• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech

B,E,F,X,Z cams for new engine

  • Thread starter Thread starter BlackPearl955.0
  • Start date Start date Nov 19, 2007
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2

final5-0

Mustang Master
Apr 6, 2003
6,817
12
79
DFW Texas
Nov 20, 2007
#21
  • Nov 20, 2007
  • #21
I say focus on reliability and ease of maintenance

Blow off the ... Blower

Do up a nice 347 all motor

Don't worry about the idle

Its gonna lope a bit
but
With a sharp tune ... it will be a stable lope

I always see these combos as toys and not dd's

Since I said that ... I'd go for a bit higher compression
and
Tell your cam guy you want a pretty aggressive bump stick
but
Make sure he understands the application is mainly Street

I'm like David ... I think around 400 would be quite possible

Of course ... with that kind of combo ...

It is gonna be really thirsty around town
and
You are not gonna be able to pump in the cheap stuff

But ... no blower belts or blower anything

Simple and Fun ... Hey ... 400rwhp is plenty for the street

Grady
 

BlackPearl955.0

New Member
Jun 8, 2007
126
1
0
Blashyrkh, Wisconsin
Nov 20, 2007
#22
  • Nov 20, 2007
  • #22
I already use midgrade not high because my engine is not made for it. It will not be a daily driver. It will be a summer car. It will see alot of street time and some track time.
I know that I really should not go with a blower but with all that work why not? Plus I really want one I dont know I got this winter to think and save so I can roll it over a bit. Maybe a poll would help And grady do you really think 400 is possible N/A? I could deal with that. but still a blower would make the car feel more... complete

I have been looking at intake also the four I have looked at are a Victor 5.0, Holley systemax II, trickflow Box R, and a BBk SSI-R. Any experience with these? I am liking the TF and eddy so far.
 

final5-0

Mustang Master
Apr 6, 2003
6,817
12
79
DFW Texas
Nov 21, 2007
#23
  • Nov 21, 2007
  • #23
Let me share what I believe to be some basic thoughts I think
peeps at times get side tracked on or maybe loose focus on.

I mean ... why do we mod our Stangs for more power
cause
Its fun to have more

Basically ... we do the more power thing seeking the experience :Word:

Allow me to use perspectives with two different applications

1) Mine which is ... OEM shortblock and NA h/c/i combo

A few years ago we somehow or the other came to a benchmark for
such combos as 300 rwhp on a Dynojet with a SAE calibration

You can get 300 to the wheels many different ways

For my combo I placed a focus on high torque ......
down low, mid range, and keeping it there until at least 5K.

I had my cam done up to reflect those specifications and I told Ed I
would be willing to give up some peak power to make that happen.

IMHO ... my car is a blast to drive around town and the reason is
the torque

My focus was on an experience ... not on dyno peak power values
Even though I missed the 300 rwhp benchmark ..........
The experience is still quite remarkable to me

2) Look at the difference between a KB and Centri blower

Many times, peeps come away form a KB and can't believe it makes
as little peak value power as it does

Again ... the wow factor was in the experience ... not peak power :Word:

Hopefully ... I have been able to explain my perspective
about the experience thing

I said all that to say ............

Yes ... I do think you could do up a 347 and hit 400 rwhp and have
pretty good drivability :Word:

But

Say you only made it to 385 rwhp
You would have to ask yourself ... Would it be the end of the World

I can say I'm pretty familiar about what can be done with an OEM block,
h/c/i, and tune when talking about a NA Street Car application that
offers stock like drivability.

Simply Put ... 1 rwhp for 1 cubic inch is a very doable thing

Based upon the things I've learned with my little 95 GT .....
I firmly believe I could do things a bit differently and move up
to the 350 rwhp level with the same drivability.

