Skip Navigation Links.
 |  390, Aluminum heads, push rod lenght & Roller rock -- colin, 11/18/2004
HELP here is the deal. I have a 390 block D4 casting Tri-power in my 64 Galaxie. Mild cam. I want to put the Edelbrock Performer RPM heads and Harland Sharp (or other roller rockers) on this motor. Please help me, does anyone know off hand what size push rods this will take. I know they will be 3/8 Ball & Cup but what lenght? IF you have done this combo, please drop me an e mail or call me!
thank you very much,
Colin
greengalaxie64@hotmail.com
412-498-7773 |
 | C3AE-C rods and forged pistons? Pitfalls? -- R. Hunt, 11/18/2004
I want to use some L2245F .030 oversize pistons in my 428 with C3AE-C rods. Will there be a balance issue? This engine is not going to be used for high revs or anything like that. This engine is in my 76 F100 and will be used as a truck just for hardware store runs and such.
The pistons that are in this engine are B174 (known today as P174) .030 oversize Badger pistons. They have never caused a vibration, but they are just cast pistons whereas the L2245F pistons are forged.
Basically I just don't know what to expect since I have never used any forged pistons before.
Any help will be appreciated. |
| | RE: C3AE-C rods and forged pistons? Pitfalls? -- McQ, 11/19/2004
Are the C3AE-C rods the early 427's? If so, you shouldn't have any problems with the forged pistons. You shouldn't have any problems with forged pistons on any FE rod if all machine work and balancing is done properly. |
| |  | RE: C3AE-C rods and forged pistons? Pitfalls? -- R. Hunt, 11/20/2004
I have no way of knowing if these rods were ever in a 427. However I would have to say they most likely were based on the history of this engine. It is made up of all kinds of different years of parts which is why I call it the Frankenford engine. Are these rods rare or special in some way?
I have a set of C6AE-C rods. Would they be as good of a match for use with these pistons? |
|  | RE: C3AE-C rods and forged pistons? Pitfalls? -- giacamo, 11/20/2004
forged pistones are not a slap in job thear alot heaver than cast and in a 428 balance ishues are a proublem even in a stock rebild,and the forged piston neads alot more clearance to bore than the cast.if the pistones you have are new or in good shape i,d just save them for a project later on...... |
| | | RE: C3AE-C rods and forged pistons? Pitfalls? -- R. Hunt, 11/20/2004
These pistons were already used for a short time in a 428 with C6EA-C rods before that person decided to go with flat top pistons for a higher compression ratio.
They appear to have been machined at the pin boss area underneath in order to lighten them. The skirts are a bit shorter than what I have seen in all of the cast pistons I have used. Is this normal or do you think someone would have machined them off to lighten them?
|
| | | | RE: C3AE-C rods and forged pistons? Pitfalls? -- giacamo, 11/20/2004
dam it,s hard to say try weighing the pistones and see if thay are all uniform in weight. and compair them with the cast ones if the rods and pistones are uniform i,d say try them, on the clearance for the pistones i,d haft to resurch that further, i belive the 428 forged piston is a slopy fit what brand pistons are you using? |
| | | |  | RE: C3AE-C rods and forged pistons? Pitfalls? -- R. Hunt, 11/21/2004
These are TRW L2245F .030 over pistons. |
| | | | | RE: C3AE-C rods and forged pistons? Pitfalls? -- R. Hunt, 11/22/2004
I weighed one of the pistons on an electronic scale. In ounces, the forged piston weighs 31.4 and the cast one wieghs 32. So, I have a forged piston that weighs less than the aftermarket cast piston. What effect is this going have on the balance? Would the standard size cast piston weigh 31.4 oz. Are they kept to the stock weight somehow even in oversize pistons? |
| | | | | | RE: C3AE-C rods and forged pistons? Pitfalls? -- giacamo, 11/22/2004
on your forged pistones i,d run .003 piston clearance for the streat and up to .006 clearance for all out racing, the after market cast pistones run close to the stock weights so thear mostley a slap in thear and thay will word fine.some after market pistons skearts are shorter hoo knows wy but some are. if the forged pistones weigh that close to the cast thay would problie work fine, |
| | | | | | | RE: C3AE-C rods and forged pistons? Pitfalls? -- R. Hunt, 11/22/2004
Thanks, I wasn't going to make a move until I got something to go on. I did see where some newer forged pistons are using .002 for skirt clearances. I know that the cylinders in my engine are not that tight. More likely to be .003 like you stated since this engine has close to 20,000 miles on it and has been taken apart twice now and honed out.
Anyway, thanks for the help. I'll post later what I decide to do and how things work out. |
| | | | | RE: C3AE-C rods and forged pistons? Pitfalls? -- walt, 04/17/2005
those are 390 hp/early 427 rods,but they havd 2 different size rod bolt, 3/8 standard rod,19/32 hiper rod,same applies to the c6ae-c,c7ae-b rod,and they weigh all the same |
| | | | | | RE: C3AE-C rods and forged pistons? Pitfalls? -- walt, 04/25/2005
i meant 13/32 rod bolts.i apoligize |
| | | RE: C3AE-C rods and forged pistons? Pitfalls? -- R. Hunt, 11/20/2004
Almost forgot to ask, what is the piston to cylinder wall clearance supposed to be for these pistons? I have looked everywhere and cannot find this information.
I would probably be right if I said that these cylinders are not to tight for these pistons. This engine has been dissassembled and honed and reassembled at least twice and getting ready ro a third honing. Also having close to 20,000 miles on it since being bored must have increased the clearances a bit. I'll check everything out just to be sure though. I can get the piston to wall clearances right on the money. The balance problem and solution just isn't something I have any experience with.
Is it possible to machine enough weight off of these pistons to solve the balance issue if needed? Or do you have to take material off of the rods too?
Sorry fo asking so many questions. |
| | | | RE: C3AE-C rods and forged pistons? Pitfalls? -- giacamo, 04/17/2005
i,d put the lightest pistons on the heavest rods and try to make the set uniform it,s hard to say wear to lighton up the pistons with out looking at them i,d keep the piston clearance under .006 and no tighter than .003 |
| | | | | RE: C3AE-C rods and forged pistons? Pitfalls? -- R. Hunt, 04/17/2005
I have already installed these rods and pistons with no problems. No vibrations and very smooth idle. I have had the rpms up to at least 4500 rpms on the highway and I am very pleased with the performance.
Thanks for everyone's input |
| | | | | | RE: C3AE-C rods and forged pistons? Pitfalls? -- giacamo, 04/17/2005
what piston clearance did you use? |
| | | | | | | RE: C3AE-C rods and forged pistons? Pitfalls? -- John, 04/19/2005
I think these are the same psitons I used. The TRW spec sheet I had listed 0.002" clearance, but there was a note on the spec sheet that said to add another 0.001" if it was for HP use. That still seems tight, but keep in mind, the piston skirts will be deformed in a bit after the first start-up, so additional clearance will occur. As for balancing, looks like you got away OK. Basically, for the relatively cheap expense of balancing, I always have it done when mixing and matching parts. They usually get all the pistons to the same weight by machining off the underside of the wrist pin support and on the rods by machining the protrusions at each end of the rod. The weights are then used to calculate dummy weights for the crank, and the crank is then fitted with these weights and balanced in a way similiar to balancing a tire. The result in my crankshaft, was only about a 3/8 deep hole about the diameter of a quarter in the outside edge of one of the crank counterweights. Not very much difference in the long run. So it makes sense that your similiar set-up would produce no "noticeable" vibration. |
| | | | | | | | RE: C3AE-C rods and forged pistons? Pitfalls? -- walt, 04/27/2005
forged calls for .007 wall clearace on the ford pistons,little tight for a .002 wall clearance,but i'm using 65/66/67 nuumbers |
| | | | | | | | | RE: C3AE-C rods and forged pistons? Pitfalls? -- John, 04/27/2005
Yes, surprised the hell out of me when I saw the TRW spec sheet compared to the old Ford Forged clearances, but I've had no trouble and my engine was designed to put out 480 HP according to Crane's computer model. I figure that is a bit optomistic, but I have lots of power, revs high, no troubles. |
| Tri-power for a 67 390 mustang -- Terry, 11/17/2004
Any body out there running a 61 - 63 Tri-Power in there 67 390 Mustang ?
