A
Anonymous
Guest
just wondering, as I'm sure most of us are.
turbocharged66stang
Well-known member
just wandering if the motor is together and running yet and how well it runs?
A
Anonymous
Guest
Sorry guys. I'm still around. I have been really really busy lately - way too busy to work on the website.
The good news is that the engine is together and in the car. I need to work out a few small issues, plumb everything, and see what happens. I hope to find the time next week.
The good news is that the engine is together and in the car. I need to work out a few small issues, plumb everything, and see what happens. I hope to find the time next week.
8)
We need video and sound!
And a dyno pull. Hoper the dyno there is cheaper than the $100 for 3 pulls last time a friend did one here.
We need video and sound!
And a dyno pull. Hoper the dyno there is cheaper than the $100 for 3 pulls last time a friend did one here.
A
Anonymous
Guest
The head is on it's way. I might add that the plan is to test it as it is, only a 3 (maybe 5) angle valve seat and milling.
A
Anonymous
Guest
What size valve seats?
Oversize valves possible?
Thanks
DaveP
Oversize valves possible?
Thanks
DaveP
A
Anonymous
Guest
The idea is to offer the customer several choices of sizes. This one in particular will be sporting 1.75" intake and 1.5" exhaust valves. You can go larger than that (chamber design its different, so valve shrouding problem is not that critical), but there is no need to do it. They are being raced with valves smaller than that, with no power delivery problems whatsoever.
A
Anonymous
Guest
I haven't seen this answered so I'm gonna ask. Is the head gonna be dynoed only on the engine while installed in the car or is the engine itself gonna be dynoed outta the car?
I'd kinda like to see before (stock head) and after (Your Al head) results if possible. I guess that might entail changing to all stock parts like exhaust manifold not headers and all.
-Dan in Atlanta
I'd kinda like to see before (stock head) and after (Your Al head) results if possible. I guess that might entail changing to all stock parts like exhaust manifold not headers and all.
-Dan in Atlanta
I'm not really sure that's necessary Dan. The stock engine is pretty well documented to make roughly 100 net HP at the flywheel and around 75-75 at the rear wheels, depending on drivetrain. That's very consistent with the 18-20 second 1/4 mile times of most Falcons, Mavericks, and Mustangs.
A chassis dyno of just an Argie engine build would give you a pretty fair indication of the performance difference.
A chassis dyno of just an Argie engine build would give you a pretty fair indication of the performance difference.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Good question,
While the engine we will be using its not stock, it's far from wild. The baseline we have is that this head, installed in an otherwise stock SP engine (166 hp SAE), provides a 20% increment in HP, without changing other hardware. While mechanical, the SP cam is pretty mild, with lift numbers under .400".
While the engine we will be using its not stock, it's far from wild. The baseline we have is that this head, installed in an otherwise stock SP engine (166 hp SAE), provides a 20% increment in HP, without changing other hardware. While mechanical, the SP cam is pretty mild, with lift numbers under .400".
A
Anonymous
Guest
I seek enlightenment! (or just and answer to a stupid question)
What is a stock SP engine (166 hp SAE)?
I have not run across that term. What is the engine displacement, model year etc? Am I the only one in the dark?
Thanks,
Doug
What is a stock SP engine (166 hp SAE)?
I have not run across that term. What is the engine displacement, model year etc? Am I the only one in the dark?
Thanks,
Doug
A
Anonymous
Guest
66 Fastback 200":3l01tc7s said:
I think he's refering to the 200 that they are doing there tests on.
A
Anonymous
Guest
The SP engine equipped the argentinian version of the Falcon Sprint. It's basically a taller 200 block, displacing 221 cubic inches. The regular 221 engine (and it's cousin the 188), it's of Australian origin, and was adopted by Ford Argentina for the Falcon, Fairlane and F100 pickups. The SP option included the SP head with removable aluminum intake, mechanical cam, 2 bbl Holley, headers, and some other shorblock mods.
A
Anonymous
Guest
That parts some of the fog. So in reality it is not really the same engine as our domestic 200's etc. and may already have some "upgrades" that our stock engines did not. I assume the taller block allowed for a longer stroke like the domestic 250?
Doug
Doug
I'll duck in.
Two points.
Point one. 166 hp SAE is a gross Hp reading with no hood, no air cleaner, no exhast, and a conservative heat, humidity, and sea level air pressure correction.
Installled, it was about 123 hp SAE net. Generally, you loose 35% when reading via the net on sixes.
