Skip Navigation Links.
 |  Factory cast iron headers, what are they worth? -- James, 05/05/2002
The casting numbers are COAE-9431-B and COAE-9430-B. One of the numbers is hard to read, the 9, but I believe it is a 9 anyway. What are they worth and what did they come on. They will be for sale as soon as I can figure out what they are worth. Any help will be appreciated. |
|  | RE: Factory cast iron headers, what are they worth? -- Tom, 05/05/2002
well i would image for a 351 maybe or a 390 dont know if 390's were out in 60 |
| | | RE: Factory cast iron headers, what are they worth? -- Bob, 05/05/2002
They came on the 352-390 HP-PI engines and are commonly referred to as "Shorty" heades. Check completed sales on eBay for pricing. |
| | | | Thanks Bob. (n/m) -- James, 05/05/2002
n/m |
| | | |  | RE: Thanks Bob. (n/m) -- Mike McQuesten, 05/06/2002
Your COAE manifolds are specifically for the 1960 High Performance 352. This is the first year they were used with the first true High Performing Big Block Ford. They were carried through 1964. In 1961 with HP 390 and Police 390 packages from '61 - '64. And finally in through most of '62 with the 406s both 385 & 405 horse versions. The Long style started showing up in late '62 406s.
They're an excellent exhaust manifold. In excellent condition they seem to bid up to high $300s to low $400s. No cracks? No broken ears? No problem selling them. |
 | fe/heads/casting # ---car and code -- rick, 05/05/2002
i purchased a wrecked 1969 ford custom. the serial tag on the door, engine code Q, to signify 428. can some light be shed on this ? i understand that police should be P, but that code ended in 1968. the Q in 1969 is cj and cj was not used in that body style. am i confused or would this be a carry-over engine from 1968 for a pi or a cj? i had the engine rebuilt and the builder said it had the bigger cj rod bolts, that i had him replace with new.
the engine builder said the heads that were on it were some junk heads from a 391 truck engine that someone had put on it. i could not locate 428 heads at the time but found some heads that i was told were performance 390 heads, they have a very big intake ports. is there some way that i could identify these heads as to what they came from? i would like to find out what the chamber size, etc. is on these heads.
i have had this engine for several years in my pickup, i have just discovered this website, so thought i would pick some brains for any info i can get.
is there a site that lists ford casting numbers?
i apologize for being so long winded.
thanks for any info that can be given,
rick |
| | Q code full size Ford -- Royce Peterson, 05/05/2002
Q engine code in a full size Ford / Merc is a 345 HP 428 - 4V engine. I bet that was a 1968 Ford, not a 1969.
These engines used ordinary heads like any 390 2V engine, nothing special.
Let us know a casting number from the heads in question and we might be able to identify them.
Royce Peterson |
| | | RE: Q code full size Ford -- rick, 05/05/2002
i am not too familiar with casting numbers but this is stamped on the heads. C6AE, would this be the casting number?
thanks,
rick |
| | | | RE: Q code full size Ford -- Royce Peterson, 05/05/2002
Opposite the C6AE there should be a letter, what is it?
Royce Peterson |
| | | | | RE: Q code full size Ford -- rick, 05/05/2002
i found, what looks like the letter B following theC6AE. on the other head is a number that looks to be 60900 and a C4AE with no other letter that i can find.
thanks,
rick |
| Help, got a BAD vibration in drive. -- rkutzner, 05/04/2002
When the car is in drive and moving, I have a rythmic vibration that comes and goes about every 2 seconds. If I put it into neutral (at any speed), the rythmic vibration goes away. The vibration gets noticable (ie unbearable) around 2000 rpm and gets worse as rpm increases.
When I am stopped and idle or rev the engine, it does not have the rythmic vibration (though it isn't perfectly smooth either).
