Skip Navigation Links.
 |  72 Wagon -- Kitster, 07/26/2001
I have a 72 wagon with a 400 ci engine /w c-6 trans. I was told this is basically a 351 /w modified heads. I want to pull it and drop a 460 ci. I was wondering about motor mounts and the trans. being able to bolt up or if i need to modify the mounts and trans. ? I would really appreciate and help.
Thanks Kitster |
|  | RE: 72 Wagon -- gerry, 07/27/2001
400M engine uses the same trans bellhousing bolt pattern as the 385 Lima series (429/460 ci engines), so you're o.k. on that issue.
You're dealing with some rather foggy information regarding the cylinder heads. There are three 351 Ford engines. The Windsor, the Cleveland, and the "M." The Cleveland and M heads are the same...excluding specific design accomodations such as adjustable rockers, small and large ports and chambers. Your 400 is nothing more than a stroked 351M.
You didn't specify what model "wagon" you have but all you have to know is: "Did Ford offer a 429/460 option for that year chassis?" My guess is yes since you now have a 400. If so, just go to your local auto parts store and get the motor mounts for that engine application. But, and this is a big BUT since I'm not a subject matter expert here, it's my understanding that the Lima and M series used the same block, insulator, and frame mounts as the Lima engines. I caution you to verify this, which shouldn't be too hard to do. |
| |  | RE: 72 Wagon -- Styleline58, 07/27/2001
There is no such engine as a 400M.
The M designation was given to the 351M, which is a destroked 400 that was introduced in 1975. The 400 was introduced in 1971, and it is a tall-deck version of the 351C. The 351C-2V, 400 and 351M use the same heads. Ford never use an "M" with reference to the 400. Ford did not make another engine with the same displacement as the 400, so there is no need to identify it in any other way than "400". Too bad the hacks at the ragazines did not understand this, cuz now everyone feels the need to add M to an engine that never had on there. It just causes confusion.
The 400 uses larger main and rod journals than the 351C, but it's design is very similar. It does use the 429/460 bellhousing bolt pattern, so any C4 or C6 found behing a 400 or 351M will bolt to 385 series engine. The moto mounts are unique, but since the 429 was offered in the mid- and full-sized cars, you can buy the mounts. The 400 crank is often machined to fit in a 35W for stroker kits.
The 400 always suffered from a small cam, small carb and low compression. Add compression, Cleveland cam and a 4V carb and headers and they build a lot of power.
There was a special 400 block cast in 1973 with a small block bellhousing bolt pattern and small block motor mount bosses. They were equpiied with the FMX trans, and are hard to find. |
 | SCJ Toploader housing -- Toltz, 07/26/2001
Is there a difference in the transmission case between a regular toploader and a SCJ or CJ toploader case? Maybe higher quality casting or more reinforcement anywhere?? I have a "C5XX" prefix case, and a "C8XX" prefix case. The "C8XX" is out of my SCJ but the upper mounting ears are cracked off and rewelded, but I have an undamaged "C5XX" case that I can use. |
| | RE: SCJ Toploader housing -- The Original Ross, 07/27/2001
No difference except the ID tag. Matter of fact, you can use a small block case as readily as anything else. I have done it a number of times. Only the front bearing retainer and the tailshaft housing are different, and both bolt on |
| | | RE: SCJ Toploader housing -- Toltz, 07/27/2001
Thanks Ross, I've already done it. I was just wondering if the case was made out of a diiferent quality of cast.
|
| | RE: SCJ Toploader housing -- John R. Barnes, 07/29/2001
It is all casting numbers. Call David Kee Toploaders or email him and he can give you the probable casting numbers you need to use to stay correct. The 69 and 70 tails are different as far as the numbers. I have a 70 tail and need a 69. |
| COAE-C cc?? -- DJ, 07/26/2001
Need chamber volume stock as made new |
| | RE: COAE-C cc?? -- rico, 07/29/2001
59-62cc's hope this helps |
 | COAE-C cc?? -- DJ, 07/25/2001
What chamber volume of these heads? also port size etc. |
| 68 cougar 390 2v -- Doug, 07/25/2001
i have a 1968 cougar with a 390 2 bbl stock original equp with a c6 tranny ...anyone know how rare....??
was told that of 128,000 made that year only 1208 were " X" code cougars 390 2 barrel cars does this seem true & if so would it be worth more ..... not sure if i should change to a eidlebrock intake & a 600cfm carb any info & comments would be great |
| | X-code Cougars are rare, but so are potential buyers. [n/m] -- Mr F, 07/25/2001
n/m |
| | RE: 68 cougar 390 2v -- Orin, 07/26/2001
If you do go for the 4V set-up be sure to save the 2V set-up for the next buyer just in case he wants to go "all original." "Matching numbers, all original" looks good in any ad and is bound to increase your traffic flow when it cmes time to sell.
Have fun!!
|
| | RE: 68 cougar 390 2v -- Tim B, 07/26/2001
There were 1,217 HTs and 2,037 XR-7s (all C6), info courtesy of Kevin Marti's COUGAR .......BY THE NUMBERS. I never understood who it should appeal to. Budget Minded Big Block? It was less expensive than a S 4V 390. It sold in similar numbers with the C6 in both (956 & 2,551) so it's not really rare. Less performance, better gas mileage, good for towing perhaps.
Or maybe it was for someone who wanted to add aftermarket parts above and beyond the factory S code . Even 30+ years later it's a good idea! The Edelbrock packages will really wake it up :-) Save the unique parts just in case.
Tim B
1969 XR7 428 CJR convertible
http://members.aol.com/timbrands/index.html |
| | | Yup, this motor was MADE for mods. -- Dave Shoe, 07/26/2001
In 1968, Ford could no longer make hot-cammed and hot carbed engines without piling on expensive pollution control equpment. It was getting tought to sell performance cars in 1968 (due to market saturation and insurance costs), so Ford saw fit to make a low-cost engine option which could wake right up if aftermarket "intake/cam kit/headers" were bolted on.
The number one failing of any 390 engine in a unibody car is the exhaust manifolds. You really NEED to upgrade to CJ exhaust manifolds or FPA "GT type" (low-flange) headers. Don't use Hookers, as they are not compatible with your C8AE-H heads.
Note the standard Edelbrock Performer intake won't buy you much performance. It's mainly a lightweight stock intake, not a big breather at all. Go for the Edelbrock RPM intake and a 600CFM carb - 700 if you plan to add a cam.
Because that engine got a mild cam and valve springs, and because it's now a free-breathing engine, it's a good idea to stick a nice cam kit into it. Yup, this does mean you've got to upgrade the valve springs, and naturally toss out the old lifters, but it'll make your 390 into the road menace it was always intended to be. 400 quiet horsepower is simple in this configuration.
Note that you may need to replace the valves because "performance" spring retainers often require stem locks with grooves in different positions. If so, you might consider dropping some stock CJ-sized valves into the head to eliminate any valve recession which has occured over the past 33 years due to overly aggressive valve jobs or general wear.
Shoe. |
| C3AE-C cc? -- Mike McQuesten, 07/25/2001
Shoe's fav author, G. Reid, indicates that the C3AE-C(early '63 406 tri-power head) has a combustion chamber volume of 64 - 67cc. The old trusty How To Rebuild Your B-B Ford, by Steve Christ, shows the same head to have a volume of 56.4 -61cc. Who's right?
Just something we'd like to know. Always planning that next FE. We've found a couple of sets. |
| | Seen my 406 page in the Engines section? [n/m] -- Mr F, 07/25/2001
n/m |
| | | RE: No Y code? -- Mike McQuesten, 07/26/2001
Mr. F, I just checked the engine spec section. Very nice. Checked your info on the cc of the '63 tri power heads and so now I'm wondering why FoMoCo gave a C3AE-C casting to those heads and '63 390-300 heads?