See if you think the numbers justify my thinking

350 rwhp divided by 302 cubic inches = 1.159 rwhp per ci

Now about your Question with the 347

400 rwhp divided by 347 cubic inches = 1.153 rwhp per ci

Also with the 347 ........
You got the advantage of a b & b'ed shortblock which would be
good for about 5 rwhp that the OEM doesn't have

anyway ... Just a thought or two and how I came to have them

Start searching out 347 NA Street Car Combos and see whats possible

Grady
 

BlackPearl955.0

New Member
Jun 8, 2007
126
1
0
Blashyrkh, Wisconsin
Nov 21, 2007
#24
  • Nov 21, 2007
  • #24
Grady... You are too persuasive. damn your reasoning.
Yea I guess the money I would spend for a blower can go torward somthing else. OK how about I build the engine to stay N/A.
New Boss 302 with new crank to 347 (5.315"/1.175" rod/piston combo)
The afr185's 58cc are still a good choice along with a trickflow box r and 75mm tb and jlt intake for beathing in.
80mm MAF from Pro-M
Long tubes with and catless h for breathing out
Domed pistons and stick around 10:1 or 10.5:1
FTI cam
30# injectors w/new fuel pump (LPH estement?) High flow fuel rails
1.6 or 1.7 rr's?
No smog (keep A/C? in WI so it fets COLD and HOT)
No EGR
anyone think 400?
Any changes, suggestion, or stuff I missed?
thanks
 

reddy351

10 Year Member
Jun 13, 2006
560
12
38
Columbus, Ohio
Nov 21, 2007
#25
  • Nov 21, 2007
  • #25
To play "Devils Advocate" to Grady's points, you could also leave the longblock stock and drop the money for the KB and supporting mods to make similar power AND get the blower that you desire.

Just a thought in a different direction.
 

5spd GT

"the 5.0 owns all"
Founding Member
Aug 7, 2002
9,516
6
99
Arkansas
Nov 21, 2007
#26
  • Nov 21, 2007
  • #26
BlackPearl955.0 said:
Grady... You are too persuasive. damn your reasoning.
Yea I guess the money I would spend for a blower can go torward somthing else. OK how about I build the engine to stay N/A.
New Boss 302 with new crank to 347 (5.315"/1.175" rod/piston combo)
The afr185's 58cc are still a good choice along with a trickflow box r and 75mm tb and jlt intake for beathing in.
80mm MAF from Pro-M
Long tubes with and catless h for breathing out
Domed pistons and stick around 10:1 or 10.5:1
FTI cam
30# injectors w/new fuel pump (LPH estement?) High flow fuel rails
1.6 or 1.7 rr's?
No smog (keep A/C? in WI so it fets COLD and HOT)
No EGR
anyone think 400?
Any changes, suggestion, or stuff I missed?
thanks
Click to expand...

Looks pretty good. All those are things you need to tell your custom cam grinder or ask for his suggestions from that list.

Personally, with a strong aftermarket block and the goal for 400rwhp, I honestly would try the AFR 205's That is some more change though

Ed Curtis has posted on a few occassions on how he likes the 205's and it can be done on a daily driven combo.

It honestly is the combo I would go with if I had an aftermarket block to match

You will not need high flow fuel rails for an N/A combo.

I can see KB's being funner, but I do not like the lack of not having an intercooler.

I like the centrifugal and positive displacement blowers, both one in the same. The centri's will actually outrun the KB's on the highway, but not just off the line.

I like the 1.6 roller rocker idea myself.

I also enjoy my air conditioning, but it is warmer and more humid down this way.
 

final5-0

Mustang Master
Apr 6, 2003
6,817
12
79
DFW Texas
Nov 21, 2007
#27
  • Nov 21, 2007
  • #27
I gotta say ... Why the need for the fancy block

If you are gonna go for 400 rwhp ... the OEM block will handle that

I like the idea of NA simplicity with no hassle

Then again ... Rob makes a very good point

I'd love to do a KB someday

In either case ... I just don't see the need for a high dollar block

Grady
 

BlackPearl955.0

New Member
Jun 8, 2007
126
1
0
Blashyrkh, Wisconsin
Nov 22, 2007
#28
  • Nov 22, 2007
  • #28
First I already have the new block coming. The old block is going to my brother who is doing a gt conversion. Second having a BOSS engine is just so cool. Sure it is about 1700 which I dont think is too bad but its a block that can handle what I want. (whatever that turns out to be)
 

