These are the old FoMoCo Obsolete Forums and are being hosted by JCOConsulting.com.
While you're here, check out my articles or have a look around at some of the
Ford Stuff we have for sale. You might find something you can't live without.
|
|
|
|
Skip Navigation Links.
 |  1969 mustang 351W engine problem -- Bart Simmons, 04/30/2004
Well this problem has lasted for a while and i can't figure out what it is. When i turn off my car after its been running for a few minutes, the engine keeps on firing and makes a kinda popping noise. It also makes a burn oil smell or it could just be exuast coming through a broken gasket which could be the problem but i dont know. I know it could be a number of things probably but I want some ideas of what it might be. Also if i am going about 70 mph or excellerate to fast the engine starts popping and i get no horse power and i have to pull over but the car still runs while im getting no hp. Well whoever might have an idea email me or something. |
|  | RE: 1969 mustang 351W engine problem -- David, 05/01/2004
Bart it sounds like your engine is dieseling.
This happens when either the engine gets too hot & continues to ignight the fuel because of the heat OR because you have carbon buildup
on you pistons, head chambers and or valves.
The carbon creates hot spots that also can
ignight the fuel. This is why the engine keeps running after you turn off the ignition, the hot spots act like your spark plugs & continue to
ignight the fuel. This is also why you are
losing power because the fuel is ignighting prematurly robbing power.
There is profesional top/uper engine cleaner
you can buy. It is either put in your gas tank
or in through the carb (read the directions on the can), this will clean the carbon build up from the top end of your engine. It will smoke for a few days while it is cleaning.
Other than that it sounds like your motor is tired & probably needs to be rebuilt.
Hope this helps. |
| |  | RE: 1969 mustang 351W engine problem -- Bart Simmons, 05/01/2004
but i got this engine rebuilt just about a 1 1/2 years ago so could it still be carbon buildup? |
|  | RE: 1969 mustang 351W engine problem -- Lucas, 05/16/2004
If the plugs tell you that the fuel mixture is okay and you're not overheating; check the ignition timing or a bad vacuum advance assembly. |
| Is it worth changing out C8AEE-H for C3AE heads? -- Jay, 04/29/2004
I currently have a set of C8AE heads on my 390. I was wanting to know if it would be worth the hassle of changing out the heads for a set C3AE's. I am going to make a cam change regardless I would have the motor tore down already. I upgraded the C8's to 2.09 int 1.65 exh and didn't know if there is a gain in hp. I know the C3's have the taller ports and supposedly smaller chambers but didn't know if there was hp to gain. Thanks |
| | What vehicle are we looking at? -- Dave Shoe, 05/01/2004
Also, what intake manifold and what exhaust?
If you are running headers, you will want to note the exhaust ports are located about 1/4" differently between the two heads, so you need to have headers which are correct for the particular head, otherwise improper gasket crush will pretty much assure header gasket leaks. Also the C3 head has the tall "pre-emissions" intake runners and the C8 has the smaller "velocity" runners which are well flowbenched but to come up short in the high RPM arena.
Also, what intake manifold? C8 heads with CJ valves are great street performers, but the C3 can rev a bit higher if you cam is a revver, however the C3s lack the bosses for drilling the eight diagonal exhaust manifold bolts which make the C8s so much easier to install on Fairlane/Mustang applications. C8 heads all have the bosses which allow 16 exhaust manifold bolt bosses to be drilled (don't drill too deep or you'll hit coolant!).
Shoe. |
| | | A F250 4x4 -- Jay, 05/01/2004
Sorry Dave, I should have mentioned this with my post. The truck is pretty heavy at 5600 lbs. Motor is a 390 with flat tops and I am running a performer rpm intake. The reason for the intake is cuz I had the motor in a shortbed p/u that I use to play with. The only thing done to the heads is I installed CJ sized valves and I pocket ported the chambers. I should of checked to see if the rpm intake ports were bigger than the C8 ports in the heads. Are they? From what you mentioned in your reply I am better off with the C8 heads as I rarely hit 5000 rpm. I am going to change the cam from a Cam research which I am not too happy with to a Lunati. The cam I have is 218 int and 225 exh with a 530 lift on a 110 sep. The cam I going with is 207 int and 217 exh with a lift of 507 and 533 on a 112 sep. The bigger cam just doesn't have any pulling power. I am also thinking of putting on some headers, any recomendations. Try-Y's or what? Thanks Dave. |
| | | | Hooker seems to have done OK with truck headers. -- Dave Shoe, 05/02/2004
I'm not to smart when it comes to truck headers, but I understand Hooker and Hedman truck headers all cater to the low-exit exhaust port of hte C8/D2 heads. C3 heads would likely be a mismatch with C8/D2 compatible headers. I say "likely" because some truck headers have oversized flanges that port match to both high exit and low exit heads.
The RPM is a nice but imperfect match to the C8 heads. I see no need to clean the mismatch up at your RPM levels. The CJ intake was a mismatch to both the CJ and the PI heads, and both ran well.
C8 heads have a well flowbenched runner design. I'd stick with them as long as the air velocities are gonna be well within the operating region you are looking at.
