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.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19694&Reply=19694><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>Cyl Wall Thickness Test</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Tim  P., <i>01/08/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>Any One Have Viable Info On Some Drill Bit Test,  Thanks Tim. </blockquote> Cyl Wall Thickness Test -- Tim P., 01/08/2004
Any One Have Viable Info On Some Drill Bit Test, Thanks Tim.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19695&Reply=19694><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>Here ya go.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Dave Shoe, <i>01/08/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>For a complete drill bit test, you've got to pop all six core plugs out of the block and feeler gauge hihgand low into ALL core plug holes using the shank of a drill bit.  Since drill bit sets containing all 64th inch sizes are readily available and cheap, I use drill bit shanks to make the measurement instead of pin gauges.<br><br>Note that:<br><br>330/332/352/360/361Edsel/390/410 blocks frequently have 17/64" or 18/64" as the largest gap on the entire block.<br><br>361FT/391/406/428 blocks frequently have 13/64" or 14/64" as the largest gap on the entire block.<br><br>427 blocks frequently have maybe 8/64" as the largest gap, but I've never yet probed an entire 427 block, so that info is preliminary.<br><br>Actually, all the info is preliminary, but it seems to hold up fairly well.  Also, I only speak in 64ths, to let you know the resolution requirements.  If I stated 3/16" instead of 12/64", you'd have no idea whether my drill bit set only checked every 16th", or 32nd", or 64th".<br><br>Note that checking the gap sorta-kinda verifies which size of water jacket sand cores were stuffed into the mold, but does not verify core shift isn't a problem.  Once the drill bit "screening test" passes, the block needs to be sonic mapped to verify the core shift will permit boring without developing thin areas.<br><br>Reference these posts which popped up in a search of "drill bit test":<br><br><a href="http://jcoconsulting.com/forumfe/reply.aspx?ID=16629&Reply=16617">http://jcoconsulting.com/forumfe/reply.aspx?ID=16629&Reply=16617</a><br><br><a href="http://www.jcoconsulting.com/ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=17938&Reply=17933">http://www.jcoconsulting.com/ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=17938&Reply=17933</a><br><br>Shoe. </blockquote> Here ya go. -- Dave Shoe, 01/08/2004
For a complete drill bit test, you've got to pop all six core plugs out of the block and feeler gauge hihgand low into ALL core plug holes using the shank of a drill bit. Since drill bit sets containing all 64th inch sizes are readily available and cheap, I use drill bit shanks to make the measurement instead of pin gauges.

Note that:

330/332/352/360/361Edsel/390/410 blocks frequently have 17/64" or 18/64" as the largest gap on the entire block.

361FT/391/406/428 blocks frequently have 13/64" or 14/64" as the largest gap on the entire block.

427 blocks frequently have maybe 8/64" as the largest gap, but I've never yet probed an entire 427 block, so that info is preliminary.

Actually, all the info is preliminary, but it seems to hold up fairly well. Also, I only speak in 64ths, to let you know the resolution requirements. If I stated 3/16" instead of 12/64", you'd have no idea whether my drill bit set only checked every 16th", or 32nd", or 64th".

Note that checking the gap sorta-kinda verifies which size of water jacket sand cores were stuffed into the mold, but does not verify core shift isn't a problem. Once the drill bit "screening test" passes, the block needs to be sonic mapped to verify the core shift will permit boring without developing thin areas.

Reference these posts which popped up in a search of "drill bit test":

http://jcoconsulting.com/forumfe/reply.aspx?ID=16629&Reply=16617

http://www.jcoconsulting.com/ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=17938&Reply=17933

Shoe.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19696&Reply=19694><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Here ya go.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>BarryMcLarty, <i>01/08/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>I have heard of using allen wrenchs as a tool to determine cylinder thickness.i.e.9/32 is good for 4.080max,7/32 is equal to 4.160 max.Have you ever tried using allen wrenchs Dave? </blockquote> RE: Here ya go. -- BarryMcLarty, 01/08/2004
I have heard of using allen wrenchs as a tool to determine cylinder thickness.i.e.9/32 is good for 4.080max,7/32 is equal to 4.160 max.Have you ever tried using allen wrenchs Dave?
 It'd work, but I prefer drill bits. -- Dave Shoe, 01/08/2004
It's not possible to find a 17/64" allen wrench at your local hardware store. Only drill bits offer the needed resolution for a cheap price.

A 1/4" allen wrench would work well as a rough approximation when scouring a salvageyard, but I wouldn't go measuring an entire block and quoting that all gaps turned out to be 16/64" exactly, since you had no way to measure 15/64" or 17/64" using an allen wrench.

You've got to assume that allen wrenches have a step size of 1/32" at best, and even then you'll have no idea if the person even had a set with anything better than 1/16" increments.

I would discount any "drill bit test" with results not printed in 1/64" increments as being inaccurate and clueless, as it suggests the person doing the test was not aware of the resolution requirements of the test, and may have even only tested one cylinder and/or only probed one position in each cylinder. Those that post only in 64th increments would have a fuller understanding of the basic need for resolution communication, and would more likely have performed the test properly.

Not that it really matters. The drill bit test is mainly a crude salvageyard screening test used to determine whether a block sitting out in a junkyard is worthy of being purchased for the possible purpose of being overbored. It's not a decisive test like a sonic mapping is, and the numbers are approximate.

