[Phila]

Hey guys

I’m starting a build thread on here to show what I’m doing, to ask a bunch of questions, and to try and be helpful to other people down the road who are looking to do something similar.

I have an 03 cobra, currently stock longblock with head studs. E85, Gen2 2.9 and 24lbs. I just got a Gen5 3.0 and will be putting it on the stock longblock while building another engine alongside in the garage. It’s a second vehicle, I drive it to work every once in a while, and take it to the track as often as life/work allows

I don’t have a specific HP or ET goal in mind. I want a car that runs, idles, and drives well, something that’s reliable. I’m not looking to drive this car to the moon and back, but I’d like to be able to hop in and turn the key without thinking twice about reliability issues. I’m planning on ~10.5:1, with boost numbers somewhere in the same vicinity as I am at now. If it makes 1000rw and drives as well as it does now, that’d be great with me.

So, I figured I’d kind of have two things going on at the same time and would post up some pictures and where I’m planning to go with this.

First, getting the bigger blower set up and ready to install. I was able to get the J2Fab intercooler and water manifold, and I’m hoping those will help out quite a bit with charge temps.

I am going to run a trunk tank for the Intercooler with an EMP pump. Currently working on line sizing, fittings, and routing over the IRS (yes, it’s there still). I think the 7/8”ID hose will be the best fit in terms of flow/capacity and feasibility with routing. The ID of the pump, Intercooler manifold, and the heat exchanger barbs is all the same size, and the hose maintains a workable bend radius to snake up and back from the trunk. I coated the tank with some kind of bedliner to hopefully keep sweating to a minimum with ice at the track.

Currently waiting for top end gaskets to ship along with better pneumatic/vacuum fittings and then I’ll be able to install this guy:

I picked up a stock-bore Teksid block out of a MarkVIII from a local guy. Everything looks good and all cylinders have cross-hatching top to bottom on all bores. I spent a bit of time deburring and smoothing everything as well as chasing all threaded holes for heads/mains. I used James’ (Cobra Engineering) plate for the oversized timing pins, which worked out really, really well.

It’s over at the machine shop where we’ll use old gaskets and a torque plate to figure out just how far over I’ll need to go to end up with perfectly round cylinders. Hoping it’ll clean up at just a few thousandths over stock size. Then I’ll order Gibtec pistons with pins and rings as per Ed’s suggestions.

I ordered King main bearings part numbers MB5219SI and MB5281SI to combine for the full-flanged thrust bearing that’s been discussed here. It will have a six-speed behind it (for now, at least...) so I hadn’t planned to drill the thrust face, though certainly could/would if it’s suggested to do that. Stock-stroke Kellogg crank at standard/standard sizing that will be studded as per the Crank Tech article here. Still unsure which route I’m going to go for balancer (IW vs ATI) and which front assembly (stock caged vs Metco) I’m going to use. Not 100% if the crank stud makes the stock cage redundant, or if the cage offers more strength/stability for the snout.

Rod choice is still up in the air. I’ve talked with quite a few people about this and it sounds like it’ll likely be either the Molnar power adder or the Manley H-Tuff. Either choice I will use the ARP 2000 series fasteners. I’m planning to use King SI bearings here as well.

Heads/cams still up in the air. I’ll most likely order custom cams, and springs/retainers as suggested by the cam designer. I’ve learned I can reuse stock followers, and I ordered stock-replacement lash adjusters from Melling. I’d like to go with ported heads, waiting to hear back on a set, and I have a set of DB castings in the garage that I’ll send out to get done if it turns out the first set isn’t available. I’ll be using FelPro gaskets 26187PT/26222PT as they’re apparently up to the task after talking with a few guys who are making way more power than I’m hoping to make.

I have ARP studs for heads and mains.

I’ll have all sorts of questions as time goes. I’m still undecided on engine management, other than I know I don’t think the stock ECU is a safe option any longer. Holley, MS3, etc are on my radar.

Thanks for reading. I’ll post more as time goes, as more parts show up, and when I have questions.

Phil

 

[4sdvenom]

Very nice!
Sounds very similar to my build! Except I have an unused Aluminator block and a new set of DC casting FRPP/Roush CNC ported heads. I'm also going 10.5:1 on compression with Gibtech pistons and custom cams. I went with Molnar Power Adder rods as well as the MS3 Pro for engine management. All of the other details are the same except I have a Lentech 4r70w behind mine and a built SRA backing that up. I just ordered ARH 1 7/8" x 3" longtubes and their matching 3" off-road x pipe as well as a Whipple Gen5 3.0 supercharger and will be pushing similar boost numbers on E85. If I were you I would look into the J2Fab crank support with the Innovator's West damper and Metco 4lb lower pulley to round out your crank stud mod. That's the route I'm going with unless MFP releases their crank support in the meantime. Then it'll be a decision based on price and who's has the better design.
Good luck with your build and I'll be following it quite closely. You're a few steps ahead of me right now but I'm hoping to get my build thread going soon.

Ken

 

[eschaider]

Hey guys

I’m starting a build thread on here to show what I’m doing, to ask a bunch of questions, and to try and be helpful to other people down the road who are looking to do something similar. ...

I want a car that runs, idles, and drives well, something that’s reliable. I’m not looking to drive this car to the moon and back, but I’d like to be able to hop in and turn the key without thinking twice about reliability issues. I’m planning on ~10.5:1, with boost numbers somewhere in the same vicinity as I am at now. If it makes 1000rw and drives as well as it does now, that’d be great with me.

So, I figured I’d kind of have two things going on at the same time and would post up some pictures and where I’m planning to go with this.

Phil,

Good instincts. I thought I would share a couple of thoughts on the engine, the build and what to expect down the line.

These engines do not need much encouragement to produce fairly impressive power numbers and do it reliably. There is a sensibility threshold you might want to think about. Whenever we talk about Terminator HP it is almost always in terms of RWHP, we tend not to think about FWHP. RWHP is essentially 85% of FWHP.

