Ford Mustang Forums banner

1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Had about 300 miles on new shortblock so I figured it was time to see what it would do and put a good tune on it. I was a little disappointed at the peak RWHP. I was hoping for the 350 rwhp mark. It was made up for by the rwtq #'s though.

HP TQ

4000 270 355
4100 278 357
4200 283 354
4300 288 352
4400 292 349
4500 299 349
4600 306 350
4700 315 352
4800 321 352
4900 327 350
5000 331 348
5100 330 340
5200 331 334
5300 332 329
5400 333 324
5500 332 318
5600 334 314
5700 334 308
5800 338 306
5900 338 301
6000 335 294
6100 334 288
6200 329 279
6300 318 265
6400 302 248
6500 288 232
6600 284 226

Max: 338 357

Air/fuel ratio was 12.8- 13.0

I wish we would have started the pulls a little earlier to see where the torque was at 3000 and 3500. As i said I was hoping for more peak HP, but I am surprised at the torque. I guess these little AFR's and Ed's cam is are working well together. Anyone have any suggestions to bring up the peak HP without hurting torque too much? Maybe 75mm TB, 1-5/8 to 1-3/4 step headers.

What do ya think ED.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Great numbers!! Thats a stout 306 there. How did you get 10:1? What parts did you use on the shortblock? I would expect the numbers to keep going up as the shortblock loosens up a little bit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
Great numbers, makes my 308 look like a chump. Why did HP fall off at 6000rpm? What are the specs on the cam? I guess it could be the heads, but the 185s are probably too big huh? If you can, post your WOT fuel and timing settings for the PMS. I understand if you don't want to give anything away, but I could sure use some tips on tuning my motor and we have somewhat similar setups.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,554 Posts
cam specs? nice numbers!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
682 Posts
If you look closer at the hp/tq numbers all the HP is basically made by 5000 rpm. After this the tq falls off pretty quick.

The TQ numbers are very high for a 306. Very, very high.

The tight LSA on ed's cam and the good velocity on the AFR's are working wonders for your mid range tq.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Cam specs Lift w/1.6 rockers .562/.565
Dur @ .050 228/232
.006 282/282 and a 109 lobe sep.

10:1 comp. is approx. as I have not figured it exactly. JE flat top pistons with 58 cc heads milled .020, but valve job lost some cc's so ended up at 55-56 cc's.

PMS settings @ WOT FP 38 psi no vacuum

2000 4000 6000 7800
Fuel -4 -4 -4 -4
Timing +12 +14 +16 +14
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,508 Posts
Nice #'s! I just don't know what to make of these torque #'s being thrown around. I was told there a few different programs and depending on which one is used the torque #'s will be different for each one. Different dyno's different #'s i guess...but everyone uses the same hp program...so i'm told. Me, 324 ft. lbs. Latro.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
682 Posts
I don't think the heads are an issue at this point. They have enough flow potential to allow between 450-500 hp N/A.

Its that RPM intake again.

The cross section of the intake tract is limiting tq peak to 4100. Shift the same tq curve over to the right about 500rpm and you are talking a good 360-370rwhp...

I don't think a 1 5/8" LT with 3" collector should be replaced with the 1 3/4" at this point. If you have a BBK LT, then there is a bit to gain by going to a real LT such as a Kooks or Bassani, even Mac should do a small measureable amount better.

Then again, you can expirament with 1.7 rockers. This one could work out 1.7 on intake, as you have same flow as 185cc on exhaust side.

Think a fully ported and 1" internally shortened RPM would be the ticket.

Or simply the newer TFS track heat intake could be your answer. It has fatter runners than the edelbrocks, which means you are going to tq peak higher up.

Like the other poster said, figure 5-10rwhp from simply having the motor breakin.

Also a dyno EEC tune isn't going to hurt either.

Dennis
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Discussion Starter #11 (Edited)
What is the main cause for the early peak TQ and HP? Is it the intake or the cam. The intake is mildly touched up. Runners smoothed,port matched not much material taken out. I opened up the entrance to the openings of the runners in the upper, then tapered them in about 3 inches. Again, I did not get aggressive here either.
When I assembled the motor I did degree in the cam per Ed's instructiions. I wonder if retarding the cam 4 degrees or so would move the power band up and higher?
I do have just the BBK 1-5/8 with 2-1/2 collector. I ground out all the weld in the ports and opened the collector a little. I may look at some Bassani step tubes if necessary. I dynoed with full length 2-1/2 exhaust. How much of a benefit is removing the tailpipes? I may try that.
Who knows, maybe I got exactly what Ed intended. He may say don't touch it.

Where ya at Ed? People don't mind if you stop working on their stuff to chat. Honest. Tom
 

·
Old timer
Joined
·
5,945 Posts
88bullet said:
Where ya at Ed? People don't mind if you stop working on their stuff to chat. Honest. Tom

Hi Tom,

Have you driven the car around? The very flat (and fat) torque curve is the main goal for your combo, not some random high peak number. Compare your average, under the curve power to some of the more racier (albeit peakier higher hp) combinations. You have most of them covered pretty well....

You'll rotate the earth with the twisting power of this 300 incher! Check around, there are 351 Windsor combinations that have problems making those Tq figures....

Recommendation???? Drive it, race it, enjoy it and "then" we'll get a bit more once you're used to it....
:D
Ed
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,363 Posts
excellent numbers for a combo that makes a nice street car,should run very good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
284 Posts
Wow!!

Nice combo! Love that torque... :)

Be sure to post track times when you go.

Randy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
682 Posts
Ed is right, theres a good deal of built 351's out there that don't have your rwtq numbers.

Intake runner cross section has good bearing on where the tq peaks occur.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,342 Posts
Those are impressive numbers. It makes me want more out of my ed cam :) I only put down 310 RWHP and 346 RWTQ :joy:

Then again, my cam is very streetable and those number are thru an AOD with a locked converter. Flat torque is what it's all about when you have an AOD, I put down 300+ RWTQ from 2800-5400 RPM. Peak HP @ 5500 and peak TQ @ 3800. At FFW Houston, I averaged 12.21 in true street and ran a 12.02 @ 113 in time trials :evil:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
682 Posts
What I don't understand, is most of these well built ford combo's never have HP exceeding TQ.

For example, lets try to make an apples vs apples here and compare 331-351's to the LS1 setups.

Now, the complaint on having an HP actually over TQ is that the low speed tq will suffer. However on these LS1 setups
they have HP over TQ ( I call this "getting over the top" ) for example 430rwhp/410rwtq, and they best most of the dyno's I see for 331-351's here from 2000 on up.

I don't understand what is the problem with "getting over the top", or the perseption that low speed tq just goes out of the window.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Thanks for everyones responses. I am very satisfied with what it put out. I just had a # in my head I wanted to see. Oh well, I'll get that later. As I said the torque makes up for that. Besides, who is really ever satisfied. Don't we all want more.
I wanted to hear from Ed and he said what I was hoping to hear. Thanks Ed. I cant wait to get it to the track this weekend. Jesse, I am planning on this saturday for sure, maybe sunday too. Of course this all depends on the weather. Do you think it could let us race once this spring. Will you be at the Rock, Jesse?
Hey Joe Dirte. You're going to hurt my feelings with comments like that, LOL. I know what my wife can sound like!
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Top