The right engine for the Frua!

[Emmanueld]

The 454 FE engine is now in early assembly process, I will post pictures soon. Billet crank is from Moldex, straight 3.98 stroke (428) and Chevy big block rod bearing size. Rods are Oliver Nascar Billet 6.8" length BB Chevrolet as well, quite a bit longer than original. Forged piston from JE. Block is an original 1968 427 FE side oiler bored .10 over. Heads are Edelbrock big valves and stage II porting from Keith Craft. Intake manifold is an original Ford aluminum PI. Carburettor is an original Ford Holley 780 minus the Le Mans bowls which would not fit the air cleaner anyway. Cam is a Crowler solid lifter. The engine will look almost stock externally and should provide massive amounts of torque and HP when finished! Camshaft is conservative with good idle and vacuum characteristics for the power brakes. It will be dynoed before installation in the car. I am hoping for very usable 500HP and 550 Lbs of torque. We will see. Pictures to follow very soon.
   
   Emmanuel[:)]

[runt]

This has to be the 'ultimate hyper motor'; looking forward to the pics, and later on, hearing your driving impressions..!
   Excuse my ignorance, why are Chevvy parts being used?
   It's worth remembering that the first FE motors (352?) saw the light of day in '58 I think, fantastic the potential in these motors, this will be the icing on the cake in that beautiful Frua!
   
   Paul.[:)]

[Emmanueld]

Paul, I know it's a sin to use Chevy parts on a Ford motor, There is probably a price on my head from the Ford crowd. But believe me, it's done a lot. For one thing, parts for Chevy motors, both small and big blocks are plentiful and cheap.
   
   When you build a high performance motor, you want to minimize the rod angle as the piston travels through the bore. The longer the rod, the less angle you will have and as a result you will have less side load reducing bore wear. Also the longer rod will reduce piston speed as well which is also a benefit and increases the time the piston is at top dead center. The limiting factor is the position of the piston pin in relation to the oil ring (Lower ring). On an FE with 3.98" stroke, a 6.8" long rod is pretty much the maximum rod length you can have and have the piston pin sufficiently away from the oil ring. Some small block builders stroke their motor so much that the piston pin sits so close to the oil ring that the motor has unacceptable  oil consumption and blow by. The drawback of having a long rod is weight, that is why I chose Oliver Nascar billet rods which are pretty much the lightest for their size without going to a titanium rod (833 Grams Each).
   
   http://www.oliver-rods.com/products/FordBilletIndex.html
   
   This is lighter than the Ford "Le Mans" rod used in the 60's racing 427 and the 428 Super Cobra Jet. These rods like almost all Ford FE rods were only 6.488" long. Oliver rod are much stronger than any stock rod and can withstand tremendous load in top fuel dragsters and offshore racing. As a matter of fact their unique parabolic shape make them as strong as an H beam design like a Carrillo for example, but quite a bit lighter. Another advantage of the longer rod is less tendency to detonation. Since I am requesting 10:1 compression, which is the limit for a carburetted aluminum heads engine on pump gas here in the US.
   
   Why use a Chevy rod bearing size? The FE has a rod journal size of 2.4384" but is slightly narrower than the BB Chevy. Chevy rod journal size is 2.20" in diameter but slightly wider. Racers like to reduce journal diameter because it reduces the rotational speed of the bearing. The smaller diameter of the rod big end saves weight, increases clearance to the block walls and allows the uses of a rod made for the Chevy motor which is quite a bit less expensive than a custom designed and built item. Some people will turn down a stock Ford crank to the Chevy size but the crankshaft weights have to be trimmed as well to accommodate the wider rod and crank strength and stiffness can be seriously compromised. The other alternative is to machine the rods but then a custom size bearing has to be used, not a good idea as well! This is why I think that this should only be done when using a new custom forged or billet crank.
   
   With longer rods, the engine should have a bit more torque and reliability should be much better than if I was using stock Ford bits. We will see! When you look at the size and weight of the rotating assembly in one of these motors, (4.25" bore) you want to make sure that your bottom end is bullet proof or everything might go with a loud bang at 6,000 Rpm! After all, each rod and piston assembly weights over 3lbs.
   Hopefully, the motor will stay together during the dyno run, I will publish the sheet when that happens probably in a month! The bottom end of my engine should be able to handle more than a 1,000HP with these components, the goal is to have a motor which will be dead reliable like a stock motor but can go the distance with about 500HP. Time will tell.
   
   The FE is a wonderful motor which is seeing a resurgence in popularity. Being a full skirt block, it is extremely strong, and as a side oiler, it can withstand tremendous rotation speeds. Long ago, Shelby saw it's potential and the GT40's that won Le Mans ran virtually stock motors. It's not perfect, the rocker assembly is horrible and extensive modifications are required for the heads to breath half as well as a big block Chevy. But the motor is relatively light and compact compared to it's competition and is an icon in automotive history. With this type of engine, the Frua is virtually the fastest automobile of the 60's, 70's and maybe 80's as well, and we know the chassis is up to it! It should be a fun ride![:D][:D][:D][:D]. I might have to sell my house to pay for the gas!
   
   Emmanuel[:)]

[runt]

I'm sure the Fo Mo Co crowd will watch this space with reverence;nothing wrong with what you're doing there. Thanks for imparting all this knowledge in layman's terms Emmanuel, I've heard of 351w people suffering rod angle problems when stroking out to 427,(on other forums),I see why you are being careful here.
   Next question.. how do you rate the Eagle 'I' beam rods, these are on my 393w, with Eagle steel crank, why are there 'H' and 'I' rods?
   I bet your FE will run sweetly on the dyno, my answer to friends who ask; "How do you pay for the gas..?" has been the same for years; I join them in the pub ONE night a week, they're in there seven nights.[;)]
   Racing the GT40.. must have been terrifying (and HOT)having that monster 427 rumbling away behind your shoulder, these guys were supermen.
   Looking forward to updates!
   
   Paul.[:)]

[Emmanueld]

Paul, Hi
   Thanks for your compliments, but I know many people much more knowledgeable than me. I just like to hang around car people, hot rodders and engine builders and I have read a lots of books on the subject. Also, I like to be conservative when playing with engine dimensions, more particularly stroke. On my new 454, the rod angle will be less than a stock 428 motor. The piston pins will still be far away from the oil control rings. I also bought a 12lbs Romac harmonic balancer which is a replica of the original Ford 427 one. This should help tame any unwanted vibration and make the engine happy.
   
    Eagle makes really good products, good quality, way better than the original Ford stuff. Yet their products are affordable. My engine builder likes to use their rods.
   
   H beam rods are supposed to be stronger than I beam. Torsional rigidity of H beam rods is higher, however I beam rods are lighter. Prestigious companies like Carrillo for example specialize in H beam rods, however these are not always the best choice for performance when a lightweight rotating assembly is  needed. If your motor is in the 400hp range, I beam rods are sufficient and probably better as far as weight is concerned.  I guess your 393 uses a 351W block bored .30 over resulting in 4.030" bore size with a 3.850" stroker crank, this is already quite large for a small block.
   
   Above 450hp or for blown applications, I would go with H beam rod. Again, the trick is to use the maximum rod length and staying away from the oil control ring or you wont be happy with oil consumption.  I think you did well not to go any bigger with your small block, those SB 427 don't like to rev and have to be rebuilt often (or they go BANG!!!). Of course, using a small block in a Cobra makes for a much better handling car. To me, I like any motor with more bore than stroke, otherwise you got a lazy truck engine.
   
   I think Eagle uses American made steel at least in their billet and forged items. Others like Scat use blanks which come from China and are machined in the US. I have not heard anything really bad about Scat but their prices so competitive that a lot of people use their stuff. [:)]
   
   Emmanuel

[runt]

Hi Emmanuel, yep when I looked at the 351w stroker options what shied me away from 408 was that it's 'square' and as you say; even  393w for example has a longer stroke than a 390 FE..!
   I asked for no more than 400 horse as I had no experience piloting any 'Cobra type' car, and inhabit the traffic infested E.London suburbs! But..I did want lots of torque for lazing in fourth/fifth.
   The motor made 390 horse on dyno; 450+ ft/lbs, pulls like a lion and still has that lovely instant response to the loud pedal that all tuned SBF have.. haven't been brave enough to bring in the secondaries yet (Holley 650).
   I would have loved a 427 FE but as you say these cars are easier through the bendy stuff with a Windsor; also I was running out of money!
   Have recently picked up a wonderful book entitled 'Super '60's Fords' by John Smith chronicling the Total Performance era, 1957-73,great learning curve for me and I'm thinking WHAT a range of power units; FE, 289-351w family, and 351c all in one decade!
   
   Paul.[:)]

[Emmanueld]

Paul FYI, here is a photo of an SB Ford aftermarket piston with the pin inside the oil ring. Because there is no wall behind the oil control ring, the oil will sip behind it and find it's way in the combustion chamber, not to mention the risk of the pin eventually hitting the ring (not very likely since it's probably a press-on or semifloating type).
   
