re: The future doesn't look too bright.
« on: August 15, 2022, 08:04:01 AM »
Really sucks to see a good business with a long standing reputation (like Craft Engines) go down.  Whatever is that's happening has a wide swath.  In the chemical industry, formulas often take years to test and develop.  Shortage of just one raw material messes everything up.  It's been whack-o-mole for the past couple years solving one shortage or another.

I went a bit nuts on the FE for my old truck 7 fast years ago.  Glad I did when I did.  It's been fun and still running great.

On the plus side, there are honest paying jobs out there...at least for now.

36
Would it be possible to put together a 445 with a pro charger and get a torque curve like a 3.5 eco boost?  Around 1.8 lb ft per cube from 1500 rpms to 5200 rpms and then it drops straight down? Keep it under 600 hp but with 800 or so lb ft?  Could the 390 or an aftermarket block handle it? (Truly an academic question for me since I have enough lb ft to twist up my truck if I pushed it… just call me curious.)

Let’s say it is possible, would it idle like a kitten?

37
I've had an Actron for many years and have been happy.  It only does obd II.  Couple years ago I got an Innova (either a 3130 or 3150) and also happy.  It does plenty for me...including ABS codes and reset, SRS codes.  Also reads live data like coolant temp, emission related readings, etc.  The next level up does ABS bleed and cost $100 more.  The few times I thought I wanted to pump the ABS unit I just found a slick spot and slammed the brakes. 

Both of mine will tell you which coil over plug is bad and also things like which injector is bad (for gasoline).  You just have to look up how your particular car's make and model counts cylinders.  Some of them hop around as they count...

They're nice.  I think it was the Innova that told me the turbo actuator was bad on my wife's VW diesel.  That saved me a ton of money.  I found a new actuator ($200) and swapped that.  Didn't have to buy the whole dang turbo ($2000 and lot more work).

38
If it were my engine, I'd follow up on My427stang's idea of looking at the rocker shafts.  Remove the rocker arms and support stands and look for any scratches or fretting on the shafts especially if this engine has been road driven for a few hundred miles or more. 

I can imagine high revs over short duration (drag racing) can stress a rocker assembly and I imagine a little push rod rubbing the intake helps in that scenario.  On the other hand, I have seen low revs for long duration (freeway driving) also stress a rocker assembly and I wouldn't want to see push rods rubbing in that scenario.

39
FE Technical Forum / Re: Repair or Replace?
« on: May 28, 2022, 02:53:39 AM »
Theoretical question for those with more experience than me… How often do rockers break this early on a tame cam without an underlying cause? 

Probably want to look for a cause and verify there’s no further damage. Check for damaged pushrods, lifters etc.  Definitely check both push rods and lifters in the affected cylinder but check rest of them as well.  Make sure the affected valve is at the right height (I.e not bent and hanging open). Look for signs the push rods are rubbing the intake tunnels,  I don’t think you have to run it hard to break stuff if things aren’t right.

40
Non-FE Discussion Forum / Re: lawn mower carb on a V-8 = 40 MPG?
« on: April 25, 2022, 11:49:07 AM »
I only skimmed the video.  Sure would be nice if the carb on my two cylinder zero turn mower worked better than the port injection on my crown vic.  I'd swap it toot sweet !  :)  Color me doubtful...

41
Lot of cheating in turbohunter’s pic…port fuel injection and I’m guessing a hydraulic clutch…I’m jealous.

42
FE Technical Forum / Re: Fuel Efficient Build---352 or 351W
« on: March 18, 2022, 08:12:45 AM »
 I think you said you have a C6 tranny now so I imagine you'll like the 4R70W a little better.  I'd be less excited about the  '98 vintage sbf when considering the amount of work for the whole swap...I'm guessing the power and mpg will be only a little better than the current I6.  A coyote 5.0 would definitely be more exciting. 

43
FE Technical Forum / Re: Fuel Efficient Build---352 or 351W
« on: March 03, 2022, 08:04:57 AM »
How about a straight six?
The truck has an EFI 300 6 in it now. The fuel economy is nothing to write home about. I've heard how great these engines are as far as low RPM torque and towing capacity, I don't tow, but so far have not experienced the awesome torque. In fact, it's relatively flaccid as far as I'm concerned.
I'm just a V8 guy.

They do have good low end torque...for their size.  Around 3000 rpms is the end of their world.  They can't keep up towing with a bigger V8, especially at highway speed.

  I expect around 16 mpg with them in a pickup.  A very carefully custom built 351 or 352 should get real close to that.   

44
FE Technical Forum / Re: Fuel Efficient Build---352 or 351W
« on: March 03, 2022, 07:58:10 AM »
For what my two cents is worth...I believe how you build either engine will make the real difference.  Modern ring packs for less friction and better sealing, custom pistons to dial in your compression, EFI will help and even better would be port injection for better balance, and believe it or not a roller cam to allow use of modern oils.

My fuel economy jumped 0.5 to 1 mpg switching from a high zinc oil to a modern synthetic (10W30 for both)...that's after several thousands of miles and always calculating my mpg using each oil with my roller cammed FE.

IMO, the trick to building fuel economy into any vehicle is sizing the engine to the job.  For instance, I had a 390 in my truck that got the same mpg as new F150's with the 3.5 ecoboost when pulling a 10K lb camper.  Running empty the 3.5 beat my 390 easily for mpg.  The 390 wasted gas when my truck was running empty (no trailer attached)...it was the wrong size for that job. 

My427stang has a good point...you're loosing buying power by hemming and hawing :-)

45
FE Technical Forum / Re: Installing tranny, won't go in all the way
« on: February 23, 2022, 10:05:37 AM »
Only time I had a real head scratcher is when someone put dowel pins in the block that were too long.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 12