Skip Navigation Links.
 |  Flexplate? -- Steve Gundlach, 12/29/2000
Does anybody know if a reverse starter (cruise-a-maic) flexplate and standard (c-6) flexplate will work with either application?
|
 | Few more fe questions -- TIKMA/TIM, 12/28/2000
Fellas,
Finally got the engine out. Its got an "A" on the back of the block. What is it? The block is a c6me-a has a 1u crank so I feel its cool.
The trans however, has a problem with the tag. the last letter that says what type is just an "A" not aa or any thing but just "A". Can t find it anywhere. Know its a c6 by the prefix but whats the single letter mean? Thanks for the reply. TIM |
|  | 428 -- Ed Foral, 12/29/2000
Looks like you have a 428. What are the head casting numbers? Intake and carb #'s?
What is the full tranny tag number?
Several C-6's through the years had just an A for the second part of the ID number.
Ed
|
| | | Re: 428 -- TIKMA/TIM, 12/29/2000
Its a c6me-a block and a 1u crank standard 428 pistons,390 gt heads. Thinks its a galaxie motor exept for the heads,theres a 390 gt intake with it but theres no way I`m gonna use that heavy thing. Forget the rod number but I was told there 390 hi po rods. Taking the block to be checked next week finally got time to work on the car a little. Trans code is
PGA A
03639
Thanks for the help. TIM |
| | | | RE: Re: 428 -- Ed Foral, 12/29/2000
The base 428 used the same intake as the 390. What casting heads and how many exh. bolt holes?
Your transmission is from a full size. 352-428 Base
Ed |
| | | | | RE: Re: 428 -- TIKMA/TIM, 12/30/2000
They are 14 bolt heads. Believe going to have em drilled to 16 if possible have been told it is anyway. Just for no header problems. The intake has the s( dont have the numbers right with me there in the shop but has been positively id as a gt 390 and has to weigh 50 pounds,yuck) Anybody want it. Cut a really really good deal. The motor came with car in pieces. As the story goes somebody had put a windsor in it which was prompty pulled and the guy hooked up with another guy that sold him parts from his shop.You know how it goes ( you need these and these and these to make it go pretty good). Adj rocker arms also but cant find a part number on em . The car is a real 428cj and is optioned pretty good or at least the way I like it to be.
Color t5= Red flat black hood
trim 3a= Black mach one luxury vinyl
Date code 17k= oct 17
dso= Atlanta
Axle A= 350 open( gonna change this)
tran V= C6 auto
And last the one that sold me
Engine code R Yea ha!!!!!
Its complete but taken apart and am working the body out now. Had to put a new roof on ( the hardest part of the job but its done now) Body otherwise is pretty good
Has dual remote mirrors which I thought were pretty unusual.
No power steering but power brakes( front disc) I DO NOT LIKE the slave cyl style. Worked on em think it was a bad idea.
Factory sport slats spoilers and all that stuff. TIM
|
| | | | | | RE: Re: 428 -- Ed Foral, 12/30/2000
The 390GT, shared the "S" cast intake with most 428's and other 390's in 66.
The two outside top holes on each head are lower than all other heads. These holes are what limit your manifold selection.
8 bolt C6AE-R heads can be drilled for 16 bolt pattern, if you really wanted to, and they have the tall intake ports and early exh. port style.
Ed |
| | | | | |  | RE: Re: 428 -- TIKMA/TIM, 12/30/2000
Thanks ! I`ll start looking around for a set. TIM |
| 428 Oil Pressure Problem Almost Solved! -- John, 12/28/2000
Hi! Many of you may remember some postings about a month ago or so, where I was looking for input as to why my 428 FE suddenly started losing oil pressure, with nothing apparetly wrong...gauge checked out, no bearing debris in oil.....no obvious leaks or pump or pick-up problems, etc. I finally yanked the engine out yesterday and have found a stress crack in the inner lifter valley area, right above the lifter bores from the # 7 cylinder. Antifreeze may be able to seep through this crack into the lifter valley area and then into the oil...a pressure check will reveal this eventually. The crack is about 1.5 inches long, parralel with the crank axis, and I can catch my nail on the crack. Now...here's the QUIZ...any bets on which of the following I will eventually find?
