Please do not repost, forward or otherwise publish messages
contained in these archives without consent from the respective
author(s). These archives may not, in whole or part, be stored on
any public retrieval system (FTP, web, gopher, newsgroup, etc.) by
individuals or companies, without consent of the respective authors.

Received: with LISTAR (v0.128a; list perf-list); Wed, 23 Feb 2000 07:42:55 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2000 07:42:55 -0500 (EST)
From: Ford Truck Enthusiasts List Server ford-trucks.com>
To: perf-list digest users ford-trucks.com>
Reply-to: perf-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: perf-list Digest V2000 #9
Precedence: bulk

==========================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts Performance, Hot-Rod and Custom
Truck Mailing List

Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com

To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with
the words "unsubscribe perf-list" in the subject of the
message.
==========================================================

------------------------------------
perf-list Digest Mon, 21 Feb 2000 Volume: 2000 Issue: 009

In This Issue:
462 Years
Re: [compression ratio]
Re: 460/462 Questions
Re: 460/462 Questions
Re: 462 Years
429/460/462 engines
Re: [compression ratio]
Re: 429/460/462 engines
Continental
Re: [compression ratio]
Re: [compression ratio]
ADMIN: Searchable mailing list archives now online!

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

From: Ray or Fran Bell erols.com>
Subject: 462 Years
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 11:28:03 -0500

Sorry, no info. The book says "will not be covered here" and they're not.

RAY


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

Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 17:36:28 +0100 (MET)
From: Bas van der Veer dds.nl>
Subject: Re: [compression ratio]

> general higher is better, BUT compressing something generates heat... too much
> compression and the mixture will ignite itself (pre-ignition, detonation etc.)

Just wondering.. if an engine knocks, it sounds like somebody is pounding
on it with a hammer, right? So if you don't hear anything and the engine
is running smooth, that means it's fine..?

I've been running my 68 lincoln on 87 octane, just checked the timing
this weekend and it was exactly as specified 10 deg BTDC, and it runs
perfectly fine. People always tell me those high compression engines
don't run on 87. Weird. But good though, there is quite a price gap
between 87 and 92.




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

Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 17:48:48 +0100 (MET)
From: Bas van der Veer dds.nl>
Subject: Re: 460/462 Questions


> what year of cars were these 462`s put in?

All I know is that they were put into mid 60s lincolns. In '68 they
started the 460 production. They still had some leftover 462's so some
68's had them. My manual actually says it's a 462. Although you can still
get most of the 462 parts, the 460 has been in production up until a few
years ago, so I would prefer not to get an engine that has been
discontinued 32 years ago.

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

Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 17:56:43 +0100 (MET)
From: Bas van der Veer dds.nl>
Subject: Re: 460/462 Questions


> The good news: They identify the 68-71 460 as 365 HP 4600 RPM w/10.5:1 CR.
> The 72-77 460 as 212 HP 4400 w/8.5:1 CR. The 73-77 460 as 274 HP ???
> RPM w/?? CR.

Alright! Thats wat I have!

> More good news: "High Performance Ford Engine Parts Interchange" book
> (1998) identifies the 429/460 with the words "... offered in large Ford,
> Mercury and Lincoln luxury cars. Lincolns got the 460 while the
> mainstreamers like the T-Bird got the 429. The terrific (read good) part
> about the 429/460 is interchangeability, There is an abundance of it."

That's interesting, my uncle had a t-bird which he claimed had a 460.
Maybe the valve cover wasn't correct.

> The bad news (from the same book): "There is also the MEL series big-block
> (Mercury-Edsel-Lincoln displacing 383, 430, and 462ci) which will not be
> covered because it is not a performance engine. Little, if anything of a

There's only a 7% difference in power and then they don't call it a
performance engine anymore?

> performance nature is available for the MEL series engines. The MEL was
> primarily a Lincoln engine .. a large passenger car big-block designed for
> low-end torque and quiet operation."

