520 BBF ideas.. (Daily driver)

cazsper

Well-known member
Joined
May 30, 2012
Messages
1,066
Reaction score
2
Location
Sunnyvale, CA
My Car
1968 Coupe: 393w, TKO-600, Maier Racing springs, Global West suspension, Currie 9in with forged axles, 3.50 gears, Trutrac, Baer brakes front/rear
1973 Mach-1: 351c 4V, C-6, 3.73:1 gears and a long "To Do" list..
After talking to a hand full of people (most recently lduke12) about the idea of either a stroked Windsor or Cleveland it swapping to a 460 based motor, I have decided to plan a 520 stroker as a daily driver (or at least daily driver capable).

Regardless of motor choice, I am planning to use either a TKO-600 (if not the T-56) and a built 9 inch with 3.50:1 gears. Everyone as an opinion about a car, a build or whatever. Please feel free to chime in with advise. This will be my first big block and would like to know I'm at least heading in the right direction.

I have looked at 500 BBF builds, 520 BBF builds and even 496 BBC builds and have come up with the following "recipe" if you will:

-520 stroker with 9.75+/- compression

-SCJ aluminum heads (am also watching to see how the AFR heads turn out)

-Edelbrock Air Gap intake (possibly the Victor EFI intake with Wilson elbow if I decide on EFI)

-236/242 @ .050" (unsure of lift)-112' lsa (prefer a idle that's not too choppy and will work with power brakes. Should also work well with the EFI if I go that route).

I also plan to use aluminum parts where I can to keep the front end weight down (not the block).

As for exhaust, I'm thinking a set of shorties from Ford Powertrain, an X-pipe with magnaflow mufflers and 3 inch exhaust..

Opinions anyone? Thanks..

Mike

 

flstf09

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2015
Messages
129
Reaction score
1
Location
Missouri
My Car
72 Mach 1 429 CJ
Check out my 521,it's posted in this section.FPA headers are nice pieces can't speak about fit yet.


How much power are you looking for?

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jeff73Mach1

VIP Members
Site Supporters
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
Messages
4,751
Reaction score
72
Location
Nashville, Tennessee
My Car
1973 Q code Mach 1
Keep in mind that the rear suspension is unlikely to control higher power levels without some additional work and factor in the time and cost of that work-

I suggest fresh 5 leaf springs or at least 4 1/2 leaf springs, look at CalTrac Traction bars as one option and consider your tire sizes-with the right backspacing our cars will fit a fairly wide tire, but height wise you start to run out of room.

 

cazsper

Well-known member
Joined
May 30, 2012
Messages
1,066
Reaction score
2
Location
Sunnyvale, CA
My Car
1968 Coupe: 393w, TKO-600, Maier Racing springs, Global West suspension, Currie 9in with forged axles, 3.50 gears, Trutrac, Baer brakes front/rear
1973 Mach-1: 351c 4V, C-6, 3.73:1 gears and a long "To Do" list..
Jeff73Mach1,

I didn't mention it but I have certainly been giving that some thought. I was thinking a similar rear and to that of my '68 coupe. A 9in with 31-spline Currie axles and a TruTrac.

As for the Caltracs, how will they affect my handling in the corners (windy road going to Santa Cruz)? I was really considering a torque arm. Just not sure which way to go.

As for the suspension, I had planned on 650-700# front coils and 4 1/2-5 leafs for the rears. I already have a 1 1/8" front sway bar.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jeff73Mach1

VIP Members
Site Supporters
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
Messages
4,751
Reaction score
72
Location
Nashville, Tennessee
My Car
1973 Q code Mach 1
I was out Saturday driving on some fairly curvy roads and a couple of tight entrance ramps and the Caltracs didn't cause any issues. Because of the front aluminum bushing, they do make some noise. I run mine on the street and use just a little bit of preload. I suspect my pinion angle might need some further tweaking. I can still spin my tires excessively, but at least when I do so my car tends to go straight!

Though I have yet to try it, I do suspect they might interfere with a four wheel drift or extreme tail out driving, but if you are tackling a road course, you can always remove the bars or back them off far enough that they do not engage.

Coil overs and a 4 link may provide some greater degree of flexibility, but do require some alterations to the vehicle that I didn't want to perform. While my car isn't original, I have tried to not alter anything that cannot be undone.

At one time I thought a torque arm suspension was the way to go. When I mentioned it to a very experienced mechanic/friend, he advised that he had driven many cars so equipped and he was not at all impressed.

