This is topic X 303 Question in forum Tech Talk at Northern California Ford Owners  .


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://californiafords.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=016040
Posted by lky_3 (Member # 1116) on :
 
Would an X-303 Cam work well with a stock 302 rotating assembly and GT 40P Heads with mild port work? The heads also have triple coil springs? What kind of numbers am I looking at?
 
Posted by Quick 88LX (Member # 1950) on :
 
You will probably have piston to valve clearance issues.

I don't know what your overall goal is for your combination but a cam needs to compliment the package. It sounds like you may be adding a cam before thinking about what you are using it for.

More information on your setup would also help [Wink]
 
Posted by F8LSN8K (Member # 7080) on :
 
i think that is too much of a cam for ur setup....and U WILL have p2v clearance issues

just my .02
 
Posted by lky_3 (Member # 1116) on :
 
Im looking for some decently heavy Torque Gains. I dont want to do any internal work as I cannot afford it. I plan to keep the stock internals, with a GT40 lower and Box Upper, 70mm TB, CAI, Pulleys, All the little bolt ons and 3.73 rear! I do have the GT40P heads with the triple coil springs and they have been mildly ported and gasket matched. Any suggestions with the cam? Numbers? Thanks Guys! I just want to have somethihg that will really push me back in my seat. Torque is what you FEEL, HP is for bragging and tickets!
 
Posted by 93PONY (Member # 60) on :
 
The X is a GREAT cam for a mild setup like this.
It will clear the stock pistons if you install the camshaft 4-6 degrees retarded using a 9-keyway adjustable timing chain. (FMS makes one for $69)

I ran this cam in a stock shortblock with Edelbrock performer heads (1.90/1.60 valves) retarded 6 degrees with a Cobra intake (ported lower), shorty headers, off-road X pipe, 65MM TB, etc & picked up 4mph over the same setup with an E303, catted high-flow H, & an un-ported lower intake.
The X kicks ass for the price.
It will also pass smog.

Use 1.6's rockers with it unless your valvesprings can handle the added lift with 1.7's.
Check piston to valve, it will be close, but it should clear if you have 1.90/1.60 valves or smaller & heads that haven't been severly milled.
 
Posted by 95VERT306 '8850GT' (Member # 5909) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by lky_3:
Im looking for some decently heavy Torque Gains. I dont want to do any internal work as I cannot afford it. I plan to keep the stock internals, with a GT40 lower and Box Upper, 70mm TB, CAI, Pulleys, All the little bolt ons and 3.73 rear! I do have the GT40P heads with the triple coil springs and they have been mildly ported and gasket matched. Any suggestions with the cam? Numbers? Thanks Guys! I just want to have somethihg that will really push me back in my seat. Torque is what you FEEL, HP is for bragging and tickets!
a bigger cam doesnt mean bigger torque...and if your into torque. your going to KILL it with a box style upper. WAY TO MUCH for what you have....be more open minded when it comes to cams. theres more and better out there than SVO cams. But if your tryin to be cost effective. ide put an E cam in it....with a GT40 manifold. flows more than a cobra but still keeps the torque your after....
 
Posted by lky_3 (Member # 1116) on :
 
Thanks for all the info 93! And for scott whar kind of cam can u recomend for high torque gains? Do u think a GT40 Combo is best for torque?
 
Posted by CoKeWhiTe50 (Member # 4216) on :
 
quote:
The X is a GREAT cam for a mild setup like this.
It will clear the stock pistons if you install the camshaft 4-6 degrees retarded using a 9-keyway adjustable timing chain. (FMS makes one for $69)

I ran this cam in a stock shortblock with Edelbrock performer heads (1.90/1.60 valves) retarded 6 degrees with a Cobra intake (ported lower), shorty headers, off-road X pipe, 65MM TB, etc & picked up 4mph over the same setup with an E303, catted high-flow H, & an un-ported lower intake.
The X kicks ass for the price.
It will also pass smog.

Use 1.6's rockers with it unless your valvesprings can handle the added lift with 1.7's.
Check piston to valve, it will be close, but it should clear if you have 1.90/1.60 valves or smaller & heads that haven't been severly milled

 
Posted by CoKeWhiTe50 (Member # 4216) on :
 
quote:
The X is a GREAT cam for a mild setup like this.
It will clear the stock pistons if you install the camshaft 4-6 degrees retarded using a 9-keyway adjustable timing chain. (FMS makes one for $69)

I ran this cam in a stock shortblock with Edelbrock performer heads (1.90/1.60 valves) retarded 6 degrees with a Cobra intake (ported lower), shorty headers, off-road X pipe, 65MM TB, etc & picked up 4mph over the same setup with an E303, catted high-flow H, & an un-ported lower intake.
The X kicks ass for the price.
It will also pass smog.

Use 1.6's rockers with it unless your valvesprings can handle the added lift with 1.7's.
Check piston to valve, it will be close, but it should clear if you have 1.90/1.60 valves or smaller & heads that haven't been severly milled ---93PONY
how much did that set-up dyno at?