1/ other stress cracks through to a oil gallery? or
2/ slight leakage of antifreeze into oil stripped the main bearings? (I never noticed any anti-freeze in the oil...but that doesn't mean there wasn't any)
I will post my findings as soon as I finish stripping the engine down...in about a week. Right now it takes anout 2 hours to heat up my garage in winter, so I mostly work weekends only...by the time it's warmed up in the evening, it's time to pack theings up for the night. As long as I'm back on the road by April, I don't mind the delay...but the curiosity is killing me. Any guesses? |
| | RE: 428 Oil Pressure Problem Almost Solved! -- Craig Nelson, 12/28/2000
Hey John, I can't pose any guesses about what more you might find upon tear down, but its good to know there are other 428 guys out there working in garages that take two hours to warm up just like mine (all you SoCal guys can feel smug now). Please keep us posted on what you find. Are you planning on replacing the oil pump? If so let me know about your choice. Best of luck! |
| | | RE: 428 Oil PUMP of Choice -- John, 12/29/2000
With 0.025 to 0.030 clearances, the Melling HV57 High Volume pump is the way to go. With cold thick oil the max pressure at idle will be about 80 psi and hot at idle, about 20 psi. To me that's perfent for an FE with small oil galleries. The 10psi rule applies only to Chevs. The pressure, or more correctly flow, at the bearings should be the same no matter what kind of engine you have, and to get this with a Ford's smaller galleries (they increase the back-pressure) you should have more pressure to maintain the correct flow at the bearings.
A originally used a FPP modified HVHP pump and got 145 psi cold oil pressure at an idle...way too high I think. HV only is fine. Also, the HVHP pump practically sucked the sump dry until the oil thinned down as it heated up. I couldn't move the car for a few minutes as the little remaining oil in the sump would slosh and I'd suck an air bubble indicated by a fluctuation on the gauge. And I use solid lifters and oil restrictors to the heads. And that was with a 7 qt oil capacity (pan and filter).
There are other oil mods I did..flaring the main galleries at the main bearings, enlarging the pump to filter adapter gallery, plugging off the hyd lifter galleries, using threaded plugs vs press-in ones....Very meticulpous I was...but still...now I have to tear the engine down again...but such is life. Thanks for your encouragement. |
| P...how's this for MEL power boy's?... -- steiny, 12/28/2000
Mike Steinberg, AA/Gas Super-charged "Lemon Twist"
40' Willys coupe, 430" blown & injected Lincoln engine.
It also ran BB/Altered and held the record in the late sixties for over a year. Best time was 9.42 et. 153.47 mph.
The 430 Lincoln MEL motors were stronger than the FE428 motors. That's a fact! Because of the combustion chamber being in the cylinder and not in the head, this helped valve shrouding. It also allowed the engine to have very large valves. Out of memory, 2-3/8 x 2" ex. as I recall. The ports in the heads were also large. This made the motor a natural for super-charging. The engine was intended to be run at lower rpm. Thats were it developed its best power. Just like the FE428's. I spun mine in the lights to 6200-6500 rpm. That's pushing it with this motor. It had no end stands for the rocker arm shafts, or for that matter, no snap-click parts available. I just drilled the shafts and stands, and went over size on the rocker bolts. I guess I got away with murder right? The 430 Lincolns did not run near so well normally aspirated. That's where the FE's came in...in the right hands, the FE428's & 427's were a terror...with carburators! But the 430 Lincoln could handle super-chargers and even nitro; Ted Cyr, who I knew, and Earl Canavan. To the best of my knowledge, their weren't any FE super-charged nitro or gas motors running back then. I never saw or heard of any!
Mike Steinberg, AA/GS
 |
| | 430 vs; 428... -- steiny, 12/28/2000
The 428 Cobra Jets with the tri-web blocks, and cross-bolted mains would get the nod on strength against a stock 430 engine. However, on the second 430 motor I built, I started making my own steel main girdle and cross-bolted caps. That motor probably had the CJ beat for strength. In the four years I ran the car, I never dropped a lower end onto the track. Their were no stainless snap-click valves to put into the heads. I had to run modified stock valves. So, I broke valves, springs, retainers, pistons, rings, but never a lower end. Because of the large journal area on the 430 motors, I had to change the bearings after every meet.
The only use of the FE that I can remember was the block. I believe it was used under the SOHC heads. This engine was used by several people with Ford backing, but with limited success in my opinion (Sneaky Pete, Skip Hess in the REVELL kit racer). The only one I consider ever having any real success with the SOHC motor, was "Ohio" George Montgomey. He used one in his "MALCO" gasser, and eventially, he began to literally dominate the AA/GS class until it was finally disbanded by the idiots(IMO)in NHRA. In case anyone cares, here's another picture of my Ford/Lincoln powered gasser by the Golden Gate bridge in San Francisco, circa 1969.
 |
| | RE:Don't forget Jack Chrisman's Comet -- Tim, 01/01/2001
The Sachs & Son A/FX Comet was a blown 427 wedge.
Steiny, Did you have to run boxed rods in the Lincoln? |
| Sneaky Pete and his "vacuum" device.... -- P, 12/28/2000
Here's a photo I'll bet not many people have seen.
"Sneaky" Pete Robinson was known for innovate "cheating" of any kind that would allow his cars to win. He even had a "jack car" which would jack up the rear end and allow the wheels to spin real fast, and would drop the jack when the green light came on. After showing up at his first race with that rig, they called him up to the tower and said "lose the jack or stay home".
This device (vacuum) was intended to suck air from below the car, but it also tended to suck debris too. It's a crazy innovation that Jim Hall (Chaparal fame) developed in other ways later on for road racing.
 |
|  | More about "Sneaky" and his Cammer -- P, 12/28/2000
Pete also developed a gear drive for his SOHC FE Cammer, to get rid of the 10' chain everyone else was using.
When Pete died in the 1971 crash, many people thought the spiritual leader of the Cammer movement passed on, and it seems that they may have been right.
Here is a pic of Sneaky Pete's gear drive on the SOHC 427
"Cammer".
P
 |
| | RE: Sneaky Pete and his "vacuum" device.... -- Louie, 12/28/2000
What was the theory behind the 'street sweeper'. Was the air pressure greater underneath?? |
| | | More traction.......... -- P, 12/28/2000
....I think........due to "sucking the car down" onto the track. I know it's crazy, but most devices now in production had their prototypes, crashes, failures, etc., and this was one that never made it very far.
Jim Hall, of Chaparall fame, had a big vacuum cleaner built into his Can AM racer, and it would suck the car down onto the track, and he could power around corners like nobody else could. But the power it took to do that, and the weight, meant he didn't have the power on the straights, and I think they eventually banned that concept all together because it was so radical.
P |
| | | | Being radical . . . -- Orin, 01/05/2001
Andy Granatelli (spelling?) and his turbines had the same problem, being too radical I mean.
Imagine what NASCAR would be like today if they hadn't banned the turbines. You'd have afterburners, vectored thrust, and "viffing" (going forward and sideways simultaneously), all of which would make a grand noise, even if it would melt the concrete!
Pistons are fine, but compressors rule! |
| | | It took guts to haul that thing to the track n/ m -- P, 12/28/2000
|
| 427 Galaxie vs. 409 Chevy -- Stanley Superior, 12/28/2000
[deleted by Mr F] |
| | Definite case of trolling, here. Reported to ISP 12/28 [n/m] -- Mr F, 12/28/2000
n/m |
| motor mounts -- T1M, 12/28/2000
I have a 68' Ford Galaxie with a 390 2V and a C6. I just replaced the motor mounts. My first time too. And they sit on the mount brackets kind of funny. Do they break in after awhile and do I need to monitor this and keep tightening the mount nuts?
Thanks |
| Ford racing records.....fact....not opinion..... -- P, 12/28/2000
I originally posted this on the Network 54 "original FE Forum", and wanted to share it with you guys over here due to the recent "flap" going on about oiling, etc. etc. There are some good replys to the orig post that can be found at this address if anyone is interested.
http://network54.com/Forum/message?forumid=21142&messageid=977937271
Doing some research I stumbled across some numbers I thought everyone would find of interest. These are NASCAR endurance racing records of the 1950’s and 1960’s. It is interesting to see how the development of various engines helped get the particular manufacturer in the “W” column.
Although my database also contains the name of each driver, the location of the race, and the car driven, etc., I am only showing abbreviated information here.
Forgive me if I might seem to be "lecturing" to this group, because the "article" was prepared for a group not nearly as informed as this one!
When there are so many "emotional" arguments out there flapping around, documented facts have a way of bringing things into their proper perspective. Although this info is limited to one particular racing series, it is noted that the FE engines competed in many other series, including sucessful duty in Europe, and they even won the Miami to New York boat race in a Holman Moody prepared boat.
Starting back in 1956 provides an interesting perspective, because the FE big block series (Ford/Edsel) wouldn’t be in production for two more years. Ford won race number 3, but didn’t win again until race number 25 (Ralph Moody happened to be the driver), and finally closed the season with 13 wins. Ralph Moody, incidentally, was the partner in the famous Holman Moody racing shop of Charlotte, NC, which later prepared competition engines under contract from Ford Motor Company. After race number 25 things appeared to be picking up with wins at races number 30, 33, 35, 38, 39, 41, 42, 44, 46, 48, 50, and 51. During this time frame Ford was racing their Y-block 312 cubic inch engine. (Chevrolet won 3 races this year, and Dodge won 11.)
During the 1957 season it appeared that Ford found the magic formula winning 26 races, including; 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 25, 28, 29, 31, 36, 37, 44, 50, and 51; with drivers Fireball Roberts, Parnelli Jones, Ralph Moody, Marvin Panch, and Paul Goldsmith among others. (Chevrolet won 21 races this season and Dodge/Plymouth none.)
1958 was the first year of the new Ford “big block” engine known as the “FE” (Ford/Edsel series). This engine was configured in 332 and 352 cubic inch displacement, and was intended to counter the 348 cubic inch engine being offered by Chevrolet in late 1957. The 1958 season saw 16 wins for races number 4, 10, 11, 14, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 30, 32, 37, 44, 50, 51; with a new Ford driver being added to the list by the name of Junior Johnson. (Chevrolet won 25 races this season, and Dodge/Plymouth none.)
1959 saw the further development of the 352 cubic inch FE, including a street version with solid lifters putting out 360-hp. Ten NASCAR track wins occurred at races 7, 8, 11, 12, 17, 19, 22, 29, 30, and 39. With only 10 wins this season it was apparent that Ford needed something with more power. Notable drivers were Junior Johnson, Parnelli Jones, and Net Jarrett. (Chevrolet won 16 races this season, Plymouth won 7, and Dodge won none.) This era also saw the “square” Thunderbirds with the 430 “MEL” engines (Mercury/Edsel/Lincoln); these engines offered a lot of power but were not ideally suited for the rigors of endurance racing.
1960 saw some improvement with 15 hard-earned wins mostly in the middle of the season; 2, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 20, 22, 28, 34, 38, 42, and 43. Notable drivers were Ned Jarrett, Joe Weatherly, Glen Wood and Speedy Thompson. Junior Johnson didn’t appear in the Ford stable again until 1964. Fifteen wins out of 51 was not the kind of record Ford wanted, and the 352 engine was about to see it’s first enlargement. (Chevrolet won 13 this season, and Plymouth won 8, and Dodge won one race.)
1961 saw the 352 engine enlarged to 390 cubic inches by virtue of an increase in piston diameter from 4.0” to 4.05” along with an increase in crankshaft stroke from 3.50” to 3.78”. This new configuration produced a significant engine with 401-horsepower in high performance street trim. The 3.78” crankshaft, incidentally, would see service through several evolutionary steps all the way through the development of the 406 and 427 cubic inch engines. The new engine was competitive on the drag strips, and Chevrolet admits it was responsible for their moving ahead with development of the 409. Ford only won a disappointing 7 NASCAR races this year, including race numbers: 1, 13, 19, 23, 33, 42, and 45. Fred Lorenzen was added to the Ford driving list. (Even with the new engine, Chevrolet drubbed Ford 11 times, and Plymouth won three, with Dodge winning none.)
1962 saw the development of a larger FE engine part way through the season, with the 390 being further bored out to 4.13” but retaining the 3.78” crankshaft of the 390. The new engine was 406 cubic inches in size, and produced 405 horsepower in high performance street trim. This engine also pioneered the cross-bolted “4-bolt main” design for crankshaft retaining clips, and various cylinder head and piston developments. The season used both engines and produced a disappointing 6 wins, including race numbers: 21, 23, 24, 45, 49, and 50. (Chevrolet again drubbed Ford with 14 races this season, and Plymouth won 11, with Dodge none.) It was very apparent that Ford had to do something, because the “horsepower wars” were in full swing and they were not producing the desired results.
