Chassis Dyno Results - 62Ranchero200

Thought I would also post this here, since people following my build may not check the aluminum head forum very often.

This is a 250 from a '74 Maverick, .020 overbore, ARP main studs, early 300 rods, ARP rod bolts, custom, very short "zero deck height" forged pistons, CI aluminum head, ARP head studs, single springs with dampers, 1.6:1 adjustable rockers, dynamically balanced, CI intake with Holley "500 CFM" with custom metering block, CI headers with FlowMasters, 2" true duals and x-pipe, DUI with custom advance curve.

A link to the dyno graph has been included, but the best run was the last, #4, 140 HP and 182 FT-LB at the rear wheels. If drivetrain losses through the torque converter and C-4 are conservatively estimated at 25%, the 250 must be producing at least 186 HP and 242 FT-LB at the flexplate.

http://i767.photobucket.com/albums/xx31 ... 3fa3fc.jpg

For comparison, in 1974 this engine was SAE rated at 91 HP @3,200 RPM. So the CI aluminum head plus other high performance parts have doubled the horsepower output of this engine.

Other than a baseline HP and torque output, I have also learned: that the low profile "carb hat" air cleaner is restricting the air flow significantly. The engine generates about 15 more HP and 20 FT-LB more torque without the air cleaner. Also, max torque is at about 3,750 RPM and HP begins to fall off at about 5,100 RPM, so there is no point in revving the engine past 5,000.

Thanks
Bob the Builder

Cam ?
My way

Bob, something is strangling your engine. You should closer to 180 RWH.

This is my 67 Mustang with whats listed. Its a later head with a lot of mods & direct mount. Pan also has oil scraper & baffling.

As I posted before ( but seems lost somehow ? ) the loss in a STOCK C-4 Drive train is 15% tops , less if its rollerized , rear wheel Dyno's are notoriously skewed for results ( as are computer simulations ) Weigh it , take it to a Drag-strip and post the weight and MPH ( et is based more on chassis variables ) MPH will NOT Lie , take note of the weather conditions if possible , temp humidity and altitude , post it and i can tell you WHAT it really makes, ALSO First time out is NEVER optimum , I am sure there is LOTS left in the Combo !!

my way":3ox39ah5 said:

Cam ?
My way

Click to expand...

Clay Smith 274/274/108 hydraulic, with 1.6 ratio rockers, single springs with dampers.

Thanks
Bob

FalconSedanDelivery":9jn4luyh said:

As I posted before ( but seems lost somehow ? ) the loss in a STOCK C-4 Drive train is 15% tops , less if its rollerized , rear wheel Dyno's are notoriously skewed for results ( as are computer simulations ) Weigh it , take it to a Drag-strip and post the weight and MPH ( et is based more on chassis variables ) MPH will NOT Lie , take note of the weather conditions if possible , temp humidity and altitude , post it and i can tell you WHAT it really makes, ALSO First time out is NEVER optimum , I am sure there is LOTS left in the Combo !!

Click to expand...

Thanks for the encouragement, I would be very happy if there was more left in the combo.

I do plan to E.T. and MPH the car, but first I have to get the rear suspension sorted out: the previous owner left me with air shocks and worn out leaf springs on the rear.

Thanks
Bob

Never delt with a New combo that couldn't be tweaked and improved with good tuning , good luck

Don't argue with drag racers, they know.

I had to blow these dang low pixle images the heck up to see a proper carb entry.

viewtopic.php?f=40&t=41798&p=502631#p502631





I expected with your Classic Inlines combo and your engine settings about that carb about 165 rear wheel hp easily.

If you were able to drag race it now, I'd be certain from those dyno figures that you'd have a result for mph which indicates 140 rear wheel hp, but that may require 195 to 228 hp to get 140 rear wheel hp. A lot more hp gets lost with even a stout rebuild converter and good shift kit.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=69807



Three parts to this story.

Point 1, A pure drag racing auto shows often a 15% loss off the engine dyno with an auto because planetary gear sets and converters are the ideal launch for cars in the 20 to 10 second quarter bracket. But on a chassis dyno to drag racing end of quarter mile mph test, it won't show 15% if it has a torque converter. It'll be a nominal 40 to 60 hp, with my observed 39 to 63 % based on 50 years of Ford Six and V8 data with automatics and stick shifts. The info from a host of magazines who have tested this backs it up, it is irrefutable.


Point 2. For anything else, I'll use evidence and be a self quotin' pompass a$$ on the side of educating the dyno going population. Yeah!

