Let's talk specifics here..

schaferstephen

Well-known member
Just waiting on Mike's head to get in so I can put this mess together! For those that aren't familiar, I'm building a 250..Specs will follow.. I am working on calculating some final numbers prior to ordering some custom racetec pistons, as per 62ranchero's build. Here is what I am looking at for calculating my piston dish size:

Stroke is 3.910
Bore is 3.720 (40 over)
Rod length is 6.2097
****Can someone confirm this is correct? I am using the early forged 300 rods****
Chamber is ~56, according to Mike's preliminary numbers
Crushed HG thickness is ~ 0.039"
HG bore I am unsure of, so I assumed 3.8"
Piston is 0.005" below deck at TDC, according to my calcs and 62ranchero's build
***This is NOT a measured number - it is from calcs and 62 ranchero****
IVC closes @ 65 degrees

Using this, and assuming that I get identical pistons to 62Ranchero w/ the 15cc dish, I calculate a static compression of 9.8:1, and a dynamic compression of 7.8:1. This doesn't sound bad to me, and I wouldn't mind dropping the dish closer to 10cc just to bring the dynamic up closer to 8:1. What are y'all thoughts on this?
 
If I had it to do over again, I'd probably go with a smaller dish to raise CR a bit (maybe .5 - 1.0) higher.

A lot of variables come into play as far as how high your dynamic CR can be:

Are you willing to pay for high-octane racing fuel? (I can't afford to do that; I use 93 octane)
Will you drive the car on the street much? (I drive my Ranchero multiple time per week when all is well, although I don't drive it in stormy weather or end of the world traffic)
What's the climate where you live? (here in Houston, daily highs of 100 degrees are the norm in summer)
What's the traffic where you live? (Houston is probably the second to worst traffic city in the US, behind LA)

Under my circumstances, I was conservative with the CR because I didn't want to risk engine damage from detonation while stuck in traffic on a 100 degree day. Also, there may be a time when I must get gas and only the lower octance 87 or 89 is available.

Thanks
Bob
 
OP i think you have a real nice basic combination for a solid street motor that will make decent power on low octane fuel(lighter fluid?). i owuld say stick with what you have right now.
 
62Ranchero200":36crlb7y said:
If I had it to do over again, I'd probably go with a smaller dish to raise CR a bit (maybe .5 - 1.0) higher.

A lot of variables come into play as far as how high your dynamic CR can be:

Are you willing to pay for high-octane racing fuel? (I can't afford to do that; I use 93 octane)
Will you drive the car on the street much? (I drive my Ranchero multiple time per week when all is well, although I don't drive it in stormy weather or end of the world traffic)
What's the climate where you live? (here in Houston, daily highs of 100 degrees are the norm in summer)
What's the traffic where you live? (Houston is probably the second to worst traffic city in the US, behind LA)

Under my circumstances, I was conservative with the CR because I didn't want to risk engine damage from detonation while stuck in traffic on a 100 degree day. Also, there may be a time when I must get gas and only the lower octance 87 or 89 is available.

Thanks
Bob

Bob,

I definitely do not want to pay for race fuel, so I want to stay in the range of pump gas. I'd like to be able to run on low 90's Octane, which according to Mike's charts, puts me at an 8.4 or less. I want to be able to drive this car as much as I want to!! I live in Lafayette, and I can only assume that when you said Houston traffic is worse than LA, you were talking about Lafayette.. ;) I've driven in Houston and 9 times out of 10, I'd rather be there than in Laffy! That being said... I probably am safer off sticking with a lower CR.

I have been reading through your thread about the carb intake and air horns etc... And I've considered two ideas for my build..1 is to get a cold air intake and run it into where the voltage regulator used to sit for a sort of ram air setup...The other is to buy a new hood with a scoop and fab up an intake through the hood.. Hoping to get some feedback on this and see what the experts say. Thanks again y'all!!
 
rbohm":1qdti6vf said:
OP i think you have a real nice basic combination for a solid street motor that will make decent power on low octane fuel(lighter fluid?). i owuld say stick with what you have right now.

Thanks man...That is probably a good, safe bet for me.
 
I agree/affirm with the above, look for the what you have, or pitch for 15 cc. Our Antipodean engines didn't suffer the terriable maliase which was the US engineers response to the Clean Air Act engines...our tall deck engines were close to zero deck engines, with deeper 12 cc dishes. We used the deap dish 250 pistons to create a low compression 200, and the high compression 200 later used 15.4 cc pistons from 1976 to 1992, and before that, the earlier 5.5 cc piston used by all early Aussie and US 200 and our Aussie and Argentine 188/221 engines. Our X-flow 250's then went up to 23.9 and even 27.9 to get the compression down, with combustion chambers machined from as little as 53.1 cc to as much as 60 cc. There is a huge scope for compression ratio change with an alloy head, and you totally right in rejecting any of the US 250 prodcution engineering practices, as they were just band aides to get emissions passes and logn term relaiblity. The cam had to be hotted/hopped up just to get the US 155 gross figure. The tigher regs took that down to 145 hp for 1970-1971.


