The Legend of Dyno #2A

Like many others on this site I'm driven to the uniqueness of the inline 6 and this community as a whole. When I was still in grade school I first read about Classic Inlines and Mike and everything that was being done re-engineering the inline 6. I couldn't afford half the things I wanted to do then but as an adult I've ordered one of the first "new batch" aluminum intakes/heads (should be in my hands any day now) and I'm in pursuit of something that seems almost mythical at this point, Dyno #2A. For those unacquainted, Mike's Classic Inlines site had a dyno page showing different documented outcomes for builds and Dyno #2A always peaked my fancy because it was a NA 200 that cracked 200 HP at the wheels. I've searched high and low but I have yet to find anyone who has replicated these numbers, and frankly had trouble finding numbers anywhere close to the 211/227 reported. With Mike's passing I feel like I am literally chasing a ghost. Has anyone built a NA 200 that has cracked 200 at the wheels? I can't imagine I'm the first to try and I will document my build if someone wants to replicate it but if someone has been successful with it, do you have a dyno to prove it, how'd you do it and is the juice worth the squeeze? :unsure:

Thanks,
Mark & Sydney
 
Here is the link

https://fordsix.com/ci/Dyno2.html

"Mike Raley has dyno'd most of his upgrades while building his motor in stages. This is actually quite interesting and a good comparison of the various upgrades.

Dyno test on a stock 200ci motor with a 1V carb, stock dizzy, and stock exhaust.
Dyno test on a stock 200ci motor with a 1V carb and headers, and DSII dizzy.
Dyno after installing a 264-10 cam, 2v adapter & Holley/Weber progressive carb.
Dyno after swapping to a OZ250-2V cylinder head, alloy intake, and 350 Holley carb.
Dyno after swapping to the CI aluminum head, OZ intake, and a 500cfm Holley.
Dyno after installing a DUI Distributor, verse the custom curved DSII dizzy.
Dyno after installing CI's new 2V/4V intake manifold and an Autolite 480cfm-4V carb.

Note: Dyno's were done on a chassis dyno, so this is RWHP and Torque.
"
 
In my opinion, this dyno test was bogus. Post edited by me. 3-8-18 13:00 EST
I believe the DS11 was just a stock rebuilt one & that would make any recurved dist. help. The DUI is still not recurved for optimum performance, but it was better than stock. I build the 500 Holley for Michael Raley & the A/F i tested with this carb tested out at 13.0 A/F WOT.
A former moderator Gary Stubs also ran an A/F using the same inovate wideband as mine & got the same results as i did.
The employee's at the test site of John Enyright's monkeyed with the carb possibly by closing the choke partly to make the engine run rich.
A DS11 & a Dui with the same curve will be very close. In fact using the MSD-6al box with the DS11 will be better. I run a DS11 on my mustang.
The DUI is a very poor design, it has a 2 piece housing & will lead to lack of oil to the dist. shaft.
My HEI is a one piece housing & will be custom curved to your engine. The one advantage of the HEI is its a one wire hookup.
This was a buddy-buddy deal from two vendors of Classic Inlines.
In a conversation after the test & when Michael Raley drove the vehicle home he stated the engine ran worse compared to what was on the engine previous to this last test.
I believe you could get over 200 RWH but only with a solid lifter camshaft with lift in the mid .550"-.575" & a carburetor properly set up with the necessary flow.
The dyno #'s at Pony Carburetors would lose 10% just because of altitude.
Another nail in the coffin for the last two rests.
Doug Leach's 200 probably could achieve those #'s.
 
Well hopefully I can tell you really soon. My block is still at the machine shop. I still have to order a few things.

The first numbers are correct. If you look at my post a few threads down. My stock setup and OZ250 setup were almost the same as Mike's.
 
65coupei6":2a22dvea said:
Well hopefully I can tell you really soon. My block is still at the machine shop. I still have to order a few things.
This is a post from 10 years ago.
Bobscoupe » Thu Oct 16, 2008 8:08 am
I'm at a loss to explain how a DUI could produce more horsepower than a DSII with MSD. Especially since the DSII in Mike Raley's car was professionally recurved. The DS11 was just a stock reman. That was not my DS11 on his engine.
The DUI is a nice piece of equipment, (billet, one wire, and coil in cap) but it doesn't do anything that a DSII doesn't do.
Running the DSII with a MSD does increase spark so it should produce more power than either a standard DSII or a DUI.
There are other variables that could explain a horse power increase from one dyno run to another, especially when the runs are several months apart as in the case of Mike Raley's DUI install.
The first numbers are correct. If you look at my post a few threads down. My stock setup and OZ250 setup were almost the same as Mike's.
Marco, i agree the posts up to to & including the OZ head are spot on.
After i did the 500 Holley on the CI head that was also ok.
Thats where the #'s get fuzzy. Bill
 
Not to hijack this thread.

