Skip Navigation Links.
 |  396 -- Mac, 02/13/2002
i was wathcing a race from 1969 and saw David Pearsons Driving a Torino and hd a 396 on the hood what is that never heard of it |
 | cubic inches -- JESSE, 02/13/2002
what cubic inch is a 390 bored .060 over? |
| 390 ? -- Peter, 02/13/2002
My name is Peter and i live in germany . My car is a `67
Cougar with a 390 ? engine . I have some codes - may be someone can tell me what kind of engine it is .
Heads . C6AE-R , intake : C6AE9425-G , the second
number from the block code isn`t good to read - it can be DGTE , D8TE or D6TE and there is a Ford Sheffield sign on the cylinder front cover . I hope my english is not so bad and thanks for help , Peter |
|  | RE:good heads -- Mike McQuesten, 02/13/2002
And a great car! It would be interesting to know what the Vehicle Identification Number is for your autobahn flyin' Cougar is?
I'm not sure on that block.....definitely a D first letter? Which would indicate it's a '70s block.
But those heads are the good ones. The C6AE-R are very easy to build to C8OE-N(428 Cobra Jet) specs. They are cast with the provisions for unibody exhaust manifolds. They are the tall intake ports, etc. Good combustion chamers and so on.
We're always keeping our eyes open for these rare big FE block Cougars and there you go with one in Germany! You're a lucky man.
What transmission? |
| | | RE:good heads -- Peter, 02/14/2002
Thank you for the answer , Mike ! Yes it´s a great car but he need`s some body work . The VIN is 7F91S589781 . I have a look on my block and the first letter is a D - the second number can be a 3 and right hand (front) under the head is another code : 4 C 4/8 J (small numbers) . The transmission is a C6 , rear axle 9" code WES-G . Can you tell me how to built the haeds to 428CJ specs ? Thanks , Peter
|
| | | | RE:good heads -- Mike McQuesten, 02/14/2002
Honestly, I've learned about the benefits and value of C6AE-R heads from this forum, specifically Dave Shoe's comments about them. I have a set, er John has them, I traded him some "High Velocity" D2s for them.
All I think you have to do is the have CJ valves installed, 2.13 intakes and 1.66 exhaust. With this you should have the bowl area opened up to gain the full advantage of these larger valves. Then a good valve grinding job done by a person who is competent with FE valve grinding. If the cast in tabs/portions for unibody exhaust manifolds have not been drilled and tapped, have that done too. The rest is just basic head rebuilding which is pretty straight forward with FEs. So that's all I can recommend. I'd be interested in reading more about building these heads too. |
| | | | | RE:good heads -- Peter, 02/15/2002
Thanks Mike ! But i don`t believe to find a competent person in germany , i will try it..... Something new about my block numbers ? I was on the pliverman site - the only code i found was the D3TE (359,361,389 & 391) could that be ? I`ve read some of Dave Shoe`s comments - hope i learn enough to build a good FE engine . |
| | | | |  | RE:good heads -- Peter, 02/15/2002
Sorry i forget - there is a mirror image 105 on the block - may be this helps you to find out what block it is
Thanks, Peter |
| | | | | | RE:D3TE is -- Mike McQuesten, 02/15/2002
that's definitely a 1973 casting and very likely that it's a Truck block of the cubic inch dimensions you list. I hope I'm not insulting you with these basic facts...
The D indicates an item designed and probably used from 1970 through 1979. Remember C was the sixties. It doesn't necessarily mean that the item was cast, made or used just in the seventies though. It could be a service block sold new over the counter at a Ford authorized dealer in 1980. It could have been cast in '80 or later too. A quick example I can relate is the Ford FE adjustable 1.76 rocker arm. It has always carried a B8A part number indicating 1958 full size pasenger car. There are a lot more knowledgable experts out there than I am on this subject.
The T indicates the block was designed as a Truck/HD unit. If it is a 361/391 block, that's good. Someone has probably used the mandated bushing, C4TE-12367-A, so that your engine is using the automotive distributor.