Shoe.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19700&Reply=19694><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Here ya go.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Tim P., <i>01/08/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>Thank's Dave. </blockquote> RE: Here ya go. -- Tim P., 01/08/2004
Thank's Dave.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19703&Reply=19694><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Here ya go.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>BarryMcLarty, <i>01/08/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>Thanks,was looking for a second opinion on the allen keys.Found them a bit inconvenient,but figured it was just me. </blockquote> RE: Here ya go. -- BarryMcLarty, 01/08/2004
Thanks,was looking for a second opinion on the allen keys.Found them a bit inconvenient,but figured it was just me.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19705&Reply=19694><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>Actually, my purpose is a bit different than some.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Dave Shoe, <i>01/08/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>THe main reason I seek drill bit measurements from others is to collect a database of info from many sources that is comparable.  For this drill bits in 64th increments is necessary.<br><br>For the average yokel in the salvageyard, using an allen wrench would not be all that bad for finding a good block candidate to purchase for 428 overbore.  They just can't use the resulting info to communicate their "drill bit numbers" to a community chart.<br><br>I think some may want to define a "hex-wrench test" as being a crude version of a crude test.  At least you can carry an allen wrench in your pocket.  A drill bit needs to be wrapped to prevent slicing the pocket open.<br><br>Shoe. </blockquote> Actually, my purpose is a bit different than some. -- Dave Shoe, 01/08/2004
THe main reason I seek drill bit measurements from others is to collect a database of info from many sources that is comparable. For this drill bits in 64th increments is necessary.

For the average yokel in the salvageyard, using an allen wrench would not be all that bad for finding a good block candidate to purchase for 428 overbore. They just can't use the resulting info to communicate their "drill bit numbers" to a community chart.

I think some may want to define a "hex-wrench test" as being a crude version of a crude test. At least you can carry an allen wrench in your pocket. A drill bit needs to be wrapped to prevent slicing the pocket open.

Shoe.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19709&Reply=19694><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Actually, my purpose is a bit different than some.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Paul Garvin, <i>01/09/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>Dave,<br>Info for your database. My block is a D4TE with MCC casting marks. It would not take a 16/64th bit anywhere except one spot between cylinders three and four (I think). It would take a 15/64th bit everywhere except the bore spacing on the other side of the one where the 16/64th would fit. Iyt only fit 14/64th in between those bores. It sonic out very well with the smallest side being .110 after a .030 overbore, but one cylinder had to be sleeved because of of pourosity problems.<br>Paul Garvin </blockquote> RE: Actually, my purpose is a bit different than some. -- Paul Garvin, 01/09/2004
Dave,
Info for your database. My block is a D4TE with MCC casting marks. It would not take a 16/64th bit anywhere except one spot between cylinders three and four (I think). It would take a 15/64th bit everywhere except the bore spacing on the other side of the one where the 16/64th would fit. Iyt only fit 14/64th in between those bores. It sonic out very well with the smallest side being .110 after a .030 overbore, but one cylinder had to be sleeved because of of pourosity problems.
Paul Garvin
 Wall thickness -- Steve M, 01/12/2004
What is the min acceptable wall thickness for a 427 overbore?

thx, Steve

Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19782&Reply=19694><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Actually, my purpose is a bit different than some.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>bear, <i>01/17/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>what about a D4TE  block with mirror image 105 cast on i am building a .060 390.  it has the crank webs but i thought it should have the bigger distributor hole if it was an FT.  The block was given to me minus crank and rods. i don't know what it came out of.   however it did come with a 4x4 rear sump pan and pick-up.  I was thinking it came from a 3/4 ton truck any in put?   </blockquote> RE: Actually, my purpose is a bit different than some. -- bear, 01/17/2004
what about a D4TE block with mirror image 105 cast on i am building a .060 390. it has the crank webs but i thought it should have the bigger distributor hole if it was an FT. The block was given to me minus crank and rods. i don't know what it came out of. however it did come with a 4x4 rear sump pan and pick-up. I was thinking it came from a 3/4 ton truck any in put?
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19889&Reply=19694><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Here ya go.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Tim P., <i>01/26/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>Dave I Measured The Block Cyl. Thickness They All Came Out At 13/64ths  Except On The To Center Cyl. on both sides they were 14/64ths near the tops only this is a casting # C7ME-A 4.05 orginal bore how far can this be bored roughly guessing and who does sonic mapping any input appreciated, Thanks Tim. </blockquote> RE: Here ya go. -- Tim P., 01/26/2004
Dave I Measured The Block Cyl. Thickness They All Came Out At 13/64ths Except On The To Center Cyl. on both sides they were 14/64ths near the tops only this is a casting # C7ME-A 4.05 orginal bore how far can this be bored roughly guessing and who does sonic mapping any input appreciated, Thanks Tim.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19930&Reply=19694><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Here ya go.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Tim P., <i>01/29/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>Still looking for more input guys on last post, humor me. </blockquote> RE: Here ya go. -- Tim P., 01/29/2004
Still looking for more input guys on last post, humor me.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19934&Reply=19694><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>Sounds like a nice block.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Dave Shoe, <i>01/29/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>If core shift is minimal, you should be able to take it out to 428 overbore numbers without issue.<br><br>You'll first need to do a sonic mapping to be sure there are no thin areas.  Since sonic mappings can be inaccurate if done by someone who doesn't understand the science, you'll want to verify the numbers by combining neighboring wall sonic numbers and the water gap width, just to be sure the numbers are not unreasonable.  Since you know there is 4.630 - 4.050 = 0.580" between cylinder walls when the cylinders are new and unworn, the math is pretty easy.<br><br>To be sure, only a minority of blocks with the C6ME or C7ME prefizes have the heavier walls.  Most got the standard 360/390/410 cylinder jackets.<br><br>JMO,<br>Shoe. </blockquote> Sounds like a nice block. -- Dave Shoe, 01/29/2004
If core shift is minimal, you should be able to take it out to 428 overbore numbers without issue.

You'll first need to do a sonic mapping to be sure there are no thin areas. Since sonic mappings can be inaccurate if done by someone who doesn't understand the science, you'll want to verify the numbers by combining neighboring wall sonic numbers and the water gap width, just to be sure the numbers are not unreasonable. Since you know there is 4.630 - 4.050 = 0.580" between cylinder walls when the cylinders are new and unworn, the math is pretty easy.

To be sure, only a minority of blocks with the C6ME or C7ME prefizes have the heavier walls. Most got the standard 360/390/410 cylinder jackets.

