View Single Post
  #4  
Old 07-28-2015, 02:21 AM
simplyconnected's Avatar
simplyconnected simplyconnected is offline
Slow Typist
 
Join Date: May 26 2009
Posts: 7,129
simplyconnected is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brushwolf View Post
Dave,

Yes, I have seen a couple FI systems that look interesting, but they are expensive and take away from the simplicity of just running a carb, which is a lot easier to fix and trouble-shoot on the side of the road even, if necessary.I am for sure going to aluminum intake and aluminum heads are not out of the question, though not cheap. Yes, more or less a driver, though maybe leaning restomod with mostly stock appearance, but enhanced mechanicals.

I live out in the country and much of my driving is freeway and longer distances, so not the same as tooling around town to local car shows. If local cruises were the case, I could probably just install 3:30 third member and more or less stock rebuild and call it good enough. But, I like to be able to drive half way across the country, if I have the time.
Thanks for giving more information regarding your situation. Performance parts are expensive, especially for engines that have been out of production for many decades. Consider the number of EFI systems in service. Not many disabled cars are due to EFI reliability or performance. If you drive long distances, fuel economy must be a major concern. Of all the performance parts out there, EFI delivers the most HP, the best economy and it will pay for itself. Carbs must be run rich to prevent preignition.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brushwolf View Post
Since the CM trans will at least need a rebuild too (for reliability sake...), am I better off to put in a C6 from a 69 Galaxie that is sitting in storage? Have read that it is 50 lbs less and better able to deal with a little extra power.. I like having overdrive and have several T85's but want to keep this an automatic trans so the wife can drive it too.
For your needs the difference between a cruise-o-matic and a C6 is, personal preference. The COM will easily handle your HP with little overhead. The C6 will handle more HP but it taxes more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brushwolf View Post
Also hear that another 75 lbs can be dropped with aluminum intake and water pump, although not sure about head weight difference between aluminum and iron. Already have the intake. Ceramic headers from FPA run about $850 they told me. So, it definitely adds up.

Brought the 68 engine to machinist today so they tell me it should be done in about 4 weeks with me doing the assembly. Have assembled several Ford motors before and found all of them easier than early Dodge hemi and Chev 348 that I most recently put together.

Roller cam conversion is not out of the question either, but not sure how that affects torque, since it probably will not see 5000 RPM that often.

I have read quite a few articles that indicate that the cam overlap on some cams bleeds of some of static compression, but not sure how that works out in the real world.

Thanks for your response. Mike
Since you have built Ford engines, you must know they are drastically different and more expensive than Chevy. I've seen Chevy builders give up on an FE. Ford made about fifty different sets of intake and heads so make sure your set is compatible. Camshafts determine the torque curve. Overlap determines the amount of scavenging, again, for more HP but at the cost of fuel economy. - Dave
__________________
My latest project:
CLICK HERE to see my custom hydraulic roller 390 FE build.

"We've got to pause and ask ourselves: How much clean air do we need?"
--Lee Iacocca
Reply With Quote