That's about all I can tell you. Except I envy you for owning an S code '67 Cougar. They're hard to find here. And you've got one in Germany! |
| | | | | |  | RE:D3TE is -- Peter, 02/17/2002
Thank you for the basic facts - i didn`t know that D is a year code. I think i remove heads and oil pan and look what parts inside . Believe me - i`m very proud and happy to own the Cougar . My best friend own a `70 Mustang coupe and in my town is a `67 mustang and an Oldsmobile - but i have the only Big Block !! Thanks again for your help and if i had more questions - may be you help me again .
Peter . |
| How strong is the 390 bottom end for lugging & tow -- P, 02/13/2002
I recently posted some questions about the actual differences of rebuilding between the 390 and the 427, and I appreciate the responses, thanks guys.
Along a somewhat similar line, because these questions do have a potential purpose some day, I am asking now about the ability of a 390 to pull a load under the marine environment.
Everything I see about the 390 suggests its a hoss, but needs mods for oil flow when spun at higher speeds. In the marine world, motors are under load like a truck running uphill all the time, and max RPM is limited to 4000 (warranty speed quoted for the cross bolted 427).
Due to increasing costs, wear, failures, etc., some of us are considering replacing the cross bolted 427 block with a 390 or 391 FT long block, because virtually all of the 427 marine manifolds, transmissions, etc.(with some exception) will bolt right to the block. The (large) hassle would appear to be swapping out the solid lifter opposite rotation cam, into a hydraulic 390 or FT, making the hydraulic a solid, or using the solid cam for hydraulic work, and then swapping the distributor onto the opposite rotation motor (again, FT being the hassle, distributor would need bushings to fit, etc., so the FE sounds best). My 427's are running fine right now, but I'm just hunting for the knowledge.
I've received some good info about the ability of the 390 to run in a marine environment, if good parts are used, but now I would like specific opinions about the bottom end. How do you guys think a 390 will fare lugging at 2500 to 3000 RPM for extended time frames, versus the cross bolted 427?
I'm quite sure I can use a 390 to get the same 300-HP, with good parts, but I'm wondering just how much those cross bolts come into play under "lugging" loads.
390 and 427 cranks and bearings appear to be identical. I know those cross bolts were intended for the 7000-RPM NASCAR runs, but just how much do they come into play in the lower RPM ranges when they're hauling the load?
Fire away, my intent is to learn something here, and I certainly don't mind qualified answers.
thanks, P
|
| | RE: How strong is the 390 bottom end for lugging & tow -- kevin, 02/13/2002
I think you can get away with it. I abused a two web block to death when I learned how to stabilze the valvetrain. (8,000+RPM's). Ran it for years at 6,000. Rory's car has a 2 rib block and he does a lot of racing without grief. I think it would be wise to get 391's and put the bushing in them along with main studs. You have the room in the Marine pan so you can add support straps on the caps without too much trouble. I used to have to do it to BBC blocks to get them to live in Late Models. (yes, everyone ran big blocks at one time for you younger people). There is also girdles available since weight is not going to be an issue. I know it is a pain to change, but you could find a junkyard motor and just throw it in and see how it does. I do think the weak point would be the cast pistons as any detonation on the water with the cylinder loading will sure crack the ring lands or worse. The Marine pistons are a fine piece, and they have the holes instead