Ford Aluminum SCJ Heads/High Compression?

Are the Ford SCJ Aluminum heads relics when compared to all the other new BBF heads

Is 10.8-12.5:1 CR to much for the street if used with E-85

Are Tunnel Rams like the Weiand Hi Ram a relic or just good for Max Effort Race but aweful on the street

Thanks guys I love what you guys are doing.

I hate to say it but 12.5 is not high compression, I am working to get mine up to 14.5 from 13.3....

The tunnelrams have the WOW factor for the streets but a victor engine will most likely Kick your Butt in short order..... and be more responsive and easier to tune.....

Randy

the Coug wrote:I hate to say it but 12.5 is not high compression, I am working to get mine up to 14.5 from 13.3....

The tunnelrams have the WOW factor for the streets but a victor engine will most likely Kick your Butt in short order..... and be more responsive and easier to tune.....

Randy

X2 on the Intake and carb setup.

12.5 with a good tune i would imagine could run on E85.

dfree383 wrote:I wouldn't say the Single 4 will woop on the old TR, You might be supprised how good the 40 year old stuff can work in the right application.

After doing one on the Boss 9 and one on the P-51 headed 466 for 2009 EMC, I can tell you they do work. They are just a PITA. There is alot to be said for equal runner length and tunabilty.......

That also is VERY true. Someone should do an all out max effort tune and compare the two back to back!

just a thought.

I will tell you very shortly how it will do, I have a 521 with the SCJ heads, 13.37 to 1 compression, a custom flat tappet cam from Lem with a weiand tunnel ram, I am running 2 750 holley carbs with vaccum secondaries. The carbs are being custom taylored to my motor.

Tennessee Bullitt wrote:I will tell you very shortly how it will do, I have a 521 with the SCJ heads, 13.37 to 1 compression, a custom flat tappet cam from Lem with a weiand tunnel ram, I am running 2 750 holley carbs with vaccum secondaries. The carbs are being custom taylored to my motor.

Are you going to try a single plane with one carborator as well?

I might see how one does later but right now I want to run it and enjoy this setup for a while.

Tennessee Bullitt wrote:I might see how one does later but right now I want to run it and enjoy this setup for a while.

sounds good let us know how it turns out. I might consider a tunnel ram

Maddmattmustangs wrote:

dfree383 wrote:I wouldn't say the Single 4 will woop on the old TR, You might be supprised how good the 40 year old stuff can work in the right application.

After doing one on the Boss 9 and one on the P-51 headed 466 for 2009 EMC, I can tell you they do work. They are just a PITA. There is alot to be said for equal runner length and tunabilty.......

That also is VERY true. Someone should do an all out max effort tune and compare the two back to back!

just a thought.

Someone HAS ... but, I ain't tellin", lol.

dfree383 wrote:

rmcomprandy wrote:

Maddmattmustangs wrote:

dfree383 wrote:I wouldn't say the Single 4 will woop on the old TR, You might be supprised how good the 40 year old stuff can work in the right application.

After doing one on the Boss 9 and one on the P-51 headed 466 for 2009 EMC, I can tell you they do work. They are just a PITA. There is alot to be said for equal runner length and tunabilty.......

That also is VERY true. Someone should do an all out max effort tune and compare the two back to back!

just a thought.

Someone HAS ... but, I ain't tellin", lol.

I ain't Squeelin' either..........

Hate it when people do this neener neener neener neener shi*!!

95lightiningguy wrote:

dfree383 wrote:

rmcomprandy wrote:

Maddmattmustangs wrote:

dfree383 wrote:I wouldn't say the Single 4 will woop on the old TR, You might be supprised how good the 40 year old stuff can work in the right application.

After doing one on the Boss 9 and one on the P-51 headed 466 for 2009 EMC, I can tell you they do work. They are just a PITA. There is alot to be said for equal runner length and tunabilty.......

That also is VERY true. Someone should do an all out max effort tune and compare the two back to back!

just a thought.

Someone HAS ... but, I ain't tellin", lol.

I ain't Squeelin' either..........

Hate it when people do this neener neener neener neener shi*!!

AND, I just hate it when someone suggests an expensive, time consuming test be done by someone else so they can simply be given the results and get all the benefits of the testing told to them for free without lifting a finger, (or wallet), of their own..
Why do a lot of people even suggest that THEY are ENTITLED to other people's test results...?
Do you now get the drift of what was being said with those posts ...? LOL.

rmcomprandy wrote:

AND, I just hate it when someone suggests an expensive, time consuming test be done by someone else so they can simply be given the results and get all the benefits of the testing told to them for free without lifting a finger, (or wallet), of their own..
Why do a lot of people even suggest that THEY are ENTITLED to other people's test results...?
Do you now get the drift of what was being said with those posts ...? LOL.

I remember a time of the past when a "carb spacer" was tested at the expense of another and another's engine. The so-called test was to prove the "carb spacer" and it's benefits. After several WOT dyno pulls and the carb's benefit to the engine has changed due to the "carb spacer" and needed tuning along the way, the engine's owner said to me, that's enough of this sh!t! If I remember correctly responding, "yea, their going to sling a rod out of your engine then run out the door!"

Just a trip down memory lane.
Dave.

LivermoreDave wrote:

rmcomprandy wrote:

AND, I just hate it when someone suggests an expensive, time consuming test be done by someone else so they can simply be given the results and get all the benefits of the testing told to them for free without lifting a finger, (or wallet), of their own..
Why do a lot of people even suggest that THEY are ENTITLED to other people's test results...?
Do you now get the drift of what was being said with those posts ...? LOL.

I remember a time of the past when a "carb spacer" was tested at the expense of another and another's engine. The so-called test was to prove the "carb spacer" and it's benefits. After several WOT dyno pulls and the carb's benefit to the engine has changed due to the "carb spacer" and needed tuning along the way, the engine's owner said to me, that's enough of this sh!t! If I remember correctly responding, "yea, their going to sling a rod out of your engine then run out the door!"

Just a trip down memory lane.
Dave.

Dave ... your memory of that incident is much better than mine, lol.
That was just another "freebe" to add to the list of many ... I can't even remember 'em all.

Maddmattmustangs wrote:

dfree383 wrote:I wouldn't say the Single 4 will woop on the old TR, You might be supprised how good the 40 year old stuff can work in the right application.

After doing one on the Boss 9 and one on the P-51 headed 466 for 2009 EMC, I can tell you they do work. They are just a PITA. There is alot to be said for equal runner length and tunabilty.......

That also is VERY true. Someone should do an all out max effort tune and compare the two back to back!

just a thought.

I have not done the comparison, let alone a max effort deal, but hope to do a little testing one of these days. Like already mentioned by Randy and Dave... these people everyone refers to as "They", have... but likely haven't bothered with a pair of 750s... hardly max effort, even in my book.

Maddmattmustangs wrote:

Tennessee Bullitt wrote:I might see how one does later but right now I want to run it and enjoy this setup for a while.

sounds good let us know how it turns out. I might consider a tunnel ram

when you do the T/R thing , are you going to cut a hole in the hood ?.... 71/73 stang . should get another plain hood for T/R and use the nasa hood for the victor , with and w/o ram air . let the forum know the value of nasa hood HP gain

dfree383 wrote:The 4150's are a waste of time IMO. With 4150's on a TR, you might as well run the Victor and a Domie...... Now a pair of Dominators on the old TR, now thats a different story...... If you saw the results, you'd have the same look on your face that Charlie did seeing the dyno sheets..... Lets just say it put alot of old theories out to pasture........

X2 ... for power; even at low RPM's.

Just get the street drivability part worked out and then ...

DanH wrote:

Maddmattmustangs wrote:

Tennessee Bullitt wrote:I might see how one does later but right now I want to run it and enjoy this setup for a while.

sounds good let us know how it turns out. I might consider a tunnel ram

when you do the T/R thing , are you going to cut a hole in the hood ?.... 71/73 stang . should get another plain hood for T/R and use the nasa hood for the victor , with and w/o ram air . let the forum know the value of nasa hood HP gain

On my 351 that was in the car we tried that after screwing with the aircleaner and removing the ram air system with the scoopes closed we ran it up to about 115 and took it about 12 seconds to get there.
opened them and got to 120+ (thats max on the speedo)in the same time span.

I wouldnt imagine any gain on the dyno because the car is not moving.

as for the hood bit I hope to one day shed that stupid steel NASA hood and get a fiberglass version.

I have the dominator top as well, I just need to start somewhere and go from there. I got a pic of my hood that has been trimed to let the TR and a street scoop go through. I'd be happy to share if I can send a pic and someone post it up for me.

Tennessee Bullitt wrote:I have the dominator top as well, I just need to start somewhere and go from there. I got a pic of my hood that has been trimed to let the TR and a street scoop go through. I'd be happy to share if I can send a pic and someone post it up for me.

I would help if i wasnt stuck on a stupid network computer

how tall is your tunnel ram?