Close



Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 130
  1. #26
    Venomous Moderator Hissing Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Wareham, Massachusetts
    Posts
    9,720

    Default

    Thanks Dave. The 306 still runs good so that's going in for now. I haven't decided if I want to fix it or if I want to sell the pieces off yet. When my head clears up I'll know better what I'll do.
    Pete Slaney

    1979 Mustang Cobra

    347/T-5/4.30's
    420 rwhp/380 rwt (New Motor)
    11.49 @ 121.86

    306/T-5/4.30's (Old Motor)
    307 rwhp/278 rwt
    12.38 @ 111.38

  2. #27
    Venomous Moderator Hissing Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Wareham, Massachusetts
    Posts
    9,720

    Default

    Reviving this thread because things have drastically changed over the past couple of months and I figured I'd update all of you with what's been going on. I never did reinstall the 306 so that's still sitting humbly in the corner, waiting it's next turn to run. I also did not part out the 347. Instead, I worked two side jobs, and worked for my uncle at night for about 10 or 12 nights in a row (in addition to my regular job) and I earned enough money to get the 347 repaired.

    About three weeks ago, I dropped the 347 into the back cargo area of my minivan and took it to my brother's house. We tipped it over, removed the pan, and found that the thrust bearing was toast. The good news is that the caps, block, and connecting rods were not damaged.This saved me a ton of money in machine work, as a new block would need to be cleaned, checked for cracks, bored, and honed. I also would have had to replace any damaged rods, replace the crank, and have everything re-balanced again. Because it was only the crank and the thrust bearing (all the other bearings were fine), I got out of it in a very lucky manner.

    At this point however, we were not too sure what caused the thrust bearing failure but we now think we know. I said "think" 'cause it's so hard to pinpoint the actual cause. At any rate, my brother ordered a new crankshaft from Eagle and then pulled out his micrometer. He measured every journal size, weight size, etc.. and then compared them to both a stock 289 crankshaft and a stock late model 302 crankshaft. EVERYTHING was identicle on the measurements except for one, the hole that's machined into the back of the crank. On the old damaged crank it was machined at a depth that's the same as the stock 289 crank, which was originally machined for a Bronze bushing instead of a Pilot Bearing. On the new crank it was machined at a depth that's the same as the stock late model 302 crank, which is machined deeper for a pilot bearing instead of the bronze bushing. Thus, the new crank had the new style hole while the old damaged crank had the old style hole. This would explain why my pilot bearing was sticking out quite a bit on the old damaged crank when I installed it. Because it was sticking out, the input shaft of the transmission was pushing on it - even though I had no problems installing it and didn't need the bolts to "suck it in". We know it wasn't the end of the input shaft that was pushing as it wasn't bottoming out, thus we think it was the tapered edge where it flares out for the splines that was pushing on the bearing itself which in turn put constant pressure on the crank. Does this make any sense?

    The block has been cleaned, re-honed and new freeze plugs installed. The crank is getting balanced as we speak (I have the balance specs from the original balancing so the crank can be balanced to those specs) The heads have also been taken apart, cleaned, and reassembled. All that's left is to reassemble it and when we do, we'll be installing new rings on the pistons, new cam bearings, new crank bearings, new oil pump, new gasket kit, new head gaskets (Fel-Pro multi layered steel units), and new intake gaskets.(Fel-Pro 1250-S3's) I'll be going over to my brother's house this upcoming weekend to watch/help him do what he does, and this time I'm keeping my fingers crossed that this one will last. We'll see!
    Last edited by Hissing Cobra; 12-01-2013 at 08:34 PM.
    Pete Slaney

    1979 Mustang Cobra

    347/T-5/4.30's
    420 rwhp/380 rwt (New Motor)
    11.49 @ 121.86

    306/T-5/4.30's (Old Motor)
    307 rwhp/278 rwt
    12.38 @ 111.38

  3. #28
    FEP Member brianj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Raymond, New Hampshire
    Posts
    2,896
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Good to hear it is a (relatively) simple fix. Could have been so much worse!
    1983 Mustang G.T. No-option stripper- I like strippers.
    5.0, GT40P heads, Comp Cams XE270HR-12 on 1.6 rockers, TFI spring kit, Weiand 174 blower, Holley 750 mechanical secondarys, Mishimoto radiator, Edelbrock street performer mechanical pump, BBK shortys, T-5 conversion, 8.8 rear, 3.73 gears, carbon fiber clutches, SS Machine lowers, Maximum Motorsport XL subframes, "B" springs.

  4. #29
    Venomous Moderator Hissing Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Wareham, Massachusetts
    Posts
    9,720

    Default

    Thanks Brian. It definitely could have been. I'm glad I took my brother's advice and stopped driving it. For some reason, I'm going to have a hard time trusting this motor until I can get a lot of miles on it without any issues. I'm scared!
    Last edited by Hissing Cobra; 10-29-2013 at 03:54 PM.
    Pete Slaney

    1979 Mustang Cobra

    347/T-5/4.30's
    420 rwhp/380 rwt (New Motor)
    11.49 @ 121.86

    306/T-5/4.30's (Old Motor)
    307 rwhp/278 rwt
    12.38 @ 111.38

  5. #30
    FEP Power Member wman24's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Medford, NJ
    Posts
    1,100

    Default

    I seem to remember a thread on fordstokers.com (the message board, not the store site) about common thrust bearing failures. I don't have a current subscription but think you can sign up for a free trial, might be worth a look or a search on the corral of Woody's posts.

    Sbfbuilding.com is the site I was thinking of.
    Last edited by wman24; 10-29-2013 at 04:01 PM.

  6. #31

    Default

    Not so sure bout that... I've used the bearing style in 289s/302s for quite some time.
    Cheers,
    Jeff Cook

    '85 GT Hatch, 5-speed T-Top, Eibachs, Konis, & ARE 5-Spokes ... '85 GT Vert, CFI/AOD, all factory...
    '79 Fairmont StaWag, 5.0, 62K original miles ... '04 Azure Blue 40th Anny Mach 1, 37K original miles...
    2012 F150 S-Crew 4x4 5.0 "Blue Coyote"... 65 coupe, 289 auto, Pony interior ... '67 coupe 6-cyl 4-speed ...
    '68 Vert, Mexican block 307 4-speed... '71 Datsun 510 ...
    And a 1-of-328 Deep Blue Pearl 2003 Marauder 4.6 DOHC, J-Mod, 4.10s and Lidio tune

  7. #32
    Venomous Moderator Hissing Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Wareham, Massachusetts
    Posts
    9,720

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JACook View Post
    Not so sure bout that... I've used the bearing style in 289s/302s for quite some time.
    Hmmm. I'm probably way off base in assuming that then. I've read so much online about thrust bearing failures and from what I can gather, it's not an easy task trying to figure out what causes them. I want to learn more about them though. I do know that when I installed the Pilot bearing, it wasn't flush with the back of the block and it was sticking outward. What would cause something like that? Do ya think we'll have a hard time the 2nd time around?
    Last edited by Hissing Cobra; 10-29-2013 at 04:10 PM.
    Pete Slaney

    1979 Mustang Cobra

    347/T-5/4.30's
    420 rwhp/380 rwt (New Motor)
    11.49 @ 121.86

    306/T-5/4.30's (Old Motor)
    307 rwhp/278 rwt
    12.38 @ 111.38

  8. #33
    FEP Power Member gmatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Chicago, south subs
    Posts
    2,136

    Default

    Check the finish on the thrust surfaces of the crank(s).
    Not sure if you need to be a member to see this: http://sbftech.com/index.php/topic,35747.0.html

  9. #34
    Venomous Moderator Hissing Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Wareham, Massachusetts
    Posts
    9,720

    Default

    Thanks gmatt. I was able to read that article but not any others as I have to pay to be a member. What's interesting about all of this is 3 things:

    1. Woody on that site stated that Eagle is notorious for NOT machining their cranks for deep enough holes on the end of them (same issue my brother found on my original, damaged crank.
    2. Poor finish on the thrust surfaces (my brother will check this).
    3. The majority of these thrust bearing issues seem to be with automatic transmissions and not 5-speeds like I have.

    Crazy, but we're going for attempt # 2 and hopefully things will pan out. If anyone's got any advice they can give me ('cause I'm an uneducated fool in this area), I'd certainly welcome it!
    Pete Slaney

    1979 Mustang Cobra

    347/T-5/4.30's
    420 rwhp/380 rwt (New Motor)
    11.49 @ 121.86

    306/T-5/4.30's (Old Motor)
    307 rwhp/278 rwt
    12.38 @ 111.38

  10. #35

    Default

    The important thing is, when you install things like transmissions, you never pull them in with
    the bolts. If you can't seat things fully by hand, stop.

    Automatic transmissions are notorious for taking out thrust faces because of torque converter
    ballooning. But it can also happen to a lesser extent with really stiff clutches. Other than that,
    a manual transmission car should almost never take out a thrust face, so I have to presume
    until proven otherwise that you had something applying forward thrust to your old crankshaft.

    I would mock up the entire works before installing the engine, and use a dial indicator on the
    nose of the crank to verify your thrust clearance with everything as it will be once it's in the
    car. Put the crank damper on and everything.

    Also, don't overlook excessive thrust clearance in the transmission itself. Combined with a
    too-long driveshaft that makes the slip yoke bottom on the mainshaft, it could pass the thrust
    load all the way through to the crank. Not likely, sure. But not unpossible either.
    Cheers,
    Jeff Cook

    '85 GT Hatch, 5-speed T-Top, Eibachs, Konis, & ARE 5-Spokes ... '85 GT Vert, CFI/AOD, all factory...
    '79 Fairmont StaWag, 5.0, 62K original miles ... '04 Azure Blue 40th Anny Mach 1, 37K original miles...
    2012 F150 S-Crew 4x4 5.0 "Blue Coyote"... 65 coupe, 289 auto, Pony interior ... '67 coupe 6-cyl 4-speed ...
    '68 Vert, Mexican block 307 4-speed... '71 Datsun 510 ...
    And a 1-of-328 Deep Blue Pearl 2003 Marauder 4.6 DOHC, J-Mod, 4.10s and Lidio tune

  11. #36
    FEP Super Member mustangxtreme's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Snohomish, Wa
    Posts
    4,021

    Default

    Pete, I'm glad to hear most parts are still serviceable. Good luck on getting this beauty back together.
    Dave

    If common sense was common wouldn't it just be sense?

    1983 Capri L T top 5.0 efi aod
    1983 Capri RS Turbo
    1981 Black Magic 400 c6
    93 F-250 351 5sp 4x4

  12. #37
    Venomous Moderator Hissing Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Wareham, Massachusetts
    Posts
    9,720

    Default

    Thanks guys. Jeff, great advice. My brother and I will install everything in a mock up fashion while he looks at it and uses his dial indicator to measure things. We haven't talked about the crank thrust surfaces yet but I know he's on the lookout for those scratch marks/swirl marks and he'll polish it as much as possible. I'll have him re-read this thread tonight so if there's anything we've overlooked, it'll spark his memory. Like I said earlier, I'm scared.
    Pete Slaney

    1979 Mustang Cobra

    347/T-5/4.30's
    420 rwhp/380 rwt (New Motor)
    11.49 @ 121.86

    306/T-5/4.30's (Old Motor)
    307 rwhp/278 rwt
    12.38 @ 111.38

  13. #38
    FEP Power Member 306gt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Plymouth, Ma.
    Posts
    1,503

    Default

    Pete's original 347 Eagle crank was machined too shallow in the pilot bearing counterbore. The replacement crankshaft is machined deeper like the late model 5.0L factory cranks. The replacement crank was machined twice in this area. meaning it was originally machined shallow and then corrected before it was shipped to me. There are two distinct witness marks from the two machining operations.
    His original crankshaft had the pilot bearing sticking out 3/16" (.187) of an inch. I measured this by removing the roller pilot bearing and measuring the counter bore depth and the overall length of the pilot bearing. I then compared the old Eagle crank to a 65 289 crank I have and the depth was the same on both cranks. The new Eagle crank is now the same depth as the late model 5.0L factory Ford cranks. as I compared and measured those too.
    In our haste to get the car back together we didn't check the stack-up tolerances of the input shaft to the pilot bearing. We actually didn't think too much about it. When it goes back together I will check this without the flywheel and clutch assembly installed. I will mount the block plate, bellhousing, transmission to the block and peek inside the clutch fork hole with a flashlight and actually see what the relationship is between the bearing and the input shaft. I will also check the very end or tip of the input shaft and measure with clay the distance between the tip and the depth of the inside of the crank. I already mocked up the new crank in the block and recorded .005 end play and .0025 oil clearance on the main journals, before the crank was balanced. So that is what I will be shooting for on final assembly. As for the surface on the wiped out crank it was ok when new. The new replacement crank is also ok and smooth to the touch with very very light swirl marks from the side of the grinding wheel. I will polish it even more. I may also modify the the actual upper half of the thrust bearing to supply more oil to the back of the crank. Hopefully we can get it all together and make it work this time.
    Last edited by 306gt; 10-30-2013 at 07:11 PM.
    85 G.T. All motor
    337 c.i.d 11.44-120 mph

    1984 1/2 G.T. 350 (13.01-106 mph)

    1984 G.T. (Daughters car)

    1986 G.T. (Son's car) (12.99-105 mph)

  14. #39
    Venomous Moderator Hissing Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Wareham, Massachusetts
    Posts
    9,720

    Default

    Thanks Paulie, much better description than I could have provided.
    Pete Slaney

    1979 Mustang Cobra

    347/T-5/4.30's
    420 rwhp/380 rwt (New Motor)
    11.49 @ 121.86

    306/T-5/4.30's (Old Motor)
    307 rwhp/278 rwt
    12.38 @ 111.38

  15. #40
    Venomous Moderator Hissing Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Wareham, Massachusetts
    Posts
    9,720

    Default

    Back to the top! I picked up the engine from my brother a couple of nights ago and the installation is about to commence. It's been completely rebuilt with a new crank that was polished and then sent out to be balanced, new bearings, new gasket kit, rehoned cylinder walls, and new piston rings. The end clearance on the crank is 5,000th's of an inch. After it was assembled, we installed the block plate, bellhousing and transmission (without the clutch or the pilot bearing) so that we could check the clearance of the transmission input shaft in regards to the back of the crank. It did not touch and had plenty of clearance. Next up, we installed the pilot bearing but purposely kept it out of the back of the crank by 3/16th's of an inch (like it was on the back of the damaged crank). From there, we installed the block plate, bellhousing, and transmission. We looked inside the clutch fork hole to find the flared part of the input shaft pushing onto the back of the bearing. The good news is that we were able to disassemble the entire assembly and re-seat the pilot bearing into the crank until it was flush (something we could not do on the old crank). This gave us 3/16th's of an inch of clearance and when we mocked it up again, the flared part of the input shaft is not touching the pilot bearing any longer. Success? I certainly hope so! Next up was the installation of the clutch/fork assembly and then the block plate/bellhousing/transmission. The tranny slid right in without the bolts. They were then installed and my brother checked endplay with his dial indicator on the front of the motor. There's still only 5,000th's of an inch.

    All that's left to do is install it and run it. The installation will begin tonight so I'll let you all know how it's going with another update soon. I'm keeping my fingers crossed!
    Last edited by Hissing Cobra; 11-25-2013 at 04:48 PM.
    Pete Slaney

    1979 Mustang Cobra

    347/T-5/4.30's
    420 rwhp/380 rwt (New Motor)
    11.49 @ 121.86

    306/T-5/4.30's (Old Motor)
    307 rwhp/278 rwt
    12.38 @ 111.38

  16. #41
    FEP Super Member FM2NOTCH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Foothills of Piedmont NC
    Posts
    3,265