The rating for the Aussie 200 was 130 for the Low Compression, 135 hp for the High Compression and 155 for the High Compression, 170 for the High Compression M code. These were 93, 95 and 102 hp net respetively.

The key thing is that the stock 250 iron log or 2V heads carried less than a 7.8:1 effective compression, so your set up is way ahead and you really cant go wrong.


Second point is, the common Aussie 250 from 1971 to 1992 was always a high compression engine, and always carried a lot more compression than the common 200.

Any alloy/aluminum head with a longer duration cam will take more compression than the stock M codes 9.1:1. Aussie 200 and 250's ran the same 256 degree cam, unlike the US 200 and 250's, where it was differernt, the 250 cam was always wilder, with more lift, than the 200. The US Code 6 and L code 250's were rated at the same 9.1:1 as the Aussie 250 log and 2V, but it was never that, as your engine had 98 to 103 thou extra deck height at 9.469 verse the Aussies 9.380".



from viewtopic.php?f=1&t=72173&p=555512#p555512

The compression ratios from the sticky viewtopic.php?f=95&t=18418&start=50 for iron heads with 97 MON/RON leaded gasoline were:-

The 1971 XY, 72XA, 73-76 XB engine codes

M = High Compression HC 250 2V, 170 HP 9.1:1 (9.38" deck seven bearing, wide block, 160 teeth flywheel or flexplate)
L = High Compression HC 250 1V, 155 HP 9.1:1 (9.38" deck seven bearing, wide block, 160 teeth flywheel or flexplate)
E or J = Low Compression LC 200 1V 130 HP 8.8:1 (9.38" deck seven bearing, wide block, 160 teeth flywheel or flexplate)
G = High Compression HC 200 1V, 135 HP 9.3:1 (9.38" deck seven bearing, wide block, 160 teeth flywheel or flexplate)

Now, in the late 1979 to 1985 versions, the reduction to 91 MON/RON fuel (your 87 aki), the 9.35:1 compression of the 4.1 Alloy head engine was dropped to 8.6 to 8.8:1 for 1986 to 1992 with HSC 2.3/2.5 style EECIV TFI ignition. 1976- early 1979 Iron head 1-bbl was 9.15:1. The unleaded alloy head 4.1 engine could handle the old 9.35:1 compression with our 95 mon/ron octane, your 93 AKI. The EFI cam was 264 degree, up from 256 degrees. It had reduced compression.


All that means with a modern high swirl head, you'll get way with a lot of compression on stock 87-89 AKI
 
schaferstephen":3lrzencc said:
xstacy, that being said, how much compression (static and dynamic) would you feel comfortable with on a street engine?

remember that X lives in new zealand where they have real gasoline rather than the lighter fluid we use here in the US.
 
rbohm":3kjeirkn said:
schaferstephen":3kjeirkn said:
xstacy, that being said, how much compression (static and dynamic) would you feel comfortable with on a street engine?

remember that X lives in new zealand where they have real gasoline rather than the lighter fluid we use here in the US.

Ahh... Gotcha. Just curious, what exactly is the difference? I work for Chevron, new hire...Kind of curious what the difference is, or where I could read more about it
 
X will probably have some good information on their gasoline, and since you work for chevron, you should have access to information about local lighter fluids, er fuels.
 
Our old iron headed 1971-1975 4.1 log and 2v and 4.1 cross flows from 1976 to 1980 with just 9.15:1 compression would run very badly on 91 octane, great on 96 to 97. Same with any Cleveland 351. Downgrade the octane, and it would detonate. These were 16 thou deck engines, where the piston stopped short 16 thou, not 103 thou like the 250, or 25 thou like the old log 200.

The Classic Inlines is a modern redesign of the 2V 250, and its alloy construction and high swirl mixture motion gives you detonation resistance with your 89 aki pump grade gas. To be safe, use 93 octane, but the cylinder head isn't canted valve, and is made of alloy, and it should handel a lot of compression with even a short duration cam.


The three US pump grade gasolines has more variation than NZ fuel, as you have oxygenated blends now, but all NZ fuel is aromatically inferior, and has less controlls in place for the levels of benzine and aromatics. In Kiwiland, three grades of It can go from the bowesers 91, 95 or 98 call rating to just 83, 87 or 93 in just a six weeks. Our rating is MON+RON/2. Your rating is either AKI or RON. Our fuels are 3 to 5 % aromatic benzenes, a lot more than US blends. The so called octane difference is explained fully in this article

http://www.scribd.com/doc/26804743/How- ... vid-Vizard

*Source:How to Modify Ford SOHC Engines (Pinto/Cortina/Capri/Sierra 1.3- 2.0 litre 1970 to 1982) by David Vizard, published 1984 by Fountain Press.

