These are the old FoMoCo Obsolete Forums and are being hosted by JCOConsulting.com. While you're here, check out my articles or have a look around at some of the Ford Stuff we have for sale. You might find something you can't live without.

Skip Navigation Links.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=5921&Reply=5921><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>FE oil pressure</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Dan, <i>04/12/2001</i></font><br /><blockquote>I have a '66  390 ci (.040) in my '57 ford custom.  The oil pressure is 60-70 psi when started.  When the engine warms up and is at idle, the pressure drops to 10 psi on the guage.  Upon acceleration the pressure returns to normal, 60+ psi.  Any suggestion what going on.  Is this normal for the FE.  The car this come out of probably had an idiot light.<br><br>Thanks<br>Dan </blockquote> FE oil pressure -- Dan, 04/12/2001
I have a '66 390 ci (.040) in my '57 ford custom. The oil pressure is 60-70 psi when started. When the engine warms up and is at idle, the pressure drops to 10 psi on the guage. Upon acceleration the pressure returns to normal, 60+ psi. Any suggestion what going on. Is this normal for the FE. The car this come out of probably had an idiot light.

Thanks
Dan
 RE: FE oil pressure -- Tim B, 04/12/2001
Is it a factory gauge? They are notoriously inaccurate. Have you replaced the sending unit? It's normal to be lower at idle and increase with rpms, with any engine.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=5917&Reply=5917><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>Original FE parts durability/reliability question</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Robert, <i>04/12/2001</i></font><br /><blockquote>Open question: What are your experiences with the old original Ford trick parts, specifically the steel-shim head gaskets and the original hollow stem/sodium filled intake and exhaust valves. I've heard the gaskets don't seal that well, compared to modern gaskets, although they do have the least compression height. I've also heard the hollow stem valves used to break off the valve head or that the sodium corroded the inside of the valve stem over the years and made them unsafe. Can anyone substantiate these claims? Mahalo, Robert </blockquote> Original FE parts durability/reliability question -- Robert, 04/12/2001
Open question: What are your experiences with the old original Ford trick parts, specifically the steel-shim head gaskets and the original hollow stem/sodium filled intake and exhaust valves. I've heard the gaskets don't seal that well, compared to modern gaskets, although they do have the least compression height. I've also heard the hollow stem valves used to break off the valve head or that the sodium corroded the inside of the valve stem over the years and made them unsafe. Can anyone substantiate these claims? Mahalo, Robert
 RE: Original FE parts durability/reliability question -- RJP, 04/12/2001
Steel shim gaskets require a perfect surface on both head and block to seal properly. [ didn't know they were still available] but with modern sealers such as Hylomar I suppose they will work just fine although I haven't used them in over 30 years. Sodium Valves: Throw them away, especially old sodium valves. Ford recommended they be replace every rebuild under racing conditions. Age can cause the sodium to corrode the metal from the inside out. I wouldn't put the engine at risk. Buy a set of stainless valves from one of the many suppliers such as REV and S.I.
 Question? -- John, 04/12/2001
What color did Ford paint the 427 engine?
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=5907&Reply=5907><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>Color of engine</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>John, <i>04/11/2001</i></font><br /><blockquote> What color did Ford paint the 427 engine?<br>  </blockquote> Color of engine -- John, 04/11/2001
What color did Ford paint the 427 engine?
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=5911&Reply=5907><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Color of engine</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>FE427TP, <i>04/11/2001</i></font><br /><blockquote>probably blue late in it's life and seen what appears to be bronze or gold for the SOHC </blockquote> RE: Color of engine -- FE427TP, 04/11/2001
probably blue late in it's life and seen what appears to be bronze or gold for the SOHC
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=5912&Reply=5907><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Color of engine</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Dave Shoe, <i>04/11/2001</i></font><br /><blockquote>It could be gold or black or blue, based on fuzzy info.<br><br>Shoe. </blockquote> RE: Color of engine -- Dave Shoe, 04/11/2001
It could be gold or black or blue, based on fuzzy info.

