Skip Navigation Links.
 |  Erson roller rockers -- steve mcdonald, 02/10/2002
Has anyone used these.?? I saw a bunch of info a while back but no evaluations.... Also where can i purchase them.?? Will they fit under Motorsport aluminium valve covers without removing baffels.?? THANKS.... |
|  | RE: Erson roller rockers -- Royce Peterson, 02/10/2002
Steve,
I have ben running a set on one of my stroker 427's (452 CI). The Erson's are the best engineered rocker setup on the market, they are a no brainer bolt on for a 390 or 428/ 428 CJ. If you are running Edelbrock aluminum heads Erson offers a spacer kit to make the tips align properly with the valves. I am running the stock chrome "Power by Ford" valve covers on my 427 with the baffles in place. No problems of any kind, stock pushrods were perfect. I am running fairly stout Comp Cams valve springs and stock length Crane pushrods. My cam is 240 degrees at .050 and .550" lift.
Royce Peterson
|
| |  | RE: Erson roller rockers -- peter, 02/10/2002
Royce,
Are you running solid lifters? and what brand.
I'm going down that road soon and your advice is appreciated. What price is the rocker setup worth?
Engine: 428Cj, heads with mild porting and ford light weight racing valves haven't picked a cam as yet
0.30" over forged pistons stock cranks and rods |
| | | | RE: Erson roller rockers -- Royce Peterson, 02/10/2002
My lifters are solid Isky, they are actually a hollow hydraulic lifter that has no travel at the top.
I have heard horror stories about the Ford lightweight valves, you might think about replacing them with new ones. I have not used any of them personally, maybe someone else has actual experiences to relate.
Royce Peterson |
| | | |  | RE: Erson roller rockers -- peter, 02/11/2002
Royce,
you are the second person too tell me that.
I think I'll keep them on the shelf as a talking peice. |
| | | RE: Royce are you running.. -- James, 02/10/2002
Are you running Edelbrock heads? |
| | | | RE: Royce are you running.. -- Royce Peterson, 02/11/2002
I have Edelbrock heads on my other 427 stroker (448 CI) but am using Harland Sharp rockers on it with cast iron Ford Low Riser stands. Also a good setup but the Ersons are needle roller bearing on the shaft versus the H-S rockers bronze bushing at the shaft. The Harland Sharp setup is also more expensive by the time you buy the shafts, rockers, some kind of iron or billet support stands. Erson is clearly the leader now in the area of rocker setups for FE's.
Royce Peterson |
| | | | | RE: I have H-S rockers and.... -- James, 02/12/2002
I am not running anything but stock shafts and the standard alumunum CJ rocker stands and am having no trouble so far. Is there some technical information that I have over looked? Spill the beans Royce. |
| | | | | | RE: Royce, tell me more about the Ersons. -- James, 02/12/2002
What do they use for shafts and stands and...how much are they? |
| | | | | | | RE: Royce, tell me more about the Ersons. -- Royce Peterson, 02/12/2002
The shafts and stands are included. It is all bolted together ready to install. The shafts are a thick wall steel, stands are billet aluminum. I paid around $560.00 from Summit, you might be able to find them a bit cheaper by shopping around.
Royce Peterson |
| | | | | | | | RE: Royce, which spark plug are you running? -- James, 02/13/2002
The literature that cam with my heads recomended a champion RC12YC. I am running the Autolite equivolent. Which ones have you had the best luck with on those Edelbrock heads? |
| | | | | | | | | Plugs in my Edelbrock heads. -- Royce Peterson, 02/14/2002
James,
I have had bad experiences with Champion plugs in the past so I also got the Autolite Platinum equivalent. With an MSD 6AL and Pertronix plugs always look good.
Royce Peterson |
| | | | | | RE: I have H-S rockers and.... -- Royce Peterson, 02/12/2002
The aluminum stands and the stock shafts are probably sufficient if you are running spring pressures in the 100 closed / 280 open range. Higher than that you will see a problem one day, the shafts are not supported on the end and try to bend upward. Companies like DSC and Harland Sharp offer heavier wall shafts and stud kits are available to assure accurate torquing of the stands. DSC also offers billet steel stands, I am using 1963 - 65 427 Low riser cast iron stands which are dimensionally the same as 390 - 428 - 428 CJ aluminum stands.