I know it says the engine spec section is a work in progress but was wondering if you're working on specs for the 352HP? As I'm sure you're very well aware, but there are many confused by this, the '60 HP was built with the same code as the standard 352/300 Lo-Po I like to call it. Same story for 1961, where all HPs were built with Z codes, which was also lo performance 390/300.
Just wondering if there's a future for 352HP specs. Now I really do have to get to packing. |
| | RE: C3AE-C cc? -- Travis Miller, 07/25/2001
In the early '90's I pulled a 390/300 out of a 4-dr '63 Galaxie 500 that I had bought from the son of the original owner. The build date on the car was late May 1963. This original engine had C3AE-C heads with the 2.037 intake and 1.566 exhaust valves. I did not mill the heads but did cc them after the valve job. By swapping valves around in the chambers, I was able to get each one to read 72.0 cc's.
These heads would have had to be milled a long way to reach the advertized 56.4 minimum cc's. I sometimes wonder if Ford's factory specs were a little bogus. |
| | RE: C3AE-C cc? -- kevin, 07/25/2001
Dont get overly excited about those heads. There were a lot of 300 horse 390 engines that had these on them. The diff is that the 390 did not have the spring seats or the larger ex valve or the smaller chamber. The 406 did and when I checked the cc's they were more on the large side, but they have a good chamber for correct reworking and run quite well on anything. The Van Cleve clan is well known to all who raced, and I believe he was campaigning a 390 fairlane the last I heard. Jimi Hendrix taught Steve Miller to play guitar, and when he came to my town, along w/Jefferson Airplane, nobody hardly showed up, maybe 500 people. Such is life. Have a good trip and stay out of the purple haze..I mean rain. lol |
| | | RE: C3AE-C cc? -- Mike McQuesten, 07/26/2001
It's funny because John Saxon and I were just talking about how these C3AE-C heads that he located aren't machined for the spring seat cups. It got us talking about how these heads are popping up more often than you'd think for them being listed in various resources as 406/405 horse '63 heads. So Travis is saying that some C3AE-C heads don't have the combustion chamber of the 406 head? And yet they were cast with the C3AE-C? I did have a set of these heads years ago. The c-chamber was definitely the small one.
Hey John....are you reading? Maybe we better take a closer look at these tomorrow before we part with the bucks? Even at the reasonable price they're being offered they might not be any better than the bunch we have stacked around.
I'll go take a look at your 406 page Mr. F. thanks. And Kevin, the weather is going to be nice for a change. Jim Van Cleve racing a 390 Fairlane? I don't live over on the west side anymore but he was a definite 427 TP runner many years ago.
Lost in the purple haze.........nothings wrong with that! |
| | | | RE: C3AE-C cc? -- Travis Miller, 07/26/2001
One thing needs to be discussed here. By small combustion chamber, are we meaning the ones with the rounded corners? I call the chambers in a C1AE-A head with the two square corners, the large non-performance chamber.
The C3AE-C 390 heads that I owned had all rounded corners in the combustion chamber. Seems that all they needed was machining for larger exhaust, which the factory may have done to the 406. But that would not explain the spring seats. Any ideas?
One other thing. These heads were the original heads on a May 1963 car. This was after the 406 was out of production. Could that have any bearing on the subject? |
| | | | | RE: C3AE-C cc? -- Mike McQuesten, 07/26/2001
You're helping us a lot here Travis. Thanks because it's just so strange to see that these heads were used as you've found. An example, I have a '64 390-4V that was a complete and correct engine right out of a '64 Gal. It had the C1AE low performance heads you describe. Did the '63 390 have the dished pistons like '61s? This '64 390 spare I have had flat tops that with the C1AE heads yielded somthing over 10:1(going from memory here). So was Ford trying bump the compression ratio up in '63 while retaining the dished pistons that had been yielding 9.5:1?
And yes, the heads we are looking at have the rounded combustion chamber that looks just like the c-chamber of a guaranteed genuine '63 406/405 head that is factory machined for spring cups. We know that head is 406 correct.