1963 started the season again with the 406 cubic inch engine, and finished the season with the new 427. The 427 cubic inch engine was yet another larger bore edition of the FE design featuring a 4.23” bore and the famili |
| | Part-II of the post......................... -- P, 12/28/2000
1963 started the season again with the 406 cubic inch engine, and finished the season with the new 427. The 427 cubic inch engine was yet another larger bore edition of the FE design featuring a 4.23” bore and the familiar 3.78” crankshaft. Although the crankshaft remained numerically similar, many developments were made in metallurgy, balance, weight, casting techniques, oiling, etc. Ford saw immediate improvements this season with 23 NASCAR wins, including; 4, 7, 11, 13, 14, 25, 26, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 37, 41, 42, 44, 45, 47, 48, 49, and 50. You can almost see the time when the high performance 406 was transitioned over to the 427 configuration. Dan Gurney was added to the list of Ford drivers this season. (Chevrolet won 8 races, and Plymouth won 19, with Dodge winning none.) The 427 had an immediate impact on racing. After only winning 13 races the previous two years, the introduction of the 427 FE finally allowed Ford to turn the tables on the competition in a convincing way, and Ford won twice that many in one season. Chevrolet saw the writing on the wall and some say they “folded their deck” after an aborted attempt to fit the old 409 with non-production prototype heads, and not being allowed to race the non-production motor in the NASCAR stock car racing circuit. Chevrolet then went into a mode where they either “didn’t have a racing program”, or they “did have a racing program”, depending on how the situation suited corporate headquarters. On one hand they didn’t compete in NASCAR because it required a “stock” engine base, and the 409 simply wouldn’t do the job. They did develop the Grand Sport Corvette (complete with 409-based “mystery motor” with new design heads ) and successfully ran up a series of wins. It was good marketing to do so, and they got a lot of headlines until Carroll Shelby stuffed a 427 FE into the AC body and produced a lighter car with more power and better handling. The Grand Sport program stopped shortly thereafter. Even today it is interesting to see how manufacturers carefully select when and where they are willing to compete.
1964 saw an improved season with the new 427 engine becoming the dominant force with 30 wins. 1964 NASCAR victories included an even distribution of wins, including races; 1, 2, 5, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 27, 28, 32, 36, 42, 45, 46, 49, 50, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, and 62. Notable drivers this season included Junior Johnson, Fred Lorenzen, and Ned Jarrett. (Chevrolet won 1 race this season, Plymouth won 12, and Dodge won 14). It is noted that Chrysler Corporation was using the newly designed non-production Hemi part of this season, which was outlawed for the 1965 season due to the fact that it was not based on a “stock” production motor.
1965 was a year that included new developments in the carburetion and oiling systems in Ford’s top-gun 427 cubic inch engine. This season Ford dominated the tracks with 48 wins. These wins were evenly distributed because the total efforts of the competition only won 6 races that year. Ford 427 NASCAR wins included races; 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 38, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44, 45, 47, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, and 55. Ford drivers this year included the addition of AJ Foyt. (Chevrolet didn’t win a single race this year, Plymouth won 4 races, and Dodge won 2). It is noted that Chrysler Corporation didn’t fare well in 1965 because the non-production based pure racing prototype 426 hemi that accounted for most of the Ford losses in 1964 was outlawed this season. It is also noted that even with the illegal Chrysler Hemi prototype being run in 1964, Ford still managed to win more races with their FE. 1965 was the last year the 409 Chevrolet was offered to the general public, and only about 2500 units were sold.