of slots in the oil ring groove, so they are plenty strong. I have found that as soon as you get around 400 horses the slotted type pinch the oil ring and do not allow rotation. The down side is the drilled holes need more skirt clearance as the heat is transfered into the skirt more than the slotted ones. Marine use needs more anyway due to the cylinder walls not expanding as much as if they were in a car. Without it, the pins can sieze up. If it were me, I would try a couple of FT blocks with all the rework, and some D2 heads for the velocity. The bushing is C4TZ-123 something, something, for a 330 I think. I like Fords terminology, "workhorse" for the 390, and believe it. JMO |
| | | Re: c4tz-12367a -- Mike McQuesten, 02/14/2002
That's that distributor bushing part # that Kevin has nearly memorized. I don't .... I have to go look at it every time just to make sure I have it right. I keep that one hanging on the wall 'cause I know I'm gonna need it with my C6ME 391/428 block someday. I don't know how much longer Ford is going to offer that bushing? |
| | | | RE: Re: c4tz-12367a -- Russell, 02/14/2002
Regarding you question on 390 FE for low sustained RPM use , they have a very good reputation. This is why when they were discontinued in cars they were still being used in trucks. Some suggestions to consider. Any motor (with heavy torque) could use a girdle to strengthen the bottom end and are readily available. FE's USUALLY don't need them due to their design with both end mains being recessed. Another possibility would be cross bolting your 390 mains. There are numerous tech reports out on doing this. I even saw a set of crossbolt mains for sale on Ebay yesterday. I feel the key to keeping an FE bottom end together is percision. ensuring line bore, torque specs etc. I have raced themn for years and the bottom end has always been the least of my worries. Now if someone had a magic answer for keeping all the oil from ending up on the top end we would have the world's best Big block motor. Good luck Russell |
| 428cj vacuum tree -- Stuart Cofer, 02/13/2002
I have a 1970 428cj Mustang 4-speed,non air car with a build date of 8-22-69.It has a different vacuum tree then all the pictures have seen.The tree is mounted in the intake behind the distributer instead of the thermostat housing.I wonder if I have the right housing(It does have a factory plug where the tree should go)And I would like to know if the three port tree off a 351 cleveland is the same as they look alike.Is the heat range for the vacuum tree the same or does it matter? The tree I have is sure not the correct one.Thanks Stuart |
| | DVCV belongs on water neck. Look for 'C8AE-' cast ID. [n/m] -- Mr F, 02/13/2002
n/m |
| | | RE:DVCV belongs on water neck. Look for 'C8AE-' cast ID. [n/m] -- Barry B, 02/13/2002
Lets see, DVCV= Distributor Vacuum Control Valve? I thought it was called TVS= Thermal vacuum switch. |
| | | | 'DVCV' is Ford's term; 'PVS/TVS' are generic, industry names. [n/m] -- Mr F, 02/13/2002
n/m |
| | | | | Gotcha, thanks! n/m -- Barry B, 02/14/2002
n/m |
| 66 cyclone throttle bracket/rod -- blake, 02/13/2002
can anyone shed some light on a throttle bracket and rod to the carb for a 66 390 gt automatic cyclone gt?
i'm in desperate need for one, or does any other car interchange w/this? any help would be greatly appreciated... |
| | RE: 66 cyclone throttle bracket/rod -- Mike McQuesten, 02/13/2002
Any bracket/throttle rod will work that is from a '66 - '69 Fairlane, Comet, Cyclone, Torino, Montego FE powered mid size FoMoCo Unibody vehicle.
Personally I did not like the bellcrank that was stock on '66 Fairlane/Comet 390 automatic cars. I preferred to use the more direct rod that was used on '68-'69.
The kickdown rod is basically the same for all of these vehicles.
