Return-Path:
From: fordtrucks-digest-request lofcom.com
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 20:24:11 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: t3.media3.net: lof set sender to fordtrucks-digest-request lofcom.com using -f
Subject: fordtrucks-digest Digest V97 #109
X-Loop: fordtrucks-digest lofcom.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/volume97/109
X-Distributed-By: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
To: fordtrucks-digest lofcom.com
Reply-To: fordtrucks lofcom.com

------------------------------

Content-Type: text/plain

fordtrucks-digest Digest Volume 97 : Issue 109

Today's Topics:

Re: Engine mystery [Chris James ]
Re: Engine mystery [Don Grossman ]
The wonderful thing about tiggers... [sdelanty sonic.net ]
Re: 77 F150 Questions [TACYCBR aol.com ]
Re: Engine mystery ["Jon" ]
Re: Will 429 fit a 77 f150 [TACYCBR aol.com ]
RE: Engine mystery [Kevin Kemmerer ]
56 F-100 A/C installation [JSanc82344 aol.com ]
engine mystery, maybe not ["DONNA " ]
EGR TVS location ["Donald R. Screen"
Oil Filter bypass? ["Donald R. Screen"
While we're jacking things up.... [gusinks ruraltel.net (Clark Gustafs]
RE: fordtrucks-digest Digest V97 #10 ["Shaw, Eddie (MSMail Mailbox)"
Re: Edelbrock 600 carb - C6 kickdown [Mark Tanner ]
blue thunder [Kevin Kemmerer ]
RE: Engine mystery [DC Beatty
RE: Oil Filter bypass? [DC Beatty
Re: While we're jacking things up... ["George Shepherd"
Re: Engine mystery [Don Grossman ]
Re: Engine mystery ["George Shepherd"

Administrivia:

____________________________________________________________________
Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
For help send mail with subject "HELP" to:fordtrucks-digest-request lofcom.com
Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com
____________________________________________________________________


------------------------------

Date: Wed, 09 Jul 1997 17:31:00 -0700
From: Chris James
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Engine mystery
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

TACYCBR aol.com wrote:
>
> No a 460 intake will not fit your 360 heads. It and the 429 are in the same
> family and they will work together. A 352 and 390 will work for you. The
> 352,360 and 390 are in the same family and not considered a big block.They are considered Y blocks.

the 352,360 and 390 as well as 427 and 428 are not Y blocks. they are FE
big blocks.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 09 Jul 1997 16:45:19 +0000
From: Don Grossman
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Engine mystery
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Chris James wrote:
>
> TACYCBR aol.com wrote:
> >
> > No a 460 intake will not fit your 360 heads. It and the 429 are in the same
> > family and they will work together. A 352 and 390 will work for you. The
> > 352,360 and 390 are in the same family and not considered a big block.They are considered Y blocks.
>
> the 352,360 and 390 as well as 427 and 428 are not Y blocks. they are FE
> big blocks.

What Chris said...

Just think of a 427CJ y-block....Sign me UP!

--
Don Grossman
duckdon pacific.net

The scene;

Bunch of NASA guys looking at TV monitor.

"Look, A ROCK!"


63 Ford F-250 4x4 67' 390, t-98, Spicer 24, Dana 60, Dana 44

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 18:26:34 -0700
From: sdelanty sonic.net
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com
Subject: The wonderful thing about tiggers...
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

"The wonderful thing about tiggers, is tiggers are wonderful things.
Their legs are made out of rubber, their tails are made out of springs!!!"

Springs? Oh yeh, that reminds me...

The rear springs and bushings on my '71 F100 are pretty well shot.
I've got a new set of urethane bushings and a nice, but used spring set
out of a HD 3/4ton p/u and they are the same width and length as my F100 set,
but have 7 leaves on top of the short flat overload spring.
The stock F100 springs have 4 leaves on top of the over load...
I think 7 over 1 is too much for me.

Soooo... I'm staring at the disassembled spring packs trying to decide whether
to slip out a leaf and run it as a 6 over 1 set, or remove 2 and make a 5
over 1
set.

I don't want it so stifff that it rides like sh!t or breaks my 9" axle.
But I would like it stiffer than it is, and more load carry capacity.
I don't really want more ride height, although I'll get a little anyway.

