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=18207&Reply=18207><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>bent pushrod</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>bill, <i>08/21/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>guys i got a 69 -390 #7 cylinder intake valve push rod bent replaced pushrod now no compression any ideas?  thanks for the help     bill </blockquote> bent pushrod -- bill, 08/21/2003
guys i got a 69 -390 #7 cylinder intake valve push rod bent replaced pushrod now no compression any ideas? thanks for the help bill
 RE: bent pushrod -- tom, 08/21/2003
is it adjustable or non if so you might have one to long
 You probably have a bent valve. N/M -- Royce Peterson, 08/22/2003
 RE: bent pushrod -- giacamo, 08/22/2003
Check valve heith conpaired to outher ones
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18204&Reply=18204><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>heads and rebuilt engines</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>eddie mcmanus, <i>08/21/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>Hi to all. I need some help with the ID on these heads if someone has the time.<br>C1AE, C2SE, and C4AE. I am guesing that they are early 70's heads. I'm not sure how they would work on my '67 project engine.  The original heads have some bad pitting inside some chambers and not sure if I should use them or not.  Thanks for your time. Ed </blockquote> heads and rebuilt engines -- eddie mcmanus, 08/21/2003
Hi to all. I need some help with the ID on these heads if someone has the time.
C1AE, C2SE, and C4AE. I am guesing that they are early 70's heads. I'm not sure how they would work on my '67 project engine. The original heads have some bad pitting inside some chambers and not sure if I should use them or not. Thanks for your time. Ed
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18212&Reply=18204><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: heads and rebuilt engines</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Royce Peterson, <i>08/22/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>C1= 1961 design<br>C2 = 1962 design<br>C4 = 1964 design<br><br>Be sure to use a matched pair of heads. These early heads will work fine on later FE engines.<br><br>Royce </blockquote> RE: heads and rebuilt engines -- Royce Peterson, 08/22/2003
C1= 1961 design
C2 = 1962 design
C4 = 1964 design

Be sure to use a matched pair of heads. These early heads will work fine on later FE engines.

Royce
 how about C6AE heads? -- eddie mcmanus, 08/23/2003
Thanks Royce, for the help. I just bought an FE that's a 4V today. The #'s on the intake start as C5 and the heads are C6AE. The motor is complete except for starter and have flat topped vavle covers. I figured for 150. dollars I should be okay. Ed
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18203&Reply=18203><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>390 fuel pump 1965</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Mike, <i>08/21/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>I noticed fuel spray from the top of my fuel pump.  It look as though it is coming from a vent opening?  Replace / rebuild?  what's up with this thing?<br> </blockquote> 390 fuel pump 1965 -- Mike, 08/21/2003
I noticed fuel spray from the top of my fuel pump. It look as though it is coming from a vent opening? Replace / rebuild? what's up with this thing?
 That's the standard sign of a ruptured diaphragm. [n/m] -- Mr F, 08/21/2003
n/m
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18199&Reply=18199><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>formula to figure displacement</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Mike, <i>08/21/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>Does anyone know where I can a formula to determine the displacement of a 390 .40 over with a 428 crank?  Thanks </blockquote> formula to figure displacement -- Mike, 08/21/2003
Does anyone know where I can a formula to determine the displacement of a 390 .40 over with a 428 crank? Thanks
 RE: formula to figure displacement -- Gerry Proctor, 08/21/2003
It's bore x bore x stroke x number of cylinders divided by .7854

