Vintage Mustang Forums banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,904 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
I just got my 1970 Mach 1 running last spring. My Mustang club was doing a Dyno Day, so I brought my car just for fun. We had just over ten cars from the club. This is was a wheel dyno, so the numbers weren't that high.

My Mustang won the "Pony Power" award for the highest horsepower from the carbureted car. The numbers don't appear very impressive, but they were much higher than the other cars. Two of the 289-powered cars didn't break 200 HP and won was at 204 HP. The last carb car to go was a '68 GT with a factory 390 and an Edelbrock top end kit. I expected that car to blow me out of the water. Although the torque numbers were higher than my car, the horsepower was well below. (I think he had some tuning issues.)

Here's a link to a video of the run just for fun.


My engine isn't at all tricked out. Here are some details in case you're curious:

- Factory 351 Cleveland short block
- Australian 2V Cleveland heads (iron)
- Custom solid, flat tappet cam from Bullet Cams
- Edelbrock Performer intake
- Summit Racing 600 CFM carb
- Factory distributor calibrated by Dan at Mustang Barn with Petronix III ignition
- Sanderson shorty headers

I don't know much about dyno numbers. I'm posting a copy of the graph and would appreciate comments.

Thanks.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
1967 Mustang Convertible
Joined
·
867 Posts
Nice. Assuming a 15% drive train loss, you are about 313HP at the engine. I think they where rated at 300HP from the factory and that was high more like 280HP by today's standard I would think. I see a lot of white smoke after the run? What where the stock 289 putting down? I take it like 180 RWHP?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,904 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Nice. Assuming a 15% drive train loss, you are about 313HP at the engine. I think they where rated at 300HP from the factory and that was high more like 280HP by today's standard I would think. I see a lot of white smoke after the run? What where the stock 289 putting down? I take it like 180 RWHP?
My Cleveland has an issue with blowing smoke under high vacuum situations, like letting off after high RPMs or cruising downhill with no throttle. It's not as bad as it used to be. I don't know what's causing it. I had the block bored and I installed new pistons. The engine has just over 2,000 miles on it. Every car, even the brand new Mustangs, blew some smoke after the dyno run.

None of the 289s were completely stock. The first car had an Edelbrock 4bbl carb and aluminum intake. It was around 140 HP. A similar car was at 160 HP. The third 289 had a pretty stout Crane cam as well and it was at 204 HP.

I suspect having my distributor calibrated made a difference. Nobody else had that done. Seems to me the power curves look pretty nice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,359 Posts
Check your egr valve on the valve cover, make sure your valve cover has a plate under it so it can’t suck in oil under high vacuum. Otherwise valve seals. Possibly an intake gasket. Make the car smoke as bad as you can then pull over and inspect the plugs. See if its localized to one or more cylinders.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,904 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Check your egr valve on the valve cover, make sure your valve cover has a plate under it so it can’t suck in oil under high vacuum. Otherwise valve seals. Possibly an intake gasket. Make the car smoke as bad as you can then pull over and inspect the plugs. See if its localized to one or more cylinders.
- There is no oil in the hose which connects the oil cap to the air cleaner

- There is no oil in the PCV valve hose

- Yeah, could be valve seals. They're new, but they are the lame umbrella seals. I should have installed better valve seals. I suspect that's the culprit

- I installed a new, "turkey pan" intake gasket. That seemed to help, but I'm not certain

- I have inspected all the plugs and, strangely, there's no sign of any plug burning any different from the others
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,775 Posts
If you like how it runs - congrats. If you want more power, up the carb to the 750 area and get some quality long tube headers. Also, that intake is not helping.


Again, your car looks and sounds fine to me, but you are leaving 50HP on the table with that intake, carb & header combo - assuming your cam is up to the challenge.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,882 Posts
I just got my 1970 Mach 1 running last spring. My Mustang club was doing a Dyno Day, so I brought my car just for fun. We had just over ten cars from the club. This is was a wheel dyno, so the numbers weren't that high.

My Mustang won the "Pony Power" award for the highest horsepower from the carbureted car. The numbers don't appear very impressive, but they were much higher than the other cars. Two of the 289-powered cars didn't break 200 HP and won was at 204 HP. The last carb car to go was a '68 GT with a factory 390 and an Edelbrock top end kit. I expected that car to blow me out of the water. Although the torque numbers were higher than my car, the horsepower was well below. (I think he had some tuning issues.)

Here's a link to a video of the run just for fun.

https://youtu.be/5GGozueVAU8

My engine isn't at all tricked out. Here are some details in case you're curious:

- Factory 351 Cleveland short block
- Australian 2V Cleveland heads (iron)
- Custom solid, flat tappet cam from Bullet Cams
- Edelbrock Performer intake
- Summit Racing 600 CFM carb
- Factory distributor calibrated by Dan at Mustang Barn with Petronix III ignition
- Sanderson shorty headers

I don't know much about dyno numbers. I'm posting a copy of the graph and would appreciate comments.

Thanks.
What transmission is in your Mach? I think it was a 4 spd manual?