Note: the throttle linkage for Mustangs/Cougars w/FE is totally different. |
| 406 tri power -- rod, 02/12/2002
1963 406 tri power 4spd [thunderbird] anything would be helpfull ,horsepower # strong or weak points, production#s. what it will take to put in a 67 fastback. headers?mounts?anything thank you! ROD |
| | 4 speed -- Ron, 02/13/2002
You have a 406 tri power with 4 speed from a 63 T bird you want to put ina 67 Mustang, is that the question ? |
| | | tbird 406 4 speed didn't never happen -- hawkrod, 02/13/2002
no such animal, tbirds never came with a stick shift after 1960 and puting one in is more than a little difficult (but i am trying!). hawkrod |
| | | 406 tri power -- rod, 02/13/2002
yes; that is one of the questions, what will it take to make it fit without cutting. would like to know hp#s production#s. |
| | yes -- rod, 02/13/2002
that's what i would like to put it in but need to know any problems i could run in to. and to answer hawkrod the #s show motor and tranny to be from a 63 t-bird any help would be great. |
| | | Point -- Ron Vesterby, 02/13/2002
Hawkrod, that was my point. Not sure where it came from, but like you said, Ford made no such animal for a Tbird. Cant find my Mustang book but there were big blocks in 68, and I think 67,68 were the same car, so the parts were available. Maybe Crites has a kit Rod, www.crites.com I believe. |
| | | RE: yes and some tbird questions -- hawkrod, 02/13/2002
like the other guys noted, you may be reading more into the numbers than there is. 61-65 tbirds all had 390 engines and never anything else and there were no stick shift cars after 1960. there were three different 390's, an export low compression engine, a standard 300HP version and the hipo tri-power M code engine. methinks you have a galaxie engine with S part numbers on the heads (and no those weren't used on birds!). another post noted the flat plane of the intake on a tbird, here is a shot of mine. and now my question, the other post mentioned the brake fitting, i picked my manifold up from another guy and it has no vacuum ports at all. any body got pics? and why is this manifold like this? it has a 2E24 date and is flat for a bird but has no ports for pcv or brakes. also how did the kickdown linkage mount? there are no towers for the throttle stuff and the parts books are not clear. also , please no slams, my car is a rod not a stocker so i ain't gonna spring for no #'s matching carbs! these are three modified list 1929-1S carbs that we cut the air horns off of and used secondary metering plates from some 600's on the outer carbs (no idle circuit, easier to tune!). anyway hope this helps clarify the tbird 406 question and also i hope someone can answer my new question
[Image edited for size by Admin.]
 |
| | | | Hey Hawk, how about a pic of the drivers side?... -- kevin, 02/13/2002
Both M-Birds I have seen had the boss w/threads. The two cars were Sport roadsters and one intake a friend had was a swap item. The one that I restored (62) was never fooled with, but maybe you could have ordered a Bird with deleted power booster, although I cant imagine why. Anything is possible I suppose. |
| | | | | here is a pic of the drivers side. -- hawkrod, 02/14/2002
here is the drivers side, no holes see? i don't really want to drill this thing until i am sure i am putting the holes in teh right places! hawkrod
[Image edited for size by Admin.]
 |
| | | | | here is a pic of the back as well -- hawkrod, 02/14/2002
i have seen galaxie intakes and they all had a hole for a fitting under the rear carb. this one has nothing and is irritating! hawkrod
[Image edited for size by Admin.]
 |
| | | | | | RE: here is a pic of the back as well -- dgasman, 02/14/2002
Is it posable that you have a galixie manifold that someone milled flat like the t-bird manifold ? That would explain why there is no vacum ports and no auto trans provisions on your manifold |
| | | | | | | RE: here is a pic of the back as well -- hawkrod, 02/14/2002
i thought of that as well but when i compared the casting to a big car manifold it was a different casting entirely. unfortunately i have not been able to compare it to a tbird casting. my other thought was maybe ford made manifolds to sell over the counter as this would fit something like a 60 galaxie or such. hawkrod |
| | RE: 406 tri power -- BOB HOPKINS, 02/13/2002
We got to know a couple thingskirst what engine /trans was in 67Stang ,makes a difference weither it is a small block car or a bigblock car in what you need to change. First the 406 is a two bolt hole engine block and the 67 were 4bolt hole engine mounts so you will have to do some work there ,and the 406 heads only have the 8 bolt hole pattern exhaust flange pattern and the top exhaustbolt head till hit the shock tower with out solid engine mounts,so you will have to 1. change the heads to 67-68 14-16 bolt hole pattern heads or modify shock towers or use solid engine mounts to keep the engine from rocking,this is if your are starting with a big block car. |
| | | 63 M-Bird had a flat intake... -- kevin, 02/13/2002
is yours flat and have a fitting under the center carb on the left side for the power brake booster. If so you will need to get a different induction set up. You can sell it and pay for something else that is much faster unless you want 3-2's. If so, you need the stepped carb manifold that came on other cars. What are the #'s on everything anyway. Look above the thermostat opening for the intake date code. No 406 came in M-Birds from the factory. The vertical bolt heads do work if you are willing to have patients, and shorten a couple of header bolts and make your own wrenches to fit easier. |
| | | | 406 in a T-Bird? -- Travis Miller, 02/13/2002
For those not familiar with early Galaxie and T-Bird FE's, it is easy to think that the 406 came in a T-Bird. Everyone says to learn to breakdown Ford casting numbers, you need to learn the code for each body line. The 406 head casting number is C2SE-6090-B. Makes sense that someone just starting out with FE's and armed with a breakdown of codes for each body line in regards to parts would say that the engine came from a T-Bird. Evidently Ford had plans to use the 406 heads on a T-Bird but pulled the plug on the idea at the last minute. No wonder it is so hard for young guys to understand FE's and even harder for us older guys to explain FE's to anyone!
