Skip to main content

40 replies

In need of carb recommendations

N ngc414Member
I recently purchased a 73 pantera. The car was missing the carb. Here is a list the previous owner gave me of what has been done to the car:
351c 4 bolt main rebuilt bored .060 over 10.5-1 trw pistons. hydraulic lifters, edelbrock roller rockers. isky 270 degree supercam 431270. peak power range 3500-5000rpm.
I was considering the demon 750 carb. Any suggestions or advise would be greatly appreciated.
thank
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

George PGeorge PAdmin.
You didn't mention what intake manifold, if any, is currently available for your Pantera's engine. This makes a difference because the factory manifold was designed for a spread bore Autolite/Motorcraft carburetor known as the 4300D, whereas the aftermarket manifolds will be designed for Holley 4150 style carburetors. It appears the engine is equipped with an aftermarket manifold, because you are considering a Demon carburetor, but I don't want to "assume" anything.

The Autolite/Motorcraft 4300D carburetors were factory calibrated lean for emissions. Recalibrating the carbs for something close to 14.7:1 air-fuel ratio will improve the motors drivability, and increase horsepower by 10 to 25 bhp. But finding someone who can tune the 4300D carburetors in this day and age is difficult to do. A carburetor rated at about 600 cfm is fine for daily transportation purposes, but it will choke the 351C, especially the 4V version, at higher rpm. Ford used a carburetor of that size on the M code version of the 351C 4V specifically for the purpose of limiting the horsepower.

It is easy to warp the 4300D air horn (top casting) and once it is warped the fuel bowl will leak fuel dangerously. The 4300D is also known to cause the engine to stumble during high G-force cornering. For day in and day out driving and even moderate street-type performance it is just fine, but it is not suitable for the high G-forces encountered when cornering on race tires or on banked turns. Properly chosen aftermarket carburetors offer better fuel bowl designs and castings that don’t warp, they have features making them easier to tune, and they offer features such as annular booster venturis that enhance performance. These are some of the reasons people choose to replace the Autolite/Motorcraft 4300D carburetors rather than refurbish and re-use them.

The usual carburetor choices for a 351C 4V range in size from 750cfm to 850cfm. Some guys opt for a smaller 650 cfm carburetor because they believe it will improve low rpm drivability, or because they are influenced by the popular press & internet buzz which caters to the SBC and SBF style engines. My advice is to ignore everything you've read about SBC and SBF engines because a lot of it does not apply to a 351C with 4V cylinder heads.

Here are some carburetor recommendations from Sticky #3 of this forum (the engine forum):

(Note: If the budget is tight the Summit Racing carburetors are the lowest priced carburetors in the list)

Mechanical secondary/annular booster carburetors featuring street calibration and electric chokes

•Demon Carburetors #1282020 - 650 cfm - Speed Demon, mech. secondary, elec. choke kit #421440
•Demon Carburetors #1402020 - 750 cfm - Speed Demon, mech. secondary, elec. choke kit #421440
•Demon Carburetors #1563020 - 850 cfm - Speed Demon, mech. secondary, elec. choke kit #421440
•Holley #0-9379 - 750 cfm - Competition Series, mech. secondary, choke horn equipped
•Holley #0-9380 – 850 cfm - Competition Series, mech. secondary, choke horn equipped
•Quick Fuel Technologies (QFT) #SS-650-AN – 650 cfm – SS Series, mech. secondary, electric choke
•Quick Fuel Technologies (QFT) #SS-750-AN – 750 cfm – SS Series, mech. secondary, electric choke

Vacuum secondary/ annular booster carburetors featuring street calibration and electric chokes

•Demon Carburetors #1282020VE - 650 cfm - Speed Demon, vac. secondary, electric choke
•Demon Carburetors #1402020VE - 750 cfm - Speed Demon, vac. secondary, electric choke
•Demon Carburetors #1563020VE - 850 cfm - Speed Demon, vac. secondary, electric choke
•Summit Racing #M08600VS - 600 cfm – vac. secondary, electric choke
•Summit Racing #M08750VS - 750 cfm – vac. secondary, electric choke

Vacuum secondary/down-leg booster carburetors featuring street calibration and electric chokes

•Quick Fuel Technologies (QFT) #SS-680-VS - 680 cfm – SS Series, vac. secondary, electric choke
•Quick Fuel Technologies (QFT) #SS-735-VS - 735 cfm – SS Series, vac. secondary, electric choke
•Quick Fuel Technologies (QFT) #SS-780-VS - 780 cfm – SS Series, vac. secondary, electric choke

Annular booster venturis atomize fuel better and provide a stronger fuel metering signal at low air velocity. In other words, annular booster venturis benefit the low rpm and mid-rpm performance of a motor in the same manner as the smaller primary throttle bores of a spread bore carburetor. These attributes make annular booster venturis popular for improving the low rpm operation of performance engines, where they have earned a reputation for improving torque, horsepower and throttle response at low engine speeds. However the improvement in fuel atomization distributes fuel more consistently throughout an intake manifold, resulting in more consistent fuel/air ratio from cylinder to cylinder, therefore annular booster venturis actually improve torque and horsepower across a motor's entire power band; and they improve fuel economy too! The only drawbacks of annular booster venturis include their larger physical size (which reduces the airflow capability of a carburetor by a relatively small amount) and their greater cost of manufacture.

-G
W wasatchcatMember
Can't say enough about how pleased I am with Demon Carburetors new Street Demon. I have run many Carbs and know how to tune Holley's, which I run on my classic Fords, but this carb is a new design and they got it right. It will fit both spread bore and standard holley intakes. In my opinion the street dive-ability and linear power delivery is unmatched by the holley and Edelbrock designs. In some ways they took the best of both and added features like triple stacked annular boosters

I have the 750cfm with the plastic bowl on a 393C stroker. I had to tune it for altitude, but that was it. No heat soak or leak issues at all. The "goggle valve" is basically a controlled mechanical secondary and it when it opens the motor pulls like freight train.
noquarternoquarterMember
Hi all
I recommend the Summit carb. It's the Holley improved all over. I have it on my Longchamp and on previous Pantera. Worked perfect right out of the box, only set the idle. Best throttle response carb I've experienced, due to the redesign.

Never had a Demon, but I know there were quality issues once, hope they're history.