You're probably pretty solidly in the 300-325 hp range at the flywheel.
My decently built fuel injected 289 did about 210 RWHP on a similar dyno. Or about 260 at the flywheel (C6 auto).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,904 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
If you like how it runs - congrats. If you want more power, up the carb to the 750 area and get some quality long tube headers. Also, that intake is not helping.


Again, your car looks and sounds fine to me, but you are leaving 50HP on the table with that intake, carb & header combo - assuming your cam is up to the challenge.
I am happy with the way it runs. I thought about a bigger carb, but I live at 6,700 feet above sea level and I think my low-end would suffer.

I am very skeptical swapping the shorties for long tube headers would make any difference.

Yeah, the intake isn't the best, but I have a shaker and if the intake is any higher, the shaker top would stick out way too far above the hood.

The cam is amazing! Those guys at Bullet know their stuff.

Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,913 Posts
Reading this takes me back to my Dyno moment...never been near a Dyno, yet, I had to determine my engine build. Not too far from my hood is a "go fast" garage with a chassis Dyno, I was very nervous as this engine was one of my handcrafted builds. The tech(s) get the car setup, hookup and stabilized. I stated they should go for 6000 RPM WOT. They get it set up and "punch it" it approximately 2000 Rs. The engine is screaming up to 4K and onto 6K, I'm waiting for the engine to explode! They do this 3 times, each time I'm having a mini stroke, thinking the engine is going explode. Well it didn't, and I was so gratified, my handi-work held together......

How many of you have "been there done that"?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
124 Posts
I thought about a bigger carb, but I live at 6,700 feet above sea level and I think my low-end would suffer.
I saw this and thought to myself "where the heck does this guy live that he's 400 feet higher up than me?" and then I saw your location and it all made sense :grin2: Your Mach 1 is beautiful from what I saw in the video--enjoy!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
116 Posts
Good looking car. I had a 351C way back that would smoke on decel. I ended up pulling the heads, getting bronze wall valve guides installed, machined for Viton seals, another valve job, and no more smoking. Just a suggestion for the smoking, especially if you have used heads without replacing the valve guides.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,882 Posts
Isn't some smoke on the cycle down normal particularly on carberated engines with a wheel dyno?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,359 Posts
You having lived till you e Done a dyno run on a mobile dyno built into a car carrier. He had me drive onto the top rack which was scary enough right there! Then 10 feet in the air I pulled 289hp and 319 torque on my old motor with the entire rig flexing and working while I fretted that I was about launch over his truck at any minute into the snack bar.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
269 Posts
Long tube headers would increase your low end torque. A lot is made about "flow" when headers are talked about but it's really more about the scavenging affects of the long tubes. If you look at dyno sessions comparing long and short tubes the long tubes usually increase torque in the lower ranges as much as anything. There was an article in Car Craft a year or two ago by Richard Holdener where he compared shorty headers and long tubes on a 351 windsor. The windsor was originally a ford motorsport crate engine where the gt-40 heads were replaced with some Brodix. Other than that it was fairly mild with mild cam and a dual plane. It was up over 20 ft lbs of torque with the long tubes and maybe about as much horsepower. The shortys were no better than the shortys that used to come on 1980s 5.0s.

Like has been said if you are happy with it leave it. I am sure the shorty's are much easier to fit.

I would agree about the performer intake too but I'm sure your options are limited with your combo. If you have the hood clearance a 1 inch open spacer might add some top end, especially since your engine seems to be making peak power around 6000 rpm and the performer is supposed to be done around 5500.

Still a beauty of a car. Enjoy!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,904 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Thanks for all the comments. I really appreciate it.

Seems a dyno session is typically a very humbling experience for classic car people. Almost everyone thinks they have 400+ ponies under the hood and then find the reality is more like half that. :| I know the first guy to go yesterday must have been pretty bummed at the 140 HP number.

What I really found humbling were the numbers from the new Mustangs. A friend of mine had his 2019 Bullett Edition strapped into the dyno. I don't recall the exact number, but it cranked out over 480 HP! From a non-aspirated 5.0 liter engine, that just knocks my proverbial socks completely off! It also shows that particular dyno was well-calibrated. The Coyote results were very close to Ford's advertised numbers.

I know my Cleveland has much more potential. I will weigh possible mods with everyday driving and see what works for me. For example, I have a factory Z-bar clutch linkage and factory power steering. I don't think there's any way I can make that work with long tube headers. If I did, it would be pretty painful.

I'm considering adjustable engine mounts to get my drive line angle where I want it. If I can lower the engine, that would allow me to swap the intake for something like an Air Gap. And maybe I'll step up to a Quick Fuel 650 carb or even EFI.

Of course, the primary purpose of that local shop doing these club dyno sessions is to offer their tuning services. They told me they could play with the timing and carb calibration and improve driveability as well as power. The driveability thing is tempting me. While I like the way my engine currently runs, it's always nice to make it run a little better.
 

·
Registered
1967 Mustang Convertible
Joined
·
867 Posts
Klutch what are your cam specs? And what was your total timing for your tuned distributor? Just curious as mentioned your HP seems to be in the higher RPMs. And only other thing I saw was that your Air Fuel ratio seems to be in the 13:1 or higher and usually you want to be in the 12.5:1 at WOT.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top