There are also abundant Internet sites that have automotive formulas that perform the calaculation for you. Just use your search engine.
 Just for grins, here's a related thread with formulae... -- Mr F, 08/21/2003
http://jcoconsulting.com/ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=35467&Reply=35467
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18189&Reply=18189><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>Cast Iron Headers</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Steve Gundlach, <i>08/19/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>Hey guys, I would like to see if you guys know what set of factory headers flow more or less as the case may be.   I have a set of long tube style, C2AE & C3AE's and a set of short tubes that are still on the car.    I am rebuilding a separate 390 to replace the tired one in the car and was looking to see which set will better suit a mild 390 build.   I will be selling the opposite set. </blockquote> Cast Iron Headers -- Steve Gundlach, 08/19/2003
Hey guys, I would like to see if you guys know what set of factory headers flow more or less as the case may be. I have a set of long tube style, C2AE & C3AE's and a set of short tubes that are still on the car. I am rebuilding a separate 390 to replace the tired one in the car and was looking to see which set will better suit a mild 390 build. I will be selling the opposite set.
 RE: Cast Iron Headers -- Travis Miller, 08/19/2003
If you are running thru mufflers, go with the short headers. You will not notice any difference in power but you will see a difference in weight at the front of the car. Drag racing theory says 100 lbs of weight added equals one tenth second slower on a 1/4 mile.

You will also recover more money when you sell the long cast iron headers. And don't worry about looks because both look good on an FE.
 RE: Cast Iron Headers -- John Saxon, 08/22/2003
Steve,what year car are you going to be putting them in?Also does the car have powersteering and do you want to keep it?
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18225&Reply=18189><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Cast Iron Headers</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Steve Gundlach, <i>08/23/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>The car is currently no P.S. or brakes.  Iwould like to convert to P.S. so the shorties are desirable.   On that note, looks like the longer units will be for sale. Does any one know what the the long units originally came off of?<br>C2AE-8480-B   Right<br>C3AE-9491-D   Left<br> </blockquote> RE: Cast Iron Headers -- Steve Gundlach, 08/23/2003
The car is currently no P.S. or brakes. Iwould like to convert to P.S. so the shorties are desirable. On that note, looks like the longer units will be for sale. Does any one know what the the long units originally came off of?
C2AE-8480-B Right
C3AE-9491-D Left
 RE: Cast Iron Headers -- John Saxon, 08/23/2003
That would be 63-64 427 Galaxies and possibly some very late 406 Galaxies but I've personally seen a mid 63 406 convertible that still had shorties can't remember the build date on it though it was somewhere in december or january.Of course everyone has seen the pictures of the late 406's at holman moody with the long headers but that may be just a nascar only deal.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=19240&Reply=18189><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Cast Iron Headers</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Jim Thomas, <i>11/16/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>Steve,<br>Do you still have a set of cast iron 427 headers for sale? If so, please advise price and condition. Thanks,<br>Jim<br>jthomas427@sbcglobal.net </blockquote> RE: Cast Iron Headers -- Jim Thomas, 11/16/2003
Steve,
Do you still have a set of cast iron 427 headers for sale? If so, please advise price and condition. Thanks,
Jim
jthomas427@sbcglobal.net
 RE: Cast Iron Headers -- Steve Gundlach, 11/16/2003
Jim,
They are currently on ebay with a "buy it now" price of $650.00.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=33631&item=2443267836

If you want them for $600.00 I will stop the auction. You can still use Paypal to pay or the typical check/money order route.
ebay has pics and description. I can provide more of each if nessessary.

Thanks, Steve
 flatlander racing -- 390ranger, 08/19/2003
has anyone used any of there stroker kits or bought any products from them. looking into buying there 430 390 stroker kit. any info would be appreciated

Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18172&Reply=18172><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>fuel injection</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Charlie, <i>08/18/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>I'm planning on adding fuel injection to my 428. I'm not sure what set up I want to run so I'm looking for some ideas. The 428 has cj heads, edel. rpm intake, cam dur at .05 is 236I 238e, headers, 4 speed, crane hi6 and duraspark dist.<br>    The car runs great now, but I've always wanted to play with a fuel inj. set up. Besides if I didn't have this to play with I'd have to get another car and I don't think the wife would under stand.<br>     I'm considering holley's commander system, a tbi off a 460 ford or buying a new intake and building my own fuel rail and using a generic tb from holley and custom fitting a holley control box to run it? <br>    Any thoughts, insights or pictures of projects would be helpfull.<br>Thanks<br>Charlie </blockquote> fuel injection -- Charlie, 08/18/2003
I'm planning on adding fuel injection to my 428. I'm not sure what set up I want to run so I'm looking for some ideas. The 428 has cj heads, edel. rpm intake, cam dur at .05 is 236I 238e, headers, 4 speed, crane hi6 and duraspark dist.
The car runs great now, but I've always wanted to play with a fuel inj. set up. Besides if I didn't have this to play with I'd have to get another car and I don't think the wife would under stand.
I'm considering holley's commander system, a tbi off a 460 ford or buying a new intake and building my own fuel rail and using a generic tb from holley and custom fitting a holley control box to run it?
Any thoughts, insights or pictures of projects would be helpfull.
Thanks
Charlie
 check out the mopar in "hot rod" looks intriguing -- FE427TP, 08/18/2003
I'd almost like to give that a shot
 Venturi Fuel Injection -- KULTULZ, 08/19/2003
http://www.barrygrant.com/images/bgfuel/catalog/63_r1_c1.jpg

Best of both. Looks and mounts like a carb.
 RE: fuel injection -- harry, 08/19/2003
you could always check out a megasquirt system... if you are well versed enough with electronics and soldering to put it together, it is a great system... that, and you could go with TBI, or multiport depending how much work you're willing to put into an intake...
 RE: fuel injection -- Charlie, 08/20/2003
Thanks for the ideas guys. I'm really leaning towards tpi and modding an intake and some fuel rail pieces from a 460 I was measuring today. Big thing will be getting the fuel curve right with correct size injector. I like the idea of building the mega squirt, it looks as programmible as the holley commander and the price $120 vs $600.
I hope every one here gets a chance to check on the web sights mentioned in the posts above, some good food for thought if nothing else.

http://www.bgsoflex.com/megasquirtright.html

http://www.barrygrant.com/bgfuel/default.aspx?page=63
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18195&Reply=18172><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: fuel injection</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Barry R, <i>08/20/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>I have a multiport EFI conversion on my 428 CJ engine.  I used single plane Dove intake, and had the guys at Wilson weld on the injector bungs and mount the fuel rails.<br><br>The throttle body in an older DFI piece.  The injectors are 36 lb. Bosch (from a 3.8L Super Coupe I think).  The electronics are from F.A.S.T. - - formerly Speed-Pro in Brighton, MI.  Fuel pump and regulator are Aeromotive.<br><br>In the past, the best this 3600 pound street car ran was 11.27 at 120 MPH w/o nitrous.  After a week or two of laptop tweaking, we took the same package except for the EFI out to Milan and ran 11.10 @121MPH.  The car runs, starts, and drive much nicer - - you would never know that it has a .680 lift solid roller cam in it.<br><br>The conversion was both time consuming and expensive - - but I would do it again.  The results are worth the effort. </blockquote> RE: fuel injection -- Barry R, 08/20/2003
I have a multiport EFI conversion on my 428 CJ engine. I used single plane Dove intake, and had the guys at Wilson weld on the injector bungs and mount the fuel rails.

The throttle body in an older DFI piece. The injectors are 36 lb. Bosch (from a 3.8L Super Coupe I think). The electronics are from F.A.S.T. - - formerly Speed-Pro in Brighton, MI. Fuel pump and regulator are Aeromotive.

In the past, the best this 3600 pound street car ran was 11.27 at 120 MPH w/o nitrous. After a week or two of laptop tweaking, we took the same package except for the EFI out to Milan and ran 11.10 @121MPH. The car runs, starts, and drive much nicer - - you would never know that it has a .680 lift solid roller cam in it.