Royce Peterson |
| | | | | | | RE: Thanks for the info Royce -- James, 02/12/2002
Many thanks |
| camshaft -- Ken Sanzone, 02/09/2002
I own a 69 482scj mustang and I am in the process of getting the car a close to stock as possible. It currently has a solid lifter cam, headers, high end dist. etc, . What camshaft would you recomend for me to use? |
| | Re:c6oz-b -- Mike McQuesten, 02/10/2002
Crane & Competition Cams both grind a repop of this cam which was the only cam that was run stock in a true 390GT, '66-'68, 428PI, '67-'68, and both the 428 Cobra Jet and Super Cobra Jet.
It's an excellent all around driveable cam. It makes a lot of torque up to 5,200 or so and that about it. So if you want your '69 SCJ to be as close to stock as possible...there you go. |
| 428CJ or 390GT ? -- Eddie, 02/09/2002
I found a 69 Cobra R-code car.The motor is a 68.
The intake has an S stamped in front of the cast
#'s C8AE.. ID books show this is a 390 GT.The
heads are cast # C8AE-H. 390 or 428CJ ? |
| | RE: 428CJ or 390GT ? -- Dan, 02/09/2002
C8AE-H heads are 428 passenger car heads with 68.1cc - 71.1cc combustion chamber volume.. I picked a set of these up at a junk yard and are fixing them up for my 68 mustang GT fastback with a S-code 390, soon to be swaped with a 428. |
| | | RE: 428CJ or 390GT ? -- Eddie, 02/09/2002
What about the intake with the S stamped in front of
the cast # ? This is supposed to be a 428 CJ ? |
| | | | RE: 428CJ or 390GT ? -- Ed Foral, 02/09/2002
The heads and intake are most definitely NOT off of a 428CJ.
The S cast intakes were used on both base 428 and 390 4V engines. The C8AE-H heads were used on everything from Mustangs to trucks. They were used in both 2V and 4V applications including the 390GT Motors. being a C8 cast intake, my vote is that the heads and intake are probably off of a 390. What are the casting numbers and dates from the block? You could have anything under the heads and intake.
Ed |
| | | | | RE: 428CJ or 390GT ? -- Eddie, 02/09/2002
I did not get the #'s off of the block. I should have but
once I saw the intake I felt something was not right
about the motor.Then the head #'s did not match.
The car was supposed to be 100% original.But
the VIN. # was for a 69' Cobra 428 4V RAM AIR.
The carb. and breather were missing.The guy
swears he purchased the car 15 yrs. ago from the
orig. owner.The car is definately a Cobra.But for the
price he's asking,it needs to be all original. |
| | | | | | RE: make an offer... -- Mike McQuesten, 02/10/2002
Hey Eddie, I'd make the '69 Cobra seller an offer. If you can do it tactfully, which can be difficult with someone who's convinced their car is original, explain the facts to the Cobra seller. It sounds like one of two things, either someone robbed the original CJ intake/heads and replaced them with 390GT stuff or my guess would be that someone replaced the entire 428 CJ with a 390GT.
Mr. Current Cobra owner never knew that he bought his Cobra with a 390 fifteen years ago.
Just a hint, there's or was a week or so ago, a pretty decent looking '69 Cobra Formal Roof for sale on ebay. This guy tried to sell it once before that I know of on ebay a month or so back and it didn't sell. Take a look and see what it's up to. I'm not going to venture any kind of guess on what a '69 Fairlane Cobra is valued at now. |
| | | | | | | RE: make an offer... -- Eddie, 02/10/2002
Thanks.That sounds like some good advice.I have
found so much mixed info. about the motor I'm not
sure what to do at this point.Some old literature I
found states that on early 69's Ford may have used
390GT heads on Cobra Jet motors.If this is true,
did they also use a 390GT Intake( S stamped in front
of the cast#) ?? I would hate to let it slip away if
it really is all original by chance... |
| | | | | | | | never happened r and q code cars came with a cj -- hawkrod, 02/11/2002
there is no way that ford intentionaly put the wrong engine in a car or wrong heads and intakes on a motor (it would be noted in the parts books, an example of this is some 1972 fords that are coded for 9 3/8 rear axles have 9 inch N case rears. the parts books are very specific about where and when this happened. there are no notes about the wrong heads on a 428 engine). all torino and fairlane cobras should have a 428cj and there is no reason why they shouldn't, cj production started in early 1968 and there were plenty of 68 model cars with the engine so why would they not have them for early 69 cars? check the serial number of the car and make sure the 5th digit is an R or a Q. if it is anything else the car is not a cobra and does not have a CJ. next thought is that the original engine blew early on and was replaced. it is even possible that this happened before the original owner got the car but i doubt it. most likely is that back in the 70's somebody swapped it with a 69 mustang they wanted a cobra jet for. i am guilty of this myself and put 390 running gear in several torinos. it was so long ago that the cars would look original and correct because we used all of the right parts from the 390 cars we were swapping. hawkrod |
| | | | | | | | | RE: '69 Cobra -- Mike McQuesten, 02/11/2002
Hawkrod's right. If the car you're looking at Eddie is a Q or R code Fairlane Cobra there's no way it'd have a stock 390GT. In your original post I think you said it was an R code car.
