Skip Navigation Links.
 |  Midplate for 390/410 -- Dallas Fridley, 05/29/2002
Hey all,
I am building a drag car with a converted 390. It is going into a tube chassis car and I need a mid plate for it. Any ideas where I could locate one or have it made?
Thanks
Dallas Fridley |
 | Numbers on my new (old) marine 427's -- P, 05/29/2002
I am going over the 427 marine engines that I picked up in Maryland over the holiday, and although everything the former owner said appears to be true about the good condition, including new heads that were installed, I can not find any casting numbers on the blocks except for the designation 12 DIF.
The engines are cross bolted top oilers, but the location where I normally see casting identification is blank. The casting does not look like a side oiler casting that was machined as a top oiler, as I see no bulge where the bulge should be on the port side (driver side) of the motor. No tags on the motors, but they had been majored two years ago, with $5000 each spent on them. The blocks look pretty new actually, but looks can be deceiving. The guy said he thought they were 1970 motors, but this is word of mouth info.
I am wondering if they are replacement service blocks, and if so, how would I be able to tell with them still intact. Not that it matters, as compression and all signals are good. The heads are supposedly new, C7AE-A, which appear to be the generic 352 and 390 70 cc or so heads, not really too different from the C7JE heads found on standard marine motors.
Any clue as to the block. One last bit of info, the front motor casting (this is cast iron, and not a pressed metal timing cover) has a number on it, dating it to 1969, and I didn’t record it at the time as it was not directly attached to the block. This number may actually be of help and I’ll get it tonight and post it tomorrow.
Regards, P
|
|  | Here are some numbers -- P, 05/30/2002
These numbers came off the front casting over the timing chain. The marine engine uses a cast cover, rather than a pressed metal cover. Here is what it says
C7TE 6059 B followed by the date 3-13-69
Elsewhere on the casting is a 7841 designation, and the letter "A"
Anyone have any clue as to what this all means, of course I understand the date, but what about the C&TE stuff, etc. I looked again for block casting numbers, and I can assure you there are none located in the normal place, forward part of the block, passenger side.
regards to all, P |
| | | Re: c7te? -- Mike McQuesten, 05/30/2002
I am in no way knowledgable on block numbers. So I'm just offering a guess or more of a question to you P. Are these blocks 391FT castings? A lot of the 361/391 FT blocks were cast with the cross bolts provisions. If they are FTs, would the distributors have the bushing that's necessary to run a standard FE distributor?
As for the pressed metal timing cover, it was only '58 - '60 that the big blocks got such. From '61 on they were cast aluminum. |
| | | | RE: Re: c7te? -- P, 05/30/2002
Hi Mike,
I have decided to take some close up photos with a macro lens on this one. I'll also do the magnet thing to be sure it is iron, and not aluminum, but the marine engines used a LOT of iron. The darn thing looked like it was going to collapse the Penske truck ramp when we were winching them into the truck, and it was rated at 1500 pounds.
I'll check a bit further and will get back. Good hearing from you, and yes.............that "other project" is still in the works, but time being what it is, some things just get moved to the back burner in favor of more exciting things, like going to DC for a pair of 427's!
regards, P |
| | | RE: cast vs. pressed metal -- Mike McQuesten, 05/31/2002
I can't open the pics from this computer. But I'm sure I can from the home unit.
What I meant in my explanation about cast vs. stamped steel/pressed metal timing covers was in response to your statement that that the marine cover used a "cast cover, rather than a pressed metal cover". Now I understand that you meant cast iron timing cover. The only pressed metal timing covers I know of were the '58 - '60. Were there other stamped steel timing cover applications?
Thanks for the clarification P and I'll take a look at the pics tonight. Looking forward to your "published project". |
| | | | Mike, About those photos -- P, 05/31/2002
Mike, look at the photo link, scroll across it, cut and paste it into your internet adress bar (the same one that identifies that you are on this forum, etc.) and then hit "enter". That may open the pic for you now.
good luck
I did verify the cast timing cover is iron. don't know if any other years used a pressed metal cover, other than what you noted.
regards, P
|
| bf32 cross reference -- Mark, 05/28/2002
Does the bf32 autolite and motorcraft actually cross reference to anything other than a bf42 nowadays? Everything I search for on the bf32 takes me to a manufacturers bf42 equivalent. Is that all I can hope for? Anybody else had better luck?