The conversion was both time consuming and expensive - - but I would do it again. The results are worth the effort.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18198&Reply=18172><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: fuel injection</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Charlie, <i>08/21/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>"time consuming and expensive" 2 things my wife loves to hear, but I can't wait to start this project. <br><br>Do you have any picture of the intake showing the injectors or part numbers you used,<br><br>Thanks for the help<br>Charlie </blockquote> RE: fuel injection -- Charlie, 08/21/2003
"time consuming and expensive" 2 things my wife loves to hear, but I can't wait to start this project.

Do you have any picture of the intake showing the injectors or part numbers you used,

Thanks for the help
Charlie
 RE: fuel injection -- tom, 08/21/2003
what about the hilborn elec.inj. they just cool looking
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18165&Reply=18165><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>Help with my rear(be gentle)</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Anthony, <i>08/18/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>Ok, This is not FE related other than it is in my FE powered '67 Mustang. With the 9" rear chunk out of the car, how do you test the limited slip to see if it needs clutches? I took it out of another car, but I would like to know if there is a test that can be done without having to disassemble it.<br>Just trying to tap the wealth of knowledge here.<br>Thanks,<br>Anthony </blockquote> Help with my rear(be gentle) -- Anthony, 08/18/2003
Ok, This is not FE related other than it is in my FE powered '67 Mustang. With the 9" rear chunk out of the car, how do you test the limited slip to see if it needs clutches? I took it out of another car, but I would like to know if there is a test that can be done without having to disassemble it.
Just trying to tap the wealth of knowledge here.
Thanks,
Anthony
 Measuring Your Rear For Tightness -- KULTULZ, 08/18/2003
You can mount it in a fixture and insert either a FORD Special Service Tool or cutoff axle shaft and turn the axle gear with a direct reading torque wrench and record the break away and continuous turn torque values.

You can even do it on the car. It is explained fully in any 1960s/1970s shop manual.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18164&Reply=18164><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>C8AX Cam</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Tony, <i>08/18/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>Could you please tell me what the specs are for the Ford C8AX cam?<br>Thank You<br>Tony </blockquote> C8AX Cam -- Tony, 08/18/2003
Could you please tell me what the specs are for the Ford C8AX cam?
Thank You
Tony
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18167&Reply=18164><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>Which One?</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>KULTULZ, <i>08/18/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>There was a C (hydraulic) and a D (solid). </blockquote> Which One? -- KULTULZ, 08/18/2003
There was a C (hydraulic) and a D (solid).
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18175&Reply=18164><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Which One?</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Tony, <i>08/18/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>It is the C8AX-C </blockquote> RE: Which One? -- Tony, 08/18/2003
It is the C8AX-C
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18180&Reply=18164><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>Cam Event Specs</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>KULTULZ, <i>08/19/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>Intake Duration 282 DEG.<br>Exhaust Duration 296 DEG.<br>Max.Valve Lift .515" Non-Adj. .524" Adj.<br>Valve Overlap 58 DEG.<br><br>Is that enough or do you need more? </blockquote> Cam Event Specs -- KULTULZ, 08/19/2003
Intake Duration 282 DEG.
Exhaust Duration 296 DEG.
Max.Valve Lift .515" Non-Adj. .524" Adj.
Valve Overlap 58 DEG.

Is that enough or do you need more?
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18197&Reply=18164><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Cam Event Specs</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Tony, <i>08/20/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>Thanks for the info KULTULZ. I am going to be installing it into my 1968 428 Cobra Jet engine this weekend. I was wondering how it measured up to the stock Cobra Jet cam? I have owned my Mustang for many years now, and I wanted a cam that sounds more aggressive than the stock cam, but not take away any of the low end torque.<br>Thanks<br>Tony </blockquote> RE: Cam Event Specs -- Tony, 08/20/2003
Thanks for the info KULTULZ. I am going to be installing it into my 1968 428 Cobra Jet engine this weekend. I was wondering how it measured up to the stock Cobra Jet cam? I have owned my Mustang for many years now, and I wanted a cam that sounds more aggressive than the stock cam, but not take away any of the low end torque.
Thanks
Tony
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18200&Reply=18164><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>C6oz 6250-b</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>KULTULZ, <i>08/21/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>Intake Duration 270 DEG.<br>Exhaust Duration 290 DEG.<br>Max Lift At Valve 0.481"<br>Overlap 46 DEG<br><br>It has the choppy sound you want and will give you more at higher RPM. Where did you find it? </blockquote> C6oz 6250-b -- KULTULZ, 08/21/2003
Intake Duration 270 DEG.
Exhaust Duration 290 DEG.
Max Lift At Valve 0.481"
Overlap 46 DEG

