Skip Navigation Links.
 |  Distributor I.D? C5AF 12127 E, 8D22.. -- pop428, 08/31/2002
Found this Twin point dist. in the boot of my Mach 1 428 CJ when I brought it..I know it's not factory for my car, so can someone please tell me what it's meant to belong to?
Also how would this go in my FE?
thanks
peter. |
|  | just a dual point sold over the counter..... -- hawkrod, 08/31/2002
the 427 dual point was available for years through the ford parts system and the muscle parts program. this would not have been out of an original car as none of the late 68 or early 69 cars came with this one (or if it is a motorcraft instead of autolite it would be 78 or 79). it was a very popular item and wasn't dropped until the early 80's if i remember correctly (i have one with a 73 date code that is labeled motorcraft myself). hawkrod |
| | | It's autolite.... -- pop428, 08/31/2002
O.k.... plenty where it came from HUH!! :(
Would this be a fair swap for a 69 dated 428cj single point? As I said before it came with my Mach 1 and I'm looking at replacing it for a number matching one?
How would this go if I chose to run it?
Thanks for your help so far....
Peter
1969 Mach 1 428cjr
WT 7034 Green. |
| | | | i think the single point is worth more if it..... -- hawkrod, 08/31/2002
is a correct date coded unit. the dual point is a good part and will run nicely but the correct CJ distributors are as good or better when set up with a pertronix. and i have been selling original 69 CJ units with the correct advance for about 50-100 more than the dual point lately. hawkrod |
| | | | | Well I'll be.... -- pop428, 09/01/2002
I would of thought the other way around :^(
Thanks for your help, I'll take your advise. I have a lead on a correct date code dizzy and I'll fit it out with pertronix ;-)
Peter..... |
| | | | |  | there are a lot more incorrect date coded..... -- hawkrod, 09/01/2002
dual points than correct CJ distributors and from what i have seen not that many people are running dual points like they used to. i myself am running duraspark II in anything that is not restored. hawkrod |
 | FE Bell housings identification -- George, 08/31/2002
I have 3 "blowproof" bellhousings that I picked up with some other stuff and I do not know what they are to. I am fairly sure that at least one of them is to an FE, especially the one marked "FE" and has C60A- etc cast into it. I need to identify these, so I'm asking youse knowledgable guys to help me out here. I think one of them might be from a truck. I also have a 4 speed trans I picked up at the same time that I need to identify.
If someone would email me, I will send the pictures I have.
Thanks all!
Cheers
George |
| | Thanks, Bob! n/m -- George, 09/02/2002
n/m |
| cam problem's -- Vince, 08/30/2002
have problem with cam breaking thrust plate on my 68 428 cobrs jet with everything in place i should only have a max.of .007 end play and I have much more than this. anyone else ever had this problem and how did you correct it any help will be appreciated. |
| | RE: cam problem's -- Pete, 08/30/2002
is the rear cam plug installed correctly?? That is where I would look. |
| Knock In A 428 CJ -- Jim, 08/30/2002
Just rebuilt/balanced a 428 CJ and it knocks after 350 miles of easy breakin driving. The knock can be heard after warm up and only after engine quits accelerating between shifts or out of gear. No knock at idle. If the 7 plug wire is pulled it knocks during idle.
Sounds down low. Oil pressure is 20 psi at lowest. Want to check out as much as possible before pulling it back out.
Engine went back as stock as possible to run best off idle to 5000 RPM. I at first left out the pilot bushing but put it back. No change.
Need ideas or your experiences.
|
| 352/390 HP heads -- bear, 08/30/2002
I am looking for info or pictures on the small chamber FE heads. REally would like to see a picture. Are the 352 and 390 HP heads the same. Looking for 50 something cc's. If you have a set do you want to sell them?
