ReneH Posted August 13 Author Share Posted August 13 But in those 726 miles how much did the oil go down on the dipstick? I think Jim's point is that if the oil level went down more than what went into the catch can then it is going somewhere else and not just through the PCV system. Today I've checked the oil-level...I've lost 600ml oil in total. I haven't checked how much miles I'm driven, but let it be 100 more...so about 850 or so. As it seems, the engine looses more oil than only the amount through the PCV... I've to check it, when I'm back from holidays... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Lewis Posted August 13 Share Posted August 13 Today I've checked the oil-level...I've lost 600ml oil in total. I haven't checked how much miles I'm driven, but let it be 100 more...so about 850 or so. As it seems, the engine looses more oil than only the amount through the PCV... I've to check it, when I'm back from holidays... My math says 600 ml is about .6 quart. In 850 miles that isn't good but it isn't bad. You could put a lot of oil in for the cost of working on the engine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReneH Posted August 13 Author Share Posted August 13 My math says 600 ml is about .6 quart. In 850 miles that isn't good but it isn't bad. You could put a lot of oil in for the cost of working on the engine. Hmm...That calms me down, but I don't like it, if things not working as they should. I will do the test, when I'm back, to see where the oil is vanishing...maybe it's a work, when I'm changing the C6 to the E4OD. If my wallet is able to, I also plan to change the intake mainfold to the HIGH-RAM from Holley and I also thought about changing the heads, if this will bring me more efficiency... When doing this, the truck will stay some weeks and I also can replace the ECU and the rest of the wires for all other electrical components, as I've done this currently only for the engine wiring... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Lewis Posted August 13 Share Posted August 13 Hmm...That calms me down, but I don't like it, if things not working as they should. I will do the test, when I'm back, to see where the oil is vanishing...maybe it's a work, when I'm changing the C6 to the E4OD. If my wallet is able to, I also plan to change the intake mainfold to the HIGH-RAM from Holley and I also thought about changing the heads, if this will bring me more efficiency... When doing this, the truck will stay some weeks and I also can replace the ECU and the rest of the wires for all other electrical components, as I've done this currently only for the engine wiring... I've run plenty of engines that used a quart in 1000 miles. Not ideal, but they didn't suffer from lack of power due to that. So I'd run it. As for the changes you mentioned, I don't know about the intake and what it would do. But you might not want to change to aluminum heads if they don't give you at least a 1-point compression boost. Summit Racing explains it here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReneH Posted August 14 Author Share Posted August 14 I've run plenty of engines that used a quart in 1000 miles. Not ideal, but they didn't suffer from lack of power due to that. So I'd run it. As for the changes you mentioned, I don't know about the intake and what it would do. But you might not want to change to aluminum heads if they don't give you at least a 1-point compression boost. Summit Racing explains it here. OK, thanks for the link, Gary. So it seems, I should stay with my heads. The thing is, that I've read that the original 1986 302 heads are not very "good" whatever this should mean. My heads and my deck were planned, as the block was re-worked for installing the stroker-kit, so they should fit optimal without any tension in between. I'm not 100% satisfied with the exhaust mainfolds, but I'm currently still thinking about to construct and mill me a kind of adapter-plate to get a better fitment or maybe let a friend of mine (a specialist for custom racing mainfolds) construct me new headers When other heads won't bring more efficiency, I don't need them. I my opinion the truck has enough power for its use, but not less:nabble_smiley_happy:. Durability and efficiency are the current aims, therefore I have bought the E4OD. I'm convinced, that one of these intakes will work better for my needs, especially with the new EEC-V and the MAF, cause of the single TB and the better position of the injector ports. Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Type 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArdWrknTrk Posted August 14 Share Posted August 14 OK, thanks for the link, Gary. So it seems, I should stay with my heads. The thing is, that I've read that the original 1986 302 heads are not very "good" whatever this should mean. My heads and my deck were planned, as the block was re-worked for installing the stroker-kit, so they should fit optimal without any tension in between. I'm not 100% satisfied with the exhaust mainfolds, but I'm currently still thinking about to construct and mill me a kind of adapter-plate to get a better fitment or maybe let a friend of mine (a specialist for custom racing mainfolds) construct me new headers When other heads won't bring more efficiency, I don't need them. I my opinion the truck has enough power for its use, but not less:nabble_smiley_happy:. Durability and efficiency are the current aims, therefore I have bought the E4OD. I'm convinced, that one of these intakes will work better for my needs, especially with the new EEC-V and the MAF, cause of the single TB and the better position of the injector ports. Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Type 4 Aluminum heads aren't likely to be more durable. They may better stave off hot spots, but married to an iron block you can't avoid differential heating and electrolysis And as Gary mentioned, unless you're going for compression numbers beyond what iron can safely handle on pump fuel the only advantage I can see is port flow and volume (if you're racing!) If you want more efficient ports and chambers there's always the GT40 & GT40-P heads from a '90's Exploder or Mountaineer. You say the exhaust manifolds don't fit? Are they warped? Maybe it's the Y-pipe that isn't right? Headers are hot and usually come with their own set of problems like spark plug and starter clearance. I ask these questions coming from back when the transition of carbureted performance 5.0's to FI, and 351 swaps were what we had for trackable Mustangs. Windsors are great engines, but you seem to have a lot of problems getting them right over there where there isn't a grass roots knowledge base. (which is fast disappearing through attrition here as well) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReneH Posted August 14 Author Share Posted August 14 Aluminum heads aren't likely to be more durable. They may better stave off hot spots, but married to an iron block you can't avoid differential heating and