BTW, if you need help tuning it, let me know(or buy my bookSmiler)
panteradougpanteradougMember
quote:
Originally posted by "72 GTS:
Hello
Same question for me please, I would need a 4150 style Holley carburetor, to run the 351C engine
Here's the camshaft

http://www.compperformancegrou...egory_Code=F351MFTCM

This is going to be a Fia approved engine 351ci, Holley dominator intake, gts headers, 4 barrels (Holley) carburetor, points distributor,
First step before the webers, who knows ?...
Kind regards
Philippe


Years ago Ford Muscle Parts (John Vermersch was the engineer then and still is head of Ford Racing Parts Division) recommended a Holley 850 cfm "double-pumper". The old number was R-4781.

There testing showed it made 15hp more than any other carb.

I personally ran a Holley r-4779. That is a 750cfm double pumper. It ran best on an Edelbrock Torker.

It was calabrated out of the box, to have a much heavier idle then say, and 1850 would.

Holly's explanation was that was needed because it was anticipated to be used on a car with race size headers and collectors.

They said that the heavier idle was to eliminate leaning out caused by the scavenging effect of the headers.

I can tell you that the idle is heavy and is annoying. It will smart your eyes because of that BUT the car ran like a frightened cat.



The 48 ida Webers in fact have a reputation for being heavy at idle. The 4779 Holley is worse.

The Webers with this cam,

http://www.compcams.com/Compan...s.aspx?csid=861&sb=2

and the Hall 180 headers idle surprisingly clean.

This I am convinced is because of the header scavenging effect. What that simply means is the headers are doing what they are supposed to and the size and length of the tubes and collectors are matched well.



I know you don't need the 850 (4781) but the engine likes very much the mechanical secondaries with the secondary accelerator pump.

To run the Holley double pumpers which work very very well on a track car, you really need to be able to adjust both the idle air bleeds and the main air bleeds to get the air fuel mixture where you want it for a street car.

For a track car though, out of the box, they are fine.

For strictly performance, i.e., get up and go, you will be much happier with a Holley double pumper on a hot Cleveland then any of the vacuum secondary carbs. 750 is about the size that you need.



An 1850, vacuum secondary 600cfm is all any 351 needs ON THE STREET. It is clean and crisp but really will not give you the top end that you want on the track. No where near it.

I aslo tried on both my 427 and 351c, a 69 428 cj carb (735cfm), a 69 Boss 302 carb (780cfm), and a generic 3310 (780 z28 Camaro carb).

The three vacuum carbs were all very flat and clean at idle which is to be expected because they were not calibrated for headers.



You are going to get a lot of different recommendations and with the difficulty of accessing them on a Pantera you want to be close to start with.

With that camshaft Mikael is correct with the 600cfm recommendation. The problem is, and this is from personal experience, it is way to small for a track car.

Neither is a 6700 rpm redline reality on the track. Try 8,000 rpm, and the engine better have been built for that consideration.

At 6700rpm you are going to feel like the track workers look in their electric golf carts.



I would go with the hotter cam (and have) and stay away from the special "Weber cams" for your purpose, when you get to them that is.

In my opinion, those are to make the reversion more acceptable for street use so the guys in their Gucci loafers and heavy gold dog collar necklaces don't get their noses all out of joint needlessly. You do not want them for track cams. For that purpose, they just plain suck.

I saw a before and after with a Boss 351 with 48 ida's. On the track it was easily down 100 hp with the special "Weber cam". You could clearly feel the difference in the car and see the difference on the track from a distance.

The car had no top end get up and go and was just plain flat.

Wave you dyno numbers at me that show the cams work. I don't believe it. I saw the difference for my self. You LOOSE power. A lot of it.



I would say a 4779 Holley, out of the box and just adjust the idle. The 427 likes the 750 also, but is difficult to compare directly since there are too many differences in parameters caused by the cubic inches. There are similarities in some respects but too many differences in others.

With that cam your car will idle around 850 hot, but there isn't enough overlap for a track car. That's a hot street cam that you have.



My personal opinion is that the best overall set up would be a 2x4 Holley carb set up with two 1850 carbs on a 180 degree manifold like Ford ran with the 67-68-69 Trans Am race Mustangs.

That set up just plain works and no need to look further. The Wizard may have stumbled upon that set up purely by accident but it is one of the best kept secrets ever with a street/strip set up.

It certainly ran exceptionally well under race conditions which is fact, not conjecture on a pitifully bad head design.

It would run as if you had a single 600cfm on the street but give you the top end that you need.

I have this on my 347. That is running vintage 302 Windsor heads.

They are race ported but they aren't even a close comparison to my A3 circle track heads.

Unfortunately no one ever made this combination manifold for the Cleveland.



And before anyone chimes in that a single Holley makes more power and is better, all I can say is that is just not true and you have to drive one to understand.

There is a very funny thing that happens with engine dynomometers and air flow benches, they really are lousy on the track. They don't handle for crap either! Big Grin

Of course this is all my opinion based upon my experiences and is not a rehash of what a car magazine has written for the sake of sensationalizing their magazine sales. Wink


I simply am not going to argue with a dyno. All I will say is put the engine in the car and see if it is faster.
Last edited by panteradoug
panteradougpanteradougMember
quote:
Originally posted by "72 GTS:
Doug,
Thanks for your help
any other cam advice ( I 'd preferably stay in a 7000 Max Rpm range)
Any power prediction then ?
Philippe


You build the engine for 8,000 then set a rev limiter at 7000. Big Grin

You are looking at around 490 to 500 with a Holley and around 550 with Webers with iron heads. Another 40 to 50 hp with a good set of high port aluminum heads.

Torque with either heads is right around 500 at 4500 rpm. Comes in a little lower with the Webers. Maybe 4,000 to 4200.

That's good for the ZF. Seems to have a maximum load capacity of around 550ft-lbs under duress.

180 degree headers will give you more hp and torque too. Maybe another 50hp and 25-30 ft-lbs of torque. You tune those with the size of the tube and the lengths of the primaries.

You need 2" tubes to tune it right. 1-3/4 are too small.

So you could get 650 OR MORE...EASY with a few parts changes. Big Grin

That will get you right into the hp range of the current vintage racers. Those cars are fast.

The old rule of thumb for the cleveland is that the lift equates to the hp,i.e., a .600" lift cam will give you 600hp, etc.

Make sure your setup holds you in the seat tightly. This thing is fast. Easy 12 second 1/4 mile car.

Mike Cook took Gary Halls GTS with this set up, changed the ring and pinion to 5.38:1 and put it into the 9 second 1/4 mile times. With a single Holley 750dp.

The thing would pull the front tires off of the pavement.

Very close in nature to a good 427 Cobra.

The Cobras you would see them twisting the chassis when they would pull the wheels.

The Pantera is stiffer believe it or not?