But, which would be better or help with HP numbers. A recurved DSII or a HEI? Both would be hooked up to a MSD box.
 
Marco the DS11 hands down. I can pinpoint the curve better than the HEI & MSD makes a harness to connect the MSD directly into the DS11. Its called a cable adapter MSD # 8869.
Also use a Ford design TFI coil which is bound in epoxy & not an oil filled unit. Plus you pick up 5K higher output & is even lower primary side resistance than the Blaster series. This is the best of the best.
 
I just got off the phone with Michael Raley & he stated the DS11 on his engine was just a Auto Zone or Advance Auto parts reman.
Thats why even the poorly recurved DUI out performed the stock DS11.
After Michael got back to Texas after the installation of the 4bbl carb he stated the engine did not have the drive-ability & performance that the modified 4412-500 Holley had.
That proves that the last several dyno runs by Pony Carburetors were questionable?
I would think a properly tuned 4bbl should outperform the 2bbl if the rest of the mods on the engine could take it.
I can see where the mods i did on the 500 metering block would provide better driveabilty due to precise calibration.
WOT the extra air flow from the secondaries should have helped. Its possible the linkage prevented WOT after the vehicle left the dyno run??
 
Wow, thanks for all this information but it really confirms my suspicions with the testing involved and honestly makes me rethink my build entirely if I can only get 2/3rds of expectation without spending more $$$ than the ridiculous amount already budgeted. Seems a fools errand to possibly create something that isn't much fun to drive just to get to a HP # that could be crushed by a off the shelf 302 too. Before the aluminum heads/intakes became available again I had planned just a mild fix of the inline's biggest issues (2bbl conversion / upgrade ignition / add header) as I had previously rebuilt the head/block years ago and it was operating at a modest 75hp/127tq. I figured I could crack 100 to 110 but decided to go all-in on something that now seems unreasonable.

Worst part is I just yanked the damn engine for what seems like imminent disappointment.
 
My combo puts down 139 RWHP & thats through a C-4.
For everyday driving its perfect.
Its a mild build but the Carb & Distributor are spot on for my combination.
 
Is that your combo using the modified large log head and the 500 Holley? Dollar for dollar it seemed a better value / balance of hp and drivability and I just happened to find a guy near me who has a head for sale. How does the engine drive with the dual pattern cam and a CR of 10.4:1? That was my original blueprint but I had trouble locating a head.
 
With the cam i have i would shoot for 9.2-9.5 compression. If you have a 10.5 compression you will need a Little more cam to bleed off some compression.
The exception if you altitude is over 5000 ft.
My cranking compression is 175#.
 
SydneytheMustang":3igd8h49 said:
Wow, thanks for all this information but it really confirms my suspicions with the testing involved and honestly makes me rethink my build entirely if I can only get 2/3rds of expectation without spending more $$$ than the ridiculous amount already budgeted. Seems a fools errand to possibly create something that isn't much fun to drive just to get to a HP # that could be crushed by a off the shelf 302 too. Before the aluminum heads/intakes became available again I had planned just a mild fix of the inline's biggest issues (2bbl conversion / upgrade ignition / add header) as I had previously rebuilt the head/block years ago and it was operating at a modest 75hp/127tq. I figured I could crack 100 to 110 but decided to go all-in on something that now seems unreasonable.

Worst part is I just yanked the damn engine for what seems like imminent disappointment.

Hot Rodding or building a Hi Performance type engine is a balancing act at first many of the first mods don't affect the drivability too much, yet the more radical you go there may be some compromises in areas that can affect street type driving. And for the sake of argument, where would your disappointment in your build up be, what is the combo of parts you were considering? Comparing the tipical stock 302 / C4 combos rear wheel horsepower and torque (they don't put all that much torque to the ground either), so how much of a differance is there from your 200 combo? Plus also the 302 already has half again more cu. in. then you are staring out with.

