Skip Navigation Links.
| Interior Paint Question... -- Posi, 03/09/2003
Is there a good and safe way to remove old paint from interior fiberglass panels (67 Mustang) Some time ago, these were painted or dyed, but some of them never looked right. I'd like to clean and repaint, without it looking like a spray bomb job.. even though it will be. Color is charcoal black met... Thanks |
| | RE: Interior Paint Question... -- Tim B, 03/10/2003
Fiberglass? Take em off, clean em up, scuff with scotchbrite, use a vinyl prep spray, prime and finish coat.
Look for the right paint/dye (color/sheen) from the Mustang Vendors. |
| Help needed 66 390 -- Bow-Tie Basher, 03/08/2003
My uncle recently purchased a 64 Galaxie 500XL minus drivetrain. So he dropped in a 66 390 GT motor from a 70K mile 66 Fairlane GT. Now he installed stock 390 lifters and there is some clatter in the valvetrain. My question is does the 390 4bbl GT motor use different lifters than the stock 390 grocery getter? What did ford do to the 390 for that extra horsepower. 390 GT rated at 335? stock at 310? Any help in this matter would be greatly appreciated. |
| | The cam is the key difference. -- Dave Shoe, 03/09/2003
The 390GT motor, available from 1966 thru 1968, was a hot-cammed version of the 390 4-barrel engine. It also got a Holley carb and neato air cleaner, but was saddled with the restrictive exhaust manifolds found in all 390 Fairlane/Mustang cars. Note that 390-2V, 390P-2V (hi comp), and non-GT 390-4Vs were also available in the Mustang/Fairlane.
The 390GT cam was later used in the 428PI, the 427Hyd, and the 428CJ/SCJ, so it was a very nice cam. Naturally, stiffer valve springs and stronger valve spring retainers were needed with the cam, but a standard hydraulic lifter was used with the GT cam.
Otherwise, the engines are approximately identical, though the exhaust manifold bolt pattern was drilled differently, and various calibrations, such as the distributor curve, was modified. The head castings, block castings, intake castings were the same.
The original 335HP rating was probably correct on the dyno using Galaxie log-type exhaust manifolds, but once installed into the car, with restrictive Fairlane/Mustang exhaust manifolds in place, it's likely the power was down a bit from this advertised number. It's likely that customer complaints drove the 1967 advertised number to be adjusted downward.
Stricter emissions laws in all 50 states in 1968 forced the addition of Thermactor to all 390GT engines in 1968. Prior to this, only California 390GTs needed Thermactor. The 390 was still available in 1969 Fairlane and Mustangs, but the 390GT engine was gone, replaced by the lower-cost 390IP, as the 428CJ had taken top honors for 1969, and only the CJ was allowed to run the expensive Thermactor option, an option which allowed the GT cam to pass emissions in the CJ.
Your lifter clatter is a real concern. I'd advise hooking up a mechanical oil pressure gauge and characterizing the pressure curve to get a feel for what it looks like under varying conditions. It might be time for a simple tear-apart, inspection, and reassembly, just to be sure nothing has gone haywire in the 30-some years since the engine was built.
JMO, Shoe. |
| | | One small correction Dave...... -- Royce Peterson, 03/09/2003
The 1968 427 hydraulic engine did not use the same cam as the 390 GT and 428 CJ. The specs were the same, however the cam has a different part number due to the fact it is machined for oil grooves on the #2 and #4 cam journals.
Otherwise I agree with everything you posted.
Royce |
| | | | Thanks for the clarification. -- Dave Shoe, 03/09/2003
So the 1968 427 was a true sideoiler.
It's been only the past couple months that I've fully understood the unique hydraulic 427 oiling system. Your cam info now makes sense.
One more correction from my previous post is: I mentioned the head castings, block castings, and intake castings were the same, but I failed to mention I was specifically comparing the 390GT and 390 non-GT. While the head castings and intake castings were common to all FE cars during the GT years, whether 352, 390, 410, 428, or 428PI, the block castings did differ between the 352, the 390/410, 428, and 428PI, even though they were all marked pretty much the same on the outside. The C6ME or C6ME-A marking does not indicate the sand cores used to cast the block.
