High compression_ methanol injection opinions

[gregaba]

I am getting ready to build my engine to go in a 63 Galaxie.
So far I have a stock bore and stroke [428] forged h beam rods and pistons [Scat], Fe power intake adapter, timing cover, chain set,  Trick flow single plane intake and Sniper EFI and aluminum heads.
I just received my new C8AX-6250-D cam.
I will be running a C-6 with a Doug Nash 2 overdrive unit with it. It has a Roush-Yates Detroit locker with 390 gears.
This is build for the street with maybe 5 or 6 trips to the strip every year but mostly to make cruise night and the local cars and coffee show every month.
I would like to run a 12-1 compression ratio [Static] or higher with 91 octane gas. This is the highest octane I can buy everywhere. Race gas is available but expensive. I looked into CNG but the 10 to 13 thousand for the system is a little much for what I want to do and they said it would only work with port injection so I would have to go to the megasquirt system which is a couple thousand more.
The reason I was posting this is because I wanted to know if anyone had ran this kind of compression on the street with the Snow water-methanol injection system and how it worked out. I would run 70% methanol and 30% water.
 Any advice would be great.
Thanks
Greg

[blykins]

Greg, I have no experience with the methanol injection, so I can't be of much help there.

I do, however, have to ask why you opted for the copy of the C8AX camshaft.  With 330° of duration at .015" lift and over 100° of overlap, it's mostly a "Dairy Queener" camshaft.

[gregaba]

Hi Brent
There are several reasons for going with the monster cam.
I have 3 daily drivers a 2013 F 250 used for work and the 71 CJ which I will finish this year [hopefully in 2 to 3 months] and a 17 edge for gas mileage..
I bought the Galaxie on a whim and really don't need it.
All the people around here are off brand racers and all I hear is how much a dog the FE engine is.
I kind of got to them with my 2013 Boss 302 but got tired of driving a computer with wheels and sold it to finance the 71 build.
With all their talk they would shut up when I would drive the 71 around them as they lost to many times to me [before I decided to rebuild it 2 years ago].
I want the 63 to be as close as I can get it to a 63-64 type race car that I can drive on the street.
It won't be driven everyday and is just a toy I can break out on a Friday or Saturday night.
I thought about a stroker kit for it but decided to build a 63 style car as they would in the day with a few modern add on's.
I know this isn't the best decision as I won't be able to resale it but sure am looking forward to the fun of driving it.
The car was an original bought as a race car in 63 by a racer who lived about 35 miles from me and I know the car from the 60's.
I removed the roll bar but left all the other race parts on it. It has 23,000 miles on it from new and has rarely been driven on the street.
I know I could go with a more modern cam design but wanted to stay as period correct as I could-just wish I Had a 427 instead of a 428 but can live with the 428. 
 Greg

[jayb]

What are the specs on the cam?  You may not need the water/methanol injection, if I recall correctly that cam has a whole bunch of duration.

When I ran the Snow system on my supercharged engine that said don't go any more than 50/50 on the mix, apparently more methanol doesn't really help.

[blykins]

Hi Brent
There are several reasons for going with the monster cam.
I have 3 daily drivers a 2013 F 250 used for work and the 71 CJ which I will finish this year [hopefully in 2 to 3 months] and a 17 edge for gas mileage..
I bought the Galaxie on a whim and really don't need it.
All the people around here are off brand racers and all I hear is how much a dog the FE engine is.
I kind of got to them with my 2013 Boss 302 but got tired of driving a computer with wheels and sold it to finance the 71 build.
With all their talk they would shut up when I would drive the 71 around them as they lost to many times to me [before I decided to rebuild it 2 years ago].
I want the 63 to be as close as I can get it to a 63-64 type race car that I can drive on the street.
It won't be driven everyday and is just a toy I can break out on a Friday or Saturday night.
I thought about a stroker kit for it but decided to build a 63 style car as they would in the day with a few modern add on's.
I know this isn't the best decision as I won't be able to resale it but sure am looking forward to the fun of driving it.
The car was an original bought as a race car in 63 by a racer who lived about 35 miles from me and I know the car from the 60's.
I removed the roll bar but left all the other race parts on it. It has 23,000 miles on it from new and has rarely been driven on the street.
I know I could go with a more modern cam design but wanted to stay as period correct as I could-just wish I Had a 427 instead of a 428 but can live with the 428. 
 Greg

I can understand the desire for vintage pieces.  Old school cool is just....well....old school cool. 

