|
|
Original Message
|
Hot Diggity! You found one doozy of an FE misprint. |
By Dave Shoe - 10/10/2001 8:38:46 AM; IP 216.243.158.80 |
Those valve covers are a dead giveaway. Good eye!
I was just paying attention to the text under the photo which read "Nineteen fifty-eight was the year that Ford rolled out it's all new big-block FE engine family. Displacements that year were modest but still good enough to produce 350 horsepower..."
Anyone know who Dr. John Craft is? I guess this proves that second opinions are not always bad ideas. Suddenly, the book sounds rather humerous as it describes the FE in the early years. The book claims, "Ford answered that demand by quickly increasing the size of it's corporate(?) big block from 332 to 352 cubic inches (these engines were born together!). Each pass with the boring bar(???) produced even more horsepower...(a 352 is not a bored 332)", and later Dr. Craft mentioned, "Ford announced that it was breaking out the boring bare once again(?!?) for 1961, the FE would displace a full 390 cubic inches.". Hmmm....The Edsel used the same bore as the 390 in it's 1958 361 FE, so the FE was never bored until the 406 came along. Other obvious mistakes are there, too. I've just borrowed this book from a friend, and haven't had a chance to read much of it. It still looks like a winner (great photos), however. Now I gotta find time to dig through it a bit more.
Thanks for the correction, Travis. It puts solid logic to the horsepower of the early FE.
Shoe. |
|
This thread, so far...
|
Skip Navigation Links.
| | | |  | Hot Diggity! You found one doozy of an FE misprint. -- Dave Shoe, 10/10/2001 |
| | | | | | |  | Yup. -- Dave Shoe, 10/12/2001
|
| | | | | | | |  | Cool! -- Barry B, 10/12/2001
|
|
Post A Response
|
|
|
|