It has the choppy sound you want and will give you more at higher RPM. Where did you find it?
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18214&Reply=18164><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: C6oz 6250-b</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>salid, <i>08/22/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>I used the hydraulic C8AX in my 68 for several years.  It really likes headers and it does give you a bigger top end.  I did not notice a loss of bottom end, even with a C6.  I have 3.50 gears with a locker.  I did not have a chance to compare the 2 cams with the stock exhausts.  I liked the cam, but I swapped in an "RV" cam during the fuel crisis.  That was a mistake.  It didn't get any better gas mileage and it wasn't as fun to drive.  If you can lay your hands on one of these cams, do it, you'll like it. </blockquote> RE: C6oz 6250-b -- salid, 08/22/2003
I used the hydraulic C8AX in my 68 for several years. It really likes headers and it does give you a bigger top end. I did not notice a loss of bottom end, even with a C6. I have 3.50 gears with a locker. I did not have a chance to compare the 2 cams with the stock exhausts. I liked the cam, but I swapped in an "RV" cam during the fuel crisis. That was a mistake. It didn't get any better gas mileage and it wasn't as fun to drive. If you can lay your hands on one of these cams, do it, you'll like it.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18224&Reply=18164><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: C8AX Cam</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Tony, <i>08/23/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>I actually bought this cam from a guy in Ohio that races CJ's, about two years ago. I think he said that he had two of them when I bought this one. I did some research before I bought it, and it seemed to be what I was looking for. I will be running the stock exhaust manifolds. I know that the exhaust manifolds will not sound like headers, but I'm hoping it will be close.<br>Thanks<br>Tony </blockquote> RE: C8AX Cam -- Tony, 08/23/2003
I actually bought this cam from a guy in Ohio that races CJ's, about two years ago. I think he said that he had two of them when I bought this one. I did some research before I bought it, and it seemed to be what I was looking for. I will be running the stock exhaust manifolds. I know that the exhaust manifolds will not sound like headers, but I'm hoping it will be close.
Thanks
Tony
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18227&Reply=18164><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: C8AX Cam</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>salid, <i>08/23/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>If you're even considering headers, look at the FPAs.  I got a set a year ago, and I really like them.  They're the tri-wye style so they don't cost you any low end torque and they wind good up to 6k.  You probably don't really want to wind it any tighter than that anyway.  The headers I referred to in the earlier post were Hookers.  The FPAs were easier to put on, but don't let anyone kid you, none of them are "easy" to put on.  The FPAs don't hang down as far as the Hookers did either, so unless you open the hood or bend down and look under. it is not obvious you have headers.  Don't get me wrong, other than putting them on and getting them off, I liked the Hookers, and I never thought it suffered from a lack of low end torque.  I bet it sounds like I'm pushing headers.  Well you're right.  If you think you want to change cams to broaden your smile, then I'm betting headers will make you laugh out loud.  In fact, if your goal is to peg your grin-meter, I think I'd go with headers before the cam. </blockquote> RE: C8AX Cam -- salid, 08/23/2003
If you're even considering headers, look at the FPAs. I got a set a year ago, and I really like them. They're the tri-wye style so they don't cost you any low end torque and they wind good up to 6k. You probably don't really want to wind it any tighter than that anyway. The headers I referred to in the earlier post were Hookers. The FPAs were easier to put on, but don't let anyone kid you, none of them are "easy" to put on. The FPAs don't hang down as far as the Hookers did either, so unless you open the hood or bend down and look under. it is not obvious you have headers. Don't get me wrong, other than putting them on and getting them off, I liked the Hookers, and I never thought it suffered from a lack of low end torque. I bet it sounds like I'm pushing headers. Well you're right. If you think you want to change cams to broaden your smile, then I'm betting headers will make you laugh out loud. In fact, if your goal is to peg your grin-meter, I think I'd go with headers before the cam.
 RE: C8AX Cam -- Tony, 08/24/2003
Your right, there are no headers that are "easy" to put on these cars. That is the reason that I don't have my exhaust manifold heat shield today! In 1975, when I was 16, I "tried" to install a set of headers that were for a Fairlane. The headers never did get installed (I wonder why?) and the heat shield was something else that was going to take another 8 hours to install, so I through it away! But that's a whole other story. I have thought about installing headers that "were made for the car" but I am mostly concourse restoring it, so that is the reason that I want to stick with the stock exhaust manifolds. Depending on the difference in sound, I might install headers later.
Tony
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18161&Reply=18161><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>Anybody know 1967 390 horsepower??</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Steve, <i>08/17/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>Hi, does anybody know what the horsepower was on a stock 67 390 out of a galaxie? Also, what is everybody's opinion on building them?Are they capable of getting good speed out of them? I currently have a 351 cleveland in a 4100 pound galaxie and was thinking of buying an old 390 to build..<br><br>Thanks </blockquote> Anybody know 1967 390 horsepower?? -- Steve, 08/17/2003
Hi, does anybody know what the horsepower was on a stock 67 390 out of a galaxie? Also, what is everybody's opinion on building them?Are they capable of getting good speed out of them? I currently have a 351 cleveland in a 4100 pound galaxie and was thinking of buying an old 390 to build..

