Post A Reply
read DMs/my profile
login
|
join CAFords
|
search
|
faq
|
»
Northern California Ford Owners
»
Automotive
»
Tech Talk
»
Anybody run the E cam 4 degrees retarded?
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by bwkelley76: [QB] No one said the 347 was a POS, nice assumption but please don't put words in my mouth. It has a tainted past unlike a 331 and it's not my choice of rotating assemblies. That is all that was said. The 347 was actually a great idea for an engine designed to stay under 5500 rpm that makes good horsepower and torque, however it has serious limitations in terms of longevity. You will not see it being used in any endurance races reliably. I'm sorry to say they took a step backwards shortening the rod instead of perfecting the oil-control problem the right way. It's a cost thing, trust me on that, and we'll see how well they hold up in the near future and I must say I'm a little nervous. What many folks don't know is Ford professional racers made a similar motor when they were tinkering with the Boss engine back in the '70's. They perfected the oil control problem back then but it also failed as a good alternative for the same cost reasons. 331 pistons (the latest combo) in the 347 fixes the oil control quickly and cost-effectively, however it's not the best move for rod-to-stroke ratio at all, and I know from experience the stock 5.0 block doesn't like the extra side-loading. One good hick-up and that block will split open like a melon. I've seen it. I'm aware of "the times" when it comes to the 347's and the leaps and bounds they have made over the years. Definitely better than the first gen in some aspects, (mostly customer satisfaction and cost) however still not my choice of rotating assemblies, especially not in a standard block. I'll just throw something out there for ya. I really have nothing to prove and I'm sure some of the more intelligent folks on this site would appreciate this next combo. It's a good "alternative" outlook on the idea behind the 347 versus the 331. By the way anyone familiar with the Shelby Super Car? Not Carol Shelby, the other Shelby. It has a low-cube twin-turbo setup and puts out over 1000 horsepower. Its engine is based similarly on a combo I've designed which may or may not be the one I'm about to share. :) you can investigate that if you wish. Just a note... It's nice to have a complete custom engine machine shop and an engineering crew at your disposal m-f 8-5. The facility I used in order come up with and test the following combo as well as a few others holds the only true CNC of it's kind in California so I'm sorry I can't divulge it's location or give too much info. Some of the engineers there have purchased a few of my ideas so I also have to be sure not to give out too much info and spoil their plans for some new and upcoming Ford engine combos. I hope they make them to production. Also keep in mind this next combo was tested vigorously in "real-world" combos and on the racetrack. Rumor has it one of my engineering buddies has one in his SCCA race-car. "Back in the day" since I'm such an old fella with "old-school" knowledge as some of you proclaim, I designed a 331 rotating assembly with an early 347 style piston with a custom made pin-button and pin for oil control, in combo with a 5.565 rod. (some of you may know what production motor that rod comes from, and NO this was not the ordinary piston button used on the original 347 kits you can still buy today). It was custom-made in our facility and it actually worked and solved the 347 oil-control problem. On this combo rev-limits on the bottom-end increased to well over 7500 rpm reliably with a stock 5.0 block and made more power and torque than any 347 I have ever seen. (Don't ask to see dyno sheets, they were sold with the plans and I can't specify any numbers to ya) The cubes of a 331 in combination with slower piston speeds from the long rod were perfect to use an AFR head (not disclosing which) to flow air at that rpm and beyond, giveing great high rpm horsepower and great low-end torque. ...Little head, lots of rpm potential, etc. Scarry thought? Depending on your application street/strip or road-course, this combo is a perfect setup that is flexible enough to make awesome power in all 3 worlds naturally aspirated, giving the proper heads, cam, etc for the application. One can also combine it with different supercharger and turbo combos to make different power bands and the motor design was versatile enough to accept them all. If someone really wanted to go nuts they could use a Boss block and heads and rev it up to over 9000 rpm. ..not necessary accept for Indy...LOL. The more "common" setups everyone is tinkering with now are good platforms and they perform well in a fairly small window of performance. What the future holds is more versatile bottom-end combos that you can "choose" your horsepower by the parts you bolt onto it. Not the opposite where we are fighting to find the right head and cam choices that our bottom-end likes. :) So for me on the street If I needed more cubes than 331 I'd much rather use a 351 based stroker. The 351 block is much stronger and the block-height allows for better options. I think the fact that 93 is running a 331 rotating assemble should speak for itself. I'm sure he can whip a few more ponies out of it as time goes on also, and I'm sure he learned a little more from that 347 combo he worked with. Every tuning experience should allow a little education. Have fun all and keep an open mind. Cheers. [/QB][/QUOTE]
(
how?
)
Instant Emojis
Instant UBB Code
What is UBB Code?
Options
Disable smilies in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Questions/Requests/Suggestions? email CAFords
Fueled by
Ford Mustang Owners
on CaliforniaFords.com