I need opinions! How about a poll... maybe Youse guys with F100's and F150's
could take a peek and tell me how many leaves You are running.
I'd like to Know:
How many leaves. (+ overload) Anything special?
F100 or F150?
What rear axle You have (9" or dana)? [28 or 31 spline if 9" and You know.]
Do You usually run empty or loaded (the truck, not You!) Camper shell? etc..?
Opinions about whether Your setup is "too soft, too firm, etc" when empty
and loaded.
Any other thoughts/suggestions about rear springs..

I may pull my old springs out tomorrow, so replies to my address would be
preferable as I am on digest and might be done before the next.. (-:

Gonna go out to the garage now and press the old bushings outa dem springs.

Thanks much,

{disclaimer} no tiggers or pooh bears were injured during the writing of this.

Steve Delanty

1971 F100 shortbox, FE390, T-18 4-speed

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 22:46:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: TACYCBR aol.com
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 77 F150 Questions
Message-ID:

The Ranger is the top of line.It just basicaly has the chrome package.Some
radiators in them were a little heavy dutier. Parts will interchange from 73
to 79. Up to about 75 the F-150 was down on the fender but they will come
off and a little bit of bondo will cover that up. Another difference was the
grills but they will all bolt up. The beds all had scwer cap on the outside
up to about 75.The others had the door. I have two of these trucks a 78 and
79 and the both are good trucks and I think you will be happy with yours.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 19:48:45 -0800
From: "Jon"
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Engine mystery
Message-Id:
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

On 9 Jul 97 at 19:55, TACYCBR aol.com wrote:


> From: TACYCBR aol.com
> Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 19:55:07 -0400 (EDT)
> To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
> Subject: Re: Engine mystery
> Reply-to: fordtrucks lofcom.com

> The 352,360 and 390 are in the same family and not considered a big block.They
> are considered Y blocks.

wrong.!

352,360,390,406,410,427,428 and there is a couple i missed in there
are FE blocks noy Y blocks

now 292,312 are Y blocks easy way to tell, the dist. is in the back.

HTH

jon
URJB Racing ...Because walking sucks!
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.urjb.com/

Undocumented Windows 95 Error Codes:

WinErr 019: User error - Not our fault. Is Not! Is Not!


------------------------------

Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 22:49:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: TACYCBR aol.com
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Will 429 fit a 77 f150
Message-ID:

Everything will bolt in place. I would make the swap but I don't have your
wallet for the gas.


78 F-100 351C CJ
79 F-100 300

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 23:05:14 -0400
From: Kevin Kemmerer
To: "'fordtrucks lofcom.com'"
Subject: RE: Engine mystery
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

look guys, FE blocks are Y-blocks. Y block is a type of casting. most =
modern engines are not Y-blocks with the exception that i know of the =
dodge V10. (i don't consider the FE a modern engine.)

what is the definition of a big block? i thought it is a block casting =
that is larger than the same companies' smaller block - anyone got a =
better definition?. if that is the case, then the FE blocks are big =
blocks and i can tell you they are heavier than the 429/460. before the =
429/460, the FE was THE ford big block.

but all this arguing doesn't accomplish a damn thing.

sleddog

----------
From: Chris James[SMTP:cjames cow-net.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 1997 8:31 PM
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Engine mystery

TACYCBR aol.com wrote:
>=20
> No a 460 intake will not fit your 360 heads. It and the 429 are in the =
same
> family and they will work together. A 352 and 390 will work for you. =
The
> 352,360 and 390 are in the same family and not considered a big =
block.They are considered Y blocks.

the 352,360 and 390 as well as 427 and 428 are not Y blocks. they are FE
big blocks.


____________________________________________________________________
Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
For help send mail with subject "HELP" to:fordtrucks-request lofcom.com
Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 23:51:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: JSanc82344 aol.com
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: 56 F-100 A/C installation
Message-ID:

I am currently trying to install an A/C system in my 56 F-100. Can somebody
tell me what could be the best donor truck or car for this project? I am in
a budget and can't afford a $1,000 A/C system. I currently have a condenser
from a 75 4x4 Jeep and a GM A/C compressor. I heard that perhaps a Bronco II
evaporator could fit well in my 56. I'm sure that I will need custom made
hoses. Any help on this will be greatly appreciated.