Shoe. |
| | | GT 390 in 1969 -- ralf bask, 03/11/2003
Hello Dave and thanks for some interesting reading. If you could clearify: which 390 engine came with the mach 1 390 car in 1969? I ask since I´ve heard about a GT equipped mach 1. Was there a car like that produced or.. not?
greetings Ralf Bask, Finland |
| | | | the 390 in a 69 mustang is an IP not a GT -- hawkrod, 03/11/2003
new for 1969 was the S code Improved Performance 390. it features the GT style exhaust manifolds and has the same heads as a 68 GT (they were not special anyway) but it has a milder cam, carb, and distributor curve to meet emissions standards easier. the engine also has a special one year only cast iron intake manifold with a C9ZE casting number. the 69 is basically a very detuned engine and in reality is the same as a galaxie 390 in terms of performance. its a good start but nothing to get excited about. hawkrod |
| | | | | GT was a Mustang option in 69, not a motor option. -- Dave Shoe, 03/11/2003
You could still get the GT option in a 1969 Mustang, but a 390GT engine was no longer part of the GT formula.
Shoe. |
| | | | | RE: the 390 in a 69 mustang is an IP not a GT -- Warren, 05/29/2003
> new for 1969 was the S code Improved Performance 390. it features the GT > style exhaust manifolds and has the same heads as a 68 GT (they were not > special anyway) but it has a milder cam, carb, and distributor curve to > meet emissions standards easier. the engine also has a special one year > only cast iron intake manifold with a C9ZE casting number. the 69 is basically > a very detuned engine and in reality is the same as a galaxie 390 in terms > of performance. its a good start but nothing to get excited about. hawkrod >
I'm restoring a 390 IP engine in a 69 Mustang GT fasback. What would you recommend to wake up the engine? I'd like to keep it generally a stock rebuild, bore it 30 over, keep the same C8AE-H heads and Autolite 600cfm carb. Can the C8AE-h heads be worked to CJ specs? Are there any header applications that work and can fit in the tight engine bay of this Stang? As well, what would be the best way to reduce the 10.5:1 stock compression to accomodate fuel at the pumps? What is the difference in my 3U crank in comparison to other 390/427 cast iron cranks that are available? |
| | | | | | The heads are great. -- Dave Shoe, 05/29/2003
C8AE-H heads are great. The 428PI engines got them from 1968-70 and are the engine that got me interested in the FE. If the original valves have become recessed over the years because of valve jobs or heavy trailer towing, then you'll want to install CJ sized valves. Otherwise, stock sized valves are fine for streetable performance.
To wake up your engine, you'll first want CJ exhaust manifolds (gives the stock appearance but eliminates those horrid 390Fairlane/Mustang exhaust manifolds). They are available as reproductions, but are not cheap. FPA headers for the 390 would also fit well, would perform even better, but would detract from a stock looking engine bay but are recommended for max performance. Hooker SuperComps don't fit those heads at all.
Next, you'll want an Edelbrock RPM intake (not for shaker scoop cars because of the carb pad position), though the carb will end up sitting maybe a half inch higher on the engine, so you'll want to check to see you can clear the hood with the stock aircleaner.
Lastly, you'll want a cam kit. Nothing fancy will be needed to wake the car up. I say "cam kit" because the lifters absolutely must be replaced with a new cam or disaster is guaranteed. With a new cam, you'll require new valve springs, new spring retainers, valve locks, valves (the locking grooves are in the wrong position), and rocker end-support pedestals (offering shaft support at the end positions - an easy bolt on and very important with a non-stock cam). For greatest street reliability, keep the lift below .550" to allow the greatest chance of compatibility with your non-adjustabl rockers.
Since octane is a concern with you, you can drop compression inexpensively using 390-2V automobile pistons of the 1966-70 era (not 1971 era cars and not pickup truck 390 pistons!). The engine will not need a rebalance, though it might be nice to weigh an old piston/pin combo and compare it to a new piston/pin combo just to be sure they're identical (withing a few grams). Note that factory pistons apparently use the pin when balancing, so it must be kept with the original piston and included when weighing, as different pins weigh differently. Otherwise, Silvolite and others offer mild performance pistons for the 390, and most of the non-racing ones tend to try to match the stock piston weight.
The stock distributor is great, but you'll want to dump the points and install a basic Pertronix ignition conversion. The cheapest model is best for street applications. The distributor will likely deserve a recurving to assure you have a centrifugal advance curve which applies to modern gas and cams. There are shops that know exactly what to do. I'd keep the stock coil, as it's great for street performance engines that are not excessively revved and the stock coil is calibrated for the ballast wire that runs from your ignition to assure optimal energy transfer. Oversizing the coil can cause complications if you are not prepared for them.