If anyone has any ideas..... |
|  | RE: Help, got a BAD vibration in drive. -- Tom, 05/04/2002
most likley you have a U joint problem check front and rear |
| | Manual or auto trans? [n/m] -- Dan Davis, 05/04/2002
nm |
| | | C6 tranny. Doubt its a u-joint because.... -- rkutzner, 05/05/2002
....the vibration goes away at speed if I slip it into nuetral. Wouldn't the driveshaft still be turning at the same rate if say, I'm in nuetral or drive, at 50 mph? |
| | | | RE: C6 tranny. Doubt its a u-joint because.... -- Joel, 05/06/2002
I had a pickup that had identical symptoms. Under power it vibrated, coasting in neutral, the vibration went away. It was a bad u-joint. It's easy to check, crawl under the vehicle, and attempt to move the drive-shaft side-to-side at the universal joint. If there's any play, it should be replaced. |
| | | | RE: C6 tranny. Doubt its a u-joint because.... -- hawkrod, 05/06/2002
a U-joint under load will act different than when coasting. dropping it into neutral won't help much with the diagnosis. check the joints manually before you start pulling hair out. hawkrod |
| | | | | Yeah, I started thinking about that load issue &.. -- rkutzner, 05/06/2002
I'm gonna check it all out this weekend. I'm thinking the poly tranny mount I put in, which was 1/2 inch thicker than the stock one, put too much angle on the driveline, then the CJ kicked in.........
......and all those P245 driveway burnouts while waiting for my exhaust to come in..............
............mighta hurt somethin' ! |
| | | | | | Whoa there...DO NOT use a poly trans mount... -- Dan Davis, 05/06/2002
UNLESS you also have solid engine mounts. You WILL break the trans case!
Cheers,
Dan |
| | | | | | You never mentioned the after market Mount? -- Pop428, 05/06/2002
On the cj registry forum, you never mentioned the burn out's or the after market mounts?? |
| | | | | | Didn't think about the poly mount, the burnouts .. -- rkutzner, 05/07/2002
.....should have been assumed! At the rae track and in my driveway..........all perfectly legal! Gotta test out the 2800 stall, ya know! In all my years, I've NEVER had a u-joint problem, am I just lucky? |
| | | | | | | RE: Didn't think about the poly mount, the burnouts .. -- pop428, 05/07/2002
You make yourluck if you use the right gear!
Stall's can be fun I had one in my 69 Xw Gt falcon 351 w, Fmx - 3000 stall.
Basically stock with a good cam, solid lifters Wiend Stealth inlet, 3.25 rear end, Ran Mid 13's with a street set-up, Tyres and pipes on. Man could it hook up off the line.....I hope you sort your's out.
Peter
9R02R181708
WT 7034 Green. |
| 427 sonic map, help!?! -- Josh, 05/04/2002
I have a 1965 427 ceter oiler and need some advice after having the block sonic tested. The block has no cracks or defects. However, it is bored .060 over. Please take a look at the sonic map below. I am building a street motor with roughly 10.0 comp, 428 crank, and the origional MR heads. Since I am running low comp and building a street motor the guy that sonic tested it recommended honing it and putting it together. Is he right?!? Should I sleeve it back to stock? Should I have the block filled and try to sell it to as a drag only motor? Thanks.
 |
| | The only troublesome area in my opinion is... -- Dan Davis, 05/04/2002
between cylinders 7 & 8. However, even that is not that bad, especially if you are not racing, not making over 600HP and are using under 12:1 compression. This could lead to a warm running engline, but I doubt it as it is only one cylinder-to-cylinder interface. It certainly will not fail here in the configuration you plan on running. FYI, I generally want 0.120+" between cylinders, but would run 0.100" with a street engine. If they would have offset bored #7, you would have been perfect.
The major thrust faces look good, with only one measurement under 0.140". I look for 0.150+" here for race engines, but you are fine for a street engine.
Run it! You will not do much better with a Ford passenger car block.
Cheers,
Dan |
| | RE: 427 sonic map O.K .w/ if no more .002 Taper -- Ray, 05/04/2002
You have 3 holes in the map that are weak, if you have a good machinist to work with, and you have a little taper. He should be able to give you cross hatch needed (using a CK10 machine), and straighten bores with out boring!. With that said, I don't like sleaving if i don't have to. But I will add moroso block fill to the water jackets to stiffen the cylinder walls ( to bottom of soft plugs). It tranfers heat well and has saved many blocks with thin walls that are still on the street. Ray |
| | | Confused about "if no more .002 Taper" -- Josh, 05/05/2002
Dan and Ray,
Thanks for the advice! I am a little confused by Ray's message. First, I should make it clear that the block does not need to be bored further. So I am a little confused about the .002 taper and CK10 machine comment?!?