JMO,
Shoe.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19935&Reply=19694><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Sounds like a nice block.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Tim P., <i>01/29/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>Ok Dave so does the (X) in valley carry any weight as to the probably of a heavy casting cyl walls?  Tim P. </blockquote> RE: Sounds like a nice block. -- Tim P., 01/29/2004
Ok Dave so does the (X) in valley carry any weight as to the probably of a heavy casting cyl walls? Tim P.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19941&Reply=19694><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>The "X" remains a mystery.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Dave Shoe, <i>01/30/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>One rumor has an "X" in the valley indicating a 2% nickel addition, but that's not yet been verified.  Maybe later this year we'll have info.<br><br>For now, I've only found documentation showing Ford used extra chromium to gain tensile strength in the FE.  Alternately, one project used phos and chrome. <br><br>Shoe. </blockquote> The "X" remains a mystery. -- Dave Shoe, 01/30/2004
One rumor has an "X" in the valley indicating a 2% nickel addition, but that's not yet been verified. Maybe later this year we'll have info.

For now, I've only found documentation showing Ford used extra chromium to gain tensile strength in the FE. Alternately, one project used phos and chrome.

Shoe.
 RE: The "X" remains a mystery. -- Tim P., 01/30/2004
Maybe thats where they mention the (X) refers to the extinct muscle car program perhaps, at lease thats what the book i have states for what it's worth and from what i"ve come to understand is a crap shoot in reference to FE's anyhow?? Tim P.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19690&Reply=19690><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>390</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Phil, <i>01/08/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>I plan on installing a 427 crank with Lemans rods in a 390 block. Do the cylinders need to be notched to clear the rod bolts? </blockquote> 390 -- Phil, 01/08/2004
I plan on installing a 427 crank with Lemans rods in a 390 block. Do the cylinders need to be notched to clear the rod bolts?
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19697&Reply=19690><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>No problem.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Dave Shoe, <i>01/08/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>The LeMans rod was developed in 1962 for the 8-liter FE racing engine (the Starlifter engine) to offer extra cam lobe and cylinder clearance over the nut-and-bolt rod.<br><br>That engine had a 4.3" stroke, and I'm sure it needed get some cylinder base notching.<br><br>With a 3.784" stroke 390/406/427 crank (all FE cast cranks are made of the same pearlitic nodular iron), clearance will be plentiful.  Similarly, a 391 forged steel crank with 3.786" stroke clears fine.  With a 3.984" stroke 410/428 crank clearance in a 390 would be plentiful, too, since the LeMans rod offers more clearance than a stock rod.<br><br>Shoe. </blockquote> No problem. -- Dave Shoe, 01/08/2004
The LeMans rod was developed in 1962 for the 8-liter FE racing engine (the Starlifter engine) to offer extra cam lobe and cylinder clearance over the nut-and-bolt rod.

That engine had a 4.3" stroke, and I'm sure it needed get some cylinder base notching.

With a 3.784" stroke 390/406/427 crank (all FE cast cranks are made of the same pearlitic nodular iron), clearance will be plentiful. Similarly, a 391 forged steel crank with 3.786" stroke clears fine. With a 3.984" stroke 410/428 crank clearance in a 390 would be plentiful, too, since the LeMans rod offers more clearance than a stock rod.

Shoe.
 RE: No problem. -- Phil Lemoine, 01/08/2004
Thanks for the info Shoe
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19676&Reply=19676><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>1965 galaxie body to frame pads</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>galaxiefreak64, <i>01/06/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>Where can I find body to frame pads for a 1965 galaxie?  If nothing else, will pads that fit a 1964 galaxie fit?  HELP! </blockquote> 1965 galaxie body to frame pads -- galaxiefreak64, 01/06/2004
Where can I find body to frame pads for a 1965 galaxie? If nothing else, will pads that fit a 1964 galaxie fit? HELP!
 Not sure if they're available, but I suggest trying... -- Mr F, 01/07/2004
http://www.autokrafters.com
http://www.dearbornclassics.com
 RE: 1965 galaxie body to frame pads -- galaxiefreak64, 01/07/2004
Thanks alot...I checked Dearborn and they have them. I am helping my mom do a ground up on a 65 galaxie with a 427 and she was about ready to give up and try parts for a '64. Man, I am learning that I need alot of patience when it comes to working with both my mother and '65 galaxies....again...Thanks.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19673&Reply=19673><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>428 Mechanical cam</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>CHAD, <i>01/06/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>I am considering using a mechanical cam when I build my 428CJ. My dad ran this setup in a 1966 LTD state patrol car and it was a terror.Cam was out of a 406.Looking for some opinions. </blockquote> 428 Mechanical cam -- CHAD, 01/06/2004
I am considering using a mechanical cam when I build my 428CJ. My dad ran this setup in a 1966 LTD state patrol car and it was a terror.Cam was out of a 406.Looking for some opinions.
 RE: 428 Mechanical cam -- galaxiefreak64, 01/06/2004
well first ask your dad and try to get all tghe info you can (if he passed away i fell for you and your family) but from my understanding with 427, you first have to block off the oil passage to the valves. (look at some 427 oil diagrams and 428 didagrams to compaire the valve galleries) and sience the 428, 427,and 406 are in the fe family the cam would work. i have seen it done, but never tried it my self. the best thing to do is ask a GOOD machinest about there openions. but ask more than 1. i would do i if your dad did it just make sure thats what you are always going to run in that block becuse its hard to unplug the oil galleries. i think it would be cool and would be different.
i hope that answered your questions.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19684&Reply=19673><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: 428 Mechanical cam</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Tim  P., <i>01/07/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>Chad you can plug the galleys have machinist thread the feeds to the lifter galleys for allen type plugs put one below main leave space and put one above galley use sealer. if you have fax machine i can send printed info with pictures on how you do it, this can be undone in the future if you change cam design,s Thanx  Tim. </blockquote> RE: 428 Mechanical cam -- Tim P., 01/07/2004
Chad you can plug the galleys have machinist thread the feeds to the lifter galleys for allen type plugs put one below main leave space and put one above galley use sealer. if you have fax machine i can send printed info with pictures on how you do it, this can be undone in the future if you change cam design,s Thanx Tim.
 RE: 428 Mechanical cam -- CHAD, 01/07/2004
I emailed it to you. Thanks.
 RE: 428 Mechanical cam -- CHAD, 01/28/2004
I guess it was good luck, when I received my block last week the block had already been set up for a mechanical cam. It was exactly like Tim P described.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19908&Reply=19673><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: 428 Mechanical cam</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Tim P., <i>01/28/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>Well chad your on your way if needing any extra parts get in touch with me, Thanks Tim P. </blockquote> RE: 428 Mechanical cam -- Tim P., 01/28/2004
Well chad your on your way if needing any extra parts get in touch with me, Thanks Tim P.
 RE: 428 Mechanical cam -- CHAD, 01/31/2004
Hey Tim this is my first FE project. What is the safest way to mount the block to the engine stand?
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19975&Reply=19673><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: 406 cam?</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>McQ, <i>01/31/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>If it was a 406 it was the same grind as used on 352-390HP.  This is an excellent all around solid lifter cam that offers a very decent idle with strong perfomance to 6,000.  If it was a 406 cam it would have to have been from an early '63 which ran the cam thrust plate retention system.  <br><br>Another cam that works very well in the 428 is the factory equipped 427 cam, 306d/500L.  This is the grind that FoMoCo ran in the '66 428 PI.  The only factory solid liftered 428 was this engine.  It idled well enough that most State Patrol/Police cars were equipped with C-6s.  <br><br>And mounting your 428 to an engine stand...just make sure to use a plate that utilizes all the bell housing bolt holes.  It also is important to have a high quality stand that will take the weight.  Don't attempt to use the small ones offered at chain auto parts stores.  Shop around for a stout one.  Or have one made. </blockquote> RE: 406 cam? -- McQ, 01/31/2004
If it was a 406 it was the same grind as used on 352-390HP. This is an excellent all around solid lifter cam that offers a very decent idle with strong perfomance to 6,000. If it was a 406 cam it would have to have been from an early '63 which ran the cam thrust plate retention system.

