Ford Mustang Forums banner

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
1985 Mustang
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I’m wanting to build a mostly street but definitely not daily driven 1985 mustang. For street fun I’m thinking more of a flat torque curve, maybe 6000 rpm max type combination. I have a pair of canfield heads purchased from BHP in 1997, part number 20-450-64-1: 190cc intake ports, 64cc combustion chambers, 2.08 intake valves. My plan is to go with a stock roller 5.0 block, 347 kit, the canfield heads and a performer rpm air gap. The paperwork that came with the heads stated “Standard efi intakes should not be used other than with extreme caution. Our port height is very high compared with a stock manifold”. My question is around the “port height is very high” statement. Will there be an issue with performer rpm air gap? Would I be better off with the victor jr or something else?

Back in 97’ when I purchased these heads I had planned on using a B&M 174 roots blower. When I bolted that manifold to the heads I needed to double up two extra thick gaskets to get it to line up with the intake ports. Things happened, and I never got the chance to get the car sorted out other to move it from storage here and there on a trailer. Now 23 years later I’ve decided I need to get this thing back on the street now or never.
 

·
Old timer
Joined
·
5,915 Posts

·
Registered
1985 Mustang
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Thanks, that looks like exactly what I would be looking for. After lurking on this site for a while I had you in mind for the camshaft when I get to that point. To take advantage of you answering above, I'd like to ask if you think the rpm air gap would be a good fit for what I'm wanting to do, street car 347 N/A, hydraulic roller, with the canfield heads I have, 190cc intake, 64cc chamber. The ports on those heads measure about ~1.25 x ~2.15.
 

·
USAF retired
Joined
·
9,123 Posts
I think Tmoss can do port matching for those. He did my buddies stealth intake for his AFR 195's. I wouldnt just put it on though, it was made to match smaller stock ports.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,922 Posts
Thanks, that looks like exactly what I would be looking for. After lurking on this site for a while I had you in mind for the camshaft when I get to that point. To take advantage of you answering above, I'd like to ask if you think the rpm air gap would be a good fit for what I'm wanting to do, street car 347 N/A, hydraulic roller, with the canfield heads I have, 190cc intake, 64cc chamber. The ports on those heads measure about ~1.25 x ~2.15.
My notes have 192 and 197 cc Canfields as well as a 215 cc. Did you use a micrometer to measure the port? The 5.0 Air gap has runner exits of 1.04" x 1.85". If the intake does get ported, nothing can be taken off the bottom of the as-cast runner of most brands and may even need a little build up. You might try just running it stock until you get power hungry ;).
 

·
Registered
1985 Mustang
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Thanks for the recommendation superirish, and thanks to the recommended man himself for replying. I did not use a micrometer to measure the ports. I took them off the block and put them on a shelf then half heartily measured them with a dial caliper. I didn't know what you meant by your notes, but after searching I found a whole listing of documents by you. The first one that caught my eye was "Street Engine Intake Ramblings". I'm going to read the rest, but that document validated what I was wanting to put together for this car and I really appreciated how well written it was.

Unfortunately now that I tore the rest of the block down I've found that the stock block is shot. My brother bought this car new in 1985, we did a .030 over, ported heads and new carb/manifold in the early 90's. Then in 98' i put on the canfields and a 174 powercharger but life got in the way until now. I never even got the chance to run the car more than to put in on a trailer and move it to storage. So now I'm really going to back to the drawing board.
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top