The engines begin to get progressively more temperamental and less fun to operate (other than in a race car) when your RWHP exceeds 700. 700 RWHP is esentially a whisper north of 820 FWHP. At 820 FEHP you are a 3HP per cubic inch engine. That is right on par with the best ProStock engines in the country. Despite the high power per inch numbers these engines are still pretty reliable at that plateau. As you go higher the reliability starts to disappear with increasing rapidity.

First, getting the bigger blower set up and ready to install. I was able to get the J2Fab intercooler and water manifold, and I’m hoping those will help out quite a bit with charge temps.

You will find the charge temps on the 3.0L Whipple are surprisingly low which is where a lot of the additional HP comes from. Whipple changed the rotor profiles and the change was impressively good. The J2Fab IC will certainly improve on that performance.

I am going to run a trunk tank for the Intercooler with an EMP pump. Currently working on line sizing, fittings, and routing over the IRS (yes, it’s there still). I think the 7/8”ID hose will be the best fit in terms of flow/capacity and feasibility with routing. The ID of the pump, Intercooler manifold, and the heat exchanger barbs is all the same size, and the hose maintains a workable bend radius to snake up and back from the trunk. I coated the tank with some kind of bedliner to hopefully keep sweating to a minimum with ice at the track..

This approach works well at the track but not so much on a street car. At the track you will need to replenish the ice every pass. On the street this is a problem.

I picked up a stock-bore Teksid block out of a MarkVIII from a local guy. Everything looks good and all cylinders have cross-hatching top to bottom on all bores. I spent a bit of time deburring and smoothing everything as well as chasing all threaded holes for heads/mains. I used James’ (Cobra Engineering) plate for the oversized timing pins, which worked out really, really well.

Teksids are good block choices, Aluminators are even better.

Whenever you do thread chasing on a used block you should be using a thread forming tap like the original CNC machines used to thread the various locations on the block. A cutting tap will significantly reduce your thread engagement and produce a weaker fastener anchor point. I recently was torquing the heads down on a high dollar race block that someone decided to do thread chasing on (why ?). The head studs felt 'different' than I was used to as I began the torquing process. At 50 ft/lbs one of the head studs made a loud cracking sound like a gunshot. I thought the stud had broken and I was going to have to fish it out of the hole.

When I pulled up on the nut, the entire stud came out of the block with the aluminum threads from the block. The cutting tap had reduced the %thread engagement to a ferrous metal spec that was insufficient to hold even 50 ft/lbs of torque. The entire block had to be re-studded for larger fasteners. This was about a $2000 detour that was not necessary but for the use of a cutting tap instead of a thread forming tap.

If you used a cutting tap, as I suspect you did, I would give some consideration to replacing that block before you spend more prep dollars on it — its cheaper than re-studding. If and when you do look for a Teksid block consider using an Aluminator block. As good as the Teksid is, the Aluminator is better.

...Stock-stroke Kellogg crank at standard/standard sizing that will be studded as per the Crank Tech article here.

Be sure to have the snout cut for double square keys. The OEM woodruff key is inadequate for driving a supercharger especially a 3.0L Whipple.

Rod choice is still up in the air. I’ve talked with quite a few people about this and it sounds like it’ll likely be either the Molnar power adder or the Manley H-Tuff. ... I’m planning to use King SI bearings here as well.

Molnar's are excellent rods. The new Manley H-Tuff's are even better. The original Manley H-Beams were pretty good copies of the Carrillos they were mimicking. The new H-Tuff's are right on par with the Carrillo's, they're just $2000 less expensive.

Heads/cams still up in the air. I’ll most likely order custom cams, and springs/retainers as suggested by the cam designer. I’ve learned I can reuse stock followers, and I ordered stock-replacement lash adjusters from Melling. I’d like to go with ported heads, waiting to hear back on a set, ... I’ll be using FelPro gaskets 26187PT/26222PT as they’re apparently up to the task after talking with a few guys who are making way more power than I’m hoping to make.

There are a lot of cam sources that will point you down the road of too big a cam. The engine will sound ferocious and not perform. A good example of how little cam and compression is necessary is Broke7, he used to be one of the mods on the site here. He has a 9:1 compression 6 speed Terminator with a 3.0L Whipple at mid 20;s boost with a set of 10 or 12 year old, off the shelf Crower or Comps (I don't remember which anymore). The cams are essentially 222˚ with 0.475" / 0.450" lift if they are the Comps or 212˚ with 0.484" lift if they are Crowers. He runs high eight second passes at 160 mph with a full weight nothing stripped off the car 03/04 Terminator! You don't need to get crazy with these engines. It is important to properly phase the cams to the crank. When it comes time there will be much to say about that.

Livernois head porting is a country mile better than anything commercially available today. It is money well spent. Read this post on heads, click here => Ported Heads

I have ARP studs for heads and mains.

Be sure to use ARP 2000 studs for the heads.

You should have a very enjoyable fun car at the 700 RWHP threshold. When you get above that you get into a numbers bragging contest that progressively makes the car less attractive to drive on the street. Even more importantly there is no way you can hook up that much power on the street.

For a PCM I highly recommend the MS3Pro Plug and Play system. It will plug right into the OEM Ford wiring harness connector and run all your dash instruments like stock. If you are in a smog sensitive state you can plug in the OEM computer for smog test and then put the MS3 back afterwards. Read the write up here => MS3Pro PnP and watch the two 7 minute install videos at the end of the post.


Ed


p.s. 10.5:1 compression on a supercharged gasoline engine will not make for a happy street life. You will always be needing the highest octane available and then adding octane enhancers to mitigate detonation. Eventually you will pull timing to protect the engine and the power you had hoped for will be unavailable to you. Stay in the 8.5 to 9:1 space if you are serious about your initial, I want a car that runs, idles, and drives well, something that’s reliable, is for real.

 

[Phila]

If I were you I would look into the J2Fab crank support with the Innovator's West damper and Metco 4lb lower pulley to round out your crank stud mod. That's the route I'm going with unless MFP releases their crank support in the meantime.

