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 - Jim Kramer

Pages: 1 2 [3]
31
FE Technical Forum / Re: Best actual Ford cast 4V intake found
« on: January 03, 2021, 11:11:01 AM »
I have two sidewinders, a "J" and a "K". The J has had some home porting done on it, so I can't compare the ports, and I've never ran the K on anything so I can't offer any info on it performance wise. One thing I will say is that the one you have there is a lot cleaner than mine ;)..........Jim Kramer

32
Private Classifieds / Re: GT exhaust manifolds
« on: October 09, 2020, 02:33:57 PM »
7a19 and 7b6.  Send me an email and I'll send some pics. Thanks  jim390@msn.com

33
Private Classifieds / Re: GT exhaust manifolds
« on: October 09, 2020, 09:09:20 AM »
Where are you located? I have a couple sets in NE Iowa. I'll have to dig them out to check for  numbers. $200 pick-up........Jim Kramer

34
FE Technical Forum / Re: Rocker arm adjuster wear.
« on: September 19, 2020, 09:47:47 AM »
That's the strange thing about this deal Rory, nothing shows any signs distress. the rocker arms are fine, as are the shafts, pushrods, and even the adjusters themselves "look" ok except for the wear. No bluing or galling. That's what led me to wonder about the hardness of the new adjusters I put in. The lifters are Crower "cool face" solids and the pushrods are Comp Cams 9.157. With the set-up I have they do put the cups pretty close to the bottom of the spit hole in the rocker arm. I don't remember who's shafts they were, ( I bought them 20 years ago ), but they have one hole on the top and one on the bottom, but again they have several hundred quarter mile runs on them with no problems. And I have studs, properly necked down.  Thanks......Jim Kramer   

35
FE Technical Forum / Re: Rocker arm adjuster wear.
« on: September 18, 2020, 11:29:38 AM »
Also to the question of sizing, good question, as there doesn't seem to be much info in the catalog listing as to sizing. Everything is listed as being 3/8. This is a possible issue........Jim Kramer

36
FE Technical Forum / Re: Rocker arm adjuster wear.
« on: September 18, 2020, 11:24:57 AM »
CJ.. All your points are valid. The wear is occurring at the tip of the ball. In fact the pr. cup has a hole, ( not drilled through ), for pushrod oiling, and that has caused a pronounced "nipple" to be created on the adjuster ball. No visible evidence of oil starvation anywhere, even the ball itself doesn't "appear" to be staved of oil. I don't honestly know what the clearance might be between the arms and shaft, but the assembly isn't new, having seen hundreds of 7500+ quarter mile runs with no seen problems. I've thought too about cutting a groove in the rocker to promote pr. oiling. However every pushrod/adjuster lack of oiling problem I've envolves distressed looking components, but I'll admit I haven't come even close to seeing it all.    Thanks for your reply    Jim Kramer

37
FE Technical Forum / Rocker arm adjuster wear.
« on: September 18, 2020, 09:27:46 AM »
I am seeing abnormal wear on the balls of my adjusters. I'm gaining considerable valve lash with only a few miles driving and it is coming from the adjuster balls that have worn as much as .030 in less than thirty miles. I replaced the original adjusters ( these arms are the low ratio Iskys ) with new Crane units but that didn't cure the problem. My push rods are 9.157 long Comp items, which are longer than stock, but are still below the spit hole in the rocker arm. The cups are still like new ( no wear ). No apparent wear on the rocker arms themselves, shafts, or anyplace else. The shafts are heavy wall aftermarket with a single oiling hole on the bottom and top of the shaft. Oil pressure is good with a minimum of 20 hot at 1000 rpm immediately rising as the speed increases to about 60 hot at maybe 2500. Valve springs measure about 300/310 at full lift ( about .520 ). I do have a restrictor in the heads, but it's .125 so shouldn't be the problem.

