Most power on a B303? - Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum
 10Likes
  • 2 Post By 5.0thunder
  • 5 Post By buddy rawls
  • 2 Post By Meegs
  • 1 Post By Radrick50
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 23 Old 02-17-2017, 12:23 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Dallas/Houston
Posts: 1,109
Most power on a B303?

With all of the fame the B Cam has, I'd imagine there have been some heavy hitters when it comes to power numbers? Who has made the most power on a B303? Has anybody designed a head/intake/engine package around that cam for optimal performance?

I'll start the race..

Summer of 2008, 1987 mustang, speed density stock computer, stock everything except GT40 intake and bcam. 170hp to the tire and lost most of my bottom end.

Who else has dominated the streets with this cam?

mikestang and kjb302ho like this.
5.0thunder is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 23 Old 02-17-2017, 01:05 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: ny
Posts: 1,180
Old school Mustang Magic combo:

Cobra intake 70mm Accufab
Eddy performer heads 1.7 rockers
B303
Full mac exhaust

Joe sold lots of these combos.

kjb302ho is offline  
post #3 of 23 Old 02-17-2017, 08:49 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Cheyenne, WY
Posts: 82
I had an 85 Mustang GT that the previous owner installed a Ford Motorsport RHO engine. It had a B303 cam, flat top pistons, E7TE heads with the exhaust ported, Edelbrock Performer 289 intake, Holley 650 double pumper, and cat back dual exhaust. The car put 225hp and 270lb ft to the tires through a T5 and 4.10 gears.
JMGlasgow is offline  
 
post #4 of 23 Old 02-17-2017, 09:50 PM
Registered User
 
1995gtCPE's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (34)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,588
Mods, take this BS thread to the lounge please.

80 coupe, A4 347, Bullet hyd roller, ported 11r 190's, ported Super Vic, HPI e85 carb, Liberty TKO500/4.30
1995gtCPE is offline  
post #5 of 23 Old 02-17-2017, 10:26 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: madison, AL, usa
Posts: 1,631
I reverse engineered the FMS cams a long time back.

The B303 fits over a range of combinations with inlet flow in the mid 200's (*at 28"). assume low to mid exh/int 75%

With total inlet flow in the 220-230 range, the motor will require 1 3/4 headers and 3" exhaust, and a minimum of 10.75:1

With total inlet flow in the 240-260 range, the motor will require 1 7/8 headers and 3" exhaust, and a minimum of 10.75:1

In a 300cid motor, max rpm will be in the 6400-6800 range. In a 350 cid motor, max rpm will be in the 6000-6500 range

Cylinder pressure is critical. the ramps are a little lazy, therefore for the seat timing, the actual lift area is low. This will require additional static compression (as evident in the 10.75). Outside of these paramaters, the cam is far less than optimum. many will say their car flies, but with these relationships it will really fly. The inlet and outlet relationship and static compression are the key.

These set-ups allow the engine flow parameters to match the valve events as good as possible. In these cases, is the FMS cam the best cam? no. But if you want the FMS cam to do its best, this is what it will want.
TomV, cleanLX, tmoss and 2 others like this.
buddy rawls is offline  
post #6 of 23 Old 02-17-2017, 11:46 PM
Registered User
 
midnightlaundry's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Westland, MI.
Posts: 1,532



Thanks for that. We're all wondering about the other letter cams now!
midnightlaundry is offline  
post #7 of 23 Old 02-19-2017, 02:13 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 86
Buddy that is great info, was that with 1.6 or 1.7 rockers? How much does rocker ratio change things.

1987 Coupe: Stock 5.0, T5, 4.10s and a spool
russ3747 is offline  
post #8 of 23 Old 02-19-2017, 03:23 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Dallas/Houston
Posts: 1,109
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddy rawls View Post
I reverse engineered the FMS cams a long time back.

The B303 fits over a range of combinations with inlet flow in the mid 200's (*at 28"). assume low to mid exh/int 75%

With total inlet flow in the 220-230 range, the motor will require 1 3/4 headers and 3" exhaust, and a minimum of 10.75:1

With total inlet flow in the 240-260 range, the motor will require 1 7/8 headers and 3" exhaust, and a minimum of 10.75:1

In a 300cid motor, max rpm will be in the 6400-6800 range. In a 350 cid motor, max rpm will be in the 6000-6500 range

Cylinder pressure is critical. the ramps are a little lazy, therefore for the seat timing, the actual lift area is low. This will require additional static compression (as evident in the 10.75). Outside of these paramaters, the cam is far less than optimum. many will say their car flies, but with these relationships it will really fly. The inlet and outlet relationship and static compression are the key.

