The first picture attached is the "puddle" that was under Rusty's clutch area this morning as a result of the drive 250 mile trip yesterday. Not really all that much, but a leak nonetheless. And, from the residue on some other things, like the rear shocks, it isn't just dripping after a trip but during the drive as well. And, there is still a puddle at the back of the block around the oil pressure sending unit.

So, I have some work to do to ensure that doesn't leak and to determine where any additional leak is coming from. Oddly, this time the oil at the back of the block isn't as clean as it was when there was for sure a leak in the oil pressure plumbing, which makes me worry about where it is coming from. And, it doesn't appear that this oil is going down the back of the block, nor is it hitting the firewall, which makes me think the drip from the clutch area is the rear main. But, more investigation is ahead.

Also, I've attached two shots of the plugs and they lead me to two questions, which I'll set out below to make sure both get considered/answered:

1. Oil: It looks to me pretty sure that the engine isn't burning oil. But, what do you think?
2. Lean/Hot: Bill said that from what he saw in a previous picture that Rusty might be running too lean. This is a shot of the #4 & #8 plugs - do they look too lean or too hot? (I'm asking everyone, but given Bill's experience with carburetion & ignition I sure hope he'll answer as well.)

 

4 looks like a slight deposit, maybe oil, 8 looks a bit lean. Is the manifold on Rusty a 180 degree or open plenum design?

 

The intake is Edelbrock 180 degree Performer 400.

You say #4 is showing a slight deposit - that would be the little bit of dark on the insulator? And, if oil, isn't that very little oil? Do you think it really could be burning some?

As for #8, what are you seeing that would suggest it is lean? The little bitty "droplets" on the end of the side electrode and the center electrode? That's not piston is it? Will it being lean hurt anything, or just cause a potential miss?

Sorry for the 20 Questions, but I'm trying to learn. And, for thoroughness, here are the plugs from Rusty when he was sporting the Holley 1640. Same plug, ASF 42C's, but big difference in fuel mix.

 

The glazed looking droplets are from excessive heat due to either lean mixture or you might try one step colder plugs. The plugs from Rusty with the Holley tell me you could jet it leaner by probably 2 steps or more unless the power valve was bad. Of those #2 is almost correct.

 

IIRC, with Autolite a #41 is cooler than #42 - right?

Also, I have a brand new set of the Champion extended tip plugs that Champion says are the right ones for that engine and were/are in Dad's 351M. I'll attach the picture of the difference between the Autolites and the Champions, but is there any reason to think the Champions would be colder? While the cost isn't enough to worry about, I could take those back and get colder Autolites tomorrow.

But, it isn't damaging the engine to leave the hot plug in? Just maybe the plug?

As for the plugs with the Holley, I think the plug you are referring to is #7. The way they are laid out is as if you are looking at the engine from in front - #1 in the lower left.

THANKS!

 

Gary, I don't know how Autolite figures their heat ranges any more. Ever since they and just about everyone else started using strictly numbers, the old heat ranges went by the wayside. FWIW, I never had good luck with Champion after they revised their conversion chart in the 70s, they always ran cold and fouled. I would drop a heat range if Rusty runs OK and see what they look like. The danger would come from detonation caused by a excessive lean condition.

Old equivalents:
BF32 = F9Y
BF42 = F11Y
BF82 = F14Y

Then they started using F9Y for BF42 and F11Y for BF82, see the problem. I try to use Motorcraft in Fords, AC in GM and Champion in Chryslers, BTW, I spent most of today at my favorite transmission shop trying to help figure out a Chevy 4500 with Duramax and Allison that doesn't want to work right, Everything points to a wiring issue (loss of communication with modules, no speed sense, trying to engage wrong clutches etc.).

 

Bill, in the close up picture of #4 and #8. Has #4 started to melt or mushroom the electrode over or is that a deposit sitting on it?





The reason I ask is because I put an Autolite in my Stihl chainsaw and it cooked the elctrode down within a short time. The saw wouldnt start or run due to the melting. I had an NGK plug in it for yrs. I didnt have trouble with the plug. Then it finally went and I replaced it with the Autolite. It only lasted a few months total of light use.

I use NGK and they work great and last. I have heard good things about Motorcraft also.

 

Bill - I see the problem from the numbering standpoint. I'll see if I can find heat range info on-line.

As for detonation, I am getting a gutteral sound at part throttle that I think is in the exhaust tone, not radiating from the engine - which is where I'd expect detonation. But, no pinging or any kind of problem that way. However, I havent put it under a lot of load like towing, so maybe I'd better get this sorted before I make it work.

Ahhh, failure to communicate. I see George Kennedy and his sun glasses talking to Paul Newman, who is holding a pipe cutter. Cool Hand Luke.

 

My take on the plugs, one or two jet sizes down with the Holley and one or two steps smaller diameter on the metering rods with the Edelbrock.

White insulators after several hundred miles is definitely lean. Should at least have a little tan to them. Colder plugs may help, but I would still install smaller metering rods.

If you take a light and look down at the base of the insulator, is there any color there?

 

Stang - Thanks for the input. These plugs have ~750 miles on them, made up of mainly of two 250 mile trips and one 75 mile trip, and have maybe 3 miles of 25 to 30 MPH driving after coming in off the highway.

If you look closely at the pictures in post #406 you'll see that plugs #4, 6, & 7 show a bit of color. But there isn't any more color at the base of the insulator than what shows at the tip. And, btw, the fuel for the last run was probably a 50/50 mix of straight gas and gas with ethanol.

Spent some time with my friends at O'Reilly's and wound up with ASF32C's to replace the ASF42C's from the picture. That was the next lower/colder plug they had. My plan is to run them a while and then take a look to see what difference they make before making any jetting changes.

Sure would be nice if I had a bung in my exhaust since I have the Edelbrock A/F meter. I could put the O2 sensor in and find out what it thinks the ratio is.

Bruno - What rods do you have in that kit?

 

I believe I would swap the rods/(P) jets to match the stock 1405 setup.
Edelbrock clearly states the 1406 is "calibrated" leaner than the 1405.
Run it at that calibration for a bit, and recheck the plugs.....

 

Yes, the 1406 certainly is leaner than the 1405, in both cruise and power modes. But, I don't think I want to jet it as rich as the 1405 is on cruise as the 1405 is 22% richer than the 1406 when comparing metering area. However, metering area is apparently not a good measure as Edelbrock says the 1406 is calibrated 2% leaner than #1405, although it doesn't say if that is primary cruise, primary power, or secondary metering, or a combination of all three.

But the Edelbrock manual has a table for each of the carbs to show you the recommended step changes for both cruise and power. The first step on cruise is to change out the rod to one .075" in diameter vs the stock one that is .073" in diameter. That is said to give a 4% increase in metering, although it calculates as a 7.4% increase in area. Obviously area and true metering of fuel are two different things, having to do with issues like laminar flow and others, I'm sure.

So that's why I asked Bruno what rods he has in his kit. I know he has one pair that is .073" in cruise mode as he is running them, but they are smaller on the power end as well. In fact, the chart shows those rods would give both cruise and power a 6% boost when combined with the stock jets. I'd rather not go that far as it would surely seriously hurt the fuel mileage.

 

I will round the kit up shortly Gary. It is sill in the Bronco from when we messed with it last. Besides the stock diameter for the 1406 which is what we replaced on mine. I know there are 2 other sizes still in the kit as well as 2 or 3 jet sizes that added into the equasion to get that combination you need even if the metering rods in the kit wont make it happen with your stock 1406 jets.

 

Thanks. But don't hurry 'cause I remembered that my nephew has one and isn't using it. He lives in KS where Dad lives and since I'm going up there today I sent him a text message. He says I can have the kit as well as some other carb parts he has, some of which are my QJet parts he used to tune my brother's boat with.

Anyway, I may have a set myself. I'll let you know. Thanks anyway.

 

Ok, I have the strip/calibration kit so could change out the metering rod, which is easy on these carbs. And, the plugs are out so i can put either set in

Question: Would it be best to re-jet first and see if the plugs are ok, re-jet and go with cooler plugs at the same time, or go with cooler plugs first and re-jet if needed?

IIRC, lean A/F ratio causes things to run hot, so it is possible that I could run the current jetting and cooler plugs - Right? On the other hand, fattening the mix up would cool it some and the current plugs might be the right ones - True?

As well as it runs with this jetting I'm reluctant to change if cooler plugs will resolve the problem. But I don't want to melt things either, so want to come up with the best approach.