Takes a lot of practice to use this much power.
G 72gts 2Member
Dear Doug

Let's clarify :
the engine is a 351c that was in the car when I bought it, It's almost stock.

I'm building a FIA car, then I can't brake the rules.

It must be (stay) 351ci capacity.
I can play with the cam, and carb.

I have the strip dominator intake, GTS headers, free mufflers.

I must use a 4 barrels carb that's close to the Holley 4777.

I chose first a 2500/6500 rpm cam, but I can think about a 3000/7000+ cam
I have to check the valve train ...
There's no need to run 8000 rpm ! the thing have to last ...

Believe me : none of the Pantera FIA race cars produce more than 500/520 HP in Europe, only the liars with 7liters engines ...
Let's talk about a cam with this setup

Thanks !
panteradougpanteradougMember
500 hp with 4v iron heads with a .030 over is not uncommon.

Here is one with 456hp.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqxFcsurlqg

Here's another with 490hp.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6usEGrNCqMY

I would go with the Compcam I recommended to you.

You need to bush the lifters. Restrict the oil to the lifter gallery, use the small orifice oil passage Johnson solid lifters for the Cleveland,
use the Boss rods and bolts or the equivalent, Avaiad oil pan or equivalent, Holley 650dp carb 4777, Holley Track intake is good, GTS "Euro" headers. Unfortunately those are the best stock headers but you are loosing power through them because the primary pipes are too short and the collectors are wrong.


You need the Boss heads or equivalent with screw in studs, roller rocker arms if permitted, and the heads need to ported just under the valves like shown in the Ford "Off Highway Engine" booklet.


If you need a copy of that I'll email those pages too you.



Use nice stainless aftermarket valves. Under NO CONDITIONS USE THE FORD VALVES. "Morto bene",i.e., you'll be good as dead.

If you need valves, go here.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/FORD-3...&hash=item5af7c1a5ae

These are race quality stainless valves. I use them on all my engines now. Beautiful quality. Ferria buys them and repackages them with their packaging.

His name is Ted Standhope. He sells to a lot of people including Edelbrock, and some of the other head manufacturers. His manganese/bronze valve guides are works of art.



I didn't say you need to run 8,000 rpm, I said you need to build the engine to be able to withstand it.

That means the above oiling restrictions, triple valve springs, fully grooved main bearings.

You should be able with very little effort to bring this engine in at right around 490 to 500hp on the dyno and 495 to 500 ft-lbs of torque at somewhere in the 4500 to 5000 rpm rance.

You also need the Boss balancer or the equivalent. The stock 4v-cj balancer is inadequate for this.

You also want to use the lightest piston and rod combination you can find and re-balance the assembly. 10 to 10.5:1 static compression ratio.

The entire idea of the 351 Cleveland with the 4v heads (iron) was that it was an easy 500hp engine. It was when it was new, and still is now.



You do not need to go crazy with it at all. The biggest single factor is the camshaft. This is almost just a stock rebuild of what you have.

The NASCAR guys were running .750 to .800 lift cams back in the day.

On racing gas with 11.5:1 compression those engines were around 700 hp.

The cam I suggested is .605 lift. 74 degrees overlap. 248 duration at .050. That's a very, very nice track cam. Big mid range and screaming top end. You will love it.

On the street, it is almost like the cam you were proposing to use.



I don't see what the issue is with this formula?

You don't want to use a stroker kit in the engine. The stock bottom end is fine for what you want. Even a steel crank is unnecessary. Those are mostly used to reduce the amount of rebuilds you need to do on the crankshaft.

The harder crank surface reduces the inbedment of the bearings into the surface and therefore reduces the amount of times it needs to be cut. The steel crank also created issues with block failure due to passing along vibration into the block that it should have absorbed. Iron is better.



All this fits into the rules and gives you 500hp, 7,000+ rpm with some safety factor and you can easily run the entire season with the one engine.

I would look into the rules though and see why you cannot run a "vintage Gp4 engine configuration? That engine configuration was allowed to Detomaso in 1971-72 and as such should be allowed to you as well?

That would allow you the 180 headers, Weber carbs and the aluminum bar stock modification to the exhaust ports.

You can get the aluminum "pro-stock" exhaust plates CNC cut from Price Motorsport in Indiana. That will make the exhausts flow like the aluminum high port ones do.



THIS is the Boss/HO balancer. Actually a D2ZX, which is the '72HO. You need this for what you intend to run. See how thick the ring is? I am running one. It smooths out the engine incredibly.

Don't waste your time with the stock 4v-cj balancer. it's junk for this and you will destroy the engine without a heavier balancer.

Occasionally you can find one for around $150. I got mine for $125. They aren't very common. If you can't find one use a new race balancer. I prefer the original Ford version. It was made for this kind of application and the heavier, the better for bottom end longevity.

The D1ZZ is the Boss balancer and will bring a lot more money than the 72 HO. Although functionally the same. Problem is there were not many 72 HO's built, so most of these were over the counter service parts.

This is George's pic. My pics are...somewhere...everything needs to be...somewhere? Big Grin

Attachments

Hide
Images (1)
  • Boss_351_Balancer
Last edited by panteradoug
panteradougpanteradougMember
You can get the cam directly from Compcams or someone like Summit Racing.

Click on the link for the cam I gave you. Look at the top of the page. There is a hyper link to "add to basket".

That's where you can get it directly from.


You can also get it from Summit Racing. Here's the link for it.

http://www.summitracing.com/pa...a-32-239-4/overview/

Do not get the CompCams lifters with it. They are wrong.

You need to get the Johnson solid lifters because they have a restricted oil feed hole in the lifter.

Can't remember the application and part number but you can get them from Summit Racing too.

George...HELP...we need the lifter part number or cross reference. Can you help me out with the part number please? I can't find it.

Thank you (he says sheepishly).
panteradougpanteradougMember
quote:
Originally posted by "72 GTS:
Right,
Is there space enough in the Pantera engine area ?


I don't know. I never ran this set up. I am using Ford A3 heads with 180 degree headers.

The modification raises the header location 1". I would think that it really is an issue with using one of the stock headers with the modification.

It would move them up 1" and out 1". You might encounter difficulty with that?

Personally I think it isn't worth the effort and expense.

As George mentions, durability is going to suffer.


The aluminum bars are held in place with dowels on the bottom and extended head bolts on the top. More likely head studs.

I know that head studs on a Pantera are difficult to use because with the engine in the car and removing the head to service it, the studs make that difficult, if not impossible to do with the engine in the car.


I personally have never known anyone who has used the modification.

