I can tell you that my 454 HP engine is very streetable. Use the right pedal lightly and the car is as docile as any 260 powered Tiger. When you mash the pedal, hold on as things are going to get brutal fast!
347 and/or high HP engine guys (PCV?)
- Thread starter Duke Mk1a
- Start date
I can tell you that my 454 HP engine is very streetable. Use the right pedal lightly and the car is as docile as any 260 powered Tiger. When you mash the pedal, hold on as things are going to get brutal fast!
cadreamn67
Platinum Forum Member
- Messages
- 608
PCV followup
Well, my parts guy did not come up with anything with a 90 degree elbow for a 350 ish motor. He did show me a PCV for a high performance 351C, but it did not have the nipple extension I wanted. So I ended up getting the Standard v112, which is the equivalent to the Fram 112 that Duke already found. BTW my parts guy said the one for the high performance 351C are getting very hard to find. There were like only two more in the entire midwest. If you want one and can find it, don't pass up a chance to get one. He is keeping the one he showed me for his Pantera.
Let me explain why I am fixated on that bottom extension to the PCV. Many of you may know Jerry Christopherson. I know Buck does. There was a discussion on the Tiger List about motors burning oil when people had the LAT valve covers without a PCV baffle installed because of roller rockers. Jerry solved the problem for himself with a creative solution.
Jerry made a cylinder out of a beverage can, poked a lot of holes in it and JB welded it to the bottom side of the PCV hole in the valve cover. Now I am one of those folks who have not had a lot luck with JB Weld. I really do not want to trust it to hold something that otherwise could come loose and fall into the valve train area. With this PCV valve and its extension botton tip, there has got to be a way to pop rivet, or otherwise mechanically attach a tube to do the same thing functionally that Jerry has done.
It could be that the extra length that currently exists gets the opening down below the splashing of the adjacent rocker arms enough to materially cut oil consumption. If not, a longer snout mechanically attached ought to do the trick. And given the configuration, everything should slide down through the grommet hole from the outside quite nicely.
I for one am not inclined to add an air -oil separator to the PCV - manifold line after the valve if I do not have to. Given the relatively inexpensive cost of the 112 valve and even with a little ingenuity modification time and expense, it is to me worth a try, first.
Duke, my motor is still not finished so I cannot post any results. If you try any of this and it works meaningfully for you, please let us know. BTW, I loved your response about bling's relevance to performance.
Gene
Well, my parts guy did not come up with anything with a 90 degree elbow for a 350 ish motor. He did show me a PCV for a high performance 351C, but it did not have the nipple extension I wanted. So I ended up getting the Standard v112, which is the equivalent to the Fram 112 that Duke already found. BTW my parts guy said the one for the high performance 351C are getting very hard to find. There were like only two more in the entire midwest. If you want one and can find it, don't pass up a chance to get one. He is keeping the one he showed me for his Pantera.
Let me explain why I am fixated on that bottom extension to the PCV. Many of you may know Jerry Christopherson. I know Buck does. There was a discussion on the Tiger List about motors burning oil when people had the LAT valve covers without a PCV baffle installed because of roller rockers. Jerry solved the problem for himself with a creative solution.
Jerry made a cylinder out of a beverage can, poked a lot of holes in it and JB welded it to the bottom side of the PCV hole in the valve cover. Now I am one of those folks who have not had a lot luck with JB Weld. I really do not want to trust it to hold something that otherwise could come loose and fall into the valve train area. With this PCV valve and its extension botton tip, there has got to be a way to pop rivet, or otherwise mechanically attach a tube to do the same thing functionally that Jerry has done.
It could be that the extra length that currently exists gets the opening down below the splashing of the adjacent rocker arms enough to materially cut oil consumption. If not, a longer snout mechanically attached ought to do the trick. And given the configuration, everything should slide down through the grommet hole from the outside quite nicely.
I for one am not inclined to add an air -oil separator to the PCV - manifold line after the valve if I do not have to. Given the relatively inexpensive cost of the 112 valve and even with a little ingenuity modification time and expense, it is to me worth a try, first.
Duke, my motor is still not finished so I cannot post any results. If you try any of this and it works meaningfully for you, please let us know. BTW, I loved your response about bling's relevance to performance.
Gene
Moondoggie
Gold forum user
- Messages
- 569
Duke,
One could argue that a precision machined part held at tighter tolerances over
a mass produced two buck part is going to perform better but that was not my point. It's the frosting on the cake that makes it look pretty and it says to the casual observer that this is a well thought out motor. Just my opinion and I'm not building an ordinary Tiger....
