Dyno #'s Systemax/FTI cam/TW heads

zenboy99 said:

-giant caterpillar welds around each primary tube. If you talk to header designers you'll find out that the transition from the head to the header is crucial.-ceramic coating rusted up in a few months, after a few years they look horrible. I'll post pics
-hole out the collector is 2.2" not 2.5" and its shaped like a D
-collector is bent in on each side
-passenger side collector hits cross member, rattles during idle

Click to expand...

The only problem I have had, if you call it a problem is the one in bold. Take a grinder to them, before you stick them on is what I would do. Smooth it out...

I have not noticed any of the others at all on my ride or any of my friend's with BBK.

The rust may have something to do with you being from the cheese state No excuse though...

Excellent time, and right on the money with your car weighing around 3500lb and having 330rwhp to pull it.

Damn that's strong.... Makes me miss my old AFR/FTI/Cobra combo... It dynoed 311 before I switched to the long tubes and the ported cobra intake. I figure it probably was good for 320 rwhp. It only weighed 3100 lbs with me, and used to eat LS1 lunches frequently.

I ran the BBK longtubes, too. The collector was definitely 2.5", but narrowed at the end to about 2.25" measured with a micrometer. I ground that **** away, and the beads in each of the primaries, too. The car ran like a raped ape. With it's 4.10 gears and drag radials it was a mean street car from the light.

Mike, why don't you like your stroker as much? I didn't know that.

Chris

FastDriver said:

Mike, why don't you like your stroker as much? I didn't know that.

Chris

Click to expand...

Chris its not that I don't like the engine itself, I just wish I woulda saved that money and kept my old combo I used to have. The TFS h/i/c with a small shot of spray but tuned it. I want to get rid of the car and the more i've spent on it, the more i'm gonna lose. I wanna get a nicer daily driver and then a bike in spring.

zenboy99 said:

Combo is:

-185,000 mile stock shortblock
-untouched Twisted Wedge heads with comp cams springs
-FTI custom cam (ground for Performer intake, shorty headers/cats/daily driver)
-Holley Systemax II intake (untouched)
-BBK 1 5/8" Long tubes, 2.2" collector (worst purchase ever)
-Custom X-pipe, 2.5"
-Magnaflow catback
-75mm Accufab throttle body, Fox style, with AFM NA power pipe
-Pro-M 80mm MAF
-Tweecer tuned by me, 36 degrees total timing all in @ 3000rpm

330rwhp @ 5700-5900rpm with ~12.7:1 air fuel ratio

I only got 3 pulls, but I doubt 13.1:1 air:fuel would have gotten me that much more power. Going to the strip this sunday so I can't wait for some #'s

Previous dyno:
Same combo above but with:
-20,000 less miles
-Performer intake
-65mm FMS throttle body
-FMS shorty headers
-34 degrees total timing

304rwhp @ 5300-5400rpm 338 rwtq @4300
12.87 @ 109.98mph with 1.95 60 foot on street tires

I'm trying to post the dyno results, but it keeps telling me its too big??? I've shrunk this thing down to a thumbnail size!

I only got hp numbers on the dyno, no torque #'s, no explanation for that.

Winter project is 4.30 gears, bigger cam and opening up those stupid headers. I'm real close to making this into a NMRA Pure Street car

Click to expand...

i find those numbers as high as anything i have seen for a bolt on 5.0 nevermind an effn 185000m engine

what do you think was the big reason for those #?

holley,fticam ,lt ,etc?

Nice, a gain of 1.02 mph from what he posted

zenboy99 said:

Well, the heads and intake are pretty big for a 302. I should also mention that my mom drove this car for the first 108,000 miles, but I drove it pretty hard the rest.

Click to expand...

Big air flow = big power. What we're all seeing here is something that Chevy has been doing for a long time. High flowing aluminum heads, high flowing intake, small-ish cam.

I bet you get pretty good MPG if you don't beat on it as well.

Ed seems to squeeze some fantastic numbers out of little ol' 302 street cars....

Adam

zenboy99 said:

EXACTLY! Sorry to say this, but that LS stuff makes me jealous.

Click to expand...

Chevy has done some good things with a pushrod motor
where
Ford has done nothing but abandon it

I know the Windsor is not an apples to apples comparison here
but ...
Never forget

Its really unfair to compare our little 302 against a 350 :Word:

To me ... It always boils down to ...

Do you really want to drive a Chevy

Grady

I am a big fan of ls1 engines and the potential they have. Some get by with 500rwhp out of their 346 N/A combinations.

The ls1 platform is great, because GM kept exploring it past the Ford pushrod days in the early 90's.

The ls1 346 (not 350) has a 3.62" stroke and a 3.90" bore, which aims more of a square design than a 347 stroker of 3.4" stroke and a 4.030" bore.

The ls1 features a 200cc runner volume head, with 2.00" valves on the intake and 1.55" on the exhaust.

Those head ports are also a taller design, which also allows for a better fuel injector placement sprays the fuel on top of the intake valve, while a 302 design sprays it near the end of the lower intake runner ports.

Also the ls1 heads have 15* valves, compared to 20* valves of a standard 302 design. A shallower valve angle (15*) becomes less "shrouded" by the cylinder wall with that angle approach. It also puts the intake valve closer to the piston center, which in turn allows for a larger intake valve, i.e., 2.00" on the intake side.

