Bronco Forum - Full Size Ford Bronco Forum banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
PROPERTY U.S. GOVERNMENT
Joined
·
244 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So now that I have tied up the loose ends with the transmission, I'm now focusing on the engine.

My basic engine setup is the stock '95 Mustang block, bored .030, stock shorty Mustang heads (non roller rockers) and headers, Edelbrock Performer 289 intake, and a Holley 600 4bbl.

My goal here is to build it up to around lower 300's HP, and mid to high 300's on torque, with torque coming in way lower than what it does now. I'm thinking peak around 2500-3500, if that's realistic. In other words, I want it to carry its weight with superb acceleration down low, but still be able to reasonably coast down the highway going 70 @ 2000 RPM, without speed constantly falling and having to downshift to 3rd just to pick up speed again.

As it sits now, in OD on the highway, doing 70, I'm pulling around 1700, again, motor very mildly built.

I'd love to hear any and all recommendations that would put my torque and HP in the mid-high 300's, and low 300's respectively, unless you'd suggest something otherwise!
 

·
PROPERTY U.S. GOVERNMENT
Joined
·
244 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
Current dyno chart as of 11 FEB of this year reads as follows:
163396

The lighter blue line was the first dyno run, the darker blue one was the second run.
 

·
Addicted to Junk
85 Bronco, 309ci I6 w/4bbl, np435, 4" lift, 37" Irok NDs, 4.56 w/ Detroit Locker and tru trac
Joined
·
16,371 Posts
Heads of your choice around the 170-180 size. AFR165 would be a good choice for a 302. Comp 35-512-8 roller cam. Combined with what you have, it should get you close to the HP number and should hit your torque goals. Upping the compression a bit would only benefit you too.

That cam makes its peak torque around 2000 rpms and keeps 75% or more of that torque through 5000 rpm. It'll also idle nice
 

·
PROPERTY U.S. GOVERNMENT
Joined
·
244 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Heads of your choice around the 170-180 size. AFR165 would be a good choice for a 302. Comp 35-512-8 roller cam. Combined with what you have, it should get you close to the HP number and should hit your torque goals. Upping the compression a bit would only benefit you too.

That cam makes its peak torque around 2000 rpms and keeps 75% or more of that torque through 5000 rpm. It'll also idle nice
Hey BigBlue,

As always, thank you for replying quickly. I have more statements/questions on my setup.

I've done some reading on heads, and seen that the AFR's are a common but great modification to liven up things with the motor.

As far as the 35-512-8 cam goes, it says "for computer controlled EFI" engines, and I have a Holley 600 on my 95 Mustang motor, does the computer controlled part really matter, or is the camshaft still relevant? The motor used to have EFI before a previous owner evidently took it off.

Also, the cam says RPM range 800-4800, is that the mechanical limit of the camshaft or just the power band in which it is designed for?

Lastly, just to clarify, since I am letting the engine "breathe" better, would it be ideal to get a bigger carburetor than what I have now, or stick with the 600?

Thanks again Blue.
 

·
Age. Fac ut gaudeam
Joined
·
3,881 Posts
EFI doesnt really matter if you're carbed when picking cam. You'd be better off calling a reputable camshaft supplier and telling then your needs paired with your modifications. Heads will do alot for you matched with a good cam. The cheat code would be regearing to pump your acceleration and would also increase your rpms in OD so you maintained 4th better.
 

·
Addicted to Junk
85 Bronco, 309ci I6 w/4bbl, np435, 4" lift, 37" Irok NDs, 4.56 w/ Detroit Locker and tru trac
Joined
·
16,371 Posts
Hey BigBlue,

As always, thank you for replying quickly. I have more statements/questions on my setup.

I've done some reading on heads, and seen that the AFR's are a common but great modification to liven up things with the motor.

As far as the 35-512-8 cam goes, it says "for computer controlled EFI" engines, and I have a Holley 600 on my 95 Mustang motor, does the computer controlled part really matter, or is the camshaft still relevant? The motor used to have EFI before a previous owner evidently took it off.

Also, the cam says RPM range 800-4800, is that the mechanical limit of the camshaft or just the power band in which it is designed for?

Lastly, just to clarify, since I am letting the engine "breathe" better, would it be ideal to get a bigger carburetor than what I have now, or stick with the 600?

Thanks again Blue.
The computer controlled aspect is just the correct specs for the speed density efi. It would be a very good cam for a carb, with smooth power. It will not be a lopey idle.

The 800-4800 is the base rpm range it makes power in. Depending on what engine they based that off of, it could be slightly higher in a 302 due to stroke differences. In my 351, that rpm figure was spot on. Though my max HP didnt come in till 4800.

The 600 will be plenty big. I run a 450 cfm carb on my 309" inline six.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 84Bronco4x4

·
PROPERTY U.S. GOVERNMENT
Joined
·
244 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
EFI doesnt really matter if you're carbed when picking cam. You'd be better off calling a reputable camshaft supplier and telling then your needs paired with your modifications. Heads will do alot for you matched with a good cam. The cheat code would be regearing to pump your acceleration and would also increase your rpms in OD so you maintained 4th better.
Ok, that's good to know. Less complication there.

That's my plan, to regear to 4.56's, then soup up the motor more so it'll pull even better than it already would with 4.56's. Thanks for the reply!
 

·
PROPERTY U.S. GOVERNMENT
Joined
·
244 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
The computer controlled aspect is just the correct specs for the speed density efi. It would be a very good cam for a carb, with smooth power. It will not be a lopey idle.

