COMET CENTRAL

Rocket989 wrote:The HP makes sense and is a nice gain...but losing 27ft lbs. of torque?!? Where did torque peak before? Have you tried less total timing (and/ or maybe less initial)?

I don't know much about FE's but I thought I read they like a little less timing and the aluminum heads probably have a more efficient chamber (curious now - have to look) so may not need as much. Did the Eddy heads have the same size combustion chambers?

cairnscomet wrote:I now its not a Mercury but have just done a 2nd dyno run on the 66 390 Ranchero, C6, 9in
1st run a while back ,stock block,heads ,exh manifolds ,Edel RPM intake 750 Edel ,comp cam 268H with comp recommended springs ,187HP @ 4250RPM and max torque 331ftlbs ,16deg in and 36 total timing carby tuned for fuel economy

2nd run all same bar edelbrock alloy heads, slightly higher rate springs as it would valve bounce at 4200 hence peak test 1 ,FPA headers and richen the carby up -240hp@4710rpm and 304ftlbs@3700

would have been good to see differences with heads first the then headers made sense to fit all at once. 50hp does make it feel a lot more livelier
Now to try it out on the new strip just been built here Springmount Raceway

cairnscomet wrote:I now its not a Mercury but have just done a 2nd dyno run on the 66 390 Ranchero, C6, 9in
1st run a while back ,stock block,heads ,exh manifolds ,Edel RPM intake 750 Edel ,comp cam 268H with comp recommended springs ,187HP @ 4250RPM and max torque 331ftlbs ,16deg in and 36 total timing carby tuned for fuel economy

2nd run all same bar edelbrock alloy heads, slightly higher rate springs as it would valve bounce at 4200 hence peak test 1 ,FPA headers and richen the carby up -240hp@4710rpm and 304ftlbs@3700

would have been good to see differences with heads first the then headers made sense to fit all at once. 50hp does make it feel a lot more livelier
Now to try it out on the new strip just been built here Springmount Raceway