Skip Navigation Links.
| Propane Fueled 361 FT Engine -- Rollie H, 10/14/2001
I have discovered a 1978 Ottawa trailer mover (switcher) with a 1975 361 FT engine. Has D5TE-9425-TA cast into the intake manifold. This engine has an oil supply line running from the passenger side of the block to the air compressor for the air brake system. It also runs on propane. How can a propane fuel system be obtained for say a 1976 F100 with an FE engine? It looks simple enough at a glance, but I know there has to be more to it than I see. All I see is the propane tank of course with a line running to a regulator which is piped into the back of a throttle plate which looks very much like the base of a four barrel carburetor with linkage. There are wires running to what look like a soleniod and a couple of other devices. One peculiar thing I noticed about this engine (as if there aren't a bunch of peculiarities) is the vacuum advance on distributor is facing to the rear of the engine. I have no idea if this is someones mistake or a Ford heavy duty service distributor of some kind. Any information will be helpful Thanks in advance! |
| | I'd like to learn what a "Trailer Mover" is. -- Dave Shoe, 10/14/2001
Rollie,
If you could talk a bit more about what a "Trailer Mover" is, I'd much appreciate it.
Also, I've got a smidgen of literature on propane/nat gas carbs which utilize 2-barrel FT intakes. I'm not aware of any which use 4V intakes.
Shoe. |
| | | RE: I'd like to learn what a "Trailer Mover" is. -- Will, 10/14/2001
Think of a trailer mover as a tow-truck for trailers. They are big heavy trucks that are very short (in length, not height).
Also - my father used to work for a propane company. We had a pickup truck (300 I-6) and a station wagon (351M) on propane. I don't remember all of the parts, but I do remember - tank with normal regulator, valves, etc., lines to the engine, propane carburetor, hose to the top of the gas carburetor. The propane carburetor mixed the propane with air. The gas carburetor was used to control speed - basically just the throttle plate was used. There was a switch inside that turned the propane on/gas off, and vice versa.
The propane dropped power quite a bit, but ran super clean. At 280,000 miles, my dad replaced the air filter or something like that, and didn't get a nut on tight. The lock washer may have been flattened. The nut worked its way loose, and down the carb. Once it hit the cylinder, it split the block. We took the engine apart, and it looked brand new - 'cept for sunken valves. The bearings even looked fresh - at 280K miles!
Another weird thing - if you run on propane exclusively for a long time, you'll have to rebuild the carburetor if you ever want to run on gas again. The gas dries up. Just make sure you run on gas once a month or so. |
| | | RE: I'd like to learn what a "Trailer Mover" is. -- Rollie H, 10/14/2001
A trailer mover is a short wheel base vehicle which is used by trucking companies to get trailers to and from docks for loading and unloading. It is used by many companies in trailer storage yards because tandem axle trucks can't fit into some of the tight places in those yards. This particular trailer mover was used by the Blue Rhino propane company. I guess it make sense that they converted it over to propane. I was surprised that this thing has points ignition since the mover is a 1978 model. Evidently the engine was worked on at some time and or the electronic ignition went bad and was replaced with the points type. |
| B9AE Cylinder Head -- Ted Young, 10/13/2001
Can anyone supply me with one B9AE or equivalent FE cylinder head?
Thanks, Ted Young |
| | Any plain 1959-65 head should be equivalent. -- Dave Shoe, 10/14/2001
I suspect that any "non-performance" FE head from mid-1958 thru 1965 should be equivalent to your B9 casting, both in chamber size and runner config. One exception might be one type of 1965 352 truck head with anti-reversion tabs in it. I've only seen one of these, and don't know it's part number.