Personally I think you shouldn't let this Cobra go just because it has the wrong engine. I admit though that I'm very partial to '69 Fairlane Cobras.
Again, tactfully explain to the current non original owner that someone has changed the original CJ for a 390 for whatever reason. This is a major factor in considering the current value of any muscle car. To bring this car up to value it will need a 428 Cobra Jet engine.
It's tough to break bad news to people. Hopefully this current owner will accept it. You might have to allow him to sew awhile and even do a little checking on his own. Be patient. I was surprised that '69 Cobra Formal roof (I like to say Cobra Coupe...but that makes the Shelby purists squirm) didn't sell the first time on ebay.
Good luck to you Eddie. |
| | | | | | | | | | RE: '69 Cobra -- Eddie, 02/13/2002
Thanks for the advice.Believe me it is a big help
in my decision on what to do about this car.I
went back today and looked at the car again.
I have told the seller everything I have learned
but he feels the car is rare either way.The pass.
door and fender have been replaced.It has some
rust in the quarters.The carpet was removed
and it has good floor pans.The car will need
bodywork,interior work,paintjob and all new
chrome.My biggest question is what the car is
worth without the orig. motor,ram-air breather,
carb. and needing the work it does to put it
back original ?? |
| | | | | | | | | | | It's a generic 390. -- Dave Shoe, 02/13/2002
Since the heads on the Cobra are 1968-71 vintage, the only way it's going to be a 390GT engine is if it's a 1968 model, and ALL of these 390 GT engines have Thermactor ports drilled in the heads, due to the stricter national emissions regulations of 1968 (first major emissions wave was 1966). In 1966-67, only the California 390GTs needed Thermactor to pass emissions. I suspect the C8AE-H heads on the Cobra have undrilled thermactor bosses, which proves it's not a GT. Exhaust drill patterns may be another "GT" giveaway, but I'll hold off on discussing that side of the issue.
The Cobra owner must know it's not the original engine, because it's not fast enough to be. I also suspect he's been told it's not an original by dozens of informed onlookers who get drawn under the hood every time it get's opened in public. I suspect he's looking for a sucker. Make an offer, but be cautious and prepared to back away.
JMO,
Shoe. |
| | RE: 428CJ or 390GT ? -- Stuart Cofer, 02/13/2002
Eddie,go to www.428cobrajet.org and you will find pictures and part numbers to prove to the seller that the car is not original. |
| Best parts for the job. -- jason, 02/09/2002
I'm forced to perchase all new internal and external parts for my 390 (sept for crank) due to wear and tear... I was wondering if anyone can tell me what would be the best cam/lifter combo for my block.. (max proformance)
Thanks.
|
| | Pretty tall order -- Louie, 02/09/2002
The cam must be complementary to the rest of the setup. There isn't a wonder cam. In selecting a cam you must take into consideration your intended purpose (flat out drag car or street/strip), your gearing, your transmission, your heads, your intake, your carb, your exhaust , your wallet. So spill the beans and you'll you will probably get many recommendations. |
| | | RE: Pretty tall order -- jason, 02/10/2002
k, I'm only going to be on the street/strip. i'v got a 68 390 GT. all new highP bearings original crank double tooth timming grears edlebrock rmp proformer intake with a edlebrock 750. I have C8AE-H heads roller rockers, factory 4-speed toploader, factory 9" don't know the spacific gears. (outa 68 cyclone)
and for exhaust running header 3" collectors with 3" dual straight pipes. and for money there isn't really a limit. "go hard or go home".