[ April 30, 2007, 11:48 PM: Message edited by: CoKeWhiTe50 ]
 
Posted by 93PONY (Member # 60) on :
 
No dyno #'s....but here's what it did at the track:

E303/Catted/Cobra intake combo: Best 13.3 @105mph.
X303/Off-road/Ported Cobra combo: First time out 12.8 @109mph.

From there I milled the heads .024", ported the exhaust side ONLY, swapped out the camshaft for a Comp 286HR (230/230 110LSA .598/.598), swapped out the valvesprings to handle the cam, swaped out the TB to a 70MM, swapped out the Cobra for an Edelbrock RPM (un-ported), & a custom cold-air setup.
Best after the swap was 11.99 @114.5mph & 314RWHP/321RWTQ....this setup had TONS of low-end TQ.
Car was a full weight 91 GT with A/C, smog pump, etc.

95Vert306 is right, a box upper will kill low-end power.
You're better off with a longer runner intake. IMO there is nothing better than the Edelbrock line. (although I don't like the RPM2). I'd recomend either a Performer or Performer RPM for this application. Although the GT40 is a beautiful intake, it is still restrictive compared to the Edelbrock manifolds. Remember, the more bends the air must make to reach the piston, the less velocity (& Torque) it'll have. A LOT of power can be gained from straightening the intake airflow path.

Example:
We ran a BBK cold-air intake on the above GT. That cold air kit has 2 90 degree bends from air filter to throttle body. I made a custom cold air kit with 1 45 degree bend from the air filter to the throttle body. The car picked up 1.5mph in the 1/4.

[ May 01, 2007, 01:59 AM: Message edited by: 93PONY ]
 
Posted by court (Member # 6700) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by 93PONY:

You're better off with a longer runner intake. IMO there is nothing better than the Edelbrock line. (although I don't like the RPM2). .
93Pony can I ask why you dont like the RPM2?

I am curious as I am shopping for an intake, myself.

Thanks.
 
Posted by 93PONY (Member # 60) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by court:
quote:
Originally posted by 93PONY:

You're better off with a longer runner intake. IMO there is nothing better than the Edelbrock line. (although I don't like the RPM2). .
93Pony can I ask why you dont like the RPM2?

I am curious as I am shopping for an intake, myself.

Thanks.
The Lower is HUGE. Bigger than the Victor EFI, but that's not a bad thing as long as you have the heads & cubes to back it up. My wife's all-motor 347 isn't quite big enough for this lower.....She's got 225cc ported VicJr heads & made 442RWHP.... The lower is BIG. I ran one on a 388RWHP 319 I built before the 347. Had to open up the Ported AFR185's to get it to match up.

The real problem is the upper intake. It'd be *ok* if there was decent access to the plenum to do some portwork, but if you pull off the cover (under the plenum) & take a look at how tight it is in there for the airflow to make the turn into the runners, you'll see that it's just big enough to get your fingers stuck in it. That's pretty damn small & whenever airflow makes a tight turnlike that it realy needs extra room to make a nice wide turn, otherwise it becomes turbulant & restrictive. There seems to be plenty of 'meat' to port this opening, but the problem is access. The only way to do it properly is to cut the plenum off, do the portwork, & weld it back together.
The inlet at the TB is not the greatest either, but neither are the Performer, RPM, or VicEFI....& that's not a hard fix since you can easily access it.

So, basically you have the most restrictive Edelbrock Upper intake bolted to the most un-restricted Edelbrock Lower intake.
It's not a bad blower intake however....since boost pushes past most restrictions.
 
Posted by court (Member # 6700) on :
 
right on. i have never personally seen one.

i am going single turbo so maybe it will work for me?
 
Posted by 93PONY (Member # 60) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by court:
right on. i have never personally seen one.

i am going single turbo so maybe it will work for me?
With a turbo, there are other things to consider first. Hell, a stock longblock with the correct turbo can make enough power to split the block in half.
I personally like seeing those 'stockish' turbo setups running 18+psi & clicking off 9's with A/C driving to/from the track. Problem is the block can't take that much abuse for long. One of the best moves I made with my turbo stang was buying a Dart block & throwing a damn good rotating assembly in it. Still run the stock Cobra intake with A/C & the car has run a best of 10.1 @135mph shifting at 5900rpm. Sure, I would gain a significant amount of upper RPM HP from swapping to a better manifold like an VicEFI or RPM2, throwing in a bigger cam, etc, but this car looks/drives like stock... To me, even though it could be a lot faster, I'd rather run a little more boost & keep it driving/looking the way it does. Everybody is different....it's up to you to figure out exactly what you want out of the setup. Just know that a turbo will make up for any lack of power the setup may have in N/A form. (it's the ultimate band-aid for a poop N/A setup. [Smile] )
 
Posted by Pure Stang (Member # 7251) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by 93PONY:
quote:
Originally posted by court:
quote:
Originally posted by 93PONY:

You're better off with a longer runner intake. IMO there is nothing better than the Edelbrock line. (although I don't like the RPM2). .
93Pony can I ask why you dont like the RPM2?