 

flstf09

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2015
Messages
129
Reaction score
1
Location
Missouri
My Car
72 Mach 1 429 CJ
Depending on what kind of power you are looking for don't dismiss the Torker 2 intake.You can bleed off some of that massive low end torque and move it up in the powerband some.Its all going to go up in tire smoke anyway.

 

cazsper

Well-known member
Joined
May 30, 2012
Messages
1,066
Reaction score
2
Location
Sunnyvale, CA
My Car
1968 Coupe: 393w, TKO-600, Maier Racing springs, Global West suspension, Currie 9in with forged axles, 3.50 gears, Trutrac, Baer brakes front/rear
1973 Mach-1: 351c 4V, C-6, 3.73:1 gears and a long "To Do" list..
I'll look into it. I've always been told to stay away from a single plane on the street (unless it was EFI). But I assume I will not be down on low end power. What do you think of my proposed engine build?

 

flstf09

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2015
Messages
129
Reaction score
1
Location
Missouri
My Car
72 Mach 1 429 CJ
You will have more low end power than you know what to do with.My 521 is making 600+ torque at about 3k max torque is 645 at 4500 and max hp is 630 at right around 5700.This is with a Torker 2,1" Jomar Power cone spacer and a Holley 950 HP.Your build sounds fairly similar to mine so far.Single or dual plane isn't the end all be all.


Torker will gain you some hood clearance too.I didn't want to cut my hood is the main reason I'm using it.Mine has been ported to match the SCJ heads and is less than 20 hp down from a victor.


Also are you planning on a flat tappet cam?

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jeff73Mach1

VIP Members
Site Supporters
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
Messages
4,751
Reaction score
72
Location
Nashville, Tennessee
My Car
1973 Q code Mach 1
My car is a Small block, 393 Cleveland, but a fairly radical build. I run a single plane intake no problem. Torque I have to spare. Oddly enough, if I drive it like a daily driver, short shift and keep the RPM's under 3500, it behaves wonderfully. I have plenty of power to cruise in 5th gear at highway speeds and to pass without downshifting for anything normal on the interstate.

I can't see your build needing the extra torque that a dual plane manifold would add.

 

cazsper

Well-known member
Joined
May 30, 2012
Messages
1,066
Reaction score
2
Location
Sunnyvale, CA
My Car
1968 Coupe: 393w, TKO-600, Maier Racing springs, Global West suspension, Currie 9in with forged axles, 3.50 gears, Trutrac, Baer brakes front/rear
1973 Mach-1: 351c 4V, C-6, 3.73:1 gears and a long "To Do" list..
You will have more low end power than you know what to do with.My 521 is making 600+ torque at about 3k max torque is 645 at 4500 and max hp is 630 at right around 5700.This is with a Torker 2,1" Jomar Power cone spacer and a Holley 950 HP.Your build sounds fairly similar to mine so far.Single or dual plane isn't the end all be all.


Torker will gain you some hood clearance too.I didn't want to cut my hood is the main reason I'm using it.Mine has been ported to match the SCJ heads and is less than 20 hp down from a victor.


Also are you planning on a flat tappet cam?
Well, I suppose hood clearance is always a good thing. As for the Mac, I was actually looking at converting over to hydraulic roller..



My car is a Small block, 393 Cleveland, but a fairly radical build. I run a single plane intake no problem. Torque I have to spare. Oddly enough, if I drive it like a daily driver, short shift and keep the RPM's under 3500, it behaves wonderfully. I have plenty of power to cruise in 5th gear at highway speeds and to pass without downshifting for anything normal on the interstate.

I can't see your build needing the extra torque that a dual plane manifold would add.
Wow.. Now I don't know.. I do suppose too much on the bottom end could end up with a car that will light them up even when I don't want to.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

flstf09

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2015
Messages
129
Reaction score
1
Location
Missouri
My Car
72 Mach 1 429 CJ
Do some research on hydraulic rollers in a big block Ford.They can have some geometry issues due to the lifter body being so tall.Not saying they won't work but can be an issue.

 

TommyK

VIP Members
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
46
Location
CT
My Car
73 Mustang Convertible
After talking to a hand full of people (most recently lduke12) about the idea of either a stroked Windsor or Cleveland it swapping to a 460 based motor, I have decided to plan a 520 stroker as a daily driver (or at least daily driver capable).

Regardless of motor choice, I am planning to use either a TKO-600 (if not the T-56) and a built 9 inch with 3.50:1 gears. Everyone as an opinion about a car, a build or whatever. Please feel free to chime in with advise. This will be my first big block and would like to know I'm at least heading in the right direction.

