Power Possibilities in a 200 I-6

<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD><font size=-1>Quote:</font><HR></TD></TR><TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1><BLOCKQUOTE>
On 2007-01-03 09:07, FALCONAROUND wrote:
<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD><font size=-1>Quote:</font><HR></TD></TR><TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1><BLOCKQUOTE>
On 2007-01-03 06:59, CaptVirgilHilts wrote:
http://home.cfl.rr.com/mustangsix/

This guy did up a six with the aussie cross flow head.

Stu
</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>

This guy did a WHOLE aussie motor... Nothing in or on that 250 is from the American side of the table.

Besides he's vyying for 200 HP out of 250+ cubes. I'm going for 200 HP with 200 cubes! Oooooooohhhhh yeeaaaaahhhhhhh [img]/forums/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>

Yeah so I see. I saw his site along time ago and couldn't recall all he had done. He has some good links too. One seems to talk about the Argentinian head which looks pretty cool. The heads are the real problem on that motor.

http://www.geocities.com/jryelverton/project221.html

Stu

I know Tim, I remember, I was just thinking about possibilities saying with ALL american parts... The OZ stuff is fine and dandy if you want otherworld stuff...

Thanks for the link Nolan but the Clifford stuff is backwards too... I mean Aussie... [img]/forums/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

This 200 head I am working is an untouches original 200 from a 78 fairmont, never milled or touched until now.

I've researched exhaust valves this morning and I am going with a 1.495" valve as compared to the 1.39 stock. I am going to start some mill work on the head later this week if I have the time.

After looking at the head, just lobbing off the intake portion would gain zero advantage due to materials that weld to cast being scarce...
I am shooting for mill work and fabrication with gasket's.

I have available to me about 6" to make runners unless I go with a single 4V, then I can go 2 feet if I needed it, but the welded in frame strengtheners on this falcon prevent me from doing 3 carbs with more than 5 or 6 inches of intake runners...

About that subject of intake length versus torque, how does it apply to injected engines with the injectors only 1" from the intake valve?

What factors the higher rpm touque curve as to the length of intake runners?

FE

[addsig]

Smaller/Longer intake ports are 'tuned' to lower RPMs, but can be restrictive at higher RPMs. Shorter/Larger are tuned for high RPMs but don't have the velocity at lower RPMs to 'stuff' the cylinder full when the piston hits BDC. The ideal length/size depends on the size of cylinder you're trying to fill and the RPM you want to run... but to give you a reference point, a SBF Vic Jr. has about a 5 inch runner, plus 4.5 inches inside the head for a total of 9.5 inches of port length. Your 200 will have a smaller diameter port, so smaller diameter at same length will tune for a slightly lower RPM range. That's why I said 10-12 inches (including the length of port in the head) would probably be ideal for what you're going for.

This is true for both injected and carb'd vehicles, and the formulas are pretty much identical (the only difference being the density of air goes up a little with carb due to fuel being in it).

How is it you are planning to add two carbs without welding on the intake a pad for them to bolt to? If you're gonna have to weld anyways, like I said by far your greatest gain will be by scrapping the factory intake and making your own. Just for example, I've made plans for a big-block-ford intake with 12" runners, which will add 40ft/lbs of peak torque over a normal Performer/RPM intake, and still make the same peak HP at 5000rpm. You can EASILY gain 20-25ft/lb of peak torque and add torque/hp through the entire power curve by fabbing up a long-tube intake (which BTW is MUCH easier on an inline 6 than a V[img]/forums/images/smiles/icon_cool.gif[/img]. All this with only a few bucks worth of materials and a day of welding.
[addsig]

Well Motorhead, I have approximately 2.5" on intake runner and a total of 3.5" to the intake valve...

the curent carb sits between 3 &amp; 4 and the distance is 5" between centerline to centerline on those 2 cyl's, and the next two outer cyl's is 4.5" cent. to cent. and the next 2 cyl's it is 3" cent. to cent.

My intake log on this 200 head is 20" long overall.

The intake valve is 4" from the center of the intake runner on #1 and 2 cylinders, about 4.5" on #3 and #4 and about 5" on runners for cyl's #5 and 6, none of which are the same distance.