I need to know if there are any hight restrictions with the air cleaner ? |
| | I seriously doubt it will fit. -- Wayne K., 11/17/2004
It's more or less the same height as the medium riser 2X4 and THAT definitely will not fit with the air cleaner on it (but does fit without it).
A friend of mine had the 2X4 on his 67 Stang and never did find any air cleaners, stock or otherwise, that would fit. I can't imagine the tri-pwr would either. As a side note, I have both setups and although I've never measured each of them they look pretty close height wise.
Wayne K.
[Image deleted by Admin.] |
| | RE: Tri-power for a 67 390 mustang -- Dano, 11/17/2004
I had a 406 with a factory tri-power holley setup in a 70 Mustang a while back, It fit ok. |
| | | RE: Tri-power for a 67 390 mustang -- McQ, 11/19/2004
I believe the FoMoCo FE tri power system will fit under the hood of your '67 390 Mustang. The intake is lower than a medium riser, actually, very similar in heigth to the lo-riser dual 4V intake.
I have seen numerous '67 Mustang 390's with the factory lo riser dual set up and a stock hood. I've seen one with the tri power and stock hood.
You won't be able to run an air filter element any thicker than the stock Ford one. |
| | From what I've seen, it won't fit w/ oval air cleaner. [n/m] -- Mr F, 11/20/2004
n/m |
| | | RE:Well, I think it will.... -- McQ, 11/20/2004
Terry, I found what I was looking for to answer your question. Sorry Mr. F but a FoMoCo '61-'62 390/406 tri power system will fit very nicely under the hood of an FE powered '67-'68 'stang.
Good ol'Mr.F motivated me to go out diggin' through a stack of the last two years of Mustang & FORDS. You may not be able to find it anywhere now but on pages 50-51, February 2002, Mustang & FORDS is a featured '67 Mustang GT titled "Poor Man's Cobra Jet". A beautiful white, red interior, red stripes, -S- code Mustang powered by a built 390 using C6AE-R heads topped off by, you can guess in one try, a C1AE FoMoCo tri power system with the stock oval air cleaner. And the hood of this '67 GT Mustang is standard (no dual-dips w/turn signals) stock. No scoops or anything cut out.
I personally knew two owners who were less than satisfied with their newly purchased '67 Mustang GT's with 4 speeds. Both were immediately trounced by SS396 Malibus, yes, the one-option up 350 horse 396. It didn't take either too long to shop and locate '63-'64 -R- code Galaxies. The old switcheroo was done by both owners, 390GT's out, replaced with lo-riser 427's. The 390GT's went into the -R- code Galaxies and were sold. The dual four 427's fit perfectly under the hoods of the stock '67 GT's. Now my FE friends, the two '67 -S- code Mustangs did an admirable job of representing Ford Muscle in the late sixties. They built their Mustangs the good old hot rod way. Ford coulda, shoulda but I'm not going to go there again.
BTW, it's sad but true, that due to the lackluster performance of the -S- code cars, many '62-'64 HP FE full size Fords gave up their mighty, well built and designed big blocks for some much needed horsepower transfusion into the -S- code unibodys.
Have your trio of Holleys rebuilt by Joe Bunetic, install the entire system into your '67 Mustang -S- code and enjoy.
Joe Bunetic's # 618-397-3580 |
| | | | RE:Wait! One more thing -- McQ, 11/21/2004
It just hit me, more important than the under hood clearance issues, what heads are you running on your '67? If they're C7AE, short intake ports, there's a serious mismatch between those and the tri power port.
The early intakes, '58-'65, have the tall exit port to head port. Look at the intake ports of your heads....short? Not a good match.
