DFW Mustangs    

Go Back   DFW Mustangs > General > Picture and Video Post Forum

Picture and Video Post Forum Amusing and Photoshopped Pics.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-12-2019, 11:17 PM   #21
svauto-erotic855
I know everything, I'm older than you
VIP Member
 
svauto-erotic855's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,074
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Torinoman View Post
Jon Kaase did win the last 2 Engine Masters with a MEL.
That's really surprising. Have you ever seen one taken apart? I have and I can't imagine trying to get power out of that engine the way the head is set up.

What cylinder head did he use? Did he find an engine with similar bore spacing and use that head?
__________________
Magnus, I am your father. You need to ask your mother about a man named Calvin Klein.
svauto-erotic855 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2019, 12:14 AM   #22
Gasser64
Lifer
 
Gasser64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 3,869
Default

Yeah well what about that sohc 600 hp engine ford had in the... 60's? 70's? Can't remember. How come they never pushed that to the forefront
__________________
WAH HAA!
Gasser64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2019, 07:17 AM   #23
Broncojohnny
Lifer
 
Broncojohnny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 43,527
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Torinoman View Post
Jon Kaase did win the last 2 Engine Masters with a MEL.
And in 2016 second place was a ~400 cube Chrysler hemi. Which is surprising since that would make it seem like SVO has no idea what he is talking about.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by racrguy View Post
What's your beef with NPR, because their listeners are typically more informed than others?
Quote:
Originally Posted by racrguy View Post
Voting is a constitutional right, overthrowing the government isn't.
Broncojohnny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2019, 07:37 AM   #24
svauto-erotic855
I know everything, I'm older than you
VIP Member
 
svauto-erotic855's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,074
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gasser64 View Post
Yeah well what about that sohc 600 hp engine ford had in the... 60's? 70's? Can't remember. How come they never pushed that to the forefront
That was the Cammer 427 SOHC and I have owned 2.

It was used in top fuel and they had to replace the entire engine after every run. Nitro methanol is simply too rough on the bottom end. I've seen the same engine on gasoline making almost 1800 horsepower without missing a lick and I think the Top Fuel engines back in the day were not making much more than that.
__________________
Magnus, I am your father. You need to ask your mother about a man named Calvin Klein.

Last edited by svauto-erotic855; 02-13-2019 at 07:47 AM.
svauto-erotic855 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2019, 07:42 AM   #25
svauto-erotic855
I know everything, I'm older than you
VIP Member
 
svauto-erotic855's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,074
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Broncojohnny View Post
And in 2016 second place was a ~400 cube Chrysler hemi. Which is surprising since that would make it seem like SVO has no idea what he is talking about.
A hemispherical combustion chamber is not a good chamber for making power; it is very inefficient . The Boss 429 used a modified Hemi chamber to address those issues. This is only a problem if you're trying to use alcohol, gasoline, natural gas, or propane for fuel. The Hemi engine is a fantastic engine for making massive amounts of power when using nitromethane.
__________________
Magnus, I am your father. You need to ask your mother about a man named Calvin Klein.
svauto-erotic855 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2019, 08:26 AM   #26
Torinoman
when I get around to it
 
Torinoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Richardson
Posts: 2,271
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by svauto-erotic855 View Post
That's really surprising. Have you ever seen one taken apart? I have and I can't imagine trying to get power out of that engine the way the head is set up.

What cylinder head did he use? Did he find an engine with similar bore spacing and use that head?
Factory iron with massive amounts of wizardry and rule bending... Like a half inch thick aluminum "head gasket", and "valve seats" that sink the valve face into that 'gasket' thus elongating the runners and improving the short turns.

https://www.hotrod.com/articles/phot...ng-mel-engine/
__________________
1971 Ford Torino - Time to go bigger and better.

2011 F150 Limited - Stock with a 6.2
Torinoman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2019, 09:21 AM   #27
Gasser64
Lifer
 
Gasser64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 3,869
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by svauto-erotic855 View Post
That was the Cammer 427 SOHC and I have owned 2.