Joe

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 10 Jul 97 01:44:06 UT
From: "DONNA "
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: engine mystery, maybe not
Message-Id:

Donald,

We have a '73 F100 with a 360 that we are in the process of swapping for a
390. One thing we noticed is that the 390 has three holes on the right
(passenger) side bottom of the engine where the oil pan bolts on (under the
motor mount). The 360 doesn't have these holes.

This (D5TE-9425-MB) is a Ford casting number so that Ford can identify what
part is going on which vehicle. It does break down to a '75 intake part
number. Since I work in the dealership's parts dept. I'll break down the
number tomorrow and e-mail it back to you. It doesn't matter what numbers you
find (i.e. D5TE... or D0FF) because many years are interchangable amongst
different makes and models. Truck parts fit on cars and vise-versa.

This casting number is on mine also and it's going from the 360 onto the 390.


Hope that helped a little.

If you have any other questions....

Steve and Donna
Onholdintl msn.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 09 Jul 1997 08:22:09 -0500
From: "Donald R. Screen"
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: EGR TVS location
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> Keep in mind that the casting number only tells You *the first* year
> and origion of production. For instance the 9" rear axle on my '71 F100
> is a C8AW, which indicates that this style axle was *first* used in
> a '68 Galaxie, even tho Ford put it in a '71 truck..
> A carburetor stamped DOFF *may* be used on a '71 truck...
> If You find parts stamped with dates later than Your vehicle, then You know
> something's up.

Thanks, Steve....did not know this..


The water neck currently has a 3 port TVS (a 235 degree TVS) for
switching between intake manifold vacuum and ported vacuum at the
distributor. Normal vacuum flow is from the ported vacuum port on the
carb, until something like prolonged idleing raises the water temp above
235 degrees then the TVS switches to full intake manifold vacuum to
raise advance the distributor timing and raise idle rpm thus cooling off
the engine (at least that's the theory). It's my understanding that the
EGR system would use a 2 port TVS (not 3 port). Should there be a
second TVS also mounted on the water neck? (The EGR TVS can operate at
one of 3 temps, depending on color code if I remember correctly)
Just bought new rad hoses, thermostat, gasket etc. Gonna go change out
the cooling system this morning. Will take another look at the water
neck.


> >The EGR TVS is missing, still
> >not sure where the EGR TVS would have gone on this 390FE 4V manifold but
> >no doubt it was plugged by some previous owner.
>
> The TVS lives on the water neck. There should be a threaded hole for it
> unless this has been changed also.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 09 Jul 1997 23:51:11 -0500
From: "Donald R. Screen"
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Oil Filter bypass?
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I pulled the water pump on my 1974 F100 XLT Ranger today and noticed an
odd looking device attached near the oil filter. It is mounted on top
of a flange where the oil filter screws in. It is bell shaped with a
small L shaped black tube coming out of it...sealed black tube.
The device is about 2 inches high and about 1 inch in diameter. Is this
some sort of oil bypass?

Second question -
Is there suppossed to be a steel fuel line running between the
mechanical fuel pump and the carb? There is nothing but rubber fuel
line there now. Is it safer to run a steel line? with smaller sections
of rubber fuel line for the final connections? I have to run a line
from the mechanical pump on the driver's side over to the passenger
side rear section of the carb for my new Edelbrock 600 carb.


Don

PS. Many thanks to those of you who helped me in my attempts to
identify my engine. After pulling the power steering brackets off
today, I found the 352 casting number on the left (driver's side) front
of the block. Will check Donna's suggestion and Dave's to further
identify this motor. Definitely a 360 or 390. Will know more tomorrow.