Thanks
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18163&Reply=18161><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Anybody know 1967 390 horsepower??</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Petes Ponies, <i>08/17/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>if it was a 4V, it would have been about 320 I believe. That is a gross HP figure. I love old FE,s however, a built 351C is a good engine to build and will make every bit as much HP as a 390, if not more. </blockquote> RE: Anybody know 1967 390 horsepower?? -- Petes Ponies, 08/17/2003
if it was a 4V, it would have been about 320 I believe. That is a gross HP figure. I love old FE,s however, a built 351C is a good engine to build and will make every bit as much HP as a 390, if not more.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18166&Reply=18161><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Anybody know 1967 390 horsepower??</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Steve, <i>08/18/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>Thanks for the info. It is a 2v, I was thinking of buying a 390 to make the car original again, but I didnt want to lose horsepower. </blockquote> RE: Anybody know 1967 390 horsepower?? -- Steve, 08/18/2003
Thanks for the info. It is a 2v, I was thinking of buying a 390 to make the car original again, but I didnt want to lose horsepower.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18170&Reply=18161><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Anybody know 1967 390 horsepower??</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Allen, <i>08/18/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>I have a 67 Gal with a 390 in it, which I just rebuilt about 300 miles ago.  I don't know full power yet, but it seems to be average...not super strong, and with the weight of the Galaxie in 67, it probably won't be a quarter mile killer.  If you want to put an FE in it look for a 428...more expensive, but no replacement for displacement (if muscle is a factor for you...mine is a daily driver so it wasn't a big concern).  If I ever decide to get mine dyno tested I will be sure to post numbers.<br><br>Allen<br><br> </blockquote> RE: Anybody know 1967 390 horsepower?? -- Allen, 08/18/2003
I have a 67 Gal with a 390 in it, which I just rebuilt about 300 miles ago. I don't know full power yet, but it seems to be average...not super strong, and with the weight of the Galaxie in 67, it probably won't be a quarter mile killer. If you want to put an FE in it look for a 428...more expensive, but no replacement for displacement (if muscle is a factor for you...mine is a daily driver so it wasn't a big concern). If I ever decide to get mine dyno tested I will be sure to post numbers.

