n/m

It probably is the seals leaking , but there could another problem. If it has new valves and guides, the clearance maybe the problem .001 to .003 clearance (normal). To much to start with your in trouble. Even with .001clearance without a seal, it will have very little oil rolling down the guilde when done right.That is common complaint if you using old valves or guides, nerualing the guides is short timer for guide life, thats where clearance problem useally accure. Yes you can change seals make sure your piston is at TDC when you do it! There is some seals with large shoulders that will help. Ray

The Thunderbolts all started life as 289 Hi- Performance 271 HP cars so the VIN's have a "K" for the engine designator. The engines were installed at Dearborn Steel Tubing, along with the chassis and body mods.

There is a T Bolt registry that has tracked these cars for years, I would consult with them before laying out $100,000 for a car. There are some with legit numbers that are fakes. I have heard there are two with the same serial number both claiming original parts.

Royce Peterson

Royce Peterson

4F41Kxxxxxx is the correct VIN for Thunderbolt.

I know someone will disagree with me, but factory gt or corbra jet cast iron manifolds are installable and last a good long time, something that headers on a fe never did for me. the headers are so tight I don't think they help much, and usually leak.

FPA Tri-Y headers for 390GT engines will be your absolute best bet. www.fordpowertrain.com is the place. Not cheap, but the quality and fit is tops.

CJ exhaust manifolds are also a slick idea, but FPAs fit well and offer great ground clearance.

Since 1968 was the last year of the 390GT engine, you inherited the next version of the motor: the 390IP.

IP stands for "Improved Performance", apparently a new term for Ford which fit between "Standard Performance" and "High Performance".

All 390GT engines were forced to accept the expensive Thermactor emissions package in 1968 (due to the large valve overlap allowing raw gas to pass through to the exhaust), because of a new set of regulations which took effect that year. The 428 took top position in 1969, and also needed Thermactor systems to pass emissions.

Since the 390GT was no longer needed as a premium performance package, Ford ordered (in print) that Thermactor be removed form them, as there was more sales value in reducing costs of the second-tier engine. The only way to accomplish this was to put a regular production cam in the engine. The Holley carb was also replaced with a less expensive Autolite.

GT heads are actually the same as any FE production head. The difference is in the valve springs and associated hardware. Since there were never any dud FE heads cast, all FEs have good heads, though the smaller runners of the "emissions era" heads (first showing up in 1966), make the large runner heads comparatively desirable.

I harp on FPA headers for your C8AE-H castings because those are "emissions era" castings with smaller "velocity" runners. Yes, the same castings are used in 428PI engines, so they are proven runners.

The problem with Hooker headers, or most of the headers, is that they were designed for "pre-emissions" heads which have their exhaust positioned 5/16" higher on the head. The port height is the same on your head, but it was positioned downward in 1966 to make it compatible with Fairlane/Mustang 390 exhaust manifolds (a poor design exh manifold, in my opinion).

FPA makes a header flange for raised-port heads (all 1958-65 heads, C6AE-R castings fairly common in 1966-67, CJ, and all 427 castings), and they also make another flange for low-exit heads (C6AE-J, -L, -U, C7AE-A, C8AE-H, and D2TE-AA (some others also exist).

The FPAs have a great reputation among FE enthusiasts.

Shoe.

I second the FPA recommendation. I have them on my '67 Cougar GT and the fit is excellent with plenty of ground clearance. I can't say much for performance improvement because I added mine when I rebuilt my engine so I don't know how much performance to attribute to the FPA's.

Very cool nm

suggest you do the same. every time this question gets asked, fear flies along with the BS and opinions (not that my opinion is any better, just first!). hawkrod

I ran that cam straight up in my LTD with 427 stroker and C6 for several years and it idled silently at 600RPM with an 850DP and offered plenty of vacuum for brake boost. It's basically a perky version of the CJ cam.

Shoe.

Hi Dave, that is a good high vacuum cam, you could run that cam just the same way the cam card reads. If you take just the one intake opening number, which is -5 degrees @ .050 you should be there. The numbers for that particular cam are by far one of most popular grinds for replacement cams. I've use that profile in many different engines, some times called an RV cam. It is good idea to follow through with degreeing the rest of cam to see if all # are correct. Ray

What you describe from Carlisle also sounds very similar to the Mopar 440-6Pk air cleaner. I'll try to include a picture of one here.

Years ago, I had an original 62A R-code Fairlane. The opening from the ram-air hood's plenum was merely cut out in an oval to drop down around ,and surround, the factory dual-quad oval air cleaner.

Since the air cleaner then fit up inside the plenum, and the opening was only about 1/2" bigger all around, I assume they didn't feel it was that important to 'seal' it from engine compartment heat.

I don't know if the 'W' code Fairlanes were similar, or used something more like the Cyclone setup. But you can buy the repro 427 oval air cleaners from numerous sources for <$100 (PAW, Summitt, etc.), and they have both single and dual-quad versions.

You need a bushing for the bottom of your FE distributor to fix properly in the FT-type block. Part number is C4TZ-12367-A. Was available last year.