Skip Navigation Links.
| Shoe, How did your day with Genesis go? nm -- Louie, 09/09/2002
nm |
| | Genesis was the first stop on my trip. -- Dave Shoe, 09/10/2002
My weeklong trip took me to Genesis, Columbus, the Henry Ford Museum, and to Total Performance. I was surprisingly welcomed at all of these stops, and, in particular, I was a bit stunned when John Vermeersch opened the doors to Total Performance and let me take over a thousand photos of interesting FE goodies over a period of three days. I learned a bunch and am still a bit sore from moving all those cranks, heads, blocks, intakes, and other FE goodies around.
I very much wanted to visit Dove Performance this trip, but the combination of a dead cell phone and the heaps of great goodies at Total Performance mean I'll have to visit Dove when I set out to visit Holman Moody early next year.
I was very impressed by what I found at Genesis. GEnesis 427 is the brainchild of Tim McLoughlin (sp?) and Ron Read, both of Indianapolis, Indiana.
I got a tour through both the machine shop and also the foundry which they have allied with, and got to see the patterns and molds for the block, as well as the castings.
The machine shop is ISO9000 qualified. Because the shop makes military components, they are not allowed to deviate from these procedures for non-military projects. This means Genesis blocks are being machined to the same standards as missile parts. The CMM (coordinate measurement machine) in the machine shop's inspection department will be used to certify that the measurement fixtures used to inspect the finished blocks are machined to exacting tolerances.
There are presently two Mazatrol CNC machines set up for full-time machining of Genesis blocks. Each of these machines holds all the tooling specifically needed for cutting and tapping the blocks to completion. It takes four hours for one machine to machine one block completely. Four blocks a day are the anticipated production rate, twenty per week, a rate which will likely be in effect in perhaps three weeks (my guess). I expect production is in full swing this week, though I doubt they want to be machining 20 per week until a couple weeks pass.
There were three finish machined blocks at the time of the Columbus show ten days ago. I believe one or two finished blocks were at the show. Two of these finished blocks have likely been sliced apart (destructively inspected) last week in order to assure the product is ready to go to a customer.
Genesis is temporarily nicknaming their present iron block the "Generation 2", because they've made numerous changes in both design and process control since their initial effort. All remaining "Generation 1" blocks will be destroyed, and none have left their hands. Principle changes to the Generation 2 block involve more assured support of the cylinder jacket cores to prevent core shift.
They also had one aluminum block cast up and available for inspection. It had not been machined, but looked just like a production 427 iron block. I picked it up with two fingers. The aluminum sand cores are a bit different than the iron block cores because they pour the metal in very different fashion.
The skirt of the iron block is stronger than any FE block I've ever seen. Granted I've never yet seen a Shelby block, and I can be sure Shelby also has a rigid design.
Note the rumors that the Shelby block do NOT resemble an FE block are apparently false. The Shelby block IS a reasonably authentic facsimile of the FE, though I kinda doubt it comes close to the Genesis block for matching the looks of the original.
The foundry is also ISO9000 certified, so it can be expected that process control will be good here, too.
I expect there will be "shelf stock" of Genesis iron blocks within two months. It'll probably be three years before I can afford one myself, but I'll be dreaming of supercharging and revving the hell outta my Genesis block in the mean time. Hammering around the racecourse will be lots of fun.
Nodular iron 428 cranks and MR heads will be available from Genesis "sooner than you think". I see no reason to spout off anticipated dates right now. Just be assured the wait is not long at all.
While I'm probably not the best person to make a determination of whether the Genesis projects will succeed, I do have a real good feeling about what I see. I like the approach these two guys are taking, and believe that the FE will remain a popular engine on the racetrack for a long time to come.
Shoe.
|
| | | RE: Genesis / Good news Dave -- Ray, 09/10/2002
How much do you think the parts will cost, any idea? Ray |
| | | | I'm not sure what the prices will be. -- Dave Shoe, 09/11/2002
I seem to recall seeing $2995.00 for an iron block. Perhaps not cheap, but it seems to be a value, particularly since these guys haven't yet made a penny off their investment and also because it does look like a strong hunk of iron. Again, keep in mind that I'm not really qualified to recognize a good racing block, I'm just spouting my opinion.
I'm not aware of what the other prices are, but the www.genesis427.com website can fill you in on some of this info, and an email to the website should get you an answer in short order.