The fuel from the carb travels farthest to cyl's 5 and 6 due to the height of the rear of the log being about 1 inch taller than the front.

About getting two more carbs... It's fairly simple to cut the portions on the intake I don't need and fabricate a gasket and clamps or drill and tap for bolts... This way I can give one carb for every two cylinders, thus increasing fuel and air available to each cylinder. And, utilising the makeup of the original Log's internal design which would still allow each cylinder to pull from any of the carbs or all of them at the same time which would increase turbulence in the horizontal plane of the intake log which might just help keep the fuel airborne and atomised longer...

At $40 bucks for a 200 head at U-pick it, I can afford to experiment, but I would like to stay with the original head and just maximize it's potential rather than go easy with an aussie head or the new aluminum heads that are coming out.

Is my theory sound or full of holes? Will the carbs mounted as described hurt performance? Do you think that my power curve would still be stymied by the short 5" path to the cylinders?


FE

_________________
Signature contemplation still in legal process so as not to step on any toes... [img]/forums/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: FALCONAROUND on 1/4/07 5:59am ]</font>

Just a thought, but why not add a small turbo from a Tbird Turbo coupe with an automatic (wastegated to 10 psi instead of 15) Set it up as a draw through system, I'td be a bit laggy, but would definately boost performance, and packing it on that straight 6 would be pretty straight forward. Using a 500 CFM 2v Holley would probably be enough carb, and provide with good tuneability.

BTW, the turbos from the JY are as cheap as 200 cyl heads [img]/forums/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]
[addsig]

Somewhere I have a very old Mustang magazine showing a home brewed Tri carb. I'll see if I can find it. Basically they milled flat spots on the intake and made up new carb bases and gaskets to bolt on.

Here is the Offy mod.

http://www.kastang.net/offenhausermod.html

I have seen guys use Tbird SC blowers on slant sixes so that may be another option.

http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.p...09712763145f82

This is a good archival thread too. Stu

CaptVirgilHilts, I think I have that mag. Is it titled something like "The Pico Rivera Flash"? and I think it was a '69 Mustang coupe with a 250 if I remember correctly. It was from "Mustang" back in 1983 I think. If it isn't, than oh well, but if it is, than I remember it really well because it was such a cool article and the name really stuck in my head. I might even still have that issue.
[addsig]

Thanks Virg, the offy thing is cool (seen it somewhere b4) but still not what I want to do and it would be waaay to tall for my baby falcon.... I want it all under the hood... [img]/forums/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img] Besides that, that tiny hole they drilled don't allow a whole lot of room to bang around with a dremmel or a die grinder and a carbide bit to hog that bastage out... I need a bigger hole for that[img]/forums/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img] [img]/forums/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

I HATE those Cobra air cleaners, I detest ANYTHING with Cobra on it. It's one of Fords most annoying names yet... And it's friggin everywhere... Yuck...
I'd like a plain one though [img]/forums/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

Like I said earlier guy's I want to go without bolt on power adders...


FE
[addsig]

There were guys on fordsix.com that drilled extra holes in the intake log, and then brazed on 2 more carb flanges. Brazing is easier to do on cast than actual welding, and it works well.

There is an argentine 221 head IIRC, that has a removable 2v intake manifold. I think it was even aluminum. Some hunting on ebay may turn something up.

Other than that, head work alone wont get you to 200hp with a stock cam. I definately admire your desire to build power with a six. I did it with a 300 in my brothers F-150 and it was a runnin SOB. That being said, you've got a lot of hurdles to clear trying to hop up the small six without adding a Turbo or other means.
[addsig]

Thanks for the props Dude!
I am going to change the cam but not until I have everything hogged out the carbs mocked up or installed etc...

I am also going to 1 Ford 1.499 exhaust, chevy uses the 1.5 and I don't put chevy pieces in my ford. I will use a Ford 1.75 intake or one a few thou larger, but once again avoid anything not American Ford produced.

I will probably end up with some flat top pistons, and go for overall power and a truckload of bottom end torque, since I don't have a lot of runner length to add to the intake system unless i go with a 4V, utilising a single 4v carb I can make runners as long as I want, but I like the idea of 3 single venturi carbs better... [img]/forums/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]


[addsig]