electrolysis And as Gary mentioned, unless you're going for compression numbers beyond what iron can safely handle on pump fuel the only advantage I can see is port flow and volume (if you're racing!) If you want more efficient ports and chambers there's always the GT40 & GT40-P heads from a '90's Exploder or Mountaineer. You say the exhaust manifolds don't fit? Are they warped? Maybe it's the Y-pipe that isn't right? Headers are hot and usually come with their own set of problems like spark plug and starter clearance. I ask these questions coming from back when the transition of carbureted performance 5.0's to FI, and 351 swaps were what we had for trackable Mustangs. Windsors are great engines, but you seem to have a lot of problems getting them right over there where there isn't a grass roots knowledge base. (which is fast disappearing through attrition here as well) OK, if I think about it, I've heard about this GT40-heads from someone in the past. I will check the availability over here. My stainless steel exhaust mainfolds "fit" so far...I've bought shortys and built own downpipes and the whole rest of the exhaust. All made from stainless steel. The mainfolds itself have had the problems that I've heard about also from products of well-known brands regarding the fitting. I've adopted them to the heads and the bolts. Everything is very tight there, as you know... As the ports in the heads are rectangular and pipes are round, there is not much space for the bolts. My plan is to build an adapter or at minimum a space plate, that solves this problem with longer rectangular pipes and then a floating transformation to adapt round pipes. As the plan is to mill this adapter by CNC machine, it will be much better, than the common 0.3" stainless-steel sheet on which the pipes are welded on. When I have time, I'll construct the adapter in solidworks and start a threat here to present my 3D-model of the adapter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArdWrknTrk Posted August 14 Share Posted August 14 OK, if I think about it, I've heard about this GT40-heads from someone in the past. I will check the availability over here. My stainless steel exhaust mainfolds "fit" so far...I've bought shortys and built own downpipes and the whole rest of the exhaust. All made from stainless steel. The mainfolds itself have had the problems that I've heard about also from products of well-known brands regarding the fitting. I've adopted them to the heads and the bolts. Everything is very tight there, as you know... As the ports in the heads are rectangular and pipes are round, there is not much space for the bolts. My plan is to build an adapter or at minimum a space plate, that solves this problem with longer rectangular pipes and then a floating transformation to adapt round pipes. As the plan is to mill this adapter by CNC machine, it will be much better, than the common 0.3" stainless-steel sheet on which the pipes are welded on. When I have time, I'll construct the adapter in solidworks and start a threat here to present my 3D-model of the adapter. That kind of port mismatch is rather unfortunate. Tubular headers I've seen have mandrel expanded ends where they meet the head, and at least a good approximation of the rectangular profile. Be aware, if you decide to go with GT or GT-P heads that the intake and exhaust sides are different than what you have now, so you might want to model from gaskets that fit those heads and make sure you leave spark plug clearance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Lewis Posted August 14 Share Posted August 14 That kind of port mismatch is rather unfortunate. Tubular headers I've seen have mandrel expanded ends where they meet the head, and at least a good approximation of the rectangular profile. Be aware, if you decide to go with GT or GT-P heads that the intake and exhaust sides are different than what you have now, so you might want to model from gaskets that fit those heads and make sure you leave spark plug clearance. Wow, you guys made a lot of progress while I was sleeping. Good progress! I think the GT or GT-P heads are a good way to go. But there are differences, and you might want to read about those differences. This article might help, but there are plenty of others out there as well. One of the things to consider is the difference in combustion chamber size. I don't know what heads you have but the GT-P heads have a bit smaller combustion chamber and will probably raise your compression ratio a bit. That might require you to run the higher octane gas you were talking about earlier. And there's the spark plug position that tends to be a problem with headers. Just things to think about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mat in tn Posted August 14 Share Posted August 14 OK, if I think about it, I've heard about this GT40-heads from someone in the past. I will check the availability over here. My stainless steel exhaust mainfolds "fit" so far...I've bought shortys and built own downpipes and the whole rest of the exhaust. All made from stainless steel. The mainfolds itself have had the problems that I've heard about also from products of well-known brands regarding the fitting. I've adopted them to the heads and the bolts. Everything is very tight there, as you know... As the ports in the heads are rectangular and pipes are round, there is not much space for the bolts. My plan is to build an adapter or at minimum a space plate, that solves this problem with longer rectangular pipes and then a floating transformation to adapt round pipes. As the plan is to mill this adapter by CNC machine, it will be much better, than the common 0.3" stainless-steel sheet on which the pipes are welded on. When I have time, I'll construct the adapter in solidworks and start a threat here to present my 3D-model of the adapter. just reading up on the last couple weeks of this thread. it seems that you are getting good use out of this vehicle now. that is great. as to the oil consumption, that might just settle down. as Gary said, it's not really a major concern. I know it's not perfect but it's not far from normal fifty years ago. and this engine was basically designed in 1962. I guess we each must decide what an acceptable loss is over a span of miles. just don't run out! or low as it is a cooling mechanism. do I understand that you rebuilt and used the original 1985/6 cylinder heads on a 347 stroker? if so, I'm not sure that you are going to benefit enough in mpg or usable power to do any change unless you buy "good" heads. and that can easily be 1-2k dollars here. how you drive is the biggest point. you are planning a swap from the c6 to an e4od and this is going to change a lot. possibly more than you expect. how well your engine carries a load is going to get tested as while rpm will be lower it will need more torque per the same vehicle speed. this may work for you or against you depending on how you drive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts