Dyno numbers TW heads, FTI cam

Discussion in '1994 - 1995 Specific Tech' started by zenboy99, May 7, 2004.

  1. Well, I blew up 3rd gear dickin around a local street last friday. And since taking a tranny out looks like a PITA(Im referring to sexystangs pics) I think I might pull the motor and trans. Being that I have extra room under my new hood. Im gonna save up and put a new trans and motor in at the same time.

  2. http://home.comcast.net/~nmrastocker/95GT.html

    Specs, timeslip, dyno sheet etc.

    Also, GT-40P heads are a great bang for the buck head but I preffer the TW anyway.
  3. WOW that si unreal....can you come help me do that to my combo?
  4. simple, get a real cam, tune it, and get some slicks and skinnies. you car should at least do mid 12s at 108
  5. wow... VERY impressive, makes me wish i knew how to race :) . how much does the car weigh troy?
  6. Troy, thats awesome! makes me feel better about the future of my combo. How many miles are on your stock shortblock and whats the weight of your car?
  7. I guess I've been proven wrong. A few questions: Is the car street legal? Can you drive the car on the street, meaning, is it streetable? What do you rev the motor to, and where do you come through the traps at?

    Those are very nice numbers, but I think there is more to the story than what most TW guys have.


  8. It's 3300 lbs with me in it. Lighter than most but not a featherweight.

    The shortblock has 110k on it and smokes pretty hard after I over revved it during a road racing off track venture. I really think that if the shortblock was in better shape it would have made 15-20 more HP.
  9. Street legal...hmmmm...legal in that I can drive it and have never been bothered by law enforcement, Yes. Legal as in it's emisions legal in my state, Yes. Legal as in complies to every rule out there, No.

    Can I drive it on the street, Yes. In fact I've been complimented several times on how impressive it is that I would drive the car 150mi round trip to track events. One such event was a Drag Radial street car event that I drove the car to and finished as the runner up with a 11.73 pass. I lost to a T-Type that runs 9.30's on slicks. Then I drove home. I do also take the car out on weekends and nice evenings but it is certainly not my daily drive. I did road race the car for 2001 & 2002 before converting it to a drag racer in 2003. Same motor as it has now was used to raod race for that time (~800-1200mi. est.). The car idles fine @ 900, doesn't idle hunt and I can start it on cold mornings without having to give it gas or anything...just turn the key and your off. Certainly it's not quite like stock but it doesn't die in traffic or anything like that so I can live with some of the small things it may do.

    I **** at 6400 and trap at 6400. And yes, the stock 94/95 eec will rev that high without an aftermarket chip.

    The most likely is more to my car than most people's cars, most of that would be that I've been doing this sort of thing for a few years now (10+ with Fords), I test more than most at the track and dyno (2-3 times/mo. at the track), and I'm willing to remove a few parts from my car that are not required to get some weight out. I'd hate to speculate on what it would have ran if it was 3500+ or if "this" or "that" was done but I"m not going to. This is what it ran, no what if's or could have been, just fact.

    FWIW the first paragraph of your statement that I quoted is, or should be true. However you tossed the guantlet and asked someone to prove something and stated what would suffice. I supplied that proof, like it or not. If I have more than others do than maybe they will simply look at my combination and learn from it. Apply that info to something they put together and hopefully go even faster than I did.
  10. Troy, no harm, no foul. I asked for it and you gave it to me, whether I like it or not. These guys have to remember that your heads have had work done to them, and you are running (probably) a much bigger cam and manifold than they are. Not taking away from you, it is just going to be that much more that these guys have to make up. What was the PTV clearance like with that cam? Less than .030"? Either way, wrong or right, your times are VERY impressive.

    OT: How's the car doing in the races this year? Every time I go to Stangcrazy, it seems like they are always "updating."

  11. Hey Joe,
    None taken. Everyone here must remember that what I have is not the same as what they have in most cases. However, what I have isn’t exotic in any way nor is it really any less streetable than what most have it’s just often misrepresented on the internet by people who didn’t have everything sorted out. I just took a slightly different path than most.

