352 360 horse

[WerbyFord]

I'm mostly bummed out about the heads.
I thought those C0AE-D were something special but it appears not.
If I put C1AE-A heads in the Gonkulator it lines up with the dyno exactly.
I thought I had dyno data to support that the C0AE-D chambers are better, but it seems not, at least from this data. Lower CC but that's all.
I also suspect the big valves are doing nothing, shrouded by the little chamber and small bore.

On the cam:
I degreed a 324-324 "8v" cam.
I think the 324-324 at at about .006 lobe
Ford also rated this cam at 288-288 or 290-290 duration in some old literature.
That's about what I measure "at lash".
At .020 lobe I got about 278 duration, and 244 at .050.

SO, for the 306-306 cam that would mean
306-306 at about .006 lobe
274-274 or 276-276 "at lash" which is also a duration FoMoCo used
228-228 at .050

I really thought it would do more with no mufflers.
How long was the 2.5" pipe?

Some of the cars back in the day ran AWFULLY good, trap speed & even top speed - must have had some good prep.

[Joe-JDC]

I think the statement "back in the day", is key to our expectations.  I can remember when I was young and dumb driving above my tires, brakes, headlights, and suspension every time I got close to some of my high school friends on those country roads where I grew up.  I can also remember when you could keep up with another car, and nudge his rear bumper, but when you pulled over to pass, you just could only keep up, not pass.  A few horsepower would have made all the difference at those times.  I had one high school "friend" who was a chevy guy that could not pass my '56 Fairlane on those country roads, so his dad bought him a new '64 Nova SS with the high performance 327, and one day he fell in behind my '56, and proceeded to blow around me so fast I had NO defense.  I grew up with one of my uncles who is my age, and he bought a '60 Thunderbird with the 352 HP, and that car would outrun most everything around the area at that time, but the city kids started buying the new Chevy IIs with the 283s and 327s, and became the street cleaners until the Falcons and Fairlanes got the 289.  Even a 260 Falcon was a car to be reckoned with if it had the 4 speed.  An honest 330 hp is still a fun car to drive.  I just wish I could buy a new Starliner today.   Joe-JDC

[WerbyFord]

What I meant by "back in the day" was the MPH from some old road tests, and forum members that ran em back then.
Top speeds reported as 148-152mph - clearly open exhaust, but still, that takes some serious power in that old brick body.
1/4-mile trap speeds of 101-103mph per Jody Alberts & Bobby Spears, and 106-107mph from Myrl Morris (in a gutted 3430 lb car).
I'm sure those were well-prepped engines, some with headers, but still allegedly stock legal prep.

SO I think, given that data, I just "assumed" those C0AE-D heads were something more special but maybe not.
Brannan tried them once on his 63 LWG, I should look at that data again too.

The 352/360hp never did well in class racing so that would imply indeed that it was likely overrated.
In contrast, the 406 and 427 LoRiser grabbed their share of NHRA Nationals class wins so they were likely rated pretty close.

For sure Joe, that's what happened year-by-year back then, even I remember a little of it.
The cars werent really THAT fast, it's just that each year was faster than the year before, right up to 1969-70.
After 1971, each year seemed awful - they weren't THAT slow, but each year was SLOWER than the year before & that's what we felt.

[Royce]

I don't think the small chamber heads are good for anything but adding compression, and my oversized valves probably cancelled out any extra flow with shrouding. I had a set of the C2SE heads on a 63 390 M code  with 3x2.. About the same compression, cam about 10 degrees smaller, dyno headers.   It made 340 horse at 5100. It had a better intake and headers and only made 10 more horse.. So by that measuring stick this 352 looks pretty good.. This cam is not all that bad.  Docile idle with some low rpm torque and yet it pulls good up top. It looks to me like it would be close to a Comp 280 with wider LSA. And we know that cam runs good in FEs.  When it goes back in the Starliner we will see if it runs 140ish  LOL. Werby  I bet those racers with the 352s had those things bending the rules to the max.. Given what it makes with these parts and no special prep, a guy in the know could make a lot more power

[frnkeore]

I don't think quench would have made a difference, I was using 110 fuel so detonation was not a concern..Maybe it would have not required as much timing, but the quench was not awful at .050. The extra compression would have helped.. I got the gaskets from Dennis at DSC

The quench was even worse on the factory 360HP @ .066 (.036 deck, .030 gasket).

What was the ICL on your cam? Also, what was the main, rod and piston clearance?

[Royce]

Bearings are .0025 rod .0030 main. Did not measure the piston to bore clearance    Relied on the machine shop and I forgot the spec.   I did not check ICL  I think the cam has a symetrical lobe and i installed it straight up . If you can figure it out from the event numbers here they are:  IO 24 BTDC  IC 70 ABDC  EO 72 BBDC  EC 22 ATDC. Not much info on a Holman Moody cam card

[frnkeore]

By those numbers, it's 113 ICL  and 115 on the Ex.

I asked because the 271HP, 289 uses the same lobes and 114 LSA but, they set the ICL @ 108 and Ex @ 120, when measured at .050 and 109 ICL when measuring at 306 duration.

