I dunno. the ring gear on my flywheel isn't for a 64 type starter. its for the newer 65 & up starter. From my research there where two different 428 engines. one used bigger rod bolts and had a balanced harmonic balancer. Ford did some wierd things. my Uncle bought a new pickup in 67. 352 stick. after many years it started burning oil. So he pulled it down installed new rings & rod bearings. started it up and it knocked. Looked in the trash at the old rod bearings. .010 undersize. and he had bought it brand new? I know of a guy had bought a new 64 390 ford. The lifters on one side would peck terrible when it was cold. eventually the dealers mechanic pulled the valve covers, one side the quiet side had adjustable rocker arms. the pecky side did not. They replaced both rocker arms with non adjustable and used longer pushrods.
the FT engines used a larger diameter flywheel and they where not counterbalanced. I used the FT flywheels on FE 360 and 390 engines.
The 428 engine that used extra balancing in the harmonic balancer was the Super Cobra Jet, it was needed due to the larger cap screw rods that the used in that engine. But it didn’t come around till late 1968. As for the undersized factory rods, I have heard of this before, seems rare, but I guess it does happen. I have heard of factory overbore, too. Chrysler, used to do it all the time, that’s kinda where it became necessary to put the rods/ pistons back in the same hole. As for the FT flywheels not being counterbalanced, I have heard that some are, but I , myself, have not seen any. The mystery goes on! Bones
Yea oddball flywheel. I know my uncle installed a big cube MEL or Edsel engine in a 57 ford in about 59 and had to get a special flywheel & bellhousing.
1965 is when Ford started using FE engines in pickups, as 1964 was the last year of the Y block in pickups
Mine is a 428 FE. A scratch on back of block and 1U on crankshaft. I pulled it down to the short block. It was in good enuf cond that it would have been ok to start and use with just pulling the oil pan and cleaning a small bit of sludge. hardy any wear in the cyls. Just a normal amount of carbon. However I wasn't willing to take a gamble? It has medium rizer heads.
Casting number C7AE-A date code of 7A11. Pretty certain the engine hasn't ever been apart. all the little brackets and clips where in the correct places.
Yes however july of 64 was when the factory started building the 65 models. Lots of 65 engines had parts with C4 casting numbers. My flywheel has a cast date of J 30 that October 30 th of 64. So its a 65 truck flywheel however for what engine? Where any 410s or 428 engines factory? installed in 65 pickups
Nope same rods and pistons as a 390. All you got to do is remove the ring ridge on a 360 and install a 390 crank. and those pistons come up to the top of the deck.
A 332,352, and 360 all use the 6.54 rod I've checked many times a 390 uses a 6.488 rod. A 360 does use a 390 piston. If you want compression in your 360 Egge sells Edsel 361 pistons but they are not cheap. https://www.diyford.com/ford-big-block-engine-rotating-***embly-interchange-guide/
Ok , let’s throw another thing in the monkey works! Ford put 410 pistons in the truck engines to lower the compression! I pulled several FE pickup engines down and the pistons had 410 stamped right on them. Ford never put a 410 in a Ford! It gets confusing! Bones
Old Wolf I went to that site that ” sunbeam” mentioned and they say the FT was externally balanced, if so that fly wheel must be a small diameter FT wheel???? Bones
Cut the ring groove from a 360 and stick a 390 crank in it and if a stock 390 would of had a zero deck height the converted 360 pistons would protrude .035 above the deck. however the stock factory 390 doesn't have a zero deck. When you stick a 390 crank in a 360 the pistons come up level with the deck. Ive done it and it worked fine. I simply used a thick head gasket
Possibly they installed some of the Ft engines in ton trucks? Glad to find I don't have a 428 flywheel. It would have ruined my engines crank in a short time.
Ok how about hanging those 410 pistons on the .200 longer 352-360 rods and using a 390 crank? that would give you a long rod 390 with piston tops closer to the deck.
Never thought about that, but the measurements seem to be correct! I always liked the longer rods for more torque. Edit: Nope, The 410 pistons are .100 “ shorter” than the 390 pistons. 3.98 - 3.78 = .200 cut that in half = .100. The rods are only .052 longer. 6.54 - 6.488 = .052. It would work, but you would still be .048 in the hole. That would kill any power gain by using longer rods. Bones
I got to thinking I have a 68 merc wagon in the hoard locked up FE. So I pulled the engine. CM8E on the block. pulled off the trans. nope wasn't a weighted flywheel. its a 390. I do have a 66 428 that was in a galaxie my dad bought new. It had 325,000 when pulled. dad took it apart and it needed bored out and he took the crank & block someplace to get it miked and the block bored. and they didn't do anything for a couple of months. So dad got mad and went and got the engine. And the crank he got back was a 390 crank. Some thief swapped cranks? Ive considered if I could find some cheep oversize pistons just installing a 390 crank in it. Ive greased the entire block with axle grease even packed the water jackets full. and its now buried in a bread van with about a dozen other engines with a pile of lumber stacked on top.
The Jalopy Journal