JMO,
Shoe. |
| | | | | I tried Hooker super comps before -- Jay, 05/02/2004
When I had the motor in my shortbed I bought a set of sc's. They did not match the port location on the C8 head. They said my heads were car heads was the reason, but beacuase my application was for a truck and I had car heads they were a mismatch. I don't know. I own em now. |
| | | | |  | RE: I have Hooker Comps on my 72 twd -- Robert, 05/03/2004
The port on the standard comps matches the "low exit" truck heads. Only truck gaskets will work. If you were going to run them with any other head they would have to be modified by welding a larger bead around the tube and grinding it to create a new sealing ring. You'd still have a port mismatch.
|
| | | | | | That makes sense. -- Dave Shoe, 05/03/2004
Are they Hooker truck headers, or Hooker car headers used in a truck?
I keep hearing how Hooker truck headers are a good port match, but cannot understand why Hooker hasn't transferred the flange over to car applications, and I'm always angered at Hookers improper description of car header applications.
Your observation of the mismatch is logical and is what has puzzled me. I now don't understand why so many truck header folk claim they port match fine, and I have a tendency to believe your observation over the numerous other observations.
You've given me more to think about. I need to look into this. If you could email me photos, that might help me learn faster. MAybe it's only Hedman truck headers that fit, though that is now uncertain, too.
Shoe. |
| | | | | | | RE: That makes sense. -- Robert, 05/03/2004
They are the Hooker comp headers spec'ed for an F-series truck. I tried to order the super comps and they were N/A.
My truck is not here at the house but I will try to get whatever pictures you like next time I go get it.
There are a few at:
http://www.bellsouthpwp.net/d/u/duckryder/F100/
(Yeah, I know it is the wrong color, I will fix that when it is built soon.)
I base my observations on comparing the Hooker gaskets and headers with MrG and FelPro high performance gaskets. If you line a FelPro HiPo FE gasket up on the flange, the upper side of the header sealing ring passes ever so slightly below the top of the port in the gasket. If you tried to use a head with anything close to the FelPro sized port, it would not seal. Some of the truck guys have reported this exact problem trying to run ED heads.
It is beyond me why Hooker could not make the header so that it could be used with Edelbrock or other CJ style heads. Had I realized this when I bought the headers, I would probably have picked some other set...
HTH
|
| | | | | | RE: I tried Hooker super comps before -- Robert, 05/08/2004
BTW,
My truck has the C8AE-H heads, you sure the headers don't match? Or could it be th egasket problem? |
| | | | | | | I'm pretty sure. -- Jay, 05/09/2004
I even measured the bolt holes center-to-center and then measured from the center of the bolt hole to the edge of the port. It is not the same as the head. The port is the same size it's just that it's not located in the same place. |
| | | | | | | I know it's not the gaskets either. -- Jay, 05/09/2004
I run the steel core Fel-Pro gaskets and their port opening is way bigger than the port on the head or on the header. Hedman flanges use the tall opening to work with either head. I have used the Hedmans on these heads with no problems. |
| FE Water pumps -- Boidman Of ATL, 04/29/2004
As Im finalizing the engine rebuild parts list for my Six Deuce,I see aftermarket water pumps for FE engines,but are they better than stock for a semi regular use car(no racing or heavy use).Aluminum heads and intake will help in the weight savings,headers(Now made for 61-63 Boids) will definitely help in the breathing.I thought about a roller cam and lifters but I dont want a lopey idle and low vaccum for this ride. |
| 1965 Mustang starter nose cone grinding -- David Renshaw, 04/29/2004
When the car is running at high rpm, the starting begins making a horrible grinding sound,like metal on metal. When I take it out, the nose cone of the starter is all torn up. I've tried shimming it, same thing. Does anyone have any ideas? |
| | RE: 1965 Mustang starter nose cone grinding -- Boidman Of ATL, 04/29/2004
I wonder if you have a flywheel out of balance causing it to wobble at high speeds.Or maybe some of the bolts are loose enough to make it bump the starter |
| Can a 66 intake work on a 62 block -- Boidman Of ATL, 04/28/2004
I havent visited the site in a while,but I remember it for my FE questions.My 390 is a 62 block.The intake I want to use is Edelbrock made for 66 ad later.What would keep me from using it other than me having to use diffrent valve covers for venting blowby back to the carb and for oil filling. |
| | RE: Can a 66 intake work on a 62 block -- Barry McLarty, 04/29/2004
You have it covered.Physically it works fine,just that the newwer models have pcv instead of downdraft tube. |
| | | RE: Can a 66 intake work on a 62 block -- Boidman Of ATL, 04/29/2004
Thanks for the nod.It just seemed wierd to me since the PCV valve was used in T-birds since at least 1963 on,but there just wasent an oil fill location.Now ,heres my final question on the matter.Does it matter whether the fill location is on the front or back part of the compatable valve cover and do I continue to use the water heated carburetor spacer.The edelbrock carb is tempting with its electric choke,but Pony says the original one is still better with their modifications they make. |
| | | | RE: Can a 66 intake work on a 62 block -- raycfe, 04/29/2004
I would dump the hot water from the spacer, keep the intake as cool as you can. |
| | | | | RE: Can a 66 intake work on a 62 block -- Barry McLarty, 04/29/2004
For what it"s worth,I agree.Keeptheintake charge as cool as possible.Cooler denser fuel=horse power.Have seen the oil filler in both locations.Don"t think it matters. |
| | | | | | RE: Can a 66 intake work on a 62 block -- Martin Micheelsen, 04/29/2004
I would have the oil filler cap closer to the front where it is easier to reach and the one for the PVC valve in the back so that hose is out of the way. |
| | Mod's to manifold for 64 390 -- GaryXL, 10/24/2004
Is it possible to modify the 66 up E-brock manifold to work with the '64 overboard breather and oil fill parts?? Would like to upgrade from my C4 (C3)? manifold but want to look as stock as possible. I like the sleeper approach and have ground and rewelded/machined new lettering on aluminum SBC manifolds when I ran stock cars.
