200ci Seriously disappointing dyno numbers

This applies only to 200ci
Status
Not open for further replies.
datac":2u0c75mu said:
I'm surprised that it seems to sound, run and drive so well, considering how far amiss something clearly is.
Yep...been there done that. Many years ago I built a 250 in a different Maverick...it sounded awesome and drove nicely...but it ran the same et's as the bone stock motor. I didn't degree the cam :nono: and I found out later it was way retarded. Once that was straightend out it ran REALLY good. Not saying this is your problem for sure, but this kind of stuff can happen. Good luck with your build and keep us informed! :)
 
:unsure: Need some feedback.


I've discussed this before, but its very pertinent to anyone with an Automatic car

Is your T code a C4 auto, or 3 or 4 speed manual.



If its automatic, its certainly not unreasonable to loose 63% to the back wheels, so 78 hp at 4300 rpm could be up to 127 flywheel hp at 4300 rpm. Its common to loose that much with a converter, and its quite difficult to get good baseline figures with automatics, especially I6 autos, where the interplay between the dyno counterweight and the torque converter flash and stall readings can seriously skew the rear wheel hp figures.


See viewtopic.php?f=1&t=69807

I've seen a lot of dyno reports in my 43 years, and I haven't been able to see if your car is C4 equiped of not. If it is, a 1.63 rear wheel hp to flywheel hp figure is typical. On cars with Top Loaders, T5's, SROD's and Dagenhams et al, 1.264 is typical from the historical accounts. Apples must match apples, fluid drive auto's mess up the dyno results more often than you'd expect. It's also nothing for a chassis dyno to be out 15% even if calibrated. That's 40 rear wheel hp on a car making 400 hp. On a 145 hp flywheel hp engine in a front wheel 1435 cc Mini, going 50 miles across town to another chassis dyno, Dave Vizard lost 20 wheel hp, and got only 92 hp at the front wheels.

Help us fill in the transmission gaps. You might be lookin for a black cat, in a black room, that isn't even there!
 
3.03 toploader 3-sp at the moment (early small-pattern block with Econoline bellhousing), T-5 in the offing.
Hopefully I'll have something to report here shortly.
 
Thanks for that. I'd try some 0 to 60 mph times and use the cheapest of the following methods. You have dyno figures, you can calibrate the dyno.

I'd bet money the dyno is out of calibration.

xctasy":3dauvof2 said:
See viewtopic.php?f=5&t=69948

:nod: From 9 bucks https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/dynolic ... 74533?mt=8


to $9, 999 :unsure: http://www.corrsys-datron.com/

hp measurement has never been easier. Find your regular 660 and 1320 feet section of safe road, maybee with a 8 to 12% gradient, and presto! you have a means of measuring Hp and torque improvement. Hp requirement with grade is just sine theta of the basic weighbridge weight at test.

Do change ups at rpms after the stall ratio tips in, at 3000, 3250, 3500, 3750, 4000, 4250,4500,4750,5000,5250,5500,5750,6000 etc, and you've got the details to define the hp curve without needing a dyno. It couldn't be easier

Or my $ 1600 favorite :banana: , the Detective John Shaft 'Richard Roundtree' dyno shaft on car dynamometer
http://www.aemelectronics.com/dyno-shaf ... ometer-73/


http://www.jimmy540i.com/gtech2.jpg

see http://www.jimmy540i.com/gtech.htm

Gtech-Pro-SS_0.jpg

see http://www.sub5zero.com/g-techpro-ss-wo ... ate-gauge/
 
Fuel pressure and float level checked out fine, got to thinking back to last Summer when I first fired this engine. Had a problem chasing down a noisy lifter, ended up replacing them with no improvement, after adjusting umpteen times trying to quiet it I recall I ended up cranking them down nearly 3/4 turn instead of the usual 1/2 turn which helped somewhat. Forgot all about that, thinking I'd sort it out later.

Readjusted the valves last night to 1/4 turn, definitely a bit noisier but the butt-o-meter detects a significant improvement. I'd effectively carved a big chunk out of my valve lift, nice. Still not certain what the source of my lifter noise is, which does bother me a bit.
 
datac":557jg7td said:
Thanks for the advice- I'll start with the fuel pump, float level, maybe try a valve adjust before I pull the front cover for a cam degree. I'm surprised that it seems to sound, run and drive so well, considering how far amiss something clearly is.