These set-ups allow the engine flow parameters to match the valve events as good as possible. In these cases, is the FMS cam the best cam? no. But if you want the FMS cam to do its best, this is what it will want.

Basically exactly what my intention for this thread was. Many people build a decent flowing engine then just throw a letter cam in it without knowing how to make one work. There is also a lot of talk about this being a good "basic bolt on cam" or "mild" cam (I took this advice in high school with the build described in first post with terrible results). From your data, it actually looks like it favors small chambered higher flowing heads and big free flowing exhausts. I'm trying to see what people have done to make that cam actually work as good as possible. Thanks for your info!
5.0thunder is online now  
post #9 of 23 Old 02-19-2017, 08:50 PM
Registered User
 
mikestang's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (22)
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,519
http://forums.corral.net/forums/atta...799162&thumb=1
Attached Images
File Type: jpg hail b cam.jpg (33.0 KB, 22 views)
mikestang is offline  
post #10 of 23 Old 02-19-2017, 10:17 PM
Registered User
 
FlamedHatch's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 567
I ran a B cam with some ported 1969 Windsor heads and ported systemax intake. Car had all the bolt ons, was a 5spd with 3:73 gear. If I remember correctly if went 12.9's 13.0s. Was just a bitch to drive, no low end. I changed to a Lunati 51014 (# maybe) and it ran close to the same #'s but was WAY more fun to drive. Was a great combo in my opinion but thats been probably 16 or 17 years now.


POS 91 LX 5.0
308 DART PRO1'S
TREMEC 3.73
FlamedHatch is offline  
post #11 of 23 Old 02-20-2017, 08:47 PM
Registered User
 
thunderjet302's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Chicago
Posts: 917
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddy rawls View Post
I reverse engineered the FMS cams a long time back.

The B303 fits over a range of combinations with inlet flow in the mid 200's (*at 28"). assume low to mid exh/int 75%

With total inlet flow in the 220-230 range, the motor will require 1 3/4 headers and 3" exhaust, and a minimum of 10.75:1

With total inlet flow in the 240-260 range, the motor will require 1 7/8 headers and 3" exhaust, and a minimum of 10.75:1

In a 300cid motor, max rpm will be in the 6400-6800 range. In a 350 cid motor, max rpm will be in the 6000-6500 range

Cylinder pressure is critical. the ramps are a little lazy, therefore for the seat timing, the actual lift area is low. This will require additional static compression (as evident in the 10.75). Outside of these paramaters, the cam is far less than optimum. many will say their car flies, but with these relationships it will really fly. The inlet and outlet relationship and static compression are the key.

These set-ups allow the engine flow parameters to match the valve events as good as possible. In these cases, is the FMS cam the best cam? no. But if you want the FMS cam to do its best, this is what it will want.
So in other words the typical 240-250cc aluminum head/9.5:1 compression/shorty header/2.5" exhaust 302 is not the best home for a B303.

'88 Thunderbird LX: 306, Performer heads, Comp 266HR cam, Performer RPM intake, Edelbrock 70mm TB, 76mm C&L MAF, 30lb injectors, 2.5" exhaust, AOD with 2800 PI converter, 8.8 with 3.73 gears, 31 spline Traction-Lok, 31 spline Moser axles. '11 Focus, '12 Mustang 3.7, '17 Accord EX-L V6
thunderjet302 is offline  
post #12 of 23 Old 02-21-2017, 10:00 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: madison, AL, usa
Posts: 1,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderjet302 View Post
So in other words the typical 240-250cc aluminum head/9.5:1 compression/shorty header/2.5" exhaust 302 is not the best home for a B303.
thats set up does not have anywhere near the exhaust flow that the valve events are needing, and not near enough static compression to for the motor to generate good dynamic compression.

With that being said, the cam in that set up will run and run well, you have seen it many times. But running well and good is not the same as optimized. Optimization adds a whole new meaning to the performance capability.
buddy rawls is offline  
post #13 of 23 Old 02-21-2017, 10:26 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (6)
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Twin Cities, Minneapolis
Posts: 564
347 stock block
B303
PTE 7675

450/500 & 9psi. Was making about 42hp per psi from 6 -9.
17.2psi now. Over 600whp easy with a B303.

In all fairness, this motor was never intended to be push like I'm doing to it. But the darn little mule keeps taking the beating.
Really want to hit the dyno this summer and go all in, say a full 20psi and either crush Internet folklore or BOOM. Either way, would make for an interesting YouTube??

