I think I killed my engine - 392W

[GrabberOrange69]

I built the 392W engine for my 69 Shelby in 2004ish. Its been through some abuse over the years and has seen 3 different intake/head configurations. One time I missed 3rd on a power shift and hit 7,000rpm and bent an exhaust valve (~2007). Last year I put a set of ported 351W heads on it, removed the headers and went back to stock look for the SAAC 50 show. That raised my compression from ~11.25 to ~12:1. I have run octane boost in all of its configurations, and for the last 7 years, its been fed a diet of 91 ethanol free, base fuel +boost.

Cylinders 1 and 6 have been oiling the plugs for some time, but it got way worse after the head swap. Its now a constant smoker (not cool).The Duraspark keeps firing through most of the oil storm, and there's no knock or bang or clack...but I'm taking it down this winter. I'll be aiming for 10:1 compression this time Its not a date code correct block anyway, so I think Ill hit up Don Rush at WCCC for a date code correct M code to start my next build.

 

[Grabber70Mach]

Always like your car. Looking forward to seeing your engine build.

 

[GrabberOrange69]

Always like your car. Looking forward to seeing your engine build.

Wont be until winter likely, but I cant let it sit 2 years like I did when I bent the valve.

 

[Horseplay]

Not a chemical engineer or anything but 91 seems pretty light to be running 12:1. When you say adding octane boost you aren't meaning the stuff like those old cans of 104 or whatever, are you? The science on those I've seen shows they don't do much of anything to raise the octane level of pump gas. FWIW, I run nothing but 93 in my 10.7:1 stroker.

 

[MyFirstCar66]

That car says "Look at me!" and you'd better because it likely won't be still for long!
I'm sure you'll find a recipe you like.
I do agree the 92-93 or using track gas may be better for keeping it in one piece for now but 10:1 seems happy with the 90 to 92 non-ethanol around here.