Mark |
|  | RE: Autolite......... -- SDP, 05/28/2002
Try the Autolite #AR33. I pick them up at the local NAPA store................................. |
| | RE: bf32 cross reference -- Anthony, 05/29/2002
The BF32 is an Autolite #45. I just put a set in last night. |
| | | RE: bf32 cross reference -- Mark, 05/29/2002
All my information says the autolite 45's cross-reference to the bf42 |
| | | | RE: bf32 cross reference -- Anthony, 05/29/2002
I just did a web cross reference on the BF32and the BF42 and they both cross to the autolite #45 and they ALL cross to the same Bosch WR5 1071. The Autolite 45's are two for 1.97 at Walmart. |
| | | | | RE: bf32 cross reference -- Mark, 05/29/2002
On one of the cross-reference websites they mentioned the bf42 went to the 45, but no mention of the bf32. It just sounds like they lumped the 42 and 32 together here to be honest and grouped it to the 45. Thats my analysis anyway. It sounded like the 32 got left out somehow. |
| | | | | | Old Champion F-9-Y's..... -- kevin, 05/31/2002
or RF9Y is the same as a BF-32. Also, Motorcraft # 33 I think. I dont remember the AC # anymore, but never liked them. There was a Mallory as well as Holley and Accel too. Plugs are getting very hard to find. I had good luck with the truck plug, # BTF-31. You may find an equivalent, but I dont know, I have not looked for a while. Whatever listing for an F-600 HD I would think is available. |
| 390 Roaddraft Tube Substitution -- Boidman Of Atl, 05/27/2002
Since im almost sure i am going to add an Edelbrock performer intake,heads and cam,im going to need a way to vent the crankcase gasses.Id rather not let them into the atmosphere but recirculate like with the pvc system.I have seen that edelbrock makes a carb spaces with a pvc hole.Would this plus their no name valve covers do the trick? Also,about their waterpump for FE's.I originaly have a heater hose coming off the old heavyweight.Does the new have that connection? |
| 1969 Mustang question. -- boB, 05/27/2002
Are there serial/vin numbers on the rear section of a 1969 Mustang? If so where should they be?Thanks |
|  | RE: 1969 Mustang question. -- Bobby Spedale, 06/01/2002
No,and if someone says yes they can tell us where. |
| FE's rule at Norwalk -- Royce Peterson, 05/27/2002
I won my heat at the Factory Stock Muscle Car Drag Race yesterday! Here's the picture. The Pontiac won in round 1 but after that he didn't have a chance.
Royce Peterson
 |
| | RE: FE's rule at Norwalk -- Bob, 05/27/2002
Great! But tell us more. What kind of ETs and MPH using what tires etc. And you beat.
|
| | | More details -- Royce Peterson, 05/27/2002
The opponent was a 69 Firebird 400 with RA II or III engine, forget which and a 4 speed. Both of us ran quicker in the morning during time trials. First round I cut a .491 light and redlighted giving him the win. He ran a 14.07 at 97.98, I ran a 14.04 at 100.81.
Round two I cut a .782 light while he slept and cut a .977. I pulled away from him and ran a 13.900 at 101.29.
In the staging lanes before the final round the Pontiac sounded funny and he had to empty the puke tank because it was overflowing. His car fell on its face before the 60 foot mark, I ran a 13.866 for the win at 101.37.
My car is completely stock except better valve springs (Erson). It is a .030 over 428 CJ, stock heads with stainless valves from Grady Lowe, bronze guides and stellite seats. No porting. Stock exhaust and stock iron intake manifold. Stock distributor recurved by me to advance all the way by 2000 RPM. Vacuum advance limited to give 34 total when set at 12 initial. Rear axle is the original 31 spline 3.50 Traction - Loc. Wheels are the original styled steel 6" wide with Goodyear Eagle radials P215 70R 14.
The car weighed in at 3920 with me in the driver's seat and a full gas tank.
Way fun, I am looking forward to the Michigan event in September.
Royce Peterson |
| | | | RE: More details -- pop428, 05/27/2002
Royce,
I'm impressed, great Mph! With a stock set-up WOW!
Your car is they same drive train as my Mach 1, I'll be very happy to run those figure with my car, finally.... |
| | | | RE: Great job Royce! -- Mike McQuesten, 05/28/2002
We're all proud of you. I'm also very impressed with your stock set up and the severe limitation you face with the rubber you have to run.
What a great car! |
| | | RE: FE's rule at Norwalk -- Mitch Lewis, 05/29/2002
I had a friend that brought his 428CJ Mach 1 to the Pure Stock Muscle Car Drags last sept, (unfortunately he had to drop out due to oil pressure problems) Anyway from what he said that the Studebaker club had more people than their cheering than anyone else. Again very few Fords/Mercurys running.
Mitch |
| | They rule? -- D. Rosenberg, 05/28/2002
Royce:
I was there - I was the kid who asked you about your car and told you about a similar 4-speed I almost bought in high school.
While your showing was great (and so was the 427 Marauder's), FE's don't rule. Ford turn-out has been poor at these events. We've tried to get more to come, but they don't.
I believe 428s and 429s are competitive with the competition (BTW, that was a RAIV Firebird), but they have not tried to make the impact that the other brands have. I certainly hope that with your lead, more Fords will come to these events.
Diego |
| | | RE: They rule? -- Tim B, 05/28/2002
He didn't mean in sheer numbers, but rather that they were 4 for 4 in wins.
Now, if they could get it together in California I'd give it a shot! Even though I'd be slower with a heavier convertible.
Tim B
1969 XR7 428 CJR convertible
http://hometown.aol.com/timbrands/Cougar.html |
| | | | RE: They rule? -- D. Rosenberg, 05/28/2002
Yeah, I know what he meant. You're right to think I may have misunderstood because to me, to rule you need to kick ass. Four cars does not kick ass make.
However, I know a guy with 2 SCJs (Novakoski, or something like that) who should be at the MI event. And then there's Bill Kullenkamp with his CJ Brougham. And Jim Kholi with his 390 GT . . . there's a few more that'll probably go to the Sept. event. Collectively, I think they can truly kick ass with the right preparation.
Gorgeous Cougar, ain't it?
Diego |
| | | | | Re: feul? -- marty vogler, 05/28/2002
What octane level is allowed? |
| | | | | | Racing gas is fine // -- D. Rosenberg, 05/28/2002
|
| | 'Atta boy Royce!! Beautiful Cougar too btw....n/t -- Nitro, 05/28/2002
|
| | RE: FE's rule -- P, 05/29/2002
I hope I'm not the last guy to say "Congratulations". Way to go Royce!
P |
| | | RE: FE's rule -- Rob, 05/29/2002
Nice cougar Royce, good job! Great to see The FE drag racing spirit still alive. Ive been fixing my tbird up 390 for around 5 years now, even though its not an ideal car for dragracing, its all about originality... plus to beat some chebbys and ricers.. had it in the mid 15's with a C6 tranny conversion, new carb, pertronix ignition (which held it back somehow) and a shift kit, basically stock engine and car weight... i ran outta engine and gear around 70 mph but it sure killed everything through the 60 foot,
before i bore ya'll to death with my story just wanted to appreciate the FE racing spirit in everyone
Rob |
| | | | To Rob -- Royce Peterson, 05/29/2002
Some of the Oldsmobiles and Pontiacs were running 16 second quarter miles at 89 MPH. Your T-Bird would have been competitive.
