• Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech

Hit the dyno today...

  • Thread starter Thread starter jcp123
  • Start date Start date Dec 1, 2007

jcp123

New Member
Nov 1, 2003
408
0
0
Tyler, TX
Dec 1, 2007
#1
  • Dec 1, 2007
  • #1
Here's my combo:
Originally C-code 289
Bored .030 over, 302 crank, 306ci total
Edelbrock Performer intake, Carter AFB carb
Hooker headers with 2" duals and h-pipe, Dronemaster Delta 40's
Pertronix Ignitor solid-state ignition, 45k volt coil, 8mm Pertronix plug wires
Stock cam, original heads

160.3hp @ 4300
229.5tq @ 3100
A/F went on a straight line from 14:1 @ 3100 to ~12.5:1 @ 4950

Measured on a Dynojet, corrected to SAE standard.

I think there's more power on this combo. I learned at least where the gains are to be had.
-The air filter's been on there for 4 years. Only has 1800 miles on it, but it has a lot of varnish from evaporated fuel
-Solid fan is mounted on a spacer sans clutch, grabs a lot of air
- Carter carb - can't remember what the CFM #'s are on it, but I seem to recall it's only 425cfm or so. The lean A/F #'s give me pause there, though. I'm going to have to find the build sheet for the motor.

I don't need a whole lot of power, but I think I'd have another 20hp in it with just the first two, easy.

What say you?
 

Fast63

New Member
Sep 20, 2007
717
0
0
Dec 2, 2007
#2
  • Dec 2, 2007
  • #2
IMHO that is about right for rear wheel horsepower. You possibly might need bigger primary jets or smaller metering rods on the primaries, but if it's onlt 425cfm, you could get some more power out of a 600cfm I think.
 
C

C0V3R

Member
Feb 14, 2003
524
0
16
Australia
Dec 2, 2007
#3
  • Dec 2, 2007
  • #3
12.5:1 at redline is actually not far from right. Low 13's would be ideal usually depending on the combo. You might have 10hp in it if you fix the fuel to be a little leaner up top and a little richer down low.

I would borrow another carb if you can, as you might not get as much as you would hope just by swapping.
 

iskwezm

10 Year Member
May 24, 2005
4,159
20
79
Rowland Heights,California
Dec 2, 2007
#4
  • Dec 2, 2007
  • #4
Many years ago when i built my first engine in high school, i had a .060 289,Performer 289,try-y's,Intake,stock heads(54 cc i think),comp cam 270* and Edelbrock 600 carb. it made 305 RWHP at about 4600 rpm.The place it was dynoed though the dyno was broken, so he made come back and do it again,same results.

Then I thought i knew it al and changed heads and cam and lost hp
 

brianj5600

Active Member
Sep 19, 2003
1,964
2
39
Middle TN
Dec 2, 2007
#5
  • Dec 2, 2007
  • #5
I think the dyno was broke too. That combo would have been over- achieving to make those numbers at the flywheel. It would have to make around 350 at the flywheel to put 306 to the rollers. I think the dyno got fixed possibly explaining the loss in power with head/cam swap.

jcp, with stock heads and cam you should not expect much. The fan is hurting power for sure. A thermostatic clutch fan or electric fan will show noticable gains. The intake, carb and cam could be swapped for a big improvement. A stealth or rpm and 600cfm carb would help and are not too uncommon to find used for reasonable money. Intake swaps are quick and easy too. If you have ever seen the stock cam specs, they are incredibly small, and a major hold back. I really doubt there is a lot left in current form. What is you total timing? There is some power there.
 

jcp123

New Member
Nov 1, 2003
408
0
0
Tyler, TX
Dec 2, 2007
#6
  • Dec 2, 2007
  • #6
Oh, I know I can't expect that much out of stock heads + cam. My expectation was around 150, so the 10hp I got on top of that keeps me happy enough. As I said, I don't need much - this is a cruiser, after all, and with the open rear end, there's only so much she can lay down at once. But it showed me there's some more to be had with just a little effort.

Now that you mention it, though, a bigger carb wouldn't necessarily help much on top of a regular Performer intake, would it?

I think I'll just get the fan clutch'd and drop a new air filter on top and call it a day. Maybe down the road I'll get her dyno tuned, as well.
 
M

mikethebike

Member
Jun 12, 2007
358
0
17
Greenville, SC
Dec 2, 2007
#7
  • Dec 2, 2007
  • #7
Try a Holey 600 vacum secondary carb. I think you'll pick-up the additional h-p you are looking for. Plus the Holley will carry you much farther up the h-p scale when you build a stronger engine later. And replace that filter!
 

iskwezm

10 Year Member
May 24, 2005
4,159
20
79
Rowland Heights,California
Dec 2, 2007
#8
  • Dec 2, 2007
  • #8
brianj5600 said:
I think the dyno was broke too. That combo would have been over- achieving to make those numbers at the flywheel. It would have to make around 350 at the flywheel to put 306 to the rollers. I think the dyno got fixed possibly explaining the loss in power with head/cam swap.
Click to expand...
Actually he dynoed his own car to see if the numbers were the same for his car and they were. My car ran 12.90-13.10's @110 with that combo, so i think it was right.
 
