9.70 at 135 – Edelbrock Heads, E85
Printed From: TheAMCForum.com
Category: The Garage
Forum Name: AMC V8 Engine Repair and Modifications
Forum Description: AMC-made V8 engine mechanical, ignition and fuel from basic repair to high-perf modifications
URL: https://theamcforum.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=90103
Printed Date: Apr/16/2024 at 4:56am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: 9.70 at 135 – Edelbrock Heads, E85
Posted By: ramblermoosecocka
Subject: 9.70 at 135 – Edelbrock Heads, E85
Date Posted: Oct/03/2017 at 4:34am
|
This is the engine that was reported on in 2015 by SC397 and Stickshifter. It has been installed in a ’69 Rambler, finally done in May. The engine is home-built, 426 CID with ported Edelbrock heads, 12.8:1 CR, Torker, HP 1000 Ultra, and a small solid roller. The crank is ground to 3.850 stroke x 1.900 wide, with 2.0 inch pins. Rods are offset Callies for SBC, 6.0-inch. The valves are 2.100/1.625, and the heads flowed 289/227 cfm at .600. Dyno’d at 642 HP at 6400 and 590 LB-FT on E85. A different cam and step headers were installed before the build was finished. The car is complete, with stock full interior and exhaust to the bumper; weight with driver is 3110#. 904 trans, tight 8” converter, 3.73:1, P275/60 drag radials, stock suspension with slapper bars and adjustable shocks. Four trips to the track so far, generally runs mid 9.7’s at 135-136. Best is 9.70 at 134.9 with 1.34 60’. Mild foot-brake, shift at 6700, ET at 6800. The car is driven frequently, more than 700 miles this summer. As an aside, it seems fairly insensitive to air quality, averaging 135.5 in good air (600’ DA) and 135.0 in poor (2850’ DA). Will attach photos and time-slips when and if I figure out how to.
|
Replies:
Posted By: jcisworthy
Date Posted: Oct/03/2017 at 4:54am
|
Awesome! Alcohol is less sensitive to air quality I miss E85 ------------- Specializing in dyno services, engine building, and cylinder head porting rbjracing.com Phone Number 518-915-3203 |
Posted By: gremlinsteve
Date Posted: Oct/03/2017 at 6:53am
| Awesomeness |
Posted By: n2ojoe
Date Posted: Oct/03/2017 at 7:14am
| Congrats Brad, nice numbers! |
Posted By: 67RogueX-Code
Date Posted: Oct/03/2017 at 8:00am
|
Way to go Brad. It was nice to meet you at the Nostalgia-Drags at Milan... nice job! ------------- Bob Wilcox 67RogueX-Code |
Posted By: CamJam
Date Posted: Oct/03/2017 at 8:21am
|
Impressive numbers! ------------- '73 Javelin 360 (current project) '72 Baja Bronze Javelin SST '69 Big Bad Orange AMX (2018 Teague Heritage Award) SOLD  |
Posted By: nda racer
Date Posted: Oct/03/2017 at 8:43am
Now that is the part I really like. Most think you have to have Cal-Tracs to run 13s, because Slappers don't work at all. lol |
ramblermoosecocka wrote:Posted By: purple72Gremlin
Date Posted: Oct/03/2017 at 4:20pm
| Cool... |
Posted By: Ken_Parkman
Date Posted: Oct/04/2017 at 9:25am
|
Very nice Brad! |
Posted By: pfordamx
Date Posted: Oct/04/2017 at 11:32am
| that is really impressive an makes me feel like our car runs like crap, who did the cam for you? our car is 150lbs heavier 427inch adkins ported iron heads flow 303/254 and has a pretty big solid roller in my opinion, 278/288 @ .050 and 740/760 lift with 13.1 compression a 950hp on e85 with a 727 and a 6000 stall 8inch with a 4.56 gear and has been 6.61 in the 1/8th don't have good 1/4mile data but still either the chambers on the edelbrock head makes a big difference or mid lift flow or our cam is crap, not sure but 150 lbs shouldn't be .6 tenths off. any how congrats on a excellent combo. |
Posted By: ramblermoosecocka
Date Posted: Oct/04/2017 at 1:19pm
| Thanks. The cam is a custom Harold Brookshire (Ultradyne, etc.) 28 deg piece, 259/267 at .050, cut on a 106 LSA, installed at 101. Tight lash; .650 net lift. Harold was adamant that the combo would ET best with 106/101, but I have not confirmed by trying anything else. I have had experience with 3 engines that use this lobe series, and each ran faster than expected (only one install was cam only, however - the ET dropped 3 tenths in the 1/4 over the same combo with a Comp .420 cam in a consistent car. Same LSA, same lift.). Also, these lobes appear to be relatively easy on parts. |