Allen

Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18173&Reply=18161><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Anybody know 1967 390 horsepower??</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Steve, <i>08/18/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>Allen, thanks for the reply. I am looking to get it moving as fast as possible in the shortest distance. I want it to at least beat these mustang GTs that pull up next to me at the light... (I am not knocking Mustangs, I am complimenting them by saying I want to be at least as fast as).. </blockquote> RE: Anybody know 1967 390 horsepower?? -- Steve, 08/18/2003
Allen, thanks for the reply. I am looking to get it moving as fast as possible in the shortest distance. I want it to at least beat these mustang GTs that pull up next to me at the light... (I am not knocking Mustangs, I am complimenting them by saying I want to be at least as fast as)..
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18178&Reply=18161><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Anybody know 1967 390 horsepower??</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Allen, <i>08/18/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>Well, if Mustang GT's and other late model cars are your main competition (most imports are scared to race a car as big as the 67 Gal) then you may be able to pull it off.  In Illinois, 67 is a non emission controlled year, so you can do a lot of stuff that the newer cars can't, like headers, radical cams, bigger carb, etc.  My 390 is running a 30 overbore, Comp Cams 268H (which is not a radical grind since this is a daily driver) Hooker super comp headers, Edelbrock 427 intake, Edel Performer 650 carb, just got a 3 angle valve job, and it feels like it could beat most cars on the street today.  When I said it wouldn't be a smoker I meant on the track against other muscle cars, but you don't encounter those on the street nowadays, and when you do, you usually just give them a thumbs up and smile.   </blockquote> RE: Anybody know 1967 390 horsepower?? -- Allen, 08/18/2003
Well, if Mustang GT's and other late model cars are your main competition (most imports are scared to race a car as big as the 67 Gal) then you may be able to pull it off. In Illinois, 67 is a non emission controlled year, so you can do a lot of stuff that the newer cars can't, like headers, radical cams, bigger carb, etc. My 390 is running a 30 overbore, Comp Cams 268H (which is not a radical grind since this is a daily driver) Hooker super comp headers, Edelbrock 427 intake, Edel Performer 650 carb, just got a 3 angle valve job, and it feels like it could beat most cars on the street today. When I said it wouldn't be a smoker I meant on the track against other muscle cars, but you don't encounter those on the street nowadays, and when you do, you usually just give them a thumbs up and smile.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18179&Reply=18161><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>Does it pull the wheels off the ground?</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Steve, <i>08/18/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>It sounds like you have an awesome motor..I bet that baby goes!!  </blockquote> Does it pull the wheels off the ground? -- Steve, 08/18/2003
It sounds like you have an awesome motor..I bet that baby goes!!
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=18182&Reply=18161><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Does it pull the wheels off the ground?</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Allen, <i>08/19/2003</i></font><br /><blockquote>Well I have street radials and the stock rear gears (I think they are 2.73 or something) so no wheel stands yet.  I am cruising highway speed (about 70) at less than 2500 rpm, so I can definately steepen the gears some.  Plus since I only have 300 miles on the rebuild I haven't put the pedal to the floor yet...I'm excited to see what it does too. </blockquote> RE: Does it pull the wheels off the ground? -- Allen, 08/19/2003
Well I have street radials and the stock rear gears (I think they are 2.73 or something) so no wheel stands yet. I am cruising highway speed (about 70) at less than 2500 rpm, so I can definately steepen the gears some. Plus since I only have 300 miles on the rebuild I haven't put the pedal to the floor yet...I'm excited to see what it does too.
 Getting the wheels off the ground -- Martin Micheelsen, 08/19/2003
If it is in your budget you can have alternate gearings by adding a unit from Gear Vendors to the C6. It offers a 25% spread between the gears. That way you can set up the rear-end, so that you can have approx 3.7 gearing for "streetfighting" and approx 2.8 for highway driving. It is a bit pricey though.
Go to the top of this page
Go back one page Back    Next Go forward one page

181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200