Thanks for any input. |
| | RE: Edelbrock has.... -- James, 02/09/2002
All the cam manufacturers can recomend a good cam for what ever set up that you are going to run as long as you tell them everything you are going to be running. Edelbrock is the only people that I know that offer a complete set up that is designed to work together as a package. The package includes heads, cam and intake that have been developed to all work together. If I had it to do over again I would have done it that way. |
| | | RE: Edelbrock has.... -- Bob, 02/10/2002
And I would never buy a cam from anyone but a Cam Vendor. Isky, Crane, Comp Cams, Erson, Chet Herbert, Crower, Lunati etc, but not Edelbrock or JC Whitney.
Yes its designed to work toegther ... for the Dyno!
I street drive my engine. The cam vendors sell only cams and know that word of mouth advertising is the best advertising. If you tell them what you have and how your want to drive it you will get a very good cam for you needs. |
| | | | RE: Edelbrock has.... -- James, 02/10/2002
I seriously doubt if Edelbrock makes their own cams. The last time I checked they outsourced the cam grinding to a major cam manufacture. I will find out who makes it for them just for the sake of argument. To say that dyno work is worthless makes me wonder why every factory and race engine builder who manages to sit in the "winners circle" bothers to dyno there engines before it graces the engine bay of any of their cars. I guess this aproach is to scientific for some folks. |
| | | | | RE: Edelbrock has.... -- Bob, 02/10/2002
I did not say the use of a Dyno was worthless.
Two cams optimized for a set of heads, two intake manifolds and two or three carburetors to meet teh needs of every single combination of FE engine displacement, gears, transmissions, headers, tires, vehicles and driving styles. Get real!
As I did say, the cam needs to matched to the application. Edelbrock offers two cams. No cam vendor offers less than four, most have more that half a dozen..for the street.
|
| | | | | | RE: Edelbrock has.... -- James, 02/10/2002
Bob, you have compared the dyno work that Tim, the engineer at Edelbrock, who spent sevaral months of his life getting it right with the shallowness of a Jcwhitney catilog. I just have a simple question, have you heard bad things about this set up? If so it is new one on me. I have a friend who has used this set up without any problems and I spent time on the phone with engineer that designed it. All things, wheels, gears, carberators, trannies and so on have been taken into account and it is a system that works so I did my home work on this issue before I opened my mouth on it and I think you could a better part by the people in this forum if you would do the same. |
| | | | | | | RE: Edelbrock has.... -- Bob, 02/12/2002
I've got a friend, John W, who bought their package for his 352, and it has less power than a totally stock 2 BBL 390. He owns both and feels he was cheated.
The 352 has the small Edelbrock cam, manifold and carburetor, Hooker headers, a C6 and 3.00 gears. The 390 has is bone stock 2 BBL with the terrible log manifolds, a C6 and 2.75 gears.
Both engine are in '66 F100 trucks. The 390 runs well and pulls hard. The 352 is whimpy.
|
| | | | | | | | RE: Edelbrock has.... -- Paul G., 02/12/2002
That's surprising to me. A couple of years ago I replaced the factory intake, carb and cam on my 390 with the edlebrock performer power package intake cam and lifters. And replaced the old carb with a Holley 600 vac secondary unit. The truck is an F-250 4x4 hiboy with 4.10 gears. The package really woke the engine up. Granted, it was no race car, but it definitely had more power, better driveability, and improved gas mileage. The performer packege promised just that, improved performance off idle to 5000, and I feel that it delivered. I am now in the process of building the motor again and I will probably go for a more radical build up, but I thought the edlebrock package was a simple economical improvement for a daily driven truck. |
| | | | | | | | | RE: Edelbrock has.... -- Bob, 02/12/2002
I think the Edelbrock package is fine for some FE engines. But it is not fine for others.
The point is 2 cam choices don't give enough options to meet everyone's needs. Certainly some, but not everyone's. |
| | | | | | | | | | RE: Edelbrock has.... -- James, 02/12/2002
Now you are making sense Mr. Bob. |
| | | | | | | | In fairness to Edelbrock.... -- Nitro, 02/12/2002
The 352 wasn't exactly a big burner to begin with. |
| | | | | | | | | RE: In fairness to Edelbrock.... -- Bob, 02/12/2002
It's got bigger valvers than the 350 Ch*%y, the same bore and stroke, and a more stable rocker arm setup.
In 1961 the 352 made 360 HP, one of the first factory engines to ever made MORE than 1 HP per cubic inch!
Fariness to Edelbrock. That's BS.
