Thanks so much for the replies! Let me be clear: I'm not bitching at all... I think the build was super fun and turned out well enough, I Just want to get the most I can out of my build reasonably.
I guess I had kinda forgotten that ford rated their motors without the water pump etc at the factory, but I figured that they would still see about 100hp at the wheels back then....but after hearing what you said I see your point.
I'd like to reiterate my expectations for this project so nobody gets the wrong idea here, I don't plan to go racing in an inline six land whale
But my expectation for this project was a cool hotrod that turns heads when people hear it or pop the hood...and to give her some "fun" go on the streets, not trying to beat 5.0 mustangs and such. I know that there is a limit to what can be done without forced induction and frankly I don't know that I'd trust a 1950's 4 main tractor motor for long with it.
The car is drastically better to drive and keeps up with modern aggressive traffic where I live easily. I'm a bit of a "first from the light" kinda driver even when I'm not trying...spoiled me expects my vehicles to at least keep up with that, which she now does.
I regret that I am not old enough to have dealt with Jack Clifford when he was alive, but from speaking with people who knew him he would be rolling over in his grave at how his current company is being handled. Jack was a genius and a well respected man...Larry....well we'll leave it at that.
Now onto the technical stuff:
Your comments about the 38/38's being too small for the motor strike me as a little off compared to what I have been told by others. It is my understanding that they are around 380 CFM each for a total of roughly 760cfm. If anything I figured they were a bit on the big side since I'm not going to be regularly spinning to 7k.
Cam:
When I installed the timing set I used a rollmaster Y block set with adjustable crank keys. Idegreed it and every cylinder matched the cam card. Schneider told me if I wanted my power curve to come on earlier to advance 2-4*, so I just put her at +4* figuring it would keep the torque band in the daily driver range.
Bearing tolerances: I don't know, the guy who assembled the short block did not provide me with that information at least not in writing. I think he installed everything a hair on the tight side to allow for wear and expansion as he had put it...definitely did not put her together loose for a race motor since we wanted some longevity out of her.
Head:
Yes, he CC'd the chambers and matched them. He did not write down what the volume was
I will have to see if I can get the information from him if he still has it.
The receipt shows the following information on what I had done:
Bronze liners with sized guides
Hardened seats, seats opened up for custom valves
Stainless undercut swirl valves, 1.910 intake and 1.600 exhaust, both .200 long.
Valve job and lap, 3 angle
Opened intake and exhaust ports, bowl blend,
Cut for PC style valve seals
351W springs/retainers/locks, @ 1.750 # 105/110lbs
interestingly enough it says he only took .030 off the head (!!) when I had asked for .040. He may have taken it off the block as it says that the block has been zero decked as well.
On the compression note, clifford performance says with my set up from them and the engine work I should see 320lbs of torque and 260hp. They may be full of horse poo but who knows? At any rate, they achieve this number with supposedly .060 off of the head...perhaps I should take her down another .020? I don't know what the piston to deck measurement is, because again I did not assemble the short block myself. This is all a lesson on what NOT to do next time... now that I have my garage I will be able to do my own assembly.
The machinist said his numbers came out to about 9.5-9.7:1 compression. I think it had about 180-190 cranking psi per cylinder, but I will verify what it has this weekend.
I had asked my machinist to blend the bowls and smooth the runners, as well as remove the casting flash from the intake runners which it appears he did at least attempt to do...I'm not sure how good of a job he did though as it wasn't quite as clean looking as I'd expect. However, I can attest to the fact that the bowls are a significant bit bigger and more blended than they were before.
My cam is supposed to be really close to cliffords grind, Larry flat refused to give me any meaningful numbers over the phone for their cam specs though. He only would provide clues such as 264* duration and "about 455-500 lift." I'm not sure if this is lack of experience or simply being stingy about their "secret rocket science" cam recipe... but after reading about numerous cam failures from improperly ground clifford cams I opted to use Schneider instead, and they had a cam that was supposed to be like the clifford cam.
The Schneider card for the 264-F reads as such: .450 lift I and E @ 260 duration. 110LSA & degree intake lobe to 108.
I'm starting to wonder if yanking the head this winter and shaving it another .020 and having the bowls worked over by someone who knows a bit more about what they are doing is in order?
One final thought on a previous comment made about the power peak possibly being higher than my intended use: Should I indeed go back to the drawing board with the cam? it's not especially lopey or radical sounding, but I cant help but wonder if a slightly smaller cam would bring my power band down some?
As always, many thanks to the guys on here who know these motors...we are dealing with a very much lost and dieing artform that I would love to keep alive.
P.S. I need to get a video up here of her running, nothing sounds quite like it!