Another cam that works very well in the 428 is the factory equipped 427 cam, 306d/500L. This is the grind that FoMoCo ran in the '66 428 PI. The only factory solid liftered 428 was this engine. It idled well enough that most State Patrol/Police cars were equipped with C-6s.

And mounting your 428 to an engine stand...just make sure to use a plate that utilizes all the bell housing bolt holes. It also is important to have a high quality stand that will take the weight. Don't attempt to use the small ones offered at chain auto parts stores. Shop around for a stout one. Or have one made.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19980&Reply=19673><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: 406 cam?</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>CHAD, <i>01/31/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>What would you recommend the weight limit be for the stand? </blockquote> RE: 406 cam? -- CHAD, 01/31/2004
What would you recommend the weight limit be for the stand?
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19981&Reply=19673><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: 406 cam?</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Tim P., <i>01/31/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>Chad Get The 1250lbs one with a (H) pattern on the base and buy the grade 8 bolts that will handle any heavy block </blockquote> RE: 406 cam? -- Tim P., 01/31/2004
Chad Get The 1250lbs one with a (H) pattern on the base and buy the grade 8 bolts that will handle any heavy block
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19990&Reply=19673><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: 406 cam?</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>CHAD, <i>01/31/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>Where can I find the plate? </blockquote> RE: 406 cam? -- CHAD, 01/31/2004
Where can I find the plate?
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19991&Reply=19673><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: 406 cam?</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Tim P., <i>01/31/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>Chad The Engine Has 4Arms that protude from the stand that the bolts go through and into the block you adjustit to line up with the holes that the tranny bolts would normally go into from the bellhousing the engine stands come with this fitting except the bolts you will have to buy thoes as there are many different bolt sizes. </blockquote> RE: 406 cam? -- Tim P., 01/31/2004
Chad The Engine Has 4Arms that protude from the stand that the bolts go through and into the block you adjustit to line up with the holes that the tranny bolts would normally go into from the bellhousing the engine stands come with this fitting except the bolts you will have to buy thoes as there are many different bolt sizes.
 RE: 406 cam? -- CHAD, 02/02/2004
Thanks. McQ had mentioned a plate that would utilize all of the bell housing bolt holes.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19670&Reply=19670><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>Edelbrock Parts and Info Needed</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Ian Dobson, <i>01/06/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>So I just received all my performer RPM stuff for my 428, cam, heads and intake.  Now I have more questions than answers after reading through this forum :) the main use is to replace my 390 4speed in a 69 mustang for mainly street/strip use. car runs 13.2 now at 102 but I'd like it a little quicker if you know what I mean.<br><br>1. the RPM cam is .572 lift, I bought adjustable rocker arms, but do I order stock length pushrods? <br><br>2. I read a few places that I need rocker shaft end stands, where can I get them?<br><br>3. running the numbers through dyno2000 I get more HP and torque if I degree the cam <br>-4 degrees, but edelbrock recomends  installing at 0, anyone have any feedback on this?<br><br>4. who sells windage trays for RE engines, I can't find them anywhere.<br><br>5. timing chains, who makes a good one, I'd like one that I can't hear over the engine noise :)<br><br>and the last question Compression!  how much is too much for the street, I don't mind having to buy 94 octane gas all the time, and when I get that figured out who makes pistons for it,  All I can find is speed pro 10.5/1s  and thats with a 68cc head I think.<br><br>Sorry to be so long winded, but I'm an FE idiot :)<br> </blockquote> Edelbrock Parts and Info Needed -- Ian Dobson, 01/06/2004
So I just received all my performer RPM stuff for my 428, cam, heads and intake. Now I have more questions than answers after reading through this forum :) the main use is to replace my 390 4speed in a 69 mustang for mainly street/strip use. car runs 13.2 now at 102 but I'd like it a little quicker if you know what I mean.

1. the RPM cam is .572 lift, I bought adjustable rocker arms, but do I order stock length pushrods?

2. I read a few places that I need rocker shaft end stands, where can I get them?

3. running the numbers through dyno2000 I get more HP and torque if I degree the cam
-4 degrees, but edelbrock recomends installing at 0, anyone have any feedback on this?

4. who sells windage trays for RE engines, I can't find them anywhere.

