Author Topic: Engine build opinions  (Read 6273 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Buckwheat

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 20
  • 69 Mustang, work in progress
    • View Profile
Re: Engine build opinions
« Reply #15 on: April 26, 2018, 03:49:13 PM »
$1250 doesn’t scare me if it’s the right way to go.

blykins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4857
    • View Profile
    • Lykins Motorsports
Re: Engine build opinions
« Reply #16 on: April 26, 2018, 05:05:21 PM »
I'm not going to say it's the *right* way to go, but it would certainly be easiest on startup.  No break-in procedures.  With your compression ratio, I would rather see you with a hydraulic roller lobe to help out.
Brent Lykins
Lykins Motorsports
Custom FE Street, Drag Race, Road Race, and Pulling Truck Engines
Custom Roller & Flat Tappet Camshafts
www.lykinsmotorsports.com
brent@lykinsmotorsports.com
www.customfordcams.com
502-759-1431
Instagram:  brentlykinsmotorsports
YouTube:  Lykins Motorsports

Buckwheat

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 20
  • 69 Mustang, work in progress
    • View Profile
Re: Engine build opinions
« Reply #17 on: April 26, 2018, 09:03:31 PM »
Hydraulic roller is good, I sent you an email if you would prefer to quote that way.

machoneman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
Re: Engine build opinions
« Reply #18 on: April 27, 2018, 05:16:14 AM »
I'm a big fan of hydro rollers but here, unless our poster is truly wanting a pretty hot engine, that big price difference could be put to better use elsewhere. Put another way, if that level of $ is acceptable, go roller. Otherwise, if $ are more precious, head work, a new intake, maybe a carb, better rockers and shafts and a hotter flat tappet cam would be a better investment.

Funny, but we all struggle with these kinds of decisions on not only how many $ to spend but where they should or could be spent. 

I'm not going to say it's the *right* way to go, but it would certainly be easiest on startup.  No break-in procedures.  With your compression ratio, I would rather see you with a hydraulic roller lobe to help out.
Bob Maag

Falcon67

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2166
    • View Profile
    • Kelly's Hot Rod Page
Re: Engine build opinions
« Reply #19 on: April 27, 2018, 09:28:25 AM »
I ran flat for years and after converting one over to a roller, I'll sit before I run a flat tappet again.  The rollers and the selection of profiles are just so much better for so many applications.  No break in and if you upgrade the cam, lifters go right back in.  If have over $1100 in roller lifters in two engines - I've easily spent that much replacing flat tappets over the years. 

wowens

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
    • View Profile
Re: Engine build opinions
« Reply #20 on: April 27, 2018, 04:22:03 PM »
Stroke it
Woody

My427stang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3960
    • View Profile
Re: Engine build opinions
« Reply #21 on: April 28, 2018, 04:16:38 PM »
I am a little late to the discussion, but I would base the cam on use and which 5th gear you run.

You can go pretty rowdy with a 3.89/2.78 1st gear in a TKO (assuming it's a 600, if its a 3.27 geared early or TKO-500 I'd be looking at it differently)

However, 5th gear really matters, if it's a .64 OD, you will actually want a little less cam (or at least more LSA) because when you are lumbering around you want it to be a little cleaner.  FWIW, in my TKO-600, 489FE, I actually added gear from 3.70 to 4.11 and gained mileage and drivability (as well as acceleration) everywhere.  The .64 / 3.70 combo was just wasn't perfect when at lower speeds on highways

If you have a .82 600, then you can go a bit more rowdy as the final drive works out to 3.19, so you will still be spinning it pretty decent on the highway.

FWIW, my recommendation for a 433 inch with a .64 and 3.89s would likely be high 230s @ .050, mid 280s intake, 290-ish exhuast, HR, 108 LSA on 104, unless you wanted to go 110 to tame the idle.  Not a lot different than what you have, but a little more .050, earlier overall, and likely sneak a bit more lift out of it.

I also agree with 2 other points made.  1 - Brent won't steer you wrong, and 2 - More head, more better.  I don't think a stock Edel will gain you much unless your CJ heads are beat or valve job poorly done, but regardless, more flow without making the port too big is muy bueno
---------------------------------
Ross
Bullock's Power Service, LLC
- 70 Fastback Mustang, 489 cid FE, Victor, SEFI, Erson SFT cam, TKO-600 5 speed, 4.11 9 inch.
- 71 F100 shortbed 4x4, 461 cid FE, headers, Victor Pro-flo EFI, Comp Custom HFT cam, 3.50 9 inch

Buckwheat

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 20
  • 69 Mustang, work in progress
    • View Profile
Re: Engine build opinions
« Reply #22 on: April 28, 2018, 07:20:47 PM »
Not too late, thanks for the input.  Trans has .64 od, haven’t picked out tire size yet which will make a little difference on cruise rpm.  I understand the benefits and plan on spending a lot of time on the heads.  What are the details on your 489 FE build?