1966 was the year Ford campaigned the big 427 in international sports car racing and won LeMans, finishing 1, 2, and 3rd place using “detuned” NASCAR engines with aluminum heads. Ford only won 10 NASCAR races in 1966, largely due to the introduction of a “production” racing version of the 426 cubic inch Chrysler hemi engine. 1966 hard-fought NASCAR wins included races number; 2, 7, 18, 23, 26, 29, 45, 46, 47, and 49. (Chevrolet won 3 races this season, Plymouth won 16, and Dodge won 18). It was apparent to Ford again, that staying on top would not be easy, and the tunnel port heads and SOHC “Cammer” engine programs were added to bolster the bulletproof 427 block. Ford knew NASCAR wouldn’t allow the SOHC engine to run unless it was produced in quantities, so manufacturing was begun in earnest. The Cammer was essentially trumping the Chrysler hemi by utilizing its own hemispherical head configuration along with the superior high RPM valve train capabilities of a chain driven overhead camshaft. Even with Ford meeting stated production quotas, NASCAR feared the Ford SOHC “Cammer” would dangerously raise horsepower on the tracks and it was not allowed to run. The Cammer utilized the 427 FE block and crankshaft system, and the stock of engines were relegated to primarily drag strip use where they won “everything” in the late 1960’s with Danny Ongias and “Sneaky” Pete Robinson. In 1969 Ongias provided the first 6-second quarter mile time with a Cammer powered funny car. The Cammer program did, however, soon run dry from lack of replacement parts, funding, and development from Ford Motor Company, as Mr. Ford was interested in bigger challenges than those of the drag strip. In 1971 the Cammer competition was still very much alive, but the Cammer racing program seemed to die when Sneaky Pete Robinson crashed and died during a race.
1967 saw another LeMans victory for the Ford 427 and 10 more hard-fought NASCAR wins. It seemed that the competition had finally caught up to Ford, the 426 Hemi was back on the track, and wins were distributed throughout the season for race numbers; 2, |
| | | RE: Part-III of the post......................... -- P, 12/28/2000
1967 saw another LeMans victory for the Ford 427 and 10 more hard-fought NASCAR wins. It seemed that the competition had finally caught up to Ford, the 426 Hemi was back on the track, and wins were distributed throughout the season for race numbers; 2, 4, 5, 10, 13, 28, 34, 36, 48, and 49. Cale Yarborough, Bobby Allison, Mario Andretti, Fred Lorenzen and Parnelli Jones were in the “W” column with Ford this year. (Chevrolet won 3 races this year, and Plymouth won 31, with Dodge winning 5).
1968 saw 21 NASCAR wins for Ford largely due to the utilization of the “tunnel port” engine. (Chevrolet won 1 race, and Plymouth won 16, with Dodge winning 5). The 427 Ford FE was the equal of the Chrysler 426 hemi this year. Chevrolet and their new big block 396/427 engine won one race, totaling seven wins in three years for Chevrolet.
1969 saw 26 NASCAR wins for Ford despite the fact that the Hemi was still racing, and so it goes, history reflecting the ebb and flow of the horsepower wars with the lead being held by one camp for a precious few seasons. (Chevrolet won none this season, Plymouth won 2, and Dodge won 22). Although Ford introduced its new 429 “Shotgun” engine this season, they continued to rely on the 427 to keep the wins coming during the introduction and development of the new engine. The final culmination of the 427 tunnel-port FE design was (and is) one of the finest big block high RPM push-rod competition engines ever built. Many will say it was the very best of its kind during its day; if you count up the endurance wins this engine garnered with the entire world watching, perhaps you will be one of those who will agree.
During the horsepower wars of the 1960’s there were many high performance engines developed by Pontiac, Buick, Oldsmobile, Chevrolet, Chrysler, Ford, Edsel, Studebaker and even American Motors had one. Many of the engines of the era that were “highly touted”, were essentially touted by the marketing departments of their respective manufacturers. Pontiac toyed with the idea of an overhead cam V8 but never developed one. A few low production hand built specials were offered by various manufacturers for quarter mile drag racing and to capture a headline now and then, but in that era the NHRA (for example) would consider almost anything produced by a manufacturer to be a “stock” engine. As a result, many “low budget” headlines were captured with engines that never saw true production for the general public. One manufacturer built a series of 12 Super Heavy Duty motors, and we’re still hearing about them 35 years later. In reality, a run of 12 motors simply didn’t exist in real terms. Ford Motor Company and worthy competitor Chrysler Corporation were the only two manufacturers who were really doing any serious endurance racing during this era. While drag racing did attract a lot of attention, it was not a seriously funded activity by Ford, with a few notable exceptions such as the 427 Fairlane Thunderbolt which was produced in very small numbers for racing only.
While there is a serious and loyal following for Chevrolet, with very good reason, the NASCAR records during the 1960’s obviously don’t speak well for Chevrolet. There are still “excuses” floating around 35 years later, but the real fact is “Chevrolet found itself during a several year drought with an engine design (the 348/409 big block) that reached it’s peak development in 1961, and simply couldn’t be developed much further”. Yes, Chevrolet did build a small run of prototypes referred to as the “Mystery Motor”, which were 409’s fitted with a new design cylinder head that didn’t meet NASCAR regulations for being a production motor. The fact remains that Chevrolet was caught with an un-competitive engine, and conveniently established a “non-racing program” until one was developed. In the interim, Chevrolet’s marketing department managed to hype the performance merits of Chevrolet high performance products in any other way they could, with considerable success.
|
| | | | RE: Part-4 of the post......................... -- P, 12/28/2000
It is apparent that when Henry Ford, II wanted to win races, he did win. He practically “bought” the wins. The LeMans effort was essentially an ultimatum from Henry Ford, II. When one Ford employee asked “what about the budget for this program?”, he was directed to a sign posted in Ford Corporate Headquarters that read “We win LeMans in 1966”. There was no budget limitation, and the engine of choice was the venerable 427 FE side-oiler that had been refined during years of dueling on the NASCAR tracks.
Carroll Shelby is often quoted and misquoted, but said the 427 side-oiler was a “waste of good machinery” in anything other than an all-out racing machine. As a result, it is not very well known fact that the 427 Cobra actually received the less expensive 2-bolt 428 cubic inch FE engine for most of the production run, while the more expensive 427 was saved for the track (but all of then said “427” on the side of the car). The 428 “Cobra Jet” engine was another interesting variant of the FE theme, using the piston bore of the old racing 406 cubic inch engine (4.13”), but with a newer long stroke crankshaft of 3.98”. It looked almost identical to the 427 except for the lack of the 427 exposed cross bolts near the oil pan. For street or drag racing use, the 428 was a worthy but much less expensive competitor. Racers have long known that if you combine the 3.98” crankshaft with the big 4.23” bore of the 427 you can get enough power to burn tires like nothing else. The main problem with the 427 FE engines is short production run, and commensurate availability of parts. They are fine engines of the first caliber, but they were produced in relatively low production numbers. There is not a large following for this engine today due to the fact that parts cost more. Other alternatives are more common.
Lastly, there will always be Chevrolet fans commenting on the so-called “oiling deficiencies” of the FE engine series. This is odd coming from fans who watched the FE win 101 races to 9 Chevrolet wins during the 1963, 64 and 65 season. I guess it’s better to have a so-called “oiling problem” people talk about, rather than being stuck with an engine that wouldn’t win! The “oiling” issue arose when the big block became more and more powerful and people began running them harder and harder. The initial design did have a need for improvement, which was improved upon more than once, and finally slam dunked with the side-oiler design. As Shelby noted, this side-oiling feature simply is not needed for anything other than NASCAR or LeMans type racing activities.
Hey, that's my opinion, laced with some facts. Let me know if I'm off base anywhere.
(Time to crawl back under a rock)
P
|
| | | | | We dont need another one of your history lessons -- Stanley Superior, 12/28/2000
Blah,blah,blah! Thats all you ever seem to do,P. What is the point of all this? I question your "facts" anyway. I suppose you're gonna tell us that all these races were won with the same production block FE motor? Like they never had any back-up motors? The truth is,they (Ford) were exploding engines,left and right! So they had to have a BIG supply of replacements on hand to finish the races. BTW,my friend Renniford is keeping an eye on things for me,over there. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT AND UNDERSTANDING. |
| | | | | | Mr. F...............we're waiting................. -- P, 12/28/2000
......for you to ban this guy from an otherwise perfectly good forum.
I've taken some time to post some quality photos and information here. This guy has been banned on two other FE forums for the same reason I now see existing on your forum.
