Skip Navigation Links.
| C6 diferences from year to year.... -- pop428, 02/08/2003
Apart from the "R" servo ( and internal valve body) is there any physical differences between later C6's compared to A 1969 Cobrajet C6? I ask because a P/O has taken to my original C6 out of my Mach 1 and made a nice big hole in the bell housing. I'm chasing a replacement and i have been offered a 1971 C6 which I'm only after for the case to swap out for my original box, which doesn;t have the vin # on....So will I be able to do this or do i go for the more expensive repair on the original box? Can anyone help out here? Thanks Peter 1969 Mach 1 428 Cjr.
|
| | Sounds like a good swap to me. -- Dave Shoe, 02/08/2003
I'm far from a C6 wiz, but the only difference I'd know of between a 1969 case and a 1971 case might be that one has thevacuum modulator fastened to the tranny with a clamp (clamps sorta like an FE distributor), and the other has a threaded-in vacuum modulator. The change may have actually happened in 1972, I can't remember.
Starting in 1969 (late 1968 models, too?) a few extra holes were drilled in C6 iron (not the case) to promote extra drainback or lubrication in a couple areas for severe racing. There are plenty of rebuild kits which explain how to drill out earlier parts to match later parts. All C6s after this were drilled.
I suspect you can swap cases without any issues, possibly excepting the alternate modulater mount requiring the new-style modulator.
I have heard one faint rumor there is an FE case with extra ribs on it, but I presently believe it's a false rumor. You may want to compare the CJ case with the 1971 case, just to be sure they cosmetically appear identical on the outside. If different, please let us know.
JMO, Shoe. |
| | | Thanks Dave... -- pop428, 02/08/2003
I will let you know if I find any diferences. and if I do I'll use the 71 box as a donor for the CJ box repair.....Not ideal but I'd like to keep the original box in the car if all else fails.
Are Cj or 69' C6 boxes hard to get?
Peter. |
| | | | RE: servo/band lever -- Courtney Bolze, 02/08/2003
Peter, be sure to switch the lever for the servo to direct band, as there is one for every day of the week. They have different ratios and applicatins vary with servo size etc. Rebuild shops tend to leave them in the case when rebuilding. You want the one with the most leverage. I'm sure someone, MR. F, has the list of levers to help you identify what you sould have. Courtney Bolze. |
| | | | | Thanks for the tip I'll remember it...:)n/m -- pop428, 02/09/2003
n/m |
| | | | | | a big difference is waiting for you inside.... -- hawkrod, 02/09/2003
when you tear down that C6 you are going to find an enourmous difference inside at the back. the 428 C6 has more clutches in the forward/low pack and that is actually mounted in the aluminum part of the case. in order to accomodate the added clutches the groove for the snap ring is machined in a different spot. you will either need thinner aftermarket parts or use less clutches to put the trans together with the later case. you can not simply cut a new groove as the old groove will end up in the middle of the clutch pack and some clutches will just spin. hawkrod |
| | | | | | | The groove is in the drum, not the case. -- Dave Shoe, 02/09/2003
I've swapped the 5-plate direct clutch drum into a regular case without issue. The retaining ring groove is in the iron drum, not the case.
Note that rebuild kits all come with 5 plates, but you install either 3, 4, or 5, depending on which type of direct (third gear) clutch drum your tranny came with (groove location in drum determines this). I'm pretty sure the cases don't vary if the drum is different.
I believe most car and pickup C6s came with three clutch plates in the drum. I suspect more plates may have caused a harsh shift into third, so three was settled on as the standard.
M-7044-A is the old Motorsports part number for the drum, and C9OZ-7D044-A is the factory replacement part number, both obsolete. The part is still sold new at tranny specialty shops. I paid about $90.00 for mine a decade ago.
JMO, Shoe. |
| | | | | | | | the case has the groove for the low/reverse clutch -- hawkrod, 02/09/2003
deep inside the main case is the low/reverse clutch pack. it is not in a drum it is in the main case itself and the groove in the case is cut in different spots for the number of clutches and steels. the CJ trans has 6 clutches and most others are 4 or 5 depending on year and application. hawkrod |
| | | | | | | | | I can buy that. -- Dave Shoe, 02/09/2003
That's a bit of a bummer, but it's good to learn.
