Skip Navigation Links.
 |  Which One FMX or C6 -- Fred, 10/17/2001
I have a 1966 F100 wich originally came with 3-on the -tree, and now I want an automatic to put in it. Of course it has an FE engine, thats why i am posting the question here...
I heard the FMX was stronger than the C6 and also heavier. Either way I just want to know what to look for in the junkyard that will bolt up to the block..
Did they make a C4 that would bolt up? |
|  | RE: Which One FMX or C6 -- Mike McQuesten, 10/17/2001
The FMX transmission is little more than the Cruisomatic. From a layman's point of view, and that's my point because I'm not a trans rebuilder, the FMX used a valve body that allowed for a 1 - 2 - D shift pattern like the C-6 and C-4. I've heard that the FMX is an okay trans just like the cruisos were.
But they weren't as tough as the C-6. If you want a tough, durable, hard shifting Ford automatic, the C-6 is it. It robs a little more horsepower but it will take a beating if built right.
As for a C-4 to a FE, that is done by some. It takes an adaptor and the correct bell housing. I've heard "rumors" that there were some FE C-4 transmissions used in the mid to late sixties, where else? Canada of course. They always got the cool stuff, i.e., those Canadian CJ heads. Again, this is a rumor and most likely a myth...the C-4/FE bell housing I'm talking about.
For your F-100, I'd recommend going with a C-6. |
| | | C-4/FE Bellhousing Myth -- Travis Miller, 10/17/2001
The myth was exposed a few years ago. It seems that an industrious transmission builder cut the front section off of a C-6 case online with the front pump and then welded the flat rear surface off of a C-4 bell housing to it. He then used it as a mold and had new fake bell housings cast saying that they were off of a Canadian 352 1/2 ton F-100 pickup truck.
As for strength in a pickup, go with the C-6. Modifications will include moving the crossmember rearward as the mount sits further back on a C-6. |
| | | | Don't you need a different cross-member? -- Paul M, 10/18/2001
I'm asking because I don't know for sure. I have a C6 and crossmember from a `70 F100 that I was considering putting into my `69 F100. It currently has a T18 4spd, and the crossmembers are definately different.
They do bolt to the same location, but they are shaped differently, I think the C6 one locates a little farther back, and it looks to be a little taller at the mount bolt-location.
I'm also not sure if there's a difference from the 4spd and 3spd manuals' crossmembers, either, so if you got knowledge on that it would be cool.
|
| | | |  | RE: Auto transmissions -- Mel Clark, 10/19/2001
The C 6 is definately the best Ford transmission that can currently be rebuilt or modified by most shops. The easiest way to ID one is to look at the case, The C 6 is a 1 piece casting and the FMX, Ford O Matic and Cruise O Matic had seperate bellhousings.
In 1963 Ford built some A/FX drag cars with automatics and these were reputed to be the Lincoln transmission which I believe was only a beefed up Cruis O Matic. They performed really well, so which ever one you choose should be alright if your trans builder knows his stuff. |
 | 390=427? -- Tom, 10/17/2001
i just got a 390 im puttin in a 68 cyclone
i wanted to change the bore from 4.052 to
4.232 the same as a 427 my question is
does it have enough wall thickness
if ya dont know but own a 427 can ya please give me the part number and if the block got hte same part number as my 390 i can go get the work done thanks |
| | Re: 390=427? -- 67_coupe, 10/17/2001
My first time answering a post but here goes. You will need to have your block sonic checked before even going to the 428 bore much less the 427's bore. The block part #'s are not unique. ie. a block # of C7MEA can be a 352 as well as a 428 so you have to check bore to determine the difference between the two.
67_coupe |
| | | RE: Re: 390=427? -- Bob, 10/17/2001
A 390 (4.050) cannot be bored out to the size of a 427 (4.23). And 427 blocks are no longer available from Ford and very expensive every place else. They typically go for $2500 and up at eBay. 428 blocks go for several hundred dollars and up at eBay.
There are some aluminum block 427s available from Shelby but they too are very expensive. |
| | | | RE: Re: 390=427? -- Mel Clark, 10/17/2001
There is no way to bore a 390 to 427 size and have a reasonable life expectancy from it. The cylinder walls would most likely be paper thin if there were any walls left. |
| | | | | RE: Re: 390=427? -- Tom, 10/17/2001
ok i figured that out what about making a 390 block into a 428? |
| | | | | | RE: Re: 390=427? -- Flack Jack, 10/17/2001
Why not just drop in a 428 crank (not exactly an every day item but...) and make it a 410? The 410 is great for torque and quite an improvement over the 390....ain't no slouch to any others either with the right modifications. |
| | | | | | | RE: Re: 390=427? -- Tom, 10/17/2001
that is what i wanna do but punch it out so the bore is the same size as a 428 i now know i cant do it to the 427 what about 428 |
| | | | | | | | RE: Re: 390=427? -- Flack Jack, 10/17/2001
Yes I believe that can be done as long as you use the 428 crank. |
| | | | | | | | | RE: Re: 390=427? -- Bob, 10/17/2001
It been done but sometimes the 390 cylinder walls are too thin and break. FIrst get the walls sonic tested to ddetermine their thickness. Cost about $50 that last time had had it done. Lots cheaper that blowing an engine.