1993 Teal Cobra #2531 1 of 452, 347, Precision 7675, The entire kitchen sink....maybe 2 kitchen sinks at this point!
Meegs is offline  
post #14 of 23 Old 02-21-2017, 11:50 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: madison, AL, usa
Posts: 1,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meegs View Post
....crush Internet folklore ...
what internet folklore are you speaking of? stock block vs psi vs hp, or the B303 part
buddy rawls is offline  
post #15 of 23 Old 02-21-2017, 12:12 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Dallas/Houston
Posts: 1,109
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddy rawls View Post
what internet folklore are you speaking of? stock block vs psi vs hp, or the B303
Maybe that B303 can't make power or isn't good for boost? not sure either
5.0thunder is online now  
post #16 of 23 Old 02-21-2017, 01:26 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (6)
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Twin Cities, Minneapolis
Posts: 564
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddy rawls View Post
what internet folklore are you speaking of? stock block vs psi vs hp, or the B303 part
Internet folklore of the unicorn exploding at 550rwhp as the mustang crashes into a spectating crowd of bystanders.
"Time bomb" "Boom" "stock blocks can't make real power" "tune was off" "TW170's are too small" "everyone needs a custom cam" "alphabet cams are '80's technology" "my friends cousin brother in-law twice removed from marriage blew up a stock block at 350hp and he was a doctor at an engineering university and won a Pulitzer for his documentary on how no stock block 8.2" can ever make 552hp" "I'm 19 years old an I want to set the world on fire with a max-effort GT40 build" "I want to spend $5k on a H/C/I and make 380whp" "it's all in the combo, and the combo can't start with a B303"

Secondary aspect of the B303 being a redhead step child.

I'm sure I missed a few others...
Calypsojake and JFraser27 like this.

1993 Teal Cobra #2531 1 of 452, 347, Precision 7675, The entire kitchen sink....maybe 2 kitchen sinks at this point!
Meegs is offline  
post #17 of 23 Old 02-21-2017, 03:31 PM
USAF retired
 
superirish's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (39)
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Foht Walt'n Beach Floriduh aka The Redneck Riviera
Posts: 8,703
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderjet302 View Post
So in other words the typical 240-250cc aluminum head/9.5:1 compression/shorty header/2.5" exhaust 302 is not the best home for a B303.
A 240-250cc head on a 302 is hardly typical, did you mean 240-250cfm?

Quote:
Originally Posted by buddy rawls View Post
I reverse engineered the FMS cams a long time back.

The B303 fits over a range of combinations with inlet flow in the mid 200's (*at 28"). assume low to mid exh/int 75%

With total inlet flow in the 220-230 range, the motor will require 1 3/4 headers and 3" exhaust, and a minimum of 10.75:1

With total inlet flow in the 240-260 range, the motor will require 1 7/8 headers and 3" exhaust, and a minimum of 10.75:1

In a 300cid motor, max rpm will be in the 6400-6800 range. In a 350 cid motor, max rpm will be in the 6000-6500 range

Cylinder pressure is critical. the ramps are a little lazy, therefore for the seat timing, the actual lift area is low. This will require additional static compression (as evident in the 10.75). Outside of these paramaters, the cam is far less than optimum. many will say their car flies, but with these relationships it will really fly. The inlet and outlet relationship and static compression are the key.

These set-ups allow the engine flow parameters to match the valve events as good as possible. In these cases, is the FMS cam the best cam? no. But if you want the FMS cam to do its best, this is what it will want.
Kind of funny this comes up. From what I can find the B cam is a crane flat tappet profile for a big block chevy. They list the specs on their lobe catalog, as are most of the other FMS cams
I'm in the process of building a cheap engine using a 1986 flat top shortblock, ported GT40 heads, a B cam, of course, 1.7s, beehive springs, and the headers and exhaust I've got on my 90LX which are the 1 3/4 accufabs, 3" exhaust. Compression should be 10.4, not going to spend money to deck the block, although that would help aid compression I'm sure. Because I'm using a Vic Jr with a 4 hole throttle body I'm thinking I'll advance the cam a couple degrees. Seems to me an engine with a short runner, small plenum intake would need the earlier intake valve opening, whereas a longer runner, larger plenum intake would benefit from the later opening, so this cam would be best installed up to 4 degrees retarded. Is that not adviseable?