Shoe. |
| | | RE: H.Ford Museum/Total Performance. -- Mike McQuesten, 09/10/2002
What a great trip/visit you had Dave. I was fortunate to have business take me to the Detroit area back in '94. While there I had to make it to Dearborn. Just to say I had been there once in my life and to see the Ford proving ground, the Glass House and of course, Henry Ford Museum. I was able to go to the museum twice while there for a week. Still wasn't enough for me.
John Vermeersch was a total gentleman to me and an associate. We just popped in on a Sunday to Total Performance. John happened to be there. His extremely cool '61 Country Squire was sitting outside. We were giving it a close up inspection and John stepped out the front door to see if we needed anything. I boldly said "We're looking for John Vermeersch". His reply, "Does he owe you money?"
John gave us a nice hour plus tour. He showed me a factory dual port tri power intake. Did you see that? What gives with that? We could only speculate. The runner ports look similar to what Offenhaeuser offered with their dual-port designs years ago.
Thanks too for the great news on Genesis. A local friend made the big purchase with them for one of their aluminum blocks. I think he has paid for most of it. Sold a bunch of his good old FE HP parts on eBay to do it. Stuff like a good 406 block and lots of other goodies. I'll e-mail him to let him know of your tour. That'll make his evening. His Genesis aluminum 427 is going into a '56 'bird that had been the home for his 406/405 w/Borg Warner T-85 O.D. He's keeping the trans just as it is. |
| | | | Here's one pic of that intake. -- Dave Shoe, 09/11/2002
This pic might be too big to be allowed in this forum, but in case it's not, here it is.
The center carb is connected to the small runner dual plane, and the the end carbs are connected to the larger runner dual plane. Kinda abstract and confusing to comprehend, but a neat concept when it slowly sinks in. It took me about a day to realize what it was.
Though I doubt the separator would allow this intake to rev out like a regular Tri-Power intake, I also suspect the runner arrangement would have made it an extremely smooth and torquey intake ideally suited for low to medium RPM power contests.
JMO, Shoe.
|
| | | | | Looks alot like an offy... -- Alan Casida, 09/11/2002
360 deg dual port, and we all know how well they work.JMO |
| | | | | | I'm not sure, but I believe... -- Dave Shoe, 09/11/2002
...the Offy manifold with the split runner has only an upper plane and a lower plane.
This intake actually has four levels - two levels in the upper plane and two levels in the lower plane.
The center carb's driver-side venturi takes the low path to four cylinders on the lower plane, and the center carb's passenger side venturi takes the low path on the upper plane. The center carb is on a completely different flow circuit than the end carbs.
I would have liked to take some photos of the intake with the carbs removed, but that was not in the schedule.
Interestingly, I also verified the 352HP and 390HP intake manifolds are of slightly different runner design. I've heard stories and rumors that the 390HP intake flowed 10% better than the 352HP intake, but it wasn't until I compared them side-by-side that I saw notable external casting differences in the runners.
Shoe. |
| | | | | | | RE: 352HP vs. 390HP intake -- Mike McQuesten, 09/12/2002
Yup, you're right on again Dave. In my search for a "correct" '60 HP 352 intake I ended up with a '61 HP 390 intake too. There are obvious external casting differences as you noticed. The '61 intake is the one that's bolted on my '63 427 dressed up to look as close to the original '60 HP352 as possible. There's a few that will notice the cross bolts.
Now as for that '61 carb base being tilted or angled down from rear to front vs. the '60 flat base.....I'm still not buying Kevin's assertion that there was a difference in the leaf spring mounting locations or that there was a difference in the angle of the engine/transmission between the '60 & later Ford full size. I've measured and remeasured and can't find it yet. And I used a '62 Mercury Wagon second leaf added to the original '60 four spring pack to raise the rear of the '60 a little.
Thanks for the great picture of a rare odd factory Ford intake. That's the only one I've seen....so far. |
| | | | | | | Shoe, I live 15 minutes from Dove -- Dave Racela, 09/12/2002
but I've never been there. The owner comes up to the cruises in an all aluminum engined 427 Tunnelport Cobra. He is very friendly, and likes to talk 427. Shoe, if you need a place to stay next year let me know.
Dave Racela |
| | | | | | | | Will do. -- Dave Shoe, 09/12/2002
It'd be great to look you up when I'm in the neighborhood. I've made a note of your offer.