5. timing chains, who makes a good one, I'd like one that I can't hear over the engine noise :)

and the last question Compression! how much is too much for the street, I don't mind having to buy 94 octane gas all the time, and when I get that figured out who makes pistons for it, All I can find is speed pro 10.5/1s and thats with a 68cc head I think.

Sorry to be so long winded, but I'm an FE idiot :)
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19672&Reply=19670><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>That is not a very good street cam.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Royce Peterson, <i>01/06/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>1. It has lobe seperation angle of 108 degrees which means very low vacuum. Get an adjustable pushrod, measure it after you find the ideal length. Stock length will probably be OK.<br><br>2. DSC Motorsports or Precision Oil Pump Inc.<br><br>3. Don't use that cam. Get something with ayt least 110 degree lobe centers.<br><br>4. Your Ford dealer in his FRPP catalog. About $20<br><br>5. Edelbrock sells an excellent timing chain set made by Cloyes. </blockquote> That is not a very good street cam. -- Royce Peterson, 01/06/2004
1. It has lobe seperation angle of 108 degrees which means very low vacuum. Get an adjustable pushrod, measure it after you find the ideal length. Stock length will probably be OK.

2. DSC Motorsports or Precision Oil Pump Inc.

3. Don't use that cam. Get something with ayt least 110 degree lobe centers.

4. Your Ford dealer in his FRPP catalog. About $20

5. Edelbrock sells an excellent timing chain set made by Cloyes.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19674&Reply=19670><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: That is not a very good street cam.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Ian Dobson, <i>01/06/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>thanks for the info..<br><br>I don't have power brakes, does that matter?<br> </blockquote> RE: That is not a very good street cam. -- Ian Dobson, 01/06/2004
thanks for the info..

I don't have power brakes, does that matter?
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19675&Reply=19670><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>That helps.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Royce Peterson, <i>01/06/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>Still you will like a cam with more torque over a broader range compared to a peaky one like the RPM. <br><br>Not having power brakes would make it drivable with either a stick or a 3000 RPM converter (don't remember if you said what kind of tranny).<br><br>Royce  </blockquote> That helps. -- Royce Peterson, 01/06/2004
Still you will like a cam with more torque over a broader range compared to a peaky one like the RPM.

Not having power brakes would make it drivable with either a stick or a 3000 RPM converter (don't remember if you said what kind of tranny).

Royce
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19679&Reply=19670><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: That helps.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Ian Dobson, <i>01/06/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>Its a 4 speed toploader.<br><br>the cam thats in it now is a Sig Erson Hi-flo II<br>it's 20 years old or so and it's a 390 engine, it has 555 or 551 lift and 300 ish duration, not sure on the other specs.  I like the way it drives with that cam in it, any idea if it is comparable or not?<br><br> </blockquote> RE: That helps. -- Ian Dobson, 01/06/2004
Its a 4 speed toploader.

the cam thats in it now is a Sig Erson Hi-flo II
it's 20 years old or so and it's a 390 engine, it has 555 or 551 lift and 300 ish duration, not sure on the other specs. I like the way it drives with that cam in it, any idea if it is comparable or not?

Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19680&Reply=19670><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>Without seeing a cam card it's hard to say</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Royce, <i>01/06/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>Sig Erson's old cams were often given big advertised durations but had very low duration at .050". If you like the old cam why not keep using it?<br><br>The Performer RPM FE has been a disappointing cam for everyone I have ever talked to who tried it. It is doesn't have enough duration to be a good race cam. It has too tight a lobe center displacement to be a street cam. Just an unfortunate combination. It has a really wild idle sound but is no more powerful than cams with "frisky" sounding idle.<br><br>Here's another recent discussion on the same cam:<br><a href="http://www.network54.com/Hide/Forum/message?forumid=74182&messageid=1073350258">http://www.network54.com/Hide/Forum/message?forumid=74182&messageid=1073350258</a> </blockquote> Without seeing a cam card it's hard to say -- Royce, 01/06/2004
Sig Erson's old cams were often given big advertised durations but had very low duration at .050". If you like the old cam why not keep using it?

The Performer RPM FE has been a disappointing cam for everyone I have ever talked to who tried it. It is doesn't have enough duration to be a good race cam. It has too tight a lobe center displacement to be a street cam. Just an unfortunate combination. It has a really wild idle sound but is no more powerful than cams with "frisky" sounding idle.

Here's another recent discussion on the same cam:
http://www.network54.com/Hide/Forum/message?forumid=74182&messageid=1073350258
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19681&Reply=19670><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Without seeing a cam card it's hard to say</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Ian Dobson, <i>01/07/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>Ahh cos its 20 years old and I'm sure its probably worn down a bit..<br><br>Ok, you have convinced me to return my Cam and Lifters.<br><br>Should I be looking at a dual pattern cam like the DE275H?  or something more like the 280H or 292H <br>what in your opinion based on what I have would probably make it faster in the 1/4 and still keep it drivable on the street, and idle below 1000rpm ?<br><br>I'm not going to hold you to anything, I just want an opinion.<br>its going to have FPA headers on it. Its got hooker super comps on it now with speedbumped bottom tubes :(<br> </blockquote> RE: Without seeing a cam card it's hard to say -- Ian Dobson, 01/07/2004
Ahh cos its 20 years old and I'm sure its probably worn down a bit..

Ok, you have convinced me to return my Cam and Lifters.

Should I be looking at a dual pattern cam like the DE275H? or something more like the 280H or 292H
what in your opinion based on what I have would probably make it faster in the 1/4 and still keep it drivable on the street, and idle below 1000rpm ?

I'm not going to hold you to anything, I just want an opinion.
its going to have FPA headers on it. Its got hooker super comps on it now with speedbumped bottom tubes :(
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19683&Reply=19670><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>My experience</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Royce Peterson, <i>01/07/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>...has been with the 280H and 282S, both are great for what you are doing. I have driven in friends cars who have the 275DEH and it has a very smooth idle with a broad power band. <br><br>I would like to see someone do some rear wheel dyno numbers on that one, I bet the 280H beats it in the mid range but the 275DEH might be even with the 282S on top.<br><br>Any of those cams are good choices. If you are going to make an error do it on the conservative side, too radical of a cam is rotten.<br><br>Royce </blockquote> My experience -- Royce Peterson, 01/07/2004
...has been with the 280H and 282S, both are great for what you are doing. I have driven in friends cars who have the 275DEH and it has a very smooth idle with a broad power band.