I am curious as I am shopping for an intake, myself.

Thanks.
The Lower is HUGE. Bigger than the Victor EFI, but that's not a bad thing as long as you have the heads & cubes to back it up. My wife's all-motor 347 isn't quite big enough for this lower.....She's got 225cc ported VicJr heads & made 442RWHP.... The lower is BIG. I ran one on a 388RWHP 319 I built before the 347. Had to open up the Ported AFR185's to get it to match up.

The real problem is the upper intake. It'd be *ok* if there was decent access to the plenum to do some portwork, but if you pull off the cover (under the plenum) & take a look at how tight it is in there for the airflow to make the turn into the runners, you'll see that it's just big enough to get your fingers stuck in it. That's pretty damn small & whenever airflow makes a tight turnlike that it realy needs extra room to make a nice wide turn, otherwise it becomes turbulant & restrictive. There seems to be plenty of 'meat' to port this opening, but the problem is access. The only way to do it properly is to cut the plenum off, do the portwork, & weld it back together.
The inlet at the TB is not the greatest either, but neither are the Performer, RPM, or VicEFI....& that's not a hard fix since you can easily access it.

So, basically you have the most restrictive Edelbrock Upper intake bolted to the most un-restricted Edelbrock Lower intake.
It's not a bad blower intake however....since boost pushes past most restrictions.
yea i got the rpm2 and it killed my torque... but my top end is alittle better...im kinda regreting getting it
 
Posted by lky_3 (Member # 1116) on :
 
So I guess I am looking at a X303, with my stock rotating assemble, Mildly ported GT40P's, 1.7RR, Performer Upp./Low. Ported Mildly, 70MM TB and Egr and a CAI! Sound good to you guys??? What do you think about power gains and Numbers??
 
Posted by 93PONY (Member # 60) on :
 
A B303 with 1.7's is near identical to an X303 with 1.6's.
If you're going to use 1.7's with the X, make sure the valvesprings are up to the task. Never seen triple springs on a set of SBF heads, are you sure it's not a double spring with a dampner in between?
 
Posted by lky_3 (Member # 1116) on :
 
Thats right...My Bad...Double Springs with a Damper. You think it Will Work? What do you think in a cam choice?
 
Posted by 93PONY (Member # 60) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by lky_3:
Thats right...My Bad...Double Springs with a Damper. You think it Will Work? What do you think in a cam choice?
The X is one of the best 'bang for the buck' cams out there. It'll be fine.
Can you give me the part # of the springs you're running? I can look up the specs & let you know if they'll be adequite or not.
 
Posted by lky_3 (Member # 1116) on :
 
I actually got them with the heads, so I dont have a part #. What should the pressures be? Seated / open?
 
Posted by 93PONY (Member # 60) on :
 
125# seat
330# open
Minimum for an X at 6000RPM....give or take a few hundred RPM.

You must also make sure that you won't hit coil bind with the 1.7 rockers as that will be .575 lift with the X. Most people use either 1.46 or 1.55 OD valvesprings with SBF heads. Your heads would be setup with 1.46 OD or smaller springs. These are typically installed at 1.800" installed height. Given this, most 1.46 OD springs can take .600 lift before coil bind, but there are a few that can not take that much lift. & you don't know at what height the springs were installed at. Some shops will shim the spring to give more seat pressure, which will reduce the amount of total lift the spring can take before coil bind.
 
Posted by lky_3 (Member # 1116) on :
 
I called compucams and gave them the specs of the engine that I am building, he recommended a cam with: .533 lift I/E, 110 sep., 215 @ *50 and a range of 1600-6000. Sounds PERFECT, but the cam is $312 and I just dont have that kind of cash. i looked up the X Specs and compared and it looks comprable...whats your opinion? the part # for the comp Cam is #35-420-8, in case you needed it. Thanks.
 
Posted by lky_3 (Member # 1116) on :
 
93 Pony... Your Wisdom is Requested!
 
Posted by 93PONY (Member # 60) on :
 
The X will out-power that cam.
If you're going to spend that kind of $$$ on a cam, might as well go custom. $295 will get you a custom from HiTech.

Overlap = Power
Overlap can be caculated easily:
((Intake duration + exhaust duration)/2) - (2 *LSA)
EX:
((215+215)/2)-(2*110)
215 - 220 = -5 degrees of overlap @.050 lift
Compared to the X:
((224+224)/2)-(2*112)
224 - 224 = 0 (or 5 degrees more overlap @.050 than the Compcam)

Along with that the X has 12 degrees more overlap @.006 lift than the Compcams.

Although the Comp will idle better & pull more idle vacuum, possibly make more power under 3500, the X will have no problems making more power.

Bang for the Buck the X is hard to beat.
 
Posted by lky_3 (Member # 1116) on :
 
Ok X it is, You rock bro!!!!! Thanks a Million!
 




Fueled by Ford Mustang Owners
on CaliforniaFords.com