It was far more common to use is drag racing in 72 or 73 then Professional level road racing.


You would have to check the rules you were running under to see if it was allowed.


On a 500hp engine , I would take a guess and say it is worth about 25 to 30 hp over a certain rpm where exhaust flow is significant.

Bud Moore was the only one that was building 351c road racing engines that I can think of although probably Jack Roush was too.

I don't know if the NASCAR engines used the modification either.


I've never seen a set of modified heads from a race car being offered for sale. Chances are they would only last for one or two races and then crack.

The aluminum doesn't supply any structural support to the heads where the iron has been machined away and the angle of the cut would encourage a failure through it.


While I am on the subject of racing with the iron 4v heads, there was an issue with valve spring failure in long races like the 500 mile races NASCAR ran.

Eventually it was determined that the springs were overheating and failing.

The fix for this on the IRON heads was to spray oil on the springs to cool them.


The Ford MOTORSPORT high port aluminum heads were cast differently under the valve covers.

They were made to pool about 1-1/2" deep of oil against the valve cover, essentially submerging the springs in oil.


I don't think special iron 4v heads were ever cast like that to fix the problem. The Boss 351 production head configuration, as far as I know was the basis for the race head too?

Whereas the 289/302 Ford Windsor head had a special racing iron head cast for it incorporating changes necessary for racing the production head did not have.

At first that was just called the "heavy duty head", but shortly was changed to the "GT40 head" and had a C6FE casting number.


For a time Ford Motorsports, now called Ford Racing, offered valve covers for the Cleveland with the spray ports and nozzles built into the covers.

I have only seen them advertised once and never seen a used set offered for sale anywhere since.

Probably the NASCAR teams made their own.

I know there was a -3 or -4 exterior port to attach an exterior oil line source to. I can't find any pictures of those anywhere. Perhaps George can help on those?


I can anticipate a lot of people questioning that now but it you look at the ORIGINAL Boss 351 valve covers, inside they had sheet metal drip tabs that directed oil to the top of the rocker arms. The hydraulic cammed Clevelands didn't have that feature.

I think these were on the Boss 302 valve covers also.

To me this is a Ford acknowledgement that there was additional consideration necessary to the upper valve train for solid lifter camshafts?


Getting specific details of the Detomaso Gp4 factory race engines now is a bit difficult and sometimes the details are sketchy.

The press didn't cover those details hardly at all.

You have to presume that the engines were built to the maximization of the rules?
panteradougpanteradougMember
quote:
Originally posted by ttam23:
what hp gains (if any) can i expect from changing out the stock carb and manifold with a Edelbrock 2665 Performer 351-4V and a summit racing 750 carb. all other parts stock on a 1972 pre-L . From what i read on the mustang forums http://www.7173mustangs.com/th...brock-intake-351c-4v it looks like i should just keep the stock intake any thought?


That Edelbrock is not the way to go. The Forums are correct. The stock manifold is better.

The Ford aluminum manifold is the same casting as the iron manifold. It just looses the weight of the iron, AND if you live in a climate where it gets cold and has a real winter, under about 40 degrees it starts to freeze up the carb WHILE you are driving the car.

The iron manifold doesn't have that problem.

You could pick up about 10 hp with a Holley 750 mechanical secondary carb, i.e., a "double pumper". 4779.

Be aware though that out of the box it has a heavy idle. Heavy enough to smart your eyes...and everyone else's too. Wink

You need to go to the level of at least a Boss 351 to be able to use it.

Personally I think on a stock hydraulic cammed 4v/cj all you need is a Holley 1850, 600 cfm carb.

A 750, i.e., a 3310, won't do anything but use more gas.
G 72gts 2Member
quote:
Originally posted by PanteraDoug:
quote:
Originally posted by "72 GTS:
Right,
Is there space enough in the Pantera engine area ?


I don't know. I never ran this set up. I am using Ford A3 heads with 180 degree headers.

The modification raises the header location 1". I would think that it really is an issue with using one of the stock headers with the modification.

It would move them up 1" and out 1". You might encounter difficulty with that?

Personally I think it isn't worth the effort and expense.

As George mentions, durability is going to suffer.


The aluminum bars are held in place with dowels on the bottom and extended head bolts on the top. More likely head studs.

I know that head studs on a Pantera are difficult to use because with the engine in the car and removing the head to service it, the studs make that difficult, if not impossible to do with the engine in the car.


I personally have never known anyone who has used the modification.

It was far more common to use is drag racing in 72 or 73 then Professional level road racing.


You would have to check the rules you were running under to see if it was allowed.


On a 500hp engine , I would take a guess and say it is worth about 25 to 30 hp over a certain rpm where exhaust flow is significant.

Bud Moore was the only one that was building 351c road racing engines that I can think of although probably Jack Roush was too.

I don't know if the NASCAR engines used the modification either.


I've never seen a set of modified heads from a race car being offered for sale. Chances are they would only last for one or two races and then crack.

The aluminum doesn't supply any structural support to the heads where the iron has been machined away and the angle of the cut would encourage a failure through it.


While I am on the subject of racing with the iron 4v heads, there was an issue with valve spring failure in long races like the 500 mile races NASCAR ran.

Eventually it was determined that the springs were overheating and failing.

The fix for this on the IRON heads was to spray oil on the springs to cool them.


The Ford MOTORSPORT high port aluminum heads were cast differently under the valve covers.

They were made to pool about 1-1/2" deep of oil against the valve cover, essentially submerging the springs in oil.


I don't think special iron 4v heads were ever cast like that to fix the problem. The Boss 351 production head configuration, as far as I know was the basis for the race head too?

Whereas the 289/302 Ford Windsor head had a special racing iron head cast for it incorporating changes necessary for racing the production head did not have.

At first that was just called the "heavy duty head", but shortly was changed to the "GT40 head" and had a C6FE casting number.


For a time Ford Motorsports, now called Ford Racing, offered valve covers for the Cleveland with the spray ports and nozzles built into the covers.

I have only seen them advertised once and never seen a used set offered for sale anywhere since.

Probably the NASCAR teams made their own.

I know there was a -3 or -4 exterior port to attach an exterior oil line source to. I can't find any pictures of those anywhere. Perhaps George can help on those?


I can anticipate a lot of people questioning that now but it you look at the ORIGINAL Boss 351 valve covers, inside they had sheet metal drip tabs that directed oil to the top of the rocker arms. The hydraulic cammed Clevelands didn't have that feature.

I think these were on the Boss 302 valve covers also.