I would like to see someone do some rear wheel dyno numbers on that one, I bet the 280H beats it in the mid range but the 275DEH might be even with the 282S on top.

Any of those cams are good choices. If you are going to make an error do it on the conservative side, too radical of a cam is rotten.

Royce
 RE: My experience -- Geoff McNew, 01/08/2004
I have a '69 Mach 1 with 428, a toploader and 3.91 gears. When I rebuilt it, I went up on duration from the Cower 286H that was in it, but was wary to keep the lope separation wide as Royce suggested, and not go to radical. I'm now running a Crane split duration 296H2, which gives 234/238 deg @ .050" and .554"/.563" lift with 112 lobe separation, and degreed it straight up. It's right at the limit for power brakes - my vacuum dropped from 13.5" to 10", but they still work, as does the tilt wheel. It's a great street/strip cam with a stick, idles @ 900, good low to mid range and it screams from 3,500 passed 5,800, but I think it might give someone with an automatic or highway gears some trouble.

I'm using Comp Cams best dual roller timing set and it degreed up first time. The Crower set I took out was 6 degrees retarded, and no the chain was not stretched - it was frigging off that much! So, absolutely degree wheel it, move the sprocket if you have to, take your time to get it bang on...then recheck it yet again just to be sure.

Mustangs Unlimited has trays, but be careful that with the added pan depth with double gaskets that the crossmember doesn't start rubbing the pan...there's only a pubic hair's clearance to start with.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19652&Reply=19652><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>Cast Iron Headers.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Tim  P., <i>01/04/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>Casting #s  C5AE 9430 H & 9431 G  What Appl. Did They Come On .  Thank You.  Tim.  </blockquote> Cast Iron Headers. -- Tim P., 01/04/2004
Casting #s C5AE 9430 H & 9431 G What Appl. Did They Come On . Thank You. Tim.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19656&Reply=19652><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>I will guess...</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Dave Shoe, <i>01/04/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>I believe it was only factory original on the 1965 427 Galaxie.<br><br>I don't have time to dig through my records right now, but if those are the long tube headers, they're for the 1965-later Galaxie applications.<br><br>Long tube fitments are different between the 1961-64 frame and the 1965-70 frames, so different long tube header versions were cast.  I believe some slight frame changes may have happened in the late 1960s, so 1968-later Galaxies might possibly have a component that interferes, maybe not.<br><br>The long tube header was dropped in 1966 in favor of the smaller and cheaper 1966 Fairlane 427 "fan" manifold design.  When the fan manifold became available for the 427 Fairlane, 427 Galaxies inherited it, but the long-tube was still available over-the-counter.<br><br>I wish I had quicker access to my exhaust info, but this preliminary guesswork might help a bit.<br><br>Shoe.<br><br> </blockquote> I will guess... -- Dave Shoe, 01/04/2004
I believe it was only factory original on the 1965 427 Galaxie.

I don't have time to dig through my records right now, but if those are the long tube headers, they're for the 1965-later Galaxie applications.

Long tube fitments are different between the 1961-64 frame and the 1965-70 frames, so different long tube header versions were cast. I believe some slight frame changes may have happened in the late 1960s, so 1968-later Galaxies might possibly have a component that interferes, maybe not.

The long tube header was dropped in 1966 in favor of the smaller and cheaper 1966 Fairlane 427 "fan" manifold design. When the fan manifold became available for the 427 Fairlane, 427 Galaxies inherited it, but the long-tube was still available over-the-counter.

I wish I had quicker access to my exhaust info, but this preliminary guesswork might help a bit.

Shoe.

Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19658&Reply=19652><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: I will guess...</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Tim  P., <i>01/04/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>Thanks Agine,  They Are Long Tube, And In A-1 condt.  Where can I find The 2 Bolt exhaust flange to bolt the pipes to the header?  Tim. </blockquote> RE: I will guess... -- Tim P., 01/04/2004
Thanks Agine, They Are Long Tube, And In A-1 condt. Where can I find The 2 Bolt exhaust flange to bolt the pipes to the header? Tim.
 muffler shop might have some -- galaxiefreak64, 01/07/2004
muffler shop might have some flanges
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19648&Reply=19648><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>FE,  Intake</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Tim  P., <i>01/03/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>Have A Factory Intake  #C6AE-9425 E  Also Has A  big  {S} Next To It Anyone Know What This WAS BOLTED TO  { WHAT MOTOR ETC&gt;}  THANK YOU  TIM&gt; </blockquote> FE, Intake -- Tim P., 01/03/2004
Have A Factory Intake #C6AE-9425 E Also Has A big {S} Next To It Anyone Know What This WAS BOLTED TO { WHAT MOTOR ETC>} THANK YOU TIM>
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19650&Reply=19648><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: FE,  Intake</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Robert, <i>01/04/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>It is my understanding that that is the "GT" intake. Would have come on a 390 GT engine. </blockquote> RE: FE, Intake -- Robert, 01/04/2004
It is my understanding that that is the "GT" intake. Would have come on a 390 GT engine.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19651&Reply=19648><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: FE,  Intake</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Tim  P., <i>01/04/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>What Does The ( S ) Mean And Any Other Info On Its Perf. It Is Taller Than A Reg  4BBL Intake .  Tim. </blockquote> RE: FE, Intake -- Tim P., 01/04/2004
What Does The ( S ) Mean And Any Other Info On Its Perf. It Is Taller Than A Reg 4BBL Intake . Tim.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19653&Reply=19648><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>"S" stands for Thunderbird, "T" for truck.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Dave Shoe, <i>01/04/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>There was no "S" or "T" marking on the #1 runner in 1958-65, but in 1966 Ford developed two emissions control versions of the intake.<br><br>The "T" intake was based on the 1958-65 design, but the runners necked down at the head to match with the smaller "velocity" runners in the head which first appeared in 1966.  This intake was most often found on pickup trucks.<br><br>The "S" intake was an all new design.  It stands about 3/4" taller at the carb flange than the "T", but the runners are thinner than the "T" runners, so I've found no indication it breathes any better than the "T".  This intake was found on most every FE car from 1966-1970, and I don't think it was available after 1970.  I believe the 1971 390 car engine was a pickup truck 390, so it may have been a "T" intake.<br><br>Both the "S" version and the "T" version are available with either a 2V or a 4V carb flange cast in.  In 1973, EGR was added, so you'll find the "T" intake with EGR in both 2V and 4V form, too.  Also, some cars will have the carb flange tilted slightly different (TBird) to match the air cleaner tilt with the hood slope.<br><br>In the mid 1960s, the era when some cars still got expansion tanks (TBird), you'll find some "S" (and maybe "T" intakes) cast for a large hole thermostat, others for a small hole thermostat.  Later years standardized on the small hole TStat.  Both TStat and TStat housings remain available, so you can convert back and forth, but it's a hassle to dig up the other housing and TStat if you weren't expecting to need to.<br><br>Neither "S" or "T" intake is a performance intake.  If you want performance cast iron, the 428CJ intake (cast C8OE) is a GREAT cheap intake, though the price has gradually crept up through the decades to $125.00 plus expensive (heavy) shipping.<br><br>If you seek a basic performance intake that works well from 300 engine dyno horsepower to beyond 700 naturally aspirated HP, the Edelbrock "Performer RPM" is new, cheap, and quality cast.  I don't recommend the lower-cost "Performer" for any application outside of a stock build.  Many great aluminum intakes are available for the FE, but they are likely used, so the purchase can get complicated.<br><br>JMO,<br>Shoe. </blockquote> "S" stands for Thunderbird, "T" for truck. -- Dave Shoe, 01/04/2004
There was no "S" or "T" marking on the #1 runner in 1958-65, but in 1966 Ford developed two emissions control versions of the intake.