Shoe.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=5913&Reply=5907><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Color of engine</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>John R. Barnes, <i>04/11/2001</i></font><br /><blockquote>1963-4 is black. 1967 is blue </blockquote> RE: Color of engine -- John R. Barnes, 04/11/2001
1963-4 is black. 1967 is blue
 RE: Black & Blue -- Mike McQuesten, 04/12/2001
'63 - '65 427s were black except most of the tin work, i.e,, valve covers, which were chrome.
'66 - '68s were Ford Blue.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=5903&Reply=5903><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>1961 390HP tripower system</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Carl, <i>04/10/2001</i></font><br /><blockquote>Iam Building a 390HP,  with the original 3x2 carbs<br>I am looking for  the specs on the camshaft for a 1961 401 horse power 390HP.     </blockquote> 1961 390HP tripower system -- Carl, 04/10/2001
Iam Building a 390HP, with the original 3x2 carbs
I am looking for the specs on the camshaft for a 1961 401 horse power 390HP.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=5904&Reply=5903><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: 1961 390HP tripower system</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Lou, <i>04/10/2001</i></font><br /><blockquote>1960/61, 352- 360 HP<br>1961/1962, 390 HiPo<br>1962/ 1963, 406 <br>1963, 427 single 4 barrel all share the same cam timeing. The Ford book that Hotrod Magazine put out in the early 60s gives all the specs. Which I have but can't find! Iskenderian ground the orginial cam for Ford and as of a few years ago still offers a "Isky" cam with the same specs.<br><br> </blockquote> RE: 1961 390HP tripower system -- Lou, 04/10/2001
1960/61, 352- 360 HP
1961/1962, 390 HiPo
1962/ 1963, 406
1963, 427 single 4 barrel all share the same cam timeing. The Ford book that Hotrod Magazine put out in the early 60s gives all the specs. Which I have but can't find! Iskenderian ground the orginial cam for Ford and as of a few years ago still offers a "Isky" cam with the same specs.