To me this is a Ford acknowledgement that there was additional consideration necessary to the upper valve train for solid lifter camshafts?


Getting specific details of the Detomaso Gp4 factory race engines now is a bit difficult and sometimes the details are sketchy.

The press didn't cover those details hardly at all.

You have to presume that the engines were built to the maximization of the rules?


Doug,
these are great infos,I'll try to think about all ...

I don't need to build an exact gr4 engine, but I'll try to get the best with those "simple" parts ... I was told something like 400HP with the 238 compcam, Hope to get a little more with the 239 compcam, It's a matter of fine tuning first, what do you think ? maybe 430 HP with the GTS headers ?
Philippe
panteradougpanteradougMember
[/QUOTE]

Doug,
these are great infos,I'll try to think about all ...

I don't need to build an exact gr4 engine, but I'll try to get the best with those "simple" parts ... I was told something like 400HP with the 238 compcam, Hope to get a little more with the 239 compcam, It's a matter of fine tuning first, what do you think ? maybe 430 HP with the GTS headers ?
Philippe[/QUOTE]

I don't know. Good headers can be worth 100 hp?

You need to look at some of Dan Jones dyno testing with those headers.

As I recall they were not terrible. Dan made a remark that he thought they could be made to work with an adequate collector.

If you look at them, they really don't have one.

It certainly would be the least expensive way to go with the exhaust.

The biggest culprit in horsepower loss in the Pantera are the Ansa mufflers. Somewhere in the 50 to 75 hp range.
bosswrenchbosswrenchMember
[quote]:
Originally posted by ttam23:
what hp gains (if any) can i expect from changing out the stock carb and manifold with a Edelbrock 2665 Performer 351-4V and a summit racing 750 carb. all other parts stock on a 1972 pre-L . From what i read on the mustang forums http://www.7173mustangs.com/th...brock-intake-351c-4v it looks like i should just keep the stock intake any thought?[quote]

Rule of thumb: going from a Holley 600 to a Holley 750 on a 351-C will increase bhp by about 30 and decrease mileage by about 3 mpg. This is without fiddling with jetting or ignition timing- just a straight bolt-on. Various intakes can be a little better or worse but do not markedly change the above rule. And if the Summit 'racing' carb you have in mind is a double-pumper, the mileage drop will be more, since DP carbs are set up rich out of the box; you are expected to re-jet; in the meantime, you will not blow up your engine and cause warranty claims running rich.

I'm reminded of a mid-west Pantera owner that added a Holley Dominator to his stroker-351. He said "The Dominator looks trick and makes lots more noise but goes slower and now I get 8 mpg; want to buy a carb cheap?" A Shelby Mustang owner I know tried autocrossing: the engine had an 850 DP for drag and road-racing. As he went down in carb size, his autocross times improved; today, he still wins his class using a Holley 600.

Professional carb tuners make some 35 major & minor changes inside DP carbs to tune them for a given engine combo, usually on a dyno. With a tuner-DP, you CAN get decent mileage AND extra power. But not out of the box. My Holley tuner- 700 DP gives significantly more power AND 20 mpg in our modified 351-C. A lot of Pantera owners have found this the hard way, so don't dispose of your smaller carb. You likely will want it back some day.
George PGeorge PAdmin.
quote:
Originally posted by PanteraDoug:

... I don't know if the NASCAR engines used the modification either (exhaust port plates) ...

... there was an issue with valve spring failure in long races like the 500 mile races NASCAR ran ...

... Getting specific details of the Detomaso Gp4 factory race engines now is a bit difficult and sometimes the details are sketchy ...



Yes NASCAR Fords used the exhaust port plates until the rules made them illegal.

Valve spring failures were not an oil-cooling issue, folks intentionally limited the amount of oil flowing to the valve train; valve spring failure was mostly due to the choice of springs. Valve springs in the 1970s were mostly of poor quality. The Ford springs were unreliable for racing, as were Crane springs and a bunch of others. In my little part of the world folks used Vasco Jet springs. Traco is another brand of "good" spring that comes to mind. Holman Moody and Reed cams both sold springs which were choice quality stuff, they were probably sourced from Vasco Jet or Traco. It seems there's another brand I'm forgetting (my memory isn't what it used to be). But even the "good" springs from that era are junk by today's standards. Another cause of valve spring failure was the camshaft lobes. Some cam grinders had better lobes than others, lobes that put less stress on the valve train, Reed cams comes to mind as an example.

The earliest Group 4 Pantera engines are not something anyone should copy, they were unreliable; the best thing you can learn from them is what NOT to do. The original engines were supplied by Bud Moore Engineering (BME) in the US. The motors were built in late 1971 or early 1972. Bud Moore was the first US engine builder to be considered a 351 Cleveland expert ... because he had raced Boss 302 Trans Am Mustangs equipped with Cleveland cylinder heads for 3 seasons (1969, 1970 and 1971). The problem was, his experience racing the 351 Cleveland short block at that point in time was nil, his team didn't actually race a 351 Cleveland in NASCAR until the 1972 season! PLUS he had no idea what the race courses in Europe were like. The Group 4 Pantera race engines were unfortunately Bud Moore's guinea pigs!

The Panteras were dominant in their class during the 1972 and 1973 seasons, but the motors were unreliable which often prevented the Pantera race entries from finishing races. When the motors didn't fail the Panteras usually won! The motors BME delivered to DeTomaso were equipped with a single plane Ford intake manifold, Holley 1050 cfm Dominator carburetor, GTS style tri-y headers, titanium valves, 12:1 compression ratio and a wet sump style racing oil pan. These motors came in two states of tune, rated first at 470 bhp and later at 440 bhp. They failed one by one during the 1972 racing season.

Problems were pretty typical of the stuff you expect from a 351C circa 1972, cylinder wall cracking, rod bearing under-lubrication, head gasket failure and valve train component failure (springs and fulcrums). On top of that, at least one engine threw a slug of Mallory metal (that had been used to internally balance the crank) through the oil pan! Bud Moore's engine shop had drilled the holes for the Mallory metal on the edges of the crankshaft counter weights instead of through the sides of the counter weights. Then, instead of welding the Mallory metal in place, the holes in the counter weights were merely peened to hold the slugs of Mallory metal. As Homer would say, "DOH"!

Disillusioned by the experiences with the motors supplied by BME DeTomaso began developing in-house expertise for building 351 Cleveland based racing motors in 1973. In fact DeTomaso's engine shop became the only engine shop in Europe with 351C expertise. This occurred in a period of time in which DeTomaso and Ford had parted ways.

