|
|
Original Message
|
Raven's watchful eye... |
By kevin - 01/12/2002 7:43:29 AM; IP 209.240.222.131 |
OK, now that the date code is in, how about the jury! I did not want to say anything before, but that block has hydraulic lifters! This would mean it was cast two years before any known hydraulic 68 side oiler. I dont think employees really gave a damn about anything other than getting the hell out of work, same as most shops anywhere. Use whatever you have to, to get the order filled can be a logical point. I was appalled at what I saw in the shops and did not want to be a "shoppee" the rest of my life. This can only conclude in my mind (until I hear more) that for industrial use on low po, low rpm motors like these, Ford offered some stock hydraulic cammed, (no not the GT profile either) lug motors with nothing more than a more durable block casting to equipment manufacturers. I bet this block was bored over from its original 4.13 configuration as a 428 by a previous owner (again that is JMO) If you can tell us more on its history Mr. Gurley, please do. Ford would not use a forged piston in a 427 irrigation motor due to the forged piston needing the extra operating clearance and the fact that cast pistons have a longer life span as per the ring groove wear on forged is too great. I want to hear more on this as it is a variable can of worms. I do have a 428 block that a neighbor bought. It came in his new 66 motorhome. It is a date code of May 65 and is the earliest one I can think of. It has thick walls too. One thing, I have a digital camera now and will be able to post some pics for you all coming up. |
|
This thread, so far...
|
|
Post A Response
|
|
|
|