|
| | | | | | | | | | RE: Re: 390=427? -- Tom, 10/17/2001
that is what i planned on doing so can i also use the 428 CJ or SCJ heads and intake and such |
| | | | | | | | | | | 390 doesn't = 428 -- Paul M, 10/18/2001
Not very often, anyways. More than likely you'll be lucky to punch it out .060 over, let alone the .080 you'ld need to get to 4.13 for a 428.
On the flipside, many of the D4TE truck blocks (360-390 have same bore) seem to have been cast a bit heavier, and can safely take the 428 bore.
Some of the earlier blocks, (ie: `60's 390's) might go to 4.13, but, bottom line, get it sonic checked, and make sure you have a good wall left over after boring. |
| | | | | | | | | | | | RE: 390 doesn't = 428 -- Tom, 10/18/2001
ok cool is 390 is coming out of a 1968 galaxie got any idea there? |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Depends. -- Paul M, 10/18/2001
I've heard elsewhere that there are ways to guestimate (NOT a substitute for sonic checking, but a way to save money looking for a candidate block).
One is to look inside the block, behind the center freeze plug, for the #'s 428 cast or stamped in (not positive which).
Also, try putting a pencil (standard #2 type) between the middle cylinders, (after you looked for the casting #'s inside) at the widest point you can see. If the pencil fits, forget it, you *might* get .060 over, if you're lucky.
`68 was getting close to the end of production 390's for cars, so they may have been letting the
casting's quality go a bit. Not to mention it was for a Galaxie, and not a GT for a Mustang. Chances are it's not a heavy block, but you never can tell for sure, as Ford was notorious for using whatever parts they had on whatever engines they were building.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | RE: Depends. -- Tom, 10/18/2001
ok cool i got no problem sonic testing about how much is it ? |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | RE: 390 doesn't = 428 -- Rollie H, 10/18/2001
Here are the block casting numbers that were used for 428s in the 60s: C6AE-A, C6AE-B, C6AE-F, C6ME, C6ME-A, C7ME, C7ME-A, C8ME. There may be others I am not aware of for the 60s. Ford keeps us on our toes when it comes to figuring out what they built back then.
It is possible your 390 may have been built by Ford using one of these blocks. Just because your engine is the original one installed by Ford in 1968 doesn't mean the block wasn't a left over 428 block from the previous years of 428s. Then built into a 390 and installed by Ford. Also, this may not be the original engine in your Galaxie. Don't rely entirely on the cars engine code on the VIN plate. Only a close inspection of the entire engine will give you the real facts.
By the way I currently have a 428 engine built from a heavy duty " mirror image 105" D4TE block. It is bored .030 over standard 428 specs. No problems, but it isn't being used for racing. It does haul the mail very well though. Just can't seem to keep from pulling into a gas station everywhere I go. |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | RE: 390 doesn't = 428 -- Tom, 10/18/2001
hahahah ok thanks man i dunno if the 390 is origonal
it is in a junkyard 50 bucks and i cant pass up a deal
out here in vegas i get 110 OCTANE Gas for 4.00$$ a gallon or goto the local small air port and get it for a plane (same gas) for 1.50 a gallon im also thinking of going with a 351c 4v setup on my 68 cyclone
but id like to go with the 428 i cna get a 428 block for 500 now but if i can use that 390 i will thanks for the input got any more info for me just tell me |
| | | 390 wont run right -- Dan Wolf, 10/18/2001
my 390 gt in my truck has a bad flat spot just off idle. it has a holley carb which I dont know much about. I tweaked the carb and timing but there is still a small flat spot. I think it might be the accelerator pump but I dont know. any help would be greatly appreciated. |
| | RE: Numbers don't make HP, Knowledge does -- R. Shannon, 10/18/2001
You might be able to squeeze 421 Cubes out of the 390 using a 428 crank/flywheel and a .060 over bore. 415 cubes would be more friendly (.030) overbore with the 428 crank. But, by the time you find a crank and HP pieces get all the work done you just as well buy a 428 cause you'll have the same 2K to 3K in the motor. Unless you won the lottery forget about the 427. Numbers really don't make the engine, a seasoned mechanic and a good machine shop makes the HP. |
| | | RE: Numbers don't make HP, Knowledge does -- Dan Wolf, 10/18/2001
i have a 1968 390 GT in a 77 f250. it has a flat spot just off idle. I cant tune it out with the carb or distributer but it is a holley carb which is not my specialty. any help would be greatly appreciated. |
| | | | RE: Numbers don't make HP, Knowledge does -- Old Bob, 10/18/2001
Try changing the acel pump diaphram. You can also get different pump cams that alter how soon the pump squirts gas |
| | | 390 bogs down -- Dan Wolf, 10/18/2001
i have a 1968 390 GT in a 77 f250. it has a flat spot just off idle. I cant tune it out with the carb or distributer but it is a holley carb which is not my specialty. any help would be greatly appreciated. |
| | | | RE: 390 bogs down -- Bob, 10/18/2001
You should start a new post for a new problem but it probably is the accelerator pump. |
| | | | | RE: 390 bogs down -- Tom, 10/18/2001
yeah i been out at the cobra shop and they keep telling me that im prolly just gonna go with a 351c 4v in my cyclone thanks alot guys |
 | kevin...? -- Mike McQuesten, 10/16/2001
Kevin, are you the kevin that said sometime back in August that you were going to check your shop for some '60 352HP parts? Specifically a '60 open element HP/Police air cleaner?
If not, never mind.
If so, please contact me.
I'm just a fool for the '60 Bat Wing Specials!
And I'm just a fool for lots of reasons, one prominent one being I'm trying to figure out how I'm going to get the $32,500 to Mel.
|
| Edelbrock vs. Dove -- Darrel Ricketts, 10/16/2001
I have a sideoiler that is going in a 67 Mustang for street use. I am currently putting it together with midly ported 428 CJ heads. In the near future I want to switch to aluminum heads and can't decide on Dove or Edelbrock. The Edelbrock are the most affordable, but the large chamber head doesn't have the CJ exhaust bolt pattern. I'm told that the over/under pattern is ok if I run headers (which I am). The Dove F5WE head is the closest in price and is supposed to completely outflow the Edelbrock, but I hear all kinds of horror stories about quality and porosity. Does anybody have any experience with either of these heads? Any info you have is greatly appreciated. |
| | RE: Edelbrock vs. Dove -- Mel Clark, 10/16/2001
Contact George at email address "gessford. com". He does a lot of engines for the Cobra replica set and uses both, often.
From what I have heard, there are several steps that a good shop goes through before assembling an engine using Dove components, regarding the porosity issue. They must orherwise be worth the money as so many people use their products.
You can find his phone number at their "Club Cobra" web site. Some very neat stuff there. |
| | RE: Edelbrock vs. Dove -- Heath, 10/17/2001
You get ready to sell those cj heads let me know! |
| | | RE: Edelbrock vs. Dove -- Darrel Ricketts, 10/18/2001
No, They're going on a 390 and in something else, maybe a Mustang or Fairlane |
| | RE: Edelbrock vs. Dove -- ANDY, 10/18/2001
Surely some judicious unshrouding of the valves would take the CJ style chamber to a usable figure? |
| Engine-number -- Christian Gustavsson, 10/16/2001
Hello!
I wonder if someone could help me to identify a ford engine.
I found a number (O or 0) C5AE-6015E.
There is also another number 8B4.
Best regards
Christian Gustavsson
|
| | RE: Engine-number -- Bob, 10/16/2001
My list shows it as a 427 top oiler. Cast Feb 4, 1968 if I recall how to read block casting dates correctly. |
| | | RE: Engine-number -- Mel Clark, 10/17/2001
If it's a '68 engine it should be a hydraulic lifter block or else marine. |
| | RE: Engine-number -- Christian Gustavson, 11/07/2001
Hello!
I wonder if someone could help me to identify a ford engine.
I found a number (O or 0) C5AE-6015E.
There is also another number 8B4.
I am pretty sure that it is an 289 or 302......
Best regards
Christian Gustavsson
|
| block and valve cover colors for 67 merc -- dennie, 10/15/2001
need to know original color for 390 valve covers and block my pbf's are blue i'm replacing with merc pentroofs with al intake, also has anyone aluminized their valve covers? |
| | RE: Ford Blue! -- Mike McQuesten, 10/15/2001
The correct colors were a deep shade of Ford Blue....I say deep because the Ford blue for valve covers from the early '60s 352s is not the correct shade.
I've Zinc coated Merc Pentroofs the gold irridate and run a set of those on my '68 F100. The zinc plating has held up well and is very cheap to have done. I also chromed a set for a 428CJ in a '66 Comet Cycolone GT I once owned too.
What I like to do is run two drivers side Merc Pentroofs so that I can run the nicer breather in both and not the typical PCV grommet sytem. It takes a little longer to find two sets.....I've got quite a few passenger side Mercury pentroof covers stacked up that I'd part with very reasonably. |
| 390 - Timing Chain Check Question -- Ralph Wasielewski, 10/15/2001
Is there an easy way to check if the timing chain has jumped? Here's what I done so far:
I resently bought a 64 Tbird that does not have the factory engine. It does have a 390 engine, just not the original Tbird configuration.
It ran poorly and I noticed the spark plug wires were one hole off all around the distributor cap. Also, the ground wire in the distributor was replaced with something home made and was installed in a way that would not allow the vacuum advance to pull in. I put the #1 piston in TDC ( using a method a read in this forum) and could see that the distributor bug was pointing mostly to the wrong plug, the previous cylinder in the firing order,#8 I think. I put the plug wires back to their correct positions (as indicated on the manifold - another tip I read in this forum) on the cap and reset the distributor to point to #1. It felt like it was two teeth off. It starts and runs much better but I want to check if its was something the previous owner(s) had botched or combination of problems gone from bad to worse until I found the wire interfering with the vacuum advance. |
| | RE: 390 - Timing Chain Check Question -- richard, 10/15/2001
you can check for timing chain slack by first hand turning the engine in one direction(it doesnt matter which direction) untill the rotor just starts to move. then turn the engine in the opposite direction again untill the rotor jusr starts to move. if you turn the crank more than 2-3 degrees then rplace the timing chain as you have too much slacl in the system. other wise you have just corrected problems the previous owner had. |
| | | RE: 390 - Timing Chain Check Question -- Mel Clark, 10/15/2001
I found a jumped timiing chain when I was replacing the fuel pump. I noticed a bit of plastic resting ay the bottom of the pump hole, I stuck my finger in there and felt a very loose timing chain.
The reason I thought the pump was the problem was the car would not hold a steady speed on the highway, I was constantly speeding up or slowing down.
In any case, there were no teeth left on the cam gear, Plastic, you know. It just fell apart. I installed a Cloyes true double roller and no more problems. |
| | | | 390 - Cloyes Sprocket Question -- Skip C., 10/18/2001
Mel or anyone, I installed a Cloyes Tru Roller in my 390 about a year ago. At the time, I wasn't interested in changing the cam or altering the factory valve timing. I have since found out that the '66 390 4bbl comes stock with the cam retarded 4 degrees. If I remember right, the Cloyes chain cam sprocket had three holes (for the cam pin) in it. Does anyone know how many degrees the cam timing is effected by using one of the other two holes ?? Sorry for the question, but I threw out the paperwork that came with the chain/sprocket set. Thanks, Skip |
| | | | | RE: 390 - Cloyes Sprocket Question -- Bob, 10/18/2001
I've never heard that and don't believe it! |
| | | | | | RE: 390 - Cloyes Sprocket Question -- Skip C., 10/18/2001
Maybe I'm getting senile, sorry. Skip |
| | | | | | | RE: 390 - Cloyes Sprocket Question -- Bob, 10/18/2001
I should have explained and not been so rude. All of the manufacturers played with timing in the mid to late '70s for emmisions reasons but inthe mid '60s they were after HP; mileage didn't matter and emisson issues were just an annoyance. |
| | | RE: 390 - Timing Chain Check Question -- Ralph Wasielewski, 10/16/2001
Thanks for the info. I rotated the engine until it pointed exactly to 0 TDC. Then set a pointer to the rotor bug. Turned the engine in the other direction until the rotor bug barely moved from the pointer - read the timing marks and got 7 degrees. Looks like it was timing chain problems then everything else was a bandaid.
Since I just got this, I'd like to run it for a while to try and determine what other problems there may be.
Does the 390 FE engine have a destructive condition of valves hitting the pistons when the timing gets too far out?
|
| | | | RE: 390 - Timing Chain Check Question -- Bob, 10/16/2001
Not with the stock pistons and cams. Putting a in set of roller chain and gears will make a new engine out of yours. Even a regular set of gears will make it like new it just won't stay that way for as long. And it not relly that hard to do. |
| | | | | RE: 390 - Timing Chain -- Mel Clark, 10/16/2001
The original Ford chain uses a plastic gear, you can get a standard type of gear in all steel/cast iron. I think most would reccommend using the double roller type. Never reuse the old timing chain. |
| | | | | | RE: 390 - Timing Chain -- Ralph Wasielewski, 10/17/2001
Thanks. I will replace the timing gears and chain as a set. To me it does not make much sense to tear down the front of the engine and reuse any of the internal timing parts. More than likely they are designed as a set and should be replaced as a set. I'm looking at the double roller type since the engine seems to be in good enough shape to warrant a few extra dollars for the better parts. |
| | | | | | | RE: 390 - Timing Chain -- Mel Clark, 10/17/2001
Good plan! This would also be the right time to change cams if you are planning to do so soon anyway. |
| | | | | | | | RE: 390 - Timing Chain -- Tom, 10/19/2001
lol i have a 1973 Torino "itis a Bitch to do timing on it since its got a 351c 4v and i saw the times gear it had 3 teeth left look like on the compression stroke it was just tearing up mt timing sprocket
also got plastic in my oil pan and was not gettin enuff oil to the lifters and lifter #5 went flat after i fixed that lifter and timing and new intake and 700 Doublepumper it is like driving a new car |
| | | | | | | | | RE: 390 - Timing Chain -- Mel Clark, 10/19/2001
Ford used the plastic cam gear to help keep the engine running as silent as possible, I'd rather have the very slight whine that steel makes.
I have no idea if Ford planned it that way or if they just didn't care but, the plastic gears rarely last much more than six years or about 60,000 miles, just a bit past warrantee requirements. Ford does get quite anal over warrantee claims, as we all know.
|
| Holley Float Bowl -- David Shelton, 10/14/2001
Has anyone tried to tap out other side of a Holley float bowl so It can be fed from the driver's side like original? I need a C9AF- N carb, but could get by with my currect 3310 if the bowl was changed. Does Holley sto bowl tapped on both sides? |
| "Canadian Cobra Jet" SK Heads -- Royce Peterson, 10/14/2001
A while back someone mentioned the so - called "Canadian Cobra Jet" cheater heads used in some S/S classes in the 1960's. I knew I had pictures somewhere taken at the Carlisle All Ford swap meet in 1999. Here's the first picture, the nest one shows the exhaust port. They looked like a Medium Riser with valves closer together.
 |
| | RE: "Canadian Cobra Jet" SK Heads -- Royce Peterson, 10/14/2001
Here's the other picture. The guy was asking $3500.00 and he worked for Barrie Poole during the early 1970's.
Royce Peterson
 |
| | | RE: "Canadian Cobra Jet" SK Heads -- Mel Clark, 10/14/2001
Very nice pics you have there. I don't believe that I've ever seen a pair of those heads "live" before. If you will give me all of the casting numbers that are on them I have a phone buddy that is seriously connected at Ford Engineering and he may be able to make a positive identification on them. You can bet that if Ford gave them out to the racers of the day they were as good or better than any cheater head you could make and still pass a teardown. |
| | | | RE: "Canadian Cobra Jet" SK Heads -- Royce Peterson, 10/14/2001
SK 35369 was the casting # and the date was 7k7. They were nice heads but were not useful to me for the price. Someone restoring a Super Stock car from the '60's would deserve them. They loked like new, had the sodium exhaust / hollow intake valves. You can't see it in the picture but they had cast in valve spring pockets. It appeared they were identical to Medium Riser heads except for the valve spacing.
Royce Peterson |
| | | | | RE: "Canadian Cobra Jet" SK Heads -- Mike McQuesten, 10/15/2001
These are very interesting castings indeed. Over the years I've heard the "legend" but of course haven't had such an opportunity to see and touch these SK/Canadian CJ heads.
So what is the deal with them? These heads were cast October 7, 1967. There is no provision for the multi-bolt Cobra Jet/Uni-body exhaust manifold.
I'm certainly no expert on Super Stock drag racing rules then or now. But how did the SK 35369 get by as legal for Super Stock drag racing? |
| | | | | | RE: "Canadian Cobra Jet" SK Heads -- Mel Clark, 10/15/2001
They had to use the 427 exhaust manifolds or headers to use those in a Mustang or Fairlane/Comet body. The 427 manifolds seem to breathe a bit better than the 428 units. Also needed to drill holes in the inner fender panels to install the verticle bolts. |
| | | | | | | RE: "Canadian Cobra Jet" SK Heads -- Mike McQuesten, 10/16/2001
Still wondering how the Super Stock racers got away with that Mel. Obviously, they must have. But I was just wondering ...did NHRA allow different heads of the original manufacturer? So why not tunnel ports?
I understand about having to run headers although a guy could run the very uncommon Fairlane/Comet 427 exhaust manifolds from late '66 and '67......I've never seen them in real life. Every 427 Fairlane/Comet I've ever seen was equipped with headers. But I have two nice black & white 35mm pics of them. Wish I had a scanner.......better check the ads to see what's on sale. |
| | | | | | | | RE: oem exhaust manifolds -- Mel Clark, 10/16/2001
My 1967 Cyclone has the original cast iron manifolds and will run to 8500+ rpm without choking, the truth is I don't think they are much heavier than a decent set of headers. I'll sell you the Cyclone for $32,500.00 and give you the car free. |
| | | | | | | | | RE: oem exhaust manifolds -- Mike McQuesten, 10/16/2001
You know.....I'd rather own your '67 R-code Cyclone than I would a $35,000 (going price here in Spokane) '01 Lightening. So now all I have to do is get that $32,500.
It's great that your car still has those extremely rare, which makes sense, '66/'67 427 unibody exhaust manifolds. Most got yanked for headers because most got thoroughly drag raced.
Okay Mel, I'm talking with my wife tonight about why $32,500 would be an excellent investment in our futures.....oh wait, I've used that one before...hmmm, I'll be thinkin' about it. |
| | | | | | | | | | RE: oem exhaust manifolds -- Mel Clark, 10/16/2001
I can help you find financing. :-) |
| | | | | | | | | | | RE: oem exhaust manifolds -- Barry B, 10/16/2001
Mel and Mike, are you guys talking about these manifolds?
 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | RE: oem exhaust manifolds -- Mike McQuesten, 10/16/2001
Those are the ones I've seen.....in pictures only. |
| | | | | | | | | | | | RE: oem exhaust manifolds -- Mel Clark, 10/16/2001
Those are the ones on my Cyclone. They work really well. I would like to see a dyno comparison between those and a good set of headers. I think a few people would be surprised in the difference. I don't think there is much. |
| | | | | | | | RE: "Canadian Cobra Jet" SK Heads -- Travis Miller, 10/16/2001
When you say Canadian Cobra Jet and SK heads, you are talking about two totally different heads.
The SK heads were developed for the 427 Medium Riser and were used prior to the introduction of the Tunnelport heads. To give you an understanding of the SK heads, you must first understand the regular Medium Riser heads. There were two different versions of the regular MR heads. The first was the C5AE-F which had a intake runner volume of 153cc's and an exhaust runner volume of 115cc's. The 2nd version was C5AE-6090-F which held 164cc's and 124cc's respectively in the runners. The 2nd version holds more volume because it used a larger bowl under the intake valve. It can be identified by a large C5AE cast at an angle between the middle exhaust ports and a large 6090F cast between the outer exhaust ports toward the right end of the head. As for the SK heads, there were two different casting numbers, SK 35369 and SK 31635. These heads differed from the regular MR heads because they used the huge bowl under the valve that the Hi-Riser head used. They also had no heat riser passage. The SK, the C5AE-F, and the C5AE-6090-F heads all use the same intake gasket. The exhaust port is in the same place and the ports measure the same at the exhaust manifold mating surface on all three heads making them appear the same without looking at the casting numbers. Ford knew how to play the game. For drag racing, all three heads are legal for S/S with the SK being rated higher but the SK's are not legal for Stock.
The Canadian head was used on the 428 Cobra Jets. Externally it is identical to the regular 428 Cobra Jet head. Some people say that there is a difference in the clarity of some of the casting marks but I've never seen it when comparing the two. Both use the same casting number of C8OE-N. The difference is in the intake runner. The intake runner goes straighter back into the head to a larger bowl under the valve. The intake port also has a dip cast into the floor of the runner. The only way to learn the differences is to put a regular CJ head next to a Canadian head and actually compare the two. Then you can see the difference. The biggest problem is that most of the rare Canadian heads have been used up in S/S drag racing where porting and welding is legal.
One thing that I do find interesting is that every Canadian head that I have seen or asked anyone about has a casting date of 9H20, 9H21, or 9H22. If this is the case, then they were not cast until August 20-22 in 1969. That was just before the NHRA Nationals at Indy that year. So how did the '68 428 Cobra Jets have Canadian heads in 1968, or did they? The story goes that NHRA caught Ford with them on the earlier 428 CJ's in 1970 and made the 428 CJ's run at a different horsepower rating when claiming the Canadian heads.
|
| | | | | | | | | RE: makes sense to me.. -- Mike McQuesten, 10/16/2001
Travis, this makes a lot more sense to me. I'm not positive but doesn't the SK casting have something to do with experimental parts?
I've heard of the Canadian heads but I've never read or heard such a clear and concise explanation about them and the differences compared to the "Regular" C8OE-N heads.
Great post! |
| | | | | | | | | | RE: makes sense to me.. -- Mel Clark, 10/16/2001
Best explaination I've ever heard. That is one of the most interesting posts I've read regarding the Canadian heads. Thanks |
| | | | | | | | | | | RE: Canadian heads -- garrett, 10/17/2001
At a show a few weeks ago I saw a GTE Cougar, and the owner said it had the Canadian heads on the 427...I couldn't make out the casting numbers because of the darn shock towers. I guess being so similar to CJ heads made them good for the hydraulic, emissions-laden 427's? |
| | | | | | | | | | | | RE: Canadian heads -- Travis Miller, 10/17/2001
I cannot verify the following paragraph from first hand knowledge but this is what I have heard.
The 1968 GTE Cougar with the 390 horse 427 engine had head numbers of either C8WE-A or C8AE-J. I have been told that the Canadian heads are actually cast from the C8WE-A mold but the casting number was changed to match the C8OE-N number so they could be used for S/S drag racing on the 428 CJ.
Also, in my previous post I failed to print the runner volumes that we use at NHRA for the regular C8OE-N and the Canadian C8OE-N heads. They are as follow:
Regular C8OE-N intake runner=155cc, exhaust=123cc
Canadian C8OE-N int. runner=174cc, exh.=125cc
This shows how much larger the intake runner with it's larger bowl under the intake valve actually is. Again the regular C8OE-N and the Canadian C8OE-N heads use the same intake gasket. Those Ford engineers were tricky rascals.
|
| 428CJ/C-6 Kickdown rod -- Joel, 10/14/2001
Does anyone have a picture of what one looks like and how it attaches? |
| | | RE:Are you sure? -- Mike McQuesten, 10/15/2001
This is the kickdown for a C6 & CJ? Sure different from what I remember and so this is just a friendly inquiry based on memory here but all of my FE/Fairlane/Torinos with a C6 had a different "system". The kickdown lever actuated off of the C6 bellhousing from a lever off the bellcrank linkage mounted on the back of the intake. Then there was a small connecting linkage lever to the transmission kickdown lever. That's the best way I can describe it.
I still have two of them. One was originally on a '66 Cyclone GT/automatic C6. Of course that's not a 428CJ/C^ combo. The other was off of a '69 Torino GT 428CJ/C6. It's very similar to the '66 system with a few minor differences in that larger lever shape.
Or is the picture you're showing for a Mustang/Cougar application?
|
| | | RE: 428CJ/C-6 Kickdown rod -- Joel, 10/14/2001
That's perfect thanks. I have a kickdown from a 302/FMX torino? I looks the same but doesn't have the extra little piece on the tranny side. Will it work? Thanks. |
| | | | RE: 428CJ/C-6 Kickdown rod -- Royce Peterson, 10/14/2001
It is going to be close, maybe you can make it work. I am surprised no one is repro - ing these things, they are always missing.
Royce |
| | RE: 428CJ/C-6 Kickdown rod -- David Shelton, 10/14/2001
I wish I could find one. |
| | | RE: Which car? -- Mike McQuesten, 10/15/2001
Hey Joel, it depends on which 428 Cobra Jet vehicle. I've checked my assertion a little more, it depends on which vehicle and maybe what year. Here's what I found:
From the 1967 Mustang/Fairlane/Comet/Cougar shop manual, page 7-67, there's are pics of the two systems of accelerator/kickdown linkage for Mustang/Cougar w/390 & C6 and one system for the Fairlane/Comet w/390 & C6. So this is why I was assuming that the kickdown/accel. linkage would be the same for .... '68 or '69/'70.
Then I walked out back to look at a '69 S-code Mustang parts car I've had for many years. Not much left of it. We've picked it over quite a lot. However, the accelerator cable throttle is still intact. So this would lead me to believe that '69 Mustang may have used the kickdown rod like Royce is depicting. I can say for a fact that the '69 Torino/Fairlane 428s ran a system very similar to the one I described before.....the accelerator pedal rod had a "spoon" welded to it that actuated a lever connected to the bell and linked to the kickdown lever on the C6. I still have this system complete from a Torino GT 428CJ/C6.
So it does depend on what vehicle. Which I don't think you mentioned.....must be a Mustang, huh?
The rod Royce has provided a picture of looks very similar to what was used on pick ups and full size Fords/Mercs and with small block apps in the Mustangs/Cougars.
The 735 Holley carb I had was original on the Torino I mentioned too and it had no provision (kick down lever) for the rod that Royce is showing. I guess the Mustang/Cougar 428 CJ 735 Holley had this kick down lever on the carb? |
| | | | Torino -- Joel, 10/16/2001
n/m |
| | | | | RE: Torino -- Mike McQuesten, 10/16/2001
Then I'm telling you that that kickdown rod is not correct for your Torino. As I've said, that long rod is typical for Pick ups, Full size Fords/Mercs, and that "system" is used with the small block 302/351W in Torinos & Fairlanes. And it may be used with FE Mustangs/Cougars but I'm very vague on this. The '69 'stang coupe S code I have has a cable accelerator and it may have run the rod. It originally ran a Ford/Motorcraft carb, not a Holley like the '66-'68 real GT 390. I pulled the engine/trans over ten years ago and sold it. The car was totalled and it's been picked over very well.
So again, if you want your Torino to be "correct", then you'll need the system that includes the accelerator pedal rod with a "spoon"(this is what the shop manual refers to it as) and the lever that attaches to the bell of the C6, connected to the bell crank at top and to the kickdown lever from the trans. Sound complicated? It kind of is but it's easy to set up if you have all the parts/pieces. The shop manual helps too.
If the carb you plan to use on the 428 has a kickdown lever on it, then you will be able to fabricate something like the rod that was on your 302 connected to your FMX.
Good luck if you're installing a 428/C6 in the original home of a 302/FMX. It can be done. There are a few who have done it. I admire your initiative.
|
| | | | | here's an idea from Mojo -- for Mojo, 10/16/2001
http://network54.com/Hide/Forum/message?forumid=74182&messageid=1003078051 |
| | | | | | RE:Original 428 Torino? -- Mike McQuesten, 10/16/2001
I just re read one of your original posts. You said that you had found a kick down rod from a 302/FMX car and that's what you wanted to adapt to your car. Okay, so if your Torino is an original FE car it should have that "spoon" welded on the acclerator rod running through the firewall. Look down back there. It should be pointing down. It's a flat little flapper looking thing. It pushes against a rod/flat lever that will pull, thus actuate your kickdown lever on your C-6. If it's all there? I can see someone leaving off the lever portion but not replacing the accel. pedal. So you might be part way there. |
| | | | | | | RE:Original 428 Torino? -- Joel, 10/17/2001
I saw that post over on network54 as well. I'm concerned about originality and want to get the correct parts. So there is no kickdown rod like above connected from the carb to the tranny? I'll look tonight. |
| | | | | | | | RE:Original 428 Torino? -- Mike McQuesten, 10/17/2001
I don't believe there is. As I've said based on personally owning a '69 Torino GT 428 CJ with console shift C-6 automatic, the kickdown "system" was actuated off of the accelerator pedal rod that runs through the firewall up to the bell crank. There was no long kickdown rod from the carburetor back and down to the kickdown lever of the C-6. At least not on a FE/428 Torino or Fairlane.
I wish someone could scan the illustration for you from the genuine Ford shop manual. |
| | | | | | | | | | RE:Original 428 Torino? -- Mike McQuesten, 10/17/2001
Ya, except you don't really need the entire set. Just the manual for the Fairlane and Torino. Still $60 for a full set doesn't look too bad. But since you have a '69 Torino 428 CJ, you need that resource to find out how everything should go to make your car as original as possible which is what you said you wanted to do.
Good luck. |
| | | | | | | | | RE:Original 428 Torino? -- Bob, 10/17/2001
I've scanned in the '67 and the '69 Fairlane linakage. They are very similar and just as you described. I don't have the '68 Fairlane shop manual but at least the '67 and the '69 show that the type of linkage did not change.
I've sent larger copies of both scans to Joel. I had to shrink them to download them here.
 |
| | | | | | | | | | RE:thanks Bob -- Mike McQuesten, 10/18/2001
Thanks Bob for doing that for Joel. I really need a scanner. But that gives Joel the shot he needs for finding the parts for his CJ Torino '69. I'd still like to know about the kick down system for the '69 Mustang 428? Did they use the long rod like Royce was thinking about? I wonder because that '69 Hulk I have has a cable throttle and that would lead me to believe a different system was used vs. the '67 FE 'stang...just wondering. Or did the '68 Coug 427 GTE use the long carb to trans rod? |
| | | | | | | | | | | You guys Rock! -- Joel, 10/18/2001
I checked last night, it's all there! It is the spoon and lever setup as you guys described. It's out of adjustment. If I actuate the throttle from closed to WOT, the spoon contacts the lever but barely moves the tranny lever. What's the proper adjustment for this thing? I would think, at WOT, it would move the tranny lever to it's maximum point. I suppose it depends on how I want it to repond when driving. I would like to kickdown at half throttle or so. |
| | | | | | | | | | | | RE: You guys Rock! -- Bob, 10/18/2001
What year is your Torino?
The '69 shop manual says: Depress accel. pedal to wide open throttle with rod assy. 7A186 held so trans. is against internal [within trans] kick-down stop. Adjust trunnion to permit entry into hole in kick-down lever. Then shorten rod by turning trunnion 1 or 2 turns and connect. |
| | | | | | | | | | | RE:thanks Bob -- Bob, 10/18/2001
For the Mustang V-8 the '69 shop manual shows a cable from the pedal to the carb and a rod from the carb to the trans. Don't have the '68 Mustang manual.
I only use sticks so all I can do is report what the book shows. |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Update -- Joel, 10/22/2001
Well, I adjusted the kickdown per the service manual. It doesn't seem to work as it should. I mash the pedal to the floor and it doesn't consistantly shift down. I would like it to shift down above about half throttle. Sticky linkage maybe? I didn't have an assistant (my wife won't set foot in the car) to acuate the pedal while I watched from underneath. I put a wrench on it to simulate WOT. Maybe it's not moving the linkage enough. |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | RE: Update -- BOB HOPKINS, 11/02/2001
Joel ; I 'll tell you how I git around a assistent I doo woodworking too,you know the woodclamps you see the one end comes off and becomes a spreader one end on petal "gas or brake" and the other end on the back of dash or front of seat "instant assestant"and no bitching |
|