Skip Navigation Links.
 |  Another 428 Valve Adjustment Question -- john, 01/25/2002
I just want to confirm which is the exhaust and intake on a 428 head. from the front, facing the car --is the intake the first in each pair of four on each side? as shown below?
f I E I E I E I E
r
o I E I E I E I E
n
t
Thanks, John |
|  | RE: Another 428 Valve Adjustment Question -- Barry B, 01/25/2002
This should be the layout if I remember correctly.
F EI EI IE IE
R
O
N
T EI EI IE IE |
| |  | RE: Yup! -- Mike McQuesten, 01/25/2002
As Budweiser Ed used to say to Johnny.....
"You are correct sir!" |
| | RE: Another 428 Valve Adjustment Question -- Bob, 01/27/2002
NO NO NO
it is: E I E I I E I E for both sides.
FE heads have exhaust ports on BOTH ends. |
| 428cj oil capacity and K&N filter -- marty vogler, 01/25/2002
I have a couple of questions. First is in reference to recent post about 428cj oil capacity. When I rebuilt my 428, I was unable to reuse the original oil pan. I do not think it is a cj pan. I am using the original dip stick with the crome end. This was a late '68 built '69 Mustang. Oil pressure when at operating temp. runs about 35-40 psi, when cold it's close to 100psi. I am using an aftermarket guage (Auto meter). I am running 5-1/2 quarts of oil. Any concerns or suggestions would be appeciated. Second question (much less important), has anyone used a K&N air filter with stock ram air set up and if so, any significant performance improvement over paper media filter? |
| | Using a HP/HV pump, by chance? -- Gerry Proctor, 01/25/2002
At what rpm do those pressures occur and what's your oil? |
| |  | RE: Using a HP/HV pump, by chance? -- marty vogler, 01/25/2002
I do not think oil pump is high volume or high pressure. Idle is 800 rpm, cold-100psi, warm 40 psi. if motor is rev'ed up oil pressure does rise, I'm guessing to 60 psi. I'll check this weekend for more accuracy. I'm running Penziol 10W30. |
| | | | RE: Using a HP/HV pump, by chance? -- Gerry Proctor, 01/25/2002
With 10-30 oil and that pressure, you've at least got a HP/HV pump or your gauge is reading wrong. The smart money says it's the pump. I have a HV/HP Milodon pump in mine with 10-40 oil. Cold, I hold 80psi at 1,200 rpm on a rather loose engine. Other possibilities are very tight bearings, system blockage, etc...but you'd normally experience other problems. |
| | RE: 428cj oil capacity and K&N filter -- Chip Huffman, 01/25/2002
Marty,
You may want to replace the K&N filter with a long style Dodge truck filter from NAPA that will give you 1.4 quarts in the filter if you have the small pan with a hv pump.
Chip |
| | | RE: 428cj oil capacity and K&N filter -- marty vogler, 01/25/2002
Chuck, thanks for the tip on the Dodge oil filter from NAPA. As far as the K&N, I was refering to the air filter. |
| head gaskets -- Shagg, 01/24/2002
I have a 360 engine and everywhere I look I'm told to use the felpro head gaskets, but they only offer one part # for both sides with "front" and "this side up" in the same spot. I can see you can't flip it over but when I do what it says the water hole on the deck in the front is blocked on one side but open on the other?!! Has anyone else had this problem? |
| | I think you can safely ignore the one note. -- Dave Shoe, 01/25/2002
The head is iron, the block is iron. I doubt the head gasket can tell which side is which.
All you gotta worry about on the head gasket is that the large water opening is in the rear and the teeny one is up front, and that the "dowel holes" line up.
There is no such thing as a passenger-side and a drivers-side head gasket for the FE. They all work on any side.
Shoe. |
| | | RE: I think you can safely ignore the one note. -- shagg, 01/25/2002
thanks for replying. why do they make suck a big deal about "this side up" then? felpro I mean. |
| | | | I suspect it actually means... -- Dave Shoe, 01/25/2002
..."up", as in the intake edge of the deck surface, as opposed to "down" meaning the exhaust edge of the deck surface.
I think it's correct if you've got the proper frames of reference, but since the frames of reference are not defined, it's tough to see thay might not be talking about the "sunny side" of the gasket at all.
I didn't hit the garage to look at any gaskets, so I'm just guessing. I'll look at this next time I'm out there.
