And make sure you use a sealer on both the pickup and pump gasket.

Perhaps the valves are too tight (or the pushrods too long if non adjustable)

As robert pointed out, you could have too much preload and the lifters are pumping up and hanging the valve open. That could be one cause of the carb backfire. A vacuum gauge will show some rythemic bounce if that's the case. It's also possible that the valves are too tight in the guides and when the engine is reaching operating temp, the valve stems are expanding faster than the guide and are sticking. Though you'd usually hear some rocker noise if that was the case. The carb could also be running lean. A lean misfire will also cause overheating and backfiring.

The overheating and low manifold vacuum are very likely the result of retarded ignition timing. It could also be a significant vacuum leak causing a lean misfire but check the timing first. I always prefer to overadvance on initial fire and adjust as the engine is going through the cam break-in. At 2k rpm with the vacuum advance connected, you shouldn't have any problems with timing between 40 and 50 degrees. Overadvancing the timing causes far fewer issues than retarded timing. I also prefer a fat fuel curve for the same reasons...too rich will make your eyes water but the engine will live until you can dial in the carb and ignition.

So you're looking at significant mechanical issues (excessive lifter preload, valve guides, intake manifold vacuum leak) or some tuning issues (lean carb calibration, retarded timing). I'd go for the tuning issues before you start invasive surgery on the engine. Also, I'd pretty much rule out cam timing since the engine will run fine with an advanced or retarded cam as long as the fuel and spark are right.

I checked the spark plugs and the right bank (1-4) is running hotter than the left. This engine is in a 60 Tbird and I think I have the heat riser installed wrong. My guess is that this caused the overly hot intake.

I think the distributor may be stabbed in off one tooth too. Will try both of these this week if I get home at a resonable hour.

Keep the ideas coming & thanks

Kevin

Turns out that the heat riser was installed upside down. When the engine heated up it all stayed in the exhasut manifold and eventually in the intake manifild.

You failed to mention which oil pan you have in your vehicle. Because of this , I cannot make any valid comments on the matter. The oil pan is the single most important component in a performance FE's oil system. Stock oil pans are great for completlely stock FEs.

You will also need to mention which oil pump you are using. Bearing clearances, if known, would be helpful.

Your numbers seem fine to me, but it sounds like you've likely installed an aftermarket oil pump, and if that's the case, your engine could be in danger.

Shoe.

I don't know of any sites but there's got to be some that cater to these big beautiful Mercs.

It's a two door. It's a '66 -Q- code 428 Merc. Its got great value.

You bought yourself a Mercury, now just cruise on down the road.

This old post thoughtfully critiques the book you are referencing:

http://www.jcoconsulting.com/ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=6226&Reply=6127

In your case, George apes a mistake made in many FE reference books. You've got to do the "drill bit test" to verify you've got the 361/391/428 cylinder jackets stuffed into that block.

C6ME (or any CxME-x marking from 1966-on), is basically a generic marking. It indicates you've got a topoiler block for the FE/FT family, but it does not indicate which sand cores were stuffed into the mold. It may be a 330FT block, a 352 block, a 360/390/410 block, a 361FT/391FT block, a 428 standard block, or a 428PI/CJ block. All are identical on the outside. You can determine which cores were stuffed into the mold by running a few tests, such as the "drill bit test", but you've got to run the whole drill bit test, not just a single cylinder sampling at mid-cylinder.

As mentioned earlier, C6ME on a block simply indicates it's a topoiler FE cast from model year 1966 through about 1972 or so. A sideoiler FE casting of similar markings would have gotten C6AE-A. Note that I'm aware of sideoiler blocks cast with C5AE-G, C5AE-H, C6AE-A, C7AE-A, and C8AE-A. Natch, some later sideoilers have no marks of this type, since the foundry smartly abandoned the practice, since the numbers came to mean approximately nothing sometime before 1966. Blank (unmarked) blocks started showing up at DIF and CF around 1968, but the meaningless DxTE-x markings resurfaced when MCC took over 360/361/390/391 casting duties. DIF never seems to have handed over 427/428 casting duties to MCC, so you'll find the late 427/428 industrial castings were maintained at DIF and were not saddled with the markings. Since FE and FT truck block castings were all machined at Clifford Manufacturing in Clifford Michigan since 1973, it appears Ford did not make contractual arrangements with either MCC or Clifford to handle the larger displacement FEs.

(DIF is Ford's Dearborn Iron Foundry, CF is Ford's Cleveland Foundry, MCC is Ford's brand spanking new Michigan Casting Center)

The "drill bit test" is a work in progress. I'm trying to determine what cylinder jacket sand cores got stuffed into the various FE and FT blocks over the years, and I'm basing my study on a statistical evaluation of the size of the coolant gap found between each cylinder. For gauging, I've selected a cheap set of drillbits which must be incremented in 1/64th steps (commonly available) to achieve the step resolutions I seek. Since I'm fractionally illiterate, I am only capable of comparing drillbit numbers in mistake-free manner when they are converted to the 64th denominator. This means a 1/8" drill bit is called an 8/64" bit, all because I'm sorta dense.

I typically speak of the "drill bit test" numbers in "numerator slang", where "7" means 7-64", "13" means 13/64", and "16" means 16/64".