BlackPearl955.0

New Member
Jun 8, 2007
126
1
0
Blashyrkh, Wisconsin
Nov 22, 2007
#29
  • Nov 22, 2007
  • #29
StreetBeast Ford Hydraulic Roller Camshaft Kit

Includes:
Custom Designed Hydraulic Roller Camshaft
Rollmaster Billet Timing Set Nitrided w-Roller Thrust Bearing
Modified FMS Cam Retainer w-hardware for above
Eaton or Johnson Hydraulic Roller Lifters
ROL HP Timing Cover and Water Pump Gasket Kit
(Standard factory roller blocks only)

Starting at $699 with FREE shipping!
sound good for the setup?
 

PUNISHER RACING

Active Member
Aug 27, 2007
1,124
0
36
FORD CITY, PA.
Nov 23, 2007
#30
  • Nov 23, 2007
  • #30
MM&FF Ultimate Guide to Cylinder Head Test:
331 inch motor with GT40X heads 64cc and a 274 Xtreme Comp Cam made:
390 fwhp 416 fwtq the same motor with AFR's made 448/445 so that gives you a bit of a look into what a good head will give you and that is with a camshaft I do not feel is the bee's knees for the n/a combo they had kickn'
 

5spd GT

"the 5.0 owns all"
Founding Member
Aug 7, 2002
9,516
6
99
Arkansas
Nov 23, 2007
#31
  • Nov 23, 2007
  • #31
BlackPearl955.0 said:
StreetBeast Ford Hydraulic Roller Camshaft Kit

Includes:
Custom Designed Hydraulic Roller Camshaft
Rollmaster Billet Timing Set Nitrided w-Roller Thrust Bearing
Modified FMS Cam Retainer w-hardware for above
Eaton or Johnson Hydraulic Roller Lifters
ROL HP Timing Cover and Water Pump Gasket Kit
(Standard factory roller blocks only)

Starting at $699 with FREE shipping!
sound good for the setup?
Click to expand...

I am guessing that is from Ed Curtis?

Looks like some of the top-notch products he uses
 

Methodical

15 Year Member
Dec 1, 2003
1,192
11
59
Clinton, MD
Nov 24, 2007
#32
  • Nov 24, 2007
  • #32
BlackPearl955.0 said:
I already use midgrade not high because my engine is not made for it. It will not be a daily driver. It will be a summer car. It will see alot of street time and some track time.
I know that I really should not go with a blower but with all that work why not? Plus I really want one I dont know I got this winter to think and save so I can roll it over a bit. Maybe a poll would help And grady do you really think 400 is possible N/A? I could deal with that. but still a blower would make the car feel more... complete

I have been looking at intake also the four I have looked at are a Victor 5.0, Holley systemax II, trickflow Box R, and a BBk SSI-R. Any experience with these? I am liking the TF and eddy so far.
Click to expand...


To me it sounds like you know what you want and don't know what you want. I thinks it's safe to say we've all been right where you are know. I'd say use the winter to do some deep research (save $ of course), talk to those guys mentioned above - i.e. Ed Curtis and the likes - to get their perspectives. Also, seriously think about how you plan to tune the car (self or a tuner) and factor in those cost too. Also, I'd say do the motor yourself as you've indicated and use those funds saved for better quality parts to reach your goal. I won't say it's easy or hard - just time, patience, proper tools and lots of ?s. Build up your allies now and hear peeps out. You will get the occasional nut but don't be discouraged 'cause you have way more helpful peeps than non-helpful ones here.

