what size head for good low torque?

chiaronate · 07-01-2003, 05:27 PM

i'm planning on changing heads soon, and so far i like the edelbrock performer and the windsor jr. the edelbrock has 170cc intake runners, 60cc combustion chambers, and 1.90/1.60" int/exh. valves. the windsor differs from this with 180cc intake runners, 58cc combustion chambers and 1.94 intake valves. which of these would be better for low-rpm torque? should i use the stock cam to make good low rpm power, or can i be doing better?

Nixon1 · 07-01-2003, 10:42 PM

Well, just based on the fact that the Windsor Jr's have larger intake runners and valves, I'd say it would be a fairly safe bet for me to say the Performer RPMs will make a little more power down low.

I can say this......from what I've heard, I think about the ONLY thing the stock cam is good for is low rpm power. Any of the fairly streetable Ford alphabet cams (namely the B and E) suffer from low end torque deficiency...ESPECIALLY the B. However, cams ARE made for low end torque...you just gotta find one. But some of them are NOT the best for power mind you! If you want low rpm torque...look for cams meant for an RV or a truck. I've got a stock Ford Explorer cam for sale. And a B cam too.

But that's enough whoring of parts....

90GT398 · 07-01-2003, 10:56 PM

GT40p is also a good head that builds low end torque, and i have to agree there are cams that can make a car a stump puller but you will hate it if you ever have to run someone down on the top end of the track or street ( did I just say that????).

Stock cam hold's it's own though, just look at NMRA Factory Stock and Real Street for how stout and capable a stock cam is.

chiaronate · 07-02-2003, 05:24 PM

i'm not looking to race at the track, i'd just like a good street car. what is the rpm operating range of the stock cam? anything that pulls up to 5,000 rpm is fine with me.

chiaronate · 07-02-2003, 05:25 PM

i'm not looking to race at the track, i'd just like a good street car. what is the rpm operating range of the stock cam? anything that pulls up to 5,000 rpm is fine with me.

90GT398 · 07-02-2003, 08:25 PM

stock cam will be good, but an E303 would be better. When most 5.0's were stock you always played with the shift points, I usually went 5500 1-2, 5500 2-3, and 5000 3-4 with 3.73 gears and mildly ported stock heads, really they just had a good valve job and a slight milling to get them to 9.5 instead of 9.0.

glenn95gt · 07-03-2003, 02:16 PM

AFR165's

chiaronate · 07-03-2003, 05:19 PM

what are the specifications on the afr 165's? do they have more low-end torque than the edelbrock performer or windsor lite's?

VeNuM · 07-03-2003, 05:22 PM

Another vote for the 165's. Check their website for the info. Excellent for a nice street head. Comes completely CNC ported too. ~Brian

90GT398 · 07-03-2003, 06:48 PM

the CNC port is just to make sure all the ports are the same, I know that is what you meant, but some might mistaken it for meaning that they cannot be ported anymore which as we know is far from the truth.

If you want some really good scoop and this is a cheap plug for my boy call Flow Tech Induction and ask for Ed Curtis. Met him last year at Bowling Green and he is good to go, if you want the truth and no BS call Ed Curtis.

Coupe50h · 07-03-2003, 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Nixon1

I can say this......from what I've heard, I think about the ONLY thing the stock cam is good for is low rpm power. Any of the fairly streetable Ford alphabet cams (namely the B and E) suffer from low end torque deficiency.......

Oh no, my e-cam with 1.7 rr's and 3.27 gears in the rear, my car makes good lowend torque.
And 'Acbar00' a member here on mw, goes "ONLY" 109 mph traps with the stock cam.....

i wish i could "ONLY" trap that with my E.

86GT · 07-03-2003, 09:45 PM

Edelbrocks out of the box make a really good street head and with a TFS Stage 1 cam, really nice. Now port the heads, go with a stage 2 cam and have some wild mid-range and upper rpm power with respectable low end.

Nixon1 · 07-03-2003, 10:16 PM

I recant my previous statement...I am running the E cam now and the low end torque is excellent. Off-idle is a bit of a dog but as soon as it picks up to maybe 1500 rpms, it pulls hard.

chiaronate · 07-04-2003, 12:58 PM

thanks guys. from what i've seen on this post, i think i'll go with afr 165's and the stock cam. although i'm sure i'd be happy with any one of the above combinations. now, is there an intake manifold that will match up to the afr 165's, or will i have to do some porting?

07-01-2003, 05:27 PM	#1
chiaronate Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: watervliet, ny Posts: 105	what size head for good low torque? i'm planning on changing heads soon, and so far i like the edelbrock performer and the windsor jr. the edelbrock has 170cc intake runners, 60cc combustion chambers, and 1.90/1.60" int/exh. valves. the windsor differs from this with 180cc intake runners, 58cc combustion chambers and 1.94 intake valves. which of these would be better for low-rpm torque? should i use the stock cam to make good low rpm power, or can i be doing better?

