Projects SBF Gurus Input Appreciated

I have a question how long does it normally take for molly faced rings to seat? I am approaching 1k miles and I am still around 125lbs compression plus or minus 5lbs. I found where I had the compression numbers on the block before I tore it down for the rebuild. And the numbers are as follows: 1-165 2-190 3-160 4-145 5-190 6-190 7-155 8-165. I dont want to have to tear it all back apart if I dont have to but I do not believe that everything is as it is supposed to be. It runs and drives nice but just lacks power.
I tried putting one of my holley 600s back on to see how it ran with that and it had a little more low end but it was surging so I went back to the holley 670.

 

I'd say you still have a problem or a number of little things in combo. The 351C2V comes with a 350 CFM carb that's in theory too small & it doesn't have any problem getting down the road.

 

I agree with the rod resizing But I've never heard of line boring the block because of going to studs. The main caps register in the block not off the bolts changing fastners should not effect them.

 

What kind of stone were the bores finished with? Molly rings don't like a rough wall finish.

 

Is everything in the engine the same as before? (cam ,pistons , heads, head gaskets)

 

Putputboom,

Compression loss combined with coolant leaking into your oil indicates head gasket sealing problems.

 

I am not positive what stone was used to finish the cylinder walls. Same crank rods and heads. Pistons went from dished to flat top and cam went from stock to E303. Head gasket is felpro 10111 and the water in the oil stopped after I regasketed the timing cover which leads me to believe that was the problem.

 

Are you using the right firing order for that late cam?

posted via smoke signals made with a Mexican blanket

 

This may explain things,take the time to read it:http://www.iskycams.com/techtips.html The bottom line is with the E303 your cranking compression will be less than the stock cam was.Depending on the oil used for break in the rings may take longer to seat,do not use a synthetic until after 6K.

 

It wouldn't run with the wrong firing order.
Its tough to imagine it being loose enough to only have 115psi,especially with higher compression pistons than stock in there....I'm kinda stumped here.

How many miles do you have on this thing?
I would think the rings would have seated by now...shit.

Scott


Posted using the Full Custom H.A.M.B. App!

 

I am using chevron 10w-30 that I got from Costco currently as from what I have read it is a pretty good oil. It has close to 1k miles on it so far. I took it for a fairly long drive yesterday and am going to do the same thing again tonight. Here are my readings on it again. 1-130 2-130 3-135 4-140 5-150 6-155 7-150 8-145. Plugs 1-4 show some oil on them. Hopefully its just my normal lack of luck and as I drive it more everything seats in as it is supposed to

 

My understanding is that Moly rings should seat relatively immediately (hence the smoother hone) and cast rings take some time. Anybody else chime in on this?

 

That is my thought also. But I think that you are not supposed to put a bunch of oil on them when you install them. Moly that is.

 

I used a light coat of 30w motor oil on pistons rings and cylinder walls as I was assembling it because I had been told to. My machinest mentioned today that you are not supposed to but that it shouldnt hurt anything. There is so much conflicting information with any thing you try and do with these old cars. If need be I will pull the engine out and just start back from square one.

 

Alright I will probably stop posting much on this thread till I make the next big mod to the engine since it is running alright and that is all I need but heres the rest for tonight. I took it on a 100 mile round trip this evening to give it some time to do its thing. I used 4.3 gallons of gas giving me 22.8 mpg which makes me quite happy. After getting back the warm compression reading is as follows. 1-138 2-135 3-135 4-142 5-155 6-155 7-152 8-150. From here I am guessing that the uneven compression reading is because one head may have been milled more than the other or something but each banks readings are close. My next steps in this order will be: CSRP disc brake conversion ($640), AFR 165 aluminum heads ($1600), Pro comp 1.6 roller rockers (180), Hardened push rods ($) Tri Y headers($165) that hopefully dont hit on pitman arm and give better floor pan clearence with 2.5" exhaust ($20) exiting through long glass packs ($60), Rebuild the 8" pumpkin ($), Wide band o2 sensor ($200), and a few other small odds and ends that im not thinking of.

 

I've not heard many good things about pro comp roller rockers. I haven't fired my engine yet but Scorpion has superior customer service if you have a problem.

 

Pro Comp is Chinese & their stuff gets lots of negative comments on other Forums(I E, they make junk).. Alloy heads are something that should have been planned for/done in the original rebuild. If you have 2 identicle heads, one alloy & one iron, the iron one will make more power due to the higher heat conductivity of the alloy. You have to raise the C/R by 1 point to offset this effect. 10:1 on an alloy head gives apx the same power as the iron head with 9:1 Depending on your C/R you may have to find heads with a smaller combustion chamber to offset the heat loss. You might still have a net increase in performance because of other improvements in the aftermarket head design vs OEM if the C/R remains the same or you might not.

