You ran these combos through your computer awhile back. Made some changes so would you mind running these again? I don't know if you keep old info so some stuff is the same.
4.31 bore 4.25 stroke
13.5 to 1 compression
KC stage 3 heads
Cam timing at .05 int opens 26* BTDC closes 70* ABCC
exh opens 76* BBDC closes 32* ATDC
.824 intake lift .796 exh lift
112* LSA installed at 112* centerline
Victor intake with 1150 dommy
2.125 headers - how much improvement would 2.25 headers be?
Just for fun what would be your computed ET with this motor in a 66 Fairlane with 5500 stall, C4, 4.30 gears (might try 4.71), 29 inch tire at sea level?
Next is a similar milder combo:
4.25 bore and 4.25 stroke
11.25 to 1 compression
KC heads with stage 2 intake ports and stage 3 exhaust
About 10hp more with 2.25" pipes, which is only about 1%.
I assumed a Fairlane curb of 3200 and a chassis that hooks, cold air to the carb, and of course open headers.
1.28
9.76 at 135.0
With the 4.71 rear
1.26
9.72 at 136.3
Combo 2, much more sensible at only:
Torq 586 at 5100
Powr 700 at 6800
Same 3200 and setup for the Mustang
1.38
10.31 at 128.1
With the 4.40:
1.35
10.24 at 130.0
When I first wrote the WerbyFord Gonkulator, back in the days when most new cars ran a carburetor, I was thinking of cars that ran 1/8-mile in the 9s, not 1/4-mile in the 9s!!! It's a lot harder to do the latter - even on the computer - the car and engine are both right on the edge, so far from stock I think it is harder to predict them.
Wow good luck they both sound like fun cars.
Will you be able to post back some dyno and timeslips?
Will post the timeslips when we get the cars to the track. Just need to get the right pushrods for the smaller motor in the Mustang and decide if the Victor or POS goes on first. Just got the heads and exhaust bolted on today.
The bigger motor for the Fairlane will take a bit longer but the shortblock is together. Need to play with the Victor a bit more.
Would be a pleasant surprise if the cars can run anywhere near those times. It would have been nice if the local track wasn't closed.
Oops I just block copied the cam durations so they were wrong for the Mustang. Here it is fixed:
Torq 595 at 4700
Powr 670 at 6400
1.37
10.35 at 127.4
With the 4.30:
1.34
10.28 at 129.1
Just for kicks, I computed the exact same engine & trans and 3.91 gear, but in an otherwise bone stock 69 shaker Mustang, shaker, 2-1/4 exhaust and antique mufflers, lousy tires, 3600+ lb curb, belts, etc.
2.18
13.29 at 105.7
Yup, that's the same engine /trans/converter/shifts as the 10.35 run. Right engine, wrong setup. I was surprised it slowed down as much as it did.
That seems like an awful performance reduction for the stock application. In the late 1980`s , I had been running my Fairmont with a nitrous assisted 390 FE. After 1 too many mid-low 10 second passes, the 105 block tore out all the main bearing webbing, and broke the crank in 5 pieces. Over the winter, I had the car painted, and was scheduled to enter the car in the local "World of Wheels" car show in Vancouver, in March. However, the 428 I was building for the car was taking longer than planned, so with the show date looming, I took the good running 428CJ and C6 out of my partially dis assembled 69 R code Mach 1, and installed it in the Fairmont, using the existing headers and mounts, and another modified 4x4 oil pan. Since I wanted to be able to drive the car into the show building under it`s own power, I made the car runable. Now, this 428CJ was the VIN numbers matching unit, as was the stock C6. I had rebuilt the engine a few years earlier, .030" over stock replacment cast pistons, a Comp Cams 268H cam, and a F427 intake under the stock 735 Holley were the only changes. The C6 had also been rebuilt, all stock, including the stock torque convertor. After the car show (won 1rst place in "Race Car"!), I though since the car was all together, it would be interesting to take it to Seattle International Raceway, just to see what it would run (Mission Raceway would not open until 1992, so Seattle was my closest track, 3 1/2 hours away). I had raced the 69 with this engine and trans a couple of years earlier, with the stock CJ exhaust manifolds, running thru a crappy 2 1/4" badly crimped cheapo full length exhaust system, on 235 60R14 radials, with 3.70 gears, shifting at 5400 rpm, the best the Mustang had gone was a 13.39@102 mph, weighing 3600 lbs with me in it. (I was a "tad" more svelte in those days!)Since the Fairmont was only 3200 lbs, had ladder bars,open headers and slicks, the Fairmont would obviously be quicker, but how much? A bunch of us took a guess, the slowest prediction was in the low 13`s, I figured mid 12`s. Since the Fairmont firewall would not allow the Mustangs kick down rod to fit, I simply wire tied the kickdown lever wide open, and shifted at the same 5400 rpm as the Mustang. I made 4 passes, the best was a 11.82@108 mph, which was consideably quicker than anybody expected, and listening to the cars open headers with the 268H cam and stock torque convertor was almost embarrassing, idling smoothly at 650 rpm in Drive! Anyhow, to make a (very) long story short (sorry!), the heavier, and less prepared Mustang was much slower than the Fairmont, but still not as drastic as the "Gonk" shows for afrets car. Granted his engine is much healthier than my almost stock 428 was, but I still don`t see a more than 20 mph differance.
428 powered Fairmont drag car, Best ET:10.03@132.11MPH, best 60 ft: 1.29
59 Meteor 2 dr. sedan 332, Ford O Matic
74 F350 ramp truck 390 4speed
Rory thanks for the Fairmont vs Mustang comparison
October 19 2008, 7:43 PM
That is very valuable data, same engine / different chassis.
I ran the "Gonk" on your 428cj+open-headers in the Fairmont chassis, and assuming a water pump and fan hooked up I got
11.95 at 109.3
vs the Fairmont of yours from a year or two ago at
10.09 at 130.1
with the hotter 428 in front of the jerico.
The Gonk is not right on, but pretty close in this comparison although admittedly it's not quite a prediction since I read your times already.
What it tells me is that:
* If you move a mild engine/trans from a mild chassis to a race chassis, the increase will be a lot but not "incredible".
* If you move a race engine/trans from a race chassis to a stock chassis, the decrease will be massively disappointing instead of just mildly disappointing.
I think either way though, we gave afret a good idea that with those two scary engines he wants to build, how they run will depend very much on the chassis/car setup.
Wow, 3.5 hours to the strip, and I thought our 2 hours was a long drive! Of course, I used to think Milan was a long drive and it was only 1 hour.
Re: Rory thanks for the Fairmont vs Mustang comparison
October 19 2008, 11:34 PM
Werby, removing the race engine from a race chassis, and installing it in a stock chassis may well be disappointing, but I think frustrating might be a better word!! I see a lot of blown and or nitrous FOX Mustangs putting out some ungodly power thru 8 1/2 x26 slicks or drag radials. Ocassionaly they can hook it up, but more often than not,they have to lift in order to stay off the guardrail, or in their own lane. Not my idea of a satisfying day at the drags.
428 powered Fairmont drag car, Best ET:10.03@132.11MPH, best 60 ft: 1.29
59 Meteor 2 dr. sedan 332, Ford O Matic
74 F350 ramp truck 390 4speed
Hey I was there and can vouch for the truly awful sound of a 268H with open headers.
There is a local guy who took the 350 orange thing from his other leading brand ChevyII and put it in a front engine dragster. No other changes and he even ran the ChevyII headers and air cleaner at first. It went from mid 11's to running high 8's with about a 1300 lb weight difference.
