WHYDTYTT: What Have You Done To Your Truck Today?

[FuzzFace2]

Rusty, my first thought is, are the people that are telling you this, do they have experience with both intakes? Or is it “magazine stand” talk. Folks at your place of employment would make me think twice though.

My other thought is personal preference. I like torque down low, not horsepower up high. I want a truck to pull, not to race. But, I understand what you are saying about pulling the manifold after it’s painted and together.

A long that same line how much time will be spent at or above the 5500 RPM mark?

If you spend most of the time at 2000 RPM and once in a while up to the 5500 RPM to blow the cob webs out then what you have I think will be OK.

What are the valve spring rated for?

The heads may flow more than stock be if the springs are only good to 4000 RPM then why need more intake? Just numbers but you see what I am getting at.

I think you did your home work and came up with a package that all works together.

Now if you have not gotten the intake yet and the RPM down low is the same then MAYBE go for the other if the rest works for you, other wise go with what you got.

my .02

Dave ----

[ArdWrknTrk]

Should be getting my NOS distributor hold down tomorrow in the mail and I just ordered off ebay a NOS Ford timing pointer to save myself the time of disassembly. Can simply just assemble the new engine and remove the accessory brackets and bolt them up to the new engine then move the truck in pull engine drop new in and start hooking everything back up.

Only thing that is bothering me now is I have so many people telling me to toss the Performer 2121 intake I have and get the Performer RPM intake even though its power band is 1,000 rpm higher than what my cam is. They claim the RPM will help 5000 rpm up while the 2121 I have is going to fall on its face at 5,000 even though its listed as idle to 5500 rpm. With all that naysaying it has me starting to question it myself even considering that I have better than stock flowing heads for this build as well as higher than stock lift at 0.520"/0.542". Probably just over thinking it but its gnawing at me right now as I hate to waste the time and the expensive 2K Urethane engine paint only to have to pull the intake off cause it just isnt good enough.

I tried looking at others but none of them have what I need such as a pad to drill and tap for an extra coolant sensor, only the 2121 I saw had this pad which helps strengthen the location for adding a sensor. Then there is the issue with the vacuum ports on the back, some that have them put them in a spot where the factory vacuum tree cant be threaded in as it will hit the throttle cable bracket or it just doesnt have a vacuum port in the first place. I even looked at the Weiand Stealth which I saw many on the ford fourms talk about what a great manifold it is making power idle to 6,800 rpm but yet it still has the same issues as far as coolant and vacuum ports goes. Also not sure if I could still use the 1" phenolic plastic spacer and heat insulator gasket I planned on using.

Sucks when you are on the final stretch and you start questioning some minute details that you probably shouldnt be questioning but at this stage its hard to do when I dont have much to research for my build anymore.

Rusty, I don't think you need the RPM manifold.

As Dave pointed out, how much time do you intend to be above 5,000 rpm?

Is this a street/strip truck?

Are you going to be taking off at 1,500 rpm from every stop sign?

While it's always good to think things through, it's not too good to always be doubting yourself or playing the 'what if' game.

 

[Rusty_S85]

Rusty, my first thought is, are the people that are telling you this, do they have experience with both intakes? Or is it “magazine stand” talk. Folks at your place of employment would make me think twice though.

My other thought is personal preference. I like torque down low, not horsepower up high. I want a truck to pull, not to race. But, I understand what you are saying about pulling the manifold after it’s painted and together.

Its not really people I know, the people I know tell me I dont need the RPM to go with the plain Performer as I dont need a intake that makes power 1,500 - 6,500 or like the stealth idle - 6,800 rpm when my cam is only 1,400 - 5,400 with a 6,000 redline.

The people telling me this are ones in the groups I am on over on reddit and fb about ford engines. One of the ones that is telling me that is Ed Curtis who I never heard of till recently supposedly hes some big shot with ford performance in porting intakes for more flow and proclaims he can make low end torque as well as high end power all with his intake porting. Another one that told me the same thing is Ben Alameda who basically wrote the book building ford performance engines or what ever it was called years ago. I never got a word back from him on my build and what he thinks he said he could help nudge me in the right direction if there is any issues with my combination of parts.

For me thats what I want I want my truck to pull and not lay down. Im concerned that I will be on the highway at 75/80 mph at 2,750 - 3,000 rpm and nail the throttle to pass someone and the engine hits 5,000 rpm and just falls on its face. Thats the problem I have now with my OE smog engine is at highway speeds when I try to pass someone there just is no power. I dont want to hinder my engine in passing if this intake will do that. I looked at the two most recommended intakes the Performer RPM for the 302 and the Weiand Stealth 302, Abbotts SuperFlow Port & Polish website cites the 2121 Performer 289 as having 205 cfm flow per port out of the box, the 7121 RPM 302 has 220 cfm flow per port out of the box and the 8020 Stealth 302 has 220 cfm flow per port out of the box.

Seems like all the so called high rise intakes out of the box are all 220 cfm and the low rise intakes out of the box are 204 cfm. I could use Abbotts and send my 2121 intake and have some stage 2 work done on it to get 265 cfm per port out of it which would match the flow capabilities of my Renegade 165 cc heads which is 251 cfm @ 0.500" lift and 255 cfm @ 0.550" lift and my roller Crane TruckMax cam is 0.520" lift on the intake side and 0.542" lift on the exhaust side.

That is what is kind of bothering me I know the real world results wont be the same as in a controlled test such as flow bench testing and I dont know if Abbotts is using 28" hg like AFR uses or not there is no mention of it for his flow so his flow may not even be on a comparable scale. But it bothers me a little knowing my heads at the intake lift I have is going to be flowing some where around 250 - 255 cfm and the 2121 only has one mention of flow data as being the lowest small block ford flowing intake at 205 cfm per runner. I just feel like the intake may be choking the engine down considering Holley`s Snipers are 800 cfm for the smallest one so my bottle neck is going to be the intake I fear and I dont believe a four hole 1" phenolic plastic spacer will help increase the plenum volume enough to improve the flow much. I know it will or in theory should improve mid range torque which would be good for me seeing as I do quite a bit of highway driving.

I know I am over thinking this cause surely Edelbrock wouldnt sell a intake manifold that is rated with a operating range of idle to 5,500 rpm if its going to fall on its face performance wise after 5,000 rpm. But when trying to research more on it I see so many people claiming the Performer 289 is just an aluminum version of the OE 4V intake and it doesnt even flow as good as an OE 4V cast iron intake. I personally find this hard to believe but all I ever was able to find was one guy stating that Edelbrock redesigned the Performer 2121 some 10 years ago or so which basically means its not a aluminum copy of the OE cast iron 4V intake. But I couldnt verify this as I couldnt find anything on line about redesigns on Edelbrock Intakes.

I also looked at the Weiand Street Warrior which claims its design allows it to make 14 more hp and 13 more torque over edelbrocks 2121 with the average torque increased by 9.5 and hp by 8.5 between 2,200 to 6,000 rpm which was on a 302 test bed with high flow 58cc heads 268/279 duration cam with 0.522" lift and 600 cfm carb. But it is basically the same low rise design as the Edelbrock 2121 with idle - 5500 rpm power band. Only thing is I seen some issues with these Weiand intakes leaking water due to warpage and they want you to torque the outside most bolts considerably less than the inside bolts because they claim there is no support under the intake at those bolts and it creates risk of cracking the intake. No mention of that with Edelbrock intakes probably cause they have a thick flange compared to the super thin flange of the Weiand. The more I look the more I realize that there just isnt anything that will meet my requirements with a improved flow over the 2121 intake. I need a place to put a second temp sensor near the thermostat for my sniper stealth temp sensor I dont want to put it in the back since that will be considerably hotter than the front. Then I need a accessible vacuum port for the OE vacuum tree to screw in for my power brake and firewall mounted vacuum tree for my shift modulator. I could just tee off the back of the throttle body for PCV and brake booster but it just creates more work for me as now I have to add another tee to run off the first tee to get a vaccum line to the tree on the firewall for my shift modulator. The RPM doesnt have a pad to drill and tap for another sensor, could just drill and tap the thick casting anyways but I dont like that without the raised boss that helps to stabilize the aluminum to reduce cracking. The weiand stealth has one already drilled and probably isnt the correct size for my sensor and I prefer to not use bushings.

Rusty, my first thought is, are the people that are telling you this, do they have experience with both intakes? Or is it “magazine stand” talk. Folks at your place of employment would make me think twice though.

My other thought is personal preference. I like torque down low, not horsepower up high. I want a truck to pull, not to race. But, I understand what you are saying about pulling the manifold after it’s painted and together.

A long that same line how much time will be spent at or above the 5500 RPM mark?

If you spend most of the time at 2000 RPM and once in a while up to the 5500 RPM to blow the cob webs out then what you have I think will be OK.

What are the valve spring rated for?

The heads may flow more than stock be if the springs are only good to 4000 RPM then why need more intake? Just numbers but you see what I am getting at.

I think you did your home work and came up with a package that all works together.

Now if you have not gotten the intake yet and the RPM down low is the same then MAYBE go for the other if the rest works for you, other wise go with what you got.

my .02

Dave ----

The crane truckmax cam I have is listed as making power 1,400 - 5,400 rpm with a 6,000 rpm valve float with the valve springs they recommend. So I should not be over 5,500 rpm considering I am going to be having Broader Performance here in Texas build me a C6 to replace my worn out C6 and I plan on having him play with the governor to get a wide open throttle shift point of 5,500 rpm or as close to it as possible. Most of the time the engine will spend its life between 1,500 rpm in the city to 2,500 - 3,000 on the highway depending on speed. (1,500 should be around 40 mph, 2,500 - 3,000 should be 60 to 75/80 mph). I would do flooring the throttle quite a bit at first cause its all new then from there it will be from time to time or when trying to pass on the highway.

Heads are AFR Renegade 165cc cnc machined heads #1399 for non emission legal applications. I got the 6411 3/8" to 7/16" stud upgrade and the 8603 valve spring upgrade. I talked with AFR and they recommended the 3603 upgrade as being the closest match to what Crane recommended for their cam. I then went and asked Crane if this valve spring would be ok for use with their cam and maintaining a 6,000 rpm valve float as designed and they confirmed it should be fine.

Specs on the springs are as follows.

Crane 44308-1 valve springs recommended 375 lbs open @ 0.560" lift.

AFR 3603 upgrade valve springs 385 lbs open @ 0.560 lift.

Lift on the cam is 0.520"/0.542" lift so at full lift the springs wont be at those pressures but the springs should be good to 6,000 rpm.

Flow data on the heads are as follows @ 28" of water on Superflow 600

0.200" : 135cfm/122cfm

0.300" : 200cfm/163cfm

0.400" : 240cfm/192cfm

0.500" : 251cfm/208cfm

0.550" : 255cfm/212cfm

0.600" : 260cfm/215cfm

The lifters I got are the Ford Racing 302H, I found out the plain non H version Ford Racing was selling was nothing more than repackaged OE roller lifters. The 302H are OE roller lifters but with improved valving to make them stable to 6,500 rpm vs the OE rollers which were only good to 6,000 rpm. Basically valve train wise this engine should be fine to 6,000 rpm without damage and the lifters have that 500 extra rpm cushion so even if I do some how hit 6,000 rpm I will float the valves but the lifters wont go crazy and cause extra problems.

The intake I already have, it was one of the first items I picked up since warranty wouldnt matter as much as compared to say a short block that could possibly have too tight a bearing or a improperly installed bearing. Something like that I saved till the end to buy so the warranty can cover repairs/replacements of that. But I dont mind buying another intake, I can always unload this one. I also have a old Edelbrock F4B intake that came off a 302 that had 351W heads thrown on it, its used and I personally wouldnt want to put it on my engine but its supposedly is a old late 60s production intake based heavily off the shelby factory intake. But I plan on selling this intake as I see people paying $300 - $500 for this intake used. So I can unload this and use the money to buy another intake if possible.

Still the basis of my engine build is low and mid range power. Why I picked the cam I did from Crane with a 1,400 - 5,400 rpm power band and a 2,400 - 3,000 rpm cruise range. Its also why I matched the intake with the idle - 5,500 rpm edelbrock performer. But because of naysayers I keep running into I am wondering now if this intake will choke down my AFR cylinder heads. They arent huge heads they are heads intended more for a 302 displacement engine with the larger 180s being more for 302 strokers. Even with that known the AFRs being CNC machined still flow 251 cfm @ 0.500" lift and 255 cfm @ 0.550" lift with my cam having 0.520" lift. So I should in theory be flowing some where around 250 - 255 cfm. Only thing I could find spec wise for intake manifolds shows the 2121 out of the box flows 205 cfm per runner. But the guy that lists that has no mention of if it was done at 28in or not like AFR does for theirs so I can make a proper comparison. Still I just dont know if I want to take a sub $200 intake manifold and ship it off to Abbotts and pay $450 to have the intake worked on to get 265 cfm out of it.