    Default

    I believe you said the old crank was machined wrong, correct? not allowing the pilot bearing to seat
    *FOXTOBERFEST* 2015 http://www.foxmustangrestoration.com/events
    85 T Top coupe 5.0 2R red, E7's, rpm intake, 4180 carb, 7.4 1/8
    83 CC capri 5.0 5 speed,black mesh wheels
    76 cobra II 302 auto black/gold, big cam 3 inch dumps- sold to a good friend
    92 coupe 5.0 5 speed -red
    92 Lx hatch 5.0 5 speed -black, 66 coupe 5.0 4 spd (project)
    87 Vert 5.0 AOD red stock as a rock

    " Are you sure you know what you're talking about? It kinda sounds like you know what you're talking about"

  17. #42
    Venomous Moderator Hissing Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Wareham, Massachusetts
    Posts
    9,720

    Default

    Correct. When Eagle machined the original crank, they machined the hole to the same depth as an "old school" '65 289 crank, which used a Pilot Bushing instead of the Pilot Bearings that are used in the late model 302 blocks. I sent them a letter detailing my "issue" and how my brother compared the old and new cranks to both a '65 289 crank and a '90 302 crank, and how he came to the conclusion that the original crank wasn't machined deep enough. Below is the reply that I got from Eagle.

    " I apologize for the trouble you encountered. Our original 289/302 based cranks were based on the early design. This is evident by the slinger, the pilot hole dimension, and the intended 28 in-oz balance. Due to popular demand, we have made running design changes over the course of the product's lifespan. The slinger was reduced so that it could be used in newer blocks, but still retain adequate effectiveness so that it can be used in older blocks as well. The pilot depth was also changed (as you have found out) so that a newer style bearing can be used in lieu of a bushing for manual transmissions and longer snout torque converters in automatics. We intend to retain the 28 in-oz balance because it is closer to internal balance than the newer 50 in-oz balance. While we try to accommodate every type of build possible with our design, there are variations from block to block, from different years, and when used with different components. It is impossible to build a complete "drop-in" part that will never require any checking for compatibility with the variety of possible combinations. Checking for fitment and dimensions is an essential part of engine building.

    If you find anything incorrect or out of spec. with any of our products before they are used, we will replace them."

    These "running design changes" prove to me that I'm not the only one who's had this issue in the past and that these changes were necessary to save face. Why would they advertise a 347 stroker kit for a late model Ford 302, advertise it in every magazine, and then send it through with '65 289 specs? I mean, how many top loader 4 speeds or C-4 transmissions are going to be put into an '80's or '90's Mustang? The majority of them are going to be either 5-speeds or AOD's.

    Oh well, it's a done deal and I've got to move on.
    Last edited by Hissing Cobra; 11-19-2013 at 01:38 PM.
    Pete Slaney

    1979 Mustang Cobra

    347/T-5/4.30's
    420 rwhp/380 rwt (New Motor)
    11.49 @ 121.86

    306/T-5/4.30's (Old Motor)
    307 rwhp/278 rwt
    12.38 @ 111.38

  18. #43
    FEP Super Member FM2NOTCH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Foothills of Piedmont NC
    Posts
    3,265

    Default

    looks like eagle was a day late and good bit behind on the crank design. yes it's up to the builder to check things but it should be up to the manufacturer to do the homework before they design something and sell it to the masses.
    *FOXTOBERFEST* 2015 http://www.foxmustangrestoration.com/events
    85 T Top coupe 5.0 2R red, E7's, rpm intake, 4180 carb, 7.4 1/8
    83 CC capri 5.0 5 speed,black mesh wheels
    76 cobra II 302 auto black/gold, big cam 3 inch dumps- sold to a good friend
    92 coupe 5.0 5 speed -red
    92 Lx hatch 5.0 5 speed -black, 66 coupe 5.0 4 spd (project)
    87 Vert 5.0 AOD red stock as a rock

    " Are you sure you know what you're talking about? It kinda sounds like you know what you're talking about"

  19. #44

    Default

    That's why i don't ever use Eagle products because there stuff is not up to par. Scat crank and rods all the way!!