Three ways to verify a 390 vs a 360
1. 390 has 3 holes below motor mount on passenger side, 360 doesn't
2. 360 and 352 crank have half moon cut in it between flywheel and pan
390 doesn't
3. Stroke on a 360 is 3.50 in ...on a 390 it's 3.78 in.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 03:18:08 -0500
From: gusinks ruraltel.net (Clark Gustafson)
To: "Ford Truck Mailing List"
Subject: While we're jacking things up....
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I was wondering if there is a better method or at least an easier on for
replacing the pan gaskets and seals in my 1973 F-100 302 cu in. My Haynes
book says I will need to drain the radiator, take off the starter, loosen
the motor mounts and such and then lift the engine up and turn the crank to
counterweights up, disconnect the oil-pump and then drop the pan. I don't
think that this is all impossible but is it all necessary? Surely someone
out there has a better much more logical simpler method........I hope! Well
anyway if you do let me know I am planning to do this on Monday the 14th.
Thanks alot. Griz

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 09:16:22 -0400
From: "Shaw, Eddie (MSMail Mailbox)"
To: "'fordtrucks lofcom.com'"
Subject: RE: fordtrucks-digest Digest V97 #107
Message-ID:

I am looking for a 1956 Ford F100 in decent shape
>You can respond to eshaw tmwsystems.com

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 06:57:05 +0000
From: Mark Tanner
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Edelbrock 600 carb - C6 kickdown
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

fordtrucks-digest-request lofcom.com wrote:
>
> Date: Mon, 07 Jul 1997 17:17:10 -0500
> From: "Donald R. Screen"
> To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
> CC: edelbrock edelbrock.com
> Subject: Edelbrock 600 carb
> Message-ID:
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> I just dropped an Edelbrock 600 carb on my 360 V8
> Trouble is the automatic transmission kickdown rod and throttle
> linkage rod don't line up the Ford adapter linkage on the carb
> Should I just bend the rods to get it to line up or is there
> a better solution?
> By adding the Ford adapter linkage to the Edelbrock carb as required,
> the throttle and trans kickdown hookups have moved almost 2 inches over!
> Anybody else done this mod?

This is the setup I have on a 390. I did not have to bend the
kickdown lever because there was enough slop in it to just move
it over. Since there is an adjustment in the linkage, I can't see
how there would be a problem if the linkage and rod operate smoothly.
Also if you want to bend it to make it look straighter, I don't see
why not since you will have to adjust it anyway.

Now the only problem I have is understanding why the kickdown rod
is there at all. My truck seems to shift down fine on the modulator
alone and I can't find any references on what the purpose of the
kickdown is, or how to adjust it. Can anyone help me there?

Mark
'74 F-250 Supercab 2WD
--
Mark Tanner mtanner pacifier.com Washougal, WA

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 11:39:07 -0400
From: Kevin Kemmerer
To: "'fordtrucks lofcom.com'"
Subject: blue thunder
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

this is a question for all the horsepower nuts.

Blue Thunder makes a set of heads for the 429/460 that are much better =
than the stock early heads and better than the CJ heads. they used to =
make them in both cast iron and aluminum. now they only make them in =
aluminum. the rule book for the sactioning body that i truck pull under =
requires cast iron heads.

so, does anyone have, or know someone who has a set of the iron blue =
thunder heads for sale or trade? i need them as i am competing against =
trucks with them and even a $2000 porting job on the stock heads won't =
flow enough to build the hp numbers i need (these guys run over 900 hp.)

they were available with the ford exhaust port and a BB chevy port, =
either would do just fine.

thank you.
sleddog

ps.-if anyone is interested in the aluminum heads but doesn't know were =
to get them (since ford motorsports doesn't sell them) i have a number =
for engine systems, they sell them.

------------------------------

Date: 10 Jul 97 07:54:52 EDT
From: DC Beatty
To: "'INTERNET:fordtrucks lofcom.com'"
Subject: RE: Engine mystery
Message-ID:

I have always understood the definition of a big block to be the use of older,
thick wall casting for the block (as opposed to thin wall casting, of course)
and a longer stroke, smaller bore. Of course, this is just a general
description and there are exceptions.

My book, Ford Performance by Pat Ganahl, says: "The FE is cast in the 'Y-block'
or extended skirt style and is of the older thick-wall construction;" (page 9).
So I guess the answer to the question is, "Yes. Yes it is."


