1952-59 Ford 1956 Mercury engine swap options, anyone done a 400M?

I have a 56 Merc Montclair 2 dr hardtop with a stuck Y block in it. I doubt it is the original 312 cuz it does not have Merc valve covers and has a 2 barrel carb. It has the automatic, which I****ume is Mercomatic, but who knows?

Getting ready to pull the engine and put in another. Will probably leave it automatic so I don't have to mess with rear axle gearing (though I do prefer sticks and have numerous manual transmissions laying around to include 3 and 4 speeds).

One is even a 56 Merc T85 OD transmission, but again the rear gear would need to be swapped also then and I don't have any 56 clutch linkage. I do have 57-58 linkage but thought that was different?

Anyway, I have several engines I could use:

1962? 292 +.40 over, G heads, late 4v intake, low mile rebuild, have swapped it to front drop pan and run on stand. Very good oil pressure and compression. Sounds snappy. Someone else built it but they were not happy with Y block torque in 4x4 and I traded a running 460 with Dove heads for the Y block. IDK what cam is in it.

The biggest drawback to using this would be that I doubt the Merc transmission is still functional sitting since 1965 according to the plate on it. Have lots of Y block bellhousings and flywheels, transmissions but again no pedals, linkage, etc.

And if a 312 was hardly adequate for the 56 originally, then even a modified 292 is probably much the same torque-wise...

Next option: I have a 1994 351W and a C6. This is not rebuilt, but was a take-out by a guy who was installing a Coyote engine in his grampa's former truck. I have had it on an engine test stand and it runs great. Again, has good oil pressure, no odd mechanical noises, sounds good. Has an Edelbrock aluminum intake and I also switched this motor to a front drop pan. Was going to install in a 54 Merc, but sold that. So, with this I have the good matching C6, rear end in Merc could probably stay and my wife could drive it too. And I have both aftermarket motor mounts and 64 Galaxie small block mounts, so no problems perceived mounting it... Should be more torquey than the 292 as well.

Finally, I have a 400M that is a fresh rebuild, bored out to 410, aftermarket mild cam, one of the better aluminum 4v intakes, 351C earlier heads (no exhaust "bumps"), deck and heads shaved to boost CR.

That one has a 4wd oddball oil pan on it cuz I was going to put it in a Chev truck just to annoy people. Even painted it Chev orange and put finned aluminum covers on it. But sold the Chev truck and motor needs another chassis prospect.

I asked the last 5 car guys who visited me buying or selling stuff what motor they thought that engine was. Not one of them guessed what it was. I have the original front drop pan and another off a 351C, so getting that to the standard front drop pan would not be difficult.

The 400/410 currently has 351C Mustang headers on it, which no doubt would not work in the Merc chassis. So, I would have to round up some stock 400 exhaust manifolds. And engine mounts probably might have to be homemade, but I have done that before.

Also have both a 400 manual flywheel, 460 bellhousings (aftermarket and stock), and no clutch linkage again, I do have a C6 from a 460 Lincoln Mark 3 that worked fine when I pulled it, but idk if either stick or manual would fit in the 56 Merc tunnel...

So, idk. Probably any of them would work. Too many options... The Merc has some rocker rust, some roof dings, driver floor pan rust and a little rust in quarters. Not a pristine car, not a total rust bucket. I think I would be more motivated to do some body work if it actually ran and could at least yard drive though..

So, go ahead and tell me why I should, or should not pursue any of the above options. I believe the 292 and the 351W would be easiest, but the 400's had massive torque to start with and kind of leaning toward attempting it. I do not care about car's resale value at all. Just having fun with it.

Biggest drawback might be the tunnel not accommodating either a manual bellhousing or C6 though. Guessing the manual install would put up less of a battle tunnel-wise cuz of 400/460 bell top profile compared to C6 profile.

Anyone here used a 400 or 460 in their 54-56 Ford or Merc stock chassis? If so, what transmission did you use? I have a fresh rebuilt 460 on a stand also, but have a 61 Galaxie that I think needs that motor...).

Thanks..

 

The 351W is easy using these mounts https://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/media/albums/289-302-351w-swap-mounts.41498/ It will have plenty of potential to move your Merc the M motors are longer and wider so that would probably cause some issues with steering box and radiator clearance,the C6 should clear an AOD would be great with the stock rear too you could probably cruise at 70 MPH at about 2000 RPM with it's .67 overdrive and Lokar has a linkage kit to adapt to your present column shift.

