matt_lamb_160

I'd go with comp as well but and extreme energy XE256H. If you aren't touching the heads an alloy manifold is pointless other than weight saving and a cast 4brl manifold will be pretty much as good. If getting a manifold, the dual plane Weiand manifolds are meant to be the go. 465-600 Holley. 480cfm Autolite 4100?

I am not takin sides or forcing a debate, but I think PRO250 did ask two good questions in "what is the difference in flow-rate" and "what is the difference in torque required to drive them"? That info or info similar must be out there? It is good to see people thinking about something important, that is not given enough attention. Ando built pumps may start getting real popular here.

Pretty easy to get pretty good.

Middle screw on a 300a is idle only. Squared one on the bit that bolts on is the "power valve"

There are some pics in the wastegate position thread.

Yeah it is finished. Only running 7psi, but is still pretty good and I don't plan on changing it. Should do some time.Still haven't fixed the gaurd though, haha. Yeah, I know. Nope, it is mild steel. External wastegate and cat made it more $$$. Probably should have done it at home, but they did a pretty good job. No idea about tge power. I have thought that about the mani. I run the 4brl as it is easier to mount the carb to.

My rule is roughly 2 square inches (cross-sectional area) of exhaust per 100 HP.

I assume that timing includes the vac advance and that is why the numbers are high. What is the timing without vac advance (base and total)??

Yeah the OMVL setups don't work. The converters are good for HP, but mixer rings are not. Even with an air-rod variable mixer you use way more gas to make the same power as an Impco setup and the mixtures will vary way more. My turbo'ed Impco setup uses way less gas than my 180-200HP air-rod powered crossy did

A 1&20 300a on a 2brl manifold is neat and good though, just make sure it is a good spacer under it NOT a carby.

A 1&20 300a flows no more than a 225 and will be harder to fit on a banana manifold. If you don't rev over 4k I would use a 225 and a banana manifold. It will go way better than a 4brl manifold and 50&70 300a or 425 below 2,200rpm, but not as good beyond 4k. Don't use an OMVL RE90 unless you want to chew gas and make no power. Impco meter well and are a piece of piss to tune, so I see no point to GRA either, they are unnecessary $$$ in my mind.

It is a 4brl manifold. Yes it is blow through. Apart from the exhaust and good wastegate I think I have done it about as cheap as ir can be done wellish.

Interesting. I would have thought HPR30 was a bit in the heavy side in that application an HPR10 would be better.

Yep, they are the best bit of all!! Thanks Ando

It will be good

I am jumping in late here, but turboing is not all that cheap unless you do a lot yourself My parts (just from memory, I have never added it up before) Exhaust manifold $50 Intake manifold $350 Intercooler $200 Cooler piping $200 Gas carb $350 Other gas stuff $200 Turbo $900 (Garret) Ignition $400 Exhaust $1500 Waste gate $350 Fittings, hoses and stuff around $400 Engine "reco" $400 (already had a good cam and lifters) Auto $500 (500 HP kit, full manual valve body) + $300 for the auto and stall to start with. Probably more things there. But is reliable and is plenty to scare me.

11.5:1 with that cam and gas will be fine, but slightly less might be better. With the same size cam and over 12:1 compression I could not get full timing (only 26deg total, mind you I didn't want much more. Ideal would still be under 30deg most likely). I was planning on 11.5:1 at the time, but thought I'd see what happened (had another head ready to go on) and then stuck with it If you are building a highway car with 2.77 or 2.92 gears it will be great (assuming no over-drive here).

Agreed

Man, those LCA are ugly. The ones he ended up with (http://www.cfcomponents.com.au/lca.html) look good though (a dust cover for the spherical would be nice, but it is in a long way). Be nice what to know what "slightly longer" is with respect to the uprights, but it sounds like less of a drop is needed when compared to the stangs

My lower arm is pointing upwards. It looks pretty level until you put a tape on it. If the car was 40mm higher and had the Shelby drop, it'd be pretty good (but 40mm too high, haha). Mind you the measurements were bad and there is a bit of guess work in picking the centre of the ball joint.

I just measured mine very very roughly, but it is obvious that it wants more camber gain. Again, it is extremely rough, but it will have less than 0.2deg/inch camber gain. Ideally I'd like to lift the LCA mount at the chassis, as well as dropping the top (so I can set the roll centre above the ground, to work better with the Watt's link). Kind of wish I didn't look at it!!!

Interesting

No, they won't. That was my concern with them as well. Lots of mustangs use them though. I also wonder if the original vertical spacing between the control arms is the same on these Falcons as it is on the Mustangs? If it isn't, the Shelby drop is just a guess. I might work it out just for fun one day, but thought someone who is looking at doing the mod may have already. Save your $$$ on the real world test, a string model of the suspension points would tell 90% of the story. It would be interesting just the same, but I imagine you are pretty happy with yours as is.

Agree with wagoon, that it would be nice to know the spring rate versus deflection, but they look pretty good to me. With all the interest in the Shelby drop etc has anyone ever looked at what the camber gain and roll centre height is? You might find that you can do better than the std drop??

Has anybody here ever "wedged" the ball joint to improve the angle? I have seen your moded ones Crazy. Also has anybody ever measured the camber curve of the stock configuration to see whether or not the Shelby drop is of benefit on an x-falcon?