High Performance Big Block Cadillacs
November 17, 2017, 05:47:24 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: SMF - Just Installed!
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
Author Topic: 1990 Hatchback Mustang  (Read 16784 times)
C.I.D. Vicious
C3
***
Posts: 139



« Reply #15 on: January 20, 2008, 09:42:24 AM »

MD,

Looked up what i could. I'll talk about 10 of these 425 crank engines I built, test ran and drove, and then sold.

 First one used a 425 crank, stock 472 rods, and Egge machine 10-1 472 piston. That 472 piston is tall and heavy. Took 2-3 slugs of metal to balance. Replaced a tired junkyard 500 in a 50's Chevy panel delivery street rod. Rod had a 700r4 trans. With the deep first gear those had. It ran real well. Liked the deep 1st gear.

Built 4 more as stock 472 replacements. These used 425 crank, 472 rods, 76cc head, with large dish stock 472 pistons. The deep dish piston was lighter by enough to use less metal in the crank. These were also like a badger or silvo-lite piston. At that time, the Egge item was a real hunk of metal. Thick skirt, etc. So piston design was well a factor too.
 These got installed in full size Cads. One replaced a 425 in a 79 Fleetwood. IMHO there was no gain here to speak of. Except of course for the Fleetwood which gained cubic inches in the deal.

The rest I built as spec engines. Around christmas I would gear up engine work for the spring rush. I would like to have 3-5 completed engines. Every spring as the first warm days hit the country, the phone would go nuts. Everyone would realize the good weather was coming. But their car was not ready Shocked  Shocked No way you could build stuff fast enough. !! Or work long enough!!

 These spring rush spec engines, is where I experimented. It's where I started to grow the rod. While shrinking the piston and pin. It's the reason I went to Scat for the 7" rod. I thought between the Cad guys, & the Olds guys we would have enough demand.

The last such engine was equipped with 425 crank, 7" olds rod bushed for floaters, with custom Ross pistons. It had Bulldog heads, RAS ford shaft rockers, MT20 hydraulic cam, and the Bulldog S/P intake. I was running this in my 3/4 ton shop truck with the 4:10 gears.
It sold to the Porsche guy. I had it in the truck less than a week. He wanted a dyno sheet on the engine. I do not have a copy. However this car sold on ebay not to long ago. I saw in his ad that he had the dyno sheets.

What I do remember is this engine got hooked to the dyno with a reduction box.They were able to load the engine real low in the RPM band with that. It did over 400ft lbs@ 17-1800 RPMs. Peaked @ 520hp or so. Again I did not keep a copy.
When it went in the Porsche The Bulldog intake had to come off.

Never heard a word back from 9 of the 10 engine owners. Heard frequently from the owner of the first one. He was attending rod shows all over the country. Was getting 14-16 mpg one the road, and havin a ball.

I spoke with Ken Sharp about his 425 powered Eldo @ the MTS bash he came to. Ken runs over 6000 RPM with roller cam etc. He's had to run looser bearing clearance.  That's a known report.


I'll post more in a second part
 
 
Logged

"If this CSOB crowd would quietly go find a hole and hide themselves in, the engine might not be setback 20 years from the rest of the American made V8's."  -Juan Zapata
C.I.D. Vicious
C3
***
Posts: 139



« Reply #16 on: January 20, 2008, 10:42:27 AM »

I was enjoying fooling with this engine combo. Never built anything that saw over 5500 RPM with the 425 crank.

IMHO I still see alot of promise to this. With limits. What I've learned is someone always want to go 1........2.............3............steps further. I'm all for it. As long as you can afford to do it, are willing to post about it, and also realize that IF you do blow up you won't prove much.

 By that I mean before I crossed this off my list I would need to see 10 or more failures in a group of 100 engines. In truth little is learned without like kind comparison. If it's not built by the same folks, to the same spec, used the same way, it opens up unlimited variance.

So I guess to "boldly go where no man has gone before" can be exspensive and embarassing too! Top it off it won't really prove much either.

Unless we were to see repated, same type failures, in multiple engine, this topic is not off the table. IMHO

 So hat's off to Maddog. I saw a statement from him that "I built it to blow it up". I've 80% convinced myself to do the same. I have a Gbody street/strip project I am about to finalize build plans on. If it's okay with MD i think I have my new signature quote for the board here. Short, sweet, and to the point.
 May you have nothing but fun in your quest.!!!!



* 4842.jpg (59.13 KB, 550x412 - viewed 269 times.)

* 472.jpg (41.19 KB, 550x322 - viewed 244 times.)
Logged

"If this CSOB crowd would quietly go find a hole and hide themselves in, the engine might not be setback 20 years from the rest of the American made V8's."  -Juan Zapata
Maddog
Guest
« Reply #17 on: January 20, 2008, 12:33:57 PM »

Thats some G-body...lolol.....Awesome--is that your "last" project? Thanks so much for the data. Charles

Logged
dave brode
C5
*****
Posts: 1074


Best of 11.66, 113.96, 1.59 sixty


« Reply #18 on: January 20, 2008, 01:29:07 PM »

I was enjoying fooling with this engine combo. Never built anything that saw over 5500 RPM with the 425 crank.

IMHO I still see alot of promise to this. With limits. What I've learned is someone always want to go 1........2.............3............steps further. I'm all for it. As long as you can afford to do it, are willing to post about it, and also realize that IF you do blow up you won't prove much.

 By that I mean before I crossed this off my list I would need to see 10 or more failures in a group of 100 engines. In truth little is learned without like kind comparison. If it's not built by the same folks, to the same spec, used the same way, it opens up unlimited variance.

So I guess to "boldly go where no man has gone before" can be exspensive and embarassing too! Top it off it won't really prove much either.

Unless we were to see repated, same type failures, in multiple engine, this topic is not off the table. IMHO

 So hat's off to Maddog. I saw a statement from him that "I built it to blow it up". I've 80% convinced myself to do the same. I have a Gbody street/strip project I am about to finalize build plans on. If it's okay with MD i think I have my new signature quote for the board here. Short, sweet, and to the point.
 May you have nothing but fun in your quest.!!!!



Now, Al. You know that you aren't allowed to post only teaser pics like that one. More are required.

Reminds me of the nicely done Porche with the 500 and luggage engine cover on ebay a while back.

Dave
Logged

3960 lb '71 C-10. 11.7-1 CR 514". PEP I beam rods floating MTS 18cc dish Probes, Elgin solid cam, home ported heads, MTS 2.19/1.84", Potter/Probe shaft rockers, edel 2115, 4781 850. Switch-pitch TH400, 12" 1800/3200 Tri-Shield convertor, 4.30 gears. Best so far of 11.66, 114.8 mph and 1.59 sixty
ST Dog
C4
****
Posts: 499



« Reply #19 on: January 20, 2008, 07:54:58 PM »

Now, Al. You know that you aren't allowed to post only teaser pics like that one. More are required.
Reminds me of the nicely done Porche with the 500 and luggage engine cover on ebay a while back.

I suspect it is...
These spring rush spec engines, is where I experimented. It's where I started to grow the rod. While shrinking the piston and pin. It's the reason I went to Scat for the 7" rod. I thought between the Cad guys, & the Olds guys we would have enough demand.

The last such engine was equipped with 425 crank, 7" olds rod bushed for floaters, with custom Ross pistons. It had Bulldog heads, RAS ford shaft rockers, MT20 hydraulic cam, and the Bulldog S/P intake. I was running this in my 3/4 ton shop truck with the 4:10 gears.
It sold to the Porsche guy. I had it in the truck less than a week. He wanted a dyno sheet on the engine. I do not have a copy. However this car sold on ebay not to long ago. I saw in his ad that he had the dyno sheets.
Logged

caddycarlo
Guest
« Reply #20 on: January 21, 2008, 09:25:26 AM »

AL
 one would asume that if the crank had big problem anytime soon after they got there engines you would have gotten a call .....



I was thinking yesterday about the Ken Sharp bearing falures ................ and it sounds like harmonics   .......  this could be as in the balance being off .......... or as in the balancer not doing its job or it not having a balancer .............. I saw a big differance in how the bearings looked on my caddy engines when run at a higher rpm with and without the balancer ...................


and when I was at my buddy john's house yesterday I brought it up becouse it was on my mind and the first word he said was harmonics and reminded me that even on his blower engine we put a balancer on it instead of a hub becouse of what we had seen in the past with other blower engines and bearings and that his has run fine since 2002 with a stanard chevy block and basic parts in a combo that the speedtalk guys said would not hold the power that it has made ( 9.99 @ 146 in a 3200 lb car at 5500 ft or 635 hp up here)

so he and I are on the same page ( must be why we are buds )  what does anyone else think ?
Logged
Nick Campagna
C3
***
Posts: 180



« Reply #21 on: January 21, 2008, 10:34:56 AM »

    Sounds reasonable. Does anyone remember Hank the Crank and the center cheeks weld on modification ? Turned a 6 cheek crank into an 8 cheek crank. From an engineering standpoint, the 8 cheek makes more sense wrt harmonic suppression. Maybe we need to revisit the technique. The 472 and 425 cranks have the same material, bearing sizes, spacing, and overlap, so I don't immediately see the "weakness" being related to the lighter cheeks UNLESS it has to do with dynamic balance, harmonic generation, or other second order effects.
Logged

Is the defect in what I see, or in what I'm seeing with ?
C.I.D. Vicious
C3
***
Posts: 139



« Reply #22 on: January 21, 2008, 02:01:57 PM »

CC,

 I think it could be 3 things. Harmonics, piston/pin weight, and Sharp is also using a 425 block. That is alot thinner block, in all the wrong places from a high hp standpoint. I do remember selling him some main studs. I think he was working on a main girdle to help.

 The 472/500 block is a much stouter foundation. I was really starting to work the piston/rod/pin weight issues. The last few I built were also equipped with Innovators dampners as well.

   IMHO A  425 crank, in a 472/500 block, with a set of chinesse forged rods and pistons, would spin hard and fast, to the practicle limts of any hydraulic cam MTS sold @ the time. Our # 20 grind. Shifted @ 5200-5400 RPM.I think it would live a long life @ those levels.

 I asked Scat for the 7" rods to test the market. I did that because of this engine combo. I really wanted those 7 inch rods to sell. So I could justify and pay for a run of 7.100 rods. I wanted that rod specifically for these combo's. Unfortunatlly that was not the case. Ever seen a rod debate issue? In every forum I visit, a rod length topic ends up as in a fight and or a  locked topic.
I don't think debates like that helped with sales of the 7 inch long rods.
 

I wanted to produce in volume, a package that had forged rods, pistons, lighter pins etc, @ at chinesse price. Specifically for the 425 crank/472 block engine.

 A bottom end built like this, with a hot hydraulic cam, and aluminum heads would be a real sweet package.

 However @ this point in us sharing info on this, I would not recommend that you build one unless you can afford to experiment.

Logged

"If this CSOB crowd would quietly go find a hole and hide themselves in, the engine might not be setback 20 years from the rest of the American made V8's."  -Juan Zapata
C.I.D. Vicious
C3
***
Posts: 139



« Reply #23 on: January 21, 2008, 02:03:49 PM »

Hey! forgot to mention. This thread is kinda of hidden with it's topic no??

I found it here by accident. Just reading about the Mustang
Logged

"If this CSOB crowd would quietly go find a hole and hide themselves in, the engine might not be setback 20 years from the rest of the American made V8's."  -Juan Zapata
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!