    As for the P/V clearance – You would be very surprised at how much clearance there is. I actually took .04” off the heads to bring them back to 59cc chambers after the port work, which is basically like taking away .04” of P/V clearance. With a .039” gasket (flepro 1011-?) this motor had .07” intake and .08” exhaust roughly. Since I’m curious and didn’t have anything better to do when I was putting this and other cams in I often find myself putting multiple cams in just to check P/V with different cams on the same heads/shortblock. I don’t have the numbers here but this cam actually had more clearance than the Crower 15511. I expected the two cams to be similar but I think the Crower was more like .05” on the intake. LSA and ramp rates have a large part in P/V clearance; lift is generally not the issue. In this case the Erson cam may have more duration and lift but the intake valve doesn’t start to open until much later in the cycle than the Crower cam so there is a net gain in P/V clearance.

    I was actually intending on running a cam that is 6° larger than the Erson on both intake and exhaust but due to the milled heads I couldn’t fit that thing in there safely IMO. P/V was ok on the intake (.04”) but only .05” on the exhaust, which I thought, was a bit close for a street motor. In the past that cam was worth 1-1.5 mph over the Erson cam so I really wanted to use it.


    Frank is constantly updating everything. There are new forums over there and new feature coming soon, as always…LOL

    The car is doing well and will be coming around shortly. It’s been a rough first half of the season but I see that changing shortly. The weather is finally good enough to go and test locally, which will help tremendously as the car is still relatively new with a few bugs left to kill. Thanks for asking!
  12. That is actually very surprising, even for as big as a cam it is/was, and the times you run, I expected it to have early valve timing events. Guess not...

    Will you be at MG in June? I should be up there on Sunday for eliminations. I'll be routing for ya. Good luck :nice:.

  13. I'll be there Joe on sunday, I'm going to Carlisle on saturday. Look for my car in the show field. Maybe I'll see you there too Troy! Best of luck to you!!!
  14. Paul, Joe,

    Thanks Guys! I should be there all weekend, come hunt be down and say hello.
  15. TMC, ever consider getting in touch with Ed Curtis and seeing if he can design a cam that cam make even better power? Are those TEA ported 185cc TW heads? I personally think theres a lot more in your car with a better cam. I would even say your numbers now could even be attained with box stock TW heads. Anyway, one more question. You mentions that you had to shave the heads .040", to bring them down to a 59cc chamber after the port work? What does port work have to do with combustion chamber size? Mine were milled .020" and they cc'd @ 57.6cc's. Nice track times by the way, very impressive for a heavy sn95.

  16. Is your 95 now your R/S car? If not, what does your R/S car look like so I know what to look for when I'm there?
  17. 1 did you ever think his setup was running just fine

    2. this is a 95 NOT a fox

    when you polish and do bowl work, you open up the bowls and they need to be milled to bring them to the lower CC

    4. I think TMC might know what he is doing and might not need your help
  18. Not to answer for Troy, but my guess is that the turns were rolled into the bowls, hence the slightly larger measurement.

    Troy, maybe I'll come down and give you some hell in the pits. :D

    Paul, I'll look for your car. It's probably not too hard to pick it out. :nice:

  19. {quote}1 did you ever think his setup was running just fine

    No, I think theres room for improvement with such a good head.

    {quote}2. this is a 95 NOT a fox {/quote}

    Really?? I though 95's were still fox bodys :rolleyes:

    {quote}when you polish and do bowl work, you open up the bowls and they need to be milled to bring them to the lower CC
    Learn something new everyday, thanks :)

    {quote} 4. I think TMC might know what he is doing and might not need your help{/quote}

    Never said he asked for my help??? All I said was if he contacted Ed C about his thoughts if he can improve the car since he's running a really good head. :)
  20. the 95s DO NOT make the power mod for mod that a fox body does when it comes to heads cam.

    this is a fact.

    It is very easy to slap heads intake and an E cam and make 310 + on a fox. while a 95 would fall far from it.

    why exactly... the answer has its debates and its half answers. teh culprits are said to be the intake setup (possibly) this has been proven on boosted applications for great inprovemnet with the conversion. we shall see when my conversion goes on this summer.
    And of course the computer....obviously an issue, though my computer has seemed to do just fine with a little adjusting of fuel pressure. again, we will see how it does this summer.