Shoe. |
| Come on guys, somebody has a Galaxie shroud -- Pete, 09/09/2002
I need an early Galaxie upper shroud for an FE in a Galaxie. I know they were used in 63-64 probably the same in earlier too. This is the sheetmetal piece that covers the fan and has a decal that says caution. Someone has one of these, I need one :o) |
| | it is called a fan guard..... -- hawkrod, 09/09/2002
A/C cars had an actual fan shroud. the guard fits 61-63 and then a different one for 64. i don't have any right now as there does seem to be some demand and i sold all that i had. the part number is C3AZ-8A611-A or C (chrome) for a 63 and C4AZ-8A611-A or B (chrome). the 63 part is 22 1/2 inches long and teh 64 is 12 inches long. hawkrod |
| | | RE: it is called a fan guard..... -- Pete, 09/09/2002
thanks for the reply!! I want this for a Thunderbolt clone. The ones I see used on them are certainly longer than 12", 22" sounds about right. Maybe they used the earlier style?? Still seems the 64s I have seen have the same one. But anyway, yes that want I desire. Anyone have one? |
| | RE: Come on guys, somebody has a Galaxie shroud -- Bill in Michigan, 09/11/2002
i'm going on a "hunting" trip through some yards out west later this month and should be able to find you the part you're looking for. send me an e-mail at carolinac@peoplepc.com and we can discuss further. |
| | RE: Come on guys, somebody has a Galaxie shroud -- Jared, 11/05/2002
A little late but, http://www.dennis-carpenter.com/ has them. Have your radiator demensions and call them up. They are a little expensive. 704-786-8139. By the way, alot of the Galaxies didn't come with a shroud unless they had A/C. |
| Small problem with 'Search' page. Stand by. [n/m] -- Mr F, 09/09/2002
n/m |
| | Should be Ok, now. [n/m] -- Mr F, 09/09/2002
n/m |
| Screw in Freeze plugs how do i install? -- federico, 09/09/2002
i have a 428 that i would like screw in freeze plugs installed. how and what procedure does anyone have pics?? thanks |
| | RE: Scew in Freeze plugs how do i install? -- Martin, 09/10/2002
Earlier this year they ran an article series in "Mustang and Fords" where they had Rousch Racing (Spelling ?) build a 390 for the 21st century. They mentioned that they had the machinist tap the holes for the freeze plugs when the engine block was done. In the article brass plugs were then screwed in with an epoxy as a sealer. I don't think there were any pics of the process itself. |
| upgrades for C1AE-A heads.. -- Mike, 09/08/2002
can the standard cj valves installed in these heads, any other upgrades? what can be done with a 352 with a standard 4inch bore, i'm looking for more performance. thanks for any help. |
| | May I suggest another head?...... -- kevin, 09/08/2002
depending on your vehicle, the newer small port jobs will outperform the C-1's on a 352. There is a lot of technical reasons why, but a book could come out of that. If you are keeping it #'s correct, then the compression (or lack of it) is what is killing you. You can install the bigger valves, but will need to notch the tops of the cylinders. This should be done on most any engine built as the flowcone is always torn apart from the walls close proximity. That head has a large chamber, and the compressed mixture is not that excited as if it would be with the smaller chamber styles. The hi rod ratio of these engines need a small intake runner, head port to keep velocity up. What is the car, and intended use? |
| | | RE: May I suggest another head?...... -- Mike, 09/08/2002
its a 63 2-door Galaxy, orginal 2v carb, can i get more cubic inches with a 390 crank and what would be envolved, i also have a set of C6AE-U heads smaller ports and combustion chambers as you mentioned. the motor is out on the ground, i plan to go thru an do a complete rebuild, i would like to keep stock apperance, except for a set of headers an a aluminum 4v manifold. |
| | | | Be aware... -- Dave Shoe, 09/08/2002
...the exhaust port positioning on the head surface is 5/16" different vertically between the two heads you have. If you plan to install headers, be sure to select a header which is compatible with the port position, otherwise you'll lose some performance to the port mismatch, and you'll have chronic exhaust leaks because one surface of the header gasket cannot be crushed by the header weld bead because there is no head underneath that segment.
The later small "velocity" runners are an excellent flowbenched design which apparently perform great in smaller displacement performance FEs. They were standard in 1968-later 428PI engines, and I know these engines ran great. Most 1966-67 428PI engines also got the small runner "emissions era" or "velocity" heads.
As horsepower climbs over 400-450, there may come a point where the small runner heads reach an efficiency limit and larger runner heads become easier to work with. Porting can resolve the limit with the velocity heads, but it's often easier to find a set of large runner heads.
If you don't plan to push more than 400 horsepower, the velocity heads will likely perform better, and will be notably stronger in the low to medium RPM ranges.