It's our theory that these C3AE-C '63 390 - 4V heads are great candidates for the larger '27/'28 valves and machining for spring cups - there you go....A good set of HP heads if you want decent compression. |
| | | | | | RE: C3AE-C cc? -- Travis Miller, 07/26/2001
The '63 390 these heads came from had dished pistons with no valve reliefs.
|
| | | | | | RE: C3AE-C cc? -- John R. Barnes, 07/29/2001
I have had several of those heads and I have two pair now. I have always assumed that the exhaust can be changed and the springs seats for cups. Had a set years ago that came off a 63 1/2 390 Galaxie. I think Ford used them for both and just machined them differently. However, all the 406 Galaxies I have seen including the two I have, one built in late December of 62, had C2SE heads. |
| | RE: C3AE-C cc? -- Jan Collins, 07/26/2001
I was looking at the heads on my newly purchased 69 Mustang. The owner stated that it has 427 heads on it. The only numbers I can find on the heads are located between the center spark plugs. These heads are C3AE-3 or 8 090-C. Are these the same heads you are refering to? If not where are the part numbers? Also could you tell me where to find the block part number. The engine is still in the car. |
| | | RE: C3AE-C cc? -- Travis Miller, 07/26/2001
The casting numbers are between the two center exhaust ports. Angled up in one direction it will read something like C3AE. Angled down the other direction it will read something like 6090C. The number 6090 is Ford's casting number meaning it is a cylinder head. Usually when talking about casting numbers of heads such as C3AE-C, we leave out the 6090 just to make it shorter. And sometimes Ford does not cast the 6090 on the head, but you can still tell it is a cylinder head.
There are times in print you will see the number 6049 when the discussion is about cylinder heads. The number 6049 is Ford's part number meaning cylinder head. Part number and casting number are two totally different things. |
| | | | RE: C3AE-c cc? -- Eric, 07/28/2001
Since we're talking cylinder heads, the motor I'm building, a 65 390 has C4AE-G heads on it. Any imput in those? Good, bad, indifferent? Thanks |
| | | | | RE: C3AE-c cc? -- Travis Miller, 07/28/2001
Can you tell if they are the original heads on the car? |
| | | | | | OT - It was Boz Skaggs who taught Steve to play Gu -- Royce Peterson, 07/28/2001
At least that is what everybody at Sunset High school said back in the '70s.
Royce Peterson
Class of '75 |
| | | | | | RE: C3AE-c cc? -- Eric, 07/28/2001
They seem to be origional. 65 mercury, 100k miles, just enough sludge, 1 weak valve. They must have been leftovers from 64. This is the most complete 35 year old car I've ever seen, so I bought it for parts. It has a 2 barrel, origional air cleaner with stickers on it even. I was pulling it apart today and the tag was still on it. The tag reads: 390 65 5
5 B N 380 J
if that's any help. Been sitting in a field for 10 years. Thanks for the help.
Eric |
| | | | | | | Tag 'N380-J' =code H; 390 2v special, with Fordomatic [n/m] -- Mr F, 07/28/2001
n/m |
| | | | | | | | Mr. F, What does "Special" mean? -- Eric, 07/28/2001
And what would the compression ratio be wit this setup? Also, my inital question. Is there anythin special about these heads, or are they run of the mill 390 heads? Thanks for the info in advance,
Eric |
| Kevin/352HP -- Mike McQuesten, 07/25/2001
Kevin, please contact me regarding your 1960 HP items.
mcquesten@earthlink.net.
Mike
PS- I will be gone on a little trip to Seattle, 7/27 - 7/30. Searching the Puget Sound for HP FE stuff.....I wish. I know there's a lot of it lurking in that region. Ever heard of Jim Van Cleve, Morton, WA, Ford dealer? One time National Record holder w/'67 R code Fairlane. Actually I'll be spending a little time with the family seeing the finally mighty Mariners, Space Needle, Science Center/Titanic show, The Zoo, and The Jimi Hendrix Music Experience. I'll get back to you ASAP. |
| Drive shaft yoke -- Bob, 07/25/2001
Need info on drive shaft yoke for 1973 ford 3 speed trans out of a F-100 with a 390ci. Need to know spline count and size if anyone can tell me. Parts stores do not sell yokes and no one seems to have any info on them. I will probobly have to do trial and error at the junk yard. |
| | Need Additional Information -- KULTULZ, 08/01/2001
There were two yokes used, depending on the wheelbase (116" or 133").
The 116" wb used D3TZ 4841-A and has 28 splines.
The 133" WB used C5TZ 4841-F and has 16 spline.
You might luck out at a yard that has a Hollander Interchange Manual to find a donor vehicle. |
| 427 valve spring specifications? -- John, 07/25/2001
What are the valve spring specifications for a 600 lift cam in a 427. The heads have dual springs and Im trying to find this info for the guy thats rebuilding them for me. Thanks! |
| | RE: 427 valve spring specifications? -- kevin, 07/25/2001
It depends on what grind you have, but typically 125-140 seat and 325-340 open. To help see what kind of wear pattern it will have you can put toothpaste on it and light springs (such as rocker shaft springs) and rotate the cam and look at the pattern. The back side of the lobe must have the pattern off to one side as well as the lifter must have a "ring" 2/3-3/4 of the way to the outer edge. Its a lot of work, but so is the heartbreak of a wiped out lobe. Hope this helps |
| Holley Carb problem part two -- Joe, 07/24/2001
I want to thank everybody for responding to my questions on the Holley 660 carbs,well i decided to install the original carbs instead of trying to tune the Holley 660 carbs,but i was told the original carbs two Holley 600s would not work with the cam installed in my 428CJ part no.for the competition cam is#33-240-4 Grind number is FB 292H-10 I hope someone can help since the engine just got rebuilt and the last thing i want to do is pull the engine.Thanks for any tips
Joe |
| | RE: Holley Carb problem part two -- RJP, 07/24/2001
Joe, Why wouldn't those carbs work with that cam? Did the person who told you that give you a explanation that made any sense to you? Does he want to buy them or "do you a favor and take them off your hands"? In my opinion those carbs should work just fine providing they are in good working order and properly set up for 2x4 use and jetted accordingly. Just curious, what are the carb "list"numbers? |
| | RE: Holley Carb problem part two -- Will, 07/25/2001
Of course they'll work. How well is the question. A single 4 will probably work the best no matter which cam you use, but then you wouldn't have that 2x4 look.
Remember, with 2 vac secondary carbs, you're basically running a 600 manual secondary with 600 cfm of vacuum secondaries to open should you need them. So, saying the 2x4 won't work is pretty similar to saying a 600 double pumper won't work. |
| | | Just adding to the chorus of snorts here. -- Styleline58, 07/25/2001
Sure those carbs will work! I used tri-power with a bigger cam, and folks use FE 3x2s and 2x4s with larger engines and cams. The 600s MAY need some jet changes to tune them in. They MAY need to have the idle mixture adjusted. They MAY need to have the secondary springs adjusted for best performance. They MAY ned to have the pump lever adjusted. This is all regular, normal stuff. They will provide more CFM than you need, so they are certainly not too small. They will not load up the engine, and they will be reliable and fairly efficient in cruise mode. They will work as cool as they look.
Do give us the list numbers, found on the choke horn. Give us the general area you are in, in case someone nearby might be able to help you out on the phone or something (if you are in SoCal, I wouldn't mind). Are you using the factory style linkage?
Those carbs are just what you need. They may need to be rebuilt, and then tuned, but they are just what you need. The 660s can be sold on Ebay, if you choose to do so. |
| | | | RE: Just adding to the chorus of snorts here. -- Joe, 07/25/2001
The carbs are #C3AF-9510-BK,BJ Holley 600 CFM List #2804 primary & 2805 secondary, the engine is pulling 8 inchs of vaccum at idle what i was told the secondaries will not work with that amount of vaccum at idle ,I guess my camshaft is to radical to run these carbs.I am from New Hampshire so i have a real short season to drive this beast. THANKS for the tips
Joe |
| | | | | Joe, you are listening to the wrong guy. -- Styleline58, 07/25/2001
>I guess my camshaft is to radical to run these carbs.>
What is with the defeatist attitude, Joe? You want this thing to run right, dontcha? Dig this:
Idle vacuum does not operate your secondaries. Manifold vacuum does not operate your secondaries. The info you have been given is crap. Stop thinking of the term "vacuum secondary" as a technical term and think of it as a marketing term. "ZAP-ZOWIE secondary" would be as accurate. I will explain.
The secondaries on those Ford carbs are controlled by a servo. The secs are held closed by a spring working to push the servo down. The servo has a rubber membrane. The upper side of the membrane is sealed in a chamber that is open at one small point to the inside of the passenger-side primary venturi. Airflow through this venturi causes a low pressure area to develop at the opening to the secs servo chamber. As airflow increases, the pressure in the servo cavity decreases, it becomes negative to ambient. When the negative pressure is enough to overcome the force of the spring and the friction of the shaft and stuff, the secs begin to open. More airflow, more opening force. The action of the secs is controled by airflow though the primary, not by manifold vacuum. You can test this by removing the carb, opening the primary and blowing compressed air through the primary past the port for the secs. The secs will open. Meanwhile, the manifold is far away.
When you floor it, manifold vacuum drops. At WOT, it's less than 2 inches.
My engine, a 352, has about the same vacuum at idle as yours does. It has a big cam. It also uses a BT DP intake with a 3310. I use the lightest spring in the secs. Works great. Pulls hard to 5K, then pulls harder. I shift a 7K to save the stock rods and cast pistons. Read about it here:
http://home.earthlink.net/~tcrocker/
Your idle vacuum IS telling you something. It's telling you to use no higher than a 5.5 power valve in those Ford carbs. Use the stock jetting for now, get the lightest Holley secondary springs. Put them on and tell us who this "expert" is so we know who to avoid when we call Comp for info. I am serious, this guy was not helping you. Email me privatly if you want to talk more about these carbs. |
| | | | | | Very well put. n/m -- Will, 07/25/2001
n/m |
| | | | | | RE: A few words on power valve selection -- RJP, 07/26/2001
Tom, Idle vacuume has nothing to do with power valve selection as there is no fuel flow thru the main circuit at idle. P/V selection should be made from cruise vacuume when the carb[s] are into the main circuit. This usually doesn't occure untill about 1900-2000 rpms. Hope this clears up some mis-conception on power valves. As to the list numbers of the carbs I suspect the adviser wanted to rid you of those carbs as they are orig. equipment on R code 63 427s and are a matched set. Do not part with these carbs. |
| | | | | | | The idle vacuum is indicative of what it will be.. -- Styleline58, 07/26/2001
at the RPM level you refer to. Also, with a big cam, you don't want fluctuations of the idle vacuum to cause the PV to pulse or open. That makes a big stinky mess, and gives comfort to the enemy. The common formula is take the idle vacuum reading and divide by two and use the PV nearest that. I do agree that the cruise reading is also important, and should be taken into account.
I agree that Joe should hang onto those carbs. Sell the 660s. Also, Joe, I may come on kinda strong, but I really am interested in helping you to get your engine right. I am too poor to build my own right now, so I get my jollies vicariously. |
| | | | | RE: Just adding to the chorus of snorts here. -- Will, 07/25/2001
Those are the good carbs. I've heard that the trick 2x4 arrangement is two 450 cfm carbs. 900 cfm is plenty for a street or street/strip car.
Your carbs were stock on the 67 Shelby's. They're worth as much as new carbs, so you can sell them and buy 450's if that's what you want to do. You can sell them on ebay for $300-$500 each depending on their condition. If you don't want to fool with ebay, send me an e-mail, and I may buy them if you don't want them.
I'm also pulling around 8" at idle. The secondaries definitely open, but not at idle. The vacuum is low at idle, but that's because of the cam overlap. Once you rev up to 3,000 or 4,000, the secondaries will definitely open. They actually provide too much airflow, but you can tune the vac secondary springs to make them open earlier or later. |
|