Vintage Mustang Forums banner

Mach 1 Dyno Run

8K views 25 replies 16 participants last post by  Klutch 
#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

See less See more
1 1
#2 ·
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?
 
#3 ·
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.
 
#5 ·
- 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
 
#7 ·
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.
 
#9 ·
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.
 
#8 · (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.

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).
 
#12 ·
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"?
 
  • Like
Reactions: j persons
#14 ·
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.
 
#16 ·
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.
 
#17 ·
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!
 
#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.
 
#19 ·
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.
 
#21 · (Edited)
Duration at .020: 272 Intake, 282 Exhaust

Gross Valve Lift: .559 Intake, .580 Exhaust

Separation: 112

It's also an asynchronous profile, if that makes a difference.

I don't recall the total ignition advance. As I said earlier, the distributor was calibrated to match the cam by Dan at Mustang Barn. I currently have it set at 16 degrees BTDC.

Today I installed one size larger jets in the secondary. I just got back from a long drive. After stomping on it a few times, it seems to go a litter better with the larger secondary jets.
 
#22 ·
stay away from any thought of Hooker Long Headers, I tried to install a set with my Z-bar, power steering,toploader. What a waste of a few days I will never get back. Not much room with the Clevo and everything about the Hookers was off -even the collector flange lined up with the lowest chassis crossmember - and they advertise as for a 351C, pwr steer, manual..... They now sit on my shelf!
 
#23 ·
Hard to believe Hooker is still in business. Their stuff NEVER fits. Their super comp
crap is particularly bad. Fabrication dept at JBA used to laugh at their product line when I
worked for Bittle in the 80's. HORRIBLE.
 
#24 ·
Here’s what I would do, get a better intake, get a better carb, (I recommend this one...https://www.smicarburetor.com/products/sfID1/7/sfID2/5/sfID3/20/productID/35 ). Up the compression to at least 11:1. Yes you will have to run good gas.Who cares, do you drive it every day? Find a dual point distributor and send it to Dan (Mustang Barn) to rebuild & recurve or switch to new certified full MSD ignition system. I don’t know much about the 2V Aussie heads, but I would guess the exhaust side would benefit from some porting and the valves could use some de-shrouding.

Assuming the back of the envelope calculations are approximate, you are right at or below .9HP/CI. Personally, I would be disappointed with that. I’m guessing you could be in the 1.3HP+/CI with the suggested changes.

Just thinking out loud (or on the inter-web) here. Not blasting your car at all.
 
#26 ·
Thanks for the suggestions.

The Aussie heads have the Cleveland 2V ports, which are still pretty huge, and closed combustion chambers. And they are pretty small chambers. My machinist said with the flattop pistons I used, the static compression would be about 10.7:1. I'm doing OK now with that compression, iron heads and premium pump gas. I would fear detonation if I moved the compression any higher.

I wish you guys could drive the car. I'm pretty tickled at how well it drives, rides and cruises. That's what makes me happy. Today I drove it on a road next to the mountains. The scenery was stunning and I was thrilled. (I'll try to get some dash cam video posted. Colorado scenery is quite stunning.) I'm not going to be doing any serious drag racing or track events. I might get into autocross next year and I should have plenty of power for that.

When I'm ready for a power boost, likely I would go with aluminum heads. And, if I'm really ambitious, I could try to find another Cleveland block and build a 427 stroker. Truth is, right now I don't need a lot of horsepower to enjoy the car.
 
#25 ·
Nice car. Here are my two runs at the flywheel and the tires, a 427 Windsor stroker. At the time of the build JBA only had 1 5/8" mid-lengths. They now have 1 3/4" long tubes that are tempting me. A Tremic TKO 600 and 3.50 9" rear. I drew in the torque on my flywheel curve.

 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top