Royce Peterson |
| Finding TDC -- Corey Zimmerman, 05/26/2002
Here's a question for you engine guys. Does anyone know an accurate and easy method for determining the exact TDC of an engine when it is fully assembled in the car. I'm guessing that the only way is to determine the travel through the #1 spark plug hole. Any suggestions and gadget help would be appreciated.
Here's the reason for the question. Inglese has been telling me to increase my timing for the Webers. They said that they need as much as the engine can stand. I was told the best way to determine this is to increase the timing a bit at a time until the car is fighting the starter. Then back it off a degree or two. Well according to my timing marks on the balancer, I am at 30 Degrees initial and it starts easily and quickly! The car actually runs better and I don't think there is any pinging with 18 degrees of mechanical (48 degrees total!!). This can't be right. My guess is that the timing marks are wrong. The other thing that I haven't checked yet is the fact that I am timing it at about 900 RPM. I have the weakest MSD springs in the MSD distributor. I am going to check to see if I am actually getting a bit of mechanical thrown in at that rpm. I'll try it down around 750 or so.
Any thoughts?
Zimmy |
| Klez virus -- Terry Harroun, 05/26/2002
I just got an email from someone's account here in these forums that had a subject line of "Let's be Friends" that contained the Klez virus. Watch out! This is a nasty virus and can be a pain to get rid of once you have it!
If you get an email with this subject line, delete it!! You can go to http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/FixKlez.com and run this Klez virus fixer/checker if you think you may be infected.
Good luck! |
| marauder -- john bach, 05/25/2002
speed channel will be showing "mercury at speed" about the '63 and '64 427 mercury marauder at 12:30 p.m. and 'mercury test drive" probably about the '03 marauder at 1:00 p.m. saturday may 24 |
| 428 CJ Casting # Question -- J. Wofford, 05/25/2002
Can somebody tell me where to find the casting # on a 428 CJ Block??
I found the date code near the oil filter .
The # I found is 8L23.
Under it was the letter E
Nothing else..............
Thanks JW |
| | RE: 428 CJ Casting # Question -- Royce Peterson, 05/25/2002
Some blocks don't have a casting number. If yours has one it is on the passenger side of the water jacket towards the front.
Royce Peterson |
| | | Also... -- Dave Shoe, 05/25/2002
...the casting numbers are the same for a 330, 360, 361FT, 390, 391FT, and 428 that year (1969), so you really don't know what you've got unless you look at the tail of the block where the "A" or "C" will be scratched into the sand of a 428.
Shoe. |
| | | Use with caution. -- Dave Shoe, 05/26/2002
They don't exactly explain the part number thing correctly, and the "C" on the rear is not explained as well as it could be.
Nice picture references, but following that web page too closely could get you interested in buying some overpriced junk.
Shoe. |
| | | | RE: Use with caution. -- Scott Hollenbeck, 05/27/2002
Dave, if you think something is lacking I'm more than willing to incorporate whatever text you can provide to clear things up. |
| | | | | i'll probably get flamed for this but...... -- hawkrod, 05/27/2002
i believe all (and when i say all, i realize that one or two may have gone through but not the numbers claimed by some sources) original CJ blocks should have had a C on the back. and as far as that C goes i really don't believe it means cobra jet like so many people say it does. if that was true why do galaxies have an A and tbirds an S on the back of their 428 blocks? look up the part number for a CJ block and you will notice an odd bit of trivia, it is a mercury part C8M#! (you have to look the part number up in an original 69 or 70 parts book, the later printings have one block for all 428 applications). what does this have to do with anything you may ask? well for some reason in the parts books refer to full size fords and mercs as A line, tbirds are S line (see my note about the A and S on the other 428 blocks) and as i am sure most people know the mustang and cougar are F line but the odd bit about this is the fairlane torino is the B line but the comet montego line is C. add this C and the mercury part number and then A+B=C. just my .02, hawkrod |
| | | | | | There are no 428 blocks with an "S" on the rear. -- Dave Shoe, 05/27/2002
You may be referring to "part numbers" as listed in some book, as I'm only aware of the "C", "A", and occasional "X" blocks in 428 applications. These characters define the "machining protocol" for the block, not the car line.
