Restomod build

any body ever read the famous car craft article where they got 400 hp from a relativley stock 5.0. Basically, just AFR heads (don't remember if 165's or 185's), 1.7 roller rockers, stock HO cam, stock compression, stealth intake, I think they used a road demon carb but a 650 holley would work fine, and some long tube headers. Engine made great hp and torque, and would still get great mileage and be very streetable due to the stock cam and compression. Do a search for it, should be easy to find.

I do think its an exceptional case where the parts just happen to work well with each other. I know other people that have hotter builds and a good tune, but manage to fall short of the power produced in the car craft article.

HistoricMustang said:

No problem with the horsepower request.

Just go here and write a check for $25,000 give or take a few dollars:

http://www.cobraautomotive.com/horsepower.htm

Let us know how the project goes!

HistoricMustang
www.historicmustang.com

Click to expand...

Sorry, I miss read the original post as being Rear Wheel HP. The 350 at the FW is fairly easy to get. Remember, Shelby had 306 HP 40 years ago without todays heads, intakes and valve train improvements.

HistoricMustang
www.historicmustang.com

I'll bet $100 that you cannot get "streetable" 400RWhp from a 289/294 without spending over $10K on motor (unless you do a power adder of some sort like a blower/turbo/NoS).

If it idles at 2,000RPM and only hits the 400 mark at 8,000RPM it is not what I would call "streetable".

302 coupe said:

any body ever read the famous car craft article where they got 400 hp from a relativley stock 5.0. Basically, just AFR heads (don't remember if 165's or 185's), 1.7 roller rockers, stock HO cam, stock compression, stealth intake, I think they used a road demon carb but a 650 holley would work fine, and some long tube headers. Engine made great hp and torque, and would still get great mileage and be very streetable due to the stock cam and compression. Do a search for it, should be easy to find.

I do think its an exceptional case where the parts just happen to work well with each other. I know other people that have hotter builds and a good tune, but manage to fall short of the power produced in the car craft article.

Click to expand...

Most people you read about fall short of that. The Car Craft engine was IMO an ad for AFR disguised as an article. I presume they did the old gross horsepower method, not net(which gives lower #s). They also have underdrive pullies which were not mentioned.

like I said, it was an exceptional case. Also, don't plan on seeing much of a gain with underdrive pulleys when you're only spinning a water pump and alternator.

I'm not a guru on dyno standards, but I think on an engine dyno, on an engine such as tested, numbers are normally rated gross. OEM's use net because they have need to figure in all that power robbing crap mounted on the front of the engine.

I did it! I got 422 gross HP @ 6500prm and about 365lb/ft @5500.

I used a .030 over 289, equivalent of "competition" program built AFR185s, 10.5:1 compression, a PerformerRPM intake, TriY headers, and a Comp 288R Magnum solid roller (lashed at .019) and a 750cfm Holley. Torque @1500RPM was around 105lbft IIRC.

Adding bigger tube headers and a VicJR intake pushed power into the 465hp range, but torque @ 1500rpm went to crap (65lb/ft)

This was run on 93 octane, with a stock waterpump pulley and open headers in EA 3.0
HTH
--Kyle

302 coupe said:

like I said, it was an exceptional case. Also, don't plan on seeing much of a gain with underdrive pulleys when you're only spinning a water pump and alternator.

Click to expand...

Thats all good, I'm just baffled how someone can "show" that its so hard to make 400fwhp and then be condradicted by an article showing how "easy" it is. In theory, my roller 302 should have ~375hp and I really doubt it does. However, I wont discount some people running 5.0s and making 320rwhp on GT-40Ps, but they have high compression/lumpy cams, etc. When I mentioned the underdrives, I just did that to hint at the potential for padding the numbers with little things going under the radar. The may have made an impressive 388hp otherwise, but that still means they fell short of the goal.

Hey fellas, just to chime in and drop my .02, it can be done, I have it. Now, I am by no means an expert or engine builder, I just read a lot and listen to what others have mentioned or done.

I did not build the engine, but I set the parameters I wanted and it was basically built to what Shelby American was doing in the 60's with the 289. When I purchased the car it had a lot of vintage parts that were added by the original owner who I am told worked for Shelby American.