I am also a little confused if you think I should sleeve the block or not? What is the down side to filling the block to the bottom of soft plugs? Will this make the motor run hotter or cooler? Thanks again for your help. As always this forum rocks! |
| | | | RE: Not a good time to be confused" -- Ray Tirri, 05/05/2002
This block has been rebuilt at least two times, ware on the on cylinder walls is nevitably. Straighting out the cylinder walls is must with CK 10 for good ring seal. But the last time it was bored was the problem, they should have sonic checked block for thin areas so they could centered the boring bar and not end up with thin side. It's a matter of choices now, on how to fix a problem cylinder wall, you could sleeve, or you could use block fill to stop cylinder wall deflection(which causes heat problems, broken cylinders, dirty oil, and premature ware). There will be a slight increase of oil heat, that you could take care of with a oil cooler. Block fill should be put in before any honing is done, no more than 2" from bottom of water jacket. Doing it correcly, you should be able have your cake and eat it to! with that bad boy good luck. Ray |
| | | | | Truely sorry but, still lost... -- Josh, 05/05/2002
Ray,
Thank you for your patience. This is my first time building up a 427. The engine was built up as a strocker in the early 70s. It took two trips down the drag strip in a 65 Galaxie before dropping one of those famous hollow stem valves. The engine was then completely disassembled and bagged. I bought the complete but disassembled engine this year and recently had the block sonic checked. The reason I think the block only needs to be honed is because it only ran two trips down the drag strip! Maybe I am still missing the point? Are you saying that the bores are not straight since one side is thinner than the other and therefore I need to CK 10 the block? Or is CK 10 an alternative to boring? Thanks again, I am truely sorry for being lost and I appreciate the patience. |
| | | | | | Bore taper. -- Dave Shoe, 05/05/2002
Bore taper becomes an issue in engines with lots of miles on the most recent cylinder boring.
Since there is little oil that makes it to the top of the bore, the bore tends to wear more quickly at the top than at the bottom where the cylinders run wetter with oil.
After a fresh bore job, cylinder taper is typically zero. It'll remain near zero for many thousands of miles. Because the piston is able to slide up and down in a perfectly fitted bore, the piston tends to rock less and also the rings do not have to expand and contract as they move in the uniformly sized bore.
It generally takes a year or two for cylinder wear to start showing up. The "cylinder ridge" at the top of the bore is a precise indicator of what kind of taper you can expect to find in the cylinder, since maximum wear occurs at the top of the ring travel area, and zero wear occurs above this position. Generally, the lower portion of the ring travel area offers a practical approximation of zero wear, as well.
Since the ring must expand and contract with existing taper, and the piston will also tend to rock just a little bit more, a ring in a tapered bore will tend to seal less efficiently than a ring in a freshly bored cylinder properly fitted to the piston.
Typically, a cylinder with .0005" of taper or less is considered to be like new (if I recall correctly). Taper of .0020" or less is often times considered to be satisfactory for certain types of rebuilds. Taper exceeding .0100" can sometimes be problematic (blowby, oil consumption), but if you're just looking for a cheap rebuild to have fun with, this kind of taper can work O.K.
If you're engine has been freshly bored, cylinder taper is not a likely problem. If it's only been honed, taper needs to be measured.
As for "thin spots" in the block, for an .060" 427 block, those look like reasonable numbers. Expectations for any .060" factory 427 block should be pretty low - I'd expect worse numbers than you've got. You didn't mention whether it has cloverleafed cylinder jackets (squared cylinder jackets which help translate head bolt torque to the cranksaddles), as this makes a difference.
I'm not much of a cylinder sleeve person, so I can't really give much opinion on what you should do with the block.
Shoe. |
| | | | | | | RE: Bore taper. Your right Shoe! -- Ray, 05/05/2002
If those numbers are correct, that thickest block I've seen. I wonder if how many more 427 blocks like that are still out there. Had to be intended for nascar. Ray |
| | | | | | | Thanks, I get it now! -- Josh, 05/06/2002
Shoe,
Thanks for the explanation! Sorry I was so lost. What are your toughts on particially filling the block?
The origional owner of this 427 owned a ford dealership in the 1970s. It was put together with lemans rods and some other goodies. It was not thrown together in someones garage and maybe this is the reason the numbers look pretty good for a .060 over block?!? Thanks again.
