Here is the information from the bad Photobucket pictures.Chris430 wrote: ↑Sun 20. Mar 2016, 16:47Interesting article with car photos and engine specifications. I have a 332 from a 58 Ranch Wagon with machined chambers in the second link. I have sense learned from the FE forum the shim gaskets are 4cc bore volume.
http://www.network54.com/Forum/74182/th ... iew+Thread
http://www.network54.com/Forum/74182/thread/1450741454
'58 Edsel's 361 (303 HP) Factory Claim Vs. Real Dyno Results
-
- Technical Sergeant
- Posts: 206
- Joined: Tue 20. Oct 2015, 13:23
- Gender: male
- Location: Waco, Texas
Re: 1958 Ford Police 361
-
- Technical Sergeant
- Posts: 206
- Joined: Tue 20. Oct 2015, 13:23
- Gender: male
- Location: Waco, Texas
Re: 1958 Ford Police 361
Straight cut 58 332 head and the 59 Thunderbird head with the unshrouded exhaust valve. I have seen three different 58 Thunderbird 352's with this combustion chamber shape. My 2v 332 and Thunderbird 352 were both 74.5 cc's.Chris430 wrote: ↑Sun 20. Mar 2016, 16:47Interesting article with car photos and engine specifications. I have a 332 from a 58 Ranch Wagon with machined chambers in the second link. I have sense learned from the FE forum the shim gaskets are 4cc bore volume.
http://www.network54.com/Forum/74182/th ... iew+Thread
http://www.network54.com/Forum/74182/thread/1450741454
Five 1958 332 2 barrel photos:
Three 1958 Thunderbird 352 photos:
-
- Airman basic
- Posts: 15
- Joined: Sat 27. Dec 2008, 20:21
- Gender: male
- Music instruments you're playing: Clarinet and Sax but not lately
- Location: Northern California
Re: '58 Edsel's 361 (303 HP) Factory Claim Vs. Real Dyno Results
Interesting pics and spec sheet on the 361/303 in 58 Fairlane etc, even if police only.
On the Aug-Sep 1958 Hot Rod dyno session we should remember the following:
* The starting dyno test gets only 210hp vs 303hp as rated, and they kinda rag on the rating after that.
* That dyno test was pretty much a NET horsepower test ie like the "220 net hp" rating you'd see on a 1973 Ford 460, or "266 net hp" on a 1973 351CJ.
* That said, this was a tight, poorly tuned engine. Test #5 at 226hp is more like a stock, well tuned 361/303, but again more like 226 NET hp.
* The Gonkulator says a nominal bone stock 361/303 would make about 270 GROSS hp. Still shy compared to the 303 gross rating, which I think came from the original intended FE with its solid almost-390-police cam.
* The Gonkulator says this particular 361/303 was only making 256 gross hp (or 212 net hp) out of the crate so yes they started with a tired example.
* The bright side though is that when the series finished in Sep 58 with Dyno #30, they dyno the 414cid stroker at 342 hp but that's 342 NET hp, and about 402 GROSS hp per the Gonkulator. Those numbers are better than a 428cj.
* So it's a good article and a good engine, if properly interpreted!
On the Aug-Sep 1958 Hot Rod dyno session we should remember the following:
* The starting dyno test gets only 210hp vs 303hp as rated, and they kinda rag on the rating after that.
* That dyno test was pretty much a NET horsepower test ie like the "220 net hp" rating you'd see on a 1973 Ford 460, or "266 net hp" on a 1973 351CJ.
* That said, this was a tight, poorly tuned engine. Test #5 at 226hp is more like a stock, well tuned 361/303, but again more like 226 NET hp.
* The Gonkulator says a nominal bone stock 361/303 would make about 270 GROSS hp. Still shy compared to the 303 gross rating, which I think came from the original intended FE with its solid almost-390-police cam.
* The Gonkulator says this particular 361/303 was only making 256 gross hp (or 212 net hp) out of the crate so yes they started with a tired example.
* The bright side though is that when the series finished in Sep 58 with Dyno #30, they dyno the 414cid stroker at 342 hp but that's 342 NET hp, and about 402 GROSS hp per the Gonkulator. Those numbers are better than a 428cj.
* So it's a good article and a good engine, if properly interpreted!
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests