Next will be a Mustang II front suspension, narrowed 9" rear, Y-Block and T-5 mockup for crossmembers and engine mounts.

I will be working hard to get this thing to look like a race car.  My imagination works well, but a glimpse of the finished product sure helps the inspiration.

                         one of the airforce's fighter jets(FA-18?)

                                   This will probably stablize the "Fireball" as you approach the "Sound Barrier"....

                          I'm looking forward to following the project on this forum.

                                                            Merry Christmas

                                                                    Bill

I'm all for "stabilize".  Tell Reed I need help on the turbos........

Dustin,

I'm trying to make this a "Gas Coupe" (if you make to many mods, you will be moved up to altered).  The gas coupe rules only allow the following body modifications; front air dam/splitter, hood scoop, radiused wheel openings for tire clearance and minor chrome trim removed.  Currently there is discussion of allowing a spoiler.....we'll see.  I will do all of these mods except for trying to keep the tires under the stock wheel wells. 

http://www.frantik.co.nz/Products/GT45/masterpower.htm

You made a lot of progress since I was there a few weeks ago...sure enjoyed the visit!

There are four basic classes for a sedan like the Comet.  Production (bone stock aerodynamically with an engine that was available from the factory in the year of the given car), gas coupe (pretty much the same as production, but requires an engine swap to something not available from the factory), altered (mainly an engine swap, covered grille and headlights with a few other mods available) and competition coupe (chopped top, extended wheel base from the cowl forward, full belly pan and an engine swap).

So with the Y-Block, it will have to run at least in gas coupe, which is exactly where I plan to be.  The fender skirts are good thinking.  I have only noticed one set and that was on a Corvette.  The rules do say no streamlining, but it doesn't say you cannot run fender skirts, you might have something there.  Most of the guys agree, if it doesn't say you can't, then you can.  I am going to follow up on that.  My intentions are to run a narrowed 9" to stay inside the body.  And yes, the reason I picked this one is the same reason I picked the pickup.

Is bigger really better?  I know it would look better!  Please keep in mind that we will only be running 258 cu. in.  I have read your turbo articles at least three times and I am filling my head with as much info from books, internet, and experienced racers as possible.  The possibilities include draw-through/blow-through carb, draw-through/blow through mechanical FI (EFI not allowed in the class I'm trying to compete in).  Selecting the right turbo isn't easy while trying to match the volume of air being moved with the maping and A/R ratio.  It's like the old story, the more you know, the more you know you don't know.

Ketterbros,

Yikes, perhaps Bill was thinking that it would be "stabilized" in flight!!!

Todd,

The pleasure was all ours, you are welcome back anytime.  Thanks for all the insight and recommendations on the Mustang II front suspension.  Good luck with the bird, I know it will be a killer ride. 

I am still in the gathering info mode, but I would like to run twin turbos.  All the fancy math with exotic inputs seem to be geared towards finding optimum performance at all operating levels.  My simplistic mind says - I don't care about idle, off idle or mid-range responses, I just care about WOT at top end.

With that in mind, it is reported that a turbo from a late 80's T-Bird can spool up 13-15 psi on a 2.3L all the way to redline.  The Y-Block will have 4.2L and a pair of those T-Bird units would be just enough overkill to wastegate them back to the max sealing capability of the Y-Block heads.  Sounds like a start anyway...............

I think Reed has already been signed on weather he likes it or not. 

Now you see them...............

Now you don't..........

Here is the donor suspension.........

Where is the instruction manual??????

It will take a while before the next up date...........do you think?

                     that you will have to narrow. You might look into an 7.5

                     or 8.8 from a Bronco II. These diff's require less power loss,

                     lighter weight,plus you may not have to "narrow" these.

                            Since your're not Drag Racing, the little 7.5

                     would proabably work well, if you can get the ratio you need.

                            Just a thought..........

                                                 Merry Christmas

                                                       Bill

The bolt in Bronco II 8.8 sure sounded good.  I measured the track of the stock Comet at 55.5" with stock rims.  I googled the Comet track and it came up 55.6".  Next I googled the Bronco II track and it was said to be 56.9".  I went to the local wrecking yards and measured two Bronco IIs and both had a 57 11/16" track with stock wheels - darn, just too wide.

Back to the drawing board with the narrowed 9".  I called Cliff Williamson in Temple City, CA and he was in the middle of re-splining some axels.  He agreed to do mine and I guess that will be the direction we will be headed.

Cliff is a very experienced Y-Blocker with machine shop, super charger, and El Mirage experience.  He is very interesting and I think I will add a few lines about him in the "Y-Block Personalities" over in the This-N-That section.

Thanks guys for the recommendation, I will chase down any idea that will make this project easier or better.

Charlie, looking good!

If I may chime in on the spring topic, I have had tried a little of everything in my F-100, but it still may be helpful to this scenario as far as spring rates and my experience. A lot will be dependent on how the engine sits over the axle c/l in the Comet...

I started with MII V-6 springs. V-8 MII springs were next, and still a little mushy, so I swapped in a set from a late 1980's 5.0 'stang. They were a marked improvement, but I had to cut between 1 and 1 1/2 coils to get down to proper geometry. Feeling that there was still room for improvement, I decided to try a freebie set of coils from a '95 Mustang GT. The diameter works, and they have been settling in for about 6 weeks. They seem much firmer, and I should only need to remove 1/2 or 3/4 coil to get to proper geometry. 

You probably know this by now, but "proper" geometry on a MII is when the lower control arm is parallel to the ground. You'll probably be able to play around with your ride height quite a bit with how you locate the X-member in the Comet's front sub frame.

Also noteworthy is that aftermarket spring "hats" are fabricated with a few degrees of caster built in. I don't know what the stock set-up has, but I can measure the angle on mine if your curious.

Think I'm starting to ramble on, so I'll quit for now...feel free to give me a call anytime if you need a sounding board...

Glenn,  I like the idea of the 57 9" housing if it is the correct width and especially if it has the spring mounts in the right location.  I have a number of 9" housings, third members and extra ring and pinions, I will probably stay with that. 

Kid, the other housings are tempting, but I like the 9" hp capability and the fact that I have so many extra parts.  I will mock up with a shortened 9" and keep an eye out for a 57 housing to see if it fits.

Todd, as the crossmember gets set this week, I'm sure I will be calling you if I run into any problems or questions.

Here is the rebuilt Mustang II suspension system ready to be installed.

It sounds crazy to go to all the trouble for a car that will only go (hopefully) in a straight line.  The spring selection and weight distribution for the front (and rear) will help stabilize the car at speed and especially if I hit rough salt or heaven forbid have a spin.  It is commonly thought that 30% of the money and energy goes to the power of the car and 70% goes to safety.

What you are looking at is the original 61 Comet springs that I cut just to set the suspension with level lower A arms (and look complete).  The arms are in a fixed position with a solid rod replacing the shocks.  This will help me set the ride height where I want it by raising or lowering the crossmember in the frame.

My wife always says, "I asked for a nickel question and you give me a five dollar answer!" ................Guilty!

Tomorrow the frame gets cut to accept the crossmember.  The frame rails are 31" outside to outside.  The width of the crossmember where the frame attaches is 27 1/2".  Something has to go.  I'll post more pictures.

This may actually work to your advantage, as notching a relief in the front sub-rails will allow you to weld in multiple locations and planes to the MII cross member. For lack of a better word, you'll unitize the suspension with the uni-body construction...

Are you going to rig the lower "A-arms" with the stocker single pivot / strut rod system - or convert it to a "real" lower A-arm? Those struts have always scared me to death when I think of going really fast with parts made for a Pinto!!!!

Also - how much caster are you shooting for with the final assembly? You must want more than the usual stocker for that too, for topend stability....its going to be easier to deal with this subject now when you set the front x-member - than maybe later when its anchored in there permanently.  

Excellent questions.  I am walking a thin line between gas coupe and altered.  There is no mention in the rule book of the front suspension required to be original for gas coupe.  However, it does specifically say that the frame needs to be in it's original location.  The front frame rails will appear to be unchanged, but I don't want them to look to long.  I am trying to do everything I can to make this car as safe as possible and not get moved up to the altered class.  Those stock strut rods will probably have to stay.  I want this thing to look as stock as possible and not give the tech guys reason to look any further than they have to.  If I run altered in the future, I will undoubtedly change to the "real" bottom A-arms.

You are right on target with the caster question.  We cut the frame yesterday to set the crossmember and I have decided to research the best caster question a little further before I make the welds permanent.  I rolled the solid axel 8 degrees positive caster in the race truck, but problems with bumpsteer has not allowed me to see if that was optimum.  I know there is some adjustment available in the upper A-arm for caster.  However, if I give it a head start with the placement of the crossmember, I will have a better chance to reach the desired angle.

Thanks for the input.  These are helpful questions.

Back to the rear.  I have heard somewhere that the rear cover type rear ends, without the extra pinion pilot bearing, and with different pinion location in relation to the ring gear, have less parasitic drag.  I always figured Ford went to the 7.5 and 8.8 rear ends because they may be cheaper to manufacture, but just maybe they did it to help the corporate fuel mileage to meet government standards.  If this is true, a little less drag in the rear gears could mean 8 or 10 mph more speed, give or take.  Maybe someone here can guide us to a place that compares the two.

Can't remember which was best but it bears looking into - if there is a mechanical advantage to be had, maybe better use it the first time around.  

As an "add-on" .....the article was in Car Craft and they used a chebbie for the sacrificial power source:

http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles/ccrp_0806_chevy_chevelle_rear_axle_swap/index.html

Worthy of mention - for a top speed car - at the end of the article they discuss the use of a "Mikronite or REM process" that has shown an improvement in parasitic loss (+6 hp) and listed a price for coating the ring and pinion at about $275 - and I'm sure this number is old.

http://mikronite.com/documents/dragsterMag.pdf

http://remsuperfinish.com/rem/rem_benefits.html

Creeping into my head......Do you suppose this would work on automatic transmission parts too?

http://www.carcraft.com/techfaq/116_0701_mikronite_surface_treatment/results.html

Results of our "study" so far......

(1) Yes   The Ford 9 inch appears to have a slightly lower efficiency - and the difference appears to widen as the rev's increase. The greater hypoid offset is thought to be the culprit (but I didn't locate any textbook engineering reference data that backs that supposition). Doesn't mean there isn't something somewhere - but I haven't stumbled over it. The reduced efficiency is a very small amount - and it could be negated by the micro-polishing processes mentioned in the magazine articles.

(2) Yes    The "micro-polishing" of the ring and pinion has shown an advantage in improving gear efficiency (by a small amount percentage-wise) - several automotive tests have shown similar results. Of the two mentioned processes - Mikronite and REM - neither shows an advantage over the other for performance. One abrades and smooths the surface with contact pressure - one uses ceramic powder and chemical etch - both end up at the same place, a very smooth silky surface - and still true to the engineered geometry (mating curves remain). REM seems to have a clear price advantage over Mikronite - and also is mentioned by more than a few NASCAR users of this technology.

(3) From a racing standpoint - the second benefit of the micro-polishing is a reduction in surface fatigue from contact loading of the "rough" (ground) finish the parts start out with. Rough is a relative term here - the ground finish of most ring and pinion sets is by machine tooling standards, very good. The NASCAR references hit this feature as hard or harder than the friction reduction. In short terms - it provides a surface that is already "broken in" - polished - without losing the proper contact surface shape through wear.

We think....use the 9 inch (its a Ford part and the punkins are handy at the track)......and find a good source of getting your choice of ring and pinion sets polished by REM.   

             of help, using a thin(75 wt) synthetic gear lube as well as synthetic

             wheel bearing grease should offer some small friction losses to help

             those small "pony's" in that 258" Y-Block......

                                                     Maybe 1 or 2 mph

                                                             Bill

I’ll add to what John and Steve have brought up regarding rear end drag.

The lowered pinion offset on the 9” Ford rear gears allows the teeth on the pinion to have more contact or surface area which is where much of the strength for the 9” is derived from.  Unfortunately that increase in surface area is also a detriment as far as drag goes.  If not concerned about the overall life expectancy of the rear, then there are several other rearends out there that will reduce the friction and in turn allow more of the engines horsepower to be delivered to the rear tires.  For the 9” housing, both Mark Williams and Strange Engineering have offered unique ring and pinion sets with a specialized gear housing that raises the pinion back up and frees up some of the hosepower that's lost in using the standard design 9” ring and pinions.  These specialized ring and pinion sets do have have some horsepower limitations but are used in those cases where getting just a bit more power to the rear wheels makes the difference between running like everyone else or being just a tad quicker (or faster).

For the 9", there are also some low drag pinion bearing supports that are also of benefit in reducing rear end drag.  I have one of these in my roadster and essentially it does away with the tapered bearings and the crush sleeve or bearing spacer and instead uses a stack of roller bearings without a crush sleeve.  With the pinion nut tightened in excess of 200 ft/lbs, the pinion still rotates freely with this setup.

Bill, good point about the synthetic lube.  I do run synthetic in the t-10 trans and diff now.  I think I remember Karol Miller saying that he changed the trans and diff to straight 30wt up on arrival to the events and then changed back to 90wt to drive back to Texas.  I will be changing to a T-5 and I'll have to check, but I think it uses auto trans fluid.  Perhaps there is a synthetic for that light of weight too.

The ring and pinion sets I use are NASCAR take-offs.  The sellers list them on Ebay as "polished".  When I get them they are extremely smooth and look just like chrome.  I don't know if they are just polished or have one of the treatments that have been mentioned before.

Good job on the thread guys.  Let's keep it going.............

By the way, I have spent many hours internet searching, talking to techs at IFS manufacturers like Heidts, and bending the ears of other Bonneville car builders to determine the best caster range for the Comet.  Straight axel users like 15 degrees or more (positive of course) while IFS users are all over the map (there are racers with +3 to +9).  I rolled the solid axle back 8 degrees in the race truck, but big time bumpsteer kept me from knowing if 8 degrees was enough.  The best advise for the Comet seems to be to set the rake of the frame and body at 1 percent (1" rise in 58") for best aerodynamics (NASCAR numbers), rotate the crossmember about 5 degrees positive from the  horizontal ground (not the frame) and then do the final settings with the top A arm adjustments.

Here we go.................

We'll be looking for you, and bring your work clothes.

I have forgotten to mention that we were honored in the 2009 rule book with a picture of the race truck to represent what production pickups could look like.

No caption with mention of the Y-Block, but we were pleasantly surprised just the same.

Here is the Comet with front and rear suspension systems temporarily attached.  I still need to set the ride height and dial in the pre-caster for the front crossmember.  The 9" housing is narrowed and attached to springs, but the panhard bar and shock mounts are next to be fabed up.  I will post more pictures as these get finished.  I sure am looking forward to seeing that Y-Block setting in the engine bay.

Thanks for the comment.  Yes, I am ready to smell some smoke (like Rob from way up north).  However, you are way ahead of me and I will do my best to catch up.  And yes, I do plan to return to Maxton as soon as I can.  I feel this Y-Block will be very competitive in its class there.  Actually, I would like to make a big swing east to attend both Maxton (1.0 miles) and the new 1.5 mile landspeed event in Main.  The Loring Timing Association had its inaugural run there last August.  I received a phone call last week from the gentleman who held the Maxton record before me.  He is from Ontario, Canada, and he attended the LTA race this summer.  He said that with the extra .5 mile track (also on a runway), he was able to increase his speed 12 mph.

As if that wasn't enough, there is also a new landspeed event on the west coast.  The Mojave Mile will have its first race in March of 2010.  It will be held in its namesake city of Mojave. California, located 70 miles south of Bakersfield and 50 miles northwest of El Mirage Dry Lakes.  Your car number and its class are sacred in all of these events, including Bonneville and Lake Gairdner in Australia.

So many races . . . so little time . . . gotta get back in the shop!!!

It would be great to see you in May.  Tim and I will be at both the Eagle Field drags and El Mirage Dry Lakes.  A close neighbor has Y-Block experience with an F-100 and has made a commitment to build a gasser for the Eagle Field drags.  He took one of my 59 F-100s and purchased a stroker Y-Block (340 + cu. in.) and a C-4 from Tim and is hell-bent-for-leather to have it done in time.  So come on down, we will have a great time.  My neighbor isn't the only one who is working feverishly to be ready for Eagle Field, get ready for Tim's FED.

As for the turbos, I have said it before, the more you know, the more you don't know.  There is certainly more to it than slapping on a couple of puffers and mash the throttle.  I really am enjoying the learning process.  My goal is just to be able to talk the language with the experts who might help me if they choose to (you know who you are).  Then be able to develop, maintain, and tune this rascal.

I think a book could be written on turbocharging, focused on the specific needs of a Y-Block.  Areas like head sealing, plenum design, intake runners, headers, cam design, and compression ratios need special attention with Ys.  General areas like exhaust, wastegates, turbo selection (volume), block prep, induction choice, and ignition timing would be needed to finish up a system.  Sounds like a lot, but I believe there is more (and safe) bang for the buck than just traditionally hotrodding an engine. 

Important question regarding exhaust.  The rules will allow for exhaust to exit from the front fenders.  My intention is to dump the turbo exhaust in front of the wheel well to disturb the swirling effect caused by the front tires.  It is a common trick to keep the air flowing down the side of the car.

Man, the nostalgia racing bug has certainly been busy biting gear heads in the butt.  I think a more-door Falcon gasser would be great.  It certainly would peg the "gotta-be-different" needle.  I also like the early 60s compact as a vehicle choice.  I have been watching the 64 altered wheel base drag car build on Muscle Car TV.  Best of luck with the project if you are fortunate to land the Falcon.

I see you mentioned coming to "Maine-iac" country to try out Loring air force base. For those who don't know the base has been closed and just this summer I heard they started having events there with cars. They used to have Phish concerts up there. Its still a 300 mile one way trip for me and I live in Central Maine, Its a long way up there.

If you do come you will have to look me up and check out my new Y block shop, I could prbably join you. What dates are they running up there, I'll mark my calender.

Loring ran in August last year and as of now, there is no event date for 2010.  I know they will run again, but we will just have to wait for the official word.  It is not likely that we will be able to run the Comet there this summer.  If they have a late date, the odds get better.

I would be pleased to visit you and your shop.  Let's keep in touch as we make progress and please let me know if you hear anything regarding a date for 2010.  It would be great to make the event together as well, but you might get your hands dirty!

Old Loring Air Force Base Land Speed Race / Mini Rally?

The Loring Timing Association will be holding their Inaugural Land Speed Race at the former Loring Air Force Base near Limestone, Maine on July 31st, August 1st, August 2nd, 2009. I'm still waiting to find out if spectators will be able to dry camp overnight, being this is a first time event the progress has been at times painfully slow, with the racing venue itself taking priority. I'll be there with the Wild Hare Racing Wabbit and we competitors have just recently received permission to camp overnight in the same area where we will be pitting our race cars and I am awaiting information on spectator camping as well as spectator admission fees, I am thinking that they will be very similar to those at Maxton.

We will be racing a standing start timed 1.5 mile course on the 12,100 foot main runway (at Maxton the timed course is 1 mile) http://www.lta-lsr.com/track.htm and using the same rules and classes that are used at Maxton, the top speeds should be faster due to the extra half mile of timed length, so if you live in the northeast and haven't had a chance to get to Maxton to see what Land Speed Racing is all about, here is an opportunity to do just that. I apologize for this being done at the last minute, but the information has been coming very slowly. I will post more information as soon as I get it.

Attached Thumbnails

 

I just found on the LTA forum that the dates have been approved, Great site and forum, some interesting stuff, I almost went last year but got late notice of it. (See pasted below from forum.)

Bob Wanner Full Member Offline Posts: 243	Re: Loring 2010 « Reply #17 on: November 10, 2009, 06:47:39 PM » Dates for LTA/10 APPROVED !!! Friday July 30, 2010, is Tech/Sign in Saturday, July 31 is racing day one Sunday, August 1 is racing day two.  Hallelujah, even. Bob W, LTA guy

Bob Wanner Full Member Offline Posts: 243	Re: Loring 2010 « Reply #17 on: November 10, 2009, 06:47:39 PM » Dates for LTA/10 APPROVED !!! Friday July 30, 2010, is Tech/Sign in Saturday, July 31 is racing day one Sunday, August 1 is racing day two.  Hallelujah, even. Bob W, LTA guy

Re: Loring 2010 « Reply #17 on: November 10, 2009, 06:47:39 PM » Dates for LTA/10 APPROVED !!! Friday July 30, 2010, is Tech/Sign in Saturday, July 31 is racing day one Sunday, August 1 is racing day two.  Hallelujah, even. Bob W, LTA guy

Friday July 30, 2010 is Tech/sign in

Saturday July 31, Racing day 1

Sunday August 1st is Racing day 2

I guess the place is a bird sanctuary now so they have to get approval from the department of conservation and the bird lovers who have quite a bit of clout.

From readings on their forum, many are saying its the best place they ever turned a tire on. Some people have come from Texas and California and say they would make the 5000 mile trip again in a heartbeat.

sounds like a promising venue to me.

Just curious...what are the rules governing fuel injection for your class? Have you thought about this option, or is it even allowed?

