Help Please- Falcon Gasser & Can I build a strong 327 without breaking the bank?

Could'nt help but check in this morn. I work nights and was thinking about this subject all night long. This will be the last thread I inject my predjudice into. Poor Dan just wanted to know how to build a 327. It is a shame how this stuff works out. I've got answers for alot of the points raised in this post. Like the example of the `40 Ford guy going to a chev next time to reduce the cutting. With a Mustang II frontend there is NO extra cutting to get a Ford in there, in fact less around the X- member with a C4. With a beam axle, yeah no doubt about it the oil pump interferes with the crossmember. I would'nt hack the firewall though, I'd notch the crossmember for clearance and use a monoleaf front spring. That does'nt sound like brain surgery to me. Then you end up with a nice Ford in a Ford install and you can't see any cutting. You could even put it back original with an extra crossmember which are not that hard to come by. They all come out to put the`Tang II frontend in. Some years back I put my money where my mouth was and came up with a front cover mounted "gerotor" oil pump for small block Ford's. It fit over the crank snout and was driven by the harmonic balancer. I hated the oil pump in the pan up front and also the skinny drive rod. I got the idea one day looking at the front pump in an automatic trans. This eliminated all the h***les with that situation. Got it to the working model stage. Ford showed interest, I just could'nt take the next $100,000 step to bring it to market. At least I could say I tried and I'm happy for that.

I'm talking about this again because some of you misunderstand me. I just try to be the counterpoint to the status quo around here. I'll never be able to outrun you drag racers with anything I build. You could spot me 200 cubes and I would find a way to lose. Besides Chevrolets are magic anyway. I'm happy if I build a nice running Flatty for a friends street driven hot rod. I scan the threads looking either for cool pics or for stuff relating to the things I've had some experience with. Often I see threads with Ford related content that I can help with. Many times I see things which I know to be ********. The car magazines did a good job brainwashing the average hot rodder about Ford stuff. No one can deny the place the small block Chevy holds in the performance world. I never have. I just think their place is under the hoods of GM cars. If Ford were'nt such a legendary company with a rich racing history and pride of accomplishment, I'd agree with you guys. But that's not the case. The Ford bins are full of cool stuff from all the era's and I just like to point out what's possible if I can. There is no scenario I can come up with to beat the "I can go faster for cheaper with a Chevrolet". How can you beat that? That was maybe even true for a long time, but times have changed and Ford stuff is cheap now, especially in the 5.0 and the 429- 460 families, but that'll never sink in. A whole bunch of sub- 30 year old racers have figured out how to make those ****py Fords work right down into the `6's but who's counting? Then they'll say those are'nt "traditional" enough. So it's never gonna be a win here.

So to all you cool guys with your so cleverly crafted snide remarks all I can say is I asked for it. You are the kings of your narrow little world. Complete with a special set of convoluted rules to make sure you are right so relish in yourselves.

Lastly, like I said Dan sorry for hijacking your thread, I'll try my best to never do it again. Good luck with your project.

 

wow Dan.. what did you do? hahaha.. I make it a point not to read any posts that go over 4 or 5 lines, so I didn't read much of this. I'm sorry the Austin didn't work out, but you'll get your g***er one of these days.. I want a ride when you do!

 

Yeah, if you talk about SBC into non-chev around here... yeah, the drama spins right up.

I say go for it! Since you're not building a ***** "streetable" (God, I hate that ****ing word) car, you should be able to hit your goals. Just how to do it on the 'down low'. There are guys who've made 400+ HP with a pretty mild 318 mopar build, and I don't really think that'd be any great shakes better of a motor than a 327. I'd rather try to make big power outa' the Chev, for the simple fact that a) the pushrods push straight on the lifters, instead of at a goofy angle (which is hard to correct on the low $$$ route), and there's so much more stuff available used/cheap.

My friend's neighbor drag raced SS/E and /F cl*** SBC F bodies (and other things now); at the time he was running a low CR 350 in the tens by spinning it to 8K. Stock parts (blueprinted) including a cast crank; except for lightweight (very) pistons. Cheap? No. But it shows you don't need the trick parts. I'd expect that there've been more stock shortblock 327's spun to 7K than I've had hot meals. Hell, a good stock 383 MoPar (770 gram piston!) will take that as long as you keep on top of rod insert condition.