Figures don't lie, any chassis dyno test is just a back to back comparo on the best combo of the day. So is drag racing a car over the standing eighth or quarter mile. I know that 39 to 63% is the likely loss over the flywheel to rear bags on a dyno, so You'll have 195 to perhaps 228 flywheel hp if a torque converter is involved and if that 140 hp at the bags is on a calibrated dyno. I can absolutely assure you of that. More to the point, 182 lb-ft is 255 to 297 lb-ft of torque, 302 or stock to mild 351 territory.

Point 3.

Read How to Modify Ford SOHC Engines David Vizard pages listed in the index from 63 on Carbs.

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

Look at how the best racers manage fuel stand off....look at FSD's old 250 Tri power Mustang engine combo photo's to see how he gets air flow.

You need this

Three Quarter Inch David Vizard Five Point Eight Percent Flow increase Carb Bell Mouth



On 250's, Traditionally, fuel standoff (the fuel haze with the hood up and no air cleaner, the top of the roosters tail of atomized fuel flow into the engine) needs to be fully contained all the way through the rev range by trying to raise and widen the area around and above the carb air horn. Its classic engineering flow net stuff. In practice, David Vizard found that you can run a flat plate close to a carb air horn if the annular zone around the carb is maximized.

The engine is 1.666 " taller than the 200, so height is limited with respect to hood clearance, so you have to go wide and allow the air to turn in.

I'm a total advocate with our tall I6's of doing a full Autolite, Holley or Motorcraft air horn removal, and then find a method of richening up the mixture for a cold start that isn't a conventional choke. By putting a throttle lean out device or adjusta jet or some tojer means, you can then make a wide base air cleaner like the old 2V Falcon 170 hp M codes ran. The only had just over one inch of air cleaner, but they had over 10 inches of wide brimmed hat air cleaner to pull in air.

That's what makes hp.

The reason the carb hat is loosing you power is that cam profile needs space for air fuel containment. You can't go up for height, so you gotta go wide.


Refer this for ideal containment profiles. Holden guys in Aussie have been studying it for years

http://forum.fefcholden.club/index.php?topic=23061.100



Type 11 is what you need, just like FalconSedanDelivery's. Only problem is, he's a drag racer, and typical of them, his pictures don't show nearly enough....

Back to point 2...

When it come to chassis dynos, with respect, the loss of power on a chassis dyno on any car with a converter is more like 39 to 63%. Aint no way a counterweight dyno will be sucking 25%. The C4/7.875" diff combo will always take at least 39% off the flywheel hp with the best torque converter, and the 3 speed manual /7.875" combo removes 26.5% based on extensive experience.

That's why drag racing is the be all and end all, the counterweight method of measuring torque reaction isn't perfect. Loading a car up on the tarmac, and maybee a little VHT glue is.

Had the discussions before.

I have personally seen here (80Foxes 3.3 C4 auto Fox Mustang) 14% loss as a figure given on some test equipment, but when you log it against the Moroso Computer or any other, a C4 auto that isn't transbraked or extensively shift kitted is a mandatory 40 to even 63% sap on the flywheel hp, so what you see at the wheels is always less 40 to 63%.

I agree with everything else.

See my previous posts.

Chassis dyno tests on a approx 350 hp net small block V8 Car Craft tested in an article show the total trans and axle and rolling resistance losses
Powerglide 35% total with 5.4% loss from the gearbox
Ford FMX 39% total with 7.7% loss from the gearbox
Mopar A904 39% total with 7.7% loss from the gearbox
Ford C4 41% total with 5.4% loss from the gearbox
Turbo Hydramatic 350 45% total with 11.1% loss from the gearbox
Turbo Hydramatic 400 50% total with 14.4% loss from the gearbox
Mopar A727 51% total with 14.7% loss from the gearbox
Ford C6 60% total with 20.0% loss from the gearbox

Click to expand...

Figures don't lie, any dyno test is just a back to back comparo on the best combo of the day. So is drag racing a car over the standing eighth or quarter mile

viewtopic.php?f=76&t=71753&p=551115#p551115
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=72006&p=553034#p553034
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=19190
viewtopic.php?f=76&t=71891&p=552370#p552370

@Xctasy,

As always, thank you for the very informative response!

Don't know anything about auto transmissions that have been modified for drag racing, but I suspected that my C-4 (stock except for a mild shift kit), TCI converter (rated at 2,500 RPM, but certainly flashing at a lower speed on my 250), and 52 year old, light duty 7.25" differential had quite a bit of parasitic power loss.