If it was rated the way we do today, 123 hp would be it at the flywheel. At the rear wheels, thats over 92 hp or so.
The second point is that a 200, a 221 or a 250 are very much the same engine in terms of camshaft and power delivery characteristics. It's just that the 221 and 250 have 11% and 25% more torque respectivley without doing anthing to the head.
Each engine has a corresponding height differnece in the block.
The 200 is a low deck engine.
The 221 is a meduim deck engine.
The 250 is a tall deck.
Each engine uses the same pistons, and just gets slightly longer rods and a longer stroke with the same bore.
The Heres the best summary.
The Federal 200 gave 125 hp SAE gross, about 91 hp SAE net, 67 RWHP
The Argie 221 SP 2-BBL, 166 HP SAE Gross, about 123 SAE net, 92 RWHP
The Aussie 250 2v, 170 hp SAE Gross, about 126 hp SAE net, 95 rwhp.*
In general terms, just the head alone on a 200 should add more than the close to 40 ponies the Aussie 2V heads gives stock US 200'S.
With any of the modern the cams and carbs and headers they run, an Argie engine will make great horspower. It's nothing for Aussie 202 Holdens to go up to the 160 net hp level with just the single jug carb. With a 2-bbl and a good head, 200 hp net is easily in reach with just a cam,carb and headers.
Guess what? The Argie bits are all there to get another 100 hp net at the flywheel without making the engine any less tractable than the stock
engine.
* Indications are that that was a fudged figure, as the 240 hp Gross 302 was not much quicker than the 170 HP 2V, but I'm not here to argue
Two points.
Point one. 166 hp SAE is a gross Hp reading with no hood, no air cleaner, no exhast, and a conservative heat, humidity, and sea level air pressure correction.
Installled, it was about 123 hp SAE net. Generally, you loose 35% when reading via the net on sixes.
If it was rated the way we do today, 123 hp would be it at the flywheel. At the rear wheels, thats over 92 hp or so.
The second point is that a 200, a 221 or a 250 are very much the same engine in terms of camshaft and power delivery characteristics. It's just that the 221 and 250 have 11% and 25% more torque respectivley without doing anthing to the head.
Each engine has a corresponding height differnece in the block.
The 200 is a low deck engine.
The 221 is a meduim deck engine.
The 250 is a tall deck.
Each engine uses the same pistons, and just gets slightly longer rods and a longer stroke with the same bore.
The Heres the best summary.
The Federal 200 gave 125 hp SAE gross, about 91 hp SAE net, 67 RWHP
The Argie 221 SP 2-BBL, 166 HP SAE Gross, about 123 SAE net, 92 RWHP
The Aussie 250 2v, 170 hp SAE Gross, about 126 hp SAE net, 95 rwhp.*
In general terms, just the head alone on a 200 should add more than the close to 40 ponies the Aussie 2V heads gives stock US 200'S.
With any of the modern the cams and carbs and headers they run, an Argie engine will make great horspower. It's nothing for Aussie 202 Holdens to go up to the 160 net hp level with just the single jug carb. With a 2-bbl and a good head, 200 hp net is easily in reach with just a cam,carb and headers.
Guess what? The Argie bits are all there to get another 100 hp net at the flywheel without making the engine any less tractable than the stock
engine.
* Indications are that that was a fudged figure, as the 240 hp Gross 302 was not much quicker than the 170 HP 2V, but I'm not here to argue
A
Anonymous
Guest
XTaxi,
Excellent info! The only thing I might add is that net SAE HP for the 221 SP was more like 132 hp at the flywheel, but other than that, you're right on. And I forgot, the stock SP engine has several shortcomings from the factory, namely low compression (8:1), a carburetion oriented more to economy rather than power (the original Futura SP, same engine, US Holley, did 0-60 in 9.3 seconds, compared to the 10.8 of the Sprint), and albeit mechanical, the cam it's rather mild, oriented to offer good torque from 1500 rpm (the Falcon was, even the Sprint versión, always a 4 dr. family car around here).
Excellent info! The only thing I might add is that net SAE HP for the 221 SP was more like 132 hp at the flywheel, but other than that, you're right on. And I forgot, the stock SP engine has several shortcomings from the factory, namely low compression (8:1), a carburetion oriented more to economy rather than power (the original Futura SP, same engine, US Holley, did 0-60 in 9.3 seconds, compared to the 10.8 of the Sprint), and albeit mechanical, the cam it's rather mild, oriented to offer good torque from 1500 rpm (the Falcon was, even the Sprint versión, always a 4 dr. family car around here).
