Ford Mustang Forums banner
1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Hello All,

I’ve had someone build me a 408w stroker but upon further investigation I believe this cam might be too small. Block came out of a 90’s f250. The current cam is a trick flow track max hydraulic roller part# TFS-51403002. I should note the car will be a street/strip build and I plan on adding boost in the future. I reached out to another engine builder and he also stated the cam is small. I will be running AFR Renegade 220cc heads with 58cc chambers. I’ll post the specs of the assembled block below. My question is what do you guys recommend for cam’s from (mild to wild) and what would need to be replaced or adjusted when switching cams. Trying to knock this out before the motor gets dropped in the car.

Thanks!
Handwriting Font Paper Paper product Parallel
 

·
Registered
'87 20th Anniversary Cougar7.0 427W
Joined
·
5,405 Posts
Don't know about the rest of the combo - intake, expectations etc., but assuming about 10:1 compression based on that build sheet, and assuming you want something more appropriate for the AFR220s and that displacement, one would expect a cam closer to the TFS-51403004 "size" wise (242/246 .595/.595 110LS). If you have the AFR 8019 HR spring package, no spring change would be needed for the larger cam.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
13,176 Posts
I dont know how much boost you plan on but I would have opened up the ring gaps a bit and possibly the piston to wall, again depending on the boost amount. Also the specs.for that arp rod bolt is for an 8740, not an arp 2000 they have listed. Also l
I wouldn't have left the piston in the hole .027, was the block surfaced?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Don't know about the rest of the combo - intake, expectations etc., but assuming about 10:1 compression based on that build sheet, and assuming you want something more appropriate for the AFR220s and that displacement, one would expect a cam closer to the TFS-51403004 "size" wise (242/246 .595/.595 110LS). If you have the AFR 8019 HR spring package, no spring change would be needed for the larger cam.
I wish I knew what they were as they aren’t listed on any of my invoices. I assume they are the AFR 8002 valve springs?? There’s no stripes on any of them…
Motor vehicle Light Automotive design Automotive tire Rim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 · (Edited)
I dont know how much boost you plan on but I would have opened up the ring gaps a bit and possibly the piston to wall, again depending on the boost amount. Also the specs.for that arp rod bolt is for an 8740, not an arp 2000 they have listed. Also l
I wouldn't have left the piston in the hole .027, was the block surfaced?
Great catch on the ARP rod bolts, I couldn’t find anything other than this for verification even though it doesn’t show the torque specs for the ARP 2000 bolts I’m using. I wonder if they made a typo when writing down the hardware used and meant to put 8470. If these are incorrect torque specs on my motor I assume the best thing to do would be to torque them even more to proper spec… You wouldn’t happen to have proper torque spec information would you? 😅


Rectangle Font Magenta Screenshot Parallel
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 · (Edited)
I dont know how much boost you plan on but I would have opened up the ring gaps a bit and possibly the piston to wall, again depending on the boost amount. Also the specs.for that arp rod bolt is for an 8740, not an arp 2000 they have listed. Also l
I wouldn't have left the piston in the hole .027, was the block surfaced?
For my own knowledge can you explain what you mean by not leaving the piston in the hole at .027? Also according to what’s on the invoice…. The block was hot tanked, had the line hone checked, bored and honed with torque plate, and the deck was checked. If they didn’t list it being surfaced then it might not of been required?
 

·
Old timer
Joined
·
6,567 Posts
With so little vehicle information....

Wrong Camshaft Profile -

Wrong Spring Package -

It'll run but it's not an optimized combination.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mark O'Neal

·
Registered
'87 20th Anniversary Cougar7.0 427W
Joined
·
5,405 Posts
I wish I knew what they were as they aren’t listed on any of my invoices. I assume they are the AFR 8002 valve springs?? There’s no stripes on any of them…
Hmmm. The AFR220 head comes with a fairly stiff solid roller spring unless otherwise specified. They offer a "spring exchange" for a hydraulic roller cam, but you need to specify this when you purchase the heads :/

I missed the note on the build sheet stating 0.027" in the hole, I had assumed a more typical 0.010". That lowers static compression to about 9.6:1. I also missed the sentence about adding boost. That changes a lot as strokeme noted - your ring gaps are tighter than they should be for boost. It also affects the cam choice, especially where your static compression ratio is a little higher than typical for boost.