Shoe. |
| | | | | This kind of thing can make your head hurt. -- Gerry Proctor, 01/25/2002
Don't get too wrapped around the axle on this. As long as the front mark is at the front, it doesn't make any difference which side goes up. Your primary consideration is to ensure that the water flows where it's supposed to without restrictions.
That "this side up" reference is what confuses the issue. On some gaskets, there could be a proper left and right side. This is so that the fire ring doesn't brinell aluminum heads duging the expansion and contraction process. |
| Galaxie fuel line installation problems!! -- Rob, 01/24/2002
Hello All,
I recently bought a replacement tank to pump fuel line for my 62 390 equipped galaxie from Classic tube. The line is beautiful, all the right bends in all the right places. My question is this. How do I get it installed on the car without pulling the body off of the frame? I had to cut the old one into 4 pieces to get it off. The clearance between the frame and the floorpan is so tight that I cannot maneuver the turns without straightening them. I really don't want to cut my new 1 piece fuel line, or have to rebend all of my nice bends, does anyone have any ideas as to how i can get the line onto the car without pulling the body off the frame. The car is a driver, not a resto project. In hindsight I should have just replaced the short section that was crushed with a piece of rubber hose. Now I am down a hundred bucks, six hours of work, and my car has no line from the tank to the pump.
Any advice, or similar stories would be much appreciated.
Rob.
 |
| | RE: Just one right way -- Mike McQuesten, 01/24/2002
Sorry Rob, there's just one way I know of to do this. John Saxon did this to the '61 Starliner I sold him. He replaced the entire 5/16" line with a HP standard 3/8" line from classic tube just like you. You're right it is a beautiful one piece item. So what to do?
You'll have to remove all of the body hold down bolts/nuts on the left side. Then carefully jack the body up just enough to allow you to swing that tube over the frame there where it goes just under the firewall. Ford installed the line before the body of course. "Our" '61 was an excellent rust free low mileage car thus the body mount bolts were fairly easy to loosen. They were no problem for me because John did it! It was his car now. Anyway, that's how he did it. It does look nice to have a shiny 3/8" line there. Makes it almost like a HP 390 or 406 car!
BTW, I'm talking with Dave at Classic Tube right now about a need that I have. They offer the two piece 3/8" lines for the fuel pump to filter & filter to tri power but they don't offer the 3/8" HP line from in line HP filter to single 4V Holley....yet. I'm trying to put together some information or pics so that they can make this line correct that works with '60 - through at least '64 single 4V Holley equipped HP cars, i.e., 352-360,390-375/407-385/427-410. Anyone have a good picture they can scan and send to me or post here. I'd print it or attach it in e-mail to Classic so they can make it? |
| | | | RE: I'll check -- Mike McQuesten, 01/24/2002
I'll talk to John about this. I'll find out exactly how much he jacked the body up and where too. His '61 is a 4 speed/Hurst but so he didn't have problems there. And I don't think he had acceleator linkage hooked up at the time either. I'll get back to you tomorrow after I ask him a few things about what he did. It's all in there though. |
| | | | | RE: I'll check -- Rob, 01/24/2002
Thanks Mike.
I assume that I will need to disconnect the kickdown, throttle, and shifter linkage, but If I only need an inch or so, maybe I can sneak by......
I am also working on a custom crossmember for my conversion from Cruise-O to C-6. I read in another string that you have experience in this also. My plan is to section the x member, and slide the center portion rearward, so I can mount to the original frame mounts. I have an extra x member, so if I ever decide to got he resto route, I can just unbolt the modified x member, and bolt the stocker back in. I figure that if I adjust my parking brake cable lengths, I should be able to use the factory e-brake setup. (I can't remeber the last time I had a really strong parking brake)
Someone should really market a tubular x member for this application with a provision for the parking brake. I keep reading that people are doing this conversion, everyone seems to use a different method. Hope mine works!
Thanks again,
Rob. |
| | | | |  | RE: good lookin' mill -- Mike McQuesten, 01/24/2002
Ya you reminded me about the e-brake bracket/mount. All we did on mine was cut the original bracket off the '61 cross member and welded it on the '65 Merc member. The cable itself was just right and it all worked out.
You're right about there being a need for a tubular cross member for this common switch to C6. I think you've got a good plan. It'll work.