Posted By: SC397
Date Posted: Oct/04/2017 at 1:35pm
|
Page 3 shows the Dyno Session (72. BradmobileII427) http://rebsamcandjeep.proboards.com/thread/144/dyno-time?page=3 I will try to re-post the pictures. |
Posted By: SC397
Date Posted: Oct/04/2017 at 1:55pm
|
Page 14-15 tells a little bit about the engine build. His is listed as 72. BradmobileII427 on this forum. http://rebsamcandjeep.proboards.com/thread/11/amc-engine-builds?page=14 The man the myth the legend.. LOL! https://flic.kr/p/Z5ToXy" rel="nofollow">  https://flic.kr/p/Z5ToXy" rel="nofollow - Bradfarmguy by https://www.flickr.com/photos/149168736@N07/" rel="nofollow - Rick Jones , on Flickr
|
Posted By: ramblermoosecocka
Date Posted: Oct/04/2017 at 2:07pm
|
Here is the cylinder head flow data, from a conservative local bench that a number of us in SE MI have used. MCSA of the intake port is 2.52 sq-in, so it is relatively large and slow (average velocity at .600 is 275 fps). Maybe this is what E85 wants. There is more liquid taking up space and adding charge momentum in the port, so big and slow may make it easier to make the turn to the valve. This is all a guess however. The Edelbrock's have a more modern chamber shape, and there may be other subtle port shape improvements over stock. BTW, 6.61 sec in the 1/8 converts to 10.40's in the 1/4. At 3250#, a fast car by any standard.
|
Posted By: pfordamx
Date Posted: Oct/04/2017 at 2:09pm
| i thought harold had passed and i noticed bullet shows to now own ultradyne do you happen to know the lobe # used on this cam? |
Posted By: ramblermoosecocka
Date Posted: Oct/04/2017 at 2:51pm
| Regarding the camshaft duration, I have shifted as high as 7100, and the engine does not nose over. But there is no ET advantage to shifting there over the 67-6800 that I settled on, where it seems to be pulling a little harder. An educated guess is that peak HP is around 6600, based on feel and on comparison to the cam the engine was dyno'd with. RPM range seems to be a reasonable match to the gear ratio and torque converter, etc. |
Posted By: ramblermoosecocka
Date Posted: Oct/04/2017 at 3:42pm
| Yes, Harold is deceased, unfortunately. Generous, talented, and hard-working man. But before he became that way, he spec'd the cam I used. He sent the CNC data to Steve Slavik at Lunati for grinding. I have the lobe numbers at home, will post them tomorrow. Steve worked with Harold at Ultradyne for many years. He should be able to set you up. The duration, as well as the lift, of the lobes I used is much smaller than the one in your motor, as you probably noticed. There are many others in the series to choose from. |
Posted By: Ken_Parkman
Date Posted: Oct/04/2017 at 5:48pm
| BTW the 2.52 csa shows a peak of about 6800 on the calc I use. I'm of the opinion too high a velocity is a bad thing, especially on a stockish port height like the Edelbrock. Just too hard to keep the flow attached on the ssr. Clearly it works well in your combo! |
Posted By: amcenthusiast
Date Posted: Oct/04/2017 at 6:23pm
|
Congratulations on the great running well sorted out engine, proving again there is more potential in AM V8s than most mainstream auto enthusiasts are willing to admit. One more example of an intelligent AM V8 engine builder who's used my "AMC V8 Oil System Modifications" information successfully. *notice the rods don't have the stock oil spurt feature either, which is key to building a successful '56-'67 AM RV8 race engine also. ------------- 443 XRV8 Gremlin YouTube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=2DmFOKRuzUc XRV8 Race Parts website: http://amcramblermarlin.1colony.com/ |
Posted By: SKeown
Date Posted: Oct/04/2017 at 9:05pm
|
Those mods are? SKeown
|
Posted By: SC397
