FORD 94 CARBS

[chad]

Nowa that'sa nicea!
(esp 1st 2 pic)

Reminds me of the abarth fiats we had in the late 60s. A 6 cyl was a big engine in those light bodies. More like alota the rice burners they chip today (look at those movies I just saw on the lap top last nite - Fast & Furious).

 

[BCOWANWHEELS]

yes there nice but not relevant to 94 carbs at all.

 

[chad]

Si`, scsusa Ron.
Mea culpa.
Got excited there, sorry to jack yer thread.

 

[BCOWANWHEELS]

guys were not building every last hp engines , this is just a hobby. yes theres fellas who have a real big budjet and then theres the rest of us. I don't condem the big buck guys as they've earned the right to go big. I,ve been there in my young days now in my old age I just want a good middle of the road 250 within moderate $ limits. just going 250 alone is a far cry from my 144 in my old comet. wonder if the 2 speed ford-o-matic can handle the mild 250 ? anybody with experience on these trans ? I,am just gonna drive it not race or do burnouts .
bob

 

[bubba22349]

X2 yep I agree with you when you have to stick to a reasonable budget you will need to use what you have and make every dollar work hard. But that old Ford-O-Matic from your 144 isn't going to work unless you are going to use it behind another 144, a 170, or one of the early 200 sixes (1964 to 66) that can use the small bell housing pattern. It's just not going to bolt up to any of the 250 blocks besides the torque of even a stock 250 would likely smoke that old 2 speed in short order. The good thing though is that there are still lots of the better 3 speed C4's for cheap, look for one from the mid 1965 up SBF V8's (from a 289, 302, & 250 sixes) though any 6 bolt bell C4 fits my personal preference is to use a 1972 and up C4 they had all of the best in factory improvements, you could also use one of the old cast iron Cruse-O-Matic's, or the later FMX'es. Good luck on your build

 

[BCOWANWHEELS]

thanks I didn't know they wouldn't bolt up. I,ll just hunt up a c4 and put the stock engine and trans in storage in case I ever sell the car a person would be able to put the car back original.
bob

 

[chad]

"...SBF V8's (from a 289, 302, & 250 sixes)…"
300, 351 as well.
Most folks here wisely go New World T5 frm a bent8. not sure what yrs.
That is a transmission from this times for these needs. I seek the NV3550 but mine's a 4 WD Falcon (the '66 - '77 bronk).

You live in suburbia & will use the vehicle as a DD? Or just occasionally? Some interstate, some stop'n go, some 2 lane ?
/OR/
???
every Q gets answ. w/ the same one: WHAT is the FINAL APPLICATION? (w/as detailed a response as the wish for satisfaction w/build resulting).

I like the C4 (rebuilt?) as it's the least parasitic of the autos of engine/s power (but…no OD)
some suspension up-grades and 1 set of discs R also recommended (again 'for these times/conditions': it's not the '60s anymore).

 

[BCOWANWHEELS]

in my area those bronco,s bring big bucks.

 

[xctasy]

I,d like to see your modified log head. been thinking about this a lot recently.........

I dont have any photos. It's not really going to help you much.

The idea of twin Dueces will work fine. The whole idea I get from you is to have a go, and make it work with what you have.

The fact is, those carbs, a good C4, a light Comete, it will be epic. And I knew you'd figure out a way to move forward on rocker ratio in confines with your budget.




(I have used my background in Liquid Propane Gas control systems to eliminate costs. The guru for those from a technical point of view was a Ford Total Permance guy, Ak Miller. If there's one thing Ak Miller taught us Ford guys, its to use (and understand!) what Ford have done, and only change from it if there is a performance gain. Everything Ford did during the 1963-1970 total performance era, I look at doing too. Don't Forget, Ford with a modest budget, bet the pants of European cars at Le Mnas with Holley 4-bbls and production blocks. Any Ford part is the one I use if it passes Fords durablity requirements.

My 4-bbl set up is designed to use all the stock Carter YFA Fox body/F150 cruise control, throttle levers and cables.

It uses two side by side Holley 2-bbls linked together as one 4-bbl.
It leaves room for port EFI under the carb adaptors.
I use Mini A series style offset bushed stock FE rocker arms to get 1.76:1, and late model Mercedes 280E intake and exhausts with lash caps to get a 5.16" tall valve height, also a 308/304 Holden V8 valve height with proven results. This is a mini replica of the Gurney Weslake rocker gear, and a mini version of the Le Mans 427 FE engine, with sodium cooled exhaust valves to avoid any durability problems.
I use beehive springs to avoid coil bind.
Cam is roller cam, with linked roller followers from a 460. Cam profile is basically a K code 289/ Boss 302 Q code roller cam spec which suits the power requirments.

Since the rods are a compromise, in the 250, I use rods via our domestic 2.4 liter Ford Corsair (Nissan 240SX) and sleave the block for Australian Falcon 4.0 pistons which are made by CP.

For the 200, I use Ford SOHC Pinto rods.

It uses a modern AOD or T5 SBF trans adapter).

 

[chad]

"...in my area…"
where's dat?

"...I use Mini A series style offset bushed stock FE rocker arms to get 1.76:1…"
dair ya go
(not sure what it means tho)

 

[BCOWANWHEELS]

whats mini A series rockers

 

[chad]

let's learn together

 

[cr_bobcat]

Using offset bushings like the do in the Mini cars.

http://www.mgbmga.com/tech/mgb16c.htm

I reckon one could bush the rocker shaft pedestals and/or the rockers in order to achieve the correct geometry.

 

[xctasy]

whats mini A series rockers

All explianed in intimate detail.

When you work it out, you'll have a delightfull "a-ha!" moment.

Good fortune Bob.

http://www.theturboforums.com/threads/3 ... -blow-thru

On the A series 1275 cc engines, offset bushes on the steel rocker shaft were made to take the rocker arm from 1.18:1 to 1.31:1.

No offence intended here but--> anyone writing a book about minis 30 years ago may not have experienced such worn or stuffed-with components as we are finding these days.

You should put your heart & soul into everything you do.

You'd be better using a narrowed FE rocker arm, and use custom made Offset bushes on a downsized rocker shaft. You can easily get another 12% rocker ratio from some stock 1.5:1's to get 1.69:1. But if you use machine down (narrowed) 1.73:1 FE hydraulics, you can get 1.65 on the small six, and then go up to almost 1.85:1,the same as an OHC Falcon 4.0.

Ask RAS if they will outsource them to build a 1.76:1 non adjustable hydraulic rocker http://www.spridgetmania.com/part/2A21/ ... dget--Mini

http://www.ausmini.com/forums/viewtopic ... ht=rockers

I tested S rockers, pressed steel rockers, and the late sintered ones.
I found the S ones gave 1.16:1, pressed steel 1.21:1, and sintered 1.18:1.
All were measured on the same 12G940 head, with an RE13 cam (0.290" lobe lift) fitted.

I like the pressed steel (round pad) ones, with 0.44" offset bushes in I can get them up to 1.31:1 ratio. And their pads are harder than the S rockers.

See Image http://home.exetel.com.au/zoomini/zoomi ... GP1558.JPG

The oval pad 1275 ones with the same offset bushes, I got 1.35:1. Simon K has a set in his S.

No one in there right mind would spend a pound to get an ounce. No, hang on, um, what I ment was probably "spend ounce money for no bang for the buck". Ford started with a serious 1.76:1 solid lifter ratio, any I6 builder stuck with 1.5:1 ratios should do the same.