Hi Ken
Looks like we’re after similar builds. Thanks for checking in. I appreciate the crank support suggestion. I have an IW813 balancer, essentially the stock 03 replacement that’ll work with the caged lower. I’m not sure if the stock lower pulley will be able to spin the blower fast enough without slipping on what would have to be a really small upper pulley. I’m looking into the 2lb/4lb lower options and learning about those now. I talked with John M who suggested an ATI balancer, and it looks like Metco makes a hub that’ll attach their rings. So, work to do on this front still.



Ed - thanks for the reply. I’m hoping the block hasn’t been compromised thread-wise, as I used the ARP 11mm thread cleaning tap instead of a cutting tap.

I’ve read differing opinions on single- vs dual-keyed crank snouts. From what I understand, the key locates the sprocket and balancer rather than preventing it from turning. With the studded snout at 180lb-ft, is the 2nd keyway necessary still? I’ve gotten a few lower timing parts in so far, including the Accufab billet reluctor. However...I didn’t do my homework because it looks like it’s going to be too thick for the billet Cloyes sprocket (S869HP). So, after John M advised against the stamped reluctor wheel, looks like I’ll either need to run an earlier crank sprocket without the shoulder, or somehow machine the shoulder off of the one I have.

I like the H-Tuff rod suggestion, and unless I come up with a reason not to use those, I’ll probably head in that direction! Thanks for the suggestion here. That’s funny you mentioned Allen Broke7 - a guy who spent nearly 2hrs on the phone with me the other night as a complete stranger, awesome guy and resource to have for us cobra guys. He’d mentioned the cams he’s using and making great power with. If I had to rank the priority of camshaft attributes, it would be 1)drivability, 2)power, and 3)sound/lope. If it does the first two things well, that’s all I care about.

Ed, I run E85 full time. Luckily there’s a pump about two miles from the house. The input on HP is well taken, And I certainly don’t want to turn this into a car that is not drivable on the street. It makes just over 800rw now with the 2.9, and certainly doesn’t hook in the first couple of gears anywhere but the track. A couple hundred more won’t improve that at all, but hopefully swapping from the 4.10s now to something like 3.55-3.73 will help Currently it goes through the lights at 6900rpm at the top of fourth, so I’ll try and re-gear it to do the same with the new engine combo.

Phil

 

[eschaider]

...
Ed - thanks for the reply. I’m hoping the block hasn’t been compromised thread-wise, as I used the ARP 11mm thread cleaning tap instead of a cutting tap.

If you were using the ARP thread chaser it is a much better solution than a cutting tap. The cutting tap will ruin the rolled thread the factory put in the block. The thread chaser is like a rolled tap in that it doesn't brmove metal, so that is good news.

I’ve read differing opinions on single- vs dual-keyed crank snouts. From what I understand, the key locates the sprocket and balancer rather than preventing it from turning. With the studded snout at 180lb-ft, is the 2nd keyway necessary still? I’ve gotten a few lower timing parts in so far, including the Accufab billet reluctor. However...I didn’t do my homework because it looks like it’s going to be too thick for the billet Cloyes sprocket (S869HP). So, after John M advised against the stamped reluctor wheel, looks like I’ll either need to run an earlier crank sprocket without the shoulder, or somehow machine the shoulder off of the one I have.

The OEM crank snout diameter is 1.250" and the press fit length is 0.700" for a press fit of 0.56 diameters. This is inadequate for a damper of any mass on a performance engine. Keys and keyways are supposed to be used for indexing the keyed component to the driving shaft. The press fit and the attaching bolt are supposed to maintain positioning. The simple fact of the matter is the 0.56 diameter press fit, the light press fit and the woodruff key will allow the damper to move on the crank snout, shearing or mutilating the woodruff key and the crank snout.

The double 3/16" hardened steel keys make it more difficult for the damper to move on a stock sized snout. Upgrading the press fit to a 0.0015" or 0.002" press fit will substantially improve the damper location issues also. If you have the opportunity to go the billet crank route the absolute best fix is the use of a 1.400" diameter, 0.700" longer snout, with a 0.002" press fit and a full length 3/16" hardened steel square key all held in place by an ARP LS7 5.185" long, 18mm diameter damper bolt, torqued to 250 ft/lbs.

The stamped reluctor wheel will work just fine for our engine applications. If you want to use the thicker billet piece decrease the thickness of the Cloyes lower sprocket by the difference in the thickness of the stamped wheel and the thicker billet wheel.

I like the H-Tuff rod suggestion, and unless I come up with a reason not to use those, I’ll probably head in that direction! Thanks for the suggestion here. That’s funny you mentioned Allen Broke7 - a guy who spent nearly 2hrs on the phone with me the other night as a complete stranger, awesome guy and resource to have for us cobra guys. He’d mentioned the cams he’s using and making great power with. If I had to rank the priority of camshaft attributes, it would be 1)drivability, 2)power, and 3)sound/lope. If it does the first two things well, that’s all I care about.

The H-Tuff rods will exceed any strength requirement you are likely to have. If you and Allen talked about cams, pay close attention to what ge tells you. Allen had a choice of going with super duper custom pieces and elected to stay with his 10 years old plus off the shelf cams. It is unlikely you will find another 6 speed Cobra substantially improving on his performance let alone equalling it.

Ed, I run E85 full time. Luckily there’s a pump about two miles from the house. The input on HP is well taken, And I certainly don’t want to turn this into a car that is not drivable on the street. It makes just over 800rw now with the 2.9, and certainly doesn’t hook in the first couple of gears anywhere but the track. A couple hundred more won’t improve that at all, but hopefully swapping from the 4.10s now to something like 3.55-3.73 will help Currently it goes through the lights at 6900rpm at the top of fourth, so I’ll try and re-gear it to do the same with the new engine combo.

Phil

With E85 for a street driven moderate combination I would suggest an 11:1 c/r. Gibtec already has the design for that piston and has built them for others. They work extremely well on either of the two alcohols. If you can get consistently good E-85 or better you can easily go to 13:1 compression w/o any problems. The big issue is fuel consistency.