 RE: 1961 390HP tripower system -- hot428ford, 05/17/2006
401 HP @ 6000 RPM 430 torque @ 3500 Compression 11.1 dual breaker, no vacum advance , Timing w/auto 10-14 BTDC @700 RPM CAM for 390,401 HP-,in 1961 .499 lift , 278 duration , overlap 50 , The ticket when my age was jumping around was change the hydraulic rockers (1.73) for the adjustable rockers (1.79) and increase the lift about .009 ..
 RE: 1961 390HP tripower system -- RJP, 04/10/2001
Duration: 276 deg. Lift: .479" overlap: 48 deg Valve lash: .025" Timing: in. open 24deg btdc/ in. close 72deg abdc- ex. open 72deg bbdc/ ex. close 24deg atdc. If you are looking for the origonal cam look for part no. C2AZ-6250-A
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=5908&Reply=5903><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: 1961 390HP tripower system</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>kevin, <i>04/11/2001</i></font><br /><blockquote>TRW # TP-107 is the stock replacement for that cam if you can find cross reference information. It is .480 lift, 228 duration at .050 and 114 CL. Pulls like hell till 5,500 rpm. Idles smooth too.  </blockquote> RE: 1961 390HP tripower system -- kevin, 04/11/2001
TRW # TP-107 is the stock replacement for that cam if you can find cross reference information. It is .480 lift, 228 duration at .050 and 114 CL. Pulls like hell till 5,500 rpm. Idles smooth too.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=5915&Reply=5903><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: 1961 390HP tripower system</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>John R. Barnes, <i>04/11/2001</i></font><br /><blockquote>Ford service cam same as 406 and 427. 306 duration on the exhaust and intake and .500 lift, .025 lash on factory cam. There was also a HYD 6V cam from Ford. </blockquote> RE: 1961 390HP tripower system -- John R. Barnes, 04/11/2001
Ford service cam same as 406 and 427. 306 duration on the exhaust and intake and .500 lift, .025 lash on factory cam. There was also a HYD 6V cam from Ford.
 RE: cam mod -- Mike McQuesten, 04/12/2001
I know this is late. But Crane and Comp both grind the original replacement also. If you're using an original HP 61 block, you'll have to modify the cam retaining system from the early thrust button style which had a tendency to allow the cam to "walk" to the vastly better '63 style with thrust plate retention. Easy for a machinist to do. BTW, the '61 HP tri power was rated at 401 horse. HP single 4V was 375 horse.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=27358&Reply=5903><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: 1961 390HP tripower system</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Chris Sheffe, <i>05/17/2006</i></font><br /><blockquote>The 1961 390 Cu In HiPo engine came from the factory only with a single Holley 4V carb rated at 375 HP in the spring of 1961 Ford offered the Tri-power 401 HP option but it came in the trunk for dealer installation as was the T-10 4 Spd. that came in just in time for the Spring Nat's </blockquote> RE: 1961 390HP tripower system -- Chris Sheffe, 05/17/2006
The 1961 390 Cu In HiPo engine came from the factory only with a single Holley 4V carb rated at 375 HP in the spring of 1961 Ford offered the Tri-power 401 HP option but it came in the trunk for dealer installation as was the T-10 4 Spd. that came in just in time for the Spring Nat's
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=27364&Reply=5903><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: 1961 390HP tripower system</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>walt, <i>05/17/2006</i></font><br /><blockquote>i got a tripower system that came out of a big body 61 ford,i don't think it was in a truck,maybe something i missed? </blockquote> RE: 1961 390HP tripower system -- walt, 05/17/2006
i got a tripower system that came out of a big body 61 ford,i don't think it was in a truck,maybe something i missed?
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=27367&Reply=5903><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: truck vs. trunk</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>McQ, <i>05/18/2006</i></font><br /><blockquote>Have another read Walt.  Chris said the tri power system came in the trunk of '61 Fords ordered with the "Super Stock" option that bumped the HP 390's horsepower from 375 to 401.  The '61 HP 390's were all built as 375 horse cars.  The tri power was a mid year option.  For '62 the tri power was factory installed on both early 390HP cars and the mid year 406 cars. </blockquote> RE: truck vs. trunk -- McQ, 05/18/2006
Have another read Walt. Chris said the tri power system came in the trunk of '61 Fords ordered with the "Super Stock" option that bumped the HP 390's horsepower from 375 to 401. The '61 HP 390's were all built as 375 horse cars. The tri power was a mid year option. For '62 the tri power was factory installed on both early 390HP cars and the mid year 406 cars.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=27369&Reply=5903><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: truck vs. trunk</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>inquisitor, <i>05/18/2006</i></font><br /><blockquote>Was that 401/390 stronger than a 428CJ? </blockquote> RE: truck vs. trunk -- inquisitor, 05/18/2006
Was that 401/390 stronger than a 428CJ?
 In a word, YES...!! -- Lou, 05/18/2006
I've driven both when new, 61/401 was by far the better of the two.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=27375&Reply=5903><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: truck vs. trunk</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>walt, <i>05/18/2006</i></font><br /><blockquote>oops,,i had put that tri power on my 66 7 litre,it had the low riser port type heads,small valves,solid cam,boogied pretty good,then after i lunched it,i was told that the solid lifter 428 was rare,why didn't ford keep up with that 390,375/401?and sorry about the trucnk deal,i misread the story </blockquote> RE: truck vs. trunk -- walt, 05/18/2006
oops,,i had put that tri power on my 66 7 litre,it had the low riser port type heads,small valves,solid cam,boogied pretty good,then after i lunched it,i was told that the solid lifter 428 was rare,why didn't ford keep up with that 390,375/401?and sorry about the trucnk deal,i misread the story
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=27376&Reply=5903><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: 428 w/solids</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>McQ, <i>05/19/2006</i></font><br /><blockquote>1966 was the only year a 428 was factory built with a solid lifter camshaft.  It was the -P- code Police engine.  I don't know a lot about them.  I've seen them.  I even got pulled over fairly regularly back in those days while doing some wild things in my '66 Fairlane GT/A.  <br><br>As for the 390/401 vs. 428 CJ?  It's difficult to really say.  The 390HP was definitely a total performance engine with special block, rods, cam, intake, induction but then the CJ also had those things.  In reality the 390HP is more closely like the 427 in its "style", like the 427 the 390HP took tuning and maintenance where the 428CJ was so smooth that just about anyone could own/operate a vehicle powered by the CJ.  The 390HP "sounded" serious with a nice choppy idle, solid lifters clattering.  The CJ sounded like a 390GT.  The 390HP was pretty accurately rated at 375/401 horsepower, the CJ was way under rated at 335.<br><br>Random opinions. </blockquote> RE: 428 w/solids -- McQ, 05/19/2006
1966 was the only year a 428 was factory built with a solid lifter camshaft. It was the -P- code Police engine. I don't know a lot about them. I've seen them. I even got pulled over fairly regularly back in those days while doing some wild things in my '66 Fairlane GT/A.

As for the 390/401 vs. 428 CJ? It's difficult to really say. The 390HP was definitely a total performance engine with special block, rods, cam, intake, induction but then the CJ also had those things. In reality the 390HP is more closely like the 427 in its "style", like the 427 the 390HP took tuning and maintenance where the 428CJ was so smooth that just about anyone could own/operate a vehicle powered by the CJ. The 390HP "sounded" serious with a nice choppy idle, solid lifters clattering. The CJ sounded like a 390GT. The 390HP was pretty accurately rated at 375/401 horsepower, the CJ was way under rated at 335.

Random opinions.
 RE: 428 w/solids -- walt, 05/19/2006
i know what your saying,i usedto get busted all the time for excessive noise crap tickets,the best one was exhibition of power,pulled a wheel lift,(few inches)didn't see the boy in blue behind me,i hadd pulled the 390 out of my 66 fairlne gt,dropped in the 427,with a 514 locker,joe liberty top loader,doug thorley's,but i still had more fun busting around in them 390 mustangs and fairlanes,and true that 428 was a smooth sleeper,long stroke seemed to smooth out the more radical cams,just had to watch the rpms to the rods that were inside,they could not run the rpm's of 427/390 in stock form,i know,been there ,i had the bolts stretch,nuts loosed up,then rest is history,never spun a bearing though,but the block and crank were sent to the happy hunting ground
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=5902&Reply=5902><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>1950 RPM Balance Problem</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Rick Read, <i>04/10/2001</i></font><br /><blockquote>Can anyone tell me the secert for the balance on a 428.  Has a rumble between 1950-2050 rpm. Understand FE balance different. 4 speed. Very small harmonic damper.  Good running engine.  Maybe fly wheel clutch out of balance?? </blockquote> 1950 RPM Balance Problem -- Rick Read, 04/10/2001
Can anyone tell me the secert for the balance on a 428. Has a rumble between 1950-2050 rpm. Understand FE balance different. 4 speed. Very small harmonic damper. Good running engine. Maybe fly wheel clutch out of balance??
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=5910&Reply=5902><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: 1950 RPM Balance Problem</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>gerald, <i>04/11/2001</i></font><br /><blockquote>takes  dif  flywheel  than reg fe   has  a wate  cast in to it<br>like  a small like a small block.    360,352,390,406.<br>and427 all use the same  one  .  428-410 is the only<br>pass car to use this flywheel       so  good  luck in your<br>hunt    .  you might  look at   your imput  shaft  barring<br>or  pilot barring  if  eather one  is bad   you will get a<br>vib        </blockquote> RE: 1950 RPM Balance Problem -- gerald, 04/11/2001
takes dif flywheel than reg fe has a wate cast in to it
like a small like a small block. 360,352,390,406.
and427 all use the same one . 428-410 is the only
pass car to use this flywheel so good luck in your
hunt . you might look at your imput shaft barring
or pilot barring if eather one is bad you will get a
vib
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=5940&Reply=5902><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: 1950 RPM Balance Problem</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Rick, <i>04/15/2001</i></font><br /><blockquote>Finally a reasonable answer.  I knew I had heard that something was strange about the balance.  Engine was an automatic and now a 4 speed.  Looks like e-bay looking for me to find one. </blockquote> RE: 1950 RPM Balance Problem -- Rick, 04/15/2001
Finally a reasonable answer. I knew I had heard that something was strange about the balance. Engine was an automatic and now a 4 speed. Looks like e-bay looking for me to find one.
 RE: 1950 RPM Balance Problem -- Dave Shoe, 04/16/2001
It seems unusual to me that an unbalanced flywheel would only cause symptoms only at 2000RPM. This very well could be the problem - I don't know - but it just seems like an incorrect flywheel balance would be noticeable at many RPMs.

Is it possibly a broken exhaust system hangar causing the pipes to vibrate when the engine passes through 2000RPM?

The small damper is standard on 67-earlier FEs. In 1968 the damper grew a nice bit, but sadly the same pulleys don't bolt up to them because Ford changed the bolt circle diameter ('67-early pulleys had timing marks in them and were keyed, '68-later pulleys did not).

Shoe.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=5897&Reply=5897><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>Looking for good 428 mechanic in Florida</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Eric, <i>04/09/2001</i></font><br /><blockquote>Hello,<br><br>I recently purchased a '69 Mustang GT conv. Q-code.<br>Wanted to completely go through the engine. Does<br>anyone a mechanic well versed w/ the ins & outs<br>of the 428 cj in Florida? Any help would be greatly appreciated.<br>Thanks,<br>Eric  </blockquote> Looking for good 428 mechanic in Florida -- Eric, 04/09/2001
Hello,

I recently purchased a '69 Mustang GT conv. Q-code.
Wanted to completely go through the engine. Does
anyone a mechanic well versed w/ the ins & outs
of the 428 cj in Florida? Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Eric
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=5900&Reply=5897><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Looking for good 428 mechanic in Florida</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>kevin, <i>04/10/2001</i></font><br /><blockquote>You did not mention where in Florida. </blockquote> RE: Looking for good 428 mechanic in Florida -- kevin, 04/10/2001
You did not mention where in Florida.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=5901&Reply=5897><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Looking for good 428 mechanic in Florida</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Eric, <i>04/10/2001</i></font><br /><blockquote>I'm in St. Petersburg, but anywhere in the Tampa Bay area will work.<br>Thanks </blockquote> RE: Looking for good 428 mechanic in Florida -- Eric, 04/10/2001
I'm in St. Petersburg, but anywhere in the Tampa Bay area will work.
Thanks
 RE: Looking for good 428 mechanic in Florida -- kevin, 04/11/2001
Sorry, I forgot to sign my name on your letter. kevin
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=5925&Reply=5897><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Looking for good 428 mechanic in Florida</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Rusty, <i>04/12/2001</i></font><br /><blockquote>I've got a friend who lives in St. Pete who has been racing cobra jets for about 20 years.  He can set you up with a local machine shop who knows how to work on F.E.'s.  His email address is stanger2434@aol.com.<br>Rusty </blockquote> RE: Looking for good 428 mechanic in Florida -- Rusty, 04/12/2001
I've got a friend who lives in St. Pete who has been racing cobra jets for about 20 years. He can set you up with a local machine shop who knows how to work on F.E.'s. His email address is stanger2434@aol.com.
Rusty
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=5927&Reply=5897><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>RE: Looking for good 428 mechanic in Florida</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Eric, <i>04/12/2001</i></font><br /><blockquote>Thanks Rusty...<br><br>I think I'll do that.<br>This Guy Ratcliff dude sounds real good<br>but I'm looking for someone a little closer.<br><br>Thanks for the info!<br>Eric<br> </blockquote> RE: Looking for good 428 mechanic in Florida -- Eric, 04/12/2001
Thanks Rusty...

I think I'll do that.
This Guy Ratcliff dude sounds real good
but I'm looking for someone a little closer.

Thanks for the info!
Eric
 RE: Looking for good 428 mechanic in Florida -- MCR, 04/14/2001
Kevin - I know a guy in Pinellas Park who DEFINATELY knows his stuff and has owned/run a machine shop out there for more years than I can count. He used to race FE's at one time. He does mostly performance work at this point and he's not cheap, but in my opinion, you get what you pay for. I guess it really depends what you're looking for.

E-mail me if you're interested, and I'll follow up with you off-line.

Mark
 Looking for good 428 mechanic in SAN DIEGO? -- Tim B, 04/12/2001
I'd like to find someone near me in San Diego. She (a 69 Cougar conv. 428CJ-R) seems to run fine, but it would be good to have someone nearby. There was a guy at Carlsbad Raceway who was racing a 390/428 67 Ranchero, but I lost his number.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=5896&Reply=5896><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>oil</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>ben, <i>04/09/2001</i></font><br /><blockquote>can someone help settle a debate here.  i say oil is oil and a friend of mine says all oil  is NOT created equal.  im not comparing synthetics with pure petroleum base stock; im comparing ALL petroleums  with one another.   i use the cheapest crap out  there and my trucks run fine. my friend  claims that cheapo stuff is going to get me in the long run.  any ideas guys?  is it true that cheap oils will wear out an engine faster EVEN IF drained  it every 1000 miles?   </blockquote> oil -- ben, 04/09/2001
can someone help settle a debate here. i say oil is oil and a friend of mine says all oil is NOT created equal. im not comparing synthetics with pure petroleum base stock; im comparing ALL petroleums with one another. i use the cheapest crap out there and my trucks run fine. my friend claims that cheapo stuff is going to get me in the long run. any ideas guys? is it true that cheap oils will wear out an engine faster EVEN IF drained it every 1000 miles?
 RE: oil opinion... -- RC Moser, 04/10/2001
Well, I think if you change you oil regularly and for every day use any oil will do. I had a friend that would hardly ever change his oil, just the Filter. Guess what, He had over 145K on that engine and it still runs fine. Now, would I buy that truck from him knowing he don't change the oil regularly? NO! I think it also depends on how old the engine is, older engine create more blowby thus dirting the oil at a more rapid pace increasing sludge build up. Now for high RPM use, I would think the best Vescosity oils would be best. do to the additives to reduce friction and heat. I tried alot of different brands of oils, but always seems to come back to QS. I'm sure you will get alot of different opinions, this is just one.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=5892&Reply=5892><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>390</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>thomas santoli, <i>04/08/2001</i></font><br /><blockquote>What is the aftermarket parts availability like for 390's?  Does ford sell FE perfomance parts for the 390? Does anyone else? </blockquote> 390 -- thomas santoli, 04/08/2001
What is the aftermarket parts availability like for 390's? Does ford sell FE perfomance parts for the 390? Does anyone else?
 Re: 390 -- HighSpeed, 04/09/2001
Most aftermarket parts companies make parts for the old three-nine-o. Are you looking for something in particular? HighSpeed
 Re: 390 -- gerry, 04/09/2001
Ford sells very little for the FE series. For the most part Ford's participation in parts support for the FE is oil filter adapters (C8OZ-6881-A, yes these are the ones you see selling on Ebay for over $50 in bidding frenzies all the time. They're actually still available new from your Ford dealer's parts counter for about 36 bucks) and windage trays.

The FE is very well supported in the aftermarket for new parts, and used and NOS parts are relatively plentiful through many vendors...even Mr. FoMoCo.

You just have to understand that many parts for an FE are generally going to cost more.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=5891&Reply=5891><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<b>428  ==cam</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>gerald, <i>04/08/2001</i></font><br /><blockquote>i had a comp  294   in 428    it was gutles   on  take off<br>at mid  range   it came on  hard    3500-5500   so<br>i  took   a  64  ;352.4v   cam  and put  it in   the  engine<br>is  total  dif   come in at 2000.-5500 .  <br>can  some one  tell me  why    a 352  cam   is that  much   better      </blockquote> 428 ==cam -- gerald, 04/08/2001
i had a comp 294 in 428 it was gutles on take off
at mid range it came on hard 3500-5500 so
i took a 64 ;352.4v cam and put it in the engine
is total dif come in at 2000.-5500 .
can some one tell me why a 352 cam is that much better
 RE: 428 ==cam -- gerry, 04/09/2001
The 352 cam isn't better. It just performs better in the rpm range you were more interested in...low end grunt.

Duration, lobe separation angle and opening timing generally influence the cam's operating range. Generally, the shorter the duration and more advanced the opening points are, the more low-rpm cylinder pressure the cam will create. Cylinder pressure is power. Your 352 cam makes more cylinder pressure in the low-rpm range.
Go to the top of this page
Go back one page Back    Next Go forward one page

401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420