JMO, Shoe. |
| 427 SOHC still alive? -- Brian Gough, 09/08/2002
I've heard that dove offers all the parts needed to complete a ford hemi, I can't seem to find anything on dove and how in the world to get ahold of them... please help me stop this headache one way or another... I'd lov ya! thanks bg |
| 390-410 -- Rich Larsen, 09/07/2002
I was getting some input from my machinist the other day and he said he had a line on a Mercury 410 crank. He said it would slip right in place of the 390 crank, use the same rods but probably would need new pistons to keep the compression ratio realistic. Has anyone ever done this? Any suggestions? Thanks, Rich |
| | Re: 390-410 -- John, 09/07/2002
Yep, the 410 crank is the same as a 428 crank. You will definately need new pistons. The 390 ones will probably stick up above the block deck. 410 pistons arn't always that easy to find and tend to be forged custom units....i.e. $$ Makes a great torquey engine though. |
| | Re: 390-410 -- John, 09/08/2002
Rich use Sterling 381P piston. I am using that very same piston for my 410 build up. If you need a set i do have .30 over that I was going to install, however my machinist told me that I would have to use .40 over instead. |
| | | RE: Re: 390-410 -- Rich Larsen, 09/08/2002
John thanks so much for the offer. I am still in the planning stages. I bought the engine from a fellow who had bought a Ford factory short block and then ran out of money, put the old heads back on and was not happy with the performance. Duh! But so far I have not torn down the engine. The short block supposedly had only about 2,000 miles on it, but I am not sure what the existing bore is. If it is good enough to accept you .30 overs, I will most definitely be intersted. Thanks, Rich |
| | Re: 390-410 -- Rich Larsen, 09/08/2002
Wow! Thank you all so much for all the help so far. I really apprecaite it! Rich |
| | | RE: Re: 390-410 -- Dallas Fridley, 09/09/2002
Rich I have just completed this same build up scenario for my Ranchero race truck/car. We are averaging 10.20 in the qtr mile at 128 mph with 10.12 and 130 being the fastest. I have obviously done a few things different then bolting on stock components though. I can vouch for the torque as explained in an earlier post.
Good Luck
Dallas |
| | | | RE: Re: 390-410 -- bob bracken, 09/09/2002
i am building a 1956 ford with a 410 motor. i am looking for a cam that would work well for street and track use. any input would be appreciated. |
| | | | | RE: Re: 390-410 -- Dallas Fridley, 09/10/2002
Bob I got my help from Comp Cams (Red was the name of the salesperson) I did not know what cam to choose but I explained the scenario I had for our car and he recommended our present cam and I am not disappointed in any way. |
| | | | | | RE: Re: 390-410 -- bob bracken, 09/10/2002
dallas, thanks,i'll give them a call and see if they can help...bob |
| | | | RE: Re: 390-410 -- Rich Larsen, 09/10/2002
I am loving this. I just contacted my machinist and he verified that he got the crank for me and it looks to be in excellent shape. He is going to mic it out for me tomorrow. Hopefully it will need very little work, My use is a bit different. We have a mountain pass that is the test everyone wanting to prove the strength of their rides goes against. It is a long pull called Parley's Summit. It is not uncommon to see a vehicle or two pulled to the side of the road on the way up. To pull a trailer of any size over it at 60 MPH is quite an accomplishment. I think this engine just might do it. Thanks again, Rich |
| FE in a box -- Mike B, 09/07/2002
I bought a couple of FE engines disassembled a while back. One of them is supposed to be a 428 code P. I've been compiling part #'s and this is what I've got: Crank is IU, rods are C7AE-B, Intake is C7AE9425-F, Cam is either XBA or ABX with a 9 stamped on either side of the center brg, and two sets of heads C6TE(large intake ports) and C8AE-H (has smog fittings). Which heads are correct (or are neither) and are specs available for the cam? Any help appreciated! |
| | RE: FE in a box -- John, 09/07/2002
Crank is a 428/410 unit, rods are just rods, don't know about the heads, but throw the cams away. A used cam without the matched lifters will generally fail pretty quick. |
| | RE: FE in a box -- Bob Sprowl, 09/08/2002
The C8AE-H heads are common on the '68 and up FEs so they are probably stock for the 428.
