pre 66 or post 66

[matt souders]

Building a 390 and just wondering if there was any one with actual flow or dyno # for the tall port and low port fe heads. Didn't know which might respond better to the standard upgrade 2.09 1.65 valves with a mild clean up. The pre 66 obviously are bigger but It's just the floor that's lowered. I'm not an export head porter but it looks like it just hurts the short turn. I have set of c8ae-h and c4ae-g. One set for the stang and the other for the f-250. I'm planning on running a 294s with a streetmaster intake and approx. 3000 stall. Haven't decided on gears 373-410 any suggestions would be appreciated. One more ? do you guys think this combo is capable of low 12's or high 11's. Thanks Matt.

[jayb]

I'm not a casting number expert, so I'm not 100% sure what the ports look like on those two head castings, but I think that the C4 heads are the standard low riser port, and those will respond very well to the increase in valve size offered by the Cobra Jet valves.  The C8 heads may be the heads with the lowered exhaust port location; you should be able to measure the two heads and confirm that.  If that is the case, those are not good performance heads, and you should stay with the C4 heads.

You are talking about your Mustang running low 12s or high 11s, I assume?  I don't think you'll get there with that combination unless the car is pretty light.  With the 294S cam and the Streetmaster intake on the 390 you are probably looking at around 400-425 HP, and that will probably get you into the high 12s.  More gear will help; go with the 4.10s or even 4.30s if you can tolerate it.  FYI my Mach 1 with the 410 HP 428CJ engine weighed 3600 with me in it, and ran 12.80s with a 3.91 gear.

[matt souders]

Thanks for the reply. I was pretty sure that was wishfull thinking with that combo. but the car is going to be driven on the street more than raced any how. Do you think the rpm intake would be better or at that power level won't it make a difference. How are 4.10's on the street with a 27 inch tire. I've done the math and the rpm's will be up there at a cruise.

[hotrodfeguy]

I think the G,R,A heads(LR ports) could do it with some porting and work. Cody Ladowski from the forum is running 12's with his 390 Pick up on G heads and CJ valves. So I think it is in the plausible area.
The H heads would be a good pick up truck head but thats about it. As Jay said the are the small intake port and low exhaust exit. But would not be a bad choice for a tow truck and under 5k situation.

[afret]

I'm an optimist.   

I don't see why you can't reach your low 12 second goal.  You'll need sticky tires and might have to go to several test and tune sessions to get the motor and suspension dialed in.  Just take your time in putting your engine together.  Have them use torque plates for honing and use a good set of file fit rings.  Get a good valve job.  Somewhere around a 4.30 set of gears and 4000 stall converter will help.  If you can reach about 110 MPH in the traps, you should be able to break into the 11's if your tires and suspension are working.

We used to take our '68 4 door 390 Torino to the track back in the mid 70's.  Had home ported CJ heads, Edelbrock F427 intake, 850 Holley, Hooker headers, heavy cast pistons, 3000 stall C6 converter, 391 gears, Ford C8AX-C hydraulic cam (I think it had only about 220* intake duration at .05), and slapper bars and small slicks.  Got the car to run 12.70's before we decided to try a 427.  Probably still had another few tenths in that combo.  Your Mustang should be quite a bit lighter and have the advantage of better technology now in the area of cams, converters, and suspension.

[jayb]

Thanks for the reply. I was pretty sure that was wishfull thinking with that combo. but the car is going to be driven on the street more than raced any how. Do you think the rpm intake would be better or at that power level won't it make a difference. How are 4.10's on the street with a 27 inch tire. I've done the math and the rpm's will be up there at a cruise.

At that power level the RPM intake and the Streetmaster are pretty much a dead heat.  No reason to go to the RPM if you've already got the Streetmaster.

As far as the gears, I would say it would depend mostly on how much highway driving you will be doing.  If that is a lot, those gears will get annoying in a big hurry.  If you're not on the highway that much, not big deal.  It's all a tradeoff  

[e philpott]

I think you could run mid 12's with the low riser port .... my 63 fairlane was 3389 and I was every bit of 250 then (now 189 ) when I first starting bracket racing with it 3600 plus pounds , I had a 3500 stall Coan converter , C1AE heads with 2.10/1.65 home ported .030 390 flat top Lunati 237/247 .050 and 559/579 lift flat tappit cam , had factory tri-power and Dove 4V with 735 carb intake on it , ran 12.50 at 108 in cool weather and around 12.78/107 hot and humid weather with 4.11 and 4.56 gears , I never did try my street master though I still have it .... on street with your converter you could run 3.50 or 3.70 gears for cruising and not lose hardly any at the strip

[rcodecj]

I think mid 12's is possible depending on how much you do to the car in terms of weight and suspension.
You are also going to need no matter what good racing tires, something like Cal-trac bars and shocks. Also sub frame connectors or it is tough to dial in the suspension.
Best to have someone video tape the launch, you will learn a lot on how to dial in the shocks by watching the run.
A higher converter would be better. Do whatever you can on the heads, as they are key in performance.
If you want to make it easy, stroke it to 445. Nothing wrong with a 390 though, nothing at all. It'll run and it'll run good.

