2.8 progress

[Fordtootsie]

2.8 Conversation Update

It has been some time sence my last update so here is my progress to date

I have completed the installation of break lines and the brake MC. It is in the normal location. I am using a mech clutch system as was used in the Mustang II. My car did not come with the clutch MC so I am trying something different - see the picture - these things are hard to attach by the way??.

I have the wiring installed, the brake lines installed, the battery cable in - changed to positive ground, new fuse box with more fuses than factory original, and starting relay and all the front end steering stuff.

I am using Ford wheels that are for the Ford Torrus. To do this I have used a 7/8 inch spacer on the front wheels and a 2 inch space on the rear wheels. The spacers convert the lug nut spacing so that it all fits up right This puts the rear wheels in the middle of the fender well and does not require any mods to the lower front fender area. The front tires are 185/60R15 and the rear tires 185/65R15. The front wheels are 4 inches wider that the rear which is normal - I thank ?

I am using a spring assest shocks on the rear. It is a Monroe 58551. I am using a cut down 8 inch
ford rear end which adds unsprung weight. I have not done any math on this set up but have seen a post here that used or were going to use this shock. It is a guess as to how it will work.

As the picture shows body work is yet to come.

John in Colorado

 

[DanR]

I have completed the installation of break lines and the brake MC.

I believe your headers will heat the brake lines as you have them routed. May consider routing them in front of the crossmember.

Those are some beauties for wheels

 

[Bill Blue]

The Ford 8" is only about 10 pounds heavier than the Alpine rear.

Bill

 

[Fordtootsie]

So you think I have over done it??? I moved it around today. It seemed a bit bouncy but the gas tank is not in yet - fuel weight might help.

You know picking up the 8 inch rear end - it seemed like 500 lbs but as I age things get a lot more heavy than they used to be.

Any one used this combo oa a Ser I before??

John in Colorado

 

[Bill Blue]

So you think I have over done it??? I moved it around today. It seemed a bit bouncy but the gas tank is not in yet - fuel weight might help.

You know picking up the 8 inch rear end - it seemed like 500 lbs but as I age things get a lot more heavy than they used to be.

Any one used this combo oa a Ser I before??

John in Colorado

John, I have zero idea about what you may or should have done. Back about 20 years ago I weighed a 3.55 Ford 8" and stock Alpine 4.22 on the same scales and within about 5 minutes of each other. Thought you might find the info to be helpful. I know it surprised me. A lot. I had thought there was probably 50 lbs difference.

Bill

 

[260Alpine]

John, Not to be criticizing but being helpful. You are going to be bouncy with the coil over shocks and leaf springs. I think your shocks are too long (70-81 Camaro) and because of that your lower mounts are too low. You don't want any suspension parts below the wheel rim as a rule. 68-69 Camaro shocks are what others have used. They are 2 3/4" shorter. I know one guy with a MGB that has done what you have done and removed the leafs below the top 2 and used an aluminum block and said it was just right.

 

[Fordtootsie]

260 Alpine

What got my shocks so long is that my Ser I - I don't know about other Ser_ has an 8 inch travel. Top of axle to bump stop. I could not find many Monroe shocks with that travel length.

Do the Camaro shocks have that large travel?

I am open to ideas as this set up is just a guess.

John in Colorado

 

[260Alpine]

John, 68-69 Camaro have 7" travel and would work fine. Mounts are reversed, eye on bottom, stud at top. I would use regular non coil over shocks with the leaf springs.

 

[Fordtootsie]

OOO - KKK
It has been a long time since I posted my Series 1 v-6 conversation progress. So here is an update
A move to New Mexico has made progress slow BUT I started the engine last Sat - Feb 11. The normal issues - rear end leaked, oil filter 90 degree leaked, water leaked you know the normal stuff.

But here is my latest issue. The engine starts right up but it runs rough. Resolved all vacuum leaks, spark checks out on all cylinders, comp checks . I think the rough idle may be a cam issue.

My cam duration @ 0.016 is 262 degrees (my cam tag does no list the 0.05 duration value). Exhaust duration is 276 degrees - opens at 62 closed at 34. Intake duration is 263 degrees - opens at 24 closed at 59.

My cam lobe center is listed at 108 degrees for both intake and exhaust. This makes the Lobe separation angle 108 degrees.

Timing is set at 20 degrees with out the vac advance connected.

The cam was made by Delta Camshaft and they say it is a sport cam - a PERF KC GRIND ??

The engine does smooth out some with advanced throttle but my Tac is not connected yet so I dont know the RPM's

My engine was a long block from S&J Engine Remanufacturing located in Spokane Washington.

Comments??

John

 

[Barry]

I think you are getting exactly what would be expected from your cam spec's.

The cam spec's you listed are very similar to a Comp Cams "Thumper" series cam with "medium split duration" and a "tight" lobe separation angle. The "Thumper" series cams are designed to have a "choppy / thumping" idle and typically have poor (very low) idle vacuum.

The upside of the tight lobe separation angle would be good power / torque in the 2,000-5,000 RPM range.

 

[DanR]

When John said Delta my first thought was the experience I had with the Jose grind.

Little to no vacuum at or under 1 thousand RPM

 

[260Alpine]

John, Are you using a cable clutch?

 

[Fordtootsie]

Yes I am using the Mustang II cable clutch

 

[Fordtootsie]

I have now run my engine about 2 hours. It idles very rough. The cam that came with the reman engine is part of the issue as talked about before BUT something else is going on. I dont have a tech yet but at a normal idle the vacuum is erratic some where around the 7 to 10 inches. Running the engine to somewhere around the 1000+ rpm range the vacuum goes to 14 inches. It is no longer erratic but has a intermittent reduction with a engine miss. This engine has been sitting since 2014 so a weak valve spring? or something else? It seems to get better the longer it runs so we will see.

I am also going to try using a Cable X unit made by Abbott Enterprises to run the mech tach. If that does not work out I will change the face plate and use the Alpine electronic tach.

To respond to a fuel question I am using a Mallory Red Electric P/N 12-801-1 fuel pump. 67 gph at 5 psi pre set to 7psi max and a Ford 2150 carb

260Alpine - I think you are right about my shocks being to bouncy with the spring assist (Monroe 58551). I have removed the springs - they rub the brake line anyway. I will see what the ride is once the car is on its wheels and moving.

Other info - I had my drive line made by a company called Drive Line Service in Grand Junction -$354.68 shipped to me in New Mexico . It is 3inch dia and 29 5/8 inch long C to C.

John

 

[DanR]

I will change the face plate and use the Alpine electronic tach.

The stock Guage (4 cyl) needs to be set for the V6

 

[Fordtootsie]

Dan
Does tom Hayden still rebuild the electronic tachs and how to contact him
John

 

[Fordtootsie]

Dan

I sent Tom a PM

 

[DanR]

Tom was still at it last year.

 

[Fordtootsie]

I am still chasing my intermittent vacuum leak.
Question - Has anyone had trouble with the valley pan gasket leaking - Has anyone blocked off the passage way underneath the carb that was used to get a fast carb warm up and did it leak?

Any other ideas

John K