Moondoggie
One could argue that a precision machined part held at tighter tolerances over
a mass produced two buck part is going to perform better but that was not my point. It's the frosting on the cake that makes it look pretty and it says to the casual observer that this is a well thought out motor. Just my opinion and I'm not building an ordinary Tiger....
Moondoggie
I am still trying to have the motor look somewhat period. I may have moved past that though as non-stock parts have become more common on my car. One thing leads to another you know.
With my recent education of PCV valves and the vast amount of different ones, I am trying to find one that is a good fit for my engine. The billet valve does not give any specifications as to what engine it was designed for. As I have seen, the wrong valve will eliminate the function of the PCV system entirely. I installed a brand new PCV valve before my trip and had bad blow by to include the front and rear main. Life is a learning curve. Hope my clutch has been spared.
More info yielded from search -
Thank you for your inquiry with Jegs High Performance. The billet PVC valve in our Jeg’s brand simply unscrews and in side is a regular style PVC valve that you can pick up at your local auto parts. If you have any more question don’t hesitate to ask either by email or give us a call ...
So, any PCV can fit inside the billet body except the valve I have with the extention.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 4,152
Duke, iwas more reffering to the very high HP 302's on the AFR site.. big numbers but perhaps not street motors. Your motor is big numbers.. but also quite big displacement...... that said.. your motor and $ spend.. woudl it be about the same as one of the 363's ford racing is now selling?
Moondoggie
Gold forum user
- Messages
- 569
Michael,
I hate to be the one to tell you this but Ford Racing doesn't build a very good motor...sort of ho hum but nothing close to state of the art stuff. I will be dynoing my 302 tomorrow morning at www.caldyno.com/ and I will be very happy to post numbers but I am pretty sure we will get over 400 hp and big torque numbers. I have AFR heads on my 302 if you go back and look at the picture that I posted earlier along with all forged RPM internals and Ross racing fordged pistons. The cam is a roller hydraulic etc etc. THis combination idles at 700 rpm and will throw you back in the seat and make your eyes bleed over 2500 rpm....very docile on the street by Cobra standards !!
Duke....you know I was pulling your leg about the billet stuff. They are dynoing a 522 Chevy in the other camber next to my 302 so I will try my best to make sure the wires don't get crossed.......
Moondoggie
I hate to be the one to tell you this but Ford Racing doesn't build a very good motor...sort of ho hum but nothing close to state of the art stuff. I will be dynoing my 302 tomorrow morning at www.caldyno.com/ and I will be very happy to post numbers but I am pretty sure we will get over 400 hp and big torque numbers. I have AFR heads on my 302 if you go back and look at the picture that I posted earlier along with all forged RPM internals and Ross racing fordged pistons. The cam is a roller hydraulic etc etc. THis combination idles at 700 rpm and will throw you back in the seat and make your eyes bleed over 2500 rpm....very docile on the street by Cobra standards !!
Duke....you know I was pulling your leg about the billet stuff. They are dynoing a 522 Chevy in the other camber next to my 302 so I will try my best to make sure the wires don't get crossed.......
Moondoggie
About the money spent..............Long story short. I got the short block and heads of off Craig's list here for $3500. The short block was all new (except the block) and never been started. The seller had over $4500 into it, I got it for $2K. The heads were AFR 185 (1388) and came with chromoly roller rockers for $1000. New, it would have been at least $2500.
The rest was full cost......its a $6K engine to include the skattershield and clutch.
Was not sure.........am relieved you were. Good luck on the dyno! I am sure you will be over 400...................but less than my 454
http://youtu.be/gBUFgMc-HvQ
Initial break in 415 lb-ft torque @ 4800, 416 HP @ 5800.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 4,152
I know the motors dont use all the super trick parts (though notice ford are now using a bit of aftermarket stuff in their crate motors and not their own parts) what i do like about the ford crate motors.. they are new, have a good waranty and if you are not racing put out enough HP to bring a smile.
I have a 302 340hp ford racing crate motor.. and on the dyno it came out as it should. Motor is very smooth and quiet.. but i got ot admit.. i started lookign in to AFR heads.. stroker cranks... and the idea of another 100 or so Hp is soooo tempting...
Moondoggie
Gold forum user
- Messages
- 569
Was not sure.........am relieved you were. Good luck on the dyno! I am sure you will be over 400...................but less than my 454;) [url said:
We shall see in the morning but I built my motor with these guys in mind
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=clydesdale+horses&qpvt=clydesdale+horses&FORM=IGRE
It's torque that makes your Tiger move !!!!
Moondoggie
- Messages
- 2,866
Then there's handling
AHA! But a sure-footed Morgan will get you through the corners regardless of power or torque . . . . . .
AHA! But a sure-footed Morgan will get you through the corners regardless of power or torque . . . . . .
Moondoggie
Gold forum user
- Messages
- 569
Rick,
Duke wan to get into the 11's and he can't do it with Horse power he needs torque. If he wanted to continue to run at WOT for a long distance than he needs horse power or aerodynamics. This is what the Badger knew so much about when he designed the Daytona Coupe in 1963-4 it took advantage of both torgue ( the ability to move heavy objects and horse power
the ability to sustain movement)...
THis might help https://secure.drivers.lexus.com/lexusdrivers/magazine/articles/Vehicle-Insider/Horsepower-vs-Torque
Moondoggie
Duke wan to get into the 11's and he can't do it with Horse power he needs torque. If he wanted to continue to run at WOT for a long distance than he needs horse power or aerodynamics. This is what the Badger knew so much about when he designed the Daytona Coupe in 1963-4 it took advantage of both torgue ( the ability to move heavy objects and horse power
the ability to sustain movement)...
THis might help https://secure.drivers.lexus.com/lexusdrivers/magazine/articles/Vehicle-Insider/Horsepower-vs-Torque
Moondoggie
- Messages
- 4,152
OK.. we are heading off topic a little.. and happy to jump this to another thread... but the best part about a tiger on the street is torque...
In a racecar.. power is great.. you can keep the motor spinning up high all the time and there is no traffic/stop start driving... race motor.. great on a track.. not so great on the street.
Now after driving a 1494cc alpine with 10.6:1 comp, twin DCOE webers for 17 years on the street i know what it takes to row a car along.. with momentum its fine.. but low torque figure.. and all up high... if you get blocked or if you go through a slow corener on a decent hill all the fun is over and it's a slow climb to get back on cam.. this is why a street engine is better based on a rally spec, lots of low-mid range go.
When I first jumped in my tiger WOW.. the ability to slingshot out of corners and the pull up hills was amazing. It opened my eyes to torque.. sure it has go.. but the ability to put your foot down in 3rd up a hill and pass people.. all smiles. When i finally build my other alpine motor i am going for torque at the exepense of revs/power as on the road.. that's what you use.
In many ways all this is a moot point probably.. any tiger with 250+ HP will likely have decent torque and feel fast on the street (heck a stock one has heaps down low)... if you can get the torque down lower.. all the better... that is until it rains!
In a racecar.. power is great.. you can keep the motor spinning up high all the time and there is no traffic/stop start driving... race motor.. great on a track.. not so great on the street.
Now after driving a 1494cc alpine with 10.6:1 comp, twin DCOE webers for 17 years on the street i know what it takes to row a car along.. with momentum its fine.. but low torque figure.. and all up high... if you get blocked or if you go through a slow corener on a decent hill all the fun is over and it's a slow climb to get back on cam.. this is why a street engine is better based on a rally spec, lots of low-mid range go.
When I first jumped in my tiger WOW.. the ability to slingshot out of corners and the pull up hills was amazing. It opened my eyes to torque.. sure it has go.. but the ability to put your foot down in 3rd up a hill and pass people.. all smiles. When i finally build my other alpine motor i am going for torque at the exepense of revs/power as on the road.. that's what you use.
In many ways all this is a moot point probably.. any tiger with 250+ HP will likely have decent torque and feel fast on the street (heck a stock one has heaps down low)... if you can get the torque down lower.. all the better... that is until it rains!
UPDATE -
The brake booster now has its own port. PCV (FRAM FV112) valve has its own 3/8 port just below the back of the carb in the manifold.
Drove around for about 30 minutes (city traffic and several WOT pulls) and the breather is bone dry. Nice vacuum in the oil fill tube at idle that increases with RPM. Hoping the rear/front main is now sealing as it should. Will take a pic once I get the proper PCV line in.
Oil fill breather -
You can see the Mr. Gasket baffled grommet here. I think WOT oil spray will be kept to a minimum.
The brake booster now has its own port. PCV (FRAM FV112) valve has its own 3/8 port just below the back of the carb in the manifold.
Drove around for about 30 minutes (city traffic and several WOT pulls) and the breather is bone dry. Nice vacuum in the oil fill tube at idle that increases with RPM. Hoping the rear/front main is now sealing as it should. Will take a pic once I get the proper PCV line in.