The issue is that camshaft has a 273° duration @ .050" lift.  107LSA on a 102 ICL.  It's a 7500-8500 rpm camshaft and will most likely be a bubbling mess on the street, especially if the Holley EFI won't go open loop. 

That cam would need something like a 4.88-5.13 gear, especially in a heavy car.  A 428 isn't big enough to really make it perform on the street and most setups wouldn't perform at the strip with it. 

To put it in perspective, I run smaller camshafts on 511 cubic inch Tunnel Port engines and peak them at 7000-7200 rpm.   Engines just don't keep making more horsepower as you add more and more camshaft.  At some point, the cylinder head, induction, and bottom end can't handle it, and then you end up with an engine that has zero power down low, plus it can't pull high enough to make any power up high. 

You could take 30 degrees out of the duration on that camshaft and run quicker....

[1968galaxie]

E85 would certainly work well with 12:2 CR.
Quickfuel E85 850 carb perhaps.
The old 330 .600" Ford racing cam will certainly sound awesome.
You will certainly not want a 10" 3000 stall converter with that cam and cubes.
5000 stall would be more in the ball park.

I drive on the street with 5500 stall 3.89 gear detroit locker and drag radials.
Big cooler on the transmission and all is well.

With the right compression ratio and converter it will certainly not be a dairy queener.
I do not think that is an 8500 rpm cam - lol, far from it. 7000 rpm yes.


Cheers

[My427stang]

I think it’s way too radical, I am with Brent. If it’s really 330 advertised and over 270 at 50, 107 LSA you will not be happy unless it’s lashed so loose it hammers parts

If the specs aren’t accurate different story but 428 cubes and 270 @ .050?

[1968galaxie]

There are a few old Ford guys that have run that cam in the 60's and 70's.
Yes it is an old slow lift curve camshaft - very old school.
But it did work with 427.8 cubes back then with 12:1 CR.
Valve springs then required slower camshaft profiles.
Newer cams will have much higher acceleration rates and make more power with less duration.
That old cam is not radical at all - it is a very lazy lobe.
Yes it will require a very high stall converter. No need to "loose lash" it at all.
If you are running less than 4500 stall converter then I agree - get a different cam.

[blykins]

E85 would certainly work well with 12:2 CR.
Quickfuel E85 850 carb perhaps.
The old 330 .600" Ford racing cam will certainly sound awesome.
You will certainly not want a 10" 3000 stall converter with that cam and cubes.
5000 stall would be more in the ball park.

I drive on the street with 5500 stall 3.89 gear detroit locker and drag radials.
Big cooler on the transmission and all is well.

With the right compression ratio and converter it will certainly not be a dairy queener.
I do not think that is an 8500 rpm cam - lol, far from it. 7000 rpm yes.


Cheers

With a 428 and decent heads, it just takes about 250 degrees to peak at 7000.  The extra 20 degrees does nothing but increase the overlap without gain. 

[1968galaxie]

Yes a modern fast lift curve cam with 250+ degrees of duration may peak at 7000 rpm with 428 cubes and a decent head.
We aren't talking modern cam here. This is an old lazy cam profile. It wasn't 8500 rpm even in a 427 medium riser.

You have your opinions as do others.

