Budget performance engine build ideas? - Ford Mustang Forum
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 46 (permalink) Old 10-02-2011 Thread Starter
Apprentice
Classic Member
 
Dangerous Dan's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Location: Sonora
Posts: 125
 
Budget performance engine build ideas?

Doing the body/paint work on my 66 GT, starting to think about sourcing engine parts..figuring the direction of the build. I am going to convert from my C4 to either a 4 spd toploader or T5. Weekend driver, looking to liven the engine up but not really rev it up, no racing (okay, maybe a stop light or two..) So I'm thinking decent idle, good torque, but noticeably more pull than stock. My initial ideas from limited research...and limited funds (gotta be reasonable after a total restore)
-302 crank/rods
-GT40P heads, mild port
-Edelbrock performer intake (or similar, dual plane)
-Some kind of performance, hydrolic roller performance cam (what do you recommend?)
-somewhere around 10:1 compression
-Headers
.....Just fuzzy ideas to start with...what do you think? Any proven component matches along these lines that work? Thanks in advance!
Dangerous Dan is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 46 (permalink) Old 10-02-2011
GT Member
Classic Member
 
SDMustangRider's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: Imperial Beach, Ca (S.D.)
Posts: 1,768
 
You don't need to upgrade rods but for safety wise like I did, throw in some ARP rod bolts. Think it's less than 30 bucks for a set. I'm sure your upgrading carb as well.

2004 Nissan Titan Crew Cab
1966 Ford Mustang Original 289
Edelbrock RPM Performer Heads; bored .30 over
Weiand Stealth Intake, Holley 600 CFM Carb.
Comp Cam 268H 9.5:1 Speed Pro Pistons
Patriot Tri-Y Headers w/ 2.5" H Pipe, Flowmaster 40S
Air ride system with 4 link CSRP Front Disk Brakes.
Ford 8 3.40 trac-loc rear end
SDMustangRider is offline  
post #3 of 46 (permalink) Old 10-02-2011
GT Member
 
kenash's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Location: Severna Park, MD.
Posts: 1,915
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dangerous Dan View Post
Doing the body/paint work on my 66 GT, starting to think about sourcing engine parts..figuring the direction of the build. I am going to convert from my C4 to either a 4 spd toploader or T5. Weekend driver, looking to liven the engine up but not really rev it up, no racing (okay, maybe a stop light or two..) So I'm thinking decent idle, good torque, but noticeably more pull than stock. My initial ideas from limited research...and limited funds (gotta be reasonable after a total restore)
-302 crank/rods
-GT40P heads, mild port
-Edelbrock performer intake (or similar, dual plane)
-Some kind of performance, hydrolic roller performance cam (what do you recommend?)
-somewhere around 10:1 compression
-Headers
.....Just fuzzy ideas to start with...what do you think? Any proven component matches along these lines that work? Thanks in advance!
Hi,
Just so you know, there are two ways to handle converting to a "roller" which I highly advise due to maintenance. Both of the following, I have personal experience and both, of which, are good.

1. Use spyder assembly with roller lifters stabilized with, what's called, dog-bones and Comp Magnum roller rockers. cost is much less than 2nd alternative

2. Use link-bar roller lifters and same roller rockers. Much more costly!

In both cases, you will need to check your push-rod geometry.
A nice carb your setup would be a 600 Eddy as they are reliable and easy to tune. I have no problems with Hollys, as I have run them both.

If you or anyone else is interested, I have a complete assembly, as noted, in my #1 comments for sale. PM for details. I have since moved on to # 2.
Good Luck!