Since you are rebuilding, you will likely replace the bearings. The rod bearings will likely have taken on an egg-shape, based on the notion that the forged steel rods tend to elongate as the years pass. While you can replace the main bearings without bore issues, you will likely need to refurbish the big end of the rods (resize is the term), in order to make them perfectly round again. If thay are obround by more than .0005" (they likely are), you will have reliability issues if you simply replace the bearings with new ones, since circular bearings are being installed into egg-shaped rods. Failure is common if the rod is not resized. While resizing, you might as well install all new rodbolts. Stock rodbolts are nice and strong, but thay are allowed to have somewhat severe flaws in them, from a racing perspective. Rather than magnafluxing the stock rods to assure they all have reasonable flaw features, it's typically best to simply install ARP bolts. Adding arp bolts also REQUIRE resizing the rod, since they have a different clamping force than stock bolts (different torque) and thus the rods big-end takes on a deformation away from round. With new bearings and new ARP rodbolts, resizing the rod is a double-value. FE 390 rods are fantastic performance rods whwen equipped with magnafluxed stock bolts or ARP bolts with a resize.
All FE cast iron cranks are made from the same pearlitic nodular alloy, and all are worthy of very high performance applications. Yup, that means the 390, 406, and 427 cranks are all about the same in strength. They're probably stronger than any 410/428 crank, too, since the "journal overlap" is more robust in the 390.
The stock oil pump is a great idea, as HV or HP or HVHP pumps cause a whole myriad of complications if you are not prepared for them. A stock oil pump can work with a stock oil pan, but a performance pump really requires an aftermarket oil pan with extra capacity. Your engine has done great with a stock pump, and oils have improved, so I'd stick with a completely stock oiling system and forget the hype about oiling mods. If you upgrade the pump, do some serious forum research, or else expect engine problems. I'd add a windage tray ($40 or so new) and would advise overfilling the oil pan by one quart and keeping it to that level. Damage can result if you have a fast FE and a stock pan - things are worsened by a performance oil pump with a stock pan. Zero damage will result with an "extra" quart (running six instead of 5) and a windage tray. If you make your car really fast, or if you add a non-stock oil pump, you'll absolutely need a baffled high-capacity oil pan for longevity.
Just some ideas to get you started, Shoe. |
| | | | | | | About CJ exhaust manifolds... -- Dave Shoe, 05/29/2003
...be sure you redrill the one mounting bolt hole in the head to be compatible with the CJ manifold. If you go that route, it'll be obvious what I refer to. Be sure to drill before installing the heads in the engine bay, since you need to have access with a drill.
Shoe. |
| | | | | | | RE: The heads are great. -- Warren, 05/30/2003
Thanks for you suggestions, Dave. It's good to here the positive feedback on the potential of the 390 IP. My neighbor has a 67 340 Baracuda that keeps reminding me of the 390 link to a "boat anchor." It sure would be nice to surprise him when I get my car on the road. |
| | | | | | | | The 'IP' is no dog - just needs some coaxing & TLC. [n/m] -- Mr F, 05/30/2003
n/m |
| Well we lost argument with zonning -- Louis Champeau, 03/08/2003
So my 60 HiPo T-bird is up for sale (See FoMoCo classifieds) I'm going to look into what it would take to change the law at the state level. Of the 9 member panel only 3 sided with us ( rest were openly hostile to unregestered vehicle regardless of age) even though we had pictures to prove my two cars were covered and neatly stored. I talked with my lawer and he said there was a chance we could sue the town but as he said the law says no unregestered motor vehicle may be kept on ones property, so all they will do is say "it's the law" and thats thats. We would have to prove the law is unfair and that law suit would cost about $$20,000 and we could still lose. So I'm seeing what can be done at state level , like in new Hampshire. |
| | RE: Well we lost argument with zonning -- Bruce Geister, 03/08/2003
Why don't you register the cars, if that is what they want? Seems to be better than the hassle and cost of sueing or selling! |
| | | RE: Well we lost argument with zonning -- Louis Champeau, 03/08/2003
Cars would not pass state inspection so can not be regestered, also the zoneing law says cars must be road worthy at all times. So reg out of state is out. What worries me is that I'm hearing a lot of this kind of zoneing law inforcement in other states not only here in Connecticut. Ive been restoring cars for over 35 years and up untill last November the zoneing officer told me he wouldn't inforce the law as long as the cars were over 25 years old and were kept neat. He just retired and I got a gun-ho woman inforcement offcer that say if in in the book she is going to inforce it! I think this is just the beginning of a new round of problems for old car lovers, not only here but all over. |
| | | | RE: Well we lost argument with zonning -- Michael, 03/17/2003
I'm in Colorado,30 miles east of Colo. Spgs. 2 yrs ago they rammed zoning down our throats even tho it was proven that commissioners lied & broke various laws.We were told that it wouldn't be enforced against old cars.Yeah right. I've got 70 or so cars,all stored behind berms,buildings,etc.Nothing visible to neighbors or from the street.I'm into a lawyer for $1500 so far as the county was granted the right to come on my property & haul cars off at my expense.Judge came back 2 months later & said "oops",they shouldn't have been given that right. The zoning laws are so restrictive I am not allowed to weld INSIDE my garage.If anyone has ever had any luck getting this type of "law" repealed,drop me a line. Michael |
| 69/70 wiring block and harness -- Kent Keyser, 03/08/2003
I saw a review on TV about the wiring products offered by American Autowire. Too bad they don't have a Ford product offering. They had a new wiring block and harness for a 69 Camaro. Looked great. Anyone know of an outfit that might reproduce the wiring blocks and harnesses for my 69 and 70 Mustang's? |
| | RE: 69/70 wiring block and harness -- Pete's Ponies, 03/08/2003
under dash harness or engine compartment harness, including headlights? |
| Engine ID -- Craig G. Robitaille, 03/06/2003
Was looking at the castin numbers on my FE BB. Its out of 59 Ford retract-non matching numbers. Was considering a change until I saw the casting- C3AE 6015H
What is this? |
| | 390, 1963-64. -- Dave Shoe, 03/08/2003
It's listed as a 390 for 1963 and 1964.