I will mention that in my C6 rebuild (w/B&M master kit and Motorsports high clutch pack upgrade), I wore out third and second gear before parking the car. First signs showed up after about a year of hellish daily driving in a '67 LTD after the rebuild, and got progressively more noticeable over the next full year. First gear, with the common clutch count found in most C6s never gave me problems.
Shoe. |
| Scj vin number -- alvin, 02/07/2003
If anyone has this vin number on there car i have the block and complete engine,the number is 9a227110 i believe this engine was in a scj torino or farlane 1968-1970. I also have the transmission and torque convertor with the id tag. |
| | 1969 Fairlane/Torino built late in ATL [n/m] -- Dan Davis, 02/11/2003
nm |
| 428 balancer -- mike, 02/07/2003
I have a 66 428 and need the front bal. but dont know the numbers can any body help |
| Need 4 generic 352 or 390 heads (new or rebuilt) -- P, 02/06/2003
I need to replace 4 marine 427 heads. These heads (C7JE) are generic 352 or 390 heads, as I understand it, and I'm looking for a place where I can either buy new replacement heads (if they exist today) or where I can find 4 generic 352 or 390 heads that will all be the same cc volume and valve size.
If any of you guys have a set of good marine heads sitting around, that would be good, but I'm going to need four of em, and could buy one at a time I guess if I had to.
This is for a friend, but I'm the one doing the hunting. Any help will be appreciated!
P |
| | They are actually closer to C6AE-R heads. -- Dave Shoe, 02/06/2003
As long as you only need to use the vertical exhaust bolts (as I believe is true on boats), you are correct in stating 352/390 heads will suit your needs well.
I would recommend any common production 1959-1965 heads, as these are all exactly the same (in my opinion), and will flow just slightly better than the C7 marine heads because they lack thermactor bumps in the exhaust. Yes, the chamber and valves are the same on these heads as on the C7JE heads, and the runners are the same, except for thermactor bosses.
You may want to avoid mixing in C6 and later castings (except C6AE-R and CJ), as these tend to have small "emissions" type runners and slightly smaller combustion chambers. Having said this, emissions heads would perform great for a stock 300HP marine motor, particularly since your friend probably has the matching "T" marking on the #1 intake manifold runner, indicating the manifold is designed for small runner 1966-later emissions heads.
I suspect new heads are around someplace, but I haven't seen any sold for a while. You'll probably have better luck looking for used heads. If the valves are sunk in the heads you buy due to too many valve jobs or use of unleaded gasoline under heavy service conditions, you may wish to install hardened valve seats. Note also that small runner "emissions" type heads also accept hardened seats very well.
When it comes to used heads, one concern will be whether the head has been milled. The most accurate way to determine this is to measure from the deck to the center of the intake manifold bolt holes. No other deck reference has quite the positioning accuracy of the intake holes.
JMO, Shoe. |
| | | Where are you? -- Lou, 02/06/2003
I belive I have 2 used 59 T-bird heads somewhere in my cellar. I'm in Connecticut on the shore between Bridgeport and New Haven. |
| | | | RE: Where are you? -- P, 02/07/2003
Lou, I'm in Nashville, the guy who needs em is in Michigan.
P |
| | | RE: They are actually closer to C6AE-R heads. -- P, 02/07/2003
As always, Dave, your comments are savored because they always contain such GOOD INFO.
