427 FE What do you think?????

[jhv48]

Hey guys,

His mind is made up!

He's not seeking opinions, he's defending his.

Let him build the engine his way and then we can listen to him complain about it after he has it on the "street" for a week.

May look and sound cool, but won't drive worth a s--t!

[lemans24]

Hey Priobe: Close your eyes and pull the trigger. it will look awsome. there
won't be any gas anyway ,so who cares how it runs.lololol

[Excaliber]

priobe says,

I have contacted injection weber setup and asked them to compare the weber carb to the injection version and point blank the individual stated the carbs were just as good as the injection. I would not see a difference in power as long as the webers are properly tuned.

Personally I would run the Webers because they look cool. Will you 'see a difference'? Or a better question would be, will you 'feel a difference'? Most likely you won't see or feel it without a timing tree or exacting lap times carefully measured. So, in that respect the quote is accurate at the same time it may be misleading.

My rebuilt motor gave up about 150 horse power from what I had before. I can BARELY 'feel' the difference, and 150 h.p. is a LOT! But it shows up at the drag strip where the electronic timers don't lie! In the real world? Well all I know is the engine sure is nicer to drive on the STREET, more smiles per miles than I was getting before.

[priobe]

JHV48,

You see this is exactly what I mentioned in the begining. I did not want this to turn in to a debate or argument, but here goes so directed question since you feel the motor will run like 5h1t.
As I mentioned, I think we are all learing from this. Those of us that have Webers carbs.
Here we go!

As suggested by your fellow peers, take the motor to a person that has experience with this setup. OK

Since you are so confident to step up to the plate to offer a direct out come I would like to ask you a few question to validate you conclusion.

1) How many FE have you built ?
2) How many FE have you built with Webers
3) How many FE are in your shop / garage currently?
4) From what I can tell from this thread, the safest approach has been said to pull off the Webers and use a Holley. I have no problem with that response. What is your take on that? I am assuming you have the knownledge working with webers and cam profiles to come to your conclusion.
Please respond.

5)What is your suggestion for the setup.


You have a customer which has a 427 SO with Webers. What cam would you use?

Ask me what ever questions you like on the build that are not posted here. How do you handle this situation without getting rid of the webers.

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by Excaliber

My rebuilt motor gave up about 150 horse power from what I had before. I can BARELY 'feel' the difference ... Well all I know is the engine sure is nicer to drive on the STREET, more smiles per miles than I was getting before.

If more novice Cobraphiles took that simple advice and followed it you would see far less "600HP Cobra for Sale, Only 1500 Miles!" over on Cobra County. Don't get me started on that....

[RICK LAKE]

Proibe Phil you can't compare webers to holley carbs,for JHV48 it doesn't matter how many motors he built, bought, or leased. Weber carbs are great for CERTAIN applications. They make great MIDRANGE HP. 48mm where used for the 289 motors and could rev them to 7,400 rpm. They had the on the GT-40's but opped out of the single 4 barrel. A lot less moving parts for a 24 hour race. Less things to break, come loose, or fall apart. This is an endurance race, not a 4 hour speed race. There also had a 6,500 rpm limit on the motors to save them for the 24 hours. They gave up 35 HP in the midrange with the holley but picked up top end speed. I never saw a set of 58mm on a 289 motor. The 58mm Olbergs and Webbers where for the Can-am cars. I asked you to send me a copy of the specs from your motor, I received nothing. So here goes, You want to run webers, run them, The cam is large but the webers will remove some of the lift and duration if they are setup right. 11.0-1 compression is OK. The CFM is going to be the limit on the motors rpm. In the high rpm it's like you trying to suck air through a straw. The motor A/F is going to richen up from no more air flow. 48mm Have a limited rpm in a 427 motor. It's about max CFM of the carbs. The only differents is you are running 8 carbs instead of a single 4 barrel carb with a min of 650cfm air avaliable for each cylinder not 280. KCR has a nice smaller roller camshaft for your setup. RUN IT. I have one of his cams,roller for my 498 motor with 58mm TWM setup going on it. Yes I have alot more drivablity then you will with the webers because of the computor and other sensors. Even before CC started guys where running webers on 427 motors, and they all say just about the same thing, Great midrange power, proven on the dynos, both motor and chassic. Problem air flow at high rpms, the little carbs run out. If you have and real port work done to your heads, they are going to outflow the carbs. If the webers where so great, everyone would be running them at the race tracks, They only ran the 58mm for the 427 and up motors. I hope you are running an air box that is pressurized. Reason the back carbs DON'T get the same clean air as the front ones. Air also doesn't like to do 90 degree turns. The only BBC motors I have seen and running well had on the 58mm Olbergs or Webers. Small blocks, I have seen alot running the 48mm setups. Your money, time and car, Do what you want, If the motor has a melt down, build another. Bigger is not always better, that's all the guys on the thread are trying to say and save you alot of money and problems. Yes I learned the hard way too. Rick L.