Just one of those things I know my OE smog engine when on the highway running 75 mph @ 2,750 rpm and you nail the throttle to pass the truck just has no power when it shifts down into second gear. I hate to put this much time into designing a nice hard pulling truck engine for daily street use that can also be great for off road use as well only to have the same thing I have now when trying to pass someone on the highway. Why I dont know if the falling on its face at 5,000 rpm is even true or not. Surely Edelbrock wouldnt market a intake manifold stating its power band is idle to 5,500 rpm if its going to just fall on its face at 5,000 rpm.

Rusty, I don't think you need the RPM manifold.

As Dave pointed out, how much time do you intend to be above 5,000 rpm?

Is this a street/strip truck?

Are you going to be taking off at 1,500 rpm from every stop sign?

While it's always good to think things through, it's not too good to always be doubting yourself or playing the 'what if' game.

I didnt think I need the RPM and part of me still thinks I dont. As far as being above 5,000 rpm, I am planning on having Broader Performance build me a C6 with a E4OD planetary gear set, R code big block servo and piston, tow/rv valve body shift kit and going to pay a bit extra for him to recalibrate the governor so when I floor the throttle instead of shifting out at 4,500 rpm I want it to shift out at 5,500 rpm that way I can use the vacuum modulator to properly set part throttle shift points for proper nice but firm shifts vs using the modulator to try and force a 5,500 rpm shift point at full throttle.

Wont be much time spent above 5,000 rpm, but I will from time to time do some stop light racing I guess you could call it nailing the throttle against total strangers that are acting like they want to run to show how fast their vehicle is. The only other time I would be above 5,000 rpm would be when I am on the highway and I nail the throttle to down shift back into 2nd gear to pass someone. So majority of the time will be spent below 5,000 rpm but when the need arises to be above 5,000 rpm but below 6,000 rpm I am concerned I guess you could say about all these naysayers telling me this intake will lay down at 5,000 rpm and hinder my power above 5,000. Thats the biggest issue I have with my OE engine now is on the highway at 75 mph at 2,750 rpm and I nail the throttle to pass someone and the truck just slowly accelerates at wide open throttle and just cant really pass anyone especially if they want to be a tool and step on the throttle themselves. Thats why I plan on having the transmission governor recalibrated to get that extra 1,000 rpm that I would be leaving on the table that is still part of the cams powerband.

Realistically I probably will just end up using the 2121 Performer anyways cause I keep looking but cant find a intake that has the vacuum port on the back side that I can screw the vacuum tree fitting into and not be directly in the way of the throttle cable bracket mounts nor can I find one that has the raised boss center punched already for drilling and tapping for adding another temp sensor. The RPM and even the Street Warrior or Stealth they just dont have the proper raised pads for these ports which help strengthen the area and help prevent cracking. Why I hate when I have to drill and tap a OE manifold or aftermarket replacement aluminum manifold for a sniper temp sensor cause ive seen so many of them split without that extra strength. If I went with another intake I would probably go with the stealth if it wasnt for the warpage and coolant leaks that I see so many people complain about on them. That intake by holley supposedly has a power band of idle to 6,800 rpm which means if its true it should not hinder low or mid range power like the RPM does with its 1,500 - 6,500 band.

1,500 rpm is the speed I always leave a stop, not sure if it will still be that way with the new engine, transmission and axle ratio swap but thats what it is currently with the OE setup when I apply the throttle the OE engine quickly hits 1,500 rpm and I ride it out at 1,500 when driving.

As far as doubting I think the doubt comes from the fact that I have planned everything out and have already bought majority of what I need just a few nitpicking items such as push rods and sending my dist and headers out for some finishing work. So now I got nothing to focus on and it allows me to reflect on what I have already. Why Im trying to keep myself busy in other areas so I dont start second guessing myself on what I have already decided on. Its why I searched for and bought the correct grill emblem before the 1987 redesign for my truck as well as sourcing out more NOS parts such as the dist hold down and still hunting out the alternator pivot bracket so I can modify one by flattening out for the 3G alternator and keep one OE in the off chance this truck is ever restored back to OE stock. Or the coil mount so I dont have to attempt to clean up my rusty old one to refinish it or this hand held spotlight I found under the 15312 number in the parts and illustration guide. But then I finish with my search and see nothing out there today then I am left with reflecting on what I currently have.

Its like the 1" tall phenolic plastic spacer with 4 holes I plan on using this should improve mid range torque but I am contemplating if I want to risk the whistle of the IAC on the Sniper and try a 1" tall phenolic open spacer to try and improve the upper rpm range by increasing the plenum volume a bit more than a 4 hole spacer would.

