Видео

True,. This build started out as a 450 hp goal that kind of morphed into a 500 hp target. Probably would have chosen some different parts if I was shooting for 540,

@@MarksMuscleCarGarage Yeah, I kinda followed the same path. Built a 351W and kept getting gapped by 302s. Went from Edelbrock 60cc chambers to TFS heads with 53cc chambers. Swapped the Edelbrock Rpm manifold for TFS R series manifold. Tossed the 1-5/8 tube headers for 1-7/8". With the same Clay Smith solid cam and rejetted Quick Fuel carb It went from 436hp at 6400 to 544hp at 6900

Pistons are Wiseco part no. PTS501A3. I reused the valves that came with the heads. The heads are 30 years old, so I'm not sure of the valve brand, but I did replace one of them because the valve tip was damaged, and used a Melling V0988 to replace the one valve. It has the same dimensions as the other valves, but the underside of the valve head has a bit different shape.

Yes, the Edelbrock Performer series carbs are very reliable and perform well for street driving. I've run one on my 69 Mustang for years and never had any problems with it.

@@MarksMuscleCarGarage Yeah I have the Edelbrock 1406 on a Jeep with a 304 V8, small cam and fenderwell headers. Not high horsepower but good low/mid torque.

Thanks!

That's a lot, especially if it was NA.

Hard to say. I would probably start with you need a lower rear gear (3.50 or higher ratio).

About $6000

Sounds like the 385 should be a good runner. I bought my heads in '93 I think, ... I ran them for about ten years before I pulled them and then dusted them off for my recent build.

Yes pistons were about .022 below deck on average. I compensated with a thinner head gasket though (.023 " thick), so not too bad. Thanks for watching!

Wow, that's a really good piece you've got there. What do have it in? Nevermind, Maverick I see. That's a lot of motor for a Maverick.

Well, the carb used on the first 3 runs didn't perform as well which might be what you are referring to. For the other carb, if you look at the torque/hp curves at the end of the video, from 3500 to 4000 torque was pretty flat at 400 lb-ft for the single plane and about 425lb-ft for the dual plane not really struggling in my opinion. There might be some low numbers when he engages the dyno around 3500 rpm or so, as it loads the engine down which aren't really representative numbers.

@@MarksMuscleCarGarage Last sbf I built was 331ci that made 460 ft lbs 3800rpm had a much smoother torque curve with HP peaking at 480ish at 6200rpm. 10.5:1 cr, TW out of box 170 heads, etc. Custom cam 229/235, 111 LSA on 109ICL.

@@msk3905 Those are pretty good numbers. I'm sure I could have made more low end torque with less cam duration and less overlap, but the cam does what I wanted it to do which is make peak power around 6500 RPM and pull to 7000 (kind of looks like Coyote power curve). I don't think I'll be missing the lost torque below 4k but we'll see. There is a Richard Holdner 347 vs 351 comparison video where he made 480 ish hp with both motors with a little less cam and better heads than I'm using... so I guess my point is dyno numbers on the internet should all come with a +/- 10% accuracy disclaimer.

@@MarksMuscleCarGarage rpm and vibration (they kind of go hand in hand) kill motors so I guess I don't understand the want for a 7000rpm peak when you can make the same or more with a lower peak? Sorry my engineer brain cannot comprehend things like this but I get it its what you wanted. I built my engine mainly for torque rather than HP but in hindsight probably shouldn't have as 1st gear was useless (in my foxbody), 2nd I was breaking tires loose once I got some rpms but mashing the gas when cruising was a blast especially in 3rd when I had traction!

​@@msk3905 I think I indicated I wanted it to peak at 6500. I built it with a redline of 7000 in mind ... so it peaked at 500 hp at 6500 or maybe 6600 and held 500 hp to 7000,. In hindsight, seeing it carry power the way it does I wished I'd have built the bottom end to rev to 7500. I wouldn't be making more power if torque peaked at a lower rpm... peak torque would be about the same just at a lower rpm. Horsepower being a function of torque x rpm, it would make less hp if torque peaked at a lower rpm. 400 lb-ft torque from 3500 to 6500 is pretty solid regardless of where it peaks. I think Foxbody stock T5 is something like 3.3:1 first gear which is ok for stock 5.0 power but too much for any significant power mods.

All true. I underestimated how it would carry past 7000 rpm. ARP 8740 rod bolts were only rated to 6800 rpm, so I didn't want to push it. ... I should have used ARP 2000 bolts.

Thanks!

Thanks! Agree with the manifold vs ET and mph.

Thanks! That's pretty close. Watch the dyno video if you haven't already.

Have a hard time making 500 hp with iron heads and pump gas on a SBC

About 10.5

Well I did some work on the heads and got them up to 314 cfm on the intake which is about the same as a what stock LS3 heads flow peak, so they do alright. Not sure about the LS1, but probably not as good as LS3 or LS7.

Thanks for the tip! I did not know that

Stock crank. Bored .030 so it is 357 cubic inches

@@MarksMuscleCarGarage that power is great for a 357 I have a 398w was wondering what kind of power I make my guess on mine was around 500hp I don't have after market heads I have GT40 heads iron heads my only set back

@@jerryburks2755 I'm not sure but would guess somewhere between 400 and 450 even with the extra displacement, and depending on the other components (camshaft, intake manifold, compression ratio). The GT-40 heads flow better than other factory small block heads but they are still not great compared to aftermarket heads. Richard Holdner has done some videos with GT40 heads and dyno testing. He probably has a video where he tested a stroked 351 with GT-40 heads.

@@MarksMuscleCarGarage 10.5 compression hydraulic flat tappet 292d 518 lift runs real good for a classic street car

Thanks for watching!

Good question, but I think what you are asking is, Do I think a tighter LSA would make more power? ... A 107 LSA would probably give me another 20 lb-ft or so below 5000 rpm., but I'm pretty happy with it as is and don't feel like swapping cams at this point. Besides a tighter LSA would have less vacuum and worse idle than it already has...would have to idle it up to probably 1500 rpm with a 107 LSA cam and this much overlap.

Yes, time for torque, jet for horsepower. I was thinking 34 or 35 would be the best but my machinist wanted to keep it safe at a 33. I'm sure I could have pushed it if I wanted. Think he didn't want to risk detonation, especially with cast iron head. First time on a dyno for me and I wasn't trying to wring out every bit, it's more street/strip than pure drag race engine, so I'm not really concerned about ET. If I wasn't trying to test two carbs and two manifolds, I would probably have tried to dial it in a little better including running another degree or two of timing.

​@@MarksMuscleCarGaragenice running engine, what size valves in heads,nice head when ported,what do they flow

​@@eddiefe428 Thanks. I made some incremental improvements on the heads and a made few videos on them. Peak flow was 314 cfm intake/207 exhaust. Valves are 2.02/1.60. Exhaust could use some more work, and I could go bigger on intake valves. Future upgrades maybe...

Edelbrock does have annular boosters... Demon just had standard downleg boosters, although the race Demon boosters are changeable so I could have swapped in annular boosters in it if I had them