From '66 on, intakes had the small exit ports. This provided more power/torque in the lower rpm ranges which is where most FE's were cammed to run, even the GT/CJ were limited to 5,500 rpm. The '67 Shelby GT500 intake, C7ZX dual four even has the small exit ports as does the CJ cast iron. The GT500 ran the same cam as the GT/CJ/PI. As a matter of fact, the GT500 428 was a '67 hydraulic cammed Police engine with the special C7ZX dual 4 induction system.
To really see performance benefits from the tri power you need to build a set of C6AE-R's. They're reasonably available and reasonably priced unlike the CJ, C8OE-N, which is neither. If the C6AE-R's aren't already drilled for your GT exhaust manifolds, the can be.
Sorry to forget about this important issue. |
| | | | | RE:Wait! One more thing -- Terry, 11/22/2004
Hey thanks for the input guys. I am running a set of C6AR - R Heads. with a 61 - 63 Tri power set up. I had the Carbs rebuilt by the Daytona Parts Company, they did an awsome job. This car has been a 15 year project and have just got it fired up about two weeks ago. I am running the standard GT manifolds with the correct Gt exhaust system. It sounds awsome. I had a fair idea it would be a close fit, thats why i thought i might just ask the question would it fit with the original air set up.
I decided to lower the Hood on last night to see how close it would be. Unfortunatly the 61 - 63 cleaner is to long, so i borrowed a friend of mine's 68 Shelby GT500 air cleaner lid which is about 1 inch shorter that the 61 - 63 lid and bingo it fits. So i am going to remake the bottom air cleaner plate and reposition the three carb holes back about another half an inch to give me some extra clearance. But height is not a problem only the extra lenght of the original Air Cleaner.
And i'm with you under the Hood it looks awsome with Gold Thunderbird covers and Tri power, Its how Ford should of made them.
Again thanks for the imput. |
| | | | Well, how 'bout that...I was right. Go figure. :-) [n/m] -- Mr F, 11/22/2004
n/m |
| | | | | RE:That's why you're..... -- McQ, 11/22/2004
Mr. F! And I'm just a guy who continues to learn, learn, learn. Someday.....
Thanks for keeping this site up Mr. F.
I sure do appreciate it.
And, Terry, your engine does sound exactly what Ford shoulda had optional in '67. |
| | | | | | RE:in closing -- McQ, 11/22/2004
I just couldn't put it away! I don't mind being wrong especially when it leads to the correct information. But I had to go have one more look at that pic of the FE/tri-power in the '67 Mustang GT, Mustang & Fords, February 2002.
The engine pic I'm looking at would indicate that an original style tri power air cleaner is used. It does look tight, like right up to the shock tower to firewall braces, but it fits. But I admit I can't see the back well from this pic and it's very likely that the carb plate/lid have been trimmed to fit. I do understand the difference between the 3x2 air-c and the 2x4 unit. I'm lucky to have them both. But I've never been lucky enough to own an -S- code '67 or '68.
Maybe you'd like to e-mail M's&F's to see if this issue is still available:
mustangand fords@neadata.com
I think you'd like to have this issue featuring this '67 GT. |
| | | | | | | RE:mustangandfords@neodata.com -- McQ, 11/22/2004
I'm just one mistake after the other tonight.....
the e-mail address is correct this time. |
| | | | | | | On cars I've seen, they whacked 1"-2" off the lid. [n/m] -- Mr F, 11/23/2004
n/m |
| exhaust manifold and generator to alternator -- mitch, 11/16/2004
i am looking to find a passenger side exhaust manifold and it seems to be really hard to find just one not in a pair. I was wondering if any one had information on where to possibly find one for a 64 1/2 ford mustang with a 289 engine. also my generator is shot but that seems to be another item that is hard to find. If a generator is going to be impossible to find then i need to go with a alternator but was wondering if there was a conversion kit and if i could do it myself? |
| | RE: exhaust manifold and generator to alternator -- giacamo, 11/17/2004
64 1/2 mustang i,d keep looking and leave the generater setup on it. the generater on the old fords is a eazy bild, about any auto electric shop should be abel to handel them,on the manifold i belive thay are the same as the 289 manifolds in the outher production 289 autos witch are eazy to come by just get out and beat the bushes, you should be abel to get your car squared away, |
| | Man...eBay scammers sure have lots of free time. :-) [n/m] -- Mr F, 11/20/2004
n/m |
| headers -- russ, 11/15/2004
I have a 390, 66 fairlane with hooker headers, the two front left cyl. go under the crossmember [3peace header] i looked at crites 2 in. headers and seem to hang pretty low , how are the fpa;s ? any other;s available ? the hookers aren;t to bad but are 1.78 dia. any advice would be nice, thanks russ |
| 460 water temp climb -- Chip Luttrell, 11/15/2004
I have a 460 that has been rebuilt and I am having some temperature concerns. While on a hot day, my cruising temperature stays around 185. When I stop at a light, the temperature stays at that temperature, but as I begin to accelerate, the temperature climbs 5 to 10 degrees. Light after llight, the temperature continues to rise, after acceleration. Once I am back on the road, the temperature starts to drop, but never returns to 185. In stead it holds at 190 to 195.