1985 LTD LX, small truck motor, painted axle tubes, various mustang stuff.

1990 LX stock porno block, '86 flattops, cobra flywheel, ported GT40s, Vic Jr 4-hole throttle body, DB1 speed density processor, B-cam
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
, 1.7s, 4.30s, stock T5 living on borrowed time.
superirish is offline  
post #18 of 23 Old 02-21-2017, 07:31 PM
Registered User
 
jmardlin's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Michigan
Posts: 740
Quote:
Originally Posted by superirish View Post


Kind of funny this comes up. From what I can find the B cam is a crane flat tappet profile for a big block chevy. They list the specs on their lobe catalog, as are most of the other FMS cams
I'm in the process of building a cheap engine using a 1986 flat top shortblock, ported GT40 heads, a B cam, of course, 1.7s, beehive springs, and the headers and exhaust I've got on my 90LX which are the 1 3/4 accufabs, 3" exhaust. Compression should be 10.4, not going to spend money to deck the block, although that would help aid compression I'm sure. Because I'm using a Vic Jr with a 4 hole throttle body I'm thinking I'll advance the cam a couple degrees. Seems to me an engine with a short runner, small plenum intake would need the earlier intake valve opening, whereas a longer runner, larger plenum intake would benefit from the later opening, so this cam would be best installed up to 4 degrees retarded. Is that not adviseable?
I would even even consider getting a set of Scorpion 1.82 rockers to get the valves open more and open/close faster.

83 Capri RS T-Top 302, Afr 195 Renegade,11.2 compression, e303 cam, TFS-R, X3Z w/Tweecer RT, T56 Magnum, 2 1/2" Pypes X pipe w/2 chamber Flowmaster mufflers.
jmardlin is offline  
post #19 of 23 Old 02-21-2017, 08:15 PM
Registered User
 
thunderjet302's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Chicago
Posts: 917
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by superirish View Post
A 240-250cc head on a 302 is hardly typical, did you mean 240-250cfm?
Yes. 240-250cfm. Typo on my part.
thunderjet302 is offline  
post #20 of 23 Old 02-21-2017, 09:59 PM
USAF retired
 
superirish's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (39)
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Foht Walt'n Beach Floriduh aka The Redneck Riviera
Posts: 8,703
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmardlin View Post
I would even even consider getting a set of Scorpion 1.82 rockers to get the valves open more and open/close faster.
I had looked for them at one point, but already have a set of cobra roller rockers, this is a cheap build for fun.

1985 LTD LX, small truck motor, painted axle tubes, various mustang stuff.

1990 LX stock porno block, '86 flattops, cobra flywheel, ported GT40s, Vic Jr 4-hole throttle body, DB1 speed density processor, B-cam
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
, 1.7s, 4.30s, stock T5 living on borrowed time.
superirish is offline  
post #21 of 23 Old 02-22-2017, 05:32 AM
Registered User
 
black88coupe's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (36)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Detroit area
Posts: 894
This guy ran good with one.
Passtime - Bcam & 175 Dry Kit

https://
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
http://forums.corral.net/forums/5-0-5-8-engine-tech/1869321-who-committed-running-stock-roller-cam.html
black88coupe is offline  
post #22 of 23 Old 02-22-2017, 07:55 AM
Registered User
 
Radrick50's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Altoona, PA, USA
Posts: 1,707
Quote:
Originally Posted by black88coupe View Post
This guy ran good with one.
Passtime - Bcam & 175 Dry Kit
Hahaha...you beat me to it! This was the first thing that popped in my head when I saw this Thread!
black88coupe likes this.

93 Notchback, turbo, slow

91 Notchback, blower, slower
Radrick50 is offline  
post #23 of 23 Old 03-01-2017, 03:40 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Rush, NY
Posts: 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddy rawls View Post
I reverse engineered the FMS cams a long time back.

The B303 fits over a range of combinations with inlet flow in the mid 200's (*at 28"). assume low to mid exh/int 75%

With total inlet flow in the 220-230 range, the motor will require 1 3/4 headers and 3" exhaust, and a minimum of 10.75:1

With total inlet flow in the 240-260 range, the motor will require 1 7/8 headers and 3" exhaust, and a minimum of 10.75:1

In a 300cid motor, max rpm will be in the 6400-6800 range. In a 350 cid motor, max rpm will be in the 6000-6500 range

Cylinder pressure is critical. the ramps are a little lazy, therefore for the seat timing, the actual lift area is low. This will require additional static compression (as evident in the 10.75). Outside of these paramaters, the cam is far less than optimum. many will say their car flies, but with these relationships it will really fly. The inlet and outlet relationship and static compression are the key.

These set-ups allow the engine flow parameters to match the valve events as good as possible. In these cases, is the FMS cam the best cam? no. But if you want the FMS cam to do its best, this is what it will want.

Would the same apply if it was the X303? They have the same valve events ground into them, but the X has more lift ground into it. Also would such a creature run on premium pump gas? I am assuming this would require aluminum heads.

Lastly, this leads me to believe that the TrickFlow top end kit with the TF1 cam needs similar compression and exhaust. Would that be a correct inference?
tjm73 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Bookmarks

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome