As I've kept digging, it sounds like a build using metric rings and an offset ground set up is where I would like to go.
The cam is another big part of what I'm looking for. I think I'm looking for something similar to what Miker is talking about. Numbers on a dyno are one thing, but pulling up to a stop light or a cruise in and getting everyone's attention is what makes me happy. I honestly don't know enough about cams to look at Mummert's chart and know what I'll get out of it. Based off of what Miker said, the 270 or 280 might be what I'm looking for. Honestly looking at the chart, the Y-284S sounds cool purely based off the fact he named it the "Cruise night special". But again, I'm not 100% sure what I'm looking at. 

Has anyone here used the Y-284S?
Keeping in mind this will be using a offset ground 312 crank, manual transmission, with the goal of having plenty of "personality".

1956 Ford Victoria
1932 Ford Roadster

No, but it’s a very careful timing curve in the computer. It did run nice on the $8 a gallon stuff if I put the curve back in. It’s probably $16 now. The aluminum heads do buy me a little leeway.

miker
55 bird, 32 cabrio F code
Kent, WA
Tucson, AZ

Miker, with a dynamic compression ratio of 8.7, are you running 100+ octane race gas?

I grew up around cars that were often over cammed. Some mine, some friends. I’m pretty tolerant of a rougher or higher idle, but it’s almost always been with a manual transmission. I think Jonh’s “descriptions” are good, but for me, if I’m on the line between 2 cams, I could live with the larger one. The other thing working here is I’ve used them in stroker motors, so there’s a little more displacement than stock. That tends to make the cam more “tame”. Maybe I should have mentioned that. But the cams are great, and the last one I bought came with the cam dr readout, so you know it’s what was advertised.

miker
55 bird, 32 cabrio F code
Kent, WA
Tucson, AZ

Miker, when you say that John's recommendations are "a little conservative," do you mean that his cams are bigger than he describes, or that it's safe to go with a bigger cam?

I have a 292 block, 312 crank, offset ground for 320cid. It’s currently got Mummert’s heads and has a 10.7 compression ratio. Measured, not calculated. The cam is a custom ground unit, after some consultation with Ted Eaton, my builder and John Mummert. It’s got a dynamic ratio of 8.7.

The induction is an Accel Gen 7 unit with a Boss EFI throttle body on a Blue Thunder manifold. It also controls the ignition timing. (That lets me run the original 55 tach drive distributor as it’s locked out with a Ford duraspark unit).

I didn’t ever do a full dyno pull on the chassis dyno, so no numbers. It runs great and drives great.

I stopped by the dyno shop today and asked what he thought about the Sniper units. He’s done several, and has one in the box waiting to be installed for a customer. He likes them, says the programming is good and the learning feature is better than the old Accel unit (which doesn’t really have one). It will control the timing “if you use the right distributor”. So that’s one guys opinion who’s not trying to sell you one.

That said, if I was back to step one, I’d be building a 9:1 motor, and looking at one of the better modern carbs, specifically the Autolites or one of the current clones.

In 2 other builds I used one of Mummert’s 270 cams, and one of the 280’s. Both stick shifts, I was happy with both. I found John’s recommendations on the site to be a little conservative, so if you’re used to living with more radical cams keep that in mind.

miker
55 bird, 32 cabrio F code
Kent, WA
Tucson, AZ

Take a look at this thread.  It's an engine very similar to what you plan, right at about 300hp.  It's probably about as precise a parts list as you can find for that goal.

http://forums.y-blocksforever.com/Topic110858-1.aspx

Rods won't matter too much for a build like that.  Use new, ARP bolts and refurbish original rods.  The pistons will be determined to some extent based on the cam you choose, for an appropriate dyanamic compression ratio and very likely be custom and domed, if you want to get the most out of the engine.


Lawrenceville, GA

I honestly haven't dug into the details of the build yet. Just starting out with the big picture items and trying to track them down. I'd love to hear what you guys think when it comes to advice on rods, pistons, and cams. 

DLR, I love your AC install! Sometime down the road when I add AC, I'd like to have a panel for the controller and vents just like you made. 

1956 Ford Victoria
1932 Ford Roadster

DLR,  it's been quite a while but static worked out to just shy of 9:1 and it's very obvious the engine likes premium 93 octane.  I probably should revisit the fact sheet but it's a stdandard 312 bore, pistons are .008 in the hole, FelPro gaskets and small letter G heads milled .010 if anyone wanats to check.  Yes the 312 mains must be ground down to std. 292 dimension.  I was fortunate the grinder in my area maintained the oil slinger.   I've always wished I knew about the possibility of using the longer 292 rods and machining the pistons to achieve 0 deck/  Thjus requiring removing only enough of the deck iron to true and square.   I haveto say, I really am happy with this build. It pulls really good, maybe too good.

64F100 57FAIRLANE500

To the original question, my build is very similar to what you are proposing -  292 block, 312 crank, -G heads, -B intake except I used a 600cfm holley and a clone  57 cam.  100% pleased whth this build but I would explore a different method of "0" decking if I were to do this again.  Since we are fortunate to have a rare 312 crank, instead of trashing a lot of good metal from the deck, why not use 292 rods and remove the excess metal from the pistons to achieve "0" deck?   I believe it was Ted who suggestded that - makes a lot of sense to me.  I hope others will comment as to there being enough stock on the pistons to do this along with other pros/cons.   It's been a long time ago but I think it was around .025 removed from the decks and another .010 from the heads which made it very difficult to install the valley pan, even with compisition gaskets.  Also removed some stock from the tintke surface of the heads but If I can remember correctly, it was a little less than the reccomended 140% of what was removed from the deck and heads combined.  

64F100 57FAIRLANE500