 

My vote is for the y block. I have a mildly built 292 in my wagon and it will cruise at 75 on the interstate with no problems at all. It has plenty of low end torque to get it moving and enough on the upper end to get me in trouble. Plus it will be the easiest to swap in as it will be a direct replacement for the 312. I dont think the higher gearset will be much of a problem. The clutch linkage is easy to find and I may be able to hook you up on it.

 

It does not matter what you put under the hood. you stated that you would like a manual transmission. Well do that. The pedals are available from those with parts cars. The clutch can be hydraulic is needed, but stock linkage could work. You also said you have the bell housings and flywheels. Heck, just bite the bullet and get the pedals. You'll have lots of fun regardless what is in front of that manual*******.

 

For me, I'd go with the 400. In my world, it would be comparable to the 368 and since those cars came with a 368, there should be plenty of room to be had for the installation.

The Lincoln Y block, is longer than the SBF and wider than the FE.

 

Yep, don't care about mileage or fuel octane required either. Have lotsa other cars for that. Appreciate the varying perspectives so far. This is just a toy, not to be driven a lot. Just now and then, but move under its own power. No love at all for the 400 option though so far..

BUT, I forgot that I have 2 other orphan Ford engines in my pole building which I could use that I forgot about on the original post. The too many options issue, strikes again...

Option 4:
1969 390 FE 2v 9.5 CR version that came with a stock 2 barrel. But it now has reconditioned 1958 machined chamber heads with hardened seats and a 4v iron intake and exhaust manifolds off the same 1958 engine (intended for a 58, got another actual 58 engine for that car).

I have an unused new Edelbrock Performer aluminum FE intake on the shelf, so I could use that to lighten it up about 50 lbs. Comp cams 268 cam. Have both new and old versions of iron FE bellhousings, flywheels and a Lakewood FE bell also. Along with a 63 Galaxie T10 which is in excellent shape, but idt I have the shifter for it.

Option 5:
And last but not least, another one of the oddballs. A 1960 Lincoln MEL 430 (same bell and flywheels fit on those as FE, but for 58-60 motors only...) It has a stock 2v intake. Read that all 430's in 1960 Lincolns came with 2 barrels only, but I have a 58 or 59 4v intake and exhaust manifolds from a scrapped 383 MEL and the new gaskets to swap them. Very heavy I know.. Had one in a 57 Ford before, but suspect 56 Merc engine compartment is smaller.

I have had mostly Fords, but only have had the 2 Mercs. Used to think they were basically the same car with sheetmetal and trim differences, but later read the Merc for 56 is longer besides heavier, different rear axles, different wheel bolt pattern, etc. Suspect that any extra length of Merc is not in the engine compartment though. The fact that the 56 Merc T85 I have is much longer compared to several Ford T85's seems to support that proposition too.

From what I have read, hardly any stick versions of these 56 Mercury cars were produced. Do the 54-56 Ford clutch pedals fit in the Mercs also? Would like to hear more about what clutch pedals work, whether mechanical or hydraulic mechanism is attached to it, or which engine is ahead of it..

 

Well, gonna go out and winch it on trailer (again) and bring it back to primary shop for pulling existing motor and transmission before it gets dark..

 

The 55/56 Mercs were marketed as "The Big M" and boasted 2" more front seat legroom. Ford achieved this by moving the firewall forward 2" compared to the same year Fords, so yes, the engine compartment is a little tight lengthwise. I discovered this when researching electric puller fans; there is scant space between the water pump pulley and the radiator and no way to easily move the radiator forward.

 

Just brought it up to the shop and looked it over a bit in engine bay. I would agree that the radiator is not something with a lot of flexibility to move around. Pretty much needs to be where it is. Thought it probably had PS, but nope.. Manual steering and brakes. Kinda basic for top of the line, but my uncle's 57 Dodge Custom Royal Lancer with factory hemi was also top of the Dodge line and has manual brakes and steering as well..

 

Automatic transmissions and power steering were still relatively new in the mid 50s and many buyers were unwilling to adopt "unproven" technology. Many viewed automatics as inefficient slush pumps (the Buick Dynaflow comes to mind), and power steering systems of the day often weren't worked out well by the engineers. They did make slow speed maneuvering easier but felt numb on the highway.

 

This will apply to using the 351W you can shorten it's overall length by using the early 289 "short" water pump and balancer and pulleys since the early 289-302's also used the 28 ounce balance factor it's an easy swap the lower hose will be on the passenger side. See Post # 5 https://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/threads/sbf-short-water-pump-pulleys.303600/

 

I was looking up engine dimensions. I know the FE has been installed in 55-56 Fords and I put one in a 54 Ford wagon many years ago without any major complications, but it is the longest of all these engines.