What''s the date code under the oil filter pad? |
| | RE: FE in a box -- Mike B, 09/08/2002
Thanks John and Bob. The casting date on the block is 8F19 and there is an E above that by itself. The C8AE-H intake ports match closely to the aluminum intake that I have, but the C6TE intake ports are a lot taller. What would have been the application for them? |
| | C8AE-H heads would have been original on a 428PI. -- Dave Shoe, 09/08/2002
If those thermactor-drilled C8AE-H heads have the 8-bolt vertical exhaust pattern, they are very likely to be PI heads from 1968-70. If they have a 14-bolt exhaust pattern they are likely to have come from a 1968 390GT engine in a Fairlane or Mustang.
The 8F19 marking on the block indicate it's an early enough block to get an aluminum intake, as the more cost-effective CJ cast iron intake replaced the aluminum on the 428PI soon after the CJ became available. It would ot have been too many weeks later that iron intakes would have replaced the aluminum on your engine. There are other identifiers which will help assure it's a 428PI/CJ/SCJ type block, but I won't go into them now.
C8AE-H heads with thermactor bosses drilled are not particularly common. They tend to be found on all 390GT cammed engines, and since the 390GT cam also came in the 1967-70 428PI and all 428CJ engines, it follows that these engines also got thermactor. The greater valve timing overlap of the GT cam apparently allowed some raw gasoline to pass directly from the intake valve right out the exhaust valve, thus requiring an exhaust gas reactor to clean things up. Note that in 1966-67 only California GT cammed engines needed thermactor, but the more stringent emissions laws of 1968 required GT cammed engines to run thermactor to
The C6TE heads are probably marine or industrial heads which likely came off 428 or 427 motors. These are the same as C6AE-R heads, and only need to have the "AR" lip ground off the exhaust port ceiling and seats cut and throat dressed to fit CJ sized valves installed to make them perform just like CJ heads. Note that CJ heads were cast for regular FE valves, but were throat dressed to fit the larger CJ valves. Also grinding the thermactor lump off the ceiling of the exhaust runner. Note the so-called "AR" lip is not really an anti-reversion lip, but I haven't yet figured out a handy nickname to describe it's real function of matching the early exhaust runner to the crappy 390 Fairlane/Mustang exhaust manifold, so AR will have to do for now. The nice thing about these heads over CJ heads is that you can likely cut them to "new" CJ valve seat specs, allowing the valve to sit tall for optimal breathing, rather than recessed in the head becuase of numerous valve grinds.
The 1U crank is correct for all 410, 428plain, 428PI, and early 428CJ engines. They are the same as later CJ and SCJ cranks, except they are drilled differently to achieve a different balance.
I believe there are two PI intakes, a C6 and a C7 casting number version. The best I can tell they are identical, and you have the latter. This is apparently the same as a 427MR intake, except the throttle linkage bosses are different.
The rods are standard 390/410/428/427, and were drilled for either 3/8" bolts or 13/32" bolts, depending on application.
Shoe. |
| | | RE: C8AE-H heads would have been original on a 428PI. -- Mike B, 09/08/2002
Dave, thanks for the info. The exhaust is drilled in the 8 bolt vertical pattern on the C8AE-H heads that I have. Would you recommend that I use these heads or convert the C6TE heads to the CJ valve size? I'm planning on using this engine in a '66 F-100. |
| | | | It depends on the build. -- Dave Shoe, 09/09/2002
If you want a torque monster that'll tow, haul, and make up to 400HP, then The C8AE-H is likely the stronger performer.
If you plan to rev and make even more horsies at higher rev levels, then the C6TE heads with exhaust ceiling and valve mods are likely the way to go.
JMO, Shoe. |
| Freeze plug or? -- Mark Ernst, 09/07/2002
At the back of a 67 390 block what is used to close off the cam shaft? Special freeze plug or plate or? This question pertains to just the back cam access hole where the bearing is pressed in. Thank you! Mark Ernst |
| Anyone ever tried this? -- Greg, 09/07/2002
Using a 360 block with a 390 crank and rods but using the 360 pistons. Any ideas as to the c.r. of such a combination? Greg |
| | Guess not -- Greg, 09/08/2002
n.m. |
| | | The 360 often got 390-4V pistons. -- Dave Shoe, 09/09/2002
You should have good luck with using 360 full-slipper skirt style pistons with 390 rods and crank.
Just as te 390 truck engine got 410 car pistons, the 360 truck got 390 car pistons several years.
There is a catch, however, if you've got the semi-slipper skirt type of 360 piston (SAE makes these skirt terms up, not me), as the larger skirt is unable to clear the crankshaft throws.
Bottom line, if the piston skirt forms tab tips, it'll work, but if the skirt pretty much circles the entire piston without any distinctive tab protrusions (i.e.: piston looks sorta like a soup can), it won't work.
Shoe. |
|