ISBN 0 86343 9856, Dewy Decimal No 629.2504 Viz
See Chapter Nine on Page 119-124

This is a very old article but it covers most of it. You can blend
1. alcohol race fuel to get a target r+m/2 octane ratio,
2. or use a water injection system with pure water or as Anti Detonation Injection in a 50/50 water/alcohol ratio
3. or use a water injection system as Anti Detonation Injection (ADI) in with a 50/47/3 blend of water, alcohol and acetone with a small amount of fuel conditioner to create a very high compression, long duration cam engine that runs on standard grade gasoline. You can run them like Mustang Geezer used to. I use ADI to operate 12.7:1 on my 3.3 engine, while still using 91 r=m/2octane, our lowest grade.



He noted
It was also pointed out in the cylinder head chapter (CHAPTER 2) that high compression ratios are needed if long- duration cams are used because the valve overlap causes much of the incoming charge to be pushed back into the intake duct at low rpm. This leads to a "soggy" feel of the engine. By utilizing a high numerical compression ratio the cam can be made to work much more effectively

He noted in Chapter 2
In some areas of the world, such asthe U.S.A., the octane rating of available fuels is little better than that of peanut butter. Once compression ratios start exceeding about 9.7-9.9:1 the engine is likely to run into detonation problems, even on premium-grade fuel. Where 100 octane fuel is available, compression ratios up to about 11.5 or 12.1 can be used.





The X-flow and log heads were a lot like the early Pinto 2000 engines, they didn't cary a lot of compression before detonation set in, but the Classic Inlines head has a lot more mixture motion and always is mated with a wilder than the short period 240, 252 or 256 degree cam....everyone seams to go for medium duration cams like the 260 and 270 Schnider, the 260 Comp Cam, or 264 and 274 Clay Smith cams, and they bleed off effective compression. Down here, we go a lot more radical flat tappet and roller cam durations than the US does, and use much higher lift with 300 thou longer 5.16" Holden 308 valves and common deep dish pistons. That's how come you see 250 sixes pushing the 350 to 410 hp barrier often in oval track and drag race engines. The detonation issue drops off with long duration, high lift cams and deep dish pistons. Experts say that the shallowest piston with relief for flame front travel is the best to kerb detonation, but that is for NAscar engines. For the street, whatever gets the compression ratio into the sweet spot for a medium duration cam also yields detonation resistance. The decimlized 87/89/93--->8.7/8.9/9.3 is a good rule for iron heads, not alloy ones. You've got quite a lot more head room to play with when the head is aluminum.

I used for 8 years 100 MON+RON/2 Liquid propane Gas, and it allowed 9.65:1 compression with just a 252 degree Heatseeker cam and 500 cfm Holley 2-bbl and 348 cfm mixer on my 1984 Falcon 4.1 X-flow. 34 degrees total, 9 degrees static, and it was hammered and never detonated due to the compression ratio. It did get some rtv stuck in the carb, and melted a combustion chamber and blew a gasket, but it was easy to reweld the camber, and the pistons and bearings were fine. High compression alloy Canted valve heads and propane are the worst combination for detonation...I never got any. The Classic Inlines head is more like the FE and Windsor, HSC/HSO Tempo/Topaz/ inline four and Big Six head, and they are much more detonation resistant than my X-flow heads were.

I think 9.8:1 with the Classic Inlines head, a 264 Clay Smith cam and a good carburation system with the well tubes that aren't damaged, and power valves working, and the right Power Valve channel restrictions and a good igntion system without more than 34 degrees total and a quick advance with a lot of static timng should like 93 AKI, and the odd fill of 89 AKI.
 
Actually we are also rated as MON+RON/2 at the pump. There is a lot of seasonal and regional variability in the blend. Non-ethanol fuel is commonly available in my area now.
 
xctasy":m1g9mz47 said:
I think 9.8:1 with the Classic Inlines head, a 264 Clay Smith cam and a good carburation system with the well tubes that aren't damaged, and power valves working, and the right Power Valve channel restrictions and a good igntion system without more than 34 degrees total and a quick advance with a lot of static timng should like 93 AKI, and the odd fill of 89 AKI.

I assume you're saying a 9.8:1 static? I have the longer duration 274 cam also...But that being said, I'd rather err on the side of losing a bit of performance and having a reliable street engine.
 
schaferstephen":3g0rdspq said:
xctasy":3g0rdspq said:
I think 9.8:1 with the Classic Inlines head, a 264 Clay Smith cam and a good carburation system with the well tubes that aren't damaged, and power valves working, and the right Power Valve channel restrictions and a good igntion system without more than 34 degrees total and a quick advance with a lot of static timng should like 93 AKI, and the odd fill of 89 AKI.

I assume you're saying a 9.8:1 static? I have the longer duration 274 cam also...But that being said, I'd rather err on the side of losing a bit of performance and having a reliable street engine.

Yep...static.
 
Back
Top