Have you weighed your car?

Good luck, I want to hear more about your car as one of my cars is a 67 mustang coupe.

[matt souders]

Thanks for all the replies. I really like this forum been following along for a while and plan on getting jays book soon. I kind of compare this forum to the snap on  truck versus sears. Sears is big and fancy and has all the gimmicky tools "robogrips" lol but snap on has what gets it done. Its nice and small with guys that seem to realate real world experiences.  It's good to here my goals are optimistically obtainable. I would go with a stroker and ported edelbrock heads but that just seems to obvious. Can't really explain what I'm trying to say but like the Idea of putting more work into it even if it means less of a return. Don't think I'll ever be a crate engine type of guy.

[matt souders]

Mine is actually a 67 coupe as well. This is my first car and have never driven it. lol I just turned 27 on the 4'th and I bought this car right before I turned 16. I remember when I was about 10  I wanted a mustang and dad told me to get a job. so when I turned fifteen thats what I did. Been slowly working on it. Kinda of lost interest a couple of years ago chasing girls and then I became  a Dad myself so family obviously came first and now I'm starting to get more financially set to get back into it. But now that I'm a little older I kinda of wish I had something a little different like a 66-67 fairlane post sedan or a galaxie live and learn i guess. I'll try to keep you posted how the car is going if you would like. I don't think I'll be getting evething done in the near future.

[jayb]

That's a good looking car, Matt.  My first car, back in 1976, was a 67 Mustang.  I should've never sold it LOL!

[rcodecj]

I love the fairlanes and galaxies as well. The nice thing about the mustang is that you can get any part you need.
My first 67 mustang was a 6 cyl 3 spd, that I help a friend who bought it from me to change into a 390 4 spd.
It ran 13.6 on 295/50/15 street BFG radials, not much traction. It had a cobra jet hood scoop and sealed cold air to the carb. It was bored .030 with forged pistons. It had 4.11's, traction bars, 6114 Hooker headers, sidewinder intake, 750 carter carb, Crane hydraulic cam around 226 dur at .050, 9.5 compression actually measured. The heads were C8AE-H with only a 3 angle valve job. It weighed 3314 lbs without driver, he had a lot of crap in it and it could have been lighter. It would have been nice to see what it would have ran with slicks.

My 2nd 67 was a black on black GT fastback, 390 4 speed.

My current 67 coupe is a 289 sprint originally, currently has a low compression, lousy quench 460 from a van, ran corrected 11's but time slips of 12.019, 112.98 mph, 60 ft 1.69.
212 degree cam at .050, shifts at 5300 to 5400 rpm's. 3.50 rear gears, C6, 2500 converter. Weighed 3012 lbs at the time, all steel, full exhaust.
I can't help but believe a 390 with good compression, good cam, good quench, good heads, would run better.

[machoneman]

Like the car Matt! Hey, the blue one in the background looks pretty good too.

I'll give a different take. There was a time when only iron OEM heads were available. Today though for a performance build, starting with the best head makes more sense to me, that being the Edel-B's. Unless one is severely cash-strapped or has some HR or TP heads lying around, it may actually be almost as cost effective to get new ready-to-run aluminum heads rather than invest in some porting, valves, maybe seats, retainers, springs, machining, etc. to get some old OEM iron heads ready.  Understand though why one may want to stick to iron especially if the heads need zero work, hence zero cost.

The 4:0+ gears sound good....until one drives at highway speeds of 65-70mph for hours on end. The noise will drive you nuts, let alone getting extremely poor mileage! This gets back to all of us wanting say 11 second FE powered cars that give 25 mpg, have great manners on the highway, and only turn say 2,000 rpm at 70 mph. Not-gonna-happen! 
   
2x on the very best frame connectors (welded-on), Cal-Tracs, lightweight components ($ permitting), battery in the trunk, etc.