Skip Navigation Links.
 |  Oil Cooler Lines -- Frank, 08/20/2001
I need a picture of the oil cooler lines for a '69 428 SCJ. Can anyone help? |
 | stripped oil plug bolt, -- mikeb, 08/20/2001
do i have to worry about the shaving/threads causing mayhem?
it is a 351w, i posted in the general forum , but no reply, and i guess this problem could happen to FE's too! Hope it don't happen to my CJ! |
|  | RE: stripped oil plug bolt, -- matt, 08/20/2001
first of all did you fix it? i have used oversized bolts with tap sets for this problem, when i have fixed this in the past i used greese when drilling and tapping to trap the metal particles. personally i would either A: drop the pan and clean it. B: get a magnetized plug and oil filter magnet and flush the engine. or C: change the oil and hope it all comes out with it. hope these ideas help, i guess no one else sees this as a big deal because of their lack of response. i just started up a forum tell your friends and maybe it will be another good place to get responses once it gets going.http://network54.com/Hide/Forum/147637
|
|  | RE: stripped oil plug bolt, -- Mustang Mike, 08/21/2001
On my brothers 390 with a stripped plug we got oversize oil pan plugs at the local parts store. They gave us 1 over and 2 over. We just screwed the 1 over plug in and it sealed up fine. There didn't seem to be a lot of shavings that I noticed anyway. |
| Any suggestions for a alum. radiator for a 390 -- WEM, 08/20/2001
in a torino?
Thanks! |
| Excessive oil ... out the breather and fill caps. -- Scott Perry, 08/20/2001
Hello. I have a very strong 390 PI motor that I run in a 67 Mustang. The motor was complete rebuilt a few years ago and has only a few thousand miles on it. I've been getting oil on the valve covers...and it appears to be blowing out the oil fill cap and breather tube. I know the motor has a high volume oil pump, but it should have that kind of presssure at the valve covers. It's almost impossible as well to run the car with the covers off...LOTS of oil to the valve train. It has the stock type rocker arms with adjusters and sheild. Any suggestions?? Thanks.
|
|  | RE: Leak down test -- Mel Clark, 08/20/2001
You need to do a leak down test on that engine. It sounds like you may have broken rings. The rings may also have walked around to where the end gaps are lined up with each other which is usually caused by too much clearance.
If you take the heads off again you might want to install a restrictor in the oil passage to the rockers, they usually get more oil than they need anyway and that will help keep the pressure at the cam and crank, where it's needed most.. |
| | | RE: Leak down test -- John, 08/20/2001
If you don't have restrictors in the heads, and you are using a high vol oil pump, the small amount of blowby that is in every normal engine can push the abnormally high oil in the heads out the vents. This is an easy fix with the engine in the car, although time consuming because of the valve train readjustment (solid lifters especially). Drop a inch long piece of aluminum or steel rod down the oil supply galleries below the rocker stands which supplies oil to the heads. If it's a tight fit, drill a 0.090" hole through the rod...if it's a loose fit, don't bother with a hole...enough oil will flow around the dowel. Secondly...make absolutely sure you have a PCV system connected and functioning correctly, as this will relieve the small amount of blowby by adding negative pressure to the crankcase. Best of luck. John "the Snoid" AKA FE WannaBe Expert....chuckle |
| | | | RE: Leak down test -- Scott Perry, 08/23/2001
Thanks for the posts guys. The next rainy weekend I'm going to try to apply this and see what happens. I ran my car last night at National Trails Raceway (Kirkersville, OH) for the first time. Basically a stock 390 out of 63 Tbird (currently in a Mustang), with aluminum intake and Holley 4 barrel/headers, 3:70 gears, ran a 14.2 @ 98mph with hard street tires. I should be able to run mid 13's once I get used to it. I manually shifted at 4K and just rolled it off the line to avoid lighting the tires up. I was real happy with the results! Way to go FE!
|
| motor mounts -- 390fastback, 08/19/2001
I recently discovered that the mounts that are supposed to hold my 390 in my 68 Mustang are some what hard to get. I need the rubber insulator and the plate that goes between it and the engine. Does anyone have any idea where I would find these parts?! All help is appreciated!
P.S. I posted this in the general forum then realized I should have put it here first. |
| | RE: motor mounts -- Ross, 08/19/2001
Most of the Mustang resto catalogs have them, National Parts Depot, Virginia Mustang, and Dallas Mustang all list them. Expect about 125-150 less in your wallet when done, but they are out there. |
| 390 rebuild kits -- T1M, 08/19/2001
I'm not exactly sure how I want to rebuild my 2 barrel 390 but can anyone recommend a good brand of rebuild kit for my engine?
Thanks for everyones help |
| 390 "S" Code C6 Trans -- Tony, 08/19/2001
Hey Guys. Can anyone tell me if the 1967 390 "S" Code C6 Trans. had a steel output shaft or not? Was it the same C6 transmission that was used in the Cobra Jet and the Shelby? Once again, Thank You for all your help. Tony |
| | All trannies have steel output shafts. -- Dave Shoe, 08/19/2001
You're thinking of the tail housing.
Most C6s have aluminum tail housings, the exception being CJ and police interceptor cars which have cast iron tailshaft housings.
390GT got a fairly ordinary C6, which is a great tranny. In fact, though the cast iron tailshaft may offer some status, the aluminum tail C6 weighs less, and it's proven reliable in most any situation.
Unless I was building a concourse correct car, I'd go with the aluminum tail. If you're looking to build a performance C6, start with any common 1967-later core and go from there (the "Select-Shift" shifting pattern started in 1967, 1966 had the old "Dual-Range" shift pattern). Note that 1969-later C6s got some minor oiling mods - it's easy to retrofit these mods to ealier C6s, if you wish. It's not really necessary, though.
Lastly, note the compatibility differences between C6s are mainly due to the shift arm which pokes outta the tranny case. This arm can be easily swapped or easily welded to suit any application, such as column shift or floor shift positions.
Just my opinion,
Shoe. |
| | | RE: Thanks For All Of Your Help Dave -- Tony, 08/19/2001
I was wondering if there was a big difference between the trans. for a 390 "S" code and the Cobra Jet. I guess there is not that much of a difference internally. Thanks for all your help.
Tony |
| FE Head oil passage modification -- Matt K, 08/18/2001
I read in a book that you could restrict the oil passage under the rocker pedestal to aleviate the problem of too much oil in the rocker area that cause oil to leak thru the valve seals. The book said to drill out a piece of rod and shove it in the hole, a friend said I could use a #80 Holley Jet, has anyone done this? Does it work? If so, should (or can) I tap the hole so the jet will thread in? Any info is appreciated. |
| | RE: FE Head oil passage modification -- Matt K, 08/18/2001
I made the restrictors according to the specs in the Ford performance book, 5/16" rod 3/4" long and the book says a hole .009 diameter. If my math is correct, .009 comes out to about 3/32, this looked very small, so I made the hole 5/32, or one half the size of the oil passage. Paul, does restricting it 50% sound close to correct? Does yours perform O.K.?
Thanks,
Matt |
| | | Sorry so late in getting back to you. -- Paul M, 08/22/2001
Actually, the only FE I have running right now is in my truck, and it's not setup that way. Still the original engine :) Also, I havent actually put this into practice yet. It's mearly second hand knowledge from many individuals that I've been gleening over the last year or so.
I'm not sure of sizes, in holley jets, so bear with me. If I remember correctly, a #60 holley jet is a good place to start, and you can adjust from there. So, take the size of the orifice in that size jet, and compare to another material you can or wish to use. Been told that you can adjust the size according to whether or not you're getting enough oil to the top a little more simply using the jets, as they are threaded in, so you don't have to fish them back out of the holes! Simply back them out.
50% smaller seems like a good objective for a start, I suppose. I'll probably leave mine larger than that for my truck, when I rebuild my spare 390, as I do a lot of hauling and some towing with it, so the extra oil is almost necessary on top, and can't really hurt much.
|
| LEAKING INTAke gasket at water jackets -- DAVE C, 08/18/2001
i have a problem with my intake blowing antifreeze out the rear near the last bolt in intake...i noticed that the water jacket hole in the head has a upside down teardrop shape opening in the bottom of the hole,,this is where the gasket needs to compress onto, to seal the jacket oppening in the head to the intke. the leak occurs from this bad spot and follows the "L" shape notch in the gasket then pressure pushes the anti-freeze out the rear.
how do you repair this so the intake can seal?
66 390 galaxie 500xl
thanks |
| | RE: LEAKING INTAke gasket at water jackets -- Paul M, 08/18/2001
Try using sealer around the water ports.
Not too much, though! Don't want it getting in the oil system, or in the combustion chambers. |
| Return of the prodigal posts..... :-) -- Mr F, 08/18/2001
| If you've ever searched the General Forum's archive, you
might have noticed that a few posts were missing. Ok, more
like a few hundred posts were missing. After clicking on what
looked to be a valid link, you'd be greeted by this cheerful
message:
Sorry - the record number for this thread was
not found in the database.
Here's why: several months after creating the
new Forums we (that is, I) felt it was crucial to free up some server
space. After much consternation, it was decided that several
hundred of the earliest entries would be sacrificed.
Only too late did I learn that it had been a
mistake. And many times I've rued that day, after realizing that one
of better responses had gone into the ol' bit bucket. With
the exception of criticizing myself, I hate doing things
twice.
Well, I'm of the hook for that gaffe'. Our
resident Tech Meister Joe Oliphant worked a little DB
magic and those errant files are now back in the fold. Here's
proof:
http://www.fomoco.com/forumMain/reply.asp?ID=238&Reply=
For the few of you who venture in there on a
regular basis, I hope this is good news. It sure is for me, as my back is
aching from several months of self-flagellation. Thanks, Joe!
Mr
F | |
|