If it's worth doing it's worth doing right!! |
| steel wheels -- bob, 04/28/2004
anyone know where i can find the original steel rims for a 1965 coupe. looked all over bur unable to find any. |
| 88 Mustang timing -- Stan, 04/28/2004
I installed a trick flow upper and lower intake, my retarded butt pulled the distributor, now I can't get my timing right. book shows a diag. marks like this: TDC 10-0-10-20-30-40 BTDC
looks like they have it on the 10 on the left, but my car didn't like it at all... I turned crank by hand untill TDC mark, rotor was pointing close to #1 in cap, then I turned dist. to where it matched #1 perfectly, still didn't like it. I'm lost here... Please help. |
| | RE: 88 Mustang timing -- Gerry Proctor, 04/29/2004
Are you using a timing light or just "eyeballing" the timing?
One has to wonder since your method doesn't mention this.
You also appear to be missing the part where you pull the chip from the process to be able to actually adjust the timing.
If you aren't using a timing light and don't pull the chip you will never be able to get the timing right except by providence. You can eyeball it to get the engine to run but not to get it in tune with the specs.
It's also possible that you have the plug wires on wrong. Check that first. |
| | | RE: 88 Mustang timing -- Stan, 04/29/2004
Sorry, I should have mentioned it, yup I am using a timing light, and I pull the little plug from the wire at the distributor while timing. As far as my plugs I went by the book and re-checked 5 times, I am using Ford racing wires that are also numbered. I checked vacume and for and possible plug wires crossed.
I'm having a hard time with this thing. |
| | | | RE: 88 Mustang timing -- Gerry Proctor, 04/29/2004
Well, you're not being very specific as to what the real problem is beyond "didn't like it" and that's not much to go on.
If this engine has a cam different from what the factory put in it, like a B303, it may use the 351 timing order.
Still sounds like a timing issue but it's hard to say with no specifics.
Could also be a vacuum leak. Who knows. |
| | | | | RE: 88 Mustang timing -- 67stang, 04/30/2004
all 5.0 mustangs after 1985 have the 351 firing order
pull spout connector, set timming to 15 degrees BTDC marks to right of zero. tighten distributor, plug sprout back in and run it.... |
| WTB 4 speed Toploader -- Lucas, 04/28/2004
I'm in the market for a wide ratio 4-speed
toploader, small ( 1-1/16")input shaft is okay.
Short tailshaft housing preferred w/ 28 spline output shaft. Would appreciate any leads in
this direction. Thanks! |
| | RE: WTB 4 speed Toploader -- Dano, 04/28/2004
I recently bought a Toploader from Mike Durhan Toploader transmissions out of Pensacola FL. I have been very happy with it. And Mike has been very helpful. Take a look at his website. |
| OT, Can anyone decode this 64 Fairlane info? -- blinker, 04/28/2004
Body 62B Color A Trim 25 Date 26L DSO 31 Axle 5 Trans 1
thanks |
| | | RE: I recomend here . . -- David, 05/01/2004
Check out the FCA (Fairlane Club of America)
web site. The best car club on the planet.
They cover '62 to '76 Fairlanes & Torinos.
I joined the club abt 5yrs ago and I have gotten lots of help & info that has helped with
the resteration of my '68 Torino. |
| 390 cam selection -- Jay, 04/27/2004
I know I posted this earlier but got no response. Anyone have a good recomendation for a very strong low end cam in a 5600 lb F250 4x4. 3.73 gears and 33" tires with a truck 4 speed. |
| | RE: 390 cam selection -- Lucas, 04/28/2004
Call Reed Cams in Stockbridge, GA.
(770) 474-6664
Their tech people are some of the best around.
They will discuss your application and custom grind you an FE cam. Excellent product and
solid advice! Prices are very competitive and
delivery usually about 1 week. |
| | | RE: 390 cam selection -- gene simmons, 04/29/2004
most likely you are going with a hydraulic cam, stick with something with a wide lc angle like around 112* or 114* / keep the gross valve lift under .500 and the duration at no more then 210* @ .050 . |
| | | | Thanks Gene and Lucas -- Jay, 04/29/2004
nm |
|
|
|
|