|
| | | | | RE: 406 in a T-Bird? -- BOB HOPKINS, 02/13/2002
You also got to remember that Ford advertised the
Hi-po engines a the Thunderbird powered and a big Thinderbird Decal on valve covers,causes some confusion too I think!! |
| | | | | 61 standard shift T-Bird -- Lou, 02/13/2002
These was a standard shift 1961 T-Bird Hardtop sold by Coloppa Ford of Fairfield, Ct the car turned up for sale a few years ago at Napoli Indoor Showroom in Milford, Ct. I saw when it was new and at Napoli's showroom when I was there to appraise several other cars for Napolis' insurance company. The car was a 3 speed with overdrive. |
| | | | | | RE: 61 standard shift T-Bird -- hawkrod, 02/14/2002
i didn't say it couldn't be done (i know of several) but ford never offered it. any cars are either preproduction mules or homebrews. 61's are easier than 62/63 due to the availability of the fixed column. the 62 and 63 all had the swing away and there is not much room under the dash for the extra pedal. there is only 2 inches between the left side of the brake pedal and the vent on the cowl. if it had a fixed column you could change the brake pedal to hang down on the right side of the column instead of the left and that would leave room for a clutch pedal. here is a pic in case you have never been unfortunate enough to try and stick your hand in there! the only space in there is where the wiring is run and there is no place to provide a good bracket to support the left side of the pedal. i have an extra pedal and hanger and am going to try to build a reinforcement to support a pedal hanging off to the left. i think linkage is out of the question so i am looking at hydraulics or a cable. hawkrod
[Image edited for size by Admin.]
 |
| | | | | | | RE: 61 standard shift T-Bird -- Travis Miller, 02/14/2002
Hawkrod, It has been quite a while since I've been around a T-Bird. However, if you think of how any clutch pedal is supported, it actually has the large pin welded to it that goes thru the brake pedal. The brake pedal pivots on this pin. Take a clutch pedal from another type car. Cut the pivot pin off and weld the pin that the T-Bird brake pedal swings on to the clutch pedal.
On a swing away column, you could replace the brake pedal with a non-swingaway brake pedal and just not allow the steering column to swing. |
| | | | | | | | RE: 61 standard shift T-Bird -- hawkrod, 02/14/2002
thanks travis, but...i don't want to give up the swing away and even the fixed columns used the same pedal, it is just that it would be easier to modify a fixed column setup. also, if you look at the pic, the cross shaft deadends into a big mess so adding the clutch pedal to the end will be a design and engineering task. i will do it but i know it won't be tomorrow. i just got this thing and it has been off of the road since 1977 so i want to get some miles on her before she comes down. hawkrod |
| | RE: 406 tri power -- Russell, 02/14/2002
Boy did you open a can of worms !! First I think Bob was right on target. Being an FE man from the 60's it gets confusing with casting #'s. C_S #'s are USUALLY Tbird BUT in this case not so. Now as to your main question. As others have already stated YES is will work but WITH MODIFICATIONS. I am installing a 428 tri-power in a 69 mustang. 67 & 68 had a FE BUT you must 1) insure that shock towers are BB or reinforce them. 2) You need GT heads (14 bolt exhaust pattern) OR have you 406 heads drilled and tapped 3) in order to fit WITHOUT major problems use 68/69/70 Mustang BB exhaust manifolds (available used and even repo now).and 4) I highly recommend reinforcing your frame rails. I have learned the hard way that they will eventually crack if you don't. I use 14 inches of 3/8 to 1/2 flat bar stock welded into the front frame rail before installing floor pans. Also on a none convertible, I would use the concertible "tunnel" to help strengthen your main body. This set up has yet to fail me with FE's putting out 600+ HP. WEAKNESS: Oil. You need windage tray, extra capacity oil pan, good quality oil pump and extra slots in your valley pan baffle to help get the oil back to the pan. Good Luck Russell |
| | | 61 standard -- Lou, 02/14/2002
The 61 Bird I'm speaking of was a factory car and belonged to a middle age Gentelman from Westport, CT. |
| | | | RE: 61 standard -- hawkrod, 02/14/2002
as i said before, it may have been a factory car but they were not available as a regular production car. the parts books do not show any parts and the production numbers show all automatics. just because you saw it and worked on it does not make it a regular production item. there were many one ofs that were later sold (the 70 torino king cobras, 1969 cougar GTE's and 1969 cougar boss 429's come to mind) but they were not regular production cars that any one could walk in and order, but they all ended up in the hands of regular joes like you and me. hawkrod |
| | | | | RE: 61 standard -- Travis Miller, 02/14/2002
Just looked in the 1960-64 Ford Parts Illustrations Book. There is a diagram of the 1960 T-Bird clutch and brake pedal setup. The 1961 T-Bird only shows the brake pedal for an automatic setup. There is no drawing for 1961 or later T-Bird pedals with a stick.
I myself have seen a 1960 T-Bird with a factory stick transmission. |
| | | | | | 60/60 Master Parts -- Ted, 02/15/2002
The 60/64 master parts book you quote was published in 1969, and only contained parts that were still available in 1969. Look in the 1962 loose leaf supplement to the 1960 master parts book..
If a car is built on the Ford assembly line wouldn't that mean it's a probuction car and the trans choice be part of the options added to the basic car? |
| | | | | | | RE: 60/60 Master Parts -- Travis Miller, 02/15/2002
While the 1960-64 Master Parts Book was reprinted in 1969 and covers only parts that were still available at that time, the 1960-64 Master Parts Illustrations Book did not change anything. All the diagrams showing parts originally used had nothing deleted in the reprint. The 1960 T-Bird drawing shows clutch and brake pedals for stick along with brake pedal for automatic, while the 1961 shows automatic brake pedal only. There may have been plans for a stick in a 1961 T-Bird, but it did not go into production.
I also looked in my Hollander junkyard interchange books. These books show what really happened in the real world of production cars. There is a stick flywheel shown for 55-57 and 58-60 T-Birds. There is no stick flywheel shown for 61-64 T-Birds. The automatic flywheel is shown as fitting 58-64 T-Birds.
Yes, if a one of a kind car does go down an assembly line, it could be considered production by some people but a prototype by most others. However the prototypes were usually assembled at the Pilot Plant in Dearborn on the special assembly line. |
| | | | | | | 60/64 Master Parts -- hawkrod, 02/15/2002
your points are valid but a little off. i used the 61 model parts book that only covers 61 and was printed in late 1960. and as far as production goes, not all cars that go down the line are production cars. many cars are test mules that are basically assembled and then sent elsewhere for modification and development. there was a boss 302 powered 68 mustang coupe mule, and a shelby coupe or two and a 1970 cougar boss 302 convertible. these were pretty much built on the line but you could not order one therefore it is not a regular production vehicle. it is a preproduction prototype or test mule and these are not generaly considered production automobiles. also all production cars are registered with the AMA (automobile manufactures association) and you won't find any of these listed as being available. i don't doubt that there were a few birds with stick shifts but it was not a regular production option and each car would have been hand modified as there were no production parts to assemble it with. and to make the point a little more, you are more likely to see parts in the books that were never made than parts that were made but not listed (1971 boss 302 parts for example, anyone need some D1ZZ boss 302 fender decals?). hawkrod |
