Ford Mustang Forums banner
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
65 fastback pump gas .060 289 (297) solid roller, T5 all motor. 11.12 122 mph
Joined
·
1,261 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Two different sets of heads with two very different results. The first is an old TFS TW hand ported by Brian Tooley back in the 90s for a fun Ford weekend class racer. Max effort that ran 9.6’s in class trim. Would hate to think what the finished product cost new. Lift limited class and the results speak to that. 40cc combustion chamber is what made me purchase them several years ago from a friend. Thoughts of using E85.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
65 fastback pump gas .060 289 (297) solid roller, T5 all motor. 11.12 122 mph
Joined
·
1,261 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
A big thanks to Tobias Aldrate, Mark O’Neil’s business partner at Vigilante, who flowed the heads and is handling my new build. Talking about the old-school nature of the port work and valve jobs (crap) used was enlightening. His digital flow bench and meticulous attention to all details including custom making port plates for each head make me very comfortable with the legitimacy of these numbers. Also makes regret not having him do the port work on the Canfields in the first place. Toby is top notch and very accommodating.

When we make a final decision on which cylinder head we are going to use I will cut Toby loose to improve the ports some and give them a proper valve job. Probably throw them back on the bench to see where we end up. Stay tuned.
 

·
Registered
65 fastback pump gas .060 289 (297) solid roller, T5 all motor. 11.12 122 mph
Joined
·
1,261 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Just realized the data on the TW doesn’t state valve sizes. 2.02 and 1.60 just like the Canfields.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
280 Posts
What throat size and msca did they use in the 90s.
 

·
Registered
65 fastback pump gas .060 289 (297) solid roller, T5 all motor. 11.12 122 mph
Joined
·
1,261 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
My CRUDE measurements had the MCSA a hair under two. Throat was right about 89% of the 2.02 valve
 

·
Registered
1965 fastback 347 hci v3-si Pro M efi. Tko600 3:55
Joined
·
386 Posts
Cool seeing those flow number charts.
Thanks for sharing
Definitely an art and not just “ hogging them out “
I sent Ron Robart my 25 year old 160/202 Edelbrock performers and he hand ported them just before a well deserved retirement.
Note: Tested with 4.125 bore
Rectangle Font Parallel Paper Sheet music
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
280 Posts
185 renegades intake
Brand new out of box.
Guy bought them about 3months ago.
I have a very well known guys manometer now . Didn't make any difference to my usual numbers

Out box big step on top cut
200 133
300 187
400 235.3
500 260.7
600 276

Blended in
200 141
300 194
400 239.6
500 267
600 280

It's more than 89% .
Tested 3 intakes that was the best one
 
  • Like
Reactions: 65fasback

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,114 Posts
185 renegades intake
Brand new out of box.
Guy bought them about 3months ago.
I have a very well known guys manometer now . Didn't make any difference to my usual numbers

Out box big step on top cut
200 133
300 187
400 235.3
500 260.7
600 276

Blended in
200 141
300 194
400 239.6
500 267
600 280

It's more than 89% .
Tested 3 intakes that was the best one

Less than what AFR publishes.....
 

·
Old timer
Joined
·
6,647 Posts
You must know by now what I told Toby to do with those TW heads... :ROFLMAO:

Get the Canfields fitted with 5/16" stem valves, 2.050" intakes and fix the ports...

Then we can talk bump stick and valvetrain. Well, maybe not "talk" as much as fork over those dead Presidents you've been hoarding for years. :D
 
  • Love
Reactions: KEVIN$

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,333 Posts
Those old TW head flow numbers are interesting. I'm still using my handported ones - 2.02/1.60. I spent an INSANE amount of time porting them by hand - took several trips to the flowbench to get there - it was easy to lose flow. The intake ports ended up at ~183-184 cc's (actual - stock, they were actually a little under 170, iirc). Hand porting out 14cc's per runner by hand generates a ton of swarf - I kept the bucket of swarf for years just because I couldn't bring myself to throw it out. I left the ports in bur finish:

Rectangle Slope Plot Font Line


FWIW, I even took them to a second flow bench to verify the numbers. I also pounded an aluminum rod into the EGR passage and raised the exhaust ports a little.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 65fasback

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,462 Posts
You must know by now what I told Toby to do with those TW heads... :ROFLMAO:

Get the Canfields fitted with 5/16" stem valves, 2.050" intakes and fix the ports...

Then we can talk bump stick and valvetrain. Well, maybe not "talk" as much as fork over those dead Presidents you've been hoarding for years. :D
I worked over a set of Canfield back in the day. I do remember they really liked the roof of the exhaust port raised.
 

·
Registered
65 fastback pump gas .060 289 (297) solid roller, T5 all motor. 11.12 122 mph
Joined
·
1,261 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
You must know by now what I told Toby to do with those TW heads... :ROFLMAO:

Get the Canfields fitted with 5/16" stem valves, 2.050" intakes and fix the ports...

Then we can talk bump stick and valvetrain. Well, maybe not "talk" as much as fork over those dead Presidents you've been hoarding for years. :D
No surprise there. Sounds like a good plan.

I will be heading to Oregon for a week tomorrow. Followed up by another week in Utah. So nothing will be happening on the engine build on my end during that time.
 

·
Registered
65 fastback pump gas .060 289 (297) solid roller, T5 all motor. 11.12 122 mph
Joined
·
1,261 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
I worked over a set of Canfield back in the day. I do remember they really liked the roof of the exhaust port raised.
I had previously had some work done on my Canfields. The guy who did the work said the exhaust port was extremely noisy and turbulent in stock form on his bench.
 

·
Registered
65 fastback pump gas .060 289 (297) solid roller, T5 all motor. 11.12 122 mph
Joined
·
1,261 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Mixed up my notes. The MCSA was for the old TW. The 89% throat was for the Canfields.

Alex, the hand port work on the TW heads I have is meticulous. Even if it’s wrong by todays standards. I admire what you did with yours.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,333 Posts
I'm sure those heads are excellent. My point was really that I spent well over 100 hours on mine, a small fortune on burs and rolls and multiple trips to the flowbench - for all that, I could've sold them and bought 205 11r's and been ahead of the game - financially, time-wise and performance wise. The only reason I did it was my daughter was little and I couldn't leave her alone at night, so after I put her to bed each night, I'd go out in the garage and grind away for a few hours. After a two or three months, I was finally done. I'd never do that again. Regarding those heads you posted, what's really interesting (to me) is that they went 9.6's in class trim. I haven't gone that fast with forced induction and a stroker (granted, it's a 3,500 lb street car driven everywhere, including to the track, but still...)
 
  • Like
Reactions: CDW6212R

·
Registered
65 fastback pump gas .060 289 (297) solid roller, T5 all motor. 11.12 122 mph
Joined
·
1,261 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
You can’t be serious. 3,000 lbs and they ran those times on motor.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top