The "T" intake was based on the 1958-65 design, but the runners necked down at the head to match with the smaller "velocity" runners in the head which first appeared in 1966. This intake was most often found on pickup trucks.

The "S" intake was an all new design. It stands about 3/4" taller at the carb flange than the "T", but the runners are thinner than the "T" runners, so I've found no indication it breathes any better than the "T". This intake was found on most every FE car from 1966-1970, and I don't think it was available after 1970. I believe the 1971 390 car engine was a pickup truck 390, so it may have been a "T" intake.

Both the "S" version and the "T" version are available with either a 2V or a 4V carb flange cast in. In 1973, EGR was added, so you'll find the "T" intake with EGR in both 2V and 4V form, too. Also, some cars will have the carb flange tilted slightly different (TBird) to match the air cleaner tilt with the hood slope.

In the mid 1960s, the era when some cars still got expansion tanks (TBird), you'll find some "S" (and maybe "T" intakes) cast for a large hole thermostat, others for a small hole thermostat. Later years standardized on the small hole TStat. Both TStat and TStat housings remain available, so you can convert back and forth, but it's a hassle to dig up the other housing and TStat if you weren't expecting to need to.

Neither "S" or "T" intake is a performance intake. If you want performance cast iron, the 428CJ intake (cast C8OE) is a GREAT cheap intake, though the price has gradually crept up through the decades to $125.00 plus expensive (heavy) shipping.

If you seek a basic performance intake that works well from 300 engine dyno horsepower to beyond 700 naturally aspirated HP, the Edelbrock "Performer RPM" is new, cheap, and quality cast. I don't recommend the lower-cost "Performer" for any application outside of a stock build. Many great aluminum intakes are available for the FE, but they are likely used, so the purchase can get complicated.

JMO,
Shoe.
 I almost forgot... -- Dave Shoe, 01/04/2004
...the 4V "T" intake was found on at least some 1969 390 engined Mustangs and was cast C9ZE (if I recall), but I suspect it may have been for clearance issues.

The CJ iron intake is about 1/2" taller than the "S" intake (if I recall), but height seems to offer little benefit in the "S" intake, other than maybe helping with sustaining atomization and therefore reducing emissions.

JMO,
Shoe.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19657&Reply=19648><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: "S" stands for Thunderbird, "T" for truck.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Tim  P., <i>01/04/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>Thanks For info  Someone said it was for 390 GT.  Is that also true?  Tim. </blockquote> RE: "S" stands for Thunderbird, "T" for truck. -- Tim P., 01/04/2004
Thanks For info Someone said it was for 390 GT. Is that also true? Tim.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19663&Reply=19648><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>Yup.  the 390GT got the same intake as any FE.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Dave Shoe, <i>01/04/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>The 390GT got a neat carb , a neat air cleaner, a neat cam, and neat valve springs, but was otherwise about the same any non-performance FE, which is pretty damned good.<br><br>Add some headers (make sure they port match the head type, as this is an improperly documented issue which has only been properly described in FE forums) and an intake (CJ, PI, Sidewinder, RPM, F427, etc), and the 390GT will outperform a stock 428CJ.<br><br>Do a forum search for "port mismatch" or "weld bead" to find info on header mismatch issues wit hthe FE.  C6AE-J, C6AE-L, C6AE-U, C6AE-Y, C7AE-A, C8AE-H (also C8AE), and D2TE-AA head castings have one type of exhaust port, whereas C6AE-R (randomly found on 1/3 of 1966-67 FEs only), CJ, 427, and 1958-65 heads have another type.<br><br>Shoe. </blockquote> Yup. the 390GT got the same intake as any FE. -- Dave Shoe, 01/04/2004
The 390GT got a neat carb , a neat air cleaner, a neat cam, and neat valve springs, but was otherwise about the same any non-performance FE, which is pretty damned good.

Add some headers (make sure they port match the head type, as this is an improperly documented issue which has only been properly described in FE forums) and an intake (CJ, PI, Sidewinder, RPM, F427, etc), and the 390GT will outperform a stock 428CJ.

