[66GMC]

Ford Classics is a great source of Ford Engine information.
90° "Small Block"

There are links on the LH sidebar to all other Ford engine "families", (i.e. "335", "385", "FE", "MEL" ... etc.)

I knew most of this (I was also a Ford partsman from 1978 to 1992) , including the answer to the trivia question, and decided to "sit this one out" so the rest of you could have some fun with it.

Yup, Ford was not nearly as simple as "Small Block / Big Block" terminology.

[496CHEVY3100]

I have all chevrolet now 16 exept 1 camry and 2 mgb ,but when i was younger 16 i had a 63 fastback XL my dad bought for me a 427 single 4 and 4 speed valve covers said 410 hp but i think that was a rating for 2x4 equiped cars,anyway after about 6 mo. i had oil changed and they left oil plug loose ,it fell out blew my engine, I bought a 59 mercury turnpike cruiser for the engine the best i remember it was a 410 it did have factory aluminum heads ,i got it partialy installed then sold it,and bought.--Get This a nash metropolitan ,rember the saying How low can you go

[boothboy]

The MEL engines were not to be confused with the FE engines. Deck angles were milled different. They were not milled perpendicular to the crank center line as were the FE. They were angled. Combustion chambers in the heads were entirely different as were the head design. The FE intake covered the entire engine where as the MEL used a galley pan like a Y Block with a open runner intake manifold like the Y Block. The rod and main journals were much larger. The MEL engines were longer. The oiling systems and bolt patterns were the same but that was about it.
BB

[vexzer]

Come-on, Come-on, Come-on, post the next question.

[boothboy]

Originally Posted by vexzer

Come-on, Come-on, Come-on, post the next question.

496 your up!
BB

[boothboy]

Has nothing to do with anything but isn't this outstanding?

1922 Megola Touring
BB

[John long]

Originally Posted by boothboy

The MEL engines were not to be confused with the FE engines. Deck angles were milled different. They were not milled perpendicular to the crank center line as were the FE. They were angled. Combustion chambers in the heads were entirely different as were the head design. The FE intake covered the entire engine where as the MEL used a galley pan like a Y Block with a open runner intake manifold like the Y Block. The rod and main journals were much larger. The MEL engines were longer. The oiling systems and bolt patterns were the same but that was about it.
BB

Interesting side bar on the MEL engines. I had a 383 in a '59 Park Lane convertible. It had a terrible oiling system but the push rod holes in the heads were so big that the lifters could be replaced by taking the valve cover off. remove the rockers and pushrod. The dealer had a tool that would reach through the head and "grab" the lifter. Finesse was in order though. If the lifter dropped off the tool you could look forward to taking the engine apart to retrieve it.

John L

[boothboy]

Originally Posted by John long

Interesting side bar on the MEL engines. I had a 383 in a '59 Park Lane convertible. It had a terrible oiling system but the push rod holes in the heads were so big that the lifters could be replaced by taking the valve cover off. remove the rockers and pushrod. The dealer had a tool that would reach through the head and "grab" the lifter. Finesse was in order though. If the lifter dropped off the tool you could look forward to taking the engine apart to retrieve it.

John L

You could do th same thing with the 289 but not through every push rod hole. I remember having to lay the lifter on it's side , drag it over to a large enough hole with a flexible magnet, stand it up and remove it with a straight magnet!
BB

[John long]

If that would work with a 289 BB, could you not do it with a 302?

John L

[Joe G]

Originally Posted by vexzer

Come-on, Come-on, Come-on, post the next question.

Originally Posted by boothboy

496 your up!
BB

I think it's actually Jester's turn. He answered the Ford Windsor displacement question yesterday was declared the winner 22 hours and 49 Minutes ago...Which means he has an hour and eleven minutes to ask the next question or else the floor is up for grabs.

[MARTINSR]

Looks like the floor is open.

What is this and where was it used?



This just popped into my head because my first job came up in a discussion, I worked at a full on rod shop , I was 17, sweeping the floor and organizing the nuts and bolts. The owner was my God parents son and lived down the street, my first real exposure to hot rods. He is a heck of a fabricator, I really learned a lot there. Anyway, he had a 671 blown early Hemi in a 29 Model A on deuce rails with real magnesium Halibrands. Anyway sitting on top of that 671 was one of these. It has a 14 inch long throttle shaft and I guess are known for binding. It happen to him and he hit the rear wall of his garage with the car pretty bad.

Brian

[boothboy]

Autolite 4 bbl carb used on 302-351 Cross Boss engines. I think they were designed for track use not so much straight line racing. Late 60's early 70's.
BB

[boothboy]

Originally Posted by John long

If that would work with a 289 BB, could you not do it with a 302?

John L

Dunno, never had to remove a lifter on a 302.

BB

[MARTINSR]

You got it BB, it's your floor.

Brian

[farna]

Well, I wouldn't say the Metropolitan was "low", only a very radical departure from the muscle cars you were buying. Got tired of buying gas all the time and went the total opposite direction??