On one of my early builds I did the "may add boost later" thing without accounting for it in the build; it didn't work out well. You're going to get more questions than answers until you more firmly decide what your goals are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nickv8070

·
Vendor
Joined
·
13,176 Posts
For my own knowledge can you explain what you mean by not leaving the piston in the hole at .027? Also according to what’s on the invoice…. The block was hot tanked, had the line hone checked, bored and honed with torque plate, and the deck was checked. If they didn’t list it being surfaced then it might not of been required?
For a stock rebuild you can skip surfacing the block, but for performance, there is no reason not to, if nothing more than to square the decks, end to end and side to side. The block is 30-35 years old. Not surfacing it, is just nonsense. The piston is .027 below the deck, meaning when tue piston is at tdc, its still .027 below the top of the block. Also the spring on your afr heads is totally wrong. Thats a solid roller spring. The head should have been purchased with the 8019 spring.
 

·
Old timer
Joined
·
6,567 Posts
Also the spring on your afr heads is totally wrong. Thats a solid roller spring. The head should have been purchased with the 8019 spring.
Not a fan of the 8019 spring in that head. Too much intake valve mass. Even worse if going to a forced induction combination. I always replace the 8000 SR springs with a tool steel retainer and a much better PAC 1200 series valve spring.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Nickv8070

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
For a stock rebuild you can skip surfacing the block, but for performance, there is no reason not to, if nothing more than to square the decks, end to end and side to side. The block is 30-35 years old. Not surfacing it, is just nonsense. The piston is .027 below the deck, meaning when tue piston is at tdc, its still .027 below the top of the block. Also the spring on your afr heads is totally wrong. Thats a solid roller spring. The head should have been purchased with the 8019 spring.
Well I know who will not be building my next motor after this.. I think the saying goes live and learn
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Hmmm. The AFR220 head comes with a fairly stiff solid roller spring unless otherwise specified. They offer a "spring exchange" for a hydraulic roller cam, but you need to specify this when you purchase the heads :/

I missed the note on the build sheet stating 0.027" in the hole, I had assumed a more typical 0.010". That lowers static compression to about 9.6:1. I also missed the sentence about adding boost. That changes a lot as strokeme noted - your ring gaps are tighter than they should be for boost. It also affects the cam choice, especially where your static compression ratio is a little higher than typical for boost.

On one of my early builds I did the "may add boost later" thing without accounting for it in the build; it didn't work out well. You're going to get more questions than answers until you more firmly decide what your goals are.
Since the ring gaps are tighter than they should be for boost along with the static compression being a little high… My question is along with swapping out a cam (either what you mentioned or going with a custom Ed Curtis) and springs is this motor more ideal for an N/A setup rather than boost? I think my goal at this point is to have a solid motor with the right components and then build off that (intake, gearing, etc). I’m not dead set on adding boost if the motor requires a complete tear down and rebuild. I have no expectations but my power goals are to squeeze out as much as possible with what I got.
 

·
Registered
'87 20th Anniversary Cougar7.0 427W
Joined
·
5,405 Posts
I have no expectations but my power goals are to squeeze out as much as possible with what I got.
You might want to consider decking the block to raise compression. A bigger cam will be happier the closer you can get the compression to 10-10.5:1. You'll still make good power with a cam customized to what you've got tho.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
272 Posts
Looks like the local machine shop just threw it together and slaped a cam in. Definitely need to deck it alot if staying na. .027 in is. ridiculous.

I think something around 232/249 make a good street cam. My.buddy is building a 400sbf. He bought used one for his short bed truck . Just something to drive around.

He builds 4v daily for a living. He was asking me on cams. I said idk .just sim the thing and watch the exhaust blowdown on a 400 .I knew from a few sims I did on 400s, there touchy there. He has same sim as me. He knows how to use it. He spent days on it computer And that's what he came up with, with his heads and I not even sure on rpm he is thinking .
I just laughed and said ,told you. I not even sure his lobe separation.

Now how do think that would run to a 242/246/110 20 year old design.
 

·
USAF retired
Joined
·
9,710 Posts
That cam is more suited to a street 331 than a 408, .027 in the hole on the pistons is unacceptable. It'll run that way, with that cam, but it'll also run with the stock 5.0 HO cam, you'll just have to make excuses why it don't live up to it's potential.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nickv8070
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top