Remote Turbo Setup & Falcon Sixes?
Crustang to Mustang
Well-known member
That's what I was assuming. Would it be good up to 10psi you think?
No
If you pull out 10 degrees of timing before you get to 10 lbs of boost the engine will fall on its face.
Last edited:
Crustang to Mustang
Well-known member
I guess I'll just go with the 250ci seeing as I already have it.
Crustang to Mustang
Well-known member
As long as they have one that fits my needs, Clay Smith Cams.
You saw what happened to 67straightsix in the first thread in this section titled "Turbo 200 Build"
He asked for a turbo cam from Clay Smith for his 200 and got a profile that was so far off I couldn’t believe it.
It was 244/236 @ .050" on a 115 LSA.
It idled extremely rough, had no power below 1800 rpm and didn't pull till 2800 rpm
He ended up removing the cam and finally getting a profile that worked from Schneider.
This time 224/220 @.050 on a 112 LSA
Engine idles smoothly and the turbo has a much better response.
The 224/220 @ .050 on a 112 LSA would work well in a 250
You need to call and see if anyone is still grinding flat tappet cams for the 200/250.
Check with Howards Cams also.
If not check with Delta Cams about welding and grinding the stock cam to the 224/220 specs.
You need to check on getting a camshaft before you do any other planning.
Obviously the engine will need a camshaft in order to run.
Last edited:
probly repeating former post :
.
up to @ 10 lbs (?)
.
DSII - mid 70's has max advance typically @ 26*, can read thru advance weight window. More or less Total Centrifugal Advance by simply adjusting stops.
( C4DE DSII ) 13R = 1/2 RPM or 26*
. 
. 
.
With Vacuum advance hooked up, will advance to 26* Centrifugal PLUS Vacuum advance UNTIL boost from intake manifold line NOT vacuum stops all Vacuum advance. Ballistic mods of centrifugal advance curve are extensive with springs and weights. (hours of fun)
.
simple, crude "LOCK-OUT" but workin so far'. Suggestions appreciated . (anecdotes not so much)
.
(one way valve on vac advance line recommended)
.
have fun
.
Crustang to Mustang
Well-known member
Seems I remember something about this. I will check.
Crustang to Mustang
Well-known member
About the low compression factor, assuming that neither the head or block have been machined, is the compression low enough with a '69 block and a '73 head to prevent detonation? I'm assuming no
The compression will be determined by the new forged pistons so not a problem.
The piston dish volume is ordered for the compression you need.
is the compression low enough with a '69 block and a '73 head to prevent detonation?
.
AFAIH
typical circa '73 head will have Compression Chambers @ 62cc's, '69 170/200 could have @ 48 cc to 62 cc chambers. All 170/200/250 used a relatively thinner than modern - 'steel shim' head gasket not available for the 3.68 cyl bore 200/250. (Steel gaskets with 3.50 144/170 bore often mistakenly marketed as 200/250 application)
.
typical re-use of an OEM head on a 170/200/250 WITHOUT milling and with a modern Composite gasket, stock pistons will drop OEM static compression ratio by @ 1/2 to 1 Pt. or from @ 8.7:1 to 8:1 (nominally). Machinist checked for warpage but did not mill 62cc 250 head on the supercharged 250. With @ .045 composite 8:1 safer for moderate boost . Detonation all about Ign.timing/fuel distribution/AFR's/boost #'s ...
.
have fun
.
.
.
AFAIH
typical circa '73 head will have Compression Chambers @ 62cc's, '69 170/200 could have @ 48 cc to 62 cc chambers. All 170/200/250 used a relatively thinner than modern - 'steel shim' head gasket not available for the 3.68 cyl bore 200/250. (Steel gaskets with 3.50 144/170 bore often mistakenly marketed as 200/250 application)
.
typical re-use of an OEM head on a 170/200/250 WITHOUT milling and with a modern Composite gasket, stock pistons will drop OEM static compression ratio by @ 1/2 to 1 Pt. or from @ 8.7:1 to 8:1 (nominally). Machinist checked for warpage but did not mill 62cc 250 head on the supercharged 250. With @ .045 composite 8:1 safer for moderate boost . Detonation all about Ign.timing/fuel distribution/AFR's/boost #'s ...
.
have fun
.
.
Keep in mind that the stock piston to deck is about .125 down, some more some less. Things need to be measured and not taken for granted. A longer rod with a dished piston would be better.
I should have posted the following earlier.
There are cheap/inexpensive turbo systems and then there are expensive systems.
The cheap systems should be limited to 6 lbs of boost
The first and cheapest system consists of the stock engine with the stock intake and exhaust manifolds with a simple pipe from the stock exhaust manifold to the turbocharger turbine housing with either an external or internal wastegate.
The intake side is piped from the turbo's compressor to the carburetor without an intercooler.
The distributor's mechanical advance is recurved with an advance of 18 degrees.