Any info appreciated |
 | FE Stroker/400M rods - What mods are required? -- Bill in Michigan, 08/30/2002
I'm building a FE stroker motor based upon a FT block and steel crank. I plan on offset grinding the crank and using 400M rods. I've seen conflicting reports as to what type of modifications are required to use the 400M rods in the FE/FT engine. Is any special machining required? Do the rods need to be "thinned" at the big end?
I would like to hear the details from someone that has built up an FE with 400M rods. |
| tips on removing exhaust manifold on '68 428CJ -- holliday, 08/29/2002
I posted this question on the regular forum and then saw this special forum for the FEs! Would you please give me some tips on removing the passenger side exhaust manifold on a '68 with stock 428CJ heads and stock CJ exhuast manifolds? The bolts the go to the middle cylinders seem almost impossible to get to. Do I raise the motor? If so, how much? Do I pull the valve cover? Is there a special wrench that makes it easier? ANY helps or tips you can pass on would really be appreciated! ONE OTHER THING! The reason I am doing this is there is an exhaust leak you can hear. The previous owner installed gaskets between the manifold and the head. Do you all recommend using gaskets? If so, what type are the best for sealing? I don't want to do this twice. Thanks again for any help.
Jeff |
| | RE: tips on removing exhaust manifold on '68 428CJ -- Royce Peterson, 08/29/2002
Jeff,
I have two FE's with 428CJ manifolds. Neither has gaskets. Neither has ever leaked. They did not come from the factory with gaskets.
The manifold will come off with the engine in place but it's really tough. Box end wrenches will get some of the bolts, I think two have to stay in the manifold after loosening because they won't clear the shock tower until you are able to lift upward.
Royce Peterson |
| | | RE: tips on removing exhaust manifold on '68 428CJ -- Gerry Proctor, 08/30/2002
As Royce wrote. I does help access some by jacking the engine up a couple of inches. Everyone with an FE in a unibody car feels your pain. It almost seems easier to remove the cylinder head with the manifold attached than to go directly after the manifolds. In fact, if you were to be headed in this direction (valve job or whatever), that IS the easier way. |
| | | | RE: tips on removing exhaust manifold on '68 428CJ -- salid, 08/30/2002
I recently went through this to install a set of FPA headers. I ground down a socket so that it was only as deep as the bolt head and then I was able to get all the bolts out by using this socket and a flex head. That is the good news, well not really. After getting the driver side header out, I was not able to get the passenger side out even after lifting the engine until the transmission (auto trans) hit the tunnel and pushing the engine as far to the driver side as I could. I finally ended up disconnecting the trans and lifting the engine till the exhaust ports were above the shock towers. I wish I had just taken the time and removed the engine in the first place. It would have taken less time than what I did even with extra time to remove the hood and removing the trans first. It would have also make the header instalation quicker and easier. Plus I could have taken time to freshen up the engine paint where I messed it up with Castrol cleaner (says right on it that it will hurt the paint, but some of us are real slow readers, or maybe just real slow).
The FPA guys said you can remove the stock exhausts and install the headers with the engine in the car, but I won't try that again. Maybe a 4 speed would be easier cuz the trans bell combination isn't as big.
I know you didn't ask, but yes I do love my new headers. I used to have Hookers, but a couple of years ago I decided to go back to the CJ exhausts to make it look more stock. I even went back to a complete stock exhaust. I hated it, it sounded horrible (it wheezed instead of roaring) and ran poor, too much restriction. My original exhaust system (I bought the car new) was not like that. All of that is gone now, well I kept the quad tips even though I had to stetch them paper thin to hook to the new pipes. The Hookers ran better above 6k, but after reading Shoes stuff on why it's not a good idea to run a stockish CJ that high, I promised myself I'd stay below 6k, and I pretty much have. The FPAs look good, sound good, run great and leave a lot more room that the Hookers.