[priobe]

Rick,

I would be more than happy to send you any information you need. I am not saying that I am using the Webers for maxium performance. I will not be using this for anytime type of racing except for enjoyment racing.

As for Weber IDA 48 being used only or majority for 289, well I heard that back in the 60's the webers were used on plently of BBC and BB Fords.

Take alook at the Inglese Website.

Are they talking out of their butt ?

Again KC has recommended to another user on CC a simular cam setup. Havent many members stated to crate the motor and send it to them ?


I will say again Comp and Crane, as well as Holman Moody have all stated that the cam is not big.

Why you many members contiune stating that this is a big cam ?

That is where I am confused.

It seems as thou some CC members state to use the holley for more power. Again I am not looking for max power.

If this was the case I would be building a 427 SOHC from Dove.

Can you please indicate why everyone is stating this is a big cam when the very same company's CC members tell me to consult?

[priobe]

Ooo and by the way, what does it not matter how many motors JHV48 has been in contact with?

I thought this was a major factor for having a Ford FE motor built.

If he does not have any experiece with FE or Webers where is he getting his conclusions from?

"If you motor is the only FE motor in the shop, run away"?


Its funny until recently, everyone with the webers were running rich with 37 mm choke until Eljaro posted his findings.
Now it seems as thou everyone is slowly moving to larger choke...even the 289 guys.

It seems as thou we are all still learning.

[jhv48]

No, I am not a master engine builder, and neither are you!

I am smart enough, however, to listen to these guy's opinions.

You are seeking opinions from knowlegeable individuals and choosing to ignore it.

Build the engine the way you want.

But have the cojones to tell us how much you hate it after you decide to replace or sell it because it has no street manners.

[olddog]

Priobe -- I owned one FE in my life and never owned or worked on webbers. So an expert I am not. I don't think you are trying to argue, but you want it explained to your satifaction. I will make a stab at it.

As durration goes up, the piston shoves air back out the intake valve on the compression stroke at lower rpms, thus the cylinder is less full and the engine makes less torque, at low rpm. This does allow the cylinder to fill better at high rpm, when there is less time to get the air into the cylinder. So big durration cams, cause the engine to make more torque at high rpm and less torque at low rpm. The more the durration, the more radically lopsided the torque curve gets. Actually the torque curve starts to look more like a picture of a volcano, when durration gets very high.

With a sigle carb and a common plenumb, a high durration cam, at idle, is pushing air and exhaust back up into the intake manifold causing instability. This instability causes cylinders to fill differently giving the lumppy idle. Webbers tame down the idle because each cylinder is connected to an independent pipe. There is simply less instability with the webbers, as no cylinder impacts the others.

What people are trying to say is that you are putting in a cam that will make its peak torque well above the rpm that your webbers will be able to supply the necessary CFM to make that torque. Therefore you will not see the high rpm torque that the cam could make, and you will loose all your low rpm torque. This is what I call a loose loose situation.

All this seems to be driven by the fact that you want a lumpy idle that the webbers, by there very nature, will not allow. If you are willing to have less power and an ill manored engine just to get a radical sounding idle and the look of the webbers, then go for it, but don't get mad when my small block zooms by.

[jhv48]

If you still want that lumpy idle and a streetable engine, simply disconnect one plug wire.

Bingo, lumpy idle. You can impress all the boys now.

And you can simply reconnect it and actually enjoy driving the car.

I'm done!

[priobe]

jhv48,

Since you have failed to provide me with your creditials, I guess you are just entitled to your opionion.

Olddog,

I hear what you are saying and appriciate the explaination. I am only stating that this was a cam recommended by Inglese and Comp Cam. If these companies as well as others Holman Moody, Keith Craft, and Crane came back with a simular profile I do not understand why the CC members disagree.

I would like to contact Inglese with your as well other feedback to find out as to why they recommended this profile. If I am not able to have a lopy idle which I am not really expecting because a lopy idle means less vacuum than so be it.