As another example my stock 250 / C4 Maverick could easily out pull those 302's / C4 out of the hole and up to a point, at which time their better top end breathing would take over. Give that little 200 six better breathing on the intake side and see what it can do! Good luck on your 200 project (y) :nod: Edited
 
A friend of mine has a 89 5.0 in his 66 mustang & he put down only 180 RWH on the same dyno that i ran on, same day.
Sure the 302 will be a lot quicker than a 200, but unless your 5.0 has factory fuel injection the fuel mileage will be very close.
If you want to go with a 302, you will need to upgrade your trans for the extra torque.
The diff. will need to be upgraded to a 8".
If thats it what you want, might as well just purchase a V-8 vehicle.
My little 200 runs very close to a 2bbl 289 with double the mileage.
Your choice. You want to purchase some V-8 engine mounts PM me.
 
I'm hoping Mark & Sydney replies again.
I would like to discuss a 250 HP (flywheel) 200 that still has good street manners.
The former mistakes do not have to be repeated.

It was not clear if an Aluminum head had been ordered?
 
pmuller9":db5q8uih said:
I'm hoping Mark & Sydney replies again.
I would like to discuss a 250 HP (flywheel) 200 that still has good street manners.
The former mistakes do not have to be repeated.

It was not clear if an Aluminum head had been ordered?

Pmuller9, according to his very first post he said he had ordered one of the first of the "new batch" aluminum intake's, head's and should be receiving it soon. So let the discussion of the 250 HP 200 begin! (y) :nod:
 
I don't cross over to the small block side very often but I really hate to see someone lose their dream especially when it is doable.
I understand that there are many other readers however I would prefer to know if the OP is still interested.
 
Hi,

So after some soul searching I have decided against going the basic swap it route for a 302. (I just love my lil' six too much-even if I keep her stock). I do have the aluminum head on order since last April and I had found a rebuilt Autolite 4100 with the smaller venturi and have the headers sitting beside me in my office right now so I'm already pretty far in though anything can be sold. No decision on cam yet.

PMuller9 if you have an idea lets talk about it! Fuel mileage isn't important to me, this is a weekend toy buy being driveable and reliable are essential, even if it means pulling back a bit. Short block is solid, bored .040 over with original style pistons (13 cc dish) about 15 years ago but no worse for wear and it mates back to a rebuilt C4.
 
The goal here is to produce 250 HP at the flywheel so I need to say up front that everything (especially the head) will need to be configured differently from “out of the box” to work for this application.
Lots of patience, time and money.
Details on the head in the next post. I want to save the most difficult part to last.

If the flow numbers for the Vintage Inline aluminum head are the same as the former CI head, they are very close to the numbers for a 300 HP big six street engine.
We are presently in the middle of another 300 six build expecting near 300 HP that will have head flow numbers along with dyno results.

Peak HP numbers are not dependant on engine displacement for a given head.
Smaller engines simply make peak HP at a higher rpm.
It is the peak torque and power curve that is effected by displacement giving the larger engine a higher torque and lower rpm power band for the same head and cam combination.
In order to keep the power band under 6500 rpm for the 200 six we are backing down to a 250 HP engine project.

Typically we use .050” cam durations in the 230 degree range for 300 hp and mid 220s for 250 HP depending on the LSA and with valve lifts above .500”

The smaller 200 is a lot more sensitive to valve timing overlap than the larger engines.
The 300 six can operate relatively smooth (drivers discretion) on the street with .050” duration overlaps upwards of 15 degrees but the 200 six needs to be limited to a zero degree overlap for a similar response.
If a cam with 224 degrees of .050” duration is selected then you would use a minimum 112 degree LSA to keep the overlap at zero. A wider LSA would further improve idle and low rpm operation.

As previously suggested, a solid lifter cam would insure valve train stability at this high rpm and high valve lift considering we would like to have around .550” valve lift to utilize the flow capacity of the head.

Since the cam profile will have a relatively large overlap for a 200 six, the initial ignition timing needs to be higher the stock spec and the aluminum head may require less total timing which means the distributors mechanical advance will need to be re-curved. Bill can do this for you.
Bill also pointed out that using a distributor with the wrong timing curve was one of the problems with the Dyno #2A build.

The compression ratio depends on the cam profile but it looks like the minimum static compression ratio is 9.5 and can be as high as 10 with the aluminum head.
Looking for some feedback from the small six group.
Would an 8:1 DCR with an aluminum head be reasonable with higher octane pump gas?

Another item to consider is the radiator fan. Dyno testing various 18” 6 blade fans in a radiator shroud shows a 30 hp loss at 5000 rpm using a rigid steel blade fan and half that with a clutch fan with flex fans falling in between.
Imagine the loss at 6500 rpm.
Electric radiator fan or fans only please.

As always all feedback is welcome making this a joint project.
Head discussion will be next.
 
Back
Top