I've seen the same engine on gasoline making almost 1800 horsepower without missing a lick...
Are they more reliable when running on gas? If so it seems like Ford really missed an opportunity with that engine. To dominate the competition in muscle cars. Maybe even put it in those big lincoln boats or something. But they never did. Hell even now those power numbers are respectable.
__________________
WAH HAA!
Gasser64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2019, 10:05 AM   #28
svauto-erotic855
I know everything, I'm older than you
VIP Member
 
svauto-erotic855's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,074
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gasser64 View Post
Are they more reliable when running on gas? If so it seems like Ford really missed an opportunity with that engine. To dominate the competition in muscle cars. Maybe even put it in those big lincoln boats or something. But they never did. Hell even now those power numbers are respectable.
The 427 blocks were incredibly difficult to cast; I believe the rejection rate was over 60%. The Cammer engine is the easiest engine to tune I have ever had on a dyno. It is insensitive to ignition timing and requires very little and it doesn't really care what the mixture is. The one making close to 1800 horsepower was one that I tuned. With two shity carburetors the engines made a little over 640 horsepower out of the box from Ford. The one that I worked on had cylinder head work, different cams, a gear setup to turn the cams and no other mods to speak of. It made the number I quoted with less than 20 lb of boost and I'm sure I could have passed Ford's durability test with that engine.

The ones that I owned where the Marine versions and I had to buy an old piece of shit Chris-Craft Cruiser just to get the engines out of. The owner did not realize that the engines were worth several times with the boat was worth.

Edit: The most amazing series of engines that I have ever dealt with are the Ford FEs. Many of their features were ahead of their time even by today's standards and Fords Engineers really burned the Midnight Oil designing some of the more elaborate set ups that the engine was available with.
__________________
Magnus, I am your father. You need to ask your mother about a man named Calvin Klein.

Last edited by svauto-erotic855; 02-13-2019 at 10:15 AM.
svauto-erotic855 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2019, 12:01 PM   #29
Torinoman
when I get around to it
 
Torinoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Richardson
Posts: 2,271
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by svauto-erotic855 View Post
The 427 blocks were incredibly difficult to cast; I believe the rejection rate was over 60%. The Cammer engine is the easiest engine to tune I have ever had on a dyno. It is insensitive to ignition timing and requires very little and it doesn't really care what the mixture is. The one making close to 1800 horsepower was one that I tuned. With two shity carburetors the engines made a little over 640 horsepower out of the box from Ford. The one that I worked on had cylinder head work, different cams, a gear setup to turn the cams and no other mods to speak of. It made the number I quoted with less than 20 lb of boost and I'm sure I could have passed Ford's durability test with that engine.

The ones that I owned where the Marine versions and I had to buy an old piece of shit Chris-Craft Cruiser just to get the engines out of. The owner did not realize that the engines were worth several times with the boat was worth.

Edit: The most amazing series of engines that I have ever dealt with are the Ford FEs. Many of their features were ahead of their time even by today's standards and Fords Engineers really burned the Midnight Oil designing some of the more elaborate set ups that the engine was available with.
Features like the valvecovers bolting to the intake? Or the pushrods going through the intake? Or the terrible oiling system? Or the goofy valve layout?
__________________
1971 Ford Torino - Time to go bigger and better.

2011 F150 Limited - Stock with a 6.2
Torinoman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2019, 12:10 PM   #30
svauto-erotic855
I know everything, I'm older than you
VIP Member
 
svauto-erotic855's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,074
Default

Dr
Quote:
Originally Posted by Torinoman View Post
Features like the valvecovers bolting to the intake? Or the pushrods going through the intake? Or the terrible oiling system? Or the goofy valve layout?
I was talking about a very generous deck height, longer connecting rods, good camshaft Centerline to crankshaft Centerline distance, very strong for its weight engine block, and really Advanced cylinder heads for their era. The medium Riser 427 has the best brake specific fuel consumption per horsepower that I've ever seen out of a wedge head engine. Part of that comes from a really good rod length to stroke ratio and a good combustion chamber.

Edit: The oiling system was only bad on the hydraulic lifter engines that were never intended for high RPM. Solid lifter engines or the side Oiler engines did not have a problem with oiling. Getting the oiling system up to snuff was also pretty easy.

Edit II: I must admit the sealing an FE intake manifold is an exercise in frustration and kind of an art. It wasn't so bad when I first started working on these engines and the parts were new but years down the road when cylinder heads have been milled along with decks it's becoming a real bitch to do right.
__________________
Magnus, I am your father. You need to ask your mother about a man named Calvin Klein.

Last edited by svauto-erotic855; 02-13-2019 at 01:02 PM.
svauto-erotic855 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2019, 07:41 PM   #31
Torinoman
when I get around to it
 
Torinoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Richardson
Posts: 2,271
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by svauto-erotic855 View Post
Dr

I was talking about a very generous deck height, longer connecting rods, good camshaft Centerline to crankshaft Centerline distance, very strong for its weight engine block, and really Advanced cylinder heads for their era. The medium Riser 427 has the best brake specific fuel consumption per horsepower that I've ever seen out of a wedge head engine. Part of that comes from a really good rod length to stroke ratio and a good combustion chamber.

Edit: The oiling system was only bad on the hydraulic lifter engines that were never intended for high RPM. Solid lifter engines or the side Oiler engines did not have a problem with oiling. Getting the oiling system up to snuff was also pretty easy.

Edit II: I must admit the sealing an FE intake manifold is an exercise in frustration and kind of an art. It wasn't so bad when I first started working on these engines and the parts were new but years down the road when cylinder heads have been milled along with decks it's becoming a real bitch to do right.
Ok lets examine this. 429/460 vs Fe

Deck height - 10.3 to 10.17
Connecting rod length - 6.605 to 6.54
Cam to crank - 6.078 to 5.044
Block strength - Almost any 429/460 block will go at least .080 over and still support 1000 hp. Most FE blocks are notorious for core shift and limited to 700ish hp.
Cylinder head - valve angle on a 460 is much better but canted vs inline seems unfair. The FE does have a good 12* valve angle for an inline head. Their wedge chamber is pretty common for the era though the medium and high riser heads lack quench pads on both sides like the 460.

You can like the Fe, but lets be honest about it. Overall its a cool hot rod motor but its in no way the pinnacle or benchmark for others. Most of it's unique features are NOT emulated with more current designs.
__________________
1971 Ford Torino - Time to go bigger and better.

2011 F150 Limited - Stock with a 6.2

Last edited by Torinoman; 02-13-2019 at 08:10 PM.
Torinoman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2019, 08:11 PM   #32
svauto-erotic855
I know everything, I'm older than you
VIP Member
 
svauto-erotic855's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,074
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Torinoman View Post
Ok lets examine this. 429/460 vs Fe

Deck height - 10.3 to 10.17
Connecting rod length - 6.605 to 6.54
Cam to crank - 6.078 to 5.044
Block strength - Almost any 429/460 block will go at least .080 over and still support 1000 hp. FE are notorious for core shift and limited to 700ish hp.
Cylinder head - valve angle on a 460 is much better but canted vs inline seems unfair. The FE does have a good 12* valve angle for an inline head. Their wedge chamber is pretty common for the era though the medium and high riser heads lack quench pads on both sides like the 460.

You can like the Fe, but lets be honest its ok. Overall its a cool hot rod motor but its in no way the pinnacle or benchmark for others.
The 385 series of engines came out many years after the first FE and had many improvements over it. I was comparing the FE to its peers. The 385s would have been a much better engine if it had copied the FEs extended skirt and flat oil pan rail.

Having cut my teeth on performance FEs with all of the factory go fast goodies they will always have a special place in my thoughts. I also never really had a chance to have many 385s on a dyno unlike FEs.
__________________
Magnus, I am your father. You need to ask your mother about a man named Calvin Klein.
svauto-erotic855 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2019, 11:41 PM   #33
Gasser64
Lifer
 
Gasser64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 3,869
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by svauto-erotic855 View Post
The 385s would have been a much better engine if it had copied the FEs extended skirt and flat oil pan rail.
So why don't they do things like this? Is it pretty much always the bean counters?
__________________
WAH HAA!
Gasser64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2019, 05:32 AM   #34
svauto-erotic855
I know everything, I'm older than you
VIP Member
 
svauto-erotic855's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,074
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gasser64 View Post
So why don't they do things like this? Is it pretty much always the bean counters?
They were trying go reduce weight and more modern designs have brought back the skirts with cross bolt mains like what were first used in the FEs and later in the Hemi.
__________________
Magnus, I am your father. You need to ask your mother about a man named Calvin Klein.
svauto-erotic855 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
al will say he has one., cnc’d by ruff, nays mom can’t buy, ruff will cnc a lathe, ruff will cnc dildos

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:09 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.