But in order to have some sort of case as to why they are recomending this profile I have to be abe to provide them with some comments.

It seems as thou even if I were to send my motor to some of these expect FE builders I would be running into the same problem with comments.

Now,


Do you members feel that I am recieving wrongful information from Inglese and Comp?

[767Jockey]

Phil,
Webers open another whole can of worms. It's too bad that one or two here can't be more like Rick Lake and offer advice without admonishment. Sometimes the haughty self righteous attitudes a very few display amaze me. I thought these cars were all about fun.

I am not an engine builder by any means. I can tell you that I have corresponded back and forth with Keith Craft many times on the subject of Webers, and have finally made the decision to proceed without them. That in no way means that you're making the wrong decision to use them - it's just not a scenario that I want to pursue. The reasons I abandoned the Weber option were twofold. First, Keith made it very clear that a Weber setup and a 4bbl setup on the same exact engine required two different cam profiles in order to optimize either induction setup for maximum driveability and power output. Once you have both setups optimized for both the Weber setup and a 4bbl setup on the same engine, the Weber setup will be 25 - 35 HP shy of the 4bbl setup. That is one disadvantage of them.

Another, as you already know, is the complexity of dialing them in and keeping them there. In the end I just don't want to deal with that. The biggest draw to Webers is the fact that there's noting out there short of Rick Lake's amazing stack injection setup that looks as awesome under the hood as a full brace of Webers. To me, and I suspect to you as well, it's the ultimate eye candy for these cars. The best combination of power output, driveability, ease of tuning and visual appeal, far and away, is the stack fuel injection setup like Rick has. Unfortunately, I'm about $9K shy at the moment!

Cobras in and of themselves are not "intelligent" car choices. Rather, they're visceral, the fulfillment of lifelong dreams in most cases. Trying to make "intelligent" choices with them is almost an oxymoron. You want a smart car choice? Buy a Prius.

We do the best we can, go with our wants and emotions, trying to balance that with intelligence, and usually all end up where you are now, trying to make sense of a situation that by definition really makes no sense at all. It's all just about what you really want in the end. What you want here likely makes no sense, but that's OK. In the end, it's just all about making yourself happy. If the Webers do it for you, then go for it! Have fun, that's what these cars are all about. Best advice I can give you is call Keith Craft, ask him about your cam and what he would recommend, make the choice and live with it.

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by 767Jockey

Sometimes the haughty self righteous attitudes a very few display amaze me. I thought these cars were all about fun.

That's absolutely right. Phil, the closest thing I've owned to Webers were dual Solex carbs -- and they were a pain. BUT, half the fun of these cars is monkeying with them. Take your best shot at what you want, and if it's not right, try it again. Unless you're taking food away from your kids, you're just having fun (and so are we), and it's just money. So have some fun and spend some of your kids' inheritance on your FE -- you deserve it.

[olddog]

Ask the cam manufacture at what rpm will your engine make its peak torque and peak Hp. At these points what volumetric efficency (VE) do they predict. Also ask what torque the engine should be putting out at your cruising rpm, which should be between 2000 and 3000. First question is are you willing to turn your engine 500 to 1000 rpm past the peak Hp rpm they give you? If not it's too much cam.

Then find out how many cfm the webbers can flow. With your cid, the VE, and rpm that the engine will peak calculate how many cfm will be needed. Compare that to what your webbers can flow. If the webbers cannot feed the cam, then get bigger webbers or less cam. Feed this info back to the cam manufacturer and see what they say.

[priobe]

Olddog,

Thank for this feedback. First thing tomorrow morning I will contact Inglese and ask Chuck these questions.

This was the feedback and suggestions I was looking for.

I will post the information and with this information they will now have to justify their cam selection.

Thank you once again.