This is what the engine had in/on it already: Comp Cams Magnum flat tappet 294s (248 duration/.560 lift) cam and matching springs, Comp Cams 1.6 roller tipped rockers, windage tray, Comp Cams timing chain, stock heads, aluminum high-rise intake, dual 600 cfm Holleys, dual exhaust with H-pipe chocked out in back by GT trumpets, MSD 6A box w/Pertronix ingnition and coil.

What the shop did: Basically rebuilt the engine. Like mentioned, bored it out to .040, ported and polished the factory heads, Serdi valve job and installed Manley 1.84 intake and 1.60 exhaust valves and port matched heads to exhaust gaskets(Doug's tri-y headers), Manley poly-locks, cleaned up intake ports (combo of tunnel port and open plain intake), shot-peened factory rods and crank, crank was chamfered and polished, Melling hi-volume oil pump, ARP bolts everywhere, Speed Pro forged pistons, Clevite 77 bearings, compression at 10:1 and balanced engine assembly. I am using the stock distributor that was sent out and rebuilt/recurved to the specs of the engine.

Holleys were sent out and rebuilt (don't have specs on those) and they are vacuum secondaries. It looks like the choke plates were milled off in the past. The car is all manual.

I had them dyno the engine and it put out 375 HP @ 5800 rpm and 346 lb. ft. @ 5400. On the chassis dyno it put down 317 HP and 297 ft. lb. all running through a 4 speed toploader, aluminum driveshaft, 8 inch rearend and 91 octane fuel.

I know I could have used a multitude of different combos and perhaps gotten better results, but I am quite content with what that little 289 can do. It idles at around 750 rpm and has no problems taking me to 6K. By all means my car is streetable, it is a weekend car, cruise-in car and soon to be open track car. I probably have around 2-3K miles on it so far and it is absolutely a blast.

with better heads, you'd probably be well over 400, maybe 415-420. I'm glad you're happy with it, its really not hard to get some serious power out of a small ford.

65shelbyclone, you should have a strong engine no doubt. But, IMO with the heads and intake you're using, you're leaving an easy 20 hp on the table. As to your reference to the GT40P's, I too doubt anyone mounting 320 hp to the wheels using stock castings. To me, you're wasting money on a cylinder head swap unless you get get something that flows around 250 at .500 on the intake, and 180-ish on the exhaust. There is a chart I've seen somewhere that shows max hp for a given displacement for a given head flow. Maybe it was on the Stan Weiss page...IIRC, the edelbrock heads flow around 225 on the intake, and GT40P's flow around 185-190(not sure), either way, it would be difficult to get 400 hp from either of them on a 289 or 302 unless you had a perfect combination of parts.

GT P-51 said:

Comp Cams Magnum flat tappet 294s (248 duration/.560 lift) cam

Click to expand...

Sheesh, thats alot of lift for a little 289. Pretty hot cam IMO for that displacement and i bet you have some stout gears out back for it to get you off the line. I have the XE262H on my 351W and i could probably go up a max of the next highest cam before i would have to get a larger stall converter and different gears.

.493 lift, 218/224 dur at .050......you're kidding right? You must be used to driving a new Cadillac, lol. Everybody's definition of 'streetable' is different, and thats cool, but sometimes you have to compromise, it all depends on what your goals are.

A buddy of mine has a chevy vega that he races in super pro brackets. Has a alky burning 540 BBC in it, 4800 stall, 4.56 gears, about 750 hp, all in a 2400 lb car. He'll air up the 31x18.50 slicks to about 20 psi and drive it around town. It only gets about 2 mpg, but he's certain its streetable, LOL.

302 coupe said:

.493 lift, 218/224 dur at .050......you're kidding right?

Click to expand...

Actually yes i was kidding, but i do have 3.00 gears and a stock FMX converter so i couldn't go too radical without a gear and converter change. If i had an aftermarket converter and say 3.50 or 3.73 gears a bigger cam would do wonders. In fact a cam with his specs would wake up my windsor more but my fuel economy would have suffered. At 11mpg with my current cam, whats losing a few more mpg With a lift like that on a 289, wouldn't the pistons have to be flycut? I'm running flat top pistons and i come close to valve-to-piston clearance problems. I'm no pro engine builder, but my knowledge has been learned through tinkering (and I have so much still to learn)

JBuening, yes, that is a healthy cam, you gotta love that loppy idle though! I am running 3.55 out back with Auburn traction loc, forged axles and going through a wide ratio toploader, IIRC, I was told it changes what my overall gearing is.