I first built this engine pre-innerwebs back in the late '80s, when info was much harder to come by. Old Ak Miller articles were pretty much all I had to go on.
Here's the same engine in the same car last time around, some time in the late '80s-early '90s (heck, same fuel pump too):

ford200r.jpg


ford200l.jpg


There are four sizes of Autolite 1100/1101 carb, you need to measure the venturis.

Autolite 1100/1101 Sizes and Applications and CFM at 3"Hg.
1.00 Venturi(120 CFM): 144 ThriftPower Six (84.9 cfm at 1.5"Hg)
1.10 Venturi(150 CFM): 170 ThriftPower Six (106.0 cfm at 1.5"Hg)
1.20 Venturi(185 CFM): 200, 250 Six (130.8 cfm at 1.5"Hg)
1.29 Venturi (210 cfm)"223,262,240,250, 1963-1969 (148.5 cfm at 1.5"Hg)

If you have the smaller ones, that's where your hp has gone. The right size for power is the 1.29" venturi, and the size of te carb hole has to be as big as you can make it. Running them all on at the same time is best for power, as the air fuel ratio can swing around a lot. Your peak 1.5"Hg cfm as you would meadsure a 4-bbl with good 1100's and 1101's is just over 445 cfm, which is 21 cfm less than the best triple 1.352" venturi 1940 Holley and two 34 Weber IC versions with the 29 mm 1.14 " venturis. With the smallest 1100's, you'd be lucky to get 255 cfm.

If you can report back to us the venturi sizes, and you'll have the peak cfm figures at 255, 318, 392, or 445 cfm. Your peak power will be way low if you only got some 1" venturis.

There are bigger 1940's around with 212 CFM or 149.9 cfm at 1.5"Hg, or about 450 cfm total. The smaller 1940 has a much smaller venturi, and much less power.

The good . The 212 CFM ratings with the 1.352" venturi on 250, 240, 300 and older I block 223 and 262's won't be the same as the generic 144/170/200 item.

It is a big 223/262/240/250 or 300 carb if its PN coded:
R 4454-AAS
R 4468 AAS
R 4509 AAS
R 4520 AAS, additional BPN plate suffix A
R 4522 AAS, additional BPN plate suffix C
R 4523 AAS, additional BPN plate suffix D
R 4524 AAS, additional BPN plate suffix E
R 4525 AAS, additional BPN plate suffix F
R 4526 AAS, additional BPN plate suffix G
R 4527 AAS, additional BPN plate suffix H
R 4528 AAS, additional BPN plate suffix J
R 4536 AAS, additional BPN plate suffix Y (an early 223 replacement)
R 4537 AAS, additional BPN plate suffix Z (an early 262 replacement)
R 4692 AAA
R 4696 AAA

See http://vb.foureyedpride.com/showthread. ... or-options for further info
 
In one Hot Rod article, Ak Miller and Jay Storer said any closed chamber 52 cc 170 head with the small chamber is up 30% on the stock (105 cfm intake) flow rate,

The article doesn't really use the word "any", so I've always interpreted it in relative terms- the small log 170 head flows about 30% better than the small log 200 head, and the large log 170 head flows about 30% better than the large log 200 head.
 
I always enjoy seeing pics of that engine bay- that 3x1 setup looks just awesome.

Hope you get to the bottom of what's stealing the hp...
 
Since datac is back...

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=72977
datac":progom7y said:
The original Ford linkage hooked up to the Offy linkage with little effort.
I run a short extension (maybe 3"), ends with a threaded pivot bolted to the Offy bellcrank.
Should be able to see it here...

10344385_10152134374841479_8930473148730600556_o.jpg


Have you gotten the part numbers of the carbs, the valve gear and igntion checked over.

how does it go NOW?
 
Anyone here ever modified the power valve in the Autolite carbs? Mine would open up at idle causing some issues. Its been years but I DID WORK OUT THE CENTER CARBs power valve closer to correct. runnig progressive linkage was debating on disabling the power valves and just go with jetting. Never realy finised it up and went with a 2305 500 cfm holley. Might go back to the 3 1bbls again.
I use the 170 head that had the larger valves next to the smallest chamber milled .062, ported even the log is a bit ported.
Think I have the 185cfm ones was thinking about the larger ones either one on each end or 185s on the ends and 210 in the center. Have a old crane solid lifter cam it hits upwards of 7K on the tach easy. .030 over 250 with forged pistons.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top