I did my entire engine and setup, which save tons of $. The parts are not exotic just some quality parts that work. My goal was similar to Grady's - 300rwhp N/A and some change and I am happy. To get additional HP, I installed a wet N02 kit so it's on only when needed. I knew I did not want a blower so I upped my compression for nitrous. I can tell you that I am satisfied with my setup. She sounds good, looks good and runs good. What more can you ask for?

Just One Man's Opnion (JOMO)

Al
 

Adam95GT

New Member
Aug 14, 2006
2,564
3
0
Burlington, NJ
Nov 24, 2007
#33
  • Nov 24, 2007
  • #33
After reading this it looks like you are spending alot more money then you need to to hit your goals and still maintain reliability and a fun car....
 

reddy351

10 Year Member
Jun 13, 2006
560
12
38
Columbus, Ohio
Nov 24, 2007
#34
  • Nov 24, 2007
  • #34
Adam95GT said:
After reading this it looks like you are spending alot more money then you need to to hit your goals and still maintain reliability and a fun car....
Click to expand...

Kinda what I'm thinking. I'm afraid that this project might be sitting in a garage or backyard, in pieces, forgotten, in 6 months.

You really do need to sit down and figure out what you really want. It's difficult to hit a moving target. (You re-negotiated the HP output with yourself 3-4 times in this thread already. )

What I'm saying is, please don't put a $1700 engine block in your car just "because it would be cool".
 

BlackPearl955.0

New Member
Jun 8, 2007
126
1
0
Blashyrkh, Wisconsin
Nov 26, 2007
#35
  • Nov 26, 2007
  • #35
First off I never leave a project. With a garage like I have you have no reason too. This is my current project, It WILL happen. If someone can find a block for me that will fit my needs send me a link. the cheapest I found the boss block is 1500. A pretty good price for a brand new block. I do not want a used block. Just my way of thinking
Overall you guys hit it right, planning a project can be harder then doing it
This winter will include much thinking and price hunting. The question is still N/A or boost . Not set on it yet.
N/A target goal would be 400hp and tq
Boost goal will be 550hp and tq
However I think the no hassle of N/A and with 400 to match should be more then enough for the street and enough for weekends at the track.
Also It will give me time to reasearch for a turbo project in the future (on a different car)
Advise or suggestions still welcome
thanks for the imput so far
 

final5-0

Mustang Master
Apr 6, 2003
6,817
12
79
DFW Texas
Nov 26, 2007
#36
  • Nov 26, 2007
  • #36
I certainly do understand about trying to decide which way to go when talking about
making major changes like you speak of here.

The stronger block would be better if you do decide to go forced later. Other than
a good bit of money spent, I don't see a compromise if it is used with either
method of induction.

however

The thing about NA is, you gain power as you go higher on compression
but
If you later on decide on boost, that can be not so good

Another thing about NA is cam choice
and
What can be good for NA is not always good for boost

I can assure you
You're not the first to think about these compromises

Grady
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Engine Suggestions on an engine rebuild. Stock cam/GT40Ps or aftermarket on both for a fun weekend driver?
  • MadSquirrelTech
  • Apr 28, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2
Replies
23
Views
808
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech May 7, 2026
MadSquirrelTech
S
Preparation for Holley Terminator X install – Foxbody 306 (electrical fan, alternator, MSD Ignition, etc)
  • So_Flo
  • Mar 1, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
22
Views
2K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Mar 4, 2026
General karthief
6
Hey all,I’m putting together a 302 for my 1968 Mustang and wanted to post the combo + some questions to make sure I’m not missing crucial
  • 68_Disgustang
  • Feb 22, 2026
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
885
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Jun 20, 2026
gray owl
G
J
68 Mustang with Foxbody Engine Stalling Issues - MSPNP2
  • JayV68Stang
  • Mar 13, 2025
  • Digital Self-tuning Forum
Replies
3
Views
439
Digital Self-tuning Forum Mar 13, 2025
JayV68Stang
J
Engine An engine building combo with stock Speed Density (SD) system
  • Mcmahst
  • Jan 14, 2025
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
11
Views
935
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Jan 15, 2025
Mcmahst
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?