So is the 460.. the noisiest part of the car is the A/C, and gearing is so
high you can drive 70 mph in 2nd gear :-)

Anyway thanks a lot for the info! It's appreciated!

Bas.


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

Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 17:58:43 +0100 (MET)
From: Bas van der Veer dds.nl>
Subject: Re: 462 Years


Search on the web, I found some sites that sell books and parts, but
don't remember the addresses.

Bas.


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

Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 13:08:47 -0600
From: "Robert F. Davis" hot1.net>
Subject: 429/460/462 engines



In my copy of GeorgeH. Damman's book, Fifty Years of
Lincoln Mercury
, which covers

Lincoln-Mercury and (some Fords) from 1921 to 1971. The 460-385series
engine came out

early (Feb) in 1968, and was only available in the then new Mark III
Lincoln.

I remember the 460 coming out in ALL Lincolns in 1969, while the
Fords still had the

429's, 428's, 427's & 390's available. I probably never looked at a MK
III in 1968.

The other Lincolns in 1968 still had the 462s in them. Damman says
in his book that these

engines "developed 340 hp 4,600 rpm, had a bore & stroke of 4.38 x 3.83
& a CR of 10.25:1

and in top tune could hold a steady 123 mph, and at normal cruising speed
could deliver 13 mpg".

Evidently the 462's came out with the 1966 models and were gone by
the start of the 1969 models.

So it seem that this engine had a relatively short 3 year production
life. It was part of that family of

M-E-L engines, which included 383 & 410 engines.

These engine were distinctive in the fact that the head surface WAS
NOT AT RIGHT ANGLES (90degrees) to the bore. In this respect they
resembled those infamous 348 & 409 engines by the

bowtie boys. This meant that you could NOT bore them with a normal boring
bar that sat on the deck.

As far as looks they looked like the FE series engines. They also had
their own unique

transmission/bell housing bolt pattern.


"Beater" Bob

56 F-100 Panel w/460/c-6

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

From: Sleddog epix.net>
Subject: Re: [compression ratio]
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 12:22:57 -0500

When i had my 77 f150, with a 68-69 460 in it, i could run on cheap gas.
Running it hard, did produce some knock/pinging, so when i did that, i
just put in good gas. The 460, IMHO, has a decent combustion chamber
design, for a big american V8. With a little work, it is even better.

Pinging though, can also happen. Knock is more deadly to the engine in the
short term. But ping, which sometimes is hard to hear if the exhaust is
loud, will eventually cause problems too.

As a side note: I found some big differences in the gas from different
places. Some 87 worked better than other 87. There were some gas stations
I had to just stay away from. My other vehicles, with lower compression
didn't seem to be so sensitive. My other 460 with much lower compression,
had zero problems with any gas.

Kevin

----------
From: Bas van der Veer[SMTP:yl dds.nl]
Sent: Monday, February 21, 2000 12:36 PM
To: perf-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: [perf-list] Re: [compression ratio]

> general higher is better, BUT compressing something generates heat... too
much
> compression and the mixture will ignite itself (pre-ignition, detonation
etc.)

Just wondering.. if an engine knocks, it sounds like somebody is pounding
on it with a hammer, right? So if you don't hear anything and the engine
is running smooth, that means it's fine..?

I've been running my 68 lincoln on 87 octane, just checked the timing
this weekend and it was exactly as specified 10 deg BTDC, and it runs
perfectly fine. People always tell me those high compression engines
don't run on 87. Weird. But good though, there is quite a price gap
between 87 and 92.






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

Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 23:27:06 +0100 (MET)
From: Bas van der Veer dds.nl>
Subject: Re: 429/460/462 engines

>
> The other Lincolns in 1968 still had the 462s in them. Damman says
> in his book that these
>

My continental is from around march '68 and does have the 460. At least
that's what it says on the engine. Weird.

I talked to another guy on the internet, he also had a '68 continental.
He said the only 462's used in '68 were leftovers from '67, and that only
the earlier models were equipped with them.

Bas.