If you run ethanol you ought to give some consideration to using an AC Delco flex fuel sensor to monitor and report the ethanol content to your ECU. Aftermarket ECU's and many OEM ECU's can use the input from this sensor to modify the tune if you get the periodic "bad" tank of fuel so the engine doesn't detonate itself to death. Motion Raceworks makes an excellent adapter to install the sensor in your fuel line. It looks like this;

This is just good old fashioned common sense on a high output engine.

Something you might want to think about is your traction situation. If you are intent on adding power to your current power level which is uncontrollable in the first two gears or so, give some consideration to an aftermarket ECU with traction control logic like the MS3Pro. It will not only make the car safer to drive but also more fun to drive.


Ed

 

[Phila]

Ed

Thanks for more input. Your thoughts on the crank make more sense when you explain it like that. The crank hasn't had any machining done to the snout yet, so I can have them do two keys. I'll have to swap the single-keyed Accufab wheel for a double, but no problem. And I'll have the billet crank sprocket machined down to accommodate for the larger wheel.

With a stand-alone, I'll be able to add in the flex fuel sensor. It only makes sense, as you're only one bad batch of gas away from an expensive pile of parts. I'd seen that Motion Raceworks inline piece before but had totally forgotten about it - thanks for adding that.

In terms of a traction control unit, it looks like a few of the stand-alone ECUs offer it, either as built-in or as add-ons. Luckily this decision is still a ways off, as there are quite a few companies to choose from. What makes you recommend the MS3 so highly, in comparison to the other options like FAST, Holley, etc?

Phil

 

[eschaider]

Ed

Thanks for more input. Your thoughts on the crank make more sense when you explain it like that. The crank hasn't had any machining done to the snout yet, so I can have them do two keys. I'll have to swap the single-keyed Accufab wheel for a double, but no problem. And I'll have the billet crank sprocket machined down to accommodate for the larger wheel.

With a stand-alone, I'll be able to add in the flex fuel sensor. It only makes sense, as you're only one bad batch of gas away from an expensive pile of parts. I'd seen that Motion Raceworks inline piece before but had totally forgotten about it - thanks for adding that.

In terms of a traction control unit, it looks like a few of the stand-alone ECUs offer it, either as built-in or as add-ons. Luckily this decision is still a ways off, as there are quite a few companies to choose from. What makes you recommend the MS3 so highly, in comparison to the other options like FAST, Holley, etc?

Phil

The MS3Pro Plug-n-Play was purpose built for the 03/04 SVT Cobra. It's harness connector is a Ford OEM connector that matches the corresponding female connector on our OEM wiring harness, uses all the OEM Ford sensors, runs all the dashboard instruments and gives you completely unobstructed access to all the tuning variables for the engine. On top of that it adds a wide range of niceties like flex fuel capability, multiple traction control strategies, and various tuning aids. The tuning software is extraordinarily easy to use and comes with a starter tune for a stock 03/04 SVT Cobra engine.

The tune is initially done as a speed density tune because they could not do tunes for all the possible MAF choices users might have made. The speed density tune will absolutely start any of the engines and get you up and running just ike in the video. If you want to use a MAF (and I recommend it) you can easily enter your MAF transfer curve in the tuning software and convert over.

There are any number of nice little touches that they have thought about to make your usage experience more attractive. The days of the old hand held and cables are gone if you want them to be. There is a less than $70 gizmo they have that is available in both battery powered and vehicle powered (better choice) form that gives you an error corrected Bluetooth connection between your laptop and the ECU eliminating the usual wires.

That ability to use OEM Ford sensors can produce some impressive savings over OEM sensors repackaged and repriced at silly price points. Don't forget that it uses your OEM wiring harness that you don't have to spend $800 to $1000 dollars to replace— not to mention the PITA wiring harnesses and grounding always present.

Did I mention the box costs $1349 and both fits and plugs in where the OEM ECU was. It is like buying a Motec or Haltech at Walmart pricing. If you haven't yet, watch the two 7 minute videos at the bottom of the MS3Pro thread. If you are wondering if I use one the answer is yes. I got ECU #1 that they built. BTW their tech support is well beyond quite good.

The EFI system is based upon the MegaSquirt software that has existed since somewhere in the late 80's early 90's which means it is very mature and well debugged. While nothing is impossible it would be difficult to find software that was more mature or widely used (read bug free) than the MS platform. It is simply very impressive at a stunningly low price point, uses all your existing OEM Ford sensors and drives the OEM electronics — hard combo to dislike.


Ed


p.s. Check around different resellers for the lower crank sprocket. The early engines used a thinner sprocket that will accommodate the thick Accufab tone ring. I think Speed Pro or Melling might have the billet steel pieces. Be careful in purchasing these sprockets. A number of retailers are promoting the powdered metal variety as billet steel.

The giveaway is the keyway. It should have clean sharp edges with no forming die or mold indentations at the front or back of the sprocket where the keyway begins or ends. If it does not, it is billet steel. Put your current billet sprocket up next to your OEM powdered metal sprocket and you will easily see what I am speaking about.


Ed

 

[cobraracer46]

Just to back up what others are saying in regards to the 99-04 stamped steel timing trigger wheel, John Mihovetz at Accufab advises against using it because it vaporizes the oil and wears on the keyway.

Here is a video where Accufab explains why they do not use the later stamped steel trigger wheel.
Ford Mod Motor Crank Triggers

Furthermore, some have suggest that reliability goes down when power levels exceed 700 at the tire but I disagree with that. The question that should be asked is where are the MOD motor durability weak points and how do you address them? The short answer is that rods, pistons, pins main bearing side bolts are some of the weak point that need attention and in my case, I am collecting parts for a 1000+ RWHP project so for something like that, you need to select parts that can reliably hold that kind power. For example, my choice for a connecting rod is the Manley 300M billet I beam rod with ARP 625+ 7/16 bolts. The Manley 300M I beam rod is expensive, but it will never ever bend or break. Another example is pistons. Accufab stocks custom .003 JE pistons that look more like something from a freight train than a MOD motor and M2K motorsports used those pistons on a Ford GT 300 mile an hour car with 13:1 compression and over 40 pounds of boost and M2K claims that they have never broken that custom Accufab spec JE piston on that car ever.