Ken
Severna Park, MD
1964 1/2 Poppy Red Cvt Resto-Mod
333 cu.in, dual Webers, CI cam, TW heads,TRI-Ys, 3.55 rear, T5z, TCP susp., real leather seating
kenash is offline  
post #4 of 46 (permalink) Old 10-02-2011
Apprentice
 
Fstbk's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Location: Indy
Posts: 116
 
Also, keep in mind that the GT40"P" head requires unique and costly headers and you will not have many choices.
Fstbk is offline  
post #5 of 46 (permalink) Old 10-02-2011
PONY Member
Classic Member
5.0L Member
S197 Member
 
MustangBradley's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: Central
Posts: 971
 
A 5spd impacts the everyday driveability of the car to a large extent. While having more power is nice for those stoplight showdowns, the 5spd makes the driving experience much more pleasurable.

I'd earmark enough in your budget to get a 5spd, but that is just my two cents.

1965 Poppy Red Mustang Convertible: with stock 95 GT 5.0 EFI engine and various other modern upgrades
2014 Mustang GT: unmodified at this point
MustangBradley is offline  
post #6 of 46 (permalink) Old 10-02-2011
GT Member
Classic Member
S197 Member
 
Jonk67's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Location: Smyrna
Posts: 1,997
 
As mentioned it is more $ to go hyd. roller, I figured about 2X+ the cost of staying hyd. flat tappet and adding a $10 bottle of ZDDP additive every oil change (once, maybe twice/yr?). Take a look at the price of hyd. roller conversion cams vs. flat tappet and the lifters required, etc.

What ever heads you use have the intake port matched to the heads, not that much and you let the better heads get the air they are looking for.
Jon

'67 Coupe 289 stroked to 333, AOD, 9" w/3.50:1, PDB, Candyapple red w/red deluxe int., PS, ext. decor group, light group, foxbody seats.
'09 Black Warriors In Pink with glass roof - the wifes Mustang.
"If it ain't broke, I haven't fixed it yet" -Jon
Jonk67 is offline  
post #7 of 46 (permalink) Old 10-02-2011 Thread Starter
Apprentice
Classic Member
 
Dangerous Dan's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Location: Sonora
Posts: 125
 
Just posted a long winded reply and the computer lost it!...

I think I'm settled on the T5..would really up the fun factor

My car hasn't driven since '80, has old school hot rod stuff on it, including old rusty headers...so the GT40P headers are more justified since I have to buy anyway. Guess HiPo manifolds work, but that would probably choke this engine.

Ken- thanks for the roller info. Didn't realize it was so involved. With a budget, lower RPM build, probably not justified? Maybe just roller rockers?
Will definitely do ARP fastners, thanks...sounds well worth it.
For porting the heads, do you match the intake, heads with the gasket? also understand the exhaust, upper chamber is worth touching up?
Thanks for the replies!
Dangerous Dan is offline  
post #8 of 46 (permalink) Old 10-02-2011 Thread Starter
Apprentice
Classic Member
 
Dangerous Dan's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Location: Sonora
Posts: 125
 
Car already has an old school Edlbrock intake, will figure out exact model when I get home, see what you all think. There's also an old Holley....will see on that too. If they are any good, and would combine well, it would save $$. Kind like the idea of old school rodding parts on it..
Dangerous Dan is offline  
post #9 of 46 (permalink) Old 10-02-2011
GT Member
Classic Member
S197 Member
 
Jonk67's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Location: Smyrna
Posts: 1,997
 
Here's a general idea, you might search for a better one:
Port Matching your Intake Manifold by Auto Media

Check to see if the holley will mount to the edelbrock intake, I think edel carbs have a different spread pattern for the 4 mounting studs if i remember correctly which is why most gaskets have 8 holes to mount.

I try to copy my replies before posting if they're long, had too many lost like that.
Jon

'67 Coupe 289 stroked to 333, AOD, 9" w/3.50:1, PDB, Candyapple red w/red deluxe int., PS, ext. decor group, light group, foxbody seats.
'09 Black Warriors In Pink with glass roof - the wifes Mustang.
"If it ain't broke, I haven't fixed it yet" -Jon
Jonk67 is offline  
SHELBY GT 350 Member
Classic Member
 
Lizer's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Location: Kalamazoo
Posts: 6,134
 
I'd go with GT40 heads instead of GT40P so you don't have to fight the spark plug angle and special headers.