[My427stang]

There are a few old Ford guys that have run that cam in the 60's and 70's.
Yes it is an old slow lift curve camshaft - very old school.
But it did work with 427.8 cubes back then with 12:1 CR.
Valve springs then required slower camshaft profiles.
Newer cams will have much higher acceleration rates and make more power with less duration.
That old cam is not radical at all - it is a very lazy lobe.
Yes it will require a very high stall converter. No need to "loose lash" it at all.
If you are running less than 4500 stall converter then I agree - get a different cam.

It may have worked with crappy heads and crappy valve jobs of the era, but it’s too much cam for anything but radical sound IMO Nothing to do with the ramp acceleration, even if it was 292 adv the 273 @ .050 on that tight center is too much for the planned use

[blykins]

Yes a modern fast lift curve cam with 250+ degrees of duration may peak at 7000 rpm with 428 cubes and a decent head.
We aren't talking modern cam here. This is an old lazy cam profile. It wasn't 8500 rpm even in a 427 medium riser.

You have your opinions as do others.

I'm not using "opinions". 

What do you think overlap does?  You either have a combination that's efficient enough to use it at very high rpm, or you don't.  When you don't, the cam doesn't serve any purpose other than a sound machine. 

This doesn't have anything to do with aggressive ramps either.  Even a "modern camshaft" with 272° degrees of duration at .050" lift, with a 107 LSA doesn't have any purpose in a street car other than sound. 

[MeanGene]

Ah, I remember you from FB, where you were also told by many that the D cam is not a street cruiser, but by saying stuff like "monster cam", you're not getting it, but are after the baddest sounding critter on the boulevard. That it will be, but it will also be a rolling spaz attack on the street up until its effective powerband, which is around 4K-8K, which any experienced FE guy will tell you is not street 428 territory. It also had nothing to do with 1963, it came along in 68 in the Tunnel Port times. If you try street racing with that cam in a 428 and 3.90 gears, you will likely prove your Brand X buddies right, as they will be at the next light before you get it wound up high enough to make any power, and then that cam will want to take your 428 where it can't go without air conditioning the block and pan.
There was a guy down around Hayward in the mid 70s that had a 69 Mach1 with a decent 427 and a D cam, drove it to work every day for a while as it was his only car and it was only a couple miles. 4 spd and 5.14s, and it was still a PITA to drive in the city, and once it hit 4K, wanted to orbit Mars

[gregaba]

Not me from FB as I have been bared from them for years. Never talked cars or engines while I was on there.
Looks like I will rethink using the D cam. I am finding out what I didn't know about it.
Looked at a stroker kit a few minutes ago and it looks like the biggest kit I can get is a 4.250.
I am loaded up on cams and that is why I bought all of JayB's adapters so I could change cams easier then the stock setup.
4 to 8 thousand is way more RPM then I would consider in a 428.
I also don't want to drive around with 513 rear gears.
The stall speed I could live with but would prefer a little less.
I still want to run at least a 12-1 compression ratio and just have to figure out a good compromise.
E-85 is not available in my area- have never seen a E-85 pump here.
Looks like I have a little re thinking to do.
Greg

[Barry_R]

Just finished running the "real" 427 tunnel port from the "Midnight Express" Maverick which was covered in an article in Hot rod a few decades ago.  Car is/was a Detroit street racing icon back in the day, and the new owner is restoring it to function after a 30 year nap in the original owner's garage.  Engine is true vintage Ford stuff - standard bore with 14:1 Ford pistons, Ford standard stroke crank, Ford block, Ford tunnel port heads (we freshened them and installed new springs), Ford OEM single 4 bbl intake.  And that "D" cam.  Only change from 1970 something is the use of a Holley Terminator EFI and matching distributor.  Only item that gave us any trouble was the new EFI (defective TPS).

Once we got it running it ended up at +/-513 horsepower at 6200 RPM and stayed above the 500 mark through 7000.  Took quite a bit of time because the EFI was kinda unhappy at first, but we fiddled with it until it finally came around.  It revved consistently past 7000 but lost valvetrain control before 7500 RPM.  Did not really matter because it was beyond its power peak by then - nice smooth curve to around 7200 but rolling off.

(added a bit more data..)