I agree with FSD that a few 1/4 mile tests would be a great comparison to the dyno run, and plan to do that as soon as the rear suspension is sorted out.

I ordered a drop-type open element air cleaner:

http://www.summitracing.com/parts/pro-302-350

which will hopefully allow a lot more air flow into the carb, and I plan to make sure that the choke is 100% open once the engine is warmed up. Not ready to take the somewhat radical step of taking the choke plate out completely just yet (it seems to be pressed into the choke shaft and I don't know if I can get it out without destroying it; tried when installing the electric choke and couldn't do it), although I will certainly consider that if it appears to be the only way.

Thanks
Bob

Bob,

Just a quick note of encouragement.

I am really enjoying following this (and other) thread(s) on your build.

Nicely done.

congrats Bob and good job! I also think you will find some more power with additional tuning. Good luck

The chassis dyno is good for some tuning if you use the same dyno for a comparison.
The big problem is a dyno does not move, so you loose the movement of the A/F mixture in motion.
Bob lost some HP cause the ambient temperature in Houston, TX was probably 90 F & very humid.

62Ranchero200":1c00gcs9 said:

.....I agree with FSD that a few 1/4 mile tests would be a great comparison to the dyno run, and plan to do that as soon as the rear suspension is sorted out.....

Click to expand...

I get older, I see more crashes. In a car with as much power and torque as yours, its not easy to safely take 90+ mph at the end of the 660 dash. Knocking it back to an eighth mile helps drag the terminal speed back a little, but I remember what 375 flywheel horsepower was like with the first Toploader 351C 4V / 3000 pound Aussie XY 71 Falcon combo my mate had, and we did an 1/8 th mile and were in danger territory within the first few feet. Same with another 375 hp/ 355 Chevy in 63 Chev, the extra 1000 pounds and a Pontiac 3.08 diff and THM 350 does very little to soften a cars ballistic ability to hit 110 mph up a 5% summit grade with our wives' and kids.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajKNJiExjXM


I'd not like to do any of that to my Mustang, my wife would kill me....

A dyno is pretty safe. On a new combo, I'd back out of too much risk. I'd want you to understand that there is a minimum of 40% coming off the engine, probably 63%, so you have at least 200 hp right away, and 255 lb-fts, so your eating basic 5.0's with a lot less revs. Lots of munch honey cake horses and clydsdale draft horses from off idle to way past 3750.

I'd go look at air fuel ratio logs, that air cleaner, and I'd like you to go away and think about the air horn mod in a car that is in a warm environment with a hood much too close.

In Arizona, there is a very special air craft company which makes a throttle lean out device which can allow you to rip out the choke. Although air horn removal doesn't do diddly squat for cfm, but when there is a height restriction, it allows the old flat plate air cleaner lid, with its close to the venturi distance, work very well.


The Classic Inlines universal fit hat can also work well, because its the only game in town when there is so little space. The manifold might be better split with a divider, and if the tuned length to air cleaner is adjusted, it can really bring up the torque without a power sacrifice.

With an air horn delete, it can still be the best option.


Bill, this is directed to you, and Bobs car is the right forum to discuss it.

I believe in cold start fuel enrichment, but not with a power sapping air horn that forces you to run a tall air cleaner in a too tall I6 engine in a to shallow X shell turret. Bill, if this kit can be incorporated into your prized 4412 500 2-bbl, I'd be pleased to drop my Holley Weber 5200/6500 and DG series 38 and 32/36's in short order. The Holley 2300 series is my favorite carb, but for one thing....that really tall air horn.

The Ford I6 needs a short, compact, air horn shaved Holley 2-bbl, and the best play off is between your carb, a Weber Power Plate ex Redline Edelbrock or TMP and a stock 2-bbl 500 with your mods and a Mc Neilly lean off addition.

Kit details below.

See viewtopic.php?f=1&t=70844


Right from 1959 when it saw duty on the FE engine, the Holley 2-bbl has had Ford adapters to improve air flow.



Bary Grant, before they folded into the Demon Holley repurchase of 2011, had PE 2-bbl Topper and Flow Control Air Cleaner kits to do the same thing.

C&S carbs, who make the Dominator 2bbl CS AEROSOL BILLET SPLIT use the David Vizard air horns and the ellipsoidal system to make air flow with there special 'Dominator 2250 split' (half a Dominator 4500 4-bbl).