The two questions I have is why would I have a climp in temperature after accelerating from the light, and how hot can I run a 460 that is bored 30 over. |
| | RE: 460 water temp climb -- giacamo, 11/17/2004
I try to keep most engins i run under 200 if i pass 220 i,l shut them down, you may just have a crappy t stat, loose fanbelt, bad fan clutch, loose pump inpeller, clouged radieater, runing to lean, sticking or restricteve exaust manfold crouseover valve,all thease things and a lot more can heat things up, i,d try a good quality t stat , problie a 170 |
| | | RE: 460 water temp climb -- chip, 11/17/2004
Thanks for the feed back. I was leaning towards the thermostat as well. All the above mentioned parts are new, but I had a feeling that the thermostat was not opening properly at low rpm. I'll try putting a better quality thermostat in and richen it up and see how it does. |
| 1968 Fastback 390 -- mike, 11/15/2004
I have a 1968 Mustang Fastback with a 390....
What Headers do you recommend. Also suggestins on how to build a mild 390. Thanks |
| | RE: 1968 Fastback 390 -- russ, 11/15/2004
hooker headers, a alum.duel plane intake , 750cfm 4bl. of your liking, mild hyd.cam and use your stock rocker arms but heavy dutypuchrods. if your taking the motor out of the car a 2400 stall conv. would be nice if you have a auto. trans. the conv. isn;t a must but is nice if you like to dragrace. do much more then that you have to dig deeper in you pocket. thisis just my idea;s my 66 fairlane 390 runs in the low 12;s but i have alot more money in mine then you will. good luck let us know how it goes. russ |
| | RE: 1968 Fastback 390 -- giacamo, 11/17/2004
I use headers for racing only. a 68 with a 390 stock is no slouch, if i wounted to wake things up littel a 265 comp cam package with springs and one pice spring retainers and better than stock pushrods, if rebilding compleat valve job with harden valve seats for the exaust, the bottom end bore if neaded pistones fed 4v cast replacment 10 to 10.5 type new rod bolts and piston pin bushings, a melling hv pump and new drive rod, tap and plug all oil galliry holes with allen plugs insted of using pushin tipe and have compleat bottom end ballanced this is a setup i have used in many 390 rebilds with good resoults i also use fel pro gaskets,clevite bearings molly rings right now i have a douzen 390,s with this combo runing on the streats, with no complants.this may not be the hotest setup but it esams to last and eats enouf tiers for most bugets....... |
| | | RE: 1968 Fastback 390 -- Dano, 11/17/2004
The FPA headers are also very good, mine fit perfectly on my 69 Stang. No leaks either. |
| 428/463 stroker? -- Geoff, 11/15/2004
My '69 SCJ Mach seems to have scorched an oil ring on #4.