Point being is that a car can reliably exceed 700 RWHP as long as the right parts are used.

 

[cobraracer46]

p.s. Check around different resellers for the lower crank sprocket. The early engines used a thinner sprocket that will accommodate the thick Accufab tone ring. I think Speed Pro or Melling might have the billet steel pieces. Be careful in purchasing these sprockets. A number of retailers are promoting the powdered metal variety as billet steel.

The giveaway is the keyway. It should have clean sharp edges with no forming die or mold indentations at the front or back of the sprocket where the keyway begins or ends. If it does not, it is billet steel. Put your current billet sprocket up next to your OEM powdered metal sprocket and you will easily see what I am speaking about.


Ed

As far as I know, nobody makes a billet lower crank sprocket for the 93-98 mod motors so I just simply picked up an OEM Ford part number XL3Z-6306-BA sprocket to use with the Accufab trigger wheel. Furthermore, Accufab also suggests to just simply use the OEM early MOD motor sprocket.

Finally, has anybody ever broken an early MOD motor crank sprocket? I don't think so. I would imagine that in a high power build using a 2step launch control, you will be doing your due diligence and replacing the timing chains and the sprockets at regular intervals anyway so I would imagine that its not an issue to run the factory sprockets.

 

[eschaider]

Just to back up what others are saying in regards to the 99-04 stamped steel timing trigger wheel, John Mihovetz at Accufab advises against using it because it vaporizes the oil and wears on the keyway.

For the sake of discussion lets stipulate that the oil is vaporized by the teeth on the reluctor wheel. If we take that for a given then is the level of vaporization less than or equal to the level of vaporization that the oil inside the crankcase experiences from interaction with the rotating assembly?

• Question 1, at what rpm does the oil vaporize?
• Question 2, are the vapor particles produced by the reluctor teeth larger or smaller than the vapor particles produced by the rotating assembly inside the crankcase?
• Question 3, if the oil is vaporized how does that affect the engine operation?
• Question 4, without anything being driven by the reluctor ring why is it moving on the crank snout behind the damper or isn't it moving and something else is?
• Question 5, while I don't doubt John's engine shut down for the reasons he stated, have you ever seen another Modmotor shut down for the same reasons?

Not withstanding the answers to all those questions (except #1) not being available, now that Paul has bought the billet reluctor there is no compelling reason for him not to run it, other than the effort to install it.

There are billet steel sprockets available in the aftermarket. The OP has already purchased one. The sprocket is easily machined if he wishes to use the thicker reluctor wheel. The early model thinner sprocket is also available. If there were no steel sprockets available then you would have no choice but to use a powdered metal one. That should be a last choice.


Ed

 

[Phila]

Interesting thoughts - thanks for the Accufab video. Regarding the crank sprocket, I called around to see if anyone made forged pieces. I'd not heard of the cast/powdered metal piece failing, but figured it'd be piece of mind for only a few dollars more. Both Cloyes and Melling are both powdered metal now. SpeedPro and Sealed Power are unavailable. I happened to find an older unused Cloyes S869HP on ebay. Guess I'll get it machined down to fit the thicker trigger wheel. I will send it back and exchange for the dual-keyed piece based on Ed's suggestion.

I know this has been beaten to death here and elsewhere, but the concern for the crank snout is probably my biggest question mark in the whole thing. I'll do the stud modification and twin keyways. I could go with a billet crank, but then I think "where does this stop?" There's always something else that you could (should?) do on these engines, I'm learning. Billet here, forged there - and I'm opting for the better pieces where available for reliability and durability. Ed - we've discussed the balancer options. I have the IW813 for the stock caged lower. In talking with Allen, he's thinking I won't be able to spin the blower fast enough without belt slip if I keep the stock lower pulley, and suggested the Metco adapter. I can either go with the IW piece, or the ATI as John M suggested. I think - unless anyone feels strongly otherwise from their experience - I'll go with the +4lb lower ring and a 3.25" upper pulley. That combo sounds like it should give good blower speed with sufficient belt wrap around the blower pulley to keep slip under control and to keep from having to cinch down that tensioner too hard.

Another question I have: timing chain guides. I ordered the billet pivot arms and liners - are the factory stationary pieces OK to run, or should those be upgraded as well? I will use iron primary tensioners along with the Cobra Engineering secondary. Ford OEM primary chains and Accufab secondaries. It sounds like Accufab is coming out with some adjustable gears soon, so I'll follow up with them to see what's going to be available on that front.

One last thing I want to ask. In regards to the thrust bearing, I've seen where guys have drilled through the bearing for increased oiling. Is that necessary for a stick car? What about if an automatic trans may be in my future someday?

Thanks again

Phil

 

[4sdvenom]

Just to get this in before too much more goes in other direction. If you’re debating at all on your balancer brand. Just know if you do decide to run the J2Fab crank support now or down the road. It requires the use of the Innovators West balancer with the Metco adapter ring to run the 4lb lower. It was designed specifically for the IW and will not work with the ATI damper. You may already be aware of that but it sounded like you were debating still between the IW or ATI damper. Just wanted to point that out incase you didn’t realize that.

Ken

 

[4sdvenom]

I too am interested in the drilling of the thrust bearing mod if the auto transmission is used.

 

[eschaider]

... the concern for the crank snout is probably my biggest question mark in the whole thing. I'll do the stud modification and twin keyways. I could go with a billet crank, but then I think "where does this stop?" There's always something else that you could (should?) do on these engines, I'm learning. ...

The absolute fix is the billet crank with the 0.700" longer 1.400" diameter snout and a long ARP LS7 18mm damper bolt, ARP part # 234-2504 torqued to 250 ft/;bs minimum.. The best bet for a stock crank is the 9/16" stud and no OEM snout support. The aftermarket snout supports look sexy but are totally useless — don't waste your money on one.