I am taking the car to the shop tomorrow because I have heard a little pinging when I first get on it, from an already rolling start. I think perhaps some of the jetting may be off, because that is the only time I hear it, just for a split second, then it is gone.

302 coupe said:

65shelbyclone, you should have a strong engine no doubt. But, IMO with the heads and intake you're using, you're leaving an easy 20 hp on the table. As to your reference to the GT40P's, I too doubt anyone mounting 320 hp to the wheels using stock castings.

Click to expand...

You're right, I could have gone bigger on the heads. I would have, but I built the engine for my '89 GT when I had it, so I had to be conservative in order to pass smog. As I recall, the GT-40Ps in question were in fact ported, but 320 @ the wheels is still alot for a an SUV head with small valves.

5.0 liter 302 c.i.d. V8 - .040 over 9.2:1
Comp Cams 586 lift 288 dur solid roller cam
Comp Adj Roller Rockers, High tension Valve Springs
Aluminum Ford Racing Heads ported/polished
Edelbrock Victor Jr Manifold
Mighty Demon 650 Carburetor
Carter High Volume Mech. Fuel Pump
JBA Titanium Headers
Custom 2 1/2" Side Exhaust w/Flowmaster 40 series
Polished Paxton Supercharger
MSD Electronic Ignition
MSD Pro Billet Distributor
24" Griffin Aluminum Radiator (67-68 core support)
TCP Motor Mount Set
Edelbrock Polished Water Pump
Chrome 120amp RV Alternator
KRC Power Steering Pump

I would say this car put's 425-450 at the flywheel without the supercharger. One of the most overlooked places to get the power is in the heads. The cam next. Roller motors and high reving intakes make mucho power in these small blocks. You limit the rpms and the flow and you limit the power. Bottom end on a 302 isn't really there anyway so shoot for the upper half. If you have an automatic, stall it.

mdjay said:

Titanium Headers

Click to expand...

For real?

65ShelbyClone said:

For real?

Click to expand...

That's a ceramic coating...

5.0ina66 said:

I used a .030 over 289, equivalent of "competition" program built AFR185s, 10.5:1 compression, a PerformerRPM intake, TriY headers, and a Comp 288R Magnum solid roller (lashed at .019) and a 750cfm Holley. Torque @1500RPM was around 105lbft IIRC.

Adding bigger tube headers and a VicJR intake pushed power into the 465hp range, but torque @ 1500rpm went to crap (65lb/ft)

Click to expand...

In my opinion a "hot" engine should have at least 200 ft/lbs off-idle. You have to get moving from a stop quickly, and you can't go around town dropping the clutch at 3,000+ RPM all the time and a 3500 stall converter is getting pretty loose for street use.

As has been mentioned everyone has a different opinion on the meaning of "streetable" but that engine (above) is not streetable according to my definition. it is not a matter of right and wrong, simply one of preference. My engine should have about 400fw ft/lbs from 2,500 all the way to over 5,000RPM, with the assistance of a longer stroke and more displacement of course. Horsepower will peak at 6K in the 425fwhp range and drop off from there.

Here's what Desktop Dyno showed:


EDIT: This is with 357 cubes from a '69 Windsor block, 2.02 intakes/1.60 exhaust in aluminum heads, cam is a 224/236 .506/.506 custom with 110LSA, Holley 750 vac-sec, 1-3/4 long tubes, and an RPM intake, compression kept low at 9.5 for cheap gas and AT/PDB.

Edbert said:

In my opinion a "hot" engine should have at least 200 ft/lbs off-idle. You have to get moving from a stop quickly, and you can't go around town dropping the clutch at 3,000+ RPM all the time and a 3500 stall converter is getting pretty loose for street use.

As has been mentioned everyone has a different opinion on the meaning of "streetable" but that engine (above) is not streetable according to my definition. it is not a matter of right and wrong, simply one of preference.

Click to expand...

All good points Edbert. To tell the truth, my rule of thumb is 175 lb/ft @ 1500RPM as being really & truly streetable. I picked the parts for my first go round in about 5 minutes, and since I had some time later, I re-did the 289 combo with *gasp* AFR205s, 10:1, 650cfm 4bbl, PerfRPM, TriYs, and a custom solid flat cam (secret specs ). It put out 398hp & 357tq, with 155tq @ 1500RPM, which seems do-able enough for the street if you're hell-bent on 400hp.