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

Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 23:31:13 +0100 (MET)
From: Bas van der Veer dds.nl>
Subject: Continental


FYI (I trimmed the post a little)

---------- Doorgestuurd bericht ----------


Item Description:
1968 Lincoln Continental

[-snip-]

*I would like to add that this car has its original 462 cu. in. motor
which was leftover from the 462's in 67 before the change to the 460's in
68. Only 7,770 Continentals were made in 68 and probably only a handful
had the leftover 462. Anyway, I don't know the significance of this, just
get to bidding. Also, the winning bidder may be offered some nice bonus
parts if the price is right. Thanks.



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

Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 00:05:44 +0100 (MET)
From: Bas van der Veer dds.nl>
Subject: Re: [compression ratio]


> When i had my 77 f150, with a 68-69 460 in it, i could run on cheap gas.
> Running it hard, did produce some knock/pinging, so when i did that, i
> just put in good gas. The 460, IMHO, has a decent combustion chamber
> design, for a big american V8. With a little work, it is even better.

Hm well I've never had a chance to run it hard. Only takes a few seconds
to get up to the speed limit :-)

> Pinging though, can also happen. Knock is more deadly to the engine in the
> short term. But ping, which sometimes is hard to hear if the exhaust is
> loud, will eventually cause problems too.

This motor is really quiet and smooth, I'm sure I'd notice. Thanks for
the advise though!

> As a side note: I found some big differences in the gas from different
> places. Some 87 worked better than other 87. There were some gas stations
> I had to just stay away from. My other vehicles, with lower compression
> didn't seem to be so sensitive. My other 460 with much lower compression,
> had zero problems with any gas.

My bronco has a low compression motor, and somehow it seems to like
cheaper gas better than expensive gas. It won't ping or anything, but at
intermediate speeds, say 25-30 mph, engine running around 1500 rpm, it
sounds like it's running way lean. At idle or at full power it's fine with
any brand/type of gas.

Guess I'll have to find out how my lincoln is. Have to take it to a steep
long hill sometime :-)

Do these cars have heat problems in the summer? My bronco does if it's
standing still to long (eg four wheeling or sitting in traffic for a long
time at 100+ degrees). I bought a 7 blade clutch fan to replace the fixed
5 blade fan. See if that helps. Noticed the lincoln has 6 blades w/
clutch .. but the shroud is missing. I'll have to keep my eyes open for
one of those.

Bas.


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

From: "Hogan, Tom" kla-tencor.com>
Subject: Re: [compression ratio]
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 04:07:48 -0800



> -----Original Message-----

> > general higher is better, BUT compressing something
> generates heat... too much
> > compression and the mixture will ignite itself
> (pre-ignition, detonation etc.)
>
> Just wondering.. if an engine knocks, it sounds like somebody
> is pounding
> on it with a hammer, right? So if you don't hear anything and
> the engine
> is running smooth, that means it's fine..?
>


I have heard of inaudible knock causing damage. I think the article was
talking about the advantage of knock sensors. I think that the problem
would be one that caused damage after extended periods of time. In general
though if I couldn't hear anything I don't think I would worry about it.

Tom H

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

Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2000 07:43:04 -0500
From: Ken Payne ford-trucks.com>
Subject: ADMIN: Searchable mailing list archives now online!

The mailing list archive, containing over 120,000 postings,
has been placed on the web site. They can be searched, but
not browsed via an index (to stop spam email address harvesters).
Its missing the last month of archives, but these will be up
soon and a system will be put in place to keep the search
"live" with the latest archives. You'll find the search to
be very fast, off peak search is about 3-5 seconds for
250+ meg of archives, peak is about 6-10 seconds. Amazing
what 256 meg of RAM will do for a system!

This was one of the many items I promised to give everyone
when FTE moved to the new server. More features for the
users are on the way, as soon as I fix a few problems a
small number of users are having. :-)

The search can be found at:

http://www.ford-trucks.com/archives/index.html

Enjoy!
....


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.