Crank snout damage occurs on gear changes when blower rotor pack rpm goes from 19 or 20 thousand rpm to 12 thousand rpm in a few microseconds during a gear change. A band aid is to run a less aggressive clutch allowing a little more clutch slip on the gear change and the snout will last longer. Ask Allen about his experience with broken snouts. I believe he is one of only two people possibly the only person to break a studded snout,

Ed - we've discussed the balancer options. I have the IW813 for the stock caged lower. In talking with Allen, he's thinking I won't be able to spin the blower fast enough without belt slip if I keep the stock lower pulley, and suggested the Metco adapter. I can either go with the IW piece, or the ATI as John M suggested.

For simplicity the IW damper is the easiest but not the least expensive. For damping performance the ATI is the better performer. I doubt you will see the difference in crank life. The ATI approach is usually the less expensive.

Another question I have: timing chain guides. I ordered the billet pivot arms and liners - are the factory stationary pieces OK to run, or should those be upgraded as well?

As long a as you already have the billet pieces you ought to use them. The number of stock pieces that have failed in the last 20 years can be counted on one hand with several fingers missing.

I will use iron primary tensioners along with the Cobra Engineering secondary. Ford OEM primary chains and Accufab secondaries. It sounds like Accufab is coming out with some adjustable gears soon, so I'll follow up with them to see what's going to be available on that front.

The iron tensioners are the right ones to use. Go to Joe Goffin's Aluminator Gibtec Build Thread and he will show you the correct way to modify them.

One last thing I want to ask. In regards to the thrust bearing, I've seen where guys have drilled through the bearing for increased oiling. Is that necessary for a stick car? What about if an automatic trans may be in my future someday?

Thanks again

Phil

The modification is not required on manual transmission cars and is nice but not required on automatic transmission cars these days. The trans shops have learned the hard way about charge pressures and keep them at a manageable level so the thrust bearing is not destroyed anymore. That said, if you convert to an auto at some point be sure to make the point about charge pressures and thrust bearing failures to the shop that is doing the trans build.


Ed

 

[cobraracer46]

since an automatic transmission is mentioned in this thread along with possible thrust bearing failures, another transmission option to consider would be a PPG T56 sequential shift transmission that allows for full throttle "no lift" upshifts without the need to depress the clutch pedal. The PPG can execute upshifts in milliseconds so it should outperform an automatic transmission and have better reliability than an auto trans as well since it eliminates the possibility of thrust bearing failures and other problems.

It's a pricy transmission, but I'm getting one anyway

 

[4sdvenom]

$15,000-$18,000 For the PPG?
Would be great though!

 

[eschaider]

Something to keep in mind about progressive transmissions is that the gear changes always have to follow the preprogrammed / designed sequence 1-2-3-4-5-6 that the transmission was designed with. They do not make provisions for skipping a gear for example in the downshift sequence because the vehicle speed is too low for the next lower gear ( a road race environment) or the traffic situation requires the use of first gear because of the presence of a stop sign or light.

The traffic scenario is an everyday phenomena and the road race style scenario is also an everyday experience, admittedly at a lower performance level than the road race variant but every bit as real. A stop light or sign would cause you to need to downshift through all lower gears to get to first gear to accelerate from a stop. Similarily traffic conditions have an ebb and flow to them that can require a downshift of two or more gears.

The sequential shifting mechanism transmissions bring with them a sequential gear selection mandate that can quickly become unattractive in a daily driver. I suspect the buyer remorse factor for purchases made for daily driving is going to be high. For drag racing likely no remorse factor, for everything else varying degrees of remorse depending on gear change characteristics and frequency for the particular usage and how quickly the sequential gear change capability ages in the owner's hierarchy of important characteristics for the transmission.

Another consideration is the PPG replacement gears that are installed in the T-56 case. The transmission has multiple gear sets available from 700 ft lbs torque capacity up to over 1000 ft lbs in some representations and 1000 HP in other representations in four or five different ratio combinations.

If there are only four different torque capacity gear sets in only four different ratios that means there are sixteen different internals combinations possible. I tend to doubt that.

Additionally, the torque ratings are suspect. If you compare the photographic images of the gears to the T56 Magnum gears rated at 700 ft/lbs of torque or the specialized Transzilla gears that are rated substantially higher, The PPG gears look like first generation T56 gears.

Photographic appearances not withstanding, you really need to view the PPG gear set next to a Magnum or Transzilla gear set in the same photo. The PPG gears none the less do not appear as robust as the Magnum or Tranzilla gears — strength claims to the contrary not withstanding.


Ed

 

[Phila]

Ha! Not sure a sequential transmission is in my future, but it’d be fun to take a ride in a car with one.

I will keep the T56 magnum for now. An auto could be faster and more consistent, but I don’t know the next time I’ll be able to have a stick/clutch car the way things are going these days. I may swap an auto down the road, just not something I’m planning on at this point.

The rear end is probably going to an 8.8 sooner rather than later. It’s more efficient, more reliable at the track with higher power levels, and will probably 60’ a lot better from everything I’ve read or the guys I’ve talked to. Downside is a bit of NVH compromise. Doesn’t make sense to go solid axle and then use poly bushings, so the spherical bushings would have to be something to get used to. We’ll see how that all pans out. While we’re at it, any good driveline shops in northern CA that I should talk to about building one?

OK so balancers. Ed - you’re saying skip the crank support eh? I can see how, in theory, it’d keep the crank from flexing laterally at the snout, but I can’t see it lessening the torsional stress it sees. Regardless, if a support isn’t going to give any longevity, I’ll go with a dual-keyed ATI. I called them the other day, part number 918036DAK for anyone looking.

I have the block at the machine shop now with crank and main bearings. Mains are all within spec and won’t need to be honed (Ed is saying ‘I could have told you that’). Crank is good standard/standard, which I like. Shop bought a torque plate for this job which I thought spoke well for them and put me at ease that they brought it up before I did. I’ve asked them to hone as little as possible and then I’ll get pistons ordered/made.

Timing stuff: I have a set of these pivot arms sized for James’ 9mm pins

The cast stationary guides will be OK?

I found a guy selling Bosch 2200cc high impedance injectors with the USCAR adapter. He’s wanting to trade for the ID1000s in the car now, which works out pretty well. Ed, you and Tony mentioned these Bosch are the right injector for my setup, so now to just decide on an engine management system...

