Ford Mustang Forums banner
1141 - 1160 of 1195 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,356 Posts
What do you think of the solid roller camshaft setup? I've thought about going that route on the new cam but not sure if it is worth it since the most I would spin the car is to 7000 rpms. I did watch a clip from Engine Masters and it showed the solid roller lifter made a bit more power on the exact same cam as a hydraulic roller lifter. Do you find it a pain to have to check the valves?
If the tippy tappy sounds of lifters is annoying to you don't do a solid roller. Thing two is spring pressure, look at the seat pressure on the cam spec sheet it's 250-260 pounds of seat pressure. Open pressures are comensurately much higher as well.

Heavy springs take horsepower to compress. High rate springs are expensive, and they lose spring pressure more quickly than less aggressive springs. I'm running the Crower stainless steel shaft mounted rockers, don't really have to check lash that often. Engine in the black car revs up like crazy, for a track car, I'm very pleased with it!

Jay
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
932 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1,144 ·
If you had to guess how much clearance do you think you have between the upper intake manifold and the fuel rails? My cobra intake had about 1-1/4 inches between the fuel rail and the upper intake manifold. The fuel rails I got for the car from Behind Bars Race cars are about 1-1/2 inches tall they seat down onto the injectors 3/8 of an inch. I noticed the Holley doesn't have the vacuum so it has a lot of clearance so I think it will be fine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,356 Posts
If you had to guess how much clearance do you think you have between the upper intake manifold and the fuel rails? My cobra intake had about 1-1/4 inches between the fuel rail and the upper intake manifold. The fuel rails I got for the car from Behind Bars Race cars are about 1-1/2 inches tall they seat down onto the injectors 3/8 of an inch. I noticed the Holley doesn't have the vacuum so it has a lot of clearance so I think it will be fine.
Guessing doesn't do you much good, so I measured this morning. The injectors on stock style manifolds enter the manifold at an angle and it makes a bit of a difference in clearance whether the injector holes in the bottom of the rails are coming off straight or at the corresponding angle of the manifold. In other words there is more clearance if the fuel rails are standing up straight (as I would imagine they do) or angled toward the center of the engine which they would do if the injector holes come straight out of the bottom. If they stand up straight you have about 2" of clearance from the bottom of the rails. It would be pretty tight if they angle towards the center.

Jay
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,356 Posts
So the two wire VR sensor, if my lousy memory is correct? I wonder about the Explorer crank sensor. Is the ProM using the Ford/Explorer sensor? Or at least will ProM support it?
The early Explorer cam sensors are 3 wire magnetic trigger. They changed to the 2 wire in either '99 or 2000, not sure on that one.

Pro-M is marketing their own crank sensor, but I'm pretty sure a stock sensor would work just as well. The Pro-M EFI is based on Ford EFI technology, and as such supports Ford sensors.

Jay
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
932 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1,147 ·
Guessing doesn't do you much good, so I measured this morning. The injectors on stock style manifolds enter the manifold at an angle and it makes a bit of a difference in clearance whether the injector holes in the bottom of the rails are coming off straight or at the corresponding angle of the manifold. In other words there is more clearance if the fuel rails are standing up straight (as I would imagine they do) or angled toward the center of the engine which they would do if the injector holes come straight out of the bottom. If they stand up straight you have about 2" of clearance from the bottom of the rails. It would be pretty tight if they angle towards the center.

Jay
They standup more and move away from the center to get around the distributor. Here's some pictures of the fuel rails.



They off set them like this clear the distributor.








I'm going to install them on the cobra intake after the March autocross. Based on your comments and Ed's I'm going to get the Holley SM2 for the car and talk to Ed about a cam. Then figure out all the other stuff he mentioned and a second job to pay for it. I would like to do long tubes on the car but I'm worried how well they will fit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,356 Posts
Too bad the guy that built the RCI headers died, I think the mid lengths would have been a good option for your car.

I know that back in the day Ed was able to make Fox cars with Windsor small blocks haul with Holley manifolds, but his porting sevices are pretty spendy. I think they work pretty darn well box stock, but then I've never had him port one either.

Ed supplied all of the springs, locators, retainers, and locks for my solid roller, I think the AFR stuff you've got on the heads now will work great for a hydraulic. Really no need to go solid roller, your engine won't be turning the RPMs that would really benefit from a solid roller valvetrain. Nothing wrong going that way, not so good from a bang for the buck perspective, and especially considering the springs and retainers you've already got will work fine for a hydraulic application, at least that's what's in the engine I posted the picture of.

I was serious about the shaft mounted rockers, they are really far superior to stud mounted rockers, more stable even than using a stud girdle, which I've never liked. Particularly when doing a solid roller, the lash will change when you tighten the girdle on the poly lock, what a cluster fu**! Plus with the shaft mounts, you can ditch the guilde plates, and an AFR head will accept 3/8" pushrods for a little added stability.

Jay
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
932 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1,149 ·
Too bad the guy that built the RCI headers died, I think the mid lengths would have been a good option for your car.

I know that back in the day Ed was able to make Fox cars with Windsor small blocks haul with Holley manifolds, but his porting sevices are pretty spendy. I think they work pretty darn well box stock, but then I've never had him port one either.

Ed supplied all of the springs, locators, retainers, and locks for my solid roller, I think the AFR stuff you've got on the heads now will work great for a hydraulic. Really no need to go solid roller, your engine won't be turning the RPMs that would really benefit from a solid roller valvetrain. Nothing wrong going that way, not so good from a bang for the buck perspective, and especially considering the springs and retainers you've already got will work fine for a hydraulic application, at least that's what's in the engine I posted the picture of.

I was serious about the shaft mounted rockers, they are really far superior to stud mounted rockers, more stable even than using a stud girdle, which I've never liked. Particularly when doing a solid roller, the lash will change when you tighten the girdle on the poly lock, what a cluster fu**! Plus with the shaft mounts, you can ditch the guilde plates, and an AFR head will accept 3/8" pushrods for a little added stability.

Jay
I was thinking if I got the throttle body flange ported for a 80mm throttle body and then port matched the lower with the heads I think that would be good. I know it won't be as good as a fully ported intake but the cost is high for the fully ported version. I'm sure this would be a big step up in power over the cobra intake.

I've been looking around and I don't think a solid roller cam is needed in my case I think it would be a waste considering the nature of my racing. Based on the functioning range of a cam that will build power low normally won't go past 6200-6500 rpms which seems to be the place most normal hydraulic lifters redline. I could go with a Morel 5879 link bar hydraulic lifter that can go past 7000 rpms but they are expensive. Then I could keep the 8019 springs I have and retainers so that would cut the cost down. I can build a cost effective solution to get me more power and not kill my wallet.

I was looking at the shaft mounted rockers or stainless steel rockers for the car and getting rid of the TFS rockers i have now. I'm with you I don't like the stud girdle idea but it could be a way to get the best bang for the buck considering it looks like shaft rockers are pretty pricey. If I kept the it hydraulic roller then I wouldn't have to worry about the lash changing when I tightened down the girdle. Not saying I'm writing off the idea of shaft mount rockers just need to do more research on them. The ones I saw on Ed's site were $1500-1800 which might be a bit much.

I'm not going to give up on my long tube header dreams. I've always wanted to run them and if they would've had carb legal ones at the time I was building the car I would have gone that route. Now that I don't care they are definitely an option.

At least I feel like I have a direction now with the engine. I'm going to order the intake from Ed and have him port the throttle body flange to fit an 80mm throttle body. I will also have to look at new valve covers since my Ford ones are not going to work. I have a credit with Chris at Pro-M so i might get one of his 80mm MAF which are an improvement over the 75mm I have now. The big thing will be the cam and the valve train accessories considering how hard everything is to get right now. I need to get that figured out so I could have it by summer time.

I wanted to thank you Jay for your advice and going out and looking at things on your car for me so I can make the decisions on my car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,356 Posts
No problem with the help, I'm enough of a gearhead it's a pleasure to talk about this stuff. I have the Morel lifters in both engines actually Woody supplied the solids and the hydraulic. Recently bought a set of these shaft mounted rockers for 363 number 3 (it's actually my first and was built by Keith Craft Racing in AK.)