I

iapexl8r

Member
Apr 1, 2005
254
0
17
Dec 2, 2007
#9
  • Dec 2, 2007
  • #9
what is your total timing set at (36 total would be a good start on premimum fuel)?? there could be a few horses hiden there add that to a knn free flowing air filter and a clutch or electric fan you could see some notable gains!!!


Hey Mario are you going to the dyno day @ bottle fed on dec 15?????? Whats up I want to see that turbo lay down some #'s



chris
 

iskwezm

10 Year Member
May 24, 2005
4,159
20
79
Rowland Heights,California
Dec 3, 2007
#10
  • Dec 3, 2007
  • #10
iapexl8r said:
Hey Mario are you going to the dyno day @ bottle fed on dec 15?????? Whats up I want to see that turbo lay down some #'s



chris
Click to expand...
Hey Chris.........I have been so busy with the baby comming and working on the house, I havent had time to drop the engine in.Its been on the stand in my garage for about a month and half now. Hopefully i can find 2 hours to drop it in before the end of the year

what dyno day is this?????
 
I

iapexl8r

Member
Apr 1, 2005
254
0
17
Dec 3, 2007
#11
  • Dec 3, 2007
  • #11
somthing with that marlon guy (in the valley with the alingment shop). but the dyno is in camirrilo at bottle fed racing. When is the baby coming???? your stoked
If you need an extra hand with the stang shoot me a line ivanpomy@sbcglobal.net. Chris
 

iskwezm

10 Year Member
May 24, 2005
4,159
20
79
Rowland Heights,California
Dec 3, 2007
#12
  • Dec 3, 2007
  • #12
iapexl8r said:
somthing with that marlon guy (in the valley with the alingment shop). but the dyno is in camirrilo at bottle fed racing. When is the baby coming???? your stoked
If you need an extra hand with the stang shoot me a line ivanpomy@sbcglobal.net. Chris
Click to expand...
Baby is due in February...........


Thanks for the offer

Ive been waiting for some warm weather to mix up some paint and shoot the engine compartment, then its just a matter of dropping it in, which i have down to a science
 

jcp123

New Member
Nov 1, 2003
408
0
0
Tyler, TX
Dec 3, 2007
#13
  • Dec 3, 2007
  • #13
iapexl8r said:
what is your total timing set at (36 total would be a good start on premimum fuel)?? there could be a few horses hiden there add that to a knn free flowing air filter and a clutch or electric fan you could see some notable gains!!!

chris
Click to expand...

No idea on the timing - it runs on 87, though, which I like. There may be a little to be had there, but I don't want to run any more than 87.
 

ratio411

Founding Member
Apr 21, 2002
3,870
73
109
Pensacola FL
Dec 3, 2007
#14
  • Dec 3, 2007
  • #14
jcp123 said:
Now that you mention it, though, a bigger carb wouldn't necessarily help much on top of a regular Performer intake, would it?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be so fast in assuming that!

A dual plane intake tames the cfm rating of the carb.
Dual plane intakes actually like larger cfm carbs.
Alot of folks don't think about this fact either when they go around telling folks with dual planes to use 500 cfm, while they tell the folks with single planes to use 750s.
The other way around would probably serve folks better.
Dual planes need larger cfm, then on top of that, a 3310 750 vacuum (for example) can't overcarb your engine anyway... When in proper tune, a vacuum carb won't use the rear venturis unless the engine needs them.

I say find a larger carb, and make sure it's vacuum secondary.
Holley 1850 and 3310 are the most common vacuum carbs.
Carters (Edelbrock) are NOT vacuum carbs.
 

Fast63

New Member
Sep 20, 2007
717
0
0
Dec 3, 2007
#15
  • Dec 3, 2007
  • #15
ratio411 said:
Carters (Edelbrock) are NOT vacuum carbs.
Click to expand...

Hey man, you've got your head on straight
 

jcp123

New Member
Nov 1, 2003
408
0
0
Tyler, TX
Dec 4, 2007
#16
  • Dec 4, 2007
  • #16
Not so hot on Holleys anymore...had two of 'em, the first and the last on my Dad's '73 Mach 1. Ran great for a week or two after a dyno tune, then never ran as well again. I thought their finicky reputation was hogwash from Holley haters until I saw with my own eyes.

As to the intake...I was comparing the Performer vs. the RPM...both dual plane. Am I correct in assuming that the RPM would make a larger carb more worthwhile than the Performer?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Carb tuning - accel pump
  • j69302
  • May 30, 2010
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech
Replies
5
Views
2K
Classic Mustang Specific Tech Jun 3, 2010
j69302
J
S
Dynoed 308ci, Canfield 195's, Jay Allen Cam, Quickfuel 650 Carb setup today!
  • Speeds8erM-1
  • Jul 8, 2008
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
9
Views
4K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Jul 12, 2008
MaxTheHooker
M
Help me analyze these dyno numbers....
  • arbailey
  • Jul 3, 2005
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
3
Views
999
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Jul 4, 2005
arbailey
How do I mellow it?
  • DarkBuddha
  • Jun 22, 2005
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech
  • 2
Replies
25
Views
1K
Classic Mustang Specific Tech Jun 24, 2005
BarnStang
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang 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?