The ignition timing is set to 10 degrees at idle and advances to 28 degrees at full advance somewhere around 2800 rpm.
The vacuum advance can still be used but should have a one-way valve that vents pressure to protect the diaphragm.
Phase two of the cheap system is still limited to 6 lbs of boost but can have an intercooler to increase the power.
A Snow water/methanol injection unit can be used in place of the intercooler and will allow the boost to be increased a few lbs.
Phase three allows a moderate change in camshaft along with valve springs while still limiting boost to 6 lbs.
Where people get into trouble is when they try to push the cheap system past 10 lbs of boost or more.
This is where piston rings and ring lands break and connecting rods bend or break.
Beyond this point IMO there is no middle ground, and you might as well build the engine and system for 20 lbs of boost or more.
If you do this without compromises it is expensive.
If you try to compromise you are asking for trouble.
A highly boosted engine has no forgiveness for mistakes.
There are cheap/inexpensive turbo systems and then there are expensive systems.
The cheap systems should be limited to 6 lbs of boost
The first and cheapest system consists of the stock engine with the stock intake and exhaust manifolds with a simple pipe from the stock exhaust manifold to the turbocharger turbine housing with either an external or internal wastegate.
The intake side is piped from the turbo's compressor to the carburetor without an intercooler.
The distributor's mechanical advance is recurved with an advance of 18 degrees.
The ignition timing is set to 10 degrees at idle and advances to 28 degrees at full advance somewhere around 2800 rpm.
The vacuum advance can still be used but should have a one-way valve that vents pressure to protect the diaphragm.
Phase two of the cheap system is still limited to 6 lbs of boost but can have an intercooler to increase the power.
A Snow water/methanol injection unit can be used in place of the intercooler and will allow the boost to be increased a few lbs.
Phase three allows a moderate change in camshaft along with valve springs while still limiting boost to 6 lbs.
Where people get into trouble is when they try to push the cheap system past 10 lbs of boost or more.
This is where piston rings and ring lands break and connecting rods bend or break.
Beyond this point IMO there is no middle ground, and you might as well build the engine and system for 20 lbs of boost or more.
If you do this without compromises it is expensive.
If you try to compromise you are asking for trouble.
A highly boosted engine has no forgiveness for mistakes.
Last edited:
... fortunate that a well put together small block six can effectively use a power adder even with 'cheap' setups. . 6 - 10 lbs boost may sound less impressive but here's a pic from the MacInnes book on Turbo's of an older Draw Thru "Kit" on a A 250. It claims at 3000 rpm - 90 RWHP without boost and 168 RWHP with 8 Lbs boost . Probly' bit optomistic but impressive .
.
used another old pic' .
. for . 
.'cheap setup from Buick 231 V6 on a 250
.
your smileage may vary ...
.
.
used another old pic' .
. for . .'cheap setup from Buick 231 V6 on a 250.
your smileage may vary ...
.
Crustang to Mustang,
I would like to chime in once more. From what I’ve been reading, you’re on a tight budget. Pmuller9 gave you all the information you need. And there is no reason to get inundated with too much advice from others and I see it has confused you. What seems the most logical way to proceed with your budget is start with phase one. (The first and cheapest system. You can always upgrade to phase two later.) It seems like with your budget, this would be all you would be able to handle. In the end, you would still have an engine that you will be proud of. You mentioned that you would like your car to be a daily driver. Well… if this is the case, a low pressure boosted engine is the proper way to go. Do not get caught up in the riffraff that you need 300 hp or more. You do not need that much hp. Having lots of hp, things start breaking. Keep the project simple, be thankful what you have and most importantly enjoy what you have. Do not take on a task that is too much to handle. In the long run you will be better off if you keep the project simple and within your means. Does this make sense? Look, when it’s all done, and people stop by to look what you have done, every one of them should be impressed. If someone isn’t, that is their problem.
Last edited:
Crustang to Mustang
Well-known member
I see what your saying, 63 Sprint.
I can't pretend I'm not a little confused. I do plan on getting a book on the subject so that I can better understand some of this stuff. My expectations have been way reduced since the beginning of this thread and I'm okay with that.
As I stated earlier, the most important thing for me is keeping the six that so many of y'all have spent time educating me on. I will continue to do some research myself but, unless I find some conflicting information that is contrary to what some of y'all have stated, I'm not gonna argue with y'all. Y'all seem to have a lot of good experience and knowledge, and I trust it.
Have you taken the time to read through this thread on turbocharging?
If you have questions as you read through the thread, please ask.
Crustang to Mustang
Well-known member
I skimmed over it but haven't really gotten the time to really read it. We were celebrating my sister's birthday on Friday and then we were getting ready for a 2hr 30min trip to my other sister's house to see my baby nephew on Saturday so... I will read it todayHave you taken the time to read through this thread on turbocharging?
If you have questions as you read through the thread, please ask.
Similar threads
