460 Ford Forum banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
1.jpg

532
11.1 comp
4.440 x 4.300
p51 heads
a460 block
tfs-r mafia intake
kaase oil pump
kaase cam 791/787 273/280 @50
1050 carb
comp 1.73 xd rockers
comp lifters
moroso 20625 oil pan

This is a pump gas build, im happy with dyno numbers but kinda questioning the peak power. Should it be a hair higher, say 6700ish?
I have a concern about valve springs being to small for the cam causing it not to pull as high as it should. Kaase re assured me multiple time that the supplied springs are strong enuff. They are the manley nextek spring 221443-16
This is my first "real" motor build and looking for input, good or bad. this look about right or should it have pulled higher.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
765 Posts
Id say the hp hangs on real well there at the end of the pull. (Better than most anyways)
Those are nice #s imo for that combination.
And yes...64-6500 is a typical peak for that manifold.
Nice job :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,412 Posts
Nice build and numbers......you sure you running the manley 221443 spring with that cam?...... .730 lift...235 seat, 610 open.

Maybe more carb would help as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Nice build and numbers......you sure you running the manley 221443 spring with that cam?...... .730 lift...235 seat, 610 open.

Maybe more carb would help as well.
That is the springs they told me are on heads, I opted for kaase lighter tool steel retainer option. They said with lash, deflection, etc, that springs are good for that cam. I ordered heads with cam so they knew the combo.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,733 Posts
Double check your spring part number, I don't think it's what you have.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,483 Posts
You didn't mention anything about the headers used in the testing. There may be some gains to be had there, but considering how the power hangs on after the peak, I wouldn't give it a second thought.

EDIT: I missed the carb size. Probably some gains to be had there too.


.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,803 Posts
how many pulls did you make?? how many timing changes did you make?? how many jet changes?? IMO a 1250 CFM carb would have made more power, and it does look like the valve springs make the power curve go flat after 6300 rpm
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,733 Posts
I don't think those springs were on the engine............ They would have been all over coil bind unless they set them up at 2.00 inch install and then they would have probably floated at his peak hp rpm.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
8,522 Posts
I don't think those springs were on the engine............ They would have been all over coil bind unless they set them up at 2.00 inch install and then they would have probably floated at his peak hp rpm.
That's the usual spring the Kaase group installs on their solid roller package.

The springs are installed 'tall' but, I'm not sure it's as much as 2.00"
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
8,522 Posts
It's not the intake manifold i.m.o.

K.Y.'s 562" P51 deal from back in 2009 made with the same intake manifold.....

940.8 @ 6,500 rpm
946.1 @ 6,600 rpm
950.6 @ 6,700 rpm
950.6 @ 6,800 rpm
951.3 @ 6,900 rpm
950.7 @ 7,000 rpm

IDT-572 knows of this engine...it's not a b.s. deal.

The above engine was NOT a pump gas package but, did have the same intake manifold.

If the A/F ratio thing is correct.....looks like the carb or it's tune up is lean at high rpm.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Discussion Starter #12 (Edited)
Lem, the cam is 109, springs were 1.97 or 1.975. I actually called you 4-5 months ago asking bout p51 heads going turbulent at 550-600 lift. You gave me Charlies number. My local engine guy was also concerned about springs, I asked him to call kaase. He did and after talking to them he said he didn't " like " the numbers but kaase guy new exact numbers and reassured him the combo been run many times. So he said " if kaase said go with it, then I guess it's good" . I want this to be a "low" maintenance deal, not replacing lifters, springs,(within reason) or worse dropping a valve. A lot of kaase guys here with similar combos so figured best place to ask.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Unfortunately, lack of time and resources limited me to carb size. We tried an out the box hp 1150 with 94 sq, it lost a few hp. 794-796 ish. The 1050 also had 94s. It seemed to like 34deg on timing and 4 hole super sucker 1 in spacer raised peak to 6500. Lost a tad down low and really nothing up top 798-799hp. First real motor I've flywheel dynod so lack of knowledge was a factor also. Using cell phone so forgive grammer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
You didn't mention anything about the headers used in the testing. There may be some gains to be had there, but considering how the power hangs on after the peak, I wouldn't give it a second thought.

EDIT: I missed the carb size. Probably some gains to be had there too.


.
We used BBC 2 1/4 dyno headers. Had adapters bbf to bbc, I'm thinking it'll make a Lil better power on 2 1/8. I'm going to use hooker 2 in engine swap headers for foxbody for now.
1050 carb was used. Limited time and resources
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,803 Posts
you said the carbs were 94 square, is that with P/V's or not because if there are no P/V's then 94 is way lean IMO!! my BBB (yes Buick) at 464 CI ran a 1050 dommy jetted 96/98 square, just some food for thought, but nice build and nice power, you will find more in it as you tune on it more, good luck
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,483 Posts
We used BBC 2 1/4 dyno headers. Had adapters bbf to bbc, I'm thinking it'll make a Lil better power on 2 1/8. I'm going to use hooker 2 in engine swap headers for foxbody for now.
1050 carb was used. Limited time and resources
Carb is probably the biggest issue. As Lem pointed out, the top end appears to be leaning out, so tuning the air bleeds might help, but a bigger carb would probably produce a better number on the dyno. Smaller headers might also keep the top end from leaning out. Smaller carb might end up being faster on the track though. You can make a whole lot of runs down the strip for the cost of another dyno test, and the real world results will be better. Best power on the dyno isn't always fastest on the track.



.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
8,522 Posts
Unfortunately, lack of time and resources limited me to carb size. We tried an out the box hp 1150 with 94 sq, it lost a few hp. 794-796 ish. The 1050 also had 94s. It seemed to like 34deg on timing and 4 hole super sucker 1 in spacer raised peak to 6500. Lost a tad down low and really nothing up top 798-799hp. First real motor I've flywheel dynod so lack of knowledge was a factor also. Using cell phone so forgive grammer.
I've reread this thread....34* timing is certaintly more than I've seen the FRPP SCJ/P51 heads want. I'm confused.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Agreed about timing, being I've got a few months before I get my transmission ( Reid case glide) I'm gonna try get another day on the dyno this time with my own carb, not a borrowed one. I was definitely unprepared the first time. I'm gonna look at the quick fuel or pro systems carb. when I get fuel right then retry timing and possibly lash.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top