| | | | | | How many 60's had 3Sp? -- CincyEd, 02/16/2002
Anyone know how many manual trans 60 Birds were produced? |
| | | | | | | About 1,200 n/m -- Lou, 02/16/2002
n/m |
| Some questions about 2 different 428cj blocks -- Allen, 02/12/2002
I have started to retore my 2nd cobra and the back of the block has the crude C and 352 on the back the first cobra that was restored has 66-427 and a boss that sticks out on the lower left hand side but I dont rember if it had the crude C. Both cars are untouched with vin numbers stamped on the blocks from the cars they wer installed in. My question is why the difference in the 2 blocks?..thanks |
| 390 -- jesse, 02/12/2002
I've got a long block 390 thats going into a 1965 f-100 an I need some advise on a carb ,intake manifold,headers ,cam,ect. that will put out some serious horse power |
| | Re: 390 -- Travis Miller, 02/13/2002
By serious horsepower, does that mean the vehicle will be dedicated to the dragstrip only with open headers? Or prehaps it will be street driven and never see the track. They are two totally different worlds when it comes to useable horsepower. |
| | | RE: Re: 390 -- jesse, 02/13/2002
mostly street |
| | | | RE: Re: 390 -- Travis Miller, 02/13/2002
In that case I would check out the Edelbrock package. Edelbrock has done an excellent job of putting together just what you are looking for. Serious horsepower but still streetable. Then once it is together, a nice nitrous kit to top it off would accent the package. |
| | | | | RE: Re: 390 -- JESSE, 02/13/2002
I was looking at that but I heard their cam sucks I was looking at a crane cams powermax cam. what size carb would you recomend for a 390 bored .060 over? |
| | | | | | i also heard that cam sucks -- John, 02/14/2002
if i were you, i would look into an extreme energy cam, or maybe a magnum cam. |
| | | | | | | RE: i also heard that cam sucks -- Jesse, 02/14/2002
how about a crane cams power max with an adv. duration of 272/284 a gross lift of .533/.563 and a rpm range of 1500-5800 |
| | | | | | one more thing.... -- John, 02/14/2002
it doesnt' matter what carb you have if your intake, and exhaust don't' cooperate. Make sure you have a good dual plane intake and headers. i would advise a dual plane design in that heavy truck. You'll need all the bottom end you can get. also, don't buy a huge cam and expect it to be real fast. YOu need a cam that offers some good low end power. |
| | | | | | | RE: one more thing.... -- Russell, 02/14/2002
Jesse, listen to John. Your biggest concern is exhaust. FE motors breathe well and flow good but scavaging exhaust is always a problem. Get a good street/strip cam BUT put on headers with at least 2 1/2 " pipes and you will notice a big difference from a stock 390.
PS: Flowmasters or similar mufflers are also recommended. |
| | | | | | | | RE: one more thing.... -- Jesse, 02/14/2002
If I ran headers with glass packs do you think it would do the job? |
| | | | | | | | | RE: one more thing.... -- Jesse, 02/14/2002
and how about a crane cams power max with an adv. duration of 272/284 a gross lift of .533/.563 and a rpm range of 1500-5800 |
| Which shade of blue ? -- Eric, 02/12/2002
Hello,
Does anyone know the Ditzler, Krylon or Dupli-Color product number(s) for the correct shade of Ford Blue engine paint for a '69, 428CJ ?
Thanks for the help !
Eric |
| | RE: Which shade of blue ? -- Tim B, 02/13/2002
Somebody posted the Ditzler paint code before. I had some made up. It was a little different than the others. I can't find the code, sorry! Whoever had it could you re-post it?
Tim B |
| | | | RE: Here it is again... -- Eric, 02/13/2002
Thanks guys, I don't know why I couldn't find this when I searched the past forums. I came up with a lot of discussion but no specific product nos. I'll have to try to find a supplier that still carries Ditzler. I was told they no longer make that brand, it's now PPG ?
Thanks again,
Eric |
| | | | | RE: Here it is again... -- Tim B, 02/13/2002
Same thing, same codes.
Tim B |
| | | | | 'Ditzler' was/is PPG's automotive product line. [n/m] -- Mr F, 02/13/2002
n/m |
|