John's built 352 is lame and he's discussed with their package deal, and I don't blame him. |
| | | | | | | | | | Really....... -- Nitro, 02/13/2002
Well that's his right as well as your's....hell I haven't got stock in Edelbrock or nutt'n :) However....that being the case (hp you listed) that 352 bone stock should get all over that 390 in the first place so it seems to me that with the upgrades, he's in like flint. Apparently HIS 352 is not the motor you described...and you were describing the hi performance police special weren't you? In any case :
The '61 352 put out 220 hp but the '59 & '60 352 put out 300 hp. I can not find reference to ANY year of the 352 putting out 360 hp Bob. |
| | | | | | | | | |  | RE: Really....... -- Bob, 02/13/2002
Try 1960. Reference is page 28 of the Muscle Parts Story Supplement No. 1, Published by Ford, July 1970.
Chart II gives the specs.
His 352 was a stock truck engine that he had rebuilt and the Edelbrock parts added to. I've been in both and while the 352 is not bad, the bone stock 390 2 BBL (out of a '69 car) is quicker. And I know the 390 is stock as it developed a wrist pin knock and we just tore it down. Factory parts everywhere except the timing chain and oil pump. |
| | | | | | | | | | | RE: Really....... -- Nitro, 02/14/2002
Ok so the 360 hp 352 cid was a special option? I'm not trying to be argumentive but you said it was the first "stock" motor to put out roughly equal hp to cid ratio and if it were a stock item wouldn't it be listed in motor manuals as such? The musclecar listing you mentioned is not accesable to me at this time so that's why I am asking.
427's pumping 425 hp are not your every day motor but are listed in motor manuals as are police specials/interceptors etc. Was this 352 a "factory stock" edition or a special order factory hot rod build up? Or something altogether different? The "THUNDERBOLT" put out some 550 hp from the factory but was never listed as a stock edition because very few were ever produced, it was nonetheless a "factory option" albeit not really "stock". There is quite a difference........
At any rate, I agree with you that the "perfect" cam should come from a cam specialty supplier tailored custom to an individual's conception of performance. Edelbrock designs cams to fit the street with an overall performance in mind, for most (not all) that is adequate. For serious performance, one must get serious equipment. |
| | | | | | | | | | | | RE: Really....... -- Ian Dobson, 02/14/2002
Ok, so that brings to mind one thing, as I've just priced out all the stuff for my mustang, and was going to buy it all until I read this thread, are you saying that I shouldn't
I have a 69 Mustang with a 390GT that currently runs 13.1s
the cam and valve springs are 20 years old, and I drive that care about 50/50 street/strip
I was gonna buy the performer RPM cam and heads, and some crane adjustable rocker arms, and keep my factory ford aluminum intake and my Holley 750 Double pump.
what would be better stuff to buy?
oh and if it matters the compression is 10.5/1
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | RE: Really....... -- Bob, 02/14/2002
The Edlebrock set-up should be fine for a 390. And may be fine for you.
But is not fine for every FE. People with 352s or 410s or 428s or that are serious about racing may need to look for a different set-up. |
| | | | | | | | | | | | RE: Really....... -- Bob, 02/14/2002
Try page 811 of the 1964 Motor's Auto Repair Manual. The 360 HP 352 is listed there and also on page 857 of the '63 Motor's Manual.
In 1960 the Plymouths and Dodges got 330 HP from their 383 and Chevrolet got 335 HP from the 348. Besides the Ford 352, only the Corvette with a 315 HP fuel injected 283 got over 1 HP per cubic inch.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | I just wish.. -- Don V, 02/14/2002
more FE enthusiasts would buy those beautiful heads and intakes offered by Edelbrock...I know they can be a little expensive, but they could sell those useless, ill -designed, engineered before Ford had computer parts( ie. any police or CJ stuff) to us poor suckers who have a fondness for that sort of thing - I know I won't have the gee - wiz factor when opening hood, but , hey I think I can live with it ....I mean I'll try.. you know. |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: i don"t think so! -- Morgan, 02/15/2002
The 428 PI in my 67 Shelby was only rated at 335HP
I am sure its less at the rear wheels. I actually believe the 352 was rated at much less if it stock. And then its an anchor with a cast manifold. |
| | | | | | | | | | | RE: Re: i don"t think so! -- Bob, 02/15/2002
I agree with you. I was only quoting the factory rating. And of course everyone knows the 335 number is a joke and should be around 375.
