351 Windsor Swap

Trying to keep them under a standard height valve cover? That would make sense because the tall valve covers take up more room and make it harder to get to spark plugs. If thats not why I am curious to know the reason

 

Not just a standard height, but a shorter than standard height, low profile type valve cover. They should allow me to keep my power brakes without having to BFH anything. Not only that but they fit perfectly with the look I'm going for.

I don't think I'm giving anything up by not using roller fulcrums. The RPM range on this engine is going to be relatively low. And they are roller tipped 1.7's at least, not just stock...

 

my full rollers fit under stock covers fwiw

 

And the SVO's would have too, but I'm running these:



...They're tight, but the slope around the ends and the overall height should allow me a lot more room around the brake booster.

 

cool deal figured you had something up your sleeve

 

If you don't have enough clearance, they make a funny noise...

 

I'm told I have sick sense of humor, but I think not even I would find that noise funny...

 

Well my weekend project is done and running. Bolted on some trick flow heads and Rpm Air Gap manifold onto a 86 5.0 roller motor. this was in my brothers 65 Falcon. So how much progress did you make this weekend?

 

Saturday was wife's birthday, so not much... Friday night I finished cleaning up the pistons, valves and combustion chambers, got the heads bolted on and realized my torque wrench doesn't go up to the recommended 105 lb/ft, so I guess I'll be borrowing one from Auto Zone or something. Meanwhile they're torqued to 85. Sunday... I really don't have an excuse for not getting anything done that day. I was working on other people's stuff and I guess I just got tired. Last night I was kept awake by a brutal headache that I still have, so tonight's not looking great either, but if I find some energy I may go ahead and put the oil pump, timing cover, etc. together.

 

Okay, before you actually look at this next picture, open this link in another window or tab and minimize it:





Got it? Ok, NOW scroll down and look...


.


.


.


.


.


.


.


.


.


.


.


.



It really is better that way, isn't it?

 

I didn't realize before that the intake is a single plane. You never brought it up and the pics had it taped over. With all the research on compression ranges and cams did you look into the effects of the single plane manifold?

I don't know how well it's going to work with those stock heads. you may be missing some low end power with the single plane. You usable rpm range is going to move up quite a bit and may be hard to tune the carb at idle and low rpm. Just keep this in mind when you get it on the road and if the car dosn't respond the way you want it to think about swapping in a dual plane manifold.

 

It looks like a dual plane to me, unless my fundamental understanding of the difference has been wrong. It looks like the divider wall under the carb has been ground down some though. I don't know if that's factory or not...

 

Ok I see now, it is a dual plane. Somebody did do some grinding to it though. I read an article many years ago about doing that. they grind down the dividing plane to get some sort of power increase. I don't think it was proven to work since I never heard of it again.

 

That intake will work fine. They reduced the divider height to gain a few more high end pony's used to be common place just don't see it much anymore.

 

Yeah, I think I've read the same article at some point... My understanding is it does about the same thing as an open spacer without the added height. I don't know, long as it doesn't hurt anything I'm ok with it.