Josh |
| Performer RPM package on '67 410 -- Boydster, 05/03/2002
Just looking for some input on getting by with the Performer RPM package in my 410 cid '67 Marquis until I find a reasonable deal on a smaller car to put it in. It has a C6 tranny and 2.83 rear (I think?). Not going to the track with this boat but would like to break the engine in with it until something better comes along. Read the earlier post about the RPM not being ideal for the big cars. Is there anything to do to get this car to move a little without breaking the bank? Thanks ahead. |
| | RE: Performer RPM package on '67 410 -- Nitro, 05/03/2002
Haven't done the RPM package, just wanted to say howdy....I've also got a '67 Marquis with the 410 "Marauder" motor. Ain't it a grand old bird? Love mine! |
| | RE: Performer RPM package on '67 410 -- Kevin66, 05/06/2002
If the motor hasn't been gone through for a long time, or wasn't rebuilt with performance in mind, putting the Performer RPM package on it would be a mistake on multiple fronts.
First, there's a good chance the engine won't live through trying to use that power; second, you'd miss so much all the low-mid range power you LOST, you'd hardly notice the top end.
Similarly, if you try to select parts now, to work with your existing car/engine combination, you'll find that most of them aren't what you want if you DO put the 410 into something smaller/lighter later on. Plan your move to a new platform, and save most of your money for that project.
In the meantime, recurve your distributor, get a low restriction air cleaner and bump the carb jets up a notch or two, throw on some less-restrictive mufflers, and get a 3.25 or 3.50 differential from a salvage yard. You'll probably spend less than $200, and I'll bet you notice a good difference in the way the ol' girl moves! |
| | I'd say to get a stock FE 4v intake.... -- Ed Jenkins, 05/06/2002
..and use a 1.12 Autolite 4100 carb.
I can sell you a non rebuilt one with kit for $120 some dollars, or trade for 66 Galaxie parts. |
| got a marti report for my birthday.... -- hawkrod, 05/03/2002
my bud and pal bought the marti report for my CJ cougar for my birthday (what a guy). i never ordered it because the car has been in parts for so long. i am totally disillusioned now. years ago i was told that there were 54 cars like mine from an old year end production report. now i get a marti report and it turns out there were 58, talk about flooding the market {G}. i hope this will give me the incentive to get it together. i just went out and stared at this rusting shell of an old car and i figure it will take 3 people a month to get it cleaned up enough to get the engine back in (the engine trans and rear end are detailed and are in the garage waiting for the mess out back). it is a rolling chassis but needs a new core support and aprons and the interior is gutted and stacked in the lawn building. i bought this from the very bud who bought my report as he was using for a parts car (i managed to buy back the #'s matching gear) and tore what was left down for rebuilding in say 1984! guess i better get off the computer and get on the sandblaster. anyone in the santa cruz area that owes me is welcome to come help (like i am ever going to see those guys again!). later, hawkrod
 |
| Machine Shops -- Rob, 05/03/2002
Can anyone recommend an experienced machine shop within a million miles of Eastern Iowa for rebuilding a FE or FT block? Will be working up a 390 or 428 engine for a 69 Mach I with some add on parts from Edelbrock, etc. Am shooting for 450-500 HP when done. Thanks Rob |
| fan -- willie, 05/03/2002
what fan set up came on a 63 1/2 Galaxie R code 427 w/4 speed? How many blades, was there a fan clutch, was the water pump pully special size?? |
| | RE: fan -- Mike McQuesten, 05/03/2002
The fan was a six blade. No fan clutch. Water pump pulley was standard big block for that year. However, the generator had a large pulley to reduce RPMs there. |
| Performer vs. RPM -- Brett, 05/02/2002
Does the RPM cam and intake package (not heads) deliver good driveability? I don't want to be jacking with the idle speed all the time.
Thanks for any info...! |
| | RE: Performer vs. RPM -- Gerry Proctor, 05/03/2002
For a four speed car with rear gears 3.50:1 and higher in an intermediate or smaller chassis, yes. Any other chassis/drivetrain package is questionable and highly specific. What does constant manipulation of the idle speed have to do with anything in the RPM package? If you're doing that, you've got an installation problem. |
| | | RE: Performer vs. RPM -- Brett, 05/03/2002
I have a '67 Galaxie with a 390 cid. I was just wondering if I should go with the milder or more aggressive setup. I'm basically trying to get performance without sacrificing driveability, especially with the A/C on (I live in TX).
|
| | | | RE: Performer vs. RPM -- Gerry Proctor, 05/03/2002
It sound like you need low-end torque, which would make the RPM cam an unsuitable candidate especially with a large-bodied car like a Galaxy, more so with an automatic without a lot of stall and a short rear gear. You need to consider a cam with .050 duration of 210-degrees or less with lobe separation in the 112-114-degree range. Lift is irrelevant to idle quality and street manners. |
|