07-01-2003, 10:42 PM	#2
Nixon1 Registered Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Palm Bay, FL Posts: 432	Well, just based on the fact that the Windsor Jr's have larger intake runners and valves, I'd say it would be a fairly safe bet for me to say the Performer RPMs will make a little more power down low. I can say this......from what I've heard, I think about the ONLY thing the stock cam is good for is low rpm power. Any of the fairly streetable Ford alphabet cams (namely the B and E) suffer from low end torque deficiency...ESPECIALLY the B. However, cams ARE made for low end torque...you just gotta find one. But some of them are NOT the best for power mind you! If you want low rpm torque...look for cams meant for an RV or a truck. I've got a stock Ford Explorer cam for sale. And a B cam too. But that's enough whoring of parts.... __________________ '91 Mustang GT 5.0 AOD Daily Driver Current stats: NEW 302 short block, E-303 cam (@.050, 220/220, .498/.498, 110 degrees), 1.6 roller rockers, Performer RPM heads (aluminum, 1.9/1.6, 60cc chambers), Cobra intake, Granatelli 75mm MAF, Billet AFPR, Equal-Length Shorty Headers, Off-Road X Pipe, Flowmasters, 4.10 POSI 13.73 at 103.8, ~2.2 60'

07-01-2003, 10:56 PM	#3
90GT398 Registered Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: USA Posts: 25	GT40p GT40p is also a good head that builds low end torque, and i have to agree there are cams that can make a car a stump puller but you will hate it if you ever have to run someone down on the top end of the track or street ( did I just say that????). Stock cam hold's it's own though, just look at NMRA Factory Stock and Real Street for how stout and capable a stock cam is.

07-02-2003, 08:25 PM	#6
90GT398 Registered Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: USA Posts: 25	stock cam stock cam will be good, but an E303 would be better. When most 5.0's were stock you always played with the shift points, I usually went 5500 1-2, 5500 2-3, and 5000 3-4 with 3.73 gears and mildly ported stock heads, really they just had a good valve job and a slight milling to get them to 9.5 instead of 9.0.

07-03-2003, 02:16 PM	#7
glenn95gt Registered Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Bay Area, Ca Posts: 86	AFR165's __________________ StAnGaHoLiC!!! 1995 GT S-Trimmed 306, with H/C/I, and some other stuff. It just sounds fast. My Car

07-02-2003, 05:24 PM	#4
chiaronate Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: watervliet, ny Posts: 105	i'm not looking to race at the track, i'd just like a good street car. what is the rpm operating range of the stock cam? anything that pulls up to 5,000 rpm is fine with me.

07-02-2003, 05:25 PM	#5
chiaronate Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: watervliet, ny Posts: 105	i'm not looking to race at the track, i'd just like a good street car. what is the rpm operating range of the stock cam? anything that pulls up to 5,000 rpm is fine with me.

07-03-2003, 05:19 PM	#8
chiaronate Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: watervliet, ny Posts: 105	what are the specifications on the afr 165's? do they have more low-end torque than the edelbrock performer or windsor lite's?

07-03-2003, 05:22 PM	#9
VeNuM Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Downers Grove, IL Posts: 464	Another vote for the 165's. Check their website for the info. Excellent for a nice street head. Comes completely CNC ported too. ~Brian __________________ 1989 Black Mustang GT Hatchback, Underdrive Pulles, Electric Fan, Cold Air Intake, Headers, Offroad H-Pipe, Magnaflow catback, Steeda Tri-Ax, Fluidyne Aluminum Radiator, Timing at 14*, 3.73's Coming not so soon: 408w Ricer Hater's Club Member #59

07-03-2003, 06:48 PM	#10
90GT398 Registered Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: USA Posts: 25	CNC port the CNC port is just to make sure all the ports are the same, I know that is what you meant, but some might mistaken it for meaning that they cannot be ported anymore which as we know is far from the truth. If you want some really good scoop and this is a cheap plug for my boy call Flow Tech Induction and ask for Ed Curtis. Met him last year at Bowling Green and he is good to go, if you want the truth and no BS call Ed Curtis.

07-03-2003, 09:45 PM	#12
86GT Sniffed too much n20 Join Date: Oct 1998 Location: Ont, Canada Posts: 1,018	Edelbrocks out of the box make a really good street head and with a TFS Stage 1 cam, really nice. Now port the heads, go with a stage 2 cam and have some wild mid-range and upper rpm power with respectable low end. __________________ 2002 Windsor Weekend Q16 Qualifier

07-03-2003, 10:16 PM	#13
Nixon1 Registered Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Palm Bay, FL Posts: 432	I recant my previous statement...I am running the E cam now and the low end torque is excellent. Off-idle is a bit of a dog but as soon as it picks up to maybe 1500 rpms, it pulls hard. __________________ '91 Mustang GT 5.0 AOD Daily Driver Current stats: NEW 302 short block, E-303 cam (@.050, 220/220, .498/.498, 110 degrees), 1.6 roller rockers, Performer RPM heads (aluminum, 1.9/1.6, 60cc chambers), Cobra intake, Granatelli 75mm MAF, Billet AFPR, Equal-Length Shorty Headers, Off-Road X Pipe, Flowmasters, 4.10 POSI 13.73 at 103.8, ~2.2 60'

07-04-2003, 12:58 PM	#14
chiaronate Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: watervliet, ny Posts: 105	thanks guys. from what i've seen on this post, i think i'll go with afr 165's and the stock cam. although i'm sure i'd be happy with any one of the above combinations. now, is there an intake manifold that will match up to the afr 165's, or will i have to do some porting?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Torque convertor size	Red5Ltr	Windsor Power	5	06-04-2004 08:33 AM
Confused on head bolt torque.	Dark_5.0	Windsor Power	4	08-28-2003 03:46 PM
raced a Supra Twin Turbo	Stang35th	Stang Stories	63	08-23-2003 12:36 AM
Aluminum Head Torque Specs	92MUFDVR	Windsor Power	5	07-24-2003 09:14 AM
Torque Spec For Head Bolts..5.0	BADAZZ89LX	Windsor Power	3	07-04-2002 02:08 PM