I personally will never put long headers on any Slick of mine; Shorties or OEM manifolds only due to all my personal headaches with the clearance. It might just be me; but Not again.

Mitch

 

John, The engine in the 4x4 sits a little higher in the engine bay, The headers go around the engine mount and sit away from the engine and is not close to the starter at all. So I have not had starter problems with my truck is years. They have never come loose from the engine and have not leaked. I put them on the truck in 1980.

 

Hey acheda, what truck were you hauling cross country in? was it a F-350? 12,000 pounds sure is a good amount to tow. Do you think that with my F-350 with 352 i'll be able to tow that much? Anyways, what about the valves burning? Does too little backpressure cause this too happen? if so, i am planning on putting on a K+N air cleaner in place of the old oil bath...would that get away from the issue with valves burning? I'm not really interested at towing at a speed of 75 mph, so if i don't tow at that speed, will my valves still burn up? Where can i find a set of these "tri-Y" headers? torque is what i'm lookign for in my application.

 

I could just say '65 Mercury and you would just think I had a Canadian M-100.

https://www.ford-trucks.com/user_gal...143324.520.390

It was heavier than a '65 F-100. I know because that was the next vehicle I had after I rolled the big Merc on I-5. (The accident happened within 12 hours of the picture shown and relates to the tongue on the trailer being much too short. High-speed fish-tailing. I still have the trailer and only use it behind my '68 F-350 DRW.) This is the short version; if anyone wants more details, I would love to help anyone avoid being upside-down at 60 mph.

The valve burning comes from using a high-compression (or even medium-compression) engine to produce continuous power. The 390 in my old Merc (my Dad picked it up new at the factory), had its 390 re-built with 410FE pistons (on purpose). They are about 1/10" down the bore at TDC and give around 8:1 compression ratio. This keeps temperatures down so that exhaust valves can survive.

My F-350 was put together by a savvy guy that taught Ag implement design and he tried a 428FE first and had a terrible time with burning valves. (I have a similar story about a 406FE.) High compression engines make more power per cubic inch, but they cannot do it for a long haul. After the 428FE came a factory rebuilt 319FT engine which has a compression ratio of 8:1 or less AND sodium-cooled exhaust valves. He used that engine for 400,000 miles of hauling machine tools as a side business. By the way, the right-hand exhaust manifold was the 390FE manifold that everyone (including me) hates. The exhaust system was dual.

The K&N air cleaner is OK, but will not really change anything at hauling rpm's. Compression ratio is the key. (I was just ribbing the "go fast" crowd about 75 mph -- I am usually between 50 and 60.) If a high-compression engine is kept wound up, the average temps would be lower, and there would be more air moving through for cooling. This is not the best solution because gas mileage would not be very good.

Regarding Tri-Y headers, let me dig in my archive. As I remember there were two companies that offered similar ones to those shown in my album. I will do another post to answer that part.

My original advice still stands. I would stick to adding dual exhaust to stock cast-iron manifolds. Save the $$$ for building a hauling engine that will survive. More later . . .

 

Five years back I did some hard looking at tubing headers. For torque engines, most everyone seems to agree that "Tri-Y" headers are better than the traditional equal length four-into-one headers that have a large collector and are designed to be run open at a drag strip. While there are other makers, the following were those that impressed me most:

www.stans-headers.com

www.fordpowertrain.com

These appear to be very high quality (the price certainly is high). At least one was available with an extra-thick (3/8") head-flange which is what will help keep leaks down. They are also available in chrome or ceramic coating - at extra cost.

 

By the time you buy a set of headers and do a few valve jobs, you will be half way to the cost of building an engine that will be more durable. Remember that the 352 was a passenger-car engine. Right after I did dual exhaust on original cast-iron headers, I would take a hard look at your radiator & cooling system before anything else.

Another thought: when you do take the heads off of your 352, replace them with heads from a 390 or larger FE engine to get that compression ratio down. (ALL new valves, valve guides, & seats; & surfaced.) You could do this first and then move those heads to another engine if the 352 rings or bearings give you trouble. Although your 352 will run on regular gas, it would probably live longer with intermediate grade. Although a low-compression engine might seem to be sluggish, it will run on just about any gas you can buy.

The seats are important. The seats in your original head were "integral" -- that is they were machined right in the cast-iron head, with no separate insert. This worked great in the days of leaded gas. Valves ran cooler because there was one less interface between them and the water jacket. Small lead oxide particles acted like miniature ball bearings and wear was not a big problem. Take the lead away and the valve starts wearing its way to that water jacket. After my first towing trip, the (original) engine had a slight miss. When I pulled the heads, THREE of the valves were "on their way to China". I put another pair of heads on that had hardened seats, wore out that engine towing for five years, had a "touch-up" valve job done, and did some more towing with those heads on another engine.

 

Strange as all the V-8 powered trucks up to including 67 were 352's.
I must have some magic exhaust valves in the warmed over 414 as it has seen hours at 90 mph with many full throttle runs in the 120+ mph zone, no
burnt valves.
Yes with headers and new to me by acheda after 40 years running them drag strip only open headers on the street with those extremely large 2 1/2" collectors on what must be extreme also 2 1/2" exhaust system.

 

I hope this is not turning into an agument as I do not see any contradictions;

The whole 390-series FE engines are car & light truck engines. For real trucks, Ford modified the design to the FT series. Many of these included sodium-cooled exhaust valves and all had low compression ratios. Hauling/towing with our pickups puts them under load for long periods of time, climbing grades, etc. What works well for a quarter mile does not for haulers. Compression ratio is part of the solution if one wants to haul with an FE. Sodium-cooled exhaust valves are expensive and I will have to by a set if I rebuild my 391.