My427stang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3960
    • View Profile
Re: Engine build opinions
« Reply #23 on: April 29, 2018, 07:06:12 AM »
Sort of a long story, but induction on mine has changed a bit over the years, but the bottom end has stayed the same since I put it together in 2006

4.277 X 4.25, Diamond Pistons, 10.7:1, SCAT crank and rods. .002 below deck, Erson E240322 solid flat tappet, Heads are 2006 era Craft Stage 2 that have had more work done to them, Erson rockers. Specs on the cam are 286/294, 242/246, 110 LSA on 106, .595 lift, however, over the years I have gone from the original .028 lash down to .014 which livens it up a bit. 

Originally, I built this combo with a 3.70 gear, TKO-600 with .64 OD, a ported Edelbrock RPM, 1000 Holley, recurved Unilite and 3 inch exhaust with Flowmasters  Later I changed to Borla mufflers which made it much easier on the ears and I think I picked up more midrange.  It was very nice to drive and had plenty of power, but I found myself driving by ear on the highway and I would just end up going way too fast.  Sort of creeping up to 80+ which isn't a big deal in Nebraska, but the guys I hung out with didn't have the power or gearing to run that fast for long distances, so I would always have to hold back on the highway. I also wanted to play around with other combos. 

I then regeared to 4.11 and it was better everywhere, both mileage and power (I run 275/60-15 rear tires).  Then I added EFI, I run port injected EFI based off a 1993 Mustang OEM computer with a Quarterhorse piggy back chip.  The EFI also controls the timing, I run a ported Victor intake now and a 1200 cfm throttle body.  After the EFI, I started tightening the lash and the engine liked it. The EFI basically made the cam act a lot milder so I was able to be a little more aggressive with lash.

Haven't been down a 1/4 mile, but it runs very strong, if I roll on the throttle to WOT, it comes up on cam in 3rd gear and will break the tires loose on a highway on ramp and sort of drift as long as I will hold it.  Driving it for so long it's predictable and can still get the heart pumping

For yours, I think the 55 or so cube difference and less rear gear should drive a little less cam, assuming you plan to put some miles on it.  However, assuming nice early cam timing to help 5th gear, your advertised should stay about the same as mine with the compression you are running.  Additionally, the smaller the engine the more you want to tighten LSA to help with WOT torque, but you need to think about it a bit, because too tight can be sloppy at low RPM in 5th when you are cruising.  My hunch is a limit of about 70-75 degrees of overlap after you pick your lobes, and lower is better if you plan to cruise more than race.

Regardless, hate to beat this so hard, but I think you need to either do a max effort valve job and bowl clean up on your heads or go with aftermarket.  I don't think a stock set of Edels are worth much to you over a well prepared set of CJ heads, but a good higher end set of of alum heads will make more power everywhere without hurting behavior in 5th.

As far as the discussion on EFI or carb, If you are going to drive the wheels off this car, a good big dollar EFI can't be beat.  The throttle body kits, not as much, but will still be much more drivable and allow many benefits, fan control, idle control with a/c etc, but aren't that controllable and likely won't add WOT power. That being said, I had no issues doing anything with the carb version of the 489 and my F100 with both the stroker and the mild 390 in it now behaves great once it warms up.  The difference in the EFI is mileage and cold start and immediate drive, like a new car.  The 445 will get a throttle body EFI kit eventually though

Not to beat a dead horse, but for a second reference, my truck motor, a 445 with ported iron heads, RPM and a 1000 Holley, 10:1, I ran a solid flat tappet cam very similar to what you have now but quite a bit more lift.  It by no means acted like a truck motor, it pulled very hard and was pretty rev happy for what it was.  It had less compression, but more head flow than you, and a bit more cubes.  (I say was because I had some machining issues and it's out right now) However, with your compression, I think your combo as it is, is going to be very fussy on pump gas.  You could retard the cam a bunch (6+ degrees) or recam.  I think the right choice is a new cam because you can add lift and add exhaust lobe, retarding the cam would indeed help fuel tolerance, but the cam is a bit of a snoozer and would get soft in 5th gear rocked that far back

Sort of guessing at your plan, and sorry for the long post, but fire away if you have questions
« Last Edit: April 29, 2018, 07:09:14 AM by My427stang »
---------------------------------
Ross
Bullock's Power Service, LLC
- 70 Fastback Mustang, 489 cid FE, Victor, SEFI, Erson SFT cam, TKO-600 5 speed, 4.11 9 inch.
- 71 F100 shortbed 4x4, 461 cid FE, headers, Victor Pro-flo EFI, Comp Custom HFT cam, 3.50 9 inch

Buckwheat

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 20
  • 69 Mustang, work in progress
    • View Profile
Re: Engine build opinions
« Reply #24 on: April 29, 2018, 02:52:48 PM »
Thanks for the input.  You are running a really tall tire (28”), I expect to run something closer to a 26” which would put our axle ratio almost identical.  I am running 3” exhaust back to spin tech mufflers, then 2 1/2” out the side in front of the rear tires.