DC Beatty
1967 F-100 352
1974 Maverick 302

----------
From: INTERNET:fordtrucks lofcom.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 1997 9:06 PM
To: "'fordtrucks lofcom.com'"
Subject: RE: Engine mystery

Sender: fordtrucks-request lofcom.com
Received: from t3.media3.net (t3.media3.net [208.5.7.1])
by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.1) with ESMTP id XAA05656;
Wed, 9 Jul 1997 23:06:25 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from lof localhost) by t3.media3.net (8.8.5/8.6.9) id XAA17329; Wed,
9 Jul 1997 23:01:02 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: t3.media3.net: lof set sender to
fordtrucks-request lofcom.com using -f
Message-ID:
From: Kevin Kemmerer
To: "'fordtrucks lofcom.com'"
Subject: RE: Engine mystery
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 23:05:14 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Loop: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Precedence: list
X-Distributed-By: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
Reply-To: fordtrucks lofcom.com

look guys, FE blocks are Y-blocks. Y block is a type of casting. most modern
engines are not Y-blocks with the exception that i know of the dodge V10. (i
don't consider the FE a modern engine.)

what is the definition of a big block? i thought it is a block casting that is
larger than the same companies' smaller block - anyone got a better definition?.
if that is the case, then the FE blocks are big blocks and i can tell you they
are heavier than the 429/460. before the 429/460, the FE was THE ford big
block.

but all this arguing doesn't accomplish a damn thing.

sleddog

----------
From: Chris James[SMTP:cjames cow-net.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 1997 8:31 PM
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Engine mystery

TACYCBR aol.com wrote:
>
> No a 460 intake will not fit your 360 heads. It and the 429 are in the same
> family and they will work together. A 352 and 390 will work for you. The
> 352,360 and 390 are in the same family and not considered a big block.They are
considered Y blocks.

the 352,360 and 390 as well as 427 and 428 are not Y blocks. they are FE
big blocks.


____________________________________________________________________
Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
For help send mail with subject "HELP" to:fordtrucks-request lofcom.com
Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com





____________________________________________________________________
Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
For help send mail with subject "HELP" to:fordtrucks-request lofcom.com
Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com

------------------------------

Date: 10 Jul 97 07:54:57 EDT
From: DC Beatty
To: "'INTERNET:fordtrucks lofcom.com'"
Subject: RE: Oil Filter bypass?
Message-ID:

Do you have an oil pressure gauge or a dummy light? I think this is the sending
unit for the oil pressure gauge. It should have a wire going to the top. It
screws right into the top of the oil filter mount that bolts into the block.

Second question: Yes, I think it's supposed to be metal. I prefer metal, it
probably is safer, but it all works, right? You ought to be able to rob a
suitable piece off another truck at the boneyard, or, if you enjoy frustration,
bend your own!!! You may have to with the Edelbrock carb.

Hope this helps,

DC Beatty
1967 F-100 352
1974 Maverick 302


----------
From: INTERNET:fordtrucks lofcom.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 1997 10:50 PM
To: INTERNET:fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Oil Filter bypass?

Sender: fordtrucks-request lofcom.com
Received: from t3.media3.net (t3.media3.net [208.5.7.1])
by hil-img-7.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.1) with ESMTP id AAA21229;
Thu, 10 Jul 1997 00:49:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from lof localhost) by t3.media3.net (8.8.5/8.6.9) id AAA17874; Thu,
10 Jul 1997 00:44:36 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: t3.media3.net: lof set sender to
fordtrucks-request lofcom.com using -f
Message-ID:
Date: Wed, 09 Jul 1997 23:51:11 -0500
From: "Donald R. Screen"
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Oil Filter bypass?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Loop: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Precedence: list
X-Distributed-By: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
Reply-To: fordtrucks lofcom.com

I pulled the water pump on my 1974 F100 XLT Ranger today and noticed an
odd looking device attached near the oil filter. It is mounted on top
of a flange where the oil filter screws in. It is bell shaped with a
small L shaped black tube coming out of it...sealed black tube.
The device is about 2 inches high and about 1 inch in diameter. Is this
some sort of oil bypass?

Second question -
Is there suppossed to be a steel fuel line running between the
mechanical fuel pump and the carb? There is nothing but rubber fuel
line there now. Is it safer to run a steel line? with smaller sections
of rubber fuel line for the final connections? I have to run a line
from the mechanical pump on the driver's side over to the passenger
side rear section of the carb for my new Edelbrock 600 carb.