FORD Jesel KSS-506060 Jesel Sportsman Series Shaft Rocker Arms | Summit Racing

Really nice and not as expensive as some of the others.

American racing headers makes a long tube 304 stainless header for your car, but it is BIG dollars! They would last you forever! They also have matching mid pipes which would make things much easier.

1993 FORD MUSTANG American Racing Headers MSFX-79134300HR American Racing Headers Ford Mustang Fox Body Headers | Summit Racing

Jay
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,356 Posts
It started I ordered the trickflow valve covers for the Holley SM2.
Sm2 for sale on eBay, looks to be in very nice shape


I hope you can get one of those relatively soon, much of this stuff hasn't been available for a while as you mentioned earlier. The tops are currently available, but not the lower sections. I've always understood that the bottom section was based on a truck manifold, I wonder of one of those could be used? With the TFS valve covers only being 3" tall, probably aren't going to fit a stud girdle under them, If using 7/16" rocker studs, probably isn' t going to be much deflection anyway with the hydraulic cam. I've got Probe shaft mounts (no longer made) on the red car engine.

Are you considering the American Racing stainless headers? I sure would like a set of those, I would want them ceramic coated, that would be a LOT of money for a set of headers, from looking at options right now, they all seem pretty pricey. I need to get the headers for the red car ceramic coated, been thinking of using Swain

White Lightning Exhaust Coatings – Swain Tech Coatings | Industrial Coatings | High Performance Racing Coatings

Although the black car is using Pro-M stuff on top of the manifold, the manifold itself is a TFS piece, very similar to an Edelbrock Victor.

FORD Trick Flow Specialties TFS-52400112 Trick Flow® R-Series Carb-Style EFI Intake Manifolds for Small Block Ford | Summit Racing

I'm really happy with the direction you've decided to take, the black car is fun on a road course, just a lot of shifting involved. You were the very person who explained to me that shifting was unacceptable for an autocross application.

Have a great Super Bowl Sunday, should be a good game!

Jay
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
932 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1,153 ·
I hope you can get one of those relatively soon, much of this stuff hasn't been available for a while as you mentioned earlier. The tops are currently available, but not the lower sections. I've always understood that the bottom section was based on a truck manifold, I wonder of one of those could be used? With the TFS valve covers only being 3" tall, probably aren't going to fit a stud girdle under them, If using 7/16" rocker studs, probably isn' t going to be much deflection anyway with the hydraulic cam. I've got Probe shaft mounts (no longer made) on the red car engine.
Luckily I do have some time since I won't be doing any of the intake work or cam work until probably July. But I would like to have all of it asap so I know I have it waiting. I was wondering if I was even going to be able to get the valve covers since I could only find them in stock at LMR every other place was sold out. Which was the main reason I jumped on them now. I might look at shaft mount rockers or just get a good set of stainless steel rockers. I'm going to get the intake on order this week I just need to get in touch with Ed to see what his lead time is on the intake. If I look at summit they say a 3/2/22 ship date from Holley. I think the valvetrain stuff is more of a concern right now.

Are you considering the American Racing stainless headers? I sure would like a set of those, I would want them ceramic coated, that would be a LOT of money for a set of headers, from looking at options right now, they all seem pretty pricey. I need to get the headers for the red car ceramic coated, been thinking of using Swain
I'm thinking about it but really don't know if I want to spend the money. Your looking at over 2k and I'm not really sure how well the headers will fit with the engine set back an inch. I've also looked at their X-pipe for shorty headers which looks really nice. I've also wondered if a 1-3/4 inch tube long tube header would be a good idea on a NA motor. I would have to do more research. I will at least do the X-pipe for shorty headers if I don't get their long tube setup.

Although the black car is using Pro-M stuff on top of the manifold, the manifold itself is a TFS piece, very similar to an Edelbrock Victor.

FORD Trick Flow Specialties TFS-52400112 Trick Flow® R-Series Carb-Style EFI Intake Manifolds for Small Block Ford | Summit Racing

I'm really happy with the direction you've decided to take, the black car is fun on a road course, just a lot of shifting involved. You were the very person who explained to me that shifting was unacceptable for an autocross application.
Definitely this is the right direction. I was making a bias decision towards the Pro-M system based on how it looked and the way it would clean up the engine bay. I'm not saying it's a bad route to take it could do all the things I need for my car but it would have been a risk. I knew the Holley setup was the safer bet. As much as I didn't want to swap my valve covers and put this big ass intake on top of the motor I knew it was the wiser decision. I told my self a long time ago that it's better to sacrifice looks for performance. But if I get the Holley intake in black it might look pretty good.

I saw that intake on ebay I have it saved to my wish list right now. I saw another one that was $700 but it didn't look like it came with the hardware.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
932 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1,154 ·
I’m going to order the black SM2 for the car I think that will look good under the hood of the car with the black TFS valve covers. I’m either going to order it through summit or Ed not sure just yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,356 Posts
Jay

Do you think those Jesel shaft rockers will fit under the TFS valve covers?
Absolutely, no question.

Edit: I have those TFS valve covers on the red car engine with Probe shaft mounted 1.7 ratio rockers. I had to do a bit of clearancing on the ends of the steel mount bases, it was structurally insignificant. I have the Jesel shafts on older AFR 185 outlaw heads under AFR short valve covers, no mods required.

Jay
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
932 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1,157 ·
I might be adding this to the car soon if they fit. I was talking with the guys at JBA and they told me they had the final set off JBA long tubes for the fox body mustang. These have been discontinued part number 6641S. They are a 1-3/4 inch tube with a 3 inch V-band collector and ceramic coated. They are letting me test fit them first before I buy them. I took some measurements last night and I think they will fit.





I will have to figure out a mid-pipe for the car but I have some ideas on how to make it work. I might be enlisting the help of my friend that welds for me to get it all working.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,356 Posts
Those look SUPER nice, hope they fit! I'll measure my RCIs from center of rear primary to the bottom of the collector so you'll have an idea how well tucked up to the floor they will be. The V-bands on the collector is a huge plus IMHO.

If you're comfortable fabbing the H or X-pipe between the headers and the cat backs, you can mock it all up with band clamps with holes in them (to tack the pipes together) before they are removed. I would recommend V-bands on the cat backs, and both ends of the H or X pipe. Makes it easy and simple to remove the crossover.

Jay
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
932 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1,159 ·
Those look SUPER nice, hope they fit! I'll measure my RCIs from center of rear primary to the bottom of the collector so you'll have an idea how well tucked up to the floor they will be. The V-bands on the collector is a huge plus IMHO.

If you're comfortable fabbing the H or X-pipe between the headers and the cat backs, you can mock it all up with band clamps with holes in them (to tack the pipes together) before they are removed. I would recommend V-bands on the cat backs, and both ends of the H or X pipe. Makes it easy and simple to remove the crossover.

Jay
They are really nice JBA has always made really good exhaust products. The shorty headers I have in my car now are JBA headers.

I'm looking to do V-bands for the all the connections to the X-pipe I'm going to try and fab my own mid-pipe using parts from summit. I need to get the headers installed then figure out how I'm going to connect the headers to the cat back. I was looking at this cross over section and tubes to connect everything together.

Jones Exhaust SXP6SS Jones Exhaust Stamped X-Pipes | Summit Racing

Summit Racing SUM-670242 Summit Racing™ Universal Rod Builder Exhaust Kits | Summit Racing

I'm going to keep looking around but this is a good start. But I still have to make the headers fit first.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,356 Posts
So I measured a couple sets of headers. The RCIs are almost exactly 16" from the bolt hole to the bottom of the collector. I also measured a set of BBK long tubes, they were slightly longer, about 16.5" from the back bolt hole to bottom of collector. Probably got a better measurement on the RCIs as they are bolted to the engine, but the BBKs fit well, and tucked up fairly closely.

Jay
 
1141 - 1160 of 1195 Posts
Top