P |
| | | | | | | "P" - if you want to discuss this, call or write me privately. [n/m] -- Mr F, 12/28/2000
n/m |
| | | | | | | All those in favor of 86'ing S.S. say "GOODBYE" -- Mark, 12/28/2000
Let the counting begin! |
| | | | | | | | Calls to action against other participants aren't welcome, here. [n/m] -- Mr F, 12/29/2000
n/m |
| | | | | | No support or understanding for this kind of post. Got that? [n/m] -- Mr F, 12/28/2000
n/m |
| | | | | | Stanley, you are right. -- Louie, 12/28/2000
"We" don't. You obviously do. |
| | | | | Shelby did put in some 428s, but I think records show it was very few. [n/m] -- Mr F, 12/28/2000
n/m |
| | | | | | Oh - and some Shelby brochures did advertise the '428 Cobra' [n/m] -- Mr F, 12/28/2000
n/m |
| | | | | | | RE: Oh - and some Shelby brochures did advertise ... -- P, 12/28/2000
Thanks for the comments
I saw in print somewhere, that they had "quietly" installed the 428's in the 427 Cobra, and both Shelby and Ford had an "agreement" that if anyone discovered this and they were upset about it, then they would refund some money or something. Don't know if it was true or not, but it was "in print"..........and I'll try to find where I saw this.
I appreciate any "corrections" to my "point of view"
thanx,
P |
| | | | | | When you write Cobra? -- Ted, 12/28/2000
When you write Cobra are you refering to the AC Cobra or the Mustang Cobra? |
| | | | | | | RE: Mustang Cobra? -- P, 12/29/2000
Reference is for the AC Cobra, due to the fact that the Mustang Cobra never saw the likes of a FE motor. The Mustang Cobra was a "Cobra" by decree of the Ford Marketing Department, and that's about it (in name only). The AC Cobra was the one that indirectly ruined the merger of Ford with Ferrari, due to the fact that Enzo insisted that (as one of his last conditions, after 9 days of negotiations) Henry Ford II break his ties with Carroll Shelby.........because of a "conflict of interest". Of course, ole Carroll used to drive for Enzo, and won a few races, and then jumped ship to build the Cobra race car which made life a little miserable for Enzo.
Henry Ford didn't like the idea of kicking ole Shel out of the family, and that's a part of how the negotions went sour. Not only did they each tell each other that their respective mothers wore combat boots, there were probably a few hand signals thrown in for good measure. It wasn't a pretty sight, and it was one reason ole Henry Ford II decided he'd essentially spend whatever it took to kick Enzo's ass. The sour negotiatiions were responsible for the enthusiasm behind the GT-40 program, and of course, the weapon of choice (the one that won) was the "detuned" 499-HP aluminum headed Ford pushrod 427 FE.
P
|
| | | | | Thank you "P"! -- Mark, 12/28/2000
I truly appreciate your obvious wealth of knowledge that you so freely share with those of us on this board that are "wise" enough to be able to sort out fact from opinion. |
| | | | | | Fair trade ! -- P, 12/28/2000
I'm relying on you guys to help me get the story right. That's one reason I posted this stuff, I want to see if anyone can shoot any of it down, and if so, then I'll try to correct whatever is not properly stated.
I've drawn some conclusions of my own, and I wanted to post them to see if anyone who may know better would take issue with them. Glad you injoyed the info !
My Grandfather had a Ford dealership in a small town, and I remember seeing all the cool FE-powered cars back when they were new.
P |
| | | | | The Shelby Registry documents 428s in Cobras. -- Dave Shoe, 12/28/2000
1966 and 1968 Cobras got 427s for the most part (nearly every one). The 1967 model year Cobra saw a shortage of the block and got mostly 428s (nearly every one).
About 2/3 of all Cobras came with 427s, 1/3 came with 428s, and 1 or 2 came with very special 390 motors.
Just from memory - (a year ago I had the Shelby registry info nailed but forget fast),
Shoe. |
| | | | | | Love that data!!!!!!! -- P, 12/29/2000
Thanks Shoe, info is golden!!
P |
| | | | | | As I alluded to, 428 was *advertised* in '67. No harm/no foul. [n/m] -- Mr F, 12/29/2000
n/m |
| 390 differences -- Greg R, 12/27/2000
I was thinking of some day pulling the 302 out of my Galaxie and swapping in a 390. What are the differences between a passenger car 390 and a truck 390? Thanks |
| FE fluidampr -- jeff, 12/27/2000
Has anyone used a fluidampr on an FE? I geuss you have to use their 460 part and modify it. How much modding is req, and is it still sfi rated after that? |
| | RE: FE fluidampr -- kevin t, 12/28/2000
I've heard of people modifying a 460 fluid damper, but I've also heard to stay away from them. Not sure why.
|
|