Let's talk engines...

[elric]

I already had the Cammer but needed a car to put it in. Bought a Mustang fastback but by the time you cut the shock towers, have headers made, install a rack and good front suspension, good brakes, etc, etc; it was starting to make less sense than the Cobra (except you get a roof). PatrickT has sound advice; I lowered compression a little and installed very streetable cams. You really need to determine what you want to do with the car. I've had plenty of hot rods in the past and dealing 7-800 naturally aspirated hp is a pain and not worth it IMO. As along as it runs good and is reliable - 4-500hp is alll you need if you're just going to street drive it.

[RAO-3]

My plans for the car are for street and show; no track time.

Patrick, even though I have been reading about everyone's big HP engines, I've kinda been thinking nothing radical or over the top for my use.

Right now I was thinking 428 fe with aluminum heads and dual carbs and street cam. Kind of a "later 427SC" even though it will have the rectangular tail lamps courtesy of NJ DMV. However I haven't talked to an engine builder yet, was waiting to talk to Peter to find out his recommendations as I'm still planning turn-key. What do you all think? Mated to a 5 speed, either the Tremec or the Richmond.

Ray

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by RAO-3

My plans for the car are for street and show; no track time.

Patrick, even though I have been reading about everyone's big HP engines, I've kinda been thinking nothing radical or over the top for my use.

Right now I was thinking 428 fe with aluminum heads and dual carbs and street cam. Kind of a "later 427SC" even though it will have the rectangular tail lamps courtesy of NJ DMV. However I haven't talked to an engine builder yet, was waiting to talk to Peter to find out his recommendations as I'm still planning turn-key. What do you all think? Mated to a 5 speed, either the Tremec or the Richmond.
Ray

Sounds good to me -- dual four barrels would be for looks only on that mill; you'd get the same performance from a single (and a single is easier to adjust). Regarding cams, I went with a solid, flat tappet cam. There's some risk in doing that, but a small upside too as far as I'm concerned. There's no downside to one provided you can get by the first 1000 miles without eating a lobe. If you're thinking solid flat, then you'll want to do some searching on the break-in and zinc issue. If you're thinking solid roller, then you'll want to do some searching on the solid roller compatibility with FE issue. If you're thinking hydraulic flat or hydraulic roller then you can pretty much stop thinking and just do it -- it'll work out fine. Both Tremec and Richmond are fine transmissions, but you must pay attention to how the gear ratios, rear end ratio, and your torque curve all come together. There is a benefit to having a first gear that will allow you to go slow. Keep that in mind when you're spec'ing out your gears.

[RAO-3]

Originally Posted by patrickt

Sounds good to me -- dual four barrels would be for looks only on that mill; you'd get the same performance from a single (and a single is easier to adjust). Regarding cams, I went with a solid, flat tappet cam. There's some risk in doing that, but a small upside too as far as I'm concerned. There's no downside to one provided you can get by the first 1000 miles without eating a lobe. If you're thinking solid flat, then you'll want to do some searching on the break-in and zinc issue. If you're thinking solid roller, then you'll want to do some searching on the solid roller compatibility with FE issue. If you're thinking hydraulic flat or hydraulic roller then you can pretty much stop thinking and just do it -- it'll work out fine. Both Tremec and Richmond are fine transmissions, but you must pay attention to how the gear ratios, rear end ratio, and your torque curve all come together. There is a benefit to having a first gear that will allow you to go slow. Keep that in mind when you're spec'ing out your gears.

My thought on the duals was for looks and not really for performance; I may end up going with the single after talking to the engine guy. I'm also leaning towards the hydraulic for ease in maintenance. Who knows, this may all change after I hear from Peter and the engine guy, but at the same time value the opinions of those on this board greatly, since you've been down this "road" before. Kramer, I had considered the 427 SO (isn't that what everyone wants?), but it seems that for what I'm looking for, it would be more $$$ than is really necessary. And I didn't want to get the 390 since that wasn't in there originally.

Good thoughts on the gears, hadn't really thought that through yet.



Ray