The 800-4800 is the base rpm range it makes power in. Depending on what engine they based that off of, it could be slightly higher in a 302 due to stroke differences. In my 351, that rpm figure was spot on. Though my max HP didnt come in till 4800.

The 600 will be plenty big. I run a 450 cfm carb on my 309" inline six.
Aw, no lope?? :((((

In all seriousness, I'd like a cam that provided outstanding low-end torque, but also had a lope, but I don't think it's possible (correct me if I'm wrong, PLEASE).

800-4800, 1000-5000, 1500-5500... It's really six in one, half a dozen in the other to me at this point, as long as I can get much better low-end torque.

P.S., with my engine as it is not, is it normal to have to hold the pedal down at a variation of about 60-80% just to maintain 70 MPH at 1700 in OD?
 

·
Addicted to Junk
85 Bronco, 309ci I6 w/4bbl, np435, 4" lift, 37" Irok NDs, 4.56 w/ Detroit Locker and tru trac
Joined
·
16,371 Posts
Well it has a bit more lope than factory, but not much. But thats for speed density efi. Something with les lobe separation will have more lope.

And no, thats not normal throttle input. Are you running a real lean fuel mixture? As I came down out of the Rockies into KS, I was struggling to keep speed. I was tuned for 7000' and above. Not good at 3000'. Mixture was 17.5:1 and i had to keep a lot of throttle in it to maintain even 65mph, at 2800 rpm. Quick jet swap and i was back on the road, cruising like i should be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 84Bronco4x4

·
PROPERTY U.S. GOVERNMENT
Joined
·
244 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Well it has a bit more lope than factory, but not much. But thats for speed density efi. Something with les lobe separation will have more lope.

And no, thats not normal throttle input. Are you running a real lean fuel mixture? As I came down out of the Rockies into KS, I was struggling to keep speed. I was tuned for 7000' and above. Not good at 3000'. Mixture was 17.5:1 and i had to keep a lot of throttle in it to maintain even 65mph, at 2800 rpm. Quick jet swap and i was back on the road, cruising like i should be.
Alright. So I guess I'll be able to audibly hear that my motor has a healthy cam, just not one out of a damn stock car.

I'll have to get with someone that has an AFR reader quick and see what my mix is. When I first start it up, until the temp gets to about 160 (warming up, idling), the takeoff has a uneven-type bog until I get further onto the gas. It might just be the oil not thinning out enough yet. There's a sweet spot when the motor seems to "get with the program" and starts running normal down the road again. That may just be the nature of a carbureted motor.

Good gracious, 17.5 to my understanding is dangerous for the motor, isn't it? I'll look into getting a jet nozzle kit if it ends up being too lean. It smells healthy (no cats), but I can't be too sure.
 

·
Addicted to Junk
85 Bronco, 309ci I6 w/4bbl, np435, 4" lift, 37" Irok NDs, 4.56 w/ Detroit Locker and tru trac
Joined
·
16,371 Posts
Yup. You'll know its there, but no, it wont sound like a NASCAR.

Sounds like you have a slight fuel timing issue with the carb. Maybe not enough fuel at first.

Tuning a carb with your own AFR gauge is so much easier than without. And yeah 17.5:1 isnt good for extended periods of time. The KS/CO border is about 3500' elevation. After that it started getting to that real lean point and i found a place to pull off and swap jets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 84Bronco4x4

·
Registered
95 5.8L MAF XLT, Hedman Shorties/MF SS Y & Muff, E4OD, Man hubs, KYB Quads, 31x10.5x15, 304K miles
Joined
·
1,388 Posts
Yo @BigBlue 94 Just a thought, if you had/have a manual choke and an AFR gauge you could "THEORETICALLY" use the choke to adjust your lean mixture to a richer mixture and then when you headed back home do the reverse until it was back to normal. Now this is just another, all be it a lazy way and not the "Bestest" way, to get similar results. It's just a Band-Aid fix and not what you would want to do long term.
 

·
Addicted to Junk
85 Bronco, 309ci I6 w/4bbl, np435, 4" lift, 37" Irok NDs, 4.56 w/ Detroit Locker and tru trac
Joined
·
16,371 Posts
Yo @BigBlue 94 Just a thought, if you had/have a manual choke and an AFR gauge you could "THEORETICALLY" use the choke to adjust your lean mixture to a richer mixture and then when you headed back home do the reverse until it was back to normal. Now this is just another, all be it a lazy way and not the "Bestest" way, to get similar results. It's Band-Aid fix and not what you would want to do long term.
Clever thought, but just a band aid to get to where i could change jets. But I have an electric choke...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 84Bronco4x4

·
PROPERTY U.S. GOVERNMENT
Joined
·
244 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Yup. You'll know its there, but no, it wont sound like a NASCAR.

Sounds like you have a slight fuel timing issue with the carb. Maybe not enough fuel at first.

Tuning a carb with your own AFR gauge is so much easier than without. And yeah 17.5:1 isnt good for extended periods of time. The KS/CO border is about 3500' elevation. After that it started getting to that real lean point and i found a place to pull off and swap jets.
Changed my vac advance from manifold back to ported today. I was astonished. Even at the ~1350 RPM at 55, it somehow managed 55 and I wasn’t needing to push the throttle in NEARLY as much as I was at manifold vacuum.

Wonder why?
 

·
Addicted to Junk
85 Bronco, 309ci I6 w/4bbl, np435, 4" lift, 37" Irok NDs, 4.56 w/ Detroit Locker and tru trac
Joined
·
16,371 Posts
Mone is hooked to the carb somewhere. Dunno if its manifold or ported. Not sure i can say what the difference is
 
  • Like
Reactions: 84Bronco4x4
1 - 15 of 15 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