I've read some good things about Keith Craft's engines here in the past.......so, I'm requesting any nightmares, metsa metsas, good times....basically, any experience at all with 463 cube strokers? Thanks for all who'd care to enlighten my dim brain.
p.s. to Shoe...I know, start with the pan. |
| | RE: 428/463 stroker? -- Geoff, 11/15/2004
make that cracked an oil ring....has to be.
oiling just the #4 plug
replaced the guide seals on #4
Edelbrock heads...but, drilled out the drain backs and have restrictors
compression is 170#...168-171 on the other (7)
leak down is 8%...same as the rest
|
| | oiling #4 -- GaryXL, 11/15/2004
I haven't heard anything about the stroker, but, Have you checked the intake manifold gasket? The cylinder seems strong, compression and leakdown show a good seal of the top and second rings. Pull the carb and try to look down the #4 port, or use a wire with a gun cleaning swab/small white rag and check for oil in the intake. Would hate to see a good motor pulled for somthing that easy.
Good luck!! |
| | | RE: oiling #4 -- Geoff, 11/15/2004
Oh, no....Mr. Gasket 202A after a Victor Renz...changed the guide seals on #4......stand has oil restrictor......I openned up the drain back holes front & rear - it's not flooding the top end. |
| | | | RE: oiling #4 -- Geoff, 11/15/2004
.....nope, no oil on top of the intake valve...I wish |
| | | | | RE: oiling #4 -- GaryXL, 11/15/2004
Was more interested if it might have lost the manifold seal along the bottom edge, had a Dodge that did the same thing, used oil, but otherwise ran fine, it had sucked the intake gasket up into the port and was pulling oil mist out of the cranckcase. would foul the plug every 3-500 miles, depending on how hard I drove it. Pulled the manifold and saw the gasket right away. Cheap, easy fix. I would still swab the runner and see if that is where the oil is coming from. |
| | | | | | RE: oiling #4 -- Geoff, 11/15/2004
No, an intake gasket leak was the first thing I looked for...& hoped for. I've had the intake off twice and the ports are dry dry dry, and the gasket surfaces looked fine and even after their crush.
In the course of things, I did try all (3) makes of gasket though- the Felpro that everyone hates, the Victor Renz, and lastly the Mr. Gasket, which I think is the best.
I'm hating life because I've ruled out that it's sucking oil down from above, which pretty much only leaves a cracked ring as the source |
| | | | | | | damn the luck -- GaryXL, 11/16/2004
Agreed, if the top end is tight it would appear to be coming up from the bottom. Good luck with it. |
| 428? cam and crank questions -- Davy Gurley, 11/14/2004
I dismantled a 428 industrial engine this evening that had a ford cam with XJA embossed in the back end of it. The crank had 1U on it. I'm pretty sure the crank is 428 but the cam has my curiosity up. Anybody got any ideas? It had 7 pistons that were forged and 1 cast piston! All cylinders were bored .030. |
| | nobody wants to take a crack at this? -- Davy Gurley, 11/16/2004
I figured out the riddle of the pistons, I'd just like some input on the cam. |
| | RE: 428? cam and crank questions -- giacamo, 11/17/2004
the 1u is 428 410 crank do all the rods mach?with one odball piston must of ben a a low rpm moter? 30 over bore sounds like a lot of good parts...... |
| | | RE: 428? cam and crank questions -- Davy Gurley, 11/17/2004
Rods all match, C7AE-B, 3/8 bolts. No. 7 cyl. (the one with the cast piston) badly scored. Gotta sleeve it, rest will be honed out to .040. Will be ordering parts soon, forged pistons and all. Would like to have a C6AZ-B cam or equivelant, any suggestions? |
| | | | RE: 428? cam and crank questions -- giacamo, 11/20/2004
265 or 270 comp cam kit springs retainers and beter than stock pushrods wakes a 428 up. |
| | RE: 428? cam and crank questions -- McQ, 11/19/2004
The FE cam markings/colorations, etc. have always been difficult to figure out. Maybe, and this is a pure guess on the fact that the letter -J- was often used to designate an industrial/marine part, the XJA is a low RPM industrial shaft.
You mentioned that you were interested in a C6AX-B cam, do you mean C6OZ-B? That was the GT390/GT500/'67-'68 P.I., CJ cam. |
| | 'XJA'...you sure? I thought the 'J' cam series was 429/460. [n/m] -- Mr F, 11/20/2004
n/m |
|