Fords M code 250 2V 170 hp engine ran the perfect base all along

xctasy":3vtjw1q1 said:

All you need is some Area 51 Technology!. You have no choice but to use the stuff you have, your under carb adaptor you have, the carb you have, and take the carb to a machinist and have him shave off all of your existing carb's choke air horn and carb mounting flange so it ends up like the ones on the outer Chrysler 340 and 440 six pack Holley carb below.

Then use an adjustable main jet to operate cold start enrichment.

There are two types, but I'd recommend the one the Mazda Rotary guys use, sourced from Tom McNeilly tomcn@earthlink.net for US $150 dollars excluding post and packaging.These are throttle leaning devices used for light aircraft

Tom McNeilly
14001 East Williams Field Rd.
Gilbert, AZ 85296
International phone number is +1-602-899-7613

He's in Arizona, USA. Almost nothing any good comes from anywhere else! Hear that Azcoupe?

Northwest Aero Products also has them available. They are at
13812 179th Avenue SE
Monroe, WA 98272
International phone number +1-360-805-8183
Call displayed telephone number to ask for respective email address of Northwest Aero Products.

These are throttle leaning devices used for light aircraft


Details

Here is some information about the Holley mixture control kit. It is best suited for a two barrel 350 or 500 CFM Holley carburetor. However, the unit has been successfully used on large four barrel carburetors. The mixture control WILL NOT fit other makes and models of carburetors! The unit replaces the fixed main jets with a rotating valve that is remotely operated by a push pull cable. The unit will go from total idle cut-off to overly rich by rotating the shaft, while the engine is running. Installation is very simple with step by step instructions provided.

Due to the outrageous cost of materials and the inflationary state of our economy,the price of the kit has recently been raised to $150.00.

The mixture control body is CNC machined from 6061-T6 aluminum which is alodine treated, the shaft is stainless steel and the screws are plated steel.

The first picture is what comes in the kit. The mixture control plate is in the background with the accelerator pump extension arm., power valve block off plug, and installation bolts in the foreground. I also include a set of three gaskets which are not shown.

Click to expand...

The kit

An example fitted to a 4-bbl carb with its choke air horn still attached

Click to expand...

All stock Holley 2-bbls have very poor roosters tails with the emulsion tube and jets they have. This kit fixes aspects of the delivery, and its based on the old Lycoming Marvel Schelber tricks his Ellisons injection uses.


The top up position gives a carb a 150% enrichment, about 9:1 air fuel ratio, while turning it back makes it a normal functioning carb at some point. So you can remove the choke, and use the first third of movement as cold sart enrichment, and a working portion as a closed loop stoich control, and then the rest is an open loop performance mixture. Each portion can be cruise controlled within an EGT or single O2 sensor stricture. The maker used old Marvel Schelber tricks in his Ellisons injection, and the Holley 2300 series has the worst roosters tail around, and adding the Tom McNeilly kit kills two bad birds (turbo charge density air fuel control and bad mixture distribution and too large atomization fuel ball micron sizes over 70 microns) with one simple 150 US dollar stone.

Tom McNeilly is a certified Aviation/Aeronautical supplier, and they require a special handshake to sort the wheat from the chaff. That's why he has no advertising to speak off, and what is supplied is via mail address to a company in the first instance, with his email under sufferance, and then a company phone number, presumably only under fear of death. When you deal with planes, you don't want a raft of civil aviation queries which aren't followed up by harmonizing paperwork.The best bet is via land mail, then email to cover it off, then phone to confirm. A three chorded string isn't easily broken. You'll have to be prepared to deal with others all the way through.

That then allows you full control of air fuel via Exhaust Gas Temperature, Head temperature and it works in cohoots with something like the JPI EDM 700-6c Engine Data Management With Fuel Flow, you can create the perfect air fuel curve with just a stock Holley with a few tricks.




The operation of the air fuel mix is shown from 1.56 to 2.26 of this video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4szv3ZBSJjw

Carbs and some TBi systems have poor atomization for a start, and with a restrictive air horn on a 250, that's probably why you've got more power with no air cleaner..Holley carbs don't like flow restrictions above the venturi, and the stock air horn makes the flow even worse, upsetting the roosters tail even more . On a turbo or low hood situation, its different, because no one will like to run without an air cleaner, so comparisons are not valid, even if they have a 17% drop in power

wsa111":393xs1ve said:

Bob, something is strangling your engine. You should closer to 180 RWH.

Click to expand...

Sorry to say but I have to agree with Bill. With some additional tweaks and maybe cooler temps I would expect that 180 number at the wheels. I have always done my dyno tests with no air cleaner so I can get the most air possible into the engine.