It would seem odd that the Merc would have any smaller engine bay lengthwise than than the Ford, but like I said I have not had enough Merc's to really know. But, the radiator and Merc upper grille sure does not allow for much flexibility in placement of the radiator.

But if it is true that Ford did have more usable engine bay length than Merc in 55-56 due to firewall placement being further forward or different grille designs, then it makes me wonder about that prospect since the FE is the longest by far by 3 inches (32") over Y block, 351c/400m, and 351w's all at 29".

But, if the Merc has the exact same engine bay as a Ford, then it is a strong prospect. Same engine mounts, multitude of bellhousing choices, 58 LH exhaust manifold would (barely) clear steering sector, lighter than a Y block using aluminum intake, etc.

I have a 55 Crown with a 351c and C6, but bought it with the motor already in it. May have to go and compare that engine bay to the Merc engine bay. I may just go ahead and pull the 292 first and then with that fresh in my mind, go measure up the 55 engine bay and****ess the 351c fitment in that at the same time.

But, if the Ford and Merc engine bays are actually the same and the Merc additional length over Ford is in back of the firewall instead of in front of firewall position as has been mentioned, then it is probably a non-issue.

Have searched looking for FE in 55-56 Merc but found none. Also found nothing on what clutch pedal would work, but an FE C6 would probably be not too difficult to find either. If the Merc rear axle ratio is 3.20 as mentioned, that would probably work ok with either a stick or an automatic.

 

JeffB2,

I forgot about those SBF engine mounts. Mustang, aren't they? Definitely a stronger design than the 64 Galaxie SBF mounts... Looks like you have a whole lot of steering and firewall clearance with the 302 and those mounts.

But, would the water pump length have been a non-issue if the engine was an inch or two further back? Or is there not that much space remaining at the firewall to have the engine set back farther?

Thanks

 

Opps, thank you, Jimmy Six. I stand corrected! But, the 400 would fit and be shorter than a FE.

That said, I'm currently putting a FE in my '54 but, the fords have a advantage of having the 6 cyl version, with the radiator forward of the V8's.

I'm not much of a Merc guy, I've only had 2, my very first car, a '48 coupe and my current one, a '04.

 

Break time.. Hood is off and stowed, radiator was already out, generator wires off, motor mount nuts and washers off, heater blower****embly off, fan off, fuel pump line was already off. Has extra oiling lines plumbed from left side of engine up under the valve covers, one broken or really bent pushrod on left bank...

See that it has a defunct engine rebuild/replacement company sticker on the oil pan, so as I thought it is not original motor. Transmission looks freaking huge, but fluid full and looks pristine.

Axle looks huge too.. Dana 44 is it? Know nothing about them.. Has remains of dual exhaust still hanging under there. Trunk and floor pans look good in back half of the car. Trunk drop-offs have varying degrees of rust on lower few inches though.

Decided to leave it on the flatbed beaver tail car trailer as I have used that as a working platform to strip numerous cars before and I can move it to where torch is accessible if I need to. I have a 1958 Case W5 front end loader that can deal with the added height. Will pull motor and trans as a unit and hopefully make less of a mess than separately.

Have been going around looking at the various likely replacement engines as comments have been added, and decided I like all of them...

 

Exhaust is off, trans linkage, speedo cable, trans mount maybe... That is a very strange transmission crossmember compared to what I am used to. Round tube welded thru both frame rails. Same diameter as the engine crossmember and welded in the same way...

It appears that these Merc's would be a bear to put a transmission in without taking out the motor with the transmission crossmember welded thru frame like that. Trans mount/E brake mount combo is the biggest I have ever seen. Sits crossways on the crossmember like a teeter-totter and about a foot long and 4 inches wide.

Looks factory though. Hopefully there are no bolts I missed on that. Anyone familiar with these crossmembers and trans mounts? Sold my 56 Victoria and 54 glasstop, but idt either of them had a solid welded trans crossmember and weird saddle above with a clamp below around the crossmember...

Lot of very thick dirt/sand mixed with dried trans fluid stuck to everything under there all the way from trans to rear axle and out to frame rails on both sides. Good news is that under all that***** is a better floor than I expected. Pale blue paint and clean metal..