Also your 428's cast iron manifolds are much worse than the ones on the 352HP. And the 352 had a solid lifter camshaft. But again I agree with you. |
| | Let's start over -- Travis Miller, 02/16/2002
Jason asked what he should do in regards to a cam. Given that he already has many mods to the engine, my advise would be to check out the cam companies and tell them ALL the things he already has on the car. This also means finding out what rearend gears it has.
As for the Edelbrock package, this is for someone just starting to modify an engine. Opps, let me rephrase that. The Edelbrock package is for someone just starting to modify a vehicle. The example given of the poor running Edelbrock package in the '66 pickup with a 352 probably ran poor because it still had the 3.00 gears in it. More than likely it also had a tall set of tires. I am not surprised at all that a stock 390 2bl could out run it. Until everyone realizes that you can build all the horsepower in the world, but if you stick the engine in a heavy pickup truck with a terrible set of rearend gears, the engine will be a dog.
Do not blame Edelbrock, blame the rearend gears. Or at least blame the owner who did not change the gears to something suitable that would match the needs of the engine. So why did the 390 2bl run good with 2.75 gears? Because it has gobs of low RPM torque. It was designed that way from the factory. |
| 390/428 -- jeff, 02/09/2002
i realize "FE" engines include the 428 and 390 and that the 428 crank can be dropped in the 390, yielding 410cid is this right? And i read with sonic wall testing the 390 block can be punched out to 428, w/ the 428 crank of course. But evidently then the 428 block has thicker cylinder walls to begin with ? |
| | RE: first 428 blocks were C6ME.... -- James, 02/09/2002
The first 428 CJ blocks were 66 truck blocks so if yours can be bored out that far just use it and go on. |
| Dave Shoe, Royce, got some 427 and 390 questions -- P, 02/08/2002
I have a running discussion with some of my marine FE buddies about the venerable 427, which is up there on a pedestal not too far below a couple of statues who represent a lot more significance to our world.
I of course, have been raised to "worship" the 427, as my Grandfather owned and operated a Ford dealership and sold a lot of em. On the other hand, I am interested in the practical differences between the marine 427 block (cross-bolted, center-oiler most of the time) and a generic or FT 390/391 block.
The reason being, the 390 and 391shortblocks are readily available at reasonable costs and all of the marine equipment will bolt right to them. One of my buddies says the 390 can't take the stress, and starts quoting all of the race-bred features of the 427. I'm of the opinion that the bottom end of a 390 is adequate for the marine environment where PRM's don't exceed 4,000 and rarely (due to the cost of gas these days) ever even get above 3,000 very often.
My buddy is quoting Steve Christ, which is a great source but far from complete, and not entirely accurate from what I understand. He is quoting all of the finer points of the 427 block, and I am in agreement with the finer points he's mentioned. However, I don't think many or most of those refinements are really even used in the marine environment, with a 9.5:1 compression ratio.
David Thayer had some interesting comments about a conversation with Lee Holman and the $1400 motors Ford was selling to Chris Craft. I also have heard that the decision to use the 427 was based on the $ and the number of call-backs the product would (or did) get, and I've heard the 430 MEL did as well as the 427 in the marine environemt (heard this from a previous employee at the CC plant). David Thayer, please comment as well!!
Since the 427 marine has a 390 crank, and the intakes and heads seem to either be 390 or 352 outright or in origin, what would be the practical difference in using a 390 block in the marine environment, should one want to replace a 427 with one? The question is more aimed at identifying any weakness that the 390 may have, such as a history of bearing failures, crank problems, etc. in the 4,000 RPM max world, which I'm nor really aware of. I'm contending that a marine 427 basically is" a "big 390", for all practical purposes in the marine context, and the cross bolts are a nice feature, but really not needed.
I may be wrong, and I'd apprecaite comments from you guys. The question is just wanting to learn more about the subject, and I am ready to soak it up, so please fire away. You know, we who don't know, or don't have a really qualified opinion, have to ask these kinds of questions! :-)
Thanks in advance.
P |
| | 390's for the water -- Royce Peterson, 02/08/2002
P,
I think a pair of 390's would work fine in your application if you used good machining and good quality components. For example, a .020" overbored 390 with flat top pistons, Edelbrock Performer RPM heads, cam, intake and carbs. Good quality roller rocker setup from Harland Sharp or Erson. In other words no medium quality parts, only best quality parts. The 390's built like this would be powerful and reliable with power equal to or maybe better than your current engines. The crank and rods in any 1967 - up 390 are identical to your 427's so that would not be an issue. Forged pistons and a good balance job would be recommended. The Edelbrock heads have bronze valve guides and hardened valve seats so longevity would be excellent with unleaded gas. For your RPM levels the Performer cam might be a better choice than the RPM.