   
   (Muscle Mustangs and Fast Fords Magazine)
   
   Incidentally, around here people like the 347 SB Ford which combines a stock 302 block with a 3.40" crank, this makes a 400HP motor which likes to rev. Coast High Performance he in California even manufacture s a long block for modern mustangs which passes smog and is street legal here)
   Regards,
   
   Emmanuel[:)]

[runt]

Thanks Emmanuel,all is explained. I forgot to say, yep those are the exact bore/stroke for my 393; although some builders (like Engine Factory) refer to these as a 396..?
   As to the 302 stroker 347, we have a company over here called Real Steel offering one of those, claimed 422 ft/lbs @5000 rpm, over 360 ft/lbs in the midrange, I always thought as 351w has a stronger block, why not start with that ..?
   (Don't mean to knock the 302, those revvy Boss motors sound wonderful!)
   
   Paul.[:)]

[Emmanueld]

The 351W block is the same as the 302 except the 351W has a taller deck to accommodate the longer stroke, this is why you can't use a 289 or 302 intake manifold on the 351W (heads sit further apart). Also, the main bearings of the 351W are larger which is why the cranks are not interchangeable. Ford Motorsport sells a racing 4 bolts 351W block with the smaller main bearing for racing which reduces the likelihood of a spun main at high RPM. The 302 boss basically is a 4 bolts main 302W block onto which Ford grafted big ports 351 Cleveland heads. This was a great racing motor but a bit shy on torque for the street. Regards,
   
   Emmanuel[:)]

[runt]

Thanks Emmanuel, when my 393w was built, a 1972 block was used; as '69-'74 351w had more metal and weigh I think about 8lb more?
   As you say the larger bearings are an issue for racers.
   I guess with the different firing order perhaps the 347 stoker might SOUND different to a 351w..or wouldn't it be noticeable?
   
   Paul.[:)]

[ak1234]

If I may plant my 2 cents.  My being involved heavily with both Boss 302's and Panteras ..the idea of building small blocks which some call clevors is second nature to both clubs.
   
   My self at this time my Cobra has a stock small block and I choose to keep it that way .. lets say originality has its advantages .. in my opinion.
   
   But for my GROUP 4 Pantera I had built a 351W 9.5 deck SVO G block, with SVO C302B Aluminum heads solid roller cam 3.75 stroke scat crank, H beam Oliver 6.125 rods.  This stroker keeps the oil ring OUT OF the piston pin area.  Motor dyno'd at 713 hp at 6900 withj 620 ftlbs torque.
   
   Its been together for 2 years of club racing with the group. All a matter of who is behind the wheel I guess.
   
   Ron

[ak1234]

9.2 deck block ...reread that and made an incorrect statement.
   
   Ron

[Emmanueld]

quote:Originally posted by runt
   
Thanks Emmanuel,all is explained. I forgot to say, yep those are the exact bore/stroke for my 393; although some builders (like Engine Factory) refer to these as a 396..?
   As to the 302 stroker 347, we have a company over here called Real Steel offering one of those, claimed 422 ft/lbs @5000 rpm, over 360 ft/lbs in the midrange, I always thought as 351w has a stronger block, why not start with that ..?
   (Don't mean to knock the 302, those revvy Boss motors sound wonderful!)
   
   Paul.[:)]
   

   
   Paul Hi!
   
   I had a 351W on  my early MK4 and I did not like the sound! However, after 1982 the 302 adopted the same firing order and modern mustangs sound nice so I think it has more to do with the exhaust than anything else. The lack of a balance pipe between the 2 sides will make for a more uneven and harsher sound.
   
   Emmanuel[:)]

[Emmanueld]

Ron,
   
   Oliver does not make an H beam rod. They make what they call a parabolic rod which is a variation of the the I-beam design. They claim their design is actually stronger and lighter than the H-beam and I guess Nascar seems to agree since most teams seem to use their rods.
   
   Emmanuel

[runt]

Hi Ron, I imagine that makes that Pantera motor around 383 ci?
   Astounding power/torque,have you fitted a pair of wings? Incredible potential in these engines.
   
   Emmanuel, Hi! That answers the question I guess;obviously with the sidepipes I am hearing two sets of four when driving,I am pleased with the smoothness of my 351w stroker, but a 289 Mk 2 (with underslungs) I heard recently was SWEET!
   
   Paul.[:)]