 

"Axle looks huge too.. Dana 44 is it? Know nothing about them.." If it's original it's a Dana 45, a very rare duck. They were used mostly in light truck applications back in the day. Very little info on the web about them. They were much more axle than needed, even for a stout 312. Parts are made of unobtainium now but most of the internals from a Dana 44 will work with some creative shimming.

 

Yeah I had a 52 Victoria with a slug 55 Chrysler poly 2v engine in it and didn't really ever beat on it much, but the stock axle got to howling pretty good in about a year and had to swap it for another.

Apparently the Merc is a 60" axle, so same width as 71-73 Mustang, 68/69 Fairlane or 68 Cougar, but the Merc is 5 on 5 bolt pattern, so don't really care to tackle making that work unless I have to. Hopefully the Dana is ok. Both U joints are sloppy on the driveshaft, so hard to tell what play is in them and what is in the axle.

Were any of the Ford pickups 5 on 5 bolt pattern?

 

First I heard of the engine compartment possibly being smaller than a Ford too. Long Merc trans tailshafts make me wonder if the increased passenger space was at least partially accomplished by lengthening the body somewhere past firewall as well though.

Otherwise why would the transmission need to be so much longer when moving firewall a couple inches? Suppose Ford could have taken a couple inches from the front, but if that was all they did, then you would think the trans would be just 2" longer than a Ford too.

Merc T85 OD looks multiples of that length over the Ford T85 OD IIRC... Maybe the OD is how come that Merc T85 looks so long. But my Ford T85 OD's with the same R11 OD units are all quite a bit shorter I think. But they range between 58 and 61 yearwise too, so maybe a 56 was longer than those. IDK..

Will have to drag them out of hiding and measure both Merc and Ford T85's as well as compare the 55 Crown engine compartment to the Merc after the motor is out of the Merc. And see if wheelbase is different from 56 Ford while I am at it...

I have been mostly working on some Chev's lately, 4 of 5 which were flipped because I had no intention of keeping them to start with. Being under the Merc now gives me the impression that this is a very sturdy chassis compared to those. Even the frame looks stronger than a C10, differential is larger, etc... And compared to a 57 Chev car frame, it looks way stronger. Overbuilt frame as well as axle?

The leaf springs have some accordian-looking rubber snubbers mounted on top of the leaf springs too. A few inches back from the front spring eye on both sides. Never seen that before either. Will look closer tomorrow, cuz goal for today was to get everything disconnected and ready to pull tomorrow.

Tailhousing of Merc automatic transmission looks longer than a Ford 57 automatic too, so that 56 Merc T85 OD trans I have might be the only one long enough for what I have in manual transmissions, but the long tail Lincoln C6's would probably be a close fit too. Or else I will need a longer driveshaft, but it looks fairly long to start with.

Think the engine and transmission are ready to pull now, will double check in the morning and see if I missed any ground straps or anything else like that. Perhaps pull driveshaft too, being that has to come off anyway...

 

The Merc body is longer in the rear than a Ford. I replaced the trunk drops in my '55 Merc using EMS parts for a Ford and had to add metal to make them fit properly.

 

Yes, any additional comments on sources for 55-56 Mercury rockers, lower quarter patches, etc would be useful eventually. Looks like inner rockers are repairable, but have not delved into that yet. I could probably make some too, but would rather buy them in the interests of time. Will worry about that more later. One problem at a time.

Looked up some comparative statistics on 56 Ford and 56 Merc:

Wheelbase, 115.5" Ford, 119" Merc (3.5" difference between front and rear axle planes)
Total length, 198.5" Ford, 206.4" Merc (7.9" difference; so 7.9-3.5 wheelbase difference =4.4 inches additional length is either in front of, in back of, or split between axle planes and front or rear of car).
Total width, 75.9" Ford, 76.4" Merc (a mere half inch difference)
Rear axle track, 56" Ford, 59" Merc (some sources say Merc 60")
Weight, 3350 lbs Ford, 3620 lbs Merc
HP, 200 Ford 292, 210 Merc 312
CR, 8.0 Ford, 8.4 Merc
Brakes, 11" in both cars

Also measured three 58 Ford stick transmissions. T85 with OD, T86 w/o OD, T86 with OD. All are 27.5 inches from front face to rear of tailhousing. Still looking for the 56 Merc T85 OD trans. Gotta be around here somewhere..

Looked at 351C with C6 in the 55 Crown. Looks like whoever installed that used 64 Galaxie mounts with about a quarter inch spacer under them. Pan is still only a quarter inch off crossmember. Plenty of fan clearance..