Do a forum search for "port mismatch" or "weld bead" to find info on header mismatch issues wit hthe FE. C6AE-J, C6AE-L, C6AE-U, C6AE-Y, C7AE-A, C8AE-H (also C8AE), and D2TE-AA head castings have one type of exhaust port, whereas C6AE-R (randomly found on 1/3 of 1966-67 FEs only), CJ, 427, and 1958-65 heads have another type.

Shoe.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19664&Reply=19648><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Yup.  the 390GT got the same intake as any FE.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Tim  P., <i>01/04/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>Thanks Dave.  You have a email address?  Tim. </blockquote> RE: Yup. the 390GT got the same intake as any FE. -- Tim P., 01/04/2004
Thanks Dave. You have a email address? Tim.
 Yup. Just click on my name. -- Dave Shoe, 01/04/2004
My email address is shoe@bitstream.net. You can get to it by clicking on "Dave Shoe".

Shoe.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=25446&Reply=19648><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Yup.  the 390GT got the same intake as any FE.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>ira, <i>08/03/2005</i></font><br /><blockquote>do you know what kind of fe heads c6ae-u are performance or not <br><br>                                                ira </blockquote> RE: Yup. the 390GT got the same intake as any FE. -- ira, 08/03/2005
do you know what kind of fe heads c6ae-u are performance or not

ira
 what kind of fe heads are c6ae-u -- ira, 08/03/2005
h
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19644&Reply=19644><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>63 low rise valves</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>wfo ford, <i>01/03/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>my heads are c3ae 6090 d. 427 lr. 2.022/2.037 intake valves. where do i get stock size hi po valves. everybody has 2.185/2.195  intake valves  for later low rise heads. </blockquote> 63 low rise valves -- wfo ford, 01/03/2004
my heads are c3ae 6090 d. 427 lr. 2.022/2.037 intake valves. where do i get stock size hi po valves. everybody has 2.185/2.195 intake valves for later low rise heads.
 Almost anywhere valves are sold -- Royce, 01/03/2004
The big mail order houses like Summit and Jeg's only list the most popular stuff in their catalogs so you probably looked and only saw 2.19 / 1.72 and thought that was all there was. You will actually have to call and ask to get the 2.09 / 1.66 valves whic are made by every performance oriented valve supplier. Manley, Milodon, Ferrea, any should have several grades available.

Royce
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19642&Reply=19642><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>390</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Sean, <i>01/02/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>I have a 64' 390 Thunderbird engine.  Factory rated at 300/427. What would a cam and dual quads do for it hp wise? </blockquote> 390 -- Sean, 01/02/2004
I have a 64' 390 Thunderbird engine. Factory rated at 300/427. What would a cam and dual quads do for it hp wise?
 http://www.woodyg.com/fairlane/finfo/390intro.html -- dennie, 01/03/2004
 Re: 390 -- Tim P., 01/03/2004
PORT EXHAUST SIDE OF HEADS. Make It Breath Better Extra HP, There. Tim.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19640&Reply=19640><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>mx trans.</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>jeff, <i>01/02/2004</i></font><br /><blockquote>first, my 67 gal.500 w/390 2v. has a factory mx trans. there was an mx,fx and when did fmx come into play? also all have different pan filters and gaskets. is the mx heavier duty? also will a c-6 fit with the same drive shaft as my mx trans.? second , my dash lights work fine, but not very bright at night,are there  brighter bulbs available for dash? reostate works fine. third,  all my taillights work fine,but right rear brake light is not as bright as left, any suggestions? </blockquote> mx trans. -- jeff, 01/02/2004
first, my 67 gal.500 w/390 2v. has a factory mx trans. there was an mx,fx and when did fmx come into play? also all have different pan filters and gaskets. is the mx heavier duty? also will a c-6 fit with the same drive shaft as my mx trans.? second , my dash lights work fine, but not very bright at night,are there brighter bulbs available for dash? reostate works fine. third, all my taillights work fine,but right rear brake light is not as bright as left, any suggestions?
 I believe the FMX was a 1968-later tranny. -- Dave Shoe, 01/04/2004
I believe the FMX was an FX with beefed up case, and it fell halfway between the FX and MX trannys in case stiffness.

The FMX was actually designed to fall halfway between the C4 and C6 in stiffness, as it became Ford's intermediate transmission size into the 1980s.

The FX stuck around for a few more years, too, but the MX disappeared about 1968 or 1969, being obsoleted by the C6.

The terms FX and MX didn't seem to exist until about 1965 or 1966, probably when the FMX project was started and engineers needed to distinguish between the three.

The F and M appear to loosely correlate to Ford and Mercury, slightly more accurately applying to small engine and large engine applications.

The simplest way to tell the trannys apart is by the tranny oil pan gasket shape. I still can't identify them by eye, but there are enough gasket graphics running around in service manuals or parts manuals or on websites, that you can usually find something to reference.

JMO,
Shoe.
 Dim bulbs. -- Dave Shoe, 01/04/2004
Over time, dash bulbs either burn out or sputter their filament onto the inside of the glass, thus reflecting the light back in and converting most of it to heat instead of light. There are maybe 8 or 10 bkaclight bulbs, all identical, in the dash, and replacing them will bring things back to original.

Looking at the old bulbs, you'll note they look silver coated - they should be clear glass.

The tail light might be a sputtered bulb, or it may be an incorrect bulb with a different filament brightness, but possibly the reflector has been deplated by the entrance of water corroding the reflector. You might need to replace the reflector (or maybe improvise short-term with aluminum foil, to get the light properly redirected out the lens.

Check to see that the bulb is a clear 1157 (I think), and that it's not jammed backwards in the socket making the dimmer filament work when the bright one is supposed to.

I don't know if the tranny lengths are the same between the C6 and MX, but the 31-spline tranny yokes are probably interchangeable between the two. I believe I have interchanged the yokes, but it's been so long ago, I forget the details.

JMO,
Shoe.
Go to the top of this page
Go back one page Back    Next Go forward one page

141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160