Shoe. |
| did the 352 has as much potential -- mikeb, 10/13/2001
as a 350 Chevy? Seems like it had bigger ports and valves,and maybe it coulda been a major player in that cubic inch range. The 350 had a lightweight valvetrain, so that may give a edge in fast revving. Thoughts anyone? |
| | RE: did the 352 has as much potential -- richard, 10/13/2001
the 350 chevy is lighter both in overall wieght and in the rotating assembly. as i recall it also has smaller bearing surfaces so there is less friction. otherwise with the right parts the 352 can be competitive but more expensive to build. |
| | | RE: 352 was competing with the 348, 347, 361. -- R. Shannon, 10/14/2001
In it's era the 352 made alot of HP and breathed quite well compared to it's era of engines. 350 chevies didn't come out till late 68 as I remember so their was alot of upgrades in the SBC and quite refinded when the 350 was born. In the late 50's and early 60's Ford was legendary with the 352s. At least that's how I remember it. |
| | | | RE: 352 was competing with the 348, 347, 361. -- Mike McQuesten, 10/15/2001
That's very true. The 352 obviously evolved into legendary big blocks. The 350 chevy evolved from the mighty mouse 265. If there were ever a case of stating that "it goes without saying ...." the small block chevy is one fine internal combustion four stroke engine. I'm not going to go on with what it has proven in all its variations because I start to get nauseated myself with the mouse's track record(s).
I can only speak for myself here, but I enjoy the FE for all of its uniqueness and that it's derived from pure Ford design/heritage. It's a challenging engine, parts acquisition being one of the main ones. But for me it's a great hobby engine to continue putting to the test on the track, strip or street.
A local legend, Dick Flynn, has literally "hand built" an FE into a 355 cubic inch Single Overhead Cam that he and a partner run at Bonneville in an all steel '32 Roadster. I'm not going into details but he took a 427 Sideoiler service block, SOHC heads and a 361 steel crank and basically hand built most of it including the rods, cams, etc. He did some damage to one of the original SOHC combustion chambers while dyno testing last year (Mallory metal shrapnel). So what does he do? He has fabricated his own new & improved 427 SOHC heads from two pieces of billet aluminum. All CAD work done on his own. The key pad & mouse of his computer are covered in grease. He believes like a lot of us...it's gonna run or why build it? As a matter of fact I'm shutting this damn computer off and heading over to his shop in a few minutes to see how he's progressing on installing cross bolted mains to my C6ME 391 (4.16 bore) block. |
| | | | | RE: 352 Potential. -- Mel Clark, 10/16/2001
The 352's potential has been shown by Ford with the evolution of that engine into very many sizes and applications. Sadly Ford figured that the 427 was the end of the line for the FE. Ford hot rodders have since shown that there was still a lot of potential when they started using the 428 cranks and the Tunnel Port heads on the supposedly dead engine. Ford quit too soon and stuck us with the 429/460 engine family and those that bought them had to learn an all new engine that looked like a durned chebby, unfortunately it didn't run like one. |
| Genesis vs Shelby -- Rich, 10/12/2001
I was just notified By genesis that they are taking orders for their new blocks. The cost apparently went way up and now is only $500.00 less that the Shelby block. Looking at both blocks the Shelby appears to be much stronger and can handle up to 1500 HP. Does any one know any more about the Genesis block and if it rivals the Shelby block. They are looking for a $2000. depost and I am trying to decide which way to go. The Shelby block is made by Arias for Shelby and is already proven. |
| | Jello brand gelatin or Royal? -- Toivo, 10/13/2001
When you go into a store buyer's office representing the distant second brand in a category, you preach the benefits of competition: "without us they'd charge the moon...you need a second supplier to keep them somewhat in line. And what about the customers who only shop based on price, not brands? You need something for them." But sometimes a store only has shelf space for one brand so you're out, and the few consumers who for whatever reason prefer your brand, learn to live without it. Something like the above reasoning was needed for the FE block market. Genesis came along and basically said Shelby is grossly overcharging for the product and we can make them toe a more reasonable line with our much lower-priced product.
Initially their pricing structure sounded good. My personal opinion now though: Buy Shelby. 10% savings on an unproven product is worth supporting a second supplier, especially if that means Shelby has been charging a reasonable price all along; heck, for supporting the FE aftermarket his charity deserves the 10%. As for Genesis: they've been talking for literally years. They've been talking, but not responding. That would be a major flag in my book. Repeatedly, I have heard people say they have made inquiries of Genesis and gotten no response. Think of what that portends if you have problems with your casting.
But as always, this is solely my opinion. The final decision is up to you. Maybe $500 means more to you than me when discussing $5500+ blocks. But I'd go with proven product, not promise-ware in this particular situation.
Then there's the resale consideration. Your widow sells your parts: the Shelby parts will command more than the Genesis pieces, no matter what the actual quality/facts of the casting are. Consider it good estate-planning.