[Royce]

By the way, The cam card says those measurements are at .015 tappet lift

[70tp]

Pm sent to Royce

[blykins]

I don't think the small chamber heads are good for anything but adding compression, and my oversized valves probably cancelled out any extra flow with shrouding. I had a set of the C2SE heads on a 63 390 M code  with 3x2.. About the same compression, cam about 10 degrees smaller, dyno headers.   It made 340 horse at 5100. It had a better intake and headers and only made 10 more horse.. So by that measuring stick this 352 looks pretty good.. This cam is not all that bad.  Docile idle with some low rpm torque and yet it pulls good up top. It looks to me like it would be close to a Comp 280 with wider LSA. And we know that cam runs good in FEs.  When it goes back in the Starliner we will see if it runs 140ish  LOL. Werby  I bet those racers with the 352s had those things bending the rules to the max.. Given what it makes with these parts and no special prep, a guy in the know could make a lot more power

I was going to use the C0 heads on my 352 but Blair told me that they were going to be dogs.  I like finding things out for myself, so I threw every trick I knew at the heads, 7mm valves, good valve job, bowl blend, etc, etc., and they rewarded me with about 15 cfm less than a CJ head with the same prep.  I don't think they even cracked 240 cfm with all the prep. 

They would be good for adding compression for sure and that's why I was looking so hard at them. 

[frnkeore]

Another issue that we haven't taken into consideration is, how much will the HP increase after it's well broke in?

[Royce]

True,,  The dyno operator did run it for about 20 min under light load to beak in the rings a bit... I had broken in the cam previously on an engine stand.
 .93 hp/cu in from unremarkable factory parts in very street friendly package. The only possible down side is if it can't handle running on 91 octane.. We will find out soon enough.

I almost forgot  The engine was not running through the dyno MSD box. Dual points and a factory coil to 5700 rpm and never skipped a beat.

Someone asked about the length of the 2.5 inch pipes.. That would be 14 inches

[blykins]

True,,  The dyno operator did run it for about 20 min under light load to beak in the rings a bit... I had broken in the cam previously on an engine stand.
 .93 hp/cu in from unremarkable factory parts in very street friendly package. The only possible down side is if it can't handle running on 91 octane.. We will find out soon enough.

I almost forgot  The engine was not running through the dyno MSD box. Dual points and a factory coil to 5700 rpm and never skipped a beat.

Someone asked about the length of the 2.5 inch pipes.. That would be 14 inches

If the hone job was good, it was broken in on the 3rd or 4th pull.

[427John]

What I meant by "back in the day" was the MPH from some old road tests, and forum members that ran em back then.
Top speeds reported as 148-152mph - clearly open exhaust, but still, that takes some serious power in that old brick body.
1/4-mile trap speeds of 101-103mph per Jody Alberts & Bobby Spears, and 106-107mph from Myrl Morris (in a gutted 3430 lb car).
I'm sure those were well-prepped engines, some with headers, but still allegedly stock legal prep.

SO I think, given that data, I just "assumed" those C0AE-D heads were something more special but maybe not.
Brannan tried them once on his 63 LWG, I should look at that data again too.

The 352/360hp never did well in class racing so that would imply indeed that it was likely overrated.
In contrast, the 406 and 427 LoRiser grabbed their share of NHRA Nationals class wins so they were likely rated pretty close.

For sure Joe, that's what happened year-by-year back then, even I remember a little of it.
The cars werent really THAT fast, it's just that each year was faster than the year before, right up to 1969-70.
After 1971, each year seemed awful - they weren't THAT slow, but each year was SLOWER than the year before & that's what we felt.

If you read the articles Hot Rod did on them when they came out,they actually felt they were pretty close on the rating,Hot Rod always had the perception that Chevrolet was pretty honest on their power ratings and that Ford had grossly overrated the 300 horse 352,but when they compared the 360 horse to the 348/350 they felt that it was comparable and that any disadvantage the Ford might have would be more attributed to being heavier and the lack of availability of a 4 speed.

[WerbyFord]

What I meant by "back in the day" was the MPH from some old road tests, and forum members that ran em back then.
Top speeds reported as 148-152mph - clearly open exhaust, but still, that takes some serious power in that old brick body.
1/4-mile trap speeds of 101-103mph per Jody Alberts & Bobby Spears, and 106-107mph from Myrl Morris (in a gutted 3430 lb car).
I'm sure those were well-prepped engines, some with headers, but still allegedly stock legal prep.

SO I think, given that data, I just "assumed" those C0AE-D heads were something more special but maybe not.
Brannan tried them once on his 63 LWG, I should look at that data again too.

The 352/360hp never did well in class racing so that would imply indeed that it was likely overrated.
In contrast, the 406 and 427 LoRiser grabbed their share of NHRA Nationals class wins so they were likely rated pretty close.

For sure Joe, that's what happened year-by-year back then, even I remember a little of it.
The cars werent really THAT fast, it's just that each year was faster than the year before, right up to 1969-70.
After 1971, each year seemed awful - they weren't THAT slow, but each year was SLOWER than the year before & that's what we felt.

If you read the articles Hot Rod did on them when they came out,they actually felt they were pretty close on the rating,Hot Rod always had the perception that Chevrolet was pretty honest on their power ratings and that Ford had grossly overrated the 300 horse 352,but when they compared the 360 horse to the 348/350 they felt that it was comparable and that any disadvantage the Ford might have would be more attributed to being heavier and the lack of availability of a 4 speed.

John,
I dont have anything from Hot Rod on the 352/360hp, can you summarize?
I also thought the Chevy 348/350hp came out in 1961 since it used the 409 heads.
BUT, there's conflicting info there, a couple sources say 1960. NHRA says 1961 though.
Maybe Hot Rod was comparing the 352/360 to the 348/335-6v?
Did they do any drag or dyno tests?
OF course if it was a 1961 Chev, 348/350-6v, the car would indeed be a lot lighter than the 1960 Ford, maybe 300 lb.

I have March 1960 Rod Builder, says they ran the 352/360 in the 1/4 and it "hit over 100" and "was quiet".
Well I dont believe 100mph thru the mufflers, so maybe the SPEEDOMETER said 100, which as we know doesnt mean much.
No data other than that.
Super hard to find data from 1960-61.