Secondly, if you aren't doing any high revving I wouldn't even worry about port matching your heads. Freeing up every bit of flow is important in high revving situations, but for what you're doing there isn't going to be a lot of benefit from a little increased flow. If you're doing it yourself, fine, do it. But if you're paying someone to do it then cross it off your list.

Roller lifters and cam are a good choice because less friction is less engine wear and frees up some ponies, but it also allows you to have a more aggressive cam. But there are some modifications to do like the others above have noted. If you aren't set on keeping your existing motor, get a 302 block from '85 or newer and it will already be set up to take a roller cam and lifters. In 85 Ford went to a roller system in the 302's. The block is the same block as a 289.

Go ahead and slap some roller rockers on there too. One mistake most people make is only getting roller tipped rockers. The purpose of having rollers is to reduce friction and wear, yet most of the friction actually happens at the rocker fulcrum, so to get maximum benefit from roller rockers you should get some that have needle bearing roller fulcrum and roller tips. Scorpion aluminum roller rockers have a good name and the are more affordable than a lot of the aluminum roller rockers out there. Just don't go ProComp.

So you never told us what your budget was. I'll share my build with you just for the sake of having more ideas. I'd guess I have around $4000 in my engine right now, excluding exhaust. At least somewhere in the 3-4k range.

I got a warrantied remanufactured '85 302 long block from hiperformer (S&J engines based out of Spokane, WA.) A long block comes assembled with the heads, but no intake or engine externals.

I drop shipped them an Edelbrock Performer roller cam (uses factory lifters). I had them use GT40 heads in which I requested bronze valve guides, and they do 3 angle valve cuts by default. They mounted Scorpion aluminum roller rockers on the heads (and they explicitly stated they wouldn't mount crap rockers such as ProComp had I requested them).

Then engine shipped (painted, compression checked, and had oil ran through it) with a gasket set and oil pump. I transferred my oil pan from my 289, and installed a Weiand Stealth (high rise, dual plane) aluminum intake topped off with a 600 Holley.

I'll let it exhale through ceramic tri y headers into maybe 2.25" dual pipes or so with a low-restriction muffler.

I had done hours and hours of research to try to put the best build together for what I was wanting to do and I think it came out pretty good. Everybody will have something a little different based on what works for them. Some people prefer Comp Cams, etc. I understand completely doing a budget build and sticking with what you had.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	67 Mustang 143.jpg
Views:	251
Size:	132.1 KB
ID:	140472   Click image for larger version

Name:	67 Mustang 151.jpg
Views:	280
Size:	121.7 KB
ID:	140473   Click image for larger version

Name:	67 Mustang 150.jpg
Views:	152
Size:	129.8 KB
ID:	140474   Click image for larger version

Name:	67 Mustang 148.jpg
Views:	162
Size:	120.2 KB
ID:	140475   Click image for larger version

Name:	67 Mustang 257.jpg
Views:	271
Size:	425.6 KB
ID:	140477  

Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_1878.JPG
Views:	228
Size:	834.9 KB
ID:	140478  
Lizer is offline  
post #11 of 46 (permalink) Old 10-03-2011 Thread Starter
Apprentice
Classic Member
 
Dangerous Dan's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Location: Sonora
Posts: 125
 
Thank you Lizer, great input.
What kind of compression did you get with the GT40? I understand the chambers are pretty large, around 64cc...what kind of pistons are in that long block? Compression issues, and a better design of the combustion chamber is what had me thinking about the "p" head...still trying to narrow that one down, the header issue is a good one..either way it sounds like both gt40 heads are much better than stock. looks like you have a nice build going. I will definitely take the advice on the roller rockers, that makes tremendous sense.
Dangerous Dan is offline  
post #12 of 46 (permalink) Old 10-03-2011 Thread Starter
Apprentice
Classic Member
 
Dangerous Dan's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Location: Sonora
Posts: 125
 
Oh and as far as budget, haven't nailed it down really. I save and buy as I go...only thing that changes is the timeframe. Would like to be reasonable, as my HP requirements aren't huge, it won't see a track, and will be driven only on occasion. Not sure if that helps!