Engine has 351c 2v stock exhaust manifolds which barely clear the steering sector on driver side cuz sector has the square top with bolt corners pointing front, back, and to both sides. So the bolt corner pointed at engine is obviously the close one. All kinds of room on passenger side for exhaust.

The Merc steering gear is not the same as the Ford though. It has a 3 bolt top and has a flat side pointed toward engine, so there is more clearance for exhaust manifolds on the Mercury than the Ford it looks like to me. Wonder if the Merc engineers were contemplating using a 317, 368 or an FE by that point in time. But the 56 Merc steering sector top is shaped much like a 58 Ford steering sector. Goody..

Measured the 55 Crown flat of firewall to rear of core support. Both sides 33.5 inches. Measured the same spots on the Merc and it is 35 inches both sides. Merc firewall is different than the Ford though. Noticeable when looking for the same measurement points.

But, unless the Merc firewall meanders forward from top to bottom, the engine compartment (without allowing for six cylinder type radiator mount) is 1.5 inches longer front to back. IDK if the Crown radiator is in the six cylinder position. Looks like it is in the same place as the Merc was, but idk if anything was changed up front there on the Crown, or not.

Anyway, back to the project. Still waiting to hear what pedal****emblies work in Merc, but guessing since so few were produced that very few people know. I will compare a 58 Ford set of clutch and brake pedals to what is on the car when I get farther along and see if I learn anything.

 

Motor and transmission are out. Used loader instead of cherry picker cuz easier. Went very well with my youngest son running tractor and me wiggling the motor and manipulating floor jack under the transmission. Will pull the trans off motor later and see if it was a 312, or not.

 

Here is a clearer pic of the oddball combo trans and E brake mount****embly. It is all in good shape other than needing a cleanup.

 

Here are some pics of the steering gear profile compared to a 58 steering gear. Very similar, except for the more squared off small corners on the engine side where the 55 Ford is sticking out toward exhaust with the 4th cover bolt provision.

 

Found the 56 Merc T85 OD transmission under the 292 on engine stand that was covered. It is 34 inches long compared to the Ford T85's at 27 inches long.. 7 inches longer than a Ford.

 

Also measured each engine from bell mounting face to front of water pump.

292: 29 inches
351w: 29 inches
400M: 29 inches
390: Harder to measure, but I get 29.5 to 30 inches. Measured 2 motors, one with stock water pump another with aluminum aftermarket water pump. Sorry, it just as not as long as online references seem to indicate at 32 inches... How can the internet be wrong?

 

While I was measuring, I took pics of each engine

The 1962? 292 +.040, unknown cam, G heads high lift version of Y block rocker arms. Runs strong on the stand and compression and oil pressure are very good, but 4x4 owner I got it from felt it did not produce the kind of torque he wanted. So, I traded a running 1971 460 with D0VE heads on it to him for it. Tri-power and Merc valve covers just sitting there as I acquired them later than the engine. I have a late 4v intake for it also though and would probably use that. The motor was supposed to go in a 54 glasstop I sold.

And there is the 56 Merc T85 OD under it..

 

The 351W. Not as pretty because it was outside and mice got under the tarp and used the intake for both a kitchen and a bathroom. That is an Edelbrock intake though it needs cleanup now. Also has the charging system functioning on the test stand and have run it a lot. Also good oil pressure. Acquired from a guy putting a Coyote motor in his grampa's former truck. Reputed to be all stock 1994 Ford pickup, except intake and I installed a front drop pan on it. Also has Duraspark ignition on it. Everything works.

 

The apparent crowd favorite. This is a 1969 Galaxie 2v 9.5 CR engine with 58 machined chamber heads, 58 iron intake and I have numerous 58 FE exhaust manifolds. I was making this look like a 58 motor because it was for a 58 retractable and I wanted it to look stock. Replaced it with an actual 58 352.

I have MT finned valve covers and an Edelbrock performer intake I could put on it though. Original points 1969 ignition, simple but functional...

 

The orphaned red-headed stepchild. The 400M bored .040 to 410CI, 268H cam, shaved heads and deck, reputed best 400M aftermarket 4v intake on it, earlier 351c 2 v heads, never fired. Was intended for a 40 Chev pickup (sold it), so it is orange has a 4x4 truck pan on it, but I have the front drop pan also. Missing exhaust manifolds, so it has 351c Mustang headers on it now.
Both 351c and 400M (larger, better flow) will fit on the 351c heads, but idk about with chassis. Looking at my 55 with 351c in it and having a more intrusive steering gear in it than the Merc,
I think both just might fit.