Here it is, people...

The FT FAQ thread. (gasp!)

I do not have much information about the FT, except what I've read in my '79 Motors Truck Repair manual, and what I've learned here, and on my own during my visits to the local truck junkyard.

A few things up front, like CID (displacement), and bore*stroke.

330 - 3.88*3.50
359/361 - 4.05*3.50
389 - 4.05*3.78
391 - 4.05*3.79

Compression ratios were in the toilet. Literally 7.4:1 in the 330, 7.2 in the rest.

There were some slightly different configurations of 330, the 330MD, the 330HD, and possibly the 330XD.

While the crankshaft on the FT's are usually steel, I think the small-snout 330 was really a cast-iron crank. Figures, doesn't it. It is the generally-accepted idea that while the FT crank is bullet-proof and sounds like it would make a great high-performance upgrade, the cast-iron crank can take a lot of power. Getting into an FT crank is way overkill for most streetable applications. Externally balanced, and heavy, it's not an ideal solution for that quicky steel-crank idea


For the most part, the FT and FE blocks are interchangeable. They may or may not be better than the FE blocks, depending on year, and what their original displacement was. Sometimes, you can find an FT block that can take a 428 bore. Or not. Also, motor mount holes might not be drilled. The FT series blocks are in trucks that use a cast-iron timing cover that is also used as a motor mount. So, they never used an FE-style motor mount on FT blocks. Or at least, very rarely. I'd check deck heights if using an FT block - you might wind up way down in the hole.

FT engines can be upgraded with FE parts - pistons, and heads, and as long as you have the intake to match, not a big deal. Be careful with the deck height - you might wind up with lower compression than you think. You might have to use an FE distributor with an FT drive gear, or some other issues, with this. Look later in this thread for posts from other members who know more about this than I do

In terms of interchangability, we'll take the example of putting an FE 390 into a 330-equipped truck. If it's the 330 with the FE-sized crankshaft snout, you're in luck. Use the cast-iron timing cover from the 330 on the 390, and away you go.

If you are replacing a large-snout 330 or 359/361/389/391 with an FE, the crank snout is smaller on the FE. So, the seal in the original FT timing cover will be bigger. In this case, you'd need to find a 330 small-snout timing cover with the motor mount - if they exist. Or, use an FT crank.

As for flywheels, the FT series is EXTERNALLY BALANCED. This means that you can't use the FT flywheel on an FE, and vice versa. And the clutch pilot bearing is different. As for the dampener, you'll need to use one that matches the crankshaft anyway. The FT dampener will not fit an FE crank.

Everyone, especially Bill, please, comment on this information. For instance, I'm not sure a small-snout 330 timing cover has the front FT-style motor mounts. Or that they even exist. I've heard it being discussed here, but no idea as to it's accuracy.

This thread is intended to tie the FT to the FE forum, by content of this thread. The forum is available here:

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/forum51/

Anyone who has done a conversion, or just knows more about this than me, please post in this thread, and I'll incorporate your information in this one post. With credit, of course

I'd appreciate more information on the U-haul issue - what trucks were they, and what engine was it?

Thanks for listening...

 

Few things....
Stroke on the 391 was 3.79...I know it's close to 3.784 but it was a bit longer.
330 crank snout was std FE size.
Maybe mention some FT blocks used a bigger bushing for the dizzy shaft. And that a replacement bushing is available from Ford to fit the FE dizzy shaft. I have the part number somewhere.

But that's just a few things doing a quick read thru. Looks good!

 

A few more a 330 small nose crank is the same as a 360 crank same casting numbers,the Hollander interchange number is 401 C8TZ6303A cast no.2T also they take a neutral balenced flywheel. Some 330 small noses take the same distributor as a FE as far as oil pump drive size is concerned. The large snout crank takes the externally balenced flywheel. Most of the small snout 330's take tjhe same oil pump as the 360 or 390's. When I get some time I'll do some more reserch on this subject. I hope this info helps

Hotwrench

 

Excellent info guys! Keep it coming!

You are absolutely right about the 391 - Motor's does list it as 3.79 stroke. And a 389 is a 3.78 - means the 389 is really a cast-iron/FE-snout crank?

 

Part number on the bushing is C4TZ-12367-A. This reduces the id of the hole from .516 to .453 std FE.

I'm not certain on the exact stoke of the 389. There was a guy here who had one for sale and it was steel and claimed it was from a 389. I was going to buy it but couldn't swing it with shipping at the time. Still had the larger dia FT snout tho. I'll look a bit more into it.

HW nice info!!! Good to see we have a 330 expert!!

 

Ok the 389FT was developed for Uhaul and used a 390 4.05 shortblock with a FT cam. So apparently it used the same 390 3.784 nodular iron crank. Being it was a medium duty application along with the 359FT also used in Uhauls. 359FT was based off the 360 shortblock. So the 389FT had a 4.05 bore and std snout 3.784 stroke iron crank. And the 391FT a 4.05 bore with the larger snout 3.794 stroke steel crank. This is from notes I have from sometime ago. So it could be subject to error. But think it's correct.

 

That's beginning to explain some of the weirdness of large-snout/small-snout FT's...

 

Art,
Looks like you've been busy.

Great info.

gw

 

Totally off the top of my head. Too bad I can't remember to pay my bills.