This box arrived from Tousley the other day. Wife rolled her eyes but didn’t ask twice

I’m excited about shedding some weight from the front of the car. These things are 57/43 F/R weight distribution if I remember correctly, and I sure noticed it when the car was on four jackstands and I removed the IRS assembly for bushings last spring time....
The teksid block will help out with that, something like 70-75lbs savings from the iron block in the car now. Buuut, I splurged and bought new front brakes - hey, they’re lighter! Rotor OD is smaller than stock at 11.75”, but they’re still a vented piece which should make them work fine on the street. I called Wilwood a couple times to talk with their tech guys, and was given the green light for my intended use. Moving from stock 2-piston to these 4-piston is a big difference in total sq.in. and they should haul the car down pretty good downtrack.

I’m waiting for some hoses and fittings to arrive and then I’ll pull the 2.9 out - hope to get that done in the next few weeks.

If everything goes as planned, I’d like to get the car to the track in the next couple of months with the bigger Whipple while the temp is still reasonable out. Once the block is back from the machine shop and the rotating assembly is here, I’ll get started on the next phase. My wife and kids go to her parents’ house for a couple of months each summer, so I’ll have plenty of undivided attention paid to the engine build

Thanks again for the posts guys - we’ll see what comes next

Phil

 

[eschaider]

...
The rear end is probably going to an 8.8 sooner rather than later. ... any good driveline shops in northern CA that I should talk to about building one?

Setting up a ring and pinion is not that difficult. It is something you ought to try yourself. I have attached two pdf files that will help you. the files are Pinion Depth Plate.pdf and MHD Pinion Depth.pdf. Take a few moments to read the MHD piece first and then look at the Pinion Depth Plate. The pinion depth plate replaces a flimsy but expensive depth measuring gizmo with a very robust and simple to make gizmo. When you make the gizmo order a piece of flat and parallel aluminum tooling plate from one of the online metals shops. It is important the plate has uniform flatness and parallelism side to side. The job is a walk in the park.

BTW do not shim behind the large tapered bearing on the pinion. You will re-shim a minimum of two possibly three times. Each time you remove that bearing in a press it is very easy to damage the bearing. The tapered cup the bearing rides in, that is located in the housing, has two cutouts in the ID of the bearing registration cup that will allow you to easily tap it out with a flat nosed punch and a modestly sized hammer. Put the shims behind the cup — the job just got much easier.

When you set and check backlash always check 90˚ apart around the entire ring gear. You may need to remove the ring gear and reattach it to minimize the runout. If you do, you want to move the high run out ring position to the low run out ring position, re attach the gear and check again.

Another item you want to be sensitive to is hunting vs non-hunting gear ratios. An example of a non-hunting ratio would be a 3.50 ratio ring an pinion with a 35 tooth ring gear and a 10 tooth pinion or a 4.10 ratio ring and pinion with a 41 tooth ring and a 10 tooth pinion.

A "hunting tooth gear set" is a gear set whose tooth counts are relatively prime; in other words they have no common factors. This is the best configuration for gears, since any tooth on either gear will contact every tooth on the other gear before encountering the same tooth again. This spreads the loads and forces evenly over the gear teeth giving the benefit of low noise transmission, reduced wear and optimum service life of gears. Try not to select a non-hunting gear set for your install.

Almost forgot, To get accurate measurements off the face of the pinion take it to a local machine shop and have them surface grind the rough face of the pinion just enough to clean up but no more, You want to have a flat smooth surface to measure the pinion depth through measuring plate.

OK so balancers. Ed - you’re saying skip the crank support eh? I can see how, in theory, it’d keep the crank from flexing laterally at the snout, but I can’t see it lessening the torsional stress it sees. Regardless, if a support isn’t going to give any longevity, I’ll go with a dual-keyed ATI. I called them the other day, part number 918036DAK for anyone looking.

Snout failure is caused by a combination of two forces, one is torsional and one is tensile. The torsional is unavoidable it is the tug on the snout when the rotor pack rpm goes from 19,000 rpm or so back to 12,000 rpm on a shift. Unless you use a faceplated or similar shifting modification, even someone with good speed shifting skills will allow the engine to climb another 500 to 1000 rpm between gears.

Lets say you run an 8.6" diameter lower (4 lb) and a 3.25" upper with a new Whipple 3.0L blower. That will give you 28 psi or so of manifold pressure depending on your cams and where you have installed them. If you shift exactly at 7500 rpm the blower rotor pack will be spinning 19,840 rpm at the gear change. When you add the extra 500 to 1000 engine rpm for a good speed shifter (lets use 750) the new rotor pack rpm is over 21,800 rpm. At the instant the clutch engages that next higher gear the rotor pack rpm will be 12,000 rpm!

The amount of angular momentum that will need to be absorbed in that gear change is nothing short of stunning! The more aggressive the clutch the more stunning the event because of the reduced time available for the event. This is the torsional event attempting to twist the snout off the crank.

The tensile event is different and at least initially comparably difficult to visualize the first time. When you press the damper on the snout and then put the snout bolt in to clamp it down you are introducing the tensile load. Visualize the large damper washer pushing the damper onto the snout, then visualize the snout bolt clamping down on the large washer. For every pound of clamp the bolt introduces into the clamping process it is pulling on the crank snout with an equal strain attempting to pull the snout off the front of the crank — which is what ultimately happens.

The crank stud solution completely eliminates the tensile loading of the snout by anchoring back into the #1 main. When you tighten down the stud nut you are sandwiching the damper between the #1 main and the washer under the nut on the end of the stud. You have completely eliminated the tensile loading on the crank snout!

By using the stud and a non aggressive clutch you can substantially extend the life of a stock crank snout even better than the original OEM support.

I have the block at the machine shop now with crank and main bearings. Mains are all within spec and won’t need to be honed (Ed is saying ‘I could have told you that’). Crank is good standard/standard, which I like. Shop bought a torque plate for this job which I thought spoke well for them and put me at ease that they brought it up before I did. I’ve asked them to hone as little as possible and then I’ll get pistons ordered/made.