Note that when probing inside the six core plug holes, I seek to learn the widest reachable gap that a drill bit shank will fit into. Generally, due to "draft angles" and "parting line" issues, the largest gap can be found close to the top of the cylinder (or low in the cylinder if of a certain type of 427 jacket), so you must not simply poke the shank of the bit straight in, but must probe high and low into the core plug for the greatest gap between all eight cylinders. There are more sophisticated ways to statistically correlate cylinder jackets, but this "biggest gap on the block" way is simplest. I simply look for the single largest single gap on a block, not a statistical averaging of all the gaps, or some such alternative.

Note also: One weakness in my method is I collect info on the largest drill bit shank which slips between the cylinders, but it's not exactly intuitive and some imported data may actually arrive in the form of the smallest bit which does NOT fit at any spot between any cylinders on a particular block. This 1/64" discrepancy is recognized as a transitional vagarity which is allowed, but not as likely to occur as the "bit that fits".

I suppose it might help to offer typical cylinder gaps found in various FE blocks.

While you will likely find these numbers using the forum search function with the string "bit test" (use the quotes), this is a summary of how the evaluation sits right now:

The 330FT, 332, 352, 361Edsel, 360, 390, 410 blocks can typically slip a 17 (17/64") drill bit at the largest gap in a block. Variances of 16 and 18 are normal for the largest gap, and I believe 19 and maybe 20 have been noted. This does indicate that the 330FT and 352 blocks make fine 390 blocks, core shift permitting. Obviously, rust plays a factor in the gap size, but I've found fewer than expected numbers of blocks with cylinder rust issues.

I don't know what type of cylinder jacket gaps are found in the 352HP and 390HP castings.

The 361FT, 391FT, 428standard, 428PI/CJ, and some 406 blocks can typically slip a 13 (13/64"), with 12 and 14 also being common.

Some 406 and some 427 blocks seem to be able to slip an 8 (8/64") drill bit shank between the largest gap on the block. This includes cloverleafed cylinders. Unremoved threaded core plugs make this test a difficult one to find samples on.

Some types of 427 blocks seem to fit a remarkable 5 (5/64") shank between the cylinders at the largest gap, but not all cylinders were checked when these samples were taken. This includes cloverleafed cylinders (squared-off corner reinforcements).

When I go to the salvage yard, I carry a 15/64" drill bit, as it'll give me a clear idea what block I'm looking at, without having to precisely determine the gap. The crill bit test is a crude test, and it is incapable of checking for core shift. A sonic mapping of the cylinders will verify core shift issues, but too many sonic maps are not accurate (done by an amateur), so you'll want to cross check the drill-bit test with the sonic map to verify all is sensible.

JMO,
Sho

I have an 89 mustang. I pulled the engine to rebuild. I know it is not the stock engine. I am trying to figure out what it is? The numbers stamped on the top of the block is XXX53. There is nothing stating 302 or 5.0 Pistons are larger than a 5.8. Push rods and stroke are short. Can you possibly help me identifying this block.
Thank You. Bob

n/m

That intake is an oinker. It stinks for performance. If you want to see any benefits with that 750DP, you must upgrade to a Performer RPM.

I assume you've got a 9.5:1 compression car engine, not an 8.5:1 pickup truck 390. The extra compression of the car will be good for the 750, but you really need to add a cam kit (includes cam, lifters, valve springs, and you'll soon learn the valve spring retainers and valves also gotta go if upgraded) if you wish any balance in performance.

Double pumpers have a nice feel, but they also suck a lot of gas. In your present build, you'll se mileage drop, but you will not see performance improve, since you are bottlenecked in other areas.

It seems to me some FPA headers which port-match C8AE-H heads, a cam kit, and an RPM intake would make that Galaxie ready for that 750DP. Mileage would still drop, but performance will climb. 650 would also be a fine carb.

JMO,
Shoe.

Scott, a common problem when using HV oil pump is flooding the heads with oil and sucking it down the guides, put an old holley main jet anysize from#75- 90 in the oil feed under the rocker stand. This will supply more than an adequate oil flow to the rockers. Also check to make the return passages are clear and a glob of silicone or gasket sealer is not obstructing the flow. You mentioned fel pro intake gaskets, there have been some problems with the print o seal fel pros failing and sucking in oil. Look at the post below by Salid on 6/16, it shows a picture of a sucked in fel pro.: http://www.jcoconsulting.com/forumfe/reply.aspx?ID=21843&Reply=21843

I pulled the intake today. The Fel-Pro intake gaskets were NOT what is causing the oil burning, they were sealed all the way around every port (you could see the impression where they sealed). The oil is coming down the intake valves, it was actually laying on top of the intake valves in pools! My mechanic friend came over and looked at it for about 25 minutes. Evidentially I am getting so much oil to the top of the heads that it is just being sucked down the intakes. I did have a valve job, new CJ size valves, new guide liners, and new seals installed. He used good seals, but they are not the little white PC seals that you must machine the heads for. I think without all that oil they may work fine.

We are going to put some 70 size Holley jets in the oil holes feeding the rockers (smaller may even be better after what I saw!!). Any comments here are welcome. I am running a Melling high-volume oil pump with oil mods to the bottom of the block (to force more oil to the main gallery).

Scott

Colors 1964 390

Engine - black
Bellhousing- unpainted natural cast iron
Trans.- unpainted natural cast iron
Valve covers and and cleaner- Gold

i would use a edlebrock duel plane, all fe motors have 352 on them don;t know why. i;d use ford blue and semi gloss black

Restrictor in the oil passage for the rockers is easy and a very good thing. I use an old holly main jet, just drop in the hole and put the rockers back on. Have thousands of miles on motors like this and works great. Need a jet with a hole about .075 to .090 on an inch.