  20. #45
    Venomous Moderator Hissing Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Wareham, Massachusetts
    Posts
    9,720

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FM2NOTCH View Post
    looks like eagle was a day late and good bit behind on the crank design. yes it's up to the builder to check things but it should be up to the manufacturer to do the homework before they design something and sell it to the masses.
    I can understand Eagle machining it for the 28 oz. balance of the '65 289 as even they admit that is a better internal balance to use. However, when they advertise this stroker kit, they give you the impression that it's for late model 302's as they're advertising it in all the current Mustang Magazines. The Mustangs that race today far out number the early generation Mustangs by a wide margin. There's not too many people installing stroker kits into 289 powered Mustangs unless they're using a late model 302 block.

    Here's a link to their 347 kit that's very similar to the one that's in my motor (cast crank, I-Beam Rods, Forged Pistons). It does list the 28 oz. balance but doesn't list anything in regards to the depth of the Pilot Bearing/Bushing area.

    http://www.summitracing.com/parts/es...3030/overview/
    Last edited by Hissing Cobra; 11-25-2013 at 04:50 PM.
    Pete Slaney

    1979 Mustang Cobra

    347/T-5/4.30's
    420 rwhp/380 rwt (New Motor)
    11.49 @ 121.86

    306/T-5/4.30's (Old Motor)
    307 rwhp/278 rwt
    12.38 @ 111.38

  21. #46
    Venomous Moderator Hissing Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Wareham, Massachusetts
    Posts
    9,720

    Default

    O.K. guys, I've been working on it all week and today my brother came over and we fired it up for the first time. It seems to run real good! I'm still not 100% confident in it (should I be?) so I'll be driving it locally for the next few weeks and will monitor things. I'll also be changing the oil next weekend and at that time we'll check it for "glitter" and metal particles. We'll also check the endplay on the front lower pulley to make sure it's the same number that we recorded last week when we mocked it up. I'm excited but concerned at the same time.
    Pete Slaney

    1979 Mustang Cobra

    347/T-5/4.30's
    420 rwhp/380 rwt (New Motor)
    11.49 @ 121.86

    306/T-5/4.30's (Old Motor)
    307 rwhp/278 rwt
    12.38 @ 111.38

  22. #47
    FEP Senior Member cobracomander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Bensalem PA 19020
    Posts
    709

    Default

    hope all time and effort is repaid with many happy miles 1/4 of them at a time.
    1979 Mustang Cobra wht/green v8
    1984 Mustang GT-350 Convertible
    2005 Toyota Tacoma Ext Cab Trd 4x4 off road- (daily driver)
    1968 Mustang Conv (Eleanor Project)
    2009 Honda crv.

  23. #48
    Venomous Moderator Hissing Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Wareham, Massachusetts
    Posts
    9,720

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cobracomander View Post
    hope all time and effort is repaid with many happy miles 1/4 of them at a time.
    Thanks!
    Pete Slaney

    1979 Mustang Cobra

    347/T-5/4.30's
    420 rwhp/380 rwt (New Motor)
    11.49 @ 121.86

    306/T-5/4.30's (Old Motor)
    307 rwhp/278 rwt
    12.38 @ 111.38

  24. #49
    FEP Super Member mustangxtreme's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Snohomish, Wa
    Posts
    4,021

    Default

    What, no vid?
    Dave

    If common sense was common wouldn't it just be sense?

    1983 Capri L T top 5.0 efi aod
    1983 Capri RS Turbo
    1981 Black Magic 400 c6
    93 F-250 351 5sp 4x4

  25. #50
    Venomous Moderator Hissing Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Wareham, Massachusetts
    Posts
    9,720

    Default

    SVT1 (Brian) took one from the passenger seat today as I ripped off every gear to 6,600 rpms. I don't know if he can post it here or not. In the next few days I'll take another video of it idling and post it up here.
    Pete Slaney

    1979 Mustang Cobra

    347/T-5/4.30's
    420 rwhp/380 rwt (New Motor)
    11.49 @ 121.86

    306/T-5/4.30's (Old Motor)
    307 rwhp/278 rwt
    12.38 @ 111.38

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •