That's the correct #
Is that correct for a 428 CJ?
JW

And that is the water outlet.

I have one fresh out of my bead blaster...
#'s are C8AE 8594 E Clearly an E
vacuum switch has C8AE-A (3 prong)
What's the best way to test vac on the switch(sensor) off of the car?
Mansfield has C8AE-8952-A listed as correct # for T Stat Housing??What does that fit?
JW

With some mild plenum work and a little grinding the Street Dom is a great manifold even stock they run great. For a street car they are good as is up to 428 cid or so.

However, Royce is right, no FE Strip Dominator, wish they would have though!

All 2WD pickup trucks had front sump pans. An F600 or such with a 391 FT may have had a front, rear or full sump pan depending on what year and decade and application. All FWD trucks had rear sump pans.

Basically the front sump pans can be a problem in how deep the sump is because of 5 quart and 6 quart pans. The 428 in my F100 has a 6 quart pan with a front sump and may not work in a mustang. It is deeper than the 5 quart front sump pan from a 1967 390 that I have as a core. I have compared the two and the difference in sump depth is roughly 3/4 to 1 inch as far as I could tell.

Also, I have seen the plug locations on the left or right rear corners of the sump.

you nead a frount sump pan. the rear sump pans wer for 4 wheal drives aps and some industrial aps had them, most late model frount sump pans should work in a mustang.....

OK. Thanks for the info. I'm just now really trying to learn how tune & understand carbs. I've read some on the powervalves and thought a change might do it some good, but if it's good enough for your CJ it should be OK for mine.
Thanks

I noticed the holley offers a Standard Flow and a High Flow 6.5 power valve. Any opinions on the difference between these two valves?

yep,i had to go over size,on the block,but we used the pistons on an egine that was a 390 originaly,was a little loose ,but the dude woundn't listen,and was cheap.damn thing runs strong,and no blow by or smoke!!,go figure?

http://www.jcoconsulting.com/ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=67257&Reply=67174

n/m

THAT'S A 427 CAMMER BLOCK!! It probably was not finished when it was cast. The front of the block is cast for the timing set up (it has a timing chain about 7 feet long). It's worth a helluva lot more than 500 dollars!

nouthing special

Date code looks like 3E29 from the pic on the ad. Might be a 406 service block possibly but thought they would have the HP designation on and in the block like the early HP blocks. I'm pretty sure the HP was cast into the block until 64 but not positive. It does have thick walls though. I have a C3-D 406 block with one side 427 wallcores and the other std 406...cruel...LOL, G.

Royce, aren't you talking about the SP2P that E'brock offered for a few years. It was in the seventies and it was designed for exactly what you described. It was trully a non-performance piece of aluminum junk. The SP2P was offered for a variety of engines.

The Streetmaster was a "Do-it-Yourself" port matching job. It even came with instructions in the box about how to port match your intake to the heads. It was a single plane and depending upon all the other necessary combination of parts, could work easily into the low 6,000 rpms.

I port matched one to my CJ heads and found it worked very well except that I developed a leak between the water passage and #1 port. I think it was my fault but at the time I blamed the narrow lip between the port/water passage. Of course, I immediately removed it and reinstalled my tried and true PI intake. But I have to say that in the short time I drove the car with that intake, it sure felt strong and the cam I was running at the time was a 6,200 max Schneider solid lifter. The CJ pulled very hard to that red line and it just felt great. But I never got an actual run at the drag strip to get the true comparison.

A good friend of mine, Jerry Pruitt, Yakima, WA, did very well in Super Stock competition, '64 Galaxie Custom with legal 352. His intake of choice? The Edelbrock Streetmaster. He ported/modified it greatly but it's his opinion that the Edelbrock Streetmaster is a gem if "worked" properly.

Right out of the box, the Streemaster does have small runner ports, i.e., similar to the -S- cast iron intake, the C7ZX dual four intake and even the C7AE PI intake. But the potential is there for a great performance intake. I don't believe the Streetmaster was ever intended as a mileage maker supposedly like the SP2P.

BTW, Edelbrock will still send you those Streetmaster porting instructions if you request them.

How was a single plane, staright runner intake designed for economy. Have you seen one? I'll promise you that mine ran better than any 2 barrell setup, or 390gt manifold. In fact I'll trade you my offy 360 degree dual plane that I currently run for that streetmaster right now.

i found a bunch of junk maifolds for the ford out there,big and small block,i would.nt put them on my mower ie the sp2p for the 351,400 m by edelbrock,that offy dual runner,if them manifold makers put as much reasearch in the ford motors as they did them chevies,same for the cam makers too,these ford would have been a lot easier to build and cheaper for part prices

raceman,i might have a friend that might be wantining to unlaod a 351,w,ported heads screwins with guides,and a c7fe cam to boot,this hauled hay in a 68 cougar,,and would run/shift 7000 plus,would bump mid,low 12;s