The ls1 heads also come with 8mm valvestems and lighter valvetrain, as opposed to a 302's standard size of 8.73mm valvestems. The ls6 heads are even better, down to sodium filled exhaust valves

Airflow Chart for stock LS1 Heads:

Lift Value (in.) - Intake Flow - Exhaust Flow

Inches - CFM - CFM

0.100 - 067 - 052
0.200 - 122 - 097
0.300 - 178 - 133
0.400 - 215 - 156
0.500 - 219 - 170
0.550 - 223 - 176
0.600 - 227 - 180

As you can see, the stock aluminum ls1 heads flow quite close to an AFR 165cc head from the mustang world, just losing a little bit in the exhaust portion (AFR > LS1).

The ls1 block is a 4 bolt aluminum block with a 9.24" deck height as opposed to the 302's deck height of 8.20."

The pistons coupled with the 67cc chamber is already getting the ls1 to around 10:1 compression, because after all more stroke, coupled with a taller deck height helps compression ability.

Back up top, you have a plastic composite intake (much like the 4.6L) with a 15" runner, and 536 cubic centimeters of volume, which all makes up the cross section.

The cam specs are smaller in "our circle," as stated. But, they are billet steel and a larger base circle cam (larger lobe area) from the factory, which is great for stability at high rpms with some 1.70" roller rockers sitting on top of the heads.

1998 - 2000 LS1

202*/210* Int/Exh @ 0.050" Duration, 0.496" / 0.496" Lift, with a wide Lobe Seperation Angle of 116*. That gives it a broad torque curve.

2001-2002 LS1

2001 - 2002 Fbody

197*/207* Int/Exh @ 0.050" Duration, 0.467" / 0.479" Lift with that same LSA of 116*.

With larger flowing heads, you do not need a "larger" camshaft.

Large Heads = Small Cam
Small Heads = Large Cam

These are generality's but remain quite true in most circles of designing a combination.

This just helps us see what "we" are up against

It is not to hard to see why a nice longtube swap, coupled with a camshaft swap, can put these ls1 platforms well over 400rwhp.

There is not much room for stroking the engins to much, without getting another block with longer cylinder skirts, or sleeving the existing block for a little more room to play with.

The ls1 pushrod is a beast for OEM, but the modular engine line has it's pros as well

An overhead engine, like the 4.6L engines, allows lighter valvetrain weight and mass which is great for increasing hp/tq per Liter of engine size.

A 4.6L pushrod would make less horsepower per liter than a 4.6L OHC (Single or Dual). Also, Ford knew that going overhead cam was the best way to be on the heels of cutting edge. Putting the cam "on top" allows them to use, 4 valves per cylinder like in the DOHC engines that came in the '96-04 Cobras Greater rpm potential and stability. The only expense that I see with going this route is increased size needed. Although the engine weights are similar between the 5.0L pushrod and 4.6L SOHC/DOHC.

The 4.6L intake weighs 11 lbs from the one I weighed, while 5.0L intakes weigh in the 40-low 50 pound range. A single head is 43 pounds WITH a camshaft and full valvetrain, because they are aluminum.

They all got potential to make great power per cube.

However, there is no replacement for displacement until you start talking poweradders

Great info David

I'm gonna start a new thread in talk
I don't want to hijack Mr. Chads thread here

I wanna follow some of this info with a Q or two

Grady

Sorry, I got on a tanget and was bored between classes, and I knew he had done posted his results

Just curious how does the new 4.6 3V stack up against the LS1, the new mustangs seem to be putting out some pretty good numbers stock, and better with bolt ons for only 281 cubes.

Also how would a 347 stroker stack up against a LS1 n/a? Seems it would come down to how each car was sit up and the drivers skill level.

onlyme said:

Just curious how does the new 4.6 3V stack up against the LS1, the new mustangs seem to be putting out some pretty good numbers stock, and better with bolt ons for only 281 cubes.

Click to expand...

Per liter, it stacks up very well! The ls1, with 346 cubes has 23% more cubes on it's side. With that, the potential to make 23% more power.

I see most ls1 dyno in the 290-310rwhp range, depending on 4l60e or t-56, and year model, 01+ get ls6 intake.

Most S197's are dynoing in the 270rwhp range, and with a SCT tune and a couple intake modifications they are pushing close to 300rwhp, while not messing with any driveability.

Take that for what you will, but the 3V's do very well when you compare them to the ls1, which in my opinion, makes them even better than the ls1 set-up, in horsepower per liter

onlyme said:

Also how would a 347 stroker stack up against a LS1 n/a? Seems it would come down to how each car was sit up and the drivers skill level.

Click to expand...

Well a 347 is aftermarket. There are so many combinations of parts that you could put together. A shortblock Ford is working with 3.4" stroke and with a 4.030" bore.

I will say that I have never seen a 347 dyno as high as the ls1 346. If you look at the above post, you will see why the ls1 parts get the advantage.

LS1s suck.... don't cave 5spd.

And what do you mean that you've never seen a 347 dyno like an LS1? LS1s dyno, like you said, in the neighborhood of 300 rwhp. 500 rwhp is kinda steep. Never seen that from an LS1, but I have seen 400 rwhp from a n/a 302. Could a high revving 347 make that kinda power? probably