My .02: check the block for deck height; make sure you have good quench distance. With the right cam, you can run pretty good CR on pump gas. Here's a thread on that, with several engine builders chipping in, including a HRM pump gas drags heavy hitter. It also has a link to KB pistons' CR calculator, and a guy made up an excel spreadsheet you can download and play with.

One thing a number of guys who've run them have told me is that a mechanical roller cam will have better idle and low end power. Broader powerband (probably a good thing if you've only got two gears...), as well as more peak power. How about a Crower 276R? 267/286 on the seat, 248/250 at .050", .614"/.620" with 1.5 rockers; 104 LSA. Pulls from 2800 (so says Crower) in a 350; might have to go to 3500 or so in a 327?

I'd think real hard about getting the pistons cut for a big (.600"+) cam while I had the whole motor apart. Make room for the upgrade path. Remember, that little mouse can spin up high without any trick parts.

As far as what heads to run (seeing as yours look like they'll need work), I don't have a clue. I don't keep up on SBC's. My advice is to spend the money to do it right - whatever 'it' is. If the heads you have need a keeper, but are otherwise okay, you might just repair them, and save up for a good set of heads that'll get you closer to your goals. I wouldn't throw good money at "wimpy" castings.

I'm building a 383 Dodge right short block right now (4.25" crank, 4340 rods, light pistons), and am putting on a set of old un-cool heads on with a MP .528" mechanical cam (because I have them), but am leaving room for upgrade on the cam and heads so I can do them in a couple years when the money tree starts to grow back.

I know I maybe put up more ???'s than answers, but hope it helps.

-bill

 

I feel your pain, Henry Floored.

I went to Iola on Saturday, and there was this T-bucket for sale. I didn't pay any attention to it until the owner started it. That's when I noticed the engine. First, I noticed it had a cast aluminum air cleaner cover with the Ford logo on it. Good so far. But, as my gaze moved down, I noticed the distributor was on the rear of the engine and it wasn't a Y-block. Doh!

 

So, all of the guys that drive hundreds of miles to the HAMB Drags and Day of the Drags, race all day, and drive home, are driving "*****" cars because they are streetable?

Do you hate street cars on the strip, or just the word "streetable"?

 

Just for the record Henry. I was just spinning you up. I could care less really.

 

One thing I meant to add to the above post of mine was how well my pal's junkyard 327 w/T-350 and one of those very special "Nobody knows what the hell the ratio is and nobody cares cuz we're just runnin' around town and honkin down the highway anyway" 8" Ford diffs.

Did I mention the casual at***ude?

Anyway, it's a junkyard 327 as mentoned, pedigree unknown, compression tested ok, it runs a cam gear drive - which is useless, but sounds cool - a bigger than he oughta PAW hydraulic cam, a single quad intake with Edelbrock 600 and an MSD distributor which does nothing more than dispense sparks contrary to what some think.

Anyway, it's good a running, dependable little car and hauls *** pretty good.
The car is full fendered, has a top and probably weighs 2600#-2700#.

Pretty economical build, the car was free, the engine was free, the T-350 was obtained in a trade, the 8" was dragged out of some junk at a guys garage.
A free roadster . . . hard to believe . . . some of you will find the following hard to believe; the roadster came with a complete 34 Ford five window coupe, also free and in pretty good shape.

I know, some guys have all the luck and sometimes that luck can bite you in the ***, but the main part of all this is to show you can spend modest amounts of money - or less - and have a strong running car.

I think the doggoned roadster would crank off 100 mph flat in the 13.90's on street tires.

I have seen a 32 full fendered roadster running a moderately built - and carefully ***embled - 327 with T-350, big slicks, good headers etc. run 112 mph in the high 12's.
That particular car probaby weighed in at 2600# or so.

 

112 seems a little high for high 12's, to me. I'd think closer to 11's with slicks at 112 mph.

I'm running high 12's at just under 105. That's with mediocre 1.9+ 60 fts.