Don

PS. Many thanks to those of you who helped me in my attempts to
identify my engine. After pulling the power steering brackets off
today, I found the 352 casting number on the left (driver's side) front
of the block. Will check Donna's suggestion and Dave's to further
identify this motor. Definitely a 360 or 390. Will know more tomorrow.

Three ways to verify a 390 vs a 360
1. 390 has 3 holes below motor mount on passenger side, 360 doesn't
2. 360 and 352 crank have half moon cut in it between flywheel and pan
390 doesn't
3. Stroke on a 360 is 3.50 in ...on a 390 it's 3.78 in.


____________________________________________________________________
Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
For help send mail with subject "HELP" to:fordtrucks-request lofcom.com
Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 11:21:29 -0500
From: "George Shepherd"
To:
Subject: Re: While we're jacking things up....
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

No better way. Alternative is to pull the engine.

----------
> From: Clark Gustafson
> To: Ford Truck Mailing List
> Subject: While we're jacking things up....
> Date: Thursday, July 10, 1997 3:18 AM
>
> I was wondering if there is a better method or at least an easier on for
> replacing the pan gaskets and seals in my 1973 F-100 302 cu in. My Haynes
> book says I will need to drain the radiator, take off the starter, loosen
> the motor mounts and such and then lift the engine up and turn the crank
to
> counterweights up, disconnect the oil-pump and then drop the pan. I don't
> think that this is all impossible but is it all necessary? Surely someone
> out there has a better much more logical simpler method........I hope!
Well
> anyway if you do let me know I am planning to do this on Monday the 14th.
> Thanks alot. Griz
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________
> Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
> For help send mail with subject "HELP" to:fordtrucks-request lofcom.com
> Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com
>

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 08:47:32 +0000
From: Don Grossman
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Engine mystery
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

DC Beatty wrote:
>
> I have always understood the definition of a big block to be the use of older,
> thick wall casting for the block (as opposed to thin wall casting, of course)
> and a longer stroke, smaller bore. Of course, this is just a general
> description and there are exceptions.
>
> My book, Ford Performance by Pat Ganahl, says: "The FE is cast in the 'Y-block'
> or extended skirt style and is of the older thick-wall construction;" (page 9).
> So I guess the answer to the question is, "Yes. Yes it is."
>
> DC Beatty
> 1967 F-100 352
> 1974 Maverick 302

I can go with "The FE is cast in the 'Y-block' or extended skirt
style". This works for me. When they were designed there was no
429/460 "Big Block", the FE series was it. I do not see that much in
common with the 239-292 (Y-block) big block engines of the time. I took
from the first post that they were in the same family. I say no.
Placement of the crankshaft and the "extended skirt style" I will agree
with. I may be wrong but I will always talk about either Y-blocks as
such and the FE series accordingly, I just can't bring myself to think
of them as the 236-428 Family.
--
Don Grossman
duckdon pacific.net

The scene;

Bunch of NASA guys looking at TV monitor.

"Look, A ROCK!"


63 Ford F-250 4x4 67' 390, t-98, Spicer 24, Dana 60, Dana 44

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 14:29:39 -0500
From: "George Shepherd"
To:
Subject: Re: Engine mystery
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

----------
> From: Don Grossman
> To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
> Subject: Re: Engine mystery
> Date: Thursday, July 10, 1997 3:47 AM
>
> DC Beatty wrote:
> >
> > I have always understood the definition of a big block to be the use of
older,
> > thick wall casting for the block (as opposed to thin wall casting, of
course)
> > and a longer stroke, smaller bore. Of course, this is just a general
> > description and there are exceptions.
> >
> > My book, Ford Performance by Pat Ganahl, says: "The FE is cast in the
'Y-block'
> > or extended skirt style and is of the older thick-wall construction;"
(page 9).
> > So I guess the answer to the question is, "Yes. Yes it is."
> >
> > DC Beatty
> > 1967 F-100 352
> > 1974 Maverick 302....


To access the rest of this feature you must be a logged in Registered User Of Ford Truck Enthusiasts

Registration is free, easy and gives you access to more features.
If you are not registered, click here to register.
If you are already registered, you can login here.

If you are already logged in and are seeing this message, your web browser is blocking session cookies. Change your browser cookie settings to allow session cookies.




Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - Jobs

This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.