That's my take on it.
Royce Peterson |
| | RE: You do get the larger bore with the 427 -- David thayer, 02/12/2002
This allows a wider choice of heads, but for the modern motor, the ED heads will work nice on a 390. No crossbolts sticking our for the world to see on a 390 though, that means a lot to a lot of people
David |
| | | RE: You do get the larger bore with the 427 -- P, 02/13/2002
Dave (and Royce) thank you for your comments, I value your credibility and I use what I learn as a form of "homework", because I want to be as accurate as possible, but I admit I'm still "dangerous".
P |
| Hey Tulley and Kevin T... -- Brett, 02/08/2002
In reference to the C-6 swap for a Cruise-O in a '64. Does the same apply for a '67 Galaxie with a 390? Also, what are my options for finding a compatible C-6 for a 390? Year ranges, Models, etc... |
| Stupid ? -- Rick, 02/08/2002
I know a 428 is a different balance but don't all FE's have the same bolt pattern on the flywheel? Guy said he had one for a 390 & the holes won't line up & all I do is 460's. |
| Holley carbs -- gordon, 02/07/2002
i am trying to fix a holley carb and need a set of used metering blocks for a 780 cfm model 3310 holley for my 69 390
does anyone have these used
please reply to my E MAIL
flash1@alltel.net
thanks
gordon |
| High Volume vs. Stock Oil Pump ? -- Eric, 02/07/2002
I need to replace an oil pump in a '69, 428 CJ.
Can I use a high volume pump with a stock oil pan or
are they designed only for use w/ high capacity pans ?
Pros & Cons anyone ? Will it run a stock pan dry ?
Same question with the fuel pump.
If I go with bigger jets after a dyno tune, will I need to move up to a hi-output fuel pump ?
Thanks for your help,
Eric
|
| | RE: High Volume vs. Stock Oil Pump ? -- Bob, 02/07/2002
High volume pumps are only useful if you've opened up the oil gallery from the pump to the oil filter adapter.
High volume pumps may help but to get the full benefit you need to install a larger diameter pick-up tube in the tank and a larger line from the tank to the pump.
Bob |
| | HV pumps require a HV pan. -- Dave Shoe, 02/08/2002
You can try installing a HV pump with a stock pan, but if your car runs like a stock CJ, you'll likely hear lifters on hard corners and your oil light may flicker on when going through the traps.
The #1 oiling mod for any fast FE is a new pan. Adding a performance pump (HV or HP or HVHP) requires numerous mods, the least important of which are drilling out oil passages, the most important are proper restriction of oil to the heads and assisting rapid oil drainback from the heads by using such items as 1958-66 style pedestal drip trays which have the three drainback fingers in them.
Also, replacing rod bearings with the non-squirting type of bearing shell (squirt hole not present) will also keep pressure in the crank while the extra pressure/flow allows plenty of cranksplash for the cylinder walls. Note that rod bearings can only be replaced if your rod passes roundness spec or is resized to a perfectly round shape.
A performance pump has caused the death of many stock-panned FEs. Run a stock pump and an extra quart of oil (as all 428CJ dipsticks since early 1969 were calibrated to do) if you don't wanna drop the bucks on a performance pan. Stock pumps work great.
Shoe. |
| | Fuel Pump -- Ron Vesterby, 02/08/2002
If your engine is working well with the fuel pump you have, a jet change up will not need a larger fuel pump - 2 or 3 sizes are a very small incremental change in volume - but if you have completly redone the motor with better flowing heads, larger cam, other performance changes, then it may be necessary - volume of a fuel pump figured from a pounds per hour consumption number I believe |
| | | RE: Fuel Pump -- Eric, 02/08/2002
Thanks for the responses guys. Based on your advise, I think I'll keep both pumps stock.
I was having an overheating prob. which I guess is pretty normal w/ these engines in traffic. The block test came out ok w/ excellent water flow but the oil pressure drops from 40 lbs. to 10lbs. after running for a while at low RPMs. Hopefully just replacing it w/ another stock oil pump will get me out of the red!
Thanks again,
Eric |
|