P |
| finally fired the beast up -- ponyboy, 02/06/2003
just last night the new rebuilt 390 (+.060) came alive in my 67 pony car. (after a couple of glitches,) all but one has been fixed. It seems like there is "green" stuff leaking from the bolts that hold the H2O pump on. Is there some special "gook" that needs to be applied to the bolt threads? Thanks. P.S., the oil dip stick tube DID fit, thanks to Tom and the pictures! |
| | RE: finally fired the beast up -- Bob H., 02/06/2003
Usually I put permatex thread sealer on the bolts if they go into water jacket. I omly remember lower pass side going into water jacket |
| What head came on 428 police interceptor -- wes tanner, 02/06/2003
I got a question what head came on police interceptor and are they any better than a ordinary 390 head.Also what is the difference between a 428 police interceptor and a 428 cobra jet other than the heads.I got one of each and they both have the c on back and the extra webbing.Im debating which block to keep the police interceptor is still together while the 428 cobra is just block and crank.They are going in mach 1 R code date codes do not matter just wondering what difference is Thanks Wes Tanner |
| | 428 used same heads as a 390 - nothing special. [n/m] -- Mr F, 02/06/2003
n/m |
| | Yup. I had three 1969 428PI engines. -- Dave Shoe, 02/06/2003
I had three 1969 428PI engines long, long ago. It sure seemed like they had some fancy flowing heads at the time, but didn't know enough about FEs or engines to understand port sizes. It turns out 428PI engines basically had 390GT heads with the Galaxie exhaust drill pattern for the plain log manifolds with large H-pipe diameters, manifolds which are apparently common on pickup trucks. I believe all 428PIs from 1968-70 got the Thermactor bosses drilled out, and only California PIs (mayby NY PIs, too) got Thermactor in 1966-67. The 390GT/428PI head was just an ordinary FE head used in all FE applications, but with heavy duty valve springs, non-rotating machined retainers (stronger than the stamped type), and associated valve locks and valve stem grooving for the machined retainers. In 1966-67 this could have been the new small port "velocity" head (for emissions efficiency), such as C6AE-U, C7AE-A, or several others, as well as the "transition" style large port head, the well known C6AE-R. In 1968-70 the head would have been the ultracommon C8AE-H. It performed great in the PI package. The 428PI got an aluminum intake until the 428CJ intake became available, at which time the PI inherited the cost saving iron intake off the CJ. The PI got a 600CFM Autolite carb, and this carb/head combo pretty much assured the engine would eagerly start with approximately a half turn of the engine - very eager starting. The 428PI used ordinary 428 pistons, not 428CJ pistons, as the dish volume was correct for the chamber volume. Early CJ pistons were the same as ordinary 428 pistons (but with an alternate dish size) until November 1969, at which time the SCJ was born which demanded an extra-duty piston casting. The CJ and SCJ would both inherit this reinforced piston (they shared the same dish size), and the PI would retain the ordinary 428 pistons and original crank balance. The various 428 cranks functionally differ only in balance, as all FE cranks are cast of the same pearlitic nodular iron. The blocks, too, are identical. It's likely you'll find a partial VIN number stamped on most PI blocks (and most CJ blocks, too), at the rear of the block behind the #8 cylinder on the casting pad right near the cylinder deck. Shoe. |
| | | | I'm guessing the State used Fords for two years. -- Dave Shoe, 02/07/2003
In Minnesota, 428PI contracts were won only in 1966 and 1969. Dodge and Chevy won other years.
If your State used Fords in 1966 and 1968, it's reasonable to believe an engine from 1966 got swapped in during a rebuild cycle. Rather than sidelining a car, the procedure at some shops may have been to jobber out the mid-life engine rebuild, and plop the freshly rebuilt engine into whatever patrol car needed it at the time.
The date code on those heads is 1966, though the -U heads were also available in some early 1967 cars, but it really was a crapshoot in 1966 and 1967. During these years you could find C6AE-J, C6AE-L, C6AE-R, C6AE-U, C6AE-Y, C7AE-A, and fleet cars (like cop cars) even got piulot line C8AE-H heads which were apparently marked "C8AE" without a suffix. This represents four distinct casting styles, though the three emissions styles were quite similar.
1968 was a simpler year, as early engines may have had either C7AE-A or C8AE-H, but later on in 1968, through to 1971, C8AE-H was the sole casting number to be found on FE heads in cars and pickups.