Oil fill breather -
You can see the Mr. Gasket baffled grommet here. I think WOT oil spray will be kept to a minimum.
Last edited:
Finished.
Gene, I totally stole your idea to add an baffling extension to the PCV valve. Here is what I came up with after taking some measurements. It is a clear shot from the PCV bung to the head with no interference from springs or lifters. There is 3/4" space from the head and the tube.
The tube I got would not work. Had to cut one of the 90 bends off of it. I also pulled a 90 fitting off of another PCV valve to use.
With carb installed -
Gene, I totally stole your idea to add an baffling extension to the PCV valve. Here is what I came up with after taking some measurements. It is a clear shot from the PCV bung to the head with no interference from springs or lifters. There is 3/4" space from the head and the tube.
The tube I got would not work. Had to cut one of the 90 bends off of it. I also pulled a 90 fitting off of another PCV valve to use.
With carb installed -
cadreamn67
Platinum Forum Member
- Messages
- 608
Duke,
Very very nice! I salute you and your work!
No theft involved here, I just put the idea out there for everyone's consideration. Thanks for picking it up and wanting to give it a try. And really I was just building off of Jerry Christopherson's original idea.
Now the real test will be what, if anything, it does to control oil consumption. Got to be better than an unbaffled valve. Looking promising at this point anyway.
Inquiring minds definitely are going to want to know.
Gene
Very very nice!
I salute you and your work!No theft involved here, I just put the idea out there for everyone's consideration. Thanks for picking it up and wanting to give it a try. And really I was just building off of Jerry Christopherson's original idea.
Now the real test will be what, if anything, it does to control oil consumption. Got to be better than an unbaffled valve. Looking promising at this point anyway.
Inquiring minds definitely are going to want to know.
Gene
Per a recommendation from the Windsor V8 board (http://www.network54.com/Forum/119417/).
Add and additional oil barrier.
I have had no issue with oil getting to the valve thus far, this is added insurance.
Stainless steel wool. Apparently normal steel wool will rust in the atmosphere in the valve cover. Got this from Ace Hardware - $2.79. Have plenty extra if anyone wants some.
Drilled a hole to pass safety wire through. This also goes through the filter material and will keep it from being sucked into the PCV valve.
Filter material in and safety wired top and bottom. Note - after you cut the material down, blow it off with pressurized air and then carb cleaner to get any loose "curleys" out. I also blasted the heck out of it once it was inserted into the cone.
Ready to go back in the VC.
Add and additional oil barrier.
I have had no issue with oil getting to the valve thus far, this is added insurance.
Stainless steel wool. Apparently normal steel wool will rust in the atmosphere in the valve cover. Got this from Ace Hardware - $2.79. Have plenty extra if anyone wants some.
Drilled a hole to pass safety wire through. This also goes through the filter material and will keep it from being sucked into the PCV valve.
Filter material in and safety wired top and bottom. Note - after you cut the material down, blow it off with pressurized air and then carb cleaner to get any loose "curleys" out. I also blasted the heck out of it once it was inserted into the cone.
Ready to go back in the VC.
cadreamn67
Platinum Forum Member
- Messages
- 608
Duke,
Very nice design enhancement.
I myself had stuffed steel wool into the stock cover baffle many years ago. Then of course forgot about it. Many years later when I had the valve cover off, I saw this ugly lump still wedged in the baffle and remembered, oh yeah.... I promptly dug it out. It did not look like very much air could still passing through it by then. The stainless steel mesh makes a lot of sense without the downside of regular steel wool.
BTW, that is really cool that you have taken over that Windsor motor site and letting us know it is out there.
Gene
Very nice design enhancement.
I myself had stuffed steel wool into the stock cover baffle many years ago. Then of course forgot about it. Many years later when I had the valve cover off, I saw this ugly lump still wedged in the baffle and remembered, oh yeah...
. I promptly dug it out. It did not look like very much air could still passing through it by then. The stainless steel mesh makes a lot of sense without the downside of regular steel wool.BTW, that is really cool that you have taken over that Windsor motor site and letting us know it is out there.
Gene
Final performance update -
Drove 2.5 hours at 70+ MPH today and made 8 (thrash the crap out of it) Auto-X runs.
Breather is still bone dry with no indication of oil burn at all. Before this fix, would have had oil all over the drivers side valve cover.
SUCCESS!
Drove 2.5 hours at 70+ MPH today and made 8 (thrash the crap out of it) Auto-X runs.
Breather is still bone dry with no indication of oil burn at all. Before this fix, would have had oil all over the drivers side valve cover.
SUCCESS!