 

<TABLE id=HB_Mail_Container height="100&#37;" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0 UNSELECTABLE="on"><TBODY><TR height="100%" UNSELECTABLE="on" width="100%"><TD id=HB_Focus_Element vAlign=top width="100%" background="" height=250 UNSELECTABLE="off">Ford guys...bless their little hearts, they stand their ground and keep tryin'. And at least they're not doing the import thing.

P.S. Just friendly ribbing...I'd rather see you in my rear view than the Po-lice.
</TD></TR><TR UNSELECTABLE="on" hb_tag="1"><TD style="FONT-SIZE: 1pt" height=1 UNSELECTABLE="on">
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

I hear ya, but the ET's are reflective of the ch***is tune - or lack therof when running typical street rod suspension.

If I remember right, the car had the typical street rod 4 bar rear with the shorter bottom bars.
From what I understand these 4 bars tend to make the car's rear squat which aint' so good for traction.

And perhaps the guy didn't have a whole lot of drag strip experience.
Street rods generally don't get to run on the strip very often and they are most times not optimally set up nor is the driver very good....

 

I've got a 289 Ford in my '57 Plymouth.. so stop whining.

 

I just threw up !!!!!

 

Trade me for one of them Hemis and you'll feel better.

 

Just the word.

'Cause it's so subjective - really just means "whatever I think is an okay tradeoff for performance on a street car". Really doesn't have a universal meaning, such as "roller", "flat tappet" or "domed".

And when I was talking about "*****" cars, I really had something along the lines of a car that's tubbed and caged with a stock 305 TPI motor... you know, all show and no go. I don't think there's much cooler than a car that's built reliable enough that you can do a 3 digit cruise to the strip, and stout enough that it does you proud while you're there. Except for breasts, but that's O/T...

-bill

 

Make sure you finish that project. I'm a Chevy guy but I have a friend with one of those Falcons. More a "pro-street" deal but one one awesome ride!

I'll place a photo here of it from a few months ago. As you can see there's a "460" under the hood.

Thanks, Gary in N.Y.

P.S. This one also runs fine on pump-gas! And will put you "in-the-seat" most easily!

 

Take them to Brooks_Elliott , in South Austin. He did the cleanup on my Darts, and I'm about to bring him the Bowtie heads for my 406. And Lux has used him for other heads as well.

Are those rockers marked 17, or 1.7 as in lift ratio? The look like Chevy to me, but I really don't know. Maybe somebody else can tell by looking.

 

Okay good. I was hoping that I was misunderstanding you. Because what I was hearing didn't jive with stuff I've seen you post in the past.

 

1.7 rockers are likely BBC. Anything beyond 1.6 tends to cause problems in SBC. They do look very chebby-like.

If you do keep the stock heads, consider gasket matching the intake and exhaust port yourself. Good luck

 

..or small block Fords.

OEM is 1.5 for Chevrolet, 1.6 for Ford.. the higher ratio rockers are 1.6 for C and 1.7 for Ford.

I think big Fords run 1.73 from the factory...

 

A friend of mine runs a 65' Chevelle station wagon with a SBC. Turbo 350 went 10:30's but broke in qualifying. He borrowed another friends powerglide and the car went 10:00's. Now he runs a powerglide. If you're going to race the car, a powerglide would be the best bet.

 

BTW, the friend-of-a-friend who was running a Camaro in Super Stock... his first car was a first gen that ran a PG; was told that at one time it was the hardest launching SS/J car in the country. Guess they work okay... And I ****ed up; he ran SS/GTE & F in the car I mentioned earlier, not SS/E...

Makes me wish Ma MoPar had made a lightweight 2 speed with the reverse/1st guts from a 727. Then I wouldn't be scanning ePay for a cheap deal on a flexplate to go with my PG-440 adaptor.

Cougardan, I'm gonna' be watching this thread to see how this motor shakes out for ya'. Of course, I'm partial to cars with tunnel rams and fenderwell headers... Anyway, don't let the naysayers get you down: your money, your sweat, your car. Period. If they don't like it, take Tingler's advice and tell 'em to "eat your ***".

-bill

 

Thanks Buzzard for the name. AND, there was a point I could see on a couple of the rockers so 1.7 makes sense and they probably were for my 460 heads. I'll give Mr. Elliot a shout.

Dan

 

hi , would you sell the falcon ?? thank you phil