Well that was long winded enough to push a sail boat arround the world. Short answer, take your time, pull the motor and check/do everything at once.
|
| | | | | RE: tips on removing exhaust manifold on '68 428CJ -- mike allen, 08/31/2002
how noticeable was the gain going from manifolds to headers? i have the manifolds on now and am thinking about going the header route. Any track times or anything after install?
|
| | | | | | RE: tips on removing exhaust manifold on '68 428CJ -- Jim, 08/31/2002
Took a 428 CJ out of a 68 Mustang and recommend removing the transmission first. Bell housing and starter can stay. There is barely room going forward and up to remove it. There is more room forward than I thought. It'd be interesting to know how it was put in on the assembly line.
Take a look at the pattern on the shock tower reinforcement and it appears to be cut out to allow the engine and exhaust to nestle in with not more than 1/16 to 1/8 clearence between exhaust manifolds and shock towers. Hope this helps. |
| | | | | | RE: tips on removing exhaust manifold on '68 428CJ -- salid, 08/31/2002
sorry, I don't have any track numbers, but the seat-of-the-pants meter was well into the "yeah baby" zone. If you are thinking about headers, this is a good site to visit http://personal.atl.bellsouth.net/rdu/b/s/bsprowl/Exhaust/Exhaust.htm
It will help you make up your mind and he has a few guesses at the kind of improvement you might get. You can check FPA at http://www.fordpowertrain.com/opening.htm to see if they have any advertised numbers. Sounds like you're probably mostly street use. The FPAs will work great and give you a noticable improvement in torque up through about 3500. It's probably better above that too but by then you start to feel the rush of better horsepower that seems to stay with you as high as you want to wind it. I only went to 6000, that's where my factoy tach redlines. I think 69 & 70 CJs redline at 5700 or there abouts.
Even without "official numbers", the grin-meter definately told me I'd made the right decision to go back to headers. BTW, my car is a 68 GT 500 KR convertible, so I did feel some pressure to keep it reasonably stockish. A free breathing system with FPA headers and Flowmasters was the right decision for me, no doubt at all. |
| | RE: tips on removing exhaust manifold on '68 428CJ -- holliday, 09/02/2002
Thanks to all for the reponses. I unbolted the motor mounts on both sides, pulled the starter and raised the motor up 'til the bellhousing hit the tranny tunnel and couldn't get enough clearance to drop the passenger side manifold. It would hit up against the shock tower and also wouldn't clear the "skirt " that sticks out where the starter mounts. Thinking about it, pulling the engine may be the way to go, at least partially. What a PAIN! Anyway, I tried the exhaust manifold with one gasket, no gasket and stacking two gaskets and it still leaks pretty bad. So I guess it may be off to the shop to see if it's the manifold or the head that is not lining up. Thanks again for the replies! |
| | | RE: tips on removing exhaust manifold on '68 428CJ -- mike allen, 09/02/2002
When i took my manifold out to fix a leak i unbolted the mounts and took them clean off the car and unbolted the starter then jacked up the car all the way and it just fell out the bottom. The only way it can come out is the bottom. I do have a 4 speed car and that may of let me jack the engine up higher, but i think you can do it with out pulling the motor. |
| | | | RE: tips on removing exhaust manifold on '68 428CJ -- holliday, 09/20/2002
Dear Mike, thanks so much for your reply. Dropping the motor mounts was the secret I was looking for - THANKS! I kept thinking they would slide out the back and just wouldn't clear. But once I had the motor mounts out of the way, the manifold pretty much just fell out the bottom. If you have a minute, could you write back and tell me what steps you took to eliminate the exhaust leak? I have taken the manifold in and had it planed as much as possible and then a really good speed shop here in town recommended using a high temp copper gasket sealer and some good Felpro gasket to try and take care of the last little gaps. Do you have any other thoughts? Thanks again for the great help.
Jeff |
| | | | | here's what the s'perts told me... -- x1968x, 09/20/2002
Machine the manifold surface,
Don't use a gasket, btw, I was unable to find any to match my bolt pattern ('68 428 CJ Shelby),
Use the permatex high temp copper sealer.