Date Posted: Oct/05/2017 at 6:15am
|
Just the normal internal oil line and extra drain back holes in the valley area. We also lapped the timing cover to get near zero end clearance at the oil pump gears. It has the Milodon oil pan with the external pick-up line running up to the oil passage in the block. I think we restricted oil to the driver's side lifter bank. Nothing fancy. As far as I know those were AMC's mods back in the day. We also ran a drill through the main bearing oil passages. Those usually aren't drilled through all the way through. I also opened up the main bearing oil holes to 5/16" with a small chamfer. And, we welded the giant oil slots shut on the front of the Timing gear. https://flic.kr/p/Z5ToXd" rel="nofollow">  https://flic.kr/p/Z5ToXd" rel="nofollow - Brad4 by https://www.flickr.com/photos/149168736@N07/" rel="nofollow - Rick Jones , on Flickr
|
Posted By: Airdrie AMX
Date Posted: Oct/05/2017 at 7:05am
|
Very impressive numbers! I have a very similar build going together, same cubic inI, rods, heads and cam specs. Can you remember what size oriface you used to restrict the drivers side lifter bank? I've searched this up and found a bunch of different numbers. ------------- 72 amx javelin 401 4spd |
Posted By: ramblermoosecocka
Date Posted: Oct/05/2017 at 10:01am
|
Camshaft grind number is 68033-68035-106. Again, Harold Brookshire's lobes, ground by Steve Slavik at Lunati. There are others available. I bought a cam the next size up in case the one I started with was too small in the RPM department. .090" lifter galley restriction on the driver's side. This is a 1/8" NPT plug with a hole drilled in it. Not positive this is optimal, its just what I used. I run the valves a lot, just to keep an eye on the lash. Usually find more oil accumulated in the RH rocker cover.
|
Posted By: amxdreamer
Date Posted: Oct/05/2017 at 10:11am
|
Impressive numbers! It's refreshing to see real world results and proof of solid engine builds! ------------- Tony Vancouver, BC 1970 AMX 1972 Badassador AMO#10333 |
Posted By: ramblermoosecocka
Date Posted: Oct/09/2017 at 10:08am
| I am a little surprised there wasn't more discussion (disagreement?) about the choice of the Edelbrock cylinder heads for this application (Barry Allen talked me into it), or the crankshaft modifications, or the connecting rods choice, or what makes a car a street-car, etc. Ramblers rule. |
Posted By: SC397
Date Posted: Oct/09/2017 at 10:56am
Umm.. You can't really call those Edelbrock heads any more.. Maybe you could call them "Razor Welded Heads". LOL! 
|
Posted By: SKeown
Date Posted: Oct/09/2017 at 12:33pm
I had noticed the width of the crank journals to accept the Chevy rods, and figured the rods were switched around to center the beams. Obviously the E85 allows for the compression. How much advantage do you think the E85 produced over race gas? I have a HP 1000 Ultra and would like to know what jets and timing you setteled on? SKeown
|
Posted By: ramblermoosecocka
Date Posted: Oct/09/2017 at 2:19pm
|
Regarding the advantage E85 has over race gas for NA applications (boosted is completely different story), there is little consistency in the data available on the net. Lots of track results reported on the bullet and other places, but results vary significantly, maybe due to different levels of carb prep or inconsistent air between comparisons. The data I believe is a dyno test run by Kurt Urban at Wheel to Wheel on a well-developed 402 inch LS street engine they had. On pump gas, it made 540 HP and 506 LB-FT. On E85, the numbers were 546 and 521, making peak power 100 RPM lower. Same sensor set and intake hardware, just a different FI cal. So probably more torque than HP. Lower RPM might make sense too, the E85 displacing some oxygen in the intake tract. Race gas comparison, not sure; some blends are highly oxygenated. That said, I believe E85 is helpful. How much is a guess. Urban's results scaled up to my engine: 7 hp and 18 LB-FT?
My carb is a modified HP 1000 Ultra, provided by Horsepower Innovations here in MI. We had to jet it up on the dyno, ending at 95/106, with a 2.5 PV in the primary, determined by on-road testing. For timing, we ended up at 37 deg (coincidentally the same timing as the previous motor using these heads, on gasoline.). My ATI damper shows 34 deg, but there is a 3 deg error in the indexing, checked carefully when installing the cam. |
Posted By: pfordamx
Date Posted: Oct/12/2017 at 8:20am
| our 427 is on e85 and we had a custom built annular booster HPI 1000cfm carb on it to begin with and the best the car went with that carb after alot of changes and trying to add as much fuel as we could was 11.40 at 116 ending up with 110's squared and .021 air bleeds without powervalves and the plugs were still white. we swapped to a mark sullens 950 cfm carb and the car went 10.70 at 124.75 the next weekend, .7 in the quarter is a huge gain the 1000cfm carb i don't think has enough wall taper unless your running really big inch's and causes fuel and air to go turbulent obviously it works better for your combination could be several factors involved there. and your car is alot faster than ours but that makes me wonder if theres not more left in it. we never ran this combo on race gas but we really like the price of e85 and how cool and consistent the motor seems to be on it. this thing repeats really well. and there is a station here that sells e100 that i mix with straight 87 to get 87% ethanol blend so the blend stays consistent. we've probably at least saved half the price of the carb in the difference in fuel price over race gas this season. |
Posted By: amx600rr
Date Posted: Oct/13/2017 at 9:41pm
|
Congratulations on your build and results! Your E.T. is unbelievable considering the weight, 3.73 gears and "mild foot braking" on a Street Car. I would hate to see what it would do on a transbrake and 2-step! You've already got me by 3 tenths in a 407/727/4:88 chassis car. Thanks for sharing the E85 info. Which pump and fuel line I.D from the tank do you guys run? Corrosion issues? How much cooler does the engine run? What spark plug and #? Thanks, Jerry |
Posted By: jcisworthy
Date Posted: Oct/14/2017 at 4:13am
|
The 1000 CFM carb probably had boosters that were not large enough to supply the fuel your car needed. No matter how much jet you put to it the booster becomes the restriction if that is the case. I ran into that with E85 and a Proform 950 carb. I kept putting jet to it and the car ran the same number. To test, I added 10 jet sized primary and secondary and the car ran the same number. That is when I knew something was up. I sent the carb to Eric at Horsepower innovations and when I got it back it was .4 faster than I could get it with much smaller jetting. He changed to larger boosters along with his other mods. The carb performed excellent and Eric is a friendly and an informative man to talk to. That carb was on a daily driver street car and it ran excellent with no issues. This is a link to his site http://eric68hpi.wixsite.com/hpinnovations ------------- Specializing in dyno services, engine building, and cylinder head porting rbjracing.com Phone Number 518-915-3203 |
Posted By: ramblermoosecocka
Date Posted: Oct/14/2017 at 2:37pm
|
Using a 15 gallon Jaz plastic fuel cell. Product Engineering pump (the big one) and filter assembly. -12 cell to filter. -10 up to the PE regulator, -8 return to the cell. -8 pump bypass and -8 vent. -8 regulator to bowls. No issues with corrosion so far (but it's only been on the road since May of this year.). I did lube the carb throttle blade shafts after the dyno session in late 2014. Using Earl's braided line, with the brown stripe. Cannot give a direct comparison on how mush cooler it runs. Previous Rambler was similar, but gas, and ran somewhat warmer than this one does on E85. On the street, at 85F ambient, runs 155-160 coolant temp. 165-170 at 94F ambient. On extended freeway drives, its ambient + 100. So at 85F, it runs 185. I hope to improve this by sealing the radiator to the front of the car. On gas, the previous Rambler would push 195-200 on extended freeway drives at 92F. Lot of variables here, but I would estimate it runs about 5-10 deg cooler everywhere, including the track. At the track, after warming it up and cooling it off some, enter the water at 140-145. I don't look at it again - too busy. 160-165 at the ticket hut after driving down the return road. NGK spark plugs, cold ones at the track. Extended tip. R5672A-8, gapped to .045. If i'm going to be street driving it much, warmer plugs, -7.
|
Posted By: amx600rr
Date Posted: Oct/14/2017 at 8:04pm
|
Thank you for sharing. I "read somewhere" that like gas, the E85 quality changes with the seasons depending on additives from the supplier. Do you adjust the mixture using a hydrometer or just run as pumped? Paul Ford it sounds like you mix your own. No benefit from mixing with 92 octane? How do you know when you have 87%? Thanks Jerry |
Posted By: Steve Obertanec
Date Posted: Oct/15/2017 at 8:33am
|
I did a quick change over from pump gas to E85 on a mostly stock 360. (Cam & Performer intake) We just jetted down an alky carb & went from 13.30's on gas to 12.49 on the E85. I'm thinking it is like alky in that the gains are substantial on slower low compression engines.
------------- Steve Obertanec www.stevandracing.com |
Posted By: pfordamx
Date Posted: Oct/16/2017 at 7:18am
|
eric built our first E85 carb and we could'nt make it rich enough and just like you had happen going from the proform when we went to a sullens carb it went .4 in the 1/8th quicker on much smaller jetting i agree eric is a nice guy and great to work with, our combination just didn't like that carb. we do mix our own e85 and i simply take 5 gallon cans and use a little simple math 5.00x0.87=4.35 gallons of E100 leaving me with 0.65 gallons of 87 in a 5 gallon can. and then double check with a tester from holley or quickfuel and make sure its in the ball park. as far as using 91 or 93 or what ever instead of 87 it just makes a fuel thats already hard to burn even harder to burn it doesn't detonate so theres really no point the plugs come out clean, you might mix with something else if you were using boost or had a compression ratio over 15.1.
|
Posted By: jcisworthy
Date Posted: Oct/16/2017 at 5:54pm
|
The car I had it on was much slower than yours, 11.70's When I got the carb back I think it had 78/88 jets with his new metering blocks, it was a while ago. It didnt run any better with jet changes at the track so I always ran it with the jets he had in it. There was a lot of room for jetting but wheter or not it would have worked on you car I dont know. It had great response and performed well on that particular engine. Never tried another carb from another E85 person
------------- Specializing in dyno services, engine building, and cylinder head porting rbjracing.com Phone Number 518-915-3203 |
Posted By: jcisworthy
Date Posted: Oct/17/2017 at 4:28am
Found the sheet I got with the carb from Eric
------------- Specializing in dyno services, engine building, and cylinder head porting rbjracing.com Phone Number 518-915-3203 |
Posted By: pfordamx
Date Posted: Oct/17/2017 at 1:44pm
| I don't have the sheet for the one we had it didn't have power valves and had 104 and 105s from eric ended up at 110s square and .021 air bleed instead of a .026 so super rich(you would think) but it just still wanted more the sullens carb we have now is happy at 99s square and .026 so big difference. in the way the rest of the carb flows fuel. |
Posted By: pfordamx
Date Posted: Oct/17/2017 at 1:56pm
Our HPI carb i wish it had worked it was pretty. |
Posted By: amcenthusiast
Date Posted: Oct/26/2017 at 10:47pm
|
I'd like to congratulate all who designed and built this custom 427 AMV8 stroker one more time. I think your engine will like the big Indy single plane intake manifold. (if it fits the Edlebrock heads) Historically, I think Traco was trying to build this engine... but they did not know about supplying oil to the rear of the engine through a bypass line... which I give credit to Bobby Allison's team for inventing (and those Matadors began winning) Back then, I think Offenhauser made a big plenum dual plane (which might also be usable on your engine because it's rod ratio 'likes' a big intake) but it never got popular because so few engines with your specs ever get built (the big Offy dual plane is too big even for 390s and 401s?) (it doesn't matter whether one lapps or uses 240-400 wet sand paper on glass sheet flat surface to fine tune pump gear end clearance because they both leave embedded grains in the aluminum just the same ~but~ on the pump side (not on the filter adapter side) it is merely a gasketed surface so it makes no difference (does not contact any moving parts) If one is still interested in finding non-embedding lapping compound (where one shouldn't use conventional 'Clover' for a surface where there are moving parts in contact, such as the AMV8 filter adapter covering the pump cavity) The only product I've been able to find is called 'Timesaver' (but it works slow and takes forever!) https://www.modeltford.com/item/TIMESAV-Y.aspx ...not sure if 'Brownell's' carries it www.brownell.com Sorry if I missed and you said it before, is this engine running a Milodon deep pan and Milodon oversized pickup tube? ------------- 443 XRV8 Gremlin YouTube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=2DmFOKRuzUc XRV8 Race Parts website: http://amcramblermarlin.1colony.com/ |
Posted By: RamblinJavelin72
Date Posted: Oct/27/2017 at 10:23am
That's beauty! Not many AMC's up here in Canada but my brother and I sponsor a friends 1972 Dart Swinger he runs 10.10's up here. I haven't ridden in a faster (straight line) car than that ( Includes my friends 950hp Viper ACR) that AMC must be H ELL ON WHEELS!! 
------------- GARAGE: 1972 AMC Javelin SST 3604BBL 4 speed manual 10400 original miles. 1968 Plymouth Fury III 383 Commando 727 AT,2dr fasttop 1995 Buick Riviera SC Black on Black highly customized |