It seems that dialing in your a/f mix might be made easier by using a throttle body type injection, and they are capable of making stupid power...if that's even an option (the injection, not stupid power )

This weekend I was visiting my kids in LA and I was 20 minutes away from the Hilborn office.  I would have liked to visit with their techs, but just didn't want to take the time.  I wanted to ask them about the flow capabilities of what I had and what was needed to finish up the system.  Perhaps next visit or I'll call them. 

It will look a little lower to the ground with bumpers and air dam or splitter installed.

I did a job under the hood of a 60 comet for a guy about 5 years ago, it was so rusty under there when he turned the wheel the box would flex in the frame instead of the wheels turning, he wondered why his car was all over the road. I installed all new front end bushings etc, everything cleaned, patched and painted. $2500.00 worth of work under the hood alone.

Before repairs.

After repairs

The Massive 144 CI after completion.

Being a Falcon nut/other bird, I like your choice of front tire, those Lincoln spares make good race fronts.. very light..

Dave and I will be glued to your posts, Good Luck..

Thanks for the recommendation.  I will pick up a copy and see if it is something that should be done.  I'll keep you informed about that.

Mr. Ketter,

You have a sharp eye.  Those 16" Lincoln wheels are so light it's unbelievable.  They would make super front runners for a drag car.  However, for me, they are just being used to set the ride height.  The landspeed tires on order are 15". 

With all the race car building and reporting this winter, I thought should hold back on sharing what little I managed to complete.  With other cars finishing up, I guess now would be a good time for an update.

The stock Mustang II crossmember is in and the frame rails are reinforced.

Driver side.

Passenger side.

Something a little different for the rear.

Nice...

Were you a gymnast? I've got to start doing yoga or something...

    What will the engine be in this one, bigger, smaller? 

We will start with 258 cu. in. just like all the rest of the engines.  The E engine class (184 to 261 cu. in.) is where I can have the most success at this time.  Other sizes are on the drawing board.

Biking is not for the faint of heart.  We have been biking for the last 16 years (I started at age 50) and we have crashed twice.  The first time was a lot more serious.  In that time we have ridden close to 30,000 miles with an average ride of about 30 miles.  We have done a number of centuries (100 miles) and five double centuries (over 200 miles in a day).  There are only two kind of riders, those who have been down and those who are going down.

Same thing for motorcycles, only they're easier to ride!

Lots of room with the shock towers gone.

Here are some fun pictures.

Charles, you are SERIOUSLY demented! So's Tim, thank God I'm sane enough to recognize this!  Carbs..Webers?

As for the induction, I am just trying to find something to "blow through" (I could use a carb, they have always worked before).  The original plan was to use twin turbos for a little boost to get this Y down the track and we will probably stay with that.  Actually these are a set of Kinsler FI units.  I took them to Hilborn for a confirmation that they would work behind the turbos and I got a thumbs up from them.  I am also talking to Jerry C about a throttle bodied plenum on a sheet metal intake with bungs for fuel injection.  The "classic" class we want to run in doesn't allow EFI, so something mechanical will have to do.  You have to know, I am not doing anything without Reed's blessing and input.  I am just the "grunt" man around here, I leave the thinking to those capable.

http://www.accufabracing.com/article%203.htm

So, we have two 60 mm throttle bodys on our turboharged 292, those will flow about 1200 cfm of air as normally aspirated and with 0.7 to 1.5 bar charge ?

Still talking to Jerry Christenson about a sheet metal intake with an enclosed plenum to cover the runners.  He recommended a large throttle body from Ron's Fuel Injection Systems.  The unit is called the "Flying Toilet".

Still have to run all this stuff by Reed, I'm just trying to learn as I go.

Seems like a good plan...that is, to have both the "Flying Brick" and a "Flying Toilet"...hehe

I'm not sure if Kinsler ever made FI units for a Y-Block or a Lincoln.  These are old Buick V6 Stage II injectors from a 260 cu. in. motor and I have not fabed up an adapter manifold yet.  I have mentioned earlier that I am trying to find something suitable (and good looking) to blow the twin turbos through.  The outside four units match up with the four stacked intake runners in the heads and the center units could be sent in both directions???  More info from Kinsler can be found at their web site www.kinsler.com and their phone number is (248) 362-1145.  As I said, I am not sure if they made any early Ford or Lincoln injectors, but I notice they are located on Thunderbird Ave. in Troy, MI.