This is what I did and so far so good!
Good Luck |
| | | | | RE: tips on removing exhaust manifold on '68 428CJ -- Mike allen, 09/21/2002
well i had my manifold machined flat then i put a header gasket on it felpro makes a 16 bolt pattern gasket and tightened it down real good. You may want to find some locking bolts to make sure they don't walk loose. You could try using no gasket but i didn't want to take the chance of it leaking. I did put headers on my LT1 camaro and i used copper header gaskets and copper RTV silcone on it and i haven't had a leak yet and since that car has O2 sensors, it would of let me know i had a leak. |
| | | By all means, avoid using gaskets. [n/m] -- Mr F, 09/20/2002
n/m |
| | | | Anybody know how did they came from the factory? -- x1968x, 09/22/2002
I'm guessing Permatex high temp copper... was not around then. Was anything used or was it metal to metal? |
| | | | | From the factory -- Royce Peterson, 09/23/2002
The manifold to head surface was coated with lithium grease. No sealant was used.
Royce Peterson |
| | | | | | Ahhh...love that new car aroma! thanx (n/m) -- x1968x, 09/23/2002
n/m |
| | | | RE: By all means, avoid using gaskets. [n/m] -- holliday, 09/23/2002
What is the reasoning for and against the gaskets? I have had very experienced people strongly recommend both ways! I know I have to use something. We machined the manifolds as far as we could. There is still some "pitting" around the tops of a couple of the ports. I have located some of the FelPro gaskets mentioned for the 428CJ. Thanks again for any advice. |
| | | | | RE: Check the head exhaust surface -- Courtney Bolze, 10/22/2002
I installed FPA tri-y headders on my 69 mach1 390. I r& r the engine, installed heli coils in the exhaust bolt holes, made sure the headders and gaskets fit while on the engine stand (finger tips threading all the way in). I put lab metal on the head exhaust surface and milled it down with a file to get the surface where it would not leak (did'nt want to have the heads surfaced). For installation I had 2 bolts holding the C6 on, no motor mounts at all, engine hoist holding up the engine as high as it would go, trans mount loose and they went on easy. Next time I will remove the entire steeering linkage (tie rod to tie rod, pitman & idler arm, and ram to give me more room to reach up etc.) Still had to shim the mounts about 1/4 inch to keep off the shock towers. Finished the system with 2 1/2" H pipe, hooker maximum flow mufflers and flowmaster mandrel bent tail pipes. It's very quiet to about 80 mph and SHAKE the tiles off the tunnel walls at WFO :-) Going on 2.5 years now with no leaks. Hope this help, just check the heads for pits/flame cut gouges because it will leak if it has them. CNB. |
| | | | | | RE: Check the head exhaust surface -- holliday, 10/23/2002
Tell me about "lab metal." What is it? How do you use it and where can you find it? Thankfully, the heads on the motor were in good shape, it was the manifolds that needed cleaning up. Thanks for the reply. |
| | | | | | | RE: Check the head exhaust surface -- Courtney Bolze, 10/23/2002
The can says Alvin's Lab Metal and it can be found at any place that sells welding gasses, it's not cheap, I think $14 a pint paint can. Check the shelf life on the bottom of the can, it does not last long after it has been opened (5 months) it turns hard in the can. The stuff is great, can drill, machine it etc when it cures. It has metal in it. It was reccomended to me by a metallurgist who I get to do any of my aluminum welding. I plugged the exhaust ports with rags, built up the exhaust surfaces with lab metal and worked a flat file between 2 ports for hours until they were flat. Drove the car to work today and still no leaks. (just love those tri-y's in the tunnel!) I had the original 390 GT exhaust manifold surfaced years ago (1988) and put them on w/o gaskets, but did not have the head exhaust surfaced, it leaked from day 1 on #4. When I took it down in 2000, all of them had been leaking to some extent. If you can't find lab metal I can shoot down to the garage and get the info off the can, CNB. |
| | | | | | | | RE: Check the head exhaust surface -- holliday, 10/24/2002
Thanks for the great information. My car is doing great right now (at least when it comes to the exhaust leaks) but I am putting this information in the file because someday, I know I will need this stuff. I would love to hear your car ripping through the tunnel, I love the rumble! |
| 427 Magnesium Intake?? -- Wayne, 08/29/2002
A friend of mine that has been into Ford Racing for 30 Yrs + just showed me an intake that seems to be Magnesium with the casting numbers C5AE-9425-N.What is this from?? Wayne |
| | RE: 427 Magnesium Intake?? -- Royce Peterson, 08/29/2002
Wayne,
It should be a 427 Medium Riser. I have seen such intakes over the years. Ford made a run of them I speculate for the LeMans 427 GT40's. That does not mean your friend's manifold came from the race winner at Lemans though. Based on my seeing three such manifolds there had to be a couple dozen made at least. A rare piece, maybe valuable to someone.
Royce PEterson |
| | RE: 427 Magnesium Intake?? -- Mike, 09/05/2002
The original comp Cobra/GT40 mag MR intake did not have a part number on it. If you supply more details it can probably be identified. |
| | | RE: 427 Magnesium Intake?? -- Wayne, 09/05/2002
Mike The numbers C5AE-9425-N are clearly marked and I have 2 Digital pics(not the best) if you have an E-Mail I can send them to.My friend lives about 4 Hrs away and I may not have a digital camera up that ways for a few months so can I send pics at a later date for you to look at ?Wayne |
| | | | I'd be interested in the pics. -- Dave Shoe, 09/14/2002
I'm aware that Ford cast up magnesium intakes and valve covers for the 427SOHC. These were particularly common in the first Cammers from 1964-1/2, as they were intended for NASCAR competition. I'm also aware that some were cast for the 427MR for use in Cobras, GT-40s, and probably for limited aftermarket application.
Magnesium is tougher to cast without flaws than aluminum, so they tend to seep a bit more oil. Also, they don't handle age or water particularly well, so new magnesuim pieces tend to offer better competitive value than old pieces. Old pieces would retain historic and restoration appeal, however.
Magnesium is preferred over aluminum because it weighs less. With all the quirks of magnesium, shaving a couple pounds while maybe gaining a little oil leak will win more races than a heavier, clean engine will.
JMO,
Shoe.
Here's a partial pic from a recent ebay auction:
 |
| | | | | RE: I'd be interested in the pics. -- Wayne, 09/16/2002
I will send pics to all who want when I get them.Wayne saint@cablelan.net |
| | | | | | RE: I'd be interested in the pics. -- Courtney Bolze, 10/26/2002
Magnesium is alway oxidized to a gray color whereas aluminum is a silver color. Magnesium is used in a lot of aircraft parts and chain saws to save weight. It is usually 1/3 less weight than AL and stronger. Get it to burn and there is no putting it out. |
| | | | | | | RE: What about blocks?. -- Ray, 10/26/2002
Many years I called used parts dealer in L.A. area, he was telling me he had complete magnesium 496" F.E. for $9500. If it was true? it diffenently was steal at that time. How far did for go with magnesium. Ray |
| | | | | | | | Ford did once ofer a magnesium head. -- Dave Shoe, 10/26/2002
It was not for the FE, it was for an air-cooled engine back in the flathead days. I reviewed several blueprints of it at the Edsel Ford Research Center in Dearborn.
I can't imagine how a magnesium head would work. To be sure, you wouldn't want to overheat the sucker.
Also, I believe aluminum is considerably stronger than magnesium, but I'm not certain of this.