[Tyler]

Pretty sweet $14 upgrade from the local pull a part! No matter what I do with the image on my phone it won't upload upright. Sorry guys.

 

[Gary Lewis]

Pretty sweet $14 upgrade from the local pull a part! No matter what I do with the image on my phone it won't upload upright. Sorry guys.

Yep, that was a good purchase.

On the pics, you have to use editing software to properly orient them if you don't hold your camera just right. I used Photoshop on them.

[grumpin]

Pretty sweet $14 upgrade from the local pull a part! No matter what I do with the image on my phone it won't upload upright. Sorry guys.

Nice!

Pick a part, pull a part, pick and pull, u pull it, whatever they’re called, aren’t they fun when you find cool stuff you need!

[FuzzFace2]

Pretty sweet $14 upgrade from the local pull a part! No matter what I do with the image on my phone it won't upload upright. Sorry guys.

http://forum.garysgaragemahal.com/file/n97040/PXL_20210516_184142051.jpg

http://forum.garysgaragemahal.com/file/n97040/PXL_20210516_184207160.jpg

That is a nice up grade as the shroud only came with AC trucks, dont know why Ford did it that way?

When I added the AC from my parts truck it did not have a shroud and looking for one (LMC) I needed a number off it, how was that going to happen?

I did a lot of searching and measuring and found the later ones would work by trimming a 1/4" off each side and fit like a glove.

Because it was cheap & got 2 and figured I could make 1 that work work from both but did not need to.

Dave ----

[FuzzFace2]

Yep, that was a good purchase.

On the pics, you have to use editing software to properly orient them if you don't hold your camera just right. I used Photoshop on them.

http://forum.garysgaragemahal.com/file/n97044/Tyler_1.jpg

http://forum.garysgaragemahal.com/file/n97044/Tyler_2.jpg

Gary when doing this from your phone I (we?) dont have that software and I know for me if I did would be a pain to try and use it and post the picture from phone to site.

I cant load pictures to my site any more, they removed software needed to do so, and there is nothing to replace it.

So if I take photo with phone I would need to save it to my computer then post to here.

Oh I also switched from an old IE browser to Chrome.

When I go to my side to look at or get pictures, some of them are turned sideways or blurred and cant make them out

Dave ----

[Gary Lewis]

Yep, that was a good purchase.

On the pics, you have to use editing software to properly orient them if you don't hold your camera just right. I used Photoshop on them.

http://forum.garysgaragemahal.com/file/n97044/Tyler_1.jpg

http://forum.garysgaragemahal.com/file/n97044/Tyler_2.jpg

Gary when doing this from your phone I (we?) dont have that software and I know for me if I did would be a pain to try and use it and post the picture from phone to site.

I cant load pictures to my site any more, they removed software needed to do so, and there is nothing to replace it.

So if I take photo with phone I would need to save it to my computer then post to here.

Oh I also switched from an old IE browser to Chrome.

When I go to my side to look at or get pictures, some of them are turned sideways or blurred and cant make them out

Dave ----

Dave - There are several free photo editing apps that will do it on a phone. I have Photoshop Express on my iPhone, but I know there are others. In fact, I think the native Apple photo viewer will rotate pics.

And, I think each phone has an orientation that puts the pictures right side up. So if you don't want to rotate the pic after taking it then you could learn which way to hold the phone to take pics that will work.

I wish the site had the option to rotate pics, and for a while I was in hopes we could add it. But I'm struggling just to get the site to run on the servers I'm paying for, so don't think fixing pictures is going to happen. Sorry.

[Nothing Special]

Dave - There are several free photo editing apps that will do it on a phone. I have Photoshop Express on my iPhone, but I know there are others. In fact, I think the native Apple photo viewer will rotate pics.

And, I think each phone has an orientation that puts the pictures right side up. So if you don't want to rotate the pic after taking it then you could learn which way to hold the phone to take pics that will work.

I wish the site had the option to rotate pics, and for a while I was in hopes we could add it. But I'm struggling just to get the site to run on the servers I'm paying for, so don't think fixing pictures is going to happen. Sorry.

For what it's worth, picture orientation is an issue on other bulletin boards as well. Post pictures that are right-side up and they'll always be right-side up on a bulletin board. Post pictures that are in other orientations, even if your phone is smart enough to rotate it to look right-side up, many bulletin boards will not be, and will post it in whatever orientation you took it.