The "C" references the reinforced 428 casting and the "A" references the standard 428 casting. Common blocks for a given year apparently received no special markings, so the foundry lineworker didn't have to keep too busy drawing the alphabet in sand.
I'm also aware that sand scratchings such as "C" are reused different years as something else, as a 1961 390 block also got a "C" marking on the rear, and I'm sure it was used other years, too.
The Tbird 428 got the same block casting as the LTD or Mercury. The foundry worker certainly would not know what car the block would eventually be heading for.
JMO,
Shoe. |
| | | | | | | RE: There are no 428 blocks with an "S" on the rear. -- hawkrod, 05/27/2002
i didn't realize that these blocks were so special! i have had at least a dozen in the recent past and two P blocks out of 67 P code mercurys. as i noted that was my opinion but the S blocks definitely do exist (see the pic). the block is not special in any way but has the S. a lot of you guys know me and have purchased stuff from me in the last 20 years and you guys know that i don't open my mouth unless i 1. know it to be true or 2. am stating my opinion (the words "i believe" indicate an opinion). if i don't know i usally keep quiet. here is a pic. sorry it took so long but i couldn't find the camera and then when i typed this and hit enter i lost all my info and had to redo it. hawkrod
 |
| | | | | | | | Do you know what displacement that "S" block is? -- Dave Shoe, 05/28/2002
Thanks for the photo. I haven't seen an "S" marking before.
I suspect that may not be a 428 block.
Do you know the year or displacement of it? I'd like to save this info with your photo.
Shoe. |
| | | | | | | | | RE: Do you know what displacement that "S" block is? -- hawkrod, 05/28/2002
all of them have been out of 67 Q code tbirds. this one is dated 7B3 has a std std 1U crank and .003 taper in the worst hole on a 4.13 bore (thats why it is still here, it was one of the best i have seen in a while). it appears to have never been down as it has ford bearings from jan 67and ford gaskets. it was a nice creampuff old lady car that still had the carb tag, an autolite distributor cap, and original plug wires. i have had a bunch of these and they were all 428's. thanks, hawkrod |
| | | | | | | | | | Very interesting info. -- Dave Shoe, 05/29/2002
That's a whole new animal for me. Haven't heard of one before, but we continue to learn all the time in the forums.
It would be interesting to learn what differentiates the "S" block from the A, C, and X block 428s, but that's probably only known by a few foundry lineworkers by now.
Thanks a bunch for the info.
Shoe. |
| | | | | | | | | | | I seem to recall... -- Dave Shoe, 05/29/2002
...tyhe "C" marking going back to 1966, and wonder about the possible "Comet" correlation.
Your A, S, C, P, (and X?) correlations are curious to ponder.
Thanks again for the insights.
Shoe. |
| | | | | | | | | | | | told you i would get flamed........ -- hawkrod, 05/29/2002
i think the X would be for special hi-per applications as all of the racing replacement parts would have the X as the application D0ZX C7ZX C8AX etc.... my guess would be that the X casting would be a little better in quality with a little time and attention to both casting and machining (all of the ones i have seen were very nice and sonic very well). also the X would tell the machinist that the casting was a little harder (another assumption on my part). i have found that many of the X blocks have a million degassing buttons on them so they would have better grain and density. i have one S block here that is also a 7B date code that is crossbolted. i talked about it before and i have always assumed that it was made by some guys screwing around because it has the 427 style webbing and i figure that it was a lousy friday and they decided to see what would happen at quality control if this Tbird engine went down the line with extra bolts sticking out of it! i have actually had this one since about 84 when i pulled it out of a Q code Tbird at a junkyard by the mexican border outside of El Centro. you could have knocked me over with a feather when i went to pick it up at the wrecker (we made the deal and then they pulled it, no self serve back then!). they backed up a tow truck to load it into my pickup and i thought i had just scored a 427 for 50.00! raced home and tore it down and it was a big rod bolt 428 with 427 caps and nothing else. odd odd odd! but