Good numbers. very similar to my 200 build. Keep tweaking at it and find that hidden HP

That exactly what I've been thinking.

The two engines are very good examples of tall I6's with restriction points. Yours is down stream of the carbs...like, how does anyone get so much power out of three little 4 cylinder Land Rover Weber carbs? Well, they do, you are proof, and lots of others like you here! And despite it all, the tiny holes in the Tri Power head don't hurt the hp on your cammed 200, Kevin. It proves that the bends cost the power, that peak head cfm numbers aren't everything, because your ride wins all the power others said wasn't in a log head.

With Bob's, its flow into the carb, or whats happening to the roosters tail directly after the throttles. With the right air cleaner, there is power to be made back. Its that the air horn becomes the restriction point when a carb bonnet is put on, most turbo guys just shave it off, and boost reference to create power. The two top hp Fords at Classic In lInes Dyno room have a carb hat like dat. With a non boosted engine, it probably needs more carb height, two holes in a phenolic spacer, splitter or flow work to the carb top to clear

On the old 2150 Motocrafts, Holley sold for a few years an EO order approved electronic power valve. A power valve on a 500cfm Holley 2-bbl or Motorcraft is worth 60%, on the 4-bbls its 30 to 40%. The 2-bbl Power Valve Channel Restrictions are 2/3rds the size of the stock 4412 main jets. If the power valve could be opened up and over ridden when cold, you could use it as a cold start device, and shave, shave shave that air horn. The choke horn won't allow annular air flow, there is a close, blank wall ghosting air flow.

It's the ideal next step, or you'll have to do nasty surgery on the Ranchero hood.

The fix is nigh!

This is why the 250 can be such a pest to make it haul. The difference between Kevins tripower and FSD's is about 22%, 181 flywheel hp verses about 220 based on dyno and mph's.

The reason Faron's Tripower got 220 was carbs, cam very smart block and head decking to get compression and what he did with airflow management to those stock Ford carbs. That we still cant see clearly. I had to pinch his facebook details to bring his hard work to you Ford Sixers here.

Halfway between Kevin and Farons tri powers is Crosley and Genes direct mount 2-bbls. The same thing applies, but its harder to get the 25% power increase out of a 250 because the log head intake is the restriction point.


It's all about air flow management, and every great performance six cylinder guy just sits down, and then nuts out a solution.

Were never out of nuts here, even if we "nut out".

OK I managed to remove the choke plate and shaft on the Holley 4412/2300. Surprisingly, the engine doesn't take that much longer to warm up; but it's around 80 degrees here at dawn this time of year, and anywhere from 95-100 degrees at dinnertime. Once I get the new, open element type air cleaner in, I'll dyno the Ranchero again, with and without the air cleaner. Up for consideration: milling the air horn off the carb, and/or boring the carb base plate and throttle bores out to a larger size.

Thanks
Bob

Milling off the horn can reduce airflow by inducing more turbulence at the carb entry. Look at adding a K&N stub stack or some other velocity stack.

BTW, next dyno run would it be possible to record manifold vacuum at WOT, full power? That would help tell you if the carb is restricting you.

Maybe the next step is a 600cfm Outlaw Rochester 2G.

Good points made. No point in drinking your champagne from a paper cup, eh?

450 ping gives it that zing

http://www.ebay.com/itm/600-cfm-Rochest ... 1446277053


On balance, though, the Holley is still the best option, IMHO. Since you already got a 500 cfm 4412...you could spent 150 dollars on that throttle lean out device, which is realy a cold start enrichment. You then get full fuel control, and realize that it is not all about airflow, its about the lack of space from carb base to top of hood that won't allow the air to turn in as a total 360 degree package. That's the point. Individually, I'm certain air horn removal without die grinder work on a 2300 Holley series carb does nothing for air flow...until you have to fit a 9.47" deck 250 engine under the stock X -shell hood, then it give a priceless flow increase...you can fit a good size air cleaner without having a postage stamp flow area on one side of the carb.

I like all versions of the Rochester 2G, it gave parkwood60 what we think was about 150 hp in smaller ex 283 form on his 24 hr at LeMonz Fox. I liked it for when I did my 6v intake manifold, it allows the use of a stock 1-bbl air cleaner hole, aka Cadillac, Chevrolet, Oldsmobile, and Pontiac three two-barrel setups, like this Oldsmobile 88 J2 item. The GM Tripower Air cleaner came in about 25 part numbers for almost 10 years from 1957 to 1966; it also allows you to add auxiliary air cleaners to single 2-bbl installs . I also like all its modified carb versions. Its all just great mechanical engineering, and in 2-bbl installs, found everywhere.



http://www.thecarburetorshop.com/Tripower_air_cleaners.htm#Oldsmobile1553292

There's even space for auxiliary air if you can track down an old tri-power air cleaner.