DeTomaso's engine shop upgraded the induction and exhaust systems with individual runner induction employing Weber 48 IDA carburetors and 180 degree, bundle of snakes style headers to improve volumetric efficiency. The power increase was substantial. The compression ratio was lowered to 10.5:1 to avoid cracking cylinder walls, a dry sump lubrication system replaced the factory wet sump system to prevent oil starvation of the connecting rod bearings (I'm not sure about lifter bore bushings) and the cylinder heads were sealed to the block with O-rings to resolve head gasket failure. Crane Cams camshafts and valve train were employed instead of the stuff Bud Moore had installed. The DeTomaso engine shop's motors achieved reliability while producing 475 to 500 bhp at 7000 rpm; that was considered the motor's limit for endurance racing employing the thin wall production cylinder block casting.

Its unfortunate that the Group 4 Panteras were forced to compete with production blocks, because Bud Moore had in his possession a stock of thick wall racing blocks referred to as "366 blocks" or as "Bud Moore's blocks". The NASCAR displacement limit for the small engines was 6 liters in 1972, i.e. 366 cubic inches, hence the name 366 block. They were cast and machined in the US. They had cylinder walls that were so thick there was no gap between adjacent cylinders in the water jacket (i.e. siamesed). The thick cylinder walls allowed Bud Moore and others to bore the cylinders to 4.080" thereby achieving 366 cubic inches. The bulkheads at mains #1 and #5 were thickened on their internal sides, but left "stock appearing" on their external sides; this gave the block the external appearance of a production block. The 3 central bulkheads were thickened on both sides. It is rumored that approximately 200 "good" copies of this block had been cast between 1969 and 1972 (Bud Moore's first season in NASCAR was 1972). These blocks preceded the racing blocks cast in Australia and were available at the time Bud Moore built the racing motors for the Group 4 Panteras.

As the years went by and improved parts were made available the DeTomaso 351C endurance racing motors were equipped with heavy duty NASCAR blocks (the ones cast in Australia), steel crankshafts and Holman and Moody cams and valve train. The motors were capable of operating at higher rpm, they made more horsepower and yet they were developed to such a high state of durability they could undergo an entire season of endurance racing without failure or rebuilding. That is an outstanding accomplishment for any motor.
panteradougpanteradougMember
Best of luck with your endeavor.

As far as rpm limitations on the track, here is a Youtube posted of a vintage 66 GT350 on the track at Daytonna.

The driver is clearly running the car to about 8,000 rpm in spots and isn't really even in the middle of the pack.

It is a 4 speed car, and of course the Pantera a 5 speed, so I don't know how that effects the rpm of the Pantera on the track?

In looking at the gear ratios 5th gear might only be able to be used on the big tracks that have long straightaways, like Daytonna.

It all depends on how hard the car will pull in 5th gear on the track.

On the smaller tracks, you might not even be able to get into 5th. I don't know, you will have to find that out for yourself, but I think you are going to need 8,000 rpm + capabilities to run with the pack with these guys.

The front runners are running the engine into the high 8,000's.

Here's the link to the video. The sound is great and you can hear the engine pretty clearly.

http://saacforum.com/index.php...;topicseen#msg203371


There is a question also as to whether or not you can run this hard for long with the stock production block.

George is absolutely correct in that when the factory Gp4 cars were running, the parts development for racing the 351c was really just starting.

The casting numbers on the aluminum block and heads would indicate they were cast around January of 1968, and they were termed "Indy Project".

Where exactly they were for Detomaso is apparently "unobtainable".

It would appear that Don Nicholson and Gapp& Rousch were "given" those parts by Ford and Detomaso was not in the "preferred" group of recipients for any of those parts.



Warren Toppe was an original "purchaser" of one of the original Gp4 cars and it is that car that you see pictures of in and around Dearborn in 1972.

Warren got the car through his fathers connections since he was an engineer that worked for Ford.

The car originally came supplied with a 4 bolt production block which Warren quickly sent to it's ancestors in broken parts history.

It was Poppa Toppe that was responsible for the "competition" Cleveland block creation and casting through the Ford foundry which became complicated because this was during the exact period when Ford was shipping the specific mill for the Cleveland block to Australia.

BEFORE anyone called the racing Cleveland block the NASCAR or THE AUSTRALIAN BLOCK, it was referred to as the TOPPE BLOCK, even in the official Ford documents.

I was told by a reliable source that on the Ford tag the block came with, the tag was marked Toppe.


All of that was done so much on the fly because of the move to Australia, that it is said that the first Australian blocks still had the D2AE-CA (CA for Canada) on the block and the Ford logo "mint mark" near the oil pressure sender casting. It was Ford of Canada that somehow owned the "technical" rights to the block and it was them who sent the machinery to Australia, not Dearborn technically speaking.

Gee. I thought "Cleveland" was in the US? roll on floor


Randy Gillis has some of the original Ford Engineering log books of the Ford FE and XE parts. Not all of them are racing parts but many are.

He can tell you the original casting dates, the dates of the revisions, and the Engineer who signed off on them.

It is really a job to research the specific changes and "technically correct" statements about these parts and kind of an academic exercise anyway.

He talks a lot about "funding" for each part, or which program paid for the part. It get's very technical and very complicated. Overly complicated often.


He also did mention something the other day about a "metallurgical designation" for adding nickle to the cast iron. I'm trying to remember, but...memory, yea right...I think it was something like "CA"?

That simply meant Ford added 5% more nickle into the metallurgical formula for the cast iron to strengthen it.

It was not something they liked to do because it made the block harder to machine.


I had one of those blocks as my first Cleveland build up in 1974 or 5 and when I went to pick it up from the shop the guy got all pissy and said don't ever come back here again with your "crap".

"That is some sort of special block and I had to resharpen the boring tool several times for each cylinder." That's what the shop said to me.

He then pointed to all of the x's and y's in the lifter valley. He said the other Cleveland blocks he had done did not have those.

He was wrong about those since at least all the D2AE-CA C's have them but who know's on the hardness of the block?

The Australian's claim they cast their blocks with more nickle? Who am I to disagree?

Sounds like I stumbled across one? Came out of a wrecked race Pantera too. I didn't think it was special at all. Wink



Also on the valve springs, it doesn't really matter why the springs were failing now. The fact of the matter is that the metal used in the Cleveland springs was the same as that in other engines being raced.

If they broke in a Cleveland, but not in a Chevy or a Mopar, then I would think from an engineering standpoint, the cause might be elsewhere than the metal alloy? When I find the documentation on the oil bath solution to overheating springs in the Cleveland, I'll post it.

I didn't dream that one up. The only question in my mind is the time periods for this stuff. It really was all bad timing for Detomaso on 351c racing engine development. He was a little early to benefit from the Ford Racing program which the money was going to go into NASCAR priorities here in the 'States rather than into Europe which at that point Ford had little interest in for sports car racing.

NASCAR rules were eliminating the "Shotgun", which was the racing Boss 429 version and limiting the displacements down to slow the pace of the cars down for safety reasons.

As far as suggesting that Bud Moore being incompetent in building race engines, you are joking right? I hardly think that was the case. I personally wouldn't go there.

He has quite a good track record before this in Trans Am with the Boss 302's...among others.

That crank IS CREDITED WITH coming from "Hank the crank", and by that time he knew how to build competition internally balanced crankshafts.

Considering the internal politics of Ford at the time, I'm sure there were probably mitigating circumstances on delivering those "racing engines" to Detomaso?

I don't necessarily disagree with George's interpretation of the circumstances at all. It really is all water under the bridge but I do agree that you don't want to repeat that history with your car and spending extra money on at least a competition block and longevity modifications to the engine is going to reap immediate benefits to your long term racing program.



No one ever said it was going to be cheap to go racing at any level now.

Cobra Automotive gets $30,000 for a 600 hp 8,000rpm 292 engine now. The problem is that if you want to run at least in the MIDDLE of the pack, you need somewhere around 650 and 8,500 rpm capabilities AND...this is the killer...MORE THAN ONE ENGINE!

MANY have asked me why I don't race with those guys. Simple answer. I haven't won even one lottery yet! Some of us still need to hold down a full time job these days? Eeker

Best. Cool
Last edited by panteradoug
rmccallrmccallMember
[QUOTE]Originally posted by PanteraDoug:

That simply meant Ford added 5% more nickle into the metallurgical formula for the cast iron to strengthen it.

It was not something they liked to do because it made the block harder to machine.

I had one of those blocks as my first Cleveland build up in 1974 or 5 and when I went to pick it up from the shop the guy got all pissy and said don't ever come back here again with your "crap".

That is some sort of special block and I had to resharpen the boring tool several times for each cylinder.

He then pointed to all of the x's and y's in the lifter valley.

He was wrong about those since all the C's have them but who know's on the hardness of the block.

The Australian's claim they cast the block with more nickle? Who am I to disagree?

Sounds like I stumbled across one? Came out of a wrecked race Pantera too. Wink

[QUOTE]

That's not entirely true. The block that is in my '71 Pantera (I built it in 2000) has NO Xs or Ys cast into the lifter valley at all. It did NOT come from a Pantera.Years ago I had a close friend who's Father drag raced a Cleveland powered Mustang. He was best friends with his engine builder and he told me that when he bores a Cleveland block with the X's and Y's you can actually hear the difference in tone from when he bores one without the X's and Y's. He attributed it to the higher nickel content in the casting.

Ron
panteradougpanteradougMember
quote:


That's not entirely true. The block that is in my '71 Pantera (I built it in 2000) has NO Xs or Ys cast into the lifter valley at all. It did NOT come from a Pantera.Years ago I had a close friend who's Father drag raced a Cleveland powered Mustang. He was best friends with his engine builder and he told me that when he bores a Cleveland block with the X's and Y's you can actually hear the difference in tone from when he bores one without the X's and Y's. He attributed it to the higher nickel content in the casting.

Ron


Interesting.

I think the difference is in the series of the casting numbers?

I think it is the D2AE-CA blocks that have the X's and y's and the D0AE does not?

I don't know if that block was unique or special at all Ron. I just know that shop won't do any more work for me.

He said that I knew it was special and that I intentionally screwed him on the price? He was the one that quoted me. I didn't twist his arm. He built a lot of Chevy race engines (this is Chevy territory, Ford guys here are rogues). The GM blocks are definitely softer cast iron.

At the time I was just a kid and knew nothing of what he was talking about.

I DO remember one thing. The block came from Carter Gette who at the time was THE guy to buy a 427 SC Cobra from. ($8500).

My parts guy told me about the block and also mentioned that he had a listing for the special racing block in his parts book.

I want to say it was $850 for the racing block and something like $350 for a new CJ 4 bolt block.

I got the entire short block out of the Pantera for $250 AND Carter delivered it to me. Can't beat that? The only thing is Carter wouldn't include or even show me the balancer so I can't say what was on it? I think I asked and he said in a stern voice, no way? Big Grin

As a result, that's where I bought my first new, Ford Service Parts "Boss" balancer. Actually an HO with the D2ZZ casting number in the ring. It was expensive then. List for $125. Cost $75. I think they figure the price on it by the weight and sell it to you by the pound. It's heavy.



Personally I was under the impression that all of the D2AE-CA blocks were higher nickle blocks, and they have the yyyyxxxx and the D0AE block does not The late 427 side oiler service block I believe is a high nickle block too? The cast iron in them definitely looks to be a different color than the 390 blocks?

Might have been a Pantera that Bob Grossman wrecked and Carter bought the "remains" of. It was not going into a Pantera, so I didn't ask for the ZF or do anything with any intelligent insight. Except for the Cobras, at the time, there was no indication that ANY car would ever be desirable as a "collector" car back then?


I actually had just bought a pair of Boss 351 service heads and wanted the 4 bolt Boss bloxk too, but the original part was superseded by the D2AE-CA block.

As it turns out, the original Boss 4 bolt block was just a modified production 2v block, with 4 bolts caps added and was only installed into the original Boss351's on the assembly line. It's my impression it was NEVER serviced separately, but as with all Ford service parts, depends on when and where?


As an aside, my engine builder, well actually my machiner and advisor, Joe LaPine at Danbury Competition, ADVISED that there are two Clevelands to build. The dividing line in his opinion is 7,000 rpm. Under it you don't need the lifter bushings, race block, but once you go over, you need them plus "a whole bunch of other stuff" that he never embellished on.

Still have a set of titanium valves for it sitting in the "valve drawer" along with titanium retainers. Never got the opportunity to use them.



Next time I have a D0AE and D2AE-CA together I'll do the ping test. I'm curious too if I could hear the differences?

I think you just started something though? Everyone is going to run out and ping on a bare block if they have one? roll on floor

Thanks for pointing that out? Smiler
George PGeorge PAdmin.
quote:


Originally posted by PanteraDoug:

... There is a question also as to whether or not you can run this hard for long with the stock production block ...

... It was Poppa Toppe that was responsible for the "competition" Cleveland block creation and casting through the Ford foundry ...

... the first Australian blocks still had the D2AE-CA

... (CA for Canada) ...

... As far as suggesting that Bud Moore being incompetent in building race engines, you are joking right ...



The production 351C was never intended for high rpm racing (8000+ rpm) but that didn't stop people from doing so. When the production engine (excepting the connecting rods) is set-up for racing it will withstand those sort of engine speeds (and higher) for a while before something breaks. The 351C was duty-cycle-tested up to 7000 rpm which was a high rpm duty cycle for an engine intended for mass production circa 1968. Based on my experience, and being conservative, I'd say the production block, crank, connecting rods and cylinder heads are good for many years of racing if engine speed is limited to about 7000 rpm; even the 2 bolt main caps resist "walking" at 7000 rpm! However, I don't recommend spending money to prepare the production connecting rods for racing. There are two caveats regarding the production engine block: the lubrication system and the thin cylinder walls require steps taken to amend their shortcomings. In the end, the durability of a 351C racing motor shall hinge upon the supporting parts that are selected and the time, money and detail invested in preparing it. If you scroll all the way down to part 4 of Sticky #3 I believe I've covered the subject fairly well there.

To clarify, Don Tope was responsible for having the first production run of racing blocks cast in Australia (1974 - 1975). He was not responsible for the earlier racing blocks known as the 366 blocks. Ford rejected a proposal to cast more 366 blocks in 1973. Bud Moore was working with Don & Warren Tope, helping them with their Trans Am Mustang circa 1973 or 1974. He mentioned to Don Tope that his supply of 366 blocks was almost exhausted and wondered if there was anything Don Tope could do to get some more blocks cast. US Ford ceased manufacturing the 351C in mid-1974. So Don Tope approached Australian Ford for help which they gladly provided. The 351C was already being manufactured in Australia, production there had begun in March 1972.

I have been under the assumption that ALL Australian blocks have the American D2AE-CA casting number!

CA does not indicate the blocks were cast in Canada. It simply means revision level "CA".

If that comment about Bud Moore's incompetency was directed at me, I didn't write that, I wrote the Group 4 motors were Bud Moore's guinea pigs. He was on the steep part of the learning curve in regards to building 351C racing motors, in fact the Group 4 Pantera motors may have been his FIRST 351C racing motors! He also had no idea what the tracks in Europe were like.
Last edited by George P
ausfordausfordMember
quote:
Originally posted by PanteraDoug:

That simply meant Ford added 5% more nickle into the metallurgical formula for the cast iron to strengthen it.

It was not something they liked to do because it made the block harder to machine.


I had one of those blocks as my first Cleveland build up in 1974 or 5 and when I went to pick it up from the shop the guy got all pissy and said don't ever come back here again with your "crap".

"That is some sort of special block and I had to resharpen the boring tool several times for each cylinder." That's what the shop said to me.

He then pointed to all of the x's and y's in the lifter valley. He said the other Cleveland blocks he had done did not have those.

He was wrong about those since at least all the D2AE-CA C's have them but who know's on the hardness of the block?

The Australian's claim they cast their blocks with more nickle? Who am I to disagree?




I think the guy that complained about resharpening the boring tools needs to get a life and some tungsten carbide tooling.

All the 351c and 302cs here are the blocks with the x's and y's except for some US imports and even the most crap machine shop can bore them without any big deal.

Sounds like he was using high speed steel and was used to having it easy and boring out soft as butter Chevy blocks.

Telling you not to come back to his shop was probably the best thing he did as i would advise to stay away from any shop that couldn't bore a D2AE-CA. Wink
panteradougpanteradougMember
My point is not to get into a battle of history. The Confederacy lost at Gettsburg. The US forces didn't pursue the retreat. Lee surrendered at Appomattox, Lincoln got assassinated. End of chapter, turn the page.

What I am suggesting is that running any "Vintage" racing isn't this great romantic endeavor it would appear to be on the surface to outsiders.

Very simply put, it is hardass.

These cars are running harder than they ever did when they were new "nickle" racers way back.

No one races in them on a whim and just goes out on the track just cruisin' around. If you do, you are going to get freakin' killed.



The problem with running a Cleveland NOW is that there really is no adequate CLEVELAND block to run UNDER THESE CONDITIONS.

Maybe Buttmore's block will do, if he ever really makes enough of them available, AND THEY ARE ACCEPTABLE AS A SUBSTITUTE within the rules? Even so, NO ONE has tested one under the duress of flat out, all out racing. At least to my knowledge.

Everything else in the engine can pretty much be adaptable to the conditions.

It would be nice if there was an allowable modern substitution for the original iron heads. That you should check the rules on.

500 hp isn't enough to run with these guys.

You are going to need a real 650hp engine with AT LEAST 8,200 rpm capabilities.



I get criticized all the time for repeating what I've been shown, told, taught or observed. I AM NOT going to get involved in a battle of expert witnesses here.

This is supposed to be a friendly casual discussion among friends and others of like minds?

That is my thinking in how I participate here. I don't tell people what they should and should not do or can or can not do.



The Ford 289/302 engine series is more ancient by far than the Cleveland is.

The modern version of that engine currently running in "Vintage racing" is quite capable of running, from what I have observed often to about 8,600 or 8,700 rpm.

That's where the Cleveland is going to need to run, not necessarily to win, but to be reasonably in the hunt.



Many of the current drivers are very, very talented. Certainly well past what personally I can or are willing to do.

These are the considerations one, anyone must make to make it not a total waste of time, effort, money and hope to even make the effort worthwhile.

Just my opinion...offered in a friendly casual discussion over morning coffee. Pass the sugar please?

Best...everyone. Happy Thanksgiving. Big Grin
panteradougpanteradougMember
quote:
Originally posted by Rocky:
quote:
I'm not going to build a monster engine....


But you must!

No amount of your own money is too much for us to spend!

(Said jokingly, in a jocular manner) Wink


Happy Thanksgiving, all! - I am enjoying reading this thread. There is a lot of good information here!

Rocky


I had to look up the meaning of jocular. I thought it meant I need to wear a cup with my athletic supporter? Roll Eyes
Next

Add Reply

Views: 2,382
Post

Membership Required

We're sorry. You must be signed in to continue. Sign In or Register
×
Are you sure you want to remove from your Block List?
×
Loading...
×
When you block a person, they can no longer invite you to a private message or post to your profile wall. Replies and comments they make will be collapsed/hidden by default. Finally, you'll never receive email notifications about content they create or likes they designate for your content.
Note: if you proceed, you will no longer be following .
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×