JMO, Shoe. |
| | | | Ever check that block for the donor's VIN? [n/m] -- Mr F, 02/11/2003
n/m |
| | | | | RE: Friend has short block will check [n/m] -- Courtney Bolze, 02/13/2003
n-m |
| | | | | | RE: Friend has short block will check [n/m] -- S.Corbin, 02/21/2003
Courtney- did you find anything out on this PImotor? I need a late 67' date coded engin. block ,etc. Thansk |
| | | | | | | RE: No reply on VIN yet [n/m] -- Courtney Bolze, 02/21/2003
n/m |
| | | | | | | | RE: No reply on VIN yet [n/m] -- S.Corbin, 02/22/2003
Thanks Courtney - please let me know what you find out. I need that late 67 date code. You can e-mail me if you'd like. |
| 57/58 9" -- SDP, 02/04/2003
Anybody recall what the measurment is from backing plate to backing plate on a 57 or 58 "narrow" 9" housing? Thanks in advance.................... |
| | Re: 57/58 9" -- Mike McQ, 02/07/2003
Hey Steve, I don't remember off hand but I'll crawl under that '58 Country Sedan donor later today after work and get that measurement for you. |
| | | Re: 50 1/2" -- McQ, 02/07/2003
The answer is: 50 1/2" Measured from backing plate to plate with the tape right behind the shocks.
The '57 - '59 Ford 9" rear readily adapts to '62 - '65 Fairlanes/Meteors; '60 - '65 Falcons/Comets; '64 to '66 Mustangs; Mavericks/Comet counter parts. |
| | | | RE: Keep in mind... -- McQ, 02/08/2003
That's a good point. However SDP asked for the backing plate to backing plate width so that's the information I got for him. |
| | | | | That got me wondering... -- Dave Shoe, 02/08/2003
...whether "backing plate to backing plate" indicates the inside surface of the plate or the outside surface of the plate. I have a friend that measures from the inside surface, since you can do it with the brakes intact, and I prefer the outside surface, as it indicates an overall bare housing width.
Axle housings confuse me.
Shoe. |
| | | | | | RE: Thanks -- SDP, 02/09/2003
Thanks for getting me that info Mike, much appreciated! |
| | | | | | good point Dr. Dave..... -- hawkrod, 02/09/2003
many people don't understand that not all for backing plates are the same and the distance between backing plates can be different between two similar cars. 65 K mustangs and 65 shelby mustangs are the easiest example. the rearends are exactly the same so the width is the same from axle flange to axle flange. the difference is the shelby has wider brakes so the distance from backing plate to backing plate is about 1 1/2 inch less. ford just made backing plates fit deeper over the end of the housing to fit wider brakes. this was done on many models for many years. usually station wagons have the deeper plates but they were usually an option on the similar sedans. hawkrod |
| | | | | | Backing plate is the Brakes? -- Dave Shoe, 02/09/2003
O.K., I now recognize that "backing plate" indictes the brake plate, not the case flange or axle flange.
That's a good point to bring up, as the "brake backing plate" varies a bunch, based on what you note are the various dishes of the plate, and what I suspect would also be slight distortions in the plate.
I may be more confused now, but I think I've got a better handle on the variations one can expect from a rear end "measurement".
Shoe. |
| is the general forum still operational? -- DON, 02/04/2003
n/m |
| Body Mount Bolts? -- Brett, 02/04/2003
I can't see where there is any access to put a backup wrench on the front body to frame bolts on my '67 Galaxie. There are two on each side, slightly forward of the bottom of the firewall.
Can anyone shed any light on this? |
| 390 GT intake? -- Keke, 01/30/2003
I have an iron cast intake with casting numbers C5AE-9425 C. Is it 390 GT's? What kind of intake is it?
Keke |
| | not a GT, just a ford 4V 352/390 -- hawkrod, 01/30/2003
the GT intakes have C6AE and C8AE part numbers. you just have a standard ole' cast iron intake. the GT intakes are not really special as they are the same intakes used on galaxie and tbird for the same years. the only one that is really special is the 69 IP 390 which has a C9ZE intake which only fits the intermediate and pony cars. hawkrod |
| | | RE: not a GT, just a ford 4V 352/390 -- Keke, 02/04/2003
Thanks.
Keke. |
|