Don Terrill’s Speed-Talk

both engines (302 ford and 327 chev) were mild street rod type motors, 327 peaked at 5500, expect the 302 to do the same. both had new short blocks but other parts were left overs. just looking for a manifold for the 302, nothing laying around, aint paying $300.00 plus for an new edelbrock, but $ 14...

has anybody done a comparison between a chinese power products dual plane and eddy performer and or a eddy performer rpm or an old eddy f4b on a small block ford 289/302. I dynoed a run of the mill 327 chev, dynoed 3 manifolds, and the chinese manifold made 10-12 hp and 10-12 torque more then a perf...

I put a balance tube (not a x pipe) on my SS chevelle. It did not change tone or add any power that I could tell. the only thing I noticed was that it was a pita to hook up the exhaust after going to the strip. will never waste my time doing that again

this might be a dumb question, but because I will be bored this winter, I plan on porting some 65 289 heads and put chev valves in them. is it worth the time and effort to pour aluminum in the exhaust crossover? It is just something to do. I plan on having them flowed when their done

my .02 cent opinion is the 3.25 main bearing engine I says are big blocks, and the 3.00 main bearing engines are small blocks.

5/16 is .313, the plate is .342 Why is .029 too much? the roller rockers move laterally about 3/16 of an inch over the valve stem, which I think is too much. I checked some arp sbc and they measured .327 I also was not expecting 500 horsepower, I was only hoping for 375-400 hp. the heads are fine f...

i did CC them, if I recall correctly they were 65 cc's. As far as flow I thought they were supposed to flow 260,I never flowed them, what do you think they will flow? Thanks for all opinions

i purchased a set of sbf pro maxx heads and I noticed the rocker arms had excessive lateral movement and I measured the slot in the guide plate and it was ,342, which I thought was too much considering I have 5/16 pushrods. has anybody else had this probelm with pro maxx heads? I called pro maxx and...

i did a bbm years back and when setting the end gap on the rings I noticed that that piston was tight putting it in with the wrist pin parallel to the crank center line, but if I turned the piston 90 degrees it slid it just fine. It was bored and honed with a torque plate. machine shop said it would...

the cylinder heads are ported, sleeved on the pushrod hole, the heads are a number 16 or 61 ( a mid 60's casting) they flowed about 255 at .600 if I recall correctly. the compression is about 9.5, the cam is a bullet 231/239 @ .050 .485//.507 hydraulic. sounds like the torker would be the better cho...

putzing with a buddy's 400 cube 64 gto street strip car, more street then strip. made about 439 hp. has run best of 12.30 @ 109.88 with a dominator type intake, but has a quick fuel 850 carb on it. it has a hood clearance probelm. has a choice of a performer or a torker intake, which would be better...

no it was the ryb cam, I seen the number on the back of the cam, he still has it. It has been stored for 40 years and he is going to use it again as he trying to relive his childhood in another 65 falcon. it is in good shape.

memory being 50 years removed I would of guessed the way I remember the rough idle that it was more 218 @ .050, but the 288 advertised duration and the .461 lift sound right. thanks for all the answers.

years back (late 60's) a friend had a 289 in a 65 ford falcon and he did the normal hop up, intake, 600 holley, hooker headers, and a melling hydro cam. I searched for all the specs but can't find anything. The cam was pn ryb12. I was wondering if anybody here knew the specs for this cam (.050 durat...

didn't big joe say that there were only helpful on grossly unpowered engines and he had 289 ford in parentheses.