JMO |
| | Thanks-but -- Rich, 10/13/2001
Thanks for the reply. I contacted genesis and was assured that they would be ready to ship in January 02. They also honored a lower price as I was on the list for a while as an FECA member. I dropped the deposit. I'll let you know how I make out. Thanks again..... |
| Hard starting -- tom, 10/12/2001
Just got the 428CJ running. It starts great when it's cold. But after it gets up to temperature it doesn't want to start until it cools for awhile. I've heard bigger cables, bigger batteries, and better starters. I'm wondering where to start rather than just replacing all these parts that are already new. Thanks for the help. |
| | RE: Hard starting -- John, 10/12/2001
I take it you mean it won't turn over when hot, not that it cranks and won't catch. Mine can turn over pretty slowly when hot, although starter and cables are nothing special, but it always catches and starts. I think one answer might be to install an electric fan on the rad. Once the engine is shut off, the water temp goes up pretty quickly as heat from the engine continues into the water. A temp switch (install one in the lower rad hose) should then come on and start the fan for about 5 minutes or more. By the time you come back to the car, it should start. I thought mine might be because the pistons had expanded when hot, but later during a rebuild, there were no marks on the pistons or cylinders due to scoring. A different oil pan...an aluminum one with fins for example might also help. |
| FE Damper Questions -- Chuck Brandt, 10/12/2001
Sorry guys, I know this has been asked before but I'm still fairly confused on this issue. I'm building a 427 side oiler for a cobra kit car. I'm trying to decide which of two dampers to use.
I have what I've been told is a 427 damper, it's big, heavy, has just a line for timing (the timing pointer has marks on it), and has an integrated single belt pully.
I also have a NOS damper that I'm told is for a 390GT / 428 CJ, the nice thing about it is that it has timing marks up to 30d advanced so I can at least eyeball total timing by interpolating to 38d.
I've read that either will work but I still wonder which is better for my application (light car with a stick). On the other end of the crank I have a 29# steel flywheel. I'd estimate (it's at the machine shop) the 427 damper is maybe 2-3# heavier than the 428 one, it's hard to imagine that doesn't make some sort of difference? If so what difference does it make?
Or should I sell all this old stuff and get a new fluid damper of some kind? If so which one is good, from what I've read the "fluidampner" brand needs machine work to fit an FE, and some of the others the timing marks are off.
Thanks for any and all opinions!
Chuck Brandt |
| | RE: FE Damper Questions -- Mel Clark, 10/12/2001
The heavy dampner with the single line requires a timing marker that is incremental to show where you are setting the initial timing, you need to have that dampner indexed and lined/marked to show timing marks up to, say 42 degrees, in this way you are able to see what the timing advance is at any given rpm. I usually worry about total advance only and set my timing at 38 degrees which is nearly always correct. If you get any spark knock you can always back the timing down a degree or two to suit the fuel you are using. The heavy 427 dampner is designed to compensate for internal vibration due to harmonics that are inherent with reciprocating mass. If your engine is properly balanced you should not need the heavy flywheel or dampner. Basic Rule: light car = light flywheel, heavy car = heavy flywheel. A heavy flywheel will help to promote uncontrollable wheel spin in a really light car. I strongly suggest that you have the assembly balanced with the dampner and flywheel "0" balanced separately. This way you can do some changes at either end of the engine by simply having the new/replacement parts "0" balanced and not the entire assembly. Any decent machine shop should be able to handle the job competently. |
| anyone have Ford Drag Team pics of Torino/Fairlane -- mikeb, 10/11/2001
they could post? thanks |
| 428CJ, to rebuild or not? -- Joel, 10/11/2001
I recently picked up a 428cj car with 44K original miles and all the correct components. It sat for at least three years outside in the elements. I had the motor tuned by a local Cobra Jet expert. It now runs strong. It leaks and burns a little oil. He said that low oil pressure is a concern (8psi hot idle up to 40 psi revved). Through his testing, he believes that it has loose lower bearings and that they should be replaced before I spin one and cause more problems. He estimated $600 for this. He has also warned me that I am doing un-reversable damage to the heads by running unleaded fuel without hardened valve seats. Lead additive slows the wear at best. The car is in 4 condition now and I plan on restoring it to maybe 3+ as money permits (at least a five year plan). A total rebuild with oil mods, head work, new components comes in at about $4000. How should I proceed? |
| | RE: 428CJ, to rebuild or not? -- Morgan, 10/11/2001
By all means start your rebuild now, I am going through the process right now, and looking forward to a new rebuilt motor. I am planning to spend4500.00 This includes all the FE tricks. |
| | RE: 428CJ, to rebuild or not? -- John, 10/11/2001
From my limited experience, the main bearings are the problem, so as long as the engine is apart, you might as well go for the hardened valve seats. Only the exhaust valves need to be done, however if you are going to use the car for daily driving and don't plan to run it hard, you don't need to do the stellite valve seats. An acquaintance who works for an oil company tells me there is other additives that make up a lot for the absence of lead that are already in gasoline when you buy it, but if you run the engine hard it won't provide the same protection. Read up on all the oil gallery mods and do them to the block. The consensus is to use a HV oil pump (about 75 psi at revs or cold idle, about 20 at hot idle) Some people say to use a stock (cast iron, not aluminum housing) oil pump, but they are in the minority. Defiately don't use a HV/HP pump. Read up on bearing clearances...I say about 0.0025" for all bearings for a street motor. Use the specs that the pistons come with for them...add 0.001" for high performance use. Good Luck. |
| | | RE: 428CJ, to rebuild or not? -- richard, 10/11/2001
definately rebuild this motor. FE's are notorious for wiping out main and rod bearings very quickly when the oil pressure goes too low. and yours is too low. use stainless steel valves when you do the heads. they are cheaper than installing hardend seats. |
| | | | RE: 428CJ, to rebuild or not? -- Joel, 10/12/2001
I guess I should clearify a bit, I don't have the money to do an entire rebuild right now. I could spend the $600 to replace the bearings/oil pump and consider it insurance. Then rebuild in a couple years. The motor sounds very tight. I get the occasional lifter noise. My rebuild guy thinks that with new bearings and restored oil pressure I could get several years of trouble free service. I do run it pretty hard though. No drag racing, just the 5-10 second warm up the tires stuff. |
| 390 Wear vs. RPM -- Skip C., 10/11/2001
For a stock 315 hp 390, does anyone know what is the max continuous RPM for sustained highway driving before accelerated engine wear results ?? Thanks in advance, Skip |
| | RE: 390 Wear vs. RPM -- Lou, 10/13/2001
In boats it's 3000 rpm range 3200 being about the highest sustained rpm you would care to run. In my cars I usually try to stay under 2800. |
| | | Thanks for the Info -- Skip C., 10/15/2001
n/m |
| | | RE: 390 Wear vs. RPM -- Bob, 10/18/2001
Running at peak torque or lower is recommended. You get your best gas mileage there if your have a heavy load. If your just cruising, the engine pulls hard if you floor it and don't down shift.
More revs also means more wear on everything from engine parts through the rest of the drrive train. Thats why the rear axle gear ratio is usually set to the lowest RPM that won't lug the engine at freeway speeds under normal loads. |
| | | | Thanks, A while back I posted a -- Skip C., 10/23/2001
question: Whick of the Ford four speed auto trans would be best to hook up w/ FE. Responses were that, due to unique FE bell housing pattern, none would work. With this question I am trying to find out how short (higher numbers) I can go with the rear without prematurely wearing out the engine on the highway. Car has C6 trans. Thanks, Skip |
| | | | | RE: Thanks, A while back I posted a -- Bob, 10/23/2001
I only run 4 speed sticks so the following is based on opinion not experince.
I depends on the kind of drving your going to do. I used to swap rear ends (pumpkins) when I was going to the drag strip and then swap it back the next time I need to make a hi-way trip. I used 3.25 for the hi-way and 4.57 for the track. The old drag pack 3.91 is a good compromise. I've also been know to drive 600 freeway miles with the 4.57s (required a quick tune-up afterwards) but then I was ready to race and no one expected it to run like it did with hi-way gears!
But my earlier post about peak RPM for torque is still the best place to start. |
| | | | | | Thanks, Skip -- Skip C., 10/25/2001
n/m |
| 427 radiator reservoir tank in a 69 mach 1? -- John, 10/11/2001
Putting a 427 in a 69 mustang and was wanting to use the reservoir tank. The question I have is will the hood shut? |
|