Shoe. |
| FE block identification -- ford429lover, 03/06/2003
Seeking information about 428CJ blocks. I'm in the process of purchasing what has been represented as a 428CJ engine. While inspecting the block i found "66-427" cast in to the back of the block. Is this common? I also purchased an Edelbrock F427 dual plane intake. It closely resembles a sidewinder, but the ports are slightly larger. Does anyone have any idea how well this intake performs for hot street application? |
| Headers for a 390Gt -- richard, 03/06/2003
What headers will bolt onto a 68 Mustang with a 390GT and stock C8AE-H heads without cutting shock towers or other destructive mods? Contacted a few manufacturers I have heard of but none carried ones for this application.....
And do any other modifications have to be done to the exhaust system to accomodate the headers connections downstream? |
| | Fpa -- Royce Peterson, 03/06/2003
Ford Pwertrain Applications |
| | RE: Headers for a 390Gt -- Charlie, 03/07/2003
here is a set of Hooker headers on a 67. cost was about $130 from ebay, If you can afford it go with the FPA. I've never gotten to use any but they come highly reccomended here, must be a reason. Charlie
[Image deleted by Admin.] |
| | | RE: Headers for a 390Gt -- ERIC, 06/09/2003
So how much do Headers help on the 390GT ?? |
| | | | The same as any other engine... -- Royce Peterson, 06/09/2003
You can expect 20-50 horsepower. You can also expect more under hood heat and less ground clearance. Worth it if originlity is not an issue.
Royce |
| | | RE: Headers for a 390Gt -- Jonpaul, 01/30/2004
390 hooker header gaskets? What I nightmare. Does any one know what gaskets are the right ones? |
| | RE: Headers for a 390Gt -- Dave, 04/04/2003
Richard, I agree the FPA Tri-y's are the way. I have them in my car and wouldnt consider putting another brand on, Thats how easy they went in. Engine out, headers bolted on, engine dropped back in. |
| SB42 Smog Exemption In California -- Len Trimlett, 03/05/2003
To anyone in California with a 66-73 vehicle. The SB42 Biennal Smog Exemption is about to be taken away. Read about it at www.smogrfg.com |
| pushrod length for roller rockers? -- Geoff McNew, 03/03/2003
My understanding of correct roller to valve tip geometry is that, at full lift, the roller should be centered on the stem - & not nearer the valley nor having rolled past center. The thinking is that at full lift is where maximum spring pressure is encountered and by centering the roller at this point you minimize the side loading and deflecion. Is there agreement out there? |
| Which covering for rear hole in FE intake -- Mike K, 03/02/2003
I've got 3 different coverings for the large hole in the rear of the 427 intake. I'm trying to run a PCV system and wanted any suggestions on which system to use. I'm not even sure if the rear hole is involved w/ PCV or not. I've currently got the PCV in the Pass side valve cover but can change it if need be. Can someone suggest which is best? Some stats: 427, 2x4, headers.
1. Complete block off plate- block off hole and wire basket and forget about it.
2. Block off plate with nipple - I think this gets attached to a PCV system and then the base of the rear carb (running 2x4)
3. Breather pipe that bolts over hole. Just a metal breather that does not attach to anything.
Any suggestions would be great. Thanks, Mike |
|