 

I'm pretty sure you can get an AFR 165 with a 58cc chamber,which would be right up the OP's alley...if you had them milled down to around 54cc's you'd be right up to the 289 HiPo's nominal 10.5 compression ratio.
The AFRs will definitely make more power than the stockers,even at a low comp ratio.Theyre a really high quality piece that just works reeeallly well.
I might consider going with 185's over 165's though,if there is any possibility that you will be tearing down the bottom end in the future to do a 347ci stroker.

Or maybe that's just the way my twisted little horsepower-starved brain works...lol!

Scott


Posted using the Full Custom H.A.M.B. App!

 

Ok I may go with a little better quality roller rockers and same with the headers. I would think about the 185's over the 165's but from what I understand they require work on the piston for clearance and I am not sure if I would be using that extra air flow. Before I went to a 347 stroker I would simply pick up a 351w seeing as they can be stroked as well and from everything I understand they have a much more sturdy block than the 302. This engine may find its way into one of my shoeboxes if I were swap out for a stroker.

 

When 351s get hard to find stroking a 302 to 347 would make sence, but not now.

 

Stroking a 302 makes tons of sense when you already have a block,intake,headers,distributor,oil pan that fit your motor and you don't wanna re-spend that money on the same parts for the new motor.
Also,fitting a 289/302 into a Falcon is tight....a 351 is shock tower notching territory.

Scott


Posted using the Full Custom H.A.M.B. App!

 

I have Clevelands in my 2 falcons, fit quite nicely.

 

Clevelands in what year falcons George?Cause the 1-5/8" headers on the 302 in my o/t M___tang are touching the shock towers.The last Cleveland I had in the garage was a good 6" wider than any of my 289s or 302s were....
Maybe the 67 and later falcon engine compartment was widened for the FE motor like the Mustang was,but I know the early cars are tight.

Scott


Posted using the Full Custom H.A.M.B. App!

 

A kid in my grade in highschool had a 351 cleavelend in a stock 65 ranchero similar to mine and it fit from what I understand but later he went to a mustang II front suspension removing the shock towers completely.

 

The shock towers just make me wonder what the hell Ford was thinking sometimes....What a pain in the ass.

Scott


Posted using the Full Custom H.A.M.B. App!

 

75 & 78.......

 

I'd go with 66 and up . . . its the same car I believe as the 67s.

I had a 302 in my 66 and the 1 5/8" hedman long tubes weren't even close to hitting the shock towers.

 

Yeah,I wasn't sure if it was the same transition year as the Mustang or not Tyler.
I sure wish Ford would have used the "twisted leaf" torsion suspension from the 65 A/FX cars as a production item,as working on the cars,and installing larger engines would have been a drop-in proposition,instead of the pain in the ass that it is now.

Can you imagine just being able to drop a big FE into an early car,and be able to slide headers in with ease,reach all the plugs between rounds at the track without having to visit the burn unit, and just having the room to move and work that the cars SHOULD have been built with...?
Oh well,when I do the fastback it's gonna have that twisted leaf front suspension,so I won't have to wrestle with the shock towers anymore.

We're straying pretty far off the OP's original topic though....lol

Let us know what you end up doing with the motor,and what turns out to be the problem.

Scott


Posted using the Full Custom H.A.M.B. App!

 

66 and up falcons shared stuff with the Fairlane

 

Ok so no real new updates other than I have been driving it a bunch and it runs quite well. I do have one or two questions relating to my holley carbs. The 670 cfm I am running right now works well from all that I can tell and with a bit of jetting the plugs look dead on. the first problem I have is when I first start it up it is quite difficult to keep running till it warms up. The other problem is under hard braking it will stall out every time and takes a bit to start back up. On my 600 cfm holley which is new like the 670 I can get the engine to start up with it but it surges up to 800 rpm and then eventually dies. Any one care to toss in some thoughts on what is going on with the holleys?
My summer thus far has consisted of tearing down and cleaning up a 46 chevy pickup truck I am hoping to sell quite soon then have the money to do most of the rest of what I would like to do to the engine.
For suspension I am considering several options because the braking capabilities are limited and the steering is terrible. By the time I do both the steering and breaks I am looking at a fair amount of cash so I am considering either the 90s mustang style front conversion similar to what fatman has or a mustang II suspension such as the one from TCI.