I've used this rocker arm assy. before on my 390 Stock Eliminator motor with no problem. The pushrods are new, with the extra length, to the equation. I'm wondering about the quality of the new Crane adjusters. Has anyone seen a problem with them?   Thank you......Jim Kramer

38
FE Technical Forum / Fun thread.
« on: August 13, 2020, 11:36:43 PM »
As an additional point of interest, when we ran NHRA stock eliminator, if you had a "heads up" run against a same class car it was typical to drop at least one quart of oil before the run. I would normally run five quarts in the 427 deep pan. I would make the run with four quarts total in the pan. It was almost always worth nearly a full tenth. A lot of people would do it, particularly if you were a little slower than you opponent. Put the quart back in before the next run, (if you won). No problem......Jim Kramer

39
Private Classifieds / Re: WTB - 67 390 Distributor C7OF- F, -G or -H
« on: August 06, 2020, 11:13:34 PM »
I have an "H"  6L4 I think. It's still in the motor. It would have to be considered to be a "core". $125. If you are interested I'll try to get it out. It's been setting a long time........Thanks.... Jim Kramer 

40
Ricky.. I used the C6 converter with my modified COM bellhousing. The C4 stator support is the same as a C6, And you can buy an adapter bushing to make the C4 input shaft work in the C6 converter. The COM bellhousing is .850 deeper than the C4 bell so the converter needs to be spaced back a like amount with fabricated spacers. Sounds kind of jury-rigged but I put hundreds of mid to low 1.40 sixty foot runs on mine with zero problems. If you need a decent 4500+ stall racing converter I have a couple......Jim Kramer

41
FE Technical Forum / Re: First post. clutch question.
« on: July 19, 2020, 03:46:34 PM »
It is a little encouraging to think it my improve with use. Right now I have zero miles on it. I too checked freeplay before I ever even started the car, ( mechanical linkage ) and mine was this way from the first push of the peddle. Thanks to all that offered help. If I can somehow figure a solution I'll post it.........Jim Kramer

42
FE Technical Forum / Re: First post. clutch question.
« on: July 18, 2020, 11:37:08 PM »
Yes Jay that describes what mine does pretty much exactly. What sucks is that I was deliberating between the diaphragm and the long style clutches, and remembering what a bear trap clutch my 427 Fairlane  had I decided to try to save my knees and go with the diaphragm type. Maybe a poor choice.  Thanks.....Jim Kramer

43
FE Technical Forum / Re: First post. clutch question.
« on: July 18, 2020, 05:23:17 PM »
Yeah, I thought about lengthening that arm after I posted, and I think shortening it would be the answer, and I may try that but it will put the pushrod somewhat out of line. The car since I have had it always had a C4 in it, (raced as  a D/SA car), and I got it as a pile of parts 30 years ago, however it is actually a 390 4spd. car. I never did put the assist spring in and peddle pressure really isn't my problem and I can adjust the point of engagement OK too, Its just that when it does engage it seems like "all of nothing". Its hard to let it out smoothly, It "pops out", or engages very quickly ( with authority ) over the course of maybe one inch of peddle travel..........Jim Kramer 
 

44
FE Technical Forum / First post. clutch question.
« on: July 18, 2020, 03:39:15 PM »
This is my first post on this forum, although I have watched it since it was new. I was also on the old 332-428 fe forum since it was new, but it has lately gotten so bad that apparently my computer and internet service can't handle it anymore making it almost impossible to read let alone post.

Anyway, my question..I bought a Ram "powermaster" , diaphragm style PP and disk for my 390 Mustang. The engagement and disengagement all takes place within about one to two inches of peddle travel. I have a friend with a similar set up and it acts the same way. Is this typical for a diaphragm type clutch. When I push the clutch down it seems to "overcenter" at the point of disengagement, making control of the process difficult. I'm afraid this will make movement in tight quarter touchy. I'm thinking the only way to improve the operation would be to lengthen the lower arm of the "Z" bar, thus improving the effective ratio. Has anyone encountered this and come up with a solution , or do I simply need to learn to live with it..... thanks....Jim Kramer

Pages: 1 2 [3]