That 390 looks great in your '62. What are the specs on that 390 again?
And in a few minutes I'm calling my friend to find out how much he actually jacked the body up. |
| | | | | | RE: here's what you do -- Mike McQuesten, 01/25/2002
You'll have to jack the body off of the frame at least 4". John loosened/removed all the body bolts on the left side. You have to access them through the trunk and the floor pan under the carpet of course. Loosen or remove all the items you've mentioned, i.e., throttle, trans., linkage, etc. Then use a long piece of wood like a 4X4 piece or similar against the rocker panel. Something to distribute the pressure from the jack.
It will take some patience and slight tweaking of the 3/8" line to get it over the frame where necessary but it'll go and then you can carefully bend it the way it needs to go.
That's it. Good luck and be careful. |
| | | | | | | RE: here's what you do -- Rob, 01/25/2002
Mike,
Yeah, I guess that it would make sense that I would need about 4" of clearance to get the line in withou severely mangling it. I got a few posts in the general forum, but your way sounds like the best.
The specs on my engine, it is a rebuilt 390 bored .40 over, eldelbrock performer intake, and cam, mallory unilite distributor, carter (pre-edelbrock) 4bbl. The bottom end is all stock, and I went with the chrome goodies when I realized I was going to lose my oil fill tube when I changed over the intake. The car is not really a screamer, but I am looking at a set of headers from ford powertrain, and flowmaster duals, so it should be a strong running (and great sounding)dependable driver. I have had the car in various states of dissassembly for a year or so now, so I can't wait to get it back on the road in spring.
My other 62 galaxie is a 292Y block cruise-o-matic 4 door, so I have plenty of experience with galaxies, but this is my first FE!!
Thanks for all your great advice!
Rob. |
| | | | | | | | RE: good choices -- Mike McQuesten, 01/25/2002
For your purposes you've made the right choices in my opinion. The headers and exhaust system will do a lot more to help you too.
Good luck again on that fuel line. You can do it! |
| 428 cj heads -- charlie, 01/24/2002
I just got a great deal on a set of cj heads. They are ready to bolt on, $400.00 from the machine shop. Question is, Can I use the nonadjustable rocker arms from my 390 on them or do I need to pick up a set of adjustable? |
| | RE: 428 cj heads -- Mike McQuesten, 01/24/2002
428 CJs were stock with non adjustables. It depends on what cam and lifters you are going to run.
AntiPump-up hydraulics? You'll need adjustable rockers.
Rhoads lifters? Adjustables.
Solid Lifters? Adjustables.
Regular Hydraulics with a mild cam? Non Adjustables.
Congrats on the purchase of the heads. |
| | RE: 428 cj heads -- Bob, 01/24/2002
If your non-adjustables were working fine before and if the CJ heads weren't shaved too much, then the CJ heads should work fine with the non-adjustables. |
| C6 crossmember info for Kane -- Mike McQuesten, 01/24/2002
I crawled up in the rafters tonight to pull that modified '65 Merc crossmember down for a closer look. It was in '93 that I pulled the CJ/C6 out of the '61. So I'm having a hard time remembering exactly what I and a good welder friend did but here are the basics:
first, the trans cross member is 35 1/2" wide. the stock mounting holes on each end, there was one on each end, I enlargened to 5/8". Just used a drill bit and reamed it out so that a 5/8" bolt would fit. Then we drilled two new holes inboard 3 1/4" from the outer edge of the crossmember. These were a half inch forward of where the stock holes were.
second, I used a C6 crossmember mount like the style that's in my '68 F100. I think it's fairly common to all C6s in full size cars and pick ups but I'm not sure on this. Here I used two pieces of 1/4" flat aluminum stock cut to match the mounting pad on the C6. These were used as shims to align the engine & trans upward at the correct angle.
third, here's where you'll have to do some looking and figuring/planning on your own. I haven't got a crusio car out there with a trans out of it right now. But the '65 crossmember attaches with little modification to the original frame to cruisomatic crossmember mounts.
I wish I had a digital camera to take a picture of the crossmember for you. Maybe I can talk John into taking a shot or two and posting to this forum.
Not as much help as I wish I could be but it can be easily done. Hopefully there's others out there that have done this and can provide more details. |
| 69 S CODE in a Fastback -- Pat, 01/23/2002
Hi, I bought an all original untouched 1969 "S" code Mustang fastback today with 62,000 miles. It has the premium burning 390 4V hooked up to a C-6. I looked at the exhaust manifolds and has 4 bolts for every hole. Is this normal for these engines. thought just 2 per cylinder. It has an autolite 4v carb. Also has a clutch fan. Again did these stangs get this option. It has the wrap around shock towers and a cover over the heater. I bought this off an estate deal and was wondering about it. The floors are rusty abit . would this be a good project or maybe part out. Some advice about these engines would help. |
| | RE: 69 S CODE in a Fastback -- Mike McQuesten, 01/24/2002
Don't part that 62K, S code, '69 'stang out! A little rust in the floors? You've got to be kidding! Those are an easy fix. The floor pans are available.
I have an S code coupe out in my little done yard. It was totalled in '88 and I picked it up for all the great parts that and S code can provide. Like you've indicated with the factory HD wrap around shock towers, the heavy suspension front to back of course including the 9". So what if it's just a 28 spline. Same rear as '67 - '68 S code Mustangs. All the little things that the 428 CJ got the S code got too. Although the '69 S code 390 is a standard non GT 390, it's a great base to build from. Your car probably has the C8AE-H heads which are very common and they're drilled for the 390GT exhaust manifolds which are not very good. So what! Build that 390 and add the correct fit headers for C8AE heads and.....you are a lucky man!! |
| Valve adjustment 428--help/comments please -- Johnj, 01/23/2002
I am adjusting the valves on a new (old) 69 Mustang with a 428. the car would run, but very rough. Check and reset timing and dwell--ok now. removed valve covers and found all the valves clearances seem to be way too tight. I believe .025-.027 cold is the setting?
I Put #1 cyl. at TDC on compression stroke am adjusting:
#1 intake and exhaust
#3 exhaust
#4exhaust
$5intake
#8 intakeand exhaust
Will go to TDC/compressions stroke for #6cyl. and do the rest.
My questions are:
Am I correct so far?
Is the intake always the first valve in each pair. For instance:
Right Side
front. I E I E I E I E
Left Side
front I E I E IE I E
Any help would be appreciated.
Would any harm had been done by having the clearance set too close?
regards, John |
| | RE: Valve adjustment 428--help/comments please -- Ray, 01/23/2002
John, some times its better to run the whole base circal of a camshaft to fine low-ist point. Most base circals are not perfectly round, useing the book method you can be off as much .002 to .003 or more! Get a bump button and hook it to your starter selanoid, start on either bank at front, do one rocker at time!. Bump the engine untill the rocker comes off the cam and start checking all the way around the base circal, you will fine its most accurate way to set them. PS it can change the the duration of the cam at each valve if there not set correctly good luck. Ray |
| | | RE: Valve adjustment 428--help/comments please -- Johnj, 01/23/2002
Ray,
I think I understand, but why does the book say to check on compression stroke, if all i need to do is move the rocker until it comes off the cam?
John |
| | | | RE: Valve adjustment 428--help/comments please -- Ray, 01/24/2002
Some manuels will say to do it that way and it will get you going, it's the old book. I think you'l like doing it this other way, less likely mess-up and forget one. In the heat night when we are racing, we have found it's the only way. Ray |
| | | | RE: Valve adjustment 428--help/comments please -- Bob, 01/24/2002
There is an easy way and the official, book way. Forget the official way.
With the engine warmed up, remove the valve cover. Using a remote starter switch bump the engine over until the Intake valve for cylinder one is just starting to close (is coming up). Adjust the Exhaust valve.
Then bump the engine around until the Exhaust valve is staring to open (going down). Adjust the Intake valve.
If you are slow at this or your battery is weak, drop the valve cover on and run the engine for a minute or two, to warm the engine and recharge the battery. Repeat the above steps for each cylinder.
This works because if the intake valve is closing the exhaust valve has been closed for about a half stroke or 180 degrees of crank rotation and won't be open for 360 degrees of crank rotation, and when the exhaust valve is opening the intake valve has been closed for sometime (360 degrees of crank rotation) and won't open for 180 degrees of crank rotation.
|
| | | | | How true! -- Gerry Proctor, 01/24/2002
Bob's method is the most fool proof and is the method I have always used for both solid and hydraulic adjustments. The reason the book method may not give you an acceptable result is that performance cams generally have a late closing intake valve. This means that the lifter will probably not be on the cam's base circle on the compression stroke unless you're assured the piston is near top dead center. If you use Bob's method, you eliminate this possibility.
|
| | RE: Valve adjustment 428--thanks for the help! -- Johnj, 01/24/2002
Just want to thank Ray, Bob and Gerry for this help on
this topic.
John |
| For those that enjoy these kind of numbers... -- Don V, 01/23/2002
than this is for you. With the demise of Musclecar Review magazine this info will not be published, so I thought I might make it available for those interested. The following are the results of the Fords at the 2001 Pure Stock Musclecar shootout at Stanton MI.
64 Galaxie htp,390/300hp,auto,3.00 gear -15.79/87.6
66 Frln GTA cvt 390/335hp,auto 3.50 gear-14.85/94.1
71Torino htp 429/370hp, 4sp 4.11 gear -14.40/99.57
68 Mstg fstbk 428/335hp 4sp 3.91 gear - 14.44/96.03
69 Frln GT fstbk 390/320 auto 3.89 gear - 14.23/97.29
70 Torino htp 429/375hp auto 3.91 gear - 14.09/100.56
70 Torino htp 429/375hp 4sp 3.91 gear - 14.06/105.26
68 Frln 500 htp 428/335hp auto 3.70 gear - 13.95/101.82
69 Cougar htp 428/335hp auto 4.30 gear - 13.62/103.27
69 Mstg fstbk 428/335hp 4sp 3.91 gear -13.63/105.32
69 Mstg fstbk 428/335hp auto 4.30 gear - 13.43/103.98
that's it until next year, FE owners, serious gearheads indeed....
|
| | RE:Cool! -- R Shannon, 01/23/2002
Thanks Don! |
| | Muscle Car Review -- Tim B, 01/23/2002
Thanks Don. I would have loved seeing them in the magazine :-(
MCR was my second favorite magazine after Collectible Automobile. Is there any other magazine out there like it? I hate Hot Rod (Chevy) magazine. Car Craft is OK. But I prefer basically stock muscle cars. They both cater too much to their aftermarket advertisers.
Anybody subscribe to http://www.musclecarnationals.com/? They are planning on going monthly or bi-monthly in 2003. |
| | | RE: Mustangs & FORDS -- Mike McQuesten, 01/23/2002
That is an intereting list. The e.t.s/mph are real world pure stock numbers.
I'd just put in a little plug for Mustangs & FORDS. Nearly every issue has a couple of FE powered features. It seems to offer more diversity than any other mag currently published. Galaxies, Fairlanes, Mustangs, Comets & Cougars, oh my....
I was wondering if anyone else gets the little FE Club newsletter published by Dan Cain down there in Tennessee? I received the most recent issue, the one with a F100 smoking the tires on the cover. My question is where's the rest of the article on that F100? Is that all there was on that truck or is there something missing?
I appreciate what Dan and his family do to put that little newsletter out. It's way better than nothing that's for sure. |
| | | | RE: Mustangs & FORDS -- BOB HOPKINS, 01/23/2002
Yes I renewed at the Ford meet in Ohio, I like the idea that there trying to put some thing out on the FE's,NObody else is doing anything for the FE style engine /car. I went for the two year sub. if it helps them succeed Ithink it's well worth it and the $48.00 it not going to make/brake me, and I have several $50.00 mistakes under the work bench and such,I really like talking to him and his father at the Ford meets they seem like good people,and I don' t have a clue on what it takes to put out a magazine/newletter but having had journalisn class way back in highschool and putting out school newpaper I do appreace there efforts.
my $0.02 |
| | RE: For those that enjoy these kind of numbers... -- mikeb, 01/23/2002
I enjoyed the list. Those 390's don't look like the doggies most mags make them out to be. |
| | | The 390IP engine in the '69 Fairlane was modified. -- Dave Shoe, 01/23/2002
I spoke with the owner of the '69 Fairlane GT fastback while he was tweaking the shifter linkage and learned the 390 had a warmed-up cam, CJ intake and exhaust manifolds, and a few other items which allowed it to run as well as it did.
Keep in mind there were no 390GT engines offered in 1969, so 15.2-15.4 second times would have been in order for that car.
Also, I believe it might have been the 428CJ Mustang with the 4.30:1 (original was 3.50:1 for that car) rear which messed up it's motor about the third run because it only ran 5 quarts of oil. He'd made a couple hundred passes on the motor with no problems, but this was the first event where he forgot to add a sixth quart. This was an early '69 car which still had the 5-quart dipstick. It probably starved for oil on every run, but died about the third. 428CJ engines got a special 6-quart dipstick and windage tray shortly after the 1969 model year started to help keep oil in the pans.
Personally, if it destructs at 5 quarts, and doesn't blow at 6 quarts, I'd wanna run 8 quarts at least.
That was a fun mid-September weekend. Lots of patriotism. Other than what was just mentioned, the cars were largely all stock. There was a new class called "Certified Stock" which went through a rigorous inspection before hitting the track.
Shoe.
|
| | | | Also, the '69 Fairlane was starving for oil, too. -- Dave Shoe, 01/23/2002
When speaking to the the '69 Fairlane owner, I mentioned that when the gar gets to his speed bracket that the oil pan can dump oil to the rear of the engine and cause problems. He mentioned his oil pressure would drop to 40PSI through the traps, but he didn't understand why. I explained it was due to oil starvation at the pickup. He seemed interested when I pointed this out, so I suspect that FE will be running with more oil in the future.
Shoe. |
| | | | RE: The 390IP engine in the '69 Fairlane was modified. -- Joel, 01/24/2002
I crawled under my 428cj car last weekend, and it appears to have a windage tray. It also has an oil cooler. It shows full at about 5.5 quarts. Two questions: Does the oil cooler assembly drain during an oil change, should I be adding 7+ quarts on a CJ with windage tray and oil cooler? |
| | | | | I don't think 7 qts in a stock pan would work. -- Dave Shoe, 01/24/2002
The Ford "quick" solution was to add a quart. I doubt that adding a second quart would help. It'd possibly result in occasional smoking.
If oil capacity beyond the Ford recommendation is a concern, you've got to look at adding a high-capacity pan or an accumulator.
Also, I don't know how much oil the cooler consumes, or whether it drains during an oil change.
Shoe. |
| | RE: For those that enjoy these kind of numbers... -- Tom J, 01/24/2002
Dave could that be why my Ranchero misses at high rpm 5500, after it is warmed up? But not when the engine is cool. Engine temp 170 no miss engine temp warmed up at 180 for a while it misses. I have the high volume oil pump, restrictors in the rockers, Ford windage tray Fuel pressure is good. 5 lbs at 5500, My oil pressure seems fine but who is looking at the oil guage when he is running the quarter. I'm running 7 quarts now but I have a dual remote oil filter. I'll have to check that out tommorow add an extra quart and see what it does. |
| | | Bad oil pressure won't cause an ignition problem. -- Dave Shoe, 01/24/2002
Your misfiring sounds ignition related. I was recently reminded that spark plugs can cause this type of problem (ceramic fouling), but so can leaky plug wires, dirty dist cap internals, a bad coil, a bad condenser, or too big a coil used with the stock ballast (coil primary voltage drops well below 5 volts).
To find the source of your miss, I'd focus on the high voltage.
Shoe. |
| Identifying a 390 -- Bird Brain, 01/22/2002
A local farmer claims he has a rebuilt 390 for sale in a 1979 Ford truck (he bought it this way and so does not know the history). As far as I know, the 390 was not produced in 1979. Is there some way to visually determine if it is an FE engine?
Thanks. |
| | RE: Identifying a 390 -- David Thayer, 01/22/2002
First thing to look for is the big huge intake manifold that actually extends down below the valve covers. This is rather unique to the FE as the FE cylinder heads were once called "half heads".
Second, the FE had a water pump that was sort of like a Chevy and was offset away from the front of the block where the small block of 385 series (429/460) was more a complete part of the front of the motor.
Also, the FE valve covers will be sort of rounded where the 385 were more flat on top.
I don't remember when Ford quit producing these in trucks but I know I had a 76 F150 that had a 390 in it.
Good Luck David |
| | Ford engine ID -- Barry B, 01/22/2002
Here’s a simple way to determine what engine family it is, count the valve cover bolts.
FE (352, 360, 390, 410, 427, 428) – 5
90*V (221, 260, 289, 302, 351W) – 6
385 Series (429, 460) – 7
335 Series (351C, 351M, 400) - 8
|
|