 

Your into 391FT powered vehicles, this forum is mostly FE's where
many members run headers and higher rpms plus use 'em as work trucks.
A F350 is one working truck be it "light truck" vs your box trucks
i'll give you that.
Sodium valves, they were the death of 427 cammers at one time.
Headers and "burnt valves" we'll just your opinion I must add.
Not busting your chops just adding my opinions like you have
been be that they are different than mine.
I pull boats at times up and down California's valley with 9.29 cr
without overheating or valve problems with stainless valves without
being a low compression dog, going on 248K. Not a special built drag truck.

 

Beemer,

Glad we are OK. I may not invest in rebuilding my 391FT due to the cost vs. the actual amount of hauling ahead of me. (I made many trips hauling all my shop stuff from CA to MD, but that is behind me.)

I did the last of my cross-country hauling with a '65 F-100 390 with a Crane cam, but I ran premium gas and did not push it as hard up the grades. The main reason I am stressing compression ratio to BlueOvalBud is that he asked if he could haul 12,000 GCVW with his F-350 with a 360. If you have to pull grades, you need to lower compression ratio to get it to live. I made refererences to the FT engines to show that Ford engineers knew this.

The 406FE I refferred to was an long experiment in trying every kind of exotic valve available. Its regular route took it over a long grade, pulling a stock trailer. They never found a valve that would hold. (If the driver had been willing to gear down more and keep his foot out of it, it probably would have lived, but he was in a hurry. That kind of hauling is diesel territory, in my opinion.)

Let me finish by agreeing with you that a low compression ratio engine is a dog. This is why I built the '65 F-100 390 to be a sharp-running engine. (I just did not plan on the price of gas going up so fast.)

P.S.: I hope no one thinks I said headers burn valves. I am saying that adding dual exhaust to stock 360 will be good first step for someone who has to budget. THEN, I would go with big chamber heads before investing in headers. If there is money left over, then buy the headers. A 4-barrel carb is nice, but if you keep your foot in it on a long grade you will stress your exhaust valves. (This is why diesels often have pyrometers in their exhaust so that they can avoid pushing it too hard.)

 

Like you stated to haul loads.
Many people only look at a build at
reaching maximum numbers in hp/tq on
the dyno. This is ok for instant numbers
as well running maximum advance, even drag
motors have to pull retard at top end as the
combuston chambers heat up preventing detonation.
Pulling a grade under load for 10 minutes is totally
different than instant high hp/tq dyno numbers i'll agree.
On your old truck with a 390 you should of built a 410 or
with todays 4.125 or 4.250 cranks available now were talking
torque to pull.
Big radiator like a 5 row stagger i've never had a cooling problem.

 

I "inherited" my 390 from my brother and did not know that was inside it until I took it apart much later. I knew the compression ratio was not very high because of how doggy the engine ran, but it served my purposes making a lot of torque. It made over ten cross-country round trips and was still running when I ended upside down on the side of the road after experiencing a high-speed fishtail on I-5. I actually had to turn the ignition off as the engine continued to idle upside-down. Now that is not an engine to throw away, so I kept it and used parts from it and other cores I had to build a 390 for the '65 F-100 which was my next vehicle. I found a lot of interesting things. One was the 410 piston tops sitting well down from the deck at TDC. Another was FIVE broken top rings. There is a reason FT pistons sometimes have a steel insert cast in to support the top ring. Running continuously under load eventually beats up the ring lands in an aluminum piston and those top ring grooves were pretty sloppy. The engine did not smoke or burn much oil although it did have blowby out the crankcase breather when pulling up a long grade. The best surprise was it had a honest-to-goodness 427 steel crank & rods which I still have not found a use for.

I had a 4-row radiator and found it to do the job. There is no substitute for cubic inches, but you are right -- the radiator has to be sized up with the engine.

 

That steel crank will fetch ya many clams to the right racer, as far as rods go I bet they have 13/32" bolts not 3/8" like standard 390's.
These are the rods I have in the 414.
That motor sounds like it had a meltdown early in life causing butted rings.
Check the numbers on the block, might have thick walls.

 

The block was an ordinary 390. I think the rods are the so-called LeMans level. (As I remember, the NASCAR ones are the highest level.) I would have the crank & rods on eBay right now, but I can only find 7 of the rods. I took the thing apart in my shop, so the 8th one will turn up sooner or later. I think the crank is 10-20 under, but it still has life in it. My 391 core does have the good block (mirror 105) and a steel crank & rods as well. The top ring grooves were about 1.3x the ring thickness, so I a pretty sure they broke from ring flutter. The second rings really did their job because the oil usage was not bad at all. On the other hand, I had a 352 in my '65 F-100 that used a quart per tank with no serious smoke or leaks.

I wonder what happened to BlueOvalBud? Looks like we are having all the fun?

 

Oh i've been listening, just sitting back, watching, and learning. Pretty much if i'm looking to haul, headers will help with more torque, but just don't run the throttle wide open or you ill be sorry because you burned the exhaust valves. I'm assuming that i can still haul a lot of weight, just as long as i don't run it wide open. is that right? However, i'm only 16 years old, so righgt now the budget is not allowing for headers right now...dang...but i'll keep the stock manifolds for now, then i'll save up for some headers, THEN things will be better.