[convincor]

here's another you may want to talk to- http://www.pacifier.com/~orcam/index.html

[RICK LAKE]

Priobe While I don't own a KCR engine he is the the for front of the FE world. He has spent thousands and thousands of dollars to design and OWN the rights to about 20 custom cams from Comp. He started with Kuntz along time ago and went his own way and is building alot of motors,Both GM and Ford. IMO Comp cams,Crane, and Holman/Moody are not into Webber carbs. The first 2 sell camshafts the Last is a Nascar racer builder for the 60-70's. I don't think webers where allowed by nascar, I could be wrong. Holman/Moody are sell 40 year old technology. I have looked at there camshafts for sale. KCR is got the latest and greatest. Keith C is not a fan of webers not to say he wouldn't build you a motor or sell a camshaft that works. Most cams are built on computors now just like my motors I build for my cobra. I use Dynosim and dyno2000. They are both within 5% or the real numbers. Crane, Comp, Isky, and the rest of the cam companies are all doing about the same thing, Build cams on computor, give or sell them to good customers for testing in the real world. If they work, they sell them if not, they are stored on disc for possible future ideas. Edelbrock I believe is the only one who has the buildings,money, engineers, computors, and machinists to do all the work in house. Inglese and weber both sell great carbs. NEITHER one sells camshafts to go with there carbs??? They rely on feed back. The only guy I know running Webers, sorry Olbergs (58MM) is running a 482 motor with a .750"+ camshaft, 11.0-1 compression and makes over 700 rwhp. This motor has been running this way since 97. The LSA is 112. He has told me that the main problem is intake valve reversion. It's a solid roller camshaft. He went through 5 customs to get this setup to work right. Total expense with the Carbs rebuilt By Gene O. was $17,000.00.dollars. This was with over 80 hours on dyno time on the car. The car runs on pumped gas high test, no adders. This is what webers can do that a single or dual 4 barrels can't. I have looked into the webers before I went with the TWM's and FI. I was told alot of info on them about every day the car runs different, and so on and so on. With a 427 motor and a .600-.630 lift, this motor will give you the best of both worlds. If you want send the numbers, I will run them and send back on a private e-mail unless you say other wise. Rick L. Good Luck Ps Phil I run beehive springs and most of the engine builders don't like them for the single spring issues. They don't know what they are missing. I am also going to a 8mm or 5/16" valve in my edelbrock heads to save more weight and drop the seat pressures. I have run beehives for 4 years and they work under the right conditions and application. No problem yet. Knock on wood.

[Chaplin]

Originally Posted by priobe

jhv48,

I hear what you are saying and appriciate the explaination. I am only stating that this was a cam recommended by Inglese and Comp Cam. If these companies as well as others Holman Moody, Keith Craft, and Crane came back with a simular profile I do not understand why the CC members disagree.

I would like to contact Inglese with your as well other feedback to find out as to why they recommended this profile. If I am not able to have a lopy idle which I am not really expecting because a lopy idle means less vacuum than so be it.


But in order to have some sort of case as to why they are recomending this profile I have to be abe to provide them with some comments.

It seems as thou even if I were to send my motor to some of these expect FE builders I would be running into the same problem with comments.

Now,


Do you members feel that I am recieving wrongful information from Inglese and Comp?

Priobe-
Go back and look at Keith's post on page one of this thread. Keith does not agree with this cam choice and flat out said that that is too much cam for Webers and that you will not be happy with it.

Keith wrote-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Like the guys mentioned I think that is way to much camshaft for the Webbers. I do not believe you will be happy with it and that you will have problems with the Webber tuning. They do not want to turn real high rpms anyway so I would look more at a 242/ 248 with about 114 lobe seperation and .620 to .630 lift. This would be on the big side and would even go smaller if I wanted it to drive real well down in the 2000 to 3000 rpms range which is where you cruise most of the time. Good Luck, Keith


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you take no one else's advice, I would listen to what Keith wrote. And just because Inglese and Comp Cams are owned by the same company doesn't mean that the techs on the phone at either comapny are experts with the other product. After all, the same company owns KFC, Pizza Hut and Taco Bell, but don't expect an employee of KFC to know how to make tacos or pizza or vice versa!

[priobe]

Chaplin,

This is true about your pizza hut example.But we are not making pizzas

But I mentioned that Inglese worked with Comp Engineer to come up with this profile.

And as for you Keith C Quote

Here is one from a member who posted on this thread:

"The present cam is a mechanical roller, Crower 301R, with 258/264 @ .050, .663/.675 lift, and 108° lob separation and it is probably too much. But I would like to try it before I order a new cam.

I mailed both Keith Craft and Barry Rabotnick. Keith Craft recommended the same cam as above. Barry R. wrote that he to would like to try my present cam first."

Also, no offense Keith, but you rather not use them. So why would I seek advise from someone who does not like the product.

I feel that I should at least spend $300 before I ditch the webers and buy 2 4 bbls and an intake along with a camshaft.