It is always worth the time to risk being pedantic with the machine shop owner. To virtually all shop owners the words, "as little as possible" gets mentally translated to the first commercially available over the counter oversize which is typically 0.010" oversize. That is exactly what you do not want! Make sure his brain is working in 0.001" increments. Many OEM blocks get factory finished at 90.20 mm which is 3.551". These blocks will typically clean up at 3.552" or 3.553" leaving you with an very nice remaining liner wall thickness.

The machine shops will not finish the block like this because they are preprogrammed for standard, 0.010", 0.020" oversize thinking. If you do not intervene and they finish your block it will be a 0.010" oversize block — guaranteed. Their argument will be piston availability because they also do not know about Gibtec.

I wasn't going to twist your arm about the main bore alignments so I won't however, one of the beauties of buying a used engine block and crank is, if there were any alignment issues the block, bearings and crank would immediately show the carnage. Absent carnage you have a straight and tru main tunnel that not only does not need any align honing but should not get any.

Timing stuff: I have a set of these pivot arms sized for James’ 9mm pins
View attachment 175530

The cast stationary guides will be OK?

Beautiful pieces — not necessary but absolutely beautiful! The stationary guides are literally alignment tracks as one or more of the attachments you posted indicated. As such there is no real strain placed upon them. The pivoting guide is different. It has to pick up chain slack and simultaneously maintain chain tension to prevent the silent drive chan from jumping a tooth and retarding the cams.

I found a guy selling Bosch 2200cc high impedance injectors with the USCAR adapter. He’s wanting to trade for the ID1000s in the car now, which works out pretty well. Ed, you and Tony mentioned these Bosch are the right injector for my setup, so now to just decide on an engine management system...

Go to the TToC sticky at the top of the 03/04 SVT Cobra Forum. Scroll down to the Fuel System section and go to the fourth item, Fuel System Calculator R2.11 download it and the instructions. You will find it helpful in a variety of ways beyond injector sizing.

On E-85 or methanol you will find a substantial increase in appetite for fuel. Initially the engine may want something in the 1400 to 1600 cc area. As you continue to push on the performance envelope, the will be a corresponding increase in fuel demand.

There is absolutely no reason the 2200 cc injectors will not work fine for you and more importantly they will give you the head room to play around without spending a boat load of money for the next larger injector up from your last expensive injector purchase. BTW we have a board member that runs dual 2200 cc injectors on methanol and when he flushes the fuel system out at the end of a race day and switches back to a gasoline tune the car idles at about 1000 rpm on gas using both 2200 cc injectors!

There is absolutely zero doubt in my mind that the best engine management solution for your project is the MS3Pro Plug-n-Play ECU.

This box arrived from Tousley the other day. Wife rolled her eyes but didn’t ask twice

View attachment 175532

A good wife and a brave man ...

... I splurged and bought new front brakes - hey, they’re lighter! Rotor OD is smaller than stock at 11.75”, but they’re still a vented piece which should make them work fine on the street. I called Wilwood a couple times to talk with their tech guys, and was given the green light for my intended use. Moving from stock 2-piston to these 4-piston is a big difference in total sq.in. and they should haul the car down pretty good downtrack.

... My wife and kids go to her parents’ house for a couple of months each summer, so I’ll have plenty of undivided attention paid to the engine build

Thanks again for the posts guys - we’ll see what comes next

Phil

Wilwood makes great products and those are monsters!


Ed

 

[Phila]

Holy rear end information! I’ll reference that when I get farther along in that direction. I’m hoping that some of you guys can give me a referral to a local (NorCal) shop that can add 9” ends, straighten/brace/weld housing and tubes. I found TRZ 8.8 Fabrication and Tin Soliders Battle Ready 8.8 as two shops to prep an 8.8, but I think shipping would kill me cross-country especially these days.

I looked around for a bit, found Winberg, Bryant, and Molnar make billet cranks for the 4.6
I imagine if this was a turbo car, Kellogg might be worry-free without stress on the snout like a blower has. I don’t want to buy something I don’t need, but I also don’t want to snap the snout off. I know some have done it, even with the stud mod, including Allen, with the newer Whipples. That concerns me....as I’m not sure what makes my build any different or less susceptible to the same. Something I considered: in order to keep parts cost at a reasonable level, I could use the DB heads I have on the shelf, get those freshened up with better springs, and use the remainder of the “ported heads fund“ and turn that into a billet crankshaft. Especially if I sold the two Kelloggs I have at the house also. Not committing to anything, just thinking aloud.....

Balancer etc: more and more reading, came across someone who apparently used to build 4+ lowers on the stock crank support. Double-band aid situation with the studded crank? Same logic applies here regarding aftermarket crank supports? That neither type of crank support guards against torsion stresses from rapidly decelerating the big blower rotors?

Thanks for the input on the stationary timing guides. Nice to pay ‘stock replacement prices’ on at least a couple things on this build. Speaking of stock pieces, I can’t remember if I asked, but cam shaft spacers. With the 12mm bolts holding the sprockets to the cams, any risk of shatter in a stock spacer? Opt for the stronger aftermarket pieces?

I ordered the ARP p/n 206-1001 with UHL of 2.085”, though I’ve also seen p/n 256-1001 recommended with 1.800” UHL. If this was an oversight I’ll send em back and replace with the shorter bolts.

Any favorite/special oil pan recommendations for street/strip car? I called both Moroso and Canton, though Canton never got back to me. Steel was recommended in case of any accidental rock strikes on the screen, which makes sense. Not sure on capacity, baffles/trap doors. I have a PA Racing K member… called and left them a message to see if there was any known fitment or interference issues, but never heard back from them either.

One last possibly contentious point, any input on head cooling mod? Necessary/helpful? There are lots out there, though I would probably order from Cobra Engineering if I were going that route. Also brings up The coolant crossover delete idea. It would be really helpful with the bigger blower and larger intercooler water manifold neck. I could either use the ICT billet fittings and ‘make’ a new crossover, or I could use one of the kits that relocates the thermostat to the top side of the system.

Until next time

Phil