Thanks for the link on porting jonk67, was looking for something like that. Will check it out now....and I will port myself, have all the equipment (can't put a value on my labor anymore!)
Dangerous Dan is offline  
PONY Member
 
David Suesz's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2008
Location: SE PA
Posts: 917
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dangerous Dan View Post
Weekend driver, looking to liven the engine up but not really rev it up, no racing (okay, maybe a stop light or two..) So I'm thinking decent idle, good torque, but noticeably more pull than stock. My initial ideas from limited research...and limited funds
I can save you some cash.

289HP air cleaner
600 cfm carb (Edelbrock or Summit)
Stock distributor re-curved to BOSS 302 spec
C9OZ-6250-C hydraulic "HiPo" cam
Screw-in rocker studs (recommended)
Exhaust port-matching of the heads 289/302 Cylinder Head Port Matching

Everything else stock. Quite a savings.

This formula resulted in a 67 289 that turned 323.5 hp @ 5300 rpm on a locally-built engine, the headwork was done by a hobbyist who'd never worked on heads before. More than 100 hp over it's original stock power, I'd say that provides "noticeably more pull than stock".
David Suesz is offline  
GT Member
Classic Member
 
Pig Muffin's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: Amelia / Cincinnati
Posts: 1,555
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Suesz View Post
I can save you some cash.

289HP air cleaner
600 cfm carb (Edelbrock or Summit)
Stock distributor re-curved to BOSS 302 spec
C9OZ-6250-C hydraulic "HiPo" cam
Screw-in rocker studs (recommended)
Exhaust port-matching of the heads 289/302 Cylinder Head Port Matching

Everything else stock. Quite a savings.

This formula resulted in a 67 289 that turned 323.5 hp @ 5300 rpm on a locally-built engine, the headwork was done by a hobbyist who'd never worked on heads before. More than 100 hp over it's original stock power, I'd say that provides "noticeably more pull than stock".
No offense but

323hp with those minor adjustments seems incredibly large for a 289. That has to be the cheapest 100hp upgrade I have ever seen or heard of.

1968, 302 .030 / Comp Cams Magnum 270h #31-414-3 501 lift @ .050 dur 224/224
Comp Cams Magnum Lifters and Pushrods Comp Cams 1.6 Full Roller Rockers
Edelbrock RPM heads (2.02 / 1.60) / RPM Air Gap
Holley Street Avenger 670 carb
Edelbrock 110gph Fuel Pump
Cloyes Street True Roller Timing Chain / Professional Products Harmonic Balancer
MSD Pro billet Dizzy, 6AL Box, Blaster 2 Coil
Flowtech Long Tube Headers
Pig Muffin is offline  
post #15 of 46 (permalink) Old 10-03-2011 Thread Starter
Apprentice
Classic Member
 
Dangerous Dan's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Location: Sonora
Posts: 125
 
Wow that is amazing David. My heads need rebuilding, so I was thinking the GT40 or "p" with it's superior design won't cost much more.
Sounds like the 600cfm is pretty well respected by all, proper sized.

I was a little surprised to see that kind of HP with a stock, though ported, heads and a hipo cam. Didn't Shelby replace the hipo cam, intake, carb, and headers?

Thanks for the port matching link!
Dangerous Dan is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Mustang Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a VALID email address for yourself, otherwise you will not receive the necessary confirmation email needed to confirm, validate and activate your new AFM member account.

Failure to provide a VALID email address, will result in the cancellation of your new AFM member account registration.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Random Question

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183