What I don't like about any stock height carb on a 250, is not being able to get full air flow into a nice big 66 sq inch plus air cleaner.The stock 2 and 4-bbl Holley's have a shrouding gall point around the venturis.With the 2CG carbs, there is no shrouding, but conversly, you cant just take 1.75" of the height of the carb entry like you can with the Holley 2 and 4-bbls. The Rochester and stock 2300/4150/4160 are the same height, but with air horn removal, the Holley is way shallower. That's why air horn removal is so important in space limited instillation's. It allows 2G like 360 degree flow into the carb for a start, but also allows the whole air cleaner to get a straight shot. On a flow bench, air horn removal and some die grinder work makes about 3 cfm extra, but power skyrockets because you can get proper flow, proper filtration.

Area of air cleaner = cid*rpm/20900

A stock 2v 250 had a 259 by 29 mm deep air cleaner for about 37 square inches of area, barely enough for proper filtration at 3000 rpm.

I use the ages old and still easy to get Fram based but K&N , Lamborghini or Ferrari Boxer Berlinetta/Datona supplied long bed air cleaner for my I6...at 250 bucks delivered from whatever source, its expensive, but if it can serve a six or four carbed 12 venturi 302 cubic inch V12 at near on 8000 rpm, that should be enough for a 750 cfm of carburation on a 200 or 250 at 5500rpm.

http://www.motorsport-tools.com/kn-lamb ... ilter.html
http://www.superformance.co.uk/flat12/fuel.html
http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-In-Box-OEM- ... 67&vxp=mtr

See below for 2G info

xctasy;1538628 said:

This is yours, ripped from your cool video.

What size carb is it?


Here below is 's what I'm using on mine. Does your 2GC have any problems at all with fuel surge?


Mine is similar to the http://carbkitsource.com/carbs/kits/CK067.htm replacement listing, with top casting 7044114 130 4 - CM and bottom casting P-7046452 C-1. Not specifically listed on The Carby Dr's site, and it has a front fuel line, not side like your little gem.

xctasy;1538624 said:

I'm avoiding the big long range tank just now. I joined an Ecomodder site, and have decided to bring up the fuel economy first, keeping the car as close to stock as a person can. Given its historical nd truly odd ball JDM status and its value and its numbers match food chain position on the Fox family tree, I owe it to myself and others here to work with the original parts. Where I draw the line is with carbs, cam and tuning, for everyone in the past, from Holman Moody to Offenhauser, from Vic Edelbrock to Ak Millar enterprises, has had a go at Triple Carb economy Falcons and Mustang sixes, but they dropped the ball when the little I6 Foxes came out. And that's why the 2.3 and 5.0 and latter Essex and Cologne V6's survived, and the I6 didn't. It was too hard to hi po this ancient engine without a full head redesign, and Ford, probably wisely, spent the extra dough on better engines. Where I come in is that I'm stuck with the log, and I gotta just make it work within the confines of my budget and purpose.


In line with that, I've been busy cleaning up my triple carb Rochester 2 jet carburation system for attaching to my 170 cylinder head. I'm using the common 7014114 130 4 - CM and P-7046452 C-1 code 2 Jet Rochester body 352 cfm carb,





Its a nice sized carb, good for independent runner induction, with 500 CFM Holley 2-bbl 4412 sized throttles at 1-11/16-in. bores, or 1.6875" or 42.8625 mm, and the same throttle center spacings as the bigger Holley 2-bbls (1.875" or 47.625 mm), but nice, small 1-3/16-in. venturis (30.16 mm) for that 352cfm at 3.0"Hg in each.




Where it is heaps better than the good old 2100 Autolite /2150/Motorcraft and the Holly 2-bbl 7448/4412 part number 2300 series is for its four bolt clamping spacings, for even though mine is a wide base 2.0" by 3.75", its got heaps of room around it to mount in the confines of the awkward 200/3.3 log heads iron dog turd.

Once I've got these jetted down to the right level, I'll get the economy and power I'm looking for, and I'll be able to fit a stock Tri-power air cleaner on it to ensure I can run it as an CAFE/CARB/EPA emission era system with all the stock interconnects.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...