Shoe. |
| | | | | | | | | A 'mag' head? Wow - neat idea for underhood lighting. ;-) [n/m] -- Mr F, 10/27/2002
n/m |
| | | | | | | RE: I'd be interested in the pics. -- Chuck Brandt, 10/27/2002
In shop class in high school someone was cutting up aluminum wheels with a torch to cast chess pieces, they got to one that turned out to be magnesium, a very impressive fire ensued.
CDB |
| Best 390 "tuneup" parts? -- Darel, 08/29/2002
I have a '61 T-Bird with a '64 390. I'm not looking to keep the car all original, so I want to give it a good tuneup that will give me a noticeable increase in performance and/or mileage. The engine runs pretty nice now but I'm sure hasn't been gone over in a very long time since I bought it from a junkyard. Anyway, I'm planning on a new carb, ignition and air filter. I'll probably go with a stock reman carb since I want to eventually get a factory 3X2 setup, and don't want to drop a whole lot of money on a carb now. Ignition - I plan on dropping in a Pertronix because I've had good results from them in the past in several IHCs, unless there's something out there (whole new hi-po distributor?) that will give me better performance. 8mm wires and plugs are obvious. Is the 40K volt Pertronix coil a good one, or is there something better out there? What sort of plug gap can I open up to with the new ign, wires, coil and plugs? Does anyone have a plug preference?
The air filter might not sound like a big deal but it is to me. I'd like to just put a generic open-element K&N on there but I want to make sure I'll still have a useable choke with all the extra cold air getting in there. I'm in MT and this is my daily driver, so with winter around the corner this is a big deal to me. Should I use the open-element or just drop a K&N in the stock filter housing?
Thanks for your advice!
Darel Matthews |
| vibration in 427 -- joe schepker, 08/28/2002
well, to make a long story short, i have a 64 427 in a 66 GT fairlane with a 4 speed. it has about 1,000 miles on it. it developed a BAD vibration at about 2500rpm and goes away at about 3500. it was glass smooth until about a week ago. the clutch wasn't feeling quite right either(pedal is about an inch lower than it used to be and sometimes stayed down until i stomped on it). it was also getting harder to shift. it's a 12" replacement diafragm style that had hard use on the 390 that was previously in the car. i thought i'd start there and when i pulled the cover off, i found a silver streak in the cover about 3 inches long, like someone took a pencil and drew a line in the grease(or asbestos) that wasn't there 1,000 miles ago. (only in one side of the cover though.) i also noticed fine silvery particles in there. i turned it over while looking at it and also noticed that the throwout bearing was wobbling back and forth as the motor turned while it was against the pressureplate fingers . looking at the flywheel, i noticed that on one side only i could see about 1/16" to an 1/8" around the outside of the disc where it looks like it polished the flywheel. but NOT on the other side. seems to me that the disc is walking. would this small amount of clutch walk cause the vibe that i'm describing? would that indicate a bad bearing in the trans? it feels just like a 428 flywheel was there instead. the assembly was balanced and the vibe wasn't there before. it just showed. any ideas? the past week, the tranny did make some noise at the top of 1st when you nailed it(a growling sound) that it didn't before. thanks, joe |
| | start crying now..... -- hawkrod, 08/29/2002
you probably lost the pilot bushing (you did put one in right?) and then the trans front bearing started to support the clutch. the real problem is the bearing between the mainshaft and input shaft. when you loose the pilot the mainshaft moves around a lot and does a lot of damage to the front of the mainshaft. a properly operating and round clutch will leave no visible polished area anywhere as it is perfectly round and always rides in its own path. good luck, you are going to need it, hawkrod |
| | | RE: start crying now..... -- joe schepker, 08/29/2002
thanks, actually i'm a bit relieved, or still hopeful that it's in the transmission and NOT the engine. it's not missing or smoking and the oil's still spotless. just worried about the vibe. sounds like that can cause the vibe that it has. i did install a new pilotbushing. thanks for the input. joe |
|