I have looked at 500 BBF builds, 520 BBF builds and even 496 BBC builds and have come up with the following "recipe" if you will:

-520 stroker with 9.75+/- compression

-SCJ aluminum heads (am also watching to see how the AFR heads turn out)

-Edelbrock Air Gap intake (possibly the Victor EFI intake with Wilson elbow if I decide on EFI)

-236/242 @ .050" (unsure of lift)-112' lsa (prefer a idle that's not too choppy and will work with power brakes. Should also work well with the EFI if I go that route).

I also plan to use aluminum parts where I can to keep the front end weight down (not the block).

As for exhaust, I'm thinking a set of shorties from Ford Powertrain, an X-pipe with magnaflow mufflers and 3 inch exhaust..

Opinions anyone? Thanks..

Mike
The cam is small for the displacement. You should calculate the DCR if your plan is to run pump gas.

The flow characteristics of SCJ heads lend themselves to solid flat cams. The advice on using caution with hydraulic rollers in regard to geometry issues is well founded.

The FPA mid-length headers fit OK and are good to 600 HP.

Nothing wrong with a Torker II if hood clearance is of any concern. If it isn't there are better manifolds for max performance.

IMO a 6 speed transmission is wasted on a BBF.

 

cazsper

Well-known member
Joined
May 30, 2012
Messages
1,066
Reaction score
2
Location
Sunnyvale, CA
My Car
1968 Coupe: 393w, TKO-600, Maier Racing springs, Global West suspension, Currie 9in with forged axles, 3.50 gears, Trutrac, Baer brakes front/rear
1973 Mach-1: 351c 4V, C-6, 3.73:1 gears and a long "To Do" list..
Well, either way I will go hydraulic. Hydraulic roller or flat tappet

 

flstf09

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2015
Messages
129
Reaction score
1
Location
Missouri
My Car
72 Mach 1 429 CJ
The cam in mine is a hydraulic roller profile on solid roller lifters 244/253 -592/614 111 LSA.Pretty mild for a 521 but it was chosen to still have some street manners,easy on valvetrain and makes decent vacuum.I think what Tommy was trying to say is the SCJ head has the flow characteristics that the added rpms of a solid lifter provides,you might not see some of the advantages with a juice lifter.

 

cazsper

Well-known member
Joined
May 30, 2012
Messages
1,066
Reaction score
2
Location
Sunnyvale, CA
My Car
1968 Coupe: 393w, TKO-600, Maier Racing springs, Global West suspension, Currie 9in with forged axles, 3.50 gears, Trutrac, Baer brakes front/rear
1973 Mach-1: 351c 4V, C-6, 3.73:1 gears and a long "To Do" list..
The cam in mine is a hydraulic roller profile on solid roller lifters 244/253 -592/614 111 LSA.Pretty mild for a 521 but it was chosen to still have some street manners,easy on valvetrain and makes decent vacuum.I think what Tommy was trying to say is the SCJ head has the flow characteristics that the added rpms of a solid lifter provides,you might not see some of the advantages with a juice lifter.
Ah.. I understand. Well, I wanted something that would be low maintenance and that I could drive every day.

 

cazsper

Well-known member
Joined
May 30, 2012
Messages
1,066
Reaction score
2
Location
Sunnyvale, CA
My Car
1968 Coupe: 393w, TKO-600, Maier Racing springs, Global West suspension, Currie 9in with forged axles, 3.50 gears, Trutrac, Baer brakes front/rear
1973 Mach-1: 351c 4V, C-6, 3.73:1 gears and a long "To Do" list..
I probably don't need a stroker motor at all. A 460 inch motor with a 232/240 cam would probably be plenty fun. But since I have to buy a rotating assembly anyway, I figured, why not?

I love my 393w with a 232/240 cam. If I could have a 520 with the same "characteristics", I would be happy.. I just don't know how to do that..

 

cazsper

Well-known member
Joined
May 30, 2012
Messages
1,066
Reaction score
2
Location
Sunnyvale, CA
My Car
1968 Coupe: 393w, TKO-600, Maier Racing springs, Global West suspension, Currie 9in with forged axles, 3.50 gears, Trutrac, Baer brakes front/rear
1973 Mach-1: 351c 4V, C-6, 3.73:1 gears and a long "To Do" list..
Not at all..lol

I have had engines build by Kuntz & Co. That have come out great and I have had engines built by Gromm Racing (San Jose Ca.). Gromm just said he hasn't done many 460's. I figured I would piece parts together for a while until I could afford to have it built.

 
Top