i figure just owning it and the story that goes with it are worth more than having another 427! BTW that same day i also bought a super low mile 63 390PI out of a P code mercury squire wagon. he charged me 150.00 for it because he wanted to use it in his tow truck because it had neat headers (shorties). some times these memories and the oddities are the best part of the hobby. my dad and i owned a reproduction parts business for years (we made parts for all of the big places like carpenter, drake C&G ford etc..) and did restoration work on 34-48 fords (we did work for brizios, don garlits, reggie jackson, vic edelbrock ,as well as having worked on over 200 dearborn award fords, and having built many displays for the ford foundation and the towe museum). we used to go to 35 car swaps a year driving to portland, carlisle, hershey, chicasha (sp.?), pate, pomona etc... and we went junking the whole way. my dad is gone now and a lot of my really good stuff came while he and i were on the road. sorry to go on but somehow you got me on a tangent that brings back some great memories. i sold the business after dad died and went back to work in retail management but the lure was too strong and for the last 4 years i have been selling parts full time. thanks for the little memory nudge, hawkrod |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Make sure you don't hot tank that block... -- Dave Shoe, 05/29/2002
...until after you photograph all the cool factory paint daubs. The 1973 427 blueprints speak a little about paint daubs, such as why the maincaps get one color or another splashed across them.
That photo is very cool with the "O" and yellow daub.
Shoe. |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | RE: Make sure you don't hot tank that block... -- hawkrod, 05/29/2002
i very rarely tank blocks as i find that it can cause more problems than it cures. i usually wash well with solvent to get the grease off and then soap and water. i have been doing it that way for 20-25 years and have been very happy with the results. what would really make you sick are the other engines in the shop. they are all original including a 16,000 mile early 69 CJ (has a 390 GT type snorkel with a paper hose and the heat stove has never had a screw for a metal S tube) and a 39,000 68 GT. virgin engines down to the plug wires! i only have a a few FE's left, maybe 10, but i have had hundreds if not thousands since i got a 66 fairlane GTA in 76 and got the bug (before that my blood was all orange!). hawkrod |
| | | | | | RE: i'll probably get flamed for this but...... -- hawkrod, 05/27/2002
watch this space......it will be a a little while while i go take a pic for you. i have blocks with S and P on the back. the S block was one of several 67 tbird blocks i have had. but this one just happens to be still here. never say never as i have had at least a dozen of these in the last year or two. hawkrod |
| | | | | I just emailed you some info. -- Dave Shoe, 05/27/2002
I appreciate the opportunity to suggest modifications to the text.
It's time to clear these eternally-repeated mistakes out of the system.
Shoe. |
| | | | | | RE: I just emailed you some info. -- pop428, 05/27/2002
Dave,
As a member and user of the 428 Cj registry as a invaluable resourse, If you could add to Scott's already Great work it would be very appreciated.
Regards
Peter
9R02R181708
WT 7034 Green. |
| | | | | | | Thanks For the Input Guys -- J. Wofford, 05/28/2002
Well I have a Carb # C9AF - 9510N =428 CJ Carb
Intake # C80E - G
Heads #C80E - N
Add The Block Has NO Casting # that I can find.
The good news is the Date code on the Intake,
Heads & Block are ALL The same DEC 23 1968-Well past the 428 CJ start up. And the Build date on the car was Jan 24 1969.Seems that would be about right.
The engine is in the car so I can't see the back of the block & so on.This is a standard bore & crank-So I'm told-never been opened up & runs good.
#'s match on the dash VIN,door & inner fender.
I've look at this car very carefully 2 times.
I think it's the real CJ Block.
Thanks Everyone.
JW |
| | | | | | | | Nice to have the orginal block -- pop428, 05/29/2002
JW,
Sounds like a real nice thing.
It's real lucky to have the original block especially standard bore.
My MAch 1 has it's original